SECESSION. 



hated oaths and declarations imposed by Charles, 

 substituting in their room a simple oath of alle- 

 giance and fidelity to king William ratified the 

 Westminster Confession of Faith restored tlie 

 presbyterian form of church government, " as agree- 

 able to the word of God, and conducive to the ad- 

 vancement of true piety and godliness," &c. and 

 placed the power of electing ministers in the hands 

 of heritors and elders, with the consent of the 

 people. The first parliament in the reign of queen 

 Anne ratified the true protestant religion, together 

 with the presbyterian form of government ; and 

 declared the unalterable continuance of them " an 

 essential and fundamental condition of the union, 

 in all time coming." But defection soon began to 

 mark the state of things. In 1712, the law of 

 patronage was revived in all its rigour. Mr John 

 Simson, professor of divinity in the university of 

 Glasgow, taught that the heathen, if they use the 

 means of happiness which they possess, will be saved 

 through the redemption of Christ that all infants 

 are formed as pure and holy as Adam was that 

 no proper covenant of works was made with Adam 

 as the representative of his posterity that our 

 own happiness ought to be our chief end in serving 

 God and that there will be no sinning in hell after 

 the last judgment. These doctrines, all of which 

 the standards of the church condemn as unscrip- 

 tural, the assembly, after various meetings and much 

 alt creation, found to be no more than "opinions not 

 necessary to be taught in divinity not evidently 

 founded in scripture, and some of them tending to 

 attribute too much to the power of corrupt nature." 

 In order to counteract these and other prevalent 

 errors, the " Marrow of Modern Divinity" was re- 

 published, with a recommendatory preface by Mr 

 James Hog. The assembly, 17-0, condemned a 

 great many passages in that excellent book, and 

 charged ministers to warn their people against read- 

 ing it. Against this decision twelve members of 

 court remonstrated, but without effect. Next year 

 the assembly again took up the affair confirmed 

 the deed of the preceding assembly, and rebuked 

 the remonstrants. Another cause of complaint 

 was the manner in which the assembly passed over 

 the conduct of Mr Campbell, professor of church 

 history in the university of St Andrews, who in 

 some of his published works taught doctrines con- 

 trary to the confession of faith. Patronage was now 

 felt to be almost intolerable presentees were vio- 

 lently forced upon reclaiming congregations, and 

 in 1730, the assembly ceased to record protests 

 relative to these unconstitutional proceedings. 

 Against these and other growing defections, more 

 than forty ministers and 1600 people petitioned the 

 assembly, but their petitions were not heard. From 

 this state of things the secession originated. 



Mr Ebenezer Erskine, minister at Stirling, in a 

 sermon preached at the opening of the synod of 

 Perth and Stirling, October, 1732, from Psalm 

 cxviii. 22. " The stone which the builders refused 

 is become the head stone of the corner," boldly 

 condemned several acts of the assembly, and espe- 

 cially the rigorous enforcement of the law of 

 patronage. This greatly displeased a considerable 

 number of the members of synod, who procured 

 the appointment of a committee to collect, .what 

 they termed, " the unbecoming and offensive ex- 

 pressions in his sermon," and report next day to 

 the synod. Having heard the report of the com- 

 mittee, and Mr Erskine in reply to the charges 

 contained in it, the synod " found," by a small 



majority, after three days' warm discussion, " that 

 Mr Erskine was censurable, on account of several 

 indecent expressions used by him in that sermon, 

 tending to disquiet the peace of the church, &c., 

 and appointed him to be rebuked at their bar, and 

 admonished to behave orderly for the future." 

 From this decision twelve ministers and two 

 elders dissented. Mr Erskine, believing that 

 in his sermon he had taught nothing but the 

 truth, refused to submit; protested, and appealed 

 to the next assembly. To his protest Messrs 

 William Wilson, Alexander Moncrieff, and James 

 Fisher, ministers, adhered. The assembly refused 

 to hear the reasons of protest, but took up the case 

 as it stood between Mr Erskine and the synod; 

 and after hearing parties, "found the expressions 

 vented by him, and contained in the minutes of 

 synod, and his answers thereto, to be offensive, 

 and to tend to disturb the peace and good order 

 of the church ; and therefore approved of the pro- 

 ceedings of the synod; and appointed him to be 

 rebuked and admonished by the moderator at their 

 bar, in order to terminate the process." Mr Ers- 

 kine, still convinced that he had uttered nothing but 

 what as a faithful minister he was bound to do, and 

 that the evident tendency of this decision was to 

 prevent every testimony in future against any 

 measure, however unscriptural, which the ipajority 

 in the supreme court might pass into a law, de- 

 clared that he could not submit to the censure; 

 and gave in a paper containing his solemn protesta- 

 tion against that deed, and his claim " to the liberty 

 of preaching the same truths of God, and of testi- 

 fying against the same or like defections of this 

 church upon all proper occasions." To this claim 

 and protestation, the three ministers before men- 

 tioned adhered, and, along with Mr Erskine, with- 

 drew from the court. The assembly cited them to 

 appear next day. They obeyed, and a committee 

 was appointed to retire with them, and persuade 

 them to recall their protest. The committee 

 having reported that they still adhered to their 

 protest, the assembly appointed them to appear 

 before their commission in August next; and 

 should they not comply, and testify their sorrow 

 for their conduct, the commission was empowered 

 to proceed against them by suspension or higher 

 censure. In August the commission suspended 

 these four ministers (they still adhering to their 

 protest), from the exercise of their office, and cited 

 them to appear again in November. At this 

 meeting, the commission, finding them still im- 

 penitent, " deposed them from the office of the 

 holy ministry." This decision was obtained only 

 by the casting vote of the moderator. It appears 

 that these four ministers had much sympathy from 

 many of their brethren, not only in the commission, 

 as the state of vote proved, but throughout the 

 church generally. Communications from seven 

 synods (the church of Scotland consists of fifteen), 

 were received by the commission, requesting to 

 delay proceeding to a higher censure, and to exer- 

 cise all lenity and forbearance toward the four 

 brethren. But these were fruitless; the four 

 brethren were thrust out from a church whose 

 principles they loved, and felt constrained to de- 

 clare a secession, not from the constitution of the 

 church of Scotland,, but from the prevailing party 

 in her judicatures; and indeed it is evident from 

 their private correspondence, as well as from their 

 public conduct, that, at this time, they did not con- 

 template a final separation from their brethren of 



