YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

A
REVIEW O F
Dr. Mayhem's Remarks
O N T H E
ANSWER to his OBSERVATIONS
ON THE
CHARTER and CONDUCT
<& O F T H E
S O C I E T Y
v t O R T H E
PROPAGATION of the GOSPEL
IN FOREIGN PARTS.
By E A S T APTHORP, M. A.
ft is the duty of all men, how much foever they differ in opi~
mons to agree in mutual good-will and kind behaviour.
Anfw. to Dr. M.'s Obfervations, p. 68.

LONDON:
Printed for John Rivington, at the Bible and
Crown in St. Paul's Church-yard.
M.DCC.LXV.

[ i 3

REVIEW O F
Dr. Mayhew\ Remarks.

" t B \HE fame men, which in heat of con-
" I tention do hardly either fpeak or give
" JL ear to Reafon, being, after fharp and
" bitter conflicts, retired to a calm remembrance
" of all their former proceedings; the caufes
" that brought them into quarrel,, the courfe
" which their Arriving affections have followed,
" and the iffue whereunto they are come ; may
" peradventure, as troubled waters, in fmall time
" of their own accord by certain eafy degrees
" fettle themfelves again; and fo recover that
" clearnefs of well-advifed judgment, whereby
" they (hall ftand at the length indifferent both
" to yield and admit any realbnable fatisfaftion,
" where before they could not endure with pati-
" ence to be gainfaid*."
This Sentiment of a writer of incomparable tem
per, judgment andeloquence, may ferve to introduce
the following reflexions on a controverted fubjedt
* Hooker, Laws of Eccl. Pol. Boojc VI.
B which

t A Review of Dr. Mayhew'j Remarks.
which has been managed by fome of both parties
with too much warmth, not to have produced fome
indifcretions. As paflion and prejudice blind our
reafon ; we are more lijcely to be difcerning, juft
and impartial, when the fervour of debate has fub-
fided. As jt becomes all men frequently to re
view their own conduct; ir. efpecially becorhes
tnofe, whofe public fentiments may have any in
fluence on the interefts of Religion, carefully to
confider what they write or have written ; fo as to
confirm what is fafe and true ir) their opinions, and
be, as ready to retract their own errors againft Truth
or Charity, as to animadvert with candour on
thofe of others.
It is not merely for the fake of having the lafi
yoorh much lefs with an intention of provoking
a reply, and bringing on endlefs matter of dif-
pute, that the Writer ventures tp rgfume the fub-
iect of a late Controverfy, concerning the conduct
of the Society for the Propagation of the Gofpei ;
which, though a local debate begun in 'New-Eng
land, has been thought interesting enough to be
prought before a higher tribunal, the Public in
Great-Britain. To that tribunal it is thought
proper to follow the Author of the '* Remarks
¦' on a Tract entitled, an Anfwer to Dr. May-
?' hew's Observations. J? To his' reflexions on thefe
Remarks, the Writer would farther premife, that
among the Fleafons which have kept him hitherto
jfrom engaging in this altercatiori, befides a Diftruft
of j]is ability to acquit himfelf properly, was an
Apprehenfion of inadvertently offending Perfons
fofc whom be has a real refpect, and Perfuafions
|qr which he has a perfeft charity. ' To thefe ne
would add, the Fear of continuing or exciting con
tentions, and of bringing on himfelf fevere and
contemptuous treatment, 'and unjuft afperfions on
fe fflxlts fha!ia£ler: Up %s been ' repeatedly ' rev

//Review of Dr. Mayhew'; Remarks. $.
reproached for his Silence in this difpute,.
(Rem. p. 83.) and expects to be not very gently
treated for breaking that Silence. Yet he would.
wifh, if poflible,.to make the Doctor his Friend, who
has no reafon, either public or private, to be his,
Enemy. When the contrflverfies of Religion are charged,
as they commonly are, with perfonal cenfures, it
may fometimes be expedient, rather to bear a pri
vate injury, in the hope of compofing differences,
than too pertinacioufly to contend for Victory, even
under the enfigns of Truth. Yet a cool and rea-
fonable felf-defence feemed in the prefent cafe
both juftifiable and neceffary: not only to vindicate
that Reputation in private life, which is dearer to
an honeft man than any thing except his Duty ;
but to afiert the caufe of the Church of England,
to which the Writer owes his beft fervices ; and
the Integrity of a Society, to which he has had the
honour of more than one attachment. The fame
equity which makes us abhor an infringement of
the Rights of others, naturally prompts us to af-
fert our own. But we Ihould limit a contro-
verfy to its juft ends, the fupport and vindica
tion of Truth and Liberty ; not unneceffariiy pro
tract it, only to gratify the vanity and felf- impor
tance of, the controvertifts.
In this attempt to difcover what is true and rea
sonable on either fide in the Subject before us, I
propofe.to follow the Method ftruck out by the
molt able and candid author of the Anfwer to the
Obfervations. The diftinction of the matter of this
controverfy, asrefpecting "the Church of England
" in general ; the Conduct of the Society in fettling
" Minifters of that Church in the Majfachufettsand
" Conneclicut ; and the appointing Bilhops to re-
" fide in his Majefty's American Colonies," is cer
tainly juft : thpugh Dr. Maybevo did not formally
B 2 propofe

4 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'j Remarks.
propofe this Method, and objects to it as not recon-
cileable with that Author's acknowleged " Candor
and Ingenuity." See Anfw. p. 3. Rem. p. 4* 5*
But as moft things in the Doctor's feveral pieces
are fairly reducible to one or other of thefe Heads;
and as much is faid on each of them, though two
of thefe points are foreign to his original fubject,
there was no reafon to prepoffefs his own " un-
" wary readers" with any'fufpicion of " craft or
" artifice," or even of " inadvertence" in fo refpec-
table a Writer, for throwing his fcattered Obferva-
tions into a better method than he found them in.
The Subjects before us are much indebted to that
excellent Author, as well for the lucid Order in
which he has difpofed them, as for his 'clear and
candid Reafonings.
• Our firft Topic will include whatever in the Re
marks, &c. relates to the Church of England, whe
ther in its Worfliip or Government. Without ftep-
ping out of his way to bring in any new matter
of coritroverfy, the Writer, in the inflances ob
jected to, will concede whatever appears juftly ex
ceptionable, as well as endeavour to vindicate what
he thinks defenfible. He ranks himfelf, in the
Words of a moft learned Prelate f, among " thofe
" fober Minifters of the eftablilhed Church, who
" hold themfelves bound to obey its Difcipline,
" as well as to profefs its Dodlrines." Yet, as
we are not obliged to afiert an abfolute Perfection
in any vifible Church : wherever, led by the power
of Truth, he fhall in the inflances alleged, make
any Conceffions or with for any Improvements ; he
hopes he fhall not tranfgrefs the limits of his Duty,
or go beyond the jufl Liberty, which hath been ap
proved in feveral Writers of our Communion.
* The Citations are according to the London editions.
t Bilhop Warburton. Doclr. of Grace, B. III.
The

A Review of Dr. MayhewV Remarks. £
The Remarker, p. 5. a little retracts h'is " too
" harflvand irritating expreffions,'^ concerning the
Hierarchy and Church of England.' But when he
would excufe his own afperity, from the ill tem
per of Epifcopalians ; the Reader might imagine
that fomething preceding his own Obfervations
had juftly excited the acrimony that appears in
that piece, and in the two Defences of it. Nothing
previous to the Obfervations had been written or,
publifhed by Epifcopalians, except one or two fu
gitive pieces in a News-paper, and the fhort pam
phlet of Confederations on the Inftitution and Con
duct of the Society ; in which the Writer dis
claimed all intentions of offence or controverfy,
exprefied his refpect and honour for good men of
all perfuafions, and his real opinion that the'y
might promote in concert the main end in view,
the chrifti'an Faith arid Virtue.
The Doctor declares " his real Sentiments con-
" cerning the cohftitution, worfhip, and difcipline
" of the Church of England to be no ways altered,
csV ." p. 6. This is not to be wondered at ; and
with all biir zeal of profelyting, we do not hope
to make Him a profelyte'. He allows, but little
weight to the argument in its favour, that other
Churches efteem it next to their own. As to the
fact itfelf, I believe it cannot be difproved, nor
the fame concurring Teftimonies produced in fa
vour of a'ny other Communion. The Authority
of the learned Writer on whom he remarks, is fuf-
ficiertt' for the Truth of the affertion : and fome
ftrong Renfons are afligned for it ; Anfw. p. 68.
The Doctor might have found a better authority for
that fentiment in the Confederations, (which afcribes.
a preference to the Church of England, from the
favourable fuffrage of other Churches) than that of
our Englifh luc i an, who applies it to quite ano-,
ther Purpofe. The Author, from whom it was
cited

6 A Review of Drt Mayhew'-f Remarks.
cited by memory, probably had his eye on a
Fragment of Cicero, which defcribes the Philofo-
phy of the Academy in much the fame terms as
he had ufed in fpeaking of the Church of England.
" Every other Sect, next to itfelf, readily gave it
" the preference to the reft : which univerfal con-
" ceffion of the fecond place, is commonly thought
" to infer a right to the firft*."
As far as the Reafonablenefs of our Church-con-
ftitution is deducible from the good opinion which
other perfuafions have of it; the fact afierted,
and not difproved by the Remarker, might be ve
rified by proper authorities. The Writer has not
opportunities of making any full Collections on
this article. But as far as the private opinions of
foreign Proteftants are of weight, (and fome of
them are of almoft equal weight, in the fcale of
Reafon, with the decifions of Churches) we have
the greateft names among them in our favour.
It is well known, that even Calvin and Beza have.
given very honourable teftimony, not only to the
Doctrines, but to the Government, of our Church.
The illuftrious Grotius f , who was cautious of af-
fociating with any particular Communion, had yet
a moft favourable opinion of the Church of Eng
land, in an age when her Government was much
lefs fuitable to the moderation of his temper,
than it is at prefent. Of the Greek Church, one
teftimony may fufEce, that of Cyrillus Lucaris §,
who
* Academic© fapienti, ab omnibus caeterarum feclarum, qui
fibi fapier.tes viderentur, fecundae partes dantur ; cum prima*
fibi quemque vendicare, neceffe fit : ex quo poteft probabiliter
confici, eum refte primumefle judicio fuo, qui omnium caste-
rorum judicio fit fecundus. See Middltton. Life of Cic. §. xii.
t Hug. Grotium ecclefiam Anglicanam maximopere com-
mendafle, & aliis omnibus praetulille, oftendit J. Clericus in fine
libri Grotiani de veritate Relig. Chr. a fe editi. Mojbem Inflic
Hift. Eccl. P.' 999.
§ -Cyrillus Lucaris antiftes C P, virdoftus, qui magnam Eu»- .
rops partem peragraverat, aperte, & apertius quam prudentiai lex

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'j Remarks. j
who may be faid to have died a Martyr to the
Church of England ; as he was cruelly put to death
by his ignorant and bigotted Countrymen, for his
noble plan of regulating the Greek Church, on
the maxims of the Englifh Reformation. With
Regard to foreign Churches, fome, as the Pruf-
fian *, have even been inclined to adopt our Li
turgy. Our Articles are afferted by a moft learned
Divine -f, to have been formed on the model of
the Augfburgh Confeffion -, which, by the way,
may ferve to acquit them of the charge of Calvin-
ifm. Thus, we have the Lutheran and other
.Churches, and many private judgments concur
ring, in giving a fecond place, and even a Pre
ference, to the Church of England: " The Luther -
" ans prefer it to the Calvinift Communion, the
" Calvinift s to the Lutheran, the Greeks to both."
Anfw. p. 68. And a Reafon is affigned for this,
which does honour to our Church. " Our in-
'? clination is, to live in friendship with all the
" Proteftant Churches. We affift and protect thofe
" on the Continent of Europe as well as we are
" able. We fhew our regard to that of Scotland,
." as often as we have an opportunity.- — To
" thofe who differ from us in this part of the
" Kingdom, we neither attempt nor wifh any in-
" jury." ibid. But the Remarker undervalues
any authorities in our favour, as " a true Prp-
lex ferebat, fignificabat propendere fefe animo in Jnglorum
& Batavorum de re divina fententias, &. veteris Graecorum re-
ligionis emendationem meditari. Mo/hem. p. 917.
* See an Account of Dr. Grahe, in Mr. Netfoa's Life of Bilhop
Bull, §. 81.
t Auguftani— quorum confeflionem, utpote omnium reforma-
torum nobiliffimam atque antiquiflimam, ita fecuti funt ecclefias
noftrse proceres ; ut qui iftam ignorat, is articulorum noftrorum
inentem ac fentehtiam vix refte percepturus fit. Bulli Harmon.
;Jfojl. Diff. II. c. xviii. See this Confeffion in the Works of
Grotius, Tom. IV.
Thefe teftimonies might be enlarged from Bilhop Ellys,pn the
Liberty jof Proteftants, f. 127, 152, cifc. I leftanf

S ^Review of Dn Mayhew's Remarks,
teftant judges not by the majority of votes or
numbers, ,i?ut by Scripture and Reafon." p. 6.
But furely he will allow the ufe of Scripture and
Reafon to other Proteftants, as well as himfelf; as
well to thofe wfio favour, as to thofe whooppoleus.
A more candid Adverfary would have found a
better reafon" for the hatred, as well as the eftee'm,
of the Church of Rome towards that of England,tban
either " a remaining fimilitude between them,"
or a fancied " rivallhip for power, worldly fplen-
" dor and preeminence." Rem. p. 7. Thefuppofed
Similitude has beenfo well explained and defended
by our beft Writers, that it may fufhxe'to refer the
Reader to them on this article*. Thofe who will
diligently and impartially compare our Eftablifh-
ment with the Romifh Church, wilj find great" rea
fon to admire and approve the wifdom of our Re-
\"> Tiers, both in retaining what was found, and in
rejecting what was falfe and fuperftitious, in that
eonfufed medley of Truth and Impofture.
A Rivalfhip in power and fplendour can hardly
fobfift, where one claims and hath fo much, and
the other fo little. For how moderate and justi
fiable a power and authority, in decreeing Rites
and Ceremonies, and in. Controverfies of Faith,
our Church afferts to.herfelf, any one may fee by
confulting Bifhop Burnet's Exposition of her Arti^
cles. One Reafon of the Hatred of the Church
of Rome to that of England is hinted in the Anfwer
to the Obfervations; becaufe " our Church is the
" moft dangerous enemy to their caufe, and the
«' ftrongeft bulwark of the Reformation."/). 4. For
while the Englifh Empire retains its Greatnefs, and
the Englifh Church its Purity, Proteftantifm will
be molt effectually fupported.
• Hooker, Book IV. lo„iQn Cafes, Vol. II. p. 264, &e. or
Abridgment, Ch. VIII. Another

