'^^s^- REGULATIONS fibrari.) of \\t Jffkral-sirett Sotictu IN BOSTON. I. Tliu Library is open to the use of all tiie Members of llie Federal-street Congregational Society. II. Books are delivered from the Library at the close of the morning service on every Sunday. Books must be returned at the same time. Ill, Each person may take two volumes at a lime. IV. No volume can be taken from the Libi-ary, until its title, together with the name and residence of the person on whose account it is taken, has been recorded in a book kei)t for the i)urpose. V. Octavo and duodecimo volumes may be kept four weeks; other books, only two weeks. This book was placed in the Library, No. -i^ Dr. Chauncy's A N S W E R To Dr. Chandler's A P P E A L to the P tXBLIC. THE APPEAL T O T H E Public answered. In Behalf of the Non-Episcopal CHURCHESm AMERICAj CONTAINING Re M A R K s on what Dr. Thomas Br ad- bury Chandler has advanced, on tho four following Points, The Original and Nature of the Epis$:opal Office; • Reafons for fending Bishops to America. The Plan on which it is propofed to fend them. And the Objections againft fending them obviated and refuted. WHEREIN THE Reasons for an American Episcopate are fhewn to be infufEcie.nt, and theOB^ jECTioNs againft it in full Force. By C H A R L E S C H A U N c y, D. D. And Paftor of the firft Church of Chrift in Bo/ion, B S T N: N, E. Printed by Kn^eeland and Adams, in A4ilk-Strect^ fcr Thomas Leyerett, in Corn-HilW 1768, sec ADVERTISEMENT. ij*^ II E y^ujjjor of^ the folhwhig ivot:k cannot fay., that he undertook it in virtue of anj % "Voted appointment,'' hj a '* convention of the Clergy" ; or that he was ''^affifted'' in it^ either as ip " mefhpdl\ or " nianqgemenf'j 4>/' direciion^* fr.pnji learned and able 4, hody^ of men. Hf does not -pretend to have, been favoured ivith fuch ((iftinguipinz utn-a lit ages. Not that his appear- VI g^ upon ti)i: occafion^ was of his own meer tno- tion., ■ Me would rm[ber have cbafe.n to hxive hjeen ^xeuf^dfrovi cngcgiTJg in on affair, that he knew would he attended with labour^ and might expofe Mm ig ?nuch ill-w'-IL But he war, at lengthy tvcrconie by private friends ' More efpecially as urging this motive, its being piiblifed /#, the world, that, if no " objcBions were offer- ed again ft-, Qt Am e r i c a fJ Ep i s c o p a t e, it would be taken for granted ^Lh Parti^es >V K K £ S A T I S F I K D ", ^{M INTRODUCTION. IT ha;?, for fome time, been known, that tht Epifcopal Clergy, in the Colonies, in confe- (^uence of confultations, in convened bodies, have tranfmitted a number of addreffes to England •, one, to his prefcnt Majedy, importunately requelt- ing an American Episcopate ; o:hers, to the Arch-Bifhops cf Canterbury and York, to the Bifhop of London, and to the Univerfuies of Ox- ford, and Cambridge, iblliciting their influence in an affair of fuch im/portance to the well-being, if not the very being, of the Church of England in thefe parts of the world. If this was " never in- tended to be kept a fecret", it was certainly made one, at lead in regard of the arguments' rnade ufe of in lupportof [he thing requefted ; for though an authentic knowledge of them vvas defired, it could not be obtained at firft, and I know not that it ever has been fince. The affair feems to have been carried on, as it were, under ground, until *' the dilcovery of a favorable dsfpofuion in ma- ny,", at home, towards the fupport of the thing jnvievv. And now, the v/ay beiiig prepared, it is *•* thought proper, in a public manntr, to give informaiion of the Reasons, why an American- Epifcopate is lb earneliiy defired by the Clergy, and other friends and membtrrs.of the church". It might have been as proper, and certainly would have been more candid and generous, not to fay fair, if they had given thete reaipns, when they fent cheir addreffes fupported by them. VVp ^ight then have b^en heard at hoine as well, and as ^ INTRODUCTION. as foon, as they ; and judgment might have been made upon an impartial hearing of the cafe, and not by hearing one fide only. We are, after fuch previous care to ripen matters at home in their favor, without all controverfie, under difadvantage in offering what we have to fay upon this affair, which may far more nearly concern the civil as well as religious interefts of the Continent, than, feme may be ready, at ficft view, to imagine. It muft not be eftetmed ftrange, if '^ fome perfons", I may rather fay many, are " alarmed at this condu6t of the clergy". For now " the cafe has been explained", and is well " under- flood", there dill "remains uneafinefs" ; nor is the exhibited Plan " fo reafonable", even in regard of the Epifcopal churches ; or fo " harmlefs to other denominations", as the Dr. would repre- fent. He hopes, " every objedtion", or even " fuf- picion", will be "intirely obviated" by what he has to fay. But " (liould any objections continue, which fliall be thought worthy of notice, objectors are invited to proppfe them in fuch a manner, that they may be fairly and candidly deba:ed before the tribunal of the public''. It is m compliance wjth. this invitation, rhar. rhe following fneets are wrote; as alfo, that it tni-ht not be " takr-n f(T, granied, that all parties acqu^elceand arefati^ftcd" We join, with the Epifcopalians in bringing thv cafe to open tryal We defire nofhira more than an impariial hearing. Let the public j-idge between us. I SHALL proceed in the method the Dr. has chalked out -, taking into confideration his feveral fe6lions one by one, and faying what may be thought proper, in a way of arilwer, to tach o£ them diftin6ily. .^?!<>i!Ol!Ol!eHI«^l<>llOIlOU^ll0ll0{l^l!Oll<>IIOlIOl!^ THE The Appeal to the Public anfwered. Anfvver to Seftion I. which contains " a Sketch of the Arguments in favor of Epifcopacy." ||SSSI|t?E Dr. begins the fubjefl before "^'^ him with premifing, " that the I T ( ^ Church of England is Epifcopal^ -^(^ and confequently holds the neceffity ii©;©®J| of Bifhops to govern the Churchy and to confer ecclefiaftical powers". If he means, that the conftitution of the Church of England, as eftablifhed by law, is Epifcopal, making Bifhops, under the King, and within certain prefcribed li- mits, the governors of the Church, and conveyers of ecclcfialtical powers, and that this is the dodrine of the Church, it is readily acknowledged : Bur, if he intended to lead us into this thought, that the Church of England holds, or is obliged to hold, the Divine Right of Bifhops to govern the Church, or Confer ecclefiaflical powers, in virtue of their being officers diftindl from, and fuperior to PreKbyters j we differ from him in opinion. None 8 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. None of her public offices, no part of the fyftcni cf her conduct towards the clergy is founded on this principle. The pafTage he has here quoted, from the preface to the book of ordination, may feem to have an afped this way •, but it is, as the late learned and excellent prof< fTjr IVigglefworth, obicrves,* '• too (lender a foundadon to build uppn in the picfent cafe -, efpecially, if ',c be remeuiber- cdjwho v/ere the compilers of that book, and what reafon we have to conclude they were of the judg- ment, that Priefts and Bijhops are by God's law one and the fame". This was certainly the doftrine of the Church of England in the btginning of the reformation, and of the g nerality of its pious and learned divmes for a very confiderSible time afteir- wardsf. In Henry the eight's time, the Arch-6ifhops, Bi- fliops, Arch-Deacons, and Clergy of England, in their book intituled, " the inft'^idion of a chriftiari- man," fubfcribfd with ail iheir hands, and dedi- cated to the King, Anno. 15^7 ; and King Henry himTelf, in his book ftiled, " a necelTary erudition for any chriltian-man," fet out by the authority of the ftatuie of 32. H.-nry VIII. chap >6. approved by both houfes of Parliament, prefaced with the King's own epiftle, and pL^.blilhed by his command Anno. 1543, exprefly refolve, '*■ that Priefts and Bidiops BY God's Law, are one and the fame ; and that the power of C>rdinati6n and excom- municaaon belongs equally to them both. J Edward * Sober Remarks, p^g. i r. t See the many quotations from their writings to this purpofe, by the cf-iebrated Or. Stillingfltet, in his JreniTum, pag 394.. and onwards. J Calamy's defence of mOd, hQn-coiiforihity, ptg. ^tl ^he Appeal to the Public anfwered, ^ Edward the fixth no fooner came to the throne; than he took proper methods to go on with the reformation, begun in the former reign. Among other meafures, he called an aflembly of felefl Di- vines, the moft refpedable for ftatlon, piety and learning in that day, and propofed to them feveral queftions, relative to the fettlement of religion ac- cording to God*s word j to which queftions they gave in feverally their refolutions in papers, all whofe judgments were accurately fummed up, and fet down by the Arch-Bifhop of Canterbury him- felf. In anfwer to the loth queftion, '' whether Bifh'ops or Priefts were firft", Arch-Bifhop Cran- mer's opinion, given in writing under his own hand, was this, " Biihops and Priefts were at one time, and were not two things, but one office in the beginning ot Chrift*s religion". * The Bifliop of Afaph, Dr. Therleby, Dr. Redmayn, and Cox, were all of the fame opinion with the Arch-Biftiop ; and the two latter exprefly cited the opinion of Jerom with approbation, f In this fame reign, in a public declaration, fubfcribed by the Arch-Bifh- ops of Canterbury and York, eleven Biftiops, and many other Dodlors and Civilians, it is exprefly aflfertcd, " that, in the new-teftament, no mention is made of any degrees, or diftindion of orders, but only of Deacons or minifters, and of Priefts or Bi(hops". X It is indeed beyond all reafonable difpute, that the Epifcopal form of government was fettled, at the reformation, as Dr. Stillingfleet exprefles it, § " not under pretence of divine RIGHT, but for the conveniency of that form to the ftate and condition of the Church at the time B of * Irenicum pag. 392. f Ibid. pag. 393. J Bifhop Burnet's hift. of the reformation, and Ncal's iiift. of Puritanifm, § Iren. pag. 385, lo The Appeal to the Public anfwered. of Its reformation". And it is in fadl true, that, both in Henry the eighth's time, and in Edward the fixth's, the Bifhops " took one commifiions from the Crown * like other State Officers, for the exercifing their fpiritual jurildidiGn ; in which they acknowledge, that all sorts of jurifdidlion, ecclefiaftical as well as civil, flow ORIGINALLY from the Regal power, as from a SUPREME Head, f the fountain and Ipring of ALL * The refcript of Edward the 6th, cited by S?;nders, runs thus, *' To Thomas, Arch-Bifhop of Canter- ^' bui7 — Since from the King all power and jurird'6li- *' on proceed, — we give thee power, within thy Dio- ** cefs, to give orders — by thefe prefents to endure at *' our pleafure". Dr. Lay ton's appeal to the Parlia- ment againft Prelacy, pag;. i6. This fame writer adds, '* In the ifl: year of the faid Edward 6th, it is enaded, that they fhould exercife no jurifdicHiion in their Dio- cclles, nor fend out writs, but in the King's name, and under his feal j which ilatute was abrogated in the ift of Q^ Pvlary, and re-eftablifhed by Q^ Elizabeth, and in the iirft of King James". f Agreable to this is Arch-Bifhop Cranmer's anfwer to the 9th of King Edward's queflions, which is thus ex- prefied, '' All chriftian Princes have committed unto them immediately of God the whole care of all their fubjciSl:?, as well concerning the adminiftration of the word for the care of foul, as concerning the miniftra- tion of things political, and civil governance. Ard in both thcfe adminiftrations, they muft have fundry mi- nifters under them to fupply that which is appointed to • their feveral offices. The civil minifters, under the King's Majefty, in this realm of England, be thofe whc m it fhall pleafe his Kighnefs, for the time, to put in authority under him 5 as for example, the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Treafurer", &c. The miniflers of God's word under his Majefty be the Biftiops, Par- fons, Vicars, and fuch other Pfiefl:s as be appointed by his The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 1 1 ALL Magiflracy within this kingdom ; and that they ought, with grateful minds, to acknovvledge this favor derived from the King's liberality and indulgence j and accordingly, they ought to ren- der it up whenever the King thought Hl to require it of them. And among the parriculars of eccle- fiaflical power given then^ by thi? commifTion, is that of ORDAINING Prefbyrers •, and all this to laft no longer than the King's pleafure". * Even in the days of Queen Elizabeth, when there was a re-eltablifhment of Church government, after the fiery reign of Queen Mary, in the articles of reli- gion agreed upon, the Englifh form of Church- government was only determined to be " agreable to God^s v/ord", which, as Bifliop Stillingfleet fays, " had been a very low and diminifhing expreffion, had they looked on it as abfolutely prefcribed in fcripture, as the only neceiTary form to be obferv- ed in the Church". Nay, as this fame writer ob- ferves, f if we come lower to the time of King B 2 James, his Highnefs to that miniHratlon ; as for example, the Bifhop of Canterbury, the Bifliop of Durefm, the Bifhop of Winchefter, and the Parfon of Wynwick. All the faid officers and minifters, yS well of the one fort as the other, be appointed, afligned, and clc6led in every place by the lav/s and orders of Kings and Princes". This fame Arch-Bifhop, in anfwer to the King's eleventh queftionp fays, '• A Bifliop may make a Priefl: by the fcriptures, and fo may Princes and Go- vernors alfo, and that by the authority of God commit- ted to them ; and the people alfo by their clectipn. For as we read that Bilhops have done it, fo chriflian Emperors and Princes ufuaily have done it. And the people, before chfiftian Princes v^^erc, commonly did ele(^ their 'Bifliops and Priefts''. Iienicum pag. 391. * Rights of the chriftianChurch, pref. pag. 29. as cited by the DilTent. Gentleman's anfwer to White, pag. 202. t lieiiicum, pag. 394.. 12 The Appeal to the PubHc anfwered. James, his Majefty himfelf declared it in print, as his judgment, " that the civil power, in any na- tion, hath the right of prefcribing what external form of Church-government it pleafes, which doth mod ao;ree to the civil form of government in the itate",^. The plain truth is, this notion of the right of Bi(hops to govern and ordain, as being oflicers in the Church, fuperior to Prefbyters by Divine APPOINTMENT, was, as the excellent Mr J, Owen fays, " firft promoted in the Church of lingland by Arch-Bifhop Laud. Dr. Holland, the King's profelTor in Oxon, was much offended with him for afferting it in a difputation for his degrees. He checked him publicly, and told him he v;eht about * So far from, the beginning of the reformation as 1722, the lower houfe of convocation addrelTt'd the upper^ fign'f>ing their trouble to find themfVlves zfp^rkd^ as ill afrlcbd to the M tropolitical and Epifccpai rights, begging their Lordfhips v/ou'd not give credit to any fucli eviffaggeftions, as alfo that the declaraticn they had made a?i<.i figned might be entered on their books. The import of t'nis dcciaratiori wa^, " that whereas they had been fcandaioufly reprefented as favorers of Prcfbytery, in opp^fuion to Epifcopacy, they now de- clared, that they. acknowledged the order of Bifhops, as suPEP-ioR to Preibvters, to be of Divine aposto- lical institution'* -—= The fame day they 'prefented an additional addrefs, fig- nifying, that whereas this their declaration had given NEW OFFENCE, and that from having been traduced for alio wing too little to' Epifcopacy, they were now accufcd of ascribing too much to it, they begged therefore that their Lort, fhips would take the *do(Strine atorefaid into their rnature confidcratioii."-^ Ci*iam)'s abridgment, pag. 66/3 668* The Appeal to the Public anfwered, 13 about to make a divifion between the Englifh, and other reformed Churches". * It may have been the pradllce of the Church of England, for feme time, as the Dr. obferves, *' to admit none to officiate as Clergymen, who have not been ordained by Bifliops". But it was not always fo. The point of re-ordination did noc begin to be urged, until the days of Arch-Bi(hop Laud. Through his infiuence,as Mr.Prin tells us^f Bifhop Hall rc-ordained iVIr. John Dury, a mini- iler of the reformed Church. But the old Church of England did not require, or pradtife re-ordina- tion. In King Edward the fixth's time, Peter Martyr, Martin Bucer, and P. Fagius, had eccle- fiallical preferments in the eftablifhed Church with- out it. J Mr. William Whitingham was made Dean of Durham, about 1563 ; though ordained by Prefbyters only. § In like manner, Mr. Tra- vers, ordained by a Prefbyter beyond fea, was fe- ven years Ledurerat the Temple, and had theBi- fhop of London's letter for it. |I And, even in the reign of King James the firll, the validity of ordi- nation by Prefbyters was notfet afide •, as appears from the cafe of the three Prefbyters that were coniecrated Bifnops for Scotland, at London. % The * Plea for fcripture ordination, pag. 115. f Owen's plea for fcrip. ordination, pag. 117. 4: Ibid. p. 118. § Ibid. p. 121. II Ibid. p. 122. fl See the cafe related at large in Piercers Vind. of Di/Tent. pag. 167. He likewif« here tells us, when the Arch- BiSiOp of Spalato was in England, he defired Bifhop Morton to re-ordain a perfon ordained beyond fea, that he might be more capable of preferment. The Bifhop wrote him in anfwer, that it could not be dons but to the fcandal of the reformed Churches, wherein he would have no hand. 14 The Appeal to the Public anfvvcred. ' The Dr. having premifed, that the Church of England nolds the neccffity of Bifhops to govern the Church, and conftr urderi, fays, " ic is not neceiTaiy to enter upon a particular defence of this dodnne, fmce the plea", in the prefenf undertak- ing, " is equally valid^ whether thefe principles are founded rightly or wrongly". Why then did he put himfclf to the trouble of exhibiting " a fketch of the arguments, whereby the necelTity of Epircopal goveinment is defended" ? I know of no valuable end this was adapted to' anfwer. It may have increafed the number of his pages_ -, bur, at the,fa!ne time, it has detained his readers from attending to the main bufinefs in hand; and need- lefly too, as I imagine ; fince he has given us only a detail of arguments that have been repeated over and over again, and as repeatedly been an- fwered. However, he has made it proper, if not neceffary, to poRpone the confideraiion of the grand point in view, until I alfo have given " a ilcetch of the arguments" that have been ufed on the other fide of the queilion. He fays, " ic is an effential dodrine of the Church of England, that none have any authority in the chriftian Church, but thofe who derive ic from Chrili, either mediately or im-??ediatelf\ This is not a dodrine peculiar to the Engliih Church. Every other chriltian Church, of whatever djeho- mination, holds the farne. The Churches, in the Colonies, are certainly of this opinion. But we differ from the Dr. when he lays, '' that this au- thority muff be derived, \f mrdiately^ by a regular fuccefiion", meaning hereby an uninteirupied one, in a line of Bifliops, as an order fuperior to Prefbyr ters, even from the Apoilles : Nor can we be broi.'ghi: 5 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. i brought to think, that the uninterruption of this line of fufCC'Oion is so necessary, that, " if it be ONCE broken, and the power of ordination [that is, the power in this way communicated] lod, not ail the m^a on earth, not all the angels of heaven, without an immediate com million from Chriil, can reftore it". Is this the do6trine of the Church of England ? 1 am bold to fay, no fuch th;ng can be found in the thirty-nine articles, or in the homilies, or in the form of ordination, or in the common-prayer-book, or in any part of the Church's fyliem in regard of the Clergy : Nor is it eafij^ fuppoleable, that one in an hundred, even of thoie who are tborow Epif^opalians:, make this the objed: of their faith. It is indeed fcarce cre- dible, that any who have read the fcripturcs, which every where fo exprefly fecure the great biemnga purchafed by Chrift to all that believe in him, re- pent,& fincerely obey him,fhoald imagine nocwith- flanding, that all who have a right to thcfc bleffings muft be alfo members of a particular Church, over which an olBcer fuperior to Prefbyters preiides, and in an uninterrupted fuccellion from the Apo- ftles ; efpecialiy, when this pretended regular fucceffion is fo far from being incontedable, that it is not capable of good proof, nor is there any probability, that fo long a chain, running through fo m.any ages of ignorance, violence, and all kinds of impofture, has never once been broken. * To make * The reader may fee this matter fet in its proper light by Bifhop Stillingflect, in his Irenicum ; by Profeflbr Jamefon, in his fundamentals cf the Heirarchy exa- mined ; and, above all, by Mr. Thomas Walter, one of the fiift gentlemen for genius and learning this Country has produced, in his anfwer to a piece pub- lifhed 1 6 The Appeal to the Public anfwered, make the very being of a Church, and all cove- nant hopes of falvation to reft upon To precarious a foundation, is, in reality of fenfc, to expofe ihe Church and religion of Jefus Chrift to open ridicule — It will alio follow from hence, that all the public worfhip of the Colonifts, that are not Epifcopalians, of all the diilenters in England and Ireland, of the Church of Scotland, and of all the reformed protedant Churches abroad, whofe mi- niilers were ordained by " the laying on of the hands of the Prefbytery" only, is a vile affront and abomination to Chriit the head of his Church. So very charitable is this dodrine of the Dr. Jn- ftead of deferving a ferious confutaiion, it may reafonably excite the contempt of all, who are ac- quainted wi^h the genius and fpirit of true chrifti- anity. — It will farther follow from this dodrine, thai, it the popiUi Bifliops, at the reformation, had {luck to their old principles, and diicontinued the fucceffion of the miniflry by refufir.g to confecrate, or to ordain, any but thofe of their own commu- nion, it had then been the duty of the Proteftant laity liihed here in defence of Epifcopacy, upon the plan of an uninterrupted fuccellion. Perhaps, the fubjed was never handled in a more mafterly and thorow manner. No attempt has been made, by way of reply, though he wrote forty years ago. Mr. Petoy the Hiftorian fays, that the Church of England, as well as the Scotch ■ Church, was at firft planted and governed without Bifnops, until Bifhops were fent them from Rome. And there cannot be any good evidence produced, that there were any Bifhcps in England, until Auftin the Monk was fent from Rome. He was made Bifhop of Canteibury, fays Koffman, about the year of Chrift, 595. it will, perhaps, be found difficult to make out the fucceflion from him. No man alive can do it from the Apollles in an uninterrupted line. The Appeal to the Public anf\vered. xj laity to " forfake the afTembling themfelves to- gether", and all fucceeding generations muft have been content without the public worfhip arid or- dinances of God, until a new commilTion was fenc down from heaven, giving power to fome new apoftles to admmifler them, and to tranfmit again the fame office to their fucceflbrs. The Dr. ac- cording to his principles mull affirm **ill this ; and yet, I believe, he will not be very free openly and explicitly to do it. — But the word of this dodlrine of an uninterrupted fucctrffion is (till behind \ for it is derived through the Bishops of Rome, who for an hundred years together, as Baroneus^him- felf acknowledges, * namely from the year nine hundred, to the year one thoufand, were *' monfters for ignorance, luft, pride and luxury". I cannoc fo well exprefs myfelf here, as in the words of one of the bed writers upon the fubjed in controverfie 5 fays he, in one of his letters to Mr. White, -f *' Thefe very orders, in which you glory, you *• acknowledge to have derived only from the *' Church of Rome %, a Churchy which yourfelves, '* in your homilies, confefs to be idolatrous and *' antichriftian" •, " not only a harlot, as the *' fcripture calleth her, but alfo a foul, filthy, old, *' withered harlot \ the foulefl and filthieft that *« was ever {^tn, — And that, as it at prelent is> " and hath been for nine hundred years, it is fo *« far from the nature of the true Church, that " nothing can be more*'. Note, thefe homilies *' every Clergyman publicly declares and fubfcribes " with his hand, that they contain a godly and «' wholfome do5frine^ fit to be read in Churches by C "minifters"o * A. D. 911.— 5. 8. t Diffent. Gentleman's anfwer, pag. 92, ()j. i8 The Appeal to the Public anfvvereci. " minifters. Now it is only, Sir, from \\\\s, filthy^ " withered^ old HARLOT^ that you derive by or- " dmation youv fpiritual defcent. You confefsyour " felves born of her ^ as to ecclefiaftical fedigree, : And ^' ibe fins of this fouled and fihhiefl: of harlots, *' you acknowledge as brethren^ by admitting their " orders as regular and valid •, whereas thofe of " the Prol^ftant Church you reje6l. If a Prieft^ " ordained with all the fuperftitious and idolatrous *' rites of this anlichriflian and /^//'^ Church, ccmes "■ over to the Church of England, you admit him *' as a BROTHER, duly ordained, without obliging *' him to pafs under that ceremony again : But *' if a minifler of the reformed Church ]o\ns himfelf " to you, you confider him as but a Layman, an '* unordained perfon, and oblige him to receive or- *' ders according to your form. How, Sir, is it *' poffible to account for this procedure ? Can that *' Church, which is no true Church, impart *' i;^//^.and true orders ? Can a filthy old harlot *' produce any other than afpurious and corrupt *' breed ? Will you reft the validity and regularity *' of your miniftrations on your receiving the fa- ** cerdotal chara6ler from the Bifhops and Popes of *' the Romifh Church ? Many, if not melt, of *' whom, were men of mod corrupt and infamous "' lives ; men, who were fo far from being regular *• and valid Ministers in the Church of Jesus *' Christ, that they were not fo much as regular *' or rtco far from his prefent de- fign". It might therefore be fufficient to fay, ic cannot reafonably be expeded we fhould be bro't to be of his mind, until we have feen this proof, and are convinced by it. However, ] ihall not ^hink it a going cut of my way, juft to remark one thing, which is unaccountably ftrange, if Bi- fhops are, by apodolic appointment, an order of ofncers in the Church dittind from, and fuperior to,' Prcfbyters. It is this. The Apoftles have not any' where given inftrudions, defcriptive of the 73erfons fit for the work of the miniftry, that are at all adapted to the fuppofition of "a difference OF ORDER in the paftoral office. Had there been fuch a difference, different qualifications would have been requiGte to the futable difcharge of the different trufts arifing therefrom ; and it might ji.iflly have been expeded, ;hat they would have diftinguilhed between the qualifications refpedive^ ly proper for the management of each of thefe ^ " truflso The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. 21 trufts. But they no where thus diftinguifh. They no where intimate, that fuch different endowments were neceffary. Far from this, they have fpecihed the qualifications of one order, of pallors only ; as may be feen at large in the Epiftlcs to Timothy and Titus. And, what may be worthy of fpecial notice, they have been veiy particular in defcrib- ing the qualifications of this one order, while they are totally filenc with refped to the other that is pleaded for, though that other is faid to be by much the moft honorable and important of the two. In like manner, ihey have no where laid down any rules for the guidance of ordainers in veiling ordinary minifters mih different degrees of power. They no where fpeak of the inflitution of two diftindl orders of (landing pallors ; they no where give inftrudlions to exercife the or- daining right conformably to this diflindlion, by placing fome in an higher, others in a lower rank in the Church. The facred writings of the Apo- llles fay nothing to fuch a purpofc as this : On the contrary, they prefc-nt to our view a very full and explicit diredory for the ordination of one ORDER ONLY of fixed pallors. This we have in the lr*auline inRrudlions, referring to the fettle- ment of theChurches in Crere. i he greatApollle of the Gentiles gives it in charge to Titus, whom he left in this IQand with ii dired view to " fet in order the things that v^^ere wanting", to or- dain paftors in the feveral Churches ^there. But what paftors were they ? Of a different rank, fome fuperior, others inferior ? Not a word leading to fuch a thought is to be found throughout his whole Epiftle. No ; but the paftors he direds fhould be ordained were precifely of the fame rank or de- gree ; Nor did Ti^us ordain any other. He could noc 11 The Appeal to the Public anfwercd, not indeed have done it, unlcfs he had a6led coun^ ler to the diredion he had received from the in- fpired Paul. Should ic be faid here, Titus was Jiimielf, at this time, the fole Billiop of Crete, and as fuch inrrufted with the fole power of ordaining inferior paRots ; the anfwcr is, this canno. be lup.