I Have perused Your Book, and of This you might have been sooner informed, had I not (immediately after I had undertaken your Cor­rection) been prevented by a dull and lazy distemper; but being in some measure recruited, I have, as my health and leisure would permit, given my self the divertisement of these following Ani­madversions. You have indeed taken the Advantage (though it is cowardly and dishonourably done to take it) of ac­costing me in such a clownish and licen­tious way of writing, as you know to be unsuitable both to the Civility of my Education, and the Gravity of my Pro­fession. And this is so like the Ingenuity of the Brother-hood, that I all along both foresaw and foretold it. It has ever been their old Artifice, that when they are baffled out of all their impotent Pre­tences by dint of Reason and Argument, that then they should hire some Buffoon [Page 2] to recover their Credit and Cause by downright Rudeness and Impudence. But this device shall not serve their turn, no fooling shall divert me from the seri­ous prosecution of my Design. And though I shall not baulk any good jests (if they will thrust themselves upon me) for Pag. 198. fear of the day of judgment, as you for­sooth ridiculously and impudently e­nough pretend to have rejected thou­sands meerly upon that account; yet however I shall for a better reason for­bear hunting after them, (viz.) to con­vince the world how little Wit is requi­site to prove that you have none at all. There is nothing more required to make some Creatures ridiculous, than barely to shew them. And by that time I have dispatcht all that I shall think convenient to chastise the folly and rashness of your Undertaking, I am pretty confident you will have so much occasion to look sim­ply, that the company will be fully satis­fied there will be but little need of send­ing for a witty man to put you out of countenance.

In the first place then after a long train of Beginning of 96 Pages, that might in­differently serve against all the Ecclesi­astical Politicians from the beginning to [Page 3] the end of the World, I find you at length begin under pretence of Animad­versions upon a Preface, to attaque all my Discourses of Ecclesiastical Polity, and immediately fall on front and reere, and with an horrid deal of noise and astonishment warn all Mankind that the Grand Thesis upon which I stake (you all along speak the language of a game­ster) not only all my own Divinity and Pag. 96. Policy, Reputation, Preferment and Con­science, but even the Crowns and Fate of Princes, and the Liberties, Lives and Estates, and which is more, the Consci­ences of their Subjects, is this; That it is absolutely necessary to the peace and govern­ment of the world, that the Supreme Ma­gistrate of every Common-wealth should be vested with a Power to govern and conduct the Consciences of Subjects, in affairs of Re­ligion. Is it so? why what then? what then! why nothing at all but this is the grand Thesis. For you are not provided with one syllable of objection against it, and have not spent so much as a Tale or a Jest or a Quibble in its confutation. You are a right Champion for the Fanatique Cause, that can confute any Argument with face and confidence. There is no disputing such an Adversary without an [Page 4] head-piece. This is only tilting of fore­heads, where the hardest skull, not the fullest, must get the victory. Away you trifling Wretch, talk you no more of Ec­clesiastical Policy, and hereafter never pretend to any knowledge that pretends either to Reason or Modesty! for had you any sense of the former, you would never have been so silly as to be so seri­ously scared at such an innocent and un­deniable proposition; or any of the lat­ter, you could never have been so impu­dent as to bray forth such a confident and heinous censure against it, as if it were notoriously evident without proof that it directly subverts all the Principles of Religion and Government. And therefore I would fain know in good earnest what your meaning was, in mak­ing your first onset upon this Grand The­sis? If you intended its Confutation, why have you not discharged so much as one semi-vowel of exception against it?. If you did not, to what purpose is it to trouble your self, and the world with its Quotation? A man (in my Opinion) had as good altogether, unless he be very idle, keep his mouth shut as gape and yet say nothing. If this be the Grand Thesis, in comparison whereof [Page 5] the rest of my Assertions (as you inform Pag. 98. us) are to be reckoned no better than sneaking Corollaries, and if I bottom all the foundations of Government and Re­ligion upon it, and make it more ne­cessary to the support of the World than the Pillars of the Earth, or the eight Ele­phants; one would think this, if any thing, should have been battered down with knocking and dead-doing Arguments, and here, if any where, one would have expected you should have given an hot and fierce alarm, and have drawn up all your squadrons of vowels, mutes, semi­vowels, and liquids, and by the next Gazet to have heard of a sorer and more dreadful battel than ever was fought in your Grammar-War, or my Roman Em­pire. Now after all this Threatning and Preparation, what a disappointment must it be to the Readers and Spectators to see so proud an He that bore up so bravely, and with such a manful Confidence, come off with this soft and gentle Rebuke, Ve­rily and indeed now it is a naughty Pro­position, ay, and all that. Thou a Rat-Divine! thou hast not the Wit and Learn­ing of a Mouse; when thou endeavour'st to bite, thou canst not so much as nibble. Thou talk of Government, of the Crowns [Page 6] and State of Princes! to School, Truant, mind your Push-pin, and con your eight parts of Speech, and presume not here­after to cavil at things that are above the capacity and concern of Boys and Girls, and sucking-bottles.

And yet to the same purpose (that is, to none at all) is that tedious train of Quotations that you bring in at the tail of this, without passing any smarter re­marque upon them than the same general censure of Malignancy; though if they are chargeable, there was no need of your Edition, for they were in print be­fore; and therefore it is but sit you should be endited for a scandalous Pla­giary to transcribe so much of my Book to no other purpose than only to make up 6 pages towards your full tale of 326. I believe it will be found against the Laws of the Stationers-hall, for your Book-seller to print so much of another mans Copy, after it is enter'd according to Order, without his leave and consent, and I hope M^r Martyn will seek his reme­dy against the Assigns of John Calvin and Theodore Beza. They are bold and sawcy fellows, as it is the nature of every thing to be so that relates to Geneva. But you and I will not concern our selves in their [Page 7] Controversies: they know without our information, as well as any Vermine in Christendom, how to manage their own Affairs by the intrigues and mysteries of their own Trade. At least it more con­cerns me to keep close to your self, for they tell me, that if a man will keep con­tinually running after a mad dog, it is the only way to secure himself from be­ing bitten. Tell me therefore quickly in answer to the Grand Thesis; do you se­riously believe, that his Majesty has no Power in matters of Religion? What then becomes of all your Acts of Par­liament against Popery ever since the Re­formation, nay, what then becomes of the Declaration it self for Indulgence and Liberty of Conscience, in which his Ma­jesty declares, that he therein only makes use of that Supreme Power in Ecclesiastical Pag. 4. Matters, which is not only inherent in the Crown, but has been declared and recog­nized to be so by several Statutes and Acts of Parliament. Beside, do you not think it possible for men to create publique di­sturbances under pretences of Religion? Was there never any Rebellion carried on by popular Zeal and Reformation? Did you never hear of any men that set up Christs Standard in defiance to their [Page 8] Princes, and that fought against his Per­son at least, only to carry on the work of the Lord, and that have murther'd and banisht Kings, only to dethrone An­tichrist and the Whore? You so great a Traveller! and did you never hear the Countrey people tell stories of the merry pranks of John of Leydon, and the Anaba­ptists of Germany? You so great an Histo­rian! and never read of any Kingdomes and Empires some time or other em­broil'd or destroyed by Arts of Religi­on? You would be an Historian indeed, if you could but name any one Nation in the World, whose Annals do not af­ford us variety of sad stories to this pur­pose: And then after all this, dare you be so confident as to declare it is abso­lutely unlawful, and in all cases, for any Prince to claim or exercise any Autho­rity over Conscience or Religion? If you dare not, but allow a necessity of Coer­cion in some cases, then after all your confidence you grant the truth, and ju­stifie the innocence of the Grand Thesis, (viz.) That it is necessary to the Peace and Government of the World, that the Supreme Magistrate of every Common-wealth should be vested with a Power to govern and conduct the Consciences of [Page 9] Subjects in affairs of Religion. An Asser­tion so obvious and so harmless, that ne­ver any People in the World had so lit­tle brains, or so much forehead as to deny it to all Intents, but only the salvage Ana­baptists of Germany; and they indeed claim'd an absolute exemption from the Civil Power for themselves, and that on­ly upon the priviledge of Saint-ship, but then they equally cancell'd all Govern­ment, and protested against all manner of Subjection either to Secular or Ecclesia­stical Jurisdiction. But excepting these inhumane Canibals, this Grand Thesis that you suppose to be so grosly absurd, that barely to name it is enough to expose the person that shall maintain it as an open enemy to God and Man, is so grant­ed and undoubted a truth, that it is plain­ly ratified by the unanimous consent of all mankind.

Nay, when a man has demonstrated its certainty from that unavoidable influ­ence that Religion alwayes has upon the peace of Kingdomes, and the interests of Government, and from those intolerable mischiefs that must follow upon its exem­ption from the Civil Power; from the na­tural tendency of Enthusiasm and Super­stition to publick disturbance; from the [Page 10] boldness and insolence of Fanatique Zeal, from the nature and original of Govern­ment, from the practice and prescription of all Ages, and from all the topicks of Reason and Experience; and when he has stated and confined its exercise with­in easie and discernable bounds, and has prevented all cavils and pretences of dis­like, unless only such as dash as fiercely upon the very foundations of all Civil as well as Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. After all this pains is it not a sad thing to see all blown up with meer confidence and presumption, and if a bold man will but say Tush, 'tis false, without any proof or reason for his dislike, away it all flys in fumo. I have insisted the longer upon this, because as it is the Grand Thesis of my Books, so it is the first Essay of your courage, that by this first Specimen of your Wit, the World may take a true scantling of your parts and abilities. But having thus nimbly dispatch'd this gene­ral Thesis, you proceed to your particu­lar Exceptions, where you summ up your Charge in Six Heads, which you some­times entitle Playes, sometimes Hypothe­ses, sometimes Aphorisms; and why not Plots, and Scenes, and Walks, and un­der-walks, &c? The first is the Unli­mited [Page 11] Magistrate, or as you eloquently Pag. 107. express it pag. 246. his unhoopable Juris­diction. A Metaphor taken from a Tub, I suppose, because you find Power in your Book of Apothegms compared to liquor, for a certain Reason known to every bo­dy, though no body has exprest it so hap­pily as your self, viz. because if it be infi­nitely Pag. 206. diffused or extended, it becomes impo­tency, even as a streight line continued grows a circle. I will leave it to the Mathemati­cians to consider how it is possible for a streight line to become a circle by being infinitely streight. But however for this reason it is necessary to hoop up the Autho­rity of Princes, lest they too soon weaken themselves by too great a leakage of their Power; so that methinks according to your notion, there is nothing so patly emblematical of Soveraign Princes, as Dufoy in his Tub, or a Pig under a wash­bole, and if you would define them sui­tably to the conceit, they are nothing else but so many vessels of Authority, some Kinderkins, some Hogsheads, and some Tuns, according to the circuit or hoop of their Government. Though as you and your Puritan Coopers, or (as Mar-prelate words it) Tub-trimmers, have been pleased to contract their Power, all [Page 12] the Empire in the world might easily be contained in a pipkin or a quart pot, and he would pay dear for it, that should purchase the Kings Supremacy at the price of a jug of Ale. For when you have once exempted Conscience out of the circle of humane Laws, the greatest and most absolute Monarchs upon earth will be reduced to as scant a measure of Authority as your Mock-kings of Brent­ford, in that there is nothing in humane nature directly liable to their Obligation but only Conscience: and therefore if that must be let loose from the com­mands of Superiours, nothing else can bind them. So wretchedly are such bunglers as you wont to talk, that only suck in, and then pour out your phrases by rote and at random: and because some of the Ancients have sometimes discoursed of Conscience in Metaphorical and loose expressions (as they do of all things else) calling it [...] the Domestick God, [...] the Guardian Angel, &c. you must by all means take them in the literal sense, and discourse of Conscience, as if it were some little Spirit or Puppet Intelligence within you distinct from your selves, so that though you are His Majesties most humble and loyal Sub­jects, [Page 13] yet as for your dear and tender Consciences you must have them excused by the Laws of Hospitality, that is to say, you owe him Obedience in all things, excepting only those in which he does or can require it, for wherever the man is bound to obey, his Conscience, and on­ly that is bound to obey, it being the on­ly principle in him that is capable of Ob­ligation: and therefore if that be absol­ved from all engagements of Allegiance, and all tyes of Duty, the case is plain, the whole man is at perfect Liberty. And all Subjects may huff and rant it to their Princes teeth, as well as your proud Al­manzor.

You see then there is no remedy but Conscience you must submit to the Ju­risdiction of your Prince, if you will sub­mit your selves. Yes, but you would not have it unlimited and unhoopable as I have stated it. But Sir, give me leave to tell you, that though it should be un­limited, it does not at all follow that it would be unhoopable, because it would be (as you inform us) like a streight line continued into a circle. Now I will maintain it against all the Mathematici­ans [Page 14] in Europe, Asia and Africa, and the Terra Incognita of Geneva too, (you must bear with me, for in some cases I cannot avoid this confidence) that all circles, as well as all other figures how big soever, are hoopable things.

But for all my jesting, my own words are upon Record, where I have vested every Supreme Magistrate with an uni­versal Pag. 140. and unlimited Power, and uncon­troulable in the Government of Religion, that is to say (say you) over mens Con­sciences, and that is to say (say I) that some mens Consciences are concern'd in nothing but matters of Religion. Well, seeing you are content to give Macedo for a finisht and burnisht piece of mode­sty; now then welfare J. O. for a mo­dest thing, for he had the Grace to load me with this Calumny before you, but then he had the Grace to take his An­swer too. And it is possible, though it is scarce credible, that he might stumble in­to such an horrid mistake through haste and inadvertency, for you know he al­wayes writes post. But what a Coloss of Brass are you, that after I have given him such humbling and convictive rebuke for it, persist so obstinately in the very same tract of forgery and falsification.

[Page 15] The Answer I gave him was easie e­nough for your understanding as meek as it is, viz. That in that Paragraph where I asserted the Supreme Government of every Common-wealth to be Universal, Absolute and Uncontroulable in all affairs whatsoever, that concern the Interests of mankind, and the ends of Government, it was only in opposition to the pretences of a distinct Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction here on earth. For having first asserted the necessity of a Soveraign Power over the affairs of Religion, from their con­cernment in the Peace and Government of the world, I thence proceeded to en­quire where and in whom it ought to re­side; and having shewn the inconsistency of erecting two Supreme Secular Powers, one over Civil, and the other over Ec­clesiastical Causes, I concluded that the Supreme Government of every Common-wealth must of necessity be Universal, Absolute and Uncontroulable, in that it must extend its Jurisdiction as well to affairs of Religion, as to affairs of State, because they are so strongly influential upon the Interests of Mankind, and the Ends of Government. And now is this to make the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Civil Magistrate absolutely Para­mount [Page 16] without regard to any other Ju­risdiction of what nature soever, when I only maintain it in defiance to the claims of any other humane Power? For this was the only subject of that enquiry. And when I asserted the Soveraign Power to be Absolute and Uncontroulable, 'tis apparent nothing else could be intended than that it is not to be controuled by any distinct Power, whether of the Pope or the Presbytery (for they are the only Rivals of the Princes of Christendome.) And when I asserted it to be Universal and Absolute, no man unless he would give his mind to misunderstanding, could understand it in any other sense, than that it was not confined to matters pure­ly Civil, but extended its Jurisdiction to matters of an Ecclesiastical Importance, upon which account alone I determin'd it to be Absolute, Universal and Uncon­troulable. This is the main and the fun­damental Article of the Reformation, and that which distinguishes the truly Orthodox and Catholick Protestant both from Popish and Presbyterian Recusants, and is the only fence to secure the Thrones of Princes against the dangerous encroachments of those bold and daring Sects; and therefore from so plain and [Page 17] avowed a Truth to charge me for ascri­bing in general terms an Absolute, Uni­versal and Uncontroulable power to the Civil Magistrate over the Consciences of men in matters of Religion, argues more boldness than wit and discretion, and gives us ground to suspect that these men are not less forsaken of shame and mode­sty than they are of Providence: for it must needs be a very bold face and a ve­ry hard forehead, that could ever ven­ture to obtrude such palpable and disin­genuous Abuses upon the world. This I think was answer enough for him, and is I am sure too much for you.

But when beside this I have drawn up a brief and plain account of the parts, the coherence, and the design of my first Treatise to prevent you from abu­sing the People for the future with such rude mistakes and pervertings: for you to repeat the very same Leasing is (if any thing is) false Heraldry, 'tis brass upon brass. And when I have there so stated the Controversy as to provide with e­qual care and caution against the Incon­veniences of both extremes, an unlimit­ed Power on the one hand, and an un­bounded Licence on the other; when the bounds I have proposed are so very [Page 18] easie to be observed, and so unnecessary to be transgress'd by all Partys concern'd, viz. that Governours only take care not to impose things certainly and apparent­ly evil; and that subjects be not allowed to plead Conscience for disobedience in any other case; and when I have so care­fully avoided all kind of severity more than is absolutely necessary to the pre­servation of Government and the peace of Mankind, with many other things so easie and so obvious that there is scarce any thing to excuse me from Impertinen­cy in taking so much pains to prove them but their Manifest Necessity.

After all this I beseech you (by the tyes of ancient Friendship) deal clearly and candidly with me, and tell me up­on what other principles I could have dis­coursed more safely or more innocently upon this Argument, though it is possi­ble I might have done it more wittily by the help of your friend Bays; who sup­posing two Kings of Brentford, one for example a Secular, the other an Ecclesi­astical King, remarks upon it that the People having the same Relations to both, the same Affections, the same Duty, the same Obedience, and all that; would be divided among themselves in point of de­voir [Page 19] and interest how to behave themselves equally between them: these Kings diffe­ring sometimes in particular though in the main they agree. And therefore what if they should agree to divide their Em­pire, and one be King of the Land-men, and the other of the Water-men, or one to rule by night and the other by day, or take their turns of Government by weeks or months? but this device would not do, for where there are two supreme Powers in the same Common-wealth, there can be no avoiding civil jars and bloody-noses. So that for this reason had I been a Senator of Brentford I should have humbly proposed that either King Phys or vice versâ King Ush might be vest­ed with the absolute and uncontroulable Power of the Empire, i. e. with both kinds of jurisdiction, because otherwise (as he proceeds shrewdly) the People being embarrast by their equal Tyes to both, and the Sovereign's concern'd in a reciprocal regard to their own Interest, as to the good of the People; may make a certain kind of a—you understand me—upon which there does arise several disputes, tur­moils, heart-burnings, and all that—Ay, this is pregnant and demonstrative, and does not sob us off (as you always [Page 20] do) with empty tittle tattle, without a­ny colour or pretence of reason. And had it come to hand time enough, I might have been as much beholden to it for sence as you have been for wit; for so you will have it that I have pilfer'd all my best, or (in your own Poetick phrase) rapping flowers out of Play-books, and several choice ones you have in spite of Almanacks and Chronology discover'd in my first Book that were by all means filch'd out of this very Play, though as fortune would have it this was not made any way publick till above two years af­ter that. But waving the advantage of Bays his Assistance and every body else, and re­lying upon my own single strength and presumption, after all my care and pains to way-lay Calumny could I ever suspect any thing in the shape of a man so desperately fallen from all sense of Conscience or Mo­desty as to upbraid me with ascribing an infinite jurisdiction to Princes without a­ny regard to the Divine Laws? Well! I now see what it is for a man to live in his study, and be unacquainted with the world; for my part I could never have sup­posed it possible that Mankind could e­ver by Travel and Conversation emprove it self to such an height of Confidence. [Page 21] Especially when there is not any one Writer extant either ancient or modern, that I know of, that has so vehemently and industriously asserted the hoopableness of all humane Authority as I have done; And when in particular I have spent two whole Chapters in my first Book to prove, that as the opposite opinion is no less than rank Atheism or Blasphemy, so it utterly subverts the Power of all Go­vernment, and irrecoverably destroys the safety of all societies in the World. This Confidence of yours is so provoking that I cannot but wonder your ears have not done Penance for the rudeness of your Tongue. Macedo! thou art able to outforge and outbrazen ten Macedos. And yet so assured are the drivers of the dissenting Herd, and so silly the Crea­tures they stear, that there is scarce a Shop-Divine in the whole Nation, that does not as heartily believe this unhoopa­ble Jurisdiction to be the only design of all my Books as he does the ten Com­mandments to be obligatory, or the Apo­stles Creed to be true. But when my in­nocence as to this charge is so infinitely clear, and when they have nothing to object against me or to plead in their own behalf but upon its presumption, that is [Page 22] a demonstrative Argument of a bassled and defenceless cause, that can be defen­ded with no other weapon but impudent and bare-faced Calumny. And now when you have once taken this for grant­ed, away you run clattering with abun­dance of noise and nothing, till you fall into another story full as lowd and ratling as this. That I have complement­ed Pag. 110. his Majesty so far as to inform him, that he may, if he please, reserve the Priest­hood and the exercise of it to himself. So said J. O. too, and was very pleasant in his Remarques upon it, but was I suppose sufficiently satisfied or at least silenced with this plain and simple Answer. That in the Paragraph (against which this Ob­jection is level'd) I undertook to give a brief Historical account of the Original of all Civil and Ecclesiastical Govern­ment, where I shewed how in the first Ages of the World they were vested in the same Person, and founded upon the same Right of paternal Authority: and in this State of things antecedent to all superinduced Restraints and positive In­stitutions, I asserted the supreme Magi­strate might, if he pleased, reserve the exercise of the Priesthood to himself; And so all Writers, that I know of, as­sert [Page 23] as well as I. Though afterwards the Priestly office was in the Jewish Common-wealth expresly derogated from the Kingly Power, by being setled upon the Tribe of Levi and the Line of Aaron; and so likewise in the Christian Church by being appropriated to the A­postles and their Successors, that derive their Priestly Office and Power from our Blessed Saviours express and immediate Commission.

Now what I affirm'd of things in the bare State of Nature without the guid­ance of Revelation, for this man to re­present it, as if I had applyed it indiffe­rently to all Ages and Periods of the Church, by whatsoever positive Laws and different Institutions they may be go­vern'd, is wonderfully suitable to the Genius of his own Wit and Ingenuity. But though I think I have passed so high a Complement upon his Majesty, this only Pag. 111. troubles you, how his Majesty would look in all the Sacerdotal Habiliments, and the Pontisical Wardrobe. Alas good man! Your tender heart would not serve you to behold the Ceremonies of the Coro­nation. The Rebels Wounds bled too fresh in your Memory, it would have rubb'd up all the late sad spectacles at [Page 24] Cheering-Cross, and minded you of all those choice ones that were hang'd to make way for this great Solemnity, for whose sakes the 29. of May is annually observed among the secret ones as a day of private humiliation to bemoan the loss and commemorate the Martyrdom of so many anointed and precious Brethren. But as for the malicious Consequence, that you out of stark staring Love to the Church (of which you are so enamour'd, that it even joys your Heart to hear any thing well said of her) suggest upon this Occasion: that then he may (and it is all the reason in the World he should) assume the Revenue too, it only shews your Judgment at nicking a Lucky juncture of Affairs: When you have put the King in mind of his Coronation-Oath, in which he swears, to protect and defend the Bi­shops and the Churches under their Govern­ment, to preserve their Canonical Privileges, to confirm the Laws, Customes and Fran­chises granted to the Clergy by the glorious King St. Edward, and all other Kings of England his Lawful and Religious Prede­cessours: Immediately, whilst this Oath is piping hot, to advise him to disfranchise them from the common rights of all Sub­jects, and to invade their Proprieties not [Page 25] only contrary to his solemn Oath, but to the most ancient and most ratified Laws of the Realm. But methinks it more concerns the Parliament than any private man to chastise such bold and lavish talk, as plainly subverts the very foundations of all our Proprieties; in that the Churches Rights and Revenues are vested in her by as firm and fundamental Laws as any by which you or I can hold or claim our Estates; so that the Laws of England have made but a very silly provi­sion for any mans Birthright, if they are not a sufficient security for the Churches Patrimony. And it becomes such a ten­der assertor of the English Liberties to in­sinuate the subversion of those Laws up­on which alone they are founded. I hope you will be consider'd for your pains, at least for your good will: it is no wonder to see you upon all occasions so afraid of Pillories and Whipping-Posts; for if you are resolved to follow these courses, and at last go uncropt to your Grave, it will be a scandal to the Justice of the Nation.

But before I quit this Master-Calumny of the unhoopable Magistrate it will not be improper to take an account of your Hoops and Hola's that relate to it; for [Page 26] when you have acted over your six Plays you begin them all afresh, (for you have at least eleven or twelve distinct Begin­nings) and run them (together with some few coincident passages) all down with Hoops and Hola's, i. e. with noise and con­fidence. The first next to these I have answer'd is that I have asserted the un­hoopable Power wherewith I have in­vested Princes to be their Natural Right and Antecedent to Christ, &c. But oh Pag. 143. the Consequence! then his Majesty may lay by his Dieu and make use only of his Mon-droit. Hoop and Hola! hold, not too lowd, for it does not so necessarily follow, that because he has his Patent under the Broad-Seal of Nature, that therefore he derived it not from God, for as much as Nature it self has no power of making grants, but all its Commissi­ons are sign'd only by the Author of Na­ture, and all Natural Rights whatsoever are the Immediate Gifts of his Provi­dence, that has order'd and disposed the frame of Nature according to his own So­vereign Will and Pleasure; and there­fore you must resolve all Natural Rights as well as all Natural Laws into his Au­thority, for though Nature may disco­ver, yet it is only he that passes and en­acts [Page 27] them. But I know this Inference was not made for any great opinion you had of its Logick, it was only intended for a boast of your Antiquary-Learning, to let the World know how deeply you skill in old Coins and Inscriptions; and so take this occasion to acquaint us with this ancient Motto, that you have pick'd out among the Marmora Arundeliana, Dieu & Mon-Droit. But seeing you are given to these Curiosities, here is a Trial worthy of your skill. I have seen and (pardon my Vanity) was once Master of an Antique Medal,

Expound me the meaning of the De­vice, and tell me in what Emperours Reign it was Coin'd, and I will upon the word of a Clergy-man of Honour requite your Information with ten of the largest Decus & Tutamens: and that is a very scarce Medal (you know,) though not al­together so antique.

But however (say you) this Power I have ascribed to the Civil Magistrate, is not derived from Christ, or any grant of Pag. 143. his, but is antecedent to his coming, or [Page 28] any Power granted by him as Head of the Church, being given under the Broad-Seal of Nature, so that his Majesty is next under that, and immediately before Christ, over all Persons and in all Causes &c. This is very shrewd, but then it is none of your own, J. O. had it before you, and in truth you are so given to purloining, that I expect ere long to hear of you among the Advertisements at the bottom of the Gazet, with a description of your Stature, Complexion and Cloaths. But the result of all that we discoursed upon this point was that he said I, and I said no, because though Ma­gistrates Pag. 276. were vested with an Ancient and Antecedent Right, yet its Continuance, ever since our Saviour commenced his Empire, depends merely upon his con­firmation, in that whatever Prince does not reverse a former grant confirms it. And therefore, though they were im­powr'd to govern the Church of God an­tecedent to his Supremacy, yet that they are still instrusted with the same Authori­ty, they owe it entirely to his Sove­reign Will and Pleasure, because it is now in his Power to devest them of this or any other of their ancient Preroga­tives: so that seeing he has thought good [Page 29] to continue the Government of the World in the same state and Posture he found it in, Princes are not now less in­debted to him for the grant of their Im­perial Power, than if they had been at first instated in it by his immediate and express Commission. This is a pretty reasonable answer to any plain man that has any stomach to be satisfied, but it is too homely a Truth for your Palate, no­thing forsooth will down with you un­der the Geneva race of Capons and Ma­thematical Similitudes. The streight Line continued into a Circle! that is a Treat for a Gentleman that has Travel'd and understands the Orthodoxy of mo­dern eating and drinking.

The last Essay of your shame-facedness (for it is a great symptom of Modesty that you will not venture to be confident in any Objection for which you have not some Authority; so that you dare not say one word that J. O. has not said before you) is to stand in it that when J. O. affirm­ed that I confine the whole work and duty of Conscience to the inward acts and perswasi­ons of the mind, it was no downright Lye. By this I perceive your whole family of the secret ones are incurably addicted to leasing, and therefore as then I gave [Page 30] him the Lye, so now without any farther Complement I give it you Sir. It is but a blunt and Yeomanly Jest, and I must confess smells somewhat of Garlick and Onions, but it may serve for once though it were only for variety; downright En­glish is in some Cases as good a Flower as the fairest Trope in Aristotle's Rhetorick. And I still declare that though it is no ex­traordinary conceit, yet it is the best and most proper Repartee, that my barren fan­cy is yet able to suggest to me upon so rude an occasion. And tell me Sir, for I have al­ready made my appeal, that suppose it were your own case, that should any Person be so bold and disingenuous as not only to pervert the meaning, and disturb the me­thod of your Book (I mean if you could write one with either) but fasten upon you assertions equally false and wicked, without any Reference to Page or Secti­on, and without any imaginable founda­tion of his mistake, what other return would you vouchsafe to such an unman­nerly attempt than what I have made? If you would not return the same, thanks to your Cowardize more than your Civi­lity. And therefore as for what you seem to threaten, that such a provocation must needs come to a quarrel, fear not, [Page 31] there's no danger of Blood-shed: We that are no Brothers of the Blade know how to put up harder and more girding Repartees than this with Patience and Philosophy. This is all the answer I will vouchsafe you for your own sake, and revenge your self as you can. But be­cause both your self and J. O. have this Rap­per perpetually in your mouths when you have nothing else to say, I will for the Readers sake bestow upon you another Reply somewhat more soft and gentle, e­specially when I hope it was not altoge­ther lost upon J. O. because as you have Pag. 200. observed most gravely and Senator-like that serious words have produced serious effects. Thus when upon another occasi­on the tells no body but all the Nation, that the thing by me asserted is that a man Pag. 252. of J. O. may think, judge or conceive such or such a thing to be his Duty, and yet have there­by no Obligation put upon him to perform it: for Conscience we are inform'd has nothing to do beyond the inward thoughts of mens minds. In answer to this it was inquired who gave in the Information, because the Informer (whoever he is) would in some Courts of Justice have jeoparded something that he would be loth to lose for so lewd and bold a Forgery. Phy! [Page 32] phy! for shame give over this pitiful Le­gerdemain. Such open and visible falsi­fications serve only to expose the lewd­ness of your Cause and your Conscience, and if you delight in such wretched Practi­ces they will in process of time betray you to more pernicious Courses: for what should hinder a man that can pervert and falsifie at this rate, from forging Wills, and setting counterfeit Hands to Deeds? Nei­ther fear nor modesty can ever restrain him, that dares venture upon abuses so palpable, when it is so absolutely impos­sible you should ever hope to escape the shame and rebuke of discovery. The Assertion it self is one of the chiefest and most fundamental Maximes of Knavery; and yet it is boldly charged upon me without the least shadow or syllable of pretence, either to justifie the Accusa­tion, or excuse the Mistake. You know as well as I that all I attempted was only to exempt the inward Acts of the minds of men from the Jurisdiction of Humane Power, and so to confine their Govern­ment to the Empire of mere Conscience: Now from this assertion, that our secret thoughts are subject to Conscience only, to infer that Conscience has no Power but only over our secret thoughts, is a conclu­sion [Page 33] too absurd for you to make either in good earnest or through mere mistake. This is your Answer, if you are not sa­tisfied with it, you know my mind and my weapon.

Your last and lowdest hoop and hola is at my Censure of the Clause in the Act of Parliament quinto Eliz. and you make every where an horrid noise about it, and I am consident you have in more than twenty places of your Book rended your throat against this presumption. But be that as it will, the aspersion you would fasten upon me from it is so silly, that I am not at all concern'd to wipe it off; howe­ver I have discoursed enough already to satisfie, nay almost to surfeit any reasona­ble man, and if that will not suffice you, I am resolved I will not be impertinent to gratifie your Clownishness. I will only challenge you and all your party of man­kind to maintain That whoever enacts a Law with this Proviso that it shall not bind in Conscience, enacts no Law: For if it does not oblige that, it obliges no­thing. Whether therefore the Clause were added by Cecil or by the Parlia­ment, I am not concern'd, and though you should throw in the Queen and Con­vocation and all, I care not, I must and [Page 34] will declare they were all miserably out in their Divinity.

And as for what you intimate that I have endeavour'd to prove a whole Par­liament Coxcombs, that is Language rough enough for your Mouth. For I express'd my self modestly enough, and though I observed how manifestly through this mistake they abated the ob­ligation of the whole Law, yet I hope it is no Crime against the Privilege of any Protestant Parliament to suppose it falli­ble in any speculation of Divinity. I know their meaning was, that they did not intend to enjoyn that Fast upon a Re­ligious Account, but that was their Mi­stake, in that all Laws Civil as well as Ecclesiastical equally oblige the Con­science, so that no Law-giver can make a Law with an intention not to oblige that, and though he do, it is in vain, in that his Laws are bound upon it by virtue of the Divine Command and not his own. But they were then so amused and con­founded by the Clamours of the Papists on one hand, that Conscience was only subject to the Church, and by the Puri­tans on the other, that it is only subject to God, that they durst scarce own the proper Obligation of their own Laws, [Page 35] and so through mere Modesty clapt in this blind Proviso.

And now as for all these goodly slan­ders, when they were first vented by J. O. they were little more than an unkind­ness to my single self; and though it ar­gued a fair deal of Considence in that precious man, to load me so briskly with so many, so great, and so ungrounded Calumnies, yet it was a sign that he had some little sense of humanity left, that he could desist when his forgeries were so laid open, as to leave the Rat no Craney of excuse or evasion. But after such an ample discovery of his wretched Cheats and Leasings, for you to stand in them with such a Brazen Brow is a palpable Af­front both to the understanding and inge­nuity of Mankind. What soft and changeling sots must you suppose the peo­ple of England, to be imposed upon, and born down by such wrank and bold fa­ced Impostures? Did they all walk with their Legs scambling in, and their hands dangling down, you could not have more presumed upon their silliness than you have by going about to abuse their Credulity with such shameless and unpal­liable Lyes.

The Title of your next Comedy is the [Page 36] Publick Conscience, I suppose in imitation of the Publick Faith. And here all your Plot too is borrowed from J. O. and the great subtilty of it lies no deeper than on­ly in representing what I have determi­ned in the Case of a doubting, scrupu­lous and unsatisfied Conscience, as if I had intended it of Conscience in general in all matters and as to all events. This is pretty well for Legerdemain, and clea­verly enough performed, and the Peo­ple have swallowed it with a glib and round Assurance that I have exhorted them to disgorge their Consciences in­stead of their Scruples, and to renounce all Obligations of Vertue and Religion but what are tied upon them by the Laws of the Common-wealth, and to know no other Rule or Measure of their Duty, but the will and Pleasure of their Prince, and when once the outcry is taken, 'tis to no purpose for me to plead that this is the very Divinity of the Leviathan, that I have labour'd to oppose with greater Zeal and Vehemence than I have modern Orthodoxy and Fanaticism it self; so as to prove (and that I am confident past all Contradiction) that those men who pro­fess to own no obligations of Conscience but what are laid upon them by the Com­mands [Page 37] of their Governours, own none at all; and that without a sense of Duty to God, it is impossible to bring any sub­ject under a sense of Loyalty to his Prince. But whoop and hola, what is that to them if I contradict my self? Now what should a modest man do in this case? should I betake my self to your refuge of Dulness, that when you have nothing else to reply, appeal to the day of Judg­ment? That indeed is a Trial I hope hereafter to stand by, and it is comfort enough to support an upright man, that then at least his integrity shall be for ever clear'd; but alas! I have too tender a sense of my present Reputation among good men to be willing that so great a Blot (were there any way to wipe it off) should lye so long upon my Innocence. And therefore Sir, you must pardon me for once if I dispense with a point of friendship, and leave your credit at pawn to redeem my own. For after you have given in this heinous Charge against me, it is not in my power to salve both our Reputations. If I am guilty, I do con­fess it, I am a very Secret one: if I am not, I will be so civil as to give you the Choice of your own Title.

The case then is plainly this, that next [Page 38] to the Paganism of Symbolical and the Popery of Latine Ceremonies, the two grand Pretences, or rather excuses of Non-conformity are Scandal and an unsa­tisfied Conscience. The first is the shel­ter of their Leaders, who being at length ashamed of those Scruples, and little Principles that scare the People (though they themselves at first set them up to fray them away from the Communion of the Church of England) pretend now to comply with them only out of good Na­ture and Condescension. For they would not by any means be thought so weak and unlearned in their Conceptions of things, as seriously to fancy that there is any Idolatry or Immorality in our Cere­monial Constitutions. But yet because there are some simple and well-meaning Professors that are not sufficiently assured of their Lawfulness, and by Consequence are apt enough to be scandalized at their Use, they think themselves out of pure tenderness and compassion to these weak ones obliged altogether to forbear their Practice. A goodly pretence this to weigh against the Commands of Authori­ty, that because some of the common People forsooth of weak heads and strong necks are afraid of something [Page 39] though they know not what nor why, that therefore Government must tack a­bout, and strike sail to their folly and ig­norance. But the triflingness and petu­lancy of this Scruple I have represented upon its own proper Principles; 'tis e­nough at present that it resolves it self in­to the pretence of a scrupulous and unsa­tisfied Conscience; i. e. though as yet they know no harm or danger by the things they boggle at, yet they are su­spicious and jealous lest they should not be altogether so harmless as they appear to be, and therefore desire to be for a while excused their Obedience till they can give themselves and their Conscien­ces some better and more assured satisfa­ction of their Innocence. Now would not any prudent and sober man think it enough to advise them in this perplexity, that this Scruple has long since out-worn and out-lived it self; for though it might be allowed of in the days of Queen Eli­zabeth, when at first it was started, yet after so long time and so much enquiry it is intolerable; for if with all their search and examination they have not been able to descry the Evils they suspect­ed, that is a sufficient Principle of pre­sumption that their jealousies are un­grounded. [Page 40] So that if they are now able to object any certain crime against them, then this plea of a doubtful Conscience ceases, and the certainty is to be pleaded instead of the doubt. If they are not, an hundred and fifty Years is (one would think) a sufficient time either to satisfie or to cancel Scruples. A man cannot (if he would) always doubt whether if he handle a Frog, it will sting him, or if he touch the tail of a Glow-worm it will burn his Fingers. And if after all this men will be scrupulous and afraid of no­thing or they know not what, it is be­cause they will be old Boys, and resolve when they have once blown a soap-bub­ble, to pursue and keep it up as long as they have breath to follow it. So that it is infinitely unbecoming Authority to submit its Laws to such an exception as this, that can proceed from nothing else but invincible Peevishness and Imperti­nency.

But if this will not prevail, what can be more effectual upon ingenuous and upright minds than to represent that this weakness and tenderness of Conscience is so far from being any allowable Rea­son of disobedience, that it lays upon all them that pretend to it peculiar ob­ligations [Page 41] to obey. Not only because (if they are what they pretend to be) it is of a modest, a yielding and a plyable temper as arising from diffidence and distrust of it self: but also because doubts and scruples are rarely employed un­less upon trifling and inconsiderable matters. In that the material parts of duty are too plain and easie to be almost at all lyable to so much uncertainty; and therefore obedience to Authority being withal one of the greatest and most indispensable dutys of mankind, in that it is in it self so absolutely necessary to their well-being, and injoin'd upon them by the most positive Precepts and se­verest penalties of the Gospel, that a­lone is more than enough to outweigh all scruples and determine all doubts of Conscience. But more especially in doubtful Cases of a publick Concern, it is not fit that men should be suffered to talk too peremptorily of their own pri­vate perswasions, because they are in­competent Judges of the publick good, and therefore they are to be determin'd and overruled by the Judgment of those, to whose care the management of pub­lick affairs is intrusted, and this to pre­vail universally and without exception, [Page 42] unless in case of certain and unquestion­able disobedience to the Divine Law; for we are no other way free from the su­preme Authority on earth, but as we are subject to a Superiour in Heaven, so that unless where our duty to God mani­festly interferes, there is no other plea of exemption against the Commands of Government. So vain a thing is it for doubts and scruples, fears and jealousies to be put in barr against them, when the result of all that can amount to no more than this, that they refuse obedience be­cause they dare not obey, and they dare not, because they dare not, for as yet they have no reason to produce, and only de­sire to be born with till they can find one, and when after so long a search there is none to be found, still and still they crave leave to be satisfied till they can, i. e. for ever. This is the plain ac­count of all that I discoursed of the pub­lick Conscience.

And now to represent what I have de­termin'd concerning the submission of private Conscience to its guidance in doubtful and difficult cases of a publick concernment, as if I had affirmed it of conscience in general, in all cases, and to all purposes, is such a strein of kindness [Page 43] and ingenuity!—That face of thine is of so good proof, and so true metal, that were it upon my shoulders, I would not exchange it for any crown'd head in Christendom: I would stare with the great Turk for all his dominions, and though the great Cham boasts himself the Lamp of the world, and son of the ever­lasting Son, I would look him out of all his Conquests of China.

