necessary to observe, that it originally consisted of those who objected to the terms on which the Presbyterian Church of Scotland was re-established at the Revolution of 1688; they considered that she had fallen from the attainments she had made, especially about the year 1646, and to which she was bound by solemn covenants. While they professed to rejoice in the blessings secured to Britain by the banishment of the house of Stuart, they still regarded the constitution both of Church and State as imperfect, and hence, while they refused to become members of the former, they at the same time declined to recognise the legality of the latter. Their most distinguishing principles, are those which relate to civil government. As these will be fully explained by a member of that communion, it is not necessary to state them in this place. The Secession originated in 1733, and was occasioned by a sermon preached by the Rev. Ebenezer Erskine, in which he strongly inveighed against certain recent acts of the Assembly having reference to the settlement of ministers. For this sermon (preached at the opening of the Synod of Perth and Sterling) he was immediately called to account, but refused to submit to the censure imposed, appealing from the sentence of the Synod to the General Assembly. The result was the secession from the Establishment of Mr. Erskine, together with his brother Ralph of Dunfermline, Mr. Wilson of Perth, and Mr. Moncrief of Abernethy, and the formation of a body known as the Associate Presbytery. Immediately upon constituting themselves in to a Presbytery, they emitted a Testimony, in which they declared that they had not separated from the Church of Scotland, but only seceded from "the prevailing party;" they appealed to the "first free reforming assembly" for an adjudication of their case, they declared their faithful adherence to all the Canons and Confessions of the church, and they particularly and strongly testified against the unsound doctrines, as well as the mal-practices which, for some years previous, had been creeping into the church. This testimony they required all who afterwards joined with them to approve; a step this, eminently injudicious, inasmuch as it was a large addition to the ancient terms of communion-bred among them a spirit of High Church exclusiveness, and was the remote cause of their subsequent unhappy divisions. In 1746 a dispute arose among the Seceders relative to the Burghers' Oath. By this time the Presbytery had reached the dignity of a Synod, numbering about forty ministers, and as many congregations. The point in debate was a clause in the oath required of those admitted to the freedom of the Royal Burghs, to this effect, that they professed the true religion as then professed in the kingdom, and" renounced the Romish religion, called Papistry." One party maintained that the taking this oath was inconsistent with the position occupied by Seccders; the other party held that there was no such incon sistency, inasmuch as the oath was no more than a recognition of the Protestant faith, as held forth in the standards of the Reformed Church of Scotland. The former were called Anti-burghers, and insisted upon making abstinence from the oath a term of communion, the latter were termed Burghers, and opposed any such restriction. The dispute, which was carried with much vehemence and animosity, produced a division of the Synod into two distinct bodies, each claiming the name and the succession of the Associate Synod; but they were popularly known by the names just mentioned. The numbers were about equal at the time of the separation, and the growth of the two bodies in succceding years was very nearly equal. The first effect of this breach was a change in the old Testimony to meet the new condition of things. There were, thus, in 1747, two Secession bodies, each having its own distinctive Testimony. In this state the Secession body continued until 1796, when the Burghers were again divided by a dispute respecting the power of the civil magistrate circa sacra. subject had been in discussion for some years, one party (a very small one) holding that the magistrate was bound not only to profess the true religion, but also to maintain it at the expense and by the power of the state; the other, forming the large majority of the Burgher Synod, approached, in their views, very nearly to what has since been termed the voluntary principle, though they did not abso The or 50. lutely condemn the principle of a civil | Synod, numbering some 400 churches, establishment of religion. Connected and the Old Light Anti-burghers with 40 with this question, was another respecting the binding obligatian of the Solemn League and Covenant; the former party asserting the obligation of these ancient instruments upon posterity, in the strongest manner, the latter admitting it only in a very modified sense. This dispute resulted in the separation of a small party from the Synod, in 1796. They were called the Old Light Burghers; while the majority were known as the New Lights. In 1806, the Anti-burgher branch of the Secession was agitated by the same questions, and a small body, headed by Prof. Bruce, of Whitburn, and the late Dr. Mc Crie, the eminent historian, seceded from the Synod, in consequence of a change in the Testimony on the subject of the covenants, and the magistrate's power, and formed themselves into a body called the Constitutional Presbytery; but the two parties were popularly known as the Old and New Light Anti-burghers. There were thus four distinct bodies of Seceders, all equally strenuous advocates of Presbyterian government and order; all observing the same forms of worship; and the ministry in each branch being equally distinguished for evangelical