WHEN I cast my Eyes upon the first Paragraph of your late Letter to me by Way of the Press, I was pleased with the Hope of an ample Confession of several Things in your past Conduct, which, I can't but think, have been justly offensive to good Men, as well as a great Obstacle to your Usefulness in the World. And had you been particular and explicit in condemning and retracting these Things, you would have given "me all the Satisfaction" I desire, and taken the most effectual Method to "allay and remove the Jealousies and Fears, which have been raised in the Minds, both of your Friends and Enemies"; and more than all this, you would, I believe, have honoured GOD, and done good Service to the Interest of Religion.

You must have been sensible, Sir, upon the most cursory reading of my Book, that I considered you as the true Source of several of the Disorders I complain of as generally prevalent in the Land. A heavy Charge this! I am sure, it very nearly touch'd your [Page 4] Character. And yet, how little have you said to re­move away the Grounds of it? I could wish, from the Bottom of my Heart, you had been more thorough in vindicating, or censuring your self. 'Tis a thousand Pities, as you so earnestly desire "the Prosperity of the Ministers and Churches of New-England", you did not more effectually qualify your self to be an Instrument in promoting it, either by making it evident to them, and all the World, that you have not been, in a faulty Sense, the Occasion of those unhappy Alienations, Conten­tions and Confusions, which have been so hurtful to Reli­gion; or otherwise, by frankly confessing your Faults, and taking all due Blame to your self. You might, in this Way, have calm'd the Spirits of those who are enraged against you; Nay, I have no Reason to think, but you would have gain'd the Love and Esteem, even of your greatest Enemies. And, in this Case, how much more comfortable would your Visit have been to your self, and how much greater the Prospect of its being advantagious to others?

I freely own, you have discovered no "Inclination to railing" in the Remarks you have made upon those Pas­sages in my late Book, which you might think injurious to your Character; for which Reason, I think my self obli­ged (in Virtue of the Promise you refer to) to make you some sutable Acknowledgment. And I shall endeavour to do it with Candour becoming the Gentleman and Chris­tian. I can truly say, I don't perceive the least working of Bitterness, or Wrath, or Anger, in my Spirit; but, on the contrary, am in a Temper of Mind, disposing me to all Christian good Offices towards you. And as this is my present Frame, if I should have Reason to rebuke you, it shall be with Meekness and Love, and that I might not suffer Sin upon you.

You begin with that Paragraph in my Book, where, speaking of Itinerant preaching, I say, ‘This had its Rise (at least in these Parts) from Mr. Whitefield; though I could never see, I own, upon what Warrant, either [Page 5] from Scripture or Reason, he went about preaching from one Province and Parish to another, where the Gospel was already preached, and by Persons as well qualified for the Work as he can pretend to be.—’ I really expected, as the Itinerancy (by your tacit Confes­sion) had its Rise from you, that you would have stood its Friend and Patron; at least, that you would have taken some Pains to vindicate your own going about the World in the Capacity of an Itinerant Preacher; and the rather, as you can't be insensible, how highly offensive this Part of your Conduct has been. You may remember, Sir, you have declared to the World, (Pag. 1.) that if private Chris­tians or Ministers ‘have given any Occasion of Offence, either by their Conduct, Conversation or Writings, all possible Care ought to be taken to have [...] Offences removed, especially if they are under Apprehensions (as was your Case when you wrote this Letter) of being called by a speedy Dissolution before the great Shep­herd and Bishop of Souls.’ How then shall I account for it, that you have taken so little Care to remove away this great Article of Offence? I say so little Care, for all you have said in Vindication of "your Coming where the Gospel is already preached by Persons as well qualified for the Work as you can pretend to be," is only this, (Page 3) ‘Did I come unask'd? Nay, did not some of those very Persons, who were as well qualified for the Work as I can pretend to be, send me Letters of Invitation? Yes assuredly they did; or otherwise, in all Probability, I had never seen New-England.’ Will you, Sir, upon a Review of this Passage, say, that it contains Matter of solid Argument? I had declared, "I could see no War­rant, either from Scripture or Reason, for your Itinerating Practice." And what is your Answer? Why, I was ask'd to itinerate, I had received Letters inviting me to it. Will you call this satisfactory Reasoning? Don't you perceive, that the Thing in Question is taken for grant­ed? I deny not, that your being ask'd to come into New England was the Occasion of it; But how does this war­rant [Page 6] your Conduct here as an Itinerant Preacher? Ought you not to have produced your Commission? Should you not have made it evident, from Scripture or Reason, that you had a Call to this Kind of Preaching? The Invita­tion you had to come here would then have justified you, in exercising your Ministry among us; but not other­wise. This is so plain, that you must, I think, be con­vinced.

You have not offered one Word more in Vindication of your Character as an Itinerant Preacher, unless that, in Pag. 2, (which I shall have Occasion to consider in ano­ther View afterwards) may be thought to look this Way, where you suggest, as tho' you ‘had begun a Relation how you were led into your present Way of acting, which, when God shall give you Strength and Leisure, you will finish and print.’ But as the Contents of this Relation, tho' promised four Years ago, are still secret, and no one can say but it may be four Years longer be­fore they will be made public, I can't suppose you will call this a Vindication of your self that the World ought, at present, to be satisfied with. If they are satisfied, it must be by implicit Faith, and blind Obedience, to a high Degree.

Forgive me now, Sir, if I profess myself surprised, that you have done no more to answer this grand Objection a­gainst you. In the Book you are replying to, I had plac­ed the Itinerancy at the Head of the Disorders reigning in the Land; and had spent many more Pages than are contained in your whole Letter, in shewing its Inconsisten­cy with Scripture, and Reason, and good Order, as well as the known Constitution of the Churches in New-England, and other reformed Churches, and in pointing out the Restraints that have been laid upon this Practice, as an evil one, by Ecclesiastical Authority, almost from the Beginning of Christianity: And yet, you have passed all over in total Silence. Is this all the Care you could possibly take to re­move this known Occasion of Offence? Especially, at a Time, when you were "under Apprehensions of being [Page 7] speedily call'd before the great Shepherd and Bishop of Souls. May I not appeal even to your self, whether I han't just the same Reason to say, "I can see no War­rant for your Itinerating Practice," as before you wrote this Letter? Have you answered one Objection against it? Have you proposed one Text in the whole Bible to justify it? Have you offered any one Argument, upon the Strength of which you will say I ought, as a Man or a Christian, to own I am convinced?

Upon all which suffer me, Sir, to beseech you in the Bow­els of Christ Jesus to review your supposed Call to the Work of an Itinerant Preacher.— If one Minister may go about preaching at large, where the Gospel is already preached by settled and well-qualified Pastors, may not a­nother do the same, and another still, and so on, 'till their is no such Thing as Church-Order in the Christian World? —And what is the Tendency of this Kind of Preaching? Han't there been awful Effects of it in the Country? Has it not produced Envy, and Strife, and Schism, and an undue Preference of one Minister to another to the great Hindrance of the Gospel? Have you seen nothing of this, since your Coming among us? Have none of the Works of the Flesh been manifest, Hatred, Variance, E­mulation, Wrath, Strife, Bitterness, Clamour, Evil speaking? Do you know of no Alienations between Ministers and People on your Account? Have you heard of no Parishes, where, on the one Hand, the Minister appears for you, and the People against you; and, on the other Hand, the Minister is against you, and the People for you? And is it possible, in such a State of Things, but that Religion should suffer unspeakable Damage? I own, if you are sent of God, you are not accountable for what may follow upon your Obedience to the heavenly Call; but the Case is otherwise, if your Mission is not real, but imaginary. In this Case, you are answerable, in a Sense, for all the mis­chievous Effects, which are occasioned by your present Method of Acting. An awful Consideration truly! And I pray GOD to impress it deeply on your Heart.

