a Consequent of true Reason, it ought to be embraced; but where 'tis
not, I need not say it ought to be rejected; and I think any Man may
be allowed to dispute whether it be so or no. The Bishop of
_Worcester_ cannot publish a Book, but you'll have an Answer to it.
It would indeed be of Reputation to the Councils and Fathers, some of
them at least, if what were objected against them were of no more
force. His Philosophy is too rational to be weak'ned by Sophistry,
his Divinity too solid to be shook by Heresie: He seems to have been
predestinated to Glory, and the appointed Instrument to deliver us
from Popery, Atheism, Deism, and Socinianism, with all those spurious
Sectaries which have been spawned into the Worlds: What can resist
the Power of his Arguments? And who is able to abide his Force. But
to return, I think the Controversie, in short, is this:

_Whether the Allowance of a Theatre in a Christian Country, is
consisting with the Christian Religion._

The Answer to this Question may be this:

That whatever is approved by lawful Authority, and is not against
any positive revealed Law of God, is consisting with the Christian
Religion.

Now it lies upon the Adversaries of the Stage to prove, That the
Theatre is against Law or Scripture.

'Tis unfair to take the advantage of the present Corruptions, and cry
down the Stage, because Men make an ill use of it. The Priests Won't
allow this Argument in another Case; and I think an ill Poet is no
more an Objection against the Stage, than a Clergyman's being a