EDITOR.

Dear Brother,

A PARTIAL answer to your request is all I can give you at this time. A correct translation of Matthew v. 22, renders it more intelligible:"Whosoever is vainly incensed against his brother shall be obnoxious to the judges; whosoever shall call him fool shall be obnoxious to the sanhedrim; but whosoever shall call him miscreant (or apostate wretch) shall be obnoxious to a Gehenna of fire," (or to burning alive in the vale of Hinnom.) The Saviour informs his disciples that while the Jews then only brought those guilty of actual murder before the judges; under his reign, the least degree of anger would subject a person to a punishment analogous to that which was usually inflicted by the inferior courts; that the expression of anger in the way of contempt of a brother should render the persons obnoxious to the punishment analogous to that inflicted by the sanhedrim, which was stoning to death; and that the highest expression of anger with the tongue should expose the transgressor to a punishment analogous to being burned alive in the vale of Hinnom. He, in this instance, as his method was, communicates the doctrine of his reign through the medium of existing customs, institutions, and avocations of men. He, through these allusions, teaches his disciples that every aberration from brotherly love would be taken cognizance of by him.— Anger in the heart, anger expressed in the way of contempt, and anger expressed with marked hatred. All laws, human and divine, award punishment proportioned to the crime or offence. His design in the context renders his meaning apparent, and teaches all the disciples that while he mercifully forgives the offences of those who confess their faults and forsake them, he severely scrutinizes their thoughts and words, with even more severity than men are wont to exhibit to the overt acts of iniquity.

Matthew vi. 25, becomes perfectly plain when fairly translated. Thus-"You cannot serve God and Riches. Therefore I charge you, be not anxious about your life, what you shall eat, or what you shall drink, nor about your body what you shall wear."

The context gives the following as the spirit and design of Matthew xix. 12. The question was-Whether it were not better in some conditions to live unmarried. The Saviour answered, "They alone are capable of living thus on whom the power is conferred. For there are some persons who never had any desire to enter into the nuptial bonds. Others have been prevented by violence, and others from their zeal to publish the reign of heaven, have divested themselves of any such desire. Let him act this part who can act it." This is the spirit of the reply and the reasons for his answer. My limits will not permit me to be more particular at this time.

THE following Ode we understand was written by an emigrant to this country, who, in the midst of misfortunes in a foreign land, was brought to remember the blessings he enjoyed when under the pious tutelage of his christian parents. To what extent the tuition and example of the parents was a blessing to the son, we have not yet learned; but one thing is certain, that it is seldom in vain.—ED.

To the Family Bible.

How painfully pleasing the fond recollection
Of youthful connexion and innocent joy,
While bless'd with parental advice and affection,
Surrounded with mercies and peace from on high.
I still view the chairs of my father and mother,
The seats of their offspring as ranged on each hand,
And the richest of books, that excels every other-
The Family Bible that lay on the stand-

The old-fashion'd Bible, the dear blessed Bible,
The Family Bible that lay on the stand.

The Bible, the volume of God's inspiration,
At morning and evening could yield us delight;
And the prayer of our sire was a sweet invocation
For mercies by day and protection by night.
Our hymn of thanksgiving with harmony swelling
All warm from the hearts of a family band,
Hath raised us from earth to the rapturous dwelling
Described in the Bible that lay on the stand-

The old-fashion'd Bible, the dear blessed Bible,
The Family Bible that lay on the stand.

Ye scenes of tranquility, long have we parted,
My hopes almost gone, and my parents no more;
In sorrow and sighing I live broken hearted,
And wander unknown on a far distant shore.
But how can I doubt a bless'd Saviour's protection,
Forgetful of gifts from his bountiful hand;
Then let me with patience receive the correction,
And think on the Bible that lay on the stand-
The old-fashion'd Bible, the dear blessed Bible,
The Family Bible that lay on the stand.

JANUARY 2, 1826.

No. 6.] Review of "Remarks on the Rise, Use and Unlawfulness of Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the church of God-By JOHN M. DUNCAN, Pastor of the Presbyterian Church, Tammany street, Baltimore."-Part Second.

