conftitution? We deny not that a man may judge he has a claim to this fpiritual independence; and indeed our principle fuppofes him so to judge; but then we must beg leave to think in our turn, that he is groffly miftaken in that judgment. (pp)

I wish to remark, that if the capital truths of the Gospel are discoverable any where, they are most indifputably to be found in the Catholic Church; the great repofitory of Chriftian doctrine. Our bleffed Lord's affurances of fuperintendency, fupport, and protection are out of all question given to his difciples, and to believers in general, as to a body, or fociety. Upon this rock, fays he, I will build my Church, &c. Lo! I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. When he promised his Apoftles that he would fend the Holy Spirit to them, who fhould guide them into all truth, he must neceffarily mean that truth which they were to communicate to their fucceffors, and these to others, and fo on, through all generations. When the facred penmen speak of the truth,

or

or the faith, &c. they undoubtedly speak of the truth embraced, and the faith profeffed by all found Chriftians; and when St. Paul exhorts the Corinthians to examine themfelves, and to prove themselves, whether they were in the faith, he most certainly means the faith of the catholic Church. In a word, we must look for spiritual truth in its native fimplicity, though we fearch for it as for bid treasures; we must look for it within the pale of fome communion or other: which furely will be acknowleged by every man, who does not, in defiance of Scripture, and in contempt of all the world, fuppofe that the infallibility which he justly denies to appertain to any Church upon earth, is really and truly lodged in himself.

The principle of the Confeffional leads, we apprehend, to thefe abfurd confequences; but at the fame time we affert no dominion over the faith, or the confciences of others; we leave every one to ftand or fall to his own mafter; we conceive, that, by the immutable conftitution of things, every one will think

and

and act for himself, though we imagine all men to be accountable to God as well for their opinions as for their practices; we neither do, nor wish to compel men to come in that our Church may be filled, perfuaded as we are at the fame time that this Church is, in refpect of all effentials, an apoftolical one; that the bolds faft the things which become found doctrine, and teaches the words of eternal life.

It may with great truth be affirmed, that the Church of England afferts the right of private judgment in the fame fenfe, and to the fame latitude that every party or body of Proteftants does. For how does the management of the several leaders and teachers of the Sectaries accord with this univerfally avowed principle? How do they leave men to their own judgments in matters of religion? Do they not find ways and means to become mafters of the understandings, and the confciences of their followers; and accomplish that by indirect artifice which they load us with obloquy for doing under the fanction of lawful authority? The fact is, in cafe of fuperiority,

riority, any fect that you may name would think itself, not barely empowered, but bound to ftrengthen and secure itself by legal fences and establishments, and by authoritative constitutions; i. e. by those very means and methods against which it now so vehemently exclaims. Experience will justify our fuppofition that fuch would be the cafe ; as we know the moft confiderable branch of the Dissenters to have changed its language, and its fentiments, with its fituation. The -first article of the memorable folemn League and Covenant declares the intention of its framers to be, to "bring the Churches of God in "the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction " and uniformity in religion, CONFESSION OF "FAITH, FORM OF FORM OF CHURCH-GOVERN

MENT, and DIRECTORY FOR WORSHIP "and CATECHISING; that they and their pofterity after them might as brethren live in "faith and love."'

"

It is pleafant enough to obferve, that, notwithstanding the fine flourishes and colourings of certain authors, who plaufibly profefs

profefs themselves to be advocates for the common rights and privileges of Christians, we find them fometimes driven out of their track by the irrefiftible force of truth, and infenfibly advancing, or admitting ecclefiaftical notions: we find them after all their efforts and struggles to climb over the pale of the Church, unwarily, or rather unavoidably flipping back, as I may fay, into her fold, and undermining their own principles. The words of a late famous prelate* upon this fubject will verify the observation. “As it

is abfurd, fays he, to fuppofe that any man

can be faved by the faith of another, or "by any belief but what is truly his own; "fo there is no poffible method of having a "faith of his own, properly fo called, with❝out building it entirely upon what appears

right to his own judgment, fuch as it is, "after his best endeavours for INFORMATION." That is to fay, in other words, a man cannot properly be faid to judge for himself till he has received information, or instruction from others. In fhort, let privileges be as facred, or confciences as tender * Bp. Hoadley,

as