.v*** n-. .. 2- t H E APPEAL DEFENDED: O R, T H E PROPOSED AMERICAN EPISCOPATE VlNDieATEDn li* ANSWER TO •THE Objections and misrepresentations O F Dr. CHAUNCt and OTHERS. By THOMAS BRADBURY CHANDLER, D.D. There are fome Spirits in the World, who, unlefs they arc in aftual Pofieffion of Defpotilm themfelves, are daily haunted with the Appre- henfion of being fubjecl to it in others ; and who feem to Ipeak and aa under the ftrange Perfuanon, that every Thing ftort of Perfecu- tion againil what they dillike, muft terminate in the Perfecution of ^"^ ^ ^ ' Lett, to the Author of the Confejfionah JSf E H^ ' T R K: .Printed by HUGH GAINE, at the Bible and Crown, in Hanover-Square, 1769. «« MMHE Chutch Of England is, in its Conftltution, Ipiftopal. Iti», In fome Plantations, cofi* I feffedly the eftablifhed Church ; in the reft are many Congregations adhering to it ; andE ^ through the late Extention of the Britifli Dominions, and the Influence of other Caufes, it is likely that there will be more. All Members of every Church are, according to the Principles of Liberty, intitled to every Part of what they conceive to be the Benefits of it, entire and com- pleat, fo far as confifts with the Welfare of civil Government; yet the Members of our Church in America do not thus enjoy its Benefits, having no Proteftant Bifhop within jooo Miles of them j a Cal'e, which never had its Parallel before in the Chriftian World." Anfxv^er to Dr. May hew* s Oh/ervau ADVERTISEMENT. rH E Author of the following Defence legs Leave to inform his Readers^ that it was his . Deftgn not to reply to the Writers againft the Appeal, until they fhould have offered all they had to fay upon the Subje^y as he intended his Defence fhould be general. . IVith this View he continued long filenty waiting -patiently for his Turn to be heardy and expelling that a Tear*s Oppofition and A- hufe would fatisfy his moft zealous Adverfaries. But before the Tear was compleatedy he was called upon by fome of his Friends^ and toJdy that many were impatient to fee the general Defence that had been promifedy and that to wait any longer upon the Ame- rican Whig, who dif covered no Signs of coming to- wards a Ccnclufiony would be conjidered as a Piece of very nee die fs Complaifance — efpecially as it was pretty well known what he could fay^ from what he had [aid in near 50 Papers^ and as an Anfwerer was ready to reply to every l^hing worthy of Notice that he fhould fay. Upon this Reprefentation the Author proceeded to prepare the following Sheets. He foon found that his chief Difficulty would conjijly in confining a Reply to fo many Particulars within a moderate Number of Pages. This Difficulty he counteracted as much as he couldy confijiently with his Intention of doing Juftice to himfelf and his Caufe j but Jlill he is much diffa-- tisfied with the Length of his Performance^ which be hopes may be forgiven himt THE ADVERTISEMENT. ^ H E Author confiders it as his Misfortune that he is brought into fiich a Difpute^ in this turbulent Seafon. While the Minds of Men are agitated with Contefts and Jealoufies about political Rights and Pri- vileges^ it is not a 'Time to enter into Controvcrfies relating to Matters of Religion, ti may be faid^ V)ho but the Author of the Appeal has introduced the Controyerfy about American Bifljops ? He confeffes he has occajloned it ; hut he is not convinced that he has given any jujl Caufe for the Out-Cry that has been made. He mea?it no Injury to any human Great urey and forefaw no Oppofition ' to what he hiew was., in its Nature and Intention^ altogether harmlefs and in- cffenfive. Moreover., when the Appeal was drawn up., the Colonifts were in high good Humor \ and when it was publifhed., he was not apprehenfive of the ge^ neral Difcontent that foon followed. Coyifcious there- fore of his Innocence in this Rcfpe^l., he doubts not hut the fiber and candid will acquit him \ and as to • the Cenfure or Condemnation of others^ although he could wifh to avoid it^ it will noi greatly diflrefs him, ^ H E Writers againfl the Appeal have endea- voured to avail themf elves of the prefent Troubles -, re- frefenting that the Taxation of the Colonies., and the Fropofal of fending BiJIoops to America^ are Parts of one general Syjiem ; and that the latter is as unfriend- ly to our religious., as the former is to our political^ Privileges. But their Succefs appears to have been in- adequate to their Wifhes. Very few., it is thought.^ have been fo far blinded as not to fee.., that., although ihefe Things^ in the prefent Contr over fy., have been art- fully blended together.^ they have in Reality no Man- ner of Conneftion. And it is well known., that tht T)iffenters in general would not anfwer Po this Spur., when it was clofely applied to thm^ in fever al Counties., in the late Ele^ions. CON- CONTENTS. INTRODUCTORY Obfervations, p. x The Reafonablenefs of the propofed Epifcopatc allowed, by Dr. Chaimcy and the American IVhig^ The Dcfign of the prefent Defence^ p. 9 Dr. C's Confidence, p. 1 1— and Complaint, p. 12 The Church of England's 5^ //^ of the Dodrine of Epifcopacy juilifies the Plea for American Bi- Ihops, P* ^5 Dr. C. following the Trent cum^ mifreprefents th^ principles of our Reformers, P* ^7 That the Reformation in England was fettled upon epifcopal Principles, proved from the Preface to the Ordinal, p. 18 — from the Injlitution of a Chnfiian Man^ &c. p. 21 The Principles of Cranmer and our other Re- formers particularly confidered, and proved to be epifcopal, p. 24 The Reformation re-eflabiilhed by Q^ Elizabeth upon the fame Principles, p. 31 The Dodtrine of Epifcopacy not difputed in the former Part of the Queen's Reign, p. 32. When this Do6lrine was afterwards attacked, it was vigo- roufly defended, hy JVhit gift ^ p. 33 — by Bancroft^ p. 36™by liutton^ p. 37— by Bilfon^ p. 38— by Hooker^ Saravia and m.any others, p. 40 Why we hear not of Re-Ordination in that Reign, Ill CONTENTS. Reign, p. 42 — the Cale of JVhittinghamy I'ravers^ &c. p. 43 The Church of England reproached by Dr. C. k p. 47 — after the Example of Papifts and Infi- dels, p. 48 The Nature of the Supremacy dated, according to the Articles and the Queen's hijun5fions^ p. 49--- according to the Tenor of the CommiJJions granted by the Crown, and an Explanation of Hen, VIII. P- SI — ^^<^ a Declaration of Jamc^ I. P- 58 Of an uninterrupted Succejfion^ p. 59 An AfTertion of Mr. Petoy confuted, p. 64 The Cafe of xh^ foreign Frotejiarts^ &c. p. 66 Dr. C's Objedions to an uninterrupted SuccefTi- on anfwered, P' 73 Why the Author choofes not to enter into the general Controverfy concerning Epifcopacy, p. 76 The Opinion of Chillingworth^ UJher^ Burnet and Stilling fleet ^ concerning Epifcopacy, P- 7^ ^^erius and Colluthus the firft Prelbyterians, p. 86 A remarkable Inflance of D, C's AlTurance, p. 89 The Waldenfes always Epifcopalians, P- 9 1 The Charge againll the Author, ?)f unfairly quot- ing A^s xix. 6. refuted, " • P- 93 The Diffenting Gentleman's Objections to the Office for Confii'mation, fully anfwered from Mr. White ^ ' P- 95 The American Church without Bilhops, necerf^- rily deftitute of a regular Government, p. 100 — and of Ordination, p. loi The State of Difcipline in the Church at Home, ■ P. loS Of the Difcipline propofed for the Church in America, under an Epifcopate, p. 112 Of thofe who have loft their Lives in going Home for Ji. Orders, p. 120 Of CONTENTS. ui Of the Expenfivenefs of fuch a Voyage, p. 123 The Want of Clergymen in America chiefly owing to the great Difficulty of obtaining Ordi- nation, p. 126. A PafTage , in the Billiop of Landaff's Sermon vindicated, p. 129 The Charadler of the American Clergy, p. 1 3 1 The Sufferings of the American Church have no Parallel, . P- ^37 The Charaders of the Archbifhops Farkerj JVhitgift^ Bancroft and Laud^ p. 140 Of the Minifters ejeded by the A61 of Unifor- mity, p. 143— their Sufferings not to be compared with thofe of the loyal Clergy during the Uiurpa- tion, ^ p. 145 What is meant by natural Rights^ p. 148 The Loyalty of DifTenters in America not im- peached in the Appeal^ p. 149 The American Church has not the fame Privi- leges with the other religious Denominations in the Colonies, P- ^53 The Charge <»f Ingratitude and Undutifulneis refuted, p. 154 How the propofed Epifcopate will operate in New-England, p- 158 Of the external Circumftances of the propoled Bifhops, p. 160 The Cafe of Paul of Samofata^ p. 165 A Decree of the 4th Council of Carthage con- fidered, p. 166 For what Reafons the ^p^^/ was judged to be not unfeafonable, P- ^7^ Of the Number of American Epifcopalians, P- 17.4 An American Epifcopate a proper Monument of national Gratitude, p. 179 Savages iv CONTENTS. lavages muft be civilized, previoufly to tht'itf Converfion, p. 185 The Converfion of the Heathens not the primary- End of the Society's Incorporation, p. 189 Of the Indian MilTions in New-England^ p. 192 The Defign of the Non-Epifcopcilians in Bofton for the Converfion of the Indians, not defeated by epfcopal Influence, p. 196 That any Members of the Church fliould be averfe to the propofed Epifcopate^ incredible, p. 199 That the Plan for American Biihops was legally' fetled, p. 201 That this Plan is no Violation of the 73d Canon^ p. 204 Dr. Chauncy\ formal Objeftions to it anfweredy p. 206 — 220 His Extra£fc from Dr. Mayhew anfwered from Mr. Apthorp^ p. 220— 22S Dr. C. willing the American Church fhould have the Epifcopate propofed, but denies it to be a Right, p. 229 That this Epifcopate is not propofed on the Footing of an Eflablifhment, p. 230 The Teftim.ony of Dr. 6". Chandler^ P- 23 1 Why the Petition of the Prefbyterians in New- Tork for a Charter^ was rejedled, P- ^33 Dr. BenJon\ Teftimony hi Favor of the Moderai- tionof the Church of England vindicated, p. 235 The Opinion of the mofl; eminent Reformers and foreign Proteflants, concerning Epifcopacy, p. 237 — and the Church of England,. p. 241 That the Two popular Obje6tions of tithes and fpiritual Courts are now acknowledged to be im- pertinent, p. 244 That the Members of the Church In America d© .CONTENTS. ^ do not defire an Eflablifhment of 'T'ithes. for the Support of the Clergy, p. 248 That it has never been propofed to fupport Ame- rican Bifhops by a Tax upon Americans, p. 249 That the propofed Biiliops fhould hereafter be invefted with civil Authority, improbable^ P- 251 That Reafons of Policy favor the propofed Epif- copate, ■ P- 255 Dr. Chauncy called upon to produce fome Evi- dence, that the Epifcopate aimed at, correfponds hot with our public Declarations, p. 25S That the propofed Epifcopate is pradlicable, ' ' p. 26t i:\it Conchfion^ . p. 264 »* ^"BitLAt A. ERRATA Page. Line. 3. 6, for nvaSi r. nvere. 14. 6. for Dyers, r. //^^ Dyers. 18. 15. for Instruction, r. Institution; 19. 9. after concei've, add ^'. 20. 8. for ^^, r have been 31. 30. for although ii is there, r. ivhcre it is, 55. 21 after Fa?ni!y, add or »o/, 00. 4, for /o London, r. yt;r London, 76. 1 2. for ^vhitheredi r. 'withered, 100. 27. for//', r c/^. 153. 14. for Perjujjon^, r. Perfuajions. 160. il after Church, add /k^rf, 188. 20. for it, add, z« /if^ -S^«/^ nioherein it ii obje^ed 258. In the Note, for £/;.'/; Tm^^j, r. ff//j'j'i T>^^j. 259. 1. II, for o'ver-aSi, r. o-T^t^ri' «^. Other /^/^-/-rt/ Errata, of icfs Confequence, need not be pointed out. i Introdu6lory Obfervations. T is common for thofe who are engaged In public Difputes, to profefs their Averfion to Controverfy. If this Profi^fTion were needful, I could make it with great Truth and Sincerity. For my natural Difpofition inclines me to comply with, and conform to, the Sentiments of others, as far as I can confiftcntly, and with a good Confci- ence, rather than to oppofe them. To this Difpo- fition, however, I find that my prefent Situation is very unfavourable ; fmce it obliges me to enter into a publick Debate •,— a Debate which will pro- bably be of long Continuance, — and with a Num- ber of Opponents at the fame Time,— -efpeci ally with fuch Opponents as have hitherto exhibited, in Oppofition to the Appeal to the Publick in Behalf of the Church of England in America. When this well-meant Appeal was made, the Propofal for an American Episcopate as therein explained, appeared to me to be fo reafonable, and intirely unexceptionable, that I could then as eafily believe that the Dillenters in this Country, who of late Years had difclaimed the Principles of Into- lerance, would generoufly and publickly declare their Approbation of our Plan, as that they would oppofe it with Violence. But knowing that I might poflibly be biaffed in my Judgment, and that Things might not appear to others in the fame Light v/herein I viewed them my felf; I intimated (Page 2) my Readinefs to attend any Objecftors, B ' that INTRODUCTORY that might arife, in a fair and candid Debate ; aHcl requtfted (Page 1 18) that they would pro^>oie their Objections, ' in inch a charitable and Chriiiian * Way, that / might be the better for them, and * They not the worle.' A Debate has been brought on i how ' fair and candid' on the Part of my Op- ponents, the impartial Reader can judge : — Ob- jcdions have been ohered •, but whether ' in fuch ' a charitable and Ciiniiian Way', that the Objec- tors ' are not the worle for them', a fmall Degree of Self-Examinadon will enable them belt to judge for themfelve^. Before I reply to the Particulars objeded, it may be proper to make a few general Introductory Oblervauions, relating chiefly to the Manner where- in I have been oppoied •, which has been different from what, in my humble Conception, I had a Right to expect, in thefe feveral Refpe«5l:s. I. As the Appeal was a ferious Performance, and its general Subje6c confelledly of Importance, fe- rious Anfwers, if any, ought to have been given it. But it may be faid of fome of my Opponents, that inftead of giving ferious Anfwers, they have endea- voured to place the whole Matter in Difpute in a ludicrous Light, and have condefcended to adt the Part of Buffoons^ for the Amufement, rather than oi jober Reajoners^ for the Initrud:ion, of the good- natured Reader : — That, infcead of applying them- felves fairly to convince the Judgment, they have- ufed all their Addrefs to engage the Prejudices, and inflame the PaHloris, of the Populace, againfl the Refidcnce of Biuiops in America. 2, I^I OBSERVATIONS. 2. In Order thereto, the propofed Epifcopate has been grofsly mifreprefented, the Appeal has been per\Trted, and the Author and his Friends abufed, with an unlparing Hand. If the Plan for the Settlement of Bifhops in America^ as publifhed in the Appeal^ was inconfiftent with the Rights or Liberties cf any Denomination of Chrlflians, its Inconfiilency faould have been fairly pointed out; and it this had been done with Temper and Decency, it would have had fo much the greater Effe^i:, with all reafonable and confiderate Perfons. But every one can fee that this has not been done ; and it is one of the firft Obiervations that muft occur to the Reader, that the Epifcopate of my Opponents, is not the Epifcopate of the Appeal. The Character aiTumed by them requires them to oppofe the latter \ whereas they have impofed upon their Readers, in- flead of it, anEpifcopate of their own, contrived for the Purpofe of fupporting a Clamour, They have loudly and vehemently declaimed, againft the E- ftablilliment of ecclefiaftical Tyranny in this Land of Liberty— againft depriving Men of their reli- gious Freedom and worldly Property, and even of their natural Rights ', as if thefe Evils were confti- tuent Parts of the Epifcopate in Qiieftion, or at leaft muft reftilt from it by necelTary Confequence. And yet I fee not how it is poftibie, that they ftiould not know in their own Confciences, that nothinG: they have faid in this Strain, militates either againft me, or the Biftiops propofed. Indeed Paftages from the Appeal have been quoted, to enable them to carry on the lUufion ; but before fuch PafTages, could anfwer the Purpofe, it was found neceftary to put them to the Tortvire, and to vvreft them, from their plain and obvioys Meaning. As to any pt^rfonal Abufes I have received from thefe Vv'riters, B 2 1 truly 4 INTRODUCTORY I truly defpife them, and lliall filently pafs them over with the Contem^^t they deferve. They affed not the Merits of the Caufe in Debate, and are of no Confequence to any but themfehes. I never ex- pe6led much Fame as an Author •, and as to my pri- vate or moral Charad:er, I do not conceive, that ^in the Eflimation of a fingle Perfon whrfe Opinion is worthy of Regard, it has really received any In- jury, from the malevolent Impeacliments of my literary Adverfaries. 3. I ESTEEM it no fmall Proof of the "Want of Candour in fome of my Opponents, that they have brought on their Attacks in the Weekly Papers -, by which Contrivance, any Defence that I can make, will have no Chance to be feen by many of their Readers. But, not contented with a fmgle Impref- fion of their Publications, they have caufed them to be reprinted in feveral of the Colonies. No fooner './ere the Harangues of the American Whig addrefled to the Inhabitants of New-Tcrk^ than they were reverberated from the Gazettes of Phi- ladelphia and Bojlon. The falfe Alarm founded in Philadelphia by the Centinel, was alfo immedi- ately echoed from the PrefTes of other Places. By . this Management, all the bitter Things, and all the unfair Things, as well as all the ludicrous Expref- fions, which they have uttered againft the Church, have been widely circulated amongft the People •, many of whom are ignorant, fome of them great- ly prejudiced againft us, and perhaps not one in a Hundred of them has ever had an Opportunity, of hearing what is faid on the other Side. Such Con- dud: is artful, and has a Tendency to raife and in- iiame a Party ^ but it can never promote the In- tcrv^lls of Truth ^nd Condour. I may appeal to Dr, OBSERVATIONS. Dr. Chauncy whether this is generous and fair •, who (Page 6) pronounces it to be Matter of Com- plaint, when Men are prevented from making a Judgment upon an impartial hearing of the Cafe^ and are led to give Sentence, upon hearing one Side only. Had indeed the Nature of the propofed E- pifcopate been honeftly explained, and the Argu- ments in Favour of it fairly reprefcnted •, in that Cafe, thefe periodical Gentlemen might have ob- jed:ed and declaimed, and have publifhed their Ob- je •®> '^ ■'Sk* THE IS The APPEAL Defended. S E C T I O N I. HE Fir ft Se6lion of the Appeal con- Sect. tains ' a Sketch of the Arguments I* ' in Favour of Epifcopacy ;' which was marked out^ with a View of en- abling the Reader to judge the better of the Situation of the Church of England in A- merica^ from a general Acquaintance with her Prin- ciples, and the Grounds that fupport them. But although it was not thought to be improper, nor altogether foreign from the general Defign of the Appeal^ to give a fummary View of the Evidence in Favour of Epifcopacy-, yet, as was obferved, we maintain that the Validity of our Plea for Ajiie- rican Bifhops depends not upon the abfolute Truth, but upon our Belief of the Truth, of thofe Prin- ciples. The Plea of DiiGTenters for a Toleration in England^'W2iS never founded,! prefume, on the- abfo- lute Truth and Certainty of their refpeclive Tenets; at leaft, it was never admitted, on that Footing, by thofe in Authority. It is fuiticient that Men helieve the religious Syftems they have adopted to be true, and that they hold no Dodrines that are inconfiftent with the Safety of the State, to intitle them to a Toleration from the civil Government : And a Toleration im.plies, in the very Notion of the Word, a Liberty for Men to enjoy the free, upon j6 THEAPPEAL Sect, open and undifturbed Ufe of fuch Methods of pub- lic Worfhip, and fuch Forms of ecclefiaftical Go- vernment, as belong to their religious Syllems. If therefore the Church of England in the American Colonies has a Right to be tolerated, i. e. unlefs fhe has forfeited the common Rights of Chriftians, fhe has a Right to an Epifcopate ; it being, as was fliewed in fome of the firfl Se6lions of the Appealy an effential Part of her Confcitution. At my Entrance upon the Subje6t, I made the following Obfervation, ' That the Church of Eng- * land is epifcopal, and confequently holds the ' Necefilty of Bifhops to govern the Church, and * to confer ecclefiaftical Powers \ and for Proof of it, refered to ' her public Offices,' and to - ' the * whole Syftem of her Condudl with Regard to her ' Clergy.' The Truth of the Obfervation Dr. Chauncey is pleafed in one Senfe to allow, and in another to deny. But if it be true in any Senfe, it is fuificient for my Pyrpofe. If it be, according to the Dodior's Notion, by Virtue only of the Jus humanum of Epifcopacy, that Billiops are neceffary •, ftill the Ends for which they are neceffary cannot be obtained without them, fo long as we are fubjedl to the Authority that requires them. We com- plain of the Hardfhip of being obliged to go 3000 Miles for Ordination, with great Hazard and Expence : Will faying that the Obligation of Epif- copacy in the Church of England, is founded only on the national Authority, relieve us, while we look upon ourfelves to be bound in Duty and Con- fcience to obey that Authority ? Or, v/iil it prove that we ought not to be relieved ? If it will do neither, we are ftill in the fame Condition, and have the fame Reafons for Complaint. But DEFENDED. 17 But I humbly conceive the Dodtor is greatly Sect. miftaken in his Opinion of the Matter, and that,^ 1- in the long Account he has undertaken to give of the Principles of our Reformers, if he will be fo good as for once to lend me his favourite Expref- fion, he does not fpeak the Truth of Fa^. As the Subllance of this Account has been copied from the Irenicum^^ by a SucceiTioh, I had almoft laid an uninterrupted SuccefTion, of Writers againfl the Church, including Writers againil Chriftianity, down to the JVhigs and Centinels of the prclent Day •, and as I look upon it to be very partial and unfair, as well as injurious to many excellent Cha- racters, and to the Church of England in general — I beg Leave to examine it. The Subjed, I fear, may Be unentertaining to fome of my Readers •, on D which i * The following juft Account of the Irenicum has been given \>y one of our periodical Writers. " I do not fcruple ** to declare, that I look upon the Irenicufn to have been a ** hally, indigefted and partial Account of Principles and *' Fads. And in this the good Bilhdp would not have blamed *' me ; for when he had examined Matters more thoroughly, ** he looked upon it in the fame Light himfelf. His Dcfign " in writing it appears to have been a good One -, which v/as, *' in general, to aiUli in compofmg the religious Differences ** that then tore the Nation in Pieces, and particularly, in Or- ** der thereto, to demoiiih the y^/i i^/'z;///^/;? of Prefbytery. But ** his Zeal carried him, as it often carries others, into an *' Extreme. It reprefented Things to him through the Me- *' dium of Prejudice ; but it was not long, before he was *' able to correc't his Pv'Iiftakes, and to form a very diiierent *' Opinion, both of Principles and Perfons. He wrote his " Irenicum at the Age of 24, and did not fcruple to condemn. ** it himfelf afterwards, declaring that there are mam Things " in it, njjhich if he 'were to tirite again, hdvouU ?ict Jay ; fo}}i£, ** ^jjhich Jhevu his Youih^ and Want of dti£ Cctf deration ; others, ** --which he yielded, too far, in Hopes of gaining the Dijfyning '' Parties to the Church of England". A"Whip, ^c. Numb. XXXIV. I. i8 THE APPEAL Sect, which Accoiint, their Indulgence will be efleemed a peculiar Favour. The Dodtor excepts againft the Preface to the Book of Ordination^ as a Proof that the Church of England is epifcopal^ in the common Senfe of the Word ; becaufe, as Profeflbr Wigglejworth had oblerved, there is Reafon to conclude the Compilers of it were of Opinion, that Priejis and Bijhops are by God^s Law one and the fame, ms was certainly^ fays Dr. Chauncey^ the JDo5irine of the Church of England in the Beginning of the Reformation., and of the Generality of its pious and learned Divines for a very confiderahle Time afterwards. (Page 8.) He refers to a Book publifhed in the Reign of King Henry VIII, entitled, " The Instruction of a Chrillian Man", afterwards altered and reprinted with a fomewhat different Title. Let us firft fee what the Preface to the Ordina- tion Offices, fays. The Words are thefe : " It is evident to all Men diligently reading Holy Scripture, and ancient Authors, that from the Apoflles Time, there have been thefe Orders of " Miniflers in Chrill's Church ; Bifhops, Priefts *' and Deacons. Which Offices were evermore " had in fuch reverend Eftimation, that no Man *' might prefume to execute any of them, except *' he were firfl called, tried, examined, and knowQj to have fuch Qualities as are requifite for thej fame ; and alfo by publick Prayer, with Impo- fition of Hands, were approved and admittec thereunto by lawful Authority. And therefore, to the Intent that thefe Orders may be continued, *' and reverently ufed and efteemed, in the Church *' of England \ no Man ihall be accounted or " taken cc DEFENDED. 19 ' taken to be a lawful Bifhop, Prieft or Deacon, Sect.. ' in the Church of England, or fuffered to execute ' any of the faid Functions, except he be called, ' tried, examined, and admitted thereunto, accor- ' ding to the Form hereafter following, or hath ' had formerly epifcopal Confecra.ion, or Ordina- tion." If the Reader now will carefully confider this PalTage, let him fay, whether it is eafy to conceive a more diredl, pofitive and compieat Teftimony in Favour of Epiicopacy, than is here given by the Compilers of the Ordinal. The DijUnofion of tlie three Orders, of Bifhops, Priefls and Deacons, is in this Preface fully alferted ; the Antiquity of this Diftindion is deduced " from the Apoftles " Time •," — the Evidence in Favour of it is faid to be contained in " holy Scripture and ancient Authors," — and the Clearnefs of this Evidence is fuch, that it mull appear " to all Aden diligently reading holy " Scripture, &c." In Confequence of this Do61:rine, " no Man is to be accounted a lawful Biiliop, Prieft, " or Deacon, in the Church of England, or fuf- " fered to execute any of the faid Funftions, ex- " cept he be admitted thereunto, according to the " Form" then eftablifhed •, with a farther Excepti- on in Favour of thofe only, who ha.d received " formerly epifcopal Confecration, or Ordination.'* If the Dodlor can difcover no more in thefe De- clarations concerning Epifcopacy, than that they may fcem to have an AJpe5l this Way ; fuch Pre- judice will go far towards accounting for the many Mifreprefentations he has made, in his Anfzver to the Appeal. But to enable him to make a more im- partial Judgment of the Matter, I beg of him to try an eafy Experiment, v/hich is no otlier than D z this i 20 T II E A P P E A L Sect, this ; whether, with all the Explanations and foften* ^' ing Interpretations that the Words will adnnit of, he is able himfelf, honeftly and confidently, to fubfcribe to this Declaration of our firft Reformers. If he cannot, he muft allow them to have enter- tained other Sentiments of Epifcopacy,\han he has reprefented them to have had— unlefs he can fiip- pofe them to be guilty of the grofTeft Deceit and Prevarication, But, fays the Dodor, " that Priefts and Bifhops '' were the fame," certainly was the J0o5frine of the Chm'ch of England in the Beginning of the Re- formation ; (Ibid.) meaning when the Ordination Offices were compofed ; or it is impertinent to his Argument. But the Dodrine of the Church of England concerning Epifcopacy, is certainly to be learnt from her public Offices and A6i:s, rather than from the fuppofed Sentiments of Individuals. For how incredible is it, that different Offices fhouid have been compofed for the Ordination of Bifiiops and Priefts, if they were both confidered as being in Reality but one Order '^. If every Prieft was believed to be already a Bifhop, would Men, , who had any Confciences, confent to ad the folemn ' Farce of ordaining fuch an one to the epifcopal Offi.ce, with Prayer and the Impofition of Hands ? Would they folerpnly invoke the Almighty for his Ble0ing upon them in communicating thofe fp-iri- tual Powers, which they had no Intention to com- municate, as the Perfon was believed to be fully invefhed with them already ? How injurious to the Gharaders of our excellent Reformers, is the moft diftant Infinuation of fych Duplicity of Condud I But DEFENDED. 21 But Hill the Do6lor, it feems, is clear in the Sect. Matter •, The firfl Englijh Reformers certamly were ^* not Epifcopalians. If pofitive AlTertions are to be admitted as Evidence in this Difpute, I can pro- duce, from the moil refpe6table Authors, innu- merable Witnefles on the other Side. Bifhop Ken- net^ as moderate a Man, as candid a Writer, and as well acquainted with the Englijh ecclefiaftical Hiftory, as Doftor Chauncey^ fays, that " the Su- ^' periority of Bifhops is one of theTwo diftinguijhing *' Principles of our Reformation," the " Supremacy *^ of Kings" being the other -, " for both which our '' conformable Divines have been continual Advo- " cates."* To this Teftimony I will add another from Doctor Mojheim. This learned Foreigner, fpeaking of the Church of England in the XVIth Century, amongft other Things, fays, it " con- "^ ftantly infifted on the divine Origin of its Go- *' vernment and Difcipline."-f It is fuppofed thefe two Aflertions will be allowed to have as much Weight, as the Dodor's. But let us proceed to Evidence of another Na- ture. The Book intitled " The godly and pious " Institution of a Chriftian Man," was publilhed 1537, in the early Infancy^ or rather foon after the firft Conception^ of the Reformation. It was drawn up by Cranmer and others, agreed to by bothHoufes of Convocation, publiihed with the King's Appro- bation, and intended as a Standard of Doftrine for the Bifhops and Clergy. The Book itfelf I have never feen ; but Collier has given an Jbjira^ of the moil * In his Hijforical Account of the Difcipline and Govern- ment of the Church of England, t Eccle. Hiit. Vol. II. p. 231. I. 22 THEAPPEAL Stcr. mofl material Parts of it. In this Abftradt there is. nothing like what the Do6tor would prove from it ; but there is fomething extremely unlike it in the following PalTage : " They proceed (fays Collier^. fpeaking of the Authors of that Book) " to a " more particular Explanation of the Authority of " the Clergy, and divide it into two Branches, Po- " teftasOrdtniSy etPoteftas Jurifdi5fiGnis. Concerning *■' the Firft, not being contefted^ they fay nothing ; " the Latter, touching Jurifdidlion committed by *' God to the Hierarchy, they throw it into three *' Subdivifions. By the Firft, they are impowered to reprove Immorality and Mifbelief, and to ex- communicate the Obftinate and incorrigible.