A LETTER TO A Diſſenting Miniſter.

I Can't but think the converſation we late⯑ly had with ſome friends about the diſ⯑ſenting intereſt might be very uſeful, if made more publick, becauſe tho' every one is ſenſible it gradually declines, yet no one has endeavour'd to recover it, tho' a great part of that company thought it not difficult to effect. I believe this is owing to our diſagreement as to the cauſes of its de⯑cay, and unleſs the cauſes are found out a remedy cannot poſſibly be apply'd, but it muſt continue conſuming 'till it is quite worn out and ſpent. You may remember there were many reaſons hereof aſſign'd at that time, ſome of which appear to have but very little, if any, pretence to it. Such as the lenity of the government, the want of a perſecution to keep us together, the loſs of a puritanical ſpirit, &c. As to the firſt, I can't think it to [4] be any cauſe, for men are rather apt per⯑verſely to abuſe the lenity of the govern⯑ment, and to go in direct oppoſition to it, and thoſe who can ſuffer perſecution for the truth, would certainly act conſiſtently with it at other times; but if it be indeed the reaſon, then the in⯑tereſt is not worth ſupporting, becauſe 'twould be founded upon mere obſtinacy, and proceed from a ſpirit of contradiction. The laſt cannot be the cauſe, inaſmuch as the true puritanical ſpirit is not loſt, but rather carry'd farther and improv'd. The ſpirit of the good old Puritans was nothing elſe but a ſpirit of liberty; and conſidering what they ſuffer'd in the defence of it, they cannot but be thought as much ſuperiour to the Patrons of civil liberty, as civil liberty is inferiour to re⯑ligious. Indeed ſome of them had a few oddities mix'd with this generous ſentiment, which it muſt be acknowledg'd were ridicu⯑lous enough; and theſe have been improv'd by witty and ſarcaſtical men to the prejudice of their ſentiments. But their ſucceſſours have by degrees thrown them off, and ſtill continue to do ſo, 'till 'tis to be hop'd they will in time entirely vaniſh, that ſo their true ſpirit, abſtracted therefrom, may appear in its own colours, bright and lively, and be valu'd as the alone principle, not only of diſ⯑ſenting, but even of truth and religion them⯑ſelves. So that I think the grand cauſes of the preſent decay of the diſſenting intereſt are [5] ignorance of their own principles, and ill con⯑duct and management of their own intereſts.

The firſt of theſe muſt be one cauſe, for when they are rightly underſtood they are unanſwerable. They are only thoſe of the reformation carry'd farther than in the Church of England; and 'tis ſurprizing how any who pretend to be reform'd can entertain that enmity to them, which has always been more or leſs ſtrong in thoſe who call themſelves Tories. But eſpecially I'm ſurpriz'd at thoſe who have wrote in other caſes upon the ſame principles. How then comes it to paſs we ſhould be branded as upſtarts? for our principles are not new, but eternally true and ſacred; or that any who have ever heard of them ſhould be aſham'd of, or renounce them? So that I am perſuaded thoſe who leave us either have never thoroughly learnt them, or elſe their circumſtances are ſo unhappy that, either from the perverſeneſs of thoſe they have to do with, or elſe from their own private affairs, they cannot act conſiſtently with them.

Therefore for the benefit of thoſe who have been bred in ignorance, or inſtructed in falſe principles, I think, Sir, 'twould be very proper to acquaint the world what our true ſentiments are, and to diſclaim thoſe which are prejudicial to truth, and introductive of bigotry and enthuſiaſm; for ſuch are not on⯑ly falſe but vicious. And yet how many diſ⯑ſenters are there who have run into them, [6] and thereby driven others from us who ſee their abſurdity, if they do not examine whe⯑ther we have any thing more ſolid, and con⯑vincing to ſay for ourſelves. I never yet met with any who could withſtand the force of them, when they were rightly explain'd; and even thoſe who are led to approve the cere⯑monies of the eſtabliſhment, as proper e⯑nough in a political view, yet can never vin⯑dicate them when objected againſt upon the foot of liberty.

The fundamental principle of the diſſen⯑ters is, as I apprehend, a liberty for every man to form his own ſentiments, and to purſue them by all lawful and regular methods; to diſclaim the impoſitions of men, and to wor⯑ſhip God according to the dictates of his own conſcience. It ſuppoſes that God has given to all men capacities of underſtanding their obligations to him; and therefore as eve⯑ry man is accountable to God for his actions, he is under the ſtricteſt obligations to act ac⯑cording to his own knowledge, and whenever he does not, he is guilty of a voluntary vi⯑olation of truth. It ſuppoſes the ſcriptures to be a ſufficient rule of the conduct of men, as well in religious as in ſecular affairs, and that no one has a right to enjoin things as neceſſary to church-communion which are not enjoin'd in the ſcriptures; and that the arguments from antiquity and the practice of the primitive church are not a ſacred [7] and infallible rule for our practice, becauſe then they would not have been left to the diſcretion even of the Antients themſelves, but been mention'd by the Apoſtles, who only were inſpir'd; and however we may follow any of their cuſtoms as fit and proper enough, yet we are not to pay them any particular re⯑verence, or to acknowledge a divine right in them. That as the circumſtances of churches, or private ſocieties vary, ſo their method of worſhip and communion muſt likewiſe vary; and however it may be proper for them to agree upon certain cuſtoms and ceremonies amongſt themſelves, yet they muſt not be conſider'd as binding the conſcience; and therefore 'tis proper ſometimes to alter them, leſt cuſtom ſhould ſeem to bear the ſtamp of au⯑thority. It ſuppoſes that the Church of Chriſt is not national but private, and ſince neither our Saviour, nor his Apoſtles have laid down any rules for the government of the churches, no particular rules were de⯑ſign'd for all churches in every particular place, but were left to the diſcretion of eve⯑ry one, according as they appear'd beſt ſuited to anſwer the purpoſes of religious worſhip therein. This is the reaſon why we differ amongſt ourſelves, tho' that has been object⯑ed againſt us, becauſe we have all an equal right to judge for ourſelves, and one church has the ſame liberty of making diſcretionary rules as another. This ſeems abſolutely in⯑conſiſtent [8] with any national eſtabliſhment and impoſition, and the ſame reaſons that induce us to diſſent in England would lead us to the ſame in Rome, or at Scotland.

