m 
 
 mm 
 
 m 
 
 '•llfi'iiii;:';:';;':': 
 
 iiii^i!;':;;'''' 
 
^^V Of PRI/VCf^ 
 
 BX 9078 .B967 1824 
 Burns, Robert, 1789-1869 
 Plurality of offices in the 
 Church of Scotland examined 
 
PLURALITY OF OFFICES 
 
 IX THE 
 
 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND 
 EXAMINED, 
 
 WITH A 
 
 PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE CASE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 VERY REVEREND DR. M'FARLANE, 
 
 PRINCIPAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. ROBERT BURNS, 
 
 MINISrER OF ST. GEORGE's CHURCH, PAISLEY. 
 
 GLASGOW: 
 PRINTED FOR CHALMERS AND COLLINS; 
 
 WILLIAM WHYTE AND CO. AND WILLIAM OLIPHANT, EDINBURGH; 
 4 R M. TIMS, DUBLIN ; 
 
 AND &. AND W. B. WHITTAKER, LONDON. 
 
 1824. 
 
Printcnl by W. CoUin* & Co. 
 Claugow. 
 
a, ^f 
 
 PKIIieSTOIJ ^ 
 
 TO THE \'r^SOLOGIC^L 
 
 RIGHT HONOURABLE* .^V-^i,!/ jNf^;K, >>!fr^ 
 
 LORD VISCOUNT MELVILLff'''''^"^^'^'" 
 
 FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY, LORD PRIVY SEAL OF 
 SCOTLAND, &c. &c. iiC 
 
 My Lord, 
 
 Considerations both of a public and private 
 nature have led me to solicit the honour of Inscribing 
 the following Work to your Lordship. The question 
 which it professes to discuss is one of vital interest to 
 the Church of Scotland; and no real friend to the 
 prosperity of that Church will hesitate to give it a 
 candid and careful attention. It is a question not of 
 party, but of principle. A question which involves 
 in it all that is valuable in the Pastoral relation, and 
 the claims which our Church prefers on public pa- 
 tronage and support. 
 
 It cannot have escaped the notice of your Lordship, 
 that attempts have been made to give to the present 
 question a political aspect, and to hold up the men 
 who have adopted certain sentiments with regard to 
 it, as the systematic opposers of his Majesty's Govern- 
 ment, and as guilty of " disrespect to the Sovereign" 
 himself. And is it, then, true, my Lord, that the 
 majority of Ministers and Elders in the Presbytery of 
 Glasgow, and the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, are 
 leagued in confederacy against the Government, and 
 against Majesty itself? And, with all your accurate 
 knowledge of Scottish affairs, did it ever occur to your 
 Lordship, that " Scottish democracy" and " Scottish 
 radicalism" were really so respectable — that they could 
 count among their staunch adherents, the Chalmerses 
 and the M'Gills of our Church — and that around their 
 contemptible and revjalting standard there had rallied 
 so much of the genius, and the eloquence, and the 
 piety of the land ? No, my Lord. The men who 
 will tell you so are the accusers of brethren as right- 
 
IV 
 
 hearted, as patriotic, and as loyal as themselves. It 
 is a fact well-known in the west of Scotland, and in 
 the country at large, that the most zealous opponents 
 of pluralities, in the case under discussion, are at the 
 same time the most zealous supporters of the Consti- 
 tution, and of his Majesty's present Government; and 
 it never could have entered their minds, that in main- 
 taining the purit}^, and upholding the rights of their 
 Church, they were acting from any other principle 
 than an imperious regard to duty. Indeed, my Lord, 
 there is no class of men within the British dominions 
 who cherish, and who endeavour to extend, a more 
 heartfelt attachment to the person and Government 
 of his Majesty than those Clergymen who have been 
 so often stigmatized as the abettors of popular disaf- 
 fection and cabal. It is, no doubt, true tjiat in a 
 large body of men there will be a considerable variety 
 of sentiment on questions of public policy ; but this, 
 while it is obviously unavoidable, is no real disadvan- 
 tage to the country at large. Besides, my Lord, it 
 ought not to be forgotten, that the Ministers of^ the 
 Church of Scotland are necessarily called to mingle 
 with persons of every variety in rank and sentiment. 
 The meanness and the violence of partizanship, there- 
 fore, are in them peculiarly unbecoming ; and i'ew 
 things are more prejudicial to their credit and their 
 usefulness. Your Lordship; knows well, that nothing 
 tends more effectually to promote the best interests 
 of the country than the union of moderation and 
 mildness with firmness and decision; and that they 
 are the best friends of their country and their King 
 who are most tenderly alive to the value of moral and 
 religious principle, and who labour most assiduously 
 to have the King and the Constitution still more firmly 
 enthroned in the affections of a free, a loyal, a united, 
 and a religious People. 
 
 1 have the honour to be, 
 My Lord, 
 Your Lordship's most obedient 
 
 And most fiiithful Servant, 
 
 ROBERT BURNS. 
 
 Paisley, j^pril 5ih, 1824-. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The following Treatise was suggested by the proce- 
 dure of the ecclesiastical courts, in the question re- 
 lative to the induction of Principal M'Farlane into the 
 parish of St. Mungo, or the Inner High Church of 
 Glassrow. It occurred to the Author, that a small 
 work on the general subject of pluralities of office in 
 the clergy of Scotland, might be of use, as embody- 
 ing the information which lies scattered over the ex- 
 tensive surface of our books of ecclesiastical history 
 and statute law, and exhibiting a connected view of 
 the sentiments and spirit of our church, on a point of 
 vital interest to her members. The Author claims 
 the credit of good intentions ; and he is confident that 
 there is nothing in his work which can give reason- 
 able offence to any candid and Hberal mind. While 
 his own sentiments are perfectly decided on the ques- 
 tions at issue, he has endeavoured, as far as possible, 
 to lay aside the tone and manner of a special pleader; 
 and to present the leading features of the argument 
 in a plain and unvarnished style. 
 
 To the distinguished claims of his predecessors 
 and fellow-labourers in the same field, the Author can 
 never be insensible. The talents, and the labours, and 
 the eloquence of Principal Brown, of Mr. Bell, and 
 of Dr. Cook, shall live in the annals of the Church, 
 and be embalmed in the recollections of her best 
 friends. What they accomplished, constitutes a most 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 important movement in the return of our Church to 
 purity and primitive order; and they only require to 
 carry their exertions a httle farther, in order to com- 
 plete what they have so auspiciously begun. 
 
 Considerations of delicacy prevent a particular spe- 
 cification of the kind services of those friends, who 
 have been aiding to the Author, by furnishing hints, 
 or by suggesting sources of information, or by sup- 
 plying the requisite documents. Of their valuable 
 services, he trusts he is duly sensible. He has en- 
 deavoured to avail himself of them as far as practica- 
 ble ; and he takes this opportunity of returning his 
 cordial acknowledgments. 
 
 In a provincial town like this, the advantages for li- 
 terary pursuit cannot be very ample ; and the labours 
 of a large parochial district leave very little time in- 
 deed for avocations distinct from the ordinary routine 
 of duty. The Author most readily acknowledges, 
 that the composition of this work has, for the last few- 
 weeks, constituted him a kind of pluralist, in as far as 
 labour is concerned ; and experience has thus impres- 
 sed on him more deeply the conviction, that the pas- 
 tors of our city parishes should, in no case, be bur- 
 dened with the cares and anxieties of multiplied avoca- 
 tions ; and that while every member of the church is 
 bound to cultivate the literature of his profession, the 
 honour of sustaining and extending its fame must 
 principally devolve on the members of our great liter- 
 ary establishments, who, unincumbered with other 
 toils, and enjoying peculiar advantages, can prosecute 
 the career of scholarship with credit to themselves, 
 and benefit to the public. 
 
 Paisley, April 5tk, 1824. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 Introduction, . . . • . 9 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 The Nature and Extent of Pastoral Obligation, . . 13 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 Sentiments of the Christian Church on Pastoral Duty, and 
 on the Union of Offices in Ministers of Religion, . 37 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 Sentiments of the Church of Scotland relative to Pluralities 
 
 of Offices in Ministers, . . . . 63 
 
 Sect. T. Sentiments of the Church of Scotland relative to 
 
 the general nature of the Pastoral Office, . . ib. 
 
 Sect. II. Laws of the Church against Non-residence and 
 
 Pluralities, . .... 82 
 
 Sect. III. On the union of Academical Charges with the 
 
 Pastoral Office, ... . , 96 
 
 Sect. IV. Civil Regulations, ... 124 
 
 Sect. V. On the design and import of the act 1817, . 149 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 
 On the judicial power of Presbyteries over presentees, 176 
 
 CHAP. V. 
 
 On tlie question relative to the Principality of the College 
 
 of Glasgow, . . . • • • 212 
 
 Sect. I. On the duties of a minister of Glasgow, . 215 
 
VIU CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 Sect. TI. On the Duties of the Principahty of the College 
 of Glasgow ...... 224 
 
 Sect. III. On the nature and extent of the Power of the Vi- 
 sitors over the University, ..... 24-6 
 
 Sect. IV. Additional Considerations, . . . 260 
 
 Sect. V. Objections answered, .... 272 
 
 Appendix, No. I. Reasons of complaint in the case of Pro- 
 fessor Hill, 1780, ..... 295 
 
 Appendix, No. II. Reasons of dissent in the Case of Pro- 
 fessor Ferric, 1813, 296 
 
 Appendix, No. III. Resolution of the Presbytery of Glas 
 gow in the case of Principal M'Farlane, July 1823, 297 
 
PEIHCETGIT 
 
 ON '-._ 
 
 PLURALITY OF OFFICES. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The term 'plurality^ when used iii reference to the 
 English Church, always conveys the idea of two or 
 more ecclesiastical benefices possessed by one person, 
 and served by means of the principle of substitution. 
 Pluralities, in this sense, have been happily unknown 
 in the Church of Scotland, since the time of the Re- 
 formation ; and, with the single exception of an at- 
 tempt made several years ago, to combine military 
 chaplainships with parochial charges, there has not 
 been even a single wish expressed to load the Church 
 of Scotland with a burden under which our brethren 
 in England and Ireland have groaned for centuries. 
 But, while a plurality, in this sense of the term, is a 
 thing totally unknown amongst us, we are no strangers 
 to the existence and the effects of a phenomenon sub- 
 stantially the same. We possess what has been with 
 propriety termed unions of offices; and these may be 
 said to form a very fair substitute for 'pluralities of 
 henejices. If the latter are instrumental in augmenting 
 the livings of the clergy, so are the former. If the 
 one has the necessary effect of withdrawing the atten- 
 tention of a clergyman to a greater or less extent, 
 from the immediate sphere of his personal ministra- 
 tions, so has the other. If, in the one case, the mind 
 may be expected to feel the distracting influence of a 
 variety of separate and independent clerical engage- 
 ments; — an effect precisely the same in kind, and still 
 
10 
 
 more extensive in its range, may be expected to flow 
 from the union of two or more independent offices in 
 the same individual. If the Episcopal Church begins, 
 at length, to feel some anxiety in regard to the results 
 of a system which she has long incautiously patronized; 
 it is high time that the Church of Scotland should 
 take the alarm, lest, unconsciously, she be found to 
 give her solemn sanction to the establishment of an 
 evil, which she may painfidly deplore when it is too 
 late to apply the requisite remedy. 
 
 The uniting system of Scotland, like that of the 
 pkralizing system of England, has put on a vast variety 
 of appearances. In one of our universities, we have 
 a Professor of Logic, who holds, at the same time, 
 the pastoral charge oiy/teen thousand souh. In another 
 we have a Professor of Moral Philosophy, who is, at 
 the same time, one of three parochial clergy to whom 
 the pastoral charge of a very populous city is com- 
 mitted. In one college, we find one person discharg- 
 ing, that is, attempting to discharge the several duties 
 of Principal, and Professor of Divinity, and a minister 
 of the city. In another college, we find a willingness 
 expressed, to hold the active Presidency of a large 
 university corporation, along with the trifling addition 
 of a parish with ni^ie thousand inhabitants. Nor has 
 the unitarian spirit of our Scottish churchmen con- 
 fined itself to the acquisition of established literary 
 appendages. In certain situations, we occasionally 
 see a clergyman burdening himself most unnecessarily 
 with the labours and anxieties of a private boarding 
 house or academy. Another we find to be most 
 thoroughly occupied with the cares of an extensive 
 arable or sheep farm ; officiating also, it may be, as 
 factor on an extensive property ; and, in the end, per- 
 plexing himself and his friends with the anxieties of 
 commercial and mercantile speculation. So exten- 
 sively prevalent, indeed, has this secularizing and en- 
 
11 
 
 grossing spirit become, that in a late trial before a 
 grand Jury, at Calcutta, it was solemnly deponed to 
 on oath, by members of the Church of Scotland too^ that 
 according to the constitution and practice of our 
 church, a clergyman might, if he were so disposed, 
 unite with his parochial charge, the truly classical 
 pursuits of a tailor or a shoemaker;"^ and yet maintain 
 all the dignity and usefulness of his order. When 
 such things are said, and when such things are done, 
 it is surely high time that the best friends of our esta- 
 blishment should take the alarm, and that a " testi- 
 mony," clear, and strong, and persevering, should be 
 " lifted up" against the toleration of such enormities. 
 There is, indeed, a very great difference betwixt the 
 addition to a pastoral charge of an office purely lite- 
 rary, and one that is in the grossest sense of the word, 
 worldly and secular. Some of the offices to which re- 
 ference has been made, approach so near to the ordi- 
 nary pursuits of a clergyman, as, without great diffi- 
 culty, to coalesce with them, and the courts of the 
 church must take this into view, in estimating the 
 comparative character and effects of such unions. But 
 can such an argument be of any avail, in the case of 
 ministers already loaded with an over charge of pas- 
 toral avocations? And, be it noticed, that it is pre- 
 cisely in the case of such ministers that such unions 
 are most likely to take effect. The Church of Scot- 
 land, as we hope to show in the course of our argument, 
 has established certain great general principles, by 
 which all her members must abide. She has marked 
 out the work of the ministry, as the single and proper 
 vocation of her sons. In this, as in a centre of attrac- 
 tion, she requires that all their anxieties, and all their 
 sympathies shall meet. Secular engagements, whether 
 arrayed in the garb of classic attraction, or cast into 
 
 * The Calcutta Journal, July 22, 1823. 
 
the mould of a grosser plebeianism, she has jealously 
 proscribed. Relaxation and amusement, be they lite- 
 rary or otherways, she does by no means prohibit; 
 but still the work of the parish is the ministers busi- 
 ness. To this she has affixed a competent provision; 
 and from this she permits nothing, however plausible, 
 to alienate or to distract. 
 
 Independent of every other argument, it might be 
 no difficult matter to show, even on the avowed prin- 
 ciples of policy and political economy — that the union 
 of two well-endowed offices — such, for example, as 
 those of the Principality with the High Church of 
 Glasgow, is inexpedient and unwise. At no time, and 
 in no circumstances, can it be desirable that two such 
 offices should be vested in the person of one individual ; 
 and never could the expediency or the necessity of it 
 be pleaded with less appearance of reason, than at the 
 present moment. Not many such " good things" — 
 speaking commercially — have the patrons and guar- 
 dians of our church to bestow; and not many such 
 boons, have her members to receive. It is not with 
 us as it was with our forefathers, when an absolute 
 dearth of clergy, imposed by necessity a species of 
 pluralism on the church ; and yet it is well known that 
 even in those times of difficulty, our fathers were most 
 delicately sensible of the dangers to be dreaded from 
 the very appearance of a permitted union of offices. 
 
 But we take our stand on higher ground than the 
 principles of political economy; and we trust to be able 
 to show, by an induction of particulars, that unions of 
 office, of every kind, while they are at variance with 
 the general principles of revelation, and with the con- 
 stitutional law of the reformed churches at large, are 
 particularly opposed to the statutes and spirit of the 
 Church of Scotland, and ought by all legal means to 
 be put down, as abuses tending to tarnish her purity 
 and to waste her strength. 
 
13 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF PASTORAL OBLIGATION. 
 
 The question, What is a plurality, and what may be 
 its probable influence on ministerial habits and char- 
 acter? depends for its solution on the previous in- 
 quiry, What may be the nature and extent of those 
 duties which are reasonably expected from one who 
 has been solemnly set apart to the office of the Chris- 
 tian Ministry ? If we take it for granted, that a 
 minister of religion has nothing more to do than to 
 preach, and to dispense ordinances, and to go through 
 the ordinary routine of duty — then, indeed, will the 
 pastoral relation appear a very simple and easy thing, 
 and the holding of a plurality of offices, however in- 
 compatible, will not be considered as any very violent 
 intrusion on the sanctity of its obligations. If, on 
 the other hand, we contemplate a minister of religion 
 as a person who has been set apart by the most solemn 
 of all vows to the service of God and of godliness; 
 and as, in that capacity, bound to wait upon the people 
 committed to his care, in all the varied modes of 
 Christian and ministerial intercourse — labouring in 
 his private studies to fit himself for " bringing out of 
 the treasury things new and old for the service of 
 God" — preaching the Gospel to them publicly and 
 " from house to house" — catechising frequently the 
 young and the ignorant — paying the oft-repeated and 
 ever-welcome visit of sympathy, of sacred conference, 
 and of prayer, to the chambers of sickness and of 
 death — watching over the purity of religious ordi- 
 nances — applying the discipline, and exercising the 
 
 B 
 
14 
 
 government of the church with a holy, a prudent, and 
 an impartial zeal — inspecting, and from time to time 
 reporting to his constituents and the public, the 
 state and progress of education — taking a fatherly 
 care of the poor as their natural guardian — reconcil- 
 ing differences among brethren and neighbours- 
 directing and encouraging religious and charitable 
 institutions — marking the progress of general litera- 
 ture, aud its probable influence on the morals of the 
 people — laying himself out for usefulness to his people, 
 in all the nameless offices of kindness which Christian 
 affection and the sense of duty never fail to dictate; — 
 if such be our idea of the nature and extent of pas- 
 toral obligation, then, indeed, will we be incHned to 
 consider as a great and a grievous evil, whatever in- 
 terferes, directly or indirectly, with the full and the 
 efficient discharge of ministerial duty. " The duty of 
 a Christian minister," said Dr. Samuel Johnson to his 
 friend Boswell, *' is not an easy work; and I envy not 
 the man who makes it an easy work." If we take our 
 estimate of the Christian ministry from the writings 
 and the examples of the Basils, and the Chrysostoms, 
 and the Augustines of other days, we must form a 
 very different notion of it from that which is enter- 
 tained by the man who regulates his sentiments and 
 his practice by the manners and the maxims of a de- 
 generate age. 
 
 In order to know something of the nature, the spirit, 
 and the responsibility of pastoral obligation, it will be 
 necessary to make a direct appeal to that inspired 
 volume which all Christians profess to receive as their 
 infallible directory. Shall we be told, indeed, that, 
 in a question of this nature, " statute law" and '* eccle- 
 siastical usage" have the. exclusive title to be received 
 as the sovereign umpire? and that all appeals to 
 
15 
 
 Scripture authority must be necessarily vague and 
 inconclusive ? I beg to know, whence does the pas- 
 toral office derive its very existence ? How do we 
 come to know any thing whatever regarding it ? And 
 on what ground do we take our stand, when we claim 
 for it the reverence which is due to an institution 
 confessedly divine ? Deprive us of our right of ap- 
 peal to the records of inspiration, and do not you 
 sweep away the whole office and order of the Chris- 
 tian ministry, and thus fight most successfully the 
 battles of the infidel ? But, if ail our information re- 
 lative to the very existence and authority of the Chris- 
 tian ministry be derived from the word of God, and 
 from it alone, why debar us from all appeal to the 
 same source for information on the nature and extent 
 of those duties which the pastoral relation involves ? 
 Are not all the " statutes," and all the '' usages," of 
 the Church of Scotland avowedly grounded on their 
 supposed " agreeable ness to the twrd of God;'' and is 
 it not this which, in the estimation of the fathers and 
 founders of our Church, imparted to them all their 
 interest and all their value ? The same reasons which 
 once existed for the establishment of a standing minis- 
 try, exist now; and surely no man will be so unrea- 
 sonable as to maintain, that the precepts which enjoin 
 pastoral obligation and duty were designed exclusively 
 for the days of miracles and inspiration. In modern 
 times, no doubt, the dangers connected with the due 
 discharge of ministerial duty are considerably lessened; 
 but, on the other hand, the duties themselves may be 
 justly said to have received a material enlargement. 
 In primitive times, the attention of the pastor was 
 necessarily limited to the Christian flock of which he 
 was the appointed overseer. In the modern state of 
 the church, and particularly within the pale of an estab- 
 
 B 2 
 
16 
 
 lishment, there is a large though undefined class of 
 duties which we owe to those who are not properly 
 members of the sacred society, and who yet are the 
 appropriate objects of pastoral sympathy and atten- 
 tion. And let it be recollected that, if the difficLdties 
 which arise from the violence of persecution be 
 happily unknown amongst us, those which flow from 
 the lukewarmness of formal professors, and the smiles 
 and the frowns of an unchristianized world, are mightily 
 increased ; and, assuredly, that most fearful of dan- 
 gers — scarcely even apprehended in apostolic times — 
 is now deeply and extensively realized; the danger, 
 namely, of being lulled, by the sense of external tran- 
 quillity, into the deep and death-like stupor of indolent 
 repose. 
 
 We allow that the word of God does not set before 
 us a specific catalogue of all the minuter departments 
 of pastoral duty; but neither does it present a com- 
 plete catalogue of all the ramifications of private and 
 personal virtue. The Scriptures claim to be received 
 not as a mere collection o^ statutes, but rather as an ex- 
 hibition o( principles. The great lines of moral and reli- 
 gious duty are marked out to the Christian ; and the 
 great lines of pastoral obligation are traced out, with 
 at least equal clearness, to the Christian minister. 
 The very names and titles which are affixed to the pas- 
 toral office serve to define, with sufficient precision, 
 its claims and its duties. Those who occupy this office 
 are termed " watchmen," stationed at the post of ob- 
 servation ; to mark the aspect of the hostile camp, 
 and the movements of the hostile army; to guard the 
 citadel against the dangers of surprise, and to warn 
 those who are at rest, of the hazard they unconsciously 
 run. They are termed " labourers together with 
 God," either in rearing the spiritual temple, or in 
 
17 
 
 cultivating the spiritual vineyard; and, in both views, 
 the nature, extent, and duration of the results, depend 
 on the fidelity with which the trust is executed. They 
 are termed " overseers, inspectors, bishops," to denote 
 the care and diligence, the anxiety and perseverance, 
 with which they must examine, oversee, and direct 
 the departments committed to their charge. They 
 are termed " pastors," or " shepherds," to signify the 
 assiduity and the skill with which they must tend " the 
 sheep of God's pasture;" the fidelity with which they 
 must defend them from beasts of prey ; and the kind- 
 ness and promptitude with which they must administer 
 to their wants. They are " stewards of the mysteries 
 of God," intrusted with a sacred deposit, which they 
 must manage and apply with uncompromising fidelity. 
 In fine, they are styled " ambassadors for God," to 
 indicate at once the dignity of their office, and the 
 enlightened skill with which they are at all times 
 bound to maintain the rights, and to execute the com- 
 mission of the Monarch whose badge they wear, in 
 opposition to the enticements of selfishness, or the 
 artifices of unprincipled chicane. The representations 
 thus given of the pastoral office are, no doubt, to a 
 considerable extent, figurative ; but the figures are 
 admirably selected, and they certainly do exhibit to 
 us a class of duties solemnly important in themselves, 
 and combined with a most fearful responsibility.* 
 
 But let us listen a little more in detail to the testi- 
 mony of inspiration on this subject. 
 
 *' Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto 
 the house of Israel : therefore hear the word at my 
 
 • See a beautiful and comprehensive illustration of these figu- 
 rative representations of the pastoi'al ortice, in Gerard's Pastoral 
 Care, pp. 64 — 68. 
 
18 
 
 mouth, and give them warning from me. When I 
 say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou 
 givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the 
 wicked from his wicked way to save his Hfe; the same 
 wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood 
 will I require at thine hand." " If the watchman see 
 the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the 
 people be not warned; if the sword come and take 
 any person from among them, he is taken away in his 
 iniquity, but his blood will I require at the watch- 
 man's hand. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee 
 a watchman unto the house of Israel : therefore thou 
 shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them 
 from me." " Take heed to the ministry which thou 
 hast received of the Lord that thou fulfil it." " I 
 kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but 
 have showed you, and have taught you publicly, and 
 from house to house." " Take heed, therefore, unto 
 yourselves, and to all the flock over the which the 
 Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the 
 cliurch of God, which he hath purchased with his own 
 blood." " Therefore watch, and remember that by 
 the space of three years I ceased not to warn every 
 one night and day with tears." " Now then we are 
 ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech 
 you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead be ye recon- 
 ciled unto God." '' Having then gifts, difFering ac- 
 cording to t\\e grace that is given to us, whether pro- 
 phecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of 
 faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering ; or 
 he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, 
 on exhortation." '' Let a man so account of us as of 
 the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries 
 of God. Moreover it is required in stewards, that a 
 man be found faithful." " Therefore seeing we have 
 
19 
 
 received this ministry, we faint not; but have re- 
 nounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking 
 in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully, 
 but by manifestation of the truth, commending our- 
 selves to every man's conscience as in the sight of 
 God." " Give attendance to reading, to exhortation, 
 to doctrine. Neglect not the gift that is in thee." 
 *< Meditate upon these things; Give thyself iKholly to 
 them, that thy profiting may appear to all. Take 
 heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine ; continue in 
 them; for in doing this, thou shalt both save thyself and 
 them that hear thee." " Thou therefore endure hard- 
 ness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man that 
 warreth, entangleth himself with the affairs of this 
 life, that he may please him who hath chosen him to 
 be a soldier. And if a man also strive for masteries, 
 yet is he not crowned except he strive lawfully." 
 *' Study to show thyself approved of God, a workman 
 thatneedeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word 
 of truth." '< I charge thee therefore before God, and 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and 
 the dead at his appearing and his kingdom ; preach 
 the word ; he instant in season, out of season; reprove, 
 rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and doctrine." 
 " Watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the 
 work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry." 
 " Obey them that have the rule over you ; and submit 
 yourselves,ybr they v^atch for your souls as they that must 
 give account" *' Feed the flock of God which is among 
 you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint 
 but wiUingly ; not of filthy lucre, but of a ready mind ; 
 neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being 
 ensamples to the flock." " We are unto God a sweet 
 savour of Christ, in them that believe, and in them that 
 perish. To the one we are the savour of death unto 
 
20 
 
 death; and to the other, we are the savour of life 
 unto life : and who is siifficientfor these things^' 
 
 Let any unbiassed man seriously peruse such pas- 
 sages as these — and the number might be greatly 
 multiplied — and what is the natural impression which 
 they leave on his mind ? Will he not be led to infer, 
 that the work of the ministry is designed to be the 
 business of the life of such as venture upon it — that 
 it is sufficient to occupy the whole of a man's thoughts, 
 and labours, and pursuits — and that to engage in 
 additional occupations, particularly such as tend to 
 distract the mind, and to interrupt the ordinary and 
 due discharge of the ministerial office, is altogether 
 unbecoming the character and the professions of the 
 man who hath given himself by a solemn vow to the 
 service of the sanctuary? " Ministers are described 
 in Scripture by so many epithets implying various 
 kinds of exertion, on purpose to impress them with a 
 deep sense that their business is difficult and laborious, 
 and demands vigorous application and unwearied dili- 
 gence. In like manner, the exertion incumbent upon 
 them is described in terms expressive of its intense- 
 ness and constancy. They are exhorted to * wait on,' 
 to * study,' to ' take heed to,' to * give attendance to,' 
 to ' give themselves continually to,' to ' be instant in,* 
 to ' labour in,' the several duties of their office. In- 
 junctions in such terms would be superfluous, if there 
 were not great difficulty in performing these duties 
 aright. But being the words of the Holy Spirit, they 
 cannot be superfluous ; and they are no stronger than 
 the nature of the subject demands."* Let it be re- 
 marked, that the passages which have been quoted 
 address themselves not to the extraordinary cases of 
 
 * Gerard's Pastoral Care, p. 68. 
 
21 
 
 prophets, and apostles, and other inspired men, whose 
 office in the church was designed to be temporary, 
 but to the ordinary ministers of religion — the " Elders 
 of the Church" — the pastors of the flock of Christ; to 
 whom is assigned a definite portion of the field, and 
 who are to cultivate that definite portion as " workers 
 together with God." Every ordained minister is to 
 be held as a successor of these evangelical labourers; 
 following the same paths, acknowledging the same 
 rules, and honouring the same Master. 
 
 It is argued, indeed, that the case of Paul, and 
 perhaps of some others, who occasionally laboured at 
 a secular occupation, is at variance with the strict 
 and rigid interpretation of these passages, and seems 
 to vindicate the union of offices in ministers of the 
 sanctuary. In answer to this argument, if it may be 
 termed an argument, we would remark, that the doc- 
 trine and the example of an inspired apostle, on such a 
 vitally important matter as this, must ever harmonize. 
 Let us listen, then, for one moment, to his doctrine. 
 " Who goeth a warfare," asks he, '*' any time at his 
 own charge? Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth 
 not of the fruit thereof? Or who feedeth a flock, and 
 eateth not of the milk of the flock ? Say I these 
 things as a man? Or saith not the law the same also? 
 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not 
 muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the 
 com. Doth God take care for oxen ? Or saith he 
 it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, 
 this is written: that he that plougheth should plough in 
 hope ; and he that thrasheth in hope should be par- 
 taker of his hope. If we have sown unto you spiritual 
 things, is it a great thing if we shall reap yom* carnal 
 tilings? Do ye not know, that they which minister 
 about holj- things live of the things of the temple ? 
 
 b3 
 
22 
 
 and they which wait at the altar are partakers with 
 the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they 
 which preach the gospel should live of the gospel." 
 1st Cor. ix. 7 — 15. This is the rule of procedure ap- 
 pointed by the great head of the church ; and if the 
 Apostle of the Gentiles did not always avail himself of 
 his right, we may rest assured that he had good reasons 
 for doing so. Sometimes necessity compelled him to 
 work " with his own hands" for subsistence ; while at 
 other times considerations of expediency influenced his 
 mind. " If others," says he, in the sequel to the pas- 
 sage above quoted, " be partakers of this power over 
 you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used 
 tliis power; but suffer all things, lest w^e should hinder 
 the gospel of Christ." " What is my reward thea? 
 Verily, that when I preach the gospel, I may make 
 the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not 
 my power in the gospel : for though I be free from 
 all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that 
 I might gain the more." Besides, it is worthy of re- 
 mark, that the case of an apostle or evangelist, tra- 
 velling as a missionary from place to place, is very 
 different from that of an ordinary pastor, chosen by 
 the members of a regularly ordained church, and so- 
 lemnly set apart to the great work of spiritual super- 
 intendence. In all such cases, the apostolic rule was 
 regularly acted on; and what is the obvious inference 
 which this rule suggests? It is, that as the churches 
 were understood to provide a competent maintenance 
 for their pastors, so they on the other hand were un- 
 derstood to dedicate their talents, and their time 
 exclusively to the work for which they thus received 
 a remuneration. The work of the ministry was to be 
 their calling, in the ordinary acceptation of that term; 
 and the first sacred conference which was held on the 
 
23 
 
 subject of ecclesiastical government and discipline has 
 determined, with precision, the nature and the extent 
 of the duties of that calling. " It is not reason that 
 we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. 
 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven 
 men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wis- 
 dom, whom we may appoint over this business. But 
 we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to 
 the ministry of the word." Acts vi. 2. 
 
 The circumstance of St. Paul having occasionally 
 employed himself, for particular reasons, in a mecha- 
 nical occupation, has been commonly adduced, by 
 certain classes of religious professors, as an argument 
 to prove, that there ought to be no distinct order of 
 pastors ; that any member, whom the rest may think 
 competent, may be set apart to the duties o^ preaching 
 elder; and that as the ordinaiy business of life is sup- 
 posed to be carried on at the same time, no mainten- 
 ance is allowed, except in cases where that business 
 does not yield a competency. It was not till of late, 
 that the advocates of pluralities in the church made 
 common cause with these sectaries. The reply we 
 have given will suit the reasoning of both; and if the 
 votaries of pluralities are not satisfied with our reply, 
 but still cling to the example of the great Apostle as 
 favourable to their views, we make them welcome to 
 the benefit of that example, with this understand- 
 ing, that they shall imitate it also in its spirit and lead- 
 ing principles, as well as in its outward actings. Paul 
 wrought as a tent-maker because " necessity" some- 
 times required it. Are they prepared to assign the 
 same reasons? Paul did so that he might preach the 
 Gospel freely and without charge to the Gentiles. 
 Are they prepared to say that this is their motive ? 
 Paul was either oflPered no stipend from the people, 
 
24 
 
 or, for proper reasons, he declined accepting any. 
 Can they plead the same thing, or are they prepared 
 to copy his example ? In fine, Paul was a Missionary y 
 perpetually travelling from place to place; and it was 
 not to be expected tliat he could obtain a competent 
 maintenance from any particular class among whom 
 he might occasionally vcdmsiev. But are they prepared 
 to sanction the " Ministerium Vagwn,'' and to devolve 
 every minister of the church on " his own resources," 
 or on the voluntary donations of the people? 
 
 The view which we have taken of the nature and 
 extent of pastoral obligation, may enable us to form 
 some idea of what is meant by a plurality of offices in 
 the church, and the reasons why the toleration of such 
 a thing must be injurious to the interests of the pas- 
 toral charge. In the Jirst place, it is obvious that 
 whatever does necessarily and unavoidably occasion 
 non-residence in a minister, must be held as utterly at 
 variance with the nature of the pastoral relation, and 
 the designs for which it is constituted. We do not 
 think it necessary to attempt a proof of what every 
 one concerned in the present argument will be ready 
 to acknowledge, that a minister, who has been solemnly 
 ordained to the pastoral office, is thereby held bound 
 to discharge its duties in his own person. This prin- 
 ciple we take for granted as inseparable from the very 
 idea of a pastoral relation ; and the inference we would 
 draw from it is, that the pastoral relation is virtually 
 broken when a minister accepts of an office, the regular 
 discharge of whose duties unavoidably prevents his 
 constant residence among his people. A weak or a 
 careless pastor though resident, may be of little use to 
 his flock; but the wisest and most accomplished can 
 be of no benefit to them unless he takes up his abode 
 among them, so as to be accessible to them at all 
 
25 
 
 times, and ready to discharge all the occasional and 
 undefined, as well as the regular and stated duties of 
 the ministry : And, most assuredly, that man has no 
 right to lay hold of the stipulated provision, who 
 discharges not the trust for which that provision was 
 made. 
 
 In the second place, it seems equally obvious, that a 
 plurality oi benefices, even though locally and geogra- 
 phically convenient, is at utter variance with every 
 right view we can take of the pastoral office. A cer- 
 tain district is marked out as the sphere of a pastor's 
 labours. To the inhabitants of that district his ener- 
 gies and his affections are consecrated; and the whole 
 economy of this arrangement proceeds on the as- 
 sumption, that the duties connected with such a dis- 
 trict are sufficient to occupy his time and thoughts. 
 While he is instructing his people in the place assigned 
 him, and on the day that is sacred to such exercises, 
 it is physically impossible that he can, at the same 
 time, be instructing another class of people in another 
 sphere. It may so happen, indeed, that the district 
 marked out as the sphere of pastoral ministration, may, 
 in the course of things, become so limited in point of 
 population, as to authorise its union with another in 
 the immediate vicinity, and the charge may then be 
 devolved on one individual. All such instances are 
 held as exceptions to the general principle. And is it 
 not well known, that in every such instance of annex- 
 ation, \he general 'principle o^ one charge to one minister 
 is distinctly recognised, while reasons are assigned 
 for granting the proposed arrangement? In every 
 such case, there is no plurality sanctioned — the charge 
 is still one — and the only difference is, that its compass 
 has been enlarged, so as to bear a still fairer propor- 
 tion to the average extent of range usually assigned 
 to pastoral ministration. 
 
26 
 
 In the third place, the addition to a minister's pro- 
 per charge of a distinct and independent calling or btisi- 
 ness, must be considered as an infringement on the 
 peculiarity of a pastoral relation, while it involves in 
 it all the characteristic features of a plurality. The 
 active superintendence of a literary establishment ; 
 a professorial charge in a university; the regular 
 practice of medicine or law as a gainful trade ; these, 
 and such as these, are among the ordinary and lawful 
 callings to which men are chosen, and to which they 
 devote their lives. These are supposed to be severally 
 sufficient to occupy a man's talents and time. Under 
 this impression they were originally instituted; and 
 to conjoin them with the separate and independent 
 office of the ministry, is a plain deviation from the 
 leading principles of both. It will not do to say that, 
 in the course of things, the duties of some of these 
 offices have gone into desuetude, and that the laws 
 which regulate them have fallen aside. The question 
 is, To what cause is this to be ascribed? Is it to the 
 carelessness and indolence of those who have held 
 those offices? Or is it to a change in the state of society, 
 over which no human control can be exercised? If 
 the first of these be the real cause, then we hold that 
 the laws which regulate the offices in question have 
 been sinfully neglected, and that the union of such 
 offices with the duties of the ministry is just to sanc- 
 tion and perpetuate the evil. If the second be the 
 real cause, the natural inference would be, that an 
 office no longer necessary should be abolished ; and 
 if this is impracticable, and if the emoluments must 
 be bestowed on one who holds another and an efficient 
 station, then the case must be viewed as peculiar, 
 and to be determined by the proper authorities, ac- 
 cording to its own special merits. It may even hap- 
 
27 
 
 pen that, from the poverty of the endowments, or other 
 causes equally cogent, a charge which is not absolutely 
 a sinecure may be conjoined with a pastoral office ; 
 but all such cases are exceptions to the general prin- 
 ciple, and to be tolerated on the ground of necessity 
 alone. 
 
 In the fourth and last place, those partial or occa- 
 sional occupations which do not engage the business 
 of a man's life, but which tend to distract, by their 
 secular character, and thus to unfit a minister for the 
 due discharge of his spiritual functions, must be held 
 as infractions of the great principle of the pastoral 
 relation. To this class of pluralities belong all en- 
 gagements in trade and merchandise; the practical 
 pursuits of agriculture and husbandry ; the active 
 management of estates as factor or agent; the con- 
 ducting of an ordinary newspaper, and such like. Tlie 
 inevitable tendency of those avocations is to secularize 
 the mind — to divert it from that spiritual frame which 
 a minister should seek to cherish; and to unfit him more 
 or less for the right discharge of the pastoral func- 
 tions. Around the path prescribed to the Christian 
 minister, ^ line of sanctity is drawn ; and the atmos- 
 phere in which he moves has a character of sacredness 
 attached to it. Beyond that line it is not permitted 
 him to travel farther than circumstances of necessity 
 require; but tvithin its ample range he is required and 
 expected to exert himself to the utmost. Let it not 
 be said, then, that the clergyman who devote a part 
 of his time to the business of Sabbath Schools, or of 
 religious and charitable institutions, is equally to 
 blame with the clergyman who manages an extensive 
 fann, or who acts as the factor on a large estate. In 
 the one case, the labour, though not directly and 
 immediately official, lies plainly and undeniably within 
 
28 
 
 the prescribed range of the minister's walk ; in the 
 other, it lies as clearly and undeniably beyond it. 
 In the one case, the labour is a " labour of love ;" 
 in the other, private emolument is, in general, the 
 leading principle of action. By the exercise of the 
 one, a minister's own mind is fitted more and more 
 for duty, and he is by the very employments referred 
 to, effectually promoting the best interests of his people. 
 By the exercise of the other, his mind is secularized; 
 his thoughts are dissipated; his time is incessantly bro- 
 ken in upon; and the harmony between him and his 
 flock is frequently disturbed. The one is a field which 
 a minister is not permitted only, but required to culti- 
 vate; the other is forbidden ground. To tread upon 
 it is dangerous ; to dwell on it is death.* " We," 
 says a writer whose sentiments no member of the 
 Church of Scotland can treat with contempt or in- 
 difference, " We whom God hath honoured with 
 the ministry of the Gospel, should be devoted en- 
 tirely to the service of our flock, that they may 
 reap all possible fruit from our life and from our 
 labours. This should be our ambition, our pleasure, 
 our end and aim in every thing. We should consider, 
 that, from the moment in which we enter on this 
 sacred office, we have, as it were, given up all right 
 over ourselves, and transferred it to the flock to which 
 we appertain. To this we owe our care, our time, 
 our health, our life, and our death too, if duty and 
 religion should require it. . This is the field we ought 
 to labour, the vineyard we ought to cultivate, and the 
 family we ought to manage as stewards, with all the 
 
 • The financial dijjicullies into which those clergymen Jiave 
 generally fallen, who have engaged in mercantile or other specu- 
 lations, may be viewed as the testimony of Providence against 
 all such unseemly alliances. 
 
29 
 
 application of which we are capable. In a word, we 
 should reckon every day and hour lost, in which we 
 are not occupied in the way of our duty, and in which 
 we have not an opportunity of doing something for 
 the glory of God and the souls of our people. And 
 that such precious opportunities may not be lost from 
 inattention, we ought to look often about us in search 
 of them, and reckon our own happiness to be deeply 
 concerned in finding them."* 
 
 But is a minister to be ever employed in the duties of 
 his office'? Is he to enjoy no leisure time? Is he to 
 be constantly and unremittingly engaged in avocations 
 professedly sacred? We answer in the negative. A 
 minister, even in the most laborious charge, ought to 
 have some leisure time — that is, a certain portion to 
 be employed in offices distinct from the direct duties 
 of his calling. He must have a certain portion of 
 time to devote to the pursuits of general literature. 
 He must have another portion to employ in attending 
 to what is passing on the great theatre of public life. 
 He must have a third portion to spend in the society 
 of his friends and acquaintances. He must have a 
 fourth portion to devote to the purposes of health 
 and reasonable recreation. In a word, he must have 
 some time in reserve for those little nameless avoca- 
 tions which every day will present, more or less, to 
 every man who sustains a public character. A mini- 
 ster stands in a double relation to the public. He has 
 his proper calling, the duties of which he must zea- 
 lously and perseveringly discharge; and he has a 
 certain general character to sustain as a public man, 
 a citizen of the world, a member of the great republic 
 of literature and science. 
 
 » Lectures on the Sacred Office, by Dr. Smith, of Campbel- 
 ton, pp. 236, 237. 
 
30 
 
 The union of this more general character with that 
 of his ecclesiastical function, forms a leading pecu- 
 liarity in the studies and habits of a clergyman, par- 
 ticularly in the Church of Scotland. To his proper 
 vocation the great burden of his time and talents must 
 be devoted ; and the calls inseparable from that more 
 general character which he sustains, will require a very 
 large portion of all the leisure time which it is possi- 
 ble for him to command. What then is the necessary 
 effect which must result from the junction of another 
 and a distinct calling with that which he already holds, 
 even although the duties of it may not require a very 
 large proportion of his time? Why, the necessary 
 result will be, that all the leisure hours which he can 
 spare from his proper calling will be taken up with 
 the routine and indispensable business of this additional 
 occupation ; and, after all, the duties of both will be 
 performed in a very slovenly and perfunctory manner. 
 
 We do not question, that a man of superior talents, 
 and activity, and zeal, may be able to execute- the 
 duties even of two laborious offices, and to make a cre- 
 ditable appearance in both. But, then, we maintain that 
 for such a man to execute such offices in a creditable 
 way, is by no means siifficient. From his known talents 
 and habits, the public have a right to look for some- 
 thing eminent — something far above the ordinary 
 standard of excellence. A decent mediocrity will not 
 do ; and yet a decent mediocrity is all that can be 
 expected, even from the rarest endowments, when 
 these endowments are not steadily directed to one 
 leading object. The church is thus deprived of the 
 benefits of a high standard of distinguished excellence, 
 presented to the view of candidates for distinction in 
 the same walk, and giving a tone of elevation to the 
 public opinion regarding it. 
 
31 
 
 But, farther, taking it for granted that one man 
 may do the duties of two distinct offices in a creditable 
 manner, the question still recurs, Would not the pub- 
 lic be better served, and the great design of these 
 offices more satisfactorily accomplished, by means of 
 two men occupying each their separate departments, 
 and applying to them the whole vigour of their minds? 
 Each of these offices is supposed to have its own dis- 
 tinct duties properly official; and besides, there are 
 certain calls of a more general and undefined nature, 
 to which the holders of such offices are necessarily 
 liable ; and surely, if the provision for each is suffi- 
 ciently ample, every principle of equity seems to 
 require that one individual should not be loaded with 
 a plurality of avocations. The question is not one of 
 private emolument but of public benefit ; and surely 
 it can require no evidence to prove, that they " who 
 serve at the altar," should be placed in such circum- 
 stances as to have it in their power to discharge their 
 sacred and responsible duties in a manner most cre- 
 ditable to themselves, and most satisfactory to the 
 public. 
 
 An important distinction must here be noticed, be- 
 tween those exercises not properly official, in which 
 a minister may voluntarily/ engage ; and those which 
 he must attend to, by virtue of an extra or additional 
 office which he has pledged himself to fulfil. In the 
 former instance, he has it in his power to order his 
 time as he pleases, and to make such arrangements as 
 may prevent the hours sacredly devoted to the proper 
 duties of his calling from being unduly invaded. In 
 the latter case, he is bound to the public by a sacred 
 engagement to discharge the duties of the office he 
 has undertaken, in their own time, and to their utmost 
 extent, even although, in consequence, many calls 
 
32 
 
 and avocations of a purely clerical nature may be neg- 
 lected or overlooked. For instance, a minister may 
 employ a part of his time very advantageously in pre- 
 paring for the press a work on the literature of theo- 
 logy; or he may devote an hour or two every day to 
 the superintendence of the education of his family; 
 or he may officiate as one of the office-bearers of a re- 
 ligious institution ; and, in so doing, he may so arrange 
 his time and his cares as to prevent any such avoca- 
 tions from interfering with the due exercise of his 
 pastoral functions. When he undertakes the charge 
 of a particular department in a great literary institu- 
 tion, or ventures on any public office, the duties of 
 which he must discharge, if he is to receive the remu- 
 neration expected, it is obvious that the case is very 
 much altered. In such a case, there must frequently 
 be an interference between the calls of this extraor- 
 dinary charge and those of his proper vocation ; and 
 over these cases of interference iie does not possess the 
 same control. I do not mean by this that a minister 
 may not become a pluralist in consequence of his own 
 voluntary engagements, or even in consequence of his 
 engaging to excess in pursuits laudable in themselves, 
 and by no means incompatible with the ministerial 
 character. If he sets up a school or academy in his 
 own house, taking the sole superintendence of it; if 
 he entangle himself with the ordinary business of 
 several extensive charitable or religious associations ; 
 if he takes the sole or chief charge of the poor in an 
 extended population ; if he is so employed in literary 
 study, and even in writing theological books, as to 
 give his people cause to complain that they seldom 
 share in his visits, or in his sympathies of kindness; if 
 he is so fond of giving advice in matters of law, or of 
 agriculture, or of medicine, as to require frequent 
 
33 
 
 absence from his parish; if he intermeddles with the 
 endless labyrinth of state and of party politics ; if in 
 any one of these ways, or in any similar way, he 
 eventually deprives his people of the right they have 
 to his official services, or unfits himself for discharging 
 them in a proper spirit, he is in fact and effect aphiralisty 
 although perhaps a gratuitous one, and as such is guilty 
 of a culpable dereliction of his duties as a consecrated 
 minister of the sanctuary. " Under a lively sense of 
 the arduous nature of his work, a minister will study, 
 by all the methods of instruction, exhortation, admo- 
 nition, reproof, terror, consolation, persuasion, in pub- 
 lic and in private, in their health and their sickness, 
 amidst the dissipation of prosperity, and the depression 
 of adversity, to enlighten the ignorant with religious 
 knowledge, to form the young to impressions of truth 
 and goodness, to fix the unthinking, to awaken the 
 secure, to reclaim the wicked, to resolve the doubting, 
 to confirm the wavering, to strengthen the weak, to 
 perfect the saints. To this he will devote his time, 
 his strength, and all his talents. He considers it as 
 what properli/ belongs to hi?n ; and though he cannot 
 be every hour employed in it, yet all other pursuits, 
 even such as would most laudably gratify his curiosity 
 or his taste, and such as are most indispensably neces- 
 sary for his temporal concerns, he will reckon only 
 amusements in comparison, subordinate to this, and 
 which he will cheerfully postpone, when he has an 
 urgent call to any part of this."* 
 
 Let it not be thought that the avocations of a mini- 
 ster in a large town are necessarily less sacred or less 
 extensive than those of a minister in the country. 
 The duties are substantially the same ; and I never 
 
 * Gerard's Pastoral Care, p. 79. 
 
34 
 
 yet found out a reason why the one should not visit 
 and examine his people, and wait on the sick, and 
 superintend schools, as faithfully as the other. A city 
 minister, indeed, has difficulties peculiar to his situa- 
 tion; but this is surely no reason why his difficulties 
 should be increased, or his labours multiplied, by the 
 assumption of a plurality of offices. In one sense, in- 
 deed, a minister in one of our large towns is constituted 
 a kind of pluralist by the very situation which he holds. 
 He has a mixed audience whom he must address every 
 Lord's day, and with whom he must make himself ac- 
 quainted privately, if he really wishes "rightly to divide 
 to them the word of life;" and he has a parish, generally 
 very large and populous, among whose inhabitants he 
 is to labour during the week, and over whom he is to 
 preside in the exercise of the government and disci- 
 pline of the church. This is an inconvenience which 
 it seems impossible in a free country to avoid ; but, 
 most assuredly, it is a very good reason why the cares 
 of a school, or an academy, or a college, should not 
 be superadded to a burden already too great for even 
 the " maximum of human strength." 
 
 The conclusion at which we have arrived by this 
 induction of particulars is a very short and a very 
 simple one — That the office of the ministry is, and 
 ought to be, the business of every man who has been 
 solemnly set apart to it — that the right discharge of 
 its duties requires and is sufficient to employ the whole 
 man — that a minister lawfully ordained over a people, 
 and provided with a competent maintenance, is not 
 at liberty to take upon himself the burden of other 
 avocations — and that if any cases should occur in 
 which considerations of necessity or expediency seem 
 to require a deviation from this great principle, that 
 these must be determined by the special merits of 
 
35 
 
 each, according to the constitution and rules of the 
 Church. 
 
 The principles which we have endeavoured to esta- 
 blish in this Chapter, receive a powerful sanction from 
 the following admirable sentiments of one who has 
 a rigid to be heard on such a subject as the present. 
 
 " What though kind offices among our people should 
 take up much time, require much pains, put us to 
 much real trouble and inconvenience, rob us of many 
 agreeable amusements, and greatly interrupt delight- 
 ful and useful studies? — Sense of duty, love to our 
 people, and the pleasure of doing good, will reconcile 
 us to all these hardships. A just sense of the impor- 
 tant relations we stand in to our respective flocks, 
 and a genuine feeling of that tender affection which is 
 due to them, will not allow us to hesitate one moment, 
 whether that part of our time is most worthily em- 
 ployed, which is taken up in doing real offices of 
 friendship among them; or that part of it which is 
 spent in perusing the finest writings of men of the 
 greatest genius that ever appeared in the world, or 
 in polishing any little compositions of our own. Is 
 the arranging of words, the measuring of periods, the 
 beautifying of language, or even storing our own minds 
 with the divinest sentiments, an employment of equal 
 dignity and importance in itself, or equally pleasant 
 on reflection, with that of composing differences; ex- 
 tinguishing animosities ; searching out modest indi- 
 gent merit, and relieving it ; comforting a melancholy 
 heart; giving counsel to a perplexed mind; suspend- 
 ing pain by our sympathy and presence, though it 
 were but for a moment; suggesting to an unfurnished 
 mind proper materials for meditation in the time of 
 distress; or laying hold of a favourable opportunity of 
 
36 
 
 conveying valuable instructions and religious impres- 
 sions to a mind little susceptible of them on other 
 occasions ? There is no need of saying any thing in 
 confirmation of this ; it was the glorious character of 
 Jesus, * that he went about doing good.' "* 
 
 • Sermons by William Lecchman, D. D. Principal of the 
 College of Glasgow, Vol. I. pp. 130—132. 
 
37 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 SENTIMENTS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH ON PASTO- 
 RAL DUTY, AND ON THE UNION OF OFFICES IN MI- 
 NISTERS OF RELIGION. 
 
 Of the sense which the church entertained of the 
 importance of the pastoral tie, and the great evil of 
 an union of offices in ministers of religion, we have a 
 very decisive evidence in the fact, that even in the 
 darkest periods of its history, and when many other 
 abuses were sanctioned, or at least tolerated, laws were 
 enacted from time to time for the express purpose of 
 securing a more vigilant attention to ministerial duty. 
 The second council of Nice was held in the year 787, 
 and while it sanctioned the worship of images, it con- 
 demned pluralities of office in the following pointed 
 manner : " No clerk shall from henceforth be reck- 
 oned in two churches ; for this is the character of traf- 
 ficking and covetousness, and wholly estranged from 
 the ecclesiastical custom. ' Let every one,' according 
 to the apostle's words, ' continue in the vocation in 
 which he is called;' and serve in one church." "This 
 shall be the rule in this town which is guarded by God ; 
 but, in remote villages, an indulgence may be granted 
 by reason of the want of men." In this canon two 
 things are very obvious ; the one is, that the sin of 
 covetousness being supposed, in that age, in every case 
 of plurality , is stated as the grand reason why such unions 
 of office are forbidden ; and hence we may infer, that 
 such unions must have been disallowed in all cases where 
 they became subservient to the gratification of avarice 
 or ambition. The other is, that the ground of an in- 
 
 c 
 
38 
 
 dulgence, in certain cases, is expressly said to be " the 
 'want of men' fit and sufficient for the service of the 
 church ; and this is the first and most prominent of 
 those reasons which are assigned by the canonists for 
 the holding of a dispensation. 
 
 In the eighth council of Paris, held under Louis 
 the Good, in 829, the following canon was passed : 
 " As it becomes every city to have its proper bishop, 
 so it is also becoming and necessary that every church 
 dedicated to God should have its proper priest ; yet 
 covetousness, which is idolatry, has so got hold of 
 some priests, and caught them captives in its fetters, 
 that they, blinded with it, know neither whither they 
 go, nor what they ought to be or do ; so that they 
 being kindled with the fire of covetousness, and for- 
 getful of the priestly dignity, neglecting the care of 
 those churches to which they were promoted, do, by 
 some present given and promised, procure other 
 churches, not only from clerks, but from laymen, in 
 which they do, against law, undertake to perform the 
 ministry of Christ." " There is scarcely a priest to 
 be found who warreth worthily and diligently in that 
 church, in which he is dedicated to the divine service ; 
 and how much less will he be able to do that worthily 
 in two, three, or more churches?" " We decree that 
 every church that has a congregation belonging to it, 
 and has means by which it may subsist, shall have its 
 proper priest."* On this we remark first, that by this 
 general council each church and congregation was 
 considered as affording ample field for the talents of 
 
 * Tlie Acts of these Councils on the subject of clerical cha- 
 racter and duty, are to be found in the second volume of Bing- 
 liam*s Christian AntiquiticF. 
 
39 
 
 one man. Secondly," that the exercise of the mini- 
 stry in that one church and congregation, was designed 
 to be the peculiar and proper calling of the pastor. 
 Thirdly, that nothing but the absolute want of the 
 means of decent subsistence in one district, could ex- 
 cuse the holding of two or more livings ; and, lastly^ 
 that as one grand objection to pluralities was the en- 
 couragement they gave to the covetous devices of 
 men, the same objection obviously lies against the 
 union of any distinct office with the pastoral charge, 
 even when that office does not carry with it the cure 
 of souls. The holding of it with its temporalities, 
 must be viewed as substantially an infringement of 
 this rule. 
 
 The third council of Lateran, held in the 13th cen- 
 tury, A. D. 1215, the darkest period of the Church, 
 found it necessary to enact the following canon: " When 
 any church or ecclesiastical ministry is to be given, 
 let such an one be sought out for it as shall reside up- 
 on the place, and shall be able to discharge the cure 
 in his own person. If otherwise, he who receives any 
 such benefice, contrary to the canons, shall lose it, 
 and he who gave it shall likewise lose his right of 
 patronage." The fourth council of Lateran, held in 
 the same century, added as follows: " Whosoever shall 
 receive any benefice, to which a cure of souls is an- 
 nexed, shall thereupon by law be deprived of any 
 other such benefice that he formerly held; and if he 
 endeavour still to hold it, he shall lose the other like- 
 wise. This we do likewise decree as to parsonages, 
 and do further appoint, that no man shall presume to 
 hold more dignities or parsonages than one in the 
 same church, even though they have no cure of souls 
 annexed to ihem."* This last clause is particularly wor- 
 
 * Burnet's Pastoral Care, p. 82. 
 c2 
 
40 
 
 thy of notice, as it proves beyond doubt, the sense of 
 the church at this period to have been, that the addition 
 to a pastoral charge o^ any office or dignity, whether 
 involving the cure of souls or not, was inconsistent 
 with the temper and d^ign of the sacred ministry; 
 and if this was the sense of the church at an era 
 when the clergy were not particularly noted for mode- 
 ration in their aims, much more must it have been the 
 sense of the church in its days of primitive or of restored 
 purity. No doubt, this same council, by allowing to 
 the Pope a power of granting dispensations to persons 
 of rank and learning, cut the sinews of its own enact- 
 ments; but this only proves more strongly that the 
 contest was then very keen between conscience and 
 interest ; between the remaining sense of duty on the 
 one hand, and the monopolizing tendencies of human 
 nature on the other. 
 
 Archbishop Peccham, one of the oldest and most 
 faithful expounders of the canons, thus comments 
 on the decree of the council of Lateran. " He who 
 shall take more benefices than one, having cure of 
 souls, or being otherwise incompatible, without dispen- 
 sation apostolical, shall be deprived of them all." 
 And Dr. Burn, in his " Ecclesiastical Law," thus ex- 
 plains the terms employed in the canons : " Having 
 cure of souls" — " Whether it be a cathedral, or a pa- 
 rochial church, or a chapel having cure of the parish- 
 ioners, either dejure, or defactoy wherein he can exer- 
 cise parochial rites ; also, whether it be a dignity, or 
 office, or church, as there are many archpresbyters, 
 archdeacons, and deans, who have no church of 
 their own, yet they have jurisdiction over many 
 churches." " Or beiyig othertvise incompatible'' — 
 " namely, dignities, parsonages, and other ecclesiasti- 
 cal benefices, which require personal residence either 
 
41 
 
 by statute, privilege, or custom."* It is clear, from 
 this view of the canons, that by the term " plurality," 
 the church did not understand merely the union of 
 two or more charges " having cure," but the union with 
 a pastoral charge of any office or dignity, the due ex- 
 ecution of whose duties was incompatible with the 
 riffht exercise of the ministerial functions. 
 
 It is a very remarkable fact, that even the cele- 
 brated council of Trent, exclusively devoted as it 
 was to the tenets of Popery, renewed and reinforced 
 all the old statutes of the church, prohibiting plurali- 
 ties as at utter variance with the due discharge of pas- 
 toral duty. Its words are these : " This Synod ad- 
 monishes all that are set over any cathedral churches, 
 by what title soever, that they, taking heed to them- 
 selves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost 
 has set them, to govern the church of God, which he 
 has purchased with his own blood, do watch, and la- 
 bour, and fulfil their ministry, as the apostle has com- 
 manded. And they must know, that they cannot 
 do this if as hirelings they forsake the flock committed 
 to them, and do not watch over those sheep, whose 
 blood will be required at their hands in the last day, 
 since it is certain, that no excuse will be received, if 
 the wolf devours the sheep when the shepherd does 
 not look after them. Yet since, to our great grief it 
 is found, that some at this time neglect the salvation 
 of their souls, and, preferring earthly things to hea- 
 venly things, are still about courts; and, forsaking 
 the fold, and the care of the sheep trusted to them, 
 do give themselves wholly to earthly and temporal 
 cares ; therefore all the ancient canons which, by the 
 iniquity of the times, and corruption of men, were 
 
 * Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, vol. II. p. 155. 
 
