of that period laboured-and laboured fuccefsfully, to procure a toleration of faith and worship to every clafs of diffenters from the established church; but they never dreamed that the ATTERBURYS, and SHERLOCKS, and WAKES, and POTTERS, of the fame period, deferved to be loaded with opprobrious names; and perfecuted, as far as calumny, widely circulated by the prefs, amounts to perfecution, merely for defending the faith and conftitution of the Church of England! The age of Queen Anne is indeed called the age of illiberality and High Churchifm; but is the prefent age more liberal or tolerant than was that age? No; intolerance has only changed fides; for while the church is cheerfully granting to the Diffenters more than the forefathers of the prefent Diffenters prefumed to afk or hope for, and while many who call themselves Churchmen-fome even in orders-unite occafionally with the Diffenters in worship; thofe Clergymen, who prefume to maintain the rights of the church, to contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the faints, or to plead for the Divine commiffion of the epifcopal Clergy, are allaulted not by argument but by obloquy,and fo affaulted, not by diffenters only, but by many falfe brethren among themselves.

Formerly, there were violent controverfies among Epifco. palians, Prefbyterians, and Independents, about the Divine Conftitution of their refpective churches, and the authority by which their feveral minifters acted as "ambaffadors of Chrift, and stewards of the myfteries of God;" and these different parties occafionally reproached each other with intolerance, and illiberality of fentiment. But now, every man is deemed illiberal, who would not occafionally communicate with them all; who contends for the Divine authority of any denomination of Clergymen; or who does not fay with the poet,

"For modes of faith, let graceless zealots fight,

"His can't be wrong, whofe life is in the right "

though the lives of the liberal men of the prefent age are not more correct, than were the lives of the bigots of the laft.

Amidst this relaxation of what our forefathers thought principle, Mr. Davies has the fortitude to contend for apo!tolical truth; while he feels it neceffary to conciliate the liberal minds of his readers to the doctrine which he en deavours to defend, by writing an elaborate apology for

Z 2

main

maintaining the right of argument founded on fcripture against the ufurpation of railing and buffoonery! a series of Difcourfes on Church Union, he was well aware, would give occafion to keen ftrictures founded on the liberality of the age; and therefore in his firft difcourfe he endeavours to afcertain what is the province of reafon in religious en-: quiries; how he is bound to conduct herfelf in fuch enquiries; and what are the limits beyond which she should not attempt to proceed. His text is 1 Theff. v. 21.-Prove all things: hold faft that which is good.

Having fhown that, in these words, the Apoftle commands his Theffalonian converts to exercife their reason on certain topics, even of revealed religion, which he enumerates; fuch as whether the Scriptures be indeed the word of God; whether the text that has come down to us be authentic; how the most obfcure and intricate paffages are to be interpreted; and what precepts and ordinances are of a temporary, and what of perpetual obligation, he fays, Reafon will thus acquire a general rule, by which to prove all things and to ascertain that which is good.

"It will alfo begin to perceive the legitimate bounds of its own deliberation: for the word of God is not to be difputed by men. If he who judges righteous judgment, and holds faft that which is good, remarks, in this word, fome doctrines which are above his com. prehenfion, he will, notwithstanding, acknowledge the obligation of receiving them, as they are delivered, with reverence and refpect; because God is wifer than man. If he discover fome precepts and ordinances, for which he cannot affign an obvious and adequate reafon, he will nevertheless fubmit to the duty of obferving them with humility; because they are ftampt with an authority which is not to be controverted by the children of the duft." P. 8.

This is unquestionably the way in which the mysterious doctrines and pofitive ordinances of the Gofpel will be received by him, who, with fincerity and the love of truth, endeavours to prove all things and to judge righteous judg ment. With refpect to the conftitution and authority of the church, the obvious refource of a right judgment will be

tudy the conftitution of thofe churches which were founded by the Apoftles of Chrift; and to pay a due regard to fuch regulations as obtained a general confent among them; always keeping in mind, that the ends to be aimed at, are the advancement of true religion, and the preservation of good order.

"It is then requifite, in order to the forming of a right judgment in matters which pertain to the Chriftian religion, to

have a facred regard to the Holy Scriptures, and a steady atten. tion to the model of the primitive and apoftolical church. These were the great principles upon which our pious forefathers judged and acted, in the reformation of our national church. And whilft we adhere to the fame principles, we cannot want means to fupport the ftedfaftnefs of our own minds, or a rule to prove and judge of the various doctrines and suggestions of men." P. 19..

This he explains by the confideration of feveral particular cafes, to which he applies the rule, and thereby fhows its importance.

The fecond difcourfe, which is preached from 1 Cor. ii. 5, is on the Divine authority of the New Teftament. It is the chief object of the author to obviate the objections urged, by thofe who call themfelves rational Chriftians, against the infallibility of the Apoftles in the discharge of the various duties of their office, and of course against the fupreme authority of the New Teftament. With this view he traces the history of the authors of that book, from the period at which they first became difciples of Chrift; admits their original ignorance and prejudices, and utter unfitness by nature to be the preachers of a new religion, and the founders of a new church; fhows how thofe prejudices were gradually removed, and their minds enlightened by the teaching of their Divine Mafter; proves that they were not permitted to publifh any thing of the new difpenfation, but by an exprefs commiffion from him, which was gradually enlarged as they became more capable of executing it; and fhows that they were not allowed to enter on their great work of converting the nations, until they were endowed with power from on high, and rendered infallible in their doctrines by the descent of the Holy Ghoft on the day of Pentecoft. The author dwells much, and with great propriety, on the importance placed, in the New Teftament, on a divine commiffion to preach the Gofpel; and the reader will here find more fatisfactory reafons, than perhaps he has met with anywhere else, for our Lord's forbidding those, whom he had cured of their diseases, to" tell any man what he had done unto them;" for his not being himfelf" fent but to the loft fheep of the house of Ifrael;" and for his prohibiting the Apoffles from proclaiming that he was the Chrift, "until he fhould have rifen from the dead." This is an excellent fermon, without any pompous difplay of useless erudition or meretricious eloquence.