THE more deeply we drink into the spirit of the New Testament, the less we relish the dry and lifeless dogmas of human creeds. As we ascend in clear and comprehensive views of the Holy Oracles, human formularies descend in our estimation. Hence we invariably find an ardent zeal for human systems, accompanied with glas ring ignorance of the revelation of God, and true veneration for the records of God's grace, is always attended with intelligence and liberality.

The following extracts from Mr. Duncan's work, so fully confirm these sentiments; so exactly correspond with many pieces published in this work, that we cannot deny ourselves the pleasure of presenting them to our readers.Their value will apologize for their length; and, indeed, we have done violence to the author in garbling his pages, and have rather detracted from the force and beauty of his remarks, by selecting only a few sentences of many which ought to appear together in the order he has giv. en them. We wish our readers to have some tolerable idea of the work, and hope that many of them may be induced to add this book of Mr. Duncan's to their library. These selections are made from page 184 to page 208. ED. C. P.

"Our second principle is, that the bible being the word of God, it must necessarily be precisely suited to human beings as sinful and fallen; and therefore it embraces in its provisions

"And what is the Bible, for which we plead so ardently? It is not merely a high wrought eulogy upon the character of Jehovah; but it is his condescension to men upon earth. It is not a stern display of abstract righteousness; but it is the mingling together of justice and peace, of mercy and truth. It is not the impracticable requisition of absolute purity, made with an unpitying eye and an oppressive hand; but it is the proclamation of "the righteousness of faith," that glorious principle of which angels and the redeemed shall talk together throughout eternity. It is not the statute of an indescribable sovereignty, which no prayer can relax and which no tears can soften; but it is the opening of the prison doors, it is a universal call, it is an indiscriminate overture;-whosoever will, may come; and whosoever comes, shall in no wise be cast out; and all its agents act upon its own liberal commission. "The Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that hears, say Come. And let him that is athirst, Come. And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely." None of our Calvinistic brethren, as they may be pleased to denominate themselves, will halt at the foregoing statement. If they do, let them pause and reflect whether, under the guise of Calvinism, they have not sunk into a system of the most haughty, joyless, and chilling fatalism? "Again, the Bible is intended to be a system of practical morals. It reveals not doctrines for the sake of doctrine, but as they may serve to fulfil practical purposes; or it never was designed to establish theory independent of practice.God did not send his only begotten Son into our world merely to display the brightness of his glory; he veiled all that glory that men might look at it, and sent his Son "in the likeness of sinful flesh," that men whose moral perceptions were very low by reason of the "weakness of the flesh," might have an "express image of his person," which they could adore with a degree of intelligence consistent with their infirmities. The Holy Spirit has not come down merely to astonish by his own mysterious movements; his official work is to build up a temple on earth for the habitation of God-a spiritual house, resting on Jesus as a living stone, and into which he inserts, as living stones, all whom he sanctifies. The gospel, even when angels have tuned their harps to its lofty strains, is not simply, Glory to God in the highest; but it is, Peace on earth and good will toward men,"

The simplicity of the Bible, or its happy adaptation to the circumstances of mankind, is one of the most striking proofs of its divine original. That the blind should receive their sight and the lame walk, that the lepers should be cleansed and the deaf hear, and that the dead should be raised up, form an irresistible demonstration in favor of any thing they can be brought to prove; but when the Redeemer stated all these things in testimony of his own pretensions, he did not think the train of evidence complete, and added, "the poor have the gospel preached to them." The heavenly visions which he had seen with his Father, and the particulars of which he came down from heaven to reveal on earth, are made plain and distinct to the human mind; level to the comprehension, not only of the divine, the philosopher and the scholar, but to the poor. They are like Habakkuk's message, made plain upon tables, so that he who runs may read. It is this very thing which reveals the author of the bible with peculiar glory; for infinite wisdom is ever

an end. Instead, then, of needing any of those perplexing summaries, which different religious denominations have given us as the product of their own wisdom, the bible, by its own plainness, evinces its own perfection, and recommends itself to the most uninformed, as a sure guide to everlasting life. If in it "there are depths where an elephant might swim," there are in it also "shoals where a lamb may wade." If it administers strong meat to those who are of full age, it serves the babe with milk. If it prescribes perfection to its reader, it begins by communicating first principles; and he who has learned rightly to divide it, has learned how to give to each his portion of meat in due season."

