THE ninth jubilee of the Glasgow University was celebrated last year. It appears that the University was founded by a Pope in the year 1451. The Reformation came after this date, and the University is more indebted to our noble Reformers than to all the Popes since the first. Romanism may set up educational institutions for the furtherance of its own pernicious tenets, but it has ever been the determined foe of a sound enlightened education. It makes no hiding that it is opposed to the instruction of the common people. Glasgow University authorities saw meet, however, to give the Pope last year a certificate of his love for education, and addressed him in terms of flattery worthy of the most devoted Papists. There are traitors in the Protestant camp. The Jesuits are not dead, but are as active as ever they were in their history. It is strange that this letter was sent to Rome with the signature of Principal Story, but that the Chancellor, Lord Rector, and the Professors knew nothing of it. There has been some Jesuitical scheming in connection with the business. The following is a translation of the letter given in the Glasgow Observer (a Romish paper), which was the first to give it publicity in this country. The Reformed Presbyterian Witness republished it (with a condemnatory note):—
TO THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF THE MOST HOLY, THE MOST REVEREND, AND THE MOST LEARNED MAN, LEO XIII.
The entire University of Glasgow, the Chancellor, the Rector, the Professors, the Graduates, and the Students, (send) health.
In our great joy (for soon we celebrate our centennial feasts), this above all else we can remember with grateful minds, that this splendid University, which is to-day enriched with all the wealth of talent and works, started from the Apostolic See itself, and that it commenced with the most loving patronage of the Supreme Pontiff, as we have learned from our forefathers.
For that most learned Pontiff, Nicholas V., in the year of the Incarnation of our Lord, one thousand four hundred and fifty-one, displaying the greatest love for the Scottish people, being himself a man most illustrious for all the lights of talent and of the liberal arts, founded among us a University, and wished that our doctors, masters, and students should enjoy and use all the liberties which had been granted to the University of his own city of Bologna.
The which so great benefit, as like a loving daughter we ascribe it to the most dear mother from whom it came, we think leads us to hope that Your Holiness may become a sharer of our joy, as also to utter due thanks to the Holy See for so great a favour.
We therefore pray that you may deign to increase this our happiness with your authority; and if on account of these wicked times it could not be that your Beatitude should come to us in these feasts over such difficulties of sea and journeying, we hope at least that you will express to us your feelings through some other person enjoying your favour, and that this our University, founded by the learned Nicholas, fostered by James, King of the Scots, cared for and defended by William, Bishop of Glasgow, and furthermore enhanced by many benefits from many of our Kings, you yourself, most scholarly and most elegant cultivator of Latin Literature, through your kindness may deign to honour still more, and to commend to yet new ages.
We write at Glasgow on the Ides of May, MCM.I.
The Prefect and the Vice Chancellor.
About a month ago the University Council took up the matter. Dr. Young tabled a motion disapproving of the letter, and supported his motion in a vigorous speech. Mr. W. Rounsfell Brown seconded the motion. It was not carried however, a majority deciding that it was quite unnecessary to take any steps. The letter was said to be a mere letter of courtesy. We were disappointed with this decision; but we were much more disappointed with the speech of the seconder of the motion disapproving of the letter. The seconder was Mr. W. Rounsfell Brown, editor of the Bulwark, and treasurer of the present Free Church. Mr. Brown objected to the letter because of the terms in which it was couched, but he gave the public to understand that he was not wholly against it root and branch. Truly there is room for astonishment. The editor of the Bulwark and treasurer of the Free Church only against the terms in which the letter to the Pope was couched! Things are coming to a strange pass. Is there no scope here for inquiry on the part of a Free Church Committee? We think there is abundant. The inspired command is, “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness;” and there are no circumstances whatsoever that can justify a Protestant University entering into communication with the Pope of Rome.
The Rev. Jacob Primmer, we are pleased to see, has been pursuing Principal Story on the subject, and has moved for libel in the Glasgow Presbytery. The Presbytery first refused to take any step in the matter; Mr. Primmer appealed to the Synod; the latter sent him back again to the Presbytery, deciding that it was proper for the Presbytery to consider a libel. The Presbytery have agreed by a majority to adhere to their first decision, and Mr. Primmer has appealed to the Assembly. Mr. Primmer deserves to be encouraged in his laudable work, and it is rather interesting to observe that his resolute and able advocacy of Protestantism has secured for him now a more attentive and respectful hearing than he used to get when he began his crusade. We hope his efforts will be attended with abundant success.