^, IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) k // J <° J z II I.I 11.25 tttKA 121 g i^a |2.o MlUtl il.8 U 11.6 % ^ ^V-^'^.-^ -^ ^^ Photographic .Sciences Corporation '''^^^J^ 23 WIST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. MSM (716) •72-4S03 '^ '9>'- '(^: V '^ y. 4 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHJVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques • Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiquaa Tha Instituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua. which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha reproduction, or which may significantly change the uauai method of filming, are ' acked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ la meilleur exemplaire qu'il iui a AtA poaaibla de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mAthoda normale de filmage aont indiqute ci-daaaoua. rri Coloured covers/ bLl Couverture de couleur '^— Coloured pages/ Pagea de couleur 1 1 Covera damaged/ 1 — 1 Couverture endommagte ^— Pages damaged/ Pages endommagtes 1 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 1 — 1 Couverture restaur^ at/ou pelliculte "v Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurtes et/ou pellicultes 1 1 Cover title miasing/ 1 La titre de couverture manque V Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages dteolortes, tachatAea ou piquAea 1 1 Coloured maps/ 1 — 1 Cartea gAographiquas en couleur ""~ Pages detached/ Pages d6tach*as 1 Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 1 — 1 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) • Showthrough/ Transparence 1 1 Coloured piatea and/or iliustrationa/ 1 — 1 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur _— Quality of print varies/ Quality InAgala de I'lmpression 1 Bound with other material/ 1 1 RalM avac d'autrea documanta Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du material suppi^mantaire - The tot The pos oft film Orii beg the sior othi firsi sioi oril The she TIN whi Mai diffi enti begi righ reqi met D D n Tight binding may cause shadowa or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliura serrAe peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge IntArieure Blank leaves added during reatoration may appear within tha text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certainaa pagea blanchaa ajouttea lore d'una restau ration apparaiaaant dana la texte, mala, lorsqua cela Atait possible, ces pagea n'ont pas txk filmtea. Additional commenta:/ Commantairas suppi^mantairea: D D Only edition available/ Seule Mitlon diaponible Pages wholly or partially obacured by errata slips, tissuaa, etc., have been refiimed to ensure the best possible image/ Lea pages totalament ou partiailement obscurcies par un fauiilet d'errata, una pelure, etc., ont At* filmtes k nouveau de fa9on h obtenir la meiileure image poaaibla. Thia item la filmed at tha reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document eat film* au taux da reduction indiqu* ci-dassous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 2BX 30X y 12X lex aDx a4x 28X 32X lira details uaa du : modifiar gar una filmaga Tha copy filmad hara has baan raproducad thanks to tha ganarosity of: National Library of Canada Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha iMst quality possibia considaring tha condition and laglbility of tha original copy and in Icaaping with tha filming contract specifications. L'axampiaira film6 fut raproduit grAca A la g4nArosit4 da: BibliothAqua nationala du Canada Las imagas suivantas ont €t6 raproduitas avac la plus grand soin, compte tanu da la condition at da la nattatA da l'axampiaira film*, at an conformity avac las conditions du contrat da filmaga. Original copias in printad papar covars ara fiimad beginning with tha front covar and ending on tha last page with a printad or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copias are filmed beginning on the first page with a printad or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printad or illustrated impression. Aes Les exemplairas originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont filmte en commen^ant par la premier plat at en terminant soit par la derniAre page qui comporta une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplairas originaux sont film6s en commengant par la pramiAre page qui comporta une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration at an terminant par la darniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain tha symbol ^^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la darniAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE". le symbols ▼ signifie "FIN". re Maps, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure ara filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartas, planches, tableaux, etc., pauvent Atre filmte it des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre . reproduit en un seul clichA, il est fiimA A partir da Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut an bas, an prenant le nombre d'imagas nAcessaira. Las diagrammes suivants illustrant la mtithode. y errata id to nt ia pelura, 9on A n 1 2 3 3ZX 1 2 3 4 5 6 r' i % "^^, •!0^^ »--»■■. <«^'' ^> --C AN ACCOUNT Of THK PROCEEDINGS U Of Till: COMMITTEES ON UNION ArrOIXTED BT THE SYNOD OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHtltCII OF CANADA, ANT) THK SYNOD OF THE MISSIONARY (NOW THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN) CHURCH IN CANADA, CONTAINING MINUTES OF ALL THE MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEES, AND ALL THE PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THEM, EXPLAKATOBT cp THEIR KESPECTIVE OPINIONS OK NATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS OP RELIGION, AND OR THK r ENDOWMENT OF CHURCHES. £0ii5on. or. to. :-1840. Mm •'- ''^^^m,-^' *' AN ACCOUNT OF TIIK PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEES ON UNION # ':i. ArroIJiTED BY ■J I .•3 THE SYNOD OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF CANADA AND THE SYNOD OF THE MISSIONARY (NOW THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN) CHURCH IN CANADA, CONTAINING MINUTES OF ALL THE MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEES, AND ALL THE PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THEM, EXPLAKATORT OF THEItl RESPECTIVE OPINIONS ON NATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS OF RELIGION, ANB ON THE ENDOWMENT OF CHURCHES. M PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF THE SYNOD OF THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. % tovibon, C il). PRINTED BY WM. SUTHERLAND, DUNDAS STREET. 1849. / "«r--- "-^s' NOTICE. 1 The Committee of the United Presbyterian Chirch having been instrocted hf the Synod to publish an account of the proceedings of the joint Committees, have judged it courteous to the CoDnmiftee of the Presbyterian Church to limit their ac' count to the publication of the minutes, belkviog that this will convey all the- information that may be desired. W. PROUDFOOT, Convener of Committed. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OP THE COMMITTEES of tue PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF CANADA, k of the UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN CANADA, ON UNION. edhf haver ir aci" ^U the mUtei- HAMILTON, OCTOBER 22nd, 1845. Tlw committees appointed by the Synod of the Presbyterian Church and the Missionary Synod, met this day in Hamilton. On the part of the Synod of the Presbyfceriaa Church, were present, — the Rev. Messrs Alexander Gale, Mark Y. Stark, and John Bayne ; and Messrs. WiUiam M'Millan and Wiiliam Kyle, Elders. On the part of the Missionary Synod, were present, — the Rev. Messrs. William Proudfoot, Thomas Christie, R. H. Thornton, and James Roy ; and Robert Christie, Esq., and Mr. Walter Chisholm, Elders. The Rev. Mr. Gale was chosen Chairman ; the meeting was constituted by prayer, and the Rev. Mr. Proudfoot was appointed Clerk. Mr. Gale read the following extract from the Minutes of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church : — " The Synod called for the report of the Committee to wait on the Mis- sionary Synod of the United Secession Church in Canada. Mr. Gale re- ported that that Synod had not yet met, but was to meet next week. The Synod continued the appointment of the Committee, with a change of some members, willing them, besides tendering to that Synod the Chris- tian greetings of this Synod, to express to them the deep c<^nv!ctions entertained by this Synod of the importance and practicablenes^ -J union, on a scriptural basis, amongst all the sound Presbyterian Chuf bes in Canada: and the Synod authorize the Committee to confer on the subject with any corresponding Committee of the Synod of the Seces- sion Church of Canada. The Committee to be the Moderator, Mr. Gale (Convener), Mr. Bayne, and Mr. Stark, Ministers ; and Messrs. McMillaa and Kyle, Elders." Mr. Proudfoot read an extract from the Minutes of the Missionary Synod, bearing date 12th June, 1845, stating that the Rev. Alexander Gale and Mr. W. McMillan, Elder, accompanied by the Rev. George Sraellie, were introduced as a deputation from the Synod of the Presby- 7^' 3 Plinutf?. tcrian Cliurch of C.inada. Mr. Oale read an extract from the Minutes* of said Synod, appointing the deputation. " The Missionary Synod, cordially reciprocating tlie sentiments ex" pressed in the above document, appointed Messrs. William Proudfootf Thomas Christie, R. H. Thornton, and James Roy, Ministers ; together with Robert Christie, Ksq., and Mr. Walter Chisholm, Elders, a Com- mittee to meet the Committee of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church, for the purpose therein stated, — Mr. Proudfoot, Convener." After some conversation it was unanimously Resolved, 1. — That, whereas the Missionary Synod and the Synod of the Presbyterian Church, have the same standards of doctrine and disci- pline, it is highly desirable that they should unite, both for their mutual benefit and for strengthening each other's hands in the advancement of the interests of Christ's Kingdom in this Province. Resolved, 2. — That there is a full agreement among us in holding the Westminster Confession of Faith, as the confession of our faith, ex- pressive of the sense in which we understand the Scriptures, in all points, excepting certain statements regarding the powers of the civil magistrate, contained in chap. xx. sec. 2, xxiii. sec. 3, xxxi. sec. 4. Resolved, 3. — ^That we find a very satisfactory measure of agreement generally among us, in regard to the doctrine of Christ's Headship over the nations ; and that the chief point in which we differ is respecting the questions, — Whether it is lawful, under any circumstances, for the civil magistrate to devote any portion of the public funds to the support of the Church ? — and. Whether, under any circiirastances, it is lawful for the Church to receive such support ? — the Committee pf the Missionary . Synod taking the negative, and the Committee of the Synod of the Prea-? byterian Church the affirmative, in these questions, Resolved, 4. — That the Committees shall severally prepare written statements of their views in regard to the questions specified in the last resolution, to be submitted for consideration at a future meeting ; as also on the question, whether a difference of opinion on the foregoing points continuing to exist, such difference ought to be regarded as a barrier to union, or whether satisfactory grounds of union, may not nevertheless be found. Resolved, 5. — ^To adjourn till the call of the conveners. (Signed,) ALEXANDER GALE, Chxiirman. (Signed,) WILLIAM PROUDFOOT, Clerk. 