3. The minister or preacher, who accepts of a prefentation doth not only bring fin upon himself, by oppreffing the church, and spoiling her of her juft right; but alfo takes the ready way to encourage and harden a patron in his guilt and finful ufurpation, and to obtruct his conviction, repentance, and reformation: for he will readily think that his confcience needs not be more ftrait-laced than theirs, who fhould inform his. Wherefore we earnestly with and pray, that God would bring accepters, with their advifers and fupporters, calmly to confider what a finful hand they have in enfnaring patrons in a corrupt courfe, and in hardening them in their ufurpation over the church of God.

4. The way of accepting prefentations doth open a door to many fad evils, fuch as Simoniacal pactions and intrigues, unchriftian contentions and divifions in judicatories, oppreffive concuffions in parifhes, vexatious profecution and appeals, and many fcandalous intrufions into churches, to the great difcredit of religion, and reproach of the minifterial character: hereby congregations are robbed of their just rights to call their own minifters, and very oft Chrift's flock is fcattered and broken in pieces, the godly are grieved, and the wicked hardened: hereby ordinances come to be neglected, the Lord's day profaned, ignorance and vice encouraged, church-difcipline weakened. Yea, this pernicious practice has given occafion to many violent fettlements, and to a woeful fchifm in the church, to the depofing of feveral worthy miniflers, and to the difcouragement of many pious ftudents and preachers from ferving the church: fo that our accepters have need to confider how they will answer for all thefe direful confequences of their practice, and whether the commonneis of it will excufe the finfulness of it: O that we could look to God, who only can open their eyes!

5. Accepters of prefentations act contrary to the known principles of Prefbyterians, and to their own engagements; and fo are chargeable with fad defection and breach of faith. Our Second Book of Difcipline, which is fworn to in our National Covenant, declares patronages to be contrary to the word of God, chap. 12. VOL. IV.

3 E

And

And it was the general opinion in the year 1719, that accepting of presentations was inconfiftent with Prefbyterian principles, and with the rights and rules of this church, which all minifters and preachers oblige themfelves to maintain; upon which account, none adventured to meddle with them for a good many years thereafter. In our opinion, they act contrary to their engagements which they come under by the Affembly's formula 1711; wherein they fubfcribe and promife, that they will never directly or indirectly endeavour the prejudice or fubverfion of the difcipline and government of this church, but that they will to the utmost of their power maintain and fupport the fame. Now, it was ftill reckoned a branch of our discipline and government, for parishes to have the liberty of free elections, and for Prefbyteries to have accefs to free moderations in the calling of minifters. And it is vifible to all, that accepters of prefentations do ftop and hinder this free liberty and accefs, contrary to their engagements by the formula, and also by the national covenant.

6. Seeing it is notour that the defign of accepting presentations is to fecure the ftipend to the prefentee, fo as another cannot have a title to it; it is plain that the accepter doth hereby invert the order which Chrift hath appointed in his church, viz. that a minister's right to maintenance fhould be confequential to his ordination to the miniftry: whereas, by the method he takes, he would make a minifter's ordination to the ministry confequential to his having a right to the maintenance ; which is contrary to Christ's stated order, and the nature of things.

7. By accepting prefentations, minifters do fadly prejudge the fuccefs of the gofpel and their own miniftry, by offending and stumbling the parishes concerned, befides many others, at their conduct. And is it any wonder though a parifh be offended with a man for going about to fecure a title to their ftipend, before they have access to know him, or fhew any inclination for him; and for his binding the yoke of patronage upon them, and fpoiling them of their just right of chufing their own paftor; and for hindering them to get ano

ther

ther worthy paftor whom they dearly love? What must they think of a man that tells a reclaiming parish, by word or deed, "I'll be your minifter in fpite of your teeth, I'll have the charge of your fouls whether ye will or not; and, if ye refufe ordinances and means of falvation from me, ye fhall have none? Nay, come of your fouls what will, though they fhould perish in a ftate of ignorance and prejudice, I'll poffefs the kirk, manfe, and benefice, and hold out another minifter from you." Have they not too good ground to fufpect fuch a man, of earthly-mindednefs, greed of filthy lucre, or of being more concerned for "his own things than for the things of Jefus Chrift," and the falvation of their fouls? Which apprehenfions are fufficient to ftuff the breafts of people with prejudice against him at his entry, and to blaft his miniftrations to them for many years thereafter. For it is no wonder if they think fuch language or practice is not like that of one who fincerely defigns to advance Chrift's kingdom, and win fouls to him, as a faithfnl minister ought to do; but rather of one that hath base worldly ends in view! The language of a paftor, whom Chrift fends, is that in 2 Cor. xii. 14. "I feek not yours, but you;" whereas that of an accepter feems to be the very reverse, "I feek not you, but yours."

