AN Amicable Accommodation OF THE DIFFERENCE Between the Representer AND THE ANSWERER, In Return to his Last Reply against The PAPIST Protesting against Protestant Popery.

Permissu Superiorum.

LONDON, Printed by H. Hills, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty for His Houshold and Chappel. 1686.

AN Amicable Accommodation OF THE DIFFERENCE Between the REPRESENTER And the ANSWERER.

HERE is a strange Voluminous ado about the Papist Misrepresented and Represented. First, almost Twenty Sheets by way of Answer to it; then, Ten in a second Reply; and now, Fif­teen in a Rejoynder: And after all this pother and noise, the upshot of the Matter is come to this, That the Word Misrepresented is an improper Expres­sion; That the Character of a Papist Misrepresented cannot be called a Misrepresentation in a strict and proper sense, as our Antiprotester has it often in his last Reply: where yet he owns the proving this, to Pag. 2. 4. [Page 2] have been the main drift of his former Ten Sheets, and a great part of these last Fifteen. Surely he has taken a great deal of pains; but to what purpose, I expect to hear in other Ten Sheets yet to come: for really, I do not yet know that I am much concern'd, whether it be a Misrepresentation in a strict and proper sense, or no. And therefore, since he has pitch'd upon so civil a way of confuting my Book, I think I may, in return to his Civility, and without wrong to my Cause, grant him the whole of his Pretensions, and then sit down and smile with him a while, to see, how being so near of a mind, we have yet been so long clashing Quills, as Adversaries. I am really for Peace, and a good Correspondence; and upon a serious Consideration of this last Answer, ha­ving great reason to think, that the most considerable part of the Contention between us, has been about a Word, and for want of a fair Understanding, I'le en­deavour to lay open my Mind farther to him, so to remove all Misrepresentation from between us, (I hope he'll pardon the Expression, tho' it be not in its strict and proper sense) and by this means accommo­date our Affair, without letting it swell farther into a Quarrel of yet greater Volumes.

And First, To take up the Matter from the begin­ning, If he had duely consider'd all I said in the Pa­pist Misrepresented and Represented, he might very well have excus'd entring the Field against me. For tho' I there complain'd of Papists being Misrepre­sented to the World, that their Faith is expos'd in a Disguise, and many things imputed to their Belief and Doctrine, which they disown and abominate: Yet in all this Complaint I nam'd no body, I ad­vanc'd no Accusations against any particular Party. [Page 3] And tho' I could have fill'd my Margins with num­bers of Authors, urging much blacker Calumnies than I there inserted; yet still I suppress'd all Names, consulting Modesty, and in regard of Peace. Now what need here of any singling themselves, or a Par­ty out, to Engage with me? I left every body to to their own Conscience; and had those who felt themselves touch'd, conceal'd the Sting within their own Breast, there had been still a Peace betwixt us. If a Man wipes the Dirt off his Face, that has been thrown at him in the Street, I hope he may do it without any affront to the Passers-by. His Com­plaint in general of being abus'd, is only a Natural Right; those that are innocent need not be much concern'd to clear themselves from the Charge; and such as are guilty avoid all Quarrel, if they but hold their Tongues. The Papist therefore Misrepresented and Represented might very well have pass'd with­out moving of Choler, if those who will have them­selves not concern'd at all, had not been too much concern'd to wipe off the Imputation. This had been a means of preserving a mutual Peace from the beginning.

But Secondly, Tho' contrary to this Method, much Dust has been rais'd, and not without some Heat in the Quarrel; yet I am still persuaded our Dif­ferences may be compounded, if a fair Condescension can win any thing upon my Adversary, and he'll allow me to purchase his Good-will by almost an en­tire Submission to the Chief of his Pretensions. I'le beg his leave to state the Occasion of our Debate, and the Reader shall soon see how much I can oblige him by my yielding.

[Page 4] The Occasion of my writing the Papist Misrepre­sented and Represented, was this; I found that the People in England had a very false Notion of Popery, or of the Faith and Doctrine of Roman Catholicks; that there was scarce any one Article of their Creed, any one Practice of their Church, which was not falsly drawn in the Imagination of the Vulgar, either blackned with Calumnies, or disfigur'd with preju­dic'd Interpretations or malicious Misconstructions; that hence arose so great a hatred against all of that Communion, that the Comprehensive Precept of Loving ones Neighbour, seem'd now to admit with the Zealous of a necessary Exception against all of that Profession; and the Design of rooting out Po­pery, a sufficient Dispensation for the violating all other Duties, both to God, the King, and our Neighbour.

This Uncharitable Temper I could not but look upon as ill becoming a Christian Name; and that to endeavour to remedy it, would not be only ac­ceptable to Catholicks, but even to Protestants too; who, I presum'd, would be as willingly prevented from doing an Injury to their Neighbours, as the others would be willing not to be injur'd: it being a greater Concern of a Church not to do an Injury, than to receive one.

For the removing therefore this Scandal from Christianity, and hindring Men from maligning and railing against their Neighbours, for the false Con­ceits of their own Imaginations, by what means so­ever taken up by them, I thought it no ill Expedi­ent, to declare sincerely what is really the Faith of a Catholick: and to shew more clearly how different it is from what it is vulgarly said to be, I drew out [Page 5] two Descriptions or Characters of Popery; the one being an Idea of Protestant Popery, or as it is gene­rally conceiv'd by Protestants, and painted in the Ima­gination of the Vulgar of that Communion: The other being a Draught of the Faith of Roman Catho­licks, as deliver'd and prescrib'd by their Church. The former of these Characters I call'd A Papist Mis­represented, and the latter A Papist Represented. And I thought these Titles justifiable enough, in as much as the one describes a Papist otherwise than he really is, disfigur'd with false Colours, and artificially tur­ned into a Monster, by a deform'd Dress, thrown over him by such, who through ignorance or malice are willing to render him Ridiculous: While the other sets him out divested of this Bug bear Habit, and shews him in his own genuine Shape and Com­plexion.