1 PROOF OF THE NEGATIVE. (bv the committee ok the missionary synod.) The III. and IV. Resolutions passed at the meeting of the Commit- tees appointed by the Synod of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, and the Missionary Synod on the subject of an Union between the two bodies, held at Hamilton on the 22nd Oct., 1845, are of the following tenor : — Resolution III. — " That we find a very satisfactory measure of ♦' agreement generally among us in regard to the doctrine of Christ's " headship over the nations ; and that the chief point in which we differ " is respecting the questions, whether it is lawful under any circum- " stances for the civil magistrate to devote any portion of the public funds " to the support of the Church ; and whether under any circumstances it " is lawful for the Church to receive such support. The Committee of ♦' the Missionary Synod taking the negative, and the Committee of the " Synod of the Presbyterian Church the affirmative, in these questions. Resolution IV. — " That the Committees shall severally prepare " written statements of their views in regard to the questions speci- *' fied in the last Resolution, — to be submitted for consideration at a " future meeting ; as also on the question, whether a difference of opinion " on the foregoing questions continuing to exist, such difference of opin- " ion ought to be regarded as a barrier to Union, or whether satisfac" ** *ory grounds of Union may not nevertheless be found." Though the Committee of the Missionary Synod might leave the onus probandi with the Committee of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church, reserving it to themselves to assent or dissent as they might see cause ; and though this might be defensible in a case where there is a striving for victory, yet it would be unseemly when the object in view is, by a free expression of their sentiments, to find some common ground on which they can unite. They therefore proceed to prove the negative. The Committee of the Missionary Synod would premise that they understand the affirmative and the negative as opposites to the same extent, viz. The affirmative, — That it is the duty of all nations, as such, to devote a portion of the public funds to the endowment of the church ; and (> i\^hud ul lU 'bU^'AlU. tlint if it ho tlu' duty of all nations to do this, it must be lawful loi the Church in all circumstances to receive such support. The negative, — That to devote any part of the National funds to the support of the Church is no part of the duty of nations, as such, and therefore it is no part of the duty of tlie Church to accept of such support. The personal character of the ciril magistrate is no element in the question on either side. The affirmative is, that it is the duty of all na- tions, — of all Governments, irrespective of their character, to honour the Redeemer by endowing the Church ; and that the Church may law- fully, — dutifully accept what it is the duty of the magistrate to give : the negative is, that it is not the duty of any Government, as such, whether it be Infidel or Christian, to appropriate any part of the nation's revenue to endow churclies, and that it is not the duty of a church, or of churches, to accept of such endowments. The Committee of the Missionary Synod farther premise that the affirmative, while asserting that Christ is king of nations as well as king of the ehurch, assumes, that it is the duty of nations, as such, to honour Christ as king of the church, and that the way in which this is to be done is by endowing the church. In this the following inaccuracies are to be noticed : 1. There is a confounding of the authority which Christ has over the nations, with the authority which He has over the church. Unless the authority which he exercises over both be homogeneous, tthe duty of both cannot be the same. But in the affirmative, it is assumed that it is the duty of nations to perform to the Head of the church a duty, which it is admitted on all hands, is the duty of the church, and in both cases for the same reason, viz., because he is the Head of both, which amounts to this, that it is the duty of both to do a service, which must in the one case be different from what it is in the other, and for a reason, which in the former is assumed, (and the very point to be proved), and which in the latter is granted by both. The authority of Christ over the church is one thing. His authority over the nations is quite another thing. In the one case, the authority is mainly spiritual for the purpose of regulating its duties and promoting the ends of salvation ; in the other, it is wholly of an external character, and is exercisedyor tlie sake of the church. Of this kind, to a certain extent, and as far as their cir- cumstances will permit, is the authority which he exercises over the holy angels and devils. But a difference in the kind of authority is founded on a difference in relationship, and consequently, involves a dif- ference in duties. The authority of a king is different from that of a parent, and both arc different from that of a husband, because in all these the relative position of the parties is difterent. Therefore, what Vwrf •( ll>f Kfgnliljf. is the duty of one of the parties in subordination, is not nccnssarily the duty of the other. The duty of each is fcnituted upon entirely different premises, and is proved by entirely ditfercnt arguments, and enforced by entirely different sanctions. To say therefore that it is the duty of na- tions to do the same thing as the church is bound in duty to do, to Christ because he is the king of both, is a fallacy of the same kind, as that tho duty of a subject to a sovereign, and of a child to a parent, and of a wife to her husband, are identical ; which is absurd. 2. In the aflHrmative there is an ambiguity in tho use of tho terms churches and nations, inasmuch as tho same thing is predicated of na* tions which is predicated of churches, leaving upon the mind the impres< sion that what is the duty of the one is necessarily the duty of the other, — that because the supporting of the church is tho duty of the church it is therefore, and also, the duty of nations. But to assume that the duties of two parties to a third are identical, is to assume that each of these parties stands in tho same relation to tho third party that the other does, but to predicate the same thing of the church and of a nation would bo to make tho church and tho nation tho same identical thing so far as the predication goes ; a conclusion in ex- cess of tho premises, and therefore based upon a fallacy. But a church and a nation are not one thing, but two, and very dif- ferent things. They are regulated by different laws, they propose td themselves different ends, — and are not necessarily composed of the same persons, and therefore their duties do not belong to the same category. A great part of the confusion in which this subject is envel- oped has arisen from confounding the two under the name of national church, a phrase not recognized by the New Testament. The New Testa- ment gives no countenance to the idea of Christian nations as distinct from Christian churches. The church is not national in any sense consistent with the teaching of Christ and his apostles. What is national, takes its origin from the national will, and is regulated by the national mind, and is main- tained by the nation's wealth and by the nation's power ; but to predi- cate these of the church which is tho kingdom of God, and which Christ purchased with his own blood, and in which he dwells by his Spirit, is alike absurd and impious. Citizens of a nation are those born within its limits and enjoying the protection of its laws. Citizens of tho kingdom of heaven are those who are born of the spirit ; and the moment they undergo that process they pass into a community distinct and different from the nation within which their civil privileges lie, — a community into which the nation as such, or its Government, has no right to enter. The chmch has laws of its own, made by its Head, and which a human govcrEmcnt has no right 8 :lf?rcci Dt Hi 'Mfiiatitx to abrogate, or alter, or modify. To the civil government no appeal from the church can be carried, and the civil government cannot, dutifully, enforce the laws by which the Christian community is regulated. The civil government has no right to enquire who is and who is not a mem- ber of a church, and whether he is in good standing with his church, or whether his church be founded upon the word of God. The civil gov- ernment has to do only with the persons and property of the subjects,; and on it, all, whether Christians or Infidels, have an equal claim. The defining of the relation in which Christ stands to the church and to nations is the first step to the understanding of the validity of the argument for the national endowment of the church ; if the relation be of a different kind, the argument which proves that it is the church's duty to support the ordinances of Christ's' kingdom will be altogether in- valid as a proof that it is the duty of a nation to endow the church. What has contributed to give speciousness to the argument in the affirmative is the syllogistic form in which it is put. The following is the form : — Christ, as mediator is king of nations, It is the duty of nations to honour their king, Therefore, it is the duty of nations to hon«^ur Christ. On this we remark, 1st. — That the word nations is used in the widest sense, including Heathen nations, as well as those in which the Chris- tian religion is known and professed. But the peculiarity that Chris- tianity is professed in some, is to be dropped, so that nationalism may be predicated equally, and to the same extent, in all. 2nd. — The re- lation between king and subject requires that the duty of the subject be expressed by the word obei/. But were that word used, it would be proper to ask, what obedience does he require? The Voluntary would reply, it is that they should believe on him, for he commands all men everywhere to repent and believe. The anti- Voluntary would reply, it is, that nations should endow Christ's Church. The next question would be, where does he require nations to endow his church ? No where. Endowments therefore cannot be proved if they be regarded as obedience. Therefore 3rd ; — the more general term honour is employed, and under this loose terra it is supposed that endowments may be included. But will Christ regard himself as honoured by those who give money to persons who profess to be his servants, while he is him- self rejected and despised 'r — Again, is endowing the church the