And as you have mentioned Idolatry, you will give me Leave, Sir, to afk, Why is Image or Idol-worship fo offenfive to God, and fo ftrictly forbidden? Is it not chiefly, that it weakens Mens Belief of the Omniprefence of the Deity, and represents Him as confined more to one Place than another. This God refents as derogatory to his Honour, and injurious to the Cause of Virtue and true Religion: And yet, what is that Bowing towards the Altar and the East, which is practifed amongst us, but a dangerous Approach towards this Popish, and Pagan Worfhip? For when the Congregation are taught to turn about from the Weft or the South, and devoutly worship towards the Eaft, how natural is it for them to think that the God whom they worship is more prefent THERE, than in any other Quarter; for if he were not more prefent THERE, why should they thus folemnly and conftantly turn towards it? But, if this Practice tends to cherish fuch wrong Apprehenfions in the common People, (who in all Ages and all Countries have been too prone to debase and confine the Divine Majefty in their Conceptions of Him) I fhall not ftick to pronounce it a very dangerous Advance towards Idolatry and Image worship. From worshipping towards the Altar, 'tis but too easy to pass to worshipping the Altar itself. Our learned Clergy know, that in fome fuch Manner as this, the Worfhip of Images at firft flid into the Church; and from fo fmall a Beginning, that enormous Corruption which now overfpreads fo vaft a Part of the Chriftian World, chiefly arose. Vic. I own, Sir, the Juftnefs of your Remarks, and can only fay that I wifh, and am certain Multitudes of my Brethren join heartily in the Wish, that our Liturgy were revifed; its exceptionable Paffages amended or expunged; that indifferent Things were left indifferent; that no other Terms were made neceffary to Chriftian Communion than Chrift hath made neceffary; and that none of the Lord's Minifters fhould be conftrained to deny the Lord's Table and the Lord's Bread, to thofe whom at the fame time they verily believe to be the Lord's faithful and accepted Servants, and to belong to his Houfhould of Faith.-'Till the Things you have now remarked on, and fome other that might be mentioned, are fet right, our Church can never hold up its Head with Boldness. Infidels will laugh, will teaze and infult; and from the Abfurdity of fome eftablished Doctrines and Forms of Worship, draw draw Prejudices and Cavils against Chriftianity itself. Those who diffent from Her will too juftly retort upon her the heinous Sin of Schifm, the has long branded them withal; in as much as by her unfcriptural Rites she makes a grievous Rent or Divifion in the Chriftian Church, re-` jecting those whom Chrift receives; and cafting out from her Communion those whom the muft believe to belong to the Communion of Saints, and to be real Members of Chrift. Gent. To fpeak freely, Sir, to me it seems manifeft, That a Church fo unequally poifed with the Weight of immenfe Revenues and Grandeurs on one hand; and with the Lightnefs of fuperftitious Forms and enormous Claims on the other, can never be well established; it carries the Principles of Diffolution in its very Frame.Its Honours and Wealth will keep many, no doubt, attached firmly to its Interest: But may it not be feared, that in fome future Age the first rapacious Hand that shall find itfelf able, will feize the rich Prey? That the Revenues which now fupport it, will fome time or other prove the Occafion of its Ruin? Like the Temple of Belus, that once richest and |