A

read their prayers from a book: that there were no liturgies in those days: but the pastor, as Justin Martyr and Origen say, offered up prayers and praises to God, according to his power, or as he was able. But, secondly, by the account 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. "Stamus ad orationem, "cum modestia et humilitate adorantes, &c. *--We "stand at prayer, adoring with modesty and hu"mility that we may the more effectually com"mend 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 pray"ers, was humble and dejected, went away jus"tified rather then the saucy Pharisee."

When you have sedately considered the contents 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 matters. which you had so slightly examined.

Though this view of your misrepresentations might have been greatly enlarged, I shall conclude with mentioning only one fresh and flagrant instance, which shews your honour and justice in a very unfavourable light, and too plainly demonstrates 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 affirm, declared from his pulpit, that the Common Prayer-Book had damned more. souls than the Bible had saved; for which he

*Tert, de Orat. Cap. 13. + II. Defence, page 116.

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, hanourably 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 indignation; 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.*

He was fhewing how utterly repugnant the Arminian principles are to feveral parts of the Common Prayer; and after feveral things faid very respectfully of that book, concludes,- "F "with there was more of that spirit of God breathing in the "fouls of men now, which breathed in the fouls of those who "made the Common Prayer; and, indeed, confidering the in"confiftency of men's principles, with their grofs hypocrifies "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 fwift witnefs against them. And, if fo, I fear "it will be found that that book they fo much now rely "on, inay be a means of fending more of them to hell, than the gofpel converts in England."

46

SECT. VIII.

Dissenters not inconsistent in submitting to some ceremonies, 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 "authority, and in the same place, (the Common "Prayer,) as the other ceremonies and rites "against which we protest." And you state it as a difficulty 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 supper."* 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, pretending 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 are the forms prescribed by law for making a good title to an estate,) submit to it as an ordinance of man, notwithstanding we are sensible of the objections which may be justly urged against some parts of the service which he has appointed for this purpose. Yet, as he has also enjoined, in the same statute, other things merely of a religious nature, (relating to baptism.

* Defence, page 80. Letter III. p. 6.

and the Lord's supper,) which, in our opinion, belong to another kingdom, viz. that of Jesus Christ, to whom God has delegated all authority in his church, we think ourselves justified in with

holding 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?"*Certainly very much. The church is, indeed, nothing but a branch or limb of the state. But, if the state exacts of those whom it deputes to officiate in this part of its administration, unreasonable and shocking things; if it commands them to say that black is white, to pronounce solemnly 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 away in wrath, and hath driven him from his presence to eternal darkness below,---is the officer, will you say, who is to pronounce and to do this, not at all 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 regard they owe to righteousness and truth, ought openly to protest against such public violations of them, and to de

* II. Defence, page 82.

clare their dislike of such prostitutions of sacred things.

"The church," your learned Warburton* tells us, has, by contract or alliance, resigned up "her supremacy in matters ecclesiastical, and "her independency to the state." The state, in consequence of this, hath drawn up for her, articles 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 a 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 worship 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 obey those who have the rule over us. It is not for an individual to oppose the public voice, but, if any one dare say "That either of the articles is " in any part erroneous, or that the book of Com"mon Prayer, contains any thing in it contrary "to scripture," your IVth. and Vth. canons thunder out upon him ipso facto, a most terrible excommunication, and cut him off as a wicked wretch, from the body of Christ. Excellent constitution this! quite holy and apostolic! most heavenly and divine! bearing upon every part a lively and glorious impress of the character of Jesus Christ! What wonder if the dignity of the 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 conduct lays these stones of stumbling in the way of infidels and papists! and by whom the offence

cometh.

Alliance, &c. page 87.