To the Reverend Mr. George Whitefield, &c.

WE have received your Answer to our Testimony, and have read it, we hope with unprejudic'd Attention. We agree with you in thinking, that the great Governour of the Church beckoned to you by his Providence to Answer for your self. And we apprehend he had done so long before our Testi­mony was made publick. But we cannot perswade our selves, that your Answer is such a one, as this great Governour might justly have expec­ted, in some important Instances.

You think our Charges against you are ill grounded. We still be­lieve, that we had good Reason for them all, when we publish'd them; and that you have done but very little to remove the Reasons, by which almost any of them were supported. Let us consider the several Articles in the Fear of God, and try if we can't get nearer to one another in our Sentiments.

THE first Thing we charge you with is Enthusiasm. This we take to be a Charge of an higher Nature, than perhaps People are generally a­ware of. They who are unacquainted with the Histories of former Ages, and so strangers to the Mischiefs which Enthusiasm hath often brought up­on both States and Churches, may be too apt to think it a pretty harmless Thing; and may fancy an Enthusiastick Turn to be an Innocent Weakness, to which none but good Men are liable. But all who duly consider the natural Tendency of this cast of Mind, and are acquainted with the out­ragious [Page 4] Acts of Wickedness, which Men have been frequently led into by it, cannot but dread and set themselves vigorously to oppose its very first Appearances.

IT we consider the Nature of Enthusiastic, which is to make a Man imagine, that almost any Tho't which bears strongly upon his Mind (whether it came into it by Dream, Suggestion, or whatever other Way) is from the Spirit of God; when at the same Time he hath no Proof that it is; it will plainly appear to be a very dangerous Thing. For if a Man believes the Tho't which bears upon his Mind, to be from the Spirit of God, he must think it his Duty to conduct himself agreably to it. And yet if he hath no Proof, that such a Tho't is from the Spirit of God, it may be, for any Thing he knows to the contrary, only the Off spring of his own Brain, or perhaps a Suggestion of the wicked One. And yet so long as he believes it to be of divine Original, he must subject his Rea­son to it; and if any Text of Scripture seems to thwart it, it will be strange, if he don't force such a Meaning upon that also, as shall make it correspond with the Suggestion which he believes to be from God. So that a Man of an Enthusiastick Turn is likely to have but little Help in his Conduct, either from his own Reason or from the Holy Scriptures, whenever a Tho't from some other Quarter rushes strongly into his Mind, or lieth much upon it. And what Wonder will it be, if Men in such a Case, are led on insensibly, till they have put away a good Consci­ence, and concerning Faith have made Shipwrack in a most surprising Manner.

AND such hath been found by sad Experience to be the Fruit of En­thusiasm, in all Ages of the Christian Church. But we shall only men­tion two or three Instances, looking no farther back than the Times of the happy Reformation from Popery: Soon after the Beginning of which arose in Germany, about the Years 1522 and 1524, Nicholas Stork, Thomas Muncer, Henry Pfeiffer, and others, who under the Conduct of Dreams, Impulses of the Spirit, and at length Visions, declared, That Luther's carnal and literal Gospel was worse than the Pope; cried down Books and the Letter of Scripture, and said the Spirit was Leader and Rule to Believers; called Christian Magistrates New-Testament Task­Masters; and to pull them down and bring all Men upon a Level, stirred up such a cruel Civil War, as cost the Lives of more than one Hundred Thousand Persons. ^*

[Page 5] ANOTHER surprizing Instance of the violent Influence and mischie­vous Effect of an Enthusiastick Spirit, was seen in our own Nation. Anno 1661 among the People then called Fifth Monarchy-Men.

THESE being intoxicated with the Notion of a New Monarchy to be set up, in which Christ was to Rule, and the Saints only were to exercise Dominion under Him, got a Declaration printed, entitled, A Door of Hope opened; in which they said, that they would never sheath their Swords till Babilon, as they called Monarchy, became a Hissing and a Curse, and there be left neither Remnant, Son, nor Nephew: That when they had led Captivity Captive in England, they would go into France, Spain, Ger­many, &c. and rather dye than take the wicked Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance: That they would not make any League with Monarchists, but would rise up against the carnal to possess the Gate, to bind their Kings in Chains, and their Nobles in Fetters of Iron.—In Pursuance of this Declaration, on the Lord's Day Evening, Jan. 6th. 1660, 61. hav­ing been fully animated by the Sermon, which hinted to them, that they had been praying and preaching, but not acting for God; they fallied out, about fifty of them, well armed, from their Meeting-House, into the Streets of London; killed a poor innocent Man, who, upon Demand, had answered, He was for God and the King; desperately fought, and routed great Part of the City Train'd Bands, who had taken the Alarm; and then march'd off, and retired to a Wood about two Miles from the City: On Wednesday Morning they returned into London again, being assured by their Leader, that no Weapon formed against them should pros­per: Therefore they might look upon the Example of Gideon. It was the same Thing to God, whether be saved by Few or by a Multitude. And now, after having been once dispersed, they gather'd again, and fought with so much Fury, that they ruffled some Train'd Bands, and repelled the King's Horse Guards, who came to assist them. And tho' at last they were with much ado overborn by Numbers, yet they could not be subdued, till near half of them were killed upon the Spot. They who were taken, blasphemously pleaded, that if they were deceived or misted, 'twas God who deceived them. And Venner, a Wine-Cooper, who had been both their Preacher and their Leader in these desperate Encounters, after Sentence pronounced against him, when the Lord Chief Justice seriously charged him with the Blood of his unhappy Accomplices, re­plied with the true Spirit of Enthusiasm, that it was not be, but Jesus that led them. ^†—We have mentioned these sad Instances of the outra­gious [Page 6] Acts of Wickedness, to which Men have sometimes, been led by an Enthusiastick Temper, for the Warning of those who dont so well know, as you, Sir, ought to do, the extream Danger of such a Turn of Mind.

WE shall take Notice of but one Instance more, among the Multitudes which might be rehearsed; for hardly any Age of the Christian Church hath passed without them: And tho' the Instance which we shall now pitch upon, did not end so tragically as the two already mentioned; yet Enthusiasm in this proved as destructive to [...], as it did to a good Conscience in the two former. And we the rather speak of this, because the World bath never yet had any publick Account of it. And we our selves very sensibly felt its ill Effects, in the Society under our Care, not more than Ten Years ago; when a Gentleman, who had been permitted to teach the French Tongue in the College, where he had be­haved himself to all Appearance unblameably, at length began to give too much heed to certain Dreams, which he supposed to be of Divine Original. And when once he had gotten his Imagination thoro'ly hozted with these, be soon began to fancy himself favoured frequently with Visitors too; and these sometimes attended with articulate Voices to instruct him in the Divine Meaning and Design of them. Upon this he very industriously, tho' with as little Observation as he could, endeavoured to propagate among his intimate Friends, several strange and pernicious Doctrines; such as the unlawfulness of Magistracy among Christians, and consequently of any temporal Punishments for evil Doers, from Men; that Punishment from God in the Future State would be sure not be eternal, nor any other, nor perhaps more, even for a Time, than what wicked Men now suffer in this World, by being abandoned to the outrage of their own and others Passions, & c. That a standing Mi­nistry, Ordinances, the Christian Sabbath, and Social Worship, were all without Warrant from the New-Testament: That, beside our blessed Lord of the Tribe of Judah, who was in his Account but a meer Crea­ture, (if not a meer Man) there was quickly to be expected a second Messiah of the Tribe of Ephraim, who is the Shepherd the Stone of Israel, spoken of Gen. 49. 24. And the Person like the Son of Man, whom Daniel saw in the Night Visions, to whom there was given Dominion and Glory, and a Kingdom, &c. ^* that this Person was then in Being; that he had been often presented to him in Vision, and was one whom he knew [Page 7] very well. And tho' he declined telling who he was, under Pretence of wanting a Permission for it; yet, by many Circumstances it appeared highly probable, that he himself was the Man; in his own Conceit. Nor was his being by Birth a French Man, an Objection of Force enough to be set in Opposition to his heavenly Visions; for Multitudes in the World (as he said) are undoubtedly of Israelitish Extract, who are not known to be so, either by themselves or others. And since the Posteri­ty of Jacob have utterly lost their Genealogies, it was impossible that Ben Ephraim should know his own Descent, otherwise than by Revela­tion; or be able to make it out to others, but by the Gifts of Pro­phesy and Miracles.

AND these Gifts, he once and again before very credible Witness, de­clared, that he knew by Revelation he should shortly be endued with from on High, in as great a Degree as ever the Apostles were, to say nothing more.

THESE extraordinary Things Monsieur did not broach all at once; but by little and little; the most plausible of them, or rather some plau­sible Deductions from them, first, and only to such (as to use his own Expression) he found of a teachable Spirit; till at length the Secrets were imparted to too many to remain such any longer.

THE Propagator of them now waxed bold, ^* professed the strongest Assurance imaginable of the Divine Original of his Dreams and Visions, and of the sacred Truths of those Doctrines and Interpretations of Scrip­ture which he had by these Means been led into; and sometimes went so far as to declare, that if the Event should prove these Things to be Delusions, he should doubt, for his part, whether God had ever made any Revelations at all to Men.

WE soon perceived, that too great a Respect was paid, by several in our Society, and elsewhere, to his Pretences to Visions and Revelations; that one of his greatest Confidents began to be favoured with Visions too, in his own Conceit; and that others were in suspence, whether he might not be a Teacher sent from God; and waited with some Impatience to see him begin to prove his Mission, and were likely to take up with Evidences slight enough.

AS the Gentlemàn's Notions were now no longer Privacies, it soon appeared, that they had been industriously spread by some, among their Friends, in Places far and near; that many People's Minds were greatly [Page 8] moved with them; and strange Apprehensions and Expectations raised, [...] what these Things would come to.

IT would be beside our present Business to relate by what Means, thro' the good Providence of God, it was at length made manifest, that these high Pretences to extraordinary Divine Communications were all meer Delusions; and so the Minds of People again quieted.

IT would be of more Importance to remark, what was the End of these Things with respect to the Enthusiastick Gentleman himself; name­ly, That when he began to be exalted above Measure, with the abundance of his imaginary Revelations, he withdrew himself entirely from the publick Worship of God, which he before diligently (and so far as ap­peared) devoutly used to attend; and he has since returned to the Idola­tries of the Church of Rome, from which he had professed himself a sincere Convert.

AND now, Sir, having had such a flagrant Instance, so very lately, among ourselves, of the pernicious Tendency of an Enthusiastick Turn of Mind; you cannot wonder at it, if we are alarm'd ourselves, and if we give faithful Warning of their Danger to our Neighbours, when we see any Man of publick Character and Influence giving heed to Dreams, Suggestions, Impulses, &c. as from the Spirit of God, without being able to prove them to be of such Original. And this, Rev. Sir, you must give us Leave to tell you, we still think to be your Case, notwithstand­ing all you have said in your Letter to us, to clear your self from the Charge.

WE shall speak first concerning your Dreams, the first of which you mention in your Life, P. 12. and is, that you was to see God on Mount Sinai, but was afraid to meet him. We should not have tho't this worth our Notice, tho' you apprehended it deserved a Place in your Account of God's Dealings with you, if it had not been followed with others, in which an Enthusiastick Temper appears more evidently. We are far from blaming you for making a pious Improvement of the Surprize which this Dream might give you: But if it made a great Impression up­on you, (as you say it did) because you believed it to be a Divine, and not a Natural Dream; then we think you fondly imagined that to be from the Spirit of God, which you could not prove to be so; but on the contrary, before you published your Life, had sufficient Evidence that it was not. For the Dream had not then, after so many years been verified; and we are perswaded that you did not then believe, that it ever would; and therefore had no Reason to think it to be from the [Page 9] Spirit of God, who is the Spirit of Truth; but had Reason enough to conclude the contrary.

YOUR next Dream you give us the following Account of in your Life, P. 39, 40. ‘I prayed most earnestly, that God would open a Door for me to Visit the Prisoners here also. [at Gloucester] Quickly after I dreamt, that one of the Prisoners came to be instructed by me—The Dream was much impressed upon my Heart. In the Morning I went to the Door of the County Goal, I knock'd, no Body came to open it, I tho't the Hour was not yet come.—I waited still upon God in Prayer; and in some Months came a Letter from a Friend at Oxford, desiring me to go to one Pebworth, who had broken out of Oxford Goal, and was retaken at Gloucester:—As soon as I had read this Letter, it was suggested to me, that my Prayer was now answered. Immediately I went to the Prison, assuredly gathering that the Lord called me thither.’

THIS Dream, you say in your Letter to us, P. 5. ‘was no farther a Reason of my going thither [to the Goal] than as it was a Means of exciting me to pursue the reasonable Inclination I had before. And subsequent Providences made me afterwards judge that God directed the Dream for that Purpose.’

UPON this Account of the Matter, we would observe, that here are the strongest Appearances of your taking this Dream to be from God, before you could have any Reason to judge it so, from subsequent Providences.—For you was more influenced by this, than by the Dictates of your own Reason and Conscience. You acknowledge that your Inclination to visit the Prisoners, was a reasonable one before you had your Dream. And you prayed most earnestly that God would open a Door for it: And when you had commended the Case to God, and had begged his Help and Blessing on your Endeavours, what hindered you from pursuing your reasonable Inclinations? What need of waiting for a Dream or a Suggestion to excite you to that, which you was inclined to upon good Reason (as you tho't) already? Would the Goaler have denied you Ad­mittance, if you had asked it, till you could come to him with the Au­thority of a Dream, or a Suggestion? And yet you sat still till you Dreams, That one of the Prisoners came to be instructed by you: Upon which away you go in the Morning. And did you not at that Time (as well as afterwards) assuredly gather that the Lord called you thither? But you don't tell us of this, because when you came to the Door of the Goal an knocked, behold, it was a meer Dream, of Natural and not [Page] of Divine Original: For no Body came to open to you! However, you seem to have settled it in your Heart from this Dream, that there was an Hour appointed by God, for your visiting the Prisoners; but that it was not yet come. And your collecting this from your Dream, together with your paying more Respect to That than to the Dictates of your own Reason, plainly shews, that you then imagined the Dream to be from God, before you had Reason to judge it so, from any subsequent Providence. For the Event hitherto was directly against such a Sup­position.

Now you sat still again, without any appearance of Reason for it, whole Months together; and probably would have continued so to do, notwithstanding your reasonable Inclination to visit the poor Prisoners, if it had not at length been suggested to you, that your Prayer was now answered. And pray, Sir, why might you not as well have told your Readers, that it took you in the Head to fancy so? For what Reason have you to think, that you might not at twenty other Times, during the Months wherein you sat still, have as easily obtained Admission, and done as much Good among the Prisoners, as after you say it was sug­gested to you, that your Prayer was now answered? We believe you will hardly tell us, ‘that you consulted the Word of God on this Occasion, and was from thence as plainly directed at that Time to sit still, not­withstanding your Dream, till it should be suggested to you that your Prayer was answered, as tho' you had consulted the Urim and Thumm­im which was upon the High Priest's Breast, as you affirm every spiritual Reader of holy Writ may be directed at all Times, in your Sermon of Searching the Scriptures, P. 146, 147.’—But if you say this was the Case, we expect you should tell us, what that remarkable Passage of Scripture was, which gave you such clear Direction in these minute Circumstances. And till you produce the Passage, and show how you drew the Knowledge of your Duty from it, you must not take it amiss if we conclude, that you governed yourself in this Affair much more by a Dream and a Suggestion, than by your own Reason and the Word of God. And that this Dream, as well as the former, was from the work­ing of your own Imagination, and not from the Spirit of God. For did the Prisoner, who was presented to you in the Dream, come for Instruc­tion then, or not till some Months after? If he came for Instruction to be given some Months after, why did you go to the Prison the next Morn­ing? If he came for present Instruction, the Event shewed that it was not of God.