42 
 
 fallen into desuetude, are renewed," &c. In the 23d 
 session of the Synod, the same statute is enforced in 
 language still more pointed, and its application ex- 
 tended to every species of pastoral charge, whether 
 belonging to cathedrals, or parish churches, or cha- 
 pels. And in session 24th, the existence of plurali- 
 ties is thus expressly put down : " Whereas the ec- 
 clesiastical order is perverted, when one clerk has the 
 offices of many committed to him ; it was, therefore, 
 well provided by the holy canons, that no man should 
 be put into two churches. But many, led by their 
 depraved covetousness, deceiving themselves, but not 
 God, are not ashamed to elude those good constitu- 
 tions by several artifices, and obtain more benefices 
 than one at the same time; Therefore the Synod be- 
 ing desirous to restore a proper discipline for the go- 
 vernment of churches, does, by this decree, appoint 
 that for the future, one man shall be capable of re- 
 ceiving only one ecclesiastical benefice." It is indeed 
 true, that in cases of necessity, arising from the abso- 
 lute want of a suitable maintenance; and in cases of 
 dispensation granted by the Pope, these wholesome 
 enactments were frequently evaded ; and yet it is a 
 very striking fact, that ever since the era of the coun- 
 cil of Trent, non-residence is an evil that has been 
 scarcely known in the church of Rome. Its ministers 
 do in general discharge their duties in person ; and in 
 too many instances, do they exhibit a pattern of pas- 
 toral diligence and fidelity which might well put no- 
 minal Protestants to the blush. Aware of the vulner- 
 able parts of their doctrinal system, the adherents of 
 the papacy have, for the last two centuries, aimed, 
 and with no slender measure of success, to strengthen 
 and support their cause by the decency of their lives, 
 and the zeal of their pastoral ministrations. 
 
43 
 
 That the churches of the reformation should have che- 
 rished the most exalted conceptions of the clerical cha- 
 racter and duties, and should have given their unanimous 
 verdict against every practice that might tend directly 
 or indirectly to withdraw the minds of pastors from 
 their appropriate avocations, is precisely what might 
 have been expected. In the hierarchy of England, 
 the canons of the ancient church were adopted, and 
 residence, in order to the personal discharge of duty, 
 was considered as imperiously binding on all the cler- 
 gy, until, in the 21st year of the reign of Henry VIII. 
 an Act was passed, in an evil hour, permitting cer- 
 tain classes of persons, and in certain modifications 
 of circumstances, to hold a plurality of benefices, and 
 to do the duties of the ministry by substitution ; an 
 Act under which that church has groaned till the pre- 
 sent day ; and the deplorable effects of which are 
 mournfully conspicuous. There are, however, two 
 things to be remarked in regard to the constitution of 
 the English church on this particular head. In the 
 first place, it is well known, to all who have examined 
 the subject with impartial accuracy, that in the es- 
 timation of many of the brightest ornaments of that 
 church, at the era of its reformation, the change, 
 which was primarily effected by authority, did, by no 
 means, come up to the expectations and wishes of the 
 more enlightened part of the nation. A commence- 
 ment was indeed made; but we know that the plans 
 devised and resolved on by Edward VI. and his faith- 
 ful advisers, went far beyond what v/ere actually rea- 
 lized. Henry VIII. never contemplated such a re- 
 formation as had been exhibited on the Continent, and 
 in Scotland. His views were limited by considerations 
 of state policy ; and the strict and regular administra- 
 tion of the word and ordinances among the mass of 
 
44 
 
 the people, seems to have found only an inferior 
 place in his calculations and schemes. But secondly, 
 It is a very striking and a very pleasing fact, that the 
 authorized formularies of the Church, including the 
 offices for consecration of deacons and priests, which 
 were long anterior to the Act of Henry sanctioning 
 pluralities, do, by the strictness and purity of their 
 requisitions, most unequivocally demand of all cler- 
 gymen the personal discharge of every clerical duty; 
 while they not only set aside, by implication, non- 
 residence and pluralities, as utterly inconsistent with 
 this, but otherwise testify their disapprobation of ev- 
 ery thing which might directly or indirectly tend to 
 prevent the due discharge of ministerial obligation. 
 As illustrative of this, we need only quote a passage or 
 two from these authorised formularies. In the solemn 
 charge which the Church of England requires her 
 bishops to address to all priests on their receiving or- 
 ders, they are specially exhorted " never to cease their 
 labour, care, and diligence, till they have done all that 
 lieth in them, according to their bounden duty, to- 
 wards all such as are or shall be committed to their 
 care, to bring them to a ripeness and perfection of 
 age in Christ." They are again urged to " consider 
 with what care and study they ought to apply them- 
 selves to this; to pray earnestly for God's Holy Spi- 
 rit, and to be studious in reading and learning of the 
 Scriptures ; and to forsake and set aside as much as 
 they may, all worldly cares and studies." It is hoped 
 " that they have clearly determined, by God's grace, 
 to give themselves tvholli/ to this vocation, and as much 
 as lieth in them to apply themselves wholly to this 
 one thing, and to draw all their cares and studies this 
 way, and to this end ; and that by their daily reading 
 and weighing the Scriptures, they will study to wax 
 
45 
 
 riper and stronger in their ministry."* From such 
 documents as these, ought the genuine sense of the 
 Church to be learned; and if Acts of Parliament 
 should seem to dictate another sentiment on the sub- 
 ject, let us remember, that no act of human legisla- 
 ture can release from an ordination vow; and that the 
 genuine doctrine of every church must be most surely 
 and unequivocally learned from its own duly author- 
 ized standards. 
 
 The views held by the reformed Church of Trance^ 
 generally allowed to have been the best regulated 
 of all the continental churches, may be readily as- 
 certained by reference to such canons as the follow- 
 ing: " Ministers are enjoined totally to devote themselves 
 unto the duties of their calling as ministers, and to 
 the study of the Scriptures." " No pastor, under the 
 title of a pastor, shall be permitted to possess an 
 inheritance ; but in case his stipend or any part 
 thereof, were assigned on some particular tenement, 
 rent, or revenue, the whole shall be administered by 
 the deacons, or other persons commissioned and or- 
 dained thereunto by the churches, through whose 
 hand the minister shall receive his pension ; that so all 
 suspicion of covetousness may be removed, and lest 
 by such worldly cares, he should be diverted from 
 the weightier duties of his calling." " A minister be- 
 ing employed in the church, may not ordinarily exer- 
 cise an^'^ other calling, nor receive wages for it." 
 " No minister, together with the holy ministry, shall 
 be a practitioner in law or physic ; yet, out of charity, 
 he shall give assistance to the poor of his flock, and 
 of his neighbourhood ; provided always that he be not 
 thereby diverted from his calling, nor derive any gain 
 
 * Quoted by Bishop Burnet in his Pastoral Care, p. 100, 101. 
 
 c 3 
 
46 
 
 from his practice, unless in times of trouble and per- 
 secution, and when he cannot exercise his calling in 
 his church, and cannot be maintained by it. And 
 those who shall thus employ themselves in law or 
 physic, or in any other worldly distracting busi- 
 ness, or in any other calling, trade, or vocation what- 
 soever, shall be exhorted wholly to forbear it, and to- 
 tally to devote themselves unto the duties of their 
 calling as ministers, and to the study of the Scrip- 
 tures. And all colloquies (presbyteries) and synods 
 are admonished to proceed according to the canons 
 of the discipline against the refractory, and such as 
 be wilfully disobedient ; as also against those who ex- 
 pend so much of their time in teaching youthy that it 
 is an hindrance to them in the principal duties of their 
 ministerial office. And all consistories, (sessions) col- 
 loquies, and synods, shall have a most especial care 
 and regard that this canon be punctually observed, 
 and to suspend such as do transgress it from their ex- 
 ercise of the ministry.* In conformity with this ca- 
 non, it was expressly declared by the national synod, 
 held at Poictiers, in 1560, that " the ministry requires 
 the whole man."-}- And exactly a century afterwards, 
 the synod, in the last convocation which they were 
 permitted to hold during the tyrannical reign of Louis 
 
 * Discipline of the French R^jpormed Churches, published 
 in Quick's Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, vol. I. p. 16-58. 
 Also pp. 95, 136. In 1631, two professors of Greek, not ministerSy 
 were deposed, because they " were frequently hindered and di- 
 verted l)y their practice of phi/sic, from the said profession, and 
 for that the public interest requireth all University offices should 
 be conferred on unincumbered persons." Quick, vol. II. p. 
 294. 
 
 f Id. vol. I. p. 19. 
 
47 
 
 XIV. enacted the following remarkable statute : " That 
 pastors may acquit themselves more carefully of this 
 most needful part of their ministry, (the rehgious in- 
 struction of youth) and may have the more time for 
 their private studies, and better prepare themselves 
 for their public work in the pulpit, and give more satis- 
 faction to their auditories by a clear, judicious, and 
 solid explication of the Scriptures ; those churches 
 whose ministers are obliged to preach oftener than 
 three times in the week, are entreated to discharge 
 them of some part of this exercise, that they may be 
 the better qualified for their work, and may apply 
 themselves more profitably to the instruction of the 
 youth, by familiar catechisings. And synods and col- 
 loquies shall see unto it, that pastors and their churches 
 do all of them endeavour the advancement of their 
 member's edification, and the glory of God, and of 
 the Gospel."* 
 
 With regard to the nature of those " vocations" 
 which these churches considered as inconsistent with 
 the due discharge of pastoral duty, some information 
 suited to our present argument may be derived from 
 such facts as the following. In the national synod of 
 Alez, held in 1620, the provincial synod of Dau- 
 phiny moved the question, " Whether a minister might 
 together with his ministry exercise the profession of 
 philosophy? The assembly judgeth, that these two pro- 
 fessions are not convenient to be discharged by one 
 man at the same time."f In the year 1645, the na- 
 tional synod unanimously resolved, that considering 
 the learning and talents of the celebrated Blondel, he 
 
 * Acts of the National Synod of Loudun, 1659. chap. viiU 
 sect. 2. 
 t Acts of Synod, 1620, chap. 9. 
 
49 
 
 should be released from the office of the mmistry, and 
 appointed to reside at Paris as an " lionorary professor " 
 with a suitable salary, that he might devote himself 
 to the edification of the church by his theological 
 writings.* In regard to the theological faculty in 
 their several Universities, the following regulations 
 were made. " We shall need two professors at least 
 in Divinity, one of which shall expound the Holy 
 Scriptures, without expatiating into common-places. 
 The other shall read common-places, that is, expound 
 the system. If God do bless us with ability, we will 
 have a third, and then one of them shall expound the 
 old Testament, and the other the new ; and the third, 
 shall have the common places, which he shall have 
 finished at least in three years time, with that brevity 
 and solidity as becomes a scholar." " Every one of 
 them shall read ybz^r lectures a-w^eek, and shall exer- 
 cise their scholars in propositions, every week, both 
 in Latin and French."-}- A professor of Hebrew is 
 also nominated ; and, in some instances, txioo appear 
 to have been in office at the same time ;:|: but what 
 is remarkable, no professor of Church History ap- 
 pears to have been as yet constituted ; nor is that de- 
 partment included in the field marked out for each of 
 the Divinity professors. Indeed it is certain, that ma- 
 ny important parts of theological science were over- 
 looked from the want of adequate funds. The ordi- 
 nary salary of the divinity professors was 700 livres, 
 equal in value to about £30 sterling ; and this small 
 pittance was very defectively paid. It need not 
 
 * Acts of 88th Synod, held at Charenton, 164.5. chap. xv. 
 f Regulations for Universities, ordained by Synod of Alez, 
 1620. 
 \ Quick, vol. I. p. 419, 515. 
 
49 
 
 surprise us, therefore, to find, that in many cases these 
 professorships were united with churches; but in all 
 such cases the ordinary rule was this, that every such 
 pastor and professor shall be required only to preach, 
 and shall be released from all private ministerial duty. 
 In the synod of Nismes, 1572, it was declared, that 
 " Professors of Divinity have nothing to do" with the 
 duties of " correcting and reproving as pastors," be- 
 ing, by virtue of their office relieved from all ordinary 
 pastoral charge.* The synod of Alez, 1620, speaks of 
 the Professors of Theology in the University of Nis- 
 mes, as " ministers of the Gospel, though not in ac- 
 tual service^ because of their said Professorships,'' \ And 
 they passed this important regulation : " Professors 
 of Divinity and of the Hebrew tongue, which are in 
 holy orders, shall ever be reputed pastors of that 
 church in which their University is erected, and where 
 they do ordinarily reside, provided the church do con- 
 sent imto it, and shall take their turns in preaching, 
 only they shall be discharged from the exercise of 
 church discipline, and from other iurdensome employ- 
 ments of the ministry.'^. This decree was explained 
 and confirmed by the synod of 1623, in these words : 
 " This synod confirming the decree of Alez, declareth 
 this to be the sense and meaning of it ; That the 
 churches are not obliged to give them wages, nor 
 employ them in such frequent services as their ordi- 
 nary pastor, but leaveth it to the prudence and dis- 
 cretion of consistories to agree with the said professors 
 about their work and maintenance, as they shall judge 
 most consonant to reason and equity."^ The synod 
 
 * Acts of the Synod of Nismes, chap. vi. 
 f Id. chap. viii. 
 I Chap. XV. of Colleges, &c. 
 § Acts of the Synod of Charenton, chap. xi. On Colleges. 
 
50 
 
 of 1626 farther enact, " As for professors of Divinity, 
 who serve the churches of Universities, and receive 
 some kind of maintenance from them, because of 
 their ordinary ministry among them, there shall be 
 an half portion (of salary) granted to them, which 
 they shall receive also, but with deduction of their 
 pension promised them by their respective churches.* 
 In 1637, there is allotted *^ to the University of Nis- 
 mes, for two professors of Divinity 1100 livres; where- 
 of one shall receive 700, and another 400, because 
 he hath a stipend as pastor.''-|- 
 
 It deserves also to be noticed that the Universities 
 of Protestant France being six in number,:}: and ex- 
 clusively devoted to theological education, could not 
 be attended by any very great number of students ; 
 and the labour of preaching once a-week would be 
 no very serious addition to the labours of the profes- 
 sional chair. But the real reason why these churches 
 found it necessary at times to tolerate what they did 
 not entirely approve, will be found in the following 
 extract from the work of a man who is justly entitled 
 to the most ample credit: " It is certain," says Oster- 
 vald, " that all the churches are not provided with 
 a sufficient number of persons who devote themselves 
 to the purposes of Divine service, and to the instruc- 
 tion and improvement of the people." " One single 
 person performs all the ecclesiastical functions, and 
 sometimes several churches have but one pastor. This 
 disorder, as well as others, proceeds in part from the 
 
 • Acts of Synod of Castres, chap. xxxi. 
 
 f Acts of Synod of Alanson, chap. xix. 
 
 I Those of Montauban, Saumur, Nismes, Montpellier, Die, 
 and Sedan. The only one now remaining is that of Montauban, 
 where there oxe four Divinity Professors. 
 
51 
 
 want of means and of necessary funds, for supplying 
 the necessities of the churches."* The same cause 
 has influenced, more or less, all the reformed churches 
 of Europe, in permitting certain practices to creep 
 in, and to gain a kind of establishment, though directly 
 
 • Ostervald's Sources de Corruptions, torn. II. p. 22. An 
 attempt has been repeatedly made to obtain the example of this 
 eminent individual as a sanction to the lawfulness and practica- 
 bility of pluralities; and a bon mot of his, rather ludicrous in it- 
 self, has been brought forward as affording a sort of explanation 
 of his sentiments on the subject. I have been led to look into 
 the " Life of Ostervald," published hi 1778, by M. Durand, mi- 
 nister of the French Church at the Savoy, in which the anec- 
 dote is detailed. Ostervald was not a pluralist in any sense, but 
 a humble, though most laborious parish minister at Neufchatel. 
 He happened one day to meet, as he often did, u-ith M. de la 
 Gacherie, a physician of eminence in the place, and he addressed 
 him in his usual style of good-humoured pleasantry, " A^us som- 
 mes, vous et moi, sans comparaison comme les mulcts ; jjIus on les 
 charge et mieux Us vont." Little did the worthy man expect tliat 
 this harmless jew cTesprit would be gravely brought forward at the 
 distance of a century and a half, in the ecclesiastical courts of 
 Scotland, as a kind of argument in favour of pluralities. (See 
 Report of the Presbytery of Glasgow, on the Case of Principal 
 M'Farlane, p. 14.) But did not Ostervald, after all, sanction 
 pluralities by his example ? The facts are simply these : In the 
 city of Neufchatel, with a population not exceeding 5000, (see 
 Brooke's Gazetteer, and Edinburgh Gazetteer, Art. Neufcha- 
 tel) there were three parochial ministers, besides a regularly es- 
 tablished Catechist, (Durand, p. 90.) Ostervald was chosen 
 first to the office of Catechist, and afterwards elevated to 
 that of parochial minister. After labouring in the charge for 
 a number of years, he in 1701, resolved to give private les- 
 sons in Divinity, to a few young men, with the view of pre- 
 paring them for the office of the ministry in the French Church. 
 There was no college nor theological school in the city, and Oster- 
 vald continued his humble private efforts till 1711, when a theo- 
 logical school was formally established, the chief direction of 
 
62 
 
 in the face of their most solemn statutes and consti- 
 tutions.* 
 
 From considerations of necessity, then, it need not 
 surprise us to find in the University towns of France, 
 the offices of pastor and professor frequently con- 
 joined. The fact is, that their union was tempo- 
 rary, and sanctioned solely on the plea of necessity ; 
 and even then the duty of preaching was all that 
 was required of such as held the conjoined offices. 
 In the German Universities, similar arrangements seem 
 to have been made, and in the larger seminaries, such 
 as Leyden, the theological professorships appear to have 
 been held exclusively of all other charges.f If in 
 later times, the good old regulations of the reformed 
 age have been laid aside, and pluralities, in their worst 
 sense, obtruded on the churches of the Continent, the 
 
 which was conferred on him. But long before this, he had received 
 as a colleagiie in tlie ministry, his old friend and fellow student 
 M. Tribolet, by whom he was effectually relieved of the more la- 
 borious duties of his office. The number of students under 
 his care was necessarily veiy limited, and he continued to hold 
 these conjoined offices, until, by the infirmities of age, he felt 
 himself unable for the duties, when he resolved on an uncondi- 
 tional resignation. This, however, the magistrates of the city 
 declined accepting, and he remained in office till 1744<, when he 
 died. " La Vie de Jean Frederic Ostervnld, Pasteur de Keufdia- 
 tel en Suisse, par M. David Durand, Miuistre, &c." pp. 90, 99, 
 110, 160, 296. The cases of pluralities in the French and Swiss 
 Churches, are mostly a-piece witli this ; and we may safely say 
 in regard to them all, " Valeant qvAntum valere possunf." 
 
 * As affecting illustrations of the defective state of the French 
 churches, partly from the want of pastors, and partly from the want 
 of funds, see the very interesting records of their national synods, 
 as published in Quick's Synodicon, vol. I. pp. 20. vol. 11. pp. 
 117, 211,268. 
 
 f Life of Witsius, by Frazer, p. xx. 
 
53 
 
 fact only proves the rapid progress of corruption ; while 
 the melancholy state of those churches holds out to 
 us a salutary warning of the dangers to be dreaded 
 from a system which tends to secularise the ministry, 
 and to deprive the people of the full and salutary 
 influence of a regularly conducted pastoral superm- 
 tendence. 
 
 The sentiments of the once justly celebrated 
 churches of the Helvetic Confession, in Switzerland, 
 accord most exactly with those of the French Pro- 
 testants in relation to the nature and importance of 
 pastoral duty. In their friendly epistle to the churches 
 of France, convoked in national synod, the pastors 
 and professors of Geneva thus express themselves: 
 " We take the freedom to entreat you for God's sake, 
 strictly to inspect into vocations and employments, 
 that they be not mixed nor confounded to the detri- 
 ment both of one and the other. We know very 
 well that necessity, the law of the present day, ia 
 pleaded and urged on behalf of this practice, too too 
 much in use among you, to vindicate and justify it. 
 But, most dear brethren, we beseech you to consider 
 whether it were not better that your temporal affairs 
 should suffer some inconveniences, than your spiritual 
 ones be contaminated. And whether the great risque 
 you run of ruining and depraving your pastors, should 
 be preferred unto your temporal interests," &c.* In a 
 reply made by the French Churches, in 1626, to an 
 epistle of exactly the same tenor, there is the follow- 
 ing strong and comprehensive declaration of their 
 views and feelings : " We do give you assurance that 
 it is our intention, that those who are called of God 
 
 * Acts of the National Synod of the Protestants of France, 
 1614, chap. xix. 
 
54 
 
 to serve and minister before him, in his house, shall 
 voholli/ and absolutely attend thereunto ; we well know- 
 ing that whilst with Moses in the mount, they give 
 themselves to prayer, and apply themselves wholly 
 to their ministerial work and duty, they will attract 
 upon their people the blessing of the Lord, and they 
 will be mighty with God for the throwing down of 
 strongholds, and of every high thing that exalts it- 
 self against the knowledge of God."* 
 
 But it may be asked, Is the Chiircli of Scotland to 
 be regulated by the sentiments and practices of the 
 Reformed Churches of Switzerland, of Geneva, or of 
 France? In reply, we would observe, that, in a ques- 
 tion of this nature, it must ever be of importance to 
 know what were the sentiments held regarding it by 
 the most enlightened and best regulated part of the 
 Protestant world; and it cannot be a matter of indif- 
 ference to know what the sentiments and practices of 
 that Church were, which, in the period of its greatest 
 purity, could number upwards of 2000 flourishing 
 congregations within its pale — which can boast in its 
 literary catalog;je, of such names as those of Calvin, 
 Beza, Chamier, Du Moulin, Rivet, Ludovicus Cap- 
 pellus, Blondel, Amyrault, Daille, Claude, Ostervald, 
 Saurin, and a host of others equally illustrious — whose 
 Councils were attended by not a few of the most 
 honourable and enlightened peers of the realm, in the 
 capacity either of commissioners or elders — and whose 
 judgment on all matters of theological controversy 
 was held in high respect, not by the king of Great 
 Britain alone, but by all the sovereign princes of 
 Protestant Europe.f Such a Church as this may 
 
 * Acts of the Synod of Castres, 1626, chap. 38. 
 
 •f See the Letter of King James addressed " to the Ministers, 
 
55 
 
 certainly be considered by us as no contemptible 
 expositor of the general sentiments of the Reformed 
 bod}^, on matters so deeply affecting the general spirit 
 and principles of the Reformation. 
 
 But there are circumstances of a peculiar nature, 
 which render the sentiments and practice of these 
 churches particularly interesting to Scotsmen, and 
 which bring them into close contact with the consti- 
 tution and laws of our own church. In the Jirst 
 place, it is well known, that the confessions and canons 
 of the French and Genevese churches were either 
 wholly compiled, or at least revised and sanctioned, 
 by Calvin and his friends ; and it is equally well known, 
 that these eminent persons were likewise deeply con- 
 cerned in all matters connected with the establishment 
 of the Reformation in Scotland. It is not, therefore, 
 to be supposed, that their judgment, in regard to eccle- 
 siastical constitution and ministerial duty, in the one 
 instance, would be materially different from their sen- 
 timents on similar points in regard to the other. John 
 Knox was the steady friend and correspondent of Cal- 
 vin, and there was a remarkable coincidence between 
 them in all matters connected with the doctrine, go- 
 vernment, and discipline of the Church. 
 
 In the second place, Andrevo Melville who had such 
 a distinguished part assigned him in the settlement of 
 the Presbyterian form of government in Scotland, and 
 who presided over the two principal seats of learning 
 in his native country, received his education in France, 
 officiated for a considerable time as Regent in the 
 Academj^ of Geneva, and after his return to Scotland, 
 
 Pastors, and Elders of the National Synod" of France, with the 
 Synod's Answer, May, 1614, in Quick's Synodicon, Vol. I. pp. 
 437—440. 
 
56 
 
 in 1572, continued to maintain a close and endeared 
 intercourse with Beza and his other friends on the 
 continent. The leaders of the French Church he held 
 in the highest esteem, and their sentiments with re- 
 gard to ecclesiastical government and law he cherished 
 with the most profound veneration. 
 
 In the third place, it is a fact of great interest in 
 connection with the present inquiry, that from the era 
 of the Reformation in France, down to the year 1645, 
 when Louis XIV. prohibited foreigners from holding 
 ecclesiastical offices in his dominions, a succession of 
 eminent Scotsmen adorned the annals of the Gallican 
 Church, It may suffice to notice the names of Henry 
 Scrimger, Regent in the Academy of Geneva.* Robert 
 Boyd of Trochrig, pastor successively at Porteuil and 
 Saumur, and afterwards Principal of the Colleges of 
 Glasgow and Edinburgh, and finally /;ro7?2o/^af to be 
 minister qfPaisley.\ John Welsh, son-in-law of Knox, 
 minister successively at Selkirk, Kirkcudbright, and 
 Ayr, and banished for attending the Assembly at Aber- 
 deen, 1605, fourteen years ministerof St. Jean d'Angely 
 in France, and afterwards permitted to live in retire- 
 ment till his death in 1623. David Hume, the honoured 
 
 * M'Crie's Life of Melville, Vol. I. p. 9, where some account 
 is given of this eminent individual. 
 
 f Boyd was elected Principal of Glasgow College in 1615, 
 translated to the Principality in Edinburgh in 1622; and de- 
 prived of his office the very next year, by an order of the king 
 to the magistrates of tliat city. Boyd was obnoxious to James 
 on account of his determined opposition to Episcopacy. Calder- 
 wood, pp. 799 — 801. He was soon afterwards settled in the 
 Abbey Parish of Paisley, then a single cliarge ; and was for 
 several years eminently useful in that important station. He 
 died there in 1G28. See Records of the Presbytery of Paisley, 
 1626. 
 
57 
 
 bearer of a special letter from king James to the French 
 National Synod of 1614. Duncan, Professor of Greek 
 in the Protestant University of Saumur. Forbes, Pro- 
 fessor of Eloquence in the same seminary. Weems, 
 Principal of the University of Montauban, afterwards 
 Principal of St. Leonard's College, St. Andrew's.* 
 John Cameron, Minister at Bourdeaux, Professor of 
 Divinity at Montauban, and afterwards at Glasgow, 
 well known as an able theological writer, and termed 
 by Bishop Hall " the most learned man Scotland ever 
 produced." Alexander Colville, the successor of Mel- 
 ville in the Theological Chair at Sedan, afterwards 
 Professor of Divinity at St. Andrew's and Edinburgh. 
 Walter Donaldson, Principal of the College of Sedan. 
 John Smith, Professor of Philosophy in the same semi- 
 nary .f Sharp, Professor of Divinity in the University 
 of Die.:}: Gilbert Primrose, minister first in Edinburgh, 
 afterwards successively at Montauban and Bourdeaux, 
 the able antagonist of the Jesuits at Amboise, and who 
 afterwards became pastor of the French Church at the 
 Savoy, London, and Chaplain to king James — and of 
 John Dury, who received his education in one of the 
 French seminaries, and afterwards became one of the 
 ministers of Edinburgh. j^ Such men as these pos- 
 sessed no slender weight in the transactions of both 
 
 « Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, Vol. V. p. 4«75. 
 
 f M'Cries Life of Melville, Vol. II. pp. 420, 4oS. 
 
 \ Wodrow's Life of Boyd, p. 173. 
 
 § " The number of Scotsmen who taught in the seminaries 
 of France," says Dr. M'Crie, " was great. They were to be 
 found in all the universities and colleges; in several of them 
 they held the honorary situation of Principal; and in others, 
 they amounted to a third part of the Professors. Most of them 
 had been educated under Melville at St. Andrew's." Life of 
 Melville, Vol. II. p. 419. 
 
58 
 
 the French and Scottish Churches; and from this 
 circumstance, among others, we may reasonably infer 
 a similarity in their constitution and spirit. It is per- 
 haps a circumstance not unworthy of notice, that as a 
 symbol of close and endeared union between these 
 churches, they severally adopted the same armorral 
 ensign, if we may so term it— a bush burning, with the 
 appropriate inscription. Nee tamen consumehatur. 
 
 The following sentiments of the celebrated Oster- 
 vald, one of the brightest ornaments of the Swiss and 
 French churches, may form a very appropriate con- 
 clusion of this historical review. We have already 
 noticed his example in regard to the duties of the pas- 
 toral office ; and the reader will be prepared to judge 
 whether the man who speaks in such terms as these is 
 likely to become a very keen advocate in favour of 
 the system of plurahties. After detailing a variety of 
 ministerial duties, he thus concludes : " From these 
 
 general reflections, this consequence may be drawn 
 
 that the ministry is a real businesSy and that it demands 
 the "oihole man. Preaching requires much of our care; 
 but after having preached, it is necessary to attend to 
 discipline; nor is this all: it is necessary to watch 
 over the flock individually; and this is the most pain- 
 ful and the most important part of a pastor's duty."— 
 *' It is necessary for a pastor to know the state of his 
 church, because without this, he cannot know how 
 to edify it."—" From all we have said, it appears 
 obvious that the pastoral charge is a most painful one, 
 and that it requires the vohole man. One can never fail 
 of employment in such a field ; and the chief occupa- 
 tion is by no means that of making sermons and 
 preaching them."—" The visitation of the sick is one of 
 the most important functions of the ministry— and it 
 is one of those in which ministers seldom acquit them- 
 
59 
 
 selves well. The greater part of ministers make no 
 preparation for it."* In his justly admired treatise, 
 " On the Sources of Corruptions among Christians," 
 the best of his works, we find one chapter entitled 
 " Le Defaut des Pasteurs," from which we shall cull 
 a few pithy remarks. " I shall speak one word on 
 the instruction which a pastor ought to address to his 
 flock. Public instructions, useful as they may be, are 
 by no means sufficient. The edification of the church 
 requires that pastors should instruct individuals in the 
 different districts. I prove the necessity of these spe- 
 cial instructions by the following reasons. 1. If we 
 instruct and exhort only in public, what instruction 
 will those persons receive who attend not on our ser- 
 mons, or who cannot hear them ; as well as those audi- 
 tors who hear, but who do not comprehend their 
 meaning; not to say others, who comprehend them 
 well enough, but who forget all immediately, and 
 thus profit not by them? 2. It is impossible to tell 
 every thing in one sermon. Into whatever detail we 
 enter, there must ever remain many topics on which 
 we cannot treat. There are also matters which a 
 preacher cannot with propriety bring before the pub- 
 lic. If, then, Christians have not an opportunity of 
 being instructed on these points individually, they 
 will remain ignorant of them all their days. 3. In 
 order to teach well, it is necessary that in proportion 
 as he who instructs others, communicates his thoughts 
 
 * De I'Exercise du Ministere Sacre, par M. Ostervald, a Basle, 
 1739, p. 342. This work, which has never been translated into 
 English, contains a vast variety of admirable observations and 
 rules relative to every department of the sacred office. Our 
 only regret is that the theology of the venerable author is not 
 always so sound, as his moral precepts and prevalent spirit are 
 pure. 
 
60 
 
 to them, so they whom he instructs should communi- 
 cate their thoughts to him. Sometimes they have 
 their doubts. A hearer may find himself stumbled 
 by a fact of which he is ignorant, or by a difficulty 
 which arises in his mind. Such a man frequents ser- 
 mons, it may be for twenty or thirty years, who has 
 still his doubts and difficulties as to the very founda- 
 tions of religion. If such persons have not such things 
 explained to them, they cannot be much influenced 
 by what is said to them, and they may retain their 
 scruples even unto death. It is, therefore, a great 
 evil, that particular instructions should be so much 
 out of use, and that Christians should have so little 
 intercourse with their pastors on the things of religion. 
 Nothing is to be had now, except the instruction 
 which is given in public discourses, which are by no 
 means sufficient, even though those discourses may 
 be such as they ought to be. When private instruc- 
 tion fails, and even when there is no deficiency in the 
 sermons preached, it cannot but be, that the greater 
 part of Christians, deprived of that light and those 
 aids which are absolutely necessary, should live in 
 sin." " The chief and most general function of pas- 
 tors in the primitive church, was the private instruc- 
 tion and government of the church. Preaching was 
 by no means neglected; but all the ecclesiastics were 
 not preachers. This duty was committed to such as 
 were specially qualified for it. Would to God, that 
 this distinction were still kept up ! The church would 
 be better taken care of, and the gospel would be better 
 preached." " The learning and the studies of theo- 
 logians, I speak chiefly of such as have the cure of 
 souls, is very often vain, and of no use to the edifica- 
 tion of their flocks. They attach themselves to pur- 
 suits that suit their taste, while their proper studies 
 
61 
 
 are held merely as an amusement or diversion. There- 
 fore, he who neglects the duties of his pastoral charge, 
 and who engages in other occupations, differs little 
 from that minister who does literally nothing at all." 
 " The pastor who seeks perpetually the means of 
 edifying his people, who directs to this all his cogi- 
 tations, voho is occupied night and day ivith the wants of 
 his flock — that man cannot fail of success. When he 
 speaks, when he exhorts, it is the heart which speaks ; 
 and the language of the heart has an eloquence and 
 a persuasion which the hearers well know, and which 
 elevate, in their esteem, the preacher of piety and zeal 
 far above the man who is mercenary and hypocritical. 
 Whosoever will consider seriously, and without pre- 
 judice, all that I have said, will be convinced that it is 
 principally in ministers we are to trace the corruptions 
 of Christians. I speak not of all indiscriminately. 
 There are some to whom we must give credit ; and 
 who distinguish themselves by their talents, and their 
 zeal, and by the purity of their lives. But their num- 
 ber is not sufficiently great to stay the course of those 
 disorders which the crowds of degenerated pastors 
 occasion in the church. These men destroy what the 
 others design to establish."* 
 
 We have thus endeavoured to exhibit an historical 
 analysis of the sentiments of the Christian Church in 
 the three great periods of its existence — first, in its 
 earlier and purer form, as it existed in the apostolical 
 times; then in its state of corruption under the pa- 
 pacy; and, lastly, in the period of its reformation. 
 Throughout we find the same unequivocal recognition 
 
 * Traite des Sources de la Corruption qui regne aujourdui, 
 parmi les Chretiens, Amsterdam, 1708, Tom. IT. pp. 82, 102, 
 107, 117, 124. 
 
62 
 
 of the pastoral office, as the exclusive vocation of 
 those who are ordained to it — the same decided con- 
 demnation of pluralities as evils of incalculable mag- 
 nitude — and the same disapprobation of every extra- 
 neous engagement, however laudable and useful, that 
 would interfere with the due discharge of the whole 
 work of the ministry. Those Churches in particular 
 whose connection with Scotland was most close, do 
 most plainly and perseveringly maintain these prin- 
 ciples, while they acted on them so far as circum- 
 stances rendered it practicable for them to do so. 
 This review of opinions and practices in the Church 
 will pave the way for a more minute examination of 
 the principles and practices of the Church of Scot- 
 land in regard to pluralities, to which we shall proceed 
 in the following Chapter. 
 
63 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 SENTIMENTS OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND RELATIVE 
 TO PLURALITIES OF OFFICES IN MINISTERS. 
 
 The sentiments of a Church may be most satisfac- 
 torily ascertained by reference to her established 
 standards of discipline and government; the acts of 
 her supreme councils ; and the general tenor of her 
 historical procedure. 
 
 Instead of exhibiting a dry historical detail of the 
 statutes and proceedings of the Church of Scotland, 
 in regular chronological order, we shall endeavour 
 to analyze them systematically, and to arrange them 
 under distinct heads, according to their respective 
 subjects, accompanying them with such remarks of a 
 critical and explanatory nature as may appear neces- 
 sary for the purpose of our argument. It is not my 
 intention to collect the tvhole of the ecclesiastical re^u- 
 lations and proceedings on any one topic, but simply 
 such of them as bear most directly on the general 
 question at issue. We wish to bring under the eye 
 of the reader at once, what lies scattered over a very 
 extended surface, and to show the separate bearino- 
 of each particular, on the great principles we wish to 
 establish. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 Sentiments of the Church of Scotkmd relative to the 
 General Nature of the Pastoral Office, 
 
 In the " First Book of Discipline," drawn up, In 
 1560, by Knox and his fellow-labourers, a work, which 
 
 D 2 
 
64 
 
 although it has been superseded by later authorities, 
 must ever be viewed by us, in the words of a most com- 
 petent judge,* "as a striking monument of the abihties, 
 the views, and the principles of our venerated Refor- 
 mers;" we have the following general representation of 
 the nature and extent of pastoral duty. " The minister 
 must, with all careful diligence, attend upon the flock 
 of Christ Jesus, over the which he is appointed the 
 pastor ; that he walk in the presence of God so sin- 
 cerely, that the graces of the Holy Spirit may be mul- 
 tiplied unto him, and in the presence of men so soberly 
 and uprightly, that his life may confirm in the eyes of 
 men that which by tongue and word he persuadeth 
 unto others." " He may not leave the flock at his 
 pleasure, to which he hath promised his fidelity and 
 labours." " We mean not but that the whole church, 
 or the most part thereof, for just considerations, may 
 transfer a minister from one church to another; neither 
 yet mean we, that men who now serve as it were of 
 benevolence, may not be appointed and stated to 
 serve in other places, but once being solemnly elected 
 and admitted, we cannot approve that they should 
 change at their own pleasure."f 
 
 In the " Second Book of Discipline," agreed upon 
 in the General Assembly, 1378, sworn to in the Na- 
 tional Covenant, revised and ratified by the Assembly, 
 1638, and according to which our Church government 
 was established by law in 1592, 1640, and 1690, we 
 have the following statements relative to pastoral 
 duty. " Pastors, bishops, or ministers, are they who 
 are appointed to particular congregations, which they 
 rule by the word of God, and over the which they 
 
 * Cook's History of the Reformation, Vol.. II. p. 343. 
 f First Book of Discipline, chap. iii. 
 
65 
 
 watch ; in respect whereof sometimes they are called 
 pastors, because thej^ feed their congregations ; some- 
 times episcopi, or bishops, because they watch over 
 their flock; sometimes ministers, because of their 
 service and office; sometimes also presbyters, or se- 
 niors, for the gravity of manners which they ought to 
 have in taking care of their spiritual government, 
 which ought to be most dear unto them." " They 
 who are called by God, and duly elected by man, 
 after that they have once accepted the charge of the 
 ministry may not leave their functions. The deserters 
 should be admonished; and in case of obstinacy, 
 finally excommunicated." " No pastor may leave his 
 flock, without license of the Provincial or National 
 Assembly; which if he do, after admonitions not 
 obeyed, let the censures of the kirk strike upon him." 
 <* Unto the pastor appertains teaching of the word of 
 God, in season and out of season, publicly and pri- 
 vately, always travelling to edify, and to discharge 
 his conscience, as God's word prescribes to him." 
 *' He ought also to watch over the manners of his 
 flock, that he may the better apply the doctrine to 
 them, in reprehending the dissolute persons, and ex- 
 horting the godly to continue in the fear of the Lord."* 
 We quote these passages with the view of exhibiting 
 the light in which the Fathers of the Scottish Church 
 contemplated the pastoral office, as the business or 
 calling to which ministers were devoted ; as requiring 
 the full strength of their faculties and of their time; 
 and as involving in it a tie of relationship never to be 
 broken without great necessity, and that necessit}'- to 
 be judged of by the competent ecclesiastical autho- 
 rity. 
 
 * Chap. iv. Of Pastors or Ministers. 
 
66 
 
 In the form of Church Government drawn up by 
 the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, and approved 
 by the General Assembly, 1645, we have the follow- 
 ing connected view of the " office of pastor." " The 
 pastor is an ordinary and perpetual officer in the church, 
 prophesying of the time of the Gospel. First, it be- 
 longs to his office to pray for and with his flock, as 
 the mouth of the people unto God ; Acts vi. 2, 3, 4. 
 where preaching and prayer are joined as several 
 parts of the same office. The office of the elder (that 
 is, the pastor,) is to pray for the sick, even in private, 
 to which a blessing is specially promised ; much more, 
 therefore, ought he to perform this in the public exe- 
 cution of his office as a part thereof." It belongs to 
 him also, " to read the Scriptures publicly — to feed 
 the flock by preaching of the word, according to which 
 he is to teach, convince, reprove, exhort, and com- 
 fort — to catechise, which is a plain laying down the 
 first principles of the oracles of God, or of the doc- 
 trine of Christianity, and is a part of preaching — to 
 dispense other divine mysteries — to administer the 
 sacraments — to bless the people from God — to take 
 care of the poor — and he hath also a ruling power 
 over the flock as pastor." " Where there is but one 
 minister in a particular congregation, he is to perform, 
 so Jar as he is able, the whole work of the ministry." 
 " The pastor and people must so nearly cohabit to- 
 gether as that they may mutually perform their duties 
 each to the other with most conveniency." " Ordin- 
 ation is the solemn setting apart of a person to some 
 public church office. It is agreeable to the word of 
 God, and very expedient that such as are to be or- 
 dained ministers, be designed to some particular church 
 or other ministerial charge." " The proportion of 
 his gifts in relation to the place unto which he is called 
 
67 
 
 shall be considered." " And as for him that hath 
 formerly been ordained a minister, and is to be re- 
 moved to another charge, he shall bring a testimonial 
 of his ordination, and of his abilities, and conversa- 
 tion, whereupon his fitness for that place shall be tried 
 by his preaching there, and (if it shall be judged ne- 
 cessai'y) by a farther examination of him." — Of the 
 nature and extent of the private duties required of 
 ministers, some idea may be formed from an act passed 
 in the Assembly at Edinburgh, August 30th, 1639, 
 which, among other injunctions laid on the clergy, 
 contains the following: " The Assembly considering 
 that the long waited for fruits of the Gospel, so mer- 
 cifully planted and preserved in this land, and the 
 reformation of ourselves and families, so solemnly 
 vowed to God of late in our covenant, cannot take 
 effect except the knowledge and worship of God be 
 carried from the pulpit to every family within the 
 parish ; hath therefore appointed that every minister, 
 besides his pains on the Lord's-day, shall have weekly 
 catechising of some part of the parish, and not alto- 
 gether cast off the examination of the people till a 
 little before the communion ; also, that in every family 
 the worship of God be erected, where it is not, both 
 morning and evening: and that the children and ser- 
 vants be catechised at home by the masters of the 
 famihes, whereof account shall be taken by the mini- 
 sters and elders assisting him in the visitation of every 
 family ; and, lest they fail, that visitation of the 
 several kirks be seriously followed by every Presby- 
 tery for this end among others. The execution and 
 success whereof being tried by the Synod, let it be 
 represented to the next General Assembly."* With 
 
 * Act anent Ministers Catechising, and Family Exercise, 16S9, 
 solemnly lenewed in 1C49. 
 
68 
 
 regard to visitation of families, the Assembly, 1708, 
 has laid down the most precise rules and directions ; 
 and the importance which the church has attached to 
 this part of ministerial duty is clearly evinced by the 
 imrticularity of these rules, and the solemnity with 
 which their observance is enjoined. The length of 
 the article precludes its insertion here; nor is it ne- 
 cessary, as its contents must be supposed to be fami- 
 liarly known to every minister.* We may remark, 
 in connection with the subject of private pastoral 
 duty, that the institution of an order of men called 
 Elders, " who do not labour in word and doctrine, 
 but who assist the pasto?' in examining those who come 
 to the Lord's table, and in visiting the sick, and who 
 hold assemblies with the pastors and doctors, for esta- 
 blishing good order and exercise of discipline;"-]- 
 plainly proceeds on the assumption, that the pastoral 
 office is designed to be a man's exclusive business, 
 and that so far from being able to undertake " another 
 vocation," he requires the help of a regularly organized 
 class of assistants, in order to execute the duties of 
 this one aright. 
 
 In conformity with these general principles, we find 
 such particular enactments as the following. " All 
 office-bearers should have their own particular flocks 
 amongst whom they exercise their charge ; and should 
 make residence with them, and take the inspection 
 and oversight of them, every one in his vocation; and 
 generally these two things ought they all to respect, 
 the glory of God and edifying of his kirk, in discharg- 
 ing their duties in their calling."J " To Christian 
 
 * Acts of Assembly, 1708, Sess. 10. Gillan's Abridgment, 2d 
 ed. p. 322. 
 f Second Book of Discipline, eh. vi. Of Elders. 
 ^ Idem. ch. iii. 
 
69 
 
 magistrates, it pertains to assist and fortify the godly 
 proceedings of the kirk in all 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 sufficient provision be 
 made for the ministry, the schools, and the poor; and 
 if they," that is, the ministers and teachers " have not 
 sufficient to await upon their charges, to supply their indi- 
 gence even mth their own rents, if need should require."* 
 Here it is plain, that cases of extreme necessity are 
 ordered to be provided for, in a way very different 
 from that of union or plurality of offices. As to the 
 extent of provision made for the ministry, we have this 
 general enactment: " The ministers stipends should 
 be moderated, that neither they have occasion to be 
 careful for the world, nor yet wanton nor insolent 
 anywise."-}- In 1375, the Assembly enjoin on every 
 minister or superintendent, " the peculiar charge" of 
 one *' particular flock" as his " chief function'' — this 
 last expression being explained by what immediately 
 follows, " that out of the number of ordinary pastors, 
 some may be chosen to have power to oversee and 
 visit such reasonable bounds, besides his own flock, 
 as the General Assembly shall appoint, with consent 
 of the ministers of that province, and the consent of 
 that flock to which they shall be appointed. "J Here 
 it is plain, that the care of one charge is the official 
 function of a pastor; and that, when through the ne- 
 cessity of the times, the Assembly shall see meet to give 
 him the power of visiting or inspecting other churches, 
 it shall only be with the consent of all the parties con- 
 
 * Second Book of Discipline, ch. x. 
 f First Book of Discipline, ch. vi. 
 \ Calderwood, p. 69. 
 
 d3 
 
70 
 
 cerned, and during the pleasure of the Assembly. 
 And the office of these visitors is expressly said to be, 
 " to see that eve>-y one of the 7ninisters exerce their oim 
 vocation vigilantly in their own congregations." Even 
 Mr. Patrick Adamson, partial as he was to Episcopacy, 
 and erroneous as were his views on certain points, thus 
 explained his sentiments relative to the nature of the 
 pastoral duty, and his object in doing so was to show 
 how far he accorded with the general sentiment of the 
 Church. " In the Epistles of Paul to Titus and 
 Timothy, the office of a pastor is described to be 
 a certain function, to which a certain administration 
 of a certain peculiar flock is enjoined." " A bishop 
 is not the bishop of a bishop, nor yet the pastor of a 
 pastor; but every one bishop and pastor of their own 
 flock, for which they shall give reckoning to the most 
 high Judge." " We take us to one kirke to bestow our 
 labours to our potver thereat,''^ In 1397, power was 
 given to the " first General Commission" to see " that 
 every congregation have a special pastor, honestly 
 sustained for the better awaiting on his cure, and 
 discharging his dutiful office in the same."f In the 
 Assembly, 1600, all the power of the king and his 
 friends, set in array against the Presbyterian principles 
 of the Church, could not prevent the Assembly from 
 declaring it as their decided conviction, " that one 
 office for one man is sufficient. When many irons 
 are in the fire some mil cool. Therefore Plato and 
 Aristotle, men naturally wise, crave in the republics 
 iTg ir^og h\ and banish from the same oQeX/gKoXv^mv xai 
 6o^'jd^i--ram ; instruments serving for more uses than 
 one as unprofitable and spoiling things, &c. Now, 
 
 * Adainson's Propositions, Assembly, 1580. 
 f Acts of Assembly, 1597. 
 
n 
 
 if in siibjedo o/jjoysvsoj in the commonwealth, by the 
 light of nature, one office is sufficient for one man, 
 it is no ways convenient that m subjecto InooyvjiM, 
 that is, both in kirk and commonwealth, one man bear 
 two offices."* The Assembly, 1602, renew the ap- 
 pointment on visitors to be particularly careful to 
 inquire in every parish whether the minister is atten- 
 tive to all the duties of his office, especially regular in 
 preaching, examination of his flock, visitation of fami- 
 lies, exercise of discipline, &c. being constantly among 
 his people, and alive to their best interests.f In the 
 Assembly, 1646, one of the " enormities" particularly 
 affecting the " calling of ministers ' is " idleness, either 
 in seldom preaching, as once on the Lord's-day, or 
 in the preparation for public duties, not being given 
 to reading and meditation; others show their diligence 
 only in fits, and are not like other tradesmen continually at 
 their ijoork"'\. And ministei's are exhorted " with all 
 diligence and faithfulness to improve their ministry to 
 the utmost, to be instant in season and out of season; 
 yea, even frugally to employ their time in private, in 
 reading of and meditating on Scripture, that the word 
 of God may dwell plentifully in them."^ 
 
 We might multiply references, but it is unneces- 
 sary. The quotations we have made will surely bear 
 us out in these several conclusions. First, That in 
 the eye of the Church of Scotland, the pastoral charge 
 is the proper Junction of every minister, to which his 
 time, talents, and labours are to be sedulously devoted. 
 Secondly, That the due and regular discharge of the 
 
 * Caldenvood, p. 438. 
 
 t Idem. p. 463. 
 
 \ Acts of Assembly, 3d June, 1646. 
 
 § Idem. Sess. 10. 
 
72 
 
 varied duties of this vocation is held as amply sufficient 
 to occupy the talents and time of any ma" and will be 
 felt to be so by every conscientious pastor, j..... 
 That, for the adequate support of one minister for each 
 parish, sufficient provision was ordered by the Church 
 to be made, and, after many struggles, actually was 
 made, out of the funds consecrated to pious uses. 
 Fourthly, That if the necessity of the times should 
 require the occasional employment of an ordinary pas- 
 tor in some additional duties, those duties shall be of 
 a nature agreeable to his spiritual functions, and shall 
 in no case be undertaken without the special consent 
 of the General Assembly, and of all the parties con- 
 cerned. 
 
 From the quotations which have been made, we 
 may form a pretty good idea of the sentiments held 
 by the members of the Church in those days, relative 
 to what may be termed the exclusively sacred character 
 of the pastoral charge. But there is another source of 
 information on this subject, to which it will be necessary 
 to attend. We allude to those instances in which the 
 Church interposed to prevent all secular intermixtures 
 with the sacred avocations of the ministry. 
 
 The regulations of the church on this head are re- 
 markably strict and appropriate. " We desire," says 
 the second ^book of Discipline, *' the ecclesiastical 
 goods to be uplifted and distributed faithfully, to whom 
 they appertain, and that by the ministry of the dea- 
 cons, that the poor may be answered of their portion 
 thereof, and they of the ministry live without care and 
 solicitude.^ " The views of a public body," says Dr. 
 Cook, with his usual discrimination and good sense, 
 " are often strikingly exhibited by incidental resolu- 
 
 * Chap. xii. 
 
73 
 
 tions, not bearing directly upon the general point, 
 accidentally confirmed. This appears to me to be 
 very much the case in the enactment which I am now 
 to quote. In an assembly, held in 1575, it was or- 
 dained, that * an article should be made to the lords 
 of the session, for the ministers and readers, that they 
 may have expedition of their processes pursuit before 
 them, that they be not abstracted from their charges;' 
 an article which certainly would never have been sug- 
 gested to men who did not entertain the strongest 
 ideas of the necessity of a minister's devoting his time 
 to his vocation."* In the Assembly 1574, the follow- 
 ing act was passed : " For as meikle as it is understood 
 be the said assemblie, that diverse ministers, within tliis 
 realme, uses the offices of collectorie and chamberlainie 
 under bishops, and other beneficed persons, where 
 through they are avocat from their cures, and gives 
 great occasion to slander the truth; therefore it is 
 statutit and ordainit in this present assemblie, that, frae 
 henceforth nae minister within this realme use and 
 exerce the office of collectorie and chamberlainie, 
 under whatsoever beneficit man, whereby they may 
 be abstractit frae yair vocation; and contravening here- 
 of, to be deprivet of the office, and secluded there- 
 frae."f In 1596, the assembly, in order to check the 
 progress of certain evils which had sprung up among 
 the clergy, in consequence of the laxer regimen, in- 
 troduced under episcopal influence, published a pro- 
 clamation, ordaining " that ministers given to unlaw- 
 ful and incompetent trades and occupations for filthie 
 gain, as holding of osteleries," &c. " and such like 
 
 * Dr. Cook's Speech on Pluralities, p. 39. 
 f Bulk of Universal Kirke, A.D. 1574. 
 
74 
 
 worldly occupations as may distract them from their 
 charge, and may be slanderous to the pastoral calling, 
 be admonished, and brought to an acknowledgment 
 of their sinnes, and if they continue, be deposed."* 
 Many were the disputes concerning the propriety 
 of ministers having a vote in Parliament, and those 
 who contended for it, had recourse to arguments sub- 
 stantially the same with those employed by the mo- 
 dern advocates of secular additions to the pastoral 
 charge. The nature of these arguments may be learn- 
 ed, by a few quotations from the replies given by the 
 commissioners appointed to confer with the king and 
 council on the subject, at the palace of Holyrood 
 House, 17th Nov. 1599. " There is great difference 
 betwixt our actions and duties, to be done at certain 
 times and occasions, upon urgent necessity ; and the 
 discharging of a certain ordinary office in a common- 
 wealth." " That is said to entangle the warrior, which 
 hindereth him from the duties of a soldier, and pleas- 
 ing his captain. It was plainly affirmed, they never 
 knew nor felt the weight of the ministerial charge, 
 that thought an office of civil government might be 
 overtaken therewith." '' The apostles would not leave 
 the preaching of the word for an ecclesiastical office, 
 but appointed deacons to that effect : much less should 
 ministers leave preaching of the word, for civil 
 and impertinent offices." " It was pleaded," on be- 
 half of the vote, " that there was as much distrac- 
 tion and time spent in commissions, visitations, waiting 
 upon the plats, pleading for stipends, attending on 
 Parliaments and Conventions, to present articles and 
 petitions. It was replied, some of these were wants 
 
 * Bulk of Universal Kirke, A.D. 1596. 
 
75 
 
 and imperfections in our kirk, the blame whereof lay 
 upon the magistrates, and the flocks complained upon 
 at all occasions. Jam qiicrritiir, quid fieri deheat, nonqidd 
 fiatf As for commissioners for visitation, we are 
 then occupied m om' own calling, in preaching of the 
 word, exercising discipline and the censures ; and that 
 not ordinarily, or by set office ; but ex necessitate ec- 
 clesice, and^ro re nata.'' " There is a great difference 
 betwixt a certain action to be done now and then, as 
 necessity and occasion craveth, and a set office to be 
 discharged ordinarily."* In the assembly at Montrose, 
 28th March, 1600, the following, among other argu- 
 ments, were urged against the order of bishops, and 
 the civil offices at which they aimed, " and being 
 so strong, that in effect all were granted, the matter 
 not succeeding, as the king and the commissioners of 
 the General Assembly looked for, they went another 
 way to work." '"If most necessarie, natural, economical 
 duties, yea, and ecclesiastical offices, should not dis- 
 tract ministers from the preaching of the word, (Luke 
 ix. Deut. xxxiii. 8. Acts vi. 2.) much less should civil 
 affairs or offices have place to distract. But this office 
 of a bishop, voting in Parliament, &c. will distract. Ergo, 
 It was answered, they would be employed in preaching 
 of the word, at these solemn times, for the well of 
 the whole kirk and commonwealth. This was rejected 
 as frivolous; and it was seen afterward that that much 
 was not performed." " Whosoever are to be occupied 
 in the business of their calling, night and day, ' in 
 season and out of season,' should be freed, and have 
 immunity from all other work. But ministers are 
 and ought to be so occupied, 2 Tim. iv. 15, 16, &c.** 
 " To account the charge of souls so light, that there 
 
 * Calderwood's History, pp. 429, 430. 
 
76 
 
 witlial another may be joined, is against the word, 
 Ezek. xxxiv. 1 Pet. v. 2, &c. But this office is joined 
 with the charge of souls, &c. The assumption was de- 
 nied ; and so in effect they were denying, as in other 
 answers, the thing they were doing." — " The expe- 
 rience of the kirk in all ages, since that corruption 
 entered in, and, namely, in our own age, not only 
 among the papists, but also in our neighbour country, 
 and among ourselves, crieth aloud, that it is not possi- 
 ble they can stand together." " Experience also of 
 godly pastors may teach them, that when they have 
 been never so little, and of necessity, occupied in the 
 world, how hard it is to them to gather their minds 
 again, and set their heart toward God, and upon spi- 
 ritual duties and actions."* 
 
 The celebrated Assembly at Glasgow, 1638, rati- 
 fied all the previous enactments prohibitory of secular 
 engagements in ministers, and drew its conclusions in 
 the following terms: " As on the one part, the kirk 
 and the ministers thereof are obliged to give their 
 advice and good counsel in matters concerning the 
 kirk, or the conscience of any whatsumever, to his 
 Majesty, to the Parliament, to the Council, or to any 
 members thereof, for their resolutions from the word 
 of God; so on the other part, it is both inexpedient 
 and unlawful in this kirk for pastors separate unto 
 the Gospel, to brook civil places and offices, as to be 
 justices of peace; sit and decern in Council, Session, 
 or Exchequer; to ride or vote in Parliament; to be 
 judge or assessor in any civil judicatorie;" and the 
 reason assigned is, that " all civil offices in the persons 
 of pastors separate unto the Gospel are incompatible 
 with the spiritual function."f 
 
 * Caldervvood, pp. 436, 437, 438. 
 
 t Acts of Assembly, 1638, Sess. 25, Dec. 19. 
 
77 
 
 The first case in which the principles maintained 
 in the above extracts were acted on by the church, 
 was that of the celebrated Mr. Robert Pont, minister 
 of St. Cuthberts. This eminent man had, at the ear- 
 nest request of the regent Mar, been allowed, by the 
 semi-episcopal convention at Leith, January 1572, on 
 account of his great knowledge of law, to act as one 
 of the lords of Session.* But in March 1573, the 
 regent Morton having laid before the assembly a pro- 
 posal for appointing a certain number of ministers 
 as senators of the college of justice, " The assembly 
 votit througJiout that nane was apt nor ahle to hear the 
 saidis twa charges.'^ They therefore inhibited any mini- 
 ster from accepting the place of a senator. From 
 this inhibition, however, they exempted Mr. Pont, who 
 kept his office till 1584, when he resigned in conse- 
 quence of the Act of Parliament, then passed at the 
 request of the Church, prohibiting, in the most abso- 
 lute form, all ministers from holding civil or criminal 
 offices.;}: At a time when the Church was pressed with 
 poverty, and when the path of honourable ambition 
 was fairly laid open before them, this instance of self- 
 denial in the Reformed Clergy must ever be men- 
 tioned to their honour. The regulation which was 
 then made, and subsequently renewed, is absolute, and 
 the grounds of it are of universal application. The 
 exemption in favour of Mr. Pont was grounded wholly 
 on the specialities of his case, and of these the Church 
 alone could be the judge. It is also worthy of notice, 
 that the liberty given him to retain his situation as a 
 senator does not appear to have met vvith the concur- 
 rence of the more strict and zealous part of the Pres- 
 
 * Buik of Universal Kirke, p. 5i. 
 
 f Idem. 
 
 t M'Crie's Life of Knox, Vol. II. p. 350. 
 
78 
 
 byterian body ; for we find this entry in the Acts of 
 Assembly, at Edinburgh, 6th August, 1573, that 
 " in the trial of bishops, superintendents, and com- 
 missioners, Mr. Robert Pont, commissioner of Mur- 
 ray, was delated for his non-residence in Murray, 
 for his not visiting the kirks there two years by- 
 gone, except Invernesse, Elgin, and Forres, &c. 
 He alledged want of leisure." The remark made 
 by that most respectable historian Calderwood, is: 
 " No wonder, for he was suffered to be a Senator 
 of the College of Justice."* Indeed, the words 
 of the historian, in stating the original deed by 
 which permission was granted to Mr. Pont, show 
 clearly what were the genuine sentiments of the 
 Church ia those days relative to such unions : — " How 
 corrupt, how partial, how ready this convention, of 
 1372, was to please the court, ye may see by this; 
 that understanding my Lord Regent's grace and coun- 
 cil were desirous that Mr. Robert Pont should accept 
 the place of one of the Senators of the College of 
 Justice, which he would not accept without the ad- 
 vice of the Assemblie, they give him license to accept 
 and use the place what time he shall be required 
 thereto; providing that he leave not the office of the 
 ministry, but that he shall exercise the same as he 
 shall be appointed by the kirke, and that this their 
 license to the said Mr. Robert Pont be no preparative 
 to any other minister to procure such promotion, with- 
 out the Kirke's advice and license, had and obtained 
 hereto before."f 
 
 It has been argued indeed, that there can be no con- 
 clusion drawn from an instance like this, that will bear 
 
 * History, p. C3. 
 f Calderwood, p. 52. 
 
