the matter." Christ hath said, "Search the Scriptures." But man saith, "If your life be right, you need search no farther." And thinkest thou this, O vain man! that without the light of God thou canst discover the error of thy ways? The Prophet both recorded his feeling and his conviction in these words, "Who can understand his errors! Cleanse thou me from secret faults; keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me; then shall I be righteous, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression." Believe us, friends of the truth, that were the difference between Arianism and Orthodoxy a mere speculation of opinion, we should little trouble our heads on what side the argu ment predominated. But the difference is neither little nor speculative; it is vast and practical. The difference is as vast as the distance between the creature and the Creator. The difference is so practical, that it penetrates to the heart of our devotion; it lies deep at the foundation of our faith; it builds the tower of our confidence; and it binds us to the anchor of our hope. "Their rock is not as our Rock, our opponents themselves being judges."Exod. xxxii. 31. We are indeed fully aware, that by ingenious misrepresentation of the preaching of Orthodox Ministers, and by an artful exhibition of a few principles of Arianism, the error is made to appear upon the side of the truth, and the truth to stand upon the side of error. With persons who read little, and study less, all this may pass, and has passed for reality. We, therefore, lay down a few broad principles of difference between Arianism and Orthodoxy for the present, and shall give, in a future number, a separate review of certain popular and well travelled misrepresentations.

Between the two systems, even a child may perceive the following broad lines of separation. The Saviour of the Trinitarian is God,-that of the Arian, a creature. The Sanctifier of the Trinitarian is God,-that of the Arian, a lower creature than Christ-or it may be the energy of God-or a disposition in the man's own mind. The redemption of the Trinitarian depends upon the sacrifice of Christ, who really "bore his sins in his own body on the tree." The redemption of the Arian might have been effected without the sacrifice of Christ, who is said to have borne his sins merely by a rhetorical figure. The righteousness of the Arian is his own; that of the Trinitarian is the righteousness of God. Phil. iii. 9. The salvation

of the Arian rests upon a human condition,-that of the Trinitarian upon the finished work of Christ. These are differences so broad, that no man can mistake the lines of separation. Yet, not for a moment would we be understood to say, that every man who professes the truth is thereby necessarily sanctified. If he hold the truth in the love of it, if he feel the truth in the power of it, then, no doubt, will the truth make him clean. John xv. 3.

But lifeless profession of the truth so far from recommending to God, will but serve to aggravate the guilt of sinners, and leave them without excuse. We, therefore, warn every man to conclude, that he loves the truth just so far as he feels the power of the truth; and that by the truth he is saved just so far as by the spirit of God he is sanctified.

3. The third argument by which not a few are assailed, stands as follows:-" Arianism, or whatever it is, was the religion of your fathers; what served them may do for their sons; and if they found their way to heaven by it, the same may serve you also." This is a most specious argument, and it is most seductive, for it appeals to the finer feelings and recollections of the heart. Yet it is a mere phantom of argument, and a moment of examination will dissipate the delusion. 1. Weak argument that it is, if it be worth any thing now, it should, in the mouth of a Heathen idolator, have silenced the call of God himself, when he appeared to Abraham in Ur of the Caldees. Josh. xxiv. 2. Heathenism had been the religion even of Abraham's progenitors; therefore, Abraham should not have listened to the voice of God. The same argument also, if now worth a moment's attention, would have served to silence the preaching of the Apostles. They every where assailed the errors of long established opinions, and commanded men, in the name of Christ, to forsake the religion of their fathers. The same argument, if worth any thing now, would also have arrested the light of divine truth_that broke upon the world at the glorious Reformation. With a few noble exceptions in the vallies of Piedmont and Dauphiny, and a few scattered individuals, bright, ye solitary as the occasional star that looks out from the darkness of a clouded night; with these exceptions the broad nations of Christendom had, at the date of the Reformation, submitted the peck to the iron shackles of Rome. When the voice of Luther, and Calvin, and Knox, and Zuinglius, sounded the alarm in the ear of a sleeping world, and

called them to arise, and shake off their mental thraldom, it required but a modern Arian to point to the "religion of their fathers," and silence for ever the arguments of the noble Reformers. The same argument would this moment put to silence every Christian Missionary to the Heathen. They are, like the Apostles, seeking to turn, men from idols to serve the living God; but they can only effect their holy purpose by turning them from the religion of their fathers.

