*

*

*

*

show of opposition. The sense of the House was so strongly evinced in favor of the Boards, and in opposition to mere speculative objections to their existence, that we presume the controversy will not be renewed. It seems indeed unworthy of debate, whether the body appointed to carry on our benevolent operations, be called a Committee, and be appointed by the Assembly, or whether it be called a Board. In the one case it would be a small body,-in the other, large. The former method has the advantage of simplicity, but the latter has considerations in its favor which are not likely to lose their influence on the Church. In the first place, they have been incorporated in our policy for years. In the second place, they are a necessary intermediate agency between the Assembly and its Executive officers. The Assembly cannot conduct its Theological Seminaries otherwise than through the intervention of a Board, neither can it otherwise conduct its Educational and Missionary operations. In a small, compact body, like the Church of Scotland, with a permanent commission, to refer to in every emergency, it may do for the Assembly to conduct all its operations by simple Committees. *** In the third place, the abolition of the Boards would throw a responsibility and power on the Executive Committees and Secretaries, which they ought not to be entrusted with. Their accountability to a body like the General Assembly, which, from its nature, is incapable of efficient inspection, would be merely nominal. The whole work would really be in the hands of a very few men, without any real supervision and control. Our complaints against the management of the American Home Missionary Society in New York, should make us sensible that any irresponsible power is a dangerous thing. And not to prolong an unnecessary discussion, it may be remarked that our Boards serve the purpose of break-waters. As to the objection that the Scriptures know nothing of Boards, that they are not Church Courts, &c., we would only say, this is the jus divinum theory in its dotage. God has not sent his church into the world, as an infant in its swaddling clothes, without liberty of action; he has given her a work to do, which requires the free use of her limbs; and it will be found hard work to bind her with split hairs."-(Bib. Rep., July, 1854, pp. 559-'60-'61.)

No one who will take the trouble to consider this paragraph attentively, in connection with the circumstances which furnished the occasion for it, will be much surprised that one of the persons here referred to, as having assailed the Boards with "speculative objections to their existence," should feel unwilling to allow this statement from such a quarter to pass unchallenged, especially so, if, so far from warring against their very existence, he did nothing more than propose an inquiry relative to the expediency of symplifying their structure, and changing somewhat the location of some of them. Nor is it wonderful, that the views here set forth, touching the necessity of something more than a committee acting ecclesiastically;-of the practical irresponsibility of the Boards to the Assembly;-of the relation of the Church under her great commission, to the work of missions, as no more direct than her relation to the matter of teaching young men Hebrew, or technical theology;-of the jus divinum theory of the Church, that demands a scripture warrant for all agencies employed by the Church, as a matter to be scoffed at;-of a power claimed for the Church, of ordaining -not indeed "rites and ceremonies," but what is far more dangerous, a power to ordain, as of herself, agencies for doing her divinely appointed work;— that all this should seem to him to demand the most serious attention: especially so, seeing that these views came from a quarter to which the Church has been accustomed to look, with almost unlimited confidence, for orthodox views of the nature and duties of the Church, and as the hypothetical dangers herein admitted in regard to irresponsible power, are conditioned on what are actual, rather than supposable facts, in regard to the Boards. It is to be borne in mind then, that the article on the Boards of the Church, which gave rise to so much unkind remark, was not a spontaneous assault upon the Boards at all, but a defence and remon

