was occafioned by the low talents of many incumbents in the more early days of the reformation, whofe abilities carried them no farther than to the reading of homilies; a defect which has long been remedied by a liberal education of sufficient numbers of perfons for the miniftry, who regularly perform the office of preaching, as well as other duties, in the parishes committed to their care. And if the forementioned defect did ftill continue, as GOD be thanked it does not, it would be ill fupplied by our modern itinerants, who make cit their principal employ, wherever they go, to inftil into the people a few favourite tenets of their own; and this, with fuch diligence and zeal as if the whole of chriftianity depended upon them, and all efforts towards the true christian life, without a belief of those tenets, were vain and ineffectual."

But, my Lords, what can this author mean by writing thus? for fuppofing the practice of itinerant preaching was primarily occafioned by the low talents of many incumbents in the more early days of the reformation, does it therefore follow, that there can be no other juft caufe affigned for itinerant preaching now? What if the generality of the prefent incumbens depart from the good old doctrines that were preached in the more early days of the reformation, and notwithstanding their liberal education, make no other ufe of their learning but to explain away the articles and homilies, which they have fubscribed in the grammatical and literal fenfe? Is it not neceffary, in order to keep up the doctrines, and thereby the real dignity of the church, that either the clergy thus degenerated, fhould be obliged to read the homilies as formerly, and to preach confiftently therewith; or that those who do hold the doctrines of the reformation, fhould go about from place to place, and from county to county, nay from pole to pole, if their sphere of action extended fo far, to direct poor fouls that are every-where ready to perifh for lack of knowledge, into the right way which leadeth unto life? That this is the cafe between the established clergy and these itinerant preachers, will appear prefently; and how then can this author charge them with making it their principal employ, wherever they go, to inftil into the people a few favourite tenets of their own? Has the author followed them wherever they have preached, that he afferts this fo confidently concerning them? Is it not to be

wifhed that he had at least taken care to have been better in formed? for then he would have faved himself from the guilt of a notorious flander. Is it not evident to all who hear them, that the favourite tenets which the itinerant preachers make it their principal employ to inftil into people's minds wherever they go, are the great doctrines of the reformation, homilies and articles of the church? fuch as "Man's bringing into the world with him a corruption which renders him liable to GOD's wrath and eternal damnation: That the condition of man after the fall of Adam, is fuch that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural ftrength and good works, to faith and calling upon GOD: That we are accounted righteous before GOD, only for the merit of our LORD and Saviour JESUS CHRIST by faith, and not for our own works or defervings: That they are to be accurfed, who presume to say, that every man fhall be saved by the law or fect which he profeffeth, fo that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law, and the light of nature." Thefe, my Lords, are fome of the favourite tenets of thefe itinerant preachersp Their others are like unto them. Can thefe, my Lords, be properly called their own? Or ought it not to be the princia pal employ of every true minifter, wherever he goes, to instil fuch tenets, and that too with the utmost diligence and zeals into the people's minds? Does not a great part of chriftianity depend on them? And are not all pretenfions to a true chriftian life, without a belief of these tenets, vain and ineffectual May not these itinerant preachers therefore complain unto your Lordships of this anonymous author, as Mephibofheth complained to David of treacherous Ziba? Doubtless he hath flandered them. And wherefore does he fpeak fo contemptuoufly of itinerant preachers? Is it not an amiable and hoa nourable character? And may I not take the freedom of ace quainting your Lordships, that if all the Right Reverend the Bishops did their duty, (efpecially my Lord of London, whose diocefs is of fuch a vaft extent) they would all of them long fince have commenced itinerant preachers too?

But to return to an examination of the other part of the author's preface. After he has taken it for granted, that many irregularities are juftly charged upon these itinerant preachers, as Violations of the laws of church and ftate,"

he adds, "It may be proper to enquire, whether the doctrines they teach, and thofe lengths they run beyond what is practifed among our religious focieties, or in any other chriftian church, be a fervice or differvice to religion." The religious focieties or any other christian church! What, does our author make the religious focieties a church? This is going further than the Methodists, whom he is pleased to stile only a fect. But if the religious focieties, my Lords, be a church, may it not be proper to enquire how their doctrines or practices came to be fet up as a rule and standard for others to go by, fo that perfons doing service or differvice to religion must be judged of according as they deviate from or adhere to the religious focieties either in doctrine or practice? Or fuppofing the religious focieties were to be a standard for others to go by, was it not incumbent on the author to give the public a short summary and account of their doctrines and practices? For otherwife how can the world poffibly judge whether the Methodists do deviate from them; or if fo, whether they do thereby fervice or differvice to religion? Indeed, this author has told us in his first part, how the religious focieties behave on Sundays; but he has no where acquainted us with the principles they hold, or how they behave on other days. And till he does, I will venture to affirm, that unless these itinerants teach other doctrines than the prefent religious focieties generally hold, and run greater lengths in christianity than the generality of them, it is to be feared, now run, they will be in great danger of never arriving at "the mark for the prize of their high-calling in CHRIST JESUS their LORD."

