IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I I^|2j8 |2.5 no "^ ■■■ Vi Ui2 |2.2 u m 2.0 m llir-25 II '-^ m ^ 6" ► '/] / Photographic Sdences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716)872-4503 V ,V \\ y ^ O^ <?' CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian tnstitute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian da microraproductions historiques Tachnical and Bibliographic Notas/Notc* tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa to Tha Instituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of this copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua. which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha raproduction. or which may significantly changa tha usual mathod of filming, ars chackad balow. 0Colourad covars/ Couvartura da coulaur I — I Covars damagad/ D Couvartura andommagAa Covars rastorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura rastaurte at/ou palliculAa r~1 Covar titia miasing/ La titra da couvartura manqua □ Colourad mapa/ Cartas gtegraphiquas wn coulaur n D D D D Colourad inic (i.a. othar than blua or black)/ Encra da coulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou noira) I I Colourad plataa and/or illustrationa/ Planchaa at/ou illustrations wt coulaur Bound with othar matarial/ Ralii avac d'autras documants Tight binding may cauaa shadows or distortion along intarior margin/ La ra liura sarria paut causar da I'ombra ou da la distoraion la long do la margo intftriaura Blank laavas addad during rastoration may appaar within tha taxt. VVhanavar possibia, chasa hava baan omittad from filming/ II sa paut qua cartainaa pagas blanchas ajoutiaa lors d'una rastauration apparaissant dana la taxta. mais. lorsqua cala Atait possibia, cas pagas n'ont pas iti filmAas. Additional commants:/ Commantairas supplAmantairas: L'Institut a microfilm* la maillaur axamplaira qu'il lui a itA possibia da sa procurar. Las details da cat axamplaira qui sont paut-Atra uniquas du point da vua bibliographiqua, qui pauvant modif lar una image raproduita. ou qui pauvant axigar una modification dans la mithoda normala da filmaga sont indiquAs ci-dassous. □ Colourad pagas/ Pagaa da coulaur D D CZl D D Pagaa damagad/ Pagaa andommagias Pagas rastorad and/or laminatad/ Pagaa rastauriaa at/ou pallicuMas Pagaa discolourad. stainad or foxad/ Pagas d6color6es. tachat^as ou piquAas Pagaa datachad/ Pagaa dAtachAas Showthrough/ Tranaparanca I I Quality of print varias/ Qualit* Inigala da I'imprassion Includos supplamantary matarial/ Comprand du material supplAmantaira Only adition availabia/ Saula Mition disponibia Pagas wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Lea pages totalement ou partieiiement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont M filmAes A nouveau de fapon A obtanir la mailleure image possible. Th( poi of filH Ori baj tht sio otr fin sio or Th( shi Tl^ wh Ma difl ant bei rig raq me This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X XX y 12X lex aox a4x 28X 32X Th« copy fllmtd h«r« hat b««n i«produe«d thanks to tha ganaroaity of: New Brunswick Museum St. John Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha bast quality poasibia conaidaring tha condition and lagibllity of tha original copy and in itaaping with tha filming contract ■paciflcationa. Original copiaa in printad papar covers ara filmad baginning with tha front covar and ending on tha last paga with a printad or iliustratad impras- sion, or tha bacic covar whan appropriate. All other original copies ara filmad beginning 'on the first paga with a printad or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche ahail contain the symbol — »> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right end top to bottom, as many frames as j required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaira filmA fut reprodult griee A la gAnAroaitA da: New Brunswick IVIuseum St. Jolin Las images suivantas ont AtA raproduites avee ie plus grtind soin, compte tenu de la condition at da la nattetA de l'exemplaira filmA. at an conformitA avac las conditions du contrat da fllmaga. Lea exemplairaa originaux dont la couvarture en papier eat imprimAe aont filmAa an commanpant par la premier plat at an terminant soit par la darnlAre page qui eomporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iiiustration, aoit par la aacond plat, salon la cas. Toua lea autrea exemplairaa originaux sent fiimAs en commen9ant par la pramiAre page qui eomporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iiiustration at en terminant par la darnlAre page qui eomporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboies suivants apparaitra aur la derniAre imege de chaqua microfiche, aaion Ie cas: la symbole — ► aignifie "A SUIVRE". la symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmAa A des taux da rAduction diff Aranta. Lorsque Ie document eat trop grand pour Atre reprciisjlt en un seul clichA, 11 est filmA A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droKe, et de haut en bas. en prenant la nombre d'imagas nAcessaira. Les diagrammes suivanta iilustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 t i 3 4 5 6 L.«* ■1 ^.^ 'r^-^'ii»^ .y mw^'^- i i\ <V s »| yrWJ'tl '^f^i *. -. «?liE^-*' «WB*iU ■iS! i8^:*J l&t? ^ 5:k-4l ' V X1I^ i_j¥. -.^i- ^J m a THE KIRK" ON UNION OF PRESBYTERIANS IN NEW BRUNSWICK, CRITICISED IN A SERIES OF LETTERS, BY REV. JAMES RENNET, MINISTER OF ST. JOHN PREUBYTBEUN CHUBCB, AMD A LETTER OF " A SELF RELIANT UYMAN." sa-raiMTiD from "tbb colonial prksbttbri an. SAINT JOHN, N. B. V (K y- FRINTED BY BARNES AND COMPANY, PRINCE WILLIAM STREET. <^ 1861. K'.r^y-: '■?>%^-ci :>t? ■?' a;. - - -"n;: J,,;.r*f j\i;";-'v- ■, - w '^' • i: V,"M ^ijtjt -•ij-^i^i^-. ,i ■«'?.;. ^a-TS \ \ y The following Correspondence, containing report of Speeches delivered on union of Presbyterian Bodies in the Synod met at Fredericton, on the 14th August, and the action of Synod in reference thereto, with the letters of the Rev. James Bennet, and that of «^ Self- Helimt Zwyman;' on Synod's speeches and action, are re-printed in the following pages from the Colonial Preshytenan, at the earnest request of many who de- sire to have the whole subject before them in a con- nected form. ' , It need only be further stated that the speeches, the sentiments of which are here made the subject of st It ture, were reported for the Colonial Preshytenan by a gentleman-an adherent of the Kirk— well qualified for the task, and that, in the absence of any legitimate dis- claimer, they may be held to be substantiaUy correct. V' UNION OF PRESBYTERIANS. For **The Oolonial PreibsrterUn." CONPERENCE ON THE PROPOSED UNION OP PRESBYTERIAN BODIES IN THE SYNOD OP THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OP NEW BRUNSWICK IN CON- NEXION WITH THE CHURCH OP SCOTLAND. Last week the Synod of tie Church of Scotland held their annual meeting in Fredericton. The question of Union came up on Friday afternoon (August 16), in the following manner : — ^The Clerk read a letter from the Rev. Mr. Elder, Convener of the Committee of Union appointed by the Synod known as the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick, requesting the earnest consideration of this Synod to certain papers forwarded at the same time, and which were also read. At same time was also read a letter from a Committee on Union, appointed by the Presbyterian Churches of the Lower Provinces, which was also accom- panied by a copy of the Minutes, — 1st, Of last Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Nova Scotia ; 2d, Minutes of the last session of the Synod of the Free Church of Nova Scotia ; 3rd, Minutes of the last session of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of the Lower Provinces of British North America. Bead also, from the Minutes now de- scribed, the basis of union entered into by the Church in Victoria, by the two Presbyterian bodies in Nova Scotia named, and also by certain parties in Canada. Where- upon, on motion of the Rev. Dr. Donald, the several mem- bers of the Synod were called upon to express their opinion on the subject. This accordingly was done by the mem- bers present. Some of the members asked to be excused from expressing their thoughts ; and all who did speak, spoke shortly, in the order and to the following effect: — The Bev. Mr. Ooo (of Chatham) said, he had been called upon unexpectedlv to speak, and ne was therefore not pre- pared to enter fully upon the subject, or to give his opinion 6 tliorofui, as liu Imd not jjivuii it ji luutnro (••uisidorutiuii. llo considortHl it, liowevor, liighlv dcsiruhle that a union niiould take place — for union would give thcni more rcBpec- ta1)ility and inHuuncu, and would consequently put theui in a condition of bein*^ of greater usefulness, llcspecting the basis of union, he had nothing to object to ; if it was worked (tut with care, ]inuK'n( c, and niodcratioii, they would no doubt be successful in accomplishing a moBt desirable object ; but at the present time ho tnought that they, as a Church, were not prepared to take the step proposed. Thev were still receiving aid from home, which tney could not dispense with. They were therefore not in a condition to cast oft* their connexion with the parent Church — to which result ho believed it would come, if they united themselves with the body known as "the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick ;" and the question therefore was, whether they would not lose their position as members of the Church of Scotland by forming such a union ? whether, if any of tlieir members were anxious to return to their native land (as some of them might be), they would not lose their status as members of the parent Church, if such a step as that l)ropo8cd was eft'ected ? He certainly was not prepared to propose that they should cast off their connexion with the motlier Church, and forego the privilege of being one of her ministers. In thus expressing his hasty sentiments, he wished it to he understood that he was quite liberal in his views, and that he entertained the highest respect for members of other Presbyterian bodies. Mr. Robert Nicholson (Elder) then observed, that he would not say much on the subject under discussion ; but he would say that he had seen no reason why their breth- ren should have separated from them in the nrst place. If they were desirous to return again to the fold, they were welcome to come back as members of the Church of Scotland. Rev. Mr. Mackie (Moncton) had very little to say on the subject, but his sentiments were in accordance with those which had been expressed by the Rev. Mr. Ogg. Before debating on such an important subject, he thought that the Church at home should be consulted oflScially. Mr. Gkant (Elder) briefly said he was in favour of union ; but, taking into consideration what would in all Erobability result if that union were effected, he gave it as is opinion that he would rather stick to the old Church. dl tf c< c{ bj al 8( tl were 2I1 of »iir of jin all |e it as rch. Kev. J. II. McLakdy (ordaiiietl Missiuiuirv) would not Kpoftk at Icii^^h on the subject ; it was one that remiired tlio deepest consideration. It was no doubt a desirable thing that all profesftinj? Christians should draw together ; they were all of one mind as to the desirabilitjy of union, and wore all agreed, as far as the abstract principle was con- cerned — but there were great difficulties in the way. IIo could see no likelihood that all the members of Christ's body would ever be formed into one Church. There hnd always been diversities of opinion ; there had been branches separated from the parent CJiurch from the beginning, and there always would be 8U(!h diversities and such separations. But ho believed that there might be a union of spirit among the Churches, and this he conceived was the thought of the Saviour in the text so often quoted in the argument for union. The meaning of that text was, that all believers should be one in spirit ; evidently rot that all should bo one body ; it was a spiritual, not an outward, union that was here shown forth. With that interpretation of the word of the Saviour, he could conceive how there might be a union of spirit and sentiment in separate bodies. There were particular difficulties, moreover, in the way of an external union, through which he could not "see his way straight," and the first was with regard to the recognition by the Church at home of such a union. That Church had not yet decided wliat would be her conduct to the united bodies of Presbyterians in Victoria. It was true she had not censured them, but it was equally true she had not praised them. They should therefore wait the decision of the Mother Church with regard to her bearing towards those bodies, before they commenced a similar action of such serious importance. Besides, it appeared to him, if a union took place immediately it could not be permanent : there were so many differences between the two bodies, not in things of the highest importance, but in such as would rec^uire a great deal of consideration to adjust. A perfect union could only take place when they were all agreed in thought ; and he believed there were such differences of thought and feeling between themselves and the body that sought to be incorporated with them, that a permanent union would be impossible. No doubt several advantages would be derived from such a union as was proposed ; some small struggling congregations would thereby be rendered self-supporting : but would we not be withdrawing labour from tiic great vineyard, by thus helping to strengthen a few congregations ? He would not enter into the question 8 how the status and position of clergymen would be aflfected by union ; but if tne basis proposed were such as would sever their connexion with the Church of Scotland; if after the union was eifected, they would thereafter no longer be received as members of that Church, he, for one, was not willing to relinquish his stat j'^ . The basis of union, moreover, was not such as had received the approbation of the Church at home — at least such an approval was not before them ; and in absence of that, they inight well pause before they took steps in such an action. The probaDility was, that the Church at home would not support the Church in Victoria as before, and that in the future she would deal with it as a castaway. He was not willing, therefore, to unite on such a basis as was proposed. Rev. "William Mueeay (Dalhousie) said, that the subject under discussion was one on which he had strong feelings. He believed in his heart that union was a right thing. Kit with regard to the language of the Saviour so often quoted as the strongest argument in favour of union, " That they all may be one, as Thou Father art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us," the simple meaning of " one in us," was one in spirit wHh us ; and therefore that passage could not be held to constitute a Divine command lor external union. The chief objection to the union of the two bodies that had been stated was, that they would not be received as members of the Church of Scotland after it was consummated ; but if a union was according to the interest of the Church in this Province, he, for one, would be willing to forego the privilege of being accepted as of the parent body. But he believed that a union would not promote their interests at all. He was, therefore, opposed to it ; and his final opinion was, that they should answer with all courtesy the letter of the Convener of the Com- mittee on Union, appointed by the Church known as the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick, and then let them give up all thought on the subject. Rev. Mr. Keay, on being called on to deliver his opinion on the subject before the Synod, briefly remarked, that before they could entertain the question, " How shall those two bodies come together?" another question should be answered, " How did they go apart ?" Of their own will the Free Church went out from them. Were they to re- ceive its members back again, now when it suited their interests to \>g once more united ? He did not see how I 9 i affected as would tland; if safter no , for one, of union, bation of was not rell nause obability e Church ould deal refore, to le subject ; feelings. :ng. But en quoted That they [ in Thee, eaning of efore that command ion of the ould not d after it g to the le, would ited as of ould not [, opposed answer 3 Com- as the let them opmion lea, that lall those lould be I own will ley to re- tted their sec how I there could be a union at the present time. When the hir^er branches of tlie Church of iScotland were yet se- j)anited, liow could the smaller in the Province twine together? He desired to maintain all brotherly love to- wards the mhiisters of that body ; but he did not see, if they liad a due regard to their own interests, how a union could take place at the present time. Not until there was a union between the parent Churches, could there be an enduring bond between their offspring. Rev. James Murray (Tabusintack) said, that there was nothing that he would desire more to see than a union be- tween the cliurclies : if that union was perfect, it would f^trengthen their hands, advance the cause of religion, and do away with all petty jealousies. But he thought that the question was then untimely. He