the fountain, (Zec. xiii. 1) and ask, whether we are not constrained to connect all our hopes, both of justification and sanctification, with the vicarious sufferings and death of Christ, considered as an atoning sacrifice, by which the law and justice of God are satisfied, and the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit procured? Salvation, be it remembered, is not the mere issue of pardon to the guilty, however procured; but the exercise of an influence which shall subdue and eradicate corruption, so as to fit the soul for the enjoyment of God, flowing, as the best reference teaches us, immediately from the blood of Christ.

This brief view of Old Testament instruction concerning the atonement which Messiah was to make, will, it is thought, serve to give us a clear insight into its nature, and be found in harmony with the instruction which we next mean to draw from the New Testament. The view might have been much enlarged, if it had been thought necessary. C.

Review.

LETTERS TO PRESBYTERIANS, on the Present Crisis of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. By Samuel Miller, D. D., Professor of Ecclesiastical History and Church Government in the Theological Seminary at Princeton.

(Continued from page 35.)

Professor Miller employs four letters of his series-the second, third, fourth, and fifth-in examining the comparative claims and fitness of Voluntary Associations and Ecclesiastical Bodies, to be the organs and instruments of the friends of religion in conducting Christian missions, and in the selection and education of candidates for the gospel ministry. In much that the professor says in these letters, we have the satisfaction to agree with him cordially. As the volume which contains the letters is not, we are persuaded, in the hands of most of our readers, and it is about a year since they first appeared in The Presbyterian, we shall extract the arguments commonly used, according to Professor M., by the friends of Voluntary Associations, to justify the preference they give to their method of promoting missions and theological training, with some of his remarks upon them; and then, in like manner, the considerations which he states, "to show that it is plainly the duty of the church, in her ecclesiastical capacity, to undertake and conduct such enterprises; nay, that when she neglects to do so, she is guilty of great injustice to herself, and of direct disobedience to her divine Head and Lord." It would exceedingly gratify us, if our space would permit the insertion at large, of the powerful, and as we think unanswerable reasoning, by which the author of these letters combats the assumptions of those who exclusively favour Voluntary Associations; and by which he maintains the right and the duty of Ecclesiastical Bodies to conduct missions, and the education of youth for the gospel ministry. But although we can do little more than exhibit the propositions which are here made the subjects of discussion, with a few leading thoughts on each, yet we think even this may be very instructive and useful. It is of no inconsiderable importance to those who wish to understand a subject—and it is of importance to every member of the Presbyterian church to understand this subject—to know distinctly the points of controversy, and the allegations which are attempted to be sustained, on the one side and on the other. To those who think and deliberate on what they read, it is of great advantage to have the chief topics of thought and deliberation,

by which the merits of a question or inquiry must be decided, clearly presented to their view.

"1. The first argument commonly urged by the exclusive friends of Voluntary Associations, in behalf of their doctrine, is drawn from the alleged fact, that almost all the good which has been done, especially in modern times, has been accomplished, not by the Church in her organized capacity, but by Voluntary Associations. Now the assertion here made, if I mistake not, is false in fact; and would deserve to be set aside as a non sequitur, even if it were true.

"It is false in fact. That is, the alleged fact which it assumes, cannot be admitted. The instances are numerous of much good being done by Ecclesiastical Bodies, long before Voluntary Associations became either frequent or efficient. Has the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland done nothing for enlightening and evangelizing the destitute parts of their own country and other countries? Let the history of that church tell. Have the highest judicatories of the Presbyterian Church in the United States done nothing toward sending the Gospel and planting churches among the frontier settlements? The old Synod began this hallowed work, as we have seen, near seventy years ago, when no Voluntary Associations for this purpose were known on this side of the Atlantic, and when most of the religious denominations around her were fast asleep, in reference to their duty in this matter."

*

Professor M. need not have confined the missionary character and exertions of the Presbyterian church in this country to seventy years. This church has always been engaged in the sacred cause of missions, from her first existence to the present hour; a period of nearly one hundred and thirty years. The missionary services performed by the fathers of the Presbyterian church, even before they were numerous enough to be constituted into a Synod, although not so systematic and continuous, were even more arduous and self-denying, than any which are now performed in the United States. In deep poverty, they preached to the destitute, without fee or reward. The present extended limits of our church, are to be attributed to the effects of missionary operations. It has become fashionable to represent missionary exertions as of recent origin. Whatever truth there may be in this representation, in reference to other churches, it is not true in relation to the Presbyterian church. We repeat, that this has been a missionary church from her very origin-David Brainerd was a Presbyterian missionary. Neither is the gratuitous education of youth for the gospel ministry in the Presbyterian church, though much increased of late, a recent measure -Witness the funds appropriated to this object in the College of New Jersey.