This inoffensive proceeding of mine, as I thought and meant it, pass'd not long without an Adversary, who proclaim'd to the World that he had Answered and Confuted the Book: But what, and how has he done it? He says, he has prov'd that the Character pag. 21 of a Papist Misrepresented contains nothing in it, which in a STRICT and PROPER sense can be call'd a Mis­representation: That it contains no Misrepresentation pag. 4. PROPERLY so call'd. That there is nothing of Mis­representation pag. 18. PROPERLY so call'd. This is the way he has answer'd and confuted it: and for this he is set up upon every Stall, as bidding me defiance, and with the Character of an Adversary.

But really the World is over hasty in proclaiming men at Odds. I love Peace too well, to fall out about such Trisles. Let those who have a mind to it, fight for a Word; for my part, he shall never be my Ene­my, [Page 6] who demands no more of me than this: Ile willingly yeild my right in such a Point as this, ra­ther than make an Adversary of one, who is so civil to ask no more. Nay rather than fail of obliging my Answerer, Ile e'en crave his pardon, for putting him to the trouble of reinforcing his proofs a Second time. He says here (p. 2.) He hop'd the talk of Mis­representing would have been at an end: After he had prov'd, to wit, in his Former Reply, that the Cha­racter of a Papist Misrepresented contain'd no Misre­presentation properly so call'd, in its strict and proper Sense. And really 'twas only through mistake, and not design, that I have been so troublesome to ob­lige him even to the talk of Misrepresenting beyond his expectation. For had I but imagin'd that that had been the utmost of his design in his last Ten Sheets, I should certainly have so far condescended to so Gentile an Adversary, as to have spar'd him the Charges and Sweat of laying down his Proofs again.

And therefore that he may not be importun'd with any farther talk of Misrepresenting for the future, I do here in compliance with him solemnly declare, that the Title of the Papist Misrepresented, is not to be taken in its strict and proper Sense, as Misrepresent­ing signifies only downright Lying, or falsly charging matter of Fact; the whole Character being not indeed of this Nature: But in its larger or less proper Sense; as it comprehends both Lying, Calumniating, Misin­terpreting, Reproaching, Misconstruing, Mis-judging, and whatever else of this kind; For in this Sense I don't find the Answerer has any dislike to it. But in case this should not please him neither, Ile yield one step lower, and will have Misrepresenting quite blot­ted [Page 7] out. But then he must give me leave to see, If I can please him with something else in its stead. And what if I should try if something borrow'd from the French, would be more suitable to his humor? That Nation speaks very politely and quaintly, it may be a Title a-la-mode de France may be as acceptable as their Fashions. What then if I should take Copy from the Acts of the General Assembly of the French Clergy lately Published; and instead of that Improper English word of Misrepresenting, prefix to my Book what they have done to their Complaint, viz. The Calumnies, Injuries and Falsities, which the Preten­ded Reformd publish in their Books and Sermons against the Doctrine of the Church? If this will agree to the Character in a more strict and proper sense, than Misrepresenting, let me but know his Sentiments, and wee'l never fall out for want of such a Refor­mation.

But however that he may be sensible, how much he's to be engag'd to me for this condescention; I must assure him, that whatsoever I yield in this kind, is purely out of good nature, and for the love of Peace; and not as oblig'd to it by force of his Ar­guments. For really to speak freely and betwixt Friends, I do not think he has advanc'd any thing in the whole matter, that has the face of a Proof; but proceeds all along upon a Principle, suppos'd to be certain indeed, but without the support of either Au­thority or Reason.

His Principle is this, That there can be no Misre­presenting, where there's an agreement about matter of p. 2. & alib. Fact; which to me has more of the Counterfeit in it, than true Standard.

[Page 8] For were the Anti-Protester put to prove, that there can be no proper Misrepresentation, where there's an agreement about matter of Fact, I believe 'tis not every ordinary Topick would find him mat­ter for a Demonstration.

For Misrepresenting seems to stand in opposition to Representing; and proper Representing being nothing more, than the Describing or shewing a thing as it is in it self: As many ways as a thing can be shewn otherwise than it is in it self; so many ways may it be properly Misrepresented. Now 'tis certain that for the description to bear an exact resemblance with the thing; it must not only agree with it in matter of Fact; but likewise in every other respect, which it pretends to declare, as in Motive, Circumstance, In­tention, End, &c. The disagreement in any one of these, being enough to quite change the nature of the thing, notwithstanding the matter of Fact being still the same. Nay many times even a Grin, a Wry Face, a Shrug or a Frown is enough to Misrepresent any man, without belying him in matter of Fact.

'Tis certain the Children of Reuben, and of Gad, and the half Tribe of Manesseh, had been fouly Mis­represented, if upon sight of the Altar raised by them on the Brink of Jordan, they had been presently de­clar'd Josh. 22. as Rebels against God, by the other Ten Tribes, as Prevaricators of the Law of MOSES, and as Setters up of an Altar against the Altar of God and of Israel. This I say had been certainly a Misrepresentation of the Two Tribes and a half; because tho' the matter of Fact, viz. the building an Altar, was true beyond all exception; yet because they raised this Altar, not for Burnt Offerings or for Sacrifice; but to be a Te­stimony to their Children to come, that they had a [Page 9] part in the Lord; the branding them with the Title of Rebels against God, and as Schismaticks from the Altar of the Tabernacle, had been altogether unjusti­fiable, and a Representing them to their Fellow-Tribes, otherwise then they were, which is properly Misrepresenting.

And had not Hannah been Misrepresented too, if Eli had set her out amongst her Neighbours, for a 1 King. 1. 13. Drunken Gossip, and a Prophaner of the House of the Lord, when he saw her muttering over her Prayers, without hearing her voice?

I know if Our Answerer had been by, neither the two Tribes, nor Hannah must have complained in this Case of being Misrepresented. He would have told them, whilst there was an agreement about mat­ter of Fact, there could be no Misrepresentation in a strict and proper Sense; that therefore they might rest contented with this infamy upon them, since by this one Principle they had a full Answer and Confuta­tion of their Complaint.

