STRANG, (DR) JOHN, minister
of Errol, and principal of the university of Glasgow in the early part of
the seventeenth century, was born at Irvine in Ayrshire (of which his
father, Mr William Strang, was minister,) in 1584. Like many other eminent
men, he had the misfortune to lose his father at a very early period, but
the place of a parent was supplied to him in Mr Robert Wilkie, minister of
Kilmarnock, whom his mother married soon after she became a widow. Under the
care of that gentleman, he was educated at the public school of Kilmarnock,
where he had as a schoolfellow Mr Zachary Boyd, renowned as a divine, as a
poetical paraphrast of the Bible, and as a munificent benefactor to the
university of Glasgow. That singular person always mentioned Strang as being
from the earliest period remarkable for piety; together with acuteness and
its frequent concomitant, modesty. At the age of twelve his step-father sent
him to study Greek and philosophy at St Leonard’s college, St Andrews, then
under the direction of his kinsman, principal Robert Wilkie. Nor did he
disgrace the patronage of the principal: he equalled or surpassed all his
contemporaries, and was made master of arts in his sixteenth year. Although
still very young, he was then unanimously invited by the master of the
college to become one of the regents. That office he accepted, and continued
to discharge with great fidelity and effect till about the end of 1613, when
he was with similar unanimity urged to become minister of the parish of
Errol, in the presbytery of Perth. Thither he accordingly removed in the
beginning of the following year, carrying with him the best wishes of his
colleagues at St Andrews, and an ample testimonial from the presbytery.
Among the signatures attached to that document appear those Alexander
Henderson, John Carmichael, Robert Howie, and John Dykes, - the first highly
celebrated, and the others well known to those who have studied the history
of the period. The head of the family of Errol, who resided in the parish to
which Strang had been appointed, had as a sort of chaplain a jesuit of the
name of Hay, whose subtilty and eloquence are said to have been the means of
converting him and his family to the Roman catholic faith, and of spreading
the doctrines of papistry through the country. These circumstances afforded
Strang an opportunity not to be omitted, and he is said to have so far
counteracted the efforts of the jesuit, that, although he could never
persuade lord Errol fully to embrace the protestant doctrines, he was the
means of converting his family. His son, Francis, a youth of great hopes,
died in early life in that faith, and his daughters, ladies Mar and
Buceleugh, adhered to it throughout their lives.
Among the steps by which king
James and the Scottish bishops were now attempting gradually to introduce
episcopacy and conformity to the Anglican church, one was the restoration of
academical degrees in divinity, which had been discontinued in Scotland
almost since the period of the Reformation, as resembling too much some of
the formalities of the system which had been abolished. In the year 1616, it
was determined to invest several persons with the honour of doctor of
divinity at St Andrews, and, as it was considered good policy to introduce a
few popular names into the list, Mr Strang, though in no way attached to the
new system, was among others fixed upon. In the following year the monarch
revistied his native country, and, among the long train of exhibitions which
marked his progress, the public disputations held in the royal presence were
not the least. One of these was held at St Andrews by the masters of the
university and doctors of divinity, and according to his biographer, "by the
universall consent of all present, Dr Strang excelled all the rest of the
speakers in discourse, which was pious, modest, but full of the greatest and
subtilest learning." But any favour which he might gain with the learned
monarch upon this occasion was more than counterbalanced in the following
year by his opposition to the famous articles of Perth: he was the only
doctor in divinity who voted against their adoption. Yet, notwithstanding
this circumstance, when the archbishop of St Andrews got the court of High
Commission remodelled with the view of compelling conformity to these
articles, Dr Strang’s name was included among the members. It is greatly to
his honour that he did not attend its meetings or give his sanction to any
of its acts; a circumstance which renders it at least doubtful whether he
approved of the principles of such an institution. In the year 1620, Dr
Strang was chosen one of the ministers of Edinburgh; but he was too shrewd
an observer of the signs of those times, and too much attached to his flock
to desire a public and a more dangerous field of ministration. Neither
persuasion nor the threat of violence could induce him to remove.
In 1626, Dr Strang received
the king’s patent, appointing him principal of the university of Glasgow, in
place of Dr John Cameron, who resigned the charge and returned to France. At
the same time he received an unanimous invitation from the masters of the
university, but it was not till a second letter arrived from court, and till
he had received many urgent solicitations, both from the university and the
town, that he could be prevailed upon to accept the office. His modesly, as
well as his prudence, seems to have inclined him to a refusal; and although,
perhaps, with such commands laid upon him, he could not with a good grace
resist, the subsequent part of his history leads to a belief that he must
have often looked back with regret. The duties incumbent on the principai of
a university were at that period considerable; but his active mind led him
to take a voluntary interest in everything connected either with the
well-being of the university or of the town. Under his superintendence, the
revenues of the former were greatly augmented, -- the buildings on the north
and east sides of the inner Court, were begun and completed,—a large and
stately orchard was formed,—and it is supposed that to his early and
continued intimacy with Mr Zachary Boyd, the society was indebted for the
large endowments which it received by his will. In the business of the
presbytery, he also took an active part; and when sickness, or other causes,
prevented the ministers of the town from occupying their pulpits, he
willingly supplied their place.
