chapter xxiii

. 17.) _The prophets of_ Jerusalem _strengthen the hands of the evil-doers, that none doth return from his wickedness_, (verse 14.) _They have seduced my people, and one built up a wall, and lo others daubed it with untempered mortar_, (Ezekiel xiii. 10.) _With lies they have made the hearts of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he shall not return from his wicked way, by promising him life_, (verse 22.) _Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard, they have trodden my portion under foot; they have made my pleasant portion a desolate wilderness_, (Jeremiah xii. 10.) _There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst of her, like a roaring lion, ravening the prey. They have devoured souls_, (Ezekiel xxii. 25.) _Thus saith the Lord, Feed the flock of the slaughter whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty, and they that sell them say, Blessed be the Lord, for I am rich; and their own shepherds pity them not_, (Zechariah xi. 4, 5.)

II. 1. Such is the general account which the scriptures give of the _Jews_, the antient church of God. And since all these things ♦were _written for our instruction_, who are now the visible church of the God of _Israel_, I shall in the next place appeal to all who profess this, to every one who calls himself a _Christian_, how far in each instance the parallel holds? And how much _we_ are better then _they_?

♦ “was” replaced with “were” per Errata

And first, were they _discontented_? Did they _repine_ at the providence of God? Did they say, _Is the Lord among us or not_? When they were in imminent _danger_, or pressing _want_, and saw no way to escape? And which of us can say, _I am clear from_ this sin: I have washed my hands and my heart in innocency? Have not we who _judge others, done the same things_? _Murmured_ and _repined_ times without number? Yea, and that when we were not in pressing _want_ nor distressed with imminent _danger_? Are we not in general, (our own writers being the judges) have we not ever been from the earliest ages, a _repining, murmuring, discontented people_, never long satisfied either with God or man? Surely in this we have great need to humble ourselves before God; for we are in no wise better than they.

But _Jeshuron forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the rock of his salvation_. And did not _England_ too? Ask ye of the generations of old, enquire from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof, whether there was ever a people called by his name, which had less of _God in all their thoughts_? Who in the whole tenor of their behaviour shewed so _light_ an _esteem for the rock of their salvation_?

Could there ever be stronger cause for God to cry out, _Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth_! For hath he not _nourished and brought_ us _up_ as his _children? And_ yet, how _have_ we _rebelled against_ him! If _Israel_ of old _did not know God_; if his antient people _did not consider_; was this peculiar to them? Are not we also under the very same condemnation? Do we, as a people, _know_ God? Do we _consider_ him as God? Do we tremble at the presence of his power? Do we revere his excellent Majesty? Do we remember at all times, God is here! He is now reading my heart: he spieth out all my ways: there is not a word in my tongue but he knoweth it altogether: is this the character of us _English Christians_? The mark whereby we are known from the _Heathen_? Do we thus _know_ God? Thus _consider_ his power, his love, his all-seeing eye? Rather, are we not likewise a _sinful nation_, who _have forgotten him days without number_! A people _laden with iniquity_, continually _forsaking the Lord, and provoking the Holy One of Israel_.

2. There is indeed a wide difference, in this respect, between the _Jews_ and us; they _happened_ (if I may so speak) to forget God, because other things came in their way: but we _design_ to forget him; we do it of set purpose, because we do not like to remember him. From the accounts given by _Jeremiah_, we have reason to believe, that when that people were most deeply corrupted, yet the greatest men in the nation, the ministers of state; the nobles and princes of _Judah_, talked of God sometimes, perhaps, as frequently as upon any other subject. But is it so among us? Rather, is it not a point of good-breeding to put God far away, out of our sight? Is he talked of at all among the great? The nobles or ministers of state in _England_? Among any persons of rank or figure in the world? Do they allow God any place in their conversation? From day to day, from year to year, do _you_ discourse one hour of the wonders he doth for the children of men? If one at a gentleman or a nobleman’s table was to begin a discourse, of the wisdom, greatness, or power of God, would it not occasion (at least) as much astonishment, as if he had begun to talk blasphemy? And if the _unbred_ man persisted therein, would it not put all the company in confusion? And what do you sincerely believe the more favourable part would say of him when he was gone? But that――“He is a little touched in his head!” or, “Poor man! he has not seen the world.”

You know, this is the naked truth. But how terrible is the thought to every serious mind! Into what a state is this _Christian_ nation fallen! Nay the men of eminence, of fortune, of education! Would not a thinking foreigner, who should be present at such an interview, be apt to conclude, that the men of quality in _England_ were atheists? That they did not believe there was any God at all; or, at best but an _Epicurean_ God, who sat at ease upon the circle of the heavens, and did not concern himself about us worms of the earth? Nay, but he understands every thought now rising in your heart. And how long can you put him out of your sight? Only till this veil of flesh is rent in sunder. For your _pomp_ will not then _follow you_. Will not your body be mingled with common dust? And your soul stand naked before God? O that you would now _acquaint yourself with_ God, that you may then be cloathed with glory and immortality!

3. Did God complain of the _Jews, Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them_? And how justly may he make the same complaint of us? For how exceeding small a proportion do we find of those in any place who call themselves Christians, that make a conscience of attending them? Does one third of the inhabitants in any one parish throughout this great city, constantly attend _public prayer_ and the _ministry of his word_, as of conscience towards God? Does one tenth of those who acknowledge it is an institution of Christ, duly attend the _Lord’s supper_? Does a fiftieth part of the _nominal_ members of the church of _England_ observe _the fasts_ of the church, or so much as the forty days in _Lent_, and all _Fridays_ in the year? Who of these then can cast the first stone at the _Jews_, for neglecting the ordinances of God?

Nay, how many thousands are found among us, who have never partook of the supper of the Lord? How many thousands are there, that live and die in this unrepented disobedience? What multitudes, even in this _Christian_ city, do not attend any _public_ worship at all? No, nor spend a single hour from one year to another in _privately_ pouring out their hearts before God? Whether God _meeteth him that remembereth_ him _in his ways_ or not, is no concern of theirs: so the man eats and drinks, and _dies as a beast dieth_,

“Drops into the dark and disappears.”

It was not therefore of the children of _Israel_ alone, that the messenger of God might say, _There is none_ (comparatively) _that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth himself up to take hold of thee_.

4. Ye have heard, that it was said to them of old time, _Because of_ swearing _the land mourneth_. But if this might be said of the land of _Canaan_, how much more of _this_ land? In what city or town, in what market or exchange, in what street or place of public resort, is not the holy _name whereby we are called_ taken in vain, day by day? From the noble to the peasant, who fails to call upon God, in this if in no other way? Whether can you turn, where can you go, without hearing some praying to God for damnation, either on his neighbour or himself? Cursing those, without either fear or remorse, whom Christ hath bought to inherit a blessing!

Are _you_ one of these stupid, senseless, shameless wretches, that call so earnestly for damnation on your own soul? What if God should take you at your word? Are you _able to dwell with everlasting burnings_? If you are, yet why should you be in haste, to be in the _lake of fire burning with brimstone_? God help you, or you will be there soon enough, and long enough; for that _fire is not quenched_! But the _smoke thereof ascendeth up, day and night, for ever and ever_.

And what is that important affair, concerning which you was but now appealing to God? Was you _calling God to record upon your soul_, touching your everlasting salvation? No; but touching the beauty of your horse, the swiftness of your dog, or the goodness of your drink! How is this? What notion have you of God? What do you take him to be?

_Idcirco stolidam præbet tibi vellere barbam Jupiter――――?_

What stupidity, what infatuation is this! Thus without either pleasure, or profit, or praise, to set at nought him that hath _all power both in heaven and earth_! Wantonly to _provoke the eyes of his glory_!

Are you a man of letters, who are sunk so low? I will not then send you to the inspired writers (so called: perhaps you disdain to receive instruction by them,) but the old, blind Heathen. Could you only fix in your mind the idea he had of God, (though it is not strictly just, unless we refer it to God made man) you would never thus affront him more,

Ἦ καὶ κυανέῃσιν ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι ♦νεῦσε Κρονίων· Ἀμβρόσιαι δ᾽ ἄρα χαῖται ἐπεῤῥώσαντο Ἄνακτος Κρατὸς ἀπ᾽ ἀθανάτοιο· μέγαν δ᾽ ἐλέλιξεν Ὄλυμπον.

♦ “νεῦσε” inserted per Errata

Shall not the very Heathen then, _rise up in judgment against this generation, and condemn it_? Yea, and not only the learned Heathens of _Greece_ and _Rome_, but the savages of _America_. For I never remember to have heard a wild _Indian_ name the name of _Sootaleicatee_, (him that sitteth in heaven) without either laying his hand upon his breast, or casting his eyes down to the ground. And you are a _Christian_! O how do you cause the very name of _Christianity_ to be blasphemed among the Heathen!

5. But is it _light_ swearing only, (inexcusable as that is) because of which our _land mourneth_? May it not also be said of us, _Though they say the Lord liveth, surely they swear_ falsely? Yea to such a degree, that there is hardly the like, in any nation under heaven; that almost every corner of the land is filled with wilful deliberate _perjury_.

I speak not now of the perjuries which every common swearer cannot but run into day by day. (And indeed common “swearing notoriously contributes to the growth of perjury. For oaths are little minded when common use has sullied them, and every minutes repetition has made them cheap and vulgar.”) Nor of those which are continually committed and often detected in our open courts of justice. Only with regard to the latter I must remark, that they are a natural consequence, of that monstrous, shocking manner, wherein oaths are usually administered therein: without any decency or seriousness at all; much less with that awful solemnity, which a rational Heathen would expect, in an immediate appeal to the great God of heaven.

I had once designed to consider all the oaths which are customarily taken by any set of men among us. But I soon found this was a work too weighty for me: so almost _in infinitum_ are oaths multiplied in _England_: I suppose to a degree which is not known in any other nation in _Europe_.

What I now propose is, to instance only in a few, (but those not of small importance) and to shew, how amazingly little regard is had, to what is solemnly promised or affirmed before God.

6. This is done, in part, to my hands by a late author. So far as he goes, I shall little more than transcribe his words. (Mr. _Disney_’s First Essay, page 30.)

“When a _justice of peace_ is sworn into the commission, he makes oath――‘That he shall do equal right to the poor and to the rich, after his cunning, wit and power, and after the laws and customs of the realm and statutes thereof made, in all articles in the king’s commission to him directed.’――What those articles are, you will find in the first assignavimus of the commission: ‘We have assigned you and every one of you, jointly and severally――_to keep and cause to be kept, all ordinances and statutes_, made for――the quiet, rule and government of our people, in all and every the articles thereof, according to the force, form and effect of the same, and to _chastise and punish all persons, offending_ against any of them, according to the form of those statutes and ordinances.’ So that he is solemnly sworn to the execution of all such statutes, as the legislative power of the nation has thought fit to throw upon his care. Such are all those (among others) made against _drunkenness_, _tipling_, prophane _swearing_, _blasphemy_; _lewd_ and _disorderly_ practices, and _prophanation of the_ Lord’s _day_. And it is hard to imagine how a justice of peace can think himself more concerned, to _suppress riots_ or _private quarrels_, then he is to levy twelve pence on a _prophane swearer_, five shillings on a _drunkard_, ten shillings on the public house _that suffers tipling_, or any other penalty which the law exacts ♦on vice and immorality. The same oath binds him both to one and the other, laying an equal obligation on his conscience. How a magistrate, who neglects to punish excess, prophaneness and impiety, can excuse himself from the guilt of _perjury_, I do not pretend to know. If he reasons fairly, he will find himself as much _forsworn_, as an evidence who being upon his oath, to declare _the whole truth_; nevertheless conceals _the most considerable part_ of it. And his perjury is so much the more infamous, as the ill example and effects of it will be mischievous.”

♦ “of” replaced with “on” per Errata

7. The same author (in the preface to his second essay) goes on:

“You, gentlemen of the _grand juries_, take a solemn oath, that you will _diligently enquire_, and true _presentment_ make, of _all_ such articles, matters and things _as shall be given you in charge_: as also, that you will (not only present no person for envy, hatred, or malice, but) not leave any _unpresented_, for fear, favour or affection. Now, are not the laws against immorality and prophaneness _given you in charge_, as well as those against riots, felony and treason? Are not presentment and indictment _one_ method expresly appointed by the statutes, for the punishment of _drunkenness_ and _tipling_? Are not houses of _bawdry_ and _gaming_, punishable in the same courts, and consequently _presentable_ by you? Is not the proclamation for the punishing of vice, prophaneness and immorality, always read before you as soon as you are sworn? And does not the judge of assize, or chairman of the bench, in the charge given immediately after the reading it, either recite to you the particular laws against such offences, or refer you for them to that proclamation? ’Tis plain from all this, that you are bound upon your _oaths_, to _present all vice_ and _immorality_, as well as other crimes, that fall within your knowledge, because they are expresly _given you in charge_. And this you are to do, not only when _evidence_ is offered before you by the _information of others_, but with regard to all such offences as you or any of you are able of _your own personal knowledge_ to present: all which you have sworn to do impartially, without _fear_, _favour_, or affection.”

I leave it now with all reasonable men to consider, how few _grand jurors_ perform this? And consequently, what multitudes of them, throughout the nation, fall under the guilt of _wilful perjury_!

8. The author proceeds, (page 8.) “I shall next address myself to you that are _constables_. And to you I must needs say, that if you know your duty, ’tis no thanks to us that are _justices_. For the oath we usually give you is so _short_, and in such _general_ terms, that it leaves with you no manner of instruction in the particulars of the office to which you are sworn. But that which ought to be given you, recites part of your duty in the following words:

“You shall do your best endeavour, that rogues, vagabonds and night-walkers, be apprehended; and that the statutes made for their punishment, be duly put in execution: you shall have _a watchful eye_ to such as shall keep any house or place where any _unlawful game_ is used: as also to _such_ as shall _frequent_ such places, or shall _use_ any _unlawful game_ there or elsewhere. You shall _present all_ and _every_ the offences contrary to the statutes made to restrain the _tipling in inns, alehouses_, and _other victualling_ houses, and for repressing of _drunkenness_. You shall once in the year, during your office, present all _Popish recusants_. You shall well and duly execute all precepts and warrants to you directed. And you shall well and duly, according to your knowledge, power and ability, do and execute _all other_ things belonging to the office of a _constable_, so long as you shall continue therein.”

Upon this, “I would observe first, that _actors of plays_ are exprest by name within the statute, to be taken up for vagabonds, and punished accordingly: and that though a statute of queen _Elizabeth’s excepts_ such companies as have a licence under the hand and seal of a nobleman, yet a ♦later statute in the reign of king _James_ I. has taken away that protection from them; by declaring, that _from thenceforth no authority to be given by any peer of the realms, shall be available to free or discharge them from the pains and punishments of that former statute_. Every _constable_ therefore in those parishes, where any of these _strolling players_ come, is bound by his _oath_, to seize upon, correct, and send them packing without delay.”

♦ “latter” replaced with “later” per Errata

“The next part of your oath obliges you to keep _a watchful eye_, on such houses as keep and such _persons_ as use _unlawful gaming_. The statute directs you _weekly_ or at least _monthly_, to search within your liberties, all houses or places suspected of this offence, and upon discovering, to bring them to punishment. Upon this article I would observe, 1. That the law makes some allowance, for artificers, husbandmen, apprentices, labourers and servants, _to play in Christmas_, but at no other time of the year; and 2. That _all sports and pastimes_ whatsoever are made _unlawful_ upon the Lord’s day, by a statute of king _Charles_ II. You are therefore bound upon _oath_, to bring to punishment such as are guilty of _prophaning_ that day by any sports or pastimes whatsoever.”

“The following parts of your oath are, 1. That you shall _present all_ and _every_ the offences of _tipling_ and _drunkenness_ that come to your knowledge; 2. That you shall once in the year _present_ all _Popish recusants_. Nay, and by the statute on which your oath is grounded, you are obliged once a year to _present in session_, all those within your parishes, who (not being dissenters) come not once in a month, at least, to church.” And 3. That you shall _well_ and _duly_ execute _all precepts_ and _warrants_ to you directed. I believe no _constable_ will pretend to be ignorant of this. How is it then, that when we send out warrants, to levy on offenders for _swearing_, _drunkenness_, and the like, those _warrants_ are so ill obeyed? Are you not _sworn_ to execute _these_ as well as any other, and that _duly_ too, according to the tenor of your _precept_? Your _precept_ tells you, you shall _demand_ such a sum, and if the offender will not ♦pay, you shall _levy it by distress of his goods_: and _if no distress can be taken_, you are _then_ only to set him _in the stocks_; otherwise you have no authority so to do: nor is the setting him in the stocks, when you might have distrained, any execution of your _precept_.”

♦ “pray” replaced with “pay”

“The last part of your oath is in _general_ terms. That you shall _well_ and _duly_ according to your knowledge, power, and ability, do and execute _all other things_ belonging to the office of a _constable_. I shall instance in some things which certainly _belong to your office_, because you, and none else, can do them. 1. A constable may, _without a warrant_, apprehend any persons, and carry them before a justice, who are driving carts, horses or cattle on the Lord’s day: 2. Such as he shall find at _sports and pastimes_ on that day. 3. Such as he shall find _tipling_ in public-houses; 4. Shopkeepers _selling_ or _exposing_ goods on the Lord’s day; and lastly, Such as he shall find drunk or blaspheming, or prophanely swearing or cursing.”

“Thus I have shewn you, in part, _what belongs to your office_: it is well, if according to the tenor of your oath, you _duly, according to your knowledge and ability, do and execute all these things_. But remember, that if you do not, if you neglect any of them, you are _forsworn_.”

Now let all men judge, how many _constables_ in _England_ are clear of wilful _perjury_!

9. “I will now (he goes on) address myself to _church-wardens_. Your oath is, ‘That you shall well and truly execute the office of a _church-warden_, for the ensuing year; and to the best of your skill and knowledge, _present_ such persons and things, as are _presentable_, by the ecclesiastical laws of this realm.’ I shall set down only a few of these.”

“The statute of king _James_ I. obliges you to present once a year, all monthly _absenters_ from church.”

“The 90th canon enjoins you, first to _admonish_ and then, if they reform not, to _present_, all your parishioners who do not _duly_ resort to _church_ on Sundays, and there continue the whole time of divine service. On this article observe. 1. That a person’s being absent from church, is ground sufficient for you to proceed. 2. That you are not only to present those who do not come to church, but also those that behave _irreverently_ or _indecently_ there, either walking about, or talking; all who do not abide there orderly and soberly, the whole time of service and sermon, and all that _loiter_ away any part of that time in the church-yard or in the fields.”

“The 112th canon enjoins you, within 40 days after Easter, to exhibit to the bishop or his chancellor, _the names of all_ above the age of sixteen, within your parish that did not receive the communion.”

“Other statutes oblige you to present _drunkenness_, _tippling_, and public houses _suffering persons to tipple_ in them.”

“And the 109th canon binds you to present _all manner_ of vice, prophaneness and debauchery, requiring you faithfully to _present all_ and every the offenders in _adultery_, _whoredom_, _drunkenness_, _prophane swearing_, or any other _uncleanness_ and _wickedness_ of life.” It is therefore a part of that office to which you are solemnly sworn to present not only all _drunkenness_ and _tippling_, but _prophane swearing_, _lewdness_, and whatsoever else is contrary to Christian piety. So that if you know any of your parishioners, be his quality or circumstances what they will, that is guilty of any of these, you are obliged to _present him to the next visitation_, or you are yourselves guilty of perjury. And the 26th canon expresses such an abhorrence of a _church-warden_’s neglect in this matter, that it forbids the minister, _in any wise_, to admit you to the holy communion, _who_ (as the words of the canon are) _having taken your oaths to present all such offences in your several parishes, shall notwithstanding your said oaths, either in neglecting or refusing to present, wittingly and willingly, desperately and irreligiously incur, the horrid guilt of perjury_.”

And who is clear? I appeal to every minister of a parish, from one end of _England_ to the other, how many _church-wardens_ have you known, in twenty, thirty, forty years, who did not thus _desperately_ and _irreligiously incur, the horrid guilt of perjury_?

10. I proceed to perjuries of another kind. The oath taken by all _captains of ships_, every time they return from a trading voyage, runs in these terms:

“I do swear, that the entry above written, now tendered and subscribed by me, is a just report of the name of my ship, its burthen, bulk, property, number and country mariners, ♦the present master and voyage: and that it doth farther contain a true account of my lading, with the particular marks, numbers, quantity, quality and consignment, of all the goods and merchandizes in my said ship, to the best of my knowledge; and that I have not broke bulk, or delivered any goods out of my said ship, since her loading in.

So help me God.”

♦ “he” replaced with “the” per Errata

These words are so clear, express, and unambiguous, that they require no explanation. But who takes this plain oath, without being _knowingly and deliberately forsworn_? Does one captain in fifty? Does one in five hundred? May we not go farther yet? Are there five captains of vessels now in _London_, who have not at one time or another, by this very oath, which they knew to be false when they took it, incurred the guilt of _wilful perjury_?

11. The oath which all _officers_ of his Majesty’s _customs_, take at their admission into the office, runs thus:

“I do swear to be true and faithful in the execution, to the best of my knowledge and power, of the trust committed to my charge and inspection, in the service of his Majesty’s customs: and that I will not take or receive, any reward or gratuity, directly or indirectly, other than my salary, or what is or shall be allowed me from the crown, or the regular fees established by law, for any service done or to be done in the execution of my employment in the customs, on any account whatsoever. So help me God.”

On this it may be observed, 1. That there are regular fees, _established by law_, for some of these officers; 2. That the rest do hereby engage not to take or receive _any reward or gratuity, directly or indirectly_, other than their salary or allowance from the crown, _on any account whatsoever_.

How do the former keep this solemn engagement? They whose fees _are established by law_? Do they take those established fees and no more? Do they not _receive any farther gratuity_? Not _on any account whatsoever_? If they do, they are undeniably guilty of _wilful perjury_.

And do the latter take _no fees at all_? Do they receive _no reward or gratuity, for any service done, or to be done, in the execution of their employment_? Do they not take any money, _directly or indirectly, on any account whatsoever_? Every time they do receive either more or less, they also are flatly _forsworn._

Yet who scruples either the one or the other? Either the taking _a larger fee_ than the law appoints? Or the taking _any fee_, large or small, which is offered, even where the law appoints none at all?

What innumerable _perjuries_ then are here committed, over and over, day by day! And without any remorse; without any shame! without any fear either of God or man!

12. I will produce but one instance more. The oath of one who _votes_ for a member of parliament is this:

“I do swear, I have not received or had, by myself, or of any person whatsoever in trust for me, or for my use and benefit directly or indirectly, any sum or sums of money, office, place or employment, gift or reward, or any promise or security for any money, office, employment or gift, in order to give my vote at this election, and that I have not before been polled at this election. So help me God.”

We may observe here, 1. That this oath is taken, once in seven years (if ♦required) by all the freeholders, in every county throughout _England_ and _Wales_, as well as by all the freemen in every city and borough-town: and 2. That hereby every voter swears, in words liable to no evasion, that he has not received, _directly or indirectly, any gift or reward_, or _promise_ of any.

♦ “requested” replaced with “required” per Errata

But (to pass over those godless and shameless wretches, who frequently vote twice at one election) how few are there, who can take this oath with a conscience void of offence? Who have not received, _directly_ or _indirectly_, _any gift_ or promise of any? No! have not _you_? If you have received nothing else, have not you received meat or drink? And did you pay for the meat or drink you received? If not, that was _a gift_; and consequently, you are as really _perjured_, as the man that has received an hundred pounds.

What melancholy prospect is then before us! Here are almost _all the common people_ of any substance throughout the land, both in the city and country, calling God to record to a _known, wilful falshood_!

13. I shall conclude this head in the weighty words of the author before cited.

“Most of these, I am afraid, look upon their oaths as _things of course_, and little to be regarded. But can there be any thing in the world more sacred than an _oath_? Is it not a solemn appeal to God for your sincerity? And is not that very appeal an acknowledgment, that he will surely punish falshood? Nay farther, Is it not _a calling down_ the vengeance of God upon yourselves if you are false? Do you not, by laying your hand upon the gospel, declare, that _you hope for no salvation by Christ_, if you perform not what you then promise, or, if what you then affirm, is not true? And do not the words, _So help me God_, sufficiently prove, that the intention of your oath is so? And that if you swear false, you are to expect no mercy from God, either in this world, or the next? And do you not _personally_ and expresly give your consent to this heavy curse, by _kissing the book_? How then dare any of you to venture to play with so awful an engagement? Is it that you think the oath of a _grand jury-man_, or _parish-officer_,” (of a _captain_, an _officer of the customs_, or a _voter_ in elections) “is not as sacred and binding as that of an _evidence at the bar_? What is it can make the difference? Both of them are equally appeals to God, and imprecations of his vengeance upon _wilful perjury_.”

