proposition to proposition, and from theme to theme, the logical concatination running through that huge work of Polanus; but Gomar with his great learning, and wonderful power of analysis, led us completely captive; and had we then been appointed to read lectures on theology, or called into a discussion of the doctrines of grace before the public, we should have viewed them, to a very considerable extent, from the stand-point of these two great divines. And having identified such a position with our literary reputation (whatever that might be) before the church and public, we understand the operations of the human heart well enough to know the power of that influence which must have been brought to bear upon all our subsequent reading; and the tendency which it is calculated to produce in the mind. We have felt all this; and while pursuing the present discussion, have ever had it in memory. And we should have deemed it scarcely worth our while to criticise the earlier productions of Dr. Hodge on the subject before us, had it not been for his recent indorsement and reiteration, and even advance upon the very principles inculcated in those earlier tractates; and for the evidence derived from other sources that these views were becoming current in our church; and in some places even constituted the touchstone of Calvinistic orthodoxy. In such a case, we have felt that silence would be injustice to the cause of God and truth. The truly painful feature of the case, and that which we were not prepared to meet so extensively is the misuse which Dr. Hodge has made of his authorities. But we know how easily, and in how many ways, a mistake may be made here; and we have no doubt that he will correct those errors. No upright mind who has any knowledge of Dr. Hodge can suspect for a moment that they were intentional; nor do we doubt that their occurrence is susceptible of a satisfactory solution.

As to the work of Dr. Baird, to which we have had occasion to refer in connection with the Reviews of it, we hope that nothing which has been said in relation thereto will be so considered as to imply our approval of its main speculations, or our sympathy with the mode of treating the subject as therein exhibited. It has been very harshly assailed by Dr. Hodge, from a Supralapsarian stand-point; and has been criti

cised by Dr. Thornwell from a stand-point evincing a strong sympathy with the same scheme, and its defenders; and we have felt that whatever may be the merits or demerits of the work itself, some of the grounds upon which it has been assailed are presumptive of its merit rather than otherwise. We are not, however, called upon to give here our own views of this performance, except so far as respects the point before us; and we do not regret it, for Calvinism has no more to do with such philosophical speculations than with the speculations of the Supralapsarian school. And it is quite time that the ministry and the church at large, were made fully to understand this fact. Dr. Baird has done good service by his arguments, evincing that the guilt of Adam and his posterity was a common guilt; and this, after all, was the great point bearing directly upon the subject before us, which his reviewers, if they attempted to say anything against his work, were required to meet. But neither of them make any more allusion to it, as a topic ably treated therein, and in connection with the real theme of discussion, than they do to the contents of the yet unrolled volumes discovered among the ruins of Pompeii. But instead of attempting to meet this the actual issue involved, they assail his philosophy, and absurdities, and what not; whereas, great as are the absurdities of Dr. Baird's speculative system, they, both in weight and measurement, sink into insignificance if compared with the speculative errors involved in the philosophy of his antagonists. And then, moreover, Dr. Baird's vindication of the justice of God, against the speculations by which it is often impugned-speculations with which, as it now appears, his reviewers were in deep sympathy, is complete, so far as he confines himself to the Word of God; but when he departs from this, he is weaker than an infant. His work has also done this good service, that it has drawn forth a fuller expression of the Supralapsarian element than would probably have been otherwise made for some time to come. Baird's work is on many accounts intrinsically valuable, and will take its place in our theological libraries as a work evincing great industry and ability; and will be remembered, moreover, as the tractate which developed the last great effort of the Supralapsarian scheme to obtain the ascendency in Calvinistic theology.

Dr.

In this same connection and in view of the persistent efforts (unkind and uncandid too almost without a parallel) to destroy the reputation of a work of singular merit, to which we have had occasion to refer repeatedly in this discussion, we take the opportunity to say, that the most perfect exposition of the Calvinistic system in its doctrinal and practical details which we have as yet had the fortune to meet with in the Reformed theology, and the most perfect development of the Infralapsarian principle as distinguished from the Supralapsarian, elaborated, too, in all its facts, with a depth and consistency rarely attained and never surpassed, and to the utmost allowable limits of that principle, without the slightest compromise either with Supralapsarianism on the one hand, or Pelagianism on the other, is the treatise of our theological Professor in Danville Seminary, Kentucky. To any one extensively familiar with the writings of the Reformed divines, it must be a matter of surprise how Dr. Breckinridge, in the work referred to, has succeeded in restating with such remarkable clearness the Calvinistic system, so as both to include all the desirable results of past investigation, and to avoid the errors which, through the influence of false philosophies, have sought at various times and by the potency of illustrious names, to associate themselves with the doctrines of grace. To us it appears truly surprising that persons in our own church who claim to possess a reputable acquaintance with Calvinistic theology, should undertake to disparage such a work; a work which we regard as an honor both to our church and country, and one which is calculated, in an eminent degree, to make known the true and saving knowledge of God.

