probably should not have noticed it. The "Introductory Remarks," we think, would have much better answered the purpose of explaining the motives and objects of the Editors. Those "Remarks" are admirable; they manifest intellectual strength, they breathe the pure and elevated spirit of that liberty wherewith Christ has made his disciples free. We say this with one exception,—it is the sentence which speaks of "the disagreeable and ungracious task of theological controversy.' We know not what this can mean. 66 Theological controversy" may be ungracious in the eyes of those whose superstition will be exposed to scorn by public discussion-it may be "disagreeable" to those who dwell in regions of mystery, and who thrive thereby on human ignorance, to have light thrown in upon the darkness of their abode,—but surely to those who believe themselves in possession of truth, and the multitude to be in grievous aud pernicious error, the task of theological controversy ought not to be, cannot be, either disagreeable or ungracious. To the "Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites" of old, to the members of the Jewish Sanhedrim, the "theological controversy" conducted by the blessed Saviour and his Apostles, which condemned the "commandments and traditions" of the day, and laid bare the motives of those who "devoured widow's houses, and for a pretence made long prayers," was doubtless both "ungracious" and "disagreeable." The complaint or the apology, however, came not from Jesus: it was his meat and his drink to do the will of his Father, and that will was, that God might be adored in purity, and mankind be virtuous, and therefore blessed. And surely to a faithful disciple of the Christ of heaven, nothing can be more delightful than to behold the individual from whose mental vision the scales of ignorance and bigotry have fallen, holding on his way rejoicing in his spiritual emancipation, and proving the superiority of his faith by his virtuous and benevolent practice. To effect this blessed change, "theological controversy" is absolutely necessary. When rightly considered and properly conducted, it is not a task, but a sacred and solemn obligation; nor to him who values the mental and moral regeneration of his fellow-beings, will it ever be deemed either ungracious or disagreeable.

With respect to the Prospectus, it notices and regrets the rejection of the offer made at a meeting of the Synod of Ulster, by the Rev. H. Montgomery, that a joint period

ical should have been begun by the two opposing parties. To our great surprise, it affirms, that the "friends of peace and unity" "are persuaded," that had such a periodical been agreed on, and properly conducted, "the unhappy division of the Synod, which has since taken place, would never have occurred." What! designate that as an 66 unhappy division," from a body which, in the "Introductory Remarks," is thus characterized? "We defy the records of Popery or Prelacy, or any other form of ecclesiastical domination, to furnish a parallel to the present enslaved and abject condition of the Synod of Ulster, in its Students, Licentiates, Pastors, and People. Other tyrannies may be venerable from their antiquity, or respectable from their learning, character, and sincerity, associated with them; or in some degree pardonable from the darkness and circumstances of the times in which they originated; but the petty tyranny of the Synod of Ulster, which will stand as a blot upon the page of the nineteenth century, does not possess one single redeeming quality. Worthless in its origin, treacherous in its progress, and destructive in its aims, it equally merits the scorn of the wise, and the disapprobation of the good." And is it to be supposed that a conjoint periodical would have cleansed this Augean stable? Is it to be believed a single instant, that printed arguments the most powerful, and persuasion the most convincing, would have converted those from their principles of prejudice, or turned those from the error of their way of bigotry, who to the living argument of Blakeley, and the Christian elequence of Montgomery, turned an ear as deaf as that of the adder? Believing the age of miracles to be past, we regard such an expectation as among the vainest ever entertained by humanity. No, no, we look on that division, "unhappy" though it may be termed, with equal truth, as that affair of Navarino was named "untoward," to be a mighty movement in favour of free inquiry, and, consequently, of Christian knowledge and truth. That does not exonerate the authors of the persecution, but it does give us a presage of the onward march of improvement and benevolence.

We could not refrain a smile, on learning from the Prospectus, that had such a periodical commenced its labours, the opposing parties "might have found good reason, on either side, to change their opinions, and thus the cause of truth would have been advanced." We have heard of

a controversy between a Catholic and a Protestant, which ended in the conversion of the Catholic to Protestantism, and of the Protestant to Catholicism; but that the cause of truth was "advanced" thereby, we confess our inability to discover. How persons "in vindication of their own opinions, and of what they believe to be the cause of divine truth," can affirm, "In this task, they engage with reluctance," we really know not. It surely indicates a wish to stand well with the world, rather than to "quit themselves like men." All such pleas, such phraseology, will be useless. It will not abate a jot the rancour of opponents--it will not strengthen the timid, but it may disgust the honest and the fearless. The days of trimming, of expediency, and of pleasing both parties, are past-the times of Reformation are come. "I have not shunned to declare the whole counsel of God," should every man strive to be able to say with truth and sincerity. We again say, we rejoice to see, that the tone and spirit of the "Introductory Remarks," indicate better things than did the Prospectus. In what we have said, we have had in view the progress of knowledge and goodness; and we are satisfied, that that cannot be speeded onward, if accompanied by any appearance, however unintentional, of bending to man's frown, or accommodating religious principles to circumstances and seasons.