This is the general opinion of the diſſen⯑ters, ſtedfaſt and unmoveable in all places, and at all times; I mean of thoſe who underſtand themſelves. It muſt be allow'd there are many who diſſent from the eſta⯑bliſhment, not upon this principle, but be⯑cauſe they think their own method of wor⯑ſhip to be the only ſcriptural method, and plead as ſtrictly, and with as much bigotry for it, as the higheſt in the Church of England do for the divine right of epiſcopacy. But theſe I ſhall reject afterwards, and ſhew not only their tendency to deſtroy the diſſenting in⯑tereſt, but the neceſſity of our diſſenting as entirely from them as from the eſtabliſhment. I am now, Sir, only ſpeaking of thoſe who are in the ſame generous free ſentiments with yourſelf, and who have long renounced all bi⯑gotry and enthuſiaſm.

And if thoſe which I have mention'd be our genuine opinions, let us conſider how neceſſarily they oblige us to decline the com⯑munion of the eſtabliſhment, both as to the clergy and the laity, for there are great, tho' not equal hardſhips that are impos'd upon each.

As to the clergy, their hardſhip conſiſts, not only in ſubmitting to all the forms and [9] ceremonies, which the laity muſt likewiſe ſubmit to, and which 'tis impoſſible they can always approve of; but they are likewiſe oblig'd to ſubſcribe in the moſt ſolemn manner that they aſſent to the truth of every tittle contain'd in the book of common prayer and the homilies, and that they conſent to the uſe of them upon all the times therein mention'd; as likewiſe to the truth of thirty nine articles drawn up in the time of Queen Eliza⯑beth, for the avoiding diverſities, of opinions, and for the eſtabliſhing conſent touching true religion. I will not now diſpute the truth of any of theſe articles, but only ſay in the general that there are many of the beſt and wiſeſt of the Church of England that cannot believe ſome of them to be true in any ſenſe whatever; and there are others the whole current of whoſe opinions run contrary to them. 'Tis well known the generality of the Divines of the Church are in the opinions commonly call'd Arminian, and that theſe articles are compil'd in a Calviniſtical ſtrain, and are not true in any Arminian ſenſe whatever; and therefore we find that ſome who at their firſt promotion could ſubſcribe to them, as literally true, have yet afterwards, upon a change of ſentiment, declin'd preferment, ra⯑ther than make a declaration ſo contrary to their conſciences; for, you know, they are oblig'd to ſubſcribe to them upon every new preferment.

[10] Now what an infinite hardſhip is this! and what a ſhrewd temptation either to per⯑jure themſelves, or leave the church and turn diſſenters? and, which of the two is more preferable, let even the moſt virulent advocates for the eſtabliſhment determine.

There are but two arguments for this ſub⯑ſcription, or rather excuſes for it, for moſt of the arguments for impoſitions are only excuſes for them; and they are, either that they may be ſubſcrib'd in any ſcriptural ſenſe, or elſe they now mean juſt nothing at all, and are only preſerv'd as an old ceremony in the church, to prevent innovations. This you know, Sir, has often been ſaid, and Biſhop Burnet has endeavour'd, in his preface to the articles, to ſhow that, tho' they muſt be aſſented to, yet they may be taken in any ſenſe the ſubſcriber can put upon them to make them literally true; and quotes a royal declaration in King James I's time, that no man thereafter ſhall put his own ſenſe or comment to be the meaning of the articles, but ſhall take them in the literal and grammatical ſenſe; and thence infers that perſons on both ſides of a queſtion may ſubſcribe them. And there are many of the Biſhops who, at ordi⯑nations, will not hear the ſenſes they are ta⯑ken in, but only require the candidates to ſatisfy themſelves. Theſe are the ſhifts that are made to vindicate a thing of the worſt conſequences imaginable. Moreover as to [11] the uſe of ſome of the ceremonies which are not only unſcriptural but abſurd, and which they have conſented to the uſe of, if the Dig⯑nitary cannot comply with them himſelf, 'tis, ſome of them think, only to keep a Curate in ſuch low circumſtances that he muſt be forced to it. Thus how many of the ſupe⯑riour clergy never read the common prayer, and eſpecially the creed of Athanaſius? Now this being the caſe what abundant reaſon have all your brethren for their diſſenting? and how great an inſtance of virtue is it to move in a lower ſphere of life, and ſubmit to many inconveniences that are put upon them, for the ſake of their conſciences and a regard to truth? for it muſt be acknowledg'd that many of them, if they could comply with the impoſitions of the church, would be en⯑titled, by their learning and piety, to conſi⯑derable preferments, and ſuch conſiderable preferments have ſometimes been laid as baits to draw them into it.

But let us ſee how unreaſonable this ſub⯑ſcription is in either of the two views that have been mention'd, and then how right it is to diſſent, and how much more inconve⯑nient it would be to the conſcience to com⯑ply with them, than 'tis to their worldly cir⯑cumſtances to avoid them. You know, Sir, there are many who think the very word conſcience implies ſomething ſuperſtitious and enthuſiaſtical; but ſince we pretend to diſſent [12] only upon a rational account, we muſt let theſe gentlemen know that we mean by con⯑ſcience nothing elſe but reaſon, honour, inte⯑grity, &c. and that 'tis the rule whereby we judge of the lawfulneſs or unlawfulneſs of our actions, and the principle that tells us whe⯑ther we do right or wrong.

As to the firſt, that they may be ſubſcrib'd to in any ſcriptural ſenſe; this cannot anſwer their end, which is to prevent diverſities of opinions, becauſe then 'tis no more than an aſſent to the truth of ſuch particular paſſages of ſcripture; and how abſurd is it to give an explanation of ſcripture, for ſo 'twas originally intended, which muſt afterwards be explain'd by the ſcripture. This is to explain or prove a thing by itſelf, which is both needleſs and tedious, becauſe an aſſent to the one is an aſſent to the o⯑ther. But ſuppoſing ſome of them would ad⯑mit of no ſcriptural ſenſe at all, as, if I was a Clergy-man and call'd upon to ſubſcribe, would be the caſe with me, then I muſt either in a manner perjure myſelf, or elſe be debarr'd of that ſervice to men's beſt intereſts which I might think myſelf capable of. I do not ſay there cannot poſſibly be any ſcriptural ſenſe put on the articles upon any ſcheme of chriſtians, but then this muſt effectually ex⯑clude innumerable of the wiſeſt and moſt learned of the clergy; for when they are ſub⯑ſcrib'd in a ſcriptural ſenſe, it muſt mean not according to the letter but the interpretation [13] of ſcripture, and let any, but the moſt rigid Calviniſts, thus ſubſcribe them, if they can. But if by ſubſcribing them in a ſcriptural ſenſe be meant bringing them to ſuit with a⯑ny words of ſcripture, then what is it we may not ſubſcribe to? that God is corporeal, becauſe we read of his eyes, hands, &c. or to the doctrine of tranſubſtantiation, for our Sa⯑viour has literally ſaid this is my body. I could by this rule receive any preferments in the Church of Rome, if the condition was that I would ſubſcribe to this doctrine, tho'I meant according to the proteſtant interpreta⯑tion of that paſſage, this is my body, that is, this is the reſemblance of my body. But what would our Biſhops ſay, if a Preſbyterian was to do this at Rome? 'Tis plain this was not the view of the compilers, and I believe no one ever thought it was; all then that can be ſaid for it is, that 'tis the view of the preſent government who now impoſe them. But where has the government made this de⯑claration? The requirement of this ſubſcrip⯑tion is to be conſider'd as an act of parlia⯑ment, which is in full force, 'till 'tis abro⯑gated or explained; but neither of theſe have been done. The private declarations in con⯑verſation of any who are concern'd in the government cannot alter the deſign of them, any more than the diſlike of any one mem⯑ber of parliament to an old ſtatute can repeal it, without a publick aſſent of the whole le⯑giſlature. [14] So that the way of ſubſcribing them in any private or particular ſenſe will not do; but they are to be conſider'd in the original ſenſe of the compilers, or elſe they now mean juſt nothing, but are only an old ceremony preſerv'd in the church, to pre⯑vent innovations.

