My Diplomas of Doctor of Divinity

Autobio- I HAVE always had some doubt of the propriety of this academic

gi-aplucal. I I J

honour, grounded on our Lord’s injunction to His disciples not to be called Rabbi, which in conventional usage signified teacher or doctor. I am aware that the case of the apostles and that of modern ministers is not precisely parallel, nor perhaps are the reasons as forcible for the non-reception of this distinction by the latter as by the former. Still, the general ground of both is the same, which is, that no titles of distinction are to exist amongst the teachers of religion, since they suggest the idea of superiority, and foster pride and vanity. To what an exorbitant extent of mischief has this love of distinction by rank, office, and title, in the matters of religion, reached in Christendom! “If those rules,” (Matt, xxiii. 8,) says Scott the commentator, “were proper for the apostles and primitive disciples, they must be still more suitable to the case of all other teachers and Christians; and it is evident they were given with a prophetic view to the enormous abuses and fatal effects that have since been witnessed in the Christian Church, from the ambition and lust of dominion in some, and the abject subjection of others to them.”

It is pleaded that the application of this term in modern times, means something essentially different from what it did in Jewish history. Among the Jews, it implied not merely eminence of “MY DIPLOMAS OF DOCTOR OP DIVINITY.” 425

knowledge, but authority in teaching. The words of the Rabbis Autobiowere accounted, by their infallibility, the word of God. And, therefore, our Lord forbade only the application of the term in that sense in which it was used and understood by the Pharisees and their pupils. The universal precept, founded on this local one, meant no more than that no teacher of religion was to be called by a designation, or honoured by a distinction which implies undue authority, or demands undue submission. Tlais, I admit, has some force; but still, even the modern application of the word doctor, intends a pre-eminence which I think the spirit of our Lord’s prohibition forbids.

I am quite aware that it is argued that these diplomas are to be regarded as mere academic and literary honours and distinctions, conferred as the reward of merit. This may be said of mere secular degrees, such as B.A., M.A., LL.B., or LL.D. — these are all simply literary; but it is not the same with D.D. This is in its true meaning a religious distinction, never conferred but upon a minister of religion, and intended to raise him in public estimation above his fellows. It does therefore appear to me to be in opposition to our Lord’s injunction to His discijjles. I have ever felt this so powerfully, that, if on other accounts I were entitled to the degree, I could not accept it. More than thirty years ago I came to learn that some of my friends were wishing to obtain a diploma for me from the Glasgow University. As soon as I was acquainted with their intention, I immediately stopped it.

Several years after this, my friends in America moved the college of Princeton, New Jersey, to confer a D.D. upon me; which accordingly came. I locked it up in my drawers, and said nothing to anybody about it, and hoped that nobody would know it. However, it oozed out. The kindness of my Scotch friends, especially Mr Henderson and Dr King, applied to the University of Glasgow for a D.D. to be conferred upon me, and obtained it. No sooner was this announced in the papers, than I wrote to say I did not mean to assume it. By this determination I inflicted some pain upon those generous individuals who had sought to honour me. I was much grieved at this, but could not consent to

LIFE OF JOHN ANGELL JAMES.

Autobio- oblige them at the expense of principle. The next attempt to graphical, yy niade by Jefferson College, in the

United States. From that institution, a diploma, entirely unsought, I believe, by any one, arrived. But none of these things moved me. I could not consent to wear the title. And, moreover, apart from this conscientious scruple, I never thought myself warranted on the ground of any superior learning or attainment to be thus called Rabbi. True it is I have written books on religion, not a few, but they are all of a practical nature, and contain no profound theology, nor any new elucidation of holy Scripture. Perhaps I might lay claim to as much of this, and therefore as good a claim to the distinction as very many on whom it is conferred, and who now consent to wear it. This, however, is saying very little. As regards some who are now called Rabbi, I wonder they do not blush at this iteration of their own distinction. May I but be considered as a faithful, earnest, and successful minister of the new covenant, and be accounted such by the Great Master, and I am quite content that my name shall stand, wherever it is recorded, without any academic affix!

Editorial. An extract from an earlier passage of the autobiography will appear in a general review of Mr James’s connexion with the Carr’s Lane Church, in the chapter on his Jubilee; but at this point Mr James’s recollections of his life, from which this volume derives its chief value, terminate.