[Page 11] ONE Dream more you give us an Account of in your Life, P. 43. One Night you Dreamed, that you was talking with the Bishop in his Palace, and that he gave you some Gold, which chinked in your Hands.—Upon which we observe, that tho' it may be true (as you tell us in the same Page) that before the Bishop sent for you, you always checkt the strong Perswasion which frequently rose in your Mind from this Dream, that you should shortly go to his Lordship; yet it is certainly true also, that afterwards when you wrote the Account of Gods dealings with you, you be­lieved this Dream to have been from God. For you expresly say, Before I conversed with his Lordship, God was pleased to give me previous Notice of it, by this Dream. And therefore whatever you might do before, yet when you publish'd your Life, you tho't this Dream to have been from the Spirit of God.—But upon what Evidence? Surely the Bishop's sending for you some Time after, and giving you Money, and the Money's chinking in your Hands, are no satisfactory Proofs of it. For can you be certain, that the Bishop had not told some Body or other what he intended to do? and that this Dream was not thereupon excited by Satan to ensnare you, and lead you to pay more respect to Dreams, than they deserve?—

UPON the whole, the two last of your Dreams, it is manifest, you tho't to have been from God, without having any Proof of it. And it is highly probable from several of your Expressions, that you tho't so of the first also.—You conducted yourself according to your two first Dreams; and if you check'd the Impression which the last made upon you, it could be only because you was not so strongly perswaded of its Divine Original then, as you was afterwards, when you publish'd it to the World. So that we had sufficient Reason to say, as we do, P. 4. That it is Mr. Whitefield' s Manner to conduct himself according to his Dreams: Not in the general Course of your LIFE, as you suppose we mean (for we never imagined you had Dreams enough for your Conduct in that) but when you happen to have a Dream, which make [...] great Impression, you have shown yourself very apt to fancy it to be from the Spirit of God, tho' you have no Proof of it, and to conduct yourself ac­cordingly; and have thereby plainly discovered an Enthusiastick Turn of Mind.

AND now, Sir, does it make you appear any Thing less Enthusiastick, that you have not put one Dream in your Journals, and another in your Sermons, but have told them all in your Life? If not, why do you seem to complain as if we had done you some Wrong, because we say, ‘ From [Page 12] these Pieces [namely his Life, Journals and Sermons] it is very evident that he used to govern himself by Dreams?’ But if you had been pleased to add, as we said a few Lines before, ‘ Or some unaccountable and ri­diculous Impulses and Impressions on his Mind,’ there would have ap­peared no Ground for your Complaint. For with these Things your Jour­nals and Sermons abound as well as your Life. And indeed we should have been loath to charge you as an Enthusiastick Person, only for your Dreams, whatever Pieces they might appear in, since you mention no more than three; if you had not given so many other Indications of the same Turn of Mind, by the numerous Instances of Suggestions, Impulses, Impressions, &c. which occur so frequently in your Writings, and to which we next proceed.

Now concerning these, we have said, P. 5. ‘It is plain that he usually governed himself by some sudden Impulses, and Impressions on his Mind.’ And we add, that ‘we have one Instance which may satisfy us, that his first setting out in his Itinerant Business, was (from what? Not a sudden Impulse: We don't say so; but) "from an Enthusiastick Turn of Mind."’ And why were we satisfied of this? Why, because you say to your Friends, Journal from London to Gibraltar, P. 3. ‘the sole Motive which induced me to leave my Native Country, was a full Conviction that it was the Divine Will I should. What Reasons I can urge for this Perswasion is needless to mention.—What seems a Reason to me, may not be deemed so by another. Let it suffice to inform you, that after earnest Prayer for a Year and an half, that if the Design was not of God, it might come to nought, tho' strong­ly sollicited to act in a contrary Manner; I found my self as eagerly bent on going abroad as ever.’—You seem to suspect, that what other Reasons you had to urge, would be deemed of no Weight by your best Friends; and therefore would have them rest satisfied with this, as the most important Thing you had to offer, that you found yourself eagerly bent on going abroad, notwithstanding all Sollicitations to the con­trary, and your own Prayers to God. And is this a good Rule, or is it not rather high Enthusiasm, to judge of the Will of God, and expect that others should do so too, by the eagerness and obstinacy of our Inclina­tions? And the more Time you took to consider of the Step you was about to take, the worse it makes your Case; if after all, your great Reason to think it the Will of God that you should go abroad, was, that you still found yourself as eagerly bent upon it as ever.—

[Page 13] IF we have been mistaken in supposing, that you was now setting out upon your Itinerant Business, when you was only going to Georgia, with an Intention to settle there; we trust you will easily forgive us this Wrong; since, if you was going abroad under a full [...] that it was the Will of God you should do so, because you found yourself eagerly bent upon it, the Charge of Enthusiasm for this will be but very little af­fected by the Place, or the Business for which you was going. Of what Consequence is it, whether you was going abroad to Itinerate, or to [...] if the Consideration which carried you, and which made you think it the Will of God, was this, that you found yourself eagerly bent upon going, and that you had been so a long Time? But if it cannot be fairly de­termined, as you say, P. 6. ‘whether your first setting out upon the Itinerant Business, was from an enthusiastical Turn or not, till you have publish'd an Account how you was induced to set out upon it;’ we think it can much lets be determined, on the other Hand, that you had any Warrant from God, to act in such an extraordinary Manner, till you have fairly told us what it was. And therefore we think, that you ought not to be encouraged by any in your present Practice; and that you should be willing to cease from it of your self, till you have publish'd that Tract, which hath been promised so many Years for our Satisfaction, that you have a Call from God to the Business of Itinerancy.

IT seems to us strange preposterous Management, for any Man to go about from one Province and Colony to another, Year after Year, acting as an extraordinary Officer of Christ, and never shew all the while, what Warrant he hath from the Word of God so to do; but only intimate, that as ‘he finds Freedom in himself, and Leisure from his Ministerial Employ, hereafter he shall relate how God led him in­to his present Way of acting,’ as you speak in your Life, P. 49. Is not this just such Conduct, as might be expected from any bold Deceiver, who was conscious to himself, that he could give no Account of his pre­sent Way of acting, which would bear Examination?—Should any Man come from England into the Plantations, under Pretence of a special Commission from his present Majesty King George, whom we heartily pray God long to preserve and prosper; should such a Person go where, and act what he pleased, from Year to Year, under Pretence of Autho­rity from such Commission, and cry down all, especially Officers, who presumed to oppose him, as disloyal to their King; should he frequent­ly thrust himself into the Business of other Officers, who were known to have held Commissions from the King for 10, 20, or 30 Years, and [Page 14] to have been faithful in their respective Trusts; and should he put People off from Time to Time, who suspected his Authority, and say, ‘How can any one determine fairly, whether my setting out to act in this Way was of mine own Head or not, till I have published how I was induced to it? but as I find Freedom in myself, and Leisure from the King's Business, hereafter, God willing, I shall produce my Commission;’ could any Body be simple enough not to see thro' such Management? Or would any loyal Subject of the King dare to encourage or support such a Man, in such a Course of Behaviour, for five or six Years together?

YOU go on and ask us, P. 6th. ‘If I say I went to Bed with unusual Tho'ts and Convictions, how is this an Instance of my attributing any com­mon Turn of my Mind to a Motion of the holy Spirit?’ We Answer, be­cause what you call unusual Tho'ts and Convictions, are nothing but such Turns of Mind, and Workings of Fancy, as are common in enthusiastical Persons. And the same Answer may serve well enough for what you say to the next Instance.

BUT you observe concerning this, that ‘we draw an Inference from it, viz. So that every Scripture which came to his View, was received as the Bath Kol of the Jews, and he plainly shews himself as much directed by this Way of finding out the Will of God, as he calls it, as the old Heathens were by their Sortes Homericae, Virgilianae, &c.’—Upon which you demand, ‘How doth this prove, that every Scripture which came to my View was received as the Bath Kol, &c? I think I mentioned only the first of Jonah and the 27th of Acts.’—Here you don't deny, that you received these two Portions of Scripture as the Bath Kol of the Jews; but only intimate, that two Instances are not enough to prove, that you received every Scripture so, which came to your View.—Could you imagine, Sir, that we intended the Word every in a strict absolute Sense, any more than our blessed Lord did, when he said, Preach the Gospel to every Creature? All that we meant was only, that it was your frequent Practice to receive such Scriptures, as came to your View, after this Manner: And this was all that the Argument before us required. You, by your Silence, allow it to be true of the two first Instances given; and we immediately subjoined a third, and tho't three Instances sufficient for a Specimen of your Custom in this Matter.—If we had mentioned all the Examples of this Sort, which occur in your Writings, we must have transcribed a considerable Part of some of your Journals.

[Page 15] BUT you seem to think our third Instance not pertinent to our Pur­pose. The Instance, as it stands in your Journal from Savannah to Eng­land, P. 38. is this, ‘The Doctor of our Ship took up the Common Prayer Book, and observed, that he opened upon these Words, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he hath visited and redeemed his People. And indeed (say you) he has, for about 8 o'Clock our Men saw Land.’ You take special Notice of the Doctor's observing, that he opened upon these Words; and upon it you make the Application above-mentioned. Here again you don't deny, that you tho't yourself directed by this Scripture in finding out the Will or Purpose of God, as the old Heathens were by their Sortes Homerics and Virgilians, which was what we alledged this Passage to prove: But you only ask, ‘How is this a full Instance, when these Words did not appear to my View at all, but the Doctor's?’—But of what Consequence is it, whether this Scripture was bro't to your Mind by seeing it your self, or by hearing another read it? Your Application of it, is what proves your Enthusiastick Turn. You might very piously say upon Sight of Land, The Lord hath visited and redeemed his People, tho' not in the Sense in which these Words are used by Zacharias, Luke 1. 68. But if you took the appearing of these Words to the Doctor, at his first opening the Book, to be a previous No­tice from God of your approaching Deliverance; then you used the Scriptures in this Case, just as the old Heathens frequently did Homer and Virgil.

YOU tell us upon another Occasion, P. 12. ‘that you don't think that holy venerable Man of God, Dr. Increase Mather, would have blamed you.’ But we are perswaded he would have blamed you for this. In a Discourse concerning Angelical Apparitions, the Dr. says, P. 29. Concerning one Drabicius, a Protestant Moravian Minister, ‘I could not but take Notice of one Vanity in him, which I am unwil­ling to pass by without a Remark, viz. that he would snatch up the Bible, resolving that the first Place which he lighted on, should be the Answer to his Doubt. Thus to make a Fortune Book of the bles­sed Bible, is a very unwarrantable Custom, however practised by many. It is indeed a Paganish Custom, the Heathen did, in that Way, use Divinations. When Septimius Severus was in Doubt concerning his obtaining the Empire, he would know his Fortune by trying what Verse in Virgil he should first light upon, which happened to be that AEneid. 6. Tu regere Imperio Populos, Romane Memento:—Such Per­sons imitate that Sort of Witchcraft, which of old was known by the [Page 16] Name of Sortilegium, more than becomes Christians to do.’ This was the Judgment of that holy venerable Man of God, Dr. Increase Mather (under whose Wing you sometimes seem desirous to shelter your sell) concerning such Practices.

YOU proceed, P. 7. and say, ‘That we lay something more to your Charge, namely, that you sometimes speak as if you had Com­munications directly from the Spirit of God.’ Upon which you ask, whether ‘it is a Crime for a Believer, much more a Minister of Jesus, to speak of his having Communications directly from the Spirit of God?’—We Answer, by no Means, if you intend Communications of Grace and Comfort. And this appears to be your Meaning, by your following Interrogatories; ‘How are Believers sealed? How is the Divine Life begun?’ &c.

But if you had duly observed the Instances mentioned by us, you would easily have seen, that they were Communications of a very different sort which we blamed you for seeming to arrogate to yourself. And so you might have spared your Questions, which tend only to amuse and mislead your Readers.—The Instances we cited were such as these, Journal from Savannah to N. E. P. 68. The Spirit of the Lord was upon me. Journal from N. E. to Falmouth, P. 6. The Spirit of the Lord gave me Freedom, till at length it came down like a mighty [...]. And many other like Instances might be mentioned; as when you tell us, that you was filled with the Holy Ghost; That the Lord [...] you with Power from in high; That the Holy Spirit gave you Utterance, and that others received the Holy Ghost immediately upon hearing you preach Christ.—Now, Sir, you doubtless know very well, that all these Ex­pressions are used in the Scriptures to signify (principally, at least, if not only) the Communication of miraculous Gifts from the Spirit of God. And therefore we cannot out think it a very dangerous abuse of Scripture Language, for you to speak so frequently, in such a Style, of the Communications from the Spirit of God to you. It looks too much as if you did it on Purpose, to lead weak People to think more high­ly of you, than they ought to think; to lead them to imagine, that you are [...] from on high with those miraculous Gifts, which these Expressions always denote, when they are used in the Scriptures. And we think you the more to blame in this, because it is what you have been told of long ago, and yet have made no Alteration in your Man­ner of Writting; but in the last of your Journals, which we have seen, [...] to apply to yourself, the strongest Expressions which the [Page 17] New-Testament any where uses, to signify the Communication of miracu­lous Gifts to the Apostles, or others. And you tell us, in such Language, of Communications from the Spirit of God to you, much oftner than we read of them in the New Testament concerning any, or all the Apostles of our Lord.—We should be glad, Sir, if you would help us to account for this Part of your Conduct, without supposing either firing Delusion, or a very ostentatious Temper, or a very ill Design to lie at the Bot­tom of it.

AGAIN, you observe (P. ibid) that we ‘bring a fresh Accusation against you; that sometimes, and indeed very frequently, you (in a most Enthusiastick Manner) apply, even the Historical Parts of Scrip­ture to yourself, and your own Affairs.’—The Instances we men­tioned were, that which occurs in your Journal from Savannah to Eng­land, P. 28. ‘when you was consulting God by Prayer, whether it was his Will that you should go to England, those Words were re­markably pressed upon you, that when Jesus was returned, the Peo­ple gladly received him, for they were all waiting for him.’ This you took (as appears by the Reflection you made upon it) to be a Direction to you from God to go to England. And again, that P. 42. where you make your being brought safe to Carrig [...]olt Island to be a Fulfilment of those Words of the Apostle Paul to the Mariners, Acts 27. 26. How­beit we must be cast upon a certain Island. It was such an Application as this of the Historical Parts of Scripture to yourself and your own Affairs, concerning which we supposed you ‘appeal to the Experience of every spiritual Reader of holy Writ, whether or no if he consulted the Word of God in this Manner, he was not, at all Times, and at all Seasons, as plainly directed how to act as tho' he had consulted the Urim and Thummim which was upon the high Priest's's Breast.’ Sermon (of searching the Scripture) P. 246.—Now you don't tell us that we have Mistaken you; and that it was some other sort of Application of the Historical Parts of Scripture, which you intend; but you endeavour to justify such Applications as these by alledging, "that all Scripture (in­cluding the Historical as well as Doctrinal and Preceptive Parts) is given by Inspiration of God, and is profitable for Doctrine, for Reproof. &c." And that the Historical Parts of Scripture were written for our Admonition, upon whom the Ends of the World are come. But pray, Sir, how do these Texts, or any which you further offer, prove, that because when Jesus was returned, the People gladly received him, therefore it was your Duty to leave your Flock at Savannah, and return to England? or [Page 18] how do they prove that your being bro't into a safe Harbour, was a Fulfilment of the Prediction and History of the Apostle Paul's Ship­wreck? May not these Passages of Scripture be profitable? May not some Lessons of Piety or Wisdom be learned from them? And yet the Applications you have made of them to yourself, and your own Affairs, have no Foundation but in an heated Fancy?

