May I crave your Lordship’s attention to consider another material point. I speak as to a true Churchman; judge you what I say. How is it likely to fare with true religion, as to _purity_, when your association shall be arranged and perfected according to the proposed plan? A man of your Lordship’s known integrity and serious turn of mind, cannot be supposed to be a member of the church but from conviction; upon conviction, that of all the several denominations of Christians, that established is the purest and best; of course, that all others are not so pure, and, upon the whole, are worse. Now we read in the sacred volume, that evil communication corrupts good manners. “He that toucheth pitch,” saith the son of Sirach, “shall be defiled therewith.” Shall we not then extremely endanger the rectitude of our opinions and manners, by constant and intimate communication with all sorts of impure and erroneous religionists? Familiarity would soon lesson the deformity of the most abhorred doctrines, and daily intercourse would in time smooth the way, first with ease to tolerate, and then to favour acknowledged and pernicious errors. And this I speak, not with relation to that denomination alone, to which your Lordship belongs; it holds with all the others in common. The Socinian, for instance, charges idolatry upon the Calvinist; the Calvinist returns the charge, and accuses the other of denying his Saviour. And is it possible, that two such opposite sects can cordially unite for religious purposes, and enter into familiar friendship, without considerable danger to the purity of that creed, which each of them deems the true one? Will the Socinian deem it safe to give the right hand of fellowship to an idolator; and will the Calvinist do the same to the despiser of his redeemer? Surely not; if they meet upon such terms as shall secure to each party the purity of his faith, they must meet upon the ground of religious indifference: for if each party be hearty in his cause, and zealous for his religion, he will not only stiffly maintain it against his friend; but, if he be touched with one feeling of benevolence, he will endeavour to gain his friend to that side, which he considers as the religion of God; and then, I presume, it is evident, that all security is gone, with respect to the other’s faith; for the zeal of his friend will be perpetually assailing what he deems the truth; and, doubtless, each party will be always ready to quote against his friend, the strong words of the Apostle Paul. “What concord hath Christ with Belial?” “What part” will the Calvinist say, “hath he that believeth, with an infidel?” Whilst the Socinian with equal spirit may retort, “What agreement hath the temple of God with idols?” To speak in no hardier terms of your Lordship’s invitation into your association, than I feel by conscience bound to speak; do you not my Lord, at least, lead the clergy into