SECTION I. The QUESTION stated.

THE author of the following pages de­sires to have what he disputes about, relative to the charter, SOCIETY and their missionaries, clearly understood in the first place. He apprehends there is no ground for controversy as to religious liberty, or the na­tural and legal right which protestants of all denominations have, in any part of his Majes­ty's dominions, to worship God in their own way respectively, without molestation.

NOR is the question, whether any person or persons in Great-Britain have a right, consi­dered in their private capacity, if they think it expedient, to encourage and propagate epis­copacy in America, by transmitting money to build churches here, to support missions and schools, or the like. Whatever our sentiments may be about the church of England, we are not so vain as to assume a right of dictating to them the manner in which they shall, or shall not bestow their charity; or in any sort to [Page 12]controul them herein. This is said with re­ference to people in England, considered in their private capacity, as was intimated before.

AGAIN: The question is not, whether that very respectable Body corporate, the Society for the Propagation of the gospel in foreign parts, are to judge for themselves in what particular pla­ces, and under what circumstances their cha­rity is to be employed, conformable to the true design of their charter. They must, in the nature of the thing, judge for themselves in this respect, if they act with integrity, accor­ding to the nature of the trust reposed in them; which is not disputed. Though as this is a matter of public concernment, in which the civil as well as religious interest of the King's subjects in America is nearly concerned; other people have a right to give their opinion about the manner in which that charitable fund is employed; whether agreeably to the intent of the charter or not; and even publicly to re­monstrate against any misapplications of it, whether through mis-information, or any other supposeable means, in order to a reformation of such abuses, if real. Moreover;

THERE is no dispute, but that the venerable Society have a right to plant churches, to sup­port missions and schools, &c. in many of the British American colonies; or whether this is in conformity to the intent of their charter. No one that has ever read it, can possibly make a doubt of this; or imagine that the Society's [Page 13]care and charity ought to be confined to the heathen slaves in, or the savages bordering on the plantations.

BUT then it is supposed by many persons, that there are some of these American colonies, whose religious state is such, as renders them improper objects of this charity; and conse­quently, that whatever has been done by the Society in supporting episcopal missions in them, is a misapplication of that part of their fund, which has been employed in this way; to the neglect, prejudice and injury of other colonies, the Negroes and Indians, who were unquestionably proper objects of their cha­rity.

THIS therefore, is the main question now proposed for a free and candid discussion; Whether the planting episcopal churches, sup­porting missions and schools, &c. in certain parts of America, particularly in New-England, in the manner, and under the circumstances in which this has been, and still is done by the Society, is conformable to the true design of their institution, according to their charter; or a deviation therefrom, and consequently a misapplication of their fund?

THIS is a question of no small importance: And it can be determined only by comparing the manner and circumstances in which the Society have planted churches, supported mis­sions, &c. in these parts, with their charter it­self. And all who are capable of understan­ding [Page 14]the charter, which is very plain, and who are apprized of the facts and circumstances a­foresaid, may be deemed competent judges of the merits of this cause.

THAT part of the charter which explains the design of the institution, will be produced in the next section. In the mean time it may be observed, that the ingenious Mr. Apthorp has proposed a certain question for discussion, or rather to be "determined once for all," which was probably never thought of before; and is indeed hardly intelligible. It is this, ‘Whether the Society—conform to the de­sign of their incorporation, by maintaining episcopal churches in the settled towns and villages of North-America: or whether they have not misapplied a fund originally limi­mited to the conversion of the heathens.’ ^† This he speaks of as a very interesting question to "the Missionaries and their congregations." Possibly it may be so. But what does the gentleman mean by the settled towns and villa­ges of North-America? Is this designed in op­position to unsettled, or uninhabited towns and villages here? I know of none such: But if there were any, who ever supposed that it was expected the Society should maintain episcopal churches in such, but not in the inhabited towns and villages? It were hard indeed, to confine the pious labors of the missionaries to places [Page 15]without inhabitants!—Especially while there are so many settled towns and villages in North America, Indian as well as English, where they might be useful. But by the disjunction which he makes, it seems as if by settled towns, &c. he meant places inhabited by English subjects and professed Christians; for the Society's em­ploying their charitable fund in order to the conversion of the heathens, is the other part of the disjunction; and so stands in direct oppo­sition to maintaining episcopal churches in the set­tled towns and villages here. But if this is what he means by settled towns, &c. the question seems at best very vague and indeterminate: For some of these towns and villages have all along had ministers of other protestant com­munions in them; others have not. And it was proper, one would think, that the gen­tleman should have let us know which of these he intended. If he meant the latter only; and intended that the society rightly applied their fund in maintaining episcopal churches in them, as well as in the conversion of the heathen, it is allowed; there is no controversy as to this. But if he meant the former also; and that the Society rightly apply their fund in maintain­ing episcopal churches in places where other protestant churches were before settled, and the administration of God's word and ordi­nances provided for, then indeed he opposes us. But, on any supposition, his disjunction is extremely lame and imperfect. And how [Page 16] interesting soever his question may be to the Missionaries and their congregations; yet, as he has stated it, the established ministers and chur­ches of New-England will not probably think themselves much concerned in it. For if the question is determined only in the same loose, vague manner in which it is proposed, it can do little good nor hurt to any cause, even tho' it should be thus determined once for all.

SECTION II. Part of the Charter, with observations up­on it, shewing the true design of the Society's institution.

THE first thing requisite in order to a right determination of the question, Whe­ther the Society have deviated from the design of their institution or not, is to shew what that design was. And to this end an appeal must be made to their charter, granted by King WILLIAM III. in the 13th of his reign, Anno 1701. The preamble of which clearly expresses that design, if considered all together. The whole preamble is therefore here subjoined, without the omission or addi­tion of a single word; only such clauses as are especially necessary to a right understan­ding of its design, are printed in a different character.

THE following observations are submitted to the candid reader's judgment.

1. NOTHING is to be supposed the object, or any part of the object of this charitable and royal institution, but what plainly appears to be really so, from the very words of the char­ter. Even tho' it were certain that those persons to whom it was granted, had, at the very time, some farther views and ends in obtaining it, be­sides those which are expressed, or plainly im­plied; yet the words of the charter itself must determine and limit the sense of the royal Gran­tor, and consequently the legal power conferred on the noble and reverend Grantees, the So­ciety. It was only for those purposes that are particularly expressed, not any private or secret ones, which they might possibly have had in their own minds, that they were incorporated.

2. IT appears that the British plantations, &c. were really the primary, more immediate object of this institution: or the King's subjects. In which term, subjects, may be comprehend­ed the slaves in the plantations, who are the most inferior subjects. But it also appears that the grand, ultimate design of the institution was, the [Page 19] propagation of the GOSPEL in those parts; which necessarily includes the design of christianising the Indians bordering on the colonies, as a principal part of the general design.

3. THIS charitable foundation was not in­tended for all the plantations, colonies and fac­tories indiscriminately; but for such of them only as really stood in great need of relief and help in this way, and whose religious state cor­responded to the description in the charter. This distinction betwixt the colonies, &c. is clearly supposed in the charter itself, by the manner of expression used; particularly those words, "Whereas—many of our plantations;" and— "many others of our said plantations." Had it been said, the rest of them, or all others, it would have materially altered the case. And it is at least probable that some such expression would have been used, had it not been taken for grant­ed, that some of these plantations were in a quite different state with reference to religion.

THIS charity must needs have been inten­tionally limited to those plantations, &c. which were or should be, in the state represented in the charter; in such sort, that the Society had no warrant to extend it to any others, if others there were, whose religious state was materially and essentially different.

4. EVEN amongst those plantations, &c. which were truly the objects of this charity, there is some difference; for they are differently de­scribed; and come under two distinct heads in the charter, viz.

[Page 20] First, THOSE in which the "provision for ministers is very mean:" which are passed over with this cursory mention, as not being the plantations whose relief was principally intend­ed. [And this, by the way, naturally implies that some of the plantations, &c. were at that time supplied with such ministers as are design­ed in the charter, "learned and orthodox" ones: For there is no complaint against these ministers themselves, but only against the mean­ness of their support.]

Secondly, SUCH plantations as are "wholly destitute, and unprovided," &c. And these be­ing the places more especially regarded in the charter, their deplorable and pitiable state is en­larged upon: They are represented as wholly destitute of the "public worship of God;"— "wanting the administration of God's word and sacraments;"—"seeming to be abandoned to atheism and infidelity"—and in danger of being perverted to "Popish superstition and idolatry." Sad state indeed! but one degree better than that of pagan barbarity. And who that reads this first paragraph of the charter, can possibly doubt, but that the relief of these places was principally designed, not only in distinction from those plantations where a tolerable pro­vision was already made for ministers, and the support of God's public worship, but also in distinction from those where the provision was "very mean?"

5. IT is evident that, by "ministers," or as they are afterwards called, "learned and orthodox [Page 21]ministers," and "an orthodox clergy," were not intended ministers of any one denomination a­mongst protestants, exclusively of others. For this it may suffice at present to assign only three reasons: There will be occasion to resume the consideration of this point hereafter, when many others will be given. First, Orthodox mi­nisters, in the charter, stand in direct opposition to Romish priests and jesuits: For it is said, that for want of the former, the latter were the more encouraged to pervert the King's subjects. Secondly, It is not said, that for want of such ministers to instruct the people in the peculiar doctrines, discipline and worship of the church of England, or any other particular protestant church, the Romish priests were thus encourag­ed; but for want of such to instruct them in the "principles of true religion" in general; or, as it is afterwards expressed, in "the christian religion." There is not the most remote hint in the charter, at any controversies sub­sisting amongst protestants; but only at those which subsisted betwixt them and Roman-catholics. The evils proposed to be reme­died, or guarded against by this institution, are those of atheism, infidelity and popery; not the errors, whether real or supposed, of any pro­testants out of the communion of the church of England. It could not even be known from the charter, that there were any dissentions a­mongst protestants; so general, generous and ca­tholic is the language of it; and so far is it from countenancing any party-design. Thirdly, King [Page 22]William himself was bred up in the Calvinistic principles and discipline, quite opposite in some respects to the episcopal; and is generally sup­posed to have retained a regard for the princi­ples of his education all along; tho' as King of England, and Head of that church, there was a necessity of his externally conforming to its rites and discipline. Can it be reasonably supposed then, that in this charter, by orthodox ministers, he intended those of the English church in dis­tinction from those of all other churches in the world; and consequently to brand all the rest as heterodox! For this will necessarily be the con­sequence; orthodoxy being always and only op­posed to heterodoxy or heresy. To suppose that that noble-spirited Prince had any such inten­tion, is quite unnatural: And to say that the Grantees understood the term orthodox in this narrow, exclusive sense, is to reflect upon their understandings as well as their catholicism.

FROM the foregoing observations it ap­pears, that, none of those plantations, &c. if any such there were, in which a tolerable provision was made for ministers, tho' not of the church of England, to administer "God's word and sa­craments," and to instruct the people in the "principles of true religion," or "the christian religion"—and so, to guard them against "athe­ism and infidelity" on one hand, and "Popish superstition and idolatry" on the other, were in any sort the intended objects of this charity. And therefore,

THAT if the society have applied any [Page 23]part of their fund to support and encourage the peculiarities of episcopacy in any such places, they have applied it in a manner not warranted by their charter. And

THIS abuse is so much the greater, if at the same time they have either neglected to support God's public worship in those, plan­tations, &c. which were exactly in the poor and destitute condition represented in the charter; or to propagate the gospel amongst the heathen bordering on the colonies. This, if real, is a double abuse; with-holding their charity from those for whom it was originally designed, and bestowing it upon those whom the charter, by natural and necessary consequence, excludes from it—The truth of these supposed facts will be considered hereafter: In the mean time it will not be amiss to take some notice of Mr. Apthorp's mistakes as to the charter, and the design of this institution.

SECTION III. Of Mr. Apthorp's manner of quoting and representing the Charter.

THIS gentleman having intimated his intention to determine the question "once for all, by authentic vouchers;" (Consid. p. 7.) says (p. 8.) ‘The proposed vindication is designed to convince the candid. To confute the obstinate, and silence the mali­cious, [Page 24]is not in the power of reason.’ From a person who sets out in this modest manner, we have doubtless a right to expect very direct, plain authorities, and great candor, as well as the utmost clearness and strength of reason: For should he fail in these respects, even those who are neither uncandid nor malicious, may possibly remain unconvinced. But in the next page, just after a very heroic threatning (in some lines from VIRGIL) what a severe and de­served revenge he would take on some unknown person who, it seems, had provoked him in a news-paper; we find him taking a method to accomplish his grand design of vindicating the Society, so as to convince all but the uncandid and malicious, which does not seem the best adapted to this end: And that is, mis-quoting the charter. He there undertakes to give the words of the charter, which, he says, "thus expresses the design of their" [the So­ciety's] "institution;" and then goes on with the usual sign or mark of a quotation. Nor, indeed, do I accuse the gentleman of inserting, as from the charter, any words that are not in it. But whoever compares his quotation (p. 9.) with the charter itself, or only with the pream­ble as it is quoted verbatim in the preceeding section, will find the following particulars true: —That he has taken the liberty to transpose some clauses, and wholly to leave out others, without giving the least notice of it to his rea­der in the usual way, by a blank or —; and also that he has thus omitted clauses which are [Page 25]very material, in order to ascertain the true sense of the charter. For he has intirely dropped the following clause—"and seem to be adandoned to atheism and infidelity"—and these also—"divers Romish priests and jesuits are the more encouraged to pervert and draw over our loving subjects to popish superstition and idolatry;" misplacing the intermediate clause concerning "learned and orthodox mi­nisters." And yet the pointing all along in this 9th page, is as it ought to be, if the charter had been quoted verbatim, without any omissions or transpositions.

NOW, can even the most candid think, this gentleman dealt ingenuously by his readers, in thus mangling and castrating the charter? Or can it be supposed that he thought the clauses thus suppressed, were of no use in ascertaining the sense? The importance of them is quite obvious in this respect; they shew the very sad and deplorable condition of those places, which were in an especial manner the objects of this charitable institution; — that they were not merely destitute of episcopalian ministers, but ministers of any other denomination among protestants; so as to be in a manner abandoned to atheism and infidelity, or in great danger of being perverted to popery. Considered in their proper connexion, and in this view, any com­mon man may easily see the importance of the clauses. But it would have ruined his design, if it had plainly appeared from his own quota­tion, as it does from the charter itself, that the [Page 26]institution was not intended for the support of an episcopal clergy, where a competent provision was already made for a clergy of the congrega­tional or presbyterian persuasion; but where there was no competent provision made for any ministers of any denomination amongst pro­testants, capable of instructing the people in "the principles of true religion," and so, by God's blessing, guarding them against the fatal errors of atheism, infidelity and popery. There was therefore evidently an end to be served, such as it was, by thus mangling and mutilating the charter; whether he had any such design in it or not. For it would answer his purpose much best, to have the true, and very forlorn condition of those plantations, &c. kept out of sight as much as possible, which the royal Founder of the Society had in his mind, and which those omitted clauses so clearly and strongly express; that so people might be the easier induced to believe, that any of the plan­tations where there was no episcopal clergy, were actually the objects of this charity, even tho' they had ever so many ministers of any other denomination, competently supported. And, that this was his intention, there is hardly any room even for the candid to doubt, when his own words just after this extraordinary quotation, are considered. For there he de­duces this as one of his "certain conclusions" from that view of the charter which he had given; viz. ‘That the primary intention of the Society was,—to provide a maintenance [Page 27]for an orthodox clergy; which (as the charter was obtained by the members of the Church of England) must—mean a clergy of their own church.’ ^† It might indeed be naturally expected that the Society, being at least chiefly episcopalians, whenever they sent mis­sionaries abroad, would send those of their own communion. But it will not from hence fol­low, that they were to send and support such, in any or all of the colonies indifferently, where a competent provision was already, or should be made, for protestant ministers of an­other communion. This latter is what the defence of the society requires; and it is a sophism, perhaps undesigned, which runs thro' the Considerations. But of this more hereafter. —If Mr. Apthorp did not perceive those clauses which he has suppressed in so singular a man­ner, to be of any importance, I blush for him as a reputed Scholar: But if knowing them to be so, he omitted them in order to impose upon his unwary readers, and the better to disguise the true design of that excellent institution, I am quite in pain for him as a Christian;— especially as One who is by office, I would hope by example also, an instructor of others in christian simplicity and godly sincerity.

BUT whatever might be his design therein, which is left to his own reflections, he has not left out enough of the charter to answer his pur­pose. Those remaining clauses—"provision for ministers is very mean"—"wholly destitute and unprovided of a maintenance for ministers, and [Page 28]the publick worship of God"—"ministers to instruct our loving subjects in the principles of true religion;—"want the administration of God's word and sacraments;"—which are all descriptive of the pitiable state of the places whose relief was designed by this charitable foundation, are sufficient to invalidate his defence of the Society, without the assistance of the clauses suppressed in such a manner. For if it can be shewn that the Society maintain many missions and schools in those plantations, &c. to which no part of this description is applicable, but quite the reverse is true; the gentleman must certainly consider at least once again, and reason a little more closely, before he will convince the candid and judicious, that the Society have not misapplied their fund. The charter warrants them to maintain no mis­sions or schools in the colonies, but in such places as answer to the descriptions in the charter; in order to make converts to the church of England from christians of other denominations. The charter knows of no distinction amongst christians, except that of protestants and papists: Its grand object, a truly glorious one, is, to promote christianity, con­sidered in opposition to atheism, infidelity and popery; not episcopacy and the liturgy of the church of England, in opposition to presbyte­rianism, &c. Tho' if the profession of christia­nity is upheld, or if the gospel is propagated at all, it is readily acknowledged that this must be done in some particular way, mode or form. And [Page 29]when episcopalians do any thing to these ends, it is to be expected that they will do it in that way, mode or form, which themselves most approve. Neither is this the thing objected against in the present argument; but, the So­ciety's turning their arms, as it were, against other protestants; and expending a great pro­portion of their monies in supporting a party.

SECTION IV. Of some other Things tending to explain and confirm the Sense of the Charter, and the design of the Institution aforesaid.

I. THE name itself by which this respec­table corporation is distinguished and known, is agreeable to the spirit of the charter as before explained: The Society for the propagation of the GOSPEL, &c. From this name or title any one would naturally con­clude, that if heathens and barbarians were not the more immediate objects of the charitable in­stitution, but only the more remote; yet it had for its object people in very deplorable circum­stances at best; such as were in a manner desti­tute of God's word and sacraments, or the means of grace. It would never enter into any one's heart to conceive, that any part of its design was, the building up any one protestant church on [Page 30]the ruins of others. Thus the name of the So­ciety, and the charter well agree. But accord­ing to some things which Mr. Apthorp and others have advanced, not to say at present, ac­cording to some proceedings of the Society, it ought rather to have been called, The Society for propagating the church of England, in those parts where the administration of God's word and sacraments is provided for, after the con­gregational and presbyterian modes.

2. THE common seal of the Society, which often serves as a frontispiece to the charter, is agreeable both to the charter and name of the Society. The device is, a sun in the upper part of a circle, shining gloriously on the world; a natural and noble emblem of the sun of righte­ousness; of Him that said, "I am the light of the world." Within the circle to the right, is a ship under full sail; on the prow of which stands a clergyman with a book in his hand, (I suppose intended for the Bible) which he ex­tends to a company of naked savages on the left, who are eagerly thronging to the shore, to meet and receive the blessing. Just over them is a scroll with these words, Transiens adjuva nos; alluding to Acts xvi. 9. "Come over—and help us:" the words of the man of Macedonia, whom St. Paul saw in a vision; from whence he infer­red that the Lord called him "to preach the gospel" to the heathen there. And in the out­ward circle or circumference of the seal, is the aforesaid title or name of the Society. This is a fine device for the seal of such a society, ac­cording to its name and charter.

[Page 31]3. THE sermons preached annually before the Society, in the general strain and tenor of them, correspond very exactly to the noble de­sign of the institution, as before represented. The grand topic insisted on in them, is promot­ing THE GOSPEL; the undoubted doctrines and duties of the Christian religion. The preachers on these occasions seem evidently, however, to have had the heathen in their minds, rather than professed Christians who only needed assistance in order to the support of God's wor­ship and ordinances: In which respect the ser­mons rather coincide with the ultimate than the more immediate design of the institution; and so harmonize rather more perhaps with the seal and name of the society, than with the charter. This is not said with the least design to reflect on the preachers of them, as if they had for­gotten the design of the institution, which is indeed kept in view in those sermons; tho', as was intimated before, the ultimate design of the institution is much more enlarged on, than the primary or more direct. And the grand argument insisted on, to induce good people of all denominations to assist the Society with their charity, is, the common cause of christianity; partly for supporting the public worship of God in those British colonies, where it could not be tolerably supported without such assistance; but chiefly for the sake of the poor heathen slaves and savages in, or bordering on the English plantations: An argument which has been handled with the greatest propriety and pathos [Page 32]in these sermons; and has doubtless drawn some thousands of pounds from protestant dissenters in England.

