66 unable to carry out the discipline of the Presbyterian Church, he removed to Philadelphia, and for some years was minister of the Spruce Street Church. He afterwards accepted of a call from a congregation in Baltimore. In this his last fixed he demitted it in favor of the present pas- preachers and pastors of his age. He was a man of a sound strong mind, of extensive learning, and of unusually fervent piety. His scholarship was rare. He had so habituated himself to classical studies, that at the age of twenty, he spoke the Latin language on all the higher sub-charge he continued about six years, when jects of discouse, with equal ease and greater elegance, than his mother tongue. In Greek his proficiency was but little inferior; and he was familiar with Hebrew. At the age of twenty-four, he taught logic and moral philosophy in the seminary of the Anti-burghers at Abernethy. His lectures were in Latin. As a preacher he was uncommonly judicious and instructive; as a pastor singularly faithful and diligent, and as a friend and companion he displayed an assemblage of excellencies rarely found in so great a degree in one person. Few ministers have ever lived in New York, in so high esteem, or died so deeply and generally lamented."-The following testimony of regard is from the pen of the late Dr. Linn, who knew Dr. Mason well:-" He had prudence without cunning, cheerfulness without levity, dignity without pride, friendship without ceremony, charity without undue latitude, and religion without ostentation."* For thirty years he was minister of the Old Scots' Church, (Cedar Street,) New York; he died in 1792, and was succeeded by his distinguished son, Dr. John M. Mason. He is said to have written in connection with Gov. Livingston of New Jersey, some powerful political papers, during the discussions that preceded the Revolution. Banished in common with other Presbyterians from the city during its occupancy by the British army, he acted as a chaplain to the American forces, and was very warmly esteemed by Washington. The Rev. Robert Annan had been a fellow student with Dr. Mason, and they came to this country about the same time. He was first settled at Neelytown, in Orange county, New York; and during the early years of the Revolution he was a very active promoter of the Whig cause. About the close of the war he was called to the charge of a newly formed Scots' church in Boston; but finding himself Miller's Life of Rogers, p. 164. The Rev. James Proudfit was also educated for the ministry at Abernethy. His first settlement was at Pequa, Pennsylvania. After laboring here upwards of twenty years, he was called to Salem, as the successor of Mr. Clark, where he remained until his decease, in 1802. For some years before his death, his son, the Rev. Dr. Alex. Proudfit, was associated with him in the pastoral charge. He was one of the first Presbyterian ministers settled north of Troy, and for many years he was abundant in labors over a wide extent of country; not a few of the largest congregations in Washington county having been founded by him. He published nothing, but he was eminent for his holiness. A brother minister who had long known him, once said to his son, that "he was the holiest man he ever knew." So great was his acquaintance with the Bible, that he was often called by his friends the concordance. Of the Covenanting brethren, Messrs. Dobbin, Lind, and Cuthbertson, we regret that we are unable to give any certain information. In this connection it may not be out of place to give a few notices respecting the principal localities of the Associate Reformed Church, in these early days of her history. The earliest settlements were in Pennsylvania, within the Cumberland Valley. From these, colonies went forth to various parts of the United States. Numbers emigrated to West Pennsylvania, but in what year, we are unable to state, -we only know that these emigrants formed some of the earliest Presbyterian churches west of the Alleghany mountains. Some of the first settlers in Pennsylvania remained but a short time, and then removed to the upper parts of South Carolina and Georgia. The Old Church in Philadelphia, was formed by a few pious Scotsmen, who at first met together as a praying society. The Old Church in New York was formed by the scparation of the Scottish members from the Wall Street Church in 1751, in consequence of changes in the forms of worship, and the neglect of Presbyterian order. In Orange county, a colony of Irish Presbyterians was established under the auspices of Col. Clinton, the founder of the Clinton family, so early as 1734; from these have sprung the various Associate Reformed churches in that county. Others were induced to settle on the Colden and Campbell patents. The first settlement in Washington county, was made by Dr. Clark; his congregation emigrated from Ireland about the year 1760: one part going to Carolina, another portion accompanying him to Washington county. To this day, this county is eminently Scottish in its religious peculiarities. It may be added, that the Associate Reformed Church was one of the first to plant the standard of the Gospel in the State of Kentucky; and at the close of the last century the prospect of increase