Foreign Literature.

213

Lutheran Synod of Iowa, U.S., to Dr Guericke of Halle, one of the editors of the journal, making enquiry regarding the doctrine of the Church on the office of the ministry, and on the "last things," viz., Antichrist, the conversion of Israel, and the Millenium. Dr Guericke's reply is, that in the Lutheran Church these are open questions.

This number of the journal contains the usual proportion-about 78 pages-of well written critical notices of recent theological works, contributed by different writers.

Zeitschrift für die historische Theologie. 1868. Erstes Heft. Gotha. Pp. 162.

This journal is conducted by Dr Kahnis, in connection with the historico-theological society of Leipzig. It has, for now many years, rendered very important service by publishing historical documents, and bringing to light valuable information which would otherwise have remained unknown. The present number contains two articles. The first conveys many interesting details regarding the distinguished mathematician, John Kepler, during the period 1596-1619. It is from the pen of Dr Paul Stark of Stuttgart. The second is a contribution to the History of Athanasius, by the late Dr Sievers of Hamburg. Both of these writers enter into their subjects with a thoroughness and minuteness of detail which we are accustomed to look for only from German theologians.

During the year 1866, there were published in Germany no fewer than at least 692 separate works, all within the department of theology. Besides these there are the following German periodicals, more or less directly of a theological or ecclesiastical character, regularly published, viz: (1.) devoted to strictly scientific discussions of theological questions, 13 different journals; (2.) to practical theology, 7; (3.) to church news in general, 18; (4.) to foreign missions, 28; (5.) to Jewish missions, 3; (6.) to home missions, 6; (7.) missions in general, 6; (8.) the operations of the Gustavus Adolphus union, which has for its object the strengthening of the church in different parts of the Fatherland, 2; (9.) church intelligence for congregations and the people, 60. Our readers will gather from the above statistics an idea of the prodigious activity of the theological mind among our Teutonic neighbours. Those who wish to see a very good "table of contents" of all these publications, may consult Hauck's "Theologischer Jahresbericht." We take this opportunity of commending that Quarterly to all who would keep themselves fully acquainted with the course of German theological literature.

XII.-AMERICAN LITERATURE.

The Princeton Review for July 1867.

This number of our old friend the Princeton, is mainly occupied. with a long article, evidently from the pen of the worthy editor, on the projected union between the Old and New School Presbyterians of America. It is, we regret to say, decidedly opposed to that union. And our regret arises not merely from regard to the interests of Christian union, but from the evidence which this article affords, that union in their case would seem to be either undesirable or impracticable. With the sentiments of Dr Hodge, and those of the Old School whom he represents, we need hardly say, that as Calvinists and Presbyterians, we cordially sympathise; and as to the extent of the differences which may still prevail between the two parties, we perhaps stand at too great a distance from the field to form a correct judgment. But with the profoundest respect for the talents, learning, and soundness of Dr Hodge and his friends, we cannot help thinking that they have formed their opinions regarding their brethren of the new school, rather from the contentions of the past than from the actual creed of the present generation. There are some men whose minds, once heated in the furnace of controversy, seem to retain ever afterwards, when cooled down, the impressions of men and things whieh they received in the hour of conflict. Tempora mutantur; times, circumstances, persons, prejudices, tendencies, all have changed; but, in regard to them, it cannot be said, et nos mutamur in illis, they remain unchanged; and are apt to transfer to the existing state of things, the fears, the dislikes, and the anxieties which distracted a bygone generation. They forget that Providence is a training-school, in which men's minds are gradually emancipated from prejudice and extricated from fallacy; that the forms of expression which in one age proved watchwords of strife, frequently lose in course of time the meaning they formerly conveyed, and that mutual misunderstandings which kept the friends of truth asunder, having yielded under the friction of mutual progress in the common cause of Christian life and labour, they find themselves prepared, unexpectedly, when they meet together in brotherly converse, to "see eye to eye, and to sing together with the voice."

