THE GREAT DISRUPTION
SIR,—Mr. Robert Aitken's statement that " the State claimed the right to compel Presbyteries to ordain, if necessary, and to induct, the presentees of lay patrons " ignores the fact that no presentee could be ordained until he had first been examined by the Presbytery as to his life, literary qualifications and doctrine, and had satisfied the Presbytery of his fitness. One of the objections raised by the constitutional party in the Church to the Veto Act passed in the General Assembly of 1834 by 184 votes to 139 was that it denuded Church Courts of the Scriptural right and duty (" collation") to take trial and judge of ministers' qualifications.
The case of the constitutional party is fully set forth in The Life of Archibald .Hamilton Charteris, D.D., LL.D., by Rev. the Hon. Arthur Gordon, M.A. (Hodder and Stoughton, 1912), and in Matthew Leishman of Govan and the Middle Party of 1843, by James Fleming Leishman, M.A. (Paisley, Alexander Gardner, 1924).—Yours, &c., Creggandarroch, Blairmore, Argyll. W. NAPIER BELL
Previous page
