NUMBER 51.

Of the three High-Churches in England.

HAVING in my former papers given some account of the scripture church; I shall in this, give an account of the three bigh-churches in England, which are very different from it. And though in order to this, I shall be obliged to take in a good deal of matter, and reveal many high-church and jacobite secrets; yet, I hope to give the publick a clear notion of them, in the compass of one paper. I shall, first, state what the true church of England is; and then describe the three high-churches of England, shewing how they differ from one another, and from the true church of England.

1. First, What the true church of England is. All churches by law established, are creatures of that state, where they are so established. For whatever is established, necessarily depends on the legislature, which can and does repeal and enact whatever it thinks fit, and always calls its present constitution in religion, the church by law established. The church of England therefore by law established, is whatever the legislature has enacted, and continues in force, in relation to religion, together with whatever is enjoined by the authority of the king, or is determined by the proper judicatories, acting by the authority of and in subordination to, the legislature. Thus the act of parliament requiring the subscription of the thirty nine articles; the acts of unifor mity, and the act of toleration; the king's injunctions, the canons of convocation confirmed by the king; the sentences of the delegates, and the determinations of the house of lords, constitute the church of England; and the members thereof are good and true members, who conform their belief and practice to the several particulars aforesaid: As on the other side, they fall short of being good and true members, who recede from any particular established and settled as aforesaid. Nor can those be truly said to agree with and conform to a church, who do not agree with and conform to it in the sense intended by the makers of the several constitutions of that church. This last is so plain a truth in itself, and so manifestly implied in taking all oaths, and making subscriptions and declarations, that it would have been needless to have observed it, had it not been for the equivocation and Jesuitism of so many of our priests, who think that they may take oaths, and make subscriptions, in senses contrary to, and different from, the intention of the imposers, and yet be good, and true, and perfect members of the church.

II. Now the high-churches, which differ from this establishment, are three in number; which I shall rank under the names of the most remarkable leaders in them. 1. Dr. Bungey's high-church. 2. Mr. Lesley's high-church. 3. And Dr. Brett's high-church. The two last are in an open separation from one another, as well as from the true church of England. But Dr. Bungey's high-church has as yet

* A name frequently given to the late Dr. Sachevercl

66

made no separation from the true church. He and his people are on ly schismaticks in the church, (as were those upon whom St. Paul char. ges schism, when they were met together in the same church, 1 Cor. xi. v. 18.) being as his present grace of Canterbury* describes some high-church priests, a new sort of disciplinarians risen up among our selves, who seem to comply with the government of the church, as oth ers do with that of the state; not out of conscience of their duty, or any love they bear to it, but because they cannot keep their prefer. ments without it: They hate our constitution, and revile all such as stand up in good earnest for it; and yet, for all that, go on to subscribe and rail." Which passage, from so great an authority, cannot be too often quoted.

But to proceed to the description of these three high-churches in their order.

1. Dr. Bungey's high-church stands distinguished from the true church of England; by their Arminian doctines, contrary to our old orthodox Calvinistical articles; by their enmity to the act of toleration and to the principles on which it is grounded; by their claiming an independent power in the priests to make laws, and govern the church which is contrary to the laws of England, that place the power of making church-laws in other hands, and particularly contrary to the oath of supremacy, which makes his majesty supreme head of the church; by teaching the doctrines of hereditary right and passive obedience, contrary to the judgement and practice of the legislature at and since the revolution, and to the determination of the house of lords, on the impeachment of Dr. Sacheverel, and their condemnation of the Oxford decree; and by a spirit of faction against the present establishment in state, and against his majesty's measures; by rebellion and perjury, by uncharitableness to all foreign, and more especially to domestick protestants; and by an implacable fury and malice towards all dissens ters among us, besides Jews and papists: in which they act contrary to the known loyal principles of our church; to its opinion of all for eign protestant churches, which it esteems true churches; to its principles, which all tend to preserve liberty and property; and to its known charitable and peaceable temper, and regard to tender conscien

ces,

2. The second high-church is, Mr. Lesley's high-church. At the revolution several bishops, who were deprived by act of parliament, for not taking the oaths to the government, made an open separation from the church of England; and pretended, that they and their adhe. rents were the church, charging those who filled their sees with being usurpers, and setting up altar against altar; and also charging them and their adherents, together with all the other bishops, clergy and laity, who joined in the same communion with the usurping bishops, with schism. Hereby also they distinguish themselves in principles from the church of England; which, being a legal establishment, asserts to the legislature (which has a right to preserve their peace) a right to deprive bishops for crimes against law. They do not indeed so much distinguish themselves in principles from Dr. Bungey's church, as they do from the true church of England; for the doctor's church

