has been obferved to inculcate no chriftian virtue, was delivered on a Sunday, which ought to have been devoted to better purposes.

The greatest part of my theological publications are of a serious nature, enforcing the evidence and doctrines of chriftianity; and those of which Mr. Madan fpeaks with abhorrence and contempt, viz. my controverfial writings (with which he is evidently very little acquainted) are in my own opinion, calculated to affert and vindicate very important christian truths; and I do not know that I can employ whatever talents I may have to a better purpose. With what fuccefs, or with what spirit, I have written, I do not appeal to Mr. Madan, but to you.

Befides, is the person who is wantonly attacked always to be charged with a love of controverfy, when he defends. himself, and his writings, and not rather the person who wantonly attacks him? Mr. Burn, for example, charges me with undervaluing, and rejecting, the teftimony of the apoftles concerning the person of Christ; when all that I have written on the subject, has been to fupport what I take to be their teftimony. He also charges my theological principles in general, as "big with all mischief." This he does in the place where I live, and before the congregation to which I preach. Am I then to be blamed if I repel with the indignation that it deferves, fuch unmerited and unprovoked calumny?

Befides, my controverfial writings bear but a small proportion to the rest of my publications. I do not think all my controversial writings, properly fo called, that is, those in which I reply to particular persons, would make so many sheets as I have printed this very year of works of a different nature. But controversy, as far as appears, makes the whole of Mr. Burn's and Mr. Madan's publications. Theirs also are both on the offensive side, whereas mine are wholly defenfive. Indeed, there is nothing of any confequence that I have written in this way but what was as unpremeditated, as my replies to Mr. Burn and Mr. Madan.

What

What has contributed the most to get me the character of a controverfial writer, is what I have written in defence of myself, when attacked from a great variety of quarters, on account of my Difquifitions concerning Matter and Spirit, and my History of the Corruptions of Christianity. I fhould never have written against bishop Horfley, any more than against Mr. Burn, if he had not first written against me. I have not answered to one challenge in ten that has been given me. If I do flounder, as Mr. Madan fays, in the muddy waters of controverfy, he and Mr. Burn are among those who first tempted me in, by plunging in before me, and keeping me company as long as it was convenient to them, and yet they now infult me for it.

But I do not defire to make any apology for what is called controverfy. For, how offenfive foever the term may be to those whofe principles fuffer by it, it means nothing more than public difcuffion, without which no question of consequence can be thoroughly, and generally, understood. The apostle Paul was a great controverfial writer, and fo was the meek St. John; all his epiftles being written against the Gnoftics.

Befides, how can I escape blame in this cafe? If I make no reply, I am faid to be unable to make any; and if I do, I am fond of controverfy; fo that my fituation resembles that of the old man and the afs. Do what I will, I must displease some. Mr. Madan, you fee, challenges me to answer a pamphlet written by bishop Horsley, about the Test Act, which he speaks highly of, but which I think undeserving of any particular notice. On the whole, I have thought it moft manly, and most favourable, to the cause of truth, after avowing any opinion of importance, to difcufs it publicly with fuch perfons as appeared to me the best qualified to do the contrary opinion juftice, and to continue the difcuffion till nothing of confequence remained to be faid on either fide, that the public might judge for themselves on which fide the truth lay. This I think is far better than, like Mr. Madan, to throw my dagger, and then run away from the

perfon

perfon offended by it. However, it is by no means true that I have always had the laft word. My rule has been to cease to write when I had nothing material to add to what I had advanced before. I could name many persons to whose last publications I never made any reply.

Mr. Madan, you fee, binds himself to make no reply. But as bishop Horfley made the fame imprudent declaration, and afterwards violated it, fo may he; and if he see it to be in his power to reply with effect, 1 doubt not but we shall have fome more last words of Richard Baxter. Do you think that if he, or Mr. Burn, irritated as they evidently are, had any hope, either of filencing me, or of convincing you that I ought to be filent, they would not do it? Has either of them fpared any thing to injure me in your opinion? You well know they have not; and it is not probable that their difpofition is changed in this respect.