But here you thicken your plot upon us, and under this scene of publick con­science you bring Christian Liberty upon the stage, and are all upon the sudden so civil as to make your Leg, and con me pag. 113. thanks for this new and important disco­very that the great Priviledge of Christian Liberty is, that Thought is free. This I know you intended only for wit, but that is your want of Judgment; for, I will assure you it is a very serious truth, and a very important discovery, and you had been a very ungrateful Wretch had you not acknowledged it: all the misfor­tune is, that it is neither new nor mine. Pay your acknowledgments to its right Authors; and be not so partial to your friend as to entitle him to the honour of other-mens inventions. That such a ma­ster of Systems and Syntagms! that one [Page 44] so well acquainted with Germany and Geneva should ever suppose me the first inventor of so old a discovery! Alas poor wretch! it is the known and re­ceived doctrine of all Divines whether ancient or orthodox, the first that taught it (as I remember) were S. Paul and S. Peter, and your great and infallible John Calvin has not been able to go beyond them in this, though he has in most other Articles of Religion. Freedom of thought was the utmost that he could dis­cover upon this Argument. And no man was ever suspected to think other­wise, but only the Gnostick Fanaticks of old, and the German Anabaptists of late, that whenever occasion was pleased to be debonair, had this pretence al­ways in ready pay to warrant any Re­bellion and disobedience. But at length from them our English Puritans got the word into their mouths, and then it might signifie any thing as it hapned to chime to their purposes. Sometimes it was the same thing with the Liberty of the Subject, when they pleaded it for an Exemption from all Ecclesiastical Im­positions. And sometimes it was no­thing else but the Liberty of Contradi­ction, when they will have it that what­ever [Page 45] the Magistrate commands in matters of Religion, though before they were free to do it, yet for ever after they are bound to do the contrary. Sometimes it is this, and sometimes it is that, and sometimes they know not what, for ne­ver did any generation of men so shuffle and prevaricate with themselves and the world at the rate that these men have done in this pretence; and no wonder, for every cause must be defended as it can, and if when they once fall into an absurdity, they will think themselves obliged to justifie it, the more they con­tend to get off, the more they vex and entangle themselves. But however this mystery of Libertinism is so easie a cover, and so fruitful a Nursery for all manner of Treasons and Seditions, that it highly concerns all Christian Princes not to suf­fer any of their Subjects to stretch its Plea any farther than the Apostles in­tended it. For it is very observable with what zeal and caution they bestir­red themselves in all their writings to confine it within its proper limits, that it might not be extended (as the Gnosticks would have had it) to the prejudice of Government. So that from them we must take the only certain ac­count [Page 46] of its nature and notion, especi­ally when beside their care to state it, they were the first Founders both of the name and thing. Now it is undeniable, that the controversie that was managed about it between the Jews and the Chri­stians in their days concern'd only the eternal obligation of the Law of Moses, which the Jews suppos'd unalterably e­stablish'd to all ages, whilest the Chri­stians thought it not only capable of a Repeal, but to have been actually a­bolish'd by the Christian Religion. And though the Apostles might and did suf­fer them for some time to conform to the practices of their sturdy Countrymen for ends of prudence, yet they would never be brought to do it upon the ac­count of the Mosaick Law; and if at any time they condescended to humour them in their old customs, they still protested against the opinion of their necessity. So that their Christian Liberty plainly con­sisted in nothing else but the rescuing of their minds from the obligatory force of Moses's Law, that was tyed upon them by Divine Authority in the Old Testament, and rescinded by the same in the New. And therefore it can relate only to the freedom of mens minds, and thoughts; [Page 47] and that too only in such cases, wherein the immediate Authority of God is, or may be pretended. This then is so far from being any invention of mine, that it was a trite and vulgar notion in the A­postles days. And now I hope you see that you are as far to seek in my trade of Divinity, as I am in yours of Buffoonry. We are all bunglers out of our own Pro­fession; but you will be snearing at every thing, though it be only to be­tray your ignorance, and shew your want of teeth.

The Hypothesis of the third play is moral Grace. Yes, so it is, and I will maintain 'tis as pure terse Orthodoxy as any grows upon the banks of the Lake­lemane. What, would you have an im­moral Grace? I see you are still for the old Grace of the secret ones, a Grace that is invisible to all the world beside your selves; a Grace that can maintain it self upon plunder and sequestration; a Grace of which we formalists and mo­ral men, that are strangers to the secret, could never perceive any other effects beside Confidence and Knavery. This is the Grace you would be at, to shew your zeal for the Lord and against An­tichrist by preying upon Kings and Bi­shops [Page 48] Lands. It is the Grace of Beggars and Bankrupts, that have the face to look demurely, and amuse us with talk of their intimate Communion with God, whilst their fingers are in our Pockets, and their Daggers at our Throats. We have seen and felt so much of the goodly Pranks of this your Grace already, that you have no great reason to blame us, if we are a little concern'd to get Morality joyn'd in commission with it. But this same Morality is an arrant Cavalier, and would quite defeat the Act of Indemnity. It is so unkind and so unmerciful to Gods People, that it would force them to re­fund all their Plunder and Sacriledge; It is so severe as not to accept of any pre­tences, or offers, or compositions of Re­pentance upon any milder terms than of entire Restitution; and (oh more than Church-mens Cruelty) it would even af­ter an Act of Oblivion require them to undo themselves, before it would so much as allow them to sue out their Par­don.

But Sir, how come you to be concern'd either in Grace or Morality, but that it is the nature of some Vermine to be nib­ling though they have no Teeth. What if I have confounded them, what have [Page 49] you to say against it? Why! you need say nothing at all, because 1. I my self Pag. 118. have discoursed it large enough even to sur­feit. I easily believe you, for what I have discoursed is more than enough to make any man that will or can understand sence to disgorge all your fanatick Non­sence. But 2. If Grace be resolved into Pag. 117. Morality, I think a man may almost as well make God too to be only a notional and moral Existence. Indeed now! do you think so in good earnest? Is this an infe­rence for a man to make that talks of no­thing under Divarications, Dilemma's and Mathematical Simile's? That thou shouldst make thy self so pleasant, i. e. (in Bays his sence) so ridiculous to no pur­pose! This is mere and witless Imperti­nence, the Prentice-Boys shake their heads at this idle talk, and there is no professing she so silly as not to under­stand the dulness of this Consequence; this Logick is below the apprehension e­ven of the Blew Apron-strings. But 3. White Apron'd Amaryllis was of the same O­pinion. Ibid. The honester she. 4. If the Arch-Bishoprick should ever fall to my Lot, you are resolved instead of his Grace, to call me always his Morality. I thank you Sir, it is a much more civil and cleanly [Page 50] Title than his Belzebubship of Kanterbury, which yet was the softest word your meek-spirited Puritans could in the days of your Predecessor Martin afford to that pious and humble man Arch-Bishop Whit­gift. But you may set your mind at rest, I have no such vehement design upon the Arch-Bishoprick as you imagine; and if I had, I would not care how you loaded me with all the filthy and dirty Language that your Party has vomited out against the Church of England; though out of their Pamphlets you may furnish your self with more Flowers and Embellish­ments of your own eloquence than are to be gathered out of all the Libells in the World beside. His Grace, and his Mo­rality! a surprising Conceit this! it is lovely worth a whole Tester in English. And seeing you have still a faculty and (they tell me) once had an employment that way, I would give you more than it is worth, or perhaps your self either, to translate or transprose it into Latine: It is pity but so quaint a fancy should be pre­served in the Universal Tongue. And now (as you inform us) Clementia is the Latine word for his Grace. And then the Crisis of the Wit would lye thus: If Grace be Morality, then instead of cal­ling [Page 51] the Arch-Bishop his Clemency, I would call him his Morality. But then no foreign Critick would ever be able to pick out where lay the Picquancy of the Conceit; and yet that the Learned affirm is the most certain Symptom of a Quib­ble, when the jest cannot live in another Language. But if this be no more than a Quibble, the next and last remarque is Pag. 322. scarce so much as a Semi-quibble. 6. Me­thought I never saw a more bold and wicked attempt, than that of reducing Grace, and making it a meer Fable, of which he gives us the Moral. Sure, your Muse pinch'd you for this Conceit. Bays talk of ele­vating and surprising! an impudent Fop! no mortal man could ever have luckt upon this feat fancy beside thy self. It is the very Non ultra of Spirit and Flame. I will warrant it thine own, Virgin-new, and never yet blown upon by Mankind. Take no farther care, it shall be inscribed upon thy Tomb; thou art its undoubted Author, and no man will ever be so pre­sumptuous as to rob thy Ghost of the Glo­ry of its invention. Make Grace a mere Fable, and then give us its Moral! Hold, you either juggle or conjure; I thought I had fast hold of the Jest, and yet when I open my hand it is quite vanisht, and [Page 52] there is nothing left behind but a gross and palpable mistake. For I never in the least attempted to make Grace the Fable (there is not the least syllable to that pur­pose in all my Books) you your self know I only made it the moral, so that at last it plainly appears, that though I have gi­ven the moral of Grace, it is only you and your party of modern Orthodox, that have turn'd it into a Fable. And so in truth you must, if you will make it a­ny thing beside Morality; for if it be not that, it can be nothing else but cheat and enthusiasm. And therefore, to be seri­ous, do we not write to very great pur­pose, when such whifling tools as you are able to defeat our most rational dis­courses by squirting at them with such trifles as these. I have asserted (and I still believe it to be undoubtedly true) that there is no real difference between Grace and moral Vertue, and I have proved it by a particular Induction of all the most material duties of Mankind, and have reduced all the Branches of Christian Re­ligion either to the Vertues or the Instru­ments of Morality; have shewn that they are but different names of the same thing, and that they are nothing else than mo­ral Vertues that are call'd Graces in the [Page 53] Gospel, because they are wrought in us by the assistance of Gods free Grace and goodness. I have challenged them to produce any ancient Writer that gives a­ny other account of them than what I have done. I have appeal'd once and a­gain to their own Understandings, that when they have set aside all manner of Vertue, they would tell me what distinct duty remains to be call'd Grace, and give me any notion of it different from all morality. If they can, they are more abstracting and subtile Metaphysicians than J. O. that has in a large Volume de­scribed that distinct Communion that e­very Believer is sensible of in every Act of Worship with each distinct Person of the Blessed Trinity. And now (by the way) because I have smiled at the ridicu­lousness of this Attempt, you (according to the custom of your Ingenuity) charge me confidently, as if I had blasphemed the Mystery it self. But this (I have already told you) is no fouler Play than you have ever shewen to all Adversaries; for whoever is so hardy or so unadvised as to correct any of your wild and crazy tri­flings in any Article of Faith, is immedi­ately traduced as if he had rejected the Article it self. It were very easie (were [Page 54] it not tedious too) to give you a large Catalogue of the worthiest men of our Church, that you have from time to time branded with rake-shame names. But I suppose it will be caution enough to all Prudent men, not to give too easie cre­dit to our malicious suggestions, when Mr. Hooker (whom one would have thought no body could suspect either of Heresie or Infidelity) was immediately upon the Publication of his Eccles. Pol. taken to task by a Smectymnuan Club of your Orthodox Divines, for broaching such Doctrines as overthrew the founda­tions of the Christian Religion, and the Church of England. But this I must pass by with a Thousand more of your friend­ly and Candid bobs, because they are too trifling to need or to deserve an an­swer. And therefore to keep close to our present debate of Grace and Vertue, the argument it self is so plain and obvi­ous that it carries along with it its own E­vidence and Conviction. In so much that J. O. himself, notwithstanding all his Zeal and Reluctancy, is at length forced Def. Pag. 335. over to my side of the Question (as you know where I have charged it upon him) Truth and Innoc. vindic. Pag. 104. for as much as all the difference he him­self is able to assign between Grace and [Page 55] Vertue relates not to the nature of the things themselves, but to the Principlès from whence they issue, viz. that the same Instances and Duties of Moral good­ness, that are call'd Vertues when they proceed from the strength and emprove­ment of our own natural abilities, are call'd Graces when they proceed from the Assistances and Impressions of the spi­rit of God: so that even in his account Grace is nothing but infused Vertue, and infused Vertue is Vertue still. I am not apt to be over-positive in my own Con­ceptions of things, yet in this Article I must crave and will take leave to be peremptory and confident, because I am seriously perswaded that as Religion has been of late trifled with among us, great Numbers of well-meaning People have merely through this mistake been abused both out of the Notion and the Practice of all real goodness. And my heart e­ven bleeds to consider how wofully they have by this means been gull'd with rank Non-sence and Imposture. For whilst their gracious Preachers work their Lungs, and water their Handkerchiefs to decry Moral Righteousness as a thing not only useless but dangerous if void of Grace, and therefore drive them on with [Page 56] furious Exhortations above all things to get this secret of Grace; if any of them chance to enquire what it is, and where­in it consists, they are forced to amuse them with abundance of general talk in Scripture Phrase of an uncertain i. e. no signification. And presently they begin to make a grievous noise of the Lord Christ, talk loud of getting an interest in the Lord Christ; tell fine Romances of the secret amours between the Believing Soul and the Lord Christ, and prodigious stories of the miraculous feats of Faith in the Lord Christ; all which, and infinite Loads more of the like crude stuff, that they are perpetually pouring forth upon them, is at last no better than mere gibbe­rish; they are perfect Barbarians to the Peo­ple, & prophesie in an unknown Tongue; they gaze at the Mystery, and perhaps lay up the Phrase, but yet understand its meaning no more than if they had dis­coused to them in Chinese or High-Dutch. Now the unavoidable conse­quence of this way of trifling is to betray the People into Enthusiastick and giddy conceits of Religion; it fills their heads full of something, they know not what; and this heats their Fancies, and sets their Brains awork, and makes them talk­ative [Page 57] and impertinent; and then they a­bound and overflow with Mystery and Non-sence, and the whole neighbour­hood is annoyed with the Rattle of their Phrases, and canting Noise. But that which is worst of all is, that if once men fall into this Crazedness of mind, as there is little hopes of their recovery, so there is no end of their Frenzy. Non-sence and Enthusiasm are unbounded things, and they seldom stop till they run stark mad with zeal and reformation. 'Tis the natural humour of this sort of people to dislike, and (if they are able) to subvert all establish'd order for some­thing else that they would have, though they know not what; for what can re­strain mad men from railing at their Keepers and Governours, and what more grievous to Enthusiasts than sober discipline? because that fetters them up from those outrages, that they are eager to act upon themselves and the publick. But to spare these political considera­tions, 'tis enough and too much that this mistake has this sad effect, that it fore­stalls all the real obligations of Religion, and gives men up to the invincible de­lusions of hypocrisie and false godliness. They are possess'd with a confident per­swasion [Page 58] of their own Grace and Saint­ship, and thereby they are already en­dear'd unto God and engrafted into Christ, and then this unavoidably stifles all thoughts of change or amendment, because their conversion is past already: so easie is it through this mistake for the common people to abuse themselves into a strong opinion of their being ensured in the state of Grace, when they are up­on terms of utter defyance to all the practices and obligations of Religion. And hence is it usual with them to stile some of the grossest enormities of vice by the civil title of sins of infirmity and such as are the peculiar spots of Gods own people. For if they can but once find or fancy in themselves those cha­racters of Grace that they are told are the marks of Gods secret ones, they roundly conclude all their accursed Lusts and Vices to be rather weaknesses of their natures, than obliquities of their wills. And then they take the measures of good and evil, not from the nature of actions, but from the conditions of persons, and with them an action is not thought gracious so much because it is agreeable to the Law of God, as because it issues from a child of God. So that if [Page 59] a man be once in a state of Grace, all his sins are presently turn'd into infirmities; and what is a crying sin in other men, is in them at worst but a pitiable weak­ness, and vice in the people of God ceases to be vice suitably to the doctrine of the Stoicks of old, (for they too had found out an odd kind of Wisdom, much like this secret of Grace, peculiar to their own Sect, that no body could understand beside themselves, and that was reconcileable to all the folly in the world,) [...], that a sage or a long beard of their Sect might indeed be soundly overcome with wine, but could never be properly drunk. Though to be overcome with wine were downright drunkenness in a carnal Epicurean, yet it was only to be full of the Creature in a grave Stoick. To be adopted into their Sect and Con­venticle, was enough to enchant a man against all the powers of Wine, in spite of all the debauchery and intemperance in the world. And thus is it with these men, they list themselves into some par­ty and faction of Saints, in which after they have been for some time train'd and exercised, and are prettily well skill'd in the arts of their own way of godli­ness, [Page 60] and thereby secured of their inter­est in the love of God, which if once they can get, they can never lose; upon this presumption how smoothly and con­tentedly do they slide into an habitual commission of those sins, to which their natural propensities, or their worldly interests most incline them. And they protect all their lusts and passions under the privilege of Grace, and by wearing the Livery of Gods people.

And what is still more fatal, they do not only excuse and dispense with their rank and froward passions upon the score of their imaginary Grace and Saint­ship, but they adopt them among the choicest vertues of their Religion. They will be angry and spiteful for the Glory of God, i. e. to gratifie their own fancy; rude and malicious against all that are enemies to the godly, or (what to them is the same) their own party; and they may and ought to hate their brother, if he hate the power of god­liness, i. e. if he loath and despise their way of hypocrisie. And when they have thus consecrated their passions by separating them to religious Uses, they are so far from cooling or allaying their unreasonable and brutish heats, that [Page 61] they think nothing more their duty than to feed and cherish them; till they blow up the sparks of zeal into glorious blazes of Reformation, i. e. into pub­lick Combustions. And thus when their Religion is nothing but zeal, and their zeal nothing but an heated rage, it is so far from controuling their passions, that it not only justifies, but causes their ex­cesses, and instead of sweetning their hu­mours, it tinges them with malice and malecontentedness. 'Tis made a San­ctuary for ill-nature and ill-manners, where they not only shelter, but abett their pride and insolence. Those vices that meer moral Philosophy would ba­nish humane conversation take shelter under the protection of zeal; and those heats that bare reason would quench in humane nature are kindled at the Altars of Religion; and they usually nourish this glowing coal in their bosoms till it burn out all their bowels of natural pity and compassion. This is enough, but yet it is not all; for as their zeal is im­placably fierce and bitter against all that oppose them, so is it salvagely rude and censorious against all that are not as ex­travagantly mad & raving as themselves, aspersing men of a silent and composed [Page 62] piety with the odious names of hypo­crites and Luke-warm Formalists, and abhorring nothing more than the ver­tues of Christian meekness and discreti­on. But if this be Religion, then fare­wel all principles of humanity and good nature, farewel that glory of Christia­nity an universal love and tenderness to mankind, let us bid adieu to all the practices of charity, let us renounce all pretences to the meekness and inno­cence of a Christian Spirit. Let our B. Saviour be branded as the greatest Incen­diary in the world, let his Laws be can­cell'd as arts and precepts of Sedition, let us banish Religion humane converse as the mother of all rudeness and incivi­lity, and let us at last go to the school of Atheism and Impiety to learn good man­ners. And yet all this is the unavoidable event of fixing peoples care and zeal up­on this imaginary godliness, call'd Grace as distinguish'd from all morality or the obligations of natural Religion, in that whilest their minds are busied and satis­fied with this phantastick nothing, it appeases their Consciences in the neglect of their useful and material duties, and prevents all endeavours of possessing them with serious and effectual Resolu­tions [Page 63] of vertue and true goodness. I must beg your pardon if I have dis­coursed too warmly and copiously upon this Theme; it is you see of very weighty Consequence both to the welfare of mankind here, and their eternal salva­tion hereafter, and upon this mistake meerly are founded all Abuses and Im­postures of Religion whatsoever, viz. when men fancy it to be some secret they know not what; and therefore I here declare that I still adhere to my opinion with the seriousness of a dying man, and that I shall be content to stand or fall for ever by my integrity in this belief. But what can we think of you? must you not be deeply concern'd in a matter of such sad and serious importance, to whiff it all away with so childish a conceit as this, that this is first to turn Grace into a meer fable, and then to give the moral of it. At least must we not suppose you profoundly learned, to be so very fond of such a poor crawling fancy, that were it not ridiculous for its sence, would be unpardonable for its wit, and yet you are so highly opinion'd of it, that you have reserved it for the disert of your book, and serve it in for the last jest, to give a farewel to the whole en­tertainment. [Page 64] One pregnant conceit I had almost overpass'd in hast, give me but leave to record it, and I have done, viz. that I have made the passage to Hea­ven pag. 76. so easie, that one may fly thither with­out Grace, as Gonzales to the Moon, only by the help of his Ganzas. Now I would fain know what likeness there is between flying without Grace and with Ganzas; do but make me out the wit of the simi­litude, and I will cast you in the sence of the argument into the bargain.

The Plot or Hypothesis of the fourth pag. 119. Play is debauchery tolerated. That is to say, I have in some of my Books repre­sented his Majesty this Declaration to issue out to all his Loving Subjects, for the toleration of debauchery, in oppo­sition to that of the fifteenth of March for the indulgence of tender conscien­ces. Whereas ever since our happy Re­stauration, we have, out of our special zeal and care for the interest and securi­ty of the Church of England, executed with all severity all penal Laws against whatsoever sort of Non-conformists and Recusants; but yet finding by the sad experience of 12 years, how ineffectual all forcible courses are either to reduce or restrain dissenters, We think our [Page 65] self obliged to make use of that unhoop­able Power, that is naturally inherent in us, not granted by Christ, but belonging to us and our Predecessors under the broad Seal of Nature next and immedi­ately before him. By vertue whereof we have and claim an absolute dominion not only over the consciences of all our sub­jects, but over all the Laws of God and man, so as to repeal or dispense with their obligation, as shall from time to time seem good to our Royal Will and Pleasure. And therefore that we may obviate and prevent those mischiefs that are likely to befal our Kingdom from the sobriety and demureness of the Non-con­formists, our Will and Pleasure is to give a free and uncontroulable Licence to all manner of vice and debauchery; and of our Princely Grace and Favour we re­lease to all our Loving Subjects the obli­gation of the ten Commandments, and all Laws of God, and Statutes of this Realm whatsoever contrary to the con­tents of this our Declaration: And we require of all Judges, Justices and other Officers whatsoever, that the execution of all manner of penalties, annexed to the Laws aforesaid, whether by Pillories, Whipping-posts, Gallies, rods or axes, &c. [Page 66] be immediately suspended, and they are hereby suspended. From whence we hope by the Blessing of God to give some check and allay to the inso­lence of fanatick Spirits, and by de­bauching our good people out of all ten­derness of Conscience to free our King­doms from those great and grievous an­noyances, wherewith they perpetually disturb our Government, and at last bring back all the advantages of peace and good-fellowship, both to our Self and all our loving Subjects, &c. Such a Declaration as this had been a stabbing proof against me and home to your purpose. But when you have exhibited so foul a charge without so much as re­ferring to any passage of mine to make it good, you prove nothing at all but that you have a bold face and a foul mouth. For we all know you are not so unskilful at improving the smallest and most inconsiderable advantages, that had you been furnish'd with any shadow of proof, you would have smother'd it; and therefore when you have produced none, your Readers easily conclude that the only reason is, because you know none. Yes! but however I have said as much as amounts to the same reckoning. [Page 67] But what have you to do with my reck­onings, mind your own accounts, and take care to ballance your expences with your incoms. Assure your self, I shall never trust you to be any of my Au­ditors, for I find you are as ignorant in Computation as in Logick. But yet that which amounts to this summ is this, that it is less hazardous to Government to give toleration to mens debaucheries, than to their religious perswasions; and therefore debauchery is to be tolera­ted. A fair reckoning! But what this a­mounts to I have already accounted largely enough to J. O. And if you are not satisfied, that concerns not me, I will not trifle because you are peevish; I have both computed and proved it at large in my answer to him, from p. 678. to p. 697. If you or he or any body else have ought to object against it, you know the Press is open, do your worst, it defies all your Forces; but as you va­lue your own credit hereafter cease to trouble me and the world with such silly and childish surmises. But to be short, the sumn of all that can or need be deter­min'd upon this argument is, that offen­ces are punishable by humane Laws, not according to the degrees of their intrin­sick [Page 68] evil, but according to the maligni­ty of their influence upon the publick Weal. So that those offences that are of most dangerous consequence to the wel­fare of the Community, usually are or ought to be provided against with se­verer penalties, and punish'd with more rigorous executions. From hence it is evident, that it concerns Government to keep a more watchful eye, and to hold a stricter hand over the freaks of Enthu­siasm, than the exorbitances of Debau­chery. Because though Debauchery always may, and often does its share of mischief where-ever it prevails, yet it rarely proves so dangerous, as either se­rious or affected pretences of Religion. For as much as this is the most necessary and most plausible disguise of all Rebel­lion. And therefore if men are not in good earnest, this is the fittest mask under which Malecontents and ambitious minds can hide their crafty and disloyal de­signs: If they are, then they are al­ways so much the more bold and confi­dent in their disobedience, and pursue their seditious courses with greater cou­rage and assurance of mind, than those that are conscious to themselves of their hypocrisie and disloyalty. But the main [Page 69] mischief of all is, that in all Seditions un­der colour of Religion there is always an unhappy mixture of both these sorts of people; the crafty knaves drive on the zealous fools, and they never want for trinkling Maxims to wheadle them out of all duty of Loyalty and Allegi­ance; and if they do but beat the Drum, or blow the Trumpet to Reformation, they will do or venture any thing for the Cause. So that it is plain enough that Fanaticism is very often more dan­gerous to the peace of Government, than downright debauchery: which as mis­chievous as it is can never proceed to a­ny more daring wickedness, but under this fair and deceitful Vizor. And this is so notorious that it is almost a shame to appeal to the experience of mankind to make out its proof; when there have been so few if any Rebellions in Chri­stendom that have not been commenced, or at least maintain'd by factions of Re­ligion. And as for what you affirm (confidently enough) that 'tis demon­strable that for one war upon a Fanatick or religious account, there have been an hundred occasioned by the Thirst and Glo­ry of Empire, that has inflamed some great Prince to invade his neighbour; Were it [Page 70] true, it is lamentably impertinent and like your self. For the only wars that do or can concern our present debate are Rebellions and not Invasions. That being the only argument I all along chose to insist upon, to represent how much it imports the peace and security of Government to prevent all religious contentions. Because they are either the Causes or rather the Covers of all Rebellion: But you add immediately and it is done like a man of Algebra: That more yet have sprung from the Contentious­ness and ambition of some of the Clergy. And yet you know the Cause or at least the Pretence of Religion is the main ground of all their ambitious Contenti­ons; so that they very rarely involve their Country in a Civil War, but upon a Religious Account. But yet because it is possible they may be pragmatical up­on other scores, I will deduct all out of this additional number but one, and then thus your reckoning casts up it self, That for one war upon a Religious Ac­count there have been an hundred oc­casioned by the thirst of Glory and Em­pire, but more, that is at least an hundred and one, by the Ambition and Conten­tiousness of Clergy-men; and now lay [Page 71] all this together, and the resolution of the Problem is, That for one war upon a religious account, there have been an hundred and one upon a religious ac­count. But (you proceed) however Pag comparisons of vice are dangerous. It is a venerable Sentence and worthy the wis­dom of a Senatour, and I should have supposed it entirely your own, but that it jumps so exactly with as wise a Para­dox of the old Stoicks, that all Crimes are equal; so that it is as heynous a wick­edness to kill a Robin-red-breast, as to murther ones Father or betray ones Country; and therefore they were wont to be very angry if any man would be making comparisons between vice and vice, though he did it but in jest and waggery. But as for all other Sects of learned men, whether Moralists or Di­vines, they unanimously allow the de­grees of wickedness, and are so far from thinking these comparisons always odi­ous, that they often think them necessa­ry. And certainly there can be very lit­tle harm or danger in teaching children that it is not altogether so naughty a thing to cheat one another at Push-pin as it is to pilfer half-crowns out of the Shop-box. But the great mischief of all [Page 72] would be; that if a greater severity (as Pag. 119. I teach) ought sometimes to be exercised over mens Consciences, than over their vices and immoralities, debauch'd persons will be ready hence to conclude, although it be a perverse way of reasoning, that when the severity ought to be less, the Crime is less also. But can I help the perverseness of mankind, when it is in their power to draw any thing out of any thing in the perverse way of reasoning? Name me if you can any one Assertion never so true or so harmless from whence perverse men may not force perverse Conclusions. Thus when I affirm'd the Sovereign Power in Church-matters to be so abso­lute, that it ought not to be controul'd either by the Conclave or the Classis; I hope you are by this time better in­form'd than to think your perverse Con­clusion from it even to my denial of a Deity, an allowable objection either a­gainst the honesty or the discretion of asserting his Majesties Ecclesiastical Su­premacy. However as long as their way of reasoning is perverse, it can never re­flect any disparagement upon my Premi­ses. Ten thousand perverse exceptions cannot in the least impair the credit of any Truth, but it is enough that if it be a [Page 73] perverse way of Reasoning, it is your own.

Your fifth Play is Persecution recom­mended; and here in the opening of Pag. 123. your first Scene you bring the Emperour Julian upon the Stage as a more cruel and execrable Monster of Persecution than An­tichrist or the Dragon himself, and you throw your slaver upon him with so much scorn and rudeness, that the Peo­ple take him for as very a rake-shame as Bishop Bonner or Pope Hildebrand. And yet poor Gentleman, he was a very ci­vil person, and a great Virtuoso, and though he were somewhat Heathenishly inclined, yet he had nothing of the per­secuting Spirit in him against the Christi­ans, as you may see at large in Ammianus Marcel. l. 22. unless you will suppose (as he did) that there is no such effectual way of persecuting an establisht Church as by suspending all Ecclesiastical Proceedings against Schismaticks and Hereticks, and granting an Unlimited and Universal Toleration. So that you might have found out some other Emperours that might better have become your Character of Cruelty than Julian. And how you will reconcile this hard usage of him with that deep Respect you profess to Sovereign Pag. 254. Princes is past my Understanding. I am [Page 74] roundly taken up for my Irreverence to Queen Elizabeth, only because I seem not to approve the humour of some Writers in her time, that affected to stuff their Books with Shreds and Remnants of Poe­try; and it must by all means be for her sake, that I will not endure the Wit and Learning of her times. And when else­where I happen to use this expression of old Elizabeth Pretensions, concerning the Puritans foolish talk of their Holy Disci­pline, it is no less than a spiteful piece of Unmannerliness to her Majesty to call her old; though it is manifest I spoke it not of the Queen, but the Fanatick Argu­ments; and if I had intended it of her self, yet I hope it is no ill Manners, not­withstanding she was a Woman, and ne­ver married, to call Queen Elizabeth old under the Reign of Charles the Second. But yet for all your severity upon me, you cannot find in your heart to speak with a­ny kindness of any Prince out of hearing. Nay, you cannot so much as afford his present Majesty one good word, but on­ly for his Gentlemans Memory, and when you have occasion to mention your comfortable Act of Oblivion and Indempnity; and how many bad things you have suggested of him, I will not be [Page 75] so unmannerly as to repeat. 'Tis too plain that it was the least part of your design to fall upon Ecclesiastical Policies; your Plot was under that pretence to take advantage of bolting ugly suggesti­ons against some bodies Person and Go­vernment. And it is obvious to all Rea­ders with what violence you force oppor­tunities of hinting spiteful and unmanner­ly Reflections, and then think to bring your self cleanly off by pretending to discover naughty and secret meanings in my words, though after your rate of Con­struction a Quarrelsome man might raise an Action of the Case out of your humble Servant Sir. I forbear Instances, because I will not be so far assistant to your inso­lent and bold Aspersions. But it were easie to specifie some sawcy Remarques that you have darted without any other ground than your own Malecontented­ness, for which, if you had your due, the Rods, the Axes, the Whipping-posts, the Gallies, the Pillories, and the Strap­pados would scarce be all together a suffi­cient Correction. But so it is that no Per­son that was more than ordinarily brand­ed for a dissolute and sottish Life in anci­ent times can be so much as occasionally mention'd (though the occasion of men­tioning [Page 76] him be the vulgar and Proverbial use of his name) but as if the resemblance were as obvious and natural as it is forced and malicious, you take upon you to conclude, that some Person now in Be­ing must be for certain intended, and then plainly enough unriddle the Secret, and make the Application. It is happy for you that I have so tender a sense of respect and reverence where it is my Duty, that I had rather an impudent Libeller should escape uncorrected than serve his design and promote his Slander by bringing him to publick Punishment; I say no more, but if you have any gratitude I expect you will shortly thank me for the possessi­on of your Ears. Certainly you were so provident as to take leave of your Com­fortable Importance before you set Pen to Paper. And though you dare not speak out plainly against every body now alive, I am sure you have bolted it out broadly enough against his Maje­sties Royal Father, when you represent him no better than a Jailour to all his Subjects, and accuse him for turning his three Kingdoms into one great Prison, in Pag. 295. so much that many thousands of his Subjects that had no mind to rot in Jails, were con­strain'd Pag. 296. to seck another Habitation, and e­very [Page 77] Countrey, though it were among Sal­vages and Cannibals, appeared more hospi­table to them than their own under his Go­vernment. But yet for all this, I have good reason to believe that your Pick at Julian was not taken up against him ei­ther as Emperour or Pagan: But (as you suppose) he once belong'd to the Clergy, and then because of his Indelible Chara­cter he is the eternal Mark of your Ma­lice. And if you can but get scent of a­ny thing that smells of a Priest, away you run with full Cry and open Mouth. And were your Fangs as good as your Throat the whole Order would in a very little time be torn and woried in pieces. For so, (it is your own Remarque) of all Beasts none are so fierce and cruel as those that Pag. 240. have been taught once by Hunger to prey up­on their own kind; as of all men, none are so inhumane as the Cannibals. The shrewdness of the observation makes some amends for the dulness of the Similitude. For take but an Hunger-starved Whelp of a Countrey Vicar, and enter him in a Committee-Pack for plunder'd Ministers, and let him but once draw blood of the Church, and tast the sweetness of Eccle­siastical Sequestrations, and if ever after he get view of any regular Clergy-man, [Page 78] though an Arch-Bishop, he opens and pursues with all the rage of a Phanatick Blood-Hound. I know your outrage springs from another Principle, because forsooth you were cheated by a Dignita­ry at Picquet; yet had you been a Com­mittee-Cannibal, you could not have been more inhumane to your own kind, than you have shewn your self upon this frivo­lous Provocation.

Having arrain'd Julian, your next Arti­cle Pag. 124. is against my self for inveighing against Trade. Ay, that is to the purpose, Purse-persecution strikes deep, drain a­way our money, and you draw out our Blood and Vital Spirits. What, Young man, are you not content to whip the Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple, but you must whip them out of the Nati­on too; and when you have already shipt away Grace, will nothing appease your rage, unless you may send Trade af­ter it too? Is it not privilege enough to blaspheme the Blessed Trinity, to tra­vesteer the Bible, and to revile the King, but you must be wrecking your Ecclesia­stical Malice upon the best and most indu­strious part of his Subjects too. This is beyond either the Rage of Julian, or the Zeal of Arch-Bishop Laud, or the Sal­vageness [Page 79] of a Capon-Cannibal; for that is your Name for a Presbyterian. Here I see I have raised a Devil that I can never lay; there is no Calumny, how black soever, so effectual to expose me to popular hatred as this Clamour; and therefore do what I can, it is resolved I shall never get clean from it, and let me bestir my self never so nimbly in my own defence, they will throw it on as fast as I can wipe it off. I thought I had given J. O. his Answer, but it seems that will not edifie with their Zeal and Choler. It is and shall be de­creed that I have with all my might perswaded the discouragement of Trade, for this strengthens their Interest, and combines both God and Mammon in a Confederacy against me, and endears the Trading and the Puritan Party of the Nation to each other, and then whoe­ver ventures to reprove one shall be vo­ted to rail at both: And now in this case it is to no purpose for my self or any of my friends to make Apologies, as good preach to the Wind and Tide, as remon­strate to the prejudice of the wild Multi­tude: though it is so very notorious that were all I have said put in Practice, no Trade could ever be in the least endam­maged, but that of the secret ones, the [Page 80] Trade of Plunder, and Sacriledge, and Conventicles, unless possibly the Pin­makers Trade by my having declared so frankly against the usefulness of Push-pin Divinity; and I wonder you have not exasperated that whole Company in par­ticular against me for the rashness of that Attempt. But what, (say you) do not I Pag. 151. say there is no such ungouernable Beast as a Wealthy Phanatick? I beg your pardon Sir, I was mistaken, I am now convinced by you that a beggarly Phanatick is somewhat worse, though of all wild Creatures I find none so fierce and impla­cable as the Gaming Fanatick, especially when he is rook'd of all, for that is the trick of all broken Gamesters, who ha­ving nothing of their own to lose are e­ver for serambling. However it is plain here from your own Quotation, that it is not the Tradesman I meddle with, but the Fanatick, nor with him as wealthy, but as Fanatick. Yes, but (say you) ma­ny a proper man has march'd up Holborn Pag. 151. for distinguishing betwixt the wealth and the Fanatick. This may pass for a Clinch, (and I presume you intended it for no more) but not for an Argument; and therefore seeing you have nothing serious to prove your Charge, if you had any [Page 81] Conscience or Modesty you would have forborn it, and not have endeavour'd to expose me to the Violence of the Multi­tude by such false and knavish Abuses. In short then, I am so far from bearing any ill will to Tradesmen, as such, that when I see one that keeps his Shop, ob­liges his Customers, delights in his own fire-side, lives lovingly with his Fami­ly, behaves himself quietly, and con­verses cheerfully with his Neighbours, keeps his Parish Church, pays Parish du­ties, bears Parish Offices, relieves the Poor, and is kind and civil to his Mini­ster, methinks he looks like a Venerable Relique of the meekness and modesty of the Primitive Christians; and is beside as good and useful a member of the Com­mon-wealth as any private Subject of what Rank and Condition soever, and deserves too as much respect and encou­ragement. But—I was about to give a Character of some People of ano­ther Kidney, that I shall forbear, because I foresee it will grate too severely upon too many guilty Consciences. Especially when you have (as a token of your ancient Friendship) given me secret Advice that I presume too much upon the good nature of the Fanaticks in thinking to walk night Pag. 128.[Page 82] and day in safety, when it is so easie a thing to deifie me, after the ancient manner, and no body be the wiser. Hitherto you have put me to no great pains to acknowledge and complement your Civility, but now, dear Sir, you overwhelm me with love and kindness. You could not have made a fairer invitation to the Rascal-multi­tude to attempt some Violence and Out­rage upon me as I walk the Streets. This is such a Villainous piece of Malice, as could never have offer'd it self to the thoughts of an English man, that had not travel'd abroad to learn Italian Cowar­dize and Cruelty. But had I exaspera­ted any of my Countrey-men so much as you would insinuate to the unruly Rab­ble, yet I should never fear such attempts as you suggest but from such as are de­bauch'd with Forreign Villany. This is offer'd so like a Wretch that has forfeited all Sense of Honour and Conscience, that you could scarce have spoke more broad­ly, had you a mind to be hired for the Executioner. And yet 'tis no fouler Play than what was shewn to the late Arch-Bi­shop himself; for when such another civil Gentleman as you had loaded his Grace with a vast heap of Calumnies, then (ac­cording to the Ingenuity of the times) [Page 83] call'd Cumulative Treason; he at last falls into an Admiration (as you did) that the People did not stone him, as they did him that acted the part of Bellerophon in Rome. Thereby animating the Rabble to some Violence, that might save the credit of his Judges, who otherwise must have been forced to murther him in form of Law. And to the same purpose I sup­pose it is intended that you intimate your knowledge of my Lodging, to invite Pag. 130. the Apprentices and the Southwark Ra­scality to bestow another Visit upon Lam­beth-House; but I doubt things are yet scarce ripe enough for these Long-Parlia­ment Tumults; though if they were, I doubt not but that there are seditious Bankrupts enough who would be for­ward enough to thrust themselves into the head of the Riot; but then, my friend, take you heed lest your Zeal and good service be rewarded with Captain Ben­steads pay, a bold fellow that was only hang'd, drawn, and quarter'd for head­ing that Tumult. You can expect but little Mercy if I am not defeated of the Hang-man's Office, that you have been pleased so generously to bestow upon me; Ibid. it is no very Honourable Employment, but yet however he is one of his Majesties [Page 84] Ministers of Justice, and you know and rue the time when he has done him admi­rable Service, and as meanly as you think of the place and as much as you de­spise it, set your heart at rest, it is an higher Office than ever you are likely to be preferr'd to in the Common-wealth; and in truth it was a place of very com­fortable Importance in the Roman Em­pire (which for your sake I will venture to mention once more) and yet (as little as I love you) I would not care though I recommended you to the Employment, because this is an age whereinGentlemen, (i. e. Pag. 131. Gamesters) cannot well support their Qua­lity, without some Accession from the Pub­lique. So that had you this or any other honest way of livelihood, it might stop your mouth from bawling perpetually for the seisure of Church Revenues, only in hopes of creeping into some small Of­fice at the division of the Prey; for I am apt to believe (though all that know you, know so ill of you, that they will take it for a very strein of Candour and Courtship) that all your rudeness to the Church does not proceed from meer ma­lice to that, and revenge upon the Dig­nitary. Want will put any man that de­lights in Gaming out of humour; but of [Page 85] all discontents there is nothing so pee­vish and so clamorous as when pride and poverty meet together in the same Gamester. But that which seems to strike the greatest damp upon your mind, and of which you make the oftenest com­plaints is that I talk so much of Pillories, Whipping-posts, Galleys, Rods and Axes, that is to say, the Pod [...]strabae, the Tile­thrae, Pag. 132. the Otagrae; the Rhinolabides and the Cheilostrophia; these are villainous En­gines indeed, but take heart Numps! here is not a word of the Stocks, and you (since the Act of Indemnity is past and sure) need never stand in awe of any more honourable Correction; however suppose the worst, you have read Seneca and Epictetus. And what though your worth should sometime or other prefer you to the Pillory (and that is not im­possible) yet it is no very painful Engine (and Philosophers can endure any thing but smart) it is only intended to make men look a little simply, and put them out of countenance awhile; but for con­fidence let you alone.