did not see how there could be a union immediately, for several reasons. There had been as yet no communion between the two churches. They must be first drawn together in the spirit of the religion of Jesus, and commune with each other in prayer. They must first interchange good oflices in all love and kindly feeling in their pulpits, and in their inter- course with one another — as yet, there had been little of that, and before they could think of union, there must be that communion. He would say nothing about their standing as clergymen of the Church of Scotland, which would be lost or jeopardized by union. If their Church was self- sustaining, he might be content to give that up ; but as yet they were dependent on the Church at home for their veiy existence, and could not therefore throw off their connexion. While he thought that union at the present time was unadvisable, and impossible if advisable, no member of the Synod was more desirous of union in mind and spirit with the other Presbyterian bodies in the Province than he was, or more willing to interchange kindly offices with any minister of Christ, let him be of what Church he might. Rev. Dr. Donald (St. John) said, that it had been agreed on all hands, by those who had expressed their opinion, that union was desirable, but that the time for incorporation had not yet come. That was precisely his opinion also. No doubt a union was to be desired, but there were then several practical difficulties in the way. Before there could be an incorporation of the two Churches, a union of sen- timent and feeling must take place, and unless it was one /■ 10 m head, hand, and heart, the union would bo founded on compromise and not on principle. Then neither churches were self-sustaining : if a union did take place, with the consequent severance from the parent branches^ what condition would they be in ? They all knew the difficulties in the Church at the present time ; how would those diffi- culties be increased then if it was obliged to sustain itself 3 There was only one church in the Province, at St. John, that could do more than support itself — there might be one in Kichibucto also ; but beyond these two, there Were none other that could put forth a helping hand to the many strug- gling congregations throughout the Province. He did not think, therefore, that their church would be strengthened by such a union. And further, it was much to be feared that those who Were so anxious to promote that union were desirous that the Presbyterian churches in the Province might be strengthened politically ; but nothing, to his mind, was more to be deprecated. If the churches united were thereby strengthened politically, there was every reason to fear that the influence of their body would be merged and lost in that with which they were incorporated. Union demanded of necessity a compromise of principle. The members of the other Presbyterian body had been led to entertain different opinions from themselves as to the right of interference bv the civil magistrate in any ecclesiastical procedure. Difficulties would therefore in time arise on that point among the members of the united body : many parties would refuse to recognize such interference, while the members of the Synod on principle would do so. Here then there would be an ever recurrmg cause of disagreement. There was another difficulty in the way of union, and a no small difficulty, and that was the position held by them as members of the Church of Scotland. At present they en- joyed certain privileges ; they held the same stuitus as the clergymen of the Church of England : it was a position that was to be highly prized (he had been surprised to hear members of the Synod say that they would be willing to give it up under certain conditions — he would relinquish it on none) ; but it was as certain as anything, if that union did take place their status would be lost. There must be a union of feeling and sentiment before an in- corporation of the two bodies could take place. Let them exchange friendly acts as individuals ; let them assist each other in the pulpit (several of the ministers of that body had preached for him and he had preached for them) ; let them go along and unite in that frieudly way ; let them bear and ded on lurches ith the r what iculties se diffi- 1 itself 3 ;. John, the one re none y Strug- did not wthened ! feared on were 'rovinee is mind, 2d were eason to ged and Union le. The jn led to ;he ri^ht isiastical arise on many jrhilethe ere then reeraent. and a no them as they en- is as the tion that to hear lUing to aquish it at union )reanin- ,et them sist each )ody had let them bear and 11 forbear with each other; and at some future time the union tliat had been anticipated would in all likelihood take place. He entertained a very great respect for the ministers of every Presbvterian denomination — as high as any other member of the Synod did ; but he was firmly of opinion that the time for union (which he believed would come) had not yet come. Till the churches were self-sustaining, there could be no prospect of union. Eev. Mr. Henderson (Newcastle) who spoke next, ob- served that he had very little to add to what had been already eaid. He coincided with all the sentiments expressed by the members of the Synod who had spoken. He considered that union would be exceedingly desirable, but at present an incorporation without a union of sentiment would do more harm than ^ood. It would be their duty however to remove all the circumstances that lay as obstacles in the way of that union : in the meantime let them cultivate such feelings and sentiments, and exchange such good offices as would help to bring them into closer communion with each other. H« hoped that the time would come when the more practical difficulties in the way would be got over and a union be consummated ; but, in the meantime, these diffi- culties could not be got over. Rev. Dr. Brooke (Fredericton), in expressing his opinion, remarked, that after what had been said so well by several members of the Synod, he would not take up their time by speaking at any length on the subject under consideration. If the question had been absolutely one between union and disunion, he weuld certainly have pronounced in favor of union. But that was not the question. They had been asked to enter into an incorporation with another body ; but before they thought of entering into such a union they must know the terms on which it was proposed to found it, and then decide whether a greater good would result to the * two bodies by their being united than by their continuing separate. The word union seemed to have a charm for some ears. Man^y seemed to think by virtue of the word all were bound to listen to it: that' all would be well if only a union were eflfected. But union in name only was, he believed, food for nothing. Two horses of different breeds might be amessed together to a vehicle, but if one of them would trot while the other galloped, or botji pulled different ways, then "union" would not result in comfort to themselves and to him who drove them ; or when a man and woman of IS incompatible tempers were joined tt>j;ellier in inarria«:e. surely their happiness was not promoted by " union ;"' and it was his opinion if the two bodies wore united in name at the present time, before many years went over they would be separated again. Injustice to themselves they could not entertain the thought of union with those who called themselves the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick : that properly was their own title ; and to enter into a union with that body would be to admit that it had a right in assuming that title, and to allow themselves to be swallowed up by it. If those who seek union are really desirous of it, let them return to the parent church. They " went out from us." There could be no middle ground — they could not be met half way. Let them return to their first love, and they would be received graciously. But they could not be received at present on their own terms. Such a union could only be parent of a lew secession. He had been surprised to hear a member of the Synod say that he was ready to give up connection with the Church of Scotland. lie confessed he was very much surprised at such a sentiment. They had been indebted to her for every thing, and it would be ungracious, ungratefully to break off their connection with her under aTiy circumstances. The Kev. Dr. Donald then stated that it was a serious subject with which they had been engaged, that it had been seriously discussed, and that the minds of all were seriously impressed. lie therefore thought that it was a fit occasion to call upon the Moderator to engage in prayer for the union of the visible Church of Christ, and more especially for those branches between whom there is so little difference. , The Moderator then offered up a very earnest and impr«^s- sive prayer, for the object referred to. if 1 i I DELIVERANCE ON THE SUBJECT OF UNION OF THE SYNOD OF THE PRESBY- TERIAN CHURCH OF. NEW BRUNSWICK IN CONNEXION WITH THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. At Saint Paul's Church, Fredericton, the 16th day of August, 1861. Tne which day the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick, in connexion with the Church of Scotland, being met and constituted. Inter alia, the Clerk read a letter from the Rev. William Elder, Convener of a Committee on Union, appointed by Ui ;'• and laine at ' would f could ) called iswiek : a union right in allowed irous of ent out f could •st love, f could Such a Lie had iay that urch of rised at her for fully to stances. seriouB it had 1 were ivas a fit prayer more 'e is so iinpres- PRESBY- I CHURCH day of Lurch of jotland, Villiam ited bv the Synod, known astheSvnod of the Presbyterian (/hurch of New Brunswick, requesting tlie earnest consideration of this Synod to certain papers forwarded along with the said letter, and which were also read. At the same time was read a letter fr ^m a Committee on Union, appointed by the Presbyteriaii Ohurch of the liOwer Provinces, which was also accompanied by (^opy of Minutes — 1st, Of the last Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Nova Scotia ; 2d. Of the last session of the Synod of the Free Ciiurch of ^ova Scotia; and 3d. Of the first session of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of the Lower Provinces of British North America. Read also from the said Minutes the basis of Union en- tered into by the Church in Victoria, by the two Presby- terian bodies in Nova Scotia now named, and also by certain bodies in Canada. Whereupon the several members of Synod were called upon to express their opinions on the subject, beginning with the youngest. This, accordingly, w^as done by the members, all expressing tlieir earnest desire for union with their Presbj^terian bretliren, but stating their conviction that the time had not yet arrived when such a union could be formed, with any prospect of its being satisfactory or permanent. Dr. Donald remarked that it was a serious subject in which the Synod had been engaged, and that it had been discussed in a very solemn and earnest manner ; that the minds of all appeared to be seriously impressed, and he, therefore, thought it was a fit occasion to call upon the Moderator to engage in prayer for greater unity in the visible Church of Christ, and, more especially, among those branches of it which have so nmch in common. The Moderator then ofifere*! up a very earnest and im- pressive prayer, chiefly for the objects specified. Thereafter, it was moved that the Clerk be instructed to acknowledge tho receipt of the communications from the Synod of the Church known as the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick, and that from the Presbyterian Church of the Lower Provinces on the subject of union ; and to inti- mate, at the same time, that the siibject had been carefully, and at great length considered by all the members of this Synod ; that all most earnestly desire t.o manifest and cultivate the most friendly and christian intercourse with the Synods of the other Presbyterian C/hurches, in further- ance of the great object contemplated in the communica- v'.ions received, until an oppf>rtunity for a satisfa(rtory and 3 It m !?'' 14 permanent union should, in the good providence of God, be presented. Extracted from the Minutes of the Synod of the Presby- terian Church of New Brunswick in connexion with the Church of Scotland, by John M. Brooke, D. D., Sytiod Cleric. Letter from Rev. Di'. Brooke, accompanying the fore- going extract : — My Dear Sib, — I send you extract of our Minutes on the subject of union. The question received our most earnest and prayerful consideration. AVe are all agreed that union is exceedingly desirable, but, as yet, we do not see our way clearly to a satisfactory accomplishment of the object. There are grave questions, both ecclesiastical and civil, that must be settled before a union can take place. In the present state of matters, I am persuaded that a union could neither be satisfactory nor permanent ; and so long as a large number of our people continue to think as they now do, I should fear that, were a union attempted, it would just lead to another secession, if not in your connex- ion, at least in ours. 1 see no reason, however, why we should stand apart, and in a hostile atttitude to each other, as has too long been done. Let us cherish friendly relations with one another, so that ministers and people being more frequently brought into contact, all may be prepared for such a union as we long to see consummated. In what I have said I am not to be understood as speaking officially ; but I believe I express the views of every member of our Synod, and of the great majority of our people ; and I have no objection to your using this note in any way you please. 1 will send you a copy of the prmted Minutes in a few days. I am, my dear Sir, Very faithfully .yours, John M. Brooke. MaDse, Frederictoa, 3Ut August, 1S61. li^c. WUUam Elder. 15 of God, Presby- fith. the ?lerk. he fore- lutes on ir most L agreed 3 do not it of the ical and :e place. a union I so long : as they ipted, it connex- d apart, too long rith one squently a union aid I am believe and of bjectioii in a few lOOKE. TO THE EDITOR OF THE "COLONIAL PRESBYTERIAN." LETTER I. Sir — Being of the number of the members of the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick who were most desirous and hopeful of union between the two largest sections of the Presbyterian Church of this Province, I felt all the more grievea and disappointed with the evident death-blow given to all such expectations and desires for at least many years to come, by the action taken by the Synod in connexion with the Church of Scotland, and by the sen- timents of its members, as expressed in their supreme Court, and recorded in your paper of the 4th Sept. The domi- nant feeling however which arose in my mind — the dominant feeling, I believe, which every one must have been conscious* of — on reading the whole action of that Synod on the o(!- casion, was one of extreme surprise, I might say wonder mingled with sorrow, at the quality of the objections against the union sought : these being not against the proposed basis of union, but consisting of three elements — Ist. A money consideration ; 2d, A personal status and thoroughly selfish concern ; and 3d, An apparent anxiety to give the civil magistrate all freedom of interference in the affairs of the Church. I was further grieved, in view of the manifest opposition between the action of the Synod and its pro- fessed desires and solemn prayers, and at the apparent fi- nality of its action : even after its prayers for union no measures having been taken to ascertain whether there were any validity in the objections made, and which were only hypothetical, against the union, nor any committee appointed to take any further action for the removal of these difficulties. I felt too that a tone of arrogant assump- tion runs through the whole of the speeches delivered on the occasion, exceedingly offensive towards the Church of which I have the honor to be a minister, and towards Presbyterian Churches in general. The speeches delivered on the oc- casion also seemed to me, and indeed to all with whom I have conversed on the subject, to look at the question from such an entirely selfish, worldly, and personal point of view, that I could not but feel that while the speakers were con- sulting for the maintenance of civil status, they had lowered their ministerial dignity and Christian character ; that their anxieties about money to carry on Church operations had blinded their minds in regard to any true conception of the 1« I! I I'cmI value uf the (ibjcct which tlioy i»rotWsi;tl tu liavo in v'u'W ; tliiit tlit'i'o was iniicli want ot" candour in their past profobsioiis, that their principles, as applied to the relations of the civil magistrate with the Church in tliis Province, were the same as those of the Free Church, and therefore that there was no necessity why there should be division of the Church hero. These and many other disagreeable thoiighrs arose in my mind as 1 read the speeches of the various niembers of the Synod at Fredcricton, on the lOtli August. The general impression, I belieye, which has been produced by the publication of them on the minds not merely of those i)opularly denominated Free Church, but upon the minds of the members of the Kirk, is one eminently unfayorable to the gentlemen who uttered them, and cal- culated to produce a bad impression regarding the yiews and motives of ministers generally ; one Kirk adherent, in my presence, sneering at their going to pray for the accom- plishment of that which they had determined should not be done; another shaking the head, with the remark that the less said about the subject the better ; while a third, in a phrase of classic form and gentle yet stinging pungency, re- marked concerning the sentiments of the speakers on the occasion, " that they were not by any means heroic." After reading the neatly expressed minute of the yener- able clerk of Synod, and the yery polite letter with which he accompanied it, one fayorable to the union of the two Churches might feel disappointed ; but it is only after pe- rusing the speeches and hearing of the prayers, -which led to the elegant miimte and not less beautiful letter of the clerk, that one can appreciate at their true yalue the pro- fessions of desire for union which from time to time hayo been made by the members of that Church. I feel thankful to your correspondent who has furnished you with, I shall suppose, a true account of the speeches delivered on that important F>iday afternoon, the 16th August last, by the members of the august Synod of the Church of New Brun- swick in connexion with the Church of Scotland. You, also, I thank for having given them publicity in your paper, though in doing so I fear you have put these gentlemen in a position before the public which they never intended to occupy ; for I solemnly believe that there is not one of the ministers who uttered his thoughts on that occasion, and who has read the record of them in your paper, who has not al- ready come to the conclusion that their speeches, taken altogether, '' are not by any means heroic." 