had never been formed. The Great Head and King of Zion saw, however, a necessity for trying his people in this way. But if these sentiments pervade that whole body, and a corresponding practice ensue, may we not indulge the hope, that there will yet be such a returning to former principles and attainments, that the wound then given to the unity of the church, may be healed? "Thus saith the LORD: stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.' 99 "Then will God give his people one heart and one way, that they may serve him forever for the good of them and their children after them.' "Then shall they be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment, and will with one mind and mouth lift their voice up together in praising God." And then will they "mark and avoid all those who cause divisions and offences, contrary to the doctrine learned." But to return to our narrative.

Before closing our remarks on the union, there is one other thing, which in justice ought not to be passed over without notice-it is this: that on the part of those members of the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania, who voted for the union, there was a breach of faith towards their brethren. At the meeting of Presbytery at Philadelphia, April 4, 1781, the Presbytery unanimously agreed, that the terms then agreed

and transmitted to the Reformed Presbytery, were the only terms upon which a union could be formed. This was a judicial transaction of the Presbytery. It was also unanimous. These terms were with equal solemnity and unanimity rejected by the other Presbytery. If any faith was to be given to their judicial proceedings, every member of that Presbytery had a right to consider himself solemnly pledged to others by that decision not to receive, nor to close the union on any other terms. If such decisions of judicial bodies, are not regarded as mutual pledges between the members, and if they are not kept with good faith, society can not exist. Yet that union was the result of a violation of that faith; and however well intended it may have been, the principle upon which it was organized is disorganizing.

There was another step highly disorderly, and which in any society constituted on and regulated by Presbyterian principles, would have nullified the act of union, and consequently all subsequent acts resting on that deed. This step was the introducing and closing of the union at the same meeting of the court. It has been a rule, time immemorial, in Presbyterian discipline, that no change in the terms of communion, nor any

rule affecting the constitutional principles of the church, can be enacted, by even the supreme court, until such change has been submitted to the inferior judicatories for consideration in the form of an overture; and until the whole church in that way has had an opportunity of expressing her mind on the proposed change.

Those who had acceded to the union, met in Convention at Philadelphia, in October afterwards; they arranged them. selves into three Presbyteries, constituted a Synod and assumed the name of the ASSOCIATE REFORMED SYNOD.* It is not intended here further to trace the history of this society, the principal events are recent and within the recollection of most persons at the present day, who have been attending to the movements that have been taking place in the religious communities.

But before dismissing this part of our subject, it will be proper to give a brief sketch of the subsequent history of the individuals who joined in the union. The first effects of the union, so far as particular congregations in the Presbytery of Pennsylvania were concerned, were very disastrous. Most of the congregations even of those ministers who went into it, were far from being satisfied. And in all these were divisions of greater or less extent, some of which may hereafter be particularly noticed.

One of the first changes produced by the union, was the removal of Mr. Proudfit from the united congregations of Pequa and Brandywine. It has been stated that Mr. Proudfit was Moderator at the time of the closing of the union, and that it was carried only by his casting vote. The spirit and manner in which the whole business was conducted, gave to most of the people who witnessed it, much dissatisfaction. These events having been transacted in the principal branch of Mr. Proudfit's charge, a more than equal share of responsibility, in the estimation of the people, rested on him. His congregation, therefore, disapproving of the union, adhered to the Presbytery of Pennsylvania.

*The Reformed Presbytery in Scotland, with which the Reformed Presbytery in this country was in fellowship, in their Testimony disowning, and testifying against the union, complain, that the part of the name borrowed from them is not placed foremost. "The appellation," say they, The Associate Reformed Synod, resigns the honors of the day to the Seceding body, [Associate,] and seems to indicate a predilection for their Testimony: if the thing comprehended under the name had been right, the title of the court with more propriety would have read, "The Reformed Associate Synod." Condemnation, &c., p. 4.

The friends of truth need feel neither ambition nor jealousy, to have their name assumed first or last by those who are in a course of defection from the truth.

The congregation in Salem, N. Y., in consequence of the removal of Dr. Clark to South Carolina, was now vacant; and as the principles of the union were but little known among the people in this section of the country, (no account of it having been published for sometime afterwards,) it was generally acquiesced in. Mr. Proudfit was settled in Salem, where he remained until his death. He continued to adhere to the union; but his adherence was supposed to be owing more to the circumstances in which he was placed, than to his approbation of the course he had taken. It is still reported by credible persons, who had had an opportunity of knowing, that he more than once expressed his regret, for having given the casting vote in favor of the union.

The following letter, written by Mr. Proudfit to Mr. John Harsha, (late of Argyle,) who had been a ruling elder in the congregation of Salem, shows that while he censured those persons who would not join in the union, yet he did not give his approbation to the principles of it himself.

"MY DEAR SIR

"NEW PERTH, Dec. 15th, 1785.

