A FEW FACTS ABOUT ONE OF THE SEPARATED SYNODS.

The following letter will speak for itself. It was addressed to one of the conductors of this Magazine, but came to hand after the. great reform it was intended to promote had been effected-and the body to which it was evidently meant to give material information had finally adjourned. We publish it without communicating with the writer, and therefore of course without express permission; but it will appear not to be inconsistent with his views in writing it to use it in justifying that, which it was written to aid. We cheerfully make ourselves responsible for the Christian character and perfect veracity of the writer. Let his statements be seriously pondered by any who entertain a doubt, if there be any true Christian in such a state of mind—as to the wisdom and necessity of the action of the late General Assembly of the Presbyterian church, in separating the synod spoken of, from its communion. The truth is, that the facts of the case have been sedulously concealed from our churches; and the only cause of self accusation will be, when we fully know them-that we have thro' a misplaced confidence too long neglected to ascertain and put an end to proceedings, which were equally dishonouring to God and hurtful to the souls of men. What are we to think of men, who pursue the conduct here exposed-and yet claim fellowship with our faith and order? What could be thought of us, if we knew and connived at such proceedings?

June 4th, 1837.

DEAR BROTHER-Since I left Philadelphia I have been informed that a motion, to declare the Synod of Utica to be no longer a part of the Presbyterian church would be made. As facts will be the basis of action on this point, I take the liberty to throw some together and transmit them to you. I think they will not be flatly denied by the opposition as they can be proved.

1st. In many of the churches of that synod, there are persons called perfectionists, compared with whom the Methodist perfectionists are very orthodox. They hold, that do what they may, they cannot sin; yea, that it is as impossible for them as for God himself. They break the Sabbath &c., on the ground that they have got above these things. They consider ministers nuisances, and churches useless, and that they ought to be torn down. In the church of Adams, Watertown Presbytery, they proceeded to acts of the grossest sensuality, on the principle, that they can do no wrong. Indeed some of their notions are blasphemous. They are the results of the doctrine of man's ability and new measures. The filth deposited, &c.

the

2d. When urged to condemn error, as in the case of Goodrich, who was at last found guilty but not punished, for asserting that children at birth have no moral character, ministers said how can we go forward? In condemning him we condemn ourselves. The Presbytery of Oneida is the most corrupt in that synod, the strong hold of abolitionism and I think cannot be reformed. Green has great influence, and in his institute, the blacks and whites are sitting side by side at the dining table. However, this would excite combustion, and slavery had better be let alone. It is a fact, however, that immediate

abolitionism and new schoolism are nearly allied. Where one is you will find the other also. I heard a minister say in Presbytery, that since he became an abolitionist, he did not know where he was in theology. He was at sea--no compass to guide him.

3d. In the synod of Utica in 1834, a venerable elder who was trembling over the grave, rose in open synod and rebuked the ministers for their management and corruption. Formerly said he (I suppose he referred to the ministry of Dr. Carnahan,) clergymen were distinguished for whatever things are lovely, honest and true, but now they have degenerated into mere pettifoggers and double dealers. I can have no confidence in them.

