should at once resign his office, or be excommunicated if he refused to do so.143

145

The minister and the people had now done their work, and, so far as they were concerned, had done. it well.144 But the same circumstances which made them desire equality, made the upper classes desire inequality. A collision, therefore, was inevitable, and was hastened by this bold proceeding of the Church. Indeed, the preachers, supported by the people, rather courted a contest, than avoided it. They used the most inflammatory language against episcopacy; and, shortly before abolishing it, they completed, and presented to Parliament, the Second Book of Discipline, in which they flatly contradicted what they had asserted in their

143❝ Forsameikle as the office of a Bischop, as it is now vsit, and commounly takin within this realme, hes no sure warrand, auctoritie, nor good ground out of the (Book and) Scriptures of God; but is brocht in by the folie and corruptions of (men's) invention, to the great overthrow of the Kirk of God: The haill Assemblie of the Kirk, in ane voyce, after libertie givin to all men to reason in the matter, none opponing themselves in defending the said pretendit office, Finds and declares the samein pretendit office, vseit and termeit, as is above said, vnlaufull in the selfe, as haveand neither fundament, ground nor warrant within the word of God: and ordaines, That all sick persons as bruiks, or sall bruik heirafter the said office, salbe chargeit simpliciter to demitt, quyt and leave of the samein, as ane office quhervnto they are not callit be God; and siclyke to desist and cease from all preaching, ministration of the sacraments, or vsing any way the office of pastors, quhill they receive de novo admission from the Generall Assemblie, vnder the paine of excommunicatioun to be denuncit agains them; quherin if they be found dissobedient, or contraveine this act in any point, the sentence of excommunicatioun, after dew admonitions, to be execute agains them." Acts of the General Assemblies, vol. ii. p. 453.

144 As Calderwood triumphantly says, "the office of bishops was damned." History of the Kirk, vol. iii. p. 469. "Their whole estat, both the spirituall and civill part, was damned." p. 526. James Melville (Autobiography, p. 52) says that, in consequence of this achievement, his uncle Andrew "gatt the nam of eσкожоμaσтiέ, Episcoporum exactor, the flinger out of Bischopes."

145 Tytler (History of Scotland, vol. vi. p. 302) observes that, while "the great body of the burghers, and middle and lower classes of the people,” were Presbyterians, "a large proportion of the nobility supported episcopacy." Instead of "a large proportion," he would not have been far wrong, if he had said "all." Indeed, "Melville himself says the whole peerage was against him." Stephen's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 269. Forbes ascribes the aristocratic movement against presbytery to "godles atheists," who insisted "that there could be nothing so contrair to the nature of a monarchie,” &c., “than that paritie of authoritie in pastours." Forbes, Certaine Records touching the Estate of the Kirk, p. 349, edit. Wod

147

First Book of Discipline.146 For this, they are often taunted with inconsistency. But the charge is unjust. They were perfectly consistent; and they merely changed their maxims, that they might preserve their principles. Like every corporation, which has ever existed, whether spiritual or temporal, their supreme and paramount principle was to maintain their own power. Whether or not this is a good principle, is another matter; but all history proves that it is an universal one. And when the leaders of the Scotch Church found that it was at stake, and that the question at issue was, who should possess authority, they, with perfect consistency, abandoned opinions that they had formerly held, because they now perceived that those opinions were unfavourable to their existence as an independent body.

When the First Book of Discipline appeared, in 1560, the government was in the hands of the nobles, who had just fought on the side of the Protestant preachers, and were ready to fight again on their side. When the Second Book of Discipline appeared, in 1578, the government was still held by the nobles; but those ambitious men had now thrown off the mask, and, having effected their purpose in destroying the old hierarchy, had actually turned round, and attacked the new one. The circumstances having changed, the Church changed with them; but in the change there was nothing inconsistent. On the contrary, it would have been the height of inconsistency for the ministers to have retained their former notions of obedience and of subordination; and it

row Society. See also p. 355. "That Democratie (as they called it) whilk allwayes behoved to be full of sedition and troubble to ane Aristocratie, and so in end to a Monarchie." The reader will observe this important change in the attitude of classes in Scotland. Formerly, the clergy had been the allies of the crown against the nobles. Now, the nobles allied themselves with the crown against the clergy. The clergy, in self-defence, had to ally themselves with the people.

