Part 2

Alas! my Lord, you well know how many sad examples might be brought to demonstrate the reverse: why then put me to the needless task of reminding you of the many times and occasions when the “several denominations of Christians have united, upon a liberal basis, their zeal and exertion, to an unexampled degree,” for the utter destruction of church and state? Why should I be forced to enter upon the disgraceful history of men, who, with words smoother than butter, and softer than oil, with fair promises of taking sweet counsel together, and walking to the house of God as friends, have put forth their hands against such as be at peace with them, have broke their covenant, and drawn their swords against them? The church’s many scars and wounds as yet unhealed, and sores that are daily vexed, have taught her not to lean upon every arm that is held out to support her weak and tottering strength. Experience always begets caution; and knowledge of degenerate human nature, brings with it circumspection. She reads in the sacred volume written for our learning, of Joab’s slippery trick with Abner; and till she can be persuaded that he who speaks quietly and peaceably means no mischief, it would now be worse than imprudence to turn aside to speak at all. The church, my Lord, is not solicitous for such companions as these; and why should your Lordship be solicitous to bring her sons and servants into familiarity with those who despise her, and are plotting her destruction?

Permit me to address you as a Church of England man; as a man who fears God, honours the king, and hears the church. Allow us, my Lord, to reason together a little, upon this project of yours, to which you call my attention, and endeavour to engage my feelings. You propose an alliance between the churchman and every description of religionists, who either use or abuse the name of Christ; that is, in the new phrase, between Christians of the “several denominations.” Has your Lordship weighed well the advantages and disadvantages that are likely to accrue to the church? Supposing the design of this proposed association to be as pure as it appears to your Lordship, and that the exclusive object be, to disseminate Bibles throughout the world; will this new connexion empower the church to extend its bounds, and to confer its salutary blessings upon those who sit in darkness? Is this likely to be effected by the aid and assistance of those whole delight has always been to clip the silver wings of the heavenly dove, and to pluck her golden feathers from her breast? When did she ever soar, but to encounter a cloud of enemies, to tempt the rapine of every bird of prey under heaven—to offer a luscious and inviting morsel to all the several hungry “denominations of christians, to whom the happy constitution of this country,” your Lordship says, “affords _equal_ protection with herself?” If the church to which you profess to belong, be really a part of the Holy Catholic Church, that kingdom of Christ in which we are promised pardon and salvation—is it likely to be enlarged and promoted on earth, by a coalition with those who profanely hold it in derision, and disdainfully, dispitefully, and cruelly load her with all the ill names that the most vindictive malice can suggest? Look to all the public acts of your new friends; observe the spirit of all their various and varying publications; and what do we find, but one steady and unremitting plan of hostility; sometimes marked with smiles and proffered fraternity; sometimes ferocious and formidable, with open mischief and attack? And if by this connection, it be impossible to enlarge the pale of the church, there appears no probability that its interests of any sort can be safe and secure; for that opposition which would prevent its extension, must infallibly operate, and does indeed operate, to produce its destruction.

In this projected association, indeed, the danger of final destruction to the established church is scarcely concealed; it is open and evident even to him who runs and reads its proposals. It scarcely needs a suspicious eye; it only needs the attentive one. How this has escaped your Lordship, and several other illustrious friends of this association, I cannot explain; unless we bear in mind, that those who mean well themselves, are the last to suspect evil in others.

But let us see, my Lord, how the case stands, and examine what claim I have to credit, when I assert, that your society is in direct opposition to the interests of the established church. In this association, with no previous reconciliation between the church and her acknowledged adversaries, the church is invited, by your Lordship, to meet the several denominations of Christians in all their avowed and secret enmity. Thank heaven, the gates of nonconformity have never, since the grand rebellion, prevailed against the church; and if her members were true to themselves, and to the cause they profess to espouse, in this happy country they never would. But if such projects as this, which your Lordship recommends, become popular and numerous, and are supported by such patronage as appears at the head of this—with tears, and many an heart-rending pang, I must soon bid a last farewell to that venerable mother, that chaste spouse of Christ, who hath borne many an illustrious child of God, and many an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven!

