Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 9.djvu/779

 FREE CHURCH 743 grounds on which this claim is made, it will be necessary briefly to point out how the leading facts of the ecclesi astical history of Scotland during the last 320 years are accentuated and construed by those who read them in a Free Church sense. In that history the Free Churchman sees three great reforming periods. In his view these deserve to be called reforming on many accounts, but most especially because in them the independence of the church, her inherent scrip tural right to exercise a spiritual jurisdiction in which she is responsible to her Divine Head alone, was both earnestly asserted and practically maintained. The first reformation extended from 1560, when the church freely held her first General Assembly, and of her own authority acted on the First Book of Discipline, to 1592, when her Presbyterian order was finally and fully ratified by the parliament. The second period began in 1 638, when after 20 years of sus pended animation, the Assembly once more shook off Epis copacy, and terminated in 1649, when the parliament of Scotland confirmed the church in her liberties in a larger and ampler sense than before. The third period began in 1834, when the Assembly made use of what the church believed to be her rights in passing the Veto and Chapel Acts. It culminated in the Disruption of 1843. The fact that the church, as led first by Knox and after wards by Melville, claimed an inherent right to exercise a spiritual jurisdiction is notorious. More apt to be over looked is the comparative freedom with which that right was actually used by the church irrespective of state recog nition. That recognition was not given until after the queen s resignation in 1567 j 1 but, for several years before it came, the church had been holding her Assemblies and settling all questions of discipline, worship, and administra tion as they arose, in accordance with the first book of polity or discipline which had been drawn up in 1560. Further, in 1581 she, of her own motion, adopted a second book of a similar character, in which she expressly claimed an independent and exclusive jurisdiction or power in all matters ecclesiastical, &quot; which flows directly from God and the Mediator Jesus Christ, and is spiritual, not having a temporal head on earth, but only Christ the only king and governor of his church :&quot; and this claim, though directly negatived in 1584 by the &quot; Black Acts,&quot; which included an Act of Supremacy over estates spiritual and temporal, con tinued to be asserted by the Assemblies, until at last it also was practically allowed in the Act of 1592. 2 This legisla tion of 1592, however, did not long remain in force. An Act of Parliament in 1606, which &quot; reponed, restored, and reintegrated &quot; the estate of bishops to their ancient dignities, prerogatives, and privileges, was followed by several Acts of various subservient assemblies, which, culminating in that of 1618, practically amounted to a complete surrender of jurisdiction by the church itself. For twenty years no Assemblies whatever were held. This interval must neces sarily be regarded from the Presbyterian point of view as having been one of very deep depression. But a second re formation, characterized by great energy and vigour, began in 1638. The proceedings of the Assembly of that year, afterwards tardily and reluctantly acquiesced in by the state, finally issued in the Acts of Parliament of 1649, by which the Westminster standards were ratified, lay-patronage was abolished, and the coronation oath itself framed in accord ance with the principles of Presbyterian church govern- 1 In the Act Anent the true and holy Kirk, and of those that are declared not to be of the same. This Act was supplemented by that of 1579, Anent the Jurisdiction of the Kirk. 2 The Second Book of Discipline was not formally recognized in that Act; but all former Acts against &quot;the jurisdiction and discipline of the true Kirk as the same is used and exercised within the realm &quot; were abolished; and all &quot;liberties, privileges, immunities, and free doms whatsoever&quot; previously granted were ratified and approved. ment. Another period of intense reaction soon set in. No Assemblies were permitted by Cromwell after 1653 ; and, soon after the Restoration, Presbytery was temporarily over thrown by a series of rescissory Acts. Nor was the Revolu tion Settlement of 1690 so entirely favourable to the freedom of the church as the legislation of 1649 had been. Pre lacy was abolished, and various obnoxious statutes were repealed, but the Acts rescissory were not cancelled; pres- byterianism was re-established, but the statutory recognition of the Confession of Faith took no notice of certain quali fications under which that document had originally been approved by the Assembly of 1647 ; 3 the old rights of patrons were again discontinued, but the large powers which had been conferred on congregations by the Act of 1649 were not wholly restored. Nevertheless the great principle of a distinct ecclesiastical jurisdiction, embodied in the Confession of Faith, was accepted without reserva tion, and a Presbyterian polity effectively confirmed both then and at the ratification of the treaty of Union. This settlement, however, did not long subsist unimpaired. In 1712 the Act of Queen Anne, restoring patronage to its ancient footing, was passed in spite of the earnest remon strances of the Scottish people. For many years afterwards (until 1784) the Assembly continued to instruct each succeeding commission to make application to the king and the parliament for redress of the grievance. But mean while a new phase of Scottish ecclesiastical politics com monly known as Moderatism had been inaugurated, during the prevalence of which the church became even more indifferent than the lay patrons themselves to the rights of her congregations with regard to the &quot;calling&quot; of ministers. From the Free Church point of view, the period from which the secessions under Erskine and Gillespie are dated was also characterized by numerous other abuses ou the Church s part which amounted to a practical surrender of the most important and distinctive principles of her ancient Presbyterian polity. 4 Towards the beginning of the present century there were many cir cumstances, both within and without the church, which conspired to bring about an evangelical and popular reaction against this reign of &quot; Moderatism.&quot; The result was a protracted struggle, which is commonly referred to as the Ten Years Conflict, and which has been aptly described as the last battle in the long war which for nearly 300 years had been waged within the church itself, between the friends and the foes of the doctrine of an exclusive ecclesiastical jurisdiction. That final struggle rnay be said to have begun with the passing in 1834 of the &quot;Veto&quot; Act, by which it was declared to be a fundamental law of the church that no pastor should be intruded on a congregation contrary to the will of the people, 5 and by which it was provided that the simple dissent of a majority of heads of families in a parish should be enough to warrant a presbytery in rejecting a presentee. The question of the legality of this measure soon came to be tried in the civil courts ; and it was ultimately answered in a sense unfavourable to the church by the decision (1838) of the Court of Session in the Auchterarder case, to the effect that a presbytery had no right to reject a presentee simply because the parishioners protested against his settle- 3 The most important of these had reference to the full right of a constituted church to the enjoyment of an absolutely unrestricted freedom in convening Assemblies. This very point on one occasion at least threatened to be the cause of serious misunderstandings between William and the people of Scotland. The difficulties were happily smoothed, however, by the wisdom and tact of Carstares. 4 See Act and Declaration of Free Assembly, 1851. 6 This principle had been asserted even by an Assembly so late as that of 1736, and had been invariably presupposed in the &quot;call,&quot; which had never ceased to be regarded as an indispensable pre-requiaite for the settlement of a minister.