14. If there be then a God that is not mocked, what a weight of sin lies on this nation? And sin of no common dye; for perjury has always been accounted one of the deepest stain. And how will any one attempt to excuse this? By adding blasphemy thereto? So indeed some have done; saying, like those of old, _Tush, thou_ God _carest not for it. The Lord seeth_ (i. e. regardeth) _us not. The Lord hath forsaken the earth._ He has left _second causes_ to take their course, and man _in the hand of his own counsel_.

* How many are they who now speak thus? According to whose _minute_ philosophy, the _particular_ providence of God is utterly exploded, _the hairs of our head are_ no longer _numbered_: And _not_ only _a sparrow_, but a city, an empire may _fall to the ground, without the will_ or care _of our heavenly Father_. You allow then only a _general_ Providence. I do not understand the term. Be so kind as to let me know, what you mean by a “_general_ providence, contradistinguished from a _particular_ one?” I doubt you are at a loss for an answer; unless you mean some huge, unweildy thing, (I suppose, resembling the _primum mobile_ in the _ptolemaic_ system) which continually whirls the whole universe round, without affecting one thing more than another. I doubt this hypothesis will demand more proof, than you are at present able to produce; beside that it is attended with a thousand difficulties, such as you cannot readily solve. It may be therefore your wisest way for once to think with the vulgar, to acquiesce in the plain, scriptural account. This informs us, that although God dwelleth in heaven, yet he still _ruleth over all_: that his providence extends to every individual in the whole system of beings which he hath made: that all _natural causes_ of every kind, depend wholly upon his will; and he increases, lessens, suspends or destroys their efficacy, according to his own good pleasure: that he uses _preternatural causes_ at his will, the ministry of good or of evil angels: and that he hath never yet precluded himself from exerting his own immediate power, from _speaking_ life or death into any of his creatures; from _looking_ a world into being, or into nothing.

_Thinkest thou_ then, _O man, that thou shalt escape the judgment of_ this great God? O no longer _treasure up unto thyself wrath, against the day of wrath_! Thou canst not recall what is past; but now _keep thyself pure_, even were it at the price of all that thou hast; and acknowledge the goodness of God, in that he did not long since cut thee off, and send thee to thy own place.

15. The _Jews_ of old were charged by God, with _prophaning his sabbaths_ also. And do we _Christians_ come behind them herein? (I speak of those who acknowledge the obligation.) Do we _call the sabbath a delight, holy of the Lord, honourable? Not doing our own ways, not finding our own pleasure, nor speaking our own words?_ Do our _man-servant and maid-servant_ rest thereon? And the _stranger that is within our gates_? Is no business, but what is really necessary, done within our house? You know in your own conscience, and God knoweth, that the very reverse of this is true.

But setting aside these things which are done as it were by stealth, whether by mean or honourable men; how many are they, in every city, as well as in this, who prophane the sabbath with a high hand? How many in this, that openly defy both God and the king, that break the laws both divine and human, by working at their trade, delivering their goods, receiving their pay, or following their ordinary business, in one branch or other, and _wiping their mouths and saying_, “_I do no evil_?” How many buy and sell on the day of the Lord, even in the open streets of this city? How many open or (with some modesty) _half open_ their shops? ♦Even when they have not the pretence of perishable goods; without any pretence at all, money is their god, and gain their godliness.――――But what are all these droves in the skirts of the town, that well nigh cover the face of the earth? Till they drop one after another into the numerous receptacles prepared for them in every corner. What are these to gain by prophaning the day of the Lord? Nothing at all. They _drink in iniquity like water_. Nay many of them _pay_ for their sin; perhaps great part of what should sustain their family the ensuing week. I know not what is _finding our own pleasure, or doing our own ways_, if this is not. What then shall we plead in _your_ excuse? That “many others do it as well as you?” Nay, number is so far from extenuating your fault, that it aggravates it above measure. For this is open war against God. And a whole army of you joins together, and with one consent, in the face of the sun, _runs upon the thick bosses of his buckler_.

♦ “And” replaced with “Even” per Errata

16. It is once mentioned in the prophets, _In thee_ (Jerusalem) _they have set light by father and mother_. But frequent mention is made of their setting light by their civil parents, of their murmurings and rebellions against their governors. Yet surely _our_ boasting against them is excluded, even in this respect. For do not all our histories witness such a series of mutinies, seditions, factions and rebellions, as are scarce to be paralleled in any other kingdom, since the world began? And has not the wild, turbulent, ungovernable spirit of our countrymen, been continually acknowledged and lamented, (as abundance of their writings testify to this day) by the cool, rational part of the nation? Terrible effects whereof have been seen and felt, more or less, in every generation.

But did this spirit exist only in times past? Blessed be God, it is now restrained, it does not break out; but the traces thereof are still easy to be found. For whence springs this continual _speaking evil of dignities_? Of all who are at the helm of public affairs? Whence this _speaking evil of the ruler of our people_, so common among all orders of men. I do not include those whose province it is to inspect all the public administrations. But is not almost every private gentleman in the land, every clergyman, every tradesman; yea every man and woman that has a tongue, a politician, a settler of the state? Is not every carman and porter abundantly more knowing than the king, lords and commons together? Able to tell you all their foibles, to point out their faults and mistakes, and how they ought to proceed, if they will save the nation? Now all this has a natural, undeniable tendency to mutiny and rebellion. O what need have we above any nation upon earth, of his continual care and protection, who alone is able to _rule the raging of the sea, and still the madness of the people_!

17. But to proceed. Were there _drunkards_ in _Ephraim, mighty to drink wine, men of strength to mingle strong drink_? And are there not in _England_? Are they not the growth of every county, city and town therein? ♦These do not indeed, or not often _rise up early, that they may follow strong drink_; and so _continue till night, till wine inflame them_. They have found a readier way! namely, to begin at night, and continue following their wine or strong drink till the morning. And what numbers are there of these throughout the land? Lost to reason and humanity, as well as to religion: so that no wonder _they regard not the works of the Lord, neither consider the operation of his hands_.

♦ “Those” replaced with “These” per Errata

* Nor indeed have _our_ drunkards need to continue from morning _to night, until_ wine _inflame them_: seeing _they_ have found a far more compendious method of casting aside all sense and reason, and disincumbering themselves of all remains, either of conscience or understanding. So that whatever work of darkness is speedily to be done, and that without any danger of being interrupted, either by fear, compassion or remorse, they may be in a few moments, by one draught as effectually qualified for it, as if they could swallow a legion of devils. Or, (if that be all their concern) they may, at a moderate expence, destroy their own body as well as soul, and plunge through this _liquid fire_, into that _prepared for the devil and his angels_.

* Friend! Stop! You have the form of a man still. And perhaps some remains of understanding. O may the merciful God lay hold of that! Unto him all things are possible. Think a little for once. What is it you are doing? Why should you destroy yourself? I could not use the _worst enemy_ I have in the world, as you use _yourself_. Why should you murder yourself inch by inch? Why should you burn yourself alive? O spare your own body at least, if you have no pity for your soul! But have you a soul then? Do you really believe it? What, a soul that must live forever! O spare thy soul! Do not destroy _thy own_ soul with an ♦everlasting destruction! It was made for God. Do not give it into the hands of that old murderer of men! Thou canst not stupify it long. When it leaves the body it will awake and sleep no more. Yet a little while, and it launches out into the great deep, to live, and think, and feel for ever. And what will chear thy spirit there, if thou hast not _a drop of water to cool thy tongue_? But the die is not yet cast. Now cry to God, and _iniquity shall not be thy ruin_.

♦ “eversting” replaced with “everlasting” per Errata

18. Of old time there were also those that _were at ease in Zion, that lay upon beds of ivory, and stretched themselves upon their couches, that ♦ate the lambs out of the flock, and calves out of the stall_. But how inelegant were these ancient _epicures! Lambs out of the flock, and calves out of the stall!_ Were these the best dainties they could procure? How have we improved, since _Jeroboam_’s time? Who can number the varieties of our tables; or the arts we have “To enlarge the pleasure of tasting?” And what are their couches, or beds of ivory, to the furniture of our apartments? Or their _chains and bracelets, and mantles and changeable suits of apparel_, to the ornaments of our persons? What comparison is there between their diversions and ours? Look at _Solomon_ in all his glory; and yet may we not question, whether he was not an utter stranger to _the pleasures of the chase_? And notwithstanding his 40,000 horses, did he ever see a _race_ in his life? He _made gardens and orchards, and pools of water; he planted vineyards and built houses_. But had he one _theatre_ among them all? No. * This is the glory of later times. Or had he any conception of a _ball_, an _assembly_, a _masquerade_, or a _ridotto_? And who imagines that all his instruments of musick put together, were any more to be compared to ours, than his or his father’s rumbling _Hebrew_ verses,

“To the soft sing song of _Italian_ lays.”

In all these points our pre-eminence over the _Jews_, is much every way.

♦ “eat” replaced with “ate” per Errata

* Yea, and over our own ancestors, as well as theirs. But is this our glory, or our shame? Were _Edward_ the third, or _Henry_ the fifth to come among us now, what would they think of the change in their people? Would they applaud the elegant variety at the _old Baron_’s table? Or the costly delicacy of his furniture and apparel? Would they listen to these instruments of musick? Or find pleasure in those diversions? Would they rejoice to see the nobles and gentry of the land, lying _at ease, stretching themselves on beds_ of down? Too delicate to use their own limbs, even in the streets of the city; to bear the touch of the people, the blowing of the wind, or the shining of the sun! O how would their hearts burn within them! What indignation, sorrow, shame must they feel, to see the ancient hardiness lost, the _British_ temperance, patience and scorn of superfluities, the rough, indefatigable industry, exchanged for softness, _idleness and fulness of bread_! Well for them, that they were gathered unto their fathers, before this exchange was made!

19. To prove at large, that the luxury and sensuality, the sloth and indolence, the softness and idleness, the effeminacy and false delicacy of our nation are without a parallel, would be but lost labour. I fear, we may say, the _lewdness_ too; for if the _Jews_, as the prophet speaks, _assembled themselves by troops in the harlots houses_, so do the _English_, and much more abundantly. Indeed, where is _male chastity_ to be found? Among the nobility? Among the gentry? Among the tradesmen? Or among the common people of _England_? How few lay any claim to it at all? How few desire so much as the reputation of it? Would you yourself account it an honour or a reproach, to be ranked among those of whom it is said, _These are they which are not defiled with women: for they are virgins_? And how numerous are they now, even among such as are accounted men of honour and probity, _who are fed as horses, every one neighing after his neighbour’s wife_?

But as if this were not enough, is not the sin of _Sodom_ too, more common among us than ever it was in _Jerusalem_? Are not our streets beset with those monsters of uncleanness, who _burn in their lust one toward another_, whom God hath _given up to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient_? O Lord, thy compassions fail not: therefore we are not consumed.

20. Neither do we yield to them in _injustice_ any more than _uncleanness_. How frequent are open robberies among us? Is not _the act of violence_ even _in our streets_? And what laws are sufficient to prevent it? Does not _theft_ of various kinds abound in all parts of the land, even tho’ death be the punishment of it? And are there not among us, who _take usury and increase_, who _greedily gain of their neighbour by_ extortion? Yea, whole trades which subsist by such extortion, as was not named either among the _Jews_ or _Heathens? Is there not_ yet _the scant measure, the wicked balances, and the bag of deceitful weights?_ Beside the thousand nameless ways of over-reaching and defrauding, the _craft_ and _mystery_ of every trade and profession. It were an endless task to descend to particulars, to point out in every circumstance, how not only _sharpers_ and _gamesters_, (those public nusances, those scandals to the _English_ nation) but high and low, rich and poor, men of character and men of none, in every station of public or private life, _have corrupted themselves_, and generally applaud themselves and count it _policy_ and wisdom so to do: so that if _gain_ be at hand, they care not, though _justice stand afar off_: so that _he which departeth from evil_, which cometh not into their secret, still _maketh himself a prey_; and _the wicked_ still _devoureth the man that is more righteous than he_.

And what redress? Suppose a great man to oppress the needy? Suppose the rich grinds the face of the poor: what remedy against such _oppression_ can he find in this _Christian_ country? If the one is rich and the other poor, doth not justice stand afar off? And is not the poor under the utmost improbability, (if not impossibility) of obtaining it? Perhaps the hazard is greater among us, than either among _Jews_, _Turks_, or _Heathens_.

For example. Suppose a great man, with or without form of law, does wrong to his poor neighbour. What will he do? Sue his lordship at common law? Have the cause tried at the next sessions or assizes? Alas! Your own neighbours, those who know the whole case, will tell you, “You are out of your senses.” “But twelve good men and true will do me justice.” Very well: but where will you find them: men unbiassed, incapable of corruption, superior both to fear and favour, to every view whether of gain or loss? But this is not all; they must not only be good and true, but wise and understanding men. Else how easy is it for a skilful pleader to throw a mist before their eyes? Even supposing too the judge to be quite impartial, and proof against all corruption. And should all these circumstances concur, (of which I fear there are not many precedents) supposing a verdict is given in your favour, still you have gained nothing. The suit is removed into a higher court, and you have all your work to begin again. Here you have to struggle with all the same difficulties as before, and perhaps, many new ones too. However, if you have money enough, you may succeed: but if that fails, your cause is gone. Without money, you can have no more _law_; _poverty_ alone utterly shuts out _justice_.

But, “cannot an honest _attorney_ procure me justice?” An _honest_ attorney! Where will you find one? Of those who are called _exceeding honest_ attornies, who is there that makes any scruple.

1. To promote and encourage _needless_ suits, if not _unjust_ ones too?

2. To _defend a bad cause_, knowing it so to be:

By making a _demur_, and then withdrawing it:

By pleading some _false plea_, to the plaintiff’s declaration:

By putting in an _evasive answer_ to his bill:

By _protracting_ the suit, if possible, till the plaintiff is ruined:

3. To _carry a cause_ not amounting to ten shillings into _Westminster-hall_, by laying it in his declaration as above forty:

4. To _delay_ his own client’s suit knowingly and wilfully, in order to gain more thereby:

5. To _draw himself_ the pleadings or conveyances of his client, instead of giving them to be drawn by able council:

6. To _charge_ his client with the fees which should have been given to such council, although they were not given:

7. To _charge_ for drawing fair copies, where none were drawn:

8. To charge _fees for expedition_ given to clerks, when not one farthing has been given them;

9. To send his clerk a journey (longer or shorter) to do business with or for different persons; and to charge the horse-hire and expence of that journey to every person severally:

10. To send his clerk to _Westminster_, on the business of ten (it may be) or twenty persons, and to charge each of these twenty for his attendance, as if he had been sent on account of _one_ only:

11. To charge _his own attendance_ in like manner: and

12. To fill up his bill with _attendances_, _fees_, and _term-fees_, though his client is no whit ♦forwarder in his cause.

♦ “forward” replaced with “forwarder” per Errata

This is he that is called an _honest attorney_! How much honester is a pick-pocket?

But there is a magistrate whose peculiar office it is, to redress the injured and oppressed. Go then and make trial of this remedy; Go, and tell your case to the _Lord Chancellor_. Hold; you must go on regularly: you must tell him your case, _in form of law_, or not ♦at all. You must therefore _file a bill_ in chancery, and _retain_ a lawyer belonging to that court. “But ♠you have already spent all you have; you have _no money_.” Then I fear you will have _no justice_. You stumble at the threshold. If you have either lost or spent all, your cause is naught: it will not even come to a hearing. So, if the oppressor has secured all that you had, he is as safe as if you was under the earth.

♦ “at” inserted per Errata

♠ “ye” replaced with “you” per Errata

* 21. Now what an amazing thing is this! The very _greatness_ of the villainy makes it beyond _redress_!――――But suppose he that is opprest, has some substance left, and can go through all the courts of justice, what parallel can we find among _Jews_, _Turks_, or _Heathens_, for either the delays or the expence attending it? With regard to the former, how monstrous is it, that in a suit relating to that inheritance, which is to furnish you and your family with food and raiment, you must wait month after month, perhaps year after year, before it is determined, whether it be yours or not? And what are you to _eat_, or to _wear_ in the mean time? Of that the court takes no cognizance! Is not this very _delay_, (suppose there were no other grievance attending the _English_ course of law) wrong beyond all expression? Contrary to all sense, reason, justice and equity? A _capital_ cause is tried in one day, and finally decided at once. And, _is the life_ less than _meat_? _Or the body_ of less concern _than raiment_? What a shameless mockery of justice then, is this putting off _pecuniary_ causes from term to term, yea, from year to year.

* With regard to the latter. A man has wronged me of a hundred pounds. I appeal to a judge for the recovery of it. How astonishing is it, that this judge himself cannot give me what is my right, and what evidently appears so to be, unless I first give, perhaps one half of the sum, to men I never saw before in my life!

22. I have hitherto supposed, that all causes when they are decided, are decided according to justice and equity. But is it so? Ye learned in the law, is no _unjust sentence_ given in your courts? Have not the same causes been decided quite opposite ways? One way, this term, just the contrary, the next? Perhaps one way in the morning (this I remember an instance of) and another way in the afternoon. How is this? Is there no _justice_ left on earth? No regard for right or wrong? Or have causes been puzzled so long, that you know not now, what is either wrong or right? What is agreeable to law, or contrary to it? I have heard some of you frankly declare, that it is in many cases next impossible to know, what is law, and what is not. So are your _folio_’s of law multiplied upon you, that no human brain is able to contain them: no; nor any consistent scheme, or abstract of them all.

But is it really owing to _ignorance_ of the law, (this is the most _favourable_ supposition) that so few of you scruple _taking fees_ on either side, of almost any cause that can be conceived? And that you generally plead in the manner you do on any side of any cause? Rambling to and fro, in a way so abhorrent from common sense, and so utterly foreign to the question? I have been amazed at hearing the pleadings of some eminent council: and when it has fallen out that the pleader on the other side understood only the common rules of logic, he has made those eminent men appear, either such egregious knaves, if they could help it, or such egregious blockheads, if they could not, that one would have believed they would shew their face there no more.――――Mean time, if there be a God that judgeth righteously, what horrid insults upon him are these! _Shall I not visit for these things, saith the Lord? Shall not my soul be avenged of such a nation as this!_

23. There is one instance more of (I know not what to term it) injustice, oppression, sacrilege, which hath long cried aloud in the ears of God. For among men, who doth hear? I mean the management of many of those who are intrusted with our public charities. By the pious munificence of our fore-fathers, we have abundance of these, of various kinds. But is it not glaringly true, (to touch only on a few generals) that the managers of many of them, either 1. Do not apply the benefaction to _that use_ for which it was designed by the benefactor, or 2. Do not apply it with such _care and frugality_, as in such a case are indispensably required: or 3. Do not apply the whole of the benefaction to any _charitable use_ at all; but ♦_secrete_ part thereof, from time to time, for the use of themselves and their families. Or, lastly, by plain, bare-faced oppression, _exclude_ those from having any part in such benefaction, who dare (though with all possible tenderness and respect) set before them the things that they have done:

“Yet _Brutus_ is an honourable man: So are they all: all honourable men!”

And some of them, had in esteem for religion; accounted patterns both of honesty and piety! But God _seeth not as man seeth_. He _shall repay them to their face_. Perhaps, even in the present world. For that scripture is often still fulfilled, _This is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth. I will bring it forth, saith the Lord of hosts, and it shall enter into the house of the thief_, (such he is and no better, in the eyes of God, no whit honester than a highwayman) _and it shall remain in the midst of the house, and shalt consume it, with the timber thereof, and the stones thereof_.

♦ “secret” replaced with “secrete” per Errata

24. And is not _truth_, as well as _justice_, _fallen in our streets_? For who _speaketh the truth from his heart_? Who is there, that makes a conscience of speaking the thing as it is, whenever he speaks at all? Who scruples the telling of _officious lies_? The varying from truth, in order to do good? How strange does that saying of the ancient fathers, found in modern ears, “I would not tell a lie, no, not to save the souls of the whole world.” Yet is this strictly agreeable to the word of God; to that of St. _Paul_ in particular, if any say, _let us do evil that good may come_, their _damnation is just_.

But how many of us do this evil, without ever considering, whether good will come or no? Speaking what we do not mean, merely out of _custom_, because it is _fashionable_ so to do? What an immense quantity of falshood does this ungodly _fashion_ occasion day by day? For hath it not over run every part of the nation? How is all our language swoln with _compliment_? So that a well-bred person is not _expected_ to speak as he thinks: we do not _look for it_ at his hands. Nay, who would thank him for it? How few would suffer it? It was said of old, even by a warrior and a king, _He that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight_: But are we not of another mind? Do not we rather say, _He that telleth not lies, shall not tarry in my sight_? Indeed the trial seldom comes; for both speakers and hearers are agreed, that form and ceremony, flattery and compliment should take place, and _truth_ be banished from all that _know the world_.

And if the rich and great have so small regard to _truth_, as to _lie_ even for _lying-sake_, what wonder can it be that men of lower rank will do the same thing _for gain_? What wonder that it should obtain, as by common consent in all kinds of _buying and selling_? Is it not an adjudged case, that it is no harm to tell lies _in the way of trade_? To say, that is the _lowest price_ which is not the lowest; or that you _will not take_ what you _do take_ immediately? Insomuch that it is a proverb even among the _Turks_, when asked to abate of their price, “What! do you take me to be a Christian?” So that never was that caution more seasonable than it is at this day, _Take ye heed every one of his ♦neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and they will deceive every one his neighbour_.

♦ “neigbour” replaced with “neighbour”

25. And as for those few who abstain from outward sins, is their heart right with God? May he not say of us also (as of the _Jews_) _This people is uncircumcised in heart_? Are not _you_? Do you then _love the_ Lord _your_ God, _with all your heart, and with all your strength_? Is he _your_ God and your all? The desire of your eyes? The joy of your very heart? Rather, do you not _set up your idols in your heart_? Is not your _belly your God_? Or your diversion? Or your fair reputation? Or your friend? Or wife? Or child? That is plainly, do not you delight in some of these earthly goods, more than in the God of heaven? Nay, perhaps you are one of those grovelling souls that _pant after the dust of the earth_! Indeed who does not? Who does not get as much as he can? Who of those who are not _accounted_ covetous, yet does not gather all the money he can _fairly_, and perhaps much more? For are they those only whom _the world rank_ among misers, that use every art to increase their fortune? Toiling early and late, spending all their strength in _loading themselves with thick clay? How long?_ Until the very hour when God calleth them; when he saith unto each of them, _Thou fool! this night shall thy soul be required of thee! And whose shall those things be which thou hast prepared?_

26. And yet doth not our _pride_, even the pride of those whose soul _cleaves to the dust, testify against us_? Are _they_ not _wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own conceit_? Have not writers of our own remarked, that there is not upon earth a more _self-conceited_ nation than the _English_; more ♦opinionated both of their own _national_ and _personal_ wisdom, and courage, and strength? And indeed, if we may judge by the inhabitants of _London_, this is evident to a demonstration: for, are not the very meanest of them able to instruct both the king and all his counsellors? What cobler in _London_ is not wiser than the principal Secretary of State? What coffee-house disputer is not an abler divine than his Grace of _Canterbury_? And how deep a contempt of others is joined with this high opinion of ourselves? I know not whether the people of all nations are greater masters of dissimulation; but there does not _appear_ in any nation whatever, such a proneness to despise their neighbour: to despise not foreigners only (near two thousand years ago they remarked _Britannos hospitibus feros_) but their own countrymen; and that very often for such surprising reasons, as nothing but undeniable fact could make credible. How often does the gentleman in his coach despise those _dirty fellows that go a foot_? And these, on the other hand, despise full as much those _lazy fellows that loll in their coaches_? No wonder then that those who have the _form of godliness_ should despise them that have not: that the saint of the world so frequently says to the ♠gross sinner, in effect, if not in terms, _Stand by thyself; come not near unto me; for I am holier than thou_!

