THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SITE DISPUTE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XXVIII, Issue 78, 31 March 1892, Page 2

THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SITE DISPUTE.

. '— « — — " A frien can tak a naebor's jmirfc, And still hae nought to gie him." . TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — It is with pardonable pride I mention the fact that I am one of the favored few possessing the privilege of belonging to the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, a Church presided over for the most part by men of the type of Dr Elmslie— larged- minded, charitable, and withal liberal Christians. You will not wonder, then, at my feeling both surprised and grieved at the tone of the Rev Mr Robb's letters towards Mr Sinclair anent the Church question. After allowing myself leisure for dispassionate 'reflection, I have arrived at the conclusion that Mr Robb's replies are, to say the least, discourteous, •as coming from a clergyman, disrespectful towards the individual, and m excess of the prerogative attached to his office. I have bean a consistent member of the Church, and have, during that period, all along been of the belief that Mr James Sinclair was the donor of the church site, and I still think, with many of my ooworshippers, that Mr Sinclair will yet establish that fact. What I, however, complain of is the wretched example set the young amongst us by one who ought to be a pattern m toleration and charity. Instead of which, he has exhibited a spirit of narrowness, of bigotry, of intolerance, of glaring unfairness, and unkindness ; such as' characterised those lacking Catholic spirit m the Dark Ages. Nay, even worse, there is an invective begottec of coarse instincts and stubborn self-will, as is exhibited m the " you're another" type of reply, which takes the place of dignified, calm assertion. Assuming, however, that Mr Sinclair is wrong m his recollection of actual facts, taking into consideration that gentleman's age and position, as well as his liberality towards the churoh m the past, which cannot be unknown to the Bey Mr Robb, I consider the rev gentleman not at all justified m grasping the opportunity. for indulging m acrimony and personal recrimination hidden behind the veil of liberty and justice. I ask, is this the tolerance lie has been so long trumpeting from the pulpit ! Is this |he magnanimity of Presby terianisna ! Why, if I mistake not, amongst other gifts to the Church the vary land the maqse occupied by Mr Robb stands on is a gift by Mr Sinclair to the Church. Alas for the gratitude of our modern spiritual guides ! It is well for our Church that a Moderator was not selected from Maryborough, or we might find ourselves m a predicament similar to that the Primate brought the Anglican Church at its recent Synod meeting. I have no desire to perpetuate the quarrel, but solemnly claim the right, as a parent and a Presbyterian, to protest against Mr Robb's tone, as flavoring too much of those of whom it was said — " Their grapes are grapes of gall";' their clusters are' bitter; their wine is the poison of dragons and the cruel venom of asps." — I am, etc, Spiritus Cranii Humani^*