TOWGQOD'S 
 
 DISSENT 
 NEWRY 1816
 
 > ' 
 
 A DISSENT 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, 
 
 FULLY JUSTIFIED; 
 
 BEING 
 
 THE DISSENTING GENTLEMAN'S 
 
 THREE LETTERS, 
 
 IN ANSWER TO THE 
 
 LETTERS OF THE REV. JOHN WHITF. 
 
 OK THAT SUBJECT. 
 
 BY MICAIAH TOWGOOD. 
 
 The Fifteenth Edition. 7 A 
 
 TO WHICH IS ADDED 
 
 A LARGE APPENDIX, 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE 
 
 HISTORY, PRINCIPLES, AND PRESENT STATE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, 
 
 Particularly that of Ireland. 
 
 PRINTED BY ALEXANDER WILKINSON 
 
 Telegraph Office-
 
 THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE 
 
 TO THt 
 
 SIXTH EDITION, 
 
 A HE gentleman to whom these Letters 
 are addressed, having made it necessary 
 for the Dissenters to vindicate their reli- 
 gious principles and practices, they think 
 thenv>elves happy, that in consequence of 
 the enlarged and liberal sentiments of the 
 present age, they can make their defence 
 without much danger of the heavy fines 
 and imprisonments, to which their forefa- 
 thers were exposed. 
 
 A calm and unprejudiced examination 
 of their cause, is the only method by 
 which they wish to promote it. Such an 
 examination, they are confident, will 
 shew that they are nonconformists to the 
 established church in those points only, in 
 which she is not conformed to the primi- 
 tive and apostolic plan of discipline and of 
 worship, as established in the word of God; 
 and that if the governors of this church 
 would lay aside those tilings, which many 
 of the most eminent of the clergy, as well 
 as the most discerning of the laity, have 
 long known and even acknowledged to be 
 no part of genuine Christianity, the diffe- 
 rences between Churchmen and Dissenters
 
 IV PREFACE TO THE 
 
 would cease, and we should immediately 
 join together, with one heart and with one 
 mouth, giving glory to God. 
 
 The Dissenters cheerfully appeal to eve- 
 ry candid and impartial inquirer, who will 
 attend to the subject, whether their dissent 
 from the church of England be not founded 
 on the most weighty and cogent reasons. 
 They have only one principle on which 
 they rest their cause, THAT THE SCRIPTURES 
 
 ARE A PERFECT RULE OF FAITH AND MAN- 
 NERS ; and that as the power of interpreting 
 authoritatively for others those scriptures, 
 which contain the Christian religion, can- 
 not be assumed by any man, without di- 
 rectly opposing the genius and spirit of 
 that divine religion, no civil magistrate has 
 .ever had, or ever can have, any right, au- 
 thority or power, over the consciences and 
 religious opinions of Christians, 
 
 The Dissenters, therefore, believe it to 
 be their duty, to enter their most solemn 
 protest against the new edition of Christi- 
 anity, with corrections and amendments, 
 which their brethren of the establishment 
 have ta,ke}i upon them to set forth j and 
 they have much satisfaction in knowing, 
 that many of the wise, the learned and the 
 good, amongst all ranks and degrees, both 
 of the clergy and the laity of the establish- 
 pd church, have adopted, and are in many 
 respects influenced by, the peculiar distin- 
 guishing principles of the Dissenters, 
 though, from various motives, they do not 
 openly profess themselves to be Dissenters.
 
 SIXTH EDITION'. V 
 
 No one \vlio entertains a just sense of 
 the dignity of human nature, can forbear 
 to treat with an honest indignation, every 
 restraint which the authority of the church 
 presumes to lay on his reasoning powers ; 
 and to this laudable pride of man it must 
 be imputed, that of those who are unhappi- 
 ly tempted to submit to this unchristian 
 usurpation, so many appear solicitous to 
 reassert their liberty and independence-, 
 and to make, by this means, some atone- 
 ment for the treason of which they have 
 been guilty against the sacred riglrts of 
 conscience. Hence it is, that often, in 
 their conversation and their sermons, and 
 not seldom in their publications, they re- 
 sume those unalienable privileges which 
 they once pretended to renounce, and shew 
 that they rev'// think and reason for them- 
 sclves, notwithstanding their former solemn 
 declarations of assenting and consenting 
 to the determinations of the church. 
 
 While things continue in this state, the 
 Dissenters are well warranted in asserting; 
 that their cause is countenanced, and that 
 their distinguishing principles are virtually 
 espoused, by a very respectable number of 
 the clergy of the established church ; for all 
 those who print, preach, speak, or even 
 think on religious subjects, in any degree 
 contrary to the articles which they have 
 subscribed, are so far Dissenters, that they 
 renounce the authority of the church, in 
 matters of faith. Over men of this de- 
 scription, the non-subscribing Dissenters 
 A 2
 
 VI PREFACE, ETC. 
 
 have the greatest advantage, in respect tr> 
 that consistency of character, which is of 
 BO much importance to the true dignity and 
 happiness of man. 
 
 It is hoped, that every person who reads 
 the following defence of the principles of 
 the Dissenters, will remember, that the 
 only point in dispute between them and 
 the defenders of the established church is 
 this : 
 
 Whether men are to reason and 
 judge for themselves, concerning the arti- 
 cles of faith and the rites and ceremonies 
 of religion, as appointed by Jesus Christ, 
 the only lawgiver of the Christian church? 
 Or, whether the church, as by law estab- 
 lished, has power to decree rites and cere- 
 monies, and authority in controversies of 
 faith ? 
 
 May the God of truth judge between 
 the contending parties ! He will judge in 
 righteousness : and to him alone be the 
 glory of dominion over conscience, and 
 all authority in religion, throughout all 
 churches, in all ages Amen.
 
 PREFACE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 PRESENT EDITION. 
 
 A FOURTH Edition of the DISSENTING 
 GENTLEMAN'S LETTERS TO MR. WHITE, was 
 published in 1766, by some of the minis- 
 ters of the General Synod of Ulster- 
 Having been long out of print, however, 
 in this country, (though they have lately 
 gone to a twelfth edition in England,) a 
 considerable number of presbyterian mi- 
 nisters have approved of the publication of 
 a new edition, and have subscribed for 
 copies for the use of their congregations. 
 
 Some denominations of Christians are in 
 the habit of recommending and inculcating 
 their peculiar tenets, by periodical works 
 under their own direction. The Presbyte- 
 rians have not adopted this mode of com- 
 municating religious instruction. They 
 are not, however, ignorant of the import- 
 ance of the press ; and therefore, they 
 deem it expedient, by occasional publica- 
 tions, to remind their people of the distin- 
 guishing principles of their system. 
 
 Lest the re-publication of Towgood's 
 Letters should be considered as an unpro- 
 voked aggression on the established church,
 
 Vlll PREFACE TO THE 
 
 it is necessary to mention, that the Pres- 
 byterians have been first attacked in a late 
 virulent production, which appears to have 
 met with extensive patronage. 'It is surely 
 right that they should be permitted to de- 
 fend their principles, and to remove any 
 impression unfavourable to presbyterian- 
 ism, which the writings of their opponents 
 may have produced. If, therefore, any 
 members of the establishment shall be "dis- 
 pleased, at the revival of the controversy, 
 let their indignation fall on the author of the 
 attack on the Presbyterians, and his patrons. 
 
 As several passages in the Letters, refer 
 to the sacramental test, it may be proper, 
 in this place, to apprize the reader, that 
 the Test act, as far as respects Protestant 
 Dissenters in- this country, has been re- 
 pealed ; and that in England, its operation 
 is suspended by acts of parliament, passed 
 from time to time, allowing those who have 
 obtained posts, farther time to qualify. 
 
 It is but just also to state, that the spi- 
 rit of the times, together with the equity, 
 moderation and good policy of the state,, 
 has had ati important operation, with re- 
 spect to the administration of the laws and 
 canons, which were framed to guard and 
 support the established church. From 
 these, Nonconformists have at present lit- 
 tle to fear. The power of ecclesiastics 
 has been restrained ; and the church has 
 been tempered by the clemency and virtue 
 of a wise and good government. Since 
 the accession of the present reigning farm-
 
 PRESENT EDITION. * 
 
 ly, the Dissenters have largely enjoyed the 
 ' blessings of civil and religious liberty. 
 
 As the letters of Mr. Towgood contaia 
 a justification, more particularly of the 
 nonconformity of the English Dissenters, 
 it was thought expedient, to add to this 
 edition an Appendix, illustrative of the 
 history and principles of the Presbyte- 
 rians. 
 
 The promoters of this publication ar 
 anxious that it may be understood, that 
 they by no means wish, that its circulation 
 may, in the smallest degree, disturb tlie 
 good understanding which generally sub- 
 sists at present between Presbyterians and 
 the members of other churches. This, 
 they hope, will increase more and more. 
 They do not conceive it necessary, that 
 men should neglect their peculiar religious 
 principles, in order that they may live on 
 terms of peace and harmony with one ano- 
 ther. Each individual may value, as he 
 ought, the candour, probity and sincerity 
 of his neighbour, \yhile he differs from 
 him in opinion ; and by avoiding bigotry 
 and intolerance, may maintain in full per- 
 fection, the sacred rights of Christian cha- 
 nty and brotherly love. 
 
 As little is probably known in this coun- 
 try, of the author ot the Dissenting Gen- 
 tleman's Letters, a. short abstract of his 
 history, taken from an account of his life 
 and writings., by his colleague, the Rev. 
 James Manning, is given in this place; and 
 will, it is hoped, be acceptable to the ge- 
 nerality of readers.
 
 SKETCH OF MR. TOWGOOD'S LIFE. 
 
 AIlCAIAH TOWGOOD was born at Axminster, 
 in Devonshire, on the 17th of December, 1700. His 
 grandfather, the Rev. Matthew TWgood, was one of 
 those ministers who left the church in 1662, in conse- 
 quence of the Act of Unifortnity. His father, Dr. 
 Micaiah Towgood, was a physician, who having given 
 him domestic instruction, committed him to the care 
 of the Rev. Mr. Chudwick, an eminent teacher in the 
 ^vest of England, and afterwards placed him at an 
 academy at Taunton. 
 
 In 1722, he became minister of a congregation of 
 Protestant Dissenters, at Moreton-Hampstead, in the 
 county of Devon. In 1736, he received an invitation 
 from Cred-ton, of which he accepted, having the 
 prospect of being more extensively useful in this new 
 situation. 
 
 In 1737, he published a small pamphlet, entitled 
 *' High-flown Episcopacy and Priestly Claims exa- 
 mined," &c. In this publication, he defended the 
 cemmon rights of Christians, and established the suf- 
 ficiency and perfection of Scripture, as a rule of faith 
 and practice. 
 
 In 1739, he wrote the " Dissenter's Apology," in 
 which he vindicated the Dissenters from the charge of 
 sen-ism, brought against them in the sermons of Dr. 
 Warren, a church clergyman. 
 
 About the same time, he wrote three numbers in 
 the Old Whig, in which he stated his objections to 
 certain offices of the established church. 
 
 In 174-1, he published a pamphlet, under the title 
 of " Spanish Cruelty and Injustice, a justifiable plea 
 for a vigorous war with Spain, and a rational ground 
 fjr hopes of success," for the purpose of encouraging 
 his countrymen in the war against Spain. 
 
 The following year, he wrote a pamphlet, entitled, 
 " Recovery from Sickness," as a present to some 
 members of his congregation. 
 
 In 1'743, a dreadful fire having broken out at Credi- 
 ton, by which 450 families were deprived of places of
 
 SKETCH OF TOWGOOD S LIFE. XI 
 
 fesidence, Mr. Towgood, besides liberally imparting 
 private aid, exerted himself to the utmost, to procure 
 relief for the unhappy sufferers. 
 
 In 1745, when the Pretender invaded Britain, Mr. 
 Towgood was anxious to draw the public attention to 
 the errors of popery ; and he therefore preached and 
 published a sermon against the doctrines of the Romish 
 church. 
 
 In the same year, the Rev. John White, B. D. Fel- 
 low of St. John's College, Cambridge, and vicar of 
 Ospring, Kent,, having brought forward the charge of 
 schism against the Dissenters, on account of their 
 separation from the established church, Mr. Towgood 
 signalized himself in the cause of Christian truth and 
 liberty, by the " Dissenting Gentleman's Letters," in 
 answer to Mr. White. These Letters have been high- 
 ly esteemed by rational Dissenters ; and even many 
 liberal minds in the establishment, have felt and con- 
 fessed their force. They are indeed composed with a 
 strength of argument, acuteness of discussion, and 
 animation of language, which entitle them to a distin- 
 guished rank among controversial writings. This pub- 
 lication had a very extensive circulation, and was the 
 means of introducing its author to the acquaintance of 
 persons of high literary character, both in England 
 and in America. 
 
 About this time, appeared his Essay on the charac- 
 ter of Charles I, with an Appendix, illustrating the 
 conduct of the Presbyterians. 
 
 In 1749, having been invited to Exeter, he became 
 ne of the pastors of the two united congregations in 
 that city. 
 
 The next year, he published a pamphlet in defence 
 f infant baptism, which was followed by another, en- 
 titled, " Dipping not the only Scriptural and primitive 
 mode of baptizing." 
 
 Mr. Towgood again appeared before the public, in 
 1756, as the author of a very seasonable and spirited 
 tract, entitled " Serious and Free Thoughts on the 
 Present State of the Church and Religion," occasione'd 
 by the bishop of Oxford's charge to the clergy of his 
 diocess. 
 
 Some years after, Mr. Towgood was engaged, one*
 
 xii SKETCH OK TOWOOOD'ti LIVE. 
 
 a week, in delivering a critical lecture on the Scrip- 
 ture*, in an academy at Exeter. 
 
 At the request of an assembly of ministers in Noi'th- 
 amptonshire, he published, in 1772, an abridgement 
 of his Letters to Mr. White, under the title of " A 
 Calm and Plain Answer to the Inquiry, why are you 
 a Dissenter from the Church of England." 
 
 In 1782, not being any longer capable of public 
 duty, through the infirmities of age, he resigned the 
 pastoral office, after above sixty years of service in the 
 Christian church. The congregations in Exeter re- 
 turned him their unanimous and affectionate thanks, 
 for his labours among them; and as a token of their 
 gratitude and esteem, presented him with a valuable 
 piece of plate* with a suitable inscription. It was 
 accompanied with a request, that he would publisfc 
 some of his manuscripts. This was a task, however, 
 which he felt that he could not undertake, at his ad- 
 vanced age. He published, however, an Address to 
 these societies, on the grounds of faith in Jesus Christ, 
 written in his 84-th year. 
 
 Theugh Mr. Towgood appeared to be of a con- 
 sumptive habit, yet, by regular exercise and the stric- 
 test temperance, he lived to a great age. His person 
 was above the middle size and extremely slender ; hit 
 eye lively and penetrating ; and his whole appearance 
 venerably pleasing. His delivery in the pulpit was 
 solemn yet animated. He spoke like a man full of 
 his subject, and labouring under the weight of those 
 conceptions which its awfulness inspires. 
 
 He was distinguished for hospitality fr>r cheerful- 
 Bess for candour for fervent piety. He was of a 
 very social disposition, and entertained a very exalted 
 idea of the virtue of friendship. His learning, which 
 wds extensive and profound, was perfectly free from 
 pedantry ; and he had a happy talent of making him- 
 self at once pleasing and instructive in' conversation. 
 
 He died on the 1st of February, 1792, in his 92d 
 year, leaving no good man his enemy, and attended 
 with that sincere and extensive regret, which can fol- 
 low those only, who occupying useful stations, have 
 acquitted themselves with zeal and fidelity.
 
 A DISSENT, 
 
 SIR, 
 
 X SHOULD not have chosen a debate of this 
 kind in the present situation of our public 
 affairs :* but as you have done me the honour of 
 publicly addressing to me three long letters for 
 my conviction and edification, gratitude and 
 good manners constrain me to answe*r. 
 
 As worldly considerations are very strong on 
 your sides, I assure you I have an ear always 
 open, to any thing that may shew conformity to 
 be my duty. Dissenters are not men of so pe- 
 culiar a turn of mind, as to love suffering and 
 reproach, or to despise the dignities, prefer- 
 ments, and lucrative posts, to the amount of 
 millions a year, which are shared among their 
 fellow-subjects, could they with a good con* 
 science partake of them, as they have a natural 
 right to do. 
 
 But, notwithstanding this prejudice in favour 
 of your argument, and all the ingenuity with 
 which you set it off, I cannot say it has wrought 
 in me the conviction you seemed to hope. So 
 far, sir, from this, that the more carefully I ex- 
 amine the grounds of my separation, the more 
 thoroughly I am convinced of its lawfulness and 
 expediency of its bein^ a debt I owe to GOD, 
 to liberty, to truth and an act of homage and 
 allegiance due to Christ, the only law-giver and 
 king in the church. 
 
 * These letters were first published in 1746, the year in which, 
 notwithstanding this kingdom was so happily delivered from som 
 of its distresses, by the defeat of the rebel nrmy at Culloden, yet 
 ft was still eugaged in a war with Franca and Spain. 
 
 B
 
 I shall not enter upon the inquiry, on which 
 you largely expatiate which are the best livers, 
 churchmen or dissenters, and amongst \vhich 
 the best means for holy living are to be found ? 
 Let the world judge between us. Would to God 
 that both of us had greater reason to boast ! 
 
 The controversy between us, sir, I apprehend, 
 may easily be brought to a plain and short issue, 
 if you will heartily join in it. It turns upon the 
 single point of the XXth article of your church, 
 viz. that THE CHURCH hath porecr to decree rites 
 find ceremonies, and authority in -matters of faith. 
 For, if the church hath really this authority and 
 power, then all objections of the Dissenters 
 about sponsors, the cross in baptism, kneeling 
 at the Lord's supper, and every other thing, 
 are impertinent and vain : the church having this 
 authority, ought reverently to be obeyed. And, 
 if instead of two or three ceremonies, it had 
 enjoined two or three score ; and if to the thirty- 
 nine articles it had added a hundred besides, 
 we ought meekly to have bowed down to its spi- 
 ritual jurisdiction, and to have believed and 
 practised as the church had taught and enjoined. 
 But if, on the contrary, the church hath really 
 and in truth, no power at all, nor authority of 
 this kind ; yea, if Christ, the great law-giver 
 and king of his church, hath expressly com- 
 manded that no such power shall ever be claim- 
 ed, or ever be yielded, by any of his followers, 
 then your church is reprehensible and highly 
 criminal before God, for usurping this power : 
 and consequently the Dissenters are justified, 
 and will have honour before God, for entering 
 their protest against such usurpation : for as- 
 serting the rights and privileges of the Christian 
 church, and for standing Jttsi in the liberty ;, 
 Kith Christ has made them frci. 
 
 You are pleased to represent our separation 
 from the establishment, in very black and terri- 
 fying colours, as a sin of nearly the first ma<*-
 
 15 
 
 nit tide " Our minister-, you say, liave 
 lying heavily upon them on account of their 
 schismatical and uncatholic proceeding's. They 
 are notoriously peccant (i. (. are great sinners) 
 in throwing: off the authority of those whom they 
 ought to obey and submit themselves to. Their 
 conduct is such as you challenge all the wit and 
 ingenuity of the nation ever to reconcile with 
 holy liv : nv. You represent them as carnal, evil, 
 and deceitful workers, disorderly walkers, "whom 
 God will, undoubtedly, for these things, bring 
 into judgment ;* and the r'aithful, far from be- 
 ing- permitted to enter into any pastoral relation 
 to them, are not permitted to have any Christian 
 communion with them ; no, not~so much as any 
 intimate unnecessary acquaintance and famili- 
 arity with them in common life;"t with much 
 more to the same purpose. 
 
 You speak also ;< of the lay-dissenter, as hav- 
 ing- stained his soul with guilt :$ and of the doc- 
 trine on which our separation is built, as being 
 false and dangerous. "|| This you wish me to lay 
 to heart, and seriously to consider. 
 
 I have, according- to your wish, sir, laid it to 
 heart, and seriously considered. The result of 
 my consideration 1 shall now freely give you ; 
 and in return heartily wish, that, laying aside all 
 prejudice and worldly attachments, you would 
 impartially consider what is the true nature 
 and constitution of the Christian church ; and 
 what the allegiance, which, as a subject of 
 Jesus Christ, you owe to him, the only law- 
 giver and king- in his church; who will shortly 
 call you to account for your conduct in this re- 
 spect. 
 
 To come then to the point the church, you 
 say, and you have -solemnly subscribed, hath 
 poicer to decree rites and ceremonies, and aulhori- 
 
 * Letter I. Pago 82, 87 f Letter II. Page 8. 
 
 f Letter 1 1. Page 26. |j Letter 1 1 1. Page j!>.
 
 ti/ in matters of faith. This is the -grand hinge 
 upon which the whole controversy turns. Now 
 here, sir, let me ask you, 
 
 First, What church is it, to which this author 
 rity and power are given? You will, doubtless, 
 say, the church of England ; for the church of 
 England expressly claims and exercises this 
 power; and you avqw and defend it in this ex- 
 ercise and claim : yea, this is the very basis on 
 which its whole frame and hierarchy stand; It 
 obliges all its ministers to subscribe to articles of 
 faith which it hath authoritatively decreed ; and 
 to use in religious worship, ceremonies and rites, 
 which it hath authoritatively enjoined. 
 
 But mark, sir, I beseech you, the conseqnen* 
 ces of this claim. If the church of England hath 
 really this authority and power, hath not the 
 church of France, the church of Spain, the 
 church of Rome, the very same power ? Hath 
 England, in this matter, any privilege from God, 
 any spiritual prerogative, any charter from 
 heaven, which its neighbouring countries have 
 not ? You can have no pretence to assert that it 
 has. But if it have no such privilege or prero- 
 gative, then the church of France, and th 
 church of Rome have also, you must acknow- 
 ledge, power to decree rites and ceremonies in 
 God's worship, and authority in points of faith ; 
 consequently, all the fopperies and superstitions 
 of the Romish church, at least, such as cannot 
 be proved to be contrary to the word of God, 
 are to be reverently submitted to by all the mem- 
 bers of those churches, and to be cordially re- 
 ceived. 
 
 But does not this power for which you con- 
 tend, evidently oppose the principles of the re- 
 formation itself, and subvert the very foundation 
 of the church you seek to establish ? for till you 
 can shew, why the church of England is possess- 
 ed of this power, but not the church of Rome ; 
 why a body of acknowledged fallible men in Bri-
 
 17 
 
 tain have authority to make and to enjoin arti- 
 cles of faith, but not a body of pretended infal- 
 lible men at Trent ; how England became thus 
 spiritually gifted, and endowed beyond all its 
 neighbouring kingdoms your separation from 
 the church of Home is incapable of a just and 
 sol id defence. 
 
 To this, perhaps, you will reply but our 
 church hath expressly guarded against any such 
 abuse of the power it claim?, by adding in the 
 XXth article Yet it is not lawful for the church ' 
 to ordain ant/ (king that is contrary to God's zcorrf 
 zsrittcn ; neither muy it so expound one place of 
 scripture that it be repugnant to another. But, 
 upou this 1 beg leave to make these two remarks : 
 
 1st. AVhatever ceremony or rite cannot b 
 shevvn to be contrary to God's word, your church, 
 yea, the church of Home hath, on your own prin- 
 ciples, full authority to enjoin : consequently, 
 as your church, by virtue of this authority, hath 
 enjoined the cross in baptism, it hath full power 
 also to require you to cross yourselves, when- 
 ever you enter your places of worship, say your 
 prayers, look towards the east, touch the Bible, 
 sit at meat. It has full power to enjoin the 
 use of salt and spittle in baptism, chrism, ex- 
 treme unction, and an hundred other things 
 which are no more contrary to God's word -than 
 the cross in baptism is. 
 
 As your church now consecrates ground, it 
 has every whit as much power to consecrate the 
 other element, and to make holy water, as well 
 as holy earth ; and to order it to be decently 
 sprinkled upon its members (Jbr all things, you 
 know, are to be. done decent I// and in order) in to- 
 ken that they shall keep themselves pure from 
 sin : it hath power to consecrate holy knives to 
 cut the sacramental bread ; holy basins and 
 ewers for the priests to wash in before the sacra- 
 ment, holy vestments and robes, and a great va- 
 riety of holy utensils, lighted tapers for the altar, 
 
 B 2
 
 18 
 
 &c. (all which, you know, sir, was done by 
 your admired bishop Laud), knocking on the 
 breast, bowing towards tfie east, prostration be- 
 fore the altar. All these, I say, and innume- 
 rable other ceremonies your church claims autho- 
 rity and power to enjoin; for none of these can 
 be shewn to be more contrary to the word of 
 God, or be a whit more superstitious, ridiculous, 
 or absurd, than the crossing at baptism, or the 
 solemn consecration of churches and church- 
 yards. But, 
 
 2dly. The limitation or guard, which the ar- 
 ticle seems to put upon this power of the church, 
 is really of no force, and is in fact no limitation 
 at all. 
 
 For though it says that the church may not 
 ordain any thing contrary to God's word, nor so 
 expound one scripture as to be repugnant to ano- 
 ther : yet of this repugnance and contrariety, the 
 church alone, you will observe, and not every 
 private person, is allowed to be the proper judge, 
 for otherwise the article is absurd ; it actually 
 overthrows itself; and takes away, with one 
 hand what it gives with the other. For, if 
 every private person hath authority to judge of 
 the church's decisions, and to reject them, if 
 they appear to him repugnant to scripture, then 
 the church's authority in points of faith is entirely 
 destroyed. It is an authority to decree, where 
 no one is bound to submit. But such a sense- 
 less, unmeaning, impertinent claim, can never 
 be the design and import of this article. It does 
 claim therefore for the church some real autho- 
 rity to settle points of faith; consequently, to 
 points thus authoritatively settled by it, private 
 Christians, its members, are reverently to sub- 
 mit, even though to their own judgments they 
 appear repugnant to the word of God. 
 
 This, sir, must be the real meaning and in- 
 tent of the article, notwithstanding the restric- 
 tive clause. Accordingly, in consequence of thi
 
 10 
 
 claim, your church hath authoritatively decreed 
 thirty-nine articles of faith ; and these it declares 
 to have decreed for fhe taking area)/ difference <*f 
 opinion, find to establish an ftgrcr: ->i :>t true reli- 
 gion* : the plain language of authority. These 
 articles it obliges all its ministers to subscribe ; 
 and our princes, as heads and governors of the 
 church, have authoritatively forbidden its clergy 
 to preach any thing repugnant to them, and re- 
 quired them to frame their sermons according to 
 the plan here prescribed. From all which it ap- 
 pears, that, notwithstanding the pretended limi- 
 tation, there is a real authority claimed by the 
 church, that is to say, by its governors, to settle 
 points of faith. But if there be such authority 
 really vested in them, then the people are bound 
 to submit to their decisions, and have no right of 
 private judgment to examine or reject them ; for 
 there cannot be two contradictory rights ; a right 
 in governors to prescribe, and aright in subjects 
 to refuse. But if the church of England have re- 
 ally this authority and right, the church of Rome 
 had it before her; and, as the elder and mo- 
 ther-church, ought to have been obeyed. The 
 reformation, therefore, as we are wont to call 
 it, was a rebellion against superiors, a disobe- 
 dience to the authority vested in the church, and 
 ought, as such, to be renounced, by returning to 
 the church of Rome. 
 
 In this manner, sir, a Romish priest Avill turn 
 upon the church of England its own dangerous 
 artillery ; and by the mere concessions of this 
 XXth article, thousands of proselytes have, 
 no doubt, been made from you. Nor, with all 
 your ingenuity, would you find it easy to ward 
 off the force of such reasoning, should any of 
 your parishioners be likely to be seduced. And 
 this, perhaps, is the reason why the numerous 
 on verts these priests are said to make, are ga- 
 
 * Prefaoe to XXXIX Articles.
 
 20 
 
 thered all from your church ; whereas, from 
 among the Dissenters, you scarcely ever hear 
 of one being made. But, 
 
 2Jly. I very much wish to he informed as to 
 the persons who are invested with this authority 
 and power. 
 
 You say, it is the church : but who, I pray, 
 are the church, in whom this great power is 
 lodged ? You will please to observe, it is not the 
 bishops and clergy, who are wont to speak of 
 themselves as our spiritual pastors and guides, 
 as being over us in the Lord, as stewards of the 
 mi/stfrics, ,c. This power to order the manner 
 of God's worship, and to settle articles of faith, 
 is not at all lodged in them, but entirely in the 
 king and parliament of these realms. 
 
 You need not be informed, sir, that all the 
 clergy of this kingdom, with all the bishops, at 
 their head, have not the least authority to enjoin 
 one ceremony or rite of worship ; or to establish 
 or annul one article of faith. On the contrary, 
 all power and jurisdiction relating to these mat- 
 ters are lodged chiefly in lay-hands ; in the king 
 and parliament, the clergy being obliged to act 
 in all things under their direction and control. 
 The king and parliament are in truth the real 
 fathers, governors, or bishops of this church ; 
 these only have power to make or to unmake 
 forms and rites of worship, and to authoritatively 
 instruct and perscribe to the clergy what they 
 are to believe in what manner, and to whom 
 the sacraments are to be given what prayers 
 they are to offer up what doctrines to preach 
 who are to be admitted to the episcopate or priest- 
 hood, and who to be refused by what cere- 
 monies and prayers, and exhortations they are 
 to be set apart, and consecrated to their office. 
 These, with every other circumstance relating 
 to religion and the worship of God, which is 
 authoritatively prescribed or enjoined in your 
 church, you know, sir, not the bishops and
 
 clergy, but the king with his parliament are th 
 only persons who have authoritatively enjoined 
 and prescribed them. 
 
 " The clergy of the whole land, in convoca- 
 tion assembled, cannot so much as attempt any 
 canons or constitutions without the king's li- 
 cense. If the king and clergy make a canon, 
 though it binds the clergy in re-ecclesiastica, yet 
 it does not bind laymen."* 
 
 Yea, so far, sir, were the bishops and clergy 
 from having any hand in the first forming our 
 present established church, or in ordering its 
 rites and articles of faith, that it was done not 
 only without, but in actual opposition to them : 
 " for in the 1st of queen Eliz. the parliament 
 alone established the queen's supremacy and the 
 common prayer-book, in spite of all opposition, 
 from the bishops in the house of lords ; and the 
 convocation then sitting, w r ere so far from hav- 
 ing any hand in those church acts for reforma- 
 tion, that they presented to the parliament se- 
 veral propositions in behalf of the tenets of Po- 
 pery, directly contrary to the proceedings of the 
 parliamentt. Hence then, sir, I think you 
 must be compelled to own (what I know gentle- 
 men of your robe do not care to hear) viz. that 
 the church of England is really a parliamentary 
 thurch; that it is not properly an ally, but a 
 
 * Vide Examination of the Codex, &c. page 114, 148. " By 
 the 25th of Hen. VIII, Cap. 19. it is a Pretnfunire for the con- 
 vocation to meet without the king's writ : and when thej are met, 
 to do any thing without the king's licence : and then no resolution 
 of theirs to hare the force of a canon, unless the king confirm it. 
 Nor is it then valid, if it be contr.irient or repwgnant to the laws, 
 statutes, and customs of this realm, or be to the damage or hurt 
 of the king's perogatiTe royal and of this the courts of West- 
 minster-hall must judge. Hale, in his Analysis (page 12.) says, 
 if ecclesiastical laws are not confirmed by parliament, the king 
 may revoke and annul them at his will and pleasure." Vide 
 notes on an Answer to the Examination of the bishop of Loa- 
 'i Codex. 
 
 f Vide priestcraft in perfection, Pref. page 4.
 
 mere creature of the state. It depends entirely 
 upon the acts and authority of parliament for its 
 very essence 'and frame. The qualifications of 
 its ministers, their power to officiate, the man- 
 ner in which they are to administer the sacra- 
 ments, are all limited and prescribed by autho- 
 rity of parliament, and this authority, which at 
 first made, can alone alter and new-make it ; 
 can abolish, or add to its articles or rites, ac- 
 cording to its pleasure, even though the whole 
 body of bishops and clergy should ever so much 
 dislike, or protest earnestly against it. 
 
 It is a point therefore incontestable, that the 
 church, which your article declares to have this 
 authority and power, is no other than the king 
 and parliament of these realms. But. 
 
 Sdly. The grand difficulty which yet remains, 
 and which, without your assistance, I shall ne- 
 ver get over, is, how came the civil magistrate 
 l)y this authority in the church of Christ ? Who 
 gave him this pow r er to decree rites in Chris- 
 tian worship, which Christ never decreed ; and 
 to make articles of faith which Christ never 
 made ? Neither Christ, nor the apostles, ever 
 gave him this authority ; from whom then is it 
 derived ? 
 
 The subjection to higher powers, and obedience 
 tn magistrates^ which the scriptures enjoin upon 
 Christians, relates only to civil, not at all to re- 
 .ligious matters : for this obvious reason ; that 
 the magistrate at that time was every where 
 Pagan. The apostles therefore instead of pay- 
 ing, or exhorting Christians to pay any sub- 
 jection to him in religious affairs, strenuously 
 exhorted them to renounce and disavow it to 
 come out from among them and lie separate,. They 
 were every where, you know, sir, dissenters 
 from the established church. 
 
 Christianity is so far from enjoining, that it 
 actually forbids, obedience to civil governors in 
 things of a religious nature. It commands us to
 
 tall no man upon earth father or master,* i. f. to 
 acknowledge no aiiiiiority or jurisdiction of any 
 in matters of religion, but to remember- that 
 ONE, one only is our Master aud law-givei', even 
 Christ ; and all Christians are brethren ; ?. e. 
 stand upon an equal footing, having no domi- 
 nion over one another. Though the princes of 
 the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they 
 who are great exercise authority upon them, yet it 
 shall not, our Lord says, be so amongst you.\ 
 Nay, your church replies, in this its XXth ar- 
 ticle, but it shall be so amongst us. There are 
 some who have authority oi'er others in matters of 
 fnith. There are other masters besides Christ. 
 Thus the article and the scripture manifestly 
 clash : will you be so good, sir, as to adjust the 
 controversy between them, and tell me which I 
 am to follow. 
 
 The church is Christ's kingdom, a kingdom 
 not of this zcorld : for his voluntary humiliation 
 and suffering of death, he is advanced to the 
 high honour of being sole law-giver, judge and 
 sovereign in religious matters. He only hath 
 authority to fix the terms of communion for his 
 followers or church ; and whoever shall presume 
 to alter or new-make, .the terms of communion 
 which he himself has fixed, is guilty of the 
 greatest arrogance, as he thereby invades his 
 authority and throne. But this, we apprehend, 
 is what you have done. You will not now re- 
 ceive a person to public baptism or the Lord's- 
 supper upon the terms on which Christ and his 
 apostles would have received him. Neither 
 Christ nor his apostles ever made the sign of the 
 cross, or other sponsors- besides the parents, ne- 
 cessary to a child's baptism ; nor did they ever 
 make kneeling a necessary term of receiving the 
 sacramental supper ; but both these YOU make 
 
 * Matt, xsiii. 8, 9. f Matt. xx. 25.
 
 necessary.* Thus you have taken upon you to 
 new-model the church of Christ, to change and 
 set aside his law?, and to make others in their 
 room. 
 
 Now give me leave to ask you, sir, by what 
 authority do you presume to reject those from 
 your church, whom in your conscience you be- 
 lieve Christ and his apostles would have receiv- 
 ed into theirs ? Are you w iser than they ? Or is 
 your church better framed, and more perfect 
 than theirs ? If an honest and sincere Christian 
 now brings his child to you to be publicly bap- 
 tized, desiring it may be done without the sign 
 of the cross, and that himself may stand forth as 
 surety for its education ; would you not refuse 
 him ? Or tf he desired to be admitted to the 
 commiinion of Christians, in the other sacrament 
 of the Lord's-supper, but that he might not take 
 it kneeling: would you not reject him ? But if 
 the same person had come to Jesus Christ or the 
 apostles, offering himself and his child upon the 
 same terms, would they not have received him ? 
 But how is it, sir, that you take upon you to re- 
 ject from Christ's family and church, those whom 
 you believe he himself would have received ? is 
 not this lording it over God's heritage, and usurp- 
 ing Christ's throne ? Is it not setting yourselves 
 Up for law-makers and rulers in his kingdom ; 
 claiming homage from his subjects ? and are not 
 his faithful subjects, by the allegiance they owe 
 Lim, obliged to enter their protest against such 
 usurpation, and to stand fast in the liberty vhcrc- 
 Kilh Christ hath made them free ? 
 
 Where then, let me appeal to your own sober 
 judgment, does the guilt of schism lie? upon 
 you or upon us ? Upon us, who offer ourselves to 
 
 The XXVIIth canon requires, the minister never wittingly 
 to administer the communion to any, but to such as kneel. The 
 XXIXth canon requires, that no parent shall be urged to be pre- 
 sent at his child's baptism ; nor be aclnulltd to aaswer as god- 
 fatker for bis own child.
 
 communion in your church upon the terms which 
 Christ appointed, and are ready to do every 
 tiling which Christ has commanded : or upon 
 you who absolutely reject us, unless, besides 
 What Christ hath ordered, we will submit also 
 to some orders and devices pf your own ? We 
 come, as the Lord's servants, and desire to eat 
 at the Lord's table, with reverent submission to 
 Mil his appointments. Nay but, say you, you 
 shall not come to the Lord's table, unless you 
 will kneel ; i. e. unless you will come in that 
 posture, -which though Christ in his wisdom did 
 not think proper, yet which we in our wisdom 
 have thought proper to ordain. (In other words,) 
 unless besides being Christ's servants, you will 
 also be ours ; and pay subjection to our institu- 
 tion and authority in this religious rite. 
 
 Thi, sir, is the true state of the controversy 
 between us ; judge now, I pray you, with the 
 im partiality of a Christian, who makes the schism, 
 and who has reason to fear being brought into 
 judgment) by the great law-giver of the church, 
 for the unhappy breach which subsists ? Let a 
 great prelate who at present adorns one of the 
 highest stations of your church, be heard asjudge 
 between us. " In all other societies, the ex- 
 press will of the founder, and the terms of fel- 
 lowship and communion which he has laid down, 
 are accounted sacred. In all other kingdom* 
 the will of the supreme power is a law. No one 
 pretends, or d;ires pretend, to make laws of 
 equal force with hi^. How hard then is the fate 
 of the Christian church, or of the kingdom of 
 Christ, when his will is declared insuflicieut, and 
 the invented words and decisions of his subjects 
 are made co-ordinate with his own equally ex- 
 clusive of others of his subjects from the com- 
 munion of their fellow-subjects! And how hard 
 i* the fate of those believers in him, who desire 
 conmunion upon thrtenns God has pr( scribed^ to 
 U excluded by the words oi' men ; by the inven- 
 c
 
 26 
 
 tion?of men, imposed upon them for his precept* ! 
 And, how unhappy is the church, to be reduced 
 by any such methods within more narrow bounds 
 than our Lord himself has confined it."* 
 
 But you are in readiness to retort, and with 
 great assurance tell me, " that the avoidance of 
 kneeling insisted upon by our ministers, is not 
 less an imposition than your enjoining it. That 
 we do really impose the observance of one par- 
 ticular gesture upon our communicants. That 
 fining is the regular, unvaried practice of our 
 churches: observed as constantly and universal- 
 ly amongst us, as kneeling is amongst you 
 liever allowed to be departed from ; which our 
 Tninisters require, insist, upon, and refuse to 
 abate." And you ask me " if one should pre- 
 sent himself to take 4he sacrament standing, or 
 offer to take it on his knees, whether I don't 
 think he would undergo some severe expostula- 
 tions, and be plainly told, we had no such cus- 
 tom, nor the churches of God, and it would not 
 b? given him at yll."t 
 
 I believe the world w ill be surprised, sir, and 
 that an ingenuous blush will cover your own face, 
 when you find that this account of us is absolute- 
 ly without truth, and quite contrary to fact, I 
 have spent my whole life amongst the Disen- 
 ters, and am acquainted with a great number of 
 their churches and ministers ; but never once, 
 till now, heard that silting at the Lord's table 
 was ever insisted on as a term of communion 
 with them,, or that it is their unvaried and uni- 
 versal practice. The contrary to this I know to 
 be the truth. In the church to which I myself 
 belong, there is a person who for many years has 
 constantly received the elements kneeling, with- 
 out the least offence to the congregation, or any 
 expostulation from the minister, on that account. 
 
 * Bishop of Winchester's Postscript to his Answer to pr. 
 Hare's sermon, page 254. 
 
 f Letter II. page 56, 57, 58. Letter IIL page 8, 9.
 
 27 
 
 In some of our churches-, 1 r.in well informed, there 
 are some wno receive standing, some kneeling : 
 in this, every one amongst us is left entirely at* 
 his liberty. Though the posture -of sitting be 
 generally thought by us most suitable to . the 
 commemorative supper of our Lord ; instituted 
 instead of the paschal-supper of the Jews: and 
 most agreeable to the practice of Christ and his 
 apostles, who, without any doubt, sat around 
 the table ; yet in this we ar.e ail left to follow 
 freely our own persuasion. Nor is there, I be- 
 lieve, amongst our ministers, one in five hundred,, 
 who would refuse to administer the sacrament 
 either standing or kneeling to any one who 
 thought either of these the fittest posture of re- 
 ceiving it. Our liberty as to this matter you 
 might have seen in Baxter's Reformed Liturgy ; 
 where it is expressly said " And let none of the 
 people be forced to sit, stand or kneel in the act 
 of receiving, whose judgment is against it." And 
 in Dr. Calamy's Brief Account, &c. which you 
 
 appear to have read " The communicant* 
 
 amongst Protestant Dissenters, are at liberty to 
 use their own posture in the time of receiving ; 
 though a table gesture is most commonly used.''* 
 
 Thus, sir, I have at large considered your 
 charge of schism upon the Dissenters; and hope 
 that by this time you begin to think more fa- 
 vourably of us; and to justify onr principles a* 
 truly Catholic and generous, and to admit that 
 they are the only foundation on which the peace 
 of the church can be solidly fixed ; and that tha 
 guilt of the separation lies wholly on your church, 
 which insists upon unchristian a:;d unscriptural 
 terms ofcomimimcsrtfng with it. 
 
 But 1 hope to complete your conviction, sir, 
 and to wipe off every speck of the taint of schism 
 from Dissenters, by calling to your remembrance 
 your own excellent definition of the Catholic or 
 
 Letter to a divine in Germany, pnga 1 1 .
 
 Christian church , and reasoning with you on it, 
 " The Catholic church, you say,+ is one out- 
 ward and visible society divinely instituted ; the 
 most admirable and glorious society under het> 
 ven." Pursue, sir;, the consequences of your 
 own definition, and it will soon end the debate. 
 If it be a society divinely instituted, then what- 
 ever society is not of divine, but\>f merely hu- 
 man institution, is not the church of Christ. If 
 it be a society divinely instituted, then the terms 
 of admission into this society, and the qualifi- 
 cations of its member* are divinely fixed, i. e. 
 fixed by the will and authority of God : what- 
 ever visible society then hath its terms of admis- 
 sion and the qualifications of its members not 
 divinely fixed, fixed only by the will and autho- 
 rity of men, cannot be the truly Catholic and 
 Christian church. 
 
 Now here I shall intreat you, sir, with the 
 impartiality of a Christian, who has nothing but 
 truth and the will of God in view, to pause a 
 moment, and compare the constitution of the 
 church of England, and the constitution of 
 the church of Christ, and see if they be not 
 societies of a quite different frame ; the one a>hu- 
 man, the other a divine institution ; the one rest- 
 ing entirely on the authority and will of men, 
 the other upon the will and authority of God. 
 
 If you inquire after the constitution and frame 
 of the church of Christ, where must you look for 
 it ? Only in the Bible, t But if you inquire after 
 the constitution and frame of the church of Eng- 
 land, where must you look for that ? In the sta- 
 tute-book, in the canons, and common prayer- 
 book, and in the codes of the English law. 
 
 The church of Christ is a religious establish- 
 ment, founded upon the Scriptures, as the only 
 authentic rule of its doctrines and worship ; the 
 church of England is a civil establishment, found- 
 
 Letter I. page 73. 
 f The Bible only is the religion of Protestants,
 
 29 
 
 ed upon acts of parliament, as the only _ authentic 
 rule of \fhat is to be believed and practised there- 
 in. The one a spiritual structure, built upon 
 the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesnsi 
 Christ himself being the chief corner-stone : the 
 other a political structure, built upon the foun- 
 dation of thejords and commons of the realm, 
 the king, as supreme head, being the chief cor- 
 ner-stone. 
 
 Into the church of Christ any person may be 
 admitted, who submits to the terms appointed 
 by Christ : But, into the church of England, h 
 cannot be admitted, except, over and above these, 
 he subn its also to terms which human authority 
 Lath instituted and devised. 
 
 In Christ's church, the Lord's supper is ap- 
 pointed and used only for spiritual and religious 
 em's ; but, in the church of England, it is no- 
 toriously used for political and worldly purpo- 
 ses. In the former, it was appointed with the in- 
 tention, and as a mean of uniting all Christians ; 
 and of destroying all variance and distinctions 
 between them. In the latter, it is appointed with 
 the intention, and as a mean, of discriminating 
 and dividing Christians ; and of making a dis- 
 tinction between one another. 
 
 In the Christian church, no openly debauched 
 or scandalously wicked person lias a right to 
 come to the table of the Lord, or to partake of 
 its provisions; but in the chinch of England, if 
 such a person had a commission from the kin.< 
 in the army or the fleet, or any profitable po>t, 
 this gives him a right to come f> the commu- 
 nion-table, :.i right to demand the holy elements 
 at the priest's hands, as a qualification for hi* 
 post. 
 
 In the scriptural church of Christ, there are 
 no such officers ever heard of as archbishops, 
 dean<> archdeacons, prebendaries, canons, chan- 
 cellors. &c. But there is another church, yo;t 
 know, sir, where the^e are office-is of great 'ki- 
 
 c 3
 
 30 
 
 fluence, of high importance and rank. But 
 whence came this pompous train ! From the 
 apostolic fountain at Jerusalem, or from the 
 corrupted source at Rome ? 
 
 The church of Christ never excommunicates, 
 nor pretends to exercise its discipline upon any 
 but its own members; For what have 1 to do, the 
 apostle says, to judge them that are without;* 
 JBut the church of England extends its ecclesias- 
 tical authority over those who never belonged to 
 it; and by a very extraordinary act of power, 
 excommunicates such as never were of its com- 
 munion ; that is, it casts those out, who never 
 were in it. In common life, such a thing would 
 be reckoned marvellous indeed. But miracles 
 of this kind, sir, your church, you know, some- 
 times works- 
 
 Again ; the rod with which the church of 
 Christ chastises its delinquents is spiritual, not 
 carnal ; but the rod of the church of England is 
 carnal, not spiritual. By the constitution of 
 the former, the excommunicated member is only 
 to be deprived of 'spiritual privileges, such as 
 fellowship in prayer, singing, sacraments, &c. 
 As for his civil property and rights, it meddles 
 not with these ; for Chrisfs kingdom is not of this 
 world ; but by the constitution of the latter, the 
 excommunicated member is delivered over to th^ 
 civil arm, to humble and chastise him ; he is dis- 
 abled from asserting his natural rights, from be- 
 ing a witness, from bringing actions at law, anil 
 if he do not submit in forty days, a writ shall 
 sue forth to imprison him. 
 
 In the church of Jesus Christ, those who are 
 entrusted with ecclesiastical discipline are so- 
 lemnly charged before God and .the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and the elect angels, to be no respecters of 
 persons, to do nothing bi/ partiality, and not to 
 prefer one before another ;t Neither the gold ring 
 
 l COT. v. 12. f l Tim - v - 21 -
 
 Si 
 
 nor Ike gntj clothing.,* nor pecuniary gifts, are to 
 have any influence upon their ecclesiastical pro- 
 ceedings ; but the poor are to receive the same 
 measure with the rich. But is it thus, sir, in 
 the church of England ? May not a grievous sin- 
 ner, according to her constitution, be suffered to 
 commute ? to have pardon for money, and to 
 skreen himself by a round fee from the stroke of 
 the church's rod? Yea, when he is going to be 
 delivered, or actually is delivered, into the hands 
 of the devil, and Satan has him in his keeping, 
 will not a handsome sum presently pluck him 
 thence, and restore him to the church's soft and 
 indulgent bosom again? You remember, sir, 
 the heathen satirist, 
 
 At vos 
 
 I facit ai. 
 
 PERSIUS, Sat. II. 
 
 jit i>os 
 
 Dicite, potilifices, in sacris quid facit auriim 
 
 T*I 
 
 And you know what was said, upon a like occa- 
 sion, by a much greater than he Thy money 
 perish zsith thee ; because thou hast thought thai 
 the gift of God may be purchased with money? 
 thou hast neither part nor lor in this matter.^ 
 
 Some of the most sacred acts of spiritual ju- 
 risdiction, its solemn censures and excommuni- 
 cations, are exercised in the church of England, 
 by unconsecrated and mere laymen. These hold 
 the keys, open or shut, cast out or admit into it, 
 according to their sole pleasure. The chancel- 
 lors, officials, surrogates who administer the 
 jurisdiction of spiritual courts, and determine 
 the' most important spiritual matters, such as a'c- 
 -lirering men to the devil, <$r. frequently are, and 
 by express provision of law, always may be, lay- 
 men. And truly, sir, I greatly pity yon gen- 
 tlemen of the clergy, that some of the most tre- 
 mendous and solemn parts of your sacred office, 
 such as excommunications, absolutions, &c. you 
 are forced to perform, not according to, but 
 sometimes, perhaps, directly against your own 
 
 James ii. 2, 3. f Acts viii. 20, 21
 
 judgments, as you are authoritatively directed 
 and commanded by these lay-persons. Forced, 
 1 say, to do it, notwithstanding what you urge 
 about your own concurrence ; for if you refuse 
 to concur, you are immediately liable to suspen- 
 sion ab ojficio Sf benejicio; and if you continue 
 obstinate, to be excommunicated yourselves.* 
 
 The church of Jesus Christ never owed its 
 support to the powers, preferments and riches of 
 this world; it was of God, and therefore wanted 
 no such aids ; it was its glory, that it made its 
 way , and was established upon earth, not only 
 without, but in direct opposition to them : it com- 
 mands its ministers not to strive, but to be gentle 
 to all men; in meekness, instructing those who 
 gainsay (2 Tim. ii. 24, 25.) But the church of 
 England, conscious of its weakness, props itself 
 on every side with civil dignities and emoluments ; 
 calls in the powers and riches of this world to its 
 support ana defence; deeply intrenches itself 
 under penal law r s; and thus fortified, thunders 
 out its excommunications, and threats of fines 
 and imprisonments, upon all those who shall 
 dare to write or speak any thing derogatory to 
 its ceremonies and forms of warship, or its arti- 
 cles of faith. t 
 
 There is one thing, says bishop Burnet, yet wanting to 
 complete the reformation 1 of the church ; which is, to restore pri- 
 mitive discipline against scandalous persons, the establishing tb 
 government of the church in ecclesiastical hands, and taking it 
 out of lay hands, which have so long profaned it; and have ex- 
 posed the authority of the church and the censures of it, chiefly 
 excommunication, to the contempt of the nation : so that the 
 dreadfullest of all censures, is now become the most scorned and 
 despised Hint. Reform. Abridg. jiage 367. 
 
 f The IV, V, and Vlth canons solemnly denounce " That who- 
 soever shall affirm that the form of God's worship contained in 
 the common-prayer, hath any thing in it repugnant to the word 
 of God or that any of the XXXIX articles are in any part er- 
 roneous, or such as may not with a good conscience be sub- 
 scribed, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not be re- 
 stored until he repent and publicly revoke his wicked errors." 
 And by the act of uniformity, it is enacted " That if any out
 
 S3 
 
 There is one difficulty more, sir, which I 
 could never possibly get over ; it seems to hang 
 as a dead and insuperable weight upon the frame 
 of your church ; it' you are dexterous enough to 
 remove it, you will merit Lambeth for a reward. 
 The church of England and the church of 
 Christ seem to be t\vo societies, absolutely dis- 
 tinct, and of a quite different constitution, as 
 they have two different heads, or fountains of 
 power, whence ail authority, jurisdiction, and 
 ministrations in the t\vo churches severally spring-. 
 In the church of Jesus Christ, he himself is su- 
 preme head, the only law-giver and sovereign : 
 fo us there is but one Lord.* One is your master, 
 <~cen Christ. t Gate him to be head oncer all things 
 to the ehurch.% All power is given to me in heaven 
 and in earth, go ye therefore and teach all nations.!) 
 Christ is the only fountain of influence, jurisdic- 
 tion, and power in his church, by commission 
 from whom alone all its officers act. 
 
 But in the church of England, you well know, 
 sir, the king or queen is supreme head, " vested 
 with all power to exercise all manner of ecclesi- 
 astical jurisdiction; and archbishops, bishops, 
 archdeacons, and other ecclesiastical persons, 
 have no manner of jurisdiction ecclesiastical, but 
 by and under the king's majesty, who hath full 
 power and authority to hear and determine all 
 niiiiiner of causes ecclesiastical, and to reform 
 and correct all vice, sin, errors, heresies, enormi- 
 ties, abuses whatsoever, which by any manner 
 of spiritual authority or jurisdiction ought, or 
 
 may be lawfully reformed. "|| 
 
 At the first establishment of this church, under 
 
 s 
 
 hall declare, or speak any thing in the derogation or depraving 
 of the book of common prayer, lie shall, for the first oflence, suf- 
 for imprisonment one whole year, without bail or mainprize ; and 
 .for the second oflence shall he imprisoned during his life." 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 6. f Matt - '" 8 - I Ephes. ' ~ 2 ' 
 
 Matt xxviii. 18, 19. || ^6 Hen. VIII Cap. i. 37. 
 
 Hen. VIII. Cap, xvii. 1 Eliz. Cap. i.
 
 Hen. VIII, and Edw. VI, all the bishop* took 
 out commissions from the crown, for exercising 
 their spiritual jurisdiction in these kingdoms, 
 during the king's pleasure only ; " and in their 
 commissions acknowledge all sort of jurisdiction, 
 as well ecclesiastical as civil, to have flowed ori- 
 ginal !y from the regal power, as from a supreme 
 head, and a fountain and spring- of all magis- 
 tracy within his own kingdom.' * 
 
 Yea, even the power of ordination itself, 
 which is reckoned the peculiar province of the 
 episcopal office, the first reformers and fount' TS 
 of this church derived from the king, a:nd exor- 
 cised only as by authority from him, and during 
 his pleasure. " Thus Cramner, archbishop of 
 Canterbury, Bonner, bishop of London, &j. 
 took out commissions from the crown, importing, 
 that because the vicegerent (Cromwell, a lay- 
 person) could not personally attend the charge 
 in all parts of the kingdom, the king authorizes 
 the bishop in his (the king's or perhaps the vice- 
 gerent's) stead, to ordain, within his diocess, 
 such as he judged worthy of holy orders : to col- 
 late-to benefices ; to give institution ; and to ex- 
 ecute all other parts of the episcopal authority ; 
 and this during the king's pleasure only."t 
 
 In consequence of this supremacy, the king 
 or queen of this church hath power to excom- 
 municate from, or to re-admit into it, indepen- 
 dent of, yea, in direct opposition to, ail its bi- 
 shops and clergy. The king or queen can re- 
 voke, at pleasure, any spiritual censures of the 
 bishops or archbishops; yea, can of themselves 
 ftispend, deprive, or even excommunicate; or 
 can, by their proclamation only, without the 
 least confession, humiliation, or satisfaction for 
 their offence, pardon and restore excoimnuni- 
 
 Burnet'i Hist. Reform, part II. Col. p. 91. 
 
 f Vul. Exaiuiuatiou of the Codex Juris, &e. page 32, 33.
 
 35 ^ 
 
 ated persons, to the bosom of the church again.* 
 Yea further ; they have power to forbid all 
 preaching for a time; as did K. Hen. VIII. K. 
 Edw, VI. Q. Mary, Q. Eliz. to limit, in- 
 struct, and prescribe to the clergy what they 
 shall, and what they shall not preach ; as did Q. 
 Eliz. K. James I, 'K, Charles I. K, William, 
 &c. Finally, to the king or queen osily does it 
 pertain to declare what is heresy, and au- 
 thoritatively to pronounce what doctrines and 
 tenets are, and what are not, to be censured as 
 smch : nor have all the bishops and clergy, as- 
 sembled in convocation, the least authority to 
 censure any tenet as heretical, if the prince on 
 the throne refuse his consent. 
 
 Now here, sir, I am pressed with an insupe- 
 rable difficulty how to reconcile this constitution 
 of the church of England with the constitution 
 of the church of Christ. Are they not most in- 
 disputably two different societies, subject to two 
 different, sometimes opposite, authorities, ani- 
 mated and governed by two different heads ? In 
 Christ's church, himself is the only sovereign 
 and head ; he only hath power to decree cere- 
 monies and rites, to fix terms of communion and 
 authority in^oints of faith : nor hath any earthly 
 prince power to make lws in his kingdom, which 
 shall liuJ the consciences of his subjects ; or so- 
 vereignly to dictate to his servants and ministers 
 what they shall believe, and what they shall 
 pre^fh. V'a, his subjects are expressly com- 
 map-lfvl and charged to receive nothing as doc- 
 trin-- 4 or parts of religion, which are only com- 
 niftni'mrnts of men. \ But in the church of Eng- 
 land there is another sovereign, law-giver, su- 
 preme head besides Jesus Christ ; an. authority 
 
 * A person wis deprived for adulterj ; afterwards a general 
 pardon came, which pardoned the adultery. It was adjudged 
 tltat the parson was ipso Judo, restored to his benefice. Coke . 
 Hq>. IS. 
 
 f Matt xr. 9.
 
 36 
 
 tvliich commands things Christ never command- 
 ed, which teaches doctrines Christ never taught, 
 which enjoins terms of communion, and rites of 
 religious worship, he never enjoined. Now 
 what can 1 judge, sir! What do you yourself 
 judge! but that the two churches are two dis- 
 tinct and quite different societies, (for in one 
 and the same society, surely there cannot be two 
 supreme heads), that they are framed after dif- 
 ferent models, consist of different members, are 
 governed by different officers, statutes, and laws. 
 Consequently, my separation or dissent from the 
 one, doe?, by no means infer my separation from 
 the other. Yea, 'what am I to judge but that 
 by the allegiance I owe to Christ, my only su- 
 preme head and king in spiritual matters, I am 
 obliged to enter my protest against the preten- 
 sions and claims of my other supreme head. For, 
 can a man serve ti&o masters? Can he be subject 
 at the same time to two supreme heads ? Can he 
 be faithful to Christ, the only king'of the church, 
 and yet acknowledge another king, as a fountain 
 of all magistracy and power therein ? Surely he 
 caunot. 
 
 Permit me, sir, to exercise your patience a 
 moment or two more upon this remarkable con- 
 trast, and 1 will dismiss the unpleasant subject. 
 
 By the constitution of the church of Christ, it 
 is expressly ordered and declared that the <ro- 
 nan shall not be suffered put-lief// lo teach nor to 
 usurp authority over Ihe man* But by the con- 
 stitution of the church of England, the woman i. 
 permitted pulliely to teach, yea, to limit and con- 
 trol in spiritual and religious matters, and au- 
 thoritatively to instruct the bishops, and clergy, 
 and all men in the land. Thus did queen Eli- 
 zabeth, thus did queen Anue, and thus hath 
 every queen authority to do that sits upon our 
 throne ; authority to prescribe and dictate to nil, 
 
 * 1 Tim ii. 13.
 
 
 both ministers and people, what the one are to 
 preach and the other to receive. And was it not, 
 ir r a very comely and edifying' sight, to behold 
 the two houses of convocation waiting; upon queen. 
 Anne,* in the case of Whiston's books upon the 
 Trinity, to be instructed by her majesty whether 
 they were to be condemned as heretical, or not ? 
 That venerable and learned body had solemnly 
 decreed them to be dangerous and heretical ; 
 but this their censure was of no force, till they 
 had laid it before the queen, to have her judg- 
 ment upon the point. Upon her Majesty's de- 
 termination it entirely depended, whether Whis- 
 ton's tenets were to be rejected by the church of 
 England as erroneous, or not. Her majesty, in. 
 this case, was of a different opinion from her two 
 houses of convocation ; she thought not fit to 
 censure the books : so her single opinion, (strange 
 to relate!) her single opinion carried it against 
 that of her bishops and clergy. She over-rules 
 and sets aside all their proceedings, restrains 
 and counteracts them in one of the very chief of 
 their pastoral functions, the guarding against er- 
 rors and heresies in the church. 
 
 Behold here, sir, a woman exercising spiri- 
 tual ecclesiastical authority over the man ! Yea, 
 behold the representative of the clergy of the 
 v, hole land, a most learned, grave and venera- 
 ble body, waiting upon a woman to learn from 
 her mouth, what the church is to believe, and 
 what to reject, as to this great mystery of faith : 
 upon a woman, by whose sole determination, 
 (I repeat it with astonishment, and you hear it, 
 no doubt, with perplexity and grief) your church 
 was uncontro-ably and authoritatively directed 
 in this deep and mysterious point. 
 
 I ask you, sir, in the name of God, is this the 
 constitution and frame of the church of Christ ? 
 Is it not a constitution of a quite different na- 
 
 * Anno 1711. 
 u
 
 38 
 
 ture; a society not divinely, but humanly in- 
 stituted; and therefore, by your own definition, 
 
 not the church of Christ? And may not, think 
 you, a person separate peaceably from it, with- 
 out the least danger of thereby separating 
 himself from the only scriptural, apostolic, and 
 catholic church. 
 
 When you stripped the pope of his supremacy, 
 and gave it to our princes, you should have ta- 
 ken care not to have left his infallibility behind. 
 An infallible head and director of the church, 
 be it woman or man, be ii a he or a she-bishop, 
 is a thing- j 1 msible enough, and carries a good 
 face ; but to lodge the absolute direction of the 
 conscience, the faith and the discipline of the 
 church with a faiiibje head ! to give a prince, 
 yea a lady, bred up in all the so fin esses and di- 
 versions of a court, an uncontrolatile dominion 
 over the religious conduct both of clergy and 
 laity," authoritatively to direct what those are to 
 preach, and what these to believe as to the doctrine 
 of Christ ! to make her the sole ju -ge in all con- 
 troversies which shall arise upon any the n-r-st 
 mysterious and inexplicable points ; so that all 
 the priests are to ask knowledge at ktr ///?/ ar.d 
 \vhatevershe determines is to be received by the 
 church as Christian verity and truth ! This is 
 such a constitution as quite shocks the under- 
 standing, and comes not a whit behind transu in- 
 stantiation itself. Hence, doubtless, sir, the 
 triumphs of popish priests over you ! Hence 
 their inroads upon you, and the thousands they 
 are continually carrying captive from your 
 lents ! And hence the sad increase, and the ii>- 
 suits of deists, who, tit king the scheme of' tie 
 church of England to be that of the Christian 
 church, are authorized by common sense, they 
 think, not only to reject ii, but to treat it wit U 
 contempt. 
 
 And now, sir, having so largely discussed tUis 
 point, I presume you are convinced, u that this
 
 39 
 
 peaceable reparation of ours is not, what 
 V'.JM c.\!l- it, a piece of arrant nonsense and con* 
 tiMcHction :" and that you will cease to be so dis- 
 pleaso I at our treating your grave lectures upon 
 (lie heinous sin of schism, as solemn cant and ec- 
 cii-siastical scare-crows. Yon see. likewise, 
 how extremely unapt, and quite wide of the 
 p ;iul, are the two instances you bring to illus- 
 trate our case, viz. " of a wife separating from 
 the bed and board of her husband or of two or 
 three counties disliking a monarchical govern- 
 ment, and throwing off their allegiance to the 
 kin*."* Has the church of England, sir, any 
 such power or authority over us Dissenters, as 
 the husband has over the wife ? Pray, who gave 
 it that authority ? Have we ever plighted it our 
 troth ? or bound ourselves by a solemn vow to 
 honour and obey it to the end of our lives ? Or 
 have we ever sworn allegiance to it ; or do we 
 owe it any homage ; as the counties have sworn 
 and do owe to the king ? 
 
 Amongst the peculiar excellencies of your 
 church, you reckon " the use of the three creeds 
 in public worship, as one of the most effectual 
 and powerful means both for teaching and pre- 
 serving the Christian faith entire and uncorrupt, 
 which we have n:>t in our churches. "t The 
 creed called the Apostle's, we have in constant 
 use amongst us: and as for the two others, espe- 
 cially the Athanasian, we are content you should 
 Isave the honour of its being peculiar to your- 
 selves. But methinks, sir, it should a little 
 check your triumph over us here, to remember, 
 that some of the wisest and most illustrious mem- 
 bers of yojir church, both cleijjy and laity, ac- 
 count the use of this creed your great sin and 
 reproach, and with archbishop Tillotson, wish 
 you were well rid of it. 
 
 What! are you, sir, amongst the weak and 
 
 * Let. I. page 72, . f Let. I. page 5.
 
 40 
 
 uncharitable minds who damn to the pit of lull 
 those who cannot receive all the dark and myste- 
 rious points set forth in that creed ! Do you in 
 your conscience think that there is no salvation 
 for those who do not fuiilt fully believe the several 
 articles it contains ; and that whosoever dcth net 
 keep whole and imdifihd the faith therein delivered, 
 he shall, without doubt, - perish everlastingly ? 
 What ! the many great and worthy persons, 
 bright ornaments of your own church, who in- 
 stead of keeping it whole and undefined, have 
 openly disavowed, preached and written against 
 it, dying in this disbelief have they without per" 
 adventure everlastingly perished ? Alas ! 'for the 
 pood doctors, Clarke, Whitby, Burnet, &c. 
 For the illustrious sir Isaac Newton, &c. &c. 
 Yea, alas ! for the whole Greek church, who, 
 for having rejected that clause, both in Jhe 
 Athanasian and Nicene creed, commonly called 
 Filioque, which asserts, that the Holy Ghost is 
 of the Father and the Son, neither made nor 
 created, nor begotten, but proceeding, are gone 
 down, it seems, to the infernal pit ! so that not- 
 withstanding their great knowledge and piety in 
 this world, yet, for not believing the Athanasian 
 creed, they are sunk into everlasting darkness 
 and damnation in the other ! Do you wonder 
 that deism prevails, if this be genuine Chris- 
 tianity ? 
 
 It is a fact, I presume, indisputable, that a 
 great part of the most learned and virtuous of 
 your clergy are departed from the Athanasian 
 doctrine ; and that those of them who are not, 
 do by no means think its belief absolutely and 
 indispensably necessary to salvation. What now 
 must a deist think, when he hears both the one 
 and the other thirteen times a year, most so- 
 lemnly declaring in the presence of Almighty 
 God, and as instructors of his people, that who- 
 ever will be saved, it is before all things neces- 
 sary that he hold the Athanasian faith ; and most
 
 41 
 
 prrrmptorilv denouncing everlasting damnation 
 upon those who do not believe it ; that is, many 
 of them denouncing damnation upon themselves! 
 Is this your Li powerful and effectual means of 
 preserving the Christian faith?" I should think 
 it one of the most eifectual to subvert and destroy 
 it. It has no doubt, been in fact a great stumb- 
 1 ing-block in the way of infidels and Jews, and 
 hardened them in their opposition to the reli- 
 gion of Christ, when they see it dooming to un- 
 doubted and everlasting perdition all who do 
 not heartily and sincerely (for that must be meant 
 by faithfully) b3ii?ve thess deep and mysterious 
 points, which you must acknowledge to be in,- 
 explicable, and far above the powers of reason 
 \'.> comprehend. 
 
 " But the dissenting ministers, you tell me, 
 who have complied wih the terms of the tole- 
 ration, have solemnly subscribed to the Vlllth 
 article which approves the Athanasian creed."* 
 Let Dr. Calamy answer. f *' The Dissenting; 
 ministers about the city, in a body, gave in their 
 eeuse of the articles when they subscribed them, 
 mid among the rest of this Vlllth article, in the 
 glass upon which, the damnatory clauses of this 
 creed are expressly excluded the subscription. 
 And there was something of the same nature 
 done in several parts of the country." Now 
 the fathers and predecessors of the present Dis- 
 senting ministers having made this public pro- 
 test and declaration at their subscription, and 
 the legislature having accepted, or at least not 
 rejected it ; under the favour of this protest, 
 their successors may be supposed now to sub- 
 scribe with the same disapprobation of the dam- 
 natory clause. If it were not to be thus taken, 
 there is, I hope, not a minister among us but 
 would publicly disown and renounce his sub- 
 scription. 
 
 * Appendix, page 78. f Life of ^ Ir Baxter, page 236. 
 
 D 2
 
 42 
 
 I should now proceed, sir, to the examination 
 of other parts of your letters, to shew the great 
 insufficiency of your arguments and objections ; 
 and to observe that, in many instances, you 
 have extremely mistaken and given quite wrong 
 representations of our religious principles and 
 practice. But I relieve your patience for the 
 present. If this province be undertaken by no 
 other hand, you may in some time, expect to 
 hear farther from, 
 
 Sir, 
 
 Your very humble servant, 
 A DISSENTER.
 
 TIIR 
 
 DISSENTING GENTLEMAN'S 
 SECOND LETTER, 8fc. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 JLT is with regret I proceed in vindication of my 
 dissent, as it will constrain me to say some 
 things, which may seem to be disrespectful to es- 
 tablished forms of worship. But self-defence is 
 a principle which generous minds allow strongly 
 to operate. I highly reverence and esteem, and 
 most heartily rejoice in the great number of illus- 
 trious and excellent persons, both clergy and lai- 
 ty, of which the church of England can boast. 
 But yet, as the present established forms were 
 drawn up when this kingdom just emerged out 
 of popish darkness ; and as in drawing them up, 
 especial regard was had to the then weakness of 
 the people, who could not be all at once entirely 
 brought off from the old ceremonies and forms : 
 as there are several parts of our liturgy, and ec- 
 clesiastical constitution, which a great number, 
 I apprehend, if not ell our bishops and clergy, 
 wish to see altered : and finally, as the altera- 
 tion of these, and the removing a few things, ac- 
 knowleged in themselves to be mutable and in- 
 different, would heal the unhappy breach, and 
 restore the chief part of the dissenters to the 
 church. Upon all these accounts, I may be al- 
 lowed, I hope, with freedom to make my defence 
 against your vigorous attacks : and to represent 
 my objections, and the grounds of my dissent, in 
 as strong a light as I am able. 
 
 The part of a public monitor, and of my in- 
 structor in this affair, which you have voluntarily 
 taken upon you, will allow me, as I go along, to
 
 put you in mind of one or two great objections 
 which Dissenters are wont to urge, but which jou 
 have quite overlooked, and to entreat you will 
 direct me how to get over them. 
 
 " We letter-writers, say you, have a privilege 
 of setting down our thoughts as they offer them- 
 selves, without scrupulously adhering to strict 
 and close method*." This privilege you have 
 indeed with great freedom taken, I shall there fore 
 be indulged in the same. 
 
 To begin then with your defence of sponsors 
 in baptism. When an infant is brought to be 
 entered by baptism into the family or church of 
 God, and a solemn vow and engagement are to 
 be made before the church for its religions edu- 
 cation, it is the opinion of the Dissenters that the 
 parents, whose child it is, and to whom both God 
 and nature have committed its education, are the 
 proper persons to stand forth, and take upon 
 them this great and important trust ; and to bind 
 themselves by a solemn vow faithfully to div- 
 charge it. Now, our objections to the order and 
 practice of your church are 
 
 1. That in a very arbitrary and strange man- 
 ner, without the least shadow of authority from 
 reason or scripture, or the ancient practice of 
 the church, you actually set aside the parents in 
 this solemnity ; and forbid them to stand forth, 
 and take upon them this great charge to which 
 God hath called them. For your XXIXth ca- 
 non expressly commands that no parent shall bejtr- 
 ged to be present at his chilli's baptism, nor be ad- 
 mitted to answer as godfather for his ozc'n child. 
 And, 
 
 2. That you require other persons to appear 
 in the parents' stead, and to take upon them this 
 important trast, and most solemnly to promise be- 
 fore God, and the church, the performance of 
 that, which few of them ever do, or ever intended 
 
 Let. III. p- GO.
 
 45 
 
 to perform ; or, perhaps, are ever capable of 
 performing. What now, sir, is your answer to 
 these objections of the Dissenters ? Why truly, 
 the first, which is indeed the chief, you very 
 prudently slip over ; and attempt not the least 
 apology for setting aside the parents ; so that you 
 leave us still to consider this, as a thing utterly 
 indefensible, unlawful, absurd, and which will 
 admit of no excuse. 
 
 But^as to the second, viz. the solemn vozc and 
 obligation under which the sureties lay themselves, 
 to this you largely speak, and tell me " it is a 
 gross mistake, to imagine, that the promises there 
 made by their sureties concerning the future 
 faith and practice of the child, are made in their 
 own name: as if they engaged thereby, that, 
 when it is grown up, it shall actually believe all 
 the articlesof the Christian faith, shall renounce 
 the devil and all his works, &c. Whereas the 
 church considers these answers, as the child's 
 answers, only made by its representatives : they 
 contain its part of the baptismal covenant or con- 
 tract ; which, because by reason of its tender age 
 it cannot itself utter, is uttered by its sureties*." 
 But if this, sir, be a gross mistake, the mostce- 
 lebrated of your own writers have led us into it. 
 " The sureties in baptism, says your lea. ned Dr. 
 Nicholst, religiously engage for the faith of the 
 baptized : that they shall sincerely believe all 
 that is revealed in the gospel, and shall direct 
 the subsequent actions of their lives by the laws 
 of Christ." A cloud of witnesses, 1 believe, can 
 be brought from the doctors of your church, 
 whose judgment is the same. But no wonder 
 the learned differ in so mysterious a point. You 
 go on and affirm, " that the sureties are, by the 
 church, considered in this affair, no otherwise 
 than as the mouth of the child. You see, sir, 
 here are no promises nor engagements which any 
 
 * Let. I. 31. f Nichols's Defence, &c Part II. 273.
 
 46 
 
 s the child are supposed to enter into, and 
 to be. bound by. Read over the office of public 
 baptism, and you will not find, I as-sure you* any 
 promises or stipulations at all made by the sureties 
 in their own name : I mean any that are expli- 
 cit*." But this account of the matter is to me 
 very dark and obscure, and seems rather to 
 strengthen than remove our objections. For, 
 
 FIRST, it represents the church as acting a ve- 
 ,ry extraordinary and unaccountable part; viz. 
 as receiving a child to baptism, on account of 
 its own faith, and its own promise, intered by its 
 sureties ; when at the same time, it knows, the 
 child neither does nor can, either promise or be- 
 lieve any more than the font at which it is bapti- 
 zed. It considers the child as actually covenant- 
 ing and contracting, yea, asthe oniy covenanting 
 and contracting party in this solemnity, when it 
 knows it to be absolutely incapable of either. 
 It represents the church as very solemnly asking 
 the child, "Jlostthou believe? Wilt thou be 
 baptized ? Dost thou forsake the devil ?" &c. 
 When it is fully persuaded of its utter inabi- 
 lity to believe, or resolve, or will any thing 
 about it. Now, when a deist stands by, and sees 
 a learned and grave divine thus asking, and 
 talking, and covenanting with a child, can you 
 wonder, sir, if he smiles, and merrily treats the 
 whole transaction as a je*t. 
 
 " The answers, you say, are considered by 
 the church as only toe answers of the child, and 
 contain its part of the baptismal covenant 
 which because, by reason of its tender age, 
 it cannot itself utter, is to be uttered by its 
 sureties:" that is to say, the child thinks, but 
 cannot speak : It really covenants, contracts, 
 promises ; but not being able, by reason of its 
 tender age, to utter its good intentions, these 
 
 * Let. I. page 31, 32.
 
 47 
 
 sureties are its mouth to utter them for it. But 
 why, 00 -1 sir, its month to speak for it ; and 
 not its understanding also to think for it; its 
 will to promise for it : and indeed its soul, a:ul 
 its very self, to covenant and contract for it ? 
 Is not the child, by reason of its tender age, as 
 absolutely incapable of covenanting, as it is of 
 uttering; of contracting, as i,t is of speaking? 
 If the surety therefore do.es one of these good of- 
 fices for it, he undoubtedly docs the other also. 
 But, 
 
 Secondly, If there be, as you say, no pro- 
 mises nor 'engagements which any besides the 
 child are supposed to enter into, or to be bound 
 by, the consequence is extremely plain, that 
 then there are no promises nor engagements en- 
 teivd into at all, for its religious education. 
 For the child surely, does not engage for its own 
 reii^ious education. If the sureties therefore 
 do not enter into any promise of this kind, it 
 evidently follows. I'.iat there are no express en- 
 gagements entered into by anyone, for the child's 
 education. And thus, behold, your boasted 
 double security, turns out at hist to be no secu- 
 rity at all! But, a surety not bound ! a spon- 
 sor promising nothing ! a security unengaged ! 
 This is language, which, in the mercantile, 
 whatever it may be in the scholastic line of life, 
 would be absolutely unintelligible. And 'to re- 
 tort your OVA n instance ; my lawyer I should think 
 a very wrong-headed man, who should pretend 
 to lend my money upon a double security, and 
 make a merit of so doing, when at the same time 
 he confessed, there were no promises, nor en- 
 gagements, by which either of the securities 
 were explicitly bound. 
 
 To be plain, sir; as for this Ir.i-'iprcs of a 
 child's believi x ng. promising, covenanting by re- 
 presentative or proxy, I cannot but think a gen- 
 tleman of your penetration, will easily perceive, 
 it to be a thing absolutely inexplicable, impost
 
 sible, and absurd ; a thing utterly repugnant to 
 reason and common sense, and without the least 
 shadow of foundation in the Christian religion. 
 For if by the constitution of the gospel covenant, 
 a child may believe, repent, vow, promise, and 
 contract by proxy, he may also, no doubt, be 
 saved or be damned by proxy. But, into what 
 a jest will this turn the religion of Christ ? 
 
 As for the antiquity of this practice, sponsors 
 in baptism, you have the good sense and ingenu- 
 ity not to pretend it was ever known, or so much 
 as thought of, in the primitive apostolic church. 
 Tertullian, who lived about Anno Dom. 200, is 
 the first, I apprehend, of all the Christian writers, 
 that makes any mention of them. Nor does it 
 at all follow from what he says, that these spon- 
 sors were any other than the parents of the child. 
 Justin Martyr, who wrote fitly years before him, 
 when he particularly describes the method and 
 form of Christian baptism in his days, says not 
 a single word of any such persons.* 
 
 But we learn from St. Austin, about the year 
 590 (one of the earliest Christian writers, in 
 which any mention of them is found) when, and 
 upon what occasion, these sponsors were admit- 
 ted. " A great many," says he, " are offered 
 to baptism, not by their parents, but by others ; 
 as infant-slaves are sometimes offered by their 
 masters. And sometimes when the parents are 
 dead, the infants are baptized, being offered by 
 any, who can atford to shew this compassion to 
 them. And sometimes infants whom their pa- 
 rents have cruelly exposed, to be brought up by 
 those who light on them, are now and then taken 
 up by the holy virgins, and offered to baptism 
 by them who have no children of their own, nor 
 
 design to have any." These are Austin'sf 
 
 own words. Observe now Dr. Wall's}: ingenuous 
 
 * Vide Lord King's Inquiry, part II. p. 67, 68. 
 f Epist. ad Bouifuc. f Hist. Inf. Bap. vol. I. p. 19<>.
 
 49 
 
 confession on them, (and the good doctor, you 
 know, was never partial in favour of Dissenters, 
 but a severe remarker on them :) " Here we see 
 the ordinary use then wa?, for parents to answer 
 for the children : but yet that it was not count- 
 ed so necessary, as that a child could not be bap- 
 tized without it." 
 
 Hence then it is plain, that parents never were 
 set aside, when they were capable and willing 
 to offer their children for baptism ; and that 
 sponsors were admitted only in cases of parents' 
 incapacity. And in all such cases, Dissenters 
 also use them. Why now, 1 beseech you, sir, 
 in defiance of this acknowledged usage and prac- 
 tice of the ancient church, as well as of common 
 sense, does your church severely decree, " that 
 no parent shall be urged to be present at his 
 child's baptism, nor be admitted to answer as 
 godfather for it?" What! would the parents 
 standing forth together with the sponsors, and 
 promising jointly with them, at all detract from 
 the solemnity, or render it less effectual, to se- 
 cure the child's religious education ? It is most 
 evident it would not, and that your practice in 
 this point is undoubtedly an innovation ; an un- 
 reasonable and arbitrary deviation from the 
 usage and institution of the primitive apostolic 
 church : an absurdity very generally acknow- 
 ledged, and complained of, by the members of 
 your .church, though not attempted to be re- 
 formed. 
 
 " But by this institution of godfathers and 
 godmothers, you say, your church affords its 
 members some great and special advantages to- 
 wards growing in grace and goodness, above 
 what are found amongst us:" and you tell me, 
 " you lay a great stress upon it, as a wise, a 
 us-eful, and necessary institution."* But did 
 you not consider, sir, that you were highly 
 reflecting upon the wisdom and goodness, not of 
 
 * Let. 1. p. 5 8, 59. 
 B
 
 do 
 
 the holy apostles only, but also of your great 
 law-giver, Jesus Christ ? How came it to pass, 
 that the great founders of the Christian church 
 never happened to think of these special advan- 
 tages for growth in goodness and holiness ? You 
 do not pretend it to be an institution of Jesus 
 Christ's, and ye,t are not afraid to call it a wise, a 
 useful, and even a necessary institution. Strange ! 
 that Christ, in whom were hid all the treasures of 
 wisdom, and who loved the church so as to lay 
 down his life for it, should not know this institu- 
 tion to be so especially advantageous and neces- 
 sary to the growing goodness of his church ; or 
 that knowing it to be so, he should unkindly omit 
 it ; and that we' are obliged to the superior wis- 
 dom and goodness of after ages, for supplying this 
 defect. It has usually been thought, that the 
 apostles declared the whole counsel of God ; and 
 kept back nothing from the church which was pro- 
 fitable to it ; and that the Scriptures are a perfect 
 ride; but this, it seems, is not true; you have 
 discovered it, sir, to be not true : for here you 
 shew us a wise, a useful, arid & necessary insti- 
 tution, which they really kept back : and which, 
 had it not been for the superior sagacity of their 
 successors, the church had been so unhappy as 
 never to have known. Into what mazes men 
 plunge themselves, when they deviate from the 
 truth ! 
 
 Of the same temerity you are guilty, when 
 treating of another institution of your church, 
 confirmation, and glorying over us in the want 
 of it. You observe, " Another administration of 
 our church is confirmation ; this, you know, you 
 have wholly discarded, arid surely you will be 
 obliged to acknowledge, you have lost thereby a 
 very great advantage, greatly conducive to future 
 holiness of life.''* Yes, sir, this we will freely 
 own, when you also will acknowledge, that you 
 are wiser than the apostles ; and can better judge 
 what is conducive to holiness and to the advantage
 
 51 
 
 of the church, than its great lawgiver, Jesus Christ. 
 Had this ceremony of confirmation been really 
 of great advantage, and conducive to holiness, it 
 is very strange that neither Christ, nor his apos- 
 tles, should have ordained it. That it is an 
 apostolic institution, you have not so much as 
 attempted to prove : unless Calvin's conjecture 
 must be admitted as proof. 
 
 The text usually urged for it, (Acts viii. 14.) I 
 presume you are fully sensible has no weight. 
 Peter's and John's going down to Samaria to 
 pray, and laying their hands cm those whom Phi- 
 lip had baptized, is surely, no precedent, no di- 
 rection, no institution nor command for our bi- 
 shops to do likewise. For the end for which the 
 apostles did it, it is expressly said (ver. 15, 17.) 
 was. that they might receive the Holy Ghost, i.e. 
 its miraculous gifts ; and they prayed for them, 
 and laid tluir hands on them, and they re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghost. That it was the mi- 
 raculous gifts, {such as prophesying, speak- 
 ing with tongues, &c.) to form them into a 
 church, cannot be disputed ; because, they were 
 something visible, and obvious to the sense, 
 something which struck the wonder and ambi- 
 tion of the wicked sorcerer ; for it is said, zchen 
 Sim on saw that thro' laying on of the apostles' hands 
 the Holy Ghost zcas given, he offered them money. 
 Besides, as Dr. Whitby justly observe?, if they 
 laid not their hands on all who were baptized, 
 it makes nothing for confirmation; if they did, 
 then Simon Magus also was confirmed, and re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghost : which you will by no 
 means admit. 
 
 It was then to give the newly baptized 
 converts at Samaria the miraculous gifts of 
 the Holy Spirit, that Peter and John went and 
 laid their hands on them. But do our bishops, 
 <-ir, pretend that, by their praving and laying on 
 of hands, the Holy Spirit is given ? Do they not 
 disclaim any powers of this kind ! Seeing then
 
 52 . 
 
 they make no pretensions to the end, why with 
 such solemnity do we see them practising the 
 means ? Might they not as well stretch them- 
 selves upon the dead body of a child, in imitation 
 of Elisha ; or, make ointment with spittle for the 
 cure of the blind, in>irnitation of our Saviour ; as 
 pray and lay their hands on those who were bap- 
 tized, in imitation of Peter and John, who did 
 this to the Samaritan converts only, that they 
 might receive the miraculous gifts and powers 
 of the Holy Spirit ? 
 
 " As for the open and solemn renewal of the 
 baptismal covenant before God and many wit- 
 nesses, which you say, baptized persons ought 
 to make, when they come to years of discretion :" 
 this they make with us, in the other sacrament 
 of the supper ; which Christ himself has appoin- 
 ted, and which is the only institution his wisdom 
 has thought fit to appoint, for this purpose, 
 
 But to speak freely, sir, this ceremony of con- 
 firmation, asitis at present appointed and practi- 
 sed in your church, is so far from being greatly 
 conducive to holiness of life, that there is great 
 reason to apprehend it may be productive of quite 
 different, and even dangerous consequences, by 
 cherishing in men's minds false and presumptuous 
 hopes, or by deluding them into wrong notions as 
 to the safety of their state, and the terms of ac- 
 ceptance and favour with God. 
 
 By the order of your common prayer, all per- 
 sons baptized^ when they come to competent year*, 
 and are able to sat/ the JLord^s prayer, creed,, and 
 ten commandments, and the answers of the short, 
 catechism, are to be brought to confirmation. The 
 bishop having asked, " Whether they renew the 
 solemn promise and vow which was made in their 
 names in baptism," &c. Upon their answering we 
 do, he proceeds hereupon to declare in the most 
 solemn manner, even in an address to God him- 
 self, that he has vouchsafed to regenerate these his 
 servants by water and the Holy Ghost ? (note :
 
 33 
 
 not by water only, but also by the Holy Ghost,) 
 and to give them the forgiveness of all their sins: 
 and laying his^hand upon the head of each par- 
 ticular person, he certifies him by that sign of 
 God's favour and gracious goodness towards him. 
 
 I pray you, sir, in the name of God, inform 
 me, what warrant has the bishop to pronounce a 
 man's sins all forgiven, and himself regenerated 
 by the Holy Ghost, upon no other grounds than 
 Ins being able to say the short catechism, and 
 declaring that he stands by his baptismal engage- 
 ments ? Will you say that this is the Christian 
 doctrine concerning the terms of acceptance and 
 forgiveness with God? Are good vows and re- 
 solutions, declared in the church, infallible or 
 proper proofs of a regeneration by the Holy 
 Ghost ? Is a man's professing that he repents, 
 and promising that he will live godly, that ac- 
 tual repentance and amendment of life which 
 alone can ensure the divine pardon and favour ? 
 Are there not multitudes who call Christ their 
 Lord, and publicly profess to stand by their bap- 
 tismal covenant, whom however he will reject 
 with abhorrence at last ? You will inform me 
 then, sir, how the bishops, upon this mere pro- 
 fession and promise, presume to declare to Al- 
 mighty God, and to assure the person, that he 
 is regenerated, forgiven, and unquestionably in 
 a state of favour with heaven ! 
 
 The expressions, you must acknowledge, are 
 couched in strong and absolute terms ; nor do I 
 find that there is any intimation, that their for- 
 giveness depends upon their care to keep, and to 
 live up to, their baptismal engagements. No : 
 but though their wnole life hath hitherto been 
 scandalously corrupt, yet upon their being able 
 to say the Lord's prayer, Sfc. the bishop solemnly 
 pronounces a most absolute pardon over them ; 
 appeals to Almighty God, that he hath forgiven 
 them all their sins ; and lest this should be too 
 little to satisfy the doubting sinner, and appease
 
 his upbraiding conscience, he lays his hand upon 
 his head, and certifies him by that sign of God's 
 favour and goodness towards him. 
 
 This bishop, sir, the multitudes, who come to 
 be confirmed, are taught to consider as an em- 
 bassador of Christ, a successor of the apostles, 
 and a special minister of God. When they hear 
 then, this sacred person, so solemnly declaring 
 that they are fully justified, pardoned, and re- 
 generated by the Holy Ghost, can you blame 
 them if they believe it ; and rest satisfied that 
 their souls are in a safe and happy state ? And 
 as full remission of sins, and the favour of God, 
 are to be had on such easy terms, can you won- 
 der, should you see thousands eagerly flocking 
 from all quarters to accept it ? Or that persons 
 of very vile and profligate characters, should 
 often thrust themselves in to partake of this be- 
 nefit ; and be seen receiving upon their knees, 
 episcopal absolution, and solemn assurances of 
 God's favour and grace ? 
 
 You know the aptness of mankind to deceive 
 themselves with false hopes ; and to substitute 
 good purposes, professions, and vows in the 
 place of real repentance and amendment of life : 
 you also know, sir, (and have no doubt often 
 declared it from your pulpit) that this is one of 
 the chief hindrances of men's becoming truly 
 good. Now, should your office for confirmation 
 be feund thus plainly and directly tending to 
 cherish these false hopes ; you must excuse me 
 if I believe, that so far from its conducing to 
 holiness of life, it greatly tends to promote that 
 self-deception which is so fatal to the souls of 
 men. 
 
 ^<et me farther ask you, sir, on this head 
 Is it any breach of charity, to suppose, that 
 amongst the vast crowds which present them- 
 selves on such .occasions, there are often many, 
 whom God, who knows their hearts, knows to be 
 persons of a corrupt and wicked mind, and to be
 
 55 
 
 still under the power and tyranny of sin ? Can 
 the good bishop himself, in any judgment of cha- 
 rity, suppose there are not some such amongst 
 the thousands he con firms .' Candidly tell me 
 then, sir, upon what grounds he absolutely, and 
 without reserve, declares to the eternal God, 
 concerning them all, that he hath fully forgiven 
 these his servants, when God at the same time 
 knows many of them not to be his servants, and 
 that he hath not at all forgiven them ? Upon 
 what grounds does he lay his hand on each indiv i- 
 dual person, to assure him of God's favour, and 
 of his regeneration by the Holy Ghost ; when, in 
 truth, some of those whom he thus assures, are 
 absolute and entire strangers to the renewing 
 influences of God's spirit, and fast bound in their 
 sins ? To me it appears, I do not say a very 
 shocking, but I must say, a very unaccountable 
 solemnity ; and I should be glad to know how to 
 reconcile it to the reverence you owe to God, 
 or to the faithfulness and charity due to the souls 
 of men. 
 
 Near akin to this, but of a still more obnox- 
 ious nature, is another office of your common 
 prayer, the absolution of the sick. To this you 
 know, Dissenters have always strongly object- 
 ed, as too much resembling the solemn tricks of 
 the church of Rome ; by which they pretend to 
 send men to heaven, without real amendment 
 and holiness of life. But this you very prudent- 
 ly pass over in perfect silence : for what indeed 
 could even so ingenious an advocate offer, on so 
 extremely absurd and indefensible a point ? 
 
 Being come to the sick person, (no matter 
 what or how wicked his former life hath been,) 
 the priest is directed, after some pious exhorta- 
 tions, to examine, whether he believe the arti- 
 cles of l/ie apostles' 1 creed,- and truly repent him 
 of his sins ; and be in charity icilh alt the world: 
 and to move him to make a special confession of his 
 sins, if he feel his conscience troubled i^'ilh ant/
 
 56 
 
 matter. After which confession, th 
 priest is ordered to absolve him (if he humbly 
 and heartily desire it,) after this sort : 
 
 Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to 
 his church to absolve all sinners who truly repent 
 and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee 
 thine offences : and bit/ the authority committed to 
 me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost. Amen. 
 
