personal improvement, or for immediate usefulness; diligently avail yourself of these opportunities, still keeping your heart near to God, and in all things living not unto yourself, but unto him who died for you and rose again; do this, and your influence will gradually but surely extend itself; your path, luminous with holiness, will shine more and more unto the perfect day; and when you come to heaven, you shall know that you have not lived in vain, and shall share in the blessedness of those concerning whom it is written, that they shall shine as the brightness of the firmament forever.

APPENDIX.

Note A. p. 26.

The subject of creeds and confessions of faith is one so much debated,—and one the relations of which to the New England churches, are so extensively misunderstood among our brethren of some other denominations, that a few additional remarks in this place seem to be demanded. Among the ordinary uses of creeds and confessions, the following may be enumerated.

1. They are used as forms, in making a public profession of faith in the gospel. Such is their customary use in our churches; and to such a use, provided the form is not exceptionable, I know not how any reasonable man can object.

2. They are used as terms of communion ;as when the position is taken, No man shall be received to our church, who will not subscribe, or assent to, our formulary. In respect to this it ought to be remembered, that no formulary which is designed for such a use, ought to include any thing beyond those points, the understanding and belief of which is essential to a credible profession of christianity.

3. They are used as standards of orthodoxy, or as guards against error, and securities for uni

es.

formity of belief in the ministry or among churchAs to the utility of creeds when employed for such a purpose, I must be allowed to express a doubt. In the first place, reason and experi

ence demonstrate that such standards cannot secure a complete uniformity of religious opinions, even among those who subscribe them. Every formulary or summary of doctrines, drawn up by human wit and skill, or even planned under the guidance of superhuman wisdom, if it be framed in human language, or if human minds are to interpret it, must needs be liable to different constructions. This is the case with the Bible. This is the case with all constitutions, laws, treaties, contracts, carefully and technically as they are worded. This is the case with all confessions of faith. As to the law was added the Mishna, and to the Mishna the Gemara; so those who attempt to interpret the Bible by the standard of their confession, find themselves presently constrained to interpret that confession by some unwritten or written "tradition of the elders." What volumes of commentary and of controversy, have been written to elucidate and fix the meaning of such standards. At this hour, the meaning of the thirty-nine articles and of the accompanying prayer-book, is as much a matter of dispute as the meaning of the Bible. The same thing is true of the Westminster confession, with the catechisms shorter and

longer. Who does not know that there is more diversity of religious opinion in the church of England, more in the church of Scotland, more in the Episcopal church, and in the Presbyterian church, in this country, than there is in those Congregational churches and ministers of New England, which acknowledge each other as churches and ministers of Jesus Christ.

The

only security for uniformity, is a dead indifference. The only security for peace among brethren that think and inquire, is love and liberty.

In the next place, such formularies cannot keep out error. Have they kept out error at Geneva? in Germany? in England? in Scotland? Did they keep error out of the King's chapel in Boston ?-out of Tammany street church in Baltimore? out of one community after another which has been lopped off from the Presbyterian body in the United States? The Cumberland Presbyterians-the Davisites-et id omne genus-whence came they? where did they fall into their errors? The best guard against error is the free discussion and defense of the truth, and the love of the truth as the means of converting sinners, and of transforming the soul into the image of God.

Again, it deserves to be remarked that no form of assent to a prescribed confession, can answer any good purpose without a personal

examination of the candidate, as to the matter and the grounds of his religious belief. This, if I mistake not, the most zealous advocates for the efficacy of Confessions, are ready to admit. I ask then, what is the utility of the prescribed Confession, the formulary being worth nothing without the examination, and the examination being sufficient without the formula? Why is not an examination to ascertain whether a man intelligently and orthodoxly receives the doctrines of the Bible, as satisfactory, as an examination to ascertain whether he intelligently and orthodoxly receives the doctrines of the Confession of faith?

Once more, such standards are not indispensable as definitions and tests of orthodoxy. In the American Presbyterian church, for example, it is not every particular of the confession and catechism, which is essential to orthodoxy in a church-member, or in a minister. If it were so, how absurd would be the provisions which exist, for the amendment of those standards. If a belief in the unlawfulness of a man's marrying his deceased wife's sister, be essential to orthodoxy, then surely a motion to strike that point of doctrine out of the Confession, would necessarily subject the mover, and every vote for such a motion would subject the voter to a process for heresy. If then, to prove a man a heretic, you must prove that he disbelieves some