BOOKS lately printed for Richard Chiswell.

THE Pillar and Ground of Truth. A Treatise shewing that the Roman Church falsly claims to be That Church, and the Pillar of That Truth mentioned by St. Paul in his First Epistle to Timothy. Chap. 3 Vers. 15. 4o.

A Short Summary of the Principal Controversies between the Church of England and the Church of Rome; being a Vindication of several Protestant Doctrines, in Ansswer to a Late Pamphlet, Intituled, [Protestancy destitute of Scripture Proofs.] 4o.

Two Discourses; of Purgatory, and Prayers for the Dead.

An Answer to a late Pamphlet, Intitutled [The Judgment and Doctrine of the Clergy of the Church of England, concerning one Special Branch of the King's Prerogative, viz. In Dispensing with the Penal Laws.] 4o.

Preparation for Death: Being a Letter sent to a young Gentle­woman in France, in a dangerous Distemper, of which she died.

The Difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome, in opposition to a late Book, entitutled, An Agreement between the Church of England and Church of Rome.

A PRIVATE PRAYER to be used in Difficult Times, 8o.

REMARKS OF A PULTON MASTER in the SAVOY, UPON Dr Tho. Tenison's LATE NARRATIVE;

With a Confutation of the Doctors Rule of Faith. AND A REPLY TO A. Chresners pretended Vindication.

Published by Authority.

London, Printed by Nathaniel Thompson at the Entrance into Old-Spring-Garden near Charing-Cross, 1687.

To the Parishioners of St. Mar­tins in the Fields, and St James Westminster.

Gentlemen,

YOur Learned Pastor, the Reve­rend Dr. Tenison, having been pleas'd, to his printed Account of a Conference had between Him and Me on the 29th. of September last; in which he has not only notoriously mis-represented the Matter of Fact, but also stuff'd his whole Narrative with several false Aspersions, reflecting, not only on my particular Person, but also on the whole So­ciety, whereof I am a Member; and on our. Holy Mother the Catholick Church, of which I profess my self an unworthy Son: The Dr. I say, having been pleas'd to this Account to pre­fix an Epistle to you, fraught with malitious Insinuations and Calumnies: You will not, I hope, think me guilty of too great Presumption, if endeavouring to clear my self from the false Accusations brought against me; I, though a Stranger, making Appeal to you, before whom the Dr. has laid his Charge, and expect from your Judgement and Candor (however pre­possest [Page] with a good Opinion of the Dr and a Prejudice against both my Religion and Order;) a fair and equitable Hearing.

The Dr. begins his Epistle to you with a Complaint of many false Reports and Papers industriously spread by some of the less sin­cere and less generous Romanists, Now as I protest an utter Abhorrence of all such un­worthy Proceedings, so I cannot easily be­lieve any Catholick to have been guilty of them, without some more sufficient Testimony than the Dr's Word; of whose insincere and disingenuous Actings, his Account is a most ap­parent Evidence. And that Letters sent both into the North and West of England, bearing date the very day of the Conference; and im­porting, that there were at least Eight or Ten Jesuits put to Silence, by the force of one Dr's Arguments, manifestly shews, that the Dr. is not the only person, who has Cause to complain of false Reports, or Reason to fear, That unworthy Ends would be serv'd on the Credulous.

The Dr. to excuse the Bitterness (not to say Scurrility) of his Expressions, tells you a story of a Person, one of whose Names, as he Words it, was Gubbard, who, in the time of the Rebellion against King Charles the I. Re­commending [Page] himself to the Committee at Norwich, as a Man, Who had a zeal for the same Cause, in which they were engag'd, took Possession of the Living of Mondesly, out of which the Dr's Father was Ejected for his Loyalty: That after a few years, he Preach'd up Purgatory, and other such Points, in so open a manner, That the Committee turn'd him out again; and that in a little time he (as it were) vanish'd away.

By this story, which the Dr. ushers in with his having a Motive to severe Language to­wards that sort of men (meaning Catholick Priests) which few have besides; and closes with the Impression, it made upon him when he was young, and the raising his Suspition and Indignation ever since; he would insinuate, that this Gubbard was some Jesuit or Catholick Priest, which he pretends to prove, by his changing his Name, his Favour with the Committee, and his Preaching of Pur­garory.

Catholick Priests sometimes change their Names, thereby the better to shelter themselves from the rigorous Severity of the Sanguinary Laws, executed on them by meek-hearted Pro­testants, only in respect of their Function; yet if it be consider'd, that this is frequently done [Page] by other Persons on far different Motives and Occasions, it will seem very ridiculous to infer from thence, that the Person mention'd by the Dr. was a Priest.

Nor yet will his Preaching of Purgatory, and such other Points, evince him to have been a Romanist (much less a Priest if it shall be consider'd, how many far stranger Opinions were in those days of Liberty vented in the Pulpit; and that many years have not pass'd, since a very Learned Member of the Church of England, Dr. Thorn­dike Pre­bend of Westminster. and dying in her Communion, desir'd an Ora pro animâ to be Engraven on his Tomb.

Now to shew, how great Favour the Priests and Jesuits found with the Committees of those Times. I take the Liberty to inform the World, that my Father had six Uncles Jesuits; and yet was not only himself committed to Prison by the Rebels for his Religion, and his Loyalty to his King; but his House was also for a long time possess'd by a Committee Minister; and two of his Brethren were for three years Edu­cated in another Committee Ministers house at Kettring in Northamptonshire, where they were oblig'd, being under Age, to go to Schisma­tical Service; though it pleas'd Almighty God of his Infinite Mercy to reduce them afterwards into the Bosom of his Spouse the Catholick [Page] Church, out of which, none of our Family ever dy'd, Nor do I believe any one Family in Eng­land was more frequently Pillag'd, or more se­verely Sequester'd, than Ours; yet I bless God, I am so far from having my Indignation thereby rais'd against that Party, or entertaining any Hatred towards them, that I rather glory in our having had occasion to suffer for our King, and our Religion.

I here therefore Challenge the Dr. and his Adherents to make it appear, that this, or any other Committee Minister was either a Jesuit or Priest of the Roman Church; or else must take leave to say, that his vending such like scurrilous Suspicions and Surmises at this time of day, seem directly to aim at that, of which I am unwilling to think him guilty.

Having return'd this Answer to what is most material in his Epistle; I leave you, Gentle­men, to judge, whether he has been so Just or Fair, as he pretends; or whether his Deport­ment in this whole Matter is not such, as de­serves far more severe Remarks, than any he has hitherto undergone from,

Gentlemen,
Your Hearty Well wisher And humble Servant in Christ Jesus. A.P.

Testimonies in favour of A. P.

THese are to Satisfie, that I John Keynes, Pro­vincial of the English Jesuits, have made a strict enquiry whether any of those Priests under my Obedience, in or about London, were with A. P. at a Conference held between Dr. T. and the said A. P. in Long-Acre on Michaelmass-day last; and cannot learn that any was there, except one who came in to­wards the Evening, stay'd about half an hour, and re­tir'd again, without speaking a word to the Dr. or to A. P.

John Keynes.

THat A. P. went the said Afternoon about Two of the Clock, all alone from the Savoy, are Witnesses

James Cook, John Taylor, &c.

ABout half an hour after Two on Michaelmass­day last, Mr. P. came alone to my House in Old Spring-Gardenst to enquire for Mr. M. and departed after ashort stay, with the said Mr. M. no body else being in their Company.

Dorothy Ceene,
Edward Bysshe, Mary Bysshe.

ON Thursday St. Michaels-day, Mr. Pulton came with one Gentleman to our House in Long-Acre, and desired to be further directed to­wards [Page] Mr. Johnsons the Kings Cabinet-maker; this was between Two and Three in the Afternoon, and my Brother Thomas Jones went with the said Mr. Pul­ton and his Companion to Mr. Johnson's, no other being in their Company:

Mary Lewis, Thomas Jones, Aurelius Jones.

WE also testifie, that the Conference being end­ed, Mr. Pulton returned to our House, only in company of the Gentleman he went with; and my Bro­ther Thomas Jones lighted Mr. Pulton to the Savoy.

Tho. Lewis, Elizab. Jones, Barthol. Chiven, Jane Chiven.

ON Thursday about a quarter before Three in the Afternoon, Mr. Pulton with one Gentleman in his company, (directed by Thomas Jones) came to Mr. Johnsons the Kings Cabinet-maker, and desir'd to know where the Brazier liv'd, he was led to a Chamber whither no body went to him, saving a third Gentleman who casually came in, and whom Mr. Pul­ton said he knew nothing of, and stay'd with him till it was told Mr. Pulton that the Dr. was come, and that he might go when he pleas'd to him; he went in com­pany of the Gentleman who came along with him, the third also following him, but no body else was of the company when he went to Mr. Uppingtons the Brazier, who lives next door to Mr. Johnson. In Testimony of which,

Francis Johnson, Joseph Allen, John Abercromby.

I Thomas Jones farther witness, that standing over the way, I saw Mr. Pulton go in company of the aforesaid Gentleman to Mr. Uppingtons, nor did I observe any body else to be with him,

Thomas Jones.

THese are to satisfie the World, (that having made a diligent enquiry) I find that neither my Priest or any other of my Family, or from my house, was present at a late Conference about Religion, held in Long-Acre, between Mr. P. and Dr. T. Pastor of St. Martins in the Fields.

Mary St. Johns.

BEing in the Chamber where the Conference was held, I saw Mr. Pulton come up with only one Gentleman in his company, and a third who followed them.

Cath. Lamb.

BE it known to all, that A. P. having publickly in School, desired that if any one had heard him speak a word relating to a Conference he was to have with Dr. Tenison, or any body else, he would stand up and own it; no body was found who could say he heard any thing thereof.

