and join themselves with Gog and Magog? We have heard lately divers ways, that our people there have no hope of the conversion of the natives. And the very week after I received your last letter, I saw a letter written from New England, discoursing of an impossibility of subsisting there; and seems to prefer the confession of God's truth in any condition here in Old England, rather than run over to enjoy their liberty there; yea, and that the gospel is like to be more dear in New England than in Old; and lastly, unless they be exceeding careful, and God wonderfully merciful, they are like to lose that life and zeal for God and his truth in New England which they enjoyed in Old; as whereof they have already woeful experience, and many there feel it to their smart."-P. 799.

Mr. Mede's Answer to Dr. Twisse. "Christ's College, March 23, 1634-5. "Concerning our plantations in the American world, I wish them as well as any body; though I differ from them far, both in other things and in the grounds they go upon.

"And though there be but little hope of the general conversion of those natives, in any considerable part of that continent, yet I suppose it may be a work pleasing to Almighty God and our blessed Saviour, to affront the devil with the sound of the gospel and cross of Christ, in those places where he had thought to have reigned securely and out of the din thereof; and though we make no Christians there, yet to bring some thither to disturb and vex him, where he reigned without check.

"For that I may reveal my conceit further, though perhaps I cannot prove it, yet I think thus:

"That those countries were first inhabited since our Saviour and his apostles' times, and not before; yea, perhaps, some ages after, there being no signs or footsteps found amongst them, or any monuments of older habitation, as there is with

us.

and islands (which are many in that sea,) by the way of the North into America; which none would ever have gone, had they not first been assured there was a passage that way into a more desirable country; namely, as when the world apostatized from the worship of the true God, God called Abraham out of Chaldee into the land of Canaan, of him to raise him a seed to preserve a light unto his name; so the devil, when he saw the world apostatizing from him, laid the foundations of a new kingdom, by deducting this colony from the North into America, where since they have increased to an innumerable multitude. And where did the devil ever reign more absolutely and without controul since mankind feli first under his clutches? And here it is to be noted that the story of the Mexican kingdom (which was not founded above four hundred years before ours came thither), relates out of their own memorials and traditions that they came to that place from the North, whence their god Vitzliliputzli led them, going in an ark before them and after divers years' travel, and many stations (like enough after some generations), they came to the place which the sign he had given them at their first setting forth pointed out, where they were to finish their travels, build themselves a city, and their god a temple, which is the place where Mexico was built. Now if the devil were God's ape in this, why might he not be so likewise in bringing the first colony of men into that world out of ours; namely, by oracle, as God did Abraham out of Chaldee, whereto I before resembled it?

"But see the hand of Divine Providence. When the offspring of these runagates from the sound of Christ's Gospel had now replenished that other world, and began to flourish in those two kingdoms of Peru and Mexico, Christ our Lord sends his mastives the Spaniards to hunt them out and worry them which they did in so hideous a manner as the like thereunto scarce ever was done since the sons of Noah came out of the ark. What an affront to the devil was this, where he had thought to have reigned securely, and been for ever concealed from the knowledge of the followers of Christ!

"Yet the devil perhaps is less grieved for the loss of his servants by the destroying of them, than he would be to lose them by the saving of them; by which latter way I doubt the Spaniards have despoiled him but of a few. What then if Christ our Lord will give him a second affront with better Christians, which may be more grievous to him than the former? And if Christ shall set him up a light in this manner, to dazzle and torment the devil at his own home, I will hope they shall not so far degenerate (not all of them) as

to come in that army of Gog and Magog kingdom of Christ, but be

against thing before the devil be loosed, if not presently after his tying up. And whence should those nations get notice of the glorious happiness of our world, if not by some Christians that had lived amongst them?

"Thus have I told you out of my fancy of the inhabitants of that world, which, though it be built upon mere conjectures, and not upon firm ground, yet may have so much use as to shew a possibility of answering such scruples as are wont to run in men's heads concerning them; which consideration is not always to be despised."-Pp. 799, 800.

Dr. Twisse to Mr. Mede.

"Newbury, April 6, 1635. "As for the peopling of the New World, I find more in this letter of yours than formerly I have been acquainted with. Your conceit thereabouts, if I have any judgment, is grave and ponderous; and the particular you touch upon, of Satan's wisdom imitating the wisdom of God, doth affect me with admiration. And for matter of fact, the grounds you go upon, for ought I see, are as good as the world can afford.Call that which you write fancies, as your modesty suggests; I cannot but entertain them as sage conceits." -P. 809.

