which there certainly is neither precedent nor precept in the Gofpel? How marvellously do the opinions of men change, when they argue for themselves, and when they argue against us.

5. To explain away the offence of schism, it is farther argued, that as there were fchifms among the Corinthians, when it does not appear that there was any feparation; fo there may be a feparation where there is no fchifm: because Chriftians may ftill be united in heart and affection, though they perform the offices of religion in different places and in different ways.

The hiftory of facts in this country give us a different profpect of things; and indeed it is prepofterous to fuppofe, that if we sow in fchifm, we shall reap in unity: or in other words, that if we murder and mangle the body of the church, we fhall preferve charity, which is the life and foul of it. It is true, we shall not dispute much about any thing, if we are indifferent to every thing: but misguided religious zeal is not of this infipid character. The ordinance of parliament of the 11th of Aug. 1645, for putting in execution the directory, has thefe words-" If any person or perfons whatfoever, fhall, at any time or times hereafter, use, or cause the aforefaid Book of Common Prayer to be ufed in any church, chapel, or public place of worship, or in any private place, or family, within the kingdom of England, or the dominion of Wales, or port and town of Berwick; every person so offending herein, fhall, for the first offence, pay the fum of five pounds of lawful English money; for the fecond offence, ten pounds; and for the third, fhall fuffer one whole year's imprisonment, without bail or mainprize." This law was one of the fruits of fchifm; and there never was a law more fevere and cruel. The king was then living, and the private worship of his family is not excepted. But these were days of religious madnefs; we know better now. So it is faid; but I fear with very little truth. What would not that perfecuting fpirit do, if it had power, which is fo confpicuous in the Syllabus of Mr. Robinson's Lectures, a Diffenting teacher at Cambridge? How fresh is the remembrance (or ought to be) of the riots in London, which fhook the kingdom, and brought us fo nearly to ruin in a few days; all conducted by a fanatic Prefbyterian, with a rout of forty thousand diforderly people at his heels? And if the principles of fanaticifin can perform fuch wonders here, even in a man without learning, without parts, without morals, without fenfe: how dreadful may their effects be upon a future occafion! and who can

tell how foon that occasion may happen? especially as Dr. Prieftley, another Diffenting teacher, is now threatening us with impending ruin, from himself and his party; who give us warning, that they have long been, and are now, conveying gunpowder under our foundation, to blow up the old rotten fabric of the church of England? But our Diffenting apologists affure us, Chriftians may still be united in heart and affection, though they wor fhip God in different places: and that there may be separation without fchifm, as there was fchifm at Corinth without feparation. But these smaller fchifms of the Corinthians, which did not actually feparate them into different communions, were yet, according to the Apostle, very reprehensible, and of bad tendency: therefore, actual feparation, being schism in the extreme, must be more 'reprehenfible. To fuppofe it lefs, is to contradict the reafon of things; as if it should be argued, that because we may hurt a man without killing him, therefore we may kill a man without hurting him.

6. However, if there fhould be any fchifm betwixt the church of England and the Diffenters, they say the guilt of it is with the church, who will not " yield to weak brethren in things which' are confeffed to be indifferent and of small moment."

With what propriety can things of fmall moment be introduced, as objections to our communion, after it has been afferted, that the church of England is "no church of Chrift?" If that objection be good, all things of fmall moment are fuperfluous. For who can be obliged, or who indeed will confent, to be a member of a church, which is no church of Chrift? "Leave things indifferent (faith this reply) as they are in their own nature, and as Chrift hath left them, and the feparation is over." So then, if these indifferent things were removed, the Diffenters would communicate with a church, which is no church of Chrift! Who can believe this? Is it not much more probable, that the Diffenters do not mean to throw up the feparation for any conceffions that can be made by a church, which, in their opinion, is itself separated from the communion of Jefus Chrift? These objections are fo inconfiftent, that they leave small hopes of the posfibility of a reconciliation. For if all these small things were removed, still there will remain the infuperable (and we trust, uncharitable and groundless) objection, that the church of England is no church of Chrift; and that Diffenters cannot upon any principle communicate with a falfe church. The cafe between

us is very bad under this representation of it; but it becomes, if poffible, more hopeless in what follows.

7. For the Reply tells us, that the Diffenters do not ftand out for the value of the things required, which are matters of indifference; but ftand up in defence of that liberty, wherewith Christ hath made them free, and will not be brought into bondage.

Do they think then, that Chrift hath given them liberty to break the peace of the church, for matters indifferent? That is, to deftroy peace, effential to falvation; to fave liberty, the creature of human pride? Another apologift of the Diffenters, the author of The independent Whig, puts this matter out of question; and affirms without referve, that fchifm is fo neceffary to the prefervation of liberty, that there can be "no liberty without fchifm." What would the Chriftian world be, if this principle were univerfally followed? No two of us could confent together; because the one must lose his liberty, till he goes off into fchifm; fo it would break all Chriftian focieties into individuals. Liberty and bondage are words of ftrange fignifications in this land, which it would be tedious to difplay. Only let us distinguish, that there is no bondage in dutiful fubmiffion; for that is the fervice of God which is perfect freedom: nor any liberty in unreasonable disobedience; for that is the bondage of Satan, who works in the children of difobedience, and puts them to a great deal of trouble; making them restless and impatient, and leading them fuch a wearifome life, that, if it were not called liberty, they would wish themselves out of the world.

