grossest heresy. In 1730, a law was passed, prohibiting aggrieved parties from entering their dissents, for the relief of their consciences, against any part of the Assembly's proceedings, however violent or unjust they might be in their character, or however opposed in their spirit and tendency to the principles and constitution of the Church. In the same year, no fewer than twelve cases of complaint from congregations having obnoxious presentees intruded upon them under the law of patronage, were dismissed by the Assembly unredressed. In 1732 an overture was carried, although in direct violation of the terms of the barrier act, by which the liberties and privileges of the people were still further abridged, and their reasonable wishes and expectations set at nought. In 1733, Ebenezer Erskine was rebuked at the bar of the Assembly, because of his celebrated sermon, preached at the opening of the synod in Perth, in which he had faithfully testified against the prevailing corruptions and defections with which the Church of Scotland was chargeable. And, not to mention other cases, in November 1733, the commission of the Assembly dissolved the connexion between Ebenezer Erskine, William Wilson, Alexander Moncrieff, and James Fisher, "the four brethren," and their respective congregations,when the secession took place. Well acquainted, as there can be no doubt he was, with all these facts, was it surprising that a strong impression should have been produced by them on the mind of young Gib, or that a resolution thus early should have been formed by him to abandon the communion of a church whose proceedings were so objectionable? Nor is it wonderful that his sympathies, at this time, should have been so powerfully enlisted on behalf of the four seceding brethren, when it is considered that, as an eye-witness, he saw the oppressive course of procedure on the part of the Assembly towards them when their case was before it for consideration. Referring to what came under his notice at the commission in August 1733, when they were suspended,—“ I saw,” says he, " Mr Ebenezer Erskine then standing at the bar in a most easy and undaunted, yea, majestic appearance, amidst warm and brow-beating reasonings against the refusal which he then made, particularly by the Earl of Isla. Before the commission found themselves obliged to reverse their forenoon's resolution against receiving any written answers to their question, and before what is narrated in the preface to the representations, a proposal was agreed in for allowing him to read such parts of his representation as contained a direct answer to their question. * * Ile read, in a very deliberate manner, and with a very audible voice: Mr Archibald Rennie, who was next year intruded into the parish of Muckhart, holding the candle. to him, as it was then late."

Had any thing been wanting to have confirmed the resolution to which Mr Gib had come when in Edinburgh, to leave the Establishment, it was furnished in this case, here referred to by him, of the intrusion of an unacceptable minister into his native parish of Muckhart. It had its own influence in precipitating the step which he took, although it did not originate the determination he had formed to take that step. The case of the Muckhart intrusion was one of peculiar aggravation. Mr Rennie was most unacceptable as a preacher, and totally unfit for the efficient discharge of the duties of the ministerial

office. Only two persons within the parish, and a non-resident heritor, had signed his cail. The case was brought by complaint and appeal before the Assembly; but, after being in the Assembly's hands for two years, it was, like other cases of the kind, dismissed without any redress being given. In 1734, Mr R.'s settlement was effected, in opposition to the wishes and remonstrances of the people, by the assistance of a company of soldiers! Not long after this, Mr G., who had taken an active share in opposing the settlement, appeared before the synod of Stirling and Perth, to which Mr Rennie belonged, and, deeming the form necessary, tendered a paper intimating that, for reasons which were specified, he now seceded from the Established Church. A large proportion of the people of the parish of Muckhart did the same. In December of the same year, viz., 1735, an application was made by them to the Associate Presbytery, to be received into connexion with the Secession, and to have sermon supplied to them. This was the first application that was presented from any part of Scotland for sermon in connexion with the Secession Church; and there can be no doubt that, under God, it was the means of giving a decisive impulse to the cause, by leading the presbytery to take up, with greater boldness and firmness than they had yet done, their position as a distinct church, and to adopt measures for the purpose of extending the Secession throughout Scotland.

