Links in the Chain

W.M. Punshon, "Influence of Good Books" in Benjamin Broomhall, ed., Evangelisation of the World, a Missionary Band, p. 214:

I thought how an old Puritan doctor wrote a book years and years ago, called "The Bruised Reed," which fell just at the right time into the hands of Richard Baxter, and brought him under the influence of the enlightening power of the Spirit of God; and then Baxter's ministry was like the sun in his strength, and he wrote a book called "The Call to the Unconverted," which continued to speak long after Baxter himself had ceased to speak with human tongue. That "Call to the Unconverted" went preaching on until it got into the hands of Philip Doddridge (prepared by his pious mother's teaching from the Dutch tiles of a mantel-piece with very quaint Scriptural stories); and it was the means of enlightening him to a broader knowledge, and a richer faith, and a deeper experience of the things of God. And then I thought how Doddridge wrote a book called "The Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul," which, just at a critical period in his history, fell into the hands of William Wilberforce, who wrote a book called "Practical Christianity," which, far down in the sunny Isle of Wight, fired the heart of a clergyman, who has attained, perhaps, in connection with this society, the broadest and widest reputation of all -- for who has not heard of Legh Richmond? He wrote the simple annals of a Methodist girl, and published it under the title of "The Diaryman's Daughter"; and I should like to know into how many languages that has been translated, and been made of God a power for the spread of truth. The same book on "Practical Christianity" went right down into a secluded parish in Scotland, and it found there a young clergyman who was preaching a gospel that he did not know, and it instructed him in the way of God more perfectly, and he came forth a champion valiant for the truth upon the earth, until all Scotland rang with the eloquence of Thomas Chalmers. Look at it! -- not a flaw in the chain: Richard Sibbes, Richard Baxter, Philip Doddridge, William Wilberforce, Legh Richmond, Thomas Chalmers -- is not that apostolical succession?

John Macleod, Some Favourite Books, pp. 85-86:

Thus a chain goes back from Thomas Chalmers to William Wilberforce, to Philip Doddridge, to Richard Baxter, to Richard Sibbes. Along the links of that chain by pen and in the life the power of the Spirit of God is to be seen.

LINKS IN THE CHAIN

from 17th Century to 19th Century.

RICHARD SIBBES:

The Bruised Reed (1630)

↓

RICHARD BAXTER

   'It pleased God that a poor pedlar came to the door...and my Father bought of him Sibb's Bruised Reed...It suited my state...and gave me a livelier apprehension of the mystery of redemption and how much I was beholden to Jesus Christ...Without any means but books was God please to resolve me for Himself.'

   In 1657 Baxter's Call to the Unconverted was published. Many years later it was blessed to the conversion of

↓

PHILIP DODDRIDGE:

whose Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul, printed in 1745, was used to bring into the light of God the soul of

↓

WILLIAM WILBERFORCE: 

whose Practical View of the prevailing Religious System of Professed Christians...contrasted with Real Christianity, published in 1797, helped to bring from death into light and life the soul of

↓

THOMAS CHALMERS:

who wrote: 'Somewhere about the year 1811 I had Wilberforce's View put into my hands, and as I got on in reading it I felt myself on the eve of a great revolution in all my opinions of Christianity. I am now most thoroughly of opinion...that on the system of "Do this and live" no peace...can ever be attained. It is, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved".'

 "Ministers are living Books, and Books are dead Ministers; and yet though dead, they speak. When you cannot hear the one, you may read the other."~Matthew Poole

Nooks and Books

Thomas à Kempis, author of The Imitation of Christ, which is said to be (next to the Bible) the most-translated book in world history, had a saying: "In omnibus requiem quaesivi, sed non inveni, nisi in hoexkens ende boexkens" -- "I have sought everywhere for peace, but I have found it not save in nooks and in books."