I HAVE read many of these excellent ser­mons, both the very earliest, and those preached from time to time since; and have many of them now by me: So that it were easy to fill volumes with quotations to exemplify and prove what is here asserted concerning the general strain of them. But I am not willing needlesly to load and swell the present publi­cation, by quotations to prove what, it is taken for granted, no person who knows any thing of the matter, and either has or deserves the least reputation, will presume to deny. But by way of specimen, for the sake of those who may not have read any of these sermons, some extracts shall be subjoined from the late bishop BUTLER's sermon before the Society, 1739: A great ornament of the episcopal order, and of the church of England; the clearness of whose head, the precision of whose language, and the goodness of whose heart, are so conspicuous in all his writings.

AFTER discoursing for two or three pages, concerning the good effects that might be reason­ably expected from these pious endeavours to propagate christianity, he goes on thus—‘The design before us being then unquestionably good, it were much to be wished that serious men of all denominations would join in it. And let me add, that the foregoing view of things affords distinct reasons why they should. For, first, by so doing, they assist in a work of the most useful importance, that of spreading over the world the SCRIPTURE ITSELF, as a DIVINE REVELATION: and it cannot be spread under this character, for a continuance, in any country, unless CHRISTIAN CHUR­CHES be supported there; but will always, more or less, so long as such churches subsist; and therefore their subsistence ought to be provided for. In the next place, they [viz. serious men of all denominations] should re­member, that if CHRISTIANITY is to be propagated at all, which they acknowledge it should, it must be in some particular form of profession. And tho' they think ours liable to objections, &c.—Upon the whole therefore, these persons would do well to consider, how far they can with reason satisfy themselves in neglecting what is certainly right, on account of what is doubtful, whether it be wrong’—^†

[Page 35]THUS Dr. BUTLER, with his usual penetra­tion and accuracy, represents the true design of this noble institution, in its whole view, com­pass and extent. And how cogent is his rea­soning, to induce serious men of all denomina­tions in England to join in, and contribute to­wards carrying it into execution, upon the true original plan? But let me just ask by the way, what force there would be in this excellent rea­soning, to induce protestant dissenters in Eng­land to assist the Society, upon supposition it was a known fact, that the Society deviated very essentially from this noble plan, by applying a large proportion of their fund in supporting a party in America, and undermining the con­gregational and presbyterian churches here? Could it be reasonably supposed, that those of the same religious principles in England, would assist the Society in any designs or endeavours against their brethren in New-England? or in promoting episcopacy here, in opposition to the churches of their own denomination? Or could any preacher on those occasions, who knew this to be fact, with integrity and uprightness make use of arguments of this catholic strain, in order to get money out of the pockets of English dis­senters? I am fully persuaded that the great and good Bishop BUTLER would have detested such an artifice, and even the whole scheme of plant­ing and supporting episcopal churches in divers places in America, had he been apprised of the true state of religion in them.—The foregoing extracts from his sermon, as was intimated be­fore, [Page 36]are given only as a specimen of what is the usual strain of the sermons preached on the same occasion. Tho' I am not insensible, that some of them, especially within the last twenty years, have expressions in them of a much less catholic strain, and quite aliene from the spirit of the charter; an example or two of which may perhaps be given hereafter. But then, it is to be observed, on the other hand,

4. THAT in some of these anniversary ser­mons, all narrow, party designs are condemned and disclaimed in very strong terms; and a zeal for catholic christianity recommended in oppo­sition to every thing of this kind. Thus parti­cularly Dr. BEVERIDGE, Bishop of St. Asaph, in his sermon before the Society, 1706, after commending the zeal of the primitive Christians, says, ‘But then we must take care, that our zeal be as theirs was, according to knowledge —Not for any private opinion, party or fac­tion, not for either side of a doubtful disputa­tion, or for unwritten traditions, wherein men are apt to spend all their zeal, so as to have little or none left for that which is the proper object of it. But as it is said of Phineas, in his great commendation, that he was zealous FOR HIS GOD; Num. xxv. 13. So must WE be.’ ^† Another Bishop of St. Asaph, as quot­ed by Mr. HOBART, ^‡ (which of them I am not certain) expresses his indignation against the church of Rome, on account of the party de­signs and views with which they send missionaries about the world, in the following terms. ‘[Page 37]THEIR missions do not seem to be managed with an apostolical simplicity. THEY settle themselves in nations which are Christian al­ready, and have been so from the beginning. And, under the pretence of converting the in­fidels that are among them, their chief busi­ness seems to be to apply themselves with all their arts to pervert the Christians themselves from their ancient faith; and to draw them over to a subjection to the Pope: The want of which subjection is what they think the greatest error they find among them, and which they zealously endeavour to eradicate, while the Infidels are very sparingly, (if ever) applied to by them.’ Mr. HOBART makes a a pertinent remark to the present purpose, on Dr. WADDINGTON's sermon before the Socie­ty, which the author has not by him. ‘Dr. WADDINGTON, says he,—supposes that some would object, that not christianity itself, but the faith and practice of ONE COMMUNI­TY ONLY of Christians, would be propagated, and in replying to it he says, no such PARTI­CULAR DESIGN is mentioned in our charter.’ ^‡

NOW it is to be observed, that these anniver­sary sermons are almost always preached by members, and printed and dispersed by order of the Society: A principal design of them being, to shew what a noble and generous work they are engaged in; that so-people of all denomina­tions amongst protestants may be encouraged to bear a part with them in it, by their donations, legacies &c. How great therefore must be the [Page 38]surprize of good people on the other side of the water, if they should find, that notwithstand­ing these generous professions of the Society from time to time, and their disclaiming all nar­row, party designs, they had actually been ma­ny years prosecuting such a design themselves in America; a scheme not sufficiently unlike to that which they condemn so justly in another famous society, that De propagandâ Fide; and that they had employed a great part of their col­lections, revenues, &c. in carrying it into execu­tion! That what is here mentioned only by way of supposition, is not so remote from certain fact, as many may think it even from the lowest probability, will be shewn in the following sec­tions—[The Society have, however, all along professed a particular regard for the church of England; such an one as all persons who are sincere, must be supposed to have for their own communion: And nothing which has been said before, is to be undestood as a denial of this.]

SECTION V. Some general Account of the State of Reli­gion in New-England, before and since the incorporation of the Society.

HAVING in the preceeding sections taken a view of the charter, and represented it in its true light, in opposition to Mr. Apthorp's [Page 39]misquotation and misrepresentation of it; and also confirmed that sense which has been given as the true, by the name and common seal of the Society, as also by the anniversary sermons preached before, and dispersed by them, to get subscriptions, &c. It will now be proper to come to some facts relative to the conduct of the Society in planting churches, and support­ing missions in America. And as the principal objection lies against their conduct as to New-England, it will be necessary, in order to set the objection in a fair and true light, in the first place to make some remarks on the state of re­ligion here, before the Society sent any missi­onaries into these parts, and since. This is proposed in the present section. And,

1. IT is well known, that the first settlers of New-England were such as came hither chiefly on account of their sufferings for non-conformi­ty to the church of England. They fled hither as to an assylum from episcopal persecution, se­conded by royal power; which often conde­scended to be subservient to the views of domi­neering prelates, before the glorious revolution. That this was the occasion of their flight hither, appears even from the Society's own publica­tions. Thus in the Account of the foundation, proceedings and success of the Society, published Anno 1706, it is said, (p. 10.) ‘It must be ac­knowledged, that it was the unhappiness of New England and the adjoining parts, to be first planted and inhabited by persons who were generally disaffected to the church by law [Page 40]establisht in England; and had many of them taken refuge or retirement in those parts, on account of their suffering for non-conformity here at home.’ This fact must indeed be con­fessed; and that it was their unhappiness to suffer thus, ought to be confessed also. But, that it was the unhappiness of New-England to be first plant­ed and inhabited by these conscientious non-con­formists to the established church of England, is not so clear a point: Neither is it to be won­dered at, if they were disaffected to such a cruel, persecuting church as that was before the re­volution.

2. IT is no less certain that these refugees were very far from being persons of a loose, ir­religious character. Had they been void of con­science toward God, they would not have suf­fered so much for non-conformity, and fled their dear native country, for the sake of serv­ing him without fear in a wilderness. If they had been persons void of religious principle, they would in all probability have lived and died in the communion of that church, for dissenting from which they suffered so much.—That they were a sober, virtuous and religious set of people in general, is certain: Tho', that they were per­fect, or free from all human errors and frailties, is not pretended.

3. IT is well known that they very early made provision for the public worship of God, and founded a seminary of learning, which has been encreasing and flourishing to the present time. The zeal which they shewed both for [Page 41]learning and religion, from the first, was in­deed very uncommon; and greatly to their honor. The public worship of God, and the administration of his word and sacraments, have all along been provided for in New-England: I mean, in the Province of Massa­chusetts-Bay and in Connecticut; which two may contain perhaps about eight parts in ten of the inhabitants of New-England. In the other two small governments, New-Hampshire, and Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, there has, to be sure, been much less care taken for the support of a public worship. But in the Massachusetts and Connecticut the public profes­sion of religion has all along been very regu­larly upheld, nearly after the same mode of profession. The doctrines almost universally professed in both, are and ever have been, ve­ry agreeable to the doctrinal articles of the church of England. Their external polity, and form of worship, are indeed known to be different; the churches of the Massachusetts-Bay, the principal New-England government, being generally of the congregational perswa­sion, which the episcopalians affect to reproach under the name of independency; and those in Connecticut, of the presbyterian; or at least ap­proaching nearer to the established church of Scotland.

4. IT is farther to be observed, that in these two principal governments of New-England there has been, not only provision, but legal [Page 42]provision made for the support of a learned and orthodox ministry, and of schools; and that, before the Society for propagating the gospel had a being. Particularly in the Massachusetts, there was a law enacted in the 4th of WILLIAM and MARY, for those purposes; which having been nine years before the Society obtain'd their charter, it will be needless to look any farther back for a civil establishment of reli­gion here, upon this occasion. Some extracts from the law aforesaid may be seen in the margin ^†.

[Page 43]5. DIVERS acts, relating to the settlement and support of the gospel ministry here, ha­ving received the royal sanction, our churches seem to have a proper legal establishment. And it ought to be particularly remembered, that the act aforesaid was passed about nine years before the Society's charter was granted. Can it then be supposed that this province, where such provision was made for the settlement, sup­port and maintenance of an "able, learned, or­thodox. ministry," was either one of those plan­tations. intended in the Society's charter, where the provision for ministers was "very mean;" or one of those which were "wholly destitute and unprovided of a maintenance for minis­ters;" so that the King's subjects "seemed to be abandoned to atheism and infidelity;" or were, for want of learned and orthodox ministers to instruct them "in the principles of true re­ligion," in imminent danger of being perver­ted to "popish superstition and idolatry! Cer­tainly the charter cannot in reason be suppo­sed [Page 44]to have had the least reference to this pro­vince, or any other British plantation, where a similar provision was or should be made for the administration of God's word and ordi­nances.

6. CHURCHES and schools have from time to time been founded, and are continually multiplying in New-England, in conformity both to the pious inclinations of the inhabi­tants, and to the legal provision made for those purposes. A competent number of young men have also been educated from time to time in the Colleges of Massachusetts-Bay and Connecticut, for the supply of both. And our ordinations are carried on in a regular, orderly and scriptural way; at least according to our own conceptions: And we have doubtless as good a right to judge for ourselves as to that matter, as the Society have to judge for us.

7. THE people of New-England, particu­larly in those two principal governments of it, are all in general professed Christians. There is no such monster as an Atheist known amongst us; hardly any such person as a Deist. And as to the superstitions and idolatries of the church of Rome, there neither is, nor has been the least danger of their gaining ground in New-England. The Congregationalists and Presbyterians are known to hold them at least in as great abhorrence as the Episcopalians do. And since the revolution, hardly a Roman-ca­tholic, except some few transient persons, has [Page 45]been seen in New-England, till after remo­ving the French from Nova-Scotia, and dis­persing them in the colonies. These are a plain, simple, ignorant people, who have now no Romish priests or Jesuits amongst them; and by whom we are surely in no danger of being perverted from the protestant faith. How much better then, in all these respects, is the state of religion amongst us, than it is even in England, under the immediate eye and do­cuments of the venerable bishops? Where, notwithstanding all their pious endeavours, there are so many Roman-catholics, Infidels and Sceptics, if not right down Atheists! It may be added, that the common people in New-England, by means of our schools, and the instructions of our "able, learned, orthodox ministers", are, and have all along been, phi­losophers and divines in comparison of the common people in England, of the commu­nion of the church there established. This is commonly said by those who have had an op­portunity personally to inform themselves: And a rationale might be given of the fact, e­ven without any reflexion on the church aforesaid.

8. AS to practical religion, tho' we have no cause for boasting, yet, to say the least, we have no cause for blushing on a comparison of our morals with those of the people in England, in the communion of that church: And many vices that are common there, are [Page 46]almost, if not quite unknown here. So that if we appeal to fact and experience, there is much less danger of irreligion in principle or practice, and of Romish superstition and ido­latry prevailing in New-England, amongst the Presbyterians and Congregationalists, for want of learned, orthodox and pious ministers "to instruct them in the principles of true religion," than there is of their prevailing in England: Tho' in the Abstracts annexed to the bishop of Clogher's sermon before the So­ciety, 1714, (p. 53.) there is indeed an inti­mation that the Episcopalians in America are in imminent danger of falling into those errors, for want of bishops to reside amongst them. And should any be sent hither, to prevent these evils amongst the people of that commu­nion, it is to be hoped they will have better success in so pious an undertaking, than the bishops have hitherto had in England—

9. FROM the foregoing faithful, tho' brief representation of religion in New-England, from the time that the first settlers of it were persecuted out of England by the established church, to the present, (I speak particularly of the two principal governments of New-England) it appears that there neither is nor has been any occasion for the Society to sup­port missions and schools here; and that they had not even a warrant for doing so, by their charter. New-England (the two small go­vernments of New-Hampshire and Rhode-Island [Page 47]excepted) does by no means answer to the description of those plantations, &c. in the charter, for supporting "God's public wor­ship" in which, a charitable provision is there­by made.

IF it should be said, (which is the most plausible thing that can be said) that in some parts even of the Massachusetts and Connecsi­cut, the provision made for the maintenance of ministers has been "very mean," and that therefore they come within the true design of the charter; several things may be observed in answer hereto. First, good ministers of JESUS CHRIST, who have the interest of religion at heart, do not aspire after worldly riches, pomp and grandeur. Secondly, the provision for ministers here, tho' not to be compared with the rich benefices in England, has not yet been so "very mean," but that a competent number of learned and orthodox ministers have been found to supply our churches. Thirdly, the government here, which took the support of ministers into consideration be­fore the Society was founded, must in reason be supposed more capable of judging, what a competent provision for them is, in this coun­try, than the venerable Society. But, fourth­ly, if notwithstanding this legal provision, a number of them in some of our poor, small, or frontier towns, have been "very meanly" provided for; (which is not denied) and this is alledged as bringing such places within the true [Page 48]intent of the charter; I will allow the perti­nence and validity of the argument, upon ei­ther of the two following suppositions. First, that the charitable Society have remitted some­thing from time to time to our poor, tho' learn­ed, orthodox and pious ministers, settled in such places, for their help and encouragement; which would have been quite agreeable to the spirit of the charter, and the catholic princi­ples of the royal Grantor, however aliene it might possibly have been from the principles and views of the episcopal Grantees. Or se­condly, if it appears that the Society have ac­tually established their own missions in such poor, little or exposed places only, instead of doing it in our richest and most populous towns, where the best provision was before made for ministers. But if neither of these things can be made to appear, it will be in vain, and indeed a piece of hypocrisy, to allege the "very mean" support of ministers here, as an argument for the Society's applying a great part of their revenue for the maintenance of God's public worship in New-England.

That there was very little, or rather no oc­casion for Missionaries in New-England, Mr. HOBART has very pertinently produced the testimony of the pious and judicious Dr. BRAY, who, before the Society's incorporation, was the bishop of London's commissary in Mary­land. This worthy divine took great pains to inform himself of the state of religion in [Page 49]the colonies, and their various exigencies; of which he published an Account, and delivered it as the result of his inquiries, that ‘from New-York northward, he found very little need of missionaries for the propagation of christianity; and in the colonies of Connec­ticut and the Massachusetts NONE AT ALL.^†’

THIS testimony of Dr. BRAY ought to have the more weight, not only because he was such a leading man with reference to the charitable in­stitution aforesaid, as to have been honoured with name of "the Father of the Society"; but because of the great respect with which I find the Society speaking of him, of his conduct in, and his account of the Affairs of America, in the following words— ‘The Lord bishop of London—did afterwards send over the Rev. Dr. THOMAS BRAY, as his commissary to Maryland; who being assisted—did settle and support several new ministers in that province, and did fix and furnish some parochial libra­ries, and did other public services, of which he has himself given a TRUE and modest account ^‡’.

IT is submitted to the judgment of the im­partial reader, whether the aforesaid testimony of Dr. BRAY, so inquisitive, observing and active a man, is not more than a balance to the testi­mony which Mr. Apthorp produces from the Dean, afterward bp. BERKLEY's sermon before [Page 50]the Society;—"that the likeliest Step towards converting the heathen, would be to begin with the English. The missionaries do good service in bringing them to a serious sense of religion," &c ^†. The excellent Dr. BERKLEY lived a re­cluse, studious life the greatest part of the time he was in N. England; and that in the small govern­ment of Rhode-Island, where there was indeed then but little of the face of religion,—except perhaps among our good friends the Quakers— Besides; he does not speak particularly of N. England, or any part thereof, but of the colonies in general; thinking that the missionaries in them do good service in bringing the English to a serious sense of religion. Which is doubtless true as to some of the colonies: Tho' the peo­ple of the Massachusetts and Connecticut had at least as serious a sense of religion, long before there was a single missionary in them, as they have had since. And Dr. BRAY is express, that in these two colonies, there was no occasion AT ALL for missionaries to propagate christianity: And the Society say, he gave a TRUE account of things in America. So that if they send missionaries into these colonies, it cannot be so much to propagate christianity, as to propagate something distinct from it, viz. the peculiarities of the church of England.

SECTION VI. Observations on the Conduct of the Society in supporting Episcopal Missions and Schools in New-England, particularly in the Massachusetts-Bay and Connecticut.

THAT the Society have chiefly sent their missionaries into those British plantations where they were much needed, according to the true design of their institution; and that they have hereby served the interest of religion in them, is by no means denied: It were very criminal to deny them the praise that is justly due to them in this respect. But, that they have deviated from their original plan according to the charter, in some other respects; and thereby left undone much of the good which they might probably have effected, with the ordinary blessing of God, may perhaps be equally evident from this and the following sections. Most of the following facts are very notorious, even from the anniversary sermons, abstracts, and other pub­lications of the Society; so that they will not be denied.

1. FOR several years, I think about eight or nine, after the Society was founded, they sent no missionary into N. England. Which may naturally be looked on as one argument, that it was not originally considered among those plantations [Page 52]which were supposed to stand in need of their charity ^†.

2. THEY have from time to time, since they began to send missionaries into these parts, been adding to their number, supporting episcopal schools, &c.

IT is also to be observed, that a very large proportion of their missionaries have fallen to the share of N. England; in the two principal go­vernments of which, Dr. BRAY, the Father of the Society, thought there was no occasion for any at all. The gradual increase of the missio­naries, catechists, &c. in N. England, appears from the abstracts to have been as follows, viz.

• In 1718 — 3.
• 1727 — 10.
• 1730 — 14.
• 1739 — 22.
• 1745 — 24.
• 1761 about 30.

I have seen no later abstract.

[Page 53]HOW large a proportion of missionaries, &c. this is for N. England, compared with the other colonies, especially when a due regard is had to their religious state respectively, may appear by the single cast of the eye on the table follow­ing. In the last mentioned year, 1761, accord­ing to the abstract, their numbers in the southern colonies, where they were so much needed, were,

In New-York

10.

New-Jersey

10.

Pennsylvania

9.

N. Carolina

5.

S. Carolina

5.

Georgia

1.

Bahama Islands

1.

