a designation argue the fear of the disciples lest it should in some measure degrade the Saviour in the view of others? It certainly wears this appearance. Yet Jesus, to complete the full measure of his humiliation, employs this as his favorite phraseology (if I may so speak) in the designation of his own person.

On the like ground, we may account for his own unfrequent exhibitions of his higher nature by his own words. To refrain from the tò εivai lσa Oɛ, was a part of the discipline to which he subjected himself, while he was in that state "in which he learned obedience."

These hints give rise to a long train of thoughts on this deeply interesting subject; but I must leave the province of making reflections to my readers. It is at least easy to see, that much which has often been said about the humble manner in which Jesus spoke of himself, and demeaned himself, has been said with very defective and circumscribed views in relation to this topic. Evidence of the actually inferior nature of Christ cannot with any propriety be alleged to exist, in the use of such language and the exhibition of such demeanor as I have noted. Both of these belonged appropriately to the exévwos tavτór, which we have had so frequent occasion to notice.

In reviewing this whole topic, I feel the conviction forced upon my mind, that no satisfactory evidence can be drawn from the passage under examination, of the actual and essential inferiority of Christ to the Father. Of his temporary humiliation, during the period when he became flesh and dwelt among men, it does afford satisfactory evidence. But who among consistent and enlightened believers in the doctrine of the Trinity, does not believe this? Or rather, who does not maintain this as a substantial part of his creed ?

I can hardly refrain from another remark, before I close this investigation. This is, that Calvin, who has been so often and in so many ways depreciated and spoken of with contumely, if not with scorn, seems to have almost intuitively hit upon the true sense of the passage, by a single glance at the context and the nature of the case. He who studies the Scriptures with the design of making himself well acquainted with the logical interpretation of them, as well as with the philological, will seldom find the great Genevan tripping in the first respect, although the times in which he lived and the education which he received,

did not permit him to shine in the latter department. After a long period of obloquy and neglect on the part of his neighbours, his real worth is again coming into general notice. Justice, although sometimes slow-paced, seldom fails to arrive at her true destination. The lover of divine truth and of scriptural study, while he feels himself sacredly bound to call no man master on earth, will still be grateful for many a masterly hint which Calvin has given, as to the track which he ought to pursue. The distinguished Genevan Reformer occupied a lofty stand, and cast his piercing eye into the far distance on every side of it; and he has shrewdly warned the less intelligent fellow traveller of many a by-path, which will end in a trackless desert, an inaccessible precipice, or a deep and dangerous ravine. It is well always to consider, at least, the monitions which he gives. If he has sometimes been mistaken, and lost the way himself, it is no more than belongs to the lot of man. Humanum est errare. In matters of verbal and grammatical criticism, he rarely attempts to be a communicative guide. The Germans of the present day, it must be owned, leave him almost out of sight here. But in the higher province of logical commentary, few indeed of the Germans, or of any other nation, are likely to go before him.

At all events, in the case before us, the hints which he has given seem to me of much higher value, than the labored efforts of all the recent commentators. I cannot resist the persuasion, that the harmony of scripture doctrine, and the appropriateness of the words which we have examined, are much more satisfactorily exhibited in the way suggested by Calvin, than in that of Lücke, Kuinöl, Olshausen, or Tholuck. Of the last, however, it can hardly be said that he has developed any very definite opinion on the text before us.

In what way this text can be fairly made to aid the cause of Anti-trinitarians, I am not aware. The temporary humiliation of Christ can never prove his essential and eternal inferiority. And so long as this is the case, the text before us is appealed to by them in vain. The candid and intelligent inquirer after truth, whatever opinion he may build on other texts of Scripture, will not venture the attempt to build an anti-trinitarian doctrine on John 14: 28.

VOL. VI.-NO. XXII.

32

ARTICLE V.

CONGREGATIONALISM.

A View of Congregationalism. By GEORGE PUNCHARD, Pastor of the Congregational Church, Plymouth, N. H.

THIS is a highly respectable treatise upon church polity. It is designed to explain and enforce Congregationalism. The reason which induced the author to engage in this work, is declared, in his preliminary remarks, to be the too great indifference manifested at the present day towards the subject of church order and government. His language is, "However it may have been in the days of our fathers, certain it is, that for many years past, this subject has excited far too little interest among the descendants of the New England Puritans." For this lack of interest he assigns several causes, which need not, however, be here mentioned. Of the fact he seems entirely confident, making his appeal, without hesitation, to observation. Thus he says, "To whatever causes this indifference respecting our simple and scriptural church polity may be attributed, the existence of this indifference will not be denied by any one conversant with our churches."