4th. I have no hesitation in saying that the synod, but especially the Presbytery of Oneida, are in open rebellion as to the doctrines of our confession in their literal acceptation. Indeed, the old school doctrines are viewed very much as we would view the doctrine of transubstantiation. They abhor and despise them. Brother Barber an agent of the assembly's board was openly insulted in the synod of Utica in 1835: so much so as to excite indignation in the minds of some moderate men. He was not permitted to advocate his cause, or state to the Synod the principles on which the board acted. There is such a fanatical spirit that many imagine, that a mere novice, for instance a would be revival man, an exhorter or private member, or even an old woman or a new convert knows more of what piety is and true theology than fifty of the most experienced ministers in the church. With them the opinion of all the professors of all our seminaries would not weigh a feather. 5th. Many of the churches were once congregational, but how many came in on the accommodation plan I cannot say. The 1st church of Rome is congregational, unless it has come in within a year. The pastor was moderator of the Synod in 1835. Whether the deacons have a seat in Presbytery I know not. The 2d church of Rome altered its articles, that Baptists might become members. In the Presbytery of Watertown there are two or three congregational churches under the care of Presbytery. One has a Presbyterian supply two or three Presbyterian churches are supplied by congregational ministers. The Presbytery and Black river Association have a joint committee under the home missionary and American Education Societies, to recommend candidates, &c. 6th. Ministers are often received into presbyteries from associations without adopting the confession of faith at all. I know an instance where a minister was received from Vermont without a dismission from the association or recommendation to presbytery-but merely a certificate of good standing. Mr. Wilson of Sackett's harbor is the man. The presbytery offered to admit another but he declined. An elder was heard the other day teaching the children in the Sabbath school, that they had power enough to obey all God's commands the orthodox idea is held up as absurd. When the new school eulogize the Confession of Faith they mean with their private interpretation of it. Burchard, (as he is called throughout N. York state,) is I presume you know, a member of the Oneida Presbytery.

7th. Creeds are formed and used as a substitute for the Confes

sion of Faith. I know a minister who was broken up and driven from his parish because he would not ordain an elder unless he assented to the Confession of Faith.

Dear sir, I feel a deep anxiety for your success, I do hope, that before the members of the Assembly leave Philadelphia, that they may be enabled to say, the church is free. If these facts will aid in effecting this object they are at your service.

Your friend and brother,

E. H. S.

DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE ASSEMBLY OF 1837.

No. I.

No ecclesiastical body has ever met in this country, more important in its influence and acts, than the recent General Assembly of the Presbyterian church. We desire to make our readers familiar, with its spirit and proceedings-and to preserve a record of its most important acts. Our last number contains the memorial of the convention of the Orthodox, which preceded the assembly; and upon which memorial most of the leading acts of the assembly were based. That paper was also a Testimony, of the real Presbyterian body, against the totally new principles of church order, and the terrible heresies which have been secretly introduced, and widely disseminated in that church. We proceed to give, the first set of a series of important papers, which were produced during the course of the Assembly-and which will very clearly exhibit, as we progress, the posture, and aim of the Presbyterian and AntiPresbyterian parties.

The reader will be struck, in the perusal of the documents now published with several important points in the progress of this controversy. He will see that in the recorded judgment of all shades of opinion-there are too great differences in doctrine and too great mutual alienations, to allow a peaceful or profitable continuance of union in one body; and by reading the memorial and testimony spoken of above he will see the whole reasons thereof set forth. He will see that every demand of the minority, having any sort of reason in it was immediately assented to, by the majority-and that prompt and ample provision was tendered by them, for the equitable settlement of every matter not immediately disposed of on the most liberal, and Christian terms. He will see that the New Shool party, refused to be satisfied with any thing less, than the total annihilation of the church as now organized; and broke up the plan for a separation, mainly because the orthodox refused to destroy utterly, the church, which while they revered, the others cared so little for that their very first offer was, to give up even its name! He will perceive that every sort of shift was resorted to that time might be gained-in order that the Home Missionary Society with Dr. Peters's seven or eight hundred agents, pensioned over the land, and disseminating discontent-might operate the final ruin of the orthodox; to effect which object Dr. Peters had at his disposal $100,000 per annum, which he spends without any sort of responsibility to any church tribunal whatever; and by a very easy arrange