sentiment. Yet each had its own Testimony, an approbation of which was demanded as a term of communion. To finish this brief sketch: in 1820, the two principle branches of the Secession, viz: the New Light Burghers and Anti-burghers, united themselves into one body under the name of the United Secession Church. The two Synods contained at this time about 150 ministers, each; their reunion took place just seventy years after the breach, and in the same building, Bristo Street Church, Edinburgh, where the division had occurred. Into this union the Burghers entered unanimously; but a small party of the Antiburghers, with Professor Paxton at their head, refused to go with their brethren. These dissenters in 1827, joined the Old Lights, (Dr. McCric's party.) While in 1837, the Old Light Burghers returned to the communion of the Established Church, thus leaving at the present time but two branches of the Secession, viz: the United The earliest missions to this country, were sent out by the Anti-burgher Synod. Having received in 1751, a very earnest application from Rev. Mr. Alexander Craighead, of Octorara, for ministerial aid, the Synod appointed Messrs. James Harne, and John Jamieson, to proceed as missionaries to America. These appointments having not been fulfilled, the Synod in 1752, passed a very stringent "act concerning young men appointed to missions in distant places," to the effect that if unwilling to go wherever the Synod might choose to send, they should no longer be recognised as theological students. In 1760, this act was extended to probationers, and it was enacted that probationers refusing to be sent to North America, by the Synod, should be deprived of their license; and in 1763, it was farther enacted, that no probationer, under appointment to North America, could be proposed as a candidate in the moderation of any call in Scotland. In our day, this would be deemed ecclesiastical tyranny of a high order; still it shows the exceeding earnestness of the Synod to answer the American call for help. In 1752, Messrs. Gellatly and Arnot arrived; the former as a permanent laborer here; the latter being a settled minister in Scotland, and having been sent out for a special purpose, soon returned home. These brethren were charged by the Synod, to constitute themselves into a Presbytery, immediately on their arrival in Pennsylvania, which they did under the name of the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania. In 1753, the Rev. James Proudfit was sent, and after laboring as an itinerant for some years, was settled at Pequa, Pennsylvania. The hands of the Presbytery were strengthened in 1753, by the arrival of Rev. Mr. Matthew Henderson; and 1761, by the arrival of Rev. Messrs. John Mason, (afterwards of New York,) Robert Annon, and John Smart ; in 1762, by that of Rev. William Mar. shall. In 1770, Messrs John Roger and John Smith arrived, with instructions in reference to a subject which shall presently be mentioned. The Burgher Synod received in 1751, a very earnest application for a minister from a number of persons resident in Philadelphia; this request was renewed in the year following, (1752,) with the promise of defraying all the charges of the mission. In consequence of repeated and earnest applications, the Synod resolved, in 1754, upon establishing a mission in America, and they appointed the Rev. Thomas Clark, minister of Ballybay, in Ireland, to proceed to Pennsylvania; but he was prevented from fulfilling the appointment at that time. However, in 1764, Mr. Clark, in company with the major part of his congregation, emigrated to America, and settled the town of Salem, Washington County, New York. He was followed in 1766, by the Rev. Messrs. Telfair and Kinloch. Mr. Telfair became the minister of the Burgher Congregation, in Shippen Street, Philadelphia. Mr. Kinloch, ultimately returned to Scotland, and was settled in Paisley. In 1770, he was called by the Old Church in Cambridge, Washington County, New York, but the call was declined. The Burgher ministers appear to have had no desire to keep up a separate or ganization on this side of the Atlantic; they accordingly united, very soon after their arrival, with their brethren; but the union was disturbed by the refusal of the Scottish Synod to approve of it. In 1776, the old Presbytery of Pennsylvania was divided into two; the one bearing the old name, the other called the Presbytery of New York; this procedure was also condemned by the Scottish Synod, but no attention was paid to their order to rescind the act of division. An attempt was made in 1765, to unite the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania to the Synod of Philadelphia and New York; the minutes of the conference held by the joint committee, of which Dr. Witherspoon and Dr. Mason, were members, are now before the writer, but they are too long for insertion. The chief It may be here stated that the Shippen Street congregation, united with the old Scot's Church, in Spruce street, about the year 1783 or 1784. The ground in Shippen Street, is we believe, still used as a burial ground. points of discussion were the ground and extent of the Gospel offer, the divine right of Presbyterian government, and the qualifications for the ministry. This attempt at union might perhaps have been successful, but for the animosities excited by a foolish publication of the Newcastle Presbytery, against the first secession ministers who came to this country.