*Dr. William Wake:

equally contends with Mr. Lesley's church against the parliament's right to deprive bishops, and calls it usurpation on the rights of the church; but is for submission to such usurped exercise of power; and contends, schism to be on the side of those, who separate on a principle of defending the rights of the church, against an usurpation of those rights.

This new separate church agrees with Dr. Bungey's church, in the other principles before mentioned, which distinguish the doctor's church from the true church of England. But in point of honesty, or adherence to those principles, it greatly differs from the doctor's church, which goes on to subscribe, and swear, and practise contrary to what they do subscribe and swear; Mr. Lesley's high-church hơn. estly practising in several respects according to its villainous principles.

Proceed we now to Dr. Brett's high-church. Soon after king George's accession to the crown, the bishops of the last mentioned high-church did all, except one, assemble in a synod, where they re solved upon making four alterations in the common prayer book: 1. To mix water with the wine in the sacrement. 2. A prayer for the dead. 3. A prayer for the descent of the Holy Ghost, upon the bread and wine in the sacrament. 4. An oblatory prayer; which goes upon the ground, that the eucharist is a proper sacrifice. All which Dr. Brett is not only au advocate for, as an author, but (perhaps) as titu lar archbishop of Canterbury, exercised his authortity in enjoining. This has split the last high-church into two churches; Dr. Brett and his followers adhering to the bishops, or church governours of their church, in behalf if wine and water. &c. and Mr. Lesley and his followers adhering to one bishop only, in behalf of wine, &c. contrary to the determination of their own bishops, and all their own principles, about the authority of bishops and clergy.

To render my account of our several high-churches of England more complete; I shall, by way of supplement, observe, that there is a distinction in Dr. Bungey's church; and his high-church may be divided into two high-churches. Some of his high-church are swearers to the government, and say the church prayers for his majesty king George and his family, continuing at the some time disaffected to him, and enemies to his legal title. Others of the doctor's high-church are nonswearers; and, though they come to the church, disown joining with the swearers in the prayers for the king and his family; which prac tice of theirs the profound Mr. Dodwel has defended in a book, (whose title I shall, upon memory, venture to give the reader) entitled a further prospect of the case in view; proving, that it is our duty to be present at sinful prayers, made sinful by mistake of fallible superiours, who have a right of imposing prayers. So that, I think, the high-churches of England may not improperly be reckoned four in number; which may be justly distinguished by things, as well as by names of men after the following manner.

I. The swearing and for-swearing bigh-church.

II. The non-swearing high-church, that contends for being present at the sinful prayers of the church.

III. The non-swearing wine and water church.

IV. The non-swearing no water church.

NUMBER 52.

An Analogy between ancient Heathenism and modern Priestcraft.

As extremes meet in a point, and corruption in terrestrial bodies is the next state from perfection; so all the commands and denunciations of heaven have not been able to keep the Christian priesthood, in most countries, from running headlong into the superstitions and follies of the Gentile idolaters. By a strange sort of fatality, they have jumped in the same thoughts, and played over and over again, the same tricks; insomuch, that if we but make small allowances for the constant alte rations of time, and such as must necessarily result from different languages and fashions, the present Romish churches might be easily mistaken for heathen temples, and the services performed in them for pagan worship.

The devil, as subtle and cunning as he is represented to be, with all the assistance of corrupt priests, has not been able to find out a new device, but has ever danced the bay, and made his rounds within the same circle. The same arts and stratagems have been always made use of to seduce and delude mankind; the same advantages taken of their weakness and passions, and in all times equally applied to destroy true religion, advance the priest-hood, and make the honest and industrious, but unthinking, part of the world, the prey and property of hypocrites and impostors.