And now having thus far followed your dance, it is time (I hope) to advance to serious Counsels. You cry out of per­secution! So did Hugh Peters, and so [Page 86] did Venner, and so might all Malefactors, when brought to Justice, but that most of them are more modest than the most of you. This is but seizing upon words, and forcing them to sound or signifie a­ny thing to your own purpose. But un­less all execution of Laws upon offen­ders deserve this hard name, it is not e­nough for you to complain you are per­secuted, when you are only punish'd. It is the cause that makes the only difference; and you ought first to make out the ini­quity of the Laws, and to make good your obligation to disobedience, before you can set up this out cry. But to this you reply that you suffer for Conscience; for Conscience! what is that? but that you would take advantage of it, and re­port that I affirm there is no such thing as Conscience, I would say it is for no­thing. For Conscience it self is an inde­terminate thing, and has no more cer­tain signification than the clinking of a Bell, and that is as every man fancies. And though you are wont to discourse of it, as though it were an infallible O­racle in your breasts, or a Pope in your bellies; yet had you but skill enough to anatomize your selves, you would find nothing there beside Lights and Li­ver [Page 87] and Stomach and Guts, and perhaps a deceitful heart; for in the heart the Jews seated it of old, though the Carte­sian Philosophy has of late pearch'd it up into the Glandula Pinealis. But wherever it resides, it is not any princi­ple of action distinct from the man him­self, being the very same individual thing with the mind, soul and understanding; so that there is no other real difference between a man and his Conscience, than between a man and his mind, or rather between a man and himself. And there­fore when you make such an heavy dit­ty about your being persecuted for your Conscience sake, the result of it is, that you are persecuted for your mind sake, or suffer only because you have a mind to suffer. For whatever Conscience is, this is certain, that it is neither the rule nor the reason of its own Actions, but it is bound to guide and govern it self, and all its determinations by the measures and prescriptions of its duty, and that only can warrant either the wisdome or the innocence of its proccedings. And therefore in any case to plead only Con­science for any action, without specifying some particular Principle, upon which it grounds it self and its dictate, is in effect [Page 88] to plead any thing, or rather nothing. For without some certain direction di­stinct from it self, it may signifie any thing what you please, or if you please nothing. And it may as well be call'd Pride, Ignorance, Passion, Humour, Pee­vishness, Melancholy, Rudeness, Frenzy, and Superstition, as Conscience; for whenever a mans mind is possest or abu­sed with any of these unhappy Passions, that to him is his Conscience. And there­fore if ever you intend to make out the justice of your Cause, or the equity of your Grievances, you must give over this hovering and uncertain pretence of Con­science in general, and betake your selves to some more distinct and particular pleas; and that is to appeal to the ade­quate rule and measure of humane acti­ons, and that is to all divine and humane Laws; and if from either of these you can plead any express warrant to excuse your disobedience to the Constitutions of the Church, in Gods Name plead it; and then, but not till then, it will appear that you indeed suffer for the Cause of a good Conscience: But if you have none, then the case is plain, that you suffer for nothing. And yet it is as plain that you have not any other imaginable ground [Page 89] or pretext of reason to justisie your pee­vishness to the Ecclesiastical Laws, beside the indisputable pleasure of your own proud and imperious minds; for you are run off of all your old Cavils, and know not what you would have beyond the satisfaction of crossing the Commands of Royal Authority. For as for all your ge­neral clamours against the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of Princes, that they invade Gods Royalty, lay waste the Consci­ences of men, usurp upon their Christian Liberties; first they signifie no more than the general plea of Conscience, that whenever Superiours impose any Com­mands upon Subjects that they have no mind or stomach to obey, they then en­trench upon Gods Supremacy, as the only Lord of Conscience; and then it sub­verts all Government, and cancels all Humane Laws, in that they neither do nor can pass any Obligation upon any Subjects, but only as they are bound up­on their Consciences; and lastly, they will never stand to this themselves, when they are urged with those horrid mis­chiefs, that must perpetually overtake the Government, if the plea be once ad­mitted in general terms, and without ex­ception. This then being quitted, the [Page 90] Magistrate may, and sometimes must re­strain men in their pretences or perswa­sion of Religion, without seating himself in Gods Throne, or invading their Sub­jects Consciences, or offering violence to their Christian Liberties. And then have they nothing to pretend in their own ex­cuse, but the unlawfulness of the parti­cular Commands themselves; and this brings them to a sweet pass, when they are kept to it closely to prove out of the Holy Scriptures the wickedness and abo­mination of our Liturgy and Ceremonies.

And though you are here wont to rowl up and down in rambling and un­certain talk, yet still the last resolution of all your Impertinency (as you have been told often enough) is the great Mystery of unscriptural i. e. symbolical Ceremonies, for excepting these all of you allow the lawfulness of all other un­scriptural Ceremonies, and here, after you have done your poor utmost at sending and thrusting, are you forced to shelter both your Self and your Cause; and at last your Quarel against them is, That they want nothing of a Sacramental Nature Pag. 218. but Divine Institution; that is to say, they want nothing of a Sacramental Na­ture, but a Sacramental Nature. But the Ibid. [Page 91] grievance it seems, is, that these Humane Institutions should be made of equal force to Divine Institutions, in that they are imposed with so high a penalty. But what is that to you or me, if our Governours should be over-severe in their making of Laws, as long as they thereby enact and enforce nothing that is in it self unlaw­full? Beside, that this is such an Objecti­on as may be equally thrown against all Laws whatsoever, in that they are all establisht upon their proper Penalties, so that if it once pass, there will be no Re­medy left to prevent mad people from playing the Apes and Baboons in the worship, as you have done the Wolves and Tygers in the Cause of God; in that to restrain them by penalties (and yet there is no other way of doing it) will be to make Humane Institutions of equal force with the Divine. But here lurks the great mischief of all your peevishness (as you have been too often inform'd, seeing you will not attend) that your complaints are so impossible to be re­drest, that though we would save you from persecution, yet it is not in our power to do you so much kindness, in that Divine Worship cannot possibly be performed without some Arbitrary and [Page 92] unscriptural Ceremonies. And make choice of what others you please, refine and purifie them as long as you will, they will still retain their symbolical Nature. And then as it is necessary to the nature of external Worship to express it self by symbolical Ceremonies, so is it as necessa­ry to prevent madness and confusion that some particular Rites be determin'd and injoyn'd by Authority; otherwise after what a ridiculous rate must the publique Service of God be every where per­form'd, when every humorous and con­ceited Fellow would be at Liberty to af­fect his own singular posture and extra­vagance. And for this reason all Churches in the world have ever taken upon them to determine their own rules of Order and Decency, and exacted Conformity to them of all the members of their own Communion. And so do all the particu­lar Clans and Conventions of the Fana­tiques among themselves; and without this uniformity all their Assemblies would be no better than a wild and confused rabble of people: For do but suppose a mixt Assembly partly of a Congregation of Presbyterians, and partly of a meet­ing of Quakers, what an uncouth and fantastick medley would this appear to [Page 93] the Spectators, when upon the very same Principle that the Presbyterian refuses to kneel at the Communion, the Quaker refuses to be uncover'd, and so still they would quarrel and combate each other as much as they do the Church. This is so plain and obvious to every mans ex­perience, and they have been so often up­braided with it, that no man, whose con­fidence had not devoured his under­standing, could have taunted us so per­petually as you do with the indifferency of our Ceremonies in their own Natures; when it is so plain, that the determina­tion of some indifferent things is abso­lutely necessary to the exteriour perfor­mance of Gods worship, and when it is so certain that this exception, if once ad­mitted, would fall as fouly upon all your several Customes, as upon our Constitu­tions: So that the Quarrel relates not so much to the particular matters in contro­versie between us, for no man is, or ever was so fond as to pretend an antecedent necessity for their particular injunction; it is enough for us, and too much for you that it is absolutely necessary to enjoyn either these, or some other symbols as unscriptural and arbitrary as these: But our main concern relates to that danger­ous [Page 94] and exorbitant Principle upon which your Dissent and Non-conformity is founded. A principle so fond and so mis­chievous, that it will not suffer the settle­ment of any Church or Common-wealth in the world. So little reason have you to complain of the severity of the Laws, whilst the Laws are only level'd against such Principles as must eternally oblige you to be seditious and unpeaceable un­der all Governments and in all Churches; insomuch that should his Majesty conde­scend to grant you a Commission to or­der Divine Service to your own hu­mours, if you would but be constant to the peevishness of your own Prinoiples, that would bring you under as indispen­sable an Obligation of Non-conformity to your own Constitutions, as you now pretend to lie under to ours. So that you see the last Issue of this Plea is plainly nor more nor less than this, that you are persecuted for your Conscience sake, i. e. only because you are resolved to keep your selves under a necessity of being persecuted. And this I hope at present may suffice to stop your Cry of Persecu­tion; but if this will not do, then there is no remedy but I must muzle you and your whole party, and that I hope to do [Page 95] to the purpose when I come to your State-Policy. In the mean while it con­cerns Authority to consider whether as simply as your pretences look at top any thing but the Good Old Cause, or (as you mince it) the Cause too good be lurking at the bottom, whilst they ob­serve such blessed Saints as you that are known to boggle at nothing your selves, and withall to be the fiercest and most vehement enemies to the present form of Government, to be the only men that come forth to Witness against Prelacy and Antichrist, and preach such silly scru­ples to the Rabble as you know must be unremoveable grounds of discontent be­tween the King and his People. For as much as your general pretence, viz. that if His Majesty shall ever challenge any Authority over Conscience he invades the Divine Prerogative (which yet you know and sometimes acknowledge to be false) destroys all Government in gene­ral, in that Princes have no other secure and fast hold upon their Subjects, but only by vertue of their Consciences; and then as for all your particular exceptions, they as apparently destroy all Church-Government in particular, and are so re­mediless that it is not in the Power of [Page 96] Princes to avoid them, as long as they will leave any outward appearance of Religion or Divine Worship in the World. For if they will admit of any more Rites than the two Sacraments, it must be performed by something as liable to your own Scruples as any thing injoy­ned or practised in the Church of En­gland, i. e. by some Symbolical Ceremo­nies that are not enjoyn'd in the word of God, seeing it is plain that all outward Devotion can be express'd by nothing else, and seeing it is as plain that there are no more prescribed in the Gospel than barely the two Sacraments; from both which Premises nothing can be more plain than that Nonconformity to all cu­stomary and establish'd ways of worship whatsoever must upon your Principles be for ever unavoidable.

Your Sixth and last Play is pushpin-Di­vinity; from this one would conclude I had written at least a Treatise upon this Argument; and yet it is so far from be­ing any head of my discourse, that I only used it once as the most proper Term to express those childish Controversies that some men manage upon almost all the Ar­ticles of Religion, and that signifie no more to the Edification of the Church [Page 97] than Boys Play does to the Govern­ment of the State. But because you have so utterly mistaken the meaning of the Phrase, and because I perceive you have not Divinity enough to set you up at Push-pin, I will furnish you with a small stock of Instances. 1. Whether Conversion be perform'd in an Instant, or whether it be divided into several Acts and Scenes. As 1. the work of Vocation is the Prologue, 2. this voca­tion infuseth Faith, (only say some, but Faith and Repentance say others) and then 3. this Faith must be acted (so that it seems Believers may have Faith before they act it, i. e. they may believe before they believe) then 4. by this Act we ap­prehend Christs Person, and by this Ap­prehension we are united to him, 5. from this Union proceed the Benefits, 1. of Justification, 2. of Sanctification. 6. This Sanctification infuseth all other gra­cious habits, and hath two degrees, 1. Regeneration, 2. Renascentia as they call it, or the New-birth. Upon this dispute a great many weighty Arguments are pusht pro and con, and a great num­ber of grave Divines engaged on both sides, though (in my opinion) they had been as wisely employed in playing with [Page 98] the Boys at Push-pin, as in finding ten real differences in one and the same thing. 2. Whether the Word and Sacraments have only a moral Operation in the Conversi­on of a Sinner, as a man draws an Horse to him by the sight of Provender, or an Hog after him by the Ratling of Beans; or whether they are only the Instrumen­tal Cause to conveigh the Physical Ope­ration of the Spirit, as a Conduit-pipe does water. But this Heresie the more Orthodox will by no means endure, be­cause it is evident to all that understand Metaphysicks that none of Suarez his con­ditions of an Instrumental efficient Cause are to be found in them, and then the case is clear, and the Controversie out of dan­ger. And yet there is a very moderate man, and one that is much given to re­conciling, who ventures to declare that if any man had rather say that the word is Causa efficiens minus principalis Pro­catarctica, that for his part he will not contend. What a Condescension is here! Were all the Divines in Christendom of this yielding temper, how quickly should we see and rejoyce in that Catholick U­nity, that you in your deep Wisdome and Policy have set down for as crazy and impracticable an Undertaking as to dig [Page 99] through the separating Istmos of Pelopone­sus; Pag. 30. or to make a Communication between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean. 3. Whether common and saving Grace dif­fer only gradually or specifically, and if specifically, then whether it be only by a Moral or a Physical specification; and when they discourse upon such heads and points, they are wont to set as strong a Guard upon them of Chapter and Verse out of St. Paul's Epistles, and to as little purpose as the Assembly-men did upon their darling and fundamental Doctrine of absolute and irrespective Reprobation, though they were not satisfied with that, but for greater security were solicitous to place it next to the existence of God, and the Being of Providence. Blessed A­postle! shouldst thou but make a visit to the Christian World, how wouldest thou stand aghast to see such a vast Body of Modern Orthodox Faith framed out of thy Writings distinct from and for the most part opposite to the old Christian Belief! Shouldst thou peruse those strange Glosses and Commentaries that have of late been made upon thy Epistles, how would it recover to thy Memory all that Gibberish in which thou wert so idly bu­sie whilst thou sattest at the feet of Rabbi [Page 100] Gamaliel! How would it grieve thee to see so many Churches of thy own Plan­tation over-run with the Barbarism either of Turks, or Heathens, or School-men! Little didst thou dream that ever thy E­pistles should be brought upon the Stage to decide the difference between moral and physical Specification. But yet to confess the Truth, these were not the impertinent Fopperies I intended in that Expression; the only thing I then glanced at was the undertaking in the Grotian Religion to prove that the disputes be­tween the Calvinists and Arminians are more about words than matter, which is pursued warmly and eagerly enough, from Sect. 5. to Sect. 20. of the Preface; all which the Reverend Bishop gravely and prudently baulkt as a matter altoge­ther impertinent to his Argument, and that would bear Eternal wrangle in the way of playing Scholastick heads and points. And that you may be forced to acknowledge his Wisdome, I will give you a summary Account of his Adversa­ries performance. Imprimis to recon­cile Gods absolute decree of Election of the lesser part of Mankind Antecedently to any Consideration of their Faith and Obedience, and his absolute Decree of [Page 101] Reprobation to all the rest Antecedently to the deserts of their Impenitence and Infidelity, to the Justice and Goodness of God. Item to reconcile Christs suffering death for the Elect only, that are the least part of Mankind, without having any intent to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole World, with the design of U­niversal Redemption. Item to reconcile the loss of free will in all the posterity of Adam, so as that they lye under an una­voidable necessity to do or not to do, whatsoever they do or do not, whether it be good or evil, with the first Princi­ples of Morality or the Right of Re­wards and Punishments. Item to recon­cile Gods Method of saving his Elect from the corrupt Mass, by begetting Faith in them with a Power equal to that, where­with he created the World, and raised up the dead, (insomuch that such unto whom he gives that Grace, cannot re­ject it, and the rest being Reprobate cannot accept it, though it be offer'd to both by the same preaching and Ministry) with the Power of Election and Free Will. Item to reconcile the Impossibili­ty of falling away finally and totally, notwithstanding the most enormous Crimes, with the Power of Apostasie; or [Page 102] the necessity of perseverance with the li­berty of falling away, because it is only a necessitas consequentiae; though to you and me that are not so deep read in Mo­dern Orthodoxy every necessity of what kind soever is a necessity, and then call it what you please, it plainly destroys all Power over our own actions. This may serve for a compendious Syntagm of push­pin Divinity.

I might be very large and particular upon this Subject, but for the present I shall desire those that would be farther satisfied in the Mystery, to repair to Pin-makers-hall every Tuesday about ten of the clock in the forenoon, and there in six weeks time 'tis ten to one but they shall find two or three of them at it. And thus having represented as briefly as the Subject would bear the plot and contri­vance of your six Plays, I shall make no other Epilogue than to desire the Com­pany to give me their impartial judge­ment first of your own Modesty, Wit, Learning, and Honesty; and secondly of the understanding and ingenuity of the whole Faction, that are so strangely ele­vated with such a crude and indigested heap of non-sense and nothing. These Arguments I have pursued somewhat far­ther [Page 103] than was necessary to blow up your idle Cavils, because I was willing to do something to the edification of those Readers that have some understanding of their own, as well as to the Conviction of those that have none. And that the company may be sensible how much they are beholden to me for their entertain­ment, I will give them a short Bill of Fare of your Provisions. First, the Grand Thesis is served in, and at this you spread your arms, and cock your train, and chatter (as one would think) in token of courage and victory; but alas! under all this Pageantry there is nothing to be found beside tail and feather, and after all this cackling nothing to be discover'd beside noise and amazement, not a word discharged at the Grand Thesis it self; only you are scared out of your wits to see one so presumptuous as to assert what all the world have alwayes believed and practised, and so you immediately fall to transcribing a lump of quotation, be­ing sentences accidentally cull'd back­wards and forwards out of several dis­courses; and these you will have to be sometimes such Corollaries, and sometimes such Superstructures as are necessary to ju­stifie the Grand Thesis: Though Corol­laries [Page 104] justifie Theses just as superstru­ctures support foundations. But how­ever from hence it is evident with what presumption I treat His Majesty in my Books, though in the conclusion you tell us very judiciously, that they are not to be answer'd for certain invincible Rea­sons.

1. Because they are so full of contra­dictions, and therefore you cannot an­swer them.

2. Because no man can do it without bringing himself within the Statute of treasonable words, and at least a Premu­nire, and therefore you dare not.

3. Because whoever goes about it must of necessity either be, or be thought to be a Fanatique, and therefore you will not. And for divers other Reasons, some whereof you dare not discover, and some you discreetly reserve to your self; and so leave them to be sound out by Gods Providence, or our own Sagacity, and if both wayes fail, to wait with patience till the day of judgement: Only you in­form His Majesty, (1.) That I have given him too much Power; (2.) Too much advice; and (3.) Taken them both a­way again. And now while two or three other dull people can in the tumult of [Page 105] other business consume eight or ten months in one single Book of seven or eight hundred pages, for one man even without any Partners after forty months travel, to be able to Transprose three leaves, and find out the Grand Thesis, and the Corollaries that justifie it, and from thence to irradiate his Brethren with this beam of discovery, that such Divinity with such Policy cannot be good, no really by no means: This (I say) if duly weighed, is such an enter­prize, as cannot but strike your self, and all the world with admiration. And thus having dispatcht the Grand Thesis, you advance with huffing train against all its subordinate Hypotheses. And here first you cannot proceed well without a Preface, and so as if you had treated me hitherto with as much reverence as the Emperour of Russia, you humbly crave leave to treat me according to Decorum, i. e. like a Buf­foon; the very same Request word for word that Martyn-Mar-Prelate has often put up to his Readers to be allowed the same freedom with his Nuncka John the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury; though Sir, you might have used this familiarity with me without all this ado, for I perceive we are so intimately acquainted, that we [Page 106] have no doubt sometime heretofore ei­ther rob'd Orchards or lampoon'd the Court together. And then from this Apology in the strength of another Apo­logy to Kings and Princes, lest by reason of your private condition and breeding you should trip in a word, and fail in the man­nerliness of an expression, you proceed from Apology to Apology, (for one half of your Book is written to no other end than to beg pardon for the other) till you compare his Majesty sawcily and un­mannerly, and that without Apology, to a mad horse kicking and flinging most ter­ribly. And all this being premised out of tender regard to the rules of Decorum, you enter upon the unlimited Magistrate, where if you intended any thing against me, you ought first to have made it evi­dent that I had really invested him with an unhoopable Jurisdiction, and after that you would have had scope and advan­tage enough to have made me an Exam­ple to all Ecclesiastical Politicians to the worlds end. But you are a Civil Gen­tleman, and will say nothing more severe than only to admonish me,

1. That Bishop Bramhall would have censured this of Erastianism, though Era­stus never dreamt of any Opinion half so [Page 107] dangerous as unhoopable Jurisdiction.

2. That the Bishops and their Chap­lains would never have licensed it with­out clauses or provisos.

3. That the King does not love to hear of conceal'd Lands. Only if he may exercise the Priest-hood himself, he may with all the Reason in the world assume their Revenue too, which is as much as to say, if he may discharge the Function of the Secular Magistrate, he may (and it is all the reason in the world) assume all Secular Revenues too, which would be a better Subsidy than twenty Church Reve­nues: But truly otherwise (i. e. were it not that he is not guilty of Sacriledge) you do not see but that the King does lead a more unblameable conversation, &c. And so you forsake the fantome of unhoop­able Jurisdiction to proceed to Publique Conscience. But here too you are out of your element, and begin first with a wretched blunder about Christian Liber­ty, and then pick up here and there some passages out of my discourse of doubtful and unsatisfied Consciences, and impose them upon the Reader, as if they were intended of Conscience in general, and as if I had perswaded men that they may and ought to act against their Consciences [Page 108] where the Commands of the Magistrate in­tervene, because forsooth I have proved that when the Command of the Magi­strate intervenes in doubtful and uncer­tain Cases, by obeying they do not nor cannot act against their Consciences, if they really are what they pretend to be; and if they are not, that then they are Knaves and Hypocrites. But the Opinion is bruitish, and the consequences devilish; though whether it be so, it is no matter of your Judicature, and therefore must be referred either to a Jury of Divines, or the day of Judgement. And so we have you at Moral Grace, where you warble forth a pleasant ditty of Fortune, Prudence and Honesty in three several Languages, and the Song ended, we might have had a dance upon the high ropes, but that lightly one time or other by that means men break their necks; and for this rea­son you make hast to bid adieu to mo­ral Grace, of which not a word more, only he that is not satisfied, may satisfie himself if he can. And so immediately you get to debauchery tolerated, and this you understand a little better than mo­ral Grace, but yet all that you have to say upon this subject, is, to acknowledge that I never asserted any such thing, only [Page 109] debauch'd persons will (as you do) by a perverse way of reasoning conclude so and so, i. e. if I had affirmed (as you do) that it had been safer to give toleration to mens Blasphemies and Heresies than to their debaucheries, then it would have been Heresie tolerated. And so after a driveling and School-boys Declamation against the debauchery of the Sibarites, you are at Persecution recommended. And here it is Gods Mercy that Julian was Emperour and not I, and though you dare jest upon him and the Gallies as the more remote, yet you sculk by the Axes, Pillories, and Whipping-posts, as the more practicable and dangerous instru­ments of Persecution; and being your self a most gracious and conscientious Coward admire at some bodies courage that dares walk the streets so confident­ly, when it were so easie to deisy the Di­vine after the ancient manner, and no body be the wiser, and so cunningly in­sinuate as if you your self would be glad to accept the Office, provided you may gain some accession from the publique stock of the Party, because in this age Gentlemen cannot otherwise well sup­port their Quality; but if ever you un­dertake it, I shall never fear any other [Page 110] weapon than a Spanish Fig, or some more secret Italian dispatch; for though you talk so much of fighting and duels, you are so far from being so hardy as to see any man dye upon the spot, that it is ma­nifest you never had the Courage to at­tend the event of a war between two Boys in the streets, in that among all the wise and politique remarques you have made upon the transactions of Oheering-Cross and Lincolns-Inn-fields we have not one Observation upon that subject. And so at length we come to Push-pin Divi­nity, but because you understand nothing of the Game, I have directed you to the School where it is weekly practised: Onely to hide your ignorance you tell us what you have to say upon it, and perhaps you may have a stomach, but perhaps you may not, for when you come to it, you only repeat it all over Pag. 247. again, and tell us, that though you in­deed have not, yet the King himself has considered all these things. Strange that a man of such private condition and breeding should be so intimately ac­quainted with the studies and retire­ments of Kings. These are the Acts and Scenes of all your six Plays, but yet when all is over, the Plot of the Grand Thesis [Page 111] and Ecclesiastical Policy stands stock still. And now among friends was ever any thing so monstrous? you see what some men may come to with high feeding and no Divinity. Did ever any man run such taplash as this at first Broaching? Well! for your sake may I never live to out-live my self and my little Understanding so much as to be proud of such witless and insipid stuff as this upon the usefullest and most pregnant Arguments in the World.

This a Merciful man (as I am) would have thought Correction enough for one mans back; but you are so pregnant and awkerd a Dunce, so emproved in Igno­rance, so dexterous in the knack of being impertinent, and so addicted to all kinds of Leasing, that though you had Truth on your side, yet it would never please you, till you had dress'd it up and set it off with all the Colours of Falsehood, and whatever the cause is in which you en­gage, you will be sure to make your self ridiculous; and therefore but for a proof of this peculiar giftedness of yours, I shall (to avoid Ink-shed) content my self, and (I fear) more than satisfie my Reader with three or four of the goodliest Instances of your Wit, and so leave you to chew the Cud upon your own shame and folly. [Page 112] Thus when J. O. had (and that without blushing too) pleaded in Justification of his own Non-conformity, that he dares not conform to Socinianism, Arminia­nism, and Popery, as if he could be ad­mitted into the Communion of the Church of England upon no other Terms than of Popish and Socinian Subscripti­ons, and when I had scourged such an in­solent Libel with some smartness of Cor­rection, though not so much as it deser­ved; you (in your bashfulness) call it railing. So that it seems if any man im­pudently belye the Church of England, and I take him in it, and expose him for it, it is but telling me I rail, and I am an­swer'd. This is too like the stubbornness of your shrew; that when she was duck'd Pag. 160. over head and ears, still stretch'd up the Symbols or (as your Pin-Divines will have it) the Sacraments of Lowsiness and Cuckoldry. Nothing but such incorri­gible Scolds as you and she could have persisted so obstinately in so rude a Ca­lumny as this of J. O's. But when among other passages, I tell you that to the Isme of Socinianism, he might as justly have added all the Ismes in the Old Testament; out of this you rear two thwacking Ob­jections, the one against my self of pro­phaneness, [Page 113] the other against the Church of England of Schism. And this is yelp'd like a true Whelp of Old Martyns; for no man, be he Bishop or Arch-Bishop, could ever open his mouth against the ho­ly Discipline, but this dull Buffoon pre­sently run him up into Blasphemy and Treason. Blasphemy; because he revi­led the Lord Christs own Institution, and set up a form of Church Government of mans devising, in defyance to his unalte­rable Platform. Treason; because he perswaded her Majesty to keep out Christs true Officers and plant Antichri­stian Bishops in their steads, and by that means to draw the Judgments of God down upon her self and her Kingdoms.

This was the Summe not only of all old Martyns Buffoonry, but of all the se­rious part of the old-Elsibeth Puritanism. But as Martyn was just such another Wit as you, so are you just such another fool as Martyn, that as despicable as you make your self when you would play the Mon­key, are ten times a more ridiculous sight when you would look serious. For here forsooth you would fain make up your Mouth and turn up the white, and put on as rebuking a Countenance as you fancy J. O. did when he spoke of the day [Page 114] of Judgment, and take me up with ruful face for that peculiar delight and felicity I Pag. 184. have (which no man envies me) in Scrip­ture Drollery. My friend, this is too se­vere reckoning; what, can we not make mention of any Name recorded in Holy Writ, but we must abuse the sacred book it self? shall we not dare so much as to take the names of the Hivites, Perizzites and Hittites into our Lips because we find the story of their wickedness recor­ded in the Holy Scriptures? shall we not call a Traitour Judas, or a Rebel Achito­phel for fear of prophaning the Old and New Testament? This is a shrewd and a sad symptom of wretched Poverty of Ca­vil when you are every where forced to make so very much of so very little. I only wonder how the Bramble escaped this severity, especially when one would think that of all the Books of the Bible, you should have been acquainted with the Book of Judges, because though it be no Gazet, yet it conteins the Transacti­ons of a certain time when there was no King in Israel, and yet even here you be­tray the Grossness of your Ignorance, and declare in the Simplicity of your Heart, that you cannot imagine what the Mystery of Shiboleth is no more than of Categorical­ness [Page 115] and Entanglement. And yet the sto­ry of Shiboleth is recorded in the same Book of Judges with that of the Bram­ble, so that it is not improbable but you might be equally ignorant of both; and that you might look for this sto­ry in Gerhard's Herbal, or AEsop's Fa­bles. But as for the other two words, you know as well as I that it is only for my dear J. O's sake that I am so fond of them, as well as divers others, that you might as well have insulted over; viz. Self-wrought-out-mortification, Eristical­ness, Songs upon Sigionoth, the high pla­ces of Armageddon, Providential revolu­tions and some other affected Phrases that are the peculiar Language or Shibo­leth of your secret ones. But perhaps you had a mind to reserve this Parable (for all its being found in the Bible) for your own Drollery; and you are wonderful­ly pleasant both upon that and me, be­cause after I had (in allusion to that) transformed Calvin into a Bramble (not a Bishop Bramble as you notably clinch it for the nearness of the sound to Bishop Pag. 50. Bramhall) I should ascribe indefatigable­ness to him, a Liberty that has ever been allowed of by all Criticks, and must be practised by all the Writers of Apo­logues, [Page 116] and without it what pleasant work would such a Sarcastical Wit as you make with AEsops Fables and Reignold the Fox. But if I am guilty of a solecism (and I do not much care if I grant it) I am not alone, you your self stick as fast in the same absurdity, for when you have turn'd the Clergy of England into an Ivy­bush, Pag. 133. you in the same breath ascribe cun­ning and contrivance to it; now if you will but undertake to teach a shrub how to plot and contrive for its own self-in­terest, I will undertake to teach it how to take pains to compass its ends, so that your Politick Ivy will be a fit match for my Indefatigable Bramble, and I hope in time will overcome it too, i. e. that the discretion of the Church of England may at last be too hard for the Zeal of the Ge­neva Faction.

But though it be prophane enough to droll upon the word of God, yet wilful­ly to pervert or (in your own unaffected language) trinkle it, is somewhat worse, and that is the next Article of my charge; that when I quote St. Paul to prove that the fruits of the spirit as he enumerates them, Gal. 5. 22. are only Moral Vertues, I translate (say you) joy to chearfulness, peace to peaceableness, and faith to faith­fulness, pag. 193. [Page 117] as if either the Apostles Original were written in English, or I had transla­ted it out of English into English; no, that is your own way of translation, to expound the Greek Text by the English Version as you do the Chapter by the Contents. It was not then joy, and peace, and faith that I translated into chearful­ness, peaceableness and faithfulness, but [...] and [...]. But what ignorance, or rather what forgery is this of Scripture and Religion? Who is there of the Syste­matical, German, Genevah, Orthodox Di­vines, but could have taught you better? Who is there of the sober intelligent Episco­pal Divines of the Church of England, but would abhorr this interpretation? So say you, but then say I, what honest and upright dealing is this with Scripture and Religion? Who is there of the Systema­tical, German, Genevah, Orthodox Di­vines, that could have taught me better? Who is there of the sober intelligent Episcopal Divines, that would not ap­prove of this interpretation? And so M^r Impertinence you and I are even, you see how little Answer will serve to stop your mouth, though you open never so wide. But this confidence is worth all our Moral Vertues, and is able to make [Page 118] such stuff as this pass among the Party for Wit and Demonstration. And with what Triumph here do you bear me down, and rescue this Text from my violent interpretation, and carry it off as bravely recover'd out of the Enemies possession, and yet it is but dropping one simple No-forsooth in your way, and your carreere is stopt, and there may you stand gaping till the day of Judgement. For as for this Text, when all your Or­thodox Divines have sifted and bolted it to the Bran, they will with all their search and canvasing never get any thing out of it, or discover any thing in it be­side Moral Vertues. And if you have credit enough to borrow a Bible in the Neighbour-hood, you will quickly find (if you can find the Epistle) that St. Paul is there describing the opposite Effects between the Flesh and the Spirit; and therefore as all the fruits of the flesh there reckoned up are immoral Vices, so must all the fruits of the Spirit there opposed to them be moral Vertues; but particu­larly chearfulness must answer to envy or discontentedness, peaceableness to strife or contention, and faithfulness to the Gnostick treachery or perfidiousness. But in the Name of Mercury, tell me to what [Page 119] end you quarrel my preferring the word chearfulness before that of Joy, when (as I have told you) they are but synony­mous expressions of the same thing, and may be, and often are used promiscuously, and differ no more than Reason and Reasoning. And what if instead of this I had made choice of the word Alacrity, What ignorance or what forgery had that been of Scripture or Religion? But yet af­ter all your swaggering all your own Or­thodox Divines will vote chearfulness as a much more proper expression in this place than joy. Because St. Paul here speaks of the temper or the habit of the mind, whereas Joy in its proper accepta­tion denotes only the particular acts of rejoycing. Oh! but say You and J. O. to grievous purpose, that this Joy is not chearfulness, but that spiritual joy which is unspeakable, yes, but then say I, this spi­ritual joy that is unspeakable might more properly have been translated that spiri­tual chearfulness that is unspeakable, in that it is that habitual tranquillity of mind that arises from the testimony of a good Conscience, and a right to Eternal Life, and therefore is best exprest by chearfulness that denotes the habit, and not Joy that denotes the act. And so [Page 120] Peace (cry you both) is not peaceable­ness but that peace which is wrought in the hearts of believers by the holy Ghost: though this is plainly coincident with your former notion of joy, in that the holy Ghost works this satisfaction of mind only by joyning its suffrage to the vote of our own Consciences, so that accord­ing to your account joy and peace would be but one thing in two words. But be­side this it is manifest that the Apostles design here is to enumerate the Vertucs, or the Duties, or the Graces of the Spirit (call-them what you will) whereas this Peace you talk of is a priviledge or a fe­licity of good men, but no proper effect of the spirit of Sanctification, and there­fore cannot without plain violence to the Text be understood of any thing else than peaceable-mindedness, especially when it is so manifestly opposed to con­tentiousness, and when there are so many parallel Texts of Scripture, that do not only warrant but enforce the same inter­pretation, as you may easily inform your self by the help of a Concordance, if you cannot procure a Bible. And this (with­out forgery) is that Peace that passeth all understanding: not because it is some se­cret and unintelligible thing, of which [Page 121] no rational and sober account is to be given, or ought to be demanded. But if you can find out the Epistle to the Phi­lippians (it stands not many leagues off from that to the Galatians) you will per­ceive that its grand design was to exhort them against breaking the Peace and Unity of the Church by Gnostick dis­putes and contentions, to which purpose he recommends to them above all things a peaceable and quiet temper of mind, as a thing much more excellent and valu­able than exactness of Wit and Know­ledge, or (as we render it) that passes all understanding. But then lastly, as for the word [...], I know there are several ac­ceptations of it in the New Testament (and that is more than you knew before) though none so common as this of faith­fulness, at least none so proper in this place, where it is not only opposed to the perfidiousness of the Gnosticks, but is reckoned up as one of the fruits of the Christian Faith, and therefore must be something distinct from it, and conse­quent to it, and then unless it be the Faith of Miracles, it can be nothing else but the vertue of Fidelity. And now I hope you see what reason I had to slight J. O's Cavil as too trivial to need or re­quire [Page 122] a set and serious Answer, though your impertinency has forced me to your shame upon such a tedious and needless Task, Notwithstanding that the Fortune of Caesar and the Roman Empire depend not upon it. But no sooner can I any where mention Caesar or the Roman Em­pire, but your blood immediately rises, and you are past all patience. I cannot imagine the ground of your Antipathy, unless it be, that when Caesar took the Empire upon himself, he turn'd the Com­mon-wealth into a Monarchy. But what­ever the picque might be, this I am sure of, that there is not any one passage in which these words occurr through all my writings that has escaped your wit and fury. You think it a pleasant conceit to find me so often medling with the Ro­man Empire. And yet not so often nei­ther, for what is it to quote something of its affairs and transactions six times in above a thousand pages, that is about once in a Book as big as yours; It is no more to a man that reads Livie and Taci­tus than six kicks was to Daw after he had read Seneca. At least it is not half so of­ten as you have hooked in Gazette, and that you know is in comparison a very Modern History. For if you will con­sult [Page 123] your Almanack, it is a great while since the building of Rome, 2424 years; and yet from its very foundation it has alwayes been a place of very great action, and bred more business for Heroick Song than Gondibert or all the Princes of the Lombard Race, and its Story is not so much the History of a particular Nation as of the whole World; and yet after all, you are pickeering at the Roman Empire five times for my once. You have informed Princes that Julius Caesar Pag. 251. was stabb'd for subverting the Liberties of the Common-wealth: And another Roman Emperour for giving the word Pag. 244. unhandsomly. From you we learn, that Pag. 34. in his time the Empire was stretched to its largest dimensions, though the learn­ed say, that hapned not till the Reign of Trajan. From you we learn that it Pag. 232. cost the Roman Empire some Millions of Men to gain the Dominion of Words, and yet that Augustus though so great an Em­perour, Pag. 230. and so valiant a man, (but being withal a very wary Prince) was used to fly from a new word as studiously as a Mariner would avoid a Rock for fear of splitting. From you we learn that the Pag. 164. Emperour Tiberius when he was very an­gry would curse a little; and that Julian [Page 124] was not only a powerful Holder-forth, but the first Founder of the Inquisition. From you we learn that there was no love lost between the Guelphs and Gibel­lines, and that Geneva was the Helvetian passage that Caesar speaks of in his Com­mentaries. From you we learn that there was a certain Roman Emperour, who tri­umphed Pag. 219. over the Ocean, because he had gather'd Periwinkles and Scallop-shells on the Beach; with an hundred more that you have told as but idle stories, and yet Kings can tell how to make use of them, and learn to behave themselves dutifully to their Subjects, and not force them to Conform, remembring Caesars Pag. 251. bloody Coat. Here is twice as much Ro­man Empire in 300 Pages, as I have in 1300. And now though no other Ur­chin-Pamphleteer, no not Martyn nor his Cubs, would have pelted me with such lean and meager Cavils as these, yet this is not enough to asswage your Fanatique zeal and malice to abuse me for pervert­ing the Texts that I have quoted, unless I may be abused for those that I never (for any thing you know) so much as mentioned, or read; and thus when you cite for your own convenience this pas­sage, That Rebellion is as the sin of witch­craft; Pag. 120. [Page 125] you are pleased to adde too, that this Text will scarce admit my Inter­pretation. And yet you know no more what my Interpretation would be, than you do what Rebellion and Witchcraft are. But fear not, you are I perceive concern'd (for what reason you your self best know, I know none) lest I should interpret it of the Rebellion of Subjects against their Prince. No, but (if it will do you any service) we will resign up this Text to the Long-Parliament side, and you know a friend of ours that has vindi­cated its true meaning against a learned Man abroad that indiscreetly and injudi­ciously enough objected it against the late Rebellion.