J. Whitaker, Prot. Joh. Brady, Cath. Edw. Bray, Cath. Char. Tripp, Prot. Rog. Thornton, Prot. Edy Lacy, Cat.

ADVERTISEMENT.

There are two of the Texts alledg'd against Luther, which A. P. has not found in the Author (not having all his Works) but for satisfaction, he will allow at the next occasion, sixteen grams more.

REMARKS UPON Dr. Tenison's NARRATIVE.

THe Dr. in the beginning of his Dr. T's acc. of Conf. p. 1, 2. Narrative, Charges A. P. that having had a Discourse concer­ning Luther's Contradictions, and his being Taught some things by the Devil, made this general Inference, That ever since, the pretended Reform'd had proceeded upon the Word of the Devil. A. P. positively affirms, he never said any such thing; but acknowledges, that on this occasion, he put indeed the following Quaery: Now I ask, whether the Doctrine, deliver'd by the Spirit of Ʋntruth, can be from the Holy Ghost. The Dr. would by this odious Insinuation, possess his Reader with an Aversion for A. P. as Teaching all of the late pre­tended Reformation to be Scholars of Satan: So that whatever A. P. shall say in Defence of his Cause, may be heard with prejudice and averseness of mind.

Then the Dr. gives a hint, as though the Youth was not found in his Intellectuals; and that his Master should say, This had befallen him since his having been seduced: As also, that he was grown a great Lyar, Idle, uneasie to the Family by Damning his fellow Servants, &c. Here I cannot but blame in the [Page 2] Dr. first his want of Fraternal Charity in publishing Faults (for at present I take them upon the Dr's word) committed in a private House, to the view of the whole Kingdom. Secondly, His want of respect in charging the Religion, of which the Sworn Head of his own Church is a principal Member, and which, as themselves confess, flourish'd in this Kingdom near a thousand years, before Protestancy was ever heard of, to be such, whence a mopish, lying, uneasie and idle Temper, naturally flows.

As for the Youth's turning what was said about Luther and the Devil upon the Dr. and ascribing it to him; I think the Boy might have some small rea­son for it, since the Dr. neither then did, nor now does deny the Truth of this Passage concerning Luther; so that his silence might be taken for a tacit and secondary Confirmation.

He Damn'd his fellow-Apprentices about Whit­suntide last (as the Dr. told A. P. in the Savoy,) which was long before A. P. began to Catechise: so that he Learn'd not of him that Damning Prin­ciple, of which A. P. will speak in its proper place. Here again the Dr. uses Artifice to create an Odi­um in his Reader against A. P. that what A. P. shall say, however just and reasonable, may be re­ceiv'd with Passion and Rancour against him. But Truth will take place, maugre all disingenuous Artifices.

Now had the Dr. been so successful, as to have re­duc'd his esteem'd seduc'd Sheep; O then he had been (as truly I believe he is) a very Candid, Ingenuous, Laborious, Tractable Youth: But this is a common shift with the Party, to decry, vilifie and defame all that leave their Communion, though convinc'd [Page 3] in Conscience and Reason, that they ought so to do; and extol all that joyn themselves to it, though known to be Sacrilegious, and little better than Atheists in their Lives.

The Dr. speaks of great Boasting on the Catho­licks Conf. p. 3. side; as though the Dr. durst not meet A. P. of which A. P. never heard but from him; nor can the Dr. ever bring any Witness, who will be able to make out, that A. P. gave the Challenge. So much he might have said to the Youth; that, if his Master were offended at his Change, he would endeavour, if his Master so desir'd, to give him satisfaction. But he never nam'd any Dr. or Minister in the Kingdom, much less assign'd Place and Hour; as the Dr. has been pleas'd to give out. And for A. P's Party, he knows none he had, ex­cept the Youth, who to his knowledge had nothing to do in the whole Affair. What jugling Mr. Ʋ. or his Wife, or both, may have us'd to make the Parties meet, A. P. knows not; and as on the one side he will never decline any fair Conference, (though he has been twice disappointed, wait­ing in vain, a Minister of the Church of England:) So on the other, he will not easily appoint any, unless the Conditions, hereafter set down, be punctually observ'd.

'Twas agreed, (says the Dr.) on all sides, that Ibid. there should be little Company, and no noise. First, There was no agreement made in order to any Par­ticulars, before the Parties met; if made then, why was it not kept? Shall I tell you? because the Dr. saw his own Party to be at least six to one, and therefore Mr. Ʋ. would not harken to A. P. de­siring the Chamber might be clear'd; so that the [Page 4] whole matter of Fact, contain'd in this Paragraph, is very notoriously mis-represented; by which the Dr. would cunningly insinuate, that the Catholicks are forward in carrying on this Cause, and willing to be bickering with the Church of England.

The Dr. affirms, That A. P. came in with Nine Confer. p. 4. or Ten after him. Now a Gentleman, zealous for the Truth, will allow a Guiney an Head, for every one, that shall be prov'd to have been of A. P's Company, Invitation, or Appointment, more than Mr. M. In order to which, the Reader is desir'd to consider the Testimonies alledg'd at the end of these Remarks. If a third Gentleman unknown to A. P. or some others (of which A. P. knows no­thing) should casually come in, he has nothing to answer for that; and Mr. Ʋ. may thank himself, who had buz'd the Conference abroad, whilst A. P. knew not so much, as at which end of Long-Acre Mr. Ʋ's House was.

The Dr. adds, that presently, after he came in, [...]. He espied in the Room, a Priest in a yellow Pe­ruke; one from my Lady St. John's of Long-Acre, whom he supposes to be a Priest, and one in a plain Band, who (as was said) came with him. Were not this from a Grave Dr. I should not spare a severe Reflection upon it, since every part of the Asser­tion is false. And there are two Gaineys deposited in A. P's Hands, for him, who shall find out this yellow Peruke; (which was there presently after A. P's coming in) this suppos'd Priest of my Lady St. John's, or the Gentleman in the plain Band, and prove them to be Jesuits or Priests, or in the least to have medled with the dispute. There was indeed one in a yellow Peruke, but he came not [Page 5] till the Evening, stay'd not above half an hour, and spoke not one Syllable to the Dr. or relating to the Conference. Now the Reason, why the Dr. has so mis-represented this meeting, is because he was asham'd, that, all the Kingdom being fill'd with the noise of Eight, Ten, and Fifteen Jesuits, silenc'd by him; and that his Friend Mr. Ʋ. and his Wife being known to be the prime Authors and spreaders of these stories, the sham should in the end be discovered: And therefore, he would give some colour and ground for these false reports, by setting forth Jesuits under distinctive signs, viz. yellow Perukes, plain Bands, &c. with these Salvo's, It is said, it is suppos'd; whilst the Dr. is conscious, he had to deal but with one Jesuit, and another he esteems as good as one. Where mark, that even the Dr. himself, never makes the yellow Peruke, or plain-Band-Gentleman, speak one word through his whole Narrative; though trim'd up with all the advantageous (though little sincere) flourishes imaginable.

But let us grant these (supposed so) to have been truly Jesuits, how will the Dr. make out the second part of the story, viz. of so many being silenc'd by him? Now A. P. being vers'd in the Doctrine of Equivocation, (as the Dr. is pleas'd Confer. p. 4. to hint) has an Evasion for him: Eight Jesuits were silenc'd, that is, some not known of in the crowd, besides a yellow Peruke and plain Band, &c. stood silent before the Dr. Nor do I see how it can any other way be made out.

For what relates to Scholars pressing at the p. 4. door, A. P. assures the World, he never spoke a tittle of this Affair to any Scholar, as you shall see [Page 6] attested anon; and that one having (A. P. knows not by what means) heard thereof, and asking leave to go, he absolutely refus'd it: And that meeting two in Long-Acre, he was offended at them, and sent them presently home: Nor was there any one, who came near the Chamber, only six or eight at most (all living there abouts) who flock'd to the Street▪door, where a numerous Crowd was assem­bled.

As for what he says in his 5th. Page, I refer the Reader to what Mr. M. intends to publish in his own behalf.

The Dr. in Page 6th. Begins his Artifice of in­verting Confer. p. 6. and confounding the whole Order of the Conference, leaving out the Discourse concerning Luther's Contradictions, which was a Preamble, and not the main Subject, as he would make the World believe, so to cast a mist before their Eyes, that they may not consider the stress of the prime Question in debate.

To A. P's urging, What assurance the Church of Ibid. England could give, that she had the true Word of God, He answers, that these Discourses tend to Atheism, to which A. P. gives his assent; and grants the whole, to wit, that those who will not believe Transubstantiation, can never be oblig'd by the Dr's Rule of Faith, to believe the Trinity, neither word being there: The Texts of Scripture, relating to either, being equally lyable to Cavilling: And the one being as repugnant to the apparent Prin­ciples of Discourse, as the other to the Arguments of Sense.

Now woe be to them, who have open'd this door to Atheism, by teaching the People, they [Page 7] ought to believe no farther than they see; whence they bid adien to all the hidden and secret Myste­ries of Faith, which are essentially obscure in their Object, though clear in their Motive.

He brings next, that which was truly premised, Confer. p. 7. willing to delude his Reader with an Opinion, that this was the Point in debate: And has therefore gather'd together several Passages, brought in ca­sually on different occasions.

He says Paschasius Radbertus allow'd of Three Ibid. Sacraments, but the Dr. should have added, he allowed of no more than Three, which he will never make out. He adds that he was the inventor of Transubstantiation. A. P. answered, That is no more true, than the first Nicene Council was the Au­thor of Consubstantiality. Where note, that on emergent occasions, the Church, to condemn new Errours and Heresies, has been often obliged to Coin new words (as in the above-mention'd Coun­cil of Nice) thereby to take away all Collusion in terms, the ordinary shift of Hereticks.