And is not this an admirable expedient now for the Honestest Man in the World to be blasted in his Credit and Reputation, and yet not to be Misrepre­sented neither? If Envy or Malice can but be inge­nious enough, to invent something like a Proof against him, and with Confidence insinuate it into the populace; 'tis no Misrepresenting him, to set him out for a Fool or a Knave. Let there be only some matter of Fact, which ill Will can but interpret into a Crime, and his Reputation is forthwith brought to the Stake. For tho' barely to defame an Honest Man, would be a Misrepresentation, and a Sin: yet to Preach and Post him up for a Rogue and a Villain, and to stand to it, and run down his Credit with a [Page 10] Proof, is no proper Misrepresentation at all. If the Two Elders had cried down Susanna for a Harlot, without offering to prove their aspersion, they had Misrepresented her then, it seems, according to our Answerer's Doctrine: But because their own Villany prompted them with a Proof against her Innocence, this so alter'd the Case, that a Vertuous Woman was painted out and decried for a Strumpet, and yet the Two Elders no Misrepresenters all the while. No, by no means; this is too foul a Character for them to bear, and they might be reasonably concern'd to wipe off the imputation; they have a Proof for what they urge, they have a matter of Fact of her being Alone and Naked in the Garden: and this makes her Credit a Subject of Dispute, and not of Misrepresenta­tion. This is admirable I confess, and tho' that young youth Daniel laid open the two Sages, for Perjury and False Accusation; yet they are beholden to this nicking Principle of our Anti-protester, for dischar­ging them from the Infamy of Misrepresenting.

And 'tis not only these Two Old Sinners are in­debted to him for his Assistance: As many as have ever made use of those Fashionable Topicks of Calum­ny and Slander, and maliciously plotted against In­nocence by Perjury and Desamation, must come and acknowledge their obligation, for his having found them out a method, by which tho' they have turn'd White into Black, shewn Honest Men for Knaves, stamp'd Vice upon Virtue, made Wise men pass for Fools, and always endeavour'd to represent things otherwise then they were; yet they may still plausibly quit themselves from the charge of proper Misrepresenting.

And first let the Jews come; for tho' they cla­mour'd [Page 11] against our Saviour, and painted him out, as a Breaker of the Sabbath, as a Glutton, as a Friend and Companion of Publicans and Sinners, and that in Belzebub the Prince of the Devils he casted out De­vils; yet this was no Misrepresenting of Christ, it seems; for as long as there was a matter of Fact in all these cases, 'twas no Misrepresenting, thus fouly to blacken Innocence, and to Represent Christ other­wise then he was.

And may not all after Jews, Infidels, and Turks come in too? For tho' they branded the Apostles as Troublers of the City, and movers of Sedition: Tho' they defam'd the Christians, as Superstitious Foolish and Bloody; tho' they decried them for Murdering Infants, and eating their Flesh in their Assemblies, for Worshipping the Sun, and adoring an Asses head for God, and teaching a thousand other Absurdities and Abominations. Yet if any one be so Bold as to call these Misrepresenters of the Christians and of their Faith, the charge is not likely to pass many days, without a return of something which will be certain­ly call'd an Answer.

Nay let none stay out from acknowledging their share in this favour, excepting only such Dull Souls, who have Malice enough to calumniate, but want wit to give a Reason for what they do, or can find no matter of Fact on which to ground their Scandal, or which they are not able to make Criminal by Inter­pretation. For as for all others, who carry on their Business by Calumny and Scandal, and can give a reason for it, they may go on as to this point; this Salvo is a General discharge, by which they may se­curely take away any mans Good name for the future, without being Misrepresenters.

[Page 12] And 'tis by this admirable Plea, the Anti-protester has absolv'd all the Antient and Modern Protestant Character-drawers of Popery, from the infamy of Misrepresenting. For tho' they expose a List of pre­tended Popish Doctrines to the People, usher'd in with They teach this, They Believe that, They say this, They affirm that, and under these Preambles charge the Papists for asserting and believing such Blasphe­mies and Abominations, which they would sooner lose their Lives than assent to: Yet these are no Misrepresenters, as long as they can find some matter of Fact, on which to ground these charges. But whether it be with reason or without reason, that's no matter, only distinguish, says he, (p. 4.) between matters of Representation and Dispute: And if the matter of Fact they charge the Papists with be true, they are no Misrepresenters; as for their Reasons and Arguments, I will not undertake to defend all the Reasonings of Protestants. So that let them traduce the Papists and their Doctrine never so odiously, yet they are no Misrepresenters, as long as they charge them with matter of Fact, and can say something they call a Reason for't, tho' it be no Reason at all.

This is the Doctrine of the Answerer; and thus is the Papist Misrepresented confuted. So that for the future the Papist, tho' he be expos'd in the most monstrous and horrid shape imaginable, must never complain of being Misrepresented, especially as long as those that make the show have Wit and Malice enough to give a Reason for what they say, and can fix it upon some matter of Fact, but whether right or wrong, that's all the same.

[Page 13] But now I would willingly know, whether this Explication of Misrepresenting be absolute and uni­versal, in regard to all Nations, Judgments and Pro­fessions; or only Calculated for the Elevation of Popery: So that only Papists must not think them­selves Misrepresented, when they are thus represented otherwise than they are; but not any others in the like Circumstances.

I have a little Scruple in this Matter, and there­fore will explicate my self a little, that I may be better inform'd concerning the nature of Misrepre­senting. I will for that end beg leave of my Answerer, to propose an Example or Two, which may serve to give me some Light into this Affair. Suppose there­fore that some Zealous Brother, that had Separated from the Church of England, having now his Ho­nour and his Interest engag'd in the Schism, to pre­vent the Re-union of his Flock, should make it his daily Business to animate his Followers against the Establish'd National Church, by exposing her Do­ctrine and Practices, and rendring them as odious as he can; would it be Misrepresenting or no? As now, if he should thus in the fervour of Spirit ad­dress himself to his Congregation:

Beloved, beware of the Whore that sits upon the Seven Hills; flie from the Abomination of Babylon; get out of the reach of the Dragon; be not contented to get from under his Feet, but stand afar off, afar off, Beloved, out of the Swing of his Tail: Oh, he has a long Tail, Beloved, [Page 14] a long Tail; and, do ye mark me now? there's as much Poison in his Tail, as in his very Teeth. I must explicate to you this Mystery. The Dragon's Seat is upon the Top of the Hills, and the poor Papists lie under his very Nose. There are some others, who have had thoughts of with­drawing themselves from this Place of Ini­quity, and have stepp'd a little aside, but could never yet bid Adieu to their Capti­vity, and these are such who call themselves Men of the Church of England; who tho' they have retir'd a little from the Top of the Hill, and are got from under the Dra­gon's Feet, yet they are not the half-way down, but stick in the way, and are as much under the Power of the Dragon, as if they were under his very Belly. For, mark ye, Beloved, he has such a Sweep with his Tail, that as many as are on the Sides of the Hills are still under his Command, and breath nothing but the Air of the Dragon. Smell to 'em a little, my dearest Saints, and you'l soon perceive them rank with Po­pery, and that their Delight is in the Fop­peries and Abominations of the Whore, and their Marks are the Marks of the Beast. [Page 15] For see what they are, behold their Chara­cter, Beloved.

1. They allow and maintain an intole­rable Pride in their Prelates, setling on them large Revenues and State, contrary to the Example of the Apostles, who were poor and humble, and by the Work of their Hands got Bread for themselves and their poor Neighbours. And these Prelates are verily nothing but Popish Prelates, and are commanded by their Church to wear the Miter and the Crosier, and the Cope, the most solemn Rags of the Whore: and tho' they generally dissemble this Popery in their Life-time, excepting only on their Coaches, so to try if they can gain us; yet you may see their Claim to it at their Death; there being scarce any of 'um bu­ried, but with the Miter and Crosier on their Tombs.

2. They make Gods of Dead Men, erecting Churches in their Honour, and Dedicating them to their Names. Nay, they honour them more than God him­self; of the Hundred and thirty seven Pa­rish-Churches of the Weekly-Bill of London, there being only Five in Honour of Christ, [Page 16] or the Blessed Trinity. And how much they honour the Virgin Mary more than Christ, you may see in the same Weekly Bills, in which Mary has Nineteen Churches Dedi­cated to her Name, and Christ only Three. And is not this to place Mary above Christ, and to make a Goddess of her? Is not this to worship her more than God? For, what more Sovereign and Divine Honour can there possibly be paid to any, than to raise Temples and Churches to their Names? This is an Honour and Worship to which all others of Bowing, Kneeling, and Pray­ing, are much inferiour. For these Acti­ons we lawfully use to Creatures, we Bow and Kneel to our Prince, and by humble Petitions beg his Assistance: But to build Temples and Churches to the Honour and Name of any Creature, is Blasphemy and Idolatry, 'tis to make Gods of them; and nothing better than an Imitation of the Heathens: And therefore as they had their Temples Dedicated to their Demy-Gods, Hercules, Vespasian, Trajan, and Di­ana, &c. so amongst our Brethren you see one Temple rais'd to Martin, another to Dennis, another to Bennet, another to [Page 17] Catherine. For this the Papists were Idola­ters, and for this the Church of England are Idolaters, and this Idolatry they inherit of the Papists; for tho' these Churches were built first by the Papists, yet the Church of England rais'd them out of their Ashes, and rebuilt them with the same Titles, Invoca­tions, and Dedications.

3. They teach and practise Idolatry on another account, and that is their Image-Idolatry. For tho' they pretended an ha­tred to Images for some years, yet that was only Dissimulation. For now at last they speak plain, and have given that Abo­mination a place in every Leaf of their Bibles. They may pretend they do not honour and respect them as the Papists do; but this is only before us Schismaticks: for, believe me, my Flock in Christ, they honour them in their Hearts more than the rankest Papist in the World. For I appeal to you now, be you Judges; What greater Honour can there be imagin'd, than to give a thing place even in the very Word of God? You understand very well, that to place an Image in the Throne of a King, is to give it Kingly Honour, and [Page 18] to place it in the Imperial Seat, is to give it Imperial Honour: What then, Beloved, is it to place Images and Pictures in the Bible, in the very Word of God, but to give them Divine Honour, and to respect them as Gods? For certainly the Word of God is of God, and all Divine; and to give any Image place there, is the greatest Argument of Sovereign Honour, and open acknow­ledgment of its Divinity.

But this is not all, my Brethren; for be­sides this Abomination of thus honouring Images and Pictures, they likewise Pray to their Pictures, as you may see them in their most solemn Devotion of the Com­mon Prayer. For they have them not only on the Walls in some Churches; but look but over their Shoulders, and you'l see them in the very heat of their Devotion under their very Eyes, in the Leaves of their Common-Prayer Books.

Nay, their Altars have their Images too, and this in a more prophane manner than the Papists; for these have none but Images of Christ, of the Apostles, and their Followers; and if any were tolerable, it ought to be These at a Christian Altar: [Page 19] but to throw down these of Christ, and set up Moses and Aaron in the place, is an Ido­latry beyond all Excuse. God hid Moses's Body, and they set up his Likeness over their Altars.

And mark ye now, Beloved, how all this is in defiance to the Commandment of God; For the Lord has said, Thou shalt not make to thy self any Graven Image, nor the Likeness of any thing in Heaven above, or in the Earth beneath: So that did they not honour, worship, or pray to these Pi­ctures, yet the very Making them is ex­presly forbidden by God. And let their Intention be what it will in so doing, 'tis certain, there's no Intention can alter the Pap. not Mis­rep. by Prot. p. 65. Nature of Actions which are determin'd by a Divine Law; For then Men might Mur­der, or Steal, or Forswear themselves, and yet avoid the Guilt of such Actions, by in­tending to do no Evil in them. 'Tis there­fore a very prophane Absurdity, Beloved, to see the Commandments set up in Church­es, in order to the keeping them, and yet with Moses and Aaron on each side, which is a flat Contradiction to the very Second of them, which says, Thou shalt not make [Page 20] the Likeness of any thing in Heaven above, &c. What think you now, my Brethren, do these Men love Images and worship them, or no? They profess'd a hatred to Image-worship in the beginning, for the more plausibly turning the Papists out of doors, when they pursu'd them with the Commi­nation in their old Common-Prayer-Books, of Cursed be all Worshippers of Images: but af­terwards succeeding to the Errors of the Papists, as well as to their Revenues, they no longer dar'd to curse the Worshippers of Images, knowing the Curse would light up­on their own Heads; but instead of that, reform'd their Prayers, and have it now, Cursed are ye Idolaters.