We have now completed our work; one design of which has been to evince by a full presentation of the facts in the case that the whole doctrine of the imputation of sin as taught and insisted on by a portion of our church, requires to be modified. The doctrine of antecedent imputation, as entertained and asserted by Dr. Hodge, never was the doctrine of the Presbyterian Church either in this land or in the British Islands; nor of the Reformed Church on the continent. We might show how Dr. Hodge was led into the mistake which resulted in the opposite conclusion, but this is hardly necessary. His own attempt, or any attempt to reconcile the Supralapsarian scheme

with Calvinism, by occasionally adopting the representations which each presents of the subject before us, while it is calculated only to confuse and mislead, can result in nothing but failure. To say that the imputation of sin is antecedent, and moral corruption consequent thereupon is to utter a sentiment inconsistent with the doctrine that we having sinned and fallen in Adam, God finds us guilty and corrupted by that fall, and treats us as sinful, guilty, and corrupt. The former is Dr. Hodge's views, and the latter the doctrine of the Reformed Church, which has ever taught that we are exposed to the displeasure of God, not only because Adam sinned, but because we sinned in and fell with him in his first transgression (though not in his other transgressions, as must be the fact, if the philosophical theories of identity are to be recognized). How WE then sinned, the church has never pretended to say, though some have philosophized hereon; claiming, that antecedent imputation, identity with Adam, traduction, and what not, may solve the problem. BUT LET NO SUCH SPECULATIONS BE CHARGED UPON THE CHURCH HERSELF. She has ever been satisfied with the simple fact announced on the testimony of God; and has held that the doctrine of original sin can be properly explicated only by a full recognition of both the natural and federal headship of Adam. "The sin of Adam is imputed, but never irrespective of our nature and its inherent sin. That is, we must not attempt to separate Adam's federal from his natural headship-by the union of which he is the Root of the human race."* This is the doctrine of God's own blessed Word; and has ever been the doctrine of the Calvinistic Church.

DANVILLE, Ky., Dec. 16, 1861.

P. S. As the writer has accepted a chaplaincy in the army of the United States, with which he expects to continue, if his life be spared, until the conclusion of the present struggle on behalf of our Constitution and Government, he would request

*See p. 499, of the "Knowledge of God Objectively Considered," by Dr. Breckinridge.

that, in case any reply is, in the meantime, offered to the foregoing argument, the public will, before pronouncing a final decision on any issue which may be taken, allow to him (if living) a reasonable time and opportunity to give to such rejoinder a proper consideration. L.

ERRATA.

The following errata occur in our article on Imputation published in the September number:

P. 514, line 12, for fleshy read fleshly.

P. 518, 1. 2, for tandum read tantum.

P. 519, 1. 7 from bottom, add an * after imputation.

P. 520, 1. 20, for "they never denied," read "it never deemed."

P. 522, 1. 13, omit the quotation marks.

P. 522, 1. 18, for "Frigland" read "Trigland."

P. 522, 1. 32, for were read are.

P. 522, 1. 2 from bottom, for parable read parallel.

P. 524, 1. 17, after says, use a ; instead of a

P. 524, 1. 23, for See read So.

P. 524, first line of note, insert in before Rom.

P. 527, note, line 8, after Adam read a, instead of a .; and for We read we.

P. 528, 1. 6 from bottom, add a; after ostendunt.

P. 529, 1. 24, omit the words "teach that."

P. 530, 1. 1, for "antithesis or analogy" read "notion of imputation."

P. 531, 1. 4, for first read one.

P. 531, 1. 5, for second read other.

P. 538, 1. 7 from bottom, read in propria persona.

ART. II.-Mental Science.

IT is a curious and significant fact that the human mind, ever active, takes but little notice of itself. This is the more remarkable, as the mind is not, as the eye, dependent on a reflector for its self-cognition. It is capable of scanning and analyzing its own constitution and operations.

The conceded mystery of its own existence is sometimes assigned as a reason for this reluctance of the mind to selfinvestigation. There is, however, no more mystery involved in the existence and operations of mind than in the existence and organization of matter. Neither can be defined.