The principles, on which establishments in general, and our own in particular, are founded; the tolerating fpirit of the Church of England, with refpect to Chriftians of other denominations; the jurifdiction affigned to it by the laws of our country; the provifion made for its clergy; their learning and freedom of inquiry; our public forms in which they officiate, their duties, and their manners, are the particulars which naturally offer themfelves to his confideration.

Mr. Sturges does not enter into a long difcuffion of the different parts of his fubject, and there are fome tender points, which he only touches in a very soft and gentle manner; but it would be the hi heft injuftice to him, indeed, not to acknow ledge, that he writes with great candour and liberality of sentiment, with a fpirit of moderation that well becomes his profeffion; in a word, in fuch a manner as will make those, who may differ from him in fome points, entertain a very favourable opinion of his temper and difpofition.

He introduces his fecond Letter, wherein he treats of Eftablishments in general, and that of the Church of England in particular, by obferving, that, with fome perfons, the word Eftablifhment is ittelf criminal; that they reprobate all human authority, all human opinions, which refpect religion, as unlawful; as infringing their own liberty, and derogating from the fupremacy of Chrift. He proceeds to ftate the principles on which, according to his conceptions, all religious focieties muft be founded, and endeavours to fhew, that all, which are defigned for any permanency, muft in effect admit, whatever they may profess to do, human authority for their regulation; that they must concur in human opinions as a bond of union; and that establishments, as fuch, are not, on that account, unlawful, inconfiftent with our liberty as men, or with our allegiance to Chrift as his followers.

Such authority, he fays, may be ill employed, fuch opinions may be ill founded, and improperly imposed; violence may be exerted by the one, in order to inforce the other; by their abuse they may both become pernicious; but it no more follows from thence, that the principle on which they are ufed is unlawful, than that, becaufe there are in the world many bad civil laws, therefore all legislation is unjuft.

If religion were to fubfift only in the hearts of individuals, continues he, without the concurrence of others, or any external profellion of it; if God had not meant, that in this instance, as well as in all others, we fhould be Social Creatures, the Truths and Precepts, which we collect by our reafon, and which are delivered to us by revelation, would then in their naked flate be fufficient to make us in this manner religious we might certainly think of God as we pleafed, and offer to him in what manner we pleafed our folitary worship. But if we are not fatisfied with that, if we are prompted

prompted by our nature to unite with others in the adoration of the Supreme Being, and feel our religion imperfect without doing fo, we muft in fome refpects agree with thofe others; there must be fome mutual compliances; and certain regulations must be admitted, both with refpect to the Outward Form of Worship, and the Opinions conveyed by it.

Without fome regulations of the Outward Form in which the Worshippers are agreed, it is impoffible that Public Worship can fubfift even in its fimpleft fhape; and as the reafon of this worship, the manner of our addreffing God, and the duties which we fuppofe him to require from us, arife from the Opinions we form concerning him, concerning his attributes and government, it is plain, that without a certain agreement in thefe opinions it is impoffible for dif ferent perfons to join in the worthip of God, and in giving or receiving Religious Inftruction, which ufually makes part of it. A Jew or a Chriftian could not join with an old Heathen in worshipping his numerous and imaginary deities. A Proteftant cannot concur with a Papist in offering his prayers to the Virgin Mary, to Angels, and to Saints. The fame prayers alfo, and the fame inftruction, cannot well fuit thofe Proteflants, who differ about the Object of their worship, or about the Neceffity of good works to falvation.

Every United Set of Worshippers must therefore agree in certain Forms and Opinions; and they must make fuch Agreement the condition, on which others may be admitted to their Society. They must prescribe, like all other focieties, thefe conditions for themfelves; and thofe, who do not chufe to comply with them, muit either not enter into fuch a fociety, or retire from it.

"But this, it is faid, is an infringement of our Liberty, an oppreffion of Confcience; it is ufurping the Supremacy of Chrift; and giving Human Opinions that authority, which is only due to Divine Revelation."