[Page 8]The Paragraph you are considering goes on, ‘I cha­ritably hope, his Design herein was good; but might it not be leavened with some undesirable Mixture? Might he not, at first, take up this Practice from a mistaken Thought of some extraordinary Mission from God? Or, from the undue Influence of too high an O­pinion of his own Gifts and Graces? And when he had got into this Way, might he not be encouraged to go on in it, from the popular Applauses every where so libe­rally heaped on him?’ You own (Pag. 2) "all this might possibly be true concerning you." But yet, I am blameworthy. And why? The Reason you give in the following Words, ‘Have you not prejudged me? Did I not, at the latter End of the Account of God's Deal­ings with me, already published, promise, as soon as I had Time and Freedom, to relate how I was led out into my present Way of Acting? And should you not have waited for this, and then from the Account it self inferred what might be the Motives that induced me to commence and continue an Itinerant Preacher?’ I did wait, Sir, about three Years; and as you was not plea­sed, within that Time, to tell the World how you were led into this Way of Preaching, I thought I might venture to make some Guess as to the probable Motives exciting to it: Nor am I convinced by any Thing you have said, that I have either prejudg'd, or done you the least Wrong. You take Occasion indeed from those Words, Might not his Design be leavened with some undesirable Mixture, hum­bly to enquire (Pag. 3.) ‘Whether we must leave off acting for God, till we feel that our Actions are not leaven'd with some undesirable Mixture?’ And then go on to renounce the "Doctrine of sinless Perfection as un­scriptural;" for which I am glad, because, if Mr. Ten­nent is to be rely'd on, the Moravians, whom you call Brethren, and have spoke well of since you have been in Town, are strenuous Asserters of this Doctrine, and en­tertain so high an Opinion of their perfect Freedom from Sin, as not to be able to join with you in what you say [Page 9] from the Apostle Paul and Bp. Beveridge. But what Need, Sir, of so much Enlargement in confessing that you are a frail imperfect Man, and can do nothing but with a Mixture of Sin? Is this what I aim'd at by the Phrase, undesirable Mixture? Did I not evidently intend something more gross, though I spake in that soft Language? And was not my Meaning sufficiently explained by the Words that immediately followed? ‘Might he not, at first, take up this Practice from a mistaken Thought of some ex­traordinary Mission from God? Or from the undue In­fluence of too high an Opinion of his own Gifts and Graces?’ These are Suggestions, I think, carrying in them a stronger Idea than that of common Imperfection and Frailty. But what is it you say to them?

The first Suggestion, viz. "that you took up Itinerant Preaching from a mistaken Thought of some extraordinary Mission from God," you no where except against as ground­less; and consequently, I have no Reason, from any Thing you have offered, to reflect upon my self as hav­ing injured you, in mentioning this as one of the Motives to your taking up the Itinerating Practice. If you had thought yourself misrepresented, in this Instance, I may reasonably suppose you would have been particular in sug­gesting it to me; and the rather, because, a Misrepresen­tation in a Matter of such high Importance would have been greatly criminal in me. I believe, Sir, you would have gratified many, (I know you would have pleased me) if you had opened your Mind here, and plainly told the World your Sentiments about your Mission as an Iti­nerant Preacher. There are those, without all Doubt, who imagine you are a Minister extraordinarily sent forth from God; and there are a great many Passages in your Writings, which might lead them into such an Appre­hension of you. And as you have not particularly bla­med me for suggesting that this might be your own Ap­prehension of your self, I shall not think I wrong you in supposing that it is; though if it be your real Apprehen­sion, that you are extraordinarily called of God to this [Page 10] Way of Preaching, I am abundantly satisfied, in Virtue of a great Variety of Arguments particularly illustrated in my Book, but no where reply'd to by you, that you are under a gross Mistake. And it may be, you will, sooner or later, see your Mistake, after the Example of Mr. Da­venport, a Gentleman highly celebrated in one of your Journals.

The other Suggestion, ‘That you might be influen­ced to take up this Practice from too high an Opinion of your own Gifts and Graces, and the popular Applau­ses so liberally heaped on you,’ I did not publish from my own Fancy, much less from a Spirit of Evil-Surmising; but in Consideration of numerous Passages in your Wri­tings, almost perpetually repeated, which so evidently sa­vour of ostentatious Boasting, that even your very good Friends have complained of them. How often do you lead your Readers into Admiration at your spiritual En­largements, the Sweetness and Power of your inward Feel­ings, and the extraordinary Communications you so often receive from above? And when you are so particular in describing, upon every Occasion, the Troops that attended you, the Alarm of Towns as you made your Entrance into them, the Flocking of People after you, the vast Numbers coming to hear you, their Meltings under your Preaching, their sore Weeping, their being drowned in Tears, their Hearts leaping for Joy, their receiving you as an Angel of God;—I say, when such Passages as these are perpetually dropping from you, in almost every Page you write, is it possible an unprejudic'd Person should take no Notice of the Self-Satisfaction you discover in the Hosanna's of the Multitude? This shews itself in so many Instances, that others can't help seeing it, if you don't your self. And to what, separate from this, could it be owing, ‘That you were so fond of Preaching always yourself, to the Ex­clusion, not of your Brethren only, but Fathers in Grace, and Gifts, and Learning, as well as Age? And that you were so ostentatious and assuming as to alarm so many Towns, by proclaiming your Intentions, in the [Page 11] public Prints, to preach such a Day in such a Parish, the next Day in such an one, and so on, as you passed through the Country; and all this, without the Know­ledge either of Pastors or People in most Places?’ These Queries you except against and say, ‘What Foun­dation are they built upon? Or, how can it be prov­ed, that I was so fond of preaching always myself to the Exclusion of my Fathers, &c?’ Are you really ignorant, Sir, how this may be proved? Don't you know that two Sermons, preached on two Lord's Days, one by Dr. Colman, the other by Dr. Sewall, were the only Ser­mons you heard preached by others, in all New-England; though the whole Time of your Continuance here, you preach'd your self every Day in the Week, and mostly twice a Day? And though so many Lectures were call­ed, particularly in this Town, did you ever excuse your self from Preaching, urging the Work upon your Fathers or Brethren? Nay, did you ever, at such a Time, so much as coldly desire any one of the 14 associated Pastors to take the Pulpit, that you might be a Hearer? And has this no Appearance of your being always fond to preach yourself? Especially, if it be considered, that most of the Ministers were your Fathers in Age, not to say in other Respects. I may appeal even to your self, whether it would not have look'd more modest and humble, in so young a Man, if you had sometimes, at least, been a Hear­er, and not always the Preacher? You say, it was "thro' repeated Sollicitations that you preach'd the Thursday-Lec­ture." You should have added every Time it was preach'd while you were in Town. And I deny not that you were sollicited to preach this stated Lecture; but as your Prea­ching was so frequent at other Times, would you not have made it more evident, that you wan't fond of preaching always yourself, if you had withstood their Intreaties, and let the Town know by your sitting patiently as a Hearer, that you supposed some of the Ministers, at least, were capable of preaching as well as you. Your always preaching the stated as well as occasional and extraordinary Lectures, [Page 12] was a virtual Exclusion of your Fathers and Brethren from the Pulpit▪ such an Exclusion of them as could not have taken Place, if you had preferred others in Love, as the Scripture directs.

You go on, and say, ‘Whatever I may think your Opinion of the Boston Ministers was, at that Time, yet you always recommended them, and instead of encou­raging People to separate, constantly exhorted them (as you would do again) to attend upon their Ministrations.’ I never charged you, Sir, with directly encouraging People to separate from their Ministers; though, in a late Sermon, which you have seen, I have charged you with publish­ing such Sentiments concerning Ministers in general, and the Ministers of New-England in particular, as are natu­rally connected with the Separations brought forward in the Land, and the true Source from which they original­ly sprang; and this Charge I am ready to make good, whenever you shall think fit to call me to an Account for laying it against you. In the mean Time, don't take it amiss, Sir, If I say, tho' you did not, when here, carry the Matter so far as, in Terms, to "encourage People to separate from the Boston Ministers," yet you had no very high Opinion of them at that Time (however raised your Conceptions may have been since); and this you e­vidently discovered by putting Mr. Tennent to the extra­ordinary Trouble of so long a Journey in the Winter Sea­son, to carry on the Work you begun here; the Boston Ministers, though so considerable a Body, not being tho't sufficiently qualified for the Purpose. I shall repeat here what I said in my late Book, Pag. 39. ‘I know what Opinion Mr. Whitefield had of the Generality of the Ministers in Town; for I have had personal Conversa­tion with one, who join'd in the Prayers previous to Mr. Tennent's Journey to Boston.’