^Review of Dr. Mayhew'j Remarks. 9
Another true caufe of this hatred to us, from
the Church of Rome, is that her monftrous delu-
fions have been more exprefly and authoritatively
difcarded by the Englifh government, more ftrongly
and clearly expofed by the EngliJh'Chrgy, than by
any other Church or State. Our Reformation was
a national undertaking, conducted by the wifdom
and .authority of government. When Popery
comes in his way, the Doctor falls into fuch a
paroxyfm, that we cannot help calling to mind a
principal character in a certain curious theological
production, to which he fomewhere refers us. But
it is not calling hard names, and fcolding at the
Church of Rome.-r-" The Scarlet Whore, with
" whom the kings and great men of the earth
" have committed fornication ;" who " at certain
*,1 feafons, fairly mounted ' on her horned beaft,
*' hath rode, with the cup of abominations in
" her hands, ajmoft triumphant through Eng-
" land.,,—r-lt is not this kind of declamation, {Rem.
f\. 76.) that can unveil her fuperftitions, or "fhew
her execrable infernal face in its moft hideous atti
tudes." ibid. The Doctor needs not be told, that
it is only an accurate knowledge, firft of Scripture,
then of the works of the earlieft Chriftian writers,
and lallly of the civil and ecclefiaftical hiftory and
other writings of the dark and barbarous middle
ages, when thefe abhqrred Superftitjons were clan-
- deftinely brought into the Church, that can qua
lify any one properly to cjetect and confute them.
And certainly no Church qn earth can produce
.men better qualified in all thefe refpects than ours.
•Witnefs our Jewels, Stillingfleets, Chillingwcrths,
fifedes, and fillotfons. Where can this fhort and
imperfect jift fcje paralleled, either among the Pu
ritan or other Prpteftant Divines ? The laft efpe-
cially has, in fo plain and clear a manner, and
With fuch invirjciljle force of eloquence and rea-r -
6 f<W»

10 A Review of Dr. Mayhew' 's Remarks,
fon, difcovered and expofed the whole impofture
of Popery, that any Proteftant, of any Papift, who
can read and think, may be either warned and arm
ed againft her corrupt Communion, or convinced
and brought off from it ; as I fuppbfe many have
been by the arguments of that great and good Pre
late. In addition to this fubject, I beg leave to
tranfcribe a fhort paffage from his 77th Sermon,
which happens to lay before me. "We Proteftants
" too have our faults and our follies ; and thofe,
" God knows, too many, and too vifible. We
" poffefs more Truth, but there is but little Peace
«' among us, and yet ; coo is as well and as often
" in Scripture called the God of Peace, as the
" God of Truth. In this great light and liberty v
" of the reformed Religion, we are apt to be wan-
" ton and to quarrel and fall out ; we are full of
" heats and animofities, offchifm and divifions,
" and the way of peace we have not known."
The Remarkets large Obfervations in the clofe
of his pamphlet, p. 72 — 77, reflecting thet pro-,
grefs of Popery in England, would indeed be very
alarming, if they were juft. But by whofe Com
putation the Papifts were 100,000 in London 29
years ago, he has not faid, nor can I learn. I
hope they fall very far fhort of that number,
and believe that they exaggerate very much
in their boafts of the annual increafe of their
converts. Yet undoubtedly, rpany are made
in fome places : and we have caufe to be hear
tily forry for every one that is made ; as I am well
allured, the whole body of the Clergy are, and
every ferious member of our Church muft be.
When the author of the Anfwer to Dr. Mayhew
pleads in behalf of Bifhops in America, that " Pq-
" pirn Bifhops relide here, and go about to pxer-
" cife every part of their function without offence
" and without obfervation ;" he evidently means every

A Review of Dr. MayhewV Remarks. 1 1
every part of their peculiar function as bifhops ;
confirming the youth, ordaining and vifiting the
clergy of their own communion : for his argu
ment led him to fpeak of nothing elfe. And it is
a known fact, that thofe things do give no offence'
either to. Churchmen or Diffenters in this kingdom;
whence he concludes, that the fame things done by
Proteftant Bifhops, would give none in New Eng
land, And furely, fp juft an affertion and fo fair'
"reafoning ought npt to have raifed an outcry : nor
could they have raifed any, if the Doctor, and
fome others, had not either haftily imagined, or
artfully pretended, that making Profelytes to the
Church of Rome, was included among the things
which were faid to give no offence : which is pal
pably falfe. Profelytefs are chiefly made by their
Priefts ; and many cannot be made by fo few Bi
fhops as they have here. But all attempts to make
them give very great and very juft offence ; and I
am authorized to fay, give as much to the Wri
ter of thai Pamphlet as they do to Dr. Mayhew
himfelf : and I doubt not but the Doctor inwardly
thinks fo, though he, clamours on , the contrary
fuppdfition. Were no Papifts, permitted to inhabit
the king's dominions, it cannot be faid they would
have any wrong done them, their principles being
fp inconfiftent with tJhofe of our Civil Government.
Yet while they are permitted, common humanity
requires, that they fliould enjoy fuch Exercife cf
their Religion, as. can be allowed them with fafety
to ourfelyes. But they cannot with fafety be al
lowed to make profelytes ; and it is a grofs ca
lumny to reprefent any part of the Clergy, as be
ing indifferent or lukewarm in this matter. They
anfwer the books publifhed in favour of Popery ;
preach againft it often, where it is needful ; they
difcoprfe perfonally with fuch of their people, as
they know to have been^tempted to it ; for in the
larger parifhes of this city, many fuch things may
C 2 efcape

ti A Review of Dr. MayheV* Remarks-
efcape their knowledge; and they give notice to
magift rates and Minifters of ftate, when any re
markable progrefs is made, or fteps are taken, by
that party. Some, among fo many, may be re-
mifs ;-but in general, this is faithfully done. And
what more can be expected from the Clergy or the
Bifhops, they who, blame them, ought to fpecify
coolly and diftinctlyj inftead of throwing out in
vectives or insinuations at random. What rea
sons Juftices of Peace, or higher Officers have,
for paying fo little regard to the Refnonftrances of
Ecclefiaftical Perfons, I take not upon me to enquire.
But the latter can ufe no coercive power againft
Papifts : and were the former to ufe it, and
(how mueh foever I difapprove of penal pro
ceedings in matters of Religion) I earneftly wifh,
they would to a proper degree ; perhaps they
who now rail at the fupinenefs of the Clergy,
would accufe them of exciting Perfecution. I
believe there never was a time, though the Doc
tor is pleafed to affirm there was, p. j6. when
<c the Clergy, especially thofe of fuperior ranki
" snd who aimed at riches or higher preferments*
" connived at the practices of Papifts and the pro-
" grefs of Popery, excepting, on certain occafi-
" ons of mere form : and left it to a few men,
" moftly poor and unfiipported, to exert their1
" endeavours againft it, tb a certain detrifnent
" in their promotion." In the wOrft of times,
both the inferior and fuperior Clergy, have always,
to their immortal honour, exerted themfelves iri
the caufe of Proteftantifm without fear ; and in
our times there hath been no fhadow 6f any thing
to deter them. For how little zeal foever o-reat
men may have fhewn againft Popery, they have left
us entirely at liberty to (hew as much as we are able.
And I hope, even Dr. Mayhew does not think
that we favour it, when we have no intereft to
do &>. M

.^Review of Dr. Mayhew** Remarks. 13
As to the fupremacy of the King, difcuffed
in the Doctor's way, Rem. p. 7, 10 — 12. it is
explained in our articles in a manner, that quite
jfpoils his indecent parallel between the King and
the Pope. The true fenfe of the xxxviith Article is
demonftrated by a moft able Writer — " not to
" afiert any authority in our princes properly fpi-
" ritual in any cafe ; but only to take care, exclu-
" lively of any other fovereign or foreign power,
" that the Clergy of this realm do their duty by
" profeffing and practifing themfelves, and teachr
ti ing the people, true Religion *."
Let us go on to cpnfider fuch points of differ
ence between the Church of England and our difr
fenting Brethren, as are adduced by the Remarker,
to widen the -breach between us.
The Objections, p. 7, 8, to the " power and
** authority of the Church, refpecting rites, cere-
" monies, and controversies of Faith," are at pre
fent urged with a very ill grace, when that power
is fo eautioufly exercifed. But to avoid going
over this beaten field of Controverfy, we muft
again refer to the authors -f who have written ex-
prefsly on this point.
When he infifts on the great Strefs laid by us
on the many appointments in our Liturgy and Ca
nons* p. 8. he fpeaks like one both unacquainted
with and prejudiced againft us. Our Church has
forms for religious offices : his Church has moft
of the fame offices, only they are performed ex
tempore : and the Doctor's people can no more
" be born or live or die" without iubmitting to
whatever he fhall pleafe to fay over them, than
ours can without fubmitting to the Liturgy. We
lay no more ftrefs on indifferent ceremonies, than
we do on particular words ; both being arbitrary
* See Bifliop Ellys, of Spiritual Liberty, Traft VI. p. 261.
t Hooker, Books J I, III. Bifhop Burnet on Artie. XX. and

*4- A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
and mutable- figns of our meaning. But when
they are appointed, they are to be obferved, juft
as the appointment of any civil form is : on which
yet the legifiature lays no more ftrefs, than it
would on any other that fliould be eftablifhed to
ferve the fame purpofe. The Church would gladly
part with any thing that is indifferent, in order
fo bring over our diffenting Brethren.. But whilft
they will not come over, unlefs we Will alfo part
with fome things, which we cannot think indiffe
rent; we may as well continue the ufe of the. reft,
which we conceive to be decent, and experience
to be edifying. We have Fafts and Feftivals,
and Saints' (not Sinners') days ; btit they are un-
derftood to be only recommended ; arid that only to
thofe, whofe circumftances they may fuit: fo that
perfons may " live in regular communion with
our church" all their days, without obferving one
of them. We have Creeds, and fo has the whole
Church of Chrift had from the Apoftles' days. -But
here, I fuppofe, the principal Objection is againft
the Athanafian Creed, and its damnatory claufes.
But whoever will but take the, pains to fee, how
mildly, and yet how reafonably, Dr. Waterland,
in his Critical Hiftory of that Creed, Chap. X.
has interpreted thefe claufes, I am perfuaded will
entertain a favourable opinion of them. And yet I
acknowledge rhyfelf of the fentiment of Bifhop Hoad-
ley, when he fays, " Though I cannot but won-
" der to find you always fo very ready to pitch
" upon the worft interpretation of every fentence
" in our fervice ; and am fully perfuaded, there
" is nothing in this, but what may be faid with a
" good confcience : yet I confefs I agree with you
" thus far, that I cannot apprehend how the pub-
" lie fervice would fuffer, were there no fuch
" damnatory fentence ever read in it. Nay, I
" am of opinion, thatthe doctrine of the trinity " would

^-Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. ig
" would be better fecured, and this very account
" of it better received, without fuch fentences than
" with them*." The " Diffenters themfelves do
" [or did] efteem this very Creed an excellent ex-
" plication of the doctrine of the trinity agree-
** able to the word of god, and to Truth." Yet
it is plain, that the mere exclufion of the damna
tory expreffions would by no means pleafe the
DoilOr ; who has a more irreconcileable quarrel
with the Church of England, for drawing from
the Scriptures, from the primitive church, and the
maternal Council of Nice, that " fincere milk of
" homooufianity," which he fo loaths and nau-
feates. D.ef, p. 92. Rem. p. 68. Here we cannot
agree with him ; but muft beg leave to retain the
doftrine of both thefe Creeds, as a true and accu
rate expreffion of the doftrine of Scripture, con
cerning the trinity and incarnation.
We have alfo Canons : and all Churches muft
have written or unwritten ones : elfe, no order will
be preferved in them? But the Doctor alleges
againft ours, that " They declare perfons excom-
" municated ipfofaSfc, for many things extremely
'* trivial, till they retract their wicked errors.."/). 8,
But Firft, _ the errors condemned are not fo trivial
as he pretends : they are declaring the conftitution
of the eflablifhed church to be unlawful, and fepa-
r^ting from it. Secondly, The Canons of 1603
were made when almoft, if not abfolytely, all the
King's Subjects, but Papifts, profeffed to be mem
bers of that Church. Thirdly, Excommunkation
ipfo faiJo doth not take place againft any perfon,
till he is legally convicted. Thefe things muft be
owned, to leffen the feverity of fuch Canons; and
yet I will not fay, that they are a fufficient defence
of them. But let it be confidered further, that
this body of Canons- was made 160 years ago;-
*- $i(hop. Headley. Reaf, of Conform, p. 73, 74.
< that

18 ^Review of Dr. May hew V Remarks.
that, on a folemn hearing in Weflminfter-hall, \t
was determined, that they bind only the Clergy
and Ecclefiaftical Officers ; that neither the one
rior the other of thefe give their affent to them, or
promife to obferve them ; that thofe of them to
which the Doctor refers, have not, for a long
time, if ever, been put in execution ; and that'
fuch a continued and general neglefl: and difufe,
with the connivance and countenance of all in au
thority j temporal and fpiritual, is a tacit abroga
tion of them, and almoft equivalent to a repeal *.
Certainly the Doctor would think it very hard, if
the New- England Churches were to be reproached
at prefent with fome Orders which their Predecef-
fors had made ids than 160 years ago, and which
have not been formally repealed fince. Why then
does he reproach our Church at prefent, with thefe
orders of ourpredeceffors? The lenity of our beha
viour for fo many years paft, and every year in*
creafing, myft furely deferve another fort of return.
But fo it is, that many of thofe, who were ftrenuT*
ous advocates for moderation, when they wanted.
it from us, exprefs.a ftrange bitternefs againft us,
now when they enjoy it to the full. However, lef ;
us not be overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
Rom. xii. 21.
As to Confirmation, which the Remarker makes,
fo light of and treats fo ludicrou fly, p. 58, 6i,
&c. we think it has a good foundation in Rea
fon, in Antiquity, and even in Scripture. It is
not eafy to give a better interpretation of that paf- -
fage in the Epiftje to the Hebrews, vi. 2. which
fpeaks of Laying on of Hands, cpnfequent to
Baptifm, as among the principles of the doc
trine of Chrift. See aifo Ails viii. 14.— -17. This
rite is ftill rnore expedient in the prefent age,
both as infant- baptifm js fo generally approvec]
• See Sharp on the Rubric ?nd Canpns, Difc? I. V. VI. 3n4