79 
 
 on the case of a clerical instructor of youth, in the ele- 
 mentary principles of education ; and that teaching 
 ought ever to be viewed as an exemption from the 
 ordinary class of civil offices. We readily allow, that 
 there are great varieties comprehended under the 
 general name of " civil offices," and that one civil 
 office may be more nearly allied to the ordinary du- 
 ties of a clergyman than another. But we beg to 
 know whether the professorships of Natural History, 
 or of Mathematics, or of Logic, or of Moral or 
 Natural Philosophy, especially as these branches have 
 been usually taught in our Universities, be not as far 
 removed from the ordinary habits and pursuits of 
 clergymen, as are the expounding and applying the 
 civil and criminal jurisprudence of the country. And 
 we beg farther to know, whether the vigilant and active 
 management of a great University Corporation, which 
 occasioned to one of its Principals at least no small de- 
 gree of" peculiar trouble,"* be not in the strictest sense 
 a '' civil office." In the management of an University, 
 the church, no doubt, has an interest; and the church 
 has also an interest in the procedure of the Court of 
 Session. In the one avocation, or in the other, an in- 
 dividual may do incalculable service to the church, 
 and in each there will be sufficient room for the exclu- 
 sive range and occupation of the most capacious 
 mind. 
 
 But in estimating the real value and import of any 
 particular enactment or deed of a collective body, we 
 must not forget to take into view the prevalent cha- 
 
 * Principal Leishman. See his Life, by Dr. Woodrow, p. 77. 
 At the period referred to, Glasgow College had not 500 students ; 
 now it has 1500. Long before this, Baillie tells his fiiend Spang, 
 that " Principal Strang had a charge would kill an ox\" MSS, 
 Letters, 1G43. 
 
80 
 
 racter and sentiments of the times. At the period in 
 question, the study and the practice of law were not 
 considered as by any means at variance with the ordi- 
 nary habits and pursuits of clergymen. *' The chief 
 divines of the reformed church," says Dr. M'Crie, " were 
 intimately acquainted with the principles of jurispru- 
 dence, and qualified, by the course of study which they 
 had pursued, to give their advice on questions relating 
 to government and the administration of laws. Not to 
 mention Calvin, Beza, and other foreign theologians, 
 it would be easy to establish the fact by referring to 
 not a few in our own country, as Row, Craig, Pont, 
 Arbuthnot, and Adamson. This may be ascribed 
 partly to the passion which those who addicted them- 
 selves to learning at that period felt to ' intermeddle 
 with all knowledge ;' and partly to the superior grati- 
 fication which this manly study yielded in comparison 
 with the dry and disgusting logic which had so long 
 been exclusively cultivated in the schools. But it is 
 chiefly to be traced to a new feeling which recent 
 events had produced, and which had for its direct ob- 
 ject the promotion of the public good. This was the 
 effect of the late reformation of religion ; and, at the 
 same time, one of the moral forces by which that 
 mighty revolution exerted its influence upon the sen- 
 timents of mankind, in favour of civil liberty and the 
 amelioration of government."* When we take these 
 considerations into view, we are led to see, in the pro- 
 hibition of ministers from engaging in pursuits of law, 
 a most decisive evidence of the sentiments then held 
 by the Church relative to the sacredness of the minis- 
 terial function, and the U7iitt/ and cntireuess of the 
 ministerial charge. The design of the office was uni- 
 
 * Lite of Melville, Vol. I. p. -17. 
 
81 
 
 formly held to be, the religious improvement and the 
 salvation of men; and the real good of the people at 
 large was ever esteemed as the object to be kept 
 steadily in view. The question then was not, May 
 one man be able to do the duties of two distinct offices, 
 so as to be entitled to the profits of both ? but rather, 
 How shall the duties of the pastoral office be most 
 efficiently discharged, so as to secure most extensively 
 the benefit of the people? This was an object para- 
 mount to all others ; and such excepted cases as that 
 of Pont — and I am not aware of any other parallel 
 instance — only establish more firmly the general prin- 
 ciple, and the pre-eminent value which was attached 
 to it. 
 
 The sentiments of one who held the office of a 
 parochial minister in Scotland, and afterwards of a 
 bishop in England, are not unworthy of notice, as 
 illustrative of the views of one who was brought up 
 within the pale of the Scottish Church. " In all other 
 professions," says he, " those who follow them, labour 
 in them all the year long, and are hard at their busi- 
 ness every day in the week. All men that are well 
 suited in a profession, that is agreeable to their genius 
 and inclination, are really the easier and the better 
 pleased the more they are employed in it. Indeed 
 there is no trade nor course of life, except oiirst that 
 does not take up the whole man; and shall ours only, 
 that is the noblest of all others, and that has a certain 
 subsistence fixed upon it, and does not live by con- 
 tingencies and hopes, as all others do, make the la- 
 bouring in our business an objection against any part 
 of our duty ?" — " We," (the bishops,) " must lay the 
 importance of the care of souls before our clergy, and 
 adjure them as they shall answer to God, in the great 
 day in which we must appear to witness against them, 
 
82 
 
 that they will seriously consider and observe theii* 
 ordination vows, and that they will apply themselves 
 ijoholly to that one thing. We must keep an eye on them 
 continually; and be applying reproofs, exhortations, 
 and encouragements, as occasion offers. We must 
 enter into all their concerns, and espouse every in- 
 terest of that part of the Church that is assigned to 
 their care. We must see them as oft as we can, and 
 encourage them to come frequently to us; and must 
 live in all things with them, ' as a father with his 
 children.' And, that every thing we say to stir them 
 up to their duty may have its due weight, we must 
 take care so to order ourselves, that they may evi- 
 dently see that we are careful to do our oivn. We 
 must enter into all the parts of the word of God with 
 them ; not thinking ourselves too good for any piece 
 of service that may be done; visiting the sick, ad- 
 mitting poor and indigent persons, or such as are 
 troubled in mind to come to us; preaching oft; cate- 
 chising and confirming frequently ; and living in all 
 things like men that study to ' fulfil the ministry, and 
 to do the work of evangelists.' "* 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 Latjos of the Church against Non-residence a7id Pluralities. 
 
 Having thus ascertained the general sentiments 
 of the Church of Scotland, regarding the impor- 
 
 * Burnet's Pastoral Care, pp. 184, 218. Bishop Burnet was 
 first settled as minister of the small parish of Saltoun, in the 
 neighbourhood of Haddington; afterwards translated to the 
 Divinity Chair at Glasgow ; and ultimately raised to the See of 
 Sanim, by the favour of his steady patron, King William. See 
 his Life, at tlie end of his History of his Own Times. 
 
83 
 
 tance and sacredness of the pastoral calling, let 
 us now attend to the provisions which have been 
 made for securing the personal discharge of its duties, 
 and for guarding against every obstruction which 
 might prevent these duties from being discharged in 
 the most satisfactory and efficient manner. The 
 statutes and regulations which come under this de- 
 scription are principally those which prohibit non- 
 residence and pluralities. After exhibiting a short ab- 
 stract of these statutes, I shall take the liberty to offer 
 a few remarks on their import and apphcation. 
 
 The general rule for regulating the relation between 
 a minister and his pastoral charge, is thus laid down 
 in the Second Book of Discipline : — " Seeing the 
 whole country is divided in provinces, and these pro- 
 vinces again are divided in parishes, as well in land- 
 ward as in towns, in every parish and reasonable 
 congregation, there would [should] be placed one or 
 more pastors to feed the flock ; and no pastor or mini- 
 ster always be burdened with the particular charge of 
 more kirks or flocks than one alone." Then follow 
 certain rules for the division and annexation of pa- 
 rishes, according to circumstances and the necessities 
 of the times.* So early as the year 1563, the follow- 
 ing statute was passed by the General Assembly: — 
 " For as meikle as ministers, exhorters, and readers, 
 remainis not at the kirkes quhair yair charge lyes, but 
 dwells in towns far distant from the said kirkes, qr 
 throw the people ivants the continual comfort — qlk yr 
 daily presence should give, be mutual conference of the 
 ministers with the flock, ordainis ministers, exhorters, 
 and readers having manses to dwell in, that they make 
 residence at the same, and X)isit the sick as they may"-\ 
 
 * Second Book of Discipline, eh. xii. 
 f Buik of Universal Kirke, A.D. 1563. 
 
84 
 
 In the Assembly, 1365, it was " ordained, that no 
 bishopric, abbacy, &c. or any other benefices, having 
 many kirkes annexed thereto, be disposit altogether 
 in anytime coming to any one man; but, at the least, 
 that the kirkes thereof be severally disposit, and to 
 several persons, so that every person halving charge, 
 may serve at his otvn kirhe, according to his vocation ; 
 and to this effect, that the glebes and manses be given 
 to the ministers, that they make residetice at the Mrkes, 
 vs^here thro' they may discharge their conscience ac- 
 cordins: to their vocation.''^ In December of the same 
 year, the Assembly, in answer to a question in rela- 
 tion to plurality and non-residence, gave this memor- 
 able reply: — " Nae minister of the evangil of Jesus 
 Christ, nor nae person receivifig sicfficient living for 
 preaching of the evangil, may, with safe conscience, 
 leave his vocation, together with his flock, and the 
 place appointed for his ordinary residence."f In 
 1569, the Assembly enacted, that " Sic as lies plu- 
 rality of benefices be compelled to demit all save 
 one."t In 1573, it was enacted that " where a mini- 
 ster was obligedj^or xuant of clergy, to have more than 
 one kirke, he shall make his residence at ane kirke, 
 and only have superintendence of the rest until there 
 be other labourers."^ Even in the Assembly held at 
 Leith, in January, 1572 — an Assembly which has been 
 always considered by true Presbyterians as under no 
 small degree of Episcopalian and Court influence — 
 the following specific statute was passed: — " It shall 
 not be lawful to any entering in the function of the 
 
 * Bulk of Universal Kirke, A. D. 1565. 
 t Idem. Dec. 1565. 
 \ Idem. p. 104.. 
 § Idem. p. 139. 
 
85 
 
 ministry, to leave that vocation and the place appoint- 
 ed for his residence, above the space of fortie days in 
 the year, without a lawful impediment, and license of 
 the king, and ordinar where the benefice lyeth, under 
 the pain of deprivation." " That all common kirkes 
 be disposed as benefices to qualified persons ; that 
 none be admitted hereafter to plurality of benefices 
 with cure."* In 1576 the Assembly ordain, that the 
 visitors specially appointed " shall have the oversight 
 of all particular kirkes within the bounds of their 
 visitation, and of the ministers thereof, to see that 
 every one of the ministers exerce their own vocation 
 vigilantly in their own congregations."f In the As- 
 sembly 1578, " the kirke thot meet that civil law be 
 cravit, decernand the benefices to vaik through non- 
 residence.":}: In 1579 the Assembly " ordainit that 
 commissioners of counties, and their assessors, shall 
 try within their bounds, sic of the ministers as hes plu- 
 ralitie of benefices and offices, and to enquire the reasons 
 thereof, to be reported to the next General Assemblie 
 with their names, that bruikis the saidis benejices and 
 offices, that the kirke may tak order for removing 
 thereof."^ In 1580 an act was passed against plu- 
 ralities, ordaining that onlj'^ one church should be 
 assigned to each minister, and giving the same reason 
 for this which had been applied in former instances, 
 namely, " in order that his attention might be devoted 
 to a particular flock." [] In the Assembly held at Dun- 
 dee, 12th July, 1580, the following very decisive act 
 
 * Calderwood's History, pp. 52, 53. 
 
 f Idem. p. 71. 
 
 \ Bulk of Universal Kirke, p. 187. 
 
 § Idem. p. 204. 
 
 B Idem. A. D. 1580. 
 
 £ 
 
86 
 
 was passed : — " Forasmuch as by the confusion and 
 misorder of the pluralitie of kirkes sustained in the 
 person of one pastor or minister, the flocks of Christ 
 throughout the realm universally are destitute of the 
 true food of their soules, discipline and good order 
 utterly neglected, and the consciences of pastors burdened 
 with heavier charges than they may hear, whereas, by 
 tlie word of God every several congregation ought to 
 be provided with their own pastor; it is not lawful 
 by the word of God that a minister or pastor be bur- 
 dened with the charge of feeding of more particular 
 flocks or congregations than one." And the same 
 Assembly " requireth, and in the name of God de- 
 sireth, all men, as well gentlemen as others, con- 
 vened at this time, if they know any in the ministry 
 scandalous in life, unable to teach, unprofitable or 
 curious in teaching, negligent in preaching, non-resi- 
 dents, or deserters, or to have pluralitie of benejices Or 
 offices, to give in their names in a ticket to the moder- 
 ator and his assessors, that order may be taken with 
 them."* Among the causes of deprivation of a mini- 
 ster, the Assembly, 1582, enumerates " non-residence, 
 absence from his kirk, neglect of his office for fourtie 
 days together in a year, without a lawful impediment 
 allowed by the next following General Assembly, 
 pluralitie of benefices,"f &c. The Assembly, 1593, 
 renews the power of visitors to look after such mini- 
 sters " as do not make residence, having no reason- 
 able excuse." In 1596, the Second Book of Disci- 
 pline having previously been sanctioned by Parliament, 
 the Assembly resolved, " that ministers not resident 
 at their flocks be deprived, according to the acts of 
 
 * Bulk of the Universal Kirke, A. D. 1590. 
 t Idem. p. 291. 
 
87 
 
 General Assembly and laws of the realme." In 1601 
 the Assembly allow certain ministers to reside for a 
 quarter of a year or so in the houses of the nobility, 
 that their respective households may be suitably in- 
 structed, the presbytery in the meantime taking order 
 for the keeping of their kirks during their absence."* 
 This was a special case, and exceptio confirmat regidam. 
 The celebrated Assembly at Glasgow, 1638, passed 
 this statute, " that every minister be obliged to reside 
 in his own parish, at his ordinary manse, for the better 
 attending of the duties of his calling, conform to the acts 
 of the Assembly.'''\ And the same Assembly declare, 
 by their unanimous vote, their cordial approbation of 
 all the laws of preceding Assemblies prohibiting plu- 
 rality of benefices and non-residence, as altogether 
 inconsistent with the end and design of the ministerial 
 office. It is also expressly enjoined, "that none take 
 the charge of a greater number of people nor they are 
 able to discharge.''^ And in order to prevent the 
 infraction of such wholesome rules as these, and to 
 secure a due attention to the devout duties of the 
 ministry, a special decree was passed, " against all 
 civil offices in the persons of pastors, separate unto the 
 gospel, as are incompatible with their spiritual func- 
 tions" — as " prejudicial to the powerful fruits of their 
 spiritual ministrie."^ 
 
 In the interpretation of these numerous statutes 
 against non-residence and pluralities, and in the prac- 
 tical application of them to occurrent cases, common 
 sense suggests to us the reasonableness of recognising 
 
 * Calderwood, p. 453. 
 
 f Acts of Assembly, pp. 32, 35. 
 
 I Idem. 1638, Sept. 23. 
 
 § Idem. Sess. 25. 
 
 e2 
 
88 
 
 the general principle on which they all proceed. That 
 principle is, the sacred and exclusive character of the 
 pastoral calling, and the necessity of guarding against 
 every thing that may prevent the due discharge of its 
 important functions. Now it is obvious that a plurality 
 of benefices, even in the same place, and where non- 
 residence does not necessarily follow, may be equally 
 detrimental to the best interests of the ministry, as a 
 plurality in those cases where non-residence is inevit- 
 able; and hence we find, that the law has addressed 
 itself jointly and severally against both. It is also 
 obvious, that the union of particular offices, such, for 
 instance, as the rectorship of an academy, or a pro- 
 fessorial chair, with the work of the ministry, may be 
 productive of exactly the same results as the junction 
 of one ecclesiastical benefice with another. In the 
 express terms of the statutes quoted, " the sick may 
 not be visited" — the people " may be left destitute of 
 the true food of their souls" — " discipline and good 
 order may be neglected" — *' the consciences of pastors 
 may be burdened with heavier charges than they may 
 bear:" in short, the spirit of pastoral duty may be 
 lost, and the avocations of the ministry habitually neg- 
 lected. Is it to be supposed that the law cannot be 
 applied to such cases, but that it must be rigidly in- 
 terpreted as comprehending " benefices" or pastoral 
 charges exclusively? The terms used are " henejicea 
 or offices,'' and no law can be supposed to be so com- 
 prehensive and minute in its details as to express bij 
 name every case, which, in the course of ages, may 
 occur to demand its application. In the Acts of Par- 
 liament relative to the observance of the Sabbath, 
 various abuses are specified by name, such as the go- 
 ing of mills, salt-pans, brick-kilns, &c. &c. but whert* 
 is the civilian, or even the special pleader, who would 
 
89 
 
 venture on the expedient of resting the defence of an 
 offender on the literal rendering, or the ipsissima verba 
 of the statute ? Certain cases are named, not as com- 
 prehending all that may occur in the course of things, 
 but simply as examples or specimens of the classes 
 intended; and the legal court must determine the 
 application of the law to each as it happens to come 
 before it. And so it is with the question under re- 
 view. Be it a '' benefice" or an " office," civil or eccle- 
 siastical, admitting of residence, or involving the oppo- 
 site, the question still is this very simple one, Does 
 it, or does it not, materially interfere with the regular 
 discharge of pastoral duty? And of this question 
 the church, and the church alone, can be held as the 
 competent judge. 
 
 That by the use of the terms " benefices and offices^' 
 the church designed to mark out all offices in schools 
 and universities f may be reasonably inferred, from the 
 mode of expression employed in several of the Acts 
 of Parliament, made at the same time with the above 
 Acts of Assembly. In 1578 the Visitors of St. An- 
 drew's College are empowered to " displace sik as 
 are unqualified to discharge their office in said College."* 
 And in the " ratification of the gift," made to the 
 University in the same year, it is ordained, " that 
 nothing in the said letters sail be prejudicial to the 
 presentation o? benefices, offices, or bursaries, pertaining 
 to lawit patrons."f In " the report of the visitors, 
 1579," certain regulations are made relative to the 
 " offices" of Chancellor, Dean of Faculty, &c. " that 
 the foundat persons in every college, as weill teachers 
 as students, be diligent in dischairging of their offices "% 
 
 * Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol. III. p. 98. 
 f Idem. p. 106. 
 I Idem. p. 181. 
 
90 
 
 In the Act 1585, " All ministers, maisters of colleges 
 and scJmills qlk departit furth of the realme at any 
 time within the space of thrie years bypast, sail be 
 restorit and repossessit to their benefices, lands, leivings, 
 offices, and possessions."* Indeed it is impossible to 
 assign any plausible reason why the terms " benefices 
 or offices'' should have been employed in the statutes, 
 had it not been with the design of rendering the laws 
 against pluralities as comprehensive as possible, and 
 to guard prospectively against their exclusive applica- 
 tion to parochial or pastoral charges. If the Chris- 
 tian fathers of the Church of Scotland designed to 
 prohibit pluralities o^ benefices or o^ pastoral charges 
 only, it is inconceivable that they should have made 
 use of varied modes of expression, the natural and 
 obvious meaning of which is, that not only a plurality 
 of benefices having cure, but a plurality of offices 
 of any kind which interfere with the due and regular 
 discharge of pastoral duty, is legally prohibited and 
 denounced as meriting the highest censures of the 
 Church. 
 
 A grievous mistake has prevailed in certain quarters, 
 and has been for obvious reasons encouraged ; namely, 
 that pluralities of office are prohibited in the Church 
 of Scotland, merely because they interfere with the resi- 
 dence of the clergy on their cures. This certainly is 
 one reason ; but it is far from being the only one. 
 The grand reasons are, the sufficiency of one office to 
 one man, and the impracticability of one man doing 
 aright the duties of two situations ; and it is very plain 
 tliat many cases will occur in which this state of things 
 will take effect, even although non-residence be not 
 necessarily implied. On the plea which we now op- 
 
 * Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol. III. p. 395. 
 
91 
 
 pose, the law could not take hold of pluralities of 
 benefices in totmis and large communities, where there 
 are different congregations. Besides, what are the rea- 
 sons assigned for denouncing non-residence itself as an 
 evil ? Are they not all grounded on the principle, 
 that one man is to be appointed to one charge, and 
 that the due performance of its duties is amply suffi- 
 cient for all his talents and all his time ? 
 
 To place this beyond all doubt, let us look for a 
 moment to the reasons expressly assigned in the se- 
 veral Acts quoted for requiring the residence of 
 the clergy. They are such as these — " That the 
 people" may have " the continual comfort qlk yr 
 daily presence should give be mutual conference of 
 the ministers with the flock" — " that the ministers 
 should make residence at the manse, and visit the sick 
 as they may" — " that every person having charge may 
 serve at his own kirke according to his vocation" — 
 ■" where thro they may discharge their conscience, 
 according to their vocation" — " and use their office 
 according to the tenor of their admission" — " taking 
 the inspection and oversight of them every one in his 
 vocation" — " residing in his own parish at his ordin- 
 ary manse, for the better attending of the duties of 
 his calling." Every commentator on ancient law 
 knows the value and importance of that principle by 
 which the meaning and intent of a statute are best 
 ascertained, by reference either to the history of its 
 enactment, or to the grounds and reasons expressly as- 
 signed for its enactment. And what are the fair and 
 obvious inferences, which he would draw from the 
 terms of the statutes under review, and the reasons on 
 which they are grounded? They are two in number — 
 first, that residence among the people of his charge is 
 enjoined on a minister, as affording the necessary faci- 
 
92 
 
 lities for the due performance of his pastoral duties ; 
 and, secondly, that whatever interferes with or ob- 
 structs these facilities, so as to prevent the people 
 from enjoying the Jidl benefits of their minister s per- 
 sonal residence among them, must be held as a contra- 
 vention of the law of residence, A minister's resi- 
 dence is required in order that he may devote his 
 time and talents to the duties of his office; but where 
 is the value of a minister's personal residence, and 
 what is the use of a law requiring his residence, if in 
 the meanwhile his time and his talents may with im- 
 punity be occupied in the active concerns of a differ- 
 ent occupation? Be it a secular occupation, such as 
 that of a factor, or a farmer, or a cattle dealer, or an 
 engineer, or a clerk in the stationery office, or any 
 other office under Government ; or, be it an academical 
 charge, such as the rectorship of a literary establish- 
 ment, or a professorship in the university, the effect 
 is substantially the same. The benefits of residence 
 are in so Jar lost; and the law which enjoins residence 
 merely as a means in order to this end, is virtually con- 
 travened. In appearance, the letter of the statute is 
 observed; but in reality the intent and meaning of it 
 are frustrated. In our criminal code high treason is 
 defined to be " the compassing the death of the king;** 
 but who does not know that this definition refers not 
 so much to the overt acts of treason, as to the results 
 in which these are supposed to issue? And hence 
 we find that many a man has been condemned for 
 treason, who would have shuddered at the very idea 
 of lifting up his hand against the life of his sovereign. 
 The Pretender was equally guilty in the eye of the 
 law when he set his foot with a hostile intent on the 
 shores of Lochaber, as he would have been had he 
 directly aimed a blow with his own hand at the head 
 
93 
 
 of King George. The principle on which this appli- 
 cation of the law is made is plain and obvious; and 
 on substantially the same principle we maintain, that 
 a minister of religion is guilty of a breach of the law 
 of residence, who, by entangling himself with the cares 
 of foreign occupations, deprives the people of all the 
 benefits which the law was designed to secure to them. 
 " The necessity of residence," says Dr. Cook, " is not 
 stated to arise out of any thing pecuhar to the times 
 in which it originated, but out of causes which always 
 exist, and which will render the residence of parochial 
 ministers a blessing, whilst human nature remains un- 
 changed. By their daily presence, the good men of 
 other times believed that continual comfort would be 
 imparted to the people ; they were convinced, that 
 the mutual conference of ministers with their flocks, 
 would lead in general to that kindness which opens 
 the heart to the sweetest influence of religious instruc- 
 tion; and deeply impressed with the sufferings to 
 which we are exposed, and having probably experi- 
 enced that they had often, through the comforts of 
 religion, lessened the anguish of pain, — reconciled 
 the young to leave a world which they had never 
 viewed but with the ardour of hope, and prepared the 
 aged for a happier state, — they wished that the pas- 
 tors whom they selected should make residence at their 
 manses, that they might visit the sick as they may. Are 
 such calls of duty not to be expected now? Or is it 
 less necessary to gain affection in order to be useful? 
 Is not much to be hoped from being the friend and 
 counsellor of the people, towards the promotion of 
 that great work, which renders all classes of men wiser 
 and better here, and opens to them the blessed pros- 
 pect of an endless felicity hereafter ?"* 
 
 * Dr. Cook's Speech, p. 32. 
 e3 
 
94 
 
 But let us notice, also, the reasons on which the 
 prohibition of pluralities is grounded. They are such 
 as these: — *' Nane," that is, no ministers " are able to 
 bear the saidis twa charges" — " in order that his at- 
 tention may be devoted to a partiadar Jloclc'' — '* mini- 
 sterfs sail faithfullie wait thereupon" — commissioners 
 are " to see that every one of the ministers earerc^ their 
 ovon vocation vigilantly in their own congregations" — 
 " the consciences of pastors must not be burdened 
 with heavier charges than they can bear." These are 
 the terms of the respective statutes prohibitory of a 
 plurality of benefices; and we put it to the candour 
 of any fair expositor of statute law, whether it would 
 not be a barefaced evasion of the law against plu- 
 ralities to maintain, that while it expressly puts down 
 all union of benefices, it was never intended to apply 
 to an union of other offices with the ministry, however 
 laborious, and however secular in their nature, and 
 however " incompatible" they may be with the due 
 discharge of pastoral duty ? The same reasons which 
 apply to the one class, apply much more strongly to the 
 other; and if evils are likely to flow from unions of 
 offices precisely the same, much greater evils must flow 
 from unions of offices differing widely from each other, 
 and requiring a diversity of qualifications. On this 
 general principle, the spirit of the law is decidedly 
 contravened; while the combination of the terms 
 " benefices or offices" renders the holding of a plurality 
 of any kind, a glaring infringement of its letter. 
 
 It is a very obvious remark, that the same statutes 
 which order a minister to be deprived who has placed 
 himself in the situation contemplated, do virtually 
 prohibit a Presbytery from inducting a minister who 
 is already placed in such circumstances as to unfit 
 him for the due discharge of his ordination vows. 
 
95 
 
 To say that we ought to admit such a person into the 
 charge, and then bring him to trial upon the statutes 
 in question, is so ridiculous, that the only wonder is 
 that any one should gravely and seriously advance it. 
 Such a mode of acting would in other words be, to 
 place a man in such a situation that he inust contra- 
 vene the law, and then to punish him for so doing. 
 
 " But, we are told, these are old charters, although 
 some of these deeds are of a date not quite so old as 
 Magna Charta. By what tenure do gentlemen hold 
 their estates ? By what right do Universities claim 
 their privileges, and all their members possess their 
 offices? On what foundation do we sit, and deli- 
 berate, and vote, in this House ? Are not old char- 
 ters the titles by which all these possessions, and 
 rights, and privileges, are claimed, and held, and 
 enjoyed? What acquired such distinguished reputa- 
 tion, and such deserved popularity, to the greatest 
 and wisest Minister that ever directed the councils of 
 this, or of any other nation ? what, but his defence of 
 the chartered rights of the East India Company ? 
 ' What is the ground-work and safeguard of the British 
 Constitution, and of British liberty, but Magna Charta, 
 a very old charter indeed? Against what do the 
 enemies of morality, of religion, of social order, and 
 of established government, direct their principal at- 
 tacks? Is it not against those ancient constitutions 
 and charters, which we have received from our an- 
 cestors, and which form the principal pillars on which 
 our civil and religious edifice is erected ? These, Sir, 
 we must defend and support, if we mean to resist with 
 success the assaults of irreligion, of atheistical philo- 
 sophy, or of democratical extravagance."* 
 
 * See Principal Brown's Speech, p. 20. 
 
96 
 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 On the Union of Academical Charges xuith the Pastoral 
 
 Office, 
 
 The Church of Scotland, it has been stoutly mam- 
 tained, did not intend, by her laws against plurali- 
 ties, to prohibit her ministers from holding pro- 
 fessorships in Universities along with their paro- 
 chial charges. In order to throw some light on this 
 important matter, let us inquire into the sentiments 
 of our church regarding such unions, by endeavouring 
 to ascertain, ^r5^, what she has said; and, secondly/, 
 what she has done in regard to them. Certainly, the 
 sentiments of a church are best known by means of 
 plain and unsophisticated language on the one hand, 
 and of actions equally plain and unsophisticated on the 
 other. Has the Church of Scotland then said nothing 
 and done nothing to warrant us in our designed infer- 
 ence, that professorships were intended to be held as 
 distinct and independent offices, and that the union of 
 them with parishes, except in cases of necessity, is a 
 modern usage unknown to, and unsanctioned by, her 
 established constitution? I shall confine myself in 
 this historical inquiry, to the case of theological pro- 
 Jessorships, as held by those whom our church has de- 
 signated by the name of teachers or doctors; because 
 it is very obvious that the argument from them will 
 apply a fortiori with much stronger force in the case 
 of professorships devoted to the purposes of science 
 and general literature. 
 
 I. The First Book of Discipline does not mention cfoo 
 tors, but it seems to take for granted vvhat had been 
 stated respecting the officers of the church, in " the 
 
97 
 
 Book of Common Order," where doctors are declared 
 to be a ^^ fourth hind of ministers left to the church of 
 Christ" In the Second Book of Discipline they are 
 expressly mentioned as " ane of the twa ordinar and 
 perpetual functions that travel in the word," and 
 " different from the pastor, not only in name, but in 
 diversity of gifts." " His (that is, the doctor's) office 
 is, to open up the mind of the Spirit of God in the 
 Scriptures, to the end that the faithful may be in- 
 structed, and sound doctrine taught" — '' to assist the 
 pastor in the government of the kirks, and concur 
 with the elders, his brethren, in all assemblies;" but not 
 " to minister the sacraments or celebrate marriage." 
 With the exception of this last particular, the ac- 
 count given of the doctor's office in the " Form of 
 Church Government," 1645, is substantially the same. 
 ** The Scripture doth hold out the name and title of 
 teacher, (or doctor) as well as of the pastor; who is 
 also a minister of the word, as well as the pastor, and 
 hath power of the administration of the sacraments. 
 The Lord having given divers gifts, and divers exer- 
 cises, according to these gifts, in the ministry of the 
 word, though these different gifts may meet in, and 
 accordingly be exercised by one and the same mini- 
 ster ; yet where be several ministers in the same con- 
 gregation, they may be designed to several employ- 
 ments, according to the different gifts in which each 
 of them doth most excel. And he that doth more 
 excel in exposition of Scriptures, in teaching sound 
 doctrine, and in convincing gainsayers, than he doth 
 in application, and is accordingly employed therein, 
 may be called a teacher or doctor. Nevertheless, 
 where is but one minister in a particular congregation, 
 he is to perform, so far as he is able, the whole work 
 of the ministry, A teacher or doctor is of most ex- 
 
98 
 
 cellent use in Schools and Universities ; as of old in 
 the schools of the prophets, and at Jerusalem, where 
 Gamaliel and others taught as doctors." Indeed it 
 seems perfectly clear, from the testimony of Calder- 
 wood, that there never were any doctors in the Church 
 of Scotland, except the teachers of Divinity, in the 
 Universities.* In regard to these, however, the re- 
 gulations of the Church are very numerous. In the 
 very first assembly, held 1360, the doctor, or inter- 
 preter of Scripture, was recognized as a distinct func- 
 tionary of the church, and the regent was petitioned 
 *' to appoint competent salaries for such learned men as 
 were wiUing to discharge this office in the Universi- 
 ties."f It was reported to the assembly, 1382, that 
 " an eldership (prejbytery) is begun already at St. 
 Androes of pastouris and teachers^ bot not of those 
 that has not the cure ofteaching.X In 1386, the as- 
 sembly fund, " that all such as the Scripture appoints 
 governors of the kirke of God, as, namlie, pastouris, 
 and doctors, and elders, may conveen to general as- 
 semblies, and vote in ecclesiastical matters."^ That 
 these teadiers or professors in the University, were 
 designed to devote their luhole time and strength, to 
 the duties of their office, is placed beyond dispute, 
 by the following passage,- in that part of the First Book 
 of Discipline, which lays down the plan proposed for 
 reformation of the seats of learning. *' The rector 
 and inferior members of the Universities must be ex- 
 
 * Calderwood, de Rcglminc Ecclesiae Scoticanae, p. 1, 2. See 
 M'Crie's Life of Knox, vol. II. p. 282. 
 
 f Bulk of Universal Kirke, p. CO. M'Crie's Life of Mel- 
 ville, vol. I. p. 64. 
 
 \ Bulk of Universal Kirke, p. 1 18. 
 
 § Id. p. 139. 
 
99 
 
 empted from every charge that may onerate or ab- 
 stract him or them from the care of his office, such 
 as tutory, curatorie, or any such Uke, that are estab- 
 hshed in our commonweale; to the effect that without 
 trouble, they may wait on the upbringing of the youth 
 in learning, and hestovo their time onelie in that most ne- 
 cessary exercise."* 
 
 The assembly, 1582, thought it " lawful for a rai- 
 nister,yor a season, to cease from the exercise of his mi- 
 nistrij, and to use the office of a doctor" — " his kirk be- 
 ing provided in the meantime of a sufficient minister "\ 
 In 1588, the assembly statute and resolve, that " out 
 of the temporal lands" " there be stifficient levingsfound- 
 edfor professors and students in theology, for the en- 
 tertaining and flourishing of learning in the several 
 Universities.''^ That in the year 1596, the union of a 
 professorship of theology, with a pastoral charge, was 
 unknown in the church, and was not designed to be 
 introduced into it, is plain, from the reply which was 
 given to a question of the king relative to the right of 
 professors of theology, &c. to sit and vote in church 
 courts, as not having any pastoral relation: " Doctors 
 and professors of theology, and ordinar instructors 
 of the youth in the grounds of religion, should vote. 
 The first, because they are ordinar office-bearers with- 
 in the kirk : the second, being lawfully called to be 
 sympresbyters, or elders."^ Another decisive evi- 
 dence of the same thing, we have in the resolution 
 of the assembly at Perth, 1597, that " no masters or 
 professors within the Universities, and in special, pro- 
 
 * Dunlop's Confessions, vol. II. p. 561. 
 
 t Calderwood, p. 137. 
 
 \ Id. p. 220. 
 
 § Calderwood, p. 385. 
 
100 
 
 fessors of divinity, sit in presbytery on matters of dis- 
 cipline,"* seeing they had no parochial charge. This 
 resolution was entered into by the advice of the king 
 and his council, who expected thereby to exclude 
 Andrew Melville, and the other doctors of the Col- 
 lege, by whose influence and talents they were held 
 in great awe. In 1602, the synod of Fife sent in to 
 the assembly a complaint of grievances, among which 
 is this one : " that the doctors bearing an ordinarie 
 calling in the kirke, by the discipline and custom 
 thereof, are debarred from the assemblies."f Although 
 this assembly recognized their rights, it does not 
 clearly appear, tliat they were fully restored to them, 
 until the assembly at Glasgow, in 1638, rectified 
 this, together with Vaciny other abuses. In August 
 
 1641, the assembly recommended to Parliament, and 
 all having interest, '• that special care be had that the 
 places of the professors, and especially of professors 
 of Divinity, in every University and College, be filled 
 with the ablest men, and best affected to the refor- 
 mation and order of this church."^ But with regard 
 to the manner of obtaining such men, the church 
 thought fit to prescribe a mode very diflferent from 
 that which some would recom.mend. In the assembly 
 
 1642, we find this enactment: " It is a transporting 
 
 ♦ Caldervvood, p. 411. 
 
 f Id. p. 464. On the 29th July, 1619, the title of Hoctor in 
 Divinity appears to have been first conferred on tlie three princi- 
 pals of St. Andrew's College, and on several other professors 
 and ministers. Caldenvood, p. Q5Q. Prior to this period, the 
 name doctor was descriptive of the office of a teacher ; now it was 
 designed as an honorary badge, and this is the light in which it 
 has been since considered. 
 
 \ Assembly Acts, August, 1641. 
 
101 
 
 of ministers for public good, that colleges having the 
 profession of divinity, be well provided of professors 
 wherein the college of Divinity of St. Andrews is 
 first to be served, without taking any professors or 
 ministers from Edinburgh, Glasgow, or Aberdeen ; 
 and that the rest of the colleges would be provided 
 for as their necessities shall require ; yet in respect of 
 the present scarcity, it were good for the Universities 
 to send abroad for able and approved men, to be pro- 
 fessors of divinity, that our ministers may be kept in 
 their pastoral charge, as much as may be/'* Let us 
 here notice the reason assigned for this recommenda^ 
 tion — It is that the ministers of the church should 
 " be kept in their 'pastoral charge much as may ^e," — ^in 
 other words, that nothing should be allowed to inters 
 fere with their regular discharge of pastoral duty ; and 
 this reason could have no force at all had the assembly 
 meant to sanction the union of offices, except in cases 
 of absolute necessity. Besides, if the custom of con- 
 joining professorships with pastoral charges had at 
 this time been recognized as agreeable to the constitu- 
 tion and spirit of the church, such a recommendation 
 would have been superfluous. Nothing is more fami- 
 liar to the student of the ecclesiastical history of Scot- 
 land, than the assiduous care with which our fathers 
 " travelled" to supply " the burgh townes and sic like" 
 with the " ablest and most learned ministrie ;" and yet 
 there is not a hint given as to the practicability of sup- 
 plying the chairs by means of such a '' ministrie;" but 
 men must be brought from the Continent to teach 
 theology, as their sole and exclusive charge." " If 
 ever," says an eloquent pleader on this subject, "if 
 
 Assembly Acts, August, 1642, Sess. 2. 
 
102 
 
 ever there was a time whei-i a professor of divinity 
 could have been permitted to hold a pastoral charge 
 together with his professorship, it certainly was when 
 there was a scarcity of clergymen. Then, it might 
 have appeared expedient to combine these offices, so 
 that if the duties of each could not be discharged 
 with full effect, it might be done at least as tolerably 
 as circumstances would permit. But instead of this, 
 we find the General Assembly rather preferring that 
 professors should be brought from abroad, than to 
 adopt a plan which frustrated the ends of both of- 
 fices."* 
 
 The same conclusion may be drawn from the in- 
 junctions so frequently given by the church, that ade- 
 quate provision shall be made for the support of Uni- 
 versities, and especially for the faculty of theology. 
 To this important end, a third part of all the revenue 
 of the church was ordered to be applied ; and the ra- 
 pacity of the nobles was the only obstacle to the rea- 
 lization of this enlightened plan. Had such a scheme 
 teen carried into effect, the plea of necessity could not 
 have been brought forward to vindicate an union of 
 offices in circumstances unfavourable to the best in- 
 terests of both. " The Universities shall be erected 
 in this realm," says the First Book of Disciphne, " St. 
 Andrews, Glasgow, and Aberdeen." " A contribu- 
 tion shall be made at the entry of the students, for 
 the upholding of the place, and a sufficient stipend is 
 ordained for every member of the University, accord- 
 ing to their degree." *' The whole rents of the kirk 
 abused in papistry shall be referred again to the kirk, 
 that thereby the ministry, schools, and the poor, may 
 be maintained within this realm, according to their 
 
 * Principal Brown's Speech on Dr. Arnot's Case, p. 11. 
 
103 
 
 first institution."* The annual stipend proposed to be 
 allowed to principals and professors of theology, was 
 200 pounds scots, (£16 13s. 4d.) with freedom from 
 all taxes, a free house, and other perquisites.f This 
 must have been considered as a liberal allowance for 
 the full maintenance of each, when we consider that, 
 in 1588, the stipend of the Inner High Church of 
 Glasgow, was only £27, and that of the minister of 
 St. Mary's only £16 13s. 4d.t 
 
 In the " Articles presented to the king," by the as- 
 sembly 1582,5 this is one: " that of the temporal 
 lands of every abbacy, priorie, bishopric, nunnerie, 
 &c. so much shall be applied to schools as may suffi- 
 ciently entertain a good number of masters and bur- 
 sars, (according as the living may bear) in place of 
 canons, monks, nuns, and other idle bellies ; the one 
 to teach, the other to pass their course as w^ell in phi- 
 losophy as in theologie, according to the Act of Par- 
 liament, made anent the foundation of the new col- 
 lege of St. Andrews, that the kirke may be once 
 planted with sufficient learned men." By the as- 
 sembly 1588, it is earnestly petitioned, ' that out 
 of the temporal lands there be sufficient livings 
 founded for professors and students of theologie, 
 within the new college of St. Andrews, and col- 
 lege of Edinbro, so many as may make a convenient 
 seminary for the entertaining and flourishing of learn- 
 ing and religion within this realm, and this for the 
 
 * Chap. xvi. xvii. 
 
 f First Book of Discipline ; Dunlop's Confessions, vol. II. 
 
 p. 558. 
 
 ^ Cleland's Annals, p. 145. 
 
 § Bulk of Universal Kirke, 9th Oct. 1582. 
 
104 
 
 present necessitie, till provision sufficient be made for 
 colleges in every part."* 
 
 In 1641, the assembly overtured " the king's ma- 
 jesty and parliament, that in order to provide sufficient 
 revenues for the colleges out of the rents of prelacies, 
 collegiat or chapter kirks, or such like, a sufficient 
 maintenance be provided for a competent number of 
 professors, teachers, and bursars, in all faculties, and 
 especially in Divinity, and for upholding, repairing, 
 and enlarging the fabric of the colleges, furnishing li- 
 braries, and such like good uses, in every Universitie 
 and colledge."f At the opening of the next assem- 
 bly, 1642, Charles boasts, in his letter to the mem- 
 bers, " of the liberal provision of all the Universities 
 and colledges of the kingdome, not only aboon that 
 which any of his progenitors had done before, but 
 also aboon the hope and expectation of the church." J 
 
 Indeed nothing can be more commendable than the 
 zealous care with which the fathers of the Church of 
 Scotland watched over the interests of the Universi- 
 ties, so as to place them on a respectable footing, and 
 to supersede entirely the necessity of an union of 
 offices. It did not occur to them in those early days, 
 that the living of a professor should be augmented 
 by the addition to it of an ecclesiastical benefice. 
 Each department of duty was supposed to afford ade- 
 quate scope for the exertions of separate individuals ; 
 and if, at any time, a case should occur, in which an 
 union for a season might appear expedient, that case 
 was reserved for the judicial decision of the church. 
 [t is indeed said, in the Second Book of Discipline, 
 
 * Act of Assembly, 6th Feb, 1588. 
 t Assembly, 1641, Sess. 9th, Aug. 3d. 
 \ Acts 164-2, Act I. 
 
103 
 
 that "pastors may teach in the schools/' which is just 
 to say, that the greater office may comprehend the 
 lesser; and that according to the act of assembly 
 1582, " a minister may possess or take on him the of- 
 fice of doctor, his place in the church being suitably 
 supplied." 
 
 While the attention of our fathers was thus steadily 
 directed to the interests of the church, as materially 
 depending on the prosperity of the seats of learn- 
 ing, and the qualifications of professors, they took 
 special care that the superintendence of all schools 
 and universities should be vested in the presbyteries 
 and other courts of the church. The acts both of 
 Parliament and of assembly on this head, are so nu- 
 merous and explicit, that it is quite unnecessary to 
 quote them.* We may just remark, that professors of 
 divinity, as being one of the regular orders of clergy, 
 and essentially connected with the best interests of the 
 church, were uniformly represented and held as sub- 
 ject to the jurisdiction of the church courts, which 
 had a right to see, and were bound to see, that they 
 executed faithfully the trust reposed in them. This 
 power of superintendence has not yet been taken 
 from them ; and it will not do to contend, that because 
 one important branch of the theological faculty may 
 have, through carelessness or other causes, become a 
 " sinecure," that therefore the church ought to " find," 
 and by their solemn sanction, " declare" it be so. 
 So long as the statutes of colleges require certain du- 
 ties to be performed by their members, these duties 
 never can be dispensed with ; and the church has a 
 
 * See an excellent Abstract of them in the Article on " Edu- 
 cation," in the Acts of Assembly, 1800. 
 
106 
 
 right to see that these statutes shall not pass into de- 
 suetude. 
 
 II. Having thus endeavoured to collect the sentiments 
 of the church as to the union of academical chairs 
 with parishes, let us now attend to the practical ap- 
 plication of these principles in the course of her his- 
 tory. — And here we set out with the remark, that if it 
 had ever been consistent with the constitution and 
 spirit of the church of Scotland to sanction pluralities 
 of any kind, we might have expected to see it fully 
 exemplified in the earlier periods of her history. When 
 we find every successive assembly, for half a century 
 and more after the Reformation, most bitterly com- 
 plaining of the slow progress which had been made 
 in the plantation of churches — when in 1596, we find 
 it solemnly recorded in the acts of assembly, that at 
 least " four hundred parish kirks were destitute of 
 the ministrie of the word, by and attour the kirks of 
 Argile and the lies"* — when we find that the funds 
 destined to the support of religion had been so com- 
 pletely alienated, that the laborious ministers of the 
 Protestant church could with extreme difficulty ob- 
 tain a very scanty pittance of support — and when we 
 also observe that the established seats of learning 
 were miserably impoverished by the rapacity of selfish 
 and mercenary men — might we not have expected that, 
 in such a combination of circumstances as this, the 
 church would, from considerations of expediency, have 
 given its sanction to a scheme which promised, in 
 some degree, to remedy evils so severely felt and so 
 loudly complained of? The assemblies of the church 
 thought and acted otherwise. They felt and they 
 lamented the evils of the times ; but they saw the 
 
 ' * Calderwood, p. 320, 325. 
 
107 
 
 danger of ultimately aggravating those evils by a. de- 
 parture from the pure and salutary principles of 
 their establislied constitution. They sought redress 
 from the competent source, and their efforts were in 
 the end successful. 
 
 " In the history of ecclesiastical proceedings," says 
 Dr. Cook, " there is to be found a train of decisions, 
 some of them very remarkable, and strikingly evinc- 
 ing the purity and independence of those by whom 
 they were passed, which fully confirm the statute 
 law ; and it is nov\", and indeed has long been, a de- 
 cided point in Scotland, that no minister can hold 
 two church livings, or, holding one, can engage in any 
 other profession."* 
 
 On the 6th of March, 1572, a General Assembly 
 was held at St. Andrews, when certain complaints 
 were brought forvvard against the newly made Tulchcm 
 Bishops. Amongst others, Mr. John Douglas, Bishop 
 of St. Andrews, was complained of, because " he had 
 promised, when he became a bishop, to demit all the 
 offices which might impede him to execute the office 
 of a bishop, and especially the Rectorie of the Univer- 
 sity, and Provostrie of the New College." Although 
 this Assembly was decidedly under Episcopalian in- 
 fluence, it thought proper to denude the Bishop of 
 his " Provostrie" instanter; while it allowed him to 
 retain the " Rectorie" (an of£ce of very small labour) 
 only till the next Assembly. That the consideration 
 of his " promise" was not the sole nor chief ground 
 of decision in this case, is clear from the fact, that 
 " Mr. Knox, who was confined to his home by age 
 and infirmities," when he heard of the case, expressed 
 his " lamentation that so many offices were laid on 
 
 * Life of Principal Hill, p. 84. 
 
lod 
 
 the back of an old man, which twenty men of the best 
 gifts were not able to bear."* The case of a bishop 
 is, no doubt, different from that of an ordinary paro- 
 chial minister; but I question much whether the 
 Bishop of St. Andrews had in those days more to 
 occupy his time and thoughts, than the single pastor 
 of a modern city parish, with its " teeming population"' 
 of 9 or 10,000 souls. At all events, the fact proves, 
 that the Church, corrupted as it was by an influence 
 adverse to Presbyterian views, did hold in her hands 
 the power of reviewing all such cases — of judging 
 in regard to the incompatibility of offices — and of so 
 regulating matters as to prevent the avocations of each 
 from being neglected or carelessly performed. 
 
 In the Assembly, 1576, we find a very appropriate 
 illustration in the case of Robert Hamilton, who seems 
 to have succeeded Douglas in the Principality of 
 the New College: — " Anent the pluralitie of offices 
 objected to Mr. Robert Hamilton, minister of St. 
 Andrews, the said matter being long debated with 
 reasons on either side, and rypely advisit, the present 
 Assemblie, in respect of the circumstances of place and 
 congregation of St. Andrews, finds and declares the 
 twa offices joined in his person, to be incompatible? 
 in him." From this decision it is clear, that by a 
 '* plurality of offices" was not meant merely a plurality 
 of benefices or of pastoral charges — that the general 
 principle of incompatiiDility in such cases of plurality 
 was distinctly recognised — while the Church retained 
 in her hands the power and right of determining on 
 the application of the principle. Although Hamilton 
 had been allowed to retain his Principality, the general 
 principle might not appear to have been very grievously 
 violated, as we find by reference to the charter of the 
 
 ^ Caldenvood's History, p. 57. 
 
109 
 
 College, that at the time of its erection, by John Ha- 
 milton, in 1353, the whole number of its '•'■ fundatce 
 persoJicBj' as they are called, including professors, 
 students, and servants, was limited to thirty -nine.* And 
 in 1376, which was three years, at least, before Mel- 
 ville's reformation of the University took place, the 
 number of students must have been extremely small.f 
 Still it appears that the sentence of the Assembly was 
 acted on ; for we are expressly told, that they " or- 
 dained Mr. Robert Hamilton to remain with the mini- 
 strie, and to leave the Provostrie of the New Colleo-e 
 as an impediment and hindrance to his calling of the 
 ministrie, under the pain of the censure of the kirk."t 
 To show that the removal of Hamilton was not ordered 
 on slight grounds, nor with the interested view of 
 making way for Melville to succeed him, we have 
 simply to quote the words of the " royal visitors" of 
 the College, whose report was ratified by Parliament, 
 1379. " The Provest of the New College hes already 
 the charge of the ministry of the city and parochie of 
 St. Andrew's, quilk is a burding greit aneuchjbr ony ane 
 man to discharge.'' § 
 
 In 1581, the case of Mr. Alexander Arbuthnot 
 came under the notice of the Assembly. This dis- 
 tinguished man had held the office of Principal of 
 King's College, Aberdeen, since 1569, when he was 
 nominated to it by the Regent Murray, as a tribute 
 to his learning and worth. || In 1581 he was offered 
 
 * Charter of St. Mary's, 5th March, 1553. 
 t M'Crie's Life of Melville, Vol. I. p. 247, &c. 
 \ Bulk of Universal Kirke, p. 161. 
 § Acts of Scots Parliaments, Vol. III. p. 181. 
 II Account of King's College in Stat. Account, Vol. XXI. 
 p. 68. 
 
110 
 
 the parochial charge of the city of Aberdeen; and, 
 in consequence, was " ordainit to demit the Prin- 
 cipality in favour of Mr. Nicol Dalrymple."* It 
 a'.ipears that Arbuthnot did not choose to surrender 
 his charge of the College, and on this account never 
 became minister of Aberdeen. In this instance, it is 
 plain that the Assembly held itself as entitled to judge 
 not only of the character and talents of the presentee, 
 but of every circumstance in his situation which might 
 affect his qualifications for the ministry, and the con- 
 sequent discharge of his pastoral functions. And yet, 
 if the plea of necessity was at any time to be adduced 
 as a good reason for such an union of offices, it might 
 have been successfully brought forward in this in- 
 stance. When Arbuthnot went to Aberdeen the 
 greater part of the students in the neighbourhood 
 were strongly addicted to Popery, and his predecessor, 
 from hostility to the Protestant establishment, had 
 reduced the University to absolute poverty. In these 
 circumstances, he had to struggle, during the greater 
 part of his life, with the greatest difficulties.! 
 
 In the same Assembly which decided on Arbuthnot's 
 case, *' the kirke thought it meet, that the pryor and 
 town of St. Andrew's nominate sic ane of the brethren 
 whom they haiv best liking of to serve the cure, &c. 
 They gaiv commission to certain persons to give as- 
 sent yrto, and to place him there, provided they find 
 no lawful impediment, or that they," the persons to 
 
 * Bulk of Universal Kirke, A.D. 1581. 
 
 f See his Life, abridged by Dr. M'Crie, in "Vol. I. of Mel- 
 ville, p. 115, where some of his poems are inserted, particularly 
 a specimen of one seemingly designed to describe his own state, 
 entitled " The Miseries of a Poor Schollar." These poems are 
 publislied in Pinkerton's Ancient Scottish Poems, Vol. I. 
 
Ill 
 
 1 
 
 be appointed, " he not of ane of the colleges whom the 
 kirke exeems from considerations therefrae."* " If 
 any member of the college had applied to serve the 
 cure, it is evident, from this decision, that the com- 
 missioners were authorised to put to him the question, 
 whether he would demit the professorship ?"f 
 
 In 1600, session 7th, the following sentence was 
 pronounced by the Assembly: " Anent the supplica- 
 tion given by the Presbyterie of Deer, makand men- 
 tion, that qras the Laird of Philorth havand erected 
 ane college within the town of Fraserburgh, and 
 agreit with Mr. Charles Ferme to be baith pastor of 
 the said burgh, and principal of his college, qlk bur- 
 den the said Mr. Charles refuses to accept upon him, 
 without he be commandit be the General Assemblie, 
 desyrand therefore, ane command to be given to the 
 said Mr. Charles to accept baith the said charges, as 
 at mair length is contenit in the said supplications. 
 The General Assemblie having considerit the neces- 
 sity of the said work, and how that the Laird of Phi- 
 lorth has refusit to sanction a pastor at the said kirke, 
 unless he undertake baith the said charge, yairfore 
 commands and ordainis the saidis Mr. Charles Ferme 
 to undertake and wait upon alswell the said kirke 
 as to be Principal of the College of Fraserburgh.":}: 
 On this decision it is obvious to remark, in the first 
 place, that at the period in question, it was an under- 
 stood principle among the ministers of the Church of 
 Scotland, that no plurality of offices, whatever might 
 be the nature of these offices, could be undertaken 
 without the special consent and authority of the Su- 
 
 * Buik of Universal Kirke, p. 284<. 
 f Cook's Speech, p. 5o. 
 \ Buik of Universal Kirke, p 542. 
 
 1-2 
 
112 
 
 preme Ecclesiastical Court ; and, in the second place, 
 that the grounds of the decision, in this instance, are 
 assigned to be, the peculiarities of the case. The 
 Laird of Philorth appears to have been the patron of 
 the parish, and had possession of the tiends. He 
 founded the town and erected a church for the ac- 
 commodation of its inhabitants. He endowed a col- 
 lege for the instruction of youth in those northern 
 parts, and his liberality in doing so certainly entitled 
 him to the gratitude of the church. At the same 
 time, it is expressly recorded, that the said Laird had 
 " refusit" to sustain " both a minister and principal 
 of the college," by reason of the very heavy burden 
 which would thus be brought upon him; a burden in- 
 deed which would have gone far to neutralize all the 
 benefits designed to flow from the erection of the 
 seminary. If there had been competent provision for 
 both offices, we may reasonably infer that the Assem- 
 bly v/ould not have acceded to the wishes of the pro- 
 prietor ; or rather, it is likely that the application would 
 never have been made. Besides, it deserves to be no- 
 ticed, that the parish was not very extensive, and the 
 college was at least on a smaller scale than that of 
 Glasgotv at the present day ; and Mr. Ferme might with 
 ordinary abilities be able, in some degree, to manage it. 
 Besides it ought to be remarked, that the arrangement 
 was only meant to have a temporary continuance. 
 Had the circumstances of the case been different, 
 we may rest assured that the Assembly would have 
 given a very different decision. Our conclusion is, that 
 although unions were not in ever?/ instance absolutely pro- 
 hibited, a very strong case of necessity required to 
 be substantiated before permission to form them was 
 granted.* 
 
 * Tlio history of this College of Fraserburgh is simply as 
 
113 
 
 The truth is, that considerations of necessity often 
 led the Assembly to tolerate what, in other circum- 
 stances, would have been frowned upon as altogether 
 
 follows. In 1575 the town of Fraserburgh was founded by Sir 
 Alexander Frazer of Philorth, an ancestor of the present Lord 
 Salton, whose family mansion still goes by the name of Philorth 
 House. As the town soon became a place of considerable trade, 
 it was endowed by the superior with all the privileges of a burgJi 
 of regality, and its charter bears date 1613. In 1592 Sir Alex- 
 ander obtained a charter from the crown, in which powers were 
 given to erect and endow a College and University, to appoint a 
 Rector, Principal, and Sub-Principal, and all the Professors for 
 teaching the different sciences. Every immunity and privilege 
 of an University is granted in the amplest manner. A building 
 was erected for the accommodation of the Professors and Stu- 
 dents, some part of which is still standing. In 1597 the insti- 
 tution was ratified by Parliament, with high commendations of 
 the liberality and patriotism of the founder; but with express 
 provision that out of the " rentis, and tiendis, and other emolu- 
 ments of the parsonage and vicarage" of the parish, " the mais- 
 ters of the said College shall either serve the cure of the saidis 
 kirke, or furnish sufficient men" for the purpose. (Acts Pari. 
 Scot. IV. 147, l-iS.) Ferme having undertaken the charge, con- 
 tinued in it till about 1607, when his labours were interrupted 
 by tlie Earl of Huntly, the great patron of Popeiy in the north ; 
 and he was imprisoned first at Down, and afterwards at Aber- 
 deen, on account of his having attended the Assembly at that 
 place. He M'as restored to his parish before his death, which 
 happened on the 2kh September, 1617. He had been in his 
 young days a Regent in the College of Edinburgh, under Prin- 
 cipal Adamson, and afterwards minister of the second charge at 
 Haddington. It does not appear that he had any successor in 
 the College, which was most probably allowed to fall into decay 
 amidst the distractions produced by the change of church govern- 
 ment. The erection of the Marischal College in New Aberdeen, 
 in 1593, would, in a good degree, supersede its necessity. Stat. 
 Ace. Vol. VI. p. 11. and M'Crie's Life of Melville, Vol. 11. 
 p. 286. 
 
114 
 
 at variance with the best interests of the Church. In 
 
 1563, we find the Principal of St. Salvator's College 
 officiating at Cults.* In 1564, the minister of Cupar 
 was appointed to supply occasionally at Largo.-j- In 
 
 1564, we find William Ramsay, the second master of 
 St. Salvator's College, officiating as minister of Kem- 
 back.J In 1569, " the qualified men in the Auld 
 College, habile to preach," are ordered to supply at 
 Kilmeny, or to find others capable to do so, and will- 
 ing to undertake the charge.^ In 1573 it was enacted, 
 " that where a minister is obliged, for want of clergy, 
 to have more than one kirke, he shall make his resi- 
 dence at one kirke, and only haiv superintendance of 
 the rest until there be other labourers." || In these 
 and other instances, which it would be easy to notice, 
 the Assembly were obliged to yield to circumstances; 
 and each of them forms a kind of exception to the 
 general principle. Still there was not in one of these 
 instances a plurality tolerated. All that was allowed 
 was an occasional help, rendered necessary by the 
 scarcity of ministers, and the poverty of the Church. 
 The general principle was still recognised; and every 
 seeming deviation from it was the result of dire neces- 
 sity alone. 
 
 In 1638, the Assembly at Glasgow, authorised Mr. 
 Samuel Rutherford to hold the office of colleague to 
 Mr. Robert Blair, as minister of St. Andrews, along 
 with his office of professor of divinity, in St. Mary's 
 college, and the circumstances of his appointment 
 
 * Bulk of Universal Kirke, p. 16. 
 f Idem. p. 40. 
 \ Idem. p. 49. 
 § Idem. p. 112. 
 II Idem. p. 137. 
 
115 
 
 afford a strong confirmation to our argument. Ruth- 
 erford strenuously refused the nomination to the chair, 
 on the ground that he would be thereby prevented 
 from officiating as a regular preacher of the gospel. 
 The Assembly, in order to satisfy his mind, and to 
 secure his valued services to the students of theology, 
 permitted him to divide the labours of the pulpit with 
 Mr. Blair; and this additional duty 09 his part appears 
 to have been gratuitous.* How long he continued to 
 supply the place of a colleague to Mr. Blair, we do 
 not know; but certain it is, that we find him not many 
 years afterwards in the situation of Principal of the 
 New College, while Mr. Blair, and Mr. Andrew Honey- 
 man, were the parochial ministers of St. Andrews.f 
 Rutherford appears to have been promoted to the 
 principality in 1642, as it is in that year we find Dr. 
 Colvil appointed to the ordinary professorship of 
 Divinity in St. Mary's, by order of the General As- 
 sembly.J 
 
 In the Assembly 1642, the subject of Mr. Baillie's 
 translation from Kilwinning to the third professorship 
 of Divinity in Glasgow, was discussed; and in refer- 
 ence to this matter, Mr. Baillie himself states the fol- 
 lowing facts, which throw a pretty clear hght on the 
 sentiments of the church relative to the union of 
 offices:—" Saturday, 7th August, 1641. When Mr. 
 David Dickson, in the question of my translation, had 
 declared his intention to have as much help from me 
 in professing in the college, as he gave by his ministry 
 to the town, the moderator and others then there, not 
 
 * Baillie's Manuscript Letters, p. 657. Stevenson's Hist, 
 vol. II. p. 660. 
 
 f Acts Pari. Scot. Vol. V. p. 347. 
 I Act of Assembly, 1642. 
 
