holding the doctrines of Dr. Taylor and Prof. Park are to be received in the united church as of undoubted orthodoxy.

We repeat what we have already said. We are not labouring to prove the prevalence of heresy in the New-school church. We know many of their ministers whom it would be an honour to any church to count among its members. We are willing to receive as true whatever can be even plausibly said as to the general orthodoxy of our New-school brethren. Let this be admitted. It does not touch the question. That question relates to a rule of church action, viz., the principle which is to govern the united church in receiving and ordaining ministers of the gospel. Shall every man who denies any one of the great constituent elements or doctrines of the Calvinistic system be excluded from the ministry in our church? Or, shall we admit men who deny the doctrine of original sin; of inability; of sovereign election to holiness and eternal life; the perseverance of the saints; the doctrine of the atonement as a true and proper expiation for the guilt of sin and a real satisfaction to the law and justice of God, and who represent it as merely didactic, moral, or symbolical in its design and influence? This is the question, and it is one which concerns our life.

can

We have no belief that any honest Old-school man approve of the proposed plan of union, if he regarded it in the light in which we have presented it. And still further, we do not believe that there is any real difference among us, as to the principles set forth in the foregoing pages. The difference is not concerning principles, but simply a matter of fact. Those who have assented to this plan of union admit that the Old-school principle of subscription is right, and ought to be adopted in the united church, but they say the New-school have adopted it, and therefore, and on that understanding, they are in favour of the union. They have been led into this serious mistake because the New-school members of the committee assured them that as for themselves they did adopt the Confession as we do. This we doubt not is true as to them individually, but it is as clear as day that it is not true of the New-school as a church. This being the case, union with that church, on the proposed programme, would be the renunciation of a principle

to which the Old-school are pledged in honour, in conscience, and by solemn vows.

As to the other great point in controversy, the admission of Congregationalists to sit as members of our church courts, little need be said. It is admitted to be unconstitutional; but it is urged that it is a limited and temporary evil, and ought not to stand in the way of a union which promises such advantages. But the question is, Is it right? Is it right for a church deliberately to violate a constitution which it is solemnly pledged to support? In 1837 the Old-school abolished the old Plan of Union with Congregationalists, on the ground that it was unconstitutional. They justified the exscinding acts on the ground that it was against their conscience to allow Congregationalists to sit as members of Presbyterian judicatories. Are they now willing to disgrace themselves in their own eyes and in the eyes of all other men, by saying this was a false pretence? If conscience forbade it then, it forbids it now. And it ought not to be done. It is a great mistake to regard this as a small evil. Every moral wrong is a great evil. And that it is morally wrong for men deliberately to violate a constitution which they have vowed to support, admits of no dispute. Suppose it were proposed to allow a British peer to sit as a member of the United States Senate. It might be said it was a small matter, only one member out of sixty-four, and that his presence could do no harm. In one sense this may be He might be the wisest and most useful member of the body; nevertheless his admission would shake the very foundations of the government. We cannot believe that our church will ever be brought to assent to a plan of union which involves the surrender of the great principles which we have conscientiously adopted, and to which we stand pledged before God and man.

true.

If the view of this subject given above be correct, it necessarily follows that the Old-school would be guilty not only of a great moral wrong should it accept of the proposed plan of union, but would forfeit the moral right to all endowments, whether of churches, or boards, or seminaries. Those endowments were given to a church professing certain principles, and pledged to support them. If those principles be abandoned, the 66

VOL. XXXIX.-NO. III.

moral right to the endowments ceases to exist. We say nothing of the legal question. That is beyond our province. But if property be given to a body pledged to require of its ministers sincere faith in the grand old scriptural Augustinian theology, which has ever been the fountain of life and strength, all moral right to the property is gone, if that body becomes latitudinarian, admitting to its ministry men to whom that theology is a jest or an offence.

SHORT NOTICES.

The Poetical Books of the Holy Scriptures, with a Critical and Explanatory Commentary, by the Rev. A. R. Fausset, A. M., Rector, St. Cuthbert's, York, England, and Rev. B. M. Smith, D. D., Professor of Oriental Literature and Biblical Instruction, in Union Theological Seminary, Va. Philadelphia. 1867.

This brief commentary is marvellously compact and is often almost epigrammatic in its terseness. It is suggestive rather than exhaustive, yet it contains more than might have been imagined from its diminutive size. The plan upon which it is constructed, of giving a page of commentary opposite to each page of text, has embarrassed its preparation without promoting the convenience of its readers, for the proposed correspondence has not in actual fact been preserved, and could not be without a detriment far greater than the advantage to be gained. Nevertheless, with this drawback, which is chiefly one of mechanical arrangement, it will serve a valuable purpose and meet the wants of a large class of readers who have not leisure nor inclination to consult more extended commentaries, and who wish to arrive at the meaning of the sacred writers by as direct a route as possible. The exposition of the Psalms in particular is admirably executed. That of Job would probably have been improved, if the writer had consulted some of the later continental commentaries, as those of Hahn, Schlottmann, and others.