We learn with pleasure, from "The Bible Christian," that at a meeting of the Unitarians of the parishes of Killeleagh (the place at which the Rev. H. Cooke preached, before his removal to Belfast), Killinchy, Kilmore, and Saintfield-Dr. Gordon of Saintfield in the Chair,—it was resolved to erect Independent Unitarian Churches both at Saintfield and Killeleagh. Branch Associations were also formed to "the Irish Unitarian Christian Society," and Committees nominated to carry the resolutions into effect. Would this have happened, at any rate, so early, had it not been for the "unhappy division" of the Synod? We think not.

The 1st, 2d, and 3d Volumes of the CHRISTIAN PIONEER, and any of the single Numbers to complete sets, may be had on application to Mr. HUNTER, St. Paul's Church-Yard, London; or the EDITOR, Glasgow. The price of the Volumes, 4s. 6d. each.

ADVERTISEMENTS for the Cover are respectfully solicited. They will be inserted on the following terms: -Advertisements of a few lines, 5s.; half a page, 7s. 6d. ; whole page, 10s.

CHRISTIAN PIONEER.

No. 44.

APRIL, 1830.

Vol. IV.

Religious Denominations in Glasgow.

From Dr. CLELAND'S "Glasgow Statistics: Population, and Church Accommodation.

(Concluded from page 257.)

"IN 1804, the Rev. Dr. Sandford of Edinburgh, effected a union between the Scotch and English Episcopalians. Bishop Abernethy Drummond having been appointed to the united diocese of Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Fife, held the first diet for confirmation at Glasgow, on 15th May, 1806, when ninety persons were confirmed. The Rev. Dr. Sandford was made bishop in 1807, and was afterwards appointed to the united diocese of Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Fife. On 5th Dec. 1811, he confirmed fifty-six persons in Glasgow. This talented and highly respected Prelate departed this life on 14th Jan. 1830, in the 64th year of his age. On the 19th and 20th days of June, 1811, a Code of Canons for the Episcopal Church of Scotland was drawn up and enacted at Aberdeen, by an ecclesiastical Synod, consisting of six Bishops, four Deans, and four delegates, viz. Bishops, the Right Rev. John Skinner Primus, Andrew MacFarlane, Alexander Jolly, Daniel Sandford, Patrick Torry, and George Gleig; Deans, the very Rev. William Sangster, James Walker, James Sommerville, and John Robertson; Delegates, the Rev. John Cruikshank, Archibald Alison, Heneage Horsley, and John Skinner.

"In 1715, the Nonjurors in this city and neighbourhood, met for worship in a private house in Bell-Street; Bishop Alexander Duncan was the first officiating clergyman. About the year 1754, the congregation had increased so much, that it became necessary to remove it to a large hall in Stockwell-Street, and in 1800, to a more commodious chapel in George-street, where they had an organ. When the penal statutes came to be enforced at the close of the Rebellion of 1745, several Episcopal chapels were erected in Scotland, whose ministers had been ordained by English or Irish bishops; but from having no connection with the

Nonjurors, and the English and Irish bishops having no jurisdiction in Scotland, they were considered by the Nonjurors in the light of Independent Episcopalians, without the spiritual authority of bishops, and, consequently, without the sacred privilege of confirmation. In 1750, an Episcopal chapel, unconnected with the Nonjurors, was erected in this city, behind St. Andrew's Square; the Rev. James Reddoch was the first minister. The present incumbent, the Rev. William Routledge, was admitted in 1795, he was ordained Deacon in 1791 by the Bishop of Carlisle, and Priest in 1795 by the Archbishop of York. In 1775, an organ was placed in the chapel, which was the first in this city since the Reformation, when the great organ was removed from the Cathedral. In 1825, a large Episcopal chapel was built in Renfieldstreet, where there is also an organ. The Rev. George Almond was the first minister.

"The Old Dissenters-under the inspection of the Reformed Presbytery, assumed this appellation because they were of longer standing, as a distinct body, than any other denomination of Presbyterians who have separated from the Established Church. They have been called Whigs, as zealous friends of civil and religious liberty-Cameronians, from Rev. Richard Cameron, who fell at Airsmoss, in Kyle, on 20th July, 1680, while nobly defending the civil and religious liberty of his country: the 26th regiment of foot, or Cameronians, was raised from their body— Mountain-men, on account of their adherence to the cause of those who faithfully preached the gospel in the mountains and moors of Scotland during the persecution— M'Millans, from the name of the first minister who espoused their cause after the Revolution, and whose immediate decendants of the second and third generation till lately ministered among them-Anti-government people: this epithet the Old Dissenters justly reject with indignation, as they have often done from the pulpit and the press.

"The Old Dissenters are strenuous advocates for the binding obligation of the national covenant of Scotland, and of the solemn league and covenant of Scotland, England, and Ireland, fully convinced that the Holy Scriptures warrant public vowing or covenanting to the Lord. The last ordained minister, who openly espoused their cause previous to the Revolution, was the Rev. James Renwick, who was