But is this honeſt, or is it not a very near approach to perjury? Do the ceremonies and ſolemnity of the ſubſcription ſignify nothing? Are they a mere farce? Can they ſatisfy them⯑ſelves with ſo ſolemn a mockery both of God and man? certainly they have little rea⯑ſon to expect to receive the Holy Ghoſt, after they have thus publickly ly'd to him. I know not how 'tis poſſible a man can do this with an upright mind, either with regard to the thing itſelf, or to the very evil conſe⯑quences of it upon all truth and common morality. The thing itſelf cannot be vindi⯑cated from a crime almoſt as bad as perjury, and the conſequence is to ſet an example of it to the laity. With what face can a man diſſuade them from trifling with ſerious things, when he has done it ſo egregiouſly himſelf? What is become of juſtice, truth, and fidelity, if this be allow'd? What is it a man may not ſay, or ſwear to, for valuable conſiderations? Where is that ſtrict adherence to truth which is not only inculcated in the chriſtian revelation, but is a principle of na⯑ture? Why might not the primitive chriſtians [15] have ſacrific'd to idols, deny'd their Maſter, and ſo avoided perſecution, ſince they meant nothing more by it than an outward ceremo⯑ny which in the ſight of God meant nothing at all? How is it poſſible a man can ever ſuffer for truth, and be a martyr in its cauſe?—But, ſuch Sir, are you and your bre⯑thren, ſince you are often ridicul'd and con⯑temn'd, ſometimes abandon'd to miſery and want, for not doing that which in civil caſes the pillory would puniſh! What an infinite pleaſure is the ſatisfaction of your own minds, beyond the thouſands which a contrary prac⯑tice might procure!

Upon the whole, this ſubſcription is ab⯑ſurd, becauſe it abſolutely prevents all ſearches and enquiries after truth, and only tends to ſhackle the mind, or to betray it into vice. It does not keep any out of the church but men of honeſty and integrity; for thoſe ei⯑ther of no principles, or of very unſtable ones, will not ſcruple it, and then it does not avoid diverſities of opinions, but encourages the very worſt of all opinions, that a man may ſubſcribe any thing for a living. Why then is it not entirely laid aſide, ſince an⯑ſwers no one valuable purpoſe, but it may have the worſt conſequences imaginable? Biſhop Burnet has declar'd this ſubſcription cannot lawfully be made, as to articles of peace. And indeed how can an honeſt man be at peace, while the world is in an error that he [16] can correct. If he can, he may ſubſcribe to Mahometaniſm in Turky, that is, ſince 'tis the eſtabliſh'd religion there, he will not diſpute againſt it; and ſo 'tis impoſſible a falſe eſtabliſhment can ever be laid aſide, and truth introduc'd.

If theſe be the conſequences of ſub⯑ſcription in all views, why does not the go⯑vernment either take it away, or elſe publick⯑ly explain what is now meant by it, that ſo there may be no temptation to that which honeſt minds ought not to do, and generous ones cannot. Can men conſent to the uſe of the common prayer, who think ſome things in it to be ſo abſurd, that 'tis an af⯑front to the Divine Being to offer it to him? How many are there who think Athana⯑ſius's creed to be the moſt inconſiſtent jargon that ever was invented, and yet 'tis read, at certain ſeaſons of the year, in the moſt ſo⯑lemn manner, as the catholick faith which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be ſaved. I know there are many ſhifts made uſe of to ex⯑cuſe this, as that thoſe, who do not believe it themſelves, repeat it not as their own faith, but only as the faith of Athanaſius, and the Church of England. But how then are the people of England taught? why, to believe that a great part of the clergy will be damn'd, ſince there are a great part of them that do not believe it. And thus a man who either reſolves to ſearch into reli⯑gion [17] for himſelf, which every good chriſti⯑an and honeſt man ought to do, muſt either abide out of the church, or elſe play the hypocrite in it. For if he teaches the people his own opinions in oppoſition to thoſe of the church, he has manifeſtly ſub⯑ſcrib'd to what he did not believe; if he does not, he is inſtrumental in keeping them in ignorance. But I ſhall ſay no more on this head, becauſe I know, Sir, you have read and juſtly approv'd a pamphlet entitled, The Difficulties and Diſcouragements which attend the Study of the Scriptures in the Way of pri⯑vate Judgment, repreſented in a Letter to a young Clergyman, ſaid to be written by a Gen⯑tleman who is ſince advanced to a biſhoprick. This I wiſh the people would univerſally read, becauſe it has a ſtrength and convic⯑tion of argument that no conſiderations whatſoever ſhould overcome; and 'tis to be hop'd this Reverend Prelate will now do his endeavour to take theſe diſcouragements a⯑way, which the title-page ſays was his deſign in writing it.

Theſe, Sir, you know are the hardſhips that lie upon the clergy, and keep you and your brethren out of the church; yet, I think, are not peculiar to the clergy, but lie pretty heavy upon the laity too. For it ſeems to be principally out of regard to them, that theſe impoſitions are preſerv'd, becauſe they cannot bear any alterations in that [18] which they have been accuſtom'd to think ſa⯑cred. I have met with many of the lower ſort, who eſteem the common prayer to be of e⯑qual authority with the ſcriptures themſelves: and this renders it very improper to bind them up together, as is too common, and I think no ſmall affront to the holy Bible. Now perſons of better ſenſe muſt be expoſed to theſe things, for the ſake of vulgar prejudices. Thus who could be grave to hear Mr. Addiſon, or Mr. Pope, chaunting out the Pſalms of Sternhold and Hopkins? when Dr. Watt's, which have all the charms of poetry in them, cannot be ſung in a church without publick authority.

