TICE OF ENGLAND (whatever he may think) were sent by Providence, for the fake of humanity, to adorn two periods, when RELIGION at one time, and SOCIETY at another, most needed their fupport; I do not fay, of their great talents, but of that HEROIC MODERATION so neceffary to allay the violence of public diforders: for to be MODERATE amidst party-extremes, requires no common degree of patriotic courage.

Such characters rarely fail to perform much of the task for which they were sent; but never without finding their labour ill repaid, even by those in whose service it was employed. That glory of the Priesthood left the World, he had fo nobly benefited, with this tender complaint, ---" Hoc tempore ni"hil fcribi aut AGI poteft quod non

pateat CALUMNIA; nec raro fit, ut "dum agis CIRCUMSPECTISSIME utram

que

Partem offendas, quum in u« traque sint qui PARITER INSANIANT.” A complaint, fated, alas ! to be the motto of every Man who greatly serves his Country

T

SIRS,

HE purpose of this work being to
prove

the DIVINE LEGATION OF Moses, it will, I hope, have so much merit with you, as to engage your serious at-' tention to the following address; which, from the divinity of Moses's Law, as in this work demonstrated, attempts to shew you, how, by necessary consequence, it follows, that the religion of Jesus is also divine.

But, while I am laying my conclusions before you,

let me beseech you not to suffer yourselves to be prejudiced against the evidence, by such kind of fallacies as these ; Both Jews and Christians confess that the religion of Moses came from God: but one only, of these two Sects, believe the divinity of that of Jesus : the safest way, therefore, is to adhere to what both sides own to be true. An argument, which however like, hath not, in all its parts, even so much force as what the idolatrous Romanifts are wont to urge against the Reformed That as both parties hold falvation may be had

"

may

in the church of Rome, and only one party holds it be bad in the churches of the Reformed, it is fafeft to adhere to popery: which I dare fay you laugh at for its impertinence, how much foever you may have deluded others by the fame kind of fophiftry. For if the Roman catholics, or you, will not take our word for Christianity or Reformation, why do you build any thing upon it, in favour of Popery or Judaifm? Both of you will fay, perhaps, "because we are prejudiced in the former conclufion; but that the mere force of evidence extorts the latter from us even against ourselves." This is eafily faid; and may, perhaps, be eafily believed, by thofe who taking their Religion from their anceftors, are apt to measure Truth only by its antiquity. But genuine Christianity offering itself only to the private judgments of men, every fincere enquirer believes as he finds caufe. So that if either you or they would give yourfelves the trouble to examine our motives, it would appear, that the very fame reasons which force us to conclude that Chriftianity in general, and the Reformed religion in particular, are true, force us at the fame time to conclude that the Jewish was from God; and that falvation may be obtained, though with much

difficulty, in the church of Rome. Either, therefore, the whole of our conclufion is prejudice, or no part of it is fo.

As I would not have you harden your habitual obftinacy in favour of your own Religion, by bad arguments; fo neither will I use any fuch to draw you over to ours.

I shall not therefore attempt that way to bring you to the truth, which fome amongst us, little acquainted, as fhould feem, either with your Difpenfation, or the Christian, imagine they have difcovered: Who, taking it for granted that the Mofaic Law can be defended only by the Gospel of Jefus, pretend you must first acknowledge our Religion, before you can fupport your own: and so, which is very hard, will not allow you to have any reasonable afsurance of the truth of your Religion till you have forfaken it'. But I would not urge you with such kind of reasoning, if it were only for this, that I fufpect you may not be fuch utter strangers to the New Teftament as not to know, that it

"Dr. Rogers has declared as I remember in one of his fer"mons, that he could not believe the truth of MOSES's pre"tentions were it not for the confirmation given to them by "the Gofpel. This I take to be a dangerous affertion, that "faps the very foundation of Chriftianity; and fupercedes at "once the whole purpose of your intended work, by denying "any original intrinsic character of divinity to the inftitution of "MOSES." Dr. Middleton's letter to Mr. W. Nev. 30. 1736. Vel. v. f his works.

lays