The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-02-19

timony of Dr. Dufield, himself prominent
New School man, recorded in the article ofthe
Bibtotheca Socra, to which DR.. Hodge refers,
is sufficient, at least, to justify our demand for
an official disavowal of this lax rule as an es-
senhal preliminary to reunion. Ii we are
mistaken in regard to the facts above recited-
or if, as DIR. Smith says, the New School body
have materially changed their position upon
this subject, it is easy for them to say so
through their regularly organized Church
courts. But where such eminent doctors as
Smith and Dufleld differ so widely in their
views of what rs the New School historical
and Cavnistc sense" of the standards, we
think our Presbyteries ought not to accept,
and we trust in God they will not accept, any
thing short Of an authoritative and binding de-
cision Of the question. .
Our purpose in this series of articles is two
fold. First, to give some further reasons for
insisting upon this official settlement of the
doctrinal basis of reunion; and secondly, to
show that aside from the doctrina basis there
are other grave questions upon which the two
bodies are at variance, and which ought to be
settled before they are organicaly united
There is no unkiDdness, and no want Of the
true spirit of Christian union, in the investi-
CATION we propose. Common honesty demands
that it should be made. Christian prudence.
and regard for the future peace of the
| Church. require us to search and see whether
we are agreed, before we undertake to walk to-
gether.
Upon the question of our theological agree
ment, the standard literature of the two bodies,
the books written, edited, and endorsed by our
ministers, and especially the works issued by
our respective Boards of Publication. throw a
food of clear dry light against which we can
not shut our eyes.
For example, we invite attention to the ex-
cellent treatise on the Atonement, by DIR. A.
A. Hodge, which our Board has recently added
to its rich store of Theological literature. 1t
seems to us that every one who really receives
our Confession of Faith in its true historic and
Calvinistic sense, ought to hail the appearance
of this work. not only for its intrinsic value,
but because Of its adaptation to meet the spe-
cial wants of the Church at the present time.
After the storm of secuarism which has been
beating upon us for the past eight or ten years,
any thing fitted to excite in the hearts of min
isters and people new interest in the great
fundamental doctrine of the gospel, is like the
quickening breath of spring, after the winter
is over and gone. Moreover the publication
of this admirable book by authority, seems to
us to be exceedingly timely, in view of the
| c.. 18th
ties to the proposed marriage ought to make
a clean breast of it beforehand Not that we
should fight old battles over again, or enter
into any discussion in the spirit of controversy.
But we ought frankly and fully to state our
views, that we may ascertain whether there is
a prospect of our living together peaceably in
the same house, or whether it would not be
better to be satisfied with separate houses, and
cultivate good feelings towards each other as
near neighbors The basis of our union is to
be doctrindl This is contended for, and adj
mitted on both sides What surer way is there
to ascertain whether there is doctrina agree
ment between us, than for one party to put
forth, by authority, a fresh and clear state.
ment of some of the underlying and compre-
hensive doctrines of the gospel, and see
whether the other party can accept it? DIR.
Hodges book is well fitted for this purpose.
The atonement is the central, and at the same
time the pervading doctrine of the gospel. 1t
underlies the whole book of Revelation, and n
mans views on this subject are fair index
and test of his whole religious creed DR..
Hodges statement and defence of this doctrine
will be accepted, we think, throughout the
Old School body as fair, and in the main an
accurate, exposition of the historic and Cal
whistle sense" in which we understand the
teaching of the Confession of Faith on this
subject Its publication by our Board GER
tainly indicates. this much. But how will it,
and other books of similar kind-such, for
example, as Symington on the Atonement-be
received by the other branch?"
An answer to this question is before U.S.
The american Presbyterian, which we believe
to be the most popular and influential paper
in the New School body, thus speaks of DR..
Hodges book:
This book is a distinctively controversial
and Princetonian book; is issued by authority
and presented as a standard of doctrine on its
subject 1t is from the press of the Presbyte-
rian Board Of Publication. In the present re-
latons of the two great Presbyterian bodies of
this country. its issue under such auspices
cannot but prove unfortunate The very al
phabet of the negotiations on re union is the
recognition of the perfect equality of both
parties. And yet here, in the midst of the
negotiations, the brand of heresy is attempted
to be put upon one of the parties by an official
act of the other. The Publication Board of
theother branch virtually say, either there is
to be no reunion, or the reunited Church
must take Professor Hodge as the exponent of
orthodoxy upon the Atonement They would
scarcely issue costly book, only to be thrown
out by committee of revision. The publica-
ton of the work by private enterprise would
have signifed nothing in this regard Its is
sue by the Old School Board is an anti union
movement; resumption of hostilities in the
midst of truce.
This extract suggests several weighty con-
siderations, to which we cannot shut our eyes
without treachery to the truth.
l. 1t is admitted by the american Presby-
terrain, who certainly is a competent witness,
that there is an irreconcable difference be-
tween the view of the atenement a4+eeatal-in
this book and the prevalent views of our New
School brethren; insomuch that its publication
at this time is regarded as an attempt to put
upon them the brand of heresy" The book
itself does not. avow nor intimate any such
design; and the only possible theory upon
which it can be supposed to produce such
result. is the admission that the difference be-
tween us on this vital doctrine is so great as
to involve heresy on the one side or the other.