strance against such an exposition of the views, both of the advocates of inquiry concerning the Boards, and of the Assembly of 1854. It ought to be borne in mind also, that the suggestions in that article, touching the defects in the working of the Philadelphia Boards, instead of being volunteered in a fault-finding spirit, were in response to challenges thrown out and reiterated, over and over again,-"why are not the defects in the working of the Boards pointed out?" The author of that article, being called upon for candid criticism, something after the fashion, and in the spirit in which a certain hero of an old fashioned story, was called upon for free and candid criticism upon his master, the Bishop's sermon, was guilty simply of that hero's blundering simplicity, in responding according to request, and got for his pains that hero's reward! The subsequent papers on this subject in the "Critic," were all of them the natural and necessary out-growth from the article of the "Repertory" also. The indignation of the parties who called so boldly, and in apparent candor, for the pointing out of defects, being kindled at the too satisfactory response to the call, the author of the response was held up to the Church, as a reviler of faithful public servants, and in self-defence, he was compelled to prove true specifically and in detail, that which he at first delicately asserted in most general terms, for the very purpose of saving the personal feelings of those, whose acts were the subject of discussion. This, we take it, will be found to be the real history of the controversy, by all who will take the trouble impartially to inquire into it.

That the authors of the articles in the "Critic" on this subject, could not possibly be moved to write, as they have done, by any of the absurd reasons which seem to be insinuated in much that is said of them, is clearly manifest, from their peculiar relations to the whole matter. It cannot be, that they aim to embarrass the officers of the Boards in this round-about way, since for those officers longest in the service, and therefore most to blame, if the defects in the working of the Boards be attributed to them, the writers in the "Critic" are publicly known to entertain the very highest esteem personally, and a degree of confidence in their official integrity, which all the votes of confidence that the General Assembly could enact, could not increase.

That these two writers are not visionary and impracticable theorists on the subject, ready to sacrifice substantial, practical good, for the sake of an abstraction, ought to be very manifest from the fact that they have each, in their way, been practical workers in the Church. That a passion for notoriety in the Church, especially of this cheap kind, could not be the inciting cause, is most singularly manifest in the case of one of them, who, as the "author of the Act and Testimony," has surely achieved reputation enough among Presbyterians of both names, to satisfy the ambition of any reasonable man.

But enough on this head. We would say a word, touching another charge against us :-the vagueness and indefiniteness of our statements, particularly in reference to what is practically wrong in the Boards, and how it should be righted. To this charge we cannot respond better, than to cite a specimen of the style in which these things have been said in the "Critic:"

"We say the church is the agent of God to do his work to do it-not to see it done to do his work, and no other work. And this is of Faith; and relates to every thing that is of Faith; and relates to nothing else. Our brethren agree not

The Critic and its Censors.

[July,

with this. They appear to say, in effect, the church is the counsellor of God; and as such, may omit to do his work-if she only sees that it is done; may contrive methods, to that end, never appointed by him; may give herself to work that is not of Faith-nor addressed to Faith. Here in its last analysis, is the difference between us. A difference radical in itself,-and fatal except only that they say may, while we say must. one side, in the fruits which the church will bring forth, the precise measure of In its practical results-it is a difference presenting on her ability and her piety combined; on the other side, the ever-fluctuating results of human contrivances acting and reacting upon the spiritual life of the church. A difference in its theoretical results on the one hand, planting the church in her Doctrine, her Form, and her Action, immoveably on the eternal Word. On the other hand, setting her adrift, amidst the rage and conflict of boundless carnal commandments.

"9. Practically-it may be properly enough demanded, what do we suppose can be done or ought to be done? Simply and directly this: 1. Remove two of the present Boards, out of Philadelphia. 2. Place the two that are removed, in such positions, as the good of the particular cause each represents, shall indicate to the Assembly, that makes the change. 3. Organize all four of the Boards, in such manner, that they shall be, really and truly, charged with the work committed to them respectively, and really and truly responsible for it. to them nothing, but the proper work belonging to each one of them, as immediate agents of the Church of Christ; and let all they do, be done, with, by, and through, 4. Commit the Church herself-and not as powers, independent of the Church-nor for objects heterogeneous to the Church, nor by methods foreign to the Church. 5. Break up, utterly, the one man power, wherever it may linger in any part of the Board: our Church Government is not hierarchic-it is a commonwealth. 6. Transfer the election of all the chief officers of all the Boards, to the General Assembly itself; and, as far as possible, associate ruling Elders or Deacons, in the chief executive administration-especially the financial part of it. ilar means-as far as the habits, the necessities, the principles even, of the Church, may require the continued use of any portion of our present apparatus-let it be 7. By these, and simsimplified, renovated, and brought into a workable condition, and placed in an advantageous posture: bad parts eliminated, good parts strengthened,-shocks and jars avoided-and a fair and complete opportunity afforded, without commotion or revolution, of bringing up the Church, with power, to her glorious work, in all its departments.'

