Original Correspondence.

Bruce Herald, Volume VI, Issue 403, 31 January 1872, Page 6

Original Correspondence.

(To the- Editor of the Bruce Herald. )

Sir, — It is very evident that your Du»- --• edin correspondent has no liking to the Proa- • byterian Church, and especially to the Pres 'byterian clergy. In several of 3iis late coin'munications he has referred to Church matters, and from his own professedly iudepeu • dent point i.f view has given the public what he calls an impartial and faithful account of • sayings and doings in some of the Church • courts. More than once, however, have I i'had pen in hand'to correct fhe unfair representations he has given both of men and their "modes of doing- things ; but, hating newspaper-squabbling as heartily as lie pro-"fessed^tce-clo ministerial squabbling, I have •-•hitherto held back my hand from going further. His last,however, is so unfair, and • calculated to bring the whole Synod of the ' Church into such -contempt in the eyes of < those who had not the opportunity of seeing • with their Own eyes, and hearing with their « own earsthe things said and done by that body, that justice compels that some notice '■be taken ana contradiction given to his • slanderous misrepresentations. Your correspondent would have the public to under- • stand ; i;hat the meetings of Synod were throughout of the style and character painted <hy him in the somewhat lengthy first parar graph of his letter. Now. nothing could be -further from the-truth, 0a one evening one member did'makense of strong language and for accusations against some of his brethren, which-called forth the condemnatory remarks of the Rev- Mr Johnstone and • others, -reported by your correspondent. But • observe, the objectionable language was by - one, fee condemnation thereof by many, so '■- that : the Synod frilly vindicated itself from having any sympathy ""with "that one, either in the substance or style of his speech, and for your cofivspo'rident to represent the whole 'Synod and all its in the light in ■which he does is perversion df a kind which betrays malice, and amounts to slander. Let fit be remembered also that the condemnatory remarks made by members of Synod duly, chronicled- by your mud-thrower, were all msed in reference to that one most objectionable speech, Jand not a resume of remarks made at various times and in various debates. From this judge of the fairness of your correspondent. ■ Why has he nothing to say of 'the long, earnest, and harmonious discussion of our mission operations, the extension of ; the Church ; the rendering more efficient our Sabbath schools, and ihe devising of means for supplying ordinan^jjjLto all outlying dis■tricts by means of stucfehts and lay missionaries, when a regular ministry cannot be ■supported ; "the organising of a fund whereby the, ministers, out of their own pockets, by ■an annual subscription of L 5. undertake the •support of ministers widows and orphans, •giving an annuity of L4O to each .widow, ami of LlO to cacti boy- under 15 years of age, and -each/girl- under TT"years.. of age, 1 being sons and. daughters of deceased ministers / Why has your correspondent not a, word to .say of these and other good 'works, that the Church and the "world might know what really the Synod had been doing ? ■ I hnmhly submit, and I think you will agree with me, that his time w;otild. have Jaetsn- "better employed, and ybu4- space better-^iccu pied with jorae account of, these things-,- than, as it has been , with a slanderous dJ^imunicatipri 4jiterhirded with pious to The Synod had, I -think, twelve sittings, only two of which were under five hours, aiid

so, 'olit of -the at least 'sixty liours discussion and transaction of business, your correspondent takes what was said by "one individual on one occasion, though immediately condemned by many others, and sets that 'before the public as a fair representation of the whole. I venture to say that never, at least in Dunedin, was there so large a jbody of men met, holding different opinions on many questions which came tinder discussion, and their meetings conducted in a more becoming and oaderly manner. That there were differences of opinion among the members, and that these were honestly stated and earnestly advocated lam not concerned to deny. It will be a sorry day when differences of opinion cease to be expressed and maintained ; we will then have stagnation and death, not peace. „ It would appear as if your correspondent thought, and he is not alone in the absurdity, that ministers should never differ in opinion on Church matters, or that if they do they should not express or urge their individual opinions, but all follow whoever speaks first.. That apparently is your correspondent's high ideal of ministerial pea cef ulness, and his beau ideal of what a church court should be. All I can say is, may it never be realised. There are many other nasty, things in his letter which T feel tempted to comment upon, but a regard for your space bids me forbear. Allow me, just in closing, to congratnlate you on the very mai-ked improvement in the tone and general character of the correspondence of your paper of late. The absence of mere gossip and slander has been very marked, your Dunedin correspondent being the only one whose communications have at all partaken of that character ; and as it is just as base and wrong to slander a public body of men as a private individual, your correspondent might bo none the worse of a renewal of: your editorial warning to all correspondents that your columns cannot be made the vehicle of gratifying or indulging either personal or sectarian sjjleen and animosity. — I am. &c,

A Reader (Not a correspondent.)

P.S.— The ' Daily Times' "casual," in last "Wednesday's issue has his slap at the Synod also, as such gentleman " are to the manner born," but even he is constrained to make a concession which your correspondent does not hint at— that in the Synod " there are some honorable exceptions. Your " regular" sees nothing good in any, but, classing all together, repri sents them as alike bad. Noble impartiality in one assuming to himself the post of censor inorum of parties in general, and the Presbyterian clergy in particular.

(To the Edito) of the Bruce Herald.)

Sir, — If you do not publish the proceeedings of the Presbyterian Synod , would you try and find room for the enclosed : —

■pS-AIrMODY,

The report of a committee on Psalmody having been given in. it wa,3 moved and seconded that the English Presbyterian Hymn-book, the collection of hymns and paraphrases contained in the Free Church report, and the collection of the United Presbyterian Church, be sent down to Presbyteries and Kirk Sessions for their consideration, with the view of any of them being adopted if deemed expedient. It was moved and seconded that none of, these collections be sent down. It was also moved and seconded, that the English Presbyterian Hymn Book be sent down to Presbyteries and Kirk Sessions for their consideration that if it be deemed expedient, said collection may be adopted at the next meeting of the Synod. It was afterwards moved and seconded, that the Synod delay sending any hyii:n-book down to Presbyteries and Kirk Sessions until that iitloptcd by the Free Church of Scotland (if any such should be adopted), be received. A. vote having been taken, the second amendment, that the English Presbyterian Hymn-book be sent down, was adopted by a majority of 12 to 8. Thereupon Mr Bannerman, in his own name, and also in the names of those holding similar views, dissented, for the following reasons: — 1. Because the principle as to the use of hymns in the Public "Worship of God has not been affirmed by this Church in accordance with its standards. 2. Because the attempt to shew this, by the ruling of the Synod, is an infringement of our rights as members of the Synod. The reasons were signed by Messrs Bannerman, Grant, Duil", and J. W. Thomson Messrs IStobo, Gillies and Will were appointed a committee to answer the reasons of dissent. Hi'MX-BOOK. The following answer to reasons of dissent on the motion anent the hymn-book were adopted. 1. In reply to the first reason of dissent, it is suilicient to refer to the Synod's proceedings of IS7O, pages 8 and 12, where it will be found that the principle of the use of hymns has been affirmed by this Church in .accordance with scripture and the standards of this Church. 2. It being out of all order to discuss the general principle of the use of hymns when the question before the House was simply ;vhat hymnbook shall be sent down for consideration, there was no infringement of the rights of Mr Bannerman or any other member of Synod, by the ruling of the moderator complained of. My reason for asking for its insertion, is , to draw the attention of presbyterians of the district to it, and to express a hope that the Kirk Session'will have the courtesy to ascertain the feelings of the congregation oil the subject before coming to any deliverance on the question. — I am &c, Harmony.