IF you say, that you was led into such Applications of the Historical Parts of Scripture, by their being strongly pressed upon your Mind; we then heartily recommend to your Consideration, the prudent Advice of the venerable Dr. Colman, in his Letter to Mr. Williams, upon reading the Confession and Retractations of Mr. Davenport, ‘P. 5. Let such, says he, as may be listning too much to Impulses from particular Texts of Scripture, suggested to them with Glosses quite foreign to the direct, plain, and true Sense of the Place; let such take Warning from Mr. Davenport, and learn from his sad Experience and sorrow­ful Testimony, to apprehend themselves in great Danger of being led astray, by hearkening to Impulses or Impressions as a Rule of Conduct, whether they come with or without a Text of Scripture.’

WE shall only add upon this Head, that when you ‘appeal to the Experience of every spiritual Reader of holy Writ, whether or no, if he consulted the Word of God in this Manner, he was not at all Times and at all Seasons as plainly directed how to act, as tho' he had con­sulted the Urim and Thummim which was upon the High Priest's Breast;’ and when in a following Paragraph of the same Page, ‘you extend this plain Direction to all Circumstances and Places, tho' never so minute, never so particular:’ We apprehend these to be Stretches, beyond what might reasonably have been expected from any Protestant Minister, or sober Christian.—You know, Sir, that the Answer of God by Urim and Thummim, was not uncertain and ambiguous, like the Hea­then Oracles, but clear and determinate, so that none could mistake or differ about the Meaning of it; whereas the Directions which you have fetch'd from the Historical Parts of Scripture, are such, as none beside yourself can see to be contained in them.—Again, the Answer by Urim and Thummim was concerning important and not minute Matters; and it was infallible; whereas you cannot but see from the very different Sentiments of sincere Christians, in many lesser Points both of Doctrine and Practice, wherein you have no Reason to doubt but they have consulted the Word of God in the best Manner they can, that after all, they are not infallibly directed, as the Israelites were, when they consulted the Urim and Thum­mim about important Affairs.

[Page 19] IN fine, to pretend that every spiritual Reader of holy Writ, if he con­sults the Word of God right, shall be directed in all Circumstances, tho' ever so minute or particular, as the Israelites were by Urim and Thummim, is to ascribe to every spiritual Reader, who is not wanting to himself in consulting the Word of God, such an infallible Direction as the Church of Rome it self never claimed.—For the Infallibility which the Romanists arrogate to their Church, is no more than this, that thro' the Assistance of Christ and his Holy Spirit, it cannot err, in any Doctrine of Religion; in other Matters, especially minute ones, they readily allow it may: Whereas you will not allow the spiritual Reader of holy Writ to be left to err, so much as in a Circumstance, tho' ever so minute, ever so par­ticular; but affirm, that if he consults the Word of God in the Manner you prescribe, he shall be at all Times as plainly directed, as tho' he had consulted the Urim and Thummim at the High Priest's Breast.—If there were not many other Evidences of it, we think that this alone would be a full Proof, that you, Sir, are not at all Times so directed, even in the Doctrines which you preach, print, and take a little Time to revise and correct for a new Edition. ^*

YOU go on, P. 3. to mention our blaming you for saying, ‘that to talk of any having the Spirit of God without feeling it, is in reality to deny the Thing it self.’—The Rev. President, we suppose, will take a proper Notice of what you offer upon this Occasion, in his fol­lowing Letter to you: And therefore we shall only observe as briefly as may be,

1. THAT you lay great Stress upon an Expression, which the Scriptures rather discourage, than countenance the use of.—When our blessed Lord says, Luke 24. 39. Handle me, for a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones, don't be intimate, that a Spirit is not to be felt?

2. YOU yourself own the Expression of feeling of the Spirit, to be Metaphorical, and not Proper.—Why then may not another believe all the Truth which you do about the indwelling of the Spirit, and the Believer's perception of it, and yet not like to express his Sentiments by so gross a Metaphor as feeling? Why should it be tho't as incredible as the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, for a Man to have the Spirit of God dwelling in him, and to be satisfied he [...] too, and yet chuse to express his Perception of it, by a proper, rather than a Metaphorical improper Word? Especially, when the very frequent use of that Meta­phorical [Page 20] Word, and the laying great Stress upon it, hath led many weak People into gross Apprehensions of the Spirit of God, and its Operations; as if their perceiving a great Commotion of their own animal Spirits, was a feeling of the Spirit of God. Is it not high Time to lay aside the ordinary Use of an improper Word, when the frequent Use of it is found by sad Experience to be attended with such unhappy Effects, as we suppose the President will show you in his following Letter? Will you dare to say, that every Man is destitute of the Spirit of God, who don't feel it, just as we feel the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper? If not, why can you no more part with the Metaphorical Word fuel than you can believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation?

3. IF when you say, that to talk of having the Spirit of God, without feeling it, is in reality to deny the Thing it self, you intend, that no Man can have the Spirit of God, unless at the same Time he perceives it as fully and certainly, as he does any Material Substance, when he handles and feels it; if this be what you intend, (as appears highly probable from your contending so earnestly for this strong, however improper Ex­pression) then we say, you mean by it, to advance a Doctrine contradic­tory to the unerring Oracles of God.—For doubtless the Man who feareth the Lord, and obeyeth the Voice of his Servant, ^† hath the Spirit of God dwelling in him: And yet such a Man may walk in Darkness and have no Light, and therefore not be as certain that he hath the Spirit of God, as he is that he feels a Piece of Matter when he hath it in his Hand.

BUT you tell us, P. 9. that ‘such a Way of speaking and writing is very common amongst the most eminent Divines, as well as the Articles of the Church of England.’ We shall not minutely criticise upon your Diction here, or upon the Grammatical Construction of some other Passages; but only observe, that you have not proved the Truth of what you affirm, by the instances you have alledged. The single Instance you produce from the Articles of the Church of England, to prove the frequency of this Way of writing in those Articles, speaks of such as feel in themselves the Working of the Spirit of Christ; Mr. Guthrie speaks of feeling the Love of God shed abroad in the Heart; and Mr. Baxter, of feeling the Evil of Sin, and the Worth of Holiness. But none of them speak of feeling the Spirit of God it self; as if that was a proper Object of the Sense of Feeling. And much less do they say, [Page 21] ‘That for a Believer to be satisfied that he hath the Spirit of God dwel­ling in him, and yet not feel it, is as incomprehensible, as the Doc­trine of Transubstantiation.’—If any should think the Expression with which your Quotation from Mr. Guthrie concludes, is too near akin to your own Way of speaking; we only say, it is so very gross, that we hope he never used it more than once We have not observed the Writings of that pious Man to be full of such Expressions. And if ‘your Compositions are full of them’ (as you tell us, P. 10) we should hope that by this Time you would be sensible, that you have little Reason to glory in them; were it not that your Mind must be fast shut up, and barred against Conviction, that you have been mistaken, or done amiss, so long as you vainly imagine, ‘that if you do but make an Appli­cation of every Thing you read in Scripture to your own Heart, you are at all Times and in all Circumstances, tho' ever so minute or par­ticular, as plainly directed, as tho' you had consulted the Urim and Thummim.’

AND your maintaining this Principle only, which you affirm in the strongest Terms, is, we think, enough to enable you to determine very easily, what you say, P. 11. you ‘cannot determine; namely, what Tendency your Writings have to make People think, that you have as familiar a Converse and Communion with God, as any of the Pro­phets and Apostles, and such as we all acknowledge to have been un­der the Inspiration of the holy Ghost.’ For besure none of them ever pretended ‘to be directed how to act, at all Times and in all Circumstances, more plainly, than if they had consulted the Urim and Thummim which was upon the High Priest's Breast.’—It can therefore only serve to amuse your Readers, when you affirm, P. ibid. ‘that you would not have undertaken to preach the Gospel for ten thousand Worlds, had you not been fully perswaded that you had a Degree of that Spirit, and was admitted to a Degree of that holy and familiar Converse and Communion with God, which the Prophets and Apostles were favoured with, in common with all Believers.’ For you know very well, Sir, that we blame you not, for pretending to that Converse and Communion with God which is common to all Believers; but for lead­ing your Readers to think, that you are favoured with such Converse and Communion as was peculiar to the Prophets and Apostles, as they were inspired Persons. And what Tendency your Writings have to do this, we have very fully manifested above, P. 18. 19.

[Page 22] AND now, having shown the Insufficiency of your Defence of your­self against the Charge of Enthusiasm, we hope, in every Instance which hath been mentioned; we proceed next to consider what you say in An­swer to our Charge against you, as an uncharitable, censorious and slande­rous Man.—And here we readily allow, that you understood us right, when, P. 11. you suppose we meant habitually such; for at that Time we had no Reason to think you otherwise. "Might not Peter have been properly stiled a cursing swearing Man, and David a murde­ring adulterous Man," if Peter and David had frequently repeated those Sins, and done so deliberately, and never expressed any Repentance or Sorrow for them? And this, Sir, with Concern and Grief we apprehend to have been exactly your Case. We think you have entertained groundless Surmises of others, and that you have been guilty of the cry­ing Sin of treating the Name of others very injuriously, and that you have done thus deliberately and often, in the most publick Manner you could, and with other Circumstances of Aggravation; and we don't know that you had ever publickly manifested any Sense of your Sin, or Con­cern about it, in any Instance of this Sort, before our Testimony came abroad. How far, what you have done since, may deserve the Name of Christian Satisfaction, we shall consider as the Instances occur. We may add, that you have thus injuriously, treated, not particular Persons only, but large Bodies of Men of publick Character, and whose Usefulness in the World, in a great Measure, depends upon their good Name. These Things, Sir, are notorious, you have been often told of them, and have had a great deal of Time to reflect upon them, and yet after all, to our Sorrow, we see you insinuating. P. 11. as if you "might only have been somewhat rash or uncharitable in your Judgment past upon some particular Persons or Things." You go on to ask, ‘How we prove this Charge, viz. that you are an uncharitable (you should have added, censorious and) slanderous Man?’—For the Proof of this, we had instanced first, in ‘your monstrous Reflections upon the great and good Arch-Bishop Tillotson (as Dr. Increase Mather stiles him) comparing his Sermons to the conjuring Books,’ &c.—But ‘this you apprehend does not prove, that you cast monstrous Reflections upon Arch-Bishop Tillotson, as to his personal Character.’—Pray, Sir, would you not think it a monstrous Reflection upon the Rev. Mr. White­field, if we should compare his Sermons to conjuring Books? And would it not affect his personal Character too? For what Apprehensions must the World have of the Man, if it was once made to believe, that his [Page 23] very Sermons are as pernicious, as Books which teach familiar Converse and Communion with the Devil?—And is it not true, Sir, ‘that you have poken of the Person of the Arch Bishop in too strong Terms, and too rashly condemned his State, when you ought only to have censured his Doctrine?’ Have you not freely confessed these Things in your Letter to Dr. Chauncy, before you wrote this Letter to us? and have you not also professed "your Sorrow, that you have judged the Arch-Bishop's State and Person, and not spoken sufficiently in Commen­dation of his great Candour and Moderation?" If these are your own Words, and proceed from your Heart, why so loth now to let the World know, "that you have cast Reflections, which we call monstrous," and that very justly, "upon Arch-Bishop Tillotson, as to his personal Cha­racter?" Do you desire, that such as have not seen your Confession to the Rev. Dr. Chauncy, should believe, that you don't think yourself to blame in this Mattter? Or do you now really repent of your Repen­tance; and design by this Passage, implicitly to retract your Retracta­tions, and insinuate to the World, that what you have said of the Arch-Bishop, as to his personal Character, is Truth, and not Reflection? That you again think his State and Person as bad as you have ever re­presented them?

YOU proceed and tell us, ‘that Dr. Increase Mather himself, as you have been informed by the Rev. Mr. Gee, constantly warned the Students against the Arch Bishop's Books,’—We are perswaded here is some Mistake in this Matter; either that the Rev. Mr. Gee expressed himself unwarily, or that you misunderstood, and so have misrepresented what he told you. Indeed we can easily believe, that the Dr. frequent­ly warned the Students against some Things in the Arch-Bishop's Books: And some of us have done so too, as freely and publickly as ever Dr. Mather did. But we have Reason to think, that the Dr. did not con­stantly warn the Students against the Arch-Bishop's Books in general, as if there was nothing in them worth their reading, nothing but what was dangerous and to be condemned. For we have been credibly informed, that the Dr. hath sometimes inserted the Arch-Bishop's Books in Cata­logues he hath given to the Students; no doubt at the same Time giving proper Warning of what he tho't erroneous in them; or putting other Books into the Catalogues, which would be sufficient Preservatives against the Arch-Bishop's Errors. Nor is Dr. Mather to be charged with Inconsistency for this, any more than you, Sir, who have greatly [Page 24] blamed ^* the Rev. Mr. Stoddard, ‘for his endeavouring to prove, that unconverted Men may be admitted into the Ministry.’ And yet you call him a great and good Man, and highly esteem, and strongly recommend his Books; notwithstanding that if unconverted Ministers are so dangerous to the Church of Christ, as you have represented them, this Error of Mr. Stoddard's must be (in your Account) one of the most fatal and extensively pernicious, that a Divine could fall into.

YOU observe next. ‘that Dr. Increase Mather, if we may credit the Writer of his Life, dealt as much in Impressions and inward Feelings, as the Person against whom we have published our Testimony.’—To this we need only say at present, that whenever you shall think fit to produce the Reasons, upon which you ground this Apprehension of the Dr. we shall shew you the Difference between him and you; or readily own we cannot. But we think it a great Injury to him, when you insinuate in your next Words, as if the Dr. was so artful and insin­cere, as to call the Arch Bishop a Good Man, only for his great Generosity and Moderation towards the Dissenters. Some of us have heard the Dr. say, that he believed the Arch-Bishop was now in Heaven. Surely he did not think, that only Generesity and Moderation carried him thither.

YOU go on and tell us, that ‘you don't think Dr. Mather would blame you for what you have said concerning Mr. G. and Mr. H.’—That is, in other Words, you don't think you ought to be blamed for your Treatment of these two Ministers of the Gospel. You don't think you have injured them, or violated any Law of God, in speaking as you have concerning them.—We are truly sorry, Sir, to see you still in this Temper: You cannot but be sensible, that we don't blame you, for telling these two Gentlemen in private, what you tho't of them. And whether you did well or ill, to allow your self in the Tho'ts you enter­tained concerning them, we willingly leave to the great Searcher of Hearts of determine. You might be very criminally defective in the Exercise of that Charity, which thinketh no Evil, believeth all Things, and hopeth all Things, when you suffered your self to think these Gentlemen unconverted. But whether you was right or wrong in your Tho'ts, you might do well to tell them with a becoming Modesty, Tenderness, and Concern, to the Gentlemen themselves, between them and you. This could do them no Harm, and might possibly be a Means of Good to them.—But did you act the Part of a Christian, when you entered [Page 25] your hard Tho'ts of these two Gentlemen in your Journal, and made them publick to the World? Was this a likely Way to do any Good to the Men themselves? or was it not rather the Way to irritate their Passions, and so prevent the Good they might otherwise have gotten, by your private Dealing with them? And was it not the most direct Course you could have taken, to prejudice the Minds of many under their Pastoral Care against them, and so prevent their getting any Good by their Ministrations? So that in this, you have not only done, what in you lay to deprive these two Ministers of Christ of a good Name, which is rather to be chosen than great Riches; but have also done what had a natural Tendency to hurt, both the Souls of these Ministers themselves, and also the Souls of the People committed to their Care. And there­fore we think, that in these two Instances you have heinously violated the holy Laws of God; and that the Guilt of doing so still lies upon you; since you rather justify than condemn yourself for it.