"2. Another argument which has been urged in favour of the almost exclusive enterprise and usefulness of Voluntary Associations, is, "that they are made up of Volunteers, and officered by men of select and devoted character;' and of course, will be more likely to work with zeal and energy than the members of Ecclesiastical Bodies." This is most extraordinary reasoning. Is not the Christian Church in all Protestant denominations, made up exclusively of Volunteers;' and is it not officered' by men in the highest degree select and devoted? At least if it be not so, the fault is not either in the Head or in the Scriptural constitution of the Church; but in the want of wisdom or fidelity in its administration. Is not such a character indispensably required by the authority of its Master, and by every essential principle of its organization? Surely, if voluntary devotion, and ardent disinterested zeal are not to be found in the Church, it is not easy to conceive where associations out of her pale should find them.

*

*

*

*

"3. It is further alleged, that Voluntary Associations, by bringing Christians of different denominations to unite and act together, have a tendency to promote liberal and Catholic feelings; whereas the natural operation of Ecclesiastical Bodies is to beget a narrow, sectarian spirit.'

"If this argument proves any thing, it will prove too much. It will show that all the fences which divide different denominations ought at once to be broken down; that it is criminal in any Church to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints;' and, of course, that all distinctive testimony, on the part of any portion of the Christian

6

family, in favour of that truth and order which are revealed in Scripture, is uncommanded and wrong. Can this consequence be admitted?

4. "It has further, been contended in favour of committing the benevolent_enterprises of the day to Voluntary Associations alone, rather than to Ecclesiastical Bodies, that the former tends to promote freedom; the latter despotism: that when this important work is committed to Ecclesiastical Boards, it is adapted to build up a strong system of ecclesiastical government; whereas, if it be carried on by men who are wholly free from the trammels of Church rules and Church authority, it is attended with no such danger!'

*

*

*

"If I understand the spirit of the argument, it is this; that as long as ecclesiastical judicatories are confined to the work of government and discipline, there is no fear of them; but that when they undertake to intrude into the province of doing good, they become dangerous.

*

*

*

"The very statement of this argument, I should suppose, is sufficient to refute it. Indeed, if the direct converse of the allegation on which the argument rests were made, it would, evidently, wear an aspect more like the truth. Ecclesiastical Bodies, constantly employed in acts of government and discipline only; exercising judicial authority; deciding appeals; adjusting differences; and presiding over all investitures with office, and all official decisions;-Ecclesiastical Bodies, I say, constantly engaged in the discharge of such functions, and such only, might be imagined, by a suspicious mind, to be in danger of having a love of power, and a spirit of encroachment and domination cherished by these habitual employments. But the moment such bodies began to engage in enterprises of direct and unmingled benevolence; the moment they commenced the work of planning, preaching, and praying for the poor heathen, and others destitute of Gospel ordinances, and of rousing themselves and others to this labour of love;-one would imagine that a spirit of ambition and dominion would be one of the last that would be apt to arise as the fruit of such employments."

*

#

To

"5. A further plea in behalf of Voluntary Associations alone being employed in the great work of Christian benevolence, is, that they can engage in new enterprises with MORE PROMPTNESS, than Ecclesiastical Bodies, which must necessarily wait until a majority of the Church can be enlisted in the measure, or prevailed upon to move. this plea I answer, that expedition is not the only, or even the chief good quality, in religious movements. It is of more importance to move wisely and with energy, than in haste. Many advantages may sometimes be gained by waiting a short time, and taking the whole Church along. But there is no need of thus waiting in any case. A single Presbytery or Synod, on becoming convinced that a certain course is proper, may enter upon it at once, without waiting for the concurrence of the whole denomi nation with which it is connected. Nay, this may be, in some cases, the very best method of commencing ecclesiastical enterprises."

*

#

"6. It has been further urged, with great confidence, that Voluntary Associations alone ought to engage in benevolent enterprises for evangelizing the world, because, when they are undertaken by Ecclesiastical Bodies, they too often give rise to controversy and strife: whereas, if conducted by Voluntary Societies, who are of one mind, and no others will, of course, unite in the scheme, there will always be harmony of action. This argument, if admitted to be valid, would prove that Ecclesiastical Bodies ought never to undertake any thing; for I know of no subject on which they can be called to deliberate on which diversity of opinion may not arise. Controversies often arise in such bodies, and sometimes of a very animated character, in regard to ques tions of government and discipline. Shall we therefore infer, that such questions ought never to be discussed? There was much disputing' in the Synod of Jerusalem, in the apostolic age, when the question respecting Jewish observance was under deliberation-still, as the Holy Ghost decided, that was very proper business for the Synod to undertake and decide."