only way of honouring him ? or is it one of the ways ? If it be one of the ways, then, we ask, is it the most acceptable way? — If it be said that it is the only way in which nations as such can honour him then, we ask )iavc we any axithority for this in the word of God? f FlPxoof of 15^? l^T^sali'of. 9 It is useless to waste more time on so Avorthless a syllogism, which by the way, has more faults than those here enumerated. The Commit- tee of the Missionary Synod would only remark concerning the matters contained in it, that they firmly believe that Jesus Christ, as medi..tor, is King of nations ; and not of nations only, but that to him " every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God, the Father." Tliey also believe that it is the duty of all men to whom Christ is offered in the gospel, to honour him by believing on him, and by vieldin" obedience to his commands : and that they who do not believe are hi.s enemies, and shall be subjected to the penal consequences of sin. But they deny, that it is the duty of nations, as distinguished from the church, to appropriate " any part of the public funds for the support of the church," and for this they assign the following reasons : — I. Jesus Christ hath no where in his Word, either directly or bv im- plication, commanded nations as such, to endow his church. It is not therefore their duty, because not enjoined. Not only is there no com- mand to «rt"i 10 ^iixufdttf Kr^U'tf. II. But while there is no commtind to nations to support Clnistian ordinances, there is a body of persons expressely enjoined to perform that duty, and to that body, and to none other, is tlie command given. That body is the church. And to show that the apostles believed that it was the duty of Christians and of none else, they repeatedly brouf^ht their rights to be supported by the church before their converts ; praised them when they libeially contributed for this purpose, and blamed them ■when they neglected to do it. It appears further, that the apostles could, in some cases, \Yith difikulty pei-suade the Christian people to believe that this was a duty incumbent upon them. There was then, the same unwillingness to support religious oidinanccs as is often met with now, but there was no application to any otlier body to furnish what the church •was unwilling to furnish. It seems never to have entered into the minds of the apostles to suppose that it was the duty of any but converts to minister to their wants. Tliat it was their duty, the apostles broadly as- serted, and when the churches failed in their duty, they •' worked with their own hands" fot support. In urging this duty upon ChrLstians, the apostles not only told them that it was their duty, but they employed arguments to convince them, and to persuade them to discharge it. In writing to the Corinthians, Paul says, " Who goeth a warfare at any time at his own charges ? who plant- t'th a vineyard, and cateth not of the fruit thereof? or Avho feedeth a flock and eateth not of the milk of the flock ?" " Say I these thinos as a man ? or sailh not the law the same also ? For it is written in the law of Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that tread- eth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen ? Or saith he it alto- gether for our sakcs ? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written : that he that plougheth should plough in hope; and that he that thrasheth in liope should be partaker of his hope. If we have sown unto you sj;)iritual thino-s, is it a groat thing if we shall reap your carnal things ? Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the tem- ple ? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar ? Even .so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel." (1 Cor. ix. 7 — 14). In this passage it is asserted that the preachers of the gospel should be supported because they preached the gospel ; also, that such support in temporal things is to be given b}> those to whom they minister in spiritual things. And this is declared to be agreeable to the laws of God, — to be reasonable — and according to the principle which regulates support in all departments of life. And lastly, God hath so ordained it. No less forcibly dops Paul inculcate tills duty in writing to the Gala- tians, (vi. 6 — 9.) " Let him that is t;iught in the word, communicate to St ar iirojf of iTjf Kfsrur.Dc. 11 liira that teacheth in all good things," And lest they should deny or neglect this duty he adds, " Be not deceived ; God is not mocked : for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that sowcth to to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption ; but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reap life everlastinoj." In this passage Paul tells the Churches of Galatia, that the neglecting to communicate in all good things to him that teacheth, is a mocking of God, and that whatever ar- guments men may employ to excuse their neglect, are only so much self- deception — are a sowing to the flesh, and that the result will be a reap- ing of corruption. This is the style in which Christians were spoken to on this subject, and on none but Christians is the duty inculcated. Where, in all the New Testament, are net (ions told that if they do not endow churches, they are resisting an ordinance of God ? — that they are mock- ing God, and are guilty of self-deception ? and are committing sin ! ! It is enough now to add here, that the style of the New Testament which contains the law of the gospel dispensation, is uniform on this sub- ject, — that it is churches and not nations which are commanded to sup- port the Christian ordinances. And what is enjoined upon the church, the church is well able to per- form. And where there is 'a willini; mind, God, who loveth a cheerful giver, is able to make all grace abound to him, that lie always hav- ing all-sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work. (2 Cor. ix. V, 8.) As a proof that the Christian people are able to perform fully this duty ; the Committee need only name the United Secession Church — the Independents — the Methodists — the Baptists — the Free Church — all Dissenters of every name — all the Churches in America, and many others. To these may be added the Romanists in Britain — in Ireland and America, if they be admitted as a sect of the Christian Church. If in the practical carrying out of this duty there be-met with many instances of short-coming, we are, from sucli instances, as little entitled to quarrel with the principle, as wc would be to repudiate Christianity, be- cause every Christian does not do all that eveiy Christian ought to do. And moreover, it is believed that instances of neglecting this duty would be much fewer than they arc, were the Christian people divested of the opinion, that the supporting of the administration of Christ's Kingdom on earth, is not wliolly their duly, but is the duty, in whole or in part, of some other party, — and that party, one, of which the church of Christ may have no knowledge. Seeing then that the church is commanded to support the whole in- stitutions of the gospel, — tliat the church is able to perform this ser\-icc, and that many Christian churches have done it, and many still do it, and do it cflicicntly : there doco not appear any good reason why civil gov- 12 5f^X5Uii•I3«Kl■3am^ ernments, which are no part of the complement of the church, should be applied to for pecuniary aid. Without calling in question the motives of those who apply for such aid, and who accept it, but looking at it as one of the class of things to which it belongs, it would seem that they who seek the money of others for their own ends, seek it, because they are not willing to give their own. III. As the supporting of Christian institutions is the duty of the church, it is beheved, that this, like other duties, is healthful to the spiritual interests of those who discharge it. It must be advantageous to the church to know that Jesus Christ has devolved on it the high and honourable function of maintaining, and extending, and perpetuating his interests in the world, — It must be healthful to the Christian people to be called together to devise means for carrying out their high commission — to contribute of their substance, and to offer up their earnest prayers, for counsel and a blessing. Engaged in such work, it may be expected, that they will take a deeper interest in their own salvation, — will more intensely compassionate the "ignorant and them that are out of the way," and will enjoy a sublime and holy delight in seeing, and hearing of souls saved, partly through their own instrumentality. Take now out of the hands of the church, duties upon which so many blessed results de- pend, and a grievous injury is done to it. Some of the noblest, the most God-like emotions of the Christian soul, are allowed to lie dor- mant, and some of the subliraest pleasures which a Christian can feel must be unknown ; — Christians are then put in a position where they must reap sparingly ; and they will soon plead, as an apology for indolence, that if the church he supported, it matters not how, nor by whom. All that sovereigns and governments can do will not compensate for the loss which the church sustains in checking the formation of holy sym- pathies for precious souls, in rendering it a stranger to those circumstan- ces which are ever urging to a throne of grace, and which strengthen and cement brotherly love by combined, strenuous efforts, to promote a noble cause. To all such activities civil governments, with their world- liness and their political leanings, are strangers and aliens. The genius of the Gospel and of human governments are so diverse that they cannot be incorporated. They must ever remain unamalgamated, like the iron and miry clay in the feet of Nebuchadnezzar's image, and if forced into contact and mixed, the state must be to the church a source of weakness and impurity. But this is not all. State endowments amount to the superseding of an express command of Christ, and de facto, are equivalent to a repeal of one of his laws. The simple statement of which is sufficient to con- demn them. That they are incompatible with that spiritual association cl ilt Kcar4itf. U wliich Christ came to gatlier out of the world, may be seen from the effects which their introduction has produced. They amounted to a re- casting of the whole of the church's machinery. They introduced new movements, and displaced those which for three centuries had worked with wonderful speed and heaven-aided power. The whole machine became cumbrous, the friction was vastly augmented, and the work done was far less in quantity, and greatly inferior in quality. If the pro- duction of worldly-mindedncss, pride and sloth in the clergy — indolence and formalism in the people, and a thousand years of ever-thickening darkness, be sufficient to demonstrate the uuwiadom of bringing in hu- man governments to do what the church alone is commanded to do, and what the church alone can do, then the history of state-endowed churcheg furnishes that demonstration. IV. The Committee of the Missionary Synod further maintain, that