His magnum opus was recommended reading by divines such as Gisbertus Voetius, Willem Teellinck, Wilhemus à Brakel, Henry Scougal, Richard Baxter, and Thomas Chalmers, among others. Read him as he wished to be read -- with discernment in the Lord. Here is some wisdom gleaned from à Kempis, a man who both studied much and loved much, on the place of books in the Christian life:

If thou knewest the whole Bible, and the sayings of all the philosophers, what should all this profit thee without the love and grace of God? (Book 1, Chapter 1)

Of a surety, at the Day of Judgment it will be demanded of us, not what we have read, but what we have done; not how well we have spoken, but how holily we have lived. (Book 1, Chapter 3)

It is Truth which we must look for in Holy Writ, not cunning of words. All Scripture ought to be read in the spirit in which it was written. We must rather seek for what is profitable in Scripture, than for what ministereth to subtlety in discourse. Therefore we ought to read books which are devotional and simple, as well as those which are deep and difficult. And let not the weight of the writer be a stumbling-block to thee, whether he be of little or much learning, but let the love of the pure Truth draw thee to read. Ask not, who hath said this or that, but look to what he says. (Book 1, Chapter 5)

Our own curiosity often hindereth us in the reading of holy writings, when we seek to understand and discuss, where we should pass simply on. If thou wouldst profit by thy reading, read humbly, simply, honestly, and not desiring to win a character for learning. Ask freely, and hear in silence the words of holy men; nor be displeased at the hard sayings of older men than thou, for they are not uttered without cause. (Book 1, Chapter 5)

Be thou never without something to do; be reading, or writing, or praying, or meditating, or doing something that is useful to the community. (Book 1, Chapter 19)

Whereupon then can I hope, or wherein may I trust, save only in the great mercy of God, and the hope of heavenly grace? For whether good men are with me, godly brethren or faithful friends, whether holy books or beautiful discourses, whether sweet hymns and songs, all these help but little, and have but little savour when I am deserted by God's favour and left to mine own poverty. There is no better remedy, then, than patience and denial of self, and an abiding in the will of God. (Book 2, Chapter 9)

There are some who carry their devotion only in books, some in pictures, some in outward signs and figures; some have Me in their mouths, but little in their hearts. Others there are who, being enlightened in their understanding and purged in their affections, continually long after eternal things, hear of earthly things with unwillingness, obey the necessities of nature with sorrow. And these understand what the Spirit of truth speaketh in them; for He teacheth them to despise earthly things and to love heavenly; to neglect the world and to desire heaven all the day and night. (Book 3, Chapter 4)

Great is the difference between a godly man, illuminated with wisdom, and a scholar learned in knowledge and given to books. Far nobler is that doctrine which floweth down from the divine fulness above, than that which is acquired laboriously by human study. (Book 3, Chapter 31)

Never read thou the word that thou mayest appear more learned or wise; but study for the mortification of thy sins, for this will be far more profitable for thee than the knowledge of many difficult questions. (Book 3, Chapter 43)

The voice of books is one, but it informeth not all alike. (Book 3, Chapter 43)

In Thee, therefore, O Lord God, I put all my hope and my refuge, on Thee I lay all my tribulation and anguish; because I find all to be weak and unstable whatsoever I behold out of Thee. For many friends shall not profit, nor strong helpers be able to succour, nor prudent counsellors to give a useful answer, nor the books of the learned to console, nor any precious substance to deliver, nor any secret and beautiful place to give shelter, if Thou Thyself do not assist, help, strengthen, comfort, instruct, keep in safety. (Book 3, Chapter 59)

When I think on these wondrous things, even spiritual comfort whatsoever it be becometh sore weariness to me; for so long as I see not openly my Lord in His own Glory, I count for nothing all which I behold and hear in the world. Thou, O God, art my witness that nothing is able to comfort me, no creature is able to give me rest, save Thou, O my God, whom I desire to contemplate everlastingly. But this is not possible, so long as I remain in this mortal state. Therefore ought I to set myself unto great patience, and submit myself unto Thee in every desire. For even Thy Saints, O Lord, who now rejoice with Thee in the kingdom of heaven, waited for the coming of Thy glory whilst they lived here, in faith and great glory. What they believed, that believe I; what they hoped, I hope; whither they have attained to, thither through Thy grace hope I to come. I will walk meanwhile in faith, strengthened by the examples of the Saints. I will have also holy books for comfort and for a mirror of life, and above them all Thy most holy Body and Blood shall be for me a special remedy and refuge. (Book 4, Chapter 11)

Biblical Theocracy and Past Abuses

Henry Van Dyke, ed., Groen Van Prinsterer's Lectures on Unbelief and Revolution, "Lecture III: Anti-Revolutionary Principles" 57-67:

4. One weighty and controversial point remains: the union of Church and State. It has many opponents, including Christians. I can best begin with the unadorned presentation of the grounds for it.