But that which is still more pleasant is to see such a one as you seriously reprov­ing the Divine for making merry with the day of Judgment, because forsooth, when I had bafled J. O, and he had cited me to answer for it at that day, I laughed at the silliness of his summons, and thought it a very peevish and impertinent Ap­peal. For to what purpose should he or any man else write Eristical Books to sa­tisfie the World in the Innocence and Ju­stice of their Cause, when at the last they have nothing to plead in their own de­fence [Page 126] but by appealing to the World to come? 'Tis (I say it again) an easie mat­ter by this dancing and capering humour to perpetuate all the Controversies in the World, how plainly soever determinable, to the coming of Elias; and after this rate shall the Barbers Bason remain Mambrino's Helmet, and the Asses Pannel a furniture for the great Horse till the day of Judgment. You seem much pleased with this Quota­tion, and travel'd a great way to fetch it in, and it is a very pertinent story to re­present the folly of such impertinent Ap­peals. For Sir you must know that once upon a time a Knight-Errant (you may have read of) despoiled a poor Village Barber of his Bason, (which the poor man in rainy weather was wont to wear upon his head instead of an Oyl-case to preserve his Hat) supposing it to have been the enchanted Helmet of one Mam­brino a notorious Magician of those times. But a while after the Barber happening into the same Inne with the Knight, spies his Bason and cries stop Thief; at this an uproar is made, the Lye is given, and the Inne is immediately fill'd with no­thing but plaints, and cries, and screeches, and confusions, and fears, and dreads, and disgraces, and flashes, and buffets, and [Page 127] blows, and spurnings, and kicks, and twecks, and effusions of Blood. But at last by the mediation of some that had more Wit and less Courage than others, the Tumult was appeased, the whole bu­siness between the Knight and the Barber was referr'd to the Arbitration of some pleasant fellows, that were present at the Fray; but they resolving to turn all into Mirth determine at last upon grave and solemn deliberation, that the Bason in­deed to them seem'd an Helmet, but yet they durst not swear that it was so in good earnest, and therefore for the greater safety enjoyn'd both parties to refer its Decision to the day of Judgment. No doubt, much to the Barbers comfort and satisfaction. And just thus has J. O. dealt with me, who having fallen as rudely up­on me as the Knight did upon the poor man, and coming off with no great ad­vantage either to the Justice of his Cause or the Reputation of his Wit, gravely summons me to the day of Judgment, where though I am prepared to answer him and all the World, yet I cannot but deem it a very simple and ridiculous de­termination of any Controversy that con­cerns the Affairs of this present Life, to adjourn it to the Life to come, because as [Page 128] to the present purpose the decision will come somewhat too late. Now methinks it is a very hard case if a man cannot de­spise this Confidence and Folly without making a mockery of the supreme Judge and Judicature. But that which most troubled me was to see proud men abuse themselves and the World with so serious a thing, so as whenever they expose their own discretion by any rash or silly At­tempt, they presently call down for Fire from Heaven upon any man that does but smile at their weakness. And it is a sad and prodigious thing to observe how some men feed and pamper their Malice with Religion, and depute the Divine Justice the Executioner of their Rancour and Bitterness, and make the World to come a mere shelter for Anger and Dis­content. When their minds are through­ly sowr'd with ruminating upon Injuries and Disgraces, and this World seems to run counter to their designs, then they'l take refuge and sanctuary in the other, that so if they cannot bear up against their Enemies here, then Hell and the day of Judgment may make amends for all. And if you had indeed marked J. O's looks (as you pretend you did) when he spoke of this day, you could not but [Page 129] have observed what a mighty ease and sa­tisfaction it was to his discontented mind, and that the very hopes of some revenge then did as much allay his Maladies, as if he had really executed the utmost of his spite and Malice now. I am sure any man that reads the Character of the Per­sons that he in his Christian meekness summons to this judicature, will easily conclude he was in no very kind and lo­ving humour, viz. that they are such as have no regard to Truth, or Modesty, or Sobriety towards God or Man, that they are only animated by their secular Inter­est or desire of Revenge, that they are hard hearted and incompassionate, that they have no thoughts but of Rage and Destruction; that they are for nothing less than Massacres, and cutting Throats, &c. This is a sweet and obliging Cha­racter, and it is not to be doubted but that J. O. made no question of being too hard for such Rake-hells as these at the day of Judgment. And against such as these it is that he has denounced these Expos. on 130. Psal. Pag. 275. Curses. ‘Cursed be you of the Lord with all the Curses that are written in the Law, and all the Curses that are denounced against despisers of the Go­spel. Yea, be you Anathema Marana­tha; [Page 130] cursed in this World always until the coming of the Lord; and when the Lord comes, be ye cursed from his Pre­sence into everlasting Destruction. Yea, Curse them all ye Holy Angels of God, as the obstinate Enemies of your King and Head the Lord Jesus Christ. Curse them all ye Churches of Christ, as despisers of that Love and Mercy, which is your Portion, your Life, your Inheritance; let all the Saints of God, all that love the Lord, curse them, and rejoyce to see the Lord coming forth mightily, and prevailing against them to their everlasting ruine. Why should any one have a thought of Compassion towards them, who despise the Com­passion of God? or of mercy towards them, who trample on the Blood of Christ?—Nay, God forbid, we hope to rejoice in seeing all that Ven­geance and Indignation, that is in the right hand of God, poured out unto Eternity upon our Souls.’ By this you may perceive what J. O. means by talk­ing of the day of Judgment when he is angry, and that he then designs for him­self no small Devils Office. Oh! the day of Judgment! how does it allay all Maladies and Discontents! Then shall it [Page 131] be one part of his Eternal Bliss to behold his own and the Lord Christs Enemies lodged in Eternal Flames. The Brim­stone of the damned shall shed a perfume up into his Heaven, and their shrieks and howlings shall be as musical to him as the Hallelujahs of blessed Spirits. Not that he is in the least unwilling to forgive all affronts and unkindnesses, but that God never will. Ay, that is the comfort of their Spite and Malice. They snatch not the Sword out of his hand, only because they hope the strokes of an Almighty Arm will light heavier than theirs. They put out their Revenge to Interest, and are content to stay a little for it till hereafter, because then they expect to have it payed in with infinite Emprovements, and hope to re­joyce in seeing all that Vengeance and In­dignation, that is in the right hand of God, poured out unto Eternity upon their Souls. Truly a very comfortable spend­ing of Eternity, and a ravishing Descri­ption of the Joys of Heaven. But as for your part (had I made too light of that terrible day) your seriousness looks more abusively than my Mirth; you bring it in in such a sly and snearing way, and you preach upon it in such untoward and light [Page 132] Expressions, as would give occasion to a­ny man, though he were endued with some more Charity and Civility than your self, to make a shrewd Conjecture of your Opinion. How many good jests Pag. 198. have you baulkt even in writing your Book, lest you should be brought to answer for eve­ry prophane and idle Word! A wicked Knave! it seems you had them all in your Heart. But whilst you conceal your good Jests for fear of Damnation, could you ever hope to be saved by so many bad ones? Can a man strein so much and beat so far about to hale in a poor malicious and smutty Conceit, and yet study to baulk good Jests though they always come in easily and of their own accord? Could you take so much pains to mistake through so many Pages J O for one word, and then I Vowel for I Consonant to rear a few despicable fancies, and yet think to perswade the World that you have baulkt a Thousand good Conceits for fear of ac­counting for idle words? But seeing you Pag. 197. are pleased to attribute something to my Judgment, and desire to know what I think in good earnest of these things. If it weigh any thing with such a one as you, that dare not trust either your Soul or your Money with one of my Robe since the si­nister [Page 133] Accident of Picquet, I declare frankly that I would by no means advise you to check and mortifie your wit for fear of the day of Judgment, for I will ensure you that neither your self nor any friend of yours shall then fare the worse for a good Jest. But yet you are afraid of being brought to answer for every pro­phane word; poor man, never be scrupu­lous, for good jests are never prophane. Thus have you unawares given the pub­lique a tryal of your judgement of good wit, whilst you think it consistent with prophaneness. But could ever any Crea­ture in the world beside thy self have been so scandalously impertinent as to beg excuse for the sparingness of his good jests only to avoid the danger of en­trenching upon prophaneness, and yet at the same time stuff a witless and ridicu­lous Libel with so much impudence, ma­lice and ribaldry? Your last charge up­on this Article is so silly, that out of meer pity to your ignorance I could almost pass it by in silence; viz. that whereas I affirm that our Saviour, when he whipt the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, took upon him the person and priviledge of a Jewish Zealot, that is (say you) the second person of the Trinity did Personam [Page 134] induere of a notorious Rogue and Cut-throat. But to omit the classicalness of your translation out of English into La­tin, I perceive you are as much a stranger to the Rabbies as to the Push-pin Divines (and the truth is they are both much of the same understanding) and therefore at present I shall only advise you for the cure of your ignorance to consult M^r Sel­den de Jure Naturali & Gentium, Lib. 4. Cap. 4. and a little Treatise of D^r Ham­monds upon the Subject, and there you will find a vast difference between a Jew­ish and a Fifth-Monarchy Zealot; or be­tween the Order of Zealots in the Jewish Common-wealth founded in imitation of Phinees and Elias, and that was impower'd, or at least licensed by Publique Autho­rity to execute notorious Malefactors without form and process of Law; and those bloody Cut-throats that under this disguise play'd such reaks in the City at the destruction of Jerusalem. I say no more, but I hope you will acknowledge my civility to let so great a miscarriage escape with so mild a correction. Take warning, and play no more at my heels with such trifles as these; if you do, thank your self, if you go yelping off.

But of all the gall you have lickt up [Page 135] from J. O's vomit, methinks there is none so rank and bitter as your Charge of Schism against the Church of England upon the account of your Fanatique Se­paration; and that for no wiser Reasons, than first, because Schism rhimes to Ism; and secondly, because M^r Hales has writ­ten a Pamphlet upon the Subject. As for the first I scorn to answer it, though it is surprising beyond all Bayes his Plots, and Martyns pranks. As for the second, if M^r Hales have printed any thing that re­flects upon the Church of England (though I have a very deep respect for his worth and piety) it is no more to be re­garded than if it had been bolted by such despicable Scriblers as your self and J. O. and that is your answer. But if he had any such design, it is enough if he will stand to his own definition of Schism, that you have set in the Van of your long Quotation, that it will concern the Church of England no more than J. O's charge of Socinianism, viz. That Schism is an unnecessary separation of Christians from that part of the visible Church of which they were once Members. Now he must be a bold man and something more, that will venture to assign any Reason (beside yours of Rhithm) that shall con­vict [Page 136] the Church of England of being the cause of any unnecessary separation from that part of the visible Church, of which it was once a Member, only because you and your Clients the Nonconformists tye your selves by confederacy not to submit to her necessary injunctions; for if the things she requires and imposes in order to the due and decent performance of Gods Worship are not necessary of them­selves, (as you plead) yet either these or some other as unnecessary as these are. And then good Noble Marquess you might have put up your trumpery too, and spared that grateful Penance you have undergone in transcribing so many pages for your own proper use out of that Authour. For whatever he has sug­gested after this, you may assure your self the Church of England neither is nor will be concern'd. I am not ignorant that he has dropt some loose passages in that Treatise, for which himself was then censured, and the Book is still, though the Authour be pardoned, because as he did not first publish it, so he afterwards recanted it. At least it is too well known that this learned man was in his younger years too much tainted with the Socinian Tenets (perchance for their novelty and [Page 137] singularity) and so might vent some ex­pressions derogatory to the establisht dis­cipline of the Church in which he lived conformable to the mind and doctrine of Socinus. Who (you know) had an am­bition to set up for as great a Patriarch as Calvin, and therefore labour'd as Cal­vin did to erect a New Church of his own, and distinct from all other Commu­nions, only that it might bear his own Name. In pursuance of this design he was forced to contrive such Conditions of Church-membership, as flatly con­demn'd the Constitution of all the esta­blish'd Churches in the world, and con­sequently warranted his separation from them. Of this if you are not satisfied you may see enough in his own Epistles to Radecius upon this Argument, where you may too (if you have any mind to it) trace M^r Hales his Books of Schism, and undergo another as grateful a Penance in transcribing and construing as much more to your own, i. e. no pur­pose. The next time you nose the Church of England with M^r Hales, let the Disquisitio Brevis be your Book. I will add no further censure of him, he was a good man, and therefore if he had any defects, I shall choose to cover them [Page 138] with that additional Civility that (you Pag. 18. say) consecrates the ashes of the deceased. I see you are a friend to the consecration of Reliques though not of Chappels, for you have made bold to trample upon the Learned and Venerable Bishop An­drews his ashes for leaving behind him a form of Consecration of a Church or Chap­pel, Pag. 309. and of the place of Christian Burial, i. e. for being a little concern'd that Po­sterity should know some difference be­tween St. Pauls and a Stable. However I shall not treat M^r Hales for your sake so as you have Bishop Bramhal for mine, whom because, as you enviously think, I have over-praised, though you profess your self utterly unacquainted either with his Person or his Writings, you will not allow the truth of any one period of all the Commendations I have given him, but represent him as a crackt-brain'd fel­low that was stroke with a notion, and cra­zed Pag. 43. on one side of his head, and so busied himself, and troubled the world as other mad men are wont to do with extrava­gant and impracticable projects, or in digging through the separating Istmos of Peloponesus, and making a Communicati­on between the Red Sea and the Mediter­ranean. Nay, you are not satisfied with [Page 139] making the Bishop alone an undertaking Coxcomb, unless you may throw in Gro­tius, and all the wisest and learnedest heads of Christendom into the same ba­sket, they only talkt like conceited fel­lows that went bigg forty years with im­possibilities. Pag. 29. And this is as modestly chat­ter'd as can reasonably be expected from such an Urchin as you, that are so suffi­ciently unqualified to give a competent judgement of the best and most probable terms of Reconciliation, that you are as yet to learn the differences of the several dissenting Parties among themselves. Go to your Systems and your Syntagms, your sucking-bottles of Orthodoxy, before you presume so lavishly to spend your Censures against the most pregnant wits, and best improved Scholars in the Chri­stian world. But to all wise and discreet men the accommodation is feasible e­nough, when the truly learned and sober of all interests are so inclinable to it; es­pecially when the best part of the Church of Rome it self are as desirous to abolish their corruptions out of their own Church, as we are to keep them out of ours. The two hindrances are the pride of the Jesuites on their side, and the sierceness of the Calvinists on ours, so that [Page 140] neither of them will part with a pin (though it have neither head nor point) for the peace & prosperity of the Church, but the former are resolved one and all to adhere unalterably to their old Innova­tions, and the latter to their new ones. And here snap me not up too nimbly, for it is no Bull to stile the Innovations of the Church of Rome old, so they are when compared to the Calvinian Novelties. But shutting out these two fiery & wasp­ish Sects for eternal wranglers, it is no such difficult thing for all sober men to agree upon a form of primitive simpli­city; or if it be, I am sure it is not incum­bred with so many difficulties as was the attempt of the Reformation, and yet so zealous a Protestant as your self would not, I suppose, have discouraged those men that arose to that great work, from the consideration of those many and great inconveniences that might probably en­sue upon it. However though they had been favour'd neither with Power nor Opportunity to effect it, yet it had been worthy the greatness of their minds to recommend so brave and pious a work to the Princes of Christendom. And so it was of Bishop Bramhal and H. Grotius (that prodigiously-erastio-arminio-socino­pontificio-politique [Page 141] Head-piece, as a certain long-winded Presbyterian calls him) to inform the world that the distance be­tween Party and Party was not so wide and irreconcileable as some hot and ea­ger Bigots would represent it, and their endeavours have been kindly enough ac­cepted by the best and most judicious men of all Communions. But here I am snapt, for how cleverly do I contradict my self, when I say, that the Bishop was not so Pag. 27. vain nor so presuming as to hope to see his design of Catholique agreement effected in his dayes, and yet but two pages before I had told you, that he finisht all the glo­rious designs he undertook, here no doubt I am trapt in a palpable contradiction, and yet the escape is as easie as the pit­fall, for the Bishop only undertook to propound the way of a Catholique agree­ment, not to effect it, so that though he were not so vain as to hope to see it ef­fected in his dayes, yet for all that he might finish all the glorious designs he undertook, seeing he only undertook the proposition not the execution of this glorious design. You see how little you get by fastning upon any of my Asserti­ons, no more than one of the Curr-dogs (you speak of) would by starting and [Page 142] worrying of an Hedge-hog. As for the rest of my Character of the Bishop, I scorn to justifie it, it were an affront not only to the greatness of his Worth but of his Name, that will bear a much loftier Pa­negyrick than I am able to compose for the consecration of his ashes. Though I could tell you how by his skill and cou­rage he forced back the Revenues of the Church of Ireland out of such hungry mens hands as yours, for there you must know they had finisht the Reformation that you only propound, that is, they had unrevenued the Clergy, and in Confor­mity to the Primitive Times had turn'd all the Tythes into Lay-fees, only allow­ing the Vicars comfortable stipends of a­bout twenty or forty shillings per annum. Now to me it seems as difficult a Task to force men of sacrilegious stomachs to disgorge their Prey after it has been so long poucht, as to you it does, to dig through the separating Istmos of Pelopone­sus. But I will not, only to satisfie your petulant exceptions, give a retail of all the proofs of this great mans prudence and courage; it is enough that he rela­ted to the Earl of Strafford, and if he had not an hand in all his enterprises, yet (though he were none of his Secre­tary) [Page 143] he had an head in all his Counsels, and that alone, if all the reports I have heard of that Great Man be true, will suffice to entitle him to ten times greater Elogies than those wherewith I have con­secrated his ashes, especially when you your self allow some additional civility to the praises of the deceased. But if my character of him be too termagant (abuse me not for this fantastick word, as you do for several of J. O's, when it is your own) yet it is not so romantick, as your own luscious and fustian lines wherewith you would embalm the ashes of your own Hero, in whom you cannot but admire that Ma­jesty and Beauty which sits upon the fore­head of masculine Truth and generous Ho­nesty. This is properly to trick up the good Old Divine in a yellow coif and a bulls head, to set Majesty and Beauty upon the forehead of his Masculine Truth. The forehead of truth is a sin­gle flower of a stronger and more rap­ping scent than a whole posie of D^r Bailys. But we still take an higher flight, He was a man that had clear'd himself from froth and groans. As scurvy a Commendation this as one shall lightly meet with! when the loftiest thing that can be said of so Great a Man as M^r Hales, is, that he was [Page 144] neither a Madman nor a Fanatique. But seeing I have acquitted my self so ill-fa­vourdly to the Bishop, that were he alive he would be out of love with himself, and that you (though a stranger to his worth and person) account it a work of some piety to vindicate his Memory from so scurvy a Commendation. I will (to make him some amends) trick him up in some of those elaborate and studious periods wherewith you have with an additional civility endeavour'd to Consecrate the ashes of the deceased. ‘I am confident the Bishop studied to do both God and His Majesty good Service, so that he ought never to be mention'd with­out due honour; but alas, how ut­terly was he mistaken, though so learn­ed, so pious, so wise a man, he seemed to know nothing beyond Ceremonies, Arminianism, and Manwaring, and seemed to place all the business both of Christianity and State in persecuting men for their Consciences differing from him in smaller matters; with these he begun, and with these he end­ed, and thereby deform'd the whole Reign of the best Prince, that ever weilded the English Scepter, turning his whole Kingdome into a Prison. [Page 145] What Censures, what Excommunica­tions, what Deprivations, what Impri­sonments? I cannot represent the mi­sery and desolation, as it has been re­presented to me. But wearied out at home, many thousands of His Majesties Subjects, to his and the Nations great loss, thought themselves constrain'd to seek another habitation, and every Countrey even though it were among Savages and Canibals, appear'd more hospitable to them than their own. Happy had it been for the King, happy for the Nation, and happy for himself, had he never clim'd that Pinacle. He was indeed a Person, whom my age had not given me leave to be acquainted with, nor my good fortune lead me to converse with his Writings; but sor whom I had collected a deep reverence from the general reputation he carried, beside the veneration due to the place he fill'd in the Church of England. So that had any man a mind to shew a proof of his good nature and elo­quence, he could not in my opinion have fixed upon a fitter Subject of com­mendation. And therefore (here mark the Connexion) I could have wished for my own sake that I had missed this oc­casion [Page 146] of being more fully inform'd of some of the Bishops Principles, where­by I have lost part of that pleasure, which I had so long enjoyed in think­ing well of so considerable a person. But however I recreate my self, with believing that my simple judgement cannot, beyond my intention, abate any thing of his just value with others. And seeing he is long since dead, which I knew but lately, and now learn it with regret, (tender heart!) I am the more obliged to repair in my self what­soever breaches of his credit, by that additional civility which consecrates the ashes of the deceased. And for a proof of this my additional civility, I tell you he was an undertaking Church-man that had a vast opinion of his own sufficiency, and went big forty years with an useless and impracticable project, and however he were other­wise a person of excellent prudence and learning, yet was he struck with a No­tion and crazed on one side of his head. And so neglected not only his own Charge and Diocess, but the whole Protestant Interest both Foreign and Domestick, to take an Oecume­nical care upon him, which none call'd [Page 147] him to, and none con'd him thanks for. Being upon his own single judgement too liberal of the publique, & retrench­ing upon our part more than he had Authority for, and granting more to the Popish than they can of right pre­tend to. And indeed he all along com­plies much for peace sake, and judici­ously shews us wherein our separation from the Church of Rome is not war­rantable. And in fact made a bridge, as Grotius too did, for the Enemy to come over, or at least laid some of our most considerable passes open to them and unguarded, and the bottom of all this most glorious design was only to fetter men straiter under the formal bondage of sictitious discipline. So that this enterprize of Bishop Bramhals, be­ing so ill laid and so unseasonable, de­serves rather an excuse than a commen­dation. And beside all this he had a great respect for poor Readers, he was no friend to preaching, he was a zea­lous Patron of Sports and May-poles, he was an enemy to the reading of the Scriptures, and the observation of the Sabbath; and lastly, he did not pre­vent the Irish Rebellion, or if he per­formed any such wonderful things as [Page 148] are ascribed to him, the honour of it is due, and ought to be given to General Usher. In short, an accusatory Spirit would desire no better play than he gives in his own vindication. And now whatsoever all this may have glanced upon him, it was directed only against a certain Authour, that has ill-favourd­ly commended him, and intended out of pure piety (and pure piety it is) to vindicate his memory from so scurvy a Commendation, and to repair the breaches that he through his unskil­fulness had made in his Credit, with that additional civility which conse­crates the ashes of the deceased.’ And have you not done it to purpose? no doubt were the Bishop alive, this flatter­ing Panegyrick would reconcile him to himself again. But certainly such impro­bable Elogies as these are of the greatest disservice to their own design, and do in effect diminish alwayes the person, whom they pretend to magnifie. And the result of all these elaborate and studious pe­riods of Commendation is to prove him only a most egregious Knave and Fool; such is your piety and additional civi­lity. I would know whether this be to trick him up in a yellow Coif and a Bulls [Page 149] head, or to furbish him in martial ac­coutrements, like another Odo of Baieux, though in your account they are all one, and you have been so inconsistent with your self as to compare the same com­mendation to both, in one page it is as effeminate as a Ladies dress, and in the next it is as martial as a fighting man in armour. Well! you of all men are in most danger of being choakt not with the swelling of truth (as you ridiculous­ly speak, for truth it self never yet choakt any man) but of falsehood and calumny. Was ever civility graduated up and enhanced to such a value? Had you been the very pink of courtesie you could not have endeared the Bishop with greater sweetness. Had you spoke the language of a Lover, and transcribed the Grand Cyrus and Cassandra, you could not have courted your Mistress in a more luscious and extravagant stile. ‘Poor Bishop Bramhal, whether you or I are most unfortunate I cannot determine; whether you in being alwayes court­ed, or I in being alwayes rail'd at. But in good earnest I think I have the bet­ter of it; for though an ill man can­not by praising confer honour, nor by reproaching fix an ignominy, and so [Page 150] they may seem on equall terms, yet there is more in it; for at the same time that we may imagine what is said by such an Authour to be false, we conceive the contrary to be true.’ This I am sure of, it is hard to disparage a man more by slander and calumny than you have the Bishop with all your ela­borate and studious periods of commen­dation. And this I hope is enough to convince you of your insolence in pas­sing your malepert censures upon a man so great in a matter so foreign, not only to your judicature but understanding. But this is right Fanatique Malice and Impudence to bespatter the most worthy persons with such foul reproaches under profession of so much love and sweet­ness. ‘And so go your way like a wretch as you are, and if you have any spark of Vertue unextinguish'd, lament and pine away for this desperate folly, for the disgrace you have, as far as in you is, brought not only upon this vene­rable Prelate, but all the Church of England, by this undertaking, and for the eternal shame to which you have hereby condemn'd your own Me­mory.’

To this your new Edition out of Mr. [Page 151] Hales, I care not though I cast in that o­ther long lesson, that you have been at the pains to construe out of Arch-Bishop Parker (for should I altogether baulk it, as impertinent as it is, I know your way of insulting) wherein he censures the Ce­remonies of the Church of Rome as too troublesome and too numerous. Why, what then? nothing at all, but you have gain'd by this in English and Latine five pages, as you did eight by Mr. Hales, a good days work and wages easily earned, and you were too hard here for the As­signs of Theodore Beza and John Calvin; had they been aware how cheaply you came by these 13 Pages, they would no doubt have deducted proportionably for it out of that days Pay. But if you intended it to any other purpose than barely to fill up, you ought to have pro­ved either that the Arch-Bishop inten­ded this against the Church of England, though certainly by his Office he could be as to Ceremonies no Non-conformist. Or if he did not, that yet his words fall as heavily upon the Church of England as upon the Church of Rome. But to say only in general that in this passage he girds us no less than J. O. himself does in his Treatise of Evangelical Love, though [Page 152] he does there in broad terms indite us both of Socinianism and Popery, is such an additional Civility to the Ashes of this Venerable Prelate, as was not long since offer'd him by some of your dear Bre­thren, when they translated his Urn out of the Chappel at Lambeth into an Un­consecrated Dunghil. Yes, but howe­ver (say you) if we once grant the Church a Power of establishing Humane Institutions in the Worship of God, they may accumulate their number till they become as burthensome as the Roman or the Mosaick Yoke, and therefore though the Ceremonies already injoin'd are nei­ther many nor troublesome, yet they ex­pose us to the peril of Superstition, for the same Authority that appoints three, may (if it please) appoint three Hundred. And when it does so, then complain; in the mean while it is (to say no worse) but a sawcy and uncivil deportment to­wards your Governours, to refuse Obe­dience to their reasonable Commands, that you may not encourage them to proceed to unreasonable Impositions. And if this may pass with you for an allowable Ob­jection against the use and exercise of any Authority, only because it is possible it may be abused, then farewel all the Laws [Page 153] and all the Government in the World, when 'tis so impossible for any of them to prevent or avoid this Exception. But methinks it is a pleasant Entertainment to hear you tell so many sad and heart­breaking stories of the Yoke of Moses and Superstitions of Rome upon Occasion of three innocent Ceremonies; when they are so easie and so natural, so without la­bour and distraction, that to lift up a fin­ger requires full as much pains and trou­ble. Whereas their rites were so nume­rous, so chargeable, and so troublesome, that it was almost impossible any care should constantly attend or exactly per­form such an intricate service. But men that are resolved to be seditious, are for­ced to be unreasonable. And what can silence their Clamours that have the face to compare three easie and harmless Rites with the Yoke of Moses, and the Tyran­ny of Antichrist. But thus split a Straw and lay it cross a Fanaticks forehead, and (as hard as it is) it shall break the back of his Conscience.

I could have wish'd you had been as much refreshed and edified with the Arch-Bishop's Testimony as with Mr. Hales's, that so instead of quoting a sin­gle Passage, you might have taken upon [Page 154] your self the grateful penance of transcrib­ing his whole Book, and then you would have obliged us with that remarkable Prophecy wherewith he shuts up his An­tiquities. ‘There is nothing more to be fear'd and provided against in this well-constituted Church of England, than lest the Clergy, whilst it takes pains in the Word and Truth, and is with the greatest Observance subject to the Soveraign Power, should be set forth as a Prey and Spoil to the Lavish and Spend-thrifts, and be torn by the Reproaches and Contumelies of the Ig­norant, and exposed to the Affronts and Insolences of the Rascal-Rabble; If this shall ever happen, more heavy Scourges from God, and sadder times than those of Queen Mary's Reign may justly be expected.’ And yet thus it has been, and thus it must be, wherever it is the humour and fashion to vilifie the Priesthood, Religion becomes contem­ptible with its Officers, and where that loses its Esteem and Reverence, Govern­ment loses its support and security. And this was at the bottom of our late wild and wanton Rebellion, that the People were debauch'd into a slight regard of all things Sacred and Civil by the bold and [Page 155] juggling suggestions of a few ambitious and sacrilegious Malecontents, and then it was not only easie but natural to put Affronts upon all the Proceedings of Au­thority, to bear down all its Remonstran­ces, and run the Common-wealth into flat Anarchy and open War. You see how little Execution is to be done upon the Church of England with the But-end of an Arch-Bishop, as you express it with Pag. 281. equall Wit and Manners.

Here the Quotation of my Lord Veru­lam, which you could produce to my Pag. 166. confusion, would in my opinion have been much more to the purpose; but to tell us what you can say without saying it, is only to talk to your self. Or the story of Pork, that you forbear to tell too, be­cause you say I know it, but I say I do Pag. 320. not know it, or if I did, you should how­ever have had the Manners to have told it for his Majesties sake, because he knows how to make use on't.

But another Qualm that is upon every turn throwing you into groaning Fits is, that after all my seeming and pretended zeal for the Church of England (for which you have the greatest kindness in the World, were it not for the Pick-thankness and Pick pocketingness of the Clergy) I [Page 156] shall be found by any unpack'd Jury of Divines little better than a rank Erasti­an; a word you have pick'd up out of Bi­shop Bramhal, though for any thing you know, that may signifie a Wizard or a Magician, yes, or a Jewish Zealot, i. e. a notorious Rogue and Cut-throat. But be it what it will, this too was (as all the rest are) J. O's grievance. And you are both Crafty Colts, that when you know your selves unable to answer Arguments presently spurn at them with some false and foul Recrimination. I scorn'd to take any notice of his Braying, and so I should of yours; but that I perceive some weak and well meaning Brethren, that are only wont to skim and skip over Books, to be a little startled at the Im­peachment, because I all along discourse of the Power of the King and not of the Church, though the reason of it is very obvious, viz. because the Subject I de­sign'd and proposed to treat of was the Power of the King, and not of the Church; so that if you and J. O. are ag­grieved at any thing, it is for no other cause than that I have stuck close enough to my own Argument, and too close to yours. Now Sir, as you well remember, you have for want of wiser Remarques [Page 157] calculated at least ten times over in what Year of the Lord, and upon what day of the Month my several Books were born, and then, if you will compare it, you will find that the juncture of Affairs to which the first was accommodated, was at a certain Season after the Chatham Ad­venture, when you began to lift up your Heads, and to Nose your Governours, and to make bold demands in the name of your Consciences against the late ille­gal Impositions of King and Parliament. And you know what innumerable swarms of Pamphlets you were perpetually send­ing abroad only to declare to all his Ma­jesties good Subjects (that either were already out of humour, or had a mind so to be) that if himself or any other Civil Magistrate whatsoever shall presume to challenge or exercise any Authority over their Free born Consciences in any mat­ters of Religion whatsoever, he usurps upon the Royalty of God, and involves himself in the guilt of Tyranny and Per­secution. This was loud and broad e­nough to alarm the Church of England, we understood the men and their mean­ing; and had no mind (believe me) to have that comfortable settlement resto­red to Church and State by his Majesties [Page 158] happy Restauration unravel'd by these Men's bold and insolent Pretences. And therefore divers Persons out of pure Love for the Church, and Loyalty to their Prince, and Zeal to their Countrey, set themselves to beat back all your new Re­publican Pleas of Sedition, and to assert his Majesties Prerogative against all your old Shifts of Dis-loyalty. Among the rest I had no more Wit than to thrust my self too forward into the Scuffle, and to pursue you too close through all your peevish Clamours and Pretences. For when I saw men of known and approved Enmity to the present State, buzze a­broad such Exorbitant Principles among the Common-People, as flatly contra­dict all the Principles, and defeat all the Obligations of Government, I could not, I ought not to refrain from lashing such Lewd Designs with some Warmth and Smartness of Reproof, and if I have any where overlash'd, it was out of an over­vehement Concern for the Peace and Prosperity of my Countrey; though for my own part I am not sensible of any one Expression that is chargeable with the least Harshness or Incivility; I have only express'd ill things by their Proper Names; and whereas both your self and [Page 159] J. O. pour fourth in every Page incessant complaints of Railing and Reviling, that is but an Uncivil Word that you may throw at any man that you are not fond of; and it proceeds merely from your Old prodigious Pride and Partiality to your selves, who whilst you make it both your Recreation and Employment to in­vent or blazon Slanders against the Inno­cent, rave and fome at all Conviction of guilt against your selves. I have challenged you often enough to specifie but one foul or false word in all my Writings, to name but one good Quality, that you possess, that I have not granted you, or one bad one, that you disclaim, and I have unjust­ly charged upon you, and I will be con­tent to suffer all the Engines of Clergy mens Cruelty, the Pillorie, the Whip­ping posts, the Galleys, the Rods, the Axes, and the Rhinolabides; nay what is a more desperate Penance than all this, I have stipulated to write a Panegyrick in praise of the Good Nature of the Pres­byterians, and the Sincerity of the Inde­pendants, and I think it would puzzle the Wit of Mankind to invent a severer Penalty, unless it were to write another in Commendation of your Wit and Learn­ing. But whilst you continue this out­cry [Page 160] against me only in general Terms without being able to produce particular Articles to vouch and justifie it, you prove nothing but your want of breeding and better Arguments, and the Calumny when you cannot drive it home, recoils upon your own Heads. He that charges another of an uncivil Crime, when he cannot make it good, indites himself. And yet perhaps in spite of my Integrity I may have been too zealous for my King and Countrey, Plain-dealing is too rough a Vertue for this false and self-designing Age. But be that as it will, and as for the decency of the manner of my treating you, when I have said all I can (and I have said too much already) I must leave it to the Judgment of the World. I am now only concern'd to vindicate the matter of my discourses against you, and here I have laid open your jugling so plainly that 'tis a Reproach to Mankind that you should still persevere so immo­destly in the same Impostures. This is no bragging, no man that had any consi­sistency in his Skull could have perform'd less in so plain and palpable a Case. For what can be more notorious than that

1. When you exempt your Consci­ences from the jurisdiction of your Prince [Page 161] you exempt your selves, both in that a man and his Conscience are one and the same thing, and in that he is not capable of any obligation of Laws, but purely by vertue of his Conscience.

2. When you exempt matters of Re­ligion from the same Power, you in ef­fect exempt all things, there being no­thing of any considerable weight or con­cernment in humane affairs, that is not matter of Religion, and much more so than those things that you contend about; and this dashes in pieces all your general pleas. But then

3. As for your particular pleas of Scan­dal, and an unsatisfied Conscience, and unscriptural Ceremonies, &c. what can be more evident than

1. That they are precarious and de­pend purely upon your own humours?

2. That they are unavoidable in all Churches and all Constitutions in the world?

3. That they are so unreasonable as that they may be adapted or applyed to subvert all Government in the Church as well as ours, even your own? And if after all this you will not learn to be quiet and peaceable, you will first or last thank your selves for something that must [Page 162] follow; and then your being big with conscience will not serve to reprieve you: You are ferreted out of all your subter­fuges, and they are laid open to the view and scorn of all men. And you have now nothing left to shelter your selves, but only by slandering your Adversaries, and perswading the people (for you presume strangely upon their ignorance and stu­pidity) that whilst we assert His Majesties Ecclesiastical Supremacy, we invest him with an unhoopable Jurisdiction; which being so bold and rank a forgery it is to all intelligent men, (i. e. all such as can either read or understand) an ample de­monstration of a desperate and baffled Cause. But by the way, how is this con­sistent with what you as often suggest, that my design was to write against the Power of the King, and to animate the People against the exercise of his Ecclesi­astical Pag. 278. Supremacy? Are you not suffici­ently furnished with informations against any man, that can in the same indictment charge him for plotting and attempting at the same time to assert the unlimited Power of Kings, and yet to allow them none at all; certainly between two such wide extremes a man can never want for materials to make out an impeachment. [Page 163] But how have I animated the People a­gainst the exercise of His Majesties Su­premacy? How! have I not written ex­presly against his Indulgence to tender Consciences? Not one syllable; you know well enough, I have only beat down and witnessed against your de­mands of Indulgence, when you chal­lenge it from the King by vertue of your Natural and Religious Rights, and charge him as a Tyrant towards his Sub­jects, and a Rebel against God, if he pre­sume to claim or pretend to any Jurisdi­ction over your Consciences or Religi­ous Pretences; the insolence of this kind of talk was not to be endured, and there­fore it was that I set my self to clear and defend His Majesties Supremacy against such plain, and yet (to the Rout) plausi­ble Principles of Anarchy and Confusi­on. But I was no where so presumptu­ous as to censure or condemn the mea­sures Pag. 264. he has taken of his Government; par­don me Sir for that, we of the Bran of the Church of England have modesty enough to submit to the wisdome of our Superiours, when ever they are pleased to declare their will and pleasure. And whatever may be my own private Opi­nion, neither I (nor any other good Sub­ject) [Page 164] shall ever go about to confront it to the publique Declarations of the State; so that as long as the Government shall think good to grant you Indulgence, assure your self (whatever you simply surmise) I shall never trouble them with Pag. 144. Remonstrances. They understand the turns and junctures of their own affairs, and are the most competent Judges what methods are fittest to procure both their own and our quiet. And though they should at any time mistake, yet if there were no other tye of duty, it is more eli­gible they should be complyed with, than that their Government should be affront­ed, and the Common-wealth disturbed by every man that thinks himself wiser than his Governours. But Sir, though we are so dutiful to His Majesty as to submit to his granting Indulgence, if he apprehends it seasonable for his present Affairs; and as for his power of dispen­sing with Laws, by vertue of his Prero­gative, we have nothing to do with it by vertue of our Office, it is a matter for­reign to our Judicature; and therefore it is not only manners but duty in us to leave it to our Governours to adjust such disputes among themselves. But yet though we are so entirely submissive to [Page 165] our Prince, yet assure your selves we shall never be so civil to you, as to suffer you to challenge a right to it in spite of his Power, and to extort it from him as he would not stand charged before God of Tyranny and Usurpation. You see now the vast difference between opposing the Kings Power to give Indulgence, and yours to demand it; and whether he give it, or give it not, as he sees it most convenient for the ends of Government, concerns neither Me nor my Writings, seeing in both he exercises that Ecclesi­astical Jurisdiction, that I have asserted to be inherent in the Supreme Power. At least you see what reason I had to dis­course of the Kings Power, rather than the Churches, because that was the only Principle you endeavour'd to batter down, and if once you could but tye up the Secular Arm, you valued not the strokes of the Spiritual Rod; so that had I opposed the Power of the Church to your attempts of Anarchy, it had been as wisely design'd as to send forth a party of Church-men to encounter a Brigade of Horse with their Spiritual Weapons. But because I see you are resolved not to spare for laying on load enough, and have the confidence to impeach or suspect a [Page 166] man of any thing that is odious, if he do not expresly protest against it, and be­cause some other men that I have more reason to satisfie than your self, have fallen into the same suspicion of Erastia­nism, take this short and plain account of the whole business, for the prevention of future mistakes. Religion then has a two­fold End, either as it relates to the af­fairs of this present life, or of that which is to come, and so is enforced with a two­fold Jurisdiction or Power of Coaction suitable to its respective ends. Now its design in reference to this present world is the peace of Societies, and the security of Government, and therefore it must be enforced by such sanctions as are proper to the attainment of that end, and those are secular rewards and punishments; so that this being the Office of the Civil Ma­gistrate, or (as you word it according to that deep respect you profess to Princes) the trade of Kings, to provide for the safety or welfare of the Common-wealth, all his Jurisdiction must be temporal, and backt only by external inflictions, as suited only to the ends of his Authority. His Power then over Religion is of a Po­litical Nature, and is intended to the same purpose as his Power over all other [Page 167] affairs of State, i. e. the publique peace and prosperity, and therefore need only be exercised in the same way of Jurisdi­ction, and this is that Authority that I have all along asserted to be the natural and unalienable Right of all Sovereign Princes. But then secondly, its design in reference to the world to come is purely spiritual, and relates only to the welfare of the Souls of men hereafter, and there­fore is to be prosecuted by such enforce­ments as are apt to govern Souls without laying restraints upon their bodies. Now the only sanctions proper in this case are the rewards and punishments of another life, and this is the power of the Eccle­siastick State Authoritatively to declare the Laws of God to the People, and to enforce their obedience to them from the threatnings and promises of the Go­spel. And to this purpose did our blessed Saviour depute the Apostolical order or succession of Apostles to superintend the Affairs of his Holy Catholique Church; it is the right of their Office and Com­mission, to consult, advise, and determine in all disputes that concern the Govern­ment, and the welfare of all Christian Assemblies; and their Decrees are obli­gatory upon the Consciences of men, by [Page 168] vertue of their own proper Authority, and under their own proper penalties. For as all their Power is meerly spiritual, so are all the Sanctions of their Laws, and therefore though they cannot by vertue of their own inherent Jurisdiction punish the disobedient with Civil and Secular inflictions, yet may they require and demand obedience to their consti­tutions under pain of the Divine dis­pleasure, and the lash of the Apostolical Rod; and their sentence when regular­ly passed upon refractory offenders is va­lid and terrible as a decree of heaven; and if there be any truth or sense in our Saviours words to the Colledge of Apo­stles, that whatsoever they shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; their Censures shall be approved and ratified by the judgement of the Almighty. And that man deserves the wrath of God that is want only rebellious and incorrigible to the soft and gentle discipline of his Church, this is such a desperate and ma­licious peevishness, that it does of it self consign a man up to final contumacy and utter impenitence. He is too stubborn, and too impudent to be reclaim'd that dares rashly bid defiance to the wisdom and authority of his ghostly guides and [Page 169] governours; but when the extermina­ting sentence is passed upon the Offen­der, it smites like the sword of an Angel, it throws him out of the Church, and the ordinary capacities of Mercy, and deli­vers him up to the wrath and judgment of God. And this is no more than what is necessary to the very Being and Preser­vation of all Society; in that Society can­not subsist without Order, nor Order without Authority, nor Authority with­out a Power of requiring and enforcing Obedience; and therefore if our Savi­our have founded a Church in the world, and does design its continuance to the end of it, it is necessary he should pro­vide for its Preservation by delegating some peculiar persons to govern and guide the Society by Laws and Penalties, otherwise his Church were no better than a wild and ungovernable Rabble, that only meet together by chance or by humour, and are under no enforcements of orderly and peaceable behaviour. And this would be a worthy representation of the Church of Christ, that it is only a Rout of rude People without Law or Government. But as it is necessary that Ecclesiastical Affairs should be govern'd, so is it that this should be done by Eccle­siastical [Page 170] persons, whose profession, and peculiar employment it is to study and understand those matters; and 'tis but reasonable to relye upon their judge­ment, who ought to be presumed best skill'd in the nature of the thing, it is no more than what common prudence di­rects to in all other affairs of life to con­sult and trust every man in his own pro­fession; we do not apply our selves to Physicians for the settlement of our Estates, nor to Lawyers for the preserva­tion and recovery of our healths. But men are to be entrusted and employed with regard to their own proper skill and office, and therefore though we should set aside the express Authority of our Saviours commission to the Apostles and their Successours for the perpetual Government of his Church, the very rules of common prudence will cast the management of Ecclesiastical matters up­on Ecclesiastical persons; and this is so avowed a principle among mankind, that the Jurisdiction proper to the Church was never yet invaded by any Laicks, till t'other day the Tradesmen and Bur­gers of the Corporation of Geneva ba­nish'd Vid. vit. Joan. Cal­vini. their Prince and Bishop, and then took the Government both of Church [Page 171] and State into their own hands; and seat­ed the Power of the Keys in Mr. Mayor and the Town-Clerk, and issued out Ex­communications under the Town Seal, and every Fisherman upon the Lake Le­mane, if he were a Livery man of the Ci­ty, immediately became an Apostle, and the Spirit of Infallibility forsook the whole Order of Church-men, and set­led upon every illiterate Mechanick that had a bold Face and a loose Tongue. And with what Apostolical Wisdome and Gravity they made Religion it self ridi­culous, Mr. Calvin himself has inform'd us particularly in the cases of Bertileir Vid. Epist. Calv. and Perin, who were absolved from the Sentence of Excommunication by the Pag. 122. Common-Council and under the Town-Seal. And 'tis observable that those States that have made bold to despise or disre­gard the Power of the Clergy, have al­ways first prostituted the Revenues of the Church to the worst of men, and in a lit­tle time the Government of it to the Scorn and Contempt of the Common Rabble. And therefore all wise and pious Princes have ever chosen to govern Religion by the Counsel and Assistance of their Cler­gy, and to be determined in Enquiries of Faith by their Decrees and Declara­tions, [Page 172] for though all Power of External Coercion be vested in the Civil Magi­strate, yet that of teaching and decla­ring the Law of God is the Right and Of­fice of Ecclesiasticks; so that though they cannot force Princes to confirm and ra­tifie their Decrees, yet may Princes be obliged by Vertue of an Higher Autho­rity, by regard to Piety and Religion, by the Order and Decency of things, to have reference to their Judgments; though if they will not, it is not in the Power of the Church to call them to an account for their Proceedings (as the men of Rome and Geneva talk) That shall be demanded at an higher Judica­ture; they can only declare and dis­charge their Duty, and leave the pur­suance of their Cause to the Judgment of God. For in all Affairs whatsoever ca­pable of External Cognizance the Su­preme Civil Power must and will over-rule; this is absolutely necessary to the Order and Preservation of Government, and the World must be govern'd as they will, or not be govern'd at all. And thus have I briefly proved that the Cler­gy must be vested with some Power pe­culiar to themselves both from the Insti­tution of Christ and the nature of Socie­ty, [Page 173] for as much as the Constitution of the Church as such is distinct from that of the Civil State, so that all Christians are obliged to the Visible Profession of the Name of Christ, not only without the leave, but against the Edicts of the Supreme Authority of Kingdomes and Common-wealths. The next thing to be consider'd against Erastus is that their Office is not merely declarative or mini­sterial, but carries proper jurisdiction in all the Acts and Exercises of its Power, and enforces all its Decrees by Penalties and Inflictions; and wherever we find Coercion, there is all that can be required to the Nature and Exercise of Jurisdicti­on, that is nothing else but a Power of Imposing Laws and Inflicting Punish­ments, and whoever has a Right to both these Acts of Government, has all that Authority that is proper to Empire and Dominion; and whatsoever Privileges and Prerogatives of absolute Sovereign­ty we can imagine, they are all reducible to one of these swo Heads either a Power of requiring Obedience to its Commands or of punishing Disobedience by its Pe­nalties, and both these are apparently in­cluded in the Priestly Office, that con­sists of two parts, first the Authoritative [Page 174] Power of Preaching, whereby they are enabled to declare Divine Laws under Penalty of the Divine Displeasure, and this is proper Legislation, and is declared to be so in his Original Commission granted by our Saviour to his Apostles and their Successours to the End of the World, in that he sent them as his Fa­ther sent him, to teach or disciple all Nations, whereby he derived upon them the same Power that himself was furnisht with from above to pursue the same ends, so that if he himself were entrusted with any proper Jurisdiction, he has convey­ed and imparted the same to the Apo­stolical Office and Order, and that he was so is an unquestionable and granted Case on all sides, and therefore he him­self founds the Validity of their Commis­sion upon the Right of his Power. All Power in Heaven and Earth (says he) is given me of my Father, therefore go, &c. I am now enthroned Sovereign Lord of the whole Creation, and the Exercise of all my Fathers Power is entrusted to my Management, and therefore in the first place I appoint and Authorize you and your Successors in my Name and by Ver­tue of my Supremacy to take care of the Guidance and Instruction of my Church, [Page 175] this is the Office and Power to which you are deputed next and immediately under my self, in the Discharge and Exe­cution whereof I engage all my Power to be immediately assistant to you to the end of the World. So that it is plain that their Power of Preaching and De­claring the Laws of the Gospel is proper­ly Authoritative and of the same Nature though of a Subordinate force with our Saviours own Dominion over Mankind, and all Men by Vertue of his Command and his Commission are bound to give Obedience to their Doctrines, in the right and Faithful Discharge of their Trusts, as to the Authorized Stewards of his Mysteries. And then as for the other part of the Power of the Keys or Church Censures, it is as full of Jurisdiction as a­ny Secular Power whatsoever; it judges, gives Sentence, and inflicts Punishment in Criminal Causes, and though they do not execute their own Judgment but leave it to the Divine Justice, yet where God has promised to abett their Censures by his immediate Power, 'tis the same thing as to all the purposes of Govern­ment, as if it were done by the stroke of their own Arm, and though they did but only minister to the Divine Judge­ment, [Page 176] as to these immediate Inflictions of Heaven, yet the sentence it self is a se­vere instance and exercise of Coercive Jurisdiction; it cuts a man off from all the Advantages of the Communion of Saints, and of our Saviours Incarnation, and that is a Capital Execution, and more affrightful to any man that makes Profession of the Christian Faith than all the Rods and Axes and Pillories and Whipping-posts of the Secular Power.