the State h as nothing which it can honestly give to the church. The public funds belong, not to the Government, but to the nation. They are contributed by all, and all are entitled to a share in their application ; and when governments deal faithfully with what is committed to them, all do .share in the benefits, — in the protection given to the persons and property of the citizens, — and in the carrying on of those improvements which contribute to the prosperity and happiness of the population. To exact from a people taxes beyond what is needful for civil purposes, is tyranny and oppression ; and to appropriate to religious sects, what was raised for civil purposes, is to misapply the money of the people. As a State therefore "can have no money for the purpose of endowing churches, it must, when given, be given dishonestly. Besides, Governments are not appointed by Christ to interfere with ordinances which he has given to his church, which has a government distinct from, and not dependent upon, the civil. Civil governments therefore go out of their proper sphere when they enter into the church, and offer to do for the church, what Christ has commanded the church to do, and for which service they expect the enormous hire of the church's independence. All that the church requires from civil governments is, to be let alone, — to be allowed to prosecute her own ends by her own means, and to be protected in her right to worship God according to her own conscience. These are civil privileges, and the church requires no more. It has been said, that a people may tax themselves, by their repre- sentatives, for endowing churches. To give this the utmost force of which it is susceptible, let it be granted that a whole nation is unanimous in their religious belief, and that not a murmur would be made in pay- jog taxes for the endowment of the church. Even in that case endow- 14 Proof cf il' but a majoiity has no right to tax men of different religious opinions to get money to support their own. And not only so, but as civilians they have no Christian right to compel even those who arc of their own way of thinking to support institutions of which they approve. Contributing money for maintaining Christian institutions is not a civil but a Christian duty, and for the manner in which it is discharged a Christian is amen- able to no court, but that in which Christ presides. Moreover; in order that a service done to God may be acceptable, it is essential that it be a free-will offering presented from a sense of duty and gratitude; but these qualities it cannot have in very many instances when it is exacted under fear of civil pains and penalties. Again, a Christian's free-will offerings are to be in proportion to the liberality wi:h which God hath blessed him, but a civil government cannot estimate that, and has no right to attempt it. To all this it may be added, that what is true in religion is not to be determined by vote, so as to make the adopting or the supporting of the opinions of the majority, binding upon the minority. V. As no denomination of Christians would consent, ou would contri- bute, to the endowment of all other denominations, the power of determin- ing which sect is to be endowed and which is not to be endowed, must be with the party which has the endowment to give, i. e., with the civil Government ; but the entrusting to tlie civil government the power of determining which amongst many sects is the true church, is objection- able on many accounts. 1, The civil government has not been appointed by Christ either to make laws for the church, or to interpret the laws which he has made. Amongst all who hold office in the church, the civil power is neither named nor alluded to in the scripturco. The judging, therefore, which •ilenominatioii has the true doctrine and true discipline and worship of the church of Christ, does not belong to the civil power, and if exercised 'by it, is exercised by usurpation. The power of interpreting authorita- tively, the doctrines and lavvs of Christ, so as to render that interpretation •obligatory on others, requires infallibity which, whoever claims it, whetb- 'cr he be pope or king, seats himself in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God, (1 Thess. ii. 4.) And what renders the impiety Stal duel beiii real I belt to tl airsj unji ernr abo^ M ^ ^rc:f flf \lt KfQrlifcf. 15 and presumption the more glarinrj is, that the person so sitting in tlio temple of God, and deciding Avhat is the cliurch which Christ has purchased with his own blood, may be a female who has no voice in the- church, or one who may not even be a member of it. If divine author- ity be not claimed by him, then the assumption of the power is a tyran- nical encroachment on the rights of CDnscience, and on the civil rights of the people. That such results are inevitable when the power of judging and determining which sect is the true church, to be raised above all other sects, and for the salve of whose ascendancy all other sects are to be discountenanced and depressed, is ton obvious to require proof. Ilobbes, who embraced this monstrous doctrine, says, that the " word of the interpreter of scripture is the word of God ; and that the Sove- reign Magistrate is the interpreter of all doctrines to whose authority we must submit — that thought is free, but when it comes to confes- sion of faith, the private reasons must submit to the public one, i. e., God's lieutenant." Such is the unavoidable consequence of allowing the civil magistrate to interfere with a kingdom which does not beloncr to him. 2. Another ground of objection to the allowing the Civil Government to determine which sect is to be regarded as the true church, and in furtherance of the interest of which all the influence of Government is to be put forth, and for which a whole nation is to be taxed, and many consciences wounded, is, that all this influence, and all this favour may be employed, and has often been employed, in giving expansion and per- manence to error. Has not the power of all Roman '''atholic States been exerted in giving stability to that system on whose forehc-'d are the names of blasphemy, — of that Man of Sin who has worn out the saints of the Most High, and is drunk with their blood ! What miseries have been Liflicted for the upholding of this power, let the vales of Piedmont and St. Bartholomew's day, tell. • Let the hills and glens of our Fatherland over whicli a sanguinary persecution raged for 2S years, tell.' VI. The Committee of the IMissionary Synod farther object to all State endowments of religion, because of the jealousies which they intro- duce and perpetuate amongst the various denominations. The endowed, being lifted above others than whom they aie not better, look down with real or affected contempt on those whom an unjust partial'ty has placed below them, — often misrepresent them as disaSected subjects — arrogate to themselves an exclusive loyalty, and in various ways give themselves airs, and assume a consequentiality which is felt to be a< insolent as it is unjust. While *^he unendowed, feeling themselves placed by the Gov- ernment which they support, in a degraded position regard tliose raised above them in political and ecclesiastical status, with feelings natural to> > \ I 16 jl^foaf ef ttt ■N?5aiitf. those who are unjustly treated. For this unseemly and unchristian state of matters, endowments are mainly to blame, and such results seem to be inseparable from them. They always exist where endowments exist ; and they are unknown where endowments are not, — a great practical evidence that they are destructive of that brotherly feeling which Jesus Christ so earnestly inculcated on all his followers. For these reasons, independently of many others which might have been given, the Committee of the Missionary Synod most firmly believe, that it is not lawful for the civil magistrate to devote any part of the public funds for the support of the church ; and ihit it is not lawful for the church to accept of such support. K. B. — The Committee of the Presbyterian Synod did not produce btslfiTifiit of ©i.'inloii)» tioti it Mtill is, nnd no more. Christ, na tlio Head of tho rctncdini fiyBtciu, and ns the Head of nations, has not committed the church to tho mngia- trute's care, nor given him a commission to superintend it, nor invested him with either a legislative or executive authority over it. G. Oa the other hand, tho civil magistrate, as sueh, is not responsi* bio to tho church for any delinquencies, but to the nation from which his power is derived. Nor has tho church any right authoritatively to inter- feVe with his administrations. In their capacity as members of tho civil community, Christians may interfere ; but in their capacity of members of the Christian community, they may not. The church has no political character. {Joint Wxb: WHEIHER A NATIONAL RECOGNITION OF THE HEADSHIP OP CHRIST OVER THE NATIONS BE A DUTY. 7. On this point, tho views of the Committee of the Missionary Synod will be more easily brought out by taking up the several matters in which that recognition is said to consist. 8. Before, however, entering on the details, they would premise, that to support the affirmative it would be necessary to prove that tho in- troduction of the system of Grac3 has altered the natural relation m which man stands to his Maker, or the natural relation in which one man stands to another. The natural relation in which a subject stands to a ruler, or a ruler to a subject. And also, that some new power has been ndded to rulors by the remedial system which did not belong to them by the original constitution ; and if so, then, inasmuch as it is not con- tained in that original constitution, it must be the subject of a specific revektion, because it could not be otherwise known or otherwise binding ; and if it be revealed, then it will be needful that the statute be produced, and the law when produced will be expected to contain a shewing in what respects, and to what extent, it alters, enlarges or restricts the na- tural rights of man as a member of society ; and also, whether this al- teration is, or is not, an essential ingredient in the economy of Grace, so as that that economy would be defective were not civil rulers to have certain duties to perform to the church, necessary to her purity or her prosperity. Till these matters be proved, it must be held unproved that the recognition of the Headship of Christ is any part of the magistrate's functions. 0. In opposition to all this it is assumed that the magistrate's powers are not derived from revelation but from nature ; because the apostle Paul exhorts Christians to be subject to magistrates, who were polytheists and heathen idolators, as holding a power from God which it would be bp ^i?,r,inli511« \l " I I gion will be degraded by being mixed up with party politics, nn eflfect which has often occurred in every European nation, and which lias kept back, and still keeps back, a multitude of ameliorations, which an enlight- ened age demands and needs. A blunder of the same kind has been committed by governments with respect to science, when, influenced by what they thought bible-truth, they denounced certain discoveries, be- cause in their opinion, they contradicted the word of God. Tlie former has produced not a few rebellions, and the latter has made many infidels. 