to each of those ministers' names whom he believed to be Arian. Mr. Cooke then read a Test or Declaration of Faith, which was in substance, "that the Godhead is composed of Three Persons; that these Three are One, the same in Essence and Spirit ;" and he proposed that all the members of Synod who were present, should be compelled to sign this Test, and those who were absent should be written to, and directed by the clerk to forward their signatures, to be by him affixed to it, previous to the printing of the Minutes. An honest man (continued he) is said to be the noblest work of God; and it would be the act of honest men for them to state to the world what was their belief, and to let their people know what their sentiments really were. It was surely worth while that the Arians should tell the world what their views were on the great question of their own and their congregations' eternal welfare. "If I could conceive," said Mr. Cooke," that there was the slightest attempt to persecute for the sake of opinion, in the motion I have now made, I should be the last man who would put my hand to fur ther such a measure. I have no right to institute any proceeding which might in. terfere with men's 1007. or 1507. a-year: it is not with that view that I have prepared the resolution I wish this meeting to sanction with their approval; but it is the blessed light of God which had opened my eyes to the danger, and which directs me to withdraw from those men whose views are not as my views, and whose hopes of salvation do not rest on the same rock as mine. Dr. Wright has expressed a wish that I should point out who the thirty-five or forty Ariaus are in this body. If he wishes for it, I am ready to go over the list of the Synod, and to put a mark opposite to those whom I believe to be Arians. The blood of Jesus is so precious to all who wish to be saved through him, that uone who sincerely believe in him will deny him. Let us at once, then, lay hold of the truth, and openly, before men, say whether the Eternal Son of God be indeed the God of our salvation.". Mr. Cooke concluded by reading his motion.

Mr. R. STEWART seconded the motion.

Dr. WRIGHT rose and observed, that he had been anticipated by Mr. Cooke, in the motion just placed before the house. A stigma had been cast on the body by the assertion of Mr. Cooke, and he was therefore clearly of opinion that that gentleman was bound to point out

the men who had departed from the faith as it was in the Lord Jesus. How Mr. Cooke knew them, he (Dr. W.) could not say but although they were not bound to go all the lengths Mr. Cooke would lead them-for he had openly avowed himself anxious for a separation of that Synod. (Order, order.)

Mr. MONTGOMERY rose (amidst cries of order) and stated, that he was not at present going into an inquiry as to the merits of the question before the House, (although he was perfectly willing to enter on the subject of a separation of the Synod, or a code of faith for its members, at the proper time,) but he was opposed to an important measure of this description being discussed in a corner of the province. Besides, the laws of that body decidedly allowed proper time for men to reflect on the mat ter, and make up their minds on what course they should adopt, in case of its being carried. He wished the discussion to stand over till next year, and by that time they would have calmly examined the merits of the question; and then, when they should also have a fuller attendance of members, they would be able to come to a decision, which would not, by such a hasty and intemperate course as was now pursuing, fix a lasting stigma on the Syuod of Ulster. For himself, he was totally regardless of what step should be taken-the Synod was allpowerful, and it could act in whatever way it pleased. Such a course would be but fair play, not only to absent members, but to those members of the body now present, who had been taken by surprise, by the adoption of a measure which was at variance with their laws, and which might be considered by many as very oppressive.

Mr. STEWART (Broughshane) would endeavour to shew that Mr. Montgomery's reasons against this measure being now discussed, were not good. Mr. Montgomery had said, that the Synod was taken by surprise-that the motion was oppressive, and that it was contrary to law. With regard to the members of Synod not having received notice of this measure, he would contend there was nothing uncommon in that. Similar conduct had been, in urgent cases, often pursued in that body; and he could shew that the present motion arose out of the proceedings of the two previous days. The measure could not be oppressive on any oue, except the hypocrite who wished to cloak himself from the knowledge of the world. As to the assertion of its being contrary to

law, he denied that: if the Committee of Overtures chose, they could introduce any measure, and then it might imme.. diately be passed. As the code contains a law declaring the belief of this Synod founded on the Westminster Confession of Faith, so the present was only a declaratory one arising out of the law of the code, and not a new law. The object was to shew to the world of what complexion that body was, and that the Arians might be distinctly known.

Mr. MONTGOMERY, in explanation, observed, that the Synod had repented of its conduct in its hasty procedure against Dr. Dickson, at the instance of Dr. Black. He acknowledged that the feeling in the public mind was, that they were a Calvinistic body; yet it never was the practice of Synod to enforce a subscription of faith. The code was also opposed to it.

[The MODERATOR remarked, that in 1724, a law had passed the Synod, which enacted a Code of Faith ]

Mr. MORELL conceived, that as Synod had passed a declaration in 1813, on a political subject, it would in no way be objectionable to do the same now, on a religious one.

Mr. PORTER said, that the declaration passed in 1813, on a political subject, had come through the Committee of Overtures. He implored the Synod not to be so hasty in the passing of a measure which must inevitably divide the body.