♦ “opiniated” replaced with “opinionated”

♠ “goss” replaced with “gross”

27. Yet what kind of holiness is this? May not God justly declare of us also, _This people draw near me with their mouth, but they have removed their hearts far from me. They do but flatter me with their mouth, and dissemble with me in their tongue._ Is it not so with _you_? When you speak to God, do your lips and your heart go together? Do you not often utter words by which you mean just nothing? Do not you say and unsay? Or, say one thing to God, and another to man? For instance, you say to God, _Vouchsafe O Lord, to keep me this day without sin_. But you say to man, this cannot be done; it is all folly and madness to expect it. You ask of God, that you _may perfectly love him, and worthily magnify his holy name_: but you tell man, there is no _perfect love_ upon earth; it is only a madman’s dream. You pray God, to _cleanse the thoughts of your heart, by the inspiration of his Holy Spirit_. But you assure your neighbour, there is no such thing as _inspiration_ now, and that none pretend to it but _enthusiasts_. What gross _hypocrisy_ is this! Surely you think, there is no _knowledge in the Most High. O be not deceived_, God _is not mocked. But whatsoever ye sow, that also shall ye reap!_

28. Such at present is the religion of this _Christian_ nation! So do we honour him by whose name we are called. And yet was there ever a nation more careless and secure? More unapprehensive of the wrath of God! How can a man more effectually expose himself to the ridicule of those who are esteemed men of understanding, than by shewing any concern, _as if_ the judgments of God were hanging over our heads? Surely then _a deceived heart hath turned_ us _aside, that_ we _cannot say, Is there not a lie in my right hand_? Surely this our confidence is not of God: it is rather a judicial infatuation; a stupid insensibility; a deep sleep, the fore-runner of heavy vengeance.

“Ruin behind it stalks, and empty desolation.”

Surely never was any people more fitted for destruction! _Impudent children are they, and stiff hearted. Are they ashamed when they have committed abomination?_ When they have openly prophaned the day of the Lord? When they have committed lewdness? Or when they have uttered such curses and blasphemies, as are not heard of among the Heathens? Nay, _They are not at all ashamed, neither can they blush_. And though God send unto them all his servants, rising up early and sending them, yet _will they not hear; they ♦harden their neck: they do worse than their fathers_.

♦ “hearden” replaced with “harden”

What _then_ can God _do more for his vineyard which he hath not done_? He hath long tried us with mercies, _giving rain and fruitful seasons, filing us with the flour of wheat_. But still _this revolting and rebellious people say not, Let us now fear the_ Lord _our_ God. Nay, they gave him no thanks for all his mercies; they did not even acknowledge them to be his gift. They did not see the hand of God in any of these things; they could _account for them_ another way. O ye unwise, when will ye understand? Know ye not yet, there is a God that ruleth the world? What did ye see with your eyes? Was the _race to the swift_, or _the battle to the strong_? Have ye forgotten _Dettingen_ already? Does not _England_ know that God was there?――Or suppose your continuance in peace, or success in war, be the mere result of your own wisdom and strength; do ye command the sun and the clouds also? Can ye pour out or _stay the bottles of heaven_? But let it all be nature, chance, any thing――so God may have no hand in governing the earth!

* 29. Will his judgments bring us to a better mind? Do we _hear the rod, and him that has appointed it_? Let us observe: What fruit do we find in those who are _even consumed by means of his heavy hand_? Let any one that desires to be clearly satisfied herein, visit the _hospitals_ of this city. Let him judge for himself, how the patients there receive God’s fatherly visitation; especially _there_, because mercy also is mixed with judgment; so that it is evident _the Lord loveth whom he chasteneth_. Go then into any _ward_, either of men or women, look narrowly from one end to the other: are they humbling themselves under the hand of God? Are they trembling under a sense of his anger? Are they praising him for his love? Are they exhorting one another, not to faint when they are rebuked of him? How do nine in ten of them spend the time, that important time from morning to evening? Why in such a manner, that you would not easily learn, from thence, whether they were Christians, Pagans or Mahometans.

* Is there any deeper distress than this to be found? Is there a greater affliction than the loss of health? Perhaps there is, the loss of liberty, especially as it is sometimes circumstanced. You may easily be convinced of this, by going into either _Ludgate_ or _Newgate_. What a scene appears, as soon as you enter! The very place strikes horror into your soul. How dark and dreary! How unhealthy and unclean! How void of all that might minister comfort! But this is little, compared to the circumstances that attend the being confined in this shadow of death. See that poor wretch, who was formerly in want of nothing, and encompassed with friends and acquaintance, now cut off, perhaps by an unexpected stroke, from all the chearful ways of men; ruined, forsaken of all, and delivered into the hands of such masters, and such companions! I know not, if to one of a thinking, sensible turn of mind, there could be any thing like it on this side hell.

What effect then has this heavy visitation of God, on those who lie under it for any time? There is perhaps, an exception here and there; but in general, they are abandoned to all wickedness, utterly divested of all fear of God, and all reverence to man; insomuch, that they commonly go out of that school compleatly fitted for any kind or degree of villany, perfectly brutal and devilish, thoroughly furnished for every evil word and work.

30. Are our countrymen more effectually reclaimed, when danger and distress are joined? If so, the _army_, especially in time of war, must be the most religious part of the nation. But is it so indeed? Do the _soldiery_ walk as those who see themselves on the brink of eternity? _Redeeming_ every _opportunity_ of glorifying God, and doing good to men, because they know not the hour in which their Lord will require their souls of them? So far from it, that a _soldier’s religion_ is a by-word, even with those who have no religion at all; that vice and prophaneness in every shape reign among them without controul; and that the whole tenor of their behaviour speaks, _Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die_.

Have those who are exposed to still more danger, the _English sea-forces_, more religion than those at land? It is said they were once remarkable for this: and it is certain Sir _Francis Drake_ feared God, as did most of his commanders; and we have reason to believe, his marines and sailors too. But what shall we say of the _navy_ that now is, more particularly of the ships of war? Is religion there? Either the power or the form? Is not almost every single _man of war_ a mere floating hell? Where is there to be found more consummate wickedness, a more full, daring contempt of God, and all his laws, except in the bottomless pit? But here description fails: and the goodness of God endureth yet daily! But _shall I not visit for these things, saith the Lord? Shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this?_ O that the _prospect_ of national judgments may suffice! That we may remember ourselves, and turn unto the Lord our God, before his long-suffering mercy is at an end, and he pours out the vials of his wrath upon us!

But how small ground have we as yet to hope for this? For who will now _suffer the word of exhortation_? How few will _endure sound doctrine_, and the honest, close application of it? Do they not _say unto the seers, see not; and unto the prophets, prophesy smooth things_? And if a man will do thus, if he will _sew pillows to all arm-holes_, and _cause the Holy One of_ Israel _to cease from before them; if he will prophesy of wine and strong drink, he shall even be the prophet of this people_.

31. I am sensible, how nice a subject this is, and how extremely difficult it is so to speak, as neither to say too little nor too much, neither more nor less than the cause of God requires. I know also, that it is absolutely impossible, so to speak as not to give offence. But whosoever is offended, I dare not to be silent; neither may I refrain from plainness of speech: only I will endeavour to use all the tenderness I can consistently with that plainness.

In tender love then I ask, are there none among us (I speak to you, my brethren, who are priests and prophets of the Lord, set apart to _minister in holy things_, and to _declare the word of the Lord_) Are there none among us who commit _lewdness_, as did those by whom _Israel was defiled_? Hath not the Lord seen an horrible thing, in some of the prophets of this land also, even, that _they commit adultery, and_ (to conceal it) _walk in lies_? God forbid that I should affirm this. I only propose (not maintain) the question. If there be such a wretch, I pray God to strike him to the heart, and to say, _Thou art the man_!

Are there none of you, like them, _mighty to drink wine, men of strength to mingle strong drink_? Yea, are there none, that _err through strong drink, that are swallowed up of wine_? Are there not found those who say, _I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink: and to-morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant_?

* Alas, my brother! Is this the voice of a _minister of_ Christ? _A steward of the mysteries of_ God? Suppose you find at any time trouble and heaviness, _is there no help for you in your_ God? Is not the God whom you serve able to deliver you from any plague or trouble? Is the being _drunk with wine_ a better relief, than the being _filled with his Spirit_? Do you not understand this? Do you _not know the_ Lord? Take heed you do not destroy both your own soul and them that hear you! O beware! If you know not his love, fear his power! Make haste to flee from the wrath to come, lest he smite you with a curse great as your sin, and sweep you away from the face of the earth.

32. Can such as you be said, to _honour_ or _fear_ God, any more than those spoken of by _Malachi_? May not God complain, _These priests have violated my law and prophaned my holy things_? Yea, whensoever you presume with those unhallowed hands, to touch the mysteries of God: whensoever you utter his name or his word with those unhallowed lips! But is it on this account only that God may say, _Both prophet and priest are prophane_? May he not add, _they have put no difference between the holy and prophane; therefore I am prophaned among them_. For is it not so? Do _you_ put a difference between the holy and prophane, him that feareth God, and him that feareth him not? Do you put an effectual difference between them, even in the most solemn office of our religion? At the table of the Lord, do you take care to _separate the precious from the vile_? To receive all those who (as you may reasonably believe) _draw near with penitent hearts and lively faith_, and utterly to reject those who testify against themselves, that they are without hope and without God in the world?

Nay, who dares repel one of the greatest men in his parish from the Lord’s table? Even tho’ he be a drunkard or a common swearer? Yea tho’ he openly deny the Lord that bought him? Mr. _Stonhouse did_ this once. But what was the event? The gentleman brought an action against him, for the terror of all such insolent fellows, in succeeding times.

33. O my brethren, is it not for want of your making this difference, as well as for many other abominations that with regard to some among us, (how many God knoweth) that scripture is now also fulfilled. _His watchmen are blind, they are ignorant, they are shepherds that cannot understand.――The Lord hath poured out upon them the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed their eyes; the prophets and the seers hath he covered. And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed._

If you ask what those other abominations are? I will speak, in love and in the spirit of meekness. There are found among us _covetous_ men, men _who mind earthly things_, who _seek themselves_ and not Christ crucified, who _love the world, and the things of the world_: men in whom these words are still fulfilled, _Who is there among you that would shut the doors for nought? Neither do ye kindle fire on my altar for nought. I have no pleasure in you saith the Lord of hosts_. Yea, are there not those at this day, (O that I might be found to fear where no fear is!) who _make themselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel_? Are there not those, who now _enlarge their desire as hell, who are as death and cannot be satisfied_? Who, though they want neither food to eat nor raiment to put on, yet seek more and more _preferment_? Who are continually studying to _join house to house, and to lay field to field_? To grow rich in the service of that Master, who himself _had not where to lay his head_? Is it not to these that those dreadful words belong, enough to cause the ears of him that heareth to tingle, _They are greedy dogs which never can have enough; they all look to their own way_, (not the way of their Lord) _every one for his gain, from his quarter_.

Is it strange, if among these there should be some, who are cruel, _oppressive_ men? Inasmuch as covetousness knows no mercy, nor can a lover of money be a lover of his neighbour. Have not some been known even to _grind the face of the poor_? To strip, rather than cloath the naked? Some, who while they cried out, _as the horse-leech, Give, give_, would take, if it was not given; like those of old who said, _Thou shalt give it me now, and if not, I will take it by force_: or those spoken of by _Micah_, _The prophets bite with their teeth, and cry peace; and he that putteth not into their mouths, they even prepare war against him_. Very great is the sin of these men before the Lord. If there be ten such now in the land, may God smite them this day with terror and astonishment, that they may have no rest in their bones till their sin is done away!

34. Are _you_ as watchful and zealous to gain souls, as those are to gain the gold that perisheth? Do you know by experience what that meaneth, _The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up_? Or are you one of those watchmen who do not watch at all? Who neither know nor care when the sword cometh? Of whom the prophet saith, _They are dumb dogs that cannot bark, sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber_.

* Can it be supposed, that such shepherds will _feed the flock_? Will _give to every one his portion of meat in due season_? Will these _warn every man, and exhort every man, that they may present every man perfect in_ Christ Jesus? Will they take care to “know all their flock by name, not forgetting ♦the men-servants and women-servants?” Will they enquire into the state of every soul committed to their charge? And watch over each with all tenderness and long-suffering, _as they that must give account_? Marking how they either fall or rise? How these wax _weary and faint in their mind_; and those _grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour_ Jesus Christ? Who can do this, unless his whole heart be in the work? Unless he desire nothing but to _spend and be spent for them_; and _count not his life dear unto himself_, so he may _present them blameless_ in the day of the Lord Jesus.

♦ “their” replaced with “the” per Errata

Can any shepherd do this (and if he do not, he will never _give any account with joy_) who imagines, he has little more to do, then _to preach_ once or twice a week? That this is the _main point_, the _chief part_ of the office, which he hath taken upon himself before God? What gross ignorance is this? What a total mistake of the truth? What a miserable blunder touching the _whole nature_ of his office? It is indeed a very great thing, to speak in the name of God; it might make him that is the stoutest of heart tremble, if he considered, that every time he speaks to others, his _own soul_ is at stake. But great, inexpressibly great as this is, it is perhaps the least part of our work. To _seek and save that which is lost_, to bring souls from Satan to God, to instruct the ignorant, to reclaim the wicked, to convince the gainsayer; to direct their feet into the way of peace, and then keep them therein; to follow them step by step, least they turn out of the way, and advise them in their doubts and temptations; to lift up them that fall, to refresh them that are faint, and to comfort the weak-hearted; to administer various helps, as the variety of occasions require, according to their several necessities: these are parts of our office; all this we have undertaken at the peril of our own soul. A sense of this made that holy man of old cry out, “I marvel if any ruler in the church shall be saved;” and a greater than him say, in the fulness of his heart, _who is sufficient for these things_?

34. But _who is_ not _sufficient_ for these things, _for_ the taking care of a parish, though it contain twenty thousand souls, if this implies no more than the taking care to preach there, once or twice-a-week; and to procure one to read prayers on the other days, and do what is called the _parish duty_? Is any trade in the nation so easy as this? Is not any man sufficient for it, without any more talents either of nature or grace, than a small degree of common understanding? But O! what manner of shepherds are those, who look no farther into the nature of their office, who sink no deeper into the importance of it than this! Were they not such as these concerning whom the _word of the Lord came unto_ Ezekiel, _saying, Woe be to the shepherds that feed themselves: should not the shepherds feed the flock? Ye eat the fat, and ye cloathe you with the wool; but ye feed not the flock. The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken; neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost――――And they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became meat to all the beasts of the field. Yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them._

I conjure you, brethren, in the name of the Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, who hath bought them and ♦us with his own blood, apply this each to his own soul. Let every man look unto God, and say, “Lord, _Is it I_? Am I one of these idle, careless, indolent shepherds, that feed myself, not the flock? Am I one that cannot bark, slothful, sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber? One of those who have not strengthened that which was diseased, neither healed that which was sick! _Search me, O Lord, and prove me; try out my reins and my heart. Look well if there be any way of wickedness in me, and lead me in the way everlasting._”

♦ “as” replaced with “us” per Errata

35. “Have I not, at least, _healed the hurt of thy people slightly_? Have I not said, _Peace, peace, when there was no peace_?”――How many are they also that do this? Who do not study to speak what is _true_, especially to the rich and great, so much as what is _pleasing_? Who flatter _honourable_ sinners, instead of telling them plain, _How can ye escape the damnation of hell_? O what an account have _you_ to make, if there be a God that judgeth the earth? Will he not require at _your_ hands the blood of all these souls, of whom _ye are the betrayers and murderers_? Well spake the prophets of your fathers, in whose steps ye now tread. _They have seduced my people, and one built up a wall, and another daubed it with untempered mortar. They strengthen the hands of the evil-doers, that none doth return from his wickedness. They prophesy lies in my name saith the Lord. They say unto them that despise me, ye shall have peace, and unto them that walk after the imagination of their own heart, no evil shall come upon you._

How great will _your_ damnation be, who _destroy_ souls, instead of _saving_ them? Where will you appear, or how will you stand, _in that great and terrible day of the Lord_! How will ye lift up your head, when _the Lord descends from heaven, in flaming fire, to take vengeance on his adversaries_! More especially on those who have so betrayed his cause, and done Satan’s work under the banner of Christ! With what voice wilt _thou_ say, “Behold me, Lord, and the sheep whom thou hadst given me, whom I gave to the devil, and told them they were in the way to heaven, till they dropped into hell?”

Were they not just such shepherds of souls as you are concerning whom God spake by _Jeremiah_, _Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard, they have trodden my portion under foot; they have made my pleasant portion a desolate wilderness_: By _Ezekiel_, _There is a conspiracy of her prophets, like a roaring lion, ravening the prey, they have devoured souls_: And by _Zechariah_, _Thus saith the Lord, feed the flock of the slaughter, whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty; and they that sell them say, blessed be the Lord, for I am rich; and their own shepherds pity them not._

* 36. Is not this the _real ground_, the principal _reason_ of the present _contempt of the clergy_? And long since was it assigned as such, by him who cannot lie. The same men of old, who _made the Lord’s people to transgress_, thereby _made themselves vile_. They were _despised_ both as the natural effect, and the judicial punishment of their _wickedness_. And the same cause the prophet observes to have produced the same effect, many hundred years after this. _Ye are departed out of the way saith the_ Lord; _ye have caused many to stumble――therefore have I also made you_ contemptible, _and base before all the people_.

I have now, brethren, _delivered mine own soul_ and in so doing, I have (as I proposed at first) _used great plainness of speech_, as not studying _to please men, but the Lord_. The event I leave to him in whose name I have spoken, and who hath the hearts of all men in his hand.

I _have brought you heavy tidings this_ day, and yet I cannot but be persuaded, that some of you will not _count me your enemy, because I tell you the truth_. O that all of us may _taste_ the good word which we _declare_! May _receive_ that knowledge of salvation, which we are commanded to _preach_ unto every creature, thro’ the remission of sins! My heart’s desire is, that all of us to whom _is committed the ministry of reconciliation_, may ourselves be reconciled to God, thro’ the blood of the everlasting covenant: that he may be henceforth unto us a God, and we may be unto him a people: that we may all _know_ as well as _preach_, the Lord, _from the least unto the greatest_: even by that token, _I am merciful to thy unrighteousness: thy sins I remember no more_!

III. 1. I have hitherto spoken more immediately to those, who profess themselves members of the _church of_ England. But inasmuch as I am a debtor also to those who do not, my design is now, to apply to them also; and briefly to shew, wherein (I fear) they are severally inconsistent with _their own principles_.

I begin with those who are at the smallest distance from us, whether they are termed _Presbyterians_ or _Independents_. Of whom in general I cannot but have a widely different opinion, from that I entertained some years ago: as having since then conversed with many among them, _in whom the root of the matter is_ undeniably _found_; and who labour _to keep a conscience void of offence both toward God and toward man_. I cannot therefore doubt, but every serious man, of either one or the other denomination, does utterly condemn all that inward as well as outward unholiness, which has been above described.

But do you, as a people, avoid what you condemn? Are no whoremongers or adulterers found among you? No children disobedient to their parents? No servants that are slothful or careless? That _answer again_? That do not _honour their masters as is meet in the Lord_? Are there none among you that censure or _speak evil of the ruler of their people_? Are there no drunkards, no gluttons, no luxurious men, no regular _epicures_, none _whose belly is their God_, who, as their fortune permits, _fare sumptuously every day_? Have you no _dishonest dealers_, no _unfair traders_, no _usurers_, or _extortioners_? Have you no _liars_, either for gain, or for good manners, so called? Are you clear of _ceremony_ and _compliment_? Alas, you are sensible, in most if not all these respects, you have now small ♦pre-eminence over us.

♦ “preheminence” replaced with “pre-eminence”

How much more sensible must you be of this, if you do not rest on the surface, but enquire into the bottom of religion, the religion of the heart? For, what inward unholiness, what evil tempers are among us, which have not a place among you also? You likewise bewail that ignorance of God, that want of faith and of the love of God and man, that inward idolatry of various kinds, that pride, ambition and vanity, which rule in the hearts even of those who still have _the form of godliness_. You lament before God, the deep covetousness that _eats so many souls as doth a gangrene_; and perhaps are sometimes ready to cry out, _help, Lord, for there is_ scarce _one godly man left_. Lay to thine hand: _for the faithful are minished from the children of men_!

2. And yet you retain _the truth that is after godliness_, at least, as to the substance of it. You own what is laid down in scripture, both touching the _nature_ and _condition_ of _justification_ and _salvation_. And with regard to the _author of faith and salvation_, you have always avowed, even in the face of your enemies, that _it is God which worketh in us, both to will and to do, of his good pleasure_: that it is his Spirit alone who _teacheth us all things_, all we know of _the deep things of God_: that every true believer has _an unction from the Holy One_ to _lead him into all_ necessary _truth_: that _because we are sons, God sendeth forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying Abba, Father_; and that _this Spirit, beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God_.

How is it then, my brethren (so I can call you now, although I could not have done it heretofore;) how is it, that the generality of you also are fallen from your stedfastness? In the times of persecution ye stood as a rock, tho’ _all the waves and storms went over_ you. But who can bear ease and fulness of bread! How are you changed, since these came upon you! Do not many of you now (practically I mean) put something else, in the room of _faith that worketh by love_? Do not some of you suppose that gravity and composedness of behaviour, are the main parts of Christianity? Especially, provided you neither swear, nor take the name of God in vain. Do not others imagine, that to abstain from idle songs, and those fashionable diversions commonly used by persons of their fortune, is almost the whole of religion? To which if they add family prayer, and a strict observation of the sabbath, then doubtless all is well! Nay my brethren, this is well, so far as it goes: but how little a way does it go toward Christianity? All these things, you cannot but see, are merely _external_; whereas Christianity is an _inward_ thing; without which the most beautiful outward form is lighter than vanity.

Do not others of you rest in _conviction_? Or good _desires_? Alas, what do these avail? A man may be _convinced_ he is sick, yea deeply convinced, and yet never recover. He may _desire_ food, yea with earnest desire, and nevertheless perish with hunger. And thus I may be _convinced_ I am a sinner; but this will not justify me before God. And I may _desire_ salvation (perhaps by fits and starts, for many years) and yet be lost for ever. Come close then to the point, and keep to your principles. Have _you_ received the Holy Ghost; the Spirit which is of God, and is bestowed by him on all believers, _that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God_? The time is short. Do you experience now that _unction from the Holy One_? Without which you confess _outward_ religion, whether negative or positive is nothing. Nay, and inward _conviction_ of our wants is nothing, unless those wants are in fact supplied. Good _desires_ also are nothing, unless we actually attain what we are stirred up to desire. For still, _if any man_ have _not the Spirit of_ Christ, whatever he desires, _he is none of his_. O my brother, beware you stop not short! Beware you never account yourself a Christian, no not in the lowest degree, till God _hath sent forth the Spirit of_ Christ _into_ your _heart_, and that _Spirit bear witness with_ your _spirit, that you are a child of God_.

3. One step farther from us, are you who are called (though not by your own choice) _Anabaptists_. The smallness of your number, compared to that of either the _Presbyterians_, or those of the _church_, makes it easier for you to have an exact knowledge of the behaviour of all your members, and to put away from among you every one that _walketh not according to the doctrine you have received_.

But is this done? Do all your members adorn the gospel? Are they all _holy as he which hath called us is holy_? I fear not. I have known some instances to the contrary; and doubtless you know many more. There are unholy, outwardly unholy men, in _your_ congregations also: men that prophane either the name or the day of the Lord; that do not honour their natural or civil parents; that know not how to possess their bodies in sanctification and honour; that are intemperate, either in meat or drink, gluttonous, sensual, luxurious; that variously offend against justice, mercy or truth, in their intercourse with their neighbour, and do not walk by that _royal law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself_.

But how is this consistent with your leading principle, “That no man ought to be admitted to baptism, till he has that repentance whereby we forsake sin, and living faith in God, through Christ?”

For if no man ought to be admitted into a church or congregation, who has not actual faith and repentance, then neither ought any who has them not, to continue in any congregation. And consequently an open sinner cannot remain among you, unless you practically renounce your main principle.

4. I refer it to your own serious consideration, whether one reason, why unholy men are still suffered to remain among you, may not be this; that many of you have unawares put _opinion_ in the room of _faith_ and _repentance_? But how fatal a mistake is this? Supposing your opinion to be true, yet a _true opinion_ concerning _repentance_ is wholly different from the thing itself. And you may have a _true opinion_ concerning _faith_ all your life and yet die an unbeliever.

