modern as well as of ancient sectaries and heretics, the absolute necessity of providing against the extravagant lengths to which men may be hurried in the maintenance of their peculiar opinions? Who knows not that without a regular watch not even the strongest holds can be secure? The fact is, however, as I have already* stated, that there is no church whose terms of communion are so well calculated to embrace every denomination of sincere Christians, as those of the church of England. She in fact shuts out no man who is not by his difference in fundamental points excluded. Her articles were evidently drawn up with this enlarged view and fitted as they are for the widest admissible comprehension, she yet, as I must remind you, requires no man to declare his assent to them, except those who are specially appointed to teach others; of the integrity of whose faith, as well as their ability to impart knowledge, she is therefore bound to be fully satisfied, before she commits to their care a trust so important.

Whatever indeed of obloquy she may incur on this account we may observe, can in no way be considered as peculiar to her. She is in this case attacked only in common with all churches that are established. And the charge originated

*Sermon III.

with those from whom we might well expect that it should come. For it was by the Unitarians, or men that were or are supposed to think with them, that this objection to all establishments was first, and is now, principally maintained: that is to say, by a class of men who have never yet been able to secure to themselves not only a national, but not even any considerable establishment in any nation: whose deviation from the faith seems to have been marked by Providence with something not very unlike what has befallen the rebellious Jews; who are in some sort strangers and outcasts in every country where they abide.

But there is another accusation, very different, and even opposite in its nature, brought against our church, which, if it were in any degree true, should indeed alarm our consciences, and awaken our most serious attention. It is directed against us, both collectively and individually. It is said that the institutions of our church are not. calculated for the promotion of true piety and devotion and that we, her ministers, are wanting in diligence and in zeal. These charges are brought against us principally, as I have before observed, by those who are considered by us as intruders into the ministry, who boast that with them are found that fervency and DD 2

edification which in us are wanting. I might, therefore, in the first instance, object to them, as interested judges, as men who have an evident purpose to serve in the censures, which they pronounce. I might warn them, lest upon both

12

I cannot help stating a remarkable instance of the manner in which this is alleged, even in these days, and by men of the best repute among the schismatics, for such I take Mr. Adam Clarke to be. In the article before quoted, in n. 8, I find this account of the times when the Methodists first showed themselves: "In those days the word of the Lord was scarce, as there was no open "vision for a considerable time, till the providence of God per"mitted the churches to be shut against Messrs. Wesley and "Whitfield, and they were compelled to go to the highways and

66

hedges!" Not only the scandal against the regular clergy of those days, which this conveys, is remarkable, but still more the presumption and profaneness with which God's revelations to his prophets are likened to the reveries of these enthusiasts. Take another instance of this profaneness from the same life of Mr. Thomas Symonds, when on his death bed, being asked if he would take a little wine, he said "No more wine, till I drink it cr new in the kingdom of God." No wonder, when the words of the hymns which he sung were such as these:

66

My Jesus to know, and feel his blood flow,

"'Tis life everlasting, 'tis heaven below."

Mag. for Feb. p. 52, 53.

Take one more instance from Whitfield's own mouth. After preaching at Bristol, in the year. 1739, he “ signified to the congregation that there was one coming after him whose shoe's "latchet he was not worthy to unloose." He then published that "the Rev. John Wesley would preach next day." Method. Mag. for Sept. 1807, p. 416. This is almost equal to any passage in the

Book of the Conformities of St. Francis," before mentioned. And when such things are now published, with approbation by the leaders of the sect, it is a proof that the character of their fanaticism is not greatly improved or mitigated.

grounds, and in whatever sense taken, they should fall under the condemnation which is threatened in my text. The charges indeed are as easily made, as they are difficult to be refuted, In the exercise of a ministry so extensive and important, that it has even, by an inspired apostle, been said of it, "Who is sufficient for "these things?" administered as it is, by fallible men, what can we suppose but that there must be defects which jealousy may discover, and prejudice will magnify? In a case where the boldest of us dares not say that he is righteous, how easy must it be to impute guilt?

Such apology, however, as is consistent with the frailty of man, such claims of merit as even weak mortals may oppose to human judgments, have often, and with the approbation of the wise and good, been made for the church of England. Nor are the imputations novel, or now, for the first time, either advanced or repelled. This is but the language of the old puritans in the time of the great rebellion. Not satisfied with condemning prelacy, as radically vicious and faulty in discipline, they turned their malice against the individuals who composed the body of the episcopal clergy. By packed and interested commissioners they instituted inquiries into the character of every beneficed minister, whom they first pronounced to be scandalous, and afterwards ejected from

his living. It may be conjectured that censures so similar are not brought forward without some intention that they should answer a similar end.

This is a subject, however, upon which I need say little. Incidentally, and in the course of my argument, I have had occasion to shew what has been the conduct of our church in situations of great difficulty and danger, during which she has, with God's help, steadily maintained her ground.

Of her form of government I have also been led to speak, if not at large, yet sufficiently to shew that it is agreeable to the practice of the highest antiquity. It is indeed, we say, of divine institution. It has been shewn so to be by many of her able and pious advocates. But even of those who will not admit that episcohas the absolute sanction of God, many pacy are forced to admit that it was instituted by the apostles. We say also that it is the form of ecclesiastical government best fitted for the purposes of edification: that it admits more readily than any other the exercise of that moderation, which is on all hands allowed to be so desirable, and which is so seldom found: that it is best enabled to temper its judgments with the alternate and due application of indulgence and severity. We say farther of the church, that retaining a sufficiency of those