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. ly
and practifed ; and-a« the infidelity of our times,
which the Doctor with us laments, makes it the
more expedient, that Chriftians of competent
years and judgment fhould by a folemn act and
voluntary profeffion take upon themfelves the ob
ligations of their Faith. If the " Laying on of
hands" be fo ridiculous a ceremony as the Doctor
often repreferits it, where will the ridicule ftop ?
Will it not involve the Prefbyterian ordinations,
and even thofe of the Apoflles, in the fame indif-
criminate Contempt with che Orders and Confirma
tion of the Church of England?
Thus have we confidered fome of thofe many Ap
pointments, on which our Church is fuppofed to lay
fo great a ftrefs ; and which, " as apparently fuper-
ftitious, and not only unfcriptural, but aoti-
fcriptural," this Author-thinks will fully juftify the
Seceffion from her. The weaknefs of thofe excep
tions taken againft her, for admitting fuch appoint
ments as are not exprefsly forbidden by Scripture
(but which he fays, are forbidden " implicitly
and by natural conftruction") might appear, as
from other arguments, fo from the approved con
duct of the Jewifh Church, in appointing many
obfervances by merely human authority, beyond
what were prefcribed in fo full a ritual as that of
Mofes. See Zech. viii. 19. John x. 22. We can
not but wonder at that perverfenefs, which, while
it rejects fuch inftitutions as are injoined by the
majefty of Laws and government, can approve and
admit the unauthorized impofitions of private men.
There feems the lefs reafon at this time to repeat
thofe worn-out objections, as the Doftor and his.
party are at full liberty by human laws to enjoy
their beloved feparation : nor would we wifh that
liberty reftrained ; but rather to remove every rea-
fonable caufe of complaint againft. our excellent
conftitution.
D The

1 8 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
The Writer profeffes himfelf as defirous as any
one in her Communion, of feeing our Church, on
its prefent true and immoveable principles, im
proved to that ideal perfection, to which, he fup-
pofes, none of the reformed Churches have made
lb near approaches. Yet in this freedom of ex^
preffing his private wifhes, he thinks we have abun
dant reafon to acquiefce in the ufe of our ecclefi-
aftical conftitution as it is at prefent. When any
on account of fome fancied or even real blemifhes,
fhort of finful terms of communion, defert the na
tional church, to feek elfewhere for an imaginary
perfection not to be found in any church on earth;
they violate the real and effential duties of Unity,
Peace and Charity, for a very precarious and per
haps unattainable benefit. Undoubtedly, there
are weighty reafons againft admitting any altera
tions in our conftitution, even for the better ;
while the numerous Enemies of the Church of
England, infidels, heretics, papifts, enthufiafts, and
whole fwarms of fectaries bred in the fun-ihine of
Liberty and Toleration, would probably difcon-
cert the beft intentions, and take ill advantages of
the beft amendments that could be projected.
While we think fuch a revifal as would unite with
us the greateft number of good men, is on that
account highly defirable ; we cannot but acquiefce
in a juft reflection of.the fagacious- Hooker : •" He
" that goeth about to perfuade a multitude, that
" they are not fo well governed as they ought to
" be, fhall never want attentive and favourable
" hearers ; becaufe they know the manifold de-
" fects, whereunto every kind of regiment is
«« fubject : but the fecret letts and difficulties,
" which in public proceeedings are"^ innumerable
" and inevitable, they have not ordinarily the
•" judgment to confider. And becaufe fuch as
*' openly reprove fuppofed diforders of ftate, are
" taken

>£ Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 19
" taken for principal friends to the common benefit
" of all, and for men that carry fingular freedom of
" mind * ; under this fair and plaufible colour,
" whatfoever they utter, paffeth for good and cur-
«* rent, &c." Eccl. Pol. Book J. See alfo Book
IV. §. 1.
The Remarks from p. 10 to 14, are an invec
tive againft the civil powers of the Englifh Bifhops ;
that is, in effect, againft the conftitution of the
Englifh Government. ' But fince he owns, as well
as (hews, himfelf, to be !« very far from being a
competent judge" of their ufefulnefs in this re
flect ; I fhall only obferve, that his exprefiions,
almoft whenever he fpeaks of Bifhops, are mon-
ftroufly violent and extravagant. Particularly, in
fpeaking of Archbifhop Laud, they are horrible
beyond all palliation, even with the grimace of his
own foftening : when inftead of " more than Fiend"
he ftiles him a " Fiend incarnate." Def. p. 85.
No body at prefent undertakes to vindicate in the
grofs the actions and characters of the paft age ;
which, to be of any inftruclion to us,- ought to be
confidered with the moftdifpaffionate impartiality.
Yet even thofe who moft condemn the errors of that
Prelate, own him to have been of fincere intentions,
pious, learned, and the greateft Maecenas of his
time. His faults were thofe of the age, as much
as of the man : and certainly, they who brought
his head to the block, in their own fubfequent
practice exceeded his moft rigid notions of Church-
authority f.
* Obtreftatio & Iivor pronis auribus accipiuntur : quippe
adulationi fajdum crimen fervitutis, malignitati falfa fpecies li-
bertatis ineft. Tacit. Hift. lib. I.
t Puritan! dominantes nihilo sequiores fefe prebuerunt Epif-
copis & eorum defenforibus j quam hi olim illis Me cxhibue-
rant. — Tantum malorum Religionis male intelle&ae, & in for
mulas & inftitacis politse, ftudium parere folet. Uojhem. Inft.
P$. Eccl. /. 973.
D 2 There

20 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
There are extremes in every thing ; and they
who run the fartheft into the one, would, in dif
ferent circumftances, through the fame vehemence,
run as far into the oppofite. How does the Doc
tor know,-— and it concerns him greatly to reflect,
— whether if he had received, in another age,
another kind of education, his paffions would not
have made him to the utmoft of his ability, a Laud
or a Sacheverel? rJ ad any writer, in thefe times,
wrote with equal vehemence in delence of the
Church of England, as he has expreffed againft it,
he would have incurred the public averfion.
AT length we come to the affairs of the Society.
If we have been too long detained from the proper
fubject of thefe papers, we muft plead the necef-
fity of waiting on the Doctor in all his excurfions.
After an attempt to contract their proper powers
to ftill narrower limits, and to exclude their Mif-
fionaries from all the New-England Colonies, ex
cept Rhode- lfland^-ht makes a long and laboured
effort to confirm his fancy, that the Society's great
object, in placing Miffions in New- England, is to
profelyte the Diffenters. Rem. p. 14-7—23. On
each of thefe topics, the writer will offer fome Ob
fervations. The Society have from their firft inftitution,
conceived themfelves authorized to fend Miffiona-
ries, whenever they had occafion, (though for'
fome time they had bu,t little occafion) as freely to,
New-England, as, to other Colonies; and no one
oppofed them in it. Now, it is reasonable to in
terpret a Commifflon in the fenfe which hath al
ways been put upon it, Befides, as hath been well,
obfer.ved, fl the rules of Law require, that grants
*' of princes, and particularly grants in favour of
" Religion, be iflterpreted as liberally as may be."
Anjw. p. 24. This, I fuppofe, is a fingular in,-
ftance of an attempt r.o limit a Grant of this na
ture,

^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 21
ture, merely by fuppofed implicit exceptions, not
exprefled in the grant itfelf. So that it feems
highly probable, that the large and comprehenfive.
terms of the Charter, were defigned to convey the
fulleft liberty to the Society, of acting according
to their own difcfetion, in favour of deftitute epis
copal congregations in any or all the Colonies.
That the defcription in the Charter includes
New-England, as well as all the other Colonies,
may reafonably be inferred, from its not being for
mally excepted. It would have been natural to
fpecify fuch an exception, had it been originally
intended. As to the reftriction fo much infifted
on, of " many of the Colonies wanting the ad-
** miniftration of God's Word and Sacraments,"
&'c. let it be confidered, that, at the time of
granting this charter, the American Colonies were
in a ftate much inferior to the prefent ; and were
fuppofed in general by the people of England to
be1 overun with barbarifm, to be very unfettled,
and unprovided with the means of Religion * and
Civil Life. Much the fame notions of North-
America have commonly obtained in England, with
in our own memory. The colonies in general have
arifen to their prefent figure and importance, by a
very rapid growth, chiefly within this Century.
Whatever may be the cafe at prefent ; when the So
ciety was firfteftabliflied, the New- England Proving
* " Not one of the town?, that are utterly broken up, had
*f any minifter in it for a long time. It is horrible to tell, what
" ignorance of Chrift they were thereby funk into. Some
" young men, zo years old, had never fq much as once heard
" the name of Chrift. Whofo is wife, and will obferve thefe
<f things, cannot but wifh, that the folly of erefting planta-
" tions without the worfhip of the Lord Jefus Chrift, maybe
f* no more committed amongft us." Cotton Mather, in his
Hift. of New-England, cited by Biihop Ellys, Trafts, p. 91,
yirho adduces the wor$is of the Society's charter, to prove the.
(ame point, Ces

22 ^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks, v
ces were in a great meafure truly comprehended
under thofe Colonies wherein the " Provifion for
*' Minifters," at leaft among the epifcopal inhabi
tants, " was very mean," and " many of the
*' king's fubjefts," of that perfuafion, " wanted
" the adminiftration of God's word and facra-
,f ments." The care of the Society has, from
ips beginning, been as much wanted for our own
people in thefe governments, as in any others.
As then, at the time of inftituting the Society,
there was neither a formal nor even an implicit
exclufion of the Maffachufets and Connetlicut from
their diftrict of placing miffions ; their own un-
impeached conduct from the beginning is the beft
interpretation of their legal powers. And they
have been ever uniformly attentive to the fupport
of the Church of England in this as in other Colo
nies, without the leaft doubt or fufpicion of its
not belonging to their department ; till, of late
years, private ends and party-principles have led"
fome perfons who have no concern in it, to enter
tain jealoufies of their conduct, and to cenfure
it as not conformable to the words and letter of
their Charter. For, the fuppofed reftriction in
regard to thefe two governments, is a mere novel
interpretation, invented by Mr. Hobart, and a-
dopted by Dr. Mayhew, merely out of apprehen-
fion of the prevalence of the Church of England in
a colony, which fome diffenters fondly imagine
appropriated to their feet by right of occupancy.
The fupport of the Church of England, and of
that Church only, among its own members in Ame
rica, as the beft mode of Chriftianity and allied tq
the Englifh Government, is and ever hath been the
true and rightful object of the Society's attention,
not only in thefe provinces, but in all parts where-
everthey are concerned. It is not their object, or
{hedefign of their inftitution, to he at all guided in.
paring

A Review of Dr. Mayhew** Remarks. 23
placing their millions, either where there are or ard
not congregational or prefbyterian Mjnifters. With
equal reafon, they might be excluded from fend
ing Mifiionaries into Penn/ylvania, New-Tork, or
Rhode-Ifland governments ; where there are al
ready Lutheran Churches, or Quaker-meetings,
or Moravians, or other fects. It is their fole bu-
finefs to place their miffions in any and in all the
colonies, wherever there are a competent num
ber of families of the Church of England, who are
deftitute of the public worihip in the epifcopal
manner. That an epifcopal corporation mould
take care of this matter, carries in it reafons of
fo much equity ; that to controvert them, argues
in Diffenters" either an : intolerant fpirit, or a dif-
truft of their own caufe, which they fear muft be
fubverted by the natural influence of the Church
of England.
The Doctor concedes that confcientious people of
our Church ihould not be compelled to join in
other communions, but be left intirely at liberty
to worfhip God according to the epifcopal mode.
But then he intimates, that few Of the Epifcopa
lians have any confcience at* all, and propofes
that thofe who have, fhould turn difTenters, or be
content without the Chriftian ordinances. To
the firft of thefe infinuations, we anfwer with St.
Paul, Who art thou that judgeft Another's fervant ? to
bis own Mafter he fiandeth or falleth. And, why doft
thou judge thy brother ? or why doft thou fet at nought
¦thy brother ? for we fhall allfiand before the judgment-
feat of Chrift. Rom. xiv. 4, 10. On the fameground
of uncharitable conjecture, might not we doubt
whether the Cobgregationalifts are confcientious in
their feparation ? or whether the zealous Doctor
himfelf, or any of either party, have any confci
ence at all ? But to examine fome of his reafons — he

24 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
he believes — (and what may not be believed under"
the fafcination of prejudice ?) that " thefe profelytes
" have generally been young and thoughtlefs per-
" fons, the volatile, and unliable, of little un-
" derftanding or fobriety :" Rem. p. 27. — in a
word, a fett of giddy, ignorant profligates. Such
indeed there are in all perfuafions. But we can
truly affirm, that many, both of our own people
and of thofe who come over to us, who read but
little elfe, are not unacquainted with the fubjects
Of controverfy between us and the DifTenters, and
are able to give a reafon of their choice or prefer
ence. Many of our Miffionaries are- profelytes
from nonconformity : many of them the fons of
congregational Minifters : feveral of them have
even received prefbyterian ordination. Thefe on
all accounts may be fuppofed to have weighed the
Controverfy well. And their characters both for
probity and knowledge are fuperior to the Doc
tor's cenfure, and have even extorted his commen
dation. Nor can it be alleged, that they have
been influenced by motives of worldly intereft ;
there being no great allurements of this kind in an
American miffion. The people of New-England
need not to be told of feveral remarkable and re-
fpectable inftances in the miniftry of our Church*
of perfons who have facrificed the firft honours
and advantages in the Congregational perfuafion,
to a point of confcience of confiderable detriment to
their fortunes. Thefe inftances are a real honour to
our communion : and indeed, to confider the differ
ence of both in a fummary way — on the one fide^
a National church, though not perfect nor infal
lible, yet formed on Scripture and Antiquity ; on
the other, a Separation, not more perfect or in
fallible, with a Difcipline of no more than 200
years date : there feems but little reafon to hefi-
tate which to choofe.
The