4. They worship Saints and Angels. For see, Beloved, besides the building Churches to the Honour of their Names, and set­ting up their Pictures in them, which are as great external Acts of Worship and Re­ligion as can be; they likewise set Days apart to honour them, as God has his Day set apart; they command their Vigils to be kept, and have Prayers in their Honour, not questioning but that they can Pray Disc. against Invocation of Saints, in the beginning. for as many as they know upon Earth. [Page 21] Nay, they likewise pray for, and depend up­on their Assistance, Help, and Protection, but especially of the Angels, as you may see in their Common-Prayer Books, where on the Day of Michael, they beg to be de­fended by the Angels; as if God, who is Almighty, were not able to defend them, that they should thus seek shelter under the Angels Wings. Is not this to leave God and his Christ, and to make Gods of Crea­tures? Oh! such abomination as this is not to be endured; 'tis intolerable, Beloved. For these Churches in their honour, Days in their honour, Images in their honour, and Prayers in their honour, is paying to them Divine Honours, 'tis worshipping them as Gods: For, mark ye now, all Civil Ho­nour is terminated on the visible things of this World, and we have no intercourse Papist not Mis­rep. by Prot. with the invisible Inhabitants of the other World, but what is Religious; now if all Worship of invisible Beings is Divine and Religious Worship; what abominable Ido­latry are our blind Brethren faln into, who by this Religious Worship make as many Gods, as there are Angels and Saints in Heaven!

[Page 22] 5. They practice Idolatry again in re­ceiving the Sacrament; for though they allow this to be only Bread and Wine, yet they pay it Religious Worship, and honour it as God, by falling down to it on their Knees. They may say, they do not this to the Bread and Wine: But what, must we not believe our Senses in so plain a Case? Do we not see them do it with our Eyes? And let them pretend what they please, their Practice is the best explication of their Belief.

6. They use a Book of Prayers, which is nothing but a ship of the Mass. 'Twas call'd a Mass-Book when it came first to light; and tho' it has since reform'd its Name, for the better imposing upon poor Souls; yet the Nature of it is still the same. The Epistles and Gospels and Collects and Litanies and Hymns are nothing but Terms of Babylon. And pray now, what are the Vigils, Ember-days, Rogation-days, Ashwednesday, Epipha­ny, Sexagesima, Quinquagesima, Septuagesi­ma? is not all this the Language of the Beast? Yea, Beloved, from the abundance of the Heart the Mouth speaketh; as their Language is, such is their very Heart and [Page 23] Soul; they delight in an unknown Tongue, and one may as well understand the Mass, as this Language of the Common-Prayer Book. Then look in the Calendar of the Common-Prayer, and there you'l find the Mass-Saints stand in their Order; March shews you Gregory the Pope, and Benedict the Monk; April has George that kill'd the Dragon; the follow Dunstan, that catch'd the Devil by the Nose, and stickl'd for the Celebacy of the Clergy; and Augustin, that brought Popery into this Nation; and thus their Saints are listed as in the Mass-Book, and as the Demy-Gods were in the Calendar of the Heathens. Then if you listen to them in this their Devotion, you will not think them to be an Assembly of Christians, but rather a Confusion of Misbelievers, of all sorts of Infidels met in a Club: There you'l hear them with the Persians crying out to the Sun, with the Aegyptians to the Whale, to all the Fishes and Beasts; with the Chal­deans to the Fire; with the Syrians to the Birds; and with the Papists too to Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, Dead Men, Men that cannot hear them; and this in all their Churches, as if these their Saints were like [Page 24] God himself, present in all Places. And this Devotion is call'd the Canticle of Benedicite, taken out of the Apocrypha, which with them you may see passes for very good Scripture. So that the whole Common-Prayer Book, if not worse, is nothing but the Mass-Book in English. And all the diffe­rence is, that the Missal is of an Ancient standing, us'd even in Basil and Chrysostom's time: But our Common-Prayer Book never knew light, till 'twas devis'd under Edward VI. And how many Alterations has it had in this time? Some made by King Edward himself, some by Queen Elizabeth, and se­veral others since. Nay, have we not seen Prayers added to this Book, in Thanksgi­ving for the Discovery of and Deliverance from a Plot, which now every considering Man has reason to believe to have been no more than a Chimera, and the Invention of Bad Men?

7. They make Gods of Men, attributing to them a Power of Forgiving Sins, the in­communicable Attribute of the Almighty; and this is plain in their Liturgy, in which their Priests are order'd to give Absolution to Sinners.

[Page 25] 8. They encourage a Death-bed Repen­tance; permitting their Members to live as extravagantly as they please all the time of their Health; and not a word of Confess and Repent, but when Death is waiting for them at their Beds-Head. They have a Power to give Absolution, they say; and their never enjoyning it; but in the last Agony, is Argument enough to conclude, there's no obligation of Repenting amongst them, till Death looks 'em in the Face.

9. They know not what their Belief is touching this Power of Absolution. Some of their Divines affirm, That the Sentence by which Absolution is given to the Penitent, is an Absolute and Definitive Sentence, judici­ally absolving him from the Guilt of his Of­fences. Others of their Doctors say, That the Form of Absolution is Declarative rather than Absolute, and think it a rashness to pro­nounce a Definitive Sentence in Gods Name. And thus tho' their Faith be all pretended to be according to the Word of God, yet 'tis wonderful hard to know what it is; and whilst they thus disagree amongst them­selves, how can any embrace their Creed, who know not what they believe them­selves?