~By the fecond Branch of Jurifdidion, Bishops are authorifed by our Saviour to continue the Suc^ CESSION and perpetuate the Hierarchy. They are the Judges of the Qualifications for Prieft- hood, and may admit or refufe as they think fit.— A third Branch of Jurifdidion belonging to Biftiops. *' and Priefts, comprehends the Power of making " Canons for the Difcipline and Service of the *' Church." The Hiftorian, at the Conclufion of his Abftradl, gives the Lift of Subfcribers, and takes Leave, with the follov/ing Remark : " This " Book, in the Sacrament of Orders., declares the " Clergy have their Commiflion from God Almigh- " ty, and by Confequence, that their Authority is " no Grant of the Crown'* cc cc cc cc A few Years afterwards was publilhed, " a ne- " cefTary Bod;rine and Erudition of a Chriftian " Man," to which the King himlclf wrote a Pre- face. It was for Subftance much the fame with the Institution, but enlarged and altered in feveral Particulars : From whence it is evident that at this Period, DEFENDED. 2^ Period, the religious Principles of the Nation were Sect. in an unfettled, flii6tuating State. In the Account L given of the Erudition by the fame Hiilorian, there is fomething indeed to the Do6lor's Purpofe ; ibr therein we are told, that " after mention made *' of the Appointment of Deacons" in this Book, ■*' it is fubjoined, that the Scripture fpeaks exprefsly " of no more than the two Orders of Priefls and " Deacons." Were we to flop here, we fhould infer that the Reformers at this Time, were not proper- ly Epifcopalians, but Prefbyterians. But in another PafTage under the fame Head, they have the Ap- pearance, not of Prefbyterians, but of Epifcopa- lians. Take the Words of my Author : " The *' Erudition makes Orders^one of the feven Sa- ■*' craments, and defines it a Gift of Grace for Ad- minifbration in the Church •, that it is conveyed by Confecration and Impofition of the Bi/hop's Hands ; that in the Beginning of Chriflianity, this Character was given by the Apofbles. The Proof is drawn from the Epiflles of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus.^' How to reconcile thefe two PalTages, may be difficult •, and until this be done, they can prove but little on either Side. Collier fays, that " under thole called Prieils or Prefbyters, this Book fuppofes the epifcopal Charadler was meant -, for, that thefe two Orders were diftinct and fubordinate, is plain from this Erudition.** He concludes with obferving, that " this lafl Book *' does not fland upon fo ilrong an Authority as *' the former. The Institution was the Ai;l of the *' whole Clergy, and fubfcribed by both Houfes of *' Convocation." But the " neceffary Erudition," was drawn up only by a Committee of " the King's *' Nomination." But ^4 THE APPEAL Sect. But the true State of the Cafe appears to me to have been this : At the Time of the Erudi- tion, Cranmer and his AfTociates were generally agreed in thefe two main Points \ that the national Religion was grofsly corrupted, and that a public Reformation was neceflary. But how far either was the Cafe, was the Work of Time to determine. Luther and Calvin had made great Progrefs in Ger- many and fome Places adjacent •, but they differed confiderably in their Syllems ; neither of which could fafely be adopted, without a careful Exami- nation. Befides, in the Heat of their Conteft, they were fuppofed to have run into fome Extremes, which the Engliflj Divines judged it prudent to a- void. Our Reformers therefore were refolved to proceed with the utmoft Caution. And the Me- thod they appear to have purfued was, to conlider one Dodtrine after another with the clofeil Attenti- on, until the whole Syilem fhould be examined^ and placed on the fure Bafis of Scripture Authori- ty. While this flow and important Work was going on, the Institution and Erudition were pub- lifhed for temporary Ufe. Some of the Dodrines in Difpute between the Church of Rome and the German Reformers, had been fully canvaiTed and determined by Cranmer and his Friends. Others v/crc not yet thoroughly difcuffed 5 among which mud be reckoned that of ecclefiailical Government. This may fairly be concluded from the ^.eftions propofed to an Affemhly of select Divines^ as the Do&cr properly calls them p. 9 ♦, to which ^lefli- ons they gave in fever ally their Refolutions in Paper Sy all whofe Judgments were accurately fummed up^ and fet down by the ArchbifJjop of Canterbury himfelf. For it v/as at this Time, and not ten Years after- Vv'ards, in -the Reign of Edward Wy as Dodlof CJjaunceyy DEFENDED. 25 Chauncey, following his blind Guide the Irenicum^ Sect. afTerts, that thofe ^eftions were given out for Dif- ^' cuflion, as is plain from Bifhop Buy'fiet, At this Stage of the Reformation therefore it is no Wonder, that we meet with fome crude ExpefTions, relating to Epifcopacy ; as well as to many other Matters of the higheft Importance. The PrepofTefTions of a Popijh Education flill ope- rated in the Minds of thefe honell Searchers for Tmth ; and it was owing perhaps more to the Force of thefe PrepofTefTions, than to any other Caufe, that fome of them have ufed Expreflions, which have fmce been conflrued to imply their having fome Doubts concerning the Superiority of Biihops over Prefbyters. The PopiJJj Schoolmen and Ca~ nonifis had been for fome Ages endeavouring to de- flroy the Diflindion between the two Orders •, of which Bifhop Burnet gives a particular Account*, concluding it in thefe Words : " On this I have infifled the more, that it may appear how little they have confidered Things, who are fo far car- ried with their Zeal againft the ellablifhed Go- " vefnment of the Church, as to make Ufe of '-^ fome PafTages of the Schoolmen and Canoniils " that deny them to be diltinct Orders ; for thefe " are the very Dregs of Pcpery^ the one raifmg the ^' Priefls higher for the Sake of Tranfubflantiation, the other pulling the Bifhops lower for the Sake of the Pope's Supremacy, and by fuch Means bringing them almofl to an Equality." The like Obfervationwas before made by an eminent Archbi- fhop,whofays : "We mayjuftly afcribe the reviving " of the Aerian Herefy in thefe latter Days, to the " Dilpenfations of the Court of Rome^^ho licenfed E " ordinary '^ Hi.ft. Ref. Vol. I. p. 366. 4C (C 26 THEAPPEAL Sect. «' ordinary Priefts to ordain^ and cGUJirm^ and do ^* " the molt eflentiai Offices of Biihops. So their Schools do teach us, a Trieji may he the extraor- dinary Minifter of Priefthoody end inferior Orders by the Delegation of the Pope. Again, "ihe Pope *' may confer the Power of Confrridticn upon afimple *"• Priefl. By fuch exhorbitant Praclices as thefe, *f they chalked out a Way to Innovators. And yet *' they are not able to produce a Precedent of fuch " Difpenfation throughout the primitive Times*." But to come to the ^leflions and Refolutions^ Extra6ls from which make fo great a Figure in the Irenicum : The Manufcript is publifhed at large by Burnet -[-, excepting an OmiiTion to be mentioned prefently. Therein we find Cranmer\ Anfwer to the loth QiiefLion, in the Words quoted by the Dodlor ; but the Reader will not forget the l^ime of his giv- ing this Anfwer, Vv^hich was about ten Years before our prefent Oiiices for Ordination were compofed. However ftrange Cranmer''^ Opinion may appear to have been at this Time, there is (Irong Proof that he altered it imjmediately. For in the fame Copy <5f Qiieftions and Refolutions, Dr. Leightonh An- fwer to the I i th QjLiefton is : "I luppofe that a Bilhop hath Authority of God, as his Miniiler, by Scripture to make a Priefl ; but he ought not to admit any Man to be a Priefl, and confe- crate him, or to appoint him to any Minifhry in " the Church, without the Prince's Licence and " Confent. And that any other Man hath Au- *^' thority to nvike a Prieii by Scripture, I have not ^' read,, nor any Example therof." To the 12th Qiieilion Leighton anfwers : " 1 fuppofe that there " IS ' Brhnil-ali's Works, p. 431. f Hii>. Rci. Vol. I. Ccikciion, p. 2ci. DEFENDED. 27 " is^a Confecration required, as by Impolrtio.n of Sect. *' Hands -, for fo we be taiicrht in the EnfamDle of iht ^• " Apoftles." Nov/ Durellm his Vindicia %s, that: having had an Opportunity of exazr.ining the ori- gmal Manufcript, he found xh2^ Crmmer g^ve Mr Confent to thefe two Opinions of Leightcn, fiiblcrl!> ing to each Th : Cantuarien/is -, which very maten?! Information is omited by Bifhop Burnet'^ Why miingfieet left out this PaiTage is plain ; it inter- fered with the Defign of his Irenicum : But why Burnet^ omited it is doubtful. For that he had no Intention to tranfmit Cranmer's Character to Pofte- rity as Eraftirm, is evident from his Remark in the Body of his Hiftory. " In Crajimer's Paper, fays " he, Ibme fingular Opinions of his about the Na^ " ture of ecciefiaftical Offices will be found ; but " as they are delivered by him wi;h all poiTibie " Modelly, fo they are not eftabliHied as the Doc- " trine of the Church, but laid afide as particular " Conceits of his ov/n, and it feems that after- zvards he changed his Opinion. For he fubfcribed the Book that was foon after fet out, which is dtremy contrary to thofe Opinions fet down in '^ thefe Papers." § Dr. Chaunccy proceeds : The BifJocp of St. Afaph, Br. rhirlehy^ Br.Redmayn and Cox ^ ere all (fthe fan e Opinion with the Archbifljop, viz. that " Biihops and ^•| Priefls were at one Time, and were not twoThino-s, ^^ but one Office in the Beginning of Cbriil's Reli- " gion." I fee no great Heterodoxy in this Opinion, if properly explained. It is now generally aareed by the Advocates for Epifcopacy, that/> the Beginning of Chrifs Religion, Biihops, and Prieils or Prefby- ters, were fynonymous Terms : Confequently, they * Lowth, on the Subjea of Church. Fo^^r,• p: 4^4. -t Vol. I. p. 289. > f t i- were jj8 THEAPPEAL Sect, were at one Time^ and not two Things. But the ^- Word Bijhop in the nth Quellion, feems to have been underftood ii) its appropriated Senfe. The Qiieftion is. Whether a Bijloop hath Authority to make a Prieft hy the Scripture., or no ? And whether any other but only a Bijhop may make a Prieft ? To this Dr. Cox anfwers : " Bifliops have Authoritv, '' as is aforefaid, of the Apoftles, in the loth Quei- *' tion, to make Priefts, except in Cafes of great *' Neceffity." In his Anfwer to the loth Quellion, p which he refers, he had made this Diftindion, Bifi)ops as they be now, i. e. as fuperior to Prefby- ters ', in which Senfe therefore he afferts in this Place, that they have Authority to make Priefts. Dr. Redmayn anfwers the Queftion thus : " To " the firft Part, I anfwer. Yea ; for fo it appear- " eth, "Tit. i. and i Tim. v. with other Places of " Scripture. But whether any other but only a Bi- *' (hop may make a Prieft, I have not read, but « by fmgular Privilege of God.~As for making,^ ' ^' that is' to fay, ordaining and confecrating of " Priefts, I think it fpecially belongeth to the Of- " fice of a Bifhop, as far as can be fliewn by Scrip- *' ture, or any Example, as I fuppofe from tlie " Bee-inning ;" and with him agree Thirlehy., Sym- fnons^ Rohertfon^ Leighton and others. In fhort, they generally agree in anfwering affirmatively to - the firft P^rt, and negatively to the fecond Part, oi the Queftion •, an Exception being made by fome of them for Cafes of great Necefiity. But let us return to Dr. Chauncey : In this ftayne Reign (of Edward VI.) in a public Declaration., fubfcribed by the Archbiftdops of Canterbury and York., eleven BiJJoops., and many other B o 31 or s and Civilians., it is e>:prefsly ajferted, that '_' in the New-Teftament - ^ ^ ■" "^ "no DEFENDED. 29 "-^ no mention is made of any Degrees, or Difdnc- Sect. " tion of Orders, but only of Deacons or Miniilers, ^* " and of Priefts or Bifhops -,'' for which v/e are re- fered to Bttrnet and NeaL I fhall not trouble my- felf or my Reader with Neal^ who generally follows the Irenicum in thefe Matters. As to Burnet^ upon confulting him I find the Declaration here menti- oned, .copied from a Manufcript in the Cotton Li- brary*. It is entitled, jl Declaration made of the FunBions and divine Inftitution of BifJjcps and Priefis. But how the Doclor could afcribe it to the Reign of Edward VI, after examining Biiliop Bur- net on the Subje6t, is inconceivable. It has evi- dent internal Marks of its being of a more ancient Date ; and the Biihop puts it as far back in the Reign of Henry VIII, as 1538 at leafl, and proves that it could not have been made later than the Be- ginning of the Year he alTigns. For it v^as fub- fcribed by Edward Fox^ Biihop of Hereford^ v/ho died in May 1538. This Declaratlt)n therefore v/ill not be admitted as an Evidence, that the Refor- mers in the Reign of Edward VI, believed diffe- rently from what they exprelTed in the pubhc QfHces. Our Adverfaries have often boafted of late, that our great Reformer Crajimer was altogether in their Sentiments, concerning the Origin and Nature of ppifcopacy. But I trull fufficient has been faid to prove, that they have no juft Reafons for Triumph, on this Account. Time was when Cramner was a Papiil, and believed the Do6lrine of Tranfubflanti- ation. This, with the other diftinguiiliing Doctrines jof Popery, he renounced by Degrees ; in Confe- quence of an honefl" and faithful Examination of them f Vol. I. Addenda, p. 321. THE APPEAL them in SuccefTion, one after another. Is it then fair, or can it be reconciled with that common Juf- tice which is due to him as a Man, to fay nothing of his eminent Chara6ler, to alledge againft him in the Reign of Edward VI, after he had firmly fet- led himfelf upon proteflant Principles, any Opi- nions he entertained before he was a Proteftant ? At the Time indeed when he exprefied himfelf, in the Manner that has been mentioned, on the Sub- jedl of Epifcopacy, he was not a Papift -, but it may be faid with equal Truth and Propriety, that he was not yet a compleat Proteftant. In Regard to fome Points, he was ftill under the Influence of old Prejudices, and of the Im.preffions he had re- ceived from the Schoolmen and Canonifts ; from v/hich however it was not long before he perfe6bly difeno;ao;ed himfelf. After the Time of his fub- fcribing to Dr. Leighton's Opinions concerning E- pifcopacy, I find in him no Fluctuation of Princi- ples •, but many Proofs appear of his fettled and fteady Belief that Bifhops are fuperior to Prefbyters, by apoftolical Inftitution. In 1548, he compiled a Catechifm^ or '' large Inftru6lion of young Perfons *' in the Grounds of the Chriftian Religion ;" in which, if we may believe Bifliop Burnet^ " he jully " owns the divifie Inftitution of Biftiops and " Priefts." In this Book the Archbiftiop alfo pub- liftied his Sermon, of the Authority of the KeySy Upon Rom, x. 13, 14, 15. in which Sermon his Notions of Epifcopacy and Church-Government are fo high, that even the highflymg Dr. Ilicks^ as fome have called him, reprinted it at large, in his Pre- face to 7ke divine Right of Epifcopacy ajferted. Now let it be remembred, that this Sermon was publiftied in 154S— that the Ordinal w^s compiled in 1550 — and that Cranmer ^2i% the principal Perfon concerned DEFENDED. 31 concerned in that Work -, and then let it be judged, "Sect. whether, according to my Anfwe^er^ the Confidera- tion who were the Compilers of that JVork^ will in the leaft contribute to overthrow my Pofition, ' that the Church of England is epifcopal, and '- confequently holds the NecelTity of Bifhops to * govern the Church, and to confer eccleliailical ** Powers.' From Cra?imer^ I might go on to vindicate the Sincerity of the other Compilers of the Ordinal^ from the fame injurious Impeachment ; but I have already exceeded the Limits I propofed for this Subjed:, and I imagine what has been offered is fuf- ficient to fatisfy all reafonahle Perfons — and it is vain to attempt the Con virion of others. From the Reign of Edward VI, the Do6tor carries us to the Days of ^een Elizabeth^ p. 11 \ when according to him, // was only determined^ in " the Articles of Religion agreed upon^ to be agree - *' able to God's Word •," which feems to be all that he can difcover in Favour of Epifcopacy. But does he not fpeak, in this very Pafiage, of Qiieen Elizabeth's Re-efiablifhment of Church Government f Now what Form of Church-Government did She re-eft ablifh^ but that Form which had been before eilablilhed by Edward VI ? And has not this been fhewn to be truly epifcopal ? Is not then the Re- eflablifhment of Epifcopacy fomewhat more than a bare Determination^ mentioned in the Articles of Religion agreed upon ; altho' it is there only faid to be " agreeable to God's Word ?" Neither is this, as the Author of the Irenicum thought it, a low and diminutive Exprejfion^ when advanced in Oppofi- tion to thofewho denied it to be " agreeable to God's " Word." 32 THE APPEAL Sect. « Word." For if Epifcopacy be agreeable to Scrips ture, fo far as any Form of Church-Government is diredlly cppcfite to Epifcopacy, it is contrary to Scripture. If this were faid of that particular Form for which the Do6lor is an Advocate, how- ever diminutive he might eiteem it, I fancy he would not confider it as a low Expreffion. But we need not have been detained with the foregoing Particulars ; for we are more roundly told, p. 12, that /^/V Notion of the Right of Bijhops to govern and ordain^ as being Officers in the Churchy fuperior to Prefhyters by divine Appointynent^ was^ as the excellent Mr. J. Ov/eny^j^, " first promoted in " the Church of England, by Archbifliop Laud.'* This, Dr. Chauncey calls the plain ^ruth., and would doubtlefs have us receive it as the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth. But of dW plain Truths, this is the moil myfterious. There may indeed be fome fecret Meaning in the Word promoted., which I do not com.prehend •, but until it be unfolded, I mufl take the Liberty to believe that the national Efta- bhjfhment of this Dodrine, again and again, and making it a fundamental Principle of our Reforma- tion, was doing fomething to promote it. If the Meaning be, that none before Archbifhop Laud-, contended for the Superiority of Bifhops over Prefbyters by divine Appointment., in their Writings or publick Difputations -, ftill I muft deny it, as I am able to produce abundant Evidence to the con- trary. Among the firit Set of Englilh Reformers, the DovStrine of Epifcopacy was not difputed, other- wife than in the Way of friendly Enquiry, which foon ended in a general Confent to the Do6trine. Soon after the Accefhon of Queen Elizabeth., it was received and eilablifned as a Dodrine fairly fettled DEFENDED. . 33 fettled by the venerable Reformers ofKmgEdward's Sect. Reign, without a particular Re-examination. V/hen I- . the Englilh Exiles returned, amongftthe foreio-n Prejudices imported from Frankfort and Geneva, we find no fixed Difaffedion towards epilcopal Govern- ment. For even Calvin himfelf had no Obje6lions to a moderate Epifcopacy, fuch as that of the Church of England, Some of thefe Perfons fcrup- ied wearing the Habits, objected to the Terms of Conformity, and caviled about fome Parts of the Liturgy. For feveral Years thefe were the only Subjedls of Debate between the Church and the Puritans, as they were now called ; and it is not to be expeded that, during this Period, we Ihould find any elaborate Defences of epifcopal Govern- ment. But afterwards, when the Hierarchy came to be formally attacked by Cartwrlght, Udal, Penry and the other IFhigs and Centineh of that Reign' It was vigorouHy defended upon the Footing of a divine Appointment. Even Mr. Neal allows, that the Validity of Ordination by Prefbyters began to be difputed and denied, towards the Middle of this Reign « IVhitgift, fays he, was the firfl that de- " tended the Hierarchy, from the Pradice of the third, fourth, and fifth Centuries, when the Ro- man Empire became Chriflian; but Bancroft divided off the Biihops from the Prielthood, and advanced them into a fuperior Order by divine Right, with the fole Power of Ordination, and the Keys of Difcipline ; fo that from his Time " there were reckoned Three Orders of Clergy in " the Englijh Hierarchy, viz. Biiliops, Priefts '^'^ and Deacons." He aifo fays, " die Qiieen and " the later Bifiiops would not part with a Pin out \/' of the Hierarchy f." From whence it isev-dent, F that t Hiftory of the Puritans, Vol. I. p. 467, Dublin Edit. <( iC 34 T H E A P P E A L Sect, that whatever the excellent Mr. J. Owen may have thought, or Dr. Chauncey may now think, it v,^as not the Opinion of their great puritanical Hifto- rian, that the Do6lrine of Epilcopacy by divine Appointment^ v/as fir si pr emoted in the Church cf England by Archbifiop Laud, The firfl regular Attack upon the Hierarchy of the Church of England was made by the Puritans in 1572, in their Adynonition to the Parliament •, the Defign of which, among other Things, was to fubvert the eccleliallical Government by Biihops. Dr. Whitgift^ then Vice-Chancellor of the Uni- veriity of Cambridge^ was thought to be a proper Perfon to give " an Anfwer" to it. Upon this Service he was put by Archbifhop Parker^ and he performed it with great Approbation and Appkufe. Strype fays of his Anfwer, that it was an " excel- " lent Bock, containing a very learned and fatis- " fadtor/ Vindication of the Church of England^ " and the Ufages thereof, and efpecially o'f the " Government of it by Bifnopst." We alfo learn from the fame Hiftorian, that " as Archbifhop *' Parker was the chief Perfon that fet IVhitgift " about this Work, fo he gave him confiderable " AlTiftance therein, and the feveral Parts of the *' Copy, as it was finifhed, v/ere fent to him from " Time to Time, to reviev/ : And Cooper^ Billiop " of Lincoln^ another of our learnedeft Bifhops, " together with other Bifhops and learned Men, " were confalted withal. — So that this Book may " be juflly efceemed and applied to, as one of the " public BooIls of the Church of England^ con- *' cerning her ProfefTion and Principles ; being of " the like Authority, in Refped to its Worfnipi " and X Life of Whit gift, p. 33. DEFENDED. 35 " and Government, in Oppofition to the Dlfcipli- Sect. " narians, as BiHiop JevjeVs Apclogy and Defence, !• " in Refpe6l to the Reformation and Doilrine of " it, in Oppofition to the Papiftsl]." Upon vvhat Principle he defended the Governmaent of the Church by Bifnops, we may learn from Sir F. Knollys^ a great Patron of the PuritPuns •, who fome Years afterwards, fpeaking of Dr. JVhitgift''^ Writings in this Controverfy, complains that he '' had claimed, in the Right of all Bifliops, a Su- " periority belonging to them, over all the inferior " Clergy from God's own Ordinanc.e§." In 1583 Dr. JVbitgift was promoted from the See of IVcr- cefter to that of Canterbury^ in which he continued for many Years, giving frequent Proofs of his fleady Adherence to the fame Principles with Re- gard to Epifcopacy. I will content myfelf with laying before the Reader, the following remarkable Inftance. In 1593, he wrote a long Letter to Beza^ expollulating with him for intermedling, in the Manner he had done, in the Difputes between the Church of England and the Puritans •, in which Letter is a Railage, v/hich I v/ill take the Freedom to recommend to the ferious Attention of Dr. Chauncey^ as it will tend to re6tify fom.e of his No- tions concerning Epifcopacy. " We make no " Doubt," fays the Archbilhop to that eminent Proteftant, " but that the epifcopal Degree, which " we bear, is an Inflitution apofcolical and divine ; " and fo always hath been held by a continual " Courfe of Times from the Apofdes to this very " Age of ours. For as for what you feem to hint " out of Hierom -divA Auguftine \ as though 'Cufliom " only, and that but latter, prefered BiPxicps* to " Prefbyters ; it is a Wonder to me, that you fliould F 2 " wreft !j Life of Whitgift, p. 43. ' § Ibid. 342. 36 THEAPPEAL Sect. « wrefl their Sayings to that Purpofe •, and that you ^' " Ihould not fee by other of their Books, what they, as well as other Fathers, thought of this. And why you bring in the mention of Amhrofe^ I do not fufficiently apprehend. For neither what Ambrofe faith of the firll Pre(byter fucceeding " the Biihop deceafing, nor what of the Elders " that were wont before thofe Times to be admitted " unto the Councils, can by any Pretence look this " Way. You may remember, learned Sir, the Be- " ginnings of that Epifcopacy, which you make ;j " to be only of human Inftitution, are refered by " the Fathers, with one Mouth, to the Apoftles, as the Authors thereof; and that the Bifhops were appointed as SuccefTors of the Apoftles } efpeciaily in certain Points of their Fundions. " And what Aaron was to his Sons and to the Le- " vites^ this the Bifhops were to the Priefts and " Deacons \ and fo efteemed of the Fathers to be | '' by divine Inilitution*." Amongst thofe who fignalized themfelves in de- fending the Caufe of Epifcopacy, was Dr. Ban- croft^ who fucceeded Whit gift in the See of Can- terhiry. But I need no more than to mention this Inftance, fmce it is fo plain that even the Centinel found himfelf obliged to contradidl the general Af- fertion of Mr. J. Owen and Dr. Chauncey^ and to confefs that Dr. Bancroft in 1588 preached up (by a fmall Miftake he fays, firjt preached up) in the Church of England^ after the Reformation^ that Bi- fjjops were of divine Right., an Order fuperior to Prefiyters-\, As to what he tells us immediately ^fter .* Life of Whit gift, p. 460. f Centimh Numb. XII. in a Note. 4C DEFENDED. 37 after, that Archbijhop IVhitgift faidy he rather wtjh- Sect. ed^ than believed it to he true •, this is incredible in !• itfelf, and feems to reft altogether on Neal's Au- thority, This Hiftorian, in his Account of Ban- croft's Sermon, refers to no other Evidence than Strypeh Life of Whitgift •, and in that Book the Anecdote is not to be met with. But near this very Time, viz. in 1589, the Archbifhop in Anf- wer to the Calumnies of Martin Mar-Prelate^ fays, *' that he was perfuaded, that there ought to be *' by the Word of God, a Superiority, among the *' Minifters of the Church ; and that it was fuffi- ciently proved in his Book againft Cartwright : And that he was at all Times ready to juftify it by the holy Scriptures, and by the Teftimony of all Antiquity*." This clearly fhews, in Oppofi- tion to Neal and the Centinel^ that the Archbifhop did not wijhy but believe Dr. Bancroft's Dodrine to • be true. The Controverfy concerning Epifcopacy having fceen excited and vigoroufly urged againft the Church, by Cartwright and his AiTociates, it be- came the Obje6l of pubhc Attention. On this Occafion, the Queen's two great Counfellors, the Lord Treafurer Burleigh and Secretary Walfing- ham^ thought fit, in the Year laft mentioned, to have a Conference on the Subjedl with Dr. Hut ton., at that Time Bifliop of Durham, The Bifhop wrote a particular Account of the Conference to the Archbifhop, in a Letter, dated October loth, 1589, which is preferved in the Appendix to the. Life of IVhitgift •, and therein it appears that he very earneftly endeavoured to fromote,, with all his Abilities, the Notion of the Right of BifJoops to govern., &:c. * Life of Whitgift, p. 304. 38 THEAPPEAL Sect. ^q. And as he was known to exprefs the Opinion of the other Bifhops, Strype obferves, that in the Do6lrine and Arguments he advanced, " we may *' fee and underftand, what were the Judgments of " the Bifhops of the Realm, and the learnedeft " Divines in thofe Times, nearefl the Reformation " of this Church, and fo beft knew the true Con- " ftitution of it." About this Time Dr. Bilfcn^ aftenvards Bilhop of Winchefler^ wrote his Book, entitled, " The " perpetual Governir^ent of Chriit's Church," which w^as pubiiflied in 1593. The firft Edition of this Book is now before me ; and from the A uthor's own Account of it in his Preface^ I will prefent the Reader with the following Extrads. " In the A- " poilles, I obferve, fays he, four things needful " for the firft founding and eredling of the Church, " tho' not fo for the prelerving and maintaining " thereof j and four other Points that muft be per- " petuai in the Church of Chrift. The four extra- " ordinary Privileges of the apoftolic Fun6tion " were, their Vocation immediate from Chrift, not " from Men, nor by Men ; their Cemmijfion ex- " tending over all the Earth, not limitted to any " Place \ their Direction infallible, the Holy Ghoft " guiding them, v/hether they wrote or fpake •, " and their Operation wonderful, as well to con^ " vert and confirm Believers, as to chaftife and re- " venge Difobeyers. Without thefe Things the " Church could not begin, as is eafily perceived ; " but it may well continue without them. — The " other four Points of the apoftolic Delegation, " which muft have their Permanence and Perpetu- *' ity in the Church of Chrift, are the difpenfing of " the Word \ adminiftring the Sacramjcnts -, im- " pofi ng DEFENDED. 