"And what, we ask, would become of the mass of mankind-what of the majority of professing christians-what of our children, whose very praise in the presence of the Redeemer may be that from childhood they knew the Holy Scriptures which are capable to make even them wise to salvation, if the bible was not thus modified to meet the imbecility of human powers?"

"It is manifest that the scriptures must be plain to the human mind, or they can be of no use to the poor; and the mass of mankind could have no divine book which they can profitably read. It must be a volume suited to the illiterate and the busy, the bond and the free; fitted to the tottering old man, bowed down with years, who has no time to waste on our speculations, and to the young child that cannot comprehend them. It must be a book which the mother can explain to her little ones, and from which the father can read to them, under the sanctions of divine authority, a morning and evening lesson. Say it is otherwise, and then the fact that to the poor the gospel is preached, is no longer a proof of the divine authenticity of the scriptures, seeing they cannot be put to that use as a system of moral truths. To them its page is unintelligible; its very doctrines mysterious, its propositions unformed; its promises irrelevant; and, by a reference to a human creed, imposed upon them as the meaning of the scriptures, their faith must stand in the wisdom of men."

"If, then, we are right in saying that God has in the bible given us moral truth in the best form it could wear, considering the character of the being for whom it has been prepared-and who can say we are not right? Then, under what principle have synods and councils undertaken to alter that form? For our creeds and confessions of faith do take the truth which God has revealed out of its scriptural connexions; and they do modify it according to the conceptions of the men who make them, or the prejudices and feelings of the age which creates and enforces them. And why do they this? It certainly becomes them to give the best of all reasons for so eccentric an adventure. Can they make truth more tangible? Have they the promise of the Spirit to superintend their deliberations, when they undertake to revise and correct God's institutions? Have they any divine promise to guarantee a good result? Or do they suppose they have a sufficient warrant to take such a step, from the fact that they have a sec. tarian object to accomplish, or that the interest of a voluntary association may require it? Then they must remember that they have the very same argument to meet in application to these voluntary associations; and to justify themselves for so dividing the church of the living God, and altering her external form. And we really do

not wonder that these two things are put together; for as Paul argues with the Hebrews, The priesthood being changed there is of necessity a change also of the law."

"But perhaps it may be denied that our creeds do alter the form in which truth is brought to bear upon the conscience. We must then make our assertion good. Are not our creeds professed summaries? And what is a summary? Is it the same thing with that which it abridges, or is it a different thing? If the original and the abstract be drawn out by different hands, will they present the same intellectual image? Is this summary needed? Did the Master give us one, or empower us to make one, because his bible was a deficient instrument of operation upon the human spirit? Every man at a glance may perceive that he has not framed the scriptures upon the same principle on which our theological systems are constructed. The bible is not a collection of abstract propositions, systematized into regular order, nor is it a schedule of difficult metaphysical subjects, arranged under general titles, such as the attributes of God, the divine decrees, the perseverance of the saints, &c. On the contrary, it is a transcript of social transactions; it is an exhibition of human life; it is that species of composition which all the world knows is most interesting to the mass of mankind. It is true some lofty speculators, some profound thinkers, who are capable to reason both matter and spirit out of God's creation, might prefer a volume of mental abstractions; but then the reader must remember that the bible was written for the poor; that it was intended to throw a beam of the life that shall never end upon the infant mind; to cheer the humble, the lowly, and the contrite spirit; and, while the dews of its blessing are falling upon the dying old man, to stretch the bow of the covenant of grace across the firmament of truth, that his closing eyes may be opened upon the cloudless light of an eternal day. Had such an epitome or compend of moral truths, as our creeds profess to be, been the best form of revelation by which the human mind could be spiritually enlightened, doubtless God himself would have adopted that form; for he declares that he has done for man all that he could do for him; and indeed, he has too much pity and compassion for this fallen child of his love to leave any thing undone which could have been done. If he had intended to write a book for a race of philosophers, instead of rejecting such for being wise in their own conceits; and if philosophers really know how to make systems, or are themselves best instructed in that way, doubtless he would have given them his revelation in a more logical form. Most certainly, however, he has not done it; and the inference fairly is, that our systems are constructed on false views of human nature, or that our creeds are not at all fitted for man in his present state. There is a better way of teaching mankind the science of morals: for Jehovah himself, who needs not that any should tell him what is in man, has adopted another way. Surely we may safely follow where God leads, and to imitate his example never can jeopard the prosperity or peace of his church." "The practical result of our creeds confirms our argument. Can children understand the abstract propositions contained in the Shorter Catechism? Have not scientific men long since learned that every thing must be simplified, and, if possible, illustrated by example, in order to interest, impress, and benefit the infantile mind? Are they not descending from their own lofty