The other Queries in this Paragraph, ‘Why so osten­tatious and assuming as to alarm so many Towns, by proclaiming his Intentions, in the publick Prints, to preach such a Day in such a Parish, &c.’ I perceive [Page 13] are not grateful to you. The Facts indeed you own; but say in Vindication of your self, "That this procee­ded from Ostentation, is what the great Searcher of Hearts can alone determine." I left it intirely with the Searcher of Hearts to determine, how far this proceeded from Ostentation; but that it look'd ostentatious is what I still really believe, and if others should do so too, they would be in no Danger of invading a divine Prerogative. For Men's public Conduct may lawfully be judged upon. God himself allows of it; nor will you venture to deny it. You then excuse yourself by saying, ‘It was judg­ed expedient by your Friends to give People public No­tice of your Intention to preach to them, and that e­very Advertisement was penned by the Direction of some one or more of your Brethren and Fathers.’ I believe what you say is true; and though it may be some Excuse for the Thing, it can't alter its Nature. 'Tis pos­sible, the Friends you speak of might entertain too exal­ted an Opinion of you, and from hence be insensibly led to advise to that, which▪ in Respect of any other Person, they themselves would have cry'd out of, as ostentatious and vain. You don't directly affirm, "That Applicati­on was made to you in every Place where you preached, by the Minister or People, before you gave publick Notice of your Intention to preach;" and so I have no Occasi­on to say, that, in several Places, you had no previous Invitation from the Minister, or People; which makes the Advice of your Friends the more exceptionable, and your own Conduct in Pursuance of it ostentatious and as­suming.

The next Paragraph, you are pleas'd to bestow your Remarks upon is in the 37th Page of my Book, where I inquire, ‘And what became of his little Flock all this while?—And what is the mighty Difference (so far as a particular Flock is concerned in its Pastor's Labour) be­tween an Itinerant Preacher, absent from his Charge se­ven Eights of his Time, and a Non-Resident Minister? Or between a Pluralist, and one that acts as tho' all the [Page 14] Parishes in a Country were his proper Cure?’ In Answer to Part of these Questions you insert a large Account you had Occasion to write to a dignify'd Clergyman of the Church of England. This, Sir, I have carefully perused, and perceive not but 'tis a Confirmation of what I have advan­ced against you. For 'tis plain, from the current Strain of this Account, that you were in Fact absent from your proper Cure seven Eights of your Time; and that, while you were absent, you were going about the World as a preaching and begging Itinerant. And the Question now is, wherein does the Difference lie between you, and any Non-Resident Minister, or Pluralist, SO FAR as your Flock is concerned in your pastoral Labours? And you may re­member, Sir, this was the Point of Light, in which I was here considering the Matter. I never charged you with loitering and living at Ease, or with fleecing your Flock and spending it upon your Lusts; but with neglecting the Souls committed to your special Charge. And is not this appa­rent from what you have wrote to the dignified Clergyman? Tis true, your having been abundant in labouring and col­lecting in various Parts of the World, is an Argument that you han't been idle; but, at the same Time, it as strongly argues, that you have not taken Heed to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost made thee an Overseer. And I must needs say, your Zeal to promote the Salvation of the People of your own Charge, don't seem to equal that you discover in populous Places, where you may have Crowds to attend you. I particularly remember, when here last, you sel­dom prayed but you expressed a more than ordinary Love to your little Flock, and longing after the Salvation of their Souls: And yet, when you went to Georgia, how little Benefit had they of your Labours? I am sensible (and mention it here to correct a Mistake in my Book, Pag. 48. which you have passed over without Notice; I am sensible) your special Relation to the People of Sa­vanna was now dissolv'd; but considering the near Re­lation you had so lately, and for several Years, stood in to them, and considering also the little Advantage they [Page 15] had of your Ministry while this Relation subsisted, I can­not but wonder you allowed them so small a Share of your Labours. For you was with them no more than two Days, and preach'd no more than two Sermons to them. And yet, as soon as you left Georgia, your Journals ap­pear with pompous Accounts of your Preachings twice every Day in the Week to large Auditories, besides frequent Expoundings in the Evening. I can't help saying I could scarce have believed these Things, if I had not seen them with my own Eyes, under your own Hand.—I shall only add, if the Words of Job, which conclude this Account to the dignified Clergyman, had been wrote by another, and not your own Pen, it might have tended as much to your Honor, if there be a Pertinency in that Advice of the inspired Solomon, (Prov. 27.2) Let another Man praise thee, and not thine own Mouth; a Stranger, and not thine own Lips.

The Paragraph you are upon proceeds, ‘And some are in the Opinion, it han't been to Mr. Whitefield's Disadvantage, on temporal Accounts, that he has tra­velled about the World in Quality of an Itinerant Preacher. He has certainly made large Collections: And if, in the Doing of this, he had a Fellow-Feeling with the Orphans, 'tis no more than might be expected. No one, I believe, besides himself, can tell the A­mount of the Presents he received in this Town, as well as in other Places, for his own proper Use.’ These Words, I find, have given you great Offence. You say, "This is one of the most Ungentleman-like, as well as un­charitable Things I am pleased to mention concerning you." And intimate as tho' I must then think you "a consum­mate Villain." But what if you have affix'd a Sense to my Words that never enter'd into my Heart? And this, Sir, is the real Truth of the Matter. However suspici­ous some have been, whether you have employ'd the Mo­nies you collected for the sole Use intended when they were given, I have, for my self, been all along inclined to think charitably; and did not design by the Phrase, a [Page 16] Fellow-feeling with the Orphans, a Fellow-sharing with them in a knavish Manner, as you suggest: Nor do I see, how my Words can fairly be construed to such a Sense. If you had been in the Exercise of as much Charity in Reading as I was in Writing them, you might have spar­ed this severe Reflection. The Idea I aim'd at conveying to the World was this, and only this, that while you were collecting for the Orphans, the People who gave of their Bounty to them might give to you also, which Fel­low-feeling with the Orphans, together with the Presents I had heard of your receiving for your own proper Use, I then supposed, and do still, would justify my saying, that ‘your Travelling about as an Itinerant Preacher was not to your Disadvantage, on temporal Accounts.’ I be­lieve, upon Examination, you will find my Words capa­ble of this Sense, without the Help of any great Degree of Candour; and it was the very Sense in which I inten­ded them.

The next Passage you are pleased to reply to, is in P. 126, where speaking of People's expressing their religious Joy, in the late Times, by hearty loud Laughing, I say, ‘Nor can I think from whence it should take its Rise, unless from Mr. Whitefield and Tennent. The former of these Gentlemen was sometimes observ'd to speak of the Affairs of Salvation with a Smile in his Counte­nance.’ Upon which you ask, ‘Can it justly be deem'd a Fault, in any Preacher, when talking of Affairs of this Nature, to express his inward Joy by a Smile in his Countenance? Is there any Thing inconsis­tent in such a Conduct with the greatest Reverence and most awful Sense of the Divine Presence?’ And af­ter pointing me to the Example of Abraham's Laughing, upon the Receipt of a Divine Message, conclude with Querying, ‘Can it justly be inferred that the People in New England, could any Way learn to express their religious Joy by a loud and hearty Laugh, from my Be­ing sometimes observed, at Boston, to speak of the Af­fairs of Salvation with a Smile in my Countenance.?’ [Page 17] This, you will own, is a fair Representation of what you have offered upon this Article; and if you had been as fair in representing what I had offered, your Remarks would have made a far less plausible Appearance. You can't but be sensible, Sir, that I mentioned the Smile in your Countenance only in transitu, and that Mr. Tennent's broad Laugh, when told of any in spiritual Distress, was what I mainly insisted on. And I leave it with the World to judge, whether I have not herein assign'd the most probable Cause of People's expressing their religious Joy by hearty loud Laughter. It never came into my Thoughts, that this uncouth Way of expressing spiritual Joy was principal­ly owing to you; but your speaking of the Affairs of Salvation with a Smile in your Countenance, I then thought (and do so still) might have a Tendency, considering the exalted Opinion many People had of you, to put them upon doing the like; and by this Means they might the more easily be led into an Imitation of Mr. Tennent, the Gentleman thought by you the most proper of any one to carry on the Work you had begun in New-England. And I see no Reason from any Thing you have suggest­ed to alter my Opinion, in the least, upon this Head. I am still of the Mind, that either Smiling or broad Laugh­ing are incongruous Ways of indicating spiritual Joy, and inconsistent with the present Exercise, at least, of that holy Fear and Caution with which we ought always to talk of the Affairs of everlasting Salvation. And I am sorry, while you were vindicating your self from being so much as the remote Occasion of People's laughing under spiritual Joy, you should do it after such a Manner, as, in express Terms, to encourage them in it. For this is the true Purport of the Argument you have put into their Mouths from the Example of Abraham; though, if you had ex­amined into the Affair of his Laughing, you might easily have perceived a wide Difference between the Occasion of it, and the Occasion of that Laughing you brought this Instance to support. I don't wonder the good old Man laughed. I believe there is no one, under like Circum­stances, [Page 18] but would find himself excited to the same Thing. Here was a proper Occasion for Laughing; and Laugh­ing was, in the present Case, a proper Way of expressing the Joy of the old Man's Heart, the immediate Occasion whereof was not wholly a spiritual Matter.

