adopted by each synod, who agreed to meet as one body at four o'clock,
The synod appointed their commission to meet such committee as the synod of New York might name, to prepare the terms of union. This latter synod accordingly, in September, 1756, appointed a committee to meet the commission of the synod of Philadelphia in 1757.
When this joint committee met, "the commissioners of the Philadelphia synod declared for themselves, and doubted not but their synod would also readily declare that they do not look upon the protest as the act of their body nor adopt it as such." And as there was an agreement on all other points formerly proposed as necessary to an union, it was agreed to propose to their respective synods to have their next meeting at the same time and place. This proposal was acceded to on both sides, and the commissions of the two synods were directed to meet in Philadelphia the Monday before the day appointed for the meeting of the synods in order "to prepare matters for their happy union." The two synods accordingly met in Philadelphia in 1758. The commissions reported the plan of union which was unanimously adopted by each synod, who agreed to meet as one body at four o'clock, May 29, 1758. The plan of union was then read over in joint meeting and unanimously approved, and is as follows:
"The synods of New York and Philadelphia, taking into serious consideration the present divided state of the presbyterian church in this land, and being deeply sensible that the division of the church tends to weaken its interests, to dishonour religion, and consequently its glorious author; to render government and discipline ineffectual, and, finally, to dissolve its very frame; and, being desirous to pursue such measures as may most tend to the glory of God, and the establishment and edification of his people, do judge it to be our indispensable duty to study the things that make for peace, and to endeavour the healing of that breach which has for some time existed among us, that so its hurtful consequences may not extend to posterity, that all occasion of reproach upon our society may be removed, and that we may carry on the great designs of religion to better
advantage than we can do in a divided state. And since both synods continue to profess the same principles of faith, and adhere to the same form of worship, government, and discipline, there is the greater reason to endeavour to compromise the differences which were agitated many years ago, with too great warmth and animosity, and unite in one body.
"For which end, and that no jealousies or grounds of alienation may remain, and also to prevent future breaches of like nature, we agree to unite in one body, under the name of the synod of New York and Philadelphia, on the following plan:
"1. Both synods having always approved and received the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, as an orthodox and excellent system of Christian doctrine, founded on the word of God, we do still receive the same as the profession of our faith, and also adhere to the plan of worship, government, and discipline, contained in the Westminster Directory, strictly enjoining it on all our members, and probationers for the ministry, that they preach and teach according to the form of sound words in said Confession and Catechisms, and avoid and oppose all errors contrary thereto.
"2. That when any matter is determined by a major vote, every member shall either actively concur with, or passively submit to, such determination; or, if his conscience permit him to do neither, he shall, after sufficient liberty modestly to reason and remonstrate, peaceably withdraw from our communion, without attempting to make any schism; provided always, that this shall be understood to extend only to such determinations as the body shall judge indispensable in doctrine, or presbyterian government.
"3. That any member or members, for the exoneration of his or their conscience before God, have a right to protest against any act or procedure of our highest judicature, because there is no further appeal to another for
redress; and to require that such protestation be recorded in their minutes. And as such a protest is a solemn appeal from the bar of the judicature, no member is liable to prosecution on account of his protesting. Provided always, that it shall be considered irregular and unlawful to enter any protest against any member or members; to protest facts or accusations instead of proving them, unless a fair trial be refused, even by the highest judicature. And it is agreed, that such protestations are only to be entered against the public acts, judgments, or determinations, of the judicature with which the protester's conscience is offended.
"4. As the protestation entered in the synod of Philadelphia, Anno Domini, 1741, has been apprehended to have been approved and received by an act of the synod, and on that account was judged a sufficient obstacle to an union, the said synod declare that they never judicially adopted the said protestation, nor do account it a synodical act; but that it is to be considered as the act of those only who subscribed it; and therefore cannot, in its nature, be a valid objection to the union of the two synods, especially considering that a very great majority of both synods have become members since the said protestation was entered.
"5. That it shall be esteemed and treated as a censurable evil to accuse any member of heterodoxy, insufficiency, or immorality, in a calumniating manner, or otherwise than by private brotherly admonition, or by a regular process according to our known rules of judicial trial in cases of scandal. And it shall be considered in the same view if any presbytery appoint supplies within the bounds of another presbytery without their concurrence; or if any member officiate in another's congregation without asking and obtaining his consent, or the session's in case the minister be absent. Yet it shall be esteemed unbrotherly for any one, in ordinary circumstances, to refuse his consent to a regular member when it is requested.
"6. That no presbytery shall license or ordain to the work of the ministry any candidate, until he give them competent satisfaction as to his learning, and experimental acquaintance with religion, skill in divinity and cases of conscience, and declare his acceptance of the Westminster Confession and Catechisms as the confession of his faith, and promise subjection to the presbyterian plan of government in the Westminster Directory.
"7. The synods declare it is their earnest desire that a complete union may be obtained as soon as possible, and agree that the united synods shall model the several presbyteries as shall appear to them most expedient. Provided, nevertheless, that presbyteries where an alteration does not appear to be for edification, continue in their present form. As to divided congregations, it is agreed that such as have settled ministers on both sides be allowed to continue as they are; that where those of one side have a settled minister, the other, being vacant, may join with the settled minister, if a majority choose to do so; that where both sides are vacant they may be at liberty to unite together.
"8. As the late religious appearances occasioned much speculation and debate, the members of the synod of New York, in order to prevent any misapprehensions, declare their adherence to their former sentiments, in favour of them, that a blessed work of God's holy Spirit in the conversion of numbers was then carried on; and for the satisfaction of all concerned, this united synod agree in declaring, that as all mankind are naturally dead in trespasses and sins, an entire change of heart and life is necessary to make them meet for the service and enjoyment of God; that such a change can be only effected by the powerful operations of the Divine Spirit, that when sinners are made sensible of their lost condition and absolute inability to recover themselves, are enlightened in the knowledge of Christ, and convinced of his ability and willingness to save; and, upon gospel encouragements, do choose him for their Saviour; and renouncing their own righteousness in point of merit, depend upon his imputed righteousness for
justification before God; and on his wisdom and strength for guidance and support; when upon these apprehensions and exercises their souls are comforted, notwithstanding their past guilt, and rejoice in God, through Jesus Christ; when they hate and bewail their sins of heart and life, delight in the laws of God without exception, reverently and diligently attend his ordinances, become humble and self-denied, and make it the business of their life to please and glorify God and to do good to their fellow-men—this is to be acknowledged as a gracious work of God, even though it should be attended with unusual bodily commotions, or some more exceptionable circumstances, by means of infirmity, temptations, or remaining corruptions. And wherever religious appearances are attended with the good effects above mentioned, we desire to rejoice in and to thank God for them.
"But, on the other hand, when persons seeming to be under a religious concern, imagine that they have visions of the human nature of Jesus Christ, or hear voices, or see external lights, or have faintings and convulsion-like fits, and on the account of these, judge themselves to be truly converted, though they have not the scriptural characters of a work of God above described, we believe such persons to be under a dangerous delusion; and we testify our utter disapprobation of such a delusion, wherever it attends any religious appearances in any church or time.
"Now as both synods are agreed in their sentiments concerning the nature of a work of grace, and declare their desire and purpose to promote it, different judgments respecting particular matters of facts ought not to prevent their union; especially as many of the present members have entered into the ministry, since the time of the aforesaid religious appearances.