 The -form is extremely solemn, and the 
 matter of the last importance. You had need 
 therefore be sure you go upon good grounds, 
 lest you be found to trifle with the name of God, 
 even in things of everlasting moment, and to 
 acquit those whom he abhors. Permit me, sir, 
 in this great name, and before the world, to de- 
 mand of you, 
 
 J . What church is it, and where is the church 
 found, to which Christ has left this high autho- 
 rity and power ? Is it the church of England, 
 the church of Scotland, the church of France, 
 or the church of Rome ? Do you here mean by 
 the church, what your XlXth article hath de- 
 fined it, viz. the congregation of the faithful ? 
 Or, do you understand it as in your XXth arti- 
 cle, where it is said to have power to decree rites, 
 and authority in matters of faith ? If so, I have 
 shewn in my former letter, that the church is no 
 other than the king and parliament of these 
 realms. The king, indeed, has power to ab- 
 solve all manner of sinners, penitent or not pe- 
 nitent ; and by a single act of grace, to vacate 
 and set aside the censures and excommunications 
 of all the bishops, archbishops, and clergy of 
 the land, and to restore the offender to the 
 church's bosom again to absolve, not in foro 
 chili only, but in foro ecclesice ; not in the state 
 only, but also in the church. But whether the 
 kings or queens of England do this by authority 
 derived to them from Christ? Whether that
 
 church of vyhich they are declared the supreme 
 heads, be the church to which this high power 
 is {*iven ? and whether they, as heads of it, have 
 this power dwelling supremely, and principally 
 in them ; so as that, what they loose on earth, is 
 as certainly loosed in heaven, as any thing that is 
 loosed by any inferior members who officiate in 
 the church under them ? These are high points', 
 which without your assistance, I shall not pre- 
 sume fo settle. Be so good, sir, as to lot 113 
 know, what church upon earth it is, in which 
 Christ hath delegated this important authority ; 
 and where the charter or grant is found^ by 
 which he gave it the commission ? But, 
 
 2. That Christ has given, can give, no such 
 authority to fallible uninspired men, I should 
 think absolutely out of doubt. Because, if he 
 hath given power to any, authoritatively to ab- 
 solve those who are truly penitent, he must also 
 have given them power to know who are truly 
 penitent. Else it is a power to do nothing, for 
 till they know them to be truly penitent, (i. e. 
 till they can search their hearts) they cannot au- 
 thoritatively absolve them : but if they cannot 
 do it till then, they cannot do it at all. Besides, 
 
 3. If the priest has really this authority and 
 power from Christ, the manner in which he is 
 here ordered to apply it, is most certainly M'ror.g. 
 For upon the sinner's confessing his faults, and 
 professing his faith and sincere repentance, the 
 priest is ordered most solemnly and authori- 
 tatively to absolve him. But are any promises 
 or professions which a sinner makes in that dis- 
 tress, a proper ground for such an absolute au- 
 thoritative absolution ? Are not the most profli- 
 gate, when death is thought to approach, wont 
 to feel their consciences troubled with many 
 weighty matters, ready to confess their sins, to 
 express the deepest remorse, and to vow amend- 
 ment if spared ? But when the danger is past, 
 is there one of a thousand that remembers his
 
 58 
 
 vows, and that returns not to Ms sins with a* 
 keen an appetite as ever ? Do not you gentle- 
 men of the clergy, loudly complain of this, when 
 you press on your hearers the necessity of im- 
 mediate reformation, and warn them not to trust 
 to a death-bed repentance ? But notwithstand- 
 ing all this, when a person of a profligate cha- 
 racter sends for you, in the time of sickness, and 
 acknowledges his sins, and professes a repen- 
 tance, of which he gave no signs till he believed 
 himself to be arrested by deatn, if he desire ab- 
 solution, you are directed and required with all 
 possible solemnity, even in the name of the Fa- 
 ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, authoritatively to 
 absolve him from all his crimes, how many or 
 how great soever they have been, and to declare 
 him fully forgiven. Strange ! that you can pre- 
 sume in the name of the Almighty God, to as- 
 sure a man that he is absolved from all his sins, 
 when at the same time you know yourself not 
 sure that he is absolved ! Yea, when the only 
 grounds of your doing it, are only the same signs 
 of repentance which a thousand sinners have 
 piven, who are nevertheless held fast under the 
 power and guilt of sin ! What would you call 
 that man, who in any temporal or civii concern, 
 should call heaven to witness to the- certainty 
 of that, which he is not at all certain of? But 
 is it less reproachful, thus to trifle with thing* 
 sacred and eternal : or is it less dangerous to 
 practice the arts of collusion and deceit in that 
 presence which is infinitely more awful than 
 any tribunal upon earth ? 
 
 I cannot say, sir, in what light you view this 
 order of your church, nor what obedience you 
 pay it, but am humbly of opinion, that it is 
 straining the sacerdotal character, which has 
 sunk it into some contempt; and that if it con- 
 tinue thus strained, lower, much lower, it will 
 continue to sink. For when men see you claim- 
 ing from God, awful and high powers, which
 
 59 
 
 they are sure God has never given you ; and 
 hear you with great solemnity authoritatively 
 absolving a profligate sinner in his name, when 
 at the same time they know he never gave you 
 any authority so to do, how natural is it for 
 them to deride the, priestly character on which 
 these impious claims are founded, and to treat 
 your other offices with ridicule and disrespect ? 
 
 Having thus presented you with some of the 
 true grounds of our dissent, many of which you 
 have not at all, and the rest but slightly touched, 
 in your three long letters, I shall now make some 
 remarks on your attempts to reflect back our 
 own pleas and objections upon ourselves, and 
 to prove us self-condemned. 
 
 Here you complain " that you walk almost 
 without light that our churches are so secret 
 in all their ways, that there is scarce any know- 
 ing what they are that you must grope and feel 
 tor them as in the dark and that you are some- 
 thing like one fighting with a ghost.';* This 
 seems, indeed, a very just description of your 
 case, for you greatly misrepresent both our prin- 
 ciples and our practice. But the blame of this 
 darkness, sir, be wholly to yourself. Are not 
 our churches open ? Are not our prayers, our 
 sermons, our sacraments and ordinations per- 
 formed in view of the world, that whoever 
 pleases may come and see our manner of pro- 
 ceeding in them ? 
 
 But " we have no common rule of discipline 
 and worship, by which we hold ourselves obliged 
 to walk ; at least none made public and laid be- 
 fore the world, for your examination and dis- 
 cussion.'^ Yes sir, we have an e^fcellent com- 
 mon rule of discipline and worship, by which 
 all our churc/hes hold themselves obliged to <ralk, 
 even the same which Christ and his apostles, 
 the great founders of tlie Christian church, ori- 
 
 * Let. II. page 4. f Ibid.
 
 60 
 
 g'nally drew up, published, and established for 
 it; and which they left as a com aion rule, the 
 only perfect common rule, for the use of all fu- 
 ture ages, viz. the Holy Scriptures : this, there- 
 fore, you may discuss with all the freedom you 
 pleare, 
 
 But to descend to some of the many instances 
 in which you much misrepresent us. Your very 
 great mistake, as to our imposing- the posture of 
 sitting at the Lord's supper, I have shewn in my 
 former letter. You farther affirm " that it is 
 g-enerally held amongst us, that the sacrament it 
 for none but perfect and consummate Christians, 
 such as can give a particular account of their con- 
 Tersion."* Here you walk, sir, without light, 
 There is not, I am persuaded, amongst the Dis- 
 senters, in the whole kingdom, a single church, 
 ccarcely a single person, that hath this notion 
 of the sacrament, that it is designed only for 
 perfect Christians. We universally hold, that 
 every sincere Christian has a right to the Lord's 
 table. 
 
 " As to the duty of fasting, you say, if you 
 are not mightily deceived, it is thrown away, 
 amongt us. You have not met with any ser- 
 mons or treatises of our ministers, shewing the 
 obligations, and pressing its practice upon the 
 people ; nor have you ever heard of its being 
 practised, even by the strictest and devoutest 
 amongst us. "f \ouarein truth, sir, mightily 
 deceived, for one who sets up for so severe a 
 censor of his brethren. Amongst many others, 
 ,1 refer you only to a most excellent discourse 
 on fasting, in Bonnet's Christian oratory, vol. 
 II. which I am sure you cannot read without 
 admiring it blushing, and condemning your own 
 temerity. 
 
 You are pleased to give us also a very grave 
 and severe reprehension for standing, and not 
 
 * Let. I. page 52. f Let. I. page 65, 66.
 
 61 
 
 kneeling at our public prayers; and say; "It 
 is Jitlie less than imposed upon our people, in- 
 somuch that should any one presume to kneel in 
 our churches, we should certainly censure and 
 condemn him for it.* That your church has as 
 good a right to impose kneeling' in public wor- 
 ship upon her members, as Dissenters have to 
 impose it upon their children and servants in 
 their family devotionst and that we always 
 practise it in private.^" You are extremely un- 
 happy, sir, in your intelligence about this strange 
 people, whom you have t^ken upon you to re- 
 prehend. How came you to know, what their 
 posture of worship always is in private ? Have 
 they taken you into their closets? For my own 
 part, [ pretend not to have been much with them 
 at their secret devotions, and therefore will not 
 pronounce with such assurance as you do upon 
 the point ; but am very strongly persuaded they 
 practise variously in this matter, and do not al- 
 ways kneel. 
 
 As to their families and churches, though \ 
 have been present at prayers in a great number 
 of both, (which you, I presume, sir, never have 
 been) I assure you, I never once saw nor heard 
 any thing like the impositions you mention. In 
 their family devotions, some stand, and some 
 kneel, according as their inclination and con- 
 venience serve. And in their public assemblies, 
 many, I believe, over the whole kingdom, kneel 
 at prayer, yet I may venture to say, it never en- 
 ters into the thoughts of their fellow-worship- 
 pers, to take the least osTence at this. 
 
 You tell me " you can name a considerable 
 congregation amongst us, which is greatly scan- 
 dalized and has taken a great and general of- 
 fence, at one of its member 
 prayer."j| But as in 
 
 nembers kneclino- at public 
 many other points, sir, it is 
 
 Let. II. pages 65, 67. f Let. I. page 2S. 
 
 Let. II. page 68. || Tbid.
 
 62 
 
 notorious you Lave been ill served by your 
 informers, as to our customs and worship ; you 
 must give me leave to think, that they have here 
 also made too free with your credulity. That 
 we have weak brethren amongst us, and those 
 not a few, I am very ready to own. But a con- 
 gregation, a considerable congregation too, so 
 weak as to take a great and general offence at 
 such a trifle as this ! You must excuse me, if I 
 cannot easily admit it. I think you will do jus- 
 tice, sir, to name the congregation, that it may 
 either purge itself of the reproach, or stand cor- 
 rected before the world, for its unchristian and 
 imposing temper; and learn to act more consis- 
 tently with that liberty and right of private judg- 
 ment, which as Dissenters they profess. No, 
 sir, Dissenters are not for binding, where God 
 has left free. Our brethren of another church 
 are (hey, who think themselves capable of mend- 
 ing Christ's institutions ; and not content to use 
 them in the plainness and simplicity in which 
 divine wisdom left them, must needs embellish 
 and improve them by additions of their own. 
 
 Thus, for instance, kneeling at public prayer?, 
 you very indiscreetly presume to represent as 
 " a great improvement of public worship, and 
 as adding a natural splendor and beauty to it 
 
 that our worship is debased for want of it 
 
 that kneeling is a more humble and honourable 
 posture much more expressive of our profound 
 reverence of God. And the humble posture of 
 kneeling, nature itself so plainly dictates, and 
 so powerfully prompts us to, that a man, if lie 
 were left to himself, whenever he makes his 
 requests known to God, will hardly do it in any 
 other unless when some affected restraint is laid 
 upon him."* How towering a flight ! You do 
 not pretend to say, that either Christ or his apos- 
 tles, ever enjoined, or constantly, or mostly, 
 
 * Letter II. page 66, 67, 69, 75.
 
 63 
 
 kneeling at public prayer ; you mention 
 several instances from Scripture, where standing 
 was the posture of some of the most solemn ad- 
 dresses to Almighty God Abraham stood before 
 the Lord,* when he offered up that humble in- 
 tercession for Sodom. Of the Levites and all 
 the priests, it is particularly recorded, that they 
 stood up; and all the people are also called upon 
 to stand up, and bless the Lord their God, in 
 that solemn address to heaven, Nehem. ix. 2, 3, 
 4, 5. an address of deep humiliation, confes- 
 sion, deprecation, and covenanting- with God, 
 one of the most solemn that stands upon sacred 
 record. It is here no less than four several times 
 
 ssly mentioned, that standing was the 
 posture in which their worship was offered up. 
 Moses and Samuel are represented as standing 
 before God, when making their most humble 
 and importunate intercessions with him. Jer. 
 xv. 1. When our Saviour in his parable repre- 
 sents two men praying in the temple, standing is 
 the posture in which he describes them, Luke 
 xviii. 10, 11. Yea, he has himself in express 
 Mords, if not actually enjoined, yet most fully 
 declared his approbation of this gesture ; Mark 
 xi. 25. When you stand pray ing, forgive. Fi- 
 nally, the primitive Christians, it is acknow- 
 ledged on all hands, every Lord's day, and at all 
 other times' betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide, 
 universally prayed standing, and never kneeled 
 at their public devotions. (Consequently, by 
 the way, not at the Lord's supper) "die donti- 
 nico mfas ducimus, ftc. says Tertullianf: on (he 
 Lord's day zse account it a sin to worship kneeling: 
 which custom zee also observe from Easter to IVhit- 
 sttntidr." With all this evidence glaring full in 
 your face, sir, you have the assurance, shall I call 
 it, or does it deserve seme other name, very 
 smartly to reprehend us for standing at our pub- 
 
 Gn. xviii. 22. f D Coron. Milit. pag 340.
 
 lie prayers, and to call it a debasement of our 
 worship to affirm that kneeling is a more hum- 
 ble and honourable posture much more expres- 
 sive of our profound reverence of God A great 
 improvement of public worship, and that it adds 
 a natural beauty and splendor to it Surprisingly 
 enthusiastic ! What, Abraham, and Moses, 
 and Samuel, and Nebemiah, and all the priests, 
 and Jewish people, debase the divine worship, 
 when they stood before God, and made their so- 
 lemn addresses to him ! Yea, did Christ him- 
 self too debase it, by directing men to stand 
 praying ! 
 
 Had you happened, sir, to have been of the 
 council of the apostles, you could have helped 
 them to establish Christian worship upon a 
 greatly improved, a more beautiful dnd perfect 
 plan ; and have enjoined thi* more humble and 
 honourable posture, this additional splendor and 
 beauty to public prayer, which it never came in- 
 to their.minds to enjoin upon the disciples. But s 
 our Bibles at present stand ; and God and Jesus 
 Christ have left us full liberty, to ofTer up our 
 prayers either standing or kneeling, you will ex- 
 cuse us if we are not so struck with your addi- 
 tional beauty as to give ourselves up blindfold to 
 its charms. 
 
 But it seems we are inconsistent, in condemn- 
 ing some of your ceremonies, while at the same 
 time we readily conform ourselves to others : yea 
 while many ceremonies are allowed and practised 
 among ourselves. "Such, you aver, we have, 
 thoug'h we seem not to know it : Such as unco- 
 vering our heads, when we enter either your 
 churches, or our own meetings*/' But you are 
 still " walking in the dark," sir, as you justly re- 
 represent yourself, " and encountering with 
 ghosts. 1 ' The Dissenters have no such custom . 
 of uncovering their heads when they enter into 
 
 * Let, III. page 7.
 
 65 
 
 tlieir meeting-places, unless in time of worship; 
 no notion of paying reverence to timber and 
 walls; no ministers amongst them who have 
 sen.se or grace enough to consecrate a piece of 
 ground : and when they use this ceremony at 
 entering your churches, it is, I assure you, pure- 
 ly as a civil, not at all as a religions ceremony; 
 a compliment paid, not in tt:e ! ist to the build- 
 ing, but entirely to our good brethren, whom w* 
 would not needlessly offend. 
 
 " Kneeling at ordination," the next ceremo- 
 ny you mention, though generally use-.! - ^v >]>.;-' 
 us, was never, 1 b:>!s \ . i spo-cd. If the por-on. 
 to be ordained scrupled that poMur?, he would, 
 without all doubt, be permitted t> sta"... 
 
 As for "the secret cerr^nnuic-; w'.ioh v'u sus- 
 pect, but will not positive y affirm, to pass at 
 striking the covenant betwixt UH and our pas- 
 tors," which you once and again mention, let 
 your suspicions, on that head, sir, give you no 
 further pain, I assure you, I neither know, nor 
 have ever heard of any such covenanting no\v 
 practised amongst us : and I am persuaded, that 
 of ail our churches, not one in live hundred ob- 
 serve any such thing. 
 
 " In balance against your surplice, you put, 
 what you call the ceremony of our long sweep- 
 ing cloak*." But the least attention would 
 have shewn the two cases to be far from paral- 
 lel. Our ministers are at fulHiberty either lo u?e 
 or disuse the one : Are yours so as to the other ? 
 Did you ever hear of any learned, pious pastors 
 amongst us, silenced, rejected ;md cruelly im- 
 prisoned for refusing the sweeping cloak ? But, 
 have you never heard of your Hoopers, Samp- 
 sons, Humphreys, and an hundred other minis- 
 ters, men of distinguished learning and useful- 
 ness in your church, who have been swept from 
 their stations in it silenced, conflned, and 
 
 * Let. III. page 42. 
 F 2
 
 66 
 
 grieviously harrassed, only for scrupling your 
 surplice and cap ? Have you never heard of 
 many churches forsaken, and shut up in Lon- 
 don, and of numerous congregations, both in 
 city and country, deprived for a long while of 
 sacraments and public worship, by the rigorous 
 imposition of your habits on their ministers ? 
 And if the most celebrated divine were now to 
 offer to officiate in any of your churches, but 
 refused to wear a surplice, must he not, by your 
 canons, be set aside and refused ? Had the 
 cloak which our forefathers frequently wore, but 
 which is now, I believe, very generally disused, 
 been the occasion of a thousandth part of the 
 distractions and confusions in our church, as 
 your surplice has been in yours, and driven so 
 many worthy persons from their ministry and 
 livings in it ; they would have had the grace, I 
 hope immediately to have doomed it to the 
 flames. 
 
 But "giving the Christian name in baptism 
 to the person baptized, you very seriously urge, 
 as anothei solid argument of ceremonies amongst 
 us," and ask, " Is it not an addition to the sa- 
 crament ? Is it not an imposition ?" You add, 
 "now I see you smile.*" Excuse me, sir, I 
 could not help it ! your argument is quite new, 
 and really surprised me with its solidity and 
 weight. Yes, sir, I own it an addition, an im- 
 position, and a very ridiculous one too. And 
 should any minister of ours pretend to add, or 
 to impose this ceremony upon his people ; and 
 forbid them to call the child by its name till it 
 was baptized ; you may be assured, he would 
 soon meet with the disregard and contempt his 
 impertinence deserved. When you baptize 
 adult persons, do you give their names in that 
 ceremony ? Or do you not only call them by 
 names before given ? The same, I apprehend, 
 is the case as to children amongst us. 
 
 f Let. III. page 10.
 
 67 , 
 
 As for the ceremonies in marriage : these, you 
 justly observe, we consider only as civil ceremo- 
 nies, and the priest as a civil officer, appointed 
 by the magistrate to officiate in this affair. And 
 whatever decent rites the magistrate prescribes 
 in matters of a civil nature, we think it our duty 
 reverently to observe. But, " the magistrate 
 prescribe !" you with astonishment reply. "For 
 God's sake, how does the magistrate here pre- 
 scribe the rites aad ceremonies of marriage, more 
 than the other rites and ceremonies of the 
 church* !" But could not a gentleman of your 
 discernment perceive a difference here ? Is the 
 form of marriage any where instituted by our 
 Saviour ; or a part of Christian worship ; as bap- 
 tism and the Lord's slipper are ? May we not 
 therefore own the power of the civil magistrate, 
 to appoint rites and forms for the celebration of 
 the one, but not so as to the other ? By pre- 
 scribing the form of marriage, the magistrate 
 acts in character, and rules in his own kingdom : 
 but by authoritatively prescribing rites in baptism 
 and the Lord's supper, we humbly apprehend, 
 he extends his power beyond the sphere assigned 
 him, and attempts to rule in Christ's kingdom : 
 and that therefore here we are to obey God 
 rather than man. 
 
 You farther ask with surprise " What! civil 
 ceremonies in the church of God ! in the midst 
 of the administration of a divine institution : in- 
 termixed with pastoral exhortations, holy pray- 
 ers, andsolemnbenedictions !'"* Butwhy, sir, so 
 astonished ? Did you never take an oath in a civil 
 court of judicature ? And did not the person who 
 administered this sacred rite, give you a pastoral 
 /exhortation, accompanied with a holy prayer, 
 and a solemn benediction, piously invoking on 
 you God's blessing and help ? And as to th 
 place, which you call the church of God, where 
 
 Let. III. page 6. ' f Ibid.
 
 68 
 
 marriage is solemnized, you must have known 
 that the consecration of timber, and the sanctity 
 of walls, are points too sublime for the under- 
 standings of Dissenters; and that in their opinion 
 all places are alike holy, and that no building 
 on earth merits the high honour of being- called 
 the church of God. 
 
 The same reply we make as to the ceremonies 
 of burial, our compliance with which you also 
 briskly retort upon us. Is burial of the dead, sir, 
 a Christian institution ? Any part of the religion 
 or worship of Christ ? Is it not purely a politi- 
 cal or civil thing ? Yes, and as such only we 
 /view it : and consider the person who officiates, 
 as one appointed to this office, directed, instruc- 
 ted, and maintained by the state. 
 
 But as you are here professedly u answering 
 our great and popular objections," how came 
 you, sir, to pass over in profound silence, one of 
 the greatest and most popular, to this office of 
 burial ? which objection indeed has not been 
 made by us only, but also by some of the most 
 illustrious members of your own church. I pre- 
 sume you were conscious that the passages ob- 
 jected to, were incapable of defence, and there 
 fore you wisely overlooked them. 
 
 There are but three cases, you know, sir. in 
 which your church refuses this solemn office of 
 burial, viz. to those who die unbaptized, to self- 
 murderers, and those who are under sentence of 
 the greater excommunication. As for all other 
 persons who are brought to the church-yard, it 
 very strictly commands you, even under pain of 
 suspension, by canon 68, that you use over them 
 the form prescribed by the common prayer. 
 Now, hence it comes to pass, that over some of 
 the most abandoned and profligate of mankind; 
 over men who have been cut down in a course of 
 open impiety, by a sudden and untimely death ; 
 or who even fell by the hand of justice, for some 
 black and atrocious crime : over these, I bay,
 
 69 
 
 your church, and I say it with astonishment, di- 
 rects and commands you most solemnly to de- 
 clare, that. Almighty God of his great mercy has 
 taken to himself the son! of this your dear broth< r. 
 \OK grct God hrarty thanks, that it hath pleasi d 
 him to deliver him out of the. miseries of this sinful 
 world. And you pray God, that when you your- 
 selies shall depart out of this life, you may rest in 
 C'h>i>l, as i/ our hope is this your brother doth. 
 This is what your church commands you solemn- 
 ly to say over every person brought to be buri- 
 ed, the three above mentioned cases excepted. 
 So that if a man had been guilty of murder and 
 when brought to the gallows for this heinous 
 crime, dies au impenitent hardened wretch ; yet 
 concerning him you are to declare, that Almighty 
 God hath in his great mercy taken him to himself: 
 Though he died a victim to public justice, and 
 was taken in wrath. You are to give God hearty 
 thanks, that he hath taken this your brother out of 
 the miseries of this sinful world : Though you have 
 the strongest reason to believe, that he is gone 
 down to realms of greater misery below. And 
 you are to profess before God that you hope the 
 man rests in Christ, and pray that you yourselves 
 may rest in Christ in the same manner as this 
 your brother doth v : even though you have every 
 reason to think that he difd in Jiis sins, and is there- 
 fore not gone to be with Christ, where nothing 
 that is defiled can ever be admitted. Strange 1 
 and extremely shocking ! What can the people 
 think, sir ? What must infidels and deists think, 
 when they hear you in the morning denouncing 
 from the Scriptures indignation and wrath, Iribn- 
 ation and anguish on ei'tn/ soul of man that docth 
 tvil, and assuring them that without holiness no 
 man shall see the Lord ; but in the evening shall 
 hear y ou, from the Common Prayer, declaring 
 before- God your hope of the eternal happiness of 
 one of the most debauched and- profligate me it
 
 70 
 
 in your parish, and applying to him such lofty 
 expressions of confidence and hope, as can be ap- 
 plicable only to a person of the most shining and 
 exemplary life ? 
 
 Do you imagine, sir, people do not think ? 
 Can you wonder deisrn prevails? That, the 
 priesthood is ridiculed ? And that your good 
 sermons are not more effectual to reform a cor- 
 rupt world ? To me (and doubtless to thousands 
 of your own church) this appears to be a most in- 
 decent prostitution of your sacred character and 
 office; a trilling and prevarication with things of 
 everlasting moment ; and laying a fatal snare in 
 the way of many ; who seeing their debauched 
 neighbour dismissed to the other world with such 
 confidence of his good estate, suppress their just 
 fears, and say, / shall have peace though I add 
 drunkenness to thirst.* 
 
 But there is a farther very strange and extra- 
 ordinary circumstance attending this matter, 
 viz. that it involves the church in a manifest 
 contradiction and absurdity ; for it damns and 
 saves the same individual persons. Whom it 
 damns when living, it saves when dead. Arians 
 aud Socinians, you know, sir, your church 
 declares without doubt to perish everfastingly* 
 But let these very men die, and your church as 
 solemnly declares that God halh in his great mer- 
 cy taken them to himself, and that it hopes they 
 rest in Christ ; or in other words, tha^the man 
 whom I pronounce without doubt to be damned, 
 1 yet hope that he is saved, i. e. I hope without 
 hope. 
 
 I shall press you no farther on this point, but 
 
 * Two of our most eminent archbishops, Drs. Sancroft and Til- 
 lotson have expressed their strong disapprobation of some parts of 
 this office: the former of whom declared "that he was so littte 
 "satisfied with it, that for that very reason he never took any pastoral 
 "charge upon him." Vide Calamy's defence of moderate uu- 
 eonforuiitj. Part 1 1. page 222.
 
 proceed to your next observation in which you 
 endeavour to establish, not only the use, but 
 the church's divine right, of making ceremonies, 
 from the instance of the holy kiss.* " The kiss 
 of charity used in the apostolic church, you ask, 
 was it a rite of divine appointment, or was it 
 not ?" I answer, that I apprehend this kiss of 
 charity cannot properly be called a divine insti- 
 tution, nor be said to be ordained by the apos- 
 tles. The greeting- with a kiss, was an ancient 
 established usage, not only amongst the Jews, 
 but the Gentile nations also. This usage there- 
 fore, or ceremony, was not ordaineo! by the 
 apostles, but only by their advice regulated and 
 directed to a moral and religious end. It is as if 
 they had said, it is your custom when you meet, 
 to salute each other with a kiss, see that it be 
 a pure, a chaste, or holy kiss, a token of unfeign- 
 ed charity, friendship and peace. 
 
 " But if this ceremony of the holy kiss, was 
 not of divine appointment (which probably, you 
 say is the truth of the case, but a merely ecclesi- 
 astical prudential institution, ordained by the 
 apostles, without any precept from the Lord, or 
 
 any particular direction of the Holy Spirit." 
 
 Then, sir, I without the least hesitation say, it 
 was not at all obligatory as a law upon the con- 
 sciences of Christians ; they might or they might 
 not practise -it, without sinning against God. 
 Even the apostles had no dominion over the faith 
 and practice of Christians, but what was given 
 them by the special presence and spirit of Christ, 
 the only lawgiver, lord, and sovereign of the 
 church. They were to teach only the things 
 which he should command them. Whatever 
 they enjoined under the influence of that Spirit, 
 was to be considered and obeyed as the injnnc- 
 tidn, of Christ. But if they enjoined any thing 
 
 Let. II. p- f.
 
 in the church (which I can by no means admit) 
 without the pecuUa.- influence and direction of 
 this spirit, (5, e. merely as fallible unassisted 
 men) in that case their injunctions had no au- 
 thority over conscience : every man's own rea- 
 son had authority to examine and discuss their 
 injunctions; and as they approved themselves 
 to his private judgment, to observe them, or not. 
 Should we grant then what you ask, " that the 
 church in the present age, has the same autho- 
 rity and power, as the chftrch in the apostolic 
 age, considered as not being under any imme- 
 diate and extraordinary guidance of the Holy 
 Ghost." What will you gain by it? This 
 same authority and power, is, you see, sir, really 
 no power nor authority at all. 
 
 I go on " to the point of discipline, the want of 
 which is objected to your church ; but you will 
 represent the real state of it, and then shew that 
 we really as much want it ourselves*." We will 
 attend to your own account of it, which cannot 
 Ibe x suspected of being too severe. You ac- 
 knowledge, " that the discipline of the church 
 is of great moment towards the edification of its 
 members ; and that the fault, is unpardonable when 
 church governors let it fall, through a supine 
 carelessness and neglect that there is a great 
 prostration of discipline in the church of Eng- 
 land that it is ruined amongst you that the 
 
 distempers of the times are evidently too strong 
 for it, that those who sit at the helm, find it prudent 
 not to bear up too much against the impetuosity 
 of the storm, but to give way, till the madness of 
 the people be still that the dicipline of the 
 church has not been carried to any degree of 
 perfection and now lies under a general relax- 
 ation that your people are often indulged in 
 all their unreasonable demands and disorderly 
 
 * Let. III. p. 12.
 
 73 . 
 
 ways, to prevent their putting in execution their 
 
 threats, that they will go to the meeting and 
 
 finally, that YOU hav*e at least, the shadow and 
 form of discipline, and trust in God that these 
 drt/ bones will one day //ir.'** 
 
 This, it must be owned, is very ingenuously 
 and frankly spoken. And can you blame then 
 the Dissenters, sir, for joining themselves to 
 churches, where that godly discipline is obser- 
 ved, which you confess to be of such great mo- 
 ment to the edification of Christian people ; and 
 which your church is continually wishing for, 
 but never attempts to have restored. But here 
 you retort, and intimate as great a want of discip- 
 line amongst us. " What, are there no scanda- 
 lous sinners, you ask, f no fornicators, a- 
 dulterers, extortioners, &c. received into your 
 churches ! I must beg you pardon if I demur upon 
 this. For I could never perceive that the doors 
 of the meeting were ever shut against any. And 
 if such profligate personsbe not admitted to sit at 
 the Lord's table, they need not fear being admit- 
 ted to all other parts of your worship." 
 
 And is not this, sir, exactly right? Ought not 
 our church doors to be always kept open, that who- 
 ever will niay come, and be witness to our way of 
 worship. Such profligate persons therefore may 
 come, if they please, and hear their sins reprov- 
 ed, and be exhorted to repentance and amend- 
 ment of life. They are then, where they ought 
 to be, under the preaching of the word ; the 
 means appointed by God, to convince and re- 
 claim the profligate and corrupt. Were not the 
 doors of the church at Corinth kept open in the 
 apostles' days, for infidels to come in, and 
 be present at their worship ? Vide 1. Cor. 
 xiv. 2^4 But to the table of the Lord, to par- 
 
 G 
 
 * Let. III. page 12, 13, 14, 17, 22, 28, film! p. ?3. 
 J If therefore tke whole Ckurch be come togetlur into one place, 
 tnd tliere come in those that are unlearned and unbdicoers, <c.
 
 take of the children's bread, you seem convinced 
 that in our churches, such profligate persons are 
 not suffered to come. And is not this the true 
 order and discipline of the Christian church ? 
 But, is it the same, sir, in your church ? Are not 
 some of the most profane and abandoned of men, 
 rakes, debauchees, blasphemers of God, and 
 scoffers at all religion, often seen upon their 
 knees around your communion table, eating the 
 children's bread, and partaking of the holy ele- 
 ments, to qualify for a post ? Dare your ministers 
 refuse them? No, they dare not refuse the most 
 impious blasphemer the three kingdoms afford, 
 when he comes to demand it as a qualification 
 for an office in the army or the fleet, without ex- 
 posing themselves to such vexatious and expen- 
 sive suits at law, as very few of the clergy would 
 be either able or willing to undertake. 
 
 And if in any other case, the priest denies the 
 sacrament to the most infamous sinner dwelling 
 in his parish, if the man, upon an appeal to the 
 ecclesiastical court, can secure the favour of the 
 lay-chancellor, he may securely defy both the 
 minister and bishop to keep him from the 
 Lord's table. The chancellor's determination 
 shall stand in law, though contrary to the bi- 
 shop's ; and ihe minister be liable to a suspen- 
 sion, for refusing compliance ; and even to ex- 
 communication itself, if he be contumacious, and 
 will not give the man the sacrament. How, sir, 
 do you reconcile this with your affirming, " that 
 \our parish priest has as much power as any pres- 
 byterian or congregational minister to repel open 
 and scandalous sinners from the Lord's table ?"* 
 Or how with your "representing the lay-chan- 
 cellor as a person only assumed by the bishop, 
 not to do any act that is purely spiritual, but only 
 to be his assistant in his ecclesiastical and judi- 
 cial proceedings ?"t 
 
 * Let, III, p. 5J, f
 
 75 
 
 Is not the chancellor supremo and uncontroll- 
 ed in his court, not liable to be restrained or di- 
 rected by the bishop in his judicial proceedings? 
 Does he not finally and absolutely determine on 
 cases of excommunicaticp, sovereignly dlrjct 
 who shall be received to, and who cast out from 
 Christian fellowship and worship at the table of 
 the Lord ? And is not this an act as purely 
 spiritual, as important and momentous, as any 
 done in the church ? Must not his sentence 
 take place without control, and is the minister 
 in publishing- it, any other than his servant, ap- 
 pointed by law to put it in execution ? 
 
 Will you please to hear, sir, the sentiments of 
 a great prelate* of your own church, upon the 
 point of debate. " If there be any thing in the 
 office of a bishop to be challenged peculiar to 
 themselves, certainly it should be this ; (speak- 
 ing of excommunication) yet this is in a manner 
 quite relinquished to their chancellors ; laymen, 
 who have no more capacity to sentence or ab- 
 solve a sinner, than to dissolve the heavens or 
 the earth. And this pretended power of the 
 chancellor, is sometimes purchased with a sum 
 of money. Their money perish with them ! 
 Good God ! what a horrid abuse is this of the 
 divine authority ! But this notorious transgres- 
 sion is excused, as they think, by this, that a min- 
 i- tcr called the bishop's surrogate, but is indeed 
 the chancellor's servant, chosen, called, and pla- 
 ced there by him, to be his crier, no better ; 
 that when he hath examined, heard, and senten- 
 ced the cause, then the minister, for?coth, pro- 
 nounces the sentence. Just as if the rector of 
 a parish church should exclude any of his con- 
 gregation, and lock him dot of the church, then 
 comes the clerk, shews and jingles the keys, that 
 ail may take notice that he is excluded. And 
 
 . > 
 
 Dr. Crofts, Bishop of Hereford, Naked Truth, &c. p. 58,
 
 7<5 
 
 by this his authority, the chancellor takes up 
 him to sentence not only laymen, but clergymen 
 also brought into his court for any delinquency ; 
 and in the court of arches, sentence even bishops 
 themselves." 
 
 " I remember v$en the bishop of Wells, 
 hearing of a cause corruptly managed, and com- 
 ing into court to rectify it, the chancellor Dr. 
 Duck, fairly and mannerly bade him begone, for 
 he had no power there to act any thing ; and the re- 
 withal pulled out his patent, sealed by this bi- 
 shop's predecessor, which frightened the poor bi- 
 shop out of the court." fiehold ! this is the 
 person, sir, whom you have the courage to repre- 
 sent as only assumed by the bishop, not to do any 
 act that is purely spiritual but only to be his assist' 
 ant in his judicial proceedings. 
 
 But as we are now upon the head of discipline, 
 and the law called the TEST is a battery which 
 has beat down all its fences around your church, 
 
 and you are a zealous advocate for that law. 
 
 You will permit me here, sir, to enlarge a little 
 upon that point ; and to ask How can you bear 
 to see the terrible desolation it has made of your 
 godly discipline, without resentment and grief 5 
 Can you be jealous, sir, for the prosperity and 
 honour of your church, and yet patiently view it 
 lying in this polluted and common state ? Its 
 inclosures broken up, and a way opened by la\r 
 for the most flagitious of men, for atheists, pro- 
 fessed deists and the most open and avowed sin- 
 ners, to lie securely in its bosom, to be number- 
 ed and cherished amongst its holiest and most 
 beloved children, and to be acknowledged be- 
 fore the world, as honest and good Christians, by 
 being suffered to come boldly to the table of the 
 Lord. 
 
 But why do I say suffered? Does not this 
 church by the force of this law, even compel them 
 to come in? Many of the unhappy persons, con-
 
 77 
 
 scions of their unfitness, would gladly draw 
 back. Knowing themselves perhaps, either to 
 disbelieve the truth, or else to live in open vio- 
 lation of the laws of Christianity, they are loth 
 to add to their other crimes this prevarication 
 with Almighty God, this affront to Jesus Christ, 
 and thereby to run a dreadful risk of eating and 
 drinking judgment to themselves. But, their all 
 lies at stake : they must qualify, or be given up 
 to beggary and want. Away therefore with 
 scruples ! They rush to the Lord's table, and 
 partake of the sacred elements with conscience* 
 and characters all covered with guilt. 
 
 You will say, perhaps, it is their own fault ; 
 they might have refused to come. They might, 
 indeed, if they w r ould have lost their posts, their 
 ubsistence, their bread. But can the church 
 reasonably expect such sacrifices as these, from 
 men of corrupt minds ? Is she then in no fault, 
 in laying men under such strong, almost invinci- 
 ble temptations, to this odious hypocrisy and 
 profanation of holy things ? Is she not highly cul- 
 pable, for opening her bosom to receive men of 
 impure characters to all the sacred privileges, 
 liberties, and honours, which belong only to sin- 
 cere Christians ? Yea, for owning before the 
 world as worthy and good Christians, persons 
 whom the world sees, and whom the church her- 
 self cannot but see to blaspheme the name of 
 Christ, and to live in avowed contempt of his 
 authority and laws ? 
 
 And what relief, sir, has the unhappy minis- 
 ter, of whom as steward in God's hotfsc , it is re- 
 quired that he be found faithful, and who is here- 
 after to answer for his conduct to his great mas- 
 ter? What relief, I ask, has he, when the ve- 
 teran debauchee, shall come and demand from 
 him these pledges of Christian fellowship andof 
 GxxTs paternal! ove ? Truly, none at all. He 
 must receive him as a child of God, and a dearly 
 G 2
 
 78 
 
 beloved brother to the table of Christ, or have 
 an action commenced against him, -and be liable 
 to damages amounting perhaps to much more 
 than he is worth. 
 
 As much therefore as you are concerned for 
 the honour of the church, and for the interest, 
 reputation, and comfort of its clergy, so much 
 you ought to wish and zealously promote the re- 
 peal of this law a law, which, whatever was 
 its original intention, hath in its application let 
 in, like a flood-gate, upon your church, the dregs 
 of the human race a law, which though at 
 iirst designed only the more effectually to pre- 
 vent all danger to the constitution from papists, 
 hath by an unnatural perversion of it, actually 
 broken down all distinctions established by di- 
 vine authority, between sacred and profane has 
 thrust infidels and profligates into the most holy 
 places of your temple, and brings deists and d(- 
 bauchcesto eat at the Lord's table, amongst the 
 children of his house. Let me asli you, sir, in 
 the name of Christ, our common master and 
 judge, doth not this law, as now enforced, occa- 
 sion the most notorious prostitution of a holy 
 sacrament of his religion ? Is not its avowed 
 and open tendency and use, to pervert an insti- 
 tution of our Saviour, to ends, not only quite dif- 
 ferent from, but even opposite to those for which 
 he appointed it ? Is it not making that a politi- 
 cal instrument to divide Christians, which Christ 
 instituted as a religious instrument, to coalesce 
 and unite them ? Must it not be highly odious 
 and offensive to Almighty God, to see a holy sa- 
 crament, which his wisdom hath ordained for 
 tpriritual and religious purposes only, thus pros- 
 tituted, perverted, made an engine and tool 
 of state, employed to strengthen and perpetuate 
 differences amongst good Christians ; and there- 
 by debased, not to worldly only, but to muck 
 ivore than worldly ends ?
 
 A? to myself, sir, I assure you, though I think 
 this law to be a most unrighteous restraint upon 
 us, and an undoubted violation of our natural 
 rights ; yet I am far from being persuaded that 
 its repeal would be of the least service to our 
 interests as Dissenters. I have often doubt- 
 ed whether there be not too much truth in 
 what you say " That high trusts, public offices, 
 and court employments, would be extremely apt 
 to corrupt us, and to make practical religion 
 more visibly decay," and that it would really ra- 
 ther injure than strengthen our interest. I 
 have never therefore, as a Dissenter, been at all 
 solicitous for the repeal. No, sir, so far from 
 this, that could I allow myself to hate and wish 
 ill to the church, I would most heartily wish it 
 pertinaciously to hold fust this shameful corrup- 
 tion. I would wish it, by no means to give up 
 this open profanation of the authority and name 
 of Christ ; this prostitution and perversion of a 
 holy sacrament of his religion ; this destruction 
 of nil discipline ; this open door for the reception 
 of the most abominable and profane to its most 
 holy mysteries and rites. This, if I wished it 
 ill, I would earnestly wish your church inflexi- 
 bly to continue : not doubting but, if long con- 
 tinued, it will surely at length bring down upon 
 it the heavy anger of Almighty God; the just 
 resentment and jealousy of a despised and insul- 
 ted Saviour : and the deep scorn and contempt of 
 all wise and thinking men. 
 
 While this law continues, sir, in it? present 
 application, yourself cannot but see, that your 
 discipline must necessarily remain most scan- 
 dalously relaxed, and that it must soon be totally 
 ruined. It is impossible you can maintain, 
 hardly the shadow and form, mncli IPSS the spirit 
 of primitive ecclesiastical government. Your- 
 holy things must lie common, vilely trodden un- 
 der foot. Of all parsons in tlje land therefore.
 
 so 
 
 the clergy should be the first, to labour with all 
 their mig-ht for the repeal of this unhappy law; 
 a law, which cannot but be supposed to bear hard 
 upon, and grievously to wound the consciences 
 of many of them : and which subjects them to so 
 servile a prostitution of their character, as can- 
 not but load it with great infamy and reproach. 
 
 You tell me,* " that you engage, simple as 
 you sit here, that this law shall be repealed ; and 
 our incapacities removed, when we will lay 
 down our enmity to the church, that is, in short, 
 to one half part of the constitution. For church 
 and state here in England are so incorporated 
 and united, that they have, like the married pair, 
 the same friends and enemies ; and stand or fall 
 together." I cannot pretend to say, sir, hoz 
 simple you sat there, when you gave us this assu- 
 rance, but this I may say, that you would much 
 more effectually serve your cause were you abl? 
 to stand up, and make it good. For, 
 
 1. Are you sure that the church is really any 
 essential part at all, much less the half part of 
 the British constitution : or, that church and 
 state are so married and interwoven, that they 
 must stand or fall together ? Many, sir, besides 
 Dissenters will think, that this is a very partial 
 and wrong representation of our most excellent 
 frame of government. Let any one in his ima- 
 gination annihilate the form of our present church. 
 Let him suppose its liturgy, clergy, articles, ca- 
 nons, with all its ceremonies and rites, entirely 
 vanished from the land ; its immense revenues ap- 
 plied in ease of our heavy taxes, and for the pay- 
 ment of the public debts; and preachers paid on- 
 ly by voluntary contributions, as they areamongst 
 us. Would the state hereby sustain so essential 
 a loss, that it could not thenceforward possibly 
 subsist ? What ! would the British monarchy 
 
 Lt 1 p, 11.
 
 81 , 
 
 1>e overthrown our courts of judicature be shut 
 up the course of law stopped parliament! no 
 more meet commerce and trade stagnate be- 
 cause what you call a church is no more ? Ro- 
 mantic and absurd ! No : the frame of our hap- 
 py government, both civil and military, might re- 
 main the very same : and you will give me leave 
 to observe, on the present occasion, that in one 
 part of this kingdom, those who profess them- 
 selves to be of your church, as to its external po- 
 lity and ceremonies, are almost to a man invete- 
 rate, avowed enemies of our happy civil const.i- 
 tution, and have risen in an impious rebellion 
 against his present Majesty, and joined with Spa- 
 niards, French, Italians, and home-bred papists, 
 in their wicked attempts to subvert the Protest- 
 ant religion and liberties.* 
 
 2. The destruction of the church of England, 
 is what we by no means wish. May God in his 
 mercy prevent it, by causing her to see, in this 
 her day, the things belonging to her pt ace. We 
 bear it no enmity ; God is our witness. We wish 
 it from our souls, glory, prosperity, purity, 
 peace; the glory of being: formed according to 
 the perfect plan of the primitive apostolic church ; 
 purged of those things, which yourselves know 
 to be no parts of the religion of Christ ! We 
 wish to see it established upon the Catholic and 
 broad bottom, upon which alone it can stand firm : 
 even the scriptural foundation of the ap sties and 
 prophets, Jesus Christ himself being its only 
 lawgiver and kino- : and not upon the narrow 
 basis on which it now rests, the articles and ca- 
 nons, t'ie institutions and inventions of fallible 
 and weak men ; on which it can never be strongly 
 and firmly fixed ; which are all, in the apostle's 
 language, jc'oorf, hay> stubble ; zchose end is to be 
 kurncd! We wish, that as it opens its bosom, 
 
 In the rebellion, 1745*
 
 82 
 
 and admits the most unworthy and licentionf 
 P"ons, without demurring at their open viola- 
 tion of God's commands ; so it would cha- 
 ritably extend its arms to take us into its commu- 
 nion, without insisting upon our obedience 
 to the injunctions and commands of men ! Fi- 
 nally ; we wish, that what God, in his wisdom, 
 hath been pleased to leave indifferent ; your 
 church also, in her wisdom, would be pleased to 
 leave the same : that you would not attempt to 
 mend the institutions of Jesus Christ ; but would 
 receive us into your church upon the same 
 terms and qualifications as Christ and his apos- 
 tles would have received us into theirs ; and as 
 God will receive us into heaven at last ! This, 
 sir, I assure you, is all the harm we wish the 
 church. Judge then -yourself, whether we bear 
 it any enmity ; and whether you are not now 
 bound to take from us the incapacities, which 
 you engaged, simple as you sat there, should on 
 this condition be removed. 
 
 And you will give me leave, sir, to think, and 
 to hope, that there are numbers of your worthy 
 clergy of the same mind ; that it would not at all 
 lessen either the glory, stability or prosperity of 
 your church, if its bounds were thus enlarged, to 
 admit the moderate Dissenters, who sincerely 
 desire so happy a coalition. It? enemies seem 
 to multiply, and dark clouds to rise around i<. 
 Popery is making dangerous and mighty inroads 
 on the one hand ; and deism on the other; 
 There may come a time, as there formerly hag 
 been, when the frame of your church being ter- 
 ribly threatened, we may again be considered as 
 no despicable auxiliaries. But, if we cannot be 
 so happy, as not to be cast out and rejected by 
 our brethren ; our consolation is this, that God 
 judgcth in the earth ; and that he will surely, at 
 the proper season, vindicate and plead the caus* 
 of the injured and oppressed.
 
 83 
 
 But to return to the point of discipline. To 
 the acknowledged irregularity of lay-chancellors 
 in your church, you would fain " put in balance 
 the lay-preaching, lay-praying, and lay-ordina- 
 tion allowed in our churches."* To which I 
 reply, that in the generality of our churches, 
 there is no such thing allowed, or ever practised. 
 Besides, if they were, did not your own church 
 set us the pattern? In the rubric before the 
 general confession of the Communion, did it not 
 direct then shall this geneml confession be made, 
 in the name of all those that are to receive, either by 
 one of (hem, or else by one of the ministers. How 
 it came to be omitted in the late editions of the 
 Common Prayer ; whether it is done according 
 to law and by authority of parliament, you, sir, 
 perhaps can say, 
 
 As to " lay-men being an essential part of all 
 our consistories and synods ; sitting in them, and 
 and having an equal vote with pastors in all bu- 
 siness jointly with them suspending from the 
 Lord's table," &c.f This, sir, is no other than 
 the scriptural apostolic plan. The aggrieved 
 ]>erson is by our Lord, you know, Mat. xviii. 17. 
 directed to lay his complaint before the church, 
 that is, the congregation of the faithful; and 
 if the offender neglected to hear the church (the 
 congregation) admonishing and reproving him, 
 he was then to be considered as a heathen man 
 and a publican. How was the corrupt member at 
 Corinth, to be solemnly excommunicated ? Not 
 by any particular person, chancellor or bishop ; 
 but it was to be the act of the whole church. To 
 the whole body or congregation of believers in 
 that city, St. Paul gives directions, that when they 
 were come together, they shovld deliver such an one 
 to Satan and, that tlc'y should put a&ay from 
 amongst themselves tkat wicked person. I Cor.v. 4, 
 
 Let. III.p.SS. f Ibid. p. 57. 
 
 ' '
 
 84 
 
 5, 13. which excommunication he afterward* 
 calls a punishment inflicted by the many. 2 Coc. ii. 
 (>. So in that weighty and momentous question 
 How far the Gentiles were to submit to the la\v 
 of Moses? The elders and brethren are joined 
 with the Apostles in the decision and decree, 
 Acts xv. 23. The laity therefore have a right to 
 be consulted, and to judge, in these important 
 church matters, together with the clergy ; as 
 they do by their representatives, in what you call 
 our consistories. But with you, sir, a single 
 lay-man, (this is the absurdity which you seem 
 willing to lose sight of) I repeat it, a single lay- 
 man, not only in distinction from, but in actual 
 opposition to the bishop and all the church, both 
 clergy and laity, has authority to judge and 
 determine these important matters ; and excom- 
 municates, or absolves 3 ; shuts out, or lets in, ac- 
 cording to his sole pleasure. 
 
 And here, sir, let me stop a moment, and re- 
 riew the point in debate between Dr. Watts and 
 yourself. As for the lives, of the Dissenters, 
 though God knows we have nothing to boast 
 of but a great deal that calls for shame and 
 humiliation on this head ; yet whether we are 
 quite so deeply immersed in the deluge of pro - 
 faneriess, immorality and vice, which spreads 
 over the land whether the blasphemies and 
 oaths, the debauchery, riot, and guilty excesses, 
 which too generally prevail, be in proportion to 
 our number, found as rife amongst us, as amongst 
 the members of the established church, must be 
 left, and we freely leave it, to the impartial world 
 to judge between us. 
 
 And as to special obligations and advantages 
 for holy living, which you contend strenuously 
 with the doctor to lie on your side ; what hath 
 been above observed on your several offices for 
 confirmation, absolution of the sick, and burial 
 of the dead, shews them, I humbly think, to
 
 SJ 
 
 have really an ill aspect upon the morals of your 
 people ; a dangerous and apparent tendency to 
 cherish in them false hopes, and to give them 
 wrong; notions of the terms of acceptance, and 
 of entrance into heaven. And of the state of 
 your discipline (which you acknowledge to lie of 
 great moment to the edification of the church,) 
 no enemy need wish a more melanholy ac- 
 count than yourself have given of it. Upon the 
 whole, therefore, sir, I cannot think, the wor- 
 thy doctor to deserve censure, for attempting to 
 rouse Dissenters from the languishing state of 
 religion among thertl, by putting them in mind of 
 the superior advantages they enjoyed, and of the 
 peculiar obligations under which they manifestly 
 lay to greater holiness of life. 
 
 You seem not a little displeased* at its hav- 
 ing been urged as a reason for our dissent, 
 " that your church has shewn a persecuting spi- 
 rit," and with some emotion ask " did the 
 church persecute at any time its own members ? 
 Were you or your fathers ever persecuted while 
 they continued in the church ? And were they 
 driven out of it by those persecutions ?" I con- 
 fess, sir, you quite surprise me by such question* 
 as these. What ! are you only a stranger in Bri- 
 tain ; and have never heard of the bitter Suffer- 
 ings of our worthy fathers, the Puritans ? With 
 what silencings, deprivations, fines, imprison- 
 ments, and lingering and cruel deaths, for more 
 than a hundred years, they were terribly har- 
 rassed and oppressed by your church ? Have you 
 never read, with a bleeding heart, the unrelent- 
 ing rigours of your archbishops Parker, Ban- 
 croft, Whitegift, Laud under the first of whom 
 above a hundred, under the second, above three 
 hundred pious and learned men, not only mem- 
 bers but ministers of your church, were silenced, 
 suspended, admonished, deprived, many of them 
 
 * Letter III. pages GO, 61. 
 H
 
 86 
 
 loaded with grievous and heavy fines, and snrt 
 up in filthy gaols, where they slowly expired 
 through penury and. want ? And what were 
 the crimes which drew this dreadful storm 
 of episcopal vengeance on them ? Nothing but 
 their scruples about the surplice and the cap, 
 about bowing at the name of Jesus, about Christ's 
 descent into hell, and such like momentous 
 points. 
 
 Have you never read, sir, what desolations 
 Laud brought upon our fathers, whilst yet in 
 your church ? How many hundreds of them were 
 sequestered, driven from their livings, excom- 
 municated, persecuted in the High Commission 
 court, and forced to leave the kingdom for not 
 punctually conforming- to all the ceremonies and 
 rites ; and not daring to tell their people, that 
 they might lawfully profane the sabbath by gam- 
 bols and spoi'ts ; and to publish from their pul- 
 pits the permission of the king to break the com- 
 mand of God And yet you ask, " Were your 
 fathers ever persecuted while they continued in 
 the church ? 
 
 Pray ! what was it peopled the savage deserts 
 of North America? Was it not the thousands of 
 persecuted and oppressed families, who fled from 
 Tyrannising bishops ? who, not being suffered to 
 worship quietly in their native country, as their 
 consciences directed, sought a peaceful retreat 
 from the rage of their fellow-Christians amongst 
 more hospitable Indians. To omit a thousand 
 acts of cruelty, is not the act of Uniformity, which 
 to be sure, you will call a grand pillar of your 
 church, a very unrighteous and persecuting act ? 
 t)o not several of your canons breathe an un- 
 christian and malevolent spirit ? Did not your 
 church, at last, in a most arbitrary and unjust 
 manner, cast out at once above two thousand of 
 them, excellent and pious ministers, and aban- 
 don them and their starving families, to great
 
 poverty and distress ? To heighten that distress, 
 did not your church, by another act, banish them 
 five miles from any city, borough, or church in 
 Which they had before served : and thereby put 
 them at a cruel distance from their acquaintance 
 H2iJ friends, who might minister to their relief ? 
 Did she not by another act, forbid their meeting 
 to worship God, any where but in your own 
 churches, under the penalties of heavy fines, 
 imprisonments, and banishment to foreign lands ? 
 
 In consequence of these unrighteous acts, 
 ^were not vast numbers of pious clergymen, our 
 forefathers (once the glory of your church,) with 
 multitudes of their people, laid in prisons amongst 
 thieves and common malefactors, where they suf- 
 fered the greatest hardships, indignities, and op- 
 pressions; their houses were rudely rifled, their 
 goods made a prey to hungry informers, and their 
 families given up to beggary and want. " Au es- 
 timat" was published of near eight thousand Pro- 
 testaijt Dissenters, who had perished in prison 
 in the reign only of Charles II. By severe pe- 
 nalties inflicted on them, for assembling to wor- 
 ship God, they suffered in their trade and es- 
 tates in the compass of a few years, at least two 
 millions ; and a list of sixty thousand persons 
 was taken, who had suffered on a religious ac- 
 count, betwixt the restoration and the revolu-. 
 tion."* Behold the groans and the blood of 
 these oppressed Puritans cry beneath the altar, 
 How /.>/', O Lord ! yot you are deaf to all their 
 groans and with a stoical insensibility you ask, 
 " Were your fathers ever persecuted ?" 
 
 ' But the presbytorian and independent 
 churches have each in their d.iy of power, dis- 
 covered as m.uch, and indeed more of that spi- 
 rit, "t Too much of that bad spirit, it is ac- 
 
 Vide NeaPs Hist. Purit. Vol. IV. p. 5.^4. -f Letter III, 
 page 61.
 
 knowledged, they have each shewn. But surely 
 there is no comparison between the cruelties and 
 oppressions of your church, and of theirs. Your 
 little finger has been thicker than their loins. 
 
 " But whatever the church may have been 
 heretofore, you affirm, that it is not now of a per- 
 secuting spirit; and that there is not the least ap- 
 pearance^ of its having disquieted and oppressed 
 any, on account of religion, for moro now than 
 half a century."* You had forgotten the famous 
 Schism, and Occasional Conformity acts, which, 
 long since that date, much disquieted and op- 
 pressed us. The Test and Corporation act?, had 
 also escaped your memory, which, at this time, 
 deprive us of valuable and important privileges, 
 to which, as faithful subjects, and members of 
 the commonwealth, we think we have a natural, 
 undoubted right. 
 
 The present governors of your church, indeed, 
 (thanks be to heaven for it), are too wise and too 
 righteous, to permit persecution to rage against 
 us. But to their clemency and justice, sir, not 
 to the kind and benevolent spirit and constitution 
 of your church, I humbly apprehend, we owe it, 
 that we are not at this time severely persecuted 
 and oppressed. If the act of Uniformity, which 
 you AViil certainly call a main pillar of your 
 cSiiirch, be net a very unrighteous and persecu- 
 ting act, yet sever al of your canons breathe, you 
 know, sir, a very cruel and intolerant spirit. 
 By the former, u Whoever shall declare or speak 
 any thing in the derogation or depraving of the 
 book of Common Prayer, or any tiling therein, 
 contained, or any part thereof, he shall, for the 
 first offence, suffer imprisonment for one whole 
 year, without bail or mainprize ; and for the se- 
 cond offence, be imprisoned during life." Here 
 I affirm nothing, but appeal to tfye wholo world ; 
 
 Let III. p, 1:
 
 89 
 
 I appeal, sir, to your own conscience, whether tUi 
 he or be not an unjust anda persecuting act ? By 
 the latter, (the Canons) " If any man shall affirm 
 any of the things contained in the book of Arti- 
 cles, Common Prayer, or Ordination;" (in which 
 yet there are many things acknowledged by your 
 wwn most learned divines, and I doubt not, by 
 yourself,) to need alteration, your iv, v, vi, vii, 
 and viiith canons, thunder out upon him a ter- 
 rible excommunication, ipso fact of by which he 
 is to be cut off, as a cankered and rotten member, 
 and not to be restored, till he has repented and 
 publicly revoked his wicked error*. Doth not 
 
 I I i- savour, sir, of an antichristian and persecu- 
 ting spirit ? 
 
 But you yourself seem not to have a just hor- 
 ror of tlie dreadful sin of persecution, and to be 
 a little too deeply ting-ed with this fanatical spi- 
 rit : for you call aloud for " the church's sword 
 to fall upon heretics, as well as immoral persons ; 
 and put me in mind, that by that ancient disci- 
 pline," (which you wish to see restored,) " open 
 schismatics were treated almost as roughly as 
 any sort of offenders whatsoever. "t By heretics, 
 no doubt you mean, those whom you take to be 
 such ; and by open schismatics, those who are 
 
 * Concerning an excommunication ipso facto, our late learned 
 primate, Dr. Wake, has observed " First : that there it no need 
 in this case, of an; admonition, as where the judge is to gire sen- 
 tence ; but every one is to take notice of the law, at his peril, and 
 to see that he be not overtaken by it. And, secondly, that there it 
 no need of any sentence to be pronounced, which thecanon itself hac 
 passed, and which is, by that means, already promulged upon every 
 one, as soon as he comes within the obligation of it. In other cases, 
 a man may do things worthy of censure, and yet behave himself 
 o warily in them, as to escape the punishment of the church, for 
 want of legal evidence to convict him. Rut e*communicaiio an<>- 
 nis Hg*t etiam eccuUa delicta. Where the ranon gives sentence, 
 there is no escaping ; but the conscience of every man becomes 
 obliged by it, as soon as ever he is sensible, that he has done that 
 which was forbidden, under the pai of such an excommunication." 
 Appeal in behalf of ike king's supremacy, p. 22. 
 
 f Let.III p. 12, 21. 
 H 2
 
 90 
 
 withdrawn from your church. These you wish 
 to see roughly handled, and to have the church's 
 sword drawn upon them. But, God Almighty be 
 praised ! we live under so just a government, as 
 is not, we hope, likely to gratify this cruel wish. 
 
 Do you not remember, sir, that the first refor- 
 mers were counted heretics and open schismatics, 
 by the high churchmen, among whom they lived? 
 That Jesus Christ and his apostles endured the 
 same reproach ? That our dear brethren in 
 France, who are now* bleeding under the church's 
 word, are most confidently reckoned such, by 
 their persecuting rulers and priests? But is it fit 
 that these heretics should be thus roughly han- 
 dled ? Or, is it those only, whom you are pleased 
 to call by that name, who merit these rough mea- 
 sures? Whenever, sir, you shall produce your 
 patent from heaven, constituting you judge of 
 eresy, and shall be able, authoritatively and in- 
 fallibly, to pronounce what is, and what is not, 
 to be punished as such, then the church's sword 
 may be put into your hands. But till then,, 
 ir, it is much safer to let it remain sheathed, 
 lest under the notion of heretics, you fall upon, 
 and roughly handle, men better than yourself. 
 This has ever been the case, since the days of 
 the apostles, when ecclesiastics have presumed, 
 authoritatively, to draw and to use the sword of 
 the church. 
 
 But you add, u It is well we cannot say your 
 church has shewn a dividing spirit, and actually 
 divided itself by an open schism, from a sound 
 part of the catholic church: that, indeed, would 
 Lave been an unanswerable reason for your dis- 
 sent. ''f Yes, this also, sir, we can say, and there- 
 fore st -I' id | ustified, by your own concession. That 
 .misguided, unhappy prince, Charles 1, and hia 
 
 * This part of these letters was first published in 1747. 
 f Let. III. p. 60.^
 
 91 
 
 Various primate, Laud, began this fatal schism, 
 in complaisance to the church -if Rome, ami ac- 
 tually divided the church of England from a 
 sound part of the catholic church ; and the 
 same schismatical spirit has ever since too gene- 
 rally prevailed in it. 
 
 The Dutch. Walloon and French churches, 
 here in England, were established by charters 
 from several of o-ir princes : but lord Claren- 
 don informs us, " that as these foreign congre- 
 gations were governed by a presbytery, accord- 
 ing to the custom and constitution of those parts 
 of which they had been natives, the bishops 
 growing jealous that the countenancing another 
 discipline of the church here, by order of state, 
 would at least diminish the reputation and dig- 
 nity of the episconal government," got them 
 suppressed. " And that this might be sure to 
 look like more than what was necessary to the 
 civil policy of the kingdom ; whereas in all for- 
 mer times, the ambassadors and all foreign mi- 
 nisters of state employed from England, into 
 any parts where the reformed religion was exer- 
 cised, frequented their churches, and gave all 
 possible countenance to their profession. The 
 contrary to this was now with great industry 
 practised, and some advertisements, if not in- 
 structions, given to our ambassadors, (Le Clerc 
 says they were ordered) to forbear any extraor- 
 dinary commerce with men of that profession. 
 And lord Scudamore, the last ordinary ambas- 
 sador at Tar is, not only declined goinjy to Oha- 
 renton, (the Protestant church) but furnished 
 his own chapel with wax-candles on the commu- 
 nion table, &c. And besides, was careful to 
 publish upon all occasions, by himself, and 
 those who had the nearest relation to him, that 
 the church of England looked not upon the HU^O. 
 nots of France as apart of their communion, which 
 was likewise too .piuch and too industriously db-
 
 eoursed at home.* 1 ' Behold here, sir, 
 church of England, actually dividing itself 
 from a sound part of the catholic church! For 
 such surely you will own the brave protestants 
 in France, who have borne testimony to the. 
 faith, by so great and so glorious a fight of af- 
 flictions, and sealed it Avith seas of blood. 
 
 I would also put you in mind of another fact, 
 that seemsto have escaped your reading, or your 
 memory. Upon the queen of Bohemia's earnest 
 solicitation with the king her brother, (Charles 
 I, Anno 1634,) a collection was ordered through- 
 out England, for the poor persecuted ministers 
 of the palatinate, who were banished their 
 country for their religion. In the brief which 
 was granted for this purpose, was this clause : 
 Whose cases are the more to be deplored, because 
 this extremity is fallen upon them, for their suiee 
 rlty and constancy in the true religion, zchic/t ice 
 together with them profess. Archbishop Laud ex- 
 cepted against this clause, and denied that the 
 religion of the palatine churches was the same 
 with ours, because they Were Calvinists, and 
 their ministers had not episcopal ordination. 
 Laud acquainted the king with his objections. 
 The clause was ordered to be expunged, and the 
 brave unhappy Palatines were thus publicly dis- 
 owned by the governors of the church, who in 
 all reasonable construction, must be supposed 
 to know and speak its sense, and were not al- 
 lowed to be professors of the same true religion. t 
 How shamefully unchristian and schismatical 
 was this conduct ! 
 
 Of the like schism was jt also guilty, in the 
 Occasional Conformity act, which took place in 
 a late reign. For it thereby 'forbade, under se- 
 vere penalties, all its members who had any 
 places of profit or trust, to worship or hold coin- 
 
 * Clarcnd. Hist. Rebel, vol. ill, p. 96, 97. 
 f Neal's Hist. Punt. vol. II. p. 271. v
 
 93 
 
 munion with any of the foreign churches, 
 Dutch, French, &c, in those kingdoms in which 
 its liturgy was not used. And should any minis- 
 ter of any of the reformed churches of Scotland, 
 France, Germany, Holland, now come into 
 England, would your church receive them as 
 ministers, or admit them as such, to officiate in 
 its public worship ? I presume you know, sir, 
 she would not. But is not this virtually renoun- 
 cing their communion ? Nor will you admit 
 even the lay members of any of these foreign 
 churches to your communion, at the Lord's Sup- 
 per, except besides what Christ has ordered, 
 they will submit also to some order and institu- 
 tion of your own. 
 
 Now your great Stillingfleet* hath thus deter- 
 mined " That which confines must also divid* 
 the church ; for by that confinement, a separa- 
 tion is made betwixt the parties confined and the 
 other, which separation must be made by th 
 party so limiting Christian communion." Upon 
 the whole then, it is most evident, that your church 
 has shewn, and does shew, a schismatical and 
 dividing spirit, and has actually divided itself 
 from sound parts of the universal church. This 
 therefore you will please to take for another un- 
 answerable reason for our dissent. 
 
 You must excuse me, sir, if I think you treat a 
 great deal too severely, a worthy body of men, our 
 ministers, when you represent them as "persons 
 whom the faithful, far from being permitted to 
 enter into any pastoral relation to them, are not 
 permitted to have any Christian communion with 
 them : no, not so tnucli as any intimate unnecessa- 
 ry acquaintance and familiarity with them in 
 common life."f And also " They are not du- 
 ly ordained to their office that their adminis- 
 trations are most certaintly irregular an unne- 
 cessary and wanton, if not a factious departure 
 
 * Ration. Account, p, 359. Let II. p. S.
 
 94 
 
 from the primitive order. And tbat therefore I 
 cannot depend, at least with so much assurance, 
 as is requisite to the peace and acquiescence of 
 my mind, that such ordinances will be blessed 
 to me."* I have weighed this matter with a 
 good deal of attention, and upon the whole, am 
 fully satisfied, both from Scripture and antiqui- 
 ty, that presbyters have a right to, and did, from 
 tiie apostles' times, actually ordain. There are 
 two things, amongst many others, which I beg 
 leave to offer to your consideration, upon this 
 point. 
 
 1. That the ministers of the reformed church- 
 es, in all foreign parts, have almost all of them, 
 I apprehend, no other than presbyterian ordi- 
 nation. 
 
 The whole company of illustrious protestant 
 churches of Scothmd, France, Holland, Swit- 
 zerland, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Den- 
 mark, except perhaps, Sweden, &c. have none 
 but presbyterian ordination among them. For 
 Luther, Calvin, Bucer, Melancton, Bugenha- 
 gius, &c. and all the first reformers and found- 
 ers of these churches, who ordained ministers 
 among them, were themselves presbyters and 
 no other. And though in some of these churches 
 there are ministers which are called superintend- 
 ents or bishops, yet these are only pri'iii infer pn~ 
 res,t the Jirst among cqitah> not pretending to 
 any superiority of order. Having themselves 
 no other orders, than what either presbyters 
 gave them, or were given them as presbyters, 
 they can convey no other to those they ordain.}:. 
 
 * Let. I. p 73. -f Account of Denmark, p. 2.55. 
 \ The Danish church is indeed at this time governed by bishops. 
 But they look upon epi'scopacy as only a human institution ; 
 and the first protestant prelates in that kingdom, were ordained 
 by Bugenhagius, a mere presbyter, who by consequence, could 
 convey no other than a presbyterian ordination to their successors 
 ever since. Seckundorf. Hist. Lutherian. lib. i-'O. sect, 1. Witk 
 Caveat, p, 15.
 
 95 
 
 You are a gentleman of too great discernment, 
 to urge the stale pretence, that this is to these 
 churches, a matter not of choice, but of neces- 
 sity and force. For if they thought episcopal 
 ordination I do not say necessary, but even 
 more regular or expedient, could they not, with 
 the greatest ease, immediately obtain it : 
 Would not the church of England, upon the 
 least intimation of their willingness to receive 
 it, most readily send them bishops to sup- 
 ply this defect ? You know, sir, too well, 
 its charitable disposition, and even offers of this 
 kind, in the least to suspect it. Whatever cen- 
 sures you pass then upon the orders and admini- 
 strations of the ministers among us, they equally 
 fall upon all the reformed churches throughout 
 the whole protestant world. If ours be an un- 
 necessary and wanton departure from the primi- 
 tive order, theirs is the very same. Nowitgives 
 me great pleasure, to see myself in such a crowd 
 of excellent and good company. And unless 
 you can offer something more demonstrative on 
 this head, thtm I have ever yet seen, my mind 
 will enjoy full peace as to the regularity of the 
 ministration on which I attend. But, 
 
 2. It seems a little strange to hear you glory- 
 ing, over us, and consequently over all the fo- 
 reign churches, as to this matter of orders, when 
 these very orders in which you gl^ry, you ack- 
 nowledge to have been derived only from the 
 church of Rome a church which yourselves, in 
 your homilies, confess to be idolatrous and an- 
 tichristian, " Not only a harlot, as the Scrip- 
 ture calleth her, but also a foul, filthy, old, 
 withered harlot the foulest and filthiest that 
 ever was seen. And* that, as it at present is, 
 and hath been for 900 years, it is so far from the 
 nature of the true church, that nothing can be 
 more,*" Note, these homilies every clergyman 
 
 Vid. homilies, p. 162, 295.
 
 96 
 
 publicly declares, and subscribes with his hand, 
 that they contain a godly and wholesome doctrine, 
 fit to be read in churches by ministers. 
 
 Now it is only from this filthy witheredbld harlot 
 that you derive, by ordination, your spiritual de- 
 scent. You confessyoursel v es born of her, as to ec- 
 clesiastical pedigree. And the sons of this foulest 
 and filthiest of harlots you acknowledge as bre- 
 thren, by admitting their orders as regular and 
 valid; whereas those of the protestant chinches 
 you reject. If a priest, ordained with all the 
 superstitious and idolatrous rites of thisantichris- 
 tian and false church, conies over to the church 
 of England, you admit him as a brother, duly 
 ordained, without obliging him to pass under 
 that ceremony again. But if a minister of the 
 reformed churchesjoins himself to you, you con- 
 sider him as but a layman, an unordained per- 
 son, and oblige him to receive orders according 
 to your form. How, sir, is it possible to ac- 
 count for this procedure ! Can that church, 
 which is no true church, impart valid and true 
 orders ? Can a filthy old harlot produce any 
 other than a spurious and corrupt breed ? Will 
 you rest the validity and regularity of your ad- 
 ministrations, on your receiving the sacerdotal 
 character from the bishops and popes of the Ro- 
 mish church ? many, if not most of whom 
 were men of most corrupt and infamous lives 
 men who were so far from being regular and va- 
 lid ministers in the church of Jesus Christ, that 
 they had neither part nor 'lot in this matter, their 
 hearts not being right in the sight of God* Such 
 men, therefore, could not possibly, duly, or re- 
 gularly officiate therein ; consequently, had no 
 power to communicate or convey orders or offi- 
 ces in the Christian church. Whatever offices 
 they conveyed therefore, are at best doubtful 
 
 * Acts viii. 21.
 
 97 
 
 and suspicious, if not absolutely null, irregular 
 and void so that really your own orders, if 
 strictly examined, may minister great doubt and 
 disquietude of mind. 
 
 If Charity then were silent, Prudence, me- 
 thinks should loudly dictate, that you speak 
 gently as to the authority and orders of our mi- 
 nisters, when you know it is in their power so 
 strongly to .retort. It was therefore, surely, not 
 wise, sir, as well as extremely unkind, to set 
 them up as objects of public odium and avoid- 
 ance, and to admonish " every good man not to 
 have any intimate or unnecessary acquaintance 
 with them, or familiarity in common life." But; 
 Jilessed, our Lord hath said, are ye, when Men 
 shall hate you, and separate you from their compa- 
 ny, and cast out your names as evil, for the Son of 
 Man's sake : rejoice ye in that day, and leap for 
 joy, for behold, your reward in heaven is great !* 
 
 You very strenuously contest, what you call 
 u one of the favourite and fundamental princi- 
 ples of the dissention, namely, that every lay 
 Christian has a right to choose his own pastor y"t 
 a right so evidently founded on reason, Scrip- 
 ture, and the undoubted practice of the primi- 
 tive church, and so generally acknowledged by 
 all the learned of your own communion, that I 
 cannot but wonder at the alertness with which 
 you make your attack upon it. The charge 
 given to the Christian people, To take heed what 
 they hear to beware of false prophets not to be- 
 licve every spirit, but to try the spirits incontes- 
 tibly proves them to have aright of judgment 
 and of choice, relating to this matter ; and that 
 this right, which God has given them, it is their 
 duty to use. 
 
 When an apostle was to be chosen in the room 
 of Judas, the traitor, the whole body of the 
 
 * Luke fi. 22, 39. f Lt. II. p. 6.
 
 93 
 
 disciples were applied to on that occasion, (Acts, 
 i.) who appointed, by common suffrage, t^p 
 from their whole number, to be candidates foi- 
 that office, ver. 23." The election, you say, 
 was evidently made by God."* But was it not 
 as evidently made by the people also? If the 
 choice of one from the two be acknowledged to 
 be the act of God, was not the choice of these 
 two, from among the whole number, as much 
 the act of the people ? The people then were 
 actually concerned in that choice. " The seven 
 deacons, (Acts vi.) you say, were but presented 
 or recommended by the brethren. t" But let the 
 sacred . story determine Wherefore, brethren, 
 look ye out amongst I/OK, seven men of ho/jest re- 
 port : and the saying pleased, the whole multitude^ 
 and they chose Stephen and Philip, dye. Can words 
 be more express ? 
 
 That bishops and pastors were chosen in the 
 ancient church, by the suffrage of the people, 
 tjie evidence is so strong, as greatly to try the 
 countenance of the person who disputes it. Ig- 
 natius, if you will allow him genuine, says 
 
 crptTTOv tj-tv t'/-i' tx.K\r,5-i3c, 0=^, ip^si3oTOvr)-x E7T4O-;:o7rov J 
 
 It becomes you, as the church of God, to choose a 
 bishop. Alexander was made bishop of Jerusa- 
 lem, by the compulsion or choice of the .mem- 
 bers of that church. Upon the death of Ante- 
 rus, bishop of Rome, all the people met to- 
 gether in the church, to choose a successor and 
 .they all took Fabianus and placed him in the 
 episcopal chair. So Cornelius, his successor, 
 was elected by the suffrage of the clergy and lai- 
 ty. Cyprian often acknowledges he was made 
 bishop of Carthage, fa-core plcbis, popiili uni- 
 vcrsi siiffragio, fyc. By the favour and vole of all 
 the people,.^ And expressly says, pltbs maximc 
 
 Let. II. p. 8. f It)id - * E P' st - ad pwlad - 
 Vid. Cflstjtut.'nd Discipline of the Primitive Chuch, p. 4.
 
 9D 
 
 prolcstatcm, vcl eliscndi dignos 
 tcl indignos rccusandi. The chief poifcr of choos- 
 ing worthy ministers , and of rejecting it>(- unworth^ 
 btlongs to the people. 1 produce no farther evi- 
 dence upon a point so incontestable, but the 
 words of a learned brother of your own, high 
 enough for church power; "That the people 
 bad votes in the choice of bishops, all must 
 grant ; and it can be only ignorance and folly 
 that plead the contrary.* 
 
 ' " You think a man provides very well for his 
 soul, who submits himself to the instruction?, 
 and devoutly attends all the administrations of 
 an able and orthodox minister, by whomsoever 
 provided. And it will be confessed, you sup- 
 pose, that the king and bishops, lord chancellor, 
 nobility and gentry, who are our great pa- 
 trons, are more competent judges of the abili- 
 ties and orthodoxy of clergymen, and of their 
 fitness for particular stations, than the common 
 run of men, especially the vulgar.f" But ima- 
 gine yourself, sir, for a moment on the other 
 side of the water, preaching this wholesome doc- 
 trinetothe gobdprotetants in France. If kings, 
 bishops, &c. have authority and right to appoint 
 pastors to the people, then the people are bound 
 'to receive and attend the pastors they send. But 
 if tins be right in one country, (1 must again put 
 you in mind) it is right also in another; unless 
 one kingdom can produce a warrant or charter 
 from heaven, giving it such authority, whfoh 
 other kingdoms have not. If this doctrine be 
 truth iu England, it is truth also in France. The 
 brave protestants then have rashly and unwar- 
 rantably withdrawn themselves from the pastors 
 whom their king and bishops had set over them : 
 they org'it to return, and submit to their estab- 
 lished guides, and not proudly attempt to find 
 
 * Lowtb en Church poorer. f Ibid. R. 9*.
 
 100 
 
 ministers more able and orthodox, than those 
 their superiors have solemnly deputed to that 
 trust. Will you stand, sir, to this doctrine ? 
 If not, you must allow every man a right to 
 judge for himself. 
 
 To the common and just plea u That every 
 man has as good right to choose his own pastor, 
 to whom to commit the care of his soul, as to 
 choose his lawyer or his physician, with whom he 
 intrusts his body or estate," you reply" Phy- 
 sicians, in many places, are provided by gover- 
 nors, for those who are sick, as in Chelsea, and 
 other hospitals, whilst nobody dreams of any in- 
 croachment upon their natural rights.".* But tell 
 me, sir, would you not complain, if, whenever 
 you were sick, you were obliged to accept of 
 this public provision; and must commit yourself 
 to the care of those gentlemen of the faculty, who 
 officiated in the hospital, supposing you lived 
 near it, whatever notion you had of their fidelity 
 or skill ? Or should a physician be provided and 
 established by law, in each parish of this king- 
 dom, would you not call it an infringement of 
 your natural right, to be obliged to call him in, 
 however ignorant and incapable you took him to 
 be, and to commit your health to his care ; espe- 
 cially if there was at hand another, licensed by 
 authority, whom you thought to have better jud- 
 ment, and from whose prescriptions you had 
 received frequent and signal relief? I am per- 
 suaded, in this case, you would strongly, and 
 very justly, complain of the restraint. But every 
 man surely, is as capable, and has as undoubted 
 a right, to judge and to choose what minister to 
 attend, for the edification of his soul, as what 
 physician to consult for the recovery of his health. 
 
 " No, you reply, there is a difference in the 
 two cases : your pastors are your guides and 
 
 Let. 11. p. 19.
 
 101 
 
 governors, to whom you owe subjection in spi- 
 ritual things ; and it is not, I think, quite so 
 reasonable to challenge to yourselves the choos- 
 ing: of these, as of the other, who have no au- 
 thority over you." But I beseech you, good sir, 
 who made them my governors ? Who gave them: 
 this rule and ar.thority over me? Does every 
 gay stripling, just emancipated from the college, 
 that can get himself inducted into a good living, 
 find there are various ways of getting, you 
 know, sir, not fit here to be mentioned,) doe ; he, 
 I ask, thenceforward become governor of all the 
 souls dwelling in his parish, to whom they orcc 
 subjection hi spiritual' things ? What ! must all 
 the learned, the wise, the grave arid expe- 
 rienced persons, residing in that pariah, consider 
 the enrobed youth as their spiritual ruler, vested 
 with authority over them, in things pertaining" 
 to CJod, fro conscience, and to eternity ! Yes, 
 he has authority, you say, over me I owe him. 
 spiritual subjection. But how far, sir, does the 
 authority of my young ruler extend ? Must I 
 believe whatever he tells me, because he hath 
 said it ; or do whatever he commands. me, be- 
 cause he hath enjoined it ; or follow my spiritu- 
 al guide wherever he shall lend me, without 
 considering, examining, and judging for- my- 
 self, whither the course tonds ? And if I- happen- 
 to think he is leading me wrong, must I still" 
 obey, and submit to my ghostly director, and' 
 tru^t God with the event ? Am I to- deliver my- 
 self up entirely, or only a little, and in part, to; 
 his sacerdotal authority ? And nuist'I see things 
 in religion, only and always by the eyes of my, 
 overseer ; or ought I not also sometimes, at 
 least, to see with my own ? Will you please to 
 inform me also, whether, as my young governor 
 undertakes to judge for me now, he will also un- 
 dertake to be judged for me hereafter, and to be> 
 condemned for me too, if I should happen to get 
 
 1 /* 
 

 
 102 
 
 astray, by going as he directs ? -A certain no- 
 bleman, not half a century ago, got his hunts- 
 man inducted into a good living, and from the 
 care of his hounds, advanced him to the priest- 
 hood and to the cure of souls. Now from the time 
 of his investiture with this new character and- 
 office, he became the governor and guide, it 
 seems, of all the souls in his parish, and they 
 owed him subjection in spiritual things, If a 
 Locke then, a Newton, or even his lordship him- 
 self who gave him the living, had dwelt within 
 its bounds, they ought reverently to regard him as 
 their spiritual governor and director, and to sub- 
 mit themselves to him, us having the rule oxer 
 them, and watching for their son/s. But are these 
 claims to be supported, or is this doctrine to be 
 preached, in this age of liberty and light ? L,et 
 them, for the honour of Christianity, be eternally 
 suppressed. To return, sir, to the point whence 
 I set out, after the considerations which I have 
 .suggested, I still hold myself justified in assert- 
 ing the right which every man has, in things of 
 religion, to call no man upon earth master, but 
 to examine and judge, and choose for himself. 
 
 As to the manner in which the choice of our 
 ministers is conducted, against which you except, 
 I believe no elections of any kind, are transacted 
 with greater fairness and equity than these : and 
 the nature of the thing speaks that it must be so. 
 For ours being assemblies formed only by con- 
 sent, and supported only by voluntary contri- 
 butions of their members, any oppressive or ini- 
 quitous management would throw them presently 
 into confusion disband and break them up. 
 
 But it is time, sir, that I now release*your 
 patience and attention, having, I fear, strained 
 both to their utmost extent. There are many 
 other parts of your letters as exceptionable as 
 those I have taken notice of, but I would not be 
 tedious. I might have expostulated with you
 
 103. 
 
 largely on your reading, as parts of your public 
 worship, the fabulous and gross legends of Bel 
 and the Dragon, of Judith and Susannah ; and 
 above all, the magical romance of rescuing a 
 fair virgin from the inchantments of her infernal 
 lover, and conjuring away the amorous devil, 
 Asmodeus, by the fumes of a fish's liver. Is it 
 for the honour of the Christian name, think you, 
 sir, to have such spurious and idle tales read 
 solemnly in our churches, (if solemnly they can 
 be read,) and made parts of our public worship? 
 What will an unbeliever think, when present at 
 such worship ? When he sees such things not 
 only bound up with the Holy Scriptures, but com- 
 manded to be read as such in the order of the 
 Common Prayer ! Will it not heighten his 
 contempt of the credulity of believers, and es- 
 tablish his prejudices against the history, the 
 miracle?, and the doctrines of Christ ? 
 
 I might also have asked you, sir, to what ori- 
 ental deity you pay your devoirs, when, from 
 the north, the south, the west, the worshippers 
 in your church, on certain solemn occasions, 
 turn reverently towards the east, and make their 
 peculiar honours ? To whom, sir, I beseech 
 you, are these peculiar honours paid ? Not 
 surely to the immense, omnipresent Jehovah. 
 He is an infinite spirit, you know, alike present 
 in all places not more confined to one quarter 
 of the heavens than to another. To represent 
 him as being so, is to dishonour and offend 
 him to detract from the glory of his immensity 
 or omnipresence, and to give men very false and 
 unworthy notions of God. This worshipping 
 towards the east, is not, I think, ordered by any 
 canon of your church, which is now generally 
 received ; but it is (if I mistake not,) its com- 
 mon and prevailing practice. I should be glad 
 to be informed (for lassure you, sir, I am quite 
 ignorant) what shadow of ground, either frojn
 
 reason or Scripture, you can possibly pretend^ 
 for this unaccountable superstition, for such you- 
 must allow me at present to think it. If you 
 say the worship is paid towards the altar, this 
 seems to make the matter more inexplicable 
 still. For what is there in the altar, to make it 
 a proper object of religious veneration ? In- 
 deed, whilst the bread en God was upon it, the- 
 people who believed it to be the very body of 
 Christ, did well to pay their homage to it. But 
 now, when that idol is taken thence, I cannot 
 possibly perceive what shadow of divinity Pro- 
 testants see in the altar, that they should pay it 
 religious honours. 
 
 As much, sir, am I at a loss, when endea- 
 vouring to reconcile to reason and good sense r 
 another of your additional beauties and splen- 
 dors of public worship, viz. bowing at the 
 name of Jesus. As for that passage of the 
 apostle, Philip, ii. 10. That at the name of Je- 
 sus 'every knee shall bow the learned men of 
 your church, I presume, universally disclaim it,, 
 as not in the least authorizing or enjoining 
 this practice. Your great Dr. Nichols* vindi- 
 cates your church from such an uncouth and ri- 
 diculous abuse of this text, and affirms, that it 
 is not once menticn?d in any of your ecclesiasti- 
 cal constitutions, as to this matter ; and adds, 
 that you are net so dull as to think that those 
 words can be rigorously applied to this purpose. 
 But if this text be acknowledged, not in the 
 least to authorize or require this act of worship, 
 what shadow of argument, sir, can you possibly 
 bring, either from reason or Scripure, which shall 
 so much as seem to support it ? Why then 
 does your church command, (canon xviii.) that 
 when in lime of divine service the Lord Jesus shall 
 be mentioned^ duly and lowly reverence shall be 
 
 Defence, &c. Part 1 1. p. 319.
 
 105 
 
 done by ell persons present ? Is not this, sir, by 
 your own confession, an act of will-worship, a 
 commandment, an invention of men, not in the 
 least founded upon the authority and will of 
 God? 
 
 But why, sir, must this lowly reverence be 
 mntie at the name of Jesus, and not at the name 
 of Christ, at the name Immanuel, Jehovah, or 
 God ? Is there not in all these, something at 
 1 vast as .venerable and worthy of peculiar ho- 
 nours ; indeed something much more so, than 
 there is in the name of Jesus a name not at ail 
 peculiar to our blessed Saviour, but. which was 
 common to him, with a great many other men ? 
 But if this peculiar reverence must be made at 
 the name of Jesus, why not at all times, when- 
 ever it is mentioned, at least in public worship? 
 Why in the creed only, which is but a human 
 composition, and not every time it is read from the 
 Gospels and Epistles, which were indited by the 
 Holy Spirit ? But I press no farther a point, 
 which I believe few of your own church think 
 capable of a rational and solid defence. 
 
 I have now finished my reply, sir, to the let- 
 ters with which you have publicly honoured me, 
 and have, with freedom, set before you tiie chief 
 difficulties and elections which keep me in a 
 tate of separation from your church. If by 
 calm and fair argument, you can shew my objec- 
 tions to be weak and futile, I shall with plea- 
 sure become your convert, and readily obey the 
 calls of worldly interest and honour. 
 
 But as yor, sir, have the dignities, emolu- 
 ments, and powers of this world, on your side, 
 you must give us leave to think, at least till we 
 are better taught, that we have TRUTH on ours, 
 TRUTH, which is great, and which willjinallt/ 
 pr trail. Nor am I, sir, without hope, that up- 
 on an impartial review of the merits of the 
 cause between us, omnipotent TUUTH may even
 
 ; io6 
 
 bond your mind towards us, and dispose you, 
 like one who has had the honour of being called 
 the great apostle, to join yourself to those you 
 once censured and despised. 
 
 What, though we have not the honours and 
 profits of this world, to draw you to our com- 
 munion, are we, on this account, the less likely 
 to be the genuine apostolic church of a cruci- 
 fied, despised, insulted Jesus ? Hath he not 
 expressly told us, that his kfnsrdom is net of this 
 world*- That whosoever will come after A?V?, 
 must deny himself, and lake up his cross, -t That 
 not many mighty and nolle are called ?\ Arei-.ot 
 the witnesses to TRUTH to prophesy , cloth(d in 
 sackcloth^ 'till the promised times of refreshing 
 come from the alppearance of Christ ? Is net 
 the pure apostolic church, the true spouse of 
 Christ, represented in the Revelation, as a wo- 
 man (friz-en into the wilderness ,\\ i. e. in an afflict- 
 ed and forsaken state; whilst the corrupt and 
 antichristian church ? (the apostate church of 
 Rome) is caressed anJ enriched by the kir.gs of 
 the earth, f glittering in all the pomp and splen- 
 dor of this world, wantoning' in luxwry, pow- 
 er and wealth ? Does TRUTH need the charms 
 of earthly grandeur, to recommend it, or the 
 force of civil power, to spread or to establish it ? 
 Was it thus the blessed Gospel was at first pro- 
 pagated, made its way, and prevailed ever all 
 the earth ? No worldly grandeur and power, 
 have generally, you well know, sir, if not al- 
 ways, been extremely injurious to it -have 
 enervated, obstructed, and under pretence of 
 improving, have greatly corrupted and depraved 
 it, and have robbed it of its native beauty, glory 
 and strength. 
 
 High dignities and preferments, mitres and 
 
 * John xviii. 36. f Matt. xvi. 24. } 1 Cor. i. 26. 
 $ Rev, xi 3. |S Tbid, xii. 14. ^ Ibid, XTii. 4, 513 17.
 
 107 
 
 thrones, lordships and large revenues, hare a 
 mighty force, you will own, sir, to bias and per; 
 vert the mind, in its searches after TRUTH. 
 These are not the mearis which the God of 
 TRUTH uses, to draw the mind to it; but you 
 know they are the means which the great enemy 
 is wont to use, to seduce the mind from it. It 
 is therefore, I apprehend, sir, no presumption 
 at all in favour of any church, that it shines 
 with all the glory of worldly honours and 
 wealth. This the prophetic Scriptures very clearly 
 describe, as the state of the false church, whilst 
 the true church of Jesus Christ, his genuine and 
 faithful followers, are to be a little despised 
 Jlocl: a sect rccry where spoken ft gainst : in the 
 world it is to luvce tribulaJLion y till the expected 
 happy period, when it shall be the Father's good 
 f>!< nsurc to give them the kingdom. 
 
 Let not then the low r estate of our interest, as 
 tp the present world, at all frighten or discou- 
 rage you, sir, from casting in your lot among 
 us. The world passeth away, and all its glories 
 and pomp will soon vanish like a dream before 
 the descending Son of God, whom we? stedfast- 
 ly expect. And then to be found faithful, and 
 to have adhered, with unshaken loyalty, to the 
 only lawgiver, Lord and King of the church 
 to have denied ourselves any worldly honours, 
 preferments, or profits, out of conscience to- 
 wards him to have been separated from mens' 
 company, cast out and reproached, because 
 we would not make a sacrifice of our virtue and 
 integrity to the applause of the many, or the fa- 
 vour of the greatwill yield divine comfort, 
 and procure immortal honours in the everlast- 
 ing kingdom of God. Pardon me, sir, if I am 
 here acting alittle out of character, and seeming 
 to invade your office ; for I am extremely ambi- 
 tious of engaging so ingenious a gentleman 
 among us.
 
 108 
 
 These, sir, are the prospects with which Dis- 
 senters support themselves under all their dis- 
 advantage?, with regard to the present world. 
 They remember whose disciples and followers 
 they are who it is that hath said, in rain do 
 they worship me, teaching for doctrines the com- 
 mandments of men who hath strictly charged 
 them to call no man upon earth master, because 
 ONE only is their master, even Christ and final- 
 ly, who it is that hath promised, that if any man 
 shall forsake house, or brethren, or sisters, or 
 children, or linds, for his name's sake, he shall 
 receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting 
 life. 
 
 I now conclude, sir, with beseeching you, very 
 carefully to remember, that the controversy be- 
 tween us, depends absolutely and entirely upon 
 the decision of this single point Is there any 
 other lawgiver or king, in the church of God, to 
 whose authority and command, as to things of 
 religion. Christians are bound to submit, BESIDES 
 Jesus Christ ? Or is there not? If there be no 
 other lawgiver besides Jesus Christ, no other 
 king, no other authority to whose decrees, in 
 point of doctrine, and to whose injunctions, in 
 point of worship, Christians are obliged, and 
 ought to submit ; then the Dissenters, in every 
 impartial judgment, will be, must be justified : 
 then they act right : then they ought to be com- 
 mended, and will surely be rewarded, for adhe- 
 ring loyally and firmly to the ONE only king and 
 Lord of the church : ami for faithfully opposing 
 the claims of any other power, and for refusing 
 obedience to the injunctions of any other law- 
 giver, and the decisions of any other judge, who 
 hath made other articles of faith, other terms of 
 communion, other rites of worship, BESIDES 
 and ABOVE those which Christ himself has 
 made. 
 
 For to illustrate the case : if any foreign
 
 109 
 
 prince should pretend to make laws and prescribe 
 rules of action to the people of these realms, 
 and should exact obedience to his injunctions 
 from the subjects of the king of Great Britain, 
 I ask, would not your allegiance to him, your 
 only sovereign, jre quire and oblige you to make 
 your protest against any such laws, and to refuse 
 your obedience to them ? But is not the church 
 a province in which Christ alone is king, as 
 much as these realms are the dominions only of 
 the king of England ? If any human potentate 
 then shall rise up in the church, and shall claim 
 authority and dominion over the consciences of 
 Christ's subjects ; authority, as to things of 
 foiih, to decree what he hath not decreed ; and 
 dominion, as to things of worship, to appoint 
 rites and institutions which he hath not appoint- 
 ed I ask you, sir, does not your allegiance to 
 Christ, your only sovereign, require and oblige 
 you to enter your protest against such usurped 
 authority, and to refuse your obedience to it? 
 
 This (I repeat it, sir, because I earnestly en- 
 treat your peculiar attention to it,) this is the es- 
 sential and important point upon which the con- 
 troversy between us entirely turns. If you can 
 prove that there is another lawgiver, another 
 judge, another king in the church, besides Jesus 
 Christ, to whose authority we are to submit in 
 things of religion, and that the king and par- 
 liament of these realms are this lawgiver and 
 this judge you will then at once gain your 
 point; and by that single blow, you will entirely 
 overthrew the dissenting interest and churches 
 
 we will immediately become your converts, 
 
 and flock into the established church. 
 
 But if you cannot prove this point, you must 
 
 yield the cause to us ; you must, in efiert, own 
 
 us justified before the world; and we will still 
 
 indulge the rational and reviving hope of being 
 
 K.
 
 110 
 
 acknowledged by our great lawgiver, at his re- 
 turn into the world, as his loyal and obedient 
 subjects ; of beinr advanced to peculiar honours 
 and dignities in his kingdom, as we have here 
 suffered on account of our duty and allegiance 
 to him; and of receiving from our judge, 
 before anerels and men, that sentence of ap- 
 plause W 'ell done, good and faithful servant? ; 
 enter ye into line joy of your Lord. 
 