20. The recognition of the Bible, then, in the only way in which they believe that recognition can be made, though apparently a harmless act, and having on the face of it what appears to be an honouring of the Saviour, the Committee believe that such recognition cannot be otherwise than injurious to religion, — on whose behalf Ihey protest against it, as pre- judicial to the rights ol conscience and the civil rights of nations. At the same time they are persuaded that all the good that can be imagined from recognition can be gained ; and gained in a way more consonant with the genius of the Gospel, more favourable to civil rights, and injurious to no interest, by simply leaving religion in the hands of its friends, and by leaving governments to attend to their own proper business, civil aflairs. 21. Before leaving this "point," the Committee would re-assert, that National Recognition is no where taught in the New Testament, — no-where alluded to, — no-whcre implied. The idea is professedly bor- rowed from the Old Testament, and the whole of the proofs adduced to support it are taken from the Old Testament. But that Dispensation, — its Royalty, and its authorized national acts were typical : — typical, not of what are called Christian nations, but of the Church of Christ, — that king- dom over which David's Son and David's Lord reigns, a kingdom which is " diverse from all the kingdoms " of the world, and which is to last as long as the sun, and endure as the moon. To keep up the types, now that the thing typitied has come, is doing the very thing against which Paul spent his life in contending ; — against which, some of his epistles were expressly written ; which was, in his judgment, contrary to the es- sential character of the New Dispensation ; and was in fact, a Judaiziny of Christianity. It is in taking different views of the New Dispensation as distinn-uished from the Old. that the main difference between the vol- untary and the compulsory system lies. 22. This respects the suppression by the magistrate of sins against the first table of the Law, es.pecially against the law of the sabbath. ^Vilh respect to sins in general against the iiist Table of the Law, l2 liSiJSgionats ^ommiltff. ii5 the Committee of the Missionary Synod find no precept in the New Tes- tament authorizing the magistrate to punish them. Nor does the New Testament contain any passage that can be fairly interpreted to mean that the magistrate shall at any time coming, or in any new combination of circumstances, possess and lawfully exercise the power of making such sins the subject of executive acts. In point of fact, the magistrate is not recognised in the New Testament as having anything to do in his official capacity with the duties which man owes directly to God. The only proofs ever addnced to authorise his attempting to prevent, suppress or punish such sins, have been quoted from the Old Testament. And these are all inapplicable. Proofs from the Old Testament are of two kinds, — those drawn from the duty and practice of Old Testament Kings, and those drawn from prophecy. Those belonging to the former class are not in point, 1st, because the whole system has been set aside by God himself and is therefore not a precedent for Gospel times. 2nd. Be- cause Jewish royalty was typical, — typical not of national governments but of Christ's rule in his own church. Those belonging to the latter class are all inapplicable, 1st, Because prophecy is not a rule of duty, and 2nd, Because prophecy is not its own interpreter, — it not being un- derstood till the event explain it. 23. But human governments not only have no authority for inflict- ing pains and penalties upon transgressors of the laws of the first table, but they have not the Power of preventing or suppressing such sins. They have often attempted it. They have driven men to church by the terrors of law, but did they succeed in making men worship God ? — Could they succeed? Meanwhile the attempt was an act of tyranny, — was persecution. And after all it was not the worship of God that was the object aimed at, but submission to the religion of the Rulers. 24. Idolatry is the most aggravated crime forbidden in the First Table, and one which brought down innumerable evils on the Israelites. No human government has now any authority to attempt the prevention or the suppression of this most impious and foolish crime. Every Protest- ant believes that the worship of the Mass, and of the Virgin Mary, is idolatry. But is any Protestant Government authorized to suppress the idolatrous worship of the Romanists ? Would men of enlightened minds support it in the attempt ? Some Protestant Governments have made the attempt, but the attempt Avas persecution. Of this sin, our venerated Scottish Reformers were not free, when they forbade their Sovereign to worship God according to her own conscience, and in her own chapel ; and which proceeding, when turned against themselves, they scrupled not to call persecution, and so it was. But, persecuting of Protestants, and persecuting of Romanists is the same thing ; it is sin. Seeing then that B 26 Statement oi #pin(onjs i u ' r > civil government has no authority for, nor power of, prerenting idolatry, the first and the greatest sin forbidden in the First Table, it is but fair to conclude that sins committed directly against God lie out of the magis- trate's province. The right to pimish such sins God has reserved to himself. 25. Under the Theocracy, idolatry was at once a sin against God as God, and against God as the sovereign of the land, and when punished, was punished by his express command. Unless kings can make it evident that they have the same powers now which kings had under the Theo- cracy, they have no right to do what these kings did who acted by authority directly from from God. And this is farther and conclusively evident from the fact, that the punishment which kings, under the The- cracy were commanded to inflict upon idolators was death. No m odi- fication of the penalty was ever hinted at. If this, the power of suppres- ing and punishing idolatry rests upon the laws which God gave to his ancient people, then the same statute which gives kings the power, rend- ers it imperative that they should inflict the statutory punishment — death. They have no discretionary powers. The extreme results to which the exercise of such power would lead, and the total absence of any coun- tenance to such power in the New Testament, and its obvious contrariety to the genius of the gospel dispensation, warrant us to believe that the infliction of punishment for sins committed directly against God does not belong to the m.igistrate. 2G. There is, however, a speciality in the law, regarding the Sabbath- day. It is an ordinance of a mixed character. First. It requires that every family, — that the man-servant, and the maid-servant, and the cattle employed in labour shall rest on one day in seven. In so far it is the declaration of a natural right. It is believed, and for reasons supposed to be good, that a day of rest every week from labour is necessary for the preservation of the physical powers of all em- ployed in continuous toil, and if so, then, it is a law in the constitution of man, as certainly, though not to as great an extent, as the law which ren- ders meat and drink necessary to the preservation of health and strength. 27. Owing to the derangement which sin has introduced into the whole system, there are multitudes necessarily subject to the will of others, and it will often happen, and has often happened, that they who have power over others, will exercise that power for their own benefit, without regarding the rights of those who are subject to them. Society, must, therefore, possess the means of securing to men their natural rights — the right of the man-servant and the maid-servant and tha cattle, to a day of rest. The maintaining of this right, and of all other natural rights, is part of the business and duty of civil government. l^ 0i{S%itr.^tv Cor.niutff 27 28. To secure to every man the enjoyment in full, of his right to a day of rest, it is necessary that he be not disturbed in his Sabbath by a taskmaster, or by any thing which would render his Sabbath not a day of rest to him, 29. Nor ought he to be made to suffer in his lawful calling by others, who may not choose to rest, prosecuting their ordinary worldly business, which may be to his prejudice. 30. As, however, no governmer*' can compel a man to rest on the Sabbath, any more than it can compel him to eat and drink, or to enjoy any other natural right, its powers seem to extend no farther than to protect from, not only oppression, but disturbance, those who may wish to enjoy the Sabbath which the constitution of nature assigns to them as a right. 31. The powers with which civil rulers are invested to secure the ob- servance of a Sabbath are very different from those which were given to kings under the Theocracy, and which go to shew that the Sabbath was, in some respects, to them different from what it is to all the rest of mankind. It was expressly commanded that " whosoever doeth any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." (Ex. xxxi. 15.) This power has ceased with the dispensation of which it formed a part, and the rest of the Sabbath is to be secured now, by such means as are necessary to secure all other natural rights. The magistrate may protect the servant and the labouring beast from oppression, and may declare illegal all con- tracts, bargains and sales, made upon Sabbath. Farther than restraint and protection it does not appear that he has any right to go. 32. Second. The day which was to be abstracted from labour was to be spent in the worship of God, and in those exercises which are fitted to nourish pious sentiments. It will at once be admitted iis a manifesta- tion of wisdom and goodness on the part of God, to have so constituted human society, as, that a day must be left open, and which could be de- voted to these purposes. There can be no doubt that the observance of the Sabbath as a day not only of rest, but of worship, is necessary in a high degree, to the best interests of man. 33. But while this is admitted in the strongest sense, it is denied to the same extent, that since the repeal of the Theocratic government, any human government is invested with the power of compelling men to wor- ship God. The very idea involves an absurdity. Worship in spirit and truth, such as God requires under the present dispensation, cannot be forced. To be other than an abomiuation, it must be voluntary. No hu- man authority has a right to enact what portion of the day is to be spent in worshipping God, nor what the worship of God shall consist of, nor 28 ;tatcmfnt of ©pinions i- f liow it is to bo performed. All these belong to the department of con- Bciencc, and with conscience magistrates have nothing to do. 34. All this being true, even with regard to the seventh-day Sabbath, it far more evidently so, with regard to the New Testament Sabbath. — The observance of the Christian Sabbath is a tribute of grateful affection given by his friends, at his request, to Him who died for sinners and rose again. It can be paid only by Christians, and the enforcing of the obser- ance of it, by pains and penalties, upon those who do not believe in Christ, is a stretch of authority revolting tc every pious mind, and fitted to make some act the part of hypocrites, and to make others regard re- ligious services with abhorrence. 