"Upon the whole, as the design of our union is the advancement of the Mediator's kingdom, and as the wise and faithful discharge of the ministerial functions is the principal appointed means for that glorious end; we judge that this is a proper occasion to manifest our sincere intention
unitedly to exert ourselves to fulfil the ministry we have received of the Lord Jesus. Accordingly we unanimously declare our serious and fixed resolution, by divine aid, to take heed to ourselves that our hearts be upright, our discourse edifying, and our lives exemplary for purity and godliness; to take heed to our doctrine that it be not only orthodox, but evangelical and spiritual, tending to awaken the secure to a suitable concern for their salvation, and to instruct and encourage sincere Christians; thus commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God; to cultivate peace and harmony among ourselves, and to strengthen each other's hands in promoting the knowledge of divine truth, and in diffusing the savour of piety among our people.
"Finally, we earnestly recommend it to all under our care, that instead of indulging a contentious disposition, they would love each other with a pure heart fervently, as brethren who profess subjection to the same Lord, adhere to the same faith, worship, and government, and entertain the same hope of glory. And we desire that they would improve the present union for their mutual edification, combine to strengthen the common interests of religion, and go hand in hand in the path of life; which we pray the God of all grace would please to effect, for Christ's sake. AMEN."
This noble declaration is for our church, what the declaration of independence is for our country. It is a promulgation of first principles; a setting forth of our faith, order, and religion, as an answer to those who question us. It is the foundation of our ecclesiastical compact, the bond of our union. Those who adhere to the principles here laid down, are entitled to a standing in our church; those who desert them, desert not merely the faith but the religion of our fathers, and have no right to their name or their heritage. It is with grateful exultation we read that this declaration was unanimously adopted, that every member of the united synod set his hand to this testimony in behalf of truth, order, and evangelical religion. If our church will faithfully bear up this standard, then shall she look forth as the
morning; then shall she arise and shine, and the glory of the Lord shall be seen upon her.
CHAPTER VII
SYNOD OF NEW YORK AND PHILADELPHIA, 1758–88
Preliminary statements.—General review of the acts of the synod.—I. Its missionary operations.—II. Its efforts in behalf of education.—III. Its standard of doctrine.—IV. Its discipline.—Its exercise of ordinary powers in the formation of new presbyteries; in establishing general rules and deciding questions of conscience; in the general supervision of the church; in the decision of appeals and references.—V. Its exercise of extraordinary powers, in acting by a commission; in the exercise of presbyterial powers; in investing committees with synodical authority.—VI. The synod's intercourse with other churches.—VII. Its conduct in reference to the revolutionary war.—VIII. Formation of the new constitution.—IX. State of the church during the existence of this synod.
THE number of ministers in connexion with our church at the time of the union of the two synods, was not far from one hundred. Among these were some of the most distinguished men who have ever adorned our annals. The two Tennents, Richard Treat, Francis Alison, Alexander McDowell, John Pierson, David Bostwick, Samuel Davies, Samuel Finley, John Roan, Matthew Wilson, John Miller, John Blair, Elihu Spencer, George Duffield, Robert. Smith, John Rodgers, and others equally prominent, either for learning or piety, were then in the vigour of their days. To these were added in succeeding years, men no less distinguished for talents or usefulness. In 1759, Mr. John Ewing took his seat as a member of synod. This gentleman was pastor of the first presbyterian church in Philadelphia, and provost of the university of Pennsylvania. "In all the branches of science usually taught in seminaries of learning, more particularly in mathematics, astronomy, and every branch of natural philosophy; in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, and in logic, metaphysics, and moral philosophy, he was
probably one of the most accurate and profound scholars which this country can boast of having reared." In 1760, we find the names of James Latta, Alexander McWhorter, and William Kirkpatrick. The first mentioned is the ancestor of the family which has furnished so many ministers to our church. The second was long the excellent pastor of the church in Newark, New Jersey; and the third, a member of the presbytery of New Brunswick, was distinguished for his piety and usefulness. In 1761, John Strain became a member of the synod, and is still remembered as one of the most eloquent and impressive ministers our church has ever produced. In 1763, we find the name of James Waddell, who was to the Virginia church in point of eloquence, what Patrick Henry was to the Virginia bar. In 1765, the presbytery of Hanover reported the ordination of David Rice, a man of distinguished usefulness in the southern church. In 1766, the names of Robert Cooper and Samuel Blair were reported. The former was a prominent and pious member of the presbytery of Donegal, and the latter, a son of the Rev. Samuel Blair so distinguished for his piety and usefulness at an earlier period of our history, at the age of twenty-eight or thirty years, he was elected president of Princeton College, though he declined the appointment, and soon sank into a state of health which made the residue of his life a protracted disease. In 1769, John McCreary and Joseph Smith were added to the roll. Both of these were distinguished men. The latter, preeminent for piety and energy, was one of the fathers of our church in Western Pennsylvania. The same year the Rev. Dr. Witherspoon, who had already obtained in Scotland, a high reputation as the able advocate of evangelical doctrine, was received as a member of the synod, and entered upon that course of active usefulness in the service of his adopted church and country, which has rendered his name so conspicuous in our civil and ecclesiastical history. The same year Dr. Sproat was received from the Association of New Haven county, Connecticut, having been called to take charge of the second presbyterian church in Philadelphia. In 1771, the name of John Woodhull, so long the faithful pastor of the church in Freehold, New Jersey, first occurs on the records. This enumeration would become
tedious if further continued. It may, therefore, be briefly stated, that the names of Robert Davidson in 1774, of James Power and John McMillan, apostles of the west, and of John McKnight in 1777, of Thaddeus Dodd and James Armstrong in 1778, of Samuel Stanhope Smith in 1779, of James Hall in 1782, of Moses Hoge in 1786, occur for the first time on the minutes. To the preceding list there are doubtless many names which ought to be added, whose omission is to be attributed to the writer's limited means of information. In 1787, the Rev. Dr. Nesbit, the learned president of Dickinson college, was received as a member of synod; and in the same year the venerable Dr. Green first took his seat in our highest judicatory, in whose counsels for a long succession of years he has been so eminently influential. The whole number of accessions to the synod during this period of thirty years, was considerably more than two hundred. The deaths and removals reported to the synod were about one hundred; in many cases, however, the decease of members is not recorded in the synodical minutes.
The synod was soon called to weep over the graves of some of its most distinguished members. In 1760, the death of "that pious, zealous saint of God," the Rev. George Gillespie, is recorded. He died at an advanced age, having been received by the presbytery of Philadelphia, as a licentiate of the presbytery of Glasgow, in 1712. In 1761, the synod heard of the decease of the eloquent, devoted, and accomplished Davies, at the early age of thirtysix. "Heu quam exiguum vitae curriculum! Corpore fuit eximio; gestu liberali, placido, augusto. Ingenii nitore, morum integritate, munificentia, facilitate inter paucos illustris. Rei literariae peritus; theologus promptus, perspicax. In rostris, per eloquium blandum, mellitum, vehemens simul, et perstringens, nulli secundus. Scriptor ornatus, sublimis, disertus. Praesertim vero pietate, ardente in Deum zelo et religione spectandus." In 1766, Davies was followed to the grave by Dr. Samuel Finley, his scarcely less distinguished successor in the presidency of Princeton College. The preceding year the synod were informed that the Rev. Gilbert Tennent had closed his long, laborious, and eminently successful ministry. In 1768, the
death of the Rev. Adam Boyd was reported. He was ordained by the presbytery of Newcastle, in 1724, and was an indefatigable and faithful pastor of the church of Octarara, and of two neighbouring congregations. From this time the older members of the synod disappear in rapid succession. In 1771, there were seven deaths reported, including that of the excellent Mr. Pierson; in 1772, four, including that of Mr. John Blair; in 1776, Mr. John Roan; in 1777, Mr. William Tennent; in 1779, Dr. Richard Treat, of Abington; in 1780, Dr. Francis Alison: so that but few of the original members of this synod were now remaining.