 I have only to add that this principle that 
 Christ is the only lawgiver and king in his 
 church ; and that no man no body of men upon 
 earth, has any authority to make laws, or to 
 prescribe things in religion, which shall oblige 
 the consciences of his subjects-*-is the grand, the 
 only principle, upon which the unity, the purity 
 and the peace of the Christian church, can pos- 
 sibly subsist. Take away this, and you let in 
 endless discords and corruptions into it : you 
 split it into parties : you make Christianity one 
 thing, in one country, and a quite different thing 
 in another. In England, you make it wear an 
 episcopal form in Scotland, a presbyterian 
 in France, a popish in Denmark, a Lutheran 
 in Prussia, a Calvinistic in Russia, a Gre- 
 cian, &c. But ought these things to be so ? Is 
 t divided ? Is this the unity of his one 
 beautitu;, well compacted body ? Can these be 
 allgenuine, apostolic Christian churches? Rather 
 are any of them so .' When the powers of this 
 world take upon them authoritatively to inter- 
 pret and prescribe in things of religion, which 
 are Christ's kingdom and province, they act be- 
 yond their sphere : they invade the throne of 
 another prince : the rights of Christians are 
 violated *. the unity of the church is broken, and 
 a gate is opened for innumerable superstitions 
 and inventions to enter, .and mingle with the 
 pure doctrines of Christ ; and hence necessarily 
 flow schisms emulations, contentions, and everj 
 evil work.
 
 Ill 
 
 I beseech you then, by the mercies of God, 
 and for the honour of Christianity and by the 
 allegiance you owe your only lawgiver Jesus 
 Christ, to weigh these things in an impartial 
 and unbiassed mind. May his Spirit of truth 
 judge between us upon the point, and teach us 
 hie will ! To his influence I commend you, sir, 
 and am, with great sincerity, 
 
 Your very humble servant, 
 
 A DISSENTER,
 
 POSTSCRIPT, 
 
 Containing Remarks on the Defence of your 
 Three Letters. 
 
 JL HE preceding Letter having been sent to 
 the press before your Defence, &c. was adver- 
 tised, its publication was deferred till I had 
 seen what occasion it'might have given me, ei- 
 ther to retract or support what was offered in 
 my first letter. You seem moved at its pretend- 
 ing to be an answer to your three letters, when 
 o small a part of them is considered therein ; 
 and with airs quite suitable to the cause you are 
 pleading, ecclesiastical authority, you give me to 
 understand, that your taking any notice of this 
 performance is to be considered as a condescen- 
 sion to which you were not obliged, and which 
 I had no right to expect from you. But, pray 
 recollect What was the avowed design and 
 purport of your letters? Was it not to refute 
 the great and popular objections of the Dissen- 
 ters, and to bring me over to your church ? But 
 upon reading your letters, I found you had 
 scarcely touched upon the principal objections 
 which 'kept me from your church. Was it not 
 then my part, to state my objections to you, and 
 set them in their full light? As unasked, you 
 had taken upon you to be my instructor in this 
 affair | 4 ad 1 not a right to lay my difficulties 
 before you, and to demand your solution of 
 them? What! must I confine myself to the 
 pleas which you had seen fit to dress up for the 
 J3issenters ; and if I presume to offer others', 
 will you magisterially call them ramblings, in 
 which you are not obliged to follow me? Very 
 pleasant, indeed !
 
 11.? 
 
 Here therefore I now put in my claim, sir, 
 and give you to undersand, that I expect your 
 plain and full answer to the several objections 
 against your established forms, presented in the 
 preceding letter; some of which, though you 
 knew them to be of great weight with Dissen- 
 ters, you dextrously avoided bringing into the 
 debate. To this you are most clearly and in- 
 dispensibly obliged by the province you have ta- 
 ken upon you. If there be any parts of the litur- 
 gy indefensible and absurd, this, 1st, condemns 
 your own conformity, who not only declare, but 
 solemnly subscribe your unfeigned assent and con- 
 sent to all and rcerij thing contained in and prescri- 
 bed by the book of Common Prayer., &c. And 
 2d, it justifies the separation, by proving it to 
 have been a severe and cruel measure, when you 
 cast out above two thousand of our ministers 
 from the church, for not declaring and subscrib- 
 ing this unfeigned assent and consent) &c. which 
 began the separation. 
 
 This being premised, we come to the point 
 of church authority, upon which the controver- 
 sy turns. Here I observe, with pleasure, that 
 you are for mutilating your XXth article, rid- 
 ding your hands of one part, and holding only 
 to the other. " The church's authority in mat- 
 ters of faith (you say) you have nothing to do 
 with.'"* But this authority, you know, your 
 church claims as much as the power of decree- 
 ing rites and ceremonies ; and against this part 
 of its claim, I as much excepted as against the 
 other. When therefore you declare, that you 
 have nothing to do with it, I must consider you 
 as wisely declining to undertake its defence. 
 But then, is it not highly reproachful to your 
 church, that it should still inflexibly maintain 
 its claim to this authority should force its cler- 
 
 * Defence, p. 18. 
 K. 2
 
 114 
 
 gy to subscribe and acknowledge this claim ; 
 and keep Dissenters from a shaVe in those emo- 
 luments, " after which (you say) they languish," 
 partly for refusing their solemn subscription to 
 an article, which even one of its warmest advo- 
 cates is unable to defend. 
 
 (l By the church's power to decree rites and 
 ceremonies, is meant, a right in the pastors and 
 governors thereof, to ordain and appoint such 
 things, so as to make it ordinarily the duty of 
 the people, to conform themselves to them.*" 
 You hayje artfully declined to say, whom you 
 understand by its pastors and governors; but 
 from other passages,-)-/ it is evident you mean 
 the bishops and clergy ; for the civil magistrate, 
 you declare, has no such power at all. J Now, 
 
 1. That the clergy have no power nor autho- 
 rity at all of this kind over the laity, I proved 
 beyond-all doubt, from the express command of 
 our great lawgiver. Call no man upon earth 
 master ; ONE is your master^ even Christ % and all 
 ye are brethren.^ The princes of the Gentiles ex- 
 ercise dominion and authority over them, but it 
 HALL, NOT BE so amongst you . || What have 
 you said in answer to these texts ? Not a sin- 
 gle word. You leave them to stand in full 
 force against you. And without one- text of 
 Scripture to support this authority of the clergy 
 over the laity, you go on to treat it as a thing 
 indisputable and allowed ; and labour hard in 
 raising a pompous structure upon the sand. - 
 What you say as to the -kiss of charity* has been 
 considered above, p. 71. Should even this be 
 allowed to be a merely ecclesiastical and pru- 
 dential institution, it will by no means establish 
 the authority you claim for your pastors and go- 
 vernors ; the orders, decrees, and appointments 
 
 Def. p. -10. f Let. II. p. 14. \ Def. p. 18. Mat. xxiii. 8, 9- 
 (j Mat. xx, 25,
 
 115 
 
 of those times being by the common consent and 
 suffrage of the whole church ; in which the lai- 
 ty had an equal, if not a far greater share of 
 authority, than the clergy.* But, 
 
 2. Your lodging this power in the pastors and 
 governors, absolutely contradicts the articles 
 themselves. x For as the XXth article claims it 
 for the church so the immediately preceding 
 article (XlXth,) expressly defines what it 
 means by the church, viz. " a congregation of 
 faithful men, where the pure word of God is 
 preached." It is to the whole body of the faith- 
 ful then that this power of decreeing ceremo- 
 nies, if any such there be, belongs. How then, 
 do you presume, sir, to wrest it from them, and 
 to vest it solely in the clergy ? And 
 
 3. When you add, " that to this right of the 
 pastors to decree ceremonies, it is the people's 
 duty ordinarily to conform themselves." The 
 word ordinarily seems to be brought in with a 
 view of darkening the point, and of preparing 
 a salvo, incase the argument should press too 
 hard upon you. What mean you, sir, by ordi- 
 ntirily ? How sh.j^l the people know when it is, 
 and when it is not their duty {o submit to these 
 injunctions of their spiritual governors ? Are 
 the people themselves to judge, and always to 
 judge, of the fitness and expedience of the en- 
 joined ceremonies ; or are they not? If they 
 are not, then they are absolutely to resign them- 
 selves to the direction of their governors, which 
 is palpable and gross popery, and leads directly 
 to Rome. But if they are' to judge, the Babel 
 of church authority is at once overthrown : for 
 then tlie authority resides no longer in the de- 
 crees of the governors, but in the judgment^ 
 the people. It is the judgment they form of 
 them, which alone makes them binding erpbn 
 
 * Yul. Exam, of the Codex, j. 120.
 
 them or not. Of their number, whether they 
 be tco many -and of their nature, whether they 
 be superstitious, foppish and vain, you seem 
 sometimes to allow the. people are to judge. 
 But if they have a right to judge, they have a 
 right also to act in consequence of that judg- 
 ment ; and to withdraw from those churches 
 where such ceremonies are enjoined, as they 
 think foppish and vain : and to join themselves 
 to others, where they think the worship of God 
 is performed in a more scriptural and proper 
 manner. So that after all the solemn^parade 
 about church-authority, you see, it turns out to 
 be a mere shadow. It is an authority to com- 
 mand, which no one is under any obligation to 
 obey. This power of making ceremonies must 
 be either limited or unlimited : If it be not 
 unlimited (which you seem to disavow) pray ! 
 what limits it ? what prescribes its bounds, 
 beyond which it shall not pass ? If the church has 
 power to ordain five ceremonies, why not ten ? 
 And if ten, why not more ? Who shall pretend 
 to say how far it may go ? 
 
 Your illustration " as to the king's injunc- 
 tions, &c." * will not reach the case ; be- 
 cause the constitution and laws of England em- 
 power the king to make such injunctions : but 
 you have not yet proved, and I presume never 
 will prove, that the constitution of the Christian 
 church empowers its pastors to decree ceremo- 
 nies and rites. 
 
 You askt " Where does the church pretend 
 to be alone the proper judge, or where disallow 
 private Christians to judge for themselves in 
 these matters ?" I will tell you, sir; it is in its 
 XXXIVth article,- which decrees, that " who- 
 soever, through his private judgment, willingly 
 
 Def. p. H. f Ibid. p. 15.
 
 117 
 
 ami purposely doth openly break the traditions 
 and ceremonies of the church, which be not re- 
 pugnant to the word of God, and be ordained 
 by common authority, ought to be rebuked open- 
 ly (that others .may fear to do the like), as he 
 that offendeth against the common order of the 
 church, and hurteth the authority of the magis- 
 trate." Private judgment, you see, is here for- 
 bidden to oppose the common order of the church, 
 and the authority of .the magistrate ; and when 
 it presumes to do so, is to be censured and pu- 
 nished for it. 
 
 " The church of France, and the church of 
 Rome, you acknowledge, to be as much pos- 
 sessed of this power as the church of England : 
 but it does not follow, that because they have a 
 power to decree rites, they may therefore decree 
 
 fopperies and superstitions."* But by what 
 
 mark, I pray, do you distinguish between rite* 
 and fopperies ; between ceremonies and super- 
 stitions ? The consecration of earth in the church 
 of England is a rite, but the consecrating of 
 water in the church of France is a foppery. In 
 the church of England, the priest's signing the 
 baptized infant with the sign of the cross, in to- 
 ken that it shall confess a crucified Christ, is a 
 significant rite : but in the church of Rome, his 
 putting his finger into its ear, in token that it 
 shall hear the word of God : or salt upon its 
 tongue, in token that its speech shall be seasoned 
 with salt, are intolerable fopperies. The bow- 
 ings to the altar, bowing at the name of Jesus, 
 kneeling at the communion, sponsors, surplice, 
 hoods, lawn sleeves, and every thing of this 
 kind used in the church of England, are edify- 
 ing and decent ceremonies, ." of clear significa- 
 tion and indisputable use:"t But the slippers 
 arid staff, knocking on the breast, elevations, 
 
 Def. p. 11. f Ibi(1 P- n -
 
 118 
 
 crossings, gesticulations, sprinklings with holy 
 water, &c. practised in the church of Rome, 
 are ridiculous superstitions. How happy to have 
 governors thus spiritually gifted : thus able to 
 distinguish between things that differ ! 
 
 " My suggestion, that by the mere concessions 
 of your XXth article, thousands of proselytes 
 have been gained from you to the church of 
 Rome, is rash, (you say,) and groundless : nor 
 do you believe I can name one who was ever 
 gained by it."* I will give you two instances 
 almost equal to a thousand. The first shall be 
 the renowned Chillingworth, who was gained to 
 the church of Rome, cliefiy by this argument, 
 viz. The necessity of (in infallible lit ing judge of 
 controversies : [ which is but a different expres- 
 sion for the authority of the church in matters of 
 faith. Now if this argument was so plausible as 
 to vanquish, and lead captive so great a master 
 of reasoning, multitudes of weaker minds have, 
 no doubt, fallen by its force. The other shall 
 be king James II. of whom bishop Burnet 
 says, he gave me this account of the change of 
 his religion " All due care was taken to form 
 him to a strict adherence to the church : among 
 other things much was said of the authority of 
 the church, and of the tradition from the apostles 
 in support of episcopacy. So when he came to 
 observe that there was more reason to submit to 
 the Catholic church, than to one particular 
 church ; and that other traditions might be taken 
 on her word, as well as episcopacy was received 
 among us, he thought the step was not great, 
 but that it was very reasonable to go over to the 
 church of Rome. "J See how dangerous a wea- 
 pon is this same church authority : and how ca- 
 
 Def. p. 15, f Vid. Life of Chillingworth, p. 7. 
 "f Burnet's Hist, of his owu Tiroes, oct edit rol. 1. p, 94,
 
 119 
 
 pable of being- used to the infinite prejudice of 
 the protestant cause ! 
 
 " But granting the authority of the church, 
 (i. e. of its pastors and governors, its bishops 
 and clergy) how, you ask, would our reforma- 
 tion be overthrown by it ; which was hot carried 
 on in opposition to authority, but with the con- 
 currence of all the authority in the nation ?"* 
 Strange, sir, you should so soon forget ! Did 
 not I remind you, that the reformation under 
 queen Elizabeth, and the present forms of wor- 
 ship prescribed in the Common Prayer, were 
 strongly opposed by every bishop in the king- 
 dom ; and the convocation then sitting, were so 
 far from having any hand in it, that they pre- 
 sented to the parliament several propositions in 
 favour of popery, directly contrary to the pro- 
 ceedings of the parliament ? The civil magis- 
 trate, you affirm, " has no power at all, nor au- 
 thority in these matters. "f It is with the pas- 
 tors and governors of the church, in whom alone 
 it is lodged. But behold, these pastors and go- 
 vernors were zealous for the old religion ! They 
 argued, voted, petitioned strenuously for it, and 
 against the reformation. The reformation then, 
 upon your principles, is built upon a wrong bot- 
 tom : was carried on, not in concurrence with, 
 but in avowed opposition to, all the authority of 
 the nation. How justly might I here return your 
 own ungenerous compliment, " It was great 
 rashness (too great in conscience) if indeed it 
 was not treachery and playing booty, to set the 
 protestant cause upon so sandy a foundation. : 
 Your principles, if digested into proper form, 
 will stand thus. " The church hath power and 
 authority to decree rites and ceremonies : but by 
 the church, observe, I understand, not the king 
 and parliament, not the civil magistrate, who have 
 
 Def. p. t5. f Def. p. 18. J P. 19.
 
 120 
 
 no power at all relating to these matters ; but 
 the bishops only and clergy^ who are appointed 
 and called of God to be its pastors and gover- 
 nors : but remember, my countrymen, the Com- 
 mon Prayer, and forms of worship now estab- 
 lished and used among you, were introduced 
 into this church, not by the authority, no, nor 
 yet by the consent of the pastors and governors 
 whom God hath set over it,' but in direct oppo- 
 sition to them. It was a change brought about 
 entirely by the civil magistrate, who had no au- 
 thority to effect it. It was therefore really no 
 other than an ecclesiastical rebellion, an unjus- 
 tifiable revolt from the only rightful rulers and 
 governors of the church, in its spiritual con- 
 cerns." 
 
 This, sir, is the plain language and tendency 
 ^f your principles ; though 1 know you have 
 been so wise as to contradict them again, by al- 
 lowing, " that if church governors will not come 
 into such reformation, as is according to God's 
 word, but obstinately persevere in maintaining 
 their sinful errors and corruptions, the people 
 may reform themselves."* But this concession 
 overthrows your whole scheme of church autho- 
 rity, makes the people the supreme and ultimate 
 judges, as to points of faith and rites of worship ; 
 brings down the decrees of the most numerous 
 and most holy councils, convocations, and sy 
 nods, to stand at the bar of every man's private 
 judgment; and vests him with authority to re- 
 ceive or reject them, as to himself shall seem fit. 
 So powerful is truth, which will prevail ! 
 
 But your position s, % as to the civil magistrate, 
 deserve a more distinct and accurate considera* 
 tion. u IJe has no powtr at all to decree rites 
 in divine worshij.f This power is not in the. 
 king and parliament, for in this very article 
 
 * Def. p. IS; f Ihid. p. 'It.
 
 121 
 
 which, together with tlie rest, is con- 
 firmed by act of parliament (13 Eliz. c. 12.) and 
 thereby made a part of our ecclesiastical consti- 
 tution, they have plainly owned it to be in th 
 church ; and no body imagines, that by the 
 church they meant themselves. The king and 
 parliament then have plainly disowned any such 
 power in themselves, and have recognised it to 
 be in the church."* This, sir, is a doctrine, 
 of dangerous and important consequence, and 
 quite contrary to fact. For, 
 
 1. As it was the queen and parliament alone, 
 without, yea in opposition to, the bishops and ; 
 convocation, which decreed the present form and 
 worship of your church, so to their authority 
 tlone it owes its very being, birth, and support ; 
 by affirming that they had no power nor autho- 
 rity of this nature, you demolish the church of 
 England at once, and lay it prostrate in the 
 dust. And, 
 
 2. That the king and parliament by acknow- 
 ledging this power to be in the church, have not 
 disclaimed it, nor put it out of their own hands, 
 will appear from hence, that they have at the 
 same time expressly told you, what they mean 
 by the church ; not the bishops and clergy, but 
 the congregation of the faithful ; of which con- 
 gregation themselves are not only a part, but 
 the principal and ruling part : and accordingly, 
 our lawsi and constitution have vested the su- 
 preme power of prescribing ceremonies and rites, 
 only in them. I ask you By what authority 
 do the rubrics of the Common Prayer, bind the 
 clergy to obedience ; or whence is it, they ar<? 
 obliged to observe the rites and forms prescribed 
 in that book? Is it not entirely by the authority 
 of parliament ? As for the pastors and governors 
 to whom you appropriate this authority, (tjte hi-- 
 
 * Dcf. P . 17, 
 It
 
 152 
 
 shops and clergy,) they have no power, by ouf 
 constitution, to make one single law, to decree 
 one rite, or to prescribe one ceremony : when 
 assembled in convocation, they are absolutely 
 under the control and direction of the civil 
 power. " Even the very subjects of their in- 
 quiry and debate, as well as the extent of their 
 ordinances in point of obligation, are prescribed 
 by statute law, that they cannot so much as at- 
 tempt any canons or constitutions, without a 
 royal license ; and that none of their ordinances 
 re binding, even against the private customs 
 of a single parish."* How is it then you affirm, 
 w the king and parliament to have disowned any 
 Ktich power in themselves, and to have recog- 
 nised it to be in the church ?" But, 
 
 3. The point is, if possible, still rendered 
 more clear from the XXXlVth article above 
 cited; which says, " If any man through his 
 private judgment, openly breaks the ceremonies 
 of the church, ordained by common authority, 
 be shall be openly rebuked, as one that offend- 
 eth against the common order of the church, and 
 hurteth the authority of the magistrate." The 
 authority of the magistrate then, is indisputably 
 concerned in ordaining these ceremonies : and 
 your church, sir, however loath you are to hear 
 it, is undoubtedly a parliamentary and civil cons- 
 titution ; made, formed, and supported entirely 
 by the civil magistrate ; and by him alone it is 
 capable of being thrown into a new form. 
 
 But you ask, " Are not the dissenting churches 
 in the same sense parliamentary ? Do they not 
 depend entirely upon an act of parliament, the 
 act of Toleration ?"t No, by no means. The 
 dissenting churches were formed, subsisted, and 
 grew without and before, any parliamentary au- 
 thority. We are thankful to the excellent and 
 
 Eiaainat, of tht Codex, p, 114, f Def. p. 21.
 
 good government under which we live, for the 
 act of Toleration. But would humbly beg leav 
 to say, we derhe not our power to assemble for 
 divine worship, nor our ministers theirs to offi- 
 ciate in such assemblies, from any human law, 
 but from our natural right as men, and from th 
 authority of Christ. The act of Toleration only 
 protects us in the enjoyment of this right. 
 
 " But above all things you marvel, that 
 whilst I was making this push at the church of 
 England, I did not reflect how much 1 laid roy- 
 fcolf open : for if there was ever upon earth a 
 church, which could properly be called prrlia- 
 rnentary, it was the presbyteriau in the time of 
 the grand rebellion."* What you call the grand 
 rebellion, sir, a British house of commons, since 
 the Restoration, calls a vindication of their just 
 liberties; and brought one of their members, 
 Lerithal, upon his knees at the bar, and there 
 sharply reprimanded him, for presuming to re- 
 flect upon it in the manner you have done.f Be- 
 sides, if it was a grand rebellion, the shame and 
 reproach of it falls chiefly upon the church of 
 England ; the parliament who began it, con- 
 sisting almost entirely of members of that com- 
 munion, as lord Clarendon himself owns. But, 
 what if the prcsbyterian church established af- 
 terwards bv them were truly parliamentary, how 
 have I laid myself open? I:iad I said or suggest- 
 ed any thing at all relating to that church, or 
 (he proceedings of those times ? Net a single 
 word ; but for aught I had said, it appears not 
 but 1 as much condemn that establishment as 
 yourself. How then have I laid myself open ? 
 Are you. sir, the man, that reproves me for 
 ramblings? 
 
 You put the case,:}: " that any of our dissent- 
 
 * Def. p. 20. f Journal of the 12lh of 'May, 
 
 \ Def. p. 23, 24.
 
 jng churches, or the church of Scotland, should 
 I>y an act of the General Assembly ordain, that a 
 decent basin, with clean water, should be provi- 
 ded, and placed near the pulpit, that so the mi- 
 nister, taking the child in his arms, may conve- 
 niently pour or sprinkle water upon its face, in 
 the name of the Father, &c. Here are several 
 rites ordained, which Christ in his wisdom did 
 not think proper to ordain, and one of them at 
 least as exceptionable as any excepted against 
 in our church, Sprinkling What will this gen- 
 tleman say to Such an appointment ?" I will 
 say, sir, that if compliance with this injunction 
 be made a necessary term of receiving baptism 
 in that church, (as the cross and sponsors are 
 made necessary in yours) so as that no child shall 
 be baptized, that is not sprinkled from such basin, 
 and the parent that desires to have his child dipt 
 (believing that to be the only way in which Chris- 
 tian baptism ought to be administered) shall not 
 have it done ; in that case, sir, I will say the 
 church acts a tyrannical, unjust, schismatical 
 part ; and if I could have my child baptized in 
 any other church, constituted upon a more Ca- 
 tholic and Scriptural plan, I should think it my 
 duty to apply to it on that occasion. The spirit 
 of ceremony-making and church tyranny, is of a 
 restless and encroaching nature, and ought by a 
 timely effort to be crushed. It was from such 
 little beginnings, the mass of Romish fopperies 
 grew up to its present enormous and oppressive 
 height. 
 
 " The natural rights you represent some of 
 our fellow-subjects as submitting to be deprived 
 of by disqualifying laws,* without going about 
 to turn the world upside down for their repeal," 
 are much too trivial, to be compared with those of 
 
 Viz. That no attorney or proctor can act as a justice of th 
 &e.
 
 125 
 
 which Dissenters are deprived : (for the fellow- 
 subjects you refer to are not disqualified as to thes* 
 offices upon the account of conscience and reli- 
 gion, (which is the hard case of the Dissenters,) 
 for acting as they think they are indispensably 
 obliged to do by the authority and laws of God. 
 Nor, finally, can the persons you mention, pro- 
 perly be said to have a natural right, to sustain 
 at the same time two different characters, and to 
 execute two offices which are not allowed to be 
 united in the same person because they are ge- 
 nerally inconsistent and interfere with each other. 
 So that the cases are not parallel. Besides, why 
 are we represented as turning the world upside 
 down ? Have we ever kindled tumults, raise.'! 
 mobs, demolished houses, threatened courts of 
 law, (as you know, sir, who have done,) under 
 a seditious cry, that our churches were in danger? 
 We appeal to the impartial world, for the loy- 
 alty and peaceableness with which we behave. 
 
 Yon pass over, by your own confession, almost 
 half nn/ pamphlet* unremarked ; in which the 
 constitution of the church of England is com- 
 pared with that of the church of Christ, and the 
 societies shewn to be of a quite different and even 
 opposite nature ; so that a person's separation 
 from the one, does by no means imply his sepa- 
 ration from the other. Your replying nothing 
 to this, you will give me leave to impute to some 
 other cause, than " your not observing any thing 
 in it, which pretends to refute or contradict any 
 position advanced in your letter." Is not the 
 charge of schism your favourite and constant to- 
 pic? But if I prove the two societies so entirely 
 different in their constitution nn<i frame, as that 
 my not communicating in the former, does in no 
 wise break me off from, nor in the least inter- 
 ruptimy communion in the latter, is not this a re- 
 futation of one of the principal and most inte- 
 resting parts of your letters ? And did not justice 
 
 L2 
 
 * Def. p. 57,
 
 126 
 
 to your argument demand a proper reply, if it 
 had been in your power to have given one. 
 
 " It is growing mighty modish, (you com- 
 plain.) with our people to laugh at all notions 
 of church communion, and to make nothing of 
 the most unnecessary separations."* Yes, I 
 thank God, the loud peals you were wont to ring 
 U8 upon the head of schism, are generally treated 
 with much neglect, not only among our people, 
 but even among your own. For when we see 
 the clergy setting themselves up for rulers and 
 governors, claiming power in the name of the 
 Lord, to forgive sins, to decree ceremonies, to 
 make laws, and to determine points of faith : 
 and then thundering out their anathemas, upon 
 such as refuse submission to their authority 
 you must not wonder if it provoke in all sensi- 
 ble spectators, either contempt, indignation, or 
 mirth. 
 
 Can these spiritual fathers in their consciences, 
 believe our schism to be so horrid and damning, 
 and yet have no solicitude to remove those stones 
 of stumbling, at which we so grievously and 
 wickedly fall ? What ! will they harden them- 
 elves against the cries of so many weak and pe- 
 rishing Christians, and destroy the souls for 
 which Christ died ? Forgive me, sir, I cannot 
 think that you believe schism to be really so 
 damnable a sin as you represent it, but that it is. 
 only used as an ecclesiastical scarecrow, to keep 
 the simple in awe, and to establish a sacerdotal 
 empire over weak and ductile minds. 
 
 " All Christians, (you affirm,) living within 
 the church of England, which is co-extended 
 with the kingdom, may be truly said to owe tt 
 obedience and submission, and are de jure, whe- 
 ther they will be or not de facto, true members' 
 and subjects of it."t But pray tell me : is not 
 
 * Df. p. 3S. f IWd. P. 29. 

 
 the church of Scotland equally co-extended with 
 that kingdom, as the church of England is with 
 this ? And do not all who live within its pale, 
 owe it the like submission ? Is not the presbyte- 
 rian discipline and worship as much established 
 there, as the episcopal is here ? If it be schism 
 then, and a grievous sin for Dissenters to with- 
 draw from the established church in South Bri- 
 tain, is it not alike schismatical and wicked in 
 your episcopal brethren to withdraw from the 
 presbyterian church established in the north ? 
 Whence is it that we never hear from you any 
 solemn admonitions to your brethren beyond the 
 Tweed, of the detestable sin of schism ; warning 
 them of its damning nature, and exhorting them, 
 speedily to unite with the established church ? 
 Here your grave lectures may possibly have a 
 good effect ; and if you really thought schism so 
 grievous an offence as you affect to represent it, 
 it is strairge you never try the power of your per- 
 suasions with your brethren in the north. This 
 would be a noble proof that you were in earnest, 
 and sincere. But whilst, amidst your warmest 
 harangues against the English separation, you 
 encourage and support the dissent from the Scot- 
 tish church ; what can be thought of your out- 
 cries against schism, but that they deserve a 
 name more severe than I am willing here to give 
 them ? 
 
 Your notion of our being " true members of 
 the church of England de jure-) though we are 
 not, and will not be de facto" is a refinement, 
 indeed, and quite surpasses my comprehension. 
 I thought it entered essentially into the idea of 
 a church, that it is a society of volunteers : a 
 company joined together in certain acts and pro- 
 fessions by common consent : and that without, 
 much less against, his own agreement and con- 
 sent, no "man could with truth be styled a mem- 
 ber of any church. All persons living; ic Chris-
 
 12S 
 
 tendon* may be said to owe Jesus Christ obe- 
 dience and submission, with infinitely greater 
 reason than all the people of England can be 
 said to owe it to the church ; but does it there- 
 fore follow, that they are all dejure, if they will 
 not be de facto ) true members of the church of 
 Christ? What! those who openly renounce 
 Christ, declare him an impostor, and utterly dis- 
 avow obedience and subjection to him, can such, 
 with any truth or propriety, be styled true mem- 
 bers of his church ? Strange divinity indeed ! 
 Christ's church then, instead of a congregation 
 of faithful persons, may now be defined a soci- 
 ety of impious blasphemers, of infidels and pro- 
 fane persons, who neither fear God, nor believe 
 in Jesus Christ ; these all may be declared and 
 treated as true members of his church. If this 
 indeed be right, then with some pretence it may 
 be said, that those who openly renounce and dis- 
 claim the church of England, and declare they 
 will not live in any subjection to it, may yet be 
 considered as true members of it. 
 
 I owe allegiance to the king of England, be- 
 cause I receive under him the protection of the 
 laws, and enjoy innumerable civil blessings by 
 means of the government in which he presides, 
 and under which I consent to live. But it does 
 not hence follow, that I owe subjection to the 
 church of England, as you argue (pag. 29) from 
 which I receive no protection, eujov no benefit 
 or advantage, and in communion with which, I 
 by no means consent to live. Consent, sir, is in- 
 dispensably necessary to form the relation be- 
 tween pastors and people: and without this con- 
 sent no church in any Christian or Scriptural 
 sense can possibly be formed. Dissenters there- 
 fore cannot with any justness or propriety be 
 styled true members of your church. Your so- 
 lemnly excommunicating them, which is casting 
 those out of it who never were in it, would be an
 
 129 
 
 absurdity deserving only of contempt, if theeen- 
 *ures of your ecclesiastical courts respected only 
 their religious interests: but when we consider 
 the cruel penalties, and the deprivations of a ci- 
 vil nature with which excommunication is attend- 
 ed, we are justified in asserting that a power is 
 assumed with which the civil magistrate was ne- 
 ver entrusted, and which can never be executed 
 without violating our natural rights. 
 
 As to our posture of receiving the Lord's Sup- 
 per, instead of ingenuously owning your great 
 misrepresentation, you endeavour to conceal it 
 by proposing some quaint and frivolous ques- 
 tions, as, ' ; what meaneth this informant, by some 
 of their churches, which have admitted kneel- 
 ing ? What by some in their churches ? If there 
 were any considerable number, &c."* Their 
 number, give me leave to tell you, sir, is nothing 
 to the purpose. It is the liberty they have to do 
 it, which is the only point in debate. If all have 
 this liberty, though, not one in five thousand 
 should actually use it ; my point is established, 
 yours overthrown ; and you stand convicted be- 
 fore the world of having given a very wrong and 
 injurious account of us. You rashly asserted 
 that sitting' among us was never allowed to be 
 departed from; that our ministers insisted upon, 
 and refused to abate it. This from my own 
 certain knowledge from the information of 
 others fvom Baxter's Reformed Liturgy, I prov- 
 ed to be a -false representation. In the second 
 edition of my letter, (pag. 2l.) I added a passage 
 from Doctor Calamy's brief Account of the Ger- 
 man Divines, which expressly says the commu- 
 nicants amongst Protestant Dissenters are at li- 
 berty to use their own posture in the time of re- 
 ceiving; though a table-posture is most common- 
 ly used." Note. To this brief Account, &c. 
 
 Def. p ; 32,
 
 130 
 
 you appear to have been no stranger ; you had, 
 doubtless, read it ; for NOW quote along passage 
 from it (itet. II. pag. 62) not four lines distant 
 from that which I have now cited. How then 
 Could you take upon you so roundly to affirm 
 that it is never allowed to be departed from, &c. 
 when you had seen it declared to the world, 
 that our communicants were at liberty to use 
 their own posture f 
 
 But if this deserve an ingenuous blush, I am 
 called upon to blush with you, "for having said 
 that Christ and his apostles, without all perad- 
 venture, sat around the table, when every body 
 knows, who knows any thing at all, that they 
 used the recumbing posture, which is no more 
 fitting than it is kneeling."* If my assertion 
 cannot be supported by indisputable authority, 
 I have a blush at your command. Let my 
 vouchers be heard. St. Matthew f says, he sat 
 down with the fwelre and as they zcere eating 
 Jesus took bread and bhssed it. St. Mark,:]: as 
 they sat and aid eat, Jesus took bread, &c. St. 
 Luke when the hour was come, he sat down, and 
 the twelve apostUs with him ; and lie took the 
 .bread and gave thanks. If I am now to be cor- 
 rected for representing Christ and his apostles 
 as sitting around the table, the weight of the stroke 
 will fall entirely upon the Scriptures ; under 
 which patronnge I am safe. I make no manner 
 of doubt, sJr, but the posture was silting, though 
 with the body perhaps a little leaning or reclined. 
 Nor would our language afford our translators 
 any better, or indeed any other word than siding 
 to express it by. Pray how would you render it 
 as the?/ REfUMBET) anddid eat ? When iJie hvur 
 was come he -REruMRED with his apostles ? If 
 every body "who knows any thing at all, knows 
 they used the recumbing posture," the.n the ju- 
 
 * Def. p. 13. fxxvi. 20: \ xir. IS: 5 xxii. 14.
 
 131 
 
 clicious and indefatigable Mr. Henry knew no*" 
 thing at all ; for he says, " he sat down in the 
 usual table gesture ; not lying on one side, for 
 it was not easy to eat, or possible to drink in that 
 posture, but sitting upright though perhaps sit- 
 ting low." Or rather as doctor Lightfoot tells 
 us, the posture was sitting on a couch, leaning 
 the left elbow on the table. 
 
 There is something truly extraordinary in 
 your affirming " that the damnatory clauses of 
 the Athanasian Creed may be as safely subscri- 
 bed, without any explanatory declaration, as the 
 Holy Scriptures ; at least such passages, as he 
 that "belwceth not shall be damned he that believeth 
 not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God 
 abideth on /'/,* &c. As much as to say, you 
 may as confidently assent to the decisions of a 
 weak and fallible man, concerning the everlast- 
 ing state of multitudes of his fellow men, as to 
 the decision of the omniscient and infallible God. 
 Or thus, because God has fixed some terms for 
 a man's entrance into life, therefore man may 
 take upon him to devise and (ix others. Or tliu*, 
 because Christ had authority to pronounce, that 
 no man who received not the jjospel, which he 
 preached, should finally be saved by it, therefore 
 Athanasius (if he was its compiler) had autho- 
 rity to pronounce, that no man who believed 
 not the creed which he had made, should attain 
 
 eternal life, but should everlastingly perish. 
 
 Are these conclusions just ? 
 
 I cannot think that I need your forgiveness, 
 sir, for asking, " whether you were among the 
 weak and uncharitable minds, who damn to the 
 pit of hell, all who cannot receive the dark and 
 mysterious points set forth in the Athanasian 
 reed." For does not that creed most peremp- 
 torily pronounce this damnation on all such ? 
 Are not you a zealous advocate for and admirer 
 
 * Dfcnc, p. 40.
 
 132 
 
 . 
 
 %f that ereecf? Do you not yourself thirteen time* 
 a year, in the presence and church of God, and 
 as his minister and ambassador, declare solemnly 
 to the people, ''that whoever does not keep 
 whole and undefiled the faith therein delivered, 
 he shall without doubt perish everlastingly ?"* 
 Is any apology then necessary for my. asking. 
 " Whether you are amongst the weak and un- 
 charitable persons ?" &c. For if you are sin- 
 cere in the use of it, and do really believe what 
 you solemnly declare to the people, when you 
 read to them that creed, you must, surely, be 
 content to be reckoned in that number. For 
 how to reconcile a solemn declaration that cer- 
 tain persons, zoithout doubt perish ever last ingtyi 
 with hopes of their salvation, is what no wit of the 
 subtlest Jesuit is able to perform. 
 
 The subscriptions of our ministers, with the 
 protestation they made against the damnatory 
 clauses, can with no truth, I apprehend, be cal- 
 led " a prolestatio contra factum, nor a sub- 
 scribing assent to the truth of certain proposi- 
 tions, at the same time declaring they do not as- 
 sent to iC'* For it really amounted to no more 
 than this " I believe the articles of this creed, 
 and think it agreeable to the word of God, but 
 I here publicly declare, I do not consider the 
 damnatory clauses as any part of the creed, nor 
 give my assent to them." As for the subscrip- 
 tion of our present ministers, if it be not done 
 under a claim of the benefit of this protestation 
 made by their predecessors, or with some such 
 protestation made by themselves : i freely own, 
 siir, I shall not undertake to justify it.t 
 
 * Defence, p. 41. 
 
 f The grentest part of our minister* never subscribed the arti- 
 cles which the act of Toleration required, notwithstanding the 
 heavy fines and penal ties to which they wereexposed. But, througk 
 the favour of heaven, and the sounder policy and good sense of thu 
 present times, these penalties ar ROW removed : for by an act f
 
 133 
 
 *4t 
 
 Human creeds have, I apprehend, been of 
 infinite disservice to the Christian church, have 
 rent it into a variety of sects and parties, and 
 filled it with innumerable strifes and debates :*" 
 they are a fence raised around the church, which 
 can possibty keep none out of it but virtuous and 
 honest persons, but never can prevent one hypo- 
 crite, heretic, or wicked man, from entering in- 
 to it. I wish the case you mention may not be 
 extremely common, viz. " Fraudulent and insin- 
 cere subscriptions, and the constant use of forms, 
 which they who use them do not approve of, 
 whereby the conscience is defiled."* 
 
 But the point of subscriptions, which is the 
 subject ofyour appendix, will be considered by 
 an abler hand,t who will give you, I hope, am- 
 ple satisfaction on this head : to his instruc- 
 tions I commend you, sir, wishing you, with 
 great sincerity, abundant peace and truth. 
 
 George III. passed in 1779, all that is now required is, " I, A. B. 
 do solemnly declare, in the presence of Almighty God, that I am 
 a Christian and a Protestant, and as such, that I believe that the 
 Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, as commonly received 
 among Protestant churches, do contain the revealed will of God, 
 and that I do receive the same as the rule of my doctrine and 
 practice." * Defence, p. 4*1. 
 
 f The Case of Subscription to Explanatory Articles of Faith, a* 
 a Qualification for Admission into the Christian Ministry, &c. to 
 which is added, the Speech of the Rev. John Alphonso Turretine, 
 previous to the Abolition of all Subscriptions at Geneva. Transla- 
 ted from a manuscript in French, 1 748, by Samuel Chandler, D.D. 
 
 M
 
 THE 
 
 DISSENTING GENTLEMAN'S 
 
 THIRDS, LAST LETTER. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 A HAVE read carefully your two Defences, 
 and attentively weighed the reasons by which 
 you farther press my conformity to your church ; 
 but I must still say, that though I feel the attrac- 
 tion of worldly interest strongly operating with 
 your arguments, and giving them great force; 
 yet there is something more forcible which draws 
 a contrary way. 
 
 Were 1 to never live but ii^the present world, 
 I would soon become your convert : But when I 
 consider that the purity, simplicity, and liberty 
 of the Gospel are a sacred deposite committed 
 to my trust ; and that there is an allegiance I 
 owe to Christ, as the only lawgiver of the church, 
 for which I must hereafter be accountable before 
 him; I cannot but think it my duty, and there- 
 fore, upon the whole, most certainly my interest 
 also, to continue my separation, though attended 
 with some worldly disadvantage and reproach. 
 
 The grounds of my dissent I have already laid 
 before the world, to whose impartial considera* 
 tion. they are humbly submitted. " But you 
 complain I have left unnoticed and untouched, 
 H great part of your letters." This, indeed, I 
 have done, and shall also of your Defence ; a 
 great part of bpth being futile, and of little mo-
 
 135 
 
 mcnt to the merits of the cause before us. De- 
 bates of this kind, I knew, insensibly swell. I 
 remarked therefore, but upon a few of the many 
 obnoxious passages with which your letters 
 abound, that greater liberty might be left to pre- 
 sent you with several strong 1 , and to me un- 
 answerable, arguments for dissenting from your 
 church, which you had artfully forborn to men- 
 tion ; and from which, though since hdd up be- 
 fore you and peculiarly urged upon you. you 
 turn gravely away, and will not be provoked te 
 encounter their force. 
 
 I hare pressed youwith-the constitution and 
 frame of your church ; and have shewn you va- 
 rious points in which its structure and form were 
 not only quite different from, but actually repug- 
 nant to, the church of Jesus Christ ; consequent- 
 ly, that it was not, could not be any dangerous 
 and damnable schism for the servants of Jesus 
 Christ to separate and withdraw from it, as you 
 had rashly affirmed. But to this grand and po- 
 pular objection you have not made the least re- 
 ply ; it, stands before you in full strength. 
 
 This charge of schism is rendered still more 
 completely ridiculous, if you will observe That 
 the very powers which alone formed, and which 
 alone govern your church, have given us leave 
 to withdraw from it. The very authority which 
 made your church, and upon which alone it rests, 
 hath allowed us to set up our separate churches 
 for worship ; and hath taken those churches, 
 and the worship performed in them, under it* 
 immediate protection and care.
 
 SECT. I. 
 
 Of Church Power, and in whom lodged. 
 
 X HAVE frequently reminded you, and every 
 attentive person must perceive, that the issue of 
 the debate between the Church and the Dissen- 
 ters, depends absolutely and entirely upon this 
 single point Is there any other lawgiver or king 
 in the church of God besides Jesus Christ, or, 
 is there not ? Is there power and authority vest- 
 ed in any man or in any body of men, to make 
 and to enjoin new rites of Christian worship, and 
 new terms of Christian fellowship, besides what 
 Christ, the only lawgiver, has himself made 
 and enjoined ; or, is there not ? Could you but 
 be engaged to give a plain and direct answer to 
 this one point, it would soon end the debate. 
 But for reasons well known to yourself, and 
 very obvious to the world, you are deaf to my re- 
 peated solicitations on this head ; and will not, 
 cannot be either persuaded or provoked to speak 
 your sentiments freely and openly upon it. 
 
 You strenuously contend that there is such a 
 power: but arc greatly at a loss, 1. Whereto 
 place it ? And, 2. How to limit and confine it ? 
 These are two things which it indispensibly lies 
 upon you to fix clearly and to ascertain ; before 
 ^you can, with any grace, censure our separation 
 as unjustifiable and wrong. But though in mul- 
 tiplying words, your talent is not common, and 
 you expatiate diffusely upon things of little mo- 
 ment ; yet here where the point lies, and you 
 saw, and even felt it, you artfully endeavour to 
 evade it. However, with much difficulty, a few
 
 137 
 
 concessions are extorted from yon, which, in 
 part, shew the world your preposterous scheme, 
 and which prove you to be really (as I shall pre- 
 sently shew) no advocate for, nor even a friend 
 to the trne church of England, as by law estab- 
 lished ; but to be a betrayer, on oppuguer of it, 
 a dangerous underminer of its very basis and 
 foundation ; and that if your principles were to 
 bn adopted, the clmrch would be presently over- 
 thrown, and its hierarchy and frame be utterly 
 destroyed. 
 
 I-'or, with regard to the first of the above 
 point", viz. In whom this power of making and 
 enjoining new ceremonies and rites of worship, 
 and new terms of communion in the church of 
 Christ, is vested You a firm, 1. " That it is 
 not in the civil magistrate ; he has no such power 
 at all.-"* But, 2. " It is in the pastors and go- 
 vernors of the church. '"f Now, 
 
 First. If it be not in the civil magistrate ; (and 
 he has, as you affirm, no such power at all :) the 
 consequence is inevitable, that then the present 
 established church of England is illegally, un- 
 justly, tyrannically established : that it is a usur- 
 pation upon the rights of Christians, and upon 
 the civil liberties of mankind ; and that the very 
 basis on which it stands, with its whole frame 
 and constitution, is fundamentally, essentially 
 and notoriously wrong. For, that the present 
 church of England was constituted, formed and 
 established by the civil magistrate, and only by 
 him 5 viz. by queen Elizabeth aiul her parliament, 
 every gentleman, not a perfect stranger to our 
 history and constitution, indisputably knows. 
 When we talk of the church established by law ; 
 by what law, 1 pray, do we mean established ? 
 Is it not by a law enacted by the crown and par- 
 liampnt, and enacted by no authority or powc-f 
 but theirs? Is not the act of Uniformity the 
 
 M2 
 Df. p. I, 19. f Ibid, p. 10.
 
 138 
 
 grand pillar or foundation on which the church 
 of England rests ? Was it not that alone which 
 established its present liturgy, with all its cere- 
 monies and forms ? But by whom was that law 
 made? was it not by- the civil magistrate ; and 
 made by him alone ? the bishops in the house of 
 lords and the clergy in convocation labouring 
 earnestly against it. To say then, as you do, 
 that the civil magistrate has no power to decree 
 ceremonies and forms of worship, is to say that 
 the act of Uniformity was a tyrannical unrighteous 
 act : that it was enacted by those who had no 
 power at all to do it; consequently, that the 
 church established by that law, was an unwar- 
 rantable establishment, a spurious, illegal thing. 
 This is the destructive tendency, sir, of your 
 principles and scheme. You root up foundations, 
 overthrow our constitution, and totally demo- 
 lish the very church you seem zealous to defend ; 
 so that you never spoke, perhaps, a truer word 
 than when you were pleased to describe yourself 
 as a very sorry advocate, for the church.* 
 
 But you ask, " Why are we to regard only 
 the establishment of queen Elizabeth ? Why is 
 king Edward's reformation overlooked ?"f Not 
 
 * Defence, p. 1 28. Your learned Warbtirton, in bis Alliance 
 &c. honourably and frankly owns, " That the church hath resign- 
 ed her independency, and made the magistrate her supreme head ; 
 without whose approbation and allowance she can direct, order 
 and decree nothing, p. 87. And that the clergy are now under 
 the magistrate's direction." p. 74. 
 
 Accordingly, an act in the 2d parliament of Charles II. in Scot- 
 land, in which all the bishops concurred, and against which none 
 of the laity protested, enacts " That the discipline of the external 
 government and polity of the church is in his Majesty and his suc- 
 cesfors, as art inherent right of the crown; and that they may set- 
 tle, enact and limit such constitutions, acts and orflers concerning 
 the administration of the external government of the church and 
 the persons employed in the same, and concerning all ecclesiasti- 
 cal meetings, and matters to be proposed and determined therein, 
 s they in their royal wisdom shall think fit." 
 '.4 f II. Defence, p. HO.
 
 139 
 
 for any advantage which you can possibly get by 
 it. For in the reformation under that prince 
 also, a the majority of the bishops and interior 
 clergy (directly contrary to what you assert) 
 were on the side of popery."* And it was the 
 parliament alone, without the convocation, which 
 then established the reformed Liturgy and Ser- 
 vice-book. 
 
 But at queen Elizabeth's reformation, when 
 the present church was formed, erected and es- 
 tablished, you allege, " Though the bishops 
 did, indeed, in some of her first years, oppose the 
 reformation, which they had before approved, 
 yet they did not long stand out.''f That the 
 majority of the bishops did either before approve, 
 or afterwards comply, is, I* believe, quite con- 
 trary to fact ',$ but whether true or not. is not 
 at all to the point : for when the reformation 
 was actually accomplished, and the church with 
 . its liturgy and forms was established ; their af- 
 terwards standing in or out for a longer or shorter 
 time, will be of no weight in your argument. 
 The work was done without them ; this is all I 
 ask ; and this you are forced to grant. The bishops 
 then had no hand, no share at all, in making and 
 establishing the present church of England ; but 
 opposed it with all their might. It was done by 
 the civil magistrate (who hud no power, you say 
 to do it) and done by him alone. " At her ma- 
 jesty's accession, and even after religion was re- 
 stored to the same state as under king Edward, 
 the universities were so entirely lost, that there 
 were scarcely two of the same opinion with the 
 reformers. As to the bishops and clergy (bishop 
 
 Neal's Kist. Pur. Vol.1, p. 45, 51. f II. Def. p. 14O, 
 | Only one bishop conformed himself to the queen's com- 
 imnds, and was continued in his place, viz Kitcliin of Llandaff. 
 Fuller's Ch. Hist. Book ix. p. 59, and Book, vii, p. 414.
 
 140 
 
 Cox adds) they were unanimous for popery, firm 
 as a rock.* 
 
 " But if the reformation was carried on, it 
 was not, (you say,) perfected without the bi- 
 shops.'^ True, because it was never perfected 
 at all. That glorious work remains to iimnorta- 
 Jize, perhaps, the names of its present gover- 
 nors. But to whatever perfection it hath been 
 at all brought since its first establishment, it was 
 brought only and entirely by the authority of the 
 crown and parliament; our excellent constitu- 
 tion acknowledging no legislative power or au- 
 thority but theirs. | 
 
 " And as for the XXXIX articles, these 
 (you allege,) were some years after passed in a 
 convocation of the Bishops and clergy. "$ Whe- 
 ther they were passed in a convocation or not, 
 with regard to their authority, is of no moment 
 at all. Their unanimous assent adding not the 
 least grain to their obligation on the subject ; 
 nor their most zealous dissent in the least detract- 
 ing from it. But did not your heart smite you, 
 sir, at the very mention of these articles; the 
 XXXI Vth of which declares expressly against 
 you " That your church ceremonies were or- 
 dained by the authority of the civil magistrate/' 
 
 * Neal's Review, p. 58. Vide also Fuller's Ch. Hist. Book 
 EX. page 56. 
 
 f II. Def. p. 139. 
 
 J Synods and Convocations have, in all ages of tbe church, sel- 
 dom done good ; often much hurt ; have generally obstructed, 
 not promoted reformation ; which hath mostly been carried on 
 by lay-councils and hands. The sentiments of a learned father, 
 who had seen much of these church proceedings, may not be un- 
 worthy to be here remembered. Sic sentio, si verum tcrtbendum 
 tit, fyc. My opinion is this, if I may be allowed to speak the truth : 
 that all conventions of bishops a<-e to be avoided. For I never saw any 
 good come of any synod ; nor that it did not much more mischief 
 than it hindered. For truth, in such assemblies, is generally bornt 
 down by a spirit of strife and vain-glory, Greg. Nazian. Epist. 
 2tl Procop. Ibid. p. 140.
 
 Trie same also yoar XXXth canon.* You have 
 several times subscribed the truth of this article, 
 and sworn to this canon. With what counte- 
 nance then durst you thus publicly oppugn and 
 contradict it ; and in open defiance of our arti- 
 cles and statutes, our constitutions and canons, 
 and yoar own repeated subscriptions, presump- 
 tuously declare " That the civil magistrate has 
 no power nor authority to decree ceremonies in 
 religion ?" Do you solemnly subscribe one thing 
 and publicly teach another ! Where is the con- 
 sistency or integrity of such a conduct ? But let 
 us see where you lodge this power. 
 
 Secondly. They are the church's pastors and 
 governors, whom you are pleased to invest with 
 it ;t that is, I suppose you mean (for you are ex- 
 tremely shy of explications) its bishops and cler- 
 gy. But you have not deigned to shew me one 
 text of Scripture, nor one statute or act of par- 
 liament which vests them with this power. I have 
 shewn you several of both, which expressly di- 
 vest them of it, and utterly deny them any such 
 jurisdiction or authority. 
 
 But, were we to grant you " That these pas* 
 tors and governors have authority from God to 
 make new ceremonies and rites, and to ordain 
 in Christ's church new terms of communion." 
 Will you tell me, whether this power be vested 
 solely in the bishops ; or, must their cleans and 
 chapters act in concert with them ? Has every 
 bishop within his diocess, this power from God 
 to enjoin new ceremonies and rites ; or, may his 
 archbishop control hira ? This latter, I suppose, 
 
 * " We bold it the part of every private roan, both minister 
 and other, reverently to retain the use of the ceremonies prescrib- 
 ed by public authority ; considering that things of themselves in- 
 different do, in some sort, alter their natures, when they are either 
 commanded or forbidden by a lawful magistrate ; and*may not be 
 omhted, at every man's pleasure, contrary to the law." Can- 
 non xxx. f I. Def. p. 10.
 
 142 
 
 rot : for archbishops, you own not to be of 
 apostolic, but of modern institution ; whereas 
 bishops, it should seem, are the lineal successors 
 and representatives cf the apostles ; in them 
 therefore the apostolic power of governing the 
 churches rests. ^This then, which is of divine, 
 ought not to be controlled by that which is but 
 of late arnd human institution. Therefore the 
 bishops of every diocess, as its pastor and gover- 
 nor, has authority from God to decree in his 
 church what ceremonies and rites, and to make 
 what terms of communion, he thinks edifying and 
 fit. Nor has any neighbouring bishop, no nor 
 any power upon earth, authority to control him ; 
 for as the apostles were all equal, their succes- 
 sors, the bishops, must also be equal. And as 
 the former were not. accountable to any temporal 
 prince for their jurisdiction in the church of 
 Christ, the same exemption may their descend- 
 ants and representatives also claim. How excel- 
 lent a scheme of government and holy discipline 
 is this ! With what beauty and uniformity, unity 
 and peace is it calculated to bless the church ! 
 as we shall presently see. But, 
 
 Thirdly. Acknowledging this high power to 
 be really vested in the church's bishops, as go- 
 vernors and pastors of it, I again a^k, how far 
 does it extend ? Is it limited or unlimited ? May 
 they enjoin whatever rites they think decent and 
 ornamental; and decree whatever ceremonies or 
 new terms of communion they judge to be condu- 
 cive to the edification of the church ? As they 
 have now in the church of England, decreed, we 
 will say, only four ceremonies, to give additional 
 beauty and splendor to its public worship ; may 
 they not, if they think it farther conducive to 
 this worthy end, decree four, or even forty, 
 more ? Yes, and make that forty, four hundred, 
 if they should suppose them to be useful, and 
 calculated to promote decency and order, in the
 
 113 
 
 worship of their respective flocks. But do you 
 not plainly see, sir, how dangerous a power this 
 is ? A power which, jn ail ages, hath proved the 
 bane of the Christianr church ! A Hood-gate 
 which hath let in a dreadful deluge of animosi- 
 ties, corruptions and superstitipns upon it! 
 Hence sprung that enormous mass of profane and 
 foolish rites, which, to the scandal of the Chris- 
 tian na:ne, now grievously oppresses both the 
 Greek and the Romish churches. One bishop, 
 or perhaps a junto of bishops, fancying that there 
 ought to be a trine-immersion in baptism ; ano- 
 ther, the signation of the cross ; another, an irnc- 
 tion with oil ; another, milk and honey, and the 
 imposition of hands immediately after it ; ano- 
 ther, insufflation, or breathing upon the person's 
 face to exorcise the devil ; another, washing of 
 hands before prayers hence also praying to- 
 wards the east ; sponsors in baptism ; kneeling 
 at the Lord's Supper : first the veneration, then 
 the adoration of relics and of images, which 
 though they were at first erected only as memo- 
 rials of some saints, soon after became the ob- 
 jects of religious worship. Thus, I say, that 
 inundation of abominable corruptions, which at 
 present overwhelms the Greek and Romish 
 churches, gradually came in at this very breach 
 you are now zealously maintaining, namely, the 
 bishop's power to decree rites and ceremonies in the 
 church. 
 
 It is a most dangerous and important power ; 
 not fit to be trusted, and therefore, we may be 
 assured, never was trusted with any fallible un- 
 inspired men. Jesus Christ, surely the supreme 
 bishop and only head of his church, well knew 
 what institutions were most for its edification ; 
 and what ceremonies and rites would bust pro- 
 mote the order and decency of its worship ; and 
 either by himself, or by his inspired apostles, 
 has loft a perfect plan of both. .For any weak
 
 144 
 
 and uninspired men therefore to rise up in after 
 ages, and fancy that they can improve the scheme 
 of worship which Christ hath left ; that they can 
 add greatly to its beauty, its splendor and per- 
 fection, by some ceremonies of their own, is, cer- 
 tainly a rude invasion of Christ's throne, which 
 every sober Christian ought highly to detest. 
 
 But with great acutene^s, you observe " That 
 though those church-governors have power to de- 
 cree ceremonies and rites, yet not fopperies and 
 superstitions.'* This is extremely pleasant ! But 
 when I ask you, by what criterion I am to dis- 
 tinguish rites from fopperies, and ceremonies from 
 superstitions, you will not satisfy my curiosity, 
 and no wonder : for I defy all the common sense 
 and ingenuity of the nation (to borrow one' of 
 your own expressions) to shew the consecration 
 of earth to cover the body when dead, to be an 
 edifying and decent rite ; but the consecration of 
 water to sprinkle it when living, to be a ridiculous 
 and foolish foppery. I defy any man to say, why 
 apittl^and salt in baptism are not ceremonies as 
 instructive as the sign of the cross? ? And why a 
 bishop may not now continue the absurd ancient 
 custem, of exorcising the devil before baptism, 
 as well as the laying, on of hands after it, so as 
 thereby to impart the graces of the Holy Spirit, 
 which you say he does in Confirmation. 
 
 Superstition, sir, is ever restless, insatiable, 
 encroaching. Every zealous bishop will be ambi- 
 tious of adding some rite or ceremony of his own, 
 to beautify divine worship and render it more 
 brilliant. Thus, when your holy bishop, Laud, 
 was governor of this church, you had lighted 
 candles upon its altars ; copes for the priests, 
 with crucifixes and images of the Trinity upon 
 them ; consecrated knives to cut the sacramental 
 bread ; incense pots ; canisters for wafers, lined 
 with cambric lace, with a deal of other furni- 
 ture all solemnly consecrated for the service of
 
 145 
 
 Almighty God, and for the comfort, instruction, 
 and edification of his church ; to exalt and en- 
 liven the beauties of holiness therein. And had 
 it not been for the noble and heroic stand which 
 the Puritans and their successors have constantly 
 made against this rite-making spirit, there is no 
 reason to doubt, that the church of England, by 
 this time, had fallen little short, in these holy de- 
 corations and additional splendors, of the church 
 of Moscow or of Rome. 
 
 I have dwelt longer upon this point, because 
 it is, undoubtedly, the capital and fundamental 
 one on which the debate between the Church and 
 the Dissenters entirely turns. Prove your church, 
 sir, to have this power and authority from God 
 which she exercises and claims, a power to de- 
 cree nezo rites and ceremonies in Christian worship, 
 to make new terms of communion, and to deter- 
 mine controversies of faith and you need give 
 yourself no farther trouble ; all other things in 
 controversy, sponsors, absolution, the sacramen- 
 tal test, and every thing else shall be immediately 
 given up 1 . Make good but this one point, and if 
 your church commands us to sign ourselves all 
 over with a significant and instructive cross, we 
 will reverently do it. If it bids us worship to- 
 wards the east, and to think the omnipresent 
 Deity to be more there than in the west : and 
 to bow at the name of Jesus ; we will humbly 
 submit ; or, if it requires us to believe, that an 
 amorous devil was forced away from his beloved 
 maid by the fumes of a fish's liver ; or that the 
 most profligate wretch that lives, if the king 
 gives him a post, has a right to eat at the Lord's 
 table ; and that when he dies he rests in Christ, 
 and is taken to God in mercy ; we will cordially 
 believe it all. There is nothing your church cau 
 enjoin or decree, but you shall find the Dissent- 
 ers will dutifully submit to it, when you have onco 
 clearly shewn it to have this power from God ;
 
 146 
 
 and have told us plainly, and without reserve, 
 what you mean by the Church ; and distinctly 
 pointed out who the persons are in whom this 
 power resides. 
 
 This is indeed consummately ridiculous in you, 
 sir, to talk of " the Church's jurisdiction and au- 
 thority over Dissenters of the subjection we 
 owe it of the damnableness of the sin of refu- 
 sing obedience to it." When you have not yet 
 told us, and cannot openly and plainly tell us, 
 who arid what it is you mean by the Church ? Or 
 who the persons are to whom God hath commit- 
 ted this high and important trust ? Is it the king 
 and parliament ; or, is it not ? Is it the clergy 
 met in convocation ; or, is it not ? Is it each 
 bishop in his respective diocess ; by himself 
 alone, or in conjunction with his clergy ; or is it 
 not ? Is it the whole body of the Christian peo- 
 ple, the congregation of the faithful ; or, is it 
 not? Open yourself freely, sir, and be not afraid 
 of truth. Truth will never hurt you ; it is a 
 most innocent and lovely thing ; it may rob you 
 of some emoluments and possessions of a worldly 
 nature; but be assured it will ujive you something 
 more substantial in their stead. Be ingenuous 
 then, and tell Dissenters in whom God hath 
 lodged this power to which you say they owe sub- 
 jection, and by revolting from which they are 
 guilty of a dangerous and damnable sin. If you 
 write again, but will not explain yourself dis- 
 tinctly on this point, you yield the cause to us 
 before the world. You make it evident that you 
 write neither for our conviction nor your own ; 
 but that, you have something else in view besides 
 finding out the truth. That something perhaps, 
 you may find ; but it will continue with you but 
 for a moment : whereas, if you find and do the 
 will of God, it will give you a possession that 
 will endure for ever.
 
 SECT. II. 
 
 Of the Sacramental Test. 
 
 JL HAT^ the law called the Test, is not, as you 
 suggest, the innocent occasion only, but the plain, 
 e notorious, the culpable cause of those pros- 
 Hutions of th'e holy sacrament, which, you say, 
 you see with concern; what room can there be 
 for any rational doubt? For, does not the very 
 design and intent of the law, at least as it is now 
 applied, prostitute and pervert the sacrament to 
 a use not o nly different from, but directly re- 
 pugnant to, that for which it was instituted and 
 designed by Jesus Christ ? The Christian law en- 
 joins it as a mean, and with intent, to unite and 
 coalesce Christians. The test-law enjoins it as 
 a mean, and with intent, to discriminate and di- 
 vide them. For the ministers of Jesus Christ 
 then to be advocates for a law which prostitutes 
 and perverts a holy sacrament of his religion ; 
 yea, a law which makes themselves the very in- 
 struments and tools of this shameful prostitution ; 
 is such a violation of their character, such a pros- 
 titution of their sacred office, such a betraying of 
 the solemn trust committed to them by God, for 
 which they must give an account to the chief 
 Pastor at his coming, as cannot but greatly shock 
 an attentive beholder ; and ought, in my opinion, 
 to give the most painful apprehensions to them- 
 selves. 
 
 " These prostitutions, you assure us, you do 
 see with concern ; but yet cannot be for the re- 
 peal, because you think it inconsistent with the 
 preservation of the church."* What church 
 alas! must that be which cannot be preserved 
 but by an acknowledged prostitution and perver- 
 sion of a holy sacrament ! Surely, it cannot 
 
 * II. Defence, p. 8.
 
 148 
 
 be the church cf Christ. Let not Christians do 
 m7, that good may come t such carnal and cor- 
 rupt policy ever defeats itself ; and its comkm- 
 natifjn fs just,* 
 
 You correct me for saying That by the force 
 of this law multitudes of needy person? are com- 
 pelled to come to ih& Lord's table, and cry " (j 
 forbid t that t!>e temptations even of poverty a 
 want should be esteemed to have the nature of 
 force and compulsion for in that case they would 
 have no guilt at all upon their consciences." So 
 then, you can bring off, I find, the young adul- 
 terer from any guilt wit 1 ! the lewd woman, 
 Prov. vii. 21. because with the flail cry of her lips 
 she forced him. I thought 1 had written to a 
 bachelor of divinity, to a gentleman who was 
 no stranger to Scripture language, and who knew 
 what is meant when the king commands his ser- 
 vants to compel the guests to come in, Luke xiv. 
 23. For the like use of the word compel, you 
 may consult Galat. ii. 14. vi. 12. See also Luke 
 xiv. 18, 20. in the original. 
 
 .That the priest has no power to refuse the 
 Lord's supper to the vilest person that demands 
 it as a qualification for a post, you care not to 
 admit, and ask *' Is ther^ any law which for- 
 bids the curate to repel him from the Lord's 
 iable ?"t Yes, by the equitable construction of 
 the law called the Test, most certainly there is : 
 for the same law whic'i requires, under severe 
 
 ?enalties, all persons in posts to receive tho 
 jord's supper according to the usage of the 
 church of England, does, by indisputable con- 
 sequence, require some one to give it. If it 
 received by them, it must surely be given 
 to them. To suppose the legislature to have 
 obliged them, under heavy pains, to partake of 
 the holy sacrament ; but to have obliged none 
 
 * Rom. Hi. 8. f Dcf - P- 3Ii
 
 upon their demand, to administer it to them, (9 
 to suppose it acting a most absurd and unjustifi- 
 able part; which is not to be imagined. Who 
 then is the person to whom, according- to law, 
 a man that wants the sacramental qualification 
 is to apply for that service ? Undoubtedly his pa- 
 rish priest ; who is appointed and paid by law 
 for the performance of the several offices which 
 the state requires of him ; of which this is plainly 
 one. Whatever power therefore the rubric 
 gave the curate to repel open f-cil livers from the 
 tattle of the Lord before the Test act took place, 
 it is now, in cases of qualification, unquestion- 
 ably superseded, and the rubric is virtually re- 
 pealed. For when a new law enjoins what is re- 
 pugnant to an old one, that old law is to be consi- 
 dered as so far set aside. And as for the u da- 
 mages to which the priest is liable to be con- 
 demned for refusing the sacrament," these the 
 law, it is presumed, will give according to the 
 loss, which the person can make appear he hath 
 sustained by that refusal ; which in many cases 
 may be great ; more perhaps than the priest is 
 worth. 
 
 " The Oath of Abjuration you esteem quite a 
 parallel to the Sacramental Test ; and urge, that 
 if one should be repealed because it lays men 
 under violent temptations to prostitute their con- 
 sciences; so also ought the other. '* No: the 
 cases, if duly weighed,, will be found to differ 
 widely. An oath of fidelity to the government 
 that employs us in posts of influence and power, 
 is a security or pledge evidently founded in the 
 reason of things : it has been the practice imme- 
 morial of ail civilized nations : its necessity, or 
 great expedience, manifestly arises from the na- 
 ture of civil government : it is therefore reason- 
 ably presumed to be the will and institution of 
 
 N 2 
 Def. page 6,
 
 150 
 
 God, the author of civil government; and wag 
 instituted for purposes of a political or civil kind. 
 Here then there is no prostitution, no perver- 
 sion of this sacred rite, when the oath is tendered 
 to a man 'at his entrance upon a post of trust ; 
 and if a needy Jacobite takes it, to the pollution 
 of his conscience, himself only can be blamed : 
 the law that ordered it is clear. But can this, in 
 any case, be said concerning the Sacramental 
 Test ? Hath this been an instrument for the sup- 
 port of civil government in any kingdom of the 
 Christian world besides our own ? Hath God, 
 the author of civil government, given the least 
 intimation of his intending that it should have 
 such a guard ? Had Christ, the institutor of 
 this rite, the least intention or design that it 
 should be thus used and applied be made 
 an engine and tool of state an instrument 
 to discriminate between Christian and Chris- 
 tian to raise some to posts of power in the 
 kingdoms of this world and to fix upon others 
 (men equally virtuous) brands of odium and dis- 
 grace ? Had he not unquestionably a quite con- 
 trary design ? You know, sir, that he had. Does 
 he look down with pleasure, think you, upon the 
 kingdom and church, where he sees hig name and 
 his institutions thus openly violated, perverted, 
 profaned ; his priests liking to hare ft so; ap- 
 proving, espousing, defending the abuse? I own, 
 I cannot think it ; and should any man express a 
 fear that this is not! the least of those national sins 
 which expose us to the divine displeasure that it 
 is a public violation of that righteousness and 
 piety which alone can exalt a people a blemish, 
 a disease which preys upon the body politic ; 
 and, if it does not threaten its dissolution, yet 
 greatly impairs its strength I confess I could not 
 prove his fears to be weak or superstitious. For if 
 the church of Corinth was severely chastened for 
 not making a due distinction between theSacra- 
 Hient and their common meals, and not eating it
 
 151 
 
 nf the Lord's supper, I see not but the church of 
 England may have something also to fear, on 
 account of those perversions and prostitutions 
 w'iich, you own, you see with concern; by which 
 this Sacrament is used not only according to, but 
 directly against its primitive institution ; to a 
 purpose and for an end which quite opposes and 
 subverts one principal design for which our di- 
 vine Master appointed this sacred rite. 
 
 High offices and court employments, I have ac- 
 knowledged, might be apt to corrupt Dissenters ; 
 as every one knows them to have this influence 
 upon the human mind ; though therefore as a 
 Briton, and as a Christian, I wish earnestly the 
 repeal, yet as a Dissenter, I profess no solicitude 
 about it. " But I ought not then (you say) so 
 strenuously to plead for their being admitted 
 to such employments, but to be very solicitous 
 against it." Review, sir, in less haste, and you 
 will find. I am so fa from pleading strenuously for 
 their admission to such employments, that I have 
 not so much as pleaded for it at all. All I plead 
 for is, the removal of the incapacity under which 
 they unjustly lie the breaking a disgraceful 
 yoke which the Test hath put upon their necks ; 
 and the restoring them to their native freedom 
 and honour and right. That the state may have 
 liberty, if it thinks it needs their faithful services, 
 to avail itself of them ; and that it be left to their 
 liberty, their virtue, their choice either to ac- 
 cept or to refuse posts of trust under the govern- 
 ment; and that they may not stand branded and 
 stigmatized before the world as persons incapa- 
 ble arid unworthy of such trusts.* 
 
 * In the late excellent Comment on Warburton's Alliance. 
 &c. the passage of my second letter, to which this refers, is not 
 only mistaken, but not faithfully and justly quoted. Tn the letter 
 it stands thus, p. 79, .60" Though I think this law a most un- 
 righteous restraint upon us, and an undoubted violation of our 
 natural rights ; yet I ana far from being persuaded that its repeal
 
 SECT. III. 
 Of our Constitution in Church and State. 
 
 seem a little displeased at my doubting 
 " whether the church were an essential and a 
 half part of our constitution? and whether church 
 and state here in England are so incorporated and 
 united as that, like the married pair, they must 
 stand or fall together; and allege, that in all 
 the conversation, as well as in the writings of 
 Dissenters and others, we read and hear conti- 
 nually of the ecclesiastical as distinguished from 
 the civil constitution : yea, even from the throne 
 and both houses of parliament, we often hear of 
 
 would be of the least service to our interest as Dissenters. I have 
 often doubted whether there is not too much truth in what you 
 say, that high trusts and court employments would be extremity apt to 
 corrupt its ; and that it would really rather injure than strengthen 
 our interest. I have never therefore, as a Dissenter, been at all 
 jolicitous for the repeal." 
 
 Note, This is expressed only as a doubt or suspicion ; but the 
 author of that Comment hath made it say in strong and po- 
 sitive terms (p. 123,) " That a repeal of the Test and Cor- 
 poration acts would really be injurious to the interest of Pro- 
 testant Dissenters ; or. that I am persuaded it would rather 
 injure than strengthen our interest." \Vhich is giving the 
 passage a very different turn. 
 
 And when that gentleman asks " Is there an absolute incapa- 
 city of being virtuous in high stations? I answer, no: But (T 
 there be a great danger of being vicious ; this will justify surely 
 an indifference; a nonsolicitude about them ; and will excuse, at 
 least, a doubt, a fear, as to the event And when he further 
 asks" Would any man think his conduct justifiable, should he 
 refuse a large estate merely because of the greater danger of his 
 being corrupted by it ?" I answer, 1. There have been instances 
 of such refusal recorded, and, perhaps, justly, as instances of he- 
 roic tirtue. But, 2. To refuse it when offered, is a thing ex- 
 tremely different from being solicitous to obtain it. Public offices 
 and trusts, when offered by those in power, ought not to be re- 
 fused by such as think themselves capable of rightly discharging
 
 153 
 
 eur constitution in church and state."* But di- 
 vest yourself, for a moment, of worldly attach- 
 ments, which insensibly warp the mind, and you 
 will see it, I believe, to be a very rational doubt 
 Kor our ecclesiastical, however it may be dis- , 
 tlnguished in common language, is really no 
 oilier than a civil constitution; f it is a system 
 or frame contrived, disposed and enacted by the 
 civil magistrate ; as much as the constitution of 
 the treasury, of the army, or of the courts of 
 Westminster-hall. These all, sir, have their 
 constitutions, (that is, tlteir several parts of the 
 public business assigned them to despatch, and 
 their several officers and forms and methods of 
 proceeding in them) as really, as truly, and as 
 much as the church. The army is the constitu- 
 tion and order of the civil magistrate relating to 
 the direction of the military force. The treasu- 
 ry is the constitution and order of the same ma- 
 gistrate, relating to the collection and disposal 
 of the public money. The courts of Westmins- 
 ter-hall are the constitution of the same magis- 
 trate for the dispensing public justice. And the 
 
 them ; because this would be to reject an opportunity of publite 
 service, to which their country calls them. Cut this may be don 
 without a solicitude to procure them. 
 
 The passage on which this ingenious author has stepped aside 
 to remark, speaks but the very same sentiment which himself hag 
 elsewhere, perhaps, more strongly expressed. Comment, &c. 
 page 133. " An indifiVoncy to the honours, riches and pleasures 
 of tiiis world, a contempt of and victory over them, is the inde- 
 pendency and supremacy which the true religion and church can 
 boast ; the resignation ([or loss) of which must be infinitely dan- 
 gerous to her, her poison, her death wound." Again, page 131. 
 " Though ft mny be thought t am pleading for the introduction 
 of Protestant Dissenters into places of profit and trust, I am fully 
 persuaded that their having such places would not make them 
 xnore religious men, nor from numbers of them so employed 
 would their societies appear with greater reputation as religious 
 societies." 
 
 * Let. I. page 11. II Def. pages 9, 10. 
 
 f This I have fully proved in my first letter, pages 20, 21. '. 
 wUk'h no reply has been mads.
 
 154 
 
 ehurch is the constitution and order of the same 
 magistrate relating to the manner in which the 
 public worship is to be performed. The officers in 
 each are all entirely made, instructed, controlled 
 by the power of the civil magistrate : it is by his 
 authority alone that they are aH qualified and im- 
 powercd to act in their respective stations ; and 
 it is in that manner, and by those rules only 
 which his wisdom hath perscribed, that in ail 
 their respective offices they severally proceed. 
 
 You cannot therefore deny that the ecclesias- 
 tical is really no other than a branch of the civil 
 constitution ; and that what you call the church 
 is in truth no more an essential, much less an 
 half part of our constitution, than the treasury, 
 the army, or either of the courts of Westminster- 
 hall. If, therefore, the wisdom of the legisla- 
 ture should think proper to new-form any of these 
 constitutions ; for instance, the method of dis- 
 pensing justice in any of our law courts, (which 
 courts, by the way, are all of much longer stand- 
 ing than the constitution of our present church.) 
 Would you not smile to hear some zealous gen- 
 tlemen of the robe stand forth and insist That 
 these courts were an essential and a half part of the 
 constitution ; and that therefore whoever moved for 
 or so much as wished, an alteration in either of them , 
 could not be safely trusted with any share of the 
 public power, and was really in truth an enemy to 
 the state ? The learned gentlemen of the robe, 
 sir, no doubt, equally smile to hear you thus 
 reasoning as to the church.* 
 
 * That the account here given of the nature and constitution 
 of the church of England agrees with the sentiments of our first 
 reformers, the founders and framers of it, appears from the de- 
 termination of a select assembly of them, convened at Windsor, 
 by king Edward VI, by whom, (as may be concluded from arch- 
 bishop Cranmer's manuscript) it was declared, 
 
 " That all Christian princes have committed to them imme- 
 diately from God the whole care of their subjects ; as well con- 
 cerning the administration of God's word for the cure of souls, as
 
 155 
 
 By " the constitution in church and state, 
 then, of which we often hear even in speeches 
 and addresses from, and to the throne," can be 
 meant nothing else, than that order or form of 
 government respecting all persons and things whieh 
 is established by the laws and customs of this realm. 
 A constitution, by which the king or queen, as 
 the supreme head of the church, is the fountain- 
 of all power and j urisdiction therein ; authorized 
 to instruct, over-rule, and control all the arch- 
 bishops, bishops, and priests in this kingdom, in 
 all their most spiritual and ecclesiastical con- 
 cerns a constitution, by which a lady, when 
 such fills the throne, is empowered to compose 
 public prayers for the church ; to stop all preach- 
 ing therein ; to fill vacant bishoprics with what 
 persons she pleases, or not to fill them at all ;* to 
 to direct all ecclesiastics what they shall, or shall 
 not preach ; and even in the most abstruse and 
 metaphysical points, to be the final judge of he- 
 resy ; whose judgment must stand, as to what 
 
 concerning the ministration of things of political and civil gover- 
 nance. In both these ministrations they must have sundry minis- 
 ters under them, to supply that which is appointed to their stve- 
 ral offices. 
 
 " The civil ministers under the king's majesty in this realm be 
 those whom it shall please his highness, for the time, to put in au- 
 thority under him ; as for example, the lord chancellor, lord trea- 
 kurcr, lord admiral, &c. 
 
 " The ministers of God's word under his majesty, be the bishops, 
 parsons, vicars, and such other priests as be appointed by his high- 
 ness to that ministration ; as for example, the bishop of Canter- 
 bury, the bishop of Winchester, the parson of Coynwick, &c. 
 
 " All the said officers and ministers, as well of the one sort as 
 of the other, be appointed, assigned and elected in every place by 
 the laws and orders of kings and princes." (Vide an Extract from 
 archbishop Cranmer's MS. Stilling. Iren. Part II. Chap. viii. 
 page 391. 
 
 Any of the bishoprics may be kept vacant by the princes of 
 England, as those of Ely and Oxford were by queen Elizabeth : 
 the latter had no bishop for 22 years. The parliament dissolved 
 the rich bishopric of Durham in king Edward VI's reign, and 
 gave the profits to the crown. And it had remained so to this day, 
 probably, had not popish queen Mary restored it.
 
 156 
 
 shall or shall not be deemed heresy in this church, 
 even though it happen to contradict that of all 
 her learned clergy in convocation convened. 
 
 Thus that renowned lady, queen Elizabeth, 
 in the fulness of her ecclesiastical power,, her- 
 self composed a prayer, archdeacon Echard* 
 informs us, for the use of a great number of her 
 nobility and gentry, as well as her soldiers and 
 sailors, in the expedition against Cadiz, direct- 
 ing it to be used daily in every ship. And by vir- 
 tue of her supremacy she might, I presume, if 
 she had pleased (as any future queen may) com- 
 pose prayers for the use of the archbishop?, 
 bishops, and all the clergy of the land ; and en- 
 join their solemn use every Sunday in the church ; 
 and the use of such devout feminine compositions, 
 no bishop nor priest can, agreeably to our cons- 
 titution, in any wise refuse. 
 
 The same royal lady, by virtue of her procla- 
 mation only, put an entire stop to all preaching 
 of ministers and others throughout the kingdom ; 
 and the people were charged to hear no other 
 preaching or doctrine, but the epistle and gospel of 
 the day, and the ten commandments, zvithout any 
 exposition or paraphrase thereon. And should any 
 future queen think proper to do the same, I 
 humbly apprehend, that all her bishops and cler- 
 gy are, by our constitution in church and state, 
 obliged to obey. 
 
 By the same constitution, king Charles I. put 
 forth a proclamation (if a woman had worn the 
 crown, she also migl t have done it; as any fu- 
 ture queen may,) commanding the" clergy not to 
 preach or dispute about Arminianism. The learn- 
 ed bishop Davenport, presuming to preach upon 
 the doctrine of predestination, was forced to ap- 
 pear upon his knees before the council ; and be- 
 ing severely reprimanded, hardly so escaped ; 
 
 Hi*, of England, p. 367. Col. 1.
 
 157 
 
 though ho alleged he had preached nothing but 
 tin* XVllth article of the church of England. 
 The king, not only in his superior, but supreme 
 ecclesiastical wisdom, told him " The doctrine of 
 prcdt slination icas too big for the people's under' 
 standings ; and that he was resolved not to permit 
 that controversy to be discussed in the pulpit.* 
 
 What authority our constitution gives queens 
 to judge in points of heresy (the most deep and 
 mysterious points,) and to control the proceed- 
 ings of the most venerable and holy synod which 
 the clergy of this kingdom can possibly compose, 
 has been observed in the case of Mr. Winston, 
 whom queen Anne, by her sole authority, skreen- 
 ed from the heavy censure of her learned convo- 
 cation. Her single judgment, in the balance of 
 our apostolic and excellently constituted church, 
 being of far greater weight than that of the unit- 
 ed bishops and clergy of the whole. land. This 
 account you attempt to invalidate by calling it 
 a misrepresentation : but the truth of it is not 
 to be disputed : it is attested by two of your own 
 learned and reverend historians, Bui net and 
 Tindal, in their Accounts of the year 1711. 
 
 Again, by our present constitution, the king 
 alone, or at least by consent of parliament, can 
 undoubtedly cjividethn twenty-six bishoprics, into 
 which this kingdom is at present cantoned, into 
 us many hundred; and thus render them more 
 like the bishoprics of the first age?, when every 
 Christian bishop took the oversight of no more 
 than he could personally know, and than could 
 communicate at one table; he can also new-frame 
 the whole order of public worship ; can abolish 
 
 O 
 
 * Vide Fuller's Church Hist. Book itfl page 133. 
 
 The same blessed martyr, by his royal mandate only, without 
 any trial, sequestered and suspended from the execution of his of- 
 fice, good archbishop Abbot, for rrfusing his license and approba- 
 tion to a most vile and scandalous sermon of Sibthorp.
 
 , 158 
 
 its present articles, ceremonies and forms ; an4 
 substitute new ones in their stead. By the same 
 power, he may dispose of that part of the public 
 treasure by which the clergy are maintained in a 
 juster and more equitable manner ; he may re- 
 duce the shameful exorbitance, by which some 
 members of that great, and in itself venerable 
 and useful body, wanton in vast affluence, indo- 
 lence and sloth, (which is perhaps what you call 
 snugness.,) whilst others, equally virtuous and 
 learned, but much more laborious, wear away 
 their lives in obscurity and want. This, sir, 
 without question, is our present constitution ia 
 church and state. 
 
 SECT. IV. 
 
 OJ Sponsors in Baptism. 
 
 YOUR defence of sponsors in baptism comes 
 next to be considered. Here you affirm" That 
 I represent the use of sponsors as a very myste- 
 rious point, as an unaccountable, inexplicable, 
 absurd and unlawful thing"* an assertion which 
 escaped from you in the ardour of your zeal, but 
 which has really no foundation. The use of spon- 
 sors, in all cases of parents' incapacity, I entirely 
 approve; and expressly told you, That in such cases 
 the Dissenters also usethem.i You could not, with- 
 out extreme inattention, but see, that it was the. 
 settingaside theparents; the for bidding them to stand 
 forth and engage solemnly for the religious educa- 
 tion of the child; and the receiving the child to bap- 
 tism upon account of its own faith and its own pro- 
 wise expressed by its sureties, that I thus repre- 
 sented as unlaw ful and absurd . And though 1 have 
 
 * II Df. p. 2, J Let. II. jf. .
 
 159' 
 
 the pleasure now te find you tacitly giving up, 
 though not honourably retracting, that precipi- 
 tant expression, " That godfathers are not a 
 useful only, but even a necessary institution," 
 yet scarcely, without pain, can I see you so 
 grievously embarrassed in accounting for the aji- 
 swers mad at the font. These, you still insist, 
 are not the sureties 1 , but the child's answers. 
 Hut your attempts to explain, how a child who 
 cannot believe, does yet profess faith I How the 
 infant who in r.o sense can promise or engage, 
 does yet really and in good sense vow and en- 
 gage ! How the babe, who has no thoughts, no 
 purposes, nor desires, may yet express these by 
 the mouth of its sureties ; and how these expres- 
 sions of what it hath not, and cannot positively 
 have, are accepted by the church as a proper to- 
 ken that it hath them, and as a solid ground of 
 baptism! This is still to me, and I believe to 
 all the world, as inexplicable and mysterious, 
 as it was before you undertook to unveil and ex- 
 plain it. 
 
 Nay, the mystery grows upon you, by attempt- 
 ing to unfold it ; for you declare, " that the 
 ground and foundation of infants being received 
 to baptism, in your church, is the promise of 
 God to believers and their seed'"* Observe, 
 then, it is the faith of the parent that entitles the 
 child to baptism ; but if the ground of its being 
 received to this Christian sacrament be the faith 
 of its parent only, why do you receive it as if 
 upon account of its own faith ? Why interrogate 
 the poor babe? Dost thou believe? Will thon 
 be baptized? Again, if the parent's faith be that 
 which entitles his child to baptism ; why is not 
 the parent suffered to stand forth and to profess 
 his faith as a qualification for the baptism of hi 
 
 II. Def. p. 2f.
 
 "160 
 
 child ? Why is the child called upon vicariously 
 to declare, that itself believes, that itself desires 
 baptism, &c. when all- the world sees that it 
 neither knows, nor does, nor can in any sense at 
 all do either of these things ? 
 
 You endeavour to explain the matter " by an 
 infant in the lord of the manor's court, who by 
 his attorney is admitted to his copy-hold, and co- 
 venants to do homage for the same ; or, by an 
 infant king, who hath some one of the nobility, 
 who in his name, and for his benefit, is appoint- 
 ed to take the coronation oath ; and thereby 
 oblige him to observe the laws and protect his 
 subjects.* But these instances avail you nothing; 
 For. 
 
 I. The child, when admitted by his attorney 
 in the lord's court to his copy-hold, does not co- 
 venantio do homage for the same. That he does 
 not covenant, I prove by a very plain and incon- 
 testable argument, which is, that he cannot. 
 There is no sense at all, no religious or moral 
 sense, in which the infant can, with any truth. or 
 propriety, be said to covenant. No, it is the at- 
 torney, and he alone that covenants to perform 
 the homage. And in the case of a minor king, 
 when one of the nobility takes the .coronation- 
 oath in his name or stead, (if any such ceremony 
 be ever performed,) he does not, cannot in any 
 sense thereby oblige the, royal infant to observe the 
 laws and protect the subject : not whilst an infant ; 
 because, not being a moral agent, he cannot pos- 
 sibly be capable of moral obligation ; nor when 
 he comes of age ; because the promise or oath 
 of one rational moral agent, can never properly 
 oblige another, if that other was not at all con- 
 scious of, nor gave his consent to it. The whole 
 nature and extent of the obligation in that case 
 is uuquestionably'this : The nobleman who takes 
 
 * II. Dcf. p. 129.
 
 161 
 
 the oath, as personating the king, and who du- 
 ring the mincrity is vested with the regal power, 
 swears that he himself will, in the exercise of 
 that power, observe the laws and protect the sub- 
 jects. The obligation of this oath, which is made 
 by himself only, can extend only to himself; and 
 it lasts only so long as he continues vested with 
 the regal power. But when the royal infant 
 comes of age, and assumes the power into liis 
 own hands ; he must personally take the oath ; 
 or some way or other signify his solemn assent 
 to it, in order to his being laid under any real 
 obligation by it. And then, 
 
 2. These cases also Avidely differ from that of 
 the baptized infant, because in both of them there 
 are several important services and actions to be 
 done, (which must be performed by some one) 
 whilst the minority continues. In the first, there 
 are suits and services in the lord's court, and 
 quit-rents to be paid. In the other, there are 
 acts of regal power to be continually exerted for 
 the due government of the people, even whilst 
 the infancy remains. These, therefore, being 
 indispensably necessary to .be done, and the in- 
 fant being utterly incapable of doing them, hence 
 arises a necessity of some person's undertaking^ 
 discharge these offices for him, and to act in the 
 infant's stead. But r is there any thing like this 
 in the case of baptized infants ? Is there any ser- 
 vice or homage, any faith or vows which God 
 expects from them, whilst their infancy lasts ? 
 You know there is not. If God then expects 
 no such services from the infant, why are spon- 
 sors called forth to pretend to perform them for 
 it. And this when the pretence is in every view 
 ridiculous ; because in thing* of religion, it is ut- 
 terly absurd for one man to pretend to promise, 
 to repent, to believe in the name of another. 
 
 One principal design of the baptism of a child, 
 yo own, is " that some security be given j some 
 o 2
 
 162 
 
 solemn stipulation be made before the church for 
 its religious education." Who then, I pray, so 
 proper to give this security, as the person to 
 whom its education is committed? Whom 
 should the church bring under the engagement 
 of a solemn vow or covenant for this purpose ? 
 Strangers, who, perhaps, never saw the child ; 
 or, who when the ceremony is past, will never 
 see it more ! Or the parents, in whose family it 
 is to grow up, and under whose eye it is to be 
 formed ! 
 
 You do not pretend that there is in your bap- 
 tism of an infant, any explicit stipulation besides 
 what the child itself makes ; yet notwithstanding 
 this you consider the sureties as accepting it, 
 * { by standing there, and receiving a solemn 
 charge concerning the religious education of the 
 child."* But do you not know, sir, that this is 
 110 stipulation, neither explicit nor implicit. A 
 stipulation is a mutual promise : but though the 
 sponsors stand there, and hear the admonition ; 
 no answer, no word, no token is required of 
 them by which to signify their solemn purpose 
 land engagement to obey it. Accordingly, when 
 they return home, they too generally with great 
 levity shake off the charge again, and throw it over 
 to the parent.-^ And thus the solemnity of the in- 
 stitution dwindles into a mere trifling, if not a 
 ludicrous ceremony; and your boasted double se- 
 curity still remains no real security at all. 
 
 Dr. Nichols's Account of this apparently ab- 
 surd and mysterious affair, to which I referred 
 you, is undoubtedly far more defensible, though 
 quite contrary to yours, viz. " Baptisatorum 
 fidem religiose in se recipiebant, eos sincere om- 
 nia in evangelic revelata credere, & subsequen- 
 tes vitae actiones juxta Christi normam directuros 
 ^: That the sureties religiously engaged for 
 
 II, Df, p. 56, t c ra - to the Temp, p, 612. 
 
 \ Nich, Def. Part II. p. 273.
 
 163 
 
 the faith of the baptized, that they should sincerely 
 believe, all that icas revealed in the Gospel., and di- 
 rect the subsequent actions of their lives by the law 
 of Christ. This you call my translation; and 
 tax me before the world " for having translated 
 it wrong to serve my purpose."* It will give 
 you, surely, some confusion and pain to be told, 
 that this is not mine, but the doctor's own trans- 
 lation, or that of his learned friend who pub- 
 lished his Defence, &c. And I appeal to the pub- 
 lic, whether the doctor's or yours be the proper 
 rendering of the words. Is Recipere in se Jidem 
 bapfizatorum To make a solemn declaration and 
 
 profession touching the faith of the baptized ? 
 
 Besides, the doctor was too wise a person to re- 
 present the sureties, as you would have him, as 
 making a solemn declaration that the infant did sin- 
 cerely believe all that is revealed in the Gospel 
 
 because this he well knew was what no wise or 
 honest man could possibly declare concerning any 
 infant upon earth. He Knew it absurd to affirm 
 That the infant did believe at all; much more to 
 affirm that it sincerely believed; but more even 
 yet, that it sincerely believed all that is revealed in 
 the Gospel. In whatever light therefore you view 
 it, it appears to be perfectly mysterious : and this 
 business of the sureties and their answers at the 
 font, after all your pains to clear it up, is still 
 covered with dark and impenetrable clouds, which, 
 till some new light shall arise, one may venture 
 to prophesy will never be dispelled : it turns the 
 ceremony of your baptism into little else than a 
 solemn farce : and furnishes unbelievers with 
 too just an occasion of ridicule and contempt. 
 
 II. Def. p. 26.
 
 SECT. V. 
 
 Of Confirmation. 
 
 to tlic ceremony of Confirmation, you are 
 still so cautious as not to assert any Scriptural or 
 apostolic authority for its practice. But yet you 
 ask " If both the ordinary and extraordinary 
 gifts of the Spirit were communicated by the 
 apostles, by imposition of hands, why may we not 
 expect that the ordinary ones will be still com- 
 municated by the same administration ? And why 
 should we not continue that administration in the 
 church, in hope and expectation of them :* By 
 these ordinary gifts, as you fully explain your- 
 self, you mean, what are usually called, the 
 graces of the Spirit, even the spirit of love and 
 of a sound mind. For you add, " If this spirit 
 of love and of a sound mind was; given to Time- 
 thy by imposition of hands in his ordination ; why 
 may it not be done by the same ceremony in con- 
 firmation ?" I am sorry there is a protestant di- 
 vine in this kingdom capable of asking such a 
 question as this. For, this spirit of love and of 
 a sound mind which you encourage us to expect 
 from the laying on of the bishop's hands, is one 
 of the sublimest gifts conferred upon the human 
 race by the gospel of Christ. A gift which far 
 excels an ability to speak with tongues, a faith 
 that can remove mountains, a power to cast out 
 devils, to heal all manner of diseases, or eve 
 to raise the dead. The spirit of love and of a 
 sound mind far excels them all ; and yet this it 
 seems we may now expect by the laying on of the 
 bishop's "hands ! Blessed episcopacy indeed, if 
 
 II. Def. p. 3*
 
 165 
 
 it carries with it such gifts ! But how foolish and 
 wild is the claim, if neither Scripture nor reason 
 lends it the least support ! 
 
 I must also observe, that though this gift v/as 
 conferred on Timothy at his ordination, by the 
 Juying on of the apostle's hands, it does not fol- 
 low, that the same gifts may be expected in con- 
 firmation from the hands of our present bishops. 
 Is there power in their lordship's lingers to con- 
 vey so divine a blessing to the head on which they 
 rest ? You should know, sir, that the learned 
 prelates of your church abhor the presumptuous 
 claim : they pretend to no such power. Why 
 then will you officiously presume to claim it for 
 them ? and why amuse the world, and give infi- 
 dels room to scoff by the use of a solemn cere- 
 mony for the conferring these gifts, which no mor- 
 tal man hath now power to bestow ? The age is 
 critical and discerning. For the honour of the 
 Christian name therefore, and the dignity of 
 Christian bishops, all claims not clearly founded 
 on Scripture or reason, and all offices and rites 
 not evidently supported by them, should silently 
 be dropped. 
 
