follow the example of our Saviour Christ, and to be made like unto him; that as he died, and rose again, for us; so should we, who are baptized, die from sin, and rise again unto righteousness, continually mortifying all our evil and corrupt affections, and daily proceeding in all virtue and godliness of living.

Then shall he add, and say;

YE are to take care that this child be brought to the bishop, to be confirmed by him, so soon as he can say the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, in the vulgar tongue, and be further instructed in the Church Catechism set forth for that purpose.

It is certain by God's word, that children which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved.

To take away all scruple concerning the use of the sign of the cross in baptism; the true explication thereof, and the just reasons for the retaining of it, may be seen in the XXXth Canon, first published in the year MDCIV.

And also they shall warn them that, without like great cause and necessity, they procure not their children to be baptized at home in their houses. But when need shall compel them so to do, then Baptism shall be administered on this fashion:

First; let the Minister of the parish (or, in his absence, any other lawful Minister that can be procured), with them that are present, call upon God, and say the Lord's Prayer, and so many of the collects appointed to be the time and present exigence will suffer. said before in the form of Public Baptism, as And then, the Child being named by some one that is present, the Minister shall pour water upon it, saying these words:

N., I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Then, all kneeling down, the Minister shall give thanks unto God, saying,

WE yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own child by adoption, and to incorporate him into thy holy church. And we humbly beseech thee to grant, that as he is now made partaker of the death of thy Son, so he may be also of his resurrection; and that finally, with the residue of thy saints, he may inherit thine everlasting kingdom, through the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

And let them not doubt but that the Child, so baptized, is lawfully and sufficiently baptized, and ought not to be baptized again. Yet, nevertheless, if the Child, which is after this sort baptized, do afterwards live, it is expedient that it be brought into the church, to the intent that, if the Minister of the same parish did himself baptize that Child, the congregation may be certified of the true form of baptism by him privately before used.

THE fair way of conducting a dispute, is to exhibit one by one the arguments of your opponent, and with each argument, the precise and specific answer you are able to give it. If this method be not so common, nor found so convenient, as might be expected, the reason is, because it suits not always with the designs of a writer, which are no more perhaps than to make a book; to confound some arguments, and to keep others out of sight; to leave what is called an impression upon the reader, without any care to inform him of the proofs or principles by which his opinion should be governed. With such views it may be consistent to despatch objections, by observing of some "that they are old," and therefore, like certain drugs, have lost, we may suppose, their strength; of others, that "they have long since received an answer;" which implies, to be sure, a confutation; to attack straggling remarks, and decline the main reasoning, as "mere declamation;" to pass by one passage because it is "long-winded," another because the answerer" has neither leisure nor inclination to enter into the discussion of it," to produce extracts and quotations, which taken alone, imperfectly, if at all, express their author's meaning, to dismiss a stubborn difficulty with a reference," which ten to one the reader never looks at; and, lastly, in order to give the whole a certain fashionable air of candour and moderation, to make a concession * or two which nobody thanks him for, or yield up a few points which it is no longer any credit to maintain.

* Such as, that "if people keep their opinions to themselves, no man will hurt them," and the like. Answer, p. 45.

How far the writer with whom we have to do is concerned in this description, his readers will judge; he shall receive, how ever, from us, that justice which he has not shown the author of the " Considerations," to have his arguments fully and distinctly stated and examined.

After complaining, as is usual on these occasions, of disappointment and dissatisfaction; the answerer sets out with an argument which comprises, we are told, ir

a

66

narrow compass," the whole merits of the question betwixt us; and which is neither more nor less than this, that "it is necessary that those who are to be ordained teachers in the church should be sound in the faith, and consequently that they should give to those who ordain them some proof and assurance that they are so, and that the method of this proof should be settled by public authority.” Now the perfection of this sort of reasoning is, that it comes as well from the mouth of the pope's professor of divinity in the university of Bologna, aз from the Clarendon press. A church has only, with our author, to call her creed the "faithful word," and it follows from Scripture that "we must hold it fast." Her dissatisfied sons, let her only denominate as he does,* "vain talkers and deceivers," and St. Paul himself commands us to stop their mouths." Every one that questions or opposes her decisions she pronounces, with him, a heretic, and “ a man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject." In like manner, calling her tenets "sound doctrine," or taking it for granted that they are so (which the conclave at

: Page 13.

