The Disruption of 1843

WE HAVE SEEN that the Evangelicals had gained the upper hand in the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and began a new era of spiritual life in the 1830’s. In addition to launching a new impetus of Church Extension which led to the building of 200 churches, in 1834 they passed two pieces of legislation that were to help the church’s spiritual life.

First, there was the Veto Act which gave the majority of male heads of families the right to refuse to have the Presentee of the Patron if he were not suitable for the Congregation. This was not the perfect arrangement for giving the people their right of choice of their minister but it was a step in the right direction. An unwanted minister could not be forced upon them. The non-intrusion principle was being applied.

Then there was the Chapel Act which enabled ministers of churches built by voluntary subscriptions, (called Chapels of Ease, which were strictly outside the parish system), to have a Session of their own and a place on the Church Courts. In a word, ministers of Chapels of Ease became fully fledged ministers of the Church.

The ‘Ten Years’ Conflict’ (1834-1843)

The Moderates resisted both of these provisions on the ground that they were contrary to the Patronage Act of 1712 and therefore illegal. Among the Moderates opposing the two acts was the Dean of Faculty, Mr Hope.

Auchterarder

In 1834, the living of Auchterarder had become vacant and the Earl of Kinnoul had presented a Robert Young a licentiate of the church. By appointment of the Presbytery, he preached for two Sundays running. The Congregation was required to meet to consider a call. Only two members of the congregation signed it. Two hundred and eighty seven of the heads of families dissented. The Presbytery could not proceed with the call in any case because Young’s legal adviser had appealed to Synod on the grounds of irregularities in making up the role of members. The Synod dismissed the appeal and so did the General Assembly, the final court of appeal in the church. Presbytery met again to consider the call and there was a huge veto against Young. The Presbytery did not proceed. Mr Young had now another adviser, Mr Hope, the Dean of the Faculty. Hope took his client’s case to the to the Law Courts persuaded that the Church in the Veto Act had gone outside the Law. He maintained in court that the Presbytery should have taken Mr Young on trials as presented by the Patron and having found him qualified with regard to recognised training should had have ordained and inducted him into the charge. In heeding the Congregation’s veto they had acted illegally and contrary to the rights of his client.

The Court of Session was being asked to discern that the Presbytery had acted wrongly in obeying the General Assembly and must now in spite of the Veto Act, proceed to the trials of Mr. Young and if satisfactory ordain and induct him to the charge and put him in possession of the stipend, manse and glebe. In 1838, the Court gave a decision in favour of Young by eight judges to five. The majority of the justices had bowed to Hope’s argument that the Church of Scotland was formed, instituted and established, by the State. It is, he said, ‘wholly of statutory creation, of statutory authority and statutory jurisdiction. Its powers are the result of a statutory grant.’ He went on to argue that any power it claims beyond that conveyed by the State is an illusion of grandeur on the part of ecclesiastics. Hope used great psychological skill in carrying his argument even if he did appeal to the Court’s power and vanity and use wrong precedents.

Young appeared before the Presbytery demanding his rights and when Presbytery referred the matter to the Synod he entered a notary protest. The case was referred to the Assembly. The Assembly decided to refer the matter to the House of Lords and issued a declaration of the Church’s independence. They recognised the State’s power to give the civil rights, stipend, manse etc. it had granted the Church to whoever it thought fit and the Church would respect this but the Courts of the Church were independent. Over these she possessed complete jurisdiction in accordance with God’s Word. Her authority flows from God and the Mediator Jesus Christ who is the only King and head of the Church. Civil courts could not tell her whom she was to ordain and set over God’s people. The arguments before the Lords were much as before the Scottish Court. The Lords upheld the decision of the Court of Session.

Lethendy

In the Lethendy case a Mr Clerk, under the advice of Hope, raised an action against the Presbytery for not proceeding under the Veto Act. The patron presented a more acceptable man but Clerk obtained an injunction from the Court forbidding the Presbytery to go ahead to ordain and induct the new man and when they did, they were hauled before the court, rebuked and narrowly escaped imprisonment for contempt.