What your Lordship, who has seen a little of the world, can expect from such a meeting, but the usual manners and actions of those several denominations you convene, what you can possibly calculate upon, but the scratchings and sightings, which you know are usual with the parties when on the outside of the tavern walls, it is difficult to guess. Not one friend do you attempt to gain for the church, nor to conciliate a single foe. They are to meet; and by the sweet call of charity, chanted most musically from your Lordship’s lips, peace is to be preserved, and war is no more to be known. But it was to have been expected, that your Lordship, who professes to be of the _established denominations_ of Christians, if you had been disinclined to _assist_ the church, would certainly not have _betrayed_ her, in any degree or mode; much less have addressed a clergyman, inviting him to do the same. My Lord, this I never will believe was your own act and deed. You have lent an incautious ear to some insidious friend, who abuses your respectable name to purposes of his own. How else is it possible to conceive that your Lordship could have invited me into an association, under such a regulation as that which is numbered eleven? in which the committee, (which is “to conduct the business of the society, appoint all officers, except the treasurer, have power to call special meetings, and are charged with procuring for the society suitable patronage) shall consist of thirty-six laymen; of whom, twenty-four who shall have most frequently attended, shall be eligible for re-election for the ensuing year; six shall be foreigners, resident in London or its vicinity; half the remainder shall be members of the Church of England, and the other half members of other denominations of Christians!!!”

_We have here a standing majority against the church_! Oh, my Lord, how could you join in such a plot? What could induce your Lordship to lend your name to such a business as this; and why should you think so basely of the clergy, as to tempt them, by you own example and fair reputation, to sign the death warrant of the established church, and the instrument of their own ruin?

It cannot escape you, my Lord, that at present (and thank God for it) the church enjoys a very large majority against the combined members of all the several tolerated denominations of Christians. According to the most authentic calculation, she can produce more than four of her members to one dissenter. So that if the constitution of your committee had been formed upon a fair and righteous basis, there plainly should have been at least _four_ churchmen to _one_ of the other denominations. But here, my lord, strange to tell, you propose to deprive the church of her natural numbers and strength, you take from her, her best means of defence, and invite her into the midst of her sworn enemies! Where is the liberality of this, my Lord? Where is the justice? The first temptation held out to the public, is the _liberal basis_ of your establishment. Is it liberal, my Lord, to deprive one party of more than three fourths of its strength, and to throw it among the others, who have no other right to it, nor expectation of it, but what they derive from your Lordship? No doubt, my Lord, if you can gain your point, and can tempt the clergy into your scheme, there will not be a single Nonconformist, Papist, Socinian, or Quaker, silent in your praise. No doubt your unbounded liberality will be sounded forth, by every gospel-preacher in the church, and every twanging teacher in the conventicle. Ungrateful wretches would they be, were they to pass by unnoticed, and un-eulogised so great a friend to their cause. A friend indeed; whole unexampled zeal and exertions in their favour, must raise their memory to their halcyon days of 1648, and fill their beating bosoms, with well-grounded hopes of once more realizing those scenes, which, but for your Lordship, and a few other _liberal_ men, they little expected to see. But what will the _church_ say? What will _four-fifths of the nation_ think of your Lordship’s “liberal basis,” which is treacherously withdrawn from the established church, to build up the walls of conventicles and meeting-houses? Do you expect that any honest clergyman, in his sound senses, can relish your Lordship’s liberality, for such conduct as this? It is too gross, my Lord, to pass. I am lost in astonishment and grief, when I see a man who professes so much good-will to the pure Christianity of the country; whole well-known integrity and respectable talents, might have tempted the woe-worn church to look up to his piety and pity for relief; whose rank and credit in the world, afford him much ability to bestow it; when I see such a man engaged in a fearful scheme, by which our Zion may be pulled down, and her enemies exalted upon her ruins—alas! for these things I weep: “mine eye, mine eye runneth down with water, because the comforter that _should_ relieve my soul, is far from me.”

My Lord, I repeat it again, I am convinced you have been deceived. Were you a known enemy to the church, or even a suspected one, doubtless it would be highly gratifying to your Lordship and companions, to accomplish the object to which you solicit my concurrence. At present, the church is far too strong for her combined adversaries; the contest is unequal. Confident, I am, there is none but an enemy could have advised this:—an enemy, with whom it is far more dangerous to treat than to fight; therefore let her take a friend’s advice, for once, and stand upon her guard. Let her be _true_ to herself, and the gates of hell shall never prevail against her.