66

Rome can do as well as the convocation at London), and " soundness in the faith being a necessary qualification in a Christian teacher," there is no avoiding the conclusion, that every "Christian teacher" (in, and out of the church too, if you can catch him, “soundness in the faith" being alike necessary" in all) must have these tenets strapped about his neck by oaths and subscriptions. An argument which thus fights in any cause, or on either side, deserves no quarter. I have said, that this reasoning, and these applications of Scripture, are equally competent to the defenders of popery they are more so. The popes, when they assumed the power of the apostles, laid claim also to their infallibility; and in this they were consistent. Protestant churches renounce with all their might this infallibility, whilst they apply to themselves every expression that describes it, and will not part with a jot of the authority which is built upon it. But to return to the terms of the argument. "Is it necessary that a Christian teacher should be sound in the faith?"

1. Not in nine instances out of ten to which the test is now extended. Nor,

2. If it were, is this the way to make him so; there being as little probability that the determinations of a set of men whose good fortune had advanced them to high stations in the church should be right, as the conclusions of private inquirers. Nor,

3. Were they actually right, is it possible to conceive how they can, upon this author's principles, produce the effect contended for, since we set them not up as a rule of faith;"* since "they do not decide matters for us, nor bind them upon us ;" since" they tie no man up from altering his opinion," are no ways inconsistent with the right of private judgment," are, in a word, of no more authority than an old sermon; nor, consequently, much more effectual, either for the producing or securing of " soundness in the faith."

The answerer, not trusting altogether to the strength of his "argument," endeavours next to avail himself of a "concession" which he has gained, he imagines, from his adversary, and which he is pleased to look upon "as in a manner giving up the main point." Our business, therefore, will be to show what this concession, as he calls it, amounts to, and wherein it differs from the "main point," the requisition of subscrip

Pages 10, 11. 13. 29.

tion to established formularies. It is objected to the Articles of the church of England that they are at variance with the actual opinions both of the governors and members of that church; so much so that the men who most faithfully and explicitly maintain these articles, get persecuted for their singu larity, excluded from orders, driven from universities, and are compelled to preach the established religion in fields and con venticles Now this objection, which must cleave to every fixed formulary, might, we conceive, be removed if a test was substituted, supposing any test to be insisted upon ̧ which could adapt itself to the opinions, and keep pace with the improvements, of each succeeding age. This, in some measure, would be the case, if the governors of the church for the time being, were authorized to receive from candidates for orders declarations of their religious principles in their own words, and allowed, at their discretion, to admit them into the ministry. Bishops being taken out of the lump of the community, will generally be of the same leaven, and partake both of the opinions and moderation of the times they live in. This is the most that can be made of the concession; and how this gives up the "main point,' or indeed any thing, it is not easy to discover.

The next paragraph of the Answer attacks the account which the Considerations have given of the "rise" and "progress" of the custom in question; "the reverse of which" the answerer tells us, "is the truth," and by way of proof gives his own account of the matter, which, so far from being the "reverse," is in effect, or very nearly, the same.

The reader shall see the two accounts, and is desired to judge whether the author of the Considerations, so far from being confuted in this point, is even contradicted.

"The protestants, aware how greatly they were misrepresented and abused, began to think it necessary to repel the various calumnies that had been cast upon them, by setting forth some public Constitutions or Confessions, as a declaration of their faith and worship. And to make such declaration still more authentic, they likewise engaged themselves in a mutual bond of conformity to all these Constitutions." Considerations, page 6.