1 could have earnestly wished that nothing had occurred I « IT liuve In it'ir past •flations roviuce, lierotbrc division ijreeablo s of the :lio lOtli lias been t merely lit upon linently and cal- le views 3rent, in ! accom- d not be that the ird, in a jncy, re- 8 on the 1) e. e vener- li which the two ifter pe- lich led of the the pro- ne have laukful I shall on that by the *v Brun- )u, also, paper, men in idcd to e of the ,nd who not al- , taken x« L'C nrred to oblige me to say or do anythin«; olfensivc to the cstinu\- ble brethren of the Church in connexion with the Ohurcli of Scotland. I feel, lioM'ever, compelled, in presence of the spoken and published sentiments of those "entlemen, to subject their utterances to a criticism which may very likely offend them. While speaking my mind with all freedom, I trust, however, ] shall not transgress any rule of politeness or propriety. It is due to myself, due to the Church of which 1 am the pastor, due to the Synod of which I am a member, due to the Presbyterian people of this Province, and to the public in general, thut the speeches of these brethren and the action of their Synod should bo placed in their true light, should be translated into the ver- nacular, that he who runs may read the stmtiments which they entertain regarding their status and ours, and the principles which tliey hold relative to missionary money, the civil magistrate, and ecclesiastical union. These matters I, at all risks of dissevering the courtesy of a distant friend- ship, intend in a series of letters thoronglily to discuss. Preliminary to the observations whicn I feel it to be my duty to make on the sentiments embodied in the action of the Synod in connexion with the Church of Scotland, and in the speeches of its members relative to union, I have to present to the Christian public of New Brunswick a copy of the minutes of the action taken by the Synod of that Church in favour of union, in order that it may be made apparent that our overtures to that Synod were not made without strong encouragement, I might say solicitation, from it; that, on the contrary, from time to time, said Synod did in a very public and impressive manner, urge this matter of union upon other Presbyterian bodies, and by so doing did hold us up before their own people and the public in general as schismatics, who would listen to no reasonable terms. Concurrent also with this Synodical action on their part, the members of that Church, both lay and clerical, in general conversation, did throw all the blame of standing aloof from them upon the ministers of the Free Church in the Province, and so gained for themselves a sym- pathy, which, as is now apparent, was procured through lictitious representations, for no sooner does the Synod po- pularly denominated Free, propose a basis of union, to which no member of the Church of Scotland Synod has made the slightest objections, and which has been positivel 3"^ approved by at least one of its ministers, than the same Synod, so desirous of union, after " solemn" discussion, and "earnest and impressive prjiyer'' for union, proceeds to answer that 3 f lii.l ii il:! H i 18 they ciiuiiot ouiiter with ii8 further un the union ho oiirneHtly sought by tiieir (Miurch in tho uHHt, so earnestly and im- pressively prayed for by the Moderator of that august body — cannot go furtlier than make a courteous acknow- ledgment of our prcTTiftturo advances in seeking nnion with them, as thereby their ecclesiastical pocket might suffer some depletion, their dignified status take damage, or, still further, should the civil magistrate interfere in our clerical concerns, lest some of us might not take the same placid view of his proceedings which those who have so long breathed in the atmospliere of a State Church are always prepared with delight to submit to. Tliat all this may with the utmost lucidity penetrate the minds of the readers of the Colonial J^reahyterian, I beg to lay before them the following rather lengthy document, and to which I trust they will give all due attention : — " At St. James' Church, Newcastle, the 7th day of July 1854. The Synod met pursuant to adjournment, and wub constituted with prayer. Sederunt &e. " Inter alia .'^Tiie Committee on Union with other Pres- byterian bodies in the province, reported that a letter from tho Rev. Wm. Elder, Convener of the Committee of tho ' Presbytery of New Brunswick, adhering to tho Westmin- ister Standards,' had been received, requesting information, 1st, aft to the fact of a Union with the Synod and the Pres- bytery (embracing the great bulk of the Presbyterians of tne Provinces) being desired on the part of the iormer, and 2d, As to the basi& on which it was deemed desirable and possible that such Union could be realized. "The Synod re-appoint the Committee, consisting of Messrs* Henderson, Koss, Donald and Murray, ministers, William Napier, Richard Hutchison and Jolm Gillis,Eldei»> with the addition of Mr. Brooke, who is appointed Conve- ner, instructing them to furnish Mr. Elder with all the proceedings of the Synod on the subject ; to receive any proposal mat may be made them by the Committee of which Mr. Elder is Convener, to meet with said committee to discuss the question, if desired ; and to report to next meeting of Synod." The documents above referred to are — I. Resolutions moved by Mr. Hannay at the meeting of Synod in the year 1844. They are as follows i " Tho Rev. Mr. Hannay read and moved the adoption of the following Resolutions, which motion was seconded l>y tlic Rev. Mr. Stovou. i 4 i yfX n» ijiriicistly and iiii- t augUHt acknow- ion with lit suffer , or, still r clt'rical le placid BO long e always his may 3 readers them the i I trust ' of July and WHS fier Pres- :ter from e of the Vestmin- rniation, he Pres- jrians of mer, and able and sting of linisters, ij £lder»y \ Conve- all the eive any littee of tmmittec ; to next eeting of option of ndcd l>v " WJKM'oas, in order to promote the peiwe and unity of tlic (yhurt'h, it is desirable that the Synod should remove (Hirtain doubts and difficulties that liave reeontly arisen with respect to the connexion with the Church of Scotland, and the obligations and responsibilities which that con- nexion involves : Thereforo Resolved : — ^' Ist, That, whereas the Chuit^h of Scotland ' disclaims all jurisdiction over her Branches in the Colonies,' leaving them to exercise free, full and supreme ecclesiastical and spiritual authority over all their members, this Synod remain, as heretofore, in connexion with the Church of Scotland, as by law established. " 2d. That us the Synod is not rcprcsentetl in the General Assembly of the Parent Church, and has no voice in the Councils of that body, it is not legally qualified to express either ap])roval or disapproval of their acts. " 3d. Tliat the Synod has acted, and will still continue to act on the principle of maintaining friendly correspond- ence with all other Presbyterian Churches throughout the world, that hold the "Westminster Standards, and of receiv- ing such qualified Ministers or Probationers of said Churches as may feel desirous of placing themselves under its juris- diction and control, agreeably to the terms of the aforesaid resolutions. " It was moved by the Rev. Mr. McMaster, and second- ed by the Rev. Mr. Henderson, that the following be put as an amendment to the second resolution, viz : — " That as this Synod is not represented in the General Assembly of the I^arent Church, and has no voice in the Councils of that body, we hold ourselves not to be respon- sible for any of her acts, and as a Synod, are not legally qualified to express either approval or disapproval of these Acts. " This amendment, being then put from the chair, the state of the vote was 3 'yeas' and 9 'nays,' whereupon it was carried in the negative. And the original Resolutions being then put to the vote were carried by the same majority." II. Overture of Mr. Ross, laid before the Synod, and adopted in 1845 ; — " It is overtured that the Synod appoint a Committee to prepare a Pastoral Address explanatory of the Resolutions of last year, and to correspond with the Presbyterian Min- isters in the Provinces, who are not members of this Synod, with the view of effecting the Union of Presbyterians into «0 My :| !! one iKKjy ; and lliut, in the mriintiuio, llic i»nlj»itK of minis- tors in connexion with the SyniHl, hoo|n*n tosnch niInif*t('i'H of other I'rcrthyterian <ionuniinutionH, ns oeeaHion nniy require." m- . i •. The Synod iinftnimouMly adopted the overture, and ap- pointed MePHrs. UoHB, IFalket, Brooke and HendcrRon, a Oommittoo to earry out its intention : Mr. ilalket to bo Oonvoner. ' ■'■ ii ''•'"„;•,;.. .im III. Overture of Mr. l?rooko, in tS4« : " An Overture on Union with other Proshyterian hodles in this and the adjoining Provinces, was hrought forward hy the Rev. Mr. Brooke. Several niend»cr8 expressed their anxious desire to promote the object contemplated in the overture, and, after reasoning at some length, the Synod resolved in terms of the Kesolntion of 1S44." (See lid Resolution). IV. Mr. Henderson's motion in 1850 : — " Mr. Henderson brought under the notice of the Synod the subject of Union with other Presbyterian bodies in this Province, and after reasoning, the following Resolution was unanimously adopted : — " The Synod, deploring the divisions that exist among (Christians, and feeling the importance of uniting in one body those who hold the same doctrines, and adopt thiB same forms of worshm and of Church government, and, believing that the differences, M'hicli keep sueh denomina- tions asunder, and form them into separate bodies, have no proper cause for their existence here, in this Province; do hereby record their earnest desire for the accomplishment of such a Union of all Presbyterians ; and, with this view, appoint a Committee to confer with any who may manifest a desire to heal those divisions that imhappily exist among religious denominations that have so much in common. "The Rev. George McUoncll, Mr. Henderson, John M. Brooke and William Donald, Ministers, with Richard Hut- chison and Thomas Xcsbet, Esquires, Elders, were appoint- ed a Committee to carry out the object contemplated, and to report to the Synod at its next meeting." V. Overture of John Gillis, Esq., laid before the Synod and unanimously passed, in the year 1853 : — " The Committee on Bills and Overtures reported that they have been requested to transmit to the Synod an overture from the Presbytery of St. John, to the following effect : — " At Fredericton the twenty-fourth day of August in the I t ln'x L'l that lod an owing in the your lHr>.'{. Tlu' svlii«li djiy tlir IVoshytcry of St. .lulm tuot ill terms of adjoiiriiiiieiit, and w ;ih cotiHtitnti'd witli jiruycr. "^ Inter alhi : — It was iiutvc^l by .lolm (Jillis, K><)., un<l UiianiiiioiiHly agret'd to. Tliat, v 'lercas tlie <lif*iinited state ill which the neveral coiiffrejrations in the Provinee, lulher- in/jj to the Westminster Standards, are \\t present, and tot' Rome time liave l>oen, is a great evil, and tends to weaken th(! Presbyterian body, generally ; — It be respeett'iilly over- tnred by the Presbytery of St. John, to tlie Synod of the; Presbyterian Church adliering to the Church of Scotland, that tiie said Synod take into their serious consideration the propriety of endeavoring to promote a Union of all Pres- oyterian bodies in the Province into one Church, and also the best means of promoting such Union. "The Synod took np the overture. John Gillis, Esq., was heard in support of it, and the members generally ex- pressed their opinions on the Hubject. " After which the Synod resolved cordially and unani- mously, to record their high approbation of the object con- templated by the overture betore them ; and to show that they have all alonir been desirous of a Union with their brethren of the dinerent Presbyterian bodies in this Pro- vince, refer to a Resolution adopted at their meeting in 1850."— (See No. IV). "The Synod, farther, with a view of forwarding such a Union as is now proposed, recommend to their several members to pursue the same conciliatory course, as tlie,y have hitherto done ; and appoint the following Committee, with instructions to use their best endeavors to promote the object contemplated, and to report to the Synod at next meeting: — Messrs. Henderson, Ross, Donald and Murray, Ministers ; with Messrs. Wm. Napier, Richard Hutchison, John Gillis and Angus M'Caskill, Elders. "Extracted from the Minutes of the Synod of New Brunswick by " John M. Brooke, /S'^?i06? CV^rZ*." "What a change has come over the spirit of their dream ! The same Synod which in 1854 appear to have had a stand- ing Committee on Union, and which was re-appointed in the same year, not merely to exchange documents and receive proposals from the Committee of the Free Church Synod, but actually to meet with this Committee to dis- cuss the question of union if desired ; — this same Synod, consisting of very much the same individuals, has, in the M i:^. «22 year ISOl, after serious disciission, with sorioiisiy impress- ed iuIikIs, and earnest and impressive prayers, sliut against union tiie door of lioj)e — at least as lon^ as there is money to be had from tlie Cluirch of Scotland, or a minister in the Colonies solieitous about his status, or with an eye to a fat parish in Scorhuid, or in any respect anxious about non- interference with the interference of the civil magistrate in the conc^ejMis of tlie Church — that is, I dare say, they have deferred the further discussion of the question of union till tlie Second Advent at least. We all know what changes occurred while Rip Van Winkle slept so many years in the Kaatskill mountains, and how surprised he was at the figure of Washington in the room of that of King George over the door of the village ale house where he was wont to regale himself; hut if one of those elders who w^as appoint- ed on the Committee of Union in 1854, and who may have gone to his account, were permitted to revisit the august Synod of which, while in the flesh, he was a worthy mem- ber, on the memorable 16th of August, 1861, his surprise \vould surely have been almost as great as that of the sie^py Rip, as, rubbing his eyes, he surveyed his rusty gun and gazed on the transmutation of the alehouse signboard, and the whole scene how changed. It surprised Hamlet that, with the ccmnterfeit presentment of two brothers in her hand, his mother could so soon forget the Hyperion curls, the eye of Mars and front of Jove of the one, for the mildewed form of the other, blighting his wholesome brothel* ; and scarcely less surprising is it that the Synod of the Church of Scotland in this Province should so earn- estly have held out proposals for union, so persistently appointed Committees to initiate it, adopted overtures to procure it, and professed themselves ready to accomplish it on any proper basis, and now when all things seemed to run parallel with their long-cherished idea, when a " basis" is proposed to M'hich they cannot even find an objection, ^vhen their brethren of the Free Church to which they held <^)nt allurements for so many years, are j'cady to forget the unpleasant reminiscences of disruption 6(?encs, und to stand on the broad grounds of a common Presbyterianism, that they should give the lie to all their former