[Page 26] 10. They dispense with Vows, and dis­solve the Obligation of such as are made even to God himself. Thus you see, when any Priest, Jesuit, or Fryar comes over to their Church, tho' they have solemnly vow'd their Virginity to God, and promi­sed to the Almighty never to Marry, yet they are no sooner made a Member of this Reform'd Congregation, but their Obli­gation is forthwith dispens'd with, they are allow'd to take a Wife, and wholly re­leas'd from their Vow. And heark ye now, my Chosen of the Lord, if they can thus dispense with a Vow made to God, what trust can be placed in them? how can we rely on them? since, after this, there's no difficulty in pretending to a Power of re­leasing the Obligation to Veracity amongst Men?

11. They are a Cruel, Bloody, and Per­secuting Church, and think nothing unjust which is for the Interest of their Cause, for the Security and Propagation of their Doctrine. You know how they help'd on this score the Low Countries to Rebell against their Lawful Sovereign, and were the occasion of much Innocent Blood being [Page 27] Spilt: and how they profer'd to assist the French in their Rebellion against their Prince. What they did to that unfortu­nate Mary Queen of Scots, you know like­wise full well: She took Sanctuary here, and being Heiress of the Crown, was made a Sacrifice upon the Scaffold for pretended Crimes, but in good truth for nothing else but the Security of the Church of England. Charles I. fell too upon the same account: They lay this, you know, at Dissenters doors; but how far that War was an Episcopal War, the Lord knows. For besides the en­gaging him to take up Arms on their ac­count, you know one Archbishop changed his Rochet for a Coat of Mail, and the greatest number of the Convocation-House, of what Church were they?

12. They practice Cruelty again in per­secuting us for not obeying their Church, when they at the same time are as great Dissenters as we. For, look you now, Be­loved, are not their Ministers commanded by their Church to enjoy but one Benefice: And yet how many of them possess two or three? They find no difficulty of being di­spens'd in this Duty, if they can but make a [Page 28] Friend to speak for them, and Forty pound for the Fees. Are not their Prelates com­manded by their Rubrick to wear a Scarlet Robe, a White Rochet, and Corner'd Cap: their Ministers an Albe and Tunicle; and who is there complies with this Order? Do's not their Church command all of their Communion to Fast all Lent, the Em­ber-days, Rogation-days, and all Fridays in the Year: and yet who of them satisfies this Precept? Do we not find the contrary every where practis'd? And not only in this, but in a thousand other Instances of the like nature. And yet while they themselves thus frankly trample the Commands of their Church under feet, is it not a most malicious Cruelty that we should be perse­cuted for not satisfying her Precepts? So that tho' we are Members of their Church, we can, by their good will, enjoy no Peace amongst them. They spare us our Lives indeed, but without Liberty or Property, the only Comforts of Life.

13. They teach Absurdities and Contra­dictions. First, in requiring us to submit to the Authority of their Church, and punish­ing us for refusal: and then charging such [Page 29] as follow them from all such Submission, and giving them liberty of embracing no­thing that is propos'd to them, but what they themselves shall judge consonant to the Word of God. And thus we must be oblig'd to go to Church; and yet when we come there, the Appeal is made from the Pulpit to the People, and we need not believe what we hear, unless we think fit our selves. Then the Authority of Councils we must like wise allow and submit to; and yet after all their Examinations and Deter­minations, we need not receive what they Decree, unless in our own private Judg­ments we think it conform to Reason and the Law. So that we must not be allow'd to do what we think best, and guide our selves; and yet when we follow them, we need believe or do no more than we think fitting: Which is to take them for Gover­nors and Directors, and then afterwards go alone by our selves.

14. After all this Liberty left to their Followers, 'tis yet the Belief of their Church, That whosoever will follow her, must shut his Eyes, stifle his Sense and Rea­son, and be led only by the Nose. And [Page 30] therefore we poor Schismaticks must not reform any Abuse or Superstition, which our Reason assures us to be contrary to the Word of God, without the Thunder of Excommunication forthwith breaking upon our Heads; but if their Church in Parliament and Convocation makes any Reformation, there's no Appeal to be made to Sense or Reason, but 'tis immediately to be receiv'd as the Sense of the Word of God by all her Members. And therefore, Revision re­vis. in vindic. of the Bish. of Winton, p. 23. says one of their Divines, let them in the Name of God Reform on, if they proceed ac­cording to due Course of Law, and Act with Authority. For as to What, and How, and How far, things are to be Reform'd, such as you and I are must leave it to the Wisdom and Pleasure of Governors. So that we must lay aside our Reason, if we intend to enter their Congregation; 'tis only going on blindly without fear or care, and relying confi­dently on their Infallible Governors, and we shall be forthwith True and Substantial Churchmen. And what think you, my Bre­thren, do's not this smell of the Infallible Chair? 'Tis e'en so. But such is the Church from which you are happily gone out. [Page 31] Thus teach her Divines, and thus are her Members allow'd to believe; For you can­not Ans. to Pap. Protest. p. 9. doubt, but that all of them are allow'd to believe that, which any Man among them is allow'd to teach.

15. By this means they are a wavering and unsetled Church, subject to continual Variations, and turning as many ways as their Governors please to wind them; and yet still all is according to the Word of God. In the first Common-Prayer-Book of Edward the Sixth, 'twas requir'd that Water should be mingled with the Com­munion-Wine; and that in the Consecra­tion of the Elements, the Minister should sign them twice with the Sign of the Cross: And that the Communion-Bread should be unleaven'd and round. Baptis­mal Water was likewise appointed to be bless'd with the Sign of the Cross; The Minister was commanded to Exorcise and Conjure out the unclean Spirit from the Infant, to dip him thrice in the Water, to Anoynt him with Ovl upon the Head, and put on him the White Vesture call'd the Cry­some, and make the Cross on his Breast and Forehead. In Consirmation the Bishops were [Page 32] order'd to Cross the Children on the Fore­head. In the Visitation of the Sick the Minister was to Anoint the Sick Person on his Forehead or Breast, making the Sign of the Cross. And there was no Command to receive the Sacrament Kneeling. This was their Church then, as Establish'd by Law and the Pleasure of Governors, and conform to the Scripture: but now their Scripture and Governors say otherwise, and condemn what they then approv'd. 'T was then according to Scripture to Pray for the Dead, as in the same Book of Ed­ward VI. Now the Scripture forbids it. The Form of Ordination was then and ma­ny years after one thing, and now of late 'tis become another: and if right then, I wonder how it can be right now. Thus you see their Church alter and change ac­cording to the Complexion of the Times. And not only in these things, but in a thousand others; nay, in the very Articles of their Belief: The Apostles Creed had never more than Twelve Articles, and the assenting to these were enough to make a Christian; but to make a Church of Eng­land Christian, at first 'twas requir'd to Sub­scribe [Page 33] to Forty two Articles; and then a lit­tle after something was bated, and 'twas enough to subscribe to Thirty nine; and in these there was so much chopping and changing, both in Words, Expressions, and Sentences, that even the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition never had more before it came to perfection.