*

"

#

*

*

7. I shall notice only one argument more which I have heard adduced in favour of Voluntary Associations, as exclusively proper to be employed in enterprises of Chris tian benevolence. It is, that such associations can more easily than Ecclesiastical Bo dies, enlist the co-operation of pious public spirited LAYMEN, who have too long been in the habit of surrendering almost entirely to clergymen the affairs of the church, and all prominent agency in ecclesiastical matters." This plea, like all the rest, has more of speciousness than solidity. Is there any pious laymen of whose zeal and ser vices the Church, in her organized capacity, may not, at any time, avail herself? If such persons cannot all be introduced into her judicatories as elders, or into her service as deacons, they can be all habitually employed by those judicatories, bers of standing committees, or permanent boards, for doing the Church's work. How many pious devoted laymen in the Presbyterian Church are, at this hour, in their capacity as church-members, promoting in a very important degree, the extension of the

as mem

Redeemer's kingdom! And how many more might be thus useful, if they had but a heart for it!

*

*

Professor M. then goes on to say-

*

"That it is the duty of the Church, in her appropriate capacity, to be much occupied in works of Christian benevolence, and in particular, to engage in the work of evangelizing the world, and of selecting and training up the best agents she can find for that purpose, may be clearly demonstrated, as it appears to me, by the following considerations.

"1. It is the cOMMANDED AND APPROPRIATE WORK OF THE CHURCH to maintain its purity; to press on the hearts and consciences of men for their sanctification, and to propagate, as far as she has power, the religion of Jesus Christ. For this she was constituted to be a depository of truth, a witness for God, and a blessing to the world. Others may exert themselves, and ought to exert themselves, for evangelizing the nations; but she must do it, or disobey her Master in heaven.

*

"To say then, that the Church in her ecclesiastical capacity, is bound to maintain the ordinances of religion within her bosom, and to sustain discipline in its purity in all her borders; but that she ought to leave to Voluntary Societies the work of evangelizing the world-is, in other words, saying, that she ought to resign into other hands, as not her appropriate work, one of the most undoubted and important of all the trusts which her Almighty Head has committed to her and commanded her to discharge!

*

#

"2. It may be urged, as an important argument in favour of our ecclesiastical judicatories, as such, being engaged in the great work of spreading the Gospel, THAT THE

ORGANIZATION OF THOSE JUDICATORIES AFFORDS A CHARACTERISTIC AND PECULIAR FA

CILITY FOR PURSUING THIS OBJECT. In Congregational churches, there seems to be no possible method of combining their strength for the pursuit of any common object, but by resorting to Voluntary Associations. No wonder, then, that those who prefer this form of church government, and especially those who have no other form within their reach, should contend zealously for such associations, as alone adapted to the work of combined and active benevolence. And to this source, perhaps, in part, we may trace the zeal of some brethren on this subject. But, surely, in the Presbyterian Church the different portions of the whole body are bound together, and brought together, at stated periods, by an organization at once the most complete, energetic and convenient that can well be conceived."

*

3. When Ecclesiastical Bodies are busily and earnestly engaged in endeavouring to send the glorious gospel 'to every creature,' THEY ARE EMPLOYED IN THAT SPECIES

OF WORK WHICH, OF ALL OTHERS, IS PERHAPS THE BEST ADAPTED TO PROMOTE THEIR

OWN SPIRITUAL BENEFIT. When judicatories of the Church are occupied, as they are often called in the sovereign providence of God to be, in trying offenders; in examining testimony; in deciding appeals and complaints; and in adjusting painful differences; it cannot be said, indeed, to be a useless occupation; for, however irksome, it is indispensable, and often eminently useful, as one of the means of grace. Still the immediate bearing of such work on the spiritual benefit of those who perform it, is not always obvious; and it sometimes proves a severe trial to their faith and patience. But when either the whole Church, of any particular denomination, acting by her representatives, or any subordinate judicatory belonging to the whole body, addresses herself to the hallowed work of sending the Gospel to those who are 'perishing for lack of vision;' when she calls into fervent exercise that charity which seeketh not her own,' and labours for the advancement of the Redeemer's kingdom, and the welfare of immortal souls: when she pities those who are suffering a spiritual famine, and expends her resources in sending them the bread and the waters of life; she is, undoubtedly, employed in that way which is best adapted to promote her own spiritual benefit; to draw down upon herself the blessing of her divine Head; and to call into exercise all those graces in which the true glory of a Church consists."