"The active part you took in calling me to this corner of the Lord's vineyard, and the affectionate regard you discovered after my approach, entitle me to use that freedom and plainness, which, I apprchend, your late conduct requires. Allow me to ask, what means your total withdrawment from meetings of session? What means the cool reserve you manifest in your deportment respecting your religious connections? Is it because of the Constitution? How can that be? seeing we have set it aside upwards of fifteen months since, and never to this day took it up; to me it is a dead thing; nor had it ever any influence in producing any alteration, either in doctrine, worship or order.

"I am free to profess to you, or any one that may inquire, my warm attachment to Covenanted Reformation, in all its branches, as exhibited in our excellent Confession of Faith, Catechisms, Directory, and form of Church Government. If my heart deceive me not, it is my ardent desire to have my mind impressed, and my practice regulated by their salutary truths. You are witness that it has been my endeavor to instruct the people committed to my charge, both publicly, and from house to house, in the above truths and duties, according to the grace given to me, since I came amongst you. May I humbly apply the words of the Apostle, For we are not as many that corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. I have renounced

the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God decitfully, but by manifestation of the truth, commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.'" (1 Cor. ii. 17. iv. 2.)

66

Remember, sir, you are under solemn covenant and promise to attend and encourage my ministry by the call you put into my hand, while I exhibit the doctrine which is according to godliness; nor can you be remiss about it without incurring the guilt of breach of solemn engagement, unless you can bring forth such reasons as will bear the touchstone of the Holy Scriptures. It is probable you have jealous apprehensions of my fidelity and integrity. I cannot account for suspicious thoughts; says Paul, but with me it is a very small matter, that I should be judged of you or of man's judgment: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.' Is it not the duty of church members to be steadfast in maintaining their religious connections, after the example of the primitive christians, (Acts ii. 42,) to be diligent in improving them, and fearful of breaking them?

"Can you say that you cannot hold communion with us in a consistence with truth and a good conscience, and is it for conscience sake you have withdrawn? Does your conduct flow from a well informed judgment? Is it the fruit of a solemn prayer to the Father of lights for direction? If it is not, suffer me to tell you, for I deal with your conscience, you are verily guilty concerning your brethren. It is hateful in the sight of God to proceed in any thing of importance without asking counsel at his mouth. At any rate, I am obliged to blame your conduct for irregularity. You have withdrawn without giving any reason for so doing. This is not orderly walking. It is a breach upon the unity and order of the church of Christ, contrary to Presbyterian principles. If they are real grievances you labor under, I request you to tell us plainly what they are that is certainly a duty you owe to your brethren.

"Does it offend you that I have sometimes preached the necessity of peace and brotherly love? Let this be my apology; it is witnessed of our blessed Master, he came and preached peace to them that are far off, and to them that are nigh. (Eph. ii. 17.) Christ is the prince of peace, his gospel is the gospel of peace, his ministers are ambassadors of peace, and his people are sons of peace. I wish for no peace among us, but what has truth for its foundation, the Spirit for its author, the word for the rule, and holiness for the ornament

of it. Peace, not so qualified, is a conspiracy and combina tion against the God of truth.

66

"I shall give you a few sentences from a late sensible writer, 'Alas,' says he, for the divisions of Reuben! Should they not cause great searchings of heart? they are evil things in themselves, very evil; but they are only the alarming symptoms of worse. Yes, my friends, we are alienated from Christ, and must be estranged from one another. He is the corner stone of the church, the more closely people are joined to him in their exercise, the more firmly they are cemented among themselves. Jealousies and emulations, variance and strife among them, demonstrate they are fallen from him. Answer me, you who believe, is the spirit of forbearance extinguished in your breasts, or ready to expire? How then, pray, does your soul prosper? Is fellowship with your brethren as pleasant and fruitful as it has been? Is your communion with God as intimate, sensible and refreshing? Have you wanted enlargements at a throne of grace, and has the gospel lost nothing of its relish?'

"Thus far he. It is a wise observation of Solomon," as an ear-ring of gold and an ornament of fine gold, so is a wise reprover on an obedient ear." Faithful are the wounds of a friend. May I hope that my admonition and counsel will be acceptable to you. Be assured, it does not proceed from the gall of an enemy, but from the unfeigned affection of

66

Sir, your humble serv't and sincere well wisher,
"JAS. PROUDFIT.”

It will be proper here to insert Mr. Harsha's answer to this letter, because the answer corroborates what is observed in another place, namely, that the people were deceived by the union, and understood neither its design nor effects. Mr. Harsha's letter is plain, but sensible and judicious, and brings home to Mr. Proudfit some facts and truths which could not, we think, fail to reach the conscience of an honest man. It is written in a christian spirit, and is strikingly characteristic of the guileless simplicity and integrity, which distinguished its amiable author all the days of his life.

“Rev. and DEAR SIR

66

"NEW PERTH, Dec. 1785.

"I received your letter, and, thought of sending you an answer before now, but I am a poor hand at speaking or writing, and still worse at inditing. It is more difficult for me to express my mind in this way, than it would be for many others; but as I have one to deal with, who, it is to be hoped, will not take advantage of my weakness, I shall adventure to