BEARING OF THE QUESTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PARISHIONERS.
James Dodson
There is another view of the matter arising from the position of the Established Church as a national institution in her relation to the heritors and parishioners of the different parishes throughout the country. It appears to have been mainly upon a consideration of this relation that the introduction of an organ was prevented in the St Andrews
Page 94
Church, Glasgow, of old. Under a long series of Acts, beginning with the Reformation from Popery, provision is made in connection with the landed proprietors in each district, for providing and maintaining the ordinances of worship. Parish churches existed at first in almost every parish at the Reformation, so that the provisions of the Act were confined to “upholding and repairing” them. Included within this operation of providing and maintaining churches, is that of fitting them up internally with proper seating, and, where not already existing, the heritors are bound to provide the other adjuncts which are recognised as pertinents of the Church, such as a bell and the furniture required for the celebration of the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. By Act of the Scottish Parliament, 1617, chap. 6, it is ordained, “that all the paroch kirks within this kingdom be provided with basins and cavoirs for the ministration of the Sacrament of Baptisme, and of cups, tables, and table cloathes for the administratione of the Holy Communion,” and provision is made for securing that the heritors shall supply these.
By another series of Acts, provision is made for maintaining the regular pulpit ministrations, also at the expense of the heritors, under the name of stipend, which now includes a sum to cover communion elements. These Acts give interpretation to the mode of worship practised in the Church, as while every other detail of the worship is provided for, no provision whatever is made either for
Page 95
any portion of the area or gallery of a church being set apart for a musical instrument, or for providing an organ or organist. The expense of maintaining an organ and an organist in every parish in the country would be nearly as great as the expense hitherto devoted to maintaining the minister himself. If instrumental music forms any part of the worship of the Church, it would follow that Presbyteries and Synods could compel the heritors to provide the music in the same way as they could compel them to provide a church, a manse, communion elements, or baptismal appurtenances. No doubt it has been held that neither by statute nor at common law are the heritors bound to provide a salary for the precentor, but, as has been already shown from the Second Book of Discipline, it was intended that such a provision should be made at first; and if organs, altars, altar-cloths, and such like are now to be held as necessary or allowable in worship, it seems a fair question whether the same Act of Parliament that is supposed to authorise the change must not be held to secure and impose as a burden the necessary expense.
By the original arrangement also the duty of the parochial schoolmaster was to train all the children to sing. Provision was thus made to enable the whole congregation to join in the praise of God intelligently and harmoniously, without any need of an instrumental accompaniment, being themselves the living organ. This was changed after the Act 1803, and the absence of reference to precentors has arisen from the view that the minis-
Page 96
ter is responsible for the performance of the whole worship, and that the precentor only acts under his authority and as his substitute. This view receives much confirmation from the terms used by the present Lord Chancellor in his judgment on the appeal anent the proclamation of banns. His Lordship seemed to hold that the clerk or precentor was simply the servant of the kirk-session or minister. It is known also that these officials have been provided for indirectly through the fees for proclamation of banns or otherwise, and it would only seem to follow that as the minister himself should perform that duty, so at all events that no burden should be imposed upon the heritors in that respect. In about 120 parishes in Scotland it is understood that there is but one heritor in each, or rather the same proprietor is sometimes the sole heritor in two or three different parishes. Against each of these for himself, and as representing the other parishioners, all the statutory obligations are exigible; and if an organ is constitutional, no doubt some provision would have been made, or must yet be made, for its introduction and maintenance.
The existence of such obligations on the part of the heritors and parishioners must necessarily, it is conceived, create counterpart obligations on the part of the Church, and constitute rights and privileges to every one contributing to its support. It would be quite unreasonable to hold that while the church was maintained by the parishioners, sweep-
Page 97
ing changes could be introduced without any sanction of law, and which might ultimately infer pecuniary obligations. Although till lately the heritors have not had any voice in the selection of a minister, they have always had power over the church fabric and other arrangements. It cannot be supposed that the obligation of the heritors would still remain if the minister was not to perform his part of the contract, or if the Supreme Court of the Church should order the worship to cease, or alter the religion and worship and even make it Roman Catholic in doctrine, rites, and ceremonies. If this principle is carried out, any heritor or parishioner would seem to have the right to enforce a strict adherence to the letter of the law in regard to the duties of the Church in the matter of worship.
