THE PRESBYTERY AGAIN.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2344, 6 October 1870, Page 2

THE PRESBYTERY AGAIN.

To the Editor of the Evening Star. Sir, —The majority of the Presbytery of Dunedin are determined not to let the public think well of them. At the meeting yesterday, the old spirit and the old policy were again in the ascendant. People are almost forced to ask—ls there truth or honesty among them ? The famous St. Andrew’s case cannot be settled on the principles of ecclesiastical law or common sense, but must be mystified and prolonged by the quirks and sophistries of the Taieri twins. Will it be believed that after leading on the St. Andrew’s congregation to call the person they desire to he their minister, under the promise that if the call was anything like unanimous no obstacle would be thrown in the way of his settlement; yet when the call, signed by SOO names, was laid before them, they rtfused to sustain it. Two of the leading members of Presbytery have in writing expressed the belief that such a call would be sustained, and almost every member of Presbytery verbally expressed the same opinion ; and yet seven ministers, and most of their elders, take back their words, and decline to sustain the call. Yet these are the men who at the same sitting presumed to appoint deputations to visit the c mgregations in town upon the “state of religion.” Of old the proverb used to run—- “ Like priests, like people” ; but really it appears that in the bounds of tho Dunedin Presbytery the people are much better than the priests, and could tcich them a lesson they have much need to learn. I am, &c., Censor. Dunedin, Ocfcohep (}.

To the Editor of the Evening Star, Sin, —The Presbytery of Dunedin have perpetrated another deed of injustice and cruelty to the congregation of St. Andrew’s Church. It is difficult to conceive what motive can actuate these men in the course of action they have pursued in this case, except a determination at all hazards to crush that congregation, and the man they have ohoseu to be their minister. This whole procedure from first to last exhibits such a wanton disregard of every principle of justice and fair dealing, as must arouse a feeling of indignation and disgust in the mind of every honest and upright man. It is true we live in strange times, and we see strange things done every day, but I question if, even in these times, we could find anything to equal the disgraceful proceedings that have taken place in connection ' with this case. The congregation have behaved nobly and like Christian men 'contending for what they believe to 'be their sacred rights, when these are assa led by high-handed oppression; They have oonj,eudud earnestly against r HtU • less tyranny that would seek to drag tlleni from the high position they occupy as members of a Christian church, and trample themselves and their privileges under the heel of despotic authority. Yet, amid all the injustice they have suffered, and suffered be it observed from those who ought to have beeu the staunchest guardians of their rights, they have never in one instance stopped aside from the constitutional course laid down by authority for this guidance. Certainly they have submitted to every decision of the Presbytery, however irritating, and even insulting, some of them have been; and they have thus shown an example of high and honorable principle which their reverend oppressors would do well to imitate. They were invited by the Presbytery to proceed to call a minister, and they were assured by more than one of time who have hitherto opposed them at every step, that if the call was anything like unanimous, no further opposition would be offered. Encouraged by this assurance, and also by the fact that a call from another congregation to the same individual had already been sustained by the Presbytery, they proceeded in the usual way to do so, and yesterday, a call signed by three hupijred members and aclheteiits ' vay laid on the table (t the Presbytery. Thirty; one individuals onry dissented from the call, so it might be said to be not merely almost, but altogether, unanimous—at least as much so as most such things generally are. Yet, notwithstanding the assurance given, and the fact of their having already sustained a similar call from another congregation, the Presbytery deliberately refused to proceed with the settlement. Persecution, 'it is said, will make a wise man mad, and if thd congregation of St. Andrews Church still retain their integrity, again bow to the decision (f the Presbytery, and maintain their allegiance to that body, they will manifest a spirit of devotion which their ecclesiastical rulers have done all that men could do to undermine, subvert, and destroy. But on the other hand, who shall blame them, if dispirited and hqpcle : s, they cease the strife ami retire from the contest, cut "asunder the bonds of love and affection that binds them sq tenderly to their principles and their church, and seek in separation that liberty which is denied then) within its pale Such an event is not improbable, nay, it is very likely to happen, and if it does, those men who by their evil devices have brought it about, will have a heavy and bitter reckoning, alike with their church, their consc cuco, and their God. Yours, &c., X.X. Dunedin, CtU Oct., 1870,