 The only rite, after baptism, which I find 
 either instituted or practised by Christ and his 
 apostles, " to make a public recognition of bap- 
 tismal engagements in the face of a Christian, 
 congregation," is the celebrating the Lord's Sup- 
 per. By this, Christians are openly to profess 
 themselves the subjects and followers or Jesus 
 Christ ; to recognize the baptismal covenant ; to 
 shew forth that death by which he purchased them 
 to himself; and in the most public and solemn 
 manner to lay themselves under fresh and most 
 sacred obligations to live obedient to his laws. 
 Here then all the ends which can rationally be 
 proposed by the use of confirmation, which is 
 merely a human invention, are better and more 
 effectually answered by coining to the Lord's
 
 166 
 
 Supper, which is an undoubted institution and 
 command of Jesus Christ. With the emblems 
 of their Saviour's body and blood in their hand.-, 
 the recognition they here make of their engage- 
 ments to a holy life, is much more solemn, the 
 motives to obedience more powerful and con- 
 straining, and they are certified of God's favour 
 and gracious goodness to them, by a token incom- 
 parablv more important than the laying on of the 
 bishop a hands. If you ask, " What is this to 
 those who dare not offer themselves to the sacra- 
 ment ?"* I answer, such have equal reason not 
 to otfer themselves to confirmation ; the same 
 faith and sincerity which are requisite to render 
 a person a proper subject of the one, make him 
 also a worthy communicant in the other. 
 
 That this ceremony of confirmation is no part 
 of genuine and primitive Christianity, is, I sup- 
 pose, well known to all our learned bishops and 
 ijivines. Tertullian is the most ancient author in 
 which any mention of it is made. But by his time, 
 it is well known, a great variety of superstitions 
 and ridiculous and foolish rites were brought into 
 the church. And you are also, I presume, not 
 ignorant that confirmation was then always per- 
 formed (not as it is with us, but) immediately 
 after baptism, as it is now, also throughout the 
 Greek church, and all the churches of the east. 
 A due regard to this will lead you to the true 
 meaning of that expression in your office, which 
 you are so embarrassed in clearing up ; where 
 the bishop declares to God, That he hath vouch- 
 safed to regenerate these liis servants by water and 
 the H oil/ Ghost, and to give them the forgirenesf 
 
 of fill their sins an expression taken, probably, 
 
 from some ancient liturgy: and which was suit- 
 able and well adapted to the practice of those 
 times, but is utterly incongruous and unsuitable 
 to ours. 
 
 II. Def. pagej&
 
 167 
 
 For then, as Dr. Cave observes,* " Though 
 infants were undoubtedly taken into the church 
 by baptism, yet the main body of the baptised 
 were adult persons ; who, flocking over daily in 
 great numbers to the faith of Christ, were re- 
 ceived in at his door. Usually they were, for 
 some considerable time, catechised, and trained 
 up in the principles of the Christain faith; till 
 having given testimony of their proficiency in 
 knowledge, and of a sober and regular conver- 
 sation, they became candidates for baptism :" 
 or as a greater authoft says, " The catechumens 
 enjoyed not the privileges of the faithful till they 
 had, in a sense, merited them ; which was when, 
 through a considerable time of trial, they had 
 evidenced the sincerity of their hearts by the sanc- 
 tity and purity of their lives : And then, as Ori- 
 gen says, We initiate them in our mysteries, when 
 they Jiuve made a proficiency in holiness, and ac- 
 cording to the utmost of their power have reformed 
 their conversation. When they had changed their 
 manners and rectified their irregular carriage, 
 then they were washed with the water of baptism, 
 and not before. For, as Tertullian observes, 
 we are not baptized, that we may cease to sin ; 
 but because we have already ceased." Now, when 
 this was the case, and immediately after baptism 
 confirmation was administered, there was some 
 decency and propriety in the bishop's or presby- 
 ter's (for presbyters also then confirmed) addres- 
 sing Almighty God as having vouchsafed to rege- 
 nerate these his servants with water and the Holy 
 Ghost, and to grant them the forgiveness of all their 
 sins. But how different, alas ! (vastly different) 
 is the case at present with the multitudes who 
 flock to our modern confirmations ! with what 
 levity and rudeness do they rush to receive this 
 episcopal grace ! In' how slight and careless a 
 
 Prim; Chris. Part I. p. 194, 208. 
 
 J- Inquiry into the Constitution, &e, Part I. p. IQS,
 
 manner is the ceremony performed ! What rlof 
 and disorder frequently conclude the day ! This 
 is too obvious to the world, and it would seem, 
 perhaps, invidious, were I to dwell longer upon it. 
 Your laboured apology for the bishop's mak- 
 ing that very weighty and solemn declaration 
 over a promiscuous assembly, which is supposed 
 to include many vitious and corrupt persons, is 
 effectually overthrown by your own just conces- 
 sion, "that if he were, indeed, to declare to 
 each individual person, by himself, that God 
 had regenerated him in particular with the Holy 
 Ghost and forgiven him all his sins, it would be 
 a different case. Such a person might be temp- 
 ted thereby to entertain better thoughts of the 
 state of his soul than he had reason for, and to 
 delude himself with deceitful hopes*" Behold 
 this, in effect, is indisputably done ! For each 
 individual person, after having heard this solemn 
 declaration pronounced over himself in common 
 with all the rest, is presented separately by his 
 parish priest ; and kneeling before the bishop, 
 feels his consecrating hand resting upon his head, 
 and hears himself distinctly and personally cer- 
 tified (assured from the bishop's mouth) that this 
 is a token of God's favour and gracious good- 
 ness to him in particular. What now, I ask, is 
 the obvious, the natural construction which the 
 person puts upon all this ? Why surely, unless 
 lie thinks the whole solemnity to be a farce ; and 
 that the bishop and priest (his spiritual guides, 
 whose lips are to preserve knowledge, and who 
 are to be the mouth of God to him) have con- 
 spired to put a dangerous cheat upon his soul, 
 he must strongly conclude his soul to be in a safe 
 and happy state, and that he is a partaker of 
 that forgiveness which God has graciously pro- 
 mised in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Wfiethcr 
 
 II. Defence, p. 43. 
 r
 
 169 
 
 the continuance of this ceremony, in its present 
 form of administration, be either for the honour 
 of the administrator, or for the benefit of the 
 church ? Whether it hath not an apparent ten- 
 dency to cherish a delusive hope, and to speak 
 peace to such persons as are not, by the Chris- 
 tian covenant, entitled to peace ? I with all hu- 
 mility leave to ttte consideration of those whom, 
 I thank God, it more immediately concerns than 
 myself; who are to be faithful in God's house; 
 and to watch for men's souls, as those who must 
 give an account to the great Shepherd, who will 
 shortly come ; before whom it will be a tremen- 
 dous thing- to have the immortal souls of thou- 
 sands required at their hands. 
 
 SECT. VI. 
 
 The Terms of Ministerial Conformity hard and 
 terrible. Lay-Dissent justified. The Rise of 
 the Separation. 
 
 IN EXT after Confirmation, I considered two 
 other offices of your liturgy, viz. Absolution of 
 the Sick, and the Burial of the Dead ; and shewed 
 them, I apprehend, to be liable to great excep- 
 tions ; and to have no friendly aspect upon the 
 morals and souls of men. I am strengthened in 
 that opinion by observing, that amidst the vari- 
 ety of trifling things to which you have descend- 
 ed, in the prosecution of this debate, you have 
 quite overlooked these two important points ; 
 and have not so much as undertaken their de- 
 fence. It does some honour to your understand- 
 ing, not to attempt to defend what you know to 
 be indefensible, but to let the forms lie under 
 the imputations charged upon them, till God 
 shall put it into the hearts of those wko have it 
 p
 
 170 
 
 in their power, to wipe these unhappy blemishes 
 from the face of the church. 
 
 But as to these, and some other of your addi- 
 tional splendors (doing reverence towards the 
 east, and bowing at the name of Jesus, which 
 also you do not so much as pretend either to jus- 
 tify or explain,) you observe u That these are 
 things with which, as a layman, I have no con- 
 cern. As to the form of absolution, what has 
 he, for God's sake, to do with it ? If he does 
 not design to take orders in tlve church, and so 
 subscribe to the use of the liturgy, it is no con- 
 tern of his, whether that form be defensible or 
 jiot. : '* But have not I, dear sir, as much to do 
 with your ministerial conformity, as you with my 
 lay-dissent ? Are you not as much obliged to 
 vindicate, before the world, your subscription to, 
 and use of, these offices in your church ; as I am 
 to justify my separation from it ? Yes, and I now 
 publicly call upon you, and charge it upon your 
 most serious deliberate reflections, as you will 
 soon answer it at a supreme and impartial tribu- 
 nal, to remember and consider 
 
 That you have solemnly, and in the pre- 
 sence of God, who searcheth the heart, and 
 abhors all prevarication, hypocrisy, and deceit, 
 especially in religious concerns, in the presence 
 of this God, I say, and in the face of his church, 
 you have declared your " UNFEIGNED assent and 
 consent to all and every thing contained in, and 
 prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer," &c. 
 If then there be any one thing contained in tii.at 
 book, any one office or form, which is irrational, 
 unfit, repugnant to the Gospel scheme, and which 
 no well-instructed Christian can heartily assent 
 to, or imfeignedly approve, I appeal to your owa 
 conscience, 1 appeal to the whole world Whera 
 u the honour! Where the Christian simplicity 
 
 II. Pef. pae JH,
 
 171 
 
 and godly sincerity of this solemn declaration f 
 What ! shall a man, a minister, in God's pre- 
 sence, and appealing to him as the searcher of 
 hearts, declare his unfeigned assent to things 
 he does not approve ; and promise his un- 
 feigned consent to use forms in God's worship, 
 which he heartily dislikes! This is a most griev- 
 ous yoke upon the necks of Christian ministers, 
 beheld by unbelievers with the greatest ridicule 
 and contempt ; and which every friend to the 
 Christian name would wish heartily to see re- 
 moved. And, 
 
 This, as before observed, most fully justifies 
 that separation from your church, to which our 
 fathers were compelled, (and which we at pre- 
 sent continue :) when in a most unrighteous and 
 schismatical manner, she cast out above two 
 thousand of her ministers, for not subscribing 
 and declaring this unfeigned assent and consent. 
 These ministers were by this deprived of what 
 they had not forfeited ; deprived of acting as mi- 
 nisters by those who had no right, nor authority, 
 to deprive them of it. The pastoral relation 
 therefore undoubtedly remained between them 
 and their respective flocks ; and they acted a 
 lawful, a worthy part in continuing their minis- 
 terial services, though thus cruelly cast out. 
 
 " No, (you reply,) they ought to have con- 
 formed as lay-men, as some of them did ; much 
 less will this justify the laity of those times ; 
 less still the ministers and laity of the present in 
 their separation."* To their immortal praise 
 be it recorded, they better understood their rights 
 as men, and their duty as subjects of Christ, the 
 only king and head of the church ; an .., there- 
 fore, with great suffering and worldly loss, en- 
 tered boldly their protest againt this presump* 
 
 II, De p. 131.
 
 tuous invasion of his throne ; this schismatical 
 intrusion of new terms of the Christian ministry 
 and communion into his church. The conditions 
 of exercising the Christian ministry, which the 
 act of Uniformity imposed upon our fathers, 
 were such as no power upon earth had a right 
 to impose upon them : they were such, as if 
 complied with, opened a wide way by which in- 
 numerable corruptions, superstitions and perse- 
 cutions might enter and lay waste the church. 
 Thc-ir subscription was required to new articles 
 of fa ; th which Christ had never made : and their 
 unfeigned ap<;ent and consent to new rites and 
 forms of worship which neither Christ nor his 
 apostles had ever appointed or enjoined : yea, 
 it obliged them schismatically to confine Chris- 
 tian communion to those only who would submit 
 to these inventions of men in the worship of God ; 
 and to deny baptism and the Lord's supper, to 
 those who, by the constitution and the laws of 
 Christ's kingdom, were duly qualified for these 
 ordinances, and who had therefore an absolute 
 right to receive them. 
 
 Among others, there are two ever-memorable 
 circumstances from which the flagrant oppres- 
 sion and tyranny of those proceedings, most 
 strongly appear 1. That the time fixed for the 
 ministers' subscribing and assenting to the alte- 
 rations in the Common Prayer was so short, 
 that not one in a hundred of those who lived 
 remote from London, saw or could be supposed 
 to- see them, before their assent and consent 
 were, under so severe a penalty, to be solemnly 
 given. It is a known and certain truth, says 
 one,* that the Liturgy, with its alterations, 
 to which they were unfeignedly to assent, came 
 not out of the press till Bartholomew-eve ; and 
 the following day was the ultimate time fixed 
 
 * Tong 9! Schism, page 150.
 
 173 
 
 by the act, for the ministers' subscription : so 
 that all those throughout the kingdom, who con- 
 formed, except a few in London, subscribed to 
 they knew not what. " The matter was driven 
 on (says bishop Burnet) with so much precipi- 
 tation, that it seemed expected the clergy 
 should subscribe implicitly to a book they had 
 never seen. This was done by too many, as 
 the bishops themselves informed me."* Could 
 any thing be more unrighteous or tyrannical 
 than this) Yes : for 
 
 2. The unhappy ministers were obliged like- 
 wise to declare solemnly, and even to subscribe 
 a most notorious and dangerous untruth, viz. 
 " That it is not lawful upon any pretence what- 
 soever, to take arms against the king, or any 
 commissioned by him :" a position absolutely 
 subversive of the British constitution, and 
 which the nation was soon after (in God's righ- 
 teous and wise providence) brought openly 
 to acknowledge to be traitorous, detesta- 
 ble, scandalous and false : a position which, 
 if admitted, the glorious revolution and 
 our present happy government had never taken 
 place ; but tyranny and popery, with all their 
 dire curses, had been bound eternally upon our 
 necks. But be astonished, O heavens! this 
 false, this base, this scandalous declaration, the 
 ministers were, by the Act of Uniformity, obli- 
 ged solemnly to make, upon pain of losing 
 their places. OUR FATHERS nobly abhorred 
 such an ignominious surrender of the natural 
 rights of men ; they scorned to betray the liber- 
 ties of their country, and to be tools of arbitra- 
 ry power. -J- For this heroic refusal, they were 
 p 2 
 
 * Hist, of hia own time, vol i. page 21 2, Evo. 
 
 f- Whilst every enlarged and liberal mind rejoices in tFie consi 
 deration, that the cause of civil and religious liberty, is, in this ag 
 btter understood and mote generally patronised, thaa ia UM
 
 174 
 
 cruelly cast from their churches, and delivered 
 up, with their starving families, to extreme suf- 
 ferings and distress.* 
 
 This, sir, was the shameful, the tyrannical 
 yoke, which the Act of Uniformity would have 
 put upon the necks of our illustrious predeces- 
 sors ; and to which, as Christians and as Protes- 
 tants, they bravely scorned to submit. Noble 
 was the stand which they made in defence of 
 Christian liberty and truth. Glorious will their 
 names ever shine in the British annals, whilst 
 virtue and integrity are sacred among us. Peace 
 and everlasting honour be upon the memory of 
 
 time* of which I am writing, tne Protestant Dissenters arc pecu- 
 liarly entitled to triumph in the recollection, that these two most 
 invaluable blessings have been preserved and handed down to their 
 fellow-subjects, in consequence of the firm adherence of their 
 forefathers to the cause of liberty and truth, both civil ands reli- 
 gious. There is an observation in Mr. Hume's History of Eng- 
 land, which is the more important in proof of this assertion, as 
 it is made by an historian who cannot be suspected of entertain- 
 ing any prejudices in their favour. He observes '(when speaking 
 of the arbitrary conduct of Elizabeth), " So absolute was the 
 authority of the crown, that the precious spark of liberty had been 
 kindled and was preserved by the Puritans alone; and it wasto> 
 Ihis sect, whose principles appear so frivolous, and habit* so ri- 
 diculous, that the English owe the whole freedom of their con- 
 stitution." Hume's Hist. f England, Vol. v. page 189, 8vo. 
 
 Edition, 1 763. 
 
 * " By the Act of Uniformity (says Mr. Locke) all the cler- 
 gy of England are obliged to subscribe and declare, That it 
 not lawful upon any pretence whatever, to take arms against the 
 king ' This they readily complied with.f For you must know, 
 that sort of men are taught rather to obey tha to understand.... 
 And yet that Bartholomew-day was fatal to our church and reli- 
 gion, h<- throwing out a very great number of worthy, learned, 
 pious, orthodox divines, who could not come up to this oath and 
 other things in that Act. And so great was the zeal in carrying 
 On this church aflair, and so blind the obedience required, that if 
 youccmpute the time of passing this Act, with that allowed for 
 the clergy to subscribe the Book of Common Prayer thereby es- 
 tablished, you will find it could not be printed and- distributed, s 
 as that one man in forty could have seen and read the book they 
 " did so perfectly .assent and consent to." Maiz. Col. page 61. 
 f Our two thousand worthy predecessors ewepted.
 
 175 
 
 these Christian heroes ! Future generations 
 will rise up and call them blessed. 
 
 To their ministers thus unrighteously and cru- 
 elly ejected, it was the duty and the honour of 
 the Christian laity to adhere. It was partly for 
 their liberty, and that the Gospel might be con- 
 tinued in its primitive simplicity and purity 
 among them, that their ministers thus suffered. 
 It would therefore have been inglorious, un- 
 grateful, and in the highest degree unjust, had 
 the laity forsaken their ejected pastors ; and not 
 borne their witness with them against the 
 imposing spirit which then lifted itself up, and 
 was fastening a disgraceful yoke upon the dis- 
 ciples of Christ. Through the favour of hea- 
 ven, a noble spirit of Christian fortitude was 
 awakened also in lay-breasts, and, its mercy be 
 praised, still lives, beats high, and we hope, 
 finally advances to the everlasting overthrow of 
 bigotry, church tyranny and persecution, from 
 the earth. They saw and detested the danger- 
 ous and fatal schism and usurpation upon the 
 rights of conscience, which a party of lordly men 
 were setting up in the'church of Christ. They 
 firmly adhered to their injured ministers, and to 
 the principles of Christian liberty. And God 
 hath eminently blessed their churches for the 
 promoting sincere piety, sobriety and virtue, 
 in all succeeding times. 
 
 This was the rise of that separation from the 
 establishment, which I am defending in these 
 letters : a separation, which, as it was founded 
 upon Christian and just principles, so it has 
 marvellously subsisted, under great worldly dis- 
 couragements, strengthened and upheld, we 
 trust, by the mighty power of God. And by 
 the same mighty power, we hope, will still be 
 upheld, till his mercy shall dispose the hearts pf 
 our brethren who have cast us out, to receive 
 us again.
 
 176 
 
 As a layman, sir, I consider the Gospel and 
 Christian liberty, as a sacred deposite commit- 
 ted to me by God, for which I am to be accoun- 
 table at his tribunal hereafter. As to these, he 
 hath expressly charged me, and every lay Chris- 
 tian, to watch to stand fast to keep what is 
 committed to me to fight the good Jight of faith, 
 SfC. If I see then the simplicity and liberty of 
 the Gospel corrupted and infringed by the in- 
 ventions, traditions and commandments of men ; 
 the unity of the church broken by new terms of 
 communion, and new articles of faith imposed 
 upon the disciples : if I see things ridiculoas,* 
 superstitious,t erroneous,^: brought into the 
 church, and made a part of Christian worship ; 
 things dangerous to men's souls, and which 
 give them wrong notions of the terms of salvji- 
 tion and acceptance with God, and which mani- 
 festly tend to cherish a false and delusive peace. 
 In this case, though a layman, I am bound to 
 enter my protest, and to declare openly my dis- 
 sent, as I would not be condemned as a betray- 
 er of my sacred trust, and would stand before 
 my judge with confidence at last. 
 
 * Reading the spurious, romantic, apocryphal fables. 
 
 f Bowing at the name of Jesus, and worshipping towards the 
 east, c. 
 
 | Several of the articles, especially the ixth, and the damna- 
 tory clauses of the Athanasian creed. 
 
 The fttoolutiea of lh* sick, the burial office and conflmm-
 
 SECT. VII. 
 
 gross Misrepresentations of the Dissenters 
 corrected. 
 
 PROCEED next to what you seem to glory 
 HI, as the peculiar excellence of your Letters, 
 but which will soon appear, to your very self, 
 their peculiar foible and disgrace, viz. your re- 
 torting upon Dissenters their own pleas and objtC' 
 tions ; particularly your charge, that they not 
 only have, but impose ceremonies in divine wor- 
 ship ; and that there are various impositions 
 amongst ourselves. 
 
 You here force me to call you forth, sir, to un- 
 dergo the mortification of seeing yourself proved, 
 before the world, a false accuser of your bre- 
 thren. Sitting at the Lord's supper, you have, 
 at several distinct times, and with great variety 
 of language, most confidently asserted, " to be 
 really imposed by us to be constantly, invaria- 
 bly and universally practised among us. That 
 it is never allowed to be departed from. That 
 ur ministers insist upon and refuse to abate it,"* 
 with much more to the same purpose. This 
 now is a^charge, not only absolutely false, but 
 (which is a very aggravating circumstance, and 
 must shock greatly your character and credit 
 before the world) you had seen it to be false. 
 For, you had actually read in Dr. Calamy's Brief 
 Account &c. a most express declaration, that 
 no such thing was at all imposed among us, 
 but that cur communicants were at liberty to use 
 their own posture. I again put you in mind of 
 this, because you have not yet been so ingenuous 
 
 Let, II. pages 56, 57, 58. Let. III. pages 8, 9.
 
 178 
 
 as to emn the falsehood of this charge, and pub- 
 licly to retract it. I can assure the public, that 
 there are no less than seven or eight dissenting 
 churches in my own neighbourhood, in which 
 the posture either of standing or kneeling at the 
 Lord's supper has constantly been practised for 
 many years past, (though in some of them the 
 persons are now deceased) and this without the 
 least offence to any of the congregation, or dis- 
 like of the ministers. -Judge hence, reader, what 
 regard is to be paid to the representations of 
 this zealous eensor ! and how justly he describes 
 himself " encountering with ghosts, and groping 
 in the dark." 
 
 With equal rashness you affirmed, and still 
 itoutly maintain " That knetling in family 
 prayer is ALWAYS practised by Dissenters that 
 it is imposed and commanded by the master of 
 the family upon his children and servants, by his 
 signifying his mind to them; and letting them 
 know, once for all, he would have them kneel"* 
 Upon a particular inquiry, I assure the public, 
 that I cannot find the least trace of any such 
 imposition, or signification of the master's mind 
 in any family of Dissenters ; but that, in their 
 family devotions, standing is a posture very fre- 
 quently used, and not avoided in point of con- 
 science, I believe, by ten Dissenters in the king- 
 dom. The matter is too trifling to merit many 
 words. But, to let you see how utterly unfit 
 you are for the office you assume, I will take 
 you from the darkness where you miserably 
 grope, and lead you to a light which will a lit- 
 tle disconcert your countenance, by acquainting^ 
 you, that at the three principal dissenting acade- 
 mies in the southern parts of England, viz;, 
 Northampton, Taunton, and Bridge water, it hath 
 been the general, if not the constantj unvaried 
 
 II, Def. pages 70, 71,
 
 179 
 
 usage, both of tutors and students, to stand at 
 family prayer. These are the nurseries where 
 most of the dissenting gentlemen and ministers 
 in England have been formed ; whose custom 
 therefore must naturally have a wide and strong 
 influence upon multitudes of dissenting families, 
 throughout the land. See now with what truth, 
 with what honour and discretion, you bolt your 
 random censures at the religious conduct of your 
 neighbours! and feel the just pain with which 
 they rebound and wound your own head. 
 
 But what heightens our perverseness and in- 
 consistency, is this ; that at the same time that 
 we thus always worship kneeling in our families, 
 and the master commands and imposes it upon 
 all its members : " Yet in our prayers at church, 
 there, it seems, we always stand ; and it is little 
 less than imposed upon our people ; for so great 
 and general is the discountenance that kneeling 
 lies under, that it requires some courage and re- 
 solution for any one to ventui-e upon it ; and if 
 any one does, (you say it again) he will be cen- 
 sured for it :""* a charge not more bold, than it 
 is groundless and false. " One congregation, 
 (you have said) you can name, where great ot- 
 fence was given by a person kneeling at her 
 prayers." But you have publicly been told by 
 an authority of great weight, which I presume 
 you durst not contradict, that the whole account is 
 .a misrepresentation; of which the most authentic, 
 evidence is ready to be produced.^ Did I not 
 justly say, that your informers had served you 
 ill? A man conscious of his own blindness, should 
 be cautious into what hands he delivers himself 
 up. 
 
 Besides, could you have made good the charge, 
 not against one only, but even a hundred of our 
 churches ; will this justify the universality and 
 
 * II. Def. page 72. 
 j- Chandler's Cas f SubacriptioR, page 14.
 
 180 
 
 positiveness of your assertion, " that if any one 
 kneels amongst u?, he will be censured for it." 
 This publicly accuses not one only, nor a hun- 
 dred, but all the dissenting churches, of this 
 ridiculous weakness ; which you cannot prove 
 upon any single one of them all. The reproach, 
 therefore, comes back with great force upon 
 yourself. I have made no extensive inquiries 
 on this head, but can take upon me to assure you, 
 there are no less than six or seven of our con- 
 gregations near me (I believe there are many 
 more) where kneeling at public prayer hath been 
 constantly practised by one or more members, 
 without the least discountenance. And of the 
 many ministers I have consulted, I find not one 
 who imagines the practice would give offence 
 to any single congregation among us. 
 
 Equally just and well supported is that other 
 reproach, " That it is generally held amongst 
 us that the Sacrament is for none but perfect and 
 consummate Christians." After multiplying on 
 this subject many words to little purpose, you 
 are at last forced to retract this injurious impu- 
 tation as to the Presbyterians,* and acknowledge 
 it to be false. You might have done the same 
 by the Independents, whom you still leave un- 
 der its w r eight. For though they are generally 
 more minute, 1 fear, in inquiring after proofs 
 of the sincerity of a man's Christianity, than the 
 Scriptures authorise them ; yet there is scarcely 
 one to be found, I believe, among the most rigid 
 of them all, who will not declare that every sin- 
 cere Christian hath a right to the Lord's table. 
 For do they not all acknowledge that every such 
 person is become, by the gospel covenant, a child 
 of God, and a brother ofjfcsus Christ ? Will the 
 most rigid Independent say, then, that such have 
 not a right to eat of the sacramental supper I 
 
 * Def. page 36.
 
 181 
 
 No, the truth of grace, they will tell you, be it 
 in ever so weak a state, entitles to the sacrament. 
 You wrong them therefore by saying 1 , that they 
 hold it to belong to none but perfect and con- 
 summate Christians. 
 
 Thus groundless and ill-supported, sir, are 
 the defamations of your dissenting brethren, 
 which your prejudices against them have, I fear, 
 disposed you to receive with too much pleasure, 
 and to have published to the world before you 
 were sufficiently informed whether they were 
 true or false. But suffer, I beseech you. the 
 counsel of a friend. Put away far from you that 
 little, ungenerous, unmanly, bigoted spirit by 
 which " you advise the faithful to shun the con- 
 versation and company of our ministers as be- 
 ing notorious sinners, and not to have any inti- 
 mate unnecessary acquaintance with them, or 
 familiarity in common life."* Indulge the more 
 Christian and catholic disposition Dr. Nichols 
 recommends, who informs the world with plea- 
 sure, " of the charitable correspondence, and 
 strict degree of friendship which subsists betwixt 
 the established clergy and some of the dissenting 
 ministers. "t It is because they know one ano- 
 ther no better, that they do not love each other 
 more. The natural consequence of shyness is 
 estrangement ; this too often produces aversion ; 
 the mind then becomes prepared not only for re- 
 ceiving with pleasure, any scandalous and mean 
 suspicions, but also for industriously propagating- 
 the grossest misrepresentations or the falsest ac- 
 cusations. 
 
 Had you freely conversed with the dissenting 
 ministers around you, as the learned Dr. Nichols 
 advises, you had saved yourself a good deal of 
 public mortification, which your injurious ac- 
 
 Q 
 
 Let. II. pag 8. Lt. I. pge 83. f Nich, Bef. 
 
 page 1-15,
 
 182 
 
 counts both of their principles and practice have 
 now unhappily drawn upon you. Cultivate 
 at length, sir, a familiar acquaintance with 
 them. Their acquaintance will do you honour ; 
 will edify and enlarge your mind ; will give you 
 juster notions of men and of things than a mere 
 college education is capable of doing, and pre- 
 pare you for that happy world where bigotry and 
 party zeal will no more alienate pious spirits, 
 but where all ike children of God are gathered to- 
 gether In one. From them you would have learned 
 that the ceremonies of the sweeping cloak, of 
 kneeling at ordination, of the people's holding 
 up their hands at that solemnity, of striking a 
 covenant with their pastors, of giving the name 
 at baptism are most of them never used at all 
 in the greater part of the dissenting churches ; 
 and the others not in the least imposed ; full li- 
 berty is given to use, or to use them net ; no 
 stress is laid upon them ; much less are they made 
 indispensable terms of Christian communion ; as 
 sponsors, the cross, and kneeling are with you. 
 They would, moreover, have told you, what you 
 seem not to know, that it is not the mere usihg 
 ceremonies, against which Dissenters object, so 
 much as the imposing them ; the laying a stress 
 upon them ; the considering them as decorations 
 and improvements of Christian worship ; riot 
 ohly useful, but necessary institutions, (as you 
 had the irreverence to your divine lawgiver to 
 pronounce concerning sponsors) anu the making 
 compliance with them, terms of reception into 
 the family and church of Christ. And finally, 
 they would have told you, that men's uncovering 
 the head in prayer, is by no means a mere cere- 
 mony, but a circumstance or act of worship, 
 which seems dictated by the light of nature ; 
 and is commanded by an apostle, 1 Cor. xi. 3, 
 4, 7; and that therefore, your placing this in 
 the rank of ceremonies practised by Dissenter?,
 
 183 
 
 was (to return to your own compliment) most 
 certainly a very heedless and wrong-headed 
 thing'. 
 
 " The neglect of private fasting, 1 ' is ano- 
 ther charge you advance against us, " and in- 
 sist confidently, that you were right in saying it 
 was very little, if at all, practised among us."* 
 Dis-senters, sir, I presume, have read that in- 
 struction of their master, Matt. vi. 17. Thou 
 when thou fastest, anoint thy head, and wash 
 thy face ; that thou appear not unto men to fast, 
 but to thy Father vhich is in heaven. Though 
 they affect not to flourish with their vigils and 
 lents (which with sorrow they see turned into 
 Jittle else than a religious farce by too many 
 around them) nor; like the Pharisee, are osten- 
 tatious in telling God and the world how often 
 they fast ; yet this duty, I am persuaded, is prac- 
 tised with much seriousness among them. Be- 
 sides the excellent discourse of Bennet, to which 
 you were r furred, you call for more tracts. See 
 another on the same subject in the Morning Ex- 
 ercise, by Barker ; and from the Lives of the 
 two Henrys, Allen, Baxter, Tross, &c. parti- 
 cularly, of the late most ingenious and pious 
 Abernethy, you may learn what are their reli- 
 gious sentiments and practice as to this matter. In 
 many of their churches there are stated periodi- 
 cal fasts, besides the personal domestic ones, 
 which, upon extraordinary occasions, are not un- 
 usual among them. 
 
 But was it possible you should so alertly at- 
 tack us on this head, when you know it to be in 
 our power with such advantage to retort ! If 
 " you have met with no sermons or tracts of 
 Dissenters recommending private fasts" Pray, 
 have you met with any which discourage and for- 
 bid them ? But, have you never met with your 
 
 II Def, page 131.
 
 184- 
 
 own LXXIId canon ; which says^ " No minis- 
 ter shall without license of the bishop, under his 
 hand and seal, keep any solemn fasts, either 
 publicly or in any private houses, other than 
 such as are appointed by Jaw, nor be present at 
 any of them : under pain of suspension for the 
 first fault, of excommunication for the second, 
 and of deposition from the ministry for the third." 
 This sir, is the exalted foot, upon which the 
 duty of private fasting stands in your church ! 
 Could any thing then be more wise, more perti- 
 nent, or more just than the censures you deal us 
 here ? 
 
 As to the posture of standing at public prayer, 
 for which also you had the sagacity sharply to 
 reprehend us ; besides the great variety of Scrip- 
 ture examples which I produced in its justifica- 
 tion, you nave had since, from a learned hand,* 
 indisputable proofs from Justin Martyr, Irenasus, 
 Clemens of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Cy- 
 prian, the Apostolical Constitutions, Jerome 
 and Austin, that it was the posture in which the 
 Christian churches universally offered up their 
 public and most solemn addresses to God, through 
 all the primitive times. So unlucky is your 
 hand, that the bolts you fling at us, as de- 
 basers of the public worship, &c. alight directly 
 upon the heads of some of the most sacred and 
 venerable persons which either Scripture or anti- 
 quity holds out to your view ! 
 
 " But the instances of Abraham, Moses, Sa- 
 muel, &c. standing in prayer, serve, you say, to 
 little purpose ; unless it were also shewn, that 
 they were instances of such simple mere standing 
 as is practised in our congregations. "t Yes : 
 they are full to our purpose ; because it appears 
 not from the sacred story, but they were instances 
 
 * Chandler's Case of Subscrip. pages 11, 12. 
 f II. Def. page 76.
 
 of exactly such simple mere standing as is used 
 .among ?/.?. As to the other gestures of devotioa 
 which your imagination would supply, the Scrip- 
 tures are wholly silent ; and you will excuse us r 
 sir, from accepting- your fertile imagination as 
 a proper supplement to the word of God. 
 
 " The primitive Christians, (you observe,) 
 cannot be imagined to do no more than barely 
 keep upon tfifir feet. No, they prayed with bauds 
 spread, and with eyes lift up towards heaven."* 
 Hence then we infer ; first, That they did not 
 read their prayers from a book : that there were 
 no liturgies in those day?. But the pastor, as 
 Justin Martyr and Origen says, offered up 
 prayers and praises to God according to his paver 
 or as fie teas able. But, secondly, by the ac- 
 count which both Cyprian and Tertullian give of 
 their gesture and manner, the public prayers in 
 dissenting churches much more nearly resemble 
 it than those offered in yours. " Slamus ad ora- 
 
 tionen* cum modcstia <$- hinnilitate adorantes, 
 
 &r."t " We stand at prayer adoring with mo- 
 desty and humility, that we may the more effec- 
 tually commend our prayers to God ; not even 
 lifting up our hands high, but moderately and 
 decently, no nor boldly elevating our faces. For 
 the publican whose countenance as well as 
 prayers was humble and dejected, went away 
 justified rather than the saucy Pharisee.'* 
 
 When you have sedately considered the con- 
 tents of this section, you will see cause, sir, 
 once more to resume your censorial rod, and to 
 lay it smartly on yourself; condemning heartily 
 your own temerity, in presuming to'' write so 
 freely about persons and things you knew so 
 little of; and to pronounce peremptorily upon 
 Blatters which you had so slightly examined. 
 
 Though this view of your misrepresentations 
 
 Q * 
 * II. Def. p. 72. I Trt. de Orat. Cap, 13,
 
 186 
 
 might have been greatly enlarged, I shall conclude 
 with mentioning only one fresh and flagrant in- 
 stance* which shews your honour and justice in a 
 very unfavourable light, and too plainly demon- 
 strates that your zeal for the church hath eaten 
 them up. It is the case " of a dissenting minister 
 in Cambridge, whom you knew ; and who, you af- 
 firm, declared from his pulpit, that the Common 
 Prayer-Book had damned more souls, than the Bi- 
 ble had saved; for which he was indicted, and had 
 his public trial as a depraver of it." Here you 
 stop short, and leave that injured gentleman ; yea, 
 you transmit him to posterity, under the scandal 
 of the indictment, without having the honesty 
 and the virtue to inform the world of the issue 
 which you could not but also know, viz. that 
 after a long and full hearing, on both sides, he 
 was by the jury honourably acquitted. This, sir, 
 is such an instance of. partiality, injustice, and 
 wilful misrepresentation, that every candid and 
 virtuous man must look on it with the utmost in- 
 dignation, and you sir, I hope, will review it 
 with the deepest humiliation and contrition. 
 The case of that injured minister (Mr. Joseph 
 Hussey,) has been since published (printed at 
 Colchester in your neighbourhood 1737) which I 
 cannot doubt of your having known or seen. 
 Thence it fully appears, that Mr. Hussey spake 
 honourably not reproachfully of the Common- 
 Prayer, in the sermon referred to; and that he 
 deserved highly that acquittal and triumph over 
 his enemies, which the justice of his country 
 gave him ; but which you injuriously endeavour 
 to blast and suppress. \ 
 
 11. Def. p. lie. 
 
 j- He was shewing how utterly repugnant the Arminian prin- 
 ciples are to several parts of the Com ;non- Prayer ; and after se- 
 veral things said very respectfully of that book, concludes " I 
 wish there was more of that Spirit of God breathing in the souls 
 f men now, which breathed in the souli of those who made the
 
 SECT. VIII. 
 
 Dissenters not inconsistent in submitting to some 
 ceremonhs, and refusing others. 
 
 THIS is another charge which you strenuously 
 advance against us You say, " The ceremonies 
 of marriage and of burial, to which we conform, 
 are enjoined in the same manner, by the same au- 
 thority, and in the same place (the Common- 
 Prayer) as the other ceremonies and rites against 
 which we protest." And you state it as a diffi- 
 culty, which you seem to think will surprise and 
 confound us " where and when the magistrate 
 prescribed the marriage ceremonies otherwise 
 than he did those of baptism and the Lord's sup- 
 per."* I am truly surprised, sir, that so mere 
 a cobweb should entangle you. Pray, what is 
 your Common-Prayer ? Is it any thing but a 
 mere statute or act of parliament ? as really and 
 truly such as any statute in our books of law and 
 nothing more. Now, as the magistrate has in 
 this statute enjoined the manner in which the 
 marriage ceremony is to be performed, pretend- 
 ing that he hereby gives the best legal securities 
 both to the contracting parties and their issue, 
 *we, who consider the ceremonies of this contract 
 as being merely of a civil nature, and as such, 
 within the magistrate's province (as much so as 
 
 Common Prayer; and indeed, considering the inconsistency of 
 men's principles, with their gross hypocrisies in practice, I fear 
 that at the great day, when the books are opened, this Book of 
 Common Prayer, when it is opened, will come in a swift witness 
 against them. And if so, I fear it will be found that that hook 
 they now so much rely on, may be a means of Bending more of 
 them to hell, than the Gospel converts in England." 
 * II Def, p. SO. f Let- HI. p. 6;~
 
 fere the forms prescribed by law fcr making a 
 good title to an estate.) submit to it as an ordi- 
 nance of man, notwithstanding we are sensible 
 of the objections which may be justly urged 
 against some parts of the service which he lias 
 appointed for this purpose. Yet as he has also 
 enjoined, in the same statute, other things mere- 
 ly of a religious nature (relating to baptism and 
 the Lord's supper) which in our opinion, belong 
 to another king-dona, viz. that of Jesus Christ, 
 to whom God has delegated all authority in hi* 
 church, we think ourselves justified in withhold- 
 ing our submission to those things which are not 
 within the province of the civil magistrate. We 
 choose to obey God rather than man ; and if you, 
 sir, will calmly attend to this distinction which 
 we make, you will perceive that no difficulty or 
 entanglement attends it. 
 
 ." But you observe, that upon this supposition, 
 all our objections to the burial office, as reasons 
 against conformity, fall to the ground. For, if 
 the whole transaction be a political thing ; and 
 the gentleman officiating is, in that, no other 
 than an officer of the state, how is the church, 
 for the Lord's sake, concerned in any thing he 
 either says or does, on that occasion ?"* Cer- 
 tainly very much. The church is indeed nothing 
 but a branch or limb of the state. But if the 
 state exact of thos.e, whom it deputes to offici- 
 ate in this part of its administration, unreason* 
 able and shocking things ; if it command them 
 to say that black is white ; to pronounce so- 
 lemnly a man saved, whom they think verily to 
 be lost ; and to thank God that in his great mercy 
 he hath taken to himself an abominable sinner, 
 when in their consciences they believe that God 
 took him aicay jn wrath, and hath driven him 
 from his presence to eternal darkness below is 
 
 * U. Dcf. page 82.
 
 180 
 
 the officer, will you say, who is to pronounce 
 and to do this, not ai ail concerned therein? Nor 
 that branch of the administration in which he 
 officiates, at all wounded thereby in its honour 
 and reputation ? Most deeply, no doubt : and all 
 virtuous and good men, by the eternal regards 
 they owe to righteousness and truth, ought open- 
 ly to protest against such public violations of 
 them ; and to declare their dislike of such pros- 
 titution of sacred things. 
 
 " The church, your learned Warburton* 
 tells us, has by contractor alliance, resigned up 
 her supremacy in matters ecclesiastical, and her 
 independency to the state." The state, in con- 
 sequence of this, hath drawn up for her, arti- 
 cles of faith and forms of public worship, which 
 it requires the church to subscribe and to use. 
 Hard fate of unhappy church ! To come as 
 pupil to the state, to ask what she must believe, 
 and how she must worship ; yea, to be forced 
 solemnly to subscribe articles, which she by no 
 means believes, and to use forms of public wor- 
 ship, which she greatly dislikes ! But, is there 
 no prevarication, nor hypocrisy in all this ? No ; 
 you will say, the state hath commanded it ; and 
 we are to be subject to the higher powers, and to 
 obejy (hose zcho hare the rule over us. It is not for 
 an individual to oppose the public voice; but if 
 any dare say " That either of the articles is in 
 any one part erroneous ; or that the Book of 
 Common-Prayer contains any thing in it contrary 
 to Scripture :" your IVth and Vth Canons thun- 
 der out upon him ipso facto, a most terrible ex- 
 communication, and cut him off, as a wicked 
 wretch, from the body of Christ Excellent cons- 
 titution this ! quite holy and apostolic ! most heav- 
 enly and divine ! bearing upon every part a lively 
 and glorious impress of the character of Jesus 
 Christ ! What wonder, if the dignity of the 
 
 * Alliance, &c. page 87.
 
 190 
 
 priestly character sinks ? If religion is ridiculed, 
 and its sacred things treated with drollery and 
 jest ? It is impossible, we are told, but offences 
 will come ; but wo be to that man! wo be to those 
 Christians, whose hypocritical and corrupt con- 
 duct lays these stones of stumbling in the way of 
 infidels and Papists ! and by whom the offence 
 tomtth ! 
 
 SECT. IX, 
 
 The egregious absurdity of rejecting Presbyterian 
 and admitting Popish Ordinations. 
 
 W E come next to your observations on Or- 
 ders or Ordination, about which you make a 
 very solemn, parade, boasting of your fancied 
 superiority over us in this respect. The seve- 
 rity with which you speak of the ordination of 
 Dissenters, though the very same with that of 
 ail the illustrious churches of Protestants abroad, 
 whilst at the same time you are ?o complaisant 
 as to acknowledge the validity of the ordinations 
 of the church of Rome, is a conduct so extra- 
 ordinary in a protestant divine, that I never yet 
 gaw even any plausible reason for supporting it. 
 The hands and the devoutcst prayers of a com- 
 pany of truly virtuous, religious and Christian 
 presbyters, in Scotland or Geneva, are , not so 
 efficacious, it seems, to send a man forth a true 
 minister in the church of Christ, as the hands 
 and superstitious prayers of an antichristian, 
 idolatrous, persecuting and wicked bishop oi' 
 Italy or Spain. No; let a priest, ordained by 
 one of these, come over to the church of Eng- 
 land, he shall be received as a valid minister, 
 rightfully ordained : But, let another, ordained 
 by the most learned, religious presbytery which 
 Germany, Hungary or the whole world can boast
 
 101 
 
 f, come over also to tli church, this protes- 
 tant church ; his orders shall be pronounced net 
 valid, he must submit to be re-ordained. The 
 former is admitted, as one rightly and duly en- 
 tered a pastor in the Christian church, because 
 a bishop's hand was laid upon him ; though with 
 a great many ridiculous, superstitious, and fool- 
 ish rites; and though he was really no Christian 
 bishop, but an apostate from Christianity, an 
 open and avowed idolater, and a persecutor of 
 the flock of Christ: yea, though the church also 
 into which by that ceremony, he was enterer 1 , 
 was so far from being a trite church, that for 900 
 years past, nothing can be more.* But the lat- 
 ter, though set apart to the ministry by the most 
 fervent and holy prayers: though he has long 
 laboured in the church of God with great di- 
 ligence and success ; has suffered, perhaps, the 
 loss of all for the sake of Christ and his truth ; 
 and is fled hither from the rage of idolatrous and 
 cruel bishops ; yet (strange to relate !) not hav- 
 ing had the hand of such an idolatrous and cruel 
 bjshop in the ceremony of his ordination, he is 
 considered only as a mere layman in this protes- 
 tant church of England ; he shall not, cannot, 
 be acknowledged by us as a minister of Jesus 
 Christ. How mysterious and quite astonishing 
 is the partiality of this conduct ! 
 
 But let us hear your censure on this head 
 " Our ministers are not duly ordained to their 
 office : their ministrations are most certainly ir- 
 regular ; an unnecessary and wanton, if not a 
 factious departure from the primitive order, 
 and therefore those who attend them cannot de- 
 pend that such ordinances will be blessed to them, 
 nor can they be pleasing to God."i And con- 
 
 The -words of tb Homily which every clergyman subscribe* 
 k'w olemn approbation of. 
 
 f Lt. I. page 73, 74.
 
 192 
 
 cerning the established presbyterian church of 
 Scotland, you affirm " That having- renounced 
 episcopacy, and their ordinations being irregular, 
 their communion can neither be safe nor lawful:"* 
 a most schismatical and rash judgment; which 
 equally condemns all the illustrious reformed 
 churches of France, Holland, Switzerland, Ger- 
 many, Poland, Hungary, Denmark, &c. They 
 all likewise have renounced episcopacy ; their 
 ordinations therefore must be irregular, and their 
 communion neither safe nor lawful. 
 
 But to give you, sir, more just and favourable 
 impressions of ordination by presbyters : and to 
 abate somewhat of your high esteem of that epis- 
 copal ordination on which you so much pique 
 yourself, I recommend to your consideration the 
 following things : 
 
 ]. That Timothy was ordained by the, laying 
 on of the hands of (he Prcsbyttry, 1 Tirn. iv. 1-t 
 That Paul and Barnabas were ordained by 
 certain prophets and teachers in the church of 
 Antioch, and not by any bishop (of whom there 
 is not a wprd in all that solemnity) presiding in 
 that city, Acts xiii. 1, 2, S. And that it is a 
 well-known, acknowledged, incontestable fact, 
 that presbyters, in the celebrated church-of Alex- 
 andria, ordained even their own bishops for more 
 than 200 years in the earliest ages of Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 2. Bishops and presbyters are in Scripture 
 the very same ; and are not a distinct order or 
 office in the Christian church. The church at 
 Philippi had but two orders of church officers 
 among them, viz. bishops and deacons, Philip. 
 i: 1. And that the name, office and work of a 
 bishop and of a presbyter are the same, appears 
 from Tit. i. 5, 7. For this cause left Jthee in Crete^ 
 that thou shoiildst ordaitt presbyters in every city., 
 
 * II. Defence, p. H.
 
 193 
 
 for a bishop must be blameless. Paul called the 
 presteyters of the church of Ephesus together, 
 and charged them, Acts xx. 27, 28, to take 
 heed to the flock over which the Holy Ghost had 
 wade them bishops, ETno-xon-y?. So 1 Pet. v. 1, 2. 
 The presbyters, among you I exhort, who also 
 am a presbyter, feed the /lock of God among you, 
 performing the office of bishops, Mri-nto-roomr. 
 
 The superiority of bishops to presbyters is. not 
 onlv by the first reformers and founders of the 
 church of England, but by many of its most 
 learned and eminent doctors since, not pretend- 
 ed to be of divine, but admitted to be only of 
 human institution ; not grounded upon Scrip- 
 ture, but only upon the custom or ordinances of 
 this realm. "The truth is, that in the New 
 Testament there is no mention of any degree or 
 distinction of or'ders, but only of deacons or mi- 
 nisters, and of priests or bishops ," says a De- 
 claration of the Functions, &c. which was sign- 
 ed by more than thirty-seven civilians and di- 
 vines, among whom were thirteen bishops.* The 
 book, entitled, The Institution of a Christian 
 Man, subscribed by the clergy and convocation, 
 and confirmed by parliament, owns bishops and 
 presbyters by Scripture to be the same.t And 
 says, though St. Paul consecrated and ordsined 
 bishops by imposition of hands ; yet there is no 
 certain rule prescribed in Scripture, for the no- 
 mination, election, or presentation of them : 
 this is left to the positive laws of every country. 
 And that the main ground of settling episcopal 
 government in this nation, was not any pretence 
 of divine right, but the convenience oi' that form 
 of church government to the state and condition 
 of the church at the time of the Reformation, 
 your learned Stillingfleet:}: affirms, and proves 
 R 
 
 * Burnet's Hist, of the Reform. TO!. I. Ap. p. 321. 
 
 f To the same purpose speaks the Erudition of a Christian 
 Man. 
 
 \ Ircnic. Ch. VIII. p. 385.
 
 194 
 
 it to be the sentiment of archbishop Cranmer and 
 other chief reformers, both in Edward VIand 
 queen Elizabeth's reigns, of x archbishop White- 
 ^ift, bishop Bridges, Loe, Hooker, Sutclifte, 
 Hales, Chillingworth, &c. * 
 
 I must also add, that it deserves your serious 
 consideration whether, by the constitution and 
 frame of the church of England, sacerdotal ordi- 
 nation be really at all necessary to the mak- 
 ing a valid minister, and to the giving success 
 and efficacy to his ministrations ; or, whether 
 there be really, any such ordination in the church 
 of England at all ? It seems clearly the sentiment 
 of our first reformers, that sacerdotal ordination 
 was not necessary ; and that they established the 
 church of England agreeably to this plan. For 
 in a select assembly of divines, convened by the 
 authority of king Edward VI, for the settling im- 
 portant points relating to religion, it was de- 
 termined, as may be presumed from a recorded 
 opinion of archbishop Cranmer, their presidentt 
 " That though, in the admission of bishops, 
 parsons, vicars, and other priests to their office, 
 there be divers comely ceremonies and solemni- 
 ties used, (he speaks chiefly of ordination.) yet 
 
 * See a letter of Dr. Haynolds of Oxford on this head ; where 
 he declares the sameness ""of bishops and priests, or that they have 
 equal authority and power by God's word, to have been the judg- 
 ment of St. Paul, Chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrose, Austin, The- 
 odorus, Primasius, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Anst'Im. Gre- 
 gory, Gratian, the Waldenses, Wickliffites, Hussites, &c. Neal. 
 Hist. Purit. Vol. I. page 497. 
 
 Archbishop Bancroft and the rest of tfee bishops with him 
 owned the ordination of presbyters to be valid, and therefore re- 
 fused to re-ordain the Scottish Presbyters who were then to be 
 made bishops, declaring, " That to doubt it, was to doubt whether 
 there were any lawful vocation in most of the reformed churches." 
 Archbishop Spotswood's Hist, page 514. The bishops of Scot- 
 land, when episcopacy was settled there, never required the pres- 
 byterian ministers to take episcopal ordination. Bishop Burnut's 
 Vindicat. pages 84, 85. 
 
 f Vide Extract from archbishop Cranraer's MS. Stilling Irn. 
 C^ap. VIII. page 291.
 
 195 
 
 these be not of necessity, but only for good or- 
 der find seemly fashion. For if such offices and 
 ministrations were committed without such so- 
 lemnity, they were nevertheless truly committed. 
 And there is no more promise of God that grace 
 i- given in the committing of the ecclesiastical 
 office, than it is in the committing the civil. A 
 bishop may make a priest by the Scriptures, and 
 so may princes and ^oTernors also, and that by 
 the authority of God committed to them ; and 
 the people also by their election. For as we 
 read that bishops have done it : so Christian em- 
 perors and princes usually have done it : and 
 the people, before Christian princes were, com- 
 monly did elect their bishops and priests. In 
 the New Testament, he that is appointed to be 
 a bishop or a priest, needeth no consecration by 
 the Scripture; for election or appointing thereto 
 is sufficient."* 
 
 Agreeably thereto, the bishops in this church, 
 in the reigns of Henry VIII. and Kdw. VI. took 
 out commissions from the crown, like other state- 
 officers, for the exercising their spiritual juris- 
 diction ; in which they acknowledge " That 
 all sorts of jurisdiction, Us well ecclesiastical as 
 civil, flow originally from the regal power, as 
 from a supreme head, the fountain and spring of 
 all magistracy within this kingdom ; and that 
 they ought with grateful minds to acknowledge 
 this favour derived from the king's liberality and 
 indulgence ; and accordingly they ought to ren- 
 der it up, whenever the king thought fit to re- 
 quire it of them. And among the particulars of 
 ecclesiastical power given them by this commis- 
 sion, is that of ordaining presbyters ; and all 
 
 * To the same purpose speaks the Erudition of a Christian 
 Man, which was drawn up by a committee of bishops and divines 
 and rend and approved by the,lords spiritual and temporal, and the 
 lower house of parliament. An. 1.543. Vid. Keal's 
 Purit. Vol. I. pages 55, 36.
 
 196 
 
 this to last no longer than the king's pleasure. 
 And these things are said to be super and ft//ra 
 over and above what belongs to them by Scrip- 
 ture."* 
 
 From the commissions, which the bishops 
 took out, especially Bouner's, Bishop of Lon- 
 don, it is evident, that, all the power of ordina- 
 tion which the bishops had, or could have and 
 exercise, in this kingdom, they derived entirely 
 from the civil magistrate, and only from him.t 
 And that this really is the case as to the ecclesi- 
 astical orders conferred by our present bishops ; 
 that all the validity, significancy or weight which 
 they have in this church they derive purely and 
 solely from the authority of the magistrate, 5n- 
 contestibly appears from hence ; namely, that the 
 magistrate has authoritatively directed and pre- 
 scribed how and to whom ordination is to be 
 given.}: And should an ordination be given by 
 all the bishops of this church in other manner 
 and other form than thai prescribed by th ma- 
 gistrate, such ordination would be of no legality 
 at all, nor authority in this church. The man 
 so ordained would be no proper minister in the 
 
 * Right's Chr, Ch, Pref. page 59. 
 
 Even archdeacon Echard acknowledges, that in the reign of 
 Henry VIII. the bishops took out and acted, by commissions in 
 which they were but subaltern to the king's vicegerent : but in the 
 reign of Edward VI. none being in that office, they were imme- 
 diately under the king : hut by these commissions they declare, 
 " that they held their bishoprics only during the king's pleasure, 
 and were empowered in the king's name, as his delegates, to per- 
 form all the parts of the episcopal function." Echard's Hist. Eng. 
 page 299. 
 
 f Anno 1550, an order of council was made, that some bishop* 
 and other learned men should devise an order for the creation of 
 bishops and priests. Burnet's Hist. Refor. Vol. III. page 59. 
 
 \ Vide the Judgment of the Court in the case of Howe!, a 
 nonjuring clergyman, ordained by Dr. Hicks (Tindal's Hist, of 
 JEng Vol IV. page 502 ) His ordination was pronounced il- 
 legal, and he disowned as a clergyman. Vid. a statute 8 of 
 Kliz. la Fuller's Ch. Hist. Book ix. page 80,
 
 197 
 
 church of England. A minister iu the church of 
 Christ, he possibly mig>it be : but he would, 1 
 repeat it, be no minister in the church of Eng- 
 land ; nor would he have power and authority to 
 officiate as a priest therein.* 
 
 The church of England, if you duly weigh it, 
 seems evidently constituted upon the congrega- 
 tional or independent plan. It is from the peo- 
 ple (in other words, from the king and parlia- 
 ment, in whom the people have lodged their 
 power) that all the officers in this church receive 
 their whole authority and are directed how to 
 act. In all their ordinations, jurisdictions, mi- 
 nistrations, its bishops aivd priests act entirely 
 by an authority committed to them by the civil 
 magistrate, which he received originally from 
 the people. So that as the people, by their re- 
 presentatives, are supposed to have authorised, 
 directed, and appointed them to act ; so, and 
 so only, are all the archbishops, bishops and 
 priests in this church to officiate, and discharge 
 their several functions therein. And if they 
 presume to transgress the bounds which the peo- 
 ple, by their representatives, have set them ; and 
 to officiate otherwise than in the form and man- 
 ner prescribed, their ministrations are illegal and 
 of no authority in this church. 
 
 This, sir, I appeal to all who know our con- 
 stitution, is the real and true nature of your 
 boasted episcopal ordination, as it now stands in 
 our church. It is an ordination performed by a 
 civil officer, i. e. by one who officiates only by an 
 authority derived to him from the civil magis- 
 R 2 
 
 * The bishop at an ordination ask* " Are you called according 
 to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the DUE ORDER or THIS 
 MJALM. " 
 
 Note, It is not sufficient to make him a minister in this church, 
 that he is called according to the will or institution ef 
 Jesus Christ, if he be not also exiled according to tb* 
 
 YVX OUXR OF THIS REALM.
 
 tratc, and the legality of whose ministration?:, 
 and their efficacy in this church, depend entirely 
 upon his observing the manner and forms which 
 the magistrate hath enjoined. Ordinations then, 
 in the church of England, if traced to their pro- 
 per origin and rightly considered, are in truth 
 nothing but merely civil or popular ordinations. 
 Nor let it be here replied That these bishops, 
 who by the laws of England are empowered to 
 ordain, are at the same time to be considered as 
 successors of the apostles, and as having re- 
 ceived power of ordination from these founders 
 qf the Christian church, by an uninterrupted 
 lineal descent. For the constitution and law of 
 England knows nothing at all of this ; it rests 
 not this power, which it commits to its bishops, 
 upon any such lineal succession or descent, (which 
 it knows to be a rope of sand, a ridiculous chi- 
 mera, a thing which no man upon earth is able 
 to make out,) no : but it considers the king, 
 vested (by act of parliament, or the suffrage of 
 the people) with a fulness of all power ecclesi- 
 astical in these realms, as empowering and au- 
 thorising bishops to ordain. This power of or- 
 dination was once delegated to Cromwell, a lay- 
 man, as vicegerent to the king. And by the 
 constitution and law of England, this layman 
 had then as much authority to ordain as any 
 bishop in the realm ; and any priest whom he 
 had ordained, would have been as much a mi- 
 nister in the church of England, and his minis- 
 trations as valid, as if all the bishops of the 
 realm had laid their hands on his head.* But, 
 4. The only possible way of avoiding this dif- 
 ficulty, is recurring to the wretched refuge of 
 popish ordinations, and deriving the validity of 
 
 * Heath and Day, the bishops of Worcester and Chichester, 
 wire deprived of their bishoprics by a court of delegates, who 
 ^*rt all lajmn, Vid. Echard's Hist, JBng. page SIQ.
 
 199 
 
 your orders and ministrations, and your powers 
 of ordination, -from the idolatrous church of 
 Rome. If you derive them not from the civil 
 magistrate, you must derive them from popish 
 bishops. A desperate refuge this ! attended 
 with a train of monstrous absurdities ! all which 
 you resolutely defend, rather than admit the or- 
 ders of foreign protestant divines and the regu- 
 larity of their ministrations. 
 
 That popery is an undoubted fundamental 
 subversion of the whole scheme of Christianity, 
 That it is that apostacy from the Christian 
 faith, described by St. Paul, 1 Tim. iv. 1, 2, 3. 
 The man of sin and the son of perdition sit- 
 ting in the temple (or church) of God ; opposing, 
 and exalting himself above all that is called God, 
 foretold by the Holy Spirit, 2 Thes. ii. 3, 4. 
 And that the church of Rome is represented by 
 the prophetic spirit, in the revelation of St. John, 
 as an adulterous and bloody woman, who hath 
 broken the marriage covenant that espoused her 
 to Christ, and is fallen into a state of abomina- 
 ble and open lewdness ; multiplying her forni- 
 cations ; and instead of bringing forth and che- 
 rishing a faithful seed to the Redeemer, breathes 
 out horrid threatenings and persecutions against 
 them, makes war with the saints, destroys them 
 from the earth, and is drunk with their blood; 
 that the papacy or church of Rome is thus de- 
 scribed by the Holy Spirit, is readily acknow- 
 ledged by all protestant divines, those even of 
 the church of England not excepted. How 
 astonishing then is it to see ! that from this idol- 
 atrous apostate church you derive, by ordination, 
 your spiritual and sacerdotal powers ; and boast 
 that you can trace from her, by an uninterrupted 
 line, your ecclesiastical descent. Strange ! that 
 without shame, you declare yourselves before 
 the world, the offspring of this filthy withered 
 old harlot, as your church expressly calls her ; 
 
 siv <VG :
 
 00 
 
 and that you rest the validity of your ordinations 
 and holy offices in Christ's church, upon their 
 transmission to you from this antichristian and 
 false church, even at the very, time that you ac- 
 knowledge that for a thousand )/irs past it has 
 been so far from having the nature of the true 
 church, that nothing can be more. What absur- 
 dities are here ! That which is no true church, 
 nor has been any thing like it for a thousand 
 .years past; yet conveys true, regular, church 
 officers and powers ! An anti-apostolic church 
 imparting genuine apostolic orders ! The syna- 
 gogue of Satan becoming the sacred repository, 
 where the power of ordination to holy offices in 
 Christ's church, for more than ten centuries 
 principally rested, and was almost only to be 
 found! The church of Rome, which by apos- 
 tacy, hath ^ut itself off from the body of Christ, 
 hath nevertheless his spirit and authority dwel- 
 ling in it ; and is commissioned by Christ to ex- 
 amine, ordain and send ministers into his church, 
 for the edifying of his body and perfecting of 
 his saints ! How marvellous and transcendent in 
 every view is this ! 
 
 . " But harlot as she is, you say, she may bring 
 forth children as well as a virtuous matron, and 
 sometimes children far better than herself."* 
 Poor consolation this ! For the children she 
 brings forth in this state of her divorcement, 
 must be born of fornication, a spurious and cor- 
 rupt race. 
 
 This, sir, is that church of Rome whom you 
 own as your mother, and from whom you claim 
 by ordination to be ecclesiastically sprung ; and 
 the sons of this vile and detestable prostitute you 
 acknowledge as your brethren ; duly born into 
 the church ; ordained, because episcopally, in a 
 valid and right manner ; whereas the glorious 
 company of foreign reformed churches, together 
 with the church of Scotland and the dissenting 
 
 
 II Def, page 52.
 
 201 
 
 ministers at home, you utterly disown as ecclesi- 
 astical brethren ; and affirm, " That having re- 
 nounced episcopacy, and their ordination being 
 irregular, their communion can neither be law- 
 ful nor safe." Where, alas ! is the decency, 
 the consistency, and common sense ; to say no- 
 thing of the Christianity or charity of this illi- 
 beral assertion ! 
 
 The church of Rome, by the XXIXth article 
 of the church of England, cannot be a part of the 
 true visible church of Christ ; for this it thus de- 
 fines " A congregation of faithful men, in 
 
 which the pure word of God is preached, and 
 the sacraments be duly administered according 
 to Christ's ordinance, in all those things that 
 of necessity are requisite to the same." But, 
 do you not acknowledge, that the pure word of 
 God is so far from being preached in the Romish 
 church, that it is there corrupted by most erro- 
 neous and abominable traditions, idolatrous rites 
 and blasphemous fables, as your XXXIst arti- 
 cle most righteously styles them ? Do you not 
 confess the wine to be an essential part of the 
 Lord's supper ? Is that sacrament then duly ad- 
 ministered, according to Christ's ordinance in 
 the church, where the cup is take nfrom the laity ? 
 
 In short, " If blasphemies against God and 
 tyranny over men ; if defacing the ideas of De- 
 ity, and corrupting the principles of moral ho- 
 nesty and virtue ; if subverting the foundations 
 of natural religion, and acting directly counter 
 to the spirit and design, and overthrowing the 
 essential articles of the Christian faith ; if the 
 most avowed and bold affronts offered to heaven, 
 and the most bloody and brutal outrages exe- 
 cuted on the best of men ; if all these, I say, 
 are sufficient to exclude men from being a part 
 of the truly catholic apostolic church, the Ro- 
 manists can certainly have no pretences to it."
 
 202 
 
 The church of Rome, therefore, having by 
 her abominable immoralities, blasphemies and 
 idolatries, excommunicated and cut herself off 
 from the body of Christ, she cannot have his spi- 
 rit and power still dwelling in her ; consequent- 
 ly, she has no authority to convey sacerdotal cha- 
 racters and offices in Christ's church ; the cha- 
 racters and offices therefore, which she pretends 
 to convey, are spurious and of no validity or 
 efficacy therein. 
 
 But what completes the absurdity, and ren- 
 ders it quite astonishing, is that these very pi- 
 pish clergy, to whose orders you pay such ex- 
 travagant complaisance, are so impolite as not 
 to return the compliment to yours : PO far from 
 it, that they rudely pronounce you all, from the 
 greatest archbishop to the meanest cicrk in the 
 land, a company of mere unconsecrated laymen ; 
 equally unqualified for performing any holy of- 
 fice in the Christian church as the most illiterate 
 and contemptible dissenter. To return good for 
 evil is, indeed, sometimes truly great. But to 
 see the venerable bench of bishops and gover- 
 nors of this church, with the whole body of its 
 clergy, not only yielding to, but contending be- 
 fore the world for, the validity and efficacy of 
 the orders of popish priests ; when, at the same 
 time, these very priests are going up and down 
 the kingdom, undermining their authority, inva- 
 lidating their ministrations, and representing 
 their sacerdotal powers as a mere nullity af>d 
 jest. To see them publicly maintaining the ec- 
 clesiastical characters and office of these cor- 
 rupters of Christianity, these sworn enemies to 
 our civil government and to our king, these craf- 
 ty seducers, who are gone out spreading trea- 
 son, idolatry, superstition and destructive error 
 through the land this is such a strain of cour- 
 tesy as no reason can justify ; yea, it is such a 
 strain of weakness and impolicy as ought not to
 
 203 
 
 be behold without indignant concsrn. For this 
 gives those popish emissaries a most dangeroui 
 advantage over you : they artfully tell their pro- 
 selytes, " That you acknowledge the truth and 
 validity of their orders ; whilst they utterly de- 
 ny the validity of yours ; the only safe and sure 
 way, therefore, is to adhere to their ministra- 
 tions ; which, yourselves being judges, are au- 
 thentic and valid ; whereas there is, at least a 
 risk, a danger atttending yours;" and, "that 
 the people cannot (to use your own words) de- 
 pend with so much assurance as is requisite to 
 the peace and acquiescence of their mind, that 
 such ordinations will be blessed to them, and 
 that they are pleasing to God." Thus they un- 
 courteously turn against you the weapons which 
 you put into their Iiand^ ; and whilst you are 
 justifying their orders, they make use of those 
 very orders to poison and pervert the people ; 
 and craftily to traduca, undermine and destroy 
 \oiir church. 
 
 You also " assert that the great blessing of 
 episcopal ordination is wanting to the foreign 
 churches, rather through necessity than choice."* 
 How absurd and romantic is this assertion ! Is 
 it not well known, that in their public confes- 
 sions and formularies of faith, bishops and 
 priests are declared originally the same, and 
 that the power of ordination belongs equally to 
 both?t Can any thing be more manifest than 
 that episcopal ordination, if chosen and desired 
 by them, like other British manufactures, might 
 
 II. Def. page 50. 
 
 ^ Mr. Du Plesis, (says bishop Jer. Taylor,) a man of honour 
 and great learning, attests, that at the first reformation, there 
 were many archbishops and cardinals in Germany, France, Italy, 
 &c. who joined in th reformation, whom they might, but did 
 not, employ in their ordinations ; and therefore, says the bishop, 
 what necessity can be pretended in this case, 1 would fain learn ? 
 Episc. Asserted, &c. page 191.
 
 204. 
 
 with all imaginable ease, be in a few days ex- 
 ported to them, and spread, in a few months 
 through all their provinces and towns ? Are 
 there not in this kingdom thousands of ecclesi- 
 astics, who, re9eiving it from our bishops, would 
 most joyfully carry over this great blessing to 
 foreign churches? Or should any of their di- 
 vines come over to fetch it, would they not be 
 received, think you, with the most cordial wel- 
 come ; and return loaded with honours ; per- 
 haps with favours more solidand substantial than 
 these ? Has there been no managejnent or ad- 
 dress used, through a century past, to introduce 
 into their churches this episcopal grace ? And as 
 to its " suiting the constitution and frame of 
 their civil governments," nothing, you know, 
 can better fit those of the Lutheran profession, 
 who have nominal bishops, though no ordination 
 but presbyterian among them. To assert then, 
 " that the foreign churches do really prefer, de- 
 sire, and some of them sigh for episcopal ordi- 
 nation : and that it is not of choice, but of ne- 
 cessity, they want it," appears to me to be 
 mere romance ; an assertion which conveys the 
 most severe reflection either on the judgment or 
 the credulity of the person who makes it. 
 
 There is one farther consideration upon this 
 head of ordination, which I beg leave to men- 
 tion ; the rather, because I think, that stress 
 hath not been generally laid upon it which its 
 importance deserves : which is, 
 
 5. Supposing the power of ordination to be, 
 from Scripture, ever so clearly proved to belong 
 solely to bishops ; yet all the bishops of this 
 realm refusing to ordain but upon unjustifiable 
 terms; ordination, in this case, may justly be 
 sought from presbyters ; and, when given by 
 them, is of undoubted validity and regularity in 
 the Christian church. 
 
 The bishops require from all candidates for
 
 205 
 
 ^ruination, as an indispensable term of receiving 
 it from them " That they subscribe willingly, 
 and r.r finimo to the XXXIX Articles, that they 
 are all and every one of them agreeable to the 
 word of God : and that they solemnly declare 
 their unfeigned assent and consent to all and 
 every thing contained in and prescribed by the 
 Book of Common Prayer." This is a term of 
 admission to the Christian ministry, which they 
 have no authority from Christ to insist upon or 
 to make ; yea, a term (if with humility I might 
 say it) which, by presuming to make, they offend 
 greatly against the rights and liberty of the 
 Christian church, and against Jesus Christ its 
 only Head ; because thousands may be duly qua- 
 lified, according to the will of Christ, to act as 
 ministers in his church, who cannot with a good 
 conscience comply with this term. By insist- 
 ing therefore on it, they reject those whom Christ 
 receives ; and unlawfully keep out numbers of 
 worthy persons from a part in the Christian mi- 
 nistry, who, by the appointment and will of God, 
 and by the constitution of the Christian church, 
 have a right of admission to it ; and whose mi- 
 nistry is greatly needed, and weuld be useful 
 therein. 
 
 Even admitting, therefore, that the sole power 
 of ordination was originally lodged in the 
 bishops, yet, if at any' time, they should enter 
 into a combination to abuse and pervert this 
 power; to lay a yoke upon Christian ministers 
 which Christ never laid upon them, ad whick 
 they ought not to bear ; and by this means, or- 
 dination cannot be had from them upon honour- 
 able and Christian terms ; we may, under such 
 circumstances, adopt our blessed Saviour's max- 
 im, (hut God will fuive mercy and not sacrifice / 
 that a mere ceremony is to give way to conside- 
 rations of a moral nature ; and that men, in 
 other respects well qualified, when their service
 
 206 
 
 is needed, (of which themselves and the people 
 are to be judges,) may act as ministers in the 
 church of Christ; either without any ordination, 
 when it cannot honourably be had : or with sucli 
 only, whether presbyterian or popular, as can 
 be obtained upon honourable terms. 
 
 These things I recommend, sir, to your dis- 
 passionate and sober thoughts- not doubting 
 but they will dispose you to be less severe than 
 you have formerly been upon presbyterian or- 
 dination, and more modest in your glorying in 
 episcopal ordination. And whether those who 
 now claim the sole power of ordination, and 
 consioer it as a trust committed to them by 
 Christ, can justify their refusing it, but upon 
 compliance with such severe and unreasonable 
 terms deserves maturely to be weighed ; con- 
 sidering, that (as far as they bear any relation 
 to Christ) they are not lords, but only servant* 
 in his house, and that to him they must be ac- 
 countable for so important a truvt. 
 
 SECT. X. 
 
 Of the people's right to choose their own pastors. 
 
 HE next point to be considered, is the right of 
 the Christian laity to choose there own ministers. 
 The charge given them in Scripture, to try the 
 spirits to bezaare of false, prophets to take heed 
 of what they hear, you own, " incontestibly prove* 
 their right of judgment, or of examining and 
 proving doctrines ; but the thing you want to see 
 is, how frm the right of judgment, the right of 
 choice tan be deduced ?"* But can a person of 
 
 * tt. Prf. p. *7.
 
 07 
 
 any discernment vrant to be shewn this ? Doe* 
 not the right of judging iu things of religion, neces- 
 sarily imply not only a right but a duty also, of 
 acting agreeably to that judgment ; or in other 
 words, a right of choice ? Pray, why must amaa 
 examine ? What ! that he may have peradven- 
 Eure, the guilt and mortification^ combating hi 
 own conscience, and acting contrary to his sense 
 of things ? What an absurdity were this ! If 
 the Christian laity were to try the spirits and to 
 examine and weigh the doctrine their pretended 
 pastors tan^ht ; then, surely, they had a right to 
 reject as their spiritual guides, those pastors 
 whom they found without the doctrines of Christ 
 or the guidance of his Spirit. 
 
 Accordingly, the Christian laity are charged 
 Rom.xvi. 17. To mark (to consider, to observe 
 carefully) them that cause divisions and offence* 
 contrary to the Clnisiian doctrine, and to aioid 
 them. Note, those who make new terms of com- 
 munion in the church of Christ ; who set up netr 
 ceremonies of human invention, and command 
 the subjects of Christ to yield obedience to them ; 
 and who cast out of the church, or refuse to ad- 
 mit into it, those who comply not with such cere- 
 monies and rites ; these, sir, are the men (I ap- 
 peal to your own conscience, and to the bar (if 
 eternal reason, at which all must shortly stand) 
 these are the men who cause divisions and offences 
 contrary to the Christian doctrines ; these therefore, 
 the Christian people are expressly commanded, 
 by the apostle, to avoid. Attentively consider 
 this, and you will never more condemn our sepa- 
 ration from your church. This syigle text alone 
 justifies it before the world ; and not only so, but 
 proves it to be a most plain and indispensibl* 
 duty. 
 
 The church of England seems to have depart- 
 ed from, and most manifestly to have destroyed 
 tho 'primitive apostolic and catholic communion,
 
 208 
 
 by setting up and enjoining other terms of Chris- 
 tian fellowship than the Gospel hath enjoined, 
 and rejecting those whom Christ receives. From 
 this church, therefore, upon Christian principles, 
 and by the command of St Paul, we are to with- 
 draw ourselves, and to separate. 
 
 But to return. The manner in which the 
 place of Judas, the traitor, was filled up, Acts i. 
 and in which the seven deacons were chosen, 
 Acts vi. shews it plainly to be the constitution 
 of the groat founder of the Christian church, that 
 its ministers should be appointed by the election 
 of the people. An apostle was an officer of 
 extraordinary rank, whom, it seemed in a pecu- 
 liar manner the prerogative of Christ solely, to 
 appoint to that office ; but neither doth he do this, 
 nor yet order the apostolic college to fill up this 
 vacancy by their own authority and discretion ; 
 but (for an instruction, no doubt to future ages) 
 fce commanded the Christian people (the whole 
 number of believers, as far as appears, that were 
 then at Jerusalem) to choose out two, and present 
 them before him, of whom he would appoint one 
 to the vacant apostolate. A strong presumptive 
 evidence, every one must grant, in support of po- 
 pular elections. 
 
 And when the seven deacons* were to be ap- 
 pointed to manage the church's stock; though 
 the apostles were then vested with a fulness of 
 
 Eower, and had the gift of discerning spirits^ (in 
 oih which they had no successors) and were 
 therefore far better qualified to have chosen per- 
 sona for that office than the multitude of lay- 
 Chr^stians ; yet behold, as a standing monument 
 to aiter-tiines, in whom this elective power was 
 to rest in the church, they took not upon them 
 authoritatively to nominate, but directed the peo- 
 ple to look out seven men of good report. In obe- 
 dience to this direction, and in pursuance of their 
 right (as the Lord's freed men, put into a happy
 
 209 
 
 slate, where none were to have' authority or 
 dominion over others, but all were to b~ 
 brethren) the whole multitude, it is said, chose, or, 
 as -you learnedly render it, PICKED OUT of thdr 
 number seven men. Not to differ on small things, 
 sir, if you will allow that the Christian laity, 
 have a right to PICK OUT their ministers, as the 
 Apostles, with their superior powers and gifts of 
 v'iscc-niwg spirits, allowed thejlaity in their times, 
 this is all we ask. 
 
 As to the practice of the ancient church, it is 
 not I, as you suggest, but a writer,* of your own, 
 high enough for church power, who says, " that 
 the people had votes in the choice of bishops, all 
 must grant, and it can be only ignorance and fol- 
 ly thatjjplead the contrary." I own, I am sur- 
 prised at your so stifly contesting this point, when 
 the stream of all, even your own writers beats so 
 violently against you. Clemens Romanusf a 
 cotempouary of the apostles, says, they appointed 
 bishops, by the consent of the whole church. How 
 often does Cyprian say, '' Nihil fiat nisi con- 
 sentiente plebe," let nothing be done but by me 
 consent of the people. Again, " Dens instruit or- 
 dinationes sacerdotalesnon nisi sub populiassist- 
 entis conscientia fieri oportere,"^: God appoints 
 thai sacerdotal ordinations should not be. made with- 
 out the assistance and consent of the people. Him- 
 self he declares chosen to this oilice, t; iavore pie- 
 bis, populi suffragio," by the fax our and vote of 
 the people. Your criticism on the word sitffragi- 
 uni (which all the learned know, properly, and 
 constantly signifies a vote ; as it undoubtedly 
 <loes in one if not both the very instances you 
 bring to disprove it) is too slender to deserve a 
 particular consideration ; especially as you otfer 
 not a word against that other express testimony 
 
 s2 
 * LowU, f Epiit, d Cor. Cp, 44, i.fip*. W.
 
 210 
 
 Bunted from the same father, which indisputably 
 shows the sense in which he uses, sujjragiuvn, 
 16 plebs maximam habet potestatem yeieligendi 
 dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusancli," to 
 the people, belongs the chief power either of choosing 
 worthy ministers or of rejecting the unworthy* 
 This is a testimony full to the* point, which you 
 could not gainsay, and therefore you wisely over- 
 looked it. 
 
 The Constitutions of the Apostles decree, "that 
 he who is to be ordained a bishop, must be cho- 
 sen by all the people as the most worthy."* 
 
 The canons (called the apostles.) " depose such 
 bishops as are chosen by the civil magistrate. "t 
 
 The famous Council of Nice, in a synodical 
 epistle to the church of Alexandria, forbid "any 
 to be ordained bishops without the election of 
 the people." 
 
 The Council of Constantinople, anno 382, say 
 they ordained Nectarius, cuncta decernente ci- 
 yitate, all the city decreeing *'/; and Flavianus, 
 omni ecclesia decernente, according to the deter- 
 mination of the whole church. 
 
 The Council of Carthage, anno 394, say, a bi- 
 shop is to be ordained, cum omni consensu cleri- 
 eorum & laicorum, with the universal consent both 
 of the clergy and laity. 
 
 Leo VT (Father Paul | confesses.) has amply 
 hewn, "that the ordination of a bishop could 
 not be lawful or valid, which was not required and 
 sought by the people, and by them approved; 
 which is said by all the fathers of those times ;" 
 and adds, qui praefuturus est omnibus, ab omni- 
 bus eligatur,[j let him tluit is to preside overall, be 
 chosen by all. 
 
 The Council of Paris, anno 552, require the 
 election of the people and clergy, on pain of ex- 
 
 * Const. Apos. L. 8. Cap, 4; f ^ an - -Apos. 50, in Pbotio, 
 
 f, Mat, Sect, 29. J Leon, Ej>, 89. Cap. 6.
 
 511 
 
 ommunication, Chrysostom was chosen bishop 
 of Constantinople, by the common consent of all 
 persons, clergy as well as laity.* In the choice 
 of St. Martin, the votes of the people carried it 
 against the votes of the bishops themselves, the 
 people insisting upon their privileged 
 
 Finally ; the mighty contests and struggles, of 
 which ecclesiastical story is full, into which the 
 great cities frequently fell, at the election of their 
 bishops, put beyond all doubt the antiquity of the 
 practice. That at Antioch when Eustathms was 
 chosen, described by Euscbius (de vita Constant. 
 L. 3. Ch. 59, GO.) where also is the emperor's 
 letter to the people of Antioch (another memo- 
 rable monument full to the purpose) exhorting 
 them not to choose Eusebius as their bishop, but 
 to think of some other person. That at Cassa- 
 rea, described by Greg. Nafcian.| That at Alex- 
 andria, by Evagrius.^- That at Constantinople, 
 several times, bySozomen, &c. That at Ephe- 
 8us, by Chrysostom. At Versailles, by Ambrose. 
 At Milan, by Socrates. At Rome, by Aminianus 
 Marcellinus, &c. It hence evidently appears, 
 what the sentiments and practice were of the 
 churches in these ancient times. So that so 
 warm a champion for church authority as your 
 zealous Dr. Wall, is forced to confess, " that 
 it is a piece of history which cannot fairly be de- 
 nied, that among the primitive Christians, the 
 people used to have their suffrage in the choice 
 of church-qfficers : and that this is the most re- 
 gular way ;' that it continued many years; and 
 those Christians who have gone about to mend 
 this way, have made it worse. "|| 
 
 These, now, are the grounds on which this 
 
 * Socrat. Schol L'. 6. Ch. 2. f Snip! Sev. - Cap, 7 
 
 JOrat. 19. L. 2. C. 6. 
 
 y Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. Vol. II. page 534. Nay, if any 
 presbyter was created a. bishop by imperial mandates, the people 
 
 were enjoined to renounce him.
 
 right of the people stands. An-d thus impreg- 
 nable is the post which you so adventurously at- 
 tack. Your reasoning upon this head is truly 
 extraordinary ; which in short is this " A roan 
 does well who meekly attends. the ministry, of a 
 good, able, orthodox minister, by whomsoever 
 provided ; but the king, bishops, lord chancel- 
 lor, gentry, &c. are more competent judges f 
 the goodness and orthodoxy of clergymen than 
 the common people ;"* therefore, the people 
 ought not to jud-e for themselves in these mat- 
 ters, but to submit meekly 'to the determination 
 of the king, lord chancellor, bishops, &c. A 
 most excellent doctrine this ! admirably fit to 
 promote popery in in Spain, piahometanism in 
 Turkey, paganism in Japan. It would follow 
 from this principle, as I have already urged, 
 that the brave protestants in Fiance have un- 
 warrantably and wickedly withdrawn from the 
 ministers whom the king and bishops had set 
 over them : " Yes, you reply, undoubtedly they 
 have, if their king and bishops set over them, 
 as they do here, good orthodox ministers." 
 But could you think, sir, such an answer would 
 be received without a smile ? Pray, who is to 
 judge of the goodness, ability, and orthodoxy 
 of the minister ? Not the people, according to 
 your scheme, but the king and bishops^ who are 
 more competent judges. Well then, the rulers 
 in France are more competent judges of the 
 goodness, ability, and orthodoxy of ministers 
 than their Hugonot subjects; to their superior 
 judgment, therefore, they ought to submit. 
 But are the Hugonots in France, I beseech you, 
 more competent judges of the ability of the cler- 
 gy, on whom they ought to attend, than the peo- 
 ple of England ? Or have the king and bishop* 
 kere more authority from God to judge for their 
 
 II. Let. page 9. II. Dof page 93
 
 813 
 
 than the king and bishops there? It 
 is strange that a gentleman of discernment can 
 entangle himself in so inconsistent a scheme. 
 
 SECT. XI. 
 
 The Burial ojjicc and Athanasian Creed most ap- 
 parently inconsistent and repugnant to each 
 other. 
 
 \VlTH whattmth, sir, and justice you drew 
 your own character as a sorry advocate for the 
 
 church,* the public will judge; but that 
 
 you have shewn no defect oif courage, every 
 one must admit. You proceed in what you call* 
 your soldierly manner, t and, like a bold and 
 intrepid champion, undertake to defend what, 
 I believe, few except yourself would not desert 
 as a forlorn and untenable post : viz. your 
 church's thirteen times a year pronouncing 
 concerning all Arians and Socinians, tiiat they 
 cannot be saved that they 'do without doubt perish 
 everlastingly; and yet, with equal solemnity, 
 pronouncing concerning these, self-same persons, 
 dying in their heresies, that God has, in his gretit 
 mercy, taken them to himself, and that you hope 
 they rcs,t in Christ. I must own I did not expect 
 that you would seriously attempt to reconcile 
 such a cbutradiction as this. But let us hear how 
 you perform." When we declare that Ariaaa 
 and Socinians perish everlastingly, our sense 
 is, that their heresies are damnable, and that 
 they upon the account of them, are liable to dam- 
 nation ; notwithstanding which, there may be 
 room for pardon in particular cases, and that, 
 when one of these comes to die, it may be chari- 
 
 * II. Def. page 128. f Dedic. page 15.
 
 tably hoped, that his is such a ease, and we may 
 lawfully declare, that we do not quite despair 
 concerning him :"* that is to say, you damn the 
 heresy, but save the heretic : a piece of spiri- 
 tual legerdemain, which, I own, I cannot com- 
 prehend. But does not all the world see, sir, 
 that the Creed plainly and incontestibly refers 
 to persons only, not to things ; and absolutely 
 pronounces upon their final circumstances or 
 state? Whosoever will be saved, it is necessary 
 before all things that he hold the faith there defi- 
 ned; which faith, except every one doth keep 
 whole and undefiled, he shall without doubt pe- 
 rish everlastingly. Will you say that this 
 
 apeaks only of the heresy, and that it does not 
 expressly pronounce upon the condition or state 
 of the person who holds it ? And that it only de- 
 clares him to be liable to, or in some danger of, 
 damnation, but not that he shall without doubt, 
 or most certainly, be damned ?' 
 
 Again, does the Creed leave any room to hops 
 particular cases, when, at five distinct places, 
 it determines absolutely against all hope ; and 
 in such strong and express language, as most 
 evidently reaches, and was intended to reach, 
 to every particular case ? Whosoever every one 
 zvhich except a man believe he shall without 
 doubt, perish everlastingly. If, notwithstanding 
 these decisive and most peremptory declarations, 
 the Creed still leaves room to hope for the sal- 
 vation of the avowed deniers and oppugners of 
 this faith; then the use of language is lost, 
 there is no meaning in words, truth and false- 
 hood are the same, and a man may honestly sub- 
 scribe the Koran of Mahomet, and reconcile it 
 with a profession of the Gospel of Christ. Be- 
 sides, what contemptible chicanery and trifling 
 i* it to talk, " of room for pardon and of hope ia 
 
 II. Defence, p. 151
 
 215 
 
 particular cases," when you solemnly declare 
 this hope universally, and in every case, and to 
 say " When one of these comes to die ;" where- 
 as you do it over all when they come to die ; 
 and, "that you do not quite despair concerning 
 the man ;" when you assume the language of 
 confidence, and in the most explicit terms, thank 
 God that he hath in great mercy taken him to him- 
 self, and pray that zzhen you die, yourself may 
 rest in Christ, as you hope this Ariun or Socinian 
 doth. Is this the language oTa person who doe 
 not quite despair concerning the state of a de- 
 parted heretic ? Such trifling only hurts a cause : 
 you had much better have done here, as with the 
 burial office and absolution, have passed it over 
 in silence, and not attempted to defend what 
 every one sees to be incapable of defence. 
 
 But, the unfeigned assent and consent which 
 you hare solemnly given, and which every cler- 
 gyman is obliged most solemnly to give, sticks, 
 no doubt, greatly ; and makes you strain every 
 nerve in endeavouring to let it pass. Such po- 
 tions, indeed, must be bitter: God grant they 
 be not malignant ! To numbers in your own 
 church it cannot but be difficult, in God's pre- 
 sence and before his church, to give their un- 
 feigned assent and consent to all and erery thing 
 contained in the Athanasian Creed, with all its 
 explications, limitations, and damnatory clau- 
 ses a creed, whose limitations they condemn ; 
 whose explications they deride ; and whose dam- 
 natory clauses they heartily detest and abhor ; 
 yet in God's presence and before his church, I 
 it with astonishment! to declare their 
 assent and consent to them all is a 
 surely, which though sweetened with 
 the noblest church-preferments, a man might 
 justly dread to swallow ! You wonder, sir, per- 
 haps, to see deism, infidelity, popery, a cor- 
 ruption of manners and contempt of holy things^
 
 216 
 
 prevail throughout the land : I acknowledge I 
 do not : for when those who are to be the great 
 examples and teachers of righteousness, too ge- 
 nerally enter upon their sacred office with a dan- 
 gerous violation of it ; subscribing articles they 
 do not believe ; preaching contrary to their sub- 
 scriptions ; declaring solemnly their unfeigned 
 assent to what they do not approve, but, per- 
 haps, heartily detest ; and prostituting the holy 
 ritesiand offices of their religion to political arid 
 sordid ends. Why should it be thought strange 
 if popery and infidelity greatly* gain ground ? 
 and what wonder if they should still more fatally 
 prevail ?* 
 
 SECT. XII. 
 
 The Scottish Presbyterian establishment 
 vindicated. 
 
 IF Schism be so dangerous and damnable a 
 thing as you represent it,t methinks, your so- 
 lemn warnings against it ought not to be con- 
 fined merely to the sinners on this side the 
 Tweed; but from the profusion of your charity 
 to the English Dissenters,:}: a little of it should 
 
 * See a like manifest inconsistency between the XXVth ar- 
 ticle, and the office for confirmation. The article says " Con- 
 formation has not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God." 
 But the bftice commands the bishop to declare, " That he hath 
 laid hie hands on the confirmed (after the example of the holy 
 apostles) to certify them by this sign of God's favour." Behold 
 an evident contrariety ! But to both parts unfeigned assent and , 
 consent is obsequiously given ! 
 
 It is something (more than) odd, a learned bishop of your owa 
 I'/is lately observed, to kave two creeds established in the same 
 church ; in one of which, those are declared accursed, who deny 
 the Son to be ef the same hypostasis with the Father : and in tha 
 other, it is declared they cannot be saved, but perish everlastingly, 
 who do not assert that there is one bypostasis of the Father and 
 another of the Son Essay on Spirit, . 146, 
 
 f II. Def. p. 63, | Dedication, page 18 .
 
 217 
 
 extend also to your episcopal brethren, the Dis- 
 senters from the church by law established in Scot- 
 land. But these, such is your partiality, instead 
 of censuring;, you endeavour to justify, yea, to 
 justify upon such principles as certainly expose 
 yourself to heavy censure and rebuke. You al- 
 lege " That they did not separate from the 
 Presbyterians, but the Presbyterians from them 
 that by tumults, false musters, and other mis- 
 representations of persons and things, the Pres- 
 byterians got themselves established but that 
 having renounced episcopacy, and their ordina- 
 tion being irregular, their communion can nei- 
 ther be safe nor lawful."* Behold! in these 
 last words that schismatical, dividing spirit, from 
 which you endeavour to vindicate your church. 
 A severe and unchristian sentence ! by which 
 you unchurch at once, and cut off frojp Chris- 
 tian fellowship all the foreign reformed churches, 
 a glorious and great company, and pronounce 
 them not to belong to the visible church of Christ. 
 They have all renounced episcopacy, in your 
 sense of the word ; their ordinations, therefore, 
 you declare irregular, being only presbyterian, 
 and their communion to be neither safe nor law- 
 ful ; i. e. it is a dangerous and wicked thing to 
 hold communion with them : your own sober 
 thoughts, sir, and the episcopal authority under 
 which you are placed, will, I doubt not, correct 
 you* for so immodest a censure. To assist the 
 former in this good office, I would offer two 
 things to your serious review. 
 
 j^ 1. That the very canons of the church of 
 BEngland, to which you have sworn obedience, 
 
 ^^acknowledge the church of Scotland to be a 
 
 true sister church ; commanding all its clergy to 
 
 pray for the churches of England, Scotland, 
 
 and Ireland, as parts of Christ's holy catholic 
 
 T 
 
 . 'II. Def. pages 16, 145.
 
 218 
 
 church, which is dispersed throughout the world: 
 Canon LV. Note, the church of Scotland, 
 when these canons were made, was presbyte- 
 rian, as it is now. And, 
 
 2. Consider that the presbyterian church in 
 north Britain, is established by the very same 
 authority, and rests upon the same law as the 
 episcopal church in south Britain. 
 
 The very same legislative powers which es- 
 tablished and formed the one, have likewise es- 
 tablished the other; if then it be schism, rebel- 
 lion and contumacy against governors to sepa- 
 rate from the latter, it is also most certainly the 
 very same to separate from the former. As for 
 " tumults and false musters by which it got it- 
 self established ;" you should have known, that 
 the sense of the Scottish nation was, perhaps, 
 ten times more general for presbyterianism, iu 
 the reigns of king William and queen Anne, 
 when that form \\ as established there, than the 
 sense of the English nation was for protestant- 
 ism, in the reigns of king Edward and queen 
 Elizabeth, when the episcopal church of Eng- 
 land was formed and established here. But if 
 the settlement of protestantism in England, by 
 the crown and parliament of these realms, was 
 valid and right, even though the bishops and 
 clergy were almost unanimously against it ; 
 surely presbyterianism in Scotland, enacted and 
 established by the same crown and parliament, 
 must be equally valid ; especially as the voice 
 of their clergy as well as of their laity ran, not 
 only violently, but generally that way. ^ 
 
 A grand convention of the states in Scotland^ 
 at the revolution, in a claim of rights whicfl 
 they presented as containing the fundamental^ 
 and unalterable laws of that kingdom, declare 
 " That the reformation in Scotland, having 
 been begun by a party among the clergy, all 
 prelacy in that church was a great and insup-
 
 219 
 
 portable grievance to that kingdom." King 
 William, however, bishop Burnet informs us,* 
 " assured the episcopal party there, that he 
 would do all that he could to preserve them (es- 
 tablished,) granting a full toleration to the Pres- 
 byterians, provided they concurred in the new 
 settlement of the kingdom, (i. e. in renouncing 
 king James, and owning himself as their sove- 
 reign.) But the bishops and their followers re- 
 solved to adhere firmly to the interests of king 
 James, aril so declaring in a body, with much 
 zeal, in opposition to the new settlement, it was 
 not possible for the king to preserve that, (epis- 
 copal) government there, ai^those who ex- 
 pressed their zeal for him, being equally zealous 
 against that order." 
 
