6 TOHU-VA-VOHU myself, I could not get up even a show of enthusiasm on such topics. For a long time I was a negative Presbyterian— that is, [ remained such because I did not see any- thing absolutely perfect. I wished to have the life of Brethrenism, the form of Episcopacy, and the consti- tutional rights and liberties! of Presbyterianism. When a man objects to another being called Re- verend, the presumption is, he would like to be called so himself.2 There is as much error in making the absence of trifles vital as in insisting on their presence. I shrink from Dissent. It 1s mainly a negative thing. If you were to define it, it would be chiefly in negatives: what it is not; but not what itis. We want not so much the destructive as the constructive in religion. 1 A later note adds : ‘ These exist only in theory,’ with a few other remarks. There is also the following addition to the sentence: ‘Thank God, I am beyond this, and within the historical Church.’ 2 The reference here is to certain scruples of the ‘ Plymouth Brethren ’ and ‘ Open Brethren,’ with whom, at this period, the writer was a@ good deal thrown in contact.