Strathbogie

In the Strathbogie case where the usual procedure followed a veto, the majority of the Presbytery being of the Moderate School decided to go ahead with the patron’s choice at the direction of the Law Court. The Assembly forbade them to do so and when they persisted, it suspended them and on further acts of defiance, it deposed them from the ministry. The Church then appointed supply for the vacant charges but the deposed men, again acting under the directions of Dean Hope, took out a court order forbidding other men preaching in their vacant pulpits. The Court order when it came extended not just to the churches, manses etc., but to the whole parish territory. The Supply Preachers, including Murray McCheyne and Dr Guthrie, were kept out of the churches but preached in the open air with good attendance.

Chapels of Ease

Another area where the Law Court was to obtrude itself on request was in the matter of the Ministers of Chapels of Ease. They had been granted Sessions, and seats on the higher courts of the Church. The opponents of the Evangelicals argued that again the Assembly had gone outside the law to create these new charges and that they were not part of the State parish system. Their ministers therefore were not regularly constituted ministers. On request, the courts of the land declared the position of these men irregular and injunctions were issued restraining them taking their places on the General Assembly and declaring the acts of the Assembly null and void where such men were present.

Cases multiplied and there was emerging chaos as rival Presbyteries and rival claimants for seats on the Assembly came forward, some recognised by the Church but not by the State and vice-versa.

Political Inaction

There were several appeals to the Government but the English dominated Parliament would do nothing. Some thought it was a storm in a tea cup, others thought that a little firmness would bring the hot-heads into line. Lord Melbourne, the Liberal Prime Minister, didn’t like Chalmers personally, and Peel, the Tory Prime Minister, wouldn’t look at any grievance of the Scottish Church. The majority of the Scottish MPs were for relieving the conflict between the Scottish Church and the Law Courts but they were overridden by the English MPs. Parliament’s mind was not made any more favourable by a paper circulated among the members by Dean Hope who distorted the picture grossly. Lord Aberdeen, a Scottish peer and member of the government, tried to get a bill through which sought to settle matters but it floundered on certain misunderstandings between himself and the Evangelical party.

The ‘Claim of Right’

In 1842 there was the last undivided Assembly. This gathering drew up a Claim of Right in which it states clearly the Church’s principle of non-intrusion into her spiritual work by the State. It recognises the place of the law courts and the duty of obedience to the state but it also insists on the Crown Rights of King Jesus as the only Head and King of the Church. It states that the Lord Jesus has appointed a government in the church distinct from and independent of the government of the state. The government of the church is ministerial not lordly and is exercised in accordance with Christ’s law and the liberties of his people. Instances are given where the state had recently interfered in the churches spiritual functions. This Claim of Right, Declaration and Protest can be read with other relevant documents in the Free Church Subordinate Standards.

Another attempt to find a way out in London was thwarted. An intended Bill brought forward by Scottish MPs was thrown out on a technicality. The Auchterarder Patron and Presentee won damages against the Presbytery for its refusal to ordain and induct him though it was instructed by the Assembly to do so. The judgement of the Law Lords and the accompanying statement of the Law’s supreme authority over the Church in her Established position, seemed to rob the Church of its last vestige of independence from the State. Toward the end of 1842, a Convocation of ministers was called in Edinburgh. Its purpose was to convince the Government by a large and representative body that the Church was not acting on the instigation of a few hot-heads but on the convictions of sensible and mature men. It also met to discuss the future and if necessary plan a Church of Scotland Free. While the Convocation was held in private, notes have survived taken by delegates which indicate that while at first there was a wide spectrum of opinion, it all finally blended into one. Dr. Chalmers took a leading role in the Convocation and surprised his colleagues by producing a scheme for financing the Free Church if and when it came into being. The linch pin was a central fund to which all contributions to stipend would go and then all ministers would be paid out of a central equal dividend. In this way, wealthy congregations would support poorer ones in meeting the stipend of their minister. Other aspects of the planned organisation of a Free church were discussed and put in readiness. They apparently made a commitment to each other that a few were to resile from in the day of battle.