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 2~$
,,.Thf Doctor alleges, that. " the New-England
" ;EpifcopaJians do not fo much want the adrol-
V., niftration of God's word and facraments, as de~
" dine and difapprove of it in the congregational
" way, in which they might enjoy this benefit if
" they chofe to do fo-,",p. 31. like a man that
refufes meat fet before, him,' becaufe it is not
cooked and dilhed up a-la-mode. But I muft.beg
leave to obferve, that what is one man's meat
may, be another man's poifon: : arid we are not to
feed on .what will be hurtful,; becaufe the Doctor
recommends it. -Here indeed, he urges, that " he
", does not believe there is one in a hundred of the
".Epifcopalians, who will feriOufly declare,. -that
" he thinks it fenful to attend on the adfnini-
•" ftrations of the congregational -minifters ;'* and
.fuppofing him in the right, , are , the 99 bound .to
.attend on them ? If they are, perhaps q() in a hun
dred, of the DifTenters will for the fame reafon be
bound to attend on the adrn.iniftration of the Epif
copal Minifters. But I apprehend that many,
who can attend on fome of their offices, cannot on
others ; and that very many who can occafibnally
attend, could not with a good confcience attend
conftantly, and feem to fupport what they really
difapprove ; or would find fo little comfort and
benefit from it, that their condition muft highly
deferve pity and relief. The Doctor's kindnefs
to them goes no farther than to advife, that they
fliould live without public worfhip, till they think
better of his Communion ; and efteems it very
fufficient for perfons " of fo tender a confcience,
" that they have the common-prayer book, and
" other pious books, not to fay the Bible, to read
«' and meditate upon." His fneer on our pious
books I pafs over. But are public prayers and
preaching, and the two Sacraments, of fo frnall im-
pottance ? Hath not our Saviour promifed-his pecu-
E liar

7,6 A R e vi e w of Dr. Mayhew** Remarks.
Mar prefence with his difciples, when met together
for thefe purpofes ? Are not the more private ad
monitions and afiiftances of his regular Minifters
needful? And is there not extreme danger, that
without thefe, Conferences will grow daily lefs
tender, mens' watchfulnefs over themfelves and
education of their Children be gradually neglectefd ;,
and Religion be in a few generations utterly ex-
tinguifhed ?
. The Doctor's other propofal, that the Society,
inftead of helping the poor Epifcopalians, fliould
advife them to be content with the Congregational
•worfhip, till they can fupport Minifters bf'their
own, is made by him with fuch uncommon marks
ofdiftruft, whether it be a reasonable one, that I
can hardly think he makes it m: earned : and as. I
believe no one elfe wiil make it, I fhall only an-
fwer to it, that, we take the feparation of the Dif-
fenters to be fo wrong in itfelf, and to have pro
duced fd dreadful coniequences, that we can by no
means counfel the members of our Church to in-
creafe their numbers, though it fliould be only
for a time ; and much lefs can we try to compel
them to it, by refufing to affift them.
The Doctor had obferved, that the Society's
inftructions directed their Miffionaries, to en
deavour to reclaim their difienting Parilhioners :
whence he concludes, that it confidered the New-
England dilfenters as parifliioners of the Miffionaries.
He was anfwered, that this reafoning was unfair:
that the inftruction"could not relate to Miffionaries
fettled in Prefbyterian or Congregational parifhes,
*' for there were none fuch when it was drawn
" up." In his Remarks, p. 15. he quotes the firft
part of this Anfwer, and denies the truth of it;
but^ paffes over in abfolute filence the Reafon
which proves it. May we not fay, that this is un
fair ? He was told, that " if any Miffionaries h»
" fuch

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks, iij
rt fuch places had called the DifTenters their Pa-
" rifhioners, they had exprefied themfelves im-
" properly." He replies, p. 16. that the Society
alio quote thefe exprefiions in their extracts with
apparent approbation. But indeed the Miffiona
ries mention in thofe Extracts not their parifhion-
ers but their panfhes, meaning only the parifhes in
which they live : and befides, the Extracts are
made and publifhed by the Secretary only; and
no one elfe is chargeable with this inadvertence ;
for it is nothing more. He produced a paffage
from the account of the Society, publifhed in 1706,
to prove that they defigned to root out Prefbyte-
fianifm in New- England. -It was anfwered, that
fo much of it as he had quoted, had no relation
to New-England, but to.other Colonies. He has
now quoted more of it, p. 18. but the cafe ap
pears to be ftill the fame. He alleges farther, p.
20. that " Dr. Bearcroft the Secretary of the So-
" ciety, who is fuppofed to have been thoroughly
" initiated into all its myfteries, does in effect
" avow this defign in his Sermon before the So-
" ciety publifhed by its order." But the Society
has no myfteries ; and if it had, Dr. Bearcrofi,
though Secretary, was not a man likely to be ini
tiated into them. Immediately after the annual
Sermon is preached before the' Society, they of
courfe thank the preacher, and defire him to print
it: certainly not without approving it on the
whole, but without any examination of pjfrticular
exprefiions. Nor has the Doctor produced any one
expreffion from this fermon, which does " in ef-
" feet avow" a defign in the Society to eftablifh
Epifeopacy in NtW-England. Yet thefe are his
principal proofs of that, defign, in oppofition to
ftrorig proofs on* the other fide; his anfwers to
which are fo. very weak, that I leave them to the
Reader's judgment without making any reply.
~ E 2 That

2S A Review of Dr. M&yhew'* Remdrki.
That fome Miffionaries fliould be too zealous, Is
no wonder, for all men are liable, to it. But the
Society have never encouraged them in it. The
Doctor alleges-, to (the contrary, the cafe of Mr.
Price of Hopkintan ; who is faid, in a letter from
Mr. Barrett, dated March 15, 1738, and which
the Doctor inferts -in his Firft Defence, p. 126,
&c. to have ufed unfair arts in applying for that
miffion •, and the .Doctor fays, he was appointed
there foon after',, though,1 as he adds, in his
Second Defence,- p. 22. " it is almoft impof-
" fible not to believe, that the Society know fome*
" thing of this unhappy man's vile conduct, even
"> when they confirmed him as a Miffionary."
Yet he fuppofes.it very poffible, that the Society
might never fee Mr. Barrett'?, letter, and does not
fignify what other information againft him they
were likely to have. What appears on their Mi
nutes is, that in December, 1738, they rejected this
petition: that in Auguft, 1739, a fecOnd applica
tion was made to them and poftponed ; that in
June, 1740, another petition was prefented and- re
jected, though nine clergymen of New-England
certified, that the allegations of the former and of
this were true ; that in October, 1742, a farther ap
plication was made, and poftponed ; and, that
Mr. Price was not appointed till April, 1748, when
a valuable glebe of 200 acres of land, with'ahoufe
and barn upon it, had been procured for this mif>
fion, aad he h id preached a monthly lecture there
10 year»s, gratis. And then he was appointed, only
on condition thar he. mould ufe his belt endeavours,
to propagate Chriftianity among the neighbouring
Indians. That ffeey eye r. had caufe to think ill -of
him, does not appear. -j -^ :
The Doctor iays, p, 38. that. " it would have
t! been a xomd,\n\C- Don Quixote entefprize for- the
:„ra ,. ,-,,, . ",S0-

A Review of Dr\ Mayhew'* Remarks. 29
" Society to fend Miffionaries, before there were
" a number of people ready to receive and em-
" brace them." Yet he- cannot but know, that
this has often been done with good fuccefs, both
in the primitive and later days of Chriftianity. He
is very angry, p. 39. at his Anfvverer, for repre-
fenting it as his opinion, that whoever diffents
from him in any point relative to Chriftian Faith
is an Heretic. Yet this unavoidably follows, from
his making, as he does, Heterodoxy and Herefy
to be the fame thing. For he muft take a per-
fon, who thinks otherwife than he thinks, to be
heterodox. He takes advantage, from his Adverfary's .fay
ing, that the early New-England Miffionaries had
need of Toleration there, to argue, p. 43'. that this is
granting the Church of England not to be the efta-
bliflied Church there. And indeed it would be fo,
were the word Toleration to be taken in its legal and
ufual fenfe! But I canaffure the Doctor, that it was
meant, to Tignify only, gentle treatment, which
the verb, Tolerate, often means, without the leaft
intent of touching upon the queftion, Which is the
eftablifhed Church in New-England, or whether
there be any.
I think it needlefs to enter into any defence of
the Society,, with regard to their care of the Indian
nations : in which department they have done, and.
endeavoured all that was practicable.. And the
Doctor himfelf, p. 44, 45. retracts a great part
of his charge againft them, on this fubject. But
as the late Dr.' Barclay's connexion with the So
ciety has been varioufly reprefented, and as the
author of the Remarks, p. 46. thinks that what has
been offered relating to " his million to the Iro-
" quois, his fmall encouragement from the Society,
*l and being refufed a School-mafter and an inter-
" Pre"

30 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remsrki.
*' preter to affift him, is ftill unfatisfactory ;" a
letter from Dr. Barclay, with which the Writer of
thefe Papers was favoured on the firft occafion of
this controverfy, is here inferred : not only as it
does honour to his memory, for his zeal and
ability in a very difficult fervice; but as it fully
^vindicates the Society as to their care of the Indian
miffions. It alfo contains fome ufeful hints to
thofe, who are or may be engaged in the fame duty
of attempting the converfion of the Indians.

Reverend SIR,
Jl/fR. Auchmuty delivered me a copy of your Vifr
*"-L die at ion of the honourable Society, for which I
return you my hearty thanks. I had, before this,
feen Dr. Mayhew'* Anfwer to it ; in which, as I
find myfelf brought in as an evidence againft that ve
nerable body, I think it my >duty to give you fome ac
count of my Miffeon^ and the occafion of thofe Letters
which the Dotlor quotes as publifhed by Mr. Hop
kins. Before 1 entered the college, 1 devoted myfelf to the
fervice of Religion, if it fhould pleafe God to blefs and
fucceed my ftudies ; I had alfo determined to attempt
the revival of the Mohawk miffion which had been
fufpended for many years, on account of the many dif
ficulties and very little fuccefs attending it. Imme
diately after I had commenced Bachelor of Arts in
1734, I returned home, by 4 he way of New- York,
where I communicated my defign to fome of the Mem
bers of the General Affembly, who promijed to recom
mend me to the houfe ; and to endeavour to obtain
fome ftipend from them to defray my expences, whilft
I fhould make an attempt to learn the language : upon.
this encouragement, I went up to the firft Mohawk; town,

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 31
town, ht "hopes of meeting with fome perfon rejident
near the Indiaps, that might ferve me as an inter
pret er\ but was.difappointed. 1 found however one
Indian Woman who had learnt to read the language
in her infancy, at' the Society's fchool, and had, in a
great meafurtx retained the religious inftruSiions Jhe
had received during the miffion of the Rev. Mr. An
drews : by the affiftance of this woman, I foon became
mafter of the pronounciation ; and being kindly fur-
tiifhed with fundry manufcript tranfiations of proper
Catechifms-, and fhort Difcourfes on the principles of
Chriftianity, by the late Rev, Mr. Freeman, a Dutch
Minifter, who had in his younger years taken confi
derable fains toinfirucl thofe Indians ; and having re
ceived- from the Rev. Dr. Jenney, late Reclor of
Chrift-Church z> Philadelphia, a number of printed
copies of the Morning and Evening Prayer of our Li
turgy, left in his hands by Mr. Andrews : with this
furniture I opened a fchool, taught the young people to
read and write their own language, began to perform
divine fervice every Lord*s Day ; and inftrutled them
daily in the principles of Chriftianity in the catechetical
way j and had the pleafure of feeing my labours at
tended with great fuccefs. When I had been hear a year
engaged in this undertaking, I was honoured with a
Letter from Dr, Humphreys, late Secretary to the
Society, acquainting me that venerable Board had
been pkafed, on the Recommendation of the Rev. Mr.
Commiffdry Vefey and fundry others of the Clergy, to
appoint me their Catechifi among the Mohawk Indi
ans, with an allowance of twenty pounds for one year,
to commence from Michaelmas, 1735. Upon receiv
ing this Letter, I began a correspondence with the
Secretary, and informed him of the good profpeSl I had,
and the difficulties I laboured under for want of an
Interpreter ; that the old Interpreter who ferved Mr.
Andrews wqs ftill living, and might be prevailed on
to refume that office, if proper encouragement was of
fered •,

32 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
fered-, but JJid not fucceed in this application, for
reafons IJhall mention hereafter.
In 1737, the miffion of Albany became vacant,
and the Congregation were pr effing with me to go over
to England, to receive holy orders, and to folicit a
miffion to that city. Biut, as my heart was bent upon
the Indian miffion, I could, not comply, but told
them,, that if I could not obtain a diftinS miffion
for the Mohawks, and they would be content with my
fervices at' fuch times as the Indians were difperfed in
.the hunting feafons, I fhould be willing to ferve them.
This . they readily confented to ; and I embarked for
London in the monih 0/ June, and arrived there the
latter end of July, and continued in [ufpence till De
cember foflowing3 for want of a fufficient number of
members to ccnfliiute a new miffion. After a fufficient
Board was convened', I found that the great expence
and lit tie fuccefs this miffion had formerly .been attended
with, the annual expence amounting to upwards of two
hundred pounds fterling, .and. tie, then, very low ft ate
of the Society's funds, {on account whereof they were
obliged fobn after to folicit a Royal Letter for a gene
ral CclleSlion) di four aged them from engaging fo fully
in the revival of that miffion, as I am perfuaded they
would otherwife have done. I was however' appointed
to Albany, with a difcretionary power of dividing my
fervices bttween thai city and the Indians, as I fhould
think moft beneficial. But when the Society, after
fome time, were convinced of the fuccefs of my mif
fion, and their fund was iricreafed by the general col
lection, I found them at all times even anxioufly foli-
citous to encourage the miffion ; and upon a renewed
application^ they readily confented to the eflablifhing
two Indian Schools, and would then have allowed a
¦ j alary to an interpreter, and ordered me to employ one ;
but the old interpreter was dead, and I could never
fince meet with any other qualified for that office.
As to what concerns my own fupport in that miffion,
my allowance was indetd at firft no ways proportioned to

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 33
to my necefjary expence ; hut after a few years, on
the death of my father, by the inter eft of the Society,
ihe King's penfion to him as Chaplain at Albany wai
continued to me, which, together with fome Gratu
ities from the Society, and Prefent s from particular
members, and an annual allowance of twenty pounds
from the General Affemby of this province, afforded.
me a comfortable fubfijlance : and it is well known in
this Province, that I was not induced to leave that
miffion upon account of any backwardnefs in that ve*
tier able Body properly to fupport it, but from an una
voidable neceffiiy, through the bafe infinuations of an
ill-defegning perfon, who had infufed fuch jealoufies
into the minds of the Indians, as rendered my labours
amongft them, at that time, fruitlefs, , and even my
fafety precarious, of which I gave the Society a parti
cular account.
While I was at college, I contracted an intimacy
with the truly worthy Mr. Sergeant, who was then
a public tutor ; to him 1 communicated my defign re
lative to the Indians. This gentleman had formed
the fame defign with regard to one of the tribes border
ing on New-England, and entered on his miffion a
fhort time before me. As he was a Gentleman of great
candour and affability, free from prejudice againft the
Church of England, he had always treated me
with a franknefs and condefcenfion beyond what I could
have expelled ; but upon being acquainted with my in
tention to undertake an Indian miffion, he entered into
a moft fincere friendfhip with me, and was always
endeavouring to promote the intereft of my miffion as
heartily as he did that of his own.
As he knew that I had no f alary appointed me at
my firft Jetting out, he acquainted me, in a cotiverfa-
tion at his own houfe, that the Society who were at
the expence of his miffion, being compofed of members
of the Church of England as well as Di/fenters, he
did net doubt -but they would gladly affift me, and
F wifhed

34 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
wifhed me to give an account of my fuccefs, and of the
difcouragement I laboured under. This was the occa
fion of thofe letters and extracls of letters, which Dr.
Mayhew has beenpleafed to publifh as evidence againft
the venerable Society. Mr. Sergeant'* defign to ferve
my miffion was fencer e, and that he omitted no meanf
toeffetlit, I have full evidence ; but the good man
was miftaken : the commiffioners of that Society, at
Bofton, doubted whether thtir commiffion extended fo
far as the Mohawks. / have not, or cannot, find the
copies of thofe Letters to Mr. Sergeant; but cannot
conceive how J could fay that the Society had allowed
me thirty pounds for one year, when it was only twenty
for one year ; though when I was in England the
Treafurer was Ordered to pay me another year.
Tou are certainly much miftaken with relation it
the Indians ; they are not Atheifts, though their re
ligious notions are very confufed ; of which, when I
can find time, I fhall give you fome account. I am
now very much engaged, having, at the requeft of
Sir William Johnfon, put into the prefs a new edi
tion of the Morning and Evening Prayers of our Li
turgy, with feveral chapters of the Old and New
Teftament, and many felecl portions of the Holy Scrip
tures, to. which I am to add the feveral offices of the
Church : which is a moft tedious work.
I am perfuaded a good Vindication of the Society
might be found hi Dr. Humphreys' Hiftorical Ac
count, fo far as relates to the Indians. / have not
the book by me, but you may doubtlefs meet with it in
Bofton. I am, with much eftcem,
Reverend SIR,
New- York, Your affectionate brother
June ic. 1763. And obedient humble fervant,
Henry Barclay* The

'^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks: 35
The author of the. Obfe'rvations ftill contends,
that the words of their charter run counter to the
proceedings of the Society. Though I think that
Charter is worded in fuch a manner, as to imply a
general ftate of Incivility, Ignorance and Irreligion
in the Colonies ; yet its terms are as comprehen-
five as poffible, and exprefs no limitation of place,
no exclufion, virtually or explicitly of any colonies
whatfoever, where there are epifcopal inhabitants-,
deftitute of their own public mode of Religion1.
This we may affirm with more reafon, than the
Doctor affirms the contrary, fometimes by merely
begging the queftion. " Who can with the leaft
" appearance of reafon fay, that the Charter makes
" provifion for thofe plantations, in which the
" people enjoyed the means of religion already in
" any proteftant communion ?" Obf. p. 66. We an
fwer, That all the members of the Church of Eng
land throughout North- America, wanted the public
wOrlhip of God, after their own rational mode ;
and the due adminiftration of his word and facra-
ments, by orthodox minifters in the fenfe of the
Charter. But to fliew the weaknefs and fmall importance
of his objections againft the Society's conduct, we
need only to look into the ftate of their miffions,
according to the Abftract of the laft year. Penfions
are paid to q^ miffionaries, exclufive of Barbadoes,
amounting to near 4000 /. fterling per ann. Of this
number 8 only are placed in the Maffachufets.
and 1 5 in Conneclicut ; feveral of whom are in parts
and places, to which the Doctor himfelf, on his own
fyftem, could have no exception: (See Def. p,
102. Rem. p. 15. Obf. §. VI.) fuch as;, for in-
ftance, the Eafiern frontier, and other places in the
Maffachufets, where the Church-congregations are
numerous, but not wealthy. Such are feveral
miffions in Connecticut, where large diftrjcTts with
F 2 many

36 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks:
many epifcopal inhabitants are left to the care of
one Mir.ifter. Let it be impartially confidered,
what the Society hath done in a few years paft for
Nova Scotia, for New- York government, New-*
Jerfey, Pennfylvania, and even for. Rhode- Ifland*
tjoth the Carolines and Georgia— in fome of which
there is a provifion made by the civil government
for the fupport of Religion : — and* on the whole,
the-Doctor's charge, as being confined to the mif-
ffoas in the Maffacbufets and Connecticut, muft ap
pear unworthy of all the pains he has taken to
Jjipport it : as, in tbefe very Governments, it can
Qnly~, relate to a few Churches, which, though
built for fmall Congregations, and placed near
4i0enting Meeting-houfes, are very copfiftent with
tdie great and avowed principle of the-Society, that
of aflifting the members of our own Communion.
If there has been any difproportion. of the Society's
favour in New- England (where, it is gratefully ac
knowledged, a full proportion of their favour has
been extended) the reafons of it have been affigned. by
the candid author of the Anfwer to Dr. Mdybew'f
Obfervations. And any fuch difproportion, if real,
(for our miffions are ttill in number greatly un
equal to the exigencies of thofe two provinces)
will naturally in a few years be balanced by new-'
miffions in remoter and more deftitute places.
From the foregoing general view of what has
been done, it is furely a ft range attempt, to pre
tend to prove, that almoft all their proceedings
have been from the beginning quite befide their
purpofe, and contrary to their inftitution. Yet, I
believe,' none of us will be difpleafed with the
probable effects of this controverfy : in clearing
up feveral points relating to the paft conduct of
the Society; and propofing to a free difcuffion
theii; prefent meafures relating to the Church of
England in America. One effect in particular is inti
mated by the luff-cited moft able defender of the So
ciety,-

^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 37
ciety, p. 59; that of carrying their attention, toother
parts of the Colonies, and in time extending their
miffions as wide asour empire in America. It is crutch ,
to be regretted, that this benevolent work,, conducted
(as I am perfuaded it is at prefent") with the utmoft
integrity and purity of intention, fliould excite envy
or ill-will in any : but, it will undoubtedly excite a
pious gratitude in many more, who,, by their
means, may obtain the " knowledge of God's
" truth," and " everlafting life."
Some detached pafTages of the Doctor's i?<?»
piarks, &c. feern to merit a curfpry- review. In
hi§ Obfervations, p. 119. he reprefents it as being
qne pljea for epifcopal rniffions in the Colonies, that
they are, " a neqeffary means of ch.riftianizing the
," Savages/' His Anfwerer queftions, whether this
plea was ever- made. The Doctor endeavours,
Rem. p. 50. to prove that it has ; but has failed
entirely of proving his point, as every one may fee.
He next tells his Anfwerer, that he has " very
"• obhgingly'anfwered himfelf," by making fuch
CpncefiAons,^as in a great meafure juftify the com
plaints againft the Society. Now the Doctor's
Complaints are, that it has acted contrary to its.
Charter, in maintaining epifcopal churches, where
Other Ppoteftant Churches were before fettled; has
thereby injured other provinces ; has. rnifpent vaft
fums of the money intruded with it ; and has
done all this with a formal defign to root out
Prefbyterianifm in the colonies : to every part of
which, the Anfwerer has replied. Befides this,
the Doctor has, vilified the Church of England',
the Anfwerer has defended her :, the Doctor has
objected againft Bifhops in our American fettle.
ments ; the Anfwerer has confuted his objections :
and in many other material points, has difproved ,
his affertions and invalidated his arguments. Thus
far he has anfwered the Doctor, and how has he
anfwered himfelf? By granting that the Society
* fc. may

38 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. -
may perhaps by miftake, or through importunity;
have fet up rather too many epifcopal churches
among prelbyterian ones, confidering the need of
them in other places. Now, is this all, or the
main, or any confiderable part, of what the Doctor
contended for ? If not, there will be no manner of
occafion to change the title of the Anfwer to him :
and his friends, who think " it might nearly as
" wellbe intitled an Anfwer to Thomas a Kempis
" or Don Quixote," p. $y. will fcarce find many to
applaud their wit; if it be indeed theirs, and not
rather the facetious Doctor's own, afcribed to them
through his exceflive modefty. The Remarker
fometimes thinks his refpect.able antagOnift " if
" not actually witty, makes very alarming ap-
" proaches to it." But there is a wide difference
between the martinifm of the Doctor's perform*
ances, and the urbanity of his Anfwerer.
He argues, p. 54. that the Society, by declin
ing of late to increafe their New-England miffions,
have " ratified the judgment of all, who thpught
" their former proceedings unjuftifiable." But the
majority might think, that they had gone; not too
far, but far enough ; or might be inclined to flop,
chiefly on account of the clamours raifed bv un-
reafonable men ; being folicitous to cut off occafion
from thofe .who defire occafion againft them, and
not to let their good be evil fpoken of, 2 Cor. xi. 12.
Rom. xiv. 16.
The Society having been mentioned in the An
fwer to the Doctor, as laying their proceedings
annually before the world ; which two other Sor
cieties of the fame kind, highly in his favour, ne
ver do: he complains, p. 52. that it is not eafy for
Non-conformifts to get a fight of our Sermons
and Abftracts ; that they are not to be fold ; and
that our Secretary, when a Bookfeller, by "his di
rection, afked him for 20 copies, would not part
with

A Review of Dr, Mayhew'* Remarks. 39
with them, unlefs he knew the perfon they were
for. Now, as more than 2000 of thefe Sermons
and Abftracts are yearly given away, it cannot be
difficult for any denomination of men to obtain
a fight of them. No wonder, if the Secretary de
clined giving a fett of them to he knew not whom,
on the mere requeft of a Bookfeller, perhaps un
known to him alfo. But if the Doctor had fent in
his own name by a proper hand, I dare fay he would
not have been refufed : nor will he be, if he fends
now. > The Doctor fays, Rem. p. 48. " we are well
*' informed, that the Epifcopalians, not to fay the
Ct Society, lately made great Oppofition to our
*' having a charter merely for propagating the
" gofpel among the Indians, at our own expence :
** but I do not believe that the Englifh difTenters
" have fhewn the fame fpirit againft the Efta-
«* blilhed Church or the Society." But indeed
they are very ill informed, and perhaps by fome who
could have informed them better. I can affirm, on
very good authority, " that neither the Society, nor
any Epifcopalians, as fuch, ; oppofed the act of the
Bofton Aflembly for the purpofe here mentioned.
It was rejected merely on political and commer
cial reafons, which arofe from the manner of
drawing it up, and were reprefented by the Board
of Trade to the Privy- Council, who unanimoufly
difapproved it, when there was not one Bilhop
prefent ; as appears from the Council-Books."
The Doctor feems diffatisfied with the name of
Independents, as applied to the religious perfua^
fion of New England. Rem. p. 25. The very in
telligent Englifh author of the Anfwer to his Obfer
vations, fays, that " it is proper and not re-
*' proachful." The Difcuffion is of no confe
rence in the prefent argument \ and I heartily
"wifh thefe names of divifion were extinct. But, to
give

40 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
give fome elucidation to the term : — Mofheim, a
learned and moderate hiftorian, and rather inclined
to favour the caufe of Pu'ritanifm, derives the Con*
gr<?g&tiortalifts from the Brownifis, and gives them
the name of Independents, as of the fame import.
FataBrovm\ftr,umfapientioresinduxerunt, ut difch
pUnam magifiri temperarent &? tolerabiliorem redde-
reni. It a Celebris qua nondum defiit, independentium fett
congregationalium fratrum familia ex illis nata eft .
The Writer of thefe papers had drawn up a par
ticular defence of himfelf, againft thofe many af»
perfions on his private character, which make fo
difproportioned a part of Dr. Mayhem's Writings
againft the Society and the Church of England.
But as thefe things are too perfonal to be intereft-
ing, and as both here and in New- England every
charge of moment is known to be falfe and calum
nious ; and principally, as the Society, to whom
their miffionaries are refponfible for their conduct,
have been pleafed publicly to declare, that " any
" vindication of himfelf was unneceffary :" he fhall
therefore wave that point, and only touch on fuch
-particulars, as may ferve to clear up matters of
more general concern. Private affronts and ca^-
lumnies, he knows, are the ufual arts of contro
verfy ; and, as fuch, he freely forgives them : but
he leaves it to the Doctor to reconcile them either
to the precepts of the Chriftian Religion, or to his
* Inft. H. E. p. 776, 841 . The fame hiftorian endeavours to
clear the Independents of feveral afperfions ; and has many ca
rious remarks on that {e&.,p. 973, 974. Independentes nomen inie
habcnt quod cum Browinftis /entiunt, fingulos catns Cbriftianos inde
pendentes, feu quod idem efi, /ui juris ejfe. Parens generis Joan.
Robinfonus, i3c.
Nun recufarunt primtim, illud independentium •vocabulum Robitt-
foni difcipuli ; neque habet aiiyuid mali ominis ant in<vidiee, motto ex
Jententia eorum intelligatur .  Pojiea wro——JludioJffime illud ab
ft depf-ecati fait, y fe fratres congregationales aetufqut Juos ec-
ckjiae tbngregationales novnnarunt. p. 976.
own

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 45
own explicit cenfure of that conduct. " It is no
" new practice, for thofe who write upon contro-
" verted matters, to fit the perfons againft whom
" they write in the moft disadvantageous point of
" light ; and to take fuch methods in order thereto,
" as every chriftian, gentleman, and fcholar
" ought to have in contempt and abhorrence." —
1 ft Def. p. 79.
In the Remarks, p. 23 — 25. the Doctor is pleafed
to give a very particular account of the Church at
Cambridge ; a place fo near him, and from whence
he might obtain the moft exact information, that
his Readers muft implicitly affent to fuch a circum-
ftantial narrative. But 1 will venture to fay, that
every thing relating to this fubject, (and indeed to
the Church of England in general, in all the Doc
tor's Writings ;) is mifreprefented, with monftrous
aggravations, through the medium of Prejudice.
The Writer, who has, and ever fhall retain, a parti
cular intereft in the welfare of that Church, has
been always careful to reprefent the ftate of the
Congregation to the Society, rather under than
above its number, when that could not be afcer-
tained. His account in the Society's Abftract of
the laft year, is as low as the truth will bear.
" In the Winter feafon, there is a very fmall con-
'* gregation of the neighbouring families ; but in
" the Summer the Church is well frequented  «
*' The Families of the Church of England in this
" miffion are 26, and the Communicants 0,3."
"By an Account, dated in December, 1764., and at-
tefted by the Church -wardens, Robert Temple and
Richard Lecbmere, Efqrs; " There are belong-
«* ing to the Church, 198 fouls, of whom 41 are
" in full communion." Let us compare thefe
Accounts, which may be depended on, with that
which the Doctor gives us in his Remarks. He
fays, he is ", well informed, that there are not
G *' com-

42 -A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
" commonly at that Church in the Winter fealbn
" more than 20 perfons, fometimes not more than
" 10 ; and in Summer, not more than 30 or^a,
" except upon fome extraordinary occafions."
.The Doctor's fpies and informers might have in
formed him, that in that climate all country-con
gregations muft be very fmall in Winter. I do not
remember fo fmall a number as 20 : 1 have been
told upon enquiry, that the fmalleft was 27, in ex
treme bad weather ; but that ufualiy in Winter the
number is from 40 to 50. In Summer, and when
ever the weather was favourable, the Congregation
feldom confifted of fewer than 100 perfons : On
the laft Sunday of every month, there is a Com
munion of between 30 and 40 perfons, (in good
weather) all of truly refpectable characters ; moft
of them, if not all,conftant members of the Church.
But there are other inaccuracies in the Doctor's
account. He objects to the " fending petitions,
" figned by as many names as poffible to impofe
" on the Society." No fuch petition was fent from
Cambridge, there being no other application but by
a Letter fignci by a committee ot fix Gentlemen j
whom I fuppofe the Doctor means by his " Gen-
" tlemen ot figure, and of fo large incomes as to
" admit of maintaining domeftic Chaplains." I
fhall not make fo free with their refpectable names,
•as even to vindicate them from the Doctor's con
jectures ; but I fuppofe, " their reafons for pre-
'" ferring the Church of England" are confiftent
with their fometimes having artended, before the
Church was built, a congregational Minifter, for
whom we have a great and juft efteem. He then
¦i peaks of " a difagreement at IVatertown, about
" fetting up a new meeting-houfe, as happening
*: very opportunely, and being the means of pro-
" curing lome fubfciibers ; where or who the reft
" were, he knows not." Indeed he knows but little of

A Review of Dr. Mayhew's, Remarks. 43
of the matter. Thofe petty and contemptible quar
rels, (which, for the credit of his caufe, he ought
to have fupprefTed). never engaged our attention ;
and in the whole conduct of our bufinefs, that in
cident was never taken notice of by us, nor, that
I know of, ever procured a fingle member or fub-
fcriber to our Church. As a Minifter and a Mif-
fionary, the Writer would willingly lay open his
whole heart and intentions, to the inflection of Dr.
Mayhew himfelf. If he was too fanguine in en
gaging in that fervice, and entertained too great
hopes of its fuccefs — Obf. p. 59, 63. this was owing
to his unacquaintance with that neighbourhood, to
the computation of his friends, and, together with
his inexperience, to a difpofition which led him to
expect too much from a defign zealoufly becaufe-
honeftly engaged in. The acceffions to his Church
— ibid-~- were expected neither from the Congrega
tional inhabitants of Cambridge, nor from the Col
lege ; but from the country Families of the epifco
pal perfuafion, and from newfettlers in that neigh
bourhood. But here, the Anfwer to the Obferva
tions has honoured him with an ample vindication,
p. 15. as well as with a moft candid conftruction
of his fentiments and conduct in other refpects. -
The miffion at Cambridge having been fo parti
cularly excepted againft, in order to excite and in-
creafe the clamour againft the Society, the Writer
has taken this occafion to vindicate his own con
nexion with it. As a native of New-England, and
confeious of a hearty love for that country, he was
eafily induced to fettle there : and before he was
aware of any difiike or oppofition, was determined
to fix at Cambridge, by his family connexions and
the natale folum ; Anfw. p. 51, 5/. by the agreea-
blenefs and healthint-fsof the place; by the tnendly'
and converfible company in it, of both the religi
ous perfuafions ; and by fome favourable opppr-
G 2 tunitiea

44 ^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
tunities of literary improvement. To thefe private
•motives, he may add the view of devoting him
felf in that retirement to the»ftudies and duties of
his profeffion ; and of doing fuch fervice as he
could, tq the Church of England and to his
Country.' But he was foon awakened from thefe
youthful dreams-, by the religious feuds that al
ways fubfift in that colony •, and by fome unkind
attacks, in News- Papers and Sermons, on the du
ty he had undertaken : and has fuftained as rude a
ftorm, as perhaps ever beat on a perfon of his fta-
tion. But he had engaged his inclinations in this
bufinefs, and could not recede ; he forebore to
make any reply to thefe affronts *, and has endea
voured to promote, in his ftation as a Miffionary, a
general harmony and good-will. In return, he
has met with the kindeft reception and Angular in
dulgence, from the moft refpectable perfons of that
Town and College ; whom on this^ occafion he
publicly thanks for theif courtefy to him and his
family. The Doctor ftill goes on to perfecute f his poor
Church. Rem. p. 24. How far " the fupporting
*' a Miffionary there, is conformable to the true
" intent of the Society's charter," refts on the ge
neral argument of this controverfy. Their own
* Dr. Mayhem charges him with " beginning this difpute in
" form," and with having " given an evident occafion to write
" upon it." Rem. f. 33. Obf. p. 6. with what truth, the rea
der may judge, from his own exprefs declaration. In a pam
phlet called, " A Letter of Reproof to Mr. C!ea<veland" he
takes occafion to iofinuate a fulpicion, " that epifcopal influ-
" ence had a {hare in bringing him into a controverfy with his
" own party, at a time when he was engaged in a public con-
" tro eiiy of great importance, bfc. a work which he was re-
" peatedly iohcited to engage in by feveral Divines of the firft
" reputation, some y£ars before that incident took place,
" which final!;- determined him to undertake it."
+ Aiuyn" ^'7U, to inrucowi tapmat tsbj •hcv^a^of/.envi. Socrat.
hift.de Julians Aug. aflurance

^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 45
afTurance is its beft fecurity. " The Society will
*• not defert and abandon the Congregations,
which it hath taken under its protection, unlefs
they fhould become either too rich to need its
" affiftance, or too inconfiderable to deferve it."
Anfw.p. 58. The Congregation at Cambridge comes
under neither of thefe exceptions. 1. It is fofar from
being too rich to "need the affiftance of the Society,
that it is ftill burdened with a confiderable debt,
and its chief expence is fupported by a few fami
lies. I warmly and heartily agree with the Doc
tor, that when this or any other Miffion is well able
to fupport itfelf, it will be no longer an object of
the Society's charity. Whenever any Towns or
Parifhes in America are capable, either of wholly
fupporting, or of contributing largely to the fup
port of, their own churches and minifters ; they
are certainly bound, either wholly or in part to
withdraw that burden from the Society,. and take it
upon themfelves. This would be productive of
many good effects. It would free our Churches
from imputations,, which, if in any cafes juft, are
difhonourable to them : and it would enlarge the
Church of England in America, by enabling the So
ciety to transfer that bounty to others, which fhould
be no longer needed by the richer Congregations.
2. The Church of Cambridge, as it is not too rich to
need, fo neither is it too inconfiderable to deferve
the affiftance of the Society. The characters of
its members are truly refpectable. They have a
juft fenfe of the great benefit of this Church ; as in
other refpects, fo in preventing the diffipation and
diforder. of their families, either in leaving them,
or taking them to Bofton to the public Worfhip.
Its ftate in point of numbers hath been truly re-
prefented. I know not what is the limited num
ber of a Chriftian Church. Where two or three
are gathered together in Christ's name, he hath
promifed

46 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
promifed to be with them. Matt, xviii. 20. The
Jewifh fynagogues after the captivity *, (the mo
dels of our particular Churches) might be confti-
tuted by Ten perfons of competent age and free
condition, and of fufficient leifure to attend the di
vine offices.
Nor can any umbrage be reafonably taken at the
placing a Church in Cambridge. In the Town it
felf no inconvenience is to be apprehended from it;
as, in fecular refpects, we promote a fpirit of in-
duftry and juftice, and are of fervice to its inha-
bitants-by occafioning a greater refort to it. Our
people live in peace and friendfhip with all our
congregational brethren : we efteem and refpect
them, and receive from them reciprocal marks of
good-will. The College has nothing to fear from
the Church of England built near it. The ftudents
are under very juft regulations, in regard to at
tending our worfhip. It is at leaft of fervice to
thofe of the Epifcopal perfuafion, and will pro
bably occafion a greater refort of fuch to that re
fpectable Seminary. I have only to add on this
fubject, that the Society has never been intention*
ally deceived, - by falfe and extravagant accounts
of this miffion ; could all its difficulties have been
forefeen, perhaps it would never have been en
gaged in ; as it is, neither its friends nor its ene
mies can undo what has been done : and whatever
be the fortune of this Church, which is humbly
commended to the Divine Providence, — the Wri
ter, in his own relationto.it, will always carry with
him the confcioufnefs of having meant well to Re
ligion and to his Country.
Yet the Doctor thinks, the Society's, " continu-
" ing to fupport a Miffionary at Cambridge would
" difcover a defign, different from that they would
s' have thought the true and only one; a defign
* Pridsaux. Conned!, ad arm. 444. " to

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 47
" to encourage, ftrengthen, and increafe a party."
Rem. p. 25. The Writer is unconfcious of any
other defign in that miffion, notwithftanding any
faults in the conduct of it, but that of forming a
fmall body,of people of our own communion to the
knowledge and practice of the Chriftian Religion.
The arguments which the Doctor has pro
duced, Rem. p. 15 — 23. to prove, that the So
ciety's chief aim has been to profelyte men to
Epifcopacy, are plainly defective : and we may
prefume, that the reft, which he talks of having
in referve, are not ftronger. If incidentally the
Miffionaries have added ever fo many to our com
munion, we may juftly think it a happy event.
We invite men to it, as to a privilege, when fair
occafions offer ; but would not prefs them with
over-zealous importunity. Our churches are open ;
your people refort to them unafked, unfolicited.
Though prejudiced againft us, and put upon their
guard ; they cannot find that matter for cenfure,
which is fo plentifully fupplied them in books of
Controverfy. Some good reafons might be af-
figned, from the Liturgy, Doctrines, Unity, and
Order of our Church, which might account for
the acceffions fuppofed to be made to it in Ame
rica. But the fubject would induce difagreeable
comparifons ; and might give fome offence to thole
whom we would not willingly offend.
The Doctor takes Avarice to be one reafon for the
increafe of our'Churches. But the fupport of our
Affemblies, even with the affiftance of the Society,
is a much greater expence to our people, than it
would be to affociate with the Congregationalifts,
This I know to be a Truth, in feveral inftances ;
and have good reafon to think it is generally fo.
The burden of expence on our epifcopal Congre
gations is often fo heavy, - that they are many
years in clearing themfelves of debts contracted in

48 A Review of Dr. Mayhew' * Remarks.
in the fertlement of their Churches. And here'
my Countrymen of the epifcopal perfuafionin Ame
rica, will allow one who has lived among them to
give them a Caution againft a common error;
which the advifer himfelf has not been exempt
from : I mean, rather too much fhew and expence
in the ftructure and ornaments of our Churches ;
which only tends to impoverish our Country con
gregations, and to abridge them in the neceffary
refources for the fupport of the public worfhip. It
were indeed much to be wifhed, that our manners
and tafte in private life were reduced to the juft.
limits of a decent fimplicity : and that, by giv
ing lefs into fafhionable imitation and parade
in our buildings, tables, equipages, we might,
in a Country of fo little wealth, keep ourfelves free
from thofe incumbrances, which attend our grow
ing luxury and difproportioned expences. The
Writer is willing to offer this caution to his Coun
trymen in general ; though it carries with it a lit
tle honeft felf-condemnation ; which, he hopes,
Will foften the feverity of the Doctor's cenfure :
Rem. p. go, 60.
The animofities and divifions of the DifTenter9
among themfelves, I believe is often a real reafon
for their joining with us : but I never heard of any
acceffions to their communion, from divifions in
ours. Yet we take no more pains to divide them,
than they do to divide us. And^ therefore this
caufe of our increafe is fo little to their credit, that
they had better, if they could, conceal it.
Nor can the acceffions to our Churches be at all
afcribed to any extraordinary zeal of Epifcopalians
to promote their party. The people of our Com
munion, in America, are generally as much defi
cient in this kind of zeal, as they are fuperior in
the goodnefs of their Caufe. This is not faid in
their commendation, but as a Fact, which has
come

'^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 4$
cbme within the Writer's own obfervation. To this
coolnefs, we muft afcribe their neglect of fuch
Writings as have appeared in their defence on con-
troverfial fubjects : and partly to the fame caufe
was owing the delay and difficulty of republifhing
at Bofton the Anfwer to Dr. Mayhew 's Obferva
tions : which, though highly approved by all that
read it of all parties, could hardly appear therej,
for want of encouragement from Epifcopalians.
This I take to be a truer folution of this matter,
than the Doctor has given us in his Remarks, p. 80.
where he thinks, " that performance was written
" with too much Catholicifm to be generally ac-
" ceprable to Epifcopalians among us." The
members of our Church do not intereft themfllve9
in thefe fubjects with that zeal and warmth which
is exprefied againft them ; whether from a fecurity
in their Caufe, or from a rational and chriftian mo
deration, I fhall not take upon me to determine.
The accufation, that we encourage immorality,
or receive perfons under juft congregational cen-
fures, is a falfehood of the blackeft die. , Many
people refort to our churches, without profeffing
themfelves ftated members or communicants. Of
thefe we can make but little enquiry ; and the lefsj
on account of the falfe and foolifh alarm, of our deep
defign of making profelytes. The principles of
the Church of England, and efpecially of its pre
fent minifters, are fo far from encouraging remiff-
nefs of life, that they have even been thought to
infift too much on the moral part of Religion. In
America, the Miffionaries have remarkably oppofed
themfelves to the prevailing delufions of antino-
mianifm and enthufiafm : and, with an' unanimity
and perfeverance which does them honour, have
followed the unerring guidance of Scripture ; in
firmly efta'olifhing the obligations of virtue on the
doctrine of redemption. Yet neither We, it is to be
H feared,

50 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
feared, nor They, after all their cenfures of us,
have caufe to boaft in point of true piety and vin>
tue: and it would be as inconclufive, to judge of
the purity of any church, as to try the truth of the
Gofpel, by the lives of its profeflbrs. The tendency
of the one as well as of the other to build up Chrif-
tians in a right Faith, and to make them Holy in all
manner of converfation, is the only criterion of its
truth and excellence. But if I am not miftaken,
there is a great deal of fpiritual pride in thefe fa
vourite comparifons, which are exactly parallel to
no very good precedents : God, I thank thee, that
I am not as other men are, &c. Luke xviii. 1 1 . And,
Stand by thy/elf, come not near to me ; for I am
holier than thou. Ifai. lxv. 5.
Our admirable Hooker * obferves of the Anabap-
tifts, that " where they found men, in diet, at-
" tire, furniture of houfe, or any way, obfervers
" of civility and decent order; fuch they reproved,
" as being carnally and earthly-minded. Every
" word, otherwife than feverely and fadly uttered,
" feemed to pierce like a fword thorow them, &c."
The people of our Communion are generally
frank, open, fincere ; they deteft hypocrify and
affectation ; they think for themfelves, and fpeak
what they think ; and in their actions are focial,
generous, and free. There is likewife among them
a politenefs and elegance, which to a cenforious
eye may look worldly and voluptuous. Thefe
things may be aggravated by gloomy or formal
perfons, into a total want of ferioufnefs. God for
bid, that by expreffion or example, I fhould feem
to countenance levity or licentioufnefs in any;
to which, I fear, we are all too much inclined :
and it were well, if our accufers would abate fome-
thing of their ftiffnefs, and our own people of
* Pref. to the Laws of E. P. p. lxxxi. their

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. '51
their freedom of behaviour, and meet their difient-
ing brethren half-way. To exprefs my impartial
judgment, if the one excel in the religious, the
other no lefs excel in the focial virtues, which never
ought to be feparated : and I moft heartily wifh,
that the reproaches of our friends in that commu
nion, may animate our zeal to adorn our own ;
and that we may henceforth quit every emulation,
but that of excelling in virtue, piety and benevo
lence. If then the growth of the Church of England in
America does not proceed from any bad motives ;
what caufe is there for alarm about it I Does not
this outcry argue fome diftruft of a caufe, that
cannot keep its own party from revolt and defer-
tion ? In civil refpects, the advantages in New-
England are almoft all on the fide of the congre
gational perfuafion. They, as being far more nu
merous, are the religious profeffion in alliance
with the provincial government ; though, in a de
pendent government, they cannot properly be
deemed an Eftablifhment : they hold its offices of
honour and profit: they fill its councils and af-
femblies : and their minifters are as well, if not
better, fupported than ours. If then the Church
of England prevails there, it muft be only becaufe
it has truth and reafon on its fide ; and all will
acknowledge, that Truth and Reafon ought to
prevail. When no other means are ufed ; when
over-forwardnefs even in mere perfuafion is difap- ,
proved and difcountenanced ; what more can the
"difTenters defire ? They are certainly forewarned
enough, to be on their guard againft our feduc-
tions. So that, on all accounts, they who come
over to us, as they choofe for themfelves, may be
fuppofed to do it on 'principle. In feveral cafes of
this kind that 1 know of, the clergy have been
quite out of the queftion, as to ufing any influence
H 2 or

52 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
or perfuafion : and the Miffionaries continually fee
DifTenters uniting with the Church, without being
at all concerned or confulted in. the change.. And
why fhould they not unite with us ?
Doubtlefs, many among us of different fenti-
ments and communions, are already united in
whatever is moft important and efTential in Re
ligion. And as we concur with one another in the
purity of our Faith and love of Virtue ; our far
ther Union would add fo much to the felicity of
the Chriftian and Proteftant Church, that no
thing is more defirable than fuch a conftitution,
as would include in its communion the greateft
number of good men. "The importance of being
thus united in one Polity as well as in one Faith,
is no lefs than the interefts of Charity among Chrif-
tians. A mere unity in Faith, even though it
could be attained to, is not alone fufficient to pro
duce Charity ; as experience has long fhewn.
I would not wifh for any other union of difTen
ters with the Church of England, than fuch a vo
luntary and free aflbciation, as fhould be the refult
of an hearty approbation of her doctrines, polity,
and worfhip. But the fupporting and encouraging
that communion in all our American Colonies, ap
pears to be the only means of combining them
into one national church, on the Gofpel-maxims
of chriftian Unity : as well as the moft likely
means of attaching them firmly to each other, and
to their Mother- Country. The inhabitants are
greatly mixed in their defcent, which of courfe
brings along with jt an adherence to different fenti-
ments. The Romifb Superftition hath taken deep
root in Canada, Maryland, and fome other parts :
the modes ot Proteftantiffn are various and con
tradictory : the active fpirit of Enthufiafm afiumes
innumerable frantic appearances. And how can
there- be any hope of religious, or fecurity of po
litical

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 53
litical Union, but by the unforced growth and na1-
tural influence of the Church of England? For
C 1 n
none or the reft have any chance of growing ge
neral ; and if fome of them fhould, the wurft of
confluences muft follow. Although the effect
ing this moft defirable union is not the formal end
or intention of the Society ; yet its miffions have
incidentally laid a confiderable foundation for it.
In a courfe of fixty years an hundred Churches have
been erected, and Miffions maintained by the So
ciety, throughout the American colonies. And at
a time when difienfion, enthufiafm, and irfeligion
are foacliveindifunitingmens minds and affections ;
I cannot but be perfuaded, that the advancement
of the Church of England'^ for the intereft of Truth,
Order, and reafonable Liberty. Theoccafional pro
moting of this good end by friendly intercourfe, is
very different from making it a principal bufinefs
to profelyte difTenters ; and equally fo, from ufing
mean and infidious arts of tampering with them.
We would employ only arguments and benevolence,
to win our adverfaries over to us ; and fhew every
inftance of reafonable condefcenfion, to reunite the
divifions in the Church of Christ. Perfifting in a
feparation is not juftifying it ; nor does it lofe its
guilt, as it grows more remote from its origin.
And they who imagine, that Charity can be preferv
ed undiminifhed, not only without an uniformity
in opinions, but with the wideft difunion in go
vernment and worfhip ; judge contrary to fact and
experience, and indeed to the genius and temper of
their own writings.
I am well aware, in the prefent unbounded li-
centioufnefs of principles and opinions, with what
dtfefteem any thing is likely to be received, in defence
of eftablifhed modes of Faith and forms of Religion.
But this vulgar prejudice does not deter me from
adhering to St. Paul's directions. Now I befeecb you,

£4 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
you, brethren, mark them which caufe divifions and
offences, contrary to the doclrine which ye have learn- .
ed; and avoid them. Rom. xvi. 17. And in his
nextepiftle; Now I befeech you, brethren, by the
name of our Lord Jefus Chrift, that ye all speak
the fame thing, and that there be no divisions
among you; but that ye be perfetlly joined toother
in the same mind and in the same judgment.
1 Cor. i. 10. Words, which, I doubt not, are
the beft comment on thofe of our blefied re
deemer, in his laft moft folemn prayer of in-
terceffion to the Father ; wherein he leaves
this Unity to his Church as his laft and moft pre
cious legacy, and as a duty of higheft obligation.
Holy Father, keep through thine own name thofe
whom thou haft given me, that they may be One, as
we are.-  Neither pray I for thefe alone, but for
them alfo which fhall believe on me through their
word ; that they all may be one, as thou, Father,
art in me, and I in thee ; that they alfo may be One
in us:  that they may be One, even as we are One:
I in them, and Thou in Me ; that they may be made
perfect in one. John xvii.
THE appointing of Bifhops in our American
colonies, comes now to be confidered : Rem. p. 55,
&c. The Doctor affects to doubt, whether the
Scheme propofed by his Anfwerer be not merely
his own ; inftead of being, as is afTerted, the real
and only one that has been in view ; and fays,
that if this affertion be true, he and others have been
mifinforined, p. 59,61. Therefore, let his or their
informers fay on what grounds they have ever
affirmed a different one to have been framed ; or
elfe let them take fhame to themfelves, for in
venting falfehoods, or venting Imaginations for
Facts ; and let the Doctor fet a mark on them,
and be more cautious whom -he believes hereafter. Sue-

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 55
Succeflive propofals for American Bifhops have
been made at different times, through a long
courfe of years, by men of high rank and cha
racter in the Church ; and are ready now for the
perufal of any worthy perfon, who fhall declare
hinifelf unfatisfied in this point : all which agree
with what the Anfwerer has averred. One of
them perhaps may have peculiar weight with
the Doctor ; I mean that made in the year 1750,
by the excellent Bifhop Butler, in the Doctor's
own judgment " a great ornament of the epif-
" copal order, and of the Church of England."
This fcheme, with which the Writer was favoured
by a Gentleman * of diftinction in Bofton, is in
the Bifhop's own hand- writing, of which the fol
lowing is an exact tranfcript.
'I. That no coercive power is defer ed over the
* Laity in any cafe : but only a power to regulate the
' behaviour of the Clergy who are in epifcopal orders ;
1 and -to cor red andpunifh them according to the. law
1 of the Church of England, in cafe of mifbehaviour
* or neglecl of duty, with fuch power as the Commiffa-
* ries abroad have exercifed.'
* II. That nothing is defer ed for fuch Bifhops, that
* may in the leaft interfere with the dignity or authority
* or intereft of the Governor, or any other officer of
* ftate. Probates of wills, Licenfe for marriages, &c.
* to be left in the hands where they are : and no fhare
* in the temporal government is defer ed for Bifhops*
' III. The maintenance of fuch Bifhops not to be at
* the charge of the colonies'
* IV. No Bifhops are intended to be fettled in places
c where the government is in the hands of Difij 'enters, as
1 in New-England, &c. But authority to be given,
* only to Ordain Clergy for fuch Church of England
c congregations as are among them, and to Infpeil into
* the manners and behaviour of the faid clergy, and to
- ' Confirm the members thereof This
• William VaJfaUY.fy

g6 A Review of Dr. Ma.yhe.tfs Remarks'. *"
This Plan is is fo exactly fimilar to that in the
Anfwer to Dr. Mayhew's Obfervations, p. 60. that it
cannot be doubted, they are the fame, and that it
is the only One intended to.be put in execution.
And it is fuch a fimple and beautiful model of
the moft antient and moderate Epifcopacy ; that
it fhould, not only remove all the Doctor's ap-
prehenfions, but the fcruples of every rational and
learned Diffenter againft that Apoftolic form of
government. Suppofing this to be the real fcheme, the Doctor
owns that it fets the matter in a lefs exceptionable
point of view, than he had feen it in before. Yet
he cannot forbear going 50 years back, to ridicule
fome harmlefs, though ill-chofen, phrafes, in which
the fubftance of it is exprefied ; and expofe to
fcorn, with burlefque gravity, what he calls a
matter " fo fublime, myfterious and facred, as the
" impofition of the Bifhops' hands." Yet, he
well knows, or eafily may, that we afcribe no more
efficacy to the laying on of Bilhops' hands, than
his brethren do to the laying on of Prefbyters'
hands. And if we apprehend ourfelves bound to
admit it in one office, which they have rejected, I
mean Confirmation ; we may indeed be miftaken
in it, but furely cannot be objects of derifion for
it. The fame is the cafe of epifcopal Ordination,
and epifcopal Vifitation of the Clergy of our
Church. We think them all appointed, and ufe-
ful to. us : we are fure they are injurious to no other
perfons. And therefore according to thofe prin
ciples, for which the Doctor avows the warmeft
zeal ; we are entitled to have thefe offices perform
ed for us by perfons of that Order, to which we
conceive they are committed : elfe, we do not enjoy
" that full entire liberty in religious matters,"
which the Doctor defires for himfelf, and " which
" all men, whofe principles Or practices are not
t' in-

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 57
" inconfiftent with the fafety of Society, he fays,
" have a rjght to enjoy." He tells us indeed*
that we do enjoy it without American Bifhops,
though under fome Inconvenienties," as he
gently calls them : p. 71. The buffoonery that im-
diately follows, in order to prevent any compaf-
fion for our cafe, I omit. So he thinks We are
poffefTed very fufficiently of the whole exercife of
our Religion, becaufe our young> people may be
confirmed, and clergymen ordained for us, and
properly infpected afterwards ; provided they will all
go from America to Europe for thefe purpofes.
Can the Doctor fay with a good confcience, that
Liberty like this is all which he fhould defire for
himfelf and his brethren ? Let me intreat him to
read over again fome Words of his Anfwerer, to
which he has made no reply ; whether, becaufe they
deferve none, or becaufe they admit of none, let
others judge. " The American difTenters from
" our communion, would think it infupportably
" grievous to have no minifters but fuch as re-
" ceived Ordination in England or Ireland; or to
" be withheld from the ufe of any religious rite,
" which they efteemed as highly as we do Confix*
" mation ; or to have their Churches deftitute of
" a fuperintendency, which they conceived to be
" of Apoftolical inftitution. I fhould in fuch a
" cafe be a, zealous advocate, for them, as not yet
" enjoying the full Toleration to which they had
" a right. And furely they ought to afk their
** confciences very ferioufly, why they oppofe our
" application for fuch indulgence, as they would
" claim for themfelves ; and whether indeed fuch
•« oppofition is not downright perfecutlon ; and
" that, in a matter merely fpiritual, without the
" mixture of any temporal concern." Anfw. p. 6&,
The Doctor, ftill -flying to Ridicule in defect of
Argument, intimates, p. 58. " how much the
I » Epif-

cS A Review of Dr.' Mayhew** Remarks.
" Epifcopalians in America need to be well ruled
" and governed, — bow much the Clergy need to
" be united, and reduced to order." On which I
svould only obferve, that the American Clergy are
known to be unanimous in their wifhes to be un
der the immediate inflection of Bifhops refident
among them : which concurrence implies quite
the contrary to a prefent diforderly ftate of that
Clergy ; who are perhaps, as faithful to their truth,
and as blamelefs in their manners, as any body of
pien in the Chriftian miniftry.
He fays, p. 61, -tlsfV. that great inconveniencies
are likely to follow from the fending Bifhops to
-America. But he fays alfo, " It is readily owned
^ that our appehenfion of what may poffibly or
?' prqbably be the confluences of it, ought not
" to put us on infringing the religious liberty of
" our fellow- fubjects and chriftian brethren."/). 71.
Nay he.adds, " neither have we any power to do
" -fo; if we were unreafonable and wicked enough
?' to defire it ; our Charter granting fuch liberty
's to all Proteftants" Therefore, Bifhops mayj
by that Charter, fettle even in New-England'.
And if the having Bifhops among them he part
of the religious liberty of the Epifcopalians, as
it evidently is ; the DifTenters ought not to oppofe
it on- account of apprehended confequences : much
lefs ought they to oppofe the fettlementof them in
Other provinces, totally independent on New-Eng
land; or their rcforting to the New- England Epif
copalians occafioiially. For any thing of this kind
would be doing evil1 on pretence that good may come*.
But why are bad confequences appehendedf
*¦' Bifhops, he. tells us, are ambitious and unquiet.'*
But fo are Prefbyters, and all fons of men too of
ten. Bifhops partake of juft the fame nature with
the .reft of the fpecies : and the Doctor will own,
that they are now, and long have been, as quiet an
* Rom. iii. 8.

^Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 59
an order of men, as any in this nation. But who
knows whether they will continue fo ? And who can
know with certainty any fuch thing concerning any
perfons whatever ? Who knows whether the New-
Englanders will not hang Quakers * and Witches
again ? But why fhould either be fufpected ? The
clergy of England are in general friends to religious
freedom : the people of England', whigs and to
nes, are unfavourable to clerical power ; and a
far greater Danger, than the Doctor's imaginary
one, is, that of their laying afide all regard to the
chriftian Miniftry, in every fhape, and to Chrifti
anity itfelf. Surely then, there never was fo lit
tle profpect, that a fpirit of religious intolerance
would revive here. Or if it fliould, it might not
extend to New-England; for it did not, in the
reigns of James and Charles the Firft. But even
fuppofing it to reach thither, its effects would be
very little diminifhed by the circumftance of no
Bifhops being already -placed in America. They
might foon be fent, and with much greater au
thority than is afked for them now ; and perhaps
with fome.refentment at the oppofition made to
them before. But the whole apprehenfion is
groundlefs. The Englifh DifTenters, who have fix
and twenty Bifhops eftablifhed among them, fear
no harm from them. . Why then fhould the New-
England DifTenters fear any, if one or two fhould
be eftablifhed, with much lefs power, in one or two
neighbouring provinces ? Thofe Provinces are not
inhabited by bigots : far from it. Governours, Af-
fembfies, DifTenters, nay Churchmen, and even
Clergymen, would be all on their guard againft
epifcopal incroachments. Add to this, that fo
public a declaration as has been made of the md-
del of epifcopacy, propofed to be followed in Ame-
* See the excellent and truly Honourable Mr. Eutchinfon'%
H.ift. of ihs, MafacbufetS'Bay, p. 187, 196, 320.
I 2 rica,

(So ^Reviews/ Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
rica, will itfelf be an effectual barrier againft any
undue extenfion of ectlefiaftical power ; of which
the Doctor affects to be fo apprehenfive.
A mild-fpirited Bifhop would be glad to exer
cife the necefiary duties of his office in peace : and
if, by fome great miftake, a vehement one fhould
be fent, he would foon find the country too hot
for him. How can there be any chance then of
his acquiring influence enough to do mifchjef in a
different province, where perhaps he may not fpend
a fortnight in a year, one year with another ? Cer
tainly, he would rejoice from the bottom of his
heart, to go through the feveral parts of his func
tion there, as privately as may be, " without of-
" fence and without obfervation," (if I may pre-
fume to adopt thofe dreadful words) and to get
fate home again. For were he to attempt a Sdcbe-
verePs progrefs, as the Doctor imagines he might,
p. 62. it would quickly come to an untimely pe
riod. But he has one objection againft Bifhops in our
colonies, which I had almoft overlooked- He
knows not how they are to be maintained. " Nor,
" as he thinks, will they run this rifque, unlefs
?' they have more faith in God, and lefs love to
" the world, than moft of their order have had,
" fince Conftantine the Great became a nurfing Fa-
" ther to the Church, and the pious maternal
" council of Nice fuckled her with the clear and
*' pure, the uncorrupt and fincere milk of homoou-
" fianity, that fhe might grow thereby." p. .68. One
mightbe at a lofs to find out the affociation of ideas
between the doctrine of the Council of Nice, and the
maintenance of Bifhops in America. We can only
fuppofe, that the Doctor has an equal love for
them both. But if no proper maintenance can
be found for them, he needs not be uneafy at the
project ol fending them : and that it is not to be at

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 61
at the expence of the colonies, he has feen in Bilhop
Butler's fcheme, with which the others agree.
He imagines, p. 64. that appointing Bifhops for
America, would probably increafe the epifcopal
party there ; and then great evils might follow.
I cannot difcern in what other way it can increafe
that party, than by fupplying them more ea
fily with a competent number of minifters ; tak
ing care that thofe minifters fliould be diligent
and. exemplary ; and promoting an early fenfe of
piety among their young people. Thefe are no
evils ; and what can one or two Bifhops, on a Con
tinent 600 miles long, do befides ? The Doctor
fays indeed, p. 63. that pretexts might eafily be
found for enlarging their powers, and increafing
their number. But enlarging their powers would
immediately raife a clamour that could not be with-
ftood. If a few Bifhops proved difagreeable, more
would not be added. And though they fhould
prove 'agreeable and ufeful ; more would be fent,
only to fuch provinces as chofe them. In the fhort
ftay which one of them would choofe to make in
New-England, he could not bring over many per
fons to our Church. And therefore how terrible
things foever Epifcopalians, if they fhould become
the majority, may attempt and perform there, they
will be almoft, if not quite, as likely to accom-
plifh, without ever feeing a Bifhop among them,
as with feeing one now and then. But indeed
there is very little likelihood of their ever becom
ing the majority there; and ftill lefs, of their car
rying points in their own favour, as the Doctor, p.
70. fancies they may, while they continue a mino
rity ; for all parties, though divided among them
felves, will be fure to unite againft them. Nay,
had they power, there is no reafon to think they
would be oppreffive ; for they are not opprefiive
in the colonies where they actually have it : or that
they

6z A Review of Dr. Mayhevi's Remarks.
they would attempt-r-for they could not, with any
modefty, or any hope of fuccefs — fuch Jaws againft
the DifTenters, as the DifTenters have not attempted
againft them. And if the zeal of the New- Eng
land 'Clergy .threatens any danger, Bifhops would
temper it, as they have- done in England, inftead
of inflaming it. Therefore upon the whole, I hope
the Doctor will, on confidering farther, endeavour
fo reconcile our Countrymen to their admiffion :
a requeft, in my Opinion, fomewhat more reafona
ble than his, that the Society fliould reconcile the
members'of our Church to being contented without
Epifcopal Minifters.
And now I take a final leave of the Doctor : for
nothing fhall induce me to carry on this or any con
troverfy With him farther. Only, I would, from
a principle of fincere good- will, intreat him to con-
fider, whether he can poffibly, in his cool hours,
think many things, which in his warmth he fays ;
and whether in his mariner of writing, he does not
grievoufly tranfgrefs, and often without the leaft
provocation, the plaineft rules of Chriftian mild-
nefs, humility, and charity, and even of com-
mafb decency and good-manners. He profefTes a
defire to amend all -his Faults. Has he confidered
ferioufly the guilt of reprefenting things and perfons
uncandidly, and of unjuftly reviling and fcofhng
at his brethren ? It is true, he has fometimes
treated his candid and moft refpectable Anfwerer
with civility. But if he has at all amended his lan
guage towards the Bifhops and Clergy of the efta
blifhed Church in general, there is ftill great need
of farther amendment. And though he were never
to fay any thing injurious to them from deliberate
malevolence, but from a habit of petulance, and in
fport: yet let him remember, That every idle word
that men fhall fpeak, they foall give account thereof in
the day of judgment. Matt. xii. %6.
To

A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. 63
To have faid nothing that might offend the
Doctor, in the fhock of fuch oppofite fentiments,
would have been affectation. Yet I have endea
voured to avoid an undue afperity of expreffion ;
and have oppofed him without enmity or malevo
lence, from which my heart is free towards him
and all men. Though I may claim, in expreffing
thefe fentiments, a perfect exemption from fear or
flattery : I am not unwilling to lay afide the fenfe
of any thing perfonal, fo far as to have and exprefs a
real honour for the fuperiour abilities of the Writer
I oppofe ; and to make no more doubt of his fincere
love of Truth, than I do of my own. Yet, I think,
his Zeal in this difpute has not been always con
ducted by Knowledge or tempered with 'Charity.
Nor fliould I venture on fo free a cenfure, were I
not confirmed in the truth and juftnefs of it, by the
opinions of the moft candid and judicious perfons,
who have remarked his conduct in this Controverfy.
It has been indeed an unfair conteft, when a
Writer on one fide has allowed himfelf the utmoft
licence of invective againft the government and
worlhip of the Church of England; that we who
efteem that Church the brighteft ornament of re
formed Chriftianity, fhould have been reftrained
by its very principles of moderation, from repelling
an affault againft it with equal fpirit. Yet I can
not but lament my own embarraffment, that it hath
not been poffible for me otherwife to afiert the caufe
of truth and equity ; than by fometimes blaming
a Separation, for which in general I have a perfect
charity, and for many of whofe particular mem
bers I have the trueft efteem and refpect.
The following extract from the Sermon *preach-
ed before the Society the laft year, is added to com
plete what remained to be faid on the fubject of
Epifcopacy in our colonies ; and to ftrengthen the
whole by fo great an authority.
, - , ' " If
* By the prefent Lord Bilhop of London.

64 A Review of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks.
" If the wifdom of Government, whilft em-
*' ployed in improving every advantage, which
" may make thofe Countries a real ftrength and
" fecurity to our own, or give them a more ex-
*' tenfive influence in forming the manners of the
" nations around them, fhall find the ftate of Re-
" ligion in every view of that importance, ,as to
" deferve the moft ferious attention : it cannot be
" thought an improper occafion to exprefs our
" hopes, that a provifion will be made for a more
" regular exercife of Difcipline, and for the ad-
" miniftration of thofe offices of our Church,
" which by its conftitution, derived from the ear-
" lieft ages of Chriftianity, require a fuperior Or-
" der in the miniftry to difcharge them. Nor can
" we apprehend, that this provifion, confined
" merely to the purpofes of order and decency j
" without affecting any privilege or diftinction,
" which might feem to interfere with the right*
" of civil government, or give any juft occafion
" of offence to thofe of a different perfuafion, with
" whom we wifh to live as friends, and fervants,of the
" fame common mafter ; can reafonably admit of
" objection from any quarter : fince it cannot be
" denied, that, whilft the Romifh Church enjoys
" the full and free exercife of her Religion in all
" 'its rites, and every Sect is at liberty to obferve
" every form, which marks and conftitut.es its dif-
" tinction •, our eftablifhment alone wants the re-
tc gular adminiftration of thofe offices, which are
" efiential to complete its character, as a proteftant
" reformed Church. And if this Society, in
" wifhing well to fuch a defign, difclaims every
" other view but that of promoting fuch order
" and difcipline, as we are in confcience perfuaded,
" will moft effectually anfwer thofe purpofes of
" Religion and Virtue for which it was irtftituted;
" we cannot but hope, that the ferious part of
" thofe who diffent from us, will forgive us this
*.* v/roug

A Review, of Dr. Mayhew'* Remarks. ,65
" wrong; and even its moft avowed enemies will
' in their cooler thoughts return to a better tern-
" per, more becoming that Religion we all pro-
" fefs, and abate of their feverity in cenfuring the
" conduct of thofe, whofe principles are too can-
" did, and breathe too much of the fpirit of the
" Gofpel, to allow them to return railing for
" railing. It is better fuited to that tem-
" per and moderation, with which all our pro-
" ceedings are directed, to fubmit our conduct in
" this and every other inftance to the judgment
JL°f tne imgartial and difpaffionate ; and to ex-
"^pYels'ouX hopes and our prayers to Heaven, in
*' the language and truly Chriftian fentiments of
" a Prelate * of our church :" That the time may.
come, when we fhall all be of one heart and of one
way of difcipline and worfhip ; and that by exchanging
the good offices of common charity and a public fpirit,
we may by God's bleffing enlarge our underftandings
and our affetlions to each other, and fo meet nearer
upon earth, and infeparably in heaven.
* Bifhop Kennet. See Obfervations, p, 54.
FINIS.

ERRATA.
sPage 10. Line 9. for lay. read lie. J. 13. read among us ; andytt,
P. 17. 1. 3. for expedient, read necefjary.
P. z 1 . 1. zo. for crverun, read ever-run.
P. 28. 1. iz. for know, read knew.
P. 31.1. 9. read pronunciation.
P. 33. 1. 7. read Jfjembly.
P. 34. I. id. ^jfead, I have not, or cannot find.
P. 40. Note * read Brcwniflis.
P. 54. J. 25. fox Rem. 55, read p. 57, &c.

Lately Pjiblifhed,
A N
\ N S W JE_ JL
T „0
Dr. Mayhew s Observation §
p N T h e k
CHARTER and CONDUCT
O F T H E
S O C I E T Y
F O R T H E
PROPAGATION of the G O S ? E L "
I N F O REIG N PARTS.
Printed for John Rivington in St. Paul's Cburcb-yari

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 05395 0557