The following history of this synod, from the design of this work, and from the nature of the materials at the command of the writer, must be in a great measure purely ecclesiastical. That is, it must be in a good degree confined to a classification of the acts of the synod, with a view to exhibit its character as an ecclesiastical body. Such a classification, though it may not be without its use, cannot be expected to possess the interest which belongs to the history of revivals, or of polemical discussions.
MISSIONARY OPERATIONS OF THE SYNOD
With a field so extensive as that embraced within the bounds of the synod of New York and Philadelphia, and which was rapidly filling up with inhabitants, the burden of missionary labour which devolved upon that body was very heavy. In 1759, Messrs. Kirkpatrick, McWhorter, Latta, and Lewis, were sent to Virginia, to act under the direction of the presbytery of Hanover. Mr. John Brainerd, then the pastor of the church of Newark, applied to the synod for advice, whether he should leave his pastoral charge and devote himself anew to the service of the Indians. The synod unanimously advised him to remove, and promised him the interest of the Indian fund in the hands of the trustees of the college of New Jersey, which was at the disposal of the synod. Messrs. McKnight, Beatty, and Latta, also were directed to visit the Indians in the course of the summer. In 1760,
Messrs. Duffield and Mills were sent to Virginia; and a general collection for the support of the Indian mission was ordered to be taken up. With the view of explaining the necessity for this collection, the synod state that in consequence of the application of certain pious ministers, the society in Scotland for propagating Christian knowledge had made an annual grant, which was appropriated, first to David Brainerd, and afterwards to his brother John; who had continued to labour among the Indians for seven or eight years. In consequence of the war he had relinquished his mission and settled in Newark; but when the province of New Jersey, having reserved four thousand acres of land for the Indians, requested him, by its governor, to resume his mission, he had upon the advice of the synod, given up his comfortable settlement and recommenced his missionary labours. His support, and that of the Indian school, therefore, now rested on the synod, who called on all the churches to make a collection and to send the proceeds to Mr. Jonathan Sergeant, near Princeton. President Davies was also directed to write to the society in Scotland, and request them to renew their grant.
In 1761, an overture was made by Mr. Kirkpatrick, to send a missionary to the Oneida Indians, the importance of which the synod acknowledged, but as no one could then be found to undertake the service, and as the necessary funds were not at command, the overture was declined. The synod renewed their promises to support Mr. Brainerd, and ordered a new collection for that purpose. Numerous applications were, the same year, presented for missionaries to North Carolina.
In 1762, a new order was made respecting the Indian mission; the money to be paid to the Rev. Mr. Ewing, in Philadelphia, or to Mr. Jonathan Sergeant, Princeton. Messrs. Enoch Green and William Tennent, jun'r. were directed to serve each six months under the direction of the presbytery of Hanover.4
In 1763, a new general collection was ordered for the Indian mission, and thirty pounds appropriated to the support of the school master. Mr. Occam, the missionary among the Oneida Indians, in the service of the British society, was taken under the care of the synod, and sixty-five pounds appropriated to his use. The same year a request was presented from the corporation of the Widows' Fund, that some missionaries might be sent to the frontier settlements, to ascertain where new congregations were forming, and what could be done to promote the spread of the gospel among them, and the neighbouring Indians. The board, which held in trust a fund received from the general assembly in Scotland, for propagating the gospel in this country, offered to pay the necessary expenses of the proposed mission. In consequence of this application the synod appointed Messrs. Beatty and Brainerd to go to the west, and to report to the board the result of their researches. Mr. Green was appointed to act as a missionary within the bounds of the presbyteries of Lewes and Newcastle, and Mr. William Tennent and Jacob Ker within those of Hanover.2 A committee was also appointed to confer with the corporation of the Widows' Fund with regard to a plan for missionary operations.
It appears from the minutes for 1764, that the mission of Messrs. Beatty and Brainerd to the frontiers, was frustrated by the breaking out of the Indian war. A new collection was ordered for the support of Mr. Brainerd, and the interest of the fund in the hands of the trustees of New Jersey college was appropriated to his use.5 The same year the synod, considering the state of many congregations in the south, particularly in North Carolina, and the great importance of having those congregations properly organized, appointed the Rev. Elihu Spencer, and Alexander McWhorter, as their missionaries for that purpose; that they might form societies, help them to adjust their bounds, ordain elders, administer sealing ordinances, instruct the people in discipline, and finally direct them in their conduct, particularly in what manner they should proceed to obtain the stated ministry. They were further directed to assure the people that the synod had their interests
much at heart, and would send them candidates and supplies to the utmost of their power. This was just such a mission as that on which Timothy and Titus were sent, that they might "set in order the things that were wanting, and ordain elders in every city." It would have been perfectly consistent with our system had Messrs. Spencer and McWhorter been authorized to ordain preaching, as well as ruling presbyters, had there been any probability of finding suitable candidates for the sacred office.
In 1765, Messrs. Nathan Ker, George Duffield, William Ramsay, David Caldwell, James Latta, and Robert McMurdie, were appointed to labour each six months in North Carolina. A collection was again ordered for the Indian mission.3
In 1766, it was ordered that every member of the synod should take subscriptions, or make collections, in his congregation, and in the neighbouring vacancies, to raise a fund for the propagation of the gospel among the destitute. It was also resolved to sustain the school under Mr. Brainerd. The synod appointed Messrs. Lewis, Caldwell, Chesnut, and Bay, to perform missionary duty at the south, and authorized Mr. C. T. Smith, to itinerate in the same quarter.5 Messrs. Beatty and Duffield were appointed missionaries to the frontiers, and directed to report to the corporation of the Widows' Fund.
In 1767, a report was made of the result of the collections of the preceding year, for sending the gospel to the poor, when it was found that only £112 had been received. The synod expressed their great sorrow that so many of their members had paid so little regard to the authority of synod, enjoining a liberality for so pious and important a purpose. The presbytery of New York brought in an overture on the subject of missions, which was amended and adopted. This overture provided that there should be an annual collection taken up in every congregation; that every presbytery should appoint a treasurer to receive and transmit the monies thus obtained; that the synod
should appoint a general treasurer to whom all these presbyterial collections should be sent; and that every year a full account of all receipts and disbursements should be printed and sent down among the churches. Mr. Richard Treat was appointed the synodical treasurer under this plan. Thirty pounds were appropriated to the support of Mr. Brainerd's school, and twenty as an addition to his salary. A committee appointed to confer with the corporation of the Widows' Fund, reported, "that, agreeably to an act of the general assembly of the church of Scotland, passed in the year ——, the money raised by collections in the several congregations of that church shall be disposed of by the charitable corporation, in conjunction with a committee of the united synod of New York and Philadelphia, for the support and relief of such ministers as are, or shall hereafter be called to preach the everlasting gospel among the benighted Indians, or to such congregations as cannot afford them maintenance." The committee added, they had not been able to ascertain the sum which was at the joint disposal of the corporation and the synod; another committee was, therefore, appointed to ascertain the sum, and to assist in its appropriation.2 A petition was presented from eight congregations in North Carolina, that Mr. Spencer, Lewis, McWhorter, or James Caldwell, might be sent to settle among them, offering to contribute a hundred and sixty pounds to the support of either of them. These gentlemen, however, all declined the invitation. Petitions for supplies were at the same time received from twenty-one places in Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia. The synod appointed Messrs. Bay, Potter, Alexander, McCreary, James Latta, jun'r, Anderson, and Jackson, to visit those congregations, and spend at least six months each in their service. Messrs. Beatty and Duffield reported that they visited the frontiers, agreeably to the directions of the last synod, and found a great number of people exceedingly desirous of being formed into congregations, and ready to do all that they could to support the gospel, though they were in very distressing circumstances, in consequence of the calamities of the late war. They also visited the Indians upon the Muskingum, a hundred and thirty miles beyond Fort Pitt, whom they found
anxious to receive religious instruction. The synod appointed Messrs. Brainerd and Cooper to visit the frontiers, and to spend three months among the Indians above-mentioned.2 The same year Dr. Rodgers was sent on a mission of six weeks to Albany and the neighbouring places.