The third fermon deserves to be read with the closest attention. It is entitled, Of Apoflolical authority in matters of faith; and is preached from 2 Cor. i. 24, a text, which is

Z 3

here

here proved to have in the original Greek a meaning almost the reverfe of that in which it is understood by thofe who quote it in proof of the LIBERALITY of the Apoftles. The difcourfe would lofe fo much in an abridgment, for it is itfelf but an abridgment of a chain of reasoning which might be fo extended as to fill a volume,-that we must refer our readers to the fermon itself, after making one or two extracts from it, which will bring them acquainted with the preacher's ftyle and principles. Speaking with approbation of the lenient fpirit of the British laws with refpect to religion, he says,

"The proper object and defign of this lenient fpirit, is to difcountenance, or prevent, perfecution, and to fecure to thofe who, by falutary admonition, cannot be brought and preferved within the pale of the established church,- that portion of benevolence and forbearance which, from a Chriftian people, is due to all mankind.

"It has alfo this good effect upon the regular members of the church, that it gives them the credit of fubmitting to the laws of order, not by compulfion, but from a willing mind; fince they have the power of departing from us with temporal impunity." And thus, thofe that are approved amongst us are made manifeft. Toleration, therefore, is a thing right in itself, with regard to thofe by whom it is conceded. Perfecution is utterly forbidden in the Gofpel, where we are commended to be gentle to all men, to love our enemies, and to ferve God with a pure confcience.

"But when men view this fame toleration, as authorizing them, no less in a religious than in a civil fenfe, to withdraw from the unity of the church, to profefs what tenets they pleafe, to frame their own faith, their own form of worship, their own rules of difcipline, under the influence of private fpeculation, and the prefumed fanétion of the rights of confcience and Chriftian. liberty, it ceafes to be a bleffing with regard to them; it be comes detrimental to the harmony of fociety, and fubversive of the very foundation of Chriftianity.

"Notwithstanding, therefore, the tolerance of our laws arifes from a true Chriftian principle, it behoves every profeffor of our holy religion feriously to confider, how far he is warranted by the Gofpel to indulge in the ufe of that liberty which these laws have granted; to take care, that he does not conftrue civil permiffion into facred authority, or make the laws of the land the rule of his faith, and the measure of his profeffion. For we muft all remember, that we fhall be called to a strict account at a higher tribunal; and that the act of toleration does not conftitute the code by which we must be judged. If, in compliance with our Lord's direction, it permits the wheat and the tares to grow together till the harvest, it cannot alter the nature of the one or

the

the other; fince we are exprefly taught, that they will be aceurately diftinguished in the great day, and duly difpofed of, agreeably to the fuperior law of Chrift." P. 58.

To the queftion, which Mr. Davies fuppofes may be put, -How is the doctrine of this fermon to be reconciled to the lenity of our laws, and at the fame time the equity of thofe laws vindicated? he replies:

"Under our prefent government, we are as mariners in a free port. Every man is at liberty to depart when he pleafes, and to fhape his courfe as he thinks moft convenient. At the fame time it is permitted to thofe officers who are ftationed in this port for the prefervation of good order, and it is their duty, to caution the unadvised not to put to fea in a form, not to embark in a rotten veffel, or steer to a coaft where the peftilence walketh in darkness. This is not perfecution. It is no reftraint on civil (or, religious) liberty: it is only falutary admonition. The wanderer is invited, he is intreated to remain in a place of fafety : "he is warned of the danger which may attend his rafh departure. This is a friendly office. The advice is good; but it is not enforced by compulfion. It is fanctioned only by the confequential: rifk and hazard which await him who fhall refufe to hear, or: treat with neglect the things that make for his peace." P. 78.

The fubject of the fourth fermon, which is preached from 1 Cor. iv. 1, is the minifterial commiffion in the church of Chrift; and the preacher clearly proves, from the records of the New Teftament, that in every church planted by the Apofiles, there were three orders of minifters; that thefe orders were not of a temporary, but of permanent inftitution, to be continued in the church always, even unto the end of the world; and that of thefe the higheft then was, and now is, alone authorized to ordain others, or fend labourers into Chrift's vineyard. Mr. Daviés conducts his argument fairly and fkilfully; but he has faid nothing in* fupport of his pofition, which the reader will not find as well faid elsewhere, except perhaps the following reply to a very common objection urged by modern levellers to what they call the doctrine of High Church.

"Some have urged," fays Mr. Davies, "that the Apostles; appointed their fucceffors, under the immediate and vifible direction of the Holy Spirit; and hence they infer, that, as miracles, have now ceafed, as this visible direction is no longer given,-Chriftians may lawfully depart from this primitive rule, and, by, the guidance of human judgment, may fafely conftitute minifters,. who do not derive their office in an uninterrupted fucceffion from the apostles.

24

" In