eminence, and, taking these little immortals by the hand, leading them up step by step? And shall we leave their moral nature uncultivated, or fatigue their tender spirits by the incessant repetition of things which they do not understand? Are our grown up christians better treated by this system of perplexed legislation? Do not these creeds drag away the christian mind from scriptural exposition to dwell upon polemic propositions! Do they not make it necessary for us to contend with those whom we ought to love; and even to divide families, as if the husband and the wife, the parent and the child, worshipped different Gods? Do they not present truth in philosophical forms, about which men are every where at liberty to reason according to their own apprehensions? Do they not teach men to feel comparatively irresponsible about religious things, because they consider themselves to be reasoning with man about his notions, and not with God against his institutions? Let the reader judge for himself whether we do not recite facts. As Calvinists, we almost intuitively shrink away from being thought Arminians; and as Arminians we are equally frightened by a charge of Calvinism.The past age has made a controversy between these two sets of opinions exceedingly popular, and our creeds have served to perpetuate strife! He is thought to be a clergyman of secondary consideration, and to possess talents of a very inferior order, who cannot perspicuously arrange and skilfully discuss the five points; while on the other hand, Whitby and the Lime-street Lectures have obtained immortal honor. Neither party seems to know that if they would cease to contend, and declare what they are honestly convinced is in the bible, they would blend in most perfect harmony, as soon as long established habits, running throughout society, could admit so happy a revolution. But they have formed their opinions; they have chosen their theological system; they have entered into their ecclesiastical connexions; and of all things that are inimical to harmony, these voluntary associations are the worst-because by them all society is thrown into commotion. It is really admirable to hear how controversialists, belonging to different voluntary associations, will treat a scripture text which they have abstracted from its own relations, and how clearly they will demonstrate it to utter their own opinions. Who does not feel some concern when he hears a minister of the gospel endeavoring to establish a doctrine which every one knows is employed to evolve a sectarian, rather than a scriptural principle? And who, that has even thought dispassionately upon the subject, would not prefer to have the bible explained to him as other things are explained, than hear the most eloquent discussion on a sectarian tenet? Surely the study of the scriptures, and an effort to make men feel truth as spoken by divine wisdom, and enforced by divine authority, would entirely change the complexion of such ministrations, and impel the human mind into trains of thinking and habits of application much more spiritual and edifying. We say again, let the reader judge for himself; the whole subject is presented to him in real life; it is pressed out to its very extreme; and he may even hear, as an argument in favor of theological strife, that division is necessary to unity. A lovely paradox! An unexpected, but happy union of contraries! Its framers are fairly entitled to all the credit of its ingenuity. We dare not envy them their happy talent for inven|tion."

THE Synod of Baltimore have again proved that they make and hold the confession and formulary as authoritative rules of faith and practice, and as terms of communion between Christ and his disciples. The following is positive proof thereof.

"The Rev. John M. Duncan, of Baltimore, and the Rev. Charles M'Lean, of Gettysburgh, in this state, have both declined the jurisdiction of the Presbyterian church in the United States, on the ground that they object to creeds and confessions as terms of christian or ministerial fellowship; and the Synod of Baltimore have accordingly declared their congregations vacant, and have put them under the care of the respective presbyteries of Baltimore and Carlisle." -Pittsburgh Mercury, Nov. 30.

So Messrs. Duncan and M'Lean are to be viewed and treated as heathen men and publicans, because they aver that there is but one authoritative rule of christian faith and practice, and that this is the Bible. But behold they have declared their congregation vacant! This is another acceptation of the word "vacant." They have vacant territories in their church, with only two hundred thousand inhabitants on them; vacant churches, because the pulpit is sometimes empty; and vacant congregations when their pulpit is every day filled with a good man who happens not to be orthodox in this article of the fallible rule of faith and practice.