If this is hazy and indefinite, to any others than those who do not wish to see clearly, we must plead guilty, and give up ner, of the response to such as called for a specific pointing out of defects in the case. the working out of the Board scheme. If in the statements we have made So in like mantouching the election customs in the Boards at Philadelphia, we have not been distinct enough and specific enough, we give it up in despair.

In connection with this class of criticisms upon our work, we may notice the oft repeated displays of ingenuity, in showing, by comparing various essays, that the "Critic" is inconsistent with itself!-advocating inconsistent, and even opposite opinions, on the same general questions. Now we repeat, that we gave specific notice in the outset, that this freedom of discussion and opinion, within the range of our circle of subjects, was to be one of the peculiarities of our plan, when confined within such limits as to avoid protracted and formal controversy in our own pages; and we still consider this method best adapted to promote the cause of sound, intelligent Presbyterianism. We are happy at the same time, to inform the censors, who have been so much concerned for the unity of the "Critic,” that though, as at first declared, the prospective writers for this paper, were not aware of each other's views upon the leading questions which divide the Church, yet the result of their better acquaintance, so far, has been decidedly, a tendency to unity of opinion. Though apparently coming to their conclusions from different starting points,-one by a priori reasoning, of the principles which should, in the nature of the case, control all Church

action;-another from a consideration of the practical out-working of certain measures;—a third from both combined,—yet all are found to be agreed substantially, in reference to a far greater number of the controverted questions, than was by any means anticipated when our work began. For the comfort and peace of mind of those who have been disturbed at the want of unity in the deliverances of the "Critic," we assure them that the difficulty is not likely to be very formidable; and though we attach too special an importance to this free discussion feature of our plan, to give it up, so readily, they may feel assured that it is not likely to work out more trouble for our censors in time to come, than in time past.

We have a word or two to say in reference to the bad spirit, which it is the fashion in some quarters, to impute to us. That we should have given just occasion for any such charge, in any thing that we have written, would certainly cause us more regret than all other causes of complaint combined. If we have made such impression in any impartial quarter, we offer our humble apology. Certainly we have not the excuse of excitement and momentary passion to plead in extenuation. We are not aware of having written anything under the stress of wounded, mortified, or angry feeling, toward any body in the world. For even the specific things which seem to be referred to as evidences of our bad spirit, we are obliged to confess, we have no such apology to plead. We have gone upon the principle that in the differences which must necesarily arise concerning great issues in the Church, it is on the whole, far best in the long run, to accept at the start, the proposition, that "war is war." We have never seen any good result-but often immense evil, in destroying all manly confidence in the sincerity of brethren, from the attempt to conduct controversy on great questions, in the whining tone and style so fashionable with a certain school twenty years ago. If we were disposed to apologize however, we might in our circumstances, make out a very fair case. We might refer to the fact, that the spirit which has set itself to oppose us, has not been the most amiable in all its manifestations. The things which we have been compelled to speak of, have been, in not a few instances, of that class of things, which the selection of smooth and gentle words to characterize, could not materially relieve the harshness of. To that very amiable class of censors whose taste merely is shocked at our plain, direct sort of speech, we have no apology to offer, nor any promises of amendment to make. We confess to an utter dislike of much of the style of religious writing which has become current in the religious publications of the voluntary societies popular on this and the other side of the Atlantic, during the last quarter of a century. We cannot understand why a writer must utter his thoughts, as though he felt himself an intruder in the world in which God has placed him, and his thoughts, a sort of speaking interpolation in the current text of humanity. We cannot understand why, in the higher matters of religion, a man must shrink from any bold and manly utterance, lest he violate the canons of a white-cravated mediocrity, or his enthusiasm in ecclesiastical politics, incur the cold sneer of a gloved and gowned moderatism.