I have been the more particular, my Lord, in the examination of the preface, because the author, by annexing these words, "to which purpofe the following queries are submitted to confideration," feems to lay it down as the groundwork and foundation of all the fubfequent queries. And if the foundation be fo weak and fandy, how flight and superficial must be the superstructure?

I fuppofe your Lordships will readily grant, that it is the bounden duty of every regular and fair writer (especially when he is charging others with irregularities as violations of the laws of church and state) to take care that he does not violate the laws of chriftian charity. Or if he puts queries to the

public concerning any perfons, ought he not to take heed that thofe queries are founded upon truth, and that the charges therein exhibited are really matter of fact? But our author has notoriously neglected this fundamental rule, and thereby not only cast a lafting blot and odium upon his own character, if his name was known, but also hath done real hurt to the cause he would defend. The query already examined concerning itinerant preaching, wherein he has charged the Methodists with inftilling into people a few favourite tenets of their own, fufficiently demonftrates this. But this is not all; several of the other queries now coming under confideration are by no means founded on truth, and contain charges against thefe itinerants, whereby they are as much wronged and unjustly vilified as ever Stephen was, when the Jews fuborned men who faid, "We have heard him fpeak blafphemous words against Moses and against GOD, this holy place and the law."

To prove this, we need only examine the two queries which immediately follow the preface.

Query 1. "Whether notions in religion may not be heightened to fuch extremes, as to lead feme into a difregard of religion itself through defpair of attaining fuch exalted heights? and whether others, who have imbibed thofe notions, may not be led by them into a difregard and difefteem of the common duties and offices of life, to fuch a degree at least as is inconfiftent with that attention to them, and that diligence in them, which providence has made néceffary to the wellbeing of private families and public focieties, and which christianity does not only require in all ftations and in all conditions, but declares at the fame time (Col. iii. 22. Ephef. 5. 6.) that the performance even of the loweft offices in life, as unto God (whofe providence has placed people in their feveral stations) is truly ferving CHRIST, and will not fail of its reward in the next world."

Query 2. Whether the enemy of mankind may not find his account in their carrying christianity, which was defigned for a rule to all ftations and all conditions, to fuch heights as make it fairly practicable by a very few in compa rison, or rather by none?”

·His 5th and 6th queries, page the roth, are like unto them. They run thus, "Whether thofe exalted ftrains in religion,

and an imagination of being already in a state of perfection, are not apt to lead men to spiritual pride, and to a contempt of their fellow chriftians; while they confider them as only going on in what they account the low and imperfect way, (i. e. as growing in grace and goodness only by degrees)? And again, whether the fame exalted strains and notions do not tend to weaken the natural and civil relations among men, by leading the inferiors, into whofe heads thofe notions are infufed, to a difefteem of their fuperiors; while they confider them as. in a much lower difpenfation than themselves; though those fuperiors are otherwise fober and good men, and regular attendants on the ordinances of religion ?"

Here again it is fuppofed, that these itinerant preachers either imagine themselves to be in a state of perfection, or at least teach others to imagine that they are; and that the confequence of this, is a weakning the natural and civil relations among men, by leading them to a difefteem of their fellowchriftians, and fuperiors, who are fuppofed to be in a lower dispensation than themselves.

Heavy charges, my Lords, these are indeed! But what evidence does our author produce to prove them? Why really none at all. For here is no quotation at the bottom of either. of these queries from any of their writings; fo that we cannot tell whether they are levelled against these itinerant preachers, in general, or any one of them in particular. And therefore the Prebendary of St. Paul's, who has been pleased to reply to my first letter, in vindication of this author, has done wrong in affirming, That under each query there is some quotation either from my journals or other writings, whereon it is founded." But there is no fuch thing under thefe four, wherein fuch heavy charges are included. And therefore may I not argue, as the author does upon another occafion in his firft part, page 8th, that 'till fome proof does appear, the prefumption must be that he has none?

In the mean while, I dare challenge this author, and the whole world, to produce any paffage out of my writings, wherein I have taught any other christianity, than what, through the aids of the Bleffed Spirit, is practicable by all perfons in all conditions; or that I ever preached otherwise than That the performance even of the loweft offices of life, as