in that commonwealth was highly promising. These prospects were, however, soon darkened and destroyed by dissensions among the ministers. At the beginning of the present century, the Lexington Academy was founded under the auspices of the Associate Reformed Church. It was incorporated by the legislature of the State, and received from the same source the very handsome endowment of 4000 acres of land. Had the affairs of this institution, and of the church, been managed with ordinary prudence, there can be little doubt that it would now have been among the best collages in the great valley of the West. But the opportunity was madly thrown away, and now it is irrecoverably gone. All the subsequent efforts of the church to extend herself in Kentucky, have been attended by no encouraging results. In addition to these early settlements of the church, in the States of New York, Pennsylvania, Carolina, and Kentucky, it should be mentioned that there were some in New Hampshire and Maine. Mr. Greenleaf gives some notices of them in his Ecclesiastical History of Maine. They were associated under the name of the Presbytery of Londonderry. The region, however, was unfavorable to the growth of Presbyterianism; so soon as the older generation was removed, their descendants became "like the people of the land," and degenerated into independency, though the name of Presbytery was still kept up. The consequence was, that the Synod in 1802 passed the harsh and unwise act, declaring this Presbytery no longer a portion of the Associate Reformed Church. We now resume the history of the Synod. As before stated, it was constituted at Philadelphia, in 1782, and was then composed of three Presbyteries, and numbered in all fourteen ministers. One of the first acts of the Synod, after its organization, was, the adoption of a series of articles, which were afterwards published under the very unsuitable name of the Constitution of the Associate Reformed Church: among the people it was known as "the Little Constitution." These articles were vehemently attacked both by the Covenanters (in Scotland) and the Seceders here; yet they deserve attention as showing the ardent attachment of the men of that day to "the truth and peace;" they furnish striking evidence that they possessed a truly catholic spirit, and were eminently free from that mean and narrow sectarian temper which has often been displayed by those who make the loudest professions of universal charity. Our limits forbid the insertion of these articles; and we shall only say in reference to them, that the spirit of charity and moderation which they breathe, has been characteristic of the Associate Reformed Church from that day to this: in no case has she attempted to profit by the dissensions of her neighbors, and with For twenty years after the union, the growth of the church was very rapid; in fact, the demand for laborers in all parts of the land, New England excepted, was far greater than the Synod could possibly supply. This rapidity of increase led the church, in 1803, to adopt a measure the single and noble exception of the Mo- | by Dr. Robert Proudfit, are very valuable ravians, no other denomination in this expositions of Scripture truth, and have country has ever displayed less sectarian- long been highly prized. ism than she. Whether these articles were designed to serve only a temporary purpose or not, can hardly be determined at this distance of time; the fact, however, is, that they were ultimately laid aside for a fuller exposition of the church's faith-a measure that was probably owing to the uneasiness created in the minds of some weak but sincere persons, by the incessant and virulent attacks of the enemies of the union. The final result was, that the Westminster Confession and the Catechism, after a careful revision, at several successive meetings of Synod, in the articles relating to the power of the magistrate, were published in one volume, in 1799, under the title of "The Constitution and Standards of the Associate Reformed Church in North America," and they have continued to be such, down to the present day. The ground occupied by the United Church was the same as that held by the Church of Scotland. The testimonies of Covenanters and Seceders were approved so far as they did not conflict; but the simple standards of the Church of Scotland were adopted as the standards of the church in the United States, only with a slight change of their language on the subject before named. And even this change amounted to no more than the incorporation in the Confession of the very sentiments expressed by the Church of Scotland on this head, in her adopting act of 1646. The Directory for Worship and the Propositions of Church Government remained unchanged; the Rules of Discipline and Forms of Process were not so much altered as drawn out into a regular system, the want of which the Church of Scotland has long felt; instead of rules she has only precedents for her guide in matters of discipline. In this connection it may be mentioned, that various doctrinal acts were passed by the Synod, which were intended to oppose particular errors prevalent at the time. Of these, the acts on Faith and Justification, written by the late Dr. John