Christ; for making a noise, than for exerting a sanctifying power in the community. The spirit of these accusations is not an immaterial matter, though we shall not forget in due season to notice the sublimated pseudo-orthodoxy of their authors.

Chapter IX. Having waded through seven chapters on "Doctrinal Differences," the author at length reaches the "Basis of Union among Presbyterians," which is the theme of Chapter IX., containing the following index of matter-" What it is-The New School have departed from it-A return necessary to union." With some diffusivenesss of thought and irregularity of logical gait, extending from page 204 to nearly the bottom of page 208, we are brought to the conclusion, that the Confession of Faith is the "Basis of Union among Presbyterians ;" and that an honest subscription to the same is the duty of every one who professes to adopt it. All we have to say upon this work is, that it is labor lost. No one denies either proposition. If the author's logic was meant to imply any doubt on these points, in respect to the "New School" brethren; then as we did not need the logic, so we cannot thank him for the unjustifiable and false insinuation. Gravely to prove for the hearing of third persons what an opponent does not deny, is a very mean subterfuge. It is manufacturing a man of straw for the sake of shooting him, that somebody may hear the thunder of arms.

We admit the author's basis, and claim it for our own, and wish also to ask, Why he could not, in a scholar-like and Christian manner, state it, without on pp. 206, 207 mingling with that statement a gross caricature of " New School Presbyterians?" Whether the "Old School" will take his exposition of their faith, we shall leave them to decide; but his picture of the "New School," if not untrue in all respects, is yet untrue in so many, that it is a slander. We do not choose to have Mr. C. state our faith; if he does it, he must do it in our words, and not his own. We ask again, Why he could not give the "Basis" without the following contemptible aspersion. "If the New School desire a union with us, they ought first to retract their errors, and make an honest subscription to our standards?" p. 207. Very spicy seasoning to relieve the insipidity of an argument about union! Has it come to this, that there is no decency among professedly Christian men, even though they are writing for sectarian purposes? We let this pass, knowing as we do where it came from. Having found the "Basis," the author seems to have picked up a stray thought (we wonder it did not occur to him in the first chapter); namely, that perhaps "these brethren," these "decided Presbyterians," may have a little prejudice against at once uniting with the Synod of Buffalo on account of the unceremonious manner of their excision in 1837. The memory of this event may not make them as hopeful subjects as could be desired. This

46

cause, according to Mr. Wisner, liked to have lost to the "Old School" the services of Dr. Lord himself, and carried him, toto corpore, into the Dutch Reformed Church. Here is a difficulty, a real one; it must be met; Mr. C. is equal to the task. "To approve or condemn it (the excision) is not, with us, an article of faith, or a condition of union. We do not believe in the infallibility of Ecumenical Councils, or of General Assemblies," &c. But whether our views on this subject (the excision) are correct or not, can be but of small moment," since "each one has but to comply with the order and direction of the Assembly, and avail himself of the provisions made for him in the act itself, by uniting with the nearest contiguous presbytery, and every difficulty is overcome." This special pleading takes counsel from the late war with Mexico, and cautions patriotic feeling not to be treasonable, though it condemn the war. These "decided Presbyterians" must do likewise; namely, so far as Mr. C. is concerned; think what you please about the excision; we shall not be particular upon this point, if you will only come to the "benefit" of "our cause." Thus, we understand the allusion to, and argument upon the exscinding act. For what other logical purpose he could bring it into this connection, than to prepare a plausible cataplasm to soften the rigidity of some Western prejudices, we are not able to see. A man's logic sometimes shows his heart. Whether the remedy will be equal to the disease, we cannot tell; yet, as a gentle modifier of its action, we commend to these "decided Presbyterians" the other doctrine of Mr. C., namely that a man should seek to occupy such an eccclesiastical position, as will most faithfully express his views; leaving them to decide whether the excision be a suitable case for the application of this rule.

The reader will be patient, for we are coming to the point; all this is to get the door open, to get the difficulties out of the way. The door is open-" already thrown open as wide as it ought, and as wide as it can be." Mr. C. having by much labor found the "Basis,” and having vanquished the western prejudice by kindly consenting to accommodate it, is ready to carry all before him. He lets off a whole broadside, going on nearly to the end of the chapter, against the "New School Presbyterians." They have done almost everything that is bad; made "breaches;" "entered the bosom of our peaceful family, and bred heresy, strife, and debate in it;" "trodden in the dust the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valley;" "broken down our hedges, led away our children, and decoyed our people;" they have done evil;" "they have departed;" have gone out from us; they are "the aggressors," "their suit at law' "originated wholly with themselves," and in it they were not "brotherly or peaceable;" "their cause is wanting in integrity;" let them repent; "to make reparation Wisner's Review, pp. 20, 21.

belongs to them," &c., &c. Read page 209, and onward, for a declaration of grievances; and if you have tears to shed, prepare to shed them now.