Yet the performance of these
duties, arduous as they unquestionably were, and most perseveringly
continued for many years, was not enough to screen Dr Strang from the
suspicion of belonging to that class which received the names of Malignants
and Opposers of the work of reformation. A multiplicity of concurrent
circumstances compelled the king, in 1638, to yield to a meeting of the
General Assembly; and, from that period, the zeal of the presbyterians, like
a flame long concealed, and almost smothered by confinement, burst forth
into open air, as if in full consciousness of its strength and terrors. It
may be sufficient to remark here, that their suspicions respecting Dr Strang
were verified a few years afterwards, when, among the papers of the king,
taken at the battle of Naseby, were discovered, "nine letters of Mr William
Wilkie’s, [Minister of Gowan, in the neighbourhood of Glasgow.] one of Dr
Strang’s, and a treatise," all of which had been addressed to the noted Dr
Walter Balcanqual. These papers were for some time retained by the
commissioners, as an instrument "to keep the persons that wrote them in awe,
and as a mean to win them to a strict and circumspect carriage in their
callings." At length, however, they were sent down to Scotland, in 1646,
with a desire that they might still be kept private for the same reasons.
But neither the letter of Dr Strang, nor his treatise, so far as we can
judge of its spirit from the introduction, (which Wodrow has inserted at
full length,) can excite the smallest suspicion of the perfect integrity of
his character. Like many other excellent men, he objected to the conduct of
the presbyterians, not from any approbation of the measures of the king, of
whose character, however, he had perhaps too good an opinion, but because
"reason and philosophy recommendeth unto us a passing from our rights for
peace sake." This, and the impossibility of obtaining "a perfect estate of
God’s church, or the government thereof upon earth," are in amount the
arguments upon which he builds his objections to the covenant. He concludes
his introduction, by protesting that his opinions were formed entirely upon
information which was known to all; but, "if," says he, "there be any
greater mysteries, which are only communicat to few, as I am altogether
ignorant therof, so I am unable to judge of the same, but am alwise prone to
judge charitably; and protest in God’s presence, that I have no other end
herein, but God’s glory, and the conservation of truth and peace within this
kingdome." The treatise is entitled, "Reasons why all his Majesty’s orthodox
Subjects, and namely those who subscribed the late Covenant, should
thankfully acquiesce to his Majesty’s late Declaration and Proclamations;
and especially touching the subscription of the Confession of Faith, and
generall Band therin mentioned: with an Answer to the Reasons objected in
the late Protestation to the contrary."
But although the
presbyterians might not be able to verify their suspicions respecting
principal Strang, while his correspondence with Balcanqual remained unknown,
there were points in his public conduct which were considered sufficient to
justify proceedings to a certain extent against him. "The spleen of many,"
writes Baillie, "against the principal in the Assembly (of 1638) was great,
for many passages of his carriage in this affair, especially the last two:
his subscribing that which we affirmed, and he denied, to be a protestation
against elders, and so (against) our Assembly, consisting of them and
ministers elected by their voices: also, his deserting the Assembly ever
since the commissioner’s departure, upon pretence that his commission being
once cast, because it was four, the elector would not meet again to give
him, or any other, a new commission. Every other day, some one or other,
nobleman, gentleman, or minister, was calling that Dr Strang should be
summoned; but by the diligence of his good friends, it was shifted, and at
last, by this means, quite put by." [Baillie’s printed Letters and Journals,
i. 145. That the reader may understand the allusion to his commission, it is
necessary to mention, that the university of Glasgow had nominated four
commissioners to attend the Assembly; but the Assembly would not recognize
their right to appoint more than one, and their commission was, therefore,
annulled. Ibid. i. 107.] The Assembly, however, appointed a commission to
visit and determine all matters respecting the university. "This," continues
the writer, was a terrible wand above their heads for a long time. Divers of
them feared deposition. . . .We had no other intention, but to admonish them
to do duty." From the account given by the same author of the proceedings of
the Assembly of 1643, it appears that, at that period, the principal was
still very unpopular with the more zealous noblemen and ministers; and if
the account there given of the manner in which he managed the affairs of the
college, and the stratagems by which he sometimes attempted to gain his
ends, be correct, we have no hesitation in pronouncing him deservedly so.
According to that statement, the chancellor, the rector, the
vice-chancellor, dean of faculty, the rectors, assessors, and three of the
regents, were not only all "at his devotion," but most of them "otherwise
minded in the public affairs, than we did wish;" and an attempt was made to
introduce a system, by which he should always be appointed comissioner from
the university to the Assembly. Baillie was at bottom friendly to the
principal, and his fears that any complaint made against him at the
Assembly, might raise a storm which would not be easily allayed, induced him
to be silent. He contented himself with obtaqining a renewal of the
commisioner for visiting the university. "This I intend," he says, "for a
wand to threat, but to strike no man, if they will be pleased to live in any
peaceable quietness, as it fears me their disaffection to the country’s
cause will not permit some of them to do." [Printed Letters and Journals, i.