Barbados

2.

IT does not appear from the abstracts, that the Society have any missionaries at all in the other W. India Islands, where, as is commonly reported, there is hardly any shew of public worship kept up, of any kind; and where there are so many thousands of Negro slaves in total ignorance of christianity. The true cause of this neglect may be seen hereafter.

3. IT is notorious that the missionaries, in­stead of being sent to the frontier and other poor Towns in N. England, where the provision and accommodations for ministers were the meanest, have generally been station'd in the oldest, most populous and richest towns, where the best pro­vision was before made for ministers; where [Page 54]the public worship of God was constantly and regularly upheld, and his word and sacraments duly administred according to the congregatio­nal and presbyterian modes. This will be evi­dent to all that are in any measure acquainted with this country, from the bare mention of some of the places where the Society support missions and schools; viz. Boston, Cambridge, Salem, Marblehead, Newbury, Portsmouth in New-Hampshire, Braintree, Scituate, Bristow, Portsmouth in Rhode-Island, N. London, Strat­ford, Fairfield, Middletown, &c. I have also understood that there is a church of England in N. Haven, the seat of the College in Connec­ticut; tho' I do not find by the abstracts, that there is yet any missionary fixed there. It is not denied, however, that there arc a few missions established in N. England, particularly in Rhode-Island government, where they might be needed.

4. It needs not to be proved, but only re­membered, that these missions, &c. have not been supported, but at a large annual expence of the Society. The amount of the salaries here, exclusive of books to be distributed, &c. for the year 1761, was about £. 1270 sterling, according to the abstract. The other expences of the Society for N. England being added hereto, might probably make up the sum of £.1500 sterl. communibus annis, for many years past: Tho' I pretend not to be very exact in this calculation.

[Page 55]5. TO those who are well acquainted with N. England, and the manner and circumstances in which episcopal churches have been gathered and founded here, it appears that the Society have manifested a sufficient forwardness to encourage and increase small disaffected parties in our towns, upon an application to them;—in those towns, I mean, where a regular, legal and due provision was already made for the support of God's pub­lic worship. Some of these little parties, or rather factions, it is well known here, have taken their rise from no fixed principle of a conscien­tious dissent from our manner of worship, but from mere levity, petulance or avarice;—from some trifling, groundless disgust at the stated mi­nister; or a dissatisfaction about pews and rates; or at their being under, or likely to come under censure for their immoral practices. I do not affirm positively, that either of these has always been the case, without exception: But, that it often has been, is as well known amongst us, as a thing of that nature can be known. These people being thus affronted and angry without cause, presently declare for the church, without really knowing any thing of the state of the controversy; and apply to some missionary or missionaries, to recommend them to the charity of the Society. And divers of the missionaries have been much injured, (which there is no rea­son to suppose) if they have not been very busy in intrigues in order to foment these divisions and parties, for the good of the church; yea, [Page 56]been at the bottom of them. In which they perhaps thought, they conformed to the true design of that standing direction of the Society to their missionaries; viz. ‘That they fre­quently visit—those that oppose them, or dis­sent from them, to convince and reclaim them—’ They add indeed, ‘with a spirit of meekness and gentleness;’ which seems not to have been so much remembered in all cases, as the other branch of the direction.

BUT from whatever cause these little discon­tented parties have generally taken their origin, in towns where there were learned and orthodox ministers duly supported; thus much is certain, that they have not only been recommended to the Society from time to time, but been en­couraged thereby, and had missionaries sent to them. The number of these humble suppli­cants in a town, have sometimes not exceeded eight, ten or twelve heads of families; and this in towns consisting of two or three hundred families. It is commonly, and I believe truly said, that there are scarce so many as ten fa­milies in the town of Cambridge, which usually attend the service of the church lately set up therein, but about half a quarter of a mile from the College, and from the meeting-house there. What is this but setting up altar against altar? And some there are, who think the principal end, and true spirit of that mission was not ill ex­plained by an episcopalian, who, as is reported, expressed himself thus on the occasion— ‘I [Page 57]don't care for them; we have now got a church in the very munns ^† of 'em.’ It is a known fact, that in some other churches, which, ac­cording to the abstracts, have been represented as growing, flourishing, and increasing in reputation for near half a century, the number of stated worshippers at this day very little, if any thing, exceeds ten or twelve families. These small parties thus encouraged and supported by the Society in different parts of New-England at a great expence, have in short all the appearance of entering wedges; or rather of little lodg­ments made in carrying on the crusade, or spiri­tual siege of our churches, with the hope that they will one day submit to an episcopal sovereign. And it will appear at least probable in the sequel, that this has long been the formal design of the Society; and that it is the true plan, and grand mystery of their operations in New-England.

6. IT is well known to us in New-England, that after supporting and encouraging these lit­tle parties, till in some places they have, by one means or other, become considerable both for number and riches, and well able to sup­port their own ministers; the Society have still continued to pay these out of their charitable fund. The only reason why I do not come to particulars here, is, left it should seem too invi­dious. This conduct of the Society, for some years proved no inconsiderable means of in­creasing the church-party: I mean, till a law of this province was made, obliging the episco­palians, [Page 58]to pay ministerial rates in common with other people; the money levied on them, how­ever, to go to the support of their own clergy. This law seemed to give some check to the progress of episcopacy, and a zeal for the liturgy, in New-England. And if there had been no such act, or the episcopalians had been exempted from all ministerial taxes, as the Quakers are, almost all who loved their money better than any thing else, might in the course of a few years have declared themselves for, and adorned the communion of the church— But this is not designed as a general reflexion on the people of that communion here; some of whom are doubtless persons of principle, and sincere piety.

SECTION VII. The manner in which episcopal churches have often sprung up in New-England, illustrated and exemplified in a letter of the late Rev. Dr. COLMAN of Boston to Dean, afterwards Bishop KENNET; with part of the Deans answer. ^†

IT may perhaps be less invidious to exem­plify some things in the foregoing section, re­lative to the episcopal churches and missions [Page 59]in New-England, by some extracts from a letter of Dr. COLMAN to Dr. KENNET, then Dean of Peterborough, than by giving any more re­cent instances, however notorious. It was in 1712, that the letter from which the following extracts are made, was written by the former to the latter of those worthy Divines.

THE worthy Dean wrote a very obliging an­swer to the foregoing. His letter is dated Sept. 15. 1713: In which are the following passages.

AFTER speaking of the difficulties which the Society were under, in respect of their distance from America, the disagreement of accounts from hence, and expressing some hope that the [Page 64]time would come, when the English in America should be ‘all of one heart, and one way of dis­cipline and worship,’ with several other par­ticulars, the Dean concludes his letter in the friendly and catholic manner following—

NOW, the manner in which episcopal churches have been founded in the Massachusetts and Connecticut, has all along in general borne but too near a resemblance to that represented in Dr. COLMAN's letter aforesaid: And the wor­thy Dean was so just as to express his intire be­lief of what the Dr. said relating to the places which he mentioned; supposing these represen­tations to be some of those plain truths, which too often draw people into controversy and envy. He also speaks of it as the primary design of the Society's institution, to plant episcopal churches ‘in those parts of our English plantations, where there is no settled ministry;’ tho' not exclu­sively of those, where there are ‘good num­bers who cannot in conscience conform to the ways of worship different from the established church’ of England. The invalidity of which plea of conscience, as it relates to the present con­troversy, will be shewn hereafter.

SECTION VIII. That the aforesaid Conduct of the Society is not agreeable to the Letter or Spirit of their Charter.

SUPPOSING the truth of the principal facts represented in the foregoing sections; particularly as to the state of religion in New-England, the number of missionaries, &c. maintained here by the Society, and the places in which they are supported; which I consider as the principal facts, even in distinction from the dishonourable manner in which episcopal par­ties have often arose, been encouraged and in­creased here; (which is considered only as an in­cidental circumstance, not a principal fact, upon which the argument finally turns) Supposing the truth of those facts, I say, almost any unpreju­diced person may easily see, that such a conduct in the Society is not conformable to their char­ter in any one material circumstance, but essen­tially repugnant thereto. The contrast, or the op­position betwixt the charter and such a conduct, may be made to appear in a very few words.

1. IT is allowed on all hands, that one mate­rial end of this institution, according to the charter, was, propagating the gospel among the heathen bordering on the British plantations. But no one will pretend to say, that the missiona­ries in New-England are employed directly in that good work.

[Page 66]2. ANOTHER end was, the maintaining a public worship in those colonies, where the people, tho' called Christians, were ‘wholly destitute and unprovided,’—where they ‘wanted the administration of God's word and sacraments, and seemed to be abandoned to atheism and infidelity,’ &c. But, that this neither is, nor ever was, the true state of New-England, at least not of the Massachusetts and Connecticut, is sufficiently apparent.

3. ANOTHER end of the institution, which is indeed the first mentioned in the charter, was, the benefit and assistance of those plantations, in which, tho' there were such ministers as are designed in the charter, yet there was not a tolerable or competent provision made for their subsistence; or, in the words of the charter, in which the provision made for them was "very mean." Whereas it is a known fact, that in most of those places in New-England where the so­ciety support missions, there was a legal and competent provision before made for the support of an "able, learned, orthodox ministry."

4. THESE three are the only ends of the insti­tution expresly mentioned in, or that can fairly be inferred from the charter of the Society. And consequently, if they have annually expended a large sum here in New-England, not conforma­bly to either of them, this must needs be a mis­application. Whatever they have expended, more or less, to accomplish ends different from these, or such as are not directly subservient to them, has been laid out in a manner not warranted [Page 67]by the charter; and therefore perverted and alienated from the true, important ends of their institution. Let the knowing and impartial judge, whether this conclusion is fairly drawn or not, supposing the truth of the facts aforesaid; which are indeed too notorious to admit of a denial.

SECTION IX. Of Objections against the Reasoning in the preceeding Sections; and particularly as to a learned and orthodox Ministry.

IF the facts aforesaid are allowed, no solid objection, it is conceived, can be brought against the general conclusion as to the perversion or misapplication of the Society's charity; tho' a person who sets himself to invent evasions, may possibly think of a number of weak ones. And the ingenious Mr. Apthorp has been so lucky as to hit upon several such in his Considerations, designed to vindicate the Society against that charge, which has often been brought against their conduct in respect of New-England. One of these evasions has al­ready been hinted at: But it may be proper to speak of it a little more distinctly, tho' briefly, here—It is said, the ministers spoken of in the charter, are spoken of under the designation of "learned and orthodox."

[Page 68]NOW, as to learning; tho' the ministers edu­cated in our young, but growing Colleges in New-England, may not vie with this gentleman, who brought with him the advantageous repu­tation of a considerable Scholar from one of the ancient and renowned British Universities, in which, it is said, he reaped some laurels;—a re­putation which he doubtless merited; yet, as the truly knowing and learned, are generally candid also, it is hoped that he will not abso­lutely deny that qualification to our clergy, in the degree necessary to render them useful and sufficient ministers, provided they are not defec­tive in the other material point, orthodoxy. And, to do the gentleman justice, he seems wholly to wave the former, and to deny our clergy nothing but orthodoxy; in which, other people generally suppose, they are not deficient. After mention­ing it as the primary design of the institution a­foresaid, to ‘provide a maintenance for an or­thodox clergy;’ he subjoins, ‘which (as the charter was obtained by the members of the church of England) must, in all reasonable construction, mean a clergy of their own church.’ ^† So that, there being no such ministers amongst Us, in the sense of the charter, it was incumbent upon the Society to supply Boston, Cambridge, &c. &c. with orthodox missionaries: in doing which, they conform to the original and charitable design of their institution. This is the obvious intent of what the gentleman says upon this head; tho', for certain prudential rea­sons, he did not chuse, in a more explicit man­ner, [Page 69]to monopolize all the orthodoxy in New-England to himself, the other missionaries, and the people of the church of England; stigma­tizing all our ministers and churches as heretical or unorthodox. This is indeed the unavoidable consequence of his appropriating and confining the terms orthodox ministers, to those of the episcopal communion. But, to have reproached us thus in plain words, might have been a bolder stroke than the times would well bear as yet; and so, rather prejudiced than served the cause in which he engaged. This might perhaps have contributed to frustrate the modest hopes which he expressed of great accessions to the episcopal party at Cambridge, in his letter to the Society soon after his mission there, dated Aug. 30. 1760. some time before the church was ‘fit for di­vine service.’ For it is said in the abstract printed in 1761, that Mr. Apthorp had written, that the ‘building of the church was in such forwardness, that he hoped it would be fit for divine service in November; and particular care had been taken to make the structure use­ful and durable, as well as decently elegant; and, in case of future accessions to the congre­gation, it might be easily enlarged; and he had the satisfaction to add, that it already pro­mised to be one of the best supported, and most flourishing churches in America.’ ^† It would doubtless be a great pity that the gentle­man's wishes and expectations should prove abortive, if there is no orthodox minister in Cambridge besides himself, tho' there are three [Page 70]of our congregational churches, as well as the College, in that town.

BUT the following considerations, some of which were before hinted at, (p. 21) will be sufficient to shew that our ministers are not destitute of orthodoxy, altho' they are not con­formists to the church of England; and that the gentleman is a little too selfish, in endeavouring to engross the whole of that precious commodity to himself and his party. Tho' if orthodoxy has the property which an eminent divine of the church of England ^‡ sarcastically ascribes to it,—that of "covering a multitude of sins," I will not deny, but yet do not affirm, that they have rather more occasion for it than those whom they would strip of it, leaving them nothing better than charity to supply its place—

ORTHODOXY, in the commonly-received sense of the word amongst protestants at least, notwithstanding its general etemology, relates particularly to doctrinal points, or articles of faith, as distinguished from opinions about the best modes of ecclesiastic polity, external or­der, rites and ceremonies. To these latter it has no reference in its most common use. And it can hardly be supposed, that a gentleman so well skilled in Christian philology as Mr. Ap­thorp, will dispute this point.

FROM whence it follows, that ministers or churches differing widely in opinion about an hierarchy, discipline, and modes of worship, may yet be equally orthodox; agreeing nearly in the same common faith respecting GOD, JESUS CHRIST, his offices and redemption.

[Page 71]IT is also a known fact, that the ministers and churches in New-England, with a very few ex­ceptions, if any, agree in doctrinal points, and therefore in respect of orthodoxy, with the church of England, according to her articles re­lative to these points.

IT is moreover known, or at least generally supposed amongst us, that our New-England mi­nisters, a very few excepted, adhere much more closely in their preaching, both to the letter and spirit of those doctrinal articles, than most of the episcopal clergy themselves, whether here or in England. And if this be fact, as I am fully persuaded it is, the former are really more or­thodox than the latter, even according to the ar­ticles of their own church. Besides:

BY the same rule that this gentleman and some others deny our ministers the title of or­thodox, limiting it to the "clergy of their own church;" they must deny it to the ministers of the established church of Scotland, and of all other churches, except perhaps that of Rome. For none of them fully agree with the church of England, except in doctrinal points, as we also do; which, it seems, is not sufficient to de­nominate them orthodox. According to which pretence, there will be no orthodox ministers in the world, except of the church of England: And is not this very modest and candid!

DIVERS of our laws relative to ministers, and in which they are designed as orthodox, having had the allowance of the King, the head of the English church, this seems to be a royal ac­knowledgment [Page 72]of their orthodoxy. And is it not somewhat presumptuous for any of the members of that body to contradict their head!

NOTWITHSTANDING those ministers and churches in England, with which ours in New-England very nearly agree in doctrine, discipline and worship, have often been accused by the episcopalians as schismatical, on account of their dissent from the church there established; yet they have not often been reproached as hetero­dox, heretical or un-orthodox in that respect. So far from it, that I do not think there can be a single episcopal divine of reputation produced, or other approved writer on that side within a century past, who has taxed them in a body as heretics, or denied them to be orthodox, on account of their non-conformity. Mr. Apthorp seems to have forgotten that the episcopal di­vines in England, even in their highest flights, have generally distinguished betwixt heterodoxy and schism; while he, it seems, is for con­founding them together, and will not allow us to be orthodox even in New-England, unless we will become conformists to a church that is not established here.

IT has before been observed, how unnatural it is to suppose that King WILLIAM designed to limit the terms "orthodox ministers" in the charter, to those of the church of England; and thereby to brand the ministers of all other protestant churches as heterodox; which were to suppose that catholic-spirited Prince as great a bigot as any of his royal predecessors.

[Page 73]BESIDES: The whole air and complexion of the charter are catholic in the highest degree: There is no hint or allusion therein as to any differences amongst protestants. The grand end proposed therein, is propagating the gospel, the principles of true religion, and the Christian religion, in opposition to atheism, infidelity and popery: And orthodox ministers stand there in direct opposition to popish priests and jesuits; as before observed. It is therefore contrary to all the rules of good criticism, as well as to catholic christianity, to appropriate and confine these terms to the ministers of the church of England, and thereby to hereticate the ministers of all other protestant churches. Nothing can be less conformable to the language, and whole spirit of the charter.

IF this argument of Mr. Apthorp were of any force, it is not easy to see why the Society might not send missionaries into Scotland to convert the kirk to episcopacy, by virtue of their charter, as well as into New-England, to convert us; excepting only that Scotland is not a "plantation, colony or factory beyond seas;" and, in that respect, certainly not within the design of the charter.

THIS point may be now dismissed with re­minding the reader of the reply of Mr. HOBART to some of his antagonists, relative thereto. "If," said he, ‘they think that none but the clergy of the church of England are in a legal sense orthodox ministers, Dr. MACSPARRAN can inform them how that matter was deter­mined [Page 74]by the King in council, in the case between him and Mr. TORREY.^†’ ^‡

SECTION X. The Plea of Conscience, as it relates to the present Question, considered.

BY way of answer to the objection so often made against the Society's conduct in sup­porting missions in those colonies, where the people ‘have the means of religion already, in other protestant communions;’ Mr. Ap­thorp says, ‘This is not universally true: or wherever it happily is true; this brings us back to the claim of liberty of conscience. The means of religion are NO MEANS to him whose conscience cannot use, or does not approve them: no more than Popery or Mahometa­nism afford the means of religion to a good Protestant, who happens to reside in Popish or Mahometan countries.’ ^† Something of this sort has been said in divers of the anniver­sary sermons before the Society: And Mr. Ap­thorp might perhaps take the hint from that ex­cellent Prelate ‘who now so worthily presides over the church of England,’ [I hope he meant in subordination to the King] ‘AND THE SOCIETY ITSELF;’ (Cons. p. 19.) This great Prelate, a distinguished member of the Society, is one of the two witnesses whom Mr. Apthorp summons to bear "testimony" in favor of the Society, after producing that of [Page 76]Bishop BERKLEY, another member of the So­ciety, in this cause. Speaking of whom con­junctly, he says, he ‘confidently rests his proof on the unexceptionable testimony of two most candid and truly Christian Prelates,’ &c. (p. 18.) The testimony of the worthy Bishop BERKLEY has already been taken notice of. The other of these witnesses is quoted by Mr. Apthorp as having given an answer similar to his own, to the objection aforesaid, in the fol­lowing words—‘An objection to the conduct of the Society, is that they have sent missiona­ries to some places in which there were alrea­dy Christian assemblies established and sup­ported. But in the lest exceptionable of these assemblies, there are several things, which the consciences of many (we apprehend, with great reason) cannot acquiesce in; who were not therefore to be left destitute of public worship; especially as our charter was granted in express terms, for the maintenance of an orthodox clergy in those parts.’ ^† So that, it seems, one material point which his GRACE is called to bear testimony to, is, that the consciences of ma­ny people in these parts, cannot acquiesce in se­veral things found even in the least exceptionable of our Christian assemblies, &c. Let me make a few remarks upon the foregoing passage in the Considerations, thus supported by the testimony of this great Prelate. And,

1. MR. Apthorp plainly allows that the peo­ple in some of the colonies have the means of religion already, without the Society's charity, [Page 77] in other protestant communions; by saying that this is not universally true; or wherever it hap­pily is true, &c.

2. IF this is happily true in any of the Ame­rican colonies, I conclude he will allow it to be so in this province and in Connecticut, which have much the fairest pretensions to such a preeminence; and to the proceedings of the Socie­ty in which, the objection principally relates. It is therefore conceived, that it may be natu­rally taken as a concession of Mr. Apthorp, that in these principal parts of New-England, where so many episcopal missions have been supported by the Society, the inhabitants had the means of religion already, in other protestant communions.

3. THEREFORE, according to the reasoning in the preceeding sections, which needs not to be here repeated, these are not such colonies as were the proper objects of that charity: For their state in respect of religion, is essentially dif­ferent from that of the places described in the charter; and for which a charitable provision was made thereby. So that the money expended here by the Society as aforesaid, is not employ­ed in conformity to the true intent of the char­ter: For who can, with the least appearance of reason, say, that the charter makes provision for those plantations, in which the people enjoyed the means of religion already, in ANY protestant communion?—those in which a sufficient num­ber of protestant ministers of ANY denomination were competently provided for, and God's pub­lic worship was constantly upheld?

[Page 78]4. As to the plea of conscience, that there are some persons amongst us, who cannot use the means of religion, which they have in our pro­testant communions; and that to such persons these are NO MEANS, any more than Popery or Mahometanism, &c: If these very conscientious people were as entirely protestant in their senti­ments, as our communions are in their nature, it might perhaps in part remove the difficulty. What there is in the least exceptionable of our truly Christian and protestant assemblies, which should give offence to the consciences of sincere, good protestants, neither Mr. Ap­thorp nor his GRACE has particularly declared: Whether it be the preaching, so strictly agreea­ble in general to the doctrinal articles of the church of England; or the devout prayers, not read to GOD, but dictated by the heart, as in the truly primitive and apostolic churches; or the administration of the sacraments in the molt simple and scriptural manner, without any of those additions which the wisdom or the clergy afterwards invented; or whether it be any thing else, we are left to conjecture; and so cannot particularly answer this objection against our protestant communions, as Mr. Apthorp, or Chris­tian assemblies, as his GRACE is pleased to call them. It seems they both decline giving these the name of churches: But for what reason, it is not easy to say. It is to be hoped, they can form some idea of a truly christian and protestant church, without a King or Queen at its head; without numerous acts of parliament to model [Page 79]its constitution, and establish its ceremonials; without printed forms of devotion; and with­out an hierarchy resembling that of the Romish church, in which one great Prelate presides over the whole, with all the inferior religious orders, the lowest of which are as it were trodden in the dirt;—an hierarchy which, in a word, may be compared to JACOB's ladder, ‘"Its foot on earth, its top above the skies."’

IF there are any persons amongst us, who have no conceptions of a truly Christian church, but in connexion with such things as these, it is not indeed strange that the means of public religion which they might have in our protestant communions, should be NO MEANS to them; or that their consciences should not fully acquiesce in them; not even so readily as they might in Popery. Indeed I have myself heard some epis­copalians amongst us, who were reckoned very good church-men, say, that they should much prefer the communion of the church of Rome to ours; and would sooner go to mass than come to our assembles, if there were here any Romish, and no English churches. This I declare, of my own certain knowledge, and could mention names; and I have divers times heard credible persons speak of some conscientious episcopalians amongst us, as expressing themselves after the same manner: Tho', to do them justice, I do not suppose that these sentiments generally pre­vail amongst them. Some of them may possibly, without going these lengths, have conscientious scruples about the means of religion in our pro­testant [Page 80]communions: But to say, that because there are some things or circumstances attending them, which they cannot intirely acquiesce in, or approve of, therefore they are absolutely NO MEANS at all to them, is at best a very ex­traordinary position. However,

5. IT is readily granted, that great allowan­ces ought to be made for weak and scrupulous, tender, and even erroneous consciences; and for the prejudices of education, in matters merely of a religious nature. And this plea of conscience ought to be allowed valid thus far, viz. That these conscientious people among us, should not be compelled to join in our protestant communion; but left intirely at liberty to worship GOD ac­cording to the episcopal mode, even tho' we may think it considerably less protestant and scriptural than our own. Indeed there are not a few of them, whom we should be far from desiring to see coming to our communion, unless they were much more conscientious in some other respects, than they appear to be— The government here neither pretends nor desires to deprive them of their religious liberty: Tho', by the way, had the government in England allowed our Fore-fathers the like liberty of conscience, they would have had no occasion to take refuge in New-England, from their sufferings for non-conformity. BUT,

6. HOW good a plea soever this of con­science may be for liberty, in opposition to all restraint or constraint in matters purely religious; yet it seems far from a solid one as used by his [Page 81] Grace the Arch-bishop of Canterbury, and Mr. Apthorp, in order to justify the Society in the application of so much of their money, or even any part of it, for the support and increase of the episcopal party among us. The reason is obvious from what has been said before: Their whole fund and revenue are otherwise appropri­ated by their charter itself; viz. to the propa­gating the gospel among the heathen, and to the maintenance of God's public worship in those plantations, in which no competent provision was before made for ministers; and in which the people, for want of the means of religion in any protestant cammunion, seem'd abandoned to atheism and infidelity, or in imminent danger of being perverted to popery. To alienate their revenue from these important ends, under a pre­tence of gratifying some scrupulous consciences, in places where a legal and competent provision was before made for the maintenance of mini­sters, and a public, protestant religion; is a mani­fest abuse and perversion of that charity, even upon supposition that these conscientious people among us were much to be pitied, and really the objects of charity. If any persons in Eng­land, in their private capacity, should think it a deed of charity to advance money for support­ing episcopal churches here, for the sake of those comparatively few conscientious people, to whom the means of religion which are to be had in our protestant communions, are NO MEANS at all, any more than Popery or Mahometanism; [Page 82]they have an undoubted right to do it. But the case of the Society is essentially different in this respect, from that of private persons: They have not the same right to dispose of their mo­ney, that a private man has to dispose of his property; the former being particularly appro­priated to certain uses and ends, from which it may not be alienated to any others, even tho' good in themselves.

THAT argument which Mr. Apthorp quotes from the great Prelate aforesaid;—that "the charter was granted in express terms, for the maintenance of an orthodox clergy" in the colo­nies; cannot be thought one of his GRACE's "invincible reasons" which Mr. Apthorp speaks of, till it is proved that no clergymen besides those of the church of England, can properly be called orthodox ministers, even tho' they ad­here to the doctrinal articles of that church more closely than her own clergy. But enough of this before. And the intelligent reader is now left to judge, whether Mr. Apthorp had reason to usher in his two witnesses, as he does in the following words— ‘To take leave of this po­pular objection with so full a confutation, that it will be disingenuous ever to advance it again; the writer confidently rests his proof on the unexceptionable testimony’, &c. ^† That he does this confidently, no one will deny; but that these testimonies are so intirely unexceptionable in this cause, as to be a just ground for such confidence, [Page 83]is far less apparent;—especially considered as testimonies or the party accused. But yet it is not easy to see, why he might not call in the Society as witnesses in their own cause, with as much propriety at least, as he had before submit­ted his defence of them to their own judgment and decision. One of the witnesses, however, bishop BERKLEY, says nothing directly to the main point, as to the missions in those colonies where­in protestant churches were before settled: The other, his GRACE of Canterbury, does; but yet perhaps not so convincingly, as to render it quite disingenuous ever to advance this objection again.

SECTION XI. Of the great Good which Mr. Apthorp supposes the Society have done by their Missionaries, in bettering the general State of Religion among us.

UPON this head the ingenious gentleman expresses himself thus. ‘That the state of religion among ourselves is now so much superior to what it was, when the missions were first appointed, is, under God, so greatly the work of the Society, that to give this rea­son for their with-holding their protection [Page 84]from our churches, is to make the success and benefit of their design, an argument against it ^†’.

1. WHO ever gave this reason for their with-holding their protection from the episcopal church­es here, that the state of religion among our­selves is now so much superior to what it was, &c? They must be strange objectors indeed, who could object after this manner; which is the plain import of Mr. Apthorp's words. And one may be confident, without presumption, that no person among us ever objected against the Society's conduct, or their missionaries, that the state of religion among us is much superior to what it was formerly; tho' many have objected the direct contrary.

2. AS to the important fact which Mr. Ap­thorp supposes, viz. that the state of religion here is much superior to what it formerly was; many persons who were men of observation be­fore either Mr. Apthorp or I was born; who have always lived, and still are living in the country, will by no means agree with him. In their opinion, the general state of religion in this country, is not so good as it was "when the missions were first appointed in it;" tho' I will not myself assert any thing positively upon this head. But,

3. THO' this fact were certainly true; yet it is by no means a clear point, that this reforma­tion is so greatly the work of the Society or their [Page 85]missionaries, as he is pleased, in his great civility to them, to take for granted. I might engage to bring twenty persons who think the religious state of the country worse than it was, and who attribute this in a great measure to the same cause to which he ascribes the reformation of it, for one that he can produce to support his double hypothesis. But supposing the reformation real; yet there is no reason to think that this is great­ly the work of the Society, if at all.

4. SUPPOSING the truth of both these facts; yet this will not justify the Society in a misap­plication of monies entrusted with them; and neglecting those places which were the direct, proper objects of their charity, according to the charter. To plead the good done in such a case as this, however undisputed; tho' it may be considered as some apology for, yet it cannot be considered as a proper vindication of, those who did it; especially if it has occasioned the neglect of a much greater good to the heathens, or to those colouies wherein no tolerable provision was made for the administration of God's word and sacraments. This plea is as invalid, as if, when a particular person is accused of misapply­ing the money put into his hands expresly for the use of A, perishing with hunger and cold; it should be alleged in his vindication, that he had laid it out for the benefit of B; and fed and cloathed him more elegantly than he was cloathed and fed before. How would this excuse him in leaving A, the intended and proper object of [Page 86]the charity, to perish for want of those things that are needful for the body? The application is easy, and cannot be mistaken.

SECTION XII. Some farther reflections on the same Point, occasioned by the Considerations.

BUT Mr. Apthorp descends to some parti­culars, in which he supposes the state of re­ligion among us is greatly improved by the charitable care of the Society. "Every one," says he, ‘who knows the history of this coun­try must acknowledge, that the religious state of it is manifestly improved: notwithstanding the IMMORALITIES and defects which we lament, and wish to reform in the present MANNERS and principles. Religion no lon­ger wears among us that savage and gloomy appearance, with which superstition had terribly arrayed her: its speculative doctrines are freed from those senseless horrors with which fanati­cism had perverted them: Hypocrisy has worn off, in proportion as men have seen the beauty of holiness: and above all, that exterminating monster persecution, is itself exterminated both from the temper and practice of the age. Much indeed remains to be done in MANNERS and PIETY,’ &c ^†. How greatly are we in­debted to the Society!

[Page 87]BUT yet here seems to be a concession, that the boasted reformation in the state of religion among us, very little, if at all consists in the improvement of our morals, manners, and piety. It is not pretended by Mr. Apthorp, that there has been any considerable reformation in these respects, since the missions were first appointed here, which is greatly the work of the Society.

But

HE says, Religion no longer wears among us that savage and gloomy appearance, &c. And, not to dispute with this ingenious gentleman about small matters, it shall be allowed, (if that is what he means) that the faces of people in general are less grave and solemn than they were a century ago, or even since the institution of the Society: And this improvement, it may also be conceded, is greatly the work of the Society, by the instrumentality of those good gentlemen the missionaries, who commonly appear with a pretty gray, debonair and jovial countenance. But it is not quite clear from hence, that the state of religion is now much superior to what it was before. If divers of our Forefathers had somewhat too long faces, and a too set, formal air; yet they might be very pious, virtuous and worthy men. And tho' I would by no means deny the venerable Society or their missionaries any praise which may justly belong to them for contributing to the mirth, gaiety and chearfulness of our countenances; yet methinks the gentle­man went a little two far in using the expression [Page 88]SAVAGE and gloomy appearance; partly (unless I mistake his meaning) to express his dislike to the faces of our good Fathers, some of whose pictures he may probably have seen. And it may per­haps be worthy of his consideration, whether this dislike might not in part be owing to the unskil­fulness of the painters of those days. But be that as it may, it might still be worthy of his consideration, whether, since the missionaries came among us, many people are not run into an extreme quite opposite to gloominess and preciseness, and even to that gravity and sobriety which become the Christian character; putting on a light, thoughtless air and behaviour. He will not deny but that people may riot, laugh and frolick, curse, swear and game too much, as well as wear too grave and formal a countenance. Those are much worse, and more dangerous ex­tremes than this. And many persons that were men before either of us was born, can attest that such excesses are, beyond all comparison, more frequent since the church of England pre­vailed here, than they were before; and have in­creased in some proportion to its flourishing. But, what the true cause hereof is, supposing the fact, is another point: And, for my own part, I will not affirm that this is greatly the work of the Society.

BUT the gentleman intimates, that the state of religion is much improved among us, in respect of its speculative doctrines, how little soever it may be in respect of manners and piety— Its [Page 89]speculative doctrines, says he, are freed from those senseless horrors with which fanaticism had perverted them. Let it be here observed,

1. THAT Mr. Apthorp seems not only too harsh, but a little impolitic in giving such an account of our Forefathers. He had just be­fore spoken of religion among them, as having been terribly arrayed by superstition. And here they are represented as a parcel of wretched Fanatics, who had perverted the speculative doctrines of religion with senseless horrors. Mr. Apthorp in his Considerations, (p. 23.) expresses great indignation at the author of a supposed insult on the memory of a deceased mis­sionary; which was yet, perhaps, no insult. But whose memory does this same gentleman now insult in so licentious a manner? In ef­fect, the memory of all the pious Fathers of New-England, so justly venerable and dear to their posterity, whose faith is in substance the same with their's to this day. So that he does, in a sort, insult the living and the dead at the same time; and not a few particular per­sons only, but the people of a country in ge­neral. This, to be sure, does not seem the likeliest way to make proselytes to the church—

2. THIS outrage is the more to be wonde­red at, because the gentleman does, by natu­ral implication, insult the Fathers and Foun­ders of his own church at the same time. For it is a known fact, that the speculative doctrines almost universally received and pro­fessed [Page 90]in New-England from first to last, are in effect the same with those of the church of Eng­land according to her articles. I suppose, with others, that the gentleman had here a more particular view to the Calvinistic doctrines of original sin, justification by faith alone, elec­tion and reprobation. In this sentiment I am confirmed by a passage in a sermon of Mr. Apthorp, published a year or two since; where­in he expresses himself with so much contempt and horror of those, who ‘draw portraits of the DEITY from the sanguinary passions of the worst men—representing the all-mer­ciful Father as the tyrant of the universe, reprobating his creatures, pre-determining their crimes, and predestinating their eter­nal misery:’ of persons who falsely charge on Christianity opinions ‘subversive of all moral obligation, leading weak minds into enthusiasm and licentiousness’—of persons by whom ‘a just attention to the cause of virtue is reproached as derogating from the glories of HIM, who hath sanctified us with His blood; and the justification of sinners— is proposed in such a manner, as to render virtue useless and even a crime:—these hor­rors,’ &c. ^† I believe hardly any one who reads this passage, will doubt but that the Cal­vinistic doctrines aforesaid, are those to which Mr. Apthorp refers in his Considerations, as the speculative doctrines of our superstitious, fanatical [Page 91]Forefathers; the effects of which are suppo­sed to have been, the making them savage and gloomy, and filling them with senseless horrors. I would not be over confident; but yet take this to have been his true meaning. And, what the church of England professes in her arti­cles respecting those doctrines, the reader may be pleased to see in the margin, where the substance of several articles is quoted: ^* [Page 92]Whereby one may be the better able to judge of Mr. Apthorp's sincerity and consis­tency in subscribing those articles as part of his faith; tho' it is indeed possible that he has altered his opinion since, as a very honest man might do. But,

3. TO speak sincerely, I own it is my pri­vate opinion, that it has been too common a thing for people in New-England to express themselves in a manner justly exceptionable upon these points, however agreeably both to the letter and spirit of the articles aforesaid: But yet, I believe, not more exceptionably than many eminent divines of the Church of England did in the last century.

4. IT is probably true, that for half a cen­tury past, many ministers and others in New-England have discoursed more cautiously upon those points than the greater part did before; and some perhaps have run into an opposite extreme: Which may be owing to the preva­lence of the church of England amongst us; many of whose ministers, if not the most, have long preached in a strain almost diametrically opposite to the articles aforesaid. But upon supposition that we are really indebted to the Society or their missionaries in any degree, for freeing the speculative doctrines of religion a­mongst us, from what Mr. Apthorp calls sense­less horrors; (which will not be generally al­lowed) yet we may well think it ungenerous and inconsistent in this gentleman, to revile [Page 93]our Forefathers as a company of superstitious, senseless Fanatics, for adhering so closely as they did to the doctrinal articles of the church of England.

MR. Apthorp adds, as another particular of our reformation, which is greatly the work of the Society, that hypocrisy has worn off in pro­portion as men have seen the beauty of holiness. As to which it may be observed, that we have not more clearly seen the beauty of holiness since the prevalence of the church of England a­mongst us, than it was discerned before, ex­cept perhaps by way of contrast. He does not pretend to say, that the state of religion has been improved here, since the missions, in re­spect of morals, manners or piety. So that the holiness which he speaks of, seems to be some­thing distinct from these; and what sort of holiness that is, I will not pretend to conjec­ture. But whereas he supposes that hypocrisy has worn off in proportion to the glorious dis­covery of it in the church of England; I must observe, that the most detestable hypocrisy in the sight of God and wise men, is that which is shewn in a zeal for rites and ceremo­nies, for external modes and forms; especially uninstituted ones, the inventions of men, while the zealots are comparatively negligent of the weightier matters of the law and gospel. Of which kind of hypocrisy there has unquestion­ably been much more amongst us, since the Society was instituted than before. But, to [Page 94]what this is to be ascribed, is another question: I will not say, it is greatly the work of the Society.

Mr. Apthorp subjoins: And above all, that exterminating monster persecution, is itself ex­terminated both from the temper and practice of the present age. This he mentions as another instance in which the state of religion is ma­nifestly improved among us, by means of the Society and the episcopal missions. And any one, ignorant of the country, would from hence naturally conclude, that there had been here acts of uniformity in worship, rigorously put in execution, till the establishment of epis­copal churches in these parts: For otherwise this is not so pertinently said, as might be ex­pected from so ingenious a gentleman. But this is a mistake at best: No such acts ever took place here, so far as I have learnt. But if there were, in the early days of the country, some instances of unjustifiable severity to­wards the Quakers, &c. they were used much less under the notion of these people being dis­senters from our mode of worship, than of their being disturbers of the peace, and of our religious assemblies; in which respects they were indeed very disorderly, abusive, and highly culpable. Some learned and good men in England, who had not a thorough understanding of the case, have, for this rea­son, passed much too harsh a judgment on the conduct of our Forefathers; tho' I will not undertake to vindicate all their conduct [Page 95]relative to this point. But supposing them to have been justly chargeable with some instan­ces of persecution; from whom? — from what church did they learn this practice? E­piscopalians, certainly, should lay their hands upon their mouths—

MOREOVER: How blameable soever our Forefathers might have been in this respect; yet how does it appear that our reformation therein, is greatly the work of the Society? No­thing of that kind had been known amongst us for many years before the Society had any missionaries among us, or was itself in being. Nor is it a little odd that this gentleman should insinuate, that the posterity of those who so cruelly persecuted our Fathers out of England into America, should follow us hither to teach us charity and moderation, and to extermi­nate the exterminating monster persecution from among us! Is he in jest or in earnest? — Wherever we learnt Christian forbearance and charity towards those that differ from us, he may be assured we did not learn it of the church of England; from which our beloved and honoured brethren in England, even at this day, do not in all respects find the kindest usage; being subjected to divers temporal in­conveniences on account of their non-confor­mity. And notwithstanding the gentleman says, persecution is exterminated both from the temper and practice of the present age; I have myself heard some of the episcopalians amongst [Page 96]us speak with much regret, and even indignation, of the act of toleration, by which that of uniformity was in part repealed. Nay, it is credibly reported, that some of the warm episcopalians here, have said, they hoped for the time when they might shoot dissenters as freely as they might shoot pigeons. Not a few of them discover a like spirit. Let the reader then judge, whether the exterminating mon­ster is intirely exterminated; and if so, how greatly this is the work of the Society and their missionaries.

IT does not appear, upon the whole, that we are at all indebted to the Society for the improvement of the state of religion amongst us, in any of the instances which this gentle­man mentions: It is probably in some respects, particularly as to our morals, worse than if there had never been an episcopal church in these parts. But upon supposition that what Mr. Apthorp says as to this matter, was true in fact; still it must be remembered, that this is no justification of the Society in alienating their fund and revenues from their direct, pro­per ends expressed in the charter.

SECTION XIII. Farther Reflexions relative to the views and Conduct of the Society, the State of Religion in New-England, and the prevalence of Episcopacy here; with Remarks on some expressions in Dr. Bearcroft's sermon before the Society, 1744.

