THE SCOTCH CHURCH PATRONAGE BILL.
[To TEE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."] SIR,—In common with many of those who belong to the Church of Scotland, I rejoice to think that your valuable paper has lately been giving some space in its columns to the discussion of the im- portant subject, transference of lay patronage. I regret, how- ever, that your able advocacy should have been on the side of the "ratepayer," as against the "communicant." You are evidently under the impression that thereby the ecclesiastical constituencies- would be greatly enlarged. In towns this would result. But in addition to the utter impracticability and unreasonableness of the proposal to permit all ratepayers to choose a minister for the con- gregation worshipping in the parish church, I scarcely like to con- template the scenes of confusion and discord that would in all likelihood ensue ; and the poorest of the poor, who, for the most part, belong to the Established Church, would be robbed of rights- they at present possess.
In country parishes, the rating qualification would greatly diminish the number of electors. Ploughmen, gardeners, game- keepers, in short, all who have a "house," of ordinary rental, as part payment of wages, would be disfranchised, for no fault of their own; for such pay no rates, and have no place on the valuation- roll. Such are excluded from a share in the management of the national schools, for under the provisions of the Scotch Education Act the ratepayers have all power. It is surely unfair in the highest degree to exclude them also from a share in the Church's manage- ment. Not only would they have no voice in the election of a religious teacher for themselves, but the feeling would surely, by and by, be generated that they were aliens from the State. In truth, the Church of Scotland could scarcely stand by and see many of her loyal and devoted members thus stripped of votes, while votes in the selection of a religious teacher were being given, it may be, to some who make little or no profession of Christianity ; or who, as United Presbyterians, are hostile to our Church ; or who, as Free Churchmen, forsook the Church in her hour of greatest trial.
Is thete any hardship, after all, in a Church's demand for an outward profession of belief and practice from those who wish to share its privileges? I confess I cannot see it ; nor do I know any good reason why every parishioner, on reaching the estate of manhood or womanhood, should not add to the profession of adherentship that of membership. The "test" required is the living a virtuous and godly life,—i.e., so far as the Kirk Session can take cognit.ance, a life free from open sin and public scandal. And surely that is not too much to ask, from those who would aspire to shape in part the destinies of any important section of the Christian Church.—I am, Sir, &c., A PARISH MINISTER.
[The exclusion of members of the congregation who are not ratepayers would certainly be unjustifiable, but both might be- included.—En, Spectator.]
Previous page