He says also, ‘That Luther, (some grains of Ibid. allowance being given to him as we ought to every Man) was an excellent Instrument of Gods,’ A. P. therefore, to comply with the Dr. will allow him some grains of Allowance, and then leave it to the Judgement of every Pious Chri­stian, whether Luther Was an excellent Instrument of GODS, or no; and how Christian-like a Re­formation that must needs prove, which must (whatever its greatest Abettors say to the contrary) date its Birth and Origin from him, and own him for its prime Patriarch.

[Page 8] This digression into Luther's Praises, A. P. Judges the more warrantable, for that the Dr. is frequent­ly pleased to insinuate, that the prime Question ought to have been concerning him.

First, As to his Religion, taking it in general, t'was any thing that had but an Opposition to Po­pery. He makes the Divinity it Self Three-fold, as there are Three Persons; whence Zuinglius (a com­petent Zuing. to. 2. fol. 474. Interpreter of Luthers meaning) infers, that he makes Three Gods.

My Soul, says Luther, hates Homousion, and the Arians did very well in expelling it, least so pro­phane Lut. lib. con. Latom. tom. 2. Witt. Imp. an 1551. and new a Word should be used in the Articles of Faith. Who sees not that the same Spirit, which set him a quarrelling with the Nicene Council on account of the word Homousion, guides our modern Sectaries to except against those of Lateran, Florence and Trent, on account of the word Transubstantiation.

How can CHRIST (says Zuinglius to Luther) Par. 2. fol. 402. be said to be made of a Woman, if, as thou sayest, he was from all Eternity according to his Humane Na­ture? Vide Zuing. to. 2. fol 458. & Luth. lib. de Concil Par. 2. No less impious is that which follows, If the Divinity did not suffer in CHRIST, he was not my CHRIST.

Such being Luther's Piety towards the Deity (to omit many other execrable Blasphemies of his touching CHRIST's suffering on the Cross, the horrour of a troubled Conscience, and pains in Hell after death;) it cannot be expected, he should be much more respectful to the Sacred Writers of GOD's Word.

He says, Ecclesiastes has never a perfect Sentence, Conviv. Serm. Tit. de lib. v [...]t. & No. Test. and that the Author thereof had neither Boots nor Spurs, but ridon a long Stick, or in Begging Shooes, as [Page 9] he did when he was a Fryer. 'Tis a false Opinion, Lib. de scrip. & Eccles. Auth. cap. 3. and to be abolish'd, that there are Four Gospels; for the Gospel of St. John is the only fair, true, and principal Gospel. Is not the Church of England's Canon notably supported by this Testimony?

But of his Services done to God, there's none more Excellent, none more conducing to his Honour, none more beseeming the Godly and Religious Morals of this Instrument of God, and Church-Reformer, than his abolishing the Decalogue. ‘The Ten Commandments (says he) belong not to Us; Serm. de Mose. for God did not lead Us, but the Jews out of Aegypt. The Inference also is as admirable, as the Position Godly and Religious, ‘Hence (says he) the chief To. 5. fol. 272. Art and Wisdom of Christians, is not to know the Law, &c.

From this Principle, so instrumental to Piety and true Religion, he drew these admirable Documents. Polygamy, says he, is no more abrogated, than the Propos. de Bi­gam. Epist. An. 1528. Propos. 62, 65, 66. Tom. 7. Witt. fol. 505. rest of Moses's Law. Again, He, that resolves to be without a Woman, let him lay aside the Name of a Man, making himself a plain Angel. And again, he Counsels the Husband, in case his Wife refuse his Bed, to say to her, If thou wilt not, another will; if the Mistress will not, let the Maid come. A To. 5. fol. 123. wholesom Advice certainly (by which, he per­swaded himself, he should not fail to get Proselytes enough,) and an admirable practice for one who was to be the Father of the Reformation, and the best means he could invent, others proving in­effectual, to propagate it, and multiply the godly Party. For, as he taught, so he liv'd.

As it is not, says he, in my Power, that I should To. 5. fol▪ 119. be no Man, so it is not in my Power, that I should be [Page 10] without a Woman. Whereas he owns, that, whilst a Roman Catholick, and a Religious Man, which was above fifteen years, He kept Chastity, punish'd his poor Body with Fasting, Watching, Praying, and other Exercises, a little too harsh for his new fang­led Reformation; and therefore he prudently left them out of it.

Of his sincerity in expounding Holy Scripture (in which, if in any thing, he ought to be esteem'd an Instrument of God) I shall speak in its proper place.

His Charity to his Fellow-Gospellers, and nice­ness of Conscience, appears by this, I knew, says Parva Confess. & Tom 3. Germ. fol. 55. & Coll. Mens. Germ. fol. 210. he, the Elevation of the Sacrament to be Idolatrous; yet I retain'd it in the Church at Wittenberg, to the end I might despite the Devil Carolostadius. Now let any one accuse the Papists of Idolatry in Wor­shipping of Images, when this Excellent Instrument of GOD sticks not, at what he esteems the grossest Idolatry, to spite one of his Brethren. The Tigurines confess, That Luther was so Charitable, as to send Confess Or­thod. 122, 123. all to the Devil, that would not subscribe to his Opi­nion.

The Devil, as he was seldom out of his Mouth and Writings, so was he an inseparable Companion to this Excellent Instrument of GOD. The Devil, Coll. Mens. Germ. fol. 281. says he, does more frequently sleep with me, and more near me, than my Catharine. He confesses also, That he often walk'd with the Devil in his Bed-chamber; That he eat more than two Bushels of Salt with him. How then can any one imagine this Familiarity of his with the Devil to have pass'd in a Dream, improv'd after the Popish manner, (says the Dr.) into a Vision, Confer. p. 7. without owning the same of his Sacrilegious Fami­liarty with his Kate.

[Page 11] His modest and civil Language is such, as, being unfit for Christian Ears, I willingly omit, giving you only this Remark of the Tigurines upon it. It Tigur. Theol. Ort. Conf. fol. 10. Tigur. Tract. 3 cont. supra. Luth. Conf. pag. 61. is most clear, and cannot be deny'd, but that never any man writ more uncivilly, more filthily, more leudly, &c. than Luther. And again, Did ever man hear such Speeches pass from a furious Devil himself?

No less Excellent an Instrument was he in order to Civil Authority and Government. Among Chri­stians, Tom. 6. Germ. de Saec. Pot. & alibi. says he, no man can, or ought to be Magi­strate, but each one is to other equally subject. Hence, no wonder he treats Crown'd Heads with that unparallel'd Indignity and Impudence: He calls Henry the VIII. More Furious than Madness it self, Tom. 2. fol. 333, 334, 335, 338, 340. more Foolish than Folly it self; indu'd with an Impu­dent and Whorish Face, without any one vein of Prince­ly Blood in his Body; a lying Sophist, a damnable rot­ten Worm, a Basilisk, and Progeny of an Adder, &c. Most wicked and impudent Harry. And again, Thou lyest in thy Throat, foolish and Sacrilegious King.

Thus giving Luther some few grains of Allow­ance, that is, allowing him to be one, who que­stion'd, if not deny'd, the Unity of God; held Christ to have been Man from all Eternity; the Divinity to have suffer'd; several unquestion'd Books of Scripture, to be meer sigments, and idle stories, the three first Gospels not to be true, the ten Commandments not to be made for Us, Poly­gamy and Fornication not to be unlawful; Conti­nency to be as impossible, as not to be a Man; one generally confess'd a manifest and publick cor­rupter of Scripture, most filthy in his Language and Writings, most dis-respectful and insolent to­wards Princes; one Infamous for his intimate Fa­miliarity [Page 12] with the Devil; and in short, one, whose Principles and Practice are absolutely destructive of all Piety, Religion, Civil Government and Mo­rality; and then Dr. Martin Luther will prove most undoubtedly an excellent Instrument of GOD's. What impartial man can doubt, but these Grains of Allowance are weighty enough to counterpoise the Dr's bare assertion of it?

Having (in compliance to the Dr's Request) given these Grains of Allowance to Luther, whom he has been pleas'd to assign for an excellent Instrument of GOD's, and a Pillar of the pretended Reformation. A. P. craves the Favour of his kind Reader, that he may be permitted to draw also a short Scheme of one, whom he verily believes to have been a very great Instrument of GOD, and who was Con­temporary to Martin Luther. 'Tis of the great Xaverius, who (when some parts of Europe, insti­gated by this Trumpet of Sedition, revolted from their Obedience to the Pope) leaving those great Pretensions in the World, to which his extraordi­nary Parts might have made him justly aspire, and binding himself to GOD by a triple Vow of follow­ing the Evangelical Counsels (as Luther had for­merly done, though now broken it) went in ex­treme Poverty to the farthest parts of the East, where having Preach'd the Faith to near thirty Kingdoms, in twelve of which he left it planted, having demolish'd many thousands of Idolatrous Temples, and Baptiz'd with his own hands twelve hundred thousand Souls; Almighty GOD accom­panying his Preaching by such Signs, as he is usu­ally pleas'd to confer on Apostles of the Gentiles, as a wonderful Power over Devils, the Gift of [Page 13] Tongues, the Spirit of Prophecy, the Curing all Diseases, and raising five and twenty persons from Death to Life, all which, attested by many Eye­witnesses, were, after a very rigorous examen found indisputably true, he dy'd with an Opinion of ad­mirable Sanctity, which is yet farther confirm'd by his Body remaining till this day uncorrupt at Goa.

The Pious and Christian Reader is now desir'd to reflect a little on these two Instruments, and having seriously compar'd their Lives and Doctrines, in both of which they were Diametrically opposite to each other, freely and indifferently to determine, which of them seems to have been sent by Almigh­ty GOD.