These are the Marks, my Dearest ones, of that Congregation to which you are so earnestly invited to joyn: but let those joyn with her that can, those that can find a way to dispense with all their Sense and Reason, and admit of Prophanation, and Superstition, and Idolatry, for the Word of God. But for us, We have the Scrip­ture and our Reason for our Guides, and we need no better; and we have no surer way of avoiding the Teeth of the Dragon, than to keep out of the reach of his Tail.

If a Zealous Brother, I say, should in this manner paint out the Church of England to his Flock, and endeavour to imprint in their Minds an Idea thus Foul and Monstrous, of her teaching and maintain­ing abominable Superstitions and Idolatries; I would fain know of the Answerer, Whether this would be Representing or Misrepresenting the Church of Eng­land; whether 'twould be a shewing her as she is, [Page 34] or as she is not. I know, according to his Principles the Charges being not false as to matter of Fact, and none being urg'd without some Reason, this Character ought not to be Entitled, The Church of England Mis­represented. And yet methinks I cannot fancy 'twill be thought like her. But however it be, I am resolv'd to compound, and not quarrel upon this score. If he will not have this to be Misrepresenting in its strict and proper sense, I am ready to allow, that the word Misrepresented, as it stands in the Title of my Book, is not to be taken in its strict and proper sense, as it signifies Calumniating by Perjury only, and Lies; such as was the Story of the Pilgrims, Screw'd Guns, and Black Bills, for the hanging of the Jesuits; and that of Stifling Sir Edm. Godfrey with a Pillow in the upper Court of Somerset-House, and Strangling him in the lower Court, before the Stables, with a twisted Handkerchief, and laying it on the Papists: But in a less rigorous Signification, as it implies the Representing a thing otherwise than it is, and putting on false Colours, whether by Wry Interpretations, False Inferences, Malicious Applications, Weak Rea­sonings, or any such like Topick. For by whatsoever Method the thing is made to appear otherwise than it is, 'tis all the Misrepresenting I desire, and equally fit for my purpose. And now I have so far comply'd with the Answerer, I hope the Talk of Misrepresent­ing, as he says, will be over. And yet if he has a mind to prove once more, in other ten Sheets, That Misre­presenting is not to be taken in its strict and proper sense let him do it; 'tis only Twelve-pence apiece more for the Curious: The Judicious will think it only worth a Smile, if so much.

[Page 35] But I am yet in Arrears, and must not part thus. For it seems the Answerer has a Complaint against me, and 'tis this, (pag, 3.) That in my last Reply, instead of defending my own Misrepresentations, which I so unjustly father'd upon them, I have pick'd up new Misrepresentations for him to Answer. And really I was much to blame, to look out for new Misrepre­sentations, when he had little to say against the former, except that they were not to be call'd Misre­sentations in a strict sense. But where did I father 'em upon any body? I laid them at no bodys door; and if some appear'd so solicitous in clearing them­selves, that they were suspected to be Fathers, they may thank themselves; I pointed at none.

'Tis true, for the shewing they were none of my own Childish Conceits, I at length produc'd some eminent Protestants, describing Popery with the same ill Features, and worse than I had drawn it in my Cha­racter of a Papist Misrepresented: and first, the Arch­bishop of York. And here the Quarrel is, because I left out the Authorities mention'd by that Prelate. And now the Answerer has inserted those Authorities, what do they make to his purpose, or against me? Were they all exact and true, which yet no Man will be able to make good, is every thing to be set forth for the Faith of a Church, which can be found in one Author, as it is by him, when he prefixes to them a He (that is, the Papist) must believe? Can the Church of England stand this Test? Would it not be Misrepresenting her, to Preface every extravagant Saying of her Members, with She believes, and She teaches? What signifie therefore the mentioning those Authors, when the Question is not, What some Private Authors say; but what the Church believes? [Page 36] When the Archbishop therefore brings in the Papist professing his Faith, with this solemn Protestation, We must believe; and then supports the Paradox with a single Authority or two; as this was in him a piece of Artifice, not justifiable amongst Friends; so the omission of such Testimonies was beyond the possibility of being a Design, unless it were of Con­sulting the Credit of the Prelate.

And tho' the Books mention'd were publish'd by Authority of Superiors; yet from such Books cannot be fairly Represented the Faith of the Church, and whosoever pretends to do it, is nothing less than a Misrepresenter: Nor will a Church of England-Man, I fancy, much question this Truth, who, I believe, upon consideration, will allow, that his Church may be easily Misrepresented, if every idle Opinion to be pick'd out of Books, which come forth with an Im­primatur, were to be inserted into the Character of her Faith. And I cannot but wonder the Answerer should urge this Dispute now at this time, when we have seen a Book Publish'd by Authority of Pope, Cardinals, and other Dignitaries, and in a particular manner approv'd by them, and yet question'd by some as not Representing the Faith of the Church aright. Methinks, when a Book of this Authority comes to be disputed, as not truly Representing, I cannot un­derstand how every other Author with a petty Li­cence is a sufficient ground for a Representer. But it must be so to drive the Business on. When a Prote­stant shews forth the Church of Rome, every thing that can be rak'd out of Books, is authentick enough for him to put into the Character: but when a Catho­lick Prelate Expounds the Doctrine of his Church, all the Authority of Pope and Cardinals is not enough to set him up for a Representer.