pi'otestations, aiui refuse to consider the matter of union further at all — certainly this is very M'onderful, seemingly also not very creditable, and eminently suggestive of various inquiries as to the cause of the change to that course whi(;h tney now think it appropriate to i)ursue. Among otber inrjuincs M'hjch ppo]>lp will make, are the hi 2'^ Imprcsfl- ; against 5 money nistcr in ove \o a loiit non- istrate in ley have inion till changes irs in the the figure >rgc over wont to 5 appoint- may have \e august tliy mem- is surprise the bitapy gun and jignboard, d^ Hamlet rothers in Hyperion ne, for the rtrholesome the Synod Id so earn- ersistently ^'ertures to ic'complish seemed to I a " basis" objection, 1 they held tbrget the id to stand nisni, that otestations, ler at all — not very nquiries as tnev now following: — Was the status of these niitiibtcib iinytliiiig dift'erent in 1854 from what it is now ? Was it not likely to be tarnished in the former year, and wliat lias arisen since to make it of such delicate brightness that union wi*'' the Church of New Brunswick should pale its present glory ? Why think that the Chnrch of Scotland would cast them oif now, or treat them differently from what slie would liave done in 1854? Were they prepared to bear the mar- tyrdom of her frown then, and are they more dutiful and kind to their old mother now ? What reason have they to suppose she would knit her brow, or scold, or cut off their allowance, or cast them off as reprobates ? Whv when so earnestly desirous of union, did they not ascertain how the venerable old lady would deal with them if they should, following their desire, imite with tlie Church of New Brunswick ? Whatever be the reason of this marked change in their procedure, it is evident that the Church whicli they dismiss from their court with all the official courtesies, yet with all l^eremjitoriness, was not the first wooer. Tlie decisive JVo comes after a vast deal of coquetting. We liavc been hired on by fair speeches, glozing sentiments of equality and brotherly love, till we are now in the position of those who have paid " rejected addresses." Like an old flirt, the Church of Scotland in this Province liaving procured, by the arts of an intriguante, a declaration of our desire for union, now chooses to turn up her nose at our status, } dead 8 that her mother might be unfriendly, and cut short ler allowance, if she should form a mes-alliance with such a contemptible partner, and tells us that there is a question or two upon which we might differ in our married relation- ship. In regard to all which reasons of refusal we have simply to say we are glad to think we have escaped from an alliance with one whose conduct lias been so deceptive, and whose sentiments are — well, " not by any means heroic." Feeling, Mr. Editor, that I liave occuj)ied too much of your paper, I shall not further transgress at present, trust- ing that in your next weekly issue I may find room for some further comments on the same subject. Yours, «fcc., JaMKS BKKMiT. I ke, are the 24 .;/i ■■; ;»t-«t.;..M k' LUTTISR II. ■ '■.>«:' iii SiK— 111 my letter of last week I expressed the feelings of dlsappointineiit, surprise and sorrow, to which the action of the Synod of the Church in connexion with the Church of Scotland had given rise, and shewed how strange was the conduct of that Church, how changed her views on the subject of union ; how she had stood forth as its advocate while there was no prospect of its accomplishment ; but as soon as a fair and honest proposal was made to her, against the essential basis of which no reasonable objections could be made or were even tendered, she shut the door against any further consideration of the subject, leaving the unhappy inference that she had been thoroughly disingenuous in all her previous proceedings. The objections offered to the union itself, I have affirmed, and still hold to be of such a meagre kind, that though they might form matter for dis- cussion and adjustment previous to union, they could not form premises to the conclusion that the whole subject should be dismissed, and its further consideration postponed sine die In my present communication I shall consider the doctrine of union, as propounded in the Synod of Fre- dericton, for to the meagre views on this subject presented to the minds of the members of that Synod may we attri- bute the fact that it could be dismissed on such light grounds as status, the supplement of a few salaries, or a hypothetical disagreement on the power of the civil magistrate in the province of New Brunswick. And here, I am happy to agree with one of the speakers on that occasion, in repudiating as altogether unworthy of the subject, the idea of union, on the ground that it would aid in attaining political power, or personal aggrandize- ment. Political ends should be the last thing aimed at in ecclesiastical organizations. Personal glory is altogether foreign to the Church of Christ. It is curious, however, and betrays a great confusion of ideas to sec a learned doc- tor repudiating a union wliicli might be sought for such political and personal ends, and then maintaining so tirmly a personal status, which is merely political ; for the status of a minister connected with the Church of Scotland as opposed to the status of a minister of the Church of New Brunswick, can be only political. ]f Dr. Donald have any status in connexion with the Church of Scotland, which he would not have out of that connexion, can it be anything but political i 1 cannot see, therefore, that the Doctor was at all consistent in repudiating the political ngs of tion of fch of as the ►n the vocate but as igainst i could igaiust iliappy i in all to the such a tor dis- uld not subject itponed onsider of Fre- esented e attri- rrounds letical in the jeakers )rthy of would undize- ed at in iogether owever, led doc- br such ling so for the Gotland ni-ch of Donald cotlaiid, an it be ihal the political 3ft: status which union might confer, since he so strongly held by a status of a similar nature, and that so strongly that ho would give it up on no ground whatever, and appeared wonderfully surprised that any member of Synod lor««ny advantages, was so silly as to propose foregoing the bene- fits which it was supposed to confer. There is indeed one point of view which will relieve the Eev. Doctor, who deprecated union for political purposes, from the inconsistency which we have indicated. The Doctor probably did not repudiate union on political grounds simply as political, but because the separate poli- tical influence of his Church was likely to be lost in the greater political influence of the Church of New Bruns- wick. "It was much to be feared," said Dr. Donald, " that those who were so anxious to promote union were desirous that the Presbyterian Churches in the Province sliould be strengthened politically; but nothing to his mind was more to be deprecated. If the Churches united were thereby strengthened politically, there was every rea- son to fear that the influence of their body would be merged and lost in that with which they were incorporated.'^ The Doctor after all may not deprecate political influence — ^may still love it as he loves status — and love it so well that he would not for any consideration of advantage to the Church give it up. Now, this is a sentiment which, though of the same warp, and woof, and texture, and colour, with that other one about status, is, we take leave to say, " not by any means heroic," and, what is worse, is not by any mean^ Christian. I fail to find in that self-renunciation, that self-sacrifice for the good of the Church, which is of the very essence of the Christian life, and which, I have no doubt, lorms on all appropriate occasions the subject of the Doctor's pulpit exercitations. If political influence be good for the Church, should it be deprecated as a reason tor union, when the smaller body would lose as a separate personality, what would reappear in greater lustre and power in the united body ! Is such deprecation rational, wise, heroic, or christian ? Supposing the Doctor to have spoken from this point of view, and as it is most consistent with the other part of his speech about status, this may be the meaning. I hold that as a christian man and as a christian minister, he should have been readv to renounce on behalf of his own small Church, an influence which would benefit the united Church — his own together witli that to which it was proposed to become united. I cannot for a moment suppose that the Doctor oontcni- 4 26 plated the possibility of the absolute loss of uiiy influence in connexion with the Church of New Brunswick, but only it» loss as a separate entity wielded by the Chtirch dignifi- ed by the distinctive name of Scotland. I also find it dif- ficult to suppose it possible that he could contemplate the loss of his own or his learned brethren's influence in the united Church for either political or ecclesiastical purposes. In either of these views could the Doctor contemplate any- thing but gain ? Surely he was not afraid of wielding an influence m the Unitea Church infericw to that which he now apparently possesses. Nor with the splendid abilities of the members of his Synod just displayed in the speeches against union, could he speculate on the possibility of a les> ser influence when brougnt into competition with the small modicum of learning and talent which might bo charitably supposed to belong to the members of the Church of New Brunswick. Had the DoctcH* no more confidence in him- self and his brethren than to suppose such a pos&ible loss ? It would not have been at all wonderful if some of the men who cannot boast of status, who have very small political influence, whose congregation&are not rich, had feared that in the larger body their little influence might be utterly lost sight of, but for Dr. Donald and his compeers in some or all of these advantages, to fear the loss of influence — really this betrays a cowardice which we could not have credited had the Knowledge of it come from a less informed source. Leaving theerounds of union, which were repudiated in the Synod of Iredericton, I come to the statements of posi- tive doctrine relative thereto. The first and most useful speaker on the subject of union propounded the doctrine of its desirableness on the ground of the respectability and influence, and consequently greater usefulness, which it might procure to the members of Synod. This elevation of personal status in respectability, influence and usefulness, might have been supposed to equal the civil status derived from connexion with a state church at the distance of two thousand miles. Not so in the opinion of the learned doctors of the Synod of Fredericton. Tney may be right, but we could wish that they had con- descended to wei^h the two things in their theological balance. They did not do so, but dismissed the subject with a reproof to the gentleman who was so heroic as to de- clare his readiness to forego the status if it should api>ear that the advantages indicated by the first youthful speaker were of an important kind. 41 asj by beej ther It is outv teric sliap . tual mod and thei be. as th unitj whic and tie ro of se doctr; there unity byth( No^ ferenc Churc lieve t Churc "the 2T tice "'/ nin- dif- the the OSOB* any- g au ih he ilitieft ieche& ales- aniall itably : Kew fthim- eloss? lie men olitical 'edtbat utterly in some leuce — ot have iformed iated in of po&i- Lcaving the lower ground of expediency, however, two fiuceeeding speakers, with a valor greatly to he admired, grappled with the doctrine of union as propounded by the great founder of our religion. Let us hear these young men at whose feet the Gamaliels of the Synod were content to learn wisdom. These youthful theologians, to whom it was committed to propound the scriptund doctrine of union, observed that there had always been diversities of opinion, and that there always would be diversities and separations, that, however, there might be union in spirit among the churches, and that this was the thought of the Saviour in his prayer that liis people might be one. Ihe simple meaning "one in us" was one in spirit with us, but the passage cou& not be held to constitute a divine command for external union. Such is a condensed statement of the doctrine of Union, as propounded by the Synod and acquiesced in by all. There is no doubt much truth in the position assumed by these gentlemen. It is true that there always have been diversities of opinion leading to separations, and that there always will be such differences and sects is likely also. It is true that the unity of the Church should be wrmed outwardly from the unity of spirit within ; not that the in- terior spirit should be moulded to suit the measure and sliape of any external form, but it is also true that a spiri- tual unity ever tends to take to itself the same external mode of manifestation, and to realise itself in union of plan and purpose. The more complete the spiritual unity is, the more complete also ought tne external manifestation to be. Tliere ought ever to be as complete an external unity as there has been attained of spiritual harmony. The unity which Christ prayed for was visible, for it was one which was to show the world that they were his disciples, and each section of the visible Church should leave as lit- tle room to the world as possible to scoff at their diversity of sentiment. Where unity of sentiment on important doctrines has not been attamed, it is a sad necessity that there should still be division, but where such spiritual unity has been arrived at, the sin of schism is committed by uiose who keep apart. Now, eitiier there is or there is not an irreconcilable dif- ference of opinion on important doctrine between the two Churches which it was proposed to unite. If we may be- lieve the Synod of New Brunswick in connection with the Church of Scotland, which was holden in the year 1850, " the differences which keep such denominations (Presby- i S8 terians) asunder, and form tliem into separate bodies, have no proper cause for tlieir existence here in this Province.*' Doctors Brooke and Donald, however, in the year 1861, think differently. Tlie sun has gone backward on the dial of the Synod, and the death of disunion is adjourned sine die. The former learned doctor intimates, in his letter to the Rev. Mr. Elder, that " there are grave questions, eccle- siastical and civil, which would require to be settled," prior to union, though he docs not condescend to name any of them. In his speech also he refers to the differences which would render union uncomfortable — differences, however, not on points of doctrine, but such differences as may be forthshadowed, in elegant similitude, by horses of different breed, one of which is a quaint old stager, representing the Kirk, I dare say ; and the other a high mettled, prancing, break-and-smash-all courser, meaning, I suppose, the Church of New Brunswick. The doctor further condescends to illustrate the grand idea which possesses his figurative brain concerning the difference of the two Cliurches, by a pic- ture of married misery, sufficient to keep them from attempting a union which could only result in scolding and squabbling. What the doctor precisely means by this profusion of metaphor it would be perhaps difficult to determine. No ecclesiastical doctrine is indicated, which should become the subject of the matrimonial duel. No difference of opinion on important doctrine is affirmed. But, being of different breeds, the one party would invari- ably go off at a canter, while the other wished a quiet walk — no matter what were the road to bo travelled. But Dr. Donald, being neither so figurative nor so humorous as Dr. Brooke, points out with more explicitness the difference which necessitates disunion. He said, " Union demanded of necessity a comj)romise of principle. The members of the other Presbyterian body had been led to entertain dif- ferent opinions from themselves as to the rights of interfer- ence by the civil maeistrate in any ecclesiastical procedure. Difficulties would therefore in time arise on that point among the members of the united body. Many parties would refuse to recognize such interference, while the mem- bers of this S;^nod in principle would do so." This is suf- ficiently explicit, and we are happy that the avowri oL" such disJ;inct and positive difference between the two Churchofi has at last been made upon competent authority, and that we are no longer to be deceived by the continu- ous reiteration of the fiction that the Churches are the same, and that there is no necessity for the distinction— , have •ince.'' • 1861, he dial ;d dne Btter to J, eccle- j" prior any of 9 which owever, may he Jifferent ,tingthe rancing, eChnrch cends to ive brain by a pic- em from scolding IS hy this fficiilt to ed, which luel. No affirmed. Id invari- iniet walk But Dr. juB as Dr. Idifference lemanded ^nihers of [ertain dif- »f interfer- ^rocedure. [hat point ly parties the mem- iis is snf- avow: ! <>'- the two authority, jc continii- [es are the stinction— 3d that, in fact, it was an entirely nseless aft'air to introdnoo Free Church principles into New Brnnswick, as there were no circumstances here likely to occur to which they would bo practically applicable. Doctor Donald tells us that the two Churches differ so widely on important doctnne that it is necessary they should remain disunited, and the Synod in which he utters the doctrine acquiesces in his opinion. The doctrine about the civil magistrate's power in the affairs of the Church, if Dr. Donald be a prophet, is likely to come up in a practical shape not a great while hence. He and his Church, it appears, are prepared to take the one side, and we — being, as Dr. Brooke says, of different breed — are bound to take the other ; it is therefore better, as Homer sings and Dr. Donald says, that like Achilles and Agamemnon, we two having contended, should con- tinue to stand apart. I must here, as I know your space is limited, cut short my observations on the different doctrines of the two Churches, but hope to have large room next week for further strictures on this important subject. ' V Meanwhile, I am yours, &c.,^^ '' '•'''[ James Bennet. rn; ,), -.:,?