- ported upon jutl and folid grounds. It is a meer pretence, as we h.ave often had cccafion to mal<.e very clearly evident. The Dr. now proceeds to confider tlie evidence, in favor of Epilcopacy, in his fenfe of ir, " from ihe general (late of the primitive Chu ch". If, when he fays, " it is. a known facl, that all the *' Churches that were gathered, during the JlrJJi " Century, by the Apcliics, or. their MifTionaries, '* were under the diredion of fome one or other of '' that venerable order -, that men of the moll e- ** minent piety, who had been honored with their *' acquaintance, Vv'ere appointed by thcrn to fuper- *^ intend Churches in certain dillrids, fome of " whom were chofen to iuccced tlicm in ihiofe '* Churches which they had aUvays kept under '' their ovvn immediate infpedion'' ; 1 lay, if by this fadl he means, that the perfons appointed by the Apofllrs in ilieir day, or cholcn afcci v.'ards, luiihln this Ce}Uirr)\ to iucceed thrm in fuptr- intending the Churches, vverecfiiceis of a fupcrior order to thofe, who are calkd, rn the New-teda- ment, fometimes Bidiop?, fomelimes Prtfbyttrs, meanini^ by thefe names one and the fame order of men, he Hiould have given better proof of it, than a bare declaration, that '' nothing but grcis prejudice, or a wrangling. and captious difpofition, 10 lay ncthing worlc, could lead any to fufped or cfTerL" the contrary. He is ^nuch miftaktn, if he imagines, The Appeal to thePablic anrwered, 2d imagines, that prejudice, or wrangling captioiifnels, or any thing worle, is confined co Frclbyterians. The (ticklers for Prelacy are as much, no: to lay a great deal moi-e, under the influence of thele fatal hindrances to the reception of*' the truth in the love of it". All he has laid here in favor of Epifcopacy, in the (cnk he underitands ir, refts folely upon his meer affirmation. He goes on, " if we confider the general cha- rader of Chriftians, and the ftate of the Church, in tht fecond and third Centuries, we (hall not find it eafie to believe^ that there could have been any efTencial departure from the original plan of difci- pline and government committed to the Church". There certainly was not. The ftate of things was not much varied from this plan, within ihxifccond Century. Bifhops were not as yet known, as an order in the Church di(lin6l from, and fuperior to, Prefbyters. The promifcuous uie of the terms Bifhop and Prefbyter was dill in ufe ; nor is that mode of didlion, Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons, to be met with in any writer befbre Clement of Alexandria, v,/ho did not floundi until the latter end of this fecond Century, unlefs we ex- cept IgnatiuSj * in whofe corrupted and interpo- lated * The Dr. in a marginal note, pag. 8, 9. is pleafed to offer a few words in favor of the Ignatian E-piftles^ in oppofition to Dr. Chauncy*s Dudleian Lecture at ths College in Cambridge ; in which he endeavoured to invalidate their teftimony. Says Dr. Chandler, " hs undoubtedly knows that he has been ab'e to offer no- thing new on fo exhaufted a fubjcct'*. He did not aim at this ; though he may have added Tome neiv thoughts, at leaft the old ones are placed in a new light. It fol- lows, " and others know, that he has faid nothing a- gain(t 24 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. lared Epiftles, this manner of fpeaking is com- mon. If, when the Dr. fpeaks of the " writings of the fathers that are ftill extant, their apologies, private gainft the authenticity of thefe Epiflles, but what has, long ago, been fairly and fully confuted", 7'his is ari eafie way to anfwer any thing. He would have done himfelf much more honor, as a man of learning, if, iti a way of folid argument, he had himfelf taken off the force of what had been obje£ted againft the authenticity of thefe Epiftles. The author of the DudleiAn dif- courfe thought it below him to reject the Ignatian E- pijlles as corrupt, and not to be depended on, becaufc great and learned men knev/ this to be the real truth ; bat he was at the pains, in a courfe of juft reafoning, to evince it to be fo. Meer affirmations, m controverted points, however fanguinely delivered, are meer no- things, and accounted fo by all capable judges. He fays farther, *•' although the advocates for Epifcopacy fee no neceility for giving up the teflimony of Ignatius, it is not from an opinion that their caufe wouTd labor vnder any great diftrefs without that fupport". We are not very ftrongly inclined to give full credit to what is here delivered. Ignatius is the only writer, until towards the clofe of the fecond Century, that is of any fervice to the Epifcopal caufe. Prelatical writers know it, and accordingly repair to his Epiftles as their Sheet- anchor ; and they did fo, with as much zeal and afTu- rance as they do now, w^hen they had no copies of thefe Epiftles, but fu'ch as, at this day, are acknowledged by Epifcopalians thcmfelves to have been fo corrupted and interpolated, as not to be capable of a juft vindication. If they had thought their caufe '' would not have la- bored under diftrefs'* without thefe Epiflles, they would not have been at fuch immenfe pains to purge them,- and fupport their authority for their proper ufe. The Dr. exclaims, " hard is the fate of ancient writers ! *' For, if they do not countenance modern opinions, *' the authority of their writings will be difputed. And <« whe-n an obftinate oppofition is once undertaken, «« whether from intereft, or fpleen and malignity, no *' ancient The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 23 private epiflles, the regulations and decrees of councils, and the report of ecclefialtical hirtorians, as exhibiting evidence of irrefiftablc force, in favor" of Epifcopavy*' ; 1 lay, if he means, by thele an- cient records, fuch as are to be met with in the Tv/o FIRST Cencuriesj he is grofly niiftaken while D he *' ancient authors are fo fecure, not even thofe of feme *' of the holy Bible, but that fuch adventurers may be *' able to do fome injury to their reputation and autho- *' rity". Had not the Dr» been himfeif moft evidently under the prevailing influence of Intereft, or Malignity^ or both, or fomething v/orfe, when he wrote this, it would not have had a place here. He knows, or might have known, if he had read even Epifcopal writers, and thefe only, thatKNAVi&H Forgeries were common, even in thofe times that are called primitive. Scarce one of the Apoftles^ or firft Chriflian fathers, have e- fcaped being perfonated by fome wretched impoftor, in fome work or other fent into the world under their name. Even Jefus Chrift himfeif has been thus bafely tifed. One muft be quite unacquainted with the ancient writings not to know this. Nay, it is the truth of fait, and acknowledged to be {o, not only by Epifcopalians, but even Roman-Catholic-Writers, that IGNATIUS in particular has been moft fraudulently dealt with, no lefs than eight of the fifteen Epiftles that bear his name being Forgeries ; yea, it is faffc likewife, and owned to be fo, that the other seven, before the editions of Ufher and Voilius, had been so CORRUPTED by fome knavifh interpolator, that they ought not to be received as his genuine works. Their great advocate and defender, Biihop Pearfon, exprefly declines the vindication of them, in their old editions, notwithftanding the care and pains of Vedelius to purge them. Had the Dr. attended to thefe indubitable fafts, he would not have made the above bitter complaint ; much lefs would he have inferred his narrative from Father Hardouin^ which is as much to the purpofe, asi if he had told the ftory of a cock, and a bull, and three ram-chickens, with which the children are fometimes diverted. ^6 The Appeal to the Putllc anfvvercd. he thinks, that they will be of any fervice to thePre- latical caufe. Ignatius excepted, whole Epiilles have been proved, in the Dudleian-discourse, to have been fo corrupted as to be unworthy of notice, none of the primitive wriccrs, within this period, fpeak of the government of the Church, as committed to Bilhops, in the fenfe here con- tended for. If Epifcopaiians are pleafed to affirm the contrary, let it be remembered, the onus prC" handi lies with them ; and if they can, let them give us good evidence, that any of thefe writers fay, that Bifhops are an order in the Church fupe- rior to Prefbvters ; that ordination was the pecu- liar work of Bifhops, in diftmdion from Prefby- ters ; that Epifcopal government was that by which the Church was. governed -, and that this form of govern m.ent was inltituted by Chriil, or his Apollles. Until they do this, which we know it is not in their power to do, we fhall continue of the mind, that no more can be colleeted from the fa'thers, within this period, than from the fcnp- tures themielves, to give countenance toEpifcopa- cy, in the view in which we oppofe it. If, by the writings of the fathers referred tOj the Dr. means the fathers after the fecond Cen- tury, and downwards, we don't think any tefti- monies from them will be much to the purpofe ; as it is v;eli known to all, who know any thing of antiquity, that we are'NOw got into thofe times, in which there was a deviation from the purity and fimplicity of the gofpel, in many other things be- fides this of the government of the Church. We are free to acknov/ledge, that, in the //6/V^ Century, there began to appear a departure from the origi- nal plan of government m the Church. Biihops were The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 27 were now diflinguifhed from Prefbycers ; though, to afcertain the precife idea meant by this dirtindti- on, will, 1 believe, be found, upon tryal, to be exceeding difficult. It is indubitably clear, than ihe Church was governed, as yet, by Prefbyters as well as Bifhops : Nor does it appear, that a B fliop was NOW any thing more than the head of a SINGLE flock, or congregation, the affairs of which were managed, nor by the Bifhop alone, ?.% though all power was veiled in him ^ but by its Prefbyters alfo, united in one common council. This is plainly vifible thro' the whole of Cyprian's writings. Nay, that wonder of learnmg, Profcffor Jamefon, is very pofuive in it, that, in the opinion of Cyprian himfelf, Bifliops were no otherwjfe fu- perior to Prefbyters, than Peter was to the other Apoftles, the First, the Head, of one and the fame order in theChurch. * But, whatever the di- fiindion was, that m.ight caice place, in time, between BiQiops and Prefbyiers, it was undoubtedly fmall in its beginning":;. Xhe Bifhop was, at firfl, only PRIMUS INTER PARES, the Head-Prefbytcr, the prs^fes of the confiltory j and it was gradually arid imperceptibly that he attained to that dignity and power, with which he was afterwards vefled. It did not come into event at once. Ic was the woik of time, and a long time too. From Prime- PrefDyters arofe Bliliops ; fromCity-Bifnops, Biiliops whofe power extended to the neighbour- ing Country-Churches •, and, when chriflianity had got the feculararm on its fide, and corruptioa had incteafed therev/ich, as it hallily did to a mon- ftrous height, w- now hear of Diocefan Bifliops ; from thefe arofe Metropolitans ; from Mitropoli- - tans, Patriarchs j and finally, at the top of all, h % D 2 hoiinefs. * * S.ee his Cyprianus Isotiniu?, chap. 4-th5 thrcughc^t* 28 The Appeal to the Public anfvvcred. hcLnefs, the Pope, claiming the charadter of unu vcrial Head of the Church. This (lace of things came on infenfibly, fhep by fttp, and not all at once. It began, in a degree, even in the i^poilles days, difcovering itfelf in the pride of Diotrcphes^ who *' defired the prehcnrinence" ; and it went on increafing, until the rife of th,at amazing power^ which for fo many Centuries, l;as opprefTed, and deltroyed, the faints of the riioll high God. This will reafonably and fully account for "^ a departure from iht original plan of government", without its making at tirfl, or in its gradual ad* vances for a while, " any violent flruggles and convulfions"*'. According to the prophetic decla- ration of the Apofcle Paul, it was lo come on MYSTERIOUSLY •, and fo it did in fcft, and infen- fibly too, until the powers of this world could be called in to the aid of afpiring grafping Clergy- men ;/and then there was bufile, ilj'uggling, and noiie enough : For, from this time, we read of jictle elfe, inEccleHallical hiftory, but the fquabbles of {bme of the Clergy, and their artful, and lome- limes perfidious, managements to enrich and ag- grandize themfelves, to the deprefnon of others ^ until, at length, he that is called the son of. PERDITION became tiie Man of sin grown up iQ his fullnefs of ftature, Tpje Dr. has introduced th.at truly great rran, Mr.Chillingworth, faying, *' v/heni Ihali fee all the *' fables in the Meiamcrphofis aded, and prove *' tiue fiories ♦, vv'hen I fliall lee all the Democracies *' and AriPiocraHes in the v/orld lie down and ileep, '' and awake into Monarchies ; then will I begin ^' to believe, that Prefbytcrian government, liav- ^' ing continued in tlic Churchy during the Apo- ^' ftles The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 29 *' files times, fhouid prefently after (againfl: the *' Apoftlcs dodrineand the will of Chrift) be ** whirled about like a fcene in a Mafque, and traf- *' formed into Epifcopacy". 1 alfo ihall infert a few pafTages from this celebrated writer, leaving it with the Public to judge, whofe quotations, the Dr's or mine, reflect mod honor on him, and are the ftrongetl illuftiation of his real greatnefs. — Says he, *•• By the religion of Froteltants, I do not underftand the dodrine of Luther, or Calvin, or Melandlon -, nor the confelTion of Au- gufta, or Geneva i nor the catechifm of Heidel- burg ; nor, the articles of the Church of England i no, nor the harmony of the Proteftant confcfiions : 5ut that in which they all agree, and which they all fiibfcribe with a greater harmony, as a perfcdt rule of their faith and adions ; that is, the Bible. The Bible, I fay, the Bible only is the religion of Proteitants. — I, for my parr, after a long, and (as 1 verily believe and hope) impartial fearch of the true v/ay to eternal happinefs, do profefs plain- ly, that I cannot find any reft for the fole of my foot, but upon THIS ROCK ONLY. I fee plainly, and with my own eyes, that there are Popes a- ^ainft Popes, Councils againft Councils, feme Fa* thers againft others, the fame Fathers againft ihem- felves,a confent of Fathers of one age againft a con- lent of Fathers of another age, the Church of one age againft theChurch of another age. — In a word, there is nofufficient certainty but of fcripture only, for any confidering man to build upon. This therefore, and this only, I have reafon to believe ; this 1 will profefs ; according to this 1 will live ; and for this, if there be occafion, 1 will not only willingly, but even gladly lofe my life ; though I fliould be forty that Chriftians ftiould take it irom me. 30 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. me. Propofe me any thing out of this book, and require whether I believe it, or no ; and feem ic never j»© incomprehenfible to human reafon, 1 will lubrcribe it with hand, and heart ; as knowing, no demofjftration can be ftronger than this, God has faid io^ therefore it is true". * It is flrange that one, who couid make fo good a judgment of thi^ ancierit Fathers, and give his fcntiments con- cerning them with Rich exacl truth, and found reafon, lh:;uld afterwards write in the manner he IS here reprefcmed to have done in relation to E- pifcopacy. It is certain, he was wrought upon, by the famous J^foic, who went under the name of John Fifnrr, to forfake the communion of the Church of England, and to embrace the RomiHi religion, and to do it with an incredible fatisfaction pt mind. Perhaps, the bed wdy to account tor the extravagant mode of language in which he writes of Epifcopacy, is to tuppole, that he was under fom.e undue influence from thofe arguments whrch had induced him to profefs himfelf a Roman- Catholic. And there may be the more reafon to iufped this, as^ afccr his convcifion from Popery-, ic appears, from a letter of his toDr. Sheldon, '' that he had icruples about leaving the Church of jRdme, and returning to the Church of England" ; which fcrcplcs he freely declared to his frien Js. f 1 fliall only add here, much greater men, than Mr. Chil- lingworth, far knowledge in ilntiquity, it not for reafoning powers, and in the communion pf the Church of England too, not to fay any thing of others, * Relii^Ion of Protcftants, a faf^ way to falvatlon, chap. 6. kct. 56. t Bayle's Critic. Pi6t. in the edition that contains the lives never before publifhcd^ under the name. Chilling- worth. The Appeal to the Public anfwcredo 31 others, quite differ from him upon thehead of Epif- copacy, and as urged hereto from their intmiate acquaintance with the writings of the fathers, as well as the facred fcriptures. That great Anti- quary, the learned Arch-Bifliop Ullier, in a letter to Dr. Bernard, fays, " I have ever declared my opinion to be, that " Epifcopus et Frelbyter, gradu tantum differunr, non ordine" -, that is, Bifliop and Prtibyter differ only in degree, not in ORDER. And, in the clofe of this letter, he adds, " for the teftifying my communion with thefe Churches, [the reformed ones in France and Hol- land] which I do love and honor as true members of the Church univerfai, I do p^jfefs, that, with like affedlion, I fhould receive the bleffed facra- ment at the hands of the 'Dutch minifters, if I was in Holland ; as I iliould do at the hands of French miniilers, if 1 were in Charentone * The cele- brated Bifhop Burnet fays, " 1 the more willingly incline to believe Bifhops and Prefbyters to be SEVERAL DEGREES OF THE SAME OFFICE j finCC the names of Bifliops and Prefbyters are ufed for the fame thing in fcripture, and are alfo ufed pro- mifcuouily by the writings of the two firft Centu- ries", f I (hall only mentipn farther the learned Dr. Stillmgtieet, who was as well verfed in the fa- thers as any man, in his day, or fince. His words are thefe, J " I believe, upon the ftriclefl: inquiry, Medina's judgment will prove true, that Jerom, Auftin, Ambrofe, Sedulius, Primafius, Chryloftom, Theodoret, Theophyla61:,were all of Aerius's judg- ment as to ihe Identity of both name and order of Bifhops and Prefbyters in the primitive Church". And * The judgment of the late Arch-Bifhop of Armagh, on feveral points, by R. Bernard, D. D> pag. 125, 126. t Vind, of the Church of Scotland. % Iren. pag, 276. 32 The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. And again, a little onwv-'.rds, '' I do as yet defparr of finding any one fingle teftimony in all Anti- quity, which doth in plain terms alTcrt Epifcopacy, as it was fettled by the pradtice of the primitive Church in the ages following the Apoftles, to be of UNALTERABLE Divine right". The two propofitions, from which the confe- qaences are drawn which finidi this Sedion, are both utterly denied ; and, upon what has been offered, we may fairly and juftiy fay in diredl con- tradidlion to them : That Epifcc^al government was not at all^ much lefs univerfally, received in the Church PRESENTLY AFTER the ApoftlcS timCS. There is therefore no' room for the fuppofition \^ of an alteration in tj^iL Government presently AFTER thefe times ; and, in fad, there was no fuch SPEEDY alteration. Episcopacy therefore was not fo ancient as is pretended, nor is there any need, or reafon, to luppofc, or fay, it was apoflolic. )^)eC5@CM)^)^)s(^)^M^^)^M)e(X)sC)^5^)§()s()^ ANSWER A N S W E R to Section II. which fays, " Thd Powers peculiar to the Epifcopal Office are Government^ Ordination^ and Confirmation". THE Dr's bufinefs here is to explain, and efta^' blifh, the proper fuperiority of BiQiops to Preibyters. In order to this, he previoufly endea- vours to feparate, what he calls, the Appendages to the Epifcopal office, from the powers that eflcn- tially belong to it. And here he fays, " every one knows, that the office of a Clergyman is the lame, whether he is pofTefled of a Fortune, or is without one ; whether he has a large Pariffi, or a fmall one". And io '' with regard to place, he who has a fmall Diocefs has the Tame Epifcopal power, as he who has a large one ♦, and it matters not, as to the validity of the ad, whether it be performed by the Biffiop of Man, or the Arch-Billiop of Canter- bury". The queftion is not, whether thefe and fuch like Appendages to the Epifcopal-office will be deftrudtive of the powers, which, by the infti- tution of Chrift, effentially belong to it ; but whe- ther they do not unfit the perfons veiled with ic for the proper difcharge of the duties of it ? In- fomuch, that it would be highly unreafonable to add fuch Appendages to the office, and as much fo to expedt, if they are added, that chriftian pro- fcflbrs diould not complain of it as an mtolerable £ grievance; 34 The Appeal to the Public anfvvcreda grievance. If it " matters not, as to the validity of the a6l", whether a Bilhop has a fingle congre- gation for his charge, or feveral hundred, it cer- tainly does as to his capacity to ferve the great ends of his office. I fiippofe the Dr. would not fay, it would deftroy the " validity" of a Bifhop's adt, was he an univerfal one, as the Pope is -, but there are few, I believe, but would think it " mattered much", whether there was fuch a Bifliop, or not. And the clothing BifVsops with worldly dignity and power, and placing them at the head of large Di- oceiTes, is, in proportion, the fame incongruity ; and, inftead of ferving the true fpiritual intereft of the Church of Chrift, has been greatly detrimental to it in all ages, from Confianrine to this day j and, 1 am perfuaded, will ever be fo. The Dr. now comes to the confideration of " thofe powers that are peculiar to Bifhops, and without which they would ceafe to be Bifhops" 5 and thefe, he fays, "' will be found to be the powers oi gGvernnient^ ordination^ and conjirmation^\ * He begins with the *' pov/er or right of govern- ment", in fupport of which he has offered three things^ One Is, that "this right is neceffarily included \x\ the fupcriority of their office". He does not here, as might have been expeded, in fo impor- tant a matter, go into the confideration of the na- ture of this office, proving herefrom its fupcriority, in the fenfe he affixes to this word. By the go- verning pov/er he would make effential to the Epifcopal office, he means a monarchical power, iuch an one as may be exercifed without fubordi- nate "The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 35 nate officers, yea, in oppofition to them. But, furely, fuch a power as this is not '' necefTarily in- cluded" in meer fuperiority of ofnce. This fu- periority there may be, and this there has been, and now is, in many focieries, where the pov;er of the higheft office, among fubordinate ones, is not the power of an ablolute Monarch, which knows no check but his own fovereign pleafure. No- thing therefore is yet faid, that has the appearance gf foiid argument. Another thing is, " that *his power was con- veyed from the Apoftles to their fucceflbrs, the Bifhops •, that it was exercifed by Timothy, Titus, and others ^ and that it has, through all ages of the Church, been tranfmitted down, and maintain- ed by the Epifcopal order". So the Dr. fays, with- out adding one word by way of proof. It is very extraordinary, when he undertook to fupport the fuperiority of Biiliops in point of government, and as abfolute Monarchs toQ, that he lliould do it in a didlatorial manner only °, as though his affirma- tion would be efteemed good evidence in the cafe. We muft have a much better argument to con- vince us, that the exorbitant power he claims for Biihops really belongs to them, than barely hi^ faying, that it was " conveyed to them by the ApoSles, and has been exercifed by them ever fince". The lad thing is, , the Epiftles to the (even Churches, of the Lydian-Afia ^ which, fays he, " are a proof, that the government of the Chq#r- ches, refpedivcly, was lodged in the hands office' gle perfons, who are called Angels, by which was meant an4 intended, according to the voice E 2 t)f 5 " Sti Paul could have ordained without their concur- rence, but the impofition of their hands would have been altogether unavailable without his". We fay, on the contrary, and our bare word carries as much convincing weight with it as their's, thac this Prefbyterian-confiftory might have ordained Timothy without the apoftle Paul, as he might have done it without them ; and, in either cale, the ordination would have been valid to all the I? purpole.^ 42 The Appeal to the Public anfwered, purpofes of the Gofpel-miniftry. If the pafTioii of fhame, excited in the Dr. had operated with a litrlt more flrength, he vould not, by " repeat- ing things which have been fo frequently faid by others", have made it neceffary that we alfo fhould do the fame* He has feen fit to fay only two things more, iA fupport of the peculiar unalienable right of BiHiops, in the appropiiated fenfe, to ordain. The firft is, that " no inflance of ordination^ performed by meer Trefbyters, can be found in the Church for feveral ages. Aerius & Colluthus, in the fourthCentury, feem to have been the firft con- trivers of ordinations of this fort". So we were told in a book, intituled '* a modeft proof of the Government fettled by Chrift and his Apoftles in the Church", publifhed here and difperled about forty years ago ; which was foon anfwered by the late worthy Dr. Wigglefworth, and in fo maiterly a way, in his " fober remarks", that this blufter- ing pretence has lain dorment ever fince ; and it would have been more to the Dr's honor to have fuffered it to continue in this ftate of oblivion, than to have revived it with only a bare mention of it, and refering his readers to "Hooker'sEcclef Polity, and Arch-Bifnop Potter's very excellent difcourfe of Chuich-government". Epiphanius was the firft that found fault with Aerius, ftigmatifing him as an Pleretrc. And why did he thus condemn him ? Was it only or meerly for his opinion concerning the parity of Bifhops and Preft^yters ? Far from it. He zealoufly oppofed the lawfulnefs of praying FOR THE DEAD. Epiphanius was a ftickler for this rank fuperftition, now coming into practice, and The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 42, and could not bear to have it expofed. The He- refies therefore he taxed Aerius with, were the Identity of Bifhops and Prefbyters, and the un^ lawfulnefs of praying for the dead ; Here- fies, as Dr. Wigglefworth writes, " of much " the fame nature, and Epiphanius's confutation " of them both equally learned and fatisfadlory : ^* For it is obfervable, that, in the fame place, *^ where he condemns that monftrous Herefy of *' the Identity of order, he fairly confefTes, " that, ^' by the tv/o orders of Prefbyters and Deacons, all .*' Ecclefiaftieal offices might be performed". To " this I fliall only add the words of the learned " Dr. Stillmgfleet, who fays, if Aerius was aa *' Heretic for holding the Identity of arder^ it is ^' ftrange that Epiphanius fhould be the firft man ^' that fhould charge him with it ; and that neither *' Socrates, Sozoman, Theodoret, nor Evagrius, *' before whofe time heJiv,ed,fliould cenfure him for *' it. And why fhould notjerom have been equally *' animadverted upon, who is as exprefs in this as *■' any man in the world". * There was no need, nor any reafon, to pmColIui bus whhJerius ; for he did not aft in the capacity of, what Epifcopalians would call, a mcer Prefbyter, in the bufinefs of &rdaining ; but as a Bifhop. Dr. SriHingfieet has proved, fiom Blondel's apology, that he was a Bifhop of the Melecian parry in Cynus, and is fuppofed to have been ordained a Bifhop by Me* letius. -f As the Dr. has been pkafed to fay, " no inflancc of an ordmation by meer Prefbyters can be four.d F 2 in * Sober remarks, pag. 4, 5. t Vid. Irenicum, pag. 381 i — and more largely Blondci's a^oiogy^ Seel. 3. from 317, to 327, ^ The Appeal to the Public anfwered* in the Church for feveral ages", vve might natu- |*ally conclude there' are numerous examples ot; Epilcopal ordination in ' thefe feveral ages. We ihould take it kindly to nave pointed out to us fo much as one inltanccg within the Jong period of an hundred and fifty years from Lhiill, of an or- dination by any Bifliop, in a'ny part of the chriftian Y^orld i meaning by a Bifhop, an cflicer in ihe Church of a fuperior order to that of Prefbyters. I have lately t)cen locking over the extrafts I made twenty years ago, from the fathers of the twofirll Centuries, containing every thing in their writings fhat might be thought to have relation to the pre- fent controverfy ; and I don't find a fingle exam- ple of an ordination by Biil-iops, in the appropri- ated fenfe, within the time be tore fpecifted, If the Dr. v/ould preftnt us with one from his own know- ledge, or by communication from the convened body that api-ointed him to write, it would be, to ine, a great' favor, as hereby 1 might fill up an ^ffential vacancy in my extracts, and render them quite pcrft(ft i And, befides it's being a graiiaca= tion to me, it would be a vail help to the Epifco- pal caufe, and, in a good mealure, juflifie the Chal- lenge, prelaikal writers fcmeiimes triumphantly* make, calling upon their opponents to give an in- fiance of Ffefbyijrrian-orclinatipn for Ipme Cea- turies. The other thing, with which the Dr, fanifhe^ what he though; proper to fay upon the head of prdinarion, is, that '' from this time, [the fourth Century] until after the beginning of the refor- mation in the fixteenth Century, no inltances wor- thy of notice occur to favor ordination by Prefby- $ers". He had before faidj Aenus and Colluthu^ wer^ The Appeal to the Public aufwered, 45 were the firft contrivers of ordination by Prefby- ters ; fo that, according to him, there were no in* fiances in this kind until the fourth Century, the 2ge in which they lived. How does this agree v/ith the account of Eutichius, who- fays, " thac ihe twelve Prefbyters conftituted by Mark, in the See of Alexandria, chofe out one of their number to be head over the reft, and the other eleven, laid hands on hmi, and blelTed him, and made him Patriarch" ? — Or with the account, Jerom, more ancient than he, has given us of the fame fadt, faying, *' at Alexandria, from St. Mark to Hera- clius and Dionyfius, Bifhops, the Priefts alv/ays icook one out from among tliemfclves, whom they fet in the higheft fear^ and called Billiop, juft as an army makes an Emperor, or as if the Deacons lliould chufe one out of their number, and call him an Arch-.Deacon" ? Thefe are inftances that are to be met with in moft writers on our fide of the queftion; A great variety of cafes alfo, in proof of Prefbyterian- ordination, within the time fpecified by the Dr. may be fcen m Dr. Siillingfleet's Iren- icum, pag. 374. and onwards. Pie is cgregioufly miltakcn iikcwife in faying, that, from the fourth Century, until the beginning of the reformation in the fixteenth, '' no inftances worthy of notice occur to favor ordination by Prcfoyters". What he may think worthy of notice I cannot tell •, but ordinations, in this kmd, were comlrjon many ages "before the reformation he fpeaks of, and as worthy of fpecial notice as any Epilcoapal ones fince. * I would ^ Says Mr, Daniel Williamf?, in his preface to Mr. J. Owen's p!ea for fcripture-ordination, " the ancient Vaudois, orWaldenGjs, thofe eminent and faithful wit- m^^^? ^pinil ?aUi5hnfti^n ufyrpatioi^Sj have had no or- diiiatioiij 4^ The Appeal to the Public anfwered. would here afk the Dr. in the words of that emi- nently learned man, the late reverend Mr Thomas ."Walter of Roxbury, " whether the Vaudois of *' Piedmont were not much ancienter than two *' hundred years ? Leger has fufficiently demon- ** ftrated their antiquity, and proved, that the *^ Waldenfes were long before the time of Peter *' Valdo, which name (as they are now called *' Vaudois from the word Vaux, that fignifies a "valley) belonged to them as inhabiting the '* vallies of the Alps. We will take their cha- *' rader and hiftory from a fworn enemy of their's, " from Claudius Seflelius, the Arch-Bifhop of *' Turin, in a book which he wrote againlt them. " There he tells us, " that the feat of the Wal- *• denfes took its rife from a mod religious perfon, *' called Leo, that lived in the time of Conitantine *' rhe great, and who, detefting the covetoufnefs *' of Pope Sylvefter, and the immoderate bounty *' of Conftantine, chofe rather to embrace poverty *• with the fimplicity of the chriftian faiih, than *' with Sylvefter to be defiled with fat and rich *^ benefices ; and that all they who were feriouily ^' religious, dinations but by Prcfbyters for five hundred years pad, Hiftory of the Vaudois, chap. 3. The fiift guides of the people from myfticai Egypt v/ere Prefbyters or- dained byPrtfbyters. Thefe aie they that gathered the iirfL-fruits unto God, — They have gone in mourning from generation to generation. — They have been fore broken in the place ot dragons, and covered with the fliadow of death ; yet have they not forgotten the name of their God, or Wretched out their hand to a ftrange God. it is by the miniftry of thefe that the truth prevailed, the eyes of nations were opened, and vaft multitudes reduced to the obedience of the gofpeh They fealed their minifttv v/ith xheir blood, and hea- ven fealed it with the m oft gloiious faccefs". The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 47 *' religious, joined themfelves unto them". Alfo *' RequerusSacco, the celebrated inquifnor, quoted *' by the Jefoic Cretzer, in his Bibliotheque of the *' fathers, aflerts, " that among all tiie ie6ts there *' is none that has been fo pernicious to the Church *' of Rome, as that of the Leonifts, becaufe it -is *' the mofl ancient^ and has continued longeft : •' For fome affirm, that it began in the time of *' Sylvefter, and others fay, m the time of the " Apoftles". The Fryar Belvedoras, excufing the *' MifTionaries for their not converting one of *' thefe Waldenfes, affigns this reafon for it, " that •' their Herefie was too firmly rooted for any to be •' able to do good among them : They of the " Valleys have been always, and through all times, " accounted Heretics". * So that, upon the whole, the Dr's " uniform pradlice of the Church for fifteen hundred years", is as dettiture of evi- dence from antiquity, as the necefiity of Epifcopal ordination is from the fcripcures. He now comes to the lad br.anch of the Epif- copal office, " impofition of hands in confirmati- on" ; concerning which, after explaming the na- ture and defign of this rite, he fays, " the Church of England declares, that it hath been a folemn, ancient and laudable cuftom, continued from the Apofiles time". And here his reafoning is emi- nently curious. " If this cuftom has been from the Apoftles, it mufl: have been pra61:ired in their time ; for, in the language of the fchools, the terminus a quo h \n the time of the Apo- ftles. And it can with no propriety be faid to have been continued from their time, if it com- menced * Walter's Reply to the difcourfe of Epifcopacy, pag. ^ U, 83. 