And as their Authority carries in it true and proper Jurisdiction, so is it in its Kind, Supreme, Universal and Uncon­troulable; and extends to all Nations; Ages and Conditions. Kings and Prin­ces are subject to the Spiritual Authority of their Doctrines, they have Souls to be conducted to Heaven as well as their Subjects, and therefore stand as much in need of Spiritual Guides and Instructors; for if Christ have intrusted the Spiritual Government of his Church in the hands of his Apostles and their Successors, then all its Members of what Rank and Quali­ty soever are regularly to make enqui­ries, and receive determinations of Con­science from their Mouths; and when the Bishop reproves his Prince of any enormous Vice, if he refuse to hear him, [Page 177] he sins against the Command of God, who has given him Authority in his name to declare and to bind every mans Duty upon his Conscience under pain of the Divine Displeasure, and it is an equal Aggravation of Guilt in all men before God to break his Commands against the Sentence and Declaration of his Officers. This is so clear and obvious a Truth, that if there be any Divine Institution or per­petual Necessity of a Priestly Office in the Church, the greatest must be equal­ly bound with the least to Obedience, not by the Coercion of Secular Penalties, but by the Tyes of Religion and the Judgments of God. I mean not hereby to excuse the boldness and insolence of those men that take upon them to up­braid and expose their Prince with pub­lick and Pulpit Reproofs. This is to a­buse the Dignity of their Office into the Ill-manners and Sedition of the Kirk, that insulted in nothing more than putting af­fronts upon Kings, and exposing them and their Authority to the contempt of the Rabble. No, but all Addresses to Superiours must be private, and prudent, and modest, and though Kings may and ought to be inform'd of their duty as well as Subjects, yet it must be done [Page 178] with all the Arts of Gentleness and Hu­mility; and if any man shall abuse his Sacerdotal Freedome to vent unhandsom and disgraceful Reflections upon his Su­periours, he deserves (as much as you do) the Scorn of a Buffoon and the Cor­rection of the Stocks.

And now from these Premises it is ve­ry easie to determine the bounds of the Imperial and the Priestly Power, not­withstanding that both are and must be acknowledged Supreme in their several Kinds. The Prince is Supreme and Ab­solute over all things and persons within his own Dominions, as far as they con­cern the Affairs of this present Life, but yet when they are consider'd purely as relating to the Life to come, the Priest is Superiour; and therefore in all cases of Competition (whenever they happen) he can only refer the Justification of him­self and his Cause to the future Judge­ment of God, but at present he must be content either to obey the Commands, or (if in Cases of manifest Obedience to God he cannot) to submit to the Autho­rity of his present Superiours; and if it be his Fortune to oppose the Judgment of his Prince, there is no remedy but he must suffer his Lot, and rather choose to [Page 179] be endamaged in his own private affairs than that Government should be disturb­ed or defeated for his sake. Here then is no interfering of the two Jurisdictions, the exercise of the one is Spiritual, and of the other Secular; and so being of different natures, and to different ends, they may both without any material in­convenience be supreme in their different kinds, and if the Ecclesiastical State shall at any time think it self obliged to con­trowl the civil power, it is only of a spi­ritual efficacy, and brings no direct dis­advantage to the supreme Authority, be­cause it has ordinarily no visible force but in the World to come, and that makes no alteration in the present state of things. So that the exercise of the supreme civil Power is as uncontroulable as if it were absolute and not limited by the spiritual, because at present it must prevail as to the Government of the World, and the effectual execution of its Decrees. And thus have I (to avoid dull or wilful mistakes) as briefly as the nature of the Subject would permit, proved the necessity of a spiritual Authority in the Church as a distinct society by it self, and in order to its peace here and the salvati­on of its members hereafter. And then [Page 180] that it is not a meerly ministerial Office, but is Authoritative to all the intents and purposes of Jurisdiction, and in the next place that it is supreme and uncontroula­ble in its own kind by any other Power whatsoever, and lastly that its spiritual Supremacie is no infringement to the ci­vil Rights of Sovereign Princes, in that their Power must notwithstanding all Countermands whatsoever over-rule in the present Government of the World. And now I hope you see how plainly the spiritual Power of the Church is recon­cileable with the Ecclesiastical Suprema­cy of Kings, and that there is no necessity (as you dream) that whoever asserts one must unavoidably casheir the other. And upon review of the whole [...]ate of the controversie, 'tis some comfort and satis­faction to me, that as I have not vested the civil Magistrate with any other Pow­er than what is and ever has been chal­lenged by all Common-wealths in the World, so I never could meet with any thing objected against it, but what pro­ceeded purely from malice or inadver­tency. And that is all the trouble I have been put to both by you and J. O. to vin­dicate easie and honest assertions from wilful or sleepy Mistakes.

[Page 181] But the great Misprison of all, and that approaches nearest to Treason a­gainst modern Orthodoxy is my presu­ming to trample upon your great secret of symbolical Ceremonies, which hard word is now become the only remaining Palladium of your Cause, and Idol of your Conventicles, for in our dayes it is not with you as it was from the Reign of good Queen Elizabeth quite down to that of the Good Long Parliament. The Good Gentlemen of those times had the Holy Discipline, and the Scepter of the Lord Christ to rattle in the Peoples and the Princes ears; but those good dayes are gone, and the Kirk-discipline when it came to be put in practice, though it were an Iron rod upon the backs of Kings, yet it proved such a wooden Sce­pter among the Common People, that it quickly wore it self into sport and con­tempt, and all the little Folk that waged War with so much zeal and fury against Prelacy and Antichrist, only aim'd their stroaks at random, and rail'd and raged at they knew not what, till at last they became ashamed at the littleness of their own Pretences, and how little all of them were able to perforn in behalf of the Di­vine Right of Presbytery sufficiently ap­pears [Page 182] to the world by the great Sme­ctymnuan labours. Nothing but a com­plicated dulness could ever have brought forth such a phlegmatick and insipid Pamphlet, and no man has now so little wit, or so much confidence as to own, much less to appear in defence of such a contemptible and baffled Cause, or if there should remain a Scot or an High-Lander so unalterably peevish, he lyes below both our scorn and our confuta­tion. But though their Principles have forsaken them, yet they (so invincible is their constancy) will never forsake their Principles, but having once been drawn into a Revolt from the Church by a ma­nifest Imposture, they have too much sto­mach to confess their fault so far as only to return back to her Communion; and therefore Covenant one and all to stand firm to their party, and justifie them­selves as they can. And then the result of all their Messages, Remonstrances and Declarations is the illegal and arbitrary imposition of unscriptual Ceremonies, by which (when we come to treat more closely) they mean nothing else but only those three establish'd in the Church of England, for they themselves never stick to allow or practise any others, so these [Page 183] be excepted. And had you wit and learning enough to judge of Non-sense, you would even cross your self (were it not a Popish Symbol) to observe what a deal of Metaphysicks J. O. has lavish'd away upon this Argument. But alas, you shew so little judgment, as to slide over his great depths of subtilty, and fix up­on speculations so wretchedly shallow, that every man has wit enough to fathom their folly. Thus I verily believed I had in my first Book acquitted my self man­fully enough towards battering down this Theological Scar-crow, that you have set up in the high places of Armageddon to fray away the People, or rather Boys and Girls from the Communion of the Church; by shewing that it is so far from being a crime in any Ceremonies to be significant and symbolical, that it is their only nature and office so to be; that the signification of all Ceremonies is equally arbitrary; that it is of the very same kind, and to the very same purpose with that of words; and therefore that all tender Consciences have the same reason to be offended at the one as the other. These I thought in the simplicity of my heart solid and satisfactory notions, and counted upon it that we should never [Page 184] more be annoyed with such a thin and empty bubble. But behold out stalks the great Leviathan J. O. and pours upon me such a volley of Distinctions, as would have stunded a whole Regiment of stouter and more experienced School-men than my self. In the first place he distinguishes (very subtilely!) between the Appointment and the Institution of Pag 277, 8, 9, 10. Ceremonies, the first he allows of, but the last is or may be blasphemy. From hence he advances to distinguish between natural and customary signs, and then of customary signs, between Catholique and Topical, and these all pass muster. But as for all such wicked signs as signifie nei­ther by Nature nor by Custom, but only by vertue of their Institution, they are full of such rank and desperate Idolatry, that the people of God ought rather than suffer themselves to be defiled with them, to tear the Church into Schisms, and the State into Wars, to murther and banish Kings, to subvert the Government and destroy Religion. At their own pe­ril therefore be it (as he threatens them) if Magistrates will be venturing at such a dangerous extravagance of power, be­cause

1. They have not any absolute Au­thority [Page 185] over the sign and thing signified.

2. They cannot change their Natures, nor create a new relation between them.

3. They cannot give a mystical and spiritual efficacy to them. And then last­ly, as for the signification of words that I have parallel'd with that of Symbols, the Schoolmen have demonstrated it, that when they are signs of sacred things, they are signs of them, only as things, but not as sacred. Here are dragons and deeps; it were worth a mans while to work in the Mines of Metaphysicks for such Jew­els as these; this is gibberish strong e­nough to make a Rosi-crucian mad, and were J. O. in good earnest, I should (not­withstanding all Quarrels) be so much his friend as to provide him a dark lodg­ing and clean straw. But what wretch­ed fooling this is, any man that has a mind to the sport, may see in my Reply to him where I gave my self the diver­tisement of ferreting him from distinction to distinction, i. e. from non-sense to non-sense. And methinks it is no unpleasant sight to see a poor Rat thus to work and traverse it about, to find some little hole wherein he may hide his baffled head, & when he can hope for no other shelter then to stand still and wink hard. But as [Page 186] for your part though you are in the very same straits, yet you have the confi­dence to think your self close, with your eyes open, and all the world staring at you. Thus whereas your most astonish­ing objection from Cartwright down­wards (for just where he begun you have all left off, and stand like the statue of Erasmus in the posture of turning over a leaf, but without ever turning it over will stand in the same posture to the day of judgement) against the Institution of Symbolical Rights, is, that it is no less an attempt than to entrench upon the Di­vine Prerogative by offering to institute new Sacraments, J. O. in particular ex­presses his sense of it thus, that to say that the Magistrate has power to institute visi­ble signs of Honour to be observed in the Pag. 277. outward worship of God, is upon the mat­ter to say, that he has power to institute new Sacraments; for so such things would be. For this I took him up somewhat roundly as he deserved, I upbraided him with the precariousness of the Cavil; I challenged him with that plain answer that he could not but know had alwayes been returned to it, viz. that Divine In­stitution is the only thing necessary to the nature and the office of a Divine Sa­crament, [Page 187] and so at last I dared him to re­nounce his Argument if he would not take notice of his answer. And I could do no less, when they have for above one hundred and fifty years together vext and haunted us with such a new-fangled nothing. To all this what do you re­ply? why, after a tedious deal of forced mirth and grinning you gravely inform us that the Non-conformists were never Pag. 218. so silly as to attempt to prove that these Sym­bolical Ceremonies are indeed Sacraments. Nothing less, 'tis that which they most la­bour against. And now is it not time for me to cry Victory and Triumph, when I have put an end to so long and bloody a War, when I have gain'd all that we have fought for ever since Cartwrights Rebellion, when you your self have re­sign'd up the Controversie, and tyed all their Champions and their Chiefteins to my Chariot wheels? Are you not a trusty Patron of the dear Brethren and their dear Cause to give them all up thus broadly for a generation of egregious and incorrigible block-heads, should they ever be so weak as to go about to prove that these Symbolical Ceremonies are in­deed Sacraments? When it is the very Curtana of the Cause, when it is the only [Page 188] weapon wherewith Cartwright gored the Bowels of the Church, and that has been transmitted successively to all their Champions down to J. O. and the Cob­ler of Gloster; when it is so undeniably upon record in all their writings; when it is the subject of so many whole Books; and when it is still the last word of all their brawls and contentions. So that you say well, It is time indeed for the Pag. 218. Non-conformists to desire a truce to bury their dead, nay, there are none left alive to desire it, but they are slain every mothers son of them. But it is you that are Sir Solomon or the dead-doing Scanderbag, that have laid them all a gasping, and not left such a Creature as a Non-con­formist in Nature. Was ever Cause thus defended, or men thus abused, to be marked out for a succession of incurable dunces for spending so much zeal and logique in so absurd a Cause. But poor J. O. what an unfortunate wretch art thou, that thou art an old Cob-nut in Controversie, conquerour of Scores up­on scores, in comparison of whose Eri­stical prowess both Sir Solomon and his Sword were but wooden tools; that when thou wert so unfortunately and so unexpectedly dasht to pieces, that then [Page 189] thou shouldst be so strangely unhappy or unadvised, as to hire such an empty and unkernel'd shell as this to avenge thy ruine, a thing so soft and harmless that a pellet of dow or soft clay would have done as much execution, and yet so silly and ignorant too that he knows not on which side to play his stroaks, and as la­mentably bruised as thou art, has dis­charged all his little strength upon thine own head. He has drol'd upon you (as far as his wit would give him leave) in as many capacities as you have past through Providential Revolutions; he sometimes abuses you, as tall J the Con­sonant, and sometimes as little I the Vowel; sometimes he makes sport with you, as in Conjunction with O, some­times as at opposite points; sometimes you are a Talisman i. e. (as much as you detest it) an Idolatrous Image, and some­times an He-cow, i. e. either a Bull or an Oxe, and at last a very man with an hot head, a wide mouth, a rude tongue, rot­ten teeth, and long nails, with abundance more of such small tap-lash and blew-John that he has wantonly squirted upon your venerable and immortal Name. And then after all this has recorded you for a dull and senseless tool upon suppo­sition [Page 190] that you could be so simple and weak-headed as to assert, what he could not but know you have given under your own hand in legible black and white. And now have you not all rea­son to joyn throats to rail down that vil­lainous Engine the Press, and the drunken Dutchman that would not be content with the Wine-Press; not for contriving (as you accuse him) those in­numerable Syntagms of Alphabets that have ever since pester'd the world; for there is not one Alphabet now extant, that was not reduced into the Syntagm of a Cris-cross row some ages before the Dutch-man was born, except only the Universal Character, and that was in­vented some Ages since. I had almost forgot J. O's Primer, that would never suffer the Letters to be ranged under the Conduct of a Cris-cross: For having of his own head disbanded the Lords Prayer, he was Commission'd by Authority of Parliament to casheir or at least new mo­del the Cris-cross-row; and what refor­mation he wrought in the several squa­drons of vowels, mutes, semivowels, &c. I shall not here relate; but as for the poor Cross, that was without any mercy turn'd out of all service, not because it kept al­wayes [Page 191] so close to the Loyal or malignant party, but because it was a mere symbo­lical Ceremony set there on purpose to transform a plain english Alphabet into a Popish Cris-cros-row. A great and pi­ous work! worthy the pains of so great a Divine, and the Wisdome of so long a Parliament.

But to return; has not your beloved Press after all your fondness sold you a sweet bargain, and more than turn'd her tayl upon you? With what zeal and courage have you asserted its Liberty from the bondage of Imprimaturs and the Inquisition of Prelates? What stiff and stubborn Homilies have you made to make it good that the suppression of a good Libel is no less than Martyrdom, and Areo pag Pag. 4. if it extend to the whole Impression a kind of Massacre, whereof the Execution ends not in the slaying of an Elemental Life, but strikes at that ethereal and fifth essence, the breath of Reason it self, slays an Immorta­lity rather than a Life? Such fustian bum­bast as this past for stately wit and sence in that Age of politeness and reformati­on. Have you suffer'd Banishment and Persecution together; has the Engine been content to wander with so mean a fellow as Newman the Cobler through al­most [Page 192] all Counties of the Kingdome for the sake of publishing seditious and abu­sive Pamphlets; has it drawn your selves and your un-cris-cross'd Letters into sedi­tious words and meetings? and then (vilain as it is▪) does it turn informer? and when you had thought you had con­fidence enough to outbrazen all accusati­ons by word of mouth, & to forswear your own most avowed Principles and most notorious practices, what a surprising tre­pan is this, that this perfidious and apo­state Engine should betray all, and pro­duce your own Writings and Records a­gainst your selves? What think you now of a publick Tooth-drawer to wrench out its old ugly rotten teeth? there is no outfacing this printed black and white, and nothing could be more rashly and indiscreetly done than for you to at­tempt it. You had been a prudent man indeed, had you applyed your self to J. O. and the rest of your good masters that set you on work, and pay'd you your wages, and told them plainly, Gentle­men you engage at such mighty disad­vantage on that side of the question that you have hitherto undertaken, that it is not possible for humane confidence to de­fend your cause. Burn therefore all your [Page 193] old Puritan books, wheel about to the opinion of the Church of England, and force them to wheel about to yours, and then if you your selves will but stand stoutly to it for face and conscience let Crop alone. But now when you have done this of your own head, and with­out any of their Commission; you have as it falls out, only betrayed their cause and your own ignorance, to cross thus awkerdly with their great and master-principle. And this, as it happens, proves at last the most pleasant scene of all your folly (though you have blun­der'd so shamefully in every thing you have offer'd at) for as if you had long owed your self a shame and were now re­solved to pay off all Arrears with Interest, in the very same unhappy Paragraph where you deny it with so much resent­ment and indignation in the name of all the Nonconformists in the known and habitable parts of the Earth, that to in­stitute new signs in the worship of God is to institute new Sacraments, you are (so unhappy are you) wonderfully enamou­red of that pertinent passage directly to the contrary cited out of St. Austins ten Volumes by J. O. Signa cum ad res di­vinas pertinent, sunt sacramenta, (so his [Page 194] M S. reads it, though in your own and all other printed Copies it is read Sacra­menta appellantur.) Now by this J. O. without doubt intended to prove (as he immediately subjoyns) that these things are real Sacraments or pretend to be so fully and effectually to all intents and purposes; could any man then that were not bewitch'd or bereft of his Under­standing, be so ravishingly taken with this little scrap as you are, if he were not seriously of J. O's mind, that our symbolical Ceremonies are Sacraments indeed? And yet this ignorance (as wretched as it is in it self) is sadly aggra­vated, if we consider from how small ad­vantage and to what little purpose you have raised all this noise and triumph. For J. O. having (as you confess) forgot to quote Book and Page, I thought my self under no indispensable engagement to examine its truth or regard its Autho­rity, and therefore vouchsafed it no o­ther answer than to tell him that it was neither civil nor ingenuous to trouble me or any man else with such objections as could not be answer'd without reading over eight or ten large Volumes in Folio. No man is bound by the Laws either of duel or disputation (as you know and no [Page 195] man better) to supply his enemies defects, so that if J. O. forgot book and page, all the World will throw all the blame upon him alone; and yet here (after the man­ner of your modesty) you crow and in­sult over me as a timorous and cowardly Craven, that was glad of any excuse to shift or escape the challenge, though I am confident no wight living could have had the confidence to do it beside your self; for say what you will, it is too un­reasonable to expect that I should search ten Voluminous Tomes for one line, on­ly because J. O. either did not or could not quote Book and Page. Yes, but I could not possibly miss so remarkable a passage, when it was so dirtied with the Non-conformists Thumbs. But that is more Pag. 212▪ than I knew or could be obliged to know before; and this is the first time that e­ver I heard of such familiar acquaintance between the Fathers and the Non con­formists, however I read them not either with their Glosses or their Spectacles, at least I find none of their dirty Thumb nails in my Patron's Library. Who but such a Wit as you could put himself into so good humour with so small taplash as this? But yet if I will promise not to laugh Ibid. at you, you will tell me in the simplicity of [Page 196] your heart, where even you your own self have met with it, viz. Ep. quintâ ad Marcellinum. And because you profess to do it in the simplicity of your heart, for once, if I can refrain at so unhappy a blunder, I will not laugh, no, you ra­ther deserve to be scourged for so gross and impudent a falshood; for it is unde­niably plain from your own Quotation, that you never read it in St. Austin himself, but either J. O. or some other secret friend transcribed it to vour hands, and so have unwarily imposed upon your ignorance a fifth Epistle to Marcellinus, whereas (as Fortune would have it) the fourth is the last that ever he writ to him, and that which you quote for the fifth is the first. But had they been as careful to prevent your mistake as they ought to have been either for your or their own credit, they ought to have set it down thus, Ad Mar­cellinum: and then have added Epistola Quinta, i. e. the fifth Epistle in order as they are placed in Erasmus's Edition; but when you quote Epistola Quinta ad Mar­cellinum, you need not have inform'd us that you did it in the simplicity of your heart; tho' when you add that you have done this out of your own reading, you betray something else beside your simpli­city. [Page 197] And whereas you profess that you have taken all this pains to save me a la­bour, I do not see but you have left me as much to seek as J. O. did, unless you had set down not only Book and Page but Tome and Edition; for otherwise after all the directions you have given me, and your Author gave you, there is no remedy but I must be forc'd to turn over all St. Austins Works, to find out his Epistle to Marcellinus, and that had been a pretty task of it self, but if I had searched after the fifth Epistle to Mar­cellinus I might have pored till the day of Judgment: so that it was great Fortune that I at first light upon the Edition of Erasmus, where the first Epistle to Mar­cellinus happens to be the fifth of that Tome. But now after all to requite your kindness (I mean your good will) I care not though I confess to you in private; that I was not ignorant of the passage it self, not that I have ever read it in St. Austin, or observed it dirtied with the Thumbs of the Non-conformists, but I remembred that it was much teased and bandied up and down by the School-men in their taplash disputes upon Sacraments and Sacramentals, yet I shifted it off up­on himself to find out his own Quotati­on, [Page 198] because I knew either that he had pick'd it up at all adventure, or if he had not, then (which is somewhat worse) that himself knew it to be both false and impertinent. And I did not think it worth while (as I then declared) to trou­ble the World with too industrious a gleaning of all his impertinencies after so plentiful an harvest, but now those little Misadventures that I then refused to pro­secute for their triflingness, I am forced to expose only to stifle your more daring and unlearned Clamours. In short then J. O. had made very bold with his Text, as he always does for his own conveni­ence, and confidently read sunt Sacra­menta instead of appellantur Sacramenta; a good reasonable emprovement of the Fathers words, and becoming the mode­sty of the man. And now have you not raised this great noise upon this little Quotation to very wise purpose, when all you gain by it is only to discover that your friend has grosly prevaricated? This might have been your answer had the Quotation served at all for your purpose, as it does not; for St. Austin speaks not there of the Institution of signs in gene­ral, but only of such as are establish'd by Divine Authority, and 'tis these and [Page 199] none but these that he sayes become Sa­craments of Religion by vertue of their institution. For the plain design and oc­casion of his discourse was this: Marcel­nus had been disputing with some body in defence of the Christian Faith (as there are in all Ages a sort of little con­ceited Folk, that have no other way to pass themselves for wits than by picking up Quarrels against Religion.) His Ad­versary objects to him, that if the Jewish Sacrifices were at first well and wisely instituted, they ought never to have been abolisht; if they were not, that then it is certain they were never in­stituted by Divine Authority. For a satisfactory Answer to this difficul­ty he writes to St. Austin, who flatly denies the consequence, because all sa­crifices are of the nature of Sacraments; and all Sacraments are positive and arbi­trary pledges of some entercourse be­tween God and his Creatures, and so are in their own nature capable of change and variety, because their goodness and usefulness is not intrinsick, but depends purely upon their institution. So plainly does the good Father make Divine Insti­tution, and nothing but that necessary to erect the office, and confer the dignity [Page 200] of a Sacrament. Who then beside J. O. could have been so unhappy as to press this passage to vouch that all signs what­soever any way appointed and used in Divine Worship without Divine Institu­tion are and must be Sacraments? I know no man more unfortunate in every thing he meddles with unless your self, for though you flatly deny (what he posi­tively affirms) that the Symbols of our Church are really of a Sacramental Na­ture, yet are you fond of this Quotation that can prove nothing else but that they must be so. But (proceed you) not con­tent to affront the Holy Fathers, I defie the learned School-men too, and that notwithstanding I had before owned them Pag. 2 [...]3. fer the Authours of the Church of Englands Divinity. Bravely sworn Crop! after this rate such pleasant company as you can never want for proofs; and though this is no flower of the Sun, yet I am sure it is something that justly deserves to be call'd a Rapper. I make these budge­fellows the Patrons of our Church! no, I ever thought them (since I understood them) the greatest enemies of Christen­dom next to the Great Turk of Genevah. It is these that are your implacable Di­vines, your Jewish Zealots, your Guelphs [Page 201] and Gibellines, that are alwayes stabbing one another with their Obs and Sols, and though I do not remember that they were wont very much to frequent Ga­ming Ordinaries, yet were they the greatest players of their age at push-pin and picquet, though they were not so venturous as alwayes to stake pieces, that is for Dignitaries and Jack-Gentlemen; but they were true Gamesters that loved play for play sake, and the delight they took in wrangling, and to that purpose ranged themselves into several Factions, only to exercise their wit in dispute and contradiction. So that the School-men in general, that were so divided in all points among themselves, could not be the Authours of the Church of Englands Divinity; and therefore if it descended from these Doctors of the Game, it must have been from some particular Cast or Family, as of the Thomists or Scotists, the Nominals or Reals, &c. for they are branch'd into as many divisions and sub­divisions as a Jewish Genealogy, or the Millecantons of Fanatiques. Now I doubt it will be found upon enquiry, that the design of the Church of England in her Reformation was to casheir all these Scholastick Innovations, and to retrieve [Page 202] the Old and Apostolical Christianity; and that the plat-form she propounded for her direction were not the decisions of the Schools, but the Holy Scriptures, and the four first general Councils. And therefore (as confident as you would seem to be in so course an untruth) I shall never be perswaded that I could ever be so far overseen as to make these brawl­ing and contentious People the found­ers of the Doctrines and Articles of our Church. Who is able to deal with a man that is able to invent at so brave a rate? But farther yet, I did not put any direct slight upon the Authority of the School-men, I only rejected J. O.'s quotation out of them for the same reason that I did that out of St. Austin, in that he was so far from vouchsafing a particular refe­rence to Book, Chapter and Page, that he did not so much as deign to name any particular Author, no not so much as a particular Sect. Now I do verily believe there are very nigh a thousand great Books of Scholastick Divinity in the world, and then no man, I trow, could think it reasonable that I should sift so many heaps of rubbish only to examine J. O's integrity in a matter of such trivial concernment; especially when I was so [Page 203] fully satisfied of it at much smaller pains. And though it is a long time since I con­versed with the School-men, yet for all that I dare lay your own odds (it is the best argument in impudent cases) that there is no such idle subtilty in all their writings as this that J. O. has cast upon them, viz. where words are signs of sacred things, they are signs of them as things but not as sacred; for though I have no great opinion of their wisdom, yet I cannot believe them so palpably foolish. Though if any of them were so, I have already sent them their Answer by J. O. But here methinks you your self after you have forsaken your Friends, and renounced their Cause, grow more nice and abstra­ctive than these great Doctors of subtilty themselves, whilst you tell us, that though these Ceremonies are no Sacra­ments, yet are they so applyed as if they were of a Sacramental Nature and Institu­tion, Pag. 210. and that therefore they are unlawful. If you mean that they are so applyed by the Church of England as if they were of Divine Institution, you mean impudent­ly; if you mean any thing else, you mean nothing. Yes, but they are imposed with Pag. 218. so high a penalty, as that they want nothing of a Sacramental Nature but Divine Insti­tution. [Page 204] That is to say, 1. That they want nothing of a Sacramental Nature, but a Sacramental Nature. 2. This is no more than what may be objected a­gainst all Laws and provisions of decency whatsoever, that have and must have a penalty annexed to them to enforce their Obligation. 3. This starts new Con­troversies, that were never so much as thought upon by the School-men them­selves, viz. 1. Whether to impose any thing that is in it self no Sacrament under an high penalty be to make it an as it were a Sacrament; and then 2. Whe­ther it be unlawful for any Humane Au­thority to institute as it were Sacraments. These are weighty Controversies, and will no doubt at the day of judgement bear out all the enormities of Schism and Rebellion. And now if any man can play the fool at smaller Game than you have done, push-pin is too high for him, he is fit for no other employment than to catch shadows and Jackalents, for though they are meer nothings, yet to Children they appear as it were something.

But the great thunderclap is still be­hind, for whereas I concluded that the Magistrates Power of instituting signifi­cant Ceremonies could be no more usur­pation [Page 205] upon the consciences of men, than if the Sovereign Authority should take upon it self to define the signification of words, little suspecting any dangerous Plot against the State could have lurkt it self under such a well-meant and (as I thought in the simplicity of my heart) such an harmless supposition as this, that a Sovereign Prince might, if he pleased, refine and alter the language of his Sub­jects without offering any violence to their Consciences. But upon this your blood rises, and your zeal kindles, and you thunder and lighten as if I had sha­ken the pillars of the Earth, and of the Government, and blown up the funda­mental Liberties and Priviledges of the Subject. Princes have Power over the signification of words! Heavens forbid! Such a penetration or transubstantiation of Pag. 231. language would throw all into Rebellion and Anarchy, would shake the Crowns of all Princes, and reduce the world into a second Babel. This would destroy all the Records in the Tower, and Magna Charta, and the Act of Oblivion and In­dempnity, and divide the whole King­dom into Guelphs and Gibellines. Sure, the young man is seised with a fit of Ly­canthropy, and will certainly run a Muck [Page 206] before next Full Moon; this is a madder attempt than that of digging through the separating Istmos of Peloponesus, or ma­king a Communication between the Red-Sea and the Mediterranean; verily it is like continuing a streight line till it be­comes a circle. So ignorant are these implacable Divines of the true Idea of Wisdom and State Policy. And if there be any Council more precipitate, more vio­lent, Pag. 301. more rigorous, more extreme than o­ther, that is theirs. They never consider to what woful straits the great Sancho reduced his Government by usurping to himself the Empire of Proverbs and Apo­thegms. Nor how even Augustus Caesar, though he was so great an Emperour and so Pag. 230. valiant a man in his own Person was used to fly from a new word, though it were sin­gle, as studiously as a Mariner would avoid a Rock for fear of splitting. Is not this one of Bayes's simile's, that was made be­fore you had thought how to apply it? The Emperour avoid a new word as a Mariner does a Rock for fear of splitting! If it had been an hard word, it might have born a quibble, but sure that a new word should be able to split so great an Emperour, is very strange, unless it were very ridiculous; and any thing would [Page 207] have served the turn as well as the Ma­riner. As a Coward shifts a challenge for fear of being beaten, as a Child a­voids a Wasps nest for fear of being stung, as a Mouse does a Cat, or a Thief does the Gallows, or as any thing does any thing, for there is nothing but is afraid of something. Ay, but young man this is too serious a thing to be jested with, what! must you be flouting at the Emperour Au­gustus as well as Dooms-day and Queen Elizabeth? When you name Augustus, let me tell you, as I have elsewhere upon the bare mention of Sardanapalus, that though I would not willingly be such a fool, Pag. 148. as to make a dangerous similitude that has no foundation, yet it is manifest that some body else is intended, for he was a Prince, and his Father was murder'd too; and every similitude must have though not all yet some likeness; So that whenever Ibid. you speak any ill thing of Augustus, or Julian, or Sardanapalus, or any other of your uncontroulable Creatures, we know your meaning, and who it is you aim at. And thus by this ridiculous way of for­cing a mystical sense out of my words do you take leave to dart such impudent and ignominious reflections upon your Supe­riours, as are not to be expiated by whip­ping [Page 208] posts and Pillories. But now it is no wonder to see you every where as angry at Roman Empire as at Ecclesiastical Po­licy; for that too is perpetually sel­ling you bargains. Would you but tell me in the simplicity of your heart where you your own self read this story of Augustus; I am confident it was either in the second Decad of. T. Livius or the fifth Epistle to Marcellinus. For Sir, who­ever imposed here too upon your igno­rance, assure your self there is no such saying of Augustus upon record in Ro­man story. But to deal plainly with you and undeceive you, this passage is fa­ther'd upon one Julius Caesar, That was a lover of elegancy of stile, and could endure no mans Tautologies but his own. And yet nothing could distast him more than an affected and phantastick word, he would have turn'd a man out of his Secretaries Office for such language as this, Lycan­thropy, Trincling, Disvalising, Pick-thank­ness, ornaments of Deformity, unhoopable Jurisdiction, &c. and would sooner have split than have been so pedantick him­self. The passage I speak of is a certain fragment of a lost Book that he writ de Analogiâ, cited by Agellius l. 1. c. 10. and Macrob. l. 1. Saturn. c. 5. Habe semper in [Page 209] memoriâ atque in pectore, ut tanquam sco­pulum sic fugias inauditum atque insolens verbum. A round and well couch'd pe­riod as it is here expressed, though as you have translated it, nothing can be more flat and insipid, fugias tanquam scopulum, i. e. fly from it as studiously as a Mariner would avoid a Rock for fear of splitting. Your way of translating is not like fat Sir John Falstaffs singular dexterity in sinking. Even thus Personam induere sig­nifies to put on the person of, and to put on the person of signifies to act a part in a Play; so that if our Saviour did Perso­nam induere, or put on the person of a Jew­ish Zealot, it follows, that he was a Player as well as a Cut-throat. You have tru­anted so long about Charing-Cross and Lincolns-inn-fields, that you have forgot all your Latin. Go you old dunce to your Phrase Book, and there learn the signifi­cation of Personam induere. But what if J. Caesar avoided the affectation of a new word as he would a splitting rock, it was not out of any reason of State, or for fear of raising Tumults and Rebellions, but purely out of that aversation that so great a Wit as he could not but have to pedan­try; so that this story is calculated for the use of School-masters, and not of [Page 210] Kings, and by consequence might have been spared here. But you proceed, Come, come young man forbear your mirth and mockery, assure your self this Dominion of words is a dangerous thing. How many millions of men did it cost your Roman Empire to attain it, did you never read the sad stories how many childless Mothers were made at Langue­doc Pag. 230. by the difference between Faves and Haves at one time, and at another be­tween Crabe and Crabre, with many other bloody tales that might be enlarged up­on, if one would be learnedly imperti­nent? And do you think you have not Ibid. all this while been unlearnedly so, to hunt up all these impertinent stories to no imaginable purpose, unless it be to warn Kings not to provoke their good Subjects to Rebellion for every trifle, but to condescend to them for peace-sake, Pag. 243. and the quiet of mankind? For you are admirably skill'd, no man better, in the History of Revolts and Seditions, and Princes are obliged to con you thanks for the pains you have taken to mind them of all the slight causes and pretences that have been seised on by wanton and stomachful Rebels, that they may be­ware of the like provocations, lest they [Page 211] meet with the like events. And these idle stories you are continually preach­ing in the ears of Princes, but not a syl­lable of advice or exhortation to Sub­jects to perswade them to a modest and peaceable behaviour towards their Supe­riours. No, though Kings, and men of Courtly breeding and great Quality have or ought to have so much manners and civility, as to condescend to their Inferi­ours, Pag. 248. and if one have got a cold to force them to be cover'd, or if a man have an antipathy against any thing, to be so civil as to refrain the use of it, however not to press it upon the Person, with many more pretty resemblances, though (as you in­form us) there is no end of similitudes, and as you employ them no use neither. But alas! such mannerliness as this is not to be expected from men of private condi­tion and breeding, and if His Majesty be pleased to stand cap in hand to a high­shoon Clown, though he have a cold, who can blame the Boor if he have not so much Courtship and Ceremony, as graci­ously to desire his worship to put on? The Common People are to be pardoned their rudeness for their want of educa­tion: and if at any time they behave themselves stubbornly and sawcily to [Page 212] their Superiours, they will out of discre­tion connive at their infirmities, and out of common humanity yield to their fol­lies. But no wise Prince will ever by unnecessary impositions disoblige his good Subjects, and force them to rebel­lious practices for a trifle or an uncivil word. And what a lump of History have you here presented to Kings to terrifie them from making too bold, and being too sawcy with their people, Pag. 244, 5, 6? And if we take away some simper­ing phrases, and timorous introductions, your Collection will afford as good Pre­cedents for Rebellion and King-killing, as any we meet with in the writings of J. M. in defence of the Rebellion and the Murther of the King. But that which most of all betrayes the wretchedness of your design, is, that you throughout ei­ther misreport or equivocate so elabo­rately, that you cannot but be fully con­vinced within your self that you have forged Relations to no other purpose than to represent the weakness of Go­vernment, and the feasibleness of Rebel­lion as we shall have occasion to examine hereafter; in the mean while be your idle stories never so false, they are much more impertinent. For, what if wise [Page 213] Kings be taught by these examples to condescend to their Inferiours, and to connive at the infirmities (i. e. seditious spirits) of their people for fear of dag­gers and revolts? What if it be as dan­gerous for a Prince to take a man by the tongue, as a Bear by the tooth? What if bloody wars have been occasion'd by the difference of an accent or a syllable? And a letter in the name of Beans and Goats have set a whole Province together by the ears? And what if Empires have been shipwrackt upon a new word as Mariners split upon a rock? This only proves that it is an unwise and impolitick attempt to hazard a Crown out of fondness to an affected word. And though it may be an usurpation upon the Peoples Liber­ties, yet certainly it is none upon their Consciences, if the Sovereign Authority will take upon it self to define the signi­fication of an uncertain and ambiguous phrase. And that is the parallel of our Case, viz. That whereas these men have from time to time and at all times raised such prodigious yells and clamours of Conscience against the determination of significant Ceremonies, 'tis enough to shew that their signification is of the very same use and nature with that of words; [Page 214] so that people have no more ground of offence upon the score of Conscience a­gainst that than this. And yet no mans Conscience howsoever tender or peevish can ever pretend to be aggrieved with defining the signification of a doubtful word; and if it cannot, then has he as little ground upon that pretence to com­plain of the determination of any signi­ficant Ceremony. Though if the change of words may be of dangerous conse­quence to the Government of the State, that is a consideration of another nature, and that concerns not my Analogy be­tween words and symbols, that are in this debate to be consider'd only as mat­ters of Conscience and not of Policy. So that if a new and unpresidented word do not endanger the shipwracking of a mans Conscience, that is enough to evince that neither is a new Ceremony a more splitting rock than a new word; and is this may prove mischievous upon other scores, viz. that it would render all Laws uncertain, that it would defeat the Act of Oblivion, that it would spoil the De­claration of Indulgence to tender Con­sciences, and throw all back again into Anarchy and Rebellion: Yet what is all this to the signification of Ceremonies, [Page 215] that may be alter'd ten thousand diffe­rent ways without making any alterati­on of the Laws? So that howsoever im­practicable and of whatsoever ill conse­quence the imposition of words may some­times prove, there is not the least shadow of ground from thence to conclude (as you do) that of Ceremonies to be no less pernicious. And this I hope is enough to prove that you have been sufficiently impertinent, though how learnedly you have been solsuppose needs no proof. And yet after all this astonishment (if it were to any purpose) this very power of de­fining and circumscribing the significati­on of words, that you fancy so splitting a rock, has ever been used and chalen­ged by all Law-givers as an essential in­gredient of the Soveraign Power, in that without it, it is very difficult if not alto­gether impossible to avoid ambiguity of Laws. A man of your humour that had a mind to be learnedly impertinent might heap up innumerable instances to this purpose. But if you have either will or leasure to consult the Civil Law, Lib. 50, Digest. Tit. 16. de verborum significatio­ne, you will there meet with three or four hundred particular examples. I shall only trouble you that are or may be an [Page 216] English Senator with two or three out of our own Laws. The first occurrs in an Act of Parliament Primo Eliz. for the Uni­formity of Common-Prayer and Service in the Church, and administration of Sa­craments, where it being enacted that the Book of Common-Prayer and no o­ther form shall be used at all open Prayer, the Act it self fixes and defines the mean­ing of open Prayer, viz. that by it is meant that Prayer, which is for others to come un­to or hear, either in common Churches or private Chappels or Oratories, commonly call'd the service of the Church. And in another Act (as I take it) of the same year it is positively defined that no mat­ter or cause shall from that time forward be adjudged Heresie, but only such as heretofore have been adjudged to be Heresie by the Authority of the Canonical Scrip­tures or by the first four general Councils, or by any other general Council, where the same has been declared Heresie by the express and plain words of the said Canonical scri­ptures, or such as hereafter shall be adjudg­ed Heresie by the high Court of Parliament of this Realm, with the assent of Clergy in their Convocation. And within our own memory there have happened Cases in which the Parliament have ventured to [Page 217] define not only the signification of words but the nature of things, as you know they determin'd not long since without advising with the Royal Society that Brandee belongs properly and formally to the specifick Essence of Spirits. So that it seems this Power has sometimes been reduced to practice without throw­ing all into Rebellion and Anarchy, and shaking the Crowns of Princes, and re­ducing the World into a second Babel. Though such an exorbitant and arbitrary exercise of it, as was chalenged by your Presbyterian Long Parliament, was e­nough to dissolve all Governments and break up all societies in the World. For they had the impudence to impose such bold meanings upon words as flatly con­tradicted their common and customary signification. Thus could they make such sentences to be just and legal as were not fit to pass into Precedent in the like cases, that is to say such as themselves confess'd by their own provision to be unjust and illegal; in that there can be no hurt or danger in lawful Prescriptions. Thus could they make a new and un­heard-of sort of Treason call'd cumula­tive Treason, that is a great many no Treasons to make up a Treason. Thus a [Page 218] Delinquent signified any man that they had a mind to cut off for his Loyalty; and thus to make open preparations for Rebellion was to put the Kingdom into a posture of defence against all the Kings enemies whether foreign or domestick, i. e. against the King himself and all his friends and Allies. But the dismal Ca­lamities and Earthquakes that followed thereupon were the Consequences of the abuse of this Power, not of the Power it self, and so all Power of what kind soe­ver if stretch'd to the same degrees of Tyranny, is as naturally productive of the same effects of Confusion.