[Page 37] Besides the Archbishop, I produc'd Sutcliff's Survey of Popery, in which he had laid to the Papists charge such Tenets as are offensive to every Christian Ear, and as much detested by Papists, as any other Society whatsoever. But I did not, it seems, set down his Reasons and his Authorities. And this discovery puts the Answerer upon an outcry against the Representer's Honesty. And yet where the Scandal is I cannot find. For I undertook for no more, than to shew the Doctrines laid by Mr. Sutcliff at the Papists door, and this I did sincerely in his own words and sense, and for his Reasons; they were no Concern of mine, neither will the Answerer, after all his noise, put his approba­tion to them, as far as I see: for having summ'd them up, he concludes with this open hint, (p. 14.) If some Protestants have charg'd the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome with such Consequences as they cannot justifie, Wiser Protestants disown it. He must be a very fooolish Representer therefore, who should go about to confute such Reasons which nothing be­long to Representing, and are such as Wiser Prote­stants are asham'd of.

But now we are come to the Point of Honesty, I cannot but admire a rare Knack the Answerer has espe­cially in Translating honestly: one Instance he gives us in his former Reply, and another in this (p. 76.) where reciting a Prayer out of the Pontifical, he has these words in the Latin, Ʋt orantes inclinantes (que) se propter Deum ante istam Crucem; but rendring it into English, he leaves out those two little words propter Deum, and puts it thus: That those who Pray and Bow themselves before this Cross, without mentioning for Gods sake, or for the honor God, as not fit for his pur­pose. When I have learn'd this Artifice of him, he [Page 38] may then with reason cry out of curtailing and dis­honesty: But at present I think he has something to mend at home in this Point. And for my part, I'le endeavour not to follow so ill an Example.

And now at length we are arriv'd to the Question concerning the Bishop of Condom, and some Points Treated of by him. The Answerer has Debated the Matter in about One hundred Pages, and fairly invites the Representer to dispute it out, and two powerful Arguments he uses to provoke him to it. The first is, (p. 26) That there is no reason to dispute it at all: But the truth is, says he, I know no reason there is for all this dispute. So that the Representer, if he will be advis'd, must leave off Character-making, and dispute over an hundred Pages, because there is no reason to dispute. The second Reason (ib.) is, because I was not satisfi'd with his bare telling me he did not like my Religion, now he will give me some Reasons for't. And this is a Reason like the former: For I never was concern'd with his not liking my Religion: I never told him, I was not satisfi'd with his bare telling me, he did not like it, that now he should pretend for this Reason, to give me some Reasons for it. All the busi­ness is, dispute he's resolv'd, and in it must, tho' by head and shoulders; the Representing Humour do's not please him, and Character-making is an aggrie­vance, 'tis too fair a way of dealing for him, and lays too open the Mystery of Iniquity: and therefore he has no better way to quit himself of this trouble, than to draw me into an Ocean of Disputes, that so Re­presenting may be at an end.

Thus he labours to change the Scene, and to tempt me out of the way; but his weighty Reasons do not work so powerfully, as to render me uncapable of re­sisting. [Page 39] And therefore till we have other two Reasons given, I'le be no other than Representer still. My busi­ness is matter of Fact, and not of Right, or de jure; and since he has bulkt out his Answer with Nine Sheets of the Fifteen, fill'd up with an occasional Discourse, I'le take the freedom gravely to turn over those his hun­dred occasional Pages, tho' I fear he'll take it ill; but I cannot help him. We Wise Converts do not love to go out of our way, but upon very good grounds; and therefore if the two Reasons he has given for this at present, do not move us, 'tis because they are too sub­lime, and not suited to our Capacity.

But however, he requires satisfaction as to the Points he has there handled, and I shall remit him to such Books in which these Controversies have been discuss'd at large. And for my self shall sit down con­tented with the Title he often allows me of a Repre­senter. And as to the Bishop of Condom, to whom I ap­peal'd for the justifying the Character of the Papist Represented, he has undertaken his own Vindication, and needs not the assistance of another Hand.

All the Concern I have, is to declare, that to assent to the Catholick Faith, as Expounded by this Prelate, is sufficient for any to be receiv'd into the Communion of our Church; we require no other Terms. And if the Answerer finds different Explications given by Bel­larmine and others; tho' the Books are approv'd, yet there's no obligation of being of their mind in things that are disputed amongst Divines. 'Tis in vain there­fore to clamour against the Opinions of Bellarmine, or Suarez, Scotus, &c. as loose, extravagant, harsh or unsa­voury, &c. since it suffices for Catholick Communion, to subscribe to the Points treated by M. Condom, in the sense he has expounded them; if they are more soft or [Page 40] sweet than has hitherto be apprehended, or deliver'd formerly by others, let them but be receiv'd in that soft and sweet manner, and no more is requir'd.

'Tis therefore nothing more than a Cavil, to questi­on whether Bellarmine and other eminent approv'd Authors, are not as authentic a Rule for the Exposition of the Council of Trent and the Catholick Faith, as the Bishop of Condom. We have no concern in these Com­parisons, our whole business is only this; Whether the embracing the Catholick Faith, as expounded by the Bishop of Condom, be sufficient for a Person to be receiv'd into the Communion of our Church. And since this is evidently so, and that all those that be­lieve thus, are actually acknowledg'd Members of this Church upon this Assent, what needs the Repre­senter, who follows his Explication, any farther Apo­logy? If any Person therefore may be thus receiv'd a Member of our Church, upon the Terms I have propos'd in the Matters there handled, I have Repre­sented the Papist aright. And amongst all the Argu­ments that have been publish'd, only those have be­long'd to me, which endeavour to shew the falsity of this. 'Tis no wonder therefore I have wav'd the Con­sideration of many things that have been publish'd a­gainst me under the Title of an Answer, since of the Forty Sheets that have come upon this Errand into the World, there has not been three, but what have for­got their Business they were sent upon. If it be an Omission therefore not to return an Answer to such things as are not spoken to me, 'tis easily making a List of Omissions. But let me see where it has been prov'd, that 'tis not sufficient for a Catholick to believe as I have propos'd, as to those Particulars. And if it has had no Answer, it shall have one.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.