In 1768, Messrs. Brainerd and Cooper reported, that in consequence of the discouraging accounts brought by the Indian interpreter, they had not performed the mission assigned them by the last synod. The usual appropriations were made for Mr. Brainerd's mission; a committee consisting of Dr. Alison, Messrs. Reed, Treat, Ewing, W. Tennent, Rodgers, Brainerd, McWhorter, Caldwell, Dr. Williamson, Charles Thompson, and the moderator, John Blair, was appointed to meet at Elizabethtown, to prepare a general plan for propagating the gospel among the Indians. The committee appointed to confer with the corporation of the Widows' Fund, respecting the money in their hands received from Scotland, and subject to the disposition of the synod, reported that they proposed several questions to the board and had received the following answer. "That it is the sense of this board, that though a corporate body may not, in the management of its affairs, legally associate with others not in membership, yet in regard to the limitation of the general assembly of the church of Scotland, we judge it our duty to consult with the committee, and mutually to propose and agree with one another in the uses to which the money is to be applied; provided always, that if the synod do not appoint a committee, or if that committee do not attend upon the corporation, it shall not be hindered to proceed to business;" and "that the interest of seven hundred pounds sterling is to be disposed of yearly for the time to come, if there be occasion for it, with the advice and consent of the synod." These answers were not deemed satisfactory, as they did not state what sum had been received from the general assembly, nor what use the board had made of it since it came into their hands. Objection was also taken to the claim of the board of a right to dispose of the money without the concurrence of the synod, in case of a failure in the appointment of a committee. The synod, therefore, appointed
another committee to endeavour to get this matter cleared up. Renewed supplications for supplies were presented from the frontiers of Pennsylvania, from Virginia, North and South Carolina; and the synod appointed Messrs. Bay, Tate, Anderson, Jackson, and McCreary, for missionary service in these several places.2
In 1769, the usual appropriations were made for Mr. Brainerd. Messrs. John Harris, John Clark, Jeremiah Halsey, James Latta, John Elmore, Thomas Lewis, Hezekiah James Balch, and James Anderson, were appointed as missionaries to the south. Dr. Alison, Messrs. Treat, Ewing, and Sproat, were appointed a committee to examine the credentials and to grant certificates to any licentiates or ministers from New England, who might offer themselves as missionaries to the southern provinces. The synod engaged to pay their missionaries at the rate of thirty shillings for every sabbath they preached. The presbytery of New York was directed to supply the poor vacancies on the frontiers of New Jersey and New York ten sabbaths; and the presbytery of Donegal those in Pennsylvania ten sabbaths.
In 1770, numerous applications for supplies were presented from Virginia and Carolina, and Messrs. Lewis, Roe, Close, and McCreary, were appointed to labour in those provinces. Mr. Patrick Alison was sent to Virginia, and Mr. Nathan Niles, a licentiate from Massachusetts, was directed to labour during the summer on the western frontiers of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and to spend the winter in Carolina. The synod agreed to grant the presbyteries of New York and Donegal each fifteen pounds towards the payment of supplies for the frontiers.
In 1771, the usual appropriations were made for the support of Mr. Brainerd's mission. Messrs. James Finley, Samson Smith, Schenck, Alexander Miller, Eliphalet Ball, Elam Potter, Joseph Potter, and John McCreary, were appointed as missionaries to the south and west. Fifteen pounds were again appropriated to each of the presbyteries of New York
and Donegal for supplies. The committee of conference with the corporation of the widows' fund, reported that they had made a settlement with the board, which the synod subsequently sanctioned. The corporation agreed to pay the synod annually thirty pounds, to be appropriated to the aid of poor ministers, or to the erection of churches, or the payment of missionaries within the provinces of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Maryland. In consideration of this annual sum the synod agreed to acquiesce in and approve of such application of the money entrusted by the Scotch church for the use of the widows' fund, and all such other pious uses as have hitherto been made of it by the corporation. The synod agreed never to break in upon the capital whence the said thirty pounds were to arise by way of interest; but if found necessary, the board were to have the right to use the capital in whole or in part. This, however, was not to be done unless the annuities due from the corporation could not otherwise be paid. The synod was to receive the interest of the remaining portion of the fund at the rate of five per centum, should the corporation at any time find it necessary to use a part of the capital. It was finally agreed, that this arrangement should put an end to all debates between the synod and the board in reference to this matter. It does not appear that the synod ever succeeded in finding out the sum originally received from Scotland; or the uses to which it had hitherto been applied. In this minute the board say they considered the fund as equal to six hundred pounds, which, as nothing is said to the contrary, probably means pounds currency, whereas three years before the sum was seven hundred pounds sterling. It is evident the corporation considered themselves as having the legal disposal of the money, and as the synod acquiesced in their measures, it is to be presumed that this was acknowledged on their part. The funds of the corporation were so much injured by the depreciation of money during the revolutionary war, that in 1782, the synod agreed to remit this fund to them to be applied to the ends of their institution.
In 1772, a new general collection was ordered; and it was directed that the monies thus raised should be appropriated for the support of missionaries, the purchase and distribution of useful books, and the promotion of the gospel among the Indians. A committee was appointed in New York and Philadelphia, to procure books and distribute them to the several presbyteries. The books to be purchased were Bibles, Westminster Confession of Faith, Vincent's Catechism, Doddridge's Rise and Progress of Religion, Alleine's Alarm, A compassionate Address to the Christian world, Watts' Divine Songs, and the Assembly's Catechism. A pastoral letter was addressed to the churches urging the importance of the ends to be answered by the proposed collection upon their attention. Missionary appointments were, as usual, made for the south and west.
In 1773, it was reported that Mr. Brainerd's school was discontinued the preceding year for want of a teacher; and forty-three pounds were appropriated towards his support. Twenty pounds were assigned to each of the committees in Philadelphia and New York for the purchase of books; and the presbytery of New York were allowed to appropriate fifty pounds of the money collected within their bounds towards rebuilding the presbyterian church in the Island of Saba. The presbytery of Newcastle were appointed to send certain missionaries to the south, whose credentials were to be signed by the moderator of the synod.