It muſt be confeſs'd, there are many excel⯑lent things in the common prayer; ſome of the ceremonies are very grave and decent, and many of the prayers are incomparably the beſt that are extant, and as good as could be devis'd. But are there not others that are very exceptionable, and cannot well be joined with? Why may not theſe be laid aſide? or what injury would it be, if every Clergyman had a liberty of reading them, or leaving them out, according as he and his congregation ſhall approve, or diſlike them? If they are only human compoſures, why ſhould ſuch regard be paid to them, than which no ſtronger can be paid to thoſe that are divine? and every one muſt as uni⯑verſally agree to them? I think this is a ve⯑ry [19] great hardſhip both upon clergy and lai⯑ty, and effectually deprives both of that li⯑berty of private judgment, which they have an indiſputable right to. 'Tis wonderful they do not exert themſelves, and ſtand up for their rights and privileges; and that Engliſhmen, who cannot bear the thought of civil ſlavery, can yet be zealous for eccleſiaſti⯑cal. Diſſenters think it an inconſiſtency to be Engliſhmen, and not to be in poſſeſſion of the liberty of their conſciences.

The laity ſhould conſider that if they were univerſally againſt impoſitions, it would not be in the power of the clergy to lay them upon them; and therefore they are in a great meaſure acceſſory even to thoſe which are put upon the freer clergy themſelves. And however they may think it excuſable to com⯑ply with the authority of the civil magiſtrate, for that is all that can be ſaid for them, yet I thought it had been long inconteſtable that the civil magiſtrate has no power in matters of a religious nature; for if he has any at all, he has the ſame in Turky, at Rome, in Scotland and all other parts of the world; and the ſame reaſons of order, decency, &c. will be as ſtrong there as here. Why then ſhould they give up a right to the magiſtrate, which he can have no reaſonable claim to? The whole right he has at all is deriv'd on⯑ly from the conſent of the people; but the people have always, in free countries, reſerv'd [20] ſome previledges, as ſacred, to themſelves, which they ought not, nor cannot part with. Such are thoſe of judging of the conduct of the magiſtrate, of writing and ſpeaking free⯑ly on all ſubjects, and conſequently the liber⯑ty of the preſs; and whenever the govern⯑ment has endeavour'd to deprive them of theſe, they have immediately grown jealous of ſlavery, and ſome way or other prevented it: and all thoſe who, have not ſtood up in their defence, have been thought enemies to the conſtitution. But certainly the liberty of judging for themſelves in matters of reli⯑gion is infinitely preferable to theſe, and what they ought never to reſign upon any views whatſoever. And if every church was to uſe a private method of worſhip of their own, and chriſtianity only, in general, was to be the eſtabliſh'd religion in theſe king⯑doms, what would be the prejudice? Men would ſearch into thoſe matters for them⯑ſelves, and heats of party, which have had the moſt miſchievous conſequences of any thing, would be abſolutely impoſſible, becauſe then none of them could be uppermoſt; and 'tis likely no other zeal but that for brotherly love could prevail amongſt us. Men could not have leſs religion, for it is not true religion that is forc'd; but every one's, when 'tis his own, would be moſt likely to be genuine. Theſe are the deſire⯑able conſequences of private judgment, [21] and theſe are the principles of the Diſſen⯑ters.

I believe, Sir, we are all agreed that the civil magiſtrate has a right to annex what preferments and rewards he pleaſes, to learn⯑ing and merit, and that the Biſhops, as they are creatures of the civil power, are to be honour'd as Nobility; and whoever will not give their Lordſhips that reſpect which is due to their quality, over and a⯑bove their perſonal merit, is whimſical and unmannerly. But when they pretend to con⯑vey ſpiritual gifts, and that no one can be a Miniſter of Chriſt who is not regularly or⯑dain'd by them; when they pretend to be the lineal ſucceſſours of the Apoſtles, and have a divine authority for governing the churches, they are ſo far from deſerving hon⯑our that they ſhould be deſpis'd. This I ſhould not have mention'd, but thought it an ex⯑ploded opinion, if Mr. Betty had not, in a Sermon to a full and reverend aſſembly at Oxford, and dedicated to his Lordſhip of that dioceſs, again reviv'd it. But as I be⯑lieve the laity are not ſo very prieſt-ridden as to become proſelytes to him, I ſhall only ſay that the civil magiſtrate, upon whom he and all in the eſtabliſhment de⯑pend, is, in my opinion, too indulgent, in not calling him to account for his in⯑ſolence in ſetting himſelf and his brother repreſentatives of God ſo much ſuperiour to [22] him, as to be ſuperiour to Angels and Arch⯑angels themſelves. Theſe opinions are very prejudicial to ſociety, and I think the moſt juſtly puniſhable of any.

Such authority as this you, Sir, and your brethren do not pretend to claim, and for that reaſon are to be honour'd, ſince you have every whit as much right to it, and I believe have receiv'd the Spirit of God; tho' not the Holy Ghoſt from the hands of a dio⯑ceſan Biſhop. If learning, virtue, and piety are meritorious, how many diſſenting Mini⯑ſters have merit? and why do not the laity rather eſpouſe your cauſe, than the cauſe of ſuch vain and pert pretenders? For Clergymen of every denomination are only valuable for their perſonal, not for their reflected merit, whether from their predeceſſours, or from the government. How⯑ever if the laity are willing to be impos'd upon, there is no help for it, they muſt be indulg'd. I know there are ſome of them who think 'tis no impoſition, ſince they con⯑form out of their own choice, and may, by the toleration, go to ſeparate congregations, if they pleaſe. But they are not free in ei⯑ther caſe; the only difference is this, in one they give up their liberty, in the other 'tis taken away from them.