48 The Appeal to the Public anfwercd,- me need aftei- it". Demonftrably argued ! But to what purpoie ? May it not be true, that this was a cuftom neither in the Apoftles days, nor within the truly primitive times^ though it be granted the Church or England fays *' ir continued from rhe Apoftles times'' ; and if fo, thac it was their judg;- menr, in ccnfequence of the Dr's learned reafoning, that it was in ufe by the Apoftles themfelves ? Is infallibility the peculiar priviledge of this Church ? Will it afcertain the truth of a difputed ht\^ to fay the Church of England aHirms it to be one ^ Some farther proof is neceffary. The Dr. feems fenfible of It, and goes on to " fee what information the fcriprure gives us, relating to this fubjrd.*'. And he particularly mentions three texts to his purpofe. The firfl: is^ A(5ls S. 14—17. which gives an account of Peter and John as fent to Samaria, who, when they were come, '* prayed for them that they might receive the holy Ghoft ; and laying their hands on them, they received the holy Ghod". Thefe words, fays the Dr. " exadly defcnbe confir- mation as pradifed in the Church of England, and there is hardly room for a poffibility of applying them to any thing tW\ It is as evident as words can well make it, that the impofition of hands by the Apollles, fpoken of in this text, was for the im- partation of the holyGhoft in miraculous gifts. For it is faid of Simon the forcerer, ver. 13. that he *' wondered, beholding the miracles and figns which were done" ^ and, in the 18th ver. that *' when he faw, that, through the laying on of the Apoftles hands, the holy Ghoft was given", that is, a power to do thofe miracles and figns, " he offered them money, faying, give me alfo this power, that on whomioever I lay hands, he may receive the holy Ghoft", The Appeal to the Public anfvverec!. 49? Ghofl", that is, the ability of working wonders; Will the Dr. in Ibber fenoufnefs, fay, that there is any likenefs between the impofition of a Bifliop's hands in confirmation, and this laying on of the Apoftles hands, as to it's ufe and end ? Was any miraculous power ever conveyed, in this way, by any Bidiop of the Church of England to any one his hands were laid upon ? Does any Bifhop, fince the days of Poperyj pretend to impart this power ? Why then is this text brought in proof of the dodrine of confirmation ? Might it not be rea- fonably thought, that prejudice itfelf could not find a pOiTibility of applying it to this purpofe ? The fecond text is that in A6ls 20. 7. whicK contains, fays the Dr. " another inftance of confir- mation in the difciples at Ephefus, on whom, *' after ihey were baptifed", St, Paul " laid his hands, and the' holy Ghoft came upon them'*. He has here fhamefully (topt (hort in the middle of a fentence^' keeping out of fight a neceflTary part of it. For it follows immediately, and in order to finifh the fentence, " and they spake with Tongues, and PROPHESIED**. Is this fair ? Does it carry the appearance of that impartial uprightnefs, which, becomes every honed writer ? Can any imaginable reafon be afligned for his thus curtailing the text^ but only this, that if he had given it in whole, ic would have been, at once, vifible to his readers^ that it was nothing to his purpofe ? And this will always be the truth, until it appears, that baptifed perfons, upon a Bifhop*s laying his hands on them, are able to " fpeak with tongues, and prophefie". The lad text is that in the Epiflle to the He- brews, chap. 6. ver. 2. where, it's author, among Other things, fpeaks of " the laying on of hands". G .We 50 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. We read of the Apoilles, as " laying on their hands** in the following cafes ; in ordination, in healing the fick, and in conveying miraculous powers ; but in no other that I can rccolledl at preknt. In whichfoever of ihefe fenfes " the lay- ing on of hands" is here underllood, it makes no- thing to the Dr's purpofe. He takes notice of two objedlions againft what he had offered, from fcripturc, in proof of this rite of confirmation. One is, that " thefe inflances prove only what was adually pradifed by the Apoftles, but not that this rite was intended to be of ftandmg ufe to the Church in all ages". And, in reply, he round- ly affirms, that '' confirmation was praitifed by the IMMEDIATE fucceffors of the Apoflles, and has been universa'lli^ continued through all the ages of the Church, until within thefe two Cen-^ turies" y and that this " muH: be confeiTcd by all that have the least acquaintance with Eccle- fiaftical hiftory". This is not the firfl time the Dr. has difcovered his want of knowledge in the ancient writings ', nor the firfl: time he has, vAih great afTurance, declared that to be true^ which o- thers know to be falfe. It is well known to thofe, who are tolerably verfed in antiquity, though the Dr feems quite ignorant of it, that no instance of confirmation is to be met with, in any of the writings of the fathers, until towards the clofe of the fccond, or rather the coming in of the third Century. I now tell him what may appear a new and flrange thing to him, that Tertullian is the olclefl father who fpeaks of this rite of confirma- tion 5 and I could tell him of feveral other fuper- ftitious The Appeal to the Public anfwercd. 51 (lifious rites that were, by this time, brougKi into prafl'ce. And if he will be at the pains to conlulc Mr. Pierce's vindication of DiiTcnters, or the diffm- ting Gentleman's anfwer to White, he wiii fi-d, that confirmation, in thofe days, was always per- formed, not as it is in the Church of E:iglaud, but: liMMEDiATELY after Baptiim. The other objeflion the Dr. con fide rs is, " th^t from the inftances of confirmation he ihould have faid, of the laying on of the Ap)ftles hands i re- corded in fcripture, the efiedsof it appear to have been miraculous -, and as the power of miracles has long fince ceafed, this rite is now ufelefs, and ought not to be continued". Bur, fays he, " trie folucion of this objedion is not difRcuit". How then docs he folve it ? V/hy, by cautioufly avoid- ing to fay any thing upon it that is really to the purpofe. For though he fays, miraculous gifts were imparted by the impofition of the Apoltles hands, and other gifts alfo of a different nature^ meaning hereby '' the gracious afllftances of the holy Spirit, without which it is as certain now, as it ever v/as, that no man can fulfd the conditions of the Gofpcl-covenant" ; yet he does not venture to go on, and afHrm, that either of thefe gifts are imparted by Bifhops to thofe, upon vvh )m rhe-y lay their haadb in confirmation ; or that Blfnops have, or pretend to have, in thefe days, this power of communicadon. And if they have no power to impart the holy Ghofl, either in miraculous gifts, or gracious alTiftances, why fl^ould they ufe thac rite or ceremony by which the Appflles did this ?• *' Might they not as well, to fpeak here in the v/ords of an excellent wriierj * ftrctch themfelves G. 2 *-'poi^ « I>ifrent. Gentleraans anfw'er to White, p^s- 45- '52 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. upon the dead body of a child, in imitation of Elifha •, or, make oi. tment with fpiale for the cure of the blind, in imitation of our Savior ; or, anoint the fickwith oil, in imitation of the apofto- lic Elders ; as pray, and lay their hands on thofe 'who were baptifed, in imitation of Peter and John, who did this to the Samaritan converts only that they might receive the miraculous gifts and powers pftbeholyGhoft"? I SHALL finifli what I have to fay, upon this head of confirmation, by addrefilng to the Dr. in the language of the above quoted author to Mr. White, " By the order of your common prayer, *' all perfons baptifed, when they come to compc- **' tent years, and are able to fay the Lord's prayer, *' Creed, and ten Commandments, and the anfwers *' of 'the fhort Catechifm, are to be brought to con- ** formation". The Bifhop having afked, " whe^ *^ thcr they renew the folemn piomife and vow *• which was made in their names m baptifm'"', ♦' &c 5 upon their anfwer, " we do", proceeds *^ hereupon to declare, in the mod folemn iTjan- *' ner, even in an addrefs to God himfelf, " that ** he has vouchfafed to regener^ite thefe his fervants *' by water and the holy Ghost, (note : Net ^' by water only, but alio by the koly Gkost) ^^ and to give them ih^ fcr give nefs of all their fins'^ : *' And laying his hand upon each particular per- ^' fon, '^ he CERTIFIES him by that fign of God's *' favor and gracious goodnefs towards him". I *' pray you, Sir, in the name of God, inform me, *' what wairant has the Bifl^op to pronounce a •' man's fms Ahh forgiven, and himfelf re- ♦' GENERATED by the HOLY Ghost, upon no o- J* ther grounds than his being able to fay the fhorc *' CateghifPa The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 53 ** Catechifm, and declaring that he ftands by his *' baptifmal engagements ? Will you fay that this *' is the chriltian dodrine concerning the terms " of acceptance and forgivenefs with God ? — Are *' there not n:iultitudes who call Chrift their Lord, *' and publicly profefs to (land by their baptifmal *' covenant, whom yet he will reje6t with abhor- *' rence at lad ? You will then inform me. Sir, ^' how his Lordfhip, upon this meer profeflion and *' promife, prefumes to declare to almighty God, " and to ASSURE the perfon, that he is regene- ** RATED, FORGIVEN, and without all peradven- " ture in a ftate of favor with heaven ! The ex- " prefllons, you mull acknowledge, are couched *' in abfolute and ftrong terms : Nor do I find *' that there is any intmiation, that their forgive- " nefs depends upon their care to keep, and to " live up to, their baptifmal engagements. No : *« But though their whole life hath hitherto beea *' fcandaloufly corrupt \ yet upon their being able '' to fay the Lord's prayer, &c. the Bifhop fo- *' lemnly pronounces a mod abfolute pardon over " them ; appeals to almighty God that he hath *' forgiven them all their fins ; and left this fhould " be too little to fatisfie the doubting finner, and *' qqaih his upbraiding confclence, he lays his hand *' upon his head, and certifies him, by that fign, " of God's favor and goodnefs to him. — To me, " Sir, I afTure you, this appears, I do not fay a *' very lliocking, but 1 muft fay a very unaccoun- " table folemnity ; and fhould be glad to know *' how to reconcile it to the reverence you owe to " God, or to the faithfulnefs and charity due to ^* the fouls of men. — Whether the continuance of «' this ceremony, in it's prefenc form of admini- J' ftration, be either for the honor of the admini- ^' ftrator. 54 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. " ftrator, or for the benefit of the Church ?-^ «' Whether it hath not an apparent tendency to " cherifh a delufive hope, and to fpeak peace to ^*« fuch peribns as are not, by the chriftian cove- *' nant, entitled to peace ? 1, with all humility, *' leave to the confideraiion of thofe whom, I " thank God, it more immediately concerns than *' my felf •, who are to watch for fouls as thofe ^' who muft give an account to the great Shep- " HERD, who will {hortly come -, before whom it " will be a tremendous thmg to have the immortal " fouls of THOUSANDS required at their hands". * * DifTenting Gentleman's anfwer to White, pag. 46^ 4S, 173- MMX):(XX)^)i(XK5:(XXX^X):^X)^M)^>:(XX ANSWER '^y^:^My^:^^^:^x?^yo^^ ANSWER to Section III. which declares, the Church in America, without an Epifco- pate, is necefTarily deftitute of a regular Go- vernment, and cannot enjoy the Benefits of Ordination and Confirmation^ THE defign of the Dr. in this Se6lion, is, to fet before the Public the " wretched con- dition" of the Epifcopal Churches in the Colonies *' for want of Bifhops'*. And it's lamentably bad ftate lies in thls^ pag. 27. that " if, according to the dodrine and belief of the Church of England, none have a right to govern the Church but Bi- Ihops, nor to ordain, nor to confirm ; then the American Church, while without Bifiiops, mufl be without Government, without Ordination and Confirmation". As to confirmation, it is acknowledged, they muft be in want of it without Bifhops, becaufe they only can perform this piece of fervice, con- formably to the eftablifhed order of the EngliHi Church. But this, though a " great grievance'*, is yet paflfed over without " enlargement", as not being futed, I fuppofe, to the Colony-tafte, and the other " more important points of Government and Ordmation" immediately proceeded to, and diftinaiy 5(5 The Appeal to the Public aniwered. diftindlly confidered. I fhall follow the Dr. in his own way. Only, before 1 come to take notice of what he has offered upon thefe "more important" heads, i fliall not think it needkfs to make the two following remarks* The firfl: relates to thefe words, pag. 27. " ac- cording to the do6lrine and belief of the Church of England, NONE have a right to govern the Church but Biihcps". It is added, in a marginal note here, " the reader will obferve, that only fuch authority is fpoken of as is purely Ecclefialtical, and peculiar to the officers of the Church. The King's fupremacy, as expreiTed in article XXXVII, is maintained by the Church in America, in as full and ample manner as in England". What I would obferve here is, the difficulty, I may rather fay the impoffibility of conceiving how it fhould be be- lieved, that " NONE but Biffiops have a right to govern the Church", while it is, at the fame time believed, that the " King is the fupremiC Governor of it", according to the article refer*d to, which declares, that he hath the chief Power, the CHIEF Government in all Ecclefiaftical caufes. The King*s fupremacy in the Church means no- thing fhort of this, that he is " vefted with all *' power to exercife all manner of Ecclefiaftical *' jurifdidlion, and that Arch-Bifhops, Bifhops, *' Arch-Deacons, and other Ecclefiaftical perfons, *' have no manner of jurifdidion Ecclefiaftical, but *' by and under the King's Majefty, who hath full *' power and authority to hear and determine all •' manner of caufes Ecclefiaftical, and to reform *' and correcft all vice, fin, errors, herefies, enor- *' mities, abufes whatfoever, which by any manner *^ of fpintual authority or jurifdidion ought, or !! may The Appeal to the Public anrwered. sy *' mav be lawfully reformed". * Bifhops there- fore, are fo far from being " the only Governors of ihe Church", that they are nothing more than fubordinate rulers, dependent on the Kmg, who, by their own acknowledgemenr,is placed over them as their supreme head. The plain truth is, as to authority, "purely Ecclefiailical", there isnofuch thing in the Church of England. Whatever au- thority it's Clergy, whether fuperior or inferior, are vefted with, it is, in all it's branches, both granted and regulated by the (late, and abfolutely under it's controul j infomuch, that, be their fpiritual powers as you pleafe, they have no right, by the conftitution of the Church, to put them into ex- ercife, but in the precife way that has been pre- fcribed to them ; nor can they do it in any one inftance. No Bifhop in England, not ail the Bi- Ihops united in a body, with all that plenitude of power that has been derived to them in a diretft line from the Apoftles, have a conftitutional right to make the leaft alteration in the eflablifhed form of worfnip, ordination, or difcipline. Tliey are H reftrained * Diflent. Gentleman's anfwer to Mr. White, pag. 24.. in which he refers to 26th Henry VIII. cap. 137. — Henry Vril. cap. xvii. i Eliz. cap. i. See alfo Burn, on Ecclefiaftical law, un-Jer the word. Supremacy ; where the feveral adts of Parliament, relative to this fubje6t, in the reigns of Henry 8th, Edward 6th, Eli- zabeth, and William and Mary, are cited ; where likewife It will be found, " that no perfon fhall be re- ceived into the miniftry, nor admitted to any E'-clefia- ftical funcftion, except he (hall firft fubfcribe (among others) to this article following ; " that the King's Majefty under God is the only supreme Governor. of this realm, and of all other his HighncfTes's domi- nions and countries, as well in all spiritual or , Ecclesiastical things, as temporal".— '58 The Appeal to the Public anfwer^'d. reftrained wirhin certain bounds, beyond which they have no authority, and can no mere exercife ic than any common Layman. This U the " dc6t:- rine and belief of the Church of England" -, and yer, according to the dodrihe and belief of this fame Church, as the Dr. fays, *' none have a right to govern it but Bifnops". He may, perhaps, find it difficult, upon tryal, to make borh parts of this contradidion true. The fhort of the cafe is, Bi- fhops, with the whole Church-Clergy, are Crea- tures of the ftate, and the Church itfelf a Par- liamentary Church. I he diffenting genile- man, in his anfwei to Mr White, has fet this mat- ter in a ilrong point of light. Says he, * '' You ^' need not be informed, Sir^ that all the Clergy " of this Kingdom^ with all the Billiops at their " head, have not the leaft authority to enjoin one *' ceremony or rite of worlliip •, or to either eila- ^' blidi or annul one article of faiih.^ No, but all *' power ^nd jurifdidion is lodged chiefiy in Lay- *' hands ; it is lolely in the King and Parlia- *' ME NT, and the Cler^^^y are to a6l in all things " under thrir diredion and controul. The King *' and Parliament are in truth the real Fathers, *' Governors, or Bifhops of this Church : Thefe *' only have power to make br unmake forms and *' rites of wor{l:iip, and do authoritatively *' inPcrud and prefcribe to the Clergy v»'hat they *' are to believe — in what manntr, and to whom *' the facraments are to be given — what prayers *' they are to offer up — what doctrine to preach — " vy'ho are to be admitted to the Epifcopate or " Prieftnood, and who to be refufed — by what *' ceremonies, prayers, and exhortations they are *' to be fet apart, and conlecrated to their office. — ^' Thefc, with every other circumftance relating to t' religion * Pag. 9, 10. ■fhe Appeal to the Public anfwered. §^ " religion and the woiihip of God, which is au^ ^' THORiTATiVELY prcfcribcd or enjoined in your " Church, you know, Sir, not ihe Bid: ops and ^* Clergy,' but the King with his 1-*arliament, *^ are ihe ONLY perfons who have authorita- " TivELY enjoined and preilrlbed fhem. The " Clergy of the whole land, in convocaiiun aflem- *' bled, cannot fo much as attempt any canons or ^* conllitutions without the King's licencCy — yea, *' fo far Sir, were the Bilhops and Clergy from *' having any hand in the firft forming our prefenc *^ eitablifiied Church, or in ordering it's rites and •f articles o^i^aith, that it was done not only with- *' OUT, but in aduai opposition to them. Fcr ^' in the ift of Queen Elifabeth, the Parliament '" alone eftabliihed the Queen's fupremacy, and " the Common-prayer-book, in fpite of all oppofi- '* tion from the Biiliops in the houfe of Lords ; " and the Convocation, then fitting, were fo far. " from having any hand in thofc Church-a6ts *' for reformation, that they prefented to the Par- " liament feveral propofitions in behalf of the " Tenets of Popery, di redly contrary to the pro- ^\ ceedings pf the Parliament. Hence, Sir, 1 think " you mutt be abiolutely forced to own (what I *' know gentlemen, of your robe do not care to " hear) that the Church of England is really a " Parliamentary Church ; that it is not pro- *' perly an Ally, but a mere Creature of the *' ilare. It depends intirely upon iht a6ls and " authority of Parliament for it's very tflence ^' and frame'*. The other remark, though not cfientially im- portant, may yet be worthy of notice, it's dtfign h to point out a great and manUelt difference be-r 6o The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. twixt the complaint as made at the head of this Srdion, and in the paragraph fome words of which we have been confidenngjand it's vindication after- ■Viards, The ground of complaint, as there ipcci- iied, is this, the Church of England in America, being without BiHiops, muft, for that reafon, '* be without <2;overnment and ordination" : Whereas, the juftification of this complaint does not proceed vpon the luppofiiion, either that they have " na government", or ca» have *' no ordinarion" ; buc that their government without Bifhops is incom- plete and infufHcient, and that ordination cannct be had without difficulty, danger and expence. No government, and that which is incomplete; no ordination, and ordination with inconvenience and charge, are quite different things. The com- plaint therefore fhould not have been made in ab- solute terms, as it's illuflration is attempted in a regained mitigated fenfe only. There would not then have been a difagreement betwixt them, as there certainly is as they now (land. Let it be re- membered, it is only in the rcftrained fenfe of this com.plainr that I am called to confider it. JHav- ing obllrved thefe ihir;gs, the way is prepared to go on. The Br. begins with the affair of " Govern- ment", and fays, " It is to be underftocd in a qua- *' lifitd fenfe. For where there is abfolutely no *' government iat all, there can be nothing but ^' diforder and confufion -, which, I iruft, is not *' yet the cafe of the Church in America". The Church then, by this "qualii^ed lenfe", mitigating it's didrefs, is not in that " wretched condition", one was led to imagine when it was faid, " while V^ithoutBiiliops it muil: te widiowt Government". It The Appeal tQ the Public anfwercd. 6i It follows in the next paragraph, " It has been '' allowed, that Prelbytcrs may have a fubordinate *' authority to govern ; and it is welf known, that " the Biihop of London hath formerly taken fome '' cognizance of Ecclefiaftical matters in the P!an- *' tations, by virtue of the King's commifilon". If Prcfbyters may a6t '* authoratatively"^ in mat- ters of government, though their authority fhould. be ** fubordinate", the Church is in a ftill lefs de- plorable ftate than was reprefented by the com- plaint, as at firfl: worded •, efpecially, if the Bifhop of London may *' take cognizance of their Eccle- fiaftical matters". And it is evident he may, be- caufe he has. That which has been may be again. Bjt fays the Dr. " much more than this is need- ful to anfwer the neceflities of the American Church. The Clergy can evidently do but little without a Bifhop". * And he might have added, they * The Dr. iii a marginal note here, having hinted that there had been voluntary conventions of the Clergy in fome of the Northern Colonies for a number of years, this being the moft they could do to relieve the Church in the prefent ftate of things, fays, " Indeed fuch con- ventions of theClergy,wherein all the members meet to- gether on terms ofequality,are unknown to theChurch of England". And they are equally unknown upon terms of inequality, at leaft to adt authoritatively as a body, in order to change, or amend any one order of the Church, or to make a new one. It would rot there- fore be of any fervice to have a Biftiop at the head of the American conventions of the Clergy. If nothing more is intended by thele convent'ons than to encou- rage and help one another, and unite their counfels for the good of the Church, conformably to it's laws and canons, there is no need of a Bifhop at their head : If their defiun is to aft as a body in an authoritative way, the conftitution of the Church forbids it. As to what : follows. 62 The Appeal to tlie Public anfwercd» they can do but little with him, in point of difu^ pline. The Church at home is, in this refped, in as lamentable a (tare as the Church in America^ and ir*s '^ neceffifies" as loudly call for rtdrefs^ The Liturgy itfclfruppofcs their difipline to be in a v/retched condition. Why elfe is the Church taught, once a year, on Afh-Wtdnefday, ** to wifh it's godly difcipline reftortd" ? Bur, notwithliand- ing it's pious widies, annually repeated, it remains fli'li in a deplorably bad ftate, Epifccpalians ihcm- fclyes being judges. Says the learned Dr. Whit- by, * " The Church of England pbferves no dif- cipline". The excellent Bifliop Burnet, at the clofe of his hillory of the reformation notes, -t* *' There was one thing [ive could heartily wifli *' there were no more] yet warning to compleat *' the reformation of this Church, which was the *' reltormg a primitive difcipline againft fcanda- *' lous perfons ; the eflabl filing the government *' cf the Church in Ecciefiatlicai-handsj and taking- foHows, ^' that for fuch a number cf Prefbyters to be left without a Bifnop at th ;: head to fuper-inter.d and govern them, it is a thing cquai':y unknown to any Episcopal Church on earth' ; it may be faid, there is fcarce an Epifcopal protell'.nt Chuic » on the earth befi.^es the Engiili one : and this no more allows Prefb, ttrs with ^ Bifliop at their head, than by them- felves alone, to do any thing autiioritativciy as a body. It is well known, there cannot be a convpration with- out the King's wr-t ; nor can they when met do any thing without the King's. licence ; nor will any doing of theif's be of binding force unlefs the King corfirms it. I do not fuppofe thcfe conventions ot the Clrrgy are unfavorably thought of at HoiriC, None here objed againft them. • Vid. his note on PvOm. 14. 6. t Dr. Calamy'^ defence of Mod. Non-conformity, Part il. pag. 34.C. The Appeal to the Public anfwcred. ^3 *Mt out of Lay-hands, which have fo long pro- " phani^d ir, and have expofed thj authority ofthe '' Church, and the cenfures of it, chiefly excom- " miinication, to the contompc of the nation ; by " which the reverence due to holy things is, in fo " great a meafure, loft, and the dreadfu'.left of all *' cenfures is now become the mod Icorned *' and defpifcd". I fnail add here the complainc of a noted high Church-writer upon, this brad. " Difcipline, fays he, * is lort, and will not be per- " mitted by the (late ; which, by virtue of conge " d* EJlire^s^ ^tare impediis^ prohibitions^ &c. have *' made themielves the fole and ultimate judges, " not only of all Bifhops and Churches -, but of *' their excommunicarions, and every exercife of " their fpiritual jurifdidion". The plain truth is, the conftitution of the Church, at leaft in the affair of difcipline, is in a miferably defedive, if not ruined, date. It i£reatly wants amendment ; and unlefs it fhould vaftly differ in America fom what it is in England, Bilhops would be of little fervice with refped to difcipline. TheChurch may, perhaps, do as well without them, as with them. The Dr. fays farther, " Tryal has heretofore been made what could be done by commiflarics". — And why might not commiiTaries fupply the place of Bifhops, at leaft in regard of difcipline ? Per- haps, it will be found, upon examination, that Bifhops can do little more than they might be able to do. " But their ufefulnefs (as it follows) upon the whole appeared to be fo inconfiderable, that hone have been appointed for near twenty years". PofTibly, the reafon of their not being ufeful was owingj'not to the ufelefTncfs of the office itfelf, but to f Gafe of the Regal, and Pontif. pag. i65. 64 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. to it's not being filled with thofe who were duly qualified for it. This, 1 believe, is the exadl truth with reference to the lad comniifTary the Church had in thefe parts, and I know not but the only one it ever had. He was a native of England, and fent from thence an utter ftranger to the people here. The Bifhop of London could not thcTs fore be impofed on by " ample credentials*', relative to his chara6ler, from this part of the world, /ind yet, he was (o far from being fuperior to his bre- . thren, that fome of them, I know, would have tho't it a difhonor to be compared with him. Some- thing of his juft merit may be learned from the affair of Hopkington, as publiflied by Dr. Mayhew, in one of his pieces on the difpute about the con- du6t of the Society for the propagation of the Gofpel in foreign parts. If no more care is taken as to the perfonal qjaliBcations of Bifhops, fhould they be fent, I will venture to prophefie, that, in lefs than twenty years, even the Epifcbpal Clergy ihemfclves will be heartily fick of them. The Dr. pag, 30. divides the government of the Church into " two branches", taking in both " the Clergy, and the Laity". But, before he comes to apply this divifion to the cafe of the American Church, he interpofes a few things which mutt not pafs unnoticed. Says he, pag. ibid. " What the jull penalties ^^ " of^obedience are, we muil learn, from the nature *' of the Church itfelf — The power of the Church *' is of a fpiritual nature; and the utmofl efted of " if, in this world, is the cutting off and rejedling *' thofe members which are. incurably and danger- *^ oufly corrupted"*— —-This is certainly true of " the The Appeal to the JPablic anfwerec}. 