■' ■ ,:'!-? !». LETTER III. It may be necessary to recall to the memory of the read- ers of the Colonial PreshyisHan^ the doctrine of nnion as propounded in tlxe Synod of Fredericton, and as corrected in my last communication, as well as to restate the specific objection of apparent validity urged against its consumma- tion between the two churches. The doctrine held in that august court was that a union of spirit was all that the Saviour prayed for. The doctrine which has been asserted by me in a former letter is that unity of spirit is ever to unfold itself in the degree to which it has been attained in a unity which the world can recognize, that is — a unity in plan, purpose, and action — in the case for instance of two bodies of Presbyterian Christians in the same^jlocality, holding the same truths, and animated by the same spirit in the taking of counsel together, and working in concert for the well-being of the common cause of their Divine Master. If they stand opposed to one another — if they take separate and antagonistic counsels — if they are not one body while they have no great truth to contend for, the party maintaining the opposition is evidently guilty of J 30 i i^ J ■n the bin uf schism. Should it appear, on the other hand, that tliere is some apparently important divine truth held by one, hut denied by another of the parties, even the world will ffive them credit for sincerity, and will hardly condemn them as schismatical. Bnt if the world cannot he made to see that there is any important doctrine in dis- pute, it will be very likely to conclude that contention is kept up for the love of quarrel, or for some other seliisli object, such as the desire of political influence, or status, or other motive not eminently Christian, even tliough no di- rect avowal of such sentiments should be unfortunately made, and its conclusions will be that the men who main- tain disunion from such motives are not acting quite on the unselfish principles which it is in the habit of hearing from the pulpit, the religious press, and the mouths of professors, peculiarly belong to Christians — it will not have reason to know that these men are Christ's disciples. In view of saving the Christian character of the Synod of Fredericton, I can therefore say I am happy that it has been affirmed by that reverend body that important doc- trinal difference does exist between it and tlie Synod of the Church of New Brunswick. I could wish, however, that this doctrinal difference had been made more patent to the eyes of the world, which sometimes does not see so plainly as professed theologians do the differential value of oppos- ing doctrines, especially when not of any immediately practical character. It is true we have liad a prophecy that the doctrine in dispute may very likely assume a prac- tical bearing in the future history of this Province. This may be so. Far be it from us to affirm the groundlessness of such fears. Troy fell, though Cassandra was not believed when she said it would ; and the civil magistrate may un- warrantably interfere with onr spiritual concerns, even should we affirm our disbelief of such an event. The doctrine of the extent of interference of the civil magistrate allowable in the affairs of the (ohurch being the only one on which it ia affirmed there is any essential dif- ference of opinion between the two churches which it was proposed to unite, it h important that it should be thoroughly investigated, not it may be with much hope of our coming to a unity of opinion regarding such interfer- ence, but with the view of enlightening the general under- standing, that it may make its election on which side of this important question it ought to range itself, It is not now to be enquired wnether the Established Church or the Free Church of Scotland was right in the 31 jivil the dif- iwaa be be of t-fer- \der- tliis ished the views which tljcy »evei'ully took on the iuterfereiwc of the civil niagistratc with their concerns as a State Church. That matter has been ab*cady sufiiciently discussed, and its practical consequences are matters of historj'. Here is no state church, and the question cannot come up in the form •which it assumed in Scotland previous to the disruption — at least not till tlie church becomes established in this Pro- vince, which "Nvill be so great a time hence that it is not worth considering at present. "What a remotely distant posterity may do no man can say, but, to all appearance, no one now living will see an Established Churtui in our Province, and consequently Ave need not speculate regard- ing the views which the respective churches might take of a question which they will never be called on practically to deal with. There is, however, as most of our readers must be aware, a civil process at present going forward in Scotland in which a deposed minister of the Free Church is the prose- cutor and the Free Church itself the defendant ; the deci- sion of which is very likely to affect the procedure of the civil magistrate, in relation to every non-Established Church not only in Scotland but throughout the British Empire. It is no doubt with an eye to this case that Dr. Donald said in the Synod at Fredericton, " Difficulties would arise on that point (the right of interference of the civil magistrate) among the members of the united body; many parties would refuse to recognize such intert'erence, while the members of the Synod on principle would do so." Dr. Donald perhaps goes too far in predicting positively that such interference will occur here. Still we agree with him in affirming that it may occur, and we also believe that, should it occur, other parties will take a different view of it from that which on principle the Synod of Fredericton in their present mood would take. I say, their present mood., for I am inclined to think that should a similar case of interfer- ence of the civil magistrate take place with regard to the Erocedure of the Church of which Dr. Donald is a member, e would regard it as a high handed proceeding — of course he and his Synod could take a more placid view of it if the object of interference were any other body, such as Methodists, Baptists, or even Free Church Presbyterians. Inasmuch as it is clearly discerned that the principles of law laid down by the judges of the Court of Session in Scotland, when reviewed and decided upon, as they will be by the House of Lords, will become British law, and as such will apply in all British Colonies, where no colonial 32 tatuttite id iimdu tu iiiudify tlieiii, the ease of Mr. M'JVIilluii, now pending in Scotland uguinst tiic Free Cluiroh, must ho viewed hy nil chureheB in tiieBO h^ndu as one in which they are practically interested. 1 beg, therefore, the atten- tion of the churches generally to this case, which may, at no distant date, aflect the capacity of every church in the Province to exercise discipline. It appears that Mr. McMillan, of Cardross, was libelled before tlic Presbytery of Dumbartou on three counts — the lirst two charging him with spccitic acts of intemperance, and the third with making cruninal advances to a married woman. The Presbj^tery found the first count not proven, the second proven with a slight exception, the tlurd also l)roven with exception of certain words. From this judg- ment Mr. M. appealed to the Synod of Glasgow and Avr, who sustained tue appeal, finding the second and third counts not proven. The Presbytery of Dumbartou ap- pealed against this judgment of tlio Synod of Glasgow and Ayr to the General Assembly — the minority of Synod join- ing in the appeal. The General Assembly, after hearing the parties, pronounced a judgment, finding in substance all tlie three counts proven, and pronounced sentence of suspension on Mr. M'Millan. Mr. M'Millan, upon this sentence being pronounced, applied to the Court of Sessions, asking an interdict against the carrying out of the senttij'^'e, which was refused by the Lord Ordinary. IIavin<' been cited before the bar of the Assembly, he was asked wnether he had applied for an interdict to the Court of Session against the sentence of the Free Church, and, on his reply- iu» that ho had, the Free Church deposed him from tue office of the ministiy, under a law of the church which ordains that any appeal from the General Assembly to stop the discipline and order of ecclesiastical policy and jurisdic- tion, granted by God's Word to the office-bearers within the said church, by resorting to the civil power, shall be dealt with summarily without any process or admonition. In consequence of these proceedings Mr. M'Millan raised two actions — one against the General Assembly of the Free Church, and the other against certain members of that body — the first to obtain damages for injury done to him by the sentence of that body, tho second alleges malice against the Moderator, and the proposer and seconder of the sen- tence of deposition. The ground on which he alleges that damages should be awarded him is simply that the Presby- tery did not pursue a correct course in taking up those portions of the libel which the Assembly had found not uel to rell m sen- ithat bsby- those II not proven. But iu iiHkiiiy: for tlHimigcs he also (mkti that the sentenuo tor wliich he seeks damages shall be rendered null and void. The sentence concludes thus : — " lliereforo the said pretended judgment or suspension and the whole grounds and warrants thereof, with all that lias followed or may follow on the same, ought and should be reduced, retreated, rescinded, cassed, annulled, deemed and declared, b^' decree of our said Lords, to have been from the begin- ning, to be now and in all time coming, null and void and of no avail, force, strength and effect or judgment, or out- with the same, in time coming, and the pursuer reponed and restored there against in integrum. Further, the said defenders ought to and should bo discerned and ordained by decree aforesaid, to make payment to the pursuer of the sum of £500 stg. in the name of reparation and da- mages, and as a soatium to him in the premises." In the other case which Mr. M'Millan has raised against indivi- duals on the grounds of supjposed malice, he asks that he be restored by a decree of the Court against the sentence of the General Assembly — because there was no libel served on him, because he was not heard in his defence, and because his application to the Civil Court was no crime, and that he sliould not have been deposed for such act ; and he likewise asks for £3000 damages against the three persons who, he alleges, were actuated by malice against nim. Such is a short statement of the M Millan case, and the decision of which will without doubt affect the whole procedure of the civil magistrate in the affairs of every church, not established, in the British dominions. Before entering on any question regarding the effect of this cause, it should always be borne in mind that the Kirk in this Province, the Episcopal Church, Methodist, Baptist and all other Churches, are exactly in the same position as the Free Church of Scotland. Reminding my readers of this fact, I have just to ask them the following questions : — 1. Should Mr. M'Millan succeed in maintaining these actions against the Free Church, would it be possible for it to exercise any discipline on offenders against morals or religion, except at the expense of fine and confinement ? 2. Should any offender against morals or religion in the Church of New Brunswick, either in or out of connexion with the Church of Scotland, being dealt with for his offences, make application to the Judges of our Provincial Courts on the ground of some alleged informality, for da- mages and interdicts, could said Courts refuse, after, as we 5 .14 '\i I ^1J have BUppost'd, the law liub bcgn clcclui-Qtl in Mr, M'MilluuV favour \ 3. Should an allopfed informality in proeeodings bo hold as a sufficient ground on which to raise an action fur dama- ges, and restoration to spiritual office as well as civil rights, IS there a Presbyterj', Synod, Conference, or Bishon in the Province that would dare to exercise what has been hitherto supposed the inalienable right of the office- bearers of every Church, viz., discipline on oflfeiiders^ 4. Supposing that any offender, upon whom the Church in connexion with the Olnirch of Scotland has exercised or mav, after the. Judges and Lords have decided in Mr. M'Millan's favour, exercise discipline, if they dare such a thing, should, on account of some alleged informality in proceedings, apply not only to have the sentence of the Church Court removed, but £500 or £3000 damages awarded, and bo sustained in this application, w^ould JJr. Donald be ready not merely to rescind the sentence com- plained off, but to pay the damages so awarded ? Every one who knows anything of the conduct of cases either in civil or ecclesiastical procedure, also knows how difficult it is to conduct a case so that technical objections may not be raised sufficient in the eye of the law to invali- date the w^hole of the action. The higher courts very fre- quently annul the proceedings of the lower on technical grounds. But in jiurely legal proceedings the lower courts of law, whatever injustice may have been done, are not held liable for damages on account of the informality. In the review of the Church courts' proceedings, however, the M'Millan case, so far as it has gone, evidently affirms that the Church courts are liable for enormous damages should they commit an informality. Is not this tantamount to saying that the Church courts shall henceforth be rendered incapable of any disciplinary proceedings whatever. For there is no man who is libelled before a Church court and sentenced for crime proven against him, who may not show that thereby he sustains civil loss ; and if he can, with the help of good legal glasses, find a flaw in the proceedings, he will have, without doubt, a legitimate ground of action against the Church court which nas dared to exercise dis- cipline upon him. Will tlie Synod of the Church in connexion with the Church of Scotland affirm that on principle they will be ready to accord with the interference of the civil magistrate thus far ? I cannot think that, on maturer reflection, they will, and I do not think that upon the principles of the case 35 11 the lill be [strate they le case wo liave boon (•onaideiing, there would bo sucli a wide dif- foroiu'e of opinion between tlio Ohurch in connexion with the CInircli of Scotbmd and the Church of Now Brunswick, in rohition to tiio intert\!rence of the civil magistrate, as Dr. Donald ui the Synod »)f Kredericton Bupposed. Whatever ditlerenro of opinion their niiffht be regardinj^ the nullification of the sentence of the Cliuich court by order of the law courts, there would hardly bo any differ- ence of opinion regarding the monstrous injustice of hold- ing the Ciiurch courts liable for damages. If we are not agreed about the principle involved, wo are at least, I sus- pect, about the pecuniary consideration. Tlie Synod of Fredericton might care little for the recision of any sentence it might pronounce, but ii would hardly preserve its equa- nimity if held liable for some hundreds or thousands of pounds damages, to be paid to some of its offending brethren, who had been by it justly, yet in some untechnical manner, condemned. I have supposed that the brethren of the Church in con- nexion with the Church of Scotland mifjht agree to eye with equanimity tho nullification of its sentences by the decision of the legal courts. 1 am, however, far from say- ing that they would do so. JiOoking to tho declaration of Dr. Donald, I am justified in supposing the possibility of such a thing: Still I do think that if the Synod of which Dr. Donald is a worthy member were by the law courts of New Brunswick to have its sentences of deposition set aside, on the ground of some informality in its proceed- ings, it would not be ready, even for the purpose of avoid- ing further actions for damages, to restore to tho office of the ministry persons who by it had been on moral grounds adjudged unworthy to exercise it. True the Synod might be coerced, hy the terrors of pecuniary penalties, to do even this, but they would surely do so reclaiming and protesting; they would join with the members of the Free Church in the outcry against such unwarrantable proceed- ings, and I have no" doubt would unite with ns, if not in one Church, yet in common appeal to the beneficent Legis- lature of New Brunswick to set aside by enactment principles of law so outrageously violating the rif:ht3 and privileges of the Church of Christ. The second action which Mr. M'Millan raises, on the ground chiefly that his application to the civil court was no offence or crime for which he should be deposed, being one which need not at any time affect the Churches of this Province, we are not required to consider. As I desire no 3(; farther to defend the Free Church than as her case is also ours, and as probably it might not be held by the Church in this Province that it is in itself a crime to apply to the civil courts for redress again.