39 *' pofing of Hands ; and guiding the Keys to open Sect. " or lliiit the Kingdom of Heaven. The firft ^• *' Two, by Reaibn'^ they be ordinary Means and *' Inftruments by which the Spirit of God worketh " each Man's Salvation, muil be general to all " Pallors and Prefbyters of Chrift's Church-, the " other Two, by which meet Men are called to " the Miniftry of the word, &c. there is no Caufe " they fhould be committed to every Prefbyter, as " the Word and Sacraments are. For as there can " be no Order, but Confufion in a Common- ^' Wealth where every Man ruleth, ib would there " be no Peace, but a peftilent Perturbation of " all Things in the Church of Chrift, if every " Prefbyter might impofe Hands, and ufe the *' Keys at his Pleafure." Again : " Who fucceeded " the Apoftles, whether all Prefbyters equally, " or certain chief and chofen Men, one in every " Church and City, trufted with the Government " both of the People and Prefoyters, I have large- " ly debated, and made it plain, as well by the " Scriptures as by other ancient Writers paft all " Exception, that from the Apoftles to the firR: *' Nicene Council, and fo all along to this our Age, " there have always been leiecled fome of greater *' Gifts than the Refidue, to Hicceed in the Apof- " ties Places, to whom it belonged, both to mo- " derate the Prefbyters of each Church, and to take the fpecial Charge of Impofition of Hands ; and this their Singularity in fucceeding, and Su- periority in ordaining, have been obferved from the Apoflles Times, as the peculiar and fubftan- *' tial Marks of epifcopal Power and Calling." I have been the larger in thefe Extracts, becaufe of the judicious Diftindions contained in them, as well as on Account of the Scarcenefs of that va- luable AC iC «c 40 THEAPPEAL Sect. luable Book, of which the Authors of the Biogra- ^' fhical Di5fionary gives this Chara6ber, that " it is " efteemed one of the befl Books in Favour of *' Epifcopacy." In the next Year, viz. 1 594, Hooker began to publilli his immortal Work, the Ecclefiaftical Po- lity^ wherein the whole Syftem of Church-Govern- ment is examined from its firft Principles, and the Church of England^ particularly its Hierarchy, is defended with fuch Force of Argument and Per- ipicuity of Method, as are an Honour even to the Age in which he wrote. But this Book is fo well known, that I need not be particular. All that I fhall fay is, that the Author was fo perfedlly fatisfied of the Goodnefs of his Caufe, and the Strength of his Defence, that after he had finifhed it he called upon his Adverfaries in thefe memo- rable Words : " We require you to find out but one Church upon the Face of the whole Earth, that hath been ordered by your Difcipline, or hath not been ordered by ours, that is to fay, by epifcopal Regiment, fince the Time that the *• bleffed ApoiUes were here eonverfant." By this Time a Number of the ableft Pens in the \ Kingdom were employed in defending the Church, | againft the Arguments, and Cavils, and Calum- nies, with which it was fiercely affaulted by its Adverfaries. Amongft others that engaged in its Defence, was the learned Dr. Saravia^ formerly a Minifter of the Dutch reformed Church, and then a Prebendary of Canterbury^ who alio in the fame Year publifhed his Book in anfwer to Beza^ de di- verjis Minifirorum in Ecclefia Gradihus \ wherein he more particularly pleads the Caufe of the Englifh Hierarchy, _. DEFENDED. ^t Hiays * See this Matter related at large by Colliery in his Eccla. Mift. Vol. II. p. 701, a.s well as by Peirce. See alfo Gre/s Anf- Wer to Peirce, p. 143. 48 t H E A P P E A L Sect* t)ays of Archbijhop Laud, telling us, again fronx- ^* the Irenicum^ that if we come lower to the I'ime of King James ^ his Majefty himfelf declared ir; Print as his Judgment^ " that the civil. Power, in any " Nation, hath the Right of prefcribing what ex- " ternal Fbr^ of Church-Government it pleafes, *' which do"th mod agree to the civil Form of Go- *' vernment in the S.tate." And thus the Religion of the Church of England is made to be altogether a PARLIAMENTARY RELIGION. This Gentleman muft be fuppofed not to be ignorant to whom he is indebted for the Weaponsf of his literary Warfare •, but it may not be amifs to obferve to others, that this general Charge againft our Reformers was firft drawn up by Bellarmine^ Saunders^ Doleman^ Harding^ and other Papifts, in Revenge for their rejecting the Pope's Supremacy ; and that the Enemies of revealed Religion have all along endeavoured to fupport them in the Charge. The Point has been ftreniToufly laboured by Tin- daly the moft inveterate of the deiftical Tribe v and ^ fome of our late Adverfaries have not been afhamed to follow him as their Leader. Even the good Do6lor himfelf has honoured his Book of the Rights^ with a fecond-hand Quotation. Now, that thefe two Bands, the Papifts and Deifts; Should be re-inforced by fome of the hot-headed extrava- gant Writers on the Side of the Diffenters, is not to be wondered at ; but that a Man of the Dodor's Coolnefs and Prudence Ihould be feen to' " go " down" to thefe " Philiftines to Iharpen his Mat- " tock," is a little furprizing. But without pur- fuing fo obvious a Refle6lion, I will proceed im-=' mediately to the Do6trine of the King's Supremacy, as maintained in the Church of England^ and in- quirer DEFENDED. 49 quire whether it is fairly reprefented in the above- Sect. quoted PafTages* ^* r HAVE already proved that the Church of En- gland has conftantly aflerted an Authority purely Eccleftaftical^ derived from Chrift as its proper Source and Author ; and confequently not from the Crown, or the civil Conftitution. Thus, for Inftance, the Power of Ordination, and Authority to adminifter the Word and Sacraments, have al- ways been exercifed upon the Footing of a divine Appointment, The Church alfo claims a farther " Power to decree Rites and Ceremonies, and Au- *' thority in Controverfies of Faith," as belonging to her by Virtue of this Appointment ; which Claim has been acknowledged and fupported, by all our Kings and Queens fmce the Reformation*". Unlefs therefore the Church is inconfiftent with herfelf, and believes an Authority to be derived from Chrift, which She believes not to be derived from him, but from another Fountain \ She can- not hold that the regal Power and Supremacy ex- tend to Matters of this Nature, any farther than to controul and regulate the external Exercife of fuch fpiritual Authority. In what Senfe fhe maintains the Do6lrine of the King's Supremacy, is exprefied with great Clear- nefs and Precifion in her 37th Article. " The " Queen's Majefty hath the chief Power in this " Realm of England^ and other her Dominions, H " unto * Sec the Authority and Authenticity of the /r/? Claufe of Art. XX, clearly proved and defended in J Vindication of the Church of England^ &c. in Anfwer to Friejhraft in Per* fedion. See alfo Bennetts Hijlory of fhe Articles^ and Collier's! Ecclejia/iical Hifory, 50 THE APPEAL Sect. " uiito whom the chief Government of all Eftates ^* " of this Realm, whether they be ecclefiaflical or " civil, in all Caufes doth appertain, and is not, " nor ought to be fubjed: to any foreign Jurifdidli- " on. Whereas we attribute to the Queen's Ma- jefly the chief Government, by which Titles we underftand the Minds of fomt Jlanderous Folks to be offended ; we give not to our Princes the mi- niftring of God's Word, or of the Sacraments, the which Thing the Injun6l:ions alfo lately fet forth by Elizabeth our Queen do moil plainly teftify : But that only Prerogative which we fee to have been given alv/ays to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himfelf, that is, that they " fhould rule all Ellates and Degrees committed to " their Charge by God, whether they be Ecclefi- '' allical or Temporal, and reilrain with the civil " Sword the flubborn and evil Doers." More Power than this, we give not to our Princes ; and lefs, I believe, is not claimed by the fupreme civil Governors of any Kingdom or Republic upon Earth. In the Injunctions to which the Article refers, the Queen fays : " Her Majefty ^' neither doth, nor ever will challenge any Autho- " rity, other than that was challenged and lately *' ufed by the faid noble Kings of famous Memo- ^' ry. King Henry VIII, and King Edward VI, " which is and was of ancient Time due to the " imperial Crown of this Realm : That is, under *' God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over all " Manner of Perfons born within thefe her Realms, " Dominions and Countries, of what Eftate, either '' Ecclefiaflical or Temporal, foever they be ; fo " as no other foreign Power fhail or ought to, have *' any Superiority over them." Such DEFENDED. 51 Such Power as is attributed to the Crown in Sect. the Article^ and explained in the Injiin^ions^ is ne- •^• cefTary to preferve the Independency of every State and Kingdom at all Times ; and the vigorous Ex- ertion of fuch Power was found to be peculiarly neceffary to carry on the Reformation, wherever it was attempted, John, Ele6lorof Saxony^ refolving to refcue himfelf and his Dominions from the def- potic Authority of the Roman Pontif, and to efta- blifli the Doctrine of Luther^ alTumed to himfelf that Supremacy in ecclefiaftical Matters, which the Church of England allows to be the Right of all fovereign Princes. In Order to fecure and per- fed; this new Eflablifhment, he ordered a Body of ecclefiaftical Laws to be drawn up by Luther and Melancthon^ and to be proclaimed by Heralds throughout his Dominions. This was in 1527, while our King Henry VIII, was in Subje6lion to the papal Yoke, and not long after he had drawn his Pen to defend the Pope's Caufe againft the Doctrine oi Luther. The next Care of the Eledlor was to dif- place all fuch of the Clergy as were either vicious or illiterate, and to fupply the Churches with fiich as were moft eminent for their Piety and Abilities, By thefe wife and fpirited Meafures, the protefliant Religion was firmly eftablifhed in Saxony^ and be- came ^ble to fupport itfelf againft all the Force and Arts of its Adverfaries. The illuftrious Ex- ample of this Eledlor was foon followed by other Princes and States in Germany., and the like Sue- cefs attended their Proceedings*. The fame Ex- ample was alfo followed in England., as foon as the Refolution was taken to reform the eftablift:ied Religion. H 2 ' If * Mopem'% Ecclefiaflical Hillory Vol. II, p. 37, I. 52 THE APPEAL Sect. If we examine our 37th Article, it is evident that the main Defign of it is to guard againft the Jurifdi6lion of the Pope, and to fecure to our Princes that Supremacy in ecclefiaftical Matters, which the reformed German Princes and States had fo fuccefsfully exerted, and which, by the Englijh Conftitution, is one of the moll ancient and un- doubted Rights of the Crown. At the fame Time it is farther evident, both from the Article and the Queen'j Injun^iions^ that the Church was believed to have certain Powers of a fpiritual Nature, which this Supremacy does not include, and which our Princes are fo far from pretending to convey, that all Manner of Right to exercife them in their own Perfons is therein formally and exprefsly dif- claimed. If Queen Elizabeth had believed that all ecclefiaftical Authority flow*d from the Crown, contrary to her own folemn Declarations •, there was a Timt wherein She could have hardly avoided to ' betray thefe Sentiments : I mean, after the Depriva- tion of the Popijh Biihops, when ihe undertook to fupply the vacant Sees with Men of other Prin- ciples. It was with great Difficulty that She was ^ able to procure proper Perfons to perform the firft Confecration % and had She been of Opinion that She had the Power in herfelf, it is more than pro- bable, that, in thofe Circuniftances, She would have imm.ediately and directly invefted Dr, Parker with the archiepifcopal Office. But to fuch a Power She had no Pretenfions herfelf ; and She believed, that neither Henry VIII, nor Edward VI, pretend- ed to more, than " under God to have the Sove- <' reignty and Rule over all Manner of Perfons/* whether Ecclefiaftical or Temporal, But DEFENDED. 53 Eut E)r. Chauncy fays, that in both thofe Reigns Sect. the Bijhops took out Commiffions from the Crown like ^' other State-Officers. The moft exceptionable Com- mifTion of this Nature, in either Reign, was grant- ed to Bonner^ in 1539. The Commiflion at large is in Burnet's Colle^ion^ and the Subftance of it, as tranflated and abridged by him, is as follows : " That fince all Jurildidion both ecclefiaflical and *' civil flowed from the King as fupreme Head, '' and he was the Foundation of all Power •, it be- came thofe who exercifed it only at the King's Courtefy, gratefully to acknowledge, that they had it only of his Bounty •, and to declare that they *' would deliver it up again, when it fhould pleafe " him to call for it*." This, I believe, muft be the Commiflion which tl\e Doctor alludes to. He is pleafed to fay that the Bijhops (in the Plural) took out fuch a Commiflion, and affirms that // is in Fa5i true \ but Bifhop Burnet^ after all his Exa- mination, fays, " whether the other Bifhops took " out fuch a CommifTion from this King, I find *' not." The Language of this CommifTion, as has been acknowledged, appears to be exceptiona- ble i but its Meaning may notwithftanding be harm- lefs. What was intended by it muft be learnt from the public Deekrations of thofe Times relating to the Subjed. And it is in Fa5i true^ that it was then the Dodlrine oi the King, of the Bifhops, of the Nation, that Authority to adminifter the Sa- craments and to perform other fpiritual Offices, is derived, not from the Crown, but from Chrift. This Doctrine was clearly and fully maintained in the " Inftitution of a Chriftian Man," as has been fhewn from Collier. In the Cabala or Scrinia Sacra^ is publifhed a Letter of Henry VIII, to the Convo- cation ? liifl. Ref. Yol. 1. 1>. 267. I. cc cc cc 54 THE APPEAL Sect, cation of the Province of Tork^ explaining the Su- premacy; but in Language which may appear fomewhat uncouth at this Day. Herein fays the King ; " If you take fpiritualij?us for fpiritual *' Men, that is to fay, Priefts, their good Ads, ** and Deeds worldly ; in all this, both we, and all Princes, be, at this Day, Chief and Head ; af- ter "whofe Ordinance, either in general or parti- cular, they be ordered and governed. In all *' thofe Articles concerning the Perfons of Priefts, *' their Laws, their Adts (whofe Perfons and Laws *' he here alfo, as in the Statute -Book, calls fpiri- tual) and Order of living, forafmuch as they be indeed all temporal, and concerning this prefent Life only ; in thofe we be (as we be called) in- deed, in this Realm, Caput-, and becaufe there is no Man above us here, we be indeed Supre- " mum Caput : As to fpiritual Things, meaning by *' them the Sacraments, (including Orders) being '' by God ordained, as Inftruments of Efficacy and *' Strength, whereby Grace is, of his infinite Good- *' nefs confered upon his People ; forafmuch as *' they be no worldly nor temporal Things, they *' have no worldly nor temporal Head ; but only " Chrift did inftitute them, by whofe Ordinance *' they be miniftred here by mortal Men, eled:, " chofen, and ordered, as God hath willed, for that Purpofe, who be the Clergy ; who for the Time they do that, and in that Refped, tanqjiam Minifiri verfantur in his^ qua Hominum Potefiati non fubjciuntur ; in quibus^ Ji male verfantur Jim Scandalo^ Deum Ultore?n hahent \ fi cum Scandalo^ Hominum CogJiitionis et. Vindicla efl. Such Things, as although they be amongft Men, yet they be indeed divtna^ quoniam fupra nos^funt ni- .« hit iC cc to be a Matter of fuch Importance, that the Re- port of it was immediately propagated and carried even to diftant Places — and that, in difputed Cafes, it was eafy to difcover, whether the Perfon was, in Reality, a Bifhop or not \ or, fuppofing the con- trary, that no one would receive epifcopal Confe- cration fi'om fuch Hands. We know alfo from Scripture, that if fuch a Succeffion is as necelTary, as, upon a fpeculative Examination, it appears to be, Chrift has promifed to preferve and continue it " to the End of the World." With thefe vari- ous well affeded to the Government, and gave as good Proofs of it, as any Men in the Kingdom ; and I can recolieft no more than 5ii« Nonjuror that appeared in theControverfy. What does the Centinel think of Archbilhop Potter^ of the Bifhops Hare a.nd. S/^er/ocAy and of the Dodlors Snapgy Rcgtrs and Siebbing, who diftinguifhed themfelves on theOccafion ; to fay nothing of the Body of the national Clergy reprefented in Convoca- tion, who, by their very learned Committee, complained of Bifliop Hoadlyy among other Things, for *' the Contempt " thrown by him upon a regular Succeffion of the Minillry, ** and of the epifcopal Order in particular r" Were thefe ail Nonjurors and Jacobites ? Such Nonjurors and Jacobites are the American Clergy ; among whom I know not one, who is not firmly attached to his Majelly King George** Perfon, Family and Government, or who, notwithilanding fome fly Hints to the contrary, looks upon himfelf to have any more Concern with the Defcendants of James U, if there be any, than with the Defcendants of liardU o* Edgar Alhsling* ^4 THEAPPEAL $ECT. bus Kinds of Evidence we are abundantly fatisfied I ^' and until the Objedrors are able to bring pojitivd Proofs that the SucceiTion has been interrupted, we fhall not recede from the Claim. The only Proof of this Natiire iatterhpted by the Dodlor is in a Not^, where he gives this In- formation : Mr. Petoy the Hiftorian^ fays^ that the Church of Englandy as well as the Scotch Churchy *was at firfi panted and governed^ without Bifhops until Bifhops were fent from Rome. And there cannot he any good Evidence produced^ that there were any Bifhops in England.^ until Auftin the MoHk was fent from Rome. But Dr. Burn., a much better Autho- rity^ fays, " The ancient Britons are believed to *' have had at leaft one Archiepifcopal See before *' the Times of Auftin the Monk., vi^. at Caerleony *' or (as fome will hate it) at Landaff'^P And Dr. Stilling fleet y to whom more Attention maybe paid by fome People for the Sake of his Irenicumy having carefully ftudied the Antiquities of the Bri- tifh ChurcheSy in his large Work on that Subje6i:, fays in p. 77. " I fee no Realbn to queftiori a Stic- " cefTion of Bifhops here fron^ the firil fouiiding " of a Chriftian Church. — Although, by the Lofs " of Records of the Britifh Churches, we Cannot draw down the SuecelTion of BilTiops from the Apoftles Time, yet we have great Reafon to prefume fuch a SuccefTion, when upon the firft fummoning a Council by ConftantinCy three Bri^ tifh Bifhops appeared ; one out of every Pro- vince •, as they did in other Parts." Again, to the fame Purpofe in p. ^'^. " Although we cannot " deduce a lineal SuccefTion of Bifhops, as they " could in other Churches, where Writings were " preferved, * Ecclefiailical Law, Tit. Bishops. «( t;^ when he wrote his Vindication of the Church of Scotland, his fub- fequent Writings afford innumerable Proofs, that he afterwards h Sieved the Do^rine of Epifcopacy to be fupported, both by the Evidence of Scrip.- ture, and the Pradice of the primitive Churchy If Stillingfleet, when he wrote his Irenicum, and before he was 24 Years of Age, ivas, as the Doctor pro- nounces, as well verfed in the Fathers as any Man ; how much fuperior to any Man, in this Refped, muft he have been 20 or 30 Years afterwards, con- fidering the almoll uninterrupted Application of his great Abilities to Studies of this Nature ? Now ^t, and long before, that Period of his Age and Inquiries, this celebrated Writer condemned the whole Syftem of his Irenicum •, as indeed he great- ly departed from it within two or three Years of its firlf Publication. The Dodor may be inclined to pay more Deference to Stillingfleet Redtor of Sutton, than to Stillingfleet Dean of St. Paul's, or Bifhop of IVorcefter -, but others, I believe, will confider fuch Partiality as abfurd and prepofterous. I HAVE arrived, at length, to the End of this Sedion. And upon reviewing what has palled between us^ I can honeftly declare, that I am now more eftablilhed in my Adherence to ChillingwortFs Conclufions in dire5f Ccntradi5fion to thofe of the Dodlor, than at the Time of writing the Appeal ; more firmly believing that " epifcopal Govern - " ment" having " been univerfally received in the ^' Church prefently after the Apoilies Times," there could be " no fuch Alteration as is pretended" by Dr. Chauncy and others j and that " therefore Epil- " copacy" is not only " ancient and catholic," but truly " apoftolic." SECT. ^+ THE APPEAL Sect. U. S E C T I O N II. T^t ?^^'fTl'^^' ^^""^ been made to the fecond Sed.on of the Jppeal, wherein ' fire .r. (T.. ^r^'"^ F^^l'^r to the epifcopal Of- fice are fhewn ;' as they relate chiefly to the Evi- dence of Scripture explained by the Praftice of the piimmve Cnurch, fo far Ihall be pafled over, they coming not withm the Intention of the prefem De- fence. But a few Things of another Nature have been mterfperfed w,th thefe Objeftions, of which^t may be proper to take Notice. ' That the Reader might conceive juftly of the true Nature of the epifcopal Office, I hadK.'ht proper to make a D.ftindtion between ' the fevm ^L2n '^"a li ^''l '^'^"^ - Appendages' theiemto and thofe ' which originally and eifen- tially belong' to it. The Doftor'feemLo have no- thing tooppole to this Diftindion ; butyet ^o ca^- ry on the Appearance of differing from me in Op nion he ukes Occafion from it to objed? in p f " thatit isfo^i-j, unreafonaMe to add fuch Appendages to «, w ''^ " fr./^r^r. (Profeffors of what? Whether the Addition of fuch Appendages be rea fonable or unreafonable, is nothing to°me • and which ,s more, it is nothing to the Cafe of fuch an SwnT'" ^^ F«P°^^d ?or ^„W. I had fad nothing nor was it my Bufinefs to fay any Thine of Its being reafonable that thefe AppeldagL Sd be DEFENDED. g^ be added ; nor is it his Bufinefs as an Anfwerer to Sect. me, to fay any Thing of its being unreafonabk, ^- Much lefs was it his Bufinefs to objedt Appendages of this Kind to an Epifcopate, which it certainly is, and ever was, intended, fhall exifl without them. And yet both the Dodor and our weekly Adverfaries, have expended a great deal of Time and Paper in very impertinent Declamation upon this Subjed. I HAD Occafion to obferve, that ' he who has * a fmall Diocefs, has the fame epifcopal Powers, * as he that has a large one ; and it Matters not, ' as to the Validity of the A6t, whether it be per- * formed' by one or the other. The Doctor anf- wers, that it certainly does as to his Capacity to ferve the great Ends of his Office — and that there /V, in Proportion^ the fame Incongruity in placing Bilhops at the Head of large Diocefjes^ as in having an uni^ "uerfal One. This, confidered likewifc as an Anf- wer to me, and in no other Light are we authoriz- ed to confider it, amounts to no more than this ; that although what I faid is allowed to be true, yet Something that I did not fay is certainly falfe. The Thing which I did 7iot fay is, that a Bifliop is as able to ferve the great Ends of his Office \rx a large Diocefs, as in a fmall one. And yet if I had faTd this, unlefs the large Diocefs is fuppofed to be lar- ger than the largeft in any proteftant Country, or in the primitive Church, to which only I had Refe- rence ; and the fmall one, fmaller than the fmalleft, it would not have been fo very exceptionable. The larger DiocefTes in England have commonly been as ' well taken Care of, as the fmaller ones ; and fhould any of them hereafter, by an Increafe of the Inha- bitants, be found to be too large for the Diocefans, Provifion 86 THEAPPEAL iECT. Provifion is made that they may be afTiiled by Suf- *^' fragans, in Proportion as they are wanted. The Do6tor feems to judge of the epifcopal Charge, upon congregational Principles, confounding the Office of a Bifhop with that of a Parifh Minifler ; which is like confounding the Duty of a Lord Lieutenant of a County, with that of a Mayor of ^ Corporation. I SHALL now pafs on to his Exceptions in p. 42, to what I had laid of Aerius and Colluthus \ name- ly, that they were ' the firft Contrivers of Ordi- * nation' by Prefbyters. Concerning the former, the Do6tor endeavours to confole himfelf with thefe Refledlions, that Epiphanius was the firft that found Fault with Aerius^ and that Aerius was condemned net only and meerly for his Opinion concerning the Parity of Bifbops and Prefbyters. But as to Epi- phanius'*s being the firil Perfon that found Fault with Aerius^ why might not he have been the firft, as well as any other Perfon ? The Do6tor, I hope, knows, that Aerius and Epiphanius were Cotempo- raries •, the former broached his Herefy under Va- lentinian^ who was invefted with the Empire, in 364, and Epiphanius was made Bifhop of SalamiSy in '^66^ according to Bu Pin. If an Intimation is in- tended that Epiphanius was the only Perfon that, at firft, confidered the Dodtrine of Aerius as excep- tionable, or, in other Words, that the Parity of Bifhops and Prefbyters was generally admitted in the fourth Century^ the Suggeftion is groundlefs. The united Voice of Antiquity, and even the ConcefTi- ons of our moft confiderable Adverfaries, prove the contrary with invincible Evidence. If the Mean- ing be, that Epiphanius was the firft that wrote againft Aerius j the Chronology of th^ Fads ought to DEFENDED. 87 to be more exadlly afcertained, before any Thing Sect. material can be colleded from this Circiimflance. "' Epiphaniiis began to write his Book of HerefieSy according to Bu Pin's Account, in 374, but when Aerius firit made himfelf obnoxious, except in ge- neral that it was in the Reign of the Emperor Va- fentiniany extending from 364 to 375, I do not find. Perhaps it may have been but a Ihort Time before Epiphanius wrote againft him : — Or, fuppofmg it otherwife, perhaps Aerius himfelf, and the Progrefs of his Dodrine, were at firft too inconfiderable to deferve Notice : — and perhaps there may be Some- thing in the Cafe, which, at this Diflance, we can- not account for. If the Dodlor thinks this laft Sup- pofition can be of any Service to him, he is hear- tily welcome to it. If Aerius was not condemned only and merely^ it is fufficient for my Purpofe that he was condemned chiefly y for his Opinion concerjiing the Parity of Bi^ fhops and Prejhyters. And that this was the prin- cipal Caufe of his Condemnation, appears from all the Accounts I have met with. The learned Mofheim gives this brief Account of the Matter : " About this Time, Aerius^ a Prefbyter, Monk ^' and Semi-Arian, ereded a new Sed, and exci- " ted Divifions throughout Armenia^ Pontus^ and *' Cappadocia^ by propagating Opinions different *' from thofe that were commonly received. One of ** his principal Tenets was, that Bilhops were not diftinguilhed from Prefbyters by any divine Right •, but that, according to the Inftitution of the New-Teftament, their Offices and Authority " were abfolutely the fame. How far Aerius pur- " fued this Opinion, through its natural Confe- " quences, is not certainly known*." Thj ? Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, Vol. I. p. 202. 88 T H E A P P E A L .Sect. The Dodlor thinks I had no Need^ nor any Aed- ^' fon to join Colluthus with Aerius ; for he did not a5i in the Capacity of what Epifcopalians would call^ a meer Frejhyter^ in the Bufaiefs of ordaining •, but aS a Bifhop. But I thought it a very fufficient Reafon for joining him with Aerius^ that he adted in that Capacity^ when he was, in Reality, no more than what Epifcopalians would call^ and the Orthodox . of that Age did call, a meer Prefiyter. The true ~ State of the Cafe of Colluthus may be gathered, from the fy nodical Epiftle of the Birfiops of Egypt ^ 'Thehais^ Lybia and Pentapolis — and from a joint Letter of the Clergy of the Province of MareotiSy , both preferved in the Works of Athanafius, The fynodical Epiftle of thofe African Bilhops, fpeak- ing of the Cafe of one Ifchyras^ whom Colluthus ordained, obferves : " This is the famous Ifchyras^ who was neither ordained by the Church, nor reckoned among the Prefbyters, ordained by Meletius, whom Alexander^ Bifhop of Alexandria^ received. How then came Ifchyras to be a Pref- byter, and by whom was he ordained ^ Was it by Colluthus ? For that remains to be faid. But Colluthus died a Prefbyter, fo that all the Im- pofitions of his Hands were invalid and null ; '' and all thofe, whom he ordained in his Schifm, *' are well known to have been reduced to the '' Laity." The Clergy of Mareotis give the like Reprefentation of the Matter. " Ifchyras who calls himfelf a Prefbyter, is not a Prefbyter, fmce h( was ordained by Colluthus^ who affumed an ima- ginary Epifcopacy, and was afterwards com-j manded by Hofius^ and other Bifhops fynodicalh ^ affembled, to return to the Order of Prefbyters, *' whereto he was ordained. And confequently all *' thofe, whom Colluthus ordained, returned to theii " formei cc cc cc cc cc (C cc cc cc DEFENDED. 89 " former Stations, and Ifchyras himfelf became a Sect. " Layman*." I leave it now with the Reader to judge whether Cclluthus acted in the Capacity of a meer Trcjbyter^ in the Buftnefs of ordaining^ or as a Biflocf •, and whether it was improper to join him with Aeriu.s^ or not. If after all, the Dodlor choofc^ to give up the Example of CoUuthus^ as not fa- vouring the Caufe cf Ordination by Preibyters, I certainly can have no Objection. It was faid in the Appeal^ *" that there is not aji * Inftance of Ordination by Profbyters to be found * in the Church for fevcral Ages.* Dr. Chauncy in his Reply, after remarking that tliefe Words imply that there are numerous Examples of epifcopal Or- dination within the fame Period, calls upon me in p. 44, very emphatically to produe one hiflancey within the long Period of 1 50 Tears from Chrijl^ of an Ordination by any Bif}:)op^ in any Part of the Chriftian PForld •, meaning by a Bifhop^ an Of- ficer in the Church of a fuperior Order to that of Prefhyters. So far all is very fair. But behold, Reader, a Curiofity. This very fame Challenge he made in his Dudleian LeBure^ p. 70 ; to which a formal and dired: Anfwcr has been given by Mr. Learning, His Words are as follow : " I will com- " ply with his (Dr. Chauncfs) Demand •, and I " hope he will allow the Authority of my Author. " I might produce many, but for Brevity's Sake, " fhall mention but one Inftance : And that is the " Ordination of Titus by St. Paul. That Titus had " an epifcopal Ordination, appears from the Charge " St. Paul gave him, Tit. i. 5. For this Caufe left " / thee in Crete^ that thou fhouldeft fet in Order " the Things that are wanting^ and ordain Elders in, N every • Fo««r's Theological Work*, Vol. II. p. 265. II. <( 90 THE APPEAL Sect. « every City as I had appointed thee. St. Paul " charged him alfo to rebuke with all Authority ; and ** again, a Man that is an Heretic^ after the firji and " fecond Admonition^ reje5i. Here St. Paul commits " to Titus the whole Power of ordaining Elders in " Crete^ and of governing them and all the Chrif- " tians in that liland. This Authority is clearly expreiled, and the Bounds, in which he was to exercife it, diftindly marked out. Thus it ap- pears, that this was an epifcopal Ordination in our *' Senfe of the Matter. Our Bilhops claim nothing " but the very 'lame Power, that St. Paul save to *' Titus over the Ifland of Crete-\''* Is not this a fair and full Anfwer to the. Dodlor's Demand ? Ought he then to be unfatisfied, when all that he afks has been given him ? Is it not very extraordi- nary that he fhould fo roundly repeat the Demand, without the leall Notice of Mr. Learning^ s Anfwer ? 