The expense of providing organs and organists for every parish throughout the country would necessarily be very great, and either they are legal or illegal. Hitherto, such as have been furnished have been provided by public subscription, and have been maintained by some somewhat derogatory devices. It may be assumed that if the promoters of instrumental music ultimately succeed in getting the innovation generally introduced into the service of the Church, the probable liability for its support will rest upon the heritors, whose burdens would thereby be probably doubled. The true test of the question would seem to be this: If instrumental music is either a part of the Church’s service at present, or
Page 98
if it is held by the Assembly to be a part of it which they may sanction, the Synods and Presbyteries throughout the country might be entitled to order its introduction into every congregation of the Church. Uniformity is one grand element in the Presbyterian constitution, and if instrumental music is necessary in any one congregation, it is the duty of the General Assembly to see that it is practised in every parish, and that the heritors are compelled to do their duty. In that case, some of these shrewd men might perhaps strenuously object to such a course, and insist upon the production of legal authority for the contribution proposed to be levied, and no doubt it would task the ingenuity of all concerned to produce either statute or common law for the practice. But it is as well to resist the beginnings of change; and, when rightly considered, the privileges of the heritors would seem to entitle them to press the matter further at present. It cannot for a moment be supposed that all the legislation for the Church was one-sided, or that the landowners had not their counterpart advantages from the Acts of Parliament. It might be the anxious wish of the Church to have her privileges defined, and her creed and worship sanctioned, but it was also for the interest of the parishioners that this should be done. Because whenever the Church should in any way exceed her limits, or depart from her standards, a right would necessarily emerge to the landowners, or they would be freed from their obligations. It may be presumed, therefore,
Page 99
that the heritors have a vested interest in connection with their payment of stipends and maintenance of churches to see that nothing is done in connection with the church fabric which can in any way be held to infringe their rights. They are entitled to prevent the use of the church for any purpose not within the sense of the Acts of Parliament, and under this right it is conceived that they would have a standing also to object to the introduction of an altar, or of images, or any other extraneous object not necessary for the celebration of public worship, and especially not consistent with the worship authorised and practised since the Revolution Settlement. The people also and every one of them for whose benefit the Establishment has been provided would seem to have similar rights and privileges; and out of all this, if the present course of innovation is continued, a question quite as important as that of Auchterarder may ultimately be raised in the civil courts.
Assuming that the General Assembly has no legislative power to alter the worship of the Church by the introduction of a liturgy or of instrumental music, without relinquishing the benefits of the Establishment, the next question arises, How are the inroads of such innovations to be checked? Hitherto, as has been stated, the Assembly has not distinctly changed the law of the Church on the subject, and yet the innovations are winked at and tolerated, and are evidently upon the increase in various directions. It would seem sufficiently plain that there is a very solemn obligation upon the
Page 100
Assembly to preserve the purity of worship in the Church, and that they are bound to look the question in the face, and to deal with the changes by firmly resisting and expressly debarring them. Every office-bearer also has voluntarily undertaken a solemn obligation to defend to the utmost of his power the simple worship of the Presbyterian Church, as practised at and since the Revolution. Failing all this, as there can be no wrong without a remedy, very many are now anxious to ascertain what that remedy is, and how it may be most speedily and effectually applied. It would be very important to discover a sure method for bringing the matter to an issue, both in the Established Church and in Churches unestablished, in which such corruptions of worship have been introduced or tolerated. As not a few conceive the changes to be quite illegal, and to involve a most dangerous principle, capable of indefinite expansion, it is very desirable that the true state of the case should be ascertained as quickly and definitely as possible.