ment, might so transfer his agents, as to control the one half of our Presbyteries-even if no new ones were made; but nothing more was wanting than to follow out practices already extensively pursued, and by making numerous small Presbyteries-put the whole power of the church, into the hands of a small minority of the synods. He will be amazed to find, that even on the principles of the New School men, if the orthodox had embraced their proposals, they might have been finally unchurched and lost every thing, after complete success, by three or four stubborn semi-pelagian Presbyteries, holding obstinately out, and claiming to be the only true Presbyterian body; and yet that persons professing Godliness could seriously propose such a scheme, as fair and equal to brethren. Finally, he will blush to see Christian gentlemen making a proposition which meant one thing to the eye, and a totally different thing to the intention (No. 4 of the minority;) a proposition which as explained by its authors could be either, only nonsense-or only a fixed purpose to entrap and deceive! We say this with deep sorrow, and sincere shame: but we say it frankly and decidedly. We are utterly unable to comprehend how a fair minded and upright man, could make such a proposition, with such a meaning, as the proposition No. 4 of the minority-with their explanation of it. And Dr. McAuley, Dr. Beman, Dr. Peters, Mr. Dickinson, and Mr. Jessup will find it very hard to make the world believe they made We agree a proposition, which they intended to be nonsensical. and propose, say they, to ask the assembly, to decide a single point before submitting details; if they decide thus-our plan for voluntary separation shall "be taken;" but if otherwise then yours shall be taken." The committee of the majority considered all fair, and were in the act of assenting to the proposal. But as the other committee had already deceived them once before and retracted an ultimatum, after saying it was final-it was thought safest to ask, if they meant what they said-if they would be bound to execute in good faith the decision came to. The question was asked with hesitation, and only out of a sense of imperative duty. Its answer was heard in silent wonder! No; we will not execute, Heaven in good faith-nor do we consider you bound to do it!! preserve us from such diplomacy!

DIVISION OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.

Tuesday Morning, May 30.

Dr. Alexander, from the committee often who had been appointed on the existing state of the church, stated that in conducting the business with which they were charged, the committee had agreed that the two portions of which it was composed should meet separately, interchange communications with each other, and each report to the Assembly in its own way. He farther stated that the two portions were agreed in opinion that a division of the church ought

to take place, and were also agreed respecting many details of the plan; but that as to the main point, to wit, when and how the division should be effected, they had been unable to come to any agreement. The reports of the respective portions of the committee would place the whole subject fully in possession of the Assembly. Mr. Breckinridge, in behalf of the committee from the majority, read the following report:

The committee of the majority, from the united committee on the state of the church, beg leave to report:

That having been unable to agree with the minority's committee on any plan for the immediate and voluntary separation of the new and old school parties in the Presbyterian church, they lay before the General Assembly the papers which passed between the committees, and which contain all the important proceedings of both

bodies.

These papers are marked 1 to 5 of the majority, and 1 to 4 of the minority. A careful examination of them will show that the two committees were agreed in the following matters, namely:

1. The propriety of a voluutary separation of the parties in our church; and their separate organization.

2. As to the corporate funds, the names to be held by each denomination, the records of the church, and its boards and institutions.

It will appear further, that the committees were entirely unable to agree, on the following points, namely:

1. As to the propriety of entering at once, by the Assembly, upon the division, or the sending down of the question to the Presbyteries.

2. As to the power of the Assembly to take effectual initiative steps, as proposed by the majority; or the necessity of obtaining a change in the constitution of the church.

3. As to the breaking up of the succession of this General Assembly, so that neither of the new Assemblies proposed to be constituted, this proper body continued; or that the body which should retain the name and institutions of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in the United States of America, should be held in fact and law, to be the true successors of this body.

While the committee of the majority were perfectly disposed to do all that the utmost liberality could demand, and to use in all cases such expressions as should be wholly unexceptionable; yet it appeared to us indispensable to take our final stand on these grounds. For, first, we are convinced that if any thing tending towards a voluntary separation is done, it is absolutely necessary to do it effectually, and at once.

Secondly. As neither party professes any desire to alter any constitutional rule whatever, it seems to us not only needless, but absurd, to send down an overture to the Presbyteries on this subject. We believe, moreover, that full power exists in the Assembly, either by consent of parties, or in the way of discipline, to settle this, and all such cases; and that its speedy settlement is greatly to be desired.

Thirdly. In regard to the succession of the General Assem