good Confcience, while they have now, for above thirty-eight Years together, refufed all Offers for Examination, either of the Eufebian Doctrines, or of the Genuineness of St. Ignatius's larger Epiftles, or of the Apoftolical Conftitutions themselves; whence thofe Epiftles are in great Part taken; to which they have been fo honestly and frequently invited, I cannot poffibly understand.

After these Perfons of great Note, I fhall fay fomewhat of another fincere Friend of mine, tho' not fo well known in the World; at whofe House at Yelvertoft, Northamptonshire, I wrote my Address to the Princes and States of Europe; to be hereafter mentioned: I mean my old Chamber-fellow at Clare-ball, Mr John Lawrence, who first brought me acquainted with his good Father, with whom I lived very agreeably for a Month together, at Mr. Brown's Beadhouse in Stamford, Lincolnshire; were I got acquainted with that great Mathematician Mr. Gilberth, Clerk; and gained fome light from him in the firft Elements of Aftronomy, at the End of the Year 1687, and the Beginning of 1688; and where I became acquainted also with that truly great and good Man, Dr. Cumberland, afterward Bishop of Peterborough. This Mr. Lawrence foon became very inquifitive about Dr. Clarke's and my Discoveries as to the Primitive Faith, and to my Discoveries about the Apoftolical Conftitutions. And befides thofe Extracts of his Letters which have been by me produced upon other Occafions, he it was who wrote to Dr. Clarke that Objurgatory, but Friendly Letter about his feeming to have recanted, upon

upon the Violence of the Convocation against him. And he it was who published that Letter and the Papers of Dr. Clarke in an Apology for him, and with his own Approbation.

And now I have spoken fo much of Bishop and Archbishop Hoadly, of Mr. Waffe, and Mr. Lawrence, I must say somewhat of Bishop Gibson; one of quite another Character than the fore-mentioned Bishop and Archbishop: One that I think married but once; and changed his Diocese but once viz. from Lincoln to London: One who has written feveral devotional and practical Manuals, with good Reputation: One who performed divine Offices in a fober, and grave, and folemn Way, becoming a Christian Bishop: One of fuch great Generosity that he freely gave the 2500l. left him by Dr. Crow, once his Chaplain, to Dr. Crow's own Relations: And one, who, in the Reign of King George I. preached against that grofs Court-Foolery of Mafquerades, and procured an Addrefs to the King from feveral of his Brethren the Bishops, to put them down; tho' without Effect: Which in my Opinion was an Action both very bold, and very meritorious. This Bishop has also published several sober Paftoral Letters to his Diocese, against Infidelity. Yet all this is done in fuch a Way of grofs Ignorance of Primitive Christianity, as if he had never heard of any other Standard but modern popish Canons, and parliamentary Laws, and political Injunctions of Princes; like the infamous Doctrine of Mr. Hobs of Malsbury. 'Tis now about 20 Years ago that I wrote to this Bishop of London, to

call

call the Presbyters, Deacons, and Principal of the Laity of his Diocess together, in Way of primitive Christian Discipline; and to fummon withal before them Mr. Henley the Orator; whofe vile History I knew fo well, that I offered to come and Tell it to the Church, according to our Saviours Rule, Matt. xviii. 17. In order to his Vindication of himself, or Conviction, and Exclufion from the Christian Society; provided all were done without any temporal Penalties whatsoever: Of which true Ecclefiaftical Difcipline knows nothing. The Answer returned me from the Bishop by Dr. Nathaniel Marfbal was this, "that fince no Canon [now in "force] enabled him fo to proceed, he could do no«thing. "Since which Time Mr. Henley has gone on, for above twenty Years more, and ftill goes on without controul every Week, as an Ecclefiaftical Mountebank, to abuse Religion; to the publick . Scandal of this Church and Nation. Nay, when that excellent Christian and Confeffor, Mr. Thomas Emlyn was most unjustly and irregularly refused the Communion at Islington, by one of the weakest and foolisheft of our modern Enthufiafts, Mr. Stonehoufe, then Rector of that Place; and Mr. I Emlyn had written a fober Christian Letter to the Bishop of London, to defire his Interpofition for his Readmiffion to that Holy Ordinance, which Mr. Stonehouse used not till then to Scruple giving him ; he returned fuch an Anfwer, which I have seen,. as refer'd the juftnefs of his Refufal to fome Civilians or Canonift only; without any Thing in it like a Christian Bishop. I have faid not unfrequently,

that

1

that this Bishop seemed to think the Church of England, as it just then happend to be, established by modern Laws and Canons, came down from Heaven, with the Athanafian Creed in its Hand. Accordingly I believe my late Lord of London, with his Brother and Friend Bifhop Smallbroke, took the most effectual Care of all other Bishops, that the Eufebians or Primitive Christians should be publickly cursed thirteen Times every Year, in their two Dioceses; by the reading the monstrous Athanafian Creed by their Clergy. Whether they can believe it or not; I call it a monflrous Creed, in the Words of the very learned Dr. Kufter, who to me, many Years ago called the Doctrine therein contain'd monftrum Trinitatis. He said alfo, in my hearing, upon his Perufal of the third Volume of my Primitive Chriftianity Reviv'd, what fhall we fay to Mr. Whiston about the Conftitutions? What shall we fay to him? As being utterly at a loft how to answer the Evidence I had there produced for them. However there was a Time, before Queen Caroline died, when this Bishop of London feemed not fo obftinate in these Matters. I once waited upon him, it was probably about the Year 1735, and probably for his Subscription to my Jofephus: He treated me very kindly; and I asked him, fince he was a great Canonift, whether the Canons of the Apoftles [at least the first fifty] were not Part of our own Canon Law in England at this Day? And if fo, why they did not stand at the Beginning of his Codex; as they usually do even in the Popish Collections themselves? His Anfwer was, that he thought they

were

were abrogated by the 25th of Henry VIII. An Anfwer to me fufficiently ftrange and furprizing; who not only acknowledged no Power in any Parliament to abrogate our Saviour's own Laws, by his Apostles; but afterward found, upon farther Enquiry, that these Canons were not yet abrogated by that or any other Law in this Nation; but continue to be ftill Part of its Ecclefiaftical Laws: But only fo very good ones, as in our wicked, filly, felfifh Age, as Dr. Newton juftly ftiles it; against Pluralities, Preface, Page 18, are every where given up for impracticable. However, when I farther infifted with his Lordship for the Examination of the intire Apoftolical Conftitutions, and complained that the Labours and Studies and Books of our Divines at present were fo remote from the Primitive Ages, that till they laid all the Moderns afide for a good while, and read none but the first two or three Centuries, they were incapable of judging well about that Matter: He said, that might be a good Way. And if once our Bishops would lay afide those their prefent unwarrantable Impofitions, which can no way be fupported by the Primitive Records, and fall to the Perufal of the moft Primitive Ages in earneft, both the Clergy and Laity would certainly follow their Examples; and that most important Matter might foon be determined, to the greatest Satisfaction of all good Chriftians: Who for want of fuch a Standard, do rove about uncertainly from one Hypothefis, Party, or Pretender to another; nay fometimes become Scepticks or Infidels as to

Our