And now after all these nice and stub­born speculations about the abstracted and metaphysical Idea of symbolicalness, and after the Champions of your cause have for so long a time kept up this Ball or rather Bubble of Contention, even from Cartwright down successively to the present Age, you would like a cun­ning Rook turn the Tables upon us, and charge us as the Aggressours in this ridi­culous dispute, i. e. after you have played the Children so long with this hard word that signifies nothing, and now too late perceive your folly in raising such an in­veterate and implacable War upon such a [Page 219] slender pretence, you would (just as you dealt with his late Majesty, when you re­bell'd against him) lay the War at our doors, and upbraid us as if we had made all this stir about this wretched trifle, as if it were our Sir Solomons sword, our dead-doing Tool wherewith we flatter our selves to have done so much executi­on upon the Puritan Cause, and as if I my self had set up this hard word on purpose to be my Opponent. And thus would you Pag. 214. cunningly slide your own wooden Dag­ger into our hands, when it is manifest that we are altogether on the defensive part, and are so far from using any wea­pons of offence, that we never so much as employed a Shield to ward off your Thrusts, but have always put them by with neglect or a mere denial, and have scorn'd and pityed your simplicity in lay­ing at us so fiercely with such a wooden tool. The Church of England was never so idlely employed as to concern it self to determine the nature of Symbolical Ceremonies, whether it be Sacramental or not. It has indeed defined the num­ber of such Sacraments as are necessary to Salvation, that is to say such as are insti­tuted by Divine Authority as the perpe­tual Pledges and Symbols of the Christi­an [Page 220] Faith. And if men have a mind to a­ny more Sacraments, they may for her have as many as they please, provided they pretend not to Divine Institution. And whereas you often insult upon some great Prelate that (you say) wrote a book of seven Sacraments, (though there was never any such book written,) he might if he had nothing else to do have written one of seven hundred, for there is no­thing in nature that may not in the Puri­tan notion be applied to a Sacramental use, i. e. be appointed as a pledge and signification of something or other. Keep then your impertinencies to your selves, you shall not pin them upon our sleeves, and when you have worn this fools Coat so long till you have worn it threadbare, think not that we will then suffer you to put it upon our backs. Neither tell me of setting up an hard word for my Oppo­nent, when it is your own scarcrow; and withall such a despicable and woful pre­tence, that at last I scorn'd to dispute a­gainst it, I only despised its intolerable silliness, and exposed it to the contempt of your own Herd; It is below the seri­ousness of an argument. And if it be an hard word that signifies nothing, blame not me for mumbling and mousling it till [Page 221] I have made it contemptible, for it is your own, and you know I was so little fond of it, that I offer'd to exchange it for Syncategorematical, because it is more frightful by three or four syllables, and rattles through the throat with a bigger and more terrible accent, and any other hard word that sounds bravely, and sig­nifies nothing and that no body under­stands, would serve the turn as well, and I am content (if you are) hereafter to call them by common consent either fly­ing Dragons or Usinulca's. Keep your Goblin-nonsense to your selves, we have nothing to do with it but to despise your folly. And if it be Taplash (as you call it) it is of your own brewing, and is both the first and the last running of your brains, but hereafter let us hear no more of it for shame, such thin and spiritless stuff as this, as it is not worth keeping, so it can never hold tilting.

And now upon review of this whole matter it is well worth our observation how the state of the question is changed with the state of affairs; The controversie is not now (as it has been heretofore) between the holy Discipline and the establisht Government of the Church of England, that contest has put an end to [Page 222] it self; but whether men of rebellious spirits, and Democratical Principles shall under counterfeit shews of tenderness of Conscience be suffer'd to work the Com­mon People into a disaffection to the Go­vernment. For it is notorious that the most zealous Agents and Patrons of the Cause are so far from being seriously sca­red with their own pretended scruples, that they have given the world too many undeniable proofs of their being above the most avowed Principles of Justice and common honesty; and withall that they have been and still are (for any evi­dence they have given to the contrary) the most vehement and implacable ene­mies to the present Government; and therefore being storm'd and beaten out of all their old pleas of a Divine Right, are forced to abuse the people (that may be abused with any thing or nothing) with such grounds of sedition as are not to be removed by all the Wisdome and Power in the world. It were to some purpose if to all their noise about Con­science in general, they could assign any principle to justifie their clamour beside printing it emphatically and in great let­ters; but when every man th [...]t under­stands common sense or an hard word sees [Page 223] through the vanity and idleness of all their Cavils, what greater assurance can they give us that there is some other de­sign lies lurking at the bottom, that they dare not own, till some seasonable and propitious juncture of affairs shall invite it forth into open action? In short, their whole Controversie with the Church of England lies in so narrow a compass, and the exceptions wherewith they assault our present settlement are so shamefully frivolous, that to me it is one of the greatest riddles in the world, where they should find confidence enough to bear up thus long in such a desperate Cause. For as to their general pretence against the power of Princes in matters of Religion, as if they thereby invaded Gods own Prerogative, they in many cases forgo it themselves, and acknowledge it some­times necessary to the publique peace to restrain by force of Law some Sects and pretences of Religion; and though they grant it but in one case, as in the Laws against Popery, or in provisions against the attempts of Prince Vennor and his forty men, that overthrows the whole force of this Argument, in that it allows the exercise of this Power without en­trenching upon Gods peculiar Royalty. [Page 224] And then have they nothing to plead but the peril of our establish'd Ceremo­nies, and here the whole debate is plain­ly reduced to these two questions, whe­ther they except against any but what are symbolical? And whether they can assign any that are not so? And if they cannot (as it is plain they cannot) what follows every body sees as well as I. So that when they pitch upon such grounds of discontent, as they themselves know no Government can avoid, it is manifest that all this pretended niceness is only made use of to disguise something worse. And if they would clear their integrity to the State, or at least hide their hypo­crisie under more passable and likely vi­zards, they would do well to invent some more material scruples, for which they crave their Gracious Indulgence; but till then, whilst they keep up such clamorous and importunate demands of Toleration, though no body knows for what, they only give their Governours fair warning to beware of the malignity of their intentions. This I hope they will consider of themselves, or if they will not, that some body else will do it for them.

And now methinks (Sir) after all your [Page 225] fury you are as reasonable an Adversary (would you were as modest and civil too) as a man could lightly expect to encounter; so meek and gentle as to turn both cheeks to correction, and to accept of being boxt on both sides, for now I hope you your self see there is not one Paragraph in all your Libell, that pretends to be serious and argumenta­tive, that is not notoriously both false and impertinent. And that is too much advantage in such a trifling engagement, for it is scarce worth any mans while to spend so many words as are necessary to discover both, when it is to no other pur­pose than to correct one mans pert and conceited ignorance. But from the Pre­mises 'tis manifest that the Body of your whole Book consists of these three sorts of Materials, 1. Your impudent repeti­tion of the same enormous pervertings and falsifications; for which I thought I had sufficiently convicted J. O. of bold­ness and disingenuity. And this takes in the Grand Thesis, the six Playes, and the Hoops and Hola's. 2. Your stubborn adhe­rence to the same dull and childish Ca­vils, which I refused to rebuke in him because of their manifest trifling and va­nity; as in the charge of Erastianism, per­verse [Page 226] translations of the Scriptures and false Quotations of Authours. 3. Your starting some new Absurdities of your own so wild and extravagant, that never any man before your self was frantick enough to believe or assert, as in all the shatter'd talk of Sacraments and Symbo­lical Ceremonies. By all which you see what brave things a wise man may per­form, and how dully a witty man may come to play the fool by being learnedly impertinent. As for the remainder of your Book, it is all such course and un­serviceable rubbish, that it is not worth the sisting; it is such loose and empty talk, as is as applicable to confute any other Book in the world as mine, in so much that I might, if it would but have recompenced the pains, have turn'd three parts of your own Pamphlet upon it self. As all your profest fooling either by way of Similitude or Rithm or Story; your playing upon single words, your confu­ting introductions and transitions, your smutty imaginations, your general and insolent censures, with abundance more of such bold and immodest stuff, that though it signifies nothing by it self, yet is almost enough to beat any modest man out of countenance by pure force of brow [Page 227] and confidence. But in answer to your Ribaldry I can only blush and say no­thing; and as for your rude and uncivil language, I am willing to impute it to your first unhappy Education among Boat-Swains and Cabin-Boys, whose Phrases as you learn'd in your Child­hood, so it is not to be expected you should ever unlearn them by your Con­versation with the Bear-herds of Barn, the Canibals of Geneva, the Boys and Lackeys at Charing-Cross, and in Lincolns-Inn-fields. But as for your bold and ge­neral censures, that you may not pretend that I either baulk or slide by any thing of weight and moment, or frown it away with bigg and burly looks, as you have dealt with several modest propositions of mine, that when you have not been able to produce one Iota of proof against them, yet have rated them with such an haughty and magisterial assurance, as if you expected to make them sneak and slink away out of sight by meer sternness of look. That (I say) you may not com­plain that I pay you in your own brass coyn, I will present you a brief Cata­logue of your own Drama Common places of confidence and leasing, and then re­fer it to any Jury of your own empa­nelling [Page 228] whether such paltry trash can de­serve any other reply than neglect and scorn. ‘First of all (say you) I am of­fended Pag. 320. at the presumption and arro­gance of your stile; whereas there is nothing either of wit or eloquence in all your Books, worthy of a Readers, and more unfit for your own taking notice of. Then your infinite Tauto­logy is burdensom. And your profa­nation Pag. 321. of the Scripture intolerable, for though you alledge that it is only in order to shew how it was misapplyed by the Fanaticks (though I remember no such Allegation) you might have done that too, and yet preserved the dig­nity and reverence of those Sacred Writings, which you have not done; but on the contrary you have in what is properly your own, taken the most of all your Ornaments and Embellish­ments thence in a scurrilous and sacri­legious stile (admirable sense!) inso­much that were it honest, I will under­take out of you to make a better, that is a more ridiculous and prophaner Book, than all the Friendly Debates bound up together. I cannot but make use of this admirable way (like fat Sir Pag. 191. John Falstaffs singular dexterity in sink­ing) [Page 229] of answering whole Books or Dis­courses, how pithy and knotty soever, in a line or two, nay sometimes in a word. And as the Friendly Debate is ridiculous and prophane, so I observe Pag. 279. that all the Argument of your Books too is but very frivolous and trivial; you bring nothing sound or solid. For the excellency of your Logique, Phi­losophy, Pag. 263. and Christianity in all your Books, is either as in Conscience, to take away the subject of the Question; or as in the Magistrate, having gotten one Absurdity to raise a thousand more from it. In all your writings you do so confound terms, leap cross, have Pag. 158. more doubles (nay triples and quadru­ples) than any Hare, so that you think your self secure of the Hunters. You endeavour so to muddle your self in Pag. 159. Ink, that there shall be no catching nor finding you. You so confound the Question with differing terms and con­tradictory Pag. 103. expressions, that you may upon occasion affirm whatsoever you deny, or deny whatsoever you affirm. You have face enough to say or unsay any thing, and 'tis your priviledge, Pag. 139. what the School-Divines deny to be within the power of the Almighty, to [Page 230] make contradictions true. You neither Pag. 47. know or care how to behave your self to God or Man, and having never seen the receptacle of Grace or Conscience at an Anatomical dissection, you con­clude therefore that there is no such matter, or no such obligation among Christians; you persecute the Scripture it self unless it will conform to your in­terpretation; you strive to put the world into blood, and animate Princes to be the executioners of their own subjects for well-doing. I looked further into Pag. 156. what you say in defence of the Magi­strates assuming the Priesthood; what for your scheme of Moral Grace; what to palliate your irreverent expressions concerning our blessed Saviour, and the holy Spirit; what of all other mat­ters objected to you; and if you will believe me, but I had much rather the Reader would take the pains to exa­mine all himself, there is scarce any thing but slender trifling unworthy of a Logician, and beastly railing unbe­coming any man much more a Divine. You distribute all the territories of Conscience into the Princes Province, Pag. 66. (that is to divide a thing into one part) and make the Hierarchy to be but Bi­shops [Page 131] of the Air, and talk at such an extravagant rate in things of higher concernment (than either Conscience or Government of Church and State) that the Reader will avow, that in the whole discourse you had not one lucid Interval. Had you no friends to have given you good counsel, before your Pag. 61. understanding was quite unsetled? Real­ly I cannot but pity you, and look up­on Pag. 163. you as under some great distur­bance and despondency of mind; and in as ill a case as Tiberius was in his di­stracted Letter to the Senate. There wants nothing of it but the Dii Deaeque me perdant, wishing let the Gods and Goddesses confound him, worse than he finds himself to be every day con­founded. So all that rationally can be Pag. 70. gather'd from what you say, is that you are mad. You incite Princes to perse­cution Pag. 185. and tyranny, degrade Grace to Morality, debauch Conscience against its own Principles, distort and mis-in­terpret the Scripture, fill the world with Blood, Execution and Massacre. And as for Subjects, no Pimp did ever enter into seriouser disputation, to vi­tiate an innocent Virgin, than you do to debauch their Consciences. And to [Page 232] harden their unpracticed modesty, em­bolden them by your own example, shewing them the experiment upon Pag. 28. your own Conscience first. Nay, you threaten, you rail, you jear them, if it were possible out of all their Consci­ences and Honesty. Really I think you Pag. 215. have done the Atheists so much service in your Books, by your ill handling, and while you personate (i. e. Personam induere) one Party, making all Reli­gion ridiculous (I mean the serious part of it) that they will never be able to requite you but in the same manner. It is true, you sometimes for fashion­sake Pag. 143. speak of Religion and a Deity, but your Principles do necessarily, if not in terms, make the Princes power paramount to both these, and if he may by his uncontroulable and unlimited Universal. Authority introduce what Religion, he may of consequence what Deity also he pleases. This is a faith­full pag. 209. account of the summ and intention of all your undertaking, for which I confess you were as pickt a man as could have been employed or found out in a whole Kingdom. And I have herein endeavour'd the utmost inge­nuity Pag. 146. towards you, for you have laid [Page 233] your self open but to too many disad­vantages already, so that I need not, I would not press you beyond mea­sure, but to my best understanding, and if I fail I even ask your pardon, I do you right. And so you are a dan­gerous Fellow Bayes, you are an Hypo­crite Bayes, you are a mad Priest Bayes, you are a Buffoon Bayes, you are an Opprobrium Academiae Bayes, you are a Pestis Ecclesiae Bayes, Hola Bayes, whoop Bayes, whoop and hola Bayes; Bayes, Bayes, ay, and all that Bayes.’ Quod erat demonstrandum. You and I Sir have hitherto been good Friends, and if you had but told me all this in private, you had done a friendly office, and upon your advice and admonition I might have reformed all miscarriages; but whe­ther to blazon them abroad thus pub­liquely without proof or instance, and before you had made any tryal upon my ingenuity, whether (I say) it were either civilly or discreetly done, because you are a wise man, and I have a great opini­on of your Integrity, I shall refer it alto­gether to your own judgement. How­ever if you or any friend of yours can really think, that such Demonstration as this needs any other Answer beside being [Page 234] pitied and laughed at, do but signifie your minds to me by the next Post (provided you will superscribe Franck) and I will promise to do you reason and give you satisfaction. This is but a taste of what I might have transcribed, in that the greatest part of your Pamphlet is ma­nifestly rather Censure than Confutati­on.

But the main and most serviceable to­pick of impertinency is to picqueer at single words in Introductions and Tran­sitions, and animadvert upon them with the Similitude, the Aphorism, the Rithm, the Story, and the Parenthesis; your wit is strangely fluent upon such passages as are altogether collateral to the drift and substance of my discourses: Though when you come to any thing of Argu­ment, your mind runs upon nothing but the day of Judgement, and you grow re­served for fear of being call'd to an ac­count for every idle word, and from hence it comes to pass that you are for­ced to answer whole Books in a line or two, like fat Sir John Falstaffs singular dexteri­ty in sinking. What fearful work have you made with my Introduction to the Preface, you have mawl'd every word so unmercifully, as if you had undertaken [Page 235] to pound every Period into the twenty four Letters. And had you held on as you begun with the first forty lines, the Book of Martyrs had been but an Al­manack in comparison to the Rehear­sal.

First I am caught in my own Dilemma for writing at all, after I had declared that if I must answer every impertinent exception and Cavil, I would write no more; Now this expression (say you) lies open to my own Dilemma against the Non­conformists Pag. 1. confessing in their Prayers to God such heinous Enormities. This is the only passage that I find repeated but once more in all your book, I suppose because you thought it so shrewd and pressing, that it need not be inculcated so often as some other Remarques that were not so easie and obvious to common understan­dings. But (Sir) my promise was condi­tional, if I must endure the Penance of answering every peevish Caviller, and I had never broke it, had I not been abso­lutely overpowred both against my own Judgment and inclinations to write this Reply to your self. For which I heartily ask forgiveness, and will enter into bond, be the condition of the Obligation what you please, never to commit the same [Page 236] fault or need the same excuse a second time. But what if I had dispensed with a point of Civility to the publick to get an honest Book-seller (especially if he be importunate too) eight or ten pound in the long vacation? It was only to give some encouragement to Trade, however you would calumniate me as an utter enemy to it; and though it is possi­ble I may not have so great an opinion of the honesty of all of this sort of Trades­men, as it is possible I may of some o­thers, and if I fail herein, I ask their par­don, I do them right and recreate my self with believing that my simple judgment can­not beyond my intention, abate any thing of their just value. Yet however I am sure it is a much more honourable way of Livelyhood and more serviceable to the Common-wealth than Gaming or any o­ther lubberly way of subsistence. So that say what you will it was kindly done of me, and if I made bold with my Reader, I have made him an Apology submissive enough to excuse my own good nature and engage his. And what could he de­sire more? If he be candid and courteous this is enough of all Conscience to attone his displeasure, if he be not, he is not concern'd, for Prefaces are address'd to [Page 237] none but the courteous Readers. But after all this solemnity when all things are truly consider'd, this is no such serious matter as you would make shew of. For though Authors are wont partly because it is the fashion, and partly because it is an engagement of the Readers favour (for all people love to be courted) to make them humble addresses and Apolo­gies in their Prefaces, yet to speak plain­ly 'tis more than they owe them (for if they do not like, they may let it alone) and is at best no more than a formal com­plement. So that I do not see but a man may break his word with his Reader without being concluded indifferent as to Pag. 2. the business either of Truth or Eternity; as you have ridiculously aggravated my Crime, if I had been guilty; such swoln Hyperboles are the Cavils of such peo­ple as want wiser and more material Ob­jections. But now is it not shrewdly thought on to parallel such a trifle as this against the Non-conformists making such constant and familiar Confessions to the Divine Majesty of the most heinous and enormous Crimes, even of all that can be reckoned up, Disloyalty and Re­bellion only excepted, and that no doubt out of pure respect to his Majesties Act of [Page 238] Oblivion and Indemnity. Now if they stand really guilty of their own Charge, they may vye lewdness both with the Spanish, the French and the English Rogue, (with whose stories, so great an Historian and so accomplish'd a Statesman as you seem to be, cannot be unacquain­ted) and all their Debaucheries will appear but puny & School-boys villanies in comparison of their daily practice; if they are not, then this is plainly such a trifling piece of Courtship as is not to be endured in a matter so serious as is our Devotion to the Almighty. But I see they are incorrigible in their follies. And though they are convinced past all denial that their common confessions are plain­ly inconsistent with their most solemn Pretences; that the Scripture Language wherewith they usually indite them­selves expresses the lewdest and most de­sperate Impieties; that those expressions they borrow out of the Old Testament are descriptions of no worse people than only such, as had apostatized from the worship of the true God to Idolatry and all kinds of Moral Wickedness, and those out of the new are Characters not only of Hypocrites and wicked Christians, but even of such as had revolted from the [Page 239] Christian Faith into open Outrage and Blasphemy against it, with many other such horrid Crimes, that should their own Prayers be turn'd into Inditements, their Clerkship would stand them in lit­tle stead, and it would never be put into the power of the Ordinary (no, nor scarce of the Judge or Jury) to do them a cour­tesie. And yet notwithstanding all this they will continue still as lavish of their Tongues against themselves at Church, as they are against their Neighbours and especially their Governours at home. So that it is no small advantage to a Fana­tique Congregation, when their Holder­forth wants fancy and invention, in that they always come resolved (especially upon more solemn occasions) to load themselves and the Company with all the sad Texts and Burthens in the Bible; and the man that is more fluent and eloquent than his Brethren is but so much the bet­ter enabled to slander himself and all his Auditors: And to tell you plainly were I a brother, and should any man that pewed within my reach tell me before witness that I am guilty of but one half of the confession, wherewith the dullest and most costive of them all familiarly charges himself and all present, I would [Page 240] teach him better manners in Westminster-Hall. Every man has liberty to abuse himself as he pleases, but if he will make bold with my reputation, I must and am bound to right my self as I can.

But whether it were lawful for me to write at all, or not, is now too late to enquire; but having written so I began. Though I am none of the most zealous Pa­trons of the Press. How! (say you) the Press, it is a Villainous Engine. Why! What is the matter, did it ever cheat you at Picquet, that the very mention of it should put you into such a Fit of Lycan­thropy, and set you like the Island of Fay­ol on fire in threescore and ten places? But why Villainous Engine! fie, fie! does this Language become a Gentleman that has clear'd himself of Froth and Groans? You learn'd it at Charing-Cross or in Lincolns-Inn-fields. But however the Engine may have offended or disobliged you, it concerns not my grand Thesis, and as lit­tle my self, having profess'd to be none of its Patrons. And it is of Age and parts sufficient to manage its own quarrel (for it is as old as the Reformation, and yet still as talkative as ever) and therefore I shall not interest my self in the leaft in it, no more than if John a Nokes were railed at [Page 241] by John a Stiles. Otherwise I have al­ready inform'd you that you have more reason than you dreamt of to rail at its Villany: It has (Traytour as it is!) after all its pretended Zeal to the cause, be­trayed all your secrets, and produced your own hand-writings against your selves. There is scarce a crime to be na­med or thought of, for which it has not an information ready at any time to pre­fer against you, notwithstanding the Act of Oblivion and Indemnity. And there­fore I would wish the Non-conformists (as little as you think I love them) to be always upon their Guard, lest it first Trepan and then Peach and then hang them; I am sure it is much more likely and able to do it than my self. I cannot see how it can ever expiate all the mis­chief it has done your Cause already, un­less it would print the fifth Epistle to Mar­cellinus. But be it as perfidious as you please, it is not half so wicked as that vil­lanous Game of Picquet, that has done more harm to the Church of England than all the Brawny Printers and Schis­matical Preachers of Germany and Gene­va: Not excepting the Assigns of John Calvin and Theodore Beza that live in Chancery Lane on the South side of the [Page 242] Lake Lemane, as the matter is mended in the second Edition of your Geography. And thus having treated the Press with as much rudeness and malice as if you had taken it for a Clergyman; The next thing you chop upon is the matter of close and comfortable Importance. And here never did Countrey Whitefoot stiffen and leer more eagerly upon three legs at any thing in a tuft of Fern than you do at the meaning of these words. But the leering and the Ecstasie somewhat aba­ted, they must be reduced to one of these three, either Salvation or a Benefice or a Female, now for the Jests sake it must be neither of the former, and there­fore for the same jests sake it must of ne­cessity be the latter. But from hence men of observation will be forward to conclude that you move far above the troubles of this World as to Honour and Coin and Estate and all other trifles of humane Life, else you would have found something else to be important beside a Benefice or a Female, though it were but a Game at Picquet. You have (I thank you) bestowed upon me a Prebend, a Sine-cure and a Rectorship, now why might I not at the time of writing that Preface be busied in attending the Seals for my [Page 243] Sine-cure, and in taking order for the re­pairs of my Parsonage Barns, and in pro­viding Goods and Furniture for my Pre­bend-house. These I take to be close and comfortable things as well as a female Importance. And what if beside all this I had newly sold my little inheritance and engaged in a purchase elsewhere that lay better for my own convenience; and what if at that very nick of Affairs a stop were put to the payments of the Exchequer, and my Money in the Bankers hands, do you think it did not closely concern me to disengage it from their keeping, and whether it would not have been some comfort to have effected it. But it seems there is nothing so far from the thoughts of you Gamesters as purchasing of Lands. However you see how short your indu­ction is from taking in all particular mat­ters of close and comfortable Importance. Beside, either the meaning you have pitch'd upon was mine, or it was not; if it were, I would fain be satisfied where the wit of it lies, for you to understand the right meaning of my words; if it were not, I would then be satisfied where the wit of it lies for you to obtrude a wrong one upon them. But I know your advantage, though thus publickly to [Page 244] betray the mirth and freedome of private conversation, is but Clownishly done and like a Jack-Gentleman: you know the meaning of the story better than I do yours of Pork, and I hope all ingenuous men will take warning by my example to avoid your company for the time to come that can make such a rude and spiteful use of an innocent piece of mirth. And if the Remarque be of any value there is nothing of it beside the malice and inci­vility that is your own. But after all sup­pose for the Jest sake it be a Female, what have you made of it? You are such a stubble-Goose-wit that you are not able to raise your dull fancy by the advantage of another mans conceit. One would have expected some handsome mirth and raillery upon so pleasant a Theme, but you have emproved it so Clownishly and so phlegmatically, as shews you equally void of all capacity both of wit and man­ners. For who beside your self would up­on such an innocent occasion have vented the most spiteful and immodest reflections upon the whole order of the Clergy? It is the highest Pinacle of Ecclesiastical Feli­city to asswage their concupiscence and Pag. 11. wreck their malice. Though you were not restrain'd by any fear of the day of [Page 245] Judgement, you had reasons enough to have baulkt such impudence as this, that is so far from being a good jest, that it is a publique affront to good manners. And ill manners pass no where for wit but at Charing-Cross or in Lincolns-Inn-fields. Go your way for a smutty Lubber, that can make no other improvement of so fair an advantage, than to spit your ma­lice and ribaldry; these are the top of your wit, if they are not the pinacle of your felicity. Certainly had the jest been ten times more elevating than it is, any civil or witty man (especially one that has so many to spare) would have baulkt it for modesty, though not for Conscience or the day of Judgement. And so you may go and consider whether you had not on­ly leisure enough but cause too much to have cool'd your thoughts, and corrected your indecencies.

But turn over the leaf, and there you will find that giving the Reader an ac­count of the heads of the ensuing Dis­course, I tell him that I intend to bestow some Animadversions upon one J. O. But would I had told you of this fooling at first, for then I had saved you the labour of your first fourteen Pages. Now is it credible, nay is it not most preposterous [Page 246] to think that you should begin your Re­marques upon my Preface, before you had read (as you call it) so much as the Preamble? Or that you perused only three or four lines at a time, and so fell into your Animadversions in the same order that they are publish'd? No doubt you saw this fooling before you set pen to paper, but had no power to save the labour of all the former Pages. That had cut off the pleasant Animadversions upon the Dilemma, the Press and the Impor­tance. This wit is such a tempting and bewitching thing that a man has not power to forgo a good jest, unless it be now and then, i. e. very seldom, when he chances to think of the day of judge­ment. But though this fooling as if you had finisht your Animadversions upon the first Page before you had read the second be silly enough, yet it is not al­together so bad as confuting the first part of a sentence before you came to the full period. For thus, when I affirm, that as for the danger of the return of Popery into this Nation, I know none but the Non-conformists boisterous and unrea­sonable opposition to the Church of Eng­land. Here you stop in the middle of the sentence, and clap down a full point Pag. 267. [Page 247] after I know none. And then if there be none, the consequence is very easie, what a fool I am for my labour to print a Book upon such an impertinent Argument, and so away you run with a great deal of in­sulting and scorn, and never stop career till you come to p. 271. and there you crave mercy for taking me a little too short, and so add the latter part of the sentence, and then gravely confess that this indeed has some weight in it, for truly before you knew none too. And now though one would think no pre­tender to Controversial skill could ever match such trifling as this, yet I remem­ber J. O. served me just such another trick, that was full as foolish and some­what more knavish. Thus discoursing of Christian Liberty I had laid down this assertion. That mankind have a Liberty of Conscience over all their actions whether morally or strictly religious, as far as it concerns their Judgements, but not their Practices. He very honestly mangles this into two distinct propositions: The first, that Mankind has a Liberty of Conscience over all their actions, whether morally or strictly religious. And this he closes up with a full period, as if it were an entire Problem by it self, and then gravely in­sults, [Page 248] (as well he might) over so magni­ficent a Grant; and yet after all was not so ingenuous as you are, to cry me mer­cy, but suffers his unwary Reader to go away with an opinion of its being the Grand Thesis of that Chapter. These are Polemick Divines for the Pope and the Good Old Cause, that though they can say nothing for themselves are resolved never to hold their peace, and rather than give out will tire their Adversaries with such wretched and intolerable tri­fling as this. And that was the only in­tention of your Libell to divert people from attending to the serious Argument; but you shall not escape so, I will never leave my advantage to traverse your im­pertinencies, for I have you all at my mercy, and there I am resolved to keep you, and assure your selves you can ne­ver gain any thing by offering any re­sistance. Your Cause is so lamentably weak and defenceless that you can only betray it, and expose your selves by giv­ing an occasion to the Controversie.

And now after all this lost labour, that you are of opinion might much better have been spared, we are at length ar­rived upon the brink of the Preface: But here before you leap in, it will be con­venient [Page 249] to pitch upon some standing jest that may give rellish and picquancy to all the other insipid and phlegmatick parts of the discourse; and now because neither Authour nor Chaplain nor pink of Courtesie, nor Priest, nor Buffoon, nor Prince Volscius, nor Cicero are tuant e­nough, what think you if three or four times in every page I call my Adversary Mr. Bayes? Will it not be an admirable jest to repeat the word Bayes three or four hundred times for the pleasant con­ceit, and the pure elegance of avoiding Tautologies? Yes by all means, it is just as much wit as if the word had been in the language of Charing-Cross or Lin­colns-inn-fields plainly Bastard, or more politely Son of a Whore: Or, as if you had kept to the language of your own more serious Buffoonry, and the word had been Baals Priest, or a Locust of the bottomless Pit, or an Antichristian Beast. For though it might pass for a very trim fancy in Mr. Lacy to fasten this nick-name upon a vain and pedantick Poet, yet for you to borrow it without leave, and ap­ply it to a Person of a Sacred and Serious Profession without reason, is flat dulness and impudence. For who can imagine where the conceit of it should lye to re­peat [Page 250] a Word of another mans Invention three or four hundred times together, and that chiefly for this very reason, viz. to avoid repetitions. Next to the kil­ling jest of whoop and hola, I never met with any thing like it. You are such an­other man! But yet so transporting was the conceit among the Brother-hood (for they are most implacable wits) that at your first appearance, there was nothing to be found among them but Joy and Jubilee, the 15th of March was not a more jovial day, neither was there a greater destruction of Cheese-cakes in Islington at the opening of the New River. All preciseness was laid aside, not a gloo­my look nor an erected white to be seen, but they let down their eye-lids as their honest neighbours do upon better occa­sions their shop-windows. And all upon the suddain they are become the most jolly and most humorous companions of the Town: And the very mention of Bayes is such a splitting conceit! It even endangers both their spleens and their lungs, yes, and their Gloves too, they rub them so heartily. There is great hopes that it will alter their humours and mend their complexions, at least there is no doubt but it will prove hereafter an [Page 251] admirable specifick for Fanatique obstru­ctions. And for this you were imme­diately horst upon the shoulders of the people (where folly and ignorance al­wayes rides) and carried off with victo­rious noise and uproar, and shewn in tri­umph to your old Companions (that lit­tle suspected you would ever have come to this) in Lincolns-Inn-fields and at Cha­ring-Cross, and there leave you to be pre­ferred to the service of Punchanella, to prompt jests and repartees to his Pup­pets, you are just a fit Oracle for such an Audience. I might easily have requited this civility of yours with twenty more symbolizing nick-names, but that I both loath and scorn such a Porterly rudeness. For you that have observed the manage­ment of Arguments in the street, cannot but have taken notice that the Disputants never come to throwing of dirt, or cal­ling of names till they are basiled, and have nothing else to reply. And if you had told me all along that I disputed with a dirty Face, it had been full as Tuant. But if I would revenge my self it is not in my Power, for I cannot now stick upon you any name that is more ri­diculous than you have made your own; that is already among all ingenious per­sons [Page 252] become the proverbial term for a dull and clownish pretender to Wit.

And thus having been all this while hovering about the Brink, you at last venture to commit your self to the danger­ous depths of my Discourse. But after your diving come up only with a vinegar face and a dirty mouth, you look sowrly on Bishop Bramhal, and do by no means like his Character, because it is forsooth too much for one man, and envy will not down with it; and so to vindicate him from my Scurvy Commendation you have very piously composed 23 pages of studi­ous and elaborate periods to prove him no better than an undertaking & crack­brain'd Knave. This is the very syrrop of Additional Civility. Had the Bishop been the Dignitary of Lincoln you could not have treated him more Scurvily. But of your Piety to his Ashes we have had proof enough already, and so you pro­ceed to do the same office of kindness to Pag. 49. Mr. Calvins Memory, and by as scurvy a commendation vindicate him from my scurvy Reproaches; in that whatever I have said to his disparagement is incredi­ble for two Reasons: 1. Because I do not say true; and 2. Because I lye. For Mr. Calvin was an honest Divine, [Page 253] and spoke contemptuously of the Liturgy Pag. 59. of the Church of England; and those that will may charitably suppose he re­pented of it on his death-bed, though for your part you your self know nothing of it. To this you might have added, that he scorn'd to call any body old Elsi­beth so long after she was dead; no, though he too were an implacable Divine, yet he was more a Gentleman than so, and had the courage to call another Queen of England Proserpine in the time of her own Reign. But the greatest thing that can be said in Mr. Calvins praise, is, that he was the first founder of that Mo­dern Orthodox Doctrine. That it is the duty of Subjects to moderate the licen­tiousness of Kings, and to punish or de­pose them when they play the Tyrants, or wantonly insult on the Common Peo­ple. And now pray Sir tell me by the way what Bishops they are that you have the honour to be acquainted with, that dif­fer Pag. 71. in nothing from Calvin but in point of Episcopacy. But thus Calvin (in his Epi­stle to Cardinal Sadolet, as I remember) justifies the Mayor and Bailiffs of Geneva, that had wrested the Supreme Authority of the City out of their Bishops hands, and vested it in their Common Counsel, [Page 254] partly because he had abused his Power into Tyranny, and partly because he had no other Title but of ancient Usurpati­on; and though by vertue of that he had long claim'd both the Civil and Ec­clesiastical Jurisdiction, yet it was at first extorted from the Lawful Magistrate, i. e. the Syndicks, and therefore it could be no theft or felony in them to rob him of their own goods. A plea, if admitted of, that would as easily overthrow all the establisht Governments in the world as the Bishoprick of Geneva, seeing there is no Kingdom that cannot within the compass of some few Ages pretend de­frauded Titles against the present Prince as well as Geneva, and this pretence is so unavoidable, that it is not in the Power of any establisht Government to secure it self against it, and therefore it has al­wayes past for a Maxime in all Laws, that long possession or ancient prescription gives a sufficient Title of Right; and though possibly it is not in it self suffici­ent to vest a man in a true and real claim, yet it is enough that no man after so ma­ny years can set up any opposite Pre­tence without manifest violence and in­trusion: For supposing his Ancestours to have been once seated in the Throne, yet [Page 255] if they have been displaced whether just­ly or unjustly time out of mind, and al­most memory too, that wears out their Right; especially when it rarely if it ever happens, but that if Usurpation may be objected against the present Posses­sour, the same exception might as justly have been put in against the former Ti­tle, so that if Prescription be not suffici­ent to create a Right, yet it is at least a sufficient Barr against all Intrusion, other­wise there can never be any fence against this Principle of Rebellion. And this is enough to secure the peace of the world, and the settlement of all establish'd Go­vernments and Common-wealths. But however upon this Principle that is ready to serve alike in all Causes, he was no sooner establish'd in his Divinity Throne, but he tampers and prevails with the People to abjure all Allegiance to their Bishop for the time to come, and swear obedience and submission to his own Discipline.