Dr. WRIGHT agreed with the doctrines contained in the Declaration but other members might not yet have made up their minds on this matter. The pressing of this measure would inevitably split the Synod, whereas the course he would pursue might open the eyes of their Arian brethren, as some men's had been opened.

Mr. S. DILL pressed the motion.

Mr. CARLILE was satisfied that something should be done to clear them of the charge of Arianism; and with this view he had himself prepared a motion. The statements made abroad regarding the Synod, demanded an immediate disavowal; but as to making it imperative on every member to sign[No, no, said Mr. Cooke, it is free for any member to refuse.] Mr. Carlile requested the Clerk to read Mr. Cooke's motion; after which, he objected to the wording of it. He objected to the word "essence" being in it, as an unscriptural phrase, and also to some other parts.

Mr. REID (Rathmelton) was of opi

nion, in the early part of the present Synod, that such a declaration was not at present necessary. He had since changed that opinion, and therefore supported the motion.

Dr. HANNA felt that from the nature of the proceedings which he had witnessed since the meeting of the Synod, its members were called on to put ou record a declaration of their disapprobation of Arian principles; yet he would have much preferred to have seen such a measure brought forward agreeably to the established rules of this body-he meant, through the Committee of Over

tures.

Mr. PARK (Ballymoney) contended, that as a charge of Arianism has been made against this body, and as such a charge was so decidedly opposed to the belief they professed to entertain, and the religion they taught their congregations, they ought not to lose a moment in disclaiming the truth of the assertion. A charge of hypocrisy had been made against the members of Synod; and their usefulness amongst their respective flocks must be destroyed, unless the unfounded charge were distinctly rebutted.

"It

Mr. PORTER begged to be allowed to correct, once more, some misrepresentations of his printed testimony, which he had again and again been obliged to correct since the commencement of the present meeting. has been asserted by Mr. Stewart (said Mr. P.) aud others, that I charged Presbyterian ministers with preaching doctrines which they do not believe, in order to ingratiate themselves with their people. I merely stated, that ministers were so dependent on the people for support and comfort, that they were under a temptation to follow, rather than to lead, the religious opinions of their hearers. Is there a man in this house, who will stand up and say, under the sanction of a solemn adjuration, that he does not believe that such a temptation exists? I have stated in my testimony, that in my opinion we have more real thau professed Arians amongst us. This has been represented as a charge of hypocrisy against the ministers alluded to -as an intimation that they preached contrary to their conviction. All I said, or meant to say, was, not that they preached what they themselves did not believe, but that they did not preach all they believed; aud I vindicated them by adding, that they did not consider the points in dispute essential to salvation: therefore, they did not wish to perplex

the minds of their hearers, by introducing topics of discussion, which the great bulk of congregations are incapable of comprehending. In this statement I am borne out by Mr. Cooke, who declared, an oath, twelve months before I was examined, that of the thirty-five Ariaus who are computed to be in the Synod, VERY

FEW WOULD BE WILLING TO ACKNOW

LEDGE IT. If such ministers," contiuued Mr. P., are guilty of hypocrisy, I do not see how our Saviour himself can be vindicated from the charge. We are told that he spoke to the people, as they were able to hear; and St. Paul speaks of withholding strong food from babes, and nourishing them with milk. When men are under the influence of strong prejudices, an abrupt and premature declaration of the whole truth would in some cases but confirm them in error." With regard to the test which it was now proposed to impose on the members of that body, he would beg leave to remind the advocates of that measure, that attempts at uniformity of opinion in matters of faith had been the cause of all the contentions, persecutions, and schisms, which had taken place in the Christian Church. Such attempts had invariably been abortive. They might, and must, produce hypocrisy, but they could never produce unanimity. So long as different men had different degrees of natural understanding, and so long as they were reared under the influence of different prejudices and prepossessions, there were certain subjects on which they would always disagree. If a doctrine were true, it would, under the Providence of God, ultimately become prevalent. If it were not true, the most rigid test by which it could be enforced would not prevent it from gradually coming to nought. As well might they attempt to arrest the progress of the incoming tide, by opposing to it the puny dykes which children sometimes form of the sand on its shore, as attempt to stop the progress of truth, (if truth were on their side,) by any Synodical declaration or regulation. They had proofs in abundance of the utter inefficiency of Synodical acts, when opposed to the temper of the times. The Antrim separation was caused by a strict enforceinent of subscription to the Westminster Confession; and, until very lately, they had upon their books line upon line, and law upon law, requiring unqualified subscription to that formula. What was the consequence? In the course of time, those laws ceased to be enforced, and sub