In Page 140th of my Book I had said, ‘That Spirit of rash, censorious and uncharitable Judging, which has been so’ prevalent in the Land, appear'd first in Mr. Whitefield Upon which you cry out. ‘What! did no rash, censo­rious and uncharitable Judging appear in New-Eng­land before I came into it?’ I readily answer no; there was no Appearance of that Spirit of Judging I complai­ned of, and was so large in describing, before you came among us; and if you had read my Book, only in the most cursory Manner, you must have known I should have made this Answer. Don't I declare in express Terms, Pag. 168, 169, 170. ‘That there never was a Time since the Settlement of New-England, where­in there was so much bitter and rash Judging? And this, not in a single Place only, but in most Towns throughout the Provinces; and carried to such a Height too, that many of the most valuable Ministers in the Country have been called all the bad Names one can easily think of; nay, even those, who, for 20, 30, 40 Years, have so caused their Light to shine before others, as that they might have seen their good Works, and have learnt from their good Example to glorify our Father in Heaven?’ And after such a Declara­tion as this, and so much Pains as I had taken to illustrate the Truth of it, could you perswade yourself to think it a sufficient Reply only to put the Question, "Was there no uncharitable Judging before I came into New-England"? Is this giving what I had offered a fair and Christian Examination? Could it enter into your Heart, that you had said that which would carry Conviction along with it? You go on, "Sorry should I be from my inmost Soul, if I introduced it." And is [Page 19] this all the Acknowledgment we are to expect from you? Are you sensible of nothing said, or done by you, that might have a Tendency to propagate a Spirit of censori­ous and rash Judging? Do you need to have this proved to you? You were told in my late Book, ‘You seldom preached but you had something or other to say against unconverted Ministers?’ To which you reply, "Was there any Harm in this?" You knew, Sir, I tho't there was Harm in it, or I should not have herein publickly charged you with a Fault. You add, "Are not unconverted Ministers the Bane of the Christian Church?" If they appear to be unconverted by a Conduct visibly contradictory to the Go­spel, I own, they are a Plague to the Church of God, as well as the greatest Scandal to Religion: Nor is it a Hurt, but Service to the Interest of Christ, to expose their Character, and lessen their Influence to do Mischief: But the Case is widely different, where, so far as appears to the World, they are the Men their Profession obliges them to be. 'Tis now an Abuse of them, and Injury to the Church of God, to insinuate Suspicions against them, as you certainly did against the Ministers of this Land, by perpetually levelling some Part of your public Discourses against unconverted Ministers. You knew you could not charge them with any Thing that was visibly bad, either in Point of Faith or Practice; and yet, in almost every Sermon, you made a most doleful Outcry against uncon­verted Ministers: And what could the Tendency of this be, but to leaven the Minds of People with evil Surmis­ings against their Ministers? And wan't this the Effect in Fact? Even before you left New-England, Ministers were commonly spoken of as Pharisees and unconverted; and it was not long after, before they were called all the bad Names that could render them odious. You go on, ‘Had not the Prophets in the old, and the A­postles in the New Testament, frequently some Thing to say against them?’ I answer, you cannot produce a single Passage, either from the Prophets of the old or the Apostles of the new Testament, wherein they insinuate [Page 20] Suspicions against those Ministers as unconverted, whose visible Conduct was such as it ought to be: So far from it, that by the current Strain of the Writings of all the Prophets and Apostles, yea of Christ Jesus himself, those Ministers ought to be well thought of, and well spoken of, whose Profession and real Character, so far as is visible, agree with each other; as is the Truth with Respect to the Body of the Ministers of this Land; nor will you venture publickly to deny it.

I had said, as a further Illustration of your being the fa [...]y Occasion of the Uncharitableness prevailing in the Land▪ ‘That you often spake of the Ministers, by the Lump, as Pharisees, Enemies of Jesus Christ, and the worst Enemies he had.’ Upon which you say, ‘That you spake of the Ministers of New-England in this Way, I utterly deny.’ It is to be remembred, Sir, you preach'd when here last, as you do now, in the ex­temporaneous Way▪ and I shall not esteem it an unjust Reflection on you, to say, you are not your self the most capable Person to tell what you so deliver; especially, when carried out almost beyond your self, as was some­times the Case when you go [...] upon the Head of unconverted Ministers: For which Reason your denying that you spake of the Ministers of New-England, by the Lump, as Phari­sees and Enemies of Christ, on't satisfy me that you really did not; and your Denial is the less satisfactory, because I was my self several Times present, when you spake, in these Terms, of unconverted Ministers; and I seriously de­clare to you, and all the World, that I verily thought you intended to point out the Minsters of this Land; and I have no Doubt, but this was the Opinion of the Genera­lity of your Hearers, many of whom, at the Time, I know, said as much. And since the Publication of your Letter, a Minister in the Country of an unblemish'd Cha­racter has wrote to me in these Words, ‘I just saw Mr. Whitefield's Answer to some Things in your Book. I observed his denying that he ever spake of the Mini­sters of this Country as Pharisees, &c. I can give [Page 21] you my Testimony and Mr. C—s's too: He expres­ly spake of these our Ministers as Pharisees and uncon­verted. If you have Occasion therefor, you shall have our Testimony drawn up.’ And there is Reason to believe you said thus, because it agrees with your private Conversation upon the same Head. You have now a Letter by you, wherein a Gentleman of Character and Re­putation in the Country has told you, "that you said in his House, that you did not believe one Minister in twen­ty in the Country was converted."—But I have no need to labour this Point.— You won't deny, Sir, what you have published to the World under your own Name; and you have, in Reality of Sense, printed the very Thing you disown you have preached. You have told the People of New-England (N. E. Journal Pag. 70) that "you verily believe the Generality of Preachers talk of an un­known unfelt Christ;" Nay, you have particularly point­ed out the Ministers of New-England, as it were by Name, and exprest your Fears, (Pag. 95) lest "the most of them did not experimentally know Christ?" Nor is this all; but you have plainly hinted to them (Pag. 70) as if the "Reason why their Congregations have been so dead, is because they have had dead Men preaching to them." And as tho' enough had not yet been done to finish their Usefulness, you directly taught the People (Pag. Ibid) to look upon " unconverted Ministers as no more fitted to beget Children in the spiritual, than dead Men are to be­get them in the natural Sense;" yea, (Pag. Ibid) you put the Devil and them upon a Par in Respect of Instrumen­tality in the Business of Conversion. Besides all which, you have (Pag. 86) particularly mentioned and recom­mended Mr. Tennent's Nottingham Sermon, though per­haps as uncharitable a Piece as was ever printed; I am well assured you can't produce out of any Author, in a­ny Language, within the same Compass of Pages, so many base slanderous Names as he freely bestows upon the Body of the Clergy of this Generation. A List of [Page 22] them you may see, if you please, in Pag. 249 of my Book.