We have just seen in the newspapers a report of the proceedings of a conference held at Philadelphia, of the representatives of the two schools, at which it was agreed that the two bodies should be reunited on the basis of the Westminster standards, as understood in their historical and Calvinistic sense." For our own part we cannot understand this as indicating anything less than in their antiarminian sense. And if the New School Presbyterians have been led, in the providence of God, to the adoption of the standards in this sense, we cannot see what should hinder any of the Old School divines from welcoming them as brethren. Christian charity is a noble

American Literature.

215

grace; it elevates its possessors far above the conventionalities of the worldly code of honour; and if they would not sink far below this, they will not fail to recognise their brethren in Christ, when persuaded that they substantially hold the doctrines of the gospel as truly as themselves, without demanding, as a term of reunion, that they shall penitentially confess their former faults, and formally retract their old heresies.

Since writing the above, we have received the Princeton Review for October, and regret to say that it holds out still less hope than we have ventured to express, of an agreement between the Old and New School Presbyterians. In reviewing an article which appeared in the Bibliotheca Sacra, so far back as 1863, the editor places the doctrinal views of the New School, as there stated by Dr Duffield, in sharp contrast with those of the Old. He gives an account of the terms of union somewhat different from that contained in the report to which we have above referred. He says, "The plan of union proposed by the joint-committee requires that the Confession of Faith be adopted in its fair historical sense, as it is accepted by the two bodies.' We know what its fair historical sense is, both in its self, and as it is accepted by the Old School body. But its historical sense, as it is accepted by the New School body, is equally, to be legalised; and clearly to this extent, that no minister or office-bearer who holds it, in that sense, can be molested in, or refused admission to, the united body, without breach of covenant. It is therefore a chief test in regard to the merits of this proposed plan of union, if we can ascertain what the fair historical sense of these standards as accepted by the New School body, has been, and is." Taking Dr Duffield as a fair sample of New School views, the editor of this article proceeds to point out their divergence from Calvinists on the doctrines of original sin, regeneration, the atonement, and justification; and concludes by asking," Shall we give the foregoing theology sketched by Dr Duffield equal liberty, privilege, and authority in our church, with that of our catechisms and confessions? Shall we fill our pulpits and church courts with its proclaimers and defenders? Shall we subject our theological seminaries to their control, and admit them to our vacant theological chairs? Shall we submit the books of our Publication Board to such an Index Expurgatorius as this theology would require ? Shall we bring back the intolerable strifes which preceded and caused the disruption? Shall we, in short, surrender unconditionally? For ourselves we say, No; and in this we believe we speak the deliberate mind of our church." After language so decided as this, it would be vain, we fear, to expect any union between the parties; and if Dr Duffield is to be held a fair exponent of the doctrinal teaching of his brethren, such a union could only be deprecated. At the same time, after carefully examining the statements on both sides, we cannot help coming to the conclusion, that much of the difference between them arises from mutual misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Certain it is, that Dr Hodge does not accept of Dr Duffield's definitions as fairly stating the views of the Old School; and we cannot suppose that the great body of the New School divines would avow

themselves disciples of Pelagius and Arminius, whose sentiments Dr Hodge honestly believes that they have imbibed. To our view, there seems to have been on both sides a straining of their dogmatic views beyond the simplicity of Scripture and of the Reformation. May God in his mercy vouchsafe unto all of us, the guidance of the Spirit of truth and of love, so that while the purity of the gospel is preserved intact, the mournful breaches of Zion may be healed. The only other article in this number claiming our particular notice, is that on "The British Churches under Cromwell." The writer of this paper does not conceal his warm and all but unqualified admiration of the Lord Protector; he passes over the most questionable parts of his procedure with great tenderness, and applauds as the perfection of statesmanship even those acts which his best friends would rather cover under oblivion. But he manifests a thorough acquaintance with the history, and gives such a flattering view of the state of the churches during the short period of Cromwell's rule, that, contrasted with what preceded and followed it, we cannot help regretting that they did not enjoy it longer, or make a better use of it.