MOREOVER, it deserves to be remarked, that you entered the Inti­mation in your Journal concerning Mr. H—n, that he had no Experi­mental Knowledge of the New Birth, ^† just after you had been in close Talk with him, and he had been (as you acknowledge) very civil, and would have had you staid with him longer.—How dangerous a Thing must it be for a Minister to converse freely with you in private, when the most civil Treatment, if you happen (right or wrong) to think him unconverted, won't hinder you from taking the first Opportunity you can, to tell the World in Print, that you look upon him to be one of those Men, whom you have represented as the Bane of the Christian Church, and as unlikely as the Devil to be made use of by God in conver­ting Sinners! ^*

IN fine, it appears to us no small Aggravation of your Fault, that you strike at the Name and Usefulness of this Gentleman, under a Shew of praying to God for him.—Had you put up your Prayer for him in your Closet, you might have acted like a Christian; provided you had good Reason to fear his State to be so bad. But to put your Prayer for him into Print, what was it but to defame him, in the most publick and injurious Manner, under a Shew of Pity to him, and Devoti­on towards God? How like is this to the Pharisee, who under Pretence of giving Thanks to God, was not afraid to rob God of his Prerogative, and unjustly judge his Neighbour, as you tell us elsewhere. ^§

[Page 26] BUT what Wonder is it, to see you treating the Name and Character of particular Persons in this injurious Manner, when you have not been afraid or ashamed to deal thus with whole Societies, and large Bodies of Men, whose Usefulness is of great Importance to the Church of Christ, and yet depends very much upon their good Name and Character in the World: And when you have ventured to do thus, without any per­sonal Knowledge of them, only upon the Information of some, with whom you could have had but a very short Acquaintance, and so could not make any safe Judgment, whether they were credible Persons or not.

AND this brings us to your ‘reproachful Reflections upon the Society which is immediately under our Care.’ The Reflections are these, as you rehearse them, P 12. ‘As far as I could gather from some who well knew the State of it [the College] not far superiour to our Universities, in Piety and true Godliness.—Tutors neglect to pray with and examine the Heart of their Pupils.—Discipline is at too low an Ebb:—Bad Books are become fashionable among them.— Tillotson and Clark are read, instead of Shepherd, Stoddard, and such like evangelical Writers.’ For publishing this disadvantageous Character of us, only upon Hear say, and that too probably from Persons whom you had not had six Days Acquaintance with ^*, we have charged you with Rashness, and Contradiction to our Saviour's Rule; and you are sensible that the President undertook, from his own Examination of Things, a few Months after, to contradict some Part of your evil Report concerning us, in the Face of a venerable and great Assembly, many of them well acquainted with the State of the College.—These Things you make no Reply to; nor do you attempt to prove the Truth of the Reproaches you have taken up against us, and spread as far as your Journals find a Reading: But gravely ask us, "Were not these Things so at the Time in which I wrote them?" And taking it for granted that they were, you go on and say, ‘Wherein then in writing thus, have I slandered Harvard College?’ And you assure us, that you would ‘be glad to find, that the Rev. President was not mistaken in what he declared before the Convention, from his own Examination.’ We will not say here, what perhaps some would, that this is a lively Specimen of the prevailing of too much of that Temper in you still, which you tell us in your Life, P. 2. that you soon gave pregnant Proofs [Page 27] of Instead of this, we only ask, how you expect to find (what you say you should be glad of) "That the President was not mistaken?" It seems neither his Word, not ours, is of any Weight with you; but you still believe that "Things were at the Time in which you wrote," as you have represented them. And therefore, tho' you say, ‘you are sorry that you published your private Informations concerning the Colleges to the World;’ yet you still declare the Reasons to be credi­ble from whom you had them; and are yet of Opinion, that in writing [...] you have not slandered Harvard College. We little expect therefore to convince you; but we believe we shall do a Pleasure to many others, (whose Opinion of us we ought to value) if we proceed to consider the several Articles of your Representation of us.

AND here you say, first, that ‘as far as you could gather from some, who knew the State of the College well, it is not far superiour to our Universities in Piety and true Godliness.’—To know what you mean by this, we must look to the Character you give of the Universities in England. Now this we have in your Journal at Williamsburgh, P. 109. where speaking of the College at that Place, you say, ‘It may be of excellent Use, if learning Christ be made the Foundation of their Study, and other Arts and Sciences only intro­duced and pursued as subservient to that. For want of this, most of our English Schools and Universities are sunk into meer Seminaries of Paganism. Christ or Christianity is scarce so much as named among them.’—As for this your Character of the Universities in England, we only say, that you have taught us to believe you with Discretion, by telling the World, that our State, with Respect to ‘Piety and true Godliness, is not far superiour to this.’—Concerning our own Academy, we say, we are far from boasting of its Piety and true Godliness. We are heartily sorry, that there is not much more of these to be found among the Youth under our Care, than there is. And yet we may with great Truth, and without any Immodesty, affirm, that the Knowledge of the only true God, and of Jesus Christ whom He hath sent, is earnestly recommended to the Students as that, in Comparison whereof they ought to account all other Things but Loss and Dung. And we must farther tell you, that we cannot easily perswade ourselves, that any credible Per­son, who well knew the State of our Society, ever told you any Thing, from which he will own you could fairly gather, that it was "not far superiour for Piety and true Godliness, to such Universities as are sunk into meer Seminaries of Paganism; where Christ, or Christianity is scarce [Page 28] so much as named." Produce the credible Person who gave you this In­formation, or take the vile Slander upon yourself, and let Confusion cover you, till you have given that Satisfaction for it, which the Laws of Christ, our King and Judge, require.

YOU go on and say, "Tutors neglect to pray with their Pupils." To which we answer, that this is either not true, or not any just Matter of Reproach, as you would have it tho't to be. If you intended, by this Account of us, to make the World believe, that social Worship of God is not maintained in the College, that Tutors and Pupils don't attend upon the publick reading of the holy Scriptures, and join together in solemn Prayers, Morning and Evening, you have represented us as sunk into something as bad, or worse, than meer Paganism. But then this Re­presentation is so vile a Slander, that we can hardly believe, that, in the six Days you gave yourself to be acquainted with credible Persons, and take their Information, you met with a single Man, who was false and bold enough to give you such an Account of us.

IF you say, that this was not your Meaning, that you intended no more than to let the World know, that besides those Prayers which Tu­tors and Pupils conjunctly offer up to God Morning and Evening, each Tutor don't take his own Pupils into his Chamber and pray with them again; how does this prove what you seem to have designed it for, viz. that our Society is ‘not far superiour to such as are sunk into meer Si­minaries of Paganism,’ as you say the Universities in England are? What Law of Christ hath made this an ordinary Duty of Tutors, that you should think the neglect of it such a Reproach, that the World ought to hear it? If some credible Person should tell you concerning any professed Christian Housholder, that besides worshipping God Morn­ing and Evening with his whole Family, he did not divide it into three or four Parts, and pray with each of them again by themselves, would you think this such an heinous Neglect, that all the British Dominions ought to ring of it? And would you think that you represented the Con­duct of such an Housholder in a Christian Manner, if you should print it in your Journal, that he neglected to pray with his Children, only because he never shut out the rest of his Family, when he pray'd with them? If you say, that the Case of the Tutors differs from that of an Hous­holder, because it is not a Tutor, but the President, who is ordinarily the Mouth of the College in their Address to God; we answer, that this makes the Difference not great; forasmuch as if the Tutors have any thing upon their Hearts, which they desire their Pupils should hear [Page 29] them offer up to God for them, they have frequent Opportunities to pre­sent these Desires of their Souls to God in the Hearing of their Pupils, by the necessary Absence of the President, upon one Account or other, from Morning or Evening Prayers; upon which Occasions the Tutors supply his Place by Turns.

YOUR next Reflection upon our College, is, that ‘ Tutors don't ex­amine the Hearts of their Pupils.’ What you intend by this, we are much at a Loss to conceive. Indeed we are very sensible, that it is a great Duty, which nearly concerns us all, to examine our own Hearts with the utmost Diligence and Care. But that it is our Duty ordinarily to examine the Hearts of others, is not so clear. The Son of God, who hath his Eyes like unto a Flame of Fire, hath said, Rev. 2. 23. All the Chur­ches shall know, that I am He who searches the Reins and Heart. Would you have Tutors invade his Prerogative, and make the Churches know that others beside the Son of God, may, and ought to undertake this Scrutiny? Or, do you intend the Expression in a Popish Sense, and mean, that our Tutors neglect no bring their Pupils before them to secret Confession, as the Romish Priests do by their People? If this be your Meaning, speak out, Sir, and tell us plainly, that you think the Popish Practice of Auricular Confession ought to be introduced in the College, that it may with more Speed and Ease be propagated thro' the Country. When­ever you tell us thus in plain Terms, we shall be at no loss for an An­swer. If you reply, that you meant nothing of all this, but only intend­ed that the Souls of the Pupils are not taken Care of, by those who have the Government and Instruction of them, that "Christ, or Christianity, is scarce so much as named among them," which you say is the Case of the Universities in England; and that the Counsels and Warnings of God are not set before them; we answer, that if this, and not something much worse, be what you meant by saying, ‘Tutors neglect to exa­mine the Hearts of their Pupils,’ it is a very injurious and false Representation. And you might easily have known it to be so, upon much less than six Days Enquiry, if your Ears had not been more open to evil Reports, than to good ones.—Is not every Exposition of the President, and every Lecture of the Divinity Professor, an Address to the Students upon the important Points of our holy Religion? Are not these all in some Measure Profitable for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Cor­rection, or for Instruction in Righteousness? And is it not a distinguishing Advantage to the Youth of the College, which both they, and their Friends ought to be very thankful to God for, that they have the Benefit of [Page 30] these four Times a Week, beside what they enjoy in common with other Christians, viz. The Exercises of the Lord's Day, and Lectures on other Days out of the College?—And as for the Tutors, whom you particularly [...] with Neglect, if you mean, that they are generally so grosly negligent of their Duty, with Regard to taking proper Opportunities to talk seriously and closely with the Pupils about their spiritual Con­cerns, as does in any Measure justify your Reflections, they deny the Charge, and insist upon it, that it is a Slander.—And others of us can with Truth assure you and the World, that besides discharging the more publick Duties of our Stations, we have not been wanting to re­prove, rebuke, exhort or Encourage and direct more privately, when­ever we have had Reason to think, that the Case of any particular Per­son has called for it.

YOU tell us next, "that Discipline is at too low an Ebb."—This is a Reproach which we had little Reason to expect at the Time when you published it. We had not long before dropped one of our Tutors out of his Place, for very corrupt and dangerous Principles, as soon as they came to be certainly known. And we had kept him out till he had given Grounds for Charity to hope, that he was come to a founder Mind. We had also expelled a Professor for immoral and scandalous Practices. And can it be supposed, that a Government, which upon just Occasions, would not spare its own Officers, would at the same Time wink at the Faults of Children?—We have since, for Immorality, ex­pelled another Tutor, who was also a Fellow of the House. And these Acts of Discipline, we believe, will convince others, whatever you may think of them, that Discipline neither was, nor is at so low an Ebb, as to deserve that we should be reproached publickly with the want of it.—But you say, ‘Bad Books are become fashionable among them; Tillot­son and Clark are read, instead of Shepherd, Stoddard, and such like Evangelical Writers.’—We make no doubt but that bad Books were, and are, and always will be, too often read in a Society of such Num­bers, where many are supplied with Money enough by their Parents to purchase a bad Book, if their Inclinations lead them to it. But the Question is, whether bad Books were then read with the Approbation or Knowledge of the Governours of the House? Now the surest Way to find this, is to examine what Books were then borrowed by the Scholars [...] of the publick Library: For other Books they may easily conceal, if they please, from their Tutors. Now upon a particular Enquiry into the Library Records on this Occasion, as the World hath been informed [Page 31] by our worthy Friend Col. [...], in the [...] 22, 17 [...]1, it was found, with respect to the Books which you call Bad [...] that ‘from the 28th Nov. 1732, to that very Day (for almost nine Years) Tillotson had not been to much as once taken out of the Library by any Undergraduate; nor any of Dr. Clark's Works for above two Years: Whereas Owen, Baxter, Fla [...]el, Bates, [...], [...], Willard, Watts, and Gurse (who be sure most of them may be reckoned Evangelical Writers, as well as Shepherd and Stoddard) have some or other of them been borrowed by Undergraduates during this whole Time; and that they are scarcely ever in the Library; and that these Books have been more commonly borrowed by the Graduates, than Tillotson and Clark. This Account (says he) I have before me, arrested by the Library Keeper, and desire the Facts may be examined into by any one that doubts them.’—We think we may leave it now to every unbiassed Conscience to determine, whether the Account you have given of the Books read at College, was fair and just, "at the Time in which you wrote."

HOWEVER, if at that Time you believed this, and all the other Re­proaches, you had taken up against us, to be true; and that the State of our College was ‘not far superiour to that of Universities, where Christ or Christianity is scarce so much as named;’ why did you not act so much like a Christian yourself, as to signify your Apprehensions, and make what Remonstrances you tho't proper privately, in a Letter to the President, or to some other of the Officers of the Society? This we should have taken kindly; and if your Apprehensions had been well grounded, such a Way of communicating them, might have been a Means of much Good, and no Harm to us. But what good End could you propose to yourself in caluminating us thus publickly, in your Jour­nal, without ever hearing what we had to say for ourselves? We put this Question seriously to your Conscience; for it is easy to see many Things very hurtful to us, which you might have in View; such as discouraging publick spirited Persons from becoming Benefactors to our Society, which was to injure us in our Estate as well as Name; and such as discouraging pious Parents from sending their Children to us for Education, which must, in a little Time, bring destitute Churches under a Necessity of seeking to other Countries for a Supply of Ministers. These, and such other bad Designs, it is very easy to conceive, that you might have in your Heart; but what Good you could propose to do us by this Conduct, either upon Temporal or Spiritual Accounts, we confess [Page 32] it is out of our Reach to Comprehend. You might probably conclude it would raise our Resentment; but you had no just Reason to think, that it was the proper Way to compass a Reformation of what might be amiss; and be sure not the Way prescribed for this End [...] Saviour, thus to traduce us in the most publick Manner you could in­stead of informing us, (when you might so easily have done it) [...], of what you had heard to our Disadvantage. And to the [...] Treatment of us, we think, you was obliged merely as a [...], if you had laid Christianity quite aside; since, as you acknowledge, you was very [...] treated and kindly entertained; and since we believe you must be sensible, from the Sum collected at Cambridge, that the College contributed liberally to the Relief of your peer [...].

