ciples his church should be formed; but taking that matter into his own hand, he has decided for us all, and commanded us to be of "one mind," and to "love one another." If any imagine that they are duly authorized to take this stand in the management of religious things, it becomes them to show their scriptural commission; and to prove that they have a divine right to make a Creed or Confession, to which others must bow. We have now explicitly stated our difficulty. Some men undertake to make a summary of scriptural doctrines for other men; and bringing that summary into the Church of God, as substantially a rule of faith and morals, they exclude from spiritual privileges those who will not receive and adopt it. Where is their divine warrant? Let this question be fairly and unequivocally answered.

We do not know how far the foregoing statement may be considered as fair; for we have heard some of our brethren assert that we lay entirely too much stress upon this view of the subject; and that Creeds and Confessions are not considered as obligatory on the conscience. There is in fact every variety of opinion about the matter; and the public mind, by the natural course of events, is exceedingly unsettled on the questions, what a Creed is, and what it is not?We feel it therefore to be our duty to make good what we have said. Dr. Miller will certainly agree with us, in our exposition of the matter of fact; for after supposing a voluntary association to have been formed, he states the following

Our union is a

case, in which an individual applies for admission: "I demand admittance into your body, though I can neither believe the doctrines which you profess to embrace, nor consent to be governed by the rules which you have agreed to adopt. What answer would they be apt to give him? They would certainly reply your demand is very unreasonable. voluntary one, for our mutual spiritual benefit. We have not solicited you to join us; and you cannot possibly have a right to force yourself into our body. The whole world is before you. Go where you please. We cannot agree to receive you, unless you are willing to walk with us upon our own principles. Such an answer would undoubtedly be deemed a proper one by every reasonable person. Suppose, however, this applicant were still to urge his demand; to claim admission as a right; and, upon being finally refused, to complain, that the society had 'persecuted' and 'injured' him? Would any one think him possessed of common sense? Nay, would not the society in question, if they could be compelled to receive such an applicant, instead of being oppressors of others, cease to be free themselves?" Now all this may be justified by the brethren, who think we have very little to which to object. But in this case, are not the rules of order, and the scriptural doctrines, as they are said to be, made obligatory upon the conscience? The voluntary association formed, we are told, is only "a body

*Lecture p. 45-6.

of professing christians," exercising their "natural right thus to associate;" extracting "their own Creed from the scriptures," and agreeing to act "upon the principles by which others may afterwards be admitted into their number." But suppose that this applicant should happen to be a living, growing, humble CHRISTIAN; and the supposition is by no means an improbable one:*Would Dr. M. or any other christian minister, deny such an one admission to spiritual privileges, according to the terms in which he has described the case, we have quoted from his pages? Most certainly. Into such an association no man can enter, who will not consent to walk with its members on their own principles; or, in other words, who will not consent to receive and adopt their Creed. The whole world is before HIM. Then is their Creed made an authoritative rule of faith and manners in the house of God; and the doctrines and commandments of men are invested with power to control the human conscience, of which God alone is the Lord.

That we have righly defined a Creed or Confession, in representing it to be an authoritative rule, imposed upon the human conscience merely under human sanctions, is further evident, from the manner in which it is used, when a young man is to be licensed to preach the gospel, or to be ordained to the ministry. The following questions are asked him. "Do you believe the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the word of God, the only infallible

*Mason's Plea p. p. 6. 7.

rule of faith and manners?" The scriptures then are not the only rule; but the only infallible rule. Another rule there is that is not infallible. And this mode of phraseology is employed, to make the way clear for the introduction of that second rule; which accordingly is brought forward in full form in the next question: "Do you sincerely receive, and adopt the Confession of Faith of this church, as containing the system of doctrine taught in the holy scriptures?" The Confession of the church, is therefore a rule, sustained by the authority of the church, the sincere reception of, and unequivocal submission to, which, is a necessary preliminary to induction into the ministerial office. It is intended to add solemnity to the ceremony of ordination; to awaken the attention of the candidate to a most conscientious review of the nature and importance of his official engagements; and, like a well secured contract, to guaranty to the church the fidelity of her ministers.It is surely a mere evasion to say, that an ecclesiastical Creed is not an authoritative rule of faith and manners, binding upon the conscience.

But there is another official oath, more refined and explicit, which is administered to the Professors of the Theological Seminary, which demonstrates that we have not mistaken the use to which Creeds are applied. The third section of the third article of the plan of the Theological Seminary, is as follows: "Every person elected to a professorship, in this Seminary, shall, on being inaugurated, solemnly subscribe

the Confession of Faith, Catechisms, and Form of Government of the Presbyterian Church, agreeably to the following formula, viz. "In the presence of God and the Directors of this Seminary, I do solemnly, and ex animo adopt, receive, and subscribe the Confession of Faith, and Catechisms of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, as the Confession of my Faith; or, as a summary and just exhibition of that system of doctrine and religious belief which is contained in holy Scripture, and therein revealed by God to man for his salvation; and I do solemnly, ex animo, profess to receive the Form of Government of said Church, as agreeable to the inspired oracles. And I do solemnly promise and engage, not to inculcate, teach, or insinuate any thing which shall appear to me to contradict or contravene, either directly or impliedly, any thing taught in the said Confession of Faith or Catechisms; nor to oppose any of the fundamental principles of Presbyterian Church Government, while I shall continue a Professor in this Seminary " We do not remember to have seen any thing so revolting as this, since we read Neal's history of the Puritans; those glorious men, who refused to have their consciences trammelled in this manner. We confess, that under such circumstances we can see but little use for the Bible, and cannot avoid remarking, that if the scriptures should disclose any thing to the Professor's mind, during his laborious researches, which should contravene any thing contained in our sectarian formulary,