The all-powerful, all-wise, and all-merciful God himself, is too often represented like the Heathen deities, to be revengeful, cruel, capricious, impotent, vain, fond of commendation, and flattery; and, in ef fect, subject to all the other passions and imperfections of the weakest men: His being, which is boundless as extension, and which the whole world cannot contain, is pretended to be confined to single structures, and narrow edifices built with hands; nay, to parts of those edifices; where he is supposed to be pleased and gratified, like frail mortals, with costly furniture, gilded roofs, engraven and polished marble, fine carving, and other curious, though baubling workmanship of mechanicks and artificers.

I confess I am not wise enough to find out any essential difference between the present and the old Roman worship; they both dedicate their temples to dead men and women, whom the papists call saints, and the pagans called demi-gods and goddesses: the pagan forms of hocus pocus, which they called consecrations, were intended to con jure and call down their deities to inhabit personally their temples, their images and idols: The popish priests consecrate their churches for the same purpose, namely, to obtain the more immediate presence of the deity like the old Romans too, they erect, altars in their temples, where they worship saints with supplications, tears, grimaces, antick and distorted faces and gestures, musick, and ceremonies, and tender offerings and oblations to them; and, like the others, often make processions, cavalcades, and shews in their honour; and sometimes go in pilgrimages to them, to obtain their favour.

The popish priests have prophaned the plain and simple direction of our Saviour to his disciples, for commemorating the benefits which we have received by his death, by turning it into an old Romah sacrifice: Amongst them, the pipes and harpers were the fore-runners of the shew; and before the modern sacrifice, the organs strike up a tune: There the priests went up to the altar in a white garment free from spots, (being an emblem of innocence ;) in new Rome, the priest wears a white surplice: The heathen priest turned about to the east, being the region of the rising sun, and bowed; the popish priest does the same: The horns of the beasts sacrificed were marked with gold, and his blood received in golden and silver vessels; here the pretended Christian sacrifice of the real body and blood of Christ, is poured into the same costly cups, or laid upon as rich plates and dishes: The old Roman altar was raised, by several steps, above the floor of their tem ples; so is the present. The priest, amongst them, made a crooked line with his knife from the head to the tail of the victim; the popish priest plays tricks of legerdemain with his fingers over the elements: lastly, when the beast was consecrated and killed, the heathen priests regaled themselves upon what was left, after their gods were served; the Romish priests make it prophane for any layman to drink of the consecrated wine, or for any one even to eat the bread but the commu nicants.

The old Romans had different orders of priests, with different and distinct offices and revenues; the high-priest, the luperci, the augurs, the haruspices, the pontifices, the flamines, salii, feciales, the duumviri, decemviri, quindecimviri, the keepers of the sybilline books, the corybantes, &c. The present Romans (besides the several sorts which are in use and fashion amongst us) have a pope, cardinals, dominicans, franciscans, jesuits, carmelites, benedictines, carthusians, capuchins, cistercians, observantines, augustines, servites, &c. In imitation also of the vestal virgins, in old Rome, they have founded several orders of nuns, who take a vow of chastity, for the breach of which they are immured, as the others were buried alive and as they had a right to deliver from the hands of justice, any malefactors whom they casually met in their walks; so the present Romish priests claim and exercise an equal right to protect all criminals who can fly to them for protection, which is borrowed from that of the old Roman asylums.

The old Romans, had their dies fastos and nefastos, their fasts and feasts, their sacrificia, their epula's, their feria's, in honour of their gods and demi-gods; the present Romans also make distinctions of days a great part of their religion; they too have their dies fastos and nefastos, their stated fasts and feasts in honour of their saints, or to commemorate and condole past misfortunes, or rejoice over signal successes; and some of their feasts, and particularly their carnivals, exceed in lewdness and prodigality the bacchanalia of the antients.

The heathens had their deos tutelares, to whom the defence of certain countries were committed; and their deos præsides, who had the safe-guard of particular cities: The papists have saints, who supply the same offices. Artificers and professions have also their particular saints who preside over them; scholars have their saint Nicholas, and saint Gregory; painters, saint Luke; as soldiers and lovers had formerly their Mars, and Venus: Diseases too have their saints to cure