WE have now done with your injurious Treatment of our College in particular; and shall only observe further upon this Head, what you say of Yale College, as well as ours. ‘As for the Universities, I believe it may be said, their Light is now become Darkness— Darkness that may be felt.’—These Expressions manifestly allude to two remarkable Passages of Scripture which you most have had in your Eye, when you used them. The first is that of our Saviour, Math. 6. 23. If therefore the Light which is in thee be Darkness, [...] great is that Darkness! The other is that, Exod. 10. 23. where God threatens to send Darkness over the Land of Egypt, even Darkness which might be felt.—And now what Idea could your Readers justly form of these Expressions, but that as the Judicial Darkness over the Land of Egypt was surprisingly, mira­culously great and thick; to was the Moral or Spiritual Darkness of the poor benighted Universities in New England. Their very Light (say you) is become Darkness. And left any one should be insensible how great this Darkness must then be, you compare it to the Egyptian Plague, which was such a Darkness as might be felt. To what Purpose is it then for you to say, ‘that you had no Idea of representing the Colleges as in a deplorable State of Immorality and Irreligion,’ since it is certain you sought out War is which convey as strong Ideas to your Readers, as the Mind of Man is able to form of any Thing on this side the Blackness of Darkness for ever.

AND yet you insinuate, that it ‘must be so, when Tutors neglect to pray with and examine the Hearts of their Pupils, &c. and tell us, this is all you meant.’—But pray, Sir, what did you mean by these Expressions? This (as we have shown above) it is no easy Mat­ter to conjecture. But so much seems very clear, that by [...] Ex­pressions, [Page 33] and what followed them, you make it out, that our Society was ‘not for superiour, in Piety and true Godliness, to such Universities as are sunk into meer Seminaries of Paganism, where Christ or Christia­nity is [...] so reach as named.’ And this, we think, amounts to much the same Thing, with the worst Ideas that can be conveyed, by saying, that our Light is become Darkness.—Darkness which may [...] felt. However, you tell us, "you are sorry," and we easily believe you: But for what? Not that you have greatly wronged the Colleges, and heinously violated the eighth and ninth Commandments of the moral Law; but ‘that you publish'd your private Informations to the World, tho' from creative Persons:’ By which, and your asking us ‘if these Things were not so at the Time in which I wrote? and wherein then in writing thus have I slandered Harvard College:’ we understand you to insist upon it still, that the Facts are all true, and that you are only sorry that you was somewhat rash in proclaiming that to the World, which was only whispered to you in the [...], by some credible Persons, who are loth to be exposed. But till you bring these credible Persons out, you must take all upon your self. It hath been hinted by one of your late zealous Advocates, that some of your Informers were Over­seers of the College. But we can hardly perswade ourselves, that any of those Honourable and Reverend Gentlemen could so far forget their Character, as to turn Informers, to a meer Stranger (as you then was) of Enormities in the College, which they never took any Care to reform, since their Visitations have been no less than four in a Year, two by their Committees, and two by themselves in a Body. And it may be a Satisfaction to some, into whose Hands this Paper may sail, to know, that these Overseers are his Excellency the Governour, the Honourable the Lieutenant Governour, and his M [...]dy's [...], with the Rev. Ministers of [...], and the five neighbouring Towns; upon all of whom you have implicitly reflected, (as well as upon the Gentlemen in the more immediate Government and Instruction of the College) that they should suffer us to sink into little better than a Seminary of meer Paganism, and never tell us of it, (as be sure they never did) when they visit us so often to enquire into our State, and rectify what they think amiss. It deserves to be remarked also, that Governour Belcher, of whom you speak so often in your Journals, and with so much Respect, was in the Chair, and so at the Head of the Overseers, when you wrote these injurious Reflections upon the College.

[Page 34] You conclude your Answer to us on this Head, with telling us, P. 12. ‘that you would ask Pardon for the Mistake, if you was mistaken in the disadvantageous Report you have given out of us; that you unfeignedly wish our Prosperity, and pray, that there may always proceed from the College those Streams which may make glad the City of our God!’—Here you don't own that you have been mistaken; but in the foregoing Page plainly intimate, that you think you have not, and therefore you don't here ask Pardon, as some of your unwary Readers may think you do; but only tell us what you would do, if you tho't you had been mistaken. However, we thank you, Sir, for your present good Wishes, and are heartily sorry, that your [...] Conduct hath been so contradictory to them. We think we have fully shown, that you have very injuriously and sinfully misrepresented us. And now we earnestly pray, that you may be bro't to such a Tem­per of Mind, and correspondent Conduct, as may prepare you to receive Forgiveness both from God and Man, and may you then obtain it of them both.

UPON the Whole, we are far from desiring you should think, that we see nothing in the College otherwise than we wish it was. We too often find such Things as are a Grief of Heart to us, and which, we hope, as they appear, we are endeavouring earnestly to correct and re­form; and yet not always with that Success in which we should rejoice. And this we believe to be the Case of every pious Minister, and even of every pious Housholder; that he often meets with such Things in his Church, or his Family, as are a great Grief to him; and which, with all his Skill, and Care, and Diligence, he is not able to bring to such a Reformation as he wishes for. And this, we are very much mistaken in our Conjectures, if you yourself don't find to be the Case, if ever you return to England, with those numerous Bands, Associations, &c. which you have formed in so many Parts of England and Wales, after the Mo­ravian Manner, together with the Train of Officers, unknown to the New Testament, such as Exhorters, Superintendents, Visitors, &c. whom you have set over them.

THE fifth and last Instance which we mentioned of your Censori­ousness (tho' not the last by many which might have been mentioned) was, your ‘pernicious Reflections upon the Ministers of the Churches in this Land.’—This you pass silently over, in your Answer to us; we suppose, because you have spoken something of it in your Letter to Dr. Chauncy.—But how unsatisfactorily you have answered for your [Page 35] self to him, upon this Head, the Dr. hath shown you so well, that we can very contentedly leave you in his Hands. Only, we cannot but ear­nestly recommend it to you to consider, more seriously than you seem ever to have done yet, of the Guilt you bro't upon your self, and of the Mischief you have done to the Souls of Multitudes of People, by pub­lishing your uncharitable groundless Fears and Perswasions about the spi­ritual State of most of the Ministers in New England. You tell us in your Life, P. 45. ‘that your Friends represented to you, that every Gown Man's Name is Legion, and that if you could convert one of them, it would be as much as converting an whole Parish.’ If this be true, does not he, who endeavours to perswade a People that their Mi­nister is unconverted, and that an unconverted Minister is the Bane of the Church, and as unlikely as the Devil to be used as an Instrument of convert­ing others; does not such a Person do all that lies in the Power of Man, to hinder the Conversion of an whole Parish? For who will be likely ever to get any saving Good by the preaching of that Minister, concern­ing whom he believes, or greatly fears, these Things to be true? And how comprehensive and amazing must the Mischief then be, when a Man endeavours to perswade not a single Parish only, but an whole Country that this is the fad State of most of their Ministers?

THIS, Sir, you have endeavoured with almost the whole People of Connecticut and Massachusetts-Bay. For tho' you have not published your Perswasions and Fears concerning all, but only most of their Mini­sters; yet as you have expressed your charitable Tho'ts of but very few, and have not named the many Persons whom you suspect and judge; you have opened the Door for evil Surmisings to enter the Hearts of the People concerning almost all. And what you have done, and others since, who have followed your Example, and trodden in your Steps, hath had an Effect more extensive and pernicious, than any Man could have imagined six Years ago. Who could have believed within these six Years, that in such a Country as this, where every Church hath the Mi­nister, whom the Majority of themselves preferred before all others that were to be had at the Time of settling, and where the preaching and the Conversation of far the bigger Part of the Ministers is undeniably as becomes the Gospel; and where, if any one is found to preach or live otherwise, he is ordinarily soon removed from his Place? Who could have believed, that in such a Country, such a Spirit of Jealousy and evil Surmising could have been raised, by the Influence and Example of a young Stranger; that perhaps there is not now a single Town in this [Page 36] Province, and probably not in Connecticut, in which there are not Num­bers of People whose Minds are under strong Prejudices against their Ministers; such Prejudices as almost cut off all Hope of their ever pro­fiting by their sacred Ministrations? Nor is the Mischief likely to end with the present Generation; but will, unless some marvellous Interpo­sition of Providence prevent, in all Probability, be transmitted to Poste­rity. A sad Consideration indeed! and which may well excuse our Warmth, to think, that, besides such Numbers of the present Generati­on, many of the Children who are yet unborn, will probably be undone for ever, by the Prejudices, Suspicions, and Alienations of Affection, which you have certainly been the Ringleader in introducing.

IN Comparison of this Hurt to the Usefulness of Ministers, and there­by to the eternal Interest of their People's Souls, the Injury you have done to the Ministers good Name, is but a small Matter; tho' it be in it self a crying Sin. For it is contrary, as you very well know, to as plain Precepts as any in the Gospel. And who of us, when we are bro't to the Trial, don't find that it touches us more sensibly, to be rob­bed of our good Name, than of a considerable Part of our Estate? And you know that the wisest of Men, under the Inspiration of him whose Understanding is infinite, hath told us, Prov. 22. 1. A good Name is rather to be chosen than great Riches. Nor can you be ignorant how criminal you must have been, in the Sight both of God and Man, if you had attempted to take but Twenty Shillings a-piece from one half of the Men, whose good Name you have struck at. And yet, after, all, you seem to feel no Compunction for any Thing, but only that you ‘was a little too sudden; that you did not take more Time before you delivered your Judgment,’ (Your Judgment then it was and not your Fear only) ‘that most that preach in New-England, did not experi­mentally know Christ.’ But pray, Sir, how could you have made a just Judgment of this, had you taken ever so much Time for it, without a personal Knowledge of the Men, and a Certainty, that either their Preaching, or their Conversation, or both, were utterly inconsistent with an experimental Knowledge of Christ; a Thing which we are perswad­ed that neither you, nor any other Man hath now, and we humbly hope never will have a Certainty of.

WE shall conclude this Head, with recommending to your serious Review, your own pathetical Words in your Sermon on the Pharisee and the Publican, P. 162, 163. ‘He [the Pharisee] say you, thanks God that he was not unjust: But is it not an Act of the highest In­justice, [Page 37] to rob God of his Prerogative? [Is it not an Act of Injustice to judge our Neighbour?] And yet of both these Crimes this felt righ­teous Vaunter is guilty.— Even as this Publican.—He seems to speak with the utmost Disdain— This Publican! Perhaps he pointed at the poor Man, that others might treat him with the like Contempt.—Thou proud confident Boaster, what hadst thou to do with that poor Publican? Supposing other Publicans were unjust and Extortioners, did it therefore follow that he must be so? Thou art therefore inexcu­sable, O Pharisee, who thus judgest the Publican. For thou that judgest him to be unjust, art in the very Act of judging unjust thy self. Thy Sacrifice is only the Sacrifice of a Fool.’—Here you tell us, that the Pharisee was unjust both to God and Man, when he judged his Neighbour, tho' but a Publican. And you call him a self-righteous Vaunter, and a proud confident Boaster for it: Tell him he is inexcusa­ble, and his Sacrifice but the Sacrifice of a Fool. And now, Sir, we be­seech you to compare what this Pharisee had done, with what you have done yourself, and let Conscience do its Office.

THE Pharisee had said, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other Men are, Extortioners, Unjust, Adulterers.— I fast twice a Week, I give Tithes of all I possess.—He was a moral honest and a devout Man in his own Conceit; and he was thankful to God for it. But then he had so much Modesty, that he prayed thus, or (as it is in the Original) these Things, with himself. He did not proclaim them in the Ears of the People.—How far was this Pharisee's vain Confidence of boasting short of yours, who tell the World upon every Occasion, in your Jour­nals, that you have had great Communications from God; that God hath given you a double Portion of his Spirit indeed; that Divine Manifestations flow in so fast, that your frail Tabernacle is scarce able to sustain them; that the holy Ghost enabled you to speak with a great deal of Power; that you felt the holy Ghost come upon you, and never spoke on that wise before; &c. &c. &c?

AGAIN; The Pharisee not only applauded himself, but you say, ‘he judged the Publican, and perhaps pointed at the poor Man, that others might treat him with the like Contempt.’—However, it was but a single Man whom he treated thus, and he a Publican, whom per­haps he might know to have deserved a bad Character but lately, and whose Usefulness could not be much hurt by what he said; that Order of Men being only Farmers of the Tributes, and already infamous among the Jews.—Whereas you have judged great Numbers of Men, [Page 38] most of them utter Strangers to you, who were generally esteemed highly before you had defamed them; and whose Usefulness is of the greatest Importance to the Souls of others, of any Order of Men in the World.—And as if it was not enough to "point the poor Men out," ^* that up­on ‘seeing a great Number of them around and before, you took Occasion to open your Mouth boldly against unconverted Ministers,’ [...] as if this was not enough to make the People understand whom you meant; as soon as you was out of New-England, you turned about, and told them by your Journal in Effect, the most of your Ministers are the Men, whom I intended.

BUT what was the Judgment which this unjust, boasting Pharisee passed upon the Publican?—Why truly, that he was not so good a Man as his admired self. I am not as this Publican.—If you had said no more concerning the Ministers of New England, (tho' this would have been bad enough, since God hath declared of them, who say stand by thy self, come not near to me, for I am holier than thou, these are a Smoak in my Nose, Isaiah 65. 5. yet) we believe we should hardly have given you, or ourselves any Trouble on this Head.—But your Judgment of most of the Ministers was, that they did not experimentally know Christ; that is, in other Language of your own, that they were half Beasts and half Devils; the Bane of the Churches of Christ; as unlikely to convert People as the Devil, &c. &c. Now supposing that Ministers of other Countries, whom you might have had Opportunity to know, deserved so vile Character; did it therefore follow, that the Ministers of New­England did so too? Thou art not therefore inexcusable, O Man, who hast thus judged the Ministers of Christ. For thou that judgest them to be the Bane of the Christian Church, &c. "Unjustly robbest God of his Prerogative," and (as far as in thee lies) destroyest the good Name and Usefulness of his Ministers, and the Souls commmitted to their Care.—Your Conclusion, thy Sacrifice, &c. is so severe and sad, that God for­bid we should make it of you, as you do of the Pharisee. However, thus much we must say, that till you have humbled yourself before God and Man, for unjustly robing God of his Prerogative, and doing so much Injury to the Names and Souls of Men: And till you have done thus, in the same publick Manner you did the Injuries, we cannot think you fit to be admitted into a Pulpit, or to the Table of the Lord.—We pray God it may sink deep into your Heart, that you are so much [Page 39] more liable to the same Condemnation, than the unjust Pharisee, upon whom you have passed the severe Judgment above rehearsed, Thy Sacri­fice is only the Sacrifice of a Fool.

WE proceed now to another Charge in our Testimony against you, as ‘a Deluder of the People, with respect to the Collections of Money, which, when here before, you almost extorted from them.’ To the Word extorted, you take Exception, and say, P. 13. ‘You never saw People in all Appearance, offer more willingly, &c.’ And we readily say so too. By the Word extorted, we only meant, that you raised the Passions of the People so high, that they were more governed by them, than directed by their Reason, in their Contributions. And of this we need no other Evidence, than that it was impossible they should understand­ingly approve your Prudence, in pitching upon the Place to build an Orphan House. For what wise Man would have chosen, for that Pur­pose, the remotest Corner of the King's Dominions, a Frontier, exposed to the Incursions of Enemies; and an infant Plantation, where it must cost three Times as much to maintain poor Children, as in an old well settled Colony? And yet instead of removing the Children from that Place, from which you had design'd to disengage your self several Months before, ^* to a Place more convenient, you spoke of carrying Children from other Places thither. We think then we may safely conclude, that every Man's Reason must have been against encouraging an House of Charity scituated so inconveniently, if it had not been over born by his Passions. We therefore justly supposed, and doubt not but we may appeal to the Consciences of most who contributed, that the great Things which moved them to it (besides the Warmth excited in their Passions) were the high Opinion they had conceived of your Piety, Zeal and Faith­fulness; and because they apprehended it would be an uncommon Blessing to the poor Children, to have their Bodies and Souls both under the personal Care of such a Man as Mr. Whitefield. And if this was the Case (as we verily believe it was) then whatever Tokens of Respect and Affection People might have cheerfully given you for yourself; yet can you imagine, that they would generally have given any Thing for your Orphan House, provided you had told them publickly and plainly, that you did not intend yourself to take Care either of the Bodies or Souls of the Children; that upon your Return to Georgia with what you collec­ted (which was upwards of 700 l. Sterling) ^† you did not purpose to [Page 40] tarry so much as one Fortnight with the Orphans? and that perhaps you might continue your Travels in other Countries, so as never to see them again in more than four Years? but that you would commit the spiritu­al Affairs of your Orphan House to Mr. Barber, and the outward Affairs of it to Mr. Habersham, Gentlemen of no Name or Character in these Parts of New England, nor so much as known by Name perhaps to one among Multitudes of your Contributors?