But the Signiory of Geneva was too narrow a Diocess for his aspiring mind, and he had no sooner setled his own new model of Government, but he bestirs him­self to obtrude it upon all Churches of the Reformation, Hungary, Transylvania, [Page 256] Bohemia, Poland, Savoy, France, the Ne­therlands, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, and the Church of England. And though he at first lookt upon it as a project of his own devising, and acknowledged it had not any Authority from the pattern or prescript of the Primitive Church, and begg'd its settlement at Geneva, only as an expedient for the present exigence, till they might have leisure and oppor­tunity of agreeing upon some more Apo­stolical Plat-form, yet no sooner had he brought the Town and Territory of Ge­neva under his yoak, and establisht his Throne there by swearing all the Citi­zens to a submission to his Doctrine and Discipline; but he began to think, as all prosperous and ambitious Princes are wont to do, of enlargement of Empire, and labours might and main to impose his Discipline upon all Churches of the Reformation; and nothing will satisfie Him and his Followers unless all Chri­stendom will embrace the device of his warm brain upon pain of the Divine dis­pleasure, and under an obligation of Di­vine Right. And to this purpose he sends his Dispatches and makes his Ap­plications to all the Courts in Europe, and if any Prince entertain'd any thoughts of [Page 257] Reformation, he forsooth must imme­diately thrust himself into his Privy Council, and if they were not entirely obedient to his Counsels, he either re­jected them as people that were not in good earnest, or despised them as peo­ple that understood not the management of their own affairs; and all his Epistles to Princes and Prelates were written with the confidence of Papal Decrees. You may satisfie your self with a multi­tude of instances in his Letters to the King, Princes and Castellans of Poland, to the Prince Elector of the Palatinate, to the Church of Strasburgh, to the Duke of Wirtenburgh, and to the Lantgrave of Hess, beside his particular missives and instru­ctions to his Vicar-Generals residing in several Kingdoms and Provinces. But to keep more closely to our own concern­ments, by his Letters Patents to the Exiles of Francfurt, the English Litur­gy was casheir'd to make way for the en­tertainment of the Order of Geneva, and Dr. Cox with his Associates, Grave and Reverend Men, (cum gregalibus suis as he stiles them) were rated for endeavour­ing the establishment of the Liturgy of the Church of England. And when Mr. John Hooper Bishop Elect of Glocester had [Page 258] pickt up a quarrel against Caps and Tip­pets, and Gowns, and Rochets, and Chi­meres, who forsooth must solicite the Duke of Somerset (then the Great Mini­ster of State) to have these idle scruples dispensed with in despite of the Customes and Constitutions of the Church, but John Calvin? Not to mention his Letters to the King, to the Arch-Bishop, to the Bi­shop of London, to Cecil, and to the Lords of the Council, in which he very frankly, and before his advice is asked, makes his exceptions to the English Liturgy, and finds fault with many Popish and super­stitious Rites; and with an Apostolical Authority advises the Lay-Lords to set aside all prudence and worldly wisdom in carrying on the work of Reformation, and admonishes the Bishops to strip them­selves of all Secular Power and Jurisdi­ction, and charges it upon the Bishop of London in particular, as his duty to in­form the Queen that she ought not to trust or trouble them with any more Au­thority, than what they might challenge and exercise purely by vertue of their Spiritual Office. And all this (I suppose) to make way for the more easie admission of his Discipline, with a great many sto­ries more that I could tell, and of which [Page 259] Kings might by the help of their Royal Understandings make excellent use. And now after all this it matters not much whether Geneva be scituated upon the South-side of the Lake Lemane, or the South-west, or the South-west and by West, for peace sake I will grant you any point in the Compass, though as far as I can learn by Maps and Books of Geogra­phy, they all inform me that it stands where it alwayes did on the South-side; and if they are mistaken, it is none of my fault, for I am no Traveller; and had I been imposed upon in a matter so colla­teral and impertinent to my main design, yet no man that had not been to seek for more material exceptions, would ever have attempted to make so much noise and advantage of so small a trifle; for though Geneva were removed at as great a distance as Surat and Grand Cairo, yet for all that Calvin was an over-busie and pragmatical man, and intermedled with several Affairs foreign to his Judicature, and out of his Diocess, not only before his Advice was asked, but after it was refused. And therefore I shall not at all concern my self to examine the Debates of your Oecumenical Council about the scituation of Geneva; the discourse is Pag. 51, &c. [Page 260] suited to the wit and wisdom of the com­pany, that consists (I suppose) of your particular Friends that you so often re­member, Gilian the Cook-maid, and Abi­gail the Chamber-maid, and Mopsa the dry Nurse, together with some of your Charing-Cross and Lincolns-Inn-field wits, you your self being President, for after having condemn'd their remarques for crude and cold conceits, after a frown or two with your mouth, and some smiling with your forehead (they being both perform'd by the same Muscles) you gravely determine that it was well and wisely done of me to choose a South-sun for the better and more suddain growth of the bramble. It is such an Oracle! as if there were not a South-sun on the North as well as the South side of the Lake. And thus having finisht your serious counsels you are at leisure to advance to a dance, and recreate your self and the company with Anagrams and Acrosticks upon Calvins Name. And to confess the truth (for I love wit in an enemy) Lu­cianus and Usinulca are very pretty con­ceits, but yet I have heard of an old El­sibeth one that in my poor Opinion is more worth than both of them, though I recreate my self with believing that my sim­ple [Page 261] judgment cannot beyond my intention a­bate any thing of the just value of your wit with others. And thus having done you right (as you did the Bishop) by making you this pious Apology, I will venture to let it out, and it is Culina, for beside the transprosing Wit that is common to it with all Anagrams, it is an unhappy Omen to be­token how much his followers should de­light in Dripping pan comforts. For be­side our own experience at home, if we may relye upon the relation of your Tra­vels abroad: The Presbyterians are in all parts the very Canibals of Capons: in so Pag. 55. much that if Princes do not take care, the Race of Capons is in danger to be totally extinguish'd. The Race of Capons man! This Geneva certainly is the most breed­ing soil (whatever some Travellers may report of Africa) in the whole Universe. For who ever heard of any other Climate so fruitful, that even Capons are able to propagate their own Race? But how should Princes take care lest this Race be totally extinguish'd by the sharpsetness of the Presbyterians, when there is no such Race to be found in any Kings Do­minions; for as I take it ever since the Bi­shops banishment, there has been no King of Geneva. His Majesties Curiosity has [Page 262] replenish'd St. James's Park with all sorts of Fowl from all parts of the World, but could never yet, that I can hear of, pro­cure one single Bird of this Capon Race. So that I perceive notwithstanding all his great Alliances and Correspondences a­broad, he has no great interest in the Court of Geneva. But you Sir have tra­vel'd those parts and have no doubt con­tracted acquaintance with the good House-wifes of the Countrey; it would be a very considerable piece of service to the Common-wealth in general, and to your dear Presbyterian brethren in parti­cular, whose mouths (you say) hang so much Capon-way, if you could but help us to some of the Chickens of both Sexes of this Capon-brood. I am confident it would be so well accepted both in Court and City, that you might easily obtain a Patent for the Monopoly and a Pension for the service. Especially when they are of the greatest size of any in the refor­med World, so that if this race should be totally extinguish'd, it might prove of fa­tal consequence to the Growth and Inte­rest of the reformation in Hungary, Tran­sylvania, Bohemia, Poland, Savoy, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Scot­land, &c. for I have heard great Statesmen [Page 263] say, that if his Holiness were but House­wife enough to reer a larger Race than that of Geneva, he might easily draw o­ver the whole shole of Presbyterians to the Church of Rome, because (as they ob­serve) these Canibals are for any Com­munion that promotes the Ordinance of Capon-eating. Their Stomachs are so set towards this Race by an instinct of nature, that (as we read in your Me­moirs) they were no sooner spawn'd, but immediately they drive in whole sholes for the Land of Capons. This is their natural food without which they cannot subsist, and should this Race be ever to­tally extinguish'd, they must all starve for want of their proper nourishment. Is it not then cruelly done of you to insti­gate Princes out of a superfluous care for the Race of Capons, to endanger the to­tal extinction of the Race of Presbyteri­ans? 'Tis matter of Stomach Sir (and some Pag. [...] say their Conscience is nothing else) and if Kings are so civil as not to press any thing upon their Subjects against which they have an Antipathy, will you be such an hard hearted and inflexible Tyrant, as to de­ny them what they long for, and with­out which they cannot live? And not only so, but provoke Princes to be the [Page 264] Ministers of your cruelty? But they, as they have Gentlemens Memories, so have Royal Understandings, and do not think sit to require any thing that is impossible, unnecessary, or wanton of their People: And are fain to consider their tempers, their Constitutions and their Stomachs. They reflect upon the Histories of former times. They have heard how a Roman Emperour was stabb'd for giving the word unhandsomly; How the Parlia­ment of Poland suffer'd the Turk to enter, because the King would not suffer them to be his Taylour; How Alexander the great had almost lost all by forcing his Subjects to conform to the Persian habit; How the King of Spain is forced to ride bare-leg'd lest the Biscainers should dis­mount him; How a certain Queen gave a certain Broad-seal, of which there came no mischief; How the Queen of Sweden was forced to resign for an uncivil word; How a sturdy Swiss would not conform; How the King of Spain lost Flanders (of which he is King still) by the Inquisition; and an hundred more that I could tell you but idle stories, that you may read at your leisure in the fifth Epistle to Mar­cellinus; but however you may think them but idle stories, yet Kings can tell [Page 265] how to make use of them. And after all these fatal Consequences of Rebellion, which can only serve as Sea-marks unto wise Princes to avoid the causes, can you think any of them so precipitate and un­advised as to provoke such a fierce and cruel Race of Canibals for the sake of a few Capons? For if once they revolt, there is no withstanding their fury, but they pour in upon him like Gothes and Vandals from Hungary, Transylvania, Bo­hemia, Poland, Savoy, France, the Nether­lands, Denmark, Sweden, and Scotland, and enter into Covenant and Arms. And then you know no men fight so keenly as those whose Courages are whet by their Stomachs. And now how had the King been served if he had followed your ad­vice to interess his Government in de­fence of the Race of Capons? He had run himself into a fine Premunire, had he not, to bring all the Presbyterians in Christendome about his Ears? No, let the Race of Capons shift for it self; it concerns them to secure their own Race of Kings against these Canibals, they are as great devourers of Kings as Capons.

But under pretence of making Calvin Pag. 42, 3. and Geneva ridicule I kill whole Nations, Hungary, Transylvania, Bohemia, Poland, [Page 266] Savoy, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, England, Scotland, Charing-cross, and Lincolns-Inn-fields, with six Coun­treys more, and many more, and a long & caetera beside. This I must confess is more than I was aware of, and yet if the Inhabitants of all these Countreys are Canibals of the Race of Capons, I defie them all, though you should cast in over and above, Tartary, China, the great Mo­guls Countrey, Prester John, and the King of Guiney. Let but the great Turk stand Neuter, and I do not fear all the Calvi­nists in the World beside. I will make Cimarrs of their very Whiskers, and the Puny Bishops of Munster, Cullen, and Strasburg shall be my Chaplains. But how comes Geneva to be the Catholick Church? Or did all these Countreys e­ver submit to Calvin's Yoke? Why then must they of necessity follow the fortunes of Calvin and Geneva? I know indeed he endeavour'd to extend his Empire o­ver all these and many Countreys more, but I cannot find that ever any Prince swore Allegiance to his Discipline excep­ting only Mr. Mayor of Geneva. Nor do I know where his Discipline has any Power at this day, unless in the Nether­lands, (if it have or ever had any there) [Page 267] But that part of my undertaking his Ma­jesty and the French King have taken out of my hands. And I hope you do not mean them by the two others that you say I have taken into Partnership Pag. 44. with me. For though I am page 42. the Draw-can-sir, that fight single with all these Countreys, yet page 44. I do no­thing without the assistance of two o­thers. This is a pretty contradiction, but what is that to a man that can make Corollaries to justifie Theses, or build superstructures to support Foundations? But yet what is it we do? What! we club to travesteer the Scripture, and ren­der all the serious part of Religion odious Ibid. and contemptible. The serious part of Religion! Why, is there any part of Re­ligion that is not serious? But it were worth the while to know who these two wicked men are, why, lest we might be mistaken as to the persons you mention, you will assure the Reader that you intend not Hudibras. Of all your Apologies give me this for Civility: that you cannot make mention of any person that is re­markable for prophaneness, but as if the Character suited this Gentleman so exactly, it were necessary to except him in particular, lest all your Readers [Page 268] should immediately conclude he was the Person intended. This is such an ill-fa­vour'd piece of additional Civility, that an accusatory spirit could desire no better play than you have given in his vindication. It is a mighty complement this, though I am speaking of some ungodly Wretches that make it their business to render all the serious part of Rebellion odious and contemptible, I beg your pardon Sir, I will assure you upon my word it is not you I intend at present. This it is to be a person of private condition and breed­ing. Had that worthy Gentleman call'd you to an account for making any un­handsome reflections upon him, this weep­ing Apology had been somewhat excusa­ble, but otherwise (as you excellently observe) there cannot be a more dexterous Pag. 266. and malicious way of Calumny, than by ma­king a needless Apology for another in a cri­minal Subject. But yet however you may assure your self that he will never take any notice of such a despicable yel­per as you, unless with a Dog-whip. Thou Prevaricatour of all the Laws of Buffoon­ry, thou dastard Craven, thou Swad, thou Mushroom, thou Coward in heart, word, and deed, thou Judas, thou Cro­codile, thus (though it were in thy great­est [Page 269] necessity) after having profess'd wit and rithm these fifty years, to snivle out such a whining submission in publick is past all precedent of Cowardize from the Trojan war to this very day; but that thou should­est do it of thy own accord and without a­ny provocation is more sneaking than the flattery of a Setting-dog. Thou shalt wear a Collar, and thy name shall be Trey.

And so we arrive at the Character of a Noble-man's Chaplain; for having here­tofore (among other your juvenile Essays of Ballads, Poesies, Anagrams and Acro­sticks) laid out your self upon this Sub­ject also, and your Papers lying useless by you at this time when your Muse be­gan to tirè and set, it might be very con­venient to fill up twelve pages with this Character whilst she baited and recover'd Breath. But the greatest part of it is so very trite and vulgar, that none but a su­perannuated Wit would ever have ac­cepted of such out worn and old fashion'd Jests. And the rest of it so Garagantuan and Legend-like, v. g. the raising of a mans Hypocondria into the Region of his Brain, his being lifted up into the Air so high as to crack his Scull against the Chappel Ceiling, with a deal more of such wild and incre­dible Stuff, that I shall wave it all because [Page 270] I am sure it is impossible that Kings should ever make use of such idle and extrava­gant stories. And if I would study re­venge I could easily have requited you with the Novels of a certain Jack Gentle­man that was born of pure Parents, and bred among Cabin-boys, and sent from School to the University, and from the University to the gaming Ordinaries, but the young man being easily rook'd by the old Gamesters, he was sent abroad to gain Cunning and Experience, and beyond Sea saw the Bears of Bern, and the large Race of Capons at Geneva, and a great many fine sights beside, and so return'd home as accomplish'd as he went out, tries his fortune once more at the Ordinaries, plays too high for a Gen­tleman of his private condition, and so is at length cheated of all at Picquet. And so having neither Money nor employ­ment, he is forced to loiter up and down about Charing-Cross and in Lincolns-Inn-fields, where he had leisure and opportu­nity to make Remarques (among other Subjects) upon the wheel of Fortune, from whence with the help of a little skill in Mathematicks he at length makes out this new and important discovery in Po­liticks, as a straight line continued grows a [Page 271] Circle, even so Power infinitely extended be­comes Impotency. Which with many more of his choicest Observations he at length discharges into a certain Book call'd the Rehearsal, which as soon as you have finisht this, I would willingly recommend to your perusal, that you may see how much pains a witty man may take to make o­thers merry and himself ridiculous. Where you will meet with many more that per­haps you will think but idle stories, but Kings know how to make use of them. For how modestly soever the Author may speak of his own private condition and breeding, his Memoires will be very serviceable to the instruction of Princes. It is he that first observed how the Cler­gy have in all Ages obstructed the Cle­mency of Kings; how they can deform the whole Reign of the best Princes that ever wielded Scepters; how by their leasings they keep up a strangeness and misunderstanding between the Soveraign and his Subjects; how they trinckle with Parliaments, and by their pickthankness make them expose both their own and his Majesties Wisdome to posterity. It is he only that can with Authority from above (for he could have it nowhere else) ensure Princes, that the reason why God [Page 272] does not bless the Clergy in affairs of State, is because he never intended them for that employment. It is he that first discover'd the Sea-marks of Govern­ment, and by the Histories and Originals of all former rebellions instructed Princes how to avoid the like causes. It is he that has inform'd them that the body is in the power of the mind, and the mind in the hand of God, so that to punish ei­ther of them is to correct the Divine Ma­jesty. It is he that has advised them how to humour their Subjects, and not force them to conform to a fashion or ceremo­ny, for the sake of Alexander the Great, and the Emperour, the sturdy Swiss, and the Town-seal. In brief, it is he that has taught them Gentlemens Memories to forget all injuries, and Royal Understand­ings to prevent none. These stories would have been more instructive to Princes than a pitiful Legend of a crack't Chap­lain, and for that reason I shall not pass them by so lightly, but reserve them to their proper place of State-Policy.

From the Chaplain you are immedi­ately led by a certain train of thoughts to J. O. upon whom you spend an horri­ble deal of Abecedarian wit, that was taken out of his own Primer, as the rest [Page 273] of your Book was out of his Survey. I suppose the intention of it is to nick all Capacities, for having made the rest to please fools this was design'd for the en­tertainment of children, and to them I leave it, only I cannot but observe from your pursuing it to such an irksome and tedious length, that you have not the judgement of a Jack-pudding to discern when you have plaid the fool enough. And here follows the delightful story of Gill and Triplet, but this too I shall keep cold for your Politiques, because it is a story that Kings may make use of. And thus are we arrived once more at the Grand Thesis, that stands just as it did at the beginning. For whether it were law­ful for me to write any more, or not; whether the Press be a villainous Engine, or not; whether Importance be a Fe­male or not; whether Calvin were a bramble or not; whether Geneva stand on the South-side of the Lake Lemane or not; whether there be a Race of Capons propagated there or not; whether it be possible for a mans Hypocondria to rise up into his head or not; whether J. O. be an Hee-cow or not; and whether Tri­plet were legally whipt by Gill after he could plead adultus or not; I will main­tain [Page 274] it against Hungary, Transylvania, Bo­hemia, Poland, Savoy, France, the Nether­lands, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, Ge­neva, Germany, Charing-Cross, Lincolns-Inn-fields, Grubstreet, Pin-makers hall, J. O. and your Self, and any one man more, I care not though it be the sturdy Swiss, That it is absolutely necessary to the Peace and Government of the World, that the Supreme Magistrate of every Common-wealth should be vested with a Power to Govern and Conduct the Consciences of Subjects in affairs of Religion. And now to conclude, is it not a sad thing that a well-bred and fashionable Gentleman, that has frequented Ordinaries, that has worn Perukes, and Muffs, and Panta­loons, and was once Master of a Watch, that has travell'd abroad and seen as many Men and Countries as the Famous Vertuosi Sorbier and Coriat, that has heard the City Lyons roar, that has staved and tail'd to the Bears of Bern, that has eaten of the Race of Capons at Geneva, that has past the Alps, and seen all the Trede­scin rarities and old stones of Italy, that has sat in the Porphyrie Chair at Rome, that can describe the method of the Ele­ction of Popes, and tell stories of the tricks of Carnivals, that has been employ­ed [Page 275] in Embassies abroad, and acquainted with Intrigues of State at home, that has read Playes, and Histories, and Gazets; that (I say) a Gentleman thus accomplisht and embellisht within and without, and all over, should ever live to that unhap­py dotage, as at last to dishonour his grey hairs, and his venerable Age with such childish and impotent endeavours at wit and buffoonry.

Thus having coursed you through eleven beginnings from the Preface into the Ecclesiastical Polity, from thence in­to the Defence, from the Defence back again into the Preface, from that into Bishop Bramhall, anon into the Preface to the Ecclesiastical Polity, and streight back again into the Bishops Preface, and from thence away to Dr. Thorndike, the Friendly Debate, Mr. Hooker, to Mr. Hales for 10 pages of Rithm to Ism, thence to J. O's discourse of Evangelical Love and Unity from p. 127 to the end, and then from page the first to page the 127^th, and so backward and forward to the confla­gration of London, the burning of the Ships of Chatham, St. Pauls Church, and Diana's Temple, Ben. Johnson, Horace, the 5 Chap. to the Galatians, and the 5 Epist. to Marcellinus. After all this I [Page 276] thought I might begin to expect a little rest, and to hope that we need not de­spair that you began to design to con­clude to begin to draw an end of begin­ning to begin, as knowing that all raving fits usually end in a Lethargy; and it be­gan to succeed just according to my wishes, when I heard all on the suddain Mr. Bayes good night: But whether it is, that some body has strewed Cow-itch in your Bed, or that your Conscience is very restless, or that you only slept dogs sleep, immediately in the very next line I am awaked with good morrow Mr. Bayes, and am teased as freshly for a cer­tain Preface shewing what grounds there are of fears and jealousies of Popery, as if this had been our first salute, and we had never exchanged word before. And here (to borrow one of your Schemes of Speech) it seems that England is no stranger to rumours of Popery; it seems that it has been the Puritan Artifice ever since the Reformation to possess the Peo­ple with these panick fears; it seems the Church of England has perpetually been traduced by them as Popishly affected; It seems I vindicate the Church from this aspersion by pregnant and undeniable in­stances of Religious Loyalty and Obe­dience; [Page 277] it seems I have charged the Re­bels as justly and undeniably with the direct contrary Principles and Practices. It seems I do not recriminate any designs of Popery to the Non-conformists, but charge them most righteously with a con­stant and boysterous opposition to the Church, thereby creating dangerous dis­orders and disturbances to the State; It seems Atheistical and Irreligious Caitifs, out of a peculiar hatred, and most ex­quisite malice to the Church and Church­men, are never wanting to promote and abett these mischievous disorders; It seems if crafty and sacrilegious States­men joyn in the Confederacy, they are apt enough to run the Kingdom into such miserable necessities, that there is no sup­port of their interest without rapine and sacriledge; It seems that if the Church of England should ever be hereby de­stroyed, no other Religion can be esta­blish'd in lieu of it but Popery, because Fanaticism is so wild and untractable a thing, that it is uncapable of any settle­ment upon any Principles; It seems all this either is, or for any thing you are able to oppose to it, may be as true as Gospel, and though it seems you dare not answer it, because you cannot, yet [Page 278] it seems you have the confidence to deny it all, and confute it with abundance of censure and cavil; and more it seems you could have done were it not for falling under the penalty of a certain Act of Par­liament against spreading of false news, Pag. 261. even as you durst not answer what you had quoted out of my Eccles. Pol. for fear of bringing your self within the Statute of Pag. 104. Treasonable Words. Sweet Gentleman! What a misfortune it is when a Godly, Loyal, tender Conscience, bearing so much awful Reverence and soultry affe­ction to the Supreme Magistrate, should in all his Disputes so cross with Autho­rity, that he dares not speak out his mind plainly, only for fear of being hang'd. But were it not for the Statute against Treasonable Words you would make me an Example to all Generations. But yet though you dare not Reply for fear of these sanguinary Laws against Treason, yet you can do what is more serviceable to your purpose, you can take occasion to raise calumny enough from my Discourse to render my Self and all the Clergy odious to all Interests within the Kings Dominions; And first you be­gin with the King himself, and discover, that after all it was neither the Book-seller, [Page 279] nor Geneva, nor the Trouts, nor the Sprats, nor the Race of Capons, nor Presbyterians, nor Millecantons of Fanatiques, nor B. Bramble, nor Usinulca, nor the Hobgoblins, nor J. O. nor Non-conformity, nor Hunga­ry, nor Transylvania, nor Bohemia, nor Po­land, nor Savoy, nor France, nor the Ne­therlands, nor Denmark, nor Sweden, nor Scotland, nor Germany; but the King was the person aim'd at from the beginning. Pag. 264. And it now sufficiently detects my malice to His Majesty to stir up matter of such dangerous and seditious Discourse. Though not above a page or two since, he was abundantly assured and satisfied of my Loyalty, and we were all three very good Friends, and yet here you tell His Majesty nine times over, how I bear an evil eye to him and his Government, that I publish Manifesto's against his Indul­gence, that I make his proceedings odious, &c. by raising a publick and solemn Dis­course through the whole Nation concerning a matter the most odious and dangerous that could be exposed. When your Self, and all your Readers both know that most mens heads were fill'd with these jealousies, and all mens mouths with these Discourses before my Preface was publish'd or thought on; and withall, [Page 280] that I am so far from adding any encou­ragement to the fears and jealousies of the people, that my only design was to shew that it was a thing impossible in it self ever to be brought about by any other means than the folly of the Non­conformists. So that whatever designs the Popish Party might at that or any other time have upon our Religion, we had no great reason to apprehend any danger from their attempts, were it not for that advantage that is given them by the giddy and incessant opposition of the Fanatique Faction to the Church of Eng­land. So that it is manifest by this, that you intended nothing but cavil and wrangling, thus to charge me with stir­ring up this odious Discourse of Popery, when as to that all the Nation are able to convict you of notorious falsehood and leasing; and whether the Discourse of that occasion'd my Preface no body can know beside my self, but this they all know, that my Preface never occa­sion'd that Discourse. And now after all, it seems there was more danger than you or I dreamt of, by that Alarm that the King and Parliament have taken upon this matter. I know you and your Party will never acknowledge that my Preface [Page 281] was the cause of this new Act against Po­pery, and yet you may do it much more safely, than to make it the original of that publiok and solemn Discourse that run through the whole Nation upon this Argument, in that the Act was enacted since my Preface, and the Discourse was publique before it. And now you would do well to charge the Parliament as you have done the Bishop for being enemies to the State in raising all this din and ob­loquy, and disquieting His Majesties good Subjects with such fears, when there was no danger. But you are never concern'd either as to the truth or the ingenuity of your Cavils, so they do but reflect some odium upon the Clergy; and I have very good reason to believe, that as much as you have magnified the Declaration for Indulgence, and decryed all dangers and suspicions of Popery, yet had you been a Member of this present Parliament, you would have been as forward as he that was most so in remonstrating to the De­claration, and voting for the Act. And now you see what reason you have given the Publique to have any great opinion of your Integrity. Should I have preva­ricated at this rate with the world, have been so inconsistent in all my actions, have [Page 282] thus cut and shuffled in all my words, and have clapt on so many disguises and contradictory Apologies upon every thing I say; I must confess I have not face enough to presume so confidently upon the dulness and simplicity of mankind, as to flatter my self with any hopes of escaping without discovery and dis­crace: every body has wit enough to see through such stupid and inartificial Leas­ings.

But had you been Solicitour-General to the High Court of Justice, you could scarce have been more dexterous than you are at framing and aggravating In­ditements out of nothing; they were forced to amass together heaps of accu­sations to make up one cumulative crime, but you can hang a man for his Court­ship, and extract Treason out of a Comple­ment. Thus because I suppose it possible for his Majesty to dye before the day of Judgment, and then that some Prince may arise in after Ages endued with less Wisdome, and by consequence possess'd with less kindness to the Church of Eng­land, that is so admirably accommodated to the interest of the Crown beyond all other Churches in the World. This (say you) is pretty plain dealing, 'tis to take [Page 283] the pillow from under his head; you should have thought it better Courtship in a Divine to have said, O King live for ever. What a Miscreant am I! sure I can be no less than another John Chastel or Ravillac. What draw the Pillow from under my Princes head, that is dispatch him by fraud or violence before the course of na­ture brings on the period of his dissoluti­on? Search the Villain, his pockets are full of poyson'd Daggers and screwed Pi­stols; for how else could he foretell that the King must one day dye, unless he were resolved to fulfill his own Prophe­cie, for otherwise, if it please God, the King may live for ever. Does this Lan­guage become a Subject, much less a Di­vine to his Prince, O King you are mortal and must dye like other men. Is not this to upbraid him with his Mortality, and to beat down his esteem with the people by informing all the Nation that he is no more than a man? At least is it civil or dutiful thus unseasonably to shew him his winding sheet, and mind him of the day of Judgment, to spoil the wit and cheer­fulness of his Conversation by forcing him to baulk good jests for fear of an af­ter-reckoning for idle and profane words. This sufficiently detects your malice and ill Pag. 265.[Page 284] intention to his Majesties Government, for all your Sleights and Legerdemain, to take this occasion altogether foreign and un­seasonable to raise a publick and solemn dis­course throughout the whole Nation concern­ing a matter the most odious and dangerous that could be exposed. That no man can pass by a Book-sellers Stall, but he must be minded of the Kings Mortality. These are the marks and Characters of your displeasure against him; whilst you were pleased to vouchsafe him your fa­vour and countenance, you were not wont to talk after this rate; but now be­cause he will not take up Arms upon your Becks, and listen to your implacable and sanguinary Counsels, and tear in pieces the sacred Act of Oblivion and Indemni­ty, there is no remedy but dye he must, whereas otherwise the complement had been O King live for ever. This is almost as heavy an accusation as the rudeness you have upbraided me with against Queen Elizabeth; when suddainly with undaunted Courage down goes your Gauntlet in her Majesties quarrel, for though she were dead some years ago, yet it seems she was much disobliged to be thought old, and if any body call'd her so, could not for her heart stay till the [Page 285] day of Judgment, but must up and at'em. And therefore to revenge this Affront you have let fly at me seven pages of Latin and English, which had you rendred into Italian or Spanish, might as well have re­venged King John of the Pope, and Scan­derbeg of the great Turk, for they con­cern us all alike. But certainly never were any Princes wont to be thus irreve­rently treated by their Subjects hereto­fore, as to have the least suggestion whi­sper'd either of their Age or their Morta­lity.

And yet you are not content to bring me into disfavour with his Majesty and Queen Elizabeth, but you must expose me to the displeasure of the Privy Coun­cil, and make bate between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Politicians. For really he Pag. 316. doth speak of King and Counsellors at such a rate, and describe and characterize some men so, whomsoever he intends, that though I know there are no such, I dare not touch, it is too hazardous. You tell us, I re­member, upon another occasion that e­very similitude must have if not all, yet some likeness, that is to say every likeness must have some likeness, though it does not follow that if it must have some it must have all as you would emprove it in [Page 286] your conclusion against me, viz. that be­cause Sardanopalus was a King, and a good Spinster, that therefore every King must be as good a Spinster as Sardanapa­lus. But here is a very like Picture, and yet like no body. I describe and chara­cterize some men so, that though you know there are no such, you dare not touch, it is too hazardous. Whoop and hola! is all our talk of Duels and fighting come to this, to be afraid of no body? If there are no such persons, fear not, they will ne­ver challenge you for taking them by the Beard. I did not set down the first letters of any mans name, nor describe the fea­tures of any mans face, nor give intima­tion of my knowledge of any man's lodg­ing, I only characterized the qualities of some Persons that are to be found in all Ages to oppose the Clergy of all Ages in their opposition to the Clemency of the Kings of all Ages. Now that any mans qualities should be characterized, when there is no such man in the World, no man can understand but a man of Con­tradictions. For the persons cannot be pointed at but by the Character, and therefore if the Character happen to suit no body at this time, then it is certain no body at this time can be characterized. [Page 287] Nor indeed did I ever hear of any such Persons, who gave the King such Counsels of Sacriledge as I there described, beside your self, that have nothing to lay to his charge (since the Act of Oblivion and In­demnity) beside his not seizing the Church revenues, otherwise though the Clergy are the vilest men in the World, you do not see but that he leads a more unblameable Conversation. A very obliging Testimo­ny, and when his Majesty wants a Liv­ing, he will no doubt come to you for a Certificate. But to let that pass, this intimation against the Council is as stab­bingly suggested as the story of Sardana­palus; that a man cannot give a general Character of a sacrilegious Statesman but some of his Majesties Privy-Council must immediately be glanced at, this indeed is too hazardous to be touch'd, and yet you cannot keep in your fingers from pointing, though you dare not touch. A man of your reading cannot be igno­rant that there are too many of this sort of Vermine in all Ages, and that there are enough of them at this time, though they dare not appear in publick view, but if ever affairs should at any time seem to require it, they will be ready and offi­cious to instruct Princes in this dangerous [Page 288] Lesson, to encourage them to burn Tem­ples, to plunder Churches, to trample upon all the Laws of Justice, and affront all the solemnities of Religion, to scorn the pedantiok stories of Honour and Con­science, and to set down to themselves no other measures of Government but falshood, oppression, and cruelty. These are the Sejanusses that I described, and I took my Character from the monsters of former times, and you may find the men in the deformed Reigns of Nero and Tibe­rius. They are engendred under Tyrants, and out of the corruptions of Govern­ment, and they cannot usually lift up their heads under a merciful and gracious Prince, (though the last King it seems had the ill fortune to have his whole Reign deformed by being unhappily trinkled with Ceremonies, Arminianism and Man­waring.) Were it possible that ever his Majesty should degenerate from the goodness of his own Nature as much as (they say) Nero did, we might then, but not till then, fear such Favourites and Counsellers as should dare to tell him it is below a Sovereign Prince to submit to the Pedantry of Conscience, and to be im­posed upon with the solemn cheats of Re­ligion; these are fit stories to trinkle his [Page 289] People into servitude [...], but he must own no other Rule of Good and Evil, Justice and Honesty beside his own pleasure or reason of State; and for his own conve­nience he may break Oaths, murther the Innocent, and care not how he oppress and defraud his Subjects, and sacrifice the welfare of a whole Kingdome to his own Pride and Luxury. And therefore Sir, you must not stick at Rapine or Sa­criledge for the support or the ease of your Government, but seeing your Reign is short, be so provident as to make the best advantage of your Fortune; and seeing you received your Power by the chance of inheritance, and are no way accountable for the discharge of any trust, make your own days as pleasant and easie as you may, and burthen not your self with a superfluous care for the happiness of your Subjects or Posterity. Now to say that in such a general Cha­racter of wickedness as this I must speak particularly concerning King and Counsel­lers is such an height of impudence, that his Majesty can never sufficiently requite it by assigning you a Nitch in the Old Ex­change, that is honour enough for such vulgar Wits as King James and my self. He can do no less than pearch your Lau­reated [Page 290] Effigies upon the Imperial Gras­hopper. The only publique place that I can think of, where you may sit out of danger of rotten Eggs and Turnip tops.

But you fall so often into these throws and pangs of Ingenuity, that it is impos­sible for me to correct all your Leasings, and therefore I will only exemplifie two or three of the goodliest ones, lest I should be cast and condemned for baulk­ing a legal Plea. And thus, Imprimis, have Pag. 307. I cast a mischievous aspersion upon His Ma­jesty of thinking to convert the Revenues and Dignities of the Church to his own use. To lay such an heinous act of Insolence to my Charge without any reference to my Writings, were not to be endured in any person living beside your self, who when you have cast all the foulest asper­sions in the world upon any special friend whom you design to treat with an Addi­tional Civility, can easily wipe off all a­gain with an impudent and counterfeit Apology, it is but protesting, that You recreate your self with believing that your simple judgement cannot beyond your inten­tion abate any thing of my just value with others, and then you have done me right and merited my pardon, though you had accused me of poisoning my Pa­rents, [Page 291] and eating up all my Brothers and Sisters. But these are your leasings, for it was but just now that the King and I were very good friends, and that he was assured of my Loyalty; and yet here am I aspersing him with a calumny the black­est and most odious in the world. Where­as you cannot but be conscious that I have given His Majesty as large and fair a Testimonial as he (or any man else) can desire of his Zeal and Conformity to the Church of England. Though had I been so dis-ingenuous as to dart this aspersion upon him, yet it had been less disobli­ging than your scurvy Commendation; who when you set your self to strein for elaborate and studious Periods of flattery, the highest Elogy you can find in your heart to vouchsafe Him, is, that you do not know but he may lead a more un­blameable conversation than the worst and wickedest men in the world, were it not for one inexcusable fault, his obsti­nacy in not assuming the Revenue of the Church to his own Use. So that my as­persion, if it were true, is upon your Principles so far from detecting any malicé to His Government, that it would clear him of the only blemish that lyes upon his Reputation. Sure you are half Guelph [Page 292] and half Gibelline, you are every where so cross and contradictory to your self. But as I have asperst the King with the only thing for which you would com­mend him, so I have all along appropriated or impropriated all the Loyalty from the Nobility, the Gentry, and the Commonalty, and dedicated it to the Church. Why! did any of the Kings Subjects fight for him beside the Clergy? Had he any Com­manders in his Army beside Bishops and Dignitaries? Were not all his Battels fought under the Conduct of General Usher and Captain Bramhall against Dr. Cromwel and Dr. Ireton, for with that Title were they Dub'd at Oxford by one J. O. in their Return from the bloody Conquest of Ireland? Did not the Kings whole Infantry consist of poor Readers, as the Kirk Foot did of Mass-Johns, who brought in Covenant and Reformation in exchange for shooes and stockings. But if you can name any of the Nobility, Gentry, or Commonalty, that ventured Lives and Fortunes for the Royal Cause, I believe we shall never be so impudent as to deny them their share of Loyalty and Service to their Prince. And if you cannot, I am sure I can name amongst them as gallant Examples of Courage [Page 293] and Integrity as perhaps no Age can pa­rallel; they fought and they suffer'd with the constancy and resolution of Mar­tyrdom, and nothing could in the least abate their zeal and their devotion to an opprest and an afflicted Prince; and this because their Loyalty was founded up­on Principles of Conscience and Reli­gion; and that is it that I have appro­priated to the Church of England, that it teaches the duty of Subjects in absolute and indispensable terms without leaving shifts & evasions for disobedience, where­as all other Parties tye it on with false and counterfeit knots, so that by the help of re­serves the Subject may be as much as ever at liberty to obey or disobey as himself shall deem convenient. And when some­times they shall have preached up the ne­cessity of Allegiance in the most positive and comprehensive terms, they will bring themselves off with so many clauses and exceptions, as must utterly evacuate the obligation of their own Doctrines. And if at any time they happen to be stubborn in their Loyalty, their Prince is indebted for that either to chance or interest, or inclination, or some other un­certain and changeable Principle. But the thing that I have appropriated to the [Page 294] Church of England is Loyalty upon firm and effectual Principles; in so much that a man must be an Apostate before he can be a Rebel, and renounce his Religion and his Duty to God before he can neg­lect his Allegiance and his Duty to his Prince. This is the peculiar and distin­guishing Article of the Church of Eng­land, so that when you infer that I have impropriated it to the Clergy from the Nobility and Gentry, you must first sup­pose that none of the Nobility or Gen­try belong to her Communion. And now are you not a modest and an honest Gen­tleman to charge me with such an unsuf­ferable rudeness and disingenuity against so great a number of the bravest and most gallant spirits in the world. Though this I know was intended only in pur­suance of your Grand Design, by such impudent Leasings to raise up a misun­derstanding between the Clergy and all other Orders of men in the Kingdome. And that is the bottom of all your ma­lice and hatred to them, that as long as they are able to keep and make good the Pulpits Loyalty will be the Religion of the people, and they will not easily be wrought upon to listen to your Factions and Democratical insinuations. And that [Page 295] is it (whatever you pretend of the Dig­nitary of Lincoln) that makes you and your Partners to gnash your teeth, and knit your fists with so much impatience against the Order it self. But were you capable of wit in your anger, you would have let fly at them with some more plausible and probable aspersions, and not think to bring them into discredit among wise and sober men with such rank and notorious fictions. For this can only betray your malice and ill intenti­ons, and though you had right on your side, it would be an invincible prejudice against your Cause and your Party, that scruple not any Arts, howsoever dishonest or dishonourable, to do a despite to the Church of England. I remember another Accusation, which though it be not al­together so impudent as this, yet when I first read it, methoughts it was some­what more pleasant, that my Preface in­termedles Pag. 7. with the King, the Succession, the Privy Council, Popery, Atheism, Bi­shops, Ecclesiastical Government, and above all (it seems this is more sawcy than all the rest) with Non-conformity and J. O. Why truly not unlike; but it seems, if you had resolved to write a Preface, it is like you would have mentioned no­thing [Page 296] more than your own private affairs, and only informed the Reader of your losses at Picquet, and the Gaming Ordi­naries, your adventures at the Bear-gar­den of Bern, your encounters with the mighty race of Capons at Geneva, your Remarques upon the wheel of Fortune, and whipping of Gigs, and your studies in the 5. Epist. to Marcellinus. But alas! my breeding and condition are too pri­vate to bless the world with such great and observable Memoires; and therefore not having the advantage that You and Caesar had of writing my own Novels, I was forced to intermeddle with the affairs of others; the King, the Council, and (above all) J. O. And towards them all I have endeavourd the utmost Ingenuity, and if I have fail'd, I even ask their par­don, I do them right. And then though I have abused them never so unworthily I make them ample amends by this clause of additional Civility. But however I have treated them I must confess I am bound to beg your pardon in particular, because you your self have intermedled with none of these things. And now did ever any fool in the world make so much noise and puther to so little purpose?

[Page 297] But of all the Examples that ever I read of the undue and brutish stirring of Passions, I never met with any like that horrible and boobily noise that you have raised upon my pitying the folly of some men that can smell Jesuites and Gun­powder Plots upon every ordinary and Pag. 170, 71. accidental firing of a chimney, upon this away you run like a man scared with the horrour of the discovery, crying and roaring out to the Citizens nothing but fire, fire! and if they enquire where, why it began from some sparkles that flew out from a late Discourse, and caught hold of your chimneys. Neither is the Wretch satisfied to lay your City in ashes, but he makes himself sport with your Cala­mities. And though that sad Accident is yearly by Act of Parliament observed with due Humiliation and Solemnity, yet he turns all into mirth and derision, and bids you the next time your City takes fire to blow up the Thames to quench it, &c. And then in all your foam and froth you stand astonish'd that I am not afraid of the fury of the wild multitude, and that I dare after my late Severity a­gainst Tradesmen so much as touch the fire, &c. What a ridiculous and dis­composed rage is here raised out of no­thing, [Page 298] did ever Sophist or Impostor coun­terfeit such a mad and foolish melancho­ly, on purpose to try how brutish and dri­ving the passions of the Rabble are? Had I been convicted of setting the City on fire, you could scarce have raised more fierce and frenetick Rants than you have upon this slight and frivolous occasion. The Oration of the Old Fellow (that I remember I have somewhere read of, I think in Apuleius) if it had been as seri­ous, would have been much less ridicu­lous than this your bruitish bellowing; when he came forth with all the solemni­ties of sorrow and a discomposed mind to declaim in the presence of the whole City against a little Boy. And as soon as he could for sighs and groans, begins with weeping tears to let them know that he had something to communicate, that required all their attention as they tender'd the preservation of the Com­mon-wealth; and so proceeds to conjure them by all things both sacred and civil, by their Altars and their Chimneys, not to let the Murtherer escape unpu­nish'd; and having screwed the peoples expectations even to impatience, he was vehemently desired to declare the crime, that so they might attone the anger of [Page 299] the Gods, which otherwise they might expect upon their City, if they should suffer such an horrid villany to pass un­revenged. At last, after he had moved all this indignation, he produces three Bottles broken all to pieces by the young man; here, here (sayes he) behold the cruel murtherer. At which (you may sup­pose) all the Audience fell a laughing then as all people do at you now; only with this difference; that then they laughed at themselves for being abused into so solemn a passion by a trick, where­as now they laugh at you for endeavour­ing with so much seriousness to raise as furious a passion out of such a nothing. But thus have you after your rate of Oratory done my business both with the King, the Council, the Nobility, the Gentry, and the Citizens; and no doubt but they all take you for a most incom­parable Booby. I have laid all these Ar­ticles of Indictment together, only to let the Reader see the forces of your Inge­nuity, because as they lye scatter'd at a distance, they are not altogether so ob­servable to every ordinary understand­ing.

