IV. The next field upon which we purpose to enter, is the QUO ANIMO of this entire performance. This will be sufficiently ascertained by attentively studying the first, the ninth, and tenth chapters. That the reader may have a fair opportunity to judge for himself, and not trust to the impressions of the reviewer, we will submit these chapters in the form of an abridgement, adding some exegetical remarks to make the text more lucid.

Chapter I-Assuring us, that "the divisions" between "Old and New School Presbyterians," are very properly the occasion of painful "emotions," the author concludes, that "whatever can be done to unite in one body those who are already united in their views of Church government, and of doctrinal and experimental religion, ought to be done by the friends of Zion." Passing from this very liberal posture, he explains the nature of the excision in 1837; where we learn that though supposed to involve the excision of "four synods," still, "it really separated no single Presbyterian minister or church from the General Assembly." The "secession,' as he terms the constitutional Assembly of 1838, "cannot be believed to have" resulted from "the act of 1837." Commenting upon this "new organization," with other incidental matters, he hastens to give us a pretty bold hint of what we shall hear more in due season. "What great and good end has been attained by these various novelties in Presbyterianism? and what can we expect to gain by that other proposed novelty, an independent Synod in western New York? If brethren are dissatisfied with their present connection with the synod of Genesee, why do they not at once unite with the synod of Buffalo?" Accompanying this inquiry with a little of his peculiar logic, he then tells the "brethren," that they will never "join us in a body." "If they ever resume their connection with our church, they will do it as others have done it; they will do it as individuals and as churches." "If they wait until the Rochester Presbytery, or any other Presbytery in the Synod of Genesee, shall, as a body, correct its errors, abandon its Pelagianism, and resume its connection with the General Assembly, they may wait till their cold remains and mine shall moulder underneath the clods of the valley." Diverging for a running comment on "organizations," "excision," secession," 'truth," and "error," the state of things once in "Judea," "the Church of Rome," "the council of Constance," the respective policies of Whitfield" and "Wesley," et cetera; he returns to his task. "Those Presbyterians, who remain in the New School organization to reform it, or who unite with it from our body for that purpose, are worse than dead to us, and to the cause of reform." Arguing this thesis from the history of the past, and "the impropriety of the course itself," he observes, "no enlightened friend of our church can pursue it long, with an honest design to benefit our cause; which thought he enforces by adding, that "he places

himself at once in opposition to it (our cause) by his position, his efforts and his influence. Disposing of the first two reasons, he comes to the third, the one of "influence." Those also who are in an unsound connection by this influence will remain there from the same cause, and their names, their property, and their offspring, will be lost to our church. In a few more years, the present incumbents of these (western) pulpits will be no more; and however useful they may have been in their personal ministry, they cannot control the succession. That is in other hands, and will be much more likely to take its complexion from the living than from the dead; from the body in which they have left their churches than from the pastor's remembered wishes." Having thus exploded the insane policy of " these brethren," whether laical or clerical, who remain in the "New School" connection, and do not "at once unite with the synod of Buffalo," he is prepared to blow the trumpet of war. He declares, that "the churches" are deceived, having in Western New York heard but "one side of the question;" that they do not know where they are, ecclesiastically, thinking themselves to be in the Presbyterian Church, when they are not, but in " a new organization," and that did they know this, "there are many decided Presbyterians who would not long remain where they are, but would avail themselves of the earliest favorable opportunity of carrying out the provisions of the act of 1837, and would resume their connection with our church." He then presents a fearful object: namely, "men (ministers we suppose), who tremble in their places lest the truth should be known on this subject;" and having lectured them for suppressing "inquiry," and deceiving these "decided Presbyterians" by "scandalous imputations," and "false issues," himself disclaiming the use of all such weapons," he bringeth his first lesson to a close.

To say nothing of mistakes in regard to facts, false reasonings, and "scandalous imputations" against "New School Presbyterians," we feel inclined to ask the reader this simple question ;What do you think Mr. C. very much wishes to accomplish, if he can? Is it not apparent, that his eye is turned especially towards Western New York; that in this region there is a Synod called "the Synod of Buffalo," "Old School," by an unquestionable presumption; that in Mr. C.'s opinion there are ministers, churches, and private Christians, who, though connected with the Synod of Genesee, might perhaps be persuaded to join the Synod of Buffalo? Unless Mr. C., endorsed by Dr. Lord, has become a strange dreamer, the affirmative of these questions must be true? All this may be very simple to Western Presbyterians. What then is the burden of this song about "Pelagianism" and other heresies of the Presbytery of Rochester and the other "New School" Presbyteries? In plain speech, proceeding solely upon the authority of

Mr. C., we would express our conceptions in the following paraphrase:

Gentlemen;" decided Presbyterians" that you are-members of the Synod of Genesee, or of churches under its care; you are not where you ought to be, since said Synod is neither Presbyterian, nor orthodox, but connected with a "new organization," and that, too, heretical. If you stay where you are, then your names, your property, and your offspring will not accrue to the benefit. of our cause. The Synod of Buffalo, though a modern growth, yet, being connected with THE Assembly, and, therefore, presumptively and by our authority orthodox, is your proper home. Being dissatisfied with the heretical and Pelagian Synod of Genesee, why do you not at once unite with the Synod of Buffalo, especially since the former did not rebuke their Moderator for preaching in his Synodical Sermon, the awful heresy, that Christ did not suffer the penalty of the law? You have been told, that the act of 1837 put you out of the Presbyterian Church; but this is a mistake you are not out, but in; and that you are in, you can easily prove by coming in; namely, by resuming your connection with THE General Assembly; namely, by at once uniting with the Synod of Buffalo, not waiting to come as a body, but being contented to come as individuals and churches. In this way you will control the succession. It is very important that we-namely you and ourselves-not differing in doctrine, should be united in one body. Come, and you shall have our confidence; otherwise you shall not.

What of all this? says the reader. Nothing-just nothing, in one sense. If the author wants these "decided Presbyterians," and they want him or his "cause," we have not the least objection to their mutual gratification in the use of fair means. We have no zeal for "our cause" that would be offended, if there were forty Synods of Buffalo, and as many Mr. Cheesemans, provided they would attend to their legitimate work. We could rejoice in their prosperity, with not the slightest pleasure in their adversity, if they were founded upon Christ. But, should they assail us as a means to a sectarian end-should they write a book bearing this mark as plainly as it did a title page-should third persons choose to commend this lovely performance; then, peradventure, we might deem a reply appropriate, and in that reply some exposure of the quo animo not out of place. This will help all candid and honest men, not excepting these "decided Presbyterians," to judge a righteous judgment in the premises. "New School Presbyterians" have been made the objects of a certain kind of slang from certain sources, quite long enough to establish a good reputation for patience. Some of their accusers have been far more famous for preaching against heresy, than for preaching the truth; for alarming the churches, than for winning souls to

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

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.