church was already planted.  When I think of the piety, the Christian worth, and high character of so many friends in the Established and other Presbyterian churches in Scotland, I would again repeat my solemn protestation against such religious intolerance, and again declare my conviction, that Englishmen and Scotsmen, so far from looking out for points of difference and grounds for separation on account of the principles on which their Churches are established, should endeavour to make the bonds of religious union as close as possible.  I can scarcely express the gratification I felt on learning from the Scotsman, November 20, that such were the sentiments called forth by this event in the mind of one of the ablest and most distinguished Prelates of our day.  In reference to the Glengarry services, the Bishop of St. Andrews (Wordsworth) has declared his opinion, that the “subsequent explanations of those services seemed to mar the good work by introducing questions of etiquette, where nothing should have been thought of but the simple performance of Christian duty by Christian ministers for the benefit of Christian people[192].”

Such is the judgment expressed by the honoured and learned Bishop of St. Andrews, whose noble and patriotic exertions to draw the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians of Scotland closer together in bonds of religious feelings and religious worship have been spoken of in such terms, and such words have been applied to his labours in that cause, and to the administration generally of his own diocese, by one of the very high English Church papers, as have been to me a cause of deep sorrow and poignant regret.

As a Scotsman by descent from Presbyterians of high moral and religious character, and as an Episcopalian by conscientious preference, I would fain see more of harmony and of confidence between all Scotsmen, not only as fellow-countrymen, but as fellow-Christians.  When I first joined the Episcopal Church the Edinburgh Episcopal clergy were on most friendly terms with the leading clergy of the Established Church.  Every consideration was shown to them by such men as Bishop Sandford, Dr. Morehead, Rev. Archibald Alison, Rev. Mr. Shannon, and others.  There was always service in the Episcopal chapels on the National Church communion fast-days.  No opposition or dislike to Episcopalian clergymen occupying Presbyterian pulpits was ever avowed as a great principle.  Charles Simeon of Cambridge, and others of the Churches of England and Ireland, frequently so officiated, and it was considered as natural and suitable.  The learning and high qualities of the Church of England’s hierarchy, were, with few exceptions, held in profound respect.  Indeed, during the last hundred years, and since the days when Episcopacy was attacked under the term of “black prelacy,” I can truly say, the Episcopal order has received far more severe handling in Episcopal England than it has received in Presbyterian Scotland.  I must think, that in the case of two churches where the grounds of resemblance are on points of spiritual importance affecting great truths and doctrines of salvation, and where the points of difference affect questions more of government and external order than of salvation, there ought to be on both parts the desire at least to draw as closely as they can the bonds of Christian charity and mutual confidence.