In 1774, the usual appropriations were made for Mr. Brainerd. Dr. Rodgers, Mr. McWhorter, and Mr. Caldwell, were appointed to visit the northern part of New York for the purpose of preaching and organizing congregations. Urgent applications for supplies were received from Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina. A representation was also presented to the synod from the Rev. Dr. Ezra Stiles and the Rev. Samuel Hopkins, respecting a mission to Africa, which brought up the subject of slavery. A committee was appointed to prepare an overture on these subjects and report to the synod. The first part of the report of this committee was adopted as follows: "The
synod is very happy to have an opportunity to express their readiness to concur with and assist in a mission to the African tribes, and especially where so many circumstances concur, as in the present case, to intimate that it is the will of God, and to encourage us to hope for success. We assure the gentlemen aforesaid, we are ready to do all that is proper for us in our station for their encouragement and assistance." The part of the report which related to slavery was deferred to the next meeting of the synod. As nothing is said of the African mission after this, it is presumed that the war, which commenced the following year, prevented the plan's being carried into effect. Seven missionaries were sent to the south and west, and the several presbyteries were urged to render what further assistance they could.2
In 1775, Messrs. Brooks, Debow, Keith, Hunter, and Phithian, were appointed as missionaries to the south and west; and Messrs. Lewis and Ker to Albany, Charlotte, and Tryon counties, in the province of New York. Mr. Miller was directed to supply every fifth Sabbath until the next synod, in the vacancies in the neighbourhood of Schenectady.
In 1776, Messrs. McGill, White, and Carmichael, were appointed missionaries to the western part of Pennsylvania, and the presbyteries of Newcastle and Philadelphia were urged to send missionaries to the south. Nothing is said of the mission under Mr. Brainerd for several years, except the annual order that he should be paid the interest of the three hundred pounds belonging to the synod in the hands of the trustees of the college of New Jersey.
In 1777, a society of Highland Scots at Southerland, presented a petition to the synod requesting a supply of books, and that the Rev. Mr. McFarquhar might be appointed to preach and administer gospel ordinances among them. And the synod ordered a collection of books to be made for them, and appointed Mr. McFarquhar to supply them for some time.
In 1778, there was a very thinly attended meeting of the synod at Bedminster, Somerset county, New Jersey. The minutes contain no record in relation to missions.
In 1779, Dr. Witherspoon, the treasurer of the synod, reported that he had received the legacy left by the Rev. Diodati Johnson of Connecticut, for the aid of missions to the southern colonies. From a subsequent minute it appears that the money received was two hundred and eighty seven pounds and a fraction.5 A member of the presbytery of Hanover, requested that "some missionaries might be sent to the state of Virginia to preach the gospel, and especially that a few ministers of genius, prudence, and address, might spend some considerable time in attempting to form the people into regular congregations under the discipline and government of the Presbyterian Church, and to settle among them, and undertake the education of youth; representing, there appears at present, in many parts of that state, a very favourable disposition towards religion in general, and towards the presbyterian church in particular; that it is greatly for the interest of the church to pay particular attention to the southern and western parts of this continent; that congregations which may be formed there will be permanent and fixed, whereas the continual migration of the inhabitants in our interior congregations diminishes their importance and threatens their dissolution; that it is not desirable nor to be expected that that extensive country should continue long without some form of religion; that this synod has now an opportunity of promoting the interests of religion extensively, which in a few years may be utterly lost by the prevalence and preoccupancy of many ignorant and irregular sectaries." The synod, in consequence of this representation, earnestly recommended it to all their presbyteries, to turn their attention to this subject as peculiarly interesting and important.
During the years 1780, 81, and 82, the synod was able to do but little in the service of missions. In 1783, it was ordered that every member of the synod "shall use his utmost influence in the congregation under his inspection, and
in the vacancies contiguous to it, to raise contributions for the purchase of Bibles for distribution among the poor, and that Drs. Ewing and Sproat, and Mr. Duffield be a committee to receive such contributions, to purchase Bibles, and to send them to the several members of the synod, who, in conjunction with their respective sessions, shall distribute them." This subject was afterwards repeatedly urged upon the attention of the churches.3
ACTION OF THE SYNOD IN REFERENCE TO EDUCATION AND LEARNING
With regard to education, the influence of the synod was constantly and beneficially exerted by insisting on proper literary qualifications in the candidates for the ministry, by patronising schools and colleges, and by making provision for the education of the poor. The literary institutions in which the synod were particularly interested, were the academy at Newark, Delaware, and the college of New Jersey. The trustees of the former were almost all members of the synod, on whose application for a general collection in aid of the institution, it was agreed to countenance the measure and to recommend the academy to the charity of all the churches. In 1773, the Rev. Dr. Ewing and Dr. Hugh Williamson, a man distinguished for his scientific attainments, and an elder in the presbyterian church, visited England to solicit benefactions in behalf of this academy. Though it owed its origin to the synod of Philadelphia, and though at the time of its incorporation in 1769, all its clerical, and, it is believed, most of its lay trustees were presbyterians, it has of late years passed into the hands of the episcopalians, and is now known as Newark college. With the college at Princeton, the connexion of the synod was far more intimate, and the efforts made for its support were frequent and strenuous.
For some time after the union the arrangement which had been made between the synod of Philadelphia and the trustees in London, for the
support of German schools, was continued, and a committee annually appointed to dispose of the appropriation received from that source.
In 1760, a proposition was made for the appointment and support of a professor of divinity, which the synod recommended to the consideration of the presbyteries, that some plan might be devised for the accomplishment of the object. The following year, though the synod agreed "to promote this good purpose, yet from the pressure of other calls, and the want of funds, they were obliged to defer it." Deeply sensible, however, "that the church suffered greatly for want of an opportunity to instruct students in the knowledge of divinity, it was agreed that every student, after he has been admitted to his first degree in college, shall read carefully, on this subject, at least one year, under the care of some minister of approved character for his skill in theology, and under his direction shall discuss difficult questions in divinity, study the sacred Scriptures, form sermons, lectures, and such other useful exercises as may be directed in the course of his studies. And it is enjoined likewise, that every preacher for the first year after his licensure, shall show all his sermons to some minister in our presbyteries on whose friendship and candour he depends, written fairly, to have them corrected and amended. And as they are but young preachers, we are persuaded that no better method can be taken in present circumstances to improve them in Christian knowledge, and render them eminently useful in their station. It is also enjoined that they preach as often as they can before stated ministers, that they may correct their gestures, pronunciation, delivery, and the like. And it is further enjoined, that all our ministers and probationers forbear reading their sermons from the pulpit, if they can conveniently."
