the part of the Free Church and the Churches which impose a creed. Now we ask, have compulsory confessions saved the Christian world from such distractions? Germany and the north of Europe, France, Switzerland, Holland and England, all have had creeds as compulsory as the most ardent ecclesiastical authority could desire. Do these nations owe to such organizations the blessings of religious peace? The United States are beyond all comparison the country where, in the present day, compulsory creeds serve most stringently to guard the church for their adherents, and protect it against intruders; and yet this is the country where the greatest diversity of doctrine prevails, where congregations are the most divided, where controversy is the most violent and noisy. Such are the services which compulsory confessions have rendered to Christian faith; these are the sad evidences of history, of ecclesiastical history! We regard the authors of such confessions as discharging in the religious world the functions of the ancient heralds. No doubt these feudal officers were at times employed to announce a peace, but their ordinary duties were, to mark out the lists, to open the barriers and to sound the charge.

We may here repeat the remarks we have already made in reference to the Holy Scriptures when speaking of Christian peace. If a formulary of doctrines were necessary for the interests of Christian truth, we should find one in the gospel. But there is nothing of the kind; so far from it, no two things can be more different than the gospel and a confession of faith. One is evidently human, the other as evidently divine. If the reader of the New Testament attentively examines the mode in which the truth is there announced, notes the style, and attends to the manner of expression of the various writers, he will inevitably arrive at the conclusion that nothing can be more detrimental to the truth, than to encase it in the coffers of creeds; that, narrower than her dimensions require, they crush her form as with an iron vice, and well nigh strangle her in their efforts to reduce her form to their capacity. The New Testament is precise, distinct, authoritative in its declarations; grand, poetic and free in its style; the living acting body, fresh from the Creator's hand; human creeds are like uncoffined skeletons, falling rapidly to dust-and dust serves no other purpose than to blind.

Compulsory confessions are also irreconcilable with the fundamental principle of Protestantism-Freedom of examination. It is miserable inconsistency to call oneself a Protestant, that is to lay

claim to religious liberty, and at the same moment to sign a Confession of Faith, which is fettering liberty and conscience for all future time! The very act of signing such confessions is an admission of their human origin. No one ever dreams of signing the New Testament. That bears Christ's signature alone. They only sign human engagements.

We may be told that the Reformers to whom we owe of religi. ous independence, were the first to succumb to a compulsory creed. No doubt of it--but herein they were inconsistent. Even Luther himself entertained different sentiments at different times respecting the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The advocates of creeds would have required from him as many signatures as he entertained opinions! Let the flames which consumed Servetus proclaim in hideous characters how unhappily just is the charge of inconsistency to which we have alluded. The Catholics who condemned him at Vienne erred but in one respect, Calvin doubly erred. Protestants and Romanists agreed upon the sentence, but there was this difference between the judges,-the Catholic was alone consistent.

Irreconcilable with Protestant liberty, compulsory creeds are also opposed to another essential principle of Protestantism-progress. We know how distasteful this word is to many, and what specious arguments its use will furnish to those who attack our principles. "You wish then," they will say, "to improve Christianity, to perfect revelation, to elevate what is already divine." By no means. Our object is to improve Christians, not Christianity. To enlarge their knowledge of the gospel, not to perfect what is already complete. Our opinion is, that the interpretation of the holy Scriptures adopted by many Christian sects may be improved. We hope for instance that we may yet bring many to see with us that notwithstanding the assertion of creeds, it cannot be right to believe that infants may be damned before they are born, and we contend that by placing their signatures to such a doctrine as this, Christians are foes to progress. It is a melancholy and may be a perilous task to decide between the signature of yesterday and the conviction of to-day! Our view of the subject under this aspect is singularly confirmed, by the declaration of the first compilers of our Protestant Confession; they begin their preface by saying, "These pages set forth our own faith, and also show how the points at present in controversy have been before time understood and explained." The early Reformers then, whose

words I here quote, engaged to set forth and maintain their own opinions only. We askfor the same liberty, and by demanding it we believe we show ourselves their legitimate successors.