But our limited space admonishes us to cut short these lucubrations. All we have to ask in conclusion is, that we be judged of by our work. If our views are heretical, or revolutionary, there is an abundance of logic and learning in the Presbyterian Church, to expose and overthrow them. If we do any injustice, let them show it, and the evil shall inure to us, not to

them. We begin our second half year's work, with the good feeling which naturally arises from having amassed some capital for more extended business in future. It makes us perhaps a little conceited, but disposes us to such high good humor with ourselves and all the world, that we "let bygones, be by-gones," with all that choose it, and with new zeal go at our work-the advancement of pure Presbyterianism.

SO.

To our worthy cotemporaries-at first so ready,-of late so slow, to speak we venture to suggest, that having now got more even with them in position in the Church;-having obtained a hearing, and the acknowledgment of our right to be heard farther,-w -we shall do our very best in the way of advancing our views. It shall remain with them entirely to determine our future relations. If they have changed their mind, and think now with Carlyle-"Speech is great, but Silence is greater,"-be it We only regret that they had not made the discovery sooner, and thereby saved us some waste of valuable space. If on the other hand, they have any thing to say of us, we hope it will be in the way of discussing our views of doctrine and order, and not in the way of attempting to destroy our hold upon the confidence of the Church, by forcing personal issues, and local questions upon us. Little is to be gained by farther effort to stop discussion-much may be lost. We have now our circle of readers;—our subscription list is as large as we can well afford to have it, for the present year. The field is thus fairly open to us; and with God's blessing it is our determination to make the most of the opportunity, to awake the attention of the people to some of those grand distinguishing truths of Presbyterianism, which have given our Church its chief power in time past, and without which, in our humble judgment, Presbyterianism inust surely prove a failure in the end, however much it may, for the time, seem to prosper.

EDITORIAL EXCHANGE.

"WHICH: THE RIGHT OR THE LEFT?".

GARRET & Co's "CARD.-( Confidential.)" We have had upon our table for a month past, a volume of some 500 and odd pages, which came accompanied by another of those remarkable New York documents, to which we have already had occasion to call the attention of our readers, in the case of Mr. John Livingston, Immortality Manufacturer, at 157 Broadway.

(publishing house, and therefore present them-first with the letter (the "sure enough" letter written with a pen,)—and next the "Card--(confidential)" printed on the other side of the letter:

NEW YORK, May 5th, 1855. REV. STUART ROBINSON:-Dear Sir,-With

this please find, for your acceptance and perusal, the 1st of June, entitled Which-the Right, or a copy of a new work which we shall issue on the Left? It is the first of a series of six Reform We have been somewhat at a loss to Fictions upon the six leading evils of modern know what to do in the premises, as the society, which we have in press, and which we shall take great pleasure in forwarding to you printed Card, which accompanies the writ- as fast as issued. The first illustrates the hollowten letter, is specially marked "Confiden-ness of modern religion as exemplified in the tial." We conclude on the whole, that as every day life of the majority of those who prothis must be intended to be one of the fess to be governed by its laws-2dly, the difficul ties which the world and worldly christians throw "confidentials" after the modern fashion- in the real christian's path-and 3dly, the glorious a sort of infinitesimal degree of the confi- triumph which awaits the heart that holds out dential, which one is to reveal only to one's faithfully to the end. It has been kindly sug1000 particular friends, and in view, far-gested by a friend, that if the clergymen of the Union were made acquainted with the aim and ther, of the peculiarly intimate relation character of the work, that they would heartily between us and our readers-we are at lib-unite in securing for it a fair hearing. We erty in this private way, to let them into should therefore, dear sir, be happy to learn, our nice secret, in relation to what trans- and approval. Any assistance you can render that its publication meets with your sanction pires behind the scenes in a great New York us to that end, or any suggestion you may kind