If a sovereign in all his acts is to be guided by the precepts of morality, this morality must find support in a religion, to whose faithful profession the sovereign grants protection and favours, in the interest of maintaining justice, virtue, and order. If a sovereign is God's lieutenant, he is obliged publicly to confess and worship Him, to aid others in the exercise of worship, and as far as his legitimate authority extends to apply the standards of God's law to all his deeds and ordinances. As Scripture says: "Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling."14 As for the church, she is called to be the light, the salt, and the leaven of the world. The church ought not to seek martyrdom or humiliation. She should not withdraw if the state requests her co-operation. The church must endeavour to secure authority and influence for the Gospel, in order that the divine commandments be observed. These are the grounds for the union of Church and State.

Notice that it is not an option but an obligation. Objections based on fear of harm or despair of profit are therefore not to the point. What does it benefit the state? people ask; it has often paid too dearly for the support of the church. And why would the church need any state support? She flourishes under oppression. Worldly favours are a temptation for her. The Gospel is strong enough without human assistance. -- All these commonplaces are irrelevant the moment appears obligatory. The manner and the degree in which it is applied many run into obstacles in view of the requirements of toleration and the rights of conscience, but this may never lead to a denial of the principle.

And yet, as you know, its opponents are daily increasing. The church, they say, is sacred and the state is profane. The church is the community of God, the state is the world that lies in wickedness. What concord hath Christ with Belial?15 -- Don't think I am putting words in their mouths; you will find even stronger expressions in many a book and pamphlet, admonishing advocates of union to repent and inveighing against union as the Carthage that must be destroyed. Why, a zealous Christian in our own country has recently gone on record as saying that with the exception of ancient Israel all states are from the Devil.16 And Professor [Alexandre] Vinet, that gifted scholar and humble believer, is not afraid to assert, in his widely known book published a few years ago, that the confusion of ideas which have led to union can be attributed only to Satan.17

According to Vinet, union is at all times, in all circumstances, under any government, an abomination.

So it is to me -- in a revolutionary state. I loathe a union such as we have had in the Netherlands since 1795. Legally termed a separation, the present relation between church and state is such that factually the church is restricted in the enjoyment of her lawful rights, hindered in the exercise of her proper influence, placed under tutelage, and, breaking the reciprocal bond, is bound in fetters. From such slavery the church ought to wrest herself free. Indeed, with such a state the church should want to have no relation whatever.

But I reject Vinet's general condemnation. Vinet errs in his conception of the state and, accordingly, in his evaluation of its historic relation with the church. He begins by adopting the radical definition of the state as an aggregate of individuals by whose consent the concentrated masses of the people is governed, a "civil society" whose individual members "have made a common cause of whatever is their common concern."18 Then, to forestall having the government of such an omnipotent state, as a corollary, impose also a national religion, in violation of private conscience, he further defines the state as a "man minus his conscience," concerned only with material interests.19 Such a state, I grant, should have no relation with the church. But this is not the historic state of which I speak.

In addition, Vinet frequently succumbs to the temptation of imputing historical misapplications to the principle as such. Then oratory has free play, evoking the spectres of hypocrisy, self-interest, intolerance, fanaticism. But I hold no brief for the folly and wickedness of men. I defend only the principle and what necessarily follows from it.

Many claim, however, that past abuses followed from the very nature of this relationship. The sovereign will always make his supreme power his own ends. The financial tie will everywhere serve as a pretext for inspection and control. The clergy can be bought at any time by the tokens of honour and favour. Where the church is in union with the state, there independence in matters of faith cannot exist.

We readily admit that too often governments have used their power unjustly and have (not just in our days) used their position of paymaster of the clergy to obtain mastery over the church. We are aware that the clergy have not always remained immune to weapons of silver or of steel. Yet, temptations can be resisted; a state's attempts can meet effective opposition; nor will every sovereign want to dominate a church whose faith he shares. As Thomas Chalmers observes: "There might be an entire dependence on the state in things temporal, without even the shadow of a dependence upon it in things ecclesiastical. Although the church should receive its maintenance, and all its maintenance, from the civil power, it follows not that it therefore receives its theology from the same quarter; or that this theology should acquire thereby the slightest taint or infusion of secularity."20 Nor are regular payments of money the sole or principal tie. Payments may cease yet the union continue if the church's faith is but heeded in the drafting of laws and institutions. In short, abuses are possible but not necessary.