146 On the difference between the two productions, there are some remarks worth looking at, in Argyll's Presbytery Examined, 1848, pp. 38-43. But this writer, though much freer from prejudice than most Presbyterian authors, is unwilling to admit how completely the Second Book of Discipline contradicts the First.

147 By the Scotch episcopalians.

was perfectly natural that, at this crisis, they should advocate the democratic idea of equality, just as before they had advocated the aristocratic idea of inequality.

148

Hence it was, that, in their First Book of Discipline, they established a regularly ascending hierarchy, according to which the general clergy owed obedience to their ecclesiastical superiors, to whom the name of superintendents was given." But, in the Second Book of Discipline, every vestige of this was swept away; and it was laid down in the broadest terms, that all the preachers being fellow-labourers, all were equal in power; that none had authority over others; and that, to claim such authority, or to assert preeminence, was a contrivance of man, not to be permitted in a divinely constituted Church 149

148 See the First Book of Discipline, reprinted in the first volume of A Compendium of the Laws of the Church of Scotland, 2d edit., Edinburgh, 1837. The superintendents were "to set, order, and appoint ministers," p. 61; and it would seem (p. 88) that no minister could be deposed without the consent of his superintendent; but this could hardly be intended to interfere with the supreme authority of the General Assembly. See also the summary, p. 114, where it is said of the superintendents, that “in thair visitatioun thei sal not onlie preiche, but als examine the doctrine, life, diligence, and behavior of the ministeris, reideris, elderis, and deaconis." According to Spottiswoode (History of the Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 167), “the superintendents held their office during life, and their power was episcopal; for they did elect and ordain ministers, they presided in synods, and directed all church censures, neither was any excommunication pronounced without their warrant." See further, on their authority, Knox's History of the Reformation, vol. ii. p. 161. "That punyschment suld be appointed for suche as dissobeyid or contemned the superintendentes in thair functioun." This was in 1561; and, in 1562, "It was ordained, that if ministers be disobedient to superintendents in any thing belonging to edification, they must be subject to correction." Acts of the General Assemblies of the Kirk, vol. i. p. 14. Compare p. 131: "sick things as superintendents may and aught decyde in their synodall conventiouns."

149 For albeit the Kirk of God be rewlit and governit be Jesus Christ, who is the onlie King, hie Priest, and Heid thereof, yit he uses the ministry of men, as the most necessar middis for this purpose." "And to take away all occasion of tyrannie, he willis that they sould rewl with mutuall consent of brether and equality of power, every one according to thair functiones." Second Book of Discipline, in A Compendium of the Laws of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. pp. 126, 127. "As to Bischops, if the name oкOTоs be properly taken, they ar all ane with the ministers, as befoir was declairit. For it is not a name of superioritie and lordschip, bot of office and watching," p. 142. To understand the full meaning of this, it should be mentioned, that the superintendents, established by the Kirk in 1560, not unfrequently assumed the title of " Lordship," as an

The government, as may be supposed, took a very different view. Such doctrines were deemed, by the upper classes, to be anti-social, and to be subversive of all order.150 So far from sanctioning them, they resolved, if possible, to overthrow them; and, the year after the General Assembly had abolished episcopacy, it was determined that, upon that very point, a trial of strength should be made between the two parties.

All was

In 1581, Robert Montgomery was appointed archbishop of Glasgow. The ministers who composed the chapter of Glasgow, refused to elect him; whereupon the Privy Council declared that the King, by virtue of his prerogative, had the right of nomination.151 now confusion and uproar. The General Assembly forbad the archbishop to enter Glasgow." He refused to obey their order, and threw himself upon the support of the Duke of Lennox, who had obtained the appointment

152

ornament to the extensive powers conferred upon them. See, for instance, the notes to Wodrow's Collections upon the Lives of the Reformers of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. part ii. p. 461. But, in the Second Book of Discipline, in 1578, the superintendents are, if I rightly remember, not even once named.