 This establishment of presb\tery was again in 
 the most solemn^ manner enacted and confirmed 
 by the queen (Anne,) and parliament of Eng- 
 land when the union was made. You speak 
 therefore, of this affair, ir, in more coarse and 
 disrespectful language than is either decent or 
 true, when you talk of insurrections, false mus- 
 sers, misrepresentations, &c. It was done upon 
 the most mature and grave deliberations both of 
 king William and queen Anne, and of the lords 
 and commons of both kingdoms in parliament 
 assembled ; it bus received the most sacred sanc- 
 tion a human law can receive ; and is made as 
 essential and fundamental a part of our consti- 
 tution, as the church of England itself. Take 
 heed, therefore, that you are not preparing a 
 red for your own correction ; and lest by teacli- 
 ing men to argue away the legality and re- 
 /verence of the presbyterian establishment in 
 north Britain, you incautiously give a mortal 
 stab to your favourite church which is estab- 
 i - . 
 
 * Hist, of his Times, Vol. IV. page?. IS, 45, duodecimo.
 
 lished here. You may please to observe also, 
 that when you call the episcopal Dissenters there 
 the church of Scotland, it is with just the same 
 propriety, decency and good sense, as if the 
 Dissenters should call themselves the church of 
 England here. 
 
 Hence also it appears, that what you offer in 
 mitigation of the jacobitism and rebellion of the 
 Episcopalians in Scotland, (pages 16, 17.) has 
 one material flaw, which is, that it is not found- 
 ed upon truth. For you represent the loss of 
 their establishment as being the cause of their 
 disaffection ; whereas, the very reverse is ex- 
 actly the case; ad they lost their establishment 
 because they were disaffected, because they re- 
 jected the revolution, and firmly adhered to 
 king James. King William would have pre- 
 served them, if they would have acknowledged 
 his government ; this they obstinately refused, 
 and therefore they fell a just sacrifice to their 
 blind attachment to a tyrannical and popish 
 prince. 
 
 As to the present loyalty of the two parties in 
 that kingdom, the Presbyterians and Episcopa- 
 lians, which you have drawn into comparison, 
 you have done one of them great wrong in re- 
 presenting them both as having been, perhaps, 
 alike deeply engaged* in the late impious re- 
 bellion there. t If from the disposition of the 
 clergy, that of the laity may be reasonably pre- 
 sumed, there are two important facts, to omit 
 many others, which will dispose every impar- 
 tial person, I believe, to view that affair in a 
 very different light. One is, the letter of the . 
 royal commander, the duke of Cumberland, <<> 
 the General Assembly at Edinburgh, in which 
 he expresses a strong sense " of the very steady 
 
 II. Def. p. 15. 
 
 f This part of those letters was published two years after tbe 
 rebellion in 1745. >
 
 and laudable conduct of the clergy of that church, 
 through the whole course of that wicked and un-. 
 r.atunil rebellion ; and says, I owe it to them in 
 justice to testify, that upon all occasions, I have 
 received from them professions of the most invi- 
 olable attachment to his majesty's person and 
 government, and have always found them ready 
 and forward to act in their several stations, in 
 all sneh affairs as they could be useful in, though 
 often to their own great hazard." Upon an 
 impartial account, I believe, the balance will be 
 found by every disinterested person, to stand 
 thus Of the PRESBYTERIAN ESTAB- 
 LISHED CLERGY there \*s not one in fifty 
 in the whole body, but heartily wished success 
 to the arms of his majesty king George; of the 
 EPISCOPAL DISSENTING CLERGY, not 
 one in fifty of the whole body but heartily wis' ; . d 
 success to the arms of those Frenchmen and Ita- 
 lians, who came over to invade us, and to unite 
 with the rebels in overthrowing our constitu- 
 tion, and establishing an abjured and popish 
 pretender to the throne. 
 
 The other fact is, the necessity which the le- 
 gislature have found themselves under, by new 
 ;icts of parliament, in two different sessions, 
 more narrowly to watch, and to lay under fresh 
 restraints, the episcopal churches in Scotland. 
 These are well known to be fruitful and fatal 
 sources of jacobitism and disaffection ; dange- 
 rous seminaries where men are formed and nou- 
 rished up in allegiance to a popish prince, and 
 in avowed aversion and disloyalty to their right- 
 . ful sovereign king George. Though it be too 
 true, then, that there were some of the laity of 
 the established church, by some occasional re- 
 sentment or unhappy occurrence- hurried into 
 that black afliair ; they herein departed from 
 their settled and professed principles ; whereas 
 the Episcopalians acted quite iu character, agree- 
 T 2
 
 222 
 
 ably to the fixed sentiments and affections of 
 their party, when they prayed and fought hearti- 
 ly for the destruction of our happy government, 
 and for the advancement of a popish^ pretender 
 to the throne. To say then, " that ttie Scottish 
 Presbyterians, were, perhaps, as deeply engaged 
 in the late odipus rebellion as the episcopal Dis- 
 senters there," is to scatter censures at random, 
 to cenfront the plainest evidence, and to repre- 
 sent in a very partial and injurious manner their 
 conduct, as you have repeatedly done that of 
 your dissenting brethren in England. 
 
 SECT. XIII. 
 
 Of the Church's authority in controversies of 
 Faith. 
 
 JL HIS is a claim, which, to the grief of its real 
 friends, and to the triumph of its foes, your 
 church hath set up, and obliges all its clergy so- 
 lemnly to subscribe. For it is really no other 
 than an invasion of the divine prerogative ; and 
 in the language of the Holy Spirit, a sitting in 
 the temple of God, shewing itself that it is God.* 
 It is claiming an honour as due to a few frail and 
 fallible men, which is in fact due only to the 
 omniscient and infallible God, who has appoint- 
 ed Jesus Christ to be the sole lawgiver and king 
 in the church. It is the very root of antichris- 
 tianism ? the prop upon which the whole system 
 of popery rests ; it came from the church of 
 Rome, and thither it directly leads ; nor can the 
 reformation be ever justified, or the church of 
 England supported, while this claim is admitted. 
 For if the church hath authority in controversies 
 of faith, the church of Rome, surely, had it be- 
 
 * 2 Thess. ii 4.
 
 223 
 
 fore the church of England: yea, had it at the 
 very time when the reformation was made. 
 Cranmer, then, and Ridley, Luther and Calvin 
 were guilty of great petulancy and ecclesiastical 
 rebellion, in refusing to submit to the church's 
 solemn determinations concerning image-wor- 
 ship, transubstantiation, &c. and in proudly 
 setting up their own private opinion against the 
 authoritative decisions of their ecclesiastical su- 
 periors, to whom they owed submission, and whom 
 they ought to have obeyed. This claim of your 
 church, sir, (I must again assert it,) is an un- 
 answerable argument in favour of popery ; which 
 hath already drawn thousands, no doubt, and is 
 continually perverting multitudes from your 
 church to that of Rome. Nor can all the learn- 
 ing or wit of the whole clergy of the land with- 
 stand the force of a single Jesuit, let him be 
 armed with and skilfully wield this dangerous 
 weapon, the XXth article of your church. 
 
 It was the fatal influence of this article, I ob- 
 served, that seduced king James II. and the 
 great Chillingworth into the Romish tenets. 
 These instances you contest with me. But as to 
 the first, you are guilty of an unhappy oversight, 
 in confounding two things, in the quotation from 
 Burners History, and considering them as one, 
 when they are most apparently distinct. The 
 authority of the church, and the tradition from the 
 apostles in support of episcopacy, are, in the 
 bishop's account of king James's perversion, 
 most manifestly two several and different things ; 
 whereas you artfully endeavour to represent 
 it that by the authority of the church, is meant 
 only, the authority of its traditions or testimony 
 concerning episcopacy."* But do you not know, 
 and did not the king know, that the authority of 
 the church is one thing, and its traditions in sup- 
 
 II. Def. page 137,
 
 port of episcopacy another ? Does not the church, 
 besides this tradition, claim to itself also, an au- 
 thority in controversies of faith ? And did not the 
 king wisely and rightly judge, " that there was 
 more reason to submit to the catholic church, 
 than to one particitlar church " That if the 
 church of England had this authority, the church 
 of Rome had it long before her, and upon better 
 grounds than she ; that if the church of Eng- 
 land by its authority, might solemnly determine 
 that Christ went down into hell, and that Arians 
 and Socinians are undoubtedly damned when 
 they die, and perish everlastingly, but yet, there 
 is hope, when they die, that they rest in Christ, 
 and are taken to God in mercy ; the church of 
 Rome, by the same authority, might solemnly 
 determine that images are to be worshipped, and 
 that a piece of bread is transubstantiated into 
 the body of Christ ; there being nothing in the 
 one at all more incredible or absurd than in the 
 other ? I own I see not but, upon this principle, 
 the king acted right; and that everyone, that 
 believes this XXth article of your church ought 
 to follow his example, to immediately forsake it, 
 and go over to the church of Rome.* 
 
 Thus acted the renowned Chillingworth ; he 
 thought there was. a necessity of an infallible living 
 judge of controversy ; or, that there always was 
 and must be some church upon earth that could not 
 err, which in other words is, that had authority 
 
 * In a debate on a bit! against blasphemy, &c. brought into 
 the house of lords, Anno. 1721, the earl of Peterborough frankly 
 said, though he was for a parliamentary king, yet he did not de- 
 sire to have a parliamentary God, or a parliamentary religion : 
 and if the house were for such a one, he would go to Rcme, and 
 endeavour to be chosen cardinal ; for he had rather sit in the con- 
 clave, than with their lordships, upon those terms. Tindal's 
 Hist. Eng. Vol. IV. page 647. 
 
 Dr. Will. Tindal was also, by the same principles, perverted 
 to the church of Rome. Vide Second Defence of the Rights, 
 &c. page 79.
 
 in controversies of fa ith /finding therefore, the 
 church of Rome claiming it with a better grace, 
 and upon fairer and 'stronger grounds, than the 
 church of England could pretend to do, he too 
 hastily went over to the church of Rome ; because 
 he had not, at that time, so thoroughly examined 
 the subject as to see that neither the one nor the 
 other had a: j right to that authority which they 
 respectively claimed ; but he afterwards saw his 
 error, and well atoned, by his incomparable 
 writing's, for that precipitant step. " But he 
 was too great a master of reason, (you say) to 
 take authority for the same thing with infallibility, 
 nn.iera different expression ; and that, therefore 
 our church, in claiming the former, did, in ef- 
 fVct, claim the latter."* Whatever Chilling- 
 worth's views might have been at this time, 
 of the nice distinction .which you wish to make, 
 nothing is more plain than that the claims are 
 undoubtedly the same. For that to whomsoever 
 God gives authority in controversies offaith, he 
 gives also infallibility, incontestibly appears hence, 
 viz. that otherwise a, man might really have au- 
 thority from the God of truth to lead men into 
 error, he might have a power, a right from hea- 
 ven to seduce and to deceive. The absurdity of 
 which is so apparent that it needs not further to 
 be exposed. 
 
 To talk therefore " of the church's limited au- 
 thority to decide controversies according to the 
 r/f/e of Scripture and tinii'trsal tradition ; and that 
 these decisions, (so long as they evidently con- 
 tradict not that rule,) oblige her members to obe- 
 dience" is quite trifling and beneath the cha- 
 racter of a rational divine : for who, I ask, is to 
 judge whether the church's decisions are, or are 
 not, according to the rule of Scripture, and uni- 
 versal tradition. The church herself or her 
 
 II. Def. page 136.
 
 members ? If the church herself, and not her 
 members ; then the authority is absolute ; a po- 
 pish tyranny is erected, and a blind unlimited 
 obedience takes place. But if the members are 
 themselves to judge, and are no further to yield 
 obedience than they themselves see the deci- 
 sions to be according to the rule of Scripture, 
 then all authority is overthrown ; the determi- 
 nations of the gravesl synods are to be weighed 
 in the balance of every man's private judgment ; 
 and according as they appear to- him to agree 
 with Scripture or not, are absolutely to stand or 
 fa 11. Between authority and no Authority in 
 matters of faith, there is no possible medium : 
 as for limited and unlimited, they are only cant 
 expressions to which you affix no determinate 
 ideas ; nor can you pretend to tell the world 
 what limits the authority has where it is cir- 
 cumscribed in whom it is lodged and how far 
 its bounds go ? 
 
 Accordingly, you find that noble champion of 
 tbe protestixnt cause, when escaped from the per- 
 nicious snares in which his notions of church au- 
 thority ha^ at first unhappily entangled him, ex- 
 pressing himself thus " For my part, after long 
 and impartial search, I profess plainly that 1 
 cannot find any rest fqr the sole of my foot, but 
 upon this rock only, namely, that the Bible, 
 the Bible, I say ONLY, is the religion of Pro- 
 testants. I see plainly, and with my own eyes, 
 that there are popes atrafnst popes, councils 
 against councils, some Fathers against others, 
 the same Fathers against themselves, a consent 
 of Fathers of one age against a consent of Fa- 
 thers of another age ; the church of one age, 
 agarost the church of another rge in a word 
 there is no sufficient certainty but of Scripture 
 only for any considering- man to build upon : 
 this, therefore, and this only, I have reason to 
 betieve I will take no man's liberty of judg- 
 ment from him; neither shall any man take
 
 227 
 
 mine from me. I am sure that God does not, 
 and therefore that men ought not to require any 
 more of any man than this, To believe the Scrip- 
 lure to he God's word 3 to endeavour to jind the true 
 sense of it, and to live according to &."*These are 
 the true principles of protestantism and of Chris- 
 tianity, to which your church must necessarily 
 come back, if ever she would maintain her 
 ground against the dangerous assaults which po- 
 pery is making qn her ; for as long as she stands 
 hampered with that perplexing and unhappy ar- 
 ticle (the XXth,) she must remain the dupe and 
 the jest of insulting Jesuits and unbelievers ; and 
 be content to see her members led in triumph 
 away from her by hundreds in their snares. 
 
 SECT. XIV. 
 
 Of the Posture in which our Lord and his apostles 
 ate the Sacramental supper. 
 
 1 HIS is the only point I shall at present far- 
 ther consider. -Concerning which I observe, 
 
 1. That it is most certain that they ate it in 
 their table posture, whatever that was ; it was 
 the posture in which they were wont to take their 
 food at meals. This is all we need to know, to 
 justify our practice : our Lord and his apostles 
 took the sacrament in an eating, not in an ado- 
 ring posture. Let no man, then, think himself 
 wiser, nor pretend that he can take it in a more 
 jiumble, devout, and fit posture than they. And, 
 
 2. Though it was, perhaps, somewhat diffe- 
 rent from the posture we at present use, (as 
 there are several different ways of silting in dif- 
 ferent countries and times,) yet there was no 
 
 * Chillingworth's Rl. Prot. Chap. VI. Sect. 56. pagt 379.
 
 228 
 
 word in the English language so proper by which 
 to render etvctwrrrvi and emeutuft^eg^ as sifting, which 
 our translators, and I, after them, presumed to 
 use : for which I have fallen under your rebuke. 
 You tell me, page 148, " that the posture was 
 lying dgwn or along /' and yet just after, " that 
 it was with the upper part of the body erect; and 
 advise me to try how conveniently a man may 
 eat and drink in that posture." But to lay my 
 body down or along, and keep its upper parts 
 erect, is a position so extraordinary, that without 
 the help of some posture-master, or your farther 
 good instructions, I despair of ever compassing 
 so arduous a point. 
 
 That it was the custom of the ancients, both 
 Romans and Greeks, to sit at their meals, cannot 
 be denied ; upd* J;tYtsv><-*Ilomer. Odys.s. .And 
 Virgil,] who wrote near the time of our Sa- 
 viour, says Soliti patres considere mensis.* 
 jflEneid VII. The custom of lying or leaning at 
 table was not introduced among the Romans till 
 the primitive severity of their manners was cor- 
 rupted by the effeminacy and luxury of the east; 
 and even then, the posture of sitting was retained 
 in their sacred feasts in the capitol.t 
 
 And as for the usage of the Jews, Dr. Light- 
 foot, sir, is an authority, which, if you presume 
 to attack, without being strongly armed, the 
 blow will surely rebound, and hurt yourself. 
 But the learned doctor assures 'us "That at 
 other meals, they either sat as we do, with their 
 bodies erect, or when they would enlarge them- 
 selves to more freedom of feasting or /refresh- 
 ment, they sat upon the beds and leaned upon 
 the table on their left elbow. But on the Pas- 
 eover night, they used this leaning posture being 
 
 * Porro considere, non in lecto recumbere ad raensas, heroicis 
 temporibus morem fuisse diximus. Not- Delp. in Loc. & in 
 JSneid. I. IT. /02. f Vakr. Max. L. 2, 3.
 
 229 
 
 the posture of freemen, in memorial of their 
 freedom. And thus are we to understand those 
 texts, which mention John's lying on Jesus's 
 breast, and leaning on his bosom, (John xiii. 
 25. xxi. 20.) not, as some have pictured him, 
 reposing himself or lolling on the breast of Jesus, 
 contrary to all order and decency ; whereas the 
 manner of sitting together was only thus ; Jesus 
 leaning on the table with his left elbow, and so 
 turning his face and breast away from the table 
 on one side, John sat in the same posture next, 
 before him, with his back towards Jesus; hi^ 
 breast not so near, as that John's back and Je- 
 sus's breast did touch one another, but at such 
 a distance as that there was space for Jesus to 
 use his right hand upon the table, to reach hi* 
 meat at pleasure ; and so for all the rest, as they 
 sat in like manner : for it is a strange fancy that 
 they lay upon the bed before the table, one tumb- 
 ling, (or lolling) upon the breast of another."* 
 I have now followed you, sir, much farther 
 than I intended to have done. I hope it will not. 
 be expected that I remark upon all the weak and 
 indefensible things your Defences contain ; there 
 are I believe, five times as many as those I have 
 here noted ; upon which it would tire the read- 
 er's patience, as well as greatly try my own, par- 
 ticularly to touch. As for the discipline of the 
 church of England, its best friends I am per- 
 suaded, wish, and common prudence would have 
 advised, that you had been quite sileut on that 
 head. " Whoever thinks seriously, (says one 
 of the greatest of your present bishops,) of the 
 manner, causes or objects of our excommuni- 
 cations generally speaking, should, methinks, 
 in pity forbear to mention the word."t Your 
 u 
 
 * Lightfoot's Temp. Scrv. Chap. xiii. Vide also Rainold. 
 Censura de Libris Apoc, Prselect. 79. Altare Daraascen. Cap. x 
 page 552. 
 
 f Hoadley's Answer to the Represent, pages 58, 39.
 
 230 
 
 ecclesiastical courts, to whom that discipline is 
 committed, are justly not only reckoned, but 
 spoken of among yourselves as the very dregs of 
 your constitution. And upon your own honest 
 confession of the scandalous and ruined state in 
 which church discipline lies amongst you, (quoted 
 pages 6'9, 70, of rny second Letter,) I am well 
 content to let that matter rest. 
 
 As for the persecuting and dividing spirit the 
 church of England has shewn, I think it the 
 easiest of all points, (and so, I believe, does 
 every one who knows its real history,) to support 
 with abundant evidence the charges on this head. 
 But as both Churchmen and Dissenters, it is 
 hoped, are now growing into a better spirit, and 
 their common interest as Britons, as Protestants, 
 and as Christians, calls loudly for a stricter 
 union ; I wave, at present, any farther prose- 
 cution of a point which might rather tenrl to 
 widen than heal the unhappy breach. Upon 
 jour own principles as to persecution I also for- 
 bear to remark, though most easy to be proved 
 both unprotestant and unchristian, the merits of 
 the cause between us being little concerned 
 therein. 
 
 If this review of the controversy which your 
 letters have called up, shall be a means of hold- 
 ing forth to both the contending parties the se- 
 veral defects of their ecclesiastical constitution, 
 and of rendering them more candid and benevo- 
 lent to each other ; and shall at all prepare the 
 way for a coalition between them, I shall think 
 it an auspicious and very happy event. 
 
 " The readiness which, you say, my lords the 
 bishops have shewn, and will shew, to come to 
 a temper with their dissenting brethren,"* will, 
 I doubt not, be very gratefully and readily ac- 
 cepted by them, and returned by a correspondent 
 
 * Dedic. pag 12.
 
 231 
 
 readiness to lay aside all prejudices (for preju- 
 dices, I am free to own there, doubtless, are 
 among us,) and to comply with any just and rea- 
 sonable proposal for the accomplishing- so im- 
 portant and valuable an end. 
 
 I hear it with great pleasure, if what you speak 
 is upon good authority " That if parting with 
 the ceremonies, and taking- away a few indiffe- 
 rent things will close the breach, you are satis- 
 iicd that it will not long regain open."* And 
 in return declare, I verily believe that if such 
 concessions, as a great part of our governors, 
 both in church and state would, I presume, think 
 not unreasonable to make, were made to the 
 Dissenters, there would no unbecoming stiffness 
 or aversion be shewn by the most considerable 
 part of them. May Heaven dispose the minds; 
 of all who have power to further and help on 
 this desirable event ! that wfthtatiBflrittdj mid with 
 ONE mouth, we may glorify God, and unite our 
 common zeal against a growing common enemy; 
 and may receive one another, but NOT TO DOUBT- 
 FUL DISPUTATIONS ! For if we still continue to 
 worry and weaken one another, there is reason 
 to fear lest we finally be destroyed one of ano- 
 ther. These things I recommend, sir, to your 
 consideration : and shall only farther say, that 
 as I have not been able, and sin persuaded never 
 shall be, to get you to speak out, and openly 
 and plainly tell us whom you mean by the 
 church, " to which Dissenters owe subjection, 
 which hath power to decree rites, and authprity 
 in points of faith ; and by withdrawing from, 
 and rejecting the authority of \Vhich, we are 
 gnilty of a DANGEROUS and DAMNABLE sin." 
 Whether it is the pope with his cardinals ; or 
 the king with his parliament ; or the archbishop 
 with his bishops ; or the bishop of every diocest- 
 
 " Dedic. pages 13, 14.
 
 
 232 
 
 with his dean and chapter attending. Nor will 
 you so much as pretend to shew us the charter 
 which has vested them with this high power 
 nor will you say, to what things, or how far it 
 extends though these are essential points upon 
 which the controversy between us entirely de- 
 pends : you must excuse me from paying- any 
 farther regard to your lucubrations on these 
 thing-s. I have neither time nor inclination to 
 dispute about a scheme which you affect to wrap 
 in obscurity, and which you are afraid to lay 
 open and avow before the world. I shall there- 
 fore take my leave of the present debate, unless, 
 any thing which you may farther offer en this 
 subject should render it necessary for me to re- 
 new it. But though I choose not to bear you 
 company in the disagreeable employment of 
 groping in the dark, you will nevertheless be- 
 lieve me to tye, sir, 
 
 Your very sincere friend 
 
 and humble servant, 
 
 A DISSEXTFR.
 
 POSTSCRIPT, 
 
 TO THE THREE LETTERS TO MR. WHITE, 
 
 CONTAINING SOME REMARKS ON THAT GENTLE- 
 MAN'S APPENDIX. 
 
 Sin, 
 
 THE extraordinary remark which introduces 
 year Appendix that views of worldly interest 
 encourage and support our dissent from the es- 
 tablishment I shall leave to the universal laugh 
 of your readers, for a confutation ; and pass on, 
 to points of greater moment in debate. -To be- 
 gin with your, first : Of church-power^ and in 
 zzhom lodged. 
 
 The church of England claims, in her articles 
 and canons, * to haye power from Godj to de- 
 cree other ceremonies and rites of worship, and to 
 make other terms of Christian communion than 
 either Christ or his apostles ever made or de- 
 creed ; and to have authority in controversies of 
 faith. 
 
 This high and important power she sovereignly 
 exerts : you, as her zealous advocate, endeavour 
 to support her in it ; and charge all the Dissen- 
 ters as guilty of a very crying and dangerous sin, 
 in not submit irig to it. The Dissenters, I have 
 told you, will readily own the charge, and re- 
 turn immediately to your church, if you will gra- 
 tify them in these two most reasonable requests.. 
 1. Tell them plainly, who, and what it is, you 
 mean by the church ? And, 2. Prove it, to have 
 this power vested in it bv God. 
 
 U"2 * 
 * ATI. XX, and Can, XXVIJ, XXIX, XXX,
 
 234 
 
 Your, advocates for church power, I krtow, 
 love always to deal in generals ; and will twist 
 a thousand ways, rather than explain their 
 scheme, and be forced to speak out : but you, 
 sir, being a gentleman of singular intrepidity, 
 and affecting to do things in, what you call, a 
 soldierly manner^ when your late Appendix came 
 forth, protesting to treat expressly of church" 
 power, and in wJiom lodged \ hoped to see the 
 point, all disguises apart, openly and frankly 
 handled ; and that a certain judgment might 
 now be formed what your sentiments were. But, 
 alas, vain were these hopes! Kot all the invi- 
 tations and provocations I have used, can draw 
 you from that cover where you artfully lie con- 
 cealed in darkness and obscurity. Though -the 
 regard you owe to truth, to justice, to the souls 
 of your dissenting brethren, and to your own 
 reputation, most strongly obliged you to it ; yet 
 you have not, durst net honestly and fairly tell 
 us who the persons are whom God hath trusted 
 with this power ; nor have you produced the 
 least shadow of a charter from heaven, investing 
 them with it. 
 
 In most manifest contradiction, indeed, to our 
 constitution, our laws, our articles and canons, 
 to which you have solemnly sworn and subscrib- 
 ed ;.and even to your very self, (as I shall pre- 
 sently shew,) you continue to affirm " that this 
 power is not at all in the civil magistrate ; that 
 he hath declared and recognised it not to be in 
 himself; but that it is solely in the pastors and 
 governors of the church." But when I repeat- 
 edly press and provoke you to say, who these 
 governors and pastors are (Are they the arch- 
 bishops, or the bishops, or the deans and chap- 
 ters of every diocess, or the priest in every pa- 
 rish, or the clergy met in convocation ?) You 
 are, sour, and will not answer. No ; if Dissen- 
 ters must have these knotty points solved, let 
 them g^k it from other hands.
 
 235 - / ; 
 
 But what idea, sir, will the public form of a 
 scholar, a divine, a some time fellow of a learned 
 college, arraigning us before their bar, -as guilty 
 of high criqjes, in not submitting to church- 
 power ; writing tract upon tract to persuade 
 and reduce us to it ; coming forjth with an Ap- 
 pendix, professing to treat expressly of church- 
 poiver and in zcho7n lodged; but who, with all this 
 parade, canot be induced to say who it is he 
 means by these pastors and governors, to whom, 
 under peril of everlasting damnation, we are 
 bound to submit. 
 
 I observe, you rank yourself with the learned, 
 and claim precedence amongst' them. " I, and 
 another learned gentleman,"* (ego, & rex meus.) 
 But will not the learned disclaim you ; and treat 
 your lucubrations as a^n egregious impertinence ; 
 who_can thus double and evade, and meanly re- 
 fuse to speak to the one single point, on which 
 they must all see the whole controversy turns ? 
 Must not all your pretended charity, and lamen- 
 tation over our straying souls, appear in a high 
 degree' ridiculous, and perfect grimace ? Dis- 
 senters dangerously^sin, in rejecting a power or- 
 dained by Almighty God : they profess them- 
 selves ready to -yield it submission, if shewn 
 where it is : Mr. White, their pretended friend, 
 knows the grand secret ; but no prayers can 
 wrest it from him ; he is close and demure ; 
 and leaves thm to wander on, and sin, and pe-> 
 /rish in the dark. 
 
 But to examine your romantic scheme, as far 
 as conjecture can develope it. The church's 
 pastors and and governors are alone possessed, 
 you say, qfihis pozccr. By its governors, it is 
 presumed, you mean its bishops ; and by pastors, 
 its priests. Every parish priest then, (your good 
 sojf. sir, amonst the rest,) and every bishop of 
 
 * Appcu. page 37.
 
 236 
 
 this land, is vested with this high power : viz. 
 a power of decreeing other rites and ceremonies in 
 divine warship, and of enjoining other terms of 
 Christinn communion, than either Christ or his 
 apostles decreed or enjoined ; and of pronouncing 
 aulhorilatircf'/ in controversies of faith. This, 
 you will note carefully, is the power in dispute 
 between us. This the power which your church 
 exerts; this the power you claim for her; and 
 which you affirm is vested solely, (if I under- 
 stand your scheme) in its bishops and priests. 
 
 But, pra\, give me leave ta ask How do 
 they possess it ! separately or conjunctly ? 1C 
 must be one of these. Has every parish priest 
 within his parish, and every bishop within his 
 diores a right to exercise this power, sepa- 
 rately and apart from others ? Or, must they as- 
 semble in common council, and by joint suffrage 
 and consent, issue forth their determinations ; 
 to which the consciences of all the faithful are 
 bound to submit ? Not separately and apart, it 
 is presumed you will say, but in convocation 
 convened. 
 
 Accordingly, you lay, I observe, a mighty 
 stress upon the convocation's consent to the act 
 of Uniformity, and the present established forms ; 
 and seem to represent this as that which alone 
 gave authority to both ; and that as long as this 
 consent of the convocation was withheld, (as for 
 a considerable time it was,) so long the refor- 
 mation " was a measure not quite canonical nor 
 ecclesiastically right. That it was going a little 
 away into some illegal or extra-legal ways that 
 the king's supremacy, on that occasion, was. 
 raised to an undue height, and such as ought not* 
 to be drawn into examples at other times that 
 most, if not all, the reviews and alterations 
 which have been since made by the bishops and 
 clergy, in, or by the authority, or with the con- 
 currence of the convocation, (your great mistake
 
 237 
 
 here, you will presently see,) and if our gover- 
 nors shall at any time think fit to subject it to 
 any other alterations or reviews, you will not 
 suffer yourself to doubt, but they will be made 
 by ecclesiastical and even synodal authority, be- 
 fore the civil sanction be added to them."* 
 
 The authority of the convocation is, I see, 
 the phantom that haunts your mind, and has 
 strangely confused your thoughts, on this subject 
 of church-power. I will candidly endeavour to 
 enlighten you with regard to this point, which I 
 have the satisfaction of hoping, I have attempt- 
 ed not without good effect, with regard to some 
 others. 
 
 Before you had taken upon you, sir, to write 
 about church-power, you ought to have known, 
 that, by the constitution and laws of England, 
 the convocation is really no part of its govern- 
 ment ; no branch of its ruling powers ; has no 
 share of its legislative authority at all. To be 
 amply convinced of this, I shall lead you to au- 
 thorities which you will have neither courage nor 
 ability, however strong your inclination may be, 
 to contest. To some great ones, in the law, you 
 have already been directed, t which you have 
 very wisely not presumed to dispute. Turn your 
 attention, now, to some of your own bishops, 
 the ornament, the support, the glory of your 
 church : who were honoured with the first rank 
 among those pastors and governors, with whom 
 alone you declare church-power is lodged. 
 
 A gentleman of your erudition hath, no doubt, 
 heard, at least, of the writings of those vene- 
 rable names, Burnet, Rennet,' Nicholson, Hody, 
 and particularly Wake, your late excellent arch- 
 bishop, on this subject of the convocation. 
 
 A due attention to their learned researches on 
 this point, will effectually free your mind of the 
 
 * Appendix pages 8, 9. f Examination of the Codex, 
 
 see note, page 21,
 
 238 
 
 errors it labours under. From the last of these 
 great persons, I shall present you with a few ex- 
 tracts, to set right your misapprehensions as to 
 the real constitution and natur* of your church : 
 with which you seem, (excuse my freedom.) to 
 be extremely unacquainted. 
 
 To root up, and destroy for ever, the dange- 
 rous absurdity of two independent powers, (i. e. 
 the power you are claiming for your pastors and 
 governors, independent of the civil magistrate,) 
 the wisdom of our legislature hath enacted and 
 decreed, u by the statute 25 Henry VIII. called 
 the act of Submission, 1st. That the convoca- 
 tion should from thenceforth be assembled only 
 by the king's writ. 2dly. That it should make 
 no canons or constitutions but by virtue of the 
 king's Ircense, first given them, se to do. odiy. 
 That having agreed on any canons or constitu- 
 tions, they should yet neither publish nor ex- 
 ecute them, without the king's confirmation of 
 them. Nor 4thly. By his authority, execute 
 any, but with these limitations ; that they be 
 neither against the king's prerogative, nor against 
 any other common or statute law ; nor finally, 
 in any respect contrary to the customs of the 
 realm." Vide Wake's Appeal, &c. page 4. 
 
 The learned metropolitan farther informs you* 
 " That Christian princes have a rijxht, nnd from 
 Constantine the Great, down through successive 
 ages, have exerted the right, net only of exer- 
 cising authority over ecclesiastical persons, but 
 to interpose in ordering ecclesiastical affairs 
 That when the civil magistrate advised with the 
 clergy about cabling a synod, it was not looked 
 upon as a matter of right ; but that be often 
 called synods without such advice : and when the 
 bishops have earnestly desired a council, and it 
 has been refused by the magistrate, they have 
 
 * Wake's Authority of Christian Princes, &c. page 10,
 
 submitted, and not reckoned themselves to have 
 a rig lit to meet without his leave When a synod 
 was resolved on, the prince determined, or al- 
 lowed, the time and place of meeting, and what 
 persons should come to them When synods a 1 e 
 assembled, he shews, that the civil magistrate 
 has a right to prescribe the matters on which they 
 are to debate ; and also the manner and method 
 of their proceedings in them ; and, if he pleases, 
 to sit in, and preside over them ; or to appoint 
 his commissioner to do it in his stead. (Thus 
 lord Cromwell, a lay-person, sat in, and presi- 
 ded over the convocation for the king, Henry 
 VIII.) "They cannot dissolve themselves, nor 
 depart from council but by the king's license 
 Their definitions are no further obligatory, than 
 as ratified and confirmed by civil authority. 
 That the prince is not obliged to confirm what- 
 ever the clergy shall think fit to determine ; but 
 has a power of annulling and rejecting what they 
 have done ; to alter or improve, to add or to 
 take from it. He denies the inherent authority 
 of the church to make any synodical authorita- 
 tive definitions ; or that the sitting of convoca- 
 tions is any 'right of the church. And says, 
 that as even the king's license cannot give the 
 convocation authority to promulge or execute 
 any canons, but what are agreeable to the cus- 
 toms and laws of the realm ; so he ought to sub- 
 mit them to the examination of his council 
 learned in the law; by them to be advised, whe- 
 ther they are thus agreeable, before he confirms 
 them."* 
 
 So that the convocation, you see, are not so 
 much as the king's supreme council in ecclesias- 
 tical affairs. There are others who are to judge 
 after them ; to sit as a check upon them ; to in- 
 spect, control, approve or reject the advice they 
 
 * Wake's Authority of Christian Princes, &c. page 130.
 
 Give the king ; even his council learned in 'the 
 law. 
 
 The archbishop adds " That as the king- has 
 power, without a convocation, to make and pub- 
 lish such injunctions as he shall think the neces- 
 sities of the church to require, and to command 
 the observance of them : so he may, with the 
 advice and consent of his parliament much more, 
 (i. e. I apprehend, he may without, much more 
 with, their advice and consent,) make what ec- 
 clesiastical laws he shall think fitting, for the 
 discipline of the church : and may alter, correct, 
 disallow, or confirm the resolutions of the con- 
 vocatipn according to his own liking."* 
 
 And finally, he gives a list of a great number 
 of alterations, revievVs, and reformations hi ec- 
 clesiastical matters, which have been done en- 
 tirely by select committees, without the advice 
 or consent of a convocation, (through all the se- 
 veral reigns of Henry VIII. Edw. VI. queen 
 Eliz. James I. and Charles I.) When the king;, 
 having first appointed a certain number of bishops 
 and clergymen (whether they shall be clergy or 
 Jaity, or what number of each, is entirely in his 
 choice,) to consider what may be fit to be orde- 
 red, then enjoins it by his royal authority. And 
 adds, (directly contrary to what you assert,) that 
 after this manner, viz. by select committees, 
 (and acts of council,) the reformation of the 
 church of England was in great measure carried 
 on, and its most important affairs transacted. t 
 
 * Wake's Authority of Christian Princes, &c page 136. 
 
 f Ibid, page 256. The king, says Fuller, would not intrust 
 the convocation with a power to meddle with matters of religion, 
 from a just jealousy he had of the ill affection of the major part 
 thereof; who under the fair rind of Protestant profession, had 
 the rotton core of Rovnish superstition. It was therefore con- 
 ceived safe, for the king to rely on the ability and fidelity of some 
 select confidents, cordial to the cause of religion, than to adven- 
 ture the same to be discussed and decided by a suspicious convo- 
 cation. Ch. Hist. Book VII. page 42i.
 
 And in his Appendix, No. VII. he presents you 
 with a long catalogue of canons, injunctions, 
 new translations of the Bible, articles of re- 
 ligion set forth, explications made of them, 
 examinations of ceremonies, homilies compo- 
 sed, prayers sent to the archbishop, with or- 
 ders for lUeir public use, visitations of the whole 
 kingdom, with an entire suspension of episcopal 
 jurisdiction; (the visitors were two lay-gentle- 
 men, a civilian, and a register, and only one di- 
 vine. (Echard's Hist, of Eng. page 300,) new 
 offices ot'communion, other offices reformed, new 
 catechism drawn up, &c. &e. all done by pri- 
 vate commission?, or otherwise, out of convo- 
 cations* So that the clergy in convocation 
 have not the least ground to claim it as a right to 
 be consulted in any future reformations or re- 
 views. If the government shall indulge them 
 with leave to assemble, and to give their senti- 
 ments .on these things, it is to be gratefully re- 
 ceived, as a matter of grace, not of right ; and 
 to be used with due humility and deference to the 
 royal judgment; in which the supreme ecclesias- 
 tical wisdom is by our constitution declared, and 
 by all our clergy acknowledged to reside. 
 
 By this time, sir, you have, I hope, an hum- 
 bler and juster sense of the power of a convoca- 
 tion ; and perceive it to be no part of our go- 
 vernment, and that it has no legislative power 
 or authority in these realms. 
 
 Your favourite fantastic scheme, then, " of 
 pastors and governors having the SOLE power as 
 to church matters ; and that the civil magistrate 
 
 * Whether, and in what method, our present governors may 
 think proper to attempt any farther reviews, I presume not to 
 guess : but, perhaps may be allowed to say, that whoever know* 
 the real history of English convocations, and observes the narrow 
 and bigoted spirit, the petulant, censorious, uncatholic, and 
 rigid temper, which has ever generally prevailed there, especially, 
 in its inferior members, will indulge but faint hopei f refoma- 
 tion from that quarter. 
 
 X
 
 has NONE AT ALL,"* is really attended, as you 
 must now see, with very dangerous and important 
 consequence?, actually subversive of our present 
 happy constitution ; wresting from the king and 
 parliament a high branch of their prerogative ; 
 impeaching their supreme authority ; attempting 
 to set up another legislative power; and casting 
 a severe reflection upon our reformation from 
 popery, which was effected ONLY by the civil 
 magistrate ; your boasted pastors and governors 
 struggling vehemently against it. The act of 
 1st Eliz. chap. II. which constitutes our present 
 ecclesiastical establishment, was passed, (Judge 
 Blackstone observes.) with the dissent of all the 
 bishops, (Gibb's Codex, 268;) and therefore 
 the style of lords spiritual is omitted throughout 
 the whole. t 
 
 The times of Henry VIII. Edw. VI. and qween 
 Eliz. you say, were extraordinary times, and the 
 regal supremacy was then raised to an undue 
 height. But, see how the case stood, when the 
 church was in the zenith of its prosperity and 
 power ! I mean at the passing of the act of Uni- 
 formity of Charles II. in the preamble of which, 
 you have the sentiments of the legislature, 
 and those of your most religious king. It re- 
 cites to this effect " That the Book of Com- 
 mon Prayer, &c. having been enjoined to be 
 used by the statute 1st Eliz. and since that, by 
 the neglect of ministers, great inconvenie^cies 
 and schisms having happened ; for prevention 
 thereof, and for settling the peace of the church, 
 &c. the king had granted his commission to some 
 bishops and other divines, to review the Com- 
 mon Prayer-book, and to prepare such altera- 
 tion and advice as they thought fit to offer. And 
 
 I. Drf. pags 18, 19. 
 t Blackstone's Commentaries, 8th Edit. Book I. chap. II. 
 
 page 156, note,
 
 that afterwards his majesty having called a con- 
 vocation, and having been pleased to authorise 
 and require them to review the same book, and 
 make such alterations as to them should seem, 
 meet, and to exhibit and present the same to his 
 majesty, for his farther allowance or confirma- 
 tion : and the same having been done; his ma- 
 jesty hath duly considered, and fully approved 
 an'd allowed the same ; and recommended to this 
 present parliament that the same shall be ap- 
 pointed to be used in all churches whereupon 
 it is enacted," &c. 
 
 Behold, how poor a figure the power of your 
 convocation makes when shining in its highest 
 glory ! The clergy are authorised and required 
 by the king to propose alterations in church ce- 
 remonies and forms, for his consideration and 
 allowance, as supreme head of the church. The 
 king approves and allows such of them as he 
 thinks fit ; but in order to their having power at 
 all to oblige the members of the church, the king 
 recommends them to his parliament ; and if they 
 are approved of and passed, they thence acquire 
 the force of a law. What, I pray you, did the 
 clergy in all this affair besides giving their ad- 
 vice ? which might have been taken or refused : 
 fo lawyers, though they may have no seat in par- 
 liaiupnt, are often consulted in forming and mak- 
 ing laws ; shall they therefore set up for a share 
 in the legislative power; and exalt themselves 
 from subjects to be rulers in the state ? 
 
 And, when a most happy alteration was, af- 
 terwards made in this law, by the act of Tolera- 
 tion, which so deeply atfected the forms and ce- 
 remonies of the church, with regard to a great 
 number of the subjects of this kingdom, pray tell 
 me what hand had the convocation and clergy in 
 that important church affair ? 
 
 And as forms of worship, so matters of faith 
 are enacted /uto laws, judged and punished, en-
 
 tirely by the civil magistrate, without any inter- 
 vention or assistance of the clergy. By the sta- 
 tute of the 9th and 10th of William III. it is en- 
 acted That if any person shall be convicted in 
 in the courts of Westminster, or at the assizes, 
 of denying any of the persons of the Trinity to 
 be God : or, of maintaining that there are more 
 Gods than one ; or, of denying the Christian re- 
 ligion, or the authority of Che Scriptures ; he 
 shall forfeit be imprisoned, &c. Here again, 
 you see that the jurisdiction and decision of the 
 great articles of faith are declared by parliament 
 to be not in the convocation, but in the civil 
 courts of law. 
 
 As to the punishment of vice and irreligion, 
 the statutes against drunkenness, cursing, swear- 
 ing, the breach of the sabbath, &c. sufficiently 
 shew, that the parliament and common law 
 courts hav taker, to themselves the cognizance 
 of these. What then becomes of your ecclesi- 
 astical dominion and canonical settlement for 
 above two hundred years, when it has been, 
 and might in innumerable other instances be 
 shewn, that the king and parliament have all 
 along claimed and exerted a supreme right in 
 matters of religion, faith, worship, and prac- 
 tice ? Your ecclesiastical courts, indeed, are 
 sometimes permitted to take cognizance of sme 
 of these matters; but then it is to be remembe- 
 red, 1. that these are the king's courts ; to be 
 held only in his name. 2. The judges in these 
 courts often are, always may, and (as many of 
 vour most learned clergy say,) ought ever to be 
 laymen. And 3. The king, whenever he pleases, 
 stays their proceedings ; grants prohibitions ; 
 takes causes out of them, and removes them into 
 his courts of common law. Such is the origi- 
 nal, radical jurisdiction, which you claim for 
 your pastors and governor? !
 
 245 
 
 But to return to the convocation our excel- 
 lent constitution, you see, hath with great saga- 
 city circumscribed its power, and reduced it to 
 a mere shad w. to just nothing at all. Sad ex- 
 perience hath shewn, that ecclesiastical synods, 
 from the famous council of Nice, down to the 
 
 not- famous convocation of L n, anno 1717, 
 
 have been little else than the pests and troublers 
 of mankind : Mints, where pernicious errors 
 have received the stamp of authority, and been 
 sent out to corrupt the church ; and thnt, for t?>e 
 most part, * they have been conventions of inte- 
 rested, ambitious, factious and an^ry men : who 
 under a fair pretence of zcdjhr the Lord of hosts, 
 have frequently set the world in flames, by driv- 
 ing- furiously and foully on in pursuit of their 
 \owii worldly views: and with an aft'ectation of 
 being thought contending earnestly for the faith, 
 have been ouly contending who should be great- 
 est among thrifts? kcs. This our legislature knew 
 to have been the manner, the practice immemo- 
 rial, of ecclesiastical synods ; and therefore 
 guarded, with groat discretion, against the por- 
 tentous evil ; denied them all legislative power; 
 subjected them entirely to the authority of the 
 civil magistrate ; and thus with no small diffi- 
 culty has restrained them from throwing, as they 
 have often done, the world into confusion ; ancl 
 from filling the church with everlasting debates. 
 
 And now, sir, having thus attempted your edi- 
 fication, in a point of high importance, where, 
 it is certain, you greatly needed it ; by this time 
 you must begin to see, not the futility only, but 
 the presumption, and the real danger of your 
 scheme that it is a suggestion as groundless, 
 as it is ungrateful and ill-timed, that our refor- 
 mation was not effected in a right and legal man- 
 ner. You must see, that by representing the 
 magistrate as having no power in the church, 
 x 2
 
 246 
 
 you undermine your glorious structure, and be- 
 tray it into popisli hands. By your laying, 
 therefore, so essential a stress, upon the as- 
 sent of the convocation to the act of Unifor- 
 mity, by which the reformation and the present 
 church was established, you supply the crafty 
 Jesuit with unanswerable arguments for destroy- 
 ing that foundation upon which both are built. 
 For, pray, the Jesuits will ask, how was that 
 assent of the convocation obtained ? Was it not 
 by the magistrates depriving the holy bishops ; 
 and by thrusting- out the church's pastors from 
 those seats, and from that authority which God 
 had given them therein ? And can the assent of 
 a convocation, thus packed by the magistrate, 
 make that legal, canonical, and ecclesiastically 
 right, which was before illegal, uncanonical, anci 
 ecclesiastically wrong ? 
 
 Besides, when you talk of the convocation's 
 assent and concurrence, you adopt language al- 
 together unconstitutional : these are terms much 
 too assuming and presumptuous. Submission, 
 sir, and obedience is all that the convocation was 
 capable of giving. The king may give his as- 
 sent, and either house of parliament may give 
 their assent, and thereby confirm and give au- 
 thority to any act : but should the magistrates of 
 a country town talk of farther confirming it by 
 their concurrence and assent; which would they 
 most provoke, your indignation or your mirth ? 
 And yet, the corporation of a Cornish borough, 
 sir, has as much right, by our constitution, to 
 talk of ratifying by their assent, any law of the 
 land, as the convocation itself.* 
 
 * The convocation never gave their assent at all to the articles 
 of religion in king Edward's refoi mation. And all the assent 
 they ever gave to queen Elizabeth's, (as far as I can find,) was 
 the setting forth ?he articles, which was nut done till January, 
 1563 : whereas the reformation was established by the 1 st of Eliz. 
 January 1558. Vide Fuller's Ch. History, B. IX. pages 52, 
 and 72.
 
 24,7 
 
 And hence, by the way, you see the extreme 
 
 vanity of your imagination " That the civil 
 
 magistrate, by ratifying the XXth article, hath 
 recognized and owned the power to be not in 
 himself, but in the church."* i. e. as you are 
 pleased to understand it, in the clergy. By what 
 logic, sir, do you moke the church, in that arti- 
 cle, to mean the clergy ? Are not the laity also 
 an essential part of the church ? Does not the 
 very preceding article, XlXth, expressly declare 
 that they are ? defining the church to be a con- 
 gregation of faithful men. But, would you im- 
 pute to the magistrate so tame, so absurd, so 
 ridiculous a part, as publicly to disown himself 
 to have any power in church matters : yea to de- 
 ny himself to belong to the congregation of the 
 faithful! Yes; with astonishment be it seen, this 
 is what you are not ashamed openly to impute to 
 him. " For the king and parliament, you say, 
 have plainly disowned any such power, as we are 
 speaking of, in themselves : and recognized it to 
 be in the church ; and no body imagines, that by 
 the church they mean themselves."! But if by 
 declaring it to be in the church, they have dis- 
 owned it to be in themselves ; they have, there- 
 by, also disowned themselves to be of the con- 
 gregation of the faithful ; for this congregation 
 they declare to be the church, to whom this power 
 belongs. Besides, this is supposing the king 
 to disown and give up a power which the 
 whole legislature hath solemnly vested in him ; 
 and which every bishop and ecclesiastic in the 
 kingdom, (till the time of king William,) did 
 swear, that he believed in his conscience to be 
 true, under the penalty of a premunire, viz. 
 " That the king is the only supreme governor of 
 this realm ; as well in all spiritual or ecclesias- 
 
 I Def. page 17. Appen. page 5. f I Def. page 17.
 
 248 
 
 tical things or causes, as temporal; and they 
 will assist and deiend him in such jurisdiction 
 and authority." 
 
 See, now, the hopeful state to which you have 
 brought the civil magistrate I You have made 
 him to divest himself of all power as to church 
 matters, and to recognize it to be in you, the 
 clergy. He is now, therefore, in all these af- 
 fairs, to be subject to you, his higher parsers. 
 You have authority from God to make laws, and 
 to prescribe rites, which kings and parliaments 
 are to obey : to bind your kings in chains, spiri- 
 tual, ecclesiastic chains. Rise up, O ye kings, 
 to these your pastors and governors ! be instruct- 
 ed, and pay homage to their spiritual decrees ! 
 This doctrine was the happy engine, which hath 
 often lifted humble bishops, to the high places 
 of the earth : and hath made kings and emperors 
 bow down with abject submission at their feet. 
 
 Ecclesiastical affairs, sir, you are too saga- 
 cious not to know, take in a mighty compass ; 
 and very naturally comprehend the principles, 
 the manners, the whole social and moral con- 
 duct, of those over whom these holy pastors are 
 to watch. Thus the priests of the church have 
 exalted themselves, for many ages, to be princes 
 of the world ; and by claims of spiritual power, 
 have artfully possessed themselves of enormous 
 shares of temporal grandeur and wealth. But, 
 is this a proper time, think you, to revive and to 
 press pretensions of this kind ? Thank Heaven, 
 that darkness is passed ! the light of Christian 
 liberty dawns gloriously Hpou us ; and exposes 
 all such fanatic claims to just scorn and reproach. 
 
 But I press you no farther you begin tore- 
 lent. Having urged you with the weight of 
 your XXXIV th article, which you have fre- 
 quently subscribed ; and of your XXXth canon, 
 to which you have solemnly sworn ; both whkh
 
 249 
 
 declare positively, your church ceremonies to be 
 ordained by the authority of the ciril magistrate ; 
 you are, at length, constrained to own their 
 force. But, without the honour of retracting 
 jour former dangerous assertion, " that the 
 magistrate has no such power at all,"* you 
 are now brought to acknowledge " that the 
 truth of the case is, all our ceremonies, and 
 forms of worship, are ordained, as they ought 
 to he, both by ecclesiastical and civil authority. "t 
 Honestly said at last ! Well, if by civil autho- 
 rity, the magistrate has some power in ordering 
 church matters ; which you have all along denied 
 him : it then follows, that the power is not vest- 
 ed solely in the pastors and governors, as with 
 great pertinacity you have insisted it was. Ren- 
 der then to Caesar, the things which are Ccesar's / 
 and lift not up your heel against the hand by 
 whoso bounty you are so "liberally fed. 
 
 You are at last willing, I find, to compromise 
 the matter, and to go shares with the magistrate, 
 in the enjoyment of this power : and presume to 
 talk of an " alliance, and of terms on which it 
 stands, between the state and the church. ":J: 
 This alliance, sir, is a mere phantom, conjured 
 up by the strength of a late warm imagination, 
 to preserve at least a shadow of its lost power to 
 the church.^ Neither our history, nor our laws 
 know any thing at all of it. The nature of our 
 constitution entirely disowns it ; and avows 
 the church to be not an ALLY, but a SUBJECT 
 to the state. An alliance supposes indepen- 
 dency in the contracting powers. But, by the 
 famous act of Submission, the church hath re- 
 signed all pretensions to independency; and 
 given up its powers into the hands of the state. 
 
 * I Def. pages 18. 19. f Appcn. page 13. J Ibid. 
 See the Rev. Caleb Fleming's excellent Comment on War- 
 burton's Alliance, &c.
 
 2,50 
 
 The truth of the case is this. A few centuries 
 past, the church was found guilty of a dangerous 
 rebellion and high treason against the state. 
 Whilst it lay thus at mercy, as a criminal before 
 iis judge, its pardon and life were given it, upon 
 the terms of its resigning all claims; of indepen- 
 dency, asid cubrnitting itself thenceforward to 
 the will of "the prince. But, behold ! these terms 
 of submission, you have now, it seeons, refined 
 into terms of alliance; and the church, from a 
 pardoned criminal, now claims to be a rival 
 power, and to have its rights and jurisdiction 
 independent of the state. *' Our ceremonies and 
 forms of worship are ordained by ecclesiastical, 
 as well as civil authority." But these, a';is ! 
 are but illusions which mock your heated fancy; 
 for ecclesiastical authority, as distinguished from 
 civil, you may rest assured, there is none. Ask 
 your learned bishop?, and they will utterly dis- 
 claim it. Ask your able lawyers; and they will 
 tell you, that you incur the danger of a premu- 
 nire, by presuming to exert any one single act of 
 authority of this kind. Ask all the knowing 
 members of the convocation itself, and they will 
 answer with one voice, " It is not in us autho- 
 rity we have none." Yea, ask the meanest 
 novice inr the history of the reformation, and of 
 the establishment of yeur church, and he will 
 presently acquaint you, that your ceremonies and 
 forms were not ordained by BOTH ecclesiastical 
 and civil authority ; but by civil authority ONLY : 
 the ecclesiastics in convocation, and in the two 
 universities, obstinately refusing to give their 
 concurrence ; and even entering their very so- 
 lemn and zealous protest against it. 
 
 But, you- still insist upon it; as if it were of 
 some weight, that the convocation at last gave 
 their assent. Pray t how did they give it ? Not 
 till they had been first garbled and packed by
 
 251 
 
 the magistrate : all the bishops, save one, ex- 
 iled, imprisoned, turned out, by his authority ; 
 and new ones, accord ing to his taste, put into their 
 room ; besides, the invincible artillery of dean- 
 eries, prebends, snug- and fat livings, played 
 strongly upon the inferior clergy, who hoped 
 that by their submission, they might the more 
 readily succeed those dignitaries who had been 
 deprived by the civil power. And, is it strange 
 that the convocation, thus powerfully attacked, 
 made no long resistance ; but yielded, however 
 reluctant, to what parliament had done ?* But 
 their concurrence, I must again tell you, whe- 
 ther free or forced, gave, and could give, no 
 authority to the new establishment; because, by 
 our consfitution, they had not the smallest de- 
 gree of authority to give. Suppose the convo- 
 cation had refused their concurrence to that act 
 of the legislature ; would the law not have had 
 its force ? You dare not affirm it. Suppose, 
 again, the clergy had established any new forms, 
 without an act of parliament ; would the people 
 have been obliged to yield obedience to them ? 
 Neither durst jou assert this. 
 
 However, not to discourage good begin- 
 nings, I will take you where you are We are 
 to come, then to this issue that the civil ma- 
 gistrate has power to ordain ceremonies and rites 
 of worship, and to make new terms of Christian 
 communion ; and that the things of this kind 
 which are done in the church of England, are 
 
 * Hear what even Echard, who was never suspected of partiali- 
 ty against the church, says ' Fourteen bishops, twelve deans, 
 twelve archdeacons, fifteen heads of colleges, fifty prebendaries, 
 and eighty rectors, were deprived by the queen But it was strong- 
 ly believed, that, of the rest, the greatest part complied against 
 their Consciences ; and would have been ready for another turn, 
 if the queen had died while that race of incumbents lived, and the 
 next successor had been of another religion." Eckard's //sf. 
 Eng. page 330,
 
 done, at least, in part, by civil authority. This 
 is what you now grant. But the question then re- 
 turns with unanswerable/ weight uponjou Who 
 gave him this power ? What charter hath lodged 
 it in him ? Not, surely, the Scriptures ; the only 
 charter of the Christian church. For all the 
 power or authority which the Scriptures give 
 the magistrate, relates only, and can relate only 
 to things of a civil nature ; but cannot at nil re- 
 late to things of worship and religion. This ne- 
 ver can be contested ; because the magistrate at 
 the time, when the Scriptures were written, and 
 for near three hundred years after, was infidel 
 or Pagan. St. Paul, therefore by commanding 
 us to be subject to the higher powers ; and to obey 
 magistrates, for conscience sake, because they are 
 the ministers of God, for good does not require our 
 obedience to their decrees as to ceremonies and 
 forms of worship ; or, our conformity to their es- 
 tablishments, in things of a religious nature. No, 
 St. Paul himself, was a zealous nonconformist. 
 He was accused of the heinous sin of schism, 
 by that great champion of the Pagan Ephesian 
 church, Demetrius, the shrine-maker to the god- 
 dess Diana ; and so far was this great apostle 
 from submitting himself to every ordinance of man,* 
 that he was publicly charged with having, not 
 only at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, 
 persuaded and turned away much people, (from the 
 then established religion,) saying, that they be no 
 gods which are made with hands. t And when cer- 
 tain of the philosophers of the Epicureans and of 
 the Stoics encountered him at Athens, and brought 
 him unto Areopagus, that they might know what 
 that new doctrine was whereof he spoke, he en- 
 tered on his subject with a spirited, unqualified 
 
 * 1 Peter ii. 13, f Acts six. 26.
 
 253 
 
 protest against the established religion of the 
 state. 
 
 Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things, 
 yc are too superstitious. So that, though St. Paul 
 knew that the powers that be, are ordained of 
 God,* he also knew that these powers were con- 
 fined to those civil purposes for which society 
 was instituted, that the magistrate was to exe- 
 cute wrath upon him that doeth evil : and there- 
 fore so far was St. Paul from extending this au- 
 thority of the powers that be, over the rights of 
 conscience and private judgment, that he made 
 it the grand scope of his labours, as did all the 
 other apostles, by their preaching their lives 
 to persuade and draw men off from the established 
 forms of worship, and to convince them, that in 
 these affairs, there was one king only, and one 
 Lord, to whom alone their homage was due even 
 Jesus, who, by his sufferings, had merited this 
 high honour, and to whom alone, God had com- 
 manded, that, in things of religion, every knee 
 shall bow. 
 
 Here, then, I again call upon and provoke you 
 to tell me who gave the civil magistrate this 
 authority in religious matters? You are silent, 
 and cannot say well, then, if he hath none by 
 the command of Almighty God, and by the ori- 
 ginal constitution of the Christian church, conse- 
 quently the subjects of Jesus Christ are under 
 no obligation to obey his injunctions in things of 
 a religious nature ; they are guilty of no fauit^in 
 dissenting from established forms ; your censures 
 of them, therefore, as great sinners for so doing, 
 are extremely rash and uncharitable ; for which 
 it becomes you, to be humbled greatly before 
 God, and to ask pardon of men. 
 
 See, now, the unhappy dilemma to which you 
 are reduced If you say the magistrate has an* 
 Y 
 
 * Romans xiii. 3.
 
 254. 
 
 thority to decree ceremonies, and forms of wor- 
 ship, to make new terms of communion, and to 
 determine controversies of faith you then sin 
 against the undoubted rights and constitution of 
 tfre Christian church; against God, against Je- 
 sus Christ, against reason and common sense. 
 But if you say that he has not, you then sin 
 against the church of England, against its laws 
 and constitution : you are a dissenter, at least, 
 in principle; but perhaps, have not fortitude 
 enough to sacrifice, what you call, your snugness^ 
 by openly professing your dissent. 
 
 Having thus considered the former part of 
 your self-repugnant scheme, 1. That the ma- 
 gistrate has not; And, 2. that he has the autho- 
 rity which he claims and exercises in your church ; 
 I should now proceed to the other, vifc. That it is 
 lodged in the church's pastors and governors. But, 
 here, to the surprise of every attentive reader, 
 you content yourself with asserting, without pay- 
 ing them the compliment of so much as attempt- 
 ing to prove, that they are possessed of this pow- 
 er. The Bible, T thought you knew to be the 
 religion of Protestants; and the Scriptures, the 
 only rule of their practice and faith. But be- 
 hold ! a Protestant, a divine, claiming a high 
 power for his pastors and governors ; a power 
 in which the peace and purity of the Christian 
 church are essentially concerned ; and yet not 
 able, nor when called upon, even pretending to 
 produce one single text of Scripture in sup- 
 port of this claim. 
 
 I have pointed out to you several express com- 
 mands of the sacred law, which directly foroid 
 and condemn this pretended power; have shewn 
 you, that Chris.tians are the Lord's freed-men, 
 that they are each for himself, to study , and search 
 the Scriptures to examine and try the spirits to 
 call no manuponcarth master, and are not to becal-
 
 55 
 
 ltd Rabbi, i.e. are neither to acknowledge, nor to 
 claim any authority over others in matters of reli- 
 gion, because ONE only is our lawgiver d/id muster, 
 in these things, even Christ; and all Christians arc 
 brethren : that though the princes of I he Gentiles ex- 
 ercise dominion over them; and the;/ ic ho are great, 
 exercise authority upon them, it SHALL KOT BE, 
 so AMONGST YOU Whathave you replied, sir, 
 to these plain and direct commands ? Have you 
 FO :nuch as attempted to evade their force ? No : 
 but with conscious impotence stand still ; an,d 
 see this Scripture-artillery demolishing the boast- 
 ed thrones of your pastors and governors, and 
 beating down the high places to which your ima- 
 gination had raised them, without so much a^s 
 extending a feeble hand for their support. 
 
 From what has been said, on the point of 
 church-power, you see how- little reason you 
 have to arrogate to yourself and to your brethren 
 of the establishment, the honour of being the 
 only champions, that are able to encounter the 
 church of Rome---!Litlle reason indeed have you 
 to boast, as you do in your Appendix, "that upon 
 the head of Heresy, Schism, Ordination. Tradi- 
 tion, Church-Unity, and Catholic-Communion, 
 no protestant is so well qualified to write upon 
 these, and so likely to do it to the conviction of 
 a papist, as one of the church of England ; but, 
 to be sure, not a Protestant Dissenter."* "What 
 Protestant Dissenters can do on the popish con- 
 troversy, the Salter's Hall lectures will shew to 
 their lasting honour. And, in truth, all yoar 
 mighty champions, Chilling-worth, Hales, Stil-- 
 lingfleet, Middleton, &c. in all their conflicts 
 with the church of Rome, have been ever forced 
 to quit their own, and to borrow our weapons ; 
 and to these alone have owed the triumphs they 
 
 hare gained. 
 
 Appen. page 1 1.
 
 2,56 
 
 No Protestant can safely meet a sagacious and 
 learned Jesuit, if his principles oblige him to main- 
 tain the authority of councils, Fathers, and the 
 church's power to decree rites and authority in 
 controversies of faith. It is the sufficiency of 
 Scripture the right of private judgment (our 
 distinguishing principles as Dissenters,) which 
 supply us with such arguments as no advocate 
 for the Romish system can ever successfully op- 
 pose. These, sir, you must admit, have been the 
 principles upon which your own learned doctors 
 have defended the reformation ; and the princi- 
 ples on which alone it is capable of defence. But 
 then you are to remember also, that they are 
 principles on which the church of England can 
 never possibly be defended ; and which, if faith- 
 fully and duly followed, would have brought 
 Chillingworth, and Hales, and Middleton, among 
 us ; and would make every intelligent and honest 
 Protestant, in this kingdom, a Dissenter from 
 the established church. 
 
 For, if the Scripture be, indeed, a sufficient 
 and perfect rule ; what becomes of your addi- 
 tional splendors (as you are pleased to call thorn) 
 and of your improvements upon Christianity ? 
 What, of your church's power to decree cere- 
 monies and rites ? What, of sponsors and the 
 cross in baptism, kneeling at the Lord's-supper, 
 bowing to the east, &c. of which the Scriptures, 
 the sufficient and perfect rule, say not a word ? 
 And if the right, and the duty of private judg- 
 ment be acknowledged, what becomes of the 
 church's boasted authority in controversies of 
 faith ? It is instantly annihilated. Your learned 
 doctors themselves must have felt the difficulty 
 of the part which they had to act. And it is 
 really pleasant to observe, how, in their attacks 
 upon Dissenter?, they appeal to the opinions of 
 councils and of the Fathers, speak in the most
 
 pompous terms of the power and authority of the 
 church, and pathetically expatiate on the sin and 
 the danger of schism. But no sooner does a 
 crafty Jesuit come forth, armed cap-a-pee* with 
 the same weapon?, but they immediately change 
 their ground, retreat to our quarters, and avail 
 themselves of our arguments ! Then the Bible, 
 the Bible ONLY, is the religion of Prelcstants, 
 and every man is to read, and to judge for him- 
 self; then, not those, who separate from a 
 church that imposes unlawful (unscriptural) 
 terms, are guilty of schism ; but the church alone 
 is guilty that imposes such terms. 
 
 The slightest attention will shew you, with 
 how extremely ill a grace the divines of the 
 church of England must appear, upon the subject 
 of schism, tradition, and of church unity, They 
 who, by the traditions of men, (sponsors, the cross, 
 &c.) have notoriously made void the command- 
 ment of God, (to receive one another, but not to 
 doubtful disputations;*) who break, in a fla- 
 grant manner, the unity of the Christian church, 
 by setting up new terms of fellowship and com- 
 munion in it ; casting out such as Christ receives 
 into it : declaring before the world, against Ca- 
 tholic communion, by refusing to admit any to 
 the two sacraments of religion, unless they will 
 submit to new rites which themselves have or- 
 dained, as being improvements upon the plan 
 which Jesus Christ and his inspired apostles have 
 left us. Are these tlie men to encounter Romish 
 emissaries ? Must they not go forth with infinite 
 disadvantage, and feel their own weapons turned 
 violently upon themselves ? But, the Dissenter, 
 who stands fast to his distinguishing and proper 
 principles, (sufficiency of Scripture, and the 
 right of private judgment,) at onee beats than 
 Y 2 
 
 * Rom. jtiv. I.
 
 258 
 
 from the strong holds of councils and Fathers, 
 (where you have been long assaulting, but not 
 able to dislodge them.) and makes all their learn- 
 ed sophistry fall before the sacred force of the 
 BIBLE and COMMON SENSE. And hence it is, as 
 before observed, that the many unhappy prose- 
 lytes, which these seducers are said to make, 
 are all drawn from your, not ONE, that I have 
 ever heard of, from our churches : your doctrines 
 and forms too naturally preparing them to take 
 that fatal step. 
 
 But it is time that we now quit the subject of 
 church-power. I have treated it more largely, 
 because it enters into the essence, and is, as 
 must be universally acknowledged, the one 
 single point, upon which the whole controversy- 
 turns. Your other two points, the sacramental 
 test, and the regal supremacy, I shall dismiss in, 
 fewer words. 
 
 As to the sacramental test you still maintain 
 " that as the law now stands, the priest has a 
 power of repelling evil livers, when they 
 come to receive the sacrament, as a qualifi- 
 cation for a place." By this apprehension, you 
 are prevented from seeing the mortifying situa- 
 tion in which you really stand, otherwise you 
 would groan under this disgraceful yoke, the 
 Test act; and for the honour of Christianity, and 
 the ease of your own conscience, would most 
 anxiously wish for its repeal. 
 
 The lower house of convocation, in the year 
 1704, saw this difficulty, under which the clergy 
 lay, in the same light as I have represented it. 
 And though they are to be justly ranked among 
 the most determined champions for the church, 
 yet they did not deny this to be a grievance, as 
 you have done ; but in their address to the upper 
 house, they state, among the gravamina cleri, 
 the grievances of the clergy to be redressed, " the
 
 259 
 
 increasing difficulties of the parochial clergy 
 about administering- the holy sacrament indiffe- 
 rently to all persons who demand it, in- order 
 to qualify themselves for offices, because they 
 SEE NOT HOW THEY COULD, in several cases, 
 act conformably to the rubric and the canons of 
 the church, in repelling such persons as were un- 
 worthy, and particularly notorious schismatics, 
 without exposing themselves to vexatious and 
 expensive suits of law."* This, you see, was 
 the construction which this learned body of the 
 clergy put upon this law. They, doubtless, had 
 the best legal advice on this subject, before they 
 made the above-mentioned mortifying declara- 
 tion ; we may therefore safely presume, that if 
 the eminent lawyers of that time had been clearly 
 of your opinion, " that as the law now stands, 
 the priest has a power. of repelling evil-livers," 
 the clergy would not have stated to the upper 
 house as a grievance, that they saw not how then 
 could repel them: and if you attentively weigh 
 all the circumstances of this case, you will find 
 that the difficulties respecting this question can- 
 not be satisfactorily removed ; for there are tw r o 
 opposite evils to which the clergy are exposed : 
 both of them cannot be avoided ; their only op- 
 tion is to take the least. If they do not comply 
 with the orders of the rubric, to which they are 
 sworn, they destroy the peace of their own con- 
 sciences. If they do comply with the rubric, 
 and refuse the sacrament to an evil-liver, who 
 demands it as a qualification for a place, they ex- 
 pose themselves to vexatious and expensive suits, 
 for depriving the subject of some of Ihe most va- 
 luable favours of the prince. t 
 
 Tindal's Hist, of England, Vol. III. page 686. 
 
 ( This question, whether a clergyman can safely repel an eyil- 
 liver, as described by the rubric, when he demands the sacrament 
 as a qualification for a post, or place, bas been lately very parti-
 
 260 
 
 But, to conclude this point If, as the law- 
 now stands, the priest has, "as you affirm, a power 
 to repel evil-livers, pray, what is the reason that 
 the rubric and canons, which so solemnly oblige 
 him to it, are not only, not faithfully observed, 
 but most shamefully violated, and quite trampled 
 under foot ? Whence is it that among- the^swarms 
 of notorious evil-livers, heretics, blasphemers, 
 and open unbelievers, who continually % come to 
 t-he Lord's table, to qualify for places, we never 
 hear of one rejected by the priest ? vVTiat ! is 
 there no conscience, no integrity left among those 
 who administer this holy rite of religion ? seeing 
 the rubric requires, and the canons oblige the 
 clergy to reject these evil livers ; and the scan- 
 dal of receiving them, (both to Deists without, 
 and to Christians within,) is so crying and fla- 
 grant; why, in the name of God, whose minis- 
 ters and stewards you profess yourselves to be, 
 are these enemies to his government, these aliens 
 from his family, these despisers of his Son, never 
 rejected, but ever tamely received, as his chil- 
 dren, at his table The reason is obvious. The 
 parish priest feels the difficulty before-mentioned, 
 as having been stated by the lower house of con- 
 vocation ; he also SEES NOT HOW he can repel 
 such persons as are unworthy, without exposing 
 himself to vexatious and expensive suits : and 
 this being the case, he chooses rather to throw 
 himself upon the mercies of God, than be expo- 
 sed to the indignation of man. 
 
 
 cularly considered, previous to the application which was made to 
 parliament in March 1787, for the repeal of the Corporation and 
 Test acts. A case was laid before three gentlemen of distinguish- 
 ed eminence in the law ; and it is apprehended, that their opinions 
 will not only justify the author of these letters in what he has ad- 
 vanced on this subject, but also enable us to see the propriety of 
 that declaration made by the lower house of convocation, " That 
 they SAW NOT HOW they could, in many cases, act conformably to 
 the rubric, &c. without exposing themselves to expensive and vex- 
 atious suits,"
 
 261 
 
 And now, sir, if with this dreadful and op- 
 pressive yoke upon your necks ; whilst scoffing 
 infidels laugh, and discerning Christians mourn ; 
 you are easy and well pleased ; and bless your- 
 self, and your church in the protection of this 
 law ; all I shall say, at present, is, that I envy 
 not your felicity; but most devoutly thank God, 
 that I have neither lot nor share in this matter. 
 Only hear the word, which God sent by his 
 prophet to certain time-serving priests. Ezek. 
 xliv. (>, 7. Thou shall say to the rebellious house, 
 let it stijjice you of all your abominations; in that 
 you hait brought into my sanctuary strangers, un- 
 circumcisfd in heart, to be in my sanctuary, to poi- 
 lute it, even my house, when ye offer my bread 
 they have broken my covenant, because of all your 
 abominations. 
 
 1 have said so much on your first topic, of 
 church- power, that I have not either room or oc- 
 casion to add many things on your last, our con- 
 stitution in church and state. Here, indeed, I 
 observe with pleasure, that amidst the pompous 
 professions you affect to make of confuting my 
 account of the regal supremacy, and of our consti- 
 tution, you hardly, in one single instance, pre- 
 sume to contradict it. My account, sir, was 
 founded upon fact and upon law. After close 
 examination, I suppose you found it to be so ; 
 and therefore, though, to save appearances, you 
 would seem to say something on this subject, yet 
 in your whole fourteen pages, there is scarcely 
 the shew of any opposition to what 1 had advan- 
 ced ; but on the contrary, in one instance, a re- 
 markable confirmation of the most material part 
 of my argument : for though, in page ^hirteen of 
 your Appendix, you charge me "with false play, 
 in citing your xxxivth article, as declaring ex- 
 pressly that your church ceremonies uere ordained 
 by the civil magistrate, and ask me, did you find
 
 there any" such words ?" ygt with agreeable snr- 
 'prise, I find you were either so incautious, or so 
 honest, as within a few lines, to cite the very 
 words of the article, which support, in thestvci>g- 
 est manner, the sense I bad given, where an open 
 \md wilful violation of these ceremonies is, by t : *e 
 article, declared to lie a hurting the authority of 
 ih? civil magistrate* Can a violation oi' these ce- 
 cererncnies violate the magistrate's authority, if 
 by his authority they had. riot T>een ordained ? 
 ' As for the form of speaking in use amongst us 
 our constitution in church and state that ,it is 
 really an impropriety, as generally understood, 
 I do not at all hesitate (with due submission to 
 the great authorities by whom it is used) again to 
 insist. I.t is a form of speaking, no doubt drawn 
 from the usage of popish times, before the refor- 
 mation of our .religion took 'place. Fr then 
 truly, there was a constitution in church, distinct 
 from, and independent/of oar constitution instate. 
 The church had then its laws, its rights, its offi- 
 cers and powers, and its sovereign _or supreme 
 head, peculiar to itself, and apart from the state. 
 But, by the reformation, all that independency 
 and distinction is abolished ; it is now become 
 entirely and absolutely a civil system : there are 
 no laws in the church (I mean none of -human 
 enaction) but what were made by the civil ma- 
 gistrate, and receive all their obligation and 
 authority from him : Nor are there any officers 
 in the church but what are constituted by the au- 
 thority and direction of ;he magistrate, and are 
 all liable to be unmade and deprived again by 
 him But that our constitution in church, is real- 
 ly nothing but a civil or parliamentary constitu- 
 tion, has, with incontestible evidence, been shown. 
 in the preceding letters ; and is indeed, a truth 
 so plain, that no intelligent or sober member of 
 your church, will, I apprehend, so much as at- 
 tempt to deny it.
 
 Our constitution, therefore, having been 
 changed by the happy reformation, this form 
 of speaking, ought, in strict propriety, to have 
 been also altered ; for, to talk of our constitution 
 inchurcli and state, is not only putting- the effect 
 before the cause, but it is conveying an idea, which 
 your authorities could not possibly iiftend to con- 
 vey, because not founded in truth viz. that the 
 church has ;i constitution distinct from, indepen- 
 dent of, yea, prior or superior to, ourconstitution 
 instate. However, to abate somewhat of your at- 
 tachment to this principle, even if you could esta- 
 blish it, I must remind you that the presbyterian 
 church of Scotland is as essential, fundamental; 
 and unalterable a part of our present ecclesiastical 
 constitution, as the episcopal church of England 
 can ever pretend to be. 
 
 My account of the power which our laws and 
 constitution give to the kings and queens of this 
 realm, in affairs ecclesiastical '; to instruct, over- 
 rule, direct, control, all the archbishops, bi- 
 shops and priests of this kingdom, in all their sa- ' 
 cerdotal and most spiritual concerns, &c. you do 
 not pretend to controvert, but rather attempt to 
 vindicate and explain it. But you unhappily 
 forget the one grand and material point, for 
 which it was introduced, and to which, above 
 all other, it concerned you to speak ; and that is, to 
 reconcile this constitution of the church of Eng- 
 land with the constitution of the church of Christ ; 
 and to shew that Dissenters cannot separate from 
 the one, without the danger and the high crime of 
 separating themselves from the other. -This 
 was the point which you asserted, and on which 
 you so copiously flourished: but you are now I 
 presume, too well instructed to persevere in endear 
 vouringto support it. You must now see them, sir^ 
 to be two distinct and quite different societies ; 
 and will be henceforward eased of those painful 
 commiserations over the souls of your dissenting
 
 brethren, with which your generous mind has la- 
 boured ; and be no longer terrified on account 
 of our schism, with those direful apprehensions 
 concerning 1 our salvation. 
 
 There are some other passages in your Ap- 
 pendix on which I must make a few observations. 
 I am pleased to see that you again venture to 
 bring forward the affair of Mr. Whiston* I 
 thought you would gladly have suffered it to 
 sleep. The case, to be sure, wrung much you 
 have been once and again flinging to rid yourself 
 of it ; butthe manner in which you now do it, ra- 
 ther more solely wounds than gives you relief. 
 " You tax me with misrepresentation, and with 
 no mean talent that way."f Yea, have the cou- 
 rage to confront me with a citation from bishop 
 Burnet, to whom I had referred, as supporting my 
 account. But what will the world say, sir? 
 How will all your friends, if not your own heart, 
 reproach you ! and the learned, among whom 
 you rank, hold you in great derision, when they 
 see you undertaking to give the public an ac- 
 count of his Lordship's history of that case ; but, 
 either carelessly overlooking, or wilfully sup- 
 pressing, the material and important passages, 
 which clearly and irrefragably support my ac- 
 count. 
 
 " His lordship (say you) J reports it thus 
 that it seeming doubtful, whether the convoca- 
 tion could, in the first instance, proceed against 
 a. man for heresy ; and it being certain that their 
 proceedings, if not warranted by law, might 
 involve them in a premunire, the upper house in 
 an address, prayed the queen to ask the opinion 
 of the judges, and such others as she thought fit, 
 concerning these doubts, that they might know 
 how the law stood in this matter." Here you 
 
 * Stated in page 37. f Appendix page 39. \ Ib. p. 38.
 
 265 
 
 stop short with the bishop's narration ; having 
 either not patience to read, or not honesty to 
 write farther ; and then, with a flourish, ask 
 " will these accounts now authorise you to re- 
 present, as you do, the two houses of convoca- 
 tion as waiting upon her majesty ; and that 
 too, to be instructed by her, and to learn her 
 judgment ; and not that neither, how the law 
 stood in relation to their proceedings, but how 
 the Gospel stood in relation to the opinions of 
 Mr. Whiston, and the mystery of the Trinity : 
 And do you not now perceive your misrepresen- 
 tation of the case, and that I did not talk without 
 book, when I spake of it as a specimen of your 
 talent, which, indeed, is not mean in that way." 
 
 There is one thing I here perceive, sir, which 
 is, that if you do not talk without book, yet when 
 the book is before you, you either want capacity 
 or integrity to make a proper use of it. For be- 
 sides the partial and maimed account which you 
 have given of this matter, his lordship expressly 
 adds the important passag(s which follow ; whence 
 the public will please to observe, with how little 
 fairness and truth you treat this famous case ; 
 and how great is both the church's and my own 
 infelicity ; she in having an advocate, and I an 
 opponent, capable of such low and dishonourable 
 methods of defence. 
 
 His lordship says "that by the act of 1st of 
 Elizabeth, which defined what should be judged 
 heresy, that judgment was declared to be in the 
 crown. The bishops in convocation drew out 
 several propositions from Whiston's books, which 
 seemed plainly to be reviving of Arianism, and 
 censured them as such. The lower house, (ex- 
 cepting to one proposition,) censured them in the 
 same manner. This the archbishop, being then 
 disabled by the gout, sent by one of the 
 t the queen, for her assent, (page J 191. 
 ' z
 
 266 
 
 bation,) who promised to CONSIDER OF IT. At 
 their (the convocation's) meeting- next winter, no 
 answer being come from the queen, two bishops 
 were sent to ASK it, and to receive her majesty's 
 pleasure in it ; but she could not tell what was 
 become of the paper the archbishop had sent her. 
 So an extract of the censure was again sent to 
 her ; but she THOUGHT NOT FIT to send any an- 
 swer to it. So Whiston's aft'air slept, and all 
 farther proceedings against him were stopped ; 
 since the queen did NOT CONFIRM the step that 
 we had made ; though he afterwards published a 
 large work in four volumes octavo/'* 
 
 Here let it be noted, 1. The judgment of 
 what is, or is not to be treated as heresy, is, by 
 our (truly apostolic) constitution lodged wholly 
 in the crown. The QUEEN, when such wears it, 
 is the proper, the sole judge, what doctrines and 
 books shall be censured as heretical what prin- 
 ciples and tenets are, or are not, contrary to the 
 holy orthodox faith. 
 
 Note 2. The two houses having extracted se- 
 veral passages from Mr. Whiston's books, and 
 censured them as heretical ;t deputed first one 
 bishop, then two, to wait upon the queen, to ask 
 her approbation and consent, to receive her mojes- 
 t-ifs pleasure in this affair; and to desire her con- 
 firmation, without which, their censure was not of 
 the least signification or validity, in the church. 
 
 3. Upon the receipt of this request, the queen, 
 as sole judge, promised to CONSIDER OF IT. The 
 
 * Burnet's Hist, [of his Timts, Vol. VI. pages 11,33, 34, 
 35, 94. Edit. 12mo. 
 
 f The archbishops and bishops in their address to the queen, 
 SBV, that Mr. Whiston had advanced several damnable and blasphe- 
 mous assertions against the doctrine and ivorship of the ever blessed 
 Trinity ; and, in their censure, they earnestly bestech all Christian 
 people, by the merits of Christ, to take heed hew they give ear to these 
 false doctrines, as they tender the honour and glory of our Sviour,
 
 267 
 
 aifoir was of great importance, viz. (t What the 
 primitive apostolic doctrine was concerning the 
 Trinity, incarnation, nature and generation of the 
 Logos f Whether there were three persons ex- 
 isting in one undivided substance : or, whether 
 the .Logos was distinct in essence from the Fa- 
 ther ; not created, nor made, but in an ineffable 
 manner, begotten from eternity? And, finally, 
 whether the Apostolic Constitutions were a ge- 
 nuine and inspired book; and a true part of th? 
 sacred canon ?" Her majesty was now applied 
 to, by her two houses of convocation, and re- 
 quested, as sole judge, to pronounce authorita- 
 tively upon these points, i.- e. to tell them whe- 
 ther Mr. Winston's doctrine was to be received 
 or rejected : to be considered as heresy, or not 
 in this church. The queen, as became a wi?e 
 judge, refused to pronounce rashly: she took 
 time to consider of it ; to weigh sedately in her 
 mind the merits of the cause, lest she should con- 
 demn the innocent. 
 
 Note, The Scriptures and the four first ge- 
 neral councils, are the measure set by laze, to 
 judge of heresy : her majesty, therefore, being 
 now requested by her clergy to judge authorita- 
 tively in this important case, acted a worthy part 
 in deferring- her judgment, till she had examined, 
 carefully the rule by which she was to judge. 
 
 Observe, 4. After the queen had taken time,, 
 maturely to consider of these deep and myste- 
 rious points, she thought not fit to send any an- 
 swer. Upon her majesty's THOUGHTS, the issue 
 of this great alfair is seen absolutely to depend. 
 Finally, 
 
 It is worthy to be observed, 5. That her ma- 
 jesty's thoughts and judgment* on this weighty 
 case, were quite different from those of her learn- 
 ed bishops and clergy. They thought Mr. Whis- 
 tou's writings " contained damnable and wicked
 
 doctrines, and earnestly beseech all Christian 
 people, by the mercies of Christ, to take heed 
 how they give ear, &c." and judged them (o 
 deserve a public and solemn censure : her ma- 
 jesty thought otherwise. She did not think jit to 
 pass this public and solemn censure on them, by 
 confirm in- the step the convocation had taken : 
 in consequence of which, their proceedings were 
 all stopped ; and the solemn censure they ! had 
 passed, with all their earnest obtestations, by the 
 mercies of Christ, evaporate into air. This is a 
 fair and true state of the case. What improve- 
 ments are here made, by the w*isdom of later 
 ages, in the primitive apostolic plan ! Behold 
 the WOMAN now empowered, not only to 
 teach, but to usurp authority over the man ; ever 
 all the archbishops, bishops, and priests of 
 this realm ; to vacate their most solemn cen- 
 sures ; to quash and stop at once their spiritual 
 proceedings, in an affair where blasphemous doc- 
 trines, and damnable and wicked errors, were 
 bringing danger of everlasting ruin to the souls 
 over whom they watched ! See here, sir, the two 
 scales, that are to try doctrines and opinions in 
 jour holy apostolic church. In one, is laid the. 
 united judgment of all the bishops and clergy in 
 convocation convened ; in the other,, the queen's 
 alone : lo, the former mounts, and kicks the 
 beam ! The single judgment of the queen, in the 
 balance of the church, weighs more than that of 
 all the learned bishops and priests of the realm !* 
 
 * See a series of such exertions of feminine-archiepiscopal pas- 
 toral authority, throughout the whole reign of queen Elizabeth; 
 particularly, tiie case of archbishop Grindal ; whom she seques- 
 ttreJ, in great wralh, from his archiepiscopaj functions, for re- 
 fusing to obey a rash and tyrannical order of the queen relating 
 to church matters. Under this sequestration he continued many 
 years. The two houses of convocation presented to the queen a 
 most humble and earnest petition for his rcstorntion. but could 
 not obtain it. Vide Fuller's Ch. Hist. Book JX. page 120. 
 Neal's Hist Pur. Vol. I. pages 358, 374.
 
 And is not this exactly consonant to the ac- 
 count I hail given ? u Is not here, sir, the very 
 comely and edify ing sight, (atwhich you except)* 
 of the two houses of convocation waiting upon 
 the good queen, to be instructed by her majesty, 
 whether tnat gentleman's books concerning the 
 Trinity., were to be condemned, as heretical or 
 not ?" " " Do they tell us, you ask, of the synod 
 laying their censure before the queen, to have 
 
 her judgment upon it? 11 Yes and of their 
 
 waiting upon a WOMAN, to learn from her mouth, 
 what the church is to believe, and what to re- 
 ject, as to this great mystery of faith ?J' You 
 must see and feel, that this really is the case ; 
 and you must permit me to wonder that you, sir, 
 who, as a dutiful son of the church, ought to 
 have drawn a veil over every thing which can 
 reflect no honour upon it, should, by a rash and 
 indiscreet defence, so much injure the cause 
 which you wish to support. 
 
 As your letters and defences breathe a noble 
 compassion for the straying souls of Dissenters ; 
 the extraordinary instance , with which you con- 
 clude the whole, ought not to be overlooked. 
 You are concerned, it seems, " that I have read, 
 and in several instances agree in sentiment and 
 reasoning with the author of the Rights of the 
 Christian Church ; and appear to have much 
 studied and profited by that worthy author and 
 are sorry to find dissenting ministers and gentle- 
 men dealing so much in books of this sort. So 
 long as this is the case, what hope of a compre- 
 hension ! or, indeed, who would wish for it!"t 
 I have read, sir, and I hope profited by the 
 Rights, &c. as you profess to have read, and 
 I hope not without profit, Bellannin, an author 
 incomparably worse. As for my agreement with 
 the author of the Rights, &c. as far as he agree* 
 
 ^ z2 
 * Appn. page 37. _ f Jfcid, pages 41, 44;
 
 270 
 
 with {ruth, with Scripture, and with law, you 
 must give me leave to say, (without augmenting;, 
 1 hope, your sorrow ; ) that I esteem it not the 
 least reproach. Nay for once, sir, if you please, 
 1 will make you my confessor, and frankly own, 
 that in many things I agree in sentiment and rea- 
 soning with those who are far worse than either 
 Bellarmin or the author of the Rights, &e. ; for 
 I believe in one God, notwithstanding St. James 
 says the devils are of the same opinion.* 
 
 Dissenting ministers and all gentlemen who 
 are sincere inquirers after truth, deal, I presume, 
 in books of all sorts, whence they can gather 
 useful knowledge, and improve and enlarge their 
 minds. They have dealt in the writings of the 
 shrewdest Deists, as you see by the many noble 
 defences of Christianity which their pens have 
 produced. Your affectation of a pious censure 
 on our dealing in books of this sort) is a bugbear, 
 which may frighten children in understanding; 
 but Dissenters, you should have known, hare 
 not so learned Christ. They are commanded to 
 try the spirits ; to examine, and prove all things ; 
 and remember the noble Bereans, who are com- 
 mended by St. Paul, for searching carefully into 
 the grounds and evidences of things before they 
 gave their assent. And if this liberty of exami- 
 nation, and of speaking and writing freely upon 
 subjects of religion, be a bar to a comprehension, 
 such may it ever remain, till our brethren of the 
 establishment have both telt and avowed this fun- 
 damental principle, TI1AT IT IS THE GLORY OP 
 CHRISTIANITY, TO INVITE THE SEVEREST IN- 
 QUIRY. Let bigotry and error endeavour to hide 
 themselves in mysterious darkness, grow touchy 
 and alarmed, if you attempt to bring them into 
 open light; but let every man, who thinks h<? 
 
 ' James ii. 19,
 
 has good/reasons for believing Hie troth of the* 
 Christian religion, boldly challenge every adver- 
 sary, to examine and to disprove it, if he can ; 
 for, if it be the work of men, it will come to 
 nought ; but, if it be of God, it cannot be over- 
 thrown. 
 
 We acknowledge, sir, your goodness in bring- 
 ing down to our understanding the mystery of 
 consecrations of churches and church-yards ; and 
 your kind attempt to illustrate the usefulness, 
 edification, and comeliness of this ceremony. 
 There are some previous questions, which I could 
 wish to see answered, before we enter thorough- 
 ly into the grand debate as, whether you think 
 the apostle Paul, in all his apostolic labours and 
 travels through the churches, ever consecrated a 
 phtt of ground? Whether the synagogues, where 
 our Saviour preached ; the chamber where he 
 instituted, and first celebrated his sacred sup- 
 per ; the upper room where the apostles met, 
 when they actually received the extraordinary 
 gifts of the Holy Ghost; the house of Aquila 
 and Priscilla, Nymphas, &c. in which were 
 Christian churches ; had really any other conse- 
 cration than our places of worship have ? And 
 yet, whether these were not as much the house 
 of God, and places of his more immediate presence, 
 as any splendid cathedral, now consecrated with 
 all the pomp of sacerdotal device ?* 
 
 You appeal to " the forms which bishop An- 
 drews and others have used in their consecra- 
 tions. And ask What think you now ? Is there 
 any thing ridiculous or superstitious in all this ?"t 
 Yes ; extremely much of both, if they at all 
 
 * You have forgotten, perhaps, the doctrine of your own ho- 
 mily, to which you have several times solemnly subscribed, " that 
 in Tertullian's time, 16O years after Christ, Christians had no 
 other temples but common houses, whither, for the most part, 
 liiey secretly resorted." Peril of IdoL Part III. page 159. 
 
 f Appen. page 45.
 
 resemble that of archbishop Laud, (the only onft 
 I have ever seen,) when he consecrated the 
 churches of St. Catherine Crce, St. Giles's, and 
 others in London. The form of this intolerable 
 piece of ecclesiastical foppery, ""which no sound 
 Protestant ean read without indignation, has, in 
 larger histories, been more than once published ; 
 but having never seen it in any little tract, I shall 
 beg leave to transcribe it, for the edification of 
 our common readers. It is a striking instance 
 of the danger of indulging human invention in 
 things of religion ; and shews, into what wilds 
 of ridiculous superstition even learned minds are 
 apt to run, when they leave the simplicity of the 
 Gospel of Christ. 
 
 " The bishop came attended with several of 
 the high commission and some civilians. At his 
 approach to the west door of the church, which 
 was shut and guarded by halberdeers, some that 
 were appointed for that purpose, cried with a 
 loud voice open) open, ye everlasting doors, that 
 the King of glory may come in ! Presently the 
 doors were opened ; and the bishop, with some 
 doctors and principal men, entered. As soon as 
 they were within the place, his lordship fell down 
 upon his knees ; and with eyes lifted up, and his 
 arms spread abroad, said, 'this place is holi/, the 
 ground is holy in the name of the Father, Son, 
 and Holy (rhost, I pronounce it holy. Then 
 walking up the middle aisle towards the chance], 
 lie took up some of the dust, and threw it into 
 the air several times. When he approached near 
 the rail of the communion-table, he bowed to- 
 wards it five or six times : and returning, went 
 round the church, with his attendants, in pro- 
 cession ; saying first the hundredth, and then the 
 nineteenth psalm, as prescribed in the Roman 
 pontifical. He then read several collects, in 
 one of which he prays God to accept of that beau-
 
 273 
 
 tiful building, and concludes thus We consecrate 
 this church^ and separate it unto thce as holy 
 ground^ not fb be profaned any more to common 
 use. In another he prays That all who should 
 hereafter be buried tcilhin the circuit of this holy 
 and sacred place, may rest in their sepulchres in 
 peace, tiU Christ's coining to judgment, and may 
 then rise to eternal life arid happiness." 
 