6

4. The duty and importance of Ecclesiastical Judicatories, as such, engaging with zeal in the missionary enterprise, is manifest from the security which their agency affords that the faith once delivered to the saints,' will be maintained and transmitted in some degree of purity.

"When voluntary, and of course, irresponsible associations, engage in the great work of evangelizing the world, having no other bond of union than the common sentiments, and the warm feelings which originally prompted them to associate, there is no security that they will continue either to receive or to propagate the pure Gospel. Such bodies may commence their operations with as much attachment to truth, and as sincere a disposition to maintain and extend it, as any Ecclesiastical Body in the world; but having no confession of faith, no acknowledged standards, in conformity with which they pledge themselves to conduct their ministrations; and as all sorts of religionists may become members of such bodies who choose to do so; what is to prevent them Ch. Adv.-VOL. XII.

L

from gradually and even speedily degenerating into associations, who agree in nothing but in a warm desire to send out missionaries; who may be prompted to do this, in the strange and wayward course of human affairs, by motives far from being worthy of commendation; and who, of course, may exert an influence deeply hostile to the spread of true religion? It is true, Ecclesiastical Bodies may also swerve from their original character, and have swerved in the same way. Still, it cannot be denied that there are sources of security in the case of the latter, which do not exist, in the same degree, with respect to the former; and consequently, that the existence of Ecclesiastical Boards at the same time, and in the same country with Voluntary Associations, ought to be desired by every friend of evangelical truth, as one of the best means within our reach of maintaining the Gospel in its purity and power."

"5. It may not be improper, however, to take a passing notice of one suggestion which has been publicly made. It is this; that if the General Assembly of our Church should institute or patronise a Presbyterian Board for foreign missions it would vioLATE A TREATY with the American Board. This is an entire mistake. No such treaty exists, or was ever made. The General Assembly was one of the three ecclesiastical bodies which consented to the dissolution of the old United Foreign Missionary Society, and to the transfer of all its stations, property and debts (which debts were just about covered by the property transferred with them) to the American Board. This consent was accompanied by a recommendation of the Board to the friendship and patronage of our churches. A year or two after this transfer was effected, a proposal was privately made by some friends of the American Board, that the General Assembly should pass a solemn act, binding itself, or at least, resolving, not to undertake any separate foreign missionary enterprise. This proposal, however, was firmly resisted, and no such stipulation or resolution was ever adopted. At the last General Assembly, when a report was brought in from a joint Committee of the Assembly and the American Board, which recommended that the former should not separately engage in the work of Foreign Missions, the Assembly declined expressing any opinion, or giving any pledge on the subject, and again recommended the American Board to the affection and patronage of our churches.' The truth is, the General Assembly has never, directly or indirectly stipulated with the American Board not to undertake any separate missionary enterprise, nor made any engagement which can be considered as susceptible of this construction. Just as reasonably might it be alleged that the Reformed Dutch Church, or the Associate Reformed Church (the two other Ecclesiastical Bodies which gave their consent to the transfer above stated) were barred by treaty' not to engage in the missionary cause in their ecclesiastical capacity."

*

6. Thus it appears, my Christian brethren, that, from whatever point of view we contemplate this whole subject, we are led to the same results. We are taught that Judah not only ought not, but need not vex Ephraim, nor Ephraim, Judah. That Ecclesiastical Boards ought not to cherish a hostile feeling against Voluntary Associations, as long as they move in their proper sphere, without attempting to interfere with denominational bodies or interests; but are rather bound to regard them as invaluable helpers in the great work of doing good. And that, on the other hand, Voluntary Associations, when they cherish a desire either to depress Ecclesiastical Boards, or to bind them to their own machinery, take a view of the subject, and pursue a policy, as narrow and unwise as it is mischievous. An entire separation, and a friendly, generous competition, form the true policy of both. If they cultivate the proper spirit, and pursue the proper course, they will be greatly quickened and aided by the operations of each other; and a much greater amount of good will be accomplished by the harmonious agency of both, than could possibly be done by either, standing alone, and occupying the whole field."

Professor M. always communicates his thoughts with clearness, and not seldom with a degree of energy. But in the chapters from which we have made the foregoing extracts, he reasons with a perspicuity, and force, and conclusiveness, which is unusual even for him; and which, it seems to us, no candid mind can resist. In all that he says in these extracts, and in much of their context, we do not dissent from him in the least. But on the general subject of Voluntary Associa tions and Ecclesiastical Bodies, we are not entirely agreed; and we shall state wherein, and why, we differ from the professor. We may mention that five years ago,* we commenced a series of papers, the whole of which were published in this work, under the title of The

* See Vol. vii. of Ch. Advocate, for Feb. 1829.