378.] It must be confessed, however, that these statements of Baillie,
written to a private friend, and probably never intended to meet the eye of
the public, form a strange contrast to the general strain in which he has
written the life of Strang, prefixed to his work on the interpretation of
Scripture. In the latter it is declared, respecting this period of his life,
that "he fell under the ill-will of some persons, without his doing anything
to lay the ground of it. When such made a most diligent search into his
privat and publick management, that they might have sornwhat against him, he
was found beyond reproach in his personall carriage, and in the discharge of
his office; only in his dictats to his schollars, some few things were taken
notice of, wherein he differed in him sentiments from Dr Twiss and Mr
Rutherfurd in some scholastick speculations. He was not so much as blamed
for any departure from the confession of any reformed church, . . . but, in
a few questions, exceeding nice and difficult, as to God’s providence about
sin, he thought himself at liberty, modestly to differ in his sentiments
from so many privat men." Yet the clamour thus raised against Dr Strang,
however groundless in Baillie’s estimation, was encouraged by his
adversaries, and became at length so great, that the general assembly, in
1646, appointed commissioners to examine his dictates, which he was required
to produce, and to report. Their report accordingly appears in the acts of
the next Assembly, (August 1647,) and sets forth that the said dictates
contained some things, so expressed, that scruples have therefrom risen to
grave and learned men; but after conference with the said doctor anent those
scruples, and (having) heard his elucidations, both by word and writ, given
to us, we were satisfyed as to his orthodoxy; and, to remove all grounds of
doubting as to his dictates, the doctor himself offered to us the addition
of several words, for the further explication of his meaning, which also was
acceptable to us."
But the peace which Dr Strang
hoped to enjoy after the decision of this question, was not destined to be
granted him. "Some turbulent persons envyed his peace," and a new series of
attacks, of which Baillie declines giving any account, because, to use his
own strong expression, he would not "rake into a dunghill," followed. "The
issue of these new attacks," he continues, was, the doctor, outraged by
their molestations, demitted his office, and the rather that, in his old
age, he inclined to have leisure, with a safe reputation, to revise and give
his last hand to his ‘writings. . . .To this his own proposall, the visitors
of the colledge went in; but both the theologicall and philosophy faculty of
the university opposed this, and, with the greatest reluctance, were at
length brought to part with a colleague they so much honoured and loved."
The visitors, by their demissory act, dated 19th April, 1650, granted him "a
testimoniall of his orthodoxie;" and, as a proof of their affection, allowed
him not only the whole of his salary for the year 1650, but an annuity of
one thousand merks Scots from the funds of the university, and two hundred
pounds more as often as circumstances would permit.
The remaining part of Dr
Strang’s life was spent in comparative quiet, although an expression of
Baillie’s would lead to a supposition that the malice of his enemies reached
even to the withholding of the annuity just mentioned. "Having to do in
Edinburgh with the lawyers, concerning the unjust trouble he was put to for
his stipend," says he, "Dr Strang, after a few days’ illness, did die so
sweetly and graciously, as was satisfactory to all, and much applauded all
over the city, his very persecutors giving him an ample testimony." [Printed
Letters and Journals, ii. 382, 3.] That event took place on the
20th of June, 1654, when he was in the seventy-eighth year of his age. Two
days afterwards, his body, followed by a great assemblage of persons of all
ranks, was carried to the grave, and buried next to Robert Boyd of Trochrig,
one of his predecessors in the professorship at Glasgow college.
Among the last labours of Dr
Strang’s life, was the revisal of his treatise, "De Voluntate et Actionibus
Dei circa peccatum," which he enlarged, and made ready for the press. In the
author’s lifetime, it had been sent to his friend, Mr William Strang,
minister of Middleburg, with a desire that the sentiments of the Dutch
divines might be obtained respecting it. At his death, it was left to the
charge of Dr Baillie, who got the MS. transcribed, and sent it to the same
person. By Mr Strang it was sent to the famous Elzevirs at Amsterdam; and,
having, been carried through their press by the learned Mr Alexander More,
was published at that place in 1657. The only other work of Dr Strang which
we are aware of having been published, is entitled, "De Interpretatione et
Perfectione Scripturae," Rotterdam, 1663, 4to. To this work is prefixed the
life of the author, by Baillie, to which we have already referred.
Dr Strang was thrice married,
and had a numerous family, but few of his children survived. William, the
only son who lived to majority, and "a youth of eminent piety and learning,"
was a regent in the university of Glasgow; but died of a hectic fever, at
the age of twenty-two, before his father. He had four daughters, who
survived him; all, according to Baillie, "eminent patterns of piety,
prudence, and other virtues." [Abridged from Wodrow’s Life of Strang, in his
biographical MSS. In Bibl. Acad. Glasg., fol., vol. ii. See also, Life by
Baillie, above mentioned. The extracts from the latter are borrowed from
Wodrow’s translation, inserted in his life.] |