WHY MR LOGAN OBJECTS TO EXCOMMUNICATION.

Evening Star, Issue 3289, 4 September 1873, Page 2

WHY MR LOGAN OBJECTS TO EXCOMMUNICATION.

The following are the reasons of dissent from the decision of the Dunedin Presbytery in his case given by Mr Logan, and read at yesterday’s meeting of that body : I appeal to the Synod of Otago and Southland against the finding of the Dunedin Presbytery on the 4th June, 1873, in the against me, for the following, among other reasons : 1. I was taken by surprise, having been led to believe that the case was only sent up by the session of Knox Church for the advice of the Presbytery, and that the business would only be formal. (The Moderator of the Presbytery was of the same opinion.) I obeye 1 the summons, but only out of respect to the Presbytery, whereas the case was gone into hurriedly, and a new charge (arising out of a reply to a question given b/ me when the case was before the session) was brought against me for the first time—the original charge being kept in the background. After speeches by members containing erroneous statements, which I had no opportunity of replying Jbo, a very harsh judgment was pronounced with undue haste by the Presbytery (unless, indeed, as I was informed, the conclusions were arrived at before the case was heard), 2. The Rev. Dr Stuart has frequently said from the pulpit, and that truly, that any fool may confound a wiso man by questioning him ; how much more, therefore, may questions tend to confound when put by a learned body like ihe Dunedin Presbytery on subjects which th ir members have made ther life’s study, and to understand which they have special grace given to them. Questions were put to me—the most profound and deep—and which 1 venture to say even the Angel Gabriel could not answer in a rational manner, although he had all eternity to do so. Yet I was called upon to answer them on the spur of the moment. The questions were put, I am satisfied, in order to entangle me in my

talk; hut t followed the example of Christ in giving my replies, yet unwarrantable conclusions were drawn from these replies. 3. I have not been guilty of any offence against church law or any ether law, nor did the Pr« sbytery even attempt to show that I was guilty of any offence against the law of the Church. 4- In giving my opinion generally of the lectures of the Kev. J. M. Peebles and Dr Dunn (if I erred it was on the side of charity, of which there is now very little in our Churches), I do not hold that my opinion was infallible. 5. 1 have reason to believe that my case was prejudged by some members of the Presbytery. 1 made this statement in the Presbytery, and it was not denied. 6 I was not allowed counsel, although the frivolous charge brought against me was evidently laid hold of in order to carry out a plan previously designed. 7. I was admitted as a member of the Church of Scotland about thirty years ago by a worthy evangelical minister of the Gospel then, formerly an old light burgher, now a Free Church man, without having any foolish questions put to me; and I was chosen as a deacon twice before being selected by Knox Church congregation, Dunedin, and that notwithstanding that I each time stated I did not agree with all contained in the confession of faith and Church standards, I was pressed to take office. Twice I persisted in refusing to be inducted, but the third time I yielded to the earnest solicitations of the esteemed minister of Knox Church, and, therefore, I should not be expelled on imaginary grounds and without a moment’s notice. 8. From what I know of the state of the Church, its great want at present is men of moderately advanced ideas—men such as myself. 9. I venture to say that two-thirds of the members of the Presbyterian Church are as far in advance of the confession and standards of the Church as I am, and therefore I should not be singled out and sacrificed, more especially as it has not been shown than in anything my views are contrary to truth or to what Christ taught. 10. I am left in ignorance of what I am to repent of. Is it for having sat on a platform with Messrs Peebles and Dunn ? or for giving my opinion that they were Christians, and doing a great Christian work ? or because I am unable to weigh divinity as in a balance and give the relative proportion of the divinity of Christ and of Moses ? or am I only to repent of my sins in general ? John Logan.