sundry confessors and martyrs, and upon that account it deserves respect: and it was a great step in their day, for them to cast so many corruptions out of the public service as they did, at that time, when this Liturgy was drawn out of the several forms that were in use in this kingdom before. But it was but a pursuit of their design, to render the public service yet more Scriptural: and had they risen from the dead, there is good reason to believe they would generally have approved of it; and been so far from looking upon it as detracting from them, that they would have applauded it as a good superstructure upon their foundations. Suppose then he that drew up this "Reformed Liturgy," was by education much inferior to many of his brethren; it neither follows from thence that he must really be so much inferior to them in useful knowledge and valuable abilities, as this author would seem to intimate; nor can it justly be thence argued that his performance was contemptible; nor that there was any want of modesty neither, when his brethren put him upon the undertaking. And besides, they approving it when they perused it, and joining in the presenting it, made it their own; as sufficiently appears from the preface prefixed; and some of them had academical education, and great applause in the world too, and yet thought not Mr. Baxter at all their inferior. He was also one of the three that managed the dispute at the end of the conference at the Savoy, and freely charged some things in the Liturgy as sinful, and contrary to the word of God. As, that ministers are obliged in baptism to use the transient image of the cross; that none be admitted to communion in the Lord's supper that dare not receive it kneeling, &c. The forementioned author speaking of this in his history, says, "That it seems very strange that he and his brethren should undertake to mention eight unlawful things in the Liturgy, when they could not affirm any one of those things to be in itself unlawful; but argued altogether upon the unlawful imposition of them, which they might as well have done by the same argument in eight hundred of other indifferent and most innocent matters." But if this gentleman had considered, that the unwarrantableness of keeping up such impositions in the church was the thing which Mr. Baxter and his brethren undertook to prove, in opposition to those who were zealous for retaining them, and how little in that case depends upon the simple unlawfulness of the things imposed, (abstracting from all circumstances in a metaphysical sense,) the strangeness of their proceeding would have disappeared. For though the same argument would have done in eight hundred indifferent things, (had there been so many so imposed,) yet it does not follow but that it would be good and valid in those eight things mentioned, in which they thought they should be bound up by the ecclesiastical constitution, (if they really