Supposing therefore the _opinion_ of _particular redemption_ true, yet how little does it avail toward salvation? Nay, were we to suppose, that _none can be saved_ who do not hold it, it does not follow, that _all will be saved_ who do. So that if the one proved a man to be in ever so _bad a state_, the other would not prove him to be _in a good one_. And consequently, whosoever leans on this opinion, _leans on the staff of a broken reed_.

Would to God that ye would mind this one thing, To _make your own calling and election sure_! That every one of you (leaving the rest of the world to him that made it) would himself _repent and believe the gospel_! Not repent alone (for then you know only the baptism of _John_) but believe and be _baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire_. Are you still a stranger to that inward baptism, wherewith all true believers are baptized? May the Lord constrain you to cry out, _How am I straitened till it be accomplished_! Even till the love of God inflame your heart, and consume all your vile affections. Be not content with any thing less than this! It is this loving faith alone which opens our way into _the general church of the first-born, whose names are written in heaven_! Which giveth us to _enter within the veil, where_ Jesus _our fore-runner is gone before us_!

5. There is a still wider difference in _some_ points, between us and the people usually termed _Quakers_. But not in _these_ points. You, as well as we, condemn _all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men_; all those _works_ of the devil which were recited above, and all those _tempers_ from which they spring.

You ♦agree, That we are all to be _taught of_ God; and to be _led by his Spirit_: that the Spirit alone _reveals_ all truth, and _inspires_ all holiness: that by his inspiration men attain _perfect love_, the love which _purifies them as he is pure_: and that through this knowledge and love of God, they have power to _do always such things as please him_; to worship God, a Spirit, according to his own will, that is, _in spirit and in truth_.

♦ “argree” replaced with “agree” per Errata

Hence you infer, That _formal worship_ is not acceptable to God, but that alone that springs from God in the heart: you infer also, that they who are led by him, will use great _plainness of speech_, and great _plainness of dress_, seeking no _outward adorning_, but _only the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit_.

I will look no farther now, than simply to ♦enquire, Whether you are consistent with these principles?

♦ “equire” replaced with “enquire” per Errata

To begin with the latter: “He that is led by the Spirit will use great plainness of speech.”

* _You_ would have said, “will use the plain language.” But that term leads you into a grand mistake. That term, “_the_ plain language,” naturally leads you to think of _one particular_ way of speaking; as if _plainness of speech_ implied no more, than the use of that _particular form_.

* Alas! my brethren! Know ye not, that your ancestors designed this, only as a _specimen_ of _plain language_? And is it possible that you should mistake the sample for the whole bale of cloth?

Consult the light God has given you, and you must see that _plainness of speech_ does not lie in _a single point_, but implies an open, undisguised sincerity, a child-like simplicity _in all we speak_.

* I do not desire you to refrain from saying _thou_ or _thee_. I would not spend ten words about it. But I desire you whenever you speak at all, to speak the truth, and nothing but the truth. I desire your words may always be the picture of your heart. This is truly _plain language_.

* Either do not pretend to _plain speech_ at all, or be _uniformly plain_. Are you so? I pray, consider. Do you never _compliment_? I do not suppose you say, “Sir, your very humble servant.” But do you say no _civil things_? Do you never _flatter_? Do you not _commend_ any man or woman to their face? Perhaps farther than you do behind their back. Is this _plainness of speech_? Do you never _dissemble_? Do you speak to all persons, high or low, rich or poor, just what you think, neither more nor less, and in the shortest and clearest manner you can? If not, what a mere jest is your _plain language_? You carry your condemnation in your own breast.

6. You hold also, That “he which is led by the Spirit, will use great _plainness of dress_, seeking no _outward adorning_, but only the _ornament of a meek and quiet spirit_.”

And that, in particular, “he will leave _gold and costly apparel_, to those who know not God.”

* Now I appeal to every serious, reasonable man among you, Do your people act consistently with this principle? Do not many of your women wear _gold_ upon their very feet? And many of your men use _ornaments of gold_? Are you a stranger to these things? Have you not seen with your eyes (such ♦trifles as will scarce bear the naming) their _canes_ and _snuff-boxes_ glitter, even in your solemn assembly, while ye were waiting together upon God? Surely, they are not yet so lost to modesty, as to pretend, that they do not use them by way of _ornament_. If they do not, if it be only out of necessity, a _plain oaken stick_ will supply the place of the one, and a piece of _horn_ or _tin_ will unexceptionably answer all the reasonable ends of the other.

♦ “triflings” replaced with “trifles” per Errata

* To speak freely (and do not count me your enemy for this) you cannot but observe upon cool reflection, that you retain just so much of your _antient_ practice, as leaves your _present_ without excuse; as makes the inconsistency between the one and the other, glaring and undeniable. For instance: this woman is too strict a _Quaker_, to lay out a _shilling_ in a _necklace_. Very well; but she is not too strict to lay out _fourscore guineas_ in a repeating _watch_. Another would not for the world wear any _lace_, no, not an _edging_ round her cap. But she will wear _point_; and sees no harm in it at all, though it should be of twelve times the price. In one kind of _apron_ or _handkerchief_ she dares not lay out twenty shillings; but in another sort, lays out twenty pounds. And what multitudes of you are very jealous, as to the _colour_ and _form_ of your apparel, (the least important of all the circumstances that relate to it) while in the most important, the expence, they are without any concern at all? They will not put on a _scarlet_ or _crimson_ stuff, but the richest _velvet_, so it be black or grave. They will not touch a coloured _ribband_; but will cover themselves with a _stiff silk_ from head to foot. They cannot bear _purple_: but make no scruple at all of being cloathed in _fine linen_: yea, to such a degree, that the _linen of the Quakers_ is grown almost into a proverb.

Surely you cannot be ignorant, that the sinfulness of _fine apparel_, lies chiefly in the _expensiveness_. In that it is robbing God and the poor: it is defrauding the fatherless and widow; it is wasting the food of the hungry, and with-holding his raiment from the naked, to consume it on our own lusts.

7. Let it not be said, that this affects only _a few_ among you, and those, of the _younger_ and _lighter_ sort. Yes it does; your whole body: for why do you, who are _elder_ and _graver_, suffer such things? Why do ye not vehemently reprove them? And if thy repent not, in spite of all worldly considerations, expel them out of your society? In conniving at their sin, you make it your own; _you_, especially who are _preachers_. Do you say, “They cannot bear it; they will not hear:” Alas, into what state then are ye fallen! But whether they will bear it or not, what is that to thee? Thou art to _speak, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear_. To say the very truth, I am afraid, you rather strengthen their hands in their wickedness. For you not only ¹do not testify against it in the congregation, but even sit at their table and reprove them not. Why then, thou also art one of _the dumb dogs that cannot bark, sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber_.

¹ You say, “You _do testify against it_ in the congregation.” Against what? “Against gay and gaudy apparel.” I grant it. But this is not the thing I speak of. You quite mistake my mark. Do you testify against the _costliness_ of their apparel, however plain and grave it may be? Against the _price_ of the velvet, the linen, the silk, or raiment of whatever kind? If you do this frequently and explicitly, you are clear. If not, own and amend the fault.

It is easy to discern how your people fell into this snare of the devil. You were at first a poor, despised, afflicted people. Then, what some of you had to spare, was little enough to relieve the needy members of your own society. In a few years you increased in goods, and were able to relieve more than your _own_ poor. But you did not bestow all that you had to spare from them, on the poor belonging to other societies. It remained either to lay it up, or to expend it in superfluities. Some chose one way, and some the other.

* Lay this deeply to heart, ye who are now a poor, despised, afflicted people. Hitherto ye are not able to relieve your own poor. But if ever _your_ substance increase, see that ye be not straitened in your own bowels, that ye fall not ♦into the same snare of the devil. Before any of you either lay up treasures on earth, or indulge needless expence of any kind, I pray the Lord God to scatter you to the corners of the earth, and blot out your name from under heaven!

♦ “in” replaced with “into” per Errata

I fix this charge upon every _preacher_, in particular, who saw a young woman, daughter to one of the _Quakers_ in _London_, going to be married in apparel suitable to her diamond buckle, which cost a hundred guineas. Could you see this, and not call heaven and earth to witness against it? Then I witness against thee, in the name of the Lord, thou art a _blind leader of the blind_: thou _strainest a gnat and swallowest a camel_!

Verily the sin both of teachers and hearers, is herein exceeding great. And the little attempts toward plainness of apparel, which are still observable among you (I mean, in the _colour_ and _form_ of your cloaths, and the _manner of_ putting them on) only testify against you, that you were once what you know in your hearts you are not now.

8. I come now to your main principle, “We are all to be _taught of_ God, to be _inspired_ and _led by his Spirit_. And then we shall _worship_ him, not with dead _form_, but _in spirit and in truth_.”

These are deep and weighty words. But many hold fast the words, and are utterly ignorant of their meaning. Is not this an exceeding common case? Are not you conscious, abundance of your friends have done so? With whom the being _taught of God_ and _led by his Spirit_, are mere words of course, that mean just nothing. And their crude and indigested accounts, of the things they did not understand, have raised that deep prejudice against these great truths, which we find in the generality of men.

Do some of you ask, “But dost thou acknowledge _the inward principle_?” I do, my friends: and I would to God every one of you acknowledged it as much. I say, all religion is either _empty shew_, or _perfection by inspiration_; in other words, The obedient love of God, by the supernatural knowledge of God: yea, all that which _is not of faith is sin_; all which does not spring from this loving knowledge of God; which knowledge cannot begin, or subsist one moment, without _immediate inspiration_: not only all public worship, and all private prayer, but every thought, in common life, and word and work. What think you of this? Do you not stagger? Dare you carry _the inward principle_ so far? Do you acknowledge it to be the very truth? But alas! what is the acknowledging it? Dost thou experience this principle in thyself: What saith thy heart? Does God dwell therein? And doth it now eccho to the voice of God? Hast thou the _continual inspiration_ of his Spirit, filling thy heart with his love, as with a well of water, springing up into everlasting life?

* 9. Art thou acquainted with the _leading of his Spirit_, not by notion only, but by living experience? I fear very many of you talk of this, who do not so much as know what it means. How does the Spirit of God _lead_ his children, to this, or that particular action? Do you imagine, it is by _blind impulse_ only? By _moving_ you to do it, you know not why? Not so. He leads us by our _eye_, at least as much as by the _hand_; and by _light_ as well as by _heat_. He _shews_ us the way wherein we should go, as well as _incites_ us to walk therein. For example. Here is a man ready to perish with hunger. How am _I led by the Spirit_ to relieve him? First, by his _convincing_ me, it is the will of God I should, and secondly by his filling my heart with _love_ toward him. Both this _light_ and this _heat_ are the gift of God; are wrought in me by the same Spirit: who _leads_ me, by this _conviction_ as well as _love_, to go and feed that man. This is the plain, rational account of the _ordinary_ leading of the Spirit. But how far from that which some have given!

* Art _thou_ thus led by the Spirit to every good word and work? Till God ♦hath thereby made thy faith perfect? Dost thou know what _faith_ is? It is a loving, obedient sight of a present and reconciled God. Now where this is, there is no _dead form_; neither can be, so long as it continues. But all that is said or done is full of God, full of Spirit and life and power.

♦ “had” replaced with “hath” per Errata

10. But perhaps, as much as you talk of them, you do not know the difference between _form_ and _Spirit_; or between worshipping God in a _formal_ way, and worshipping him _in spirit and in truth_.

The Lord is that Spirit. The seeing and feeling and loving him is spiritual _life_. And whatever is said or done in the sight or love of God, that is full of _spirit and life_. All beside this is _form_, mere dead _form_; whether it be in our public addresses to God, or in our private; or in our worldly business, or in our daily conversation.

* But if so, how poor and mean and narrow have your views and conceptions been! You was afraid of _formality_ in _public worship_. And reason good. But was you afraid of it no where else? Did not you consider, that _formality_ in _common life_, is also an abomination to the Lord? And that it can have no place in any thing we say or do, but so far as we forget God? O watch against it in every place, every moment, that you may every moment see and love God: and consequently, at all times and in all places, worship him _in Spirit and in truth_.

My brethren, permit me to add a few words, in tender love to your souls. Do not you _lean_ too much on the spirit and power which you believe rested upon your _forefathers_? Suppose it did! Will that avail _you_, if you do not drink into the same spirit? And how evident is this! That whatever you once were, ye are now _shorn of your strength_. Ye are weak and become like other men. The Lord is well nigh departed from you. Where is now the spirit, the life, the power? Be not offended with my plain dealing, when I beseech _you_ who are able to weigh things calmly, to open your eyes and see multitudes even in the church, pursuing, yea and attaining the _substance_ of spiritual life, and leaving unto you the _shadow_. Nay a still greater evil is before you: for if ye find not some effectual means to prevent it, your rising generation will utterly cast off the _shadow_ as well as the _substance_.

11. There is an abundantly greater difference still, according to your own account, between us who profess ourselves members of the church of _England_, and you who are members of the church of _Rome_. But notwithstanding this, do you not agree with us in condemning the vices above recited? Prophaneness, drunkenness, whoredom, adultery, theft, disobedience to parents, and such like? And how unhappily do you agree with us in _practising_ the very vices which you _condemn_?

And yet you acknowledge (nay and frequently contend for this with a peculiar earnestness) that every Christian is called to be _zealous of good works_, as well as to _deny himself and take up his cross daily_. How then do you depart from your own principles, when you are gluttons, drunkards or epicures? When you live at your ease, in all the elegance and voluptuousness of a plentiful fortune! How will you reconcile the being adorned with gold, arrayed in purple and fine linen, and faring sumptuously every day, with the _denying yourself and taking up your cross daily_? Surely while you indulge the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eye, and the pride of life, the excellent rules of self-denial that abound in your own writers, leave you of all men most inexcusable.

12. Neither can this self-indulgence be reconciled, with the being _zealous of good works_. For by this needless and continual expence, you disable yourself from doing good. You bind your own hands. You make it impossible for you to do that good which otherwise you might. So that you injure the poor in the same proportion as you poison your own soul. You might have cloathed the naked; but what was due to them, was thrown away on your costly apparel. You might have fed the hungry, entertained the stranger, relieved them that were sick or in prison. But the superfluities of your own table swallowed up that whereby they should have been profited. And so this wasting of thy Lord’s goods, is an instance of complicated wickedness; since hereby thy poor brother perisheth, for whom Christ died.

I will not recommend to you either the writings or examples of those whom you account _hereticks_, (although some of these, if you could view them with impartial eyes, might _provoke you to jealousy_.) But O! that God would write in your hearts the rules of self-denial and love, laid down by _Thomas a Kempis_! Or that you would follow both in this and in good works, that burning and shining light of your own church, the Marquis _de Renty_! Then would all who know and loved the Lord rejoice to acknowledge you as the _church of the living God_: when ye were zealous of every good word and work; and abstained from all appearance of evil: when it was hereby shewn that you were filled with the Holy Ghost, and delivered from all unholy tempers: when ye were all _unblameable and unrebukable, without spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, shewing forth_ to all Jews, infidels and hereticks, by your active, patient, spotless love of God and man, _the praises of him, who had called you out of darkness into his marvellous light_.

13. Men and brethren, _Children of the seed of Abraham_, suffer me to speak a few words to you also; you who do not allow, that Messiah _the Prince is_ already come and _cut off_. However you so far hear _Moses_ and the prophets, as to allow, 1. That _it is the inspiration of the Holy One, which giveth man understanding_, and that all the true children of God _are taught of God_. 2. That the substance both of the law and the prophets, is contained in that one word, _Thou shalt love the_ Lord _thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and thy neighbour as thyself_. ♦3. That the sure fruit of love is obedience, _ceasing from evil, and doing good_.

♦ insert “3.” per Errata

And do _you_ walk by this rule? Have _you yourselves_ that _inspiration of the Holy One_? Are _you_ taught of God? Hath he opened your understanding? Have you the inward knowledge of the most High? I fear not. Perhaps you know little more, even of the meaning of the words than a _Mahometan_.

Let us go a little farther. Do you _love the_ Lord _your_ God _with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength? Can you say, Whom have I in heaven but thee; and there is none upon earth that I desire besides thee?_ Do you desire God at all? Do you desire to have any thing to do with him, till you can keep the world no longer? Are you not content, so you enjoy the good things of earth, to let God stand afar off? Only calling upon him now and then, when you cannot well do without him. Why then you do not _love_ God at all, tho’ you will sometimes condescend to _use_ him. You _love_ the world. This possesses your _heart_. This therefore is your God. You renounce the God of your fathers, the God of _Israel_; you are still _uncircumcised in heart_. Your own conscience bears witness, you in this no more hear _Moses_ and the prophets, than you do Jesus of _Nazareth_.

14. From _Moses_ and the prophets it has been shewn, that your forefathers were _a faithless and stubborn generation; a generation which set not their hearts aright, and whose spirit cleaved not stedfastly unto God_. And this you acknowledge yourselves. If you are asked, how is it that the promise is not fulfilled? Seeing _the scepter is_ long since _departed from Judah_, why is not _Shiloh_ come? Your usual answer is, “because of the sins of our fathers, God hath delayed his coming.” Have _you_ then reformed from the sins of your fathers? Are _you_ turned unto the Lord your God? Nay, do ye not tread in the same steps? Bating that single point of outward idolatry, what abomination did _they_ ever commit, which _you_ have not committed also? Which the generality of you do not commit still, according to your power? If therefore the coming of the Messiah was hindered by the sins of your forefathers, then by the same rule, your continuance therein will hinder his coming to the end of the world.

_Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God_ is, that he would _gather the outcasts of Israel_. And I doubt not, but when the fulness of the _Gentiles_ is come in, then _all Israel shall be saved_. But mean time, is there not great cause that ye should say with _Daniel_, _O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of face, as at this day, to the men of Judah, and unto all Israel. O Lord, we have sinned, we have rebelled against thee, neither have we obeyed the voice of the Lord our God. Yet O our God, incline thine ear, and hear; open thine eyes and behold our desolations; for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies. O Lord hear! O Lord forgive! O Lord, hearken and do! Defer not, for thine own sake; for thy city and thy people that are called by thy name._

15. I cannot conclude without addressing myself to you also, who do not admit either the _Jewish_ or _Christian_ revelation. But still you desire to be happy. You own the essential difference between vice and virtue; and acknowledge, (as did all the wiser _Greeks_ and _Romans_) that vice cannot consist with happiness. You allow likewise that gratitude and benevolence, self-knowledge and modesty, mildness, temperance, patience and generosity, are justly numbered among virtues; and that ingratitude and malice, envy and ill-nature, pride, insolence and vanity, gluttony and luxury, covetousness and discontent, are vices of the highest kind.

Now let us calmly enquire, how far _your_ life is consistent with your principles.

* You seek happiness. But you find it not. You come no nearer it with all your labours. You are not happier than you was a year ago. Nay, I doubt you are more unhappy. Why is this, but because you look for happiness there, where you own it cannot be found? Indeed, what is there on earth which can long satisfy a man of understanding? His soul is too large for the world he lives in. He wants more room.

Æstuat infelix augusto limite Mundi, Ut brevibus clausus Gyaris, parvaque seripho.

He has already travelled through all which is called pleasure; diversions and entertainments of every kind. But among these he can find no enjoyment of any depth; they are empty, shallow, superficial things: they pleased for a while, but the gloss is gone: and now they are dull and tasteless. And what has he next? Only the same things again; for this world affords nothing more. It can supply him with no change. Go, feed again: but it is upon one dish still. Thus

_Occidit miseros crambe repetita._

Yet what remedy under the sun!

* 16. The sounder judgment, the stronger understanding you have, the sooner are you sated with the world. And the more deeply convinced, all that cometh is vanity; foolish, insipid, nauseous. You see the foibles of men in so much clearer a light, and have the keener sense of the emptiness of life. Here you are, a poor, unsatisfied inhabitant of an unquiet world; turning your weary eyes on this side and on that side: seeking rest, but finding none. You seem to be _out of your place_: neither the persons nor things that surround you are _such as you want_. You have a confused idea of _something_ better than all this; but you know not where to find it. You are always gasping for _something_ which you cannot attain, no, not if you range to the uttermost parts of the earth.

But this is not all. You are not only _negatively_ unhappy, as finding nothing whereon to stay the weight of your soul; but _positively_ so, because you are unholy: you are miserable, because you are vicious. Are you not vicious? Are you then full of gratitude to him, who giveth you life and breath, and all things? Not so; you rather spurn his gifts, and murmur at him that gave them. How often has your heart said, God did not use you well? How often have you questioned either his wisdom or goodness? Was this well done? What kind of gratitude is this? It is the best you are master of. Then take knowledge of yourself. Black ingratitude is rooted in your inmost frame. You can no more love God, than you can see him; or than you can be happy without that love.

Neither (how much soever you may pique yourself upon it) are you a lover of mankind. Can love and malice consist? Benevolence and envy? O do not put out your own eyes. And are not these horrid tempers in _you_? Do not you envy one man, and bear malice or ill-will to another? I know you call these dispositions by softer names; but names change not the nature of things. You are pained that one should enjoy what you cannot enjoy yourself. Call this what you please, it is rank envy. You are grieved, that a second enjoys even what you have yourself; you rejoice in seeing a third unhappy. Do not flatter yourself: this is malice, venomous malice, and nothing else. And how could you ever think of being happy, with malice and envy in your heart? Just as well might you expect to be at ease, while you held burning coals in your bosom.

17. I intreat you to reflect, whether there are not other inhabitants in your breast, which leave no room for happiness there. May you not discover, through a thousand disguises, pride? Too high an opinion of yourself? Vanity, thirst of praise, even (who would believe it?) of the applause of knaves and fools? Unevenness or sourness of temper? Proneness to anger or revenge? Peevishness, fretfulness, or pining discontent? Nay, perhaps even covetousness.――And did you ever think, happiness could dwell with these? Awake out of that senseless dream. Think not of reconciling things incompatible. All these tempers are essential misery. So long as any of these are harboured in your breast, you must be a stranger to inward peace. What avails it you, if there be no other hell? Whenever these fiends are let loose upon you, you will be constrained to own,

“Hell is where’er I am: myself am hell;”

And can the supreme Being love those tempers, which you yourself abhor in all but yourself? If not, they imply guilt as well as misery. Doubtless they do. Only enquire of your own heart. How often in the mid career of your vice have you felt a secret reproof, which you knew not how to bear, and therefore stifled as soon as possible?

18. And did not even _this_ point at an hereafter? A future state of existence? The more reasonable among you have no doubt of this; you do not imagine the whole man dies together: although you hardly suppose the soul, once disengaged, will dwell again in an house of clay. But how will your soul subsist without it? How are _you_ qualified for a separate state? Suppose this earthly covering, this vehicle of organized matter, whereby you hold commerce with the material world, were now to drop off! Now, what would you do in the regions of immortality? You cannot eat or drink there. You cannot indulge either the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eye, or the pride of life. You love only worldly things; and they are gone, fled as smoke, driven away for ever. Here is no possibility of sensual enjoyments; and you have a rellish for nothing else. O what a separation is this, from all that you hold dear! What a breach is made, never to be healed!

But beside this, you are unholy: full of evil tempers: for you did not put off these with the body. You did not leave pride, revenge, malice, envy, discontent behind you, when you left the world. And now you are no longer cheared by the light of the sun, nor diverted by the flux of various objects: but those dogs of hell are let loose to prey upon your soul, with their whole, unrebated strength. Nor is there any hope, that your spirit will now ever be restored to its original purity; not even that poor hope of a purging fire, so elegantly described by the _Heathen_ poet some ages before the notion was revived among the doctrines of the _Romish_ church

――Aliæ tenduntur inanes Suspensæ ad ventos; aliis sub gurgite vasto Infectum eluitur scelus, aut exuritur igni―― Donec longa dies, exacto temporis orbe, Concretam exemit labem, purumque reliquit Æthereum sensum atque aurai simplicis ignem.

19. What a great gulph then is fixed between you and happiness, both in this world and that which is to come? Well may you shudder at the thought! More especially when you are about to enter on that untried state of existence. For what a prospect is this, when you stand on the verge of life, ready to launch out into eternity? What can you then think? You see nothing before you. All is dark and dreary. On the very best supposition, how well may you address your parting soul in the words of dying _Adrian_:

“Poor, little, pretty, fluttering thing, Must we no longer live together? And dost thou prune thy trembling wing, To take thy flight thou know’st not whither?