8. It increaseth the prejudice of many against fuch accepters, when they fee there is no neceffity for their accepting of presentations. Indeed, if there were no coming to a church or ftipend but by the Patron's right, fomething might be faid to alleviate the crime: but at prefent there is no neceffity from the law to accept of them; nay, on the contrary, the law leaves an open door, by which minifters and preachers may have an orderly gospel accefs both to churches and benefices, without having any dealing with Patrons at all, if they would but exercife a little patience till fix months elapfe. Now, how can people think charitably of those who refuse to enter by the fafe gofpel door, and chufe rather to climb up by the window of prefentations and violence, when they cannot but fee their so doing tends to blast their own miniftry, and bring a heavy yoke on 3 E 2 their

their mother-church, after fhe was in effect freed of it by the tenderness of the legislature in 1719? Now, feeing thefe acceptances were unneceffary and of most pernicious confequence to the church and the intereft of the gospel, it cannot but be furprising that our General Affemblies were at fo little pains to difcourage or prevent them, when it might have been eafily done at the beginning. We find indeed that the Affembly 1724 referred it to their commiffion, to think of an overture thereanent, and lay it before the next Affembly; but it doth not appear that there was any more done, notwithstanding of repeated inftructions from Prefbyteries concerning the fame. We know no reason can be asfigned for the Affembly's indolence in this matter, but their pufillanimity, or finfulness of offending the government: but this fear of man hath brought a woful fnare upon the poor church. Several fynods indeed fhewed a willingness to reftrain these acceptances; but Prefentees knowing where to have recourfe, their acts were foon difregarded. At first one or two probationers began to mint at accepting prefentations, but the outcry againft them was fo great, that they foon retracted, and paft from them again. But fome time after, when Principal George Chalmers adventured to accept a prefentation to the church of Old-Machir, feveral young men took courage and followed his example; and though at first they qualified their acceptances with having the peoples confent, yet they would not retract them after the people fhewed their averfion to them; which occafioned many intrusions and violent fettlements through feveral places of the church, contrary to our known principles. These intrufions came gradually into the church, but were not commonly practifed, nor countenanced by fuperior courts, 'till after the year 1728. For we find the Affembly 1725, after a great fruggle about calling a minifter to Aberdeen, appointing, that befides the voting of magiftrates, town-council and elders in the call, the inclinations of heads of families fhall be confulted about it. And the Affembly 1726 cenfured the commiffion for proceeding to tranfport Mr James Chalmers from Dyke to Aber

deen,

deen, without having due regard to the inclinations of the people of that city, who oppofed his call. But, a las! our Affemblies did not continue long in fuch a difpofition; for they and their commiffion began foon afterwards to pay more revard to patrons and heritors in planting of churches, though few of thefe were hearers, than they did to the whole body of the people that attended ordinances. The Crown having the patronage of most of the churches of Scotland, this melancholy turn of affairs was thought to be brought about by ftrong court-influence, and by the activity of feveral leading ministers, who had their dependence upon or expectations from that airth. Thefe began to vent themselves in judicatories against the rights of the Christian people, and to affert that there were no stated rules nor directions in Scripture about the calling of minifters, or who fhould be the electors. Some of them wrote pamphlets against the peoples rights, pretending to answer the Scripture-arguments for them; and maintained that the clergy or judicatories were the proper electors. Thefe were fufficiently anfwered by Mr Currie, Mr Hill and others; but their opponents had the afcendant in judicatories, and carried things there as they pleased.

At this time the church of Scotland was in a most lamentable condition, and the wrath of the Almighty feemed to be kindled against her, in letting loofe many adverfaries at once to attack and deftroy her: for at the fame time we find her many ways dreadfully toffed and thaken as by patronages, and intrufions pushed on by the court and great men; By Independent fchemes and conftitutions of churches, zealoufly promoted by Mr Glafs and Mr Archbald; By Arian errors taught and propagated by Profeffor Simfon; By many grofs errors vented by others, both Preibyterian and Epifcopal; And by legal fermons and moral harangues (to the neglect of preaching Chrift) introduced by many of the young clergy. All thefe evils, working and fermenting through the land at once, occafioned dreadful thocks and convulfions in this national church, likely. to rend her in many pieces. Yet, alas! we were not fenfible