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