CAMERON I ANS

The strictest sect of Scottish Presbyterians so; called from the Rev. Richard Cameron, one of the most eminent of their leaders. The origin of this sect is briefly told. Charles II., on his restoration in 1600. found presbytery to be the existing national church; ana though he had, at one time, sworn to maintain that faith, yet thinking it incompatible with monarchical government, he lost no time in superseding it, and establishing episcopacy in its room. This he did in direct opposition, not merely to his own solemn obligations, but to the principles and predilections of his Scottish subjects. And the result was such as might have been anticipated. The presbyterian clergy, though driven from their parishes and deprived of their incomes, continued to preach and hold meetings, or conventicles, as these a emblages were contemptuously called, for the celebration of religious ordinances; and their influence with the people seemed to increase in proportion as means were taken to silence or crush them, tinder these circumstances, Charles, finding that rigour failed in producing the effect at which he aimed, and the number of episcopalian ministers being insufficient to fill the vacancies that had been occasioned by his violent change of the national religion, had recourse to a plan, ostensibly liberal and mild, but which did by no means realize the views which he had anticipated from it. In 1669, he granted what he called an indulgence, or permi ion to such of the ejected ministers as had meanwhile " lived peaceably and orderly," or, in other words, who had not signalized themselves by holding conventicles, to return to their several parishes (if these were vacant), or to accept presentation to such other parishes as were vacant. A similar indulgence was i ued in 1672; but both of them were marked by restrictions and conditions which were any thing hut agreeable to tender consciences. (Wodrow'a Church Hist. 8vo cd., vol. ii. p. 130-31.) This indulgence emanated solely from the king, and had not been submitted to the consideration of the church, and was, in consequence, regarded by many as tantamount to a recognition of the royal authority in matters ecclesiastical as well as civil, and as subversive both of the national covenants {Acts of A embly, apud an. 1649), to which they had sworn, and of presbytery itself, which acknowledged no head but Jesus Christ. Some of the more moderate of the clergy, however, did not think it inconsistent either with their vows or principles to accept it; others complied with it, regarding it as an encroachment on their religious rights, but satisfying their conscience by giving an open testimony against it and the ecclesiastical authority a umed by the King; while there were some who preferred principle to expediency, and peremptorily refused compliance on any terms, and resisted every effort to procure their acquiescence. These were the persons who were afterwards denominated Cameron i ans. (Wodroio, iii. 202.) The Cameron i ans were influenced in the line of conduct which they pursued solely by conscientious motives. Rather than acknowledge the authority of the king in matters ecclesiastical, or abate one iota of their indefeasible rights and privileges, they were willing to separate from their conforming brethren, and*to encounter all the evils and disabilities which such a step had evidently a tendency to produce. They became at once the object not only of the disapprobation of their indulged brethren, but of the vindictive and cruel rage of a tyrannical government. On the principle that " oppre ion drives a wise man mad," they pushed their views to the utmost extremity; and, while they vilified the Presbyterians whose opinions, both religious and ecclesiastical, were more moderate than 186 [s. 200]