This is borne out by the union of church and state as it actually obtained in all nations prior to the Revolution. Here too Vinet, like many others among our Christian opponents today, is more at home in the flowery fields of philosophical speculation than in the arid deserts of historical research. On this point, do the annals of our fathers speak only of weakness, never of vigorous energy, only of neglect, never of vigilance in the performance of duty? In Calvin's Geneva, there was insistence on the independence of the church no less than than on the independence of the state. From the history of the Reformed Church we can summon many witnesses whose deeds are a glorious testimony to the possibility of clinging unshakably to the rights of the church against the arrogations of the temporal authorities.

I call your attention to Great Britain, where in recent years the Free Church of Scotland has sacrificed the benefits of union, however high she valued them, for the sake of preserving genuine independence. In the seventeenth century almost the whole of English history is taken up by the struggle of the courageous Puritans against the coercion of a caesaropapistic regime sympathetic to Roman Catholicism. After the Restoration of 1660 the believers in Scotland, because they wished to maintain presbyterian polity against the designs of an ungrateful and unscrupulous king, suffered bloody persecution for twenty years, ceasing only when William of Orange arrived to put an end to the coercive and arbitrary measures.
...
But it is time to close with a general remark.

My statement of last week fully holds for this evening's topics: never -- if we exclude the Sophists -- no never before the dawn of the Revolution have these basic maxims been subject to doubt. It has only been since then that historical development is exchanged for the Constitution factory, that the free action of the nation's organic parts is replaced by the lifeless whole of a centralized administration, that Divine right yields to the sovereignty of the People, and that the union of Church and State is abandoned in favour of political atheism.

14 [Psalm 2:10, 11.]
15 [Cf. I John 5:19; II Cor. 6:15.]
16 Pastor [H.P.] Scholte, in the periodical De Reformatie [vol. IV, no. 5 (1843), p. 249].
17 Vinet, Essai sur la manifestation des convictions religieuses et sur la separation de l'Eglise et de l'Etat, p. 22.
18 Ibid., p. 215.
19 Ibid., p. 256.
20 Chalmers, Works, XVII, 197.

Crowded With Splendour

Thomas Chalmers, Discourses on the Christian Revelation, Viewed in Connection with the Modern Astronomy, pp. 18-19:

It is truly a most Christian exercise to extract a sentiment of piety from the works and the appearances of nature. It has the authority of the Sacred Writers upon its side, and even our Saviour himself gives it the weight and the solemnity of his example. "Behold the lilies of the field; they toil not, neither do they spin, yet your heavenly Father careth for them." He expatiates on the beauty of a single flower, and draws from it the delightful argument of confidence in God. He gives us to see that taste may be combined with piety, and that the same heart may be occupied with all that is serious in the contemplations of religion, and be at the same time alive to the charms and the loveliness of nature.

The Psalmist takes a still loftier flight. He leaves the world, and lifts his imagination to that mighty expanse which spreads above it and around it. He wings his way through space, and wanders in thought over its immeasurable regions. Instead of a dark and unpeopled solitude, he sees it crowded with splendour, and filled with the energy of the Divine presence. Creation rises in its immensity before him; and the world, with all which it inherits, shrinks into littleness at a contemplation so vast and so overpowering. He wonders that he is not overlooked amid the grandeur and the variety which are on every side of him; and passing upward from the majesty of nature to the majesty of nature's Architect, he exclaims, "What is man, that thou art mindful of him; or the son of man, that thou shouldest deign to visit him?"

Primer on the Establishment Principle

The Establishment Principle. What is it?

The Establishment Principle or the Principle of the National Recognition of Religion maintains the scriptural view of the universal supremacy of Christ as King of Nations as well as King of saints, with the consequent duty of nations as such, and civil rulers in their official capacity, to honour and serve Him by recognising His Truth and promoting His cause. (C.J. Brown, Christ's Kingship Over the Nations Maintained and Defended in the Establishment Principle, p. 1)

What are the other major theories of church-state relations within Christendom?

1) Roman Catholic papal supremacy over the nations; 2) Erastianism, ie., the chief magistrate is head of the church; 3) Voluntaryism, ie., the state is secular and completely separate from the church.

Isn't the Establishment Principle itself Erastian?