116 
 
 generally liking of mixing these two offices, every one 
 whereof required a 'voJiole man, Mr. David, lest any 
 rub or mar from this should come to him in his minis- 
 try, M'hich very profitably he did discharge, gave in a 
 bill to have the matter cleared. It was gladly con- 
 descended, that it should be reason for him to exer- 
 cise so much of the ministry there as he found himself 
 able without detriment to his profession."* Mr. Dick- 
 son never was a parochial clergyman in Glasgow, but 
 merely gave his gratuitous aid in preaching and dis- 
 cipline; and Mr. Baillie, although appointed to the 
 Tron Church at the same time with his professorship, 
 was furnished with a colleague, by whom he was re- 
 lieved from the more laborious parts of pastoral duty.f 
 The passage quoted shows clearly the sense then en- 
 tertained by the church, of the importance of pastoral 
 and of professorial duty; and the extreme delicacy 
 with which the good men of those days contemplated 
 any thing Wee a plurality of offices in the same indivi- 
 duals. Even such men as Dickson and Baillie, required 
 to give an explanation of their sentiments and conduct 
 in regard to this matter, lest it should even appear 
 that they gave the most distant sanction to such a 
 thincT as an unauthorised union of offices. 
 
 It appears, from a recorded statement of the visitors 
 of St. Andrew's college, that, in 1642, several of the 
 professors were actually ministers.^ In an act passed 
 in 1643, the assembly proceed on the supposition that 
 professors of divinity might be ministers; and they are 
 allowed to represent in assembhes either the presby- 
 teries or the university to which they belong, while 
 
 * Principal Baillie's Letters, Vol. I. August, 1641. 
 
 f Cleland's Annals, Vol. I. p. 12(). 
 
 \ Records of St. Mary's, August 9th. 1642. 
 
117 
 
 there is no proof that these ministers were in the 
 actual exercise of a pastoral charge.* But to show- 
 that the Church still considered the profession of 
 Divinity as in itself a distinct office, requiring peculiar 
 qualifications, it was decreed by the Assembly, 1645, 
 " that in respect of the povertie of men, fit and willing 
 to professe Divinity in the schools, by reason that few 
 frame their studies that way, the provincials shall dili- 
 gently consider, and try who within their bounds most 
 probably may be for a profession in the schools, and 
 report their names to the following General Assembly, 
 that such may be stirred up and encouraged by the 
 General Assembly, to compose and frame their studies, 
 that they may be fit for such places."f When chosen 
 to theological chairs in the universities, it appears to 
 have been the general sense of the Church, that they 
 should continue to preach either statedly, or occa- 
 sionally as they found cause ; but there is no evidence 
 that they were at any time designed to hold an ordi- 
 nary parochial charge ; and the idea of two competent 
 livings being held by one man, seems never to have 
 been contemplated. 
 
 [n 1719, the commission of the Assembly transmit- 
 ted to presbyteries an overture on the constitution 
 and jurisdiction of kirk-sessions, particularly in large 
 towns.J For these it was proposed, to have only one 
 general session, composed of all the ministers and all 
 the elders of the place. The proposal excited violent 
 opposition, and a keen controversy arose, in which 
 Mr. Anderson of Dumbarton, and afterwards of Glas- 
 gow, the celebrated " defender of the Presbyterians,'' 
 
 * Acts 1643, September 3d. 
 . t Acts of Assembly, 1645, Feb. 13th. 
 t Acts of Assembly, 1719. 
 
 f3 
 
118 
 
 together with one or two more of the ablest men in 
 the church took a share.* One of the most promi- 
 nent of the objections to the scheme proposed in the 
 overtures, was, " their declaring those ministers xvho 
 are principals and professors of Divinity, members of the 
 collegiate session;'' and the ministers and sessions of 
 Glasgow, were particularly zealous in petitioning their 
 presbytery against the " slavery," as they call it, 
 " under which the city must be brought, if ministers 
 who have no ministerial charge in it, or relation to it, 
 should have the overruling management in it in such 
 tender concerns."f As similar objections were anti- 
 cipated from other quarters, they were replied to on 
 general grounds; such as the expediency of allowing 
 university ministers to be members of collegiate ses- 
 sions, inasmuch as the students are subject to the 
 cognizance of the session ;J and a great deal of acute 
 argument is applied to the question : But never is it 
 so much as hinted that academical chairs, even in 
 the theological faculty, might be held along with pas- 
 toral charges. Such unions do not seem at this time 
 to have been recognised as consistent with the great 
 constitutional principles of the Church of Scotland. 
 
 In later times, indeed, instances of the union of 
 academical offices with pastoral charges have become 
 
 * See Anderson's Letters on the Overtures, &c. 12mo. Glas- 
 gow, 1720. Vindication of the Overture, in reply to the above, 
 12mo. Edinburgh, 1720. Remarks on Mr. Anderson's Second 
 Letter, 12mo. Edinburgh, 1720. Remarks on the Overture, 
 by J. C. one of the ministers of the gospel at Glasgow, 1720; 
 &c. &c. 
 
 f Remarks on the Overtures, 1719, by J. C. one of the min- 
 isters of Glasgow; with Petition to the Presbytery, 1720, p. 83. 
 
 I Vindication of the Overtures, pp. 90 — 101. 
 
119 
 
 much more frequent than could have been reasonably- 
 anticipated; and, in some very extraordinary instances, 
 the Church appears to have given her sanction to 
 them. But, in regard to these, we observe, in thej^r^^ 
 placey that not a few of these instances constitute, in 
 fact, the very ground of complaint; and the leading 
 design of our argument is to prove, that the Church 
 ought to interpose her authority to suppress such 
 abuses as subversive of her best interests. We allude 
 to such cases of union as those of well-endowed and 
 laborious literary professorships with equally well- 
 endowed and not less laborious city parishes ; the 
 Professorship of Logic, for example, in the University 
 of Edinburgh, with the charge of a parish of 15,000 
 souls. Instances of this kind we hold to be at vari- 
 ance with the essential principles of our ecclesiastical 
 establishment; and although permitted to pass sub 
 silentio, or per incmiayn, they have not yet, and I hope 
 never will, receive the sanction of the Supreme Court. 
 , In the second place; In not a few of the cases of 
 union in question, the imperious law of necessity has 
 been found to operate; and the Church has either 
 silently or openly given her sanction on this ground 
 to what would otherwise have been resisted as an 
 encroachment on the harmony and efficiency of her 
 established system. To this class belong such unions 
 as those of the Theological Faculty in Edinburgh and 
 Aberdeen with parochial charges. The want of ade- 
 quate endowments, in these instances, has been held 
 as sufficient reason for their combination with pastoral 
 charges. 
 
 In the last place; In every instance in which the 
 Church has been called to interpose her authority, 
 in favour of an union of offices in ministers, she has 
 invariably proceeded on the assumption, that such an 
 
120 
 
 union has been compatible with the due discharge of 
 pastoral obligation. This has uniformly been held as 
 the object of prime regard; and in no instance has 
 the Church ever given her deliberate sanction to the 
 principle, that an union of incompatible offices may 
 be held by a minister for the sake of private emolu- 
 ment, at the expense of the public good. The cases 
 of this kind, indeed, which have come under the re- 
 view of the Church, are extremely few ; but in every 
 one of them the same great principle has been recog- 
 nised. In the case of Professor Hill, for instance, in 
 1780, the Assembly considered that the instruction of 
 20 pupils during six months of the year, in the rudi- 
 ments of the Greek tongue, was compatible with the 
 office of second minister in the city of St. Andrews, 
 the emoluments of which were at the same time very 
 inadequate.* In the case of Dr. Arnot, in 1800, and 
 
 * The case of Professor George Hill, at St. Andrews, as de- 
 cided by the Assembly, 1780, is deserving of particular notice. 
 With the exception of the appointment of Dr. Blair to the Rhe- 
 toric class, in 1766, it was, so far as I know, the Jirst attempt 
 that was made to conjoin o. professorship of general literature with 
 the parochial charge of a town parish. As might have been ex- 
 pected, it excited a good deal of discussion, and although sanc- 
 tioned by the Presbytery of St. Andrews, it was brought under 
 the review of the Supreme Court, by the Rev. James Burn, of 
 Forgan, a Gentleman whose name deserves, on tliis, as well as 
 other grounds, to be recorded with honom*. His hands were 
 strengthened by overtures on the subject of such unions of office, 
 transmitted at the same time, by the St/nod of Fife, and that of 
 Perth and Stirling. The summary manner in which the subject 
 was dismissed by the Assembly, reflects no credit on either side 
 of the House, " as the subject was one of vast importance^ and justly 
 merited the anxious notice of the Supreme Ecclesiastical Judicatory." 
 (Dr. Cook's Life of Principal Hill, p. 83.) The reasons of the 
 Assembly's decision in favour ef the union were these : The 
 
121 
 
 of Mr. Ferrie, in 1813, permission was given to hold 
 the offices of Professor of Theology and of Civil His- 
 tory, on the presumption that the discharge of their 
 official duties would not materially interfere with the 
 due attention to pastoral duty. Preposterous as it 
 may appear, the supposed compatibility was strenu- 
 ously contended for; and even in these disheartening 
 instances of modern ecclesiastical degeneracy, the 
 grand principle of the ministry as a clergyman's '' own 
 work" and " proper vocation," was never ostensibly 
 impugned, and an attempt was by no party, or by no 
 individual, ever made to prove that a minister might, 
 without liability to challenge, take upon him an office, 
 the duties of which may, from their secular character, 
 their extent, or their involving non-residence, abstract 
 him from his pastoral calling, and effectually deprive 
 the people of those high advantages which, by means 
 of an established church, the constitution and laws of 
 their country, have kindly secured to them. 
 
 In fine, the mere fact of the occasional existence 
 
 high talents and endowments of the individual chiefly concerned 
 — the small number of pupils attending the Greek class — the 
 facility with which Mr. Hill, from his having held the office since 
 1772, could discharge its duties — the scanty endowments of the 
 second charge of St. Andrews, and the smallness of Mr. Hill's 
 living, he having long been only assistant and successor to the 
 Greek Professor, &c. Lord Kinnoul, the respected Chancellor 
 of the University, in a private letter to Dr. Hill, dated 30th 
 December, 1779, expresses his hope, that with " abilities to 
 which all the world does justice," " he would discharge every 
 part of his duty with a fidelity and diligence becoming the sacred 
 and important character of a parochial minister;" and recom- 
 mends to him " to pursue an uninterrupted course of theological 
 study, with as much assiduity as the care of his parish will admit.'* 
 Life, p. 82. See Appendix, No. I. 
 
122 
 
 of such an union as that in question, from whatever 
 cause it may have arisen, proves nothing as to the real 
 principles and constitution of the Church, on the sub- 
 ject. There have been instances in which non-resi- 
 dence and plurality of benefices with cure, have been, 
 from considerations of necessity and other causes, to- 
 lerated and even sanctioned by the Church ; but this 
 will not prove that such things are agreeable to her 
 original constitution and principles. In the course of 
 ages, modern abuses will creep in unknown in purer 
 times ; and from such abuses, an unblushing appeal 
 must be made to those " ancient landmarks which 
 our fathers have set;" — those established principles of 
 our Church which never prescribe ; — that " genius of 
 the constitution" which presides in high authority over 
 all her movements, and whose departure from the 
 midst of us would be preceded by a boding voice, like 
 that which portended the desolation of the Jev/ish 
 temple of old — " Let us go hence."* 
 
 The following quotation, from the pen of a writer 
 whom all parties must allow to be a most competent 
 judge in all questions of this nature, may form a very 
 appropriate conclusion to the present Section. " The 
 Reformation in Scotland was commenced by men 
 deeply impressed with the solemn nature of the mini- 
 terial office ; it was considered by them as requiring 
 all the talents and all the care which could be devoted 
 to the discharge of its interesting duties, and they 
 viewed other pursuits, from their tendency to with- 
 draw the mind from those* objects, which, by the most 
 sacred obligations, ought to engross it, as what it was 
 essential in ministers to avoid. It will not be con- 
 
 * The subject of "parallel cases" will come again under notice 
 in the last Section of Chapter V; 
 
123 
 
 tended, that the duties of a minister are so easily per- 
 formed, if they be performed in the conscientious 
 manner in which they ought to be, as to leave him 
 quite at leisure for any other avocation; he has not 
 merely to preach, but to superintend; he is obliged 
 to be, in as far as is possible, the guide of his people, 
 and to be at all times ready, when they require it, to 
 administer to them consolation and support. On the 
 other hand, it must be admitted, that the faithful dis- 
 charge of what is incumbent upon a Professor in a 
 University, must occupy much of his time; that the 
 prosecution of a great many of those subjects, with 
 which he who fills, as he ought to do, an academical 
 chair, has to render himself conversant, gives his views 
 and sentiments a direction different from that which 
 is given to him who is solely a minister; and that, if 
 he be regarded not merely as the teacher of his class, 
 which is a very inadequate view of his situation, but 
 as holding a high place in the literary and philosoplii- 
 cal world, and as one upon whom science and learning 
 have the most urgent claims, there arises an obligation, 
 which it is dishonourable lightly to regard, to be com- 
 pletely engaged in prosecuting the peculiar branch of 
 knowledge, for teaching which he had been selected. 
 It is certainly of some consequence that the purposes 
 of a professor should reach thus far; and thus far they 
 will assuredly in most cases not reach, if he be dis- 
 tracted by a variety of necessary engagements, break- 
 ing in upon his times of study, and unavoidably inter- 
 rupting the speculations upon which he had entered, 
 often at the precise moment when he felt himself most 
 disposedi, and best qualified successfully to conduct 
 them. These remarks apply, no doubt, much more 
 to certain subjects than to others; but when we 
 take into estimation the common measure of human 
 
124 
 
 / 
 
 / talent and diligence, we may safely lay it down as a 
 general maxim, that the right performance of what 
 either the ministerial or professorial office requires, 
 is quite enough for exercising, in as far as they are 
 likely to be exercised, the intellectual and active 
 powers of the individuals to whom it has been com- 
 mitted. Although, therefore, in the present state of 
 various offices in the Universities, to which emoluments 
 so scanty are attached, that they are insufficient for 
 furnishing the means of decent subsistence, an abso- 
 lute prohibition to unite parochial and university 
 charges would be premature; yet it should not be 
 forgotten how much it is to be wished that these pru- 
 dential reasons were speedily removed, and that, in 
 no case, the union to which allusion has been made, 
 should have the plea of necessity upon which it might 
 be supported."f 
 
 SECTION FOURTH. 
 
 Civil Regulations, 
 
 It is pleasant when we find a perfect harmony be- 
 tween the civil laws of the country, and the constitu- 
 tional statutes of the church, on any one subject; and 
 we may reasonably infer, that whatever they zinite in 
 guarding and maintaining with sedulous care, must 
 have been viewed by both as a matter of no slender 
 magnitude. 
 
 Although the laws enforcing residence on ministers 
 do not come directly within the range of our present 
 argument, we may be allowed to notice, that so early 
 as 1562, the Scottish parliament passed an enactment, 
 
 * Dr. Cook's Life of Principal Hill, p. 83—86. 
 
125 
 
 ordaining manses to be provided for the protestant 
 clergymen in their respective parishes; and in 1573, 
 and 1592, this act was renewed and enforced with 
 additional provisions. We notice these, principally 
 with the view of remarking the reason assigned in 
 them for thus providing manses, and other accommo- 
 dations, for the comfortable residence of the clergy. 
 It is " to the effect that they," the clergy, " may the 
 better avoait upon the charge appointed^ or to be appoint- 
 ed unto them ;" and the manse is expressly ordered to 
 be " bigged beside the kirhe" Here, it is plain, that 
 each minister was supposed to have the charge of one 
 flock — that he was to devote his whole time to their 
 pastoral superintendence — and that, with this view, he 
 was to reside constantly amongst them. It is equally 
 obvious, that whatever may be the letter of these sta- 
 tutes, the spirit of them is utterly adverse to the idea 
 of a minister so burdening himself with avocations 
 distinct from and by no means necessarily connected 
 with his pastoral charge, as unavoidably to unfit him 
 for the due performance of his ministerial duties. 
 
 In the parliament held at Edinburgh, 3d December 
 1567, it was " statute and ordainit, that orders sail 
 be taken for sik as professe the trew religion, and 
 half the patrimony of the kirke in their hands, and * 
 thair devotie to thair flocks " That sik as are qualifit be 
 ye jugement of the kirke sail exerce thair awin office in 
 thair aicin kirke;'' and " that ane persone beneficit," 
 or having several benefices, " being qualifit, sail 
 preche himselfe at ane of his kirkes, and sail sustene 
 the ministeris of the remanent at the syt of the gener- 
 ale kirke; and the unquahfit to pay his thrid of ye 
 
 * A word wanting in the Original, from the state of the 
 MS. charter. 
 
126 
 
 haill; admittand na pluralitie in tyme cumynmg" And 
 ** that orders may be taken that the poore niinisteris 
 quha lang hes bene depraivit of thair just stipends may 
 not onelie be provydit hereafter yor a sufficient levingy 
 but also, that they may understand how they may lift 
 up the same be ordere of law."* In these enactments, 
 passed at the very dawn of the reformed establishment 
 in Scotland, pluralities are suppressed ; and the rea- 
 sons assigned are, that such pluralities are inconsistent 
 with ministers " duty to their Jiock,'' and attention to 
 *' theii' own office in their own kirk;" and " a sufficient 
 living" being ordered for each minister, the ground 
 of necessity is removed. It is plain, that principles 
 exactly the same, require the dissolution of all unions 
 of office, whatever be their nature, as equally at vari- 
 ance with the adequate discharge of pastoral duty, 
 and with the professed design of the legislature in the 
 establishment of the protestant church in Scotland. 
 
 In the parliament 1581, the following important 
 act was passed on the subject of pluralities: — " Be- 
 cause for laik of preaching and teaching in sundrie 
 parts of the realme, many people are suspected to be 
 fallen in great ignorance, and danger of godless 
 atheism, it being found maist difficil, that in the 
 charge of the pluralitie of kirkes, onie ane minister 
 may instruct manie flocks, theirfor it is thocht expe- 
 dient, statute, and ordainit, that every parish kirke, 
 and sa meikle bounds as sail be found to be a sufficient 
 paroche, sail have their awin pastor, with a sufficient 
 and reasonabile stipend, according to the state and 
 habilitie of the place: And that all kirkes to the pre- 
 lacies annexit be providit with siifficient ministeris 
 
 Act. Pari. Scot. Vol. III. p. 37. 
 
127 
 
 with competent levings.''^ After stating some other 
 ai'rangements, and nominating a commission to carry 
 them into effect, the act thus concludes with a state- 
 ment of the design and di/ty of the commissioners: 
 " to consider, appoint, and ordaine, the estate of the 
 saidis kirkes and stipends quhair theron the saidis 
 ministeris being honestlie sustained may the better 
 attend to thair flockis and proper vocatioun."f The 
 act 1584, makes similar provision for the stipends of 
 ministers, and for their " suir assignation and pay- 
 ment;" while it takes particular notice of the evils 
 resulting from ministers " being yearlie withdrawn 
 fra thair kirkes, to attend a large space upon the get- 
 ting the assignations of thair levings and stipends 
 modified unto theame."J The act 1392, confirms the 
 whole provision made for the church, and expresses it 
 by the very appropriate designation of " provision to 
 the ministeris of reasonable and competent levings."^ 
 And by another act of that year, so propitious to the 
 interests of presbyterianism in Scotland, commissioners 
 were nominated to confer on such points as the follow- 
 ing: — " How, in quhat manner, thair may be a minis- 
 ter provydit at ilk paroche kirke within this realme? 
 Quhat locall stipend is necessar for the minister serv- 
 ing the cure at ilk paroche kirke? And be quhat 
 means the same may be best convenientlie haid and 
 provydit to theame, that they be not ahstractit fra thair 
 cure in tyme cuming, by suiting for thair stipends 
 otherwise." II In the act 1617, entitled " anent the 
 
 * Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol. III. p. 37. 
 t Idem. p. 211. 
 \ Idem. p. 304. 
 § Idem. p. 514. 
 d Idem. p. 553. 
 
128 
 
 plantation of kirkes," the same principle is clearly re- 
 cognised, " necessitie will evince that everie kirke 
 which for distance of place or otheris lawful causes, 
 cannot be united," or incor^^orated with another, " suld 
 be planted with thair awin particular minister to serve 
 thairat."* 
 
 Now, on these statutes I beg to ask three plain 
 questions — First, What can have been the intention 
 of the legislature in " statuting and ordaining" that 
 " sa meikle bounds as sail be found to be a sufficient and 
 competent paroche^' shall be assigned to the charge of 
 a minister, if it be not that in their view such a 
 " paroche" was amply sufficient for one minister, and 
 " competent" to his regular employment? Some 
 parishes indeed, might in the lapse of years come to 
 be too large, and others too small; but the general 
 principle of one sufficient and competent " paroche" 
 remains entire, and all exceptions to it must be deter- 
 mined by their specialties. In the second place. What 
 does the legislature mean by ordaining that each 
 " competent paroche," sail have their " awin pastor," 
 if it be not that the inhabitants of the " competent 
 paroche," are hereby declared entitled to have a 
 minister as their peculiar property, from whom they 
 may require the discharge of all the duties of that 
 situation, which is presupposed to be amply sufficient 
 to engage his time and talents? If a man is to divide 
 his time and thoughts between two parishes, or between 
 a parish and an office of another kind, but still loaded 
 with important duties, can the pastor be said " to at- 
 tend on his proper vocation," or can the people be 
 said to have their " awin pastor?" He is theirs only 
 in part — they have not what our fathers used to call 
 
 * Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol. IV. p. 532. 
 
129 
 
 a " haill minister;" and the design of the legislature 
 is most completely frustrated. In the third place, 
 What is the reason why a " sufficient and reasonable 
 stipend" is provided by the legislature, if it be not, 
 that the legislature thereby designed and expected, 
 that the person receiving such a stipend should be 
 " wholly occupied with his parish, or regard it as wholly 
 incompetent for him to enter upon any other office."* 
 By the express terms of law, a fair bargain is made 
 between the parties. The " competent paroche" is 
 measured out — its " awin pastor" is nominated to the 
 charge of it — his " proper vocatioun" is prescribed; 
 and a " sufficient and reasonable stipend" is secured 
 to him, on condition of his discharging all the duties 
 of that vocation, to the best of his ability. Let it also 
 be remembered, that although the people of the 
 " paroche" may be so indulgent to their " awin pas- 
 tor," as to tolerate his undertaking a distinct " avoca- 
 tioun," and his devoting to the " paroche" but a part 
 of that time which by law is theirs, still there are other 
 parties whose concurrence is indispensable. The legis- 
 lature which established and endowed the church, has 
 a right to say. You have broken the bargain — you have 
 not fulfilled the terms of your appointment, and have 
 no claims for remuneration ? And the church at large 
 has a right to say. You are not walking up to the end 
 and purpose of your ordination voxus. You are taking 
 on you offices which we deem to be incompatible with 
 the due discharge of these vows; and we insist on a 
 dissolution of the copartnery: And that you shall 
 " attend to your propir vocatioun^ 
 
 While the state was thus anxious to make adequate 
 provision for the exercise of the ministry as the ex- 
 
 * Dr. Cook's Speech, p. 66. 
 
130 
 
 elusive occupation of the clerg}', it is extremely in- 
 teresting to notice the care which was taken in secur- 
 ing similar provision for the teachers of youth in the 
 universities. We have already adverted to the "wishes 
 of the church on this head as expressed in the First 
 Book of Discipline.* Did the legislature respond to 
 these wishes in a manner answerable to their expecta- 
 tions? We have only to refer to the report of the 
 royal visitors of St. Andrew's college, as received and 
 ratified by parliament in 1579, and from that period 
 to the present day, held as the nova erectio of that 
 seminary. The provision made by this important 
 statute, for the different masters of the colleges and 
 their households, is as follows; and considering the 
 time and the value of money, and the very small 
 stipend of the clergy, it is not so very penurious as 
 might have been supposed. " Aither of the twa prin- 
 cipal maisteris, professoris of theologie in the said 
 new college, sail have for thair fie, and their awin and 
 thair servandis buird, ane hundred poundis money, 
 and thrie chalderis victuale." " Everie ane of the 
 uther thrie masteris and professoris of theologie, ane 
 hundred poundis and ane chalder victuale;" the "vic- 
 tuale" in each case being partly " qkiet," " beir," and 
 *' aittesi" and this besides dwelling-houses and other 
 perquisites of office. That it was the design of the 
 legislature to separate entirely the offices of ministers 
 and professors, is plain from what follows: " and sa to 
 provide for sustcntatioun of the ministrie, at the kirlces 
 annext to the saidis collcgis be the superplus of the 
 thriddis and utheris ecclesiasticall rents, as neither the 
 rentis of the coliegis be diminishit, nor the Jbundat 
 personis xvithdrawin fi om thair ordinar study and teich- 
 
 * See page 103. 
 
131 
 
 ing, to serve at particiila?' Icirkes."* By the '^ act of 
 annexation" of church property to the crown in 1587, 
 all the " emolumentis and proffitis gevm, grantit, and 
 desposit to collegis for intertainment of maisteris and 
 students," are expressly excepted; as are all funds set 
 apart " for sustentatioun of ministeris makand yr re- 
 sidence in buiTowes quhair yr is na uther stipend 
 appointit to theame."f In an act passed this same 
 year, entitled, " Ratification to the new colledg of 
 Sanct Andreis," all the gifts previously bestowed are 
 confirmed with some additions.^ It was in this same 
 year, that James granted to the college of Glasgow, 
 an act confirming to them all previous grants, and 
 conferring on that seminary several other valuable 
 immunities, that adequate provision might be made 
 for " sustentation of the masters, regents, and students 
 of the same."<^ In 1392, the " fruitis" of the " par- 
 sonage of Forteviot," a " benefice without cure," were 
 ordered by act of parliament, to be appropriated at 
 the sight of the masters of St. Andrew's college to the 
 more liberal " sustentation" of the same.|| In 1394, 
 a third part of the parish of Carrol, which was pre- 
 viously connected with the abbey of Haddington, was 
 appropriated to the better support of the college at 
 St. Andrews.^ Similar appropriations were from time 
 to time made in favour of the other colleges of Scot- 
 land. For instance; in favour of the colleges of 
 Aberdeen, by the parliament, June, 1617, and 1633; 
 
 ♦ Acts of the Scots Parliament, Vol. III. p. 182. 
 
 t Idem. p. 433. 
 
 \ Idem. p. 438. 
 
 § Idem. p. 487. 
 
 H Idem. p. 511. 
 
 «[ Idem. Vol. IV. p. 94. 
 
133 
 
 the college of Glasgow, by the same parliaments; and 
 the college of Edinburgh, by parliament in August 
 1617,* and in favour of all three at once, 1644.-|- In 
 1663, we find an order of parliament for raising certain 
 sums from the bishop's rents, and other sources, in 
 order that " comjietent provision" might be made, so as 
 to *' invite" the fittest men to '' undertake such labo- 
 rious employments," as those of masters in the uni- 
 versities. J From the act, 1672, in favour of the 
 university of St. Andrews, it is plain, that an impor- 
 tant distinction was recognised between those mem- 
 bers whose livings depended in part upon the fees of 
 students, and those who had salaries simply ; while in 
 regard to both, the respective offices were understood 
 to yield a full maintenance.^ 
 
 On the 22d of May, 1 584, the following Act was 
 passed at Edinburgh. Its title defines its specific ob- 
 jects : " That ministers sail not be judges, nor exerce 
 any other ordinar office^ that may abstract themjrae their 
 office.'' " The kingis majesty, and his three estaites 
 assembled in this present parliament, being desir- 
 ous that all his loving and gude subjects sail be faith- 
 fuUie instructit in the doctrine of their salvation, and 
 that the ministers of Godis worde and sacraments may 
 the better and mair diligently attend upon their awin 
 charges and vocation : Therefore statutis and ordainis 
 that all the saidis ministers sail faithfullie await there- 
 upon, to the comfort and edification of the flockes 
 
 * Acts of the Scots Parliament, Vol. IV. pp. 556, 576, 577, 
 670. Vol. V. p. 72. 73, 75. 
 
 t Idem. Vol. VI. p. 130. 
 
 t Oct. 2d, 1663. Acts Pari. Scot. Vol. VII. p. 491. 
 
 § Act. Pari. Scot. Vol. VIII. p. 190. See also Act 1696. 
 Act. Pari. Scot. Vol. X. p. 110. 
 
133 
 
 committed unto them : and that nane of them pre- 
 sentlie being in that fmiction, or sail be admitted their- 
 to in time camming, sail, in any waies accept, use, or 
 administrate any place of judicature, in quhatsumever 
 civil or criminal causes, nor sail be of the college of 
 justice, commissioners, advocates, court clerkes, or 
 notaries in any matters (the making of testamentes 
 only excepted) under the pain of separation fra their 
 benefices, livinges, and functions."* On this statute 
 we remark,^r5^ — the avowed design of it is the better 
 instruction of the people by means of" the ministers of 
 the Gospel better and more diligently attending upon 
 their awiu charges and vocation,'' the duties of which 
 are evidently supposed to be amply sufficient to occu- 
 py their whole time. And surely that minister cannot 
 be said to wait on his own charge and vocation, who 
 undertakes the duties of another vocation, altogether 
 distinct from his otvn, and designed to be held by a 
 distinct person, and provided for accordingly. In the 
 second place, the principle of the prohibition in the Act 
 before us, is, that by " exercing any ordinar office," 
 ministers " may be abstracted from their office" that 
 is, from their own proper office, which is that of " in- 
 structing men in the doctrine of salvation," by all the 
 various modifications of pastoral care. Consequently, 
 that office or that occupation of any kind, be it sacred 
 or civil, which has the effect of " abstractinv" a mini- 
 ster from his proper caUing, either by a combination 
 of opposite duties, or by an addition of extra labour, 
 comes under the prohibition of the law. In the last 
 place, when the statutes of civil and criminal law, 
 specify a number of particular instances in which the 
 
 ♦ Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol. III. p. 294<. 
 G 
 
134 
 
 breach of them is supposed to consist, it is surely 
 never understood that these instances alone shall be- 
 come the subjects of prosecution. Do our laws, com- 
 plex and minute as they are, condescend on every 
 species of fraud, or of theft, or of murder, which 
 may be committed? and yet, are our judges rigidly 
 prevented from giving judgment in all those cases 
 which do not come under literal specification ? Spe- 
 cimens of the thing intended by the law, are distinctly 
 noticed; and it remains with the jury and judges to 
 find whether such and such instances which chance to 
 occur, do or do not accord in general character with the 
 specimen. Consequently it remains with the church 
 courts to find whether or not a professorship of any 
 of the sciences, or the headship of a literary institu- 
 tion, belongs to those " ordinar offices," the " exercing' 
 of which " may abstract a minister from his office" 
 
 In the same parliament which enacted the statute 
 on which we have been commenting, another act 
 wc,-. passed, entitled, " the causes and manner of de- 
 privation of ministers;" the preamble to which clearly 
 defines its principle and aim : " Our soveraine lord 
 and his three estates assembled in this present parlia- 
 ment, willing that the word of God sail be preachit, 
 and sacraments administret in purity and sinceritie, 
 and that the rents quhairon the ministers audit to be 
 sustainit sail not be possessed be unworthie persons, 
 neglecting to do their duties, for quhilkes they ac- 
 cepted their offices." Here the great principle is 
 again distinctly recognized, that by law a suitable 
 provision was understood to be made for every person 
 holding the cure of a benefice, and that every one who 
 " accepts" that benefice shall be held bound to give 
 himself entirely to its avocations. In order to secure 
 the great ends of this constitution of things most ef- 
 
135 
 
 fectually, the statute goes on to specify certain crim- 
 inal charges, with regard to wl.'hit declares that 
 the person, who, after trial, is " adjudged culpable 
 in the vices and causes above written, or onie qftheniy 
 sail be deprivit."* Among these " vices and causes," 
 of deprivation, ^^plurality of benefices having cure,'' is ex- 
 pressly mentioned. Every one who has examined the 
 history of the reformation with attention, knows that a 
 " benefice having cure," was understood by our fore- 
 fathers to signify ^pastoral charge, not as opposed to 
 any other office, however laborious,-]' but simply as con- 
 tra-distinguished from those benefices which had been 
 secularized at the reformation, and which yielded 
 some emoluments without any duty attached. These 
 non-cures, as we may term them, were occasionally 
 permitted to be held by ministers of parishes, but the 
 far greater proportion were either secularized or ap- 
 propriated to the support of the seats of learning, 
 while all pluralities of benefices, where actual duty 
 was required, were prohibited. But could it ever be 
 
 * Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol, III. p. 294. 
 
 f The assembly 1582, apply the term " cure" to the office of 
 doctors or professors in college. " Ane eldership (presbytery) 
 is begun at St. Androis, of pastouris and teachers, bot not of 
 those that hes not the cure of teaching.'' Buik of Universal 
 Kirke, p. 118; and the same application of it is made by Parlia- 
 ment in the act 1641, for appointing a second professor of theo- 
 logy in Glasgow college. " Mr. David Dickson sail have payet 
 yearly furtli of the parsonage teindis, of the paroche of Kilbryde, 
 for his stipend during his service of the cure, aucht hundred pounds," 
 Acts of Scot. Par. vol. v. p. 398. Those who are acquainted 
 with the style of our old acts of assembly, and of parliament, 
 know well that the term " ministers" is often applied indiscrimi- 
 nately to "professors of Theology," and to clergymen of par- 
 ishes, both being held as invested with " benefices having cure.'* 
 
 g2 
 
136 
 
 the intention of the legislature, while it prohibited a 
 plurality of such benefices, to sanction or permit a 
 plurality of benefices of another species, which, al- 
 though not connected with the " cure of souls," in 
 the ordinary sense of the terms, involve cares and 
 avocations equally laborious, and, in some respects, 
 far more adverse to the right discharge of the pasto- 
 ral office? In a large community, where there are 
 a variety of congregations, it would be less difficult 
 for one man to do the duties of two benefices " with 
 cure," than it would be to do the duties of one, toge- 
 ther with those of a professorship or the rectorship of 
 an academical institution. In the former case, the 
 avocations are literally the same; and by a little in- 
 genious management of time and place, the labours 
 of the Sabbath, even in two houses of worship, might 
 be gone through, with comparative ease. This would 
 particularly hold good with regard to collegiate char- 
 ges ; and tivo ministers might thus accommodate one 
 another, and each might hold a " plurality of benefices, 
 having cure." In the other cases, the avocations are 
 widely different from each other, and will not so easily 
 coalesce. Can it then have been the intention of the 
 legislature to forbid, in all cases, the one class of plu- 
 ralities, and, at the same time, to permit, in all cases, 
 the other? No man who entertains a just idea of the 
 wisdom and consistency of the legislature of those days, 
 will attach to them the charge of such glaring incon- 
 sistency. " It was not thought reasonable," observes 
 Dr. M'Gill, in his admirable speech before the pres- 
 bytery of Glasgow, " it was not thought reasonable, 
 or for the public interest, that one man should fill 
 the offices, and receive the stipends of two. One 
 benefice and one stipend, were supposed sufficient for 
 one individual ; and the duties of two were deemed 
 
137 
 
 to be incompatible. This incompatibility arose not 
 from the similarity of the duties, but from the impos- 
 sibility of discharging both with faithfulness and suc- 
 cess. The same principle applies still more strongly to 
 offices of a different nature, and which lead the mind 
 of a minister to pursuits and duties of a different order 
 and spirit."* 
 
 It has been argued, that since the application of 
 these two acts last quoted is expressly limited to the 
 time elapsed, " sen his hienes coronatioun" the sen- 
 tence of the law against pluralities was not absolute. 
 Than this conclusion nothing can be more unfair. 
 Had no date been fixed for the operation of the law, 
 its retrospective reference would have had no place ; and 
 every pluralist at the date of the law, would have held 
 possession of all his benefices. It was absolutely ne- 
 cessary, therefore, to confer on the law a power of re- 
 trospection, so as to cut up the evil by the roots ; and 
 if a date is to be fixed, what more fair and equitable 
 than that the era 1367 should be selected, in as much 
 as by the act passed in that year, by the three estates 
 of Parliament, Protestantism received its legal es- 
 tablishment; and " the Protestants, instead of hold- 
 ing their sacred right by no better tenure than a de- 
 claration of royal indulgence, which might be revoked 
 at pleasure, obtained legal and parliamentary protec- 
 tion in the exercise of their religion."f Farther back 
 than this era, therefore, the law against pluralities could 
 not properly go, in as much as previous to this pe- 
 riod. Protestantism could not be said to be establish- 
 
 * Report of Proceedings, p. 20. 
 
 f Robertson's Scotland, vol. I. p. 314. James was crowned 
 July, 24<th, 1567. 
 
138 
 
 ed ; and the act 1567 forbidding pluralities, did not 
 secure any retrospect. Its express terms are " ad- 
 mittand no pluralitie in time coming^* 
 
 It is true, that some of the laws passed in the year 
 1584, in reference to the church, were displeasing to 
 the leaders of the Presbyterian party ; and it is not to 
 be wondered at, that it should be so. Amidst many 
 wholesome and salutary statutes, such as those to 
 which we have just made reference, there were 
 mixed up a variety of others of a very different de- 
 scription, and calculated only to suit the meridian of 
 a high-minded episcopalian hierarchy. It is not to be 
 wondered at, therefore, that Pont and the other zealous 
 members of the church, should have protested against 
 them. It is, however, extremely worthy of notice, 
 that while the act 1592, specifies those parts of 
 preceding acts, which, as being hostile to the rights 
 and liberties of the Presbyterian Church, are declared 
 to be no longer in force, it leaves, by implication, all 
 the other parts of these acts exactly as it found them. 
 And surely we can never suppose that the Presbyte- 
 rian body would be hostile to those civil constitutions 
 which harmonized so fully with the spirit and the let- 
 ter of that ecclesiastical institute, for which they con- 
 tended so zealously, and for which they suffered so 
 much- With the exceptions noticed, the statutes 
 which we have quoted, were ratified by the act 1592 ; 
 again by the second session of the first Parliament of 
 William and Mary, 1690 ; confirmed in the fourth Ses- 
 sion of the same Parliament, 1698 ; and were finally 
 declared to be for ever part of the civil law of the 
 church, in the act for securing the Protestant reli- 
 
 * Acts Par. Scot. vol. iii. p. 37. 
 
139 
 
 gion, passed at the time of the Union of England and 
 Scotland.* 
 
 The general principles which lie at the foundation 
 of all these parliamentary statutes, are incorporated 
 in the constitution, and pervade the whole procedure 
 of the Court of Teinds. It is on the ground that a 
 minister is to dedicate himself entirely to the duties 
 of his own parish, and that these duties are amply 
 sufficient to engage his undivided attention, that this 
 court has proceeded and does proceed in the erection 
 of new parishes, and in the appropriation and augmenta- 
 tion of stipends. If a parish be divided, it is because 
 it had become too extensive for the labours of one 
 minister. His whole time and attention are under- 
 stood to be required ; and it is only when these are 
 insufficient that a new erection is appointed. In the 
 case of annexations^ the law seems to proceed on a 
 different principle, and a principle singularly favoura- 
 ble to our argument. By the act of James VI. of 
 date 17th June, 1617, the powers of the commission- 
 ers of teinds, on this point, are thus defined : " With 
 special power to the said commissioners, to unite sik 
 kirkes, one or more, as may conveniently be unite, 
 whei'e the fruits of any one alone xmll not suffice to enter- 
 tain ane ministery\ It is evident from these words, 
 that small and insufficient livings only were in the 
 view of the legislature, and that a sufficient living is 
 incapable of annexation. The parish may be very 
 small, and it may lie conveniently in to another, and 
 yet on this ground alone, the court of teinds was not 
 at liberty to annex it to the other. In another part 
 
 * Cook's Hist, of the Church of Scotland, vol. I. p. t6o-4-69. 
 Speech, p. 73. 
 t Acts Par. Scot. vol. iv. 533. 
 
MO 
 
 of that statute, as if to place the meaning and design 
 of the legislature beyond all question, there is this 
 remarkable barrier set against the annexing powers of 
 the court : *' finds and declares that all kirkes which 
 are planted with ministers, whose stipends extend to 
 Jive chaldets victual, or five hundred merks money," 
 (the then minimum of stipends) " are expressly except- 
 ed out of this commission, and no ways come under 
 the compass thereof, neither shall the said commis- 
 sioners have any power, by virtue hereof, to meddle 
 with any kirkes or stipends which are in that case, 
 seeing the said commission is not extended to the 
 same." When a parish is too large, the court may di- 
 vide it into two or more, for the purposes of better 
 superintendence ; but the smallness of a parish is not 
 held a sufficient reason for its annexation to another, 
 so long as it possesses an adequate stipend. One con- 
 dition only regulates the subdivision of parishes, and 
 that is, their extent and overgrown population ; two 
 conditions are necessary to authorise the annexation of 
 parishes; insufficiency of livings and commodiotisness for 
 annexation. 
 
 Nor was it the intention of the legislature to 
 oblige the commissioners to unite churches even in 
 every case of small livings ; for it is provided by ano- 
 ther clause, that in the case of those parishes where 
 the fruits did not amount to the minimum, and yet, 
 " for distance of place, or other lawful causes," it 
 might not be expedient to unite them to others, it 
 should be lawful to assign the whole teinds to the 
 ministers of these parishes. While, therefore, the 
 commissioners were authorized by the act 1617, only 
 to unite small livings ; their powers even in these in- 
 stances, are limited by a due regard to the necessities 
 of each case, and the localities of the respective pa- 
 
141 
 
 rishes.* Strict as the regulations of this act were as 
 to the union of parishes, it appears that the commis- 
 sioners had exceeded their powers ; for, in 1621, a 
 new commission was issued, in which there is the fol- 
 lowing recital of grievances : " that there have been 
 heretofore sundry kirkes united together, and con- 
 joyned into one, albeit on good considerations it may 
 be found more expedient, that the same union be dis- 
 solved, and that the saidis kirkes be provided gener- 
 ally with distinct functions, and separate services, at 
 such places where the commoditie (conveniency) may 
 afford, in the same manner as if no such union had 
 been made;" and the commissioners are authorised 
 " to disunite such kirkes, one or more, as were united 
 of before, and appointed to be served by one minister, 
 and as they upon good considerations shall find requi- 
 site to appoint the same to be served by several fuiic- 
 tions and charges, as distinct parodies, after such man- 
 ner as shall be found by them most expedient."-]- The 
 commissions of 1633 and 1641, confer larger powers 
 on the court, while they show the jealousy of the 
 legislature lest injury should be done to the best in- 
 terests of the people, by improper annexations of pa- 
 rishes. The last of these gives power " also to unite 
 kirkes and paroches, lying so near each other, and 
 being so little boundes and small a number of paro- 
 chineres, that the union of them shall be found more 
 useful and conducible for the good and ease of the 
 parochiners of both the kirkes and their edification : 
 providing that the dividing of large paroches, the dis- 
 membering of ane part of the saidis parochines in case 
 foresaid, and the uniting of kirkes and parochines of 
 
 * See Connel on Parishes, p. 18. 
 t Act 1621, cap. v. 
 
 g3 
 
142 
 
 the quality above specified, be done upon the special 
 recommendation of the presbytery, synod, or General 
 Assembly, given in writ, and after the commissioners 
 have cited and heard the parochiners of both kirkes 
 thereanent, and no otherwise."* The act 1649 en- 
 joins, " that where lesser paroches lie near to over- 
 great and large paroches, it is declared that some parts 
 of the large paroches may be taken and adjoined to 
 the small paroche, that thereby both the charges 
 may be made more proportionable, and the stipend 
 of the minister in the lesser charge, may be made 
 competent and sufficient."f It is indeed true, that the 
 commissions 1690, 1707, give a greater discretionary 
 power to the court, but we ought to recollect that, at 
 this time, the scarcity of Presbyterian ministers was so 
 great, that it was found necessary, in many instances, to 
 unite parishes, in order that t^iie more destitute parts 
 might be more speedily supplied. Besides, as the 
 acts 1690 and 1707 were simply a renewal of the older 
 acts already specified, we are naturally led to look 
 to them as the best expositors of the meaning and 
 design of the legislature. 
 
 The views of the church harmonize exactly with 
 those of the legislature on this head ; and indeed so 
 sensible has she been of the danger to be apprehended 
 from the prevalence of the idea of annexations on the 
 ground of smallness in parishes, that the General As- 
 sembly of 1740, by a solemn act " expressly dis- 
 charged all presbyteries to consent to, or connive at, 
 the annexation or suppressing of parishes, without 
 the consent or approbation of the synod of the bounds, 
 or the General Assembly." j: Motives not always of 
 
 * Act 161.1, cap. 30. 
 f Act 1040, cap. 45. 
 \ Acts, Scss. V. 1740, also 1793, 1794. 
 
143 
 
 the purest kind, might lead, it was supposed, a body 
 of landed proprietors to seek the suppression of a 
 small parish ; and presbyteries, it was found, from ex- 
 perience, had sometimes been passive and lukewarm 
 in such matters ; and on these accounts the assembly 
 thought fit to interpose her authority. The applica- 
 tion of the act to the case in hand, is too obvious to 
 require farther comment.* 
 
 The principle on which the erection of a neiv parish 
 uniformly proceeds are, the increasing population; 
 the extent of parochial bounds ; and the incompetency 
 of one minister to discharge the duties. When the 
 bounds of a new parish are fixed, they are such as are 
 supposed to require the undivided labours of the mini- 
 ster; to these the people of the parish receive aright; 
 and, on account of this, a stipend for a full mainten- 
 ance is provided. These principles have been dis- 
 tinctly recognised in all the instances of new erections 
 since the establishment of the teind commission.f It 
 is particularly important in illustration of our argu- 
 ment, to notice the mode of procedure in cases of 
 an increasing population in towns. In all the instances 
 
 * In the assembly 1771, the case of the annexation of the 
 small parish of Kinnaird, with Farnwell, in the presbytery of 
 Brechin, was brought forward by the wit and eloquence of Dr. 
 Charles Nesbit of Montrose ; and although he had to contend 
 single-handed with Principal Robertson, and the great leaders of 
 the church, he carried his point triumphantly. See account of 
 the Debate in the Scots Magazine, for June 1771, and Dr. Nes-. 
 bit's Speech, at length, in the London Magazine for August, of 
 the same year. 
 
 t See cases of Yell and Fetlar, 1709; Lewis, 1722; Durness, 
 1724; Polmont, 1724; Sky, 1726; Lochcarron and Kintail^ 
 1720; Gigha and Cara, 1726; Whitburn, 1731; South Uist and 
 Barra, 1733; Knapdale, 1734', &c. Sir J. Connell on Parishes, 
 p. 63—81. 
 
144 
 
 on record it appears, that when the inhabitants of 
 towns increased to such a number as to render the 
 labours of one minister unsupportable, the court and 
 the church found it expedient and necessary to ap- 
 point him a colleague or colleagues, according to cir- 
 cumstances. In 1593, when the population of St. 
 Andrews was probably 4000, a second, or colleague, 
 minister was appointed by the General Assembly,* 
 and by Act of Parliament. The preamble to this act 
 deserves to be quoted, as it states the general prin- 
 ciple on which all such erections proceeded. " For 
 sa meikle as it is statute and ordainit in the parliament 
 holden at Edinburgh, the 24th day of October, 1581 
 years, that every paroche kirke and sa meikle boundis 
 as sail be foundin to be a sufficient and competent 
 parochin therefor, shall haiv their awin pastour, with 
 a sufficient and reasonabile stipend," &c. and/' the 
 populous congregation of the said parochin, and great 
 distance of said parochiners dwellings from the parish 
 kirke" are assigned as the reasons why the " paroch 
 cannot be sufficientlie instructit by a pastor."-}- In 
 1649 the Parliament ordered a third minister to be 
 fixed ip>-the town of St. Andrews, with a stipend of 
 £100 sterling.:}: In 1612 a second minister was ap- 
 pointed to Kirkcaldy, when the population appears to 
 have been about 3000.J In 1621 the city of Edin- 
 burgh, exclusive of its suburbs, was divided into four 
 parishes, with two ministers to each, that number hav- 
 ing been found by the magistracy and privy council 
 to be absolutely necessary for a population which for 
 
 * Bulk of Universal Kirke, p. 429. 
 
 f Acts of Scots Parliament, Vol. III. p. 54-9. 
 
 t Idem. Vol. V. p. 359. 
 
 § Statistical Account, VoL XVIII. p. 18. 
 
145 
 
 a century afterwards did not amount to 20,000.* 
 The King (Charles I.) when he sanctioned this arrange- 
 ment, expressed a wish that the Principal of his fa- 
 ther's College should always be one of the eight mini- 
 sters. This the council did not choose to grant, but 
 passed an act to this purpose: " That each of the 
 said parochins and congregations sail be providit with 
 twa ministers, so that the town sail have eight mini- 
 sters in the whole, over and besyde the Principal of the 
 College, 'who shall not be reckoned in the number, and 
 exempit in all tyme cumingfrom the chairge of an actual 
 minister within the burgh ;" — " and they (the town) sail 
 agree upon such an augmentation as may be fitting 
 for a sufficient maintenance to each of them."-|- In 
 1649, twelve " ordinar ministers," (that is, over and 
 above the Principal) were declared by Parliament ne- 
 cessary;;}: but it was not till 1662, when the city was 
 divided into six parishes, and the number of ministers 
 increased to twelve, with augmented stipends.^ In 
 1636 a second minister was appointed by the court to 
 Haddington, whose population in 1695 must have been 
 about 5000; and at this last date, a part of the parish 
 was disjoined and formed into the parish of Glads- 
 muir.|| In 1633, Dr. John Elliot w^as appointed as a 
 
 * Stat. Account, Vol. XVII. p. 139. 
 
 f Maitland's Historj^ of Edinburgh, p. 274 — 280. 
 
 \ Act Pari. Scot. Vol. V. p. 462, 19th June, 1649. 
 
 § Maitland, p. 141. 
 
 II Stair's Decisions, 18th Nov. 1680. Connell, p. 53, 58. 
 It appears that long before this, Mr. Charles Ferine had been 
 called by the people and the presbytery, to be " second minister 
 of Haddington." Records of the Presbytery of Haddington, 
 July 28, and August 25, 1596, and Sept. 28, 1597. This con- 
 firms still more strongly the inference we mean to draw ; as it 
 appears that the necessity for a second minister was recognised 
 
146 
 
 fourth minister to the city of Glasgow, although the 
 population in 1660 was only 14,578.* In 1640, a 
 second minister was appointed to the town of Cupar, 
 although the population in 1753 was only 2195.f 
 The town and parish of Paisley had in 1736 a popu- 
 lation of between 5 and 6000, and besides the two 
 ministers of the Abbey parish, a third was appointed 
 to the newly erected town charge.:): In Greenock, 
 with a population of 4000 in 1741,^ a second church 
 and parish was found necessary. In 1782 the church 
 and parish of St. Enoch's, Glasgow, were erected, in 
 consequence of a representation from all concerned, 
 " that on account of the great increase of the 'population 
 of the city" an eighth church was necessary; and yet 
 the population then was only 42,83 l.|l 
 
 Among the numerous instances on record of the 
 union of parishes by the Court of Teinds, there is 
 scarcely one in which the smallness of parishes and 
 considerations of economy are held as the only grounds 
 of annexation. According to Sir John Connell, to 
 whom we are indebted for much useful information 
 on this subject, the "grounds of procedure have been 
 the smallness of the parishes proposed to be united 
 in point of extent and population, the contiguity of 
 the situation, and the inadequacy of the funds to pro-, 
 vide for two ministers."^ In general, the consent of 
 the church has been obtained, although it is a very 
 
 by those locally interested, at least, fortij years before it was 
 sanctioned by the court. 
 
 * Cleland's Annals, p. 17, and Population Tables, p. 3. 
 
 t Stat. Account, Vol. XVII. p. 139. 
 
 I Records of Teind Court, Vol. XIX. p. 19. 
 
 § Stat. Account, Vol. V. p. 570. 
 
 [| Cleland's Annals, p. 506. 
 
 ^ Connell on Parishes, p. 213. 
 
147 
 
 remarkable fact, that in two cases* in which the deci- 
 sion of the supreme ecclesiastical court was against 
 the proposed union, the Court of Teinds have held a 
 different opinion, and decided accordingly. In the 
 latest of these instances, the Assembly disapproved 
 of the union, by a judgment expressing, " that the 
 interests of religion and of the church require the 
 proposed annexation and suppression should be re- 
 jected; and that the procurator for the church should 
 be directed to oppose the same in the proper court, in 
 the name of the Church of Scotland." The Assembly 
 came to this resolution unanimously, on the report of 
 a committee specially nominated to inquire into all 
 the circumstances of the case.f When the matter 
 came before the proper court, it was argued on be- 
 half of the Church, " that the population of these 
 parishes, though not greater than that of other pa- 
 rishes, was sufficient in number to occupy the atten- 
 tion of the most zealous pastor; that the tiends of the 
 parishes afforded a sufficient provision for ministers to 
 each ; and that if the union should take place, the 
 inhabitants of Glenholm would be placed at too great 
 a distance from the new church proposed to be built. 
 It was also stated, that much inconvenience would 
 arise from the suppression of some of the parochial 
 schools, unless provision to the contrary should be 
 made."J It appears, from the Statistical Account^ 
 of these parishes, that at the time of the decision of 
 the Assembly in this case, the parish of Brouchton 
 had a population of 264; Kilbucho, 362; and Glen- 
 
 * Kinnaird, Nov. 1772, and Glenholm, Brouchton, and Kil- 
 bucho, 1794-. Connell, p. 181, 200. 
 t Acts of Assembly, 25th May, 1793. 
 I Connell, p. 201. 
 § Vol. V. and VI. 
 
148 
 
 holm, 300: and yet the Supreme Ecclesiastical Court 
 unanimously gave it as their judgment, that the " po- 
 pulation of these parishes was sufficient to occupy the 
 attention of the most zealous pastor;" and that " the 
 interests of religion and of the church required that 
 the proposed annexation and suppression should be 
 rejected." Such were the exalted views entertained 
 in 1793 of the nature and extent of pastoral obliga- 
 tion; and yet, in opposition to the recorded judgment 
 of the whole house, the Court of Session sanctioned 
 the union. The only use we wish to make of these 
 facts, is simply to show the kind of argument which 
 was then employed, to prevent an union considered as 
 prejudicial to the best interests of the Church; and 
 the application of the same kind of reasoning to pro- 
 posed unions of parishes and professorships, it requires 
 no laboured process of investigation to illustrate. 
 
 The same reasoning will apply to another very im- 
 portant function which the Court of Teinds has to 
 discharge. When an augmentation of stipend is 
 granted, the Court proceeds on the ground of a pro- 
 vision adequate to the maintenance of a person whose 
 time and talents are wholly required by the sacred 
 office and services to which he is appointed. Were 
 not this the case, a full maintenance from the public 
 would not be appointed, and no plea of augmentation 
 on such a ground would be sustained. It would be 
 sufficient to grant only a part, and to leave the other 
 offices which he might hold, to supply the deficiency. 
 The Court of Teinds, in conformity with the consti- 
 tutional regulations of the Church of Scotland, acts 
 on a different principle, and gives the sanction of law 
 to the uniti/ and entireness of the ministerial calling. 
 
149 
 
 SECTION FIFTH. 
 
 On the Design and Import of the Act 1817. 
 
 The whole of this mass of evidence, derived from the 
 public standards, the express statutes, and the accre- 
 dited practice of the Church, and of civil courts, has 
 been met by a simple appeal to one law, which is sup- 
 posed to supersede all others, and to constitute, in fact, 
 the only statute by which our sentiments and decisions 
 ought to be regulated. This is the famous Act passed 
 by the Assembly 1817, into a standing law, in conse- 
 quence of its having received the previous sanction of a 
 majority of the Presbyteries of the Church. By this law 
 it is enacted and ordained, " That if a Professor in an 
 University be hereafter presented to a parochial charge, 
 which is not situated in the city that is the seat of 
 that University, or in the suburbs thereof, he shall 
 within nine months after his being admitted to the 
 charge, resign his professorship ;" — " and that if the 
 minister of a parish which is not situated in the city 
 that is the seat of an University, or the suburbs there- 
 of, be hereafter presented or elected to a professorship 
 in any University, he shall at the first ordinary meet- 
 ing of presbytery, which shall take place after the 
 lapse of six months from the date of his induction unto 
 the professorship, resign unto the hands of the pres- 
 bytery his pastoral charge."* From the terms of this 
 enactment, it has been inferred, that in every other case, 
 except the one supposed, that is to say, in every in- 
 stance in which the professorship and the parochial 
 charge are situated within the limits of the same city, 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 1817, No. VI. 
 
150 
 
 or the suburbs thereof, the church is necessarily bound 
 to sustain the plurality. It will be readily allowed, 
 by the adherents of both sides of the argument, that 
 the law, as it now stands, does not contain an absolute 
 exclusion of ministers from professorships or of profes- 
 sors from parochial charges in every case; but the ques- 
 tion is, Does it contain an absolute injunction to admit 
 in every case, excepting only the instance expressly 
 noticed in the act? In other words, is an union of 
 offices to be uniformly and imperatively sanctioned 
 by the church in every case where non-residence is 
 not necessarily occasioned? Has the church denuded 
 herself entirely of all right and power of judging in re- 
 gard to the compatibility of certain offices with the due 
 discharge of pastoral duty, and must she sanction, in all 
 cases, an union of offices, excepting only where such 
 offices affect, or are supposed to affect, the local resi- 
 dence of the individual concerned? Are all the en- 
 actments of the church relative to the extent of pas- 
 toral obligation, the secular engagements of ministers, 
 and the evils likely to result from pluralities of offices 
 held by the same individuals, to be at once swept 
 away? And is the church now and henceforth to 
 take her stand on this insulated statute, in which all 
 others have been supposed to be " merged ?" 
 
 Let it be remembered, that the injunction supposed 
 to be contained in this act, 1817, must be held to be 
 imperative, in the most absolute and unrestricted sense 
 of the term. The moment you give to the church 
 the power of sitting in judgment on any one supposable 
 case that may occur, that moment you give up the 
 argument. The exclusion of all unions of offices 
 in the case no.ticed in the law is absolute and unre- 
 stricted; and our opponents in this question must, to 
 be consistent, and to make their argument worth any 
 
151 
 
 tiling, hold, that the admission in all other instances 
 is equally absolute and unrestricted. This, indeed, is 
 what they rigidly contend for; and hence we find 
 them setting entirely aside all reference to the spe- 
 cialties of cases that may occur, and all inquiries as 
 to the compatibility or incompatibihty of particular 
 offices — and taking their ground exclusively on the 
 supposed terms of a rigid and unaccommodating law. 
 Indeed it is a very remarkable fact, that in the case 
 which has given rise to the whole of this controversy, 
 the minority did concur with the majority most com- 
 pletely in denouncing the projected union as an evil 
 of no small magnitude, while they considered them- 
 selves as imperiously bound to sanction that evil, how- 
 ever gross, on the single ground of the supposed in- 
 tention of the Act 1817.* 
 
 What then is the bearing of the argument, when 
 generalized in its principle? Why, it is evidently this, 
 that the church is imperiously forced to sanction an 
 union of offices, however incompatible on other 
 grounds, provided only their geographical situation, 
 or their locality, be the same. For example, if the 
 minister of the Barony parish, with a population of 
 50,000 souls, has interest to obtain himself appointed 
 to the chair of Greek, or Moral Philosophy, or Logic, 
 in the College of Glasgow; or, if the ministers of St. 
 Cuthbert's, Edinburgh, with a population of the same 
 
 * " The Presbytery resolve to proceed in Dr. M'Farlane's 
 settlement with all convenient speed, according to the rules of 
 the Church; at the same time they express their decided disap- 
 probation of such union of offices in the person of any individual, 
 and that it shall not be considered as a precedent to authorise 
 any such practice in future." Motion made by the Minority of 
 the Presbytery of Glasgow, on the 2d July, 1823. Report, p. l\i. 
 