In 1768, in consequence of a request from the trustees of the college of New Jersey, that the synod would aid in the support of a professor of divinity in that institution, a general collection was ordered for that purpose, and fifty pounds were appropriated towards the salary of the Rev. John Blair, who had been elected to that office. The wants of the college at this time were so
pressing, that in the following year the synod appointed a committee in every part of the church, for the purpose of raising funds for its support. In consequence of this application, the presbytery of New Brunswick addressed a memorial to the churches under their care, setting forth the condition and claims of the college. They state that its permanent funds, though once considerable, had been reduced by necessary expenditures to £1300, and must be still further reduced, as the officers could not be supported by the fees for tuition without making those fees so high as seriously to interfere with the usefulness of the institution. It was urged that the college had peculiar claims on our church. Even in 1767, there were not fewer than eighty of her sons ministers of the gospel dispersed through the several colonies, since which time there had been considerable addition to the number. "The eyes," it is said, "of by far the greater number of our vacant churches are turned to that college for a supply of ministers; especially the churches in New Jersey and the southern colonies. That from the principles there taught and received, we have reason to think that useful instruments not only have been, but from time to time will be raised up to propagate the pure evangelical doctrines of the gospel, and to make a stand against such as might be glad to abridge our liberties, and to bring us under the yoke of ecclesiastical power; instruments to plead the cause of liberty and religion, and to make our church respectable." This effort in behalf of the college was continued for several years, with what result is not fully known, except that it is stated, that the several committees had "been very diligent and successful."2
During the period now under review, viz: from 1758 to 1789, the college was under the presidency of Mr. Davies, of Dr. Samuel Finley, and of Dr. Witherspoon. Mr. Davies entered upon the duties of his office July 26, 1759, and died February 4, 1761, so that he was president little more than eighteen months. Short as was his administration, his talents, and his devotion to his duties, rendered it eminently serviceable to the institution. His successor, Dr. Samuel Finley, entered on his duties as president, July,
1761, and died July 16, 1766. He was a native of Armagh in Ireland, but removed to this country in 1734, in the nineteenth year of his age. He was licensed by the New Brunswick presbytery in 1740, and preached with great success, especially in Pennsylvania and in the lower counties of New Jersey. In 1744, he settled at Nottingham in Maryland, where he remained for seventeen years. He there instituted an academy which enjoyed a wide and deserved reputation. "He was justly famed as a scholar, and eminently qualified as a teacher." Dr. John Woodhull, who was one of his pupils, speaks of him as being always solemn and instructive, and often fervent in the pulpit, as extensively learned, and as greatly beloved and respected by his students. Under his administration the college was very flourishing, and his own reputation rapidly extending, when he was cut down in the prime of life. About a year after he entered on the presidency, there was an extensive revival of religion in the college, in which fifty of the students, about one half of the whole number then in the institution, were supposed to have become sincerely pious.
Dr. Finley died in July, 1766: the November following Dr. Witherspoon was unanimously elected president. Before this appointment was known, a number of gentlemen attached to that portion of the church which, before the union of the two synods, had belonged to the synod of Philadelphia, waited upon the trustees to propose the establishment of several professorships in the college, upon a plan which should unite the whole church in the support of the institution. The committee of the trustees appointed to confer with these gentlemen, reported, that their proposals being based upon the assumption, that the president's chair was vacant, their plan had been disconcerted by the appointment of Dr. Witherspoon, and consequently they could not answer for what their constituents would do under these altered circumstances, but that they were nevertheless truly desirous to complete the proposed design. The committee inquired whether, on the supposition of the nomination of two gentlemen for professorships, viz: Messrs. Blair and McDowell, on condition that funds should be raised
for their support, their constituents would be satisfied." To this the gentlemen replied, that, however desirous they were to accomplish so excellent a design, they could not engage for the future conduct of their constituents. The board taking into consideration the above report came to the following resolution: "Whereas it is an object of the greatest concern, that union and the strictest harmony among all the friends and patrons of religion and sound literature, might be promoted by every proper method, and that this institution may have every possible advantage of increasing its reputation, and the cause of learning; and as there appears reason to expect great and happy consequences, both to the interests of religion and of this seminary, from putting into execution the general design of the proposals made, they will gladly do every thing in their power to accomplish the said end; and accordingly declare themselves greatly desirous that a sufficiency of monies by subscription or otherwise, might be obtained to accomplish this noble design; and are cheerfully willing to join in any particular method that can be devised for raising the necessary sums. For though this board would gladly proceed to the election of professors without delay, were their funds sufficient to support such an additional expense, yet they judge it by no means expedient to take that step before they have a certain medium for their support."
The following year this negotiation was renewed. A number of gentlemen again attended the meeting of the board, and a committee was appointed to confer with them. This committee reported that they found them and their constituents still very desirous of concurring with the trustees of the college in the establishment and support of a faculty, and promising to unite their utmost endeavours to raise the necessary funds; that the said gentlemen being asked by the committee, whether the appointment of all or of any of the particular persons to professorships named and recommended in their proposals, was intended as a term of their acceding to and assisting in the establishment proposed, replied, that it was not intended to make the appointment of any particular persons named by their constituents, a term
of the proposed union, but that any other gentlemen who might be deemed qualified for their offices, and indiscriminately chosen without regard to party distinctions, would be acceptable to them. The board taking the subject into consideration, were unanimously of the opinion, that the constitution of a faculty, to consist of well qualified professors, to be chosen without any regard to little party differences, would greatly subserve the interest of religion and learning in this seminary. They, therefore, determined to proceed to such an election; and accordingly the following day chose the Rev. John Blair professor of divinity and moral philosophy; Dr. Hugh Williamson professor of mathematics and natural philosophy; Mr. Jonathan Edwards professor of languages and logic; and, as Dr. Witherspoon, in consequence of the unwillingness of his wife to leave Scotland, had declined the presidency, the Rev. Samuel Blair was chosen president and professor of rhetoric and metaphysics. For the want of funds these appointments were conditional, and, with the exception of that of Mr. John Blair, were not to take effect for a year, and in the meantime, the college was to be conducted by Mr. Blair and three tutors. Before the expiration of the year the difficulty in the way of Dr. Witherspoon's accepting the presidency was removed, and Mr. Samuel Blair, having generously withdrawn his name, Dr. Witherspoon was reelected, and arrived in this country August, 1768, and was inaugurated as president on the seventeenth of that month.
The deficiency in the pecuniary resources of the college prevented the above plan being carried into effect. Even Mr. Blair, to relieve the funds of the institution, resigned his office as professor of divinity, and devolved the duties upon Dr. Witherspoon. Under the auspices of the latter, the college soon began to flourish, its course of instruction was enlarged, its students increased, and the funds necessary for its support were supplied. The revolutionary war, however, soon put a stop to this course of improvement. The college was, in a great measure, disbanded, and though a class graduated in each year, the number of annual graduates was often not more
than four or five. When peace returned, prosperity returned to the college, and it continued to reward the labours of its pious founders, by contributing largely to the supply of educated ministers to the church. The number of clergymen educated at this college before 1789, was two hundred and twenty-nine.
In 1771, a plan for the education of poor and pious young men for the ministry, was laid before the synod by the presbytery of Newcastle, which was approved. This plan provided that every vacant congregation receiving supplies, should pay two pounds towards an education fund, every minister one pound, and that voluntary subscriptions from other quarters should be solicited. Every presbytery was to appoint a treasurer, to examine candidates, to direct their studies, &c. Every beneficiary was to spend one year after licensure in the service of the presbytery by which he had been educated; and in case he did not enter the ministry, he was to give a bond to refund the money expended in his behalf within five years. It appears from the minutes for the following year, that the presbyteries of New York, New Brunswick, and the second of Philadelphia, had fully complied with the above recommendation, and that several others had done so partially.2
In 1775, the question was proposed, whether a presbytery could, with propriety, take any candidate upon trial unless furnished with a diploma from some college. The synod the following year answered, that the advantages of a public education rendered it highly expedient that all candidates should finish their academical studies in some public institution, yet as the presbyteries were the proper judges of the requisite qualifications of their candidates, it was not intended to preclude from admission to trial all who had not enjoyed those advantages.
In 1783, at the request of the presbytery of Philadelphia, the question was considered, whether a person without a liberal education may be taken on trials, or licensed to preach the gospel? which was answered in the negative.