But beſides this general conſideration of impoſition, I think, they may make ſeveral particular objections to the ceremonies of [23] the church, and ſee the hardſhips that lie upon them. The general rule in the ſcrip⯑ture for religious worſhip is, that all things ſhould be done decently and in order. But what an indecent noiſe is made by the reſponſes? the moſt confus'd and harſh one can hear! What ſuperſtition in bowing to the altar, and the croſs in baptiſm? But above all, what tender parent can be willing to give up his own natural right over his child, and have it dedicated in baptiſm by others? This ſeems one of the moſt abſurd ceremonies of the whole. Nay by the 29th canon 'tis expreſly ordain'd that no parent ſhall be urg'd to be preſent, nor be admitted to anſwer as god⯑father for his own child. The reverend Mr. Harriſon who has lately got an unmixed light into thoſe things, which he and all his for⯑mer brethren had been before in obſcure darkneſs about, labours to vindicate this ce⯑remony, eſpecially againſt the objection of its abuſe; tho' he has forgot to juſtify his ſubſcription which is the main objection to his proceeding of all. But ſurely he ought to think that parents, the neareſt relation of all, and who have the moſt tender affection for their own offspring, would, if they are ſerious in the matter, be very glad to offer them up to God themſelves, and are moſt nearly engag'd to provide for them. This objection was ſtrong at the firſt eſtabliſhment of it, but more eſpecially is it ſo now, when [24] the pernicious conſequences of it have been ſo much felt; how few are there that per⯑form the promiſe they make, or who is there that does not turn it into jeſt? This ſingle impoſition would keep me from their com⯑munion, ſince I could not in conſcience aſk a Miniſter who has ſubſcrib'd to the ca⯑nons to adminiſter the ordinance without it; for the 38th ſays, a miniſter who omits to uſe the form of common prayer, or any of the orders or ceremonies preſcrib'd in the communion book, let him be ſuſpended; and ſo I muſt be either a ſtranger at my child's baptiſm, or elſe tempt the Miniſter to break the ſolemn promiſe he has made. Parents, who are unnatural e⯑nough to approve of this, are incapable of being reaſon'd out of it; and as to the reſt, let their affections to their children ſpeak. I ſhall mention but one notorious impoſition more, for I would not appear tedious or diſ⯑putatious, and that is, kneeling at the com⯑munion. I do not object to the poſture it⯑ſelf; there are many who think it the moſt reverend of any, and they ought to uſe it but there are others who ſcruple it, and there⯑fore ought to be excus'd. But if the moſt did agree in it, why ſhould it be made neceſſa⯑ry to communion, ſo that whoſoever will not comply with it muſt be excluded? Would the decency, ſolemnity, or validity of the ordinance be leſs, if ſome kneel'd, others were proſtrate, and others ſtood? certainly [25] not, for there would be a greater appear⯑ance of true devotion, and leſs of coldneſs and formality.

So that all theſe reſtraints in the church are very great hardſhips upon the laity, and I wonder they ſo univerſally comply with them; but more eſpecially at thoſe who were call'd unto Liberty amongſt the Diſſenters, but yet have forſaken it, and voluntarily put on the fetters of the church. If they have known theſe to be the principles of the Diſ⯑ſenters, I know not what to ſay, but that ei⯑ther they are in love with bondage, or elſe they cannot act conſiſtently with thoſe prin⯑ciples, and they may as well be impos'd upon in the church as out of it; indeed I cannot ſay but they had, eſpecially the clergy, who are in the way of getting more by it.

And here I wiſh, Sir, I could rather ex⯑poſtulate with them that they are miſtaken, than join with them in the complaint. Theſe principles are ſo exceeding good that none but thoſe, who have too extravagant an o⯑pinion of their own power, and who delight to exerciſe it, can oppoſe them, as ſoon as they are mention'd; and I have ſeen per⯑ſons always educated Diſſenters (who yet thro' ſome diſlike, or other, have been going off to the church) ſurpriz'd to hear there were principles ſo ſtrong to detain them. And there are many who have no objection to [26] the ceremonies in themſelves, that yet, when they conſider' them as impoſitions, cannot but object to them, but are forc'd to comply with them, becauſe they think there is ſome⯑thing equivalent among the Diſſenters.

Too many of the younger people know no other reaſons for their ſeparation, than be⯑cauſe 'tis a ſin for the Miniſter to wear a ſur⯑plice, or bow towards the altar, or for themſelves to bow at the name of Jeſus, read their prayers &c. but when they come to conſider theſe things, and find no immo⯑rality in them; that they are eſtabliſh'd cere⯑monies, and many of them grave, ſolemn, and chearful, they fancy 'tis only a whim to ſtand out for things of leſſer importance, and ſo reſign their liberty at once, and ten to one become zealous for their chains. But this is thinking by halves, and indeed if they think no farther they may be as eaſy in the church as any-where. I perſonally know many who have been thus drawn into it, and have nothing to ſay in anſwer to the prin⯑ciples I have mention'd, but that they do not ſee they are practis'd among us. Indeed it muſt be acknowledg'd there is generally ſo much bigotry and manag'd in ſo diſagreeable a way, that I do not wonder at the decay of our intereſt. When men are as warm for diſputable opinions of their own, as for the ceremonies of worſhip, 'tis as well to com⯑ply with the laſt as with the firſt, and of [27] all Tories, diſſenting Tories are the moſt in⯑conſiſtent. But when men will practiſe as freely as they think, 'tis then only they are truly unanſwerable.

The different denominations of Preſbyte⯑rians, Independents, and Baptiſts ariſe from different notions of the government of the church and its communion; but heats and contentions about them ſeem happily to be laid aſide, and they agree in a friendly man⯑ner amongſt each other, tho' all think their particular one to be the ſcriptural method. Let them enjoy their ſentiment with free⯑dom, as long as they do not quarrel about it or avoid one another upon its account; for a friendly diſſention here is as neceſſary as from the church. I muſt own I think none of them to be the only ſcriptural method, becauſe there is no method at all laid down in the ſcriptures, but is left to the diſcretion of them all: but 'tis plain every one ought to follow what he thinks to be the ſcriptural method, as long as he does not impoſe it as ſuch upon the reſt. If they would but en⯑joy their other ſentiments in as friendly a manner, we might have a good proſpect; but 'till then I am quite out of hopes. For their different characteriſticks are now from their different notions in metaphyſical diſputes; and Calviniſm, Arminianiſm, Baxterianiſm, or A⯑rianiſm are to each other a mutual term of re⯑proach; inſomuch that even the lower and moſt [28] ignorant ſort of people have often fallen out about theſe things, tho' they know no more of them than the Lady who would not ſuffer her daughter to marry an Arminian, merely becauſe he was ſo. And how can this be o⯑therwiſe when Miniſters are perpetually writ⯑ing and preaching againſt each other, each party as warm, as if the whole ſalvation of mankind depended upon their faith in theſe dubious matters? The unhappy difference at Salters-Hall injur'd the diſſenting intereſt more than all their enemies together. Many who acted conſiſtently with their principles were thereby driven to the greateſt inconve⯑niences, and their opponents ſpirited up their congregations to uſe them ill, and ſometimes even to a neceſſity of leaving them for ever. But where was the liberty for every man to be fully perſuaded in his own mind? when he was oblig'd, not to conſult his own ſentiments, but the humour of his people. How many were forc'd to quit the miniſtry entirely, be⯑cauſe they could not conform to the eſta⯑bliſh'd impoſitions either of the Church of England, or thoſe which the Diſſenters them⯑ſelves introduc'd in their ſtead? when they ought rather to have been valu'd as men of honeſty and principle; for what could be a greater demonſtration of it, than to ſacrifice their own intereſts to what they thought the publick good?