To return now to our Dr. we find him relating Confer. p. 8. a story, that this great Instrument of GOD Martin Luther, being at Rome, heard the very Courtizans jeering by say, that some, who Consecrated, had us'd these Words: Bread thou art, Bread thou shalt be; Wine thou art, Wine thou shalt be.

Now had Luther heard this from the Colledge of Cardinals, Bishops, and Prelates, and had they allow'd of it, he might have had some Motive to distrust the sincerity of the Roman Catholick Tenet. But he heard it from the very Courtizans. This in­deed is an irrefragable Proof of Luther's Pious Con­versation. And here the Dr. has unawares poin­ted us out the true Motive of Luther's Change of Life and Doctrine, viz. The Conversation of Courtizans; which, he knew, being a Frier, he could not so easily enjoy.

The Dr. now got into a pleasant Humour, tells us another impertinent story of an old Man, who [Page 14] Swore to the Devil, Ador'd an Image of the Blessed Virgin, and kept his Courtizan: Giving an hint, as though the second Council of Nice approv'd all this: Which are three notorious Calumnies. The Fathers, there assembled, said, as they ought, that an Oath, made to the Devil, could not oblige; and that it would be less Sin to be naught with a Woman (it being a personal and private Trespass) than by denying the Respect due to Holy Images, at that time wickedly oppugn'd by the most Im­pious Ieonoclasts, to give occasion of publick Scan­dal and Heresie.

I must upon this occasion, mind the Reader of a very disingenuous Proceeding, frequently us'd by most Protestants, viz. That, if they find in Histo­ry, of whatever Time or Author, any Passage, seeming to make the least against the Roman Ca­tholicks, they presently receive it with all the Cre­dit, due to the most assured Verity: Whereas, though five hundred Authors of undoubted Since­rity, Virtue, and Learning, attest from their own knowledge and experience, Passages, Miracles, &c. evincing our Catholick Tenets, they value them no more than a Tale of Tom Thumb, or Valentine and Orson.

The Dr's Rule of Faith prov'd Insufficient.

THis story, which, as appears by his own ac­count, rendred the Dr. very uneasie, till he was deliver'd of it, being over, he now assigns for the Rule of Faith the Holy Bible, the sum of it in necessary Doctrines being the Apostolical Creed. Confer. p. 9. [Page 15] Now A. P. (when requisite,) will assign many necessary Points, which, as they are unmen­tion'd in the Apostles Creed, so are they either not at all, or much less clearly prov'd from Holy Scrip­ture, than the Doctrine of the Real Presence, Auri­cular Confession, Purgatory, &c. But at present, what follows, shall suffice. 'Tis necessary for Chri­stians to keep Holy the first day of the Week. Now where does the Bible teach the Sabbath, or seventh day, which was commanded to be kept in the De­calogue, to have been abolish'd by CHRIST, and the Sunday, being the first, substituted in its place? The same might be instanc'd in the Feast of Easter, no where commanded in Scripture, either as to the Obligation, or Time of its Celebration, as now practic'd by the Church. Baptism is necessary to Children for Salvation. We are bound to believe, that the Son is Consubstantial to the Father; that the second Person was Really, Physically, and Sub­stantially united to our Humane Nature, and not Morally only; that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son. What plain Texts of Scripture prove these Tenets so, as the Arian, Euty­chian, Anabaptist, &c. shall be oblig'd to submit, being convinc'd by the Evidence thereof? A. P. therefore asserts, that an Infallible Church is re­quisite to expound Holy Writ to us, and by her Traditions (which are the living Word of GOD) instruct us in necessary Doctrines. That, which the Dr. appeals to for Judge, to wit, The written Word of GOD, is no other, than what has been the Appeal of all Hereticks from CHRIST's time: Which conse­quently cannot be the Rule of one True Church, that is Essentially different from an Heretical one. [Page 16] And certainly no man of Sense and Judgment can say, that a guilty Person will ever appeal to that Judge, by whom he is evidently and sufficiently condemn'd; but all Hereticks are guilty Persons, and yet boldly appeal to Holy Scripture; Therefore Holy Scripture is not the Judge, by whom Here­ticks are evidently and sufficiently condemn'd. Whence is clearly made out, that there must be some other (living) Judge, by whose Authority Hereticks may be clearly convinc'd, and all necessary Points of Doctrine taught and deliver'd to us.

Would not that be the worst constituted Go­vernment in the World, in which there should be no living Judge or Explicator of the Law, but every one should be permitted to Expound it so, as his own Capricio or private Judgment suggests, or as it may most make for his own Interest? What Malefactor at this rate would not find a Plea for his own Defence, and a Salvo for the most Enormous Crimes? Now if this in Humane Laws would be esteem'd highly derogotary to the Prudence of the Law-giver, shall those be deem'd to have the Spirit of GOD, who presume to affirm the same of his Divine Majesty, and so far to call in question his Infinite Wisdom and Goodness, as to think, that in the establishment of his Church he would omit That, without which no State or Government could long subsist?

But here the Dr. may reply, what he afterwards says, that every one is not left to Expound this Rule at Discretion, but must Ʋse the help of all Mi­nisterial Guides possible; that is, he must Consult his Confer. p. 18. Minister, and if one satisfy him not, advise with another, and so to the end of the Chapter. Now [Page 17] what shall we say, if this Man prudently distrusts the Mission of his pretended Ministers, as every one may that of the Church of England, being grounded on meer Humane Authority. What if he distrust his Ministers Sincerity, Learning, Ver­tue? What if he question his having us'd Pious Means in humility of Soul? Of which no Body can be assur'd? What if Consulting many, one tells him one thing, another (as it usually happens) quite contrary? What Means are there left to quiet this dubious mind? You will say, He is then left to his own Conscience. Now being so left, A. P. desires to know, whether this Mans Conscience may be Erronous, and actually err in things ne­cessary to Salvation. If so, then his Religion may prove a meer Fancy, if more, an Opinion, but at most a private Judgement, and wholly void of Di­vine Faith. If he cannot err, then each one must be allow'd to be Infallible in his own Perswasion, and so the Dr. must grant that to each particular Member, which he denies to the whole. But that each one may err after all his Endeavours (if we allow no living Judge, to whom we are bound to submit,) is manifest from daily Experience; by which we see, that thousands having made use of all Ministerial Guides possible, cease not to dissent amongst themselves, and disagree even to Contra­diction in things of the greatest moment.

And against the Dr. ad hominem: Roman Ca­tholicks use all the means Protestants can prescribe, and many more, in humility of Soul, and have an undoubted assurance of being in the true way: Which being so, A. P. would be satisfy'd, with what Conscience the Church of England can Pro­secute [Page 18] men by Sanguinary Laws, who follow her own Rule with the greatest Perfection.

One word to the Dr. and A. P. will go on to the other Parts of the Dr's Rule. That can't be the only true Rule of Faith, without which a true Church did subsist: But without a compil'd Canon of Scripture, assign'd by the Church of England, as the only true Rule of Faith, a true Church did subsist: Therefore a compil'd Canon of Scripture can't be the only true Rule of Faith. The first Proposition is evident; for a Church can▪t subsist without its Essentials, one whereof questionless is a Rule of Faith. The second is prov'd thus, The Primitive Christians made a true Church: But this Church subsisted many years without a compil'd Canon of Scripture, as is evident: For several years after CARIST's Death pass'd without any written Gospels or Epistles; more, before they were di­vulg'd; and some Ages, before they were com­pil'd into a Canon. Therefore a true Church subsisted without a compil'd Canon of Scripture. Therefore that can't be the only true Rule of Faith.

The Dr. goes on, and asserts, that they had the same Proofs for their Bible with the Roman Catho­licks, viz. The Testimony of the Ʋniversal Church Conf [...]r. p. 9. of all Ages. Which is manifestly false: For neither the Universal Church, nor any part of it, deliver'd them the Bible, as the Protestants have it: Whether you consider the Number of Books, Conformity of Texts, or (what is most Material) the Sense and Meaning thereof: For, although the Note, This was only a Na­tional Council, and of no Ge­neral Obligati­on. Coun­cil of Laodicea approv'd of no more Books than those, which the Church of England now allows [Page 19] to be Canonical, nor indeed of all those, the Apo­calypse not being then receiv'd; yet that Council rejected not the other Books as Apocryphal. But the Church, then beginning to examine Holy Scrip­ture, approv'd for the present only the above-men­tion'd Canon, neither rejecting, nor admitting the other pieces. Now in the Council of Carthage, held in the year 397. the other parts of Holy Writ, being brought under Examination, were found to be of equal Authority, and consequently receiv'd into the Canon, St. Augustin subscribing thereto: And this was confirm'd by Pope Innocent the first in the year 402. who, giving an Account, what Books, were receiv'd, and directing himself by the Rule of Tradition, (viz. Quid custodita Series tem­porum demonstraret) sets down these very Books, the Epist 3 cap. 7. Roman Catholicks now still allow of. And St. Au­gustine was of the same Judgment, as also Pope Ge­lasius August. de Doctr. Christ. cap. 8. in the year 492. All which was confirm'd by the sixth General Council in the year 680.