And can you look upon your self, after all this, as ha­ving been no Ways the faulty Occasion of that Unchari­tableness towards Ministers, which has produced such aw­ful Effects in these Times? Could you "under the imme­diate Views of a happy Eternity" wipe your self clean, and say, "I should be sorry from my inmost Soul, IF I introduced this Uncharitableness"? Is this "to let Survi­vors see, if you should die, that you was not altogether unwilling to own your Faults?" I freely own, I am sur­prised; and had any one told me you would have taken no more Blame to yourself, in an Affair that has done so much Disservice to the Kingdom of Christ, and wherein you have been so evidently faulty, I could not have belie­ved it. 'Tis true, you have made a Sort of Confession. I had charged you with expressing your Fear, lest "ma­ny, nay, most of the Ministers in this Land, did not ex­perimentally know Christ." Upon which you say, ‘I confess this was too unguarded.—For whether in Fact it was or is true or not, that most that preach in New-England did not experimentally know Christ, yet I ought to have taken more Time before I deliver­ed my Judgment. I thank you, Reverend Sir, for pointing out this Fault unto me.’ And is this all the Satisfaction you intend to give for so injurious a Reflecti­on upon so good a Ministry as this Land is favoured with, the best, you have owned in private Conversation, of any upon the whole Earth. You "thank me for pointing out this Fault unto you." But wherein do you own your Fault to lie? Not in publishing that which you see Rea­son to declare was not Fact; not in publishing that which you esteem, in any Degree, the Occasion of those Aliena­tions and Schisms which have taken Place in the Land; not in publishing that which you confess has been detri­mental to the Character and Usefulness of the Ministers of New-England, and for which you desire Pardon of GOD and them. These are not the Faults you confess; [Page 23] but that you have been "too unguarded, and delivered your Judgment before you had taken Time." But had you taken Time, don't you think it would have been high­ly assuming in a young Man, and a Stranger too, publickly to judge the spiritual State of the Ministry of a Country? Who made thee a Judge? Who art thou that judgest the Servants of another Master? The Lord Christ is the one Master and Judge, and he only is fit to be so: The Judg­ment of Men's States is devolv'd on him as his appropri­ate Work, and the Revelation of their States he has reserv­ed as the proper Business of the great and last Day. You were therefore greatly faulty in pretending to judge the spiritual State of your Brethren at all; and I see not, but herein, in a Sense, You were guilty of taking from Christ Jesus some Part of that Glory which is due to him as the constituted Judge as well as Saviour of Men. And I hope, when you come to give this Matter a Review, you will be more sensible of your Error, and full in re­tracting it.

You further add, ‘But that I had a Design, either in preaching or writing, to alienate People's Minds from the standing Ministers, I utterly disavow.’ You know, Sir, I never charged You with designing to intro­duce those Alienations and Schisms, which have been so great a Hindrance to the Gospel in the late Times; but I have charged You with being the faulty Occasion of these Evils. And what have You said to clear yourself of this Charge? Nay, tho' You have confess'd your Rashness in publishing that against the Ministry of the Land, which you ought not to have done; yet You do not seem sensible of any Connection between the Fault and the Evil that has, in Fact, followed upon it: Neither do You express the least Sorrow upon this Account, or take to your self the least Blame. And will You call this Christian Satisfaction? 'Tis no small Thing, Sir, to be the Occasion of leavening the Minds of a Country with evil Surmisings against the standing Ministry. What good is it likely Ministers should do, when People are jealous [Page 24] of them, and fill'd with Fear lest they are carnal and unconverted? Their Usefulness is hereby, in a great Mea­sure, destroyed; and never has the Enemy of Souls a greater Advantage to lead People Captive at his Will and Pleasure. An awful Tho't this! It deserves your most serious Consideration. And the more so, if when you had prejudi­ced People against the standing Ministry as unconverted, you discovered it to be your Opinion, ‘that unconverted Mi­nisters ought not to continue in the Ministry, and endea­voured to propagate this Opinion, and a Practice a­greeable to it?’ if you were ‘in the Scheme, and aim'd at People's forsaking unconverted Ministers, and endeavour'd that there might be a Supply of converted Ministers.’ This, Sir, was the Opinion of your very good Friend, the Rev. Mr. Edwards, concerning you, as appears from his Letters to the Rev. Mr. Clap, Rector of Yale-College. And if he form'd this Opinion, not from any Thing you might say to him in private, but from the Manner of your Preaching and Writing, can you won­der at it, that others should be in the same Way of think­ing, and hereupon expect better Satisfaction than you have yet given? Indeed, Sir, if this Opinion of your un­doubted Friend, Mr Edwards, is well founded, you ought to be look'd upon as directly chargeable with all the Schisms and Separations in the Land. And I could wish, you had either cleared yourself more fully from all Sus­picions of Blame upon this Head, or appeared more in­genuously free and open in your Acknowledgments.

The next Thing that comes under your Notice, is the Affair of A.Bp. Tillotson. And here you acknow­ledge, (Pag. 9, 10.) that You ‘spake of his Person in too strong Terms, and too rashly condemn'd his State, when you ought only to have censured his Doctrine.’ You likewise own, that ‘Dr. Edwards, and You through him, have been mistaken in some particular Quotati­ons from the A.Bp's Discourses.’ — And in fine, You profess ‘your Sorrow that You have judg'd his State and Person, and not spoken sufficiently in Commenda­tion [Page 25] of his great Candour and Moderation.’ And if you intended, by these Expressions, a full Acknowledg­ment to the World, that you have been faulty in judg­ing the A.Bp's State and Person, and would be looked upon as professing Sorrow for the Sin therein discovered, and as retracting what you have said to the A.Bp's Dis­advantage upon this Head, I can readily forgive the Of­fence, so far as I have concern'd my self with it; and this, though you "rejoice, yea, and will rejoice, in the Testimony you have born against his Doctrines:" For the Ground of my Offence was not your Writing against any Doctrine delivered by the A.Bp, which you supposed was false; (This is every Man's Right, and he is not to be blamed for exercising his Right) But what I faulted you for was, your not confining yourself to his Doctrine but judging his Person and State.— But this, you have now publickly condemned, and so I have nothing further to say; only I could wish, you had seen, and own'd, and lamented the bad Influence your rashly Judging the A.Bp soon had upon others. I can't suppose Mr. Croswell, had it not been from the Encouragement of your Example, would have ever publickly declared concerning the A.Bp, as in the 151 Page of my Book, ‘That when he wrote his printed Sermons, God knew he had not a Spark of saving Grace, and if he was not converted afterwards he was now weltering under the scalding Drops of God's Wrath in Hell, there to remain a Monument of his Vengeance throughout Eternity.’ Was ever rash Judging carried to a greater Height! Neither would Mr. Seward have spoken of the A.Bp in such Ungentleman-like uncharitable Language, if you had medled only with his Doctrines, and not with his State. And this leads me to remove away the Offence you have taken at the Mention I made in my Book, of what this honoured Friend of yours uncharitably wrote concerning the Primate.