Thy pleasing vein, thy hum’rous folly Is all neglected, all forgot; And pensive, wavering, melancholy, Thou hop’st, and fear’st thou know’st not what.”

“Thou know’st not what!” Here is the sting, suppose there were no other. To be _thou knowest not what_? * Not for a month, or year, but thro’ the countless ages of eternity! What a tormenting uncertainty must this be? What racking unwillingness must it occasion, to exchange even this known vale of tears, for the unknown valley of the shadow of death?

“And is there no cure for this?” Indeed there is an effectual cure; even the knowledge and love of God. There is a knowledge of God which _unveils_ eternity, and a love of God which _endears_ it. That knowledge makes the great abyss _visible_; and _uncertainty_ vanishes away. That love makes it _amiable_ to the soul, so that _fear_ has no more place! But the moment God says, by the welcome angel of death, “Come thou up hither!” She

“Claps the glad wing and towers away, And mingles with the blaze of day.”

20. See ye not, what advantage every way, a _Christian_ has over _you_? Probably the reason you saw it not before was, because you knew none but _nominal_ Christians; men who professed to _believe_ more (in _their way_ of believing) but had no more of the knowledge or love of God than yourselves. So that with regard to real, _inward religion_, you stood upon even ground. And perhaps in many branches of _outward religion_, the advantage was on _your_ side.

May the Lord, the God of the Christians, either reform these wretches, or take them away from the earth! That lay this grand stumbling-block in the way of those who desire to know the will of God!

O ye who desire to know his will, regard them not! If it be possible, blot them out of your remembrance.

They neither _can_ nor _will_ do you any good. O suffer them not to do you harm. Be not prejudiced against Christianity by those who know nothing at all of it. Nay, they condemn it, all _real substantial_ Christianity; they speak evil of the thing they know not. They have a kind of _cant_ word for the whole religion of the heart. They call it _enthusiasm_.

I will briefly lay before you the ground of the matter, and appeal to you yourselves for the reasonableness of it.

* 21. What a miserable drudgery is the service of God, unless I love the God whom I serve? But I cannot love one whom I know not. How then can I love God till I know him? And how is it possible I should know God, unless he make himself known unto me? By _analogy_ or proportion? Very good. But where is that proportion to be found? What proportion does a creature bear to his Creator? What is the proportion between finite and infinite?

I grant, the _existence_ of the creatures demonstratively shews the _existence_ of their Creator. The whole creation speaks, that there is a God. But that is not the point in question. I know there is a God. Thus far is clear. But who will shew me what that God ♦is? The more I reflect the more convinced I am, that it is not possible for any of all the creatures, to take off the veil which is on my heart, that I might discern this unknown God; to draw the curtain back which now hangs between, that I may see him which is invisible.

♦ “is.” replaced with “is?” per Errata

This veil ♦or flesh now hides him from my sight. And who is able to make it transparent! So that I may perceive _through this glass_, God always before me, till I see him _face to face_.

♦ “of” replaced with “or” per Errata

I want to know this great God who filleth heaven and earth: who is above, beneath, and on every side, in all places of his dominion; who just now besets me behind and before, and lays his hand upon me. And yet I am no more acquainted with him, than with one of the inhabitants of _Jupiter_ or _Saturn_.

O my friend, how will you get one step farther, unless God reveal himself to your soul?

22. And why should this seem a thing incredible to you? That God, a Spirit, and the Father of the Spirits of all flesh, should discover himself to your spirit, which is itself the breath of God, _Divinæ Particula Auræ_? Any more than that material things should discover themselves to your material eye. Is it any more repugnant to reason, that spirit should influence spirit, than that matter should influence matter? Nay, is not the former the more intelligible of the two? For there is the utmost difficulty in conceiving, how matter should influence matter at all: how that which is totally _passive_ should _act_. Neither can we rationally account either for gravitation, attraction, or any natural motion whatsoever, but by supposing in all the finger of God, who alone conquers that _vis inertiæ_, which is essential to every particle of matter, and worketh all in all.

Now if God should ever open the eyes of your understanding, must not the love of God be the immediate consequence? Do you imagine you can see God without loving him? Is it possible in the nature of things? _Si virtus conspiceretur occulis_, said the old Heathen, _mirabiles amores excitaret sui_. How much more if you see him who is the original fountain, the great archetype of all virtue, will that sight raise in you a love that is wonderful, such as the gay and busy world know not of!

23. What benevolence also, what tender love to the whole of human kind, will you drink in, together with the love of God, from the unexhausted source of love? And how easy is it to conceive, that more and more of his image will be then transfused into your soul? That from disinterested love, all other divine tempers will, as it were naturally, spring? Mildness, gentleness, patience, temperance, justice, sincerity, contempt of the world; yea, whatsoever things are venerable and lovely, whatsoever are justly of good report.

And when you thus love God and all mankind, and are transformed into his likeness, then the commandments of God will not be grievous; you will no more complain, that they destroy the comforts of life. So far from it, that they will be the very joy of your heart; ways of pleasantness, paths of peace! You will experience here that solid happiness, which you had elsewhere sought in vain. Without servile fear or anxious care, so long as you continue on earth, you will gladly do the will of God here, as the angels do it in heaven. And when the time is come that you should depart hence, when God says, “Arise and come away,” you will pass with joy unspeakable out of the body, into all the fulness of God.

* Now does not your own heart condemn you, if you call _this_ religion _enthusiasm_? O leave that to those blind zealots, who tack together a sett of opinions and an outside worship, and call this poor, dull, lifeless thing, by the sacred name of _Christianity_. Well might you account _such Christianity_ as this, a mere piece of empty pageantry, fit indeed to keep the vulgar in awe, but beneath the regard of a man of understanding.

But in how different a light does it now appear? If there be such a religion as I have sketched out, must not every reasonable man see, there is nothing on earth to be desired in comparison of it?――But if any man desire this, let him ask of God: he giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not.

24. May you not ask, quite consistently with your principles, in some manner resembling this;

O thou Being of beings, thou cause of all, thou seest my heart; thou understandest all my thoughts. But how small a part of thy ways do I understand! I know not what is above, beneath, on every side. I know not my own soul. Only this I know, I am not what I ought to be. I see and approve the virtue which I have not. I do not love thee, neither am I thankful. I commend the love of mankind; but I feel it not. Thou hast seen hatred, malice, envy in my heart. Thou hast seen anger, murmuring, discontent. These uneasy passions harrow up my soul. I cannot rest, while I am under this yoke. Nor am I able to shake it off, I am unhappy, and that thou knowest.

Have compassion upon me, thou whose years do not fail! On me, who have but a short time to live. I rise up, and am cut down as a flower. I flee as it were a shadow. Yet a little while, and I return to dust, and have no more place under the sun.

Yet I know thou hast made my soul to live for ever. But I know not where; and I am unwilling to try. I tremble, I am afraid to go thither, whence I shall not return. I stand quivering on the edge of the gulph; for clouds and darkness rest upon it. O God! _Must_ I go always “creeping with terrors, and plunge into eternity with a peradventure!”

O thou lover of men, is there no help in thee? I have heard (what indeed _my_ heart cannot ♦conceive) that thou revealest thyself to those that seek thee, and pourest thy love into their hearts: and that they who know and love thee, walk through the shadow of death and fear no evil. O that this were so! That there was such an unspeakable gift, given to the children of men! For then might _I_ hope for it. O God, if there be, give it unto _me_! Speak that _I_ may see thee! Make thyself known unto _me_ also in the manner that thou knowest! In any wise let me know thee and love thee, that I may be formed after thy likeness! That I may be love, as thou art love; that I may now be happy in thee; and when thou wilt, fall into the abyss of thy love, and enjoy thee through the ages of eternity!

♦ “receive” replaced with “conceive” per Errata

A farther APPEAL To MEN of REASON _and_ RELIGION.

PART III.

_And when he came near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace!_ Luke xix. 41, 42.

I. 1. NOW, what can an impartial person think concerning the present state of _religion_ in _England_? Is there a nation under the sun which is so deeply fallen from the very _first principles_ of all religion? Where is the country, in which is found so utter a disregard to even _Heathen morality_? Such a thorough _contempt_ of _justice_ and _truth_, and all that should be dear and honourable to rational creatures?

What species of _vice_ can possibly be named, even of those that nature itself abhors, of which we have not had, for many years, a plentiful and still increasing harvest? What _sin_ remains either in _Rome_ or _Constantinople_, which we have not _imported_ long ago (if it was not of our native growth) and _improved_ upon ever since? Such a _complication_ of villainies of every kind, considered with all their _aggravations_, such a _scorn_ of whatever bears the face of _virtue_, such _injustice_, _fraud_, and _falshood_: above all, such _perjury_, and such a _method of law_, we may defy the whole world to produce.

What multitudes are found throughout our land, who do not even _profess_ any religion at all? And what numbers of those who _profess much_, and confute their profession by their _practice_? Yea, and perhaps by their exorbitant pride, vanity, covetousness, rapaciousness, or oppression, cause the very _name of religion_, to stink in the nostrils, of many (otherwise) _reasonable_ men?

2. “However, we have many thousands still, of truly, _virtuous_ and _religious_ men.” Wherein does their _religion_ consist? In _righteousness_ and true _holiness_? In _love_ stronger than death? Fervent _gratitude_ to God? And tender _affection_ to all his creatures? Is their religion, the religion of the _heart_? A renewal of soul in the image of God? Do they _resemble_ him they _worship_? Are they free from pride, from vanity, from malice and envy; from ambition and avarice, from passion and lust; from every uneasy and unlovely _temper_? Alas, I fear neither they (the great part at least) nor _you_, know what _this religion_ means; or have any more notion of it, than the peasant that holds the plough, of the religion of a _Gymnosophist_.

’Tis well if the _genuine religion_ of Christ has any more alliance with what you _call religion_, than with the _Turkish_ pilgrimages to _Mecca_, or the _Popish_ worship of our Lady of _Loretto_. Have not _you_ substituted in the place of the _religion of the heart_, something (I do not say equally _sinful_, but) equally vain, and foreign to the _worshipping_ of God in _spirit and in truth_?――――What else can be said even of _prayer_, (_public_ or _private_) in the manner wherein you generally perform it? As a thing of _course_, running round and round, in the same dull track, without either the _knowledge_, or _love_ of God? Without one heavenly _temper_, either attained or improved? O what mockery of God is this!

And yet even _this religion_, which can do you no good, may do you much harm. Nay, it is plain, it does: it daily increases your _pride_, as you measure your goodness by the _number_ and _length_ of your performances. It gives you a deep _contempt_ of those, who do not come up to the full _tale_ of your virtues. It inspires men with a _zeal_, which is the very fire of hell, furious, bitter, implacable, unmerciful; often to a degree that extinguishes all compassion, all good nature and humanity. Insomuch, that the execrable _fierceness_ of spirit, which is the natural fruit of such a religion, hath many times, in spite of all ties, divine and human, broke out into open violence, into rapine, murder, sedition, rebellion, civil war, to the desolation of whole cities and countries.

_Tantum_ hæc _Religio potuit suadere malorum_!

3. Now if there be a God, and one that is not a mere idle spectator of the things that are done upon earth, but a rewarder of men and nations according to their works, what can the event of these things be? It was reasonable to believe, that he would have risen long ago and maintained his own cause, either by sending the famine or pestilence among us, or by pouring out his fury in blood. And many wise and holy men have frequently declared, that they daily expected this; that they daily looked for the patience of God to give place, and judgment to rejoice over mercy.

4. Just at this time, when we wanted little of _filling up the measure of our iniquities_, two or three clergymen of the CHURCH of ENGLAND began vehemently to _call sinners to repentance_. In two or three years they had sounded the alarm, to the utmost borders of the land. Many thousands gathered together to hear them; and in every place where they came, many began to shew such a _concern_ for religion, as they never had done before. A stronger _impression_ was made on their minds, of the importance of things eternal, and they had more earnest _desires_ of serving God, than they had ever had from their earliest childhood. Thus did God begin to draw them toward himself, with the cords of love, with the bands of a man.

Many of these were in a short time deeply _convinced_ of the _number_ and _heinousness_ of their _sins_. They were also made throughly sensible of those _tempers_, which are justly hateful to God and man, and of their utter _ignorance_ of God, and entire _inability_, either to know, love, or serve him. At the same time, they saw in the strongest light, the _insignificancy_ of their _outside religion_: nay, and often confessed it before God, as the most abominable _hypocrisy_. Thus did they sink deeper and deeper into that _repentance_, which must ever precede _faith_ in the Son of God.

And from hence sprung _fruits meet for repentance_. The drunkard commenced sober and temperate; the whoremonger abstained from adultery and fornication; the unjust from oppression and wrong. He that had been accustomed to curse and swear, for many years, now swore no more. The sluggard began to work with his hands, that he might eat his own bread. The miser learned to deal his bread to the hungry, and to cover the naked with a garment. Indeed the whole form of their life was changed. They had _left off doing evil and learned to do well_.

* 5. But this was not all. Over and above this _outward change_, they began to experience _inward_ religion. _The love of God was shed abroad in their hearts_, which they continue to enjoy to this day. They love him, _because he first loved us_, and with-held not from us his Son, his only Son. And this love constrains them to love all mankind, all the children of the Father of heaven and earth, and inspires them with every holy and heavenly temper, the whole mind that was in Christ. Hence it is that they are now uniform in their behaviour, unblameable in all manner of conversation. And in whatsoever state they are, they have learned therewith to be content: insomuch that now they can _in every thing give thanks_: they more than patiently acquiesce, they rejoice and are exceeding glad, in all God’s dispensations toward them. For as long as they love God (and that love no man taketh from them) they are always happy in God. Thus they calmly travel on through life, being never weary nor faint in their minds, never repining, murmuring or disatisfied, casting all their care upon God, till the hour comes that they should drop this covering of earth, and return unto the great Father of Spirits. Then especially it is, that they rejoice with joy _unspeakable and full of glory_. You who credit it not, come and see. See these living and dying Christians.

“Happy while on earth they breathe Mightier joys ordain’d to know, Trampling on sin, hell and death, To the third heaven they go?”

Now if these things are so, what reasonable man can deny (supposing the scriptures to be true) that God is now visiting this nation, in a far other manner than we had cause to expect? Instead of pouring out his fierce displeasure upon us, he hath made us yet another tender of mercy: so that even when _sin did_ most _abound, grace_ hath _much more abounded_.

6. Yea, _the grace of God which bringeth salvation_, present salvation from inward and outward sin, hath abounded of late years in such a _degree_ as neither we nor our fathers had known. How _extensive_ is the change which has been wrought on the minds and lives of the people! Know ye not that the sound is gone forth into all the land? That there is scarce a city or considerable town to be found, where some have not been roused out of the sleep of death, and constrained to cry out, in the bitterness of their soul, _What must I do to be saved_? That this _religious concern_ has spread to every age and sex; to most orders and degrees of men? To abundance of those in particular, who in time past, were accounted monsters of wickedness, _drinking in iniquity like water_, and committing all _uncleanness with greediness_.

7. In what age has such a work been wrought, considering the _swiftness_ as well as the _extent_ of it? When have such _numbers_ of sinners in so _short_ a time been recovered from the error of their ways? When hath religion, I will not say, since the _reformation_, but since the time of _Constantine the Great_, made so large a progress in any nation, within so small a space? I believe, hardly can either antient or modern history, supply us with a parallel instance.

* 8. Let understanding men observe also the _depth_ of the work, so _extensively_ and _swiftly_ wrought. It is not a slight or superficial thing: but multitudes of men have been so thoroughly _convinced of sin_, that their _bones were smitten asunder, as it were with a sword dividing the very joints and marrow_. Many of these have been shortly after so filled with _peace and joy_ in _believing_, that whether they were in the body, or out of the body, they could scarcely tell. And in the power of this faith they have trampled under foot, whatever the world accounts either terrible or desirable: having evidenced in the severest trials, so fervent a love to God, so invariable and tender a good-will to mankind, particularly to their enemies, and such a measure of all the fruits of holiness, as were not unworthy the apostolic age. Now so deep a repentance, so firm a faith, so fervent love and unblemished holiness, wrought in so many persons, within so short a time, the world has not seen for many ages.

9. No less remarkable is the _purity_ of the religion which has extended itself so _deeply_ and _swiftly_. I speak ♦particularly, with regard to the doctrines held by those, among whom it is so extended. Those of the church of _England_, at least, must acknowledge this. For where is there a body of people in the realm, who, number for number, so closely adhere to what our church delivers as pure doctrine? Where are those who have approved and do approve themselves more _orthodox_, more sound in their opinions? Is there a _Socinian_ or _Arian_ among them all? Nay, were you to recite the whole catalogue of _heresies_, enumerated by Bishop _Pearson_, it might be asked, who can lay any one of these to their charge?

♦ “paticularly” replaced with “particularly”

Nor is their religion more _pure_ from _heresy_, than it is from _superstition_. In former times, wherever an unusual concern for the things of God hath appeared, on the one hand, _strange and erroneous opinions_ continually sprung up with it; on the other, a _zeal_ for things which were no part of religion, as though they had been essential branches of it. And many have laid as great (if not greater) stress on trifles, as on the weightier matters of the law. But it has not been so in the present case. No stress has been laid on any thing, as though it were necessary to salvation, but what is undeniably contained in the word of God. And of the things contained therein, the stress laid on each, has been in proportion to the nearness of its relation, to what is there laid down as the sum of all, the love of God and our neighbour. So _pure_ from _superstition_, so throughly _scriptural_ is that religion, which has lately spread in this nation.

* 10. It is likewise _rational_ as well as _scriptural_; it is as _pure_ from _enthusiasm_, as from _superstition_. It is true, the contrary has been continually _affirmed_. But to _affirm_ is one thing, to _prove_ is another. Who will _prove_, that it is _enthusiasm_ to _love_ God? Even though we love him with all our heart? To _rejoice_ in the sense of his love to us? To _praise_ him, even with all our strength? Who is able, to _make good_ this charge, against the _love of all mankind_? Or, laying rhetorical flourishes aside, to come close to the question, and _demonstrate_, that it is _enthusiasm_, in every state we are in, therewith to be _content_? I do but just touch on the _general heads_. Ye men of reason, give me a man, who setting raillery and ill names apart, will maintain this by dint of _argument_. If not, own _this religion_ is the thing you seek; sober, manly, rational, divine: however exposed to the censure of those, who are accustomed to revile what they understand not.

11. It may be farther observed, the religion of those we now speak of, is entirely clear from _bigotry_. (Perhaps this might have been ranked with _superstition_, of which it seems to be only a particular species.) They are in no wise _bigotted_ to _opinions_. They do indeed hold right opinions. But they are peculiarly cautious not to rest the weight of Christianity there. They have no such overgrown fondness for any opinions, as to think those alone will make them Christians, or to confine their affection or esteem to those who agree with them therein. There is nothing they are more fearful of than this, lest it should steal upon them unawares. Nor are they _bigotted_ to any particular branch, even of practical religion. They desire indeed to be exact in every jot and tittle, in the very smallest points of _Christian practice_. But they are not attached to one point more than another: they aim at uniform, universal obedience. They contend for nothing _trifling_, as if it was important; for nothing _indifferent_, as if it were necessary; for nothing _circumstantial_, as if it were essential to Christianity; but for every thing in its own order.

12. Above all, let it be observed, that this religion has no mixture of _vice_ or _unholiness_. It gives no man of any rank or profession, the least licence to sin. It makes no allowance to any person, for ungodliness of any kind. Not that all who follow after have attained this, either are already perfect. But however that be, they _plead_ for no sin, either inward or outward. They condemn every kind and degree thereof, in themselves as well as in other men. Indeed, most in themselves; it being their constant care, to bring those words home to their own case, _Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all_.

* 13. Yet there is not found among them that _bitter zeal_, in points either of small or of great importance, that spirit of _persecution_, which has so often accompanied the spirit of reformation. ’Tis an idle conceit, that the spirit of persecution is among the _Papists_ only: it is wheresoever the devil, that old murderer, works; and he still _worketh in_ all _the children of disobedience_. Of consequence, all the children of disobedience, will on a thousand different pretences, and in a thousand different ways, so far as God permits, persecute the children of God. But what is still more to be lamented is, that the children of God themselves, have so often used the same weapons and persecuted others, when the power was in their own hands.

Can we wholly excuse those venerable men, our great _reformers_ themselves, from this charge? I fear not, if we impartially read over any history of the _reformation_. What wonder is it then, that when the tables were turned, bishop _Bonner_ or _Gardiner_ should make reprisals? That they should measure to others (indeed _good measure shaken together_) what had before been measured to them? Nor is it strange, when we consider the single case of _Joan Bocher_, that God should suffer those (otherwise) holy men, archbishop _Cranmer_, bishop _Ridley_, and bishop _Latimer_, to drink of the same cup with her.

14. But can you find any tincture of this in the case before us? Do not all who have lately known the love of God, know _what spirit they are of_? And that _the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them_? Do they approve of the using any kind or degree of _violence_, on any account or pretence whatsoever, in matters of _religion_? Do they not hold the _right_ every man has to judge _for himself_, to be sacred and inviolable? Do they allow any method of bringing even those who are farthest out of the way, who are in the grossest errors, to the knowledge of the truth, except the methods of reason and persuasion? Of love, patience, gentleness, long-suffering? Is there any thing in their _practice_ which is inconsistent with this their constant _profession_? Do they in fact hinder their own relations or dependents from worshipping God according to their own _conscience_? When they believe them to be in error, do they use _force_ of any kind, in order to bring them out of it? Let the instances, if there are such, be produced. But if no such are to be found, then let all reasonable men who believe the _bible_, own, that a work of God is wrought in our land: and such a work (if we survey in one view the _extent_ of it, the _swiftness_ with which it is spread, the _depth_ of that religion which was so swiftly diffused, and its _purity_ from all corrupt mixtures,) as it must be acknowledged, cannot easily be paralleled, in all these concurrent circumstances, by any thing that is found in the _English_ annals, since Christianity was first planted in this island.

II. 1. And yet those _who can discern the face of the sky, cannot discern the signs of the times_. Yet those who are esteemed wise men do not know, that God is now reviving his work upon earth. Indeed concerning some of these the reason is plain; they _know_ not, because they _think_ not of it. Their thoughts are otherwise employed; their minds are taken up with things of quite a different nature. Or perhaps, they may think of it a _little_ now and then, when they have nothing else to do; but not seriously, or deeply; not with any closeness or attention of thought. They are too much in haste to _weigh_ the facts whereof we speak, and to draw the just inference therefrom: nor is the conviction which they may sometimes feel, suffered to sink into their hearts: but things that have a larger share in their affections soon destroy the very traces of it.

2. True it is, that there are some who think more deeply, who are accustomed to consider things from the foundation, and to lay circumstances together, that they may judge of nothing before they have full evidence: and yet even some of these appear to be _in doubt_, concerning the present work. Now, supposing it to be a work of God, how can this be accounted for? That they who so diligently inquire concerning it, do not know the time of their visitation? Perhaps, because of the deeply rooted _prejudice_ which they brought with them to the enquiry; and, which still hanging on their minds, makes it scarce possible for them to form an impartial judgment. Perhaps, even a slight _prepossession_ might occasion their stumbling on some of those rocks of _offence_, which by the wise permission of God, always did and always will attend any revival of his work. Nay, it may be, their very caution was carried to excess. They would not judge before they had such evidence as the nature of the thing would _not_ admit, or at least, God did not see fit to give.

3. All this is very easy to conceive. But it may at first appear surprising, to find men of renown, men supposed to be endowed with knowledge, and with abilities of every kind, flatly, openly, peremptorily _denying_, that there has been any _unusual_ work of God at all! Yea, a late eminent writer goes farther yet, accounts it an instance of downright _Enthusiasm_, to _imagine_, that there is any _extraordinary_ work now wrought upon the earth.¹

¹ _Observations_, part III.

It avails not to say, “no, he does not deny this, but he denies it to be the work of God”. This is palpably trifling: for the work under consideration, is of such a nature (namely, the conversion of men from all manner of sins, to holiness of heart and life) that if it be at any time wrought at all, it must be the work of God: seeing it is God alone and not any child of man, who is able _destroy the works of the devil_.