 " Then the bishop, sitting under a cloth of 
 state, in the aisle of the chancel, near the com- 
 munion-table, took a written book in his hand, 
 and pronounced curses upon those who should 
 hereafter profane that holy place by musters of 
 soldiers, or keeping- profane law-courts, or car- 
 rying burdens through it: and at the end of 
 every curse he bowed to the east, and said, let 
 all the people seiy amen. When the curses were 
 ended, which were about twenty, he pronounced 
 'a like number of blessings upon all that had any 
 hand in framing and building that sacred and. 
 beautiful church; and on those that had given, 
 or should hereafter give, any chalices, plate, or- 
 naments, or other utensils : and, at the end of 
 every blessing, he bowed to the east, and said, 
 let (ill the people senj amen. After this came the 
 sermon, then the sacrament, which the bishop 
 consecrated and administered in the following 
 manner. 
 
 " As he approached the altar, he made five 
 er six low bows ; and coming up to the side of it, 
 where the bread and wine were covered, he 
 bowed seven times. Then, after reading many 
 prayers, he came near the bread ; and gently 
 lifting up the corner of the napkin, beheld it, 
 and immediately letting fall the napkin, he rc- 
 treatedly hastily a step or two, and made three 
 low obeisances. His lordship then advanced, 
 and having uncovered the bread, bowed three 
 times as before. Then he laid his hand on the
 
 cup, which was full of wine, with a cover upon 
 it ; which having let go, he stepped back, and 
 bowed three limes towards it ; then he came near 
 again, and lifting up the cover of the cup, looked 
 into it, and seeing- the wine, let fall the cover 
 again, retired back, and bowed, as before. Then 
 the elements were consecrated, and the bishop 
 having- first received, gave it to some principal 
 men in their surplices, hoods and tippets ; after 
 which, many prayers being said, the solemnity 
 of the consecration ended." 
 
 This, sir, was the manner in which that cele- 
 brated martyr and governor of your church, con- 
 ducted this business of consecration. And, what 
 now think you ? Was there nothing ridiculous or 
 superstitious in all this ? You seem, indeed, not 
 to have quite so exalted an opinion of this so- 
 lemnity as his lordship ; but as the church has 
 no where (that I know) explained herself as to 
 this matter ; nor censured Laud's conduct, nor 
 prescribed any set form in which this ceremony 
 is to be done ; any bishop, I apprehend, at pre- 
 sent, is at full liberty to use the same, and may 
 now consecrate a church in the same manner as 
 Laud did that of St. Catherine Cree. And pray, 
 to whom shall I attend, as best knowing and ex- 
 pressing the church's sense in this point ? to the 
 great archbishop Laud ; or, to the Rev. Mr. 
 XVhite, sometime fellow of St. John's college, 
 Cambridge. 
 
 I have*done with your Appendix. -There is 
 another office of your liturgy, equally liable to 
 the severe exceptions of all well-instructed Chris- 
 tians, and to the sneers of insulting Deists, as 
 any I have yet considered ; and that is, your of- 
 fice for the ordination of priests and deacons. This, 
 "if you call me forth again, I may more particu- 
 larly shew. At present, I only ask whether to 
 your sober reason it really appears a fit question,
 
 to be put to every youn 
 from the university for orders to the bishop ; zohc- 
 thcr he trusts that he is imoardly moved by the Holy 
 Ghost to take upon him this office ? And for every 
 such young- gentleman to declare solemnly, as in 
 God's presence, that he trusts lie is so inwardly 
 moved. You well know how many rich livings 
 are in the gift of families, whose sons or de- 
 pendents are educated for the church, with no 
 other view but that of its being the most genteel 
 provision in their power, for their future support 
 in life. You must also be sensible, that the high 
 dignities and great emoluments which are to be 
 found in the church, often lead many young gen- 
 tlemen to prefer this profession to any other, 
 merely from interested and worldly considera- 
 tions. You certainly must be better acquainted 
 than I am with the general manners, the taste, 
 and the state of the two universities : tell me, 
 then, before God, is their moral state such, that 
 you can reasonably think every student that comes 
 thence, when he gets a title to a living, and ap- 
 plies for orders to the bishop, doth really feel 
 himself inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost, to 
 make that application ? Ought his feelings to be 
 so hurt, and so pressing a question be put to his 
 conscience ? One of the brightest ornaments of 
 your own church, bishop Burnet, (Pastoral Care, 
 pages 96 to 99,) has made the following obser- 
 vations on this point, which deserve the most se- 
 rious attention of all those who ask, and of all 
 those who answer, the before-mentioned most 
 important question. " Certainly, says he, this 
 answer, / trust I am so MOVED, ought well to 
 be considered ; for if any say, / trust so, who 
 yet know nothing of any such motion, and can 
 give no account of it, HE LIES TO THE HOLY 
 GHOST, and makes his first approach to the altar, 
 with a fie in his mouth ; and that, net to men
 
 276 
 
 but to God. The motives that ought to deter- 
 mine a man to dedicate himself to the church, 
 are a zeal for promoting- the glory of God, and 
 for raising the honour of the Christian religion. 
 This man, and only this man, so moved and qua- 
 lified, can, in truth, and with a good conscience 
 answer, that he TRUSTS he is'tnwartily moved by 
 the Holy Ghost ; and every one that ventures on 
 the saying it without this, is a sacrilegious pro- 
 faner of the name of God and his Holy Spirit ! 
 lie breaks in upon the church, not to feed but to 
 rob it." And when the bishop lays his hand on 
 the student's head, then kneeling before him, 
 and makes this solemn address, Receive the If oft/ 
 Ghost whose sins THOU dost for give ', they are for- 
 given ; and zchosc sins THOU dost retain, the?/ are 
 retained ; in the name of the Father., of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost, Amen. Is this a language 
 which can be clearly justified ? Do their lord- 
 ships keep perfectly free of the offence, which 
 bishop Burnet so justly condemns ? Is there no- 
 thing like LYING to the Holy Ghost in the part 
 which they are called to act in this most serious 
 affair ? I shall make no farther reflections at 
 present, but only say, that to me it appears 
 really amazing, that, in an age of such dis- 
 cernment, and freedom of inquiry, this form is 
 suffered to stand. And, in the language of your 
 collect, I very heartily pray, " That Almighty 
 God, who alone worketh great marvels, would 
 send down upon our bishops and curates the 
 healthful spirit of his grace," the spirit of wis- 
 dom and humility ! being assured, that this stone 
 of stumbling in the way of sagacious infidels, 
 will then quickly be removed. 
 
 In the mean time, let none of the clergy any 
 more reproach the separatists and the sectaries, 
 (as they affect to call us.) with being enthusiasts 
 and fanatics ; for what sect among all who dis-
 
 277 
 
 sent from the church of England, (papists only 
 excepted,) carry their pretensions to spiritual 
 motions and communications to so extravagant a 
 height as the church itself does ! Doth the Qua- 
 ker or the Methodist talk of being moved by the 
 Spirit, and of praying and preaching under the 
 inlluence of the Spirit ? Surely it does not be- 
 come any clergyman to ridicule such language. 
 He ought rather to give those who use it the 
 right hand of fellowship, knowing that he also 
 has been under the like impressions; and that 
 when he was ordained a deacon, he solemnly de- 
 clared, before one of (he successors of the 
 apostles, that he trusted that he was INWARDLY 
 MOVED by the HOLY GHOST to take upon him this 
 office. 
 
 But to conclude. I have the pleasure, sir, to 
 be persuaded that your mind is not now filled 
 with those high and swelling thoughts of the ex- 
 cellence of your liturgy, as when our correspon- 
 dence began. The Dissenters, you find, are not 
 the only persons who except strongly against 
 your forms. Many of your learned clergy have, 
 in a candid and respectful manner, and yet with 
 a becoming courage, expressed great dissatisfac- 
 tion with them. What effect their attempts for 
 the enlargement of the church's bounds, and for 
 a farther reformation and review will produce, 
 time alone will shew. Upon its present ground, 
 the situation of the church, must appear to every 
 discerning mind, to be extremely critical and un- 
 certain. 
 
 It is difficult to defend it against the crafty at- 
 tacks of popery on the one hand; and, I think, 
 actually impossible to support it again-st the as- 
 saults of infidelity on the other. Between these 
 two stones, is there no room to apprehend its be- 
 ing quickly ground to powder ? To the injurious 
 idea which many of your forms give of the Chris- 
 *2 A
 
 278 
 
 tian religion, tfce unhappy increase of deism is, 
 in great measure owing-. And there is the high- 
 est reason to believe, that it will farther increase, 
 if these forms, which are the just offence and ri- 
 dicule of unbelievers, are not soon dismissed. 
 But, when those who boast themselves the suc- 
 cessors of the apostles, and the only regular pas- 
 tors and ministers of Christ, shall give proof 
 that they are possessed of a truly apostolic virtue, 
 and shall no longer seek their own but the things 
 of Jesus Christ; a review and a correction of 
 every thing exceptionable, will be no distant, nor 
 difficult event. 
 
 In the mean time, the Dissenters have the sa- 
 tisfaction to reflect, that amidst various dis- 
 couragements they have, by their dissent, ap- 
 proved themselves loyal to the ONLY Sovereign 
 of the church, and faithful to a sacred tru?t com- 
 mitted to them by God, for which they must give 
 t-n account. They rejoice in the review, that 
 they have entered their protest against the impo- 
 sitions and inventions of men ; which have cor- 
 rupted the simplicity, enervated the vigour, de- 
 formed the beauty, and broken the communion 
 of the body of Christ. And whatever rash cen- 
 sures they may now incur from the prejudiced, 
 the weak, and the interested ; they, with great 
 assurance hope, to be not only approved, but 
 applauded by their judge hereafter ; and, at his 
 appearing, to receive honour proportioned to 
 their present reproach. 
 
 When it shall please the, Almighty Sovereign 
 to awaken in the Christian world a spirit of ge- 
 nuine Christianity when true honour shall pre- 
 vail over cowardice and temporising ; when in- 
 tegrity and truth shall triumph over falsehood 
 and error when that slavish, ignoble principle, 
 that we are to conform to the established worship of 
 the country where we dreett) whatever it dr, shall
 
 be held in deserved repraach : a principle that 
 greatly debases and corrupts the human soul ; 
 puts out its intellectual eye ; chains up its no- 
 blest powers ; robs it of its highest glory, viz. 
 the searching into religious subjects, and offer- 
 ing to its creator a reasonable serzico ; in short, a 
 principle that directly tends to banish every thing 
 that deserves the name of religion ; to drive 
 all truth, and honour, and honesty, from among 
 men ; that will justify a man's professing him- 
 self a Mahometan at Constantinople, a Pagan 
 at Pekin, a Papist at Rome when, I say, thi 
 infamous and base principle, shall be treated 
 with just contempt ; and men shall be every 
 where disposed, to seek with impartiality, ai;d 
 to practise without disguise, righteousness and 
 truth then, sir, will the character of a rational 
 Dissenter be had in universal honour. Then 
 will such appear to have been the only consis- 
 tent Protestants : the true patrons of Christian 
 .liberty, church unity, and catholic communion ; 
 and the only body of Christians upon whom the 
 guilt of schism does not really rest; because 
 they open their communion to every sincere 
 Christian ; and require no terms, but such as 
 Christ and his apostles have required in the 
 church. However, whether you will throT in 
 your lot, and partake with us in these honours 
 or not ; rest assured that i am, 
 
 Sir, 
 Yours, &c.
 
 [The following Extracts seem proper to accom- 
 pany the Dissenting Gentltmati's Letters.'} 
 
 I. 
 
 THE Restoration of Charles II. and the Act 
 of Uniformity, which was passed soon after it, 
 are two of the most important parts of the Eng-- 
 lish history. By these events, the character and 
 the state of the Dissenters were greatly affected : 
 but it is a part of our histary which is either little 
 understood or much misrepresented, especially in 
 many of the eermons which are annually preached 
 on the 30th of January. Since, therefore, this 
 act of Uniformity, which silenced and ejected 
 two thousand of our brave and virtuous clergy, 
 is the foundation on which the present church of 
 England is built, and the cause of our separa- 
 tion from it ; we beg leave to represent to the 
 impartial public, some of the disgraceful circum- 
 stances which attended that event ; circumstances 
 which will shew the baseness, ingratitude, and 
 iniquity of those transactions, which ought to be 
 transmitted as a proper warning and instruction 
 to indignant posterity. 
 
 To this .purpose we observe, in the first place, 
 that the puritan or presbyterian clergy were tl-.e 
 only body of men, in the whole kingdom, who 
 had the courage to oppose and to protest openly 
 against the trial and condemnation of Charles 1. 
 With great danger to themselves, they presented 
 a bold remonstrance to the genc'ral and council 
 of war, the then ruling power*, warning them, 
 in the name of God, and conjuring them in the 
 most solemn manner, to desist from their violent 
 proceedings against the king. This long and 
 spirited protest was signed by above fifty of the
 
 281 o 
 
 principal presbyterian ministers in and about 
 London : and presented January 18th, 1618-9.* 
 '" The Presbyterians and body of the city, (says 
 bishop Burnet.) were much against it, and were 
 every where fasting and praying for the king's 
 preservation. "t Archd. Echard says, " Crom- 
 well first pulle;! down the Presbyterians, and 
 then destroyed the king and that almost all the 
 presbyterian ministers in London, and very many 
 in the several counties, and a few of the Inde- 
 pendents themselves, declared against the de- 
 sign, in their sermons, in conferences, in moni- 
 tory letters, petitions, protestation?, and public 
 remonstrances: they earnestly hedged, that con- 
 trary to so many oaths and imprecations, contrarv 
 to public and private faith, &c. they would not 
 defile their own hands and the kingdom with 
 royal blood. ''^ Abundant proof of the same 
 might be brought from Clarendon. R'apin, &c. 
 We proceed to observe, 
 
 Secondly, That the Presbyterians had the prin- 
 cipal hand, and wer^ the chief a^.-nts in resto- 
 ring king Charles 11. to the throne. This ap- 
 pears beyond doubt, from the united testimony 
 nf the history of those times. 
 
 When Charles If. came to Scotland, Lord 
 Clarendon says, expecting force from that king- 
 dom to restore him " to his father's throne, and 
 the parliament of England resolved to send an 
 army against him, all the presbyterian party 
 greatly opposed it : they were bold in contra- 
 dicting Cromwell in the house, and crossing all 
 his designs in the city."|| 
 
 The first solemn conference which was had 
 with general Monk, to induce him to restore the 
 
 * See the whole protest, Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. III. page 5 J2 
 f -Buruet's Hist, of his own Times, Vol. II. page 31. 
 J Echard's Hist, of Eng. pages 654. 70S. 
 | Hut. of the RebeJUon, Vol. VI. jigs 37-t, 375. 
 , 2 A 2
 
 282 
 
 king, was " at Northumberland-house, with the 
 earl of that name, the earl of Manchester, Hol- 
 lis, Sir William Waller, Lewis, and other emi- 
 nent persons, who were looked upon as the heads- 
 and governors of the moderate presbyterian party. 
 In this conference, the king's restoration was pro-' 
 posed, in direct terms, as absolutely necessary : 
 the London (presbyterian) ministers talked loud- 
 ly, in the same strain, without exposing them- 
 selves to the danger of naming the king, which 
 yet they did not long forbear : every body un- 
 derstood they thought it necessary the people 
 should return to their allegiance."* 
 
 *' Monk, (says Rapin,t) knowing how the 
 Presbyterians stood affected, employed his con- 
 fident, (probably Clarges,) to make a secret 
 agreement with some of their chiefs,. for the re- 
 storing of the king, Charles II, by their means/' 
 Monk comes with his army to London ; and 
 having restored the secluded members to their 
 seats in the house, thereby made it properly a 
 presbyterian parliament. " It continued sitting 
 but twenty-five days ; in which time several steps 
 were made, which clearly discovered, that they 
 were by no means disinclined to the king. For r 
 1- they ordered a general discharge of all the 
 imprisoned friends of the king. 2. They re- 
 pealed the oath for the abjuration of Charles 
 Stuart and all the royal family. 3. They voted 
 Monk to be general of the armies of the three 
 nations. 4. They voted down the old, and ap- 
 pointed a new council of state. 5. They made 
 great changes in the militia, and took away all-- 
 commissions from the republicans. 6. They ab- 
 rogated the oath requiring to be faithful to the 
 established government without a king and house 
 
 * Hist, of the Rebellion, Vol. VI. pags 733, 73*. 
 f Bapin's Hist. Eng: Vol. XII J. pages 199, 200.
 
 283 
 / 
 
 of peers. Lastly, they dissolved themselves, is- 
 suing; out writs for a new parliament, to meet 
 the ^'Jth of April. In this free parliament, the 
 Presb\terians, who were much superior in num- 
 ber, did not think proper to exclude the royalist?, 
 iv i th whom they were in perfect agreement for 
 restoring the king-. This parliament was an as- 
 sembly in which the Presbyterians had "certainly 
 a superiority of voices ; consequently, a pres- 
 byterian parliament restored the king to the 
 throne of his ancestors."* 
 
 Bishop Burnet says, u these five following 
 persons, all Presbyterians, had the chief hand 
 in the restoration Sir Ant. Ashley Cooper, af- 
 terwards earl of Shaftesbury, Sir Arthur Annes- 
 ley, afterwards earl of Anglesey, Denzil Hollis, 
 created Lord Hollis, the earl of Manchester 
 and Lord Robert S."T 
 
 " The Presbyterians and the Royalists, (says 
 Hfcime.) being- united, formed the voice of the 
 nation, which called for the king's restoration. 
 The king was almost entirely in the hands of the 
 former party (the Presbyterians :) some zealous 
 leaders among them began to renew the demand 
 of conditions, but the general opinion seemed 
 to condemn these jealous capitulations with their 
 sovereign. The leaders of the Presbyterians, 
 the earl of Manchester. Lord Fairfax, Lord 
 Roberts, Denzil Hollis, Sir Ant. Ashley Cooper, 
 Annesley, Lewis, were determined to atone for 
 past transgressions." Again, " the king's neg- 
 ligent ingratitude to the unfortunate Cavaliers, 
 admits of some excuse, as he had been restored 
 more by the efforts of his reconciled enemies, 
 (the Presbyterians) than of his ancient friends. 
 
 Thirdly, The Presbyterians, (whom th king, 
 with too much truth perhaps, used to call God's 
 
 * Rapin's Hist. Eng. Vol. XIII pages 227, 241. P42. 
 f Hist, of his own Times. Vol. II. page 242, marginal note. 
 { II nine's Mist. Great Brit. Vol. II. pages 113, 158,
 
 silly people.) trusting to his declaration from 
 Breda, solemnly promising ' ; liberty to tender 
 consciences, and that no man should be disqui- 
 eted for differences of opinion, in matters of re- 
 ligion, which did not disturb the peace of the 
 kingdom ;" and relying- upon the fair speeches 
 and assurances of his friends, and some of them 
 perhaps duped by the low cunning of the king, 
 who, (a committee of tl\eir ministers being sent 
 to him to Breda.) ordered them to be in waiting, 
 ..whilst he hypocritically withdrew to perform his 
 private devotions, in which his heart was so en- 
 larged, that his voice was distinctly heard, as he 
 intended it should be, by the ministers in the 
 antichamber, devoutly thanking God Chat he was 
 a covenanted king, (aljuding to the solemn laajjue 
 and covenant, to which he had bound himself by 
 the most sacred of oaths,) and that he hoped the 
 Lord tsoitld give him an humble, meek, and forgiv- 
 ing spirit: whether the Presbyterians were de- 
 luded by the fair promises of the king and his 
 treacherous friends, or were pressed by the civil 
 discord which at that time subsisted, and ajarmed 
 at the dreadful disorders, into which they appre- 
 hended the nation was again running: be this as 
 it may, they were so infatuated, as to trust to the 
 honour of Charles II ; and without previously 
 settling any conditions, they were highly instru- 
 mental in restoring him to the throne ; their folly 
 was only equalled by the base ingratitude with 
 which he requited them. 
 
 Fourthly, two years had scarcely elapsed, be- 
 fore, by all the artifices of court-management, 
 by the influence and zeal of tyrannical and bi- 
 goted prelates, by lying and sham plots and pre- 
 tended conspiracies, the act of Uniformity was, 
 by a small majority, passed into a law, " by 
 which two thousand of our ministers," (the very 
 men who had so successfully helped forward his
 
 estoration,) were cast out of their livings, 
 exposed, with th'eir distressed families, to innu- 
 merable sufferings. To speak any thing dero- 
 gatory of the Common Prayer, was punished, 
 for the first offence, with a whole year's impri- 
 sonment, without bail or mainprize ; and the 
 second offence, with imprisonment for life: the 
 meeting for religions worship, in any separate 
 assemblies, was punishable with severe fines, 
 with imprisonment and banishment." The gaols 
 were soon filled with the unhappy restorers of 
 the ungrateful king; theif houses were pillaged; 
 their families reduced to beggary and want. Aa 
 estimate was published of near eight thousand 
 Protestant Dissenters, who perished in prison 
 by their sufferings on a religious account, in the 
 reign of this perjured, perfidious prince ; and 
 by the severe penalties inflicted on them, for no 
 other crime than that of assembling to worship 
 God, they suffered in th>ir trades and estates, in 
 the compass of a few years, at least, it is said, 
 two millions.* 
 
 This was the king, who had himself three se- 
 veral times taken the Scotch covenant, declared 
 solemnly his detestation of popery and prelacy, 
 vowed never to tolerate them in any part of his 
 dominions, and in the most solemn manner swore, 
 by the Eternal and Almighty God, who liveth and 
 reigneth forever and ever, that he would iiot only 
 enjoin the covenant, but fully establish presbyte- 
 rian government, and their directory for worship^ 
 and observe them in his own practice and fami- 
 ly, and never oppose them, nor endeavour any 
 change.*} 
 
 * Critic. Hist, of Eng. pag 411, and Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. 
 TV. page 514. 
 
 f King Ch.irles II. swore at Breda, to the commissioners from 
 Scotland, in 1649, that lie approved of the solemn league and 
 covenant, and that he would establish presbytcrian church-govern-
 
 286 
 
 [//ere follows a passage from Mr. Locke, ?- 
 ready given in the note to page 174.] 
 
 To conclude. The instruction we are to learn 
 hence is, to say with lord Stratford, (whose faith- 
 ful and tang service?, his sovereign rewarded with, 
 in effect, signing a death-warrant to cut off bis 
 head.) Put not your trtist in princes^ nor in the 
 sons of men ; for in them there is no help. But 
 we thank God there is a. SON OF MAN whom lie 
 hath constituted Prince oxer all the kings of the 
 earthy (Rev. i. 5.) in whose supremacy we tri- 
 umph ; in whom, with fij*m confidence and se- 
 curity' we trust : we glory in being' his subjects, 
 and rejoice in the assurance that his kingdom ojf 
 righteousness, of liberty and truth, shall finally 
 prevail ; and that every loss we sustain, and 
 every temporal emolument and advantage we 
 forego, out of conscience towards God, and from 
 allegiance to him, the only king in his church, 
 will be abundantly rewarded in that glorious, 
 everlasting kingdom, which, according to his 
 promise, we know will shortly take place. 
 
 In the mean time we are content, if the will 
 of God be so, to be cast out and reproached, 
 and to suffer great worldly discouragements, 
 
 merit, the directory of worship, confession of faith and catechisms 
 of the kingdom of Scotland; and that he would observe these in 
 his own practice and family. At Edinburgh, in lfi.50, he a ho 
 swore to observe the snme terms as at Breda ; and at Dumferiiug, 
 the same year, he published a solemn declaration, that hejiad sworn 
 and subscribed to the national covenantor the kingdom of Scotland, 
 And the solemn league and covenant of the three kingdoms of 
 Scotland, England and Ireland ; and that he detested and ab- 
 horred all popery, superstition and idolatry, together with prelacy 
 and all errors, heresy, schism aud profaneness ; and that he resol- 
 vcJ not to tolerate, much less allow any of these in any part of his 
 dominions. Such were the oaths and declarations, made by Charlo* 
 at Breda, and in Scotland ; hut the terms which the friends of 
 freedom wished to have imposed on him in England, at the resto- 
 ration in 1660, were such as would have given general security 
 to his subjects for the enjoyment of their civil and religious rights.
 
 287 
 
 (which, in all ages, hath been the lot of some of 
 the wisest, and worthiest, and best men upon 
 earth,) in the assured expectation that there are 
 times of refreshing coming from the presence,* or 
 appearing of this great King of the church, when 
 every man will rise into $lory and honour, or 
 sink into shame and everlasting contempt, ac- 
 cording to the fidelity or negligence of his pre- 
 sent conduct, and that all shall be recompensed 
 according to their present z~orks. 
 
 Amen ! Even so come, Lord Jesus ! 
 
 [N. B. The above account has been given 
 chiefly with a view to shew the great ingratitude 
 and treachery of Charles II, and to set in its true 
 light an historical fact, which seems to be for- 
 gotten in the reproaches occasionally thrown out 
 against the Dissenters, as enemies to monarchical 
 government; for otherwise it reflects no little 
 dishonour on the Presbyterians, that they should 
 have been so active in bringing about the resto- 
 ration, without stipulating some conditions, for 
 the future security both of civil and religious li- 
 berty. Conditions indeed vrere intended, and a 
 motion was made, in the house of commons, for 
 that purpose by Mr. Hale, afterwards the famous 
 chief justice. Lord Broghill, in a letter to 
 Thurloe, dated May 8, 1660. says, " I heartily 
 beg of the Lord, that our steps may be as safe as 
 they are expeditious, and that we may ascertain 
 those just rights, by an agreement which we con- 
 tended for so successfully in the war."t 
 
 But the fact was, that making any stipulations 
 with the king was prevented by the falsehood, 
 dissimulation and treachery of General Monk; 
 and the Presbyterians, with the rest of the na- 
 tion, were also deluded by the king's promises, 
 and admitted him to the throne, without making 
 
 * .Acts Hi. 19, t Harris's Life of Charles II, 
 
 Vol. I, page 557,
 
 288 
 
 any proper provisions for their own security. 
 They had afterwards, abundant reason to repent 
 of their weakness and credulity; and the Pres- 
 byterians received the most injurious treatment, 
 and experience^ the utmost baseness and ingra- 
 titude, from a prince whom they had been highly 
 instrumental in raising from a state of indigence 
 and banishment, to all the splendors of a 
 throne !] Appendix to Tozcgood's Serious and 
 Free Thoughts, Sfc. 
 
 II. 
 
 Dr. Stebbing, in his late Instructions of a 
 Parish Minister, Part II. owns, that the doc- 
 trine of sacerdotal absolution has no foundation 
 in Scripture : " that some of the methods prac- 
 tised in the primitive church, with regard to re- 
 storing penitents, had very much the air of a 
 farce : that for the first thousand years, the 
 forms of absolutions ran all in the form of a 
 prayer, and not in the form of a peremptory de- 
 finitive sentence, as it now stands in the popish 
 forms, and in one of our own forms from them 
 (the visitation of the sick.) The popish form cf 
 ordination also," the learned doctor observes, 
 " is retained in the church of England. These 
 two forms are relative to each other, and cannot 
 stand separately ; for the one conveys the power 
 which the other exerciseth ; and they are novel- 
 ties alike : and it is very much to be wished that 
 they were both properly altered. Dissenters 
 would find less matter for censure, and infidel* 
 for profane raillery." 
 
 " The late bishop Bull, (he say?,) who was 
 one of the ablest scholars, the staunches! church- 
 men, and the best Christians of his time, when 
 he was upon his death-bed, refused to have this 
 form read ; and ordered the minister that attend- 
 ed him, to use that form which stands in the of- 
 fice for the holy communion in its stead."
 
 289 
 
 The worthy doctor " freely blames those who 
 grasp at the shadow of an authority, which, in 
 truth and substance we must all renounce. What 
 else do we, when we pretend to absolve con- 
 science ? We may use a hundred distinctions if 
 we please ; we may say that the absolution is 
 not authoritative, but declaratory ; or that it is 
 not judicial but ministerial: but if you would 
 speak to be understood, you must say, that with 
 respect to any real internal effect, it is NOTHING : 
 and you will speak truth too ; for all the rest, if 
 you will preserve to God his prerogative to for- 
 give sin, are words without mean uig." Vide 
 pages 37, 38, 39, 51, 52. 
 
 Yet at this shadow, every clergyman in Eng- 
 land presumptuously grasps. He publicly claims, 
 and when called upon, presumes to exercise this 
 power of forgiving sins, which is the prerogative 
 of Almighty God alone. 
 
 But, if the absolution, as to any real effect, 
 be acknowledged by our own learned doctors, to 
 be NOTHING, what must be the public claim, 
 and the exercise of it ? What it is, I forbear to 
 say. The enemies of Christianity will, with in- 
 sulting pleasure, tell. 
 
 I shall only add, that there is oue remarkable 
 instance, in which this sacerdotal absolution has 
 been given, under such circumstances, as ren- 
 dered it peculiarly indefensible. 
 
 When Charles II came to the close of his prof- 
 ligate life, three bishops attended him ; who seve- 
 rally, by very free and serious admonitions, endea- 
 voured to alarm his conscience, and to rouse him 
 to some sober and penitential reflections. The 
 king gave them the hearing, but answered not a 
 word. He was six or seven times pressed to re- 
 ceive the sacrament, and a table, with the ele- 
 ments, was brought into the room ; but the king 
 refused. Bishop Ken then asked him, if he de-
 
 sired, ABSOLUTION OF HIS SINS ? which the king 
 not declining, behold ! in this unimpressed, im- 
 penitent state of mind, the bishop pronounced 
 it over him ; and in the name of the sacred Tri- 
 nity, and as by authority from Almighty God, 
 
 GAVE HIM THE FULL FORGIVENESS OF ALL HIS 
 
 SINS. Bishop Burnet, in the History of his 
 own Times, 8vo. edit. Vol. II. p. 312, says 
 " Bishop Ken was very much blamed, for pro- 
 nouncing absolution over the king', as he expres- 
 sed no sense of sorrow for his past life, nor any 
 purpose of amendment. It was thought to be a 
 prostitution of the peace of the church, to give it 
 to one, who after a life led as the king's had been, 
 seemed to harden himself against every thing 
 that could be said to him and soon after died, 
 recommending his mistress and illegitimate chil- 
 dren to the care of his brother ; but said not a 
 word of his queen, nor of his people, nor of his 
 servants, nor of the payment of his debts, nor 
 a word of religion." Postscript to Towgood's 
 Serious and Free Thoughts. 
 
 -*e>*4?"*<*i'*^eea> 
 
 III. 
 
 It has been frequently asserted, by the advo- 
 cates for conformity to the church of England, 
 and it is, we believe, the opinion of many, if not 
 of the greater part of the clergy, that the un- 
 feigned assent and consent which the act of Uni- 
 formity requires, to all and every thing 1 contain- 
 ed in the Book of Common Prayer and adminis- 
 tration of sacraments, &c. relates to the use of 
 the things prescribed, and not to the inzsard and 
 entire approbation of whatever is enjoined and in- 
 cluded in that book. The contrary might justly 
 be argued from the general language of the act, 
 and especially from the word unfeigned, which 
 cannot well be applied to any other than the real 
 conviction of the mind. But not to insist upon 
 this point, it will be evident from the following 
 account, taken from the Lords' and Commons'
 
 291 
 
 Journals, what was the sense of the legislature 
 on the subject. 
 
 In the year 1563, a bill was brought into the 
 house of commons, and passed there, entitled, 
 " An Act for the relief of such persons, as by 
 sickness or other impediment, were disabled from 
 subscribing the declaration in the act of Unifor- 
 mity, and explanation of part of the said act." 
 This bill was'carried up to the house of peers, on 
 the 18th of July, and was read the first and 
 second time, on the 24th of that month : after 
 which it was referred to a committee of twenty- 
 six lords. The committee made their report the 
 next day, and, besides some alterations and 
 amendments of little importance, proposed to the 
 consideration of the house, a clause to be added 
 as follows : 
 
 " And be it enacted and declared by the au- 
 thority aforesaid, that the declaration and sub- 
 scription of assent and consent in the said act 
 mentioned, shall be understood only as to the 
 practice and obedience to the said act, and not 
 otherwise." 
 
 When the question was put " whether to 
 agree with the committee in this clause," it was 
 resolved in the affirmative ; fourteen lords en- 
 tering their protest against it, as destructive to 
 the church of England. These were, the duke 
 of York, the earls of Derby, Dorset, Bridge- 
 water, Northampton, Peterborough and Berk- 
 shire, the lord viscount Mordamit, and the lords 
 Gerard, Bromley, MayirarB, Colepeper, Lucas, 
 Berkley of Stratton, and Cormvallis. 
 
 But when the bill was sent back from the lords 
 (o the commons on the 26th of July, the addi- 
 tional clause met with a different fate. The 
 question being put, to agree with the lords in its 
 being made part of the bill, the house was di-* 
 \ided, and the question was carried in the ne-
 
 292 
 
 gative by a majority of forty-two to thirty. At 
 the same time it was resolved, that a confer- 
 ence should be desired with the lords upon 
 the amendments to the bill : the conference was 
 held on the day following ; and one of the ma- 
 nagers on the part of the commons, speaking of 
 the additional clause, declared, that what had 
 been sent down from the upper house, touching 
 the bill, had neither justice 'nor prudence in it. 
 This gave offence to the lords, and occasioned 
 an order, that at the next sessions, the house 
 would take into serious consideration, before 
 they entered upon any other matter whatsoever, 
 how to provide for the future, that their privi- 
 leges might not be infringed or broken. Never- 
 theless, after some debate concerning the matter 
 of the conference, two questions were proposed ; 
 1st. whether they should proceed any farther in 
 the bill ; and 2dly. whether they should agree 
 with the house of commons ; and the question 
 being put, whether "the first question should be 
 first put, it was resolved in the negative. Then 
 the question was put, " Whether to agree with 
 the house of commons, according to their last 
 conference;" which was resolved in the affir- 
 mative. On the same day, being the 27th of 
 July, 1663, the bill received the royal assent. 
 
 Thus it appears to have been the sense of the 
 legislature, upon a very distinct and particular 
 consideration of the matter, that the unfeigned 
 assent and consent, required by the act of Uni- 
 formity, relates not to the use only, but to the 
 inward and entire approbation of whatever is con- 
 tained and prescribed in the Book of Common 
 Prayer. Lords' Journals, Vol. xi. p. 564, 570, 
 572, 573, 574, 577, 579. Commons' Journals, 
 Vol. viii. p. 526, 533, 534. Supplement to Tow- 
 good's Serious and Free Thoughts, SfC. 
 
 That neither the 6th nor the 20th article of
 
 293 
 
 the church of England can furnish a salvo for la- 
 titude of subscription, appears from a judgment 
 at common law, reported by Lord Chief Justice 
 Coke. " One Smith subscribed to the 39 articles 
 with this addition, so far forth as the same were 
 agreeable to the zcord of God. Whereupon it 
 was resolved by Wray, chief justice of the king's 
 bench and all the judges of England, that this 
 subscription was not according to the statute of 
 13 Eliz. because the statute required an absolute 
 subscription, and this subscription made it con- 
 ditional : and that this act was made for avoid- 
 ing diversity of opinions, &c. and by this addi- 
 tion, the party might, bt/ his'ovtn private opinion, 
 take some of them to be against the word of 
 God, and by this means, diversity of opinion 
 should not be avoided, which was the scope of 
 the statute, and the -very act itself made, touch- 
 ing subscription, of none effect." Blackbitrnc'a 
 fFo.-fo, Vol. v. 301, note. 
 
 Such was the decision of " all the judges of 
 England," at a time not exceedingly remote from 
 the date of the statute, 13 Eliz. Such is the law 
 of the land at the present day. Monthly tlepo* 
 sitory, May 1815, p. 280. 
 
 IV. 
 
 I. The continued refusals of some clergymen 
 to read the Burial Service of the established 
 church over the bodies of those who had not re- 
 ceived episcopal baptism. The law upon that 
 subject was ascertained by the decision of Sir 
 John Nicholl, in the case of Kemp against the 
 Rev. Mr. Wickes : and it was now known, that 
 it is the duty of every minister of the church of 
 England to bury in the manner prescribed by 
 the Book of Common Prayer, the corpse of any 
 person who had been baptized, even by a lay- 
 rnan, with an invocation of the Trinity, and 
 who died in, or was a parishioner of the parish, 
 in which such minister officiates, on reasonable 
 
 2 a 

 
 294 
 
 previous warning being given, and reasonable 
 proof being afforded of such baptism, if such 
 proof be required. 
 
 The law, as so declared by the ecclesiastical 
 courts, was also admitted and explained by the 
 bishops to whom it had been necessary for the 
 Society to apply. 
 
 In all the cases, to which their attention had 
 been directed, they had obtained from the cler- 
 gymen acknowledgments of their error.' Report 
 of the Committee of the Protestant Society, May 
 13, 1815. 
 
 V. 
 
 That the church clergy are obliged to admi- 
 nister the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to 
 all, appears from the following incident men- 
 tioned by Mr. Skelton. The late bishop of So- 
 dor and Man, (Dr. Wilson,) was thrown into a 
 dungeon, where he was very nigh perishing, for 
 refusing the sacrament to the strumpet of a 
 forry deputy. Sermons, p. 314. 
 
 VI. 
 
 The office of sponsors, although ancient, is 
 now, for the most part, become matter of mere 
 form, and seldom, if ever, answereth the good 
 purpose for which it was instituted ; it is many 
 times the* occasion of offence, and doth more 
 detriment than service to the church and reli- 
 gion.- Free and Candid Disquisitions.
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PRESBYTERIANS. 
 
 INCLUDING AN ACOOVNT OF SOME OF THE 
 ENGLISH DISSENTERS. 
 
 NOTWITHSTANDING the corruptions which, in 
 the middle ages, generally overspread the 
 Christian church, some countries in the south 
 of Europe appear to have enjoyed, from the 
 earliest times, the influence of true religion, in 
 considerable perfection. It was not indeed un- 
 til the 12th century that the Waldenses and 
 Albigenses, who had disclaimed the jurisdiction 
 of the papal see, became distinguished for their 
 nonconformity ; for then the arm of persecution 
 was raised against them, in order to check the 
 progress of that reformation which seemed to en- 
 danger the church of Rome : but their principles 
 had operated extensively many ages before. And 
 although they were subjected to the most griev- 
 ous sufferings, they continued separate sects un- 
 til the great reformation in the 16th century. 
 
 These reformers maintained that the Scriptures 
 were a perfect rule of faith and practice ; and 
 they opposed the corruptions of the Romish 
 church by arguments drawn from that sacred 
 source. They desired that their faith and wor- 
 ship might accord with the simplicity and purity 
 of the primitive model; and accordingly, they 
 disclaimed all dominion over conscience, and 
 condemned all the inventions of men in religious
 
 296 
 
 matters. They maintained a parity of rank and 
 dignity among the ministers of religion, and Re- 
 jected all hierarchal domination. Their views 
 and practices were, in many respects, similar to 
 those of Luther and Calvin ; and no doubt tend- 
 ed to prepare the minds of men for that great 
 revolution in faith and worship which afterwards 
 took place.* 
 
 Christianity was planted in Ireland in the 
 5th century, where it flourished for several ages, 
 while most other nations were involved in the 
 most abject superstition. So great was the cele- 
 brity of this country, as a school of piety and 
 learning, in which the Scriptures were diligently 
 studied, and received as the only rule of faith, 
 that students flocked to it from the neighbouring- 
 states, to be instructed in philology, philosophy 
 and divinity, in which the Irish doctors greatly 
 excelled. 
 
 The church was neither considered a political 
 constitution, nor as subject to the spiritual ju- 
 risdiction of the Roman pontiff, nor of any other 
 church on earth. It was of a presbyterian form, 
 until the llth century, when prelacy was intro- 
 duced, after it had fallen under the dominion of 
 papal Rome. 
 
 The founder of the celebrated religious order, 
 that of the Culdees, which existed at this pe- 
 riod and continued until the 17th century, was 
 the famous Columba. By him it was also estab- 
 blished in Scotland, from whence its beneficial 
 influence extended to the northern parts of Eng- 
 land and to Wales. t 
 
 The Reformation from popery, in England, 
 may properly be dated from the time of the ce- 
 lebrated John Wickliffe, an English divine, who 
 flourished in the 14th century. This great man, 
 
 * Jones's Hist, of the Waldenses, p. 559, 363, 566, 296, Ac. 
 f Toland's Nazarenus, p. 16, &c. Ledwich's Antiq. of 
 Ireland, p. 103, 115, Jamieson's History of tbe Culdees.
 
 297 
 
 having, at so early a period, publicly called in 
 question those religious doctrines, which had for 
 ages been received with implicit faith, has there- 
 fore obtained the title of " The Morning Star 
 of the Reformation." He opposed the corrup- 
 tions of the papal hierarchy with vigour and ef- 
 fect ; and it may be presumed, that the princi- 
 ples disseminated by him and his numerous fol- 
 lowers, tended to prepare the way for that great 
 reform in religion which afterwards took place, 
 in the reigns of Henry VIII and the succeeding 
 sovereigns.* 
 
 The opinions of Wickliffe concerning the 
 Romish church, were the same with those pro- 
 fessed by the Protestants of the present day. 
 But this venerable reformer likewise maintained 
 those peculiar doctrines by which the Presbyte- 
 rians have been distinguished from the members 
 of the national established churches of England 
 and Ireland. He inculcated the identity of 
 bishops and presbyters, and the unlawfulness of 
 * mystical significant ceremonies of human in- 
 vention,' in religious worship, and objected to 
 imposed forms of prayer. t 
 
 Wickliffe was professor of divinity in Merton 
 college, Oxford, for several years : and so great 
 was his reputation for learning and other excel- 
 lent qualities, that the heads of the university 
 published letters, dated Oct. 4th, 1406, 'test ly- 
 ing their high approbation of his character and 
 conduct. They thought undoubtedly, that the 
 opinions of Wickliffe concerning bishops and 
 presbyters, free prayer and human ceremonies, 
 were at least not of dangerous consequence ; 
 for though he inculcated them in his public lec- 
 tures, they declare, that in " answering, read- 
 ing, preaching and determining, he behaved 
 
 * NeaPs Hist. Pur. Vol. I. p. 3, &c. 
 f Lojr. Presb. p. 70.
 
 298 
 
 himself laudably, and as a stout and valiant 
 champion of the faith ; and that he had written 
 in logic, philosophy, divinity, morality and the 
 speculative arts, without an equal." 
 
 The doctrines of Wicklifte however,, did not 
 escape the displeasure of the papal see. At the 
 instance of the pope, his opinions were con- 
 demned in a convocation held at London in 
 1S82 ; he was deprived of his professorship, and 
 his books and writings were ordered to be burned. 
 He was likewise sewtenced to be imprisoned ; but 
 by keeping out of the way, he saved himself 
 from farther persecution. 
 
 Notwithstanding the talents of "VVickliffe, and 
 the high respect entertained for him by the uni- 
 versity, it is probable that he would not have 
 been permitted to escape without suffering heavier 
 penalties, had he not been powerfully supported 
 against the inquisition of the prelates, by Lord 
 Percy and the Duke of Lancaster. The con- 
 tention between the two anti-popes at this time, 
 was also favourable to Wickliffe, as it diverted 
 the attention of the papal see from what was 
 passing in foreign countries. 
 
 As this eminent man and his presbyterian fol- 
 lowers were the restorers of true religion m 
 England, they also inculcated sound and loyal 
 political principles. One of the articles exhi- 
 bited against Wickliffe by the bishops and doc- 
 tors, was, that he " maintained the jurisdiction 
 of the crown and secular powers over the cler- 
 gy, and asserted a power in the magistrate to 
 take away t^e temporalities and endowments of 
 the clergy when they offend and corrupt reli- 
 gion," &c. This he did in opposition to the 
 haughty, presumptuous and dangerous preten- 
 sions of the existing hierarchy. 
 
 The impotent rage of his adversaries pursued 
 him, even when laid in his grave. By a decree
 
 299 
 
 of the council of Constance, his bones were or- 
 dered to be dug up, many years after his death, 
 and burned, together with his book?, of which 
 he had written near 200 volumes. 
 
 H was the first person who translated the 
 New Testament into the English language. 
 
 The author of " An Historical Essay on 
 the Loyalty of Presbyterians,"* a work fre- 
 quently quoted in this Sketch, observes, that 
 " the loyalty of the principles of the Wickliff- 
 ites, (the same w-Lth those of the Presbyterians 
 of this and the* former age,) did produce in them 
 a dutiful and loyal behaviour to their prince ; 
 though they had the misfortune to be misrepre- 
 sented by their bloody enemies, as disloyal and 
 seditious."t 
 
 The storm of persecution became so violent 
 against the followers of Wickliffe, that the pro- 
 gress of the reformation was checked, until the 
 time of Henry VIII, when their principles be- 
 gan to re-appear. They did not as yet, how- 
 ever, shine forth with any considerable splendor ; 
 for during the reign of this arbitrary monarch, 
 who from secular motives merely had rejected 
 the supremacy pf the papal see, the state of re- 
 ligion experienced but little change for the bet- 
 ter, and many persons suffered grievous pains 
 and penalties, for their adherence to the pro- 
 testant cause. Indeed during the greater part 
 of this reign, the Protestants of every denomi- 
 nation may not improperly be styled Dissenters. 
 
 Henry having renounced the supremacy of the 
 Roman pontiff, resolved to annex the ecclesias- 
 tical jurisdiction to his own crown. Accordingly 
 the act of Supremacy was passed, in which the 
 king was declared to be supreme head of the 
 church of England. This exclusion of the pa- 
 
 * It was written by James Kirkpatr!ck, D. D. one of the 
 ministers in Belfast; and published with the concurrence of the 
 general Synod of Ulster, in 1713. 
 t Page 79,
 
 300 
 
 pal claims, constituted the first act of the na- 
 tional reformation. 
 
 TyndaPs translation of the New Testament 
 was published at this time, and was extensively 
 circulated among the people of England, ft 
 was condemned by the bishops, who proceeded 
 with the utmost severity against those who pre- 
 sumed to read it. It was also called in by the 
 king; but having been reprinted abroad, and 
 sent over to merchants in London, copies were 
 privately purchased by many individuals. It was 
 afterwards allowed by authority, having been 
 previously reviewed and corrected by archbishop 
 Cranmer. This was a most important step in 
 favour of the reformation. 
 
 Edward VI, who succeeded his father Henry 
 exerted himself with zeal to promote a farther 
 reform in the religion of the church of England. 
 During his short, but auspicious reign* the 
 Nonconformists openly professed their princi- 
 ples ; and as they conducted" themselves with 
 dutiful and loyal affection to his majesty, they 
 were treated by him and his ministers, with great 
 moderation. The famous John a Lasco, with 
 a congregation of German refugees settled in 
 London, at this time, were made denizens of 
 England, and erected into a corporation, with 
 full liberty to dissent from the established church 
 in government, discipline and worship.* 
 
 From the terms of the letters patent, it is evi- 
 dent, that the king and his ministers were of 
 opinion, that the German presbyterian congre- 
 gation was a church possessed of all the essen- 
 mls of true and uncorrupted Christianity ; for 
 in this proceeding they declare their design to 
 
 * John a Lasco was nearly related to the king of Poland 
 and had been a bishop of the Romish church. He purchased the 
 valuable library of Erasmus, as that great man lay on his death. 
 bed. He died in Poland in the year 1560,
 
 301 
 
 be " that by the ministers of the church of the 
 Germans and other strangers, there may be an 
 uncorrupted interpretation of the Holy Gospel, 
 and that by them the sacraments may be admi- 
 nistered according to the word of God and 
 apostolical observation." 
 
 The first service-book or liturgy, for the use 
 of the church of England, was prepared by a 
 committee of divines in this reign, and confir- 
 med by act of parliament. Some of the bishops 
 protested against it : but though it had been 
 ever so perfect, the penalties under which it 
 was imposed, were highly unchristian and op- 
 pressive. ^ 
 
 It was the intention of the king, to introduce 
 a gradual reform into the doctrine, worship and 
 discipline of the established church. For this 
 purpose, a second and improved edition of the 
 liturgy was published ; and 32 commissioners, of 
 whom John a Lasco was one, were appointed 
 to* prepare a scheme of church discipline. The 
 work was perfected, but the king's premature 
 decease prevented it from receiving the sanction 
 of the civil authority. The learned foreigners 
 also were countenanced and 'encouraged in the 
 profession and exercise of their peculiar faith 
 and worship, partly in order, " that the English 
 churches might be excited to embrace apostoli- 
 cal purity, with the unanimous consent of all 
 the states of the kingdom." From this it ap- 
 pears, that the king and his ministry were de- 
 sirous that the established religion of England 
 should be modelled pretty much upon the pres- 
 byterian plan. 
 
 The government being in the hands of the 
 reformers, the severities of the late reign ceased 
 to be exercised. Those who had been impri- 
 soned on account of their religious profession, 
 were set at liberty, and several of those who had 
 been obliged to quit the kingdom, returned home.
 
 302 
 
 Many of the clergy preached vehemently and 
 with success against the corruptions of popery : 
 and the king invited over some learned foreign 
 protestant divines, who considerably contribu- 
 ted to the reformation of religion. Cranmer 
 and other prelates, however, were not free from 
 a persecuting spirit; and in their misguided 
 zeal, inflicted pains and penalties on several in- 
 dividuals, on account of their faith, contrary to 
 the wishes of the king. 
 
 In Scotland, at this time, a gentleman named 
 Wishart, preached with great zeal against the 
 superstitions of the church of Rome. He was 
 much celebrated for the purity of his morals, his 
 extensive learning and popular talents. He was 
 prosecuted for heresy by Cardinal Beaton, to 
 whom he had become an object of aversion on 
 account of the success of his doctrines, and com- 
 mitted to the flames. 
 
 It is worthy of observation, that during this 
 reign, 1. Two orders only of officers were re- 
 cognised to be in the church, bishops and dea- 
 cons ; and consequently, bishops and priests 
 were considered as but different ranks or degrees 
 of the same order. 2. The ministers of the 
 church of England gave the right hand of fel- 
 lowship to ministers who had not been ordained 
 by bishops ; there being no dispute about re- 
 ordination, in order to any church preferment, 
 until the latter end of the reign cf queen Eliza- 
 beth.* 
 
 * " Cranmer and his fellow compilers of the articles (viz. 42 
 articles of faith drawn up in 1551,) are well known to have held 
 4 friendly correspondence with the great founders and supporters 
 of the protestant churches abroad, who had the misfortune, if it 
 is one, to think there might be a lawful call to the ministry, with- 
 out a prelacy. It is even notorious lhat the opinion of these fo- 
 reign divines was asked by our English reformers, concerning the 
 methods they should take in settling both matters of doctrine and 
 discipline in their own church. There is no doubt but thatj hun- 
 dreds, both in king Edward's and queen Elizabeth's reign, minis- 
 tered in the church of England, as legal pastors, who had no 
 episcopal ordiaation." Archdeacon Blackburns's Cwfcstional, page 
 244.
 
 303 
 
 The reign of Mary exhibited a dreadful re- 
 verse of the benign features of her brother Ed- 
 ward's reign. Popery was re-established, and 
 A', ith it, persecution in every form of terror which 
 inventive cruelty could devise. John a Lasco 
 after being silenced, was ordered to depart the 
 kingdom with his congregation : and many of 
 the English Protestants went into voluntary ba- 
 nishment, to avoid the impending danger. Of tho 
 latter, some fled to Scotland ; but the most con- 
 siderable number repaired to Frankfort, where a 
 division took place among them, which produ- 
 ced a separation, that has existed to the present 
 day. Some members of the society having in- 
 sisted on the use of the forms established in king- 
 Edward's reign, contrary to the sentiments of 
 their brethren, those who objected to this mode 
 of worship, not having been able to. effect an 
 accommodation, withdrew from the congrega- 
 tion at Frankfort and settled at Basil and Ge- 
 neva. In this event originated the distinctive 
 appellations by which the parties were after- 
 wards known, of Conformists and Nonconfor- 
 mists or Puritans.* 
 
 The society at Geneva established a new ser- 
 vice and discipline, which they published and 
 dedicated to their brethren in England and else- 
 where. 
 
 Of this schism, Dr. Cox and his friends, who 
 came to Frankfort, after the terms of communion 
 had been settled by the congregation there, weru 
 the sole cause. They broke through the agree- 
 ment which had been made respecting the forms 
 
 * " The Puritans, who inclined to the prcshyterian form of 
 church-government, of which Knox was one of tbp earliest abri- 
 tors in Britain, derived their denomination from their pretending 
 to a purer method of worship than that which had been c n .tal>- 
 Ji*he-J by Edward VI and queen Elizabeth.' Mos.-i. /'\v.V., ;-#-. 
 Vol. iii. p. 451.
 
 304 
 
 of divine worship,* and thus destroyed the unity 
 and order of a peaceable Christian society. Cox 
 introduced the service-book with a high hand ; 
 and even succeeded in Having- John Knox, who 
 warmly opposed the measure, ejected from his 
 ministry in the congregation. So early did some 
 members of the reformed church begin to prac- 
 tise that intolerance which they condemned in 
 others ! 
 
 The persecution of Protestants in the reign 
 of queen Mary, dreadful as it was, by no means 
 tended to advance the interests of the system it 
 was intended to support. " Each martyrdom, 
 says Mr. Hume, was equivalent to a hundred 
 sermons against popery ; and men either avoided 
 such horrid spectacles, or returned from them 
 full of a violent, though secret indignation 
 against the persecutors." 
 
 Upon the accession of Elizabeth, the protes- 
 tant religion was restored ; and although the 
 Puritans were treated with great severity, pro- 
 testant nonconformity was progressive during- 
 her reign. Tho?e who had been imprisoned on 
 iieeour.t of tLeii' religion, Were immediately set 
 at liberty ; arid the exiles were recalled. They 
 returned home in great poverty, and united in 
 congratulating the queen on her accession, and 
 petitioning that nothing burdensome might be 
 imposed upon them. Those only however, who 
 conformed to the establishment, obtained pre- 
 ferment, while the rest were neglected, and af- 
 ter $ome time, even prohibited from preaching 
 in the churches. i 
 
 * They had agreed not to use the Litany or tbe surplice, and 
 mot to answer the minister. 
 
 f It is certain, however, that the chief part of the learning of 
 which the protestant clergy could boast, nt tliis time, was to be 
 found among the exiles, and that the clerical duties were dis- 
 charged, in many instances, by illiterate mechanics and disguised 
 mass- priests.
 
 305 
 
 Queen Elizabeth regarded the Puritans with 
 nn unfavourable eye. because they considered 
 the reformation in her reign as really defective, 
 and earnestly desired that various corruptions 
 and abuses might be abolished. By publishing 
 these sentiments they virtually impeached her 
 judgment; and as she was extremely jealous of 
 'her authority, and could not brook contradic- 
 tion, she was highly displeased with those who 
 presumed to recommend any change, i:i the form 
 of that church, which had been modelled agree- 
 ably to her own sentiments. It is probable also 
 that the Puritans were object? of suspicion to 
 the queen, on account of their strong desire of 
 political liberty. 
 
 The act of Supremacy, passed in the first year 
 of the queen's reign, is the same in substance 
 with that of the 35th of Henry VIII, with some 
 additions.* By reviving king Edward's laws, 
 it repeals a severe act for punishing heresy, 
 passed in the preceding reign. But a new clause 
 contained in it, gave rise to the establishment 
 of a very formidable court, called the court of 
 High Commission. It empowered the queen to 
 appoint commissioners for ecclesiastical causes, 
 with authority to administer oaths ex officio, for 
 the purpose of correcting and amending all er- 
 rors, heresies, schisms, abuses, contempts and 
 enormities whatsoever. This proved a most 
 dreadful engine of oppression in this and the 
 two succeeding reigns. It armed the hand of 
 persecution against multitudes of innocent per- 
 sons and men who deserved well of their coun- 
 try, because they would not comply with certain, 
 established rites, to which they could not con- 
 scientiously conform. 
 
 As no mention is made in the act, of fine, im- 
 2 c 2 
 
 * " Though the act does not style the queen head but governess 
 of the church, it conveys the same extensive powers which had 
 exercised by bet father and brother." Hunt*.
 
 306 
 
 prisonment or corporal punishment, it cannot be 
 construed as conveying a higher power than that 
 of suspending or depriving, crimir.al cases being 
 referable to the laws of the land. Yet the com- 
 missioners, supported by the crown, indulged 
 themselves in such acts of tyranny and oppression, 
 that their very name at length became odious to 
 the whole nation ; and the act of parliament 
 which afterwards dissolved the court, contained 
 this remarkable clause, that " no such jurisdic- 
 tion should be revived for the future, in any 
 court whatsoever." 
 
 The Papists refused the oath of supremacy, 
 as being inconsistent with the allegiance due to 
 the pope ; but the Puritans took it, as explained 
 by the queen, in her injunctions that no more 
 was intended than, " that her majesty, under 
 God, had the sovereignty and rule over all per- 
 sons born in her realms, either ecclesiastical or 
 temporal, so as no foreign power had or ought 
 to have authority over them." 
 
 The act of Uniformity, entitled, "An Act 
 for the uniformity of Common Prayer and ser- 
 vice in the church and administration of the sa- 
 craments," was passed in the following year ; 
 and being rigorously enforced, was the source 
 of all the evils that befel the church for a period 
 of above eighty years.* This act delivered up 
 ecclesiastical jurisdiction entirely to the crown, 
 and authorized the queen, with the advice of 
 her commissioners or Metropolitan, to ordain 
 rites and ceremonies, according to her pleasure, 
 
 In 1569, the doctrines of the reformation were 
 preached in Scotland by John Knox;, a Scotch 
 tlivine, who had been one of the exiles at Frank- 
 fort, and afterwards a minister of the English 
 congregation at Geneva. t This eminent re- 
 
 Neal's Hist. Fur. Vol. I. p 110. 
 
 f Mr. Hume, in his History, has given a very unfair repre- 
 sentation of the character nnd conduct of this reformer, as evi- 
 dently appears from the Lift of Knox, written by Mr. M'Crie, 
 geotch clergyman,
 
 30? 
 
 former encountered the errors of the popish 
 church, with a zeal and resolution truly apos- 
 tolic : and by his powerful and persuasive elo- 
 quence, excited in the Scots an unconquerable 
 aversion to the superstitions of Rome. Having 
 been a disciple of the famous Calvin, he had 
 studied and admired the principles of presbyte- 
 rianisrn ; and now recommended them to the 
 Scottish nation with the most decisive success. 
 
 Mary, queen of Scots attempted by every 
 means, to restrain the impetuous ardour o,f the 
 reformer : but his severe and determined spirit 
 could neither be soothed nor terrified into com- 
 pliance wi'th the slavish principles of the court.* 
 
 The Scotch Presbyterians, having been hard 
 pressed by the forces of the queen regent, im- 
 plored the protection and assistance of queen ' 
 Eliaabethf who entered into an alliance with 
 them ; and by a treaty signed at Berwick, Feb. 
 27th, 1560, engaged to support the confederate 
 Protestants in defending their religion and civil 
 liberties. The money and troops which she sent 
 to their aid, soon enabled them to make head 
 against the regent, who too,k refuge in the castle 
 of Edinburgh, where she died. A treaty was 
 shortly after concluded, by which a general am- 
 nesty was granted, and the French and English 
 forces were to be withdrawn. 
 
 The Scotch parliament having met the same 
 year, passed various acts favourable to protes- 
 tantism and pre^byterian discipline. A confes- 
 sion of faith and scheme of church discipline 
 were prepared anil adopted. By means of the 
 latter, the ancient hierarchical government fell 
 into disuse ; though the shadow of it was pre- 
 served by the appointment of superintendents 
 
 * The dauntless intrepidity for which Krfox was distinguished, 
 
 was strongly attested !>y the- carl of Morton, who pronounced this 
 eulogium over his grave . TJierc lies he, who never feared the face 
 f man.
 
 303 
 
 in lieu of bishops : and the kirk was governed 
 henceforward* by general, provincial and clas- 
 sical assemblies. This change, however, did not 
 receive the sanction of law, until some years 
 afterwards. 
 
 The zeal of the Scotch parliament at this 
 time, Mas certainly carried to a very unjustifi- 
 able excess. They passed an act, by which the 
 pope's authority was abolished, and reading- 
 Mass was made punishable, for the first offence, 
 with loss of goods ; for the second, banishment ; 
 and for the third, death. All such penal sta- 
 tutes ought to be reprobated by every friend of 
 religious liberty. 
 
 Being thus supported by the parliament, the 
 Scots immediately proceeded to put the statute 
 in execution. They commenced a crusade against 
 the monasteries, and even the churches ; and 
 seized on the greater part of the ecclesiastical 
 revenues. By their persevering activity in over- 
 throwing the ancient establishment, they inflict- 
 ed an incurable wound on the papal authority in 
 Scotland. It is much to their credit, however, 
 that amidst all the rage of the congregation in 
 destroying monasteries, &c. few of the Roman 
 Catholics were exposed to any personal insult, 
 and not a single man suffered death.* 
 
 The first general assembly of Scotland sat on 
 the 20th December, 1560. It did not, however, 
 adventure on any decision of much importance. 
 
 A translation of the Bible, executed by seven 
 of the exiles at Geneva, was published at that 
 place in 1560. The translators compared Tyn- 
 dal's Bible first with the original, and then 
 with the best modern translations. They divi- 
 ded the chapters into verses, which had not been 
 before done, and added some figures, maps and 
 tables. It having been supposed, however, that 
 
 * Robertson's Hist. Scot, Vol. I, p. 155, Dub. edit.
 
 some marginal notes which they had introduced, 
 reflected on the queen's prerogative, this Bible 
 was not suffered to be reprinted in England un- 
 til the year 1576. Previous to this, (in 1568,) 
 the bishop's Bible, in folio, with a preface by 
 archbishop Parker, was published in England. 
 It was nothing more than Cranmer's translation 
 revised and corrected, and was intended to set 
 aside the Geneva Bible which had given offence 
 to some of the high church party. This was the 
 translation which was used in churches, until that 
 which is now in use, was edited in the reign of 
 James I. 
 
 The contests concerning the wearing of cle- 
 rical habits, form a prominent feature of the ec- 
 clesiastical history of this reign. Many useful 
 clergymen were suspended, for scrupling the u&t 
 of the vestments ; and thus the laity were, in 
 many instances, deprived of the ministrations of 
 religion. This controversy took its origin in the 
 reign of king Edward, who was' willing to have 
 indulged Hooper and others in their religious 
 scruples. But queen Elizabeth strictly enjoined 
 conformity ; and by her orders, the bishops sus- 
 pended, imprisoned and deprived some of the 
 most valuable teachers in the kingdom. These 
 minister-, finding that the queen would not abate 
 any thing of the rigour with which she enforced 
 her commands, soon after departed from the com- 
 munion of the established church, and formed 
 themselves into a separate association.* 
 
 * Some have presumed severely to censure the nonconformists 
 for their scruples inspecting the habits. Hut unquestionably the 
 crime and the offence are justly chargeable only on those, who, 
 while they considered them as things indifferent, did not scruple 
 to impose their, on others who considered them unlawful. It is 
 highly uncharitable to impute the conduct of those who refused 
 the habits, to obstinacy and perverseness ; for what could have in- 
 duced them to part with their livings, but the testimony of a good 
 conscience? Besides objecting to the habits, because they savour- 
 ed of popery, they justly considered that the smallest impositions
 
 310 
 
 The Puritans, in hopes of averting the storm 
 which threatened them, prevailed on some dis- 
 tinguished personages to apply to the court in 
 their behalf. They also consulted the foreign 
 divines, who were Unanimous in thinking that 
 the habits ought to be laid aside by authority : 
 and that, in the mean time, those who had scru- 
 ples on the subject, should not be obliged to use 
 them. The nobility were divided, and the queen 
 appeared irresolute ; but archbishop Parker urg- 
 ed her to require full and entire conformity to 
 the orders of the church. 
 
 The reformation was considerably checked in 
 this reign, by the haughty and inflexible dispo- 
 sition of the queen, by her despotic exercise of 
 the royal prerogative, and by her cruel treat- 
 ment of many of her protestant subjects. These, 
 added to her predilection for some of the Romish 
 ceremonies, tended to encourage the papists, 
 and to prevent the necessary reform of palpable 
 errors and abuses in the church. 
 
 The prosecutions in the court of High Com- 
 mission were of signal disservice to the cause of 
 true religion. Whitgift's proceedings also wero. 
 highly injurious to the protestant interest. By 
 the queen's authority, many learned, faithful 
 and laborious ministers were silenced and other- 
 wise persecuted, for not subscribing certain new 
 articles, prescribed by that prelate, without the 
 sanction either of the parliament or convocation. 
 
 The most eminent nonconformist divine in 
 this age, was Thomas Cartvvright, B. D. fel- 
 
 are injurious to Christian liberty; nnd that had they acquiesced 
 even in trivial matters, they would have in fact yielded the prin- 
 ciple, that it is right to submit to the authority of men in mat- 
 ters of religion. They disliked those remains of popery also, be- 
 cause they gave offence to many of the laity, v. ho were more averse 
 to them even than the clergy. 
 
 Those who imposed the habits, to the offence of their brethren, 
 acted contrary to the plain precepts of the Gospel, and alone have 
 to answer for the schism and all the other evils which followed.
 
 311 
 
 low of Trinity college, Cambridge. He was a 
 profound scholar and popular preacher, and was 
 held in high esteem by the university. Having 
 animadverted, however, in his lectures, on some 
 things in the English hierarchy, which he con- 
 ceived unsuitable to the primitive model, he was 
 opposed by Dr. Whitgift, who preached and 
 wrote against him ; and by the interference 
 of the prelates, he was at length expelled fche 
 university. King James ottered him a profes- 
 sorship in the university of St. Andrews, but he 
 declined accepting of it. He officiated abroad, 
 for some years ; and on his return, exerted his 
 powerful talents in favour of his persecuted bre- 
 thren in England. Some time after, he was 
 himself visited with suspension, deprivation and 
 long imprisonment; on which occasion king 
 James interceded with queen Elizabeth in be- 
 half of him and his brethren. On being releas- 
 ed, he was permitted to continue in his situation 
 of governor of the hospital of Warwick, which 
 had been procured for him by the carl of Lei- 
 cester, during the remainder of his days. 
 
 That Cartwright was a most acute disputant, 
 is manifest from his controversy with Whitgift ; 
 and that he was a profound theologian, may be 
 presumed from the circumstance of 'his having 
 been pitched upon by Walsingham and others, 
 to answer the Rhemish Testament. When 
 obliged to fly from England, he was invited to 
 draw up a code of discipline for the French re- 
 fugees in Jersey and Guernsey. He was the au- 
 thor of several works besides his controversial 
 writings : and from his great talents and piety, 
 he has obtained the honourable title of the Fa- 
 ther of the Puritans. 
 
 That Cartwright might be the better enabled 
 to proceed in the work of answering the Rhe- 
 mish Testament, the secretary of state sent him 
 100) with a promise of such further assistance
 
 as might be necessary. But no sooner had'his 
 great antagonist, Whitgift, received informa- 
 tion that Cartwright was thus employed, than 
 he forbade him to proceed. In consequence of 
 this, the work was not resumed until some years 
 afterwards ; and it was at length published in 
 1618. 
 
 The loyalty and peaceable behaviour of the 
 Puritans, under all the sufferings they endured, 
 are attested by (lie first authorities. Believing 
 that a still farther reformation in religion w r as 
 necessary, they did not cease to petition the 
 queen -and parliament ; and when they found 
 their applications wholly unsurcessful, they no- 
 bly resolved to follow the light of their own con- 
 sciences, and to exercise that worship and discip- 
 line, which they believed to be most conformable 
 to the word of God. 
 
 The first presbytery in England was establish- 
 ed at Wandsworth in Surrey, anno 1572. On the 
 20th Nov. of that year, eleven elders were cho- 
 sen, and their offices described in a register en- 
 titled ' The Orders of Wandsworth.' The queen 
 issued a proclamation for putting the act of Uni- 
 formity in force against the members ; but her 
 ministers w r ere not able to discover them. 
 
 Synods of nonconformists were also occasion- 
 ally held at this time. The venerable Cart- 
 wright was brought before the High Commission, 
 and charged with frequenting such meetings, 
 and promoting the adoption of a new form of 
 discipline.* It is worthy of observation, that 
 in the articles exhibited against Cartwright, no- 
 thing is said or insinuated as to rebellion or 
 conspiracy on the part of the Presbyterians. 
 And undoubtedly, ifthe High Commission had 
 
 * In 1566, a complete separation took place between the 
 church of England and the Puritans. Some years after, a new 
 book of discipline was signed by 500 members, once beueficed 
 clergy of the established church.
 
 313 
 
 had any grounds for^such a charge, they \yould 
 have eagerly preferred it. The only crime al- 
 leged against them was simply that of noncon- 
 formity. 
 
 They objected indeed to take the oath ex of- 
 fcio tendered by the courts, as designed to make 
 them criminate themselves. Their noncompli- 
 a nee was strengthened by this consideration, 
 that they were satisfied in their consciences, 
 there was nothing criminal in the things alleged 
 against them. Besides, they had a tender re- 
 gard for the safety of others ; and would not be 
 accessary to the persecution of innocent persons. 
 -For this presumed contempt, Cartwright and 
 liis brethren were remanded to prison, where 
 they were confined for two years, without any 
 farther process. 
 
 In the 35th of the queen, an act was passed 
 entitled^ " An Act to retain the queen's sub- 
 jects in their due obedience" by virtue of which 
 the Dissenters were obliged to abjure the realm 
 in 40 days, or suffer death without benefit of 
 clergy.* 
 
 Some of the Nonconformists endeavoured, at 
 this time, to escape from persecution, by joining 
 in communion with the members of the French 
 and Dutch churches established in England. 
 But the queen and council resolved that they 
 should not thus be permitted to escape, and 
 therefore wrote a letter, to prevent those churches 
 from receiving them. 
 
 In many instances, the puritan ministers who 
 were cast out of their livings, were received into 
 the houses of the nobility and gentry, as chap- 
 lains, and tutors to their children ; " not merely, 
 as Neal observes, out of compassion, but from 
 a sense of their real worth and usefulness ; for 
 they were men of undissembled piety and devo- 
 tion, mighty in the Scriptures, zealous for the 
 protestant religion, of exemplary lives, far re- 
 2 n 
 
 lee Loy. Presfa. p. 142.
 
 mote from the liberties and fashionable views of 
 the times, and indefatigably diligent in instruct- 
 ing those committed to their care." 
 
 The unrelenting rigour with which the Puri- 
 tans were persecuted by archbishop Whitgift, 
 is attested by the first authorities, particularly 
 by Lord Burleigh, who by letter, remonstrated 
 with him on account of his inquisitorial proceed- 
 ings. Even the privy council interfered, to 
 check the violence of the prosecutions ^carried 
 on at this time. 
 
 In 1580, " The National Covenant or Confes- 
 sion of faith," was subscribed by the king of 
 Scotland and his household, and in the following 
 year, by the whole nation. By this act, they 
 bound themselves to maintain and defend the 
 protestant religion and presbyterian church go- 
 vernment. Three years after, James adopted 
 such measures for abridging the privileges of 
 the Scottish church, that many had their sti- 
 pends sequestered, were committed to prison, 
 or compelled to fly the kingdom, for refusing to 
 subscribe the new laws which had been enacted 
 on that subject. The church judicatories were 
 almost entirely suppressed ; and in many places 
 there was scarcely a sufficient number of minis- 
 ters to perform the duties of religious worship. 
 In 1586, though the king obtained an act of the 
 General Assembly, permitting the name and of- 
 fice of a bishop to continue in the church, presby- 
 terianism was confirmed; no other preeminence 
 being allowed to bishops than that of presiding 
 in presbyteries, as perpetual moderators. In 
 1587, the parliament annexed the church lands 
 to the crown, and empowered the king to apply 
 the rents to his own use. The tithes, and the 
 principal mansion house with a few acres of land, 
 by way of glebe, were reserved for the person 
 who served the cure. In 1592, the king con- 
 sented to a law, by which the acts of 1584 were
 
 315 
 
 rescinded or explained ; and the presbyteriau 
 government was established in tlie most ample 
 manner, by act of parliament. But in 1597, 
 James exerted his utmost influence to circum- 
 scribe the jurisdiction of the church ; in which 
 he succeeded, by obtaining acts of the General 
 Assembly, by which the clergy ^voluntarily sur- 
 rendered various important privileges, which it 
 would have been dangerous to invade. The 
 same year, an act of parliament was passed, by 
 which. those ministers who should be presented 
 to the vacant bishopricks and abbeys, were en- 
 titled to a seat in parliament. 
 
 About this time, the bishops in England, in 
 order to remove from the church the odium which 
 attached to it, on account of the persecution of 
 the Puritans, delivered them over to the tempo- 
 ral courts, to be indicted at the assizes, and tried 
 at common law. Thus, many worthy ministers 
 were put on a level with the vilest culprits, to 
 the great injury of their reputation and useful- 
 ness.* 
 
 The controversy with the Puritans, which 
 originated in their scruples concerning the popish 
 habits and some ceremonies of human invention, 
 gradually extended itself to discipline, and at 
 length even to points of faith. The severities 
 which were exercised by the high church party, 
 produced indeed a separation much to be regret- 
 ted; but the struggle against intolerance which 
 the Puritans maintained, contributed to the in- 
 crease of sou ad religious knowledge, to a far- 
 ther reform in the national establishment, and 
 to the final ascendency of the protestant cause. 
 
 Towards the close of queen Elizabeth's reign, 
 <he Puritans were treated with considerable in- 
 dulgence. The reason of this was that the 
 next heir to the crown being a presbyterian, 
 
 ' * Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. I. p, 461.
 
 316 
 
 the bishops wore afraid that they might incur hi 
 displeasure, if they should persist in prosecuting 
 with rigour the professors of that faith ; espe- 
 cially as James had interceded with the queen 
 in their behalf. 
 
 King James I, while king of Scotland, bore 
 a very favourable testimony to the purity and 
 
 >od conduct of -the Presbyterians both of Eng- 
 nd and his own kingdom. When he came to 
 the English throne, the Nonconformists, who 
 had great expectations from his former profes- 
 sions, as well as his clemency and moderation, 
 received him with every demonstration of joy ; 
 acknowledged his just Hitle to the crown, and 
 addressed him in the most loyal terms. They 
 were much disappointed however by the issue of 
 the Hampton-court conference, which was con- 
 ducted in such a manner as to strengthen and 
 exalt the hierarchy, and to degrade the Puri- 
 tans. Their disappointment was completed, 
 when, on the 5th of March, 1603, the king pub- 
 lished a proclamation, enforcing conformity to 
 every thing agreed upon at the conference. 
 
 The nonconformist ministers, in a petition to 
 the king, declared their willingness to subscribe 
 to the articles pf religion according to law, and 
 to the king's supremacy. But archbishop Ban- 
 croft revived the persecution against Ihem, by 
 enforcing a strict observance of the festivals, 
 and the use of the vestments, and obli^in^ them 
 to subscribe the three articles of Whitgift. In 
 consequence of the adoption of these severe 
 measures, above 300 puritan ministers were si- 
 lenced or deprived ; some of whom were excom- 
 municated and cast into prison, and others com- 
 pelled to go into banishment. Many learned 
 minister?, with their people, retired to Holland 
 and the Low Countries, where they established 
 churches according to the presbyterian model. 
 
 The parliament, in 1610, petitic-aed the king
 
 317 
 
 in favour of tuc Nonconformists, and against 
 ecclesiastical courts ; but he dissolved the 
 meeting, without paying any attention to their 
 remonstrances. 
 
 At the request of the Puritans in the Hamp- 
 ton-court conference, king- James appointed a 
 new translation of the Bible, to be executed by 
 the most learned men of both universities. Fifty- 
 four were nominated; but some of them dying 
 soon after, forty-seven only were employed in 
 (he work. It was begun in 1606, and finished 
 in 1611. This translation slill continues to be 
 read in churches as the authorized version. 
 
 In 1610, episcopacy was restored in Scotland ; 
 the courtiers having succeeded in procuring the 
 sanction of a General Assembly to that obnox- 
 ious measure. In 1617, two acts, one relating 
 to the choice of bishops and archbishops, and the 
 other to the restitution of chapters, were passed 
 in the Scotch parliament : for protesting against 
 which, several ministers were suspended and 
 deprived, and some banished. In the following 
 year, a Convention or Assembly held at Perth, 
 passed live articles, conformable to the practice 
 of the English church, which were ratified in 
 parliament in 1621, and were the occasion of a 
 new persecution throughout the kingdom. 
 
 About this time, the king, by his own prero- 
 gative, erected in Scotland a court of High 
 Commission, in imitation of that established in 
 England. The bishops and a few of the clergy, 
 who had been summoned together, acknow- 
 ledged this court, and it immediately proceeded 
 to business, without farther ceremony. 
 
 To check the progress of puritan ism and si- 
 lence the Papists, the king published in 1618, 
 " A Declaration to encourage recreations and 
 sports on the Lord's day," contrary, as Neal 
 observes, to his p/jclamation in the first year of 
 his reign, and to the ariicles of the church of
 
 518 
 
 Ireland, rat'ifiedumler the great seal in 1615, ift 
 which the morality of the Lord's day is affirmed. 
 Still farther to annoy the Puritans, he after- 
 wards issued injunctions, to prevent ministers 
 from preaching the doctrines of Calvin; a mea- 
 sure which effectually excluded the Calvinisti 
 from all preferment.* 
 
 The conduct of James in Scotland, where he 
 pledged himself to support presbyterianism and 
 his conduct in England, where he renounced 
 presbytery, persecuted the Puritans and estab- 
 lished the foolish maxim, " No bishop, no king," 
 afford perhaps, a sample of that king-craft, on 
 which this vain monarch greatly valued himself; 
 but certainly demonstrated a great want of con- 
 sistency as well as of sound religious principle. 
 George Brown, whom Henry VIII had cre- 
 ated archbishop of Duhiin, was the first person 
 who publicly attempted to reform the religion of 
 Ireland. During the reigns of Henry and Ed- 
 ward, he made considerable progress in abolish- 
 ing the popish superstitions. Queen Mary had 
 meditated great severities against the Irish Pro* 
 testants ; but dying before her designs were car- 
 ried into execution, the accession of Elizabeth 
 saved them from the intended persecution. i 
 
 When James I came to the throne of Eng- 
 land, the British and protestant interests were 
 extremely low in Ireland. The government had, 
 at an early period, encouraged many English fa- 
 milies to remove into that country, to assist in 
 keeping the native inhabitants in subjection ; 
 but a considerable number of the settlers having 
 returned home, to assist in the contest between 
 the houses of York and Lancaster, the Irish, 
 who were extremely impatient of the English 
 yoke, soon manifested a high degree of insubor* 
 
 * Nel's Hist Pur. Vel. II. p. 107, 119. 
 f Moth, Seeks. Hiit. Yol, III. p. 26*.
 
 319 
 
 tiination. They regarded their governors with 
 still stronger aversion, when Henry VIII abju- 
 red the supremacy of the pope ; for they now ap- 
 prehended that even their religion was brought 
 into danger. In Elizabeth's reign, their here- 
 ditary antipathy acquired additional strength, 
 and the progress of the protestant religion was 
 {ffeatly retarded by an act continued from the 
 former reign, entitled, "An Act against bring- 
 ing in of Scots, retaining of them, and marrying 
 with them." The country, distracted by con- 
 tinual insurrections of the native Irish against 
 the English, displayed a dreadful scene of anar- 
 chy and confusion. 
 
 James, finding that the laws could not be car- 
 ried into execution, without the aid of a mili- 
 tary force, endeavoured to make a favourable 
 impression on the people of Ireland, by lenient 
 measures. He therefore restored to some of the 
 lost considerable Irish rebels their former pos- 
 sessions. But this step was not followed by any 
 salutary consequences. Many projects were pro- 
 posed for settling the kingdom ; and at length 
 the parliament resolved to repeal the act against 
 the bringing in of the Scots : and though many 
 Scotch families, anticipating a change of mea- 
 sures in their favour, had previously removed 
 into Ireland, the plantation of Ulster is pro- 
 perly dated from the time of that repeal ; for 
 soon after, many thousands of Presbyterians, 
 together with their ministers, came over and 
 settled in Ulster. Three English ministers, 
 Mr. John Ridges of Antrim, Mr. Henry Cal- 
 vert, and Mr. Hubbard of Carrickfergus, who 
 had been a pupil of the great Cartwright, came 
 over to reside in Ulster, at this time ; the two 
 former under the patronage of the Clotworthy 
 farffily, (afterwards Massereene,) and the latter 
 under that of Lord Chichester, then lord deputy 
 of Ireland. The first Presbyterian nainvrter who
 
 arrived from Scotland was Mr. Edward Eryce, 
 who settled in Broad-island, anno 1611.* After 
 him 'Mr. Robert Cunningham was settled in Ho- 
 lywood ; Mr. Robert -Blair in Bangor ; Mr. 
 James Hamilton, nephew of Lord Clanehoy, in 
 Ballywalter, and. Mr. John Livingstone in Kil- 
 linshy. Soon after, Mr. Josias Welsh, grandson 
 of Knpx, the reformer, became minister of Teni- 
 plepatrick, and Mr. George Dunbar of Larne. 
 
 The good understanding which subsisted, at 
 this time, between the two parties of Protestants 
 in Ireland, the Episcopalians and the Presbyte- 
 rians, tended to facilitate the settlement and 
 plantation of Ulster.t The following is a re- 
 markable instance : When Mr. Robert Blair, 
 who scrupled at episcopal ordination, was pre- 
 sented to the parish of Bangor by Hamilton, 
 Lord Claneboy, Echlin, bishop of Down, pro- 
 posed that the presbyterian ministers should join 
 with him in the ordination ; (Mr. Blair, ac- 
 knowledging the bishop to be a presbyter, and 
 as such to have power of ordination, in con- 
 junction with other presbyters ;) and that any 
 expressions to which Mr. Blair should object, 
 in the established form of ordination, should be 
 exchanged for such as he might recommend. 
 Thus was Mr. Blair publicly ordained in the 
 church of Bangor. if The bishop of Raphoe 
 
 * This is the date ordinarily assigned, hut a stone in the old 
 church or meeting-house has it 1613. Mr. B. probably came 
 over in 1611. 
 
 f It has been observed, that the principles inculcated by the 
 Culdees, for several centuries, probably tended to produce in the 
 inhabitants of Scotland, that strong predilection for presbyte- 
 rianism which they have always evinced. See Edinb. Encyclop. 
 article Culdees. It is not unlikely, that the existence of the 
 same religious order in Ireland, so late as the time of Usher, was, 
 in some respects, favourable to the settlement of the Presbyterians 
 in that country. 
 
 f Mr. Blair was born at Irvine in Scotland. He was ordain- 
 ed minister of Bangor, in his 29th year ; and had under his care 
 1200 persons of age, besides others, Lord Claneboy was ton of &
 
 granted the same indulgence to Mr. John Li- 
 vingstone; and the same form was used in the 
 ordination of all the Scotch ministers who set- 
 tled in Ireland from that time till the year 1642. 
 
 The presbyterian ministers at this time pos- 
 leesed the churches and the tithes, though they 
 did not use the liturgy, nor otherwise conform 
 to the usage of the episcopal church. They 
 were, however, comprehended within the church 
 of Ireland ; for they frequently met and consult- 
 ed with the bishop concerning the common inte- 
 rests of religion, and some of them were mem- 
 bers of the Convocation, in the year 1634.* 
 
 They held monthly meetings at Antrim, in 
 which, with much solemnity and devotion, they 
 consulted together on the best methods of serving 
 the cause of the reformation. They had also 
 quarterly communions, which greatly contribu- 
 ted to the increase'bf piety. Their labours were 
 eminently useful in civilizing a rude people, and 
 promoting general tranquillity; insomuch that 
 their entire conduct commanded the approbation 
 of all the moderate episcopalians, particularly 
 of primate Usher, with whom Mr. Blair was 
 intimately acquainted, and who vouchsafed to 
 him and his brethren his wannest tribute of ap- 
 plause. 
 
 Many of the ministers were held in high esti- 
 mation by men of the first consequence in the 
 province of Ulster. Their n'.inistry vvns much 
 respected, and was attended even by some of 
 those who did wot scruple to conform to the es- 
 tablished church. This was remarkably instan- 
 ced in the case cf Mr. Blair, who, at the desire 
 
 Scotch preshyterian minister, who had been fellow of Dublin 
 College, and said to have bee tutor to t*ie great Usher. Lord 
 Chichester had beeh a pupil of Cartwright. and was a man of 
 tne talents. The Clotworthy family wa of the presbyterian per- 
 suasion. 
 
 Loy. p. 163. Meal's Hist TUT. VJL II f 9<.
 
 322 
 
 of the bishop of Down, preached on Easter- 
 Sunday, before the judges of assize. In the 
 evening- of that day, he was sent for by one of 
 the judges, that he might converse with him on 
 the subject of the sermon which he had preached ; 
 on which occasion, his lordship testified the high- 
 est regard for Mr. Blair and his brethren, and 
 tie ministry in which they were engaged.* 
 
 The protesiant religion being now pretty well 
 established in Ireland, it was thought expedient 
 to draw up articles of the common faith, after 
 the manner of other churches. Accordingly, 
 some moved in convocation, that the articles ef 
 the English church should be adopted ; but this 
 was opposed, as unsuitable to the dignity of an 
 independent national establishment; and there- 
 fore it was agreed to, that a new confession 
 should be prepared. The articles contained in 
 it are in a great measure the same as those which 
 the Puritans requested in the Hampton- court 
 conference. t 
 
 Presb. Loy. p. 164. 
 
 f "For 1st. (as Mr, Neal observes,) the nine articles of Lam- 
 beth are incorporated into this confession. 2dly. The morality of 
 the Lord's day is strongly asserted, and the spending it wholly in 
 religious exercises is required. [Art, 56 1 Sdly. The observation 
 of Lent fs declared not to be a religious fast, but grounded mere- 
 ly on political considerations, for provision of things tending to 
 the better preservation of the commonwealth. [Art. 50.] 4thly. 
 Ail clergymen are said to be lawfully called and sent, who are 
 chosen and called to this work by men who have public authority 
 given them in the'church, to call and send ministers into the 
 Lord's vineyard ; [Art. 71. J which is an acknowledgment of the 
 validity of the ordinations of those churches that have no bishops. 
 5thly The power of the keys is said to be only declarative. [Art. 
 74.] 6thly. The pope is declared to be Antichrist or that Man of 
 tin, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth 
 and abolish with the. brightness of his coming. [Art. 8O.] 7thly. 
 The consecration of archbishops, &c. is not so much as men- 
 tioned ; a? if done on purpose, (says Mr. Collyer,) to avoid main- 
 taining tlie distinction between that order and that of priests. 
 Lastly, no power is ascribed to the church in making canons, or 
 censuring those who either carelessly or wilfully infringe the same. 
 Upon the whole, these articles seem to be contrived to compromise
 
 The plantation of Ulster was considerably for- 
 warded by the harsh treatment which the Pres- 
 byterians both of England and Scotland expe- 
 rienced at this time. For as the public safety 
 and interest required a union of counsels among 1 
 the Protestants of Ireland, many of the Scotch 
 and English Nonconformists escaped into that 
 country, where they were secure from the per- 
 secution which awaited them at home. 
 
 The good effects resultibg from the' settlement 
 of Presbyterians in Ulster were afterwards so sen- 
 sibly felt by the government, that in the 10th of 
 Charles I, an act was passed in the Irish par- 
 liament, for the naturalization of all those of 
 the Scottish nation who were born before king 
 James's accession to the crown of England and 
 Ireland : the object of which was to improve 
 the condition of some Scots who had come over 
 before, and who were liable to various inconve- 
 niencies for want of being naturalized, and to 
 encourage more of the Scots to come over and 
 settle in the country. In that act, their great 
 usefulness in improving the state of the king- 
 dom is set forth in these remarkable words 
 <' It being a great discouragement and disheart- 
 ening unto many of your said subjects of Scot- 
 land, that otherwise would have planted them- 
 gelvesxhere, for the farther civilizing, strength- 
 ening and securing this your Highness's said 
 realm, against rebels at home and all foreign in- 
 vasion." 
 
 During the reign of Charles I, very conside- 
 rable encouragement was given to the papists 
 both in England and Ireland, by the king and 
 his court, notwithstanding the strong remon- 
 
 tbe difference between the Church and the Puritans ; and they 
 had that effect till the year 1634, when by the influence of arch- 
 bishop Laud and of the earl of Stratford, thesearticles were set 
 aside, and those of the church of England received in their 
 room." Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. II. p. 95.
 
 strances of parliament ; and they were, in many 
 instances, promoted to situations of trust and 
 power. " They had, says Lord Clarendon, for 
 many years, enjoyed a great calm, being on the 
 matter absolved from the severest parts of the 
 law, and dispensed with for the gentlest." In 
 fact, the hierarchy discovered a manifest tenden- 
 cy to popery ; and the faith and worship of the 
 national church did not differ widely from those 
 of the church of Rome.* * 
 
 The Puritans, among whom may be reckoned 
 even some of the moderate conformists, who 
 disliked the introduction of Arminian and popish 
 principles, were punished with suspension, de- 
 privation, imprisonment and exile ; and this, 
 while they were acknowledged, even by violent 
 royalists and episcopalians, to be men of pure 
 morals and fervent piety. The Court being- de- 
 termined to humble all those who were unfriendly 
 to the high church principles, took especial car? 
 that moderate cliurcnmen should have no prefer- 
 ment, and should be turned out of the offices 
 they already held, upon the smallest pretences ; 
 and that those of the opposite party should enjoy 
 all the highest posts, civil and ecclesiastical, in 
 the, gift of the crown. 
 
 The king republished the declaration of 1618, 
 recommending sports on the Lord's day, and en- 
 joined that it should be read in all the parish 
 churches. This was intended as before to con- 
 ciliate the Papists and to distress the Puritans; 
 and it produced dreadful havoc among the laU.er, 
 
 Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. II. p. 146, 209, 246. Hume's 
 Hist. Eng. Vol. VI. p. 225. 
 
 " If we would but open our eyes, we should see, that w are 
 beholden to the Dissenters for the continuance of a great part of 
 our theological principles; for if the high church-men had no 
 checks, they would have brought in popery before this time, by 
 their overvaluing pomp and ceremony in divine worship. So that 
 if there had been no Dissenters, the church of England had bee 
 long since ruined." Dr. Eduiard't Preach*-, Vol. II, p. I5.
 
 325 
 
 tor several years. For many of them having re- 
 fused to read the declaration, were suspended, 
 silenced and deprived. The name of one cler- 
 gyman is on record, who was prosecuted with 
 such severity by the- High Commission, for re- 
 fusing 1 to comply with the order of the court, 
 that he was even excommunicated for the of- 
 fence.* 
 
 Many of the laity as well as clergy being ex- 
 ceeding dissatisfied with these most unchristian 
 proceedings, sold their effects, and removed with 
 their families into Holland or New England. 
 But the king and council becoming alarmed at 
 the circumstance, issued a proclamation, per- 
 mitting none to emigrate without license. Thus 
 the Puritans were neither suffered to live peace- 
 ably at home,- nor to take refuge in foreign coun- 
 tries. 
 
 At this period, when the hierarchy aimed at 
 exclusive dominion, Mr. Blair and Mr. Living- 
 stone two of the Scotch ministers who, as above 
 mentioned, were settled in Ireland, under fa- 
 vourable auspices, were suspended by Echlin, 
 bishop of Down, for nonconformity. They were 
 soon restored however on application to primate 
 Usher. On being a second time deposed,, to- 
 gether with Dunbar and Welsh, by the same 
 prelate, they 'applied in person to Charles I, at 
 Greenwich, and were reinstated in their minis- 
 try in about two years after. They subsequently 
 returned to Scotland ; and in the year succeed- 
 ing the rebellion of 1641, Mr. Blair was sent 
 back into Ireland by the General Assembly. 
 
 Not satisfied with the violent persecution of 
 Dissenters in England, archbishop Laud excited 
 serious disturbances also in Scotland, by ille- 
 gally attempting to introduce a new service- 
 book and canons into the Scottish church, and 
 
 2 E 
 * Neil's Hist. Pur. Vol. II. p. 208-
 
 326 
 
 pressing their adoption by all the influence of 
 the English court. 
 
 In 1633, Laud determine'! that the 59 Arti- 
 cles should be adopted by tlie church of Ireland : 
 and accordingly a canon was passed in Convo- 
 cation, with but one dissenting voice, approving 
 of the articles of the church of England, and 
 denouncing excommunication against all those 
 who should affirm that they contain any thing 
 superstitions or erroneous.* 
 
 To render the Book of Common Prayer more 
 agreeable to the Papists, and to separate the 
 church still farther from the Puritans, arch- 
 bishop Laud introduced various alterations into 
 the later editions of it, without the authority 
 either of parliament or convocation. t 
 
 This haughty and imperious prelate determined 
 also to reduce the French and Dutch churches to 
 the same conformity. They were ten in num- 
 ber, and contained between five and six thousand 
 communicants. The ministers and elders insist- 
 ed on the charter of privileges granted to them 
 by king Edward VI, which had been five times 
 confirmed by king James, and twice by king 
 Charles, and by which they had been exempted 
 from all episcopal and arcbiepiscopal jurisdic- 
 tion. But the archbishop having required that 
 ail the members of those congregations who 
 were natives of England, should conform, some 
 of their churches were in consequence interdict- 
 ed, and others shut up ; the ministers were sus- 
 pended; and many of the laity left ihe kingdom, 
 to the very great injury of the manufacturing in- 
 terest. As a farther mark of disregard to the 
 foreign Protestants, the king's ambassador in 
 France was forbidden to frequent their religious 
 assemblies. 
 
 In the convocation of 1640, the High Church 
 
 Neal's Hist. Fur. Vol. JI p. 219. 4 Ibid. p. 209,
 
 327 
 
 faction framed several new canon?, tending to c 
 establish slavish principles, which gave great 
 offence even to many sober and conscientious 
 Conformists. In particular, an oath was impo- 
 sed in these words " n.or will 1 ever give my 
 consent to alter the government of this church 
 by archbishops, bishops, deans and archdeacons, 
 
 &c." which, because of tha ft cetera, was 
 
 strongly objected to by many zealous members 
 of the established church. 
 