6^ the Church, confidered, in ic's proper ftnfei as «' a kingdom that is not of this world". But it is really aftonifliing, that he fliould make fpiritiial cenfures the uemoll cffed of the power of the Church of England. He mud be very ignorant, if he did not know, that an " excommunicated member is '' delivered over to the civil arm to humble and " chaftlfe him ; is difabled from afiening his na- "' tural rights, from being a witnefs, from bring- " ing adions at law, and, if he does not fubmit in *' forty days, a writ fliall iiTue forth to imprifon " him". * it follows, '* Excommunication, how^ ever It was dreaded in the purelt ages of ChriQi- anity, has loft much of it's force in This ; wherein Altars are fet up againft Altars, and Churches a- gainft Churches, and thofe who are rejcfted by one, may be received by another". I cannot affirm, that the Church of England in the Colonies have not admitted thofe to ^& Gofpel-privileges from among us, whofe inoral conduct was an hindrance to their being admitted to them in our Churches ; but this I will fay, on the contrary, that no one, in like circumflances, was ever received from Epif- Gopal Churches into any of our's •, and 1 dare ven- ture to engage, that this will never happen, unlefs we fhould become corrupt to a degree far beyond what has ever yet been our cz\t. l^he Dr. goes on, " a difpoficion to flight the higheft punifliment '^ which the Church can inflidl has become gene- " ral, and there appears to be no remedy for it, " unlefs in the ufe of rcafon and perfuafion* But " we live in an age, in which the voice of reafon *' will not be heard, although fupported by the de- •' clarations of heaven, on the fubjedlof Church- I " difcipline, * Diflent. Gent. anfw. to Mr. White, pag. 2Z. 6() The Appeal to the Public anfwered. •' difcipline. Nay, a man would be generally e- *' (teemed to be eiiher wrong-headed, or mean- *' fpirited, or both^ who (hould profeis much re- " verence for Ecclefiallical authority •, and the *' charge of Prieft-craft^ fo long hackneyed by *' infiUels and libertmes, would be fuie to fall " upon the Clergy, fliould they have courage to " fpeak up for it", it is readily acknowledged, the difcipline of the Church is held in contempt by muliitudes. Infidels and Libertines laugh to fee how it is exerciied, v/hile ferious good people are pained at heart. And \i would, in truth, be a; fhame for a man to fpeak in it's defence : But whofe fault is this ? If fo facred a matter as the difcipline of Chriil is managed by the Church in a contemptible manner, and is permitted to be ^o^ year after yeary without any attempt for redrefs, why lliould it be thought ftrange, if Libertines treat it with fneer and ridicule ? This is no other than might reafonably be expeded. Juft occafion is given for it> You knov/. Sir, to ufe here the words of the diiTenting Gentleman, * that " feme " of the molt facred acts of fpiritual jurifdidlion, " it's folemn cenjures and exccmfuunications are ^' exercifed rn the Church of England by " unconfecrated and meer Laymen. Thefe hold *' the Keys^ open or fliut, cad out or admit to ir, *' according to their fole pleafure. The Chancel- *' lors^ Ojjiciah^ Surrogates, who adminifter the ju- *' rifdidtion of fpiritual Courts, and determine the *' mod important fpiritual matters, fuch as deliver- " ing men to the devil, &c. frequently are, and, by '' exprefs provifion of law, always may be Laymen. *' And truly, Sir, 1 greatly pity you Gentlemen of ^' theClergy, that fome of the moft tremendous and " folemn * Vid. pag. 21, 1%. The Appeal to the Public anfwered, 67 9 folemn parts of your facred office, fuch as Ex- *' co'mmunicationSy /ihfoluticns^^Q. you 2^xt forced to " perform, not only according to, but fometimes, *' perhaps, dire611y againft your own judgments, " as you are authoritatively direded and command- ^^ ed by thefe Lay-perfon?. Forced, 1 lay, to do '*' it, notwithdanding what you urge about your " own Concurrence ; for if you refufe to concur, " you are immediately liable to fufpenfiGn ah cjjicio ,'' et heneficio ; and if you continue obftinate, to be " excommunicated your own felves". You know alfo, that in the Church of England fpiritual cen- fures may be bought off with money, or exchang- ed for it. " May not, fays the dillenting Gentle- '' man,* a grievous finner, according to herconfti- *' tution, be fuftcred to commute ? To have par- ^' don for money, and to flcreen himfelf by a round " fee from ihe ftroke of the Church's rod ? Yea, " when he is going to be delivered, or adlualiy is '; delivered, into the hands of the devil, and latan " has him in keeping, will not an handjcme Ju;n '' prefcntly pluck him thence, and redore him^ to "■' the Church's foft and indulgent bolom again" ? What a mockery of religion is this! How pro- p'une ^n a,bule of the diicipline Chnil hcis intt;- tu-ed ! " Thy money perilli with thee", faid th-; apoftle Peter, upon a like occafian. This moil fcandalous pra(Stice can be judified, neither by the fcripture, nor primitive antiquity. There is not a word to be found in either of tliis prophane comniu- tation. — You cannot bur know farther, what is ft;!!, if pofnble, more {liameful, that tjie vileH: fmners are fuft^icd, in your Church, to partake of the fym- b jIs of Chrift's body and blood. Sjys one of the I 2 h^^ ^ Pag. 21. ^8 The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. bed and ftmnged writers againft the Church, * ■' are not fomc of the moft prophane and aban-. *' donedof men, Rakes, Debauchees, Blafphemers '^' of God^ and Scoffers ai all religion, oiten ktn *' upon their kncts around ycur coinmunion-tahle^ *' eating the chlkhen'^s^bread; and partaking of the ^' holy elements to qualiBe for a Fojl ? Dare your " minifters rei'i:fe them ! No, they dare not refufe *' the tnolt impious UajpLeiner the three kingdoms *' afford, when he comes to demand it as a quali- ^' fication foran citice in the Army or Fleet. And ^' if, in any other cafe, the Pried denies the facra- *' ment to the mod infamcus Gnner dwelling in his ■' Pariili, if the man, upon an appeal to the Eccle- *' fiailical court, can fecure the favor of the Lay^ " Chancellery he m,ay fecurely ^^iti-"^ both the mini- •' (ler and the Bilhop to keep him fromi the Lord's *' table. TlitChanccllor's determination (hall Hand *' in h:w, though contrary to the Bishop's ; " and the miniircr be liable to a rufpen-fion for le- -Vfufmg compliance ; and if he is contumacious, "• and will nor give the man the facrament, even '-'•■ to exco,mmi!n;caiion itfelP'. As this is the real flace of the Cliqrch of JEnghnd's difcipline, it is no wonder " a m^^n vvould be efteemed wrong- headed, if l^c fhould proftfs much' reverence for it", infcead of revering " Ecclt- fiailical auiiiority", 51S exerciied in the eitabliditd Church, it oughc rather to be lamented ovtr as giving' but too jufc occafun for jt's being High ted ^nd condeirined. The Dr. now comes *to the point in hand, the dilcipline of the Church under anAmerican Epifco- pate. And he enters upon it with a frank, honeft acknovvledgment, though it ptaliy fubverts all thac he * DliTent. Gent pag. 65. The Appeal to the Public anrwered, 69 he has afterwards faid. Fj^ words are, * " In this (tare of things, the reftoration of ihe primitive dif- cipline fecms to be a matter rather to be wiChed for anddefired, than to be rationally attempted by thofe in authority". And yet, ic is propofed, that this very thing, which c?.nnot rationally BE attempted", Ihould not only be attempted, b'Jt carried into effecl. It is faid indeed, '' no at- tempt of ihis nature will be made refpecling the Laitf, under an American Epifcopate. Thcdif- cipiine of the Church, fo far as it relates to the private Members, will be left as it is". — Buc then, it is added, '' with regard to the Clergy, ic is prop6fcd, that a ftrid difcipline be etlablillied, and that the BiHiop's power over them iliall he as full and complete, as the laws and canons of the Church direct". But why fliould the difcipline, diredled to by the laws of the Church, be confined to the Clergy, while the Laity are left without re- ftraint ? Judge ye that conllituie the Public, whe- ther this is rcafonable ? Whether it confifls, in any tolerable meafure, with tlie Goipel-inftitution of difcipline ^ Is not godly difcipline as ntedful for the Laity as the Clergy ? Are the Church-Clergy fo much worfe than iheLaity, chat the latter may be left to themfelves, while *' ailrid difcipline fhall be etlabliriied for the former ^ What would the Dr. have the world think of the Epifcopal-Clergy, by placing them in i'o unfavorable a light ? Briides, are not Bidiops, as fuccefiors to the Apoftles, as much veiled with authority to govern the Laity as the Clergy ^ And wirvr Ihould their apoftolic au- thority, be thus limited by a meerly human efta- bliiliment .? Efpecially, as the Dr. himfelf f makes it one main article of his complaint, that " the people, • J Pag. 3f» t Pag' 29* yo The Appeal to the Public anfwered. PEOPLE, bting fenfible of the Clergy's want of power, without anEcclefialiical fuperior, find them- felvcs free from all refiraints ot Ecclffiadical au- thority" ; intimating the expediency of their being *' governed by thofe who have proper authority^ and that, without this, the body is without firen^th, and liable lo be deitroyed".- Ii is really furprifing, when Biiliops are pleaded for as necessary in order todifcipline, that they (hould not be fi ffered to exercife ir, in fo important a branch as that of the governmf nt of the Laity ! One would not have expected fuch a propofal trom Epilcopal Clergy- men. Perhaps, it will be faid, the lamentable Rs-te of the Church's difcipline reipeits the Laity only. It would therefore be in vain to attcm.pt it's redc- ration in regard of them \ though it may reafona- bly be atttm^pted with refped to the Clergy. Bu.t this is a,meer pireience. if there is any force in the argument taken ftom the wretched condition of the Church's difcipline, it is equally llrong againft it's beino; eftablifhed for the soverrmient of either. For It is equally lame, lax, and inefiedual rcfped- ing both. It's ruined fcatc, in regard of the Laity, has been already pointed out. 1 v/ould now fay, notwiihdanding all the godly diicipline of ihcEng-; liih Church, many ignorant, loofe, vicious men, are veiled with the PrieR's ofiice, and peimitted to a6t in it. The Public is called upon lo attend to a few v^ords, fromi the excellciU Bifliop Burner, re- lative to the Church-Clergy, 'i hey are intro- duced in this folemn manner, '^ " I am nov/ in the '* 70th year of my age, 3.nd as I cannot fpeak long " to the world in any Ibrtj fo 1 cannot hope for z " more ♦ Preface to his Pafloral Care, psg. 24. The Appeal to the Public anfUrered. yi " morerolemn occafion than this of fpeaking with " all due freedom, both to the prefent and flic- " ceeding ages ; Therefore I lay hold on it to give *' a free vent to thofe fad thoughts that lie on my " mind both day and night, and are the fubjed of '' many fccret mournings. I dare appeal to thac '* God, to whom the fecrets of my heart are known, " to whom I am fhortly to give an*account of my ** miniftry, that I have the true interclts of this " Church before my eyes, and that I purfue them '* with a fincere and fervent zeal". — The words themfelves I would bring to view are as follow, ^ " Our Ember weeks are the burden and grief of my " life. The much greater part of thofe who come " to be ordained are ignorant to a degree not to be *' apprehended by thofe, who are not obliged to " icnow it. The eafieft piart of knowledge is thac " to which they are the greateil (Irangers ; I meaa " the plained parts of the fcriptures, which they " fay, in excufe of their ignorance, that their tutors *' in the Univerfities never mention the reading of •' to them ; fo that they can give no account, or *' at leaiL a very imperfedl one, of the contents e* " ven of the Gofpels. Thofe who have read fome '' fev/ books, yet feem never to have read the fcrip- " tures. Many cannot give a tolerable account *' even of the Catechifm itfelf, how fhort and plain " foever^ They cry, and think it a fad difgrace to '* be denied orders, though the ignorance of fome ^' is fuch, that, in a well regulated date of things, *' they would appear not knowing enough to be " admitted to the holy facramertt. This does often '' tear my heart. 1 he cafe is not much better in " many, who, having got into orders, come for ^' infbi.tution, and cannot make it appear, that they ^'' have ^ Pag. 25, 26. 72 The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. '' have read the fcriptures, or any one good book, " fmce they were ordained ; fo that the imall mea- •' lure of knowledge upon which they get into holy " orders, net being iinproved, is in a way to be " quite lod -, and then they think it a great hard- " (hip if they are told, they mufl know the fcrip- " tures, and the body of d!vinlty better, before " they can be trufted with the care of fouls. Thefe *' things pierce one's foul, and make him of: en cry *' our, Ob that I held wifigs like a dove, for then *' would 1 fly c'lvay^ and be at reft I Vv^hat are we *' like to grow to ? In what a cafe are wc to deal *' with any adverfary, Atheid, Papiti, or Diffenters, •' or in any fort to promote ihe hdne;r of God, and *' carry on the great concerns of the Gofpel, when *"' {o grofs an ignorance in the fundamentals of re- *' ligion has fpread itfelf fo much among thofewha *' ought to teach others, and yet need that one *' teach them the firfi principles of ihe cracles of God", This fame pious and learned Bifliop has alio given us the fentiments of Arch-Bifnop Leightcn upon this head in the following words, '' He looked on the (late the Church of England was in with very nulancholy refiedions, and was very uneafie at an exprtlTion then much ufed, that it was the befl conftituted Church in the world. He thought ic was fo with relation, to the dodrine, the worfliip, and .the main part of our government. But, as to the adminiftration, both with relation to the Eccle- fiailical Courts, and the Paftoral care, he looked on it as one cf the moil corrupt he h:id ever {^tn. He thought we looked like a fair carcafe of a body, without a fpirit, without that zeal, that flridneTs of life, and that laborioufnefs in the Clergy that became us. * To the like purpofe the excellent Mr. ♦ Hiftory of his own Time, pag. 4^2, Vol. II. The Appeal to the Public anAvered. 73 Mr. Pierce complains upon this head. " The '' Pariihoners, fays he, * in a ve-y few places have *' that power, which, Cyprian fays, belongs "chiefly to the people, of chusing worthy *' Priests, or refusing those that are un- " woRT^HY. If a Redlor is to be placed in a " Pariili, the Patron of the living writes a letter to •* the Bifhop, and recommends whatClcrgyman he " pleafes to be put into it. The Bifliop cannot re- '^^ fufe the perfon thus recdrn to ended \ and fo the ^' Pariilioriers, whether they wil! or no, are com- " mitted t;) the care of that Prtfbyter, chofen by a '^' ftranger, and, it may be, a notorioufly wicked ^' perfon. It might, perhaps, ftem incredible a- " broad, if I (liould alTerr, that, in the Church of "England, the bed reformed Church, as they " therhlelves boaft, in the v/orld, — the right of " Patronage is bought and fold -, and that ir is noc *' reckoned fimony, nor any crime at all, for a per- " fon to buy that right, or the hext prefentation " of a living, provided it be not void at the time. *' Hence ignorant fellows, if they are but rich, often "- gee the fatted benefices. And when they have *' got the livings, they are not bound to take care of '1M the flock therrifelves -, it is enough if they leave ^' fo troublefdme a work to any forry Curate, who *' will do it cheapeft. Nay, foinetimes the mini- *' Iter fhall have the income of two, three, or more parifhes, who will not vouchlafe to take the paftoral care of one'*. He adds from Bifliop Burnet, " what can v/e fay, when we find often the *' pooreft clerks in the richeft livings ? Whofe in- *' cumbents, not content to devour the parfimony *' of the Church, while \.\\^y feed ibem/ekes, and not J' the flock out of it, are fo fcandaloufly hard in their K *i\ allowancd J Vind. of DilTent. pag. 562» 6C '74 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. *' allowance to their Curates, as if they intend- *' ed eq-jally to ftarve borh curate and peo- " pie". Mr. Pierce oblerves yet farther, *' they *' \\ho have procured themfelves bentfices may, in ** a manner, live as they pleafe. Several of our *' prefent Bifhops, of eminent learning and piety, ** v.'ho would be glad to proceed againft vicious " Clergy-men, and turn them out of their livings, *' find themfelves hindered by our laws from doing *' it. Hence our nation abounds with diilblute '* Clergy-men, the fhame of their Country, and ** the holy fun£lion". I may fubjoin to what has been offered from the above writers, that a very great part of the EpifcopaUClergy are onlyCurates, meer Underlings, hired to do the workywhich, in all reafon and confcience, ought to be done by o- thers ; and at fo low a rate too, that, notwithftand- ing the riches of the Church, they are, many of chem, by reafon of their poverty, made "contemp- tible and bale before all the people". Thus miferably lax is the Church's difciplinc refpeding the Clergy ; and it's nnethod of admi- nillraiion is fuch, thar, while this continues, it will be as vain a thing to attempt a reform in regard of the Clergy, as the Laity. The government of the former is in as ill a Hare, as the government of the latter ; and this, notwiihltanding they have fo many Biiliops at their head, fuper-intending and direding their condu6t : And no wonder, as the aflair of difcipline is in the hnnds of Chancellors, rather thanBifhops. Says theBirtiop ot Hereford, * *' If there be any thing in the' office of a Bifhop to *' be challenged peculiar to themfelves, certainly " it fhouid be this, (excommunication) yet this is " in 5 Naked Truth, pag. 58. The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 75 *« in a manner quite relinquifhed to their Chancel- " lors, Laytnen, who have no more capacity to " lentence or abfolve a finner, than to diflblve the " heavens or the earth — The Chancellor takes *' upon him to fentcnce not only Laymen, but *' Clergymen- alfo brought into his court for any *' delinquency. And in the court of Arches, they " fen tence even Biiliops themfclves'*.— He adds, *' I remember when he Bilhop of Wells, hearing *' of a caufe corruptly managed, and commg into " court to redilie it, the Chancellor Dr. Duck, *' fairly and mannerly bid him be gone, for he *' had no power to a^ any thing ; and there- " wit hall pulled out his Patent, fealed by this " Bilhop's Fredeceflbr, which frightened the poor " Bilhop out of the court". The cRablifhment of difciplme here mud therefore be differenl from what it i> at home, or it will be as truly incomplete with a BiHiop at the head of the Clergy, as it is at prefent without one ; and as infuflicient for their government, as the government of the Laity. The Dr. goes on to reprefent the neceflity of efla- blifliing a ftrid difcipline in regard of the Clergy. B'Jt what he has offered is far lei's weighty than one would have expected in an affair he feems to lay fo great itrefs upon. He confiders the Church- Clergy as either virtuous or vicious, and, in either cafe, fays, " the want of Bifhops to fuper-intend and govern them, is obvious at firft view". Says he, in cafe of their being virtuous, "if " they have no need of a Bifnop to keep ihem to " their duty, yet fome cafes will at-ile, in which his " diredion will be u eful — and many cafes, whtre- " in his fupporc and encouragement will be need- - ^^ K 2 V fuH ^6 The Appeal to the Public anfwcred. ^' ful — an-l in a'.l cafes, hisfriendfhip and patronage •* w 11 give lite and fpirit to them in undergoing ^' the difficulties, and in performing the duties, of f' their fundion". Bur what is all this to the af- fair of DISCIPLINE, the grand point in view ? The pr's bufinefs here was, to fhew it to be necessaPvY |hat STRICT DISCIPLINE fliould bc eftablifhed with refped to the Clergy ; and he begins his ar- gument wiih a cafe, wherein it is not needed. AT ALL. Is this pertinent to the propofed fubjedb of debate ? Might he not as well have left out ivhat he has here faid, as being little to the pur- pofe ? Befides, the advantange here reprefcnted by the iniiTion of a B'.fiiop is rather imaginary, than leal. Was there now a Billiop in whatever part cf Ameiica he would chufe, the Clergy would not- wichflanding be yarioufly didant from him fome hundreds of miles ; infomuch that but few of them could reap much benefit ei:her by his direftion, cncou agement, or patronage ; very little more, and with very little lefs dilBcuity, than if he wa3, in England, As to the Clergy of a vicious chara£ler, the Dr. goes on to fay, "it is more immediately necefTary, on account of thefe, that EpHcopal Government fliould rake place in Aq-^erica" And why ? The JpUowing coiifiderations are mentioned. '^ The procefs of carrying on an accufation, and afterwards of fupporting it, at fo great- a diflance, ITluft be tedious and dillicult, and, in fome cafes, rnay caufe thofe to efcape punifhment who really (delerve it". |s pot this ajuil leprefentation of a proc fs at home, though there are Bifnops theie^ gnd the c;ife may bp parried 0|i without a plea for del^y The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 77 delay on account of this " great diftance'* ? Have not multitudes " efcaped punifhmcni" by this means, who richly deferved it ? And is not this the very reafon that Epifcopalians themfclves, as well as piflenters, have often given, why there fhould be a reform of the adminittratlon of difcipline in the Englilh Church ? Have they not long complained of the difhculty, tedioufnefs and expencc, occafion- ed by the spiritual courts, and their manage- ment by Liy-cha icellurs ? And this would be the complaint here, notwithftanding the prefence of a ^IQiop. The Dr. indeed fays, " the cafe would be ditfcrent under an Epilcopate •, as then for any grievance of this nature, the Church would have an eafie and effedual remedy". Has not the Church rhis ^' eafie and efTev5lual remedy" at home, under the government of Bifhops ? And yet, this grievance continues, and there is no profpedl, ac prefent, of it's being removed. And the cafe would probably be much the fame here, unlefs the eftablilhcd mode of difcipline fliould be fo changed, as to be quite different from what it is in England. But, if an alteration is to be made, it is infinitely reafonable, it fhould firft take place at home, where it is moil needed. When it is effedted there, ic will be time enough to defire it here. Another confideration the Dr. men-ions Is, " if a Clergyman fliall difgrace his profefTion in an open and fcandalous manner, a Bifhop refiding in the Country might lufpend him immediately". Why don't the Bilhops do it at home, as fcandalous Clergymen are' not uncommon there ? Befidcs, CommifTaries might be veiled with ,the power of fufpenfion ♦, and it is pofFible thofe might be found, who would exercife this power with as much wif- domj impartiality and faithfulnefs, as Bilh^p^. It yS The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. It is added, " and if, upon tryal, the cafe (hould be found to delerve it, he can proceed to deprive him o( his benefice, and not only filence and deprive him, but excommunicate him from the fcciety of Chrillians". Obferve, the cafe muft be tried be- fore the fufpended Clergy-man can be deprived, fiienced and excommunicated. But where is this cafe to be tried ? Can it be tried any where, con- formably to the mods of the eftablifhed Church, but in a spiritual court ? To this court it be- longs to hear the cafe, and, if it appears proper, to order the Sentence of deprivation, or excommuni- cation. It can be done by this court only ; and, Ihouid the fulpendedClergy man be able to procure ihe Chancelicr's judgment in his favor, he need not fear the whole power of the Bifhop, fliould it be exerted againll him. Now, this fpiritual court muft be eredted here, or the cafe muit be carried home to feme court there. If it is to be carried and fup[ orted at home, the com.plaint of '' redi- oufhefs and difficuly" vv'ili remain in full force. If a court is ertdled here, it muft be quite changed from what I? is in England, or there wiii be Itill tedious difficuly, and great expence ; infomuch that, 1 doubt not, E^/jfcopalians themfelves would foon be as earneil in their dcfires to be delivered from it, as they now arc to have Bifhops. It is obferved ftill farther, *' the Clergy'? being under the eye of their Biihop will naturally tend to make them, in general, more regular and dili- gent in the difcharge of the duties ot their office'*. If their being under the eye of the omniprefenr, omnilcient God, will not make them regular and diligent, it is a vain thing to expe r that their be- ing under " the eye of their Bifhop" fhould do it. k The Appeal to the Public anlwered. 79 It certainly has not this effetl: at home ; and it is not probable this would be the effedl here. Be- fides,- it mtill be by rhc help of a very (1. ong figure that they can be iM to be under " their Bilhop's eye, fo as to be much influenced by this confide- ration, when, by far the greater parr of them, are fixed in cures, Ibme fifty, fume an hundred, and fome two or three hundred miles from him ; as they mud continue to be in Amenci, unlefs ^he Church here has many more Bifhops than ha/c ever yet been talked of. In fine, it is faid, " of ihofe whorechara6ler<; are juftly exceptionable, fome may probably be re- formed by a Biihop •, and, as to others, they may be ealily ciifplaced, unlefs it be the fault of the people themfeives" The reformation of vicious Clergy-men is not (o eafily effedled. I'he BiQiops at home find this to be a lad truth. And no good reafon can be given, why it fhould be otherwife here, though the Clergy had one or more Bifhops at their head to govern them. As to the " dif- placing" unreformed Clergy-men, it has long been complamed of in England, as one of the greateft difficulties j and the difficulty would be much the fame in America, under the fame mode of admi- niftring Church-difcipline ; and there can be no other, unlels the eftablifhedconftitution is departed from. And if if may in one inftance, it may in another -, and (6 on until it has quite loft it's pre- fent form. I HAVE now taken notice of every thing the Dr. has faid, in favor of an American- Epifcopate, up- on the head of di/cipliney^nd cannot but think, it will appear, that he has very much failed in v/hat he undertook 8o The Appeal to the Public anfwered. undertook to prove. The fum of what he has offered, and of what has been rephed, is this ; — He has honeftly declared, as '* the reiloration of priminve dilcipli^.e cannot rationally be' at- tempted, no attempt of this nature will be made in regard of the Laity". And might he nor, for the fame reafon, in full fofce, have faid, neither will it be attempted wirh reference to the Clergy r But though it can no more rationally be at- tempted in regard of the one ihai) the other 5 yet the eilablifhment of ft ri 61 difcipline, under an Ep'ilcopate, is pleaded for in regard of the Clergy, to the intire negledl of the Laity. And .why ? Becaufe, if the Church has a Biihop here, he can *' imimediarely fufpend a fcandalous Clergyman". And might not a CommiiTary do the fame as well ? And yet, this is all within the reach of a Bifliop's power, in confiftency with the Church's conilitu- tion. For, as to "depriving, filencing and excom- municating a fuppofed fcandalous Clergyman, the Biihop can do neither of them, before tryal of the cafe in fome spiritual court -, in confe- quence of which, the Clergyman may be acquitted^ and his fufpenfion taken off, even in oppofuion to the remonftrance of the Bifhop himfelf. As to " diredion," encouragement, patronage, and refor- mation, by being under the eye of the Bifhop", they do not belong to the affair of " ftrifl difcipline" -, fo that however ufefui a Bifhop might be in thefc refpeds, it is nothing to thepurpofe in that view of the argument it was propofed to be here confidered. The Public will now judge be- tween us. The Dr. proceeds to the affair of crdinatton^ the want of which, he fays, is [[ a greater difadvantage. The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. 8r if pofilble, than the want of a regular Governrtstni"* And why ? For the following reafons. One i without s, '' the danger of croffing the Atlantic^ which none can be admitted to holy- orders". And the danger, in this refpedt, he re- prefents, " however tritiing in it's appearance to fome" to have been fo formidable " in the appre- henfion of others, that it has dcter'd them from attempting to obtain ordination". He then tells us, " the voyage has proved fatal t) near a fifth part of thofe who have gone for holy orders". I have never heard of more than two to whom the fea proved fatal. If eight more loft their lives by ficknefs, it is no more than they mi^ht have done if they had tarried at home. But be the " danger'* great or fmall, there is good reafon to believe, the going to England for ordination is rather an ad- vantage, than diladvantage to the Church in regard of it's being fupplied.wuh miniders. As to my felf, 1 (hould efteem it a happy circurnftance in the cafe, was 1 inclined to take orders ; and many I have mentioned it to have declared themfelves to he of the fame mind. And, were it proper, I could name fome Candidates for the miniftry a- mong us, who have been tempted, by profeHbrs of the Church to receive Epifcopal ordination, with this motive in fpecial, that they would have a FINE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE ENGLAND. Ic fhould feem from hence, as though going home for orders may be confidered by Epifcopalians, either as an advantage,or diradvantage,according to the turn they have in view to ferve for the prefent. Another reafon i?, " the expence of the voyage, which cannot be reckoned at Jefs, upon L '*»o 82 The Appeal to the Public anfwergdi an average, than one hundred pounds fterling to each perlon'*. And this is aggravated by the con- fideration, that *' the expence muft generally fall upon fuch, as, having already expended the greateft part of their pittance in their education, will find it extremely hard to raife a fufficient fum for the purpofe". I candidly fuppofe the Dr. had never feen, or, if he had, did not remember at the time of writing, the account of the Society, publifhed in 1706, in which they fay, pag. 74. "all young Students in thofe parts (meaning the Colonies) "who defire Epifcopal ordination, are invited into England 5 and their expences in coming and re- turning are to be defrayed by the Society". Ac- cording to this invitation, there js no hardfliip, as to the article of " expence'*, that can be complain- ed of, unlefs abfurdly, but by the Society them- felves J and they can^havejufL reafon for com- plaint, as the money they expend in this way is as properly beftowed, as in fupport of the Mi& fionaries themfclves. A FARTHER, reafon isj that, " under thefe dif- couragements, there has always been great diffi- culty m fupplying the Church with Clergy-men^ and there always muft be". Several inftances are mentioned in illuftration of this, taken from Pen- fylvania, Ne-vV-Jerfey, and North-Carolina", where, as " Governor Dobbs informed the Society, in 17^4, there were but fix Clergymen, though there were twenty-nine Pariflies, and each Parifli con- tained a whole County". The Dr. very juftjy obferves, " other reafons may have contributed to this want of Clergymen" -, but it is really flrangc he fhould fay, " it has always been prmcipally ow- ing to the great difficulty of obtaining ordination". If The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 83 If this has been (o " great a difficulty", how comes it to pais, that the New England-Colonies have all along been, and now are, iupplied with Mililon- arles ; inibmuch, that there arc few, if any Chur- phes,but are provided with them ? Why (hould the difficulty be fo very great in other Provinces, and none at all in the New-England ones, or fo incon- fiderable as to be eafily got over ? If it was m it- fclf a real and great difficulty, ii's operation would be as powerful in thefe Colonies, as the other. Other c^ufes ti]uft certainly be fought for, in order i'o account for this want of a fupply of miniders. And it is eafie to point them out ; more efpecially in regard of " North-Carolina", which is far more fparingly provided for, than either Penfylvania, oc New Jerley — The Society has comparatively neg- leded this Colony, though it's circumftances moft importunately called for their pious and charitable care, being deftitute of the means of falvation in a degree that was never known in the more northern parts of America., Thefe, though in as full enjoy- ment of the worffiip of God, and the inftituted r.ieans of grace, in all their towns and villages, as the people in England, have yet been partakers of the Society^s charity in fuch large meafures' as to incapacitate them from giving fo full a fupply of Clergymen to the other Colonies, as perhaps they might have been willing to have done. The view indeed of the Society has been to epifcopize thefe Colonies, and this they have made their greac hufmefs -, infomuch, that (hould il be accomplilhed, IT WILL THEN HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO THE HAPPY ISSUE INTENDED, as w^ are told, in plain wprds, by the B:ffiop of Landaff, in his Society- fermon February 1)67. The Society's capacity of fupporting Miffionaiies is aot mexhaultablc ; ' L 2 U^.