HERESY IN THE PRESBYTERY.

Otago Witness, Issue 1905, 14 August 1890, Page 11

HERESY IN THE PRESBYTERY.

EEV. MR GIBB'S CASE AGAIN. At last week's meeting of the Dunedin Presbytery, The Clerk read the minutes of the previous meeting, giving the results of the ordinary business, aud in dealing with Mr Gibbs' case he entered in the minute book au extract from the sermon of Mr Gibb containing the words objected to by Mr Begg, and added, as a summary of the remainder of the sermon :— •• That he (Mr Gibb) bolieves in election, and in' his sermon he dwelt upon that aspect of the doctrine that would eifect the end he had in view — viz., to rouse to Christian activity; that he believes the abatement iv thu Confession to be inconsistent with the truth of Sci-iptun;; that the words 'nicro good pleasure ' seemed to imply arbitrariness on the part of God ; that what liv chiefly objects to is the decree of prseterition aud damnation ; aud that he cm honeatiy hold such views inasmuch as he hold** the declaratory Btatement of the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland aud of the Presbyterian Church of Victoria, and that in accepting the doctrinal standards of this church he did so in the light of the modifications of the Victorian Church."

Mr Gibb said he could not agree to the passing of the minute^ in their present form. He objected to them on various grounds In the firs!; place the cletk had presented them not with a minute of what occurred at last meeting, but with a history of the proceedings. He might be mistaken, but he scarcely thought they would find a precedent for incorporating with a formal minute of a meeting of presbytery a digest of the speeches which had been delivered at thy same. It was usual to record only the motions which had been proposed — the results arrived at by the discussion, not the discussion itself. This was the method the clerk' usually followed, and he saw no reason why the constant practice should be set aside in the present instance. But in the second place, supposing the objection he had just stated were considered irrelevant, he had to say that the history Mr Finlayson hud given them was, so far as his defence was concerned, anything but accurate. He objected emphatically to the summary the clerk had given of his speech. That summary conveyed quite an erronous impression at various points. Moreover, the clerk had dragged into his account of what took place a part of his (Mr Gibb's) sermon, which was outside the extract furnished by Mr Begg as the ground of his complaint. The sermon had beeu read in its entirety to the presbytery, but the presbytery had not pronounced a judgment upon any part of it except the words brought under their notice by Mr Begg. The minute professed to be a record of Mr Begg's complaint and of the judgment of the presbytery thereanent. In reality it was much more. It discussed certain matttrs which he (the speaker) had referred to in his defence, but which had no more right to be placed on the minutes than the statements made by other members in the course of their speeches. In the third place he objected to the minutes on the ground that Mr Finlayson intended to make use of them in his appeal to the synod against the decision of the presbytery. That gentleman had furnished him with an extract from the minutes, which extract he proposed placing before the synod along with his reasons of dissent from the presbytery's finding. The extract appeared to be the greater portion of the so-called minute which had been read to the court that morning. He would ask them to consider the practical outcome of this. It would bring before the synod a number of points with which the synod had nothing to do in so far as the appeal against the presbytery's decision was concerned. Mr Finlayson was appealing, not against him (Mr Gibb), but against the presbytery, and yet if the minutes were allowed to pass the result would be that he, rather than the presbytery, would be before the synod ; and further, he would be there on charges which were altogether outside Mr Begg's complaint. The minutes should simply state Mr Begg's complaint, and that he (Mr Gibb) had been heard in reply, and then proceed to state the motions which had been tabled. Of course it was quite within Mr Finlayson's right to approach the synod about anything contained either in the defence or the sermon. He could do so by petition. And if the synod should sustain Mr Finlayson's {appeal, he supposed the whole matter would come before that court, and if that should happen he would be very willing to speak out in his own defence on the same lines and as plainly as he had in the presbytery a month ago. No one, he supposed, would imagine he was afraid to maintain the position he had taken up, but he decidedly objected to having the matter come under the notice of the synod in an irregular way. On these three grounds, then — first, that the minute is not a minute properly so called, but a history ; second, that it is not even an accurate account of what took place ; and third, that it would introduce irrelevant matters to the notice of the synod, — he hoped the presbytery would refuse to confirm the minutes in their present form. Dr Watt thought Mr Gibb was right in his contention. For himself, he felt when the minute was being read that there should have been nothing stated further than that Mr Gibb was heard in his own defence. If the clerk was right in giving a resume of Mr Gibb's speech, he should have given a resume of all the speeches. The clerk had thoroughly honest inteotions, no doubt, but he felt he had put himself into the wrong box in this matter, especially as he had appealed against the decision, which action on his part would lead him unconsciously to have a bias in his way of framing the minute. He (Dr Watt) felt that the minute ought to be scored out, and the simple statement inserted that Mr Gibb was heard in his own defence. He would move — " That the minule consist of Mr Begg's complaint, followed by a statement that Mr Gibb was heard in his defence and read his sermon, also the motions,"

