viceable to gratify the curiofity of the public with a general view of a work, fo little known, and often fo unfairly quoted, and condemned *.

But as fome, perhaps, may entertain a doubt as to the expediency of this tafk at best, to fuch I would fubmit the confideration of the following cafe; which I trust will not be thought inapplicable to the point in queftion. Let us suppose then, that a code of laws was found, which by the wisdom of its compilation would help to fix the authenticity of fome difputable, but important principles of the constitution; and which, owing to the obfcurity of the trea tife, were likely to be done away for want of proper teftimony of their value. Could it be deemed injurious to fociety, to give them clearly to the world? Would it be any breach of real duty (because the ancient legislature had enjoined a facred deference to the very letter) to render the fubftance of the work more intelligible to

* A very refpectable clergyman who has refided in this neighborhood above half a century, wrote to me as follows, upon hearing of the task in which I was engaged:

"SIR,

:

"I received the favor of your letter yesterday, and have "fent you Dr. Nourse, whofe preface will fhew the pro"priety of his work and as there are many publications "Iately of heretics and schifmatics, I think another edition of "the Homilies, with a proper preface, may be very useful in the prefent age. I am, Sir, your's, &c. "JOHN ROOKE."

VOL. I.

thofe

those so deeply interested in its primitive sense? Or could the honeft labors of an individual in this endeavour, be juftly conftrued as any infringement of eftablished power? Surely not; fince that being univerfally acknowledged and fixed, could no ways be affected by any private difquifition. As therefore tenets of religious faith are far more estimable, than any the most perfect code of human institutes; as the infidelity of the age is busy to explode their general ufe, and to confound things temporal and divine, fo far I conceive it behoves us to avail ourselves of ancient practices and opinions, in order to confirm, or vindicate those principles which are most conducive to the furthering of our eternal welfare. When, (as one who hath gone before me in the fame enterprize, and with good fuccefs *,) moft justly argues, others have taken the liberty of paraphrafing and enlarg

pe

* This quotation is taken from Dr. Nourfe's preface to Some of the Homilies, published upwards of fixty years ago. The book (now difficult to be procured) was fent me by the clergyman mentioned in the former note, fome confiderable time after my own plan was executed. As far as I have rufed that work, it seems to be an elegant and excellent performance; but this collection is much more extensive, and differs greatly in its method. I have confined myself as much as poffible to the very letter and manner of the original, and therefore no extraordinary elegance of ftyle could be indulged, without deftroying the uniform fimplicity which conAtitutes one principal excellence of these ancient sermons.

any

ing on our articles and liturgy, or using any other fuch ways or methods as may make them better understood by the people, and more ferviceable to their edification in faith and holiness, I do not fee reason why we may not take the same with the Homilies, for private ufe at leaft. But there is another objection which the ftrenuous advocates for fuperior direction in all fuch matters may be ready to allege against exertions of this defcription; and that is a due refpect to the written canons of the church. Upon this point I would again beg leave to hold with the author just now quoted, and intimate, that the probibition in the 49th canon extends no further than to fuch additional gloffes as are used in public. However therefore it might be wished by many, that the book of Homilies was revised by due authority, and proper alterations made, or fuch others added, as beft might fuit the circumftance of the times, and render the occafional use of them more eligible to the clergy: yet far be it from me to infinuate that my feeble efforts are to be confidered in that light, nor would I have it supposed, that I presume to dictate, or assert, beyond the bounds of my profeffional, or particular charge. I am duly fenfible of the moderate standard of my own abilities; and that my labors and attainments fall very short, comparatively, with those of many among my learned

1

and pious brethren: and I agree with the fame excellent writer, that whatever blemishes the original work contains, even were they more and greater, (than they really are) yet as it is ratified and confirmed by the authority of the church, they muft ftand as they are, till the fame authority thinks fit to alter them. But this doth not annul the former argument for the propriety of publishing their chief, and valuable contents, as matter of information and improvement of the community. My principal aim, therefore, being to furnifh fuch a collection from the above precious ftore, as may afford a defirable religious study to many who are admirers of all primitive compofitions, from a hearty zeal for every thing connected with the reformation of the church to which they belong, I have only to crave the indulgence of the public for the purity of my intentions.

By thus communicating a general knowledge of the excellence of a book fo long obfcured and depreciated, an antidote is likewise supplied, against the arts and prejudices of heretics and fchifmatics; which will help to fatisfy all who have hitherto fneered at the fancied disregard difcovered by the clergy to the Homilies; that we are neither ashamed or afraid (even in an age of fuch latitude, and remiffness, as to ferious concerns) to have recourse to the fountain of our

theolo

theological tenets, and to evince their foundnefs, by referring to the arguments they fupply for orthodoxy; and this affertion the refpectable names of my fubfcribers will amply vindicate. I fhall close this part of my address with venturing the following conjecture, by way of defending the Homilies from the very fevere cenfures that have been levelled against them, as being replete with inconfiftent affertions; as trimming on the most important topics; and ringing the changes (as a late pamphleteer expreffes it) on the doctrines of the Gofpel. I conceive it by no means improbable, that the spirit and defign of fome of thefe ancient difcourfes may have been occafionally misapprehended - The character and complexion of the particular times when they were written, seem little to affect the judgment which fome pass upon them. I would humbly fubmit, therefore, whether the compilers might not poffibly be disposed to adopt the practice of St. Paul, and from a love of peace and christian unanimity, fhew willingnefs (in a qualified fenfe of the expreffion, and as far as truth, and ftrict propriety would admit) to be made all things to all men, that by all means they might gain fome. For instance, if they seem to favor certain prejudices, might it not be with a view to reconcile the over zealous of one party to more moderate conduct? And in the