* Yet neither is this difficult to be accounted for, if we consider things more closely: for the same _prejudice_ which keeps some _in doubt_, may easily be conceived so to influence others, as to make them wholly _deny_ the work of God. And this it may do in several ways: it may either bring them to question the facts related, and hinder their endeavouring to be more fully informed; or prevent their drawing such inferences from those facts, as they would otherwise see to be plain and undeniable. Yea, and it will give ten-fold weight to the _offences_ which must come, so as to over-ballance all evidence whatsoever.

4. This also may account for the behaviour of those, who not content to suspend their judgment, or to _deny_ the work of God, go farther still, even to the length of _contradicting_ and _blaspheming_. Nay, some of these have expressed a deeper abhorrence, and shewn a stronger enmity against this, than they were ever known to do against popery, infidelity, or any heresy whatsoever. Some have _persecuted_ the _instruments_ whom it pleased God to use herein, only _not to the death_: and others have treated in the same manner, all those whom they termed their _followers_. A few instances of this it may be proper to mention, out of very many which might be recited.

5. On the 20th of _June, 1743_, a great multitude of people gathered together, chiefly from _Walsal_, _Darlaston_ and ♦_Bilston_, in _Wensbury_ church yard, _Staffordshire_. They went from thence (when, by sounding a horn they had gathered their whole company together) to Mr. _Eaton_’s house, in the middle of the town, who was at that time _constable_. He went to the door with his constable’s staff, and began reading the act of parliament against riots; but the stones flew so thick about his head, that he was forced to leave off reading and retire. They broke all his windows, the door of his house, and a large clock in pieces. They went then to above fourscore houses, in many of which there were not three panes of glass left.

♦ “Dilston” replaced with “Bilston” per Errata

6. On _June 20, 1743_, _John Baker_, at the head of a large mob came to the house of _Jonas Turner_, at _West-Bramwick_ near _Wensbury_, and asked him, “Whether he would _keep from these men_ that went preaching about, and go to the church?” he answered, “I do _go to the church_. But I never see any of you ♦there.” Presently one _Dan. Oniens_ with a great club, broke great part of the window at one blow. Others laid hold of him, and dragged him about sixty yards, before he could get loose from them. Afterwards they broke all his windows, and threw into the house abundance of stones, to break his goods.

♦ ‘there,” presently’ replaced with ‘there.” Presently’ per Errata

About four in the afternoon they came to the house of widow _Turner_ of _West-Bramwick_. They threw in bricks and stones so fast, that she was forced to open the door and run out among them. One of her daughters cried out, “My mother will be killed!” On which they fell to throwing stones at her. She ran into a neighbour’s house, but before she could shut the door, they broke the bottom off with a brick end. They followed her other daughter with stones, and one with a great stake. She ran into another house, much frightened, expecting to be murdered. The widow asked “How can you come and abuse us thus?” On which one came with a large club, and swore, “If she spoke another word, he would knock her on the head, and bury her in the ditch.” Then he went and broke all the glass that was left. The same they did to many of the neighbouring houses.

7. On the 19th of _June_, _James Yeoman_ of _Walsal_, saw _Mary Bird_ in her father’s house at _Wensbury_, and swore, “By G―― you are there now; but we will kill you to-morrow.” Accordingly he came with a mob the next day; and after they had broken all the windows, he took up a stone, and said, “Now by G―― I will kill _you_.” He threw it, and struck her on the side of the head. The blood gushed out, and she dropt down immediately.

“Another of them took Mr. _Hands_ of _Wensbury_ by the throat, swore he would be the death of him, gave him a great swing round, and threw him upon the ground. As soon as he rose, one _Equal Baker_ gave him a blow on the eye, and knocked him down ♦again. In about half an hour the mob came to his house, and broke all the windows, except about twenty panes. The kitchen windows they cleared, lead, bars and all, broke the window-posts, and threw them into the house. The shop was shut up (he being an apothecary:) but they quickly broke all the pots and bottles in pieces, and destroyed all his medicines. They broke also the shelves and drawers in the shop to pieces, and many of his houshold goods.

♦ “again, in” replaced with “again. In” per Errata

8. On _January 13, 1743‒4_, the mob rose again at _Darlaston_, broke all the windows of all who _followed this way_ (except two or three who bought themselves off) broke open several houses, and took what they liked, the people belonging to them being fled for their lives.

About the same time the Rev. Mr. _E――_ came to _Darlaston_; and meeting some others at _Thomas Forshew_’s they drew up a writing, and _Nicholas Winspur_, the crier of the town, gave public notice, “That all the people of the society must come to Mr. _Forshew_’s, and sign it; or else their houses would be pulled down immediately.” It was to this effect, “That they would never read, or sing, or pray together, or hear these parsons any more.”

Several signed this through fear. They made every one who did, lay down a penny――――“To MAKE THE MOB DRINK.”

9. About _Candlemas_, the wife of _Joshua Constable_, of _Darlaston_, was going to _Wensbury_, when a mob met her in the road, threw her down several times, and abused her in a manner too horrible to write. A warrant was procured for some of these. But one of them only was carried before Mr. _G――――_, who came back and told his companions, the justice said, “That they might go home about their business.” On this the mob rose again, came to _Joshua_’s house, and destroyed all the necessary goods therein. They likewise broke and spoiled all his shop tools, threw the tiles off the roof of the house, and pulled down one room, the joist of which they carried away with them. All his gunlocks they took away; they tore in pieces all his wife’s linen, cut the bed and bedstead, so that it was good for nothing, and tore her bible and common-prayer book all to pieces. She and her husband retired to another house. But one telling the mob they were there, they swore “they would tear it down immediately, if the man let them stay any longer.” So they went out in the frost and snow, not knowing where to lay their head.

10. On _Tuesday, January 31, 1743‒4_, _Henry Old_ came to _John Griffiths_’s house, saying, “If he did not leave _following this way_, he had a hundred men at his command, who should come and pull his house down.” Soon after he brought some with him; but the neighbours gave him money, and sent him away for that time.

_Monday, February 6_, between seven and eight at night, came part of the same company. Hearing them afar off, _John_ and his wife fastened the door, and left the house. Some of the neighbours going in soon after, found them destroying all they could. Two chairs and several bundles of linen were laid upon the fire. After they had destroyed what they could, they loaded themselves with cloaths and meat, and went their way.

The same day public notice was given at _Walsal_, by a paper fixt up there, “That all who designed to assist in breaking the windows, and plundering the houses of the _Methodists_ at _Wensbury_, should be ready at ten o’clock, the next morning, on the _Church-hill_.”

11. The next morning, _February 7_, (being _Shrove-Tuesday_,) about half an hour after ten, great numbers of men were gathered together on the _Church-hill_. Thence they marched down, some armed with swords, some with clubs, and some with axes. They first fell upon _Benjamin Watson_’s house, and broke many of the tiles, and all the windows. Next they came to Mr. _Addinbrook_’s, broke a fine clock, with many of his goods, and stole all the things they could carry away. The next house was _Jane Smith_’s, whose windows they broke, with what little goods she had. The next was Mr. _Bird_’s, where they destroyed every thing they found, except what they carried away; cutting the beds in pieces, as they did all the beds which they could any were find. Thence they went to Mr. _Edge_’s house; he was ill of a fever; so, for a sum of money, they past it over. The next house was Mr. _Hand_’s. They broke all his counters, boxes and drawers, and all (except some bedsteads) that axe or hammer could break. They spilt all his drugs and chymical medicines, and stole every thing they could carry, even all his and his wife’s wearing apparel, beside what they had on.

12. Mr. _Eaton_’s house was next. They broke all his windows, and all his inside doors in pieces, cut the lead off his house, destroyed or stole whatever they could lay their hands on. Some gentlemen offered to stop them, if he would sign a paper implying, “That he would never hear those parsons more.” But he told them, “He had felt already what a wounded conscience was; and by the grace of God he would wound his conscience no more.”

After they had done at Mr. _Eaton_’s, they plundered several other houses in _Wensbury_ and _West Bramwick_. It is scarce possible to describe the outrages they committed. Only they left them they plundered alive.

While they were plundering _John Turner_’s house, he waded thro’ the brook, to try if he could save some of his goods, which one _David Garington_ was carrying away. Upon which _Garington_ told him, “It would be the same here as it was in _Ireland_, for there would be a _massacre_ very quickly. And he wished it was _now_.”

13. About eleven o’clock, _Sarah_, the wife of _John Sheldon_, being told the mob was coming to her house, went and met them at the gate. She asked _John Baker_, their captain, “What they were come for?” He answered, “If she would have nothing to do with _these people_, not a penny worth of her goods should be hurt.” She made no reply. Then they broke the door open, and began breaking and plundering the goods. ♦One coming out with a fire shovel, she begged him, “not to take it away.” He swore if she spoke another word, he would “beat her brains out.”

♦ “On” replaced with “One” per Errata

_John Sheldon_ was this while helping _Thomas Parkes_ to hide his goods, though he knew by the noise they were breaking his own to pieces. Between two and three he came to his house with _William Sitch_. _William_ asked _Sarah_, how she did? Saying, “For his part, he took joyfully the spoiling of his goods.” She answered, that, “seeing so much wickedness, she could not rejoice; but she blessed God she could bear it patiently, and found not the least anger in her.” _John Sheldon_ seeing the spoil they had made, smiled and said, “Here is strange work.” His wife told him, “if she had complied with their terms, not one penny-worth would have been hurt.” He replied, “That if she had complied to deny the truth, and he had found his goods whole on that account, he should never have been easy as long as he lived; but he blessed God that she had rather chosen to suffer wrong.”

I believe every reasonable man will allow, that nothing can possibly excuse these proceedings: seeing they are open, bare-faced violations both of justice and mercy, and of all laws divine and human.

III. I suppose no _Protestant_ will undertake to defend such proceedings, even toward the vilest miscreants. But abundance of _excuses_ have been made, if not for _opposing_ it thus, yet for _denying_ this work to be of God, and for not acknowledging the time of our visitation.

Some alledge, that the _doctrines_ of these men are _false_, _erroneous_ and _enthusiastick_: that they are _new_, and unheard of till of late: that they are Quakerism, Fanaticism, Popery.

This whole pretence has been already cut up by the roots! It having been shewn at large, that every branch of this doctrine, is the plain doctrine of scripture, interpreted by our own church. Therefore it cannot be either _false_ or _erroneous_, provided the scripture be true. Neither can it be _enthusiastick_, unless the same epithet belongs to our articles, homilies and liturgy. Nor yet can these doctrines be termed _new_, no newer, at least, then the reign of queen _Elizabeth_; not even with regard to the _way_ of _expression_, or the manner wherein they are proposed. And as to the substance, they are more antient still; as antient not only as the gospel, as the times of _Isaiah_, or _David_, or _Moses_, but as the first revelation of God to man. If therefore they were _unheard_ of till of late, in any that is termed a Christian country, the greater guilt is on those, who as ambassadors of Christ, ought to publish them day by day.

_Fanaticism_, if it means any thing at all, means the same with _Enthusiasm_, or religious madness, from which (as was observed before) _these doctrines_ are distant as far as the east from the west. However, it is a _convenient_ word to be thrown out, upon any thing we do not like; because scarce one reader in a thousand, has any idea of what ♦it means. If any part of this doctrine is held by the _Quakers_, there is the more reason to rejoice. I would to God they held it all: though the doctrine itself, would be neither better nor worse for this.

♦ “is” replaced with “it”

_Popery_ in the mouth of many men means just nothing: or at most, “Something very horrid and bad.” But _Popery_, properly speaking, is _The distinguishing doctrines_ of the church of _Rome_. They are summed up in the _twelve articles_ which the council of _Trent_ added to the _Nicene_ creed. Now who can find the least connexion between any of these, and the doctrines whereof we are speaking?

2. Others alledge, “Their doctrine is too strict. They make the way to heaven too narrow.” And this is in truth the original objection, (as it was almost the only one for some time) and is secretly at the bottom of a thousand more, which appear in various forms. But do they make the way to heaven any narrower, than our Lord and his apostles made it? Is their doctrine stricter than that of the bible? Consider only a few plain texts. _Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy mind, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength.――For every idle word which men shall speak, they shall give an account in the day of judgment.――――Whether ye eat, or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God._ If their doctrine is stricter than this, they are to blame. But you know in your conscience, it is not. And who can be one jot less strict, without _corrupting the word of God_? Can any steward of the mysteries of God be found faithful, if he change any part of that sacred depositum? No. He can abate nothing, he can soften nothing. He is constrained to declare to all men, “I may not _bring down_ the scripture to your taste. You must _come up_ to it, or perish for ever.”

3. This is the real ground of that other popular cry, concerning “the uncharitableness of these men.” Uncharitable are they? In what respect? Do they not feed the hungry and clothe the naked? No, that is not the thing. They are not wanting in this. But they are so _uncharitable_ in judging! They think none can be saved, but those of their own way. They damn all the world beside themselves.

* What do you mean? “They think none can be saved, but those of their own way.” Most surely they do. For as there is but _one heaven_, so there is but _one way_ to it; even the way of _faith_ in Christ, (for we speak not of _opinions_, or outward _modes_ of _worship_) the way of _love_ to God and man, _the highway of holiness_. And is it uncharitable, to think or say, That none can be saved, but those who walk in this way? Was he then uncharitable, who declared, _He that believeth not shall be damned_? Or he that said, _Follow holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord_? And again; Though _I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned_, yet, _if I have not_ (ἀγάπην) _charity, love_, all this profiteth me nothing.”

“But they damn all, you say, beside themselves.” _Damn_ all! What kind of word is this? They damn no man. None is able to damn any man, but the Lord and judge of all. What you probably mean by that strange expression is, they declare that God condemns all, beside those who believe in Jesus Christ, and love him and keep his commandments. And so must _you_ also, or you sin against God, and your neighbour, and your own soul. But is there any _uncharitableness_ in this? In warning sinners to flee from the wrath to come? On the contrary, not to warn a poor, blind, stupid wretch, that he is hanging over the mouth of hell, would be so inexcusable a want of charity, as would bring his blood upon our own head.

4. But there is no room for dispute, touching these _doctrines_ in general, seeing our Lord gives you so plain a rule, by which you may easily and infallibly know, whether they be of God. _The tree is known by its fruit, either therefore make the tree good, and its fruit good; or else, make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt._ (Matthew xii. 33.) Now what fruit does the tree before us bring forth? Look and see; believe your own eyes and ears. Sinners leave their sins. The servants of the devil become the servants of God. Is this good or evil fruit? That _vice_ loses ground, and _virtue_, practical _religion_, gains? O dispute no more. Know the tree by its fruit. Bow and own the finger of God.

But many, who own _these doctrines_ to be of God, yet cannot be reconciled to the _instruments_ he hath made use of. A very common exception taken against these is (and was from the beginning) “That they are so _young_.” Therefore (abundance of men have readily inferred) “This work cannot be of God.”

Perhaps they are not so young as you conceive. Mr. _Whitefield_ is now upwards of thirty; my brother is thirty-seven years of age. I have lived above forty-two years. And a gentleman in _Cornwall_, for whom I often preach, has the merit of having lived threescore and seventeen years.

But, supposing the antecedent true, what a consequence is this? What shadow of scripture have you to support it? Doth not God _send by whom he_ will _send_? And who shall say to him, _What dost thou_? “These are too young; send elder men.” What shadow of reason? Is it not possible, that a person of thirty or forty may have as true a judgment in the things of God, and as great a blessing attending his preaching, as one of fifty or fourscore?

I wish you would explain yourself a little on this head:

_Scire velim_, verbo, _pretium quotus arroget annus?_

How old do you require a man to be, before God should have leave to speak by his mouth?――――O my brethren, who could have believed any serious man would once have named such an argument as this? Seeing both scripture and reason teach, that God herein _giveth account to none of his ways_. But he worketh by whomsoever he _will_ work; he sheweth mercy by whom he _will_ shew mercy.

* 6. “But there are only _a few_ young heads,” I cannot but observe here, what great pains have been taken, what diligence shewn, to make and to keep them _few_. What arts have not been used, to keep back those of the clergy in particular, who have been clearly convinced from time to time, that they ought to join hearts and hands in the work? On this occasion, it has been accounted meritorious, to _say all manner of evil of us falsely_: to _promise_ them whatever their hearts desired, if they would refrain from these men: and, on the other hand, to _threaten_ them with heavy things, if ever they went among them more. So that how fully soever they were convinced, they could not act according to their conviction, unless they could give up at once all thought of _preferment_, either in church or state; nay, all hope of even a _fellowship_, or poor _scholarship_, in either university. Many also have been threatened, that if they went on in this way, what little they had should be taken from them. And many have, on this very account, been disowned by their dearest friends and nearest relations. So that there was no possibility the number of these labourers should ever be increased at all, unless by those who could break through all these ties, who desired nothing in the present world, who counted neither their fortunes, nor friends, nor lives, dear unto themselves, so they might only _keep a conscience void_ of offence toward God and toward men.

7. But what do you infer from their _fewness_? That because they are _few_, therefore God cannot _work by them_? Upon what scripture do you ground this? I thought it was _the same to him, to save by many or few_. Upon what reason? Why cannot God save ten thousand souls by one man, as well as by ten thousand? How little, how inconsiderable a circumstance is number before God? Nay, is there not reason to believe, that whensoever God is pleased to work a great deliverance, spiritual or temporal, he may first say, as of old, _The people are too many for me to give the_ Midianites _into their hands_? May he not purposely chuse _few_ as well as inconsiderable instruments, for the greater manifestation of his own glory? Very _few_, I grant, are the instruments now employed: yet a great work is wrought already. And the fewer they are by whom this large harvest hath hitherto been gathered in, the more evident must it appear to unprejudiced minds, that the work is not of man, but of God.

8. “But they are not only few, but _unlearned_ also.” This is a grievous offence; and is by many esteemed a sufficient _excuse_, for not acknowledging the work to be of God.

The ground of this offence is partly true. Some of those who now preach are _unlearned_. They neither understand the antient languages, nor any of the branches of philosophy. And yet this objection might have been spared, by many of those who have frequently made it: because _they_ are _unlearned_ too (though accounted otherwise.) They have not themselves the very thing they require in others.

* Men in general are under a great mistake with regard to what is called “The Learned World.” They do not know, they cannot easily imagine, how little _learning_ there is among them. I do not speak of _abstruse learning_; but of what all divines, at least of any note, are supposed to have viz. The knowledge of the _tongues_, at least _Latin_, _Greek_ and _Hebrew_, and of the common _arts_ and _sciences_.

* How few men of learning, so called, understand _Hebrew_? Even so far as to read a plain chapter in _Genesis_? Nay, how few understand _Greek_? Make an easy experiment. Desire that grave man, who is urging this objection, only to tell you the _English_ of the first paragraph that occurs in one of _Plato’s dialogues_? I am afraid we may go farther still. How few understand _Latin_? Give one of them an _epistle_ of _Tully_, and see how readily he will explain it, without his _dictionary_. If he can hobble through that, it is odds but a _georgick_ in _Virgil_, or a _satire_ of _Persius_ sets him fast.

* And with regard to the _arts_ and _sciences_: How few understand so much as the general principles of _Logick_? Can one in ten of the clergy (O grief of heart!) or of the _masters_ of _arts_ in either university, when an argument is brought, tell you even the _mood_ and _figure_ wherein it is proposed? Or _compleat_ an _Enthymeme_? Perhaps, you do not so much as understand the term: supply the _premiss_ which is wanting, in order to make it a full _categorical syllogism_. Can one in ten of them demonstrate a _problem_ or _theorem_ in _Euclid’s Elements_? Or define the common terms used in _metaphysicks_? Or intelligibly explain the first principles of it? Why then will they _pretend_ to that learning, which they are conscious to themselves they have not? Nay, and censure others who have it not, and do not _pretend_ to it? Where are sincerity and candour fled?

* It will easily be observed, that I do not depreciate _learning_ of any kind. The knowledge of the _languages_ is a valuable talent; so is the knowledge of the _arts_ and _sciences_. Both the one and the other may be employed to the glory of God, and the good of men. But yet I ask, Where hath God declared in his word, that he _cannot_, or _will not_ make use of men that have it not? Has _Moses_, or any of the prophets affirmed this? Or our Lord? Or any of his apostles? You are sensible all these are against you. You know the apostles themselves, all except St. _Paul_, were ανδρες αγραμματοι και ιδιωται· common, unphilosophical, unlettered men.

9. “What! Then you make yourselves, _like the apostles_.” Because this silly objection has so often been urged, I will for once spend a few words upon it, though it does not deserve that honour. Why, must not every man, whether clergyman, or layman, be in some respects _like the apostles_, or go to hell? Can any man be saved, if he be not holy, _like the apostles_? A follower of them, as they were of Christ? And ought not every preacher of the gospel, to be in a _peculiar_ manner _like the apostles_, both in holy tempers, in exemplariness of life, and in his indefatigable labours for the good of souls? Woe unto every ambassador of Christ, who is not _like the apostles_ in this! In holiness; in making full proof of his ministry; in spending and being spent for Christ! We _cannot_ and therefore we _need_ not be like them, in _working outward miracles_. But we may and ought, in _working together with God_ for the salvation of men. And the same God who was always ready to help _their_ infirmities, is ready to help _ours_ also. He who made them _workmen that needed not to be ashamed_, will teach us also _rightly to divide the word of truth_. In this respect likewise, in respect of his _having help from God_, for the work whereunto he is called, every preacher of the gospel is _like the apostles_. Otherwise he is of all men most miserable.

* 10. And I am bold to affirm, that these unlettered men, _have help from God_ for that great work, the saving souls from death; seeing he hath enabled, and doth enable them still, to _turn many to righteousness_. Thus hath he _destroyed the wisdom of the wise, and brought to nought the understanding of the prudent_. When they imagined they had effectually shut the door, and locked up every passage, whereby any help could come to two or three preachers, weak in body as well as soul; who they might reasonably believe would humanly speaking, wear themselves out in a short time: when they had gained their point by securing (as they supposed) all the men of learning in the nation; _he that sitteth in heaven laughed them to scorn_, and came upon them by a way they thought not of. _Out of the stones he raised up_ those who should beget children to _Abraham_. We had no more foresight of this than you. Nay, we had the deepest prejudices against it: until we could not but own, that God gave _wisdom from above_ to these unlearned and ignorant men; so that the work of the Lord prospered in their hand, and sinners were daily converted to God.

Indeed in the one thing which they profess to know, they are not _ignorant_ men. I trust there is not one of them who is not able to go thro’ such an examination, in substantial, practical, experimental divinity, as few of our candidates for holy orders, even in the university (I speak it with sorrow and shame, and in tender love) are able to do. But oh! what manner of _examination_, do most of _those candidates_ go through? And what proof are the _testimonials_ commonly brought (as solemn as the _form_ is wherein they run) either of their _piety_ or _knowledge_, to whom are intrusted those sheep, which God hath purchased with his own blood!

11. “But they are _laymen_. You seem to be sensible yourself, of the strength of this objection. For as many as you have answered, I observe you have never once so much as touched on this.”

I have not. Yet it was not distrust of my cause, but tenderness to you which occasioned my silence. I had something to advance on this head also: but I was afraid you could not bear it. I was conscious to myself, that some years since, to touch this point, was to touch the apple of my eye. And this makes me almost unwilling to speak now; lest I should _shock_ the prejudices I cannot _remove_.

* Suffer me, however, just to intimate to you some things, which I would leave to your farther consideration. The _scribes_ of old, who were the ordinary _preachers_ among the _Jews_, were not _priests_; they were not better than _laymen_. Yea, many of them were incapable of the priesthood, being of the tribe of _Simeon_, not of _Levi_.

Hence probably it was, that the _Jews_ themselves never urged it as an objection to our Lord’s preaching (even those who did not acknowledge or believe, that he was sent of God in an _extraordinary_ character) that he was no _priest_ after the order of ♦_Aaron_. Nor indeed could be; seeing he was of the tribe of _Judah_.

♦ “Aron” replaced with “Aaron”

Nor does it appear, that any objected this to the apostles. So far from it, that at _Antioch_ in _Pisidia_, we find _the rulers of the synagogue sending unto Paul and_ Barnabas, strangers just come into the city, _saying, men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on_, Acts xiii. 15.

If we consider these things, we shall be the less surprized at what occurs in the 8th chapter of the _Acts_: _At that time there was a great persecution against the church, and they ♦were all scattered abroad_: (i. e. all the _church_, all the believers in Jesus) _throughout the regions of_ Judea _and_ Samaria. (verse 1.) _therefore they that were scattered abroad, went every where preaching the word_, (verse 4.) Now, what shadow of reason have we to say, or think, that all these were _ordained_ before they _preached_?