1 have fometimes met with. Perfons who would al- ledge the Arguments of others that had been anf7 wered, and the Objections of others that had been confuted, without taking Notice of the faid Anf- wers and' Confutations -, but Dr. Chauncy is the firft: Man I have found in any of the Regions of Con- troverfy, that could,- without any Symptoms of Perturbation, deal thus with his own Arguments 'and Objections, after they had been formally anf- wered and confuted. As this and fome other Things are againil him, it is a Pity he " undertook" the "Work" of anfwer ing the Appeal^ without confulting his Brethren -, and '^ that he was" not •" afiiftcd in it, as-— to the Management" of fomc particular Parts of it, " by Direction from fo •' learned and able a Body of Men." Had he ** been favoured with fuch diftinguifhing Advan- " cages," t Defence of the Epifcopal Government, p. 61. D E F E N D E D. ~ 91 " tages," the few Blemifhes upon the Face of his Sect. Compofition might have been avoided. The Doclor, in p. 45, pronounces me to have been egregkujly miftaken^ i^f^-y^^^^f that from thefourthCentu- ry, until the Beginnwg of the Reformation in fhefi>:teenthy '' rio Inftarxes worthy of Notice occur, to favour ' , Ordination by Prefbyters :' And to convince me of "my egregious Miftake, he points out, by the AflilVance of Mr. Daniel IVilliams and Mi . Thomas Walter^ the Example of the Waldenfes, But upon Examination it will be found, that thofe two Gen- tlcriien happened to be egregioujly miflaken them- felves. We have already feen,. that the Bohemians had Bifliops confecrated by the IValdenfes •, which fhews that the IValdenfes then really were, and by o- thers were known to be, Epifcopalians. They were , moreover fuch High-Flyers^ that they claimed an uninterrupted SucceiTion in the Line of Bifhops, as fuperior to Pr^yters, The Bohemian Church, in their Preface to the Book called. Ratio Difcipli- nj^y Ordinifque ecclefiafiici inUnitate Fratrum Bohe- morum, fay T " And whereas the faid fValdenfes " did affirm that they had lawful Bifhops, and a " lawful UNINTERRUPTED SUCCESSION FROM THE " Apostles unto this Day-, they created Three " of ourMinifters folemnly Bifhops, andconfered " upon them Power to ordain Minifters.*" One of the mofl celebrated modern ecclefiaflical Fliflo- rians, • For this Account I am oblige4 to the Author of the In- validity of the dijjhiting Minijhyj in Anfv/er to Mr. Q-wen ; and he farther informs us, that by a ^//V/' read in the Churches throughout England^ for obtaining for the if'glden/es charita- ble Aflillance, not long before his writing, wliich was in 17 17, it clearly appeared, that they were epifcopal Churches, like the Church of England, for which they always pray in tihirir Liturgy. 92 THEAPPEAL Sect, rians, who is far from being partial to the Caufe of ^^' Eplfcopacy, giving an Account of the IValdcnfes in the twelfth Century, lays of them : " The Go- ** vernmenc of the Church was committed by the IFaldenfeSy to Bifhops, Prefbyters and Deacons ; " for they acknowledged that thefe three ecclefi- *' aflical Orders were inftituted by Chrill himfelf |j." But of all Authors, Dr. Allix appears to have made the mod effectual Examination into the Hillory of thc^TValdenfes^ and to have underilood it the moil: perfectly. This very eminent Writer in his Re- war ks upon the ancient Churches of Piedmont^ has abundantly proved, that the Waldenfes always pre- fervGcl, undi:r all their Perfecutions and Difperfions, the fame Form of Church-Government, from the Time of their Separation from the Church of Rome in the eleventh Century ; and that they diftinguifhed their Clergy into three Orders, vix. Biiliops, Priefts and Deacons. He proves this even from the Tefti- monies of thofe Enemies, who endeavoured to fix upon them the Reproach of allowing the Laity to preach and adminiiter the Sacraments. He proves it more fully from their own Writers, and even from the Example of that very Leger^ whom Dr. Chauncy^ following Mr. Walter^ has introduced to give Evidence to the contrary. For heger himfelf was a Waldenfian Bifhop for twelve Years before his Death, exercifing all the Powers that belong to the epifcopal Office* Thus having examined all that has been offered on the other Side, I find my- felf more firmly eftablifhed, by the Dodtor's Op- pofition, in my Belief of the Propofition advanced m the A-ppal^ ' that the uniform Pradice of the * Church for L500 Years, may be added to the * Evidence 11 Moftieim*s Ecclcfia/lical Hiflory, VoL I. p. 617. DEFENDED. 93 * Evidence of Scripture, in Support of «hc Ne- S ' celTity of epifcopal Ordination.' We now come to the Subje6l of Confirmation, i Tl\e Dodor pafles over what I had faid of its Na- ture and Ufefulnefs •, the Reafon for which, is left to the Reader's Sagacity to difcover. But he favours me, in p. 47, with fome critical Remarks upon the Paragraph, wherein I had made anObfervation,that the Church of Ejigland declares of Confirmation^ " that it hath been a folemn, ancient and laudable '' Cuftom, continued from the Apoftles Time-,'^ and wherein I endeavoured to fhew the Meaning of that ExprefTion. My reafoning upon this Head he ftyles eminently curious^ and cries out, demonftrahly argued ! Is Infallibility the peculiar Privilege of the Church ? But had he attended to the Paragraph, he might have feen that my Defign therein was, to prove what the Church of England believes concerning the Antiquity and Origin of Confirmation •, and not to afcertain the Truth of a difputed Fa5f, by the Au- thority of the Church of England's, AfTertion. However the Do6tor has gained this Advantage by his Miftake •, he has fhewn that he is able occa- fionlly to enliven and embellilh his Style with rhe- torical Decorations. By his interrogating whether Infallibity is thQ peculiar Privilege of the Church of England, one would be apt to imagine, that he claimed the Privilege of Infallibility for other Churcjies, and particularly for thofe of the Colo- nies •, but I hope this was not intended, and that there is in Reality nothing more in it than a fmall Slip of his Pen. l^ p. 49, I am accufed of unfairly quoting a Text of Scripture 3 a Crime which I hold in Abhorrence. Defignedly ECT. u. 94 T H E A P P E A L Sect. Defignedly to niifreprefent any common Author, is a • Species of Injiiftice which no honefl Man will ever confent to practice ; but to treat the infpired Wri- ters of holy Scripture in this Manner, is impious and abominable. I am lorry Dr. Chamcy could think me capable of committing fuch a flagrant Ad of Impiety, knowingly and wilfully ; and yet from fome of his ExprelTions, I conclude that he thought me, or, at leaft, that he intended his Rea- ders ftiould think me, capable of doing fo. The Text which I am charged with mifquoting, is A^s XIX. 6, which he has heedlefsly marked A5is xx. 7. The whole Verfe is thus : " And when Paid had *' laid his Hands upon tliem, the Holy Ghofl came " on them ; and they fpake with Tongues and *' propheficd." I am charged with fupprefling the latter Part of the Text, becaufe if I had given the whole Verfe, // would have been, at once,\'ifibk to the Reader^ that. it would have been nothing to my Purpofe. Would not any one from hence conclude, that I looked upon the latter Part of the Verfe, as overthrowing the Dodrine which I was aiming to eftablifh by the former Part of it .? Would he'^not infer, that I had carefully concealed from the Rea- der thofe Words which made againft my Defign ? Whereas, in Truth, I neither looked upon^'thc . Words at firft omited, as really unfavourable to my Argument ; nor did I mean to conceal them, for that or any other Reafon ; nor did I, in Fad, conceal them, but foon after produced them in the Form of an Objedion, and gave them all th^ Con- fideration I thought necefTary. To fet this Matter in a proper Light, I muil obferve, that the former Part of the Verfe in Qiief- tion, in p. 21, of the Appeal^ is introduced as be- ing DEFENDED. 95 ing exa^Iy parallel with another Text quoted in the Sfct. preceding Page. Without going on to the End of ^^'' the Verle, but only to the End of the Parallel, I made a Stop (the Do6tor fays I Jhameftilly flopped fhort) to point out, how exactly the one Defcrip- tion anfwered to the other, and to ihew that they both manifeftly related to the lame Office of Con- firmation. I then went on to anfwer the Objedlions that might be fuppofed to arife, againil my Inter- pretation ', and amongft thefe Objections, I placed before the Reader thofe very Words, which I am accufed of having kept out of Sight. Whoever will be kind enough to turn to p. 23, of the appeal, will find that I aded fairly with the Objeclion, and endeavoured to do it Juflice. From whence it is evident, that I could have had no Delign to fup- prefs or conceal the Words in Difpute ; or cKc that I failed of my Defign, fmce I adlually did not fup- prefs or conceal them. I might indeed have quoted them in clofe Connection with the preceding Pare of the Verfe ; but I thought it fufficient to quote them, when I fliouldcome to confider them. WheVi I confidered them, I fuppofed no Perfon would ob- je6t them, who did not know their Connexion as ufed by the facred Hiftorian •, the Knowledge of which I had no Defire to conceal from any one. %y this Time I hope tiije Reader is fatisfied, that 1 am free from the Guilt imputed to me ; and that the Dodor has, I will not {a,YjbamefuIlyy but however hdt 'much to his Honor, mifreprefented the whole Matter. He concludes what he has to fay oh the $ubje(!t of Confirmation, with a long Extradb from the Dijfenting Gentleman's Anfwer to Mr. White \ the Defign of which is to fhew, that the Bilhop has nOt Warrant to fronotince^ in the Adminiftration of that O/fiec, \ 9^ THEAPPEAL Sect. Office, a Man's Sins all forgiven, and himfelf re- • generated by the Holy Ghoft. In Anlwer to this Harangue, it will be fufficicnt to give the Words of Mr. IVhite. " I have now, fays he, only to clear ^1 up one or two FafTages in the Office for Con- ^'^' firmatron, and to relcue them from the perverfe " Interpretation of this Writer, The'lirft is th-t ^'^' w'lierein the Bilhop declares, concerning thofe !c T^f /°"^^ ^^ Confirmation, that God has voucb^ ^ fafed to regenerate thofe his Servants by Water and *' the Holy Ghoft, and given them the Forgivenefs of *^' all their Sins,^ This he is pleafed to underftand ^^ as a Declaration concerning their prefcnt State, " and an AfTurance that they are, all, though fome ^^ of them may be abfolute Strangers to the renewing ^1 hifluences of God's Spirit^ and faft bound in their " Sins, in a State of Grace and Acceptance, and ^^ need not doubt of their Salvation. Whereas, " It IS very plain, from the mention of Water, and their being regenerated thereby, that it is only declarative of the State they were put into by Baptifm, they having received therein, or ^^ being thereby intitled to the Holy Spirit, and the ^^ Forgivenefs of all Sin. — But though the State ^^ which they were put into when they received ^^ their Baptifm, was, doubtlefs, the State which ^^ IS here meant, yet, for Argument's Sake, I will ^^ admit what this Gentleman begs me to admit ^^ (for he offers no Proof of it) that the Bilhop ^^ means the State they are fuppofed, at prefent, ^^ to be in. And now we will fee, if this Decla- ration from the Bifhop, even in this View, be '^ really fuch an unwarrantable and prefumptuous * one as our Author reprefents it to be, and is not fairly defenfiblc. *' Let THEAPPEAL 91 '-''■ Let it then be obferved, that this Declara- Sect. '' tlon is made, not feparately to each Individual, ^^* '' but to the whole AiTembly-, the whole Multitude *' of thofe who prefent tliemfelves for,Confirma- " tion. And as the far greater Pai-t of thefe are *' very young Pcrfons, whom the Biihop may rea- " fonably, or in the Judgment of Charity, believe *' not to be yet defiled, with the Polkuions that are in ** the World through Luft^ and moft of the Reft, " who are of advanced Years, Men feemingly " ferious, and having a Difpofiiion to real Flolincls, " and he does not know for certain, therc are any ^ *' amorigft them, but can only prefum.e, that, in fo great a Number, there may probably be fom.e of another Charader, I do not fee but the Biiliop is fufficiently warranted to make fuch a Declara- *' tion concerhing; them, as he does here. Nor " can I apprehend there is the leail Danger that a *' few Individuals, who are yet unholy, and in " their Sins, getting in amongft them, will take " Encouragement, and conceive falfe Hopes of the Safety of their Condition, from any fuch Decla- ration •, which they cannot but be fenfible Vv^as never meant to be applied to themfelves, or fuch " Kind of Perfons, as they muft needs know them- " felves to be." Mr. White then goes on to Ihew, in the Words of Dr. Doddridge^ that the fame Form of Expref- fion which is blamed in our Office for Confirmation, was commonly ufed by Chrift and his Apoftles. " Our Lord, fays Dr. Doddridge^ tho' he knew the " Wickednefs of Jtidas^ often addrefies himfelf to '' the whole Body of his Apoftks, as if they were '' all his faithful Servants, and makes gracious ^ Declarations and Promifes to the whole Society^ O which (C DEFENDED. Sect. " which could by no Means be applicable to this IT. /^ tome, that he iliould not fee, that, in the Place refered to, I was confidering the Church in it^riginal State, before it was taken under the ProteJ^lbn of the civil Power. I v/as not fpeaking of the Church of England m its prefent Situation, fupported and eftablifhed by the Laws of the King- P dona ic6 THE APPEAL Sect, dom •, nor of any other Church, in fimilar Cir- ^^^* cumflances. All Churches, whether Epifcopalian or Prefbyterian, which enjoy the Benefit of a civil Eftablifhment, have their Decrees feconded and inforced, in fome Inftances, by the fecular Arm. And if the Church of England rejects not the friendly Afliflance of temporal Authority ♦, neither does the Church of Scotland^ nor that of Genevdy nor any other, to whom it is offered. This Obfer- vation I beg Leave to illuilrate and confirm by an Example from Geneva^ which was produced in the Conference at Hampton-Court. " One Baltbafar^ *' a rich Widow in Geneva^ had a Ball in her " Houfe. This DiverJion is a great Crime by " CalvirCs Difcipline. It happened that a Syndick^ ** one of the Four chief Magiftrates, and one '' Kenrick an Elde}\ were Two of thofe that danced. " When Cahin underftood Avhat v/as done, he " convented them before a Confiftory •, and tho' they were delated by no Body, the Oath ex Offi- cio was put to them to extort Matter of Fad. — " In Hiort, Henrick the Eider— was turned out of " his Office, and /;;2/)r//tf;?^i for three Days. The " Syndtck was likewlfe fuipended from the Execu- " tion of his Office, 'till he had given fome Proofs *' of his Repentance for being at the Bali, This " Man refigiied to the Confiftory, did Penance '• upon their Admonition, and fo prevented his " Commitment. There were feveral others, who ** being examined by Calvin upon their Oath, con- " feffed they were at this dancing Entertainment, " upon which they were all fent to Prifon*." We fee here that Galvin fcrupled not to make Ufe of that temporal Power granted him by the Hepub- lic, but would depofe and iyn-prifon Men, as he thought • Collier's Ecckfiallical HiHory, VoL II. p. 602. DEFENDED. 107^ thought it would beft anfwer the Purpofes of his Sect. Difcipline. And now, before I return from Gene- ^^^* *vay I will only obferve, that the temporal Effe6ts of Excommunication there, are as dreadful, as the Do6tor, in the Words of the Bijfenting Gentleman^ has reprefented them to be in England. In fpeaking of Excommunication and ecclefi- aflical Cenfures, I had obierved, that in this Age they have loft much of their Weight ; which is owing to certain Caufes that were briefly intimated* The Dodlor brifkly replies, it- is readily acknow^ ledged the Difcipline' of the Church is held in Con- tempt hy Multitudes. But furely he muft know, that Men may defpife Things that are not in them- felves contemptible, and that they may affe5f to def- pife Things, at the fame Time that they really look upon them to be venerable. I have met with Per- fons who appeared to hold the Difcipline exercifed by the ChurcBes in the Colonies in as great Contempt, as the Do6tor, or any of his Party, can hold that of the Church of England, If Infidels and Liber- 'tines laUgh to fee how it is exercifed ; we may, in a ' great Meafure, thank thofe, who have taken fo much ungenerous Pains to reprefent it in a ridicu- lous Light. IT would he a Shame, fays the Do6lor) for a Man to fpeak in its Defence. We acknowledge the Difcipline of the Church to be defedlive, and fo far we undertake not to defend it : — I wifh fome others had the fame Ingenuity. But although we pretend not to defe7id it in every Refped,.yet much may be faid, and has been often faid, to excufe it. The Do6lor takes for granted that no Attempt for /^f^?-(/} has- been ever made. But in this he aflumes P ? more* io8 THE APPE AL Sect, more, than we choofe to allow him. He muft be a "^' Stranger to our Hiftory, who knows not that fome^; Attempts have been made with this View ; and there may have been Ibme fecret ones, of which ♦^; Hiftory does not inform us. Does he think that -^ nothing can be attempted, without public Noiie andt Clamour ? Or, is it reafonabie to be noify and i clamorous, when it is known that it can anfwer no [ valuable Purpcfe ? May not an indilcreet Zeal, in- this, as well as in other Cafes, do more Mifchief- than Service ? We are not afhamed to confefs, that we wifh for the farther Improvement of every Thing belonging to the Church -, of our Difci- plinc, of our common Tranflation of the Bible, of our Liturgy and public Offices.; which we hope in due Time to obtain, in a regular and peaceable Way •, until which Time we fhall continue to Ufe them in their prefent State : — Looking upon the Difcipline of the Church, defe6tive as it is, to be equal with that of our Neighbours — confidering our Tranflation of the Bible, however erroneous in in fome particular PafTages, as tolerable upon the whole — and efteeming our Liturgy, although ca- , pable of Hill farther Improvement, to be the beft upon Earth. The Do(5lor fpends fome Pages more, in difplay- ing the Qualities and Condition of a Thing, which he profelTes to believe has no Exiftence, i. e. Difcipline in the Church of England •, but as they confift chiefly of Extra^s from the Dijfenting Gen- tleman^ I muft refer thofe, who are defirous of fee- ing particular anfwers to thofe Extradls, to Mr. White^ I fhall take Leave of this Subje6t with obferving, that in thi§ Part of his Performance, the Dodtor fviffers his unbridled Imagination to run D E F E N D E D. 109 run away with his Reafon ; and that his whole Sect, Reprefentation is manifeftly fo uncandid, fo par- ^^- tial, lo hyperbolical, fa ranting, and, I may add, fo impertinent to his proper Bufinefs, that it merits a Rebuke, rather than a Refutation. If he fhould ever again undertake to give the Charader of the Church of England^ or of her Clergy •, I recom- mend it to him ferioufly to attend to the Apoftle's Diredlion : " Let all Bitternefs, and Wrath, and " Anger, and Clamour, and Evil-fpeaking, be put " away from you, with all Malice*." In p. 69, I am charged with Inconfiflency, and the Charge is thus fupported. I had faid •, ' In ' this State of Things, the Refloration of the pri- ' midve Difciphne feems to be a Matter rather ta ' be wifhed for and defired, than to be rationally * attempted by: thofe in Authority.* And yet^ fays the Dodlor, it; is propofed^ that thievery Thing %vhich cannpt rationally be attempted, Jhould not only be attempted^ hut carried into EffeB, The Thing that ia our Opinion, cannot rationally be attempted, is the Reftoration of the primitive Difci- plifie •, theThing therefore /^r^^d?/^^, according to this Reprefentation, is not only to athmpt^ but to carry into EffeEi (as indeed moft Attempts are propofed with a View of carrying Something into Effedt) the Reftoration of the primitive Difcipline. And yet, notwithftanding that we are allowed to have propofed this, we are in the very fame Page blamed for )iot propofmg it-r-for forming a Plan not adapt- ed to thtGofpeUInfiitution of Difcipline^ which we all know was the primitive StSind^ird. The Talk, I own, is fomewhat difficult, to juftify ourfelves for propofmg and not propofing, for attempting '-i>i; ; and *ij>L iv. 31. no T H E A P P E A L Sect, and not attempting, the fame Thing -, and it is ^^^' rather unkindly impofed vponus. But if we might be allowed to proceed In our own Way, we believe we could fatisfy all reafonable Perfons. Our Opi- nion is, that in the prefent State of Things, the Reftoration of the primitive Difcipline cannot be attempted, with any Profped of Succefs. If the Do6lor thinks otherwife, let him try the Expe- riment with his own Congregation, which I fup- pofe to be not more than comihonly intradlable ; and when the Attempt is fairly carried into Effe5f^' if he will publifh a Narrative of his Procefs, fo fuccefsful an Example may animate and dired o- thers ; and then, if they refufe to follow it, he may blame them with a better Grace. We are farther of Opinion, that although it is proper and advifeable, for many Reafons, to leave the Difci- pline of the American Church, fo far as it relates to the Laity, in its prefent State ; yet, that it is neceflary, and at the fame Time very pradicablej with the Advantage of an Epifcopate, to eftabhjfh a ftridl Difcipline over the Clergy ; and therefore it is intended that ' the Bilhop's Power over them ' fhall be as full and compleat, as the Laws and * Canons of the Church dired.' But, is not godly Difcipline as needful for the Laity as the Clergy ? Some godly Difcipline for the Laity we already have ; we can repel from the Communion thofe whom we difcover to come with an unworthy Diipofition ; and, in this Country in particular, we DARE to repel, any Blafphemer the three Kingdoms afford^ even when he comes to demand it as a Qualification for an Office in the Ar- my or Fleet. Other Kdis. of Difcipline we are able to exercife over the Laity -, and, confidering the Provifion m. DEFENDED. 1 1 1 Provifion made by our Laws for the Punifhment Sect. of many of thofe Crimes, which in the primitive Ages had no other Rcftraint than the Difciphne of the Church, any farther Exertion of ecclefiaftical Authority over the Laity, is perhaps rendered lefs neceflary. Thefe Sentiments are not contradidled in the Appeal •, for therein I did not make it one main Article of my Complaint^ that ' the People, ' being fenfible of the Clergy's Want of Power, * find themfelves free from all Reftraints of eccle- ' fiaftical Authority,' I only reprefented this as being in Reality the Cafe. BISHOPS undoubtedly, as Siiccejfors to the A- foftles^ are as much vefted with Authority to govern the Laity as the Clergy •, but, after the Example of St. Paul, they may think themfelves not obliged to exercife it with Severity, fince it is given them '- to Edification, and not to Deflrudionf." If therefore they fhould judge any Plan, for a greater Extenfion, or a more vigorous Exertion, of eccle- fiaftical Pov/er over txhe American Laity, would tend more to Beftrufuon than to Edificatio7iy they are warranted to reje(^t it •, and if they have a Right to rejedl it, they may give Affurances of iuch a Rejection. But does not this Diftinction imply that the Church-Clergy are much vjorfe^ than the Laity ? All that I can conceive to be implied in it is, that greater Advantages are expefed from^ increafing tlie Reftraints of the Clergy, than of the Laity ; or, at leaft, that in the Cafe of the Clergy, \t is more pradic able. The long Extrad from Biiliop Burnet^ begi ning p. 70, Ihews that the Bilhop, at the 7 ime begin- ne of f 2 Cor* xiii. IQ. 112 THE A-PPE A L Sect, of writing it, thought there were many Things irt the Church that wanted Amendment -, and if he had undertaken, with the fame Freedom, to give his Opinion of the Diffenters, he would probably have prefented us with a no lefs dark and gloomy De- fcription. The Qiiotation from Mr. Peirce, about the Right of Patronage, is as foreign from the Dodor's Bufmefs, as an Argument would be about the Colour of Aaron's Linen Ephod. Therefore ^ -pafTing over this, and, for the fame Reafon the Qiiotation from Dr. Croffs^, which he might have told us he borrowed from the Biffenting Gen-- tleman^ I fhall proceed to what more nearly con- cerns me. Whether we are right or wrong in that Part of our Plan which relates to the Laity, it might be expeded that a Propofal for bringing the Clergy under a ftrid Difcipline, would meet with no Ob- jedions from thofe, who frequently reproach us with the Want of it. For certainly it is better that fome Part of any Society fhould be duly governed, than that no Part Ihould. But we arc fo unlucky as to be oppofed, as well in our Scheme for exer- cifmg Dilcipline over the Clergy, as for not exer- cifmg it with more Severity over the Laity. In p. 75 and "]-], the Do6bor thinks to incum- ber us with this Objedion, that our Plan for the Government of the Clergy cannot be executed in the Manner we propofe, unlefs the eftahlijhed Mode of § Dr. Crofts was anfwered by Bifhop Burnet, in *' a modeft " Survey of a Difcourfe, entitled, The naked Truth, or the true ** State of the primitive Churchy by an humble Moderator.'' See a chronological Account of the Works of Bifhop Burnet, fuf- fixed to the lall Edition of his Hijlory of his o^-wn Times, in 4 Vols. 8vo. DEFENDED.- 113 of Bifcipline Jhould he fo changed^ as to he quite dif- Sect. feroit from what it is in England. I am glad to ^^' fee it granted that the Church of England has an eftabliflied Mode of Difcipline, fo foon after a De- nial that "^Ix^ has any Difcipline at all. It fliews that the Dodlior is not incapable of feei-ng and re- tracting his Errors. But as to the Mode of our Difcipline, he need not give himfelf any Concern on that Account. It has always been intended, that the Mode of it here, under an Epifcopate, fhall be different from what it is in England, The EfTen- tials will be the fame, but the Manner of Admi- niftration will differ, in many Refpeds. The Bi- Ihop's Authority here, will be purely Ecclefiafli- cal ; but at Home, temporal Power, a Non-Ef- fential, is joined with it. There., many tedious Forms mull be attended to and obferved ; but here., every Thing may be done in a more fummary Way, and no farther Delay will be neceffary, than what will be required for a due Information, con- cerning the Fadls upon which Camplaints fhall be founded. BUT., fays the Dodor, p. 77, // an Alteration is to be made., in the Mode of exercifmg Difcipline, ^ it is infinitely reafonahle., it Jhould firft take Place at Home., where it is moft needed. When it is effe^ed there., it will he Time enough to dejire it here. All Changes of ancient and eftabliflied Ufages in any Country, are found to be extremely difficult ; and the Dodtor feems not to be aware, how many Laws muft be repealed before fuch a Plan of Difcipline, as may be eafily carried into Effe^ here, can be executed in England — nor how nearly, fuch an Al- teration may be thought to affed the State. The whole Syftem of ecclefiaftical Laws muft be new- Q^ modeled. 114 THE A PPE AL Sect, modeled, and one half of the national Conllituti- on mufl undergo a very confiderable Change, in Order to which, not only the Bilhops and Clergy, but all the Branches of the Legiflature, mull be convinced of the Utility and Safety of the Mea- fure — before this Propofal can take Place in En- gland. But at the firft Settlement of an Epifco^ pate in the Colonies, the propofed Alteration of the cftablilhed Mode may be introduced, without any fuch Difficulties, and even with as much Eafe as " the Mode that is pradlifed at Home can be intro- duced. There is therefore no Reafon at all for waiting to fee it efFeded there^ before we defire it here ; much lefs is it infinitely reafonahle to do fo. If the propofed Mode is eligible in itfelf, and may cafily be obtained by us, why fhould we wait for thofe who cannot eafily obtain it, to fet us the Ex- ample ? In fpeaking of the Clergy under the Diftindtion of the Virtuous and the Vicious, it was obferved in the Appeal p. 32, that ' the Want of Bifhops * to fuperintend and govern them, is obvious at * firft View. If one Sort have no need of a Bilhop * to keep them to their Duty, yet fome Cafes will . * arife in the Difcharge of it, in which his Diredi- * on will be ufeful — and many Cafes, wherein his * Support and Encouragement will be needful — * and in all Cafes, his Friendfhip and Patronage * will give Life and Spirit to them in undergoing * the Difficulties, and performing the Duties of * their Stations.' Upon this Paflage Dr. Chauncy makes the following Animadverfion. But what is all this to the Affair of Difcipline^ the grand Point in View ? The Dolor's Bu/mefs here was^ to Jhew it to he neceffary that ftriSi Dtfcipline Jhould he efta- hlijhed DEFENDED. 