35. While the Committee of the Missionary Synod believe that the magistrate cannot enforce the religious observance of the Sabbath, and that he ought not to attempt it, they believe, that interference on the part of government^ with the Christian Sabbath is cue reason why it has to such an extent been desecrated. Christians who ought to have set the example of Sabbath sanctification, have neglected their duty, and have called in an arm of flesh with carnal weapons to do what ought to have been done by themselves. The outward influence which is to induce men to hallow the Lord's day, is the example of Christians keeping the day holy, but if they neglect to sanctify the Sabbath, it will be in vain for the magistrates to attempt to enforce it. Nor is this all ; even Christians hive been led to fancy that while they kept within the legal statutes they were not chargeable with Sabbath desecration. The civil statute and not the word of God becomes the rule. In such a case the magistrate renders the word of none effect by basing obedience to a divine ordinance on a civil enactment. 36. It is a truth agreeable to reason, and supported by many facts, that the obligation to Christian duties which rests on the sole authority of the Head of the Church, becomes less powerful when made to rest on an inferior authority, because the addition of an element which does not belong to it, alters its character, and divests it of that sacredness in which its authority wholly consists. The interference of the civil magistrate with the Headship of Christ over his own people, has, according to the extent to which it has been carried, degraded the church, and in many ways been productive of a vast amount of evil, of which evils not the least is the giving of a civil character to the Lord's day — an iustitution wholly religious — and thereby weakened the real force of the obligations to ob- serve it. Si. I'he Comiiiittce farther think, that in the zeal which some have shewn to call in the aid of the civil power, there is apparent, as manifest a wish to force men to think as they do, as to see men honouring the K In pli^^lonatD Ccr.niltff. 29 institutions of God. Tliis they think evident from the fact that they would resort to tb', use of means wholly repugnant to the Christian reli- gion, and also froji the other fact, that in many instunces they are them- selves no way remarkable for sanctifying the Lord's day, 38. In a word, the religious element which is in the Sabbath, re- moves it, so far as that is concerned, from the list of things which legiti- mately belong to the magistrate's office ; and farther, that the sanctifica- tionof the Sabbath can be maintained by no means consistent with its character, but by the fidelity of the Christian people themselves. The only way by which the desecration of a religious ordinance can bo guarded against, is by Christians avoiding those who cause offences contrary to the doctrine which they have learned, and by withdrawing themselves from them. Point Sim : RESPECTS THE EDUCATION OF THE YOUNG. 39. Education is either secular or rcligijjjiis. So far as secular educa- tion is concerned, it is a civil question ; and it is compelcut to a nation to decide on all the points connected with it. 40. Rehgious education is, however, a very diflfercnt matter. It does not belong to the class of things civil, and consequently they whose pro- vince is things civil, have no right to interfere with it. A 11 who contend for a national religious education, mean by it the educating of the young in those religious principles of which they severally approve. Each sect regards the money spent in the indoctrinating of the young in religious principles of which they conscientiously disapprove, a misapplication of the national funds. It does not belong to a government to decide what is a religious education, nor to appoint religious teachers, nor to pay them. The religious education of the youth belongs to parents under whose care Providence places them, during the time when religious instruction can be commimicated with the best effect : a government has nothing to do with them till they attain to that age at which they become responsible for their conduct. The churches to which the parents belong, have an evi- dent right to exercise a superintendance over the religious education of the young, and for this very obvious reason, that the neglecting of the duty incumbent on parents of training up their children in the way they should go, subjects them, in all well regulated churches, to discipline. A government has no more riglit to educate religiously a youth of ten years of age, than it has to educate a man of fifty. )]otm Si^tt): 41. The Gth point on which the Committee of the Missionary Synod are 30 ^latrmmt of ^iaionjj i I l\ i requested to give their views, is " The duly of the civil magistrate as to " the promotion of religion amongst the people, and especially as to the " application of any portion of the pubhc funds for the advancemnt of " the Church." 42. This consists of two parts, the one general, and the other particular. With regard to the former, the opinion of the Committee is, that the only way in which, so far as they know, a government can rightfully promote religion among a people, is by securing to all the unalienable right which belongs to every man — the right of private judgment — the right of hold- ing and propagating his own religious opinions ; and of so ruling that no man may, in promoting his own views, interfere with the rights of others or disturb the peace of society. All beyond this is an encroachment upon the rights of conscience. 43. The Committee do not think it necessary to detail such govern- mental actings ostensibly for the promotion of religion as they disapprove of, because they repudiate in ioto all state-interference in religious matters. They would not, however, da» justice to their principles did they not as- sert their belief, that state-interference for the promotion of religion has been one of the greatest obstacles to its advancement, as well as one of the most active agencies in corrupting it and altering its character. Chris- tianity has given abundant evidences of its capacity for self-extension, and it needs only to be left in the hands of its friends to gain, by the blessing of its Author, the empire of the world. All efforts by civil governments to advance religion, beyond protecting every man's individual right to propa- gate what he believes to be the truth, have hitherto signally failed, — and not only failed, but been productive of great injustice and great suffering. And believing that the principle of state-interference is radically unsound, the Committee do not think it possible in any way so to work it out as that it shall not produce the same or similar evil consequences. State-in- terference must ever be to the Church what it has ever been, a source of corruption and weakness. For more than a thousand years Christianity has not been permitted to appear in its true character, it has been un- equally yoked, ana forced to keep company with one not of its own race ; and the unnatural alliance has cumbered, retarded and enfeebled its movements. An experiment tried for so long a period, — under all forms of civil government, — ^and in all stages of civilization — and always leading to the same results, — ^teaches lessons which it were alike unwise and unsafe to disregard. 44. The second part of this question respects the endowment of the Church out of the National Funds. On that subject the Committee of the Missionary Synod have already fully given their views, and they need not now therefore detail them at any great length. They think it suffici- i Ijj jf^iwionarg ©ommUKr. 31 ent for the present to remark, that thej stated, and to a considerable ex- tent illustrated, the following propositions : 45. 1st. That Jesus Christ fcath no- where in his word, either direct- ly or by implication, commanded nations, as such, to endow his Church. 46. 2nd. While there is no command to nations to support Christian ordinances, there is a class of persons expressly enjoined to do it ; and to that class and to none other, is the command given. That class is the Church. When nations, then, presume to endow the Church of Christ, they do an unbidden service, and by thrusting themselves forward to do what is the duty of others, they virtually supersede an ordinance of Christ. 47. 3rd. Inasmuch as the supporting of Christian ordinances is the duty of the Church, the discharge of that duty must be beneficial to the Church, — a means of doing good and of getting good. And therefore for the State to step in between the Church and its duties must be in- jurious in many ways to the Church. 48. 4th. That the State has nothing which it can honestly give to the Church : its funds being collected for other and different purposes. 49. 5th. As no denomination of Christians would consent or contri- bute to the endowment of all other denominations, the power of deter- mining which sect shall be endowed must be assumed by the party endow- ing, i. e., the Civil Government. But the assumption by the Civil Gov- ernment of the right of determining which, amongst the many sects, is the true Church, is objectionable on many accounts, especially on the two following : 1. The Civil Government has not been appointed by Christ to make laws for his Church, nor to interpret authoritatively those which he has made. Amongst all who hold office in the Church of Christ, the civil power is never named and never alluded to, 2. The assump- tion of a right to determine which sect is to be regarded as the true Church, and on that account endowed, and in furtherance of the inter- ests of which all the influence of Government is to be put forth, and for which a whole nation is to be taxed, and many consciences wounded, — has often led to the giving of extension and permanency to error. 50. 6th. That state-endowments occasion perpetual jealousies amongst the various denominations of Christians, and engender strife and conten- tions amongst those who ought to live in peace, and not only live in peace, but co-operate for the advancement of the common salvation, and •which contentions derogate from the character which Christian Churches ought to maintain. 