^t every injustice, we shall not likely ever be called practically to deal with the question. Several prominent members ot the Free (Church have held that 21. prima facie case of malice would justify an applica- tion to the civil courts for redress. So far I individuallv agree with them. I think there may arise cases in which Buch interference would subserve the ends of justice, but that the civil magistrate should interfere to regulate the technical procedure of Church courts, review all their pro- ceedings, and nullify their sentences on such grounds, I hold to be monstrous iniquity, and utterly subversive of the object for which the Clmrcli of Christ was founded on the earth. In your next paper, Mr. Editor, I hope to be permitted to make some strictures on the status of ministers in this Province. James Bennet. LETTER lY. Sir — My last letter was principally devoted to a review of the Cardross case — to a consideration of the way in which the Churches throughout the British Empire may be af- fected by the ultimate declaration of the Judges and the House of Lords relative to it — and to the different views which may be taken by the Churches in this Province of an assumption of power by the civil magistrate to review and quasn the proceedings of the Church courts. Tlie ge- neral conclusion to which this view led us was, that even the Church in connexion with the Church of Scotland would be very unwilling to be held liable for damages on account of any informality in their proceedings, and tliat they could hardly do otherwise than reclaim and protest with the Free Church against any such assumption as that which the Lords of Session seem to make in Scotland being exercised here. For whatever be tlie nature and value of what is de- nominated the status of ministci s of the Church of Scotland, it will most certainly have no force to prevent the Judges of New Brunswick treating the decisions of Presbyterian Courts, with Church of Scotland connexion, in a different wajy^ from the decisions of any other Presbyterian Church, or mdeed of any church whatever. Whatever theoretical 37 ttioai Uitferencc of opinion, tlierofore, tliero minlit be on the »loc;- trine of the power of tlie civil nia^istrute between the two jJCreat branches of the Presbyterian Church in this Province, little practical difference would be iikelj to arise relative to this question ; so that we must liold that the fears expressed in the Synod at Fredericton on this point have little or no foundation. Indeed were it not that there is a kind of un- holy joy excited in the minds of partizans of the Church of Scotland, in view of the troubles in which the Cardross case has involved the Free Church, and from which they had hoped to have forever escaped, we could not understand how the application of tlie principles laid down by the Lords of Session could excite anything but alarm. It has been said that we can view with equanimity the misfortunes of our best friends, and much more so the misfortunes of our ene- mies ; but if we are likely to become common participators in these misfortunes, our sympathies will be readily excited. Since neither " status" nor anything else may shield our brethren of the Synod lately assembled in Fredericton from any danger to which we are exposed, we hope, when the day of trial comes, to find them united in one common sen- timent with ourselves, though we should still constitute dif- ferent bodies with different interests, standing on different planes of dignity — our statical elevation being of different altitudes. The chief, if not the only objection against union of the two bodies being, then, not doctrinal differences, at least such doctrinal differences as would become of practical moment — but this matter of status — it is of importance that it also should be clearly comprehended. Possibly, our bre- thren may be the victims of some hallucination on this point. They may think there is some value in it which there is not, or tliey may foolishly suppose that a union which would elevate it would only degrade it. However this may be, it can be no harm to look at it, to measure its proportions, and test its quality. Seeing, liowever, that it is such a pre- cious article in the eyes of our brethren, we must handle it with all such gentleness and care as are consistent with a thorough «,nalysis in the alembic of criticism. If it should turn out to be a w^orthless ore, instead of the gold which maketh rich, they will not be angry, we trust, that we have exposed the delusion. Considering the general unity of idea and sentiment which pervaded the minds of the members of the Synod at Frede- ricton, it is wonderful that there should have been such differ- ence of opinion regarding the .amount of value to be laid on 3R f tlieaiticio "status." Twof^entlemen wereAvillingtoreiionnco it for ct'i'tuin advantages; but in the eyes <jf two others it M'as invaluahle. Dr. Donald would give it up on no eon* dition. I-ike the truth, it was to be purchased at any price, and sold at none. Dr. Brooke also appears to coincide with his learned brother, and is with him surprised that any one could think of giving up a connexion which conferred such jM-ivileges. Many peop'e, outside of the Synod of Frede- ricton, are, however unable to see tliat there is any advan- tage derivable from the status at all, save of a pecuniary kind, and which might therefore be vjiliied ut so many hundred dollars per annum, in the shape of ministerial sa- laries — a very important consideration, I admit, but still one which might be overcome, if not by a little self-sacrifi- cing principle on the part of ministers, at least by a little more liberality on the part of the people. For my own part, I do not think that the money element is involved in it at all ; for notwithstanding the fears expressed in the Synod of Fredericton that the salaries would certainly be lost if the union contemplated were effected, I think all such fears perfectly groundless. The idea of the Church of Scotland cutting thenri off because of their forming a union upon the basis of standards which the parent Church recognises as lier own — the tiling is preposterous ! Do not the learned Doctors see that to suppose the Church of Scotland would cut them off for forming a union on proper principles, is to suppose her actuated by unprincipled caprice ? If these learned Doctors of the Svnod of Fredericton had shown that the basis of union proposed to them contravened any principle held by them, or by the Church of Scotland, they would have had some ground for their fears and vaticina- tions; but as they have never attempted such a thing, I cannot understand why they can fear such irrational and unworthy conduct from the eminently rational and mode- rate Church from which they derive their lineage and worth. I solemnly belive that were a union accomplished on such a basis as that proposed, the Church of Scotland would neither cut off a farthing of the allowance which she now gives, nor reduce the dignity of the status of any minister in her connexion by a single hair-breadth. 1 have a better opinion of her than that. The Synod of Fredericton, if honest in supposing such a thing, was the victim of its own illusory fears. But, supposing the Church of Scotland to act the very silly, ridiculous and unprincipled part which the monetary and dignified sensitiveness of the Synod of Fredericton assitfnod to her, what M'ould the loBs amount CI (th hej K aj> to'^ Witli thti inoiioy loss 1 am nut at present concerned. However f^reat that might he, it would nudouht he made ui) in some other way. But what would he the loss in the mat- ter of "status!'' This loss may he viewed in various wayn. IntrindGally, would members of the Synod of Fredericton descend in tlio scale of ministerial or persomil dignity by a declaration of the Church of Scotland to the effect that she had cast them off, for the fault of forming a union with another Presbvterian body of good standing on righteous principles ? \V"ould Drs. Donald and Brooke be less res- pectable or less respected than they now are? Would their sermons have less unction, their opinions possess infe- rior weight, or would their influence be less commanding ? Of what real glory would they be shorn ? They would still be as eloquent, as learned, as talented, as able, as worthy ministers of Christ, as they now are. I do not believe there is a man, woman or child in this Province who would look upon them as having sacrificed a hair-breadth of dig- nity. What gives these gentlemen their status is their ]K>sition as ministers of large and influential congregations, holding the truths of the Gospel — not their connexion with the Church of Scotland. If they were under any terror of losing their positions as ministers of their respective C!hurches, their fears for loss of status would have just foundation. But no such prospect is before them. If I mistake not, the great body of their people are anxious to see the union formed which they deprecate, even while they ])ray for it. A party may be formed by ministers opposed to union, to support their views; but there would be no party so o]>posed if the ministers were heartily for it. Every one would agree to sustain them in all the dignity which they now possess ; and as far as the intrinsic worth of their status is concerned, it would just be the same in the Province of New Brunswick after they had lost status as members of the Church of Scotland as before. But it may be aflirmed by persons ignorant of the [facts of the case, that there is some political or civil dignity be- longing to Presbyterian ministers in connexion with the Church of Scotland, which other Presbyterian ministers, of similar social standing, do not possess. Of those who hold such an opinion I would ask, What is it 'i Dr. Donald said in the Synod of Fredericton, " At present they (the members of Synod) enjoyed certain privileges ; they held the same status as the clergymen of the Church of England.'' I would like to hnowfrom Dr. Donald what these prixileges arc ; and in common with what clergymen 40 of tliu Cliiii'ch of Enj^lund doos ho and his eo-prcshytei's hold the same stntiis 'i As prohahl}"^ Dr. Donald may not hold himself free to reply to these en(iuiries, I shall endeavor to furnish infor- mation concerning the foundation on which it is pretended that these superior pi'ivileges rest, and in what way it is further affirmed tliat ministers in connection with the Chiirch of Scotland hold the same status as those of the Church of Enflfland. This I am enabled to do through the kindness of the lion. John Robertson, who during the excitement caused by the Prince of Wales' visit, transmitted to nie a copy of the opinion of the Judges on certain ques- tions propounded to them relative to the Clergy Reserves of Canada. The question in which the present interest of this case is involved was — " Whether the words a Protestant clergy (31 G. III., c. 31), include any other than clergy of the Church of England and Protestant bishops and priests and deacons, who had received Episcopal ordination 'i and if any, what others ?" In answer to- this question, the Judges say that the words " a Protestant Clergy" (referring to the statute) " are large enough to include other clergy than those of the Church of Eiigland and Protestant Bishops who have received Epis- copal ordination." Ilieir Lordships then give their reasons for this decision, and proceed to reply to the second part of the enquiry — what other clergy are included? "It appears" they say, " to us that the clergy of the Established Church of Scotland are one instance of such other Protestant clergy." After giving heir reasons for such opinion, they add — '' And although in answering your Lordship's question, we specify no other Church than the Protestant Cliurcli of Scotland, we do not thereby intend that besides that Church the ministers of other Churches may not he included under the term Protestant clergy.''^ They further state as a reason why they cannot include other Protestant Churches, that they do not find any others mentioned on the statute book, and that as they were not furnished by their Lordships " with any information as to the doctrine and discipline of any other denominations of Protestants to which the statute 31 Geo. III., c. 31, can by possibility apply, we are unable to specify any other to your Lordships as falling within the statute." It has been hold — is held I have no doubt — by Dr. Donald that this decision of the Judges in the case of the Canada Clergy Roscrvos, also by implication places tho ministers of (.1 41 Id— jtion, fell of lurch mder Iclude Itliers le not las to )ns of can I other lonakl mad a ICVi-' of the Churcii of Scotland in the isamo position a& the clergy of the Episcopal Church in every respect, as to status, &c. The decision, iiowever, has no reference to any such matter, but solely to the due interpretation of the words " Protes- Reserves ? The Judges said she had ; ^'hile they refused to say, had proper information been furnished, that other Protestant Churches had not also a right to a portion of the same Reserves, I have reason to believe that it is solely on this decision that Dr. Donald founds his claim to peculiar Colonial pri- vileges and status. The readers of the Colonial Presby- terian can judge for themselves how far such a claim is valid. Far be it from me to say that the status of Dr. Donald is inferior to that of a minister of the Episcopal Church, however high his rank. I cordially agree with a ** Self- reliant Layman" in scouting the supposition that Presby- terian clergy are lower in the scale of status than those of the Episcopal Church. I hold that Dr. Donald is as good a Bishop as the Bishop of Fredericton ; but I hold with equal tenacity that I am as scriptural a Bishop as either of these dignitaries. What consideration they may have in the eye of the law I do not much care, saving as far as I am interested in the preservation of that equality which, in tliis free country, all sects are supposed alike to possess. A Bishop of the Episcopal Cliurch being a primus inter pares^ a chief among his equals, may be held to occupy a position equivalent to that of the Moderator of a Presby- terian Synod. If he be superior in learning, ability, urbanity of manners, or piety, he may be accorded the chief place, and will hold it in public opinion and in reality ; but it he do not possess these qualities, no legislation, I believe, has given it to him, and most certainly no future legislation in this Province will be permitted to do so. At at any rate, whatever old statute may be uprooted from the decayinglegislation of past centuries, giving superiority of status to Bishops of the Church of England, it would be difficult to discover among the petrified forms of statutary enactment, any law which places a Presbyterian minister of the Church of Scotland in any foremost place among otiier Presbyterian ministers of the Province. Dr. Donald's " privileges and superior " status" are mere " figments of the brain." as far as these are derivable from connexion 6 ...... 