And in the Council of Florence, held in the year 1438. the same Canon was again confirm'd, the Greeks, Armenians and Jacobites, subscribing there­to. So that, when Protestancy began, there were no Christians in the World, who believ'd those Books precisely to be Holy Scripture, which the Church of England allows of; and consequently they have the Testimony of the Ʋniversal Church and every Member thereof against them, wanting ten parts of that Rule, which they believe the on­ly essential one to Salvation. Now as for the Text, their own private Spirit is the sole Oracle it dropt from. As for what relates to the Sense and Mean­ing of Holy Scripture, the Dr. with all the Eyes of [Page 20] the quick-sighted Ministry shall never discover that Body of Christians, who ever profess'd those Ar­ticles of Faith, both Positive and Negative, the present Church of England proposes for her Cre­denda. Hence it is evident, they have been their own Choosers of Books, Texts, and Sense, and from first to last have no Authority either for one or other. Mark here, how the Dr. calls the Canon, subscrib'd by St. Augustine, and constantly allow'd by all the Universal Church for eleven hundred years Apocryphal Books of the later Time: As also, that his saying, He is as sure of this Books being the Bible, as of Cicero's Offices being his Book; is, with submission to his Doctorship, a mistake. Nor can he be said to believe a thing on anothers word, who neither believes him in his whole story, nor in his manner of relating it, nor in the meaning of the Words, he uses to explicate himself; but such an one must be said to believe, what himself pleases, and not what the other relates: Which is the pro­per Notion of an Heretick, deriv'd from [...] to choose.

He proceeds to illustrate, what he slightly touch'd Confer. p. 10. in the Conference, proving the Bible from Mens con­sidering the Prophesies, and their Events, the Cha­racters of CHRIST, the History of CHRIST, &c. Now this proves nothing, there being no other Testimony either for the Prophesies, or Events, than the Church of Englands private Judgement, she not having taken them on the Testimony of any Christians in the World. But granting the Histo­rical Part of Holy Writ to be clear'd by these Com­parisons; yet the Doctrinal part, on which the main hinge of Controversy turns, can never be [Page 21] that way made out: Which being soreseen by the Dr. he adds moreover, that Men must use Pious Means in Humility of Soul, and so they shall have Further Assurance begotten in them.

Here the Dr. has found a Salvo for all the Er­rours, that ever have been, or shall be committed in Points of Faith: For he, that shall say, he has us'd Pious Means in Humility of Soul, and that he has an Interiour Assurance of the Truth (as all He­reticks in the World have ever pretended) ought never to be proceeded against: And by the same Rule, all Penal Laws, Persecuting Christians for Conscience, are evidently unjust: Which notwith­standing have ever been the only Bulwark of the Church of England.

Now A. P. will demonstrate the above-men­tion'd Assertion of the Dr's to be Weak, Erroneous and False: Which he thus proves. The Water is clearest at the Fountain-Head: Hence, if ever any us'd those Pious Means, and had thereby Assurance begotten in them, We must allow it to Luther, Ca­rolostadius, Zuinglius, Beza, Castalio, &c. Who were the Principal Heads of the Reform'd Churches, and consequently receiv'd more of the Divine In­fluence, us'd more Industry in acquiring Authentick Copies, comparing Texts, imploring the Divine Assistance, than any of their Followers.

To begin therefore with Luther, Zuinglius says of him, That He was a foul Corrupter, and hor­rible Falsifier of GODS Word: One, who follow'd Lib. de Sacra­mentia, fol. 472 the Marcionists and Arians, that ras'd out such Places of Holy Writ, as were against him. Thou doest, says he to Luther, Corrupt the Word of God, thou art seen to be a manifest and common Corrupter [Page 22] and Perverter of the Holy Scriptures. How much are we asham'd of thee, who have hitherto esteem'd thee? With how great reason Zuinglius objected this to him, those are Judges, who have noted Vide Bell. Ser. de Pentec. above a thousand places, chang'd by him in the New Testament alone; and that he set forth the Gospels seven times, every Edition very much differing from the precedent. Now A. P. desires to know, whether, and when Martin Luther had the Assurance, he requires.

Luther on the other side affirms of the Zuinglian Vid. Pro. Ap. tract. 10. S. 10. Subd. 4. Translators, that They were Fools, Asses, Anti­christs, Deceivers, and of an Ass-like Ʋnderstanding. Beza says of the Basilian Translation, That It is in many places wicked, and altogether differing from the Mind of the Holy Ghost. Of Beza's Translation Castalio observes, That to note all his Errours, would require a great Volume. Beza again pronounces of Castalio's Edition, That, It is False, Foolish, Ʋn­skilful, Bold, Blasphemous, Vitious, Ridiculous, Cursed, Erroneous, Wicked, Perverse. In the first English Bible, set forth in the Reign of Henry the VIII. by Tindal the chief Apostle of the pretended Reformation, Bishop Tunstal has noted no less than two thousand Corruptions in the Translation of the New Testament alone.

A. P. therefore desires the Dr. to give a Rule to seekers of the Truth, by which they may discover the True and Uncorrupted Word of GOD. A­midst so much Dis-union, Clashing, and manifest Contradictions; all which naturally flow from that irregular Liberty of Expounding Scripture, given to all men by the Reformers.

[Page 23] From what has been hitherto said, A. P. draws this Argument. That which leads to manifest Dis­cord of Opinion, cannot be the Rule of One Holy Catholick Church. But the Rule, assign'd by the Dr. as now prov'd, has open'd the Door to mani­fest Discord in Opinion. Therefore, it is not the Rule of One True Catholick Church.

A. P. Humbly intreats the indifferent Reader to ponder this whole Discourse with that Attention and Judgement, it deserves: For if A. P. proves this point against the Dr. he is sure, That the whole Basis of the Reformation will totter, and that the Church of England has no more to say in her Defence, than the most Erroneous Body of Christians, which has ever been since CHRIST's Time.

A Prosecution of the REMARKS.

WEre the Quaery concerning the Ordination of Confer. p. 10. Linus any way material to A. P's Faith, he would Answer it. And what Copy St. Peter had of the Old Testament, makes nothing to the proof of A. P's Canon, for which he has the Testimony of an Infallible Church; whereas the Church of Eng­land has none at all for hers.

The Dr. in the same Page says, The Word Rock Note, That Ce­phas (the word our Saviour us'd) is a Syri­ach word, and signifies the same in either Gender, As, you are a Rock, and upon this Rock. being in the Greek of the Feminine Gender, cannot be apply'd to Peter, who is of the Masculine. Had St. Paul been endow'd with the Dr's Learning, he would certainly never have said, Petra autem erat CHRISTƲS, CHRIST was the Rock, He being no more of the Feminine Gender than St. Peter.

[Page 24] The Dr. having Read of twelve Foundations, Page 11. denies Peter to have had any Prerogative above the rest of the Apostles, He should have set down A. P's Answer, who by way of Retortion, askt the Dr. why he was by the Evangelists always nam'd in the first place, the Order of the others be­ing always inverted, since he was neither called First to the Apostolat, nor Best Beloved of Christ; why he is Read to have presided in the Council of the Apostles; and why all Controversies of Faith in all past Ages: were ever refer'd to St. Peter's Suc­cessors to be decided.

As for Mrs. Rs. saying softly, 'twas St. Peter's Con­fession, Conf. p. 11. on which Christ built his Church, A. P. knows nothing on't.

A little after the Dr. says, A. P. taxt the Greeks with being Lyars, &c. A. P. spake this in the Dr's. Opinion: Since the Greeks (to say nothing of the other Councils) having in the Council of Florence, as also in two other Councils, Assembled in the East since the Reformation, Disapprov'd, Con­demn'd, and Anathematiz'd all the Protestants Ne­gative Articles, the Dr. could not but hold them for Lyars; and the Roman Church, with all others then in the World, being of the same Perswasion; the Dr. must allow all those to be Lyars, from whom he has receiv'd his Scripture. Now whe­ther the Greeks are Hereticks in their Doctrine about the Holy Ghost, it appertaining nothing to the pre­sent Controversy, A. P. values not.

The Dr. now proves his Bible from a Principle, of which he said not a word in the Conference, viz. that all Christians cannot be in a Confederacy to vend a Lye. Here A. P. has gain'd his Point, since all [Page 25] Christians were in a Confederacy in receiving the Canon of the Roman Church, the Vulgata, and Be­lief of the now Controverted Articles; no one Par­cel of them delivering the Protestants Canon, Text, or Exposition.

The Dr. mistakes, when he asserts, that the Ibid. Roman Church proves her Being and Authority out of the Scriptures. Which is false: For she proves her self, and her Infallible Authority by all those Argu­ments, by which the Dr. would prove the Chri­stian Religion against Jews or Gentiles, and then confirms it only by Scripture.

The Dr. in his thirteenth Page, as in several o­ther places, complains, That A. P. would fix to no­thing: That is, A. P. in two hours and an half would not allow the Dr. to pass from the Question in Debate, though he made several Offers at it.

Next, you have an account of A. P's saying in a little heat, He would be hang'd, knocking the Table Confer. p. 13. thereupon. A. P. grants both the Words and Actions to be true; and though he seem'd then justly to be provok'd: Yet he confesses it to have been a Fault, and desires, none may take occasion of Scandal from it; but rather learn, how in the greatest Provocations, Men ought to moderate their Passions.

A little after, you are told, That the Greeks have Pag. 14. always had Churches, which none deny; that A­mong the Latins, they have Catalogues of Witnesses against the Romish Errours; and that a true Church (though not as such,) may have many Corruptions. When the Dr. shall produce his Catalogue; 'twill be then time to examine the Credit of his Wit­nesses, and the Validity of their Evidence: In the [Page 26] mean time A. P. allows, That there may in the True Church be Corruptions in Manners, though not in Faith. The Dr. goes on, saying, That the present Corruptions in the Roman Church were not formerly made Articles of Faith. A. P. absolutely denies these suppos'd Corruptions of the Dr's, and avers, That the Dr. will never be able to shew, That St. Gregory's Faith was not that, which Rome now Teaches. But that some, who call themselves Catholicks, should oppugne the Synods of the second of Nice and Trent, is no great wonder; since all Hereticks are desirous to retain that Name, and fail not to oppugn the Councils, by which they are condemn'd. As to what he says concerning A Doctrine contrary to Transubstantiation, Taught in the Saxon Church, and such other things, which (he pretends) He will prove out of Beda, Hoveden, &c. When his Proofs are produc'd, A. P. will return him a fair and candid Answer.