61. On these grounds, independently of many others that might be given, the Committee of the Missionary Synod believe, that it is not law- ful for the civil power to devote any portion of the public funds for the 32 ^lalcmcnt of %iniong M endowment of the Church ; and also, that it is not lawful for the Church to accept of any such endowment. IpoiiU Scoentl): 62. The Committee now proceed to state their views respecting cer- tain passr.ges in the Westminster Confession of Faith, which refer to the Magistrr.te's power, dvca sacra. The first of these is chap. XX. section 4. In reference to the matters contained in that passage, the Commit- tee believe that no Christian is warranted upon pretence of Christian liberty to oppose any lawful civil power, or the lawful exercise of it, by publishing such opinions or maintaining such practices as are contrary to the light of nature, or as arc destructive to external^peaco and order, and that they who do so may be proceeded against by the power of the Civil Magistrate. 53. But they do peremptorily deny that any lawful civil poAver, is, ex officio, an ecclesiastical power, — and also, that any ecclesiastical power may call in the aid of the civil power to proceed against those who may publish opinions contrary to what that power may call the known prin- ciples of Christianity, whether concerning faith, worship or conversation, or the power of Godliness. Ecclesiastical oft'ences are cognizable only by the Church and not by the Magistrate. When the publication of such opinions as are contrary to the light of nature, is followed by overt acts destructive of external peace, the Magistrate may interfere to restore and preserve peace. Whatever penalty may be inflicted, ought in such a case to be inflicted for the disturbance, not for the opinions ; and the more so, because in very few instances, have the publishers of siich supposed destructive opinions been the instigators of the disturbanoc, but they whose opinions have been assailed ; and in very many instances the suf- fering party has been right and the punishing party been wrong. — Pertinent proofs of this are furnished by the introduction of Christianity, and by every attempt at Reformation by the civil power. 54. The next passage is in Conf. XXIII. § 2. On this section the Committee of the M. S. remark, that they do not believe that the Civil Magistrate hath any authority from Christ, or that it belongs to his ofiice, to " take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all abuses and corruptions in worship and disci- pline be prevented or reformed, and all the ordinances of God duly set- tled and administered." Nor do they believe that " he hath power to call Synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God." 55. Such power belonged to the kings under the Dispensation which th a no Ij5 jpSi^fionRr^ €or.r;.lUtf. 33 ircU cer- » the ction imit- istian t,by iry to ■, and if tbo is, ex power may 1 prin- sation, le only )f such !rt acts jre and such a le more ipposed dt they he suf- rong.— itianity, tion the he Civil to his Church, nies and nd disci- iuly set- )Ower to atever is is now abrogiiled, and scorns to bo necessary in Cluu'ches establ. hcd 1 y law and endowed out of the national funds ; but are wholly inco -istint with the idea of a Christian Church, and of the entirtncss of I luist's Headship. The claiming of such powers is an cncroachmont on Christ's preroj^ativc, and the exercise of ihcni is j)crsocution. 50. The last passngi'!([Ufjtecl, is Conf. Chip. xxxi. ;? 2, and asserts that " Magistrates may lawfully call a Synoil of Ministers, and other fit per- sons to consult and advise with about matters of religion." Tho Committee of the Missionary Synod, believe that Magistrates have no such power granted by Christ. 6*7. Respecting the powers, said in these passages to belong to tho civil raaoistrate, the Committee remark : 1st. That by those who allow to the magistrate power in matters of religion, it is admitted, that his power of iiitei ference ceases at a certain point, but where that point is, they arc not agreed. 13y each party it is fixed arbitrarily. Some maintaining that it goes as far as the power o Jewish kings, and some denying tliis. But neither party liaving any authority for determining it of more weight than their own ojiinion. 58. 2nd. The compilers of the Confession evidently seem to have supposed that Christianity was a carrying out of Judaism to a gn-ater extent than was authorized under the Old Testament, therel)V showin"- that they were defective in the knowledge of the extent to which the old economy was abrogated, and also of the ecclesiastical form of the Church under the new dispensation. 69. 3rd. Tho passages of scripture by which their opinions were sup- posed to be sanctioned, seem to have been selected in the most careless manner, and without any judgment. The Committee have examined them all. By far the greater number of them are quoted from the Old Testament, and refer to a dispensation which lias been set aside by the authority which ordained it. Some of these seem to be quoted upon the principle that whatever a king, Jewish or heathen, is said to have done for the Jewish nation, or in any connection with it, is divine authority for kings doing similar things under the Christian dispensation. In some the principle of quotation, if principle there was, cannot fail to call forth a smile; in others a blush, and in others indignation. And in a word, none of them prove the doctrines taught in the chapters referred to. ) • on which £ II hi a N 3-1 Statfinfnt cf iJy'j.inioM Point ei9l)ti) RECiA^nS THE VIEWS ENTERTAINED BY THE COMMITTEE OF THE MI.S.SIONARV SYNOD "RESPECTING EXISTING ESTABLISHMENTS." 00. In holding this primitive principle, fundamental and essential to tlie Reformation, the opposite of a principle fundamental and essential to Popery, the Committee are happy to find their opinions clearly and scrip- turally expressed in the Confession of Augsburg: "The political ad- " ministration is busied with every thing else but the gospel. The magis- " trate protects, not souls, but bodies and temporal possessions. He de- " fends them from all attacks from without, and, by making use of the " sword and of punishment, compels men to observe civil justice and " peace. For this reason we must take particular caro not to mingle " the power of the Church with the power of the State. The power of " the Church ought never to invade an office that is foreign to it ; for " Christ himself said : * My kingdom is not of this world. And again ; " ' Who made me a judge over you ? Paul said to the Philippians : Our " 'citizenship is in heaven. And to the Corinthians: The weapons of " 'our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God.* It is thus that " we distinguish the two governments and the two powers, and we honour " both as tiie most excellent gifts that God has given here on earth."* 61. This " primitive principle essential to the Reformation," was un- fortunately checked in its development, and the principle essential to Popery permitted to keep it greatly in abeyance, the consequence has been, that a second Reformation has become necessary. The first Refor- mation recovered from the rubbish of of Popery, the original doctrine, the " articulum stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae," justification by faith alone without the works of the law. The second great Reformation has for its object the deliverance of the Church from the thealdom of State domin- ancy. State superintendance, and State pay, and setting her free to go forth and publish in every land the glad tidings of heaven's peace. With emancipation from State connection, the remainder of Popery which still clings to her, will fall off, and she will appear in the simple but heavenly attire befitting the bride, the Lamb's wife. The Missionary Synod dare not put themselves in the way of a movement so glorious and fraught with such blessings to man, convinced that by doing so they would be opposing the Headship of Christ over his own Church, and doing what in them lay to retard the glory of the coming millenium. 62. The views held on the subject of State connection, by the Mission- • D'Aiibignc's Reformation, Vol. iv. 191. 1 5 ( i is bj? ^Ifllwionarj Comrnittf*. •1 .• ight jion- ary Synod, are the views which iniuk the chamrtor of tlic present ngn. They have ah'eady arrayed in their defence the names nf many whose j)rai8C is in all tin- churches. From the writings of one of whom wo quote the following extract, — the excellence of which will he Minioient apology for its length : " Society, or more strictly speaking, the State, which seems to have renounced the persecution of creeds, has not yet renounced their protection ; and, perhaps, it will bw expected, that having protested against pt-rsecution, we shall accept of protection with avidity. Yes, it is most tn' \ that we desire that the profession of religious convic- tions sliould be protected, but protected as the common riijht of all, and consequently without distinction of creeds. We are not desirous that any particular creed should be protected, nor in general, believers to the ex- clusion of unbelievers. We deprecate protection for the same reason that we deprecate jt;erat'CM-^intor.£, ^rr. principle, and the only way to prevent religion from injurinif both itself and humanity with this dangerous weapon, is not to leave it for one siiufle moment in her hands." CI. The Committee have only farther to observe, that the Missionary Synod is an indoijcndcnt body competent to enter into imioa with any other body, with which it may choose to associate itself. I* Sflf igly ary liny STATEMENT OF THE VIEWS OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF CANADA RESrECTING THE POINTS SELECTED AND ARGUED UPON AT THE JOINT MEETING OF THE COM- MirrEES, AS THOSE ON WHICH EXPLANATIONS ARE MUTIALLV DKSIKED. Ipoint iTirst : DEFINITION OF CHRIST'S HEADSHIP OVER THE NATIONS AS DIS- TINGUISHED FROM HIS HEADSHIP OVER THE CHURCH. 1. Christ is king of nations in this sense, — that as God he is possessed of ahsolute supremacy over all men, as his dependent responsible crea- tures ; and, again, as Mediator he has been invested by the Father with all authority and power, as the Governor and Judge of the world, a'l things being put under his feet, and He being made Head over all things to his Church, and in virtue of this twofold supremacy, all men, in every relation of life, are bound to honour and serve him as king.* 2. Chiist is King of Saints or Head of the Church in this sense, — that having in terms of his Covenant with the Father, redeemed a peo- ple to himself by his blood, and having formed them into a visible insti- tute in the world, — a spiritual Kingdom in the world, but distinct from the world, whose members stand in a peculiar relation to Him, enjoy peculiar privileges, r.nd are called to the performance of peculiar duties — He is the sole and immediate lawgiver of that kingdom, and in mat- ters peculiar to that kingdom, its members are bound to honour and serve him as their only king.f And 3. The distinction between Christ's Headship over the nations and his Headship over the Church, while it implies that Christ has su- premacy over the unbelieving world as well as over the Church, yet cor- responds especially and so far as it lays a basis for distinguishing between two classes of duties which men owe to Christ, not to the distinction bc- • See Kera.' 2— OF TIIE COXFESSlOX OF FAITH ARE UXDERSTOOD. 