spirit, and who have hitherto been not unfrequently actually joined for years as companions and friends.  The tone which is adopted by publications, which are the organs of various party opinions amongst us, show how keenly disputants, once excited, will deal with each other.  The differences consequent upon the Disruption in the Scottish Church called forth great bitterness of spirit and much mutual recrimination at the time.  But it seems to me that there are indications of a better spirit, and that there is more tolerance and more forbearance on religious differences amongst Scottish people generally.  I cannot help thinking, however, that at no period of our ecclesiastical annals was such language made use of, and even against those of the highest place and authority in the Church, as we have lately met with in the organs of the extreme Anglican Church party.  It is much to be regretted that earnest and zealous men should have adopted such a style of discussing religious differences.  I cannot help thinking it is injurious to Christian feelings of love and Christian kindness.  It is really sometimes quite appalling.  From the same quarter I must expect myself severe handling for some of these pages, should they fall into their way.  We cannot but lament, however, when we find such language used towards each other by those who are believers in a common Bible, and who are followers and disciples of the same lowly Saviour, and indeed frequently members of the same Church.  Bigotry and intolerance are not confined to one side or another.  They break out often where least expected.  Differences, no doubt, will always exist on many contested subjects, but I would earnestly pray that all SUCH differences, amongst ourselves at least, as those which injure the forbearance and gentleness of the Christian character, should become “Scottish Reminiscences,” whether they are called forth by the opposition subsisting between Presbyterianism and Episcopacy, or whether they arise amongst Presbyterians or amongst Episcopalians themselves.

To my apprehension Scotland has recently seen a most painful indication of the absence of that charity which, according to St. Paul, should “never fail” amongst a Christian people.  The act of two English Prelates officiating in one of the Established churches has called forth a storm of indignation as loud and vehement as if in a heathen land they had fallen down before the image of a heathen deity, and worshipped in a heathen temple.  Then the explanation which has been given by apologists for these services is not the least remarkable feature of the transaction.  These ministrations have been called “Mission Services,” and, in so far as I enter into the meaning of the phrase, I would solemnly and seriously protest against its being made use of in such a case. “Mission service” can only be applied to the case of a missionary raising his voice “in partibus infidelium” or, to say the least of it, in a land where no Christian