152 
 
 amount, should attain to a similar honour, there is no 
 power in the church to put a negative on such un- 
 seemly unions. Again, if the professors of Humanity 
 and Greek in the college of Glasgow, occupied as 
 they are with hundreds of pupils, many hours each 
 day, and engaged in pursuits not altogether congenial 
 with the ordinary engagements of a pastor — or if the 
 professors of Scots Law, or of Natural Philosophy, 
 or of Anatomy, or of Chemistry, or of Midwifery, 
 or of Materia Medica, whose laborious employments 
 do not partake of that character which will make 
 them readily coalesce with the usual pursuits of cler- 
 gymen, should nevertheless imagine that they are 
 perfectly competent to do all the duty that is required 
 of a minister in Glasgow ; and, through the kindness of 
 the crown or of the magistracy, shall accept of a pre- 
 sentation to any one of the churches of the city or 
 suburbs, and shall apply to the presbytery for induc- 
 tion ; could the presbytery refuse to admit ? ^ On the 
 argument of our opponents, they could not, ^^nd dare 
 not. The law is imperative. The question of com- 
 patibility and of competency for the offices, is taken 
 out of their hands, and so long as the presentee is 
 otherways qualified, and has his residence within the 
 parish, induction must forthwith take place. Now, I 
 would ask, is this consistent with any common sense 
 view that can be taken either of the constitutional 
 principles of the church establishment, or of the de- 
 signs for which churches and universities were found- 
 ed ? Or, is there any presbytery in the church who 
 would, avowedly at least, carry the argument this 
 length ? Or, would any ecclesiastical court in Scot- 
 land tamely and unresistingly give up a right, which 
 was held as incontrovertible by all parties in the as- 
 sembly of 1813; the right, namely, of the church 
 
153 
 
 courts " to prevent all such unions of professorships 
 with pastoral charges, as are deemed incompatible 
 with the discharge of pastoral duty."* It will be 
 said, indeed, that these cases are 'Special, and that 
 presbyteries would bring them, by simple reference, 
 under the cognizance of the supreme court. And is 
 not this to cut the sinews of the whole argument? 
 Is not this the very thing we are contending for, that 
 each case must be judged of by its specialties ? Has 
 not eve7y case of possible occurrence its specialties ? 
 Had not the case of Principal Ferme, in 1600, its 
 " specialties ?" and upon these, did not the assembly 
 of that year decide? Had not the case of Professor 
 Rutherford, in 1638, its '' specialties?" and upon 
 these did not the assembly decide ? Had not the case 
 of Professor Hill, in 1780, its '* specialties ?" and 
 were not these the grounds of the decision in his fa- 
 vour? And has not the case which has given rise to 
 all this discussion, its " specialties," too, and of these, 
 is the church not competent to judge? It will not do 
 to say that we are supposing an extreme case, and a 
 case that may never occur. The very possibility of 
 the occurrence is all that is necessary for our ar- 
 gument; and we know, that in the course of years, 
 things which once appeared altogether unlikely to oc- 
 cur, have really and literally happened. At one pe- 
 riod of the church, would it not have been looked on 
 as very unlikely, that a parochial minister, with a com- 
 petent stipend and charge, should hold a professor- 
 ship "having cure," at the distance of fourteen miles 
 from his residence ? and not less unlikely, that a theo- 
 logical professor, in a college whose statutes impera- 
 tively require residence within its walls, should have 
 
 * Acts of Assembly, 1815, Dr. Hill's Motion. 
 
154 
 
 held a parochial charge, at the distance of six or seven 
 railes from his appointed abode? And yet such 
 phenomena have been ; and phenomena equally re- 
 markable maybe. That in such cases as those supposed, 
 the presbytery of the bounds may submit the matter by 
 SHTiple reference to the General Assembly, is true. 
 They have the power and liberty to do so : but they 
 are assuredly not bound to do so. As the radical 
 court, it becomes them to judge, in the first instance, 
 of every case that comes before them ; and, as being 
 best acquainted vrith the local and other specialties 
 of the cases, it is their duty to declare and act on 
 their judicial sentiments. Indeed the necessity of 
 reference to the supreme court, is altogether taken 
 out of the w^ay, seeing it is not likely that a matter 
 which involves the temporal interests of individu-als so 
 deeply, will be allowed to settle itself upon the deci- 
 sion of the inferior court. And after all, if the sta- 
 tute be as is supposed, vested with all the unaccom- 
 modating attributes of a " standing law" of the 
 church, will not the highest court, as well as the low- 
 est, be bound by its provisions, however unpleasant 
 to their taste? The supposition of a power in any 
 one of the courts, to review the matter, and to judge 
 of it, proves undeniably that there is no '• standing 
 law" in the case, as it belongs to the nature of a 
 standing law, that it is imperatively binding equally 
 on kirk-sessions, presbyteries, synods, and General 
 Assemblies. 
 
 Moreover, if the act in question necessarily author- 
 izes the extensive application which it is proposed to 
 make of it, a most invidious and unreasonable dis- 
 tinction will be created between offices substantially 
 the same in character, while they sustain only a nomi- 
 nal difference. For instance, on the implications of 
 
155 
 
 this statute, no church court can interfere to prevent 
 the Professor of Humanity from being one of the mi- 
 nisters of Glasgow; but the teachers of Humanity 
 in the High School, cannot be parochial ministers with- 
 out the consent of the church. A clergyman may be 
 prevented from becoming a regular practitioner in law, 
 or in physic; but he cannot be prevented from be- 
 coming 3. p7-ofessor of the one or of the other. Any 
 office, however secular, and however laborious, may 
 be held by a minister, provided only it goes under the 
 name of a professorship; while other offices, not more 
 secular, and not more laborious, cannot, if the church 
 chooses to prevent it. The laws against secular en- 
 gagements in the persons of ministers, remain whole 
 and entire ; and every presbytery is required to put 
 them in force ; but let a man once creep within the 
 walls of an University, and he may henceforth be as 
 secular, as negligent of his pastoral duty, as mercen- 
 ary as he pleases, with impunity. You cannot touch 
 him by the arm of ecclesiastical law — the law pro- 
 tects him ; and you have only to submit, with the best 
 grace, to what you know to be unavoidable. 
 
 Before we tamely consent to invest this celebrated 
 statute with such tremendous powers, and to sacrifice 
 at its shrine all that is valuable and endeared in the 
 judicative powers of the church, let us seriously in- 
 quire ; on what grounds is such an extensive compass 
 of application given to it? What reasons have we 
 for thinking, that the church, in passing that act, 
 designed to invest it with this imperative and exclu- 
 sive character ? Now, there are two ways in which 
 the spirit and design of the legislature, in a particular 
 enactment, may be best ascertained ; and these are, 
 the history of the enactment itself, and the ternjs in 
 
156 
 
 which it is expressed. Let us shortly exanine the 
 act 1817, by the application of these two tests. 
 
 I. With regard to the history of the enactment, or 
 the circumstances which gave rise to it, the act itself 
 must be held as the best expositor of its own genealogy. 
 Its preamble runs thus: " Whereas, apprehensions 
 have been generally entertained, that the permission 
 given, in a few recent instances, of clergymen holding 
 a professorship in a University, to hold at the same 
 time a parochial charge in the country, may intro- 
 duce abuses hurtful to the interests of religion and 
 literature." Here is the groundwork of the whole; 
 and we are naturally led back to the nature and spe- 
 cialties of the " recent instances" alluded to in the 
 preamble. It appears from fact that four such cases 
 had occurred within the lapse of the preceding 25 
 years — those, namely, of Collington, of Abercorn, 
 of Kingsbarns, and of Kilconquar. The two first 
 on this roll never came under the cognizance of the 
 church, and, therefore, it cannot be said with prO" 
 priety, that " permission was given to them." They 
 passed suh silentio; and although every right thinking 
 man must have looked on them with some surprise 
 and apprehension, no decisive measures were taken 
 to check or to prohibit them. By the time that the 
 third case came before the public, an important revo- 
 lution had begun to take place in the general senti- 
 ments of the country regarding such unseemly unions; 
 and when Dr. Arnot, Professor of Divinity in St. Ma- 
 ry's college, St. Andrews, was presented to the living 
 of Kingsbarns, seven miles distant from the university 
 seat, a strong feeling of hostility to his induction was 
 manifested in the inferior courts. A majority of pres- 
 bytery and of synod, indeed, voted, for the induction 
 of the presentee ; but several members of both courts 
 
157 
 
 brought the matter, by appeal, before the General 
 Assembly, of May, 1800, where it underwent a very 
 full discussion. A majority of the court did indeed 
 sustain the sentences complained of; and Dr. Arnot 
 was settled accordingly. But a deep and powerful 
 impression was made. A strong feeling of repugnance 
 to such unions was excited, and the public voice be- 
 gan to lift itself loud and clear against their tolera- 
 tion. It was not till 1813, that another case of the 
 same nature came under the cognizance of the assem- 
 bly ; and this is the fourth and last that occurred. 
 Mr. Ferrie, Professor of Civil History in St. Andrews, 
 was presented by the Earl of Balcarras, to the parish 
 of Kilconquar, at the distance of twelve miles from 
 the university seat. When the presentation was sub- 
 mitted to the presbytery of St. Andrew's, that reverend 
 body refused to sustain it, unless on condition of Mr. 
 Ferrie's giving them an assurance that he would resign 
 his professorship immediately on his settlement at 
 Kilconquar. The matter was appealed by patron and 
 presentee, to the assembly, and after a very length- 
 ened and interesting debate, the sentence of the 
 Presbytery was reversed by a very small majority of 
 Jive members, in one of the fullest meetings of as- 
 sembly ever held.* A public sanction was thus once 
 more given to the union of offices, involving non-resi- 
 
 * It is interesting to notice the remarkable change which thir- 
 teen years had produced in the sentiments of the church relating 
 to suchunions. In 1800, the great majority of the presbytery de- 
 cided in favour of Dr. Arnot. In 1813, the great majority of pres- 
 bytery decided against Mr. Ferrie. In 1800, Mr. Bell of Crail, as- 
 sisted by Dr. Nairn of Pittenweem, andiMr. Fleming of Kirkaldy, 
 (now Dr. Fleming of Edinburgh) had to stand forward against both 
 their Presbytery and Synod. In 1813, the two former of these 
 
 H 
 
158 
 
 dence ; but the public feeling was more and more 
 roused, and the minds of independent members of the 
 church began to feel alive to the vital importance of 
 the question at issue. Accordingly, by the very next 
 assembly, overtures from difterent districts of the 
 church were laid on the assembly table ; and after long 
 and full discussion, a declaratory act was passed to the 
 following effect: " Whereas, although the residence 
 of ministers in their parishes, which is essential for 
 giving full efficacy to religious instruction, has been 
 enjoined by numberless and fundamental laws of the 
 church of Scotland ; yet from residence not having 
 been clearly defined, practices have, of late, been in- 
 troduced, subversive of this admirable part of our 
 ecclesiastical constitution, the General Assembly de- 
 clare, that henceforth no presentee to a parish is ca- 
 pable of residing in it, as required by the above men- 
 tioned laws of the church, who holds an office or liv- 
 ing, imposing, or which may impose on him duties, 
 the discharge of which necessarily requires his ab- 
 sence from his parish, and subjecting him to an autho- 
 
 reverend individuals, supported by a goodly band, like-minded 
 with themselves, appeared as the defenders of the inferior judi- 
 catory. In 1800, the cause of pluralities involving non-resi- 
 dence, was pleaded at the bar of the assembly, by both of the 
 inferior courts. In 1813, not owe onemher of the inferior ecclesiasti- 
 cal court appeared openly on its side, and the appeal was brought 
 to the bar at the instance of the patron and j^resentce exclusively. 
 The change in these instances is the more remarkable, as in Mr. 
 Ferrie's case, the professorship was understood to be nearly, if 
 not entirely, a sinecure ; while in Dr. Arnot's, no such plea could 
 with decency, be pleaded. So well founded is the observation 
 made in the " humble supplication of the General Assembly of 
 1638, to the King's most excellent Majesty," that " truth is 
 the daughter of time." Acts of Assembly, 1G38, p. 67. 
 
159 
 
 rity which the presbytery, of which he is a member, 
 cannot controul;" and, therefore, prohibit all such 
 instances of union. In the assembly 1815, an attempt 
 was made to alter the judgment of the preceding 
 year, on the ground that what was passed in that as- 
 sembly as a declaratory act, was, in fact, a new latUf and 
 therefore ought to have gone through the presbj^teries, 
 in terms of the Barrier act. This attempt was resisted, 
 and the judgment of the preceding year adhered to. 
 In consequence of this resolution, a strong sensation 
 Was excited in different districts of the church, and 
 the idea of an usurpation of power, by the assembly, 
 was strongly and extensively entertained. Accord- 
 ingly, in 1816, an unprecedented number of overtures 
 were sent up to the assembly, calling for reversal of 
 the former deeds, and for the transmission of an over- 
 ture on the subject to the different presbyteries, for 
 their opinion regarding it. A majority of the mem- 
 bers of assembly went along with these overtures, 
 and in consequence, the matter was submitted to pres- 
 byteries in the regular way, and the '* standing law" 
 of 1817 thus obtained. This set the matter at rest; 
 and here we at present stand. 
 
 Now, from this short historical statement of the act 
 1817, it appears perfectly clear, that the various cases 
 in which it originated, turned equally on one and the 
 same point, namely, the question as to the meaning 
 of the statutes regarding " residence of the clergy' — 
 secondly, that the " declaratory acts" of 1814, 1815, 
 confined themselves simply to a definition of ivhaf 
 residence signifies, and a declaration that such cases as 
 those which had been tried, were at variance with 
 the proper meaning of the term — and thirdly, that 
 the overture afterwards transmitted to presbyteries, 
 and passed into a law in 1817, was designed to em- 
 
 h2 
 
160 
 
 brace simply the substance of what was formerly a c^ec/fl- 
 ratory act ; the objection to it being grounded not on 
 the substance of that act, but on the manner in which 
 it was obtained. It is called, indeed, a law against the 
 improper union of offices, but a title must be explained 
 by the contents of the deed ; and here the " impro- 
 priety" complained of is expressly defined to be, the 
 holding of offices inconsistent with residence. The 
 question as to the incompatibility of such unions on 
 other grounds, though certainly not overlooked, was 
 not the prominent feature in the argument. Neither 
 in the case of Dr. Arnot, nor in that of professor 
 Ferrie, was it argued that the profession of theology, 
 or of Civil History, were in themselves " incompatible" 
 with the studies and duties of clergymen. Nor in the 
 declaratory acts 1814, 1815, is there the most distant 
 hint of any other end being aimed at than the future 
 prevention of all those unions which involve or may 
 lead to non-residence. Surely it could not be the de- 
 sign of the church to comprehend all abuses under 
 this one class ; and to declare that every professorial 
 office, however secular, and however laborious, was 
 " compatible" with the ministry, provided the offices 
 were situated in one place. There is not one circum- 
 stance in the cases of Kingsbarns or Kilconquar— • 
 there is not one circumstance connected with the his- 
 tory of the declaratory acts of 1814, 1815, which 
 rose out of these cases — nor is there one circumstance 
 in the history of the law 1817, embodying the pre- 
 vious acts, and giving them all the force that eccle- 
 siastical law can carry; there is not one circumstance, 
 in the whole history of the matter, that can give the 
 shadow of verisimilitude to the notion, that the act 
 1817, while it was designed to forbid one particular 
 species of incompatibility, was designed, at the same 
 
161 
 
 time, to sanction and confirm every other species. 
 Whence then the wonderful transformation of an act 
 declaratory in 1814, 1815, into an act rescissory in 
 1817 ? There is not one feature in the history of the 
 business that can throw hght on such a mysterious 
 change. On the ordinary principles of human nature, 
 we take it for granted, that the abuses complained of, 
 and designed to be remedied by the act of 1814, 1815, 
 are the same abuses that are designed to be rectified 
 by the law of 1817, unless it can be shown from the 
 history of events, that some new discoveries had been 
 made in the interim, and that in consequence of these, 
 the act which, in the former year, was definite and 
 limited, was, in the latter, armed with a power incom- 
 parably more extensive. 
 
 There is an important consideration which throws a 
 good deal of light on the history of this act, and goes 
 very far to determine the end and meaning of those 
 who were engaged in framing it. It is well known, that 
 the supporters of the measure consisted chiefly of two 
 classes of persons. The one class comprehended the 
 decided enemies of pluralities in every instance, ex- 
 cepting only where the plea of absolute necessity can 
 be urged. The other class comprehended the oppo- 
 nents of pluralities in all those cases where incompati- 
 bility of offices can be reasonably pleaded. It was 
 the earnest wish of the first of these, to have the act 
 so framed as to put an absolute negative on pluralities 
 of every kind; but being aware of the strong opposi- 
 tion which such a measure would excite, they wisely 
 joined issue with the second class, in the view of ob- 
 taining a negative on one class of pluralities, as a mea- 
 sure of advantage so far, satisfying themselves with 
 the principle, that it is better to accept of a certain 
 good, though not to the full extent of our wishes, 
 
162 
 
 than to hazard the loss of all, by aiming at what we can- 
 not accomplish. Now, is it at all probable, that these 
 two numerous and respectable classes of persons 
 would be so short-sighted, as to concur in an act, the 
 necessary result of which they knew to be the depri- 
 vation of all right in the church to judge in any case, 
 either of the compatibility of united offices, according 
 to the view of the one party, or of their absolute ne- 
 cessity, according to the views of the other? For let 
 it be remembered, that on this notion of the thing, the 
 Church of Scotland is most completely deprived of 
 her power to judge at all in cases of plurality. In the 
 instance expressly noticed in the act, the church can- 
 not say one word, seeing the prohibition is absolute ; 
 and it is contended that the church has as little to say 
 in all other instances, because, by implication, plural- 
 ities of all other kinds are inevitably approved. Who 
 does not see, that if this is to be the state of things, the 
 Church of Scotland is in a much worse state now than 
 before the act was passed ? Then, the church could 
 review every case of plurality that chanced to occur, 
 and sustain or refuse as they saw most meet. Now, 
 she is entirely helpless and passive. Of non-resident 
 pluralities, as we may call them, her opinion is no more 
 to be asked ; and of all others, however incompatible 
 and unnecessary, she is not permitted so much as to 
 give an opinion. The professor of Practical Astrono- 
 my in Edinburgh college, holding an absolute sinecure, 
 can on no possible ground be allowed to hold a living 
 in the country ; while the professors of Humanity, 
 Greek, or Mathematics, holding each an office amply 
 sufficient for one man, cannot possibly be prevented 
 from accepting, if they choose, one of the parochial 
 charges of Edinburgh, St. Cuthbert's, or Canongate. 
 Is it reasonable to suppose, that the persons who had 
 
163 
 
 the charge of drawing up the act, and who had the 
 matter sub judice, not once, but frequently, daring 
 the lapse of at least four years, should have really 
 intended to bring matters to such a consummation as 
 this ? 
 
 Moreover, there is another, and an independent party, 
 who behoved to be consulted before the church could 
 reasonably think of giving her solemn sanction to plu- 
 ralities of every kind, except one. The constitutions 
 of the different universities of Scotland behoved to 
 be inquired into, and carefully studied, before the 
 church had a right to say, that in all cases resident 
 professors may become resident parochial ministers. 
 Was there no reason to suspect that, in some instances 
 at least, the duties of Professors in certain colleges 
 were such as utterly to preclude a minister from dis- 
 charging them aright, in connection with a pastoral 
 charge? Are there no instances in which the students 
 are required to give attendance on public worship, in 
 one authorised place, and the respective professors at 
 their heads? And in such instances, is not the senatus 
 of each university vested with full power to enforce the 
 statutes of the corporation ? — and then, what becomes 
 of the rights of the church ? Is there not here a 
 want of compatibility ? and is it to be supposed that 
 the Church of Scotland, with the full knowledge of 
 such facts as these, designed to pass an act, whose 
 inevitable effect must be to occasion a frequent inter- 
 ference of separate jurisdictions; and to attempt 
 what may often be found altogether impracticable ? 
 
 Again, what was the line of conduct pursued by the 
 opponents of the acts 1814, 1815, and 1817? Did 
 they not meet the very first proposal to have an act 
 on the subject of pluralities, by a motion of declara- 
 tor, that " as the church courts have within themselves 
 
164 
 
 sufficient power to prevent any union of offices, which 
 appear to be incompatible, there was no necessity to 
 consult the presbyteries on the subject?" And did 
 they understand, that their opponents, the anti-plural- 
 ists, meant, by the act in question, to denude the 
 church courts of this power? And is it likely that 
 they would have yielded tamely to such a proposal, 
 without making one struggle for the rights and liber- 
 ties of the church ? This, surely, is not very probable, 
 particularly when we find the same persons occupied, 
 next year, in proving that the assembly had, in pass- 
 ing a declaratory act, exceeded their powers, aad 
 usurped a right, which is proper to the church in her 
 collective capacity alone. 
 
 There is a circumstance which occurred in the 
 course of the debate on the declaratory act in the 
 Assembly, 1816, which, although it may appear trivial 
 in itself, throws a good deal of light on the views and 
 feelings of those concerned in that question. The 
 motion for repealing the declaratory act, as made by 
 Mr. Yorston of Hoddam, and seconded by Mr. An- 
 derson of Closeburn, stood originally thus : " That 
 the declaratory act of the Assembly, 1814, not hav- 
 ing been transmitted to Presbyteries in the manner 
 prescribed by act 9th, 1697, is not to be regarded as a 
 standing law, and is not binding on this Church." 
 It soon appeared to the observant mind of Principal 
 Hill, that if these terms were retained, the inference 
 is inevitable, that the Assembly would be in effect 
 declaring, that up to the act of 1814 the Church had 
 no fixed laws prohibiting non-residence and plurality 
 of offices, and that an entirely new law gn this sub- 
 ject was necessary. To prevent such an inference, 
 which he, in common with Dr. Nicol and the rest of 
 his friends on the other side of the house, pointedly 
 
165 
 
 disavowed, an amendment was proposed by him and 
 readily adopted; and the motion, as thus amended, 
 and carried by a majority of 118 to 94, runs in these 
 terms : *' That the new enactments contained in the 
 declaration of Assembly 1814, not having been trans- 
 mitted to Presbyteries in the manner prescribed by 
 act 9th, 1697, are not to be regarded as standing laws, 
 and are not binding upon this Church."* Now, from 
 this it is plain, that the objections urged against the 
 act 1814, did not rest on the declarations which it 
 made against non-residence and pluralities, but simply 
 on the " enactments" which it passed, or seemed to 
 pass, relative to the manner of procedure in order to 
 prevent such evils in future. The binding obligation 
 of all the laws on these subjects was granted ; but it 
 was maintained, that the act 1814 presupposed certain 
 cases to be infractions of these laws, which might net 
 be so, and that it prescribed a course of procedure in 
 regard to such cases unheard of before.f The As- 
 sembly yielded to the objection, and repealed the ob- 
 noxious act. Our argument, then, from the fact as 
 now stated, is a very plain and simple one — that it 
 could not be the design of the overture in which the 
 amended motion of Mr. Yorston issued, to touch at 
 all the standing laws of the Church against non-resi- 
 dence and pluralities, but merely to regulate the mode 
 of procedure in certain instances of their supposed 
 infringement. 
 
 A great deal of light may be thrown on the inten- 
 tions of a court in passing an act, by reference to the 
 
 * The above fact is stated on the authority of Di'. Cook's 
 Speech delivered on the occasion, p. 95, and Appendix. 
 
 f See particularly Dr. Nicol's Speech, Scots Magazine for 
 1816, p. 472. 
 
 h3 
 
166 
 
 sentiments of the principal speakers on the occasion. 
 Let us take a few specimens, then, from the chief 
 pleaders on the question before us in the Assembly 
 1816, when, let it he particularly noticed, the matter 
 was, for the last time, submitted to the review of the 
 Supreme Court. Dr. Chalmers " considered it a ma- 
 terial point gained, to have obtained the law 1814. 
 It was a vantage ground on which the church now 
 stood. The framers of it seemed to have had an 
 ulterior object in view, namely, to do what he should 
 wish to see done, union of offices declared to be unlaicful 
 in all cases. But the church at that time was not in 
 a state to be brought to such a measure. He hoped, 
 however, it would at length be accomplished. He 
 said they should keep what they had now distinctly 
 and clearly gained, and not allow it to be again in- 
 volved in doubt and all the mysticism of a legal phra- 
 seology." In his view of the impolicy of unions of 
 offices in all cases, a number who agreed with him 
 in the other points might not concur; but certainly 
 not one of them ventured on the preposterous aver- 
 ment, that Dr. Cook, and the other friends of the act 
 1814, meant the very reverse of what Dr. Chalmers 
 affirmed; namely, to sanction all unions of offices 
 where non-residence did not take place? And, we 
 beg to know, how was the averment of Dr. Chalmers 
 received by the speakers on the oMer side? Did they 
 rebut the averment? Or did they avow it as their 
 design, in the intended overture, to do the very reverse 
 of what the friends of the declaratory act wished and 
 longed for — even to give the sanction of the church to 
 an union of offices in all cases where non-residence 
 did not take place? Did any individual breathe such 
 a sentiment? Or had such an idea been put into the 
 overture, does any man in his senses think that it 
 
167 
 
 would have been taken up and carried by a majority 
 of the house ? No certainly. We make an appeal to 
 an authority of no slender weight ; that namely of an 
 enlightened and most justly respected judge, whose 
 speech followed that of Dr. Chalmers, to which it 
 was designed as a reply. " The Lord President said, 
 that the reverend gentleman who had just sat down, 
 had appeared to him to take the only consistent view 
 of the subject, when he proposed to abolish pluralities 
 altogether; nay more, that he concurred with him 
 cordially in his views of the impolicy of such unions 
 of office; and were he," Dr. Chalmers, " to introduce 
 an overture to prevent them in toto, he was ready 
 to go out and out with him in it." His Lordship then 
 went on to show, that the act of 1814 gave no advan- 
 tage to the church beyond what it had before, since 
 the terms of the enactment appeared to him so vague 
 as to leave every special case to be decided, as for- 
 merly, on the basis of its own merits. But, did it ever 
 occur to the comprehensive mind of his Lordship, that 
 the friends of the declaratory act and of the overture, 
 which are substantially the same, intended, either by 
 the one or by the other to legalise an evil, whose re- 
 sults in one class of instances, they were so anxious to 
 prevent ?* 
 
 In conclusion, let us look for one moment to the 
 
 * It is much to be regretted that no authenticated report of 
 these interesting debates has been published. I have been 
 obliged to take my accounts of them principally from the Scots 
 Magazine, and the Edinburgh Newspapers of the day. In addi- 
 tion to the above references, we may notice the speech of Dr. 
 Nicol on the same occasion, and those of Dr. Ritchie and Prin- 
 cipal Hill in 1815; all of which proceeded on the assumption 
 that the prevention of non-residence was the object specifically 
 aimed at. 
 
168 
 
 terms employed in the motion with which Principal 
 Hill and his friends met the declaratory enactment of 
 1814. " In as much as the church courts have already 
 sufficient powers to prevent any union of an ecclesi- 
 astical benefice with a professorship in an university, 
 where the duties of the two are found incompatible, 
 the General Assembly judges it unnecessary hoc statu 
 to transmit to presbyteries any overture on the sub- 
 ject."* But if the declaratory act was understood to 
 aim at the annihilation of the power of the church 
 to sit in judgment on all cases of plurality that might 
 come before them, where is the reasonableness of the 
 iriference, " that therefore it is unnecessary to overture 
 the presbyteries on the subject?" Would not this^ 
 have been the very best reason for sending an over- 
 ture to the presbyteries ? in order that the sense of 
 the church might be had on the vitally important 
 question, Whether shall pluralities come within the 
 judicative powers of church courts, or be placed un- 
 der the guardianship of a law, which no court, how- 
 ever high, can venture to tamper with? Does not the 
 obvious sense of the motion amount simply to this, 
 that seeing the church courts are vested with ample 
 powers to judge in all cases of plurality which may 
 come before them, it seems unnecessary to propose 
 any new enactment of a special nature in reference 
 to the cases noticed in the proposed act? And hence 
 we find, that the overtures presented to the Assembly 
 in 1816, all went on the assumption that the Assembly 
 1814, 1815, had by its ipse dixit, taken out of the hands 
 of presbyteries the power of judging in the case of 
 non-resident pluralists. No complaint was made of 
 their having taken the entire jurisdiction of pluralities 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 1814. 
 
169 
 
 out of their hands; for in all other instances except 
 this one, the right and the power were supposed to 
 remain complete and untouched as before. 
 
 II. But is there any thing in the terms of the law 
 which requires us to put on it such an interpretation 
 as that contended for ? It might have been reasonably 
 expected, that if the act in question had been designed 
 to take such an extensive range as to sanction, by im- 
 plication, all unions of offices in which non-residence is 
 not implied, some hint would have been inserted in 
 the body of it. Assuredly, such an important change 
 on the statutes and practices of the church should 
 not be left to be deduced by mere inference, and that, 
 as we shall soon see, not the most logical. In the 
 year 1638, the Assembly at Glasgow passed an act 
 rescissory, in which it specified nominatim et seriatim 
 all the acts, or parts of acts, passed during the ascen- 
 dency of the hierarchy, and declared, with regard to 
 all and each of them, that they were thereby annulled. 
 In 1662, the Parliament of Scotland passed an act 
 rescissory, in which every act of legislature enacted 
 during the ascendency of the commonwealth, was 
 specially named, and all declared to be henceforth 
 null and void. In such instances, there is no room 
 for doubting. The law is plainly laid down; and, by 
 its terms, we are made acquainted with what is bind- 
 ing and what is not. In this instance, however, no 
 such course is followed. A distinct negative is put 
 on a certain class of abuses ; but as to all other abuses 
 that may creep in, we are left entirely to our own 
 conjectures from the supposed implications of the 
 statute. 
 
 But farther; What are the terms in which the over- 
 ture of 1816, in other words, the standing law of 1817, 
 expressly avows its design and aim? "The General 
 
 / 
 
170 
 
 Assembly, conceiving that it is their duty to watch 
 over both the interests of religion and literature, and 
 feeling a becoming solicitude to maintain hiviolate the 
 residence of ministers in their respective parishes, which 
 the fundamental laws of this church require, and by 
 which the people of Scotland enjoy, in full measure, 
 the comfort and edification of a Gospel ministry, di- 
 rect all the Presbyteries of this church to employ the 
 means competent for them, in order to prevent the 
 same person from holding, at the same time, a profes- 
 sorship in a university, and a parochial charge which 
 is not situated in the city which is the seat of that 
 university, or in the suburbs thereof."* A plainer, a 
 more specific definition of the object and intent of the 
 Assembly in this enactment, cannot be desired; and 
 surely we must interpret the enactment in consistency 
 with the grounds and reasons on which it is represented 
 as proceeding. The e?id in view is distinctly and un- 
 equivocally avowed ; and the means employed, or to 
 be employed, in order to the attainment of that end, 
 are no less distinctly and unequivocally prescribed. 
 And upon what principle are we entitled to say, that 
 besides the avowed end, there was, in the view of the 
 assembly, another, not avowed, but understood — an end, 
 much more extensive, and affecting most deeply, not 
 the residence of the clergy indeed, but what is far 
 more important, the very purpose and design for which 
 residence itself is enjoined — an end too, let it be no- 
 ticed, for the attainment of which, the means pre- 
 scribed in the act, possess no kind of aptitude ? In 
 one word, where is the reasonableness, where the de- 
 cency of supposing, that while the Supreme Court was 
 stretching forth her arm to protect the residence of 
 
 * Act of Assembly, 1816, p. 13. 
 
171 
 
 her clergy on their cures, she was, at the very same 
 moment, covertly giving her sanction to a principle, 
 which goes directly to deprive residence of all its value 
 — to render a clergyman, although resident, entirely 
 inefficient, as to all the advantages which residence is 
 designed to secure — and to do the very reverse of what 
 this act so properly assigns, as its prominent desire, 
 that " the people of Scotland may enjoy, in full measure^ 
 the comfort and edification of a gospel ministry." 
 What more glaringly inconsistent, than to pass such 
 an enactment as this, " The clergy shall indeed be re- 
 sident, but presbyteries must see to it, that by sanc- 
 tioning the union of the most laborious university of- 
 fices, with an overburdened pastoral charge, they shall 
 take care to prevent ' the people of Scotland from €n- 
 joying, IN FULL measure, the comfort and edifica- 
 tion of a gospel ministry !' " 
 
 Again : Suppose that, in place of the terms em- 
 ployed in the act 1817, the ipsissima verba of the de- 
 claratory acts 1814,1815, had been retained, and trans- 
 mitted as an overture to presbyteries, and in the same 
 shape passed into a law, would there have been the 
 shadow of a foundation for such an inference as that 
 which has been wrested from its terms as actually 
 adopted? In the act 1814, the law of residence, and 
 no other, is specifically announced in the preamble. 
 The want of minute specification as to what residence 
 means is noticed; and to supply this want, it is ex- 
 pressly declared that non-residence means " absence 
 from theparisli' — and that he is guilty of non-residence 
 who holds " an office or living imposing, or which 
 may impose, on him duties, the discharge of which 
 requires his absence from his parish." It then goes 
 on to point out the steps which the presbytery must 
 take, in order to prevent such a thing, or to take it 
 
172 
 
 out of the way, should such an evil chance to get 
 admittance. No mention is made of professorships 
 exclusively, but simply of f>ffices in general. And surely 
 no man will be so prepostorous as to affirm, that this 
 act, while it set aside all union of offices of any kind, 
 involving non-residence, meant to sanction all union 
 of offices of any kind, however incongruous, and how- 
 ever incompatible, with the due discharge of pastoral 
 duty, so long as they were held by one person resid- 
 ing in one place. But, if the terms of the declaratory 
 act are so clear and obvious as to preclude the pos- 
 sibility of such an application being made of them, 
 how comes it to pass that the terms of the statute law 
 convey a meaning much more extensive? Was not 
 the design of both the same? Did not the same in- 
 dividuals, or nearly so, befriend both ? And can 
 we imagine that any Jesuitism was employed to word 
 the statute law, in such a way as to let in by impli- 
 cation a thousand abuses, by the attempt to exclude 
 one? 
 
 From the very terms and phraseology of the act, it 
 is plainly nothing more than a fdatute of limitation. Its 
 tendency and effect are, to lay a certain restraint on 
 the otherwise unlimited power of the church courts. 
 Previously to its enactment, the General Assembly of 
 the church claimed and exercised the power of judg- 
 ing in every case of plurality that occurred; and as 
 they were supposed to have, in a few instances, judged 
 wrong, this law was obtained expressly for the purpose 
 of putting it beyond their power to go wrong, in the 
 same way, again. Cases parallel to those of Kings- 
 barns and Kilconquar are henceforth declared to be 
 beyond the reach of the jurisdiction of church courts; 
 they are determined already, and for all time coming, 
 by a standing law of the church, and to that law the 
 
173 
 
 General Assembly must submit, equally with each 
 presbytery. Now, is it not implied in the very essence 
 of all limitation statutes, that the limitation shall, in 
 no case, extend beyond the precise instance to which 
 the limit is applied; and that, in all other instances, 
 the judicative power shall remain entire? The case 
 of non-resident pluralists, is the case with regard to 
 which a limit has been put to the power of the supreme 
 judicial court; and are we not entitled, on every prin- 
 ciple of equity, to infer that, in every other case, things 
 shall remain m statu quo? the church retaining the 
 power she was formerly understood to possess, with 
 this single exception. The church, so far from de- 
 nuding herself of the power of judging in all cases 
 of plurality, excepting in one, has, in fact, reserved to 
 herself, by the very terms of the deed, the right and 
 power of judging in every case, except one. The 
 case of pluralities, involving non-residence, is placed 
 beyond the reach of the church's jurisdiction; and the 
 General Assembly might as soon question whether 
 Presbytery shall be the form of church-government in 
 Scotland, as whether Professor Ferrie could now be 
 admitted minister of Kilconquar. This is literally and 
 truly the excepted case ; and hence we infer, that in 
 all cases to which the rules of the exception do not 
 apply, the judicial power of the church remains entire 
 as before. Nothing can be more unfair, than to graft 
 a sweeping rule upon the terms of an exception; — in 
 other words, to measure the design and meaning of a 
 whole system of statutes, by the accidental terms of 
 an excepting clause. 
 
 After all, what is the fair and logical inference 
 from the law of 1817? The statute says, that a man 
 cannot be both minister and professor, where the 
 charge and the chair are not situated in the same 
 
174 
 
 town. Ergo, A man may, or can be, a minister and 
 professor, where the charge and the chair are situated 
 m the same town. Is not this the literal and gram- 
 matical mference ? And does it not appear, that the 
 very farthest length to which the implication extends, 
 IS to permit a minister, in certain cases of necessity or 
 expediency, to accept of a professorship along with 
 a pastoral charge at the same time? The law indi- 
 rectly says, you must prove the necessity of an union 
 and the compatibility of the offices. You must prove, 
 by independent evidence, that the duties of the chair 
 are either, in their nature, or in the extent of labour 
 mvolved in them, not sufficient to employ one man- 
 or, at all events, that the duties of the parochial charge 
 are not so great and numerous as to leave no room for 
 addition to the burden. All this is plain and intelli- 
 gible, and will be readily granted by the enemies of 
 plurahties : but to say that because pluralities are not 
 absolutely, and in all cases, forbidden, they are, there- 
 fore, in all cases except one, confirmed and sanctioned; 
 and to infer, that because a professor cannot sustain a 
 presentation to a church in a different parish, there- 
 fore a professor must be inducted upon a presentation 
 to a church in the same parish, however needless the 
 union, and however incompatible the duties of each 
 may be, is surely weak and unwarranted. In the one 
 case, there is a legal disability which no act of the 
 General Assembly itself can control or set aside; in 
 the other, there is, or there may be, such an incom- 
 patibility as renders the case a very fair subject of 
 investigation and judicial discussion before the Su- 
 preme Court. The law proscribes and places, as it 
 were, hors de combat, a particular class of pluralities, 
 which, on no account whatever, can • be sustained in 
 the church, obviously leaving all other classes to be 
 
175 
 
 judged of as before. What, we ask, is the opposite 
 of an impossibility ? It is neither more nor less than — 
 a possibility. The law says, union of offices, in such 
 and such cases, is impossible — it cannot be — therefore, 
 we infer by necessary implication, that union of offices 
 in other cases is possible — ^it may be. The church 
 may allow it, either by overlooking, as in some in- 
 stances, or by judicial decisions as in others. But 
 surely the church may also disallow it, by retaining 
 in her hands the power of preventing such unions as 
 contrary to statute, or as inconsistent with the due 
 discharge of pastoral obligation. 
 
 Thus it appears, that neither from the history of the 
 law, nor from its terms and legitimate meaning, does 
 it appear to have been the design of the Church of 
 Scotland to denude herself of her just and unalienable 
 right of sitting in judgment on every case of plurality 
 as it occurs, in which there may seem to be fair room 
 to question the consistency of such plurality with her 
 express laws, or the spirit and genius of her consti- 
 tution. 
 
176 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 ON THE JUDICIAL POWER OF PRESBYTERIES OVER 
 PRESENTEES. 
 
 There is no doubt, that the functions of the Pres- 
 byteries of the Church of Scotland, in all matters con- 
 nected with the induction of ministers, are not legisla- 
 tive but judicial. It belongs not to them to 77iake laws; 
 nor is it in the power of the General Assembly itself to 
 make laws ; but it is the office and duty of every " El- 
 dership," according to the Second Book of Discipline, 
 " to cause the ordinances made hy the assemblies^ provincial, 
 national, and general, to be kept and put in execictionJ"* 
 One would naturally infer from this, that every pres- 
 bytery was vested with full power to judge of, and to 
 apply the laws of the church in all cases of pastoral 
 settlement; and as there are unquestionably certain 
 laws relative to pluralities of office, secular engage- 
 ments in clergymen, and the nature and extent of 
 ministerial duty, we might with reason propose the 
 question. On what principle do you venture to deprive 
 the Church courts of their power to apply these laws 
 as well as others? Where, we beg seriously to know, 
 where is the line of demarcation which separates the 
 fair field of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, from that en- 
 chanted land on which we are not at liberty to tread? 
 We say ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; for we beg it parti- 
 cularly to be recollected, that in all questions of this 
 nature, Presbyteries and General Assemblies stand pre- 
 cisely on a level. The laws which bind the one to a 
 
 * Chap. VII. Of Elderships, &c. 
 
177 
 
 certain course of procedure in reference to the induc- 
 tion of presentees into benefices, bind also the other ; 
 and although the supreme court may, by what is usu- 
 ally termed, in technical language, her jiobilc qfficium^ 
 lay hold of, and review and give judgment in causes 
 which do not come before her in any of the regular 
 modes of transmission, still the supreme court can do 
 no more than aiij)ly the law, or judge of its application. 
 Where then, we again demand, is the " Barrier Act," 
 by which the courts of the church are prohibited from 
 judging in questions of induction to benefices, as they 
 do in all other questions, according to the whole con- 
 stitution and laws of that establishment, which they 
 are sworn to maintain and to defend ? [n answer to 
 this question, we are referred to the act of James VL 
 5th June, 1592; an act which has been termed, and 
 justly termed, the " Magna Charta" of the Church of 
 Scotland. This act expressly " ordainis all presenta- 
 tions to benefices to be direct to the particular pres- 
 byteries in all time cumming,» with full power to give 
 collation thereupon, and to put ordere to all matters 
 and causes ecclesiasticale within their boundes, ac- 
 cording to the discipline of the kirke; providing the 
 foresaid presbyteries be bound and astricted to receive and 
 admit quhatsumever qualijied minister presented be his 
 majestic or laick patronsJ" Now, in order to know the 
 real meaning and design of an act of parliament, we 
 must attend to the objects which were professedly in 
 view at the time of its enactment. We remark then, in 
 the outset, that this famous statute of 1592, was de- 
 signed not so much to bestow on the church any boon 
 or privilege absolutely new, or never enjoyed before, 
 as to ratify and confirm all preceding acts and statutes 
 in favour of the Church. This is abundantly evident 
 from the preamble of the act. " At Edinburgh, 5th 
 
178 
 
 June, 1592: Our soveraine Lord, and Estaltes of this 
 present parliament, following the lovable and gude 
 example of thair predecessors, hes ratified and ap- 
 preived, and be the tenor of this present act, ratifies 
 and appreives all liberties, priviledges, immunities, and 
 freedoms, quhatsumever given and granted be his 
 hieness, his regentes in his name, or onie of his pre- 
 decessors, to the trew and halie kirke, presentlie 
 established within this realme, and declared in the 
 first acte of his hienesse parliament, the twentie day 
 of October, the yier of God one thousand five hun- 
 dredth threescoir and nineteen yeirs; and all and 
 quhatsumever actes of parliament, and statutes made 
 hefoir be his Hienesse and his Regents, anent the 
 liberty and freedome of the said kirk; and speciallie 
 the first acte of the parliament halden at Edinburgh, 
 the twentie-four daie of October, the yeire of God 
 ane thousand five hundredth four scoir ane yeirs ; 
 with the haill particular actes there mentioned, qiihilk 
 sail be ah siifficierit as .gif the samin tvere here ex- 
 pressed; and all uther actes of parliament made 
 sensine in favour of the trew kirk ; and sik like, ratifies 
 and appreivis the General Assemblies appointed be 
 the said kirk." The act 1579, here particularly noticed, 
 together with the act 1581, contain a specific enumer- 
 ation of all the acts passed in favour of the Church 
 from the year 1567, Vhen the first legal sanction was 
 given to her establishment; and ratify all their pro- 
 visions. What than is the tenor of these several acts, 
 in regard to the power of the Church in judging of 
 the qualifications of presentees? In the act 1567, 
 which lies at the foundation of the whole, we have the 
 following enactments : 
 
 " Item, It is statute and ordainit be our soveraine 
 
 Lord, with the advice of his dearest Regent, and three 
 
179 
 
 Estaites of this present parliament, that the examina- 
 tioun and admission of ministers within this realme, be 
 only in the power of the kirke, now openly and pub- 
 licly professed within the samin. The presentation 
 of laic patronages alwaies reserved to the just and 
 auntient patrones, and that the patrone present ane 
 qualified persone, within six months (after it may cum 
 to his knowledge of the decease of him qha bruicked 
 the benefice before) to the superintendant of thay 
 parties, qhair the benefice lyes, or uthers having com- 
 mission of the kirke to that effect ; uther waise the 
 kirke to have power to dispose the samin to ane 
 qualified persone for that time."* In this act, the ex- 
 clusive power of judging and deciding on the qualifi- 
 cations of presentees is given to the church, leaving it 
 entirely in her hands to define these qualifications, and 
 to determine as to the possession or the want of them 
 in every particular instance. The act thus proceeds : 
 " Providing that in caise the patrone present ane 
 person qualified to his understanding, and failzeing of 
 ane, ane uther within the said six months,* and the 
 said superintendant or commissioner of the kirke re- 
 fuses to receive and admit the persone presented be 
 the patrone, as said is: it shall be lesum to the patrone 
 to appeal to the superintendant and ministers of that 
 province qhair the benefice lyes, and desire the per- 
 sone presented to be admitted ; quhilk gif they refuse, 
 to appeal to the General Assembly of this haill realme, 
 be qheme the cause being decided, sail take end, as 
 they decerne and declair."f Here there are two things 
 
 * James VI. Pari. I. Act VII. AcJ:s of Scots Parliament, 
 Vol. III. p. 23. 
 t Acts Scot. Pari. Vol. III. A. D. 1567. 
 
180 
 
 very worthy of notice : First, that a presentee who Is 
 *' qualified" in the " understanding" or opinion " of the 
 patron," may nevertheless be found jiot qualified by the 
 judicatories ofthe Church, and maytherefore be refused 
 induction. And, secondly, that in all such disputed 
 cases, the matter in debate must ultimately be referred 
 to the supreme court, whose decision is final. All these 
 acts have been incorporated in the articles ofthe Revo- 
 lution, and were afterwards confirmed at the Union of 
 the kingdoms; and are now therefore part of the es- 
 tablished law of the land, which no power, short of 
 that which enacted them, can overthrow. The last 
 act on the subject, is that passed by the British Parlia- 
 ment in 1719, which, in the concluding clause, de- 
 clares and enacts, " That nothing herein contained, 
 shall prejudice or diminish the right ofthe church, as 
 the same now stands by law established, as to the try- 
 ing of the qualities of any person, presented to any 
 church or benefice."* 
 
 Having thus ascertained the inherent right of the 
 church to judge of the qualifications of entrants into 
 the ministry, let us now attend to the nature of these 
 qualifications, and the extent of the judicial power of 
 the church, in regard to them. 
 
 We remark then, in the first place, that there are 
 three ways in which a church establishment may pro- 
 ceed, in defining and ascertaining the qualifications of 
 her members. The matter may either be left entirely 
 vague and unfixed, and the church courts may be 
 vested with a discretionary power, to the very utmost 
 extent; — or the rules may be laid down so specifically, 
 and the cases marked out so minutely, as to leave no- 
 thing whatever to the discretion of the courts; — or, 
 
 » Geo. I. 1719, c. 29. 
 
181 
 
 the duties of the ministerial office having been fully 
 laid down, and the more prominent features of minis- 
 terial character having been delineated in the express 
 terms of statute law, it may be left to the judgment 
 of the courts to decide on the suitableness of the one 
 to the other. The first of these methods is obviously 
 too vague ; and the necessary result of it would be, 
 the predominating influence of partiality, prejudice, 
 and caprice. The latter, clear and precise as it may 
 seem to be, has this essential defect, that in the con- 
 stantly shifting state of society, cases must frequently 
 occur which no legislature can foresee, and for which, 
 therefore, no provision can prospectively be made. 
 The third appears to be far better adapted to the con- 
 stitution of human affairs, and is peculiarly suitable 
 when there are judicatories appointed for carrying its 
 provisions into execution. This, I apprehend, is the 
 scheme which the church of Scotland has adopted, as 
 being best fitted to secure the great ends of an eccle- 
 siastical establishment, in perfect harmony with the 
 rights of individuals, and the claims of impartial jus- 
 tice. The line according to which her courts must 
 walk, has been defined w-ith as much precision as the 
 nature of things would permit, while there are recog- 
 nised certain principles of a more general nature, 
 which no law can define, and which no law requires to 
 define — principles which pervade the whole constitu- 
 tion — which are essential to its very existence — and to 
 the security and permanence of which all statute laws 
 are designed to be subservient. 
 
 That a certain measure of discretionary power in 
 this matter must be left in the hands of the church 
 courts, is reasonable in itself, and absolutely essential 
 to the prosperity of the general system. The design 
 of an established church is the general edification of 
 
 I 
 
182 
 
 the people in religion and sound morals; and the 
 church courts, as the guardians of that establishment, 
 must be vested with such authority and power as may 
 enable them most effectually to check all abuses, and 
 to secure the great ends of Christian edification. In 
 all human societies, there is, more or less, a certain 
 measure of discretionary power vested in the hands of 
 the office-bearers, and this power is exercised, more 
 especially, in the admission of members. The gene- 
 ral rules for their admission cannot be so specific as to 
 meet every case which may occur in the lapse of years, 
 and in the ever-varying circumstances of human na- 
 ture. The candidate for admission into the church 
 must indeed be tried as to his soundness in the faith, 
 the extent of his general and theological knowledge, 
 the degree of his literary attainments, and the ordinary 
 tenor of his life and conversation. If he gives satis- 
 faction on all these points, he may be pronounced to 
 be, in so far ^ a " qualified person;" and yet it does b}^ 
 no means follow, that the presbytery are necessarily 
 bound to induct. A multiplicity of cases may occur, 
 for which no statute law could make provision, and 
 for which it would be absurd and foolish to think of 
 making provision. The laws of every society must be 
 administered for the general good of the society ; and 
 those who are intrusted with the execution of these 
 laws, must judge of these extraordinary cases as they 
 occur. " The privileges of the church of Scotland," 
 says Principal Hill, "are completely secured against 
 invasion, when the choice of patrons is by law re- 
 stricted to those whom she has licensed to preach the 
 o-ospel, and when it is competent for her to extend her 
 trial to those particular qualifications, which local cir- 
 cumstances render indispensable."* *' I have no 
 
 * View of the Constitution of the Church, p. 201. 
 
183 
 
 doubt," he adds, " of the church having a right to 
 find that a natural incapacity of being heard in the 
 place of worship where a parish assembles, is a legal 
 disqualification for being minister of that parish,"* 
 And is there any doubt that the church may, in the 
 exercise of her judicial functions, find and declare 
 that presentee " unqualified," who is either wholly 
 deaf, or so dull of hearing, as to be unfit, in a great 
 measure, for holding profitable intercourse with his 
 parishioners — or whose locomotive powers are so ar- 
 rested and disabled by lameness, as to incapacitate 
 him for discharging efficiently the active duties of a 
 large and populous parish — or whose age, and bodily 
 infirmities, disqualify him for discharging those duties 
 which the church of Scotland supposes all her mem- 
 bers to perform in their own person — or whose under- 
 standing, enlarged, it may be, by knowledge, and ele- 
 vated by piety, is nevertheless afiected by a constitu- 
 tional tendency to derangement, or by periodical at- 
 tacks of mental alienation? Can we question the 
 power of the church to find, if she is so inclined, that 
 a presentee is *' unqualified" for sustaining a presenta- 
 tion, who is already engaged in the regular duties 
 of a secular office — who is rector of a grammar or 
 commercial school — or who is a regular practitioner 
 in physic and surgery — or who holds an office, partly 
 secular and partly sacred, whose duties are incompatible 
 with the due discharge of the pastoral obligation? 
 May we not expect that there will be cases of frequent 
 occurrence in which the very best qualifications of 
 head or of heart will be rendered entirely useless to a 
 people, in consequence of the particular situation and 
 external circumstances, of the individual who possesses 
 
 * View of the Constitution of the Church, p. 202. 
 l2 
 
184 
 
 them? It is perfectly plain, that a minister can be of 
 no real advantage to his people, who, by reason of his 
 holding another, and a distinct occupation, or by cer- 
 tain peculiarities in the status which he holds, is iiica- 
 pacitated for bringing liis qualifications to bear on the 
 specific object which has been marked out to him. 
 And surely, upon every principle of equity, the church 
 is entitled to judge of these peculiarities, and, as 
 guardian of the religious interests of the people, is 
 bound and " astricted" to do so ? 
 
 But, in the second place, let us attend to the mean- 
 ino- affixed to the term " qualified," in the laws both 
 of church and state. A " qualified person," or, as it 
 is usually rendered in the statutes of the canon law, 
 *' idoiiea persona" is simply a person whom the church 
 shall pronounce to be^^ and siifficient for undertaking 
 a pastoral charge. That every one to whom the church 
 has given a license to preach, is, in consequence of 
 this, presumed to be " qualified" to receive a presen- 
 tation, is not doubted ; but it does by no means fol- 
 low that such a one is, ipso facto, " qualified" to un- 
 dertaJce a parochial charge. A license extends no 
 farther than the bounds of the presbytery which grants 
 it,* and it is well known that every preacher must 
 undergo a new series of trials before ordination. 
 Preachers indeed are only candidates, under probation 
 for the ministry ; and it still remains with the church 
 to say whether, and how far they are qualified to dis- 
 charge it. The history and constitution of the church 
 in this matter, place it beyond all doubt. In the First 
 Book of Discipline, we find a great variety of terms 
 employed, as synonymous with the word " qualified ;" 
 and each of them is indicative of the judgment of the 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 1694-, No. X. 
 
185 
 
 church, regarding individual candidates. " The su- 
 perintendant and his counsel" are required to present, 
 for election to a pastoral charge, " a man whom they 
 judge apt to feed the flock of Christ" — "sufficient in 
 their judgment for that charge" — "a sufficient man to 
 instruct them." And they are required " to examine 
 not only his learning, but also his manners, prudence, 
 a*id habilitie to govern the kirke," — " in order that he 
 who is most worthie may be burdened with the 
 charge."* 
 
 In 1582, the Assembly enjoins " particular presby- 
 teries to examine such as are desirous to enter into 
 the function of the ministry, and to provide such as 
 they Jlnd qualified, to kirks."f The Assembly of 1593, 
 the very year after the passing of the act under review, 
 appointed visitors with commission, " to visit, and 
 try the doctrine, life, conversation, diligence, and 
 fidelitie of the pastors ;" to see " if there be any slan- 
 derous person unmeet to serve in the kirk of God, 
 unable and unqualified to teach and edify, and proceed 
 against them,."J In the plan, or ^^ plat,'' for " plant- 
 ing churches," proposed by the Assembly 1596, it is 
 made one ground of complaint, " that by reason of 
 the collation of benefices plenojure to persons no tvat/s 
 qualified," great injury was done to the interests of 
 the church. In 1597, his majesty, with the advice of 
 the states in parliament, was pleased to pass an act, by 
 which he " declares, that all and whatsumever bish- 
 oprics presently vaiking in his majesty's hands, which 
 are yet undisposed to any person, or which shall hap- 
 
 * Dunlop's Confessions, Vol. IT. pp. 524, 525, 526, 54>5. 
 f Assembly at St. Andrews, 24th April, 1582. Also, 9th 
 October, 1582. 
 I Assembly, 24th April, 1593. ^^ 
 
186 
 
 pen at any time hereafter to vaik, shall be only dis- 
 posed by his majesty to actual preachers and ministers 
 in the kirk, or to such other persons as shall he found 
 apt and quaJiJied to use and exercise the office and 
 function of a minister and preacher."* In the Assem- 
 bly 1649, it was ordered that presbyteries should 
 " proceed to the trial of persons elected, and finding 
 them qualified, shall admit them/'f From the variety 
 of expression employed in these several enactments, 
 and we have only given a small specimen of instances, 
 we may reasonably infer, that the church is constitu- 
 tionally vested with the power of judging of the quali- 
 fications of entrants to the ministry, and that in form- 
 ing her estimate, she is entitled to take into view every 
 circumstance in the learning, the piety, the principles, 
 the external situation, and the local peculiarities of 
 the individuals concerned, which may affect their 
 " aptness," their " habilitie," or their ** sufficiency,** 
 for the sphere to which they are appointed. 
 
 It is of great importance, likewise, to attend to the 
 sense in which the term " qualified" was understood 
 by the legislature, when it passed those acts by which 
 the establishment of the Scottish Church was secured. 
 From the modes of expression employed in these acts, 
 we may fairly infer, that the civil law does not consider 
 the mere holding of a license, or the mere act of ordi- 
 nation, as all that is implied in the qualifications of 
 ministers for such charges as they may be presented 
 to by patrons; but that it has committed to the Church 
 an inherent power of judging in every case, of the Jitness 
 or suitableness of an entrant to any situation that may 
 occur. In the acts of the parliament held at Edin- 
 
 * Act VI. Pari. 15. C. 231. 1597. 
 t Acts of Assembly, 1649, 5th August. 
 
187 
 
 burgh in December, 1567, it is " statute and declarit," 
 " that all benefices haiving charge of saulis given 
 be ye queen or onie utheris, utherwaies than be ye 
 ordere of the Buike of DiscipHne is appointit, be 
 decernit to vaik, and yat ye patronis may have privi- 
 lege to present de novo personis qualifit and habile ; 
 sua yat ye kirke may be deliverit from unprofitable 
 pastoris." " Superintendants sail be appointit qhair 
 need requires, and ordoure be provydit, how they sail 
 be obeyit in thair office, and how they sail be hable to 
 serve in the same."^ In the act made in favour of St. 
 Andrew's college, in 1578, it is held " as lesum, and 
 permittit to the provost and others," " to dispose 
 whatsumever benefices, &c. erectit and given to their 
 college to qualijit personis, habile to travel in schulis, 
 kirke of God, and commonweal of the same."f In 
 1581, the following very decisive statute was passed 
 by parliament. " It is statute and ordainit, by our 
 soveraine lord, with advice of this present parliament, 
 that all benefices of cure under prelacies, sail be pre- 
 sented be our soveraine lord, and the laick patrons, in 
 the favour of able and qualijied ministers., apt and tvilling 
 to enter that function and discharge the duty thereof." 
 In the act 1592, establishing the " trew religion," we 
 meet with the comprehensive expression, " qualifit 
 persons, meit to enter in the funcfcioun of the minis- 
 trie," " and hable and qualifit ministris, apt and hable 
 to enter in that function, and to discharge the duties 
 thereof."^ On these different statutes, and there are 
 many others to the same effect,^ we may ask this one 
 
 * Acts Pari. Scot. Vol. III. p. 37. 
 
 f Idem. p. 106. 
 
 \ Idem. p. 545. 
 
 § Idem. Vol. IV. pp. 19, 130. Vol. V. pp. 129, 400. 
 
188 
 
 question, " Could an ecclesiastical judicatory solemnly 
 decide that a person was apt ov fd to discharge the 
 ministerial duty, who was in a situation that prevented 
 him from performing what the law of the Church 
 determines to be the precise items of that duty? or 
 could he be regarded as v/illing to discharge the pas- 
 toral duty, who persisted in retaining an office which 
 rendered its discharge impossible? The circumstances 
 in his situation, which interfere with his aptness and 
 sufficieney to do the duties of the clerical office, may 
 be widely diversilied, and it is plain that no law can 
 prospectively define them ; but no man will deny, that 
 to the Church, and the Church alone, belongs the right 
 to judge of these circumstances, and to decide accord- 
 ingly. Indeed, the Church herself has explained her 
 sense of the above acts, as well as of the extent of judi- 
 cative power v/ith which she is invested, by an act of 
 Assembly 1602, appointing a commission to visit every 
 parish in Scotland, and to make inquiry " gif each 
 pastor be resident in his parochine upon his manse and 
 glebe, and to inquire as to all other qualijications of the 
 pastors." Here we find residence, or rather the capacity 
 of residence, numbered among the " qualijications" 
 essential to a minister; and the Church claims a right 
 to judge of this as well as of the literature, the doctrine, 
 and the life of her tninisters. 
 
 In the third place; Let us attend to the nature and 
 extent of those commands, which the church has actu- 
 ally given to her subordinate courts relative to the 
 qualifications of her members. In other words, what 
 is the nature and extent of that satisfaction which the 
 Church requires, as to the qualifications oF those that 
 are to be admitted to hold office within her bounds ? 
 In 15G5, the Assembly, in their message to Queen 
 Mary, declare it as their wish, that " whensoever her 
 
189 
 
 majesty, or any other patron, do present any person 
 unto a benefice, that the person presented should 
 be tried and examined by the judgment of the learned 
 men of the kirke;" adding, that " if it be lawful to 
 the patrons to present wham they please without trial 
 or examination, what can abide in the Church of God 
 but mere ignorance ?"* That it was not the design of 
 the Assembly to confine the trial of quahfications 
 strictly to the literary attainments of candidates, must 
 be obvious to every one who examines the places 
 already referred to, as illustrative of the extensive 
 sense in which the term " qualifications" has been 
 used by the Church. Whatever may be the sense of 
 the passage now quoted, there can be no doubt as to 
 the meaning of the enactments which were passed at 
 a more advanced period of the Presbyterian establish- 
 ment. 
 
