pressed; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them, be according to the mind of God." Many of the sects which had not the opportunity of forming this unholy alliance, yet retained a most oppressive despotism over their ministers and churches. These same Presbyterians declare, that "it belongeth to synods and councils ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God and government of his church; to receive complaints in cases of mal-administration, and authority to determine the same." Can any thing be more arbitrary and absurd than the following oath, exacted by the heads of the French Protestants, in the year 1620: "I swear and promise before God and this holy assembly, that I receive, approve, and embrace, all the doctrine taught and decided by the national Synod of Dort. I swear and promise, that I will persevere in it all my life long, and defend it with all my power, and never depart from it in my sermons, college-lectures, writings, or conversation, or in any other manner, public or private. I declare also and protest, that I reject and condemn the doctrine of the

Arminians, &c. So help me God, as I swear all this without equivocation or mental reservation"? The Independents had the honour of breaking the bonds of sectarian slavery, and claiming the rights of congregations, in which they were followed by the Baptists, and afterwards by the English Presbyterians. They abolished the tyranny of the few over the many, but still retained too generally that of the many over the few. The Quaker's were the only party among the early English Nonconformists, who allowed internal liberty in matters of faith and worship. This drew upon them the reproach of heresy, and occasioned very general suspicion and antipathy: but they needed the admonition, "thy crown let no man take;" for orthodoxy and despotism made way amongst them, while liberty was dawning on others, and have led them to expulsions, the principle of which would have excluded even the illustrious Penn himself. The last step back to original equality and liberty, was made among the General Baptists and the nominal Presbyterians; many of whose societies now only require a man to be a Christian, a believer, that is, in the divine mission of Jesus, to welcome him to all which they can bestow of Christian privileges. The revival of Unitarianism has been, by turns, both cause and effect of this increased liberality of sentiment.

Let it not be supposed that, however kindred in spirit they may sometimes be, I would for a

moment compare the evils resulting from these aberrations of voluntary societies, with those produced by the interference of political authority in religious matters. From the former, any one may escape; but for the latter there is no remedy, except the melancholy one of expatriation, unless toleration be granted; and toleration, from its nature, can be but of partial efficacy. The invasions of religious liberty, to which we have already attended, are by Ecclesiastics. Those by the civil power proceed on a different principle, and require a separate consideration. In the notice of this Lecture, the mention of both "Nonconformity" and "Religious Liberty," implies a distinction, and intimates that the advocate for the one is not necessarily the friend of the other. Such we have already seen is the fact. When Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, (properly so called,) have been Nonconformists, it has been from accident, and not from principle; by the loss of power, and not by the love of liberty while Quakers and Congregationalists cannot become an Establishment. The real principles of Nonconformity, however, are indisputably those of Religious Liberty, and would produce dissent, not only from the Church of England, but from any form of Christianity incorporated with the State.

We dissent because human legislators exceed their province when they pretend to fix the reli

gion of the country. Society cannot exist without government. It is for the good of the whole that we should have laws, and that their administration and execution should not be left to individual zeal, but be the peculiar duties of persons appointed to that office. This requires the surrender of much natural right, of how much, human wisdom must decide it may fairly include even life itself, which when the good of the community requires, should be offered a willing and a patriotic sacrifice: but the rights of conscience are, from their very nature, inalienable. Man never did give them; he never can give them. The right of believing where he sees evidence of truth, and of worshipping where he finds characteristics of divinity, as it cannot injure society, cannot belong to society. It is inherent in man as a rational creature, and he cannot divest himself of it, till he can re-create himself, and become another being, and his own God. What, th, does a legislator mean, when he says, You shall believe this doctrine; you shall worship that God; you are born to this religion; we decree that you shall be a Deist or a Christian, a Mahometan or a Pagan, a Catholic or a Protestant, and will punish your disobedience? And who gave you this right? God? Produce the commission, and work the confirming miracle. Man? When and where?

None could do

it for themselves, much less for others. But you

have the power-true; so had Herod, (who was devoured of worms,) when he slew James; so had Nero, (who was assassinated,) when he martyred Paul; so had Pilate, (who died in miserable exile,) when he sentenced Christ; and so had others who died in splendour, but who wait in their graves the righteous judgment of God. You have the power-to do what? To issue the decree? And so you have to decree that robbery is religion, and persecution for the glory of God: so you have to decree that the sun shall shine by night, and the moon by day, and they will as soon obey your bidding as the mind and heart of man. But you can inflict the penalties: yes, and make martyrs of the firm, and hypocrites of the fearful-nothing more. No human authority has either the right or power to make any system the religion of any individual. We reverence human laws and governors up to this point; but with our consciences, our worship, and our God, they have no business. We cannot belong to the Church of England, because, however mildly exercised, she recognizes this claim of man to tell with authority his fellow-man what he shall believe, and whom and how he shall adore. Her Articles and Liturgy have been rightly described, by one of her own prelates, as "a long act of parliament;" a decree of the senate deciding what we are to think of God, how we are to feel and