Having been thus shrewdly handled for traducing his Majesties Government, [Page 300] by stirring this dangerous and Seditious Discourse concerning the Return of Po­pery; the very next words you produce against me, are, that for my part I know none. Was there ever such an unhappy Caviller as you to arraign me of ill in­tentions to the Government by aspersing it with jealousies and suspicions of Po­pery, and yet in the very next breath laugh at me for saying that I know none? And if there be none, and that were the design of my Preface to prove that there were none, I would fain know which way that can be improved into a refle­ction upon His Majesties Government. Both these Cavils can never pass, they run a-tilt at one another, and yet not­withstanding that they are contradictory, they have the ill fortune to be both false; for if these fears and jealousies had over­run the whole Nation, I hope I might concern my self to lay them, without any ill intention to the Government; and if they were causeless, I might without any impertinence or absurdity prove that they were so. But your trifling in this period I have shewn already, by cutting it off in the middle, and confuting the first part before you proceeded to read the second; for I no where say that I know [Page 301] none: but that I know none beside the Non-conformists boisterous and unreason­able opposition to the Church of England. And therefore to railly me for saying ab­solutely that I know none, and then to cry me mercy three or four pages after for taking me short, is such a Scheme of writing that I dare say is peculiar to your self, and without precedent in any Wri­ter in the world. But however this would serve turn (as you then thought) to throw odium upon the Bishops, and that is all you aim at, viz. because they gave Pag. 268. the word, and deliver'd Orders through their Ecclesiastical Camp to beat up the Pul­pit Drums against Popery. That they might do, and yet have no ill intention against His Majesties Government, as I am sure now you dare not deny, but if any of them did issue out any such Or­ders, I am as sure it is more than you know; so that in you it is an impudent lye to lay such an action to their Charge without any proof, only because (as you then supposed) it might be thought to bring them under some suspicion of ill­will to His Majesties Government, and whatever they did, they are sufficiently justified. But this is right Fanatique In­genuity to bring the Bishops into a Prae­munire [Page 302] for their zeal and watchfulness a­gainst Popery; you are true Gibellines, rather than not spite them, you will side with Antichrist it self; the slander has hi­therto been that they are Popishly incli­ned, but now their crime is, because you imagin'd it might do them a mischief, that they are the very men that oppose Popery: And so for Ingenuity give me a Puritan-Gibelline! But here upon sup­position of this Alarm you raise such a fearful clattering of Arms and Armour, as if the Bishops of Munster, Colen and Strasburg were come over to the assist­ance of the Church of England. And what the reason of it is I know not, your fancy runs upon nothing but wars and fighting, and turns every thing into bat­tels and blood-shed. One while what a din do we hear of Duels, Hectors, giv­ing the Lye, Brothers of the Blade, ble­mishes of Honour, Challenges, Quarrels, Combats, Villain thou lyest, sending the length of the Weapon, naming Seconds, appointing time and place, gaining the Enemies Sword, making home-thrusts, and dying upon the spot. By and by what a dreadful noise do you make with Camps, Magazins, Carasses, Habergeons, Culverins, Steel-bonets, Swords, Muskets, [Page 303] Bandaleers, Match, Bullets, Powder, Back, Breast, and Helmet, taking Alarms, fortifying Trenches, guarding Ap­proaches, marching up into Counter­scarps, ranging Forces in Battel, placing Cannon, sounding the Charge, giving the Word, falling on, fighting through Squadrons, beating whole Armies single, mowing down whole Countries, killing Friend and Foe, and eating up All, Men, Women and Children. He that came off with Honour in threescore and seven­teen Duels before he was one and twen­ty, and in forty years more by Land and Sea fought as many pitcht Battels, could not have made a more war-like sound. Certainly you go (as I have read of one in the 5 Epist. to Marcellinus, for why should not I read your Fathers as well as you read mine) always hung like a Ju­stice of Peace's Hall with Pikes, Hal­berts, Peitronels, Callivers and Muskets. And if you could but victual your self for half a year in your Breeches, it is not to be doubted but you would be able to over-run whole Countries, Hungary, Transylvania, Bohemia, and all the other territories of modern Orthodoxy.

The first Argument I made use of to remove all popular suspicions of Popery [Page 304] from the Government was the manifest inconvenience to the State that must a­rise from any alteration in the Church; and this I proved from those impregna­ble principles of Loyalty that are peculi­ar to our Communion from all other Dissenters; so that all design of Change being so manifestly imprudent and im­politick, I thought it too wild a surmise for the Wisdome of the Government, un­less it were not only trinkled but be­witch'd to expose it self, and therefore that there could be no other probable ground of danger but from the restlesness and seditious practices of the Fanatique Party, that might possibly some time or other make way for the return of Popery by making disturbances in Church and State. And to this purpose I gave a large Character of the peculiar Genius, and the distinguishing principles of the Church of England from the Gibelline Faction. But it seems you do not like my Characters; and what is that to me, am I obliged to justifie them because such Jack-Gentlemen as you do not approve them? If you have any thing to except, you know the Law and the Press is open, but your bare dislike will no where pass for a confutation. And to tell us that [Page 305] you find on either side only the natural ef­fect of such Hyberbole's and Oratory that is not to be believed, is in a great many words only to say, I lye. It may be so, but yet that satisfies no body. And yet tell me, can you deny the Loyalty of the Church of England both in its principles and pra­ctices; if you cannot, whatever I have said in her commendation is undeniably true, and then it is you that lease. Can you deny that the regular Clergy are the most zealous Assertours of the Rights of Princes, and that they, and only they teach subjection to be an indispensable duty of Religion without false reserves and limitations? Can you deny that those Subjects that stuck to the Communion of the Church of England ever stuck to ha­zard Lives and Fortunes out of devoti­on to their Prince? Can you prove that every any forsook the Royal Cause in its greatest distress, that did not first forsake the Church of England? Can you deny that the main Article that distinguishes ours from all other Communions is that we vest the Crown in an Ecclesiastical Su­premacy (which is one half of the Sove­reign Power) whilst they challenge it ei­ther to themselves or some foreign Ju­risdiction, that has no more ground of [Page 306] Claim beside bare confidence to exercise any Authority in the Kings Dominions than the King has in his? These are the Elogies I gave to the Church of England. If they are such Hyperboles as are not to be believed, that is to say, if they are lyes, make it good; or else confess your im­pudence to call them so, not only with­out proof or evidence, but against Ex­perience and Demonstration. And so for my contrary Character of the Fana­tiques, that too is all a lye or such an Hy­perbole as is not to be believed, and so I am answer'd; but if that be all you have to say, I am very well satisfied too. You had done them some kindness, if you had undertaken to prove either that the Preachers never taught the people Apho­risms of Disloyalty and Rebellion; or that they were never engaged in actual War against their lawful Prince by their Instigation; or that any of them have re­nounced their old Principles, though they could never be prevail'd with so much as to acknowledge their Crime ei­ther to God or the King. These are plain Cases of Conscience, so that till they have done this, if they were ever guilty they are so still. And therefore when you only tell us that I have dress'd [Page 307] them all up in Sambenita's painted with all the Flames and Devils in Hell. All the service you do your brethren is to inform the World that whoever will draw a Fa­natique to the life, must get the Devil to sit for his picture, and if a man cannot describe them without dressing them up in Sambenita's, I cannot help that; this I am sure of, that I have not made one false stroke or ill feature, that I cannot justi­fie to any Artist. I am not concern'd how ugly the piece is so it be but like, and yet you your self have not been a­ble to tell me one fault that I have com­mitted. I am only sorry that they are so very deformed as you have represented them, for I never suspected before you informed me either that they were so bad or the Devil so good.

But I know what it is that so much girds you, though your guilty Conscience dares not touch it, viz. that I have there proved that nothing but the Good Old Cause lyes at the bottom of all your present Schism; and that the most zeal­ous Patriots of Conventicles are such as have given the World but very little ground to suspect them from their pro­fess'd Principles or open Practices of the least tenderness of Religion and kindness [Page 308] to Monarchy; so that nothing better can ever be expected from them than fa­ctions and republican Designs. I know this twinges to the quick; it is so obser­vable all the Kingdome over that as you cannot endure to hear it, so you dare not deny it. And now your appearance has amply verified the truth of the Ob­servation. When at the same time that you come forth to vindicate the Inno­cence and Peaceableness of the Non-con­formists, and pass your word to the King that they shall never lift up disloyal thought against him; you cannot for­bear to let us see how warmly you are concern'd to justifie the late Rebellion. ‘In that the King had turn'd his whole Kingdome into a Prison, that many thousands of his Subjects were constrain­ed to seek habitations abroad, & every Countrey, even though it were among Savages and Canibals, appear'd more hospitable to them than their own; that his whole Reign was deformed with Sibthorpianism, i. e. with his af­fecting an absolute and arbitrary Go­vernment; that himself and his party were the cause of the War; that the Parliament took up Arms in defence both of their Liberty and Religion; [Page 309] and that their Cause against the King was (like that of Christianity) only too good to be fought for, &c.’ And now when you ensure us that the Fanatiques shall never rebel, it is for this reason on­ly because there neither is nor can be any such thing as Rebellion; for if the last War were none, you are safe for ever for­feiting your Loyalty; and if that cause were too good to be fought for, it will be hard to find one too bad. It is well you have declared, that if you can do the Non-conformists Pag. 282. no good, you are resolved you will do them no harm, and desire that they should lye under no imputation on your ac­count. I am confident you intended ho­nestly, but they are more endebted to your good will than your discretion. When your very Apology in their behalf brings them under the greatest imputati­on. For this not only makes good my suggestion (which you would lay by your Caveat) that they are acted by men of Democratical Spirits, but withal it is a stronger evidence of their continuing constant and stubborn to their old Prin­ciples, because as they would never be brought to disclaim them, so now it seems they are resolved to justifie them, and lay the whole guilt of the Rebellion▪ [Page 310] upon the King himself. I know you are a wise and wary man, and design'd when you set pen to paper to take upon you the Person, that is, Personam induere of a Roy­allist, and not to betray the least kind­ness to, or concern for the Good Old Cause. But you are a Gamester and know what vast odds a man may lay on Na­tures side.

And thus have I more than enough vindicated every page and period of my Preface, and yet the main of your busi­ness is still behind, for that was the least of your design to confute me, your Plot was to take occasion to fly out into in­vectives against the Clergy of all Ages in general, and of the Church of England in particular; first, as the cause of the late War, and secondly, as the hindrance of our present settlement; and then ha­ving barr'd them from trinkling with State Affairs, and wheadled the King a­gainst hearkning to their Counsels, (though you do it so grosly, and with such an impudent malice, that it is like stalking by the side of a Butter-fly, with a face as broad as a Brass-Copper) you advise Princes to a more moderate course of Government, and teach them from many sad examples to behave them­selves [Page 311] dutifully to their Subjects upon peril of their displeasure or worse. I shall as briefly as I can consider your per­formance in all these particulars, and so leave you to the shame of your own Me­ditations.

First then, having with mighty exulta­tion Pag. 95. of Spirit, and words much too good for your heart congratulated His Maje­sties most Happy Restauration, just as Malefactors cry God save the King, be­cause they have escaped the Gallows; and so do you magnifie his Clemency, Mercy and Goodness for carrying the Act of Oblivion and Indemnity through. But this serenity is suddainly over-cast, and you knit your brows, and depress your Superciliums, and at length with much fleering, and more reluctancy (for you are mighty sorry to speak it) yet because it is a sad truth, tell it him you must that the Ecclesiastical Part would not accomplish Ibid. his Felicity, and no wonder when the Ani­mosities and Obstinacy of some of the Clergy have in all Ages been the greatest obstacle to the Clemency, Prudence, and good inten­tions of Princes, and the establishment of their affairs. Which is to say, that the Clergy has not only in all Ages (nay and places too) been the bane of Govern­ment; [Page 312] but more particularly the Clergy of England murther'd His Royal Father, and are more accomptable for His Maje­sties and the Kingdoms sufferings than ei­ther the Rebels that took his Crown off of his head, or those that afterwards took his head off of his shoulders. But they shall answer for themselves anon, we must first traverse your first Bill against the Clergy in general. But who are you that are thus acquainted with the Clergy of all Ages time out of mind, sure you can be no less a man than one of the Patriarchs, or a fifth from Methusalem, or at least Andrew de Temporibus John's elder Brother, you have so general an acquaintance with the Clergy of all Ages! As for the Clergy of the Ages be­fore Noahs flood I will not contend, for for any thing that I know there might be Bishops of Munster, and Cullen, and Strasburg in those times, and I cannot disprove it but that King Nimrod's Chap­lains were his Hunts-men; but in all Ages since I cannot find that they have been more cruel than other men. Aaron I am sure was remarkable for his meekness and mercy; for though the Grand Re­monstrance of Corah were intended a­gainst himself and his Bran for trinkling [Page 313] Moses, and the Members of the Sanhedrin, yet did he bestir himself to attone the Rebellion, and procure pardon for the Offenders. Though I must confess his Grand-child Phinehas was an arrant Jew­ish Zealot that is (as your modern Ortho­dox Rabbies inform you) a notorious Rogue and Cut-throat. And as for the Heathen Priests, though they were very famous Trinklers, I do not find that they were any great Men-eaters. In my Ro­man Empire I do not read that they were fiercer Canibals of the Race of Man or Capon-kind than the Laity, nor I believe can you prove out of your 5 Ep. to Mar­cellinus, that the Clergy were the Au­thours of Julian's Persecution. But the bottom of all this is, that the Priests have in all Ages, and in all Kingdomes been advanced to places of greatest Autho­rity next to the Sovereign Power it self. The Druids of Britany, the Magi of Per­sia, the Priests of AEgypt, Judaea, Assyria, AEthiopia are a sufficient Indication, that however fanciful men may fool them­selves and their Countrey with other Philosophical Models and Theories of Policy, yet Religion and the Ministers of Religion will have the greatest share in the Government; and the reason is as [Page 314] evident as the experiment is Catholique, in that nothing can so truly and effectu­ally awe the greatest part of mankind as the dread of the world to come; and therefore they whose peculiar Office it is to guide and instruct men in their future concerns, must and will in spite of all the witty States-men in the world have the greatest reverence, power and interest with the generality of the People. And thus though the Authority of the Clergy of England be at this time by reason of some malignant effects of the late war, at as low an ebb as perhaps the power of the Priests ever was under any Monar­chy, yet it is manifest, that for all their▪ disadvantages all of the Loyal Party, No­bility, Gentry and Commonalty that are sober and serious in the belief and pro­fession of their Religion, cannot but have a veneration to their Persons, and a de­ference to their Judgements. How else think you, could they be so easily trink­led? And as for all the several Casts and Clans of Non-conformists they are per­fectly enslaved to the Authority of their several Teachers: So that do what we can, the Clergy will have a strong influ­ence upon the people; all the present contest is, whether it be not more bene­ficial [Page 315] to the Government that such should be protected and encouraged who pro­fess Loyalty and have given no ground to doubt the sincerity of their profession, than such as have heretofore incited the people to Rebellion, and never since gave any the least assurance of their hav­ing renounced their former Principles (which if they had, they would have done it loud enough) and still as far as they dare venture, disturb the present quiet and decry the present settlement of the Nation. And this is the last issue of your Advice to rebate the Power of the Regular Clergy, thereby to enlarge and advance that of the Non-conformists; for as our Interest weakens and moulders a­way, it is unavoidable but that some o­thers that pretend to the same Office must gain as much Power as we lose; unless people fall into down-right Atheism and contempt of Religion, and that sets them loose from all effectual obligations of Loyalty to their Prince, and Duty to their Countrey, and Honesty to one ano­ther; and if the humour grow strong and prevalent, they in a little time grow barbarous and ungovernable, and with looseness of manners, and a general neg­lect of the publique quickly bring on dis­orders, [Page 316] and for the most part dissolutions of Government. So that this is plain enough, that no State can be tolerably govern'd or secured but by the assistance of Religion. And then if that have so powerful an influence upon affairs of State, and over the minds of the People, its publique Officers that have the great­est share of Power over that, cannot but have a proportionable share of Power over them. And for this reason have wise Princes in all Ages entrusted them with places of greatest Authority and Reputation in the Government; and good reason too, for if they are but qua­lified with parts and abilities equal to o­thers, that makes them as fit States-men as any, but then the interest proper to their Office gives them a mighty and un­imaginable advantage over all. And hence it is that they have in all Ages been envied and maligned by every proud man that thought himself quali­fied for the great places that they filled; and these have alwayes set themselves to asperse their Government, and to expose them to the hatred of the People, by charging all necessary severity and just execution of Laws upon their Tyranny. The Prince is a gracious Prince, but it is [Page 317] these men that thrust him upon these cruel and sanguinary courses, and were these bloody Counsellours once remov'd His Majesty would quickly return to His Natural Clemency, and we should see no more of these Merciless and Arbitrary proceedings. And this has been the cru­elty of the Clergy in all Ages, that they have not trifled with their Authority, but have been watchful to nip Sedition in the bud, and by a little severity at first save all those executions that would be necessary to suppress it afterwards. For if once it gets head and form it self into a Party, it is then upon even terms with the Government, and nothing but the event of War can decide the Contro­versie. Whereas all beginnings of mis­chief are easily withstood, and to take off one Malecontented Head of Faction, may ordinarily save the lives of thousands of well-meaning people. And that is the grievance of such as you would seem to be, that the Clergy have alwayes been watchful upon their designs, and kept the innocent people out of harms way by snapping the contrivers of mischief. And wherever their precipitate, violent, rigorous, and extreme Counsels (as you call them) have been effectually follow­ed, [Page 318] it has usually saved the trouble and expence of Civil Wars; unless when the storm was grown too great, before they came to the Helm, and then it is not in their power to lay it, that must be done by other men and other instruments. It were easie for them by timely care to prevent Wars, but when the people are prepared and resolved for it afore-hand, they cannot force them to be peaceable by Laws, and nothing can reduce them but beating them into obedience. And these are the two things that may make them sometimes seem more rigorous than other States-men, in that 1. They are usually more watchful upon the artifices of ambitious or discontented Grandees; 2. In that they are more aware of the Impostures of Religion, and understand the mischiefs of Enthusiasm more perfect­ly, than usually Lay-men can or (at least) will do; and this puts them upon that kind of severity, which those that suffer by it though justly, call Persecution, though it is notoriously manifest to any person of common prudence, that for the most part the offenders are not punisht for their private conceits, but only for the security of the State, in that either they themselves carry on ill designs un­der [Page 319] that pretext, or if they are simple and well-meaning, they are carried on by those that do. I cannot conjecture any other grounds you have of charging the Clergy with rigour and obstinacy in all Ages, unless it be that they are of all Orders of men the most faithful and zea­lous servants of their Masters, and the most vehement assertors of the Supreme Power against popular encroachments. This I am sure was the only ground of the late Long-Parliaments hatred to the Bishops, because they were (as one ex­press'd it) the trustiest agents of Tyranny, because of that stubborn and invincible opposition they shewed to their Rebel­lious and Democratical designs; and for that reason did the Cabal (that trinkled all the rest of the Members) petition the People to petition themselves to remove them both from the King and out of the House, because whilst they stood in the way, they could not come at the King, that is the Crown. And this too (Mr. Trinkle) is the ground of all your indig­nation; for it is purely out of displea­sure to the English Clergy, that you are transported into this modest and man­nerly censure of the Clergy of all the world. And your enmity to them is [Page 320] nothing else than that they preach Do­ctrines so contrary to yours, and after all the fatal Consequences of the late Rebellion will not be prevail'd upon to perswade the people that the good old Cause was the Cause too good. And this becomes your Brazen Modesty to indite the most sacred and serious Profession in the World of all the mischiefs and miseries that ever befell Mankind without alledging any instance of proof unless it be the Clergy of the Church of England, and that 1. because they will not be reconciled to a good o­pinion of those men that have been en­gaged in actual Rebellion, and yet are so far from acknowledging their Errour that they justifie their Cause, 2. because they do not think it convenient to in­dulge and connive at the Propagation of such Principles as prepare People for the like Practices upon the like opportu­nities.

But in the next place as the Clergy of all Ages have ever been the greatest Ob­stacle of the Clemency and Prudence of Princes, so are they not so well fitted by E­ducation as others for Political Affairs. Pag. 300. Good now Sir Pol! what is the defect of their education? Is it that they have not that liberty that others have to frequent [Page 321] the Gaming Ordinaries, or make Obser­vations at Charing-Cross and in Lincolns-Inn-fields? Excepting these wonderful advantages, in which you indeed (though very few Gentlemen beside) outstrip them, I cannot see what breeding other persons can boast of, that Clergy-men may not have as well as they. They are born as other men are with variety of natural Parts and Abilities, and they may emprove them as Kings and other mortal men do by reflecting upon the Histo­ries Pag. 243▪ of former times and the present trans­actions to regulate themselves by in every Circumstance. And though it cannot rea­sonably be expected they should have Royal Understandings, because they were never born with them, yet what hinders but they may have Gentlemens Memories, and so be as fit for Government as any of their fellow Subjects? and if they are not as fit as Kings themselves, that is no disparagement of their abilities, especial­ly when as they have not the education, so they were not intended for the Trade of Kings. So that you have shewn no­thing but the Impotency of your spite and Malice to pass one and the same cen­sure upon all men of a Profession, when you might with as much truth and inge­nuity [Page 322] have pass'd it upon all Mankind. However the Clergy are born capable of Wisdome as well as others, and then why may they not acquire it too in the same methods with others by Study and Tra­vel, and Experience, and Observation; and I do not see what greater advantage you have made of these than any poor Reader might have done, beside being hardned in Malice, and Impudence, and Shreds of Latin.

But still you improve when next to this Remarque upon the unfitness of the Clergy by reason of their Education for political affairs, you immediately adde, That they have the advantage above others Pag. 301. and even if they would but keep to their Bibles would make the best Ministers of State in the World. So that it seems by their Education that is peculiar to them as Clergy-men, viz. the study of the Bi­ble, they have the advantage of all others to make the best Ministers of State in the World; so ridiculous was it for you to intimate that they are not so well fitted by Education as others for Political Af­fairs, when your very next words ac­knowledge that they are the best fitted of any men in the World. Was ever Malice so inconsistent with it self? You [Page 323] have an implacable mind to vent your Spleen and Rancour against the Clergy, but you are so conscious to your self of Impudence and Disingenuity, that you are ashamed of the folly and the foulness of your own reproaches, and that per­petually runs you up into these ridicu­lous Contradictions. Could any man in the World beside your self have been so precipitate as to suggest that the Clergy are less fitted than others by Education for Political Affairs, and yet in the same breath confess that they have from that Education, that is proper to themselves as the Clergy, the advantage of all men in the World beside? Yes! If they would keep to their Bibles, but God therefore fru­strates Pag. 301▪ them because though knowing better, they seek and manage their Greatness by the lesser and meaner Maxims. Good Mr. In­solence! Why not they keep to their Books as well as such Truants as you? This is but a ridiculous and incredible Paradox, that those that are best ac­quainted with the Rules of Justice and Government should for that reason be under a fatal necessity not to observe them: But if they are not, then seeing they have the advantage of knowing bet­ter than others, and seeing there is no [Page 324] peculiar reason to hinder them more than others from making a right use of their knowledge, then it is unavoidable by the Confession of your own Malice, but that they must be most likely to make the best Ministers of State in the World. Nothing can possibly hinder unless God Almighty after he has bless'd men with the greatest advantages for Wisdome and Integrity should by some miraculous and immedi­ate stroak from Heaven blast and infatu­ate all their Counsels. Why! rather than fail of your spite to the Clergy, he shall come down as he did at the building of Babel, to confound all the contrivances of Church-men. For truly I think the reason that God does not bless them in Af­fairs Pag. 301. of State is because he never intended them for that Employment. Good Mr. Secretary! is there nothing can escape your knowledge? Are you not content to be admitted into the Privacy of Kings, but you must be God Almighties Colbert, understand all the intrigues of his Provi­dence, and be of the Cabinet Council to the Most high? Is it not enough that you are acquainted with the King all over; you have observed his parts, and given an account of his memory and under­standing, you have kept him company, [Page 325] and given him your Testimony of the unblameableness of his Life and Conver­sation, you have been admitted with him into his Privy Closet, and can tell what he studies, and what books he reads, what he censures and what he approves. Great favours these for a Gentleman of private condition and breeding! and yet they are not sufficient to satisfie the ambition of such a Gonzales as you, but you must be flying to Heaven forsooth by the help of your Ganzas, even as I would Pag. 76. fly thither without the help of Grace. And there you must be prying into all the se­cret Councils of Divine Providence, and you can confidently tell all the thoughts and designs of the Almighty, and write Gazets of what News in Heaven. Of all the secret ones that ever I met with, give me you for a bold one! No doubt you are no ordinary Mortal, and have your habitation at least in the High Places of Armageddon, where J. O. dwelt when he discovered all the Methods and Maxims whereby God orders the Dispensations and Revolutions of his Providence. He is the Will. Lilly, (as you are the Poor Ro­bin) of the Churches, in so much that he is able to give them an exact Ephemeris of all turns and alterations of Weather, and [Page 326] to advise them in all changes of Affairs still to keep on the same side with God himself, let him shift parties never so often: when it is seasonable to sail by a side Wind against the seeming opposition of his Providence, and when to sing Songs upon Sigionoth, and by some secret inti­mations knock quite off with him from any Good old Cause or Good old Prin­ciples. That such bold Impostours should dare to challenge any interest, how much more familiarity with the Most high! You know that he never intended Church-men for Ministers of State! You know what he intends! away you wretch! if you have any spark of Mode­sty unextinguish'd, retire into your Closet and lament and pine away for these de­sperate Blasphemies. The Ruac Hako­desh dwell in such a distemper'd and pol­luted mind as yours! it may as soon u­nite it self to a Swine. Fatuos & hujus terrae filios quod attinet (says a Jewish Zea­lot) non magis nostro judicio prophetare possunt quàm asinus & rana. Asses and Tod-poles may as soon expect the Im­pressions of the divine Spirit as such dun­ces and sots as you. And yet you do not think it enough to pretend acquaintance with the present thoughts and intentions [Page 327] of the Almighty, but you must be be­traying his future designs, and blabbing what shall be hereafter. Thus you dare Pag. 162. divine, augurate, and presage mutual fe­licity to his Majesty and the Kingdome from his gracious Declaration of Indulgence, and that what ever humane Accident may hap­pen, they will, they can never have cause to repent this action or its Consequences. Amen! I wish you a true Prophet with all my soul, nothing recreates me so much as to hear of the prosperity of my King and Countrey. But, if you should ever live to see this Declaration repented of, would it not be a sad rebuke to your con­fidence? I am sure if it were my case, I should never be able to lift up my head after it. And though we have no Laws against counterfeit Prophets, because it is rare for any man in these Northern Cli­mates to arrive to that degree of Impu­dence and Vanity, yet among the Jewish Zealots they were punish'd more severely than notorious Rogues and Cut-throats. And if you do not pretend to some par­ticular ensurance from Heaven, you add rashness to your impudence to be thus confident in your predictions of future Contingencies. For you your own self know how uncertain the success of the best Pag. 105.[Page 328] Contrivances may be, for after all things may be laid with all the depth of humane Policy, there happens lightly some uggly lit­tle contrary Accident from some quarter or other of Heaven, that frustrates and ren­ders all ridiculous (I should have been so modest as to say) successess, for wise Counsels are not rendred foolish by dis­appointment. Now was it not possible that some of these little ugly Accidents, that might or might not be fore-seen, might spoil all the success of so wise and so well-laid an Action? And therefore, (I say it again) it was not discreetly done to ensure success so boldly to so contingent an Event. There are thousands of little and great Accidents that it is not possible for humane Wisdome to prevent, that might frustrate all its good consequences, and there are some that my slender judg­ment could easily have foreseen and fore-told. It was possible that the Non-con­formists might have made ill use of his Majesties goodness and condescention to embolden their Party to more sawcy and insolent demands. This I say is possible for all the King has so obliged them by his late mercy, that if there were any such Knave, Pag. 252. there can be no such fool among them, that would ever lift up an ill thought against him. [Page 329] I know as well as you that there is not in the World a more grateful and good na­tur'd Generation of men in all other ca­ses but the case of Loyalty and of the Race of Capons. So that still I say it is possible they may forget his kindness and their own Duty; and that they will not, I think your word is no competent secu­rity. For you have pass'd it but once before, and that with your hand upon your heart, and that was when you pro­tested upon your Honour and Integrity your own reading of the fifth Epistle to Marcellinus. Beside as it is possible for the Non-conformists to be unmindful of their Duty and their Obligation to the King, so is it (you know) possible too for the Members of Parliament to be some time or other so trinkled, that no­thing shall put them in good humour but cancelling this Declaration or any other Act of Indulgence to the Non-confor­mists. And then that (though no other sinister Accident should intervene) may for all your Prophecie prove an occasion of some Repentance. You know how much I might here insult over your baf­fled Impudence, but this is enough to let you see how unadvised a thing it is to be too positive in Predictions. And now [Page 330] to return to the Clergy, have you not made an admirable speech to have them thrust out from all Offices in the State, because they are unqualified for them by their Education and that because by their Education they have peculiar ad­vantages to make the best Ministers of State, were it not that God that has pre­pared and qualified them above all other men for that employment will not bless them in it because he never intended them for it? For a lucky hand at Con­tradictions you are the man. And had you not thus demonstratively baffled your own malice, I might have confuted your rash censures of all Ages by the ex­perience and opinion of most Ages, and shewn that as none are better qualified for State-Affairs than Church-men, so none have acquitted themselves with greater Art or Success; and that things have rarely miscarried, but when their Counsels have not been effectually fol­lowed (as I shall shew anon in the Cases of Cardinal Granvile and Arch-Bishop Laud) though when all is done, you know the wisdome of a design is not to be measured by its success. But your insolence is not worth so much Correcti­on. Only look upon our next Neigh­bours [Page 331] o're-sea, and tell me to whose con­duct that King and Kingdom owe their present flourishing condition. Who were they that brought it back from the very point of dissolution to that Settlement and Grandeur it now enjoys? Were they not Church-men and did they not do it by such Counsels as you think (& perhaps as the case stood were) precipitate and sanguinary, viz. when the Nation was divided into two powerful Factions by resolving to break one to pieces for ever, that so they might not be embroil'd in Civil Wars upon every slight occasion, whenever the People grew wanton, or any Great Man hapned to be out of fa­vour, whereas the former Statesmen that were for the trinkling Policy entail'd an hereditary Civil War upon the Kingdom from Generation to Generation, even, as I remember, J. O. sayes the Lord had sworn a great while ago to destroy the Amalekites and the Kerns.

But having taken upon your self the Office of Vicar General to the Clergy of all Ages, and all Nations, Hungary, Transylvania, Bohemia, &c. you are not content to turn them all out of publique employment in the State, but you would wheedle them out of all the comforts and [Page 332] advantages of life, and perswade them to strip themselves of all the secular con­veniencies wherewith the wisdome and the bounty of former Ages have endow­ed the Church, and to accept of no other Interest or Reputation but what they gain by abstracting themselves from the world, by humility and strictness of Doctrine and Conversation, things being best preserved by the same means they were at first at­tain'd. Yes, yes, the Authority of the Priesthood consists purely in the peo­ples Opinion of their Vertue and Piety, and their Revenues in the Alms and vo­luntary Oblations of Christian People, and not in endowments of Lands and Lordships, nor grants of Secular Powers and Jurisdictions; that is to say, that be­cause the Primitive Christians were per­petually exposed to Persecutions and Martyrdoms, therefore bring forth your Rods, and Axes, and Pillories, and Whip­ping-posts, and Strappado's, and Cheilo­strophia, and Rhinolabides, and boil them, roast them, crucifie them, hang them, for things are best preserved by the same means, they were at first attain'd. But then (good Mr. Trinkle) the calami­ty of those times was the common fate of all Christian People; Clergy and [Page 333] Laity were equally involved in the same miseries, and yet I hope no Lay-man is so weak as to suppose that when Christiani­ty has got the upper-hand, and the fa­vour and protection of the Government, that he lyes under any obligation to quit those comforts and possessions of life, that he may honestly and lawfully enjoy, be­cause it was the hard and unhappy fate of the Primitive Christians to suffer the loss of all for the sake of their Religion; and why then should the Clergy be tyed more than they to an impertinent and unprofitable self-denyal? or if it be their duty to be poor and miserable, I am sure it is equally the duty of all. And there­fore in all States as Christianity prevail'd Churches were endowed with Lands and Revenues, and Churchmen priviledged with exemptions and immunities; and when it was setled as the Religion of the State, the Clergy were every where ad­mitted to a share of the Government, as they are in all other Religions of the World. And indeed who can more safe­ly be trusted with the welfare of man­kind, than such persons whose very pro­fession in prudence lays upon them pecu­liar obligations to justice and sobriety, not but that they are liable (though not [Page 334] so much) to the same miscarriages with other Mortals, but yet if they have bet­ter means to preserve them from unjust practices, they are less likely to fall into them; for the world is to be govern'd in humane wayes, and though the Divine Providence may in some rare and extra­ordinary junctures over-bear the wisdom of men, yet in its ordinary conduct of things it makes use of the most probable means, and gives a blessing proportion­able to the natural effects of things them­selves. So that it is a pretence only fit for such as are void of all other pretence, to say that though Clergy-men are the best qualified of all men in the world for the managery of publique affairs, yet God will never bless their endeavours, how good or pious soever, because he never intended them for that employ­ment. But such is the unhappy fate of the Clergy, that they must be subjected to the lash of every proud and wanton pedant, and if there be any man in any Age more remarkably ill-natured, he is sure to be venting his malice and choler upon the Sacred Office, though in ours every thing can be laying heavy and un­reasonable burdens upon the backs of the Clergy; and as rare a thing as it was in [Page 335] the time of yore, in our dayes every Ani­mal has confidence enough to bray forth his reproofs of the Prophets madness. And nothing more familiar than for such men as have a mind to exempt them­selves from the great and indispensable obligations of Religion to be alwayes prescribling idle and unnecessary severi­ties to Church-men; and though they indulge themselves in the most licentious courses, yet they will by no means allow them the common and ordinary com­forts of life. It is a crime in a Clergy-man to be happy, nay to be a man. And if he will but be unkind and uncivil to himself, they will love him for that, though for nothing else. This is very hard dealing, and one would think very strange, and yet there are two very ob­vious reasons of it beside the general principle of ill-nature.

1. There are some men that dare not bid open defiance to all Religion, and yet have no mind to be brought under the obligations of real vertue and goodness, and therefore in excuse of their own neglect are willing to stretch the Pre­cepts and Duties of the Gospel to an im­practicable severity, and thereby they make Apology to themselves for their [Page 336] own negligence, in that it is not to be expected from men of business,) and that live in the world, and in the middest of temptations, that they should attend so constantly to that height of rigour and austerity, that (as they will have it) the Laws of Religion require. No, this con­cerns Parsons and Church-men, and such whose Trade it is to profess and pretend to a greater strictness than their neigh­bours. But for them it is enough to be solemn and serious at certain seasons of devotion, and to expiate all the wicked­ness of their lives by doing penance now and then in some childish and unprofita­ble instances of mortification. People will endure any thing in Religion rather than be truly vertuous. And this is the great disadvantage of the Church of Eng­land (as to interest) that it teaches men the plain and practicable precepts of the Gospel, such as concern their lives and conversations, and does not allow any tricks of eluding or baulking their duty, it does not feed them with push-pin. Or­thodoxy and Scholastick Nothings about Faith, and Justification, and procat [...]rtick causes, nor commute Penances and Pray­ers for the habitual practice of Vertue and Holiness; but if men will mortifie [Page 337] their own vices and passions, joyn the love of God with the love of their neigh­bour, and endeavour after an entire con­formity to the Laws of their Religion, well and good, she will administer com­fort to an uniform and universal obe­dience. But these though they are very plain, are grievous hard sayings; they grate upon mens pleasures and profits, and pluck out right eyes, and cut off right hands, for there is scarce any man but has his peculiar and darling vice, for which, so it may be indulged, men are content to make any satisfaction. And when I discoursed of the Return of Po­pery I might have insisted upon this as one of the greatest grounds of danger; that men will not endure the plain deal­ing of the Church of England, but they must have a Religion that will be more compliant with their humours, and re­concile some vices with the hopes of Eternal Life. And this is the main sub­tilty of the Church of Rome, she has found out wayes at the same time to ease the Consciences of wicked men, and to ad­vance her own wealth and grandeur; though that which is most of all taking is, that their Priests whatever burthen they lay upon the people seem to take [Page 338] the heaviest end of it upon their own shoulders, and take off their envy by di­vorcing themselves from some of the most desirable comforts of life for a state of self-denyal and austerity. And whilst those self-chosen mortifications are look­ed upon as the main exercises of Religi­on, that satisfies the minds and excuses the engagements of others, in that it is plainly inconsistent with their condition in the world, and therefore cannot rea­sonably be required of them but only at some certain seasons of looking demure­ly, and with a solemn face, and that quits all scores. This I say is that which makes some men deal so hardly with the Cler­gy as to except them from all the rights of humane nature, and comforts of hu­mane life; it is only that they may make them their Asses to carry their burthens, and excuse their compliance by placing their Piety in some fool-hardy or sloven­ly trifle that is made peculiar to their profession. And then if they are but nasty or melancholy they are brave men and deserve preferment. But whilst we deal plainly with the people, and make no distinction between Seculars and Ec­clesiasticks as to the necessity and obli­gation of constant and uniform obedi­ence [Page 339] to the Laws of Christ, that is into­lerable, and in revenge to this severity, they will task us to some troublesome and impertinent drudgery, and if we will not submit to the insolence of their folly and malice, rail at us for refusing to submit to the rules and orders of our own Profession.

This is the first, and perhaps main ac­count of some mens impertinent imposi­tions upon the Clergy, the second is more obvious and easily betrays it self, for if at any time we pursue this Doctrine to its Application, we shall find it preached, and chiefly insisted upon in matters of Right and Wrong between Church-men and themselves. If they demand their Dues, oh Sirs! Ministers must not be co­vetous and worldly minded, but it seems themselves may be so and knavish too, for so they are if there be any justice and equity in the world, when they defraud them of their Legal Rights. If they re­new a Lease, they must abate of the old Rents; for Ministers must be merciful and charitable, and because they must be so, they must for ever suffer them­selves to be cheated, impair the Church-Revenues to bestow an Alms upon a Great Man, and commit sacriledge to a­void [Page 340] covetousness. But alas! these are knavish and ridiculous devices, fit for none but Sots either to use or to regard; as if it were covetousness in them not to suffer themselves to be oppress'd or de­frauded; as if it were hard dealing to keep off private men from preying upon the small Remainder of the Churches Pa­trimony; as if it were a sin in them to de­mand their Right, but none in others to with-hold it; in a word, as if the measures of justice and common honesty were not the same to all men. And yet a goodly Casuist of the Modern Reformation, viz. from the bondage of Prelatical and Re­gal Tyranny, has set it down for a cer­tain rule of Conscience, that in Ministers of the Gospel, contention (that is de­manding their Tythes) though for their own Right is scarce allowable. These things certainly are too fond and unrea­sonable of themselves to be seriously be­lieved by those that pretend them. But they are resolved to be dishonest, and then it is easie to take up maximes suita­ble to their resolution. Though I am apt to think that in you this Levelling Principle of reducing the Clergy to a Pension according to the Dutch Modern Orthodoxy, proceeds rather from envy [Page 341] than interest, and yet you may as well make the same proposal to all mankind to forgo all their Proprieties, because it was your ill fate to be rookt of your own Fortune at Picquet.

But yet whilst you recommend the vertue of Sacriledge to His Majesty, as he would clear himself from the only blemish of his Conversation, you do but lose your labour, and it is well if you do not lose something else. For you must entertain a very mean opinion of his wis­dome and understanding, if you think he can be so weak and unwary as to be wheadled to divest himself of one of the strongest and best securities of his Crown. For whilst all Ecclesiastical Dignities are held immediately of that, all that enjoy them are engaged as well by Interest as Duty to its Service; whereby the Prince keeps that part of the Nation at his own Devotion, that ordinarily keep the great­est part of it at theirs: Whereas if these Preferments were alienated, and the Clergy forced to depend more upon the Charity and Contributions of the Peo­ple, they would lye under some shrewd temptations (I mean as many of them, whose Consciences are not touched with any high sense of Honour and Loyalty, [Page 342] and men that are poor and despicable are not wont much to regard those vertues) to carry on any design to please their proud Masters. And of this our late Re­bellion affords a very remarkable in­stance, in which none were more con­spicuous for Loyalty than the Dignified Clergy, and none greater Incendiaries than the Mercenary Preachers and Le­cturers, who subsisted purely by the Be­nevolence and arbitrary Pensions of the People. All this is so infinitely plain and obvious, that whoever thinks our Go­vernours capable of any such designs, must first have so mean an opinion of their Wisdom and Abilities, as to think that they have no more wit than directly to weaken and enervate their own in­terest. Neither can I think so dishonour­ably of the People of the Nation (Game­sters only excepted) as to imagine that they should desire the dissolution of the Churches Patrimony; seeing it is a pub­lique inheritance, and of equal advantage to all, in that the Ecclesiastical Demesns are not confined to a Tribe or a Family, nor entail'd upon the Men but the Ser­vice, so that every man has liberty to par­ticipate the publique benefit, and here is an handsome provision for any man, that [Page 343] will render himself capable of it, and there is no Gentleman but may, and or­dinarily does, dispose of one Son to the Church, as well as a second to the Law, and a third to Merchandise, whereas if it were preyed upon and devoured by hun­gry Gamesters, there are few families but would suffer loss as well as the present Possessors. At least you may much more reasonably envy the Old Gentlemen of Suttons Hospital than the Dignified Cler­gy, because that is a provision for Persons after they are grown useless and unser­viceable in the world, whereas the Dig­nities of the Church serve to reward and encourage the industry of such as are of all men the most necessary and useful to the Common-wealth. And yet so un­conceivably spiteful is the envy of the Fanatique Hirelings, that because them­selves are maintain'd upon the Alms, and out of the baskets of their followers, la­bour to raise the peoples indignation a­gainst all Ecclesiastical Revenues; inso­much that if any of them have at any time a mind to exercise their zeal and malice, they fall a whetting their claws upon Gowns and Cassocks; and to be alwayes inveighing against any comfor­table subsistence of the Clergy, is the [Page 344] most undoubted symptom and discovery of a Zealous Brother. And every Mecha­nick, that for his parts and education is qualified for nothing higher than the Clerks and the Sextons Office, to tune Psalms or dig graves, thinks much of the Doctors Allowance as wanton and super­fluous, though it be short of the Returns of his own mean and small-ware Trade. And when an ingenious Person has spent his Youth, and too often his Estate to fit himself for this Sacred Employment, this is a great encouragement and a doughty reward for one of an ingenuous and learned education to be trampled upon by every illiterate and conceited Clown. And though these men are not much to be admired for their manners and inge­nuity upon any account, yet their bar­barity shews it self in nothing more shamelesly than this insolence towards men so infinitely their betters by the right both of their parts and their breed­ing. This is a rudeness peculiar to them­selves from all other Savages in the world beside. And though we rake the East and the West Indies, there are no People so prodigiously fall'n from all sense of humanity and civil manners, as to think their Priesthood the most plau­sible [Page 345] Object, upon which they can wreck their Spite and Malice, much less to think it an Argument of their Saint-ship and acceptance with their Gods to af­front and vilifie the Officers of their sa­cred Rites.

But as for your suggesting to the King his right of assuming Church-revenues, I must confess it is very kindly and obli­gingly offer'd, and first like so great a Pa­tron of the Church of England, that it e­ven joys your heart to hear any thing well said of her, and secondly like so great a Patriot of the Subjects Liberties, that out of pure love to mankind admonishes Kings not only to preserve their Rights but to yