also to think that the latter finds place exclusively in the purchase, and the former in the application of redemption. But surely he does not mean to exclude the former entirely from the latter department of theology, for that would imply a denial of the forensic nature of justification. We do not think any such plan of riding the marches, as it were, between these two ideas, and letting each reign alone and exclusively in a separate department of the system, is at all practicable. Nor do we think it at all necessary, for the ideas, as we endeavoured to shew before, are not inconsistent, and may both of them reign harmoniously as the governing principles of every department of theology. Luther and Calvin, at least, saw no difficulty in this, for while they delighted to enlarge on the believer's vital union to Christ, they held fast, as the very core of their theology, the juridical or forensic principle, in the application as well as in the impetration of redemption. And conversely, we do not think that there is anything to prevent the other principle, that of headship or representation, from being carried out in connection with the purchase of salvation by Christ. No doubt it is somewhat more difficult to conceive of it in this connection, for, as union to Christ is effected by faith, and as faith presupposes a risen and exalted Saviour for its object, and for its cause the Spirit sent by the glorified Saviour, it is hard to imagine how there could have been any such union before the work of Christ was actually finished. But, though this makes it somewhat difficult to represent the matter to our mind's eye, it forms no real difficulty in the nature of things, or at least can only be regarded as a difficulty attaching to what is known to be a certain fact, a difficulty to be ascribed to the mysterious nature of the subject. For it is a certain fact, that believers were justified through union to Christ, long ages before Christ came in the flesh, before he actually was the last Adam at all. The coming and death of Christ was, as it were, antedated in its bearing on those who lived before the time; or rather it has, properly speaking, as a transaction in the divine government, no date, no relation to time at all. The apostle's use of the words of Moses (Rom. x. 6-10) fairly admits, and even requires, the same application to time as to space. The Israelite needed not to say, "Who shall travel down the stream of time, to bring Christ near to us ?" nor do we need to say, "Who shall ascend through the centuries to the cross on Calvary, and bring us a present Saviour?" The word is nigh even in our mouth and in our heart, the word of faith, that presents Christ to us as the end of the law for righteousness. For wherever faith is, it apprehends a present Saviour; present as even now giving

Completeness of the Union..

317

himself for us, and giving himself to us; present ever, his body broken and his blood shed, in the word and sacraments, and all the other means of grace. It is thus only that faith can embrace Christ practically. And when we look at the matter theoretically, we may imagine the cross to have been erected at different points or eras in the world's history. One set of difficulties may be best removed when we imagine it at the very beginning of history; another set disappears when we suppose it to have been postponed to the end of time; but both alike cease to vex us when we remember that we have to do with "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever."

We can see no contradiction, though undoubtedly there is a mystery, in Christ being actually the head of all his people when he suffered and died; though at the time many of them were not in existence, and many though in the world had not yet been born again, there is a similar, though not perhaps quite as great a difficulty, in understanding how Adam was the head of men not yet in existence. When the Larger Catechism sums up the benefits of redemption in those simple and sublime words, "Union and communion with Christ in grace and glory," this presupposes a previous union and communion of Christ with us in guilt and condemnation; and the believer's oneness with Christ implies not only a sharing in all his benefits, but a sharing in his sufferings and death also. The Bible is as full of the one as of the other. If we are described as being blessed in him with all spiritual blessings, having in him redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our sins, being made accepted in the beloved, we are just as often spoken of as crucified with him, dead with him and in him, buried with him, raised with him; we must seek with Paul to know not only the power of his resurrection, but the fellowship of his sufferings. This principle of the vital and federal union between Christ the head and the church which is his body, not carried out in a one-sided way, as Hofmann has done, so as to exclude the ideas of law and judgment, nor confined to one department of the system only, but carried out through all, and as the foundation of all, would, we are persuaded, give a very healthy and hopeful tone to our theology. It would silence the shallow cavils about the capricious transference, arbitrary imputation, stiff juridical representations, &c., that are so common. And, what is better, it would lead in the way of opening up more fully the rich treasures of Scripture teaching, and impart a warmer and more genial character to the presenta

* See Dr Candlish on the Atonement, pp. 349-357. VOL. XIV.NO. LII.

Y

tion of the old orthodox faith, by making the whole of our theology, instead of being a mere set of abstract doctrines, group itself around the living personal Saviour, as the centre and sun of the whole. J. C.

ART. VI.-A Plea and a Plan for Presbyterian Unity.* "That they may be one."-JOHN Xvii. 11.

THE chosen people of God are a united people; they have one Lord, one faith, one baptism. There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. They who love the Lord Jesus Christ, and are united to Him by a true and living faith, together constitute the Bride-the Lamb's wife. Here on earth

"Their fears, their hopes, their aims are one,"

and they desire and expect to be congregated at last as brethren, in the house of their common Father. What more natural, and desirable, and proper, then, than that there should be the closest possible external as well as mystical union, binding them to each other in love, and labour, and enjoyment, now and here, and for ever?

