PRESBYTERIANSM AND CONGREGATIONALISM IN ENGLAND.

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 18, 9 January 1863, Page 3

PRESBYTERIANSM AND CONGREGATIONALISM IN ENGLAND.

The Rev. Dr. Macfarlan, of Clapharo, delivered an address at the meeting of the Congregational Union of England and Wales, as the representative of the United Presbyterian Presbj'tery of London. As Dr. Macfarlan made s^me remarks of general interest, we now append an outline of his address. He said, — I wish to speak a word or two on the communion — it may bd very distant — between Congregationalism and P'resbyterianism ; and I don't know but that it will come all the sooner if wo talk about it by the way. Let me express the hope that we are now to recommence that Christian courtship which, God willing, may at some future and not very distant period end in union. And why not ? What is to hinder such a consummation so devoutly -to be wished llt is true there are points on which we differ ; but is Christian unity to wait upon universal agreement-be-tween Christian. Churches 1 Surely not. If men and women are never to associate till they are agreed in all matters of mind and temper, where would the Divine ordinance of marriage be placed? The human race would ere long be extinct. Even so, if our various evangelical denominations' never unite until they are entirely of one mind, the Church shall never see her millenium. For the sake of Christian unity — that is for the sake of the world, I hope that Nonconformists and Presbyterians shall yettogether usher in the dawn of some new transition, in which the best lights of the two systems shall be blended into one beautiful rainbow, overarching one harmonized and united Church I ask again, why not ? Who or what forbids the bans? Not the things in which we agree, which are neither fewor small ; nay, verily, God be thanked we both hold the head — we both preach rum by the fall of man, redemption by the Christ of God, and regeneration by the Holy Ghost, We both glory in the cross of Christ ; wo both preach the justification of the sinner by faith alone_ in his blood ; we both maintain the divine institutions of the sabbath, the sacraments, and the Christian pastorate; we both assume the responsibility of converting the whole world by means of the missionary enterprise ; and we both declare that Jesus Christ is the sole King and Head of t!ie Church, that his kingdom is not of this world, and that all politicarestablishments of Christianity are alike unjust, inexpedient, and unscriptural. These are rhe main and essential things upon which we are agreed, and are they not enough to justify the hopeof union? Are there not golden links forged in heaven to bind regenerated hearts on earth? But, it is rejoined, there are things on which we differ. True — and I am not sure if pity 'tis, 'tis true — I believe our differences have been permitted, and have served good and substantial ends ; but I believe, also, that they have nearly served their day; that the chapter of their generation is nearly printed out,' and may sooner than some think be out of print altogether. The main point on which we differ, is the form of Church government— a very important matter in its own place; but, whatever difficulties protract its settlement, not a matter that shall continue to keep the two Churches apart. It is certainly a Gordian knot ; but the scythe of time has cut in twain more intricate and dogged bonds, and none of us dare say that, the Father of Peace cannot cause us, even in this same thing, to be of one mind. Divine Providence has in the past history of religion solved greater difficulties, scattered denser clouds, and levelled sterner and higher mountains. The great thing we have to do is to agree to differ ; to become so intensely absorbed in our admiration of the truths we have in common espoused, as almost to forget that there is anything of importance we differ about. Nor should we find much difficulty in doing this. In these solemn times, the best friends of Christ and man are they who do what they can to help on union among the Churches. I have no call at present to enter upon the subject of the means to be adopted ; but I may be allowed to express nofc my own, but the hopes also of brethren in Scotland, that we should as far as is practicable, not only s^e each other oftener, but find out some common work in which we can unitedly engage. While working apart, that others may be as useful as we are ; when working together, and all in concert, the shades of difference are seldom noticed. For common work we have nofc far to travel. I would suggest that, as both truth and liberty are in these days threatened, we should each encourage the other in a united determination and action in their defence. I tun feappy to say that, while no doubt some amongst us are not so sanguine as others, the spirit so feebly indicated in tin's hasty address is spreading throughout the Presbyterian Churches. Indeed, it forms one of the articles in the basis of the United Presbyterian Church, that we hold out the right hand of fellowship to all evangelical Churches ; and I am not sure but that ours is the only Church having such a basis that has done good in Scotland. The United Presbyterian Church was once divided into three parts. I have seen them drop their differences. I saw the two grest sections of the Secession come together into one place, shake each other by the hand, and form themselves into one body ; and I saw the United Church, at s. subsequent period, incorporate itself with the Relief Church. Our friend, Dr. Guthrie has recently been making love to our denomination, and declares his preference for us Voluntary Dissenters to the Established Church. The Established Church is also at the same work of trying to induce the Free Church to return to the fold which it so nobly abandoned. Surely tho spirit of union is abroacLin the north, and God only knows what ir.av be the result. But is not this spirit also herein England? lam sure it is. Our brethren of the English Presbyterian Church, and the United Presbyterians in the south have initiated a movement ■which the God of peace is sure to lead onward to a union betwixt us; Now, this is rather infectious ; and I pray God that it way soon spread over all that in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus. True, I have also seen a disruption in Scotland ; but, not to speak of other mercies that have flowed from it, I may say that union has been promoted by disruption. The Free Church, like my own, is composed of what were once three distinct Presbyterian bodies; and I have no doubt other unions are already in consequence on the tapis. It is also more than whispered that there may be a disruption in the Episcopal Church. There certainly ought to be. Whenever that happens proposals of union are likely to be made which, as things at present stand, we must not even mention, come what may, it is the duty of all the follow ers of Jesus Christ to rally around tho standard of Christian union. It is not yet, but it is certain to become, the question of the day. At present it is but a science in its infancy. God may soon raise it up into manhood. When infidelity and Popery, and their black associates come in, as come they soon may, like a flood, we shall be but too thankful to drcp our shibboleth, and, like the Macedonian phalanx, armed at all points, go up as one host to the help of the Lord against the mighty. — Edinburgh Witness.