♦ “where” replaced with “were”

12. * If we come to later times; was Mr. _Calvin_ ordained? Was he either priest or deacon? And were not most of those whom it pleased God to employ in promoting the _reformation_ abroad, _laymen_ also? Could that great work have been promoted at all in many places, if _laymen_ had not preached? And yet how seldom do the very _Papists_ urge this, as an objection against the _reformation_? Nay, as rigorous as they are in things of this kind, they themselves appoint, even in some of their strictest _orders_, that “if any _lay-brother_ believes himself called of God, to _preach_ as a _missionary_, the superior of the _order_, being informed thereof, shall immediately send him away.”

* In all _protestant_ churches it is still more evident, that _ordination_ is not held a necessary _prerequisite_ of preaching: for in _Sweden_, in _Germany_, in _Holland_, and, I believe, in every _reformed_ church in _Europe_, it is not only _permitted_ but _required_, that before any one is _ordained_, (before he is admitted even into _deacon_’s orders, wherever the distinction between priests and deacons is retained) he should publickly preach a year or more _ad probandum facultatem_. And for this practice, they believe they have the authority of an express command of God: _Let these first be_ proved: _then let them use the office of a_ deacon, _being found blameless_, 1 Timothy iii. 10.

23. “In _England_, however, there is nothing of this kind; no _layman_ permitted to speak in public.” No! Can you be ignorant, that in an hundred _churches_ they do it continually? In how many (particularly in the _West_ of _England_) does the _parish-clerk_ read one of the lessons? (In some he reads the whole service of the church, perhaps, every Lord’s day) and do not other _laymen_ constantly do the same thing, yea, in our very _cathedrals_? Which being under the more immediate inspection of the _bishops_, should be patterns to all other churches.

Perhaps it will be said, “But this is not _preaching_.” Yes, but it is, essentially such. For what is it to _preach_, but _præedicare verbum Dei_? To publish the word of God? And this _laymen_ do all over _England_; particularly under the eye of every bishop in the nation.

Nay, is it not done in the universities themselves? Who _ordained_ that singing-man at _Christchurch_? Who is likewise utterly unqualified for the work, murdering every lesson he reads? Not even endeavouring to read it as the word of God but rather as an old song? _Such_ a _layman_ as this, meddling at all with the word of God, I grant is a scandal to the _English_ nation.

* To go a step farther.――――Do not the fundamental constitutions of the _university_ of _Oxford_, the _statutes_, even as revised by archbishop _Laud_, require every _batchelor of arts_, nine in ten of whom are _laymen_, to read three _public lectures_ in moral philosophy, on whatever subject he chuses? My subject, I well remember, was, The LOVE of God. Now, what was this but _preaching_?

* Nay, may not a man be a _doctor of divinity_ even in _Oxford_, tho’ he never was _ordained_ at all? The instance of Dr. _Atwell_, (late) rector of _Exeter college_, is fresh in every one’s memory.

These are a few of the considerations that may readily occur to any thinking man on this head. But I do not rest the cause on these. I believe it may be defended a shorter way.

14. * It pleased God by two or three ministers of the church of _England_, to call many sinners to repentance: who, in several parts, were undeniably turned from a course of sin, to a course holiness.

The ministers of the places where this was done, ought to have received those ministers with open arms: and to have taken them who had just begun to serve God, into their peculiar care; watching over them in tender love, lest they should fall back into the snare of the devil.

Instead of this, the greater part spoke of those ministers, as if the devil, not God had sent them. Some repelled them from the Lord’s table: others stirred up the people against them, representing them even in their public discourses, as _fellows not fit to live; papists, hereticks, traitors; conspirators_ against their king and _country_.

And how did they watch over the sinners lately reformed? Even as a leopard watcheth over his prey. They drove some of them also from the Lord’s table; to which till _now_ they had no desire to approach. They preached all manner of evil concerning them, openly cursing them in the name of the Lord. They turned many out of their work; persuaded others to do so too, and harrassed them all manner of ways.

The event was, that some were wearied out, and so turned back to their vomit again. And then these good pastors gloried over them, and endeavoured to shake others by their example.

15. * When the ministers by whom God had helped them before, came again to those places, great part of their work was to begin again; if it could be begun again; but the relapsers were often so hardened in sin, that no impression could be made upon them.

What could they do in a case of so extreme necessity? Where so many souls lay at stake?

No clergyman would assist at all. The expedient that remained was, to find some one among themselves, who was upright of heart, and of sound judgment in the things of God: and to desire him to meet the rest as often as he could, in order to confirm them, as he was able, in the ways of God, either by reading to them, or by prayer, or by exhortation.

God immediately gave a blessing hereto. In several places, by means of these plain men, not only those who had already begun to run well, were hindered from drawing back to perdition; but other sinners also, from time to time were converted from the error of their ways.

This plain account of the whole proceeding, I take to be the best defence of it. I know no scripture which forbids making use of such help, in a case of such necessity. And I praise God who has given even _this_ help to those poor sheep, when _their own shepherds pitied them not_.

“But does not the scripture say, _no man taketh_ this honour _to himself, but he that is called of God, as was_ Aaron?” Nor do these. The _honour_ here mentioned is the _priesthood_. But they no more take upon them to be priests then to be kings. They take not upon them to administer the sacraments, an honour peculiar to the priests of God. Only according to their power, they exhort their brethren, to continue in the grace of God.

“But for these _laymen_ to exhort at all, is a violation of all _order_.”

What is this _order_ of which you speak? Will it serve instead of the knowledge and love of God? Will this _order_ rescue those from the snare of the devil, who are now taken captive at his will? Will it keep them who are escaped a little way, from turning back into _Egypt_? If not, how should I answer it to God, if rather than violate I know not what _order_, I should _sacrifice_ thousands of souls thereto? I dare not do it. It is at the peril of my own soul.

Indeed if by _order_ were meant, _true Christian discipline_, whereby all the living members of Christ are knit together in one, and all that are putrid and dead, immediately cut off from the body: this _order_ I reverence; for it is of God. But where is it to be found? In what diocese? In what town or parish, within _England_ or _Wales_? Are you rector of a parish? Then let us go no farther. Does this _order_ obtain there? Nothing less. Your parishioners are a rope of sand. As few (if any) of them are alive to God; so they have no connection with each other, unless such as might be among _Turks_ or _Heathens_. Neither have _you_ any power to cut off from that body, were it alive, the dead and putrid members. Perhaps you have no desire: but all are jumbled together without any care or concern of yours.

It is plain then, what _order_ is to be found is not among _you_, who so loudly contend for it, but among that very people whom you continually blame, for their _violation_ and _contempt_ of it. The little flock you condemn is united together in one body, by one spirit: so that _if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it, if one be honoured, all rejoice with it_. Nor does any dead member long remain; but as soon as the hope of recovering it is past, it is cut off.

Now suppose we were willing to relinquish our charge, and to give up this flock into _your_ hands; would _you_ observe the same _order_, as we do now, with them and the other souls under your care? You _dare_ not: because you have respect of persons. You fear the faces of men. You _cannot_: because you have not _overcome the world_. You are not above the desire of earthly things. And it is impossible you should ever have any _true order_, or exercise any _Christian discipline_, till you are wholly _crucified to the ♦world_, till you desire nothing more but God.

♦ “wold” replaced with “world”

Consider this matter, I intreat you, a little farther. Here are thirty thousand persons (perhaps somewhat more) of whom I take care, watching over their souls as he that must give ♦account. In order hereto it lies upon me (so I judge) at the peril of my own salvation, to know not only their names, but their outward and inward states, their difficulties and dangers. Otherwise how can I know either how to guide them aright, or to commend them to God in prayer? Now if I am willing to make these over to _you_, will _you_ watch over them in the same manner? Will _you_ take the same care (or as much more as you please) of each soul as I have hitherto done? Not such _curam animarum_ as you have taken these ten years in your own parish. Poor empty name! Has not your _parish_ been in fact, as much a _sine cure_ to _you_ as your _prebend_? Oh what account have _you_ to give to the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls!

♦ “account, in” replaced with “account. In” per Errata

18. There is one more _excuse_ for denying this work of God, taken from the _instruments_ employed therein: that is, “That they are _wicked_ men.” And a thousand stories have been handed about to prove it.

But you may observe, their _wickedness_ was not heard of, till after they _went about doing good_. Their reputation for _honesty_ was till then unblemished but it was impossible it should continue so, when they were publickly employed in _testifying of the world, that its deeds were evil_. It could not be but the scriptures should be fulfilled. _The servant is not above his master. If they have called the master of the house beelzebub, how much more them of his houshold?_

* Yet I cannot but remind considerate men, in how remarkable a manner the wisdom of God has for many years guarded against this pretence, with respect to my brother and me in particular. Scarce any two men in _Great-Britain_, of our rank, have been so held out, as it were, to all the world; especially of those who from their childhood had always loved and studiously sought retirement. And I had procured what I sought, I was quite safe, as I supposed, in a little country town, when I was required to return to _Oxford_, without delay, to take the charge of some young gentlemen, by Dr. _Morley_, the only man then in _England_ to whom I could deny nothing. From that time both my brother and I (utterly against our will) came to be more and more observed and known, till we were more spoken of, than, perhaps, two so inconsiderable persons ever were before in the nation. To make us more publick still, as _honest_ madmen at least, by a strange concurrence of providences overturning all our preceding resolutions, we were hurried away to _America_. However, at our return from thence, we were resolved to retire out of the world at once; being sated with noise, hurry and fatigue, and seeking nothing but to be at rest. Indeed for a long season, the greatest pleasure I had desired, on this side eternity was

Tacitum Sylvas inter reptare salubres, Quærentem quicquid dignum sapiente bonoque.

And we had attained our desire. We wanted nothing. We looked for nothing more in this world, when we were dragged out again, by earnest importunity, to preach at one place and another, and another, and so carried on, we knew not how, without any design but the general one, of saving souls, into a situation, which had it been named to us at first, would have appeared far worse than death.

* 19. What a surprising _apparatus_ of Providence was here! And what stronger demonstrations could have been given, of men’s acting from _a zeal_ for God, whether it were _according to knowledge_ or no? What persons could, in the nature of things, have been (antecedently) less liable to exception, with regard to their _moral character_, at least, than those the all-wise God hath now employed? Indeed I cannot devise what manner of men could have been more unexceptionable on all accounts. Had God endued us with greater natural or acquired abilities, that very thing might have been turned into an objection. Had ♦we been remarkably _defective_, it would have been matter of objection, on the other hand. Had we been _dissenters_ of any kind, or even _low-church men_, (so called) it would have been a great stumbling-block in the way of those who are _zealous for the church_. And yet had we continued in the impetuosity of our _high-church zeal_, neither should we have been willing to converse with _dissenters_, nor they to receive any good at our hands. Some objections were kept out of the way, by our known _contempt_ of money and preferment: and others, by that rigorous strictness of life, which we exacted, not of others, but ourselves only. Insomuch, that twelve or fourteen years ago, the censure of one who had narrowly observed us, (_me_, in particular) went no farther than this;

“Does _John_ beyond his strength persist to go, To his frail carcase literally foe? Careless of health, as if in haste to die, And lavish time t’ insure eternity!”

So that upon the whole, I see not what God could have done more in this respect which he hath not done. Or what _instruments_ he could have employed in such a work, who would have been less liable to exception.

♦ “he” replaced with “we” per Errata

20. Neither can I conceive how it was possible to do that work, the doing of which, we are still under the strongest conviction, is bound upon us at the peril of our own souls, in a less exceptionable manner. We have, by the grace of God, behaved not only with meekness, but with all tenderness towards all men; with all the tenderness which we conceived it was possible to use, without betraying their souls. And from the very first, it has been our special care, to deal tenderly with our brethren the clergy. We have not willingly provoked them at any time; neither any _single_ clergyman. We have not _sought_ occasion to publish their faults; we have not _used_ a thousand occasions that offered. When we were constrained to speak something, we spake _as little_ as we believed we could, without offending God: and that little, though in plain and strong words, yet as _mildly_ and _lovingly_ as we were able. And in the same course we have steadily persevered (as well as in earnestly advising others to tread in our steps) even though we saw that with regard to them, by all this we profited nothing; though we knew we were still continually represented as _implacable enemies to the clergy_, as railers against them, as slanderers of them, as seeking all opportunities to blacken and asperse them. When a clergyman himself has vehemently accused me of doing this, I bless God he could not provoke me to do it. I still _kept my mouth as it were with a bridle_, and committed my cause to a higher hand.

21. The truth is, you impute that hatred to _us_, which is in _your own breast_. (I speak not this of all the clergy; God forbid! But let it fall on whom it concerns.) _You_, it is certain, have shewn the utmost hatred to _us_, and in every possible way: unless you were actually to beat us (of which also we are not without precedent) or to shoot us through the head. And if you could prevail upon others to do this, I suppose you would think you did God service. I do not speak without ground. I have heard with my own ears such sermons, (in _Staffordshire_ particularly) that I should not have wondered if as soon as we came out of the church, the people had stoned me with stones. And it was a natural consequence of what that poor minister had lately heard, at the bishop’s visitation: as it was one great cause of the miserable riots and outrages which soon followed.

It is this, my brethren, it is _your own preaching_, and not _ours_, which _sets the people against you_. The very same persons, who are _diverted_ with those sermons, cannot but _despise_ you for them in their hearts: even those who on _your_ authority believe most of the assertions which you advance. What then must they think of you, who know the greatest part of what you assert to be utterly false? They may pity and pray for you; but they can _esteem_ you no other, than false witnesses against God and your brethren.

22. “But what need is there (say even some of a milder spirit) of this preaching in _fields_ and _streets_? Are there not _churches enough_ to preach in?” No, my friend, there are not; not for us to preach in. You forget: we are not suffered to preach there; else we should prefer them to any places whatever. “Well, there are ministers enough without _you_.” Ministers _enough_, and churches _enough_; for what? To reclaim all the sinners within the four seas? If there were, they would all be reclaimed. But they are not reclaimed. Therefore it is evident, that there are not _churches enough_. And one plain reason why, notwithstanding all these churches, they are no nearer being reclaimed is this; they never come into a church; perhaps not once in a twelve-month, perhaps not for many years together. Will you say (as I have known some _tender hearted Christians_) “Then it is _their own_ fault; let them die and be damned.” I grant it is _their own_ fault. And so it was _my_ fault and _yours_, when we went astray, like sheep that were lost. Yet the Shepherd of souls sought after us, and went after us into the wilderness. And _oughtest not thou to have compassion on thy fellow-servants, as he had pity on thee_? Ought not we also _to seek_, as far as in us lies, _and to save that which is lost_?

* Behold the amazing love of God to the outcasts of men! His tender condescention to their folly! They would regard nothing done _in the usual way_. All this was lost upon them. The _ordinary_ preaching of the word of God, they would not even deign to hear. So the devil made sure of these careless ones. For who should pluck them out of his hand? Then God was moved to jealousy, and went _out of the usual way_ to save the souls which he had made. Then over and above what was ordinarily spoken in his name, in all the houses of God in the land, he commanded a voice to cry in the wilderness, _Prepare ye the way of the Lord. The time is fulfilled. The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Repent ye and believe the gospel._

* 23. Consider coolly, if it was not highly expedient, that something of this kind should be? How expedient, were it only on the account of those poor sinners against their own souls, who (to all human appearance) were utterly inaccessible every other way? And what numbers of these are still to be found, even in or near our most populous cities? What multitudes of them were some years since, both in _Kingswood_, and the fells about _Newcastle_? Who, week after week, spent the Lord’s day, either in the ale-house, or in idle diversions, and never troubled themselves about going to church, or to any publick worship at all? Now, would you really have desired that these poor wretches should have sinned on, till they dropt into hell? Surely you would not. But by what other means was it possible they should have been plucked out of the fire? Had the minister of the parish preached like an angel, it had profited them nothing; for they heard him not. But when one came and said, “Yonder is a man preaching on the top of the mountain,” they ran in droves to hear what he would say. And God spoke to their hearts. It is hard to conceive any thing else which could have reached them. Had it not been for _field-preaching_, the uncommonness of which was the very circumstance that recommended it, they must have run on in the error of their way, and perished in their blood.

* 24. But suppose _field-preaching_ to be in a case of this kind, ever so _expedient_, or even _necessary_, yet who will contest with us for _this province_?――――May we not enjoy this quiet and unmolested? Unmolested, I mean by any competitors.――For who is there among you, brethren, that is willing, (examine your own hearts) even to save souls from death at this price? Would not _you_ let a thousand souls perish, rather than you would be the instrument of rescuing them thus? I do not speak now with regard to conscience, but to the inconveniencies that must accompany it. Can _you_ sustain them, if you _would_? Can you bear the summer sun to beat upon your naked head? Can you suffer the wintry rain or wind, from whatever quarter it blows? Are you able to stand in the open air, without any covering or defence, when God casteth abroad his snow like wool, or scattereth his hoar-frost like ashes? And yet these are some of the smallest inconveniencies which accompany _field-preaching_. Far beyond all these, are the contradiction of sinners, the scoffs both of the great vulgar, and the small; contempt and reproach of every kind; often more than verbal affronts, stupid, brutal violence, sometimes to the hazard of health, or limbs, or life. Brethren, do you envy us _this honour_? What I pray, would _buy you_ to be a _field-preacher_? Or what, think you, could induce any man of common sense, to continue therein one year, unless he had a full conviction in himself, that it was the will of God concerning him.

* Upon this conviction it is (were we to submit to these things on any other motive whatsoever, it would furnish you with a better proof of our _distraction_, than any that has yet been found) that _we_ now do, for the good of poor souls, what you cannot, will not, dare not do. And we desire not that you should; but this one thing, we may reasonably desire of you: do not increase the difficulties which are already so great, that without the mighty power of God, we must sink under them. Do not assist in trampling down a little handful of men, who for the present stand in the gap, between ten thousand poor wretches and destruction, till you find some others to take their places.

* 25. Highly needful it is, that some should do this, lest those poor souls be lost without remedy. And it should rejoice the hearts of all who desire the kingdom of God should come, that so many of them have been snatched already from the mouth of the lion, by an _uncommon_ (though not unlawful) way. This circumstance therefore is no just _excuse_, for not acknowledging the work of God. Especially, if we consider, that whenever it has pleased God to work any great work upon the earth, even from the earliest times, he hath stept more or less out of the _common_ way: whether to excite the attention of a greater number of people, than might otherwise have regarded it; or to separate the proud and haughty of heart, from those of an humble, child-like spirit; the former of whom he foresaw, trusting in their own wisdom, would fall on that stone and be broken; while the latter, enquiring with simplicity, would soon know of the work, that it was of God.

26. “Nay (say some) but God is a God of _wisdom_. And it is his work, to give _understanding_. Whereas _this_ man is one of them, and he is a _fool_. You see the _fruits_ of their _preaching_.” No, my friend, you don’t. That is your mistake. A fool very possibly he may be. So it appears by his talking, perhaps writing too. But this is none of the _fruits_ of our _preaching_. He was a fool before ever he heard us. We found and are likely to leave him so. Therefore his folly is not to be imputed to us, even if it continue to the day of his death. As we were not the cause, so we undertake not the cure of disorders of this kind. No fair man therefore can _excuse_ himself thus, from acknowledging the work of God.

Perhaps you will say, “He is not a natural fool neither. But he is so ignorant! He knows not the first principles of religion.” It is very possible. But have patience with him, and he will know them by and by. Yea, if he be in earnest to save his soul, far sooner than you can conceive. And in the mean time, neither is this an objection of any weight. Many when they begin to hear us, may, without any fault of ours, be utter strangers to the whole of religion. But this is no incurable disease. Yet a little while and they may be wise unto salvation.

Is the ignorance you complain of among this people (you who object to the _people_ more than to their _teachers_) of another kind? Don’t they “know, how in meekness to reprove or instruct those that oppose themselves?” I believe what you say: all of them do not: they have not put on gentleness and long-suffering. I wish they had: pray for them that they may; that they may be mild and patient toward all men. But what if they are not? Sure you do not make this an argument that God hath not sent us? Our Lord _came_, and we come, _not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance: passionate_ sinners, (such as these whereof you complain) as well as those of every other kind. Nor can it be expected they should be wholly delivered from their sin, as soon as they begin to hear his word.

* 27. A greater stumbling-block than this is laid before you, by those that _say and do not_. Such I take it for granted will be among us, although we purge them out as fast as we can: persons that _talk much_ of religion, that _commend_ the preachers, perhaps are diligent in hearing them: it may be, read all their books, and sing their hymns; and yet no change is wrought in their hearts. Were they of old time as lions in their houses? They are the same still. Were they (in low life) slothful or intemperate? Were they tricking or dishonest? Over-reaching or oppressive? Or did they use to borrow and not pay? _The Ethiopian hath not changed his skin._ Were they (in high life) delicate, tender, self-indulgent? Were they nice in furniture or apparel? Were they fond of trifles, or of their own dear persons? _The Leopard hath not changed her spots._ Yet their being with us for a time proves no more, than that we have not the miraculous discernment of spirits.

* Others you may find, in whom there was a real change. But it was only for a season. They are now turned back, and are two-fold more the children of hell than before. Yet neither is this any manner of proof, that the former work was not of God. No, not though these apostates should, with the utmost confidence, say all manner of evil against us. I expect they should. For every other injury hath been forgiven, and will be to the end of the world. But hardly shall any one forgive the intolerable injury, of _almost persuading him to be a Christian_. When these men therefore who were with us, but went out from among us, assert things that may cause your ears to tingle, if you consider either the scripture, or the nature of man, it will not stagger you at all. Much less will it excuse you, for not acknowledging the work in general to be of God.

* 28. But to all this it may possibly be replied, “When you bring your credentials with you, when you prove by _miracles_ what you assert, then we will acknowledge that God hath sent you.”

What is it you would have us _prove_ by _miracles_? That the _doctrines_ we preach are true? This is not the way to prove that: (as our first _reformers_ replied to those of the church of _Rome_, who, you may probably remember, were continually urging them with this very demand). We prove the _doctrines_ we preach, by scripture and reason: and, if need be, by antiquity.

What else is it then we are to prove by _miracles_?

Is it, 1. That _A. B._ was for many years without God in the world, a common swearer, a drunkard, a sabbath-breaker?

Or, 2. That he is not so now?

Or, 3. That he continued so till he heard us preach, and from that time was another man? Not so. The proper way to prove these facts, is by the testimony of competent witnesses: and these witnesses are ready, whenever required, to give full evidence of them.

Or would you have us prove by miracles,

4. That this was not done _by our own power or holiness_? That God only is able to raise the dead, those who are dead in trespasses and sins? Nay, _if_ you _hear not_ Moses _and the prophets_ and apostles on this head, _neither would you believe tho’ one rose from the dead_.

It is therefore utterly unreasonable and absurd to require or expect the proof of _miracles_, in questions of such a kind, as are always decided, by proofs of quite another nature.

29. “But you relate them yourself.” I relate just what I saw, from time to time: and this is true, that some of those circumstances seem to go beyond the ordinary course of nature. But I do not peremptorily determine, whether they were supernatural, or no? Much less do I rest upon them, either the proof of other _facts_, or of the _doctrines_ which I preach. I prove these in the _ordinary_ way; the one by testimony, the other by scripture and reason.

“But if you can work _miracles_ when you please, is not this the surest way of proving them? This would put the matter out of dispute at once, and supersede all other proof.”

You seem to lie under an entire mistake, both as to the nature and use of _miracles_. It may reasonably be questioned, whether there ever was that man living upon earth, except the man Christ Jesus, that could work miracles _when he pleased_. God only _when he pleased_, exerted that power, and by whomsoever it pleased him.

But if a man could work _miracles when he pleased_, yet is there no scripture authority, nor even example for doing it in order to satisfy such a demand as this. I do not read, that either our Lord, or any of his apostles, wrought any miracle on such an occasion. Nay, how sharply does our Lord rebuke those who made a demand of this kind? When _certain of the scribes and of the pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee_; (Observe, this was their method of _answering_ the strong reasons whereby he had just proved the works in question to be of God.) _He answered and said to them, an evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign. But there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet_ Jonas, _Matthew_ xii. 38, 39. _An evil and adulterous generation!_ Else they would not have needed such a kind of proof. Had they been _willing to do his will_, they would, without this, have known that the doctrine was of God.