 In 1596, just four years after the act in question, 
 arid when " the kirke was come to its greatest puritie 
 that ever it attained unto, so that her beauty was ad- 
 mirable to foreign kirkes,"f the following very com- 
 prehensive statute was passed, along with many others, 
 relative to the internal government of the Church: 
 " That the trial of persons, to be admitted to the min- 
 istrie hereafter, consist not only in their learning and 
 abilitie to preach, but also in conscience and feeling, 
 and spiritual wisdom, and namely, the knowledge of 
 the;, bounds of their calling, in doctrine, discipline, 
 and wisdom, to behave themselves accordingly with 
 divers sorts of persons within their flocks; as namely, 
 with atheists, the rebellious, the weak in conscience, 
 and such others, wherein the pastoral charge lyeth 
 
 * Petrie's Church History, p. 345. 
 f Calderwood, p. 311. 
 
 I 3 
 
190 
 
 most; and that they be meet to stop the mouthes of 
 adversaries; and such as are not qualified in these 
 points, be delayed till further tryal, and till they be 
 found qualijied. And because men may be found 
 meet for some places, which are not meet for others, 
 it would (should) be considered, that the principal 
 places of the realm be provided of men of most 
 worthie gifts, wisdom and experience; and that none 
 take the charge of a greater number of people than 
 they are able to discharge; that the Assembly take 
 order hereunto, and that the act of the Provincial 
 Assembly of Lothian, made at Linlithgow, be urged."* 
 Here it is plain, that the church courts are enjoined 
 to inquire into something besides the general doctrine, 
 literature, and life of candidates for the ministry — that 
 the qualifications of the candidate for the particular 
 place in view shall be specially attended to, and that 
 no man shall be allowed to take upon him, without 
 necessity, a greater charge than he is competent to 
 manage, the courts and not the candidates, being the 
 judge. 
 
 This act, with others of a similar nature, are re- 
 newed by the assembly at Glasgow, Nov. 1638, and 
 ordered " to be ratified, and put in execution in every 
 presbytery ."f The assembly at Edinburgh, August 
 1639, specially enact " that all ministers or entrants 
 presented to kirks, be tried before their admission, if 
 they be qualijied for the places to which they are 
 presented, besides the ordinary tryalls of expectants 
 before their entrie to the ministry.''^ In the assembly 
 1642, these acts are thus explained : *' The meaning 
 
 » Acts of Assembly, at Edinburgh, 24th March, 1596. 
 t Acts of Assembly, 1638, p. 32. 
 \ Idem. 1639. p. 8. 
 
191 
 
 of the foresaid act is, not that an actual minister to 
 be transported, shall be tried again by the tryals 
 appointed in trying of expectants, at their entry to 
 the ministry, according to the acts of the kirk, but 
 only that he, bringing a testimonial gf his former try- 
 als, and of his abilities, and conversation, from the 
 presbytery from whence he comes, and giving such 
 satisfaction to the parochiners and presbytery, whereto 
 he comes, in preaching; as the presbyterie find his 
 gifts fit and answerable for the condition and disposi- 
 tion of the congregation, whereto he is prescribed. 
 Because according to the act of the assembly, 1598, 
 renewed at Glasgow, some that are meet for the mini- 
 strie in some places, are not meet for all alike ; and uni- 
 versities, towns, and burghs, and places of noblemen's 
 residence, or frequencie of papists, and other great 
 and eminent congregations, and in sundrie other cases; 
 require men of greater abilities, nor will be required 
 necessarily in the planting of all private small paroches, 
 the leaving the consideration of these cases unto the 
 judgment and consideration of the presbyterie, was 
 the only intention of the act." The assembly approves 
 the meaning and interpretation foresaid, and appoints 
 the said act, according to this interpretation, to stand 
 in force, and to have the strength of an act and ordi- 
 nance of assembly in all time coming."* In the " form 
 of church government" subscribed to by every mini- 
 ster of the church of Scotland, the sentiments of the 
 church on this matter are thus expressed : " He that 
 is to be ordained minister, must be duly qualified, both 
 for life and ministerial abilities, according to the rules 
 of the apostle.j- He is to be examined and approved by 
 
 * Acts of Assembly, 1642. p. 4. 
 t 1 Tim. iii. 2—6. Tit. i. 5—9, &c. 
 
192 
 
 those by whom he is ordained." " They are to proceed 
 to inquire touching the grace of God in him, and whe- 
 ther he be of such hoKness of Hfe as is requisite in a 
 minister of the gospel, and to examine him, touching 
 his learning and sufficiency, and touching the evi- 
 dences of his calling to the holy ministry ; and, in 
 particular, his fair and decent calling to that place." 
 " The proportion of his gifts in 7'elation to the jplace un- 
 to tvhich he is appointed^ shall be considered.'''^ By the 
 act 1711, thelast^he it remembered, that has been 
 passed by the church on the subject, presbyteries 
 are required to satisfy themselves " as to the siifficiency 
 andfitness'' of entrants, ^^Jbr those paroches to tvhich 
 the!/ are called" — and to show that the rule is designed 
 to extend to ministers, as well as probationers, the 
 act goes on to say, that " probationers and ministers, 
 when ordained and admitted, should give sufficient 
 proof of their piety, literature, a?id other good qua- 
 Hfications."f I beg also to know what is the meaning 
 of all the formalities prescribed by the church, and 
 invariably gone through, in cases of transportation 
 from one benefice to another, if it be not understood 
 that the church is vested with the power of judging, in 
 regard to the expediency of such transportations, on 
 grounds either of a general or of a local nature? It 
 is true, that in many instances, these formalities have 
 degenerated into a mere form ; but the very existence 
 of a form proves the reality of the principles which 
 led to its existence ; and it is impossible to account 
 for the fact as now stated, except on the supposition, 
 that the church considers herself as possessed of in- 
 herent power to judge, not merely of the life and doc- 
 
 * Confession of Faith, j). 588. 
 
 f Acts of Assembly, 1711, sect. x. 
 
193 
 
 trine of her ministers, but of every circumstance in 
 their situation, by which their " aptness" for the mi- 
 nistry, and their usefulness in their respective stations, 
 may be more or less affected. 
 
 But, in the Jbmih place, what has been the practice 
 of the church froiji her earliest periods down to the 
 present day, in regard to this matter ? 
 
 When we find the assembly in 1572, depriving bishop 
 Douglas of one of his ecclesiastical preferments — 
 in 1576, depasing Mr. Robert Hamilton from the Prin- 
 cipality of the new college — in 1581, ordering Mr. 
 Arbuthnot to demit the Principality of the college of 
 Aberdeen — in the same year declaring that members 
 of " ajiie of the colleges" of St. Andrew^s were ineligi- 
 ble to the pastoral charge of that city* — we are natu- 
 rally led to inquire what may have been the grounds 
 of those several decisions? Not surely any thing 
 connected with the moral and literary qualifications of 
 the individuals concerned, but simply the incompati- 
 bility of the offices in question with the due discharge 
 of the pastoral duties; and the judicative power of 
 the church on this head was never questioned. In 
 1597, when we may suppose that the meaning of the 
 act 1592, would be as well understood as at any time, 
 two ministers presented to charges in Edinburgh, were 
 refused induction, not on the ground of the want of 
 ordinary qualifications, but because of their " youth 
 and want of gravity," and although the assembly, by 
 a small majority, confirmed their election, there is not 
 the most distant hint given, that the ground of the ob- 
 jection was irrelevant, or that the church was " as- 
 tricted" from judging of it.f To come down to times 
 
 * See chap. iii. sect. iii. 
 
 f Spottis wood's History, A. D. 1597. 
 
194 
 
 more within our compass: In 1707, Mr. Thomas 
 Black, one of the ministers of Perth, received a royal 
 presentation to the professorship of Divinity, at St. 
 Andrews; but the Commission of assembly that year, 
 for reasons of expediency alone, fixed him to remain 
 at Perth.* In 1720, Mr. James Dick was presented 
 by his Majesty to the chair of ecclesiastical history 
 in Glasgow ; but the assembly did not see it for edifi- 
 cation that he should leave his people at Lanark.f 
 In 1726, we find the assembly passing an act to pro- 
 hibit " the transportation of ministers from the High- 
 lands to the Lowlands, without the consent" of the 
 supreme court. j: In 174-0, the assembly refused to 
 translate Mr. Mercer from Aberdalgie to Currie, on 
 the express ground of " difficulties attending his call."^ 
 " This," says Sir H. MoncriefF, '* was a remarkable 
 decision, and it furnishes a striking example, in which 
 the assembly set aside a presentee, to whose life or 
 doctrine no objection whatever could bestated."|| In 
 1742, the assembly censured the presbytery of Gair- 
 loch for " granting acts of transportability" to their 
 ministers, without leave of the parishes concerned.<[[ 
 In 1748, the presbytery of Paisley were ordered to 
 set aside a presentee, and to appoint a moderation at 
 large, because the mind of the parish was not de- 
 clared decidedly in his favour.** In 1751, the assem- 
 bly set aside a presentation from the crown to the pa- 
 rish of Biggar, expressly on the ground that there 
 
 ♦ Records of Presbytery of St. Andrews, April 5th, 1708. 
 
 f Assembly Acts, 1720. 
 
 I Idem. 1726, Sess. 13. 
 § Idem. 1740, Sess. 8. 
 
 II Life of Erskine, p. 450. 
 
 ^ Acts of Assembly, 1742, Sess. 10. 
 
 *• Idem. 1748. Records of the Presbytery of Paisley, 1748. 
 
195 
 
 was no concurrence on the part of the people.* In 
 1761, the case of Dr. Blacklock came under the re- 
 view of the assembly, and although decided in favour 
 of the presentee, there can be no doubt that the in- 
 firmity under which he laboured, was unanimously al- 
 lowed to be a fair and legal objection, and was over- 
 ruled only in consequence of the high qualifications 
 of Dr. Blacklock in other respects, and the peculiari- 
 ties of his case.f In 1762, we find the assembly set- 
 ting aside a presentation in favour of Dr. Witherspoon, 
 to be one of the ministers of Dundee, not on the 
 ground of personal disqualification, but simply be- 
 cause his continuance in Paisley was held to be more 
 for edification.:!: In 1766, we find the assembly de- 
 liberating at length on the single objection to Mr. 
 George Bruce, presentee to Dunbar, that his voice 
 was rather Aveak to fill the church ; and although the 
 decision was in favour of the presentee, still the ob- 
 jection was held to be a fair and legitimate one, and 
 had not Mr. Bruce's qualifications, in all other respects, 
 stood so high, there is every reason to believe, that the 
 decision might have been different. J In 1772, the as- 
 sembly appointed a committee of Gaelic ministers to 
 " take trial of Mr. George Mark's knowledge of tlie 
 Gaelic language, and to report," it being understood, 
 that on the tenor of their report would depend the sus- 
 taining or rejection of him as presentee to the parish 
 of Kirkhill.ll Mr. Mark was no Gaelic scholar, and, 
 
 * Assembly 1751, Sess. 9. 
 
 f Idem. 1761, Sess. 8. Account of the Debate in the Scots 
 Magazine, 1761. 
 
 \ Idem. 1762, Sess. 8. 
 
 § Assembly 1766, Sess. 6th. Scots Magazine, 1766. 
 
 II Idem. 1772, Sess. 7th and 8th. 
 
196 
 
 as we hear nothing more of his case, we may infer 
 that it was withdrawn before trial, in consequence of 
 the issue of a case exactly similar, which occurred 
 during the course of the same assembly. This was 
 the case of Arroquhar, in which the following decision 
 was pronounced: " The objection to the presentee 
 of his want of the Gaelic language, sustained, and 
 therefore set him aside as unqualified to be mini- 
 ster of that parish."* In 1794, we find the assem- 
 bly reversing the sentence of the synod of Merse 
 and Tiyiotdale, and declaring " that in the particular 
 circumstances of this case, the translation of Mr. 
 MoUeson from the parish of Walston to the parish of 
 Dunsyre, is inexpedient; and, therefore, refuse to 
 grant the said translation, leaving it to the patron of 
 Dunsyre to present a qualified person to that parish, 
 according to law."f In this case, there were no per- 
 sonal objections whatever to Mr. Molleson, who is 
 
 * Assem. 1772, Sess. 9th. In the case of the united parishes 
 of TuUich-Glenmuick and Glengairden, the assembly 1791 per- 
 mitted Mr. Brown, who had not the Gaelic, to be settled, but 
 to this, very strong opposition was made by many of the members, 
 and the grounds of the sentence may be pretty clearly gathered 
 from the following order of assembly, which was immediately is- 
 sued: " That as there are bl few persons in these united parishes, 
 who have not the English language, 'the General Assembly in- 
 struct the Committee on the Royal Bounty to appoint an itiner- 
 ant, having the Gcelic language, to the said united parishes, with 
 all convenient speed, instructing them at the same time to pro- 
 vide Mr. Grant, the present missionary," who had not the Gaelic, 
 "in a sit-.ation equally comfortable." Acts of Assem. 1791, Sess. 
 5. In the assembly of next year, Mr. Peat, presentee to Gigha 
 and Cara, was allowed to be inducted only in case " the Pres- 
 hytery Jind him pi-oper/r/ qualified as to the Gcelic language." As- 
 sembly 1792. Sess. 6. 
 
 t Assem. 1794, Sess. 5. 
 
197 
 
 still the aged and worthy minister of Walston; but the 
 assembly formed its judgment on considerations of 
 general expediency, and leaving entirely the plain 
 road of statute and " express law," took the matter 
 into its own hand, and decided for all the parties con- 
 cerned, on a general and comprehensive view of all 
 the " particulars of the case." In 1800, the assem- 
 bly were called to judge of the qualifications of Dr. 
 Arnot to be minister of Kingsbarns, the presentee be- 
 ing objected to on the ground of his holding an office 
 in an university at some distance from the parish. 
 It was surely never doubted, that had the decision 
 been different from what it was, it would have been 
 equally final. In 1813, the assembly were called to 
 judge of the conduct of the presbytery of St. An- 
 drews in setting aside the presentation to Mr. Fer^ 
 rie, on the single ground of his being professor of 
 Civil History at St. Andrews. This was something 
 different from an objection to life, or doctrine, or liter- 
 ature ; and yet had the assembly decided differently 
 from what it did, would not the sentence have been 
 equally competent and equally final? 
 
 I consider these two cases last mentioned as pre- 
 cisely of the same general nature with that of Prin- 
 cipal M'Farlane. When the cases of Dr. Arnot and 
 of Mr. Ferrie came under review of the church courts, 
 there was no " standing law" which declared in so 
 many words, that " no minister shall be allowed to 
 hold a professorship whi^h is not situated within the 
 bounds of his parish or its suburbs." The thing had 
 appeared so plain to our forefathers as not to require 
 a positive statute to regulate it. In the want of 
 such positive statute, the debate turned entirely on 
 the general complexion of the laws of the church, and 
 particularly on the obvious meaning and design of the 
 
198 
 
 laws which require the residence of a minister among 
 his people. The argument then brought forward did 
 indeed fail in carrying conviction to the mind of the 
 Assembly; but did it ev£r enter into the head of any 
 member to maintain that the argument was not fairly 
 and legally grounded? Or was it ever breathed that 
 the church had no power to judge of such cases at all? 
 Or suppose that Dr. Arnot and Mr. Ferrie had wished 
 to rehnquish their chairs in favour of the country liv- 
 ings, might not the Assembly have found and declared 
 it expedient that they should remain in St. Andrews 
 for the greater benefit of the youth attending that 
 ancient seminary ? And was it ever questioned" that 
 the Assembly had a power to say, you shall either 
 keep the one or the other, but you shall not be per- 
 mitted to retain both ? Novo, there is an express law 
 prohibiting such unions in the most absolute sense, 
 and therefore there is no room for even ai'mment in 
 
 o 
 
 their favour. Strong as the case may be, it cannot 
 be listened to for one moment, as the prohibition is 
 absolute. In the case now before the courts, there is 
 surely the same room for argument that there was in 
 the other instances, prior to the passing of the statute 
 of 1817. We cannot perhaps point to an express 
 statute on the subject; but neither can we point to 
 a statute which says, that a man who is deaf shall not 
 be the minister of a parish. We can point to general 
 principles which pervade our constitution. We can 
 point to statutes which empower presbyteries to sit 
 in judgment on the xvhole circumstances which affect the 
 character, and conduct, and state of a presentee, and 
 the " localities" of his situation, We can point to 
 certain specialties in the case which render such an 
 union as that proposed incompatiblie. We can show 
 its injurious effects on the state of the church and 
 
199 - 
 
 universities ; and we can appeal to the church as the 
 legal guardian of both. 
 
 We have hitherto proceeded on the assumption, 
 that there is no explicit laiv that is applicable to the 
 case of ecclesiastical pluralities, and that the church 
 in deciding on such cases, has recourse to general 
 principles, and to the spirit and genius of her consti- 
 tution. The truth, however, is, that there is no want 
 of law — plain, explicit, and established by practical 
 precedent. What, we beg to know, are our church 
 courts to make of the numerous statutes on the subject 
 of clerical duty in general ? of the numerous barriers 
 which our constitution in church and state has enacted 
 against secular avocations in ministers, and against 
 the holding of a plurality of benefices? And what 
 shall they make of those historical instances in which 
 these statutes and enactments have again and again 
 been applied to the case of academical offices, when 
 conjoined with spiritual cures? If there is one chap- 
 ter of our ecclesiastical history which is clearer than 
 another, it is that which rehearses the sentiments of 
 the church on such subjects as these. And is all this 
 to go for nothing ? And are all these statutes and 
 historical facts to be consigned to the grave of obli- 
 vion ? And are we henceforth to be told, and gravely 
 told, that there is 7io laxu on the subject of pluralities? 
 The plain matter of fact is, that there is abundance of 
 law on every one of the topics to which this discussion 
 relates; and it belongs to the courts of the church to 
 look at that law — to examine its bearings — and to 
 enforce its practical application. We have no express 
 law, indeed, which says in so many words — the Prin- 
 cipal of Glasgow College shall not be minister of St. 
 Mungo's : and neither have we an express latv which 
 says in so many words — that the Rector of the Gram- 
 
200 
 
 mar School of Glasgow shall not be minister of St. 
 Enoch's. But there is no need for any such law in 
 the one case or in the other. We have general prin- 
 ciples applicable to both. We have standing rules of 
 the church prohibitory of both ; and the church is, 
 in fact, guilty oi Jelo de se, when she scornfully puts 
 away from her the ample provision which her patrons 
 and best friends have made for the preservation of her 
 frame in healthfulness and vigour. 
 
 In addition to all that has been said, and as amply 
 corroborative of our argument, we have the recorded 
 testimony of the church herself, as to the power pos- 
 sessed by her courts on questions of this nature. In 
 the Assembly of 1796, an overture from the synod of 
 Perth and Stirling, " anent professors being ministers 
 of parishes where they cannot constantly reside," be- 
 came the subject of debate; when said overture 
 was unanimously dismissed as ^^unnecessary, on account 
 of the existing laws in church and state on the subject 
 of residence."* Four years after, a similar declaration 
 was made, not merely in regard to residence, but like- 
 wise in regard to the general duties of the pastoral 
 office. In 1801, and in consequence of the decision 
 of the previous year in the case of Dr. Arnot, a variety 
 of overtures were brought before the assembly; when, 
 after a very prolonged discussion, " the assembly, 
 considering that the existing laws of church and state 
 make sufficient provision for enforcing the residence 
 of the ministers of the Church of Scotland, and their 
 faithful discharge of the duties of the pastoral qffixe, and 
 having entire confidence that the presbyteries of this 
 church will continue their vigilant attention to the exe- 
 cution of these laws, of which they are the constitutional 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 179G, May -20. 
 
201 
 
 guardians, dismissed the overtures" as unnecessary * 
 In 1814, when the declaratory act on the subject of 
 residence was passed, the opponents of that act met 
 It with a counter-motion to this effect, that <' in as 
 much as the church courts have already sufficient 
 powers to prevent any union of an ecclesiastical bene- 
 fice with a professorship in a university, where the 
 duties of the two are found incompatible, it is judo-ed 
 unnecessary hoc statu, to transmit to presbyteries any 
 overture on the subject/'f This motion, although it 
 did not carry, was acquiesced in by all parties in the 
 house ; and the reason why it did not carry was solely 
 the impression on the mind of the assembly, that some- 
 thing more was necessary in the shape of a declara- 
 tion of the sense of the church relative to the law of 
 residence. The last case of plurahty which came be- 
 fore the review of the assembly was that of Mr. An- 
 derson, the minister of Bellie, who had, besides his 
 parochial living, the office of factor on certain estates 
 in the north, by reason of which the duties of his 
 ministry were neglected. What are the terms of the 
 assembly's decision on this case ? They are as fol- 
 lows: " The assembly think it proper to declare, that 
 it is impossible they should not highly disapprove of 
 the parish ministers of this church engaging in such 
 secular employments as may be inconsistent with the 
 full and faithful discharge of their spiritual functions: 
 and the assembly recommend to the presbytery of 
 Strathbogie, to take care that the pastoral duties be 
 fully and faithfully performed in the parish of Bellie, 
 and in all the other parishes within their bounds."t 
 
 * Acts of Assembly, 1801, May 29. 
 
 t Assembly, 1814-, May 26. 
 
 t Acts of Assembly, 1819, May 27. 
 
202 
 
 Is it not clear, from this decision, that in the view of 
 the assembly, the presbytery of Strathbogie would have 
 been justifiable in declining to induct into the " pa- 
 rish of Bellie," or any other of their parishes, a mini- 
 ster, who, with every other qualification, was in the 
 situation of Mr. Anderson, and by holding a secular 
 office, disqualified for doing " fully and effectually" 
 the duties of the pastoral office ? In all these instances, 
 there is distinctly recognised a power inherent in 
 the presbyteries of this church to judge, not merely 
 of the " life and doctrine" of the candidates for office 
 within her pale, but of those circumstances in their 
 actual situation of life which interfere with the " full 
 and faithful discharge of the spiritual duties of the 
 pastoral office;" and thus prevent the people from 
 enjoying all those benefits from their ministry which 
 the constitution of church and state designed to secure 
 to them. 
 
 Against this view of the judicial powers of the 
 church, it has been objected, that the supposition of 
 such a power, is, in other words, to represent the mere 
 whim or caprice of a presbytery, as the sole judge of the 
 competency or qualifications of a presentee, and thus 
 to subject the rights of patrons to a power over which 
 they have no control* And, we would ask in reply, 
 may not the very same objection be advanced against 
 the right which all parties suppose to be vested in 
 presbyteries to judge of the literature, the doctrine, 
 and the morals of the presentee ? Is there no room 
 for caprice here ? Has every presbytery exactly the 
 same standard of measurement as to the kind and 
 quantity of knowledge essential to a presentee ? — as 
 to the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of his theological 
 creed ? — as to the reality and vigour of his piety, or 
 the correctness of his moral demeanour? In the 
 
203 
 
 Assembly of May last, were not the charges of" whim" 
 and " caprice" liberally thrown out against the rever- 
 end presbytery of Alford, although their examination 
 of the presentee to the parish of Towie went not be- 
 yond the limits of doctrine, literature, and morals? 
 The fact is, church courts must judge of the qualifi- 
 cations of presentees exactly on the same principles 
 which they apply to every other case that may chance 
 to come before them. Certain general principles are 
 laid down for their guidance; and these principles 
 they must apply to the best of their judgment, and 
 according to the light of their conscience. If they 
 err, it is nothing more than has been in all institutions 
 since the beginning ; and if they were not liable in 
 certain cases to go wrong, where would be the neces- 
 sity for courts of review? But to say that church 
 courts must necessarily be influenced by whim and 
 caprice in their judgments on presentation and in- 
 duction, is a libel on the constitution of the church, 
 and betrays only the littleness of spirit which could 
 give rise to the supposition. 
 
 It has, indeed, been thought, that the legislature, 
 anticipating such abuse of privileges on the part of 
 the church, placed this effectual guard around it, 
 namely, that " in case the presbytery refusis to 
 admit onie qualified minister presented to them by 
 the patrone, it sail be lauchfull to the patrone to re- 
 taine the haill fruites of the said benefice in his awin 
 hands."* And instances have been referred to, in 
 which the civil courts have found, that " if a presby- 
 tery refuse to admit a person presented by the legal 
 patron, for any other cause than a want of sufficient 
 qualifications, and proceed to settle another, their 
 
 * Act, U92, c. 1]5. 
 
204. 
 
 sentence has not the effect of giving the minister 
 whom they settle a right to the emoluments of the 
 benefice."* The erroneousness of the conclusions 
 which have been drawn from this statute, may be very 
 easily shown. In the first place, Even granting that 
 the interpretation is a fair one, it still remains with the 
 church courts to determine whether the presentee is a» 
 qualified person; and thereis certainlynothingin the act 
 which prevents the church from finding and declaring 
 a presentee " unqualified" on grounds altogether dis- 
 tinct from those of doctrine, literature, and life. In the 
 second place, the act 1592, as incorporating in it ex- 
 pressly the previous acts of 1567, &c. must be deter- 
 mined in its meaning by these acts. Now the act 
 1567 expressly declares, that " gif the superintendant 
 and ministers refuse to admit the person presented by 
 the patron," (supposed to " onie qualified person,") 
 he, that is, the patron, " shall appeal to the General 
 Assembly of this haill realm, be qhome the cause 
 beand decyded, sail tak end as they decern and de- 
 clair." Nothing can be more clear than that by this 
 act, all questions between the inferior courts and pa- 
 trons, as to the admission or non-admission of their 
 presentees shall be finally determined by the Supreme 
 Court, from which there can be no appeal. In the 
 third place, In no case have the civil courts decided 
 against the final sentence of the General Assembly 
 when acting strictly as judges in the last resort, of the 
 qualifications of presentees. It is only necessary to 
 advert to the several cases usually referred to in 
 proof of their complete inapplicability to the ques- 
 tion before us. 
 
 The question came to be tried by the Court of Ses- 
 
 * Hill's Institutes, p. 203. 
 
205 
 
 sion, so early as 1715, only four years after the act 
 of Queen Anne, restoring patronage. In the case of 
 the settlement of Kirriemuh*, there was a dispute be- 
 tween two competing patrons. The church, without 
 regard to the claims of either, settled a minister, on 
 the call of the people; he happening to be, at the 
 same time, one of the presentees. Lord Panmure, 
 as the competing pc:*^i'on, brought an action of re- 
 duction before the Court of Session, when it was 
 found, that the incumbent settled by the presbytery 
 had the right to all the temporalities of the benefice, 
 so long as the dispute between the patrons was unset- 
 tled; but the court did not give judgment as to the 
 question, whether on Lord Panmure's making good 
 his claim, the incumbent would be immediately de- 
 prived of his living, or the patron held entitled to pre- 
 sent only on his death or removal.* In the case of Mon- 
 crief of Readie, 1735, against the minister of Auchter- 
 muchty, who had been inducted, upon a general call 
 of the people, without regard to the patron's presen- 
 tation, the court found, that " when the presbytery 
 set aside the deed of the lawful patron, and appointed 
 another in place of the presentee," the patron might 
 retain in his own hands the fruits of the benefice. f 
 In the case of Dunse, Feb. 25, 1749, the presby- 
 tery had proceeded to settle a minister on a call of 
 the people, while the question of declarator, as to the 
 right of patronage, was pending before the court; but 
 it is extremely worthy of notice, that the Lords, while 
 they reduced the deed of the presbytery, rested the 
 sentence on the single ground of their having pro- 
 ceeded in the face of an appeal to a civil court, on a 
 
 * Morrison, Vol. XII. p. 9950. 
 f Kilkerran's Decisions, Vol. III. Art. Patronage- 
 
 K 
 
206 
 
 civil question ; expressly declaring, " that the action 
 of declarator nowise affected the jpreshyterys poxver 
 of trying and admitting a minister." The presbytery 
 had appealed, in their defence, to the act 1567, which 
 gives the final decision to the supreme church court. 
 This the Court of Session allowed; while, with great 
 wisdom and discrimination, they limited the application 
 of it to all questions relative to the Jitness or admissibility 
 of the presentee.* In the caseof Culross, June 26, 1751, 
 the presbytery fell into a similar error with the above, 
 and in addition, proceeded to settle a minister in the 
 face of appeals to the synod and assembly. The court 
 decided, as in the case of Dunse, and on the same 
 grounds, with this additional observation, " that the 
 presbytery had proceeded to settle Mr. Stoddart pend- 
 ing the appeal (before the church courts) contrary to 
 their oix>n rules; and if the matter had been delayed 
 till the General Assembly, the sentence of declara- 
 tor, regarding the right of patronage would have 
 been obtained;" and the civil question of the case 
 having been thus settled, the church courts would 
 then have proceeded regular ly.-j- In July of the 
 same year, the right of the crown to the patronage 
 of Lanark was found good by the Court of Session; 
 but it was not till 1752 that the question as to the 
 right of the actual incumbent to the living became 
 the subject of litigation. The court unanimously 
 found that Mr. Dick, having been settled by the pres- 
 bytery on the bona Jide assumption that the right of 
 patronage was vested in the family of Lee, had the 
 legal claim to the emoluments. In the recorded mi- 
 nutes of this case, that part of the act 1592, which 
 
 * Falconer's Decisions, Vol. II. p. 68. 
 f Idem, Vol. II. p. 25a 
 
207 
 
 " restricts the presbytery to admit quhatsomever qua- 
 lified persons shall be presented," is interpreted as 
 relating not to the judicial power of the church over 
 the qualifications of entrants, but as designed simply 
 to prevent a presbytery ** from settling a minister by 
 a call^ or any other 'may than by the presentation of 
 a patron,'' The presentee may be set aside by the 
 church ; but the patron still retains his right to pre- 
 sent a second time, and so on, as long as the pre- 
 scribed period of six nwnths lasts. The presbytery 
 cannot take the right out of the hands of the legal 
 patron; and on this principle a clear distinction is 
 drawn between the cases of Dunse and Culross, and 
 the case of Lanark. In those instances, there was only 
 one patron claiming right, and the presbytery, disre- 
 garding his claim, proceeded to settle on a call from 
 the people. In this last, there was a competition of 
 claims, and the presbytery, led by precedent, sus- 
 tained the presentation issued by the party who had 
 been understood all along to have the legal right. Tlius 
 the Court of Session, by their unanimous decision in 
 1732, settled the point which had been left undecided 
 in the case of Kirriemuir in 1713, and nobly sustained 
 the rights of the Church.* The House of Lords, in- 
 deed, proceeding on an English interpretation of Scots 
 statutes and usages, reversed their decision; but let it 
 never be forgotten, that this famed decision does not 
 so much as touch upon the right of the Church to be 
 judge in the last resort of all questions relative to the 
 qualifications of presentees, and their admissibility to 
 office. In the case of the parish of Forbes, in the 
 year 1762, the principle of the decision of the House 
 of Lords was followed by the Court of Session, while 
 
 Morrison's Dictionary, Vol. XII. p. 9954. 
 k2 
 
208 
 
 the right of the Church to decide on the qualifications 
 and fitness of the presentee was preserved inviolate.* 
 
 Thus it appears, that in not one of the instances 
 referred to, did the civil courts question the inherent 
 right of the Church to sit in judgment on the quali- 
 fications of her intrants, and to give a final and irre- 
 versible sentence regarding them : nor, in the second 
 place, does it appear that in any of these instances — 
 and I have quoted all that are on record — did the 
 Church give judgment on the qualifications of pre- 
 sentees, but rather on the legal questions connected 
 with the right of patronage — a matter altogether re- 
 mote from their proper jurisdiction. =' 
 
 In the case of Dr. Dick, at Lanark, for example, 
 the sentence of the Assembly is thus expressed: — 
 *' The sentence of the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, 
 finding that Mr. Lockhart of Lee, who had given his 
 presentation to Mr. Robert Dick, probationer, to be 
 minister of Lanark, has the preferable right to that 
 claimed by the town of Lanark, who had presented 
 Mr. James Gray, minister of Rothes, in whose favour 
 also a presentation from the crown was granted, to be 
 minister of the said town and parish of Lanark, affirm- 
 ed ; and it is remitted to the presbytery of Lanark to 
 consider the import of the crown's right, and to pro- 
 ceed further to the settlement of the said parish, 
 according to the rules of the Church."f Here we 
 find the synod, and afterwards the assembly, discussing 
 the question as to the competing patrons ; and more- 
 over, the assembly referring to the presbytery of the 
 bounds to " inquire into the import of the crown's 
 claims;" with the view, no doubt, of regulating their 
 conduct in all future cases; but in the meantime to 
 
 * Morrison's Dictionary, Vol. XII. p. OOo-l. 
 f Assembly, 1749, Sess. 4, 22(1 May. 
 
209 ' 
 
 go on with the settlement. These are plainly civil 
 questions, not competent for the church courts to 
 settle; and the same conclusions cannot be drawn 
 from such cases as in regard to a question of qualifi- 
 cations of presentees. These last come under the 
 cognisance of the church alone ; the first are peculiar 
 to courts of civil jurisdiction. And yet it is a very 
 remarkable fact, that the Court of Session unanimously 
 found the deed of Assembly to all intents final; and 
 of course, that Mr. Dick was entitled to all the emo- 
 luments as minister at Lanark.* 
 
 What, then, is the plain meaning of the statute 
 ^^hich empowers the patron to retain the fruits of the 
 benefice? The act 1592 must be explained in con- 
 sistency with the act 1567,. which is incorporated with 
 it ; and as that act makes the sentence of the General 
 Assembly on the qualifications of ministers final, the 
 act of 1592 can only have been designed to ordain 
 that the vacant stipend shall remain in the hands of 
 the patron until the matter shall be settled by the 
 Supreme Court. With regard to its application, the 
 law expressly said, that it shall not go into the pockets 
 of the patron, but shall be applied " to pious uses ;" 
 and since the act 1814, all such vacant stipends are 
 placed at the service, not of patrons or heritors, 
 but of the trustees of the fund for behoof of the 
 widows of ministers and professors in the Church of 
 Scotland. 
 
 * On the important case of Dr. Dick, there is a good deal of 
 valuable and deeply interesting information to be found in the 
 Appendix to Sir H. IMoncrieflf's Life of Erskine. The whole 
 of this admirable work should be deeply pondered by every 
 student of the history of our Church. 
 
212 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 ON THE QUESTION RELATIVE TO THE PRINCIPALITY 
 OF THE COLLEGE OF GLASGOW. 
 
 If there be any reality in the principles we have 
 been endeavouring to establish ; — if the pastoral call- 
 ing be, from its very nature, incompatirJe with the 
 idea of a multiplicity of avocations vested in the per- 
 son of one individual ; — if the constitution, and spirit, 
 and procedure of the Scottish Church are diametrically 
 opposed to all pluralities, whether of benefice or of 
 office; — if those civil institutions which guard the 
 religious establishment of Scotland, recognise through- 
 out the same great principles ; — and if there be vested 
 in the courts of the church a right and a power to 
 apply these general principles in every case of pre- 
 sentation and induction to benefices ; — it follows, by 
 necessary consequence, that in canvassing the ques- 
 tion relative to the union of the Principality of the 
 University of Glasgow with one of the pastoral charges 
 of the city, the Church does not deviate from its pre- 
 scribed line of procedure, nor venture, in any mea- 
 sure, to assume a legislative, in place of an executive 
 province. As the appointed guardian of the religious 
 rights and interests of the people under her charge, 
 she is bound to look at every circumstance in the 
 character and situation of her candidates for office 
 which may interfere with, or seriously affect the due 
 discharge of pastoral obligation ; and she is guilty of 
 a most gross dereliction of public duty, if she tamely 
 inducts into offices of great trust and responsibility, 
 those individuals, who, she is conscious at the time. 
 
213 
 
 are placed in such a situation as to be altogether in- 
 competent to the adequate discharge of the duties 
 to which they are set apart. The circumstances of 
 such individuals may be greatly diversified, and no 
 law can prospectively define them with minute and 
 undeviating precision ; but it remains with the Church 
 to apply the general law to them as they occur, and 
 to judge accordingly. The presbytery and the synod 
 of the bounds have thought proper thus to apply the 
 law to the case of the union in question ; and in doing 
 so, they have acted honajide^ in their judicial capacity 
 as the appointed guardians of the Church within their 
 prescribed limits. It now remains to inquire, How 
 far the specialties, in the case before us, are such as 
 to warrant the conclusion to which the presbytery and 
 synod have come, that the holding of the Principality 
 of the College of Glasgow is incompatible with that 
 of a pastoral charge within the city; and that the 
 individual who occupies the former charge, is, however 
 respectable, unqualified in hoc statu for executing 
 successfully the duties of the latter? 
 
 Were the question to be tried on the principles of 
 general expediency and public benefit, it would be 
 brought within a very narrow compass indeed. Its 
 obvious bearing on the general concerns of literature, 
 of religion, and of the church at large, might be ex- 
 hibited in a very few simple and self-evident propo- 
 sitions. The Jirst is, that literature may surely be 
 expected to flourish most vigorously and most exten- 
 sively, when the heads of our great literary establish- 
 ments are left at liberty to give the full vigour of their 
 minds to the concerns of those establishments, undis* 
 tracted by the ceaseless cares and anxieties of an 
 extended and populous city parish. The second is, 
 that religion, in our large towns especially, may be 
 
 k3 
 
214 
 
 expected to flourish with most success in those parishes 
 whose ministers, being well qualified in all other re- 
 spects, are left at liberty to devote all their time, and 
 all their energies, to the duties of their office. The 
 third is, that the Church of Scotland must be elevated 
 or depressed in the estimation of the public, exactly 
 m proportion as her sons show an anxiety on the one 
 hand, to discharge their duties with uncompromising 
 fidelity; or, on the other hand, to grasp at her tem- 
 poralities, and to monopolise her honours. 
 
 It may seem, indeed, altogether unnecessary to 
 agitate a question which has been already set at rest 
 by the solemnly recorded sentiments of those, who, 
 of all men, must be held as the most competent judges 
 of its merits. The unanimous verdict of the members 
 of the Presbytery of Glasgow has been given against 
 the proposed union, while the minority of members 
 declare their reluctant submission to it on the plea of 
 necessity alone. This opinion of the inexpediency of 
 the union has been given, let it be remembered, by a 
 court which comprises within its bounds all the mini^ 
 sters of the city of Glasgotv and its vicinity, who, above 
 all others, must, in common equity and in commort 
 sense, be held as by far the most competent to give 
 any opinion regarding such a matter; as being best 
 acquainted with the localities of the question, and the 
 peculiar extent of duties, to which the Principal of the 
 College and the ministers of the city are astricted. It 
 has been given likewise by a court, a large minority of 
 whose members showed every wish to induct the pre- 
 sentee, and who actually moved for his induction in 
 the face of their own recorded disqualification; and 
 who surely would not have entered such an opinion 
 on the minutes, ad perpetuam rei memoriaiUy had they 
 not been compelled by irresistible evidence to do so. 
 
215 
 
 In a word, it is an opinion which was given after 
 lengthened and serious deliberation — when the sub- 
 ject had been viewed on all sides — and its relative 
 bearings examined with all the ingenuity and all the 
 skill which principle and which interest can com- 
 mand. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 On the Duties of a Minister of Glasgow. 
 
 It requires no great stretch of argument, and no 
 lengthened research, to enable any man of common 
 understanding, and of correct feeling, to decide the 
 question on which the merits of the whole controversy 
 must principally depend — Are the duties incumbent 
 on a minister of Glasgow, and particularly on the 
 minister of such a charge as that of the Inner High 
 Church, sufficient to employ all the time and all the 
 energies of the most highly gifted individual? The 
 parish of St. Mungo's did in 1819-20 contain a po- 
 pulation of 7431,* which in 1821 had increased to 
 8823.f Of the former number, the proportion of 
 individuals professedly belonging to the established 
 church appears to have been 3481.:}: Here then is a 
 gross population of nearly 9000 souls, all legally and 
 constitutionally under the pastoral inspection of a 
 single individual ; and two thirds of them really and 
 avowedly the objects of his immediate charge. Over 
 these he is solemnly set apart in that awfully affecting 
 hour, when, in presence of God, the representatives 
 of the church, and the assembled congregation, he 
 declares, that " zeal for the glory of God and the 
 
 * Cleland's Enumeration, p. 6. 
 ' f Government Census, p. 33.. 
 \ Cleland, p. 6. 
 
216 
 
 good of souls" has been his prime motive in accept-* 
 ing the call and undertaking the charge. And what 
 are the duties which a pastor undertakes to per- 
 form to the people of such a charge ? If the late 
 eminently learned and universally respected Dr. Alex- 
 ander Gerard is to be held as a faithful expositor of 
 the laws of the church on such a subject, the very 
 titles of his chapters furnish a satisfactory answer: — 
 " The duties of the pastoral office — private duties 
 respecting individuals — private instruction — private 
 exhortation — counselling — visiting the afflicted — re- 
 proving — convincing — reconciling differences — care of 
 the poor — private duties respecting lesser societies — 
 visitation of families — catechising, &c. — public duties 
 respecting a whole parish — preaching — presiding in 
 the ordinary worship of God — administering the sa- 
 craments, and conducting public worship on extra- 
 ordinary occasions — ecclesiastical duties respecting 
 the church in general — exercise of discipline and go- 
 vernment," &c.* If the late Principal Hill is to be 
 held as a competent judge of this matter, the enu- 
 meration of the heads of his " Counsels respecting the 
 Public and Private Duties of the Pastoral Office," 
 may suffice as an answer to the question: " On public 
 prayer — on the administration of the sacraments — on 
 lecturing — on preaching — on visitation of families — 
 catechising — occasional admonition and reproof — 
 visiting the sick— care of the poor — alacrity and assi- 
 duity in serving our people."f If the late Dr. Wod- 
 row of Stevenston, the grandson of the eminent his- 
 torian, and the friend and biographer of Principal 
 Leechman, is to be held as a fair witness, his short 
 
 * See Gerard's Pastoral Care, where all. these topics are 
 illustrated with great minuteness. 
 
 f Hill's Theological Institutes, Part III. 
 
217 
 
 but comprehensive statement may be safely appealed 
 to, as a testimony of no slender weight. " The duties 
 of a clergyman in Scotland, regularly performed, as 
 they generally are to this day, especially in country 
 parishes, are very laborious. He preaches twice or 
 thrice every Sabbath ; catechises his whole parish an- 
 nually, and visits them as often, in a pastoral way, by 
 which is meant, a stated visit to every family, accom- 
 panied with a short exhortation and prayer. Besides 
 these regular offices, he visits occasionally every dis- 
 tressed and dying person in his parish. Thus the 
 pastor is considered as the common friend and father 
 of his people, to whom they are accustomed to look 
 up for advice in their spiritual, and often too in their 
 temporal concerns ; and he is accessible to them at 
 all hours."* If Sir Henry Moncrieff is worthy of be- 
 ing retained as a fourth witness on such a subject, his 
 short but luminous and comprehensive view of the 
 pastoral office in the Church of Scotland, may be ap- 
 pealed to, as another satisfactory answer to the ques- 
 tion. " In a large parish, where every part of the 
 clerical functions devolves on a single clergyman, the 
 composition of sermons, and the official duties of the 
 Lord's day, are neither the only, nor perhaps the most 
 important branches of pastoral labour. The visitation 
 of the sick and of the dying, equally useful and con- 
 solatory, is a labour of perpetual recurrence; and it 
 is in no country of Christendom more faithfully at- 
 tended to than in Scotland. — But the private instruc- 
 tion given by the parish minister to the whole body of 
 the parishioners, in their separate houses, and in their 
 scattered villages, is a service still more extensively 
 useful, and not less faithfully performed. — The general 
 
 * Leechman's Life, p. 14. 
 
218 
 
 practice in parochial visitations is in substance this : 
 in the course of every year, a clergyman is understood 
 to visit the families of his parish individually ; when 
 he catechises the children and the servants, and after- 
 wards addresses, to all the members of each family, 
 a solemn admonition on the subjects best suited to 
 their conditions and to their practical duties ; which 
 he concludes with an affectionate prayer for their 
 temporal and eternal welfare. If there should be any 
 thing in the circumstances of particular families, which 
 appears to him to demand either advice or reprehen- 
 sion, he has in the course of this service fair oppor- 
 tunities of conveying the counsel which they have 
 most need to receive, in the form least likely to pre- 
 vent its effect. He converses with them at the same 
 time on every subject, by means of which he can 
 
 render his pastoral visits either gratifying or useful 
 
 By this intimate communication with every class of 
 his parishioners in their own families, if he manages 
 it with good sense and delicacy, a respectable clergy- 
 man has perpetual opportunities of becoming tho- 
 roughly acquainted with their several characters, and 
 with every circumstance in their conditions, of which 
 he can avail himself in public or in private for their 
 advantage. Without descending from his own situa- 
 tion, he comes from habit, as well as principle, to re- 
 gard their interests with a paternal solicitude, and 
 they are soon accustomed to look up to him as a friend 
 or as a father ; as their enlightened adviser and guide, 
 
 as well as their religious instructor and comforter 
 
 Besides the visitation of families, a clergyman in the 
 country is accustomed to hold regular diets of cate- 
 chising in the several villages of his parish, where he 
 meets as many of his parishioners together as can be 
 easily assembled in one place — In this department 
 
219 
 
 of pastoral duty, an intelligent minister does not con- 
 fine himself to the church catechism, or to any printed 
 catechisms whatever ; but while he pays as much at- 
 tention to the catechisms in use as to see that they 
 are familiar to the people, if he does justice to his 
 office, his instruction is directed to every subject of 
 religion and morals, which he thinks best adapted to 
 their capacities and situations. — His catechetical ques- 
 tions, indiscriminately addressed to the old and to the 
 young, embrace, as far as the time he must prescribe 
 to himself will permit, whatever he can render level 
 to the capacities of the people, or is calculated to 
 enlighten them, in the history of the Bible, in the evi- 
 dence, the doctrines, or the practical duties of Chris- 
 tianity. It is his object, above all, to make them well 
 acquainted with the Scriptures ; and, as far as he can 
 assist them, to accustom them to refer to them readily. 
 — In some parishes it is the practice, besides, to cate- 
 chise the communicants separately; and the clergy 
 are universally accustomed to converse privately with 
 those who are admitted to the communion-table for 
 the first time. — Without mentioning the care of the 
 poor, or the management of the church discipline, 
 which are chiefly devolved on the parish ministers, 
 this is a general outline of pastoral duty, as it has been 
 conducted in Scotland for more than a century. The 
 labour of every year, and (speaking generally) of every 
 parish, is substantially the same."* 
 
 While the general plan of ministerial duty is thus 
 sketched out, certain allowances must unquestionably 
 be made for the local and other peculiarities of a pa- 
 rish, and something must ever be left to the good 
 sense and prudent discretion of individual ministers. 
 
 * Life of Erskine, pp. 69—73. 
 
220 
 
 Bat I have yet to learn that our church has prescribed 
 one plan for country ministers, and another for the 
 clergy of toixms; and I have also to learn what those 
 duties are which the latter are, by their situation, pre- 
 cluded from discharging. Modified, no doubt, their 
 pastoral labours must be by circumstances ; and dis- 
 cretion must be exercised in directing these modifica- 
 tions; but has a town minister no families belonging 
 to his parish, or his congregation, whom he may pas- 
 torally visit? Has he no sick, no afflicted, no dying 
 persons, whom he may instruct and awaken, and 
 soothe ? Has he no young persons to catechise, and 
 no intending communicants to instruct and train? 
 Does the dispensation of the ordinance of baptism 
 never bring him into near contact with the parents of 
 his flock, and is he never called to address their con- 
 sciences in the language of instruction, and of spiritual 
 advice and encouragement? Has he no cas 3 of dis- 
 cipline which require the cognisance of the consistory 
 of the parish, and the patient and prudent application 
 of ecclesiastical law ? Has he no opportunities for 
 manifesting that " alacrity and assiduity in serving his 
 people," which is so beautifully described by Principal 
 Hill, as " seeking out and embracing those thousand 
 nameless occasions of service, which can be reduced 
 to no positive statute, but which no conscientious 
 minister will disregard?" And has he not, in addition 
 to the ordinary list of clerical duties, many avocations 
 more or less professional, which take their rise from his 
 peculiar situation, as the minister of a city parish ? 
 Schools of all kinds to examine — young men attend- 
 ing College, or the Divinity Hall, to watch over and 
 encourage in their studies — religious and benevolent 
 institutions to patronize — prisons, and hospitals, and 
 alms-houses to visit, and spiritually to superintend — 
 
221 
 
 acts of kindness to perform towards the widow and 
 the orphan, the veteran defenders of our country, or 
 the friends and relatives of such as are still engaged 
 in her defence-— acts of kindness which, although not 
 immediately nor directly clerical, do easily and natu- 
 rally coalesce with duties of a more spiritual com- 
 plexion, by bringing us into more intimate contact 
 with our people, endearing the tie which binds them 
 to our hearts, and strengthening their attachment to 
 that constitution, in church and state, which sheds 
 such a kindly influence over all their interests? 
 
 I am not unaware of the apology which has been 
 made for a city minister's acceptance of a plurality of 
 offices. It is pleaded, that a city minister is not re- 
 sponsible Jbr the souls of all his parishioners. In one 
 sense, no minister is responsible for the souls of his 
 •people, because every man must answer for himself. 
 But most assuredly every pastor is bound, by his or- 
 dination vow, to do every thing in his povoer to promote 
 the salvation of his people, by preaching the gospel 
 purely and zealously, and by the faithful discharge of 
 all the other duties of his office. And shall we be 
 told, and told without a blush, that in exact propor- 
 tion as the numbers of a parochial population are in- 
 creased, the extent of pastoral responsibility is les- 
 sened? That dissenters, or those who have voluntarily 
 placed themselves under a different guide, are not, in 
 the same sense, the objects of a pastor's care as those 
 who professedly adhere to. the establishment, is true ; 
 and yet, in regard to them^ there are many offices of 
 kindness which a minister of the established church 
 has in his power, and is bound to discharge. It was 
 well remarked by one of the speakers at the late 
 meeting of synod,* that the " maximum of duty it was 
 
 * Mr. Graham of Killearn. 
 
222 
 
 difficult precisely to ascertain ;"but that the ^'maximum 
 of human strength" it might be not difficult to fix. 
 Are we then to draw the inference, that a minister 
 who is placed over a parish whose duties are con- 
 fessedly far too great for the strongest of human be- 
 ings, may, with consistency and propriety, undertake 
 another office, involving many important and laborious 
 avocations ? Is there one class of ordination vows for 
 a town minister, and another for a country minister? 
 And if a city pastor is unable to do all that he would 
 wish, is he not bound to do all that he can ? And is 
 it not the very solemnity of the ordination vow, and 
 the awful responsibility which it implies, which above 
 all other considerations, will operate on a conscien- 
 tious man, to prevent his entangling himself with the 
 labours of a new and distinct charge, in a province 
 lying far beyond the ordinary associations of a " pas- 
 tor's walk ?" 
 
 These surely are not the times when the hazardous 
 experiment should be tried of crippling the active 
 energies of a city pastor. When ignorance, and infi- 
 delity, and profanity, and insubordination, and vice 
 of every name, are raging rank and wild around us — 
 when the dense population of our larger manufactur- 
 ing and commercial communities is so liberally pro- 
 scribed, as the great focus of such enormities — when 
 the eyes of our enlightened statesmen are intensely 
 fixed on the scheme of national reform, by means of 
 a religious instrumentality — when every thing in the 
 moral and political aspect of our country, and of the 
 times, warns us against removing the ancient land- 
 marks which our fathers have set — these surely are 
 not the times when the distance between a minister and 
 his people should be widened, and the influence of his 
 pastoral ministrations weakened, by a multiplicity of 
 
223 
 
 avocations. Surely there is nothing in the present 
 state of the city of Glasgow, which requires that its 
 parishes shall be disfranchised of their unalienable 
 right to the labours and anxieties of a " ivhole minis- 
 ter:'^ and is there any thing in the " localities" of St. 
 Mungo's parish which demands that it shall be thus 
 dismantled? Is its legal provision so small as not to 
 afford a " v/hole minister?" or is its population either 
 so good as not to require, or so bad as not to deserve 
 one? 
 
 It was m the year 1809 that the presbytery of 
 Glasgow, after due and serious deliberation, gave it as 
 their unanimous opinion that three additional paiysh 
 churches were absolutely necessary for the city; and 
 they memorialized the magistracy on the subject. A I 
 that time, there were eight parish churches, besides 
 chapels, to a population which, two years after, was 
 exactly 58,334.* Since that period, two additional 
 parish churches have been erected ; but the popula- 
 tion has increased to 73,796 ;f so that the d^ciency, 
 in proportion to the papulation, is greater than it was 
 before. To remedy this deficiency, several chapels 
 have either been erected, or are in the process of erec- 
 tion ; and there is the fair prospect of a large acces- 
 sion to the ecclesiastical provision made for the people 
 of the Barony parish. The subject of additional 
 church accommodation indeed has, at no time, been 
 absent from the serious deliberation of the magistrates 
 and presbytery of Glasgow, for the last fifteen years. 
 And in the knowledge, and under the impression of 
 such facts> was it any matter of surprise to find the 
 latter of these bodies, declaring by their solemn deed, 
 
 * Government Enumeration, 181]. 
 
 \ Idem, 18'^1, p. 32, Cleland's Edition. 
 
224 
 
 that the parish of St. Mungo required, for its spiritual 
 superintendence, the talents, and time, and unre- 
 mitted energies of the most highly gifted individual? 
 Would it not have appeared very strange and unac- 
 countable, that in the face of their own repeatedly- 
 recorded judgment — of their frequent solicitations to 
 the patrons for additional accommodation — of their 
 cordial concurrence in the erection of chapels, and 
 the loud and long-continued appeals of some of their 
 most distinguished members, on the want of clerical 
 provision for the wants of the people,* they should, 
 after all this, agree simpliciter to give their solemn 
 sanction to a deed so utterly at war with all their 
 avowed principles ? Would not this have just 
 amounted to a public acknowledgment that all their 
 previous complaints on the want of ecclesiastical pro- 
 vision were groundless; that the clerical charges of 
 Glasgow were not sufficient to occupy one man; and 
 that an accession to the number of pastors was not 
 called for by the circumstances of the case? 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 On the Duties of the Principality of Glasgow College. 
 
 Having thus adverted to the nature and extent of 
 the pastoral charge committed in trust to the minis- 
 ter of St. Mungo's parish, let us now attend to the re- 
 quired avocations of the Principal of Glasgow College. 
 If it be true, as has been again and again affirmed, 
 that the Principality is a mere " sinecure,'' and that 
 the discharge of its duties is only an " amusement,' 
 
 * Mr. Lapslie's Letters to the Magistrates; Dr. Chalmers' 
 Christian and Civic Economy, &c. 
 
225 
 
 and that a " clerk, for a few shillings, is competent to 
 do them all"* — then, indeed, the merits of the question 
 at issue are materially changed. Even on this suppo- 
 sition, however, it would remain a matter of very grave 
 inquiry, How comes it to pass that a well-endowed 
 office should have been continued so long, while the 
 duties attached to it are so trifling ? How is it that 
 the offices of Lord Rector, and Dean of Faculty, which 
 have some very important duties involved in them, 
 should be unendotved, while that of Principal, which is 
 a " sinecure," has been placed on a footing of respec- 
 tability? How comes it to pass that during a succes- 
 sion of years, when the college of Glasgow comprised 
 only a few hundred students,f no attempt was made 
 to conjoin the Principality v/ith a clerical charge, 
 whereas now, when the students amount to at least 
 1500, and the concerns of the college are multiplied 
 proportionally, it is discovered that the office is a sine- 
 cure, and that its few routine engagements may be 
 easily overtaken by any one of the ordinary pastors of 
 the city? 
 
 Let us even grant, for the sake of argument, that 
 the duties of the Principality are not very numerous, 
 nor very irksome ; — they have still the effect of adding 
 to the already overgrown burden laid upon the shoul- 
 ders of the ministers, and of withdrawing their atten- 
 tion, to a certain extent at least, from their immediate 
 avocations. " I care not," says Dr. Chalmers, " by 
 
 * Presbytery Report, July 1823, p. 13, 58. 
 
 f In 1797, when the Statistical Account of the university was 
 draAvn up, " the average number of students of all denominations 
 was considerably above 600." Stat. Account, Vol. XXI. p. 32. 
 In 1702, they amounted to 402. Id. p. 27. 
 
226 
 
 how small a fraction it is that the duties of the Prin- 
 cipality add to the duties of the clergyman. Though 
 only one tenth part of the whole, it is tantamount to 
 the annexation of 800 people to his now unwieldy and 
 unmanageable parish,"* In the present state of our 
 country, and especially of our manufacturing popula- 
 tion, when so much has been attempted, in order to 
 relieve the ministers from every avocation which does 
 not belong directly to their sacred calling, and when 
 every thing is to be deprecated which tends to divert 
 their attention from their peculiar engagements, such 
 an union as the present is to be looked upon with 
 jealousy and suspicion. Had the Principal no other 
 avocation than that of doing the honours of the great 
 university co7-poraiion, we might discern, even in this 
 comparatively easy task, the operation of a principle 
 that is inimical to the right discharge of pastoral duty. 
 The entireness of the minister's official calling is broken 
 in upon. His mind is constantly liable to be taken 
 up with concerns that are foreign to it. There is 
 something about the office of the Principality that unfits 
 it for coalescing harmoniously with the minuter and 
 more humbling departments of a faithful minister's 
 daily walk. The concerns and the demands of each 
 must not unfrequently come into competition; and 
 when, at one and the same instant, the dying inmate 
 of a garret or a cellar petitions for a pastoral visit, 
 and an illustrious stranger arrives to see the university, 
 we may be enabled to form some idea of the practical 
 results of such a competition. 
 
 But what are really the duties demanded of the 
 Principal of the college of Glasgow? In the charter 
 
 Chalmers' Speech at the Synod, p. II. 
 
227 
 
 of endowment by the city of Glasgow, in 1572, and 
 confirmed by act of Parliament, 23d January of the 
 same year, it is required that of the fifteen persons, 
 (including bursars) of whom the college consisted, 
 " the first shall be Professor of Theology, and in that 
 science deeply skilled, and shall be called Prefect, or 
 Provost, or Principal of the College." In the 7iova 
 erectio by king James VI. in 1377, ratified by Parlia- 
 ment, 1387, usually considered as the Magna Charta 
 of the university, the duties of the Principal are thus 
 defined : " The Principal" (Gymnasiarcha) " ought to 
 be a man of piety and sound morals, to whom the whole 
 college and its individual members must be subject, 
 and to whom we commit the ordinary jurisdiction over 
 every person connected with our college. It behooves 
 him to be well instructed in sacred literature; quali- 
 fied to open up the mysteries of the faith, and to ex- 
 plain the hidden treasures of the divine word ; and 
 with this view, he must be well skilled in the ancient 
 languages, and particularly in Hebrew and Syriac, 
 whose professor we appoint him to be ; for, as truly 
 becomes us, we desire that the study of the sacred 
 language should be promoted among our subjects, in 
 order that the fountains of the Scriptures, and their 
 mysteries, may be more correctly laid open. There- 
 fore we give it in trust to our said Principal, that with 
 the view of exhibiting to the whole college, in his own 
 example, a pattern of diligent industry, he shall each 
 day employ one hour, at least, in prelection, and shall 
 teach theology one day, and the sacred languages the 
 next, alternately; but on the seventh day, he shall be 
 free from his ordinary duties, that he may preach to 
 the people of Govan." The special reason assigned 
 for this last appointment, is, that since the college is 
 
228 
 
 to be sustained by the tithes of that parish, " it is but 
 reasonable that those who ministered to them carnal 
 things, should partake of their spiritual things, and 
 not be wholly deprived of the bread of life, which is 
 the word of God." The charter then goes on to say, 
 that in order to the due discharge of his official du- 
 ties, " the Principal shall reside within the collegCj 
 and shall not travel farther than Govan, without liberty 
 granted by the Rector, Dean of Faculty, and other 
 members of the faculty ; and if, without liberty re- 
 gularly asked and obtained, he shall sleep three days 
 out of the bounds of the college, he shall vacate his 
 place."* [t appears, from the records of the college, 
 that the Principal continued to discharge all the du- 
 ties of a Professor of Theology, and of Oriental Lan^ 
 guages, till 1640, when, by order of the visitors of the 
 college, appointed by the General Assembly, Mr. David 
 Dickson was nominated as conjunct Professor of Divi- 
 nity, along with Principal Strang. Mr. Dickson's ap- 
 pointment was ratified by parliament on the 11th Sept. 
 1641 at the express " desyr of Dr. Jhone Strang, (prin- 
 cipal) that meanes might be used for furnisching the 
 university with ane competent number of professours."f 
 In 1642, Mr. Robert Baillie was translated from Kilwin- 
 ning to be third professor of Theology and Biblical Li- 
 terature ; and he held this office for about ten years. 
 This third professorship appears to have undergone ma- 
 
 * These extracts have been translated from the originals, co- 
 pies of which may be found in a " Collection of papers in the 
 mutual action, Mr. Muirhead against the College of Glasgow;" 
 a document which throws a great deal of light on the history and 
 constitution of the university. 
 
 f Acts of Scots Parliaments, vol. v. p. 398. 
 