The Dr. next says, there were Christians in Bo­hemia, Ibid. making the Bible their Rule of Faith. A. P. grants, that all Hereticks have ever done the like, and always taken for their Theme the pretended Errours of the Church of Rome; and that, be­cause they knew, in that Church (as in the Head and Mother of all others) resided a Power of Con­demning them.

The Dr. asserting of Transubstantiation, That Confer. p. 15. that manner of the Breads becoming CHRIST's Body was invented by Paschasius Radbertus. A. P. An­swer'd, That he had nothing to do with Paschasius Radbertus; but that it was Decreed in the great Council of Lateran: Whence the Dr. infers, That he err'd in Time near four hundred years. The Dr. [Page 27] by making this Inference, seems to have forgotten the very Rudiments of Logick. A. P. says, That he appeal'd to a General Council, and troubles not himself with a private Man: Therefore (says the Dr.) he errs nigh four hundred years in Time. This is just, as if, the Dr. being charg'd with following Luther's Tenets; and replying, That he had no­thing to do with Luther, but that his Religion was establish'd by an English Parliament, held in the year 1662. It should thence be concluded, that he err'd in Time: Than which nothing could ap­pear more ridiculous.

To contradict, what A. P. had affirm'd about Conf. p. 15, 16. the four Patriarchs being at the Council of Lateran either in Person, or by their Legates, the Dr. al­ledges Father Walsh's Letter to the B. of L. Now, when F. Walsh's Authority and Name in History shall be equal to that of Binnius, Labbè, Carranza, &c. then A. P. will think it worth his Labour to answer this Objection: But in the mean time he cannot forbear to mind the Dr. once again of his usual Dis-ingenuity in appealing to any Paper or Person, of how little Credit soever, when it makes for his Advantage, and slighting the Authority of the most Learned and Understanding, when quo­ted against him. The account given by Binnius, concerning this Council, with whom the other two agree, is this, The fourth Council of Lateran consisted of four hundred Bishops, and eight hundred other Fathers, Abbots, Deans and Priors of Con­vents, there assisting at it the Patriarchs of the East: those of Constantinople and Hierusalem in person; and those of Antioch and Alexandria by their Legats, there being present also the Ambassadors of the Greek [Page 28] and Roman Emperours; and of the Kings of Hieru­salem, France, Spain, England, Aragon, Cyprus, and Hungary. 'Twas held in the year of our Lord 1215. by the Authority of Pope Innocent the III. in the time of the Emperour Frederick the II. For reco­vering the Holy-Land from the Turks, and against the Heresies of the Albigenses and Almaricus, and the Errours of Abbot Joachim.

In the midst of this Discourse about the Lateran Conf. p. 15. Council, the Dr. brings in the passage of the Im­pertinent School-master with his Picture, which ought to have been alledg'd six Pages before.

From Father Walsh the Dr. passes to A. P's Bre­viary Conf. p. 16. and Written Paper (though A. P. produc'd no such Paper,) and having shew'd in one Para­graph, how the question of Transubstantiation, &c. was now agreed on, and that he appeal'd to the Fathers (Though he would not take them for his Infal­lible Judge,) he presently taxes A. P. that he would p. 17. fix to nothing, and soon after complains of Mr. M. (whom the Dr. himself to avoid the hearing A. P's Testimonies had provok'd to it) That he was draw­ing p 18. them away from their point. So that here's fixing, and no fixing almost in a Breath. But here Mr. M. intends to have a word with the Dr.

The Dr. then says, That He desir'd A. P. to read p. 19. out of his printed Paper the place out of Justin Martyr. Which is a Misrepresentation: For A. P. having at least twenty times offer'd at it in vain, at last took occasion of the Dr's being out of Breath, to oblige him to hear it.

After this, the Dr. having given in his Narrative a far different Account of his Sense of the Real Presence, from what he did in the Conference it self [Page 29] (as appears in A. P's Account, to which the Reader A. P's Account of Conf. p. 12. is referr'd) where he first granted it; and then said he would not speak to that Point, passes on to a Quaery put to A. P. by Mr. D. A. C. viz. What Dr. T's Acc. of Conf. p. 20. kind of Phylosophy that was, which maintain'd, that Accidents subsisted without Substance; and tells you, that A. P. saying, 'Twas true Philosophy; D. T. himself ask'd, Whether it was true Philosophy to say, there was Whiteness without a white thing, &c. And that it was answer'd, GOD could do this. A. P. stands to his Answer, and desires to know of this Church-Divine, who measures his Faith by his Phy­losophy, By what principle of Phylosophy he conceives GOD to have made all things of nothing; to have Physically united his Divine to our Humane Nature; to be Three and One in the same indivisible Substance: What Phylosophy teaches the Resurrection of the Dead, and the washing our Soul by Baptism. Now A. P. has been instructed, first to see what Faith Teaches, and then to weigh it in the Ballance of Phylosophy; and if it surpass the reach of Natural Discourse, rather to renounce the Principles of Phy­losophy, than the Articles of his Faith. As for the Contradiction Mr. D. A. C. is said to have disco­ver'd in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation: A. P. asserts, that Mr. D. A. C. shall never with all his skill in Logick be able to make a Syllogism, that im­plies a Contradiction, in any of the Tenets of the Roman Catholick Church. It might be wish'd, that the conceited Wits of our Time had more Humility, and less Vanity: For thence would proceed more Inclination to Faith, and less to Atheism.

[Page 30] Then the Dr. alledges the Testimony of Coste­rus, who grants, that, if CHRIST be not really present in the Eucharist, The Worshiping of it would be worse Idolatry than that of the Laplanders, who Worshiped a Red-cloath. And A. P. adds, that, if CHRIST be really there, (for the belief of which there is fourty to one on A. P's side) the de­nying it Divine Worship, would prove the highest Impiety, besides the violating a Divine Precept of Eating his Sacred Body, incumbent on all, who are arriv'd at the years of Discretion. This puts me in mind of an Atheistical Expression, which fell from one of our Protestant Bigots, who seeing be­yond-Sea a Person of great Quality and Riches leave all, to become a poor Capucin, said, How will this poor Gentleman be gull'd, if after all, there be no GOD? To which Sacrilegious Impiety a stander by, reply'd, But how will you be gull'd, Sir, if there prove to be a GOD? To apply this, How great will be the Confusion of Dr. T. at the day of Judgement, when he shall find the Catholick Tenet true; whereas if A. P. should (to suppose an Impossibility,) find it otherwise, he will not have the least Reason to appear confounded, since he had the same Ground to believe Transubstantia­tion, as the Blessed Trinity.

Here the Dr. repeats, that A. P. was again Confer. p 21. desir'd to stick to something; where A. P. in near an hour and a half could only edge in two Quotations, whilst the Dr. rambled through twenty impertinent Subjects, most of which he has misplac'd; though here you find him by his own account, running on no occasion, to that of St. Matthew, Hear the Matt. c 18. Church: Which every one sees, how it was to [Page 31] the Quotations, A. P. was always pressing him to A. P. Acc. of Conf. p. 13, 14. hear: Concerning which, see A. P's. account.

The Dr. adds, That it was resolv'd, that Dr. T. Dr. T's Acc. of Conf. p. 22. should write of this matter, and of St. Ambrose, St. Cyril, and Justin Martyr to Mr. P. and receive his answer: In which there is as much Truth, as in the matter of Fact, he represented in his 4th. Page.

The Dr. would willingly have, what he said Ibid. p. 23. touhing Papists, being Breakers of their Words, to pass for a personal affront put upon A. P. But A. P. has given you a most sincere and modest Account of it, in his Relation of the Conference; and A P's Acc. of Conf. p. 14, 15. Mr. M. being on this occasion most foully aspers'd by the Dr. will add to it what is pertinent.

The Dr. drawing to a conclusion of the Confe­rence, says, That having charg'd A. P. with being of D. T's Acc. p. 24 an Order, who had brought in a Foreign Jurisdiction, Note, That A. P. only spoke of a Spi­ritual Juris­diction. A. P. asserted, That the Pope had had a Right of Jurisdiction here a Thousand Years, and that Dr. T. ought not therefore to call it Foreign; and that Dr. T. said these were dangerous words. A. P. in this matter refers himself to the Judgement of His most Sa­cred MAJESTY, who alone can be injur'd by that Assertion: As for what concerns the Bishops and Clergy of the Church of England, they must ei­ther derive their Orders and Spiritual Power from the See of Rome, or else they will never be able to make out, they have any at all.

The Dr. here omits A. P's. smart (but just) re­turn to his charging A. P's. Order with the Depo­sing Power, in which A. P. shew'd, that, whatever some private Men amongst the Catholicks had Judg'd in the Theory, it was the Reformers who re­duc'd A. P's Acc. 17, 18. it to Practice. In reference to which, A. P. [Page 32] (besides what he has already alledg'd,) has many Remarks in store; which he will produce, if far­ther provok'd. The Religion and Principles of the late Unfortunate D. of Monmouth are but too well known; nor are we ignorant, who it was, that assisted the Traytor Armstrong at his unhappy Exit, without obliging him to an humble Confes­sion of his Crimes, and an acknowledgement of the Injury done to his King and Country.

As for the Paper, left by Mr. M. the Reader is Dr. T's Acc. p. 24. by A. P. refer'd to him, whom it more immediate­ly concerns: And for the calling of the Constable by the Son of Mr. J. it was not altogether impru­dently thought of, the Disorder being very great towards the end of the Conference; and the Dr's throwing out such malicious Propositions, as ar­gu'd nothing but an imbitter'd Spirit against A. P. and his Religion, seconded by the rude Clamours of the Dr's Adherents, might give some suspition of a beginning a Ryot.