BUT you say, P. 14. ‘Did I not mention Mr. Barber publickly at the Time of collecting, as one of their own Countrey Men, and bred up in one of their own Colleges? Was he not with me in Person? And did I not again and again declare, that he was to be entrusted with the Education and spiritual Concerns of the Children and Fami­ly? Assuredly I did.’—To which we answer, that Mr. Barber might be with you in Person from Place to Place, and yet easily pass unobserved in the Croud, being but little known in these Parts of New­England. But if you really did show him publickly to the People, and publickly declare from Place to Place, whenever you asked Contributi­ons, that he was to be entrusted with the Education and spiritual Con­cerns of the Children, and that you would return to England as soon as you had settled Mr. Barber at Georgia, and see the Orphans no more in four or five Years; then you acted a fair and honest Part with the Peo­ple. And when you shall make it appear that these Things are true, we shall readily confess that we have been mistaken, and will publickly ask your Pardon, and do you Justice on this Head.

IN the mean Time we must assure you, that these Things are News to us. We don't remember that you made any such Declaration, when you moved for a Contribution at Cambridge. And we have enquired diligently of many Persons who have been present at several other of your Collections, and cannot find One who remembers he ever heard be­fore of such Declarations. And if your Declarations were not made so publickly and frequently, that you had Reason to think that the People generally, wherever you asked for Collections, were well acquainted with your Intentions, can you perswade yourself, that you have acted fairly and honestly, when you have so deceived the Expectations of such great Numbers of charitable well disposed Persons? Can you think you have treated them with the Sincerity which becomes a Christian, when by not letting them know your Designs, you drew such Sums of Money from them, as they would never have parted with, if they had understood your true Intentions?

[Page 41] As for Mr. Barber, to whom you committed the spiritual Concerns of your Orphan House, when you quitted them yourself, we only say, that whatever his Piety or Orthodoxy may be, in your Account, yet whoever believes the Account given of him by the Rev. Mr. Hart, and published by Dr. Chauncy, in his Seasonable Tho'ts, P. 186, 187, 188. if he be a Christian of a sound Mind, would by no means trust his Children under such an Instructor.

WE next observed, that ‘the Account which you have given the World of your Disbursements of the several Contributions for the Use of your Orphan House, is by no Means satisfactory; there being several large Articles, and some of about a thousand Pounds, our Cur­rency, charged in a very summary Way, viz. for Sundries, no Men­tion being made therein what the Sum was expended for, nor to whom it was paid.’—You tell us, P. 14. we should have done well to have said, "by no Means satisfactory to us."—We answer, that we are not the only Persons, who have looked upon this as a Fault in your Accounts. We have generally heard it spoken of as a great Defect, by such Gentlemen as are best acquainted with Accounts of that Na­ture.—Nevertheless, you are perswaded, ‘most of the Contributors depended upon your Veracity, and would have been satisfied as to themselves, tho' you had given no Account of the Disbursements at all.’—But the more entire Confidence the Contributors put in you, the more it concerned you to see to it, that they might have no Reason to repent of their Confidence. It is not to be supposed, that you could undertake the Trouble of making all the Disbursements yourself. And if you did not demand an Account of Particulars, with proper Vouchers, from such as you trusted to lay out such large Sums of Money for you, it is manifest, that however upright you may be yourself, yet you was liable to be greatly imposed upon and defrauded by them.

YOU ask us, "if the Account of the Society for propagating the Gospel is more particular than yours?" We answer, there is no Need it should, because their Charter directs the Society to give an annual Ac­count to the Lord Chancellour, the Lord chief Justice of the King's Bench, and the Lord chief Justice of the Common Pleas, or any two of them, of the several Sums of Money by them received and laid out, and of the Management and Disposition of the Revenues of the Corporation. ^* This we suppose is punctually done every Year; and we believe you [Page 42] will not call it in Question. For how hardly soever you have been disposed to think and speak of Ministers of Religion, we don't remember you have ever discovered any uncharitable Tho'ts of Ministers of State, or Justice.

You go on and ask, ‘if we ourselves would be more particular, sup­posing an Account of what hath been received and disbursed for Har­vard College, should ever be required at our Hands?’—We answer, Yes. Our constant Method on every Audit Day, is to require of our Treasures an exist Account of all Receipts and Disbursments since the last Audit, together with sufficient Vouchers for all Disbursments.

You observe neat, P. 14. ‘that we seem as much to dislike, and think ourselves as much bound to bear Testimony against the Manner of your Preaching, as against the Man himself, and that in two Re­spects.—First, as it is Extempore Preaching, which we think by no Means proper, forasmuch as it is impossible that a Man should manage any Argument with that strength, or any Instruction with that clear­ness in an Extempore Manner, as he may with Study and Meditati­on?—But, Gentlemen (say you) does extempore Preaching exclude Study and Meditation?’ We answer, Yes. By Extempore Preaching, we intended, as you might easily have perceived, taking no Tho't before­hand what you should say; as Mr. Barber, whom you have entrusted with the spiritual Affairs of your Orphan House, declared, long before you car­ried him thither, that he had laid aside all Study, and Fore tho't of what he should deliver in his publick Speeches to the People. ^*

THIS Manner of Preaching, we have observed to be attended gene­rally with a very frequent Repetition of much the same Things, and so to be an unlikely Way to declare the whole Counsel of God. And we think that in this Way the Preacher offers what cost him nothing, and therefore that it is a most lazy Manner of Preaching; that it is little in­structive to the Mind, and still less cogent to the reasonable Powers.—Nor have you offered any Thing to give us better Apprehensions of Extempore Preaching in this Sense. But if by Preaching Extempore, you only mean Preaching without Notes, and not Preaching without Study and Meditation, you could not but be sensible that we had no Controversy with you for that; for we expresly oppose the Extempore Preaching we condemn, to Preaching with Study and Meditation, and not to Preaching with Notes. You therefore take pains to justify what we never condem­ned, [Page 43] when you tell us, that ‘ Timothy, you believe, was an Extempore Preacher,’ that is, that he preached without Notes; ‘that this is [...] Preaching which God hath much honoured; and that you have gene­rally observed, that Extempore Preachers are the most servent laborious Preachers; and that you believe it costs them as much, if not more close and solemn Tho't, as well as Faith and Confidence in God, as preaching by Notes.’

How could you imagine, [...], that when we said, ‘Mr. Whitefield evidently shows, that he would have us believe his Discourses are Ex­tempore,’ all we intended was, that he would have us believe his Dis­courses are without Notes? Does not every Man who hears you preach, see this plainly enough, without your saying or doing any Thing on pur­pose to make him believe it? We think, Sir, you could not be weak enough your self (whatever some of your Readers may be) to imagine, that this was what we meant. The Thing we blame you for, is not, shewing that you would have us believe that your Discourses are without Notes; but that they are without Study and Meditation. For there are several Passages in your Journals, which look as if you would have us believe, that you frequently do like Mr. Barber, the Superintendent of the spiritual Affairs of your Orphan House, who declared, ^† that ‘He depen­ded wholly on the immediate Directions of the Holy Ghost, and that it was given him in that Hour, from Time to Time, what he should speak.’ How much does it look this Way, when you tell us, N. E. Journal, P. 70. ‘when I left my Lodgings, I had fixed on, and folded down a particular Text, but when I came near the Meeting-House, I found it much impressed upon my Heart, that I should preach upon our Lords Conference with Nicodemus.’ And again, elsewhere, ‘The Lord gave me the Text I preached on, just before the Meeting, directed me to a Method as I was going up the Pulpit Stairs; and enabled me to discourse with an uncommon Clearness, Freedom, and Power.’ ^* These Passages certainly look pretending to much more than preaching without Notes.

IT is easy to conceive, that a Minister who uses himself to preach with­out Notes, especially if he be an Itinerant, who frequently removes from Place to Place, may have a considerable Number of well studied Sermons in his Mind, and may be equally able at any Time, with the ordinary Help of God, to preach one or another of them as he sees any special [Page 44] Reason for it, or as God may incline his Heart. And if he is in doubt at any Time, which of these Sermons he shall do best to preach, we shall be far from blaming him, if he lift up his Heart in secret to God for Di­rection. But if in such a Case, he should pray in publick, before Sermon, that God would direct him to a Subject, or should tell the People after­wards, that ‘when he left his Lodgings, he had fixed upon, and folded down a particular Text, but when he came near the Meeting-House, he found it much impressed upon his Heart that he should preach upon another Text;’ and that he did accordingly; it is evident that such a Management would naturally tend to make People believe, that he en­tertained them with a Discourse which he never meditated or studied be­fore; and would be very contradictory to that Simplicity and godly Sincerity which every Christian, and much more every Minister, ought to maintain.—Now, Sir, you can easily tell us, whether the two Dis­courses referred to in the Journals above recited, were such as you had meditated and studied before, or whether they were such as you had not. If you say, that they were such as you had meditated and studied before, we shall be glad to know how you excuse yourself from deluding the People, in a very criminal Manner, by inserting such Passages in your Journal: But if you say, that these were Sermons which you had never meditated and studied before, then you acknowledge, that you sometimes practise that extemporaneous Way of Preaching which we condemn, and which you yourself have not attempted to justify. For we think, all you plead for in your Answer to us, is only preaching without Notes, which we never found Fault with, and not preaching without Study and Meditation, which is the Thing we condemn.

You go on and tell us, P. 15. ‘We often see that those who preach by Notes, and write too, as may be supposed, with Study and Me­ditation, are guilty of as rash Expressions, and vent as dangerous Er­rors, as those, who, you say, preach either without Study or Medita­tion.’—To which we answer, that if a Man's settled Principles are corrupt, it will be no Wonder if his preaching is so too, whether it be with or without Study and Meditation. But if a Man's Principles are found, we believe you yourself will not deny, that he will be in less Danger of "rash Expressions, and of venting dangerous Errors," if he preaches with Study and Meditation, than if he preaches without.

You next observe, that ‘what the dangerous Errors are that have been vented, in your Extempore Discourses, we have not tho't proper to specify; unless it be, that once or twice, thro' Mistake, you said, [Page 45] that Christ loves unregenerate Sinners with a Love of Complacency; and that God loves Sinners, as Sinners.’—These you acknowledge were ‘ unguarded Expressions; but say, I recalled them publickly, as soon as I was made sensible of my Mistake, and I think too, before your Testimony against me was published.’—We answer, that several of the unguarded Expressions in your Sermons, when you was here be­fore, have been taken proper Notice of by others; that the two Ex­pressions which we specified, we had heard of your using two or three Times; and that you had been taxed with them by a certain Gentleman, more than a Fortnight before our Testimony was written; and yet we could hear of no publick Retractation. And in the hearing of the Gentleman who told you of them in private, you declared, that you al­ways said so, and made no Acknowledgement that you had erred in so doing. From these Things laid together, we tho't we had just Reason to fear, that the Expressions were much worse than unguarded ones; and that your ‘bowing to the Gentleman, and thanking him for his kind Information,’ looked more like an Artifice to avoid a Dispute, than like an Acknowledgement of any Error.

BUT it is a singular Pleasure to us, that we are now able to declare, that quickly after our Testimony was published, we were credibly infor­med, that you publickly retracted those unhappy Expressions; and that in your Answer you agree with us in saying, that ‘if they were not unguarded Expressions, they must be a thousand Times worse; for we cannot look upon them as much less than Blasphemy.’—We hope, Sir, we shall always be much more ready to publish your Christian Acknowledgements, than to speak of the Errors of your Conduct or Preach­ing, which nothing but a Sense of Duty could have extorted from us.

LASTLY, you observe, P. 16. that ‘we say, we think it our Duty to bear our strongest Testimony against that itinerant Way of preach­ing, which this Gentleman was the first promoter of among us, and still delights to continue in.’ For if we had nothing against the Man, either as an enthusiastick, an uncharitable, slanderous or delusive Person; yet we apprehend this itinerant Manner of preaching to be of the worst and most pernicious Tendency.

NOW by an Itinerant Preacher, we have said, ‘we understand one that hath no particular Charge of his own, but goes about from Coun­try to Country, or from Town to Town in any Country, and stands ready to preach to any Congregation that shall call him to it. And such an one is Mr. Whitefield.’—We have further observed, ‘that [Page 46] it is but trifling for him to say (as we hear he hath) that he requires, in order to his preaching any where, that the Minister should also in­vite him to it; for he knows the Populace have such an Itch after him, that when they generally desire it, the Minister (however diverse from theirs his own Sentiments may be) will always be in the utmost danger of his People's quarrelling with him, if not departing from him, should he not consent to their impetuous Desires. And that where an Itinerant Preacher hath something in his Manner that is very taking with the People, he hath it in his Power, as we have late­ly unhappily seen, to raise them to any Degree of Warmth he plea­ses, whereby they stand ready to receive almost any Doctrine he is pleased to broach: That this hath been the Case as to all the itine­rant Preachers who have followed Mr. Whitefield's Example, and thrust themselves into Towns and Parishes, to the destruction of all Peace and Order; that hereby they have, to the great Impoverish­ment of the Community, taken the People from their Work and Bu­siness, to attend their Lectures and Exhortations, always fraught with Enthusiasm, and other pernicious Errors: In fine, that from hence the People have been ready to despise their own Ministers, and their Usefulness among them, in too many Places, hath been almost destroyed.’

To these Mischiefs of the Itinerant Preaching, introduced by you a­mong us, which we have seen and felt so uncomfortably, you say nothing at all, but pass over them in profound Silence. From whence it looks as if the Destruction of Peace and Order, tho' the Kingdom of God be Righteousness and Peace, as well as Joy in the Holy Ghost ^*; that the tak­ing People from their Work and Business, to attend publick religious Exercises, much oftner than the Word of God requires or allows; that the Propagation of Enthusiasm and Errors, which your Way of itinera­ting, without ever offering yourself to any previous Examination by the standing Ministry, opens a wide and effectual Door for; and that the rendering of the standing Ministry, tho' uncorrupt in Doctrine, and un­blameable in Life, the Objects of their People's Contempt and Abhor­rence, and so utterly destroying their Usefulness: All these Things seem to be of too little Weight with you, to deserve one Syllable of an Answer.

