« السابقةمتابعة »
7. Is it not perfecuting the ministers of our own established church, to compel them to adminifter that holy facrament to fuch as they know are unfit or (if left to their liberty) unwilling to receive it, by fuch penalties as they are not able to bear; which penalties. the perfon refused has always in his power, by the Teft-acts, to bring them under, to the utter ruin of the confcientious minifters and their families?
8. Is it not too fevere upon our civil and military officers, to fubject them to utter ruin, if they happen to forget receiving the facrament fo often as the Teft-acts require? Or if they, for want of their pay in due time, have not money to fatisfy two witnesses, who must be able to teftify their receiving it, as often as the faid acts require?
9. Did the corporation and Teft-acts ever preferve our established church from the dangers and invafions we were threatened with, by a popish king and a popish pretender ?
10. Can it be fuppofed that a papift, who knows the pope will fell him pardons for any fins, especially if they are committed to ferve holy church, will make any fcruple to receive
the facrament in our established churches three or four times every year, if he can but thereby fecure to himself a profitable office, and be fcreened from utter ruin by informations and profecutions on the acts before-mentioned ?
11. If the corporation and test-acts are not grievances to those who have no more than the bare name of churchmen, and defire no more than the name; are they not very great grievances and perfecutions to every confcien tious member of the church of England, that has always been a conftant and worthy com-. municant at the table of our Lord, and is, in all refpects, fitly qualified to ferve his king and country in fome civil or military employment or other, but dares not accept of any public office, because he thinks in his confcience (as I do) that he would fin against God if he fhould receive it for any other end than what our great Lord has appointed, viz. in remembrance of him; much more if his fecular end fhould eclipse or annihilate the facred and only end our Lord had in that folemn and facred inftitution?
12. Whether thofe members of our own eftablished church, who have (fince the Corporation and Teft- acts were in being) accepted
of civil or military employments, and till fuch their acceptance, were conftant communicants in our church, and received the sacrament of our Lord's fupper, only in remembrance of him, but to keep fuch their offices, and to preferve themselves and families from uṭter ruin, have been overcome (contrary to their judgments) to receive the facrament three or four times a year, in obedience to the faid acts, as well as in remembrance of their Lord; and, while they have been fo receiving, have doubted that they offended God, by proflituting the most facred things to fecular and common uses: I fay, would they not (if they had any fear of God before their eyes) have rejoiced, in being delivered from fuch temptations and fuares, as thofe acts were to them?
For my own part, I always thought, that in the worship of God, whatfoever I do, if I believe I ought not to do it, it is a fin in me; and that if I do that, which I do but doubt is a fin, I expofe myself to damnation.
Read what bishop Hoadly has writ on this subject: read what the great apostle Paul has writ on this head: read the Corporation and Teft-acts and read fome Confiderations on repealing the Test act, printed in the year 1732.
то тн Е
Earl of NOTTINGHAM.
Occafioned by a late MOTION made by the Archdeacon of London, at his Vifitation for the City Clergy to return their Thanks to his Lordfhip for his ANSWER to Mr. Whiston.
By a CURATE of London, Dr. SYKES.
First printed in the Year 1721.