scription was very generally laid aside. Calvinism was held, by different men, with different degrees of strictness. There were shades of difference in opinion amongst the gentlemen who were for imposing the present test. Would every one of them be willing to declare, at that moment, his belief in all the doctriues of the Westminster Confession? Some of them would not. Yet, on the very same principle on which the test was supported, those men might be called on by their more rigid associates, either to declare their entire approbation of that formula, or subject themselves to the odium of the ignorant multitude, by declining to do so. Would not they think it hard to be reduced to such an alternative? Let them do unto others as they would wish to be done by. As for himself, he had no personal interest in this matter. His sentiments were well known, and he could incur no additional reproach by declining the test proposed. On general principles, he declared himself hostile to all human tests in matters of faith. Presbyterians were in the habit of boasting that the Bible, and the Bible only, was their creed, and of maintaining the full suffi ciency of the Scriptures for bringing men to the knowledge of all needful truth. Then, where could be the necessity for any human exposition of faith? God never left his word for man to mend. Mr. P. looked on all such tests as the present, not only as restraints on freedom of inquiry, and consequently injurious to the interests of truth, but as presumptuous encroachments on the authority of Christ, who was the sole legislator in his own church. For men to usurp his peculiar prerogative, was an act of spiritual rebellion. No doubt, every religious society had a right to inquire into the character and qualifications of those persons who wished to enter it, either as ordinary members or as ministers. But in judging of those qualifications, the society, or church, must be altogether regulated by the rules laid down in the gospel. They ought always to keep in mind, that whatever might be the case with other churches, theirs was not a civil society, governed by the laws of man, but a religious body, which was, or at least ought to be, under the exclusive controul of laws enacted by Christ. Neither the Presbyterian Church, therefore, nor any other church, had a right to act as if it were a civil society. If they looked into the gospel, they would find the test of admission into the Chris

tion, although the principle of it had his entire concurrence.

A debate now ensued of considerable length, between the orthodox ministers, relative to the terms which should be applied in denoting the persons of the Trinity. Mr. STEWART (Broughshane) said, that any word in high Dutch or low Dutch would to him be just as intelligible as the term essence." Mr. ELDER wished the word "Godhead" introduced. One member wished the term to be "Father, Word, and Spirit;" another, Father, Son, and Spirit;" another, "Father, Word, and Holy Ghost;" another, "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost."

Mr. MONTGOMERY here rose and observed, that surely it was but fair that brethren of humbler capacity should be allowed some licence in deciding on these nice points, when the Calvinistic fathers themselves could not agree about the very epithets which should be applied to the Deity.

Mr. CAMPBELL (Templepatrick) said, he had reflected with seriousness on the speech he made a few evenings before. He had been writhing under the lashes he received, and no wonder, for they were laid on with a heavy hand. Since the delivery of that speech he had been shunned by all his fathers and brethren, as if there were something pestilential about him, and as if whosoever came within the halo must have his mind infected. In vindication of himself, he felt called on to make an exposition of his sentiments. (Here there was a cry of Order, order; No creeds, no creeds. Mr. Campbell, being permitted, proceeded thus.) [Mr. C. went on to give a confession of his faith, for which we have not room. He concluded as follows:-]"Let not the thought, then, be entertained for a moment, that I am a Deist or an Infidel, or a denier of the divinity of the Redeemer; but it is on the momentous subject of the Supreme Deity of Christ that I hesitate; and I candidly confess that I have not arrived at a satisfactory conclusion on this deep and inscrutable mystery; nor can I give my declaration in favour of it, unless I could be convinced of what a gentleman, who has lately published sermons, seems to consider an impossibility, that the Sender is the same as the Sent, or that the Lord, in sending his Angel into the world, seut himself; and, therefore, let me not be denominated an Arian, while I demur, till I have better evidence, to subscribe myself a Trinitarian,"

Mr. CARLILE again declared his opposition to the framing a test for this body.

Mr. BUTLER was in favour of signatures.

Mr. ORR (Portaferry) would have no hesitation in putting his signature to the doctrine in the motion, for it was his belief, and what he taught in his congregation; but, through fear of ulterior measures, of which they knew nothing as yet, but of the consequences of which danger should be apprehended, he would prefer that the general declaration of the Synod should pass without the roll being called, and persons' names, voting on opposite sides, being published.

Mr. COOKE rose to defend himself from the charge of the want of candour. Ulterior measures had been spoken of, and dark hints thrown out of consequences which might follow. He would now tell the members all the ulterior measures he had in contemplation, aud thus, he hoped, enable those doubting and hesitating persous to make up their minds on the subject of the present motion. One object was, to prove that he was right in stating that there was a large body of Arians in the Synod; and, next, to devise some means of saving the congregations placed under those Arians from being contaminated by the baneful disease under which their clergymen laboured. In the course of this procedure he would avail himself of much valuable matter contained. in Mr. Carlile's seimon, who had told them that wolves in sheep's clothing had crept into the fold of Christ. Was it not notorious that ministers had long been hoodwinking their flocks men who had crept into that body in false colours? The laws and regulations of the Synod had not been sufficiently strict to guard against young men getting into congregations after three or four trial sermous, without any strict scrutiny or pledge of their soundness in the faith. One of his ulterior measures was to guard against this, and if any young man should come among them with a mask on, to take it off him, and to let the world know and see what he really was. If, afterwards, congregations should prefer Arianism, why, in God's name let them have it; let them choose Arian preachers to be their shepherds, but let them not join in the work of hoodwinking the people. It was but seven years since a minister of that body heard two elders swear that a certain clergyman was truly orthodox, whom he (Mr. Cooke) knew to be an Arian. When