Whereas Erastianism posits the magistrate's power over the church in sacris, that is, in (internal to) religious matters, the Establishment Principle posits the magistrate's power with respect to the church as circa sacris, about (external to) religious matters.

What is the Scriptural basis for this doctrine?

Among some of the scriptural passages adduced in support of the Establishment Principle, include the following:

Ps. 2.10-12 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Ps. 9.17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

Ps.22.27-28 All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the LORD: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee. For the kingdom is the LORD'S: and he is the governor among the nations.

Ps. 33.12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.

Isa. 49.23 And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.

Isa. 60.12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

Rom. 13.3-4 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

1 Tim. 2.1-2 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

Rev. 19.16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

Rev. 21.24, 26 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

What is the (Presbyterian) Confessional basis for this doctrine?

Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), Chap. 23:

II. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate, when called thereunto;(b)in the managing whereof, as they ought especially to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each commonwealth;(c) so for that end, they may lawfully now, under the New Testament, wage war, upon just and necessary occasion.(d)

(b) Prov. 8:15, 16; Rom. 13:1, 2, 4.
(c) Ps. 2:10, 11, 12; I Tim. 2:2; Ps. 82:3, 4; II Sam. 23:3; I Pet. 2:13.
(d) Luke 3:14; Rom. 13:4; Matt. 8:9, 10; Acts 10:1, 2; Rev. 17:14, 16.

III. The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of the Word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven:(e) yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly sttled, administrated, and observed.(f) For the better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.(g)

(e) II Chron. 26:18 with Matt. 18:17 and Matt. 16:19; I Cor. 12:28, 29; Eph. 4:11, 12; I Cor. 4:1, 2; Rom. 10:15; Heb. 5:4.
(f) Isa. 49:23; Ps. 122:9; Ezra 7:23, 25, 26, 27, 28; Lev. 24:16; Deut. 13:5, 6, 12; I Kings 18:4; I Chron. 13:1 to 9; II Kings 23:1 to 26; II Chron. 34:33; II Chron. 15:12, 13.
(g) II Chron. 19:8, 9, 10, 11; II Chron. 29 and 30; Matt. 2:4, 5.

Chap. 31:

II. As magistrates may lawfully call a synod of ministers, and other fit persons, to consult and advise with, about matters of religion;(b) so, if magistrates be open enemies to the Church, the ministers of Christ of themselves, by virtue of their office, or they, with other fit persons upon delegation from their Churches, may meet together in such assemblies.(c)
(b) Isa. 49:23; I Tim. 2:1, 2; II Chron. 19:8, 9, 10, 11; II Chron. 29, 30 chaps.; Matt. 2:4, 5; Prov. 11:14.
(c) Acts 15:2, 4, 22, 23, 25.

Westminster Larger Catechism (1647):

Q109: What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?
A109: The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, ... tolerating a false religion;[6] ...

6. Deut. 13:6-12; Zech. 13:2-3; Rev. 2:2, 14-15, 20, Rev. 17:12, 16-17

Q191: What do we pray for in the second petition.?
A191: In the second petition (which is, Thy kingdom come,)[1] ... the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances,[7] purged from corruption,[8] countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate:[9] ...

1. Matt. 6:10
7. Matt. 9:38; II Thess. 3:1
8. Mal. 1:11; Zeph. 3:9
9. I Tim. 2:1-2

What about the 1788 American Revision to the Westminster Standards? Does not this exclude the Establishment Principle from the American Presbyterian confessional standards?

The Westminster Standards, as revised in 1788, and adopted by most modern American Presbyterian churches, modified WCF 23.3 to change the Establishment Principle expressed by the Westminster Divines into a statement that the magistrate has a duty to protect the church, but not to establish one church in preference to other Christian denominations, and deleted the reference to the magistrate's power to call synods (WCF 31.2) as well as second commandment sin of "tolerating a false religion" (WLC 109). Yet, it retained the duty of magistrates to maintain "piety" (WCF 23.2) and the statement that we are to pray that the church would be "countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate" (WLC 191), although it seems clear that the doctrinal points retained are understood by the modern adopting bodies in a sense rather different than the original Westminster Assembly, that is, not to uphold the Establishment Principle, but rather to protect Christian churches in general without advancing true religion, per se, or suppressing false religion.