This opinion of the devil having conveyed the first colony to America, continued to be maintained by Joseph Mede. In a letter to Mr. Estwick, dated two years afterwards, March 22, 1687, he expresses his belief as to "the American world," that "it was not inhabited in Christ's and his apostles' times, nor some ages after it;" and that it was "first inhabited since the days of Constantine, when the devil saw he could no longer reign here without controul and the continued affront of the gospel and cross of Christ." He adds that "then he sought out another world to plant him a kingdom in," repeating his allusion to the Pelopidarum facta.”—P. 843.

It is remarkable that a writer who had doue so much to depreciate the reputation of diabolical influence in the supposed cases of possession, should thus attribute to a devil an independent sovereignty over mankind, and even describe him as sharing the earth with the Almighty, though his lordship may be at length successfully disputed.

J. T. R.

SIR,

Nor. 20, 1817. EFORE this I had hoped to have

Bread the reflections of souve spirited Correspondent in your journal made in, and as wisely rejected by, on the very extraordinary suggestion Parliament (as stated in Mon. Repos. p. 443), for the insertion, in the late consolidated Clergy Residence Acts, of some rigorous provisions for compelling a stricter performance of the church services, with more especial reference to the very prevalent omnission (of late years) of the Athanasiau Creed.

Now, Sir, it strikes me that the very ground on which this proposal was suggested to the legislature, (and which was in fact negatived on the just consideration that the bishops already possessed ample powers to enforce the more regular use of this unpopular confession if they chose to do so,) affords one of the most gratifying proofs that has for long been exhibited, of the widely increasing liberality and catholicism of the age. With regard to the clergy individually, it is a well-known fact (in the establishment), that, so far from feeling apprehensive of incurring the censure, or exposing themselves to the remonstrances of their diocesan chiefs, by the omission of this creed on the prescribed festivals, they are pretty strongly impressed with the conviction that their sentiments (with a very few exceptions) would rather harmonize with the idea of its being "more honoured in the breach than the observance." And it may be even still further remarked, that in many cases where it is used, it is understood to be done more with the view of satisfying the scrupulous fears of high church LAYMEN,* (tremblingly apprehensive of every innovation,) than from any cordial concurrence of the officiating minister even where it is so used.

While upon the subject of this so obnoxious confession, I cannot omit the opportunity it affords of suggesting (with a view to its more confirmed reprobation), that as the well-known wish of the distinguished primate,

The intelligent reader is requested particularly to note that this proposition for enforcing the use of this creed originated with a layman, and, above all, a military man of high rank!

so often appealed to, that "we were well rid of it," was the attestation of an individual originally connected with a dissenting communion, whether it might not carry a more efficient weight to some persons to cite a more recent opinion of a living prelate, as less likely to be placed to the account of sentiments influenced by former sectarian partialities. With this view, I would suggest the policy of introducing the equally decisive objection to this creed, urged by the present Bishop of Lincoln. Not having his "Elements of Theology," where his remark occurs, at hand to refer to, I can only now appeal to it in a general way. I should, however, be much gratified by finding a corner of your Repository occupied by an abstract of this and some other authorities of eminent dignitaries, in support of the justly expressed desire, that we were well (or rather, effectually) rid of this unpopular creed, and to shew at the same time, that it is not quite so tena ciously adhered to as many are ready

to insinuate.

I must, however, own that it does appear extraordinary that, in spite of the popular feeling of marked dislike to the anathematizing spirit of this creed, in what are too expressively designated its "damnatory clauses," its great and almost exclusive public advocate and expositor, Bishop Burgess, should still strenuously contend that those clauses do not implicate, or attach to, any disbelief in the peculiar dogmas of the creed itself, but only to the rejection of Christianity de facto! Yet it may be justly asked of his Lordship, How he contrives to disown the assertion that this is the catholic faith (i. e. of course what follows in detail) from this introductory anathema, "which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, shall, without doubt, perish everlastingly"? SIMPLEX.

anity" says a Correspondent in The Morning Herald of Friday, Oct. 17, in a letter dated Geneva, Sept. 20.

In fact, the Church of Geneva is so enlightened, so truly pious, so admirably pure, that the proper answer to these attacks should be the reply of Philip to Nathaniel—“ Come and see.” Surely our Church does not require another defence.

But as The Herald's Correspondent brings FACTS in support of his allegations, which would prejudice parents who send their children to Geneva for education, and deprive youth of the most excellent religious instructions given in that city; I consider it as a duty of Christian charity, to enable the British public to form a sound judgment of the facts alluded to. Such is my motive, Mr. Editor, for requesting you to give a place in your paper to what follows.

