able virtue-men who could not be prevailed upon to act contrary to principle either by the smiles or frowns of princes-men who opposed the exercise of arbitrary power by those enemies to the liberties of Britains, the first James, and the first Charles, whilst their persecutors, the bishops, laboured to enslave the nation-men who, rather than pollute their consciences by the sacrifice of principle, either to acquire or retain honourable and lucrative offices, renounced every earthly prospect, and submitted to the severest sufferings, and the deepest degradation-men, but for whom the constitution, which is now the admiration of the world, would have been lost in an absolute tyranny, and popery, with all its absurdities, superstitions and cruelties, inevitably introduced—and men who, whilst the names of their persecutors will be written in the dust, or held up to endless execration, shall, like the just, be had in everlasting remembrance, The Methodists, Sir, you highly honour by such a re, semblance: they, I trust, will not be ashamed of their glory.

But these, it seems, overthrew the church. That they, in common with the great majority of the thinking part of the community, approved of that act of the great council of the nation which abolished episcopal government, is not denied. And had not the church of England already overthrown the church of Rome? thus furnishing an example of schism and precedent in the work of reformation. But the church of England had reasons to justify her conduct. And the Puritans also had reasons to justify their's. The prelacy of those

times were generally devoted to the establishment of an absolute tyranny. Both James and Charles ardently thirsted for unlimited power and authority, and they had studied human nature sufficiently to be convinced that episcopacy was more friendly to such despotism than any popular form of church government. The king cried up the bishops, and the bishops in their turn cried up the king, and both agreed in crying down the just liberties of the subject. The principal bishops were cringing sycophants of the sovereign, and the most inexorable persecutors of the people; and to their abominable intolerance must entirely be ascribed the demolition of the hierarchy in that age.

*At the celebrated conference between the Bishops and Puritans, held by the appointment of King James the first, at Hampton-Court, in which there were nine bishops and as many dignitaries of the church on the one side, and only four Puritan ministers on the other, in which James also took a considerable part on the side of episcopacy, Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury said, "That undoubtedly his majesty spoke by the special assistance of God's Spirit ;" and Bancroft, bishop of. falling on his knees, with his eyes raised to-James, expressed himself thus: "I protest my heart melteth for joy, that Almighty God, of his singular mercy, has given us such a king, as since Christ's time has not been." Yes, my lord, a blessed and most gracious king-a Daniel, a second Daniel. But what would my lord of Canterbury, or his brother Bancroft have said, had they heard him in the year 1590 make the following declaration in a general assembly held at Edinburgh?" I praise God that I was born in the time of the light of the gospel, and in such a place, as to be the king of the sincerest (i. e. purest) kirk in the world. The kirk of GENEVA keep pasche and yule (i. e. Easter and Christmas.) What have they for them? They have no institution. As for our neighbour kirk of ENGLAND, their service is an evil said mass in English; they want nothing of the mass, but the liftings (i. e. the elevation of the host.) I charge you, my good ministers, doctors, elders, nobles, gentlemen, and barons, to stand to your purity, and to exhort your people to do the same; and I, forsooth, as long as I brook my life, shall do the same."

Calderwood's History of the Church of Scotland, p. 256.

See the cases of Prynne, Smart, and Dr. Leighton, in Atmore's edition of Dr. S. Chandler's History of Persecution, pp. 330-338.

*

Lesers in his will be wrect. fissenters in generai, wing sat need heilence the 3raish conditution, world, e readr o escam. Le he Aurcă st žagtant ize free! But that he existence of fie state legends in its alliance with the urch, is 1 het nuch more gair asserted ban proved. Be this as it war, the durch of Zagtand, you canoweige, degende Sr its axistence mon the tate: it is amjorted by the laws of the land, and connected with is most tal parts of the constitution.” And is đết church which is the * most perfect firm of Chrisfanity denendant on human laws ár its support ? This was not the form of the church in the apostolical age. Then the kingdom of Christ was not of this ༣ལྔཧུ. world; Then Christianity, like a stately vessel, with her canvase unfurled, sailed majestically, without being formed along by any human cock-boat: tien she was not a compound of iron and clay, like the toes in Nebuchadnezzer's vision, as indeed she is now reprevented, but a mass of fine gold; then she flourished like the tail cedars of Lebanon, nor needed support or security from the surrounding underwood. To assert the dependance of the Christian church on any human being or institution, is to libel it. Such a church resembles a house built upon the sand, which may be destroyed by the caprice of a tyrant, or by the furimlent elamours of the mob, but bears no resem * Page 2.

blance to that church against which the gates of hell cannot prevail.

But the Puritans, it seems, were hypocrites and fanatics; and as the Methodists in "many respects resemble them," it is but natural to suppose that they also have a little tinge of fanaticism and hypocrisy-not a few of them only, but the body at large; for the Puritans, whom you represent as the archetype of the Methodists, you characterize as hypocrites and fanatics, not in their individual, but in their collective character. But will you seriously undertake to prove these charges against the Methodists? Do this, and they will be execrated by the public. As soon as this is accomplished, Methodism will have reached " its height," and the monster will sicken and die. But if instead of proofs you deal in mere declamation and reiterated assertions, Methodism, instead of coming "to nought," will probably proceed in a ratio equally great with that which has hitherto marked its progress. To say nothing of the increase of Methodism in the late Mr. Whitfield's connexion, what think you of its increase among the followers of Mr. Wesley? You may rely on the correctness of the following statement, which may perhaps assist you in your conjectures on the probable duration of Methodism. The number of members in society was in the year

The increase during the first ten years was 14348

the second ditto....100736

the third ditto.... 60241

the fourth ditto....160093

From this statement it appears that the increase during the last ten years exceeds eleven times the number added during the first ten: "and possibly it is not yet at its height." No: the sun has scarcely risen above the horison: it will continue to shine, and to shine with increasing brightness, until the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord. Few, it is presumed, after reading this statement, will say with you, "that, like other works of man, when it shall have produced its natural effects by natural means, it will come to nought."*

You appear to approve of the religious plan which was adopted in Oxford by the Wesleys and others. "These beginnings, you say, as far as they are recorded, appear to have been very laudable." But you seem to think their zeal led them much too far; for they "soon assumed some outward appearance of formality and rigour, something that made them the subject of public observation and remark, and gave rise to the appellation of Methodist."+ The fact is, they abstained not only from evil, but from its appearance--attended church and sacrament regularly-read and studied the scriptures, especially the Greek Testament-fasted and prayed-visited prisoners in the castle and instructed and relieved the