You say to me, ‘What Reason was there for your mentioning what Mr. Seward wrote concerning his Grace? I think your Design was to shew the Spirit [Page 26] of rash Judging, which was gone out into this Land, —Was not this shooting a little beside, or rather be­yond your intended Mark?’ I answer, not in the least. My professed Design was to shew, not only the Spirit of rash Judging that was gone forth into the Land, but to make it appear, that you were, in a faulty Sense, the Occasion of it. And I did not shoot at all beyond my intended Mark, in mentioning Mr. Seward; for tho' he was never in New-England, as I know of, in Person, yet his Journal has been dispersed into all Parts of the Land, and was unhappily qualified to propagate Unchari­tableness, as it went under the Character of a Performance of one of Mr. Whitefield's nearest and most intimate Friends. And in this View of the Matter, I am willing you should determine, whether my mentioning what he wrote was shooting beyond my Mark. You ask, "Am I answerable for all my dearest and most intimate Friends say or do? Or it is reasonable that I should account for all they write when distant from me?" By no Means; I never insinuated any such Thing: But this I have inti­mated, and this I am ready to make good, that, if any of your dearest Friends have been unwarily led into rash and uncharitable Conduct by your Example, and as encourag­ed by the like Conduct in you, you are a Partaker in their Sin, and answerable, in a Degree, [...]o the great God, both for the Sin itself, and the unhappy Fruits of it. A little Skill in casuistical Divinity will suffice to determine this. You go on, and characterise Mr. Seward as "an Israelite indeed, a Man rich in Faith and good Works, one whose Heart devised liberal Things, &c." I have as good an Opinion of A.Bp Tillotson as you have of your Friend Mr. Seward; nothing doubting but he was as good a Man: And if I should say, he had a Heart that devis­ed liberal Things to a much greater Degree, I don't think I should exceed the Truth. For 'tis well known, he was under GOD the chief Support of the French Protestants, driven out of their own Land, for the Sake of Christ; and he expended so much in Pity to them, under their [Page 27] miserable distress'd Circumstances, that he left no Estate when he died, tho' his Income was, at least, Twenty Thousand Pounds a Year, this Currency: Which I take this Notice of to show, how notoriously your honoured Friend abused the A.B in comparing him to Judas, but with this Difference, "That Judas sold his Lord for 30 Pieces of Silver, the A.B. got a better Price, perhaps 30 Bags of Gold:" And in adding thereupon,—"But the Love of Money is the Root of all Evil, and he (the A.Bp) chose his good Things here, a tem­poral rather than an eternal Crown." Is this fit Langu­age to be used by a profest Disciple of him who has said, Judge not, that ye be not judged? And how great a Want of true Discernment, as well as Charity, has your Friend discovered? For Covetousness was, of all Sins, the most unsutable to charge the A.Bp with, as he was of the di­rect opposite Temper. A noble Generosity of Spirit, to­gether with a compossionate Fellow-Feeling of other Men's Miseries, and a Readiness to stretch forth his Hands to help them, were distinguishing Strokes in the A.Bp's Cha­racter, and must appear to be so to all, who have read his Writings, and know how to judge of the Spirit dis­covered in them.

You finish the Paragraph with these remarkable Words, ‘He has entered into his Rest now above four Years,— And if you blame him for censuring the Arch-Bp, be­cause he was now dead, and express yourself surprised at it, would it not have been as well if you had let Mr. Seward's Ashes slept also, and been content, as more immediately pertinent to the Design of your Book, to have mentioned the Faults & Rashness of me his unworthy Friend?’ With what Face, Sir, can you condemn that in me which you allow in yourself? Don't you rejoice, and declare you will rejoice, in the Testimo­ny you have born against the A.Bp's Doctrines? And have not I equal Right, as well as Reason, to rejoice in the Testimony I have born against Mr. Seward's unchari­table Way of Writing? Can that be a Fault in me, which is commendable in you? Had I judged Mr. Seward's [Page 28] Person or State, it would have been proper for you, I own, to have pointed out my Crime, as you had retract­ed the like Fault in your self towards the A.Bp; but as I never concerned my self with any Thing but his Writings, why do you throw it in my Teeth that I testify against them, when it is the very Thing you still do your self, (and glory in it) in Respect of the A.Bp's Writings? Was it too assuming in me to meddle with the Journal of William Seward Esq? Surely you could not imagine thus, as you had, in the same Page, testified against the Doctrines of a Metropolitan and Primate of all England! Did my Fault lie in this, that Mr. Seward had been dead now four Years? Neither could you reasonably think me worthy of Blame on this Account; for the A.Bp had been dead forty Years? And if you han't uncivilly distur­bed his Ashes, in rejoicing in your Testimony against his Doctrines, why must I be charged with not suffering Mr. Seward 's Ashes to sleep in Quiet, when I have said nothing more in Respect of him, than you have done, in this very Letter, in Respect of the A.Bp?

I shall only add, as you have condemned your self for judging the A.Bp's State, you have virtually and practi­cally justified me in condemning the like Fault in your honoured Friend Mr. Seward; and if, instead of censuring me for exposing the Uncharitableness discovered in his Journal, you had thank'd me for the Pains I had taken to prevent it's bad Influence upon others, you would have been more consistent with your self. And as it was by Means of what you wrote, that your Friend was led into such an uncharitable Opinion of the A.Bp, and to publish it to the World, if, in Excuse of him, you had placed some Part of the Blame to your own Account, I am ready to think You would have both served him, and honoured your self.

I should not have been so large upon this, which I es­teem the most injudicious Part of your whole Letter, had I not heard it spoken of by some of your Friends, as that which was unanswerable, and must bring me under Con­viction, [Page 29] if I was not blind.— How great is the Power of Prejudice! What are not Men capable of believing, while they have a wrong Biass on their Mind!

You proceed to vindicate another of your Friends; and in order to it inquire of me, ‘Was it not equally fo­reign to your Purpose, to mention any Thing about Mr. Barber, who has been at the Orphan-House ever since I left America, and consequently could have no Hand in the late religious Disorders of New-England?’ 'Tis true, Mr. Barber has been at Georgia ever since you left America; but might he not sow the Seeds of Enthusi­asm and Disorder before he went? And if you will please to read over the Account I have largely given, in my Book, of his Spirit and Conduct, you may have Reason to think, that he really did so.— And was not Mr. Barber an intimate Companion of Mr. Davenport? Did he not encourage and strengthen that Spirit in him which he has since publickly lamented, as well as the great Mischief he was an unhappy Instrument in promoting, while he acted under the Influence of it? And considering these known Facts, will you say it was foreign to my Purpose to mention any Thing about Mr. Barber? Did it not rather directly fall in with my professed Intention?—But your greatest Offence is, at the Construction I put upon certain Words in a Letter of Mr. Barber's to you, saying, it appeared to me, they contained ‘an Act of downright gross Idolatry.’ You will please to remember, Sir, I did not say Mr. Barber intended any such Thing by the Words he used: Neither did I say that you took the Words in such a Sense, but intimated my Belief of the contrary, that you did not. All I aim'd at was, to point out the genuine Construction of the Words themselves; and upon a careful Review of them, I am not sensible of a Misconstruction, tho' I have made the best Use I could of all the Help you have offered for my Conviction.

The Words of the Letter referred to are these, ‘ I shall omit writing any Thing, and only hereby present my hearty Love, and let you know that I am waiting at the [Page 30] Post of your Door for Admission: Though I am unworthy, my Lord is worthy, in whose Name, I trust, I come?’ Those Words in the Letter, I am now waiting at the Post of your Door for Admission, you say were "too humble an Expression;" but if you had called it a prophane one, you would not have spoken with too much Severity; for 'tis an evident Allusion to those Words of Wisdom (by whom is commonly understood the Lord Jesus Christ, the Wisdom of God), Blessed is the Man that heareth me,—waiting at the Posts of my Doors, Prov. 8.34. And shall the Words, which are spoken of the Wisdom of God, be applied to you, and an Admission into your Presence, and you think of it as nothing more than too humble an Expression? You ought rather to have shown your Displicency at such an irreverent Use of the sacred Language. Mr. Barber goes on, ‘tho' I am unworthy, my Lord is worthy, in whose Name, I trust, I come.’ Is it not obvious, at the first Glance, that the Idea Mr. Barber had formed of you, as exhibited in these Words, was exalted beyond all due Measure? Don't he appear to look upon himself, in com­pare with you, as a poor, low, despicable Creature, not worthy to come into your Presence? And does he not use the same Form of Words to encourage a Hope of Ad­mission into your Presence, which is commonly used in Prayer when we approach before the great GOD? Are not you, in these Words, according to the literal and most obvious Meaning, the final Object, and the great Saviour the Medium of Access to you? All this, I seriously pro­fess, appears plain to me; and it was upon such a View of the Words that I charged them with gross Idolatry in Reality of Construction, though not of Intention.