1. As to Chap. XX. § 4. It being declared explicitly in a preceding section of this chapter — that God alone is Lord of the conscience a:id hath left it free from tlie doctrines and comr.:andmerts of men wlii-h are in anvtting contrary to his word or beside it in matters of faith or worship, — the statements in the section in question, cannot reasonably be understood, and are not understood by us as giving any sanction or coun- tenance to persecution for conscience sake, or to any attempt to jiromoto Christianity by forcible means; nor as recognizing any right in the civil magistrate to dictate to his subjects in matters purely religious, — all wliich we regard as alike contrary to the law of God, the spirit of the gospel and the true import of the confession. 2. As to Chap, xxiil. § 3, ar.d Cliap. xxxi. § 2. of ilio Confession. Receiving the Confession as we do with the limitations or explanations contained \\\ tlie vVct of Assembly, 1C4T prefixed to it, wc hold that the • Srp HcLiiik M. f S-c Paia.-k \ I 42 ^tatrnijnt of lU H^itiofS, Src. f I i Church being a spiritual institute, a kingdom not of this world, the free and independent kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, — who has appointed therein a government in the hands of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate, has been invested by its Gracious Head with ample and inalienable power to meet, deliberate and determine in all tilings pertain- ing to his kingdom in His name, whenever and as often as the rights, interests, and administration thereof may require ; that the civil magistrate has no supremacy over the church, nor any power therein, nor any right in virtue of any pretended supremacy or power to convoke or preside in, or dictate to the assemblies of the Church, — or to regulate or review their proceedings in matters ecclesiastical; and in particular — that any judg- ment which the civil magistrate may come to, with respect to the pro- ceedings and doctrines of the church, in such matters, is limited entirely to the regulation of his own conduct in tlie promoting within his own pro- vince, of the interest confided to his care, he having, in our estimation, no right of public ministerial judgment for the deter aiination of matters of faith — or for the regulation of the profession or practice of the Church.* Point SijEll): VIEWS RESPECTING EXISTING ESTABLISHMENTS. With reference to the fciegoing views and principles, and for reasons which they obviously suggest, we arc of opinion that the existing estab- lishments in this Empire ought to be removed ; that it is wholly inexpedient in present circumstances, to call upon the Government of Britain to grant religious endowments, — and that if such endowments were offered to us as a church, it would be our bounden duty to refuse them.f RELATIONS OF SYNOD TO OTHER CHURCHES SEVERALLY. From the documents contained in the Ecclesiastical and Missionary Record for September 1814, which is herewith transmitted, it is manifest that the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Canada ia in all respects free and completely independent of foreign jurisdiction and interference, liolding, however, friendly intercourse with sister churches, (especially with the Free Church of Scotland,) whose soundness in the faith, and whose ecclesiastical polity accord with the sentiments of the Synod ; and maintaining a special testimony against Erastianism in principle and in practice. For the Committee of the Synod of the Presbj-fcrian Church of Canada, ' (sioned) ALEXANDER GALE, Convener. •Sec Rcmaik <), t Sec Remark P. :i i REMARKS 'g- BT THX COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN SYNOD. Remark A — {Paae 3T,) The authority which Christ as Mediator has over nations, as such, is the chief point at issue. Christ has the authority over all things which belonged to G 40.) The statement tlmt it is the duty of the civil mngistratc to make pro- vision for the religious training of the nation — and that the mode of en- dowing churches is lawful, were denied and fully discussed in the 1st paper given in by the Committee, entitled the " Prvnf of the Xcyatlvc.'" The facts and the reasonings in that paper were never denied nor refuted ; and it is with some surprise we .see that the doctrine is now brought up as if it had never been before the joint Committee. Remark ^—{Paf/e 10.) We grant that the magistrate is to exert himself to prevent and punibh crime, but that he may not use all the means by which crime may be prevented or punished, lie has his own department, and liis is a most useful power in its own place, lie bears the sword not the Uib/c, Remark M— (/'«^f 41.) In this paragraph it is assumed that adequate provision may be mac'e in a nation for the support of religion, otherwise than by drawing on the national funds. If this can be done, then let it be done, and there will be no room for jealousy, division and strife. It can be done, and it lias been done, on a scale sufiicientl}' extensive to justify tiie belief that all the expenses connected with tlie maintenance and extension of religion may be provided by the Christian people. It Avas woU to leave this in the hands of those on whom it devolves both as a diUy and a privilege, rather than to entrust it to those to v.hom it is no duty, and whose mode of doing it has been productive, p; ;tically, of more evil than good. In the first sentence of this paragraph it is s'.ated that " it h the duty r * of the Civil Magistrate to take cognizance for the reijiilar trairin'r of the nation, and to see to it (hat such provision is eflectual," we trust tliat this docs not mean that he is to look into the provision which voluntary churches make for the support of their own worship, and to sec that it is eflectual. Remark N — {Page 41.) The opinion of our Committee on this head is fully set forth in the "Proof of the N(?gativc, No. 4," and we think it unnecessary to add to it. "We must remark however, that it is a mistake to suppose that our argument rests on a jyetiiio priitcipii, ours is a ncr/atlo j'rlucipii, and tlie onus 2»'ohandl lies with those who assert that it is the duty of Govern- ments to appropriate part of the nation's funds to the support of a church or churches ; of this we have never met with any thing that deserves the name of proof. We reiterate our assertion, that the taxing of a people for Avhat is called religion, and giving the proceeds to ont; church or two churches, is an act of tyranny. These taxes are raised through fear of civil pains and penalties and therefore this mode amounts to a supporting of religion by the sword, which is directly opposed to the gospel. Rem.\i:k 0—{PitrnA2.) " See Statement of Opinions." H I fe MINUTES COMMITTEES ON UNION OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CIirRCIl OF CANADA, AND OF THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN CANADA. HAMILTON, 17th NOVEMBKR. 1«46. Tlic Commiltecs of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Can- ada and of the Missionary Synod, met. Dr. IJiirns was chosen chair- man and the meeting was constituted by prayer. Were present of the Presbyterian Church of Canada: — Rev. Dr. Burns and Rev. A. Gale wiih Mr. William McMillan, elder, — and of the Missionary Synod, I- jv. Messrs. W. Proudfoot, Thomas Christie, James Roy aud R. 11. Thornton, and R. Christie Esq., elder. Rev. W. Proudtoot was chosen Clerk. Head the minutes of former meetings. The Rev. Mr. Gale for the Committee of the Synod of the Presby- terian Church of Canada, and the Rev. Mr. Proudfoot on the part of the Missionary Synod, read statements of opinions as agreed upon at last meeting of the Committees ; to bo submitted. It was moved by Mr. Gale, seconded by Mr. Proudfoot, — That the respective Committees exchange papers, and at some future time, written remarks by both parties be e.xclianged, and that at an early day there- after, the said Committees meet for further conference ; and being under- stood that tlu'se remarks be exchanged at a suHicient time previous to siud meeting to allow necessary consideration to each Committee. Closed wiih prayer. R. BniNs, Chairman. W. Pkoudfoot, CUrk of Com. HAMILTON, the 2()th OCTOBF.R. 1ramittco. of the Presbyterian Church hold that it is the ''uty of the civil magistrate to see to it that provision be made for the religious instruction of the nation — that tlie mode in which this duty should be performed has not been prescribed, but may vary in diflon-nt circumstances, and that the provision of means for direct religious instruction, and the a])propriation with this view, of a jiortion of the public funds, is lawful ; but that the adoption of tliis parti. :ular mode of promoting religion at any given time, should be dolerniiued by reference to considerations in Christian expediency. Ihit the Com- mittee of the United Presbyterian Church dillVr by liolding, that inasmuch as the extension of Christ's kingdom and the support of its ordinances are spiritual duties incumbent on every Christian, they fall not wiihia the province of the civil magistrate — who moreover can have no funds for such objects without encroaching on the rights of conscience. VIII, — Sense in which certain statements in tlie M'cst minster Confession are undcrstaod, rlz : ch. xx. sec. 4, ch. xjriii. sec. 3, a)nl ch, .r.r.ri. sec. 2. The Committees arc of opinion tliat there would be no diHiculty as (o their agreeing about the interpretation to be put on these jKis;,;igts, if there were a substantial agreement upon the points of dilierence already noticed. 'J"hc Committees agreed that Mr. Thornton and Mr. Gale be rerjucsted to prepare copies of the minutes of the Joint Committee, in all their con- ferences, and transmit them to their respective Conveners, in order to their being laid before their respective Synods. The Conmiittees also agreed to authorize Mr. Thornton (o tale means to puVdish the minutes of their meetings. Upon the call of the chairman, llov. Mr. Hoy closed with prayer. (Signed) K. II. THORNTON, ClcrL THOMAS CHIHSTIE, Chairman. a hi i CONTENTS. 1^ Proof of the Negative, by the Committee of the Missionary (now the United Presbyterian) Synod, -.-------- Statement ot Opinions, by the Committee of the Missionary Synod Statement of Opinions, by the Committee of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, Remarks by the Committee of the United Presbyterian Synod on the Statement of Opinions, by the Committee of the Presbyterian Church, Synopsis of Opinions, ----.-----. Minutes of Meetings interspersed PAOR 4 18 37 43 51 4 -«■; "i:, PAGB ited - 4 - 18 Ida, 37 lent - 43 - 51 X w t i CONTEXTS. Pioolol I he Nogutivc, by the Committee of Uic Missionaiy (now Ihe Ui.iled Proibyterian) Syuod. Sjatement ol Opinions, by the Committee of the Missionary Synod Statement of Opinions, by the Committee of the Presbyterian Churcli of Caniida , Remarks by the Committee of :he Unitet! Presbyterian Synod on the Statement of Opinions, by the Committee of th? Frcsbyterian CInnch. Synopeis of Opinions. - - Mintites '^f Mooting? inrfrT<'rsi rAi, K 1 18 37 •J 3 .■»1 W ii |nw iHa M > ii B*fefc»w>«.rfj»-«^fe^. FAI- li •13 .■»i