cording to it, is reduced to narrow limits. If it requires him to profess doctrines which he does not believe; or if he judges either the whole, or its principal parts, to be vain, trifling, or superstitious, his assent will be sinful: but whatever other difficulties may be proposed, they should have little influence on his determination.

With regard to the former part of this inquiry, we may remark, that it is confined almost wholly to the creeds, and has no concern in the issue of any disputes about the truth of minute particulars, &c. : approbation and consent is only demanded to the doctrines which our liturgy openly professes, or with which it has a necessary connexion.

But even this part of its character has been sometimes examined too scrupulously: this subject dilated on. A liturgy is not to be rejected for want of an imaginary perfection. But it may perhaps be said, that the difficulties arise not from the want of some supposed excellency, but from real blemishes, which have been observed long ago, and for which remedies have been proposed: this objection answered. In other cases similar to this, men do not perplex themselves with the same difficulties: instances adduced. Design of these reasons is, not to intimate that, of all the difficulties which our adversaries have heaped together, any part remains unremoved; but to convince them that the removal was more than they could rea> sonably demand: this dilated on.

Our articles of religion are not merely articles of peace; they are designed for a test of opinions: reasons for this: he, therefore, who assents to them, must have examined them, and must be convinced of their truth. But their truth might perhaps have been obscured with fewer doubts and difficulties, had men attended to the proper method of interpreting them: this method dilated on: what its limits ought to be, is no part of our inquiry: it is sufficient if we can determine what they are; what difference of judgment is allowed among those, who may agree without scruple in the same confession of faith.

And wherever an article is expressed in such general terms, as will fairly contain several particular opinions, there certainly it is sufficient for him who subscribes, to be convinced that some one of these is true: this enlarged on.

It is sufficient to jus

Custom can take away the force of expressions, or give to them a new meaning: and where the original sense is one, the received another, the subscriber is at liberty to use them in either this explained and dilated on. tify the use of any explanation, that it has been openly declared, and not generally condemned. This variety of interpretations may help to explain the nature and force of that assent which is given to the Articles; to show that it was never conceived to have so much rigor as would exclude all improvements from theology: this enlarged on.

The liberty here mentioned is such, as cannot be precisely marked out, and is therefore liable to abuse: but so are many moral rules, which are nevertheless reasonable and useful.

Another observation on this subject; that not only the propositions to which we assent, but the assent itself may be differently understood. The circumstances of the persons who give it, create the difference: this topic dilated on. On the whole, it appears that, in the approbation we give to the established doctrines, there is much reasonable liberty: recapitulation: concluding exhortation.

DISCOURSE II.

A DEFENCE OF THE SUBSCRIPTIONS REQUIRED IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

1 CORINTHIANS, CHAP. I.-VERSE 10.

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you.

It may be doubted, whether, among the parties, into which the Christians at Corinth were divided, and which the apostle with so much earnestness endeavors to re-unite, there was any distinction, but of names: for though one said, I am of Paul; and another, I of Apollos; or, I of Cephas; we hear of no difference in the instruction they had received from their different masters. The same doctrine which Paul had planted, Apollos watered. And yet it was not unworthy the wisdom of the apostle, to guard his converts against those mischiefs, which frequently arise from frivolous and unmeaning divisions. It is usually of more importance to the peace and happiness of a community, that its members should speak, than think alike: for they, who have learned to confess their faith in the same form, will consider each other as friends, even though they should disagree not a little in their explanations of it; while such, as have been accustomed to different expressions, can seldom be convinced that their opinions are the same.

For these reasons, the wisest and best friends of our religious establishment have long wished, that all the protestants in this kingdom could be united by a consent to the same liturgy, and

the same articles of faith; not a consent forced, or feigned; but given freely and sincerely, notwithstanding some small difference of sentiments about points of speculation or ceremonies. To promote this union, much has been already done by those who have explained, with moderation and clearness, the several parts of our ecclesiastical constitution. But something may remain to be done hereafter. In the mean time some difficulties may perhaps be removed, which have arisen from too rigid an interpretation of our subscriptions and declarations of conformity. They have been interpreted too rigidly by zealots on both sides, with different designs: by some among our friends, lest they should be thought lukewarm in defence of the church; by many among our enemies, that the compliance required of them might appear the less reasonable.

But while both parties have persisted in this rigor, both have suffered by it. The dissenters have been rendered obstinate, in matters perfectly insignificant. They continue to debase religion with those frivolous disputes, which had been long ago forgotten, if it had not been supposed necessary for every man to determine them, before he could assent to our liturgy. Among us, some few examples have been known of honest, but mistaken men, who, though educated for the ministry, have refused to comply with the terms of admission into it. Others perhaps there are, not less unhappy, who, having neither understanding to clear their doubts, nor courage to own them, are prevailed on by worldly motives to assent without conviction. It may enable us to remove some of their scruples, and vindicate our church which has imposed, and ourselves who have submitted to, these conditions, if we observe carefully their nature and extent, and examine how far our opinions are restrained by them. Such an inquiry, when confined to a discourse of this kind, must be very general: but a very general inquiry will be sufficient to show, that great liberty is left for a difference of judgments, in matters either not plain or not important; so great indeed, that one might reasonably hope it would extend to every man, whose principles are not destructive of our church or nation.

I will not enter here into any debate with those, who, calling themselves servants of Jesus Christ, and members of the ca

tholic church, assert their freedom from all human impositions, and will not submit to any terms of communion; like him, who refused to be made a citizen of Athens, because he was already a citizen of the world. Should a man adhere to this principle, he could never join in any public worship. Not only the times, and places, and ceremonies of it, but the words also, must either be appointed by common consent, or chosen by him who presides in each congregation; and that conscience must be strangely perverse, which can submit to the directions of a single person, and not to the authority of the public. I shall therefore presume, that a liturgy may be prescribed: and if it is prescribed, it is plainly necessary, that such as are appointed to officiate publicly, should conform to it; and he who can honestly conform, may honestly declare his resolution to do so. Thus the inquiry, which a man is obliged to make, before he can assent to the use of our liturgy, and promise to officiate himself according to it, is reduced to narrow limits. If it requires him to profess doctrines which he does not believe; or if he judges either the whole, or its principal parts to be vain, trifling, or superstitious; his assent will be sinful. But unless sincerity forbids the use of this service, or the main purposes of religion demand another, whatever difficulties may be proposed, they should have little influence on his determination.

To the former part of this inquiry some observations may be applied, which shall be made presently on our articles of faith. Let us only remark here, that it is confined almost intirely to the creeds: that it has no concern in the issue of any disputes, which have been raised about the truth of various minute particulars, asserted, or supposed, in the service, or rubrics. If, for instance, the inquirer doubts, whether Luke the physician was also the evangelist; or knows, that, after all the corrections of the ablest astronomers, the rules for finding Easter are not perfectly consistent; these will be no reasons against his conformity. To give a title to a saint or a king, which perhaps might not properly belong to him, or to celebrate a festival rather according to the decree of a pope than a council, will hardly disgust a man of the nicest conscience, unless it is supposed to contain a declaration of his judgment; but his assent