Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Synod Of The Reformed Presbyterian Church in Ireland

Expand Messages
  • bob_suden
    Received a comment on the RPV site which was a question: Why did
    Message 1 of 3 , Jul 28, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Received a comment on the RPV site  which was a question:

      Why did the Synod Of The Reformed Presbyterian Church in Ireland cease to exist in 1839?

      Does anybody know?
      Thanks,
      Bob S.
    • kebarrivier
      Received a comment on the RPV site which was a question: Why did the Synod Of The Reformed Presbyterian Church in Ireland cease to exist in 1839? Does
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 29, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        "Received a comment on the RPV site which was a question:

        Why did the Synod Of The Reformed Presbyterian Church in Ireland
        cease to exist in 1839?

        Does anybody know?
        Thanks,
        Bob S."

        I suppose the question may relate to what is titled "Years of Tension
        and Division: 1830 to 1840" on p. 65-67 of "The Covenanters in
        Ireland: A History of The Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland" by
        Prof Adam Loughridge, published by Cameron Press, Belfast, Northern
        Ireland, United Kingdom in AD 1984, with a second edition appearing
        in AD 1987, and a reprint in AD 2000.

        The book can be ordered from Covenanter Bookshop in Belfast, UK, via
        their website at:

        http://www.covenanterbooks.com/book/author/Adam%20Loughridge

        Extracts from the relevant pages follow below.

        In Christ

        Joe du Toit
        Based in Dublin, Republic of Ireland
        Communicant Member of the RPCI at Loughbrickland, Northern Ireland, UK


        "Normally all Bills for presentation to the Synod were licensed by a
        Synodical Committee to ensure that they contained no irrelevant or
        abusive material. In 1826, however, a paper from a minority of the
        members of the Belfast Congregation was brought directly to the
        Synod. Four members of the Synod lodged a strong protest against this
        procedure, but their objection was over-ruled. The contention aroused
        by the decision continued for three years and was not eased until the
        minority was organised into a new congregation and the congregation
        of Knockbracken transferred to another Presbytery in 1829.

        At the centre of this controversy which flared up in different forms
        over the next ten years was the Rev Thomas Houston, the minister of
        Knockbracken…In 1830 he accepted the invitation of the synod to
        publish and circulate a magazine throughout the Church, and issued
        the first copy in December 1830, which he called `The Covenanter'…In
        the fourth issue in March, 1831, began a series of articles on `The
        Magistracy'. Mr Houston who wrote the articles dealt with the power
        of the civil magistrate in forceful terms, claimed that a magistrate
        must be a Christian in order to administer the law for the glory of
        God and for the public good, and that this authority extended to
        Sabbath-breakers and blasphemers as well as to thieves and murderers.
        …

        The matter of the articles in `The Covenanter' on `The Magistracy'
        was raised in the Synod of 1831. The Synod … passed a resolution to
        the effect that the Editor alone was responsible for the statements
        made and the sentiments advocated. … Houston continued to use the
        pages of the magazine for the propagation of his views…
        Rev John Paul …of Loughnourne and Carnmoney, wrote a long letter to
        the Editor of the "Belfast News-Letter" [a popular secular newspaper]
        on the power of the civil magistrate in matters of religion and
        charged the Editor of `The Covenanter' with advocating `persecuting
        principles'. A heated controversy raged for several months in
        the `News-Letter', while Mr Houston continued to publish the articles
        in `The Covenanter'. A crisis was reached at the Synod of 1832 when
        Mr Houston framed a libel against Mr Paul `for slander,
        misrepresentation, error, and disorderly procedure'. The paper
        exhibiting the libel was read in the Synod, received and held `in
        retentis' in the hope that peace might be made between the two
        disputants. While Mr Paul was silent during the year on a matter that
        was now `sub judice', Mr Houston published the Libel in `The
        Covenanter'…An attempt to solve the problem was made by the Synod at
        Moneymore in 1833. Two resolutions were adopted by the Synod. The
        first was a somewhat modified version of the views presented by
        Thomas Houston and the second was a disapproval of the conduct by the
        two parties in the case, particularly that of Thomas Houston. Houston
        tendered an apology to Paul, and both men thanked the Synod for their
        resolutions that had helped them to reach a satisfactory agreement.

        An uneasy peace…was broken in 1835, when a report from the American
        Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church [RPCNA] was discussed…[on]…
        whether members of the Church should exercise the elective franchise
        and take active part in civil government. The American Church was
        divided…[and so it seemed] the Irish Synod [too]. Mr Houston's
        Congregation, Knockbracken, petitioned the Synod of 1836, to make a
        public declaration of the doctrine of the Church respecting the duty
        of nations and civil rulers. After discussion, a proposal was adopted
        approving the principle of the national establishment of religion,
        but disapproving of the existing civil and religious establishments.
        Mr Paul, supported by three ministers and four elders, dissented from
        this decision.

        The controversy continued for the next four years. The majority party
        led by Mr Houston issued a long statement in 1837 on Civil Government
        that did not please Mr Paul and his supporters…Mr Paul and his
        adherents, most of whom were members of the Eastern Presbytery,
        requested the Synod in 1839 to adopt the Testimony of the Scottish
        Reformed Presbyterian Church and Terms of Communion that had been
        recently modified. Synod adopted the Testimony by the Scottish
        Church, but rejected the Terms of Communion. Against this decision
        the Eastern Presbytery dissented. A deadlock was reached. When the
        Synod met as Moneymore in 1840, the Eastern Presbytery entered a
        Protest against the various decisions of Synod on the subject of the
        civil magistrate and declined the authority of the Synod. The
        Protest, which was mainly the work of Dr Paul, as he had then become,
        was directed against Mr Houston on the grounds that he taught
        persecuting principles; that he had represented the Covenanting
        Fathers as wanting to extirpate not principles but persons; that he
        had accorded to the Civil Magistrate in a Gospel Age, powers that
        were consistent with the Mosaic Law; and that intolerable burdens
        were placed on the consciences of Christian People by such teaching.

        The document was signed by 5 ministers and 12 ruling elders. They,
        with the congregations they represented, withdrew from the
        jurisdiction of the Reformed Presbyterian Synod. …on 18th October,
        1842, [they] were constituted as the Eastern Reformed Presbyterian
        Synod…In 1902, the Eastern Reformed Presbyterian Synod formally
        united with the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in
        Ireland. Half of their congregations, however, took independent
        action, and returned to the fellowship of the Reformed Presbyterian
        Synod of Ireland [RPCI]."
      • bob_suden
        Thanks for your answer, Joe.
        Message 3 of 3 , Jul 29, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for your answer, Joe.


          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "kebarrivier"
          <josefdutoit@...> wrote:
          >
          > "Received a comment on the RPV site which was a question:
          >
          > Why did the Synod Of The Reformed Presbyterian Church in Ireland
          > cease to exist in 1839?
          >
          > Does anybody know?
          > Thanks,
          > Bob S."
          >
          > I suppose the question may relate to what is titled "Years of Tension
          > and Division: 1830 to 1840" on p. 65-67 of "The Covenanters in
          > Ireland: A History of The Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland" by
          > Prof Adam Loughridge, published by Cameron Press, Belfast, Northern
          > Ireland, United Kingdom in AD 1984, with a second edition appearing
          > in AD 1987, and a reprint in AD 2000.
          >
          > The book can be ordered from Covenanter Bookshop in Belfast, UK, via
          > their website at:
          >
          > http://www.covenanterbooks.com/book/author/Adam%20Loughridge
          >
          > Extracts from the relevant pages follow below.
          >
          > In Christ
          >
          > Joe du Toit
          > Based in Dublin, Republic of Ireland
          > Communicant Member of the RPCI at Loughbrickland, Northern Ireland, UK
          >
          >
          > "Normally all Bills for presentation to the Synod were licensed by a
          > Synodical Committee to ensure that they contained no irrelevant or
          > abusive material. In 1826, however, a paper from a minority of the
          > members of the Belfast Congregation was brought directly to the
          > Synod. Four members of the Synod lodged a strong protest against this
          > procedure, but their objection was over-ruled. The contention aroused
          > by the decision continued for three years and was not eased until the
          > minority was organised into a new congregation and the congregation
          > of Knockbracken transferred to another Presbytery in 1829.
          >
          > At the centre of this controversy which flared up in different forms
          > over the next ten years was the Rev Thomas Houston, the minister of
          > Knockbracken…In 1830 he accepted the invitation of the synod to
          > publish and circulate a magazine throughout the Church, and issued
          > the first copy in December 1830, which he called `The Covenanter'…In
          > the fourth issue in March, 1831, began a series of articles on `The
          > Magistracy'. Mr Houston who wrote the articles dealt with the power
          > of the civil magistrate in forceful terms, claimed that a magistrate
          > must be a Christian in order to administer the law for the glory of
          > God and for the public good, and that this authority extended to
          > Sabbath-breakers and blasphemers as well as to thieves and murderers.
          > …
          >
          > The matter of the articles in `The Covenanter' on `The Magistracy'
          > was raised in the Synod of 1831. The Synod … passed a resolution to
          > the effect that the Editor alone was responsible for the statements
          > made and the sentiments advocated. … Houston continued to use the
          > pages of the magazine for the propagation of his views…
          > Rev John Paul …of Loughnourne and Carnmoney, wrote a long letter to
          > the Editor of the "Belfast News-Letter" [a popular secular newspaper]
          > on the power of the civil magistrate in matters of religion and
          > charged the Editor of `The Covenanter' with advocating `persecuting
          > principles'. A heated controversy raged for several months in
          > the `News-Letter', while Mr Houston continued to publish the articles
          > in `The Covenanter'. A crisis was reached at the Synod of 1832 when
          > Mr Houston framed a libel against Mr Paul `for slander,
          > misrepresentation, error, and disorderly procedure'. The paper
          > exhibiting the libel was read in the Synod, received and held `in
          > retentis' in the hope that peace might be made between the two
          > disputants. While Mr Paul was silent during the year on a matter that
          > was now `sub judice', Mr Houston published the Libel in `The
          > Covenanter'…An attempt to solve the problem was made by the Synod at
          > Moneymore in 1833. Two resolutions were adopted by the Synod. The
          > first was a somewhat modified version of the views presented by
          > Thomas Houston and the second was a disapproval of the conduct by the
          > two parties in the case, particularly that of Thomas Houston. Houston
          > tendered an apology to Paul, and both men thanked the Synod for their
          > resolutions that had helped them to reach a satisfactory agreement.
          >
          > An uneasy peace…was broken in 1835, when a report from the American
          > Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church [RPCNA] was discussed…[on]…
          > whether members of the Church should exercise the elective franchise
          > and take active part in civil government. The American Church was
          > divided…[and so it seemed] the Irish Synod [too]. Mr Houston's
          > Congregation, Knockbracken, petitioned the Synod of 1836, to make a
          > public declaration of the doctrine of the Church respecting the duty
          > of nations and civil rulers. After discussion, a proposal was adopted
          > approving the principle of the national establishment of religion,
          > but disapproving of the existing civil and religious establishments.
          > Mr Paul, supported by three ministers and four elders, dissented from
          > this decision.
          >
          > The controversy continued for the next four years. The majority party
          > led by Mr Houston issued a long statement in 1837 on Civil Government
          > that did not please Mr Paul and his supporters…Mr Paul and his
          > adherents, most of whom were members of the Eastern Presbytery,
          > requested the Synod in 1839 to adopt the Testimony of the Scottish
          > Reformed Presbyterian Church and Terms of Communion that had been
          > recently modified. Synod adopted the Testimony by the Scottish
          > Church, but rejected the Terms of Communion. Against this decision
          > the Eastern Presbytery dissented. A deadlock was reached. When the
          > Synod met as Moneymore in 1840, the Eastern Presbytery entered a
          > Protest against the various decisions of Synod on the subject of the
          > civil magistrate and declined the authority of the Synod. The
          > Protest, which was mainly the work of Dr Paul, as he had then become,
          > was directed against Mr Houston on the grounds that he taught
          > persecuting principles; that he had represented the Covenanting
          > Fathers as wanting to extirpate not principles but persons; that he
          > had accorded to the Civil Magistrate in a Gospel Age, powers that
          > were consistent with the Mosaic Law; and that intolerable burdens
          > were placed on the consciences of Christian People by such teaching.
          >
          > The document was signed by 5 ministers and 12 ruling elders. They,
          > with the congregations they represented, withdrew from the
          > jurisdiction of the Reformed Presbyterian Synod. …on 18th October,
          > 1842, [they] were constituted as the Eastern Reformed Presbyterian
          > Synod…In 1902, the Eastern Reformed Presbyterian Synod formally
          > united with the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in
          > Ireland. Half of their congregations, however, took independent
          > action, and returned to the fellowship of the Reformed Presbyterian
          > Synod of Ireland [RPCI]."
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.