Before laying down our pen, we desire in the most friendly spirit to beseech our brethren, in whatever portion of the Lord's vineyard they may labour, to listen to our appeal, while we conclude our exposition of our belief with a few words invoking peace and concord. We address all, irrespective of sect, regardless of dif ferences, forgetful of rivalry, and we intreat those who may have been prejudiced against our faith, either from the ardour of their own convictions or from the confused impression too often produced by the sight or hearing of religious disputes, we entreat them earnestly, in a charitable and not a polemical spirit, to ask themselves, if in this exposition there is not enough of truth common to them and to ourselves, to remove their exclusiveness, to silence their anathema, to terminate our strife, and to persuade us to advance side by side, against the implacable enemies of God and his word, the enemies of Christ and his cross, we mean, unbelief, indifference, immorality and materialism? To these spirits of darkness let each oppose the light he may possess, but let our mutnal efforts be hallowed by mutual charity, and let us leave it to God to decide, whose light is the brightest. Let those who fancy they possess the pure flame of truth look kindly upon those flickering lights by their sides whose spark will soon vanish, if its feeble ray is valueless. The heart bleeds when we see Christians refusing the name of Christian, and colleagues the rights of a colleague to men who avow a belief in Revelation, in its miracles, and in its prophecies, who regard man as unable of himself to merit salvation, who contend for the necessity of God's grace, and see salvation in Christ alone! What an honourable homage would it be to the memory of our predecessors, (over whose trials we should weep with shame when we see how the possession of Christian peace seems to have fled with the possession of civil liberty;) what joy would it be to the Church, what a triumph to our faith, what a confusion to the foes of Christian verity, what a glory would it shed upon the principles of the Reformation, what an example would it be to Christendom, what new life would it infuse into our own societies, if, abjuring for ever our sterile disputes, our churches of every shade of opinion would unite in one great denomination admitting to its pulpits ministers of every sect and party within its bounds! Such a union would recognize no rivalry but in zeal and love, and

respect diversity, while it cherished charity. Amidst the fearful flood of error and of sin which overspreads the land, it is in the hand of God to give liberty and progress in the right path, by placing our Protestant churches as cities set upon the hills towards which the people may flock for safety and for light; but before they can occupy this glorious position our churches must themselves be at concord and in peace. We dare to anticipate this glorious time!

SOME ANCIENT CUSTOMS ALLUDED TO, IN THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

In a former paper I explained some of the ancient customs inci. dentally referred to by Christ and the apostles in the public discourses: I now proceed to point out a few others which space did not then permit me to notice.

7. "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." [Luke 17,-2.] In this passage we have an allusion to the ancient modes of taking away human life. Different countries have different modes of execution, and even the same country has had different modes of execution at different periods of its history. The Roman mode of putting an offender to death was crucifixion — nailing him to a cross, and allowing him to remain in that position until he expired. This punishment, though usually reserved for slaves and the most abandoned characters was inflicted upon our dear Redeemer; for, although the Jews instigated his death, they, being a conquered people and in subjection to the Romans, had no power legally to inflict the punishment they could not put him to death according to their own mode of torture, but had to appeal to Pontius Pilate, to have his life taken away according to the forms of the Roman laws. The Jewish mode of punishment was stoning a punishment often referred to in the law of Moses, and which was rigidly enforced for crimes which are now considered comparatively trifling; such as sabbath-breaking and the like. This was the kind of death which befel the martyr Stephen, for, we are told "they stoned Stephen, calling out and saying, Lord Jesus receive my spirit."

The Syrian or Grecian mode of punishment was tying a millstone round the neck of the culprit and drowning him in the sea,

and is the one referred to in the passage under consideration. Eastern mills were different from ours. The ancient millstones were sometimes small and portable, and sometimes of a larger size. The smaller ones are called "querns," and were usually turned by women, with the hand [See Matt. 24-41] and the larger ones were turned by mules or asses. Millstones of the latter size when worn out in their proper purpose, were usually reserved for tying round the necks of criminals to sink them in the water. When, therefore, it is said of certain persons "that it were better for them that a millstone were hanged about their neck, and they cast into the sea, than offend one of these little ones," the meaning is that it would be better for them to be exposed to the worst pun. ishment the Syrian or the Grecian law could inflict, than be the means of intentionally leading an innocent and unsuspecting Christian into sin. Yet how many, notwithstanding this solemn warning, both by their precept and example, are daily drawing away from Christ, and duty, and God, those who have the misfortune to come within their contaminating influence! Let all such reflect how heinous is their crime in the sight of Heaven, and what a just retribution it will, sooner or later, bring down upon their guilty heads.

Whilst the Roman, Jewish, and Syrian modes of execution were all abundantly cruel and quite worthy of a barbarous age- yet the old English modes of taking away human life-sometimes by beheading on a block, and sometimes by burning at a stake are not a whit less revolting, And what has the present plan of hanging upon a gallows to recommend it, that it is still maintained in our statute books? Alas, when will the much-to-be-desired period arrive when all such inhuman spectacles will be wholly done away?

8. "That which ye have spoken in the ear in closets, shall be proclaimed upon the housetops." [Luke 12-3.] In order to understand the allusion contained in this passage, it is necessary to know that the houses in Judea and other Eastern countries had flat roofs. The roofs were approached by stairs erected outside. In warm climates it was customary for the inhabitants to spend some of their time, iu the cool of the evening and morning, in sitting or walking on the tops of their houses. The dwellings being attached to each other, a person could travel a considerable distance without having occasion to descend from the roof. Friends and neighbours had thus agreeable reunions each morning and evening, and had opportunities of conversing about the business or pleasures of the