Substance of a speech delivered in the General Assembly, on Wednesday the twenty-second of May, 1839 respecting the decision of the House of Lords on the case of Auchterarder

Glasgow: William Collins, 1839. Glasgow: William Collins, 1839. First edition, second thousand. 8vo. Pages disbound from a larger volume. 40 pp. "The Church of Scotland was recognised by Acts of Parliament as the national church of the Scottish people". Particularly under John Knox and later Andrew Melville it had, unlike the Church of England, always claimed an inherent right to exercise independent spiritual jurisdiction over its own affairs. To some extent this right was recognised by the Claim of Right of 1689, which brought to an end royal and parliamentary interference in the order and worship of the church. It was ratified by the Act of Union in 1707. On the other hand, the right of patronage, whereby a patron of a parish had the right to install a minister of his choice, became a point of contention. The difference was between those who held that this right infringed on the spiritual independence of the church, and those who regarded it as a matter of property under the state's jurisdiction. As early as 1712 the right of patronage had been restored in Scotland, amid remonstrances from the church. For many years afterwards the kirk's General Assembly sought redress as a grievance, but the dominant Moderate Party in the church acted so as to avoid confrontation with the state.[7] The "Ten Years' Conflict" Parishioners walk out of church in protest at the unpopular appointment of a minister in the parish of Marnoch, Strathbogie in 1841 In 1834, however, the evangelical party attained a majority in the General Assembly for the first time in a century. One of their actions was to pass the Veto Act, which gave parishioners the right to reject a minister nominated by their patron.[8] The intention was to prevent the intrusion of ministers on unwilling parishioners, and to restore the importance of the congregational "call". But the effect of the act was to polarise positions in the church, and set it on a collision course with the state. The first test came with the Auchterarder case of 1834. The parish of Auchterarder unanimously rejected the patron's nominee – and the Presbytery refused to proceed with his ordination and induction. The rejected individual, Robert Young, appealed to the Court of Session which, in 1838, by an 8–5 majority, held that in passing the Veto Act, the church had acted ultra vires, and had infringed the statutory rights of patrons. If that had been all, then the church might have rescinded the act, but the Court of Session went on to rule that the established church was a creation of the state and derived its legitimacy by act of Parliament. This directly contradicted the church's Confession of Faith and its own self-understanding. As Burleigh puts it: "The notion of the Church as an independent community governed by its own officers and capable of entering into a compact with the state was repudiated" (p. 342). The question now moved from the issue of patronage, to the issue of the church's spiritual independence. An appeal to the House of Lords was rejected. Complete. Very good.. First Edition. Disbound. Very Good. 8vo.