DR. BEARCROFT, who has many years been Secretary to the Society, near the beginning of his sermon before it, spea­king of the design of the institution, expresses himself in a very rhetorical stile about the great ‘charity of bringing back their brethren in America to good manners and a christian life.’ And had he spoken only of professed episcopalians, or of people in such an hea­thenish state as those in some of the colonies, no one would have doubted the charitableness of such a design. But to me it is evident that he comprehends us Congregationalists and Presbyterians in New-England, in the terms brethren in America. Taking this for granted, [Page 98]it may be observed, that how much soever we may be obliged to him for his catholicism in acknowledging us for his brethren, notwith­standing our apostacy from episcopacy; yet we are not much obliged to him for the insi­nuation, that we are sadly departed from good manners and a christian life; so that the de­sign of the Society to bring us back thereto, is produced as an argument of their prodigious charity. And if by thus bringing us back, he really intended any thing more than conver­ting us to episcopacy; the Society have hi­therto failed very much in their charitable de­sign. For though their missionaries have, first and last, made a considerable number of pro­selytes from our churches, many of whom needed to be bettered in their morals; yet it may be questioned whether any of them have thereby been brought back to good manners and a christian life: Possibly there may have been some, though I never knew an example of it. But the examples of the contrary are numerous: I mean, of persons whose morals, though not unexceptionable before, were ap­parently much worse after their being thus episcopally converted. It is a known fact a­mong us, that these proselytes often become exceeding loose, profligate, vain and censori­ous; seemingly placing no small part of their religion in railing at their unconverted, i. e. congregational and presbyterian neighbours, whose lives are christian, excepting this one [Page 99]capital fault, that they go to MEETING every Lord's-day!

THE Doctor a little afterwards seems to be quite in a rapture, when he says, ‘The word of God mightily grows and prevails in New England according to the liturgy of the church of England.’ Brave indeed! What good news was this from a far country?—that the word of God should mightily prevail here ac­cording to the liturgy; which he seems to con­sider as the standard, or the touchstone by which the word of God was to be tried. I sup­pose he had lately been reading some of the pompous, hyperbolical accounts of the mis­sionaries concerning the success of their pious labors. Of many of which accounts from time to time, as to the number of their con­verts, baptisms, communicants, &c. I have at present only time to say, that no person who knows any thing particularly about America, can read them without astonishment; tho' the direct proof of a negative in such cases, how­ever false the accounts may be, is no easy matter—Could the Doctor have truly said, that pure religion mightily prevailed in New-England according to the holy scriptures, and that the converts to the church were general­ly pious, virtuous and good men, it might have been a triumph altogether as becoming a Christian divine, as that the word of God prevailed according to the liturgy. Or if he had said that the word, inventions and command­ments [Page 100]of men, mightily prevailed in New-England according to the liturgy, he might per­haps have come nearer the truth. But with some gentlemen, it seems, the liturgy! the li­turgy! is all and all. If that is embraced, from whatever petulant, frivolous humour, or dishonorable motive, O! then to be sure the word of God mightily grows and prevails; and every unstable son of REUBEN, every tho'tless, giddy changeling or out-cast, is, without more ado, represented as brought back to good manners and a christian life. These proselytes are, perhaps, spoken of in the accounts trans­mitted to the Society, as persons of very good characters, of much consideration; and com­mended for their penetration. I lately met with a very remarkable account of the sagaci­ty of some of them in one of the abstracts, and the prodigious improvement which they had made in a short time under the documents of a missionary: It was to this purpose;—They had discovered that there were in the liturgy no re­mains of popery and the mass-book, as they had formerly supposed!—Nor are there a few episcopalians, who seem to have much the same opinion of that composition, that the old Ephesians had of their famous, adored image, which, they were so confident, fell down im­mediately from Jupiter; and of their church, that those zealots had of their goddess, when they bauled by the space of two hours toge­ther, Great is Diana of the Ephesians!

[Page 101]THE Doctor says afterwards; ‘The powers there in being, [i.e. in New-England] to do them justice, had taken care for God's pub­lic worship, and erecting schools for the e­ducation of their youth’— What occasion was there then for the Society to maintain missions and schools here at a great expence, to the neglect of the heathen, and of those colonies in which no such pious care was ta­ken by the government; which, according to their charter, were the direct, proper objects of their charity? Is not this at best very myste­rious? O, no! the Doctor explains himself in the next words — ‘but not in the true ortho­dox principles of the church of England.’— Sad indeed! And therefore we Congregati­onalists and Presbyterians in New-England, be­ing in so much worse a state than the others, were proportionably so much the more proper objects of the Society's charity; to the end that the word of God might mightily grow and prevail here according to the liturgy; whether the heathen, and those that were but one de­gree better, had the word and gospel of God preached to them at all or not—Here the Doc­tor explains at least the sentiments of his own soul, probably the views of the Society also. But can the unprejudiced even among the episco­palians, think it a matter of equal importance to convert US to episcopacy, and some con­fessedly unnecessary ceremonies, however decent, as to propagate the knowledge of the only [Page 102]true God and Jesus Christ among the heathen, or in heathenish places, where there is hardly any appearance of religion? It were doubtless bet­ter that WE should be destitute of those super-eminent, super-abundant, and, if I may be allowed the expression, super-scriptural means of grace and salvation, which are to be had in the communion of the church of England, than that any of those for whom Christ died, should perish for want of God's own word and sacraments, or be perverted to Popish supersti­tion and idolatry.

IT would doubtless rejoice the Doctor's heart, if the powers here in being, in instead of contenting themselves with taking care for God's public worship according to his own word only, should be convinced of their error and neglect in this respect; and for the future take care for it according to the liturgy; Which may be about as much of an improvement upon the Bible, as some of the Society's conduct is upon their original plan according to their charter. Yea, I believe it would not a little refresh the good gentleman, only to hear that the powers in being in New-England, (if such a thing should ever be) on some public occasion went in a body to church; tho' it were only from the same principle that the great Syrian Captain and Courtier formerly attended his royal master to the house of RIMMON, when he went to bow and worship there. ^§ The Doctor might probably consider this as an in­dication, [Page 103]that they were gradually coming off from their stifness and preciseness; possibly conclude, that in their hearts they condemned their Forefathers separation from the church of England; and intended to lead the rising generation into an opinion, that the differen­ces betwixt that communion and ours are quite inconsiderable. How might this exalt his hopes into a plerophory? And what a sure presage would it be, that the glorious aera was nigh at hand, when the word of GOD should still more mightily grow and prevail in New-England according to the liturgy! —

SECTION XIV. That the Society have long had a formal design to root out Presbyterianism, &c. and to establishing both Episcopacy and Bishops in the colonies: In pursuance of which favourite project, they have in a great measure neglected the im­portant ends of their institution.

IT is hardly possible to account for the So­ciety's conduct, without supposing them to have had such a design; and this being once supposed, it will serve to explain, and [Page 104]shew the consistency thereof; not indeed with the charter, but with itself. And as to the truth of the fact, that they have long had this design; such evidence shall now be produced, as may in this case be deemed the best, their own.

IN the Account of the Society, published 1706, which has been mentioned before, after speaking of the "independent congregations" in New-England, they say: ‘Several other ways of division and separation did so much obtain in other of our colonies and planta­tions, that this made it more necessary to think of providing for a regular and ortho­dox ministry to be sent and settled amongst them; to remove those prejudices under which the people generally laboured, and to promote, as much as possible, an AGREEMENT in faith and worship —’ ^† This can mean nothing more or less than uniformity, or a general conformity to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the church of England: Which seems to have been what some had in view, even before the institution of the Society; tho' there is nothing in the charter which counte­nances the propagation of the church of Eng­land, in opposition to other protestant chur­ches; as before observed.

IN the same Account they say, They have been ‘careful of recommending the discipline of the church of England, as far as the con­stitution of those countries will possibly admit. [Page 105]The want of a Bishop or suffragan in those parts was often complained of—And this matter has been carried as far as the difficulties in it would hitherto allow, and is under such farther solicitation and advances, that we hope shortly to see a happy success of it. In the mean time, all young students in those parts, who desire episcopal ordination, are invited in­to England; and their expences in coming and returning are to be defrayed by the Society.’ ^†

IN the Abstract printed 1711, they say, ‘It having been frequently represented to the So­ciety, that there is great want of a Bishop to govern those missionaries, whom the Society has or shall, from time to time, send over to New-England,—as well as the rest of the clergy in those and the adjacent colonies; and to ordain others, and to confirm the children of the clergy and laity; this matter has been most seriously considered of, and is yet de­pending before the Society, and in the mean time, and till they can bring it to bear, they are looking out for the best and most commo­dious place,—to fix the See for the said Bi­shop.’—^‡

DR. KENNET, a member of the Society, part of whose letter to Dr. COLMAN was quo­ted before, says in another paragraph, ‘It is our being misinformed and misguided in some ways, that increases our desires of having Bishops settled in those foreign parts committed to our care—I hope your churches would not be jealous of it,’ &c.

[Page 106]IN the Abstract printed 1715, the Society say, ‘After all, upon the renewed instances from the governors of provinces, ministers, vestries, and private persons in the plantations, for settling ecclesiastical Superiors there, with­out whom the church must rather decrease than increase; and from a full conviction of the expediency thereof, Bishops being never more wanted there than now; the Society's endeavours have been employed, not without expence this year, in paving the way for such, by all proper applications, and due prepara­tions: Not to mention what has been for­merly done in this matter,’ ^† &c.—And by ‘way of preparation for a Suffragan, or Bishop, in one of the Sees upon the continent of America; the Society having thought fit to purchase a seat for his residence some while since at 600 l. sterling expence,’ ^‡ &c. There are several pages of this Abstract fill'd with this affair of Bishops in America. Later Abstracts and other records might easily be produced, in order to shew what a favourite object this has been with the Society. And one standing in­struction of the Society to their missionaries, is in these remarkable words, viz. ‘X. That they frequently visit their respective parishioners; those of our own communion, to keep them stea­dy in the profession and practice of religion, as taught in the church of England; and those that oppose us, or dissent from us, to CONVINCE and RECLAIM them,’ &c. This clearly shews what they are after. It will also be observed [Page 107]here, that WE are considered as PARISHIONERS of the missionaries, no less than professed epis­copalians: And we are often spoken of AS SUCH by them in their letters to the Society, as ap­pears by the Abstracts. How assuming is this!—

THE affair of Bishops has lately been, and pro­bably now is in agitation in England. And we see the Society spare neither endeavours, applica­tions, nor expence, in order to effect their grand design of episcopizing (if I may use the term) all New-England, as well as the other colonies. And it is supposed by many, that a certain superb edifice in a neighbouring town, was even from the foundation designed for the Palace of one of the humble successors of the apostles.

BUT however that matter may be, the fol­lowing things are evident:

1. THAT the Society have long had a formal design to dissolve and root out all our New-England churches; or, in other words, to re­duce them all to the episcopal form; or, in the words of their own Account, before cited, ‘to promote, as much as possible an agreement [uniformity] in faith and worship’—

2. THIS fully and clearly accounts for their being so ready to encourage small episcopal par­ties all over New-England, by sending them missionaries, &c. altho' the people had the ‘means of religion already, in other protestant communions.’ For these handfuls of people, scattered here and there, it is supposed, or at least hoped, will in time, by some means or other, become considerable for numbers; and at length eat out, or absorb all our churches.

[Page 108]BUT supposing them finally to carry this favourite point, at a vast expence, as I hope in God they never will; yet one would think it impossible even for themselves to imagine, that the interest of religion in the colonies would be a quarter part so much served hereby, as if they had employed this money in those ways which are plainly pointed out in the charter, and from which they have alienated it. Is the effecting an exact uniformity among us in discipline, modes of worship, ceremonies, &c. an object worthy of any attention or expence, in compa­rison with that of maintaining a public worship in places destitute thereof, or the conversion of the heathen! Can wise men, free from bigotry and the spirit of party, possibly think it is, tho' they are themselves episcopalians in sentiment?

SECTION XV. That by supporting little Episcopal Parties in New-England, and endeavouring to convert Presbyterians, &c. to the Church of England, contrary to the whole spirit of the Charter, the Society have actually defrauded the People who were the pro­per Objects of their Charity.

IF the Society's fund, together with the an­nual collections, legacies, &c. had been more than adequate to the real exigencies [Page 109]of those people, who were indisputably the pro­per objects of that charitable institution; and they had applied only the surplusage for the support and encouragement of the episcopal party in New-England, in opposition to presby­terians, &c. their conduct would have been much less exceptionable than it is: Since, upon this supposition, others would not have been in­jured by such an application. Tho' even in this case, it might well be questioned whether their conduct would have been entirely justifiable; because their charter warrants neither their re­ceiving nor expending any money for support­ing any one party whatsoever amongst protes­tants, in opposition to another; but only for the common cause of Christianity, in opposition to atheism, infidelity and popery. But the Socie­ty have by no means thus abounded in money. They have been making great complaints for half a century past, how streightened they were for money; how much their annual expences exceeded their certain annual income. Dr. HUTTON, bishop of Bangor, in his sermon be­fore the Society 1745, (p. 24.) says, they have borne ‘an expence frequently more than five times equal to their certain annual income.’ These representations have been very pathetical­ly made from time to time, in order to induce good people of all denominations to assist them in so pious a work, as that of supporting the public worship of God in those colonies which must otherwise be destitute of it, and propa­pating the gospel among the poor Negroes and [Page 110] Indians. This shall at any time be proved at large by quotations from the sermons, and other publications of the Society, if any person of re­putation denies it, as I am confident no one will presume to do. And yet, while these loud, and almost tragical complaints have been mak­ing, the Society have been expending large sums every year in New-England, quite beyond the design of their institution, to support and in­crease the episcopal party as such; greatly to the neglect of the Southern colonies upon the con­tinent, the Indians bordering upon us, the West India islands, and the many thousands of Negro slaves in them; all of which and whom were the direct proper objects of their charity; and whose names were made use of most pathetical­ly to excite compassion in, and draw money from well disposed people of every denomina­tion! It needs no proof, that by how much more was done by the Society for the support of the episcopal party here; by so much less must unavoidably have been done for the hea­then, or for the colonies in a state but little bet­ter than that of heathenism. And if the Socie­ty cannot, in this respect, be said to have "rob­bed other churches," to ease and gratify the episcopalians here; yet they may be said to have robbed the heathen, the slaves, and heathenish colonies aforesaid; who had an exclusive right, according to the charter, to the benefit of that very money which has been sunk in the episco­pal gulph here, where the people actually "had the means of religion in other protestant com­munions." [Page 111]He that can consider these facts, and such a flagrant abuse of a noble institution, without admiration, has doubtless that qualifica­tion which the poet speaks of, as the most es­sential foundation of happiness—

EVEN upon supposition that the Society has such an extraordinary "discretionary power" as Mr. Apthorp speaks of; (which will hereafter be considered) so that they cannot be justly charged with violating their charter, by expend­ing their money for the support of an episcopal party in New-England, to the prejudice of other colonies, &c. or if they have a legal right to act thus; yet in how extraordinary and unac­countable a manner do they use that supposed right and power? Can any wise and candid man, who allows the main facts and circumstances as before represented, possibly think the interests of CHRIST's kingdom so much served in this way, as they might have been by a different conduct in the Society? If they are not, this is certainly a misapplication both of their charity and their power, in some degree. For what­ever powers or monies the Society are entrusted with, they were to be employed in such a man­ner as should most effectually answer the ends expresly mentioned in their charter. And they have all along professed to apply their fund and revenues in such a manner as should be likely to do the most good, and best to serve the general interest of religion in the colonies, and adja­cent [Page 112]countries. That they have not done so, but alienated their revenues from a truly noble to a comparatively mean, narrow, party design, is as certain as any thing of this nature can be: Tho' I would by no means be understood as charging so respectable a BODY with any wilful, criminal abuse of power, or misapplication of monies.

SECTION XVI. Of the good that might probably have been done, had the Monies which have been misapplied in supporting the Episcopal Party in New-England, been applied ac­cording to the true and noble Design of the Institution.

IT is no inconsiderable sum that the Society have sunk in the episcopal gulph here in New-England, quite beyond, and therefore contrary to, the design of their institution; there being no medium, as has before been observed, betwixt a right application of their fund, con­formable to their charter, and a perversion of it. According to the Abstract 1730, £. 705 sterling was expended on the missions, &c. in New-England. In 1739, the sum was £. 1030 sterling. And in 1761, the latest Abstract which I have been able to procure, it was £. 1270. [Page 113]These disbursements, it must be remembered, are exclusive of books to be distributed, and other incidental charges. So that, according to a mo­derate calculation, there may have been about £.1200 sterling expended by the Society for N. England, one year with another, for 32 years past; amounting to 38,400 And about £.200 per Annum for 20 years preceeding 1730, amounting to 4,000 Total Er. excepted, 42,400 sterl.

BUT then a deduction is to be made on ac­count of that part of this sum which may have been expended conformably to the design of the charter, in supporting the public worship in some places in N. England, particularly Rhode-Island government, where the Society's charity was need­ed. If we deduct £.7400, there has been about 35,000 sterl, misapplied in N. England, according to the reasoning in the proceeding sections. I shall take the liberty to go upon this supposition, tho' I do not pretend to be very exact as to the quan­tum; I believe it is not less than that. The benefit of this sum then, other persons, the Negro slaves, Indians and heathenish colonies, have been de­prived of; tho' the money was as it were col­lected in their name, or with a profession of employing it in their service.

NOW let it be considered, how much good might probably have been done to the souls of these people, the direct, proper objects of this charity, had the aforesaid sum of 35,000 sterl. [Page 114]been duly applied in maintaining and propagat­ing christianity among them, instead of being laid out to support and increase the episcopal party in those towns of N. England, in which people ‘had the means of religion already, in other protestant communions.’ Forty or fifty missions might, with this sum, have been com­fortably maintained among the heathen, and in heathenish places, every year, for more than thirty years past; and a considerable number for several years antecedent thereto. It is well known that in some of the Southern colonies, there are large districts of 10, 20, 30, and 40 miles extent, and I think more, wherein there is no publick worship of any kind regularly kept up, for want of ministers; in which colonies there are also many Roman-catholics and slaves. And their state, to this day, answers very exactly to the description in the charter, of those places which are therein marked out as the objects of this charitable institution. The same in general is applicable to some of our West-India islands, all which so much abound with Negro slaves.

LET us suppose then, that about one half the aforesaid sum had been employed in supporting missions and schools in those colonies, and the other half among the Indians bordering upon us. How much good might probably have been done, by keeping up some form of religion, and giving a check at least to infidelity, vice and bar­barity in the former; and by propagating the knowledge of true religion amongst the latter? [Page 115]In what degree it might have pleased almighty God to succeed these missions, it is indeed im­possible for man particularly to say. But such an application of the money would unquestiona­bly have been right and proper, according to the charter: And the design had at least been cha­ritable, noble and laudable, whatever the success had been. Nor is there any reason to doubt in general, but that some, yea, great good would have been done, if all the misapplied money had been discretely expended in these ways. The general state of religion in those colonies would, in all probability, have been much better at this day than it is. Many persons might have been restrained from open vice and impiety; not a few brought to a serious sense and practice of religion; a great number of the Negro slaves in, and the Indians near the colonies, brought to some hopeful knowledge of God and his truth had as many pious, and duly qualified missiona­ries been sent to one and the other, for thirty or forty years past, as might have been tolerably subsisted on the aforesaid sum, which has been very little, if any thing better than thrown away; yea, which many think really worse than thrown away, all circumstances considered. Nor am I either ashamed or afraid to own myself of this latter opinion; being persuaded that there is less real religion now in those parts of N. England where it has been expended, than there would have been, had it been sunk in the ocean instead of the episcopal gulph here: Tho' it is [Page 116]not to be supposed that any episcopalians can be of this opinion; neither is any stress laid upon it in the present argument. But even allowing that some good has been done by converting a number of presbyterians, &c. to the church of England; yet what sober and candid person can possibly imagine, that the common cause of christianity has been a tenth part so much served hereby, as might have been reasonably expected from a different application of this money, in ways directly and indisputably agreeable to the intent of the charter? What the venerable So­ciety may think of these things, I cannot pre­tend to say: But I know, many wise and good men think they have reason to bless God, that they are not themselves to give an account to him for such managements; and that the blood of so many as have probably perished thereby, will not be required at THEIR hands.

SECTION XVII. Farther Reflections on the Society's neglect­ing the Southern Colonies and the Indians; and a particular Instance of the latter, with Respect to the Iroquois, or Five (alias Six) Nations.

