But whether the Methodists are church-men or dissenters, the acts of King _Charles_ II. referred to, page 3. paragraph 1. and page 4, paragraph 2. make nothing against them, neither do they prove the Methodists to be violaters of the statute law, by their being _field-preachers_. And what the author so peremptorily affirms, page 4. paragraph 3. (and which, by the way, is one of the _few additions_ made in this, which was not in the last edition) is directly false. For he says, that “it has not been known, that a Dissenting teacher of any denomination whatever, has thought himself warranted under the act of toleration, to preach in fields or streets.” It may not, indeed, be known to the author; but I know, my Lords, two of the most eminent among the Dissenting ministers, who have thought themselves warranted, if not by the act of toleration, yet by the laws of the land, to preach out of doors; and accordingly, when the house would not contain the people, they have preached in a field or orchard, and near the common high-way. My Lords, I have been perusing all the acts of King _Charles_ II. wherein the word _field_ is mentioned, and find they are intended “to suppress _seditious conventicles_, for promoting further, and more proper, speedy remedies against the growing and dangerous practices of _seditious sectaries_, and other _disloyal persons_, who, under pretence of tender consciences, have, or may, at their meetings _contrive insurrections_ (as late experience hath shewn)”. These, my Lords, are the preambles of the acts. These are the only field-meetings I can find that are prohibited. And how, my Lords, can such acts be applied to the Methodists? Does not such an application imply a charge against the Methodists, as though they were seditious sectaries, disloyal persons, who, under pretence of tender ♦consciences, have, or may contrive insurrections? Has any late experience shewn this? No, my Lords, and I hope no future experience ever will. How then can your Lordships, with a safe conscience, encourage such a pamphlet, or bespeak any number of Mr. _Owen_, in order, as may be supposed, that they should be dispersed among your Lordships’ clergy? Well might the author conceal his name. A more notorious libel has not been published. I am apt to believe, that Mr. _Owen_ the printer is of my mind also; for he has taken care in the title-page, not to let the world know where, or by whom, this pamphlet was printed. It comes into public like a child dropt, that no body cares to own. And, indeed, who can be blamed for disowning such a libel? For how, my Lords, does it appear by these acts, what the author so confidently asserts, page 4, paragraph 2, “that this new sect of Methodists have broken through all these provisions and restraints, neither regarding the penalties of the laws, which stand in full force against them, nor embracing the protection which the act of toleration might give them, in case they complied with the conditions of it?” How can he immediately add, “and if this be not an open defiance to government, it is hard to say what is?” May I not more justly say, if this be not an open defamation, and open defiance of all rules of charity, it is hard to say what is? Might he not as well tax the Methodists with high treason? Father, forgive him! LORD JESUS, lay not this sin to his charge!
♦ “consciencies” replaced with “consciences”
Though the reign, my Lords, of King _Charles_ II. wherein the acts before referred to were made, was not the most mild and moderate in religious matters, yet your Lordships very well know the famous trial of _Mede_ and _Penn_; and, after the jury had been confined a long time, they brought them in, _guilty only of speaking in_ Gracechurch-street. And if _Quakers_ met with so much lenity under the reign of King _Charles_, what liberty of preaching in fields, and elsewhere, may not the loyal ministers and members of the church of _England_, nay, protestant Dissenting teachers also, expect under the more gentle and moderate reign of his present Majesty King _George_, who, as I have been informed, has declared, “there shall be no persecution in his days.” May the crown long flourish on his royal head, and a popish Pretender never be permitted to sit upon the _English_ throne! To this, I believe, all the Methodists will heartily say, _Amen_, and _Amen_.