_Feb. 19th._--Sir John Colborne, the Lieutenant-Governor, having nominated an Episcopal chaplain to the House of a.s.sembly, the question, "Is the Church of England an established church in Upper Canada?" was again debated in the House of a.s.sembly and discussed in the newspapers.
With a view to a calm, dispa.s.sionate, and historical refutation of the claims set up by the Episcopal Church on the subject, Dr. Ryerson reprinted in the _Guardian_ of this day, the sixth of a series of letters which he had addressed from Cobourg to Archdeacon Strachan, in May and June, 1828. It covered the whole ground in dispute.[32]
_Nov. 6th, 1832._--Archdeacon Strachan, in his sermon, preached at the visitation of the Bishop of Quebec at York, on the 5th of September, speaking of the Methodists, said that he would--
Speak of them with praise, notwithstanding their departure from the Apostolic ordinance, and the hostility long manifested against us by some of their leading members.
In reply to this statement, Dr. Ryerson wrote from St. Catharines to the Editor of the _Guardian_. He pointed out that:--
It was not until after Archdeacon Strachan"s sermon on the death of the former Bishop of Quebec was published, in 1826, that a single word was written, and then to refute his slanders. In that sermon, when accounting for the few who attend the Church of England, the Archdeacon said that their attendance discouraged the minister, and that--
His influence is frequently broken or injured by numbers of uneducated, itinerant preachers, who, leaving their steady employment, betake themselves to preaching the Gospel from idleness, or a zeal without knowledge ... and to teach what they do not know, and which from their pride they disdain to learn.[33]
Again, in May, 1827, Archdeacon Strachan sent an "Ecclesiastical Chart"
to the Colonial Office, and in the letter accompanying it stated that:--
The Methodist teachers are subject to the orders of the United States of America, and it is manifest that the Colonial Government neither has, nor can have any other control over them, or prevent them from gradually rendering a large portion of the population, by their influence and instructions, hostile to our inst.i.tutions, civil and religious, than by increasing the number of the Established Clergy.
Who then [Dr. Ryerson asked] was the author of contention? Who was the aggressor? Who provoked hostilities? The slanders in the Chart were published in Canada, and in England, by Dr. Strachan before a single effort was made by a member of any denomination to counteract his hostile measures, or a single word was said on the subject.
_Nov. 19th, 1834._--In connection with this subject I insert here the following reply (containing several historical facts) to a singularly pretentious letter which Dr. Ryerson had inserted in the _Guardian_ of this date, denouncing the opposition of a certain "sect called Methodists" to the claims of the Church of England as an established church in the Colony. The reply was inserted in order to afford strangers and new settlers in Upper Canada correct information on the subject, and to disprove the statement of the writer of the letter, Dr.
Ryerson mentioned the following facts:--
The pretensions of the Episcopal clergy began to be disputed by the clergy of the Church of Scotland as soon as it was known that the former had got themselves erected into a corporation. This was, I believe, in 1820.[34] The subject was brought before the House of a.s.sembly in 1824, and the House in 1824, "25, "26, "27, pa.s.sed resolutions remonstrating against the exclusive claims of the Episcopal clergy. From 1822 to 1827 several pamphlets were published on both sides of the question, and much was said in the House of a.s.sembly; but during this period not one word was written by any minister or member of the Methodist Church, nor did the Methodists take any part in it, though their ministers were not even allowed to solemnize matrimony--a privilege then enjoyed by Calvinistic ministers--and though individual ministers had been most maliciously and cruelly persecuted, under the sanction of judicial authority.... But in the statements drawn up for the Imperial Government by the Episcopal clergy during the years mentioned, the extirpation of the Methodists was made one princ.i.p.al ground of appeal by the Episcopal clergy for the exclusive countenance and patronage of His Majesty"s Government. Some of these doc.u.ments at length came before the Canadian public; and in 1827 a defence of the Methodists and other religious denominations was put forth by the writer of these remarks in the form of a "Review of a Sermon preached by the Archdeacon of York." Up to this time not one word was said on "the church question" by the Methodists. But it was so warmly agitated by others, that in the early part of 1827 Archdeacon Strachan, an executive and legislative councillor, was sent to London to support the claims of the Episcopal clergy at the Colonial Office. His ecclesiastical chart and other communications were printed by order of the Government, and soon found their way into the provincial newspapers, and gave rise to such a discussion, and excited such a feeling throughout the Province as was never before witnessed. The shameful attack upon the character of the Methodist ministry, whose unparalleled labours and sufferings, usefulness, and unimpeachable loyalty were known and appreciated in the Province, and the appeal to the King"s Government to aid in exterminating them from the country excited strong feelings of indignation and sympathy in the public mind. The House of a.s.sembly investigated the whole affair, examined fifty-two witnesses, adopted an elaborate report, and sent home an address to the King condemning the statements of the agent of the Episcopal clergy, and remonstrating against the establishment of a dominant church in the Province.[35] The determination to uproot the Methodists was carried so far in those by-gone days of civil and ecclesiastical despotism, that the Indians were told by executive sanction that unless they would become members of the Church of England, the Government would do nothing for them! In further support of my statement, I quoted four Episcopal addresses and sermons, sufficient to show who were the first and real aggressors in this matter--certainly not the Methodists.
