I HAVE read Mr. _B._’s letter, and think it exceedingly pretty; the stile is easy and flowing, the language soft and affecting, the sentiments he expresses, in regard to his friend and yourself, very beautiful. But what is all this to the purpose? Or how can this convince you, that you ought to give up those means of grace which you have found so extremely beneficial to your soul, in order to make a proper wife for Mr. _C._? ’Tis true, there are several assertions in Mr. _B._’s letter, designed to shew the reasonableness of your making the promise; but asserting and proving are two things. Whatever has the appearance of argument in this letter may, I imagine, be reduced to these heads: _1st._ That it is absolutely wrong for any member of the church of _England_ to attend the meetings of separatists. _2dly._ That in the church of _England_, a soul may find every thing necessary for its attaining the highest degrees of faith and holiness. _3dly._ That Mr. _W._ is a separatist: and _4thly._ That your having any acquaintance with him, will hurt Mr. _C._ both in his temporal interest, and in his character as a minister.――The opinion I had conceived of Mr. _B._ was very high, I imagined him actuated by that spirit of _universal love_, which is the first and ruling principle of every soul that is born of God; and I make no doubt but this is his _real_ character: however (in this affair) he may _seem_ to incline to a _partial selfish_ orthodoxy. *Could the church of _England_ be proved to be the _only church_ of _Christ_, there might be some reason for the cry of schism, which we hear so much of: but what is she, more than one of the most unexceptionable of those many divisions into which the universal church is broken? And therefore a separation from her, though causeless, or from mistaken motives, cannot properly be called making a schism in the _church_ of _Christ_. For my part (but I speak it with submission to Mr. _B._’s judgment) I apprehend, that the only _real_ and dangerous schism is the want of that spirit of love, which makes us rejoice in whatever is good and excellent in people of all denominations, and ready to believe good even of those who most differ from _us_ in ceremonies and opinion. And why a person of this spirit (suppose one in communion with the church of _England_) may not be allowed sometimes to hear a minister among the _Presbyterians_, or any other sect, if they find this minister’s preaching blest to their souls, I cannot imagine. What St. _Paul_ says in regard to giving offence to weak brethren, is often quoted to prove what it has nothing to do with; for St. _Paul_ surely does not mean, that he neglected those things which were profitable to _his soul_, for fear of giving offence to the weak; but that he refrained from outward things (such as making difference in meats, &c.) which he, as strong in faith, knew to be wholly indifferent, lest his example should tempt those who were weak