But, in fact, we need not spend our time in refuting the sophism. There is a shorter and readier answer.The statement, that Arianism was the religion of our fathers, is not true. That it has subsisted for a considerable time in some congregations we admit ; but it was the original profession of none; and, until this present generation, it was not even heard of in others. Were the argument of any weight, it would undoubtedly turn into our scale, for Orthodoxy was the religion of our fathers. But let our opponents shore up a tottering building, by aid borrowed from prejudice; to such a flimsy support as mere hereditary profession, we will not commit our temple. What was the religion of our fathers in days gone by, matters not a jot to us, their sons. None of us shall give an account of our father's religion but every one must give an account of himself to God. Not what was professed by men in former days, but what is taught by God in this our day, should be our sole object of inquiry. When any man, then, tells you to adhere to the profession of your fathers, tell him you will rather attend to what is taught by God in his word. With your fathers you interfere not. You know little certain about them, except that they are gone, and are in the hands of a just, yet merciful God; your concern is with the present truth, (2 Pet. i. 12.) which God teaches in the Scriptures; and by which ye are saved, if you hold the beginning of your confidence stedfast unto the end.

A few words to one class of Presbyterians, and, for the present, we have done. We speak to those parishioners of an Arian ministry, who plainly confess they cannot hear, and they cannot be edified in public; and, therefore, absent themselves from worship, and settle down upon the Lord's day at home. For public worship, they substitute the reading of the Bible; they, perhaps, superadd the reading of sermons, or other books of devotion; and thus

conceive that, by family religion, they are attaining all the ends of the Gospel. Were public service utterly inaccessible, we admit that these persons would be in the right. God demands not the performance of physical impossibilities. But the present case is of a very different character. God has left upon record the solemn admonition of “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is." Heb. x. 25. Public worship is an ordinance of God, and no more to be neglected than either reading or prayer. He, therefore, that, from any principle of mere inconvenience or accommodation, abandons public worship, as effectually resigns all claim to God's blessing, as he that resigns the worship of God in his closet. But would we, then, for the sake of its public worship, advise men to attend an Arian ministry? We would advise no such proceeding. But we would record our deliberate opinion, that as it is the duty of every Christian to attend upon public worship, it is the duty of every Orthodox Presbyterian to join himself in the communion of an Orthodox congregation.

THOUGHTS ON MISSIONS.

FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE STUDENTS AND LICENTIATES OF THE SYNOD OF ULSTER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX PRESBYTERIAN.

SIR, In a late number of your useful publication, I ob. served an article entitled "First Foreign Missionary from the Ulster Presbyterians," in which the writer lamented that want of Missionary zeal, and expansive vital Christianity, which seems so long to pervade this corner of the Church of Christ. I have often, Sir, been affected with the idea, that other churches have been sending forth their soldiers to fight in the glorious cause of the Saviour, extending his kingdom, combating the powers of darkness, and exhihiting, by their holy zeal, and unceasing labours, that the power of the God of Israel, who neither slumbers nor sleeps, has protected them in their dangers and difficuties-that the spirit of Christianity has supported them in their labours of diffusive benevolence-while the Synod of Ulster, a portion of the church which has been so highly blessed, and so unceasingly protected by the favour

of heaven, has hitherto (except in the instance mentioned*) exhibited scarce any symptom of that spirit of Christian philantrophy which impels its possessors to carry their light into the regions of Heathen darkness. We are almost tempted to fear that Christianity has hitherto been viewed by the Presbyterians of this country, as no great blessing, else they would have endeavoured to communicate its delightful tidings to the ignorant and dying Heathen. It would seem that if our Christian privileges have ever been viewed in this light, it has only been while the preacher has dwelt on the duties of benevolerce to our brethren, or excited the feelings of his audience so far as to draw forth a subscription of a few pounds, to assist the labours of a society that originated and was managed in another land. The congregation retire to their homes; talk of the great utility of Missions, and the sad state of the Heathen; bless God that they have been born in a land where the Gospel is as a shining light; and in a few hours, or, at most, a few days, forget that such a thing as a Missionary Society exists, until another appeal is made to them upon the same subject, from the pulpit. I do not depreciate the labours of some individuals among us. I bless God, that through their exertions, the attention of many has been forced to this important Christian duty. I trust the seed has been sown, which, under the blessing of the Holy Spirit, will bring forth abundantly. It cannot, however, be denied, that, with us, it is yet but the day of small things. A Missionary spirit does not generally pervade the land. A portion of that holy and ardent love, which brought the Lord of life from on high to tabernacle among us, and die for the salvation of men, requires to be shed abroad among the members of our different congregations. The salvation of lost sinners is not attended to, except as a matter of trivial importance, or as a subject too great.or too good for human beings to feel themselves interested about. May the Lord of heaven, who, even out of a persecutor, rendered Paul a boast and a glory to the cause of Christ, stir up among us such a spirit of heavenly zeal, and of love to sinners, as may induce us to enter, with heart and soul, into that great work of calling many from darkness to light; of rescuing souls from the snares of

*We believe Mr. Waddel, the Missionary referred to, belonged to the Secession Church.-Ed.