Mr J. Niven said he was thunderstruck when he heard the clerk read the minute. In all his experience he had never before heard such a minute ; in fact, it was not a minute at all, but Mr Finlayson's report of the speeches made. The clerk went further into .mistake in quoting from the sermon to a greater extent than was referred to in Mr Begg's complaint. Mr J. Ryley rose to move that the minute be adopted as read by the clerk. Seeing that the case was going to the synod, it was highly desirable it should be presented in as full and fair a way as possible, and he could not see why Mr Gibb could object to the extracts from his own sermon or from his own speech, aud there was nothing in the minute but such extracts. The synod might censure the presbytery, and especially the clerk, if au important case like that was presented in a bald aud meagre manner. He thought the minute was very fair, and if ho was in Mr Gibb's place he should be pleased to hava the whole sermon or the whole speech sent to tho synod. A man should not be afraid of his utterances being investigated or tested by the full court of the church.

Rev. Mr Gibb said he would road the sermon just as frankly to the synod an ho had read it to the presbytery, and he would also be prepared to defend himself. Rev. R. R. M. Sutherland seconded Mr Ryley's motion.

Rev. Mr Camebon thought that Mr Ryley and Mr Sutherland had taken up positions that were wholly indefensible. Rev. Mr Kiekland held that Mr Gibb's speech was the most important at last meeting, and it was therefore necessary to make more extended reference to it in the minutes than to any of the others. Rev. Mr_WiLL was of opinion that to send up the clerk's view of Mr Gibb's defence The Clerk: It is not my view; it is my account. Rev. Mr Will continued that to send up Mr Fiulay sou's account of what Mr Gibb said, while Mr Gibb himself objected to it, would be a very unfair thing to do. If Mr Finlayson had brought into the minute the whole sermon, then no objection would have been taken. If anything in the nature of the miuute was to be sent up, it should be a written account by Mr Gibb himself, but to send up an ,extraot which Mr Gibb disowned would be positively unjust. Rev. Dr Dunlof characterised the minute as an extraordinary attempt to give a kind of history of the meeting. As a rule, it was unfair to give an extract or part of a speech to represent tue whole. He was of opinion that the synod would require much more before it than was contained in the minute. The Clerk said, he did not think he had given a history of the case — not more than was 1 absolutely necessary to show in the minutes the grounds of the motions proposed in the presbytery He thought it was likely the synod would call for something similar to the minute. As clerk, he would be much relieved to think that nothing of this kind was to go into the mioutes, because it gave him some trouble to frame the extract, and even when he was fini&ht-d he was not perfectly satisfied with it. — (11. jlt, hear.) When he gave Mr Gibb a copy of i>h<? minutes the other day, he suggtatp'] that it did not do him (Mr Gibb) justice, and he said he would like Mr Gibb to draw up an abstract himself. It seemed to him that to leave the minute without indicating something said by Mr Gibb regarding the complaint made about his teaohing would be unfair to him. Rev. Dr Watt said it would be an awkward precedent to establish that in every case of appeal the presbytery would make up its mind as to what was said by a man in his defence. The only case in wt>ich they could send up a history of the matter to the synod wa» one where Mr Gibb himself was quite willing to accept what was said, but when Mr Gibb did not consider it a just presentation of his case, it would be persecution on the part of the church court to send up what he did not accept as a fair statement of the case. Rev. Mr Will : It would be worthless. Rev. Mr Ryley asked if he might alter his motion.