43 with the Cliiirch of Scuthwid, Any iiihiister of the Cliurch of Now Brunswick, of equal talent, piety, and suavity of manners, if any such there ho, has just as high privileges and as high status as that in which Dr. Donald glories, Tliere is so far no valid objection in the learned doetor's argument against union with the Church of New Bruns- wick. I find, Mr. Editor, I must devote another letter to the full explanation of status. I trust, therefore, to address you still further on tliis subject next week. Yours. ■■i r ) 111' James Bennet. ' LETTER V. Sir — My last letter was chiefly devoted to the considera- tion of how far the status of the ministers of the Church in connexion with the Church of Scotland would be affected by a uniou with the Church of New Brunswi(?k, and the conclusions arrived at were, 1st, That it was most impro- bable that the Church of Scotland would diminish the stature of the status of any ministers who now stand in connexion with her ; 2d, That if she did declare them to liave forfeited any status derivable from such connexion, yet would their status be as high, as important, in the eyes of the people of New Brunswick, as though said declara- tion were not made ; and, 3d, That the real dignity of the ministers so tremblingly alive to the importance of their position, was dependent, so far as any extrinsic circum- stances could give dignity, solely on their position as ministers of large and respectable congregations. There is evidently another view of status 3'et to be taken, viz., from that side of it which has respect to original ability, to learning, and to moral and spiritual character. In regard to the first of these, we may assume that it would probably be difficult to appreciate and to judge of original talent and ability ; but at any rate we may conclude that to whichsoever Church the greater amount of such qualities belongs, no essential deterioration could occur to it on account of union with the one to which a less amount of ability might be attributed, — rather would the union tend to set off and illustrate the superior excellence of the Church gifted with tlie larger number of superior spirits. In regard, also, to the su])eriority derivable from moral and spiritual worth, I do not wish to say anything, inasinucli I'cll In and ucli 43 as I do not think tliat the moral and spiritual character of either Church h, in present circumstances, a subject for discussion or comparison. I wish to award to tlie ministers of the Cliurcli in connexion with the Church of Scotland, nil good and excellent moral qualities ; and I will not sup- pose that any possible insinuation was made, or intended to be made, in the Synod of Fredericton against tlie status of our niinisters, on such grounds as the want of these. But with regard to the matter of education necessary to the qualifications of the ministers of the two Churches, I wish to make a few remarks, and I do so becarse, though I have no reason to sujiposc that this consi- deration entered into the views which were expressed relative to status at Fredericton, the matter has been pri- vately talked of, and insinuations to the disadvantage of the Church of Now Brunswick have been made, to the effect that the standard of ministerial education is not so Jiigh with us as it is with ministers connected with the <^ylun'ch of Scotland. A few facts, therefore, may be neces- sary to the enlightenment of the pnblic on this point, tending to show that in this particular we are quite on a par with our brethren of the Established Kirk, and which I shall now proceed to state with all possible brevity. A certain complexity belongs to this subject, springing from *..e various sources whence our ministers have derived their education. Some have been educated in Scotland ; others in Ireland ; and others still in Nova Scotia. With regard to those of our ministers who have received their education in Scotland, it cannot for a moment be pretended that their education is inferior to that of ministers of the Established Church of Scotland, inasmuch as it is on both sides the same. Several of our ministers from Scotland were educated prior to the Disruption, and thus have had training in all its parts identical with that of ministers of the Church of Scotland. The education of those who have studied since that period is still the same, the only change being their having attended different Theological Profes' sors, and those who know anything of the i ree Church Colleges will at least put them on a par M'ith, if they do not affirm their decided superiority over, the divinity halls of the Establishment. Indeed, this superiority is scarcely a matter of question, since the Free Church requires now four full Sessions in Divinity, while the Established Church only requires three full and one partial Session. As far as they are concerned, therefore, there can be neithei* cavil nor question. . ... - - ¥ Hi 44 I am not inclined to rank the ministers who Iiave received their education in Ireland as in any particular inferior to those who have received their schoiarfihip in Scotland. The reason why nndiscerning persons might rate it lower, is chiefly derivable from the fact that the Colle/je in which they have studied had not the chartered authority to grant degrees in Arts or Divinity. But in all the branches of education necessary to the conferment of these honors, the College of Belfast was as fully equipped as the Scotch Universities ; the time required for education was as length- ened ; the professors were generally as well qualified for their work ; the supervision as strict ; while every candidate for the ministry was not only required to produce testimo- nials of regular attendance on. and proficiency in, the classes at tne end of each session, but, further, he was reqiiired to produce a general certificate at the end of the undergraduate course, to the Divinity Entrance Examina- tion Committee, before he was even taken on trial for the study of Divinity. This general certificate was only given to those who passed a strict and searching examination in the whole course of previous collegiate study — an examina- tion, written and oral, conducted before all the Professors, in Latin, Greek, Logic, Mental, Moral and Physical Science — and was to all intents and purposes equivalent to a De- gree in Arts, save that \t could not be called by that name, tor want of the legal authority conferred by a charter. No one, to my knowledge, in my time, was admitted to the ministry of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland who was not the possessor of such a certificate, or a Degree in Arts from some Scotch, English, or Irish University. I have no hesitation in saying that the Irish Church demanded from candidates for the ministry a much higher general proficiency than the Scotch Church, either Estab- lished or Free, or indeed any Church of which I have any knowledge. The number of minieteis in Scotland who have attained degrees is very small. In a late number, of, I think, the Edinhurgh JReview^ the proportions of those who take degrees in Arts in the Universities of Scotland, are in one of them only four per cent, of all the matricu- lated students, while in the others, the highest proportion is set down at six and eight per cent. As a general rule, the students of the Scotch Universities do not take Degrees, and they are not required of candidates for the ministry in Scotland. All that is necessary is, that tickets certifying attendance on the classes and general proficiency should be presented. The Presbjtery to which the candidate MSI » tld ite l>t>longB may examine him in 8cotlun<l, as was done also in Ireland ; but tlie grand test of proficiency — tlie general certificate or tlie A. M. — has in past days been required in Ireland alone of the candidates tor the ministry. Nor can it be said with justice that the Professors in the old Belfast College M'ere men of inferior attainments or low intellectual stature. That College gave Dr. Ileid and Dr. •lames Thompson to adorn the halls of Glasgow Univereitv. Dr. Young, formerly of IJelfast, setMus to stand equally high in the estimation of Sir Win. Hamilton with the cele- . brated Scottish metaphysician, Dr. lirown. Dr. Stavely fills with honor tlie chair of Natural Philosophy in the Queen's College, Belfast — no greater now in a chartered University than when he filled the more lowly position of Professor in the old Iloyal College. The men, generally speaking, who occupied the Chairs in Belfast, were of high note and worth, chiefly from Scotland. There is, therefore, no reason whatever why those who studied in this recent seat of learning should rank lower in intellectual culture than those whose student life was spent in the Acivdemie Halls of Glasgow, Edinburgh, St. Andrews or Aberdeen. A few of our students were educated at the Free Church College, Halifax. The number of Professors at that insti- tution, prior to the late Union, was not so large as in some of the older Colleges, both in Europe and America. The greater amount of attention, however, which the Professors in Halifax have been enabled to give to the students who attended their instructions, would appear to have amply compensated for the greater number of Professors in the older Colleges. I say this in view of the superior scholar- ship of some of the students who received their education in the Free Church College at Halifax, and who now may be found exercising the office of the ministry in the Pres- byterian Church of New Brunswick. And now that the two large bodies of Presbyterians have united their resources in Nova Scotia, with such Professors the Churches of the Lower Provinces may certainly aim at as high a standard of education as was ever obtained even in the ancient Uni- versities of Scotland. I must apologize for this apparent glorification of the Church of New Brunswick, and I do so specifically on the grounds that utterly unfounded statements have been made regarding the lowness of the intellectual and literary status of the mmistry in our connexion, whereas, on the contrary, it stands as high, if not higher, than that of any other Church. The greater portion of our niiniaters are MaBtcre 4fl of Art!*, nv liuM uii eqiiivnlcnt ntatus. Tlio Cliiirc-li <A' S(M»tIan<l niiiy therefore eontiiiue to require tliat ministers elio'ihle to her purislies, at lioiiie or abroad, .shall only he t^iieli as have studied at her Universities, or reeeivi^d licen- sure at her hands; but the Christian i>ublie of New IJruns- wiek njay henceforth know that these requirements do not indicate greater leai'iiin^ or imply any su])erior worth, beyond what is possessed by tlie ministers f)f the Chuich of J am yours, Jamks j>j:nni-,t. LETTER VI. Sir — I had hoped to concentrate the observations M'hich 1 felt it necessary to make on the proposed Presbyterian union, into a much less space than that to Avliich they have extended, but I find on looking over the report of those speeches delivered in the late ISynod of Fredericton, some g-ems of ecclesiastical argument against union, which still r«(piire a setting of criticism to illustrate their sparkling beauty. I shall, however, only select one, on account of its appaiently transcendent value in the eye, no doubt, of the Synod. The argument to which I refer, if not first dis- covered, has the merit at least of being first presented in its native angularity by a worthy Elder. It is an argument which, assuming the foi*m of ignorance, is no doubt iur- tended to present the aspect of profound wisdom. Mr. liobert Nicholson (Elder) is reported to have said, in a speech of great terseness, " that lie had seen no reason why their brethren should have separated from them in the first place. If they were desirous to return back again to the fold, they were welcome to come back as members of the <yhurch of Scotland." This argument the Kev. Dr. Brooke, towards the conclusion of the debate, takes up and pre- sents with several flourishing rubs of oratory intended to dazzle the eyes of his admiring auditors. "' W those," said the learned Doctor, " Avho seek union, are really desirous of it, let them return to the Parent Church. They ' went out from us.' Thei-e could be no middle ground — they could not bo met half way. Let them return to their first love, an<l they wouhl be received graciously.*' How kind ! how^ polished ! how courteous ! We can well fancy the graceful wave of the hand : the difjnified incliiiation of the rhetori- is, niirl Urat III tJierl afteil diirif Scot) tookf all til final J the a| for there! ill diii i i.>f fiiiu'ti heail us liu iitturo I tliusu Maud phniHi's, worthy of u miistor of curonionloHi. Tho native politonoss of tho Doctor, no doubt, 1ms nincli to do witli the courteous vvohiouio wliicli ho in wlllin<? to give to tlic erring aud errant N(!\v Drunswick Preshytoi'iuii Church npon tho [)erc(;|>tion of her hIms, and duo repentanco manifested by a return to Nyhat tiic Doctor calls, with wonio small 8i)lco of profanity I fear in the allusion, " her lirst love." The doctrine of the association of ideas, however, enables us to trace the line of the Doctor's observations to tho matrimonial ([uarrel which ho had ])reviously figured in his mind in questionable similitude of the two horses of different breeds, as likely to take place after the union between the two Churches, though with such a bickering ])erspectivc before him, wc can hardly explain his courteous welcome to a Church which was likely to kick aiul curvetto so nuuOi, in the marital relationship, on any other ground than tliat of the entire g<jod heartedness of the Doctor. All honour to tho kind heart which, after sucdi a heartless de- sertion by the spouse of " her first love," is willing, in view of quarrels, yot blandly to welcome the unworthy deg( rter of hearth and vomo back to tho old mansion, and all the agreeable associations of other days. Hearty benedictions on the head of the kind Doctor avIio, having put uj) with such waywardness in the past, is also with great good will, ready to receive the errant one, though, no doubt, all his patience will be taxed with her follies and vagaries in all time to come. As a piece of sentimentality, this welcome of the Doctor is, no doubt, a brilliant gem. 1 am sorry to spoil its beauty by showing that it is only a bit of painted glass picked up by the Elder and turned about and about before the ad- miring Synod by the learned Doctor, as a diamond of the first water. In the first place, does the Doctor honestly think that there was nothing at all which should have grieved those, afterwards denominating themselves the Free Church, during the " ten years conflict" which was maintained in Scotland ? Granting that the Doctor with good conscience took up with the moderate party, was there no reason for all the discussion and disputation which at last led to the final separation of the two parties ? Was there not at least the appearance of right on the part of those who stood up for wliat they called" the headship of Christ ?" And was there not a certain probability that this doctrine might be in danger by the assumptions of the civil power i^ Why n 4R P'UHt nuinlKjr wlia retiiiiiiic<J in tlio Cluiruli of ScutlHiiu ut tlio tiirio of tluj tliiii'imtioii tliouglit that tliere wore groiuida of quarrel. I roHolloct having heard a doscrlptioii of a cortaiti Pro.^l»ytery in Scotland shortly after tho uisruntioii — "The Pro.s!)ytery was composed of thirty iniuiaters," said my iiifonuant, " and they were thus divided, there wero ttm Free Kirk, ten Moderates, and ten that ratted." Tlie ton rat8 remained in the Kirk. They held that the Free Kirk iM'inciple was the ri«j;ht one, but with the true courage which characterizoii tlie rat they ran away from the dan£;;or of as8ortin<j; their principles. I know not how many — hut I should suppose nearly ono half of those who remained wero men who thougiit the Free Kirk rij^ht, but who had not the courage to ansert their principles in the face of the trials to which the disruption exposed thent. Those who " ratted" would hardly say that there was no reason why the Free Kirk party went out from the Church of Scotland. I do u. t say that Doctor Brooke ever had any sympathy with those who " ratted" at the time of the disruption, but I am inclined to think that in his secret heart the Doctor is compelled to think sometimes, in view of the sacrifices which the disruption ministers made, that they had some good reasons why " they went out from us," and resigned wieir worldly all, for the uncertain prospects which in sterile and wilderness aspect lay before them. But, in the next place, it is the Church of New Bruns- wick which the Doctor says went out from them, and wliicli he would welcome back. Now did it ever enter his mind that the Church of New Brunswick, as at present constitu- ted, never wont out from them at all. True it is, certain of her ministers did, but the Church, as at present constituted, can not with any propriety be said to have p;one out fronx thein. The Church of which I am pastor never had con- nexion with the Church of Scotland in New Brunswick. Several Churches in the Province, now in our connexion, claim closer rclationshi]) with the Presbyterian Church in Ireland than with the Church of Scotland. I would not be surprised, if a national census being taken, it should appear that the majority of the Presbyterians in this Pro- vince would be found to trace their ecclesiastical connexion not to the Scotch but to the Irish Church. It is, therefore, a piece of sheer impertinence, polite as it seems in Dr. Brooke, to welcome back the Presbyterians of New Bruns- wick to a Church with which they have had at best but a distant and consanguineous connexion, as though they were a sort of prodigal wandererr^ from her maternal home. 40 3 O O sr jt jd id ho ho ^a. but ir i* ices ome ned rUe I)o(;tor ni'Muki' rthtMild undurrttand that it wuh the Church ol' Now Hnuwwk'k whicli, after being long wooe<I, profeused a gonnino williiignosH to unite on e([uai terms with tho (Jhurciiof Scothuul in this Province. Jt was not tho Freo (>hurcl», tliough a Churcii Hvm|mthizing with her ; not tho Irisli (.'liureh, tl.jugh a Onurch largely made up of tho natives of tho Emerald Isle and their aesccndants ; not a sectional Church, biassed by previous prejudices, and blinded by the bigotries of nationalities — not a Church comi)08ed of such elements was it whicli sought to quench tlu; strifes and (piarrels, engendered in past conflicts, in a union with another Church, which, though of foreign name and remote sympathies, was yet supposed to l>o Iionest in desires after a union among Presbyterians, and 80 chivalrous as to forgot tho strivings of tho past, and join in tho glorious undertakings of the future, oy which the Presbyterian Church, based on Scriptural principles, is surely to be characterized in this Province. The