Just as the brethren parted the reply of the Government to the Claim of Right was received. It rebuked the Church for its assault on vested interests (ie. the Patrons) and inferred that the Scottish Church leaders were emulating the pretensions of Rome.

The Decisive Week.

The Assembly for 1843 met in Edinburgh as usual. The Evangelical party had a conference of ministers and elders on Monday evening, 15 May to iron out last details. The issue was clear now. There would be a Church of Scotland Free. All at the conference agreed on the course of action. On the Tuesday the Protest to be read out at the Assembly was prepared. It was read, approved and signed by those members concerned on the Wednesday. There was a meeting of harmony and love in the evening.

On Thursday the members of Assembly went to public worship in St Giles. The sermon was preached by the retiring Moderator Dr Welsh. Then the Assembly moved to St Andrew’s church for its deliberations. After constituting the Assembly with prayer, Dr Welsh read out the prepared Protest at continuing any longer in this Assembly as at present constituted, bowed to the Queen’s Commissioner and walked out. He was followed by Chalmers and many others. Altogether two hundred delegates walked out - ministers and elders. Remember that the Assembly is not fully representative and those who walked out would be somewhat less than half of those present. They were followed by many more who were not on the Assembly roll that year.

The ‘Fathers and Brethren’ of the fledgling church marched along the street to the cheers of crowds until they reached the Tanfield Hall. There they constituted the Church of Scotland Free with Dr Chalmers as the first Moderator. The ministers signed a Deed of Demission leaving their stipend, churches, manses provided by the State. Four hundred and seventy four ministers signed the form and said good bye to their worldly all. One man signed away the richest living in Scotland. (Editor’s note: there is a facsimile copy of this Deed hanging in a room at the Taree church. It was kindly given to the Manning Congregation by Mr Lee.)

Dr. Chalmers in his address as the first Moderator stressed that while they were leaving a corrupt establishment they would rejoice to return to a pure one. They were advocates of a national recognition and national support of religion, they were not voluntaries. (Voluntaries are those who believe in complete separation of church and State. Very few people in the churches believe this. They all take support from the State in the form of tax-free church buildings and many take State aid for church schools!) A roll was made up of all members of the ministry adhering to the Disruption and of an Elder from each congregation adhering to the Free Church. After consolidating their demission and setting up bodies to plan and organise the new Church, the brethren dispersed to meet again in October. They went home to a formidable task.The ministers had no session, no congregation officially, no manse, no stipend, no school to supervise. A stipend was on the way less by a half in most cases. A house could be rented but it would not be as commodious as the manse and it could be well away from the flock. A church could eventually be built if they could get the landlord who might own a whole county to let them have a site on his property on which to build. Meanwhile quite a few ministers and people were to have services in barns, sheds, houses and even in the open air, for many a day. One congregation procured a floating kirk and anchored it on a Scottish loch.

The Rewards and Cost of Discipleship

Not only did the ministers and many schoolteachers, suffer the loss of income, of lovely homes that they had been a lifetime improving and beautiful gardens to go with it, (where the minister had toiled fruitfully) and beautiful church buildings, they went out also to loss of social esteem and became despised in certain quarters. Dr Grierson of Errol had to stand on the doorsteps of noble houses to see his parishioners (servants of the household) where once he had been one of the honoured guests. Like Abraham these men and their women-folk with them, went out not knowing where they were going but they knew that the Head and King of the Church would not forget their loyalty.

So great was the spiritual power released that within a few years the Free Church had built several hundred churches and manses, several hundred schools, a Divinity Hall - later expanded to three - and Teacher Training Colleges, two of which are great State education centres today. There was great spiritual blessing and great outreach to the needy masses. Women’s societies were formed to help the work, Sunday Schools were started with a missionary emphasis, Ragged Schools to reach the neglected day children were enthusiastically adopted. All the missionaries overseas joined the Free Church and had to be and were provided for. The amount of money provided for all the projects was unheard of in that day. Quite a lot of it came from ordinary working folks.

The Disruption was the result of a great spiritual movement years before. The cutting of the strings of the corrupt Establishment let loose the bottled up energy of a people revived by God.

<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next > End >>

< Prev		Next >

[ Back ]

PCEA login