Printed for Private Circulation. tB«w THE EVANGELICAL CHURCH OF ITALY AND THE REV. DR. PROCHET IN A LETTER TO A FRIEND BY JOHN CARMENT, M.A., LL.D. \ — C|n dftoangdifal Cjntrcj) ai ftalg AND THE KEY. DR PROCHET. 36 Great King Street, Edinburgh, 182A May 1896. Dear Mr. W., You must excuse my delay in writing you, as my hands have been rather full of late. You ask me to tell you what I know about the matters referred to in the “ Open Letter/’ dated in De¬ cember last, addressed by the Eev. Dr. Prochet of Eome to Dr. MtDougall—and in a Eeport by the Edinburgh Waldensian Committee, dated in January, and which have recently been circulated among the friends of the Evangelical Church of Italy. I am glad you have asked me. The reading of these documents has greatly pained me, and I am surprised that men we have been accustomed to regard with veneration and esteem, should stoop to such a style of controversy. 2 The Evangelical Church of Italy You say that Dr. M‘Dougall seems to have used rather strong language. He has, and I regret it. Eemember, however, that he is a Highlander, and the hot M c Dougall blood, which courses through his veins, has perhaps not been cooled by the Italian sun under which he has lived so long. Probably had you or I experienced similar usage, even our phlegmatic temperament would scarcely have restrained us from the use of somewhat forcible language. The Edinburgh document is marked Confidential in large print. What that means it is difficult to under¬ stand. Both it and Dr. Prochet’s letter exhibit a most unchristian feeling towards Dr. M‘Dougall, and a strong desire that the Church, of which he has been so long the mainstay, should cease to exist is manifest through¬ out both these documents. It is a painful illustration of how men, eminent for their gifts and graces, and whom we have loved and re¬ spected, are at times so blinded by personal dislikes and party feeling, as to act in a way totally unworthy of their Christian character. The Waldensian Church, with its noble history, must always hold a high place in the hearts of Scotsmen. I could say everything in praise of that Church, and nothing against it, but I must deal very plainly with the unworthy conduct of some of those who represent it. The main facts are these : Signor Borgia, who has been for many years Pastor of the Evangelical Church and the Rev . Dr. Prochet 3 of Italy at Milan, was, after the death of Gavazzi, appointed President of the permanent Committee en¬ trusted with the affairs of that Church. He is an able man, an excellent preacher, and has done much good work for the Church. With all his good qualities he is evidently a difficult man to work with on a Committee. His maxim appears to be “ Ant Caesar , aut nullus ” and it is plain that there was at times a good deal of friction in the Committee. You and I are both aware that the burden of raising the funds for the support of the Church rested mainly on Dr. M‘Dougall; and he must often have been sorely tried and worried in endeavouring to square the income and expenditure. That being so, it was essential to the welfare of the Church that he should have some control over the expenditure. Towards the end of 1894, overworked and with his nerves out of order, he found himself face to face with a possible financial deficiency. The Waldensians had a deficit of 80,000 francs, and many other churches and societies were suffering from a diminished income; and Dr. MfDougall, on 27th November 1894, addressed to Signor Borgia the letter which the Edinburgh Com¬ mittee refer to as the “crux” of the whole controversy (p. 15), and as to which Dr. Prochet says (p. 2) “the starting point of all that has happened is your own letter of the 27th November 1894. Had you not written that letter, I do not hesitate to say that we should not have 4 The Evangelical Church of Italy this unfortunate quarrel/’ and he goes on to justify the action of the Waldensian Board and himself by quoting certain paragraphs of the letter. That letter was addressed to Signor Borgia for the purpose of being laid before his Committee. He did not do so, and succeeded in persuading Dr. MtDougall to refrain from acting upon it. It was virtually cancelled and withdrawn, and Dr. M‘Dougall, on the footing of certain arrangements for the purpose of giving him the necessary financial control, agreed to go on as formerly. Some months later, fresh friction arose in the Com¬ mittee, in connection apparently with a proposal to curtail the expenditure, and Signor Borgia, not being able to get his own way, he, on 17th March 1895, intimated to Dr. M'Dougall that he had joined the Waldensian Church. This he did without having re¬ signed his position as President of the Committee of the Evangelical Church. Now, in so far as the mere fact of his joining the Waldensian Church is concerned, he was free to do so. Any man is entitled to change his Church if he likes. Had that been all, no controversy could have arisen. He was not entitled, however, to use his position and influence as President of the Managing Committee of the Evangelical Church of Italy to mislead other people and destroy the Church with which he had been so long connected. He is an able and energetic man, and what and the Rev. Dr. Prochet 5 he does, he does thoroughly. His whole conduct shows that he thought the time for bringing the Evangelical Church of Italy to a close had