pathos and point, and mock politeness of tlio Rev. Doctor, all evaporate, when it is understood that he b' even mistaken the personage he addresses, knows not c , en her genealogy, and that his idea of her having lived with him formerly, and of her having left him on a quarrel, is a mere hal- lucination. It need hardly bo wondered at that a Scottish elder should have sucli a contracted view of the extent and genealogy of Presbyterianism, as to suppose that it is pe- culiar to Scotland, or that all Presbyterians must trace their connexion to tho Kirk of that nationality, but that a Doctor of Divinity should labour under the delusion that Presbyterianism has her original and peculiar liome in Scotland, as Dr. Brooke's logical position would seem to imply, is a little startling. Presbyterianism does not date from John Knox, or hail only from Scotland. At best, it was but an importation there. Holland, Germany, tho United States, not to talk of Ireland, England, and France, contain Churches which confess it. It can be traced, if it bo worth anything, to tho Apostles and the New Testament. We cannot see that out of Scotland, if indeed in it (of which there are grave doubts), the Kirk should therefore claim to bo the source of Presbyterianism, or that any monopoly of privilege should belong to her in New Brunswick. Dr. Brooke is highly displeased that we have taken tho designation " Churcli of New Brunswick." "What right Dr. Brooke has to bo offended because we, owning no pc- 7 50 culiar origin save tliat of Scripture, antl dchiriiig to unite on equal terms, without claiming any su])erior status, with all classes of evangelical Presbyterians, have taken the name "Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick," we cannot tell. His Church, national and seelusivc, is dis- tinguished by the adjunct " in connexion with the Cliurcii of Scotland,^' and he is angry because we do not sectarize ourselves in some similarly peculiar wa}'. Like the dog in the manger, he will neither cat the hay nor permit the cow, but keeps barking at every attempt to appropi'iate what he has rejected, and continues to reject. If JDr. Brooke thinks that a peculiar glory, status and privilege is invested in the name of Church " in connexion with the Church of Scotland," why does he complain of us, when, so far from contending with her for these honours and advantages, we are content with the simple name of the country which w^c liave made onr and our children's home. Would he have New Brunswick without a Presbyterian Church if not con- nected with Scotland ? Would lie deprive our people of any proper provincial ecclesiasticisni ? Is the time never to come when the Church in this Province is to cease to look to Scotland as the source of all ecclesiastical power, authority and dignity ? When will it be possible for the Irish, American, or native Presbyterians to cherish a Pro- vincial Church ? We know not when the Eev. Dr. Brooke would permit this, but it is well that his authority is not required, and that there is already a Church in this Pro- vince, which neither hails from Scotland, nor Ireland, nor America, but which, ignoring distant nationalities, is pa- triotic enough to content herself wuth the simple name which, in all future time, will be dearer to the Presbyterian people of this country than any name, of however glorious memory — ^The Presbyteeian Chitech of New Beunswick. While affirming that the Church of New Brunswick was not in any such peculiar way related to the Church in con- nexion with the Church of Scotland, as to justify the scorn- ful politeness with which her overtures for union were, as a graceful finale, beckone'l aw^ay in the late farce played in the Synod of Fredericton, I am far from thinking that our Presbyterian Church does not owe a mighty debt of gratitude to Scotland and to her Churches. Scotland I admire — who does not ? Her heroes of the faitli are en- rolled among the noblest of our race. I have wandered over her most classic scenes, and felt their inspiration. I have scanned many of the places which her gigantic heroes have trod in battles of the olden time. Bannockburn is still ol e U le re is- 3h ize in w, lat )ke ted •om we I vc \ave con- e of ever Be to )\ver, L- tlie Pro- •OOlvG not Pro- , nor spa- iiamc [erian irious kVICK. was con- icovn- •e, as ayed that jbtof tnd I •e en- over have have Btill associutod iu memory with Thcnnopyl!\3 and Morgarten; and Waihiee and Brace stand forth' with Leonidas and William Tell in the niches of recollection. The philosophy, lyric poetry, ajid romance of Scotland, are alike glorious ; and her martyrs of the covenant are worthy of canonization, M'ith those who shed their blood in the times of Nero, when, as yet, apostolic virtue reigned over the lives and faith of men. The Church which Knox founded, and for which Wishaii; bled, will never want for admiration and tears. But that land of heroes and martyrs is far now from iinding her titting — certainly not her only or most worthy — representative in that shred of a national Church, still called in the language of the law " the Church of Scotland." In Cammeronianism, Secessionism, and Disruption, she has been shorn of by far the major part of her glory. Many times she has had to cry Ichabod — and the last time she did so, only a few years ago, many held that her lamp had gone out. Certainly that which was most allied with mar- tyrdom and heroism went out from her, when Welch and Chalmers and Candlish and Cunningham, and those in whose souls was not only the feeling to admire, but the courage to dare and do noble things, left her and her riches and status behind them, as things which though desirable in themselves were not worthy of possession witli- out a good conscience. Every soul in the world that ad- mired liberty, and unselfishness, and courage, admired these men, and either scorned or pitied the poor Church of Scotland with all her emoluments and consideration in the eye of the law. Since then ghe has no doubt rallied, and is producing and may yet produce noble and worthy men, but it is rather too much for those who undertake to repre- sent her in this province, to take upon them the airs of superiority, and condescension, and status, and what not, displayed at Fredericton, considering the comparatively low estimation which she still possesses in the eye of Chris- tendom beneath the Free Church, "with which we are privileged to hold a friendly alliance. And now, notwithstanding the deceit, which, by their own documents, I have proved to have been practised upon us ; notwithstanding the falsity of the doctrine of Union as held by them; notwithstanding their allegations about conscience in submission to the Civil Magistrate, and their fears about loss of status, and their assumptions of superior status having been shown to be vain and frivolous ; and notwithstanding the utter ridiculousness with which, it is plain, their mocking welcome to a church in many ways 52 their superior covers them, I yet desire, having ]>laccd the whole transaction in its true light before an appreciative public, to look upon and treat every minister of tiie Synod of Fredericton as a worthy and excellent man ; and all the more worthy and excellent, after having seen their late foolish escapade in the mirror which I have held up before them. And I might say in conclusion, that I feel quite certain that, so far from this discussion Imving put back the Union of Presbyterians in this province, it is most likely it has greatly forwarded its consummation, Of this I have some evidence in the fact that such a beau- tiful and well-timed article on union should have been transmitted to you, Sir, for publication since this discussion commenced, by one of the gentlemen who argued with wit and wisdom against union in the Synod of Fredericton, and which you elevated to the rank of a leading article in your paper of September 10th. Should this discussion only have the effect of inducing the gentlemen of the Synod lately held at Fredericton to study the article so much admired by one of their number, I augur the happiest results. " The motive to attempt as far as in us lies the restoration of this glory (of unity) to his Church," will not be wanting, and " The strength to promote this union in the Church found in deep abasement and humiliation before God" will surely be given. " Private selfishness" will be incapable of pre- venting it. Nor will the expectation be cherished that " brother should yield to brother" — or church to church. Indeed this article is one which I take the liberty, in con- clusion, of recommending to the study of all the brethren as well those who rejected as those who sought union. Its sentiments are scriptural, weighty, and worthy of all Intelligent consideration. I am yours, &c. James Bennft, |T, 53 PRESBYTERIAN UNION. [To the Editor of the " Colonial Presbyterian."] Sir — From tlie Colonial Presbyterian of the 5tli inst., I observe the subject of union of the Presbyterian bodies of this Province, has been recently discussed at Frederic- ton, at a meeting of the Synod in connection with the Church of Scotland. I am in favor of the proposed union, as our people are scattered in small communities over the whole Province — holding in the main, similar religious views — but, hailing from different branches of the Presbyterian family, and I am persuaded that if they were consolidated into one body, having common interests, an ecclesiastical organization might be instituted and applied, so as to meet their spiritual wants, without aid from abroad. Presbyterians in this Province, as a body, are not poor. There ar« doubtless, among them, persons in indigent eir- cumstaMce b'^t there are those also, who are wealthy, and willing t«. . ar.'ibute to assist their less fortunate brethren, provided .!...t they have confidence in the arrangements proposed to effect that object. In accordance with this view, the monies sent to this Province by the Colonial Committee in Scotland — say up- wards of £600 currency — in aid of the Church here, is misapplied, and great responsibility certainly attaches to the parties representing such an expenditure as necessary, while the heathen world still demands so much from Chris- tian benevolence, and when this sum would support four missionaries in the foreign field. Besides, it ouglit not to be overlooked, that the people in Scotland, who are in- duced to contribute these funds, may be, and probably are, poorer than those for whose benefit the money is sent ; and all experience proves, that to contribute to the support of persons able to provide for themselves, only weakens their energies and lessens their power of self-reliance. " Union," to use the language of the Rev. Mr. Ogg, in the discussion referred to, " would give Presbyterians more respectability and influence, and would, consequently, put them in a condition of being of greater usefulness" — yes^ to say nothing of other objects that might be gained — the £G00 annually now expended here, miglit be appropriated for the benefit of the heathen, and, in addition, a large sum might be raised by a united Church for the same grand object. 54 In proof of my usserf ion that the rrubhytoriaii Oliurch in this Province nuf^ht be self-sustaining, and at the same time contribute in aid of Foreign Missions, I refer to what has been accomplished at an earlier period, in colonial history, under greater disadvantages, by the Presbyterian Church of Nova Scotia ; and, that our organization in New Bruns- wick is now not what it ought to be — that it is sadly de- fective — is fully attested by the fact, that neither body is self-supporting. The Ilev. .Tames Murray said that " there was nothing that he would desire more to see than a union between the Churches : if that union were perfect, it would strengthen their hands, advance the cause of religion, and do away with petty jealousies." The Rev. Mr. McLardy said, " no doubt several advantages would be derived from such a union as was proposed," and instanced the advantage in support of weak congregations. Tlien, I ask, why not unite. Dr. ].)onald says, " that a union cannot be effected wishout a compromise of prin- ciple," and. refers to the interference of the civil magistrate : this, I admit, would bo an insurmoimtable obstacle, if the laws of Scotland, as applied to the Church there, were equally binding upon the Church here, but inasmuch as there are no laws to regulate our ecclesiastical procedure in this country, but such as are made at our own request, and such as we are willing to accept, I can conceive no practical inconvenience arising from this source. The only way that this question can arise, would be by foolishly ex- acting from adherents of the Colonial Church an expression of their belief regarding ecclesiastical questions, involving the principle, arising in the Church of Scotland, and no man would be disposed to act so unreasonably, if the Church were independent and Colonial. Again, another difficulty in the way t)f union suggested by Dr. Donald is, that he fears it is sought on " political grounds." In this something very alarming is discovered, and, consequently, deprecated with much earnestness. I must confess, hoAvever, that I can see no cause for serious apprehension on that scoi'e. Is it nothing that when the lioman Catholics number themselves by tens of thousands, and other denominations of Christians do the same thing, and demand consideration from the Legislature and the Government, in consequence of their numbers, when a great question, snch as Education, is before the public — I re])eat, is it nothing, that under these circumstances, Presby- terians present themselves in vm op})osing attitude, nentra- lisinir their infinence? u lie la la- -«^ Aojiin, the Doctor i'oars the lossi of rank, and thurclbro oljjoets. It may be owing to the point from which a colonial mind views the subject, but I am free to confess that it fails to affect me as a matter of much importance. Indeed, I think it has abstractly very little to do w^ith a man's true position, or success in any way, in this country, I consider a clergy- man's standing and social position to depend upon liis personal merits — associated with his connection with his congregation. Suppose that his people were of the humbler classes, his salary small, and his professional ability inferior — what, I ask, could status do for him ? But Dr. Donald says, " at present tliey enjoyed certain privileges : they held the same status as the clergymen of the Church of England. It was a position that was to be highly prized." This statement I regard as rather humiliating, and not less so to himself than to his people. Whoever thought of a well educated Presbyterian clergyman and gentleman, in the same social local position, being less respectable than an English clergyman. Much stress is laid on the necessity of " union in senti- ment and feeling, and the exchange of friendly acts as in- dividuals ;" but what would be thought if a clergyman of the Chnrcli of Scotland who, being in company with clergy- men of the Free Church, or of tlie Church of the Lower Provinces, were he politely to say — You will please remain where you are, this is your place on this plain, my position is on another and a higher, by the side of the English clergy- man — and then step up. This might be done with much dignity, but would it be friendly ? would it not be insulting ? and, yet, it seems to be the unmistakeable logic contained in the Doctor's language. The Messrs. Murray, of Dalhousie and Tabusintac, would yield their status if good to the Church would accrue ; but Dr. Donald " had been surprised to hear members of the Synod (referring to these gentlemen) say that they would bo willing to give up their status under certain conditions — he would relinquish it on none." The good of the Church, the benefit of liis fellow-man — nothing would induce him to yield — no, nothing. lie further says, " it was as certain as anything if that union did take place, their status would be lost," and again he was " firmly of opinion that the time for union, which he believed would come, had not come." This indicates the possibility from his own state- ments, that in time the status would bo lost. ITo\\- sad the thought ! M • " At the close of this discussion, it being considered a serious subject, and having been seriously discussed, and the minds of members seriously impressed, it was proposed by Dr. Donald that the Moderator, the Rev. Mr. McLardy, should engage in prayer for union of the visible Church of Christ, especially for those branches betvireen whom there is 80 little difference." Well, I don't know what others may think of this, but there is something in the animus of this discussion, and then this rtall for prayer in reference to it, which makes me feel that unless its spirit was principally that of confession, it was sadly out of place. It is to be regretted that it had not been printed and preserved for the benefit of the world. Perhaps his Lordship the Bishop of Fredericton would have adopted it for the use of his Church, as it was made and sanctioned by those who "hold the same status as the clergymen of the Church of England." ' — 4--i^ '.r A Self-Reliant Layman. September, 18G1. \S.P. IT'- ■ihtAUii >k'0' y '■' fc-. ^.jtl • ■in .(ft '- ) ?.i r *: , ' -' , '• f :n4r.> (^m; k