^if ^4 The Appeal to the Public anfvvered. ppcn which accounr, it is no wonder they cannot provide for inch numbers in the more norihera Colonies, and tend a needful fuj ply alfo to ihe foiithern ones. This, I believe, i?, at boftcm, the chief rtaion of the v/ant oi iVIifSonarics in the places complained of —Another rcaion may be, the wane of cate in th^r Church-pcopie to educate their fon^ for the niiniJiry, cwng, i luppofe, to their appre- Jiending {hey would nor, in this v^'ay, be fo well provided for, a.^ tluy (liould dtfire — Another rea- lon Itiii may bt, tl;c inLifficiency cf the temptation, in molt cafes, to iniiuence Candidates among us to go over ;o the Church. 1 hey have a better prof- pe6t in continuing wiih U9^ than they wculd have ihould they change fides, and become Epilcopali* ans.— -{ (hail only zd6^ 1 never heard the diiFicuhy of cbrainirg oruinatlon given as a resfon againK going f:^r if, by any one in this patt of Amierica. And 1 am perfuaded, it is now mentioned chiefly ia 3 fpecuLtiv-e v;ay, as carrying with it aplaufible ap-- pearance to thole who are Grangers ^o die Country, It is farther mentioned, as a '' more glaring dlf- '|id vantage, that it is impoOibie a Bifhop, rtfjding in England, fnould be fufHciently acquainted with ?he charaders of thofe wjio go home from tliis Country fur holy orders". And to this caufe it h attributed, ^* that ordination has been fometimcs fraudulently and furreptitioufly obtained by fuch v^retches, as are not only afcandal to^the Churchy buz a difgract; to the human' fpecies". It h (aid, liotwithflanding the ^' gr/atefi; care and circum-? ^' fpedlon have fucccAiveh/ been exercifed by the ^' ^iQiops of London, inibnces have happened, *' wherein perfons haye produced inEngland ample 5' wnuen Credentials of their pious and orderly ^^ converfation^ The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 85 ^' converfatlon, whofe lives have been notorioufly " infamous in this Country, and after having been *' invelled with the facFed oflice,they have been fcnc " back to take the charge of the fouls of others, in ** prgfecution of which work, rhey have adted as if *• they had not, or imagined that they'had nor, any *' fouls of their own". Had fuch a charge btcn pubhciy exhibited againft the Society's Milfionaries by thoie of thePrefbycerian or Congregational per^ fufion, it would, however refpedlablc they might be for their virtuous integrity, have been diiegarded at home, and eiteemed by Epifcopalians here a fure argument of inveterate enmity to theChurch. Buc they can themfelves freely fay that, v/hich, if others had only fuggefted, they would have bitterly ex- claimed againil them. There rftay have been Mif- fionaries, whofe character is here juflly defcribcd ; but, 1 be!ieve,it would be found, upon examination, that they v^ere natives of England or Ireland, and fent from home, from whence they mud have had their ample Credentials, if ihey had any, and not from thisCountry. I knov/ of none,who have gone from Ameiica, at lead- this part of it, to whom the alcove dcfcripiion can be juiHy applicable -, nor am 1, at prefent, inclined to think, it is ftiidtjy true in regard of any of them. In order to give the matter a iliil more plaufible appearance, it is faid, " in (uch a Country as Ame- rica, an artful man may fometimes be able to pro- cure teflim.onials in his favor, figned by a compe- tent number of fuch Cleir-Cymen and others as a BiQiop of London will not know how to objccl a- gainlt". What there is in *' fuch aCoiintry as this", more than in gther Counrries, to favor a wicked ;irt- ful man in procuring fuch teltimonials of his pious and S6 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. and regular life as ^' a Bifhop of London would noi 9bjc(5t againft'*, the Dr. has not pointed out, and 1 am utterly at a lofs to know his meaning here ^ but it IS tafie to know thus much, that he has Ihamc fully refiedled on the Ep^fcopai- Clergy, by faying, that th's artful man, whofe hie had been noioriouily infamous in ihisCobniry, might be able to get a '' competent number oi them" to fjgn teftimonials ol his chriftian good converfauon. — • ls[ay» he makes his ai\tful feeker of orders infamous, i;o fo high a degree of guilt, ^s even to forge teftimonials in his own favor. And to this he at- tributes ^'the luccefs of fome adventprers from the Colonies, who have obtained ordination, and then returned to America to difgrace thenafclves, and the Church". It is ftrange to lee, when men have an end in view their heart is fet upon, what lengths they wi|l go m, laying thofe things, which, if laid b^ others, would be attributed to the powerful in- fluence Oi imbjctered hatred and malice. The Dr. has painted the Miffionaries, fome of them atlead, in the blackeft colors. They were never viewed, by the woril enemies the Church, ever had, in a light, fq glaringly b^d. It is very much doubted, even by thefc, whether an infcance can be given of a fingle perfon, fo infamoufly vile, ^s to go fioni America with forged Crednetials, in order to obtain ordination. One there v/as who came from pngland with a forged i^icence to preach •, and ht^ w'as as notorious a finner as ever* prophaned a pulpit ; but we never heard, in this p^rt of the world, of any one who /^/r^-t ^'Credentials from hence to. comiC over v;ith orders to ofjiciate as a mmilter. But if it fhould be fuppofed., that the whole of w]iat is here laid is ejiadly and hicrally true, might ' ' not The Appeal to the Public anfwercd. 8> not the cafe be the fame was there a Bifhop iri -America? The greater part by far of thole who would go to him for orders, would beasunknowa to him, by reafjn of their great diftance from his feat, as to a B.ihop in England. He maft there- fore depend upon teftimonials from others, and thefe might be forged, or procured no one kno'is how, and there would be little lefs danger of ic than there is now. It is certain, many no-onoufly wicked perfons in England, vaftly more in pro- portion than in America, have found ways, by forging teftimonials, or by procurin^r them, to' ufe the Dr's phrafe, " God knows how"^', to get into holy orders ; and this, though they are much near- er the crdaining BiOiop, than mod of thofe can be, in the Colonies, who may want, and go ^ro them! And the like legerdemain might aseafilyte prad- ifed here as there. I know of nothing, if it be fuppofed that men are abandoned to atl fenfe of God and religion, to hinder it. Befides, Com- miffaries might as well prevent this miichlef as Bifhops, fo far as it can be prevented. And a Bilhop of London would be no more in danger of being impofed upon by fueh infamous wre?ches, than a Biihop in America, if he would give orders to none but fuch as came recommended by a Com- mifTary. In this cafe, one muft be a fool, or mad- man, fliould he forge teftimonials under his name ; becaufe he would immediately be detected upori his returning hither. Upon the whole, the Dr. appears to have been as deficient in his arguing upon the head of ordi- nationi as difcipline. He docs not pretend, in his reafoning, that the Church will be deprived of the benefit of ordination, fliould there be no Biihop in 88 The Appeal to the Public anfwerecf, in the Colonies. All he goes upon is the *' danger 2nd expence" that attend the obtainnnent of it ; and that the Epifcopal Churches would be in greater danger of having vicious Clergymen ob- truded on them. Enough, I truft, has been faid to {hew, that thefe are pretences, rather plaufible in appearance, than carrying with them real i and great weight. But (houid the whole of what the Dr. has bftercd be allowed it's full force, without the lead abate- ment, there is no other hardfhip, or difficulty, in the cafe, than what naturally refults frorn pro- feffed principles, and muft unavoidably follow up- on them, unlefs an eflablifhment is purpoiely made in their favor. The only proper queftion therefore is, whether fuch an eftablilhment, at fuch a diftance from the acknowledged fupreme head of the Church of England, efpecially in the prefent flate of the American Colonies, may be thought wife, expedient, or politic ? It appears to us fuch incon» veniences, or rather mifchiefs, will be the atten- dants on it, as to make it no ways proper or Uti What thefe are {hall,in it's due place, be particularly mentioned as fo many reafons or objedions againft an American Epifcopate. ANSWER ANSWER to Section IV. in which thi unparalleled Hardfhip of this Cafe is repre^ fenced. THE Dr. feems to think, that he has here i mod '* fruitful fubjedl for declamation" I though he declines to, " proceed in this way", and has it in dcfign to " ftate arguments and fads for the confideracion of the Public". If he had kepc this defigti (teadily in view, he would have giveii us lefs declamation, and more ireafoning that was folid. He begins with " making an appeal to the con-f fciences of m.en in behalf of the Church". And here, if he had fairly *' ilated the fad", he might cafily have known, the queftion he puts could noc have been anfwered in his favor, upon an impar- tial, thorow attention to it. The fadt placed in it's true point of light is this. The greater part by far of the Epifcopal-Charches, in thole valtly ex- tended, and well inhabited, parts of America, reac h- ing from Penfylvania fouthward, to Nova-Scotia northward, fubfifts chiefly upon the pious help of the Society at home, at the expence, it may be, of three thoufand pounds fterlin^ per annum •, — they fcannot have fucti Bifliops placed at their head as M thex po The Appeal to the Public anfwered. They would defire, at a hiuch lefs additional annual expence of pious charity , — ^^and, leaft going to England for oidination by a Bifhop, conformably to Epiicopalian-priiclples, fhould be Ciifcouraging, as it would be attended with charge, the Society has publicly invited into England all young Stu» dents in thefe parts, who defire holy orders ; de- claring, THAT THEIR EXPENICE IN COMING AND RETURNING IS TO BE DEFRAYED BY THE SO- CIETY. This is the fadl juftly ftaied ; and, in this view of it, I believe, no denomination of chriftians, under like circumilances, in his Majefty's domini- ons, or in any part of the earth, would think them- felves in the leaft injured on account of the expence attending the obtainment of ordination. Inflead of crying out " perfecution ! intolerable griev- ance" ! they would rather, if they had a jufl fenfe of obligation, feel the bonds of gratitude, and ac- knowledge they were kindly dealt with There could be no room^ in this cafe^ to lament the ima- ginary hardfhip of " not being allowed a Clergy- man without paying a fine of an hundred pounds iferling on his admiffion to orders". And as to " the dangerous procefs that has proved fatal to a fifth part" of thofe who have entered upon it, it is really flrange the Dr. fhould again bring it to view. Ii: is no other than that common danger which thoufands voluntarily expofe themfelves to, tho' they have nothing more in profped, than the plea- fure of feeing foreign Countries. Befides, this was much more than an ordinary fatality ; and may not happeh again for hundreds of years. Surely, the Dr. mull needs be at a lofs for fomething weighty to fay, or he would not have fo enlarged upon this comparative trifle, and painted ic in iueh hideous colors. And, notwiihftanding this mighty 'Fhe Appeal to the Puhlic anfweredf. 9t- pighty grievance^ I am verily perfuaded, the grea-' ter part of thoic who are defirous of holy orders, was it at their option, would much rather chufe to expofe themfelves to the danger of going to Eng- land to obtain them, than to be put into them here. The gratification of their curiofity, by being iri England, and getting aquainted with Gentlemen of worth and learning there, would be a much (Ironger motive to excite them to go, than the ganger of going would be to keep them at; home. The Dr. in a flufh of zeal, had fpoken of the necefTicy of going home for orders as " perfecu- tion". He feems, upon being a lictle more cool, to retra6b that wor j, as ^> the grievance in queftion does not arifc from any pofuive exertion of civil power" ; but (lill, it is '' fomething as bad in it's natural confequences'*. And, being again fudden-- iy fired, " queltions, whether the worft perfecuti- pns ever exterminated a fifth part of rhe Clergy in any Country"-, as if accidental misfortunes, men,^ in all parts of the world, readily run the hazard of, upon motives far lefs important, than thofe go. upon who defire holy orders, might be compa- red to a formal perfecution defigned to extermi- nate a whole Clergy, though it (hould take eff'ccb Vpon a fifth part only. The Dr. certainly forgot be intended to argue, or he could not have fubfti^ UUed in the. room of it, t,he meer flight of a warm.- ed imagmarion. He goes on in the fame extravagant ftrain, fay-; ing, " it there are any pomts, in which the reafon " and common lenfe of mankind can be iuppo^ed " to agree, this muft unquellionably be one, rhac «' the Church of England in America, under the ^' bsfore-meniioned difadvantages, although noc M 2 :.' forrnallf ht The Appeal to the Public anfwereci " ^' formally perfeciited, is in a mofl wretched and «* deplorable condition". It may^ on the contrary, be affirmed as a moll unqueftionable truth, and in much better agreement with the common fenfe of mankind, that the Epifcopal Churches, in moft of the Colonies, are favored and difiinguifhed far be- yond any other Churches of whatever denomina- tion on the Continent, as the moft of them, in fuch Colonies, are preferved in being by a vaftly ex- penfive charity ; on which account, infteadof figh- ing out groans, they have abundant reafoh for the moft gratdul aclinowledgn^cnts. He farther fpeaks of it as " ^n aggravation of their unhappineTs, that it a*^ pears to be altogether n^nprecedenied i th.cy being Tingled out frt)m all the people lip c) a earth to be rnade the firft exam= pie of it'V if the Church was really in that .*^- wreichtd deplorable ftate** he would reprefenr^ and if it was owing to downright pofitive perfe- cution, i: is unaccountably ftrange he fhould men- tion it as '^3n unprectdented cafc'Vahd dcfcribt the Church as *^ firtglcd out «or the firft example of it*'.' Did he never hear of the'in^nitely more' diftrelTecl condiiion of great numbers that were deprived, Ened, impriloned, and, in other ways^ ^oft cruelly dealt with, in the days of thofe hard- Ijeartcd Aich-Brihops, Parker, Bancroft, White-' 0itr, and Laud 1% Did he never heat of any bar- 5^ " Under the ftrfl of thefc Arch- Blihops, above an lOO 5 under the fecond, above 300 pious and learned menj v^t on'y members, but minifrers of the Church, were- filenced,' fufpended, acmonifhcd, deprived, many of them loade'j \Vith grievoui- and heavy foes, and {hut up- p. fi!tliv la^U:^ where thsy e:^pired flowlj through penury The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 93 barous afls pafTed in the Reign of King Charles 11, ^ubjeding multitudes of Clergymen and others to Ibardfhips and fufferings, not to be thought of with- out horror ? * Did he never hear, what it was that occafiotied and want. And what were the crimes which drew this dreadful ftorm of Epifcopal vengeance on them I Nothing but their fcruples about the furplace and the cap^ about bowing at the name ofjefuiy about Chriji*s defcent into helly and fuch-like momentous points*'*— 4 Diflent. Gent, anfwer, pag. 76. * By one of thefe a(9:s, no lefs than two thousand minifters, many of them men of {hining accomplifli- ments, and all of them well fpoken of for their piety, were turned cut of their livings in one black day, whereby both they, and their families, became liable to ftarve for want of the neceflaries of life. By another, they were banifhed five miles from any City^ Borough^ or Churchy in which they had before miniftred j whereby it was put very much out of the power of their neigh- bours and friends to afford them their charitable relief. By another a6l ftiil, as though no cruelty was too fe- Vere, they were forbid meeting for the worfhip of God any where but in Epifcopal Churches, and under the penalties of heavy fines, imprifonments, and even ba- nifhnient to foreign Countries. ''In confequence of *' thefe cruel a6ts, vaft numbers of pious Clergymen, *' with multitudes of their people, were laid in prifons *' among thieves and common malefaftors, where they ^' fuffered the greateft hardfhips, indignities, opprefli- «« ons ; — their houfes rudely riffled, their goods made *' a prey to hungry informers, and their families given ** up to beggery and want. An eftimate was publifti^d ** of near eight thousand proteftant diffcnters, who •« had periilied in prifon, in the Reign only of Charles ♦' II. By fevere penalties ir^iifted on them for afTem- «' biing to worftiipGod, they fufferrd in their tadcand •' eftates, in the compafs of a few years, at leaft two *' MILLIONS ; and a lift of sixty thousand perfons •' was taken, who had fuffered on a religious zccouni^ *.% betwixt the rejioraiion and the rrjduiion\ Diffent. Qent. anfw. to White, pag. 83, 8^. j^4 The Appeal to the Public anfwerc4 occafioned the removal of our fore-fathers frcrr^ their native land, to this part of the new, and then defolatc world ? That they fled hither, as to a place of fafe retreat fronri the oppreflive power of tyrannifing BiHiops ; chufing rather to expofe themlclvcs to external hardfhips and dangers, fadly grievous, and eAtraordinanly trying, than wrong their confciencts by i'ubnfiitting to meer human Kripofitiuns' in iht v/orfhip of their maker ?— Hav- ing now heard ihefe things, if he never hrard of them betore, will he not fufped, whether the reprefentation he has made of the ^' deplorably wretched condition'* of the Chv rch in i^merica, is not a little romantic ? Let it be fuppofed, to give his account it*s full weight, that, in the courfe of fixry years, fihy-two perlons have gone to England for orders, at the expence of one hundred pounds flerling each •, and that ten of thefe were fo unfor- tunate as to lofe their lives in the adventure — Lee it be fuppofed, that the Church will be ftill liable to the famedanger^c expence, without aBifhop. — Let \i be fuppofed llili farther, that this danger and expence may be looked upon as great a grievance, as, in the nature of the thine;, it can be.- — And after all, will the cafe be " nn unprecedented one" ? Is this " the firft example" of a " condition fo wretched and deplorable" ? Is rbe expence of a few thoufands in fixry years, to be compared w'ih the heavy fines that have been impofcd upon fuch multirudes, at one time and another, for a much longer fpace ? Is this difnculty, attending the aiTair of ordination, ro be let in competition vs/irh bemg filenced. turned out of living*;, fent to fihhv jaik, and c^*nfined there to perifn throuoh poverty and rrjifery, v/hich Has been the cafe of thoufands ? — To fpeak of a few comparatively fmali inconveni- ences^ the Appeal to the Piibiic ^nfwerccJ. '95 cnces, (to mike the mod of ihem^, as argi/ng a *' condii'iDa wretched oey >nd all precedent", is t6 *' declaim", not to reafori \ and to, do :t too in a manner that is really ridiculous. I would aflc the Dr. yet far her, are not liu- DiUcMtfirs at home, e- ven to this day, in a far worle condition than the Church now is, or ever was, here, if thf,ir cafe be co-nfidered in it*s mofl aggravated height ? What is an HUNDRED POUMDS (Icrling for FifTY-TWO Clergymen each, in the courfe of sixty years, in comparifon with thei4uNDRED thousand pounds fterling, many times told, the Difienttrs have -paid, m that time, towards the fuppvr of the Episcopal-Clergy, btfides maintaining their own ? And what is a much greater grievance ilH, are they not, by " the pofirive exertion of evil power", deprived of rheir Jiarural righrs as men, by not being permitted, whiie they a61: conforma- bly to the diftaces of their con.'ciences, to iulhia any poft, ei.her of honor or profile in the kingdom of South-Britain ? Perhaps, thefe hardfhips, being endured by DifTenters only,, may be thought wor- thy of little or no notice. But DifTenrers, to uie the Dr*s own words, upon another occafion, " have the fame feelings, the fame fenfibilty with other perfons, and are equally affeded with any fufFcr- ings". Upon the whole, it is highly extravagant, I might rather fay, to a great degree ludicrous, to fpeak of the Church, in America, as " without a precedent", in point of grievance, fhould what has been faid be confidered, in all it's force, vv.thout the lead abatement. But, if viewed in it's proper light, as accompanied with the mitigations, and lefTenings that have been mentioned, it will appear, if Bt all a grievance, but a very light one ; and fo mixt with kindnefs as to give occafion rather tor gratitude, than complaint. The ^6 The Appeal to the Public anfwereia The Dr. having/endeavoured to work upon the pafTions of the people, now comes to try his fkill upon thofe in power. He begins with claiming it as the right of Epifcopalians here to be " con- fidered as equal with the foremoft, in every due exprefTion of fidelity and loyalty". We won't con- tend with him, while he only makes them '' equal", not fiiperior, to the other denominations of men in the Country ; who efteem themfelves as flrongl/ bound to fidelity and loyalty to the Britifh Crown, upon the " principles of Chriftianity", as well as from " prefent interell and inclination". If he really meant no reflexion, when he faid, ** no trumpet of fedition was ever heard to found froni our pulpits — no words of fedition have been fufFer- ied more privately to be foWn in our houfes", as he feemsto declare in a marginal note, we will find no fault j though fome are difpofed to think, he "would not have exprefled himfelf in this manner, unlefs he had intended an infinuation, that fome«> thing of this nature had been done by others. Having thus proclaimed the extraordinary loy- alty of the Church, he proceeds to the work of ex- poftulation. *' If then the Church of England in *' America is not diftinguifhcd by the want of duty *' and affeflion to the Government, why fhould it *' be thus diftinguidied and (ligmatized by the *' want of thofe religious privileges, which are *^ granted to all other denominations of chriftians *' whatever, in the Britilh dominions'* ? Strangers to the real ftate of things in the Country would[ be naturally and obvioufly led, by what is here faid, to imagine, that fome great difference was fofttively made, by the Government at home, be- twixt Epifcopalians in the Colonies, and other de- nominations The Appeal to the Public anfwered. ^7 nominations of chrlflians ; favoring the latter, and putting fome " (tiomatizmf/'.mark upon the for- mer : Whereas the. truth is, they are allowed the fame liberty with all other perfuafions, and dt>, wiih as much freedom from mokftation, worfhip God in the precife way they themfcives are plealed jto chufe. All the differerxe is/our principles do not hamper us with thofe objtded difficulties, thtir's cxpofe them to. He goes on, '' in our petitioning for Bifhops, all that we afl: for our fclves, is whac has been freely granted to others^ what has been refufed to none elfe who have applied for it'*. AA^e know of nothing that has been granted to others, and, refufed to hone, but V/hat is equally granted £0 them, and has never been refufed. No deno- mination of chriftians in the Colonics ever aflvcd^ or defiredj mo':*e than free liberty to ferve God con- formably to the didlates of their confciences ; and this liberty t]ie Church enjoys, in common with all others. No \ they are not upon an " equal footing" wlrh their neighbours. So it fhould feern thcDr. thinks, by v;hat immediately follows. Says he, " we requell only, the liberty of enjoying the " inftitutions of our Churchy and thereby of being *' put upon an equal footing with our neighbours — *' with the various feds of Englifh dilTenters, who " have the full enjoyment of their refpecSlive forms " of Ecclefiaftical government and difcipline — a. id " even with the Moravians and. Papifts, who are *' feyerally allowed a Bifhop". It may be perti- nently afked here^ what inftitution of the Church is not enjoyed here, fave only confirmation, which the Dr. has thought proper to pafs over, leaving it out of the prefent debate ? As to " difcipline" ^nd " ordination", he does not complain, as in juftice he could not, of the'e^ want of either % ., ~ N ^ but 5)8 The Appeal to the Pubiic anAvered, but the only complaint is, that the former is in- complete without a Bifhop, and the latter attended with inconvenience. And is there no difference between n-ot' enjoying at all thefe inftitutions of the Church, and enjoying them partmily sind with inconvenience ? Befides, whence does it arife, that Epifcopalians do not enjoy the inftitntions of religion 2iS fully and completely as the other denomi- nations of chriilians ? Can it, with the lead appear- ance of reafon, be afcribed to any peculiar favoir the government has (hewn to thefe denominations, to the exclufion of them ? Far from it. It is the jnatural refult from their own principles, and not at all owing to any diftindlion that has been made between them and other chriilians. It will, perhaps, be faid here, if, according tS the principles they profefs, they cannot fully cnjof the inilitutions of the Englifh Church without a BiQi(^p at their bead, why ihould ihcy be denied one ? I anfwer, for reafons that fhall hereafter be mentioned, which, I would hope, will be thought fuiFicient by indifferent judges. In the mean time^ I vyould only fay, if the King, who is acknowledg- ed by Epifcopalians to be the head of the Church in r\mcricc1^ as well as England, does not fee fit, in his great wifdom, to favor them beyond any other of his fubjects in the Colonies, as he muft do by fending them Bilriops, which, though fpiritual ofH- cers, a^e yet greatly expenfive ones, why fhould they make fuch bitter complaints ? It would not argue their being over-modefl, if they efteemed him as good a judge of what was proper to be done in this cafe, as themfelvcs.^ Poffibly, he may think greater inconveniences would attend the fettlertient ©f an Epifcopate, at fo great a diflance from him^ than The Appeal to the Public anfwered. j^j than thofe that are confequent upon the prefent want of it. — Poflibly, he may be apprehenfive, it might prove an occafion of '' butcrncfs, envy, angv-r, wrath, clamor, ftrife, and evil-fpeakinyi", thoie " works of the flclh", which are dtlbudive of all true rehgion. — PolTibly, he may fear fome ill effeds relative to the ftate. — But, whjcever the reafons are, which redrain his Majefty from eflablifliing Bifhops in America, his wiie pleafure (hould cer- tainly make them eafie ; efpecially, as ihey own him to be the fupreme Governor of the Church, Im aggravation of theChurch's " unprecedented" hardiliip, the Dr. goes on to fay, in "' a] ortoHc times", care was taken to form chriftian?, as ihey increafjd, into " proper Ecclefiaftical diilridts, and to appoint Bifliops for each". If he means, that, as " the number of difciples was multiplied'*, rhey were " added to the Churches" in rhefe and thofe places, which had padors at their head ; or were Jprmed into new Churches with pailors over thtm, this is very true : And we heartily wifh, that all the Churches in America had fuch Padors, or Bi- fnops. Bat if he intends, that chridians were, in thofe days, " formed into diflrids wi;h BidiopG over them", in any meafure conformable to ihe manner of the Church, of England, cr that which is intended for the Church in America, he is grofly n^iilakcn. There were tlien no fuch diflnds or Billiops. And if we purlue the hiilory of the Church, through the times that may, wirh any propriety, be called truly priniiii/e, we ihjll me^t wich no m dance of this kind ; nor can an inflan,<:c be produced, until there had '' come a falling a- v/ay fird", and that '' man o( fin" began to be *' re^ 7?aied", who hath oppofed himfcif lo ail that it N z ' • called foQ The Appeal to the Public anfwered« called God, or that is worfhipped ; fo that he, as God, has fet in the ten-^ple of " God, {hewing that Jie was hinr4rdf God". The Dr. by recuring to the *^ records of Pa- ganifm and Mahon-ietanifm'*, to magnitie the neg- ied of the Church in America by his fuperiors in England, is both ungratrfui and unreafonable.— • He is ungraceful, as ihey have for more than fixty years been expreifing their pious regards to it, by expending, at the loweft cordputation, ihkry thou- (and pounds fterling to promote it's growth. And he is as unreafonable, in that, notwithftandiug the difcovery of fo much concern for the Church in the Colonies, he would make them even worfe than ^^. Pagans", or *' Mahometans", becaufe they do not gratifie hb foad defires in eftabJifhing an Epifcopate here, after the mode of the Church at |idme. Let mc take this opportunity to remind the Dr. once for all, that, as it lies with the King, "whether they fnall, or fhall nor, have Bifhops ia America, iall his complaints finally terminate on him : For this reafon, I could wifh he had ex- preficd more dutiful reverence towards his Sove- reign, than to charge him, as he does virtually, and in reality of contlrudion, with treating the Church here with '^unparalleled hardship ; per- SEcuTioM, or what is as bad in it's conse- (^UENCES J yea, with neglect so grievous as not to be precedented", either by Pagans, or Mahometans. It is hoped, the Clergy of the Church of England, in their addrefs to his iVlajefly, |iave fpoken to him ^ith more decency, aad be- (^oming reverence. !####! ANSWER, ANSWER to Section V. affigning Rca- fons why the Church in America has been thus neglec5led. ^'^ '^^^v^»^^^».j5r'^^^Si^^''*^^S6-'^^ V *' ye are the letters and feals cf our Apofilefhip" -f To the like purpofe are thofe words of the famous Bidiop Hooper, " They [the Bifhops] know, that *' the primitive Church had no fuch Bifhops as be *' now-a-days. If the fourth part of the Bifhcprick " remained unto the Bidiop, it were fufBcient ; the *' third part to fuch as fhould teach good learning ; *' the fecond part to the poor of the Diocefs ; and *' the other to maintain fnen of war for the fafe- " guard of thecommoh-wealth, it were better be- " itowed a great deal. For now it is ill ufed and *' beftowed for the greater part upcn thofe that have *' no need of it. — if any man be offended with me *' for rhus faying, he loveth not his own health, nor «* God's laws, no man's, out of which I am always " ready * Can. I4j 17, 20, 24. t Pierce's Viiid.DifTen. p. 3704 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. loy " readytoprovethethingfaidtobetrue".