229 
 
 Tiy fluctuations, in consequence of the crippled and con- 
 stantly changing state of the college funds. In 1716, 
 rt was converted into a professorship of Ecclesiasti- 
 cal History ; and with this designation it has continued 
 in regular succession till the present day. In 1709, 
 a regular professor of Oriental Languages, was first 
 appointed ; and thus was at length completed, after 
 slow and painful steps, the theological faculty of the 
 university of Glasgow, 
 
 Now, the great question which naturally arises out 
 of this historical sketch, is. Did the Principal con- 
 tinue in the active discharge of his duties as a Profes- 
 sor of Theology, after the addition of a second and a 
 f/izVc? Professor in the same department? and was it 
 then considered, and has it all along been considered, 
 as a constituent part of his official dut}^ to do so? In 
 answer, we beg to state the following considerations: 
 
 In ihejirst place, the charter of erection expressly 
 requires that the Principal shall teach theology ; and 
 there is no evidence that he was ever regularly re- 
 leased from the obligation to do so. An express sta- 
 tute, enacted by the highest authority in the state, 
 must be held as binding, so long as the same power 
 which enacted it, does not se€ meet to change or to 
 annul it, and this would hold good, even although in 
 point of fact the duty had been allowed to fall into 
 desuetude. In the present instance, there is^ no evi- 
 dence of the Principal having been released from this 
 duty; but on the contrary, there is abundant proof, 
 from historical testimony, that it was never intended to 
 release him entirely from this important part of his 
 official labours. For, 
 
 In the second place, we can appeal to a regular series 
 of historical documents, in proof that the Principal 
 was all along not officially and nominally^ but literally 
 
 L 
 
230 
 
 and truly, a professor or teacher of theology. It is 
 not necessaiy to go farther back than the year 1640, 
 because then, for the first time, a plurality of theologi- 
 cal professors was appointed. We have seen that in 
 addition to Principal Strang, Messrs. Dickson and 
 Baillie were appointed as second and ^/«V</ Professors of 
 Theology, in 1640 and 1642. Now, if ever there 
 had been a time when the Principal was to be released 
 from the active discharge of professorial duty, this 
 was the time. The students did not exceed thirhj ; 
 and two ordinary professors of Theology had been ap- 
 pointed for their superintendence. And yet what is 
 the fact ? We appeal to the authenticated records of 
 the college as affording decisive evidence, that Dr. 
 Strang continued to teach during the whole period of 
 his incumbency. We' appeal to the printed acts of 
 the General Assembly of 1647, where we find that 
 Dr. Strang's " dictates," or heads of theological pre- 
 lections, became the subject of inquiry and animad- 
 version, and after due examination, " the clerk is ap- 
 pointed to re-deliver Dr. Strang's Dictates unto him," 
 as a testimony that the assembly were satisfied with 
 their orthodoxy, and that he was at liberty to proceed 
 in his professional career.* We appeal to the particu- 
 lar account given by Baillie, m his letters, of the 
 manner in which he and his two colleagues divided 
 the system of Divinity amongst them, so as most ef- 
 fectually to attain the great object t)f a complete theo- 
 logical education. *' For the present," says he, " Mr. 
 David teaches on Monday and Tuesday before noon, 
 his excellent analytic commentaries on the text of 
 Scripture. On Friday morning he teaches precepts for 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 1647, Sess. 23. 
 
231 
 
 preachings and cases of conscience, and attends the 
 young men's privy homilies. The Principal diets on 
 Thm-sday betwixt 10 and 11, and on Friday, betwixt 
 11 and 12, has notes on the hard places of Scripture. 
 All he does is very well and accurately; onlj the 
 length is the pity," (by this he means the shortness of 
 the exercise) " but," he adds, " in this it is reason 
 that he has his will, for no Principal in Scotland 
 teaches onie time, and he hath a charge beside would 
 hill an ox. He attends every Tuesday afternoon the 
 private diatribes. For me, I have taught Hebrew 
 every Monday afternoon, gone through BuxtorfF's 
 Epitome, and dieted notes on the texts at the end. 
 By the end of the second year, I hope to close my 
 Hebrew notes, so that my third year may be for 
 Chaldaic, Syriac, and Rabbinic. Every Thursday be- 
 twixt 11 and 12, I diet of the controversies. On 
 Wednesday, I take paragetic diatribes."* 
 
 It would appear that both Mr. Baillie and Mr. Dick- 
 son were in the practice of officiating, not as the re- 
 gular pastors of congregations in the city, but as 
 " ministers of God's word," preaching the Gospel, 
 and assisting in sessions and presbyteries in all matters 
 of discipline and government. It seems that this 
 comparatively limited exercise of ministerial functions, 
 was held by the college faculty as incompatible with 
 the due and full discharge of their academical func- 
 tions, for on the appointment of Mr. Robert Ramsay, 
 who resigned his charge of the Inner High parish, on 
 his election to the Principality, an act of the Senatus 
 was passed discharging the Principal and Professors of 
 Theology, from interfering henceforth in any of the 
 
 * Baillie's MS. Letters, A. D. 1643. 
 l2 
 
232 
 
 ordinary affairs of the ministry, in order that they 
 may devote themselves with greater earnestness and 
 effect to their appropriate work which is said to be 
 " of such great weight, that the greatest parts, and 
 most diligent labours of the ablest men are hardly suf- 
 ficient therefor."* In various succeeding periods, the 
 statutes and minutes of faculty suppose evidently 
 that the Principal was a teaching professor; as, for ex- 
 ample, in 1705, the Senatus " considering that it was 
 the custom in the best times to have two professors of 
 Theology, besides the Principal, though the number 
 of students then was not so great as it is now," resolve 
 to take measures for having the deficiency sup- 
 plied.f From this period, down to the time of Principal 
 Leechman, the history of the college affords demon- 
 strative evidence, that the teaching of theology was 
 not only held as part of the duty of the Principal, 
 but was actually performed by him in conjunction 
 with his colleagues. For several years after his ap- 
 pointment. Dr. Leechman continued to lecture ;f 
 and the reason of the discontinuance of this part of 
 his official duties is not assigned by his biographer. 
 Certain it is, that in 1796, the members of the univer- 
 sity themselves did not consider this department of duty 
 as either unnecessary, or as having fallen into desue- 
 tude. In the very valuable account of the university, 
 drawn up by Dr. Reid and Professor Jardine, at the 
 request, and with the review of the other members, 
 and published in the statistical account, we have the 
 foUowino- short but comprehensive statement. " For 
 the peculiar education of churchmen, there are Jour 
 
 • Faculty Minutes, 1651. 
 f Faculty Minutes, 1705. 
 I Life, p. 77. 
 
233 
 
 professors — the Principal who is primarius professor 
 of Theology, and has besides the superintendence of 
 the whole college ; and the respective professors of 
 Theology, of Oriental Languages, and of Church His- 
 tory. This last is also lecturer on Civil Histor^^"* 
 
 In the M/r^ place; Let us attend to the reason as- 
 signed for the slow progress which was made in the 
 scheme for constituting the theological faculty as it 
 now stands. It is extremely worthy of notice, that 
 the reason assigned for the slow erection of these 
 tlieological professorships, is not the idea that they 
 were unnecessary or undesirable, but simply the "want 
 of funds. Principal Baillie, whose authority is unques- 
 tionable, tells us, in his history of the transactions of 
 his own day, in which he forms a leading part, that 
 the college gave their consent to the establishment of 
 a " Professor of Divinity" in 1640, " for now they had 
 means enough."-]' In 1664, the royal visitors report, 
 " that there will be required at least another profes- 
 sor of theology, another professor of humanity, &c." 
 *' which the university formerly had, and by the erec- 
 tion and foundation ought to haiv, but cannot for the 
 present possibly haiv, through want of revenue year- 
 Iy."j: In 1691, the faculty considering " that it was 
 the practice and custom of the university, in the most 
 flourishing time, both of this church and college, to 
 haiv tvoo professors of theology, besides the principal, 
 and considering, that the present state of the univer- 
 sity is such as the rents cannot allow such stipends to 
 the said professors as they formerly got, and were 
 
 * Stat. Ace. vol. xxi. p. 30. 
 f Baillie's MSS. Folio, in Bibl. Coll. Glas; 
 \ Report of Visitation, 1664; inserted among the papers rela- 
 tive to Professor Muirhead's case, 1808. 
 
234 
 
 reasonable and fit for them to have, yet the urgent 
 Ktate of the Church doth not the less require the same; 
 and considering, that it may be hoped some reverend 
 and learned men may, in consideration of the present 
 pressing need of the Church, the more willingly un- 
 dergo that charge, with less outward encouragem.ent, 
 until the university shall be in a condition to better 
 their stipends :" therefore the faculty proceed to 
 elect two professors of theology, to whom they assign 
 the stipend formerly allowed to one, " to be equally 
 divided betwixt them; hereby declaring, that as soon 
 as the university shall by any new fund be enabled to 
 enlarge their salary, they will readily and reasonably 
 do the same."* In 1707, the parliament of Scotland 
 recommended the state of the Scottish universities to 
 the notice of Queen Anne; and in consequence of 
 this, Principal Dunlop was sent to London, in name, 
 and by appointment of all the universities of Scotland, 
 to make application in their favour. A gift was ob- 
 tained from her majesty, one of the items in which, 
 was a sum allotted for a Professor of Oriental Lan- 
 guages, in the college of Glasgow, and accordingly such 
 a professor was nominated.f Thus it appears, that in 
 the progress of things, all the departments originally 
 combined from necessity in the office of principal, 
 were subdivided among so many independent profes- 
 sors; and yet it appears, from the university records, 
 that the number of divinity students, down to the 
 latest of the above periods, never exceeded fifty. 
 Now, we would ask any man of plain understanding, 
 whether it is consistent with common sense to sup- 
 pose, that all these strenuous exertions, on the part of 
 
 * Records of the University, 25th February, 1C91. 
 f Faculty Minutes, 12th Jan. 1709. 
 
235 
 
 the college, were made, and that all these grants, 
 obtained with difficulty, were bestowed, for the pur- 
 pose of reducing the principality to a " mere sine- 
 cure?" The whole aspect of the procedure must con- 
 vince us, that these " adjunct professors," as Baillie 
 terras them, were designed not to supersede^ but to aid 
 the principal in the discharge of his arduous duties, 
 that the work might be better done, on the principle 
 of the division of labour. The new erections are ex- 
 pressly said to be " besides" or *' in addition' to " the 
 principal," who held all along the office of primarius 
 professor of theology; and the slight sketch which we 
 have drawn, may give us some idea of the importance 
 which was attached by our forefathers to the faculty 
 of theology, even at a time when the number of stu- 
 dents did not average one-fourth of their present 
 number. To use the-^xpressive words of the college 
 faculty on this subject: " It may conduce to the glory 
 of God, to the good and advantage of the church and 
 state, and to the honour and interest of this university, 
 that the theology be ivell dca^ fully taught."* 
 
 But it may be said, that supposing the principal to 
 have been released of his professorial labours, he still 
 
 * Faculty Minutes, 25th Feb. 1691. It is well worthy of 
 notice, that in the ,£300 granted to the college of Edinburgh by 
 king William, ,£109 was expressly appropriated to a second pro- 
 fessor of theology ; and the town council entered on their minutes 
 a formal protest against the misapplication of this sum to the 
 professorship of public law. Council Register, for the year 1707. 
 The second professorship of theology was altogether distinct from 
 that of ecclesiastical history, which had been founded five years 
 before. Council Register, Vol. XXXVII. p. QQ^>. It thus ap- 
 pears, that the theological faculty at Edinburgh, was designed to 
 contain the same number of members with the other imiversities 
 of Scotland, namely, /owr professors. 
 
236 
 
 continued to officiate at Govan, and that this, along 
 with his superintendence of the college, constituted 
 his chief employment. Jlie supposition is set aside by 
 plain facts. The reason why the principal was required 
 to preach at Govan, has been already quoted from the 
 nova erectio. It is well known, that for a long time 
 the revenues of the college arose almost exclusively 
 from the teinds of the parish of Govan, first granted 
 to them by James, in 1577; and as there was thus no 
 provision made for the support of a minister in that 
 parish, the principal was bound to supply the defi- 
 ciency.* So soon, however, as tlie funds of the col- 
 lege were increased, this union of offices was dissolved ; 
 and that upon grounds highly honourable to both 
 parties. In 1621, during the time of principal Boyd, 
 a visitation of the college was held by James, Arch- 
 bish'op of Glasgow, Chancellor, the Rector and others, 
 when a minute was drawn up and inserted in the 
 University Register, to the effect, that having found 
 by long experience, and the unfeigned confession of 
 principal Boyd, that however diligent the principal 
 might be, he could not consistently, with the full dis- 
 charge of liis duty in that office, be minister of the 
 parish of Govan ; and therefore it was resolved and 
 decreed, that in all time comings the principal and his 
 successors should be exonerated from preaching at 
 
 * It was greatly to the credit of principal Melville, that when 
 offered by Morton, in 1576, the "rich parsonage of Govan, a 
 benefice of 24 chalders of victual, providing he would not insist 
 in the course against bishops," he nobly rejected the proposal; 
 but used all his influence, and successfully, in obtaining a grant 
 of it to the funds of the. college. — Calderwood's History, p. 74". 
 As there was a tack upon the teinds for 19 years after this, the 
 college did not profit much by the grant till that period was 
 ended. 
 
237 
 
 Go van, that they may devote their " whole study' and 
 " time," to their proper avocations — such as " public 
 doctrine," *' private colloquies," and conferences with 
 the students, and the " government of the college."* 
 At the same meeting, a stipend was modified to the 
 minister of Govan, out of the teinds of the parish, with 
 the manse and glebe. Although the resources of the 
 college were at this time far from affluent, a compe- 
 tent living was assigned by them out of their oxvn jjrO' 
 perty ; a sacrifice, which they could not have been 
 expected to make, had it not been from a conviction 
 of the necessity of such an arrangement for promoting 
 the interests of religion in the parish, and of learning 
 in the university. 
 
 In the fourth place; If there ever existed a reason 
 why there ought to be two Professors of Theology, 
 besides Church History, and Hebrew, the same con- 
 siderations of expediency exist at present with tenfold 
 strength. The number of theological students has 
 been rapidly multiplying of late years; and the due 
 superintendence of their studies will fully occupy the 
 attention of two professors of theology. If the theo- 
 logical department in the colleges of Aberdeen, com- 
 prises four professors ; and if a strong desire for a 
 Jifth has been expressed by those most competent to 
 judge, at a time when there were not above 23 stu- 
 dents regularly attending, -j- shall three members be 
 held sufficient for the same department in a university 
 
 ♦ Records of University, 1621, and Stat. Ace. Vol. XXI. p. 
 24-. Want of access to the original records of the college, puts 
 it out of my power to give the ipsissima verba of tliese minutes, 
 or to quote others to the same effect. 
 
 f Stat. Account, Vol. XXI. p. 139. Account of Marischal 
 College. 
 
 l3 
 
238 
 
 containing six times the number of students? If at 
 St. Andrew's, 30 students furnish occupation to Jour 
 professors of theology, surely 200 at Glasgow may do 
 the same.* Is there no room for the exercise of all 
 the learning and talent of the ablest man, in the ex- 
 amination of the theological students; the hearing and 
 criticism of their discourses; and the private superin- 
 tendence of their conduct and studies? and will not 
 the great objects of a school of theology, and the in- 
 terests of the Church at large, be more effectually 
 advanced by the labours of tico persons well qualified 
 for the office, than by the labours, however valuable, 
 of one? If there do exist endowments sufficiently 
 ample for a completely orgajiized theological college, like 
 that of St. Mary's at St. Andrew's, why should not 
 the Church of Scotland claim her rights, and avail 
 herself of all her advantages ? " Let us attend," says 
 Professor M'Gill, " to the number and state of Theo- 
 logical Students in this country; let us consider how 
 important it is both to the spiritual and temporal in- 
 terests of the nation, that this part of professional 
 education be properly conducted, and then ask our- 
 selves, if the duties appointed to the Principal by the 
 constitution of the College, can be spared — or if one 
 
 * When St. Mary's college, St. Andrew's, was reformed by 
 Melville in 1580, there were appointed five professors of theo- 
 logy, of whom the principal was one. The number was after- 
 wards reduced to fuur, and so it has continued till the present 
 day. " It was," says no mean judge, *' the most liberal and en- 
 lightened plan of study, which had yet been established in any 
 European imiversity." Dr. M'Crie's Life of Melville, Vol. I. 
 p. 245. Tlie scheme of St. Mary's was taken from the model of 
 Glasgowj and hence we may form some idea of what the compre- 
 hensive mind of principal Melville designed, by a complete course 
 of theology to make, as it was termed, " aperfite theologian." 
 
239 
 
 Professor of Divinity can suffice for such an object — 
 or if, when such additional means are within our 
 power, they should not be employed? Let us con- 
 sider only the years of attendance, so properly re- 
 quired of the candidates for the sacred ministry, by 
 the Church of Scotland; and the different ages, and 
 degrees of progress in knowledge and attainments, 
 which must exist among them; and then say, if the 
 same lectures, and modes, and kinds of instruction, 
 are suited to students in such different circumstances? 
 Such a plan is not only absurd, but, in many instances, 
 it is ruinous. And is it of no importance, that time 
 and patient attention be employed in daily examina- 
 tions of these different classes of students, on the sub- 
 jects of instruction and the objects of their studies? 
 Is it of no importance that exercises of various kinds, 
 suited to their progress and the design of their pro- 
 fessional education, be appointed and directed ? Is 
 the communication of knowledge all that is necessary 
 in a teacher? Are there no habits to be formed ; no 
 fitness of character and spirit; no right direction of 
 talent, facility, and excellence in execution, to be 
 aimed after? Can even knowledge be attained with- 
 out you employ the means to insure attention, and 
 thought, and inquiry? And is the personal acquain- 
 tance of the teacher with his students, his private ad- 
 vice and directions, his friendly and kind, yet con- 
 stant and vigilant superintendence, of no importance? 
 To these, add only the laborious and exhausting duty 
 of hearing and criticising the public discourses ap- 
 pointed by the church, extending often to above two 
 hundred in the course of a single session; and then 
 let us determine, if any plan of instruction, which de- 
 serves the name, or is in any degree commensurate 
 with the objects of an education for the sacred minis- 
 
24.0 
 
 try, can be carried on fully and effectually by one in- 
 (Jividual." 
 
 To the professorial duties of the principal, let us 
 add those other official departments, to which the con- 
 stitution and statutes of the university astrict him. 
 The superintendence of the secular affairs and interests 
 of a great corporation, of a multiplied and complex 
 order, connected with the conduct and interests of 
 various individuals, and leading to matters of daily 
 occurrence which require attention and investigation 
 — the superintendence of the general interests of edu- 
 cation within the university, and of the manner in 
 which the rules are observed, and its important objects 
 are carried into execution — the oversight of the-^on- 
 duct both of masters and students — the employment 
 of wise and prudent means to correct and remedy 
 what is wrong, to prevent the growth of evil, and to 
 encourage every good design — the preservation of the 
 proper business and discipline of the college at large, 
 and of its varied compartments — the weekly address 
 to the students of the whole college, of what has been 
 technically termed a sacra lectio,* illustrative of truths 
 the most important to mankind — " Let all these duties 
 and avocations be combined — and let the time and 
 studies, due to general literature from the Head of a 
 college, be added — and then say, if this be a sinecure; 
 and if a principal engaged in such multifarious duties, 
 and with a mind occupied in the discharge of them, 
 can indeed be in a situation to discharge fully and 
 successfully, the great and numerous spiritual duties 
 
 * The sacrce lectiones of Archbishop Lcighton, while principal 
 of the university of Edinburgh, remain a lasting memorial at 
 once, of the purity of his theological sentiments, and the classicaJ 
 elegance of his Latin style. 
 
241 
 
 of a minister of the gospel, and in a parish so exten- 
 sive and populous as that of the High Church of 
 Glasgow."* 
 
 Let it not be said that the statutes which bind to 
 these varied duties are antiquated and obsolete. The 
 most valuable of our civil statutes are antiquated, and 
 most of our religious privileges are coeval with them. 
 But a statute does not lose its binding obligation 
 when it acquires the venerable -rust of ages. In the 
 case before us, the constitutions of the college come 
 to us recommended by all the authority both of earlier 
 and of later times. 
 
 In 1727, a royal commission was appointed to in- 
 quire into the state of the university of Glasgow, and 
 to enact such regulations as its actual circumstances 
 might render necessary. This commission was com- 
 posed of some of the most enlightened men of the 
 kingdom,-]- and the wise and salutary regulations which 
 they passed, have for nearly a century been held as 
 " standing laws" of the university. Their opinion of 
 the ancient statutes of the corporation does not seem 
 to have been so very low, as that of some modern 
 reformers. After enacting their own statutes, which 
 
 * Report of Presbytery, p. 33. 
 
 f Their names as appended to the " act," dated at Edinburgh; 
 19th Sept. 1727, are as follows : James, earl of Findlater; Archi- 
 bald, earl of Hay, keeper of the great seal ; George Ross, master 
 of Ross; James Erskine, of Grange; Andrew Fletcher, of Mil- 
 ton, (two of the Senators of the College of Justice, and the 
 latter afterwards Lord Justice Clerk;) Charles Areskine his 
 Majesty's Solicitor General; Patrick Grant, of Elches, advocate, 
 (afterwards Lord Elches;) John Campbell, late Provost of Edin- 
 burgh ; William Wishart, Principal of the College of Edinburgh ; 
 William Miller, one of the Ministers of Edinburgh; and James 
 Alston, Minister of the Gospel at Dirleton. 
 
242 
 
 appear to be very salutary and wise, tlieir decreet 
 thus ends : " The commission does hereby statute, 
 enact, appoint, and ordain, that the rules and articles 
 above written, and every of them, be obeyed, prac- 
 tised, and punctually observed in all time coming, by 
 all and every person concerned in the said university; 
 and shall be deemed and taken for laws and statutes; 
 and have the full force, strength, and effect thereof; 
 and declare all laws, statides, and rides formerly made 
 not inconsistent hej-etjoiih, to remain infidlforce,^ There is 
 one part of the act of this commission, which requires 
 to be particularly noticed, as highly creditable to their 
 principles and feelings. " The commission recom- 
 mend it to the masters of the university, to observe 
 the regulations q^ former visitations Jor ijicidcating upon 
 the students the pjrinciples of the Christian religion.'' In 
 compliance with this recommendation, we find Dr. 
 Francis Hutcheson, giving a weekly lecture to his 
 students on the evidences of Christianity, making use 
 of Grotius as his text book — Mr. Clow, the professor 
 of Logic, lecturing to his class on the truths and gen- 
 eral duties of religion — and principal Leechman ad- 
 dressing the youth of the universit}^ on Sabbath even- 
 ing, and at other seasons, on the most important of 
 all their interests.-]- Nor has this good practice gone 
 entirely into desuetude even now; and yet the avoca- 
 tions of each professor, when the students are so 
 numerous, may render it difficult to attend to their 
 
 * Act of Commission, regulating the University of Glasgow ; 
 published in the appendix to the Process of Declarator, 1775, 
 4to. p. 8. 
 
 f The benefit which principal Leechman had derived from 
 attending the religious lectures of Dr. Hutcheson, is particularly 
 noticed by his biographer. Wodrow's Life of Leechman, p. 8. 
 
243 
 
 "moral and religious interests so fully as might be 
 wished; and therefore it seer»is to be a wise and salu- 
 tary measure as enjoined by the statutes, that the duty 
 of addressing the whole university on the most impor- 
 tant of all interests to man, and of taking the moral 
 and religious superintendence of the college, should 
 be devolved on the Head or Principal of the Institu- 
 tion, w hose lessons of wisdom, of experience, and of 
 piety, may tell w^ith salutary eifect on the juvenile 
 mind, and through the blessing of heaven, leave an 
 impression never to be effaced. 
 
 Of the light in which the venerable Principal Leech- 
 man contemplated the duties of his exalted situation, 
 some idea may be formed from the following sketch 
 of his biographer : — " It was impossible for a mind so 
 conscientious and so active as his was, to enjoy much 
 ease in his new station, entrusted as he was with the 
 oversight both of the morals and literature of such a 
 numerous society ; and having a peculiar trouble from 
 his office with the superintendence and administration 
 of the various branches of its revenue, more compli- 
 cated and considerable, on the whole, than that of the 
 other Scottish Universities. This trouble was doubt- 
 less increased, from his having been little accustomed 
 to business during his former life. — Besides, he did not 
 confine himself to the ordinary routine of duty con- 
 nected with his office ; but entered warmly into every 
 scheme for the benefit and improvement of the society 
 suggested by other professors, and prosecuted some 
 schemes of his own suggestion. He gave a lecture, 
 for some time, once a week, to the students of divinity, 
 which he was entitled to do as primarius professor; 
 and during the session 1763, and several following 
 sessions, he gave weekly lectures to the whole Uni- 
 
244 
 
 versity, I believe, upon the Sunday evening, when 
 they were disengaged from their pecuHar studies; — 
 lectures upon various subjects, such as the design of 
 academical institutions, and the conduct incumbent 
 both on the masters and scholars to answer this de- 
 sign; upon self-knowledge, as subservient to this, as 
 well as to our general conduct in life; upon the wis- 
 dom and benefit of early piety; upon the excellency 
 of the Scriptures; — with some other lectures formerly 
 delivered in the Divinity Hall, and now adapted to a 
 more mixed audience. These lectures were remem- 
 bered and spoken of afterwards, as excellently cal- 
 culated to inspire young minds with an ardour both 
 for literary and moral improvement, and to stimulate 
 them to strenuous exertions in this steep but pleasing 
 path: to guard them against the influence of the spirit 
 of scepticism and licentiousness, very catching in the 
 present age; and to prepare them to make a manly 
 stand, in their riper years, for truth, virtue, liberty, 
 and every thing important to mankind. Several of 
 the students, who attended these evening lectures, 
 still remember the deep impressions which they made 
 upon their minds at the time, the increased attach- 
 ment to study, and the exertions excited by them. — 
 His house was open to students in every walk, when 
 the conversation usually turned on subjects of learn- 
 ing and taste, and contributed to their improvement. 
 The students of theology he naturally considered as 
 more under his patronage than the rest; and he laid 
 himself out to be especially useful to such of them, 
 as chose to cultivate an acquaintance with him, by 
 drawing them out into an easy unreserved conversa- 
 tion, tending to open and enlarge their minds ; by 
 directing the course of their reading.; and freely giv- 
 
245 
 
 ing them advice, with a candour and persuasive warmth 
 in some sort peculiar to himself."* 
 
 It has been maintained, and justly maintained, that 
 the head of* such a great literary establishment as that 
 of the University of Glasgow, ought to be one of the 
 great lights of literature; and that, in an age like the 
 present, when an unseemly disunion has been made, 
 or supposed to have been made, between religion and 
 literature, it is highly expedient and desirable, that 
 these interests should be concentrated in the person 
 of one man, whose labours in the united, cause may 
 be of incalculable importance to the church and the 
 country.-]- All this is unquestionably true; and it 
 furnishes a very good reason why the Principal should 
 be a man of character and talents ; a clear-headed and 
 sound- hearted Christian ; and a distinguished Christian 
 minister. But it is not easy to see how it goes to 
 prove, that the principal of a college should also be 
 minister of a populous parochial charge. Most as- 
 suredly, the head of Glasgow University, while he 
 has the courage and the ability to discharge all the 
 
 * See Sermons of Principal Leechman, with Life, by James 
 Wodrow, D.D. Vol. T. pp. 76 — 80. As Dr. Wodrow does not 
 assign any reason why the Lectures of the Principal were dis- 
 continued many years before his death, we may be allowed to 
 conjecture as one reason at least, that about the year 1765 began 
 those violent contests between Professor Anderson and the 
 Principal, relative to the management of the University corpora- 
 tion, which had the unhappy effect of rending the college into 
 parties; alienating the minds of its members from each other; 
 and crippling their means of usefulness. In these contests, Dr. 
 Leechman took a leading share ; and it is well known that they 
 distracted his mind from more important pursuits, and disturbed 
 the tranquillity of his later years. 
 
 f Speech of Patrick Robertson, Esq. in Report of Synod, 
 p. 27. 
 
246 
 
 official duties of his station, is expected to take a more 
 expansive survey — to look abroad into the world of 
 science and of religion — to make frequent incursions 
 into the repubhc of letters — to watch the progress of 
 truth and error — to encourage the march of sound 
 Christian literature — to check the growth of unsanc- 
 tified philosophy — and to stand forth as, in the best 
 sense, " the defender of the faith." With all this, 
 I most cordially and cheerfully coincide; while I 
 would just venture to question the fairness and the 
 competency of the conclusion which has been drawn, 
 that in order to enable the respected Principal to shine 
 as one of the great luminaries in the republic of letters 
 1 — and to labour in the united cause of religion and 
 literature, and to lay an effectual embargo on the 
 growing infidelity of the age, and to curb the licen- 
 tiousness of our youthful literati — ^you ought by all 
 means to conjoin with his Principality, the ceaseless 
 toils and the ever-anxious cares of an " already un- 
 wieldy and unmanageable parish." 
 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 On the Duties of the Ordinary Visitors of the College 
 of Glasgoiv. 
 
 As the most grossly erroneous views have been 
 entertained and circulated on this point, it will be 
 necessary to place it in its true and undisguised light. 
 Let it be remarked, then, that, in addition to that 
 general power of superintendence over all schools and 
 seminaries of learning, which the laws of the land have 
 committed to the presbyteries of the Church, there 
 l^as been a special privilege, bestowed by royal and 
 parliamentary grant on the presbytery of Glasgow — . 
 
247 
 
 the privilege of having one of their members specially 
 constituted an ordinary visitor of the University. In 
 the charter of endowment by the city in 1572, as 
 ratified by parliament in the same year, the office of 
 visitor is conferred on " the Rector, Dean of Faculties, 
 along with the Baillies of the city of Glasgow for the 
 time being;" and they are expressly empowered to 
 Meet regularly twice every year, " to visit the college 
 in its head, as in its members, that they may correct 
 all abuses, and retain or depose, according as they 
 appear to discharge or to neglect their duties ; to see 
 that the property designed for pious uses may not be 
 alienated or squandered ; that all matters connected 
 Hvith the management of the college be administered 
 honestly, and bonajide, according to the charter; and 
 that the surplus revenue, after paying all expenses, 
 shall be appropriated to the most necessary uses of 
 the college, at the will of the visitors with the advice 
 of the Principal." In the " Nova Erectio," granted 
 by king and parliament in 1577, similar powers are 
 granted to the visitors; but, in place of the " baillies 
 of the cit}?^," the trust is committed to the " minister 
 of the parish" along with Rector and Dean. " The 
 masters of the college alone, with the steward or fac- 
 tor (economus) shall be required to render an account 
 of their intromissions Jvur times in the year to the 
 Rector and Dean of Faculty, and the minister of the 
 city of Glasgow^ who shall take care that all things be 
 examined in the exactest manner; and ivhose cojisciences 
 ive also solemnly adchess^ that they may see that all 
 matters be managed in said College rightly and agree- 
 ably to our intentions, and that by their own authority 
 they reduce all things to order, and four times a year 
 shall subscribe these presents, which then only shall 
 be held as authentic: and with their advice whatever 
 
248 
 
 remains of surplus revenue shall be applied to the 
 necessary uses of the College," &c. Some doubts 
 having arisen relative to the constitution of the Col- 
 lege, and the extent of the powers of the visitors, an 
 action of declarator was brought before the Court of 
 Session, when it was "Jviind and declared" in two 
 separate decisions, bearing date 1771 and 1772, that 
 " the visitors of Glasgow College, to wit, the Lord 
 Rector, and the Dean of the University of Glasgow, 
 and the minister of the city of Glasgow have the potver 
 of seeing that all things in the said College be rightly 
 administered, according to the intention of the foun- 
 dation charter of the said College, called the Nova 
 ErectiOf granted by king James VI. in 1377; and ac- 
 cording to the statutes enacted by the royal visitation 
 of the College," (in 1727,) " and that the}^ the said 
 visitors, have the power by their own authority, to 
 reduce all things into order, in so far as is agreeable 
 to the said charter and statutes." In one of the 
 decreets, that of 1771, it is specially found " that the 
 Rector and Dean of Faculty, and the minister of the 
 town of Glasgow, are, by the said foundation charter, 
 appointed visitors of the said College, by M'hose ad- 
 vice and consent only, or of a majority of them, all 
 the surpluses of the College revenue, after paying the 
 masters salaries, and other standing burdens, are to 
 be disposed, and applied to pious and necessary uses 
 in the College: and, therefore, that, in all time com- 
 ing, all acts and deeds whatsoever of the said admini- 
 strators in disposing of such surpluses, shall be held 
 to be null and void, unless they bear that they were 
 done by the express consent of the said visitors, or 
 the majority of them. That, according to the said 
 foundation charter, the Principal and Masters^ as admi- 
 nistrators, are bound to lay the accounts of their admi- 
 
249 
 
 nistratlon of the revenue of the College before the 
 said visitors for their examination ; and that without 
 the approbation of the said visitors, the said accompts 
 shall not be held valid and authentic."* In all this 
 there is surely something more than the formal busi- 
 ness of " docqueting accounts:" and, even granting 
 that the power of the visitors extended no farther, 
 the trust, in this limited form, is one of very great 
 magnitude and importance. In the case of a large 
 funded corporation like that of the University of 
 Glasgow, it is surely of great moment to the country, 
 that the funds shall be duly applied to the ends point- 
 ed out in the charter. No man questions the national 
 importance of the parliamentary inquiry instituted into 
 the management of the funds of charitable institutions 
 in Great Britain ; and the weight of responsibility 
 which was attached by parliament to the duties of 
 visitors has been clearly evinced by the fact, that every 
 literary or charitable establishment which has special 
 visitors provided by their established charters is ex- 
 empted from the review of the commission : and it is 
 plain that, on this principle, the funds of the College 
 of Glasgow can never come under any other reviem 
 than that of the visitors.-}- With regard to the " ap- 
 plication of the surplus revenue," there can hardly be 
 conceived a more important trust committed to any 
 
 • Process of Declarator, 1775, App. p. 9. 
 
 f The other Universities of Scotland appear to have visitors 
 specially nominated with powers more or less extensive. In St. 
 Andrews, they are the Rector, with two Assessors chosen by 
 himself, " a lawyer and a theologue." Dunlop's Confessions, 
 Vol. II. p. 557. In King's College, Aberdeen, they are the 
 Rector with four assessors, chosen annually by the College. 
 Stat. Ace. Vol. XXI. p. 61. In Marischal College, they are 
 the Chancellor, Rector, and Dean of Faculty. Id. p. 107. 
 
250 
 
 class of men. The "surplus revenue" of the College 
 of Glasgow has amounted from time to time to very 
 large sums ; and the statutes ordain, that these shall 
 be applied, at the sight of the visitors, '• to pious and ne- 
 cessary uses within the College." We accordingly 
 find that from time to time, this fund has been applied, 
 and most correctly applied, to the augmentation of the 
 salaries of the members of the College — the establishment 
 of lectureships on various branches of science — the 
 erection of houses for the professors, and of additional 
 buildings for the accommodation of the classes -^ with 
 a variety of other purposes, equally salutary and 
 equally agreeable to the design of the statutes. And 
 is it of no importance " that the country and the 
 church shall have something to say in such appro- 
 priations?" 
 
 But we pointedly deny, that the power of the visi- 
 tors extend no farther than to matters of finance. 
 By the original charters of 1572 and 1577, as ex- 
 plained by the decreets of 1771, 1772, a general 
 superintendence of all university matters has been 
 committed to them; and their visitorial power seems 
 to be precisely the same as that of the royal visitors 
 of 1727, with this difference, that they are not em- 
 powered to make new laws, but simply to see that 
 the existing statutes are obeyed. Their right to the 
 possession of this extensive power was indeed dis- 
 puted before the Court of Session, when the declara- 
 tory act was siihjudice. But how was it met by the 
 court ? We have seen the terms of the act ; let us 
 now look at some of the reasons assigned by their 
 Lordships for passing it, and these will explain the 
 meaning and designed extent of that act. " In or- 
 der to explain the nature of the general power now 
 claimed by the Visitors, it will be proper to men- 
 
251 
 
 tion some facts. By the charter of Nova Erectio, 
 the Principal ought to give lectures for one hour at 
 least every day, except Saturday and Sunday. Itaque 
 dicto Jiostro Gymnasiarchce committimus, quo sedulatis 
 exemplum diligentia sua suhninistret. The language 
 and sciences taught by every Professor are marked 
 out by the Nova Erectio, and by the statutes of the 
 last royal visitation; so that the provinces of the Pro- 
 fessors are accurately defined. A Professor may, by 
 connivance, desert his office with impunity. The Col- 
 lege records may be carried on in a different manner 
 from that ordered by the statutes, and the majority 
 may refuse to alter it. A Professor may refuse to 
 possess the College-house which belongs to him, and 
 he may hinder another to inhabit it ; by which means 
 it will suffer greatly. The Factor may be a year too 
 late in settling the College accompts. He may not 
 give a right bill of arrears, and he may not keep a 
 ledger, contrary to the order in the statutes. Now, 
 these are a few examples of things illegal and hurtful 
 to the College; and yet, if no general power belongs 
 to the visitors of seeing that all things be rightly ad- 
 ministered ; if the visitors are to be restricted to what 
 alone relates to accompts, the very intention of insti- 
 tuting the College may be frustrated, and the public 
 revenue may be ruined. Tlie Principal's office may^ 
 by mutual connivance, be turned into a mere sinecure. 
 A Professor, with a majority on his side, may invade 
 the province of his colleague; or he may desert his 
 duty entirely. The records may be kept in such a 
 manner that the Visitors cannot discover the mal-ad- 
 ministration of the Principal and Professors. A Col- 
 lege-house may be allowed to go to ruin ; and the 
 Factor may every year pocket the College money. 
 And yet it may be said, that the visitors have no- 
 
252 
 
 thing to do with all these things; because tlieir 
 power, by the last Declarator, extends only to the 
 surplus money, and' to the examination of accompts ; 
 it is submitted therefore, whether the power of the 
 Visitors does not extend likewise to such cases as 
 are now supposed ; and this claim is founded upon 
 four things. The words of the charter — the practice 
 — the utility of such a power — and the incapacity of 
 the Visitors, supposing them possessed of it, to do 
 any hurt; while, at the same time, they may do the 
 greatest good to the College. First, in the words of 
 the charter already quoted, if omnia relates only to 
 the balancing of accompts, why is there such a formal 
 appeal to the visitors as a court of equity; Quorum 
 etiam conscientias appellamus, ut omnia rede et secundum 
 nostram inteiitionem administrata esse videant? Whj', 
 instead of omnia, was it not said, omnia prqficua vel 
 emolumenta in dido Collegio ? And why, when it was 
 so easy to find other expressions, were such only fixed 
 upon as convey an authoritative power, and a power 
 of a general nature, id, omnia in ordinem sua audoritate 
 redigant? It is certain, from the records and deeds 
 in the charter chest, that the Visitors have actually 
 exercised this general power, in many instances, ever 
 since the grant of Nova Erectio. Thus the deeds of 
 the sale of the College lands and houses, the deeds 
 of borrowing and lending money, the tacks of tythes, 
 and even the elections of the College Factors, are 
 made with the express consent of the majority of the 
 Visitors. 3dly, The utility of the general power now 
 claimed is manifest; because the Principal and Pro- 
 fessors may connive with each other, so as to neglect 
 their duty ; and because they may have a fellow-feel- 
 ing with the Factor, so as secretly to pillage the Col- 
 lege revenue. * Corporations,' says Judge Blackstone, 
 
253 
 
 Comment. B. I. * being composed of individuals sub- 
 ject to human frailties, are liable, as well as private 
 persons, to deviate from the end of their institution ; 
 and for that reason, the law has provided proper per- 
 sons to visit, inquire into, and correct all in-egularities 
 in such corporations, either sole or aggregate — If 
 this is the case with regard to other communities, 
 such as burroughs royal, &c. where the administra- 
 tion is frequently shifted through different hands, 
 much more may it be expected in the affairs of a 
 College, where the administration continues during 
 life.'"* 
 
 It was on these reasons that the statute of declara- 
 tor already quoted was founded ; and is the right and 
 privilege thus conferred on the visitors a " trivial or 
 unimportant one ?'' Such was not the opinion of the 
 university itself, in 1672, when wishing to dispose of 
 some part of their property, and aware that the ordi- 
 nary visitors would not have readily given their con- 
 sent, they found it necessary to apply to Parliament, 
 to take the right of controul, in that instance, out of 
 their hands, and to grant the desired permission.f 
 And is it of no consequence whether the church shall, 
 or shall not retain a voice in the proceedings of these 
 visitors? Let it be recollected, that of the three visi- 
 tors nominated by the charter, the Rector and the 
 Dean of Faculty are both of them chosen by the 
 members of the university, and are removable at plea- 
 sure. The minister of the city is the only visitor who 
 is strictly independent of the college. Let it also be 
 recollected, that there is only one clerical visitor nomi- 
 nated by the charter; and that one clerical visitor is 
 
 * Process of Declarator, 1775, pp. 120, 121. 
 t Acts Pari. Scot. Vol. VIII. p. 68. 
 
 M 
 
254 
 
 the minister of the city — a designation which answers 
 only to the minister of the Inner High churchy as repre- 
 senting the minister of the original parish of Glasgow, 
 and possessing all the other rights and emoluments of 
 that office. And is it to be supposed, that the crown 
 and parliament of Scotland would ever have thought 
 of appointing the minister of the High church to be 
 a visitor of the college, if they had supposed it possi- 
 ble that he could be at the same time a member of the 
 very corporation he is appointed to controul? Such 
 an union of offices was never contemplated either by 
 the church or by the state ; and the incompatibility of 
 their respective duties it requires no lengthened com- 
 ment to explain.* That the minister of the Inner 
 High church has been in the practice of executing the 
 duties of visitor is well known to those who have paid 
 any attention. to the affairs of the university. A re- 
 gular record of visitations is kept and duly subscribed 
 by the visitors; and, on several occasions, their inter- 
 position has been of essential consequence to the per- 
 manent well-being and respectability of the college. 
 I need only refer to the voluminous process regarding 
 the funds and general management of the university, 
 
 * About seventy years ago, a curious case of incompatibility 
 occurred in England, in the case of the collegiate church of Man- 
 chester. The Bishop of Chester is by law appointed visitor of 
 that establishment, and it so happened that he held the office of 
 Warden, or Principal of the College at the same time ; and in one 
 particular case which chanced to occur, the British Parliament 
 required "to interpose" on the "ground that at present there is 
 no other visitatorial power in being.'^ Burn's Eccles. Law. Art. 
 Colleges, Vol. I. p. 326. In order to prevent such an occurrence 
 in future, an act was passed " empowering the king to visit the 
 collegiate church of Manchester, during such time as the warden- 
 ship of the said church is, or shall be held in commendam with 
 the bishopric of Chester." Act of Pari. 30. Geo. II. 
 
255 
 
 carried on by Mr. Anderson, the Professor of Natural 
 Philosophy, Dr. Reid, and other professors, against a 
 majority of the faculty, in 1775, 1776 ; first before the 
 Court of Session, and afterwards before the Court of 
 Visitors, to whom it was referred by the Lords, as the 
 competent ^\idges prima instantia^ and by whom a com- 
 prehensive decreet was pronounced, on the 12th Oc- 
 tober, 1773, embracing a variety of points connected 
 with the management of the university.* The Prin- 
 cipal, and one or two more endeavoured, by reclaim- 
 ing petitions, to obtain an alteration of the decreet ; 
 but as they did not venture to appeal to the Court of 
 Session, their objecLions were repelled, and the de- 
 creet thus became final. The visitors who pronounced 
 the decreet were, Lord Cathcart, Lord Rector; Dr. 
 Corse, minister of the Tron Church, Dean of Faculty; 
 and Dr. John Hamilton, ministei- of the city. Owing 
 to circumstances, the Rector could seldom attend, and 
 the great burden of hearing the pleadings, and at- 
 tending to the whole process, devolved on the two 
 clergymen; and to them the college must ever feel 
 herself under signal obligations. Now, suppose that 
 at this time one of the visitors had been annihilated, by 
 being merged in the person of the Principal, what 
 would have been the result ? No court could have been 
 held; or, if it had been held, would it have been de- 
 cent for the Principal to be judge in his own cause, 
 and a cause too, in which he was the party arraigned? 
 Or if the Rector and the Dean happened to differ in 
 opinion, as was not at all unlikely, who was to give 
 the casting votePf 
 
 * The history of this process may be seen at great length in a 
 quarto volume published by Professor Anderson, in 1778, en- 
 titled " Process of Declarator, 1775," &e. 
 
 f As additional instances of the interference of the visitors in 
 M 2 
 
256 
 
 It will not do to plead that the minister of the city 
 of Glasgow may resign his power as a visitor. Even 
 if the minister of the city were willing to set an exam- 
 ple of disobedience to the highest authority in the 
 land, he is not at liberty to do so. An essential right 
 of the church is in question—a right conferred on her 
 by royal boon— and of that right no individual member 
 is at liberty to deprive her. The presbytery of Glas- 
 gow possess a vested right, of the highest importance, 
 m the person of one of their members, and they have 
 a title to see, and are bound to see, that the privilege 
 shall not be lost through his indifference or treachery. 
 If he neglects this part of his official duty, he exposes 
 himself to their censure: and if he persists in neglect- 
 ing it, they are entitled to depose him for doing so. 
 The Moderator of the synod of Aberdeen, is by char- 
 ter vested with the right of sitting and voting as a 
 judge, in the election of a professor of Divinity in 
 King's College, Aberdeen; and would the synod hold 
 It as competent for him to tell them that, for certain 
 
 matters of importance, and with the view of bringing " things 
 into order," we may notice, that in the year 1776, the Faculty hav- 
 ing agreed to make out some additional buildings for the use and 
 ornament of the College, the ordinary visitors " stopt the exe- 
 cution by their authority," until some previous inquiry had been 
 made as to the state of the revenue, and the general management 
 of College concerns. See 'Hhe Process of Declarator, 1775, 1776," 
 p. 266. It is also well known, that within these few years, the 
 question relative to the sale of the patronage of Govan was judi- 
 cially referred to the judgment of the visitors, whose decision, /AoM^A 
 opposed to that of a majority of the Facultrj, was final. Had the 
 Rector and Dean of Faculty chanced to take opposite views of 
 the question, what would have become of the visitorial control ? 
 It is obvious that, in this case, Principal Taylor, although " minis- 
 ter of the city of Glasgow" could not with propriety liave inter- 
 fered ; as in fact he did not. 
 
257 
 
 private reasons, he did not choose to exercise the right? 
 Would they not insist that in that case he shall vacate 
 the chair, or in some other way subject himself to the 
 censures of the church? By the law of the land, 
 every parochial minister has a right to vote, along with 
 the heritors, in the election of schoolmasters, and in 
 the regulation of the hours and wages of teaching ; 
 and if a minister take it upon him to become parochial 
 schoolmaster MmselJ\ and thereby, or for some other 
 reason, denude himself of the right conferred on him 
 by law, would the Presbytery of the bounds have no 
 right to interfere, or would they voluntarily counte- 
 nance such flagrant innovations ? If the church is not 
 to guard her own rights and privileges against invasion 
 Jrom her own members, who is to vindicate her cause, 
 and what security has she for the permanence of her 
 most valued possessions? They are placed at the 
 mercy of " every capricious element in human nature,'^ 
 and are " left to lie prostrate and afloat on the current 
 of incidents, liable to be carried whithersoever the im- 
 pulse of appetite may direct." 
 
 But we are not left to general principles, and to 
 common sense on this subject. We have an express 
 act of Assembly, prescribing the line of duty to be 
 pursued in all matters which affect the interests of 
 the church, particularly in reference to Universities. 
 As it is not an " old and musty statute,^ nor a very 
 long one, we shall quote it entire: " Edinburgh, 
 23d May, 1719, Session 9th — The General Assem- 
 bly, considering how much it is their duty to do 
 all that's in their power for promoting religion and 
 learning in this church, do hereby instruct their 
 commission carefully to advert to every thing where- 
 by they may contribute to the flourishing of the 
 sciences and good literature, and to the propagating of 
 
258 
 
 religion and loyalty in universities; and particularly, 
 that they diligently enquire what privileges and inter- 
 est the judicatures of this church, or the ministers thereof, 
 have by the constitution of the several universities and 
 colleges, and by the laws of the land, with respect to the 
 settlement of the ministers'^ and professors in them, 
 which the General Assembly hereby appoints their 
 commission by all just methods to maintain inviol- 
 ably; and improve towards the promoting of the fore- 
 said interests of true piety and learning ; and that, for 
 this end, they receive and give all due encouragement 
 to whatever applications may be made to them, for 
 this efFect."-|- Looking at this enactment in the light 
 in which every such statute must be contemplated, it 
 may be fairly inferred, a pari, that the commission is 
 bound to " maintain inviolably," the interests which 
 " judicatures" or individual "ministers" may have by 
 law, in the management of the funds of the colleges, 
 and their general administration. But we need not the 
 aid of such an inference, fair and reasonable as it is. 
 The visitors of the college of Glasgow have by law 
 the control over the surplus revenue ; and to what 
 purposes must this be applied? and to what purposes 
 has it, in fact, been applied? The records of the col- 
 lege assure us, " that a large proportion of it has been 
 applied, from time to time, to the establishment of 
 Lectureships, on a variety of most important branches, 
 in almost every department;" and these Lectureships 
 
 * So it stands in the printed act ; but it is obviously a typo- 
 graphical error ; and Mr. Gillan has very properly corrected it 
 " masters and professors," as comprehending all the members of 
 the universities, by whatever name they may be called, — Profes- 
 sors, Regents, Lecturers, &c. See " Gillan's Abridgement of 
 Acts of Assembly," p. 315. 2d ed. 1821. . 
 
 t Assembly Acts, 1719, No. XII. 
 
259 
 
 have, within these few years, been transformed into 
 regular Professorships in the university. And is there 
 not here " a right and a privilege" possessed by the 
 visitors, and consequently by the minister of Glasgow, 
 as one of them, " with respect to the settlement of 
 masters and professors in the university ;" and a "right" 
 too, conferred at once by the constitution of the col- 
 lege, " and by the laws of the land?" And is there 
 not here "a right and a privilege," which the church 
 is expressly enjoined "to improve, towards the pro- 
 moting of true piety and learning?" 
 
 But there is something peculiarly important in the 
 " right and privilege" thus conferred on the clerical 
 visitor of the university of Glasgow. " The college of 
 Glasgow was destined, not only for the interests of 
 learning, but of religion. One of its great objects is 
 expressly declared to be, the education of young men 
 for the church, and the advancement of sound morals 
 and true religion. Statutes and rules are accordingly 
 appointed for these purposes. Ecclesiastical teachers, 
 with certain privileges, and under special rules, are 
 appointed ; and the piety both of public and private 
 benefactors has been displayed, in various endowments 
 to promote the cause of religion, and assist young 
 men of talents and piety, in the prosecution of their 
 studies for the sacred ministry. In such circum- 
 stances, was it not wise and equitable, and with a di- 
 rect and important design, that one of the visitors was 
 appointed to be a clergyman; and one who, by his 
 office, must live in the neighbourhood of the univer- 
 sity ? Was not this necessar}^, to give to spiritual ob- 
 jects their full weight and security; and to give to 
 ecclesiastical persons, and rights, and regulations, a 
 fair proportion of regard among the superintendents 
 and judges of the affairs of this college? And shall 
 
260 
 
 we, who are called to promote the general interests of 
 religion, but particularly its interests within our own 
 bounds — shall we, with our own hands, destroy this 
 important security ; a power so beneficial ; vested in 
 one of our own number; one constituted, as it were, 
 our representative in that venerable university, for 
 watching over, and maintaining such momentous con- 
 cerns ? 0r can it seriously be said, that this is no con- 
 cern qfoursT'* 
 
 SECTION FOURTH. 
 
 Additional considerations. 
 
 In addition to the views which have been exhibited, 
 35 illustrative of the incompatibility of the proposed 
 union between the pastoral charge of St. Mungo's 
 parish, and the principality of the college, there are 
 a few miscellaneous considerations which require to 
 be noticed, as corroborative of the argument. 
 
 In the Jlrst place; The union of the principality 
 with the parish, goes to effect an important change on 
 the constitution of the presbytery of Glasgow. From 
 the earliest days of the college, and of the presbytery 
 of Glasgow, the principal of the college, being an or- 
 dained minister, has had a place in the latter of these 
 courts, as a constituent member. From 1577, down 
 to 1621, he had an independent right to a seat in pres- 
 bytery, as minister of Govan; but from the period of 
 the disunion of these offices, down to the present day, 
 he has retained his place in the capacity of doctor or 
 professor of Divinity. The professor of Theology, 
 properly so called, has a place on the same footing; 
 
 * Dr. M'Gill's Speech, Presbytery Report, p. 40. 
 
261 
 
 and these two are the only representatives of the uni- 
 versity who have legally and constitutionally a right 
 to sit and vote in all the ecclesiastical judicatures of 
 Scotland. In the " list of all the parishes and pres- 
 byteries of Scotland," extracted from the roll of the 
 General Assembly, and appended to the *' Abridge- 
 ment of the Acts of Assembly," drawn up and pub- 
 lished in 1721, by " John Dundas of Philipsto^^^^, 
 procurator for the church, and principal clerk of her 
 General Assemblies," we have a list of such members 
 as form constitutionally the presbytery of Glasgow. 
 After enumerating the seven parishes of the city and 
 Barony, and the ten parishes in the country districts, 
 he adds to the list *' The principal, 1 — The professor 
 of Divinity, 1," making in all just 19.* Now, although 
 some may think that the annihilation of a parish, or of 
 a minister is a very trivial thing, it cannot surely be 
 matter of wonder, that the body to which the member 
 constitutionally belongs, and has belonged from time 
 immemorial, should view it in a light somewhat dif- 
 ferent ; and should feel the pain occasioned by the 
 disruption ; and should remonstrate against every at- 
 tempt to inflict such a wound. No man will deny, 
 that had a crown presentation been issued, requiring 
 the presbytery to make an addition to their number, 
 by the admission of the professors of Church History 
 and Oriental Languages to a place and vote in their 
 judicatory, it would have been perfectly fair and legal 
 in the presbytery to call in question the power to do 
 so; and to reject the mandate summarily, as an in- 
 fringement on their chartered rights. A few years 
 ago, when Principal M'Farlane was Dean of Faculty 
 in the university of Glasgow, an attempt was made by 
 
 * Dundas' Abridgement, p. 284. 
 M 3 
 
262 
 
 the crown to place a professor of Natural History on 
 the chartered foundation of the college. Did the 
 Dean and other members of the college Faculty tame- 
 ly yield to this, and make no opposition? Far from 
 it. They rejected the presentation as ultra vires, and 
 after a long and violent litigation, obtained a decreet 
 in their favour from the Court of Session.* And 
 would they not have done precisely the same thing 
 had the attempt been made to diminish the number of 
 members, instead of making additions to it? Had a 
 presentation been issued, for instance, in favour of the 
 Professor of Astronomy, whose office is nearly a sine- 
 cure, to be, at the same time, Professor of Church 
 History, both being in the gift of the crown ? And 
 surely it is a matter of some consequence to the pres- 
 bytery, and the church at large, that a constituent 
 member of so much importance and value as the prin- 
 cipal of the university shall not be annihilated, or 
 merged in the person of another member. In a body 
 consisting of a limited number, the extinction of one 
 member becomes, in any combination of circum- 
 stances, a great evil; and multiplied cases must occur, 
 in which the presence, and advice, and vote of such a 
 member as the principal of the university, may become 
 of essential importance. There are not indeed any 
 " patrimonial rights" to be affected by the dismem- 
 berment, as there were in the case of Professor Muir- 
 head ; but there are '' rights" and " privileges," of a 
 different order, which, to a conscientious lover of his 
 church and his country, must be at least equally dear. 
 A change is superinduced on the frame and constitu- 
 
 * Professor Muirhead was, by the decreet, found entitled to 
 be a « professor in tlie university," but not placed upon the 
 " foundation of the college." See *' Papers in Process," &c. 
 
263 
 
 tion of the judicatory. One of her most conspicuous 
 seats is left perpetually vacant; and her remanent 
 members sustain a proportionate loss. And is this 
 not one reason, among others, why the church should 
 make a solemn pause before she gives her deliberate 
 sanction to such an infringement ? 
 
 In the second place; We may notice the effects of 
 the proposed union on the statutory provision which 
 has been made by the university, for the religious in- 
 struction and improvement of its members. By the 
 university statutes, confirmed and illustrated by the 
 enactments of successive commissions, appointed by 
 royal authority, the charge of the discipline, the mo- 
 rals, and the religious improvement of the students at 
 the university, is devolved, in the first and highest 
 instance, on the principal. Now, even supposing that 
 the charge thus devolved, was so general and unde- 
 fined in its character, as to leave a very great deal to 
 the discretion of the Principal, still it would be no 
 easy thing to comprehend, how the trust could in any 
 proper sense be executed by a person, whose " maxi- 
 mum of strength^' has been already exhausted by the 
 pastoral charge of a parish containing 9000 souls. 
 But the statutes of the college, while they leave much 
 to the discretion of the actual occupants of office, 
 have not left every thing to discretion. They point 
 out what shall be the duties of the Sabbathy especially 
 in regard to the public worship of God. They re- 
 quire the students of the university, with the Principal 
 and respective professors at their head, to attend divine 
 service regularly in the church attached to the college. 
 This place of worship, it is well known, was originally 
 the Blackfriars, or College Church, and thither the 
 members of the university were regularly in the habit 
 
264 
 
 of resorting, for the solemn services of Jehovah, dur- 
 ing a series of successive generations. About fifty 
 years ago, a chapel within the walls of the college, 
 was appropriated for the exclusive accommodation of 
 the professors and their families, with the students, 
 and others connected with the establishment : a chap- 
 lain was appointed by the faculty; and the regular 
 attendance of students has been enforced by law. 
 In fact, the attendance usually given by many of the 
 professors is exemplary; and it is a very fair subject 
 of inquiry, Has a dispensation from attendance been 
 at any time given by the university to the principal ? 
 If not, the regulation is equally binding on him as on 
 the other members of the college, and the enforce- 
 ment of this and similar statutes may be among the 
 *' all things" which the ordinary visitors are by statute 
 and " declaratory acts," required and empowered to 
 " reduce into order" 
 
 It would be a mere waste of time and of words, to 
 attempt a formal proof of the high advantages which 
 might be expected to flow from the regular and solemn 
 attendance of all the masters and students of the 
 university, on the public ordinances of religion. We 
 all know the temptations of a great city ; and it is 
 not to be concealed, that within the classic walls of 
 a university, and even amid the highly honourable 
 and useful pursuits of elegant literature, there are 
 many circumstances, which must induce, in the minds 
 of pious parents and guardians of youth, no slender 
 apprehensions lest the higher and more interesting 
 concerns of eternity, should, like " old and musty sta- 
 tutes" be left to sink into desuetude. " And can too 
 much importance be attached to those wholesome re- 
 gulations, which require that the day of God shall be 
 
265 
 
 reverently observed and hallowed — that regular atten- 
 dance on divine ordinances, shall be given by all the 
 members of the university — and that the numerous 
 students, at a distance from home, and removed from 
 parental instruction and inspection, shall not be left, 
 amidst the dissipation of a populous city, to turn into 
 a season of folly and of vice, that blessed day, which 
 is devoted to the highest concerns of human beings." 
 