[29] Sir, I do not mention this to revive the unhappy difference, no, 'twould grieve me to be the inſtrument of any new miſchief! I only mention it to ſhew that ſuch diſputes tend to weaken the common intereſt, and oc⯑caſion its deſtruction: How often have the people reproach'd you, that the Miniſters can't agree among themſelves? If they mean in ſentiment, 'tis impoſſible. If they mean in brotherly love, the reproach is too juſt, and you do not follow your prin⯑ciples. For my own part, I value mode⯑rate men of each ſide the queſtion; thoſe who ſubſcrib'd in the fear of God, and in brotherly love, teſtify'd their zeal for what they thought the chriſtian faith; and thoſe who did not ſubſcribe, with the ſame tem⯑per, teſtify'd their zeal for what they thought to be chriſtian liberty, and the principles of the Diſſenters. The deſign of each was good, as long as they ſtopp'd there; but it became evil, when they tended to inflame their own paſſions and their people's, and denounc'd too hard and ſevere cenſures upon each other. As long as theſe parties are kept up, and mu⯑tual liberty is oppreſs'd, your intereſt can ne⯑ver revive; but when you give the liberty that is due to each other 'tis very poſſible it may: But bigotry will ever be the ruin of every cauſe.

I know, Sir, you underſtand me too well, when I ſpeak of bigotry, to think I mean an [30] attachment to one's own principles. 'Tis impoſſible for any one to be without, and a man ought to act conſiſtently with them, or elſe he reſigns his judgment, and has no ſet⯑tled rule of action. By bigotry I only mean ſo violent an intereſt in particular ſentiments as to impoſe them upon others, and occaſion cenſure if they do not receive them; or elſe ſuch an obſtinacy in preſent ſentiments, as will ſilence all others that are different from them. Here it ought to be conſider'd, that, when this is the caſe, the civil magiſtrate has an equal right to reſtrain you all, as you have to reſtrain one another; from whence 'tis plain that nothing, but the Liberty I have been ſpeaking of, can be the fundamental principle of the Diſſenters, and the ſupport of their intereſt.

They miſtake our principles who think we pretend to be in every tittle perfect, or better than the church, and ſhun us, becauſe they do not find our actions agreeable to this opinion. Whoever imagine this of them⯑ſelves are exceedingly miſtaken and intole⯑rably vain; nor are the whole body of Diſ⯑ſenters to be reproach'd, becauſe there are ſuch amongſt them. I know there are ſome who miſtake themſelves to be the only goſ⯑pel churches, and would join with no other upon any terms. But their ſpiritual pride is as odious to the more generous of us, as 'tis to the Church of England. Certainly, Sir, [31] thoſe in the eſtabliſhment would think it ve⯑ry unjuſt in us to reflect all the ſuperſtition of Archbiſhop Laud, or of Dr. Sacheverel, upon their communion; yet 'tis as unfair in them to think us all as enthuſiaſtical as the moſt rigid Antinomians. But tho they have an equal right with the reſt to enjoy their o⯑pinions, we differ as much from them as from the church.

If the whole preſent generation of the lai⯑ty were to know this, I doubt not but they would continue with us, ſince if they do not find all the inſtances of liberty they deſire, 'twould be no difficult matter to raiſe congre⯑gations where they might fix them; and then they would likewiſe preſerve the younger Miniſters too who are forc'd to go into the church, ſince they cannot meet with encou⯑ragement in their ſentiments at preſent.

It has often been wonder'd at, and there⯑fore made an objection to the free principles I have advanc'd, that thoſe who have con⯑form'd from us to the church have generally been of theſe ſentiments, and yet have reſign'd them notwithſtanding. I muſt confeſs 'tis a very great unhappineſs that they have been forc'd to do ſo, and I believe it has always aroſe from their not being able to live by them; therefore why do not we conſider this, and endeavour to prevent it? 'Tis a very great weakening of our intereſt that the beſt are oblig'd in juſtice to themſelves, to their [32] families, and to ſociety, which they ought not to encumber, to quit us, and ſeek provi⯑ſion elſewhere; and that thoſe are principally maintain'd whoſe births and hopes are low, and conſequently can practiſe the low arts of wheedling the people into a choice of them. Indeed I wonder the people themſelves are not above this, and why they will not be well inſtructed by thoſe who have the cou⯑rage to teach them even diſagreeable truths, rather than flatter'd into what may poſſibly be falſe, and, if it be true, is but of the leaſt importance in religion. If flattering and in⯑dulging the people be the only way to ſuc⯑ceed with us, the Biſhops and ſecular powers may as well be flatter'd, ſince they are much better able to pay for it. And whoever can⯑not go into the church, becauſe he cannot ſubmit to things contrary to juſtice, generoſi⯑ty, and freedom, ought not to ſubmit to them amongſt us. So that I cannot but admire, and value the virtue of thoſe younger Gentle⯑men, who, notwithſtanding all theſe difficul⯑ties, remain with us, ſince their want of ſucceſs is only owing to their want of this mean and groveling art. I wiſh thoſe Gentlemen, who have been ſtrong and powerful advocates for liberty, would rather have ſought ſome, civil than eccleſiaſtical, preferments from the go⯑vernment, ſince they have now given up the cauſe, which does it a greater prejudice, than never to have engag'd in it. I doubt not [33] but as they are many of them perſons of virtue and piety, as well as of learning and good ſenſe, they have taken care ſome way, or other, to ſatisfy themſelves in what they have done. I wiſh I could gueſs at the principle, and make an excuſe, more honourable for them, and more creditable to us, than neceſſi⯑ty; but as I think the ſubſcription will not bear it, unleſs they are in Calviniſtical ſenti⯑ments, I know not what to ſay farther; I ſhall forbear to judge them however, and think the beſt and moſt worthily of them that I am able.