* Riches, if wemaybelieve the word of truth, are attendedwith dangerous temptations -, infomnch,that iris really a difficult, extremely difficult, thing for one poiTcfled pf them, to prevent his being *' drawn afide by thofe lulls, whjch drown men in perdition'*. Men are too r^ady, if they are much raifed above others in worldly circumftances, to grow big in their own ap- prchenfions, to be haughty and imperious ; treating thjfe below them, v/ith infolence and ccmtempt. They are too apt to let their hearts " upon thaC which is not" ; to live high, keeping fumptuous fables ; to fp^^nd their time in eafe and indolence, to the dilTipation of their minds, and unfitting them for thofe fpi ritual exercifes, without which they wili have little relifh for the things of God and religion; And, perhaps, this has been as common among the Clergy, ^s any other order ^f men ; not excepting Bifhops themfelves. The excellent Bifiiop Burner, fenfible of this, in an ^ddrefs to his brethren, and fuccefibrs in the Epifcopal office, thus exprefTes himlelf, '* I wiffi the pomp of living, and the keep- " ing high tables, could he quite taken away. Ic *' is a great charge, and no very decent one •, a *^ great devoiirerof time, a^d wi.U make you look '^^ too like the men of the world. I hope this is a ^' burdc^n to you \ it was indeed one of the grear- •^^ eft burdens of my lir^*^^^ •^'^ v^ WE are as fully fenfibie as the Dr. or any of the Epifcopalians, can be, that it is " the duty of thofe whom the "day-fpringfrom on high" has yifited, to communicate this light to others, and, as they have opportunity, to give the knowledge of religion to thofe who are without it". We think, with him, that '^ the providence of God points out this general duty by the late events, more plainly and exprefly than ever. We never had until this time, fo favourable an oppoitunity for carrying for- ward this blefifed work : We never had it fo much in our power ; and our obligations of gratitude were never fo ftrong*' \ nor the arguments that may be fetched from the " principles of worldly policy". Thefe, and fuch like, powerful motives have often been urged upon our people, both publicly and privately. We do therefore moft cordially join with the Dr. in every thing he has faid to repre- fenc the reafonablenefs, the indifpenfible duty of a pious concern for the aboriginal-natives of America, exprefied in all futable endeavours to aquain: them v>'ii:h *' the gofpel of the bledcd God". The differ- ence between us lies in this, v/e do not think, that d 2 ^I> 1 24 The Appeal to the Public anfwcred an Epifcopate in the Colonies is To conne(5i:ed with this duty, but that it may very well be performed without one ; nor do we believe that an Epifco- pate is peculiarly pointed out by thofe events that have made the prelent, the molt convenient time for extending the knowledge of the only true God, and his Son Jefus Chn(t, to thefe uttermoll parts of the earth. The Dr. is of the contrary opinion. His principal aim indeed, in this fe6tion, is* to fhevv, that our duty, in regard of the Ame- rican-Heathen, more efpecially in confideration of the happy events of the late war, requires an E- pifcopate. His reafonlng here takes in a variety of articles. They are comprehended in the fol- lowing iummary, but juft, reprefentation; " From ^'^ repeated trials, it appears, that there muft be ^'forne more efFedlual way for the converfion of ^' Savages, than has been yet taken. It was ^' hoped that the converfion of Indians would na- ^•^ luraHy introduce among them civility of man- ^^ ners ; butic feems now to be generally agreed, *■' that what was propofed as a confequeiice^ oughe ^' to be confidered as a necejjary meafijot fpreading H ihe gofpel among favage nations. r^It having ^^ then become a fettled poi^nt, that the dioft pro- *' per way for converting Savages, is pre-vioufly to. ^^ infirucfl them in the arts and manners of civil ** llfe^ the Society has been, for:a confiderablc *'> lime, enoployed in colleding fuch intelligence, than property, and more inviolable than civil ^' liberty, be regarded, and procure the redrefs of ^' fo intolerable a grievance" ? He had before faid, pag, 45. that " the Church of England in Ame» rica contains near a million of members" ; and re- peated it again, pag. 8 1 j * though there is no reafoa 'f About the time of writing the above, there appeared in. ^ One of our Public papers, a Copy of the Petition that ws§ f^m? \>y s nymb^r Qf the Epifcopal- Clergy, to the univcrfity 134 "^'^^ Appeal to the Public anlvvered. reafon to think, as has been before obferved, there IS one third pan of this number on the American- Continent, and not fo much as a thirtieth in all the Colonies to the northward of Maryland, which are much the mofl populous, and bid fair to be flill more fo, as they increafe with much the, greateft rapidity. We are now told of the " complaints of this nearly a million of Britifli lubjedls''. If they have complained, their complaints have been kept fecret in their own breads, and not divulged to univerfity of Cambridge ; which, as it agreed with other copies that had been feen, and contained nothing in it that has been excepted againft, may be looked upon as genuine. And, in this view of it, i would obferve, that *' the people belonging to the Church of England, in America", are faid '' to be more than a million". This differs from the Dr's account, which is, " near a mil- lion". But inftead of charging thefe accounts with inconfiftency, i would rather f«iy, they may both be equally true ; the number may be " near a million'', or *' more than a million", j uft as the Epifcopalians picafe, if the Negroe-Slaves are reckoned ; for, as the Dr. has told us, " they were found, in the furvey that was made, in I/62, to be eight hundred and forty four thoufand". So that, by only greatning or kiienmg the number of thefe Negroes, the *' members of the Church" will be eitner '* near", or quite, or ''more than a million" ; though, if they are nut reckoned, [and it would be to an high degree fnameful to attempt to reckon them] the nymber of Epifcopalians will be at once decreafed many hundred thoufands. — It is farther faid, in the next paragraph, '^ the extent of inhabited Country which hath hithcito, with refpe6t to Epifco- pacy, been neglecRied, is forne thoufands of miles". Has not this declaration, fimply as it {lands, a tendency to lead {lranger5 into a wrong conception of the inha- bitants of this extent, as to their religious denominati- on ? It is indeed true, that this " extent is fome thc5u-^ The Appeal to thePublic anfwered. 135 to the world. So far as we may judge by the PETiTtOf^s that have been fent home, the Epifco- pal-Clergy onlv are the complainers. Thev are certainly the only perlons, we ha.e heard of; who have made any ftir about the want of Bifhops , and had not they difcovered a reftlefs frame of mind upon this account, no body elfe would : Nor fo ^ar as I can learn, are there any confiderable niim-. bers, to wnom they have been able to propa->ate tr^i'tf °^/P'''''- ^^"'^ of themoifre! fpeftable Ep:fcopal.ans, m thefe parts, for fobriety. good fenfe, and a fteady attachment to the intereff of tne Churcn of England, have declared it to be their opinion, that Bilhops would be of no fervice here, and thatthey did not' defire they fhould be lent. And it is to me; as well as to many I have converfed with upon this head, Epifcopalians a- mong others very queftionable, whether, if the members of the Church of England, in thefe north- ern fands of mil«'\; but it is as true, as to it's one half, that not a thirtietn part of the inhabitants are Epifco- pahans; and, as to the other half, that their number will be vaftly leff.ned, whe„ a deduftion has been made as It ou.ht to be, of the other denominations, together wi h thofe who profefs no religion, and are equally in- ditterent to every mode in which it is exercifed! It would have been but fair, if fome hint, at leaff, of this kind had been fuggefted. As the paffage now ftands, tnole, to wnom the petition was fent, would naturallv be led to thmic, that the inhabitants, through this large extent, were moftly, if not wholly, profcflbrs of the Church of England : Though the Petitioners trtemfelves knew, if they had entertained this idea of theni. It would not, in any tolerable degree, have con- lilted w,£h truth. It may, 1 believe, be juftiv faid, if tnere had betn more fnipiicitv, afid iels art, in the wording this petition, it would not have been fo ex- <:eptionable as it now is. %%6 The Appeal to the Public anfwefed* ern Colonies, were to give in their votes, and id do it v/ithout previous Clerical influence, they Would be found to be on the fide of an American- Epifcopate.— As to the " mod unprecedented hardihips, and intolerable grievances" this '* million of Britilh fubjeds are fuftcring vvirh regard to re- ligion", they are^ as we have fcen, nothing more than thefe •, — that they are not favored with the enjoyment of that '* difcipline, the redoration of which cannot rationally be attempted by thofe in authority", and which, if '*" much reverenced by any, they v/ould be efteemed wrong-headed, or MEAN-spiRiTED, ot both" t That though or- dination cannot be obtained without going to Eng- land for it •, yet that they have good friends there, who will lighten,if not totally take ofF,this burden, by bearing themlelves the expence arifing there- from : And,infine,that they put theSocicty at home' at a vaft expence of charity, without which theEpif- copal Churches, in many of the Colonies, would be in danger of foon dropping into Non-exiflence. And notwithllanding this gfoundlefs clamor of *' unfufferabie hardfhips, and intolerable griev- ance", the Church of England in America has had more and greater favors bcftowed on it, than any other denomination of chriftians [»ere ; yea, than all of them put together : And it may alfo, 1 be- lieve, with ftrift truth, be affifmed, that no reli- gious profeiTors, in any Colonies on the face of the earth, have been fo kindly and charitably encouraged, helped, and, I may fay, upheld in being. 1 NOW proceed to take into confideration the P6.0P0SED PLAN for an American-Epifcopate. I: is as follows. «^ That The Appeal to the Public anfvvered, 137 " That the Bifliops to be fent to America fhaU <■' have no authority, bur pj; eiy of a fpiritnal and *' Ecclefialtical nature, fuch as is derived altogether *' froni the Crturch, and not frotn the date — Thac "•' this authority (hall operate only upon rhe Clergy " of rhe Church, and not upon the Lauy, nor '' Diffencers of any denominations — That the Bi- '•' fliops (liall not interfere with the property, or *•' privileges, whether civil or religious, uf Church- " men or DiiTenters — That, in particular, they *' (hall have no concern with the Probate of Wills, " letters of Gaardian-fliip and Adrniniilration, or *' Marriage- licences^ nor be judges in any cafes ^' relating thereto — But, that they fhall only ex- >*' ercife the original powers of their offices, as be- *' fore fl:a':ed, i e. ordain and govern. the Clergy,^ *' and adminifter confirmation to thofe who fhall " defire it'*. Before I come to the obje^lions we have to make to this plan, I would previoufly interpofe cne thing, weighty in itfelf, and of Ipecial im° portance to thofe, who have been employed ia contriving, and opening, it to the world, h is this. They have given no evidence, that they v/ere au- thorifed to this bufinefs ; and, in meddling with what they were not duly called to, they have acted in direft violation of as exprefs an article as any in the eftablifhed orders of the Church of England* Let it be obferved here. The Dr. introduces this plan with faying, " ic has long been fettled by our friends and fuperiors at home, and the Clergy of this Country have often fignified their intire approbation and acquiefcence therein'*. And again, when he had wrote the plan $ for 138 The Appeal to the Public anfwerec?. for publication, he adds, " this, without any refer- vation or equivocation, is the exadt plan of art American Epifcopate, which has been fettled at home". It is truly extraordinary, that Epifcopa- lians fhould tell us of a Scheme for the miffion of Bifhops to the Colonies fettled at home, and ap- probated by the Clergy of the Church of England here, to the intire neg!e6t of his Majesty, th6 acknowledged supreme head of their Church, without whom there can be not only nofettlement of a plan, refering to any Ecclefiaftical affair what- ever ; but no authority fo much as to attempt to form one. It is juftly prefumed, if his Majefiy had been in view, when it was faid of this plan; " that it has long been fettled by our friends and fuperiors at home", the manner of didion would have been more exprelTive of dutiful reverence and fubjedlion ; a: leaft, fome intimation would h^vd been given of the Rojtal licence to &tt in this tnatter. But, inftead of this, a plan is mentioned, and publilhed to the world as a fttrled one, with- out fo much as an hint of any communicated AUTHORITY from his Majesty to this purpofe ; which is really ftrange, efpecially if confidered as done by thofe who may reafoiabiy be fuppofedto be Well acquainted with the conilitution of their own Church, and the vaft extent of the K^ing's fupre- macy over it. Even the Convocation, when convened by the King's writ, have no authority to fettle any plan without his confenr, nor indetd {q much as to attevipt to form one without his LictvNCE. In the year, 1702, the upper houfe refufed ro adl upon a declaration lent to them from the lower houfc, for this reafon in fpecial, '* that without a Royal Licence, they had no authority to ATTtiiiPT, cnad, PROMULGEj or execute any Ganon^ yhe Appeal to the Public anfwered. 139 Canon, by whatever name it might be called, which ihould concern either dodtrine or difcipline". * And yet, a plan has been privaetly formed " by fome friends and fuperiors at home", and " ap- probated by the Epifcopai Clergy here", and in CONVENED BODIES for the purpofe •, which plan is now pubiifhed to the world, and objedors in- vited to propofe their objedtions, if they have any, to be tryed at the tribunal of the Public. Is this manner of condud, ia any degree^ conformabk to the conftituted order of the Church of Kngland I Dare Bifhops, or even Arch>Biihops, at home, venture upon a method of a6ling (o repugnant to t;hat SUPREMACY in ail Ecckfiaftical matters, with which, by repeated ads of Parliament, the Crowm has been veiled ? It cannot eafily be accounted for, that It fhould be ventured upon in the Colo- nies. Surely, a Plan for an Epifcopare thus form-' ed, fettled and publifhed, ought to have no great regard paid to it. Whatever " fuperiors at home*' S 2 may ^ Calamy's abridgement, vol. I. pag. 639. This refufal of the upper houre,for the given rearon,perfc Epifcopate fettle^ for them according to their mind ? And would even the Bifhops themfelves at home be pleafcd with the propofed limitation of the authority of Biihops here ? Would they not eafily and naturally argue from what was done in the Colonies, to what might, with as much reaion, be done in England ? If Bifhops in Amr- rica may be as faithful m their office, and do cheir duty as well, without fpiritual courts and c\w\\ T 2 power^ * Pag. no. ^48 The Appeal to the Public anfvvered,, power, as with them, what need of thefe annexed appendages at home ? Why may net Bifliops there be as reafonably reftrained in their authority, as Bifhops in the Golonies ? Jc can fcarce be fuppofed it fhould efcape the thought of our EnglifhBriliops, that the (ettlemenc of fuch an Epilcopate in Ame- rica, as is here propofed, may prepare the v^ay for fuch a change in the power of Bifhops at homes as they would not be very fond of. I SHALL not think it unnecefTary, before I leave this obje6tion, 10 oblerve, that not only the Dr. but the Clergy that defired him to write, and their fuperiors at home alfo, feem to be united in the thought, that, if Bifhops are fent to the Colonies, it would be reasonable they fhould be fuch, as rtey have defcribed, that is, Bifhops divefted of ali powei^ but thai,'which they call *' purely fpiritual" : ptherwifej they would not have been at the pains . to prepare^ and publifli their plan of an Amierican EpifcopatCi ' We all as one join wiih them in this ientiment.' If Bifhops are lent to the Colonies' wi|h civil as well as Ipiritual powers, and claim it as their right to concern themfelves here, as they do "at home, v/iih the Probate of Wills, letters of Guardian-ihip' and Adminiftr^tion, holding their courts, and ading'as judges in matters of this na- ture, it would introduce an eifential change in the fettled conflitution of the Colonies upon this head, and vacate" all their lavv^s relative thereto. And this is ah alteration that would afFelt all denomi«» nations among U5, Epifcopali^ns in "common with others ; infomnch, that they themfelves would nor defire Bifhops fhould come here vefted with fuch fjovyer, ' |t is not fuppofed, there are a fcore of this denomination, in all ihe Coloniesj who would The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 143 be gratified with fo deftru6live an eflablifliment. It would, without all controverfie, be the occafioii 6f univerfal confufion. Inilead of that peace and (juiet we now enjoy, there would be noife and tlamor, anger, wrath, ftrife, and all manner of difr tradlion : Efpecially would this be the confe-^ quence, if thele Bilhops, in the exercife of their; Authority, fhould interfere with the religious liber- ties ani privileges of other denominations. Thefe their fathers purchafed for them at a very dear rate, thefe tLey value as their deareft intereft, and, rather than be deprived of them, they would chearfuily fubmit to the lofs even of life itfelf. Ic is not therefore imagined by Epifcopalians, any more than other denominations, that this kind of BiQiops will be thought proper for the Colonies ; nor can it be fuppofed, thiey will be ever fent, un- lefs a change in the (late of affairs at home IhoulcJ unhappily take place, that will be as detrimental to theni, as it will be to us. Object. III. The Church of England knows no fuch Bifhops as are fpeciiied in this plan, nor can th-y, in (ionfiftency with ic's conftitution, be fent to the Colonies. The American Bifliops, fays the Plan, '' (hall have no authority but purely of a fpintual and ecclefiaftical nature, fuch as is al- together FROM THE Church, not from THE State"; that is, in plain Englifh, they fhall have no authority at all as officers in the Church of England. If by this '' purely fpiritual authority" is meant, authority that has for it's objedl only the con- cerns of religion, and the fouls of men, it is ac- knowledged, it may be thus confined. This was the 150 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. the only authority of Bifhops, whether we under-' Hand the word in the Epilcopalian fenfe, or our's, jn apoftolic times, and atterwards, until Conllan- tine became a thriftian by profcffion. And it "would have been happy for ihe Church of Ch rill, if civil power had never been annexed to that office,, which has nothing to do but with the fpi- ritual intererts of men. But then, it is to be re- membered, that this authority, at leaft as to it's cxercile in the Church of England, is not alto- GEiHER FROM THE ChURCH, aod NOT FROM THE State -, nor can this be the cafe, conform- ably to it's prefent eftablifhment. Is not the King the acknowledged supreme head of this Church ? Does it own any fof BiQiops, or can there be any, without his licence for their eJedion, and nommating the perfons that fliail be chofen ? And when they have been eleded and conlecrated, can they exercife the leaft authority, even in fpi- ritual and ecclefiaftical matters, but by him., and within the limits that have been pointed out to them by the State ? Can they vary a tijfle from it's prelcribed orders in any one thing per- taining to the exercife of authority ? Are they net obliged to the uie of thole forms of prayer, that mode of ordination, and that n:ianner of admi- niftring the facramenfi; the State has enjoined ? Is there any orse part of govrrnmrnt or difc^phne ihey can de[ art ftom, or alrer ? How then fhouid their " authority be altogether from the Church, not from ihe State" ? Can that au- thority, with any fnew of realbn, have this affirm- ed of it, which cannot be obtairjed withour the in- tervening pleafure of the King, and, when ob- tained, cannot be exerciled but w«ihin cerfain li-^ mits, which have been afcertainsd by the State ?• The Appeal to the Public artfwered. 151 To rpfak of that authority as altogether frorrt the Church, which is lo cffentia^iy •Jtptnaent oa the State, that it cannot be havi but in com- pliance with the laws it has made, nor e<'"'''!fed but in conformity to them, is highly inro^.dll nt« It is indeed this dependance on the State, oc- withitanding the defired authority altogether from the Church, that is the true lourcc ot all the hardfhips and grievances, on account of the want of Bifhops in America, that have been (o bitterly complained of Did Bifhops ot the Cnurch of England no more depend on the State, and no more derive their authority from it, than our 'minifters do, the Epilcopal Churches here might as well be fupplied with Bilhops, as our's a^e w rh Pa- ftors. Wh<5t fhould hinder ? The Api 'dies \\ 1 heir day, and their fuccelTors afterwards for many years, were veiled with fpiritual powers, ?nd exercifed them, according to the inilitution of Chrill, with- out the intervening help of any civil date what- ever. And why may not the officers of God*s fpiritual kingdom now he veiled with like powers, and go on in the exercife of them, in the fame way ? Our EpifcopalianColonills make fome pretences to this, while they fay, the Bfliops they propole fhould be fent to America " Ihall have no authority but fuch as is altogether from the Church"; but what a vain pretence is this ? How ablurd ? when they know that Bilhops can have no authority in the Church of England, but from the State ? If they may be vefted with authority, it cannot be* exercifed, as officers in this Church, but from the King, and altogether conformably to the ORDERS of the State. If i: had been only faid, the Colon y-Biffiops ffiall have no other th^iu purely fpiritual authority, nor exercife any other, this would t^2 The Appeal to the Public anfwerecJL would have been inrelligible and" confident ; but to propofe that they fhouldhave this auihori- ty not at all from the State, as muft be the cafe if it is altogeher from the Church, is to propofe that which is incompaiible with the King's supremacy in all fpiritual and ecclefiafti- cal macters, and iubverfive of that State-power^ by which the Church of England has been efta- blid-itd. It cannot therefore be fuppofed, but that ihis part of the plan fhauld be rejeded, both by the King and Paniameat. Object. IV. We are, in principle, againft a)} civil eftabliihments in religion ; and as we do not defire any fuch eftabliiliment in fupport of our own religious fentiments, or pradice, ve cannot reafonably be blamed, if we are not difpofed to encourage one in favor of theEpifcopal-Colonifts. We profefs to " fear God, and honor the King" 5 dec-laring our readinefs to obey, in fubordination £0 the allegience we owe to him who has been conftituted. *' Head over all things", the "powers ordained of God'" to bear rule over us. We ac- knowledge, v/ith humble gratitude, the favor of our rightful Sovereign, in allowing us the enjoy* ment of thofe " liberties, wherewith Chrift has made his difciples free" ^ though we judge, at the fame time, and upon folid reaion, as we imagine, that we have a juft right to think for our felves in matters of religion, and, in confequence of this right, to worfhip God in that way, which, we ap- prehend, will be mod acceptable to him ; and, \vhile we do this, " leading quiet and peaceable Jives, in all godlinefs and honefty", we th?nk far- ther, we have a claim to the protedion of the State, and the benefit of thofe laws it has made, or reafonabl^ The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 155 reafonably may make, for the fecurlty of it's loyal fubjeds in the exercife of their rights and liber- ties, whether civil or religious. But we defirc nor, and fuppole we have no right to defire, the inter- pofuioa of the (late to eftai)liih our fentiments ia religion, or the manner in which we would exp t[s them And, as we do not defire this for our felves, ic would be hard to expedl we (hould define it ia behalf of others. It does noi indeed appear to us, that God has entruftf^d the (late with a right to make religious eltabhniments. If the (late ia England has this delegated au.horicy, mud it not be Ovvned, that the ftate in China, in Turkey, ia Spain, has this authority alfo ? What (hould make the difference, in the eye of true reafon ? Hath the flate in England been diftinguiPaed by heaven by any peculiar grant, beyond the (late in other Coun- tries ? If it has, let the grant be produced. If it has not, all dates have, in common, the fame au- thority. And as they mud feverally be fuppofed to exert this authoriry in edabliHiments conform- able to their own fentiments in religion ; whatcaa the confequence be, but infinite damage to the caufe of God and true religion ? And fuch in fadt has been the confequence of thefe edabiifhments in all ages, and in all places. What abfurdities ia fentiment, and ridiculous follies, not to fay grofs immoralities, in pradice, have not been edabliOied by the civil power in fome or other of the nations of the earth ? Even in chridian Countries, fo call- ed, has not that been eftabliflied for the religion of Jefus, which, for the greater part by far, palpably contradidled the principles of common fenfe ? Has not a power been religioufly eftablifhed in oppofi- tion to Chrift, that has exalted itfelf " above all that is called God", and that has filled the earth U with i^ ^he Appeal to thc'f ublic anf^^ered, with the blood of thofe, who chofe death, in th6 nicft hidtoufly contrived forms, rather than to pay homage to fuch an Idol of falfe woifliip ? Yea, in England itfelf, has not the religion of Chrift, under popifh ellablifnments, been debafed, corrupted, and turned into a meer farce ? And, fince the re- formation, what has been fo great an obilacle to Gofpel-fimplicity and purity of worfhip, as that eflabliihment, whrch, having once obtained, the Urongell: reafonings, and moil earned intreaties, have not availed to effect an alteration in it, not fo much as in acknowledged exceptionable articles ? •We are not convinced^ that religious eftablifh- ments arc at all adapted to ferve the caufe of truth and virtue ; but are rather perluaded, they have been, and ever will be, greatly detiimental to the prevalence of real genuine Chriftianity. And as theAmcricanColonies,af lead many of them, are, at prefent, free from difficulties and embarafments by means of fuch e{lablii]:iments, we cannot but hope they will always remain fo. It ought not to be fuppofed, that thofe Colonies fhould be fond of an citabhfhed Epifcopate, which were fettled by fuch as were driven from their native land by the oppreffive exercife of Prelatical power. We fhould exprefs but little regard to the memory of our Progenitors, and lefs gratitude for their pious care, in oppofnion to heavier tryals, and greater hardfliips, than we can now eafiiy conceive of, to tranfmit religion to us free from all yokes of bon- dage, if we fhould encourage the eftablilbment of that very power which was fo injurioufly harralTing to them, and may in time be lo to us. Object. V. The Church of England in the Colonies, in it's comparative k)w ftate, inflead of an Epifcopate, The Appeal to the Public anfwered. ^ 155 Epifcopate, upon this plan, or any other, needs rather the charitable aliiftance of it's friends to fupport it's present minifters, and others that are ftill wanted. In Norrh-Carolina, the rehgious flate of things, by all accounts, is deplorably lad- The public worfhip of God, in any form, i> flrangely negledted ; and they have few, very few, minifters to officiate in gorpel-adminiltrations. I'har chari- ty, which might be fufficient for the maintenance of as many MifTionaries as would be needful there, would be fwallowed up by one Bifhop only. And would this fo much tend to the honor of God, and the good of fouls, as if it was expended in fupport of Miffions that are really neceffary ? I fiiall only fay of Virginia, and Maryland, that it can do them no harm, if we heartily wifh, that a better and more general regard was paid thereto the inftitutions of JefusChrilt. As to the other Colonies, extending from Penfylvania to the northerpmoft bounds of the MafTachufetts- Province, notwithftanding the pious care of the Society at home, and the vad; charity they have annually been expending in fa- vor of the Church of England, from their firfl; in- corporation to this day, it has grown but little in comparifon with the other denominations of chfilli- ans, not having got as yet beyond it's infant ftate. Perhaps there are not more Epifcopal Churches in thefe Colonies, than there have been thoufands of pounds fterling expended towards bringing them into exigence \ and they are, by far the greater part of them, in fo weak and low a fl:ate,' that there v/ould be no hope of their continuance in being, if that charity was with-held, which, aE firft, gave it to them : Whereas, the Churches of other denominations, without any charitable help from home, or elfewhere, are become a great mul- U z. titgdw^. 1^6 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. titude, rapidly increafing in all parrs of the Coun- try, in the fame proportion beyond the Epifcopal Churches, as they have all along done from the beginning. At the largeft: computation, there are not more than twenty fix or feven thoufand Epif- copalians in thefe feven Colonies, v^hich contain the greateft number of inhabitants on the Ameri- can Continent ; and of thefe, it would be no wrong to the truth if it fhould be faid, a very confidera- ble part went over to the Church, not fo much upon fober inquiry and real principle, as from dif-v gull at their Parifh-minifler, or unhappy prejudices arifing from the placing of a Meeting-houfe, or fome fuch important difficulty in the towns where they lived. In this view of the matter, which is certainly a juil* and true one, what occafion is there for the miffion of Bifhops ? Efpecially, as their au- thority is not to extend to the Epifcopal Laity. Would it not anfwer much better ends, to beftow that charity it will require to fupport Bifhops, in providing for thofe Churches that muft come to 330thing, if they are not fupported in this way ? It may be worthy of fpecial notice here, one great complaint in bthalf of theEpirccpal Churches is, that numbers of them are deflitute ofminifters. This want of minifters cannot wiih more truth and juilice be attributed to any caufe, than the want of money for the fupport of more miflions. The Society at home, the grand fource of charitable help, have fetn fit, of late years, to leflen their grants in fupport of their Miffionaries, for no other reaXon, it is prefumcd, than their inability to make larger ones ; and to the fame inability it is, we believe, chiefly owing, that there are no miflions in the places where they are wanted. And, aa thi$ The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 157 this is the cafe,is it prudent to defire anEpifcopate^ which will be attended with a vaft charge, which mud be defrayed iome way or other ? It (hould feem as though it would be time enough to defire Bifhops, when the Church is able to ftand upon it's own legs, and to fupport it's own inferior Cler- gy, as well as fuch fuperior officers as Bifhops. Things are not ripe, as yet, for an Epifcopate. The Church muft get ftronger footing in the Co- lonies before this may reafonably be thought of ; and there is no probable way, in which it- can at- tain to this ftrength, but by employing all the pi- ous charity that can be coliedled for the better fupporting the prefent Miffions, and providing for ftill more : Though after all, it is very quefti- onable, whether, even with this help, the Church will foon arrive at fuch a ftate of maturity, as to make it worth while for a Bifhop to come here. Other objedions we have to make againfl: the plan that has been propofed ; but as they co-incide with what has been powerfully offered by the late excellent Dr. Mayhew, I fhall take the liberty to infert his objedlions at large. And there may be a fpecial propriety in this, not only as we efteem them highly pertinent, and indifputably valid ; but as they were wrote in anfvver to this very plan, which, though exhibited by one " who is fuppofed to be an high dignitary of the Church", and de- clared, by our author, to be fo harmlefs, in every refpedt, that no reafonable obje6tions can be offer- ed againft it", he has yet fuffered to lie expofed to all the Dr. has laid againft it^ not having lifped a word in reply to him. But, before T prefent the reader, with what Dr. Mayhew has faid upon this fubjed, I would briefly fuggeft ,158 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. fuggeft one thing, as an expedient well adapted to com-promire matters between Epifcopalians, and other Dtnominarions, in the Colonies, and unite, them all in love and peace. Jt is this ^ that the- King and Parliament, who vefted Bilhops at heme with fjovernmg and ordaining power in the Church ot England, may, if in their wifdom they think fit, lodge the fame power with Prtfbyters here. And ihould they pleafe to do this, it would inftantly put an end to the complaint for want of governing and ordaining authority in America. There would DOW be no need of Bifliops, as Frefbyters might, "with as much valid propriety, govern and ordain in the Colonies, as Biibops in England. For, let It be particularly noticed, what is now fuggefled is perfedly agreeable to the principles of the firfl founders ot the reformed Church of England. Governing and ordaining power was not given to Bifhops, becaufe it was thought they were an or- der of officers fuperior to Frefbyters by divine RIGHT. It was luppofed, that all power in fpiri^ tuai and ecclefiaitical matters, as well as temporal, was vefted in the King, who might communicate it to what fubordinate mJnillcrs he pleafed Ic was upon this principle, that the power of ordi- nation wasonce delegated trCrcn-weijaLAViMAN, as the King's vice-gerent ; who, in virtue of the King's acknowled(^cd fupremacy, had then as full legal authority to ordain as any Bifhop in the kingdom. Upon this fame pvlncipic»j " Cranmer, *'Arch^Bi(]iop ofCanterbury,BonneR3i^>'p olLon- " don, &c. took out cornn-iiilions from the Crown, " importing, that, becaufe the vicegerent (Crom- " wel, a lay pcrlon) could not perfonaHy, attend *' the charge in all parts of the k'ngdom, the King l[ authorilcs the Bilhop in his (the King's) (lead to, brdaina' The Appeal to the Public anfwerrJ, 159 *' ordain, w'uhin his D oceil,, iuch as ht- jidgcd *' worthy of ho'y orders ; to col are ro benefice^ ; *' to give inftitucion ; and to execute all Ovhcr, " parts of the Epirci>pal aurhoriry ; and this dur- " ing theKing's pleafure only".