arrived, and that he had decided to do what in him lay to accomplish that end. This is what Dr. M‘Dougall and the remaining members of the Committee resented. But let me resume the narrative of the facts. With a desire apparently to vindicate his conduct, Signor Borgia put Dr. M‘Dougall’s letter of 27th November 1894 into the hands of Dr. Prochet, and here is the Reverend Doctors account of what he did with it (p. 5). “ That letter bears no mark of being private and confidential, and its contents forbid, in our estimation , that it should be held as such. Still I printed (not pub¬ lished) it for our own friends only, to whom we thought we owed the knowledge of the reasons which had directed our action .” The italics are mine. It is a miserable subterfuge to say that the letter was not marked private and confidential. On the face of it nothing could have been more strictly confidential. Yet Signor Borgia takes this private and strictly confidential letter, which had never been acted upon, and hands it over to Dr. Prochet, the chief official of the Waldensian Church. Can you wonder that Dr. M‘Dougall should describe the man who did this as a traitor, and the act itself as treacherous ? To say that this was done to justify himself in joining A 2 6 The Evangelical Church of Italy the Waldensian Church is on the face of it absurd. It was, however, an excellent move (apart from its immorality) on the part of those who desired to discredit Dr. M‘Dougall and destroy the Evangelical Church. But the matter does not end there. Dr. Prochet, after printing and circulating the letter in Italy, “ for our own friends,” sends it over to his friends in Edinburgh, who get it translated into English, and print it at full length in the Report already alluded to. How what had the Waldensian Church to do with this letter? What right had they to deal with it as if it were a document belonging to them, and to print and circulate it both in Italy and here ? It relates solely to the affairs of the Evangelical Church of Italy. It is addressed to Signor Borgia, the President of the Manag¬ ing Committee, in order to be considered by himself and his Committee. If anywhere, that letter should be in the archives of the Committee. It was in no way personal to Signor Borgia. He hands it to Dr. Prochet, who treats it as if it were his own property, prints and circulates it in Italy, and then hands it over to his Edinburgh friends, who not only print and circulate it here, but with singular effrontery advertise in a footnote that the original can be seen at the office of their Secretary. I am an old man now, and have seen many con¬ troversies, and much unfairness in the conduct of some of them; but anything more unfair and discreditable than and the Rev. Dr. Prochet 7 the use which has been made of this letter I have not met with; and yet these are the gentlemen who arrogate to themselves the right to lecture Dr. M'Dougall in regard to his conduct! With them apparently the end justifies the means. The Evangelical Church of Italy ought never to have existed, and it should now cease. There¬ fore everything is lawful whether fair or unfair, which is calculated to promote that end. Delenda est Carthago. The enmity to the Evangelical Church which pervades the entire Report of the Waldensian Committee is something extraordinary. They actually drag in our Free Church to help them, quoting a Minute of the Continental Committee dated in 1878, and entirely ignoring the fact that this Minute found no favour with the Free Church in general, and that Deputies from the Italian Church have repeatedly been cordially received by the Free Assembly. Not only so, but the Free Church makes an annual grant to assist the Evangelical Church of Italy in their work. So much for the letter. Let me now advert to the question of the Church at Milan. Here again the main facts are not disputed. Mr. Jones, an English gentleman interested in the work of the Free Christian Church in Italy, after com¬ municating with Dr. M‘Dougall, purchased the building for them in 1876. As the Church was not then entitled under the Italian Law to hold property in its own name, the title 8 The Evangelical Church of Italy was taken in name of Mr. Jones. He granted a Power of Attorney in favour of Dr. M‘Dougall authorising him to manage and keep up the Church “ as and for a Church or Chapel for the holding of divine worship, according to the rites and ceremonies of the Free Christian Church in Italy/’ the name by which the Evangelical Church was then known. Dr. Prochet (p. 5) says “ Signor Borgia and his whole congregation believed it had been bought for them , and I believed it too according to what was said to me ” ; by whom he does not explain. Now so far as the first part of this statement is concerned, it is simply untrue. No man knew better than Signor Borgia that the fact was not so. Had Dr. Prochet been really desirous to know how the matter stood, he could have had no difficulty in ascer¬ taining it. It appears that in the meantime Mr. Jones had died, and Dr. M‘Dougall had omitted to get his Power of Attorney renewed by Mr. Jones’s heir. After Signor Borgia joined the Waldensian Church, the Rev. Mr. Mauro, one of their Agents, called upon a friend of Dr. M'Dougall in Manchester to ask if he could help him to find a Mr. Jones. Here is what passed. “ I asked,” says this gentleman in a letter to Dr. M‘Dougall, “ if there were any dispute as to property between Mr. Mauro’s friends and Dr. M‘Dougall. Mr. and the Rev. Dr. Prochet 9 Mauro assured me that there was no dispute whatever, that the Evangelical Church of Italy—that is Dr. M'Dougall’s church—was finding the burden of main¬ taining this Milan Church and others too heavy for them, and, that consequently this congregation was transferring itself to the Waldensian Church; he clearly conveyed the impression to me that Dr. M‘Dougall did not disapprove of this transfer, but was at least a con¬ senting party. Upon this assurance I gave Mr. Mauro the address of Mr. Slater, Mr. Jones’s legal adviser.” Similar statements were no doubt made to Mr. Jones and his solicitor. Now what do you think of this ? Here is the Agent of the Waldensian Church acting on their behalf, trying by false representations, to assist them in getting hold of the Church at Milan. I do not accuse Mr. Mauro of falsehood. No doubt he stated what he was told, but by whom? Who asked him to find out Mr. Jones, and who is responsible for the falsehoods he uttered ? Dr. Prochet in his “ Open Letter ” (p. 6) expresses his astonishment “ that we could be suspected of a tendency to robbery.” What must astonish any one who can see things as they really are, is that Dr. Prochet passes over all this in silence. He makes no denial and gives no explanations. His friends in Edinburgh preserve the same judicious reticence. They are at pains to tell us in the close of their elaborate Report, that it has been written “ with studied io The Evangelical Church of Italy accuracy and reserve, as well as with an honest attempt to be impartial.” You will be able to judge for yourself of its “ accuracy” and impartiality. The merit or demerit of “ reserve ” cannot be denied to them. Dr. M‘Dougall, having learned what was going on in England, took steps to make Mr. Jones’s heir and his solicitor aware of the actual facts. As soon as these were laid before them, they had no difficulty in decid¬ ing to whom the building belonged, and granted the necessary authority to Dr. M‘Dougall. But the end was not yet. Signor Borgia and his friends having failed in their attempts to deceive Mr. Jones, still persisted in holding on to the building, so that it became necessary for the Evangelical Church to apply to the Courts of Law. Signor Borgia and his friends con¬ tested the case, and denied the proprietorship of Mr. Jones! The Edinburgh Committee in their report (p. 8) say, “ the Waldensian Board has taken nothing to do with the case,” and they add, “ when the Congregation received formal notice to leave, Dr. Prochet did intervene, advising them to do so for the sake of peace.” Dr. Prochet, too, actually claims credit for having advised Signor Borgia in the month of June last to give up the Church, and says he kept urging him to do so. It would be interesting to see the correspondence, but perhaps it was confidential. The fact remains that the case had to go from one and the Rev. Dr. Prochet 11 tribunal to another, and it was not till the month of December that the Evangelical Church was reinstated in the premises which belonged to them. There are various other matters referred to in Dr. Prochet’s “ Open Letter ” and in the Eeport of the Edinburgh Committee, but it is unnecessary for me to deal with them. The two matters which I have dealt with are set forth by these parties themselves, as, to use their own word, the “ crux ” of the whole controversy. Their conduct as to these will enable you to judge how far they are likely, in regard to other matters, to have treated them “ with studied accuracy and reserve as well as with an honest attempt to be impartial.” Paraphras¬ ing an old brocard, we may say, “ Ex duobus disce omnes” What ails them at the Evangelical Church of Italy ? Can they not let Dr. M/Dougall and it alone? The Edinburgh Committee (p. 3), not finding sufficient scope for their energies in managing the affairs of the Wal- densian Church, actually take the Evangelical Church of Italy under their protection, and tell them that Dr. M‘Dougall’s position is Dictatorship in Disguise. There is room enough in Italy for both Churches, and much more than they can occupy. There are excellent men in both Churches. They have done, and are doing, excellent work; and can do better still if, laying aside all these besetting sins of jealousy, they run with meekness and patience the race set before them. 12 The Evangelical Church of Italy It is a striking proof of the vitality of the Evangelical Church, and the confidence of its Ministers and Members in Dr. M‘Dougall and his management, that Signor Borgia has not been able apparently, to induce more than three or four of his Colleagues to follow him into the Walden- sian Church, and these have only been able to get about half of the people to continue with them. It will interest you to know that, notwithstanding all the efforts to crush it, the Evangelical Church of Italy has prospered greatly during the past year, as will appear in their Annual Beport which is about to be issued. They have received more new members and adherents than in any previous year of their history ; and the con¬ tributions from the various Churches have also increased. Believe me, Yours very truly, J. CARMENT. J. W.-, Esq., etc. etc. Printed by T. and A. Constable, Printers to Her Majesty at the Edinburgh University Press