 So jealous has the Church shown herself to be with 
 regard to the moral and religious interests of univer- 
 sities, as well as of their literary advancement, that it 
 would be endless to quote or to allude to all her 
 enactments on the subject. We may notice a very 
 fewy as a specimen; and let it not be forgotten, that 
 to " presbyteries it belongs to see the acts of assem- 
 blies put in force."* In 1638, we find the General 
 Assembly appointing a visitation of colleges by com- 
 mission; and the matters to be inquired into, are 
 those " which the act of Assembly at Edinburgh, 
 21st June, 1567, and at Montrose, 1395, September 
 9th, do import." And what may these be? — " to 
 try and consider the doctrine, life, and diligence, 
 of the masters of the colleges — the discipline and 
 order used by them. — the estate of their rents and 
 living; and where they finde abuse, to reform so far 
 as they are able; such things as they cannot take 
 order with, being remitted to next Assembly; and to 
 report to next Assembly what they effectuat."f This 
 statute, which was first passed at the era of the com- 
 plete legal establishment of the Church, in 1567, and 
 afterwards revised and renewed, within three years 
 after she received her Magna Charta, in 1592, has 
 
 * Second Book of Discipline. Of Elderships. 
 f Calderwood, p. 309. 
 
266 
 
 been uniformly held as the rule of university visitations, 
 since these periods; and it is a remarkable fact, that 
 from 1690, down to 1725, there is scarcely one Assem- 
 bly which does not appoint a commission to inspect 
 and to report on the state of the universities. But 
 farther; we find the Assembly, 1643, prescribing the 
 course of study which ought to be pursued, and enact- 
 ing rules of discipline.* We find the Assembly, 1647, 
 recommending it to all universities, " to be careful to 
 take account of all the scholars 07i the Sabbath day, of 
 the sermons, and of their lessons of the catechism."f 
 And the same Assembly, recommending to synods to 
 take account of the observation of the overtures for 
 visitation of schools, and advancement of learning.":f 
 Nor was this " unwarranted interference," as some 
 would term it, confined to those times of " turbulence 
 and usurpation." In the year 1705, " the General 
 Assembly recommend to regents and masters of col- 
 leges, that no person, especially bursars, be graduate, 
 but upon a clear evidence of sufficiency of their learn- 
 ing, and good behaviour after strict examination. 
 And sick like recommends it to masters in universities, 
 and all other instructors of youth, that they be care- 
 ful to instruct their scholars in the jjrinciples of the 
 Christian reformed religion^ according to the Holy 
 Scriptures, our Confession of Faith, or such books 
 only as are entirely agreeable thereto: as also recom- 
 mends it to professors of theologj/, that they take very 
 particular notice of the piety and Christian carriage 
 of their students, &c."^ By act, 1707, April 12th, 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 7th February, 1645. 
 f Idem, 1647, Session XXVIII. 
 \ Idem. 
 § Idem, 5th April, 1705. 
 
267 
 
 we find them recommending it to the several univer- 
 sities to transmit by their commissioners to the Gen- 
 eral Assembly, overtures for the establishment and 
 advancement of piety, learning, and goodness, in the 
 schools and universities.* 
 
 In order to remove the impression on some minds, 
 that the cognizance of such matters belongs to the 
 supreme court alone, acting by special commission, 
 we have just to read one of the latest acts on the sub- 
 ject, and one of the most comprehensive. It bears 
 date, 23d May, 1711; and among other things, enacts 
 as follows: " The General Assembly recommends to 
 the several presbyteries within whose bounds colleges 
 or universities are," " to take special notice of what 
 is taught in them, and that nothing be taught therein, 
 contrary to, or inconsistent with the Confession of 
 Faith of this Church, or to the worship, discipline, or 
 government of the same; and to observe the morals 
 and conversation both of masters and scholars; and 
 that they apply first to the faculty of universities, or 
 colleges for redress, and in case any difficulties do 
 occur to presbyteries, which they cannot overcome, 
 they are appointed to lay the same before the synod 
 of the bounds. General Assembly, or commission 
 thereof, who are to consider any representations that 
 shall be laid before them by presbyteries with re- 
 lation to these things, and to give their advice and 
 assistance therein."-|- The Assembly has ever been 
 alive to the great principle, that religion and true 
 learning must stand or fall together; and the Church 
 of Scotland has all along taken a very particular con- 
 cern in the right discharge of academical duties, and 
 
 * Assembly Acts, 1707, Session V. 
 t Idem, 1711, Session XIIL 
 
268 
 
 has constantly manifested that concern by a regular 
 series of enactments. 
 
 In the third place ; In addition to the duties of the 
 principal, as required by the statutes, and as implied 
 in the very design and nature of his office, there is one 
 very important department of labour, which, although 
 not specifically required, must be allowed to be of 
 essential importance to the interests of the university. 
 The nature of this department of service, will be best 
 understood by means of a short quotation from the 
 Life of the late Principal Leechman, " The papers 
 entrusted to me," says Dr. Wodrow, " comprehend 
 the substance of most of the lectures he delivered in 
 the university; not only from the Theological chair, 
 but lectures on Ethics, Jurisprudence, Church His- 
 tory, &c. for he taught these classes occasionally, at 
 the desire of his colleagues, after the death of their 
 proper professor, before the vacancies were supplied."* 
 When a vacancy occurs in the course of a session, or 
 when any one of the professors happens to be laid 
 aside for a time, from sickness or other causes, it must 
 be of very high importance to have an individual 
 within the walls of the university, who can readily 
 undertake the charge, and prevent the interests of the 
 university, and of the pupils of the class, from sustain- 
 ing an essential injury. It is indeed a " labour of 
 love;" but it is such a labour, as every conscientious 
 man will be wishful to undertake, and no real friend 
 to the establishment, will rashly and unadvisedly load 
 the principal of it with such a measure of extraneous 
 duty, as to put it effectually out of his power thus to 
 serve his friend in the time of need, without neglecting 
 other duties still more important. To lay an embargo 
 
 * Life and Sermons, Vol. I. p. 100. 
 
269 
 
 on some of the best feelings of our nature, and to 
 oppose an impassable barrier to the exercise of these 
 feelings in acts of kindness and sympathy, is not con- 
 sistent with the character of a spiritual court, nor 
 with the regard which is due to her members. 
 
 In the Jburth place; There is another consideration 
 to which no little importance ought to attach. In 
 every case of a particular nature that comes under 
 review, sound philosophy, and a regard to public 
 good, requires that we should generalize the principle 
 which the case involves, and consider its application 
 on an enlarged scale. Let it be remembered then, 
 that every decision which is given on a question of 
 plurality, goes either to lessen or increase the tendency 
 so inherent in human nature, to aspire at a monopoly 
 or engrossment of offices, without a due regard to the 
 adequate discharge of their respective duties. If the 
 plurality of offices in the case under review, shall re- 
 ceive the solemn sanction of the supreme ecclesiasti- 
 cal court, what is there to prevent it from becoming 
 a precedent in all time coming? and what are the 
 specialties of the case, which may prevent it from be- 
 ing applied in aid of all future claims of a similar 
 description ? I am not certain whether it is competent 
 for the same individual to hold two professorships in the 
 same college, where the duties are not incompatible, 
 and especially when one of the chairs is a mere sine- 
 cure; but I see no reason why the professor of Astro- 
 nom}'^, who gives no public lecture — or the professor 
 of Moral Philosophy, whose official duties must long 
 ago have become comparatively easy, by frequent re- 
 petition — or the professor of Ecclesiastical History, 
 and of Oriental Languages, whose avocations are of a 
 sacred nature, should not be allowed to accept of pre- 
 sentations, and so become ministers of the city or 
 
270 
 
 suburbs? Nor can I see why any one of the ministers of 
 the churches or chapels of ease in the city and vicinity, 
 may not be permitted to better his circumstances, by 
 accepting one of the easier professorships. Nor is it 
 easy to divine the reason why the road to promotion 
 in the Church, should not be laid equall)'^ open to the 
 masters, and especially the Rector of the High School 
 — or to any of the poorer members of the faculty of 
 medicine and law — or to the superintendants of pri- 
 vate academical institutions. And why, we beg to 
 know, shall such a tempting bait be held out to the 
 clergymen of towns and their suburbs, while all their 
 country brethren, however eminent their qualifications, 
 or however small their parishes, or however limited 
 their means, shall for ever be debarred by a stern and 
 peremptory law, from looking with a wishful eye to a 
 share of the spoil ? Reasoning on the ordinary prin- 
 ciples which govern human beings, we would find no 
 great difficulty in proving, by the most incontroverti- 
 ble evidences, that in many instances the " incompa- 
 tibility" of offices and of duties, will be much greater 
 in the former case, than in the latter. Here is a city 
 clergyman with his ten thousand parishioners, and liv- 
 ing, it may chance, at the distance of two or three miles 
 from the nearest point of contact with them, (for so far 
 may the " suburbs" extend,) and yet he is allowed 
 peaceably and honourably to take possession of a 
 lucrative and laborious office in the university of the 
 place. T^iere is a country brother — say at Ruther- 
 glen, or Cathcart, or Carmunnock, or Govan; who 
 might, by a little ingenuity, so arrange his parochial 
 affairs, as to undertake a university office with at 
 least equal co?isistenci/y and yet dare not dream of it, 
 because an imperious law forbids. The ministers of 
 St. Andrew's Church, Edinburgh, with their 15,000 
 
271 
 
 parishioners; or the ministers of St. Cuthbert's, with . '■ 
 
 their 50,000; or the ministers of Leith, with their 
 
 25,000; may be permitted to take possession of the > 
 
 most difficult offices in the college of Edinburgh, with- \ 
 
 out any attempt to prevent them; while the ministers > 
 
 of the smaller parishes of Libberton, or Corstorphine, \ 
 
 or Currie, or Cramond, are incapacitated for accept- ^ 
 
 ing even a sinecure place in the same university. Is 
 
 this fair? and is the Church tamely and passively to \ 
 
 give her sanction to such inconsistency? i 
 
 But the fact is, — let the principle of such pluralities 
 as those we are opposing be once sanctioned, and there 
 will be no great difficulty in overleaping the boundary 
 of 1817, formidable as the barrier erected by it may 
 appear. The same ingenuity which has succeeded in 
 proving, that one and the same individual may take 
 the charge of 9000 souls, and at the same time manage 
 the concerns of a great university corporation — that 
 one and the same individual may at once be a 'visitor 
 and the subject to be visited — that one and the same in- 
 dividual may attend with the students in the College 
 Chapel, and yet be preaching in the High Church, at 
 one and the same instant ; may easily succeed in prov- 
 ing that Cathcart, and Rutherglen, and Carmunnock, 
 andGovan,and even Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch, are com- 
 prehended within the indefinite term of the " suburbs 
 of Glasgow ;'' or that Corstorphine, and Cramond, and 
 Currie, and Collington, and even Dalkeith and Mus- 
 selburgh, all belong to the no less indeterminate de- 
 signation of the " suburbs of Edinburgh ^ " Thus, the 
 evils of pluralities may be extended to every quarter 
 around us. Thus will indifference and neglect of 
 duty, succeed to the diligence and zeal for which the 
 Ministers of Glasgow and neighbourhood have been 
 distinguished; and the sad consequences of a neglected 
 
272 
 
 and disgusted people, will become every day and 
 every where apparent. Education and learning will 
 be also neglected, in the institutions once celebrated 
 for the excellence of their teachers. Harassed with 
 a multiplicity of cares, and of duties which they are 
 unable to discharge, they weariedly perform the cus- 
 tomary routine of instruction; and have neither time 
 nor inclination for the duties of education, nor for 
 the pursuits of literature and science. Our country 
 no longer enjoys the benefit of their genius and their 
 labours; and religion and learning sink together un- 
 der the deadening influence of this engrossing sys- 
 tem." 
 
 SECTION FIFTH. 
 
 Objections answered. 
 
 I. " After all your reasoning from abstract prin- 
 ciples, and from ecclesiastical law," it has been said, 
 " has not the thing now condemned as impracticable, 
 been actually done ? Do not many such cases of plu- 
 rality exist ? are not their duties faithfully discharged? 
 and have not the duties of the particular offices in 
 question been sedulously performed by the same indi- 
 vidual ?" In reply, I would observe, in the Jirst placcy 
 that it is by no means sufficient to prove that one man 
 has done the work of two or more. The question still 
 recurs, would not the work be better done upon a dif- 
 ferent system ? We find a Melville doing at Glasgow 
 the work oi four or 'Jive professors. We find a Knox 
 and a Henderson doing the work of two or three min- 
 isters. We find a Witherspoon and a Dwight occu- 
 pying the places of three or four teachers in their re- 
 spective seminaries. Necessity and casualties of time 
 
273 
 
 and place, will tolerate what, in other circumstances, 
 would be scouted with disdain. Have we not all heard 
 of the division of labour? and has not the progress of 
 mechanical invention been wonderfully accelerated by 
 means of the judicious application of the principle? 
 I do not question that one man might contrive to 
 make the body, and the head, and the point of a pin; 
 and the article produced might be equally adapted to 
 its intended purpose ; but our Birmingham brethren 
 find it more expedient to employ three or four indivi- 
 duals on the construction of this little article of trade. 
 Where there is an absolute and irremediable want of 
 the means, necessity must take the lead, and men will 
 content themselves with a part, when they cannot 
 succeed in obtaining the whole of their wishes. But 
 where ample provision has been made for two offices, 
 to be filled by two men, where is the principle, either 
 in morals or political economy, which requires us to 
 sacrifice all the advantages of a division of labour, for 
 the sake of a little paltry monopoly ? 
 
 I have all along taken it for granted that the reve- 
 nues of the Principality of Glasgow are amply suffi- 
 cient to maintain its respectability. They amount, 
 on an average of ten years, to between £500 and £600 
 per annum.* If an augmentation is necessary, as per- 
 haps it is, by all means let it be got: but why seek that 
 augmentation out of a benefice, which has been appro- 
 priated, by law, to a different purpose? and a benefice 
 too among the richest which the church has to bestow. 
 The faculty of the college have pointed out a much more 
 
 * Principal Leishman's income never exceeded ^190 per an- 
 num. Dr. Wodrow's Life, p. 81. 
 
274 
 
 suitable source of augmentation: " Another very neces- 
 sary and proper use of the surplus of the revenue, is the 
 augmentation of the salaries of the Principal and Pro- 
 fessors, so as to enable them, in some degree, to main- 
 tain the rank in society which they held at the period 
 of their institution, and suited to the changes which 
 have taken place in the value of money, and opulence 
 of the country. In this way, in the course of the last 
 thirty years, the salaries of the Principal and Profes- 
 sors have been at different times very considerably 
 augmented ; and in case the improvement of the coun- 
 try should be as great and progressive for the next 
 twenty years, as it has been for the last, the Principal 
 and Professors, under the legal controul, will reason- 
 ably look to the same surpluses as sources cf still fur- 
 ther additions to their income."* By the " legal con- 
 troul" here noticed, is meant the control of the visitors, 
 to whom it belongs to judge of the " modification and 
 locality" of all augmentations to the members of the 
 university, and who may exercise this power oftener 
 than once in twenty years. The effect of the pro- 
 posed coalition of offices would just then be, to take 
 so much from the patrimony of the church, and to add 
 it to the revenue of Jie university. 
 
 But, in the second place, we question the truth of the 
 averment, that in any one instance, the duties of two 
 offices have been done by one man, even in any mea- 
 sure of tolerable exactness. What would become of 
 the fame of some of our most renowned heroes of the 
 church, were they made to stand on their status as 
 humble and laborious parish ministers? Men of rare 
 and splendid endowments there have been amongst us, 
 
 * Information for the Faculty of Glasgow College, p. 83. 1808. 
 
275 
 
 and these men may have held pluralities of office ; but 
 have the private and less conspicuous walks of pasto- 
 ral ministration been filled by them with the same pa- 
 tient and painstaking diligence, as by their less gifted 
 brethren ? In regard to the offices in question, no at- 
 tempt has ever been made to discharge the duties of 
 both by the same individual. In one instance only, 
 did the union exist ; and in that instance, while the 
 duties of the one office may have been discharged 
 with honourable fidelity, those of the Principality and 
 of the visitorship, according to the vieto 'which has been 
 taken of them, were certainly not performed. " Z)^ 
 moriuis nil nisi bonumJ" With this adage I cheerfully 
 concur ; and not one v/ord of reflection would I cast 
 on those great men who have done, or attempted to 
 do, the duties of such united offices. Let us take it 
 for granted, that it is all true as has been said, that 
 they all executed to a wish the various avocations of 
 pastoral duty, while they contributed to enlarge and 
 to adorn the literature of their age. Let there be no 
 question also, as there is none, regarding the high tal- 
 ents and qualifications of the gentleman more imme- 
 diately concerned in the case before us. The Church 
 of Scotland has had, and we trust still has, her Admi' 
 rahle Crichtons — her sons of rare and singular endow- 
 ments, and long may it be so: But, in legislat- 
 ing for the Church, or, as in the present instance, in 
 applying the laws, we must form our calculations, 
 not according to what may be in particular instances, 
 but according to the ordinary average of human things: 
 and that average we find it not difficult to determine. 
 Of the cases adduced as resembling the present, 
 there is not one that exhibits an exact parallel. In 
 Edinburgh, there is no great university corporation, 
 of whose interests the Principal is the appointed 
 
276 
 
 guardian,* the salary allotted to the office is trifling ;-|- 
 and the charges of the city being mostly collegiate, 
 and with a small population, are easy, when compared 
 with those of Glasgow. [j: And yet we would decid- 
 edly contend, that the interests both of literature and 
 of the church, would be far more extensively and 
 solidly promoted, were the office restored to its origi- 
 nal state, and were the men who hold it to discharge 
 its duties unincumbered with a pastoral charge. When 
 Robert Rollock was appointed " first professor and 
 Principal" of that university, it was not intended that 
 he should be a pastor of a particular congregation at 
 the same time. In consequence of a petition from the 
 town, the presbytery consented to his preaching the 
 " morning lecture" in one of the churches ;§ but it 
 
 , ^ ■ ^i !■■ ■ ... ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I.I ■ - - »- I.. ■ I ■ ■■ — M, - — ,- , , 
 
 • According to the statutes 1627, the Principal was required 
 to take a general inspection of the college ; to see that the mas- 
 ters did their duty ; that order and discipline were observed ; to 
 visit and examine the classes when he saw cause ; to say prayers 
 every morning and evening ; to give a sacra lectio to the whole 
 students once a-week ; to superintend the matriculation, and to 
 promote the general interests of the college, by his influence and 
 authority. There is not a word said about his teaching Divinity, 
 or any thing else ; and it is obvious that the most laborious part 
 of his office was at an end, when the scholars ceased to live loge- 
 gether in the college, which took place long before 1700. See 
 Records of ToAVn Council, 1628, and Cravvfurd's History of the 
 University, p. 112. 
 
 f Rollock's salary, as Principal, Professor of Divinity, and mi- 
 nister in the East or High Kirk, was 500 merks, (about £25 
 Sterling). Records of Council, 1587. The Principality is now 
 worth about ^150 Sterling. 
 
 I The population of the High Church of Edinburgh, with two 
 ministers, is 256.3 ; that of the High Church of Glasgow, with 
 one, is 8823. Government Census of 1821. 
 
 § Records of Presbytery of Edinburgh, September 5th, 1587 ; 
 and, says the Town, " he preached to us in our great need," Re- 
 cords of Town Council, 1591. 
 
277 
 
 was not till more than ten years after that he " was 
 adrnittit to be ane of the aught ordinar ministers of 
 the burgh."* The reason is worthy of being noticed. 
 Rollock had, contrary to the opinions of his best 
 friends, acquiesced in a resolution of the royal visitors 
 of the colleges of St. Andrew's, that doctors or pro- 
 fessors of Theology should not be allowed to sit in 
 church courts, as having no fixed pastoral charge. In 
 this way, " he virtually stripped himself of the right 
 to sit in ecclesiastical judicatories ; and in order to 
 escape from the operation of his own law, he found it 
 necessary to take a step which violated its ostensible 
 principles, by undertaking the additional duty of a fix- 
 ed pastor of a particular congregation,"f His suc- 
 cessor, Mr. Charteris, had no pastoral charge, but mere- 
 ly preached the morning service in the East Kirk. J 
 In 1620, Mr. Sands, one of the regents, was elevated 
 to the Principality; but as he was not a divine, it was 
 necessary that some other person should be appointed 
 to the chair of Professor of Divinity. The Rev. An- 
 drew Ramsay was elected. The duties of Principal 
 and Professor of Theology were thus disjoined for 
 the first time, and this arrangement has been adopted 
 ever since.^ In consequence of this change of sys- 
 tem, the duties of the Principality have been greatly 
 reduced in point of extent, and yet we find, that the 
 magistracy of the city were not very readily disposed 
 to conjoin the office with that of a regular parochial 
 
 * Records of Town Council of Edinburgh, Jan. 25th, 1597!. 
 
 t Records of Town Council, 28th Sept. 1625. 
 
 \ History of the University of Edinburgh, vol. 1. p. 119. 
 
 § Idem, p. 141. In 1690, an attempt was made to give Prin- 
 cipal Rule a share in the duties of the Theological chair, but it did 
 not take effect. Hist. Univer, Edin. p. 328. 
 
 N 
 
278 
 
 minister. In 1625, King Charles was pleased to issue 
 an order of council, by which the magistracy were 
 empowered to make such arrangements as " that the 
 town sail have eicht ministers in the whole, and of that 
 number," adds hisMtijesty," " the prmcipal of the col- 
 lege sallahvaies be one." What does the Town Council 
 say to this? " The town," say they, " sail have eicht 
 ministers in the whole, over and besyde the principal of 
 the college^ who sail not be reckoned in that num- 
 ber, and exempt in all time cuming from the charge 
 of an actual minister within the burgh."* 
 
 From this period, down to 3703, the Principals, al- 
 though generally admitted ministers of the East Kirk, 
 do not seem to have had any parochial charge. Nor 
 does it appear that they had any additional salary on this 
 account. In 1704, Principal Carstairs having under- 
 taken the duties of a ministerial charge along with his 
 office in the college, was allowed by the council six 
 hundred merhs of additional salary.f Previous to this 
 time, the Principal merely preached the morning ser- 
 vice at the High Church; leaving all the details of 
 pastoral duty to his colleague in that charge. From 
 the year 1704, to the present day, the Principality has 
 been held by one of the parochial ministers of the 
 
 city. 
 
 The professorship of divinity in Edinburgh, small as 
 its emoluments have always been, was not designed to 
 be held along with a parochial charge. Mr. George 
 Meldrum, minister of the Tron Church, appears to 
 
 * M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. IT. p. 1 18. 
 
 f Council Register, Vol. XXXVII. p. 129. Tlie salary of 
 Principal was now fixed at 1600 merks, (£80 sterling,) so that 
 Carstairs would derive from Loth offices an income of about 
 £110 sterling. 
 
279 
 
 have been the first who united the two; and he •' con- 
 sented to make trial of it only for one year, upon the 
 express condition, that if he felt the additional duty 
 incompatible with the faithful discharge of his functions 
 as a parish minister, he should be at liberty to give in 
 his resignation. The council, however, rather than 
 dispense with his services, offered him an assistant 
 who should perform the more laborious part of his 
 parochial duty, such as catechising, and ministerially 
 visiting his flock, with which he at last complied."* 
 Finding even this modified plan inconvenient, the 
 patrons of the college, on presenting Mr. William 
 Hamilton to the chair, as successor to Professor Mel- 
 drum, " resolved, that he should have no ministerial 
 charge, that his attention might not be distracted from 
 what was now to be his sole business."-)- In 1718, a 
 proposal was made, to allow the professor of divinity 
 to undertake a pastoral charge, but it was set aside 
 by the council, on the ground, that " having such 
 weighty employment on his hands in his present elec- 
 tion, he cannot be thought uilling or capable to dis- 
 charge even half a ministerial charge.":}: In 1754, 
 when Dr. Robert Hamilton was appointed to the chair, 
 the patrons adhered to their regulation, that upon be- 
 ing elected professor of divinity, he should demit his 
 office as one of the ministers of the city, which he 
 accordingly did. J The contemptible salary affixed to 
 the office, has rendered its union with a charge of late 
 years absolutely necessary; and yet no enlightened 
 friend to the literature of his country and his church, 
 
 * Hist, of the University, Vol. II. p. 8, 9. 
 . f Idem, p. 98. 
 
 I Council Register, Vol. XI. p. 166. 
 § Idem, Feb. 6th, 1754. 
 
 n2 
 
280 
 
 will hesitate to acknowledge, that the disunion of such 
 offices, when it can be had, is infinitely preferable. 
 
 With regard to the other two theological chairs, it 
 is worthy of remark, that the professorship of Oriental 
 Languages, was not held by any one of the ministers 
 of the city till 1792, when the present Principal of the 
 university was appointed conjunct professor along with 
 Mr. Robertson.* The chair of Ecclesiastical History 
 has been held by the minister of a parochial charge 
 since 1737, when Dr. Patrick Gumming, one of the 
 ministers of the city, was appointed. The funds ap- 
 propriated for these professorships are so small, 
 as to render such unions necessary ; but such ne- 
 cessity cannot but be lamented by every lover of 
 literature and theological science. And surely where, 
 as in Glasgow, the endowments of all these offices are 
 ample, the church is wanting to her own interests if 
 she does not avail herself of these advantages. 
 
 With regard to Aberdeen, in King's college the 
 Principality is held alone, and, with a single exception, 
 has always been so.f The Principal of Marischal 
 college, while he holds the office of professor of Divi- 
 nity, the emoluments of which are altogether inade- 
 quate, has no jyastoral charge. In consequence of a 
 particular arrangement, made by the Town Council 
 many years ago, he holds the office of minister or 
 lecturer in the college, or Grey Friar's Church ; and 
 the whole amount of his duties in this relation is the 
 delivery of a lecture or sermon every Lord's day.:|: In 
 St. Mary's College, St. Andrew's, the Principal lectures 
 regularly on Theology, while he holds a parochial 
 
 * Council Register, p. 3C6. 
 
 f Statistical Account, vol. xxi. p. 100. 
 
 \ Account of Marischal College in Stat. Ace. vol. xxi. p. 129. 
 
281 
 
 charge; and this is the very union which was expressly 
 condemned by the assembly, in the case of Mr. Robert 
 Hamilton, so long ago as 1576. It ought to be re- 
 membered, however, that the pastoral charge there is 
 collegiate ; and that the population of the whole parish 
 is not much more than one-half* of the High Church 
 of Glasgow, over v\-hich one minister presides. The 
 Principal of St. Leonard's college is officially minister 
 of a parish containing 513 souls.f And why was he 
 so constituted? The reason is this. St. Leonard's 
 college being entirely a philosophy college, its head 
 could not exercise the duties of a professor of Theo- 
 logy, and therefore could not have a seat in the pres- 
 bytery. In order, therefore, that it m.ight be secured 
 that in all time coming, the Principal of St. Leonard's 
 should be a clergyman, and entitled to be a member 
 of church courts, a sort of nominal charge was given 
 him. It is also worthy of remark, that the emoluments 
 of the united offices are barely sufficient to sustain 
 the respectability of the station. 
 
 There is one remark which applies to all the univer- 
 sities of Scotland, and which the slightest review of 
 their history cannot fail to suggest. It does not ap- 
 pear that in any of the universities, our forefathers ever 
 attempted to unite a parochial charge with an academi- 
 cal chair, except in the case of Divinity professorships 
 And even with regard to these, not only was no chair 
 held by any clergyman who had a church living at 
 a distance ; but that the patrons were extremely jea- 
 lous of their being held even by parochial ministers 
 on the spot, and, when this did occur, the minister was 
 
 * 4,899, Government Enumeration, 1821. 
 t Idem, 1821. 
 
282 
 
 generally relieved from the ordinary routine of paro- 
 chial duty. The union of church livings w^ith the 
 professorships of general science, such as Logic, Mo- 
 ral Philosophy, or Mathematics, or the Languages, 
 was a thing never contemplated. I believe the nomi- 
 nation of the late Dr. Blair to the Professorship of 
 Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, was the first step in the 
 progress towards such an union ; and however ably 
 many of our clerical professors have distharged their 
 duties, we may be permitted to remark, that the pro- 
 fessor could have done his duty, not tvorse without the 
 church ; and that the clergyman would have done his 
 duty Jar better without the professorship. Such uni- 
 ons, for which the plea of necessity can never be 
 urged, although they may be overlooked by the 
 church, we hold as at war with her spirit, and as 
 subversive of the essential principles of her constitu- 
 tion. The reason why they are tolerated seems to be, 
 that a very different standard, both of academical and 
 clerical duty, is now adopted from what was recognized 
 in the days of our fathers ; and we may safely aver, 
 that until the standard shall be raised above its pre- 
 sent level, the interests of religion and of literature 
 must continue to decline. 
 
 Among the Dissenters, the want of funds renders 
 an union of Professorships of Divinity with pastoral 
 charges necessary; and yet it is well worthy of notice, 
 as highly creditable to the body concerned, and as a 
 testimony in favour of our argument, that for many 
 years the General Associate Synod contrived to sup- 
 port a Professor of Divinity exclusively devoted to 
 the duties of that office.* At this present moment, 
 
 * Mr. PaxtOTi, the learned author of a very vahiable work 
 entitled " Illustrations of Scripture," was, for many years pre- 
 
283 
 
 there is under the deliberation of the Synod of the 
 United Secession Church, a plan of theological study 
 embracing five great departments, each to be occupied 
 by a distinct professor i and yet the departments of 
 Ecclesiastical History, and Oriental Languages and 
 Literature, do not find a place in their arrangements. 
 The scheme is by far too extensive aed complex to 
 be easily reduced to practice; but the proposal of 
 such a scheme gives us some idea of the enlightened 
 sentiments at present prevalent among our dissenting 
 brethren, respecting the necessity of a most complete 
 system of theological tuition. " When we trace," ob- 
 serves their committee, " either in historical docu- 
 ments or in the works of foreign professors of divinity, 
 the variety of branches which belonged to the course 
 of theological education in the Genevan, French, Ger- 
 man and Dutcli Universities, particularly the high 
 place assigned to the Holy Scriptures as subjects of 
 critical and textual elucidation; when we connect 
 with til is survey an enlarged and liberal view of the 
 plans of tuition presently f;:>llowed in many respecta- 
 ble seminaries, both at home and abroad, in England 
 and America; and when, in addition to these con- 
 siderations, we reflect on the necessity which all who 
 are inducted into the sacred office have felt of prose- 
 cuting the study of divine things in channels scarcely 
 indicated by the previous course of preparation ; we 
 are irresistibly led to the conclusion, that great and 
 important improvements may be made on the system 
 of theological education."* That the Secession body 
 
 vious to tlie union of the dissenting bodies, Professor of Divinity 
 to the General Associate Synod. 
 
 * Papers ordered to be printed by the United Associate Synod, 
 September, 1823. 
 
284 
 
 would hail with enthusiastic exultation any practica- 
 ble expedient by which the talents and labours of 
 several learned men might be exclusively devoted to 
 the prosecution of such an extended plan of theolo- 
 gical instruction as that sketched out by them, we 
 may consider as self-evident. The prospect of such 
 a thing being ever realized among them is very re- 
 mote ; and in the mean time the work must be neces- 
 sarily confided to certain ministers, whose pastoral 
 charges ar'e regularly supplied by the Synod during 
 the continuance of their annual labours in the Divinity 
 Hall. The advantages of such an extended S37stem 
 of theological tuition are fairly within the reach of the 
 Establishment; and is not the Establishment wanting 
 to its true interest when these advantaa;es are over- 
 looked? And when our Dissenting brethren are 
 treading close upon us in the career of literary and 
 theological acquirement, is this the time for the Esta- 
 blished Church of Scotland to sacrifice her pre-emi- 
 nent advantages for the culture of the literature of 
 theology? 
 
 II. The conduct of the Presbytery and Synod, in 
 declining to sustain the presentation of Principal 
 M'Farlane in hoc statu, has been stigmatised as " dis- 
 respectful to the Sovereign." And is there nothing 
 disrespectful in the proposal made by the minority, as 
 a kind of set-off^ to the resolution adopted by the re- 
 spective Courts ? " Tliey at the same time express 
 their decided disapprobation of such union of offices 
 in the person of any individual, and that it shall not 
 be considered as a precedent to authorise any such 
 practice in future."* Here is something, indeed, 
 very like a marked disrespect to the Sovereign; 
 
 * Presbytery Record, July 2, 1823. 
 
285 
 
 and it is worth while to notice the relative situations 
 of the parties in the contest. The majority held that 
 they had constitutionally a right to judge of such 
 unions as that proposed, and they gave judgment 
 accordingly. Their judgment may have been right, 
 or it may have been wrong. This is not to the pur- 
 pose — their having given it bo7ia fide, could not be 
 wrong. But how stands the minority? They held 
 that the Presbytery had no right to touch the question 
 at all — that it involved a Jm5 tertii, and that it remained 
 for them just to implement the will of the patron ; 
 and yet, in the face of all this, they gave a judgment, 
 and a most sweeping one too. Moreover; the majority, 
 while they gave judgment, assign certain reason.^ for 
 it, and of the competency of these reasons the church 
 courts must judge : — the minority give judgment, 
 bvt assign 710 reasons for it whatever; and surely this 
 is not very respectful. Still further; the majority 
 limit their decision rigidly to the case in hand, as 
 with that only they had to do ; — the minority extend 
 their decision " to all such union of offices," and to 
 " all such practice in fiuture." Finally ; if there is 
 any thing disrespectful in the deed of the majority, 
 there is certainly no appearance of disrespect in the 
 words employed; — but can we say as much for the 
 resolution which was proposed by the minority ? They 
 yield to the royal mandate ; but they growl at it — and 
 " express their decided disapprobation/' and, pretty 
 significantly, warn against " any such practice in fu- 
 ture." They are willing to pass this Jaut pas; but 
 let those who have committed it take care again. In 
 short, the Presbytery and Synod have taken the plain 
 and open high road of constitutional procedure; while 
 their accusers have gone out of their way to aim a hit 
 
 N 3 
 
286 
 
 at what they profess at same time to hold as consti- 
 tutional and legal. 
 
 It is easy to revile where argument fails; and a par- 
 allel case just presents itself, which it may be profit- 
 able to examine. In 1808, a certain " radical" uni- 
 versity thought fit, brevi manu, to set aside a royal 
 presentation to a certain chair, on the " frivolous" 
 pretext that it had not passed the privy seal of Scot- 
 land ; and that, in fact, the crown had no power to 
 issue such a writ. Among many other arguments 
 em-}3loyed by the presentee and his supporters, (for he 
 also had a minority in the Senatus,) this was one, 
 " disrespect to the crown f' and it is reiterated in very 
 strong terms, over and over again, " resistance to the 
 mandate of the sovereign" — " the college has contu- 
 maciously refused to receive and admit the king's pre- 
 sentee" — " the Lord Rector, Dean, Principal, and Pro- 
 fessors of our said university, in contempt of our royal 
 mandate, most wrongously and unjustly refuse, or at 
 least delay to admit" — " hostility to one of the un- 
 doubted prerogatives of the crown" — " the undignified 
 spectacle of resistance on frivolous, if not capricious 
 grounds, to the beneficent and well-directed efforts 
 of the crown, for the improvement and extension of 
 the sciences" — " a vaunted privilege of controul over 
 the crown and its advisers" — " a privilege of controul, 
 to which majesty itself, in one of the most beneficent of 
 its functions, was bound to stoop" — " usurpation illegal 
 and intolerable" — " capricious and interested opposi- 
 tion" — '' they have indecorously rejected a legal pre- 
 sentation from the crown, to a most unexceptionable 
 presentee," &c.* And who may have been the mem- 
 
 * Information for Lockhart Muirhead, A. M. in an action 
 against the Faculty of Glasgow college; and for the minority of 
 
287 
 
 bers of this radical court, so rebelliously disposed, and, 
 of course, so justly characterised? They are as fol- 
 low:— Henry Glassford, of Dugaldston, Esq. M. P. 
 late Lord Rector ; the Right Honourable Archibald 
 Colquhoun of Killermont and Clathic, M. P. Lord 
 Advocate for Scotland, present Lord Rector; Dr. 
 Duncan M'Farlane, Minister of Dri/men, Dean of Fa- 
 culty; Dr. William Taylor, Principal; Dr. William 
 Meikleham, Professor of Natural Philosophy; Dr. 
 James Jeffrey, Professor of Anatomy, &c. &c. These 
 are the men who have been guilty of this grievojis 
 outrage on the respect due to the sovereign. It is 
 but fair to listen to their calm and dignified reply; 
 and it may be received mutatis mutandis, as a triumph- 
 ant vindication of the presbytery and synod in having 
 ventured to agitate the question before us. " On the 
 merits of the question," says Dr. M'Farlane, and the 
 other members of the Faculty of Glasgow college, 
 " it is the right of every individual in this country 
 freely to discuss before this court, any exertion of royal 
 prerogative by which his patrimonial interest, or other 
 le(>-al rights are affected; and in no point can our con- 
 stitution be viewed to greater advantage than when 
 the parties in a lawsuit are, the crown on the one hand, 
 and a corporation or individual on the other, and 
 where such is the independence of our courts of jus- 
 tice, and the impartiality of their decisions, that the 
 rights of parties are discussed with the same freedom 
 as if the litigation took place between two private in- 
 dividuals. Nor is it to be considered as any mark of 
 
 said college," &c. 1808. These papers have appended to them 
 the name of gentlemen whose "respect for the sovereign" is so 
 well known as to require no evidence to prove it; the late Lord 
 Rector of the university of Glasgow, Francis Jeffrey, Esq. 
 
288 
 
 disrespect to the sovereign to discuss his prerogative 
 in a court of justice. He is bound by the law, as well 
 as the meanest of his subjects. His prerogative is 
 equally subject to ordinary investigation as the claims 
 of any individual in the community; and if any exer- 
 tion of it infringes the rights of others, it can only have 
 proceeded from misapprehension on the part of his 
 advisers."* 
 
 As the charge of " disrespect" and disaffection to 
 the interests of the crown was repeated again and 
 again by the opposite party, the Faculty of the col- 
 lege found it necessary thus to express themselves in 
 another part of the process: " They have endeavoured 
 both in this and in their former information, to confine 
 their argument entirely to the point of right and of 
 law which occurs ; and to abstain from throwing out 
 any reflections on the conduct of the defender, or de- 
 claiming on topics which might tend to irritate, or to 
 hurt the feelings of their opponent, but could have no 
 effect on the merits of the question, with regard to the 
 legal rights of parties. They might have expected, 
 that the same line would have been followed by the 
 defender, and that he would have even descended to 
 argue an important point, without thinking it necessary 
 to impute to the pu7~suers tmicnrthy moti'ves for agitat- 
 ing it, or to blame them for havino- taken measures in 
 order to set at rest a question, on which the constitu- 
 tion and the future welfare of the church of Scotland 
 depend. They shall not however answer what has 
 been said on these topics, both because they are un- 
 willing to say any thing which might possibly tend to 
 keep up irritation between them and the defender, to 
 whom, in the performance of his duty as ' Principal' 
 
 * Information for the Faculty of Glasgow college against 
 Lockhart Muirliead, A. M. 1808, p. 44-. Tliis very able paper 
 was drawn up by the late Lord Reston. 
 
289 
 
 of the university of Glasgow, they wish all manner of 
 success, and will readily afford every facility in their 
 power; and because they feel confident, that ' the 
 Assembly,' so far from blaming them for bringing this 
 important question under discussion, will be of opinion 
 that they were imperiously called upon to submit to 
 the consideration of ' the Assembly, a matter' which 
 viewed as a precedent for future appointments of a 
 similar kind, cannot fail to be attended with conse- 
 quences the rriost important to ' the church' and the 
 university of whose rights they are the legal guar- 
 dians."* 
 
 Will it be said that the question, in the present in- 
 stance, does not respect patrimonial interests, and 
 " legal rights ?" We maintain most strenuously that 
 it concerns both. Has the church no right to see that 
 the provision made for her by law shall be duly appro- 
 priated to her ministers ? Has the church no right to 
 see that the visitorial power given to her by charter, 
 shall not be hastily and without cause withdrawn? 
 Has the church no right to see that a change shall 
 not be made on the constitution of any of her courts, 
 without her consent? Has the church no right to see 
 whether ministers shall do their duties, and shall not be 
 placed in such circumstances as virtually to incapaci- 
 tate them for their efficient discharge? And are not 
 the questions which are necessarily involved in these 
 claimed rights, questions about " patrimonial interests" 
 and " legal right." If these " interests" and " rights" 
 are not to be held by all ' her sons as infinitely more 
 valuable than any private patrimonial claim, whether 
 of a corporation or an individual, on v/hat ground do 
 
 * Additional information for the college, p. 35. This paper 
 has appended to it the respectable name of the present Lord Pit- 
 milly. 
 
290 
 
 we expect that the church of Scotland shall retain her 
 place and her dignity as an independent establish- 
 ment? 
 
 And ixiho is the constitutional guardian of these 
 rights and privileges of the church? Most undoubted- 
 ly it is the sovereign — not indeed as the " head of the 
 church," but as the " defender of the faith;" as the 
 pledged and sworn patron of her institutions; and the 
 high " conservator" of her privileges. It is in this 
 character that the king of the united kingdom acts, 
 vrhen immediately on his ascension to the throne, he 
 takes a special oath that he " will inviolably maintain 
 and defend the true Protestant religion, with the wor- 
 ship, government, discipline, rights and privileges of 
 the church of Scotland, as established by the laws 
 made there in prosecution of the claim of right."* 
 And is it not in the sa-.ne character that his Majesty re- 
 gularly presides by his Commissioner in our General As- 
 semblies? And is it possible that the sovereign of these 
 free kingdoms can take it amiss that the members of the 
 church of Scotland are true to her cause ? that they 
 value their privileges so highly as to think them worth 
 the contending for? that their ambition shall ever be, 
 to render her instructions as profitable as possible to 
 the whole people under their charge? The interests 
 of the sovereign and of the church are one, and tJwy 
 are not the staunch friends of either, who attempt their 
 disunion. It is of some consequence to advert to the 
 manner in which the General Assembly, which, as the 
 supreme court, may be expected to exhibit a perfect 
 model to all inferior judicatories, has acted when the 
 rights of the sovereign and those of the church chanced 
 to come into collision. I shall not go back to the 
 
 * Coronation oath for Scotland, as appointed by the Act of 
 Security. 
 
291 
 
 more barbarous days of our forefathers, when the 
 rights of the crown and the laws of politeness were 
 equally ill understood. I shall look back only a few 
 years, and take up two or three cases, which a mere 
 reader of our annals cannot fail to discover. In 1773, 
 we find an "Appeal of his Majesty's officers of state, 
 for his Majesty's interests," unanimously dismissed, 
 and Mr. John PI ay fair ordered to be settled in the 
 parish of Liff and Benvie, on the presentation of Lord 
 Gray, and in the face of a claim of patronage on the 
 part of the crown.* In 1782, the case of two com- 
 peting presentees for the parish of Crossmichael came 
 before the Assembly, when that venerable court thought 
 fit to pronounce this seemingly unceremonious sen- 
 tence, " remit the cause to the presbytery of Kirk- 
 cudbright, and appoint them, in case the competition 
 in the civil court shall not be determined by the 12th 
 day of August next, to proceed to the settlement of 
 Mr. Gordon's presentee."f Here the claims of the 
 crown are summarily dismissed ; and a precise date 
 is assigned to the sovereign, beyond which the claims 
 of his presentee shall not be respected. In 1798, the 
 iVssembly order the presbytery of Brechin, " to refuse 
 to sustain the crown presentation to Mr. Gary, in re- 
 spect that he is not qualified, according to the rules of 
 the church.":{: The '* law" by which Mr. Gary was found 
 not qualified was passed so late as 1779; and although 
 it limited, to a certain degree, the rights of the crown 
 as a patron, neither the crown, nor any other patron 
 were so much as consulted about it, Here then we 
 find the assembly taking their stand on an internal 
 
 * Acts of Assembly, 1773, Sess. 8tb. 
 f Acts of Assembly, 1782, Sess. Sth. 
 I Assembly, 1798, May 28th. 
 
292 
 
 regulation of their own, and unhesitatingly telling their 
 sovereign, that although he has been pleased to pre- 
 sent an " ordained minister," he turns out, after all, 
 to be " an unqualified presentee." It is unnecessary 
 to multiply examples. If the presbytery and synod 
 have been " disrespectful to their sovereign," the pat- 
 tern has been set them by their alma matery and her 
 they are bound to imitate. 
 
 III. It has been asked, Why did not the presbytery 
 of Glasgow interfere to prevent the union proposed, 
 when in 1803, the late Dr. Taylor of the High Church 
 became Principal of the college.'^ To this I would 
 reply in a very few observations. 
 - In the Jirst place ; Whatever may be our opinion as 
 to the conduct of the presbytery in this or in any other 
 instance, it will not, and cannot affect the real merits 
 of the question. If the inferior court overlooked in 
 this case the substantial interests of the church, that 
 surely is no reason why the synod and assembly should 
 overlook them too. 
 
 In the second place; A presbytery is composed of 
 many members, and these are constantly changing; 
 and it would be unreasonable to suppose that no change 
 of sentiment or procedure should take place during 
 the lapse of twenty years. Did the presbytery of St. 
 Andrews pursue exactly the same course in the case 
 of professor Ferrie, in 1813, that they had adopted 
 thirteen years before, in the case of Dr. Arnot ? 
 
 In the third place ; Has the progress of public 
 opinion no influence on the members of ecclesiastical 
 courts? And has there been no change in the pub- 
 lic opinion regarding this very question of pluralities, 
 within the last twenty years? The subject, it is well 
 known, has been discussed repeatedly in all the courts 
 of the Church ; and decision after decision has been 
 given upon it. The Assembly of 1800, sanctioned a 
 
293 
 
 plurality, implying non-residence; the Assemblies, 1814, 
 1815, and 1817, either by declaratory acts, or by some- 
 thing still more decisive, put a negative on all such 
 unions, however special their circumstances may be, 
 as evils of great magnitude to the Church. And was 
 it ever heard of that the Church was charged with 
 vacillation, or with an improper spirit, because her 
 representatives have acted in ways so very opposite 
 on these different occasions ? And shall a presbytery 
 be blamed, because her members were not inattentive 
 to this progress in public opinion, but actually shared 
 in it? 
 
 But, in the fourth place ; The presbytery of Glas- 
 gow vcere never before called to judge on the question 
 relative to the union of the principality with the High 
 Church. Dr. Taylor was a member of the presbytery 
 previous to his elevation to the principality ; and al- 
 though it would have been perfectly competent for 
 the presbytery to have interposed their interdict in the 
 shape of a libel, still every one who knows any thing 
 of church law and proceedings, knows that this is a 
 very delicate and formidable instrument to deal with; 
 and why blame the presbytery of 1803, for literally 
 doing that which the minority proposed that they 
 should do in 1823 ; namely, tolerate the thing this 
 once, but with an understanding " that it shall not be 
 considered as a precedent to authorise any such prac- 
 tice in future." The union in Dr. Taylor's case was 
 passed over, that an experiment might be made of its 
 tendencies and effects ; and now, when for the first 
 time the courts are called to judge of the tiling, and 
 to give or withhold their sanction to it, shall we attach 
 blame to the presbytery, because, after the experience 
 of so many years, they have now found out that all 
 such " practices" are bad; and that no more " prece- 
 dents" must be allowed? A decision at all events 
 
294. 
 
 they must give, one way or other; and the union they 
 must either solemnly sanction, or deliberately set aside* 
 In the former instance, the thing was allowed to pass 
 sub silentio, or per mcuriam. — Now, the presbytery are 
 called upon either to give the solemn seal of their 
 sanction to the thing, or to testify their disapprobation 
 of it. 
 
 In the last place; The same charge of inconsistency 
 may be brought against the advocates for the union, 
 as well as the opponents of the measure. Thei/ too 
 did not say one word against the union of the princi- 
 pality and the charge in the case of Dr. Taylor; but 
 when his successor in both, presents himself to their 
 notice, they, after due deliberation, discover that such 
 union of offices in the person of any individual, " de- 
 serves decided disapprobation," and they discharge 
 all such practices in future. Both sides have at length 
 made a discovery; but they differ in the conclusions 
 they draw from it. The one class have found, after 
 the experiment has been fairly tried, that the union 
 of offices is an evil, and therefore they decline to 
 sanction it; the other have found the very same 
 thing, but have resolved still to sanction it, for vvhat 
 reason is not assigned. In the one case, there is a 
 manifest change of sentiment since 1803, while the 
 practice continues the same — in the other, there is 
 a change equally palpable, but this change of senti- 
 ment accompanied by a corresponding change of 
 practice. And shall the consistency of the former be 
 loudly and clamorously applauded, while the caprice 
 and changeableness of the latter, shall be held up to 
 public execration? Shall the men who improve in 
 sentiment and practice too, be censured? while the 
 men whose sentiments are improved, while their prac- 
 tice remains the same, shall be hailed with the plaudits 
 of unqualified approbation ? 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 Reasons of complaint laid before the Assembly, 
 1780, in the case of Professor George Hill, by the 
 Rev. James Burn of Forgan : — 
 
 " 1st, That Mr. Hill having declared his intention 
 of retaining his present office, along with that of second 
 minister of St. Andrews, the Presbytery, by their 
 sentence, declare their disapprobation of retaining 
 both, and have thus given their sanction to a most 
 dangerous innovation.^ and as it unites a civil and 
 sacred office in the same person, which ought, ac- 
 cording to the laws of the church, and of all good 
 policy, to be kept distinct. 
 
 " 2d, There will be an unhappy interference in 
 discharcrincp the duties of each office. Each office 
 has been thought sufficient employment for one man, 
 and to each a more than common livelihood is an- 
 nexed, greatly exceeding that which most of the 
 ministers of Scotland do enjoy, both united making 
 an income of between £'300 and £400 per annum. 
 
 " 3d, A measure of this kind wears a discouraging 
 aspect to our probationers, as it vests in the person 
 of one what might prove a sufficient reward for the 
 merit of two, and open to them both a door to honour 
 and usefulness. 
 
 " 4th, Annexing the office of Professor and Mini- 
 ster, tends to hurt the widows' fund. 
 
 " 5th, As all monopolies are hurtful, and therefore 
 justly hateful in the state, so pluralities are no less 
 so in the Church; and ought, therefore, to be care- 
 fully prevented, as productive of many mischievous 
 consequences, which no human sagacity can foresee, 
 but such as at first might be easily remedied, though 
 not so easil}^ removed when once they have taken 
 place." 
 
296 
 
 No. II. 
 
 Reasons of dissent from the decision of the Assem- 
 bly in the case of Professor Ferrie, May 28, 1813, 
 subscribed by Principal Brown of Aberdeen, and many 
 other members: 
 
 " 1st, Because it appears to us, that the incom- 
 patibility of the offices of Professor in the University 
 of St. Andrews, and of minister of Kilconquhar, had, 
 by reason of the distance of the places, been com- 
 pletely established. 
 
 " 2d, Because it appears to us, that, by reason of 
 such incompatibility, either the one or the other of 
 these offices must become a complete sinecure, or 
 that while the duties of neither can be fully discharged, 
 the objects of both must, in a great measure, be de- 
 serted or frustrated. 
 
 " 3d, Because it appears to us, that from this deci- 
 sion of the venerable Assembly, essential detriment 
 may result to the Church, to the Universities, and to 
 the community at large, by tending to render ineffi- 
 cient both the academical and pastoral offices, and 
 introducing an opinion, which cannot fail to have the 
 most mischievous effects, that such offices are intended 
 not for the benefit of the public, but for the private 
 emolument of their possessors, 
 
 " 4th, Because it appears to us, that, by a decision 
 attended with such consequences, the moral senti- 
 ments of the people must inevitably be injured, while 
 their understandings are led, on the one hand, to sup- 
 pose that the most solemn obligations maybe annulled 
 by the prospects of private advantages; and, on the 
 other, that no clear principle of professional duty or 
 obligation can ever be established, and that by such 
 means, they may be gradually tempted to adopt the 
 most pernicious laxity, with regard both to the prin- 
 ciple and the fulfilment of the most sacred duties. 
 
 " 5th, Because it appears to us, that no general 
 sense of the representatives of the Church was ex- 
 pressed by the sentence from which we dissent, it 
 having been carried by the very small and most un- 
 usual majority of five votes. 
 
297 
 
 " Signed W. L. Brown. Adherents, the Rev. David 
 
 Dickson ; Wm. Dalgleish, of Scotscraig, Esq. elder ; 
 the Rev. Dr. Andrew Stewart; the Rev. JamCvS 
 Thomson; the Rev. Mr. Richardson; Benjamin Ma- 
 thie, of Glasgow, Esq. elder; Professor Jardine, elder; 
 Daniel Vere, Esq. Advocate, elder; John Campbell, 
 Esq. elder. 
 
 " N.B. — Reasons of dissent were also given in by 
 the Rev. Dr. Singers, and subscribed by a consider- 
 able number of adherents." 
 
 No. III. 
 
 Sentence of the Presbytery of Glasgow in the 
 case of Principal M'Farlane, 3d July, 1823, as af- 
 firmed by the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, October 
 1.5th, 1823:— 
 
 " The presbytery, having considered the peculiar cir- 
 cumstances attending the case of the Presentation to 
 Dr. Duncan M'Farlane, Principal of the College of 
 Glasgow, to be minister of the High Church of Glas- 
 gow, Find, that the parish of the High Church of 
 Glasgow contains a population of inhabitants requiring 
 the undivided time and exertions of the most active 
 minister, — That the duties of the Principal of the uni- 
 versity are of great extent and importance ; and, if 
 faithfully performed, also require the undivided talents 
 and labours of the most diligent individual, — That the 
 union of the office of Principal with that of the mini- 
 ster of the High Church of Glasgow, while it is inju- 
 rious to the interests of learning and religion in the 
 university, is incompatible with the full and successful 
 discharge of the duties of minister of the High Church 
 Parish, — That both offices being well provided for, 
 and having ample funds, from which an augmentation 
 may be obtained, if judged to be necessary, and no 
 want existing in this Church of ministers and preach- 
 ers to fill each office with respectability and success, 
 there exists not the slightest plea of necessity for so 
 injurious a union of office in the same person, — That, 
 farther, the minister of the High Church is one of the 
 
298 
 
 three visitors to whom the superintendance of the funds 
 and conduct of the college of Glasgow, is intrusted; 
 the only visitor not elected by the university appointed 
 to be a clergyman, and more especially interested in 
 its spiritual and ecclesiastical concerns, — That, there- 
 fore, to induct the Principal to the charge of the High 
 Church, is to destroy this important provision, as no 
 person can superintend his own administration ; to 
 render the meetings of visitors generally nugatory ; to 
 deprive the college of its only ecclesiastical superin- 
 tendant; and to remove one of its most important se- 
 curities, — That, though the late Principal was in pos- 
 session of both offices, it is to be remembered, on the 
 one hand, that the presbytery had no control over his 
 admission into the college, and, on the other, that it 
 would have required a much more difficult process to 
 have made him demit a pastoral charge to which he 
 had been previously inducted, than to resist a presen- 
 tation to the same charge when it is legally vacant, 
 
 And, farther, that this is the first time on which the 
 
 Presbytery has been called to carry into effect a mea- 
 sure, which, in their opinion, is dangerous to the inter- 
 ests of both religion and learning. On these grounds, 
 joined to a deep sense of the general danger arising 
 from pluralities of office in this church, the presbytery 
 judge it to be both inexpedient and incompetent to 
 proceed on the Presentation laid on their table to Dr. 
 M'Farlane, in respect that he appears to them, iji hoc 
 statu, an unqualified presentee ; and they did, and 
 hereby do, refuse to proceed on the said Presentation, 
 and appoint intimation to be giren of this sentence to 
 the officers of the Crown, that a new Presentation may 
 be issued in favour of a qualified presentee." 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 Printed by W. Collins & Co. Glasgow. 
 
WORKS PUBLISHED BY CHALMERS AND COLLINS, 
 GLASGOW. 
 
 WORKS OF DR. CHALMERS. 
 
 SERMONS Preached in St. JOHN'S CHURCH, 
 GLASGOW. By Thomas Chalmers, D. D. In One Vo- 
 lume, 8vo. Price 10s. 6d. boards. Just Published. 
 
 STATEMENT in REGARD to the PAUPERISM 
 of GLASGOW, from the Experience of the Last Eight 
 Years. 8vo. Price 2s. Just Published. 
 
 A SPEECH delivered before the SYNOD of GLAS- 
 GOW and AYR, on the 15th October, 1823, in the Case of 
 PRINCIPAL M'FARLANE, on the SUBJECT of PLU 
 RALITIES. With a PREFACE, by Stevenson Macgill, 
 Professor of Theology in the University of Glasgow. 8vo. 
 Price 6d. Just Published. 
 
 The CHRISTIAN and CIVIC ECONOMY of 
 LARGE TOWNS. Published Quarterly, Price Is. each 
 Number. Vols. I. and II. may be had in boards, 8s. 6d. each. 
 
 A SPEECH, Dehvered on the 24th of May, 1822, 
 
 before the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, Ex- 
 planatory of the Measures which have been successfully pur- 
 sued in St. John's Parish, Glasgow, for the Extinction of its 
 Compulsory Pauperism. With an Appendix. Price 2s. 6d. 
 
 The APPLICATION of CHRISTIANITY to the 
 COMMERCIAL and ORDINARY AFFAIRS of LIFE, 
 
 in a Series of Discourses. Fifth Edition, 8vo. 8s. bds. 
 
 SERMONS Preached in the TRON CHURCH, 
 
 Glasgow. Second Edition, 8vo. 10s. 6d. bds. 
 
 A SERIES of DISCOURSES on the CHRISTIAN 
 REVELATION, Viewed in Connection with the Modern 
 Astronomy. Tenth Edition, 8vo. 8s. bds. 
 
 SERMONS Preached on PUBLIC OCCASIONS. 
 
 8vo. 10s. 6d. bds. 
 
 SPEECHES and TRACTS. 8vo. 8s. 6d. bds. 
 
 The IMPORTANCE of CIVIL GOVERNxAIENT 
 to SOCIETY, and the DUTY of CHRISTIANS in regard 
 to it. Third Edition, 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS on the SYSTEM of PARO- 
 CHIAL SCHOOLS in Scotland, and on the advantage of 
 establishing them in Large To\vns. 8vo. Is. 
 
WORKS PUBLISHED BY CHALMERS AND COLLINS, 
 GLASGOW. 
 
 SELECT CHRISTIAN AUTHORS, 
 
 With Introductory Essays. 
 
 1. The IMITATION of CHRIST, in Three Books. 
 By Thojias a Kempis. Essay by Thomas Chalmers, D. D. 
 12mo. 3s. 6(1. boards. 
 
 2. WORKS of the REV. JOHN GAMBOLD. 
 
 Essay by Thomas Erskine, Esq. Advocate, Author of " Re- 
 marks on the Internal Evidence for the Truth of Revealed 
 Religion." 12mo. 3s. 6d. boards, 
 
 3. The REDEEMER'S TEARS Wept over LOST 
 SOULS; and TWO DISCOURSES on Self-Dedication, and 
 on Yielding Ourselves to God. By the Rev. John Howe, A.M. 
 Essay by Robert Gordon, D. D. Edinbiu-gh. 12mo. 3s. bds. 
 
 4. TREATISES on the LIFE, WALK, and TRI- 
 UMPH of FAITH. By the Rev. W. Romaine, A. M. Essay 
 by Thomas Chalmers, D. D. In Two Vols. I2mo. 7s. bds. 
 
 5. TREATISES on JUSTIFICATION and RE- 
 GENERATION. By John Witherspoon, D. D. Essay by 
 William Wilberforce, Esq. 12mo. 3s. QA. boards. 
 
 6. An ALARM to UNCONVERTED SINNERS. 
 
 By Joseph Alleine. Essay by Andrew Thomson, D. D. Edin- 
 burgh. 12mo. 4s. bds. 
 
 7. PRIVATE THOUGHTS on RELIGION. By 
 
 the Rev. Thos. Adam. Essay by the Rev. Daniel Wilson, A.M. 
 London, 12mo. 3s. bds. 
 
 8. LIVES of EMINENT MEN, Distinguished for 
 Piety, Learning, and Christian Usefulness. Essay by the Rev. 
 Edward Irving, A. M. Minister of the Caledonian Chapel, 
 London. Vol. L— BERNARD GILPIN and THOMAS 
 GOUGE. 12mo. 3s. 6d. boards. 
 
 9. The CHRISTIAN REMEMBRANCER. By 
 
 Ambrose Serle, Esq. Essay by Thomas Chalmers, D. D. 
 12mo. 3s, 6d. boards. 
 
 10. SAINTS' EVERLASTING REST. By the 
 Rev. Richard Baxter. Abridged by Benjamin Fawcett, A.M. 
 Es.say by Thomas Erskine, Esq. Advocate. 12ino. 5s. bds. 
 
 11. COMMENTARY on the BOOK of PSALMS. 
 
 By George Horne, D. D. Bishop of Norwich. Essay by the 
 Rev. Edward Irving, A.M. Tliree Vols. }2mo. 12s. bds. In, 
 the Press. 
 
Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries 
 
 1012 01185 4223 
 
n 'f .