In the following year, viz., 1736, the presbytery resolved to open a Hall for the reception of students of divinity, that a supply of preachers might be furnished to meet the demands, which were now coming to them from all parts of the country, for a dispensation of the ordinances of the gospel in connexion with the Secession. This institution, which was placed under the able superintendence of Mr Wilson of Perth, Mr Gib joined as soon as it was opened. Having attended the term of years required, and completed the course of trials prescribed, he was duly licensed, in the year 1740, as a preacher of the gospel. Possessing very acceptable gifts as a preacher, he received, that same year, two calls, one from the congregation of Stitchell, and the other from the associate congregation of Edinburgh. The presbytery decided in favour of the call from the latter place; and, accordingly, he was regularly ordained over the congregation in Edinburgh in 1741. Here he laboured as a faithful minister of the gospel, with great diligence and acceptance, for the long period of forty-eight years. By his distinguished talents, and the force of his eloquence as a preacher, many were attracted to his ministry, and the congregation soon increased in numbers and respectability. Although he was not without his trials and his discouragements, his ministry was, as there is reason to believe, eminently blessed of God, in bringing sinners to a knowledge of the Saviour, and in comforting the people of God, and "building them up in their holy faith."

Soon after his settlement in Edinburgh, where his labours were so successful and so useful, Mr Gib was called upon in providence, to give a proof of his principles, and a display of his character, which tended not a little to fix upon him public attention, and to raise him in public estimation, and to strengthen, at the same time, to no small extent, the cause of the Secession, to the furtherance of whose interests his efforts

were now earnestly and anxiously devoted. In the year 1745 the rebellion in Scotland broke out, and, for a time, in some quarters at least, assumed an aspect that was sufficiently threatening. This was a crisis, accordingly, which required that every man, be his station or office what it might, should exert himself to the utmost for the general good. While all were thus called upon imperatively, as good citizens, to act their part, Mr Gib felt that he too was called on, according to the station he occupied, and the influence he possessed, to act his part. Nor, in a case where decision was so important, and promptitude of action so much required, was he long in determining what course he should pursue. With his characteristic fearlessness of spirit he set about measures which, while they indicated plainly enough his conviction of danger, showed his determination to employ all lawful and proper means to meet the emergency. By his efforts, three companies of volunteers, amounting to an hundred men each, were raised chiefly out of his own congregation, and placed at once at the service of his country. When the Pretender with his forces immediately after took possession of Edinburgh, Mr Gib, instead of meeting with his people in their usual place of worship, retired with that part of the congregation that could still wait on his ministry, to a place in the neighbourhood of Colinton, three miles west of the city, where, in the presence of the multitudes who flocked to hear him, he boldly denounced "the unnatural and antichristian rebellion," as he termed it, and publicly prayed for the downfal of those who were engaged in seeking its success. At a time when the principles of the seceders were but imperfectly understood, and when it was ignorantly or maliciously represented by many that, having renounced connexion with the Established Church, they had also renounced allegiance to the government by whom that church was established, such a disinterested display of loyalty, on the part of a seceding minister, had the happiest effect in putting down the surmises and calumnies which were propagated to the prejudice of the Secession, and placing the soundness of the principles of seceders, on the question of civil government, beyond all suspicion or dispute. When the rebellion had blown over, and peace was again restored to the country, Mr Gib-as well as Mr E. Erskine of Stirling, who had acted a similar part with himself on the occasion-received a letter from the existing authorities of the day, conveying an expression of thanks for the important and valuable services which he had rendered on behalf of his country.

In the unhappy dispute which took place in the Secession Church in reference to the burgess oath, in 1747,-fourteen years after the date of her commencement, and when her ministers had now amounted to thirty-two in number,-Mr Gib took a very warm interest. Those acquainted with secession history are aware that, in the three towns of Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Perth, an oath at this time was required to be taken by the burgesses" or "freemen" of these places, the terms of which pledged them to "a defence of the true religion professed within the realm, and authorised by the laws thereof." Some took the view that the swearing of this oath was incompatible with the profession which seceders had made, in which they protested against the corruptions of the established system of religion; others held that the terms

of the oath were of such a general description that it might be taken, without compromising any of the principles for which seceders contended, and which were involved in their profession. Mr Gib espoused the former of these opinions, and argued very strenuously in its support. After various ineffectual efforts had been made to bring the conflicting parties in the synod to an agreement on the point of controversy, "the breach" at length took place; and those who, up to this time, had laboured together harmoniously in the same common cause, and had often "taken sweet counsel together" in reference to the affairs of the house of God, were separated and alienated from one another. They who took the view that the oath in question was admissible, or at least might be made a matter of forbearance, were known by the name of the "Burgher" synod; those who took the opposite view, by the name of the "Anti-burgher." With this latter party Mr G. became identified. The first meeting of it took place in his house on the 10th of April 1747. Out of the thirty-two ministers who belonged to the synod previously to the "breach," nineteen adhered to this branch of the Secession. This division, after existing for seventy-five years, was happily healed in 1820, when the two bodies were again united-the ground of the controversy, in the meantime, having been done away.