That Abfolute Liberty is inconfiftent with every fpecies of fociety, whether civil or religious, is moll certain; it can only belong to detached, infulated individuals. The moment we begin to act in concert with any of our fellow-creatures, this liberty is narrowed; we must fubmit to fome rules, and be content to lie under certain reftraints with respect to others, which it is neceffary for our own good that they should lie under with respect to ourselves. The Liberty of the Freeft States never was and never can be more than this; it can only be a Qualified Liberty, as great as is confiflent, not with the good of any one citizen, but of all taken together. And when in any fort of fociety this is poffeffed in fuch a degree, every wife man knows, that he poffeffes all which can from the nature of things be had. If there be any, who chuse to prefer to it the Abfoluté Liberty of a folitary State of nature, with them I will not reafon; but leave them to find in that state an equivalent for all the bleffings of Society.

"But Confcience is oppreffed by fuch conditions." What, if it be in the power of him, who diflikes them, not to oblige himself to the observance of them? if he be at liberty not to make part of that fociety, which requires it? Can any injury be done; can the confcience of any be wounded, where the contract is voluntary; where this alternative is offered, either enter into fuch a fociety and

accept the conditions of it; or abstain from the one, and be exempt from the other?

"The interpofition also of Human Authority in matters of Religion is ufurping the Supremacy of Chrift." But without certain Regulations no Societies can exift; as the Societies are Human, the regulations made for them must be by Human Authority. We find in the Scriptures the doctrines and precepts of our religion; they are there offered to the reader, who may make what use of them he pleafes; who will understand them in that fenfe, which shall approve itfelf to his mind. But if many perfons chuse to join in an external Profeffion of this religion, this profeffion must be administered in a certain form, and by certain perfons; the naked Doctrines and Precepts will not adminifter themselves any more, than the abstract Idea of Juftice will be fufficient to answer the purposes of a State, without applying it, making it effectual, and giving as it were a body to it, by laws.

Whatever Regulations are made for Chriftian Churches, are fuppofed and profeffed by thofe who make them, to be agreeable to the commands of Chrift, to be the means of carrying thofe commands into execution. Is this ufurping Chrift's authority? We all, I prefume, acknowledge God to be the Supreme Governor of the world. We are all I fuppofe ready to allow, that it is from him we derive our notions of Juftice; that it is his will we should exercife this virtue towards our fellow-creatures. But did any reafonable man ever conclude from hence, that making Laws for the purpoles of Practical Justice amongst men was impious with respect to God, was intrenching on his fovereignty? The truth is, that without the interpofition of Human Authority, in its different degrees, Public Religion and Public Juftice could not fubfift.

• There remains another charge on Establishments," that they impofe on men Human Opinions, and give them an Authority, which is only due to Divine Revelation." It has been faid before, and is indifputable, that a certain Agreement of Opinions with refpect to God is neceffary for thofe, who would join in religious worthip. Now, who is to be judge for any given Society, what thofe opinions fhall be? The Society must undoubtedly judge for itfelf. The warmest advocates for Religious Liberty plead for the right of Private Judgement; that men fhould be permitted to judge for themfelves. Nothing is more inconteftible. And fhall not a Society have the fame right of judging for itself? Is this commendable in an individual, and unlawful in a Society? They may both be miftaken in forming their opinions; this is the confequence of human infirmity; but they are both the only and the proper judges for themfelves.

And this Judgment on Religious Subjects must be exercised; for men will differ about them, and the Scriptures, which we all allow to be the Revelation of God, will no more interpret themfelves, than the doctrines contained, teach; or the duties prescribed in them, execute themselves. Each Society therefore will adopt thofe Opinions, which feem to them true; and they will be, like all other conclufions of our minds on the fubjects propofed to them, Human Opinions; they muft and can be no other.'

Mr.

Mr. Sturges goes on to obferve, that without toleration no eftablishment can be lawful or defenfible. But as the tolerating fpirit of our Church is a matter of great importance in the prefent inquiry, and as toleration has been enjoyed in this country fo completely in the prefent age, he makes it the fubject of a feparate letter, and goes on, towards the clofe of his fecond, to give us his fentiments concerning the forms, ceremonies, and opinions of our Church.

It is undoubted, he thinks, that the members, and especially the minifters of a Church, muft, to a certain degree, concur in their opinions; but a public collection of these opinions, for the purpose of uniformity fhould be as fhort, he fays, as plain, and as comprehenfive, as the end propofed will admit; that the members of a Church may not be loaded with unneceffary conditions, or others be unneceffarily excluded from it. What he advances on this important fubject appears to us fo fenfible, candid, and judicious, that we cannot deny ourselves the pleasure of inferting, or our Readers that of perufing it.