115 blijhed with Refpe£i to the Clergy ; and he begins Sect. his /Irgtiment with a Ccfe^ wherein it is not needed ^^* at all^ p. y6. I have no Objedlions to. being re- minded of my proper Bufinefs^ when I happen to forget, or miftake it -, nor to being called to Order, when I wander from the grand Point in View. I can take fuch Interpofitions kindly, even from Dr. Chaunc)\ although he has forfeited all Right to interpofe in this Manner, by his own frequent Aberrations from the Point in View. I would only referve to myfelf the Privilege of being con- vinced of my Error, before I retrad: it *, which in the prefent Cafe I am not. If a Perfon were fpeak- ing of the NecefTity and Advantages of ciinl Go- vernment •, it would be natural for him, and not impertinent^ to make fuch Obfervations as thefe : That Subjedts may be diftinguiihed into the Virtu- ous, and the Vicious — that, although Government is more immediately neceflary to reftrain the Lat- ter, it will alfo have a good Effedl upon the For- mer — not indeed in the fame Way, but by the Ap- probation, Encouragement and Direction they will, in general, receive from their Superiors ; and by this means Benefit will redound to all with whom they are conneded. Now as Difcipline in the Church anfwers to Government in the State, I fee not why the fame Method of lUuftration may not be equally proper in both Cafes ; nor why the Sen- tence here quoted from the Appeal^ may not be pertinent to the propofed Suhje^ in Debate. If the Word Difcipline indeed included only the Idea of Punifhment, the Animadverfion would be juft ; but fince, upon the Authority of the beft Wri- ters, it may be extended to Government in gene- ral, in which large Senfe I manifeftly ufed it, it is hypcr-critical. But ii6 T HE APPE AL Sect. But, it feems, the Advantages expelled from •^^* an Epifcopate are chiefly imaginary. For was there now a Bijhop in whatever Part of America he would choofe^ the Clergy would notwithftanding be varioujly dijlant from him feme Hundreds of Miles ; infomuch that hut few of them could reap much Benefit either by his Dire^ion., Encouragement or Patronage. I am glad to find it allowed that fome few of them may- be near him, and reap the Advantages propofed. I hope alfo that fome Hundreds of Miles will be found, upon the Trial, not to be equal to fome Thoufands. If all the Clergy were to be kept at the Diilance of fome Hundreds of Miles, and were to have no Intercourfe or Correfpendence with the Bifhop, the Advantages expe6led would be truly chimerical ; but according to our Plan, there will not be a Clergyman within his Jurifdidlion, but muil be perfonally acquainted and maintain an In- tercourfe, with him, in a greater or lefs Degree. As to the EfFedts of the propofed Difcipline upon vicious Clergymen, it is argued in p. yy., that they are not to be expedled ^here, becaufe it is ob- ferved that Multitudes of Clergymen efcapc Pu- nilhment at Home. The Dodor's Multitudes may perhaps, with more Propriety, be called fome \ and that fome fhould efcape, that deferve, Punilh- ment, where the Number of Clergymen amounts to twelve Thoufand, is not to be wondered at. Are there not fome Inftances of this Kind, under the Prefbyterian Difcipline ? Have there not been fome, even in New-England ? But fuppofing the Number to be greater in Proportion in England^ than in Scotland or New-England ; it may be owing to o- ther Caufes, than the comparative Infufficiency of cpifcopal Government, or the Inattention of the _ Bifhops. DEFENDED. 117 Bifhops. There are in England fome Places that Sect. are exempted from the Bifhop's Jurifdidtion ; and ^' it is greatly owing to the Refuge and Prote<5lion which thofe Places afford, that fome vicious Cler- gymen efcape Punifhment. But the Cafe of the Clergy here, will always be different from what it is in England in fo many Refpefts, that it can never be juftly argued that the Bifhop's Power over them will be ineffectual here, from any Failure of it there. It is poffible that we may be too fanguine in our Expedlations •, but if an Epifcopate will produce one half of the good Effedts which we ex- pe6t from it, it muft be very delirable ; and we cannot but look upon every Attempt to defeat the Meafures taken to obtain it, as ungenerous and unchriflian. As to all the Purpofes of Government, the Doc- tor thinks they might be as well anfwered by Com- mijfaries ^ but both Reafon and Experience teach the contrary. Some Branches of the epifcopal Au- thority cannot be communicated to Commiffaries ^ and where it is otherwife, Power in the Hands of a Delegate of an inferior Rank, has never that Weight and good Effedl, as when exercifed by the Principal. For thefe and other Reafons, when Trial was formerly made of American Commiffari- es, they were found by no Means to anfwer the Purpofes of their Appointment. The Public has been affured, from Time to Time, that none of thofe Spiritual Courts^ againft which there is fo general a Prejudice, will be con- nected with an American Epifcopate. Some have pretended to fufped, that our real Intentions are different from our Profcflions j and Dr. Chauncy thinks ji8 THEAPPEAL Sect, thinks he has at lafl deteded us. For he has fa- ^^* gacioufly difcovered, that if an immoral Clergy- man is to be tried and condemned, there muft be Courts for his Trial and Condemnation. Where^ fays hep. 78, is the Cafe to he tried? Can it he tried any where^ conformably to the Mode of the efia- hlifhed Churchy hut in a Spiritual Court ? We are under no peculiar Attachment to the Mode of Practice in the ecclefiaftical Courts at Home, nor will American Bifhops be obliged to follow it. And , as to fuch Courts as may be ereded in this Coun- try, for the Trial of the epifcopal Clergy only, the Dodlor, I again fay, need give himfelf no Concern about them, unlefs he expeds to become an epifcopal Clergyman himfelf. For none have Reafon to objedl againft Things, but upon the Suppofition that they are to be, in fome Manner, affected by them. The popular Objedion againft fpiritual Courts^ is altogether founded on the Opi- nion of their being injurious, not to the Clergy, but to the Laity •, but where fpiritual Courts take no Cognizance at all of the Anions of the Laity, as it is intended that they never fhall in Americay this Objedtion vanifhes. IT is ohfervedy fays the Dodor, that * the Cler- * gy's being under the Eye of their Bifhop will * naturally tend to make them, in general, more * regular and diligent in the Difcharge of the Du- ' ties of their Office.' And what Objection can he make to this ? Why, // their being under the Eye of the omniprefenty omnifcient Gody will not make them regular and diligent ^ it is a vain Thing to expect that their being under ' the Eye of the Biihop* fhould do it. And with equal Truth and Propri- ety he might have faid, of all but Atheifts, that DEFENDED. 119 if their heing tinder the Eye of the omniprefent, cm- Sect, mfdent God^ will not reftrain Men from the Crimes ^^ of Fraud and Injuftice, it is a vain Thing to expe3 that their heing tinder the Eye of the civil Magif- trate fhould do it. That the perpetual Prefence and Infpedlion of the Supreme Being ought to have a greater EfFed upon Men, than the Prefence of any earthly Superior, I freely allow ; but that it does not adually produce this Effed, in innumer- able Inflances, is a melancholy Truth, and upon one Moment's Rccolledlion, the Do6lor muft con- fefs it. What then is to be done ? Muft Men be left to do " what is right in their own Eyes," becaufe they will not confider themfelves as under the Eye of the omniprefent^ omnifcient God ? Ought Criminals to go unpunifhed, becaufe they will not govern themfelves by the great Motives of Religion ? Or where thefe are incffedtual, is it impoflible that Men fhould be governed by Motives of a temporal Nature •, or can it confift with public Wifdom and the Safety of Society, that fuch Perfons Ihould not be reftrained by human Laws ? According to this Scheme of Politicks, it is unreafonable to exped any Benefit, either from Difcipiine in the Church, or from Government in the State. Farther Exception is taken at the Exprefllon, that the American Clergy will be under the Eye of their future Bifhop, as highly figurative. But fi- gurative as it is, it may be juftified by common Ufage. To fay of a Clergyman who is even in the immediate Prefence of his Bilbop, that he is under his Eye, is a figurative Expreflion ; and is never, I believe, underftood in a ftridt literal Senfe. To be under the Eye of a Superior, in common Language fignifies, to be within the Compafs of his I20 THE APPEAL Sect, his Obfervatioti and Notice. And this will, in fomc ^' Degree, be the Cafe of every American Clergyman, under the propofed Epifcopate. Allowing that a Number of them will \>q. fixed inCures^ fome Fifty ^ fome a Hundred^ and fome two or three Hundred Miles from the Place of the Biihop's Refidence ; yet by Means of Vifitations, and a free Correfpondence, -nothing very material can arife in a Clergyman's Situation or Condud, without the Bifhop's having early Notice of it : — Very early, in Comparifon with what it would be, if he were at the Diftance of a Thoufand Leagues. What follows upon the Subje61: of Difcipline, is either of no Confequence, or has been anfwered already : I fhall therefore now attend upon the Doctor, in his Objedtions to what was advanced, under the Head of Ordination. Among the Difadvantages, to which the Church of England in America is fubje6t, for Want of Ordination, the Danger of crofling the Atlantic^ for the Purpofe of obtaining Holy Orders, was re- « prefented as worthy of Attention. For an Illuftra- 1 tion of this Point, the following Fad was related.; * The exadl Number of thofe that have gone Home] * for Ordination, from thefe northern Colonies, is ' Fifty-two. Of thefe Forty-two have returned * fafely, and Ten have mifcarried •, the Voyage or * Sicknefs occafioned by it, having proved fatal to * near a fifth Part of them.' The Dodlor replies ; / have never heard of more than Two to whom the Sea proved fatal. If Eight more lofi their Lives by Sicknefs, it is no more than they might have done if they had tarried at Home, p. 8 1 . If he knows but of Two, to whom the Sea proved fatal, I can tell him DEFENDED. izi Ihim of feveral. Within a Year of the Time of 'Sect,* writing the Appeal^ Two perifhed in one Ship upon ^* the Coaft of New-Jerfey^ ahnoft in Sight of their Port ♦, one of whom left a Wife and Family of fmall Children in New-Tor k, without any other Means of Support, than the charitable AfTiftance of their Chriiban Neighbours. As to thofe that loft their Lives by Sicknefs, it is true, t^^y might have died // they had tarried at Home \ as thofe who pe- yifhed at Sea might have been drowned at Home in frefh Water. But the AfTertion is, not that they died abroad, but that they died of ' Sicknefs oc- * cafioned by the Voyage,'—-/, e, of Sicknefs, to which, in all Probability, they would not have been expofcd, were it not for the Voyage. And this is ftri6lly true of them in every In lance. Per^ haps the Do6lor may not think much of our Can- didates dying of contagious Diforders, fmce fuch are no more than what are called natural Deaths, and all muft die fooner or later. If he can be of this Opinion after recolle6ling, that fuch Perfons have been taken off in the h^rime of Life— juft as they were entring into public Stations, in which they flattered themfelves that they fhould be ufetul to the World — that they died in a foreign Land, at % Diftance from their deareft Friends and Connec- tions — I will not difpute it with him. But what does he think, of our Candidates being carried into Captivity— thrown into noifome Prifons in an Ene- my's Country — arid there languifhing, for many Months, under the moft hideous Forms of Diilrefs and Wretchednefs ? Even this has happened in fe- veral Inilances, and may happen again. BUl! he the Banger great er fmalU [ays he^ there is good Reafon to believe^ the going to England for R Ordi- 122 THEAPPEAL Sect. Ordination is rather an Advantage^ than Difadvan- ^^^* tage to the Church in Regard to its being fupplied with Minijlers, If going to England for Ordinati- on» notwithftanding the Danger and Expence that attend it, is an Advantage to the Church of En^ gland in America ; why would not going thither for Ordination, be alfo an Advantage to all the Churches of the Colonies ? And why is not this Ad- vantage generally purfued ? For although their Candidates may be ordained here, there is no Doubt but, if they fhould be found qualified, they might be ordained in England^ as well as ours. The Do(5lor declares that he Jhould efteem it a happy Cir- cumjiance in this Cafe^ was he inclined to take Orders ^ that he muft go to England for that Purpofe. If he was always of this Way of thinking, why did he not go to England to receive fuch Ordination as he has ? It is no fufficient Anfwer to fay that he could be ordained here ; for if he was at Liberty to go to England^ and if his going was confidered by him as a Thing defirable on the whole, it was ab- furd in him not to go. Nay, if he is of fuch a cu- rious or adventurous Turn, why does he not gra- tify it by a Voyage now, although he is not inclined to take Orders ? For, as I underftand him, he fpeaks in the prefent Tenfe. If a Man dcfires to go to England for a Thing which he might as well ob- tain without going *, he muft be equally defirous of going thither, if that Thing were intirely out of the Queftion. But all Men have not the fame DifpoGtion with the Dodtor ; and if many^ to whom he has menti- oned the Matter, have declared themf elves to be of the fame Mind^ there are certainly many others, I imagine a great Majority, who have different Sen- timents. DEFENDED. 123 tlments. When Dr. Cutler^ Dr. Johnfon and Mr. Sect. Browne^ declared their Conformity to the Church, ^^* and went Home from Conne^iiciit for Ordination ;. it is well known, that an Apprehenfion of the Dangers of the Voyage, was what prevented fe- veral other DifTenting Minifters of that Colony, whofe Names I could mention, all Men of the like excellent Character with thofe Gentlemen, from declaring alfo their Conformity, and going with them. This is a Fa6t which Dr. Chauncy muft be fuppofed to have heard of, and he can hardly have forgoten it. There have been frequent Inftances of the like Nature, of which probably he has not heard. Now with Regard to all fuch Perfons, it is a great Hardihip upon them, that they cannot obtain what they are defirous of having *, as it is a Hardihip upon the Church, to be precluded from the Benefit of their Services, while they are fo greatly wanted. Against the Complaint of the Expenftvenefs of a Voyage to England for Ordination, the Dodor advances an Objedlion, which carries with it the moft tremendous Appearance. As this Matter be- tween him and me has afforded fome Speculation to the Curious, I will ftate and explain it with par- ticular Care. It was faid in the Appeal^ p. 34, that * theEx- ' pence of this Voyage cannoi be reckoned at lefs, * upon an Average, than a hundred Pounds Sterling, ' to each Peribn' — and that it ' muft generally * fall upon fuch, as having already expended the * greateft Part of their Pittance in their Education, * will find it extremely hard t;o raife a Sum fuffici- ' ent for the Purpofe.' In Anfwer to this, the R 2 Dodor 1*4 T IT E A P P E A L Sect, III. Doa:or very candidly fuppofes I had never feen^ cr^ if I had^ did not remember at the I'ime of writings the Account of the Society fuhlifjed in 1706, in which they fay, '^ all young Students in thofe Parts " (the Colonies) who defire epifcopal Ordination, " are invited into Engknd -, and their Expences " in coming and returning are to be defrayed by *' the Society," p. 82. Again, he repeats this Ob- jedion in p. 90 ; the Society, fays he, has publickly . tnvtted into Engknd all young Students in thefe Parts, who defire holy Orders ^, declaring that their Ex- pence IN COMING AND RETURNING IS TO BE DE- PRAVED BY THE Society, ^his is the Fa^ truly ftated. The Complaint made in the Appeal is, that the Voyage is expeniive •, the Anfwer by Dr. €hauncy is manifeftly contrived to excite the Idea, that it is not expenfive. The Complaint fays, the Expcnce upon an Average, is a hundred Pounds Sterling, to each Perlbn ; the Anfwer leads the Reader to believe, that it is not a Farthing. But | this is not the worft of it ; the Anfwer appears to •' me to be artfully calculated to lead the Reader alfo to believe Something farther— namely, that con- cerning a plain Matter of Fa6l, with Regard to which It IS impofTiblc that any Miffionary cart be miftaken, I have publifhed to the World an abfo- lute, wilful Falfhood j a Fallhood, which I knew might be eafily deteded by any of our Adverfaries ; a Fallhood, which was known to be fuch, not only by every Miffionary on the Continent, but by every Member of the Society both here and at Home and by every Bifhop in the Kingdom. So that I fear the Dodor really intended to lead his Readers to believe me to have been in this Matter, both a notorious Liar, and abominably ftupid. I have freely mentioned what I ftrongly fufpeft, and what I know DEFENDED. 125 I know to be fnfpedled by many others. If he can Sect. exculpate himieit, f think it greatly concerns him III* to do it : Or if any of his Friends can clear him, it is in their Power to do him a moft material Ser- vice*. Nothing lefs, in my Opinion, can excufe him to the World and to his own Confcience, than proper Evidence that he himfelf believes, and has Reafon for believing, that I have actually been guilty of fuch bafe and abfurd Condudt, as his Infmuations manilefly imply. But that he believes any fuch Thing himfelf, he does not fay : He only fays, that the Socitty has, meaning upwards of 60 Years ago, publickly invited over young Students, promifing to del ray their Expences. This, not- withftanding its Appearance, is not in Reality any Contradiction to my Affertion, which evidently related to the prefent State of the Church, and not to the State of it in the Beginning of this Century. That the Society publiflied fuch an Invitation in 1 706, I believe to be true ; but it appears that the Invitation was only occafional, apd that none complied with it. It was not until feveral Years af- terwards, that the firft Candidates from this Coun- try went Home for holy Orders, before v/hich Time * The Author of & /^litions Letter from a Memher of the Societyy which has been pubiilhed in one of the Ne^-w-Tcrk Papers, has endeavoured to vindicate Dr. Chauncy from the Charges of Falfhcod and Infincerity, which had been brought againil him on Account of his Conduct in this Affair. But vnlcfs he fhould have the good Luck to meet with an abler and fairer Advocate, his Reputation muft fufFer, wherever ihe Cafe fhall be known. The Doftor has received and pub- iilhed the formal Thanks of his Brethren, for his Jnfnver to the Appeal ; it is hoped that they had no particular Reference to this Part of his Performance, when they paid him the Compliment. in. 126 THEAPPEAL Se^ct. Time the Invitation was recalled, or rather had ex- pired ; and neither they, nor any of their Succef- fors, fo far as I can learn, received Benefit from it. If the Dodor knew this, he muft have known that this antiquated Invitation of the Society, which never took EfFed, was no more an Anfwer to the Complaint againft which he alledged it, than if he had quoted one of the ancient Englifh Statutes a- gainft the Lollards. If he knew it not, he ought to have fufpeded his own Ignorance, and to have inquired into the Matter, when he found that it was fo publickly and boldly alTerted. ^ In a Word ; the "truth of Fa5i is, that the So- ciety are under no Engagements to defray the Ex^ peaces of Candidates in going home for Ordina- tion, and do not defray them, and, I believe, ne- ver have, fo much as in one Inftance, defrayed them, either wholly or in Part. In a few Cafes they have made Donations to Candidates, in Confidera- tion of fome extraordinary LofTes or DiftrefTes fuffer- cd in their Voyage, but never more that I know of, than a Compenfation for fuch extraordinary LofTes ; and they make it a Rule to advance half a Year's Salary to their MifTionaries, before their Embark- ation for America^ to enable them the better to de- fray their own Expences. As this Matter is far- ther explained in a late well-received Pamphlet, written in Vindication of a Sermon of the Lord Bifhop of Landaff, I need not enlarge upon it. The next Thing the Doctor controverts with me, is the following Obfervation. * Other Rea- * fons may have contributed to this general Want * of Clergymen in America^ but it has always been ' principally owing to the great Difficulty of ob- ' taining DEFENDED. 127 ^ raining Ordination.' This Opinion might be a- Sfct. bundantly fupported both by Authorities and Ar- ^^* guments ; but it is fufficient to confider wliat is objeded againft it. The Do6lor, after teili g us that the New-England Miflions are generally filled, afks,upon my View of the QdS^^why Jhould the Diff'- cttUy be fo great in other Provinces^ and none at all in the New-England ones^ or fo incofifiderabley as to be eafily got over ? If it was in itjelf a real aiid great Difficulty^ its Operation would be aspo i rful in - the fe Colonies as the other ^ P- ^3- ^ never before heard, that the Difficujty of fupplying the New- England Millions with Clergymen, is none at all, cr fo inconfiderahle as to he easily got over, I be- lieve the MifTionaries themfelves, and the People of their refpedlive MilTions, will agree in telling a very different Story. I will point out to the Doc- tor one Cafe, which of itfelf is more than fuffici- ent to confute all that he has faid, or can fay, a- bout the Eaftnefs of fupplying the New-England ^ MifTions. The Members of the Church of En- P gland at Hebron^ in ConneSiicuty exerted themfelves for near twenty Years, and were at great Expence in fending home four Candidates fuccelTively, be- fore they had the Satisfadlion of enjoying a refident Miflionary, They firft fent home Mr. Dean, in 1 745, who was admitted to Holy Orders, and ap- pointed by the Society their MifTionary for Hebron ; but in returning to his MifTion, and to a Wife and feveral fmall Children who depended upon him for their daily Support, he is fuppofed to have pe- rifhed at Sea, neither the Ship nor any Pcrfon on board having been ever heard of. The next, was Mr. ColtoH'y who in 1752, died on his PafTagc from London to New-England, and was buried in the Ocean. The third Candidate feot Home by this 128 TH E A PPE A L Sect, this unfortunate People, was Mr. Vfiier ; who, in his V^^Y to England, in 1757, was taken by th^ French, thrown into Prifon, and at laft died in the Caflle oi Bayonne, The fourth was Mr.P^/^rj; who in 1759, not long after his Arrival in eZ gland, was taken with the Small-Pox, from which he had the good Fortune to recover— and at length, to the great Joy of the People, he arrived at He- hron, where he is at prefent the Society's worthy Miffionary f . If any Prelbyterian or congregati- onal Society in the Colonies had fulfered in this Manner ; much more, if all of them were ren- dered liable to fufFer in this Manner, through the Want of fuch a full Toleration as was allowed to all other religious Denominations ; I am much mif- taken, if the whole Britijh Dominions would not refound with, at leaft. Lamentations and Com- plaints. And if the LegiQature Ihould not fpeedi- ly interpofe for the Relief of fuch Sufferers, thefc very Writers, who can confider the Matter as a meer Trifle in the Cafe of the Church, would, if I know any Thing of their Genius and Difpofition, be found to make endlefs Outcries of Injuftice and Cruelty. But fuch is the Blindnefs of fome con- troverfial Bigots, that on one Side they miflakc Mountains for Mole-Hills, and on the other Side, Mole-Hills for Mountains ! After all, fhould I allow that, according to the Dodor's Reprefentation, there is no Difficulty, or rather that notwithftanding the Difficulty, the New-England Miffions are commonly fupplied ; it will by no Means follow, that Difficulties which are furmounted by the People of New-England^ would t Sec the Ahjira^ for 1759. DEFENDED. 129 would not intimidate and deter others, in the Sect. fouthern Colonies. ^* The Doctor, not liking the Reafon afiigned in the Appeal, for the great Want of American Cler- gymen, proceeds to aflign Reafons of his own. One is, that the Society negledt the fouthern Colonics, that they may be more able to epifcopize thofe of New-England. But this is Hale common-place Abufe, and the Charge has been confuted over and over. It has been moft thoroughly confuted in a very full and compleat Anfwer to Dr. May hew" % *' Obfervations on the Charter and Conduct of the *' Society." A Sentence indeed is quoted from the Bifhop of Landaff's Sermon, to prove that this is the grand Objedt of the Society ; but the Applica- tion of it to that Purpofe is a manifeft Perverfion, The Bilhop fays : '' This Point (the propofed E- pifcopate) obtained, the American Church will go out of its infant State ; be able to ftand upon its own Legs; and without foreign Help to fupport and fpread itfelf. Then the Bufmefs of this Society will have been brought to the happy IfTue intended." This laft Sentence is what the Dod:or alledges, as a Proof of the Society's Intentions. But let any impartial Perfon view its Connexion with what preceded, and he will find it impoffible not to fee, that the Bifhop fays no fuch Thing as he is made to fay. His Lordfhip men- tions a Time, wherein " the Bufinefs of the Soci- ** ety will be brought to the happy Ifllie intended ;'* h\jx.when does he fay this Time will be ? No other Anfwer can fairly be given to the Queftion than this: He fays "the Bufinefs of the Society will " have been brought to the happy Ifllie intended," when "the American Church" fhall " be able to S " ftand I30 THE APPEAL Sect* « {land upon its own Legs, and without foreign ^* " Help to fupport and fpread itfelf." But how does Dr. Chauncy anfwer the above Queftion ? Let us take it in his own Words : The View indeed cf the Society^ fays he, has been to epifcopize thefe Colo- nies^ and this they have made their great Bujinefs : Infomuch that Jhould it he accomplijhed^ " it will " THEN have been brought to the happy IfTue in- '* tended," as we are told^ in plain PFords, hy the Bijhop of Landaff, Does then the Bilhop of Lan- daffttW us in plain JVords^ that " the happy IfTue "intended" by the Society is, according to the quaint Phrafeology lately introduced, the Epifcopization of the New-England Colonies ? Does he fay any Thing that implies it ? Cannot the Church of En- gland in America Hand upon its own Legs and fup- port itfelf, until the Prefbyterians and Congregati- onalifts of New-England fhall be made Profelytes to it ? Do not the congregational Churches at this Day ftand upon their own Legs and fupport them- felves in the Colonies without unepifcopizing the Members of the Church ? In Order therefore to maintain his Charge againfl the Bifliop of Landaff^ even after an Abatement of what is faid about plain IVords^ will not the Do6lor be obliged to have Recourfe to Lord Peter's Invention, of mak- ing it out totidem LiteriSy fmce he muft fail in the Method of attempting it totidem Verbis^ and even totidem Syllabis ? But enough of this. Another Rcafon given by the Do61:or for the Want of American Clergymen, is the Backward- nefs of the Church People to educate their Sons for this Service. But if their Backwardnefs is much owing to the great Difficulty of obtaining Ordinati- OHj as I am perfuaded it is, although the Dodor fuppof«.§ DEFENDED. 131 fuppofcs otherwife, it contradi6ls not, but coin- ^^^^* cides with, the general Reafon afligned in the Apfeal, His laft Reafon is, the Infufficiency of the T'emp- tatioHy in moft Cafes, to influence Candidates of other Denominations to conform to the Church, ^ey have, fays the Do<5lor, a better Profpe5f in continu- ing with us, than they would have ffoould. they change Sides, and become Epifcopalians. This, 1 beheve, is, and hitherto has been, the Cafe -, and now that it is confefled on the Part of our Adverfaries, I hope we fhall no longer be reproached with con- forming to the Church from mercenary Motives. Thofe Candidates who have given up the better Profpe^i in continuing with them, ctxidiwXy ought not to be confidered as Men of no Confciences, however miftaken they may be thought to have been with Regard to their Principles. Many fuch we have already had 5 others are coming over to us daily; and had we Biihops in this Country, I fhould not doubt of a full Supply for all the Churches in Amrica, It was obfervcd in the Appeal, p. 36, that a very ' glaring Difadvantage, to which the Church ' in America is manifeftly fubjedl, arifes from the ' Impoflibility that a Bilhop redding in England^ ' Ihould be fufiiciently acquainted with the Cha- ' radlers of thofe who go home from this Country * for Holy Orders. To this it is owing, that Or- * dination has been fometimes fraudulently and fur- * reptitioufly obtained by fuch Wretches, as arq * not only a Scandal to the Church, but a Dif-^ * grace to human Nature.' Upon this, and more to the fame Purpofe faid of fuch Perfons, the Doc- S 2 tor^ 132 THE APPEAL Sect, tor, with his ufual Sagacity, obferves, in p. S^: Had fuch a Charge been publickly exhibited againjl the Society^ s Miffionaries^ by thofe of the Prejhyteri- an or Congregational Perfuajion^ it would have been difregarded at home^ and ejleemed by Epifcopalians here a fure Jrgument of inveterate Enmity againfi the Church. The Dodor is right here ; it would undoubtedly, and very juftly, be fo difregarded and ^ cfteemed. But will he venture to affirm, or does he mean to infmuate, that I had exhibited fuch a Charge againfi the Society's Mijfionaries^ or againll the Body of the American Clergy ? Did I fo much as mention the Miffionaries ? In Ihort, did I utter a finr gle Word that implies, or carries the leaft Intimation, that I entertained an unfavourable Opinion of the American Clergy ? On the other Hand, did I not declare my Belief to be, that their ' general Cha- * rader is truly refpecSlable' — that ' they are found * and fteady in their Principles, and regular in their * Behaviovir ?* But what I faid was, that Ordinati- on had been sometimes, or, as it was expreiTed in another Place, in some Instances, fraudulently obtained by Wretches, who, in my Opinion, anf- wered the Defcription there given of them. When this was faid, it was with Reference chiefly to Per- fons that never were admitted into the Society's Service. Indeed there was one Inftance among the Miffionaries that could not be overlooked ♦, an In- ilance, which was the Subject of common Con- verfation at the Time of my writing, of a Perfon then lately ordained and appointed to a Miffion in NeW'Jerfey-'-{2i\d to have been ordained upon Tef- limonials from this Country, which Teftimonials it was commonly thought muft have been forged^ as his Charadler here was fo notorioufly infamous. But before this Perfon embarked for his Miffion, his DEFENDED. 