And in 1785, the same question came up in a different form, viz. whether, in the present state of the church in America, and the scarcity of ministers to fill our vacancies, the synod or presbyteries ought to relax in any degree in the literary qualifications required of intrants into the ministry? and it was carried in the negative by a great majority." These decisions, considering the circumstances of the case, certainly reflect great credit upon the synod.
The same year it was proposed that no candidate should be taken on trial until he shall have employed two years at least in the study of divinity, after his having passed the usual course of a liberal education. This proposition, after discussion, was laid over to the following year, and then, "considering," as the synod say, "the present circumstances of our churches, it was decided in the negative." It was at the same time "enjoined on every presbytery to subject every candidate on trials for the ministry, to an accurate examination on the discipline of the presbyterian church."
The attention of the synod, however, was not confined to candidates for the ministry, but "considering the education of youth, and their being early instructed in the principles of religion, as one of the most useful means of promoting the influence of religion in our churches, they resolved, that it be enjoined on every presbytery, in appointing supplies to their vacant congregations, to take order that every vacant congregation within their limits be carefully catechised at least once in every year, in the same manner as is required by the order of our church in congregations supplied with regular pastors; and that the ministers appointed to this duty be required to render an account of their fidelity in this respect.
"Resolved, also, that it be enjoined on all our congregations to pay a special regard to the good education of children, as being intimately connected with the interests of religion and morality; and that, as schools, under a bad master and careless management, are seminaries of vice rather than of virtue, the session, corporation, or committee of every congregation be
required to endeavour to establish schools in such place or places as shall be most convenient for the people; that they be particularly careful to procure able and virtuous teachers; that they make the erection and care of schools a part of their congregational business, and endeavour to induce the people to support them by contributions, being not only the most effectual, but, in the end, the cheapest way of supporting them; that the presbyteries appoint particular members, or, if possible, committees, to go into vacant congregations to promote similar institutions; that the corporation, session, or committee of the congregation, visit the school or schools at least once in three months, to inquire into the conduct of the master, and the improvement of the children, and to observe particularly his care to instruct them at least one day in the week, in the principles of religion; that the presbyteries in appointing ministers to supply vacant congregations, require it as an indispensable part of their duty, to visit at the same time the schools, and require at the next meeting of the presbytery, an account of their fidelity in this respect, and of the state of the schools; and that in these schools effectual provision be made for the education of the children of the poor; and that at the visitation of the schools one or two of the most ingenuous and virtuous of the poor children be selected annually, in order to give them a more perfect education, and thereby qualify these ingenuous charityscholars to become afterwards useful instructers in our charity-schools."
THE STANDARD OF DOCTRINE IN THE SYNOD
The standard of doctrine established and maintained during this period was the Westminster Confession of Faith. In the first article of the plan of union, it is said, "both synods having always approved and received the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms as an orthodox and excellent system of Christian doctrine, we do still receive the same as the confession of our faith." In all the presbyteries every licentiate, or new member, was required to adopt this confession. The synod allowed of no departure from this rule. In 1764, the presbytery of Suffolk
were blamed for "neglecting to record their candidates adopting our public standards at licensure, though they inform us," it is added, "that it is matter of constant practice."
Thus also the synod itself, in receiving either a new member, or a new presbytery, insisted on the same condition. In 1765, it is recorded that the Rev. Jonathan Leavitt, "after adopting the Westminster Confession of Faith, as the confession of his faith, and having promised to conform himself to the Westminster Directory for worship and government, was received as a member of the synod, and was advised to put himself under the care of some one of our presbyteries." In 1763, a request was presented from a presbytery in New York, to the east of the North River, to be incorporated with the synod, and it was "agreed to grant their request, provided that they agree to adopt our Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, and engage to observe the Directory as a plan of worship, discipline, and government, according to the agreement of this synod." This presbytery complied with these stipulations, and was accordingly admitted.4 In answer to a similar application, made in 1770, from the presbytery of South Carolina, the synod replied, "the only conditions which we require, are, that all your ministers acknowledge and adopt, as the standard of doctrine, the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, and the Directory as the plan of your worship and discipline."
That this adoption of the Confession of Faith was strict and unequivocal is strongly asserted both by presbyteries and synod. In 1768, the presbytery of New Brunswick having a missionary in Nova Scotia, had occasion to write a letter to a gentleman in that country, in which they say. "We hear that our synod has been injuriously represented in your parts, as being lax in principle and discipline. But we assure you, sir, the charge is utterly groundless. The Westminster Confession of Faith is received here without equivocation, and in the true and proper sense of the words. The doctrines of grace are truly taught, and discipline is regularly and faithfully
exercised." At the same time they wrote to the Rev. Mr. Murdock, a seceding minister in Nova Scotia, to whom they say, "We assure you, dear sir, the public standards of the church of Scotland are our standards. We receive the Westminster Confession of Faith in the true grammatical sense of the words, and are strictly Calvinistic. And the Westminster Directory is the model of our worship and government." These letters were signed by John Blair, as moderator, and William Kirkpatrick, as clerk.
In like manner a committee of the synod, in their name and with their sanction, declared, in 1786, "the synod of New York and Philadelphia adopt, according to the known and established meaning of the terms, the Westminster Confession of Faith as the confession of their faith; save that every candidate for the gospel ministry is permitted to except against so much of the twenty-third chapter as gives authority to civil magistrates in matters of religion. The presbyterian church in America considers the church of Christ as a spiritual society, entirely distinct from the civil government, and having a right to regulate their own ecclesiastical policy, independently of the interposition of the magistrate. The synod also receive the Directory for public worship, and the form of church government, recommended by the Westminster Assembly, as in substance agreeable to the institutions of the New Testament. This mode of adoption we use because we believe the general platform of our government to be agreeable to the sacred scriptures, but we do not believe that God has been pleased to reveal and enjoin every minute circumstance of ecclesiastical government and discipline as not to leave room for orthodox churches of Christ, in these minutiæ, to differ with charity from each other.
"The rules of our discipline, and the form of process in our church judicatures, are contained in Pardovan's, alias Stewart's Collections, in conjunction with the acts of our own synod, the power of which in matters merely ecclesiastical, we consider as equal to the power of any synod or general assembly in the world. Our church judicatures, like those in the
church of Scotland, from which we derive our origin, are church sessions, presbyteries, and synods, to which it is now in contemplation to add a national and general assembly."
That the synod really maintained as well as professed this standard of doctrine, is evident from the case of the Rev. Samuel Harker, to which reference has already been repeatedly made in this history. That gentleman was a member of the presbytery of New Brunswick, and by them his case was referred to the synod, who appointed a committee, of which Mr. Pierson was the chairman, to meet with and endeavour to convince him of his errors. This committee subsequently reported that they were happy to find, from Mr. Harker's explanations, that his views were correct as to some of the points on which he was supposed to be erroneous, but that as to others, he had departed from our standards. The synod considered this report so encouraging, that they directed him to go to Nottingham and converse with Messrs. Samuel and James Finley, John Blair, Robert and Samson Smith, and on his return with Messrs. Treat, Tennent, Ewing, and Alison, in Philadelphia, in hopes that his conversion might be completed. These hopes, however, were disappointed. Mr. Harker published a book in which he set forth and defended his peculiar views. When the synod met in 1762, they committed this book to Messrs. Spencer, Rodgers, Blair, Laurence, McDowell, Wilson, and Robert Smith, with directions to examine it and make a report to the synod. This report was not presented until the following year, when it appeared that Mr. Harker taught, "1st. That the covenant of grace is in such a sense conditional that fallen mankind, in their unregenerate state, by the general assistance given to men under the gospel, have a sufficient ability to fulfil the conditions thereof, and so by their own endeavours to insure to themselves regenerating grace and all saving blessings. 2d. That God has bound himself by promise to give them regenerating grace, upon their fulfilling what he, (Mr. Harker,) calls the direct conditions of obtaining it; and upon the whole, makes a certain and infallible connexion between their endeavours and the aforesaid blessings.