You say in Defence of Mr. Barber, ‘If this be gross Idolatry, I have been frequently guilty of it in my late Sickness, when I told my Friends, though I was ut­terly unworthy of their Care, yet Jesus Christ, whose I am, and whom I desire to serve, was worthy, and that he would take what was done unto me, as done unto himself.’ I can't but wonder you dont see the Differ­ence [Page 31] between these two Cases. You might properly re­commend your self to the Charity and Care of your Friends, through the Worthiness of Christ, and for his Sake, because he has himself directed to this Method, and the Glory finally centers in him. And the same may be said of the Beggar you introduce asking an Alms. But in the other Case, the Reverse is the obvious Import of the Words. You are exalted so high, that a Man equal to your self is not worthy to come into your Presence; and 'tis through Christ that he comes. If Words can express it, you are the Person into whose Presence Mr. Barber wanted to come, and Christ is the Medium of Approach. He was so unworthy in his own Apprehension, that he could not think of being admitted into the Presence of a frail im­perfect Man, like himself, without the Interposition of the Saviour. This, it seems to me, is the genuine unfor­ced Sense of these Words; though I would be as far from imposing my Sense of them upon you, as you are your's upon me; and do as heartily pray, that "GOD would give you, and me, and all the Ministers of the Go­spel, a right Judgment in all Things."

You now come to consider what I had offered upon those Impulses and Impressions, which have been the Occa­sion of so much Mischief in the Land: Nor have you at all misrepresented me in saying, "That these I father upon you;" for it was my Intention to point you out as the Source from whence they sprang. And to tell you the Truth, you have greatly disappointed my Expectati­ons in not submitting to the Charge, at least, in Part; confessing your Error, and discovering that you were now of another Spirit. When I read that Passage in your Letter to the Bp of London, lately reprinted here at your Desire, wherein you speak of your self, (Pag. 5) as not in­sensible, ‘That you may have sometimes mistaken Nature for Grace, Imagination for Revelation, the Fire of your own Temper for the pure and sacred Flame which com­eth from GOD'S Altar;’ and declare, ‘That you are ready, if you find you have been blameable, to [Page 32] confess it;’ I say, when I read this Passage in your Letter to [...] Lordship, I really thought you were, in a Measure, sensible of your former too great Proneness to take the Motions of your own Mind for something di­vinely extraordinary; and plainly saw, that you had put those Constructions upon common Occurrences which there was no Ground for, but in your own Imagination. But so far are you from taking the least Blame to your self in these Respects, that you endeavour to evade every In­stance of Fancy and Imagination I had presented to your View; and in some Instances, the Evasion is so evident, that I can scarce think you were your self insensible of it.

The Instances I began with were, ‘the Saying of your Mother, when you were an Infant, that she ex­pected more Comfort from you than any other of her Children, and your being born in an Inn:’ Upon which, the Sum of what you offer is this, ‘That there is no Harm in making a religious Improvement of what we hear our Parents say, or the Circumstances our Saviour is pleas'd to put us in.’ And is this, Sir, all the Idea convey'd to the World by the Publication of these Facts? Is it not obvious, at first Sight, that you es­teemed them particularly observable? Why else did you think it proper to acquaint the World with them? And what should lead you to suppose such common Things wor­thy of particular and publick Notice, unless a Turn of Mind disposing you to magnify that in your own Imagina­tion, which, in it self, is of trivial Importance?

I observed what you said when at Bristol, though in an unconverted State at that Time, viz. ‘That God gave you great Foretastes of his Love, and fill'd you with such unspeakable Raptures, in St. John's Church, that you were carried out almost beyond your self.’ To which you reply, ‘Is there any Thing in this that may justly be stiled Chimerical or Enthusiastical?’ I answer yes, a great deal. It was, in the whole, a vain Imagination. You were now, being in an unconverted State (if there is a [Page 33] Propriety in the Phrase you often use) nothing better than half a Beast and half a Devil; and to suppose, that God should give a Person of such a Character great Foretastes of his Love, and fill his Soul with unspeakable Raptures, is little short of Prophaneness: Nor can I conceive, how such a Thought could enter into your Heart, unless from the over-bearing Influence of a heated Fancy. You ask me, ‘As I have had to deal with Souls, whether I have never found any Instances of Persons, that could tell of many Strivings and Drawings and Illuminations of the blessed SPIRIT, that they could reflect upon after their Conversion, which the great GOD visited them with before they were effectually called?’ I answer yes; I have met with Abundance. And, perhaps, there are very few but can tell of many Strivings, and Draw­ings, and Illuminations of the divine SPIRIT, before their Conversion: But then I would add, I never met with any (neither have you) unless under the Influence of Delusion or Imagination, who could tell of great Foretastes of the Love of God, and hereupon unspeakable Raptures carrying them almost beyond themselves: And I should be at no loss in my own Mind to determine, that this was truly their Case, if they should go on and tell me, as you have told the World, (Pag. 3. of your Life) "That they had ear­ly (even while unconverted) such Movings on their Hearts, as were sufficient to satisfy them that God loved them with an everlasting Love." No Movings on the Heart of a Man, while in an unregenerate State, can satisfy him of God's eternal Love, upon the Foundation of Christ and the Apostles; and if he is satisfied, it must be from the working of his Fancy, and not upon the Foot of reason­able Evidence.—If you had owned your Mistake of Na­ture for Grace, of Imagination for Revelation, in these and such like Instances, you would have discovered more of the Christian, than by attempting to vindicate that which is incapable of a just Defence.

I had mentioned several more of your Impressions, par­ticularly that strong and unaccountable one, (as you term [Page 34] it) even while you were a Lad, ‘That you should preach and print quickly.’ Upon which you observe, ‘Doubt­less there are such Things as some Impressions coming from God, as well as others from the Devil.’ Very true: And there are likewise the Workings of a vain I­magination; and there is great Danger, especially when Men are of an imaginary Turn of Mind, lest they should mistake Imagination for Revelation. And have you been in no Danger from this Quarter? Have you wrote no­thing that gives the World just Grounds of Suspicion of you upon this Head? There are few, even of your Friends of known Judgment, but think you have, in many Instances, discovered something of an enthusiastick Spirit. Your very good Friend, the Rev. Mr. Edwards, thought it adviseable to talk with you, when here last, a­bout your Impulses, though you did not like his Discourse. And would one prejudiced in your Favour have thought you worthy of Blame in this Respect, if you had not said or wrote that, which he could not but esteem of dangerous Tendency? You add, ‘I would never judge of them (my Impressions) but as they agree with the written Word, and are explained by subsequent Providences. —I would with Mary lay up such Things in my Heart, and wait upon GOD to see, by the Dealings of his Providence and Grace, whether they come from him or not.’ This is plausibly enough said to satisfy some Sort of People; but how does it really prove, that the Impressions I had taken Notice of were from GOD, and not the Fruit of your own Fancy? You had a strong Impressi­on, when a Lad, that you should preach and print quickly: And is it evident, that GOD made this Impression on your Mind, because, when you were grown to Years, you did in Fact both preach and print? Might not this Impression be the meer Motion of your own Fancy, or some sudden Start of a vain and fond Imagination? Will any subsequent Providence evince the contrary? Were you not, when you had this Impression, at a Distance from Christ, and an utter Stranger to a Work of Grace on your Heart? And what Rea­son [Page 35] is there to think God should point it out to you, while in this miserable Condition, by an Impulse from Heaven, that you should preach and print? Is it not far more likely, your Thought of such a Thing should be the Effect of the Working of a Mind vainly puffed up? Does not this much better sute with your Character and State at that Time? There are few, I believe, but will entertain this Tho't of the Matter; and I see not but you must be of the same Mind, if not hindered by your own Imagination.

