in the most solemn occasions of worship) unseasonably made, which seem not so much designed to confirm Dissenters in their own principles, as to place those who cannot accede to them in an unfavourable light; the Ministers especially, who, according to some representations, must be supposed to be almost destitute of common sense, or else of common honesty.

When I write a letter, especially to a friend, I think myself released from that attention to method which I might observe if I was composing a treatise. As my heart dictates, my pen moves. 1 therefore hope you will bear with me if I do not come directly to what I proposed; which was, to give you some account of the motives of my own conduct. It may not be improper to premise a few preliminary observations. I shall not weary you by attempting to justify every thing that obtains in our way, nor call your attention to all the minutiae which might furnish subject for debate to those who know not how to employ their time better. It would be mere trifling to dispute for or against a surplice or a band, a gown or a cloak, or to enquire whether it be the size, or the shape, which renders some of these habiliments more or less suitable for a Minister, than the others. But perhaps a few strictures upon establishments and liturgies may not be wholly impertinent to my design.

That national religious establishments under the New-Testament dispensation are neither of express divine appointment, nor formed in all points upon a scriptural plan, I readily admit. Whether upon this account they cannot be submitted to without violating the obedience we owe to the Lord Jesus as head and lawgiver of his Church, I shall consider hereafter. At present permit me only to hope (for my own sake) that such submission is not absolutely sinful; and in that view to offer a word in favour of their expedience. I plead not for this or that establishment, A 4

or

or the administration of one preferably to another; but chiefly for that circumstance which I suppose is common to them all: I mean, the parcelling out a country, the government of which is professedly Christian, into certain districts, analogous to what we call parishes, and fixing in each of those districts, a person with a ministerial character, who by his office is engaged to promote the good of souls within the limits of his own boundary. I think the number of parishes in England and Wales is computed to be not much fewer than ten thousand. The number of Dissenting churches and congregations in England and Wales (if those whom I have consulted as the most competent judges are not mistaken) will not be found greatly to exceed one thousand. In how many or in how few of these the old Puritan Gospel (if I may so call it) is preached or prized, I deem you a better judge than myself. It is certain, that the number of Dissenting Ministers who are very willing it should be publicly known that they differ widely from the sentiments of their forefathers, is not small. However, we will take them all into the estimate. Now let us for a moment suppose the establishment with all its provisions removed and annihilated. In this case some of the Dissenting Ministers might indeed change their situations, and fix in places where they might hope for more extensive influence; but as none of them could be in two places at once, about nine tenths of the kingdom would be deprived, at a stroke, of the very form of public religion, and reduced in a short time (for any relief the Dissenting Interest could afford) to a state little better than heathenism. That there is any regard paid to the Lord's day through the greater part of the land, that the holy Scriptures are publicly read to thousands who probably would otherwise know no more of the Bible than they do of the Koran, are good effects of the national establishment, which I

think can hardly be denied, even by those who are most displeased with it. For this reason, if I could not conform to the establishment myself, I think I should speak respectfully of it, and bless God for it. Some established form of religious profession, with a full and free toleration for all who think they can serve God more acceptably upon a different plan, appears to me the most desirable and promising constitution, for preserving the rights of conscience, and for promoting the welfare of souls. I believe, therefore, that the Church of England as by law established (for it claims no higher title,) though it be not a perfect institution, and notwithstanding its real or supposed defects, and the faults of individuals within its community, has been upon the whole, and will be, a blessing to the nation; and that its preservation is an effect of the wise and gracious providence of the Great Head of the Church Universal.

From the expediency of parochial order, I would farther deduce the expediency of a rubric and liturgy. For I cannot conceive an established Church, without including, in my idea some determinate rule or line respecting doctrine and worship, by which it is discriminated from other Churches which are not so established. As to our liturgy, I am far from thinking it incapable of amendment; though, when I consider the temper and spirit of the present times, I dare not wish that the improvement of it should be attempted, lest the intended remedy might prove worse than the disease. As I am not called to defend it, I shall only say, what I believe will be allowed by many candid persons on your side, that the gene- . ral strain of it is scriptural, evangelical, and experi mental. It recognises with precision the One Great object of worship, in his personal distinctions, and glorious attributes; the honours and offices of the Redeemer, the power and agency of the Holy Spirit, the evil of sin, the depravity of man, and all the dis

A 5

tinguishing

tinguishing doctrines of the Gospel. As to the composition, I question if any thing in the English language, (our version of the Bible excepted,) is worthy of being compared with it, for simplicity, perspicuity, energy, and comprehensive fulness of expression. But I suppose the objection does not lie so much against our liturgy in particular, as in general against the use of liturgies of any kind. And for aught I know, if the compilers of our liturgy could have expected, that all the parishes in the kingdom, and from age to age, would be supplied with Ministers competently acquainted with the mysteries of the Gospel, and possessed of the Spirit of grace and supplication, they might have left them under less restraint in conducting public worship. I believe many of the Dissenters take it for granted, that a considerable part of our Clergy are not only unable to pray in public to the edification of their hearers without a form, but are unfit for the ministerial office in every view. Should this be true, it is a truth which I hope would excite lamentation rather than ridicule or invective, in all who profess a regard to the glory of God, or love to the souls of men. But upon this supposition I should think an evangelical liturgy a great blessing; as it must secure the people (that is the bulk of the nation) from being exposed to the same uncertainty and disappointment from the reading-desk, as they are liable to from the pulpit. For they who cannot, or do not preach the Gospel, are not likely to pray agreeably to the spirit of the Gospel, if that part of the public service was likewise left to their own management. Or shall we say, it is an advantage to some Dissenting Congregations, that their Ministers, not being confined to a form of sound words, there is little more of Christ or of grace to be found in their prayers than in their sermons? It is not too hastily taken for granted by many, that God cannot be worshipped in spirit and in truth by those who use a form of prayer? Or

that

that he will not afford them who so approach him any testimony of his acceptance? If the words of a form suit and express the. desires and feelings of my mind, the prayer is as much my own, as if I had conceived it upon the spot. On the other hand, if I have the greatest readiness and fluency in diversifying expressions, so that my prayer should always appear unstudied and new, yet if my spirit, or the spirit of those who join with me, be not engaged in it, though I may admire my own performance, and be applauded by others, it is no better than a mere lifeless form, in the sight of Him who searcheth the heart. Not to say, that many who profess to pray extempore, that is, without either a printed or a written form, go- so much in a beaten path, that they who hear them frequently can tell with tolerable certainty how they will begin, when they are about the middle, and when they are drawing towards the close of their prayer.

It is said, that a prescribed form precludes the ex-ercise of a gift in prayer, which is true; but then, as I hinted before, it in some good measure supplies. the want of such a gift; and blessed be the Lord, there are many living witnesses who can declare to his praise, that a form does not restrain, much less preclude the exercise of grace. They know and are sure that their Lord and Master owns and comforts. them in what their brethren hastily condemn them. for. It is well for us that He seeth not as man seeth, and is no more a respecter of parties than of persons..

It cannot be denied that the Lord himself appointed forms of prayer and praise to be used in the OldTestament Church. When the ark set forward, and when it rested, Moses addressed the Lord, not according to the varied emotions of his own spirit, but statedly in the same determinate expressions, Numb. x. 35, 36. So likewise in the solemn benediction

A6

which