[Page 47] BUT tho' you say nothing to these, yet you "own our Charge," that you are such an Itinerant Preacher as we have described, and ‘declare yourself willing to put the Case on the same Issue as we do, namely, that if there was any Thing leading to this manner of Management in the Directions and Instructions given, either by our Saviour or his Apostles, we ought to be silent; and so would a Man of any Mo­desty, if (on the other Head) there be nothing in the New Testament leading to it.’ To which we added, ‘Surely Mr. Whitefield will not have the Face to pretend he acts now as an Evangelist. For the Duty of that Officer certainly was not to go preaching of his own Head from one Church to another, where Officers were already settled, and the Gospel fully and faithfully preached.’ You answer, P. 16th. ‘Indeed, Gentlemen, I do, [pretend to act as an Evangelist] if by an Evangelist you mean, what the Scripture, I presume, means, viz. one that hath no particular Charge of his own, but goes about from Coun­try to Country, or from Town to Town in any Country, and stands ready to preach to any Congregation that shall call him to it.’

HOW could you imagine, Sir, that this is what we mean by an Evan­gelist, when it is our Description of the Itinerant Preacher, whom we condemn? Would you perswade the People, that we condemn one of these sorts of Officers, whom our ascended Saviour gave, for the perfect­ing of the Saints, for the Work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the Body of Christ ^*? Have we not plainly intimated, that we think there is "nothing in the New Testament leading to such a Management," as that of the Itinerant we have described?—Well, but whatever we mean, "you presume this is what the Scripture means by an Evangelist." For say you, ‘does not that general Commission given by our Lord to his Apostles, Go ye into all the World, and preach the Gospel to every Creature, authorize the Ministers of Christ, even to the End of the World, to preach the Gospel in any Town and Country, tho' not of their own Head, yet whenever or wherever Providence should open a Door, even tho' it should be in a Place where Officers are already settled, and the Gospel is fully and faithfully preached? This, I humbly apprehend, is every Gospel Minister's indisputable Priviledge.’—But how does this arguing prove, that you now act as an Evangelist, according to the Scripture Meaning of the Word, namely an Officer distinct from an Apostle, Prophet, Pastor or Teacher, which is what you [Page 48] ought to have proved, if you could? Does that general Commission given by our Lord to his Apostles, Go ye into all the World and preach the Gospel to every Creature, prove, that a Man who hath no particular Charge of his own, but goes about from Country to Country, or from Town to Town in any Country, and stands ready to preach to any Congregation that shall call him to it, is neither Apostle, Prophet, Pastor nor Teacher, but indeed an Evangelist, according to the Scripture Mean­ing of the Word? Or if we should grant, that it is the indisputable Priviledge of every Gospel Minister, to preach the Gospel in any Town and Country, not of his own Head, but whenever or wherever Providence shall open a Door, even tho' it should be in a Place where Officers are already settled, and the Gospel is fully and faithfully preached; will it thence follow, that it is the Duty or the indisputable Priviledge of every Minister of the Gospel, to do as you have done? who have of your own Head, so far as yet appears to the World, thrown up your Pastoral Relation to the Flock, over which the Holy Ghost had made you an Over­seer, and whom you had been charged to take Heed to and feed, as ever you would consult the Safety of your own Soul; and who instead of waiting for Providence to open a Door, travel from Town to Town, and from Country to Country, pushing at every Door, and encouraging the People to do so too, that it may be burst open, and Way be made for you to enter into other Men's Labours, where Officers are already settled, and the Gospel is fully and faithfully preached. Did Timothy or Titus, or any other of whom you read in the New Testament, do the Work of an Evangelist after this Manner? We find that Timothy, not of his own Head, but by Order from the inspired Apostle Paul, abode at Ephesus, to charge some who taught other Doctrines, and gave Heed to Fables and endless Genealogies, ^* that they should do so no more. And we find Titus left in Crete by the same Apostle, that he should set in Order the Things which were wanting, and ordain Elders in every City ^†, as the Apostle had appointed him. But where do you find any Evangelist in the New Testament, without Command from the holy Ghost immediate­ly, or Direction from an inspired Apostle, going of their own Heads from Country to Country, or from Town to Town, where Officers were already settled, and the Gospel fully and faithfully preach'd, to let the People know, that if they lusted to heap to themselves Teachers, having itching Ears, (notwithstanding the Danger which God hath threatned to [Page 49] People of such a Temper) they stood ready to preach to any Congrega­tion, or Part of a Congregation that should call them to it? We are very sure, that this does not appear to be the Work of an Evangelist, from that general Commission given by our Lord to his Apostles, Go ye into all the World, and preach the Gospel to every Creature. And much less does it appear from that Commission, to be the indisputable Priviledge of every ordinary Gospel Minister to do so; tho' he hath had a particular Flock committed to his Care (as you have) and been charged to take Heed to himself, and to all the Flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath made him an Overseer, to feed the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own Blood. ^* If that general Commission given by our Lord to his Apostles, Go ye into all the World, and preach the Gospel to every Creature, made it the indisputable Priviledge of every ordinary Gospel Minister to do as you have done, to what Purpose did the Apostles ordain Elders in every Church? as we read they did, Acts 14. 23. since, notwithstanding the solemn Charge given these Elders, to take Heed to and feed all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers, they might, whenever they pleased, leave that Flock to take Care of its self, and wander from Town to Town, and from Country to Country, where Officers were already settled, and the Gospel fully and faithfully preached; and might thrust themselves into other Men's Labours, and boast themselves in another Man's Line, of Things made ready to their Hands. Are the People of New-England willing that every one of their Ministers should claim it as his indisputable Priviledge to do so? to leave them when he pleases, and go where he pleases, and try how far he can insinuate himself into the Affections of other People and Chur­ches? If they would not approve such a Conduct in their own Ministers, let them put it seriously to their Consciences, whether they have done as they would others should do to them, when they have so much encouraged you, and others who have followed your Example, in such a Practice?

BUT perhaps some will say, that you had Reasons for leaving your Flock at Savannah, and going from one Town and Country to another, to offer your Service to preach where the Gospel is fully and faithfully preached already, which other Ministers cannot plead; and therefore you might do what others may not. Would to God that most who have followed your Example, had been of this Mind, and kept at Home. However, to say thus, is to contradict your Principle, that it is the indis­putable [Page 50] Priviledge of every Minister of the Gospel to do so.—But waving this, let us see what your special Reasons were, that we may know whether they will bear scanning.—Now for these, till you shall find Freedom in yourself to publish that Tract, which you promised so many Years ago, to give an Account how you was induced to set out upon this Itinerant Business, we know not where to look, but into your Journals; in which we think your best Friends, as well as your Opposers, will allow, that you have been pretty communicative; and here we find you saying, Journal from N. E. to Falmouto, P. 12.

1. "That you was resolved to give up Savannah Living, as soon as you arrived at Georgia," because a Parish and the Orphan House together were too much for you.—Upon which we remark, that at the same Time that you left the Parish, you left the Orphan House also, contrary to the Expectations of them, who contributed to the Support of it; and have never seen either of them since, and perhaps never intend to. For tho' you tell us, P. 22. that ‘had not Illness prevented, you had some Weeks ago departed out of these Coasts;’ yet we find you still here, tho' very well recovered, and have seen you undertake some Journies, which considering the Season of the Year, were much worse than travel­ling towards Georgia, upon which Road every Day's Journey would have bro't you nearer to a more temperate Climate. And afterwards you tell us, that if the Pulpits should be shut, the Fields are open, and you can go without the Camp; we suppose you mean, in the approach­ing Summer. So then, because you found a Parish and the Orphan House too much for you, you gave both up, and devoted yourself to Itinerancy, after you had received 700 l. Sterling upon Supposition, that you intended to take a faithful Care of the Orphan House (whatever be­came of the Parish) in your own Person.—But you go on and say, P. ibid.

2. Besides, God seems to shew me, it is my Duty to Evangelize, and not to fix in any particular Place.—Upon which we observe, that what­ever it seemed to you, that God shewed you to be your Duty, it seems to us, that he did not shew you how to express your Duty on this Occasion: For instead of saying, not to fix in any particular Place, you should have said, to break away from the Place where you was already fixed.

WELL, if any Man should be so stupid as not to feel the Force of these Reasons for your leaving your Flock at Savannah, and setting out upon this itinerant Business, you tell us further,

3. ‘I had it much impressed upon my Mind, that I should go to [Page 51] England, and undergo Trials for the Truth's Sake. Those Words, the Jews sought to stone thee, and goest thou thither again? with our Lord's Answer, have been for some Time lying upon me: And whilst my Friends were weeping round me, St. Paul's Words darted into my Soul, what mean you to weep and break my Heart? I am willing not only to be bound, but to die for the Lord Jesus.’ ^*—If from these Things you concluded your "Call clear," as you speak a litle after ^†, to leave your Flock and Orphan House, and go to England, Wales, Scotland, &c. upon your Itinerant Business; this was another In­stance of what we charged you with, P. 7. of our Testimony, namely, ‘applying the Historical Parts of Scripture to yourself, and your own Affairs, in a most enthusiastick Manner.’ For how could the Apostle Paul's willingness to be bound, and to die for the Lord Jesus; or how could the Wonder of the Disciples, at their Lord's proposing to go again so soon, to the Place where he was lately in Danger of being stoned, teach you, that it was your Duty to leave the Flock which you had been charged to take heed to, and feed, and the Orphan House, which you had just received 700 l. Sterling, upon Supposition that you would take a personal Care of it; and that you should go about as an Itinerant, from one Country and Town to another? Had you not rather great Reason to fear, that the Impression upon your Mind to go to England, was a Sug­gestion of the wicked one? Especially, since it was set on by Passages of Scripture darted into your Mind, which were nothing in Reality, and but little, so much as in Sound, to the Purpose? How like was this Case to the Management of the Devil, when he tempted our blessed Saviour to cast himself down from a Pinnacle of the Temple, because it is Written, He shall give his Angels Charge concerning thee, and in their Hands shall they bear thee up, lest at any Time thou dash thy Foot against a Stone? Math. 4. 6. The principal Difference between that Case and [...] seems to be in this, that the Text which the Devil urged our Saviour with, was much less impertinent, than those which were darted into your Mind, or lay upon it. For that was a real Promise, tho' wickedly abused and misapplyed; whereas these were neither Promises, nor Precepts, but on­ly Historical Passages, which nothing but a warm Imagination, or a wicked Suggestion could make you think were any Arguments in your Case. And are there not two very obvious Reasons for which the Tempter [Page 52] might dart these Texts of Scripture into your Mind? First, to draw you away from your Duty in the Station wherein Providence had set you. And, Secondly, to puff you up with a vain-glorious Conceit, that there was some near Resemblance between you and the holy Apostle, or even our blessed Lord himself, and to lead many simple Readers of your Journals into the same fond Imagination also.

YOU go on to tell us, P. 17. You ‘cannot judge that it is being wise above what is written, to give it as your Opinion, that itinerant Preach­ing may be very convenient for the furtherance of the Good of the Churches, if it were under a good Regulation,’—To which we Answer, that we have by sad Experience found it greatly to the Hurt of the Churches, when carried on as it hath been by you, and those who have followed you, without any Regulation at all. When you shall pro­pose to the World the good Regulation which you think this Way of preaching ought to be under, we shall give it the Consideration which it may deserve. Hitherto we have never heard that you have offered any Scheme to regulate itinerant Preaching; but you seem to be design'd to act at absolute Will and Pleasure, till the Mischiefs of doing so are become insupportable any longer; and then perhaps, you will offer your Regula­tions.

You next affirm, that ‘ itinerant Preaching is certainly founded upon the Word of God, and has been agreeably approved of and practised by many good Men, with great and happy Success, both in ancient and later Times.’—But what itinerant Preaching are these Things true of? Unless you tell us this, you say nothing to the Purpose.—We readily allow, that in every Age Missionaries ought to be employed in propagating the Gospel in such Places, and among such People, as have not yet received it; or having received, have corrupted it, with an inter­mixture of damnable Doctrines. And yet, even in this Case, we think Men ought not ordinarily to go of their own Heads, but (where it can possibly be obtained) should have an orderly Mission, and be solemnly separa­ted to the Work, as Paul and Barnabas were, when called by the Holy Ghost to carry the Gospel to the idolatrous Gentiles ^*. But what is all this to such Itinerancy as yours, who of your own Head, threw off the Care of the Flock which was committed to you, and are now travelling from Town to Town, and striving to thrust your self in to such places, where (it is supposed) you will allow, that the Gospel is fully and faithfully [Page 53] preached already?—However, if this Supposition be a Mistake, and you really believe, that the Ministers of this Province, in general, or those of Boston in particular, where your Labours have been most abundant, preach any damnable Doctrines, or neglect to preach any necessary Truths, it may in some Measure excuse your Officiousness, tho' it won't much commend your Judgment or Candour. But if you have this Tho't of the Ministers, certainly you ought to deal faithfully with them, and endeavour to rescue their Souls, as well as the Souls of the People, by telling them plainly what the damnable Errors are, which you imagine they preach, or what the necessary Truths which you think they neglect. Till you do this, we must charitably suppose, you think, that they preach the Gospel fully and faithfully. And then, you are itinerating after such a Manner, as you have not yet produced any Warrant for, from the Word of God. We have already shown you, that that general Commis­sion given by our Lord to his Apostles, Go ye into all the World, and preach the Gospel to every Creature, will by no Means justify such itinera­ting as yours. Nor do we expect you will ever be able to produce any Thing more to your Purpose from the Divine Oracles. And we are bold to say, that you have not yet, and we are perswaded never will, be able to name the Men of Credit and Character in the World, for Piety, Learning and Orthodoxy, who have either in ancient or later Times, approved and practiced itinerating after your Manner: We find it hard to perswade ourselves, that you can be insensible, that the seve­ral Instances mentioned by you, P. 17. can serve no other Purpose, but to deceive the ignorant or tho'tless. Can you have the Face to pretend, that ‘the Reformation was begun and carried on by itinerant Preach­ing,’ where the Gospel was fully and faithfully preached already? Where were such Places to be found before the Reformation was be­gun? Or if there were any such Places to be found, was it these which needed to be reformed, and not such as were overspread with Popish Darkness, Superstition and Idolatry? Or would you make us believe, that the Itinerants you speak of, began and carried on the Reformation, by preaching from Place to Place, to such as were well reformed already;—and by leaving the unreformed to take Care of themselves?—

AGAIN, did Knox, &c. and the good old Puritans, any of them all (excepting such as might be driven from Place to Place by Persecution) ever leave their own Flocks in the Manner you have done, and go from one Town and Country to another, striving to preach in such Places especially, as had Officers already settled, who did not [...] to declare the [Page 54] whole Counsel of God, and who kept back nothing that was profitable for the Church?—And what tho' there ‘are Itinerants sent forth by the Societies for propagating the Gospel, and promoting Christian Know­ledge, both in England, Scotland and Denmark?’ Do not the very Names of these Societies suppose, that their itinerant Missionaries are designed for Places which they think to be destitute of the pure and clear Light of the Gospel?

BUT ‘did not holy Mr. Baxter (say you,) in Conjunction with others, earnestly, and with weighty Reasons, recommend itinerant Preaching, even where the Gospel was fully and faithfully preached, in 1657?’—We answer, not such itinerant Preaching as yours, as we shall easily show, from your own Extracts from him, in so many, and such important Instances, that every impartial Reader will plainly see, that his Example is much more against you, than for you. For,

1. THE Itinerants proposed by Mr. Baxter, ‘were to be chosen by the Ministers of the County, out of the most lively, yet sober, peaceable, orthodox Men.’—They were not to be Strangers, who were so often removing from Place to Place, that their moral Qualifications. Orthodoxy and Prudence could not be well known; nor were they to go of their own Heads, but to be chosen by the Ministers of the County, who best knew them.