THE FIRST FACT mentioned by The Herald's Correspondent, as “a proof of the departure from the true faith in the Church of Geneva, is, that the ancient Catechism has been supplied by another which maintains a guarded silence with respect of the Divinity of our Lord." This last Catechism, which does not differ much from many of the ancient Catechisms edited by Osterwald, De Roches, Vernes, Vernet, &c. has been translated into English, and printed in London in 1815. There the mention of God and Jesus Christ is exactly the same as in the Catechism of Osterwald, such as was made use of, for the instruction of Catechumens, since the beginning of the last century. The English Edition offers (from page 44 to 47, again from p. 60 to 73, and again from p. 74 to 78,) clear instructions on that subject, grounded on all the passages of Scripture which give the most exalted ideas of God and Jesus Christ.

Now I ask what other mention can be made of the Lord, in a Catechism, but to repeat all the passages by which his divine attributes have been revealed to men? What can be more Christian than to sum up (page 132) the law and the prophets, in the love of God and the love of our neighbour, in the words of Jesus Christ himself? What is more consonant to the doctrines of the founder of Christianity (who said,

by this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to

another,”—John xiii. 85, and who gave no other symbol to distinguish his disciples,) than a Catechism which teaches the concord and union of Christian Churches of all denominations, saying, (p. 108,) that "as they all acknowledge Jesus Christ as their head, they each form a part of the Catholic Church"? Can such a Catechism be a departure from the doctrines of Christianity, which treats of sacred history, of the truths and of the duties of the Christian religion, in 54 sections, each being the text of an hour's lecture, given by a minister to Catechumens, according to the discipline of the Church of Geneva?

THE SECOND FACT The Herald's Correspondent gives as a proof of his assertion, is, that "in 1805 the Company of Pastors introduced into the Churches of Geneva, a new version of the Bible."

--

But such an argument could be produced also against the first reformers, every body knows that Luther, Calvin and others, published new versions of the Bible,-every body knows that it was in having recourse to the originals, that the reformers dissipated so many errors, which had crept into the Christian Church. And this is an inestimable coincidence of the present Pastors of Geneva, with their ever celebrated predecessors the reformers, that they gave a much-improved version of the Bible. Twelve years have now elapsed since the publication of this admirable work, and it has not been in the power of any member of the Bible Society to prove against me, that any of the improved passages that I have pointed out to the English public (or any other improved passages whatsoever,) in the Geneva Bible, were not defective in the correlative passages of the obsolete French version, to which they have given their preference. It is a curious way to "depart from the doctrines of Christianity," to give a more faithful version of the Bible, more perfect, more conformable to the originals, nearer to the fountain head!

THE THIRD FACT by which The Herald's Correspondent pretends to prove that "the Pastors of Geneva UTTERLY exclude from their Churches the peculiar doctrines of Christianity," is, that "by a rule of their Company passed by them so recently as May 8,

1817, all candidates for Holy Orders are required solemnly to promise, that they will abstain from preaching in the Churches of the Canton of Geneva on the following subjects :—

1. On the manner in which the Divine Nature is united in the Person of Jesus Christ.

2. On Original Sin.

S. On the manner in which Grace operates, or on efficacions Grace. 4. On Predestination."

But who has ever read any of these four" peculiar doctrines of Christianity" in the gospel among the instructions issued from the mouth of Christ ?—In what chapter, in what verse are they to be found?

I am not in possession of any copy of this rule of the venerable company of the Pastors of Geneva, passed the 8d of May. But I am able to inform the Correspondent that the magistrates of Geneva had already prohibited the ministers from preaching those doctrines in the year 1552. Therefore, there is no innovation in the rule of the 3d of May; it is only a due submission of the pastors to their magistrates, and to an ancient salutary law of the republic.

Farther, the present Church of Geneva has departed so little from the doctrines of its predecessors, that Calvin himself, in a preface which he annexed to the Somme de Théologie of Melancthon, 1551, says of the discussions upon those doctrines, that "elles sont perplexes et confuses, et qu'il n'en revient mal fruit de bonne instruction."— Again, the Pastors and Professors of Geneva, in the year 1576, entirely suppressed for tolerance' sake, the confession of faith, containing, I suppose, the peculiar doctrines of Christianity alluded to, which they used to have rehearsed by the students, before they were admitted into the University, that Roman Catholics and Lutherans might also be admitted into it.

But as I was not at Geneva the 20th Sept. 1817, (the date of the letter of The Herald's Correspondent,) I beg you will insert the copy of the fol lowing letter, dated from Geneva, Oct. 7, 1817:

"Your English newspapers are ludicrous indeed! Happy symptom of the situation of Europe that their Editors should have recourse to a despicable squabble (bisbille) in a little