But, be calm; let us ask, What does all this mean, as part of a chapter upon the "Basis of Union among Presbyterians,' and after such cautious preparation for a thorough cannonading? We have been watching this manouvre, and trying to catch the animus of this portentous whine, and being somewhat collected, have perceived, as we think, the order of battle. Mr. C. now proposes to scare out these "decided Presbyterians," by telling them once more among what an awful people they are ecclesiastically living. Of course, they can no longer maintain a union with such a people; neither need they do so, for Mr. C. is before them with the "Basis" in one hand, and the compromise of prejudice in the other, and the Synod of Buffalo is not far off; the whole "difficulty is overcome." There never was a clearer case! For fear, however, they may not come, he sweeps down "Drs. Cox, Beman, Beecher, Duffield, and Mr. Barnes;" and when these chieftains, some of them venerable, are no more, then a regular enfilading fire scatters dismay and death among the "New School" Presbyterians; opening wide their agitated columns; all for the benefit of these "decided Presbyterians!" Surely now they can get out, and they will get out. They have the combined advantages of concussion and light. Being themselves "sound in the faith," though by a mistake caught in a "new organization," and, withal, not upon the "Basis," as they had supposed, they will at once take up their departure. They stay there! Not they, until the will ceases to be determined by the greatest apparent good. This mighty war of words is not a converting benediction to win these "New School" heretics, though, peradventure, they would all be orthodox if they would only come. These "decided Presbyterians" are the men whom the author, by his own showing, wishes to help into the Synod of Buffalo. If they can once be separated from the "New School," and then taught to avoid the foolish novelty of "an independent Synod in Western New York," the way will be clear for them to "resume their connection with our church." And as to the "New School" themselves, if they "desire a union with us," the plan is very simple; they must "retract their errors, and make an honest subscription to our standards." Mr. C. surely has one merit; he tells us very plainly what he wants-for what he wrote his book; giving us the opportunity to take this knowledge into the account for the benefit of all parties, himself not excepted. We ask those who have commended his labors in somewhat flattering terms, whether they have read Chap. IX., and if so, whether they really mean to make themselves parties to the slanders of his pen?

Chapter X.-This is a " Plea for union among Presbyterians" THIRD SERIES, VOL. V. NO. 1.

3

-the next thing in the order of nature to a "Basis of Union." The preliminary matter goes back to first principles; and is designed to illustrate two propositions; namely, "A union desirable-Division among Christians an evil." We shall not burden this paper with all the sundries of this argument; for we have no special objections to urge, at least, in the present connection. The author finally reaches "the grand remedy" for divisions, which is " to elevate among ourselves the standard of orthodoxy and piety." Having become somewhat familiar with his ecclesiastical pathology, we at once supposed this idea was to be turned to a special purpose, and by reading on found that the conjecture was not far from the truth. Let us then listen to the "Plea for

union among Presbyterians.”

To the first thought, as an abstract thesis, we are disposed to say, amen. It is the general principle, that when practicable and not prevented by higher considerations (conditions omitted by the author) "every minister and every communicant ought to express truthfully their respective (we suppose he means peculiar) views, by their position in the visible church." For the application of this thought, he observes--"No man can, without a change in his sentiments, be an Old School Presbyterian in one end of the State, and a New School Presbyterian in the other, and be an honest man." Many circumstances may make it expedient for a man who has been connected with an "Old School" church in one end of the State, to be connected with a "New School" church in the other, and vice versa; and we would not in all cases declare such a transition to be a breach of honesty. The fact is, theologically considered, there are a great many "Old School" men in the "New School" connection, and perhaps as many "New School" men in the "Old School" connection. They are passing and re-passing from the one to the other. We will not, as does the author, assume the responsibility of a condemnatory judgment in all these cases; nevertheless, we ask no favors for those who make the transition merely as a matter of selfish policy, who are "in the market to be bought for a piece of bread." They are a class of men with whom we have no sympathy, and for whom no respect-a genus of humanity, whose principles do not bear transportation. It becomes the author, however, to speak very modestly of such men, lest he may be justly involved in the same condemnation; for, as saith the Biblical Repertory, he "was once a zealous New School and New Measure man ;" and has, therefore, once, at least, turned his coat. A man who had never been guilty of the transition, might, perhaps, have cleaner hands, and speak of "these pliable consciences" with more authority.

Having proposed the above thesis for the hearing of these "decided Presbyterians," Mr. C. is now ready to give them a hint in very general terms, with a very pithy reference to a local allusion.

"Those Old School Men who come into places where the New School have the majority, in wealth and influence, and unite with them on that account, must expect to lose cast with their former brethren; if they claim that they have changed their friends only, and not their sentiments, they publish their own shame." After more of the like, excepting that some of it is a little more pathetic, especially the reference to "their suffering brethren" (a sad thing to be an "Old School" man living where the "New School" have the majority!!), he observes-" it is a blessing to any denomination, to be quit of all such unstable, not to say unprincipled adherents." So far the "Plea" is a mixture of pathos, indignation, denunciation, moral appeal, with the addition of the doctrine of "cast"-to borrow Ovid's description of chaos, a very rudis indigestaque moles." All this applies to "those Old School men who COME"-whether he means who have come, or are coming, or will come, or all three, is not exactly clear. At any rate, they "come into places where the New School have the majority."

We think the inside of this whole matter may be seen without the gift of clairvoyance. Mr. C. lives in a region in which, if we are correctly informed, the "New School" have a very decided "majority" over their brethren of the "Old School," in the important article of ministers and churches, as the latter have over the former in other regions. We state this as a fact, without any special joy or grief. We suppose in this age, it is no uncommon occurrence for "Old School" men to "come into places where the New School have the majority;" and, not thinking as badly of the latter as does Mr. C., to connect themselves with "New School" churches; since they cannot find those of their first preference within a convenient distance. This common practice of both Schools is a living proof of their mutual confidence. We of the "New School," having no piques or prejudices against these migrating brethren of the "Old School," are willing in all charity to receive them, if this be their desire-hoping, in the meantime, that they will not join us, because we "have the majority in wealth and influence." We act on this principle because we believe that the essential, substantial Christianity of the two Schools is one. It does not, however, seem to have occurred to Mr. C', that these "Old School men" could unite with "New School" churches for any reason, but the contemptible one he names or that possibly they might not agree with him as to the orthodoxy of said churches; forgetting on the one hand that even "Old School men" have bodies, and cannot, therefore,

'It is a circumstance that will not escape the notice of the careful reader, that the author's reasoning respects the transition from Old School to New. What would be the nature of a transition from New School to Old, he is not so particular to consider. What position of mind this indicates, let every man judge for himself.