M. Mason; on Original Sin, by the Rev. Robert Forrest, and on the Atonement, under the influence of Dr. Mason, of New York-which was altogether premature, and ultimately exerted a most disastrous influence upon her fortunes; this was the division of the church into four Provincial Synods of New York, Pennsylvania, Scioto, and the Carolinas, under a representative General Synod. The size of the denomination did not warrant this measure; the provincial Synods, held at great expense and trouble, found that they had no business to transact worth the name, and in a few years ceased to assemble; the affairs of the church fell into the hands of a few, and thus jealousies were engendered, the evil effects of which are felt to this day. In 1800 it was resolved to take steps for the establishment of a Theological Seminary, as the only means of supplying the increasing demand for ministers; and in the meantime an effort was to be made to obtain a supply of ministers from Scotland. For these purposes, Dr. John M. Mason was sent as the agent of the church to Great Britain in 1802; he succeeded in obtaining funds to the amount of about $6000, the largest part of which was expended in the purchase of a most valuable library; and on his return he was accompanied by five Scottish ninisters, several of whom still survive. At the meeting of Synod in 1804, the plan of the Seminary was carefully framed ; Dr. Mason was chosen Professor of Theology; and the sessions of the Seminary began in the autumn of the same year, in the city of New York. This was the first Seminary established in the United States, and for many years the most famous seat of theological learning in our country. The chief credit of its foundation, and especially of the admirable plan on which it was based, belongs to Dr. Mason. It is the model according to which all the other Seminaries of the Associate Reformed Church have since been framed. Of the character of Dr. Mason, his unrivalled eloquence, his rich and varied scholarship, his immense popularity, it is hardly necessary to speak. He is one of the very few American clergymen, whose fame is as bright in Britain as in the United States. Yet it is melancholy to reflect that his fame, once so great, is rapidly passing away, for he has left no durable monument behind him. The Seminary might have been such, but he, unfortunately for it, as well as for himself, undertook too much, and besides, lacked that indomitable perseverance which never rests until it has fully attained its objects. The Seminary which he founded, exists indeed in another place, but on the spot of its nativity it is now almost unknown. Dr. Mason's writings deserve a high rank in the theological literature of this country; but we have reason to believe that they are in no respect what they would have been, had the energies of his mind been concentrated upon his duties as a theological professor. His earliest work, which was published about five years after his admission to the ministry, was upon the subject of Frequent Communion. For many years, in fact since the days of prelatic persecution, the Scottish churches were accustomed to observe the sacrament of the Lord's Supper not more than twice a year, and in some cases only once. Besides the usual preparation sermon, the sacrament Sabbath was invariably preceded by a fast day on the Thursday, and succeeded by a thanksgiving day upon the Monday. Palpably opposed as this was to the spirit of the Directory, which declares that "the Lord's Supper is frequently to be observed," the church had become so wedded to these "days," that it was deemed by many almost a profanation of the sacrament to celebrate it without them. Dr. Mason set himself to oppose these additions to the New Testament Passover, as he well knew that its frequent observance was impossible so long as they were continued; his " Letters,' addressed to the members of the Associate Reformed Church, were the means of working the desired change in many con gregations, though in some parts of the church "the days" are observed even to the present time. But the great work of Dr. Mason is his masterly treatise on "Catholic Communion," published in 1816. The circumstances which gave rise to this important work are given in the work itself, and need not be here repeated. It is a singular coincidence that its appearance was contemporaneous with that of the treatise of Mr. Robert Hall of Leicester on the same subject, and in which substantially the same principles are defended. Previous to the appearance of Dr. Mason's work, the practice of the Associate Reformed Church, in common with the other branches of the Scottish Church in this country, had been that of exclusive communion. We say that such was her practice, and it furnished a sad illustration how the practice of a church which glories in her orthodoxy, may be in palpable contradiction to her own standards. In the days of the Westminster Assembly the doctrine of exclusive communion was condemned, especially by Baillie and Rutherford, two of the greatest lights of their age, as one of the peculiar errors of the Independents, who would neither commune with other Christians, nor allow others to commune with them. The Confession of the Scottish