THO' I will not affirm it for truth, yet I have been very credibly informed, that the [Page 117]people in some of the Southern colonies, and par­ticularly in those parts of N. Carolina which were intirely destitute of ministers, have made earnest and repeated applications to the Society for missiona­ries to be sent to them; sometimes without any answer at all, for years together; and at last with­out success. And some solid, sensible and serious persons from that country, with whom I conver­sed in Boston several years ago, I think gave me the same account: But whether they did or not, I know they made such a representation of their sad state for want of ministers, and expressed so serious a desire of having the public worship of God introduced among them, that at this very moment it is not in my power to refrain from tears in reflecting on it—What they told me, at least confirms in some measure the report afore­said, concerning the ineffectual sollicitations from thence to the Society; who perhaps had it not in their power to comply therewith, by reason of the large expence which they were at in the noble design of supporting and increasing little episco­pal parties, or factions, here and there in N. En­gland. And according to the Abstract, 1761, the Society had only five missionaries in the whole country of N. Carolina, while they had about thirty in N. England; chiefly in the most populous towns of it, where a due and legal pro­vision was made for the support of ministers, and the public worship of God!

AS to the Indians; no one can doubt but that there have been, and still are, some great, discou­ragements [Page 118]in attempting to christianize them. But, according to divers appearances, the Society have had this work less at heart than that of pro­pagating the peculiarities of episcopacy and the liturgy in N. England, in opposition to presbyte­rianism and congregationalism. The neglect of the Natives in America, has long been complained of, and the accusation in some sort allowed to be just by themselves, in times past. This will appear in part from Bp. WILLIAMS's sermon before the Society, 1705. ‘But whilst we find fault with others,’ says he, ‘we must not forget our own. It has been the continual matter of reproach to us, that this application to the Natives has been neglected on our part. Where are the numbers you have converted to the Christian faith? Where the fruits of your re­ligion? when you have under your care those vast dominions which are called the English empire; and from whence you draw so much of your emoluments to enrich and pleasure yourselves at home. This is an objection that has its weight, and perhaps is uncapable of a just and sufficient answer. Recriminations are but a kind of confession of guilt: And the best way to answer, is, to mend what is amiss in ourselves’—^*.

IT is unnecessary to confirm and justify this complaint by an appeal to any of the later ser­mons before the Society; which would be no difficult matter. Some essays they have indeed [Page 119]made from time to time, towards the conversion of the Savages: but they seem to have been very faint and feeble; and with a sparing hand as to money, when compared with the goodness and importance of the work, or the difficulties to be expected in it; with the zeal of our French neighbours to christianize, or rather popize the Indians, and even with their own zeal and expen­ces in order to episcopize the Congregationalists and Presbyterians of N. England. I am not ignorant however, that they and their missiona­ries have frequently given the world sufficiently pompous accounts of their efforts in order to the conversion of the Indians; not to say, spoken somewhat hyperbolically of the real and great difficulties attending this work. Tho' I doubt not but that the Society kept to the accounts given them by their missionaries; who seem to have been less indefatigable, and sooner discou­raged in their labors among the Indians than a­mong Us. And tho' the following remark of Dr. DOUGLASS, a very attentive and capable ob­server of what passed in the colonies, is not lite­rally true of all the missionaries in America, yet it deserves notice here: ‘The missionaries from the Society,’ says he, ‘do not in the least attempt the conversion of the Indians, because it requires travel, labor and hardship.’ ^‡

IT is certain from authentic records, even from several publications of the Society, that the Five, alias Six nations, a respectable and war-like [Page 120]people on the Frontiers of N. York and Penn­sylvania, and long the terror of all the other Indians from Florida to the n. west of Canada, have not only been our good friends and allies all along, but for more than half a century past, very favourably disposed towards Christianity; at least towards entertaining missionaries among them, which was a very important point gained. Their chiefs have even petitioned for them re­peatedly; of which the Society was duly adver­tised by the Governor of N. York, as appears from the Abstracts, &c. Nor have they been wholly neglected by the Society; than which, it is ap­prehended, little more can be said, notwithstand­ing all that Mr. Apthorp has written concerning their "unwearied zeal in this attempt ^†". In speaking of this matter, Mr. Apthorp has referred to Dr. BARCLAY, now a missionary in the city of N. York; who was for a time a missionary to these Indians. It will not therefore be im­proper to observe a few things relative to that worthy gentleman's mission to the Iroquois, or Six Nations aforesaid, as a specimen of the So­ciety's zeal for the conversion of the Indians ^*.

IN the year 1738 Mr. SERGEANT, the then very worthy missionary to a tribe of Indians on our western frontiers, employed by the Boston-commissioners of the Society for the propagation of [Page 121]the gospel in N. England, and the parts adjacent in America, incorporated Anno 1661; a (Society which pursues the true end of its institution) wrote the following letter to the Hon. and Rev. commissioners his employers, relative to Mr. BARCLAY and his mission.—"I had just now a letter," says he, ‘from Mr. BARCLAY, a young gentleman of Albany, lately arriv'd from London with a mission from the Society for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts, to the Mohawks ^* West of Albany; who tells me he has but a scanty allowance, (i.e. from the Society) and could obtain NO salary for an interpreter, or school-master: and that he has thoughts of applying to the commissioners at Boston for assistance; but would have my ad­vice first. I cannot tell what stock the corpo­ration has; but I suppose it is scanty, by the allowances they afford their missionaries. How­ever, I could heartily recommend Mr. BAR­CLAY to the notice and favor of the commissi­oners. He is a worthy gentleman, and well deserves encouragement in his undertaking,’ &c.

THE Rev. Mr. HOPKINS, after quoting this letter in his Memoirs, says: ‘That the reader may be sensible what a prospect there was of Mr. BARCLAY's being eminently serviceable among the Mohawks, if he had been duly en­couraged; I shall (asking Mr. BARCLAY's pardon) show by transcribing some passages [Page 122]contained in his letter to Mr. SERGEANT. The following are from a letter wrote before he went for orders, and dated in his school at Fort-Hunter, June 11, 1736.’ The quotati­ons stand thus in the Memoirs aforesaid.

‘I am heartily glad to hear of your success; I pray God more abundantly to bless and suc­ceed your labors: and may you enjoy abun­dant satisfaction in the discharge of your func­tion here, and a glorious reward hereafter. I bless God I have no reason to despair of suc­cess in my mission. They daily become more and more desirous of instruction; and would, in all probability, make great progress both in the knowledge and practice of Christianity, were proper methods taken to instruct them. But I labor under great disadvantage for want of an interpreter; so that I cannot tell what progress they may make in knowledge, nor can I proceed regularly in my instructions; and I must despair of obtaining a perfect know­ledge of their language, without the assistance of an interpreter, which could I but enjoy for the space of two or three years, I doubt not but that I should be master of it; and should take greater pleasure and satisfaction in the dis­charge of my duty. Nevertheless I have the comfort of seeing a very great and daily re­formation of manners among them, which is in­deed the end of all our endeavours— I am almost amazed at the progress the youth make in reading and writing their own language. [Page 123]All the young men from 20 to 30 years, con­stantly attend school when at home, and will leave a frolic rather than miss. Sundry of them write as good a hand as myself (which was very fair and good)—As to the encou­ragement I have, for aught I see yet, I must expect my reward in another world. I have now been here almost a year and half, but have never received a farthing from any body. The Assembly voted me thirty pounds for two years; but by reason of—I am not like to get it till a Governor comes over; and have no great hope of farther encouragement from them.’ [N. B. This relates to the govern­ment of N. York.]

‘As for the Society, they have allowed me thirty pounds for one year: What further encouragement they will give me, I know not. In the mean time I am at great charges. My board is six shillings a week, which is not a­bove half my necessary expence.’

MORE than two years after Mr. BARCLAY had taken Orders, he wrote thus in another let­ter dated at Albany Aug. 21, 1740. ‘I am sa­tisfied I should have much greater success, if I had a school-master and interpreter. I had the satisfaction last Lord's day to preach to a num­ber of the Six Nations, who came to this town to treat with the Governor, who also was present; and has taken a great deal of pains to countenance my design. My Mohawk congregation behav'd so well, that all the au­ditory [Page 124]were exceedingly delighted. I assure you I have the cause at heart, and am well persuaded of your zeal.’—

FROM the foregoing representation it is evi­dent, that a wide door was opened for the gospel to enter among those heathen tribes; The fields were white unto the harvest, had but labourers been sent, and duly encouraged to the noble work. These tribes would probably have been in general professed Christians before this day, had the business been duly forwarded and encou­raged. Which might perhaps, by reason of the great fame of the Iroquois, have had a very ex­tensive and happy influence on many other na­tions. But, alas! the Society, tho' so desirous of christianizing the natives, could not afford salaries to a school-master and interpreter, of per­haps about £.20 or £.30 sterling each; nor to Mr. BARCLAY himself, who was so zealous in this good cause, half a proper support! Why not? The reason was apparently this; that they supported so many missionaries here in N. Eng­land at a great expence, for the encouragement of the episcopal party, and in order to convert us to the liturgy. If so great a proportion of their revenue had not been thus unprofitably sunk in places where God's word and sacraments were duly administred, how easy would it have been for them to support 5, 6, or more missiona­ries, and as many interpreters and school-masters among the Iroquois? Mr. Apthorp speaking of the "promising appearance" there was among the [Page 125] Iroquois about this time, says, ‘— From the latest authorities — we find this mission either much dwindled, or greatly interrupted.’ ^†— No wonder, when the mission itself was so star­ved. The Indians doubtless, perceived how re­miss the English were in the cause, so that they could hardly think them in earnest; and the French jesuits, or other emissaries, no question made their advantage of this negligence. Can it be expected that missions will succeed, which are conducted after such a manner?—This specimen may perhaps serve to explain and confirm what Mr. Apthorp says, where he introduces the affair the Mohawks; — ‘Indian conversions are un­dertaken by our Society incidentally, and as it were ex abundanti ^‡’. They have indeed been undertaken—as it were; but the words ex abun­danti, methinks, sound but odly here. And to reconcile what he immediately subjoins, with plain facts, even with relation to this very mission which he so much glories in, is impossible— "Yet," says he, ‘have they omitted no opportu­nity of promoting this pious work, as far as they found it practicable. ^*’

SECTION XVIII. Of the important political ends that might have been answered, had the Society taken due care to send proper Missiona­ries to the Indians; and the pernicious Consequences of their Neglect.

THE author of these observations is sensible that worldly politics, and temporal things were not the direct objects of this institution; but the promotion of true religion, and the eter­nal happiness of men. However, these things often stand in a close connexion, and are in a measure interwoven with each other. And the Society's prosecuting that important part of their plan, the conversion of the heathen bordering on our American colonies, would at the same time have answered very valuable ends of a po­litical nature. This, one would think, was an additional obligation lying upon them to do so, instead of neglecting it for the sake of convert­ing us to the liturgy, in the manner they have done. That such ends would, in all probability, have been answered thereby; and that this neg­lect has been attended with very fatal consequen­ces in a civil consideration of things, may ap­pear from the following remarks.

IT is known that the Indian nations lie on the back of our settlements, from N. Scotia [Page 127]Northward, round to the West and S. West as far as Georgia and Florida. And had early and due care been taken by the Society to send as many missionaries among them, as could have been subsisted on the money so unprofitably sunk in N. England; it would have had a direct and manifest tendency to attach them to the Bri­tish interest. Had this £.35,000 sterl. or the greater part of it, been employed in maintaining a number of sensible, discrete ministers among the Indians, and enabling them to make them small presents from time to time, in order to gain their esteem and good-will, it might probably have been the means, not only of giving them at least some favourable impressions of Christi­anity in general, but of the protestant religion; and so making the greater part of them our fast friends.

And there was the more occasion for taking this course, in order to counter-act the designs of the French, till of late our dangerous ene­mies and rivals on this continent. They, if not from a principle of piety, yet of sound policy, have all along made a point of sending jesuits, priests and other emissaries to all the Indian tribes that would admit them. It is evident that the Society were not ignorant of these circumstances; which were well known the British court, even before the charter was granted; and in all pro­bability, were one reason of its being granted. It may be added, that the Society did, from the first, profess to have a regard to them. The [Page 128]following extracts from the Account of the Society, will serve at once to throw light upon this affair, and to render their neglect the more unaccounta­ble. They say, ‘Nor hath the Society been unmindful of using their utmost endeavours for propagating the gospel among the heathen In­dians and slaves in and near our plantations. They received with great satisfaction a letter from the Lords commissioners of trade and plan­tations, directed to the Ld. arch. bp. of Canter­bury,’ signifying, ‘That the earl of Bellamont had several times represented to them the great want of some ministers of the church of England, to instruct the Five Nations of In­dians on the frontiers of N. York, and pre­vent their being practis'd upon by French priests and jesuists.’— ‘At the same time the Lords commissioners imparted to his Grace, and to the Lord bp. of London, some farther advice upon the subject—in particular this remarkable extract of what was said by One in the name of the rest of the Sachems—to the commissio­ners for the Indian affairs in Albany, June 28, 1700’—Says he, ‘We are now come to trade; and not to speak of religion. Only thus much I must say, all the while I was here, before I went to Canada, I never heard any thing talk'd of religion, or the least mention made of converting us to the Christian faith. And we shall be glad to hear, if at last you are so piously inclined to take pains to instruct your Indians in the Christian religion. I will not [Page 129]say but that it may induce some to return to their native country. I wish it had been done sooner, that you had had ministers to instruct your Indians in the Christian faith,’ &c. `This representation,' the Society add, ‘was laid before the Queen in council; from whence his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury re­ported this order.’

At the Court at St. James's, &c.

‘Upon reading this day at the Board a re­presentation—setting forth, among other things, that as to the Five Nations bordering on New-York, lest the intrigues of the French in Canada, and the influence of their priests, who frequent and converse, and sometimes in­habit with those Indians, should debauch them from her Majesty's allegiance, their Lordships are humbly of opinion—that two protestant ministers be appointed,’ &c. The Society add, ‘Upon communicating this order to the Society, it was immediately agreed, that it should be referred to a committee,’ &c. ^†

THE chief design of this quotation, is to shew how early and fully the Society were apprised of the intrigues of the French with the Indians on this continent, and the importance of coun­ter-acting their designs, in a political as well as religious consideration of things. These things they have known all along, from the very foun­dation of the Society. And yet, that they have done hardly any thing towards the conversion of the Indians; and either could not or would [Page 130]not allow even an interpreter or School-master to Mr. BARCLAY, is equally certain: Their object, to all appearance, having been rather the extirpation of presbyterianism and congregation­ism from the colonies, than the planting of Christanity among the Indians; whereby they might at once have been instrumental of saving many souls, and doing an important service to Great-Britain.

HAD the Society applied the money which they have sunk in New-England, (in a way quite unauthorized by their charter) to the sup­port of missions among the Indians, it is quite probable, as was intimated before, that the great­er part of those bordering on our colonies might long since have received very favourable im­pressions of the Christian, protestant religion, and been amicable to us. We should of course have had a much larger share of the profita­ble trade with them, which has been almost engrossed by the French. And, as many of them might have been in a degree civilized at the same time, and brought into the English way of living; they would of course have taken off a greater quantity of British manu­factures, and other commodities, to the national advantage. The lives of great numbers of Bri­tish subjects in the plantations, destroyed by the Savages from time to time, would have been saved. The colonies which have been kept in terror, and stunted in their growth, their frontiers having often been quite cut off, or broken up, would have been in a much more [Page 131]flourishing condition than they are at present. And most of these Indians, instead of being at the command of the French, to cut our throats and scalp us, whenever they thought proper; might have been ready to act for us against them, on any just occasion.

THESE are some of the important political ends that might probably have been answered, had the Society thought proper to send mission­aries among the Indians, (whose conversion they have all along declared to be a principal, tho' not a primary object with them) instead of sink­ing so much money in the episcopal gulph in New-England. And when we also consider how duly they have been advertised of the French intrigues from time to time, and of the importance of counter-acting them; it is not easy to say, whether their piety or their patriotism is the most conspicuous, with re­lation to this part of their conduct. And, whether their affection for, and strong attach­ment to the peculiarities of a party, are not at least as conspicuous as either of them, the rea­der who is not afraid to think, is left to judge from the whole series of facts and circumstances.

SECTION XIX. Of the discretionary Power of the Society, and Mr. Apthorp's Reasoning thereon.

THE ingenious Mr. Apthorp, to whom I must now again pay my devoirs, urges the large discretionary power of the So­ciety, in order to vindicate their conduct. The passage to which I refer, seems to have some­thing so very curious in it, that I cannot but quote it at large for the entertainment of the reader.

"IT is observable," says he, ‘that a large discretionary power is left to the Society, to regulate their institution, and even occasionally to make ALTERATIONS in it, in such a man­ner as to render it most beneficial to religion, whether in our colonies, or among the bor­dering nations. For this purpose, they and their successors for ever are empowered to make any laws or constitutions that shall seem reasonable, profitable or requisite for the good estate and government of the Society, and the effectual promoting its charitable design. Thus, with an evidence beyond exception, it appears that their conduct in placing churches AMONG US, is in all respects CONFORMABLE to their institution’—^†

[Page 133]1. IT is to be observed, that Mr. Apthorp here refers to that part of the charter which re­lates to by-laws; but in quoting which (p. 10.) he has transposed some clauses and omitted o­thers, without giving notice of it to his readers in the usual way. However, since in his own way of quoting it, there does not seem to be any very material alteration in the sense; it will not be worth while to compare the quotation and charter together, merely for the sake of shew­ing some of his harmless errors. But had a re­puted Scholar quoted any disputed passage in LIVY, TACITUS or CICERO, in the manner in which this gentleman quoted another part of the charter, before taken notice of; it would have been no easy matter for him ever to regain his reputation in the learned world. Whether misquoting the charter in this controversy, is not an offence of a much higher nature, is sub­mitted to the judgment of the impartial reader.

2. IT seems a pretty extraordinary position, that any incorporated Society should have power by their charter, to make alterations in their in­stitution. If this Society has any such, Mr. Apthorp was doubtless right in speaking of it as a large discretionary power! For is not a power to make alterations in their institution, equivalent to a power to alter their institution itself;—to depart in a great measure from the original plan according to the charter, and to pursue ends different from those which are ex­pressed therein? And what corporation ever had so large a discretionary power as this?

[Page 134]3. BY laying claim to such an extraordinary power for the Society, and making use of this as an argument to justify their conduct, Mr. Apthorp seems to allow that they stand in need or it for that purpose. The gentleman surely would not have had recourse to such a supposed wonderful power vested in the Society, if their conduct could be reconciled with the most plain, obvious sense of the charter.

