better name-which I have mentioned and condemned. On this very ground, you will observe, the advocates of forms of prayer always take their most advantageous stand. The incoherent utterers of devotional addresses, furnish the advocates of forms with the strongest argument that they ever use. I would deprive them of this argument-I will also say, that the very exceptionable manner in which their forms are very frequently read and repeated, is, in my judgment, a full counterbalance to the broken manner in which the service is sometimes performed and attended to by us. But I rejoice to say that we can produce examples, and these not a few, of such a leading of publick devotion-such a pertinence, such an appropriateness, such a fervency, such a copiousness, in free prayer-as no forms ever did or can reach. This has sometimes been confessed even by those whose education and habits had all been in favour of forms; and I find this whole matter so well stated and illustrated by Dr. Watts in his "Guide to Prayer," that I will give it to you in his own words. "When an unskilful person speaks in prayer with a heaviness and penury of thought, with mean and improper language, with a false and offensive tone of voice, or accompanies his words with awkward motions, what slanders are thrown upon our practice? A whole party of Christians is ridiculed, and the scoffer saith, we are mad. But when a minister or master of a family, with a fluency of devout sentiments and language, offers his petitions and praises to God in the name of all that are present, and observes all the rules of natural decency in his voice and gesture; how much credit is done to our profession hereby, even in the opinion of those who have no kindness for our way of worship? And how effectually doth such a per

formance confute the pretended necessity of imposing forms? How gloriously doth it triumph over the slanders of the adversary, and force a conviction upon the mind, that there is something divine and heavenly among us?

"I cannot represent this in a better manner than is done by an ingenious author of the last age, who being a courtier in the reigns of the two brothers, Charles and James the Second, can never lie under the suspicion of being a dissenter; and that is the late Marquis of Halifax. This noble writer in a little book under a borrowed character gives his own sentiments of things. He tells us that, he is far from relishing the impertinent wanderings of those, who pour out long prayers upon the congregation, and all from their own stock; a barren soil, which produces weeds instead of flowers; and by this means they expose religion itself, rather than promote men's devotions. On the other side, there may be too great restraint put upon men, whom God and nature have distinguished from their fellow labourers, by blessing them with a happier talent, and by giving them not only good sense, but a powerful utterance too, has enabled them to gush out upon the attentive auditory, with a mighty stream of devout and unaffected eloquence. When a man so qualified, endued with learning too, and above all, adorned with a good life, breaks out into a warm and well delivered prayer before his sermon, it has the appearance of a divine rapture; he raises and leads the hearts of his assembly in another manner than the most composed or best studied form of set words can ever do: And the pray we's, who serve up all their sermons with the same garnishing, would look like so many statues, or men of straw in the pulpit, compared with those that speak with such a powerful zeal, that men are

tempted at the moment to believe heaven itself has dictated their words to them.""

If I need an apology for the length of this letter, I think I may easily

find it in the importance of the subject-which indeed must be continued through another letter. The Lord be with you and bless you.

FOR THE CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.

Maxima pars vatum, pater et juvenes patre digni,

Decipimur specie recti :

In vitium ducit culpæ fuga, si caret arte. HOR.

Mr. Editor, Theological controversy, and indeed controversy of any kind, is, on its own account, disagreeable to every pious mind. Still, it need not be sin to us, candidly, conscientiously, and even controversially, to debate on the topicks of revealed truth, and with respect to differences of sentiment which exist in the same family of faith. The distinction between a "Calvinist of the old school" and one of the new, is recognised, I see, in page 129, of your March number. You know that our presbyterian community are in fact divided -technically, I hope, not essentially, not inimically, not toto cœlo -on the subject of systematick theology. The difference is not at all so great as the common enemy would misrepresent it, nor even as some sincere brethren have supposed. It is also conscientious on both sides; and therefore piety to our common and glorious Lord, ought to constrain us to mutual forbearance. If ever there was a proper sphere for the exercise of this lovely grace, it exists at present in our church; and I am persuaded that in proportion as the two schools become acquainted with each other, animosity, jealousy, and scorn those unlovely passions of " the old man," will subside, and be gradually superseded by sensations at once more pleasant and more pure ~" And Abram said unto Lot, let

there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, for WE BE BRETHREN." Minor differences in doctrinal religion have always existed in the church of God; have always lamentably constituted a part of the imperfection of the church militant. I am not advocating imperfection of any kind, nor apologizing for it: but, let him that is consciously without it, issue the declaration of war, and hurl the first missile of commenced hostilities. Perfect orthodoxy is the sublime monopoly of the church triumphant. Here we are infantile, puerile, and in our minority; there we "put away childish things" and are invested with intellectual manhood; with knowledge in perfection, and with truth, and holiness, and joy, without alloy or deficiency. "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part-For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part, but then shall I know, even as also I am known.”