133 his true Chara6ter was difcovered, and the Society SEcr. immediately difcarded him. Now of fuch Clergy- ^^ men as thefe, who fometimes creep into the Church, thofe of the Pre/by terian or Congregational Perfuajiony may fpeak as reproachfully as they pleafe, and no Epifcopalians^ either here or at home, will efteem it an Argument of inveterate Enmity to the Church, We think no Defcription too bad for fuch Wretch- es ; we never fpare them ourfelves ; we blame not the DifTenters for any Severity of Language to- wards them. But what we blame them for, is, their indifcriminate Inve6i:ives againft the Epifco- pal Clergy in general— againft the whole Body of the MifTionaries — and, which has been very frequent of late, againft all thofe that have met together in voluntary Convention. The Dodtor ha^ not run the Length of fome others ; but I could mention cer- tain periodical Writers, who have fignalized them- felves by the moft undiftinguifhing and illiberal Abufe of the Clergy, of the Biftiops, and indeed of every Thing that relates to the Church ; and if fomeof their Accounts might betaken, the Con- clufion would naturally be made, that there is not a Clergyman in the Colonies who is of a tolerable CharaSer, any more than a Bifhop in the Kingdom Who is not a fpiritual Tyrant, a lordly OppreiTor, a Friend of Perfecution, &e. &c. &c. As to the Mattet* of Teftimdnials, the Do6lor fuppofes the Cafe would be the fame was there A Bi^ fhop in America^ as it is at prefent ; lince he could not be particularly acquainted with the Characters of the Candidates. One Biftiop only is not thought fufficient for all the Colonies in America ; but had ■* we Biftiops, they might be perfonally acquainted, if iiot with all the Candidates, yet with all thofe from 134 THEAPPEAL Sect." from whom Teflimonials muft come ; 'and fuch ITT " an Acquaintance would enable them to make ne- ceflary Diflindtions, and to give to each Recom- mendation the Weight refpedively due to it. One Clergyman's Recommendation is equal to another's, if they are both confidered only as Clergymen ; but if they are confidered under their diftinguifhing Charaders, the one being perhaps a Perfon of un- common Penetration and inflexible Integrity, the other but of an ordinary Capacity, and eafily bi- afled and deceived, their different Teilimonies will have a very unequal Force, with the Bifhop who knows them. But as what might properly be faid here, has been anticipated already ; I beg Leave to refer the Reader to it, rather than to repeat it. Upon the Whole, had we Bifhops in this Country, I am firmly perfuaded, that with proper Care, and due Regulations, it would be next to impolTible for a Man of an exceptionable Charafter to obtain Ordination. One general Regulation, if I might take the Liberty, I would humbly propofe, viz. That, when the propofed Epifcopate ihall be fettled, the Plan marked out in the Dire6tions of Archbi- fhop Wake to the Bifhops of his Province in 17 1 6, fo far as it relates to the Subjedl of Teflimonials, with a few Alterations, fhould be an eilablifhed Rule for the American Bifhops *. I'T is certain^ fays the Do6tor, in p. ^j^ many notorioujly wicked Perfons in England^ z'oftly more in Proportion than in America^ have found JVays — to get into Orders ; and he endeavours in many Places to eftablifh a Belief, that the Clergy at home, under the immediate Government of Bifhops, are worfe, than * See the Dire^lions at large in Burn's Ecclefiajiical Law, Title Ordination. DEFENDED. 135 than they are here without an Epifcopate. Sect. And he leaves his Readers to draw for themfelves this natural Inference, that American Biiliops will be more likely to corrupt, than to reform the Cler- gy. But what he calls certain^ is a Matter concern- ing which others may poflibly think that he cannot ohx.2\n Certainty. But allowing it to be true, that there are in Proportion more immoral Clergymen there than in America •, unlefs he can make it ap- pear, that more Perfons, in Proportion, of bad Chara6ters at the "Time of their Ordination^ are ad- niited from a common Diocefs in England, than from America, the Obfervation will not anfwer his Purpofe. The Point under Confideration, is the Cafe of bad Men's obtaining Teflimonials, and impofmg upon the Bifhop •, but if a Man, of a fair Reputation, at the Time of his being ordained, afterwards relapfes and becomes Profligate, he is not within the Compafs of the prefent Argument. But fhould we grant all that the Do6tor contends for •, it has beea already fhewn, that the Cafe of the Church here, under an Epifcopate, will be fo very different from what it is m England, with Re- fped to the Bifiiop*s Superintendency, that the In- ference intended will not follow. Dr. Chauncy clofes his third SeAion with this Obfervation : Should the whole of what the Br. has offered be allowed its full Force^ (which, by the "Way, is an Acknowledgment that hitherto he had not allowed its full Force to what I had offered) without the leafi Abatement^ (and why fhould there be any Abatement of the real Force of my Argu- ment or Obfervation ?) T^here is no other HardfJoip^ or Difficulty^ in the Cafe^ than what naturally re- fults fretn profefj'ed Principles^ and mujl unavoidably follow 136 THE APPEAL Sect, follow upon theniy unlefs an Eftablijhmeut is pur- ^ pofely made in their Favor ^ p. 88. I am not clear that I iinderftand the Meaning of this Sentence. Wha,t an Eftablifhment has to do with the Subjedt in Debate, I know not. This has never been re- quefted — It is no Part of our Plan — nor is it ne- ceffary to the Execution of it •, Ordination by a Bifhop no more fuppofmg, or implying, or depen- ding upqn, or being connected with, a civil Efta- blifhrrient, th^n the Adminiftration of Baptifm by a Preibyter. As to the other Part of the Sentence, there is fomething in it that looks extremely ill- favoured. There is no other Hardjhif^ or Difficulty y intheCa/ey than what naturally arifes from profeffed Principles! This looks as if, in the Do *■' to the Places from which they were removed, " than what Sequcllration, Plunder, Ufurpation " and Rebellion had given tliem. So that the Cale *' is not fo lamentable, as this Gentleman and his " Brother Calamy would have it ; and whe^ tKey •' pretend that the Sufferings of thefe Men vhW " fcarce admit of a Parallel in anv Age or Nati- (( iC cc - God, who thought fit to cut off thofe idolatrous ^^I- Nations, to make Room for the Settlement of his ^hofen People. Be this as it may, the Nature and Difpofition of Savages, of all Ages, of all Countries and Complexions, are fo nearly the fame ; that all the Trials which have been made with any of them, as well as what has happened in New- England, will afford Light tp the prefent general Subjeft. ^ Christianity, as was obferved from Dr. Bra)\ ilourifhed or declined in the early Ages of the Church, in almoft an exad Proportion to Men's Improvement in Letters and civilized Manners. In modern Ages, the moft judicious and experi- cnced Miffionaries, have judged that the Gofpci can have but little Effed with Barbarians and Sava- ges. It was a Maxim with. Father Ltf^^/, who had been a celebrated Miflionary in the American I- flands, " that in Order to make the Americans " Christians, it was previoufly neceffary to make « them Men*.' Hans Egede, a Banifrj Miflionary, who hadrefided 25 Years in Greenland, was of the fame Opinion. " It is a Matter that cannot be *' queflioned, fays he, that if you will make a Man " aChriftian out of a mere Savage and wild Man, ^^ you muft firft make him a reafonable Man.— It " would contribute a great Deal to forward their *' Conyerfion, if they could, by Degrees, be *' brought into a fettled Way of Lifef." Father Hennepin, for many Years a Miffionaiy in Canada and the interior Parts of America, among the Ob- Ikcles in the Way of converting the American In- B b 2 diaijs, • MoJheim\ EcGlcfiaflical Hiftory, Vol II. p. 307, t ^^^ the Dmne Legation, &c. Vol. II. p. 71, i88 THE APPEAL S^cr. dians, mentions their favage Manner of Life*- yiL 4c They are not fixed in a Place, carrying no longer '' in their Villages, than till Harveft is over, which ? «' is but a fmall Time •, all the reft of the Year \ ** they pafs in Wars and hunting : Then they carry ( *' all their Families with them, and are abfent '] *^ eight or nine Months ; their Children then for- ' *^ get all, and return to their former Manner of ' *' Living*." Thefe are the Sentiments of fome^j of the moft famous MifTionaries of thefe latter \ ' Ages, in different Parts of the World. The moft : celebrated Writers, both at home and abroad, have ^ joinied in the fame Opinion. The very learned i Mo/heim fays : " As to thofe Indians, who live- ', *' more remote from the European Settlements, and? i *' wander about in the Woods without any fixed | ** Habitation, they are abfolutely incapable either f *' of receiving or retaining any adequate Notions^ \ *' of the Chriftian Do6lrine, unlefs they be previ- ^' oufly reclaimed from that vagarant Manner of ' " Life, and civilized by an Intercourfe with *' Perfons, whofe humane and infrnqating Manners *' are adapted to attract their Love and excite their " Imitation^:." The more learned Author of the Divine Legation of Mofes^ fays: " Chriftianity, ♦' plain and fimple as it is, and fitted in its Na- *' ture for what it was defigned by its Author, re-. *' quires an Intelled above that of a mere Savage *' to underftand. Something then muft be previa *' ous to it. And what is that Something but " Civil SociETvf ." Again, he complains that fome Men, " having taken it into their Heads'* (like Dr. Chauncy) " that the Vices of improved Lif^ "^Millerh Propagation of Chriftianity, Vol. II. p. z^Zt 1 Ecclefiaftical Hillory, Vol. II. p. 306. •J- Pivine l of the fame Argument ^to contrary Pur- pofes^ or rather, of oppofite Principles to the fame Purpofe ; but I cannot fay that they do this with ^ good Grace* Instead of the Advantages expeded from car- rying on the Attempts to profelyte the American Heathens, under the Diredlion of a refident Bilhop, the Dodor fays, this fuperint ending Bufinefs mighty to better Purpofe^ be put into other Hands ^ p. 128. He then introduces the Society in Scotland^ for the Propagation of Chriftian Knowledge^ and the honor- able Company for the Propagation of the Gofpel in New -England^ who manage their Affairs by Commif- Jioners^ confifting of the Laity as well as Clergy^ as Inftances to prove, that the Superintendency of a Bifhop would be no Advantage to our Society, ' with Regard to the Converfion of the Indians. It might as well be proved, from the Example of the Churches in the Colonies^ that a Bifhop is not neceffary for the Purpofe of Ordination^ fince, with them, that End is alfo obtained without a Bi- fhop. But it fhould have been remembered, that although a Bilhop in neither Cafe is neceffary on their Principles, yet in both Cafes he may be necef- fary on ours. The Example of thofe two Societies can be cxpeded to have but little Effed upon the World, until their Condud fhall be better known to the Public, DEFENDED. 193 Public. An Account of their Conflitution, of the Sect. Condition and Management of their Funds, of ^^^' the Perfons employed in their Service, and the Places and State of their particular Miflions, is a Defideratiim which has been long looked tor ; and until it is obtained, many Perfons will entertain unfavorable Sufpicions. The Do6tor tells us, in general, that they have^ ^at this Day^ zvithhi the Majfachufetts-Province— Sixteen Clergymen^ Englijh and Indian^ ft ate dly labouring^ either as Paftors of fo many Indian Churches^ or as Preachers to /ijfemblies of Indians that meet together for divine JVorfhip ; Nine Englifb Le5furerSy and Seven ft-ated School- Mafters^ befides occafional ones^ p. 129. But this general Intelligence is by no Means fatisfaclory *, it rather raifes our Curiofity to know how Twenty-five Paftors, Preachers and Ledlurers are employed, as well as where^ to what Numbers^ and to what Pur^ fofe^ they are refpedively fent. For according to . Mr. Hutchinfonh Account*, the Indians in the Majfachufetts and Plymouth^ are fo greatly v/afted a- way, that they amount to no more than about 80 Families dxMafJoapee^ the famiC Number 2XMartha^s Vineyard^ 70 Families at Stockbridge^ and 15 cX Nantucket^ befides a fev/ fcattered Families in dif- ferent Parts of the Province. But how Twenty-five Paftors, Preachers and Ledurers can be properly employed, only in the four Places of Mafhapee^ Martha' s-Vineyard^ Stockbridge and Nantucket^ con- taining about 245 Families of Indians, requires fome Explanation. It might be not imiproper alfo to inform the Public, what the Difference is be- tween their Preachers to Affejnhlies of Indians y and the EngJifh LeSurers employed in the fame gene- ral Work of miniftering to the Indians -, for at C c prefent • Hift. Mair, Vol. I. p. 169, in a Npte, 194 THE A PPE AL %u' prefcnt it is unintelligible to many People. In laying this Information is wanted, and has been long cxpedred, I do not mean to condemn the Con- dud of thofe two Societies. From the refpedable Charaders of fome who are faid to be Members of them, I cannot believe tJiem to be guilty of any finiller Intentions. But why is the Light of a good Example concealed from the World ? Why do they not pul^lijh an Account of their Proceed- ings, that all injurious Sufpicions may be obviated . Or removed ? As to the Society for the Propagation of the Gof pel, the Dodtor fears whether, in what is propofed l/'i^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^» ^^ Regard to the Church, as efia- hhfhed in England, may not he too much mingled with the common Caufe of Chriftianity . A friendly Cau- tion of this Nature would undoubtedly be well ac^ cepted, as all Chriftians are more or lefs liable to iiiingle the Interefls of Party with the common Caufe of Chriftianity. But this Society is as irreproachable m this Refped, as any Society that can be mention- ed, without Exception. Its Members hitherto appear to have aded as dilinterefledly, and to have mingled Confiderations of a private Nature with their pub- lic Proceedings as little, as can be expeded from the bell of Men. They are difpofed to be upon friend- ly Terms with all Denominations of Chriftians in the Colonies -, and if there is any Danger of their ading contrary to fuch a Difpofition, it^muft arife, not from themfelves, but from thofe who make it in fome Degree neceifary, by an unreafonable Op^ pofition to all their Meafures. It is natural for Men to defend themfelves ; and fo far as Self-De- fence Ihall oblige them to regard the peculiar In- Urcjls of the Church of England, they may be ex-^ pe<51;ecj DEFENDED. ,9^ peded to be cautious. But I dare rifque all my Sect. Interefr and Reputation upon it, that they will ^•^' never be backward to cultivate, on their Part, a friendly Correfpondence with every Denomination ©f Proteftants, whether here or elfewhere. *■ . As America Is the Region wherein the divine * Goodnefs has been more remarkably difplayed in ' Favor of the Britijh Nation,' the Dodlor con- cludes that Americans are the proper Perfons to ere^ ' fome fuitable Monument of religious Gratitude/ on that Account^ p. 130. But if thlt Goodnefs was not difplayed in Favor of Americans^ Americans are under no Obligations of Gratitude on Account of it. ^ If it was ' difplayed in Favor of the Britijh ' Nation,' the Britijh Nation is under Obligations to ered:' fome fuitable Monument of reTigious ^ Gratitude.' The Truth of the Cafe is, as° the Britijh Nation in general, and the Americans in particular, were remarkably favored by divine Pro- vidence in the late War, the Duty is incumbent; upon both j and faying that the Americans are o-. bliged, is not proving that the Nation is not obliged,' to perform it. The Dodior feems to allow of my Pofition, that ' America is the very Ground, on ^ which fome fuitable Monument of religious Gra- " titude ought to be ereded;' and he differs not greatly from me, when he fays, what more Juitahk cne^ than a vifihle perpetually jianding Tejiimony of their pious Concern^ and earneji Care, to fpread thi Knowledge of their only Lord who has done fiich great ^Things for them P The chief Difference between us is, that he feems, in this PafTage, to make that to be the whole of the Teflimony of their pious Concern and ' religious Gratitude,' which I WQuld have tp be but a Part of it. c c 2 n% 196 THE APPEAL Sect. He goes on to complain, that the Endeavors of ^^* the ncn-epifc'opal Clergy and Laity in the Maffachu- fetts-Province, to do fomething in this Way, upon it he Condufton of the late War^ w^re defeated at Home. For he tells ns, that after a large Sub- fcription was made in Bofton for a Fund to fupport Mifiionaries in the Mohawk Country^ &c. Upon Conditio'ti that there might he an incorporated Society among our/elves (fays he) for the conducing and ma- naging this important Affair : An incorporating A51 was 'prepared^ and paffed by the fever al Branches of the Go- vsrnment here^ and fent Home for the Royal San5fion^ without which it could not continue in Force. But it fcon met with a Negative^ by which Means this whole Money was lofi. And he intimates that the Difap- pointment v/as occafioned by episcopal Influence, What he means here by epifcopal Influence^ in his Re- marks on the Bifhop ofLandaff's Sermon^ he muft be fuppofed to explain in the following Words : It is hoped, fays he, the Accounts we have had are not true^ that the Negative upon this A5i, was principally ow- ing to the Influence of fome of the moji important Mem- bers of the Society for the Propagation of the GofpeL Now to the Accufation evidently implied in thefe Words, the very fenfible Author of y^ Vindication of the Bifhop of Landaff's Sermon, has thus re- plied : " The Dodor may be affured that his Hope *' is well founded, and the Accounts he had, not " true, Befides the utter Improbability that aNum- **". ber of eminently pious Men who have the Con- verfion of the Savages much at Heart, would op- pofe fuch a Meafure for that Purpofe -, I will here fubjoin an Extradl of a Letter from one of '^ the mofi important Members of the Society to *' his Friend in this Country,, dated 0^7. 1762, " and which confutes that Calumny. Speaking "of DEFENDED. 197 ** of this Affair, he fays — "The Plan as frefented^ Sect. *' was liable to fever al Objections \ particularly that ^ * *' the Members were to be accountable only to them- *' f elves. However the Society made no Opposi- *' TioN TO IT*." The Letter here quoted I have feen, and from an Acquaintance with the Hand- Writing, know it to be genuine. The Author of it was no lefs a Perfon, a no lefs important Member of the Society^ than their President at that Time ; whofe eminent Integrity, Abilities, and Attention to the Affairs of the Society, leave no PofTibility of fufpediing that he could either mifreprefent, or miftake, the Matter. And from his fhort Account, thefe Things appear, viz. That the Plan was not fo properly reje6led, as the Draught that was pre- fented — that the Draught was reje6ted, not be- caufe the Defign of it was difliked, but becaufe it was improperly framed — and, that the Rejection, whether juilifiable or not, was not owing, in any Degree, to the Society. Mr. Apthorp^ another Member of the Society, after inquiring upon the Spot, goes farther, and fays : " I can afHrm, on very good Authority, that neither the Society nor any Epifcopalians, as fuch^ oppofed the A6t of the Bofion AlTembly for the Purpofe here *' mentioned. It was rejeded merely on political " and commercial Reafons, which arofe from the " Manner of drawing it up, and were reprefented " by the Board of Trade to the Privy-Council, " who unanimoufly difapproved it, when there was *' not one Bifhop prefent •, as appears from the *' Council-Books§." Now that Dr. Chauncy fhould take no Notice at all of fo clear and full an Evi- dence of the Society's Innocence, with Regard to an * Vtndicat, p. 74. S Rt'vU'vj of Dr. Mayht'w'^ Remarks, p. 39. 198 THE APPEAL %U- ^" Accufadon that bore fo hard upon the Reouta: ^"- tion of that moft refpeftable Bod^-anESnS that carries double Convidtion to thofe who are ar quamted witli Mr. Jpthorfs excellent and amiable Charafter, to which the Doftor can be no Stran ger; but that notwithftanding, he Ihould f^ill ^o on from Pamphlet to Pamphlet, intimating black Sufpicions of Guilt, and throwing out Reproaches founded at bell upon diftant hear-fay, as if the Ballance of Proof were againft the Society; is one of thofe flrange, modern Jmerican Pha-mmena which admit not of an eafy Solution. The moft natural and favorable Way of accounting for it perhaps, is to fuppofe that the Doftor wrottin fuch a Hurry, both againft the Bilhop of Landars Ser- mon and the Appeal, as not to give himfelf Time to recolleft many Things which materially concera his Subjeft, But I forbear. SECT. DEFENDED. 199 SECTION VIII. THE next Sedlion of the yfppeal cont3.ins ' the Se^t. ' Plan on which alone American Bifliops vill, * have been requefted, fairly ftated, with Expoftu- * lations on the Reafonablenefs thereof.' Dr. Chaun- cy^ in his Anfwer to it, begins with taking Notice of what he calls, a Copy of the Petition that zvas fent^ by a Number of the epifcopal Clergy^ to the Univerftty of Cambridge^ which had lately appeared in one of the public Papers at Bofion •, in which Copy there are feveral Expreffions which he looks on as highly exceptionable. This Copy I have feen ; its Editor and Annotator pretended that it was the Tranfcript of an Addrefs drav/n up and fent, by a Convention of the epifcopal Clergy of New-Tork, and Nem-Jerfey. But the Do6lor mull have fince heard that the Convention difclaims it ; and I can and do afTure him that it is fidlitious and falfe, and that the Convention fent home no fuch Addrefs, nor any that contained fimilar Expreffions with, thofe which he cenfures. He informs us, in p. 135, that fome of the mofi refpe£fable Epifcopalians in New-England— i?^':;^ de-^ dared it to be their Opinion^ that Biftoops would he of no Service here^ and that they did not defire they Jhould be fent. Whether he has any Thing pecu- liar in his Idea of refpe^able Epifcopalians^ and of a fieady Attachment to the Inter efi of the Church of En^landy which he makes to be part gf their Cha- . raster ; 200 THE APPEAL Sect, racier; and what we are to underftand by the in- ^^* definite Word fome^ whether Two or Two Hun- dred, is impoflible for me to fay. He may have met with, or heard of, fome^ i, e. Two or more refpe5iable Epifcopalians^ who were not defirous of having Bilhops in America^ meaning Bifhops with fuch temporal Powers as they exercife in England: But I much queflion whether there is an Epifcopa- lian upon the Continent, either of a more or lefs refpedtable Chara6ler, including in it fome Degree of Attachnent to the Interejl of the Churchy that has objeded againft an Epifcopate upon the Plan of the Appeal, If there be any fuch, I will ven- ture to affirm, that they have aded a very unna- tural, inconfiftent Part. For how abfurd is it for a Man, who is attached to the Intereft of the Church of England in America^ not to wifh it Soundnefs and Health ? But how can it be found and healthy, while its Conftitution is broken, and deprived of that which is effential to its Well-be- ing ? Where can be the Harm of having epifcopal Ordination adminiftred in the Colonies ? " What *' is the Fear,'* from having the Clergy brought under a flricter Difcipline ? " What the Danger," in giving an Opportunity to fuch as are defirous of Confirmation, to receive it in this Country ? Thefe are the only Ends propofed by an Epifcopate ; and every Epifcopalian* muft allow that thefe are real Advantages. And fmce the Power of American * Bilhops is to be confined to the Clergy of our own Church, and will bring no Burthen or Expence upon any Part of the Country, or upon Individu- als ; it is inconceivable that any Epifcopalians Ihould not defire it, excepting fuch clerical Delin- quents as fear, by Means of fuch an Epifcopate, to be brought to Punifhment. For my Part, I have met DEFENDED. 201 met with no fuch Epifcopalians, nor have partku- ^^^^T* /^r/y heard of any fuch : But on the other Hand, I ^ ' have been told by many of the DifTenters, and by feveral of their Clergy, and even by fome of their Clergy belonging to New- England, thzt they thought it unreafonable that any ihould obje6t to our Propo- fal. I MEET with nothing farther worthy of Notice^' after what has been already animadverted on, until we come to p. 138. The Dodtor there objedls to our Plan, becaufehe thinks it has been illegally fettled. He takes it for granted, that what has been done by our Friends and Superiors at Home relating to it, has been done without the King's Approbation. And he argues that it is inconfiftent with the Conftitution of the Church, and the eftabhfhedDodtrine of xh^Kmg^s Supremacy, to take fuch a Step •, arid that even the Convocation, when convened by the King's IVrit^ hath no Authority to fettle any Plan without his Con- fent, nor indeed fo much as to attempt to form one without his Licence. What the Rights and Powers of an EngliJI:> Convocation are, is not my Bufmefs to enquire ', as it is not pretended that the Plan in Quefcion was fettled in Convocation. Al- lowing that the two Houfes of Convocation, ac- cording to the Declaration of the upper Houfe in 1702, as quoted by the Do6lor, " without a royal Licence, have no Authority to attempt, enadl, promulge, or execute any Canon by whatever Name it might be called," which i5 the Lan- guage of the Statute of the 25 Hen, VIII ; yet not- withflanding, the Clergy, even in Convocation, " are " ftillih feveral inferior Inftances, left prefe(5lly free*." The two Houfes of Parliament^ cannot, without a D d royal * uitterburyt Rights , &C. of an Englijh Conv9((Ui9ni p. Ij;^. 3ee alfo JVah's $taU of the Churcbp p, $5, cc 202 THE APPEAL Sect, royal Licence, attempt, enadl, promiilge of e^ce- ■ cute any Statute^ more legally than the two Houfes of Convocation can enad a Canon •, but I hope the Members both of Parliament and Convocationy whether legally convened, or not convened, as they happen to meet with one another, may confer upon and propofe Plans for the public Good, and agree to carry them into Execution, as foon as the royal Licence lliall permit them to a6t in their legifla-- tive Capacity. Every AfTociation of difaffe5fed' Perfons ought to be fuppreffed 5 but Confultations for the public Happinefs, held by Perfons of the utmoll Fidelity, v/ith a due Deference and Sub-' miffion to the Wifdom of Government^ will always be encouraged by prudent Princes, and under wife Adminiftrations. If nothing farther than this, could be faid in Favor of thofe who fettled the Plan for an Amtrkan Epifcopate^ it would be fuf- ficient to juftify them : And the Dodlor would have no Reafon to cry out, as he does, p. 139^ in the following fupercilious Language : Is this Man- Tier of Condu5f^ in any Degree^ conformable to the ^oyifiituted Order of the Church of England ? Dare Bijhops^ or even Archhifhops^ at home^ venture upon a Method of ailing fo repugnant to the Supremacy . in all ecclejiafiical Matters^ with which, by repeated A'5ls of Parliament, the Crown has been vejied ? That he is much rfiiftaken in his Notion of the King's Supremacy, as maintained by the Church of England, has been already proved -, that he is alfo miftaken in his Notion of the general conftituted Order of that Church, is too plain to require any Proof. He has pronounced all Confultations of our Bilhops for the Intcreft of Religion, to be, in ge- neral. DEFENDED. 203 «cra!, an Infringement of the King's Supremacy, Sect. imlefs a Licence for that Purpofe is formally grant- ^ ^* cd by the Crown. But can any Man believe this to be true, in the Senfe wherein it is affirmed ; and without any Exceptions ? Suppofmg the King were made acquainted with the particular Subjedl of any fuch Deliberation, and privately confulted upon it, and he fhould give undoubted Proofs of his Approbation of the Meafure -, would the Doctor flill call it an Infringement ot the Supremacy ? If not, neither fhoulj he thus fpeak of the Plan in Qiieflion, as it has been honored in this Manner, with the royal Approbation, And here it may be proper to explain what has been before faid ; name- ly, that the Plan was fettled by thofe, who were warranted by a royal CommifTion conftitutionally iflued. The Charter granted to the Society for the propagation of the Gofpel^ has the Nature and Ef- ficacy of a royal Commiflion. By this Charter or CommifTion, the Members are warranted to concert Meafures and to fettle Plans^ for carrying on the Defign of their Incorporation in the mofl effeclual Manner. The Society foon faw, that an American Epifcopate was highly expedient to this Purpofe ; they therefore fketched out a general Plan for fend* ing Bifhqps to America^ which Plan was publickly approved and patronized by her Majcfty, Queen ^NNE. Many Caufes concured to delay the Exe- cution of it, at that Time, and through the Two fucceeding Reigns -, but Marks of the royal Appro* bation were not wanting in either of them. Of late Years the Plan has been refumed and digefted with peculiar Attention, and our prefent maii gracious Sovereign has given it particular EncouragCr ment. Surely^ after this Explanation the Doctor will not fay, a Plan for an Epifcopate thus formd.^ D d a ' fettled ao4 THE APPEAL Sect, fettled and puhlijhed^ ought to have no great Regard '^^' paid to it. For were it inconfiderable in itfelf, it is ftill refpeftable on Account of its honorable Origin. In p. 140, he goes on, fulminating againfl the Audacioufnefs of thofe Perfons, who ventured to form and encourage the Plan •, and (Rifum tenea- tis F) conilrues it to be a dire^ Violation of the 73d Canon. The Canon injoins, '^ that no Priefts^ *' or Miniflers of God's Word, nor any other *' Perfons fhall meet together in any private Houfe, *' or elfewhere, to confult upon any Matter or ** poUrfe to be taken by them, or upon their Mo- *' tion, or Diredion by any others, which may any *' "Way tend to the impeaching^ or depraving of the *' Dodbrine of the Church of England^ or of the *' Book of Common-Prayer, or of any Part of the *' Government or Difcipline now eftablifhed in the *' Church of England^ under Pain of Excommu- ** nication ipfo Fa^fo'^ Whoever knows any Thing of the Hiftory of the Times in which the Canon was frarned, muft be fenfible that it was deftgned againft a very different Sort of Perfons from thofe venerable Prelates, who formed and fettled the Plan for an American Epifcopate. And as it was defigned againft a different Sort of Perfons, fo the Words of it clearly point out a very different Con- dndl. I know not but the Dodlor may laugh at me, {ov ferioujly replying to what is evidently in it- felf fo highly extravagant^ I might rather fay^ to a great Degree ludicrous -, but yet I am really unable to determine, whether he was, or was not, ferious himfelf, at the Time of his writing. However, on the favorable Suppofition that he was ferious, as I f rcfume he ought to have been, I will proceed to ob- ferve, — DEFENDED, 20^ icrve,^ — That what the Canon condemns, are fac- Sect. tious Combinations and Confultations which tend ^^^* to impeach and deprave the Doctrine, Liturgy or Government of the Church of England. If there- fore the forming of the Plan for an American Epis- copate has no fuch Tendency, it comes not within the JVdrds^ any more than within the Intent of the Canon, But, fays the Do6lor, it is a Plan for altering the Government and Bifcipline of the Church of Eng* land in the Colonies. Does he then believe the Ca- non was intended to fecure the Government and Difcipline of the Church of England in the Co- lonies ? Without this Intention, the Propofal of any Alteration of the Form of ecclefiaftical Go- vernment here, can be no Violation of the Canon. But what is the Nature and Tendency of the Alte- ration propofed ? Is it to deprave the Government !of the Church of England at Home ? No, it is in Reality to honor it, by endeavoring to bring the Government of the Church here much nearer to her Pattern and Example, than it is, or can be, while deftitute of Bifliops. Nor is the Plan for a different Mode of an Epifcopate for the Church of America, any Impeachment of that under which it exifts in England. As to fuch Externals, the Church of England has always allowed them to be Things that are alterable, and that they ought to be altered, according to the Circumftances and Opinions of different Countries^ or even of the fame Country in different Ages. To fay therefore that Circumftances in America require, or make it ex- pedient, that the Externals of an Epifcopate lliould be under a Regulation peculiar to this Country, is laying no more than the Church of England has always. 