The whole is evangelical and spiritual, and a fair measure of attention is paid to whatever is typical and Messianic. In the Song of Solomon, confessedly, one of the most difficult books in the Bible to expound satisfactorily, the Messianic interpreta

tion is pushed to an extreme. It is divided into five canticles, which are supposed to relate successively to as many distinct periods in chronological order, from the times of the Old Testament to the end of the world. The first canticle, i. 2-ii. 7, is referred to the period preceding the advent, it is the bride searching for, and finding her king; the second, ii. 8—iii. 5, to John the Baptist's ministry; the third, iii. 6—v. 1, to the ministry of Christ on earth, the bridegroom with the bride; the fourth, v. 2-viii. 4, extends from the agony of Gethsemane to the conversion of Samaria; the fifth, viii. 5, 14, from the calling of the Gentiles to the close of revelation. The Song begins with longing for Christ's first coming, and ends with praying for his second coming.

The Fatherhood of God, being the first course of the Cunningham Lectures delivered before the New College, Edinburgh, in March, 1864. By Robt. S. Candlish, D. D., with a Reply to Professor Crawford's Strictures, and a notice of other objections. Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black. 1867. Pp. 389.

The Fatherhood of God considered in its general aspects, and particularly in relation to the Atonement, with a review of recent speculations on the subject. By Thomas J. Crawford, D. D., Professor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh. Second edition, revised and enlarged, with a Reply to the Strictures of Dr. Candlish. William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh and London. 1867.

These are two of the most important theological works which Scotland has recently produced. Their authors are eminent. men-the subjects discussed are of vital interest, and the ability with which the discussion is conducted is worthy of the high standing of the parties engaged in it. As Dr. Crawford's book has just come into our hands, we are in no position to express the opinion, which, with our measure of light, we should be led to entertain of the points in dispute. We can, however, confidently commend both volumes to our readers, as replete with instruction.

Cyclopædia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature. Prepared by Rev. John McClintock, D. D., and James Strong, LL.D., Vol. I. A, B. New York: Harper & Brothers, Franklin Square. 1867. 8vo. Pp. 740.

This is a comprehensive work. Besides the topics directly indicated by the title-page, it is archæological and biographical. As it is to be completed in six volumes, with every effort at condensing, it cannot be so thorough as the more extended work of Hertzog, which is in nineteen volumes. It is, however, not only comprehensive, but learned. It evinces a wide research, and familiarity with the latest and best authorities. It is well arranged, and the matter is compressed into the smallest possible compass. Abundant references to the best sources of infor

mation are given at the conclusion of every article. It is also candid and impartial in the discussion of controverted subjects. This is a great merit. Being written by Wesleyan Methodists, it bears, of necessity, the impress of its origin; but if prepared by Augustinians it would not be freer from the impress of their characteristic principles. We regard the work, therefore, as giving promise of meeting a very widely extended and pressing demand. It is an honour to its compilers and to the church to which they belong.

The First Epistle of John expounded in a Series of Lectures. By Robert S. Candlish, D.D, Principal of the New College, and Minister of Free St. George's Church. Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black. 1866. Pp. 526.

This is not a merely practical and exegetical exposition of this epistle. It is as well a profound theological work, in which some of the deepest themes of religion are discussed. The natural relation between man and God, the relation as determined by redemption, and the relations of the subjects of this redemption to each other, are severally considered. Such subjects discussed by such a writer as Dr. Candlish must be an attraction of unusual interest to all the students of the Scrip

tures.

An Exposition of the Epistle of James, in a Series of Discourses. By Rev. John Adam, Free Church, Aberdeen. New York: Scribner, Welford & Co., 654 Broadway. 1867. Pp. 440.

The character of the Epistle of the apostle James determines the character of these lectures. As the apostle deals specially with the practical duties of the Christian, so these lectures are practical, rather than theological. This, however, is by no means a disparagement of their value.

The Progress of Development of Doctrine in the New Testament, considered in a course of eight Lectures delivered before the University of Oxford, on the Bampton Foundation. By Thomas Dehany Bernard, M. A., of Exeter College, and Rector of Walcot. From the second London edition, with improvements. Boston: Gould & Lincoln. New York: Shelden & Co. Cincinnati: G. S. Blanchard & Co. 1867. Pp. 258.

By development in this volume is meant, not the unfolding of the germs of truth by a process of human speculation, but the progressive revelation of divine truth as contained in the writings of the New Testament. That there is such a progressive revelation in the Scriptures, taken as a whole, no one has ever doubted. And that this is true of the New Testament is made abundantly evident by the author of this work, if indeed it had ever been questioned. The exhibition of this subject, in a reverent spirit, is a matter of no small importance. The volume before us has been received with the very highest commendation.