150 Just as in England, we find that the upper classes are mostly Episcopalians; their minds being influenced, often unconsciously, by the, to them, pleasing spectacle of an inequality of rank, which is conventional, and does not depend upon ability. On the other hand, the strength of the Dissenters lies among the middle and lower classes, where energy and intellect are held in higher respect, and where a contempt naturally arises for a system, which, at the mere will of the sovereign or minister of the day, concedes titles and wealth to persons whom nature did not intend for greatness, but who, to the surprise of their contemporaries, have greatness thrust upon them. On this difference of opinion in Scotland, corresponding to the difference of social position, see the remarks on the seventeenth century, in Hume's Commentaries on the Law of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 544. Edinburgh, 1797, 4to.

152 44

151 Record of Privy Council, in M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 267. "The brethrein of Glasgow were charged, under paine of horning, to admitt Mr. Robert Montgomrie." Calderwood's History of the Kirk, vol. iii. p. 596. Charges the said Mr. Robert to continue in the ministrie of the Kirk of Striveling," &c. Acts of the General Assemblies, vol. ii. p. 547. This was in October 1581; the Record of the Privy Council was in April 1582. Moysie, who was a contemporary, says that, in March 1581, 2, not only the dean and chapter, but all the clergy (the "haill ministrie") declared from the pulpit that Montgomery's appointment "had the warrand of the deuill and not of the word of God, bot wes damnit thairby." Moysie's Memoirs, Edinburgh, 1830, 4to, p. 36.

153

for him, and to whom he, in return, had surrendered nearly all the revenues of the see, reserving for himself only a small stipend." This was a custom which had grown up within the last few years, and was one of many contrivances by which the nobles plundered the Church of her property.

154

This, however, was not the question now at issue.155 The point to be decided was one, not of revenue, but of power. For, the clergy knew full well, that if they es tablished their power, the revenue would quickly follow. They, therefore, adopted the most energetic proceedings. In April 1582, the General Assembly met at St. Andrews, and appointed Melville as Moderator.156 The govern ment, fearing the worst, ordered the members, on pain of rebellion, to take no steps respecting the archbishopric." But the representatives of the Church were undaunted. They summoned Montgomery before them; they ratified the sentence by which he had been suspended from the ministry; and they declared that he had incurred the penalties of despotism and of excommunication.158

157

153 "The title whereof the said duke had procured to him, that he, having the name of bishop, and eight hundred merks money for his living and sustentatioun, the whole rents, and other duteis of the said benefice, might come to the duke's utilitie and behove." Calderwood's History of the Kirk, vol. iv. p. 111. See also p. 401.

154 Scot's Apologetical Narration of the State of the Kirk, pp. 24, 25. Calderwood's History of the Kirk, vol. iii. p. 302. Wodrow's Collections upon the Lives of the Reformers, vol. i. part i. p. 206. Lyon's History of St. Andrews, vol. i. p. 379. Gibson's History of Glasgow, p. 59. Hume's History of the House of Douglas, vol. ii. pp. 216, 217. Chalmers' Caledonia, vol. iii. p. 624. 155But the Church passing this point" (i.e. the simony) "made quarrel to him for accepting the bishopric." Spottiswoode's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 282.

156 Acts of the General Assemblies of the Kirk, vol. ii. p. 548.

157 "A messenger-at-arms entered the house, and charged the moderator and members of the assembly, on the pain of rebellion, to desist from the process." M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 268.

158 The Assemblie and brether present, after voteing in the said matter, depryvit the said Mr. Robert from all functioun of the Ministrie in the Kirk of God, dureing the will of the Kirk of God; and farther, descernit the fearefull sentence of excommunicatioun to be pronuncit against him in the face of the haill Assemblie, be the voyce and mouth of the Moderatour present; to the effect, that, his proud flesh being cast into the hands of Satan, he may be win againe, if it be possible, to God; and the said sentence (to) be inti