Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1711 facts for kids
| Act of Parliament | |
|
|
| Long title | An Act to restore the Patrons to their ancient Rights of presenting Ministers to the Churches vacant in that Part of Great Britain called Scotland. |
|---|---|
| Citation | 10 Ann. c. 21 (Ruffhead c. 12) |
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 22 May 1712 |
| Commencement | 1 May 1712 |
| Other legislation | |
| Amended by | Promissory Oaths Act 1871 |
| Repealed by | Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1874 |
|
Status: Repealed
|
|
| Text of statute as originally enacted | |
The Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1711, also called the Patronage Act, was a law passed by the Parliament of Great Britain. Its main goal was to give back control to noble families and other important people, known as Patrons, over the Church of Scotland parishes.
Before this Act, Patrons had lost some of their power to choose ministers after the Glorious Revolution. This law aimed to restore their old rights to suggest who should lead a church when a minister's position became empty.
Contents
Church Patronage Before 1711
Early Church Practices
Long ago, the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland received large gifts of land. These gifts came from kings or wealthy landowners. The land was meant to support churches and religious communities. Often, the people who gave the land had a special condition. They wanted the right to pick a suitable priest for that church. If there was no specific Patron, the Pope was considered the main Patron. Local bishops would then carry out his choices.
Changes During the Reformation
The Church in Scotland changed a lot during the Reformation. This period was guided by leaders like John Knox. The King took over many church lands. Some lands went to his supporters, universities, or town councils. However, lands that supported parish clergy, now called ministers, usually stayed the same. The King became the default Patron if no one else had the right.
The First Book of Discipline (1560) and Second Book of Discipline (1578) set rules for the new Church of Scotland. Both books said that ministers should be chosen by the church members, or congregations. But the part about patronage, which was the right of landowners to pick ministers, never became a full law.
Still, a Scottish law in 1567 said that lay (non-church) patrons could keep their right to suggest ministers. They had to suggest a qualified person within six months. If the congregation disagreed, they could only do so based on whether the person was qualified.
The "Golden Act" of 1592 made Presbyterianism the only legal church system in Scotland. It stated that local church groups, called Presbyteries, had to accept any qualified minister suggested by the King or a lay patron. If a congregation refused a suitable person, the Patron could keep the income from the church's lands. By the early 1600s, patronage was a strong custom and law. Patrons could be the King, universities, town councils, or landowners like the Duke of Argyle.
Troubled Times in the 1600s
The "Golden Act" was later changed by King Charles I. But the right of lay patrons to choose ministers was not removed. In 1649, the Parliament of Scotland tried to get rid of patronage. However, this law never became official. Scotland was soon taken over by the English. Even after more changes to church government, patronage was not formally ended. This remained true during the time of King Charles II and James VII.
The Glorious Revolution's Impact
After William of Orange arrived in England, the Glorious Revolution happened. This event firmly brought back Presbyterianism as the only legal church system in Scotland. A 1690 law by the Parliament of Scotland did not completely abolish patronage. Instead, it gave the power to choose ministers to the heritors (landowners) and elders of each parish. They would suggest a candidate to the whole congregation. The congregation could approve or disapprove, but they had to give reasons for disapproving. Any disagreements would be settled by the presbytery. Patrons who lost their rights were paid compensation, usually a year's income from the church. They had to give up their claim in writing.
The Union of Great Britain in 1707
The Treaty of Union was signed between Scotland and England in 1706. It promised to keep Scotland's separate legal system. Through separate Acts of Union, the Scottish Parliament closed. A new single Parliament of Great Britain was formed. Another act guaranteed that the Church of Scotland would remain Presbyterian. This was important for future arguments about patronage. The Church of Scotland was set up by an Act of Parliament. This meant there were differences between church benefits (spiritual) and property benefits (civil law) when choosing a minister. The treaty and acts became law in 1707.
The Patronage Act of 1711
Patronage was less of a problem in the Anglican Church in England. The Scottish lay patrons who had lost their rights convinced the new British Parliament that they had unfairly lost a civil right. Most members of this Parliament were Anglican. Their argument was stronger because Article 20 of the Treaty of Union protected all inherited rights from before the Union. The British Government also did not trust ordinary people to have too much say in important matters, like choosing church ministers.
Because of these reasons, the Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1711 was passed. It gave back the right to suggest qualified ministers to the original owners of patronage. Only three patrons had given up their claims in writing for money. They were not included. This Act brought things back to how they were in 1592. Patrons had to promise loyalty to the Hanoverian kings. They also had to reject the claims of the Stuart Pretenders. If a patron refused, they had to appoint someone else to exercise their patronage. Importantly, patrons did not need to be members of the Church of Scotland themselves. The Act became law on May 1, 1712.