"They can create and they destroy."

They have annihilated Messrs. Duncan and M'Lean, as well as paganized them. Great are their tender mercies for those transgressors, and inexpressible their sympathies for their dear and precious congregations. We have it from good authority in Baltimore, that Mr. Duncan's congregation was as unanimously determined to adhere to the sentiments in his book as any congregation of orthodox christians in the country is determined to hold fast its form of sound words imported from Scotland on board the ship Enterprize, and guarded by two frigates laden with soldiers and munitions of war.

ED. C. B.

The re

On the Rights of Laymen.-No. 1. For more than half a century past, no theme has been more popular, no topic has been more fully discussed, than the rights of men. sult has been, that very generally, in the New World at least, it is conceded that all men are born to equal rights. But our theme is not the rights of men, but the rights of laymen.

Some, no doubt, will inquire, What is a layman? We answer, a man is the creature of God, but a lay-man is the creature of priests. God made men, but priests made laymen. In the religious world we often hear of clergy and laity. These are terms of Grecian extraction. The term clergy denotes the Lord's lot, or people; the term laity denotes the common herd of mankind, or the clergy's lot or people. We shall attend first to the inalienable rights of the laity, and secondly to the inalienable rights of the brethren in Christ.

In the first place, a layman has a right to consider himself as possessed of five senses, viz. seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and feeling. If misfortune or vice has not deprived him of the use of any of them, he is always to bear in mind that his Creator gave him eyes, ears, a mouth, nose, and hands, and that he designed he should use them all. These five senses completely adapt man to this present world. As an animal, he has no use for a sixth sense. His eye feasts

upon light, his ear upon sound, his mouth, tongue, and palate, upon tastes, his nose upon odors, and his hands inform him of the heat and cold, roughness and smoothness, hardness, and softness, and all such properties of the bodies around him. These all serve him as guards and defences, as well as minister to his enjoyments. As in a world of matter his whole body is liable to many inconveniences, his Creator has transfused through his whole system the sense of feeling, which exists most exquisitely in his hands. In one sentence, there is not a single property in any material thing of any use to man, that is not distinguishable by some one or all of these senses. Now a layman is endowed with all these senses as well as a priest. Therefore he is to use them, and believe their testimony in preference to any thing a priest tells him. For example: If a priest tell him that he can turn wine into blood, and bread into flesh, the layman must taste them, and if this blood have still the taste of wine, and this flesh of bread, he must believe his senses in preference to the priest's tongue. For God gave him those senses, and they are to be relied on more firmly than the words of any man. Again, when a priest tells him that he immerses or washes a person in water, when he only besprinkles his face or his hands, he must believe the testimony of his eyes, and not the lips of the priest, for his eyes are more to be trusted than the lips of a thousand priests. Now it is the inalienable right of every layman to exercise his five senses, and never to be argued out of them or to believe any thing contrary to them.

But let it be remembered that those five senses

give a man no other intelligence than what concerns the material world around him. They cannot introduce him to an acquaintance with a But in order world of spirits, or a future state. to fit him for this, God has given him another class of faculties which exist in his spirit, as those senses exist in his body. These faculties are all comprized in one sentence, which affirms man to be a reasonable being. But each of the faculties which constitute a reasonable being, are as distinct from one another as are his five senses. The eye and the ear are not more distinct than perception and reflection, than memory and judgment. These being within the man, are not so easily apprehended as his senses which are without. The spirit of a man dwells within him, and as through windows, views, through the five senses, the objects around him. What it cannot perceive through one of those windows, it can discern through another. Besides this, it can look upon itself and become conscious of its own actions. But these are not so obvious to all mankind. The mass of men attend much more to what is passing without than to what is passing within them, and therefore know more of the former than of the latter.

But of all the faculties with which the spirit of man is endowed, none exalt him so high, none put him in possession of intelligence so important as the faculty of believing. Whether this faculty be a combination of other faculties, or one distinct from all others, is not worthy of a moment's investigation, as every man knows that he can believe, and does believe human testimony when it possesses certain attributes. Indeed, all that we do know, and all that we are assured of beyond the narrow sphere of our own experience and observation, all that we know of the past, the present, and the future, beyond the limits of our horizon, we have acquir ed by this faculty of believing.