* The Revolution of 1776, may, in one sense, be regarded as the cause of the union which produced the Associate Reformed Church. The importance of union among the divided Scots' Presbyterian churches in this country, had indeed been felt long before it was actually accomplished. The weakness of the congregations of the several sects showed the need of united effort; and the consciousness of this gradually excited and increased the desire for it, until the independence of the colonies, in the judgment of many, removed the ancient causes of disunion. During the progress of the war, several conventions were held between the members of the Associate and the Reformed Presbyteries, with the view to attain this desirable end. A detailed account of these conventions would be of little use, even if we had ampler materials for giving it than we actually possess. It will suffice to say, that the three Presbyterics sat in Philadelphia in October, 1782, and formed themselves into a Synod, under the name of the Associate Reformed Synod of North America, on a basis consisting of the following articles, viz. : 1. That Jesus Christ died for the elect. 2. That there is an appropriation in the nature of faith. 3. That the Gospel is addressed indiscriminately to sinners of mankind. 4. That the righteousness of Christ is the alone condition of the covenant of works. 5. That civil government originates with God the Creator, and not with Christ the Mediator. 6. The administration of the kingdom of Providence is given into the hand of Jesus Christ the Mediator; and magistracy, the ordinance appointed by the Moral * For fuller details, see McKerrow's History, vol. i. Governor of the world to be the prop of civil order among men, as well as other things, is rendered subservient by the Mediator to the welfare of his spiritual kingdom, the Church, and has sanctified the use of it and of every common benefit, through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. 7. That the law of nature and the moral law revealed in the Scriptures are substantially the same, although the latter expresses the will of God more evidently and clearly than the former, and therefore magistrates among Christians ought to be regulated by the general directory of the Word as to the execution of their office. 8. That the qualifications of justice, veracity, &c. required in the law of nature for the being of a magistrate, are also more explicitly revealed as necessary in the Holy Scriptures. But a religious test, any further than an oath of fidelity, can never be essentially necessary for the being of a magistrate, except where the people make it a condition of government. 9. That both parties when united shall adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Catechisms, the Directory for Worship, and propositions concerning church government. 10. That they shall claim the full exercise of church discipline without dependence upon foreign judicatories. | benefits, i. e. whether the common blessings of life were derived to mankind in virtue of Christ's mediation, or were merely bestowed by God as Creator. But a calm and candid perusal of the pamphlets begotten by this controversy-once deemed a very vital one-will convince any one that it was a dispute about words rather than things. Most of the articles, it wil be perceived, relate to the subject of magistracy, and this was the grand topic of difference, viz. the essential qualifications of the civil magistrate, and the extent of his power circa sacra. On these last points, it must be confessed, that the language of the basis is by no means clear, yet it is perhaps as much so as its authors intended, and as much so as the subject admits. It should be borne in mind that each of these bodies held to the Westminster Confession, their catechisms were the same, their government, forms of worship and mode of administering the sacraments identical; their views of Gospel doctrine, and even the style of preaching prevalent among them, were quite similar. Their differences had grown out of acts of discipline, rather than points of doctrine. Here it may not be out of place to give some brief notices of the leading persons who were active in effecting this union. The Rev. Thomas Clark was one. Perhaps no minister of his day was " in labors more abundant" than he; and many inter Upon this basis all the members of the Reformed Presbytery, and all the Asso-esting traditions are still in existence resciate ministers, with the exception of two members of the Presbytery of Pennsylvania, (Messrs. Marshall and Clarkson,) united. A small minority of the people in the two communions also declined to enter into it. From these minorities have sprung the Covenanter denomination on the one hand, and the Associate on the other. The limits of this article preclude any extended comment upon this basis; it will be sufficient to observe, that at this distance of time it is difficult to discover the reason for inserting some of its articles. In reference to the extent of the atonement, the nature of faith, and the extent of the Gospel offer, there had never been any difference of opinion among these parties; and it is therefore somewhat surprising that these topics are mentioned. There had been a dispute about common pecting him in various parts of the country. His public ministrations were marked by some eccentricities, so that he usually attracted large crowds to hear him. But he was a man eninently given to prayer, laborious, zealous, of a most catholic spirit, and he had many seals of his min istry, not only by his labors in the pulpit. but also by his private faithfulness, with all sorts of persons, at home and abroad. He longed for the salvation of souls; in season and out of season, he made full proof of his ministry. After a most laborious ministry of about thirty years (in this country,) he died suddenly at Long Cane, in South Carolina, in 1796. He was the founder and first minister of the church at Salem, New York. The Rev. Dr. John Mason, of New York, was one of the most accomplished 1 |