— (Voices: "No.") He did not wish to be harsh or unjust to Mr Gibb. The motion might be altered to this effect — that the minutes stand as read unless Mr Gibb wanted to make Bomo alterations or corrections. Voices : No, uo. The question was then put, and 6 voted for Mr Rylep's motion and 13 for Dr Watt's. fhe Modebatoe declared Dr Watt's motion carried. Rev. Mr Ryley said he would appeal for reasons to be handed in afterwards. — (Dissent.) Rev. Mr Gibb : Can the presbytery disallow anything like that ? The Moderator : Well, I don't think so. Key. Mr Eirkland thought they could if they saw that the appeal was frivolous. He would bo inclined to move that in this instance the appeal be disallowed. Rev. Dr Watt suggested that Mr Ryley should withdraw his appeal. If their business was gone on with in this way they would make themselves the laughing stock of the town. Rev. Mr Ryley held he had a perfect right to appeal, and if he was not allowed he would appeal against the tyranny it was intended to impose on certain members of the presbytery. However, he .did not wish to appear obstinate, and on the suggestion of Dr Watt he would give way. The minutes as amended were then approved. THE APPEAL IN THE LATE HERESY HUNT. The Clerk read the following reasons from and complaint against the judgment of the presbytery of Dunedin anent a complaint by Mr A. C. Begg.— (1) Because the language complained of and admitted to have been used by Mr Gibb waa a repudiation of the statement of doctrine in the Confession and Catechism, and the presbytery failed in the judgment herein complained of to vindicate the Confession and Catechism from the attack made on them. (2) Because while the presbytery found that Mr Gibb had made statements reflecting on the subordinate standards, and expressed regret on account of this, no regret was expressed by Mr Gibb, and this judgment therefore leaves it open to any minister to report such statements without fear of censure, thus virtually Betting aside as of no effect the promise required by the church of her ministers to assert, maintain, and defend the whole doctrine contained in the Uonfesiion of Faith. (3) Because tbo presbytery in coming to suoh a finding exceeded Its powers ai an administrative and subordinate court, and assumed the functions of the synod, to which alone, as the supreme court of the church, it is competent to fix or alter the terms of office. Alexander M. Finlxyson John Eylky It. R. M. Sutherland. The following additional reasons were given by the Rev. Mr Sutherland :—: — 1. That Mr Gibb emphatically declared In his defence that he does not hold the doctrines of eleotion as embodied and taught in the Confession of Faith. That in discarding the dootrlne of prseterition, which he characterised as a "lie," and ai a doctrine '■ unspeakably dreadful," he demonstrates that what he means by election as he holds it is the Arminian or some other lower form of doctrine. 2. That Mr Gibb in his defence declared that the words " mere good pleasure," as the basis of the Confessional doctrine, form but a umall part of the objeotion which h9 takes to the Confessional teaching. 3 That Mr Gibb in his defence admitted in a qualified sort of way that, not through inadvertence but in ignorance of the theology of the seventeenth century, the words " mere good pleasure " deolared in the Confession to be the basis of election may have beeu understood by him in a way not intended by the compilers of the Confession, and that he had spoken as he did on account, nf fiieh misapprehension; but he expressed no regret for having wilfully, if ignorantly. attacked the Confession. On the contrary, he instilled hinisc-lf on the ground that if he lifts erred others have made the same mistake. 4. That Mr Gibb. in his defence asserted and maintained, and dirt not abandon the position, that he was within his rights in attacking the Confession of Faith in the face of his congregation when he did not agree with the touching of the Confession, and in this he was backed up by members of presbytery. 5. That the presbytery, in view of the serious nature of the complaint lodged against Mr Gibb, and in view of the equally serious and damaging statements mode by Mr Gibb in his defence, acted in a manner fitted to discredit this church by resolving hurriedly and without due consideration to dispose of the ca.e, and by not taking the usual course of appo'nMng a committee with a view to report to a future meeting of the presbytery, 6. That the preibytery in its resolution, on Mr Gibb's own showing," covers but a small part «f the complaint made against him, and in respect to that small part the resolution does not correctly state the facts of the case. 7. That the resolution complained of, and especially as read in the light of Mr Web's defence and of the speeches made in favour of dismissing the complaint, declares to the world that the church has abandoned her doctrinal position as defined in the Confession of Faith, and especially 10 in referenoe to the doctrine of election ; and that It is now a matter of indifference whether her minister* hold Arminian or lower opinions thereanent. B. B. M. SVTHKBUHD.