Disagreements and Protests
The Moderates' Acceptance
The Church of Scotland mostly accepted this new law, even though they felt it was unfair. The General Assembly, which is the Church's main meeting, protested to Parliament almost every year until 1784. They believed the Act went against the Treaty of Union. However, the law stated that a congregation could only object to a minister based on their qualifications. So, the General Assembly made rules for very strict education, moral standards, and practical skills for ministers. Also, few patrons dared to suggest unqualified people.
Appointments were often challenged in church courts. These courts included the Kirk Session, Presbytery, and Synod, with final decisions made by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. Most objections were about whether the candidate was acceptable, not if they were qualified. So, the Assembly usually sided with the Patron. This was because the Patron could sue for damages in the civil courts if the Church refused their choice.
Civil courts got involved because disputes were about ministers' salaries and church property. They also dealt with who had the right to patronage and if deadlines were missed. Over time, most ministers owed their jobs to a patron. They were not willing to challenge the system. Many also worried about more democratic involvement in church leadership. The Church itself was guaranteed by an Act of Parliament, so it tended to support legal procedures, even while protesting them. Many patrons tried to work with local landowners and elders to suggest candidates who met the Church's standards. This group of ministers, landowners, elders, and patrons were called Moderates. They were the most powerful group in the Church of Scotland during the 1700s.
Evangelicals' Opposition
Other ministers, landowners, and elders disagreed with patronage on principle. They felt it took away the Church's independence. It also removed the right of congregations to freely choose their own ministers. They saw the 1600s as a fight to achieve this freedom. This was especially true during the Covenanter period, which ended with the Glorious Revolution. Later, this group of principled opponents was called the Evangelicals. They became very powerful in the 1800s.
Also, buying and selling church jobs, called Simony, was against church law. When a Patron tried to sell their right, people would cry "Simony!" This charge had moral weight, but no legal effect in church or civil courts. Unhappy church members had many ways to object to a candidate. They could question their education, morals, or practical skills. More often, they questioned if the candidate truly believed in the Westminster Confession of Faith. They could also question the Patron's right, the timing, or if church rules were followed. Besides legal opposition, many disputed appointments led to public protests. Sometimes these protests were linked to demands for more democracy. Local church groups could even call in the army to force a disputed appointment.
The End of Patronage
The Church of Scotland strongly opposed the 1711 Act. They saw it as interfering with church elections. The General Assembly of 1712 added a clause to its instructions to protest to Parliament. This protest was repeated every year until 1784. However, because the aristocracy was so powerful, the Act stayed in force for a long time. It was finally removed by section 3 of the Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1874.
Laws in the 1700s
A law in 1719 required any suggested minister to say they were willing to take the patron's offer. This was to stop patrons from suggesting someone they knew would refuse, just so the patron could keep the minister's salary. Many hoped this would end patronage. They thought no good Presbyterian would agree to a patron's offer. But after a few uncertain years, patronage continued as normal.
General Assembly Decisions
In 1730, the General Assembly passed a rule. It said that objections to church court decisions could no longer be officially recorded. Evangelicals saw this as a way to silence their opposition to patronage.
In 1732, the General Assembly passed another rule. If a Patron did not suggest a candidate within six months, the right to choose fell to the local church group (Presbytery). The new rule said that the 1690 rules should be followed. This meant the right went to the Heritors (landowners) and Elders. There were also rules for what to do if a congregation objected. Some members, like Ebenezer Erskine, wanted the 1649 rules to apply. These rules said that all heads of families in a congregation should choose a minister. The fact that their objections could no longer be recorded led to the first split in the Church of Scotland, called the Original Secession.
The Veto Act
In 1834, the General Assembly passed the Veto Act. This law said that a minister suggested by a patron could not be installed if most of the church members' households objected and gave their reasons. This showed the growing power of the Evangelicals and the decline of the Moderates.
The Great Disruption of 1843
Between 1838 and 1841, a series of court cases happened. The Court of Session and the House of Lords ruled that the Veto Act was illegal. This meant it could not be enforced. The courts also said that the Church of Scotland, being set up by law, had to follow the country's laws in all civil matters. Church groups could face big fines if they used the Veto Act to resist a patron's choice. Court orders even stopped the ordination of ministers who might harm a patron's interests.
This led to the Great Disruption in 1843. About 40% of the ministers, led by Thomas Chalmers, walked out of the Church of Scotland. They formed the Free Church of Scotland. At the time, this new church had no major religious differences with the ministers who stayed. But it included most of the evangelical ministers. Those who remained in the Church of Scotland were determined to follow the law. In 1874, they succeeded in getting the Patronage Act abolished.
Abolition of Patronage
The Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1874 finally abolished lay patronage for the Church of Scotland. This happened 163 years after the 1711 Act. This new law allowed church groups to follow their own church laws when choosing ministers. At first, ministers were chosen by a meeting of all household heads and elders. Later, a detailed process of trials was developed. By the late 1900s, this process also allowed women to have a say in choosing ministers. The General Assembly introduced women deaconesses in 1898. They created the idea of women elders in 1966 and women ministers in 1968.