You go on to another Instance brought in my Book to show, that you mistook the Workings of your own Mind for Divine Influences. And here you have entirely left out the main Thing objected against you, whether with De­sign or not, you can best tell. You say, ‘I blame you for what you said about being led by the Spirit of God into the Knowledge of divine Things, and being gui­ded, even in the minutest Circumstances, when reading the holy Scriptures.’ And did I blame you for no­thing else? Was not the principal Ground of the Blame I reflected on you contained in those Words, you have gi­ven your Reader not the least Notice of, ‘I have been directed, by watching and reading the Scriptures, even in the minutest Circumstances as plainly as the Jews, who consulted the URIM and the THUMMIM at the HIGH-PRIEST'S BREAST.’ I'm ready to think, when you wrote these Words, you spake the real Sense of your Mind; and in doing so, you could scarce have given a more flagrant Proof of your being led by Imagination. You know GOD was won't to answer the Jews by Urim and Thummim in an immediate Manner from Heaven: And this was the appointed Way in which they were to consult him to this End. And could you place your self in the same Situation, with the High-Priest of old, while consulting the Urim and Thummim, and declare you were as plainly directed by God, and not give the World Reason to suspect your mistaking Imagination for Revelation? I don't wonder you passed over this Part of the Charge in Silence, unless you found yourself disposed to make some [Page 36] sutable Acknowledgment for your Fault; and yet, by ta­king no Notice of it, all you have said serves only to a­muse your Readers, and hide the Truth from their Sight. Do you think, Sir, I faulted you for "reading the Scrip­tures," or for "making them your Rule," or for "de­pending on the Spirit to lead you into the Knowledge of divine Things", or for "believing that the very Hairs of our Heads are all numbred by God?" Why then do you particularize these Things, as tho' herein lay the Blame I had cast upon you? What I blamed you for was, your vain­ly imagining that you were extraordinarily directed, in the minutest Matters, as plainly as the Jews were by consulting the Urim & Thummim. And was not this a meer imaginary Direction? Han't you made it evident to the World that it was so, by the many Errors, not of the minutest Size, both in Point of Faith & Practice, which you have been obli­ged to confess and retract, or are still chargeable with? I assure you, Sir, what you have said upon this Article han't raised my Opinion of your Simplicity; for I can scarce bring my self to think, but that you knew it was all Evasion.

The last Passage, upon this Head of Impressions, you take Notice of, is in the 179 Page of my Book, where I cite the following Words from the History of your Life, ‘One Day perceiving an uncommon Drought, and a noi­some Clamminess in my Mouth, — it was suggested to me, that, when Jesus Christ cried out, I thirst, his Suf­ferings were near over. — Upon this, I threw my self upon the Bed, crying out, I thirst, I thirst &c.’ This I called, as I think I might upon good Grounds, a very sinful Account. 'Tis true, I did not directly say, "what Parts of it were sinful": Nor did I esteem such a Parti­cularity necessary; having no Suspicion, that any of my Readers would be at any Loss to find out my Meaning. I assure you, Sir, I did not call this Account sinful, be­cause I supposed "You told a Lie in saying it was sug­gested to you." Such a Tho't never came into my Mind, and I wonder how it should into your's. Neither did I call it sinful, because I judg'd "You had put your self on [Page 37] a Level with Jesus Christ"; tho', I am ready to believe, if your imaginary Faculty had not pointed out to you some observable Resemblance between the Case of your Saviour and your own, you would never have had the Suggestion you speak of, nor the World this wonderful Account: And I am the rather inclined to be of this Opinion, as this is not the only Instance, wherein your Fancy has formed a Kind of Resemblance between your own, and the Cir­cumstances of Christ Jesus.—But to be free and plain;— I spake of this Account as sinful, because it appeared to me very evidently to exhibit a prophane Imitation of the Son of God in his last Sufferings. You know, Sir, it was when the blessed Jesus hung on the Cross, and was expiring a Sacrifice for the perishing World, that he said, I thirst; and he so spake, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, which had foretold this peculiar Circumstance of his dying Mo­ments. And can you prevail with your self to believe, it was a decent Thing in you, in Imitation of the Son of God, under these amazing Circumstances, to cry out, I thirst, I thirst? And do you see no Reason for blushing, when you think of that noisome Clamminess in your Mouth, which you expresly mention as an Occasion of the Suggestion, put­ting you upon making this Cry? Can you suffer yourself to suppose, that such a Suggestion upon such an Occasion came from the Spirit of God? Is it not a thousand Times more likely, it should arise from some sudden Turn of your own Fancy? For my self, I have no Doubt but the Rise of this Suggestion is to be fetched from an ungovern'd Imagination. You are pleased indeed to say, "That it came from the good & not the evil Spirit, is evident from the Effect." I never tho't there was the Hand of Satan in this Matter. A disturbed or over-heated Fancy will sufficiently account for it, without any Help from him. Neither do I think it came from the good Spirit, or that the Effect produced will argue any such Thing. For really, Sir, I have no ve­ry raised Opinion of the Effect, any more than of the Sug­gestion that was the Cause of it. "Singing wherever one goes," is not, in my Opinion, so good a Proof of true spi­ritual [Page 38] Joy, as of a State of Mind somewhat, at least, disor­dered. And to tell you the plain Truth, I don't think, nor ever did, that you had scriptural Warrant to look upon your self as a converted Man, in Virtue of any Thing, or every Thing, contained in this Relation of your Christian Experience. I don't mean, by what I now say, to judge your State. GOD forbid I should be guilty of any such Rashness! But I would seriously advise you, not to take that for saving Conversion, which, I verily believe, ought rather to be called the working of your own Imagination. And tho' I would not presume to say, you have never been "enabled to look up to Christ, and act Faith on him as dying for Sinners;" yet I don't think you were so en­abled at this Time: For which Reason, if, instead of "prai­sing the Father of Mercies" for his Grace now conferred on you, you had blamed your self for your irreverent Use of the Language of the dying Jesus, and Misapplication of his Circumstances to your own, you would, in my Opinion, have discovered more of the Spirit of a humble Christian. And this, I believe, you will be bro't to, if God ever shews you your Error in giving so much Heed to Impulses and Impressions.

Thus I have reviewed the Instances adduced in my Book to show, that the imaginary Turn of Mind discovered in your Writings, has been of great Disservice in propaga­ting the like fanciful Disposition to many People in New-England. And I am so far from being convinced of the contrary by what you have offered, that I am abundantly confirmed in the Opinion, that you are to be look'd upon as the original blameable Occasion of those Impulses, Impres­sions and Revelations, which have produced such mischiev­ous Effects in these Days. And I am heartily sorry, you appear so insensible of your Mistake, and indispos'd to re­cover your own Character, or the poor People, who, by your Means, have been led into strong Delusion.

The last Thing you say I blame you for is, "your talk­ing so freely about unconverted Ministers." To which you reply, "that they are seldom made use of to convert others, I verily believe." If by unconverted Ministers you mean, [Page 39] those who appear to be so, by a Faith or Life VISIBLY contradictory to the Gospel, I intirely agree with you: But if you intend by unconverted Ministers those, whom GOD knows to be so, tho' from what outwardly appears they ought to be well tho't of, I have no Doubt but you are under a great Mistake. You add, ‘If I have said what may be construed to imply, that it is impossible that unconverted Ministers should be instrumental in converting others, or that their Administrations in the visible Church are invalid, as it was not my Intention, I would revoke it.’ A mighty Retractation truly! But you must still enlarge it, and say, that the Ministrati­ons of evil Men, whether in preaching the Word, or dis­pensing the Sacraments, may be attended with Faith in GOD to bless his own Institutions for spiritual and saving advantage; yea, that, if evil Men are the Administrators of God's Ordinances, they shall notwithstanding be effec­tual because of Christ's Promise and Institution, if by Faith and rightly they are received: I say, you must enlarge your Retractations, and come to this, or otherwise stand con­demned as a Man, who has contradicted, with his Tongue and Pen, what he has solemnly subscribed, both with his Heart and Hand.

Upon the whole, Sir, I am free to own my Sentiments concerning you are such, that if, instead of proclaiming "your Joy in the Prospect of a happy Eternity," you had professed a becoming Sense of your past Misconduct, humbling your Soul before God herefor, and making all proper Christian Satisfaction, you would, in my Opinion, have more effectually recommended your self to the good Esteem of the World. —I heartily pray God, as you have ask'd an Interest in my Prayers, that he would show you the hurtful Tendency of that Itinerating Prac­tice you have taken up; that he would preserve you from the undue Influence of Impulses and Impressions; that he would give you a clear and just Sight of the great Wrong you have done the Ministry of this Land; that he would dispose and enable you, as much as in you lies, to undo the Mischief you have done to these Churches; and in fine, that he would, in the Way of a full Retractation of all your public Offences, qualify you to be an Instrument in doing much Service for Christ & Souls that so your Reward may be great in Heaven. I am, Sir,