* As a celebrated writer argues, " from thefc Commifiions, which *' the BiQiops took our, efpecially B )nner's, Bifhop " of London, it is evident, that all the power of *' ORDINATION which the Bifhops had, or could *' have and exercife in this Kingdom, they derived " entirely from the civil Magistrate, and " only from him. And that this really is the cafe " as to ecclefiaftical orders conferred by our present " Bifhops, that all the validity, fignificancy or " weight which they have in this Church, they *' derive purely and fokly from the aurhority of " the Magistrate, inconreftibly appears from •' hence ; namely, that the magiftrate has autho^ *' ritatively directed and prefcrlbed now and to *' WHOM, ordination is to be given. And {hould *^ an ordmation be given by all the Bifhops in this " Church in other manner, & other form, than " that prefcribed by the magiftrate, fuch crdina- '' tion would be of no legality at all, nor authority " in this Church. The man fo ordained would be " no proper minifter in the Church of England. " A minifter in the Church of Chrift, he pofTibly " might be \ but he would, I repeat it, be no *' minifter in the Church of England ; nor would " have power and authority to officiate as a prieft *' therein, — Nor let it be here replied, — that thefe " Bifhops, who by the laws of England are ini' " powered to ordain, are at the fame time to be confidered * Vid. Examination of the Codex Juris, pag. 32, 33. as cited by the DiiTent, Gentleman, pag, 24, 25, i6o The Appeal to the Public anfwered. *' confidered zs fuccejfors of the Apoftles, and hav6 *' received power of ordination from thefe founders •' of the chriftian Church by an uninterrupted lineal " defcent. For the conftitution and law of England *' knows nothing at all of this ; it refts not this power ^ *' which it commits to it's Bifhops, upon any fuch *' lineal Juccejfion or defcent (which if knows to be *' a rope of land, a ridiculous chimera, a thing *' which no man upon earth is able to make out.) *' No ; but it confiders the King, vefted (by a6t *' of Parliament, or the fuffrage of the peoplej with *' a FULLNESS of ALL power ecclefiafiical in theie *' realms, as i'mpowering and authcrifing Bifhops to *' ordain". * I fhall fubjoin here, fhould this power of ordination, which has been delegated to Bifhops in England, be delegated, by the King and Par- liament, to Prefbyters in the Colonies, they •would have as much authority, as officers in the Church of England, to ordain here^ as Bifhops have at home \ and any upon whom they fhould confer holy orders would be as authentic miniflers of this Church, and their adminiflrations in it as valid, as if they had beenordained by the laying on of the hands of any Bifhop, or all the Bifhops, in England. I would fay yet farther, fuch a conflitution would much better fuit the flate of the Colonies, than the mifTion of Bifhops •, and for the fame prudential reafons that governing and ordaining power was veiled in Bifhops, at home, upon the fettlement of the Church after the reformation, it might be veiled in Prefbyters in this new world. And fuch a delegation of power would, I will venture to fay, be far more reafonable, than the mifTion of Bifhops to the Colonies that " fhall have no authority over the Laity" of the Epifcopal Churches. Such Bifhops * DifTcnt, Gcmlcman's anfwcr, toWhite* pag. 203, 205* The Appeal to the Public anf\5r'ered. i6i Bifhops are unknown to the Church of England, and to all antiquity. They are, in truth, a thiug quite new under the fun. What Dr. Mayhew has wrote, in oppofitinn to the propoled Plan for an American Epiiccpate, is as follows. * " The gentleman, I muft own, has, in his fcheiTie, fee this propoial for American biQiops in a more p!aufible, and leis exceptionable point oF view, than I have feen it placed in before. — But he is not known •, nor has he informed us, upon what ground or authority he goes, in giving this account: of the matter. The declaration of an anonymous writer, how confidently foever he may exprtls him- felf, is not, furely, fuffi<:ient to fatibfy us, that this is the true fcheme planned. How much regard foever he might jutlly claim, if he were known to be a perfon of that eminence and dignity, which fome of his eKprefllons inrirriate him to be; yet while this is unknowh,he will excufe us if we do not intirely rely upon his word, that no other fcheme has been propofed. This may pofTibly be only his own fcheme, the fcheme of a private man : And, till it comes from better authority, or in a more authentic way, we may confider it as an irhaginary one, calculated to ferve a prefent turn, or to lull us into fecurity as to bifhops here, till, by the real^ and much more/^^/^/ fchcme's bring carried into execution, it is too late to remonftrate. W But * Vid. his remarks on an anonymous tra£)-, entitled an anfwer to Dr. Mayhew's obfervations on the charter and condudl of the Society for the propagation of the Gofpel in foreign parts, pag. 59, and onwards. t62 The Appeal to tlie Public anfvvered But let us for the prefent take it for granted, that this gentleman's is the real and only fcheme. Let us fuppofe, that bifhops are to be at fir ft fent to America with fuch limited powers, to refide in cpifcopal colonies, and to have no concern, but with epricopalians. Have we fufficient ground to think that they and their fuccefTors would, to the day of doom, or for a long time, remain contented with fuch powers, or under fuch limitations ? in a word, that they would continue fuch inofFcnfivCj, harmlefs creatures, as this gentleman fuppofes ; only diffufing bleffings around them, on all manner of people fujceftible of fuch holy imprefficns as are made by their hands on the good people in Eng- land ; fo that we can reafonably apprehend no mif- chief from them ? Has this order of men been remarkable for a quiet, ii^offenfive behaviour ? Have they ufually been free from ambitious views and prcjedts ? from a diipofition to intermeddle in fecular, worldly matters, and to enlarge the fphere of their domination? — from attempts to en- croach upon the rights of mankind, religious or civil ? from intriguing with princes, or the gover- nors of countries, for their own advantage ? from lending their affiftance, and joining with them, in carrying on fchemes of oppreflion ? Is it natural to fuppofe, that American bifhops would long con- tent themfelves in a condiiion lo inferior to that of their brethren, the fuccejfors of the apoftles in Eng- land ? — wirhout any of their temporal power and grandeur, fo as, in the eyes of moft people, to ap- pear of a lower order ; and confcquently wanting thatauthorityand refpedl which, it might be pleaded, is needful ? Ambition and avarice never want plau- fible pretexts to accomplilh their end. The gen- tleman fays, he cannot perceive why the people, even The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 163 ^ven of New-England, ' might not as fafely hreath * the fame air with a bifhop, as their brethren in *01d England do. . However (as he goes on) we * are unwilling to difquiet any of them, by import- * ing and fettling amongft them a creature, which it .' feems fome of them account to be fo noxious, .* Only we hope, that his occafionally travelling * through the country^ cannot infe5i it very danger- .^ oufly *.' One, of fuch a difpofition as he pro- -pofes, might not. But what if, inltead of this, he fhould be another ^^fi'^^^r^/ ? no impoffible fuppo- fition ! And fuch a man would probably be the mod acceptable to the major pare of the epifcopal clergy, if not of the laity, in New-England. Might not He be a very noxious creature, iftfe^ 'he country in travelling through it, and ^xQuk plagues inftead o{ hlejfings^ in his progrefs ? What the gen- tleman fays upon this head, brings to my mind what I have read of that great church-man : ' When * the Jpiritual hydra began to belch forth his * poifon^ when the — prieft went his progrefs, the air * was corrupted', with his breathy and the fell cent a- ^ gion fpread itfclf far and near. The Jnakes which ' had laid long in the grafs, began to fhow their ' heads, and hils •, they Jiung many and did much f inif chiefs &c, f I AM very remote from fufpe6ling, that this gentleman would think fuch a perfon a proper one for a bifhop in America, or any where clfe ; (ince he appears to be of a very different fpirit himfelf. And it is intimated by him, that we fhall have no ground for apprehenhons, fince biftiops here, if any there are, will be appointed by the crown, and W 2 in lire] ^' f P. 66. t ^ TracT; intltled Prif/Iianifj^ ^Q, 164 The Appeal to the Public anfwered* intirely dependent on the government in England ^ that thefmalleii attempts towards an oppr^ejjive tnlarge- nient of fpiritual power would he mmediately crujhed with indigfiation by the legijlature there ; and that both the moderation of the clergy^ and the zvatchfulnefs of the laity over them [God be thanked, if it be io] nre much more likely to increafe than,^ diminifb^, Thefe are good iwords, and fair fpeeches ^ ngr do I doubt, but that the gentleman fpeai^s his real ientiments. But fuppofing all this ; taking it alfo for granted, that in the prefeyit adminijlration^ there has been a dilcovery of lo much wifdom and integrity, of fuch a great regard to the liberties 2^nd priviledges of the fubje6t, and, particularly, o^ fuch a tender concern for the inter efi and prcfperiiy of his Majejiy^s .imerican colonies^ as leaves us no room to fear an oppreffive enlargement of fpiritual^ or any other -power^ during the continuance of it : All this be- ing taken for granted, yet may not times alter, and adminillrations change I Who knows what the next reign and ?d,minifl:rarion may be ? or whether acrempts towards an oppreffive enlargement of power, may not be as much encouraged, as it is ilippofed they v/oulJ be frowned on, during the prefent ? We are certainly much m.ore fecure a- gainft fuch opprcffion, in the abfence of bilhops, than we fhould be if they were fixed here. Otfta principiis, was never thought an ill maxim by wife men. Biiliops being once fixed in America, pretexts might eafily be tound, both for ertcreafing their number, and enlarging their powers : And thefe pretexts might probably be hearkened to, and prevail, on fuch a change of times as may be fup- pofed. To fay the lealt, this is m^uch more to be apprehended, than it is, that, on fuch a change, bi- Ihopa * P. 65. The Appeal to the PubUc anfwered, i6^ fhops (hould be Tent hirlier at firft with fuch op- prtifiive powers, or powers that interfere with the prefent rights.and privileges of the C6>/£?»//?j. Peo- ple are not ufualiy depqved of their liberties all at once, bm gradually ; by one encroachment after another, as tt is found they are difpofei to hear them \ and things of the moft fatal tendency arc often in- troduced at firft, under a comparatively plaufible and harmlefs appearance. It cannot therefore be thought ftrange, if we like the aforefaid maxim, as to oppofing the firft attempts^ in the prefent cafe ; and are defirous to keep the apprehended evil at as great a diftance as may be. All prudent men a61: upon the fame principle : Nor can 1 bring myfelf to reafon as he did, who {2^\<\JVhat hath pofterity done for us^ that we fhould be concerned for pofterity ? And Ihould biihops be once fixed here, to me it is high- ly probable, that our pofterity would not find it half fo difficult as this gentleman thinks it is for us now, before the experiment is made, to anfwer his fpi- rited demands, ' Where are the perfecutors ? Where ' is the dragca* ?' Efpecially if it be true, as many affirm, that high-church tory principles and maxims are lately revived \n England-, and favoured ^r^^/- ly by fome, whofe influence may go far towards bringing them into as much reputationjas they have been in difgrace fince the death of Queen /Inne. The gentleman confiders as perfedly chimerical, the apprehenfions which I formerly hinted, refped- ing the inconveniences that might refult from the appointm^^nt of bifhops in America. Particularly, that by the incrcafe of the epifcopal parry, they might get a majority in our houles of ^alTembly ; that in confequence thereof the church of England t P- 65, might j66 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. might become the eftablifhed religion of all thefe colonies ^ that a facramental left, or lomething like it, might enfue, to exclude non-conformifts from places, preferment, and civil offices as in England -^ and that taxes might be impofcd on us airin com- inon, for the maintenance of thefe bifliops, and the epifcopal clergy. 1 did not, however, imagine that thefe dangers were very near ax hand inNew^ England 3 nor do (o now, confidering the fmall proportion that epifcopalians bear to proteftants ^o{ other denominations. Should bifliops be fent, and the Society bend its whole force to increafe the church among us, it is not probable that thefe e- vents would fpsedily take place. But even remote evils may be reafonably apprehended, as well as thofe which are imminent •, and are to be guarded againd, as much as may be. That appointing bi- fliops for America, would be a probable means of increafing the epifcopal party here, will not be de- nied. This is doubtlels one principal reafon, why it is fo much defired ; tho' neither this gentleman, HOT the Society, fo far as 1 can at prefenc recollect, has particularly mentioned it. There is how- ever, fomething which looks a liitle this way in the Abftrail before-cited, wherein the rea- fons for bifliops here are enumerated; one of which is, ' to confirm new converts from * fcbifm *.' But even fuppofing a majority of epifcopalians in the legiflative body, in any [/ wufl not Jay either, becaufe there are more than two] of thefe colonies, the girntleman afks, ' Why * fhould a tefl: law follow ? Is there any fuch law * in the epifcopal colonies ^ Or even though there * were, can it be imagined, that if a prevailing * party in New-England were wild enough to ^ propofe, * Jbjiraify 1715. p. 54* The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 167 ^ propofe, his Majefty, would ever be advifed to * pafs one for that purpoie * ?* Whether there is any iuch law already in any "of the epifcopal colo- nies, is with me a doubt. But by what I haveob- ferved of the over-bearing fpirit of epifcopalians among us, it is ftrange to me if there is not. The very Candid Examiner of my Obfervations^ plainly enough intimated his defire of fuch a law here. And if there were a confiderable majority' of epif- copalians in the legiflature, with a zealous, not to fay bigotted and opprejfive epifcopalian Governour at their head, and bifhops in thefe parts to coun- tenance and forward {o pious a Ichc-me for edifying the church •, I make no doubr, but that the church of England would foon be eftablifhed here by a provincial law, and a teft-a6t fpeedily pafTed. Nor am I able to fee any ground for the gentle- man's great confidence, that the King would noc be advifed to allow that teft ; feeing there is fuch a one in our mother-country. I prefume, the gentleman could afTign no folid reafon for a teft- lavv in England, by -^Kxch proteiiant diflenters are excluded from offices there, which would not hold good in favour of a law of the fame tenor here ; I mean on the fuppofuion of fuch an increafe and majority of the epifcopal party. Can what is fup- pofed reafonable and equitable in Old England, be fuppofed unreafonable and injurious in New ? Or is it to be imagined, that the Head of the church of England would, at the defire of the legiflative body in any of his colonies, refufe to allow of laws for eftabli(hing that church therein, and for introducing a teft ? lav^s manifeftly adapted to the worldly grandeur, if not to the fpiritual good of that church, which is as it were his body -, and ? P. 63. 1(58 The Appeal to the Public anfwered." and to bring in, if not to convince fchifmatics ? If the gentleman was able, I could v/ifh he had done Ibmething mor£ tpward removing our apprehen- fions in this refped, than to treat them with Icorn ; which is not the moil likely method to convince thofe thrat think calmly of the matter. He treats as ftill more wild and chimerical, the fuppofifion of our ever being taxed in common, for the fupport of biiliops and their clergy. Sa^s he, ' The terror of being taxed for bilhops, &c. — * is yet mere chimerical than the former*.' But in cafe of fuch an increafe of the epifcopal party, of the government's coming into their hands, and of the church of England's being here eftablifheci by a provincial law, which things mud be prefup- pofed ; where is the abfurdity of fuch an apprehen- lion ? I can fee none, except it lies in the injurious and opprejfive nature of fuch a fuppofed tax : But this confideration will never prevent the doubts and fears of thofe, who reflect; on what has been done in almoft every age and country in chriften- dom, by the prevailing religious party, for their own eafe, and the further weakening and vexing the minority. The gentleman obferves, that * tithes are paid in England to the clergy by virtue * of grants, which laid that burthen upon eftates * many ages before the prefent pofTefTors enjoyed * them -f.' i. e. in the days of popery. He alfo ex- prefTes himfelf very pofitively, that if this had not been done, an ad of parliament could not now be obtained, of this or the like nature^ by which dijfenters in common with others, fhould be taxed for the maintenance of the hierarchy. And having, for ought I can fee, merely by his per emptorinefs, com- pleated > ! P. 63, t Ibid. ^lie Appeal to the Public anfwerei 1% pleated his viAory in this refpecl, he irhme^idtei^ begins his triumph, by faying : ' With what rfio-- ^ defty theq can the Dodor lugged, that lucfi a ^ thiftg might be Feared in New-Enghnd * ?* I am very glad if the governing parr of the natiurl have fo much moderation refpeding prorcftant difTenters, that fuch an a6t could not now be obtam- ied there ; which might, ds it appears to me, ht juftly looked on as a great hardfhip, or ihlfance of oppreflion. It may naturally be fuppofed; this gentleman is of the farrie opinion : Why clfe could not kn a6t of that nature be now obtained, if the hierarchy were ^not already pro- vided for, by virtue of grants, when t^opery was triumphant, which laid the burthen of tythes on eftates ? But I do not pretend to have a thorough underflanding of the doSirine of tythes, as profejfed and preached in the church of England ; nevc^ having rnade this any, much lefs a principal part o£ my Jtudy^ however important an article it may be. Be this matter as it may, while there is a law ini forcv!; which bears fo hard on proteftant difienters^ as the teft does, I fhall not eafi'y be perfwaded^ that it would be impofTible if the hierarchy was iipt already provided for, to obtain an ad for that purpofe, by which the burthen fHould be laid up- on diiTenters in common with others 5 which, iii fome refpedls, might be thought a lefs grievance than the other : Particularly as it would be much lefs reproachfid and ignominious x.o them, to be only obliged to pay to the fupport of a clergy difapprov- ed by them, than to be treated as if they did not merit the charadter, and were therefore unworthy tt> enjoy the privileges of Britifh fubjedi j thougli X it t P. 64, lyo The Appeal ot Putheblic anfvvereci it is well known, his Majefty, whom God preferve, has none more loyal and fait hfuU But to return. If bifhops are fent to America,' they muft be well fupported ; this is beyond doubt. By whom ? or by what means ? 1 fuppofe there is not yet a fund provided by legacies, near adequate to the fupport of one ; it not being a jmall matter^ that fuHices fuch dignified and apojlolical p'erfons. The Society will probably think, this burthen fhould not lie upon them ; as they are not able t6 fupport afufficientnumber of miflions among peo- pkjwhofe nectiTities are great and urgent. Is it like- ly then, that theBritilh nation, fo deeply plunged iri debt, and in which there is fcarce a poffibility of laying any new taxes, will undertake to maintain bifhops for America ? No furely. Will the bifhops and rich clergy in England do it out of their abun- dance ? This is at leaft as improbable ; efpccially fmce it is luppofed, that many of them cannot, to this day, be intlrely perfwaded, but that it is rather more bleffed to receive than to gfve. Will American bifhops then, truft to the generdfiry of the p^i^iple here ; depending upon providence and alms, or, in ■pther^ words, upon the good will of the Americans ? Will they be content without reaping any other carnal things here, than what the people may judge ah adequare recompe.nce for the fpiritual things fown by them •, particularly, fince bifliops feldomi preachy for confirming weak brethren^ and for thofe kciy imprejficns made by their hands ^ on all manner €f people jufcepfible thereof ? If this is all, or the principal pan of what they receive, their mainte- nance will not probably half jatisfy them ; except perhaps at firft, while wonderful effedls are exped:- " ed from their bleffmg^ and the benign influence of their The Appeal to the Public aniwered. 171 fun5iion. Nor will they run the rifque, unlefs they have more faith in God, and lefs \ovtx.oi\\t world, than moft of their order have had, fince Conltantine the Great became a nurjing father to the church, and The pious maternal council ot I^ice iuckled her wrh the clear and pure, the uncorrupc and ' finc.re milk' of Homooufianity-^ that fhe might ' grow, thereby.' Can there then be a more probable lup- polition than this ; that in confequence of the epifcop il party's increaling in thefe colonies, and becoming a majority in the legiflatures, the church of England would be eftablifhedlDy pro- vincial laws, and the people in common taxed for the fupport of bilhops and their clergy ? Have we reafon to think that, from brotherly affedlion and tendernefs, for fchifmaticks, they would exempt them from bearing a part of this burthen ? I wifli there was not more reafon to apprehend, that they would oblige non-conformifts to bear a double pro- portion of it ; not, to be fure, out of any enmity, but only as an inftance o^ wholejdme feverity^ and a probable means of bringing them into the bofom of the church, to their eternal falvation — However, if a law for an equal tax upon conform! fts and non- conformilts were paded in any Britifli colony, for the purpofe aforefaid, there is fcarce any room to doubr, but that it would be confirmed by the crown : The Head mud take care for the good of the body, and all its members. Nay, if bifiiops. were fpfredily to be fent to America, it feems not wholly improbable, from what we hear of the un- ufual, tenor of lome late parliamentary a6ts and bilk, for raifing money on the poor colonies with- cut their confent, that provifion might be made foe the fupport of thefe bilhops, if not of all the church' clergy aifo, in the fame way, X 2 Thi, r^j^^ ^he Appeal to the Public anfwereci TpE gentleman having endeavoured to expofe to ridicule the ^forefaid apprehenfions, as perfedbly ihimerical^ and called rny modefiy as well as under- ftanding in gueftion, even foe hinting them, im.- nsediately adds, ' Befides, would it have been a ^^ good realon at the revolution^ for debating the • ^iffenters from the full exercife of their church \ government and worfhip, that if they obtained ir, *^, tney n;ight perhaps iocreafe til) they got 2i major "^^vote in both houles, and then enadl r^o mortal "^^ k,nDws' What •^^.' Thsfe cafes, \x is conceived, are much too diffimilar to argue thus from one to th^ otberi ' The church of England had an exclufive legal eilsbii hment, ar the time fpoken of-, the King for her'fiead, and (worn Proredor, and a lino ft all perfqn^ of in-ercft and power for her members. Corfgripicy wag alm.(.ft, if not the only path to pre- ferrnent^' civil honours, offices and emoluments. In (hort, the conftirution both m church and flate was fo fecured, ip'guarded boih by lawi and mem- BerSs and non-conformifts were fo few, and under fuch difadvantages, that there was not room for any fei^f that thty would ever increafe fp as to be- come the major and. leadipg part in parliament, or pe able, if they defired/ir., to over-tgrn the eflab- riijimenr, and'opprefs epilcopalians. Apprehenfi- oris of this fort, would indeed^ have been perfectly fed, as a thing of courfe, mod to favour epifcopalians ; fo thac conformity, inftead of being a bar to preferment here, is perhaps generally found the readied way to it. Epifcopalians may be, and often are, chofen members of both houfes of aflembly in th.e colo- nies of New-England ; nor is thtre either law, or a,ny thing elfe, to prevent this, if, by their qualifi- cations and good behaviour, they can recommend themfelves to the eledors. And I hope this gen- tleman would not have the people obliged by law to chufe them, whether they approve of them or not ; though this feems to be the amount of what he fqmewhere fays. Befides, the epifcopalians here are more united among themfelves than we are, being of different {t6k.% and parties. And diould tiiey [the epifcopalians] hereafter approach any thing 174 '^he Appeal to the Public anfwered thing near. to an equality with lis in pbirit 6f num- ber, [hey will have the advantage greatly in this refped ; fince they may more eafily unite their Hrength, in purfuing meafures for their feparate advantage, and to our common detriment, thati we {ball ours, in any particular methods of oppo- fition to them : So that they may carry their paints, even with inferior numbers \ efpecially: being moft favoured by an epifcopal Governor,' whole influence is ordinarily very great out of courts as well as his proper conftitutionai power in it. Our circumflances being fuch, is there not ^ hundred, a thoufand times, more reafon to appre-^ hend that epifcopalians may in time become the major and governing party here, and ena&: fuch laws as I have been fpeaking bf, than there was at the revolution^ that the no^-conformifts in Eng- land might do the like there ? lean hardly think that the gentleman, upon a little refiei^iion, will difown it. Which being the cafe, the grand prin- cipal on which he fets out, in (peaking of Ameri- can bifhops, is not applicable to the flare of tbefe colonies ; at leaft, no: by far, very far, fo applica- ble as it was and is to that of Enaland. The prin- ciple 1 intend, is this : That ' all members of every * church are, according ro the principles of liberty, * intitled to every part vouId perfecutc thofe in the Kingdom who v^^ere proteiiants by principle. Far from applarding his condvict, we have no other opinion of him, m conlequence of it, than of Saul, who, undcT ihe falfe perlbaficrj cf doing God good fervlce, madly perrecuted the dilciples of Chrifl. And the belt excufe that can he made for him is that, which this Saul, when he came to himfelf, made in his ov^n behalf, namely, *•• that he d\d it ignor^intly*' •, notwichilanding which, he calls himfcll- '' the chief of finneri,", for his former folly. We do not believe, that the King of Poland, or any other King »on the earth, has a right, eiiher from his oath, or any other way, to perfecute his fubjeds for their relit^lo.us princi- ples : On the contrary, wc are fully periuaded, ihu The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 183 that he ought, (o far as the fafery of the Govern- ment will allow of it, to protecl them all, without difcrimination, in that way of Wvorfhipp'ng God, they think will be mod acceptabk to hi.n. We defire no favor in this kind, in diftindion from the Eplfcopalians ; neither ought they to defire any in diftinction from us. If they have a right, upon the foot o^ Jcripture or reafon^ to defire Bi- fhops upon a State- establishment in order to the exercife of their religious principles, we have as good a right to defire Paftors, in the fame way, for the exercife of our's ; but as we do not defire this for ourfelves, they cannot reafonably complain if we do not defire it foj them. 4^fy^^^^^'^-^^4^^*^^^4^^^j^^^^^^^^ ANSWER ANSWER to Section IX. which pre- tends that the Epifcopate propored cannon hurt the DifTenters, and is fi:et from all re^- fonable Obje(^tions, c^^o$oo^o^:^^c^(^c^CK^c$oo5o<^o§3^c^ c$b THE Dr. begins this fedion with faying, " fhould it be pretended, that an American Epifcopate would be produdive of much clamor and difconrent in the Colonies, it would be an ill- grounded affertion". We are of a quite different mind ^ as knowing it Would be the occafion of great uneafinefs to multitudes. But fays the Dr. arguing upon the fuppofuion that it would be produftive of difcontenr, "why the uneafinefs of the members of the Church, fo juftly founded^ deferves not to be confidered as much as the un- eafinefs of it's enemies, without any foundation^ will be difficult to fhew". It would be difficult upon his reprefcntation of the cafe. But, by only rcverfing it, and hereby exhibiting it's true ftate, the difficulty at once vanifhes. Epifcopalians, as we judge, have no right, in virtue of the GofpeU charter, or any other, to a State-establish- ment of Epifcopacy in the Colonies ; and if they are uneafie for want of it, their uneafinefs is " with- out any juft foundation'* : Whereas, if they are diftinguiflied The Appeal to the Public antweted iSj diftinguifhed from the other denominatiorlf!; Hf ihe grant of fuch an eftahlifhment, thele deuominiti- ons would have " juft rf-afon'' for ureafiDi^Jo oii ac- count of this difcrmininng difference. — T\h- iug- geition that follow., n-m^ly, " that difco.i'en id the minds ot Ciiurch-m-r.! wvjild noc havt- i.hac dangerous tendency wufi rr'pcd to the govern- ment, which there ;s reason to apDrehend ^.