I know, Sir, the blame of this has often been laid upon you and your brethren, that you do not provide for them, and ſettle them according to their merit. But I think no⯑thing can be more unjuſt, and more contrary to your principles; for as you pretend to no authority over the people, you have not the diſpoſal of their congregations, nor any right to be their dictators. Indeed the people may conſult you as friends, and perſons intimately acquainted with each other's characters, but they have the choice in themſelves, and are not to be over-rul'd: and 'twould be better they would generally conſult the reputation of the intereſt more than their own particular fancy. 'Tis an ill principle not to receive inſtruction, unleſs it be given in a particular manner; and a great many of thoſe things that pleaſe the people have very often a bad tendency in general. 'Tis good to pleaſe ten [34] perſons, but not to drive as many away from us. Truth and good ſenſe will generally be for edification; but the being pleas'd, which they generally inſiſt ſo much upon, ſeldom ariſes from any thing but ſome odd⯑neſs that hits their peculiar humour, and is not from any view to edification at all; therefore too mean to be worthy any one's ſtudy. The people do not uſually know wherein oratory, ſtrength of ſpeech, the art of perſuaſion, &c. conſiſt, and therefore 'tis vanity in ſuch to pretend to be judges of them. I wiſh I could deny that, amongſt us, they generally fall into the falſeſt and loweſt taſte imaginable. In theſe things I think 'twould be an inſtance of their modeſty to reſign up their pleaſures to the general no⯑tions and judgment, for then there could be no general objections againſt them; thus a man would mortify his inclinations to ſenſual pleaſure, for the good of ſociety. Whoever conſults the writings, or prejudices againſt us will find nothing objected of any value, but againſt the aukwardneſs and unpoliteneſs of our Preachers. What was Dr. South's wit levell'd againſt, but thoſe things that were really fooliſh and ridiculous in themſelves? and ſo people of wit and politeneſs grew aſham'd of them, and choſe a more graceful way of religion. Therefore I admire the art of our opponents rather to banter and ridi⯑cule, than argue with us. But when we take [35] away this objection and poliſh ourſelves, let another Dr. South endeavour to ridicule us anew. So that herein I think the people ſhould rather conſult our general credit than their own humours; and if they would en⯑courage our younger Miniſters who ſtudy good ſenſe and politeneſs, and endeavour to recommend the intereſt to the eſteem of the reſt of mankind, I make no doubt but 'twould ſtill revive and flouriſh more than ever; but if they will continue ſelfiſhly to indulge them⯑ſelves, they have an indiſputable right to ru⯑in and deſtroy it.

I make no doubt, Sir, of your general diſpoſition, whenever the people think fit to conſult you in their choice, to promote the intereſt of thoſe whom you think moſt like⯑ly to do us a credit upon the whole. The credit of the intereſt can only ariſe from the learning and piety of thoſe engag'd in it. The latter without the former is amiable in private life, but no complete recommenda⯑tion of a Miniſter; and the firſt alone, tho' it may enliven his publick performances, is not ſufficient for his whole relation. They muſt both join to make him perfect. And here I cannot but look about me with pleaſure, ſince we have ſtill ſome remaining of this character, whoſe publick labours and private lives and converſation are both uſeful and entertaining. The Church of England may know this, and grow jealous, unleſs ſhe hopes [36] from the perverſeneſs of our people to draw them over to her ſide; and indeed if ſome proper methods are not taken to prevent it, I will not promiſe for them; for they were not born to ſtarve, and 'tis a ſin to do it, if there is a juſtifiable prevention.

There are many who confidently aſſert that theſe Gentlemen's learning and politeneſs will be our ruin. But what can be more ab⯑ſurd and perverſe? For nothing can recover thoſe who have leſt us for want of theſe, but the ſtudy of them. There are many Gentlemen, who can give no other reaſon, for leaving us, but that they are aſham'd of our intereſt; but that can be no longer a reaſon, when we have the very qualities they ſeek in the Church. There is no other advantage in principle, or practice, ſhe could poſſibly have over us, but then ſhe can have none. I believe there are many of the laity who are not ſo much againſt this as 'tis imagin'd. They have lately done ſome very conſiderable things to en⯑courage learning and good ſenſe. Elſe whence the crouded auditory to a certain lecture, than which a greater or finer amongſt us was never eſtabliſh'd? And I believe, whenever the Preach⯑er ſinks in the goodneſs of his ſermons, he will ſink in the eſteem and encouragement of the hearers. But as I believe he is incapa⯑ble of it; ſo I hope it will be an encourage⯑ment to follow his example of love to truth and original chriſtianity, which he has defend⯑ed [37] in the politeſt and fineſt manner of any Writer this age has produc'd. There are many others that would ſhine out, if they had the ſame advantages from the world; but as they may hope it will, in time, be juſt to them, as it has been to him, I hope they will ſupport their courage, and ſtruggle, 'till they at laſt recover the intereſt from its pre⯑ſent low condition.

Since therefore 'tis poſſible a free and ge⯑nerous way of thinking and ſpeaking may pleaſe among us, ſuppoſe theſe Gentlemen were no longer in fear of being under diſ⯑agreeable, cenſures, and harſh imputations, but had as unbounded a liberty of ſpeaking their ſentiments in publick, as of forming them in private, I apprehend they would have no longer inclinations towards the Church, where after having well got thro' the difficulty of entrance, they frequently take more liberty than either their general rules or our bye laws will allow: ſuppoſing likewiſe the groſs of the people, inſtead of aſſuming the charac⯑ters of Judges and Cenſors of ſermons, would put on the modeſt and humble diſpo⯑ſition of learners, which is not at all incon⯑ſiſtent with their judging for themſelves, and receive the truth without being jealous of hereſy in their younger Preachers, they would no longer terrify and frighten them from us, nor give them an opportunity of complaining that they do not act conſiſtent⯑ly [38] with their principles. For I know not whence it comes to paſs, but if they happen to think out of the common road, and ſpeak elegantly and politely, it is immediately thought they are inclin'd to the Church, becauſe they are like it, and, being conſequently ſhunn'd and avoided, are unavoidably forc'd into it. But muſt we keep aloof from every thing like the Church, becauſe ſome things in it are wrong? Fas eſt & ab hoſte doceri. We ſhould follow what is really good, and learn it, tho' it were from our greateſt enemies. Certainly if our younger people are general⯑ly inclining to the Church, the more we are like it, the more they will value us, and be likely to ſtay with us; and 'tis wicked to diſlike any thing, merely becauſe it reſembles another. If they go on in this unreaſonable prejudice, we ſhall in time loſe both Mini⯑ſters and people. It ought to be conſider'd that as the taſte of mankind differs, ſo the method of applying to it muſt differ; and therefore what was faſhionable to our fore⯑fathers is now as diſagreeable to us as their dreſs, which no one is ſo fooliſhly ſingular as to continue. But yet whoever will compare the pert oratory of a young Oxonian, and the ſolid as well as polite ſermons of one of our young⯑er Divines will diſcern but very little reſem⯑blance; ſo conſequently there is as little danger.

Thus, Sir, have I given you my ſenti⯑ments of the ſubject we happen'd upon in [39] converſation; and I have purſu'd them in the method that appears to me moſt likely to ſerve the intereſt of truth and religion. I have addreſs'd them in a Letter to you, becauſe I have long known your candour and good⯑neſs, and I believe you cannot be conſcious of having contributed to the decay, ſince, without flattery, you would be a credit to a⯑ny cauſe whatever. Since that time, I have thought of ſome regulations, which I be⯑lieve would forward the deſir'd effect, to preſerve and revive the intereſt; but I ſubmit them to your judgment, and the judgment of your brethren. They relate to the ma⯑nagement of our publick aſſemblies, and to the perſons educated for the miniſtry.

I think there are two faults in your man⯑ner of publick worſhip, that your prayers are too ſhort, and your ſermons too long. The one has too little of reverence towards God, and the other is too tedious to ourſelves. It appears to me that the principal deſign of publick aſſemblies is to worſhip God in ſoci⯑ety, which tends moſt of any thing to main⯑tain a ſenſe of religion in the world; and one of the greateſt parts of it ſhould conſiſt in adoration of him, and celebrating his per⯑fections. This infinitely becomes us, as we are dependent creatures, and ſtand at an in⯑finite diſtance from God our Maker. 'Tis both a ſolemn and pleaſant employment; it tends to enoble our natures, preſerve us [40] from vice, and beget in us all thoſe affections of love, fear, and joy, that reſult from our relation to the moſt amiable, powerful, and indulgent Being. Nothing creates a greater pleaſure to me than rational worſhip. As on the one hand I abominate all foppiſhneſs and buffoonery in religion, ſo on the other I hate an affected gravity, that has nothing in it manly and chearful. A mixture of re⯑verence and chearfulneſs is the true ſpirit of devotion. There is too little of the one in ſome places, and too little of the other among us. To this of longer prayers, it may be objected that they may be difficult to the ſuppliant, and tedious for the peo⯑ple. But by longer prayers, I only mean longer in proportion to the ſermon. I think to worſhip God for twenty minutes, and to dictate to men for ſixty, is not ſo equal as one could wiſh. If it be difficult for the Miniſter, 'tis but for him to compoſe his prayers before, when his mind may be in a better temper and diſpoſition, and he may have leiſure to review whether what he ſays be proper and worthy of the divine Being, or not. I know not why the people ſhould object to this, any more than to the uſe of notes in your ſer⯑mons, for, at firſt, the one was as much a novelty as the other may be now; or why you ſhould ſtudy more accuracy in the laſt than in the firſt. It would prevent a great [41] deal of tautology, incorrectneſs, and impro⯑prieties, and too often things abſolutely unfit to be utter'd: which I think are very indecent to⯑wards our Maker. As to this method's being tedious to the hearers, I would not have them ſo long as that comes to; and if there be any danger of it, I cannot but recom⯑mend the practice of the Church, of diverſi⯑fying the worſhip; but this ſhould be at the diſcretion of the Miniſter. The ſinging of pſalms, when you happen to have a good clerk, would relieve the mind; and the whole of this would prevent the objections againſt extempore prayers, which have often been too unluckily made.

As to your ſermons, excuſe me, Sir, I think they too might be regulated. They might be ſhorter, and more intel⯑ligible. I know there are many of our Miniſters who pride themſelves in being plain, and to the capacity of the people. But I have been often preſent, where, thro' the Preacher's diſtinctions, hard words, Jew⯑iſh or ſcholaſtical expreſſions, I have been ab⯑ſolutely at a loſs for his meaning, if he meant any thing, and came away as ignorant as I went there; and how often have we been inſulted by the Church-party, for what they ſtile the cant of preaching. I think too if they were delivred in a more eaſy and natural manner, they would hear better, and be more inſtructive. I hope no one will think I intend to affront him by [42] a particular application; I only ſay it in the general with a regard to our own credit, and the publick good.

From this it will appear how neceſſary it is to take great care of perſons to be educated for the miniſtry; that they ſhould be creditable and promiſing, choſen either out of the families of Gentlemen, or elſe upon the account of a very extraordinary genius. The firſt, becauſe ſuch are commonly beſt ac⯑quainted with the world, and know how to behave themſelves; and the laſt may poſſibly be advanc'd by their own merit and abilities, without thoſe advantages. And as to the fund, if it was only apply'd to the education of thoſe whoſe parents are decay'd, or have ſpent their fortunes in the intereſt, it would be much better than to encourage the vanity of low and mechanical perſons, who imagine a gravity and ſeriouſneſs in their children, and then throw them to be a diſhonour and bur⯑den upon us. Is it lawful to ſpoil a mechanick who might earn his bread, and maintain his family, and take him to miſguide the people? (for they are too often ignorant and vain) bring a family into the world to live meanly, and at laſt be left in diſtreſs? Your conſciences, as well as policy, ſhould forbid this. And here, by the way, I think it would be well, inſtead of encouraging ſuch by the fund to apply it in larger quantities to men of real merit, and furniſh them, not barely with bread for their [43] bodies, but books to enterain and improve their minds. If a few very ſmall villages had no meeting 'twould be of leſs importance than to have large country towns, ſurrounded with Tory-gentlemen, ill furniſh'd and diſgrac'd, Poverty and want are none of the leaſt ob⯑jections to us in the eye of the world.

But to return to Students; if, after they were thus ſelected, they were perfectly taught Latin and Greek, and not ſuffer'd to go to the academy 'till thoroughly acquainted with them: if the time uſually waſted in old ſyſtems of logick and metaphyſicks was ſpent in ſtu⯑dying and underſtanding the claſſicks, the Belle Letres, oratory, and particularly the art of ſpeaking naturally, juſtly, and genteelly, it would quite deſtroy all thoſe unnatural tones and geſtures, which are the grand cauſes of our reproach and contempt. It may ſeem odd and whimſical to propoſe a dancing-maſter for one tutor at an academy, but if ſomething equivalent to it was con⯑trived, to give them a gracefulneſs and gen⯑tility of addreſs, and prune off all clumſineſs and aukwardneſs that is diſagreeable to peo⯑ple of faſhion, and which gives learning the air of pedantry, it would do them a moſt eminent ſervice. For nothing carries any man ſo eaſily and happily thro' life as a good addreſs, This may look improper to the general ſmallneſs of your ſalaries: but 'twould be none if Gentlemen were not [44] aſham'd to breed up their children to the miniſtry, and thoſe, who have no great for⯑tune of their own, had the art of appearing handſome with a little; which is natural to ſome, and might eaſily be acquir'd by others. The ſame effect would be anſwer'd, if the congregations were fewer, and of conſe⯑quence the ſalaries larger. I am not for mixing bigotted and generous people in a congregation, for that lays the Miniſter un⯑der too great reſtraints to pleaſe both parties; but in country places prudent management in elections would prevent the fatal and de⯑ſtructive breaches that end in the ruin of both ſides.

Thus, Sir, have I taken a liberty which I hope you will excuſe, and which I would not have aſſum'd the vanity of for any other cauſe, but that of Liberty the true foundati⯑on of the diſſenting intereſt; Liberty, which I verily believe to be the cauſe of God, and the happineſs of mankind.