of England, in throwing out a very great number of worthy, learned, pious and orthodox divines."*

9. The volume before us has appeared a number of years too soon for the prompt adoption of its principles. We are not yet prepared for the abolition of sects." When this precious blessing shall be vouchsafed to the Church, we have no expectation that it will be brought about by some great man, by discovering the causes of the opposite evil, and proposing some new and wonderful remedy. It will be the result of the same power, which, when the disciples were tossed on the heaving sea, and filled with fear, said to the raging winds and waves," Peace, be still;" and there was a great calm. There will probably, however, be no miracle in the common sense of that word; but the same gracious agency which blesses the Church now, given in a much larger measure. Before the Christian community can be ready for a movement of this kind, the Holy Spirit of sanctification and love must be poured out upon churches to an extent, and with a power, hitherto unknown since the day of Pentecost. The spirit of those who are constantly scrambling for proselytes;" who are far more anxious to convert men to their own denomination, than to the knowledge and love of holiness; and especially the spirit of those who "HATE THE GOSPEL, while they LOVE THE CHURCH," must be brought to yield to the genuine spirit of Christian charity. The miseries of a perishing world must bear with a hundred-fold more weight than they now do on the hearts of Christians; and they must feel, with a force and tenderness of which they at present know little, their supreme obligation to send the simple, pure gospel to every creature. They must be absorbed in the great work of converting the world to God. Then, and not till then, will sectarism gradually expire. Then, and not till then, will the exclamation of the early ages be renewed, 66 BEHOLD HOW THESE CHRISTIANS LOVE ONE ANOTHER!" The Lord hasten in his time a consummation so devoutly to be wished! Every Christian heart will say-Amen!

66

Letter from a Person of Quality. Works, vol. ix., p. 202.

ESSAY IX.

THE DIVISION OF THE PRESBYTERIAN

CHURCH.*

THE measures adopted by the last General Assembly have now been the subject of constant discussion for more than nine months. The press has teemed with arguments both for and against their validity and justice. Almost all our inferior judicatories have subjected them to a rigid examination, and pronounced an opinion either in their justification or condemnation. It may therefore be taken for granted, that the minds of all interested in the matter are by this time finally settled on the one side or the other. We are not about to re-open the subject, or to traverse anew the ground passed over in our number for July last. Since that time, however, events have occurred which have an important bearing on the prospects of our church and the duty of its members. To some of these it is our purpose to call the attention of our readers. It must constantly be borne in mind that according to the repeated declaration of the General Assembly, the object of the acts complained of, was the separation of Congregationalism from the Presbyterian Church. For this purpose they abrogated the Plan of Union, and declared that no judicatory composed, agreeably to that plan, partly of Congregationalists and partly of Presbyterians, can have a constitutional standing in the Presbyterian church. As Congregationalism was known to prevail extensively in four of our synods, the Assembly applied the above principle to them, and declared that they could not, as at present organized, be any longer regarded as belonging to our church. Several other synods, within whose bounds there was more or less of this irregularity, were directed to correct the evil as far as it was found to exist, so that all the churches connected with the General Assembly should be

Originally published in 1838, in review of the following works: 1. "Facts and Observations concerning the organization and state of the Churches in the three Synods of Western New York, and the Synod of the Western Reserve." By James Wood.

2. "Legal Opinions respecting the Validity of certain Acts of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church." By Messrs. Wood, Hopkins, and Kent.

organized agreeably to the provisions of the constitution. Such ministers and churches, within the bounds of the excluded synods, as were strictly Presbyterian in doctrine and order, and should wish to unite themselves with our church, were directed to apply to those presbyteries most convenient to their respective locations. And in case there were any regular presbyteries thus situated, they were directed to make application to the next General Assembly.

It is obvious that there were three courses open to those affected by these measures. The first was to submit to them. This course was adopted by the synod of New Jersey. In obedience to the requisition of the General Assembly, they directed the only presbytery within their bounds embracing Congregational churches" to take order as soon as it can conveniently be done, to bring all churches within its bounds to an entire conformity with our standards, and to inform such churches that they can retain their present connexion with the presbytery on no other terms." "In giving," it is said, " the foregoing direction to the presbytery of Montrose, the synod have no desire to interfere with the friendly relations hitherto existing between the presbytery and the Congregational churches under its care, further than to separate them from their present connexion, so that they shall not be considered a constituent part of the said presbytery, nor be entitled to a vote or representation in it." These resolutions were, as we understand, adopted unanimously; having received the support of some of those who, on the floor of the General Assembly, had been most prominent and zealous in resisting the abrogation of the Plan of Union. The same course was open to the four excluded synods. By separating themselves from their Congregational and accommodation churches, they could, in obedience to the General Assembly, apply either as individual churches or ministers to the most convenient presbytery; or as presbyteries to the next General Assembly.