Church asserts in the plainest terms the duty of communing with all, in every place, who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, as God in his providence gives the opportunity. But at an early period in the history of the Scottish Secession an unchristian spirit of exclusiveness began to manifest itself; new terms of communion were framed, which had never before been heard of in the Christian church; they assumed ground which was a virtual unchurching of all other denominations of Christians; and they were forced to put a construction upon the language of their own Confession relative to the communion of saints, at war with the well known sentiments of the Westminster divines, and almost too absurd to need refutation. The great aim of Dr. Mason's work.was to expound and defend the doctrine of the church on this subject, and to bring the practice of the church into a correspond. ence with her own authorized standards or, in other words, the dismemberment of a denomination, be warrantable on such grounds, the foundation of such a body must be exceedingly insecure. All the old and sound Presbyterian writers, as Rutherford, Durham and Baillie, are agreed in maintaining, that the only proper grounds of separation are, the authoritative sanctioning of gross heresy, or the positive interference with the rights of conscience; nor will even these justify it, until faithful though unavailing efforts have been made to remove the grievance. The eminent writers whose names have been given, unite in declaring, that to secede merely because the supreme judicatory tolerates something which one party deems to be an evil, while perfect freedom is allowed to testify against it, is to be guilty of schism. The truth is, that the schism of which we have spoken is to be traced to that absurd longing after an absolute uniformity in the mere externals of Divine worship, which Scottish Presbyterianism derived from the Westminster Assembly; this, we are persuaded, more than any other cause, has cramped the energies and hindered the advancement of the Associate Reformed Church in the United States. On this account, as well as for the influ- | must be manifest to all that if secession, ence which it was the means of exerting, it deserves an honorable notice in the history of the church. The appearance of this work gave great offence to those in our own and some other denominations, who cither could not or would not see the difference between catholic communion and promiscuous communion, and an attempt was made to answer it; still it was the means of producing a happy change in the practice of a considerable portion of the church of which its author was a member. But candor requires the statement, that in some other parts of the church, the doctrine of exclusive communion is taught and practised. The discussion of this subject, connected as it was in point of time with an attempt to introduce a new version of the Psalter, greatly helped to increase those sectional jealousies which had existed for some years before. All the great interests of the church languished; the Seminary was becoming involved in pecuniary difficulties —a fact however no way surprising, when it is considered how sadly its pecuniary affairs were mismanaged. The ministers in the western States made loud complaints against what they deemed innovations on the ancient order of the church; these proving-as might have been expected from the very manner in which they were made-ineffectual, the entire Synod of Scioto at length, in 1820, withdrew from the superintendence of the General Synod, This was a step in palpable violation of the essential principles of Presbyterianism; it was a causeless dismemberment of the church. Those who adopted it did not pretend that the General Synod had sanctioned heresy; they could not pretend that their interests were neglected, for quite as large a number of those educated in the seminary at New York were settled in the western States, as in any other portion of the country. The only thing which furnished them with a show of complaint was the act of the General Synod allowing the use of a different version of the Psalms from that which had been in use in the Associate Reformed Church. But no attempt was made to force a new version upon unwilling congregations. Now it In 1821, the Synod of the Carolinas petitioned the General Synod to be erected into an independent Synod. The ground on which it was made was the great distance of the Synod from the place at which the General Synod usually assembled, and the consequent impossibility of their being represented in the supreme council of the church. The request was granted. For many years after that event, the Southern Synod could hardly be said to have grown; but within the last few years a more enterprising spirit has been diffused among its members, and the prospects of increase are more promising than at any previous period. The increase of the Western Synod may be said to have kept pace with the rapid strides with which the Western States have advanced in population and in wealth. At the time of their separation in 1820, the number of ministers did not exceed twenty; now it is more than one hundred. The details of their statistics |