8. The church of England is accufed of taking away the bread and the cup, unless people will receive kneeling; and Chrift hath not made kneeling a neceffary term of communion.

Nor is it neceffary with us; because we adminifter the facrament to the fick or the infirm, either fitting, kneeling, or lying. Kneeling is proper to an act of devotion; fuch the facrament of the Lord's fupper is now, and not a social act of eating, as at the paffover, when it was first inftituted. Kneeling may admit of a bad construction, because the Papists kneel and worship the host: but charity will give it a good conftruction, and then all the difficulty is over. However, let us call it an impofition: yet why fhould the enjoining of it be objected to by the very people, who impofed on all that took their folemn league and covenant, the posture of standing, with the ceremony of lifting up the right hand

bare? But, what is ftill more to the purpofe, one of their apologifts affures us, they make no fcruple of giving their facrament to all those who chufe to kneel in a meeting-houfe*. Therefore it is not the thing, (though that is fometimes highly exclaimed againft) but the enjoining of the thing that renders it offenfive: and it appears from this cafe, that Diffenters will do that to please themselves, which they will not do to please God; who hath enjoined us all to be at peace with one another, and to agree in his worship.

Sponfors in baptifm, and the fignature of the cross, are objected to. But the first is only a prudent provision, as a farther fecurity for the child, if the parents fhould die, or be of fuch characters as renders them unfit for fponfors; which the child cannot help. The fignature of the crofs can give no offence (as one should think) to any person who delights in the memory of the cross itself. The pureft ages of the church used it on all occafions, particularly in exorcifms, which were antiently a part of baptifm; and there are fome pretty clear intimations in the Scripture for the use of fome fignature on the forehead; and the first of all fignatures is that of the crofs. For motives of worldly traffic, the Dutch, instead of preferring it to a place in their foreheads, trample it under their feet: and our Diffenters reject it from an affection to their fchifm. If the Papifts are superabundant and fuperftitious in the use of the crofs, what is that to us? If they repeat the Lord's prayer twenty times in an hour, are we not to repeat it at all t?

9. It is farther objected to our church, that the people have a right, an unalienable right, to chufe their own minifters; which with us they are not permitted to do.

As for the patriotic term unalienable, it is applied to rights of nature, which are unalienable because they are inherent. But here, it can only mean, that the Diffenters claim it, and are refolved not to part with it. On this part of the subject, I must lament with tears in my eyes, the great abufes in the church of

"In fome of our churches, there are fome who receive ftanding, fome kneeling.Nor is there, I believe, amongst our minifters, one in five hundred, who would refufe to give the facrament either ftanding or kneeling, to any one who thought either of these the fittest pofture of receiving." Diffenting Gentleman's Answer to the Rev. Mr. White's Three Letters, p. 21.

See the use of the Signature of the Crofs in Baptifm, fully and learnedly vindicated in Bennet's Abridgment of the London Cafes, chap. vi.

England, în refpect to patronage and admiffion into church-livings. But in bad times, no regulations are fufficient to fecure us from corruption; and even the very means appointed to keep out bad men, will let them in: for there are times, when persons of no confcience or character may act with impunity; and the worst of men are the most ready to play with all religious fecurities. That this cafe would be mended, if the choice of ministers were always with the people, is by no means clear. For nothing is fo common as for people to be divided in interests and affections on very unworthy motives; and thence many great and fcandalous dif turbances arife; and a parifh is fo divided into parties, that perhaps they do not come into humour again for fome years. Befides; fuppofe a Socinian fhould have got poffeffion of a pulpit, and preached the people (or a few of the most active, noisy and cunning, who overbear all the reft) into herefy: whom would they chufe, but a Socinian, at the next vacancy? And would it not be much better that an orthodox minifter fhould be put upon them? If the people have this right, then all the people have it; and confequently, a Socinian congregation have a right to chuse a Socinian minifter. How the Scripture hath been handled, as to this affair of popular election, was noted in the poftfcript to the Effay on the church.

10. Though the Diffenters have no miniftry by fucceffion, they make light of this defect, and think they are as well off as we are, because they say, our "right of ordaining came down to us through the channel of popery."

Bishops, priefts, and deacons, in a church, were no invention of popery, nor is our fucceffion any more affected by popery, than the Apoftle's creed, which is alfo come down to us through the channel of popery; and fo is the canon of the Scripture itself: yet we take the old creed and the old Scriptures, and think them as good as ever. The church of Rome is under fuch an opprobrium with Proteftants, that it is a convenient bugbear, brought forward upon all occafions by those who want better argument, to frighten us out of our church principles, and cover the weakness. of their own innovations. But the fucceflion of church offices is no more affected by the errors of popery, than a man's pedigree is affected by his bodily diftemper, or the diftempers of his parents; and if the man, by alteratives and restoratives, is cured with the bleffing of God, he returns to the state of his purer ancestors of a remote generation. A felf-originated upitart, who

1