Re.v Mr Oaiteeon asked how many representatives the presbytery appointed to defend their resolution before the synod. It was pointed out that the rule simply specified for " commissioners " fixing no number. After a lengthy discussion it was agreed to allow the question to stand over till next meeting — a month hence. Rev. Mr Gibb asked if the grounds of appeal were to be answered in any form. Ifc was stated that they were not, but the Rev. Mr Will held that they were, and pointed out the following rule on the matter :— " When reasons of appeal are given, the court appoints a committee to answer the same. When the answero are prepared, they are read to the court • and adopted." Rev. Mr Camehon did not see that they needed to answer the reasons. He would let them go on as they were, and would move that the presbytery appoint no committee. The following committee was appointed : — Dr Watt (convener), Revs. Will, Cameron, Gibb, and Porter. A CHARGE AGAINST THE BET. GIBSON SMITH Rev. Mr Rylby said he considered he had a duty resting on him to bring under the notice of the presbytery a statement which was made by the Rev. Gibson Smith at last meeting. •He did not know that it was necessary for him to go into the merits of that statement. He thought afc the time that it was a most astounding statement to make, and the more he had thought of it since the more he was convinced that it was an extraordinary statement. It had found its way into the public press, and had been circulated all over the colony, the result being that it had caused a scandal to religion. Rev. Gibson Smith rose to a point of order. Before Mr Ryley entered into the merits of the statement he said be (the speaker) had made, it had first to be ascertained whether he had taken the necessary steps in a case like this. He sent word to him the previous morning that he intended to bring a matter before the presbytery, but the notice was so indefinite that it really was not a notice at all. Practically he really did not know what Mr Ryloy was going to say. Rev. Mr Ryley said he posted a lottor to Mr Gibson Smith on Monday afternoon, and he thought that was sufficient notice to give. But Mr Smith would not deny what he was going to say. The statement was this : That the Confession of Faith and the Shorter Catechism had prevented his conversion and kept him from Christ for years. That was the statement as it appeared in the public prints. It had been the talk of all intelligent members of the church— (Rev. Mr Gibb : " Question.'*) — that he had met with, and they looked on it as a statement calculated to hold up the standards of the church to ridicule in the eyes of the world. What he wanted was that a committee be appointed to meet Mr Smith, and find out how he reconciled that statement with his ordination vows. For himself, he would say that if any document had proved such a stumblingblock to him in the way of his salvation his right hand would burn before he submitted to it. Mr Gibb might laugh, but this was a matter that involved the character of every minister who was loyal to the standards, and in bringing it before the presbytery he was not to be laughed down. He was doing his duty to the best of his ability ; and if the presbytery would not stand up loyally to' the standards their church had given forth to the world as her principles, he would go forth and leave it, and the loaves and fishes would not keep him one hour within the pale of the Presbyterian Church. It might be said by some in justification of Mr Smith that he had got more light as he studied 1 the Confession of Faith and the Shorter Catechism, and that before bis ordination he came to see these documents were Scriptural, and that they represented fairly and fully the teachings of the Word of God on the great essentials they treated upon. He tried to put that construction on the statement, but it would not do, for Mr Smith deolared in the Presbytery that he took his place beside Mr Gibb, and that he endorsed every word Mr Will had uttered, and with these facts before him, he (the speaker) could not believe that be had got that light he hoped he had got before he signed the Confession of Faitb. He moved—" That a committee be appointed to confer with Mr Gibson Smith, and ascertain how he oan explain this astounding statement in harmony and in consonance with his ordination vows."

Rev. Mr Gibb : I move that the Presbytery pass on to the next business. Rev. Mr Cameron asked if a member could call the attention of the Presbytery to a matter which they did not think of sufficient importance to consider when the statement was made at their last meeting. Rev R. R M. Sutherland would second Mr Ryley's motion. Rev. J. M. Sutherland held that Mr Ryley was perfectly within his rights. As far as he could gather, however, from the reports of last meeting, he thought Mr Smith was not the only man whose statements should be inquired into.— (Laughter.) There were about half a dozen altogether who should be taken in hand, in fact Le doubted if there was on the other side a sufficient number to constitute a committee.

Rev. Mr Cambhon rose to a point of order and ropeated the question ho had previously put. Seeing that the presbytery was unable to give a reply to ifc, he would move — " That the moderator and the clerk bo instructed to consider this matter and report to the next meeting." The point of order was this: Whether the words used by a member of the committee at one meeting, of which no notice was taken at the time, could at a subsequent meeting be brought under the consideration of the presbytery. Rev. Mr PATBEBON supported Mr Ryley's motion.