* That this is a fair exhibition of the proceedings of the General Assembly is plain from their own declarations. The Plan of Union is declared to be "an unconstitutional act," and as such it was abrogated. Minutes of the General Assembly, p. 421. Secondly, it was resolved, "That by the operation of the abrogation of the Plan of Union of 1801, the synod of the Western Reserve is, and is hereby declared to be, no longer a part of Presbyterian Church in the United States of America." Thirdly, it was resolved that in consequence of the abrogation of the Plan of Union, the synods of Utica, Geneva, and Genesee, " are, and are hereby declared to be, out of the ecclesiastical connexion of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America." Minutes, p. 444. Fourthly, the synods of Albany, New Jersey, and Illinois, are enjoined to correct the "irregularities in church order charged upon their presbyteries and churches." Min., p. 497. In answer to the Protest of the commissioners from the presbyteries belonging to the synod of the Western Reserve, the Assembly say the Assembly of 1801 had no authority from the constitution to admit officers from any other denomination of Christians to sit and act in our judicatories; and therefore no presbytery or synod thus constituted is recognised by the constitution of our church, and no subsequent General Assembly is bound to recognise them." "The representatives of these churches, on the accommodation plan, form a constituent part of these presbyteries as really as the pastors or elders, and this Assembly can recognise no presbytery thus constituted, as belonging to the Presbyterian church. The Assembly has extended the operation of the same principle to other synods which they find similarly constituted." Min., 451.

This course would indeed require submission to measures which these brethren regarded as unkind and even unjust; and might for a time have occasioned many inconveniences. But on the other hand, it cannot long be regarded either as an injustice or hardship, that the General Assembly should require that all churches entitled to representation in our judicatories, and to participation in our government, should conform to the constitution which they administer. It was submitted to the option of all the presbyteries within these synods either to separate from Congregationalism or from the General Assembly. If they refused to do the former, they cannot long expect the sympathy of the public, should they be shut up to the other alternative.

The second course open to these synods, and to those who side with them, was to act upon the conviction which they avowed on the floor of the Assembly, that the time had come for an amicable division of the church. It will be recollected that a committee of ten, five from the majority and five from the minority, was appointed to effect this object. The committee agreed as to its expediency, under existing circumstances, and differed only as to the mode, not the terms of separation. The one party wished it to be made immediately by the Assembly, the other to have it referred to the presbyteries. By acting upon their own plan, and requesting those presbyteries which agreed with them to appoint commissioners to meet and organize as the "General Assembly of the American Presbyterian Church," the division would have been effected in their own way. In this manner all contention might have been avoided, and all questions been amicably adjusted between the two bodies.

The third method was to assume that the acts in question were illegal and void, and to determine to proceed as though they had never been passed. This is the course which has been adopted; whether wisely or unwisely it is not for us to say. Without presuming to question either the motives or the wisdom of those who have advised this course, it may not be out of place to examine its probable results, and the correctness of some of the assumptions on which it is publicly defended.

Soon after the rising of the last Assembly, the presbyteries particularly interested were called together, and in most instances, resolved that they would retain their present organization; that they considered the Plan of Union a sacred compact, and therefore could not consent to the dissolution of the connexion between them and the Congregational churches under their care; that they would, as usual, commission delegates to the next General Assembly, and instruct them to demand their seats in that body. As far as we know, not a single presbytery within the four synods has consented to withdraw from their Congregational churches. Not satisfied with this separate action of the presbyteries, delegates were appointed who met in convention at Auburn, August 17, 1837, and resolved unanimously, that the acts of the General Assembly, disowning the

four synods, "are null and void;" they declared that they consider the rights accruing to the churches from the Plan of Union to be inviolable, that "an almost immemorial usage and acquiescence have committed the original confederated parties by whom the constitution itself was framed and adopted, to guarantee the validity of that important pact;" and that these churches" cannot now be dismembered and disfranchised."* That these brethren had a perfect right to take this course, no one can doubt. When it was submitted to their option either to separate from their Congregational churches, or from the General Assembly, they were certainly at liberty to make their selection. The question is, whether their refusal to submit to the abrogation of the Plan of Union is consistent with their continued or renewed connexion with the Presbyterian church? It certainly cannot be on any other ground than that the General Assembly had no authority to decree that abrogation, and to order the inferior judicatories to carry it into effect. This, however, is a position which we are persuaded cannot be maintained. It is expressly relinquished in the legal opinion given by Mr. Wood, and is virtually renounced in that of Chancellor Kent. These brethren, therefore, have their own lawyers against them. Besides, there are comparatively few persons, not connected with one or the other of the four synods, who question the right of the Assembly to abolish the Plan of Union; there are more who doubt the propriety of the act disowning the synod of the Western Reserve, and still more who disapprove of that in relation to the three synods of New York. These brethren, however, can depend on the co-operation of those only who go the whole length with them. They have selected the weakest, instead of the strongest position, at their command. To justify any one to vote that the commissioners from these synods should take their seats in the next Assembly, it is not enough that he should disapprove of the acts by which they were disowned, he must deny the right of the Assembly to decide that Congregationalists shall no longer sit and act in our judicatories, or be represented in our General Assembly. The whole controversy is made to hinge on this one point. The entire synod of New Jersey has committed itself as to this matter, by acting in obedience to the command of the Assembly, and requiring the Presbytery of Montrose to carry the abrogation of the Plan of Union into effect. Admitting the constitutionality and validity of that abrogation, the synod could not expect the commissioners from the presbytery of Montrose to be admitted to their seats in the next Assembly, had the order of the previous Assembly been disregarded. And we presume that the synods of Albany and Illinois cannot expect that the delegates from their mixed presbyteries can be allowed to sit. The Assembly has declared that "the existence of such presbyteries is recognised

*See Minutes and Address of the Auburn Convention, New York Observer, Octo37.