As a sample of Dr. Ryerson"s controversial style in 1826, when he wrote the Review of Archdeacon Strachan"s sermon (to which he refers above) I quote a paragraph from it. In replying to the Archdeacon"s "remarks on the qualifications, motives, and conduct of the Methodist itinerant preachers," which Dr. Ryerson considered "ungenerous and unfounded," he proceeded:--
The Methodist preachers do not value themselves upon the wealth, virtues, or grandeur, of their ancestry; nor do they consider their former occupation an argument against their present employment or usefulness. They have learned that the Apostles were once fishermen; that a Milner could once throw the shuttle; that a Newton once watched his mother"s flock.... They are likewise charged with "preaching the Gospel out of idleness." Does the Archdeacon claim the attribute of omniscience? Does he know what is in man? How does he know that they preach "the Gospel out of idleness?" ... What does he call idleness?--the reading of one or two dry discourses every Sabbath ... to one congregation, with an annual income of 200 or 300?... No; this is hard labour; this is indefatigable industry!... Who are they then that preach the Gospel out of idleness?--those indolent, covetous men who travel from two to three hundred miles, and preach from twenty-five to forty times every month?--who, in addition to this, visit from house to house, and teach young and old repentance towards G.o.d, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ?--those who continue this labour year after year ... at the enormous salary of 25 or 50 per annum?--these are the men who "preach the Gospel out of idleness!" O bigotry! thou parent of persecution; O envy! thou fountain of slander; O covetousness! thou G.o.d of injustice! would to heaven ye were banished from the earth![36]
_Jan. 22nd, 1831._--In the _Guardian_ of this day Dr. Ryerson publishes a letter from the Rev. Richard Watson to the trustees of the Wesleyan University, in Connecticut, declining the appointment of Professor of _Belles Lettres_ and Moral Philosophy. He says:--
To _Belles Lettres_ I have no pretensions; Moral Philosophy I have studied, and think it a most important department, when kept upon its true principles, both theological and philosophic. Being, however, fifty years old, and having a feeble const.i.tution, I do not think it would be prudent in me to accept.
During this year (1831) Dr. Ryerson engaged in a friendly controversy with Vicar-General Macdonnell, Editor of the _Catholic_, published in Kingston. This controversy included six letters from Dr. Ryerson, and five from the Vicar-General, published in the _Christian Guardian_. It touched upon the leading questions at issue between Roman Catholics and Protestants. The correspondence was broken off by the Vicar-General.
FOOTNOTES:
[24] The following is a copy of the doc.u.ment under the authority of which Dr. Ryerson was deputed to go to New York to procure presses and types for the proposed _Christian Guardian_ newspaper:--
This is to certify that the Bearer, Rev. Egerton Ryerson, is appointed agent for procuring a printing establishment for the Canada Conference, and is hereby commended to the Christian confidence of all on whom he may have occasion to call for advice and a.s.sistance for the above purpose.
(Signed) William Case, _Superintendent_.
James Richardson, _Secretary_.
Ancaster, Upper Canada, Sept. 4th, 1829.
[25] These seven papers, taken together, were the first attempt to put into a connected form the history of the Methodist Church in Canada down to 1830.--H.
[26] "Claims of Churchmen and Dissenters," &c., 1826, p. 27. (See p.
80.)
[27] For various reasons (apparently prudential at the time) this reply was never published in the _Christian Guardian_, as were other replies of the Governor.--H.
[28] This expression, "our Church," ill.u.s.trates the fact which I have indicated in first paragraph on page 97.
[29] This charge, preferred by such high authority, was taken up boldly by the Methodist authorities. Rev. James (afterwards Bishop) Richardson, Presiding Elder, was commissioned to inquire into its truthfulness. He made an exhaustive report, proving the entire incorrectness of the statement, and that the whole difficulty arose from the persistent efforts of a Mr. Alley (an employe of the Indian Department) to promote his own interest at the expense of that of the Indians, and to remove out of the way the only obstacle to the accomplishment of his purpose--the Methodist Missionary. Dr. Ryerson having pointed out these facts in the _Guardian_, Capt. Anderson, Superintendent of Indian affairs at Coldwater, questioned his conclusion "that the advice given to the Indians was both prudent and loudly called for, and perfectly respectful to His Excellency." Dr. Ryerson then examined the whole of the evidence in the Case, and (See _Guardian_, vol. iii., p. 76) came to the following conclusion:--1. That sometimes the local agents of the Indian Department are men who have availed themselves of the most public occasions to procure ardent spirits, and entice the Indians to drunkenness, and other acts of immorality; being apparently aware that with the introduction of virtue and knowledge among these people will be the departure of gain which arises from abuse, fraud, and debauchery. 2.