In point of strength, therefore, to establish herself, and to resist her numerous foes, it is impossible that the church can be any gainer by your Lordship’s heterogeneous society; on the contrary, it is perfectly evident that she would be extremely injured; in as much as she is deprived of _more than three-fourths_ of her natural strength, which is given by your Lordship to the general mass of her avowed enemies. A standing majority of dissenters is constituted _against_ her. Nor can I devise one argument sufficient to tempt her, unshielded as she is, by want of discipline and good government, to throw away that natural defence which God Almighty has given her, and trust to the liberality and protection of those who threaten, and are daily compassing her destruction.

Nor is the church more likely to gain any thing to her dignity by her new associates, than to her interest. It is prophesied in scripture, as a comfort to the church, that one day she should have “kings for her nursing fathers, and queens for her nursing mothers.” Your Lordship holds out nothing of this sort in your society. It cannot be denied that a few nobility are found in your list, and some other folk of high rank, but of such a description as we should not have expected to find there. But, my Lord, as it is not the mere presence of a nobleman that can make the company which he honours with his presence, either creditable or polite, so I presume at once, that I am not required to consider your association as a creditable one, merely because I find at its head your Lordship, and a few other respectable names. For when I cast my eye downwards to the motley list of subscribers, I find such names as can certainly reflect no credit upon the church. There I recognize the dissenting teacher, the Methodist preacher, the preaching blacksmith, &c. who can make but awkward nurses of the church. But one thing is plain, that although _our_ credit will be no gainer by the company you propose, it is not so with _them_. If we may take their account of themselves, their doctrines and communications have hitherto been confined chiefly to the inferior ranks. If your society succeeds, it will be a society for “bettering their condition;” a thing to them, it may be presumed, by no means unpleasant or ineligible. The scriptures promise to none called Christians but in the church; and history proves that none but the church have enjoyed the splendor and favour of princes. If, therefore, these several denominations have not, and cannot procure, the nursing of kings and queens, is it to be wondered at that they should be glad to share the partiality of a nobleman or two? the benign influence of some wandering star?

Moreover, as it is notorious that several _liberal_ friends of rank have strenuously defended the dissenting denominations of Christians against the one established, but scarcely any have been persuaded to quit their connection with the church, and honour the meeting-house with their presence; it would not be an easy thing for those several denominations to prove their connection with their friends in the church, were it not for the opportunities afforded them by societies established upon “liberal basis.” Here, indeed, it is with all the members, as the proverb goes, “hail-fellow well met.” All is unity and charity, and Christian benevolence; and every thing that is good! Here is realized the pretty hand-in-hand frontispiece to the Christian Ladies Pocket Book, 1803. In sweetest harmony we view the preaching shopman and the British peer; the Methodist, and Baptist, and Independent, the Antinomian, &c. &c. &c. and a venerable Bishop of the Church of England. But, my Lord, if it be fact that few men of opulence, and fewer still of rank, frequent the conventicle or meeting-house, although several are well-known supporters of the cause; if men of influence and consideration, who continue to revile the church, still think proper to remain nominal members of her communion; till I am favoured by your Lordship with a better reason for this strange inconsistent behaviour, I am satisfied with this; that _her_ society is that, which in spite of calumny is to be preferred, that still, in their sober moments, even men of the world do think it more creditable to be accounted members of our venerable church, than a subscriber to the meeting-house; they proceed as if they adopted the idea of the gay king, and thought that the church was fitter for gentlemen than the conventicle.

It cannot, therefore, be upon the notion of adding respectability to the church, that your Lordship fosters this institution: although it is evident that much respectability may be reflected upon our dissenting brethren by a connexion with the church. This they know and feel, and by their conduct avow; and certainly no man could object to see their condition improved by connection with good company, were it not that the society by which they are benefitted, must feel exactly the reverse by an association with them. The question in short must be put, who are the gainers by this new connection? The answer will direct us to the party to which your Lordship, either by chance or design, has condescended to favour, at the expence of the other.

