themselves; and that, instead of blindly pursuing a course which they had not deliberately investigated, they might carefully examine, and most profoundly feel, what was passing every day before their eyes. It was moreover supposed, that this declaration must be made on the very spot where I had been placed by the Providence of God, and in the midst of those who were Fathers and Brethren. Would not strangers have thought any interference with them, on similar principles, officious and imprudent; and very politely have bid me attend to the concerns of the religious family to which I belonged? The idea, that a man, who has something to tell, which he apprehends to be scriptural truth, and which he fears his associates do not like to hear, must cut himself loose from his social relations, belongs to the dark ages, when civil power reigned over the human conscience; or when an inquisitor's sentence would quickly and effectually determine the fate of an independent ecclesiastic. Ministers of the Gospel must not talk so in these days: ecclesiastical philology has been great- v ly changed; and we must now talk to one another like freemen of the Lord.

Such were the views sustained throughout the Discourse; and that without the smallest intention of hurting any man's feelings, or challenging any other Director of the board, or any Professor of the institution, to controversy. Not one of the principles discussed has been denied, not even by those who felt themselves called upon to enter the lists with its author; but in

ferences of a most serious character have been drawn, which must be admitted, or the principles themselves must be controverted, or these good brethren have not reasoned fairly. The deduction of the inferences is a work of their own; and under such auspices the following remarks are committed to the press; yet the public must not be surprised to find that those very inferences are conceded and justified. All this was fully apprehended. Religious prejudice is no novelty in our world: and that it is both forcible and unfeeling, is a characteristic of its operations, which every man may learn from the tears and blood that have so freely flowed in ages past. All the excitement which has been produced, only proves the truth of what had been said concerning the sensitiveness of the religious mind, on the subject of Creeds and Confessions: it is so excessive, that even the abuse of them must not be publicly condemned; nor the distinguishing principle of Protestantism, that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice, be fairly argued out. It was well known that both ministers and their people are exceedingly tenacious of their own ecclesiastical forms; that in every age, since their introduction, their advocates have reasoned most zealously in their defence; and that even now, as well as then, a divine warrant, which, if it can be proved, closes the controversy at once and for ever, is pleaded in their favour. These facts made it somewhat hazardous to deliver the discourse at all, but yet could not alter the nature of the solemn duty

which the occasion enjoined. My conscience would not accept them as an apology, and I could not decline obeying a call which was felt to be imperious. Yet, after all, the Discourse was framed in a manner so respectful to the feelings of those, who, it was supposed, were inimical to its views, that when it is subjected even to harsh and fiery criticism, its reviewers are obliged to retreat into intentions and designs, in order to find matter of censure. "No man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him."

Shortly after the Discourse was delivered, and at the opening of the subsequent session, Dr. Miller addressed an introductory lecture to the Students of the Theological Seminary, selecting for its subject, "The utility and importance of Creeds and Confessions." He did not allude to the Discourse, with which the preceding session had been closed: But the connexion between the two productions has been perceived by every reader; and at the same time it has been explicitly declared by our common reviewer, who has passed on the Professor a very handsome compliment for not being transfixed by either horn of an "apparent dilemma," and who confidently challenges an "attempt" to answer the lecture. Dr. Miller will not be surprised, nor offended therefore, if I consider HIM as having thrown me on my own defence; and as having made it necessary for me again to appear before the public, to plead in favour of opinions, which the whole circumstances of the case have iden

tified with my ministerial character. In the following remarks, his name will very frequently appear, and quotations from his writings will be very freely transcribed. If any sentence in those remarks can be justly censured, as either rudely assailing his feelings, or abandoning the subject for the sake of any personal advantage, it shall be most cheerfully retracted. Nothing of the kind is intended; neither is any further controversy sought or desired. I write for truth, not for victory; and to demonstrate to the public, that some good reasons exist for my scruples on the subject of Creeds and Confessions. No man, who has a good cause to manage, has any need to grow vulgar, and descend to personalities; or if he does, he is a feeble advocate, and his cause would succeed much better without him. At the same time, it would be carrying the rules of politeness too far, to require a writer to enfeeble his argument, or not to give it all the force which the circumstances of his subject demanded. On these terms, the principles of Dr. M's. lecture shall be fairly controverted in the following pages; for I verily believe that he is erroneous, and very erroneous too, in what he has advanced, and that the sentence of heresy is not due to those to whom he awards it.

Some time after Dr. Miller's lecture had been given to the public, a review of both it and the Discourse appeared in "The Christian Advocate. "This piece of rude criticism, it is understood, is from the pen of Dr. Green, who perhaps thought that the young heretic was escap

ing too easily from public reprobation, or that his "strange discourse" was passing too quickly into oblivion. Of this production I scarcely know what to say. It would be far more unpleasant to me, than offensive to him, to state its general character: and it must be left with the reader, to condemn or approve, as he may think proper. Had it been a young man, proud of his portly mien and his sinewy arm, who had taken up the gauntlet, and treated me with such lordly disdain, I might have, perhaps,

at least exhorted him to keep a stricter watch over his own heart, lest in old age a bad temper should be his besetting sin. But, alas! it is an OLD MAN, whose declining years no young man is permitted to distract. I cannot strike my father-my heart would fail me. It is an OLD MINISTER OF THE GOSPEL, a character and personage whom all the world should hold in high veneration; and whom all the church should desire to see "such an one as Paul the aged." My hands are tied, and I can only say, that young ministers of the gospel calculate to receive very different treatment from those who have gone before them in the arduous work to which they are called: they hope ever to find such individuals to be "helpers of their joy."

There is one circumstance, however, which the feelings of the public will not suffer me to leave unexplained; though I did suppose, at first, that I had been long enough engaged in their service to shield me from an aspersion so