"As some who set up for reformers had broached many erroneous and pestilent doctrines; the Lutherans first, and after their

example, other protestant churches, thought fit to draw up Confessions of Faith. And this they did partly to acquit themselves of the scandal of abetting wild and seditious enthu

siasts, and declaring what were their real doctrines; partly" (observe how tenderly this is introduced) "to prevent such enthusiasts on the one hand, and popish emissaries on the other, from intruding themselves into the ministry." Answer, pages 6, 7.

Now, were the " origin" of a custom of more consequence than it is to a question concerning the " propriety" of it, can any one doubt, who credits even the answerer's own account, but that the motive assigned in the Considerations both did exist, and was the principal motive? There is one account, indeed, of the "origin" of this custom, which, were it true, would directly concern the question. "This practice," our author tells us in another part of his Answer, *" is said to be derived from the apostles themselves." I care not what "is said." It is impossible that the practice complained of, the imposition of articles of faith by "fallible" men, could originate from the "apostles," who, under the direction by which they acted, were infallible."+

But this practice, from whatever "root of bitterness" it sprung, has been one of the chief causes, we assert, of the divisions and distresses which we read of in ecclesiastical history. The matter of fact our author does not, because he cannot, deny, He rather chooses to insinuate that "such divisions and disturbances were not owing to the governors of the church, but to the perverse fisputings of heretics and schismatics." He

Page 19.

+ How a creed is to be made, as the Considerations recommend, in which all parties shall agree, our author cannot understand. I will tell him how; by adhering to Scripture terms: and this will suit the best idea of a

Creed (a summary or compendium of a larger volume), and the only fair purpose of one, instruction.

It is observed in the Considerations, that the multiplicity of the propositions contained in the 39 Articles is alone sufficient to show the impossibility of that consent which the Church supposes and requires.-Now, what would any man guess is the answer to this? Why, "that there are no less than three propositions in the very first verse of St. John's Gospel." Had there been " three thousand" it would have been nothing to the purpose: where propositions are received upon the authority of the proposer, it matters not how many of them there are; the doubt is not increased with the number; the same reason which establishes one, establishes all. But is this the case with a system of propositions which derives no evidence from the proposer? which must each stand upon its own separate and intrinsic proof?--We thought it necessary to oppose note to note in the place in which we found it; though neither here nor in the Answer is it much connected with the text.

must know that there is oppression as well as resistance, provocation as well as resentment, abuse of power as well as oppositiou to it and it is too much to take for granted, without one syllable of proof, that those in possession of power have been always in the right, and those who withstood them in the wrong. "Divisions" and "disturbances " have in fact, and in all ages, arisen on this account, and it is a poor shift to say, because it may always be said, that such only are chargeable with these mischiefs as refused to submit to whatever their superiors thought proper to impose.*

*

Nor is it much better when he tells us, "that these subtilties of metaphysical debate, which we complain of in our Articles, were introduced by the several heretics of those times;" especially as it is evident that, whoever first introduced, it is the governors of the church who still continue

them.

But our author cannot conceive what all this, as relating to "creeds" only and "confessions," to the "terms of communion" rather than of admission into the ministry, is to the purpose. Will he then give up "creeds" and "confessions?" or

will his church thank him for it if he does? stance of her Articles into the form of her a church which, by transfusing the subpublic worship, has in effect made the

"terms of communion" and of admission

into the ministry the same. This question, like every other, however naked you may strip it by abstraction, must always be considered with a reference to the practice you wish to reform.

The author of the Considerations contends duties a Christian owes to his Master" to very properly, that it is one of the first keep his mind open and unbiassed" in religious inquiries. Can a man be said to do this, who must bring himself to assent to opinions proposed by another? who enters into a profession where both his subsistence and success depend upon his continuance in

*The following sentiment of our author is too curious to be omitted: "Possibly too he (the author of the Considerations) may think that insurrections and rebellions in the state are not owing to the unruliness of factious sub. jects, but to kings and rulers; but most reasonable men, I believe, will think otherwise."