'Actually, the revision was primarily intended to move the confessional position of American Presbyterianism from the "establishment principle"[7] to "voluntaryism,"[8]'

7. The "establishment" view of church-state relations (which should not be confused with Erastianism, as Kline unfortunately seems to do) is that the state should establish a particular church (e.g., in England--the Church of England [episcopal in form], and in Scotland--The Church of Scotland [presbyterian in form]) and work with it for the advancement of the cause of religion in the realm. We may paraphrase William Cunningham's description of the principle behind this view: the obligation to advance the cause of God, and the Kingdom of Christ lies not only with individuals, but also with rulers and nations. See Historical Theology, 2:560.
8. Not the more extreme "voluntaryism" of British independency which operated on the principle that the responsibility for the advancement of the cause of Christ rests merely on individual men, rather than rulers and nations (see again Historical Theology), but a "moderate voluntaryism" which explicitly intended government to favor the Christian religion (but not one particular denomination), protect all denominations of Christians, pass no law hindering Christian ministers and church members in the due exercise of religion, and to uphold the moral law. Cf., WCF 23:2,3 (American revision). (Ligon Duncan, The Westminster Confession: A Theonomic Document?)

Can one adhere to the Establishment Principle if he lives in a country which is officially opposed to (e.g., U.S. Constitution, First Amendment), or stands apart from, an established church?

Thomas Chalmers on the 1843 Disruption: "Though we quit the Establishment, we go out on the Establishment principle; we quit a vitiated Establishment but would rejoice in returning to a pure one. We are advocates for a national recognition of religion — and we are not voluntaries."

George Smeaton on the 1843 Disruption: Thus in one day the Free Church of Scotland, as she fitly called herself, started into vigorous existence. Her very name implied nationality and connexion with the historical Church of Scotland. She arose, not as a sectarian denomination, not as assuming any new ground or principle unknown to the confessors and martyrs of Scotland. She repudiated, and will repudiate, the attitude of a sect. She was conscious of being, what she called herself, the Church of Scotland, Free, and would not break her connexion with the past three centuries of Scottish church history. The principle of national establishment of religion as the fitting homage of the nation, and as the duty of the nation to Christ, the Prince of the Kings of the Earth, was her avowed principle, and could not be surrendered by her without becoming a new church and forfeiting her name. Her protest was not against the Establishment as such, but against the submission with which the Establishment succumbed to the ursurpations and encroachments of the civil power. And had a protesting minority continued within the pale of the Establishment, maintaining the church's independence and the people's rights, they would have had the warm sympathy of every Free Churchman. The footing on which they resolved to go out, and on which the practical steps were taken with a view to a new organization, was unmistakably put before the public to this effect. (George Smeaton, Memoirs of Alexander Thomson of Banchory (Edinburgh, 1869), p. 289 (emphasis is Smeaton's), quoted by John W. Keddie, George Smeaton: Learned Theologian and Biblical Scholar, pp. 48-49, 191)

Is the Establishment Principle really so important?

John Kennedy of Dingwall: [The Establishment Principle is not only] “worth living for, but a principle worth dying for."

How One Student Spent £100

George Smeaton, one of Scotland's greatest 19th century ministers and Biblical scholars, went to Edinburgh University in 1829 as a 15 year-old. It was an adjustment for him, according to Thomas Smith (who was with him on that first day, and later as a professorial colleague, and still later preached Smeaton's funeral sermon), but Smeaton soon overcame the disadvantages of his earlier education and went on during his final year to win a prize of £100 given by Dr. Thomas Chalmers to the best student of his class. One wonders, how did he spend the money?

His son, Oliphant Smeaton, tells the story, which is recounted first by William Knight, Some Nineteenth Century Scotsmen (1903), pp. 108-109; and later by John W. Keddie, George Smeaton: Learned Theologian and Biblical Scholar (2007), p. 26.

Characteristically a "bibliophile," he at once laid the sum out in books, securing among other things a complete edition of Migne's "Patristic Library" in seventy folio volumes, a first edition of "Calvini Opera," a fine copy of "Poli Synopsis," the famous folio "Erasmus" in five volumes, and other treasures.

This laid the foundation of a library to which he continued to add until the time of his death, and which at that time numbered considerably over fifteen thousand volumes, and was as varied as it was choice. I had the privilege of presenting it, afterwards, to the New College, where it now remains.