And yet this one church of God-this one household of faith-as it exists in this world, is cut up into many sects, and parties, and larger or smaller coteries, which, more or less severely, hold aloof from each other, and wrap themselves each in its own mantle of exclusiveness. From this state of things it follows, with the inevitable conclusiveness of a mathematical corollary, that there must arise jealousies and rivalries very unbecoming to the body of Christ, and very obstructive to the prosperity of his cause. And yet they all pray" thy kingdom come," and profess that their one great work upon the earth, which absorbs their most earnest zeal, and engrosses their chiefest anxieties, is to carry forward the work of the Lord to its final and glorious completion.

Now, it certainly is a most important question whether

From the "Biblical Repertory and Princeton Review," edited by Charles Hodge, D.D., Jan. 1865. We are induced to insert the following article from the interesting nature of the subject at the present time, and feeling convinced that any contribution towards the right adjustment of the question, from an impartial quarter, must be acceptable to our readers. -Ed. B. F. E. R.

Calvinistic Presbyterians should be one. 319

we, the whole church of God, are not thus hindered in the fulfilment of our divine vocation by unnecessary clogs. If we are, we are manifestly sinning against the grace of God, and walking unworthy of our sonship every day and every hour that we voluntarily continue to wear such fetters.

To us, and we think to all men who give it serious consideration, it appears very evident that these divisions among Christians are a sore evil under the sun, and a great sin resting upon those who are in any way responsible for their continuance. But if any thoughtful Christians do not so understand it, we hope to make our views plainer, incidentally, in the further discussion of our subject.

We are ready to confess that to some extent there are at present insuperable difficulties in the way of a reformation in this matter. On account of the imperfections of understanding, and the weakness and depravity of intellect, which still characterise us all, Christians are found to differ widely in their interpretations of important doctrines of grace. So long as this is the case, it is undoubtedly best that those who think alike should stand together. A peaceful and kindly separation, with mutual God-speeds, is certainly preferable to a continual discord in an external union. Though a wall of separation, even in such a case, is an evil, it is the lesser evil of the only two alternatives. And even where the honest difference of conviction is in a matter not of doctrine but of government, so long as it is an honest, conscientious, God-fearing difference, involving efficiency in the service of God on either side, we say let separation continue in all brotherly kindness and charity.

But where creed and government are identical, or so nearly so that all interested acknowledge that the divergencies are of no considerable importance, why should there not be an external and visible union? In such a case, with what arguments shall we palliate our schism (or, if that word be too strong, our denominationalism) to ourselves, or excuse it before a mocking world, or answer for it before a jealous God?

There are several separate denominations now in the church which agree in a Calvinistic faith, and a Presbyterian form of government.-(We can at present count nine or ten entirely separate and distinct sects in these United States, which are all professedly Calvinistic Presbyterians.)Why should not all, or the most of these, be ONE, not only in doctrine and order, not only in love and in spirit, but in external organization?

Our purpose is to give some reasons why they should be one. And in doing so we will take a cursory view only of

the inferior, yet perhaps most easily appreciated, motives to union, and consider it as a matter of policy.

We have said that the one great work of the church in this world is to carry forward the work of the Lord to its final and glorious completion. The church is the custodian of God's revealed will, and the instrument in his hands for the spread of his gospel, and the enfoldment of his elect.

Now, how can she, or rather how can the orthodox Presbyterian church in these United States, best fulfil the holy office? We say, by acting unitedly as one body. So, and only so, can she put forth the strength which the Lord has given her in the Lord's service.

Let us look for arguments for the support of this proposition.

First, to the ordinary work of the church here at home, in the preaching of the gospel, and the furnishing of the ordinances of God's house and the means of grace to those for whom they are given. In the fulfilment of this work, the church continually finds herself hampered by the lack of adequate means. The harvest is plenteous, the field is wide, and the work is urgent, but the executive departments of our various Presbyterian denominations complain that they have not men enough to preach the gospel, nor money enough for the adequate support of those they have, nor the means to build churches for poor and destitute communities.

Now, what are the facts? All over our land there are hamlets, and villages, and towns in which may be found from two to half-a-dozen different Calvinistic Presbyterian denominations struggling for a foothold, and each seeking to establish its church. In many cases there are means enough expended to build and pay for one commodious and substantial church, Presbyterian element enough in the community to form a good and self-supporting congregation, and room only for the labours of one faithful and devoted pastor. Instead of this, there are two or four pastors, devoted to utter discouragement and slow starvation; two or four churches overwhelmed with debt; and two or four congregations of each a handful of people, who, by the force of circumstances, are learning a gospel of bigotry, envy, and jealousy. Besides these, there are two or four boards of domestic missions, watching anxiously from a distance, overburdened with cares, and calling earnestly upon their several denominations for help to sustain the church of Christ in that place, which cannot sustain itself because it is infinitesimally subdivided.

Nor is this the case only in country villages and small towns. In our large cities also you will find, for instance,