3d. That God's prescience of future events is previous to, and not dependent on his decrees; that his decrees have no influence on his own conduct; and that the foresight of faith is the ground of the decree of election. It is further observed, that he often uses inaccurate, unintelligible, and dangerous forms of expression, which tend to lead people into false notions in several important matters; as that Adam was the federal head of his posterity, in the second covenant as well as the first; that the regenerate are not (?) in a state of probation for heaven, and such like.
"The synod judged that these principles are of a hurtful and dangerous tendency, giving a false view of the covenant of grace, perverting it into a new-modelled covenant of works, and misrepresenting the doctrine of the divine decrees as held by the best reformed churches; and, in fine, contrary to the word of God, and our approved standards of doctrine." Mr. Harker was then called in and questioned on many particulars, and the synod after referring to their several unsuccessful attempts to convince him of his errors, say that he appeared "to be rather confirmed and resolute in propagating his opinions among the people, by a variety of methods, to the great scandal of the church, seducing and perplexing the unwary and unstable; and as he has departed from the truth, and opposed this church in some important articles, and misrepresented the church of Scotland, his doctrine and practice have a schismatical tendency. On the whole, though the exclusion of a member be grievous, yet we judge that the said Mr. Samuel Harker cannot consistently be continued a member of this body, and accordingly declare him to be disqualified for preaching or exercising his ministry in any congregation or vacancy under our care; and do hereby order that all be duly warned not to receive his doctrine, nor admit his ministration, until it shall please God to convince him of his mistakes, and bring him to the acknowledgment of the truth, and recover him from the error of his ways." As the synod was thus strict in enforcing adherence to our standards, the fact that this is the only case of discipline for erroneous doctrine recorded on their minutes, during the period from 1758 to 1789, is
satisfactory proof of the general orthodoxy of the body. It is probable there never was a period of equal length in the history of our church, in which there was such a general and cordial agreement among our ministers on all doctrinal subjects.
FORM OF GOVERNMENT.—ORDINARY POWERS
In illustrating the constitution of the synod, we shall, agreeably to the plan hitherto pursued, arrange its acts under the general heads of ordinary and extraordinary; meaning by ordinary, such as are conformed to our present usages; and by extraordinary, such as differ from them in a greater or less degree.
To the former of these classes belong of course the formation and alteration of presbyteries. The synod was called upon immediately after its formation to enter upon this business, in accordance with one of the provisions of the plan of union. It was agreed that the presbyteries of Suffolk and New York should continue as they were; that Messrs. Cowell and Guild should be annexed to the presbytery of New Brunswick; that Messrs. Cross, G. Tennent, Alison, Treat, Chesnut, Martin, Beatty, Greenman, Hunter, Ramsay, Lawrence, and Kinkead, should constitute the presbytery of Philadelphia; that Messrs. Wilson, Miller, Tuttle, and Henry, should be the presbytery of Lewes; that the first and second presbyteries of Newcastle, and the presbytery of Donegal, should, for the present, continue as they were; and that Messrs. Creaghead, Black, Craig, Miller, Davies, Todd, Henry, Wright, Brown, and Martain, should be the presbytery of Hanover.
The following year Messrs. Robert Smith, John Roan, Samson Smith, and John Hoge, were attached to the presbytery of Donegal, and the first and second presbyteries of Newcastle were united, with the provision that these changes should not interfere with the liberties of the several congregations within the bounds of those presbyteries, provided for in the plan of union.
In 1762, in consequence of a difference of opinion among the members of the presbytery of Philadelphia, as to the examination of candidates for the ministry on their personal experience in religion, Messrs. Robert Cross, Francis Alison, John Ewing, John Symington, and James Latta, were formed into a presbytery for one year, to be called the second presbytery of Philadelphia. In 1763, the congregations of West Nottingham and little Britain, together with the Rev. Messrs. Hunt and Strain, with their congregations, were set off from the presbytery of Newcastle to that of Donegal. The same year the presbytery of Dutchess in New York, was received, as already mentioned. The question whether the second presbytery of Philadelphia should be continued, was deferred from year to year until 1766, when it was voted to allow it to remain. Against this decision several members dissented for substantially the following reasons. 1. The decision has an obvious appearance of disunion, and has a schismatical tendency, and will be likely to perpetuate party distinctions. 2. As it is the sense of the synod that it is the duty of presbyteries to inquire into a candidate's experimental acquaintance with religion, it involves this body in a self contradiction to erect a presbytery which expressly refuses it. 3. While nothing is imposed on persons in point of practice, which they in their conscience judge sinful, and they are not restrained from doing their duty, the rights of conscience are not violated, though, they being a minority, a matter in judicature shall be carried against them by vote. Therefore it is vain to urge the rights of conscience in such cases. And for any to signify that they will not be subject, even in such cases, to the regulations of synod, but if contradicted will violently break off, is to prefer the private rights of individuals to the public rights, and will destroy all governing authority in the body. 4. It is a very bad precedent which may be pleaded by others for the division of presbyteries, and by this means congregations now united may be divided, and the formation of new societies prevented. These reasons were signed by Messrs. William Tennent, Charles McKnight, John Blair, William Tennent, Jun., Azael Roe, John Carmichael, Robert Smith, Jacob Ker, David Rose, Nathan Ker, and Simon Horton. Before the schism
of 1741, the old-side members, so to call them, being the majority of the synod, were the advocates of its authority, and the new-side members the remonstrants against its exercise. After the union in 1758, the new-side members being the majority, became the advocates of authority, and the old-side members remonstrants. Of the correctness of this statement, the reader will find in the sequel many illustrations. In the present instance we find the Messrs. Tennent, Blair, &c., complaining that the governing authority of the synod would be destroyed if its regulations might be disobeyed, except in cases in which they were deemed sinful. And as the members of the New Brunswick presbytery before the schism pleaded conscience for their disobedience to an act of synod, so the second presbytery of Philadelphia made a similar plea on the present occasion.
The same difference of opinion which caused this separation of the presbytery of Philadelphia, produced still greater difficulties in that of Donegal. In 1765, the synod having maturely considered the situation of affairs in that presbytery, determined to erect the members living on the west side of the Susquehanna, together with the Rev. Andrew Bay, into a new presbytery, to be called the presbytery of Carlisle, and to attach the remaining members to the presbytery of Newcastle. Against this decision the Rev. Messrs. Tate, Beard, Elder, Samson Smith, McMurdie, and Steel, members of the presbytery of Donegal, remonstrated; because it gave them no relief from the grievances of which they complained, and because it was unjust to dispose of a presbytery without consulting its members or allowing them to vote. The synod consented to review the case, but adhered to their decision, saying, that those brethren were so much interested in the matter, that they had no right to a vote in reference to it, though they ought to have been consulted on the subject. The synod further expressed the hope that they would find their grievances removed in their new connexion, and stated that the presbytery of Newcastle was so small that the members to the east of the Susquehanna ought to be joined to it, and that it should be henceforth called the presbytery of Lancaster.2