will not the controversies now going on in the Presbyterian church, be likely to shake a little the Doctor's faith in the value of creeds?

'No church can effectually guard against the highest degrees of corruption ond strife, without some test of truth, adopted by her, in her ecclesiastical capacity: something recorded; something publicly known; something capable of being referred to when most needed; which not merely this or that private member supposes to have been received; but to which the church as such has agreed to adhere, as a bond of union. In other words, a church, in order to maintain 66 the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and love," must have a CREED-a WRITTEN CREED-to which she has formally given her assent, and to a conformity to which her ministrations are pledged. As long as such a test is faithfully applied she cannot fail of being in some good degree united and harmonious; and when nothing of the kind is employed, I see not how she can be expected, without a miracle, to escape all the evils of discord and corruption.'

Nor are we without significant attestations to the efficacy of Creeds and to the mischief of being without them, in our country. Of the former, the Presbyterian church in the United States is one of the most signal examples. Conflicts she has, indeed, had; but they have been such as were incident to every community, ecclesiastical or civil, administered by the counsels of imperfect men. Amidst them all, she has, by the favour of her Divine Head, held on her way, substantially true to her system of doctrine and order; and though constituted, originally, by members from different countries, and of different habits, she has remained united to a degree, considering all things, truly wonderful. Of the latter, the Congregational churches of Massachusetts, furnish a melancholy memorial. Though originally formed by a people, far more homogeneous in their character and habits, and far more united in their opinions; yet, being destitute of any efficient bond of union, and equally destitute of the means of maintaining it, if it had been possessed, they have fallen a prey to dissension and error, to a degree, equally instructive and mournful,'

So much for the efficacy of creeds and confessions, as a bond of union and a preservative from error, in the opinion of Dr Miller. Let me now, Messrs Editors, lay before your readers the views of Professor Stuart

of Andover. They are contained in a pamphlet, published this year, and entitled, 'An Examination of a Review [written by Dr Carnahan, President of the College of New Jersey] of the American Education Society.'

'Who knows whether the distinguished College and Theological Seminary at Princeton will not, before the next generation passes wholly away, go into the hands of Arminians or Unitarians? None but God, I answer boldly. Experience in other States and countries will support this answer. The Reviewer has referred us to the University at Cambridge, as an example and a proof that funds may be perverted, and the societies who manage them may become faithless. I acknowledge this, with a feeling of deep distress. [A base calumny, which Professor Stuart ought to take to himself shame for repeating.] But what is the remedy? As a member of the Presbyterian church, he may answer, "The remedy is in our creed, and in our formulas of discipline and doctrine." But have not the church in Scotland been in posses. sion of these for almost two centuries? And is the Reviewer ignorant of the fact, that the moderates, i. e. the Arminians and Arinish party have had the predominance in that church and swayed all its General Judicatories for many years, if not at the present period?' 'Or, if he pleases to refer the public attention to the establishment in England, and the 39 articles of the Episcopal church, will this in any measure help the cause? Who that knows any thing, does not know, that the Church of England, in respect to far the greater majority of its leading members has been Arminians, I had almost said for ages; not a few, (if we may credit the statements of some of its own ministers) and that for no small period of time, a decided majority were Arian? And if one goes to the creeds and confessions of the Dutch and the German Churches on the continent of Europe, is the argument helped at all? One glance at the Neology of the continent will answer this question.' 'When all is done and said, they [creeds and confessions] are only paper ramparts about the citadel of God; and men will batter them down, whenever their passions or their prejudices are armed against them.'

'Only paper ramparts!' So indeed they are. They are nothing better. Unitarians have been saying as much as this for years, and it must afford them satis

faction to receive, at length, an accordant response, in tones of such depth and strength, from the citadel' of an Institution, whose ramparts' of this sort are, though vainly as it would now seem, renewed every five years. For one, I cordially thank Professor Stuart for his testimony to the uselessness of creeds and confessions, as defences against heretical encroachments; and I may be allowed to proffer him my cordial sympathy, in the painful sensations he must, it seems to me, with his present views, feel, when, as often as the quinquennial period arrives, he finds himself called upon to swear himself a Hopkinsian or a Calvinist, I hardly know which, as the condition on which he shall continue to hold his place in the Seminary. I say, painful sensations; for certainly one cannot but have such, who is obliged, so often, to assent, by solemn oath, to five or six pages of a Creed, which, as he believes, can do no manner of good by way of safeguard to orthodoxy, but may, as many think, do much harm in suppressing the spirit of free inquiry; and who, besides, is compelled, at the same time, to say what must be revolting to every man of right sentiments, to wit that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the creed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my offfice, according to the best light God shall give to me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, Papists, Mahometans, Arians, Pelagians, Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, Sabellians, Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all other heresies, and errors, ancient or modern, which may be opposed to the gospel of Christ, or hazardous to the souls of

men.'* Pitiable, surely, must be the lot of that man, who is thus tempted, every five years, to sacrifice, on the altar of a sect, the charities of a Christian, by being forced, in a formal manner to declare war against nine tenths of the religious world; and this, too, without any better hope of benefit to that sect, than he can derive from mere paper ramparts about the citadel of God, which men may batter down, whenever their passions or their prejudices are armed against them.'

Z.

ON SIMPLICITY IN RELIGION.

When the Apostle wrote the following words to the Corinthian Church—' But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ' he seems, almost to have had a prophetic glance of successive ages of the Church. The fears of St Paul with regard to the Corinthians, have been realized in so melancholy and yet faithful a manner since his time, that we are tempted to trace the spirit of prediction in his words. At least the world's history has proved how well the apostle understood human nature, and the memory of the past with its follies and superstitions bears witness that we have been sadly corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.'

6

There were those, it seems, in Paul's time, who taught or rather undertook to teach the Christian re

* Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover, p. 52.

ligion, who instead of adhering to the plain and sublime instructions of Jesus, mixed them up with Heathen or Jewish notions, with the vain philosophy of the times, with the conceits and quibbles of Rabbins and Doctors of the Law, with the trifling and absurd wranglings of crafty and designing men who looked on the new religion merely as an instrument for effecting unlawful purposes of personal ambition. Paul discovers great fear lest the minds of his Corinthian brethren be corrupted, as he strongly expresses it, and be tempted by subtilty of argument, and a specious mode of reasoning, to give up the simple, clear, comprehensive, but unostentatious truths of Christianity. He expresses, we repeat, a fear lest this may be the case; and he thereby shows that he well knew the danger there was of this effect. He saw in those days the tendency which we observe existing among men now, to fly off from what is easily understood, and to derive a false kind of pleasure from something dark, puzzling, mystical; to think that what every one can understand is not certainly of much value, at least is not of the greatest value; to look with a certain coolness, if not with absolute contempt, upon common truths which every one allows, and to derive a morbid satisfaction from that which, without meaning in itself, serves only to darken counsel by words without knowledge.' This tendency in mankind to love what is obscure and perplexed is not unfrequently seen, nor is it only in religion that it manifests itself. It appears in every thing that engages human attention. The man of science will remember how difficult it has always been to train the public mind to a simple method of reasoning; how hard a ́strueele it was to banish the absurd disputes of