4. THIS is, in effect, tho' not expresly, a con­cession that the Society have actually made al­terations in their institution: and have really been pursuing designs not expresly authorized by the charter. That this is fact, I am far from denying. But the gentleman well knows, that the questions de facto and de jure, are very dif­ferent: And if he can clear up that of right, as plainly as I flatter myself I have and shall do that of fact, our debate will be half finished. But still it must be remembered, that tho' the Society had confessedly a power to make alterations in their institution, by neglecting some ends thereof particularly mentioned in the charter, and pursuing others not mentioned; yet unless they are supposed infallible and impec­cable, these alterations may be for the worse. That the alterations which they have made, are for the better, will not follow, as he seems to suppose, from their having had a legal power to make them. Allowing the power, if by altering they mend their institution, they are doubtless to be praised in that respect: But what­ever power they may have, if they pejorate their [Page 135]institution, and pursue comparatively mean and low ends, instead of the noble ones expressed in the charter, Mr. Apthorp will not deny but that this is an error of judgment at best, and a real abuse of their power. Whoever would fully vindicate the Society, must prove, not only that they are actually invested with such a power, but that they have used it discretely and wisely; so as most effectually to answer the general and excellent end of their institution: To alledge power only in their vindication, is not giving reasonable satisfaction to those who may except against their conduct: Because even a legal power may be abused, or a discretionary power misapplied. But,

5. THE charter contains no expression equi­valent or similar to this, of a power left to the Society to make alterations in their institution. The strongest expressions used therein, relative to the power given them, are these—‘The said Society shall and may consult, determine, con­stitute, ordain and make any constitutions, laws, ordinances and statutes whatsoever; as also execute leases for years, as aforesaid, which to them, or the major part of them then present, shall seem reasonable, profitable or requisite, for, touching or concerning the good estate, rule, order and government of the said cor­poration, and the more effectual promoting the said charitable designs.’ Now is there any thing here, that is in the least similar to a power of making alterations in their institution?—or a right to apply their fund in any manner what­ever, not expressed in their charter? So far from it, that,

[Page 136]6. THE Society are, by this very part of the charter which, it is pretended, gives them such an extraordinary power, limited and confined to those ends or objects, which had before been expresly mentioned as the ends of the institution. For the power here granted them to make con­stitutions, laws, &c. is, in express terms, in or­der to "the more effectual promoting the said charitable designs." And what, in the name of charity, are they? Is any one of them, the sup­porting and increasing little episcopal parties and factions in those colonies, where due and legal provision was before made for the public wor­ship of God; and where the people "had the means of religion already, in other protestant communions?"—and this to the manifest preju­dice of those colonies in which no such provi­sion was made for the administration of God's word and ordinances;—of the Negro slaves and Savages! I ask again, whether this is one of the said charitable designs? If it is, then the Society have unquestionably a right to make constitu­tions, laws, &c. in order to the more effectual promoting it: But if not, what can be less per­tinent and satisfactory, than to alledge the large discretionary power given them, to justify their conduct in this respect? And how did this in­ventive gentleman come to talk of a power to make alterations in their institution? What that institution is, and all the ends of it, have been sufficiently explained before: And whatever they are, the Society are here confined, limited and tied down to them, as much as if they had [Page 137]again been enumerated in the very words of the preamble; to which the reader is referred. The Society must indeed, in the nature of the thing, if they act with simplicity and integrity in this important affair', act as to them shall seem most reasonable, profitable, &c. in order to ac­complish the said designs; as other persons in­trusted with a discretionary power in order to accomplish certain ends, must also act. But their institution itself is fixed, immutably fixed by the charter; so that they have not the least power to make alterations in it; but only to prosecute, in the most effectual manner, the declared ends of it. And if any incorporated charitable So­ciety whatsoever, under the pretext of a discreti­onary power, neglect the declared ends of their institution; and pursue others, to which their charter is a stranger, they cannot but be consi­dered as acting contrary to the trust reposed in them: But whether wilfully, or thro' misappre­hension, is another question; respecting which people may have different opinions. But,

7. HAS not the ingenious Mr. Apthorp a very singular way of reasoning here? He certainly makes use of a kind of logic, which very few of the un-orthodox N. England ministers learnt at our little, young Colleges. For, having endea­voured to establish this extraordinary discretio­nary power of the Society to make alterations in their institution, as if all depended upon it; the triumphant conclusion at length comes out in the following words: ‘THUS, with an evidence [Page 138]beyond exception, it appears, that their conduct in placing churches AMONG US, is in all res­pects CONFORMABLE TO THEIR INSTITU­TION’— i. e. because he had made it so evi­dent, that they had power to make ALTERA­TIONS in their institution; therefore they have made NONE, nor in the least deviated from it; but their conduct is in all respects CONFORMA­BLE thereto! And this, it is said, appears from the premises, with an evidence beyond exception— But if their conduct is thus conformable to their institution, why did Mr. Apthorp attempt to justify it, by asserting their power to alter their institution? As his argument now stands, the premises and the conclusion unluckily frown on, and militate against each other. I have try'd several ways to reconcile them; but to no pur­pose. I have endeavoured to suppose, that this position about the large discretionary power of the Society, was bro't in only as Mr. Apthorp says, Indian conversions are undertaken by the Society, viz. ‘incidentally, and as it were ex-abundanti ^†’. But still, either the conclusion knocks down the premises, or the premises the conclusion. I have also endeavoured to suppose the ingenious gentleman's meaning was, that the Society's conduct, was conformable to their insti­tution, after they had made alterations in it, by virtue of their "large discretionary power"; not as it was originally: But neither, can I make this bear, in several respects. The war still continues [Page 139]between the former and latter branch of the ar­gument: So that they must be left to fight it out betwixt them.

SECTION XX. Remarks on Mr. Apthorp's curious Appli­cation of those Words, Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? &c. to the present Controversy.

IMMEDIATELY after the passage last quoted, Mr. Apthorp, that he might oblige us with some of his rhetoric together with his invincible arguments, subjoins— ‘And to any one who cries out on imaginary abuses or misapplicati­ons, the Society may reply, like the good Housholder whose stewards they are, Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? is thine eye evil, because I am good?’

LET it here be observed,

1. THAT whatever the Society might justly reply to those who cry out on imaginary abuses or misapplications; the same reply would not be valid or pertinent to those who cry out on real ones.

2. THE Society are hero very justly stiled stew­ards. And they were intrusted with the care of a charitable fund, not only by God, as he seems to [Page 140]intend, but by men; by the King, who granted their charter, and by all who have contributed to the charitable designs expressed therein.

3. A LEARNED clergyman, like him, doubt­less knows, it is "required in stewards that a man be found faithful." Stewards are not al­lowed to use the goods or money with which they are intrusted, but for those ends and pur­poses for which they are committed to them. If they knowingly apply them to any others, how­ever good in themselves, they are unfaithful in their trust. For example, if a steward is intrusted with money by his lord, to give to particular poor persons by name, or to the poor of such a parish; and he neglects these, to relieve other persons, tho' equally necessitous he misapplies the money, and abuses his trust; Much more so, if instead of bestowing it on any of the poor, he employs it in building and decorating an house for himself, and in adorning his wife, misses or children.

4. THAT the Society have applied a great part of the money intrusted with them, to other, and to say the least, much less noble purposes than those for which it was committed to them, has, if I mistake not, been sufficiently proved.

5. IN the very same sentence that Mr. Ap­thorp calls the Society stewards, he does, in effect, suppose them to be, not stewards, but lords or proprietors. For he supposes them to have an absolute, uncontroulable right to apply their cha­ritable fund to whatever good uses they please. [Page 141]This he evidently does, by putting that reply of the good Housholder, the Proprietor and Lord of all, into their mouths, to stop the mouths of those who cry out on abuses and misapplications —‘Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? is thine eye evil, because I am good?’ This answer could with no pro­priety be adopted by a steward, when accused or suspected of abusing his trust, and alienating the money committed to him from the particular designs of it. The language is sutable only to a proprietor, at absolute liberty to dispose of his own goods as he pleases, without being obliged to give an account of his conduct; as the Society expresly are, by their charter—‘The said Socie­ty shall yearly, and every year, give an account in writing’, &c. And is it not a little singular, that this argumentative and rhetorical gentleman should thus, in the same breath, make the Society both stewards and sovereign proprietors of the charitable fund in their hands?—characters ab­solutely incompatible with each other in the same persons, and with relation to the same thing; as he applies them to the Society, ‘to convince the candid’, and all but "the obstinate" and "malicious"; which, he says, ‘is not in the power of reason.’

6. THO' the members of the Society are themselves large contributers to this fund, it makes no material alteration in the case. What­ever they subscribe or contribute, ceases to be their own, their private property, as soon, as it is [Page 142]put into this common stock. It is then no lon­ger their own, to use as they please, or to alie­nate from the particular charitable ends menti­oned in their charter. This were sacrilege in a much more proper sense than that, in which the episcopal clergy have termed some other aliena­tions sacrilege. And supposing such an unjust thing to be designedly done, which I am not willing, to think, the words of the apostle to ANANIAS, who kept back part of the price, &c. would be very applicable to this case— ‘Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the holy. Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whiles it remained, was it not thine own?—Thou hast not lied unto men [only] but unto God’.—Let me just add here, that if the eye of any one is evil towards the Society, possibly some better reason may be given for it than this, that they are good; which were, in divers respects, the worst that could be assign­ed—: at least, it may not be, because they are too good to the colonies which most need their charity; or to the Negroes and Savages, who are the pro­per objects or it. ^†

SECTION XXI. Of the Plea, That the episcopal Missions in the Colonies, to rectify the State of Reli­gion in them, are a necessary Means of christianizing the Savages.

THIS is often mentioned in the Abstracts; and has not seldom served as a theme for popular declamation in the anniversary sermons. Mr. Apthorp has quoted, or at least pretended to quote, several of those sermons to this pur­pose. I have compared but one of these quo­tations with the text itself; that from the bp. of St. David's sermon; (Consid. p. 15.) In which short quotation of but eight lines, there are three or four deviations from the usual way of quot­ing. Some of his own words are inserted as the words of the sermon; clauses are left out, and parts of sentences at the distance of 13 pages in quarto are tacked together, and pointed as they ought to have been, if they had been con­tiguous in the sermon; tho' the pages from whence they are taken, are indeed referred to in the margin. How he has used some other au­thors from whom he quotes; and even that great Prelate who "presides over the church of Eng­land, and the Society itself," I have not thought it worth while to examine. He has not indeed misrepresented the sense of the bp. of St. David's sermon; and perhaps not that of other bps, &c. [Page 144]as to this point. For I know it is a usual thing for the preachers before the Society to talk in the same strain, about ‘remedying in the first place, the ill state of religion in our colonies themselves:’ without which care, it is said, ‘the conversion of the neighbouring Savages can hardly be effected;’ and the like.

LET it be here observed,

1. THAT all this kind of reasoning supposes, that one principal object of the Society, is, the conversion of the Savages; and so does not well harmonize with what Mr. Apthorp says else­where, however true in point of fact— ‘Indian conversions are undertaken by our Society incidentally, and as it were ex abundanti.’

2. THIS reasoning seems very just, when ap­plied to most of the British colonies, and the missions in them; viz. all those, the religious, or rather irreligious state of which, answers to the representations in the charter;—those colo­nies in which no tolerable provision was before made for ministers;—in which the people seem­ed abandoned to atheism and infidelity, or in danger of being perverted to popery, for want of the administration of God's word and sacra­ments. Sending missionaries to such places as these, is doubtless one proper means of propa­gating Christianity among the heathen. But,

3. NOTHING can well be less to the purpose than this kind of reasoning, when applied to the far greater part of N. England, where the pub­lick worship of God was so regularly upheld, [Page 145]and the people ‘had the means of religion al­ready, in other protestant communions.’ Such expressions as those, of remedying the ill state of religion in the colonies, and the like; when ap­plied to the Massachusetts and Connecticut, can naturally import nothing more than reducing us to an outward uniformity of profession, or converting us to episcopacy and the liturgy. But supposing this to be done, it is not easy to see how it would contribute much to the con­version of the Indians. Nay, if we consider what has been done hitherto to this end, by episcopalians and presbyterians, &c. respec­tively; there is great reason to think that our conversion to the church of England would rather retard than promote the conversion of the Savages. And it is intimated even in some of the anniversary sermons before the Society, that the people of New-England had provoked them to jealousy in this respect; tho' hitherto, to very little purpose. Thus particularly bishop BURNET says, ‘Let those who have a true zeal for the honor of our church, contribute to raise her glory, which hitherto has been too little advanced this way, while those who divide from us in NEW-ENGLAND, seem to have provok'd us to jealousy on this ac­count.’ ^† Similar concessions to our honor, might be produced from other anniversary sermons.

[Page 146]4. As the conversion of the heathen was from the first one professed aim of our Fore­fathers in settling in New-England; so almost all the royal charters, grants, letters patent, and acts of government in England, relative to this country, have made mention of, and encouraged, yea, enjoined upon us the pro­secution of this pious design; not considered as episcopalians, but as known dissenters from the English church. To which purpose is the following passage in the charter of this province, granted in the 12th of WILLIAM and MARY; the year before the Society's carter — ‘To dispose of matters and things whereby our subjects, inhabitants of our said province, may be religiously, peacea­bly and civily governed, protected and de­fended; so as their good life, and orderly conversation may win the Indians, natives of the country, to the knowledge and obe­dience of the only true God and Saviour of mankind, and the Christian faith; which his royal Majesty our royal Grandfather K. CHARLES the first, in his said letters patent, declared was his royal intention, and the adventurers free profession to be the principal end of the said plantation. And for the better maintaining and securing liberty of conscience, &c.’

5. CAN it be reasonably supposed that King WILLIAM, in the Society's charter granted the year after this, had the least thoughts of [Page 147]impowering them to employ a great part of their fund in converting Us to episcopacy, and uniformity in worship, either as one end of their institution, or as requisite means of con­verting the Indians;—a pious work all along recommended to, and enjoined upon the inha­bitants of New-England themselves! The royal charters, letters patent, grants, &c. sup­pose the settlers and inhabitants of this coun­try, tho' not episcopalians, to have been a re­ligious people, who were disposed and quali­fied to serve the interests of religion, by chris­tianizing the Indians. But it seems Mr. Ap­thorp, not to say, the Society, think that, in­stead of confining their pious care to the hea­thenish colonies, or applying themselves di­rectly to the Indians, they are to employ a great part of their fund in converting US to the liturgy, as a necessary means of converting the Savages. Is this such a method of justifying the New-England missions, as must needs "convince the candid?"—confute all but the "obstinate," and silence all but the "malici­ous!"

6. UPON supposition that our conversion to episcopacy had really some remote tendency to­wards the conversion of the Indians to the faith of Christ; (which is utterly denied) yet it may well be doubted, whether this would justify the Society in applying so great a part of their fund for the support and increase of the episcopal party here, in a country whose [Page 148]religious state no ways answers to the descrip­tions in the charter; to the neglect of other colonies, and the heathen themselves, the di­rect, proper objects of their charity. Colonies whose religious state is like that of the Massa­chusets and Connecticut, are implicitly exclu­ded from any share in this charity, by the re­presentations given in the charter, of those for which it was designed, so widely different therefrom. And to bring in these New-Eng­land missions and missionaries thus indirectly, or edge-ways, as a pretended means of converting the Savages, when they cannot be justified di­rectly, by the express, obvious design of the charter; is no better than an evasion; and one that naturally brings to mind those words of the CHIEF SHEPHERD, so often misappli­ed by episcopalians—‘He that entereth not by the door, into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.’—Tho' I do not mean to call the Society's missionaries among us, by those op­probrious names; or to give them any perso­nal affront. But,

7. IF it should be said, that any means which have even a remote tendency to the conver­sion of the Indians, may be used by the So­ciety to that end, by virtue of their "large discretionary power;" and if it is upon this footing that the missions here are justified, let us consider how far the same way of rea­soning might carry them, and where it would [Page 149]end. They think our conversion to episcopa­cy a means of converting the Indians. They are therefore, in pursuance of the maxim a­foresaid, right in maintaining missions here at a great annual expence, with the hopes of thrusting in the sickle, and reaping a mighty Indian harvest a century or two hence, when it is ripened by means of the benign influences of episcopacy upon New-England. Neither I, indeed, nor probably the reader, can see how this supposed means tends to the propo­sed end. It seems a round-about, aukward way of going to work: But no matter; the Society judge it proper, and that is sufficient. Let us then proceed one step farther. If the church of Scotland, for which WE have gene­rally a great veneration, was but first episcopized; this might possibly have some remote tenden­cy to induce us to conform to the church of England; and therefore a tendency, accor­ding to the present supposition, tho' more re­mote, to convert the Indians. NOW, if it should appear thus to the Society, they may, according to the maxim aforesaid, send mis­sionaries to convert the kirk, in order to the conversion of New-England; and this in or­der to convert the Savages on our frontiers. With the same pious design, they might also send missionaries into Holland, Geneva, the Swiss Cantons, &c. For though the charter says nothing of Scotland, Holland, Geneva, Switzerland, or even of New-England, but [Page 150]implicitly excludes them all from the charita­ble care of the Society; yet the Society, it is said, have a large discretionary power,—even oc­casionally to make alterations in their institution, in such a manner as to render it most beneficial to re­ligion, whether in our colonies, or among the bor­dering nations.—Who then can doubt the right of the Society to maintain missions in all the protestant countries of Europe, to promote the peculiarities of the church of England, in or­der to the establishing of episcopacy and uni­formity among us; and to remedy the ill state of religion here, without which, ‘the conver­sion of the neighbouring Savages can hard­ly be effected!’ — NOW, where Mr. Ap­thorp's method of reasoning, joined with such an imagination, may end, it is not easy to say; except perhaps in the Society's appointing proper persons to look out for some Geese of the breed of GONSALES, to carry missionaries to the moon, in order to convert the good man there to the church, in order to his com­ing as an apostle to convert us; and all this as a means of converting the Iroquois, &c. And indeed, considering how scriptural our religi­on is at present; and how unlikely we are to better ourselves by so great a change, either on temporal or spiritual accounts; it may be hoped that we shall not be generally episcopi­zed in a long time, unless that officious pla­net, at least by some secret and powerful influ­ence, should have a considerable hand in the apostolical work of our conversion.

[Page 151]IF this is too ludicrous for the grave reader, I ask his pardon. To be serious, is it not a surprising thing, that the Society should ex­pend large sums annually for half a century together, in order to establish episcopacy a­mong us, under the poor, thin pretext of its being a necessary means of converting the In­dians? —and at the same time neglect, in so great a degree, both the Indians themselves, and those heathenish colonies, which are the proper, direct objects of their institution! Can any supposed discretionary power, however large, possibly justify a conduct so aliene from the obvious sense, letter, and whole spirit of their charter?

SECTION XXII. Remarks on a curious Argument of Mr. Apthorp, in favor of the Church of England.

IT was by no means my design, in this pub­lication, to enter into the controversy be­twixt the church of England and us. But as Mr. Apthorp has thought fit to produce an argument in favor of the former, in the margin of the 22^d and 23^d pages of the Considerations, I cannot but take a cursory notice of it. ‘It [Page 152]is a good presumption,’ says he, ‘that the church of England is a reasonable Christian communion, and free from all extremes in its constitution; that all the various religi­ous persuasions, at home and abroad, con­cur in holding it next in esteem to their own. Considering the force of prejudice, what in every one's judgment holds the second place, may be supposed to deserve the first.’ The ingenious gentleman adds, that ‘for this ob­servation, as far as be can recollect, he is in­debted to a fine writer, Dr. JOHN BROWN’— Be that as it may, I can give a guess from whence it came originally; viz. from another learned Divine of the church of England; I mean Dr. SWIFT. For in his Dedication of of that curious theological production, entitled A TALE OF A TUB, are these words; — ‘It is a maxim, that those, to whom every body allows the second place, have an un­doubted title to the first.’ This he applies, in the way of compliment, to Lord SOMMERS.

BUT as to the observation itself, as applied in a compliment to THE CHURCH; where did either of these gentlemen get his intelligence, that ALL the various religious persuasions, at home and abroad, concur in holding the church of England NEXT in esteem to their own? Have they ex­plicitly declared so? Have the churches of Scotland, Holland, Geneva, the protestant Swiss Cantons? have the Lutheran and Greek chur­ches, &c, &c. by any solemn public act, pro­claimed [Page 153]claimed the church of England second best? Or has Mr. Apthorp the faculty of discerning the sentiments of all other churches, without their declaring them? Till this fact is well establi­shed, the argument which he deduces from it may well be called a presumption; but, that it is a good one, as he says, is not so evident.— There is indeed one church, a very ancient and extensive one, which, it may naturally be con­cluded, for a reason that shall be nameless, considers the communion of the church of England as the next best to her own. But it may well be doubted, whether one half the protestant churches in the world concur with her, in holding the church of England in such high esteem. And tho' this unsupported sup­position were a certain fact; yet it would be no proper evidence that the church of Eng­land is a reasonable Christian communion, and free from all extremes in its constitution, with those who plainly see many unreasonable, unchris­tian, and unscriptural extremes in her consti­tution, worship and discipline: Which almost any man, tolerably free from the prejudices of education, may easily see; and which have, in effect, been acknowledged and lamented by many of the wisest and best men of that communion; who would have been glad of a farther reformation with respect to those extremes. ^*

[Page 154]THE gentleman, by introducing this good presumption, as he calls it, tho' without foun­dation, in favor of the church of England, shews at least that he had not forgotten the great and important design of the Society's missions in these parts, viz. propagating the peculiarities of episcopacy, and reconciling us to the church of England. Hic labor, hoc opus est. What success the Society and mis­sionaries may have in this favourite project, which engrosses so much of the attention, and absorbs so much of the revenues of the former, while it is almost the sole business of the latter; God only knows. But I have good reason to think that, in general, I speak the sense of far the greater, wiser and better part of the people in New-England in the fol­lowing paragraph—

[Page 155]WHEN we consider the real constitution of the church of England; and how aliene her mode of worship is from the simplicity of the gospel, and the apostolic times: When we consider her enormous hierarchy, ascend­ing by various gradations from the dirt to the skies: When we consider the visible effects of that church's prevailing among us to the de­gree that it has: When we reflect on what our Forefathers suffered from the mitred, lord­ly SUCCESSORS of the fishermen of Galilee, for non-conformity to a non-instituted mode of worship; which occasioned their flight into this western world: When we consider that, to be delivered from their unholy zeal and oppressions, countenanced by scepter'd tyrants, they threw themselves as it were into the arms of Savages and Barbarians: When we reflect, that one principal motive to their ex­changing the fair cities, villages, and delight­ful fields of Britain for the then inhospitable shores and desarts of America, was, that they might here enjoy, unmolested, God's holy word and ordinances, without such heteroge­neous and spurious mixtures as were offensive to their well-informed consciences: When we consider the narrow, censorious and bitter spirit that prevails in too many of the episco­palians among us; and what might probably be the sad consequence, if this growing party should once get the upper hand here, and a major vote in our houses of Assembly: (in [Page 156]which case the church of England might be­come the established religion here; tests be ordained, as in England, to exclude all but conformists from posts of honor and emolu­ment; and all of us be taxed for the support of bishops and their underlings:) When we consider these things, and too many others to be now mentioned, we cannot well think of that church's gaining ground here to any great degree, and especially of seeing bishop's fixed among us, without much reluctance— Will they never let us rest in peace, except where all the weary are at rest? Is it not enough, that they persecuted us out of the old world? Will they pursue us into the new to convert us here? — compassing sea and land to make US proselytes, while they neglect the heathen and heathenish plantations! What other new world remains as a sanctuary for us from their oppressions, in case of need? Where is the COLUMBUS to explore one for, and pilot us to it, before we are consumed by the flames, or deluged in a flood of episcopa­cy? — For my own part, I can hardly ever think of our being pursued thus from Britain into the wilds of America, and from world to world, without calling to mind, tho' without applying, that passage in the Revelation of St. JOHN: ‘And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place; where she is nourished — from the face of the ser­pent. [Page 157]And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood, after the woman; that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.’