You will correctly suspect by this time, that I am not one of the "old school," and perhaps demand an avowal of my object in this communication. It is, sir, with unfeigned diffidence, with no pledge of able discussion, and without much desire of victory, that I adventure, more as an inquirer than a disputant, to say something on the other side of the question, now sub judice, in your review of Dr. Murdock's sermon. Equal to the importance of the subject of atonement, are its vastness, its central position, and its radiations in the circle of evangelical truth-from which its im

portance results. The clergy ought deeply to feel erga Deum patremque luminum, as they ought prayerfully and habitually to utter, their need of divine illumination and direction on this immensely important article. How momentous it was in the conception of the apostolick hero of our faith, in whom the church at Jerusalem "glorified God," may be inferred not only from all his writings, but briefly from that single sentence in which he presents us with the centre of his creed, the soul of his religion, the glory of his hope, and the sum of his preaching-"for I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified." I think, reverend and dear sir, you will agree with me in all I can express in favour of its importance "every way, chiefly" to the ministers of Christianity. In view of their peculiar personal and official responsibility, and of the impartial award which the "fire" will make, in testing what alone is incombustible in a professional structure"for the day shall declare it, be cause it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is"-who is there that needs not at all to question whether he be right, or can think it any more his interest than his duty to be wrong? Our ambition ought not to aim so low as to be "saved, yet so as by fire." We ought sedulously to attempt the rearing of an imperishable edifice of "gold, silver, and precious stones," upon the only "foundation that is laid, which is Jesus Christ"within, and throughout, and around which, as its harmless investing element, the "fire" might expatiate, only to evince, like that of Nebuchadnezzar, the inconsumable superiority of a fabrick protected by "the form of the Son of God." What an ordeal awaits our high-prized, vaunted orthodoxy, to record its "glory, honour, and immortality," VOL. H.-Ch. Adv.

if genuine--its eternal degradation, if spurious!

As this paper is intended merely as introductory to some others that may follow it, so-if I have ever practically honoured the saying of Solon, Fradi σEAUTO-I can assure you, dear sir, that I also intend this as a specimen of the spirit, with which my future communications shall be characterized. In investigating sentiments, in discriminating truth from error, principles, not persons, must of course be my motto. Nor, are you to infer from this announcement that a movement as mighty as the expedition of Xerxes is contemplated-Perhaps I shall be contented, and yourself and readers gratified, with an early exit from the scene, as I have entered it abruptly-desirous more to benefit than amuse, and anxious mainly to provoke other and abler actors to the boards, that the spirit and interest of the performance may be sustained, and both sides of the argument equally supported and fairly exhibited, to the many spectators that attend the monthly recitals of your excellent publication. I wish for your sake, and more for the cause you "advocate," that the attendance was more crowded and general. Perhaps this object, which we unite in desiring, may be facilitated by a little "new school" influence in a controversial way; yet devoid of the asperity which is so often the bane of professed investigation. Concordemus differre, if not too paradoxical to have any meaning, is a sentiment which controversy among Christian brethren, who know their common privileges and obligations, needs not violate and could easily honour. A demonstration of this has been happily furnished, quite recently, in the amicable correspondence and manly interchange of argument between two distinguished and excellent brethren, in whose controversy the common enemy can see nothing 2 D

to scandalize him, and their common friends, at least some of them, say the substantial difference is merely geographical, i. e. as great as the distance between Princeton and Andover; or, in other words, that if they were locally and colloquially associated for a twelvemonth, they would imperceptibly assimilate into final identity of sentiment! I am not so sanguine with respect to any human perfectibility in this world-anticipating this glorious consummation alone in that eternity where truth will live in the light and perfection of God.

ZETA.

Editorial Remarks. When in our number for July last, we published the first part of an essay entitled "Remarks on the Atonement, with special reference to its extent"-remarks, many of which we knew did not exactly accord with the opinions of a large proportion of the clergy of our church, we invited a temperate discussion of this important topick of theology, in the pages of the Christian Advocate; and we promised that those who differed from the author of the essay then in a course of publication, should be heard immediately after him, if such should be their choice. Till the present time, we have looked in vain for any thing that we were authorized to publish in reply. One letter on the subject was sent us; but the writer seemed unwilling that it should be made publick. We have given a ready insertion, therefore, to the foregoing paper; although in doing so we have departed from a rule which we believe is generally adopted by the editors of miscellanies that when a series of essays is promised, more than the first, or even the second number, must be in hand, before the publication is commenced. But we are pleased with the Christian spirit of this writer; and if it shall continue to be appa

rent, as he intimates and we confide that it will, we think we shall have no objection to his proceeding, as far probably as his wishes may carry him. We have another security against any thing that we may think improper for us to publish. We stated in the prospectus to our work that "it was intended, and should always be employed, to vindicate and explain in a seasonable, temperate and candid manner, the Presbyterian system, both as to doctrine and church government." In conformity with this avowal, we never have admitted, and we never will admit, into our miscellany, any direct attack on the government, nor any manifest denial of the great doctrines of the Presbyterian church. Call this bigotry, or narrowness, or old school partiality, or illiberality, whatsoever, it is our rule, and by it we shall abide. Nor do we covet any patronage of which an adherence to this rule will deprive us. If we are asked-are you afraid that you could not repel attacks that might be made on your government, or your doctrines ? We answer no- We feel competent and prepared to defend both, and we have promised to do so, whenever we see them attacked in such a manner as, in our judgment, to require a defence. But the attack shall not be commenced in our own pages. We are not going to present our bosom to a deadly thrust, because we are confident we can parry it. We are not going to administer a dose of poison, because we are sure we have an effectual antidote. Such experiments we confess are not to our liking. We know they are cried up as indications of a noble and liberal spirit, and of confidence in a good cause; but still we will have none of them. We believe that he who gives circulation, especially the first circulation, to falsehood, must himself be criminally indifferent, if not decisively hostile to truth. We believe,