Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 19.djvu/704

Rh 680 PRESBYTERIANISM [SCOTLAND. late ministers. In 1665 his functions increased vitally; he might then call a disobedient minister before himself, accom panied only by the nearest discreet ministers, who might suspend the delinquent from ministry and stipend until the next general assembly. In 1575 it was ordered that superintendents should be elected yearly, to avoid ambition. Care was taken to preserve the rights of the congrega tion : &quot; It apperteaneth to the Pepill, and to everie several congregation, to elect their minister. . . . Altogether this is to be avoided that any man be violently intrused or thrust in upon any congregation.&quot; But, once elected, he is irremovable, except for heinous crimes or by the majority of the whole kirk. Of course he is strictly &quot;examinated&quot; as regards both &quot; lyiff and maneris &quot; and &quot;doctryne and knawledge,&quot; and especially as to his grasp of the chief points of controversy with Papists, Anabaptists, &c. No special method of nomination of elders is laid down, but from those nominated the whole congregation is to choose, special care being taken &quot; that every man may gyf his vote freelie.&quot; The liberty of the churches is preserved by making the elections of elders and deacons annual. The affairs of each congregation were managed by the kirk session (French &quot; consistoire &quot;), which met at least once a week. In every considerable town another weekly meet ing was held, called the &quot; exercise of prophesying,&quot; which in course of time became the presbytery or classical assembly (colloque). It was formally erected in 1579, and gener ally introduced in 1581. Then, again, the superintendent, with the ministers and delegated elders of his district, formed what developed into the provincial assembly. To this any one aggrieved by the kirk session might appeal, and, if necessary, the appeal went to the general assembly. This right of appeal was given in 1563. The general assembly, composed of delegated ministers and elders, into the constitution of which a change similar to that in France in 1565 w r as introduced in 1568, met as occasion served. EJuca- A splendid educational system was sketched. Parish tioual schools, where grammar and Latin should be taught ; em&amp;gt; colleges in every important town, with professors of logic, rhetoric, and the tongues ; universities at Glasgow, St Andrews, and Aberdeen, such was what Knox desired. (The parish schools were not established till 1696.) The principle was affirmed that education was the affair of the state. &quot; Xo fader, of what estait and condition that ever he be, use his children at his own fantasie, especially in their youthheade, but all must be compelled to bring up their children in learnyng and virtue.&quot; Compulsion and free education for the poor were Knox s idea. In 1567 parliament compelled patrons who had &quot; provestries, pre bendaries, altarages, or chaplaincies at their gift to present bursars to them to studie in anie college or universitie of this realm.&quot; Struggles To carry out these schemes and one for composition of (nth the tithes Knox proposed to apply the revenues of the disestab- an&amp;lt;l the ^ snec ^ church. But he was completely baffled by the nobles, crown. wno hastened to divide the spoil. The absolute irrecon cilability of the views of these feudal barons, who were Re- formers because their supremacy was threatened by crown and church, and because they coveted the abbey lands, with those of Knox arid his fellow-labourers was at once brought into strong relief. His petitions were disregarded ; the privy council would not ratify the Book; the lords determined that &quot; the kirkmen shall intromett with the 2 parts of their benefices, and the third part be lifted up to the ministers and Queene s use,&quot; or, as Knox bitterly said, two parts were &quot; freelie given to the Devill &quot; and the third part was &quot; divided between God and the Devill.&quot; Even the sixth part allowed to the ministers was irregularly paid, a leading subject of complaint for many years. Knox s next struggle was to maintain the right to hold assemblies, the independence of which was the essence of the kirk s existence. Against Mary s able secretary, M ait- land of Lethington, he threw himself with his whole vigour into this vital contest, and so far won the day that all Mary could gain was the compromise (important in prin ciple) that a representative of the crown should have a place in the meetings. The next struggle was on the question of patronage. The church requested that the vacant benefices, about 200 in number, might be filled by duly qualified persons. Mary answered that she would not give up her right of patronage. The church replied that no claim was made on this right, only it w r as desired that the places should be filled, and that the church should have the right of collat ing, after approval by examination, those presented by the crown or patron. The church, in fact, was compelled to admit the principle of lay patronage. This was accepted in 1567, and no change was made until twenty years later, when all church lands not already bestowed inalienably on the nobles were annexed to the crown. James VI. gave these lands lavishly away with their patronages, which thus became lay patronages. Charles I. and Laud used their best efforts, but in vain, to regain them. The church pro tested until March 1649, when lay patronage was altogether abolished. It was naturally restored at the Restoration, and remained until the Revolution. On 19th July 1690 the system w r as again abolished, and the nomination to a vacancy was placed in the hands of the Protestant heritors and elders with a veto to the whole, congregation. In 1712, under the influences of the Jacobite revival, the English parliament reimposed lay patronage. This Act, as violating the Act of Security, has never been admitted as valid by the purer Presbyterians. During the troublous years 1566-67 the kirk, stable in a time of confusion, consolidated her strength, and within her own bounds established the strictest discipline. In 1567 parliament made the monarchy Protestant, ratified the rights of the church to collation, and established the important principle, resisted from time to time, that the &quot;thrids&quot; of benefices should be henceforth collected by persons nominated by herself, and that she should pay the surplus -into the exchequer after satisfying the ministers stipends. Her progress may be gathered from the fact that, while in 1560 the general assembly contained only 6 ministers and 34 laymen, in 1567 she contained 252 ministers and 467 readers. Her power is seen in the cen sure passed upon the countess of Argyll, the earl being the most powerful of the nobility, for assisting at the baptism of Mary s son with Catholic rites. To the nobility, which retained the old turbulence of feudalism that had long ceased to be tolerated in any other country in Europe, this power of the church was hateful, and after the death of Murray their enmity became out spoken. Morton, acting under English influence, led the attack. In 1571, the Roman Catholic archbishop of St Andrews having died, Morton obtained a grant of the archbishopric and of the two-thirds of his revenues dis posable, and, by appointing a minister on condition that he himself should retain the greater part of the income, gained a strong footing within the church. In January 1572 the earl of Mar got together the superintendents and some ministers at Leith, on pretence of consultation. This convention, under the influence of the nobility, assumed the functions of a general assembly, and restored the titles of &quot; archbishop &quot; and &quot; bishop &quot; and the bounds of the dioceses, en the conditions that they should be chosen by a chapter of learned ministers, that they should have no more power than the superintendents, and that they should be subject to the general assembly in spiritual matters. These were the &quot; tulchan &quot; bishops. The general