 The Courts of High Commission and Star 
 Chamber were the powerful engines which Lau-1 
 employed in support of his arbitrary measures ; 
 for by their instruaientality,the moderate church- 
 men and Dissenters were perpetually harrassed 
 with grievous and vexatious prosecutions. How- 
 ever, as soon as constitutional principles began 
 to acquire an ascendency, after the execution of 
 Strafford and the impeachment of Laud, the par- 
 liament passed bills, in 1641, for abolishing those 
 courts, and thus sheathed the spiritual sword, 
 which in the hands of the bishops, had don<* 
 such terrible execution among the friends of ci- 
 vil and religious liberty. 
 
 Charles having exasperated the nation to the 
 Utmost, by his unlawful exactions, and his dis- 
 regard of the rights of the people and privileges 
 of parliament, a powerful party rose in opposi- 
 tion to his arbitrary government. The nation 
 submitted to his misrule with wonderful pa- 
 tience ; nor did they take up arms against him, 
 until they were headed by two branches of the 
 legislature, and until the king had proclaimed 
 the parliament rebels, and collected an army 
 agaimt them. Even then they did not aim at 
 dethroning the king ; for they still petitioned him 
 a* their lawful sovereign, and besought him to 
 ivtuni and govern according to law. 
 
 About this time, an oath, commonly called 
 the Black oath, was imposed in Ireland, without
 
 328 
 
 any parliamentary authority and sanction, on nil 
 persons of the Scottish nation of the age of Id- 
 years and upwards, under heavy penalties.* 
 The Presbyterians refused to take this oath, 
 both because it was imposed in an illegal man- 
 ner, and because it tended to the destruction of 
 liberty and property; and for so doing, multi- 
 tudes of sincere Protestants were miserably per- 
 secuted and driven into banishment. These vi- 
 olent and unjust proceedings greatly contributed 
 to depress the Protestants, and to strengthen the 
 Roman Catholic party in Ireland. 
 
 The countenance and encouragement which 
 the Papists received from Charles and his minis- 
 ters, was one of the causes, to which may be at- 
 tributed the bloody massacre of 1641. Vast mul- 
 titudes of Protestants perished in the insurrec- 
 tion of that year ; but a? many presbyterian mi- 
 nisters had been driven out of the kingdom by 
 Wentworth's persecution and the black oath, a 
 remnant was providentially saved, and reserved 
 for farther usefulness. These returned and were 
 joyfully received by their flocks, after the storm 
 of persecution had subsided. 
 
 Three petitions from the Dissenters of the 
 north of Ireland, were presented to the General 
 Assembly in 1642, 1643 and 1645 ; in which they 
 pray for a a mission of ministers of their own 
 persuasion, to officiate among the poor distres- 
 sed Presbyterians who had survived the fatal 
 1641. 
 
 On the breaking out of the Irish rebellion, 
 the Lords Justices importunately applied to Eng- 
 land for a supply of men, money and arms ; and 
 
 * The oath obliged them to swear as follows: " I will not 
 bear arms, or do any rebellious or hostile act, against any of the 
 king's royal commands, but submit myself in all due obedience 
 thereunto. And I will not enter into any covenant or bond of 
 mutual defence or assistance against any person whatsoever, by 
 forces, without his majesty's sovereign and regal authority."
 
 309 
 
 as Clie Scots could be more readily transported 
 into the north of Ireland, the government agreed 
 that 10,000 Scotch soldiers should be sent over, 
 to oppose the insurgents. Owing to a difference 
 of counsels between the king and the parliament, 
 the first division of these troops did not arrive 
 until April 1642. The several regiments were 
 accompanied by their ministers, who united wi*h 
 those that remained in the kingdom, and found- 
 ed a pres?b)tery, which met at Carrickfergus, 
 July 10th, 1612. 
 
 On the 19th of that month, Montgomery, the 
 lord of Ard?, sent captain Me. Gill to the pres- 
 bytery at Carrickfergus, with a message, prom- 
 ising that he would join with them in discipline. 
 Lord Claneboy made the same proposal ; but the 
 former nobleman afterwards accepted of a com- 
 mission under the Marquis of Ormond, who 
 had projected a union of the king's forces with 
 the Irish insurgents, and thereby incurred the 
 strong displeasure of the presbytery. 
 
 Ormond had made various attempts to effect a 
 coalition with the Irish, and at length concluded 
 a peace with them in 1648,. highly favourable to 
 the popish interest. His design was, to trans- 
 port into England, a considerable body of Irish 
 troops, to aid the king in his contest with th.e 
 parliament, as had been done in 1643, during 
 the cessation. 
 
 The presbytery observing the clangers to which 
 civil and religious liberty was thus exposed, drew 
 up a declaration, atBangor, with a view of pre- 
 venting the evil consequences that were likely to 
 result from the rash measures now adopted. Af- 
 trT representing the evil tendency of the peace 
 and commission, they beseech their people to 
 avoid ail connexion with uch u cause, and 
 charge those especially who had renewed the co- 
 venant, not to serve in the array under the 
 scut command. 
 
 S E 2
 
 '. 
 
 330 
 
 In 1643, an assembly of learned divines met 
 at Westminster, in consequence of an ordinance 
 the parliament, (though the king published a 
 proclamation, forbidding their meeting,) for the 
 purpose of" settling the government and litur- 
 gy of the church of England." A few only of 
 the episcopal clergy appeared; and they, after 
 a short time, withdrew, alleging various objec- 
 tions to the meeting of the assembly. 
 
 The parliament finding it necessary to eno- a o- e 
 the Scots in iheir interests, sent coipmissioWrs 
 to the general Assembly, who were favourably 
 received ; that reverend body having agreed to 
 appoint delegates for the WestminsterAssem- 
 bly, and to advise the Convention of States to as- 
 sist the parliament in the war. 
 
 The instructions of the commissioners sent to 
 the Assembly at Westminster, were to promote 
 the extirpation of popery, prelacy, heresy, schism, 
 scepticism, and idolatry, and "to endeavour a 
 union between the two kingdoms in one confes- 
 sion of faith, one form of church government 
 and one directory of worship. 
 
 A Solemn League and Covenant, intended 
 to promote a union in religion, on presbyterian 
 principles, throughout the three kingdoms, was 
 the first object which engaged the attention of 
 the Assembly. This was pressed by the Scots 
 as a preliminary to their farther pYoceedino-s! 
 t was talien and subscribed with great solem- 
 nity by both houses, with the Scotch commis- 
 sioners arid Assembly of divines on Sept. 25th, 
 1643 ; after which orders were issued, that it 
 should be taken universally throughout England 
 and Scotland. The Committee of States cf the 
 latter country, ordered that it should be sworn 
 to and subscribed all over the kingdom, under 
 severe penalties. A form of presbyterian church 
 government was afterwards agreed to, and lastly, 
 a confession of faith, with larger and shorter ca- 
 
 \ *
 
 331 
 
 techisms, in the year 1647. The Assembly sat 
 for upwards of five years. 
 
 During the reign of the prefbyterian party in 
 England, a considerable number of ministers 
 were ejected from their livings, by virtue of a 
 warrant, also affecting schcol-masters, which 
 empowered commissioners to receive depositions 
 against those presumed to be immoral, or disaf- 
 fected to the parliament, or who had deserted 
 their cures. When, however, the causes of their 
 ejectment and the circumstances of the times, 
 are considered, the sufferings of these men ought 
 not to be compared to those of the ministers 
 ejected by the episcopal party in 1662. For 
 
 1. At this time the kingdom was involved in 
 a civil war: and in a season of tumult, confu- 
 sion and calamity, it is not surprising that harsh 
 measures should have been resorted to by the do- 
 minant party, in order to strengthen their inte- 
 rest. 
 
 But the ministers in 1662 were ejected in a 
 season not merely of peace but even of joy to 
 the whole land, and after an act of indemnity 
 had been passed. 
 
 2. In 1641, ministers wre cast out for their 
 immoral and scandalous behaviour, as well as 
 for refusing the covenant. 
 
 But in 1662, the ministers lost their livings 
 solely on account of their religious and political 
 scruples, and without any reference whatever to 
 their moral conduct. 
 
 3. Every advantage was given by the parlia- 
 ment to the persons accused, in order that they 
 miffht not be wrongfully convicted. 
 
 But the ministers in 1662 had just reason to 
 complain, that the time for subscribing was li- 
 mited to so short a period, that it was next to an 
 impossibility, that they should all have an oppor- 
 tunity of reading and examining the alterations 
 made in the service-book 3 so as to be able to
 
 give or refuse tlieir assent, wi-th a safe con- 
 science, within the appointed time. 
 
 And 4. In 1644, the parliament allowed one- 
 fifth of the income of their former livings to the 
 ejected ministers, for the use of themselves and 
 their families. 
 
 But the ministers in 1662, suffered a total loss, 
 ar.d were reduced to extreme poverty and dis- 
 tress. By a refinement of cruelty, the act of 
 Uniformity, by which they were ejected, was 
 appointed to take effect OH the day of the feast 
 of St. Bartholomew, by which those who should 
 resign would be prevented reaping any benefit 
 from the tithes of that year. 
 
 About 200 graduates, besides inferior scholars 
 were expelled from the university of Cambridge, 
 at this time, by the earl of Manchester and his 
 commissioners) on account of their hostility to 
 the proceedings of the parliament. Some time 
 afterwards, the university of Oxford experienced 
 a similar visitation. 
 
 In 1646, the Presbyterians having petitioned 
 parliament, that the covenant should be imposed 
 on the whole nation, under such penalties as the 
 houses should think fit, and that sectaries should 
 be discountenanced, the house of commons pub- 
 lishqd a Declaration against all preachers not 
 ordafned, and all such persons as should utter 
 any thing in derogation of the established church 
 government, or should disturb ministers in the 
 public exercise of religious duties. The Lords 
 published an order of a similar tendency. 
 
 The parliament in 1648 passed an ordinance 
 against blasphemy and heresy, which deserves 
 to be reprobated as most unrighteous and op- 
 pressive. It ordains " that all persons who shall 
 willingly maintain, publish or defend, by preach- 
 ing or writing, the following heresies with ob- 
 stinacy, shall, upon complaint, on proof, by the 
 oaths of two witnesses, before two justices of th
 
 333 
 
 P"ace, or confession of the party, be committed 
 to prison, without bail ormamprize, till the next 
 gaol delivery ; and in case the indictment shnli 
 then be found, and the party upon his trial shall 
 not abjure his said error, and his defence and 
 maintenance of the same, he shall suffer the 
 pains of death, as in case of felony, without 
 benefit of clergy ; and if he recant or abjure, 
 he s^iall remain in prison till he find sureties, 
 that he will next maintain the said heresies or er- 
 rors any more ; but if he relapse, and is con- 
 victed a second time, he shall sutler death as be- 
 fore." (For the heresies, &c. See Neal, Vol. 
 111. year 1648.) 
 
 This was a comprehensive engine of cruelty ; 
 and it is to be feared, considering the spirit of 
 the times, that *.he law was not put in execution, 
 only because the governing Presbyterians did 
 not find a convenient opportunity for carrying 
 the measure into effect. 
 
 In the same year, the ordinance for the more 
 offectual settling- the preabyterian government 
 received the sanction of both houses of par- 
 liament. It is a collection of the several ordi- 
 nances already passed ; and very properly lays 
 no penalty upon recusants, or such as do not 
 come to the sacrament, or submit to their dis- 
 cipline.* 
 
 The Presbyterians have been acquitted on the 
 most satisfactory evidence, of having been con- 
 cerned in the trial and execution of Charles I. 
 The parliament, who had no other object in the 
 defensive war which they maintained, than that 
 of preserving the rights and liberties of the peo- 
 ple from being destroyed by the king and his 
 counsellors, were proceeding to treat with their 
 sovereign, when all attempts at an accommoda- 
 tion were completely frustrated by the sectaries 
 
 * Neal's Hist Pur. Vol. III. p. 394.
 
 334 
 
 in the army. The parliament being about ( 
 meet after an adjournment, the avenues to the 
 house were found beset with soldier?, who refu- 
 sed admission to all except such as were in their 
 own interest. Forty-one members of the pree- 
 bjterian party were seized; above 1GO more 
 were excluded ; and none were allowed to enter 
 but the most furious ami determined of the In- 
 dependents, and these did not amount to more 
 than 50 or 60. Some opposition however to the 
 violent measures of the afmy having appeared 
 in the house, it was resolved not to suffer any 
 of the excluded members to sit, until they should 
 have subscribed the vote passed in their absence, 
 declaring the king's concessions unsatisfactory : 
 and the most active members of the presbyterian 
 party were committed to prison. 
 
 When they proceeded to the trial of the king, 
 many of the chief sectarian officers of the army 
 having been appointed in the number of his 
 judge? j the presbyterian clergy in England pro- 
 tested openly against the measure. 
 
 The Scotch commissioners protested in the 
 name of the whole kingdom of Scotland against 
 the king's trial and execution : and the General 
 Assembly, in a letter to Charles II, strongly ex- 
 pressed their detestation of the barbarous con- 
 duct of the sectaries towards his royal father. 
 
 In Ireland, the presbytery, assembled at Bel- 
 fast, Feb. 15th, 1648, framed a paper entitled, 
 " A necessary representation of the present evils 
 and imminent dangers to religion, laws and li- 
 berties, arising from the late and present prac- 
 tices of the sectarian party in England and their 
 abettors," to be read from the pulpits of their 
 several members. In this document, they strong- 
 ly express their abhorrence of the violent pro- 
 ceedings of the sectaries, in imprisoning many 
 members of parliament, seizing the person of 
 the king, carrying him frdm place to place, try-
 
 335 
 
 ing him and finally putting him (y death " an 
 act, say they, so horrible, as no history, divine 
 or human, ever had a precedent of the like." 
 "-These practices of the sectaries and their abet- 
 tors,- they declare, directly overturn the laws 
 and liberties of the kingdom, root out all lawful 
 and supreme magistracy, and introduce a fearful 
 confusion and lawless anarchy." 
 
 Their zeal prompted them even to write to 
 Sir Charles Coote, then at Londonderry, and to 
 Colonel Monk at Dundalk, to dissuade them 
 from complying with the mt asnres of those who 
 then held the reins of government. Both ap- 
 plications however were unsuccessful. 
 
 They discovered a hearty concern for the 
 king's interest by also reproving those under 
 their care for their neglect of duty towards him. 
 The following is a remarkable instance, record- 
 ed in their minutes : " April 10th, 1616. Com- 
 peared Mr. Forster, sovereign of Belfast, and 
 was rebuked for fencing, (i. e. holding) the 
 courts without mentioning the king's name, con- 
 trary to the covenant, who proaiised to amend 
 the same in time coming."* 
 
 When the Rump party, upon acquiring greater 
 strength, found that the presbytery were not to 
 be seduced from their loyal principles by methods 
 of persuasion, they determined to accomplish 
 their purpose by measures of coercion aud inti- 
 midation. Accordingly, colonel Venables, who 
 commanded in the northern district, summoned 
 the ministers to appear before him, to answer 
 for their conduct, in preaching, praying and 
 practising against the commonwealth of Eng- 
 land, and in favour of the royal family. Upon 
 this, some of the presbytery fled, some abscond- 
 ed and others were taken prisoners. Venables 
 aent them a proposal to this effect : that if they 
 
 Loy. Presb. p. 287.
 
 336 
 
 would give under their hands, that they would 
 not, in their sermons, prayers, or conferences, 
 meddle with state matters, any farther than was 
 allowed by the English government, they might 
 return in peace to their several charges or, de- 
 clining to do this, if they would engage to re- 
 move to Scotland in ten days, they should ho 
 freely allowed to do so, without being subjected 
 to any farther inconvenience. 
 
 Four ministers, Mr. John Drysdaill of Port- 
 aferry, Mr. Bautie, Mr. Main, and Mr. Alex- 
 ander, having at that time been brought priso- 
 ners to colonel Venablcs, defended their prin- 
 ciples and conduct with the most consummate 
 ability and address.* 
 
 In 1651, diligent search being made after 
 them, some fled and others were taken prisoners, 
 confined in Carrickfergus, and shortly after sent 
 off to Scotland, where they officiated for three 
 \ears. About seven remained in Ireland, viz. 
 ^Thomas Peebles, minister of Ivirkdonald, James 
 Gordon of Comber, Gilbert Ramsay of Bangor, 
 Anthony Kentfedy of Templepatrick, Robert 
 Cunningham of Broad-island and Patrick Adair 
 of Cairncastle. Under great difficulties they 
 continued to exercise the ministerial functions 
 through the succeeding year 1652. 
 
 The universal refusal by the ministers of the 
 oath called the Engagement, which required 
 them to be faithful to the Commonwealth of 
 England, without king and house of lords, is 
 an uncontrovertible proof of their inflexible in- 
 tegrity. For they were urged to take it, by 
 promises, importunities and threats, and were 
 reviled for refusing to comply. 
 
 The commissioners having desired a meeting 
 and conference with the presbytery in Belfast, 
 Oct. 21st, 1652, a long debate took place, but 
 
 Loy. Prttb. p. 289.
 
 337 
 
 the ministers would not in the least recede from 
 their principle, of refusing to recognise the pre- 
 sent government as lawful, and to bind them- 
 selves by any oath or subscription to it. Some 
 weeks afterwards, the commissioners proposed 
 sending some of them to Dublin, to appear be- 
 fore General Fleet wood and the council of offi- 
 cers, in order to explain their conduct. The 
 presbytery deputed Mr. Patrick Adair and Mr. 
 Archibald Ferguson, and instructed them to ad- 
 here with resolution to the principles maintained 
 before the commissioners. These gentlemen re- 
 plied to all the questions put to them with great 
 firmness and integrity; and in a few days were 
 dismissed, the court not having thought proper 
 to adopt any resolutions respecting them. 
 
 The commissioners not having been able to 
 make any impression on the ministers and peo- 
 ple, and finding that they constantly opposed 
 their measures, determined on transporting them 
 to the south of the kingdom. Accordingly in the 
 year 1653, having summoned the ministers to ap- 
 pear at Carrickfergus, and to bring with them 
 the greatest and best part of their parishioners, 
 that they might either take the engagement or 
 assi;n sufficient reasons for refusing it, the de- 
 sign was suddenly abandoned, even while a ship 
 was lying in the bay, ready to receive the minis- 
 ters on board, in consequence of the arrival of 
 intelligence from England, that Cromwell had 
 raised the parliament, dissolved the Common- 
 wealth and assumed the title of Lord Protector. 
 There being now therefore no '.Commonwealth 
 to which to swear fidelity, the ministers and 
 people were dismissed.* 
 
 The ministers opposed Cromwell as warmly 
 as they had the Commonwealth. Il^nry Crom- 
 well, the Lord Lieutenant, being much incensed 
 2 F 
 
 * Presb. Loy. p. 500.
 
 338 
 
 at their conduct, wrote threatening; letters to 
 them, and summoned two of their number, Mr. 
 Hart and Mr. Greg, to appear before him, and 
 answer for their neglect of the fasts and thanks- 
 givingsappointed by government. Having plead- 
 ed " that their consciences did not allow them 
 to comply with any power that was against the 
 constitution and lawful magistracy of the king- 
 dom," the viceroy charged them -with ingrati- 
 tude, because each of the ministers was in the 
 receipt of 100 a year from the government. 
 Bat this salary they did not consider as a gift, 
 which laid them under any obligations to ac- 
 knowledge the government, but as matter of 
 right ; for the usurpers had deprived them of the 
 tithes, and had given them in stead 100 each, 
 per annum, which was a very inadequate com- 
 pensation for the loss which they had sustained. 
 But though they held their livings by this preca- 
 rious tenure, they persisted in their loyal decla- 
 rations and resolutions, and publicly prayed for 
 the restoration of the king, even while exposed 
 to great danger from the army of the Protector. 
 At the Restoration, although they had been so 
 well affected towards the king, they were not 
 reinstated in the possession of their benefices, 
 which were intercepted by the episcopal clergy. 
 
 The Scotch were so well inclined to the king, 
 that they proclaimed and crowned him, ^and 
 granted him refuge jn their country, when he 
 could not appear in any other part of his domi- 
 nions. Jealous however of any attempts that 
 might be made to change the form of their reli- 
 gion, they required that he should sign the co- 
 venant. 
 
 In England, the republican party endeavour- 
 ed both by persuasion and terror, to prevent the 
 Presbyterians from publishing their sentiments 
 respecting the government. But all was insuf- 
 ficient to shake their principles ; for feoon after
 
 339 
 
 the death of Oliver, they made an open and bold 
 attempt to restore the king. It is remarkable, 
 that as the first Charles could not be destroyed 
 until the house of commons was cleared of the 
 Presbyterian members, so, the second Charles 
 could not be restored, until they were readmit*- 
 ted. A free parliament having been convened, 
 the king- was recalled by a vote of the 'house 
 May 1st, 1060. Ti.e Presbyterians had pre- 
 viously exerted their utmost influence in his be- 
 half. Immediately on this event, Mr. Calamy, 
 Dr. IVfanton, Mr. Bowles and otl-er eminent pres- 
 bjterian divines, repaired to Holland, to wait 
 upon his majesty, tvho gave them a very gracious 
 reception. 
 
 It was a very unguarded step in the Presbyte- 
 rians to procure the kingV restoration, without 
 bav ing obtained his acceptance of some specific 
 conditions for the preservation of civil and reli- 
 gious liberty. By this neglect, they lost -~\ l J J:e 
 advantages which they hid gained. Things 
 quickly reverted to their forn;er state. Indul- 
 gence was granted to tlje Papists, while protes- 
 tant Nonconformists were persecuted. A con- 
 ference between the Episcopalians and Presby- 
 terians \vas conducted in such a manner as to 
 terminate unfavourably to the latter: and the 
 king, notwithstanding his oath to the contrary, 
 restored prelacy in all its former splendor. 
 
 Two years after, the famous act of Unifor- 
 mity was passed, which made the terms of con- 
 formity more rigorous than at any former period, 
 and excluded perhaps one half the nation from 
 the national communion. The terms were, 1. 
 Re-ordination, if ministers nad not been epis- 
 copaily ordained before. 2. A -declaration of 
 their unfeigned assent and consent to all and 
 every thing prescribed and contained in the 
 :>'M)k of 1 ..'.mum Prayer, and administration 
 s and other rites and ceremo-
 
 340 
 
 nies -of the church of England, together with 
 the Psalter, and the form and manner of mak- 
 ing-, ordaining and consecrating- of bishop?, 
 priests and deacons.* 3. To take the oath of 
 canonical obedience. 4. To abjure the solemn 
 league and covenant. 5. To abjure the lawful- 
 ness of taking 1 arms against the king 1 , or any 
 commissioned by him, on any pretenee whatso- 
 ever. 
 
 The passing of this act was attended with 
 many unhappy consequences. For indepen- 
 dently of the sufferings endured by those who 
 were immediately afrected by it, and the evil 
 consequences inseparable from all impositions 
 in religious matters, many parishes were, for 
 a considerable time, without incumbents, and 
 many of those clergy who obtained livings were 
 either insufficient from their great youth, ex- 
 treme ignorance, bad moral characters or doubt- 
 fvil principles. How different from the men 
 v/hom they succeeded !t 
 
 * The last alteration* by public authority in the book of Com- 
 mon Prayer, were made in 1661. The book as improved by the 
 convocation, was subscribed by the bishop* and clergy, ll was 
 ratified by act of parliament, and received the royal assent. May 
 19th, 1662. Many applications have been since made to bave it 
 revised ; and particular alterations were proposed by a commission 
 of learned and excellent divines, in 1689; but the convocation 
 would not consent to any alterations whatsoever. 
 
 f " The principles and worship of Dissenters are not formed 
 upon such slight fonndntion as the unlearned and thoughtless may 
 imagine. They were thoroughly considered and judiciously re- 
 duced to the standard of Scripture and the writings of antiquity, 
 by a great number of men of learning and integrity ; I meaa 
 the Bartholomew divines, or the ministers ejected in the year 
 1662; men prepared to lose all and to suffer martyrdom itself ; 
 and who actually resigned their livings, (which with most of them 
 were, under God, all that they and their families had to subsist 
 upon,) miner than sin against God, and desert the cause of civil 
 pnd religious liberty ; which together with serious religion, would, 
 I am persuaded, have sunk to a very low ebb in the nation, had 
 it not been for the bold and noble stand these worthies made 
 against imposition upon conscience, profaneness and arbitrary 
 power. 
 
 "They had the best education England could afford : most of
 
 ' Two thousand conscientious ministers, says 
 Dr. Rees, were deprived by fiiis severe statute, 
 of the means of their subsistence, and of their 
 opportunities of usefulness : and the church lost 
 soire of its most learned, pious, upright, accep- 
 table arid zealous preachers ; so that, for a con- 
 siderable period, there was a lamentable defi- 
 ciency of persons under the establishment, who 
 were capable of conducting and aiding the de- 
 votion of their fellow Christians. The conse- 
 quence, and such as might naturally be expected. 
 was, that ignorance and depravity of morals, 
 sanctioned, alas ! by a licentious court, pre- 
 vailed to a very deplorable degree : and many 
 of the pious laity, who did not desert the church, 
 made grievous complaints of this want of suita- 
 ble instructors. Others, however, cast their lot 
 with the ministers whom they loved and reve- 
 renced, determined to succour them as far as 
 they were able, and to share with them in many 
 deprivations and sufferings.""* 
 
 The following penal statutes w r ere also enact- 
 2 F 2 
 
 them were excellent scholars ; judicious divines; pious, faithful 
 nd laborious ministers; of great zeal for God and religion; un- 
 daunted and courageous in their Master's work ; keeping close to 
 their people in the worst of times ; diligent in their studies ; solid, 
 affectionate, powerful, lively, awakening preachers;, aiming at 
 the advancement of real, vjtal religion, in the hearts and lives of 
 men, which, it cannot be denied, flourished greatly, wherever 
 they could influence. Particularly, they were men of great de- 
 rotion, and eminent abilities in prayer, uttered as God enabled 
 them, from the abundance of their hearts and affections; men 
 of divine eloquence in pleading at the throne of grace, raising 
 and melting the affections of their hearers, and being happily in- 
 strumental in transfusing into their souls the same spirit and 
 heavenly gift. And this was the ground of all their other quali- 
 fications ; they were excellent men, because excellent, instant and 
 fervent in prayer. 
 
 " Such were the fathers, the first formers of t!i? dissenting in- 
 terest. Let my soul fir erfr be with the snitfs of these men. '' 
 Taylor's Scripture Account of Prayer, p. 50. 
 
 * Address on occasion of laying the first stone of the oJd Jewrj 
 chapel, Sept. 5th, 1 SO*.
 
 342 
 
 ed against the Nonconformists in this reign : 
 the Corporation act, which required the oaths 
 of allegiance and supremacy, an oath declaring 
 it to be unlawful to take up arms against the 
 king, on any pretence whatsoever, and a decla- 
 ration against the covenant, the object of which 
 was, to exclude Dissenters from the lowest of- 
 fices of trust the Conventicle act, which for- 
 bade, under heavy fines, any persons attending 
 any separate meetings for religious worship*, 
 where more than five besides the fomily were pre- 
 sent : the Oxford act, which banished noncon- 
 formist ministers five miles from every corpora- 
 tion that sent members to parliament, and the 
 places where they formerly officiated, and ren- 
 dered them incapable of teaching any public or 
 private school: the Test act, which required 
 that all persons bearing any office of trust or 
 profit, shall, besides taking the oaths of supre- 
 macy and allegiance, receive the Lord's supper 
 according to the forms of the church of Eng- 
 land, and abjure transubstantiation. 
 
 It appears from a remarkable address pre- 
 sented by the house of commons to the king, in 
 1680, that it was the protestant nonconformists 
 who principally suffered by the penal statutes of 
 this reign. " The Papists, they say, escaped in 
 a manner untouched, while the edge of the laws 
 was turned against Protestant Dissenters." 
 
 In that year, though a bill for a comprehen- 
 sion was committed, it did not pass the house, 
 but was changed for another, intended to exempt 
 Protestant Dissenters from the penalties of an 
 act of the 35th of Elizabeth. The repeal passed 
 both houses ; but when it should have beer, of- 
 fered for the royal assent, it could not be found, 
 having been withdrawn from the table by the 
 king's particular order.* 
 
 * Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. IV. p. 406.
 
 343 
 
 The persecution in Scotland kept pace with 
 that in England, throughout the whole course of 
 this reign. The same acts were put in force 
 against the Nonconformists there, and the most 
 barbarous cruelties exercised. Enthusiasm was 
 encreased by persecution ; and the people were 
 readily persuaded to throw off their allegiance 
 to a government that gave them no protec- 
 tion. The sectaries being driven to despera- 
 tion, a military force was employed to act against 
 them, which execated summary vengeance on 
 all those who offered the slightest opposition to 
 the measures of the government. To avoid the 
 dreadful penalties to which they were liable, 
 great numbers transported their families into the 
 north of Ireland, where they were well received 
 by the inhabitants. 
 
 It deserves to be remarked, that Charles II, 
 had abjured the protestant religion, and that the 
 measures adopted by him and his court, were 
 subservient to a plan for restoring the popish re- 
 ligion, and rendering his power independent of 
 parliament, concerted between him and those at 
 the head of the French government. To assist 
 him in carrying this measure, the French king 
 agreed to pay him a subsidy of ^^00,000 a year.* 
 
 In 1671, a Declaration of indulgence to Non- 
 conformists was published at the instance of the 
 popish party, of which many, Protestant Dissen- 
 ters enjoyed the benefit ; but having been with- 
 drawn in 1673, the persecution was renewed in 
 its former rigour. 
 
 *' Many of the clergy of those days represent- 
 ed the schism of the Dissenters in the most ro- 
 proaehful light. Dr. South calls it " a schism 
 that unrepented of. will as infallibly ruin their 
 souls as theft, whoredom or murder, or any 
 
 * Dalrymple's Memoirs, Vol. I. p. 32.
 
 344 
 
 other of the most crying, damning sins whate- 
 ver." It is some relief, under this load of re- 
 proach, to be kept in countenance by the opinion- 
 of the pious, ingenious, learned, and sweet- 
 tempered bishop Taylor, as Dr. Jortin calls 
 him. " Such men," says this worthy prelate. 
 " would do well to consider, whether or not 
 such proceedings do not derive the guilt of schism 
 upon those who least think of it ; and whether 
 of the two is the schismatic, he that makes un- 
 necessary, and (supposing the state of things) 
 inconvenient impositions, or he that disobeys 
 them, because he cannot, without doing vio- 
 lence to his conscience, believe them ; he that 
 parts communion, because he cannot without sin 
 entertain it ; or they that have made it neces- 
 sary for him to separate, requiring such condi- 
 tions, which to no man are simply necessary, or 
 to him in particular are either sinful or impossi- 
 ble." Much to the same purpose is the opinion 
 of the ever memorable John Hales of Eaton. 
 " If the spiritual guides and fathers of the 
 church would be a little sparing of encumbering 
 churches with superfluities, and not over-rigid 
 in reviving obsolete customs or imposing new r 
 there would be far less danger of schism or su- 
 perstition. Meanwhile wheresoever false or sus- 
 pected opinions are made a piece of church li- 
 turgy* he who separates is not the schismatic, 
 but he who imposes."* 
 
 On the subject of the severities exercised by 
 the two parties of Episcopalians and Presbyte- 
 rians, the reader is presented with the following 
 extract from Dr. Campbell. 
 
 " Whether we ascribe persecution to ecclesi- 
 astical establishments, considered in a political 
 or religious view, it is contended, that all sects, 
 wheii in power, have been guilty of persecu- 
 
 * Manning*! Life of Towgood.
 
 345 
 
 lion. This is a levelling- principle and is a fash- 
 ionable one ; it decides readily without the trou- 
 ble of inquiry ; and assumes the appearance of 
 historical knowledge and candour : though there 
 is reason to think, that it is sometimes used to 
 evade difficulties with which tke person feels 
 himself entangled, and cannot easily got rid of, 
 But the Presbyterians of Scotland and Ireland 
 call upon their adversaries to produce one in- 
 stance of any man being fined, imprisoned, set 
 in the pillory, losing his ears, suffering torture 
 or death, because of his departing from the con- 
 fession of faith. See Preface to the Confes- 
 sion."* 
 
 In 1662, several preslryterian ministers in Ire- 
 land, were brought into trouble by the conspi- 
 racy of Major Bleed, a desperate adventurer 
 from England, who laid a plan to surprise the 
 f;,-4lc of Dublin, and seize on the person of the 
 duke of Ormond, the Lori! Lieutenant. Blood, 
 and his brother-in-law, Lecky, who was partner 
 with him in the conspiracy, being Dissenters, 
 the enemies of the Presbyterians improved tins 
 circumstance against them; and in particular, 
 caused suspicion to fall on three ministers, Mr. 
 Adair, Mr. Stuart and Mr. Semple, who hap- 
 pened to be in Dublin shortly before the plot 
 was discovered, having been sent thither to wait 
 on the Lord Lieutenant with an address from 
 their brethren in the north. These ministers 
 were brought up to Dublin ; but after a very se- 
 vere and critical examination, no ground of ac- 
 cusation could be found against them. Some other 
 persons were also examined : but every new cir- 
 cumstance which came to light, served only 
 the more strongly to establish their innocence. 
 The matter issued iu a mannerentirely creditable 
 to the loyalty and honour of both the clergy and 
 
 * Answer to the Bp. of Cloyne. p 70.
 
 laity of the presbyterian body. The duke, how- 
 ever, at the instigation of their adversaries, had 
 caused many of the ministers to be imprisoned, 
 merely on suspicion. Seven of them, namely, 
 Mr. Greg, Mr. Drysdaill, Mr. Stuart, Mr. Alex- 
 ander llutcheson, Mr. Richardson, Mr. Ratnsay, 
 and Mr. Gordon, were imprisoned in Carling- 
 ford, where they received very harsh treatment. 
 He at the same time disarmed all the Scots resi- 
 dent in the country.* 
 
 Sir Arthur Forbes, (afterwards earl of Gra- 
 nard) having been in London in Jb'72, had some 
 conversation with the king, concerning the pres- 
 byterian ministers and people of the north of 
 Ireland. The king inquired of Sir Arthur con- 
 cerning the ministers' conduct and manner of 
 life, stating that he had always been informed 
 that they were loyal subjects, and that though 
 they had suffered on that account, they were 
 men of peaceable behaviour. Sir Arthur having 
 confirmed this account antf added that they and 
 their people were, by no means, in affluent, cir- 
 cumstances, the king, " of his own mere mo- 
 tion," granted them 6GO per annum out of the 
 revenue of Ireland, (a sum which he had de- 
 signed for a charitable use) to be paid to Sir 
 ArtSiur quarterly, for secret service. i 
 
 Sir Arthur, on coming to Ireland, wrote for 
 four ministers to come to him to Dublin, that 
 he migkt settle with them concerning the distri- 
 bution of the money. The four ministers \vere, 
 Patrick Adair, William Semple, Alexander 
 Hutcheson, and Archibald Hamilton.' Having 
 consulted apart, they gave it as their opinion, 
 that each minister who was in the country in the 
 
 * Loy. Presb. p. 378, &c. 
 
 f The king had intended to appropriate 1200 to the use of 
 the ministers; supposing that so much remained undisposed of 
 in the settlement of the revenue of Ireland ; but upon inquiry it 
 was found, that there was only the half of that sum.
 
 347 
 
 year 1G60, should have an equal proportion; 
 and that the widows and orphans of those who 
 were removed by death, might share of the 
 king's bounty : with which plan Sir Arthur be- 
 ing pleased, ordered immediate payment for the 
 first quarter. 
 
 Towards the end of Charles's reign, however, 
 the court having revived its persecution of the 
 Dissenters, the bounty was withdrawn. 
 
 James II had not been long seated on the 
 throne, till the storm of persecution began to 
 rage with all its former violence. The Papists 
 were openly favoured and protected by the court, 
 while the meeting-houses of the Protestant Dis- 
 sejiters were shut up, and the most rigorous 
 measures employed, to prevent their ministers 
 officiating amongst them even in private houses. 
 But while the severities which were exercised 
 against the dissenting ministers forced some of 
 them into the church, it had a surprizing con- 
 trary effect on some of the clergy who had con- 
 formed, and induced them to renounce the na- 
 tional church, as a persecuting establishment, 
 and to join the Dissenters.* 
 
 In 1686, James, by letters mandatory, estab- 
 lished a court of ecclesiastical commission, for 
 trying and punishing the offences of the clergy 
 in the exercise of their duty. This court by the 
 nature of its constitution and the powers with 
 which it was invested, set all law and justice at 
 defiance. 
 
 The popish faction having a fair prospect of 
 acquiring an ascendency in church and state, 
 by the great encouragement which they received 
 from the crown, many of the episcopal clergy 
 became alarmed, and testified a strenuous oppo- 
 sition to the measures of the court, by preaclring 
 and writing against popery. This produced" a 
 
 " Nwd's Hist. Pur. Vol. IV. p. 442,
 
 348 
 
 rupture between the church and theking, which 
 terminated in the downfal of the latter. 
 
 James being- determined on the establishment 
 of popery, arbitrarily dispensed with the penal 
 laws, and granted full toleration to Nonconfor- 
 mists. The Dissenters were thus relieved from 
 the scourge of persecusion ; and being taken 
 into favour, were caressed and courted both by 
 the king and the Church. Meanwhile the king 
 directed the power of the prerogative against 
 the church by appointing an ecclesiastical com- 
 mission as above mentioned, and even raised a 
 standing army to oppose it. 
 
 Thankful as the Dissenters were for the li- 
 berty which they now enjoyed, they were never- 
 theless fearful of the issue, being distrustful of 
 that clemency which was founded on a dispensing 
 power not recognised by the laws of the realm! 
 Though admitted to serve in offices of trust and 
 profit, they did not by any means, fall in with 
 the measures of the court, nor enter into any al- 
 liance with the Papists. 
 
 On the Irish Catholics the king placed great 
 dependance ; and matters had been so managed 
 that all the civil and military offices in Ireland 
 were put into their hands. A regular popish hi- 
 erarchy was established. Many Protestants ap- 
 prehensive of the most direful visitations of ar- 
 bitrary power, transported themselves into Eng- 
 land and other more distant countries. 
 
 The church party in England were almost 
 driven to despair ; and imagining themselves to 
 be on the brink of ruin, implored the aid of the 
 Dissenters, giving them the strongest assurances 
 of toleration and a liberal comprehension, in 
 case they would assist in delivering them out of 
 their present troubles. At this juncture, the 
 Dissenters, notwithstanding the dreadful perse- 
 cutions they had formerly suffered from that 
 party, did not scruple to unite with them against
 
 34,9 
 
 the king. Had they supported the king, who 
 aimed at the establishment of popery, and the 
 utter subversion of civil and religious liberty, 
 they would have been manifestly disloyal to the 
 principles of the British constitution. They 
 were extremely active and zealous in promoting 
 the happy revolution ; and they hailed the prince 
 of Orange as the guardian and supporter of the 
 protestant cause and the natural rights of man- 
 kind. 
 
 William and Mary were no sooner seated on 
 the throne, than the Dissenting ministers in 
 London and its vicinity waited on their majes- 
 ties with an address of congratulation. 
 
 Notwithstanding the apparent unanimity which 
 prevailed, in the first instance, in favour of king 
 William, there was a considerable party in fa- 
 vour of king James. Many of the High Church 
 clergy in particular were ill affected towards the 
 Prince of Orange. A majority of the right Rev. 
 bench voted against the motion, that the king 
 had abdicated, and that the throne was vacant ; 
 and when the government came to be settled on 
 their majesties, many-of the established clergy, 
 untrue to their first professions, refused to sub- 
 mit to it, while those who acquiesced, took the 
 oaths with such limitations and mental reserva- 
 tions, as to be justly chargeable with acting a 
 very disingenuous part.* 
 
 A bill was early brought into parliament, for 
 " toleration of Protestant Dissenters," which 
 passed without difficulty.t The king was desi- 
 rous that public offices should be left open for 
 all his loyal protestant subjects ; but the Corpo- 
 ration and Test acts were suffered to remain in 
 2 G 
 
 Neal's Hist. Pur. Vol. IV, p. 490, 494. 
 
 f The toleration thus obtained should be rather called, in the 
 language of a late celebrated judge, an ettablishment ; for such it 
 was to all who could comply with the conditions on which it wa 
 gram ted. Recs's Addrtss.
 
 350 
 
 force. The Toleration act required Dissenters 
 to take the oaths to the government, to make the 
 declaration against popery, and to subscribe the 
 doctrinal articles of the church of England. 
 Those were excluded from its benefits, who in 
 preaching or writing, should deny the doctrine 
 of the Trinity as declared in those articles. 
 
 A solemn declaration was accepted of from 
 Quakers in place of the oaths required by the 
 act. The places of worship of Dissenters were 
 to be registered, and kept unlocked during di- 
 vine service. 
 
 His majesty was also anxious that Dissenters 
 should be comprehended in the legal ecclesiasti- 
 cal establishment : but the church party, not- 
 withstanding the promises which they had made 
 in their distress, warmly opposed the measure. 
 Thus early they discovered an implacable hatred 
 to the Nonconformists, and seemed desirous of 
 renewing their former methods of persecution.* 
 When the Convocation met for the first time 
 after the Revolution, they utterly rejected the 
 idea of a comprehension, as suggested by the 
 parliament, and even disowned a common union 
 with the foreign protestant churches. t 
 
 The king consented to the abolition of epis- 
 copacy in Scotland, where all ranks took the 
 oath of allegiance to his Majesty, and subscribed 
 the assurance, declaring him to be king de jure 
 as well as de facto. 
 
 In Ireland, the presbyterian ministers were so 
 forward in their zeal, that they commissioned 
 two of their number, Patrick Adair and John 
 Abernethy, to wait upon the Prince of Orange, 
 before he was proclaimed king, to congratulate 
 him on his safe arrival, and to encourage him in 
 the great enterprize which he had undertaken. 
 They concerted measures with some of the no- 
 
 Buruet's Hist, of his own times, Vol II. p. 7. } Ibid. p. 19.
 
 351 
 
 hilityand most eminent gentry of the established 
 church, for putting the country in a state of de- 
 fence againt king- James and his adherent-. 
 That king; William was entirely sensible of the.ir 
 attachment to his person and government, is ap- 
 parent from various testimonials published in 
 their favour. One of these is a letter from the 
 king to the duke of Schomberg, general of the 
 land forces, dated Whitehall, Nov. 9th, 1689. 
 In this he states, that some presbyterian minis- 
 ters have humbly besought for themselves, their 
 brethren and their congregations in the province 
 of Ulster, that he would take them under his 
 gracious protection and that he, being entirely 
 satisfied of their loyalty and fidelity, and com- 
 miserating their late sufferings and calamities, 
 thinks fit to grant their request; and therefore 
 recommends them to the duke, in a particular 
 manner, requiring him to give them that protec- 
 tion and support which they deserve, for their 
 affection to his service. 
 
 Previ js to this, Mr. Adair and Mr. Aber- 
 iiettiy, had waited on the king with a petition, 
 praying that he would prevent all further perse- 
 cution on account of nonconformity that he 
 would encourage a pure gospel ministry, and 
 that he would grant some relief to those minis- 
 ters who had suffered in the late public calami- 
 ties. To this application his Majesty was pleased 
 to give a most gracious answer.* 
 
 Another testimonial relates to a grant of Royal 
 Bounty. The order was issued at Hillsborough, 
 June 19th, 1690, for the payment of 1200 into 
 the hands of seven ministers therein named, 
 for the use of them and the other presbyterian 
 ministers in the north and was directed to Chris- 
 topher Carletou, Esq. collector of the port of 
 
 * When in London, the ministers wrote for farther direc- 
 tions to their brethren, who were then in Scotland, I.nvirjj; been 
 banished from their country by the Irish. Lay. Presb. p. 408.
 
 Belfast. Whether or not there was any thing 
 informal in this order, does not appear : but on 
 the 20th of August following, king William 
 haying joined the army in Flanders, and queen 
 Mary being regent, letters patent passed the 
 great seal of Ireland, granting to seven minis- 
 ters, during pleasure, for the use of the minis- 
 ters of the north of Ireland, 1200 per annum, 
 to be paid quarterly out of any of the revenues 
 of the kingdom. 
 
 In the reign of queen Anne, a bill was brought 
 into parliament against occasional conformity, 
 under the specious title of " An Act to preserve 
 the protestant religion, and to confirm the tole- 
 ration, and farther to secure the protestant suc- 
 cession," which obtained the royal assent in 
 1711. The act however declares, " that if any 
 persons in office, who by the laws are obliged to 
 qualify themselves, by receiving the sacrament 
 or test, shall ever resort to a conventicle or 
 meeting of Dissenters for religious worship, du- 
 ring the time of their continuance in such office, 
 they shall forfeit 20 for every such offence, and 
 be disqualified for any office for the future, till 
 they have made oath that they have entirely con- 
 formed to the church, and not been at any con- 
 venticle for the space of a whole year." it was 
 now therefore determined to revive the persecu- 
 tion against the Dissenters. 
 
 In this reign the union between England and 
 Scotland took place, when the Scottish churcli 
 was finally established by act of parliament. Its 
 government has been since guaranteed by the 
 act of Union with Ireland. 
 
 In 1704, an act entitled, An Act to prevent 
 the further growth of popery, was passed in Ire- 
 land, by which the sacramental test was estab- 
 lished in that kingdom. 
 
 In the last year of the queen, the toleration 
 was still farther limited by " An Act to prevent
 
 53 
 
 the growth of schism." By this, the education 
 of youth was to be taken out of the hands of the 
 Dissenters, and entrusted only with those who 
 were full and entire conformists. By the inser- 
 tion of a clause in the act, it was made to extend 
 to Ireland. 
 
 Though the Schism bill extended only to 
 school- masters and tutors, yet it was feared from 
 the character of Anne's ministry, that the meet- 
 ing-houses of Dissenters would have been shut 
 up. In fact, between the time of the queen's 
 death and the Hews of it arriving, the meeting- 
 houses of Downpatrick, Antrim and Rathfriland 
 were nailed up by some of the church party. 
 
 In 17lb', a remarkable Work, " Free and 
 Candid Disquisitions, relating to the church of 
 England and the means of advancing religion 
 therein," was published in England. This is a 
 model of humility, modesty and deference to au- 
 thority. It was written by a number of pious 
 and learned divines of the church of England, 
 to be submitted to the convocation. Their ob- 
 ject is, to plead for a reform in the service of the 
 church ; and the particulars they complain of, 
 are the same to which Dissenters have always 
 objected. They confirm their own opinions, and 
 those of many others of their brethren, by enu- 
 merating the distinguished person^, who had, at 
 different times, recommended similar reforms. 
 These are Lord Bacon, bishops arid other di- 
 vines at Westminster, 1611 ; bishops Saunder- 
 derson, Gauden, Wilkins, Croft, Stillingfleet, 
 Wetcnhall, Dr. Hammond, Lord Keej-xer Brido- 
 man, Lord chief justice Hale, Dr. Burton, Mr. 
 Hunt, Dr. Whitby. The ecclesiastical com- 
 missioners in 1689, viz. archbishop Lutuplugh, 
 bishops Compton, M?w, Lloyde, Snrnt. Smith, 
 Trelawny, Harriet, Humphrys, Stratford and 
 the following ui vines Dr. Stillin^tleet, Tillot- 
 t>t>n, Sharpe, Aldridgv, Hull, P.I'ji.^gue, Bcv-
 
 eridge, Alston, Scot, Grove, Patrick, Meggot, 
 Kidder, Jane, Beaumont, Goodman, Battely, 
 Tennison, Fowler and Williams; as also bishops 
 Kennett and Wake, Mr. Dawson, Mr. Needham, 
 Mr. Johnson, Dr. Read, &c. 
 
 On the decease of king William, the trustees 
 for the Royal Bounty petitioned queen /Vnne to 
 renew the grant. This she was pleased to do, 
 by her letters patent, but with the following li- 
 mitations : u upon trust nevertheless that the 
 money which shall be received thereupon, from 
 time to time, shall be distributed to and amongst 
 the said Presbyterian ministers or such of them, 
 and in such proportions as shall be appointed 
 from time to time, in lists to be approved of and 
 signed by our Lieutenant Deputy or other Chief 
 Governor or Governors of our said kingdom of 
 Ireland, for the time being."* 
 
 Under the illustrious house of Hanover, the 
 Presbyterians have largely enjoyed the blessings 
 of civil and religious liberty, and have liberally 
 shared the favours of royal munificence. 
 
 The Schism bill was repealed by George I, 
 who was fully satisfied, that the Dissenters were 
 thus persecuted because of their opposition to 
 the High Church principles, and to a Tory and 
 Jacobite ministry. The same monarch, with his 
 own hand, struck out of the Irish act of Tole- 
 ration that clause which stands in the English 
 act, that required presbyterian ministers to sub- 
 scribe the doctrinal articles of the established 
 church. t 
 
 * It appears however that from the time of the first grant in 
 1672 until 1803, the ministers of the Synod possessed uncon- 
 trolled authority in the distribution of the R I). 
 
 f That the dissenting ministers in Ireland obtained a legal to- 
 leration upon more catholic and general terms was entirely 
 owing to the friendly interposition of his Majesty king George I, 
 who upon receiving the proposals of the Irish ministers, it is re- 
 ported, should say : " They know not what they would be at ; 
 and that they should have a toleration without any subscription" 
 M. S. A passage in the Narrative 'of the noasubscribcrs \>. 
 235, may refer to this.
 
 355 
 
 The Presbyterians of Ireland, so far from be- 
 ing an oftence to the government, are counte- 
 nanced and supported by it. They are amply 
 tolerated in the profession of their peculiar re- 
 ligious principles ; and their places of worship 
 are protected from violence by the operation of 
 good laws. The cry of schism has Ion"; ceased ; 
 except perhaps occasionally with a few con- 
 temptible individuals, deplorably under the do- 
 minion of self -interest, ignorance, prejudice or 
 passion. 
 
 As the act of Toleration provided no relief 
 for dissenting tutors and school-masters, who 
 were still obliged to make a declaration that they 
 would conform to the Liturgy of the church of 
 England ; and as subscription to the doctrinal 
 articles was also considered a grievance, the 
 Dissenters applied to parliament on this subject 
 in 1772 and 1773, but without effect. However, 
 an act was passed in 1779, by which the benefits 
 of the Toleration act were granted to Protes- 
 lant Dissenting ministers and school-masters, 
 on condition of their taking the oath of alle- 
 giance and supremacy, making the declaration 
 iij.yainst popery, and declaring their belief that 
 the Holy Scriptures contain the revealed will of 
 (lod. (See note page 132 of this work.) 
 
 lu the 19th and 20th of George Hld's reign, 
 the Test act with reference to Irish Protestant 
 Dissenters was repealed by the Irish parliament ; 
 so that they can now hold oflices of trust and 
 power in Ireland without prejudice to their re- 
 ligious profession. 
 
 lit England, the operation of the Test and" 
 Corporation acts is suspended by the annual in- 
 demnity bills. Each bill pardons all past of- 
 fences, provided the law shall be complied with 
 In- fore a certain day : and before that day ar- 
 rives, another indemnity bill succeeds. 
 
 In the year 1813, there was also passed an
 
 3,56 
 
 act, " to relieve persons who impugn the doc- 
 trine of the Holy Trinity, from certain penal- 
 ties," by which all the penal and restrictive sta- 
 tutes on this subject were repealed. 
 
 In the reign of George I, 8QO per annum 
 were divided in equal shares between the mi- 
 nisters of the Synod and those of the Southern 
 Association, as an acknowledgement for their 
 services in the Hanoverian succession. 
 
 In 1784, government granted an additional 
 sum of 1000 per annum to the ministers of 
 the Synod, to be distributed at the pleasure of- 
 the chief governor or governors of the kingdom. 
 
 In 1792, ^5000 were granted, during plea- 
 sure, which were divided among the ministers of 
 the Synod and presbytery of Antrim, the Sece- 
 ders, the Southern Association, and the minis- 
 ter of the French church, St. Peters's, Dublin. 
 
 In 1803, the congregations under the care of 
 the Synod and presbytery of Antrim were ar- 
 ranged into three classes, according to the num- 
 ber of families and stipend of each ; and the mi- 
 nisters, as the congregations stood in their first, 
 second or third class, were appointed to receive 
 respectively, 100, 75 or 50 pounds per annum. 
 By the terms of this augmentation, a power is 
 reserved to his Majesty's representative, of with- 
 holding the bounty, in the first instance, from a 
 minister appointed to the charge of a congrega- 
 tion, if occasion should require, but once grant- 
 ed, it is in no case to be withdrawn from any 
 minister, so long as the grant shall be continued 
 to the body at large. 
 
 The government studiously avoids all inter- 
 ference with the discipline of the presbyterian 
 church. 
 
 It deserves to be remarked, that according to 
 the terms of all the former grants, the Bounty 
 might not only have been withhoiden at first, 
 but withdrawn afterwards from any particular
 
 55? 
 
 minister : but by the kindness and liberality of 
 government, the present arrangement, which 
 nuikos a permanent provision for the support of 
 well-conducted ministers, is much more favour- 
 able to their independence. 
 
 It should also be remembered with gratitude, 
 that several additional bounties have been ob- 
 tained from government since the time when the 
 last general grant was made. 
 
 The General Synod, is a court in which all 
 matters relating to the government and vliscip- 
 line of the church may be brought under review. 
 Hence new regulations are, from tim'j to ti >;e 
 adopted, and old ones altered or repealed, as 
 the wisdom and experience of the members may 
 suggest. By these means, every thing necessary 
 to reformation may be brought forward and car- 
 ried into effect with facility and despatch. 
 
 At the same time, however, that the General 
 Synod admits of change in its regulations and 
 resolutions, its decisions are by no means go- 
 verned by popular prejudice or caprice. The 
 voice of the people is heard ; but under such 
 circumstances as effectually to serve the cause of 
 true religion. 
 
 From the time of the first establishment of 
 Presbyterians in Ulster, their ministers claimed 
 and exercised the privilege of celebrating the 
 ordinance of marrbge among them. On this 
 account they were frequently harassed with vex- 
 atious prosecutions in the bishop's courts, as 
 they had no statute law in their favour. To 
 prevent such proceedings in tinre to come, an 
 act was passed in the Irish parliament, in 1782, 
 by which it was declared that their marriages 
 were good and validate all intents and purposes 
 whatsoever. 
 
 The General Synod, anxious, in the exercise 
 of this as of every other privilege, to show 
 themselves not unworthy of the confidence re-
 
 ssa 
 
 posed in them, and deeply sensible of the evils 
 attendant on irregular marriages, have fre- 
 quently taken the subject into their serious con- 
 sideration, and issued such orders, as appeared 
 likely to secure an observance of sound discip- 
 line in this matter. 
 
 Thus, marriages are not to be celebrated with- 
 out consent of parents or guardians, except in 
 such cases as their refusal shall be judged un- 
 reasonable. 
 
 No persons are to be joined, in marriage by 
 any vagrant or degraded minister or person 
 falsely pretending to be a minister. 
 
 Any minister of the body who shall join in 
 marriagq any man or woman, not under his care, 
 but under the care of some other regular minis- 
 ter of the Christian church, without the consent 
 in writing of the minister under whose pastoral 
 care the person or persons may be ; or of the 
 Session, in case of vacancy or absence of minis- 
 ter; or of the parents, in case of the refusal of 
 the minister or session, specified by them or 
 him, to arise only from the want of compliance 
 with the proclamation of bans ; shall, for the 
 first offence, be suspended ab officio, one month ; 
 for the second, three months : for *he third be 
 degraded. And in case of cither of the parties 
 belonging to the established church, no minister 
 of our body shall, under the above penalty, ce- 
 lebrate marriage without the full consent in wri- 
 ting, of the clergyman to whom (he party shall 
 belong. 
 
 It was also resolved by the Synod, that no 
 minister belonging to the body, shall, under 
 pain of the above-mentioned penalties, cele- 
 brate marriage, where one of the parties at least, 
 is not a member of his own congregation, ex- 
 cept in the following cases, viz. 1. In case of 
 vacant congregations, where the parties are duly 
 certified by the session of the vacant congrega-
 
 359 
 
 tion. 2. In case of the absence, sickness or 
 special request, of a neighbouring minister, 
 upon the parties being duly certified by said 
 minister or his session. 
 
 The following resolution also was unanimously 
 agreed to : That no minister of this synod 
 shall, on any account whatever, demand or 
 exact money for celebrating marriage, or com- 
 mute proclamation for money. 
 
 It may be added, that this venerablebody has 
 always discovered a very laudable anxiety to 
 promote useful learning; in the church. Many 
 excellent regulations have been made, at diffe- 
 rent times, to secure a sufficient knowlege of 
 language, science and divinity, in those designed 
 for the sacred office ; that the ministry might be 
 as respectable by its learning, as its piety and 
 virtue. 
 
 So long ago, as the reign of Charles II, the 
 Rev. Thomas Gowan, a man of great learning 
 and talents, taught philosophy and divinity at 
 Antrim with celebrity and success, for manv 
 years. And Mr. John Hutchison, a man of ex- 
 cellent acquirements in science, taught philoso- 
 phy for several years at Newtownards. At a 
 subsequent period, the Rev. James Macalpine 
 taught a philosophy school at Killeleagh, by li- 
 cense from the chancellor of the diocess. The 
 students afterwards attended lectures on divinity 
 at Belfast, delivered by the Rev. Mr. M'Bride. 
 At present, lectures on various subjects are 
 given in the Belfast Academical Institution, 
 more particularly for the instruction of candi- 
 dates for the presbyterian ministry. 
 
 For a long period, the Scotch colleges have 
 been the usual place of resort for divinity stu- 
 dents of the presbyterian persuasion from the 
 north of Ireland. These have principally fre- 
 quented the university of Glasgow, which has 
 long been distinguished for professors of emi- 
 nent abilities.
 
 360 
 
 In 1770, various regulations were adopted by 
 the General Synod, prescribing to students of 
 divinity a particular course of study at college, 
 and directing that they should be regularly ex- 
 amined by the several presbyteries. One of the 
 ministers was, at this time, directed to write to 
 the universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh, to 
 request that the professors would be particular 
 and circumspect in granting certificates to Irish 
 students. 
 
 In 1804, rules still more full and precise were 
 enjoined by the Synod : and in 1807, the sub- 
 ject having been again brought under review, 
 the following regulations were adopted in place 
 of all former regulations : 
 
 1. That students intending to become candi- 
 dates for the ministry, shall be examined and 
 approved of by a presbytery of this synod, in 
 the Greek and Latin languages, geography and 
 English grammar. 
 
 That such students, having read Virgil, Ho- 
 race, Sallust and Cicero de Officiis, the Greek 
 Testament, Homer, Xenophon's Cyropaedia, 
 may be examined in such of these books as the 
 presbytery may find sufficient to satisfy them of 
 their possessing a competent knowledge of the 
 Greek and Latin languages. 
 
 That the presbyteries report annually to the 
 Synod the names of the students they have ex- 
 amined and approved of, and shall give such 
 students certificates of their approbation. 
 
 2. That it be recommended to the presby- 
 teries, that every student shall be examined by 
 his presbytery, on his return from college, each 
 session, in the sciences he has studied, during 
 that session. 
 
 That the intervals between the college ses- 
 sions shall be spent in studying the following- 
 subjects civil history, Jewish antiquities, ec- 
 clesiastical history, Bible criticism and divinity,
 
 361 
 
 as the presbyteries may find proper to prescribe. 
 The presbyteries to require specimens of com- 
 position, elocution and devotional exercises. 
 
 3. That students be permitted to enter on 
 presbyterial trials, upon their studying divinity, 
 Hebrew, and church history, in a regular semi- 
 nary of learning, one session after taking a de- 
 gree in arts. 
 
 4. If any student should have commenced his 
 studies, without a particular view to the ministry, 
 or should come from another church, and after- 
 wards direct his attention to the presbyterian mi- 
 nistry, upon presenting himself to a presbytery, 
 he shall be examined, as other students are, at 
 their entrance ; and if found qualified, he shall 
 be placed on the same footing with students who 
 have attended the same number of sessions that 
 he has done. 
 
 5. Should any presbytery license any young 
 man to preach the Gospel, in violation of these 
 rules, such license shall be deemed null and 
 void, and the presbytery so offending subjected 
 to the severe censure of this synod. 
 
 The following is a sketch of the practice of 
 the Synod with respect to license and ordination. 
 
 A candidate for the ministry having acquitted 
 himself in his examinations, and in delivering 
 the necessary discourses,* to the satisfaction of 
 the presbytery, is then licensed to preach the 
 Gospel. In this act, two thirds of the presby- 
 tery present must concur. He is now denomi- 
 nated a probationer, and is under the control 
 and direction of his prebytery. 
 
 When a congregation is desirous of inviting 
 a minister or probationer on trials, two thirds 
 of the presbytery regularly assembled must con- 
 2 H 
 
 * These are a homily, a lecture, an exegesis or common 
 head, a presbyterial exercise and a popular discourse. Besides 
 these, various specimens are frequently required from young men 
 before they are entered on trials.
 
 362 
 
 cur in the invitation. The candidate is then re- 
 gularly transmitted from the presbytery to which 
 lie may belong. On being heard for the time 
 appointed, commonly a month, the minds of the 
 congregation are taken respecting him ; two 
 thirds being necessary to form a majority ; and 
 these reckoned from the number, quality and 
 stipend of those who vote. The minister who 
 takes the poll, is directed by an authentic list of 
 voters, put into his hands ten days before the 
 poll. The call is subscribed by the people, and 
 attested by the minister. 
 
 If the candidate chosen be a probationer, he 
 is put through a course of second trials, pre- 
 vious to ordination. And so completely does 
 the election of a minister rest with the people, 
 that immediately previous to ordination, they 
 are asked whether or no they continue to abide 
 by their call. The candidate having answered 
 such questions as are judged necessary to satis- 
 fy the ministers and people as to the soundness 
 of his principles, the presbytery proceed to or- 
 dination by prayer and the imposition of hands. 
 The service commonly consists of an ordination 
 sermon, a discourse on the ordinance, the dedi- 
 catory prayer, and the charge to the minister and 
 the people. 
 
 Two thirds of the presbytery present must 
 concur in the ordination ; and if any minister 
 shall protest against it, all farther proceedings 
 must cease until next meeting of General Synod. 
 The same is the case with respect to licensing 
 and installing. 
 
 The General Synod has, from the earliest pe- 
 riods, been in the habit of addressing Majesty 
 on suitable occasions, and of publishing, from 
 time to time, loyal and patriotic declarations. 
 
 In the Synod of 1799, the several presbyteries 
 having made their reports, concerning the con- 
 duct of their ministers and probationers during
 
 363 
 
 the troubles of the preceding year, according to 
 the injunction of last meeting, the Synod had the 
 satisfaction of finding that t4 the general conduct 
 of its members and probationers has been con- 
 formable to order and good government, in the 
 late afflicting circumstances of the country.- 
 
 " On the whole of this melancholy and most 
 painful subject, while the Synod reflects with sor- 
 row on the scandal brought upon its reputation, 
 by the indiscretion and misconduct of a few mis- 
 guided and unworthy individuals, it feels confi- 
 dent in declaring, that there is no ground forsus- 
 pecting its loyalty as a body : and it strongly en- 
 joins every member and licentiate to observe 
 such peaceable conduct and discreet conversa- 
 tion, as become their profession ; and by ail 
 unremitting application to the proper duties of 
 their ministerial calling, to recommend them- 
 selves as blameless in the sight of God and the 
 world." 
 
 In 1751, the ministers of the Syn-od established 
 a fund for the benefit of their widows and or- 
 phan families. It possesses this peculiar excel- 
 lence that in case a minister shall survive his 
 wife, his family (if any) enjoys the benefit of 
 the fund for eight years. Or, if the widow die 
 within eight years after the death of her husband, 
 the annuity, for the remainder of the eight years, 
 is made good to the family. The fund has been 
 assisted by various bequests ; but has arrived at 
 its present very flourishing state chiefly by rea- 
 son of the augmentation of the Royal Bounty. 
 It* members are incorporated by act of parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 From the above account it appears, that the 
 establishment of Presbyterians in the north of 
 Ireland, was, as Dr. Campbell observes, of a 
 peculiar kind. They were no more dissenters 
 from the established" church, than the members 
 of that church were dissenters from them. They
 
 364. 
 
 made no rent or breach in the church of which 
 they were never members, except by a compre- 
 hension, which should be ever desirable to liberal 
 minds. They were a part cut out from the church 
 of Scotland, and planted in Ireland, where they 
 have been of signal service to the protestant es- 
 tablishment, and even to the episcopal church 
 itself. 
 
 From the nature of their first establishment, 
 they have not only a right to toleration in com- 
 mon with other good subjects, but have a claim 
 on the state for support and protection ; and this 
 claim is strengthened by the manner in which 
 they lost the privileges and emoluments of their 
 church.* 
 
 The Presbyterians of Ireland wish well to 
 Christians of all other denominations, and de- 
 sire to live in peace and harmony with all their 
 fellow-subjects. It is not to be expected, how- 
 ever, that out of complaisance to the members 
 of any other church, they should refrain from 
 publicly inculcating their peculiar principles, 
 and of defending them before the world. 
 
 The compass of this sketch does not afford 
 room for noticing the Presbyterian churches of 
 the continent of Europe and of North Ameri- 
 ca ; but it is proper to make mention of some 
 other societies of Presbyterians which exist in 
 our own country. 
 
 The Southern Association or Synod of Muns- 
 ter comprehends the presbyterian congregations 
 scattered through the south and west of Ireland. 
 
 This synod has always kept up a friendly in- 
 tercourse with the northern synod ; and both 
 have considered themselves, ever since their for- 
 mation, as supporting an union of interests in 
 the common cause of presbyterianism. They 
 form one body, so far as the ministers of each 
 
 * Dr. Campbell's Vindication, page 66.
 
 365 
 
 synod are recognised by the other as regularly 
 constituted, aird freely admitted into their pul- 
 pits. 
 
 The ministers of the synod of Munster were 
 distributed into three classes, in the arrange- 
 ment of the Royal Bounty, in the same manner, 
 and at the same time as the northern synod : 
 with this difference, that the third class has 58, 
 which is 8 more than the sum granted to the 
 third class in the synod of Ulster. 
 
 In the synod of Mun-ter there is a widow's 
 fund similar to that in the northern synod. It 
 produces at present 5Q per annum to each an- 
 nuitant. 
 
 There is also a fund called the General Fund, 
 under the direction of the ministers of Dublin, 
 and trustees elected from their respective coii- 
 ffragattons, for the purpose of promoting and 
 supporting the presbyterian interest within their 
 bounds, and for educating young men intended 
 for the ministry. . It produces at present 5Q 
 per annum. 
 
 The Seceders are Presbyterians who sepa- 
 rated from the kirk of Scotland in 1733, from a 
 conviction that the original constitution of the 
 kirk had been violated by some acts of the Ge- 
 neral Assembly. The secession originated in 
 Mr. Ebenezer Erskine, minister of Stirling, 
 having, at the opening of the synod of Perth 
 and Stirling, preached against the proceedings 
 of the Assembly, in such terms as to incur the 
 censure of the synod. He and thie? other mi- 
 nisters having protested against the sentence of" 
 the Assembly, which had sustained the, decision, 
 of the synod, were suspended and disannexed 
 from their respective charges. In 17S3, they 
 formed themselves into a presbytery, which they 
 distinguished by the name Associate. 
 
 The leaders of the establishment being pro- 
 voked by their publications, they were libelled 
 2 H 2
 
 366 
 
 and cited to appear before the Assembly in 1739 ; 
 but having declined its authority, they were de- 
 posed from the ministerial office within the es- 
 tablished church. In 1743, they proceeded to 
 renew in a bond or engagement, the covenants 
 of their ancestors ; and in 1745 they formed 
 themselved into three presbyteries, under one 
 synod. 
 
 In 1747, a separation took place, in conse- 
 quence of a difference of opinion which arose 
 among them respecting the lawfulness of taking 
 the burgess-oath, administered in several of the 
 royal boroughs of Scotland* This gave rise to 
 the two denominations of Burghers and Anti- 
 burghers. 
 
 The Seceders formed societies some years af- 
 terwards in Ireland. Their ministers enjoy a 
 Bounty in the same manner as the ministers of 
 the general synod. The classes are 70, 50 
 and ^40. 
 
 The Covenanted or Reformed Presbyterians, 
 or, (as they are also called,) the Old Presby- 
 terian Dissenters, trace their original to the 
 \Valdenses, as the most ancient covenanters, of 
 whom they have any authentic records. The 
 church established by these early reformers they 
 consider as entitled to high respect, because it 
 was truly evangelical, and its members were 
 bound by oath to preserve ecclesiastical order. 
 
 The early reformers had imbibed the senti- 
 ments of the Waldenses. Hence, (say they,) 
 their unanimity with respect to doctrine and or- 
 der, and the general practice of covenanting, 
 in that age. The zeal on behalf of religion 
 which distinguished those who succeeded them, 
 
 The clause of the oath to which some objected was " I 
 protest before God and your lordships, that I profess and allow 
 with my heart the true religion presently professed within this 
 realm, and authorized by the laws thereof; I shall abide thereat, 
 and defend the same to my life's end, renouncing the Roman re- 
 ligion called Papistry."
 
 36? 
 
 prompted them very generally to perform the 
 same act, in England, Ireland and Scotland. 
 
 During the usurpation of Cromwell and the 
 succeeding 28 years of bloody persecution, they 
 beheld with sorrow a very alarming defection 
 from the principles of the reformation. Still, 
 however, some faithful witnesses remained, who 
 protested against the national corruption which 
 prevailed. 
 
 The Covenanters had resisted the arbitrary 
 and tyrannical government of Charles II and his 
 brother James, and they rejected the settlement 
 of king William, because they considered it a 
 violation of the nation constitutional, which by 
 the solemn league and covenant, both kingdoms 
 were bound to support. 
 
 The Covenanters in Ireland were, for a long 
 time without a regular ministry, though they re- 
 ceived occasional supplies from Scotland. 
 
 At present the number of congregations which 
 have fixed pastors is 15. There are five vacant 
 congregations, besides a few other small socie- 
 ties, none of which is able to support a minister. 
 
 No. II. 
 OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT, &c. 
 
 OUR Lord Jesus Christ, who is " head over 
 all things to the church," and who hath " all 
 power given unto him in heaven and in earth," 
 has appointed various officers to discharge the 
 
 * Some advocates for episcopacy do not scruple to represent 
 those of other denominations, as having no lawful ministry, and 
 entitled to no hope from the covenanted mercies of God. They 
 account them guilty of a schism, which exposes them to the se- 
 verest penalties of the Gospel. 
 
 But though Presbyterians consider church goterninejit a mat-
 
 36S 
 
 aereral duties of the Christian ministry. And a 
 it was necessary that these should continue in 
 the church to the end of time, their names and 
 functions are pointed out in the New Testament, 
 with sufficient distinctness and perspicuity, to 
 serve for the direction of his followers in every 
 age.* 
 
 The commission which our Lord gave to his 
 apostles, and through them to his ministers in 
 all succeeding times, is expressed in the follow- 
 ing terms : " And Jesus came and s-pake unto 
 them, saying, All power is given unto me in 
 heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and 
 teach all nations, baptizing them in the name ot 
 the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy 
 Ghost; teaching them to observe all things, 
 whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I 
 am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
 world. "t " Then said Jesus to them again, 
 peace be unto you. As my father hath sent me, 
 even so send 1 you." &c.:j: 
 
 This commission was given to one order of 
 ministers only, namely the eleven apostles. 
 It is observable, that it does not mention the 
 pow r er of ordaining others to the work of the 
 ministry; but that is unquestionably included ; 
 because the office and duties of ministers are to 
 continue to the end of the zvorld. We must in- 
 fer, therefore, that the power of ordination is 
 'vested in those who have authority to preach 
 
 ter of importance, they are not so uncharitable as to believe, that 
 salvation is connected with particular views of church order, or 
 that the promises of the Gospel are confined to those of their 
 communion or of any other denomination of Christians. "While 
 they earnestly recommend their own principles, they are far re- 
 moved frorfl the presumption of supposing, that those who adopt 
 a different system, are objects of the divine displeasure and in 
 danger of condemnation. 
 
 The substance of what follows in support of Presbyterian 
 ehurch government is in part borrowed from Dr. Miller's Letters 
 n the Constitution and Order of the Christian Ministry. 
 
 f Matth, xxviii. 18, 19, 20. 
 
 j John xx. 21, 22, 23.
 
 369 
 
 and to baptize. That the ministerial powers, 
 conveyed by the one commission, were after- 
 wards divided, so that some ministers retained 
 the whole, and others only a part, is a supposi- 
 tion, which has no evidence to support it. 
 
 The Greek word, {^HO-HOTTO?, which is com- 
 monly translated bishop in the New Tes- 
 tament, literally signifies an overseer. It ap- 
 pears to have been adopted from the Septuagint 
 translation of the Old Testament, in which it 
 is applied to officers of various degrees and 
 characters. 
 
 The word, 9rg3{j,T. : f>r, which the transla- 
 tors of the New Testament have rendered el- 
 der, exactly corresponds to the word presbyter, 
 and literally signifies an aged person. This be- 
 came a term of office among the Jews, in conse- 
 quence of elderly persons bein^ Dr !isrsti v select- 
 ed by them to fill gituarions of trust and' power, 
 both in church and state. They had rulers, de- 
 nominated presbyters or elders, over each city 
 and synagogue, and over the whole nation. 
 The apostles borrowed the term, as one that was 
 both familiar and significant, and applied it to 
 the pastors and rulers of the several churches 
 which they established. It was the more appro- 
 priate, as persons of age, experience and gra- 
 vity were those who were ordinarily chosen to 
 the ministerial office. 
 
 If we attend to the original meaning of the 
 word Presbyter, it will appear to be of more 
 honourable import than Bishop or Overseer. 
 With the former is associated the wisdom, gra- 
 vity and authority of age with the latter, the 
 mere business of office. The pastors of the 
 church were to execute the office of presbyters, 
 by taking the oversight of the flock. 1 . Peter v. 2. 
 
 These terms however, are uniformly employed 
 
 John ix. 21, 22, 23.
 
 370 
 
 in the New Testament, as convertible titles for 
 the same office. This is evident from the fol- 
 lowing passages of Scripture. " And from Mi- 
 letus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders 
 (or presbyters) of the church. And when they 
 were come to him, he said unto them, Take 
 heed unto yourselves ; and to all the flock over 
 which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, 
 for bishops) to feed the church of God, which 
 he hath purchased with his own blood." Acts 
 xx. 17, 28. Here, the same persons who in the 
 17th verse are styled elders or presbijt crs, are in 
 the 28th called overseers or bishops. These 
 therefore are different titles for the same of- 
 fice. Besides, there must have been a plura- 
 lity of pastors of equal authority, in the city of 
 Ephesus, seeing the apostle directs his instruc- 
 tions to them all in common, and describes their 
 office as that of overseers or bishops. These 
 governed the church as co-ordinate rulers, or in 
 common council ; and exhibit a form of church 
 government, totally irreconcileable with dio- 
 cesan episcopacy, but perfectly coincident with 
 the presbyterian system, which recognises scrip- 
 tural bishops as the pastors only of single con- 
 gregations.* 
 
 The following passage affords evidence to the 
 same effect. " Paul and Timotheus, the ser- 
 vants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ 
 Jesus, which are at Philippi, with the bishops 
 and deacons." Phil. i. 1. Thus, as in the case 
 of Ephesus, we find the apostle speaking of a 
 number of bishops in a single city. It has been 
 said indeed, that Philippi was a metropolitan 
 
 * As it may be presumed, that the first Christians held their 
 assemblies in private houses, which could not admit of any very 
 considerable number of persons meeting together at the same 
 time and place ; it is probable, that the congregations in large 
 cities were numerous, and that there were several pastors ap- 
 pointed to officiate in those places.
 
 371 
 
 city, and that therefore the bishops here spokem 
 of included those also of the neighbouring cities. 
 But besides that this is a very forced and unna- 
 tural explication of the passage, it is not true, 
 (as the most eminent episcopal writers acknow- 
 ledge,) that Philippi was a metropolitan city. 
 
 In the first chapter of the epistle to Titus, we 
 read as follows : " For this cause left I thee in 
 Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things 
 that are wanting, and ordain elders (presbyters) 
 in every city, as I had appointed thee. If any 
 be blameless, the husband of one wife, having 
 faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly. 
 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward 
 of God ; not self-willed, not soon angry, not 
 given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lu- 
 cre ;" &c. Here the apostle directs Titus to 
 make choice of elders for the church in Crete, 
 from among the most temperate, blameless and 
 faithful believers, and assigns as a reason for 
 this injunction, that a bishop must be blameless 
 a mode of expression which evidently implies, 
 that elder and bishop are different terms for the 
 same order of church officers. 
 
 This passage also proves, that it was custo- 
 mary, in the apostolic age, to have a plurality 
 of bishops in a single city. 
 
 1 Peter v. 1, 2. is equally conclusive. " The 
 elders, (or presbyters) which are among you I 
 exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of 
 the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of 
 the glory that shall be revealed. Feed the flock 
 of God, which is among you, taking the over- 
 sight thereof, (that is, exercising the office or 
 performing the duties of bishops over them) not 
 by constraint, but willingly ; not for filthy lu- 
 cre, but of a ready mind." This passage most 
 distinctly represents presbyters 'AS not only feed- 
 ing the flock, but as also governing it with epis- 
 copal powers.
 
 372 
 
 In short, the title of bishop, as applied to 
 ministers of the Gospel, occurs only four times 
 in the new Testament.* In three instances, it 
 is unquestionable, that it is applied to those 
 who are styled presbyters ; and in the fourth, 
 there is a strong presumption that it is used in the 
 same manner. In fact, the most respectable epis- 
 copal writers acknowledge the indiscriminate ap- 
 plication of these names to the same office. Thus 
 Dr. Whitby confesses that, " both the Greek 
 and Latin Fathers do, with one consent, declare, 
 that bishops were called presbyters, and pres- 
 byters, bishops, in apostolic times, the names 
 being common." Notes on Phil. i. ]. 
 
 It has been contended, that nothing conclu- 
 sive can be inferred from the indiscriminate use 
 of the terms bishop and presbyter : for by ap- 
 plying this argument to other cases, the apostles 
 would be placed on a level "with elders ; and St. 
 Paul and even our Lord himself would rank 
 no higher than deacons, that term being applied 
 to them both ; and then deacons would be in- 
 vested with apostolic powers. 
 
 But it is to be observed, that various words 
 in Scripture are sometimes used in an absolute, 
 and sometimes in a relative sense. The Lord 
 Jesus is emphatically the sent of God ; and 
 therefore he is called the apostle of our profes- 
 sion. Heb. iii. 1. He is also called the minis- 
 ter (deacon) of the circumcision, Rom. xv. 8. 
 but never absolutely " an apostle," " a deacon." 
 Paul and his fellow apostles are often called 
 ministers (deacons ;) in such form as this ; mi- 
 nisters of God, (2 Cor. vi. 4.) ministers of the 
 New Testament, (2 Cor. iii. 6.) but never ab- 
 solutely il deacons." They are also called el- 
 ders or presbyters; and for this reason, that 
 possessing ordinary as well as extraordinary 
 powers, they frequently participated in the coun- 
 
 * Phil. i. 1. 1 Tim. iii. I, 2, Tit. i. 7. Acts xx. 21.
 
 cils, and exercised only the authority of preg- 
 byters. 
 
 But further, the same character, duties and 
 powers which in the Scriptures are ascribed to 
 bishops, are also ascribed to presbyters, which 
 demonstrates that those officers are of the same 
 order in the church. 
 
 Had two orders of ministers been appointed 
 in the Christian church had bishops been con- 
 stituted of a different order from presbyters, 
 and superior to them, might we not have ex- 
 pected to have found different commissions given, 
 different qualifications required, and difrerent 
 spheres of duty assigned ? But no evidence of 
 this appears. On the contrary, when the sacred 
 writers speak of ministers of the Gospel, whe- 
 ther under the denomination of bishops or pres- 
 byters, they give the same description of their 
 character ; represent the same qualifications as 
 necessary for them ; require the same duties ; 
 and in a word, exhibit them as called to the 
 game work, and as bearing the same office. 
 
 1. That presbyters had, in apostolic time?, 
 authority to preach the word and administer 
 the sacraments, is universally allowed by epis- 
 copalians themselves. Now, if we consult 
 cither the original commission, or the subse- 
 quent instructions given to ministers, in the 
 New Testament, we shall find these constantly 
 represented as the highest acts of ministerial au- 
 thority. The ordaining of ministers and go- 
 venting the church, are so far from being con- 
 sidered functions of a higher order, that all the 
 authority with which the apostles were vested, 
 for these purposes, is represented as being sub- 
 servient to the promulgation of that ^ Gospel, 
 which is the power of God unto salvation to 
 every one that believcth." Preaching and ad- 
 ministering the sacraments, an? nobler offices 
 than tho.se of ordiuation and govern snout, a 
 2 i
 
 374 
 
 the end is more excellent than the means. 
 The language of Scripture is, " Let the pres- 
 byters who rule well be counted worthy of dou- 
 ble honour, esp< daily they who labour in the zcord 
 and doctrine." But the language of modern 
 episcopacy is, that labouring 1 in the word and 
 doctrine is a lower service in the church, and 
 government a more exalted ! 
 
 Presbyters being authorized to preach and ad- 
 minister the sacraments, are therefore to be con- 
 sidered as of the highest order of gospel minis- 
 ters, and in fact, to be the same with the Scrip- 
 tural bishops. This is supported by the opinion, 
 ^of the learned bishop Burnet ; Vindication of the 
 Church of Scotland, p. 336. 
 
 2. The power of government or of ruling the 
 church is also committed to presbyters. The 
 true meaning of the word presbyter, in its of- 
 ficial application, is a church ruler or governor. 
 Hence, the oversight or government of the 
 church is in Scripture expressly assigned to 
 presbyters as their proper duty. The elders to 
 whom the apostle Peter directed his first epistle, 
 certainly had this power. " The elders which 
 are among you I exhort. Feed the flock of God, 
 taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, 
 but willingly ; neither as being lords over God's 
 heritage, but as ensamples to the flock." These 
 words very distinctly express the power of ru- 
 ling in the church. The last clause is .particu- 
 larly explicit ; for why would the apostle have 
 cautioned them not to tyrannise, or " lord it 
 over God's heritage," if they were not invested 
 with a governing authority at all, or if they had 
 bishops over them, authorized to govern both 
 them and the flock ? 
 
 The case of the elders of Ephesus is still more 
 decisive. When St. Paul was about to take his 
 final leave of them, he addressed them thus : 
 " Take heed therefore, unto yourselves, and to
 
 375 
 
 the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made 
 you overseers, to feed the church of God." 
 Here all the ministerial powers are evidently 
 vested in the elders No mention is made of 
 any individual having the whole ruling power 
 vested in him, or even of having a larger share 
 of it than others. . Yet surely if such a form of 
 church government hail existed at Ephesus, the 
 principal individual would undoubtedly have 
 been mentioned, and some special instructions 
 been given to him. The apostle was telling 
 them that they should see his face no more, And 
 that dissentions woald arise in the church -can 
 it be supposed, that, under such circumstances, 
 he would have neglected to have put them in 
 mind of their duty to the prelate, and to have 
 directed them to cleave to him, and to snbmjt 
 to him, as the best means of promoting unity 
 and peace, had any such superior church officer 
 been known among them ? But so far from this, 
 the apostle gave the whole charge to the elders, 
 whom the Holy Ghost had made bishops over 
 the church. 
 
 But the passage above quoted from 1 Tim. v. 
 17. is completely conclusive on this point. " JLet 
 the elders that rule well be counted worthy of 
 double honour, especially they who labour in 
 word and doctrine." Here the power of go- 
 vernment in the church, is most unequivocally 
 ascribed to presbyters or elders. 
 
 3. The Scriptures also represent presbyters as 
 empowered to ordain to the ministerial office. 
 
 Thus Acts xiii. " Now there were in the 
 church that was at Antioch, certain prophets 
 and teachers, as Barnabas, and Simeon that was 
 called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Ma- 
 naen, which had been brought up with Herod 
 the Tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to 
 the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, se- 
 parate me Barnabas and Saul for the worit where-
 
 370 
 
 unto I have called them. And \?hen they had 
 fasted and prayed, and laid their bauds on them, 
 they sent idem away." This is the most ample 
 account of an ordination to be found in Scrip- 
 ture. Tiie first question that occurs is, who 
 were the ordainers on, this occasion ? they >vere 
 not the apostles, as appears from their names. 
 They were not bishops in the modern sense of 
 the word * for there was a number of them mi- 
 nistering together in the same church. They 
 were the prophets and teachers of the church at 
 Aniioch. With respect to these teachers, no 
 higher character has ever been claimed for them 
 than that of presbyters, " labouring in word 
 and doctrine." And as to the prophets, though 
 the precise nature of their endowments and of- 
 fice be not certainly known : yet there is com- 
 plete evidence that they did not sustain that par- 
 ticular ecclesiastical rank with which episcopa- 
 lians contend that, in the days of the apostles, 
 the power of ordaining was connected. 
 
 It has been said, that this is not to be consi- 
 dered as an ordination at all ; for that Paul and 
 Barnabas had been previously recognised as mi- 
 nisters of the Gospel. There is, however, no 
 evidence that either of them had ever before 
 been set apart by human ordainers. And if this 
 be not an ordination, it will be difficult to say 
 what constitutes one. Here was a call of the 
 Holy Ghost, fasting, prayer, the imposition of 
 hands every solemnity necessary to a formal 
 investiture with the ministerial office. And ac- 
 cordingly Dr. Hammond does not scruple to pro- 
 nounce it a regular ordination : in which senti- 
 ment he is joined by several other eminent epis- 
 copal writers. 
 
 The next instance of an ordination performed 
 by presbyters, is that of Timothy mentioned 
 1 Tim. iv. 14. " Neglect not the gift that is 
 in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with 
 the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."
 
 377 
 
 To tins instance of presbyterian ordination \t 
 has been objected, that although the presbyters 
 appear to have laid their hands on Timothy, 
 upon this occasion, yet the ordination was ac- 
 tually performed by the apostle alone, who else- 
 where addresses Timothy in these words, 
 
 " Wherefore I put thee in remembrance, that 
 thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by 
 the putting on of my hands." 2 Tim. i. 6. It 
 has been supposed that the power was conveyed 
 by the apostle only, and that the presbyters laid 
 on their hands, merely by way of concurrence 
 and to express their approbation. 
 
 But it is not certain that the apostle in the 
 verse last cited, speaks of the ordination of Ti- 
 mothy. .Some of the most learned divines are 
 of opinion, that he refers altogether to another 
 solemnity, in which, by the imposition of^his 
 hands alone, he communicated to Timothy the 
 extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit, to impart 
 which, is generally supposed to have belonged 
 exclusively to the apostles. But, if we consider 
 St. Paul in both passages, as speaking of the 
 ordination of Timothy, the supposition will be 
 equally favourable to presbyterian ordination. 
 For if Timothy were, on this occasion, ordained 
 a diocesan bishop, as is alleged by episcopalians, 
 how came the presbyters to lay their hands oa 
 him at his ordination ? Presbyters in the epis- 
 copal church, lay on their hands with those of 
 the bishop, in ordaining presbyters ; but in case 
 of the Of di nation of a bishop, this would be 
 considered an irregularity altogether absurd and 
 inadmissible. ^As to the supposition of the pres- 
 byters joining 1 with the apostle in the imposition 
 of hands, not as ordainers, but merely to ex- 
 press their concurrence and approbation, it is 
 sufficient to say, that it is without any founda- 
 tion in Scripture, and contradicted by the ear- 
 liest and best records of the primitive church. 
 2 L 2
 
 378 
 
 But on what rational grounds, can it be be- 
 lieved, that the very same act, the imposition of 
 hands, performed at the same time, in relation 
 to the same subject, should be considered as ex- 
 pressing the communication of authority by one 
 of the persons engaged, and expressing only the 
 approbation of all the rest ? This would have been 
 an anomaly altogether unparalleled and unac- 
 countable. It may be presumed that such a sup- 
 position would never nave been framed, had it 
 not been necessary for the purpose of evading 
 the consequence which otherwise inevitably fol- 
 lowed from the text, (1 Tim. iv. 14.) that Ti- 
 mothy was presbyterially ordained. 
 
 Another instance of ordination by presbyters, 
 is that of Paul and Barnabas, who, after hav- 
 ing been regularly set apart to the work of the 
 ministry themselves, proceeded through the cities 
 ofLystra, Iconium, &c. " And when they had 
 ordained them elders in every church, and had 
 prayed with fasting, they commended them to 
 the Lord, on whom they had believed." Acts 
 xiv. 23. Now, though Barnabas is st)led an 
 apostle, Acts xiv. 14. yet, he was not one of the 
 apostles, strictly so called ; and of course, none 
 of that preeminence which belonged to their 
 character, can be claimed for him. The word 
 apostle signifies simply a messenger a person 
 tent. It was in use among the Greeks and the 
 Jews, before the time of Christ. In this inde- 
 terminate and general sense, the word is fre- 
 quently used in Scripture. Thus Barnabas and 
 Epaphroditus are called apostles in the New 
 Testament, as John the Baptist is called an 
 apostle by Tertullian. From the use of this ap- 
 pellation therefore, no preeminence of charac- 
 ter can be inferred. Besides, Barnabas could 
 not rank higher than a presbyter, as he was or- 
 dained by the presbyters of Antioch. As a pres- 
 byter, therefore, he ordained others ; and thus, 
 we have a plain precedent for prefbyterian or- 
 dinatioi.
 
 The proof which we possess, that the Chris- 
 tian church was formed after the model of the 
 .Jewish synagogue, affords additional evidence 
 in favour of the presbyterian plan of church go- 
 vernment. 
 
 For example, the originals of the words sy- 
 nagogue and church are used in the sacred writ- 
 ings to denote the same thing a religious as- 
 sembly. The mode of worship adopted in the 
 apostolic church was substantially the same with 
 that used in the synagogue and the titles given, 
 to the officers of the synagogue, as well as the 
 duties and powers of those officers and the mode 
 of ordaining them, seem evidently to have been 
 transferred from _the Jewish to the Christian, 
 church. 
 
 In the foregoing observations on church go- 
 vernment, mention was made of ruling elders as 
 officers in the church. But as these are of great 
 importance in the Christian system, it may be 
 proper to notice them more particularly. 
 
 Independent of historical testimony, there is 
 strong presumptive evidence, that such an office 
 must have been instituted by the apostles. A 
 pastor cannot individually perform all the duties 
 necessary in a churcri. He must have a number 
 of grave, judicious and pious persons, who shall 
 assist hin with information and counsel ; whose 
 official duty it shall be, to aid him in overseeing, 
 regulating and edifying tbe church.* The Epis- 
 copalians, who have vestrymen and church- 
 wardens, and the Independents, who have their 
 committees, have, in fact, though not in name, 
 similar officers to those which Presbjterians re- 
 cognise under the scriptural appellation of el- 
 ders, t 
 
 ' The apointment of these elders is partly founded on the 
 tame principle as that which induced Jethro to recommend to 
 Hoses to appoint rulers over the children of Israel. Exod. xviii. 
 18. 
 f The radical principles of prcibyterianian ar MEential to 10-
 
 880 
 
 The propensity which in every age has been 
 discovered in pastors, to assume to themselves anr 
 immoderate and unreasonable power over the 
 church of Christ, seems to point out the neces- 
 sity of a class of elders different from them, who 
 may check their usurpations and restrain their 
 ambition. , 
 
 In Rom. xii. 6, 7, 8. various offices are men- 
 tioned by the apostle as proper for the members 
 of the body of Christ, in the same manner as 
 different offices belong to the members of the 
 human body. Now, as all the members of the 
 body are not destined to perform the same office, 
 it is natural to conclude, that the office of ruling 
 mentioned in the 8th verse, may be performed 
 by some who cannot teach, as seeing; is a faculty 
 belonging to the eye, an organ which is incapa- 
 ble of any other office. 
 
 1 Cor. xii. 28. seems also to point out that 
 the office of governing as distinct from that of 
 teaching, may be exercised by persons appointed 
 to it alone. 
 
 The ruling elders are distinctly mentioned in 
 1 Tim. v. 17. " Let the elders that rule well 
 be counted worthy of double honour, especially 
 they who labour in the word and doctrine/' 
 Here it is manifest that two kinds of elders are 
 alluded to one, whose duty it was to-labour in 
 the word and doctrine, and another who did not 
 thus labour, but who only ruled the church. 
 Had there been only one kind of elders in the 
 
 ciety. la this system of divine appointment, representation is 
 so managed, as effectually to secure the liberty of the subject, 
 and the energy of the government. No system can preserve or- 
 der in any society, civil or ecclesiastical, except in so far as it 
 proceeds upon the principles of presbyterianism. The reason is 
 obvious. These are the principles which the author of nature has 
 rendered essential to human society. No monarch can govern 
 without assistance j no community can govrn itself but by re- 
 presentatives.
 
 381 
 
 church,, and had they been all teachers and la- 
 bourers in the word, the distinction which the 
 apostle obviously makes by the last clause of the 
 text, would have been wholly inappropriate anil 
 unintelligible.* There was therefore a class of 
 elders in the apostolic church, who did not 
 preach, nor administer sacraments, but who as- 
 sisted in government. This interpretation is 
 supported by the opinion of some eminent epis- 
 copalians, as Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Waitby. 
 
 Deacons were persons officially appointed to 
 take charge of the collections raised in the con- 
 gregations for the use of the church. The first 
 deacons, Acts vi. 1 6, were not officers of a 
 particular congregation ; but were appointed to 
 manage the temporalities of the whole presby- 
 tery of Jerusalem. They were the official dis- 
 tributors of the sums of money which were col- 
 lected. They were not however invested \vith 
 the higher office of ministering in the word and 
 sacraments. Ruling elders are the constitu- 
 tional assistants of the ministry in government, 
 and deacons the assistants of both ministers and 
 elders, in managing the affairs of the poor, and 
 attending to the temporal concerns of congre- 
 gations. 
 
 With respect to what is called the episcopal 
 form of church government, it is observable, that 
 though the Puritans did not consider it unlaw- 
 ful, that a person, distinguished by the title of 
 biahop or superintendent^ should preside in the 
 assembly of the clergy, for the purpose of pre- 
 
 Dr. Whitaker, in bis Prelections, illustrates this subject in 
 the following manner. " If I should say, that all who study 
 well at the university are worthy of double honour, especially 
 they who labour in the study of th&logy, I must either mean that 
 all do not apply themselves to the study of theology, or I should 
 talk nonsense- Wherefore I confess thai to he the mo-it genuine 
 tense, by which pastors and teachers arc distinguished from those 
 who only governed."
 
 382 
 
 serving order, yet they thought it incongruous 
 and absurd, that bishops should be ranked among 
 the nobility of the kingdom, employed in civil 
 and political affairs, and distinguished so emi- 
 nently for their worldly opulence and power. 
 This controversy did not excite any considerable 
 degree of warmth, so long as the English bishops 
 pretended to derive their dignity and authority 
 from no other source than the laws of their 
 country, and pleaded a right purely human to 
 the rank they held in church and state. But the 
 flame broke out with violence, when in 1588, it 
 was asserted that by divine right, the order of 
 bishops was superior to that of presbyters. For 
 those who had not been ordained by bishops, were 
 now considered by many as irregularly invested 
 with the sacred character.* 
 
 The duties required of the primitive bishops, 
 are wholly irreconcileable with such a sjstem; 
 but they are precisely such as might be exported 
 from the pastors of single congregations. Hovr 
 could prelates do the duty oi' parish ministers f 
 and how could the people know, esteem^ and love 
 the bishops who were over them, if these were 
 diocesan bishops, whom ordinarily but few of 
 the flock either hear or see ? 
 
 But besides that the primitive bishops had a 
 very different sphere of duty assigned to them 
 from that of modern prelates, they did net med- 
 dle with matters of civil government. From 
 the very first, they were taught to disclaim ut- 
 terly all civil power and jurisdiction. How dif- 
 ferent is this from the present system, which in- 
 vests bishops with eivil authority ! 
 
 The primitive bishops also received their pow- 
 ers at the hands of the proper spiritual pastors 
 of tlie cjiurch. But modern bishops derive their 
 
 Mosheim's Ecclcs. Hist. Vol. IT I. p. 480. Neal'* Hirt. 
 Pur. Vol. I. p. 389.
 
 383 
 
 commission from the civil magistrate; all autho- 
 rity of jurisdiction, spiritual and temporal, being, 
 by the statute, derived from the king's majesty. 
 
 The government of the established church 
 proceeds entirely from the civil power. It is 
 that which prescribes authoritatively what arti- 
 cles of faith are to be believed, and what forms 
 to be used in public worship what heresy is, 
 and what are the penalties proper for every of- 
 fence, against the ecclesiastical authority and 
 laws. But according to the original establish- 
 ment of Christianity, church power is lodged in 
 the hands of spiritual persons. 
 
 It is no wonder therefore, that those who set 
 a proper value on the authority of Christ and 
 his apostles, should be displeased with a system, 
 which regulates their sacred institutions by the 
 authority of human laws. 
 
 The parliamentary establishment, however, 
 is evidently an application of the power of the 
 laity, to restrain the ambition of lordly ecclesi- 
 astics, and to preserve order in the church. 
 But how much more conformable is the presby- 
 terian system to the spirit of a kingdom which 
 is not of this world. 
 
 With Presbyterians, pastors are of one order 
 and equal in power: which is exactly agreeable 
 to the injunction of Jeeus Christ " Ye know 
 that the princes of the Gentiles exercise domi- 
 nion over them ; and they that are great exer- 
 cise authority upon them ; but it shall not be so 
 among you." &c. This plan shuts out jealou- 
 sies, unchristian competition and spiritual en- 
 croachment. 
 
 The rights and liberties of the people are also 
 duly respected. They have a considerable share 
 of power in the government of the church. 
 By the method of representation, Presbyterians 
 guard against the tumult, disorder or passionate 
 judgments of popular assemblies on the one hand,
 
 384 
 
 and the encroachments of arbitrary powtr on the 
 other. 
 
 The Presbyterians differ also from the Inde- 
 pendents, in several important respects. 
 
 With Independents, each congregation is a 
 perfect church in itself, and is not subject to the 
 decisions of any other ecclesiastical body. Re- 
 presentation is excluded; and every individual 
 member of the churcji is permitted to judge and 
 vote in all matters pertaining- to order, govern- 
 ment and discipline. Those who rule, merely 
 carry into execution the decisions of the body at 
 large. 
 
 This system, which represents each particular 
 society of Christians as entirely separated in go- 
 vernment and discipline from every other does 
 not appear to accord with the representations of 
 Scripture concerning the church of God. It is 
 compared, for instance, to an olrce-ircc^ from 
 which the Jews having been cut off, the Gen- 
 tiles who are compared to a wild olive, are re- 
 presented as grafted in among the branches that 
 remained. It is often exhibited under the em- 
 blem of a //<*///, as 1 Cor. xii. It is distinguished 
 also by being denominated a kingdom^ Mat. xiii. 
 By such allusions, the Scripture teaches us to 
 consider the church as one great whole, the se- 
 veral parts of which have an intimate union and 
 connexion with one another. 
 
 Presbyterians are also of opinion, that most 
 of the members of any congregation are unqua- 
 lified for the exercise of the power with which 
 Independents invest them. If the church con- 
 tains the collective wisdom, it also contains the 
 collective ignorance and prejudices of the bre- 
 thren. Can the plan therefore which admits all 
 persons indiscriminately to judge in matters the 
 most dubious and momentous, be more service- 
 able to the cause of truth and the administration 
 of equal and impartial justice, than that which
 
 385 
 
 vests this power in a few of the wisest and most 
 enlightened of the members, in conjunction with 
 the teachers ? 
 
 The power of judging and determining, which 
 J.-5 granted by Independents to all the members, 
 is so great, and partakes so much of the nature 
 of authoritative rule, while that which is grant- 
 ed to those termed rulers, of merely carrying the 
 decisions of the members into effect, is so incon- 
 siderable, as to appear inconsistent with the re- 
 presentations of Scripture on this subject. 
 
 The power of church-rulers is compared to 
 the authority of a. parent over his family, 1 Tim. 
 iii. 4, 5 or it is represented as that of an over- 
 seer, who is not directed by those under him, 
 but, on the contrary, prescribes to them what 
 lie considers proper to be done or it is descri- 
 bed in terms which import a high degree of 
 authority and power. Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24. 
 Rom. xii. 8. 1 Tim. v. 17. I Thess. v. 12. 
 &c. 
 
 There ar^ terms employed in Scripture to de- 
 note the obedience of the people to their rulers, 
 which do not appear to be suitable on the Inde- 
 pendent system, which grants to rulers merely a 
 power of acting by the authority and direction 
 of the people, in each particular case. Heb. 
 xiii. 17. 1 Cor. xvi. 16. 1 Thess. v. 13. 
 1 Tim. v. 17. 
 
 In short, so large a share of power is thus put 
 into the hands of the people in general, that had 
 it existed in the apostolic church, the apostles 
 would not have been warranted in drawing so 
 strong a line of distinction, as they have done, 
 between those who rule, and those who are in 
 subjection to their authority. 
 
 In the system of Independency, which re- 
 sembles the lowest form of political democracy, 
 there is more room for the exercise of tyranny 
 than under that species of mixed government 
 2 K
 
 386 
 
 alled presbyterian. For example, if a Pres- 
 byterian thinks himself aggrieved by the decision 
 of a session, he can appeal to a higher judi- 
 eatory, which may see cause to reverse the first 
 sentence as unjust. But with the Independents, 
 the decision of the first court is final ; and a per- 
 son who may have sustained injury by it, has it 
 not in his power to' appeal to any other higher 
 tribunal. 
 
 In cases of extreme difficulty, may not even 
 an enlightened congregation feel itself at a loss 
 in determining ? Would it not, therefore, be 
 extremely desirable to remove the adjudication 
 of the matter from a court where there may be 
 much party spirit and animosity, to a higher tri- 
 bunal, which from its being unprejudiced, may 
 be presumed to be better able to give a just and 
 impartial decision. 
 
 In Independent societies there is also greater 
 danger of anarchy and confusion, and of unne- 
 cessary separations, than in'those societies which 
 arc governed by a court, from which an appeal 
 lies to superior judicatories, whose authority is 
 acknowledged and respected by the whole body 
 of the people. 
 
 And under such a system, what irremediable 
 mischief may be occasioned by, a few active and 
 designing men, who possess the means of per- 
 suading the lower order of the people to second 
 the views of their self-interest and ambition ! 
 
 A congregation may be so partial in favour of 
 its minister or its elders, or so prejudiced against 
 them, from weak or wicked motives, as either 
 to be actuated by a false lenity or a spirit of per- 
 secution. In this way, justice may be pervert- 
 ed ; a delinquent may escape, and an innocent 
 man may suffer wrong. In independent socie- 
 ties, this evil may prevail ; but it is tho tendency 
 of presbyterianism, to check and prevent it. 
 
 It also appears, that in iudepeadeitl congrs-
 
 38? 
 
 gal ions, there is much greater danger that cor- 
 ruptions shall prevail. The rulers can exercise 
 no discipline but by the particular direction of 
 the people. How then can a congregation that 
 has fallen from its purity, be reclaimed, on this 
 principle ? But according to the presbyterian 
 plan, a congregation is under the inspection and 
 discipline of a superior court, which can, at all 
 times, apply the remedy proper for all its dis- 
 orders. 
 
 " If any of the members of a particular con- 
 gregation exhibit a charge against the rest of 
 that congregation, and there be no superior 
 court: \vhoare the arbiters that are to deter- 
 mine between them ? Both are parties, and both 
 consider themselves as equally aggrieved ; and 
 consequently, by the rules of all consistent go- 
 rernments, are totally disqualified from judging 
 in the difference. But, upon the independent 
 plan, they are themselves the only persons who 
 can act as arbiters ; and this office, as was ob- 
 served, since there is no superior judicatory, 
 they must still perform, even though both are 
 interested. Among Presbyterians however, when 
 any members of a congregation are injured by 
 those who are its elders or governors, they can 
 summon them to a superior court, which, if com- 
 posed of upright and disinterested men, will 
 judge impartially between both the parties." 
 Brown's Vindication, p. 29. 
 
 As to the Scripture authority for courts of re- 
 riew, it is contended, that the church of Jeru- 
 salem consisted of more congregations than one ; 
 as appears from the multitude of believers resi- 
 dent there ; from the many apostles and teachers 
 in that church, who could not exercise their gifts 
 in one assembly, and from the diversity of lan- 
 guages mentioned Acts ii. 6. But these separate 
 congregations were united together under on 
 prenbyterian government, because they are uni-
 
 formly described as but one church, Acts viii. I. 
 &c. They had a general court composed of the 
 apostles and elders of the whole, who seem con- 
 stantly to have administered their general con- 
 cerns, as well as perhaps reviewed the decisions 
 of subordinate courts. Acts vi. xi. 30. xv. xxi. 
 18. We certainly know that an appeal was made 
 from the church at Antioch to the apostles and el- 
 ders at Jerusalem, Actsxv. It may be presumed, 
 therefore, that appeals lay from the several con- 
 gregations of Jerusalem to the same court.* 
 
 In respect of discipline, Presbyterianism re- 
 quires that strict regard be paid to the conduct 
 of ministers and people, that nothing scandalous 
 or abominable be tolerated in the church. By 
 the frequent meetings of the several judicatories 
 of Sessions, Presbyteries and Synods, opportu- 
 nity is afforded for preferring charges against all 
 persons transgressing the laws of decency and 
 order; and recourse is had to admonition, cen- 
 sure, suspension or deprivation, according to 
 the nature and magnitude of the offence alleged 
 and proved. 
 
 As the exercise of discipline is vested in a 
 number of individuals, there is the less danger 
 that scandalous persons shall escape the punish- 
 ment due to their irregularities. And in case of 
 individuals being backward in bringing charges 
 against offenders, the church judicatories may 
 proceed on a fama clamosa to investigate the 
 conduct of persons suspected of irregularities. 
 As the judgment rests not with one but many, 
 it may be presumed to be highly equitable : but 
 if the accused party be dissatisfied with the sen- 
 tence of a lower judicatory, an appeal lies from 
 the session to the presbytery, and from the pres- 
 bytery to the general synod. Every advantage, 
 
 i 
 
 * See this subject fully discussed in Brown's Vindication of 
 the Presbyterian form of church government.
 
 589 
 
 consistent with justice and sound discipline, i 
 afforded him, that he may be enabled, if inno- 
 cent, to justify himself to his brethren and be- 
 fore the world. 
 
 As to forms for public devotion, and the other 
 offices of religion, it is remarkable, that the ser- 
 vice book of the established church, has remained 
 for upwards of a century and a half without al- 
 teration ; though many eminent divines have long 
 ago suggested the propriety of a great variety of 
 improvements,' which have met with the approba- 
 tion of episcopalians themselves. Even suppo- 
 sing therefore that Presbyterians approved of li- 
 turgies, it is not to be expected that they would 
 adopt that of the episcopal church, which ap- 
 pears to them to require very considerable alte- 
 rations. They would certainly prefer one which 
 they entirely approve of at present, and which 
 would be always open to such, improvements as 
 increasing light and wisdom might suggest. 
 
 But the Presbyterians of this country and of 
 Scotland object to the use of public liturgies, 
 especially when imposed, 'as wholly unautho- 
 rized by the sacred Scriptures, as well as by the 
 example of our Lord aiul his apostles, and that 
 of the primitive church. Had these been so. 
 conducive to godliness as their advocates pretend, 
 our Lord and his apostles would certainly have 
 prescribed them. St. Paul declares to the church. 
 at Ephesus, that he k kept back nothing that was 
 profitable.' It is evident therefore, that he did 
 not regard a public liturgy in this point of view. 
 Had a set^fonn been in use in the Corinthian 
 church, the same apostle could not have repre- 
 hended its ministers for praying in an unknown 
 tongue : and had it been suitable to the Chris- 
 tian system, he could not have more effectually 
 remedied the disorder, than by prescribing one. 
 
 It is certain, that public liturgies were not 
 used in the church, during the first four hundred
 
 years.* They appear to have originated in the 
 ignorance and insufficiency of some ministers in 
 the 5th century, who from inability to discharge 
 the duty of free prayer, were under the neces- 
 sity of borrowing the devotional compositions of 
 others. As the degeneracy of the times increas- 
 ed, the idea of a liturgy became matured ; till 
 at length the Roman Missal was established, by 
 which the superstitions of the popish church 
 were effectually diffused over the whole western 
 empire. From this the service-book of the 
 church of England was originally compiled. 
 
 Now, if Presbyterians prefer to follow the 
 example of the apostolic and primitive church, 
 it is extraordinary, that any should have the har- 
 dihood to find fault with their conduct, in this 
 respect. Yet^ it has been said that in their mode 
 of worship, the people have not the opportunity 
 of joining in the worship of God a most rash 
 and unVvarran table assertion, which equally con- 
 demns the practice of the first and purest ages 
 of the church, in which books of common prayer 
 were utterly unknown. If our Lord and his 
 apostles knew how to pray in an acceptable man- 
 ner, the manner of praying, used in Presby- 
 terian congregations, is certainly suitable to the^ 
 nature and design of prayer. It may even be 
 presumed to be 'the most proper, as it alone ac- 
 cords with primitive example, t 
 
 * This assertion is made on the authority of Dr. John Taylor, 
 of Norwich, who declares, that he has closely and impartially 
 attended to the subject ITe affirms, " that in St. Augiistin's 
 days, full four hundred years after Christ, there was no liturgy 
 in use. nor so much as thought of." 
 
 } No on$ will p: .-lend that the Lord's prayer is a complete li- 
 turgy, nor that Ji-sus taught it to his disciples, with a view of au- 
 thorizing iliciu and o'ber pastors and rulers, authoritatively to 
 prescribe set forms. His design was, to instruct them as to the 
 proper subjects and Inng; age of prayer. On this as (on oilier 
 points, those who set a due value on Christian liberty, object to 
 the impositions of fallible men, as tending to abridge that ' U- 
 berty wherewith Christ has made them free.'
 
 391 
 
 The unprejudiced judge will not find it diffi- 
 cult to determine, whether prayer, adapted to 
 the peculiar circumstances of each religious so- 
 ciety, the various dispensations of divine provi- 
 dence, aiid the ever-changing scenes of human 
 life, be not more suitable to its genuine nature 
 and design, than a perpetual repetition of the 
 same public forms. 'He will probably determine 
 also, that it is calculated, from its suitableness, 
 and the variety of sentiment which it calls forth, 
 to make a deeper impression on the minds of the 
 worshippers, and in a superior degree to promote 
 their spiritual improvement. 
 
 With respect to those who officiate in public 
 and private worship, free prayer is certainly a 
 much more exalted exercise of the mind, than 
 the reading of prescribed forms. For to per- 
 form this duty with propriety, it is necessary to 
 possess an enlightened understanding, aswellas 
 a devout spirit. 
 
 Ministers should not be restrained, by hav- 
 ing set forms prescribed for them, from cultiva- 
 ting a talent for this excellent kind of prayer. 
 For those who neglect it, besides being on that 
 account, in all probability, unqualified for pray- 
 ing in cases of emergency, are unable to taste 
 those higher pleasures of devotion, which pro- 
 ceed from the fervent exercise of their own pi- 
 ous conceptions, and deny themselves one of 
 the most valuable aids of true piety. 
 
 " Praying out of a book," says Dr. Taylor, 
 " hinders the free exercise of our own thoughts 
 and desires, which naturally should dictate our 
 praises and supplications. He that only reads 
 his prayers, may never be able to do any jthing 
 more than read; may never be -,!ble to use his 
 own thoughts, in conceiving a regular address to 
 Ginl. Besides, the constant repetition of the 
 same words, hath a tendency to make us less at- 
 tentive to the sense, and so has less forpe to 
 awaken, engage, and impress the mind."
 
 SUPPLEMENT, 
 
 BY A MEMBER OF THE PRESBYTERV OF ANTRIM. 
 
 1 HE Presbyterians of Ireland adhere to the 
 fundamental principle of Protestantism, the suf- 
 ficiency of Scripture, in all their ministrations. 
 They not only hold the Bible to be an infal- 
 lible rule of faith, but also that it contains a rule 
 of order, and form of worship, adapted to every 
 state of the church ; and that it is at least wiser 
 and more respectful, to conform to the practice of 
 the apostles than to adopt human inventions. 
 
 All Christians profess to admit the Bible to 
 be a rule of faith r but some have raised unwrit- 
 ten traditions to the same level ; and others ap- 
 peal to certain general councils. We adhere to 
 this standard more strictly than others : and the 
 Synod of Ulster with the Presbytery of Antrim, 
 admit of the right of private judgment in a de- 
 gree unknown to any denomination of Chris- 
 tians, that assumes the form of a church. Of 
 this liberality and mutual forbearance they enioy 
 the benefit in an eminent degree. The diffe- 
 rence of opinion, that is krvown to subsist, is no 
 impediment either to ministerial or lay commu- 
 nion ; and in their presbyteries and synods, mi- 
 nisters and elders of very discordant sentiments 
 co-operate with perfect harmony. At the same 
 time, they avoid the extravagancies of popery 
 on the one hand, and of some latitudinarian 
 sects on the other, and keep equally clear oLsu- 
 perstition and fanaticism. These objects they 
 attain, by neither pretending to be infallible, nor 
 enforcing their principles as if the^ were so ;
 
 393 
 
 but by allowing liberty of conscience, and con- 
 forming- to the Bible as the only rule of faith 
 and worship. 
 
 Hence it appears, that there is no necessary 
 connexion between presbyterian oHer and any 
 system of doctrine; nor any opposition between 
 liberty of conscience and presbyterianism, when 
 moderately exercised. 
 
 The form of church government by a session or 
 congregational presb\Vry, is taken from Scrip- 
 ture without any refinement, agreeably to the 
 obvious meaning of the words ; and it has been 
 found to agree with national churches as well as 
 with the assemblies of the" primitive Christians. 
 The extension of the plan is perfectly agreeable 
 to its first elements. If such was the constitu- 
 tion of an apostolical church, it is not inconsis- 
 tent with it, that the ministers and elders of dif- 
 ferent congregations should combine in brotherly 
 love, to promote their common interest, and style 
 the union a presbytery ; nor that presbyteries 
 should unite for the same purpose, under the de- 
 nomination of a synod. 
 
 For the efficacy of this form, we may appeal 
 to the character of every country, in which it 
 has been established. Geneva, Holland and 
 Scotland hold a high rank for piety, morality and 
 regularity of conduct. Nor is the presbyterian, 
 form disgraced by the Presbyterians of Ireland. 
 It is in (act, the most effective system for the re- 
 ligions education and moral government of a peo- 
 ple, that has ever been devised. If we begin 
 with the minister visiting, examining and cate- 
 chising in the diflerent quarters of his congre- 
 gation; and the elder praying and exhorting in 
 his walk ; and ascend to the same pastor and el- 
 ders convened in session or consistory, having 
 t!ie oversight of the whole parish; and inflicting 
 church censures on scandalous members ; if we 
 resort to the presbytery, cojuposed of an elder
 
 . 
 
 394 
 
 deputed from each parish, and its minister, as- 
 sisting, advising or admonishing one another : 
 or to the synod consisting of the same intermix- 
 ture of clergy and ta'*y, composing all their dif- 
 ferences and regulating the general affairs of the 
 church, we shall not be surprised at the correct- 
 ness of conduct, and sobriety of deportment, the 
 attachment to civil and religious liberty, and the 
 religious knowledge, by which the inhabitants 
 of every presbyterian country are distinguished : 
 and least, of ail, at the intimate acquaintance 
 with Scripture in which they so much excel every 
 other church. 
 
 Nor is there less attention paid to the educa- 
 tion and discipline of the clergy, than to the in- 
 struction and government of the people. This 
 will be acknowledged by all, who are acquaint- 
 ed with the annual examinations of the students, 
 en their return from college, by their presbyte- 
 ries ; the exercises through which they must pass 
 before they are licensed to preach ; the constant 
 inspection of the ministers into their conduct du- 
 ring their probation : their trials before they are 
 chosen by the people ; and afterwards, by the 
 presbytery, before they are ordained. When 
 nettled in their congregations, they are indeed 
 independent of the caprice or prejudices of their 
 people; but always liable to be censured, sus- 
 pended or deposed, for any scandalous immora- 
 Jity or neglect of duty by their presbytery, sub- 
 ject to an appeal to the synod. The mode of 
 voting is so regulated, that neither the rich nor 
 the poor can impose a minister on the others, 
 nor on the whole congregation. 
 
 This jurisdiction over ministers and lay-mem- 
 bers can hardly be exercised in a tyrannical man- 
 ner ; because it is vested in bodies composed 
 both of clergy and laity : nor can these censures 
 affect men in their civil capacity, because they 
 cannot be enforced by law. As the whole sys-
 
 395 
 
 tern rests upon voluntary association, it <&nnot 
 be an instrument of ecclesiastical oppression 
 amr>ng the Presbyterians of Ireland. 
 
 As ministers and peonle are little exposed to 
 the danger of tyrannical imposition among them- 
 selves, so are they exempted from all interfe- 
 rence in their religious concerns, on the part of 
 government. It is the duty of the magistrate to 
 provide for the religious instruction of his peo- 
 ple ; and not to leave it to chance, or the ca- 
 price or parsimony of his subjects, whether there 
 shall be any religion in his dominions : and if this 
 fan be done without encroachment on religious 
 liberty, it is not easy to conceive any objection 
 to such an establishment. This kind of estab- 
 lishment the Presbyterians of Ireland have en- 
 joyed from the earliest times, in different de- 
 grees. The Royal Bounty is neither a novelty 
 nor an instrument of corruption. They have 
 enjoyed the support of government, in different 
 modes, from their first settlement in Ireland ; 
 and it was never designed as a bribe, nor did it 
 ever operate so as to influence their religious or 
 political principles. It has no effect in the set- 
 tlement of congregations; nor can it render the 
 ministers independent- of their people. It MK 
 therefore accepted with all thankfulness. Be- 
 side this pecuniary assistance, in aid of the con- 
 tributions of the people, the Presbyterians are 
 effectually countenanced and protected by the 
 law. Their places of worship, and the contracts 
 between a minister and his congregation, their 
 marriages and registries of baptisms, are readily 
 recognised by the legal tribunals. 
 
 The public worship of Presbyterians is mo- 
 delled by the example of the apostles. There is 
 nothing in our worship that is not to be found 
 in theirs : nor any thing in theirs that has not 
 been adopted by us. Any objections to our prac- 
 tice we silence by appealing to the word of God;
 
 396 
 
 and by constantly referring to this authority, we 
 shun obsolete and unscriptural forms, a theatri- 
 cal service, and the mysteries engrafted on the 
 sacramental ordinances. It is no question with 
 ,u$, whether a mode of worship be more pleasing 
 to the sight or gratifying to the ears; nor even 
 whether it be more convenient, and better ac- 
 commodated to the manners of the world ; but 
 whether it be sanctioned by the divine word. 
 We equally reject our own wayward fancies, 
 and the Erastian principle, that civil govern- 
 ment may prescribe a form of religion; know r - 
 ing that if we step beyond the threshold of the 
 Gospel, we can fix no bounds to our own errors, 
 or t: spiritual domination. 
 
 We concur with the Protestant Dissenters of 
 England, in their grounds of dissent from the 
 united church of England and Ireland. So far 
 we are Presbyterian Dissenters. But there is 
 one sense in -which none of the Presbyterians of 
 Ulster can be strictly styled Dissenters. In this 
 sense, dissent implies a former union and subse- 
 quent separation : but we were never incorpo- 
 rated with the established church ; and of course, 
 we neither separated from it, like the Methodists, 
 nor were ejected as the Puritans. Our dissent, 
 ^therefore, implies neither hostility nor schism, 
 With which our brethren in England have been 
 most unjustly charged. We might be well plea- 
 sed to see the episcopal church reform itself; 
 though certainly we could be no gainers by any 
 comprehension : but we have no -wish to disturb 
 it. We are content that the state should have 
 a religion of its own, while we are not discou- 
 raged from worshipping God according to the 
 dictates of our consciences. 
 
 A recent attempt has been made to raise the 
 old cry, " that the church is in danger :" but no 
 established church is ever in danger, except 
 from itself. If the church keep free from cor-
 
 397 
 
 rxption and intolerance, it is in no danger. No- 
 thing but the grossest corruption of morals, and 
 spiritual tyranny could have produced the refor- 
 mation in the time of Luther. Without a per- 
 severing and unrelenting system of persecution, 
 and exclusion, there would have been no Puri- 
 tans to overthrow the church of England in the 
 17th century. It was the same obstinate spirit 
 of intolerance, that provoked the independent 
 sects to subvert the presbyterian establishment 
 in the time of Cromwell. Under the mild influ- 
 ence of the reigning family, while the various 
 religious societies enjoy such " godly quietness," 
 the church may rest in perfect security ; except 
 this security should betray it into indolence, lux- 
 ury, immorality or spiritual pride; and a ne- 
 glect of " that most excellent gift and grace of 
 charity." 
 
 The safety of the establishment consists also 
 in the multitude of sects, which excite its ap- 
 prehensions ; for, as the Lords said in their pro- 
 test against the Test Bill, they can neither unite 
 against the establishment, nor acquiesce in the 
 predominance of any *one sect. Besides, the 
 English Dissenters are all independent in dis- 
 cipline, and have no establishment to substitute 
 in the room of the present : the Methodists have 
 no quarrel with the established church, on the 
 score of government : no one is so absurd as to 
 apprehend, that the Scotch will once more cross 
 the Tweed, to establish presbytery in England ; 
 nor that they would meet with any encourage- 
 ment if they did : the Presbyterians of Ireland 
 are satisfied with their church as it stands; but 
 few of them would wish to see it invested with 
 power. The Catholics alone are provided with 
 a hierarchy. 
 
 This cry was, formerly used as a signal for the 
 persecution of sectaries ; but those times are past. 
 What then can be the reason for raising such an 
 2 L
 
 at present ? Whatever may be the cause, 
 the effect can only be to expose internal weak- 
 ness. How is it possible, that the only apostol- 
 kal protestant church, so pure in doctrine, so 
 rich in funds, so nearly allied to a great state ; 
 o celebrated for learned men and renowned uni- 
 versities, could have fallen into such a deplora- 
 ble condition as these writers describe, and be 
 so much afraid of poor ignorant Presbyterians 
 and Methodists, in an enlightened age, less ad- 
 dicted to superstition or fanaticism than any for- 
 mer period ? How has it come to pass, " that 
 though the Dissenters have been frowned on," 
 (as an episcopal writer states,) " from the Resto- 
 ration to the present time, yet they and the Me- 
 thodists, who are in the same predicament, are 
 so much more on the increase than we of the es- 
 tablishment, who are fostered by the govern- 
 ment, attended by the nobles and gentry of the 
 land, and supported by the state, at the expense 
 of near two millions a year ?" 
 
 Coupled with this is the outcry against sohism, 
 which sounds so ill in the mouths of Protestants. 
 Schism implies the rent of a part from the whole, 
 a less body from a greater. How then can the 
 whole company of foreign churches be in a state 
 of schism, as these men pretend, from the church 
 of England, which stands alonelnsulated from all 
 Christendom, excommunicated by Rome, disown- 
 ing all Protestants, deserted in her own country 
 by so large a portion of her population, and com- 
 posed in so great a degree of nominal professor?, 
 attracted by her enormous revenues, and her mo- 
 nopoly of all places of trust and profit under the 
 crown ? Schism implies a preceding connexion ; 
 but when were the foreign churches, or the 
 Scotch and Irish Presbyterians united with the 
 English Episcopalians ? Schism implies a fac- 
 tious, turbulent and hypocritical breach of com- 
 munion ; but wke is to judge of the truth of this
 
 393 
 
 harge ? If these writers judge their brethren, 
 they must allow the church of Rome to judge 
 them. But in fact they vindicate schism in their 
 arguments with the Catholics ; and condemn it, 
 only when they argue with Dissenters ; and if it 
 were worth while, it would be easy to select 
 from the same works, passages diametrically op- 
 posite to each other, on this point. How absurd 
 are such pretensions in a church that is out of 
 communion with the whole Christian world ! 
 While the leading principle of Protestants is ad- 
 mitted, separation for conscience sake must be 
 allowed to be a duty : and it is agreed by the 
 most strenuous advocates for conformity, that 
 the church which excludes, by imposing unlawful 
 terms of comm onion, is guilty of the schism. 
 
 Before these papers are closed, it will be ne- 
 cessary to explain the cause of the partial sepa- 
 ration, that formerly took place between the Ge- 
 neral Synod of Ulster and the Presbytery of An- 
 trim, and the intimate relation that nevertheless 
 subsists between them at present. 
 
 The difference arose from the refusal of some 
 of the ministers to subscribe the Westminster 
 confession of faith ; and it is an extraordinary 
 circumstance, that this spirit of opposition to hu- 
 man symbols, should have originated in Geneva, 
 the country and church of Calvin. In 1706, M. 
 Jacques Vial de Beaumont, a divine of Neuf- 
 ehatel, being called to Geneva to exercise hw 
 ministry there, was required to subscribe their 
 articles. This he refused to do, except as far 
 as they agreed with the Holy Scriptures ; upon 
 which his license to preach was refused. H 
 appealed to the body of divines of that repub- 
 lic, who after long debate?, decided that M. 
 Vial's subscription was satisfactory. From th* 
 ministers an appeal was lodged before the magis- 
 trates, who determined in favour of the articles : 
 but the divines, who had supported M. Vial,
 
 400 
 
 brought the matter before the council of Two 
 Hundred, who adjudged, that the following oath 
 should be sufficient for those who were to be li- 
 censed as ministers: " I swear and declare in 
 the presence of God, that 1 do hold the Holy 
 Scripture to be the only rule of my faith ; and 
 that it contains, in a very clear manner, what- 
 ever is necessary to salvation; and t promise, 
 that 1 will be conformable thereunto, both in my 
 doctrine and practice." To this is added the 
 following exhortation by the person who admi- 
 nisters the oath : <c you are exhorted not to 
 teach any thing contrary to the decisions of the 
 Synod of Dort, the forty articles of faith of the 
 reformed -churches of France, or to our cate- 
 chism, they being esteemed agreeable to the 
 Scripture ; and you are exhorted to this for the 
 sake of peace and union in the church." 
 
 The- persecution of Mr. Emlyn in Dublin, 
 and the controversy to which it gave rist, began 
 about the same time, continued till the year 
 1719, and probably contributed to inflame the 
 dissentions that broke out on the same subject, 
 in England and the north of Ireland. 
 
 In the year 1717, a suspicion having arisen in 
 Exeter, that Mr. Hallet, -and the learned James 
 Pierce were not sound in the faith, they were re- 
 quired to sign a declaration of their belief in 
 the Trinity; which they refused, on general prin- 
 ciples of Christian liberty and the sufficiency of 
 Scripture. This dispute having excited conside- 
 rable heats in Exeter, was laid first before the 
 associated ministers of Devonshire and Corn- 
 wall, and afterwards before a numerous meeting 
 of the ministers in London, of the three deno- 
 minations, Presbyterian, Independent and Bap- 
 tist, wh decided against subscription. This they 
 did on the princi, le, that subscription to a hu- 
 man formula inverted the protestant rule for de- 
 ciding controversies ; and made the words of
 
 401 
 
 men determine the sense of Scripture, instead 
 of making Scripture decide on the respect due 
 to the words of men. These debates which 
 were carried on in Salter's Hall, occasioned a 
 great ferment in England and Ireland ; and the 
 question of subscription agitated the General 
 Synod of Ulster from the year 1720 to 172S, 
 
 This controversy arose in consequence of Mr 
 Haliday being present at Salterns Hall in 1719. 
 He was then chaplain to Col. Anstruther's regi- 
 ment, and afterwards received a call from th& 
 old congregation of Belfast. Upon this, Mr. 
 Dunlop, minister of Athlone, who had also been 
 present at the debates in Salter's Hall, charged 
 Mr. Haliday with having joined the party sus- 
 pected of Arianism. These discontents con- 
 tinued till the year 1725, when the nonsubscrib- 
 ing brethren were united in one presbytery, called 
 the presbytery of Antrim, and recognised as a 
 nonsubscribing presbytery : but in the following- 
 year, some inconvenience being apprehended 
 from this arrangement, they were excluded from 
 the judicatories and exempted from the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Synod. In consequence of this, they 
 have no right to interfere in questions relating 
 to Synedieal congregations, nor the Synod to in- 
 termeddle with theirs. They both however meet 
 in one body ; co-operate in every thing that con- 
 cerns the general interests of the presbyteriar* 
 church; and live, in perfect harmony, and in a 
 free intercourse of ministerial and lay commu- 
 nion. In matters of order, the presbytery' of 
 Antrim conform to the rules established in the 
 Synod, as far as they esteem them conducive to- 
 edification and consistent with Christ ian liberty; 
 and the relaxation on the point of subscription 
 in the majority of Synodical presbyteries, is gra- 
 dually obliterating the distinction that subsisted 
 between them and the presbytery of Antrim. 
 
 The only testreqiiired by this Presbytery front, 
 
 O w* Q, 
 
 A* kt M
 
 402 
 
 their ministers or probationers, is the same that 
 was deemed satisfactory at Geneva, that they 
 shall make the Holy Scriptures the sole rule of 
 their faith and worship : and it is a fundamental 
 principle with them to disclaim all dominion 
 over conscience. From this principle they may 
 seem to swerve, when they refuse to license a 
 preacher or concur in an ordination : but this 
 would be a mistake. The distinction is plain. 
 They only claim the liberty that they allow. 
 They have certain duties to perform, certain 
 rules of conduct to which they are bound in 
 conscience to adhere ; and these they cannot vio- 
 late out of indulgence or complaisance to others. 
 When they send forth a young man to preach, 
 they do not pretend, that he could not preach 
 the Gospel without their leave. They only give 
 their opinion, that he is qualified to preach and 
 worthy to be heard. If, on the other hand, they 
 refuse their consent, they do not in this, exercise 
 authority. They only conscientiously withhold 
 their sanction. Were they to give it to an un- 
 worthy person, they would abuse and forfeit the 
 confidence of the public. If he or others set no 
 value on their approbation, there is no harm 
 done by them ; they have only performed a duty 
 and exercised a right. If he thought they had 
 no choice, or did not choose to abide by their 
 decision, why did he apply to them ? If he did, 
 why does he complain that they exercised their 
 liberty ? 
 
 If they were required by a congregation, to 
 ordain or install a stranger, without any inquiry 
 into his character, or a person known to be in- 
 sufficient or immoral, they would certainly re- 
 fuse. In this they exercise no authority. They 
 do not say, you shall or you shall not have this 
 man for your minister : but they say, we cannot 
 concur in the settlement, because we are bound, 
 as well as Timothy, " to lay hands suddenly on 
 no man, and not to become partakers of other
 
 40S 
 
 men's sins." If you choose to have this man for 
 your minister, we say plainly, that we do not 
 approve of your choice ; but we claim no autho- 
 rity to control it. If after he has been elected, 
 he shall apply for admission into the presbytery, 
 they say, no. The people may choose their mi- 
 nister, but we must choose our co-presbyter. 
 We have a privilege to maintain, and a duty to 
 perform as well as the people." 
 
 The same reasoning applies to cases that may 
 occur between a minister and his people. If any 
 difference arise, and the parties apply to the 
 presbytery, they act as friendly arbiters, give a 
 decision j and adhere to the party that complies 
 with it. If a complaint were made of immora- 
 lity or gross neglect of duty, on the part of a co- 
 presbyter, and the charge were proved, they 
 would disown him. This is a right that every 
 society enjoys, and which our Saviour expressly 
 grants to every congregation. Thus may the 
 presbyterian discipline be reconciled with liber- 
 ty of conscience and the right of private judg- 
 ment. 
 
 As to doctrine, Presbyterianisrn is not ne- 
 cessarily connected with any particular system. 
 If a presbyterian church keep clear of doctrinal 
 impositions and tests, it may consist of ministers 
 and elders of the greatest variety of sentiment, 
 as it actually does in this country. It may not 
 only formally consist of them, but if they be ac- 
 tuated by genuine Christian charity, they may 
 co-operate with the greatest cordiality and effect. 
 
 It does not therefore follow, that the members 
 of the presbytery of Antrim are Calvinists, be- 
 cause tney are Presbyterians : nor, on the other 
 hand, does it follow, from theSr refusing to sub- 
 scribe to confessions or articles of faith, that 
 they are notCalvinists, as may be seen in the in- 
 stance of the church of Geneva. There is no- 
 thing in their constitution to prevent them from 
 maintaining any doctrine that they can prove 
 by the New Testament.
 
 404 
 
 Finally, they comply strictly with those in- 
 junctions, so often repeated by our Lord, to call 
 no man father or master ; to have but one mas- 
 ter, Jesus Christ, and to treat all Christians as 
 brethren : not to exercise authority, nor lord it 
 over God's heritage, but to be helpers of their 
 joy ; and they exhort their people to search the 
 Scriptures with all diligence ; to judge of them- 
 selves what is right ; to follow their ministers 
 only as far as they are followers of Christ ; and 
 to dwell together in unity. 
 
 No. III. 
 ON ORDINATION. 
 
 * A MEMBER OF THE PRESBYTERY OF ANTRIM. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 Presbyterian Ordination. 
 
 ORDINATION is a solemn appointment to a 
 spiritual office or pastoral charge. That the 
 commencement of such an important relation 
 should be accompanied with a degree of solem- 
 nity, is consonant to the dictates of reason, the 
 feelings of human nature, and the practice of the 
 world in matters of very inferior moment. Such 
 a service is calculated to make a lasting and edi- 
 fying impression, both on the people and the per- 
 son ordained. The sanction of a body of di- 
 vines inspires a confidence, that, the congrega- 
 tion have not been erroneous in their choice, 
 and that the minister is qualified for his office. 
 The deliberation and formality, with which it is 
 conducted, have a tendency to check a rash and 
 precipitate election, and are bars to the intru- 
 sion of unworthy intrants into the ministry. If, 
 then, these purpoes ean be effected without any
 
 405 
 
 encroachment on Christian liberty, it is a valu- 
 able ordinance, independently of the blessing 
 of God, which may be reasonably expected from 
 the sincere performance of such a religious duty. 
 
 1 have defined ordination to be an appointment 
 either to a spiritual office or to a pastoral charge : 
 but the former part of the definition was formerly 
 objected to by the Independent or Congregational 
 churches of England, and is still rejected by some 
 respectable writers. That a minister, however, 
 may be set apart for an undefined exercise of his 
 ministry, as well as for the service of a particu- 
 lar congregation is, I think, sufficiently evident 
 both from reason and Scripture. If this were 
 not the case, a minister would be no minister 
 out of his own congregation. If the flock must 
 exist before the pastor, no new church could be 
 planted by any Christian minister. Neither 
 could preachers be set apart for any distant 
 country ; nor for the service of the army or 
 navy ; nor for a mission into heathen countries ; 
 yet in all these cases, it may be expedient, that he 
 should be sent forth with exhortation and prayer, 
 and sanetioned by the approbation of the church 
 to which he belongs. That a pastoral charge is 
 not essential to ordination, is also evident from 
 Scripture ; for the apostles and the seventy evan- 
 gelists were appointed by our Lord himself to the 
 ministerial office at large; Paul an i Barnabas 
 were ordained to a mission; and Timothy and Ti- 
 tu^to a general superintendence of the churches. 
 At the same time, the deacons in Jerusalem and 
 the elders in Asia, particularly in Lystra, Ico- 
 nium and Antioch, with the presbyters in Crete, 
 are instances, that ministers were more frequent- 
 ly ordained to a fixed charge. 
 
 It is the usage of Presbyterians, that minis- 
 ters be ordained by presbyters or preaching 
 elders, who have themselves been ordained.^ 
 Without adverting to any other considerations,
 
 406 
 
 there is a manifest propriety in confining- the ad- 
 ministration of the Sacraments, and the cele- 
 bration of matrimony and ordination, to stated, 
 or at least ordained pastors ; to men, who have 
 been tried and approved ; who have had expe- 
 rience, and whose qualifications and moral cha- 
 racter have received the approbation of their 
 brethren and their people. It is also plain to us, 
 that all such ministers are qualified to ordain. 
 Paul and Barnabas were set apart for the work, 
 to which the Holy Spirit had called them, by 
 Simeon, Lucius and Manaen, who were only 
 prophets and teachers in Antioch ; and yet con- 
 stituted Barnabas apostle of the Gentiles, for he 
 never received that title till after his ordination 
 by them. Again ordination was conferred by 
 Paul and Barnabas upon the elders in the 
 churches of lower Asia ; by a presbytery on 
 Timothy, and by Timothy and Titus upon the 
 Iders in Crete and other countries. 
 
 In these countries, they u ordained elders r 
 presbyters in every city" several presbyters in 
 each city ; (Titus i. 5.) Thus Paul and Barnabas 
 also " ordained elders in every church ;" several 
 elders in the same church, (Acts xiv. 23.) Agree- 
 ably to this, whenever the presbyters of a church 
 are spoken of, it is always in the plural r and 
 these plurals in the original express the powers 
 usually attributed to prelates : (see 1 Thes. v. 
 12. Acts xv. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23.) These presbyters 
 are often styled bishops, because presbyter or 
 elder is the title of honour, taken from the sy- 
 nagogue ; bishop or overseer denotes only their 
 office or business. Being synonimous, they are 
 used indifferently ; but other titles are not inter- 
 changeable, as bishop and deacon, presbyter 
 and deacon, apostle and presbyter, because they 
 signify different offices. 
 
 Timothy and Titus were of a different deno- 
 mination of ministers from any of those already
 
 .Mentioned. They were evangelists; and ac- 
 cordingly Timothy is exhorted by Paul to do 
 the work of an evangelist,* whose duty it was to 
 attend upon the apostles, and under their direc- 
 tion, to travel among the churches and put things 
 in order. Agreeably to this, Timothy may be 
 traced through Macedonia, Troas, Athens, Co- 
 rinth and Thessalonica : and Titus may be found 
 in Dalmatia, Macedonia, Achaia, Corinth and 
 NicopoKs. In short, they may be met with any 
 where more frequently than in Crete or at 
 Ephesus, where some suppose that they resided 
 as bishops. When Paul wrote to Timothy, t 
 that he had sent Tychicus -to Ephesus, it is 
 clear from the context, that Timothy was not 
 there himself, but probably at Troas : yet in- 
 stead of desiring him to return to his charge 
 at Ephesus, he says, " Do thy diligence to come 
 shortly to me,*' to Rome, whence he expected 
 Timothy to attend aim to Palestine,:}: and in hie 
 epistle to the Ephesians he never mentions his 
 <lear son Timothy. Of course he was not thea 
 at Ephesus. In Philippians ii. 19. he promises 
 lo despatch him to Philippi, and so on. 
 
 We are further warranted by apostolical au- 
 thority to maintain, that ordination should take 
 place with the consent of the people,, which is 
 our uniform practice in Ireland. In proof of 
 thisprinciple, we have two precedents to adduce. 
 The first is the case of Matthias. || Soon after 
 the ascension of our Lord, the eleven apostles 
 being assembled, they determined, that a succes- 
 sor should be appointed to Judas. How then did 
 this inspired sv nod proceed ? They were to adopt 
 into their company one of those disciples " who 
 had companied with them all the time that the 
 Lord went ia and out among them," who was 
 to be " ordained to be with them a witness of his 
 
 2 Tim. ir. 5. f Ibid. ir. 12, 13. f Heb, xiii 2*. 
 f| Mosbeim da Rcbuc, &c. Sac, I. 57, 39.
 
 408 
 
 resurrection." Now, Mho could be so well ac- 
 quainted as themselves, with those, who had 
 companied with them from the ministry of John, 
 or judge so well of their qualifications? Who 
 were so deeply interested in the choice of one, 
 with whom they were to associate for the re- 
 mainder of their lives, upon whose integrity and 
 sincerity, ability and temper, the success of the 
 Gospel seemed so much to depend ? In short, 
 who could pretend to equal authority in the 
 church, with the whole college of the apostles ? 
 Surely, if they paid this respect to the people, 
 it must have been to establish a precedent, that 
 should rule their successors to the end of time. 
 How then did they proceed ? " Peter stood up 
 in the midst of the disciples (the number of the 
 names together were about one hundred and 
 twenty,) and said, Men and brethren one must 
 be ordained to be a witness with us of the resur- 
 rection : and they appointed two and prayed, 
 and gave forth their lots : and the lot fell upon 
 Matthias, and he was numbered with the ele- 
 ven."* By this I understand, that the two can- 
 didates were selected with the approbation of 
 the disciples : and the preference decided by lot, 
 under divine direction ; or, according to Mo- 
 sheim, by the votes of the companyt and this, 
 though this new apostle was to have no connex- 
 ion with tlieir society in particular. How much 
 more reasonably would their consent have been 
 asked, in the election of a pastor! 
 
 The second instance is that of the seven dea- 
 cons. This transaction also took place in Jeru- 
 salem, while all the apostles were resident there. 
 If, then, it were in any case tolerable, that the 
 offices of a settled congregation should be nomi- 
 nated without the consent of the members, this 
 is the very one, in whicli such an exercise of au- 
 thority would have been most justifiable. The 
 
 * Acts i. IS. f Mosheim tie Rebui, &c. Seec. i. $ 14.
 
 409 
 
 apostles, however, seem to have thought, that 
 this would not be admissible in any conjuncture. 
 They would not even appoint deacons, who were 
 to share their trouble, but invited the multitude 
 of the disciples to choose for themselves, " seven 
 men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost 
 and wisdom ;" of which qualities, it seems, the 
 apostle? thought the multitude to be competent 
 judges. The people approved of this advice, 
 and complied with it : and the apostles ordained 
 the person?, whom they elected. 
 
 When Paul and Barnabas are said to have 
 ordained elders,* the Greek word strictly im- 
 plies election : but most assuredly, they never 
 exercised this power, contrary to the desire of 
 the brethren, or imposed a pastor on a reluctant 
 flock. 
 
 In the first Epistle to Timothy, the apostle 
 writes : " Let the deacons also be first proved : 
 then let thean use the office of a deacon, being 
 found blameless." If this were expedient with 
 respect to the lower class of church officers, it 
 was surely more so in the higher. I therefore 
 infer from this text, from the caution given to 
 Timothy, in the same epistle, not to be hasty in 
 laying hands on any man. and from the nume- 
 rous texts, that speak of the qualifications ne- 
 cessary in ministers, that the abilities and cha- 
 racter of the candidate should undergo some 
 trial, before the people proceed to election, or 
 the presbyters to ordination. It is reasonable 
 in itself, as well as supported by these autho- 
 rities, that the church should have some expe- 
 rience of the talents and virtues of their future 
 pastor : and it is the duty of those, who set him 
 apart, to be careful, that they do not give their 
 sanction to an unworthy person. Such trials, 
 therefore, always make a part of presbyterian 
 discipline. 
 
 2 M 
 * Acts, xir. 2J>.
 
 410 
 
 The charge which is usually delivered to the 
 preacher and the people,, immediately after or- 
 dination, is sufficiently justified by the thing it- 
 self; and further warranted by the frequent ad- 
 monitions to the people, to " take heed how they 
 hear'," " to beware of false prophets," and " to 
 take care how they behave themselves in the 
 house of God;" and by the directions and ex- 
 hortations of our Lord to the apostles, and af- 
 terwards to the seventy ; not to insist on those 
 words of Paul to Timothy, which have been 
 thought to intimate the delivery of a public 
 charge at his ordination.* The declaration, 
 which is made by the person to be ordained also, 
 is countenanced by " the good profession which 
 Timothy professed before many witnesses. "t 
 
 Lastly. It was the custom of the apostles and 
 the apostolic churches, to ordain by imposition 
 of hands. Since, however, the propriety of con- 
 tinuing this practice has been called in question ; 
 and the ceremony itself greatly abused, it is ne- 
 eessary to explain the purpose for which it was 
 anciently adopted, and the reasons why it should 
 not now be discontinued. 
 
 Imposition of hands, then, was originally 
 omly an action or gesture used in intercessory 
 prayer, to point out the person for whom the pe- 
 tition was offered. When Jacob laid his hands 
 on the heads of Ephraim and Manasseh,^: it was 
 a mark, that his prayer was made for them, and 
 more especially fur him, on whom he laid his 
 right hand. Throughout the books of Leviticus 
 and Numbers, the offerer is always directed to 
 lay his hand on the victim. When the offering 
 was made for the whole congregation, the el- 
 Uers, as their representatives, laid their hands 
 on the sacrifice. || When the scape goat was sent 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 2. f 1 Tim. i. 12. f Gen. zlviii. 1. 
 Lsvit, JT. 14.
 
 411 
 
 into the wilderness, Aaron laid his hand on his 
 head, as high priest.* This was a token, that 
 4he people joined in the sacrifice, and the prayer, 
 by which it was preceded. It was also ordained, 
 that when the man, who had cursed and blas- 
 phemed, should be brought out to be stoned, 
 all who had heard him, and testified against 
 him, should lay their hands upon his head.t 
 Here it was a sign, that they assented to the 
 curse denounced against those, who shed -inno- 
 cent blood and bore false witness. When 
 Moses desired, that his successor might be ap- 
 pointed, he was ordered " to take Joshua, a 
 man in whom is the Spirit, and lay his hand 
 upon him, and set him before Eleazar, the high 
 priest, and before all the congregation, and give 
 him a charge in their sight." In this place it 
 implies appointment to an office, which was, 
 without doubt, always accompanied with a 
 prayer. Naanian is said to have expected, when 
 he applied to Elisha to cure him of his leprosy,}: 
 that the prophet would have " called on the 
 name of the Lord, and struck his hand over 
 the place;" as an indication. 1 presume, of the 
 specific purpose, for which he called on the 
 name of the Lord. In the New Testament, 
 the observance of this form in effecting mira- 
 culous cur s, frequently occurs; and is, I con- 
 ceive, to be understood in the same manner. 
 Children were brought to Christ, " that lie should 
 put his hands on them and prny.fi At another 
 time, " he took children in his arms, and put 
 his hands upon them and blessed them :"$ as 
 parents implore a blessing on their children at 
 ti.i< clny. Many supernatural cures are expie<s y 
 said to have heen p.ttendrd with prayer: t! u-s 
 Paui is said to have enlrred into the hoi; e of 
 
 * Lcvit. xvi. 10. f Ibirf. xiir. 14. f 2 King' v. 11 
 
 H Muttb. iix. 13. Aiarkx 15.
 
 412 
 
 the father of Publius, " and prayed and laid 
 his hands on him, and healed him."* So far 
 there is no intimation of bestowing the Holy 
 Ghost. In the few remaining instances, there- 
 fore, it is reasonable to understand so general a 
 custom in the same sense; as when it is said, 
 that the apostles laid their hands on certain per- 
 sons, and they received the Holy Ghost. As 
 the apostles would never undertake to dispense 
 the gifts of the Spirit, without prayer, or pretend 
 to a power of working miracles, without asking 
 divine aid, as our Lord himself did at the re- 
 surrection of Lazarus, especially since this was 
 an occasional and not an inherent faculty, .it may 
 be inferred, that imposition of hands was only 
 a sign of the object of the petition. The influ- 
 ence of the Spirit was the consequence, not of 
 laying on hands, which neither was an emblem 
 of such graces, nor had any efficacy in obtaining 
 them, but of the prayer of faith, to which they 
 are expressly ascribed by St. James. f 
 
 Again as this gesture was neither emblema- 
 tical nor efficacious, so neither is it any where 
 asserted, that the divine influence was commu- 
 nicated at ordination ; much less that it was ob- 
 tained by imposition of hands at that ceremony. 
 Most of the persons said to be ordained, had the 
 Spirit b.efore. They were not inspired by ordi- 
 nation ; but ordained, because they were quali- 
 fied by inspiration. The gift that was in Timothy 
 by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery, 
 was the office of an evangelist.^: He had already- 
 received the gifts of the Spirit by Paul, accom- 
 panied with this customary form of blessing. j| 
 Joshua was constituted successor to Moses, !>^- 
 cause he was a man, in whom was the Spirit." 
 The seven deacons were selected as men " full 
 of the Holy Ghost," and therefore fit subjects 
 
 * Acts xxviii. 8. f James v. IS. $ I Tina, ir 14. 
 I 2 Tim. i. .
 
 413 
 
 to ho invp-trd with thnt office. Paul wa an 
 inspire?! r.pi-ile : and Ijarnaha ; was u full of (lie 
 Holy Ghost ami of faith:"* both prior lo their 
 being appointed apostles of the Gentiles. 
 
 Finally : there is reason to think, that neither 
 di ! Paul under -land, that Timothy was to be- 
 stow the ^ifts of the Spirit by ordination : for if 
 lie wer >, it was :; accessary to enjoin him to 
 commit the work of the ministry to those only 
 who were qualified to teach others: since the 
 faculty of te; ching was included in these gifts, 
 and it wa equally superfluous to warn him to 
 proceed with caution, since the Spirit was able 
 to correct their evil propensities and, supply their 
 deficiencies. 
 
 Since, then, the Holy Spirit was communi- 
 cated, without imposition of hands, as at Pente- 
 cost, in Samaria, anJ in the house of Cornel in-, 
 and imposition of hands took piace, when no 
 gifts were conferred, it is plain, that there is n > 
 necessary connexion between them : and since 
 there i.s not an instance of the Holy Ghost being 
 conferred at ordination, it may well be risked, 
 whence have the superstitious no* ions, that pre- 
 vail on tliis subject, taken their rise ; and on tike 
 other hand, how (foes it come to pass, that . 
 liberal Christians- object to the continuance '' 
 this form ? Apostolic practices are m*t to bo re- 
 linquished, because tlvey have been abused : r.<M- 
 are they to lie sacrificed to the caprice of fashion 
 or an affectation of liberality. It is the duty 
 a~nd province of tiie ministers of the Go-pel, not 
 to calculate how far they may venture to devuite 
 from Srriptunil precepts and examples: |-.ut ho\r 
 closely they can follow them. It should be their 
 pride, that there is nothing in the practice uf 
 Christ and the apostles, that is not to be foiiiiil 
 in their worship : and nothing 1 in their \vr'- 
 tliat is not warranted by Christ and liis apo 
 
 2'm 2 
 * Acts xi. II.
 
 414. 
 
 While Presbyterians adhere to this principle, 
 they will be as a house founded on a rock, and a 
 city set on a hill ; when they depart from it, they 
 will be as a house built on the sand ; equally li- 
 able to be swept away by the floods, and to be 
 undermined by the silent lapse of a prosperous 
 current. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 EPISCOPAL ORDINATION. 
 
 I HE fathers of the English reformation denied the divine right 
 of episcopacy. They held that there were in Scripture, only two 
 orders of ministers, priests and deacons- and that bishops and pres- 
 byters were but different ranks of the same order. They gave the 
 right hand of fellowship to the foreign churches, and to ministers, 
 that had not been ordained by bishops, there being no dispute about 
 re-ordination, in order to church preferment. In 1537, " The In- 
 stitution of a Christian Man," was composed by archbishop Cran- 
 mer, nine bishops and some other divines. It was recommended 
 and subscribed by the two archbishops, nineteen bishops, and the 
 lower house of convocation. This book maintains the same luo 
 orders of clergy, and avers, that no one bishop has authoiity 
 over another, according to the word of God. 
 The Declaration of the Functions, &c. of bishops and priests, was 
 made in 1538. It was signed by Cromwell, the two archbishops, 
 and eleven bishops, and twenty divines nnd casuists. It says, 
 " There is no mention made of any degrees or distinctions in 
 erdcirs, but only of deacons or ministers, and of priests orbishops." 
 A few years after, there came out a treatise, entitled, " A No- 
 eessary Erudition fora Christian Man." It was drawn up by a com- 
 mittee of bishops and divines ; and was after wards read and appiovi't! 
 by the lords spiritual and temporal, and the lower house of parlia- 
 ment. It was published by order of the king, and designed for a 
 standard of Christian belief. It maintains no real distinction be- 
 tween bishops and priests ; and asserts, that the sacraments do not 
 receive efficacy from the ministration of the prient or bishop, but 
 from God. In 1550, an act was passed for ordaining ministers, 
 in which, no express mention is made in the words of ordination, 
 whether it be for a priest or a bishop. 
 
 By the 13. Eliz. c. 12. Ordination l<y presbyters wilhout a hi- 
 hop, was admitted; and ministers who received their orders in fo- 
 reign churches, were recognised. In 1578, dean Whittingham, 
 was excommunifcifttd by the Archbishop of York, for want of j>is-
 
 41.5 
 
 copal orders. But upon appeal, his ordination was pronounced to 
 l>e of a better sort than that of the archbishop himself. 
 
 Robert Wright, who had been ordained by a presbytery at 
 Antwerp, preached seven years in the University of Cambridge, 
 with approbation. This was about the year 1552, when there were 
 great numbers in the church, who had been ordained according to 
 the manner of the Scotch and other foreign churches. In the same 
 year, the archbishop of Canterbury licensed John Morrison, a 
 Scotch divine, to preach over his whole province, in these words 
 " Since you were admitted and ordained to sacred orders, and the 
 holy ministry, by the imposition of hands, according to the lauda- 
 ble form and rite of the reformed church of Scotland ; and since 
 the congregation of the rounty of Lothian, is conformable to the 
 orthodox f'i'th and sincere religion, now received in this realm of 
 England, and established by public authority : we therefore, ap- 
 proving and ratifying the form of your ordination and preferment, 
 done in such manner aforesaid, grant you a license and faculty to 
 celebrate divine offices, to minister the sacraments," &c. 
 
 In 1586, in consequence of 15 Eliz. there were many Scotch di- 
 vines in possession of benefices ; and Mr. Travers, who had been 
 ordained abroad, was lecturer at the Temple, afterwards Provost 
 of Trinity College, Dublin, and tutor to Archbishop Usher, 
 I lis adversary, Hooker, does not complain of bis ordination but 
 only of his doctrine. 
 
 In 15S8, Dr. Bancroft, chaplain to the archbishop of Canterbu- 
 ry, maintained the superiority of bifchops, jure divino ; but this 
 was new and strange doctrine to the church-men of those times ; 
 and he was accordingly opposed by Dr. Raynolds, of Oxford, 
 who quoted bishop Jewel, and a variety cf ancient authorities ; 
 the Waldenses, Wickliffites, and all the reformers; and in Eng- 
 l?n<!, professors of divinity, bishops and other learned men ; 
 with the reformed churches of Helvetia, Savoy, France. Scotland, 
 Germany, Hungary, Poland, and the Low Countries. " I hope, 
 says Dr. Raynolds, that Dr. B.incroft will not say, that these 
 approved of what was condemned as heresy by the general con- 
 sent of the church. I hope he will acknowledge, that he was over- 
 seen, when he avouched the superiority, which bishops have among 
 us over the clergy- to be God's own ordinance. Archbishop Whit- 
 gift, said " the Doctor's sermon had done much good ; though 
 hehimsflf rather wished than believpd it true." 
 
 Whatever reasons Bancroft had for broaching this new doc- 
 rine, while he was only a chaplain, lie seems to have altered hi* 
 mind, when he became a bishop, for in his answer to the foreign 
 churches settled in London, he says " I am sensible of the me- 
 rits of Edmund Grindal, bishop of London, and of my tm-deoe';- 
 sors in this bishoprick. who had reason to take your churches, 
 which are of the same faith with our own, under their patronage." 
 In 1610. when he was archbishop of Canterbury, he agreed, that 
 where bishops coukl not be had, o;din:ition by presbyters must 
 be valid, otherwise the character of the foreign churches might be
 
 416 
 
 questioned. This was on the consecration of the Scotch bishops, 
 who scrupled receiving priest's orders. 
 
 The churches of the Low Countries were fully acknowledged 
 by the church of England, when a bishop and four other divines 
 were sent to represent them at the Synod of Dort, in 1618, iu which 
 the Swiss and German churches weiealso represented. 
 
 Presbyterian ministers possessed the livings in die north of 
 Ireland, from the time of their settlement, HI IfJIl, and some nf 
 t lie-in sat in the convocation, (1654,) in which the 59 articles weie 
 adopted, 
 
 I'rimate Usher says " I have ever declared my opinion to 
 be, that bishop and presbyter differ only in degree, not in order, 
 and consequently, that in places where bishops cannot be had, the 
 ordination by presbyters stands valid." " I do profes*, that if 1 
 was in Holland, I should receive the blessed sacrament at the 
 hands of the Dutch ministers, with the like affection ns I should 
 from the hands of the French ministers, was J at Charenton." The 
 king having asked him, (Usher,) at the Kle of Wight, whether 
 be found in antiquity, that presbyters alone ordained any. He 
 replied, yes.and that lie could shew bis Majesty more, even where 
 presbyters alone successively ordained bishops ; and instanced the 
 presbyters of Alexandria, choosing and making their own bishops 
 from the days of Mark till Heraclas and Dionysus.* 
 
 When bishop Moreton was requested to re-ordain a person or- 
 dained beyond sea, he replied, that it could not be done but to the 
 scandal of the reformed churches, wherein he would have no hand 
 The same prelate adds, that to ordain was the ancient right of 
 presbyters. 
 
 Bishop Burnet says, " as for the notion of distinct offices of 
 bishop and presbyter, I confess, 'tis not so clear to me ; and 
 therefore, since I look on the sacramental actions, as the highest 
 of sacred performances, I cannot but acknowledge those who are 
 empowered for them, must be of the highest office in the church " 
 
 Lord Clarendon says of the long parliament, they were all 
 members of the established church, and almost to a man for epis- 
 copal, government. Dr. Lewis du Moulin asserts, that both 
 lords and commons were most, if not all, peaceable, orthodox 
 church of England men, all conforming to the rules and ceremo- 
 nies of episcopacy. November 20, 164O, they made an order, that 
 none should sit in their house, but such ns would receive the com- 
 munion according to the usage of the church of England. 
 
 The divines of the Westminster assembly, were, except the 
 Scotchand French, in episcopal orders, educated inotirown univer- 
 sities, and most of them graduates. Yet, neither of these assem- 
 blies deemed episcopal ordination essenuaL 
 
 * Alexandria? a Marco Evangelists, usque ad Heraclam et Di- 
 onysum Episcopos, Presbyteri semper nnum ex se electum, in ex- 
 cclsiori gradu collocatum, Episcopnm nominabant. Hieronyiu. 
 Epist. ad Eixigriiim, ut nihil de Eutychio aliisqiie dicam. The 
 reader may see Ushar's plan for the reduction of episcopacy, in 
 Tindal's Continuation of Rapin. Vol. XIX. B. 25.
 
 417, 
 
 Laud, on his trial, said, " I deny that I have endeavoured to 
 sow discord between the foreign churches, nor have I absolutely 
 unchurched them. I say, indeed, that none but a bishop can or- 
 dain, except in cases of inevitable necessity " 
 
 King Charles I. did not undertake to censure foreign churches, 
 but supposed thtit necessity might excuse many things, that would 
 otherwise be unlawful. 
 
 In Ireland, J6<51, Dr. Bramhall, archbishop of Armngh, and 
 Taylor, bishop of Down and Connor, consecrated two archbishops, 
 and ten bishops, insisting on re-ordaining those who had presbyte- 
 rinn orders, with this clause : Non an nihilantes priores ordines 
 (si quoshabuil,) nee validitatem aut invaliditatem eorundem deter- 
 minantes, rntilto minus omnes ordines sacros ecclesiarum forensi- 
 carum condemnantes, quos proprio judicio relinquimus : sed so- 
 lummodo supplentes quicquid prius defuit, per canones ecclesiat 
 Anglicanae req\iisitum. 
 
 In 1663, Ld. Keeper Bridgman, L.C.J. Hales, bishops Wilkins, 
 tnd Reynolds, Drs. Burton, Tillotson and Stillingfleel, proposed, 
 that such ministers as, in the late times, had been ordained only 
 by presbyters, should have the imposition of the hands of a bishop, 
 with this form of words : "Take thou authority to preach the 
 word of God, and administer the sneraments in any congregation 
 of the church of England, when thou shalt be lawfully appointed 
 thereunto." 
 
 These two forms only communicated a legal authority, without 
 questioning their former orders. 
 
 1689. A commission of the same great men, with bishop Bur- 
 net, Doctor Tnnison, and others, proposed, among other alte- 
 rations, that re-ordination of those who had been ordained by pres- 
 byters, should be only conditional 
 
 The bishops of Sotland, when episcopacy was settled there, ne- 
 ver required the presbyterian ministers to take episcopal ordina- 
 tion. Burnet's Vindication, p. 84, 85. 
 
 " In 1683, Emlyn, the celebrated Arian, was chaplain to the 
 countess of Donegal!, and frequently officiated for the parish mi- 
 nist^r in Belfast, without subscription He hnd a license from th 
 bishop to preach, facultatis exercendae gratia. In his journey 
 from Ireland to London, he preached frequently in the parish 
 churches on the road; and particularly in Liverpool, at two diffe- 
 rent periods. 
 
 Archbishop Seeker, arguing with the Romanists on the autho- 
 rity of St. Peter, says " why indeed must it be inherited at all ? It 
 was given personally to St. Peter, as an apostle : what had others 
 to do with it, who were no apostles, though they did succeed him 
 as bishops? All pre-eminence of one church above another was 
 nothing originally, but an institution of men fcr convenience and 
 order." Sermon 98. 
 
 The 55th canon, expressly recognises the church of Scotland, 
 and ordains, that it should be remembered in the bidding of pray- 
 ers. The people are exhorted to pray for the whole company of
 
 Christian people throughout the world, including the foreign Pro- 
 testants ; but especially for the churches of England, Scotland, 
 and Ireland." 
 
 Lastly, the form of ordination and consecration in use at this 
 day, s!)ys nothing of an apostolical succession ; noi does it specify 
 any peculiar powers belonging to l;islx ps : and the 23d article 
 vests the appointment of ministers solely in the magistrate ; and 
 forbids any others to preach, by whomsoever they may have been 
 ordained. None of the 39 articles require assent to the distinction 
 of orders, nor the exclusive powers of bishops. 
 
 Notwithstanding these testimonies to the ptrity of priests and 
 bishops, the orthodoxy of the foreign churches, anil the validity 
 of preshyterian ordination, there have always been men, w ho have 
 set their faces against these authorities, though the great men of 
 the church disclaim their superstitious and uncharitable notions; 
 and the wise men would gladly suffer them to sink into oblivion. 
 These are little obliged to any officious partisan, who makes 
 them the subject of controversy and dissention. Neither are 
 the Presbyterians of Ulster prone to agitate such questions : but 
 when, not content with enjoying their speculations in private, 
 or inculcating them on the people of their own communion, these 
 writers proceed to insult their neighbours, and affront the common 
 sense of mankind, it is incumbent on every friend of peace and 
 rational religion, to expose their extravagance and futility. As to 
 their own people, Dissenters feel no apprehensions, that such doc- 
 trines will have any effect upon, them ; nor do they think, that 
 the Episcopalians of Ulster will be easiiy raided by their sophis- 
 try ; for whatever success they may have with a few individuals, 
 or in some bigoted districts, they will be despised by the good and 
 pious of every denomination. They will have a small chance of 
 persuading the members of the establishment, that all their re- 
 spectable and intelligent neighbours, and the population of thin 
 enlightened province, are little better than heathens, form no part. 
 of the Christian church, and must be left to the " uncovenanted 
 mercies of God," a hypocritical expression for everlasting per- 
 dition. Such abominable bigotry is unknown in this country, 
 where, by a free and friendly intercourse, and resort to different 
 places of worship, all Christians have imbibed a spirit of forbear- 
 ance in circumstantials, and of brotherly love in every thing, that 
 is hardly to be met with, in the same degree, in any quarter of 
 Christendom. 
 
 To let these writers speak for themselves, I shall quote a few 
 sentences from a work, in which their sentiments have of late 
 been industriously collected.* It appears absolutely necessary, 
 that there should be a continual succession of men invested with 
 the same authority as the first apostles, and deriving power 
 from them to ordain, and keep up a lawfully commissioned cler- 
 gy " " If it (a church) reject the episcopacy, and separate fiom 
 tbo communion of it, it thereby wholly divides itself from the 
 Catholic chinch." " Those, who hold no communion with any 
 
 Barwick on the Church.
 
 apostolic (episcopal) church, as they do not enter into the fellow- 
 ship of Christ's religion, have no right or title to its glories or re- 
 wards." " If we are out of the church, how can we be saved?" 
 " The sectaries have no ministry." ' We must recollect that 
 those pretended ministers, who officiate in the meetings of Me- 
 thodists, Presbyterians, &c. have not been ordained by bishops ; 
 and consequently, these men have not been sent by God ; and 
 therefore, it must be utterly unlawful to attend their ministry. 
 To hear them, in such a case, is rebellion against God, and ut- 
 terly unlawful ; and is countenancing them and hardening their 
 presumption and daring imposture. We must plainly insist, that 
 federally speaking, not one of the Dissenters have such a thing 
 as either the word or sacraments among them. The case being 
 thus, the non-entity of '.hese unhappy people's church appears up- 
 m a double account ; first, as wanting a ministry ; and second, as 
 wanting the due preaching of the pure word, and right adminis- 
 tration of the sacraments, So that the difference between us and 
 this peopje is, a ministry and no ministry, a church and no church." 
 " Presbyterians are in a state of unjustifiable separation from the 
 lawful bishops of these countries; and consequently, are cut off 
 from the apostles' fellowship and from Catholic communion. 
 Truly, I know not, how the Presbyterians of Scotland can ex- 
 cise their separation from the lawful bishops of that country. 
 They surely do not imagine, that the act of parliament by which 
 they are established, can take away the sin of schism." This 
 gentleman forgets the schism of his own church from Rome ; 
 forgets that his also has been called a parliamentary religion ; 
 that the Book of Common Prayer is only an appendage to the act 
 of Uniformity ; and that the bishops were once appointed, during 
 pleasure, by royal coihmissions ; forgets that two presbyterian 
 and two popish kings have been the beads of his church ; and 
 that four queens, one of them a papist, have had the framing of 
 its canons, the direction of its convocations, and the making of 
 these very bishops ; forgets too, that in consequence of these con- 
 fused councils, the controversy is still going on among themselves, 
 whether they are a Calvinistic or a Lutheran church, or neither ; 
 which led the great Lord Chatham to give this character of the 
 two parties in the house of lords " The Presbyterians keep closer 
 to the college of fishermen than to the college of cardinals. As 
 for us, we have a popish liturgy, (afed he might have said, hier- 
 archy,) Calvinistic articles and an Arminian clergy." There is 
 no pleasure in this recrimination; but let the blame lie with those 
 who provoke it. T would rather consider this as a contest with 
 individuals than the church ; for I find no such uncharitable doc- 
 trine in any of its formularies. 
 
 Let us now proceed to consider the consequences of this doc- 
 trine, first, as to our common Christianity, then as to Protestant* 
 in general ; and lastly, with respect to the church of England and 
 Ireland in particular. 
 
 According to this doctrine, faith and repentance are nothing ;
 
 righteousness and holiness of no avail ; hope and charity, beg- 
 garly elements ; and the sacraments themselves, a profanation, 
 without a regular pedigree. There can be no confidence in the 
 divine promises, no hope in the divine mercy, no efficacy in the 
 mediation, death and intercession of Christ, except we can trac* 
 the succession of our minister, through every confused period of 
 ecclesiastical history up to the apostles. We are all left in a state 
 of reprobation, if there be a flaw in his title. What folly ! 
 
 The same sentence is passed upon those churches that preceded 
 the rcfort::: tion, and anticipated its doctrines, even while strug- 
 gling in the Egyptian darkness of the middle ages the Albi- 
 genses, Waldenses and Wicklifiites, with the Moravian and Bo- 
 hemian brethren. As to Luther and Calvin, Melancthon, Zu- 
 inglius, &c. they did worse than nothing. While their disciples 
 remained in the church of Rome, they were under the govern- 
 ment of apostolical bishops, and were members of a true church; 
 but as soon as they deserted that episcopal communion, they be- 
 came schismatics, had no church, no ordinances, no pastors. This 
 must be the opinion of these divines concerning all the 'Lutheran 
 and reformed churches from Switzerland to Sweden. The same 
 uncharitable judgment must they form of their countrymen, the 
 the church of Scotland, the Presbyterians throughout Ireland, and 
 a very large proportion of the people of England j not to speak 
 f the United States of America. 
 
 The Episcopalians, however, are safe. Let us examine the foun- 
 dation of their security. As to the succession in the primitive 
 church, there is great uncertainty, various catalogues, and con- 
 tradictory opinions. " Who dare, in good faith affirm, even in 
 the apostolic age, much more in the succeeding ages, amid so 
 many persecutions, by which Christians were scattered, or thrown 
 into distinct societies, widely separated from one another ; a.-jid 
 90 many proscriptions, so many migrations from one place of 
 safety to another ; amid so many political contests and religions 
 disputes; amid so many divisions and contradictory opinions, 
 that so early prevailed among Christians themselves ; amid the ig>- 
 nnrance and credulity of the multitude, and the presumption and 
 policy of ecclesiastics ; who dare affirm, that the succession of 
 priests hath been perpetuated, deriving their claims from one 
 common apostolic source ?" In fact, it was not possible, that on 
 every vacancy, in remote provinces of heathen countries, an 
 apostolical man could be found to ordain. (Vide Mosheim de 
 Rebus. &c. Ssec. I. 59.) Now, if any interruption took place 
 at that early period, the whole series must have been vitiated. 
 Suppose the succession remained uncontaminated till the times of 
 popery, when there were several popes and antipopes at the same 
 time, mutually excommunicating each other ; when the Roman 
 world was divided, for so many years, between Rome and Avignon, 
 might it not then be in danger? Who can say, that a link in the 
 chain was not lost ? What then becomes of apostolic episcopacy ? 
 But to come nearer home.
 
 It has been maintained, that the ordination of English bishops 
 eannot be traced up even to th church of Rome, as its original; 
 for in the 7th century, by far the greatest part of the bishops were 
 of Scottish ordination, by presbyters from the Culdee monastery 
 of Columbanus. 
 
 If in the English reformation, by any fatality, the episcopal 
 uccession had failed ; if none of the popish bishops had confor- 
 med ; what then would have become of the unhappy people of the 
 tfluirch of England ? They must have gone a begging to Home, 
 fiT a ienew.il of their orders. Suppose she had refused, can any 
 ana be so absurd as to believe, that the salvation of the people of 
 .England, to the end of time, could depend on such a casualty? 
 Yet to this casualty the English episcopacy was actually exposed 
 in the reigns of Hen. Vf IT. and queen Eliz. at the Restoration, 
 nd among (he Nonjurors at the Revolution. 
 
 Suppose, that by any accident a prelate had ever been unduly 
 roiisecr.Ved ; a priest irregularly ordained ; or some unordained 
 intruder had got possession of a church, if it were only as a tem- 
 porary substitute for the stated minister, as has often happened ; 
 what becomes of all tbe pnor people, who depended on them for 
 baptism and confirmation, the Lord's Supper and absolution? 
 
 This, however, is* no supposition : fur not only during the ex- 
 istence of the Liong Parliament and the usurpation ; but at an 
 earlier period, great numbers of those jiretended Presbyterian mi- 
 nisters did actually occupy the churches, in England, Ireland and 
 ikcotland, mid even attained to the episcopal dignity. These, no 
 d'jutt, ordained priests and consecrated prelates. '1 his must have 
 tainted the succession to the present day. 
 
 Again ; has a deprivod bishop or a degraded or excommunu 
 Sated clergyman aright to dispense the sacniments? Certainly 
 uot by the law of the land; but have they in the opinion of the 
 church ? If not, how oi'tcu may the people be deceived ? If they 
 have, their characters must be indi'Ublo. This, again, is a ques- 
 tion by which the people will be perplexed, and left doubtful of 
 the cflicacy of the ordinances. Yet deprived bishops bavo been 
 oipployed to consecrate ; and degraded priests have administered 
 lita sacraments. As to excommunication ipso facto, a parish 
 priest may lie under it, before he is aware. 
 
 Further, how can the people know, whether tlieir ministers art 
 regularly ordained, or not ; or how can the church ascertain it?* 
 In short,- how caw the minister himself be assured of it. On wLat 
 does it depend ? Is it on this doubtful succession merely ? Is there 
 nothing in the vestments, the ceremonies or the form of words ? 
 Nothing in the orthodoxy, cincerity, or intention of citir. u.-.rvV 
 or both? If all these ba essential, the result must be exiremely 
 vacertain. Are none of them of importance? Suppose, that 
 Uia consecrafor or conscrratcd, the ordainer or ordained has no 
 ji'.eHUou to convey or receive any orders; suppose they arc thjuk- 
 
 2 X 
 Fee ChlJJingvfwth, C. II- $ 65.
 
 422 . 
 
 .ing of something else, and use improper words : suppose, one or 
 both are unbelievers, and laugh in their sleeve at the whole busi- 
 ness ; are such orders valid? If so, what a wonderful influence 
 must be ascribed to the hand of an ignorant profligate infidel, for in- 
 tance, one of those revolutionary French bishops, who renounced 
 Christianity, when he says, Receive the Holy Ghost. Whose- 
 soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven and what a mysterious 
 power is that, wbich can so easily convert an unbeliever into 
 Christian priest or bishop; and with such efficacy, that this new 
 character can never be forfeited or obliterated by any crime. 
 
 One writer seems to have his doubts concerning the English 
 uccession, for he consoles himself with the reflection, that there 
 can \>e no doubt of the Irish, because so many popish bishops con- 
 foimed at the Reformation : but many Irish priests and bishops 
 have been- made in England. What is to become of us then ? 
 Besides, the Irish bishopricks before the Reformation were often 
 hereditary, like the prince bishopricks in Germany. The arcli- 
 bishoprick of Armagh descended through fifteen generations in the 
 game family ; and several of these archbishops were neither ordain* 
 ed nor consecrated;* nor consequently their suffragans. 
 
 As to the laity, I should be glad to know, if apostolic succes- 
 sion be essential to the sacraments, why converts and conformists 
 are not rebaptized, as well as conformist ministers are reordained.f- 
 
 So that this unbroken line of prelates must even to its advo- 
 cates be a matter of doubt ; to all others a rope of sand : but 
 even they can entertain no suspicion, as to the uninterrupted suc- 
 cession of presbyters ; for all bishops were also presbyters ; -Hfcd if 
 there were no bishops with apostolic powers, presbyters were from 
 (he beginning the only ministers, except deacons. Of course, 
 our ordinations must have descended from the apostles. The re- 
 formers were all presbyters, and had episcopal orders ; and there 
 
 Mos pessimus inoleverat sedetn sanctam (Ardmachatn^ 
 
 btentura iri haereditaria sMCcessione decurls jam in hac ma- 
 
 Mtia quasi generationibus quindecim. Denique jam octo ex- 
 
 litcrant ante Cclsuin viri uxorati & absque ordinibus. Bernard! 
 vita Malachiae. C. 7. 
 
 f There seems to have been a reservation in the minds of Laud 
 and his pupil Charles I, as to insuperable necessity and involun- 
 tary ignorance ; and some late writers have also felt it. After sta- 
 ting their doctrine, they are ashamed of its consequences ; and ad- 
 mit, in very qualified terms however, the possibility, that those 
 may be saved, who either could not obtain episcopal orders 
 and functions, or never heard of this apostolic succession. But 
 this is only paltering ; we accept of no such compromise. We 
 have either an ordination and sacraments or none. If none, no 
 necessity nor ignorance on our part can make that valid, which is 
 nugatory ; convert a nonentity into au important reality; or era- 
 power us to convey spiritual graeus, contrary to the expreu will 
 of God.
 
 42S 
 
 is na question, that tht ministers of presbyterinn ehurches hart 
 ben regularly ordained to the present day. So that if we wer 
 ambitious of deriving our office through the church of Rome. w 
 also might make out a title to this honour of following in the 
 train of popish prelates; but we scorn it ; and therefore resort at 
 once to the New Testament, and appeal to the practice of the 
 apostles. To go beyond this, and fly from the apostles to th 
 Fathers; from the acts and epistles into the labyrinth of ecclesi- 
 astical history, is only to seek for deception and self-delusion. 
 Any one may multiply quotations on either side without opening 
 an original author. I shall neither report to this myself, nor fol- 
 low others through these mazes. With respect to a divine insti- 
 tution, church history is a blank. It must he found in Scripture 
 or no where. If this sacerdotal genealogy, branching through so 
 many ages and nations, be essential to the salvation of mankind ; 
 if the scheme of redemption depend on any ordc of church of- 
 ficers ; it' upon these points " hang the law, the prophets" and 
 the Gospel, an 1 not upon love to God and love to man, faith, 
 hope and charity; then we shall assuredly find them clearly ex- 
 plained in the New Testament. The sacred records must contain 
 he commission of these officers, so much more august, than all 
 the potentates of the earth; in comparison with whose authority 
 of opening and shutting the kingdom of heaven, all-' human 
 power dwindles into insignificance. We shall not only meet with 
 the original commission : but a power of delegation ; a form of 
 succession, and some sign by which the genuine successors may 
 be known. All this we have reason to expect from the analogy 
 of the Mo.saical dispensation. ' ' ' ' * 
 
 Some divines are fond of deducing arguments from the Levitl- 
 cal priesthood to support a Christian hierarchy : but the Law and 
 the Gospel are not only totally distinct in their ceremonials, -but 
 the one was founded on the ruins of the other. No part of the 
 Jewish ritual was adopted in the primitive church. The synii- 
 gogue was the model'on which its simple worship was formed. Th 
 Jewish religion wa< local and temporary the Christian, universal 
 and everlasting. With the Jcrws, the divine law was incorporated 
 with the civil; but the kingdom of Christ is not of this world?? 
 the priests were appointed for sacrifice, and the Levites for th* 
 t.ervice of the temple : Christian ministern for preaching and pray- 
 er ; and deacons for attending to the poor. The priests and Le- 
 vites were an hereditary cast ; the ministers of the gospel, elective. 
 The tribe of Luvi was selected for these offices, and the teaching 
 and administration of the law. Like the other tribes, it was 
 preserved perfectly pure and distinct. Every man's pedigree was 
 iofVilibly ascertained. The priests in particular were all'mem* 
 bers of one family, and descendants of Aaron. It was death for 
 ny one to usurp the priest's oflice. The appointment of Aaron 
 and his sons was declared by a pompous and solemn investiture 
 ( Exod. xxvi ii. &c.) All this is clear, authentic, and- admits 1 of -no 
 dispute ; and all this was doue, to preserve th* integrity of an i-
 
 424 
 
 titution, fliat WM only preparatory and subservient to the 
 May we not, therefore, assume that if the benefits of the Gospel 
 were to depend on a similar succession, we should find it establish- 
 ed, as authentically and authoritatively, with a solemn form of in- 
 auguration, indelible marks of office, and an uniform practice? 
 Let us then " search the Scriptures diligently, to see if these 
 tilings be so." 
 
 We are to ascertain a matter of fact. I shall therefore, confine 
 the subject within a few plain propositions, and let no man stir the 
 controversy, till he can confute them on Scriptural grounds. 
 
 I. THE APOSTLES HAD NO COMMISSION TO ORDAIN. Our Lord 
 delivered three commissions to his apostles. The first was simply 
 to go forth and preach, enforcing their reasoning by the exercise of 
 miraculous powers. (Matt. x. Mark, vi. Luke, ix.) It is agreed on 
 all hands, that it contained no directions about ordination. Th 
 second was delivered after his resurrection. (Matt, xxviii. 19.) It 
 Was to convert, baptize, and instruct all nations. The third is in 
 these words, (John xx. 23 ) " Peace be unto you ; as my father 
 cut me ; even so, send I you ;" not to crdain surely ; for our 
 Lord was sent, neither to baptize nor ordain ; nor did lie do ei- 
 ther t but to preach and forgive sins on repentance, as lie did ; and 
 as it follows ; " "Whosoever sins ye remit, they are remitted ;" a 
 power, which, 1 presume, is not now seriously pretended to by 
 any protestant. 
 
 II. THE TWELVE NEVER ORDAINED EITHER PRESBYTER. OR 
 
 usHor. They ordained none, except the deacons in Jerusalem. 
 Paul was ict one of the twelve, and had received no commission 
 to ordain, neither in conjunction with them nor separately ; yet 
 be ordained. Barnabas ordained, though he was net an apostle of 
 Christ j but only a missionary, sent out by the teachers at An t i- 
 wch. 
 
 III. THE TTCET.VB GATE NO AUTHORITY TO ORDAIV. Paul W3S 
 
 himself ordained by the teachers at Antioch ; and -was not one of 
 the twelve ; yet he alone gave directions about ordination. 
 
 IV. TH* APOSTLES DID NOT EVEN SUPPLY VACANCIKS IN THEIR 
 WN NUMBER, AFTKR THEY ENTERED ON THEIR OFFICE. They 
 
 thought it expedient, that their number should be completed after 
 the death of Judas; and therefore appointed Matthias in his room ; 
 but from the time of their being filled with the Holy Spirit, and 
 commencing their ministry at Pentecost, we hear of no successor 
 tn any of the apostles. The conversion of Paul was prior to any 
 vacancy ; and on the sub*equemt death of James, no successor 
 was appointed. 
 
 V. Tut APOSTLES COULD HAVE NO SUCCESSORS AFTER THAT GENE- 
 
 RATIOK. It was essential to an apostle, that he should have seen 
 the Lord, and been witness to his resurrection, by seeing him af- 
 ter he rose, (Acts i. 22. x. 41. 1 Cor. is. 1.) The signs of an 
 apostle were miracles, (2 Cor. xii. 12.) which they were empow- 
 ered to work by their original commission. Now m> man, 
 after the apostolic age, couid be a witness of the resurrection ;
 
 425 
 
 nor does any one now pretend to succeed to their miraculous 
 powers. 
 
 If then there was neither original commission, subsequent (It- 
 legation nor lineal succession, no order of ecclesiastics can claim 
 an exclusive right to any apostolical function. 
 
 Yet modern prelates have usurped a monopoly of ordination, 
 as successors of the apostles, though ordination made no part of 
 the apostolical office ; and have abandoned baptism and preaching 
 to presbyters, though these were the only particulars in the apos- 
 tolical commission, that could be transmitted : but then, ordina- 
 tion conferred dignity and power; preaching and baptism were at- 
 tended only wkh labour. Now if presbyters may administer 
 baptism, which was an apostolical function, they may certainly 
 celebrate ordination, which was not ; and if they are not qualified 
 to ordain, much less are they authorized to baptize. 
 
 I low abliorrent is this spirit of exclusion from the temper of 
 the founders of the two divine dispensations, Moses and our 
 Lord ! When ' there ran a young man and told Moses, Eldad 
 and Medad do prophesy, Joshua said, My lord Moses, forbid 
 them ; but Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake ? 
 Would God, that all the Lord's people were prophets ; snd that 
 the Lord would put his spirit upon them."* Again, " John 
 said Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and 1 
 we forbade him ; because lie followed not with us ; but Jesus said 
 unto him ; Forbid him not ; for he that is not against us is for 
 
 ""t 
 
 Num. si. 27. f Luke ix. 49. 
 
 F I X I
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 Page 312, add, that the Corporation act provided, that no per- 
 sons should be chosen to offices within corporations, &c. who had 
 not, within one year next before their election, taken the sacra- 
 ment, according to the rite* of the church of England. 
 
 P. 555, add as follows. It had heen usual to appoint Dis- 
 senters to corporate offices, in order that the corporations might 
 be enriched by the fines which were levi,ed off them, for refusing 
 to serve, because they could not qualify. But in 1767, in the 
 cause between the Chamberlain of London and Allan Evans, Esq. 
 Disssenter, the House of Lords determined unanimously, that 
 Dissenters who could net conscientiously take. the sacrament, in 
 obedience to the test laws, were excused from .serving corporate 
 offices. Lord Mansfield distinguished himself highly on this oc- 
 casion, by his defence of religious liberty. . 
 
 CORRIGENDA. 
 
 Page 151 v' line 20, for fa, read far. 
 
 219, 25, for rnussers. r. musters. 
 
 240, 6, note, for safe, r. safer. 
 
 262, 8. dele ce. 
 
 285, 12, for the, r. this 
 
 288, 18, for absolutions, r, absolution. 
 
 297, ..... 29, supply an 5, in testifying. 
 
 306 5, note, for Mr. r. Dr. 
 
 314, 1, for views, r. vices. 
 
 318, 15, for demonstrated r. demonstrate- 
 
 330, 15, for State, r. States. 
 
 356, 23, transpose the words the and their. 
 
 3(J7, 14, for nation constitutional, r. national consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Note, Tlie paragraph in page 35?, beginning, " In 1746,' 
 should have followed page 554.
 
 THE CONTENTS. 
 
 the only king and lawgiver, hr brs church, &. 
 
 page 22 36, 108110. 
 
 Of the constitution of the church of Enjclamli'&c. 5833. 
 
 Of the church's power to decree rites and ceremonit-s, &c. J4, 
 15 2,>,f IN 117, 136146, 222^-226, 235^-247. 
 
 This power is not vested, by the constitution of the church of ' 
 England, in its bishops nor -in Its -clergy;- but entirely in the king 
 mnd parliament. -The church a creature of-the magistrate, &c. 
 
 21, ?*, 33, 34, 121, 122, 137 1-it, 15*2 -1.58, 236 24*, 
 
 262, 263. - 
 
 The church of England no more an essential part of our crm- 
 titution than either of the courts of Westminster-hall, SO, 
 152, 15,8. 
 
 The coiiTocation net possessed of any ecclesiastical authority*, 
 21, 2SG 254. 
 
 The bishops and clergy .of the English church strenuously op- 
 posed the reformation from popery, 158 40. Arclidcacon 
 Echard's testimony, 251, note. 
 
 The king or the queen of England, the fountain of all ec- 
 clesiastical power, authority and jurisdiction therein, &c. 152 
 158, 263^269. 
 
 The absurdity of this power being .lodged in the queeu, in- 
 stanced in Mr. Whiston's case, 37, 38, 264 269. 
 
 The church of Englanii'dcnies to its 'inembers the right of 
 private judgment, 115, 116. 
 
 Of the spirit of the church of England, 23, 24,' 32,' S5 '93." 
 
 Terms of ministerial conformity m the church of England 
 hard and terrible lay dissent justified the rise of the separation- 
 Mr. Locke's observations on the act of Uniformity, 169 176. 
 
 Christianity forbids obedjerice to civil goverilors, in things of a 
 celigious nature, 22, 23, 252, 253. 
 
 The ejected ministers, in 1662, the only brave asscrtors in 
 those times of civil and religious liberty, &c, 172 175. 
 
 Mr. Hume's testimony, that the precious spark of liberty was 
 kindled and preserved by the Puritans alone, 173, 174, note. 
 
 The Dissenters no enemies to the church, Ac. 43, 81, 82, 
 230, 231. 
 
 Of the Athanasiancreed, 39 !, 131, 132 213 215. Con- 
 tradictory to the Nicene, 216, note. 
 
 Schism not chargeable on the Dissenters, &c. 24, 3539, 00 
 93, 155, 171176.
 
 428 CONTENTS. 
 
 Of the sacramental test, 76 80, 147, 258. 
 
 Of sponsors in baptism, 25, 44 50, J58 163, 994. 
 
 Of confirmation, 50.. .55, 164.. .169. 
 
 Of absolution of the sick, &c. 55.. .58, 2S8. 
 
 Objections to the burial office, &c. 68. ..70, 213, 227. 
 
 Of the posture in which the Lord's Supper was received at its 
 firsJt institution, 24, 25, 129, 150. 
 
 No particular posture imposed by the Dissenters, 26, 27 t 61, 
 129. 
 
 Of the want of discipline in the church of England, &c. 72... 
 77, 85, 594. 
 
 Of the office for the ordination of priests and deacons, 274... 
 $77. 
 
 Various misrepresentations disproved, 26, 37, 59. ..68, 1SS, 
 124, 177. 
 
 Of the people's right to choose their own pastors, 97. ..102, 90S. 
 
 Dissenters not inconsistent in submitting to some cercmonia* 
 and refusing others 66. ..68, 187. 
 
 Of presbyterian ordination, &c. 93, 97, 190. 
 
 Popery effectually opposed on dissenting principles only, 
 555.. .258. 
 
 James II and Chillingworth how perverted to popery, 118. 
 
 Paul and other apostles zealous nonconformists, &c. 22, '252. 
 555. 
 
 Of bowing at the name of Jesus, 104, 105. 
 
 Of consecration, &c. 272, 274. 
 
 The dignity of public worship disgraced by reading some parts 
 f the Apocrypha, 103. 
 
 The Scotch establishment vindicated, 216. 
 
 Various extracts, 280. 
 
 History of the Presbyterians, 295. 
 
 Of Church government, &c. 367 
 
 Of Presbyterianisna in general and the pre*bytry of Antrim in 
 particular, 392. 
 
 OH ordination, 404. 
 
 miKiMw-4,
 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW.
 
 A 001 008 795 5