Since the above sentences were printed off we have received the following authentic account of the issue of the Convention; which we have read with mingled feelings of surprise and delight. Our first thought was to cancel all that we had written; but on second thoughts, we have allowed it to stand. The articles in the Princeton Review cannot be cancelled; and these may stand as the honest convictions of good men, not withdrawn or swept away, but overflowed by the rising tide of Christian charity, which thinketh no evil, rejoicing not in iniquity but rejoicing in the truth." Viewed in this light, we hail it as an emphatic and seasonable lesson to the Presbyterian Churches at home. May the same spirit of brotherly love, of mutual conciliation, and of much prevailing prayer be poured out upon us, and the clouds that now darken our horizon may as suddenly be dispelled; and with our fears as quickly disappointed, and our hopes as surprisingly realised, we may be compelled to exclaim, "What hath God wrought!"

A sentence towards the close of the report, in regard to negotiations between the Old and New School Presbyterians, is apt to suggest a suspicion that the question is not yet closed: but after such a scene of blessed agreement, it is hardly possible to imagine that, under the mere formality of holding themselves at liberty to act in their own courts as Providence might direct, any party should contemplate opposition to a Basis of Union unanimously accepted by them and their brethren in a Convention of which they formed a part.

"THE UNION QUESTION IN AMERICA.

"The Convention of the various American Presbyterian Churches, which met in Philadelphia on the 5th and 6th November, for the purpose of furthering the cause of Union, has, according to all accounts, been most successful. The American Presbyterian, one of the organs of the New School Branch, says it was a success of such magnitude

American Literature.

217

and character, as overwhelmed its most sanguine friends with surprise, especially since the Old School Church, by its Presbyteries, had taken such an equivocal attitude on re-union with their branch. In numbers it far exceeded their expectations, there being about 320 delegates in all. And the character and ability of these delegates were such that it was declared, by good judges, the ablest body of Presbyterians that had ever convened in America. Drs Hodge, Breckenridge, Musgrave, Davidson, and Monfort, of the Old School; Professor H. B. Smith, Drs Fisher, Stearns, Hatfield, Booth, Duffield Jun., and others, of the New School; Drs Davidson and Harper of the United Presbyterian Church, Dr Wylie of the Reformed Church, with such laymen as Senator Drake of Missouri, and Robert Carter of New York, and George H. Stuart of our city, were sufficient to give high tone and character to the body. An unwonted spirit of prayer was poured out. Fully one-third of the time was spent in devotional exercises of the most delightful character. At every turn in the business-at every point deemed critical, or at any happy conclusion to the deliberations-divine aid was asked, or thanks returned in earnest, spirited, brief utterances. The time thus spent was plainly not lost. It brought the hearts of the members so much nearer together, that they were more thoroughly prepared for this peculiar work of union. It contributed to the deepening of the inner sentiment of unity, so essential to any real organic unity. It blew the flame and heated the materials more nearly to the welding point. The great matter for which the Convention assembled was quickly put in hand, and the rapidity with which the committee matured a platform, which, in the main, proved just what the Convention wanted, was only to be explained as an answer to prayer, and as indicating the maturity and unanimity of sentiment in the body itself. One of not the least results of the meeting has been to bring about a better understanding between many of the leading men of the Old and New School branches. Out of the 320 members present, 180 belonged to the former, and about 90 to the latter. It would appear that the anti-union element in the Old School Presbyteries had no place in the Convention, It was regarded as a novel and instructive spectacle, when staunch Old School men were heard protesting against a proposition coming from the New School side, as needlessly rigorous in its orthodoxy. On the first vote upon the amendment, the Old School was divided, and the New School was unanimously in its favour. When the vote was announced, an Old School brother, who had done his part in the division of '37, exclaimed, "The New School is more orthodox than the Old!" In like manner, on the question of embodying the Catechism in the Basis, the New School voted in favour, and the Old School against it. How, then, could it be otherwise than that, as New School orthodoxy vindicated itself, Old School suspicions declined? Another remarkable feature of the proceedings was, that the overpowering drift of feeling was towards nothing short of organic unity. All propositions looking towards a confederation of independent bodies were received with indifference, or were at once rejected. All the prayers were burdened with desire for organic unity

now.

A letter was read by Mr G. H. Stuart from the Rev. Dr.