2. THESE Ministers were not to relinquish entirely the Flocks com­mitted to their Care, and turn Itinerants for Life, but were to leave their own Congregations only once a Month, and the Ministers of the Coun­ty took Care that another should, in their Absence, preach in their Place."

3. ONE great Design of setting up these Itinerants was ‘to counter­mine Seducers, and hinder the ill Success of Satan's Itinerants.’—It was an unhappy Time, when great Numbers of Sectaries, of many Denominations, such as Quakers, Seekers, Ranters, Antinomians, Fami­lists, &c. &c. turned Exhorters and Itinerants, and over run the Nation; spreading Enthusiasm and Error wherever they came. And therefore it was tho't necessary that some able chosen Men should be sent out, to the Assistance of their Brethren in the standing Ministry, against these Se­ducers. A Thing which may, perhaps, by some, be tho't necessary among us, if the Itinerants and Exhorters, who ran without being sent, in the Years past, and have done such unspeakable Mischiefs to the Interests of Religion, should take fresh Spirit and Courage, from your Return and Continuance in the Country, and renew their Efforts, as several have begun to do already.

[Page 55] 4. MR. Baxter's Itinerants were to send a Letter to the Minister of the Place, and receive his Answer, before they presumed to preach in any Congregation. In which Letter it was signified, that they had no Tho'ts of obtruding their Help upon him without his Consent.—How unlike is this to your Declaration, ‘that the People have a Right to invite and hear? and that if the Pulpits should be shut, the Fields are open?’ As if the People were not in so much Hazard from seducing Spirits in the Field, as in the Pulpit; and as if the Ministers were not as much concer­ned to warn their Flocks of the Sin and Danger of indulging an itching Ear, and of heaping to themselves Teachers after their own Lusts, in one Place as in another.

5. AND lastly, the Ministers who chose and sent the Itinerants whom Mr. Baxter recommends, declare, that they will be so far from being likely to sow any Errors, or cause Divisions, or to draw the Hearts of the People from their own faithful Pastors, that they will be forward to assist them against any such Distempers in their Flocks.—And Dr. Galamy, in his Abridgement of Mr. Baxter's Life, tells us, P. 121. That wherever these Itinerants came, ‘they were to say somewhat to draw the People to the Honour and special Regard of their own Pastors; that how weak soever they were, they might see that the Design was not to draw away the Hearts of the People from them, but strengthen their Hands, and help them in their Work.’—How very different from this hath been your Behaviour, who have told the People of New England, that unconverted Ministers are the Bane of the Christian Church, and that you feared many, yea, most of their Ministers were such? And in this pernicious Practice of filling the Minds of Peo­ple with evil Surmises of their Ministers, and so hurting the Ministers Usefulness, and wronging the Souls of the People, we don't know of one Itinerant or Exhorter that hath followed you, who hath not too exactly copied after you.—

WE think we have now made it very plain, that neither the Text of Scripture which you produce, nor any of the Examples you cite from History, do by any Means justify such an Itinerancy as yours hath been; and that you have greatly, tho' we don't say wilfully, imposed upon such Readers as knew no better, in every one of your Historical Ex­amples.

AND now, Sir, we cannot but express our very great Surprise, that you should go on, and dare to say, as P. 20. ‘This is, and shall be my Endeavour, and was so when I was here last, my Conscience also [Page 56] bearing me Witness in the Holy Ghost.’ If by this you mean, that it is, and shall be your Endeavour, and was so when you was here last, to conform your Itinerancy to Mr. Baxter's Model, (and we can make nothing else of this solemn Protestation) it is altogether unaccountable.

Does your Conscience bear you Witness in the Holy Ghost, that when you was here last, you was chosen and sent on this itinerant Business, by any Ministers who well knew your Peaceableness and Orthodoxy?— Does your Conscience bear you Witness in the Holy Ghost, that you have not en­tirely relinquished the Flock committed to your pastoral Care, but that you only leave them one Lord's Day in a Month?— Does your Con­science hear you Witness in the Holy Ghost, that one great Design of your coming into this Country, as an Itinerant, was to countermine Seducers, and hinder the ill Success of Satan's Itinerants?— Does your Conscience hear you Witness in the Holy Ghost, that you had no tho't of obtruding your Service upon Ministers without their Consent, when you bless'd God for it, that if the Pulpits should be shut, the Fields are open?—In fine, Does your Conscience bear you Witness in the Holy Ghost, that instead of causing Divisions, or drawing the Hearts of the People from their own faith­ful Pastors, you have been forward to assist them against any such Dis­tempers in their Flocks? when you have told the People, that you fear most of their Ministers are such as you judge to be half Beasts and half Devils, the Bane of the Church, &c. If your Conscience will suffer you to give an affirmative Answer to these Questions, which contain some of the principal Articles in Mr. Baxter's Scheme, we beseech you to consi­der seriously, whether such an Indulgence will not more resemble the Behaviour of them, who have their Conscience seared with an hot Iron, than of a Man whose Conscience bears him Witness in the Holy Ghost.

WE shall now dismiss this Head of Itinerancy, having purposely said nothing more concerning it, than you have given Occasion for in your Letter to us, because the Rev. Dr. Chauncy hath written so much and so well upon it, in his Seasonable Tho'ts, and in his Letter to you, that as no Answer to him hath yet been attempted, so we don't expect any tolerable one will be ever given.

WE shall hasten with you now to a Conclusion; only taking Notice, as we pass along, of a few of the remaining exceptionable Passages in your Letter.—You insinuate, P. 20. that ‘some of your Expressions have been made to speak Things, and convey Ideas which you never intended.’ To which we answer, that when you shall have declared publickly, what those Expressions were, and what were the Ideas which [Page 57] you did not intend to convey by them, we shall be very glad of the Opportunity to make all reasonable Allowances. In the mean Time, we assure you, that we are not conscious that we have overstrained any of your Expressions, or affixed any other Ideas to them, than such as will naturally rise in the Mind of every impartial Man who reads them. If you have made use of such Expressions, as convey Ideas which you never intended, you must blame your self, and not us for it.

WE see no Reason, from any Thing you have said, to alter [...] Opi­nion, ‘that you are the blameable Cause of all the Quarrels on Account of Religion, which the Churches are now engaged in.’—It was you, who, by your Preaching and your Writings, first filled the Minds of the People with groundless evil Surmises about their Ministers; and it was your Example in leaving your Flock, and travelling from one Country and Town to another, where Officers were already settled, and the Gospel fully and faithfully preached, together with the Caresses and Applauses you met with for it, which first put it into the Hearts of many others, who would probably otherwise have never tho't of it, to do so too. And these, together with the Exhorters that accompanied them, have every one of them, so far as we can learn, cultivated the same un­charitable Dispositions in our Churches, which you did. And even they, who went so far as to tell the People, that this and the other Minister, by Name, was unconverted, seem to have taken it from you, who have strongly intimated in your N. E. Journal, P. 77. that you then intended to do so, whenever you should come into this Country again. For you say, ‘Never had so little Opposition: But one might easily foresee much would hereafter arise, when I come to be more particular in my Application to particular Persons; for I fear, many, many rest in a Head Knowledge, are close Pharisees, and have only a Name to live.’ You was then taking your Leave of Boston, and quickly going out of the Province; and what you could intend by that more particular Application to particular Persons, whom you feared to be close Pharisees, and from which Application you expected much Opposition would hereafter arise, it is not easy to conceive; unless it was, that whenever you should return into the Country again, you would call such close Pharisees by Name, drag them out of their Concealment, and expose them to the People. And, perhaps, it is only owing to the Opposition which you have seen arise to this extravagant Practice of some of your Friends and Followers, that you have been witheld hitherto from doing, what from this Passage you seem at that Time to have had in your Heart.—

[Page 58] NOW, Sir, since your Preaching, Writings and Example, have been such as naturally tended to lead into all the Quarrels on the Account of Religion, which the Churches are now engaged in, you may very justly be look'd upon as the blameable Cause of them all. Nor will it much alter the Case, tho' some who may have had a Hand in them, are Men whom you never knew. For tho' you are unacquainted with them, yet they are but too well acquainted with your Writings and bad Example. Would not ‘the first Founder of Harvard College be char­geable with all the bad Principles and Practices which any of the Members of that Society have been guilty of since his decease,’ if they had been led into them by the Errors of his Writings, and by his sinful Example? And would not ‘ Luther have been justly charged with all the Imprudencies of them,’ who said they were his Adherents, but were not, and who by their Enthusiasm and Errors so much distur­bed the Reformation; if they could fairly have drawn their Impruden­cies, Enthusiasm and Errors, from his Writings and Example? But Lu­ther effectually vindicated his own Character, and wrote with so much Zeal against these Men, that they soon hated and exclaimed at him, as much as at the Pope. We should be glad, Sir, to see you following this laudable Example of Luther.

AS the Rev. President is personally concerned in what you say next concerning your own and Mr. Tennant's Labours, we suppose he will make the needful Remarks upon it, in the following Pages.

YOU profess yourself, P. 21. ‘a Calvinist as to Principle, and that you preach no other Doctrines than those which our pious Ancestors, and the Founders of Harvard College preached long before you was born.’—We assure you, Sir, that the same Doctrines are at this Day preached in Harvard College, which were preached by our pious An­cestors. We have no Controversy with you so far as you are a Calvi­zist in Principle. And if you had never preached any other Doctrines than those of Calvinism, or of the Doctrinal Articles of the Church of England, we should not have taken any Exceptions at the Matter of your preaching.

YOU had told us, P. 16, that you ‘utterly detest Antinomianism, both in Principle and Practice.’—Upon this we must observe here, since we did not do it in the proper Place, that in your second Letter to the Bishop of London, lately printed and spread among us, you transcribe a long Passage (which you had printed once before) out of the Honeycomb of free Justification, written by one Mr. Eaton. You insinuate, P. 13. of [Page 59] your Letter, that he wrote with Piety, and Judgment on the Head of Jus­tification. And notwithstanding your Zeal and Uncharitableness towards Dr. Tillotsor, and the Author of the Whole Duty of Man, you don't give the least Hint that there is any thing false or dangerous in this Honeycomb of free Justification: And therefore, left your Followers, by your Ex­tracts from the Book, and Commendation of the Author, should be led to read the Book, and swallow all the Poison in it, before they are a­ware, we think our selves in Duty bound to warn them against it, as containing the very Dregs of Antinomianism. There are such horrible Passages in it as these which follow; ‘That an unjustified Man that be­lieveth that Christ hath taken away his Sins, is as clean without Sin, as Christ himself: That after Rebaptization, Men cannot Sin: That God is not angry at the Sins of the Elect: That Justification is meritorious of all the Favour and Blessings of God: That Sanctification is the very Heart of Popery: That there is no more Sin in the Children of God, than in Christ himself; and upon this Ground, God in Justice cannot punish, yea, nor rebuke them for Sin: That the Believer and all his Actions, tho' Adultery, Robbery, Lying, are as clean from Sin as Christ, or his Actions ^*.’

AND now, Sir, could a Man of your Zeal, publish Extracts once and again, from a Book full of such Blasphemies and Doctrines of Devils; describe the Man who wrote it; tell when and where the Book was prin­ted; implicitly commend the Piety and Judgment of the Author, and not say a Word of any bad Thing in the Book, and yet ‘detest Anti­nomianism, both in Principle and Practice?’ But if you hold the Doctrine of this Book, ‘that the Believer and all his Actions, tho' Adul­tery, Robbing, Lying, are as clean from Sin as Christ or his Actions,’ your most solemn Protestations are good for nothing. You may tell us a thousand Times, that you detest Antinomianism, and yet be an Antinomian all the while. The whole Current of your Preaching and your Writings for seven Years together, may be only such as you judge will best serve to engage the Esteem and Affection of the People; and then when you think they are so devoted to you, as to follow any where with im­plicit Faith and blind Obedience, you may tack about, and preach and write in quite another Strain; and yet after such a Series of Prevarica­tion [Page 60] and Lying, if you flatter your self that you are a Believer, you will be as clean from Sin as Christ, in your own Conceit, according to the Principles of that Book.

YOU tell us again, P. 21. ‘I am come to New-England with no In­tention to meddle with, much less to destroy the Order of the New-England Churches, or turn out the generality of their Ministers, or re­settle them with Ministers from England, Scotland and Ireland, as hath been hinted in a late Letter written by the Rev. Mr. Clap, Rector of Yale College.’—You have since received another Letter from that Gen­tleman, together with the Tutors of Yale College, in which we think there is so much Evidence bro't from your own Preaching and Writings, of your bad Designs, that we don't think any Denial of yours will be enough to satisfy unprejudiced Persons of your Innocence. Especially, since you have given so much Reason to fear, that you are of the same Principles with the above named Mr. Eaton.—We shall therefore only say upon this Head, that as it appears from some Writings of your own, and your Friends, but little known in New England as yet, and by a good Provi­dence bro't to Hand at this critical Season, that you have in all Parts of England and Wales, as far as your Interest reached, formed your Follow­ers into Bands, Associations, &c. after the Moravian Manner; and have set over them Exhorters Superintendents, Visitors, and are yourself Grand Moderator over all, when in England, and your dear Brother Harris in your Absence; so we may very reasonably conclude, that whenever you think the good People of this Country enough under your Influence to bear it, you will throw off the Mask here too, and endeavour to reduce us to the same Model.

You go on and say, ‘Neither as I know of, has my Preaching the least Tendency thereunto.’—Can you say so, Sir, of your Preach­ing when you was here before; or of your Writings?

You assure us next, P. 22. ‘Had not Illness prevented, I had some Weeks ago departed out of these Coasts.’ Upon which we observe, that you are comfortably recovered, the Season of the Year is inviting to travel, and yet you are not quite gone, three Months after the Date of your Letter.

BUT you ‘say, you have a Right to preach, and the People have a Right to invite and hear.’—We answer, we have shown you, that you have not yet produced any Warrant from the Word of God, for such Itinerancy as you are practising; and God hath awfully warned the People, 2 Tim. 4. 3, 4. That if after their own Lusts, they shalt heap [Page 61] to themselves Teachers, having itching Ears, they shall turn away their Ears from the Truth, and shall be turned unto Fables.

YOU proceed and say, ‘I desire to be humbled, and ask publick Pardon for any rash Word I have drop'd or any Thing I have wrote or done amiss.—This leads me also to ask Forgiveness, Gentlemen, if I have done you or your Society, in my Journal, any Wrong.’—These, Sir, are all general Terms. You don't acknowledge in them, that you have drop'd any rash Word, or wrote or done any Thing amiss; nor do you acknowledge that you have done us, or our Society any Wrong. Whenever you shall enter into Particulars, and make your Ac­knowledgements as explicit as your Offences have been, and shall reform your Conduct, we humbly hope we shall be as hearty and full in our For­giveness, as you can be in your Acknowledgements.—

IN fine, we think we have fully made out the several Charges in our Testimony and therefore are not sensible that we have done you any In­jury.—These Things, Sir, I have written in the Name, and at the De­sire of the Rev. President, &c. of Harvard College.

AND now, Sir, for my self, I can with great Sincerity assure you, that it hath been no small Grief of Heart to me, to deal with you in this pub­lick Manner: But as these Things have been all made publick by your own Writings, which are read, I suppose, in all Parts of the British Do­minions in Europe and America; and, as I apprehend, you have been per­mitted to fall into repeated, deliberate, most publick comprehensive and pernicious Violations of the holy Laws of God, I cannot perswade my self that any Good could come of private Conferences; but think, that you ought to give Satisfaction in as publick a Manner, as you have given Offence; which I earnestly pray God to incline your Heart to do, and am,