The Dr. having now ended his Relation of the Conference, returns afresh to Reproach and Defa­mation (a vein of which, little becoming the Cha­rity, he Hypocritically pretends to,) runs indeed through his whole Discourse; and repeats, that the Boy, Since he had been in this new way, had troubled the House, mis-spent his Time, and become Ibid. p. 25. an intollerable Lyar; and in general, That he was much worse in his Morals, since he had been tam­per'd with. This is so vile a Calumny, that A. P. (though represented by the Dr. as a less calm man) has not Gall enough to return it upon his Doctor­ship, as he deserves. Did the Dr. know as much of Catholicks Morals, as A. P. does, and had he [Page 33] seen (by living Abroad, as A. P. has done,) how much they surpass the Morality of the pretended Reformers, he would be asham'd of thus injuriously and shamelesly re­presenting the Catholicks, as Corrupters of Morals. A. P. therefore most sincerely affirms, that during the space of eighteen years he has been Abroad, he has seen more Ex­amples of true Christian Piety, Fear of GOD, and Sense of another Life, in any one Month thereof amongst Ca­tholicks, even in the meanest Towns, than he has been able to observe by his Eyes, or learn by his Ears, in this pretended Reform'd Church these five Months he has pass'd in England since his return. Nor yet is he so Partial to his own Church, as not to grant, that there are many ill Livers in it; but he has made this Remark, that in time of Persecution, such as these, who Scandaliz'd their Bre­thren by their ill Deportment, became forsooth of the Reform'd Church, and were esteem'd by the Party a Cre­dit to them, though well known to the World to be of most flagitious Lives and Conversation. But A. P. is un­willing to disoblige his Reader by such severe Reflections, as begin to flow but too kindly in this unkind subject, though he has a Reserve for the Dr. if ever he touch this string again.

Singular Effects of Dr. T's Conference.

THe Dr. goes on, and tells you, that the Boy was gone before the Conference. If so, why did he meet? But this is a stroke of the Dr's Artifice to palliate his not bearing away the Prize: For the Boy was not reconcil▪d till ten days after. Now besides the Boy, there are (for the Dr's Credit) at least two more a gaining to the Roman Note, That the Report of a Ca­tholick Lady leaving the Ro­man Church, is false. Catholick Religion, mov'd by the force of the Dr's victo­rious Arguments; and had A. P. had the liberty of a fair Conference, he questions not, but he should have been yet more Successful The Dr. indeed says well, that Mr. Ʋ. and Mrs. Ʋ. Were not Stagger'd, but Confirm'd; doubtless in a true Religion: For they have both made a Trade of Defaming the Innocent, and Selling false Reports ever [Page 34] since, which A. P. will prove to their Faces, when they please; and exacts of them, that they send him the Names of his Fellow Jesuits and Priests, or at least how they knew them to be such, and who those Nine or Ten were, who (as they have told A. P's nearest Relations) came with him. Now A. P. to give them a civil Item, acquaints them, that some have Bought several things of them, on design to hear their Story: So that, if their Apprentice has learn'd to Lye, the World may be satis­fied, who he has had for his Master and Mistress. A. P. once design'd to oblige Mr. Ʋ. and Mrs. Ʋ. by a publick Notary to deliver the matter of Fact; but on second Thoughts he resolv'd to let them take their swing, so to be better inform'd, of the Stories they have told. The In­nocent Apprentice, having been Defam'd by common Spreaders of false Reports, desires, the World will con­sider, how far their Testimony is to be Credited; and he Pities the Dr. for being so led by the Nose, as to believe on the Word of such Persons, That to be true, which he knew by his own certain knowledge to be otherwise.

A P. farther informs the World, that he has lately re­concil'd two zealous Protestants; one of which had been with the Dr. and sincerely desir'd to be satisfy'd in the following Queries.

First, How the Dr. could make appear, that the Prote­stant Religion descended by an un-interrupted Succession from the Apostles.

The Dr. answer'd▪ He must have ten thousand Pounds worth of Books to shew that: So that A. P. perceives this to be the Thred-bare Answer to that trivial Question; or, if you please, the Fatal Edge, wherewith he cuts the Gordian knot, which no Reform'd Dr. could ever yet untie. Now the Party thought, this Answer fell short of the Expectation, conceiv'd of so renown'd a Champion, and that he ought to have at least some confus'd know­ledge of so material a Succession. A. P. will at a quarter of an Hours warning prove at a far easier rate the Suc­cession of his Church, whenever the Dr. pleases.

[Page 35] The second Quaery was, How the Church of England, granting her self to be Fallible (and, for ought she knows, in actual Errour) could be the Church, built upon a Rock, a­gainst which Hell should never prevail.

Here the Dr. grew a little warm, and call'd the Party Impertinent, Impudent, &c. said, That these were Quaeries to entrap him, that the Party had been Tutour'd by some Je­suit, &c Now this was a most Doctor-like and direct Answer, and enough to keep the most fluctuating Mind in an equal Ballance, and fix it to the Rock of Truth.

The third Quaery was, Whether one might securely before GOD believe that the infinite number of Miracles, related by most virtuous and learned Men in all Ages to have been wrought in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith, were all Lies, Cheats, and Fictions of Impostures. If so, then there was no more Faith to be given to Man, and the Church of England would fall to nothing, being grounded on a Presumption, borrow'd from pretended Histories, of Innovation and Corruptions in the Romish Church; if not, that is, if these Miracles ought to be be­liev'd, then again the Reformation seem'd defeated, since GOD (who can't be Author of a Lye,) had positively acted for the Roman Church against that of England.

Now this was an horned Beast of a Query, which rais'd the Dr's Warmness to a great height, which he mainly discharg'd on his dubious Client. And a direct Answer not occurring, (as indeed there could not) he us'd an in­direct way of arguing, and took an oblique stroke, able to give an eternal overthrow to the Roman Church. You talk, (said he) of Miracles in the Romish Church, I'le shew in one Example, what credit they are of: There was upon a time a certain Priest, who got Money by exposing the Head of a pretended Saint to the Peoples Chari­table Veneration. Now, as Providence would have it, a Chirurgion, on what suspition I know not, pierc'd this Saint­ly Head with his Lance, and found it to be a piece of Parch­ment. Now, said he, tell me of Roman Miracles again. This was certainly the happiest stroke of a Lance, we shall ever find mention'd in History: If his Hand was not [Page 36] that of a Lady, his Eyes were at least those of an Eagle, and his Heart of a Lyon. I wonder this Chirurgion is not Canoniz'd by the pretended Reformers for thus total­ly routing the Romish Church. What need then of tum­bling over Concordances, and beating mens Brains, to search out mis-apply'd Texts of Scripture, and bring them in by Head and Shoulders against Popery, an In­stance whereof we have in that learn'd Catechism, lately cry'd about the Streets; and, to give it the greater Cre­d [...]t, Father'd on our Dr. when this one Story of the Chi­rurgion, with the help of Dr. T's Application, would every whit as well do the Feat and be as much to the purpose: As you may see by this Specimen. Master, Were there ever any Miracles wrought in the Roman Church these twelve hundred years▪ Scholar, No, for there was a Chirur­gion, &c. Master, Must we then believe, that all those, re­counted by St. Augustin, St. Gregory, St. Bernard, Vene­rable Beda, and infinite others, were so many Impostures? Scholar, Yes, for there was a Chirurgion, &c. Can any man be so unreasonable, as to desire a more irrefragable Proof of the Roman Churches Errours.

But A. P. (not to injure the Dr.) grants, that he added another Story, to fix this wavering mind, in an aversion to the Roman Church, and it was of a Person of his own acquaintance, who had been at Rome, where he had known those, who for Six pence a month, obtain'd a Dispen­sation to live at discretion, and violate the Commands of God and the Church at pleasure. Now had this Story fall'n from Dr. Titus's mouth (when he was esteem'd the Savi­our of the Nation) A. P. tho' knowing it to be false, would not yet have dar'd to contradict it, when issuing from such venerable Lips. But having it only from Dr. T. (who cannot be thought more Infallible than his Church) A. P. craves leave to say, That if the Dr. really believes this Story, he shews himself very weak, and altogether ignorant of the Catholick Tenets; But if not believing it himself, he makes use of it only to impose on the credu­lity of others, 'tis an Argument of far greater insincerity and dis-ingenuity, than A. P. desires the Dr. should be guilty of.

[Page 37] To these Stories, the Party (who truly went to the Dr. with a great opinion of his Abilities) reply'd very well. If it should be granted, that there may have been a Priest so wicked, as to expose false Relicks, does it thence follow, That there was never any true Miracle? And should there be found one so ridiculously impudent, as to delude some ignorant Soul, by giving a pretended leave to sin, Is it therefore sufficiently prov'd, that this is the Doctrine of the Roman Church? Must I cease to believe in Christ, because Peter deny'd him, and Judas, (equally train'd up in his School) betray'd him? Here the Dr. dismiss'd his Parishioner, as obstinate, and unworthy of any further Instruction, who is now a very good Roman Catholick; as is also a second, who expected the Learned Solution of the above men­tioned Queries. A. P. therefore takes the liberty to give the Dr. this Friendly Advice, That he addict not himself much for the future, to this way of Tale-telling, which, how grateful soever it may be to the Rabble and Scum of the People, who are often delighted with such shallow Raileries, is yet very distastful to the sober sort, who cannot but see through such Net-work-Sophistry at the first appearance. A. P. has a reserve of such-like effects, of the Dr's won­derful Query-resolving Faculty; but this may suffice at present.