ONE of our Kings, it is well known, exci­ted his Scotch subjects to take up arms against him, in a great measure, if not chiefly, by attempting to force the English liturgy upon them, at the instigation of the furious episco­pal zealots of that day; by whom he was wheedled and duped to his destruction. But GOD be praised, we have a KING, whom Heaven long preserve and prosper, too wise, just and good to be put upon any violent measures, to gratify men of such a depraved turn of mind.—It is not my design, however, to dishonor the more moderate and Christian spirit of the English bishops since the REVO­LUTION, particularly of this day, by compa­ring it to the persecuting, anti-christian spirit of many prelates, antecedent to that glorious AERA of British liberty.

SECTION XXIII. Part of two letters of Sir WILLIAM ASHURST, Knight and Alderman, re­lative to the Society; with short Re­marks on them.

THE author has in his hands two original letters of Sir WILLIAM ASHURST, President of the Society for propagating the gospel in New-England and the parts adja­cent in America; of which Dr. DOUGLASS says, ‘The whole revenue of the corporation is £. 500 to £. 600 sterling per Annum. At present they exhibit small, but well placed salaries to several missionaries, English and Indians.’ ^†— These letters of Sir WILLIAM were written to a person in Boston, concern­ing the affairs of that Society; but contain some strictures on the other; by which it ap­pears how early it was suspected, that their views were not altogether so public-spirited and catholic, as might have been wished. The first of them is dated, London, August 5, 1704. and contains the remarkable words fol­lowing— ‘We have lately had a new Corpo­ration erected here for propagating the gospel, [Page 159]&c. among the episcopal clergy. In my last letters in March, I sent Mr. SEWALL a scheme of their proceedings. I envy not their engaging in so pious a design, but hear­tily wish them all imaginable success. But their first steps discover no great deal of charity for their fellow Christians. For they would insinuate, that WE have no ministers employ­ed in this conversion work in America; and therefore I cannot expect much from them. I doubt not but those employed by US are as good ministers as the best of them, (tho' they have not episcopal ordination) and may be fitter to be employed in this work,’ &c.

THE other letter bears date August 10, 1714. and contains the following passage— ‘It is a great rejoicing to us, to hear from you of the success that our endeavours have had amongst those poor people; [i. e. the Indians] and I heartily wish the Society you take notice of had made greater improvements of the advantages they have over us. But I am afraid God will not bless their endea­vors; they having neither right ends in their view, nor employing proper instruments in the work. To propagate the Christian re­ligion in its purity and simplicity, is an hea­venly work; but to make it only a color to aggrandize the hierarchy, and to promote the interest and glory of what they call The church, cannot either be called a good work, nor can expect a blessing upon it.’—

[Page 160]WHETHER the conduct of the Society since these letters were written, and the series of facts relative thereto, do not prove to a de­monstration, that the Society have been in­fluenced by narrow, party, unworthy views in a great degree; and consequently, that Sir WILLIAM was no ill prophet, is submitted to the judgment of the intelligent and impar­tial reader.

SECTION XXIV. That by the Cession of Canada, &c. there is now a noble Prospect of much being done towards christianizing the Indians, provided this good Work is heartily and discretely prosecuted.

WHAT is past cannot be recalled, or undone: But abuses may be refor­med, if the authors should be sensible of them, and not above altering their measures. The cession of Canada and the best part of Louisiana, if confirmed to Great-Britain, will give the several religious and charitable Socie­ties in England, Scotland and New-England, erected for promoting the common cause of Christianity, advantages for spreading the gos­pel among the heathen in America, much su­perior to what they would otherwise be. And tho' some of the political reasons for attempt­ing [Page 161]the conversion of the Indians, may not be altogether so strong as they were, while we had the French so near us for rivals and enemies on this continent; yet all the obliga­tions arising from humanity, piety and charity remain in their full force. Yea, these are re­ally heightened in the same degree that obsta­cles to this good work are removed out of the way. It may be naturally expected that the Indians will be more accessible and tractable to us and our missionaries, by reason of the fall of Canada, and the French power in America, than they were before, either to us or to the French; as they will now be rather more dependent upon us. These circumstances, of such great importance to the prosperity of the British colonies, and to Great-Britain herself, may well be considered as a loud call of pro­vidence to her and them, to engage heartily in the business of christianizing the Natives: And the religious obligation hereto, increases in proportion to the prospect, or probability of success in the attempt; as was hinted before.

THERE is no reason to doubt, from any thing that is past, but that the Societies referred to before, excepting one, will be forward to improve the opportunity, and all advantages which God in his providence affords, for spreading the knowledge of his truth, and the common salvation among the American Savages. And so far as words and professions can go,—even the most solemn, and addressed to the greatest [Page 162]personages, there is the strongest reason to con­clude that that Society will not neglect so fair an opportunity as is now presented to them, for propagating Christianity among these nations. For the Society for propagating the gospel in fo­reign parts, in their address to His Majesty, 1760, presented by the Archbishop of Canterbury, express themselves thus—‘This Society was wisely founded by our great deliverer King WILLIAM, that the remotest of the plantations, by the instruction of an orthodox clergy, might be preserved from the danger of in­fidelity, and guarded against the restless at­tempts of popery; and that the pure light of the gospel might be spread amongst those a­round them, who sat in the darkness of hea­thenism. The glorious acquisitions which have enlarged your Majesty's empire in Ame­rica, open a yet more extensive field for our at­tention and care. And we do HUMBLY AND SOLEMNLY ASSURE your Majesty, that, so far as our ability reaches,—we will exert our utmost endeavours, that no part of your Majesty's dominions for which our duty calls us to provide, may remain unfurnished with the means of being instructed in genuine Christianity: and will GO ON’ [Quere, Whe­ther this should not rather have been, BEGIN] ‘to study and use diligently the most probable methods of converting, not only the NE­GRO SLAVES, but the neighbouring IN­DIANS.’ ^†

[Page 163]IT is to be hoped that the venerable Socie­ty will not forget these SOLEMN ASSURAN­CES, as they seem to have forgotten others si­milar to them in times past; and go on to mis­apply large sums annually, for supporting and increasing the episcopal party or faction in New-England, instead of using diligently the most probable methods of CONVERTING either the NEGRO SLAVES or neighbouring INDIANS. If Indian conversions have hitherto been under­taken by the Society only "incidentally, and as it were ex abundanti," as Mr. Apthorp says; yet it may be expected that, after these protes­tations, they will undertake them in a different manner; with more zeal and vigor, and a less sparing hand as to money; curtailing their superfluous expences in the Massachusets and Connecticut, ^† where their assistance is not needed to save Us from atheism, infidelity or popery; where ‘"Non tali auxilio, nec defensoribus istis Tempus eget"—’ Or if their memory should be treacherous, it may be hoped there will not be wanting those about his Majesty's person, to remind them of their humble and solemn assurances to HIM: Es­pecially since their non-observance of them may prove of very pernicious consequence, not on­ly to His American dominions, but to Great-Britain. Of which in the following section.

SECTION XXV. Of the political Reasons still remaining, for endeavouring to christianize the Indians.

SOME people may perhaps imagine, that since the cession of Canada, &c. there are no motives or reasons besides merely reli­gious ones, to attempt the civilizing and convert­ing the American Indians. That the politi­cal ones which before subsisted, are lessened in some degree, is not denied; but, that they are wholly ceased, no one who duly considers the matter, can suppose.

TO say nothing of the benefits that might re­sult herefrom to the agriculture, fishery and na­vigation of the colonies, and to the British com­merce, even upon supposition that there was not a jesuit, popish priest, emissary, or one Frenchman upon this continent; it is to be remembred, that human affairs are subject to great changes and revolutions, as we have lately seen, particularly in America. We cannot be certain that others may not take place hereafter, almost as much to our prejudice, as those are to our advantage. At least, human prudence re­quires that every thing of that sort should be guarded against, as far as human foresight and power can do it. And one means hereof doubt­less is, using the present opportunity of spread­ing, as far as may be, the Christian, protestant religion among the Natives; and thereby engag­ing [Page 165]them heartily in the British interest, in op­position to the French.

THE French are a very powerful and politic, ambitious and enterprising nation: They do not long sit down easy under great losses; and they soon recover themselves by peace, after being exhausted by war. In all probability, they will continue to carry on intrigues with the Indians of Canada, and on the East of the Missisippi, by means of their emissaries, to the prejudice of our colonies; not without hopes of finding their ends in it at lest—The reverend and learned EDWARD WIGGLESWORTH, D. D. HOLLI­SIAN ^† Professor of divinity at Harvard College in Cambridge, who has thought much and long on the affair of the missions and the Indians, has obliged me with two or three letters since I have been writing on this subject. In one of them (which I obtained his leave to make use of on this occasion) he speaks particularly of what has last been hinted at. And, I conceive, the best use I can make of it, is to give the pub­lic the substance of it in the Doctor's own words, as follows.

—‘Probably it may now be generally thought, that since Canada is reduced, nothing more is to be apprehended from the Indians; but that we shall live in perpetual peace and good neighbourhood with them. Tho' it may be thought a weakness, I must own, that I entertain very different apprehensions. I [Page 166]believe that the French, in spite of all precau­tions that can be taken, will continue mission­aries among all those tribes of Indians, who have been used to have them; and will thrust them into as many others as they possibly can. One great business of these will be, to keep up a strong disaffection to the English in the Savages, in hopes of making use of them, at some future favourable conjuncture, to dis­tress our provinces again, and recover their own losses. To answer such an end, the French missionaries will make no difficulty to dress and paint like Savages, and pass for as very Indians as any of them, even in visits to our sorts and frontier towns. And I know of nothing that can prevent such mismanage­ments, but our having missionaries among the Indians, who shall be men of genius enough to gain their esteem, and the same ascendency over them, which the French missionaries get, wherever they come.’

‘IF any should be so sanguine as to flatter themselves, that we shall never again have a weak administration at home, which may encourage the French to attempt to recover what they have lost in America; yet we have found by experience, when Mr. DUMMER commanded in chief, that by jesuitical influ­ence the Indians may be spirited to make war upon us, even when the French dare not ap­pear to help or abet them. And if that war had not been conducted in a manner very different from the conduct of any other war we have ever had with our Eastern tribes of [Page 167]Indians, before or since; they would have been no more humbled then, than they used to be at other times; but might have con­tinued to harass our borders, till we had been much more weary of the war than they. And if any tribes of Indians now should be set on, by secret French emissaries among them, to ravage our new settlements, and murder the inhabitants; I suspect they might live better by it than by hunting: And they might [perhaps] be better supplied with all they want, except money for our scalps, by such English provinces as they were pleased not to molest, than they ever were by the French in Canada.’

THE preceeding extract is given, not only as very clearly and precisely expressing my own apprehensions; but because it is naturally con­cluded, that coming from an aged gentleman, of so superior and respectable a character as Dr. WIGGLESWORTH, it will have a greater attention paid to it, than the same things coming only from myself could have claimed. Let me add; It is undoubted fact, that in some of our French and Indian wars, the Savages have been supplied even with ammunition from one or more of the British colonies: And it has been reported, I believe truly, that the cloaths of some of our people, butchered by them, have been very amicably sold at Albany, with the blood upon them—In a word, the ne­cessity of having a considerable number of missionaries among the Indians, is so apparent and urgent, in a political, as well as religious [Page 168]consideration of things; that one can hardly help entertaining some hopes that the govern­ment, either at home or in America, or both, may in their wisdom see cause to do something towards sending and supporting them: At least, that the several corporations erected in part, if not chiefly for that very end, will pursue it with a zeal adequate to the importance of it.

SECTION XXVI. Containing some farther Strictures on the Manner of Mr. Apthorp's conducting his Defence of the Society.

MR. Apthorp's defence of the Society is entitled, "CONSIDERATIONS," &c. And tho' it has not been thought needful to follow him step by step; yet, I flat­ter myself, enough has been said to convince the impartial, that those Considerations were both written and published with far too little consideration. He began his triumph, however, or rather insult, in the title-page, by a long, scornful, most contemptuous motto; in which he intimates, how much beneath him he thought it to enter the lists with any person, who was so hardy as to object against the Society; reproach­ing them all, in effect, as vain, impudent liars— "Vanos continuò ac mendaces esse"—This revi­ling motto, which serves him as an exordium, is from the Evangelical Preparation of EUSEBIUS: [Page 169]And on the other side of the same leaf are adver­tized, "SERMONS on PRAYER, with FORMS of "DEVOTION": which we may charitably suppose designed for general use;—both for those who had devotion before, without much formality; and those who had formality enough before, without much devotion. Next appears his humble submission of his defence, to the "judgment and decision" of his venerable Clients, the Society, of which he is himself a member. In the first page, (numbered 7) he proposes a question that is hardly intelligi­ble; speaks of it as very "interesting", and modesty expresses his intention to determine it "once for all"—And this, without ‘the least intention of offence or controversy’, (p. 8.) He also says there, ‘The proposed vindication is designed to convince the candid. To confute the obstinate, and silence the malicious, is not in the power of reason.’ But, by the way, I have always supposed that the obstinate were as capable of being confuted by the power of reason, as others; tho' much more hard to be convinced, or put to silence: And I hope that this gentle­man will never serve as an example, to shew the wide difference betwixt these things, which he now seems to consider as the same. But be that as it may, ‘"Quid dignum tanto feret hic PROMISSOR hiatu!"’

IT appears that he was put upon this desperate undertaking, by something which, it seems, hid offended him in a news-paper, relative to the missions. And p. 9. he threatens the unknown author of a supposed insult on the dead, with [Page 170]instant destruction from his powerful quill; say­ing with the old Trojan Hero,

Considering the occasion, I wonder he did not adopt the next words also—

And the following line may perhaps be proper for a motto for him, if he should again write on the subject: viz. ‘Talia jactabam, et furiatâ mente ferebar.’ But as he was to determine the matter once for all, this is not to be expected.

FROM the 9th to the 18th p. we find him chiefly employed, first in misquoting, and then in misrepresenting the charter; in putting in an exclusive claim to orthodoxy for the clergy of the church of England; making the Society stewards and sovereign proprietors, in the same breath; reproaching others with "great ignorance, or something worse"; reviling the religion of our Forefathers in the most opprobrious terms; and shewing how greatly our reformation in religi­on,—without the improvement of our morals or piety, is the work of the Society.

HAVING thus prepared the way, he proposes (p. 18.) ‘to take leave of this popular objection [against the Society] with so full a confutation, that it will be disingenuous ever to advance it again.’ How is that to be done?—Why, by ‘confidently resting his proof on the unexceptio­nable testimony of two—Prelates’—; both of [Page 171]them members of the Society—Let us see how many metamorphoses they have already past thro'; 1st. they were Clients, 2dly. Judges, 3dly. they are Witnesses; and all in the same cause, their own. But then, they are most unexceptionable Witnesses—‘incapable either of mistake or misre­presentation in a matter so thoroughly known to them.’ And (p. 19) he speaks of the "in­vincible reasons" of one of them. So that Mr. Apthorp's fruitful imagination has produc­ed another metamorphosis. It seems they are now neither Clients, Judges, nor Witnesses; but, 4ly. Reasoners, pleading their own cause. What they say, whether called their testimony or their reasoning, has been taken notice of; and others may think for themselves, whether it is unan­swerable and invincible, or not.

PAGE 23. Mr. Apthorp, as well he might, makes an ‘apology for his undertaking to vin­dicate a Society, which is above censure, as it is incapable of wrong motives.’—An extraordinary Society indeed! And surely some apology was needed for officiously undertaking the defence of a Society so incapable of erring. So that he has, in effect, infallible Clients, infallible Judges, infallible Witnesses, and infallible Reasoners; all on the same side with his own infallible Self, and all in the same persons! Did ever any man under­take a more needless work! He seems indeed to repent; and ‘promises, in amends, to employ his studies, for the future, to better purposes,’ (p. 23.) Upon which condition, I think he ought to be forgiven; and, all things considered, I know [Page 172]of none so unlikely to overlook his officious error, as the Society themselves—But it would seem hard, not to shew some lenity to him; especially if, as he there says, ‘This business, in truth, was forced upon him’—In such a case, whose stars could possibly prevent their writing; if they will but make the sad case their own! This force, it seems, was chiefly put upon him by a Braintree gentle­man, who, as he supposes, had insulted the memory of a deceased missionary; and ‘by the honor done him of sharing in the insult’; as he has accurately expressed it. He is very severe on the said Braintree gentleman: Whom, however, I should think almost as inhuman and barbarous as he has been represented, if he desired any severer revenge on Mr. Apthorp, than that he should write more SUCH CONSIDERATIONS and DE­FENCES.

Mr. Apthorp then passes some other compliments of a pretty extraordinary nature, however just, on the Society, ‘the honor of our age and nati­on,’ &c. These might possibly, however, have come from some other person with as good a grace, as from a member of the Society; accord­ing to that old maxim, ‘Let another praise thee, and not thine own mouth.’ He then gives it as his opinion, that the Society ‘cannot better apply their munificence than in providing, throughout our colonies, for the decent celebra­tion of public religion’. By which, accord­ing to his whole argument, he must mean plant­ing episcopal churches even in those colonies, where the people ‘have the means of religion [Page 173]already, in other protestant communions’. And who can doubt, but that this is a better way of applying their munificence, than sending missiona­ries to the heathens, or only to the heathenish colonies, almost ‘abandoned to atheism and infidelity!’

IN the last page, however, he talks in a rap­turous strain about ‘beholding this extensive country, just won to the British empire, gra­dually acceding, AMONG its numerous inhabi­tants, to the empire of JESUS CHRIST, and of consequence, flourishing in ARTS, in SCI­ENCE’, &c. The arts and sciences are indeed very valuable in their places; tho' they do not seem to be AMONG the primary or principal of those important blessings, which flow from the knowledge and obedience of JESUS CHRIST. However, they are not to be despised. And who can doubt, but that they will be as much improved by the mission of so accomplish'd a Scholar as Mr. Apthorp, in the confines of our College, as the religious state of the country has been amended by the episcopal missions in gene­ral? This was perhaps one design of the cha­ritable Society therein; that so the advancement of learning among us, may in time be as greatly their work, as the reformation of our religion is at present: I would hope, much more so—

AFTER quoting something on this noble oc­casion from VIRGIL, Mr. Apthorp concludes with some fine lines from Mr. POPE's MESSI­AH: Tho' if he had either mentioned POPE's name, or mark'd them as a quotation, he might [Page 174]perhaps at once have been thought less a poet by the common people, and given ill-natur'd critics less occasion to tax him as a plagiary. Not that I myself in the least doubt his poetical talents. For even in this didactic performance, he has obliged us with many specimens of a sin­gular imagination, a florid, rhetorical diction, a brisk, lively way of reasoning, marvellous turns of argument, surprising hyperboles, and divers other licences even in grammar, truly poetical: Nay, he has altered, not to say corrected two of these lines from POPE! ‘[Dum malè recitas, incipit esse tuum —]’

NOW, from a gentleman whose prosaic, ar­gumentative compositions are so agreeably be­mused, what might not be expected, if he were to write poetry in earnest!—But it may be doubted whether he will be able to spare time from his more important concerns, to oblige the world in this way; especially if, as some of late suppose, ‘—his reverend mind Begins to grow right-rev'rendly inclin'd’—