I am, &c.

Of the Principles of the Church of England.

LETTER XIV.

My Townsmen and Neighbours,

ONE of the preceding Letters that I took the liberty to

address to you, related to church establishments in general, in which I fhewed you that in forming them the civil magistrate went beyond the bounds of his proper province, and incroached upon that of Chrift, and of God himfelf, to whom alone we are accountable for our religious principles and moral conduct; and yet men, without any authority from God, have prefumed to fay what we fhall believe, and what we shall do, in matters of religion; and they have enforced their decrees with heavy pains and penalties, infomuch that, without being guilty of any civil offence what

ever,

ever, a man shall be liable to have his goods confifcated, be difabled from fuing in any court of law or equity, being guardian of any child, being executor or administrator to a will, be incapable of any legacy or deed of gift, of bearing any office, civil, military, or ecclefiaftical, and be fent to prison, as at present in this country of ours; and in others they shall be liable to be put to death in the most cruel manner, merely for avowing opinions different from what other men have thought proper to decree to be true.

Now, many of you being engaged in other neceffary pursuits, and not having had your attention drawn to these fubjects, may know very little about church establishments in general, or of your own in particular, as little as many perfons, for want of travelling or reading, may know of the country in which they live. You very piously, as you have been educated, go to church, fay your prayers on Sundays, and follow your feveral occupations diligently and honestly in the courfe of the week; but many of you have little leisure to think about any thing farther. There is however, much more implied in being a good churchman than you may think of; as there are many things in the laws of our country, which are binding upon all the subjects, whether they have taken care to acquaint themselves with them or not. For it is prefumed that men who have the use of their reason, will make use of it in whatever particularly concerns them.

Now, if this be the cafe with refpect to the civil laws of your country, it must be the fame with respect to the ecclefiaftical laws of it. Befides, when you go to church, you do not go merely to hear what another perfon fays, which a ftranger might do without bearing any part in the fervice, or being responsible for the propriety of it; but you go to pray yourselves; and in your prayers you speak to God, and concerning God; and therefore should deliver nothing but what you have well confidered, and think proper to be faid to him, and concerning him. Confequently, if, upon that due confideration which you ought to give to

fo

so ferious a subject, you cannot deliberately affent to any thing that, in the forms of your public worship, you are required to fay, you ought not to say it at all. If what all the congregation there join in be any thing not true in itself, and especially false with respect to God, and unworthy of him, you ought not to give your countenance and sanction to it, even by your presence. If you would not fo much as join in a common fong, or bear your part in the chorus, without approving of it, much lefs fhould you bear your part in a common prayer to Almighty God, without the most hearty approbation of the fentiments contained in it.

It is, moreover, taken for granted, that all members of any particular fociety hold the diftinguishing principles of that society. Otherwise they are unworthy and improper members of it. You, therefore, who profefs to be of the church of England, also profess to hold the principles of it, and especially the belief of all its articles, which the founders of your establishment have reduced to thirty-nine. These the preamble to them fays, were agreed upon "for "avoiding diversities of opinions, and for establishing con"fent touching true religion." And the royal proclamation prefixed to them requires not the clergy only, but "all his "majesty's loving fubjects, to continue in the uniform pro"feffion of them ;" it prohibits "the leaft difference from "them," and will not "endure any varying, or departing "from them in the leaft degree."

With respect to the interpretation of these articles, this declaration fays, that "they are to be taken in the true, “ usual, and literal meaning of the words ;" and that “ you

are not to put your own sense or comment upon the "meaning of any article, but to take them in their literal " and grammatical sense." Now as these articles are dictated in very plain English, the literal and grammatical sense of which is very easy to be understood, you will fee, by confidering them, what the real doctrine of the church of England is, and what the faith of all the true members of it ought to be.

Farther