May I crave your Lordship’s attention to consider another material point. I speak as to a true Churchman; judge you what I say. How is it likely to fare with true religion, as to _purity_, when your association shall be arranged and perfected according to the proposed plan? A man of your Lordship’s known integrity and serious turn of mind, cannot be supposed to be a member of the church but from conviction; upon conviction, that of all the several denominations of Christians, that established is the purest and best; of course, that all others are not so pure, and, upon the whole, are worse.

Now we read in the sacred volume, that evil communication corrupts good manners. “He that toucheth pitch,” saith the son of Sirach, “shall be defiled therewith.” Shall we not then extremely endanger the rectitude of our opinions and manners, by constant and intimate communication with all sorts of impure and erroneous religionists? Familiarity would soon lesson the deformity of the most abhorred doctrines, and daily intercourse would in time smooth the way, first with ease to tolerate, and then to favour acknowledged and pernicious errors. And this I speak, not with relation to that denomination alone, to which your Lordship belongs; it holds with all the others in common. The Socinian, for instance, charges idolatry upon the Calvinist; the Calvinist returns the charge, and accuses the other of denying his Saviour. And is it possible, that two such opposite sects can cordially unite for religious purposes, and enter into familiar friendship, without considerable danger to the purity of that creed, which each of them deems the true one? Will the Socinian deem it safe to give the right hand of fellowship to an idolator; and will the Calvinist do the same to the despiser of his redeemer? Surely not; if they meet upon such terms as shall secure to each party the purity of his faith, they must meet upon the ground of religious indifference: for if each party be hearty in his cause, and zealous for his religion, he will not only stiffly maintain it against his friend; but, if he be touched with one feeling of benevolence, he will endeavour to gain his friend to that side, which he considers as the religion of God; and then, I presume, it is evident, that all security is gone, with respect to the other’s faith; for the zeal of his friend will be perpetually assailing what he deems the truth; and, doubtless, each party will be always ready to quote against his friend, the strong words of the Apostle Paul. “What concord hath Christ with Belial?” “What part” will the Calvinist say, “hath he that believeth, with an infidel?” Whilst the Socinian with equal spirit may retort, “What agreement hath the temple of God with idols?” To speak in no hardier terms of your Lordship’s invitation into your association, than I feel by conscience bound to speak; do you not my Lord, at least, lead the clergy into temptation, a thing against which they daily pray? And is it not presumption, to trust themselves in the company of so many agreeable gentleman, who, if they be honest, must infallibly endeavour to seduce them from their first faith? The divine grace is no where promised to those who sin wilfully: and surely, it is to tempt God’s providence, to expect to come off harmless, where we know he has in general made no way to escape. My Lord, “you _know_ your strength, and I know mine: neither our own, but given.” Nothing with me has such fascinating charms as good company; and nothing sooner would seduce me from my principles. Feeling myself, therefore, too weak to say, that it is positively out of the power of any of your friends to persuade me out of the means of salvation, or to defraud me of the all-sufficient merits and atonement of my adored Redeemer, I must in prudence, and in conscience, decline your Lordship’s invitation. I am perfectly aware that there are some chosen, favoured persons, who seem to possess much greater fortitude and spiritual strength, than I can boast, or than I judge, the bulk of mankind can pretend to; doubtless, (for charity compels us so to determine) they have by some revealed means, secured a more than ordinary measure of grace, and so can safely make a bolder flight in the thickest of this world’s temptations and trials; else, might we ignorantly ask, what concord hath a mitre with a meeting-house? Why should a clergyman of the Church, be unequally yoked with a lovely sister of the conventicle? But upon these heads, my Lord, I refer you to a certain officer of the society. Perhaps, he can resolve us how a clergyman of the church, can attend the meeting-house, without danger to his principles, or gross indecorum towards the church, and its spiritual superior. He perhaps, can shew us too, how a clergyman of the church, can securely, and without breach of trust, take his pupils to hear the harangues of those who daily revile her. This to common understandings, does not appear to be the likely way “to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrines, contrary to God’s word,” which every clergyman at his ordination solemnly promises to do. It wants some clearing up. I am sure I have no such extraordinary grace, as to justify me in any such dangerous experiments; and therefore, I dare not expose myself to such temptations, as I see persons more spoken of for piety, practice every day. In short, my Lord, I confess my great fear, that frequent communication with those whom we both consider as corrupt concerning the faith, would in the end defile the purity of my own; and therefore, without presumption, I cannot join myself to your Bible Society.