Whoever shall have read Dr. T's most Injurious and Scandalous Aspersions, cast on A. P. in his own Person, whom he represents as a Falsifier, a Man who has not com­mon skill in History, a Violator of the Holy-day, &c. on the Institute of his Order, which he charges with bringing in Foreign Jurisdiction, and teaching the Deposing-Power; and on his Religion in general, which he accuses of obliging People to break their words; of teaching to Lye, to be Idle, Ʋneasy to others, and of making its Followers worse in their Morals; will not wonder that A. P. has endeavour'd to vindicate himself, which notwithstanding, he has endea­vour'd to do with all the Modesty, so foul a charge could permit.

POSTSCRIPT. An account of what A. P. designs in his next PAPER.

A. P. as fast as his Religious duties, of near five, and School-imployments of six hours a day will allow, will give the Dr. a full Answer to the remnant of his 12 Sheets, wherein he will shew, first the Dr's Exceptions against St. Quia benidicti­one etiam na­tura ipsa mu­tatur. Sermo igitur Christi, qui po [...]rat ex ni­hilo facere quod non erat, non potest ea quae sunt, in id. mutare quod non erat. In lib. de iis qui M [...]s. initiuntur. Note, that not one word was Quoted out of St. Cyiril, in the Conference. Ambrose's Works, de Sacram. to be very weak, and con­tradictory; and that St. Ambrose is evidently against the Dr. witness at present only one Text out of an undou­bted work Which the Dr. refus'd to hear in the Conference. You may say perchance; I see another thing, why do you assert that I take the Body of Christ? The Saint Answers, How many examples do we use, to prove that this is not what Nature has Fram'd, but what the Blessing has Consecrated? and that the force of the Blessing, is greater than that of Nature; be­cause by the Blessing, the very Nature it self is changed, and alledges the example of Moses's Rod. The Word therefore of Christ which made all things out of nothing, can it not change one thing into another? For it is not less powerful to give a new Nature, than to change Natures given. 2dly. That he has (like E. S. from whom he has borow'd it) Quoted St. Cyril, most disingenuously leaving out that Text, which if cited, would have left no place [...]. of doubting, but that he makes for the Roman Catholick Tenet: part of it is as follows, That which seems Bread, is not Bread, although to the Taste it appears to be so, but it is the Body of Christ. He that cavils about such a Text, has doubtless, great Humility of Soul, and notable dispositions to Faith, 3dly. That the Dr's Notes against Justin Martyr▪ are of no force at all.

Remarks upon Letters Printed by Dr. Tenison.

1st. A. P. Thinks the Dr. might have been so civil as to acquaint him with his intentions, since that he thought it necessary to make his Letters publick; but this is like the What Text of Scripture makes for pu [...]lishing private Letters? rest of the Doctors Charitable Procedure. 2d. He has very injuriously concealed A. P's fifth Letter, which was the most material of all, as containing A. P's clearing himself from the Dr's false aspersion, whereby he charges A. P. with not having stood to the Agreement. 3d. A. P. finds several false Writings in the Dr's Print, which he is mo­rally certain he never was Author of: but this may pass with the rest of the Dr's Ingenuity. 4th. The Youths Letter with two or three lines bearing appearance of A. P's hand, was carried to the Dr. by Mr. Ʋ. who broke open the Boys Chest, took out the Letter, and made a present of it to the Dr. Now this was certainly nothing against Morality; but argued a Gospel liberty, like that of the said Mr. Ʋ. ▪s, who (to spite his Catholick Appren­tice, and to shew his respect to the Common-Prayer-Book) changed in his Family the Abstinence of Flesh on Friday and Saturday, into Wednesday and Thursday, that so the Youth might be compell'd to eat Flesh on Friday and Sa­turday, or fast four days together: Who now will doubt but Mr. Ʋ. is confirm'd in his Religion?

Now A. P. in his next, will do Dr. T. the Justice, to put his Learned Reply to the Youths Letter, in School­form, that the World may see the force of the Dr's So­phistry, of which take now a short Essay. Against Ʋnity of Faith in the Roman Catholick Church, alledged by the Youth, as one of his Motives, the Dr. objects, the Janse­nists, Blackloists, and Molinists, condemn'd by the Roman Church. Now in form, it must run thus, There is no Ʋni­on in that Church which by her just censures does reclaim, or cut off those, who broach new and false Doctrines; But the Church of Rome has so reclaim'd, or cut off those who began such Doctrines: Therefore in the Church of Rome there is no Ʋnion. Now, è contra, for the Church of Eng­land. [Page 40] In that Church Ʋnity is preserved where Spreaders of various, (Doctrines in points necessary to Faith) can't be justly condemn'd, but in the Church of England, Spreaders of various Doctrines, in Points necessary to Faith, can't be justly condemn'd (as grounding themselves on the same Rule of Faith with that Church, I mean Scripture.) Therefore, in the Church of England is preserv'd Ʋnity of Faith. Argued certainly like a Doctor; yet this must be the Sense of his Argument, if any. Against the Spirit of Missions in the Catholick Church (another of the Youths Note, that the Jesuits (whom the Dr. so much loves) are actu­ally Preaching in the most Barbarous and Desolate Coun­tries in the World. Motives) the Dr. Learnedly objects, as follows. There is no Zeal of Souls in that Church which sends Missions into Warm, Rich, and Populous Countries; But the Ch. of Rome sends such Missions, therefore she has no Zeal of Souls. Con­firmatur, St. Peter Preach'd at Rome, St. Paul in Greece, St. James in Spain, St. Thomas in the Indies, all Rich and Plentiful Countries, but they had no Zeal of Souls; therefore a Pari. Bravely spoken Dr. the Jews will thank you for this, as also for your Text against crossing the Dr's Narrative page 76. Seas, which proves notably for the Synagogue against the Apostles. The Zeal of the Church of Rome being beat down, let us Establish that of the Church of England. There is true Zeal of Souls, where the Ministers of the Gospel care not what becomes of the rest of the World, so they can ob­tain good Livings to maintain their Godly Consorts, and Levitical Off-spring. But this is the Zeal of the Ministers of the Church of England. Ergo.

This may serve at present, for an item for what's to come; which the Dr. shall have at large, as soon as A: P. shall have receiv'd the Dr's Vindication of his Rule of Faith, impugned; and if I mistake not, prov'd Null by A. P.

A. P's Answer to the Vindication of A. Chresner, &c.

SInce Mr. A. Chresner School-Master in Long-Acre, has thought fit to write a Vindication from the pretended Aspersions of A. P. Jesuit, and School-Master in the Savoy. A. P. acknowledges, that no uncivil rudeness ought to have forc'd the Word Buffoon from his Lips. However, since A. C. has provoked our Jesuit, it is fitting the World should be a little farther instructed of the beha­viour of A. C. during the Conference: and then Judge whe­ther at least upon a Stage, he would not have deserved that Character?

As soon as he came into the Room, facing A. P. he began to knit his Brow, contort his Eyes, draw his Mouth into most un-natural shapes, and cut as many Faces, and as ugly, as the greatest Professor of that Art could do. A P. not accustom'd to such grimaces, said very calmly, Pray Sir look mors sweetly on't; but A. C. continu­ing his mute Scene, A. P. asked him if in any thing he had offended him? and why he shew'd so much disdain and rancor in his Countenance? Then breaking his mute Courtship, with a very ugly look, stay, says he You cited a false Council for the Marks of the True Church, in your Catechising. How so, reply'd A. P. Why you cited the 2d. Council of Nice. A. P. answered, Sir you mistake, it was the 2d. General Council (which was held at Con­stantinople) not the 2d. of Nice which I cited.

Now this behaviour remain'd with him till he came three hours after into a private Chamber, and then en­tring into himself, he cried peccavi, and desired what had passed might not be ill taken. This is the true matter of Fact, and if A. P. allow 20 or 30 very ridiculous motions of hands, eyes, and face, to imbellish this Gen­tlemans Discourses, it is short of what his deportments merit. Page 2. it is not true what he says of Mr. M's interposing private Questions of his own to the Dr, for this was the D's refuge for near two hours, tho' A. P. grants Mr. M. once or twice to have interposed, but not private [Page 42] Questions of his own. Page 3. He tells you that A. P's pulling out his Breviary, gave occasion to him of pro­ducing his Picture, which is as far from Truth, as A. C. from being Pope; the Picture being produced about the be­ginning of the Conference, and upon no such occasion as he relates, whereas as A. P. took out his Breviary, upon account of Authorities relating to Transubstantiation, which happened an hour and a half after. Page 5, He denies his wry Mouths and antick Gestures, with the same impudence he made them. It may be A. C. through force of an inveterate habit, may not be particularly mindful of his deformed comportment that day; as it befel the Shep­hards Boy, whom A. P's Brother reprehending for his ill habit of Swearing, reply'd with a great Oath, that he had never Swore in his life. Pag. 6. He gives you a smooth account of his moderate temper which never appear'd, till he cry'd peccavi with a civil Bow and Congy a little before parting. Page 7 and 8. He plays the Ignoramus Dr. and beats the Air, discovering a total ignorance of Symbo­lical Representations, as of Angels under mans shapes, the Holy Ghost under that of Fiery Tongues, Dove, &c. he ought not to impugn Doctrines he does not understand, let him ask those of Trinity-Colledge in Oxford, why they repre­sent the Blessed Trinity by the Letter Delta? Now A. P. finding so much dis-ingenuity, want of Truth, Spirit of Contempt and Ignorance in A. C's first Sheet, thought it time lost, to Scribble against one whose Tongue no Wise Man will esteem a Slander.

Now if the Reader will be pleas'd to consider that A. C. is a mercenary School-Master, he will presently disco­ver the reason why in the Conference by his uncivil Comportments, and now by his more uncivil Pen, he would sain draw A. P. into contempt; which thanks be to God A. P. stands very little in fear of from him, nor shall he ever give him the honour of a future Answer.

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. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.