That these agents are not always men who respect the Sabbath. 3. That the Missionary"s "absurd advice" was in effect that the Indians should apply to their Great Father to remove such agents from among them. 4.
That their "craft being endangered," the agents and parties concerned, "with studied design, sought to injure the missionary in the estimation of His Excellency, and to destroy all harmony in their operations, in order, if possible, to compel the Missionary to abandon the Mission Station." The effect of this controversy was very salutary. His Excellency, having reconsidered the Case, "gave merited reproof and suitable instructions to the officers of the Indian Department in regard to their treatment of the Methodist Missionary." Dr. Ryerson adds:--We had no trouble thereafter on the subject.
[30] Another disturbing element entered subsequently into this controversy. And this was especially embarra.s.sing to Dr. Ryerson, as it proceeded from ministers in the same ecclesiastical fold as himself. I refer to the adverse views on church establishments, put forth by members of the British Conference in this country and especially in England (to which reference is made subsequently in this book). Dr.
Ryerson was, as a matter of course, taunted with maintaining opinions which had been expressly repudiated by his Methodist "superiors" in England. He had, therefore, to wage a double warfare. He was a.s.sailed from within as well as from without. Besides, he had to bear the charge of putting forth heretical views in church politics, even from a Methodist standpoint. He, however, triumphed over both parties--those within as well as those without. And his victory over the former was the more easily won, as the views of the "British Methodists," on this question were almost unanimously repudiated by the Methodists of Canada.
See "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp. 330-353.--H.
[31] See pages 63, 64 of the _Christian Guardian_ for 1831; also page 90, _ante_.
[32] See _Christian Guardian_ of Feb. 19th, 1831, and also the pamphlet containing the whole of this series of eight letters, ent.i.tled: "Letters from the Reverend Egerton Ryerson to the Honourable and Reverend Doctor Strachan, published originally in the _Upper Canada Herald_; Kingston, 1828," pp. 42, double columns. See page 80.--H.
[33] For reply to this statement see extract from Review given on p.
105.--H.
[34] In "a Pastoral Letter from the Clergy of the Church of Scotland in the Canadas to their Presbyterian Brethren" issued in 1828, they say:--"We did, in the year 1820, pet.i.tion His Majesty"s Government for protection and support to our Church, and claimed, by what we believe to be our const.i.tutional rights, a partic.i.p.ation in the Clergy Reserves."
Montreal, 1828, p. 2. This Pastoral Letter gave rise to a protracted discussion for and against the Presbyterian side of the question.--H.
[35] The Report was adopted by a vote of 22 to 8. It stated:--The ministry and instructions [of the Methodist Clergymen] have been conducive--in a degree which cannot be easily estimated--to the reformation of their hearers, and to the diffusion of correct morals--the foundation of all sound loyalty and social order.... No one doubts that the Methodists are as loyal as any other of His Majesty"s subjects, etc. Full particulars of this controversy will be found in Dr.
Ryerson"s "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp. 165-218.--H.
[36] In "An Apology for the Church of England in Canada, by a Protestant of the Established Church of England," the writer thus refers to this controversy:--"Our Methodist brethren have disturbed the peace of their maternal Church by the clamour of enthusiasm and the madness of resentment; but they are the wayward children of pa.s.sion, and we hope that yet the chastening hand of reason will sober down the wildness of that ferment," etc. Kingston, U.C., 1826, p. 3.--H.
CHAPTER IX.
1831-1832.
Methodist Affairs in Upper Canada--Proposed Union with the British Conference.
Of the events transpiring in Upper Canada during 1831 and 1832, in which Dr. Ryerson was an actor, he has left no record in his "Story." His letters and papers, however, show that during this period he retired from the editorship of the _Christian Guardian_, and that plans were discussed and matured which led to his going to England, in 1833, to negotiate a union between the British and Upper Canadian Conferences.
His brother George had gone on a second visit to England in March, 1831.
This second visit was for a twofold purpose, viz., to collect money with the Rev. Peter Jones, for the Indian Missions, and also to present pet.i.tions to the Imperial Parliament on behalf of the non-episcopalians of the Province. I give extracts from his letters to Dr. Ryerson, relating his experiences of, and reflections on, Wesleyan matters in England at that period. Writing from Bristol, on the 6th of August, 1831, Rev. George Ryerson said:--
In my address to the Wesleyan Conference here I stated that we stood in precisely the same relation to our brethren of the Methodist Conference in the United States as we do to our brethren of the Wesleyan Conference in England--independent of either--agreeing in faith, in religious discipline, in name and doctrine, and the unity of spirit,--but differing in some ecclesiastical arrangements, rendered necessary from local circ.u.mstances. I also expressed my firm conviction that the situation in which we stand is decidedly the best calculated to spread Methodism and vital religion in Canada. This statement did not, I think, give so much satisfaction to the Conference as the others, for what Pope said of Churchmen: