and wild is the claim, if neither scripture nor reason lend it the least support! I must also observe, that, though this gift was conferred on Timothy at his ordination, by the laying on of the apostle's hands, it does not follow that the same gifts may be expected in confirmation from the hands of our present bishops. Is there power in their lordships' fingers to convey 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 infidels room to scoff, by the use of a solemn ceremony for the conferring these gifts, which no mortal 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 dropt. 66 The only rite, after baptism, which I find either instituted or practised by Christ and his apostles, "to make a public recognition of baptismal engagements in the face of a christian congre"gation," is the celebrating the Lord's supper. By this, christians are openly to profess themselves the subjects and followers of 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 coming to the Lord's supper, which is an undoubted institution and command of Jesus Christ. With the emblems of their Saviour's body and blood in their hands, the recognition they here make of their engagements to a holy life is much more solemn, the motives to obedience more powerful and constraining, and they are certified of God's favor and gracious goodness to them by a token incomparably more important, than the laying on of the bishop's hands. If you ask---“ What is "this to those who dare not offer themselves to "the sacrament?"* I answer, such have equal reason not to offer 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 suppose, well known to all our learned bishops and divines. 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 superstitious and ridiculous and foolish rites were brought into the church. And you are also, I présume, not ignorant that confirmation was then always performed (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 vouchsafed to regenerate these his servants by water and the Holy Ghost, and to give them the forgiveness of all their sins:---an expression taken, probably, from some ancient liturgy, and which was suitable, and well adapted to the practice of those times, but is utterly incongruous and unsuitable to ours. * II. Defence, page 39. 1 66 66 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 christian faith, till, having given testimony of their proficiency in "knowledge, and of a sober and regular conversation, they became candidates for baptism;" or as a greater author 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 sanctity and purity of their lives: and "then, as Origen says, We initiate them in our mysteries, when they have made a proficiency in "holiness, and according 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 baptised "that we may cease to sin, but because we have al"ready 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 presbyter's (for presbyters also then confirmed) addressing Almighty God as having vouchsafed to regenerate 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 * Prim. Chris. Part I. pages 194, 208. rudeness do they rush to receive this episcopal grace! In how slight and careless a manner is the ceremony performed! What riot 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 making that very weighty and solemn declaration over a promiscuous assembly, which is supposed to include many vicious and corrupt persons, is effectually overthrown by your own just concession, "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 "tempted 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 certified (assured from the bishop's mouth) that this is a token of God's favour and gracious goodness to him in particular. What now I ask, is the obvious, the natural construction which the person puts upon all this? Why surely, unless he 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 conspired 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 promised in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Whether 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 tendency to cherish a delusive hope, and to speak peace to such persons as are not, by the christian covenant, entitled to peace;---I with all humility leave to the 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 tremendous thing to have the immortal souls of thousands required at their hands. SECT. VI. The terms of MINISTERIAL Conformity hard and terrible.---LAY-DISSENT justified.---The RISE of the Separation. NEXT, 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 exceptions, and to have no friendly aspect upon the morals and souls of men. I am strengthened in that opinion by observing, that amidst the variety of trifling things to which you have descended in the prosecution of this debate, you have quite overlooked these two important points, and have not so much as undertaken their defence. It does some honour to your understanding, not to |