Rev. Gibson Smith said that after the discussion he now saw that Mr Ryley intended to base his charges on the newspaper reports. He did not understand that when he received Mr Ryley's note. Rev. Mr Ryley said he would be the last man to take advantage of anybody, and therefore he was quite prepared to postpone the matter until the next meeting, and in the meantime he would give Mr Smith a month's notice. He thought the whole matter was so familiar to Mr Smith's mind that no definite charge was necessary. Rev. Gibson Smith said he was willing to waive his right of notice and face the matter at once, but he wished to let Mr Ryley know that he was not following the proper course. Rev. Mr Gibb asked the moderator if he would be ia order in tabling a motion for next meeting of the presbytery calling attention to a statement that had appeared in one of the daily papers, and which, if correct", showed that the Rev. J. Ryley, of Port Chalmers, had been guilty of a breach of privilege in bringing under the notice of hia congregation the speeches made in the presbytery a month ago by Mr Gibson Smith and himself. He would not allow himself now to characterise this conduct as it deserved, but he certainly thought the presbytery should not refrain from visiting with its censure one who had in the pulpit denounced two of his brethren as guilty of hypoorisy. Rev. Mr Ryley : I will meet Buoh a motion, and I hope Mr Gibb will bring the elder 'who was

! so cowardly — (" Order ") — as not to sign his name to the letters. The Modbbatob remarked that it was a pity that such language was used. He was certainly not used to it. Rev. Mr Gibb said he felt very strongly indeed about this charge Mr Ryley had brought against Mr Smith. Rev. J. M. Sutherland rose to a point of order. Mr Gibb's matter was entirely foreign, and it was not for the presbytery to discuss the differences between Mr Gibb, Mr Ryley, and others. He must say that the mode of conducting their business was degenerating, and he for one was ashamed of the manner in which their meetings were carried on Ho would move tbat the next business be proceeded with. Ri.v. Mr Gibb heconde.d the motion, aud said he would point out tbat he had not said be would table the motion calling attention to Mr Kyli-y's conduct, but ouly anktui whether it would be in ordrr to do so.' He, indeed, felt strongly the indecorum of Mr Ryley's action in censuring in the pulpit any of his brethren, but he would say no more about that at present. They could scarcely hope that the proceedings would be orderly so long as members of presbytery insisted upon charging their brethren with dishonesty. Rev. Mr Ryley held that it was unfair on the part of Mr Gibb to throw out a statement on the floor of the presbytery which he was not prepared to take up and carry out. Rev. Gibson Smith said he would like to know what the motion was of which Mr Ryley had given notice. Rev. Mr Ryley replied that it was this: " That at next meeting I will call the attention of the presbytery to a statement made by Mr Gibson Smith, and which had appeared in the public prints, to the effect that the Confession of Faith and the Shorter Cateohism had prevented hia coming to Christ and his conversion for years." Rev. Mr Bobbie said this matter was plainly one in which one party was against another. It was a very unseemly wrangle that should be allowed to drop. Rev. Mr Ryley said that that appeal would come with good grace from Mr Borrie if he had been at last meeting, but being totally a stranger to what was said and done there he had no right to make such an appeal. Rev. R. R. M. Sutherland remarked that Mr Smith's statement at last meeting certainly struck him as a very curious one. The Cleek rose to a point of order, saying there was no motion before the presbytery. It was then agreed to proceed with the next business. OVEBTUBES. Notice was given of the following overtures for next meeting :■— By Rev. R. R. M. Sutherland:— Whereas recent oiroumstancus have tended to disturb the minds of many in the church with reference to the obligations of honesty in the matter of subRoription to the church's standards, and with reference to the relation of the church to her standards, it is hereby humbly overtured by the Presbytery of Dunedin to the Synod of Otago and Southland that the synod take the premises into serious consideration, in order to suoh action as may become the church as a minister of God for the instruction of her own members and adherents, and as a witness for Christian truth in the land. Further, the presbytery beg respectfully to suggest that the time Is opportune and the call urgent for the synod taking »t least such action us was taken by the synod of 1867 in reference to the church's doctrinal constitution. By Rev. J. Gibson Smith :— • Whereas elders who are elected members of presbytery and synod are understood to represent their respective congregations in these courts of the ohuroh ; whereat according to the present practice such elders are eleoted by their respeotive sessions and hot directly by their congregations; whereas there is no uniform date fixed for the time when these elections shall take place; whereas this present practice affords no sufficient guarantee that the voice of the congregations is heard, with due distinctness in the courts of the ohuroh, and to this cause may be traced in the general membership of the ohuroh a certain languldnees of interest in and lack of sympathy with the proceedings of the church courts; and whereas the defects in the present practice may, in part at least, be obviated by granting to congregations the right of directly electing their representative elderi, and by fixing the date for suoh elections throughout the whole church at some period shortly antecedent to the annual meeting of synod :— it ia hereby humbly overtured by the Presbytery of Dunedin to the venerable the Synod of Otago and Southland to take the premises into consideration, and devise such means for the better representation of congregations in the courts of the church as in its wisdom may seem best.