From the year 1747 till 1788, Mr Gib continued, with one or two short intervals, to take a leading share in directing the counsels, and conducting the affairs of the General Associate or Anti- Burgher Synod of the Secession, whose principles he ably vindicated, and to the promotion of whose interests his best efforts were devotedly and constantly applied. With all the judicial deeds and records of the synod, his name is more or less intimately associated; and in most of the very able documents of a public kind, emitted by the synod, his master-spirit and hand may be readily recognized. In respect of clearness of conception as to scriptural doctrine, of accuracy of distinction as to spiritual principles, and comprehensive and well-defined views of the character, constitution, and government of the church of God, the statements embodied in these documents challenge a very high place; and it may be questioned whether, as regards the particulars now mentioned, they have ever yet been greatly surpassed. If, at their outset as seceders, our forefathers had, as was to have been expected, notions which were comparatively misty and undefined, as to the self-contained character and functions of the church of Christ, and its independent relations to the kingdoms of this world, the new and more favourable position which they occupied, the discussions forced upon them, from time to time, in their onward progress, and in which they were compelled to engage, together with the exigencies of their circumstances, necessitating constantly the working out of their principles, had all a very happy and powerful influence (as) the great Head of the Church no doubt intended that they should have), in quickening their spiritual apprehensions, and eventually opening their eyes to the beauty, and spirituality, and independent character of the kingdom of God. Hence, in the writings, and public declarations, and "TESTIMONIES" of such men as Gib and his contemporaries, we have the germs of those great principles unfolded, which in our day have been more fully developed, and generally diffused. In expressing his own sentiments, and the sentiments, generally, of his brethren, as

to the duty of the civil magistrate interfering with the affairs of religion, or of churches seeking, by their petitions to the king and parliament, such interference, we find him, in a document drawn up upon the subject, arguing at much length, and with great force, that measures of this kind, which confounded the kingdoms of this world with the operations of the kingdom of God, had "no precepts or examples in the Lord's word." "The scripture," says he, "enjoins us to obey the civil powers in all things lawful, to honour them, to pay them tribute, and to pray for them, that we lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. But no precept appears to be in the scripture for any other or higher sphere of duty towards them, in the case of such as have providentially no immediate communication with them. If there could be a time for any such application to civil powers, it would seem to have been in the first period of the gospel, when the apostles were employed to fight against the fashionable corruptions of the world, in propagating the Christian religion. But in all the course of their ministry, they made no such application to these powers. Our Lord did not see meet to make choice of that secular way for promoting the interests of his kingdom." Referring to the impracticability and absurdity, as well as the sinfulness, of christian churches attempting to effect religious objects by their applications to parliament, instead of adopting the means which Christ himself has appointed for their accomplishment, he remarks, "We cannot formally present any address or petition to the king, without getting some great personage to introduce us. But though this were done, and a favourable audience got, yet the difficulty would not be over; for all that could be expected of the king, according to the nature of the business, is, to recommend us by a message to the houses of parliament, in our going to address them; and we could have no access to them but by a method of address which is inconsistent with our principles, taking in the title of Lords spiri tual. But though this could be dispensed with, yet there is no access to lay a petition before either house of parliament, without getting a member of the house to introduce it. When such is the case, it may be thought even ridiculous to suppose that these bars could be surmounted by us in the present state of matters. And how can we think that the Lord is calling us to any work that must depend on a ridiculous supposition for the practicableness of it?'

During this period of his active life, amidst all the other public labours in which he engaged, Mr Gib freely mixed with the controversies of the times. The tendency of his mind inclined him to controversial discussion. As a polemical writer, he possessed very great powers; and these, without any lack of zeal on his part, were often wielded by him with great effect. The Secession, in its progress, bad stirred many questions of great interest both within and without its own pale; and to the discussion of these, and the elucidation of the principles they involved, Mr Gib brought the ready resources of his well-informed, acute, and highly-disciplined mind. It affords no small proof of his industry and activity, as well as of the readiness with which he could make his resources to bear on any particular point, that, amidst other labours so onerous, he could write so much. Besides innumerable pamphlets of a purely controversial character, many of which

NO. I. VOL. I.

B