In a large collection of Speculative Opinions, fays he, obfcure and difputable by their nature, it is impoffible, that great numbers of perfons can perfectly agree; agree I mean after full inquiry and examination; fome will acquiefce without making fuch inquiry, others will diffemble, and all perhaps will think themfelves entitled to use a latitude, that is not fo much authorised by the terms in which their Affent is expreffed, as by the general principles of our nature and the conftitution of our mind. In the mean time the end proposed will not be answered; and it is probably unneceffary that it fhould: unanimity in that degree will never in fact be produced.

As Chriftianity alfo fhould be made as much as poffible in the public profeffion of it, what it is in itfelf, a Religion of benevolence and concord, Chriftians fhould be invited by every conciliating, every accommodating measure to join in one profeffion; all invidious distinctions, all unneceffary impediments fhould be removed; fmaller differences fhould be dropped by all parties, provided that in greater things they can be made to agree. Now to multiply the Public Opinions, by which one Church is diftinguished from others, on thofe fubjects efpecially which are difficult and difputable, is to multiply the conditions required from thofe who would accede to it, and to make their union with it lefs practicable.

• I confess, my Lord, that our Articles appear liable to these objections; the particulars of them are too numerous; the fubjects of fome of them of a moft obfcure and difputable kind, where it may feem unnecessary and perhaps improper to go fo far in defining; on both thefe accounts the Affent required from our Clergy may appear too strict, and other Chriftians may be difcouraged from joining in communion with us.

That fuch Objections should now lie to our Articles, is what might reasonably have been expected, notwithstanding all the abiliLies of the perfons who compiled them, notwithstanding all their me

Y 4

rits

rits in the common cause of Proteftant Chriflianity. Men were at that time in fome measure new to the fubject of Church Establishments; they had not formed juft notions of Religious Liberty; and Toleration was neither understood or practifed, Thefe topics have been fince difcuffed with freedom and ability; religious prejudices have worn off, and the prefent modes of thinking are become more Jiberal and tolerant. They did as much as could be expected from them; and if their Syftem be compared with thofe of other Reformers in the fame age, the comparison would probably turn out much to their advantage; but this is no reason, why their work fhould not be corrected and improved at a fubfequent period, when we are poffeffed of great advantages, and furnished with confiderable means of improvement.

Such a Revifion, my Lord, both of our Articles and Forms, undertaken at a proper time, when the public fituation of our country will admit of attention to thefe internal concerns of it, under the authority of the State, by the Governors of our Church, the Succeffors of these venerable Reformers, and conducted as it would then be with fobriety and good fenfe, would much contribute to her interests and honour; the ease of her own Minifters would be confulted by it, many objections removed, and the good opinion of reasonable and moderate men of all parties conciliated.

• Might I prefume, my Lord, to ftate, what appears to me the proper ground for forming a Confeffion of Faith, for drawing the line of Separation between one Chriftian Society and another? Every Church will, as she has a right, judge for herself with respect to her own Opinions. But whatever thofe Opinions are, the leading and most important only, what the judges effential to True Chriftianity, fhould be felected and brought forth for Public Ufe; where to diftinguish and fubdivide is unfit and pernicious. Speculative men in private may do this as they please; in public it only marks out and multiplies differences. The Bafis of every Establishment fhould be made as broad as poffible, that all, who agree in great points, may be comprehended in it. Thefe ftriking features, thefe leading principles of our Religion are all that should be expreffed in Forms of Public Worship; they comprife all the neceffary Subjects of Public Instruction.

Now as the reafon of requiring from Minifters an approbation of the Opinions of their Church, is to obtain affurance from them, of their being qualified to officiate in the prefcribed Forms of Public Worship, and of their conforming to thofe Opinions in their Public Inftruction; whatever makes no part either of the one or the other, fhould alfo make no part of a Confeffion of Faith; it has nothing to do with the object of it. The Forms indeed of Public Worship will neceffarily contain in them, either expreffed or implied, all the Doctrines, which are meant to be the subjects of Public Inftruction. The Confeffion of Faith therefore and the Liturgy of a Church fhould be Counter-parts to each other; their relation is mutual; if the former contain less than the latter, it is deficient; if more, it is redundant; and it is from this redundancy, that reasonable objections are most likely to arife.