* _Miracles_ therefore are quite needless in such a case. Nor are they so conclusive a proof as you imagine. If a man could and did work them, in defence of any doctrine, yet this would not _supersede other proof_. For there may be τερατα Ψευδους _lying wonders_, miracles wrought in support of falshood. Still therefore his doctrine would remain to be proved, from the proper topicks of scripture and reason. And these even without _miracles_ are sufficient. But _miracles_ without these are not. Accordingly our Saviour and all his apostles, in the midst of their greatest miracles, never failed to prove every _doctrine_ they taught, by clear scripture and cogent reason.

30. I presume, by this time you may perceive the gross absurdity, of demanding _miracles_ in the present case: seeing one of the propositions in question, (over and above our general doctrines) _viz._ “That sinners are reformed,” can only be proved by testimony: and the other, “this cannot be done but by the power of God,” needs no proof, being self-evident.

“Why, I did once myself rejoice to hear, (says a grave citizen, with an _air_ of great _importance_) that so many sinners were reformed, till I found they were only turned from one wickedness to another: that they were turned from cursing or swearing, or drunkenness, into ♦a no less _damnable_ sin ♣that of _schism_.”

♦ insert “a” per Errata

♣ delete “than” per Errata

Do you know what you say? You have, I am afraid, a confused huddle of ideas in your head. And I doubt, you have not _capacity_ to clear them up yourself; nor _coolness_ enough, to receive help from others.

However I will try. What is _schism_? Have you any determinate idea of it? I ask ♦the rather, because I have found, by repeated experiments, that a common _English_ tradesman receives no more light, when he hears or reads, “This is schism,” than if he heard or read

_Bombalio, stridor, clangor, taratantara, murmur._‏

♦ “thee” replaced with “the” per Errata

Honest neighbour, don’t be angry. Lay down your hammer, and let us talk a little on this head.

You say, “We are in the damnable sin of _schism_, and therefore in as bad a state as adulterers or murderers.”

I ask once more, What do you mean by _schism_? “Schism! Schism! Why, it is separating from the church.” Ay, so it is. And yet _every_ separating from the church to which we once belonged, is not schism. Else you will make all the _English_ to be schismatics, ♦by separating from the church of _Rome_. “But we had just cause.” So doubtless we had: whereas schism is a _causeless_ separation from the church of Christ. So far so good. But you have many steps to take before you can make good that conclusion, that a separation from a _particular national_ church, such as the church of _England_ is, whether with sufficient cause or without, comes under the scriptural notion of _schism_.

♦ insert “by” per Errata

However, taking this for granted, will you aver in cool blood, that all who die in such a separation, that is, every one who dies a Quaker, a Baptist, an Independent, or a Presbyterian, is as infallibly damned as if he died in the act of murder or adultery? Surely you start at the thought! It makes even nature recoil. How then can you reconcile it to the love that _hopeth all things_?

31. But whatever state they are in, who _causelessly separate_ from the church of _England_, it affects not those of whom we are speaking; for they _do not separate_ from it at all.

You may easily be convinced of this, if you will only weigh the particulars following.

1. A great part of these went to _no church_ at all, before they heard us preach. They no more pretended to belong to the church of _England_, than to the church of _Moscovy_. If therefore they went to _no church_ now, they would be no farther from the church than they were before.

2. Those who did _sometimes_ go to church before, go three times as often now. These therefore _do not separate_ from the church. Nay, they are united to it more closely than before.

3. Those who _never_ went to church at all before, do go now _at all opportunities_. Will common sense allow any one to say, that these are _separated from the church_?

4. The main question is, Are they turned from doing the works of the devil, to do the works of God? Do they now live soberly, righteously, and godly, in the present world? If they do, if they live according to the _directions_ of the church, believe her _doctrines_, and join in her _ordinances_: with what face can you say, that these men _separate_ from the church of _England_?

32. But in what state are they whom the clergy and gentry (and perhaps _you_ for one) have successfully laboured to preserve from this damnable sin of _schism_? Whom you have kept from hearing these men, and _separating from the church_?

Is not the drunkard that was, a drunkard still? Enquire of his poor wife and family. Is not the common swearer still horribly crying to God for damnation upon his soul? Is not the sinner in every other kind, exactly the same man still? Not better at least, if he be not worse, than he was ten years ago.

Now consider, 1. Does the church of _England_ gain either honour, or strength, or blessing, by such wretches as these calling themselves her members? By ten thousand drunkards, or whoremongers, or common swearers? Nay ought she not immediately to spew them out? To renounce all fellowship with them? Would she not be far better without them than with them? Let any man of reason judge.

2. Is the drunkard’s _calling_ himself of the church of _England_, of any more use to him, than to the church? Will this save him from hell, if he die in his sin? Will it not rather increase his damnation?

3. Is not a drunkard of any other church, just as good as a drunkard of the church of _England_? Yea, is not a drunken _Papist_ as much in the favour of God, as a drunken _Protestant_?

4. Is not a cursing, swearing _Turk_, (if there be such an one to be found) full as acceptable to God, as a cursing, swearing _Christian_?

Nay, 5. If there be any advantage, does it not lie on the side of the former? Is he not the less inexcusable of the two? As sinning against less light?

O why will you sink these poor souls deeper into perdition, than they are sunk already? Why will you prophesy unto them peace, peace; when there is no peace? Why, if you do it not yourself, (whether you cannot, or will not, God knoweth) should you hinder us from _guiding them into the way of peace_?

33. Will you endeavour to _excuse_ yourself, by saying, “There are not _many_ who are the better for your preaching: and these by and by will be as bad as ever; as such and such an one is already?”

I would to God I could set this in a just light? But I cannot. All language fails.

God begins a glorious work in our land. You set yourself against it with all your might; to prevent its beginning where it does not yet appear, and to destroy it wherever it does. In part you prevail. You keep many from hearing the word that is able to save their souls. Others who had heard it, you induce to turn back from God, and to list under the devil’s banner again. Then you make the success of your own wickedness an _excuse_ for not acknowledging the work of God! You urge “That not _many_ sinners were reformed! And that some of those are now as bad as ever!”

Whose fault is this? Is it ours? Or your own? Why have not thousands more been reformed? Yea, for every one who is now turned to God, why are there not ten thousand? Because you and your associates laboured so heartily in the cause of hell; because you and they spared no pains, either to prevent or to destroy the work of God! By using all the power and wisdom you had, you hindered thousands from hearing the gospel, which they might have found to be the power of God unto salvation. Their blood is upon _your_ heads. By inventing, or countenancing, or retailing lies, some refined, some gross and palpable, you hindered others from profiting by what they did hear. _You_ are answerable to God for these souls also. Many who began to taste the good word, and run the way of God’s commandments, you, by various methods, prevailed on to hear it no more. So they soon drew back to perdition. But know, that for every one of these also, God will require an account of _you_ in the day of judgment.

34. * And yet, in spite of all the malice, and wisdom, and strength, not only of men, but of _principalities and powers_, of _the rulers of the darkness of this world_, of the _wicked spirits in high places_; there are thousands found, who are turned from _dumb idols, to serve the living and true God_. What a harvest then might we have seen before now, if all who say, they are _on the Lord’s side_, had come, as in all reason they ought, _to the help of the Lord against the mighty_? Yea, had they only _not opposed_ the work of God, had they only _refrained from_ his messengers; might not the trumpet of God have been heard long since in every corner of our land? And thousands of sinners in every county been brought to _fear God and honour the king_?

Judge of what immense service we might have been, even in this single point, both to our king and country. All who hear and regard the word we preach, _honour the king_ for God’s sake. They _render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s_, as well as _unto God the things that are God’s_.――――They have no conception of _piety_ without _loyalty_; knowing _the powers that be, are ordained of God_. I pray God to strengthen all that are of this mind, how many soever they be. But might there not have been at this day, an hundred thousand in _England_, thus minded more than are now? Yea verily; even by _our_ ministry had not they who should have strengthened us, weakened our hands.

35. Surely, you are not wise! What advantages do you throw away! What opportunities do you lose? Such as another day you may earnestly seek, and nevertheless may not find them. For if it please God to remove _us_, whom will you find to supply our place? We are in all things _your servants for Jesus sake_; tho’ the more we love _you_, the less we are loved. Let _us_ be employed not in the highest, but in the meanest; and not in the easiest, but the hottest service. Ease and plenty we leave to those that want them. Let us go on in toil, in weariness, in painfulness, in cold or hunger, so we may but testify the gospel of the grace of God. The rich, the honourable, the great, we are thoroughly willing (if it be the will of our Lord) to leave to _you_. Only let us alone with the poor, the vulgar, the base, the outcasts of men.――Take also to yourselves _the saints of the world_: but suffer us _to call sinners to repentance_; even the most vile, the most ignorant, the most abandoned, the most fierce and savage of whom we can hear. To these we will go forth in the name of our Lord, desiring nothing, receiving nothing of any man (save the bread we eat, while we are under his roof) and let it be seen whether God has sent us. Only let not _your_ hands, who fear the Lord, be upon us. Why should we be stricken of _you_ any more?

IV. 1. Surely ye are _without excuse_, all who do not yet know the day of your visitation! The day, wherein the great God, who hath been forgotten among us, days without number, is arising at once to be avenged of his adversaries, and to visit and redeem his people. Are not his judgments and mercies both abroad? And still, will ye not learn righteousness? Is not _the_ Lord _passing by_? Doth not _a great and strong wind_ already begin _to rend the mountains_, and to _break in pieces the rocks before the Lord_? Is not the _earthquake_ also felt already? And _a fire_ hath begun to burn in his anger. Who knoweth what will be the end thereof? But at the same time, he is speaking to many in _a still, small voice_. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear, lest he be suddenly destroyed, and that without remedy!

2. What _excuse_ can possibly be made for those, who are _regardless_ of such a season as this? Who are at such a crisis, stupid, senseless, unapprehensive; caring for none of these things? Who do not give themselves the _pains_ to _think_ about them, but are still _easy_ and _unconcerned_? What! can there ever be a point, on which it more behoves you to _think_? And that with the coolest and deepest _attention_? As long as the heaven and the earth remain, can there be any thing of so vast importance, as God’s last call to a guilty land, just perishing in its iniquity!

You, with those round about you, deserved long ago to have _drank the dregs of the cup of trembling_: yea, to have been _punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power_. But he hath not dealt with you according to your sins, neither rewarded you after your iniquities. And once more he is mixing mercy with judgment. Once more he is crying aloud, _Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of_ Israel; and will you not deign to give him the hearing? If you are not careful to answer him in this matter. Do you still shut your eyes, and stop your ears, and harden your stubborn heart?――――Oh beware, lest God laugh at your calamity, and mock when your fear cometh!

3. Will you plead, that you have other concerns to mind? That other business engages your thoughts? It does so indeed; but this is your foolishness; this is the very thing that leaves you without excuse.――For what business can be of equal moment? The mariner may have many concerns to mind, and many businesses to engage his thoughts: but not when the ship is sinking. In such a circumstance (it is your own) you have but one thing to think of. Save the ship and your own life together! And the higher post you are in, the more deeply intent should you be on this one point. Is this a time for diversion? For eating and drinking, and rising up to play? Keep the ship above water. Let all else go and mind _this one thing_!

4. Perhaps you will say, “So I do. I do mind this one thing, how to save the sinking nation. And therefore now I must think of _arms_ and _provisions_. I have no time now to think of _religion_.” This is exactly as if the mariner should say, “Now I must think of my _guns_ and _stores_. I have no time now to think of the _hold_.” Why man, you must think of this, or perish. It is _there_ the leak is sprung. Stop that, or you and all your _stores_ will go together to the bottom of the sea.

Is not this your very case? Then, whatever you do, _stop the leak_: else you go to the bottom! I do not speak against your _stores_. They are good in their kind; and it may be well they are laid in.――――But all your _stores_ will not save the sinking ship, unless you can stop the _leak_. Unless you can some way keep out these _floods of ungodliness_, that are still continually pouring in, you must soon be swallowed up in the great deep, in the abyss of God’s judgments. This, this is the destruction of the _English_ nation. It is _vice_, bursting in on every side, that is just ready to sink us into slavery first, and then into the nethermost hell.――――_Who is a wise man, and endued with knowledge among you?_ Let him think of this. Think of this, all that love your country, or that care for your own souls. If now especially you do not think of _this one thing_, you have no _excuse_ before God or man.

5. Little more _excuse_ have you, who are still in _doubt_ concerning _this_ day of your visitation. For you have all the proof that you can reasonably expect or desire, all that the nature of the thing requires. That in many places, abundance of notorious sinners are totally reformed, is declared by a thousand eye and ear-witnesses, both of their present and past behaviour. And you are sensible, the proof of such a point as this must, in the nature of things rest upon testimony. And that God alone is able to work such a reformation, you know all the scriptures testify. What would you have more? What pretence can you have, for _doubting_ any longer? You have not the least room to expect or desire any other, or any stronger evidence.

I trust, you are not of those who _fortify_ themselves against conviction; who are “_resolved_ they will never believe this.” They ask, “who are these men?” We tell them plainly: but they credit us not. Another and another of their own friends is convinced, and tells them the same thing. But their answer is ready, “Are _you_ turned methodist too?” So _their_ testimony likewise goes for nothing. Now how is it possible these should ever be convinced? For they will believe none but those who speak on _one_ side.

6. Do you delay fixing your judgment, till you see a work of God, without any stumbling-block attending it? That neither is yet nor ever will. _It must needs be, that offences will come._ And scarce ever was there such a work of God before, with so few as have attended _this_.

When the _reformation_ began, what mountainous offences lay in the way, of even the sincere members of the church of _Rome_? They saw _such_ failings in those great men, _Luther_ and _Calvin_! Their vehement _tenaciousness_ of their own opinions; their _bitterness_ toward all who differed from them; their _impatience_ of contradiction and utter want of _forbearance_, even with their own brethren.

But the grand stumbling-block of all, was, their open _avowed separation_ from the church; their rejecting so many of the _doctrines_ and _practices_, which the others accounted the most sacred; and their continual _invectives_ against the church they separated from, so much sharper than _Michael_’s reproof of _Satan_.

Where there fewer stumbling-blocks attending the _reformation_ in _England_? Surely no, for what was _Henry_ the Eighth? Consider, either his _character_, his _motives_ to the work, or his _manner_ of pursuing it! And even king _Edward’s ministry_ we cannot clear, of _persecuting_ in their turns, yea and _burning hereticks_. The main stumbling-block also still remained, _viz._ open _separation_ from the church.

7. Full as many were the offences that lay in the way of even the sincere members of the church of _England_, when the people called _Quakers_ first professed, that they were sent of God to reform the land. Whether they were or no, is beside our question: it suffices for the present purpose to observe, that over and above their open, avowed, total _separation_ from the church, and their vehement _invectives_ against many of her _doctrines_, and the whole frame of her _discipline_: they spent their main strength in disputing about _opinions_ and _externals_, rather than in preaching faith, mercy, and the love of God.

In these respects, the case was nearly the same when the _Baptists_ first appeared in _England_. They immediately commenced a warm dispute, not concerning the _vitals_ of Christianity, but concerning the _manner_ and _time_ of administering one of the _external ordinances_ of it. And as their _opinion_ hereof totally differed from that of all the other members of the church of _England_, so they soon openly declared their separation from it, not without sharp _censures_ of those that continued therein.

8. The same occasion of offence was, in a smaller degree, given by the _Presbyterians_ and _Independents_: for they also spent great part of their time and strength, in opposing the commonly received _opinions_, concerning some of the _circumstantials_ of religion; and for the sake of these, _separated_ from the church.

* But I do not include that venerable man, Mr. _Philip Henry_, nor any that were of his Spirit, in this number. I know they abhorred contending about _externals_. Neither did they _separate themselves_ from the church. They continued therein, till they were driven out, whether they would or no. I cannot but tenderly sympathize with these; and the more, because this is, in part, our own case. Warm men spare no pains, at this very day, to drive us out of the church. They cry out to the people, wherever one of us comes, “A mad dog, a mad dog!” If haply we might fly for our lives, as many have done before us. And sure it is, we should have complied with their desire, we should merely for peace and quietness have left the church long before now, but that we could not in conscience do it. And it is on this single motive, it is for conscience sake, that we still continue therein; and shall continue, (God being our helper) unless they by violence thrust us out.

9. * But to return. What are the stumbling-blocks in the present case, compared to those in any of the preceding?

We do not dispute concerning any of the _externals_ or _circumstantials_ of religion. There is no room; for we _agree_ with you therein. We approve of, and adhere to them all; all that we learned together when we were children, in our _catechism_ or _common prayer-book_. We were born and bred up in your _own church_, and desire to die therein. We always were, and are now, _zealous for the church_; only not with a blind, angry zeal. We hold, and ever have done, the same _opinions_, which you and we received from our forefathers. But we do not lay the main stress of our religion on any _opinions_, right or wrong: neither do we ever begin, or willingly join in any _dispute_ concerning them. The weight of all religion, we ♦apprehend, rests on holiness of _heart_ and _life_. And consequently, wherever we come, we press this with all our might. How wide then is the difference between our case and the case of any of those that are above-mentioned? They _avowedly separated_ from the church: we utterly disavow any such design. They severely, and almost continually, inveighed against the _doctrines_ and _discipline_ of the church they left. We approve both the _doctrines_ and _discipline_ of our church, and inveigh only against _ungodliness_ and _unrighteousness_. They spent great part of their time and strength in contending about _externals_ and _circumstantials_. We agree with you in both; so that having no room to spend any time in such vain _contention_, we have our desire of spending and being spent, in promoting plain _practical religion_. How many stumbling-blocks are removed out of _your way_? Why do not you acknowledge the work of God?

♦ “apperehend” replaced with “apprehend”

10. If you say, “Because you hold _opinions_ which I cannot believe are true:” I answer, Believe them true or false; I will not quarrel with you about any _opinion_. Only see that your heart be right toward God, that you know and love the Lord Jesus Christ; that you love your neighbour, and walk as your master walked, and I desire no more. I am sick of _opinions_: I am weary to bear them. My soul loaths this frothy food. Give me solid and substantial religion. Give me an humble, gentle lover of God and man; a man full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy: a man laying himself out in the work of faith, the patience of hope, the labour of love. Let my soul be with _these_ Christians, wheresoever they are, and whatsoever _opinion_ they are of. _Whosoever_ thus _doth the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother_.

11. Inexcusably infatuated must you be, if you can even _doubt_ whether the propagation of this religion be of God! Only more inexcusable are those unhappy men, who _oppose_, _contradict_, and _blaspheme_ it.

How long will you stop your ears against him, that still crieth, _Why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks_; for a man to _contend with his Maker_. How long will you despise the well-known advice of a great and learned man, _Refrain from these men, and let them alone. If this work be of man, it will come to nought. But if it be of_ God, _ye cannot overthrow it_. And why should you _be found even to fight against_ God? If a man fight with God, shall he prevail? _Canst thou thunder with a voice like him?_ Make haste. Fall down. Humble thyself before him. Lest he put forth his hand and thou perish!

12. How long will you fight under the banner of the great enemy of God and ♦man? You are now in his service: you are _taking part with the devil_ against God. Even supposing there were no other proof, this would undeniably appear, from the goodly company among whom you are enlisted, and who war one and the same warfare. I have heard some affirm, that the most bitter enemies to the present work of God, were _Pharisees_. They meant, men who had the _form_ of godliness, but denied the _power_ of it. But I cannot say so. The sharpest adversaries thereof whom I have hitherto known (unless one might except a few honourable men, whom I may be excused from naming) were the scum of _Cornwall_, the rabble of _Bilston_ and _Darlaston_; the wild beasts of _Walsal_, and the turnkeys of _Newgate_.

♦ “man: you” replaced with “man? You” per Errata

13. Might not the very sight of these _troops_, shew any reasonable man, to what _general_ they belonged? As well as the _weapons_ they never fail to use; the most horrid _oaths_ and _execrations_, and lawless _violence_, carrying away as a flood whatsoever it is which stands before it: having no eyes, nor ears, no regard to the loudest cries of reason, justice or humanity. Can _you_ join heart or hands with these any longer? With such an infamous, scandalous rabble-rout, roaring and raging, as if they were just broke loose, with their captain _Apollyon_, from the bottomless pit? Does it not rather concern you, and that in the highest degree, as well as every friend to his king and country, every lover of peace, justice and mercy, immediately to join and stop any such godless crew, as they would join to stop a _fire_ just beginning to spread, or an _inundation_ of the sea?

14. If, on the contrary, you join with that godless crew, and strengthen their hands in their wickedness, must not you, in all reason, be accounted, (like them) _a public enemy of mankind_? And indeed such must every one appear, in the eye of unprejudiced reason, who opposes directly or indirectly, the _reformation_ of mankind. By _reformation_ I mean, the bringing them back (not to this or that system of _opinions_, or to this or that sett of _rites_ and ceremonies, how decent and significant soever: but) to the calm love of God and one another, to an uniform practice of justice, mercy and truth. With what colour can you lay any claim to humanity, to benevolence, to public spirit, if you can once open your mouth, or stir one finger, against such a _reformation_ as this?

* ’Tis a poor excuse to say, “O, but the people are brought into several erroneous _opinions_.” It matters not a straw, whether they are or no; (I speak of such opinions as do not touch the foundation) it is scarce worth while to spend ten words about it. Whether they embrace this _religious opinion_ or that, is no more concern to me, than whether they embrace this or that system of _astronomy_. Are they brought to holy _tempers_ and holy _lives_? This is mine, and should be your enquiry: since on this, both social and personal happiness depend; happiness, temporal and eternal. Are they brought to the love of God and the love of their neighbour? Pure religion and undefiled is this. How long then will you _darken counsel, by words without knowledge_? The plain religion now propagated is LOVE. And can you oppose this, without being _an enemy to mankind_?

15. No; nor without being an _enemy to your king and country_: especially at such a time as this. For however men of no thought may not see and regard it, or hectoring cowards may brave it out, it is evident to every man of calm reflection, that our nation stands on the very brink of destruction. And why are we thus, but because _the cry of our wickedness is gone up to heaven_? Because we have so exceedingly, abundantly, beyond measure, _corrupted our ways before the Lord_. And because to all our other abominations we have added, the open fighting against God; the not only rejecting, but even denying, yea, blaspheming his last offers of mercy; the hindering others who were desirous to close therewith; the despitefully using his messengers, and the variously troubling and oppressing those who did accept of his grace, break off their sins, and turn to him with their whole heart.

16. I cannot but believe, it is _chiefly_ on this account, that God hath now _a controversy with our land_. And must not any considerate man be inclined to form the same judgment, if he reviews the state of _public affairs_, for only a few years last past? I will not enter into particulars. But, in general, can you possibly help observing, that whenever there has been any thing like a _public attempt_, to suppress _this new sect_, (for so it was artfully represented) another and another _public trouble_ arose. This has been repeated so often, that it is surprising any man of sense can avoid taking notice of it. May we _turn_ at length _to him that smiteth us, hearing the rod and him that appointeth it_! May we _humble ourselves under the mighty hand of_ God, before the great deep swallow us up!

17. Just now, viz. on the 4th of this instant, _December_, the Rev. Mr. _Henry Wickham_, one of his Majesty’s justices of peace for the west-riding of _Yorkshire_ writes an order

To the constable of _Kighley_, commanding him, “to convey the body of _Jonathan Reeves_, (whose real crime is, the calling sinners to repentance) to his Majesty’s gaol and castle of _York_: suspected (said the precept) of being a spy among us, and a dangerous man to the person and government of his Majesty King _George_.”

God avert the omen! I fear this is no presage either of the repentance or deliverance of our poor nation!

18. If we will not turn and repent, if we will harden our hearts, and acknowledge neither his judgments nor mercies; what remains but the fulfilling of that dreadful word, which God spake by the prophet _Ezekiel_: _Son of man when the land sinneth against me, by trespassing grievously; then will I stretch forth my hand upon it, and break the staff of the bread thereof.――――Though these three men_, Noah, Daniel _and_ Job, _were in it, they should deliver but their own souls. Or if I bring a sword upon the land, and say_, “SWORD, GO THROUGH THE LAND:”――――_Or if I send a pestilence into that land, and pour out my fury upon it in blood:――――Though_ Noah, Daniel _and_ Job _were in it, as I live, saith the_ Lord God, _they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness_,