deacons at Jerusalem, they are merged in the church, as they had no rule, their office being entirely secular. Accordingly in chap. xvi. 4, "when Paul and Timotheous went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, which were ordained by the Apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem," delivering them, of course, to these churches through their elders, as they were called to see that they should be carried into execution.

I hold, then, that no body of men is entitled to claim obedience to their decrees as the Apostles did to theirs. Let Presbyteries be held as a matter of expediency, and as useful for mutual advice, and no one can object to them. But it is the exercise of authority, where conviction is not produced, interfering with one of our great first principles, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind," which we cannot admit. It thus appeared to me there was a complete failure in the argument for Presbytery; and it was from observing the distinct directions given to the Church of Corinth to settle their own matters, to excommunicate an offender and restore him on repentance, without any reference to any extraneous powers, that I was led to adopt congregational principles.

We often find a constitution on paper much

better than it is in actual operation. In France liberty of worship is allowed by the constitution, but in many cases in practice, the law is disregarded. In other cases the defects of a system are counteracted by the good sense and Christian feeling of the administrators of it. Thus, if I am correctly informed, in the United Secession Church when a preacher receives competing calls, he is allowed to judge for himself which he should accept; thus recognising the principle that the path of duty to every man is after due deliberation the ultimate decision of his own mind. But when I speak of Presbytery, I speak of the power inherent in the system; and this I know from painful experience, indeed, it was this experience that led me to examine the subject.

:

The case to which I refer was shortly this: when I was minister of Stirling, a vacancy occurred in the presbytery. A preacher was presented by the patron to the charge. It may be necessary here to mention, that according to Presbyterian forms, a service called serving the edict is appointed to take place in the church of the vacant parish where the presbytery meet, and the parishioners after sermon are asked if they have any objections to the life or doctrine of the presentee. On this occasion one of the parishioners came forward and said, We have;

we are prepared to prove that he is guilty of profane swearing. This service had so far degenerated into a mere form, that the presbytery were taken by surprise. They felt, however, that they were bound to inquire what proof there was to establish the above charge. The presentee aware of what was to take place, had his law agent present, who took a protest and appealed to the synod. The presbytery was thus dragged first to the synod, and next to the general assembly. It was there pleaded that we should either give up such a form, or follow it out, and not insult the common sense of mankind, by asking a question and then virtually say that no reply was to be heard. What is called the moderate party, had the majority. They accordingly enacted that without any inquiry the presbytery should assemble on a certain day and ordain the presentee, according to the rules of the church. Nay, it was farther ordained, that all the presbytery should be present, however much opposed to their convictions, though this was not necessary, and not required on other occasions. This was intended as a punishment to the refractory members, or, as Mr. Rowland Hill expressed it, to stretch their consciences, which were a little too tight. This may be considered as a strong case. But it best illustrates the nature

of the power. The power was there, and it is the existence of such a power I condemn as opposed to some of the first principles of the oracles of God.

How much power is repudiated by some presbyterians of the present day is seen by the following quotation from an interesting publication, containing an account of the Secession and the Relief denominations in Scotland. The Relief body originated in opposition to the law of patronage, and in Mr. Gillespie refusing to take part in a violent settlement. The writer, (the Rev. Dr. Struthers,) here observes, "that those who opposed the settlement at Inverkeithing, held that there are few maxims plainer in the whole system of natural and revealed religion, than that every man has a right to judge for himself in the regulation of his conduct that no man can give a blind and implicit obedience safely to the decrees of any body of men, however venerable their authority that every man must be determined by his own sentiments after a full and impartial inquiry." It is farther added, "that Mr. Gillespie was a very moderate presbyterian, and wished church courts to be rather consultative meetings, where a considerable latitude of opinion was allowed, than legislative and authoritative judicatories." Pp. 202 and 251.

Such is the language of a more enlightened age, and with such sentiments what is at first sight obnoxious in the assumed power of presbytery, is effectually done away.

If I may be permitted to suggest to my presbyterian brethren, what it appears to me would be an improvement on their system, it is this: While I know that many ministers feel the high importance of enquiring not only into the knowledge and the irreproachable conduct, but also the Christian feeling of those who ask for admission into the Church. After the minister and elders are satisfied, would it not be an advantage to name the candidates to the congregation the Sabbath before their admission, allowing any one to state in private to the minister any objection they might have to their reception. There is no likelihood that any objection would be made when there was no ground for it.

Such a plan would tend to promote mutual confidence among the members; and it would prevent any one who might be taunted with having some improper members in their fellowship, from being able to say, I have no blame in this. It lies entirely with the session. I never knew that such a person was received among us.

Adopt the Presbyterian system as a measure of expediency, and no one can object; for it is