A common reader may think this observation of the answerer a little beside the question. But the answerer may say, with Cicero and Dr. King, "Suscepto negotio, majus mihi quiddam proposui, in quo meam in Rempublicam voluntatem populus perspicere posset.' -Motto to Dr. K.'s Oration in 1749.

66

a particular persuasion? In answer to this we are informed, that these Articles are no "rule of faith;" (what! not to those who subscribe them?) that "the church deprives no man of his right of private judgment,” (she cannot-she hangs, however, a dead weight upon it); that it is a "very unfair state of the case, to call subscription a declaration of our full and final persuasion in matters of faith;" though if it be not a "full" persuasion, what is it? and ten to one it will be "final," when such consequences attend a change. That "no man is hereby tied up from impartially examining the word of God," i. e. with the impartiality" of a man who must "eat" Dr" starve," according as the examination turns out; an "impartiality" so suspected, that a court of justice would not receive his evidence under half of the same influence: nor from altering his opinion if he finds reason so to do;" which few, I conceive, will " find," when the alteration must cost them so dear. If one could give credit to our author in what he says here, and in some other passages of his Answer, one would suppose that, in his judgment at least, subscription restrained no man from adopting what opinion he pleased, provided "he does not think himself bound openly to maintain it:" that "men may retain their preferments, if they will but keep their opinions to themselves." If this be what the church of England means, let her say So. This is indeed what our author admits here, and yet, from the outcry he has afterwards raised against all who continue in the church whilst they dissent from her Articles, one would not suppose there was a pardon left for those, who keep even to themselves an opinion" inconsistent with any one proposition they have subscribed. The fact is, the gentleman has either shifted his opinion in the course of writing the Answer, or had put down these assertions, not expecting that he should have occasion afterwards to contradict them.

It seemed to add strength to this objection, that the judgment of most thinking men being in a progressive state, their opinions of course must many of them change; the evil and iniquity of which the answerer sets forth with great pleasantry, but has forgot at the same time to give us any remedy for the misfortune; except the old woman's receipt, to leave off thinking for fear of thinking wrong.

But our church " preaches," it seems, no other Gospel than that which she re

ceived," nor "propounds any other Articles for Gospel," nor "fixes any standards or criterions of faith, separate from this Gospel : and so she herself fully declares;" and we are to take her "word" for it, when the very complaint is, that she has never" acted" up to this declaration, but in direct contradiction to it. When she puts forth a system of propositions conceived in a new dialect, and in unscriptural terms; when she ascribes to these the same evidence and certainty as to Scripture itself, or decrees and acts as if they were equally evident and certain; she incurs, we apprehend, the charge which these expressions imply. She claims indeed" authority in controversies of faith," but "only so far," says her apologist, as "to judge for herself what should be her own terms of communion, and what qualifications she shall require in her own ministers." All which, in plainer English, comes to this; that two or three men, betwixt two and three centuries ago, fixed a multitude of obscure and dubious propositions, which many millions after must bring themselves to believe, before they be permitted to share in the provision which the state has made (and to which all of every sect contribute) for regular opportunities of public worship, and the giving and receiving of public instruction. And this our author calls the magistrate's "judging for himself,"* and exercising the "same right as all other persons have to judge for themselves." For the reasonableness of it, however, he has nothing to offer, but that it "is no more than what other churches, popish" too, to strengthen the argument, as well as protestant," have done before. He might have added, seeing "custom" is to determine the matter, that it has been "customary" too from early ages for Christians to anathematize and burn each other for difference of opinion in some points of faith, and for difference of practice in some points of ceremony.

We now accompany the learned answerer to what he is pleased to call the "main question," and which he is so much “ puzzled to keep in sight." The argument in favour of subscription, and the arbitrary exclusion of men from the church or ministry, drawn from the nature of a society and the