Whatever may have been the amount of indifference manifested upon so important a subject, it is probably fast decreasing, since within a few years no less than six books have appeared, whose object is to interest the public mind in Congregationalism, and classify its established canons. Our author himself enumerates five, and his own treatise makes the sixth. This is certainly a pretty fair average of books, to appear in the course of about eleven years, each intended to recommend the author's favorite scheme of church polity. That all these were necessary, we do not question. It must indeed have been high time for Congregationalists to be waked to exertion, in disseminating their principles, if, as the author says, his own denomination were founding theological institutions, and establishing churches along our frontiers, only

to behold the result of their labors, in the spread of Episcopacy and Presbyterianism. He complains, and Mr. Bacon had complained before him, that nearly all the churches planted by the efforts of Congregationalists, in our southern and western States, have set up the Presbyterian form of church government. This statement is abundantly confirmed by facts. Both Mr. Bacon and Mr. Punchard ascribe this change to the unpardonable indifference manifested by Congregationalists, in failing to diffuse a knowledge of their own principles, and urge their claim upon the New England emigrants to the western States. However satisfactory this way of accounting for the fact, may be to them, we cannot hope their Presbyterian opponents will view the theory with much favor. The latter will doubtless impute the spread of their own peculiar polity, to its own superior excellence and more scriptural authority.

For the remissness hitherto shown by Congregationalists in the advocacy of their principles, the author of this treatise sincerely hopes, that they will speedily atone, by multiplying publications of a cheap and portable character, confident that their principles, like virtue, need only to be seen, in order to be loved. In this sentiment, of course, we concur, as our own church polity is essentially Congregational. We are not, however, prepared to go the whole length of the suggestion made by Mr. Punchard, that efforts should be made "to cover the land with publications upon church polity." He does not indeed distinctly say, that such a flood of books upon this subject should be made to roll over the land, but he does say, that in the early settlement of this country the fathers of New England did thus "cover the land with publications upon church polity," and intimates in the plainest manner, that a repetition of this measure is the only way of effectually spreading Congregationalism. Such an attempt could not be hailed by us. We should be sorry to see the public attention mainly directed to the subject of church order, and a general warfare upon this point commence between Episcopalian, Congregationalist, and Presbyterian. That more interest should be excited upon this subject, is probably the dictate of wisdom, while an effort to "cover the land with publications upon church polity," would, we think, be lighting the embers of strife, and

severing that delightful union, which has subsisted among different denominations for many years. Such an attempt might be commenced with a holy frame of mind, and at first might be characterized by a spirit of fair and honorable discussion. But no one who is conversant with human nature, and aware of its ignitible elements, could help fearing, that the disputants as they grew warm, would suffer their zeal to get the better of their courtesy, and in the end urge abuse faster than arguments. If, for example, we should begin by saying, as Mr. Punchard does with reference to the multiplication of churches of other denominations, that their success is owing to their having made the "most noise," it is easy to see, how in the sequel, the increasing ardor of discussion would prompt us to use expressions still more caustic and irritating. The author will pardon us for making this exceptionable quotation, which is introduced simply for the purpose of illustration. We by no means intend to intimate the slightest censure upon the spirit of his book, which it gives us great pleasure to state is throughout kind and fraternal.

The author divides his treatise into five parts, which occur in the following order. The principles of Congregationalism. The doctrines of Congregationalism. Testimony of ecclesiastical history to the apostolicity of this method of church government. The practice of the Congregational churches, and The advantages of Congregationalism. Each of these parts claims a brief notice.

In the first part, Mr. Punchard makes a distinction between principles and doctrines, of which we fail to see the force. He says they are not "always convertible terms." This is true, but is there any other reason for this, than that one is generic and the other specific? The same remark is equally true of lion and animal. All lions are animals, but all animals are not lions. He seems to think, however, that the distinction between principles and doctrines is broad enough to justify their being discussed under separate heads, because the former imply what is fundamental, while the latter do not. Thus he says, "The doctrines of a system may be somewhat modified, or even materially altered, and some of them entirely abandoned, and yet the system remain substantially the same. But the principles of a system cannot