-f ir id the minis of others", is ar ' ncr bile jnd unjuit. If he does not know it, v/e do, char, there rave been in tiie boibm of rhe Church ot England, id ihis Country, red h')t Jacobites, who woulJ gladly have overthrown the prcf^ t eflabliOiment of the Crown, had it been in rheii powef •, and if there are any luch Jicobices in thr Ccljoles aL prefenr, they belong to that denomimtion only in whofe '* minds f here is no dangerous difconient", unlefs it be fuppoltd there rrijy be fuch among ihc Ro- man-catholics. - . ' - ' ' - } The Dr. having offered thefe few hint?, iipod fuppofuion that the miffion of Biiliops woulJ be attended with difcontent, now goes nn r.^ fay, " of any confiderable difcontent or uneafincfs ther- is no reafon to be apprehenfive". And why ? It follows, " difTenters in this Country have, of late years, greatly come off from their pfejudice.*? ; -and fenriments of candor and moderation have vifibiy taken place. And, excepting here and there a hot-heated writer— we would hope of the diffen- ters in America, that they bear no ill-will to the Church, and defire nothing more than lecu.'ity in the enjoyment of their prefc n: advantages''. How does this agree with a paffage, in the petition^ which was fent to the Univerfity of Cambridge, by the Dr. and.the convened body who put him up'd Z ^filing ? 1156 The Appeal to the Public anf^! "■*'■- Z 2 Is |88 The Appeal tQ the? 'jpublic anfvyered *'ls this the moderation of the Hierarchy" ! If let- , ters, from Epilcopahans here of private charader,"- 1 and fmall importance, could, by being handed to" dignitaries at home, i\vail to fuch hurtful purpofes, what might reaionably be expeded as the effedl of letters from a Bifliop in tfie Colonies ! As to the extrad from Calvin, the Dr. muft have inferted it rather for the fake of his name, which he knows is held in great veneration by many in the Ccun-ry, than from his efteeming him d friend to flpifcopacy, in his knfc of it. He knows/or rr.i^ht eafily have known, that he was jho greater a irknd to it than we ara. He has in- deed been often traduced, by Epifcopal-v/riters, as one pf the greateit enemies of iheChurch of Eng- land, ^ Says pi. Nichols, befides ethers 1 have not i'oom to cire from, " Mr. Calvin, in his letters to fomeoi his friends, made uie of fome very hard expreffi '.ns with relation to the Church of Englands ivhich did not i'o well become rhe m.outh ot a di- •i'ine-^ */ The plain truth is, Calvin was in prm- ciple as real an enemy to the divine right of Bi- fhopsj asro the Qmnt right of Fupes, The Dr. goes on, ^/ fome formerly had an a- '>i?erfion to the idea of Bifhops in America, on the luppofition that they mull become fubjtd to their avithoritv. " But tbe'p]an\vhich is now hxed mu(l effectually obviate all their objcclions, and difiBpate ^heir fears'", " It has been largely iKewn, that there are cbji^iflioha (\illj and jud ground for fear ; and fuch as Epifcopalians will noi fii d it very eafie to is^ovc,li is addedj *' ogr ordinatiops cannoc '■ '■ '' ^'' ''' "'"''' ' ' ■ ' . hurt , "^ Dtf-sice ortbe Doff, sind Difclpllneof the Qhurch of ^he Appeal to the Public anlwered. iSg hurt them, any more than their ordinations can injure us. — And as to fuch difcipline and govern- ment as is inte ided to be exercifsd under an Epif- copace, they will have no reafon to be diflatisfied therewith, any more than yvG now have to be difla^ tished w:th the difcipline exercifed by them". The Dr. quite miftak.es the t ue ground of our diflaiis- fadlion. it is not s|mply the ej^ercife of any of their religious principles that would give the leaft uneafinels, nor yet the exercife of them under as many purkly scriptural Bifhops as they could with to have •, but thtir having Bifh )ps under a State-estaslisHxMEnt which would put them upo.i a different foot from the other denominati- ons, and, without all doubt, fooner o^ later, expofe Uhcm to many difficukies, and grievous hardihips. He fays farther, " we fhould have many reafons to be pleafed with an Epifcopare", and mentions two or three by way of Ipecimen. *' Sometimes we have been grieved at feeing the ill-behavjor of a Clergyman in the orders of our Church ; bur^ by the lettlement of Am.erican Bifhops, a remedy will be provided for this dilbrder'*. They have thi remedy already provided at home ; and yer, there are more diforderiy Clergy-men therein pro- portion, than are to be found here. And, as this is certainly the truth of fad, it fhould feem better to let things remain as they are, than to run the venture of a remedy, which, upon long tryal, has been found not to anfwer it's intention. " Some- times we have lamented, that the Bifhops at home,, and the Society for the propagation of the gofpel, have been impofed upon by falfe accounts tranl- mitted from hence by our American Clergy -, but ynder an Epilcopate, we mud be fenfible there can ipo The Appeal to the Public apfwered, can be no opportunity for any grofs impofitions of ^his nature". Ihere has been, and now is, op- portuniiy fur impofitions in this kind at home^ v^here ihcre are Bifhops in plenty ; and there wnuld be much more opportunity for it here^ as Bdiops in America would be lo valUy diftant frorn rnuit of the Clergy under thtir care. It would be eafier to impofe upon them by wrong accounts hete^ than it is in England. " Sometimes again complaints have been made, that, in confequence cf thisfalfe information, miffions have been eredled in improper places, and (he Society's bounty has been milappli/d -, but of ail iuch cafes Bdhops in this Couni;ry will be competent judges, and no p^ rv^erfion or abufe of the Society's favors will be luit'ered to conunue". It i> nut for want of good information, as to the real Hate of religion in Norih Carolina, that it has been fo long, and fo ftrangely negle6i:ed by the Society ; but froo] a prevailing diipofirion to epifccpize 'the m.ore nor- thern Colonies. And ihould this be in the view of the BiQiops to be Tent, as many improper millions, in obr eftirnation, might be ereded, or encouraged, as there are now ; probably a great many more. We are firmly perfuadcd, this v;culd rather hurt than mend the matter. The Dr. concludes this fc6lion with renicving, as he calls it, " the frightful obifdlion of

!ipo^o^c^d^d$i(%id^c^d^^d^:^6^ THE fird objedlon is thus e^prefTed, " it maj be inquired, whether new laws will not be made, in cafe of an American- Epifcopate, to fub- jecl us to the payment of tythes" ? The Dr. an- fwers, " of this there can be no more reafon to be apprehenfive, than if Bifhops were not to be fenc hither". Very true, if the laws of England, re- lating to tythes, fhould not be interpreted to bind in America, or no enadting claufe {hould be added to make them to be of force here : But of this there might be *' reafon to be apprehenfive", through the influence of Bifhops ; efpecially, if the fupport of moft of the Epifcopal Clergy, in manjr of the Colonies, lliould continue to depend on the charity of benefadors at home, as would probably be the cafe. This would afford a plaufible argu- ment to fubje6l the Colonies to tbe law of tythes i and no man living can fay, they would not, in time, be thus fubjedled. Without all doubt, this law, or fome other lefs offenfive in it's found, would take place here, as foon as the (late of things would allow of it. The Dr. himlelf has incauti- oufly The Appeal to the Public anfwered; 193 oufly dropt that, which naturally leads to fuch a thought, under the next objedion he mentions^ W'hich is ; "As ignorance is ever rufpicious, it may be farther afl^ed, iliali we not be taxed in this Coun- try for the iupport of Bifhops, if any fhould be appoinced" ? The Dr. anfwers in as peremptory ternis, as if he had btren endowed with abfolute forefighc, " Not at b.\V\ And yet, he immedi- ^itely adds, " But (liould a general tax be laid up- *' on the CcfuNTRY, and thereby a fum be raifed *' fufficient for the purpofe,— I believe fuch a tax *' would not amount to more than four p:f nee on *' one hundred pounds. And this would be no " mighty hardfhip upon the Country. He that *' would think much of giving the Cm thoufandth *' part of his income to any ufe, v/hich the Legilla- *^ ture of his Country fhould aflign, deierves not *' to be confidered in the light of a good fubjed, " or member of fociety". You here fee, ye Co- loniils, the opinion of the Dr. and,' we reafonably prefume, of the Ep^fcopal-Clergy under whofe di- redion he wrote, that the Country might, ia equity, be taxed for the fupport of BiOiops ; that it would be " no mighty hardfhip", if it (liould ; yea, that we fliould not be v/orthy of the " cha- radler of good fubjeds, if we thought much of it". If the Country might be thus taxed, the tax might be laid upon thofe Colonifts, whofe fore- fathers forfook their native land, wich all it's ac- commodations and comforts, that they might be freed from the Epifcopal yoke of bondage. And fhall it be declared, in [he face of the world, that: this would be " no hardlhip" to their pofterity, and Ihat they would be neither good fubjedls, or good A a members J 94 The Appeal to the Public anfwerM. members cf focicty, if they " thought much" of fupporting that power which has been, and may again be, terribly opprelTive ? Would this give no untafinefs ? Would there be no reafon for difcon- tent ? If the Country might be taxed four pence in one hundred pounds, it might, for the fame rea- fon, and with as much juftice, if it was thought the fupport of Bifhops called for it, be taxed tour fliillings, or four pounds m the hundred, and fo on to ten pounds, until the tax of tythes was com- pletely faflened on us. Surely the Dr. was off his guard, or he y/ould not have given us juit reafon to fulpedl, inilead of " ignorantly fufpt^ing", that we fliould dtjirly pay fur Bifnops, if they were lent to America. Another objedion is, " that if Bifhops are fet- tled in America, although in the manner we now propofe, there will poflibly be an augmentation of their power, as iocn as circumftances will admit of it'*. But, fays the Dr. " at this rate there can '* be no end of cbjeding. For if every pofTible ill *• efFed of a thing, proper in itfelf, and harmlefs " in it's tendency, may be made an argument a- *' gaind it, there is nothing that can efcape. Ar- *' guments of this fort may as fairly be alleged a- *' gainfl: a religious toleration, — againft allowing the *' comm.on pec^ple the ufe of the holy fcripture, or " the liberty of examining any points of religion *< or government, &c •, for none can tell what ill *' confequences and abufes may follow, in fome *' future period, from thefe conceflions and indul- " gences". Enough, 1 iruft, has been already faid to (liew, that the propofcd Epifcopate is neither '' proper in itfelt", or harmlels in it's tendency" j and the objedled ^' augmentation of power", far frorh The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 195 from being merely possible, is in an high de- gree probable. Would Bifhops here be contented with " reftrained powers^* longer than they could help it ? Would they not endeavour, as they had opportunity, and circumftances would permit, to re- gain thofe appendages they have been deprived of? Would they be eafie until they were upon an equal footing with their brethren of the fame rank and order at home ? Are thefe only pofTibilities ? May they not rather be expeded in the natural courfe of things ? Nay, the Dr. himfelf has unwari- ly opened the workings of his own heart upon this head. Says he, '* fhould the government fee fit *' hereafter to inveft them [Bifhops] with fome de- *' gree of civil power, worthy of their acceptance, *' which it is ImpofTibie ro fay they will not ; — yet " it is inconceivable, that any would therelDy be *f injured". We are not told, what degree of civil power would be worthy of a Biihop's acceptance ; but, if we may guefs by what is thought worthy an home, it cannot well be fuppofed to be any thing fhorcof the fuper-intendency of two or three Ame- rican-govcrnmencs. It may eafily be conceived, vv'herein this m.ight be " injurious", at leatl, to fome. And, as civil power, in every degree, has in fad been exercifed, by fome or other, in an op- prelTive arbitrary manner, we are even necefTirated not to be at a lofs to conceive, how this might be the cafe, was this kind of power, in whatever degree, veiled in Bifliops. The Dr. indeed fays, "^ it is hoped, that our Bifnops will always be thought to dcferve the charader of being podl-iTed of the greatcft ability, integr'ty, and pi-udence'* >; v/hich 15 " all that the happinefs and fafetv of the Public resjuire". Bat on what does he found this hope ? Neither Bifliops, nor any othei men in digniry and A' a 2 ' ■ jyowef Iji^ Thq Appeal to the Public anfwcred power, have always been remarkable for fupe- tlor ability, or integrity, or prudence. This is top much to be expcdtd in iuch a world as our's. Ic has never yet been the cafe in any age, or place^. And fhoulcl it happen, in time to come, that Bi- Ihops here Ihoiild be not only wanting in thefe good qualities, but pcfTelTed of the contrary ones, would ic be at all difilcult to conceive wherein^they might be injurious ? But fuppofing the befl, that ihty were always the men that have been de- Icribed, would it be no hurt to the Church cf Chriil, iliould there be conjoined with their fpiri- tual powers, tnofe that are of a worldly nature? Would this be no injury to the fpecial cbjeds of their care, as God's minifters in his kingdom that is not of this \vorId ? Timothy was, in the Dr's opinion, aBifliQpcf the higheft order in theChurch ; snd what were the fentiments cf the infpired Paul, relative to his proper work as fuch ? Says he to him, '^. '' Thou theiefoi-e-enduie hardnels as a gccd folciier of Jefus Chrifl:. No man (hat warreth en- i^angleth himfcif v/uh tlve affairs of this life". :And again, j- *■ Mediate orj thefe things, give thy felf V/HOL^Y to them, that thy profifing m^ay sppea; to all'V 1 here is, in the nature cf the ahmg, an incongruity in vcfting the iame perfons- with fpiritual and civil powera. It unavoidably tends to divide theij. minds, as well as labors , and is much more adapted to do hurt, than good. BiQiop Latimer, cne of the firfb reformers, and a blelTed Martyr for ;he dike of Chrift, lias e>pre{red iVis fentimenrs upon this head very juftly and flrik- ingly, in his fermon of the plough ; which I re- commuid to :hs Di*s ptrufal. I HAVJ2 % 2 Tim, 2. g, i I Tim. 4. 15. The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 197 I HAVE now takep notice of what he has reply'd to '* all the objections", he fays " have been made againlt fending Bifhops to America, fo far as has come to his knowledge" ^ and I willingly leave ic with the reader to judge, whether, inftead of having proved them to be " unreafonahle and groundlefs", he has nor, by what he has offered, added to their real ftrength, rendering them more difficult to be juftly anfwered. He feems to think it " poffible o- ther objedions may be fuggefted" ; and herein he {las judged right. Such objedions have, in thefe papers, been placed before his view, not as " in- vented by dexterity, or ill-will", but as naturally and obvioufly arifing from the true merits of the'- caufe itfelf : Nor do \vc think they are capable of being refuted. '^ Cavilers and Sophifts" may at- tempt their refutation, and, by the help of" ieger- .demain", they may poffibly do it with fome " ap- pearance of plaufibility" to vulgar eyes ; but Ihould they " employ their talents in this exer- clfe", though they might pleafe themfelves, as children arc diverted while " engaged in crambo or pufh-pin", they v/ould neither " deferve the public attention", or impofe upon men of good underftanding, and folid judgment. The Dr. concludes his fubjefl with a few mif- cellaneous thoughts, he may fuppofe of fome weight. Says he, " unlcfs Biiliops fhould be fpe- dily lent, we can forefee nothing but the ruin of the Church in this Country". So far as it is a State-Church, there is no reafon for concern a- bouc it's ruin. Wherein it is a Church having no officers, fuperior or inferior, but purely scriptu- R AL ones, and v/alking according to no rule but thac ivhich'is of DIVINE appointment, it's "ru:n" can- . no: 19S The Appeal to the Public anfwercd. not be feared, but through want of faith in the fuper-incendlng government of the great " Head over all things^.—Says he, " the Church ot Eng- land here is \o efTentially the fame with the Church at home, that ic muft everfubfitl or perifh by the fame means". The Church of England at home, and here, may p.eriili in regard of a i>TATE-KSTAB- L2SHMENT, and undoubtedly wiil, iooner or la- ter; but fo far as ic is a Church, built on ihe *' foundation of the Apodles", Chrid himlelf being *^ the chief corner-ftone", it will " fubfift" againll all oppofition of earth and hell. — Says he, " 1 he Church here has been long ftrugglmg under fuch an increafmg load of difficulties, and is now in fuch a date of opprefTion, as to deferve the compafiion of the whole chnftian world"''. We are really afto- niihed at this hyperbolical reprcfentation ; and can no otherwife account for, or excufe it, than by fup- pofing that theDi's zeal had, at this time, depriv- ed him of all fober judgment. — ■ Says he, *' the author need not ufe many words* to prove, that confiderations, even of a political nature, are fuffi- cient, in this cafe, to prevail with thofe who are jnfenfible to other motives". Vv hat he means here is, " that no form of Ecclefiaftic.al government can fo exactly harmonile with a mixed monarchy in the ilate, as that of a qualified Epifcopacy". But it ought to be remembered, the Dr's Bifliops, accord- ing to his own account of them, pag. 14, 15. are ABSOLUTE MoNARCHs tn the Church; and SUCH muft Kings be in the State to make out a proper analogy. Bifhops there have b.en, even in Enghnd, who, in their own imaginations, were absolute Monarchs in the Church ; ?nd they would have made the King the fame absolute MoNARCiri in the State, to the dedrudion of that wifely The Appeal to the Public anlwered. 199 wifely contrived mixture of power, which gives the Britifli-ilare-contVitution chc prerercr.ce to any on the whole earih. The g vrriimt-nt of tne Church, by the Dr*s' Bilhops, is moie unlike the gove; nment of the (late, by King, Liids and Com- mons, than any form of government in the ChuiChi that was ever known in the Colonies ; and, per- haps, is more natorally and p-^werfuUy adapted to fubverc it.— Says he, in a word ro '.hcfe who have been averfe to American Bdh ps, *' the fubjedt is here placed in it's true lighr. and thereby, it is trufted, their mifapprehenfions are fairly removed^ and confequent fears are fhcwn to be gioundlefs'^ As the Epiicopate propofcd is not, in all refpects, as we apprehended it might be, upon it's firtl ap- pearance, io far our concep'io'ns are redified -, but the Dr. is much millaken, if he thinks, ti-at he has removed our fears. By what he has olfered, efps- cially in anfwer to objedions, inftead of Hie wing that they are '' groundleis", he has really added flrength to the reafons on which they v/ere ground- ed. We are, from him, more fatisfied ihan ever, that an Epifcopate in the Colonies, upon the pub- lished plan, even in his view of it's operation, will be greatly hurtful. It ought not therefore to be expeded, though we call oarfelves *' friends of truth, juilice and liberty", that we fhould do any* thing to help forward the million of Biihops. — Says he, on one fuppofition, in order to point ouc the " injuitice and cruelty" of endeavouring tb prevent the Epifcopate aflced for, " If all the re- ligious denominations in America, by the general conftituiion of the Britifh Colonies, are to be treat- ed on the footing of a perfect equality, for which fome have contended •, then the Church of Eng- land is as fully encicled to the compleac enjoy- menc 200 The Appeal to the Public anfwercd, ment of it's own difcipline and inftitutions, as any other chridians". Who ever objedled againft this *' corhpleac enjoyment", upon the footing of a ^' perfed equality*' ? The " other chriftians" do net enjoy, nor do they defire to enjoy, any religi- ous liberty but that wherewith Chrift, without difcrimination, has n-sade his difciples free ; and if this Is not enjoyed by Epifcopalians " as compleat- ly'*, as by the other denominations in the Colonies, h is becaufe they want to be upon an unequal FOOTING with their neighbours ; that is, to have Bifhops that are more than meer scriptural ones, that (hall cxercife their authority under the patronage of a State-establishment, whereby they would be diftinguifned from, and kt above, all the other denominations in America ; which, as we are venly perfwaded, would be putting them into circumftances, they have no right, either from na- ture or grace, realon or revelation, to expctl of defire. If they have fuch right, let the grant of it, as made to them, be produced, that it's authenticity may be fairly examined in the view of the Public* if they have not, their complaints are unreafonable.— Says he, in fine, on another fuppofition, " if any denomination is entitled to a iuperiority above o- thers, as is believed by many ; rlien the claim of the Church of England to this preference is not to be difputed". We difpiite it not in regard of Virgi- nia and Maryland ; but as to the Colonies north- ward of thefe, we think, the preference, in point of iuperiority, if fuch preference be at all fuppofed, ought, in common juftice, to be given to them \ not only as they are more than thirty times more numerous than the Epifcopalians, but as they have merited diftinguifhing favor, fo far as it may fea- lonably be bellowed, in virtue of the vaft expence of The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 201 of labor, treafnre and blood, their fore-fathers, ia fome of thefe Colonies, have been at, to extend the Britifh Empire, and add to it's Itrength, riches and glory. Having thus largely confidered the plan PROPOSED for an American Epifcopate, and what has been offered in it's vindication, I (hall not think it proper to conclude without firft letting the Dr. and his friends who voted him their writer, know, that we give full credit to what they have declared, upon having mentioned their plan for an Epifcopate, upon it's first appearance, in the Colonies, namely, " this, without any refervation, or equivocation, is the exadt plan which has been fettled at home ; and the only one on which Bi- fhops have been requefted here, either in our ge- neral or more particular addrelTes". But then, we would, at the fame time, add, that we mufl be excufed, if we fay, we do not believe, they would ever have contrived, or propofed, this plan, had it not been, as they imagined, a fcheme for the introduction of Biihops that woyld carry with it 3 plaufible fhew, and give opportunity to keep that out of fight which would occafion univerfal un- eafinefs and difcontent. We are neither fo void of difcernment, or unacquainted with the intrigues of thofe who are mod zealous for an American Epifcopate, as not to be fully fatisfied, they have much more in defign than they have been pleafed openly to declare. Their ultimate views, what- ever they propofe to begin with, have not been fo perfe6lly fecreted in their own breads, 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. The Dr. himfelf, though B b he ao2 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. he fays, pag. 79. " they have carefully confulted our fafety and fecurity, and lludied not to injure but oblige us", has yet very freely, however injudi- ciou fly, given us to underftand, pag. 107= that " a tax", in confequence of the mifTion of Bifhops^ upon this very plan, " may be laid upon the Country" •, which, if it fhould, " would be no mighty hardfhip", and (hould we thinic it fuch, we *' fliould not delerve to be confidered in the light of good lubjeds, or members of fociety" : Nay, he even fuppofes, notwithftanding the exprels guard againft it in the plan, that Bifhops " may hereafter be invefted with civil powers worthy of their ac- ceptance", and is particular in his juflification of it as reafonable, pag. 110. Other thmgs have tranfpired from thofe, who did not know how, or were not able, to keep a fecret. We are as fully perfuaded, as if they had openly faid it, that they have in view nothing (hort of a complete Church Hierarchy after the pattern of that at home, with like officers in all their various degrees of dignity, with a like large revenue for their grand fupport, and with the allowance of no other privilege to diflenters but that of a bare , toleration. * Such an Hierarchy may pofTibly, in time, * The REASON, upon which the petition of the New- York-Prefbyterian-Church for a Charter to fecure the bones of their deceafed relatives aiad friends, was negatived at home, by the interpofition of a right reverend Father in God, is an evident fpecimen of this. And it was, without all doubt, for the same 31EAS0N that the incorporating-a£t, pafled in this pro- vince, relative to the propagation of religion among the Indjan-nativcs, was, in like manner, through Prelatical influence, rendered null and void. And if what wc have heard is true, that a twentieth part, of the Apierican The Appeal to the Public anfwered. 20 time, take place in the Colonies to the fouth of Penlylvania ; bat there is no probability, humanly fpeaking, that this (hould be effeded in the Colo- nies to the northward of it. Had it not been for "'the Society's pious charity, we fhould not have feen, at this day, it may reafonably be thought, more than half a fcoie Epifcopai Churches in thefe feven Provinces •, and, notwithftanding the immenfe fums of money they have expended in propagating the Church of England, it's numbers, within thefe bounds, are comparatively trifflmg ; and they confift, in great parr, of thofe too, who are no otherwife Epifcopalians, than their being fb tends to ferve a prefent turn. The other de- nominations, from their firll capacity of moral difcernment, have been indoflrinated in that way of fervmg God that is peculiar to them. And will they eafily give this up, and embrace the Epifcopai mode of worfhip and difcipline ? " Hath a nation changed their gods which yet are no Gods" ? If people, in pagan Countries, who have been taught by their anceftors to worfhip Idols, which are vanity, inftead of the living Jehovah,, 'v/iil not, without the utmoft difiicuky, be v/roughc upon to change the objedl of their devotion ; why B b 2 Ihould American conquered lands, as they are and may hs granted by the Crown to private perfons, or bodies of men, is and will be appropriated to the ufe and benefit of the Church of England in the Colonies, a founda- tion is laid, and laying for as great a Church-revenue as they have at home. Can it be fuppofed, that thefe planners have nothing in viev.', but what is perfectly ^' barmlefs to other denominations ?" Arc'- we not, even, neceiTicated to think, that the plan they have propofed, is only a bait thrown out to catch the Ids thinking, and too credulous among the peopL^ : :i04 The Appeal to the Public anfwered. fhould it be thought, that the Colonics would renounce thofe religious fenfimenis and modes of exprefling them, that were handed to them from their fathers, which, inftead of being ridiculous and abfurd, are agreable to the didates of uncor- Tupted reafon, and the truth of revelation, and clearly perceived to be lo ? A flrange change muft be effe6led in that temper of mind they have hitherto difcovered, and that has, upon certain oc- cafions in providence, been greatly improved and Hrengthened, if they (hould be periuaded, inftead of enjoying the freedom of chiiltians, to take up- on them that yoke of bondage, which their Pro- genitors threv^ off as too burdenfome and galling to bear ! In vain may this be looked for. There is not the leaft: reafonabie room to hope for fuch a thing; and it is really furprifing, theEpifcopalians are not convinced of it, after fo long a tryal to fo little purpofe. It is our firm faith, trufting in God, that the principles of religious as well as civil liberty will tvtr diftingu'fli thele Colonics, and that gofpel worihip and difcipline, in their- purity and fimplicity, which was the great Errand of our fore-faihers in coming over to this new v/orld, will be upheld and maintained here, from genera- tion to generation, uncil time Ihall be no more, whatever pians may be formed to the conirary, and whatever efforts may be made to carry them into execution. I WOULD now afic pardon for being thus lengthy, and for being too often redioufly lo by meer re- petitions. 1 have only to fay in excufe for my lelf, that I was not willing to let any thing pafs, the Dr. or his friends, might think worthy of notice, and fo w6rthy of it as to bring to view over The Appeal to the Public anlwered. 205 over and over again. If he had comprehended what he has offered to the Public in a few pages, as he might eafily have done, and, as 1 imagjrie, greatly to the advantage of his caufe, he would, have faved me feme trouble, and both our readers the tryal of much patience. **/ V/ Vv? Vv' ^o/ ^A^ Vi^ «r$ CL» qri) dfji tfp qco dnb \a^ Say \o^ Xfl^ E R R J r J. PAGE II. laft line read, vol. I. pag. 637, 638. p. 25. 1. y.r. fomeof thofe. p. 28. l.i.f.highnefs in fome copies, r. holinefs. p. 30. ). 3. f. nor. fo p 32. 1. 16. f. this govern- ment r. the government of the church, p. 32. 1. a.fr. hot. r. angels, p. 36.]. 6. r. angels. P.64..I. 6 fr. bot.r.difobcdifnce. p. 65. 1. 19. dele the. p. 8z. 1. 18. f. can r. cannot, p. 85. 1. 9. r. perfuafion. p. 87. 1. 16. r. for inftead of from p 91.]. 23. r. orders, p. 93. 1.6. fr. hot. r. trade, p. 97. laft 1. f. real r. intire. p. 138. 1. 19. r.RoYAL, and 1. 5. fr. bot. r. 1702. p. 150. 1. 10. fr. bot. r. facraments. '^^^^^^^^^'^^^^^^^^'^^^^^^^^^^^^ To be had of Thomas Leverett, at his Shop in Corn-Hill. A Few of Dr. Chauncy's Difcourfes at the Dudleian Ledure, at Harvard-College in Cambridge, on the Validity of Prefbyterian Ordi- nation : — His Sermon on the Repeal of the Stamp- Ad ; — and. Remarks on the Bifhop of Landaff's Society-Sermon. — As alfo, — Henry on the Bible, 6 Vol. Doddridge's Family Expofitcr, 6 Vol Bur- ketton theNew Teflament, Puffendorff's Law of Nature and Nations, ditto his Inrrodudion, i Vol. Rolt's Didionary of Trade & Commerce, FlaveTs Works, Hili's Briiifh Herbal, Hogarth's Analyfis, Seed's Sermons, 4 Vol. Rcfleau Emilius, Naval Trade and Commerce, 2 Vol. Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, 4 Vol. Spedator, 8 Vol. Howell's Hiftory of the Bible, 3 Vol Drake's Anatomy, 3 Vol Quincy's Lexicon, ditto Dirpenlatoiy, Brook's Pradice of Phyfic, 2 Vol. Huxham on Fevers, Wood's Inftitutes, Burn's JulVicc, 3 Vol. Barne's Notes of Cafes, 2 Vol. Hiftory of Common Law, Martin's andGravelend's Philofophy, S.dmon's and Gordon's Geographical Grammar, Ainfworth's, Young's and Cole's Latin Didionary, Johnfton's, Bailey's and Dyche's Englifh ditto, Paradife Loft, Young's Night Thoughts, Thompfon's Seafons, Cafes of Confcience, 2 Vol, Vifitor, 2 Vol. Elofia, 4 Vol. Tom Jones, 4 Vol. Roderick Random, 2 Vol. Pamela, 4 Vol. Folio, Quarto, and other fiz'd Bibles, School, and a Variety of other Books, &c. &c. 6CQ, Arltngtnn library (Sift of 23A L±M *5"Ix T5'*i«k/:AT^aBf»**». ■iM: '^i='7^.1