2o6 THEAPPEAL Sect, always, in EfFcdl, faid and implies no Refle^tioft i ^•"^* upon the Eilablifhment at home, which alfo may ' be bed fitted for a Church fituated as the national Church is in England. In p. 141, theDoflor, although he is of Opi- nion that he might be reafonably excufed from taking cny farther Notice of this Plan, as it is^ not only deftitiite of all Authority, hut cotnes handed to Consideration, in evident Contradiction to it ; yet, upon the whole, thinks proper to go on, and dif tin5lly mention the Obje5lions we have, fays he, t9 make againft it. Here then the mofl efTential Bu- fmefs of his Publication comes forward ; in which, he not only lays out his own Strength, but calls in to his Aid what was pov/erfully offered by the late excellent Dr, May hew. His own Objediions he ^ diftinguiflies, ranges and numbers, as follows. Object, i. THE Governmeiit and Difcipline of the Church of England under the propofed American Epifcopate, is injurious, both to the Church, and the . Bifhops that are to prefide over it. But how is it injurious to the Church 1 Why, it feems, by the Limitation of the Bifhops Authority to the Clergy, fo that it jfhall not operate on the Laity. But if the Laity are not to be affefted by the Bifhops Autho- rity, they are certainly not to be injured by it ; that which does not operate at all, producing no Effe6b, either injurious or beneficial. With Regard there- J| fore to the Exercife of Difcipline over the Laity, j| no Benefit is propofed, and no Injury is to be fear- ™ ^d •, but with Regard to the Government of the ^l^^^gy? much Advantage is propofed, expe61:ed and forefeen -, fo that in this Refped:, and upon the whole, the Plan is not injurious, but be- neficial, to the American Church. Why no farther -? Difcipline D E F E N D E D. ^oj Dilcipline Is to be exercifed over the Laity when Sect. Bifhops fhall be appointed, has been fhewn in a ^^* former Sedlion, and need not be repeated here. It is thought by much better Judges than either the Dodlor or myfelf, that it will be more advantageous to the American Church, to leave the Laiiy as they are, than to introduce any Degree cr Species of Difcipline over them, with which Americans are unacquainted. The propofed Plan is reprefented as injurious to the Biffjops themfelves, becaufe thereby they are^ in a meer arbitrary Manner^ retrained in the Exercife of that Authority^ which properly belongs to them, hoth by the apcftolic Appointment^ and the Ccnfiitu- Hon of the Church of England^ p. 143. But if fuch a Reflraint" is not injurious to the Church, it will be difHcult to prove that it can be injurious to the Bifhops. Are v/e to confider the Authority of Bifhops as fo much private Property^ which belongs to them, and every Limitation of it as fo much Damage fuflained by the Bifhops ? And yet, unlels we confider it under fome fuch Idea, I fee not how it can be made out, that any prudent Reftraints of their Authority can be an Injury to them. He that is fond of exercifing Power for the Sake of exer- cifing it, without regarding v/hether it tends to E- diiication or Deftrudion, is unworthy of it. ' Object. 2. 'THE Bifhops in this Plan^ are fo *yoidely different from the Bifhops of the Church of England^ that it is not reafonable they fhculd either he defired^ or fent^ p. 144. The Bifhops in this Plan, are efientially the fame with the Bifliops at Home, how v;idely foever they may differ in fome CircumflaDces, But let thera be never fo different, if 2o9 THE APPEAL Sect, if fuch Bifhops as are propofed are fitter for the * ^* Colonies than fuch Biihops as are in England, and the Dodtor will hardly fay that they are not -, then, it may be reafonable that they Ihould be both de- iired, and fent. This I take to be a full and fuf- ficient Anfwer to the Objeftion as it (lands ; and what has been before faid, I take to be a fufficient Anfwer to all the Doctor has offered under this Head, excepting one Confideration, in p. 146^ which may require more particular Notice. The Confideration is this : That // Bijhops JJjould he fent. to the Colonies with thefe rejlrained Powers^ undefirahle Confequences might he naturally fear ed^hoth her e^ and at home. The Confequence to be feared here, he tells us, is, that our Billiops would be uneafy under fuch a Reftraint, and he difpofed to throw it off as foon as might he. But was it ever before offered as a Reafon why exorbitant Power fhould not be limited, (and fuch the Dodor eftecms to be the Power of Bifhops in England) becaufe the Perfons curtailed would en- deavor to throw off the Reflraint, as foon as may be ? But why are we to fuppofe, that the American Bifhops will be uneafy under fuch a Limitation of their Power, as the Plan fpecifies ? Thofe who have been in adlual PoflefTion, or even in Expeftation, of any great and extenfive Power, will naturally be uneafy under any remarkable Abridgment of it ♦, but this will not be the Cafe of our American Bi* Ihops. Whatever Powers or Privileges they fhall once poifefs, by Virtue of their Office, they will continue to hold, as long as they fhall remain in the Office ; and as they will know the Terms before they accept of it, there can be no Difappointment. And why ihould they be uneafy, becaufe the Bifhops at home are invefled with civil Authority ? The Bi- fhops at home may as properly be uneafy and refl- lefs. DEFENDED. 209 lefs, becaufe they are not, like fome of their Or- Sect. der On the Continent of Europe^ fovereign Princes. ^ Perhaps the Uneafinefs of the American Bifhops may be fuppofed to arife from the Refledion, that deftitiite as they are of civil Power, they are Bi- fliops of the fame Church with their Brethren in England. But they will not be able to avoid the farther Reflection, that they are Billiops of the fame Church in different Countries^ and under dif- ferent Circumftances ; which eflentially alters the Cafe. And no better Reafon can be given, why they Ihould not be contented with lefs Power than belongs to the Bifhops in England^ than why the other Bifhops in England fhould not be contented with lefs Power than belongs to the Bifhop of Bur- ham. This fame Kind of reafoning would operate as flrongly againfl epifcopal Clergymen in America, as againft Bifhops. The Clergy of the Church of England^ at home, are, in a great Meafure, fupported by Tythes \ therefore, it may be faid, if Clergymen of the Church of England are once admitted in this Country, under whatever ReftriCtions and Li- mitations, they will not be eafy, until they fhall have fecured to themfelves the Tythes of our Eflates. The Dcxflof alfb nientions Two ill Confequen- ces to be feared at Home : One is, that the Peo- ple there who diflike the prefent Power of the Bi- fhops, will be apt to be clamorous, and to make Difturbances,when theyihall find that anEpifcopate is fettled here in the Form that they defire, while they are refufed the like Indulgence in England. The Reader can hardly avoid remarking, that here, and in many other Places, the Dodtor forgetr his proper Bufmels and Character, His Bufinefs is Eg te 2 19. TH,E APPEAL Sect. ^ to anfwer thc Jppeal upon the Principles^ of the- ^^'^ Difienters;. but inrxad of this, he frequently en- deavpurs to raife DifEculties and Objections, which cannot prop^y be made but upon Principles op- pofite to his own, and of thofe v/hom he reprefents . in this Controverfy. This fhews the Difpofition: with which he undertook to oppofe the Epi-fcopate ill ,(>ueilion, and that he came prepared with a Ilefolu.tion to objed: at any Rate^ rather than not to objed; at all. It will never be admitted ^ as. art Objection coming from the DijJ'enters here or in; iLnglajid^ that many at Home will grow rnore cla- morous againft the prefent Power of the Englijh Biihops, in Confequence of the Settlem^ent of fuch an Epifcopate here as is propofed for the Colonies. But fhould the Obje(5lion be made by any who have a. Right to make it, it is fuiiicient to refer them to. what has been, already faid to the Purpofe, viz,.. That fuch an Epifcopate may be erected here witli Eafe j -but: i-t cannot be effected in England^ without fuSvertihg an Eftablilliment, and making a very vifible Alteration in the national. Conftitu- lion— a Vv'ork never to be undertaken but in thc greatefh Extrepiity, and even then, not witho.ut a tremblino; Eland. ' The other ill Confeauence fugrgefted is, that ie Bi{liopS;jn England v/ill be jealous, that an Invafion of their Authority is farther intended. In Reply to which, I will only remind the Do6lor of one Circumflance v/liich he happened to forget ; namely, that this very Plan has been formed and introduced by thofe Bifhops themfelves, and con- fequently, fhould they be jealous that any Invafion of ;their Power is" therein intended, they muft be jea- '^ bus that they have intended to invade it themfelves. Object, DEFENDED. 2it Object. 3. THE Church of .England Inoivs 710 Sect. fuch Bifbops as are fpecified m this Pian^ Vior can they ^^^'^' in Ccnfijhncy with its Conftitution^ he fent to the Cc- lonies^ p. 149. This Objection, and all that has been oiTered to fupport it, has been fully anfwered already. Object. 4. TVE are^ in Principle^ againft all €tvil Eftablijhments in Religion ; and as ive do not defire any fuch Eflahlifhment in Support of our own religious Sentiments^ or Practice^ we cannot reafonahly he blamed^ if we are not difpofed to encourage one in ■Favor of the epif copal Colonifts^ p. 152. If by we, the Do6lor means thofe of the congregational Per- fuafion in New-England in general, the Objeflion contains an Article of Intellicrence that is to me NEW. Thatfome particular Writers among the va- rious Denominations of DilTenters, both in Ensf- ,land and in this Country, have exprefied a Difiike of all religious Efta.blilhm.enrs, I well know^, but I have been of Opinion, that a large Ma]orlty of thofe feveral Perfiiafions, excepting the People cal- led Quakers, notv/ithfcanding the Declamations that have been publifhed againfc Eflablifliments iTi the grofs, had alv/ays a Referve in Favor of the Eftabhfhment of their own Religion. The Puri- tans, in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth " did not *' defire a Toleration, but the EftahlifJmcnt of ^^ their own Scheme ; fuch an Eflablilhm.en-: of it *' as would have kept all others, in particular the '' Lutherans, and the Friends of Edward's Refor- mation, out of the Church -, and as they did not defire a Toleration for themfelves, fo they would not grant it to others. The full Eftablifhment of their own Plan, abfolute and univei'fal Cotri- ^-f pliance with it, without any Favor or Indulgence, E e 2 • -••'^•'^•v/as «( C(. ^12 r THE APPEAL Sect, « was what they wrote for, and earneftly cndea- Vm. u voured to obtain*." In the laft Century, when they were able to feize upon the Power of the State, they preffed it into their Service, and according to the Dodrine of their Fathers, an Eftablijhmeni without a Toleration was urged and pradiced, a$ a Matter of indifpenfible Duty. The Do<5lor*s An- ceftors and mine, who planted themfelves in New- England, brought with them the fame Principles ; upon which they made farther Improvements, not fuffering even thofe of their own Perfuafion, except they were in full Communion with them, to enjoy fome of the moft eflfential Rights of Englilhmen. The Prefbyterians in Scotland, and the Calvinifts in Geneva, Holland and other Places, have al- ways been Friends to religious Eftablilhments, and ftrenuous Advocates for the Magiftrate's Protedi- on of the true Religion, And I imagine, froni certain hiftorical Accounts and authentic Apecdotes in my PofTeflion, that it muft have been within a very few Years only, that the Doftor's Principle, againft all civil Efiahlijhments in Religion^ has been generally adopted in New-Engbnd, if it has been adopted at all. I iNTiRELY agree with him, that if he, and thofe of his Perfuafion, do not defire an EftaUiJhment in Support of their own religious Sentiments^ they can-' not reafonahly he blamed^ if they are not difpofed to inccurage one in Favor of the epifcopal Colonijis, They are not defired to do this ; nay, when it fball appear that the American Epifcopalians ende^our to introduce any fartherEftablifhment of the Church in the Colonies, than it now has, I will not blame them if they oppofe it, provided the Oppofltion be made * Maddox^ Anfwer to Neal^ p.. iio. DEFENDED. made fairly^ and they confine themfelves within the Limits of I'rutb^ Candor and Decency, After all, what has the Cafe of religious Eilablifhments to do with the Plan for an American Epifcopate, which has been offered to the Public ? Does this Plan propofe an Eftahlijhment of the Church ? Will the Execution of it imply, or amount to, any fuch Thing ? Will the Introduction of Bifhops, who fhail have no Authority, but purely of a fpiritu- al and ecclefiaftical Nature, fuch as is derived altogether from the Church and not from the State' — whofe * Authority fhall operate only upon the Clergy of the Church, and not upon the Laity, nor upon Diflenters of ^ny Denomination' — who ' Ihall not interfere with the Property or Privileges, whether civil or religious, of Church- men or Diflenters'— who * in particular, fhall have no Concern with the Probate of Wills, Let- ters of Guardianfhip and Admiriiftration, or Marriage-Licences, nor be Judges of any Cafes relating thereto' — but who * ihall only exercife the original Powers of their Office, /. e. ordain and govern the Clergy, and adminifler Confir- matipn to thofe who fhall defire it ;' I fay, will the Introdudion of fuch Bifhops as thefe (and no Others are propofed in the Plan, or intended by its Advocates) amount to an Eftablifhment ? Nay, can it have any more Effeft againil the civil or re- ligious Privileges of the Colonifls, than againfl thofe of the Crim Tartars ? If not •, then whatever has been offered upon this Subjed in Anfwer to the Plan, by the Doctor or others, and much }ias been offered by all that have written againft it, is abfo- lutely foreign from the Point, and has 90 Manner of Connexion with it. THE APPEAL For tliis Reafon I fhall pafs over V/hat is faid^ in p. 153, about the general i^ig-^^ of States to make 'religious Eftablifh merits, with this Obfervation ; that the fame Argument, with which the Do6lof endeavours to overthrow it, is as forcible againft the Right of private Judgment. This will evident- iy appear from the following Experiment. If a ■Perfon in England has this Kight^ muft it not be czvned, that a Perfon in China:, in 'Twkey^ in Spain^ has this Right alfo ? What Jhotild make the Differ- tnce in the Eye of true Reafon ? Have Perfons ■ in England been diftingiiifjjed by Heaven by any peculiar Grants beyond Perfons in other Countries'? If they have, let the Grant be produced. If they have not^ all Perfons have^ in common^ the fame Right. And (IS they muft feverally be fuppofed to exert this Right, in forming their own Sentiments in Religion ; what can the Confec^uence be^ but infinite Damage to the Caufe of God and true Religion ? And fuch in Fa5l has been the Confequence of thispretendedRight of priV^/^J//^^- mentjn all Ages.,and in all Places. What Abfurdities in ■Sentiment ^ and ridiculous Follies., not tofay^^grofs Immo- ralities in Pra^ice., have been occafioned by the Exercife of this Right, in fome or other Nations of the Earth ? Thus the Reader fees the Force of the Dodlor's Argument againft Eftablilhments •, if he choofes to fee what can be faid in Favor of them, let him confult, among other Authors, Bilhop Warburton'j Alliance between the Church and the State, Dr. Stebbing'j Effay concerning civil Govern- ment, Dr. Rogers'^ Vindication of the civil Efta- hlifhment, Bifhop Ellys on fpiritual Liberty, Tra6t III, and a late elegant Effay on Eftablifhments in Religion, in Anfwer to the CofeffionaL Object, DEFENDED. 215 'Object. 5. ^HE .Church , of .England in thd^^^^'^-i Colonies^ in its comparative low Stat e.^ inftead of an ^^''^ Epfcopats^ upo?i this.Plan^ or any other ^ needs ra- ther the charitable Affifianee of its Friends to fupport ^ ' itsp'efent Minifters^ and others that are^flill wanted^ p; 154^ The Dodor forgets, that t:h"fe Church of ifingland in feveral of the. Cqlonies, is- riot in that comparative low State k^ here fpeaks' of; but is able to fupport and floes lupport, its .Minifters in general, asarpplyasanySetQf Giergymen arefupported in the Britifh- Dominions. But fuppofmg it w.ere,cthenwifev and that the Church throughout theCpJenies need- ed the charitable JJfiflance. of, its FrMnds.-.ti) fupport its MinifterSy as is alTumed in- tJi€,.Gbje6iion v yec this would -be.no Proof, that it does, not alfo need- an Epifcopate. The^deplorable Sadnefiof jhe religi- ous. State of T'hings, in North-Carolinay ^jvvhere there are fo, few. Clergymen^ :inilead\pf;. anfwering the Objedor's Purpofe, is, on the contrary, a flrong Ar-" gument t9 prove tl;^;lsleGe;irity;of itoifi^can Bi&^ n,». BU^^ fays he, that Charity^ which might be fuf- ficient for the Maintenance of as many Mijfionaries us would be needful there ^ would' be f wallowed up by ene Bifrjop o?dy. And would this' fo much tend to the Honor of Gcd^ and the Good of Souk, as if it was- expended in Support of Mijfions that are really necef- fary I It is furprizing to fee what Advantages are claimed by fome People ♦, how they can make Ufe of the fame Argument to contrary Purpofes ! When o- ther Ends are to be anfvvered, the Writers againft the Church can tell us, that the Society have no Power to apply their Fujids to other Ufes than were intended by the Donors— that '-the Money given " mud be looked upon as (Iridly appropriated by " the pious Donors to particular Ufes j and may " not 2i6 THE APPEAL SicT. « not on any Pretence, be diverted to other and VHI. ic different tjfes, though thofe other Ufes may *' feem to have Something pious and charitable in " their Nature*" — that the Society are Stewards^ and that " Stewards are not allowed to ufe the *' Goods or Money with which they are intruftcd, *' but for thofe Ends and Purpofes for which they *' are committed to them. If they knowingly ap- *' ply them to any others, however good in them- •* feives, they are unfaithful in their Truftf ." But now an Efpifcopate is in VieWy it is thought reafonable and juft, that the Society Ihould alienate a Fund, more ftridly appropriated to a particular Ufe than any other in their Power, (for this may be truly faid of the Fund for the Support of Ame- rican Bifliops) and expend it upon Miflionaries to be lent to Carolina, or other Places, provided always that fuch Places be at a due Diftance from New-England, But as the Society have never aded the Part of unfaithful Stewards in other Cafes, we can be under no Apprehenfions that they will in this. In^ p, 155. the Dodor reprefents the Church of England in the Northern Colonies, as having grown but little in Comparifon with the other Deno" minations of Cbriftians. If this were really the Cafe, it would not be ftrarige, fince it might na- turally be accounted for, from the peculiar Difad- vantes to which the Church in the Colonies has al- ways been fubjett ; and whether it is the Cafe or not, the Plea for an Epifcopate is exadly the fame, it being not founded on the comparative Increafe on the Church, but on its prefent State, with Ref- pcd • Hohart*t Second Addrefi, p. 117. t Majhew\ Obferration, &c. p. 140* DEFENDED- 217 fpe6l both to the Numbers it now contains, and Sect. the Neceflities it is under. But I conceive he muft be millaken, as to the Fa6t* In Pennfylvania, New-Jerfey and New- York, I will not be pofitive that the Church has increafed beyond the Proporti- on of other Denominations, for ^o Years pail. In fome particular Towns and Diftri6ls it undoubted- ly has, but perhaps in others it may have propor- tionably decreafed. But in the New-England Co- lonies, it appears from good Accounts, that the Church has confiderably increafed, and that the Number of its ProfelTors at this Day bears a great- er Proportion to the Number of Inhabitants, than it ever has before. I may be miflaken with Regard to fome of the New-England Colonies ; but my Opinion is founded upon credible Report, fVrength- ened by this Argument — that it is a common Thing there, for Families of DifTenters to conform to the Church ; whereas it feldom happens that a Family is known to leave the Church, and join with the Diffenters. But as to Connedicut, of which I can judge from my own Obfervation, the Church has increafed there moft amazingly, for 20 or 30 Years paft. I cannot at prefent recollecSi: an Example, in any Age or Country, wherein fo great a Proportion of Profelytes has been made to any Religion in fo Ihort a Time, as has been made to the Church of England in the Weilern Divifion of that populous Colony •, unlefs where the Power of Miracles or the Arm of the Magiflratc was exerted to produce that EiFect. This Progrefs of the Church has greatly alarmed the more rigid DifTen- ters in New-England ; and however the good Doc- tor may affect to defpiie it, I think that I can difcover, in fome of his late Writings, that he is not a little alarmed by it himfelf, F f lyj 2i8 THEAPPEAL Sect. Jn p. 1^7, he intimates, that it is not pruderrt yet a while for us to ^f/?r^ ^;/ Epifco^ate^ fmce it u'/// ^^ attended with a vafi Charge^ which mtift he defrayed ferns W^ay cr other. If Americans were to fupport the Epifcopate, and are not yet able, it \V>!re wrong in them, I will not fay^ to dejire^ but to reqi.ell it. But this is not to be the Cafe. And fmce there is an appropriated Fund for this Pur- pofe, v/hich will go far tov/ards defraying the Charge — lince there is no Reafon to doubt but it will be fufficientiy augmiented by voluntary Dona- tions — and efpecially, fmce the Dodlor and his Friends are not to be taxed to raife it to a fuHicien- cy ', they have no Caufe to be unealy on that Ac- count. Under this Head he arQ;ues ao;ainil an E- pifcopate, from the American Church's being yet in its Infancy — in fuch a feeble State as not to be able to ftand upon its own Legs — and, in Ihort, as being fo far from a State of Maturity., as not to make it worth while for a Bifhop to come here. But infant and feeble as She is, he has allowed that She may be 270,000 flrong in the Colonies, exclu- five of the lilands, after reducing her Numbers as low as poffible. Now can he pofTibly think, v/hen he allows himfelf Time for Confideration, that the Church of England in America, containing 270,00a IViembers (befides many Thoiifands more in the I- flands)'in which are included moft of the Gover- nors and principal Perfons in the Colonies, is fo in- confiderable, that it is not worth while for a Bifliop to take Charge of it } Would he look upon an e- qual Number of any People upon Earth, hov/ever low in their Circumilances, or however light wher^ weighed in the political Ballance, in fo contempti- ble a Light ^ Dr. DEFENDED. Dr. Chauncy's other Ohje^rions^ it feems, coincide with izhat has been powerfull;^ offered by Dr. May- hew ; he therefore thinks proper to bring that pow- erful Objeclor upon the Stage, and to retire himfelf, during a Scene of 17 Pages. But before he makes this Exit^ he complains that I fuffered what was ivrote in Anfwer to this very Plan^ by Dr. May hew, to lie unanfwered, v/ithout having lifped a IVord in Reply to him. This Appearance is againfl me, I freely confefs. It was the profefTed Bufinefs of the Appeal to obviate and remove Obje6lions againfc an American Epifcopate, and Dr. Mayhew was too confiderable a Writer to be overlooked. But the Defences of his Obfer-vations I had not then feen ; and although I made m.uch Inquiry, and fent as far as into Conneflicut, I was unable to pro- cure them. I was told however by one that had read them, that they contained nothing material upon the Subject, but what had been fuiliciently anfwered by Mr. Apthcrp^ and nothing but what I had confidered in the Courfe of my Papers ; upcn which Information I proceeded to publifli. This Excufe I now offer to the Public, not doubtino; of its being candidly accepted. But what Excufe can Dr. Chatincy make, for taking no Notice of v/hat YJ?iS> powerfully offered by Mr. Apthorp, in Anfwer to thefe very Objedlions of Dr. Mayhew, and for not having lifped a Word in Reply to him 'i Was it treating his Readers generoufly, or fairly, or ho- neflly, to prefent them with Dr. Mayhevv^'s Objec- tions, broadly hinting, although not directly altert- ing, that they had not been anfwered ♦, when he muit have known, that they had not only been anf- wered, but that no Reply had been made to the Anfwer ? Unlels fome fatisfadory Account fnall be 220 THE APPEAL Sect, bc given of this Condufl, he mull bear the Re- ^ proach of it, as v/ell as he can. Before he introduces Dr. Mayhew, he fuggefts an Expedient to comprcmife Matters between Epifco- palians, and other Denojninations, in the Colonies^ p. 158. The Expedient is, that the King jfiiould • grant a CommilTion to fome of the epifcopal Cler- gy here, to perform all the Offices of a Bifhop. Every plaufible Expedient for compromifmg Dif- ferences between the various Denominations of Chriftians, ought to be attended to •, but Plaufibi- iity cannot be predicated of this. It can neither anfwer the Ends of the Epifcopalians, nor even thofe of the Projector and his Adherents. The Powers wanted by the American Church are ' pure- * ly of a fpiritual Nature,' \vhich therefore the King cannot give ; fuch Authority as can be given by the King, is altogether temporal^ which is the very Thing that the Diflenters dread : So that nei- ther Epifcopalians nor Diflenters, can pofTibly ac- quiefce in the Expedient. I SHALL nov/ lay before the Reader Mr. Ap^ thorp's Reply to what has been produced from Dr, Mayhew on the Subje(5t ; firft begging that worthy Gentleman's Pardon, for making fo free with his Property. " The Doftor affefls to doubt, fays Mr. Ap- thorp, whether the Scheme propofed by his Anf- werer, be not merely his own -, inftead of being, as is afferted, the real and only one that has been in View •, and fays, that if this AlTertion be true, he and others, have been mifinformed. Therefore, let his or their Informers fay on what Grounds they 1 DEFENDED. 221 they have ever affirmed a different one to have been Sect. framed ; or elfe let them take Shame to themfelves, ^^ for inventino; Falfhoods, or ventino- Imaginations for Fadls •, and let the Dodlor fet a Mark on them, and be more cautious whom he believes hereafter," " Successive Propofals for American Bifhops have been made at different Times, through a loiv~* Courfe of Years, by Men of high Rank and Cha- Ta6Ver in the Church •, and are ready now for the Perufal of any worthy Perfon, who Ihall declare himfelf unfatisfied in this Poin t : All which agree with what the Anfweret' has avered. One of them perhaps may have peculiar Weight v/ith the Doctor ; I mean that made in the Year 1750, by the excel- lent Bifhop Butler, in the Dodlor's ov/n Judg- ment " a great Ornament of the Epifcopal Order, *' and of the Church of England.^'' This Scheme, with which the Writer was favored by a Gentleman of Diftin<5lion in Bcfton^ is in the Bijhop's own hand- writings of which the following is an exad: Tran- fcript." I. " That no coercive Power is defired over " the Laity in any Cafe ; but only a Power to re- *' gulate the Behavior of the Clergy who are in *' epifcopal Orders ; and to corre6l and punifh *' them according to the Law of the Church of *' England, in Cafe of Mifbehavior or Negle6l of *' Duty, with fuch Powers as the CommifTaries a- " broad have exercifed. II. " That nothing is defired for fuch Bifhops,- " that may in the leaft interfere with the Dignity, " or Authority, or Intereft, of the Governor, or any ^' other Officer of State. Probates of Wills, Li- " cencc 222 T H E APPEAL Sect. « ceBGC for Marriages, &:c. to be left in the Hands \Ul. cc where they are : And no Share m the temporal " Government is dejired for Bifljo-ps. III. " 'T^HE Maintenance of fuch BifJoops not to he ■*' at the Charge of the Colonies, . IV. " No Biiliops are intended to be fettled in ** Places where the Government is in the Hands of DiiTenters, as in New-England, &c. But Au- thority to be given, only to ordain Clergy for fuch Church of England Congregations as are among them, and to infpect into the Manners " and Behavior of the faid Clergy, and to confirm " the Members thereof." " This Plan is fo exadly fimilar to that in the Anfiver to Dr. Mayhew'j Ohfervations^ that it can- not be doubted, they are the fame, and that it is the pnly one intended to be put in Execution. And it is fuch a fnnple and beauiiful Model of the mofl ancient and moderate Epifcopacy, that it fhould, not only remove all the Do<5i:or's Apprehenfibns, but the Scruples of every rational and learned DilTenter againft that apoilolic Form of Govern- ment.'* " Supposing this to be the real Scheme, the Potior owns that it fets the Matter in a lefs excep- tionable Point of View, than he had feen it in be- fore. Yet he cannot forbear going 50 Years back, to ridicule fome harmlefs, though ill-chofen, Phra- fes, in which the Subftance of it is expreifed ; and expofe to fcorn, with burlefque Gravity, what he calls a Matter '' fo fublime, myflerious and facred, '' as the Impofition of the Bifhop's Hands." Yet, he DEFENDED. 223 he well knows, or eafily may, that we afcribe no ^ect. more Efficacy to the laying on of Biiliops' Hands, ^^^^* than his Brethren do to the laying on of Prefbyters' Hands. And if we apprehend ourfelves bound to admit it in one Office, which they have rejeded, I mean Confirmation -, we may indeed be miftaken in it, but fureiy cannot be Objects of Derifion for it. The fame is the Cafe of epifcopal Ordination, and epifcopal Vifitation of the Clergy of our Church. We think them all appointed, and ufeful to us : We are fure they are injurious to no other Perfons. And therefore according to thofe Principles, for which the Doctor avows the warmed Zeal; we are en- titled to have thefe Offices performed for us by Perfons of that Order, to which we conceive they are committed : Elfe, v/e do not enjoy " that " full entire Liberty in religious Matters," which the Dodlor defires for himfelf, and " v/hich all Men, whofe Principles or Practices are not in- confiftent with the Safety of Society, he fays^ have a Right to enjoy." He tells us indeed, that we do enjoy it without American Bilhops, *' though under fome Inconvemences^'* as he gently calls them. The Buffoonery that immediately follows, in Order to prevent any Compaffion for our Cafe, I omit. So he thinks we are poffefled fufficiently of the whole Exercife of our Religion, becaufe our young People may be confirmed, and Clergymen ordained for us, and properly inlpe6led afterwards •, provided they will all go from Ameri- ca to Europe for thefe Purpofes. Can the Dodor "fay with a good Confcience, that Liberty like this is all that he fhould defire for himfelf and his Brethren ? Let me intreat him to read over again fome Words of his Anfiverer^ to which he has made no Reply : Whether, becaufe they deferve none^ 224 THE APPEAL ^vm* "^^^' ^^ becaufe they admit of none, let others ^ ^' judge. " The American DilTenters from our Com- " munion, would tliink it infupportably gi"ievous " to have no Minifters but fuch as received Ordi- *' nation in England or Ireland ; or to be withheld " from the Ufe of any religious Rite^ which they " eflcemed as highly as we do Confirmation ; oi^ ■' to have their Churches deflitute of a Superintend *' dency, which they conceived to be of apoftoli- " cal Inflitution. /mould in fuch a Cafe be a zea- " lous Advocate for them, as not yet enjoying the " full Toleration to which they had a Right. " And furely they ought to aflc their Confciences *' very feriouily, why they oppofe our Application " for fuch Indulgence, as they would claim for " themfelves ; and v/hether indeed fuch Oppofition " is not downright Perfecution ; and that, in a " Matter merely fpiritual, v/ithout the Mixture of " any temporal' Concern." J-^if. p. 60. " The Dodor, frill flying to Ridicule in Defed of Argument, intimates, how much the Epif- copalians in Amaerica need to be well ruled and governed,— ho^ much the Clergy need to be united, and reduced to Order. On which I would only obferve, that the American Clergy are known to be unanimous in their Wilhes to be under the immediate Infpedion of Bifhops refident among them : Which Concurrence implies quite the con- trary to a prefent diforderly State of that Clergy ; who are perhaps, as faithful to their Trull, and as blamelefs in their Manners, as any Body of Men in the Chriftian Miniflry." " He fays, that great Inconveniences are likely to follow from the fending Bifhops to America. But DEFENDED* 22^ But he fays alfo, " It is readily owned that our Sect* " Apprehenfion of what may poflibly or probably ^^^^* *' be the Confequences of it, ought not to put us *' on infringing the religious Liberty of our Fel- " low-Subjeds and Chriftian Brethren." Nay, he adds, " neither have we any Power to do fo ; if we *' were unreafonahle and wicked enough to defire it ; *' our Charter granting fuch Liberty to all Protef- *' tants^ Therefore, Bifhops may, by that Char- ter, fettle even in New-England. And if the having bifhops among them be Part of the religious Li- berty of the Epifcopalians, as it evidently is ; the DifTenters ought not to oppofe it on Account of apprehended Confequences : Much lefs ought they to oppofe the Settleme... of them in other Provin- ces, totally independent on New-England ; or their reforting to the New-England Epifcopahans occa- fionally. For any Thing of this Kind would be doing evil on Pretence that good may come''" " ,* " '' But why are bad Confequences apprehended ? ** Bifhops, he tells us, are ambitious arid unquiet.** But fo are Prefbyters, and all Sorts of Men too often. Bifhops partake of jufl the fame Nature with the Reft of the Species : And the Do6lor will own, that they are now, and long have been, as quiet an Order of Men, as any in this Nation. But who knows whether they will continue fo ? And who can know with Certainty any fuch Thing concerning any Perfons whatever ? Who knows whether theNew-Englanders will not hang ^akersf andWitches again .^ Butwhyfhould either be fufped- cd ? The Clergy of England are in general Friends G g to * Rom, lil. S* f See the excellent and truly Honourable Mr. Hutchin/m^ %\^^9i X^^MaJfacbufitti.Bajfy p. I $7, 196, 320^ 226 THE APPEAL Sect, to religlcus Freedom : The People of England, ^^' Whigs and Tories, are unfavorable to clerical Power •, and a faf greater Danger, than the Doc- tor's imaginary one, is, that of their laying afidc all Regard to the Chriilian Miniftry, in every Shape, and to Chriflianity itfelf. S«rdy then, there never was fo little Profpect, that a Spirit of reli- gious Intolerance would revive here* Or if it fhould^ it might not extend to New-England ; for it did not, in the Reigns of James and Charles the Firft. But even fuppofing it to reach thither, its Effects would be very little diminifhed by the Cir- cumilance of no Bifhops being already placed in America. They might foon be fent, and with much greater Authority than is afked for them how *, md perhaps with fome Resentment at the OppcfJicn made to them before. But the whole Ap- prehenfion is groundlefs. The Englifh DifTenters, who have Six and Twenty Bifhops eftablilhed a- mong them, fear no Harm from them. Why then iliould the New-England DilTenters fear any, if one or two fhould be ellablifhed, with much lefs Power, in one or tv/o neighboring Provinces ? Thofe Pro- vinces are not inhabited by Bigots ; far from it. Governors, Aflemblies, DifTenters, nay Church- men, and even Clergymen, would be all on their Guard againfb epifcopal Encroachments. Add to this, that fo public a Declaration as has been made of the Model of Epifcopacy, propofed to be fol- lowed in America, will itfelf be an effedlual Bar- rier againfb any undue Extenfion of ecclefiallical Power •, of which the Do6tor affects to be fo ap- prehenfive." — " But he has one Obje6lion again ft Bifliops in our Colonies, v/hich I had almoft overlooked. He knows f vni. DEFENDED. 227 knows not how they are to be maintained. " Nor, ^^^^"J^' *' as he thinks, will they run this Rilqiie, unlefs " they have more Faitii in God, and lefs Love to " the World, than moft of their Order have had, *' fince Conftantine the Great became a nurfing Fa- *• ther to the Church, and the pious maternal Coun- *' cil of Nice fuckled her v/ith the clear and pure, *' the uncorrupt and fincere Milk of Homoopjianity^ *' that iKe might grow thereby '* One might be at a Lofs to find out the AfTociation of Ideas be- tween the Do6lrine of the Council of Nice^ and the Maintenance of Bifliops in America. We can only fuppofe that the Dodlor has an equal Love for them both. But if no proper Maintenance can be found for them, he needs not be uneafy at the Pro- je6l of fending them : And that it is not to be at the Expence of the Colonies, he has feen in BiPnop Butler'^ Scheme, with which the others agree." " He imagines that appointing Bifhops for A- merica, would probably increafe the epifcopal Par- ty there •, and then great Evils might follow. I can- not difcern in what other Way it can increafe that Party, than by fupplying them more eafily with a competent Number of Miniflers \ taking Care that thofe Miniflers lliould be diligent and exemplary \ and promoting an early Senfe of Piety among their young People. Thefe are no Evils ; and what can one or two Bifhops, on a Continent 600 Miles long, do befides ? The Do6i:or fays indeed, that Pretexts might eafily be found for enlarging their Powers, and increafmg their Number. But enlarging their Powers would immediately raife a Clamour that could not be withflood. If a few Bifhops proved difagreeable, more would not be added. And though they fhould prove agreeable G g a and 228 THEAPPEAL 5ect. and ufeful ; more would be fent, only to fuch Pro- ■ -' vinces as chofe them. In the Ihort Stay which one of them would choofe to make in New-England, he could not bring over many Perfons to our Church. And therefore how terrible Things foever Epifcopalians, if they fhould become the Majori- ty, may attempt and perform there, they will b? ahrioft, if not quite, as likely to accomplifli, without . ever feeing a Billiop am.ong them, as with feeing one nov/ and then. But indeed there is very little Likeli- hood of their ever becoming the Majority there ; and flill lefs, of their carrying Points in their own Favor, as the Doclor fancies they may, while they continue a Minority ; for all Parties, though di- vided among themfelves, will be fure to unite a- gainfl them. Nay, had they Power, there is no Reafon to think they would be oppreffive ; for they are not oppreffive in the Colonies where they a6lu- ally have it : Or that they v/ould attempt — for they could not, with any Modefty, or any Hope of Succefs — fuch Laws againft the Diffenters, as the Diffenters have not attempted againfl them. And if the Zeal of the Nev/~England Clergy threatens any Danger, Bifhops would temper it, as they have done in England, inflead of inflaming it. Therefore upon the whole, I hope the Do6lor will, on cpnfidering farther, endeavor to reconcile our Countrymen to their AdmifTion : A Requeft, in my Opinion, fomewhat more reafon able than his, that the Society fhould reconcile the Members of our Church to being contented without epifcopaj MlNJSTEHsV* At • Mr. Jpthrph ReviEw of Dr. Mayhenv^s Remarks on th? Answer to his OhJer'vatiqn He forgets that he fet out upon the contrary Prin- ciple, m the Beginning of his Book ; lloutly con- tending that Epifcopacy was eftablilhed at the Time of the Reformation, not upon the Footing of a divine Inftitution, but upon Account of its being beft fitted to the Form of Government in the State. The civil Conftitution of the Britilh Mo- narchy is, in all elTential Points, the fame now that it was at that Period, and Epifcopacy is the tame ; fo that if they were peculiarly adapted to each other then, they are now. That this was, T^ i^'v^r^ ^^^^' ^ ^"^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ' ^"d Reafons for this Belief were given in t\iQ Appeal-, which Rea- lons the Doctor has not attempted to invalidate. It is well known that the fame Opinion has been maintained, by the greatell and befl Writers iipon the Subject. « For the Government of Bi- *' fhops/' DEFENDED. S5; fhops," fays the incomparable Lord Baconfy Sect, for my Part, not prejudging the Proceedings of ^^* other Churches, I do hold it to be warranted by the Word of God, and by the i'radice of the ancient Church in better Times, and much mere convenient for Kingdoms, than a Parity of Mi- nifters, and Government by Synods.'* It was an Obfervation of the noble and learned Philip de Mornay^ who was not only a Calvinift, but a principal Support of the Protcilant Religion in France •, " that although the prefbyterian Govern- *' ment might do v/ell enough in popular States, " luch as Geneva and Switzerland, yet in King- " doms or Monarchies, epifcopal Government is " rather to be chofen." ' And the fame Opinion * in much flronger Terms, and with a particular * View to Englard^ was profeflcd by another Fo- ' reigner, who underftood Politicks as well as molt * Men of his Tim,e, and was both a good Pro- * teftant and had great Candor in Matters of Re- * ligion ; I mean the celebrated Pujfendorf who * expreffes himfelf in the following Words : " In " this Refpe6i: Kkewife not a little Blemijli is " thought to lie upon many of the Calvinifts, as *' being too much mclined to affc6t Democracies, *' and being on the contrary averfe to Monarchies, ^' and forward to fuhvert them."—' Whm Puff en- « ^cr/fays that the Calvinifts are too much inclined * to Democracies, he is not to be underftood as if * he reprefented all of that Sed as being at all ' Times thus difpofed ; for no doubt, while the « Kings under w^hom they live encourage and favor * them, they rgay fo long be well enough plealed * with their Government, and willing to lupporc ^ it. The Baron's Meaning I take to have been, LI t that -f- As quoted by Blfhop Ellys. THE APPEAL ^ that the popular Forms of their Church-Govern-- ' ment, have a natural Tendency to raife Difpofi- ' tions, which, when either they are foured by un- * favorable Treatment, or not enough fweetned * by perfonal Intereft under Monarchies, are apt * to lean much towards popular Schemes*.' I might quote innumerable Authorities to the fame Purpofc i but I will content myfelf with one more. *' The eftablifhed Religion, and the eftablifhedGo- " vernment," fays a Writer of great Candor and Penetration, " are in their Conflitution and Inter- *' efts fo interwoven and linked together, that they who would ftibvert the Government, have no furer Way to compafs their wicked Ends, than by endeavouring to ruin the Church firft. The greateft Strength of the Government ever did and ever will lie in the Fidelity and Affedion of " the Members of the eftablifhed Church : As the *' Government knows this to be true, fo do its EnemieSy who therefore are as ready by all Ar- tifices and Attempts to weaken it, as our Go- vernors can be to favor and proted itf .'* WE are neither fo void of Difcerjiment^ fays the Dodor, or unacquainted with the Intrigues of thofe who are moft zealous for an American Epifcopate^ as not to be fully fatisfied^ they have much more in De^ fign than they have been pleafed openly to declare^ p. 201. But notwithftanding his Opinion of his own Difcernmenty he ftiould remember that this Charge brought againft us before ' the Tribunal of the * Public,' ought to be fupported, at leaft, with an Appearance of Evidence. It is no fmall Thing pub- lickly to accufe pf Prevarication and Fallhood, fuch * Elyls TraSlsy p. I48.- t Hare's Works, Vol. I. p. 532. DEFENDED. 259 llich a Number of Men, who have always been Sect. refpeded for their Integrity ; and fomething more ^^* than arbitrary Sufpicions will be needful, to juflify fo high an Impeachment. But he tells us, he is not unacquainted with their Intrigues. Let him then, for the Sake of his own Reputation, difcover them to the World. This is what he owes both to the Public and himfelf -, and it is expeded from him, as he would not betray the Caufe, for which he profelTes to be uncommonly zealous. Let him mention fome one Intrigue., fome over-A6l, from which it can reafonably be concluded, that our Defigns are contrary to our Declarations, and we will take Shame to ourfelves ', but if he can offer no other Proof than his pretended Difcernment of our fecret Intentions, he will be confidered as no better than a falfe Accufer of his Chriitiun Bre- thren, who have given him no juft Caufe of Pro- vocation. This Matter is of fo great Confequence in the prefent Debate, that we cannot give it up, but m.ufl infift that he comes to a particular Expla- nation. Much, very much, depends upon it. The Uproar about Bifhops has been, in a great Mea- fure, excited and continued by this very Pretence. If we are gtiilty of what he charges us with, we deferve to be oppofed •, if we are innocent,, we ought to be acquitted. I therefore call upon him in a pub- lic Manner to produce his Evidence, or to retrad his Charge. 7'HEIR ultimate Views., fays he, whatever they fropofe to begin with., have not been fo perfetily je- a-eted in their own Breafts., but that they have been whifpered about from one Friend to another., fo that we are at no Lofs to form a true Judgment of them. And agam : nings have tranfpired from thofe., who L 1 2 did.- THE APPEAL did not know how^ or were not able to keep a Secret^ p 202. I once more affirm, that we have no other Views than v/hat we have publifned •, and I defy any of our Adverfaries to prove the contrary. I can, at leaft, anfv/erfor myfelf-, I can anfwer alfo for our Convention, with whofe Views and Inten- tions it will be allowed that I am acquainted — that we have no Secret in the Gafe •, that we have no ultimate Views that are contrary to our immediate ones •, and that thefe are not contrary to our pub- lic Declarations. But to anfwer to fuch an inde- finite Charge of private V/hifpers^ by no Body knows whom or when^ about no Body knows what ; is more than I will undertake, as I am confcious of my Want of the neceffary Difcernraent. And if the Do6lor has no other Evidence, it is mxer trifling with the Attention of the Public, to infift xipon this. It concerns him to fhew that fome Difcovery has been made, either with or without Defign, by fome Perfon who may be fuppofed to be acquainted with all Stcrets of the Kind, that the Clergy have been a6ting a deceitful, double Part with the World, and are aiming at a different Epifcopate from that of the Appeal. This is the grand Point ♦, and upon his Proof of it, I will venture to rifque the whole Controverfy. I HAVE now dene with Dr. Chauncy for the pre- fent, having replied to every Thing material in his Performance, whether it relates immediately to the propofed Epifcopate, to the C hurch of England, or to the Appeal ; excepting what he has faid upon the general Subje6b of Epifcopacy :— And even to fome Things that are not material, any farther than as they are thought fo by fome ignorant, pre- judiced Perfons. I have paffed over nothing, from any DEFENDED. 261 any Opinion of Difficulty in replying to it; and I Sect. have endeavored to obviate all the Objedlions ot o- ^* thers, in anfwering the Dodlor's. Different Lan- guage from his has been frequently ufed in the late periodical Exhibitions againft the Church •, but the Objections have been much the fame ; and I am miilaken, if I have not done Juftice to the Ar- guments and Reprefentations of thofe Writers, as well as to his. There is indeed one Objeflion flarted by them,' which has not yet been confidered -, and I hardly know, whether it is worth confidering. The Ob- jection is, that fuch an Epifcopate as is propofed for the Colonies, is an impojjible Thing in its own Nature. The Impojfihility of the Thing is reprefen- ted by one Writer, to be fo glaringly evident, that it is utterly incredible that they (the Qltvgy) Jloould be fo exceffvely ignorant^ as not to know it*. It is a fuiiicient Anfwer to this Obje6lion, fuppofing it to have been made ferioufly, that thofe eminent Per- fons who firft projected the Plan, and thofe who have from Time to Time been its Patrons — many of whom were much better acquainted with the Conftitution of the Kingdom and its Colonies than thefe Obje6lors — could fee no Impofiibility or Dif- ficulty in the Matter. Nay, as to the Impojfibility of the Things Dr. Chaiincy himfelf, who, m the Ame* rican IVhig's Opinion, is one of the mcft learned and able Writers in America^, was, about a Year ago, fo excejfive ignorant as not to know it. For it is ut- terly incredible., that, if he had known or fufpeCled the Impojfibility that fuch a Plan could be executed, he would not have availed himfelf of fo capital an Objedion. * American Whig^ Numb. IV. t See Numb. LU. ,.^ 262 THEAPPEAL Sect. ObjctSlIon. To this may be added : It is a good ^^' Evidence that the propofed Epifcopote may exift in America, that fuch an Epifcopate has adually exift- ed, and does now exift, in America, among the Moravians •, and if it may in one Church, why not in another ? It has been faid that the Church of England is an Exception, becaufe its Billiops by the Law of the Land^ are intitled to certain Powers and Preheminences wherever they are fettled in the Britifh Dominions ; v/hich Powers are difclaimed in the Plan. The Law of the Land in this Objedi- on, I fuppofe, means the Laws of England, and not any Laws peculiar to this Country •, and if by the Laws of England Bifliops, contrary to the clear Opinion of Dr. Blackftone, will be invefted with fuch Powers and Preheminences in America, as foon as they fhall be fent hither -, it muft be owing to this only Reafon — that the Lav/s of Eng- land eftablilh the Church throughout the Britifh American Colonies, in the fame Manner that it is eftablifhed in England. But will the Objedors ad- mit of this Dodrine ? Have not the ableft Writers of their Party, always infifted upon the contrary ? Does not this Dodrine necefTarily imply, that we have, beiides an equitable, a legale Right to an Epifcopate ; and that our Oppofers tranfgrefs the Law of the Land^ as well as the Lav/s of Equity } But flill, an Eftablilhment in Favor of the Church here, which they infinuate in this Controverfy that we have, but which they mean not to allow on any other Occafion, would by no Means exclude an Epifcopate in the very Form that is fpecified ; for fuch an Epifcopate, I believe, may, at any Time, be ereded, or rather, reftored, in England. It was fhewn in the Appeal^ that the Bifhops pro- pofed for America, were firft mentioned by the Title DEFENDED. 263 Title of Suffragans ; and thofe who are acquainted Sect. with the Hiftory of the Church, and the ecclefi- ^^' aflical Laws of England, know, that the Bifhops marked out in our Plan, whatever they may be called, are in Reality no other than Suffragans. If therefore the Laws of England admit of Suffra- gans, which they as certainly do, as of Diocefan Bifhops, they then admit of fuch an Epifcopate as we contend for-, even were we to fuppofe the Church of England to be as fully eftabiifhed in the Colonies as it is in England, and by the fame Laws. Suffragans have been frequently appointed at Home, under the prefent ecclefiaflical Eftablifh- ment •, and the Confequence is unavoidable, that they may be appointed here. But after all, were the Cafe in every Refpe6l as the Objedion repre- fents it to be, which it is not in any Refpe6l •, yet an A61 of Parliament would make our Plan prac- ticable ; and there can be no Doubt but its Friends have Intereft enough to obtain fuch an A61, ihould they find it to be neceffary. S E C T, 264 I'he Conclusion. THE Reader is now acquainted with both Sides of this Controverfy. An Epifcopate is requefled, in Behalf ot the Church of England in America. The Reafons for which it is delired, have been offered in the Appeal. The Nature of the propofed Epifcopate, has alfo been explained. Difiatisfied Perlbns were candidly invited to pro- pofe their Obje6lions. The Adverfaries of the Church have had Time to objedl •, and a fufiicient Number of Perfons has been employed in this Service. The periodical Objedlors have had peri- odical Anfwers -, and a Reply is now given to the more formal Obje6tions of Dr. Chauncy, That Obje6lions would arife ag^ind the Settle- rrent of Bifhops in the Colonies, unlefs they Ihould be under peculiar Regulations, was originally fore- feen \ and therefore, in forming the Plan for an American Epifopate, all poflible Care was taken to render it inoffenfive. It is effential to this Plan, that the Bifhops intended, are to have no Support from the Colonies, except by voluntary Donations from private Perfons •, and that they are to exercife no Jurifdidion, but over the^Clergy of the Church of England •, by which Provifion, the great popular Obje6lions of Tithes^ and Spiritual Courts^ have no Foundation to reft on. This is fo evident, that our Opponents have hazarded but very little upon thofe Points ; and have found it neceffary to introduce a new Set of Objections, in Order to keep jup the Oppofition againft the Church, being unable to defend the old ones. They r.5^ CONCLUSION. 265 They now objedl that we do not really dertre to have an Epifcopate under fuch a Modification, as is propofed to the Public. This is a very material Objedion, could it be fupported ; and deferves perhaps more Attention, than all the others which they are able to offer. But important as it is, it has nothiftg more folid to depend upon than malevolenc Conjedure ; for whatever may be their Pretences, every Reader knows that they have hitherto in- tirely failed in the Article of Proof. On our Side, the flrongefl: Evidence that the Nature of fuch a Cafe will admit of, has been laid before the Public. We have produced as Witneffes the Society's an- niverfary Sermons, their Abftrads, and indeed all that has peen publifhed on the Subjed by fuch as could be fuppofed to underftand the Cafe, for Half a Century paft •, all which, without one Ex- ception, teftify in our Favor. We have added our folemn Declarations, which muft have a Weight proportionable to what is allowed to our Charadlers. The Teftimony of our Vouchers is clear and ex- prefs, uniform and confident, and diredly to the Point •, while not one counter Evidence has appear- ed on the other Side to weaken it. To the Weight of our Declarations nothing has been oppofed, but ungenerous Reflections and pretended Sufpicions. Aeter driving the preceding Objection as far as poflible, it has been farther urged, that fuppo- fino- fuch an harmlefs Epifcopate as that of the A-pped to be at firfl fettled, yet it would foon de- generate into one that is opprefTive. We fee not the lead Probability of this -, and we abfolutely deny that any fitch Thing is intended : So far from it, that the Friends of the Church would even join wiih its Enemies, were that necelTary, in guarding a- M m ' gainft the CONCLUSION. gainft it. All the Afiurances, all the Evidences, all the Securities wliich we have in our Power to give, to prevent Uneafmefs, we are willing to of- fer ♦, and all that is not beneath the Dignity of Go- vernment to give, Vv^e are willing to foilicit. Wc y/ant not an Epifcopate on the Footing of a State- Eftahlipjnent ; we defire no more than a compieat Toleration, which we have not at prefent •, and thereby to be raifed to an Equality with other re- ligious Denominations in the Colonies. To this, we think ourfelves Entitled, upon the common Principles of religious Liberty and of the Enghili Conflitution •, and we are furprized and concerned, to find that any who profefs a Regard for thofe Principles, can oppofe our Claim. We are frill more furprized to fee the Arts to which they can defcend, in fupporting their Oppofition. From Men of Senfe and Candor, reafonable and candid Beha- viour is naturally expe6led. From Gentlemen we expect, at leaf!:. Decency ; and from Chriftians, Charity. 0\\v Opponents make high Pretenfions to Candor and good Senfe, and call themfelves Gentlemen and Chriftians ; but how far their late Attacks upon the Church haye been reafpaable, or candid, or decent, or charitable, I am perhaps too far interefled, fairly to determine. The Public have been invited to judge of this Controverfy ; and to their impartial Decifion the Manner, as well as the Matter of it, is mpft refpedlfuliy fubmitted. If this Difpiite is to be continued, I would humbly propofe a new Plan of Operations, viz. That the Debate be reduced within a narrower Compafs, and that nothing which does not imme- diately relate to the Merits of the Caufe, be offer- ed on either Side. We have already trefpalled toq far r/^^ C O N C L U S I O N. ■far upon the Patience of the Public -, let us be careful hereafter to make a proper Ufe of their Indulgence. I v/culd alfo propofe, that no Invec- tive or Abufe, nothing that favors of Bigotiy or Barbarity, be fuffered to mingle in the Debate •, but that ingenuous, fober Reafoning, fnould decide it. It ought to be remembered, that we are not only accountable to the Public for our Behavior in this Controvcrfy, but that v/e muil one Day anfwer for it before a higher Tribunal. This lail Confideration had fuch an Effect upon Dr. du Moulin, who, it feems, had been an ahufive controverfial Writer, that when he came to lie upon his Death-Bed, he made the following penitential Declaration •, which may deferve our peculiar At- tention, while we are engaged in the prefent Dil- pute about American Bifhops. " As for my Books, *' fays he, in which I mixed many perfonal Reflec- " tions, I am now fenfible I vented too much of *' my own Paffion and Bitternefs •, and therefore I '' difclaim all that is perfonal in them ; and am *' heartily forry for every Thing I have written to " the defaming any Perfon. I humbly beg God, " and all thofe I have v/ronged. Pardon, for Jefus " Chrift's Sake, and am refolved, if God fpare my " Life, never to meddle more with fuch perfonal ^' Things : And do earneftly exhort all People, as " a dying Man, that they will ftudy more Love " and mutual Forbearance in their Differences; ^' and will avoid all bitter and uncharitable Reflec- " tions on one another's Perfons. And as I ear- " neilly pray thofe worthy Men of the Church of " England to have Charity and Tendernefs for " the°Diffenters from them -, fo I beg of the Dif- *' fenters that they would have a due Regard and M m 2 " R piped 268 "The CONCLUSION. " Rcfpeft to thofe of the Church of Englarid i ** Of many of whom I fay now, let my Soul bfe with theirs ! And that all true Proteftants among us may heartily unite and concur in the Defence and Prefer vation of the holy reformed Religion, now by the Mercy of God fettled among us. *' And that Men of all Sid^s nlay^ according to St. ^^ Paul's Rule, ceafe to hite and devour one another^ *' left we he deftroyed one of another \ and that *' whereunto we have already attained, we may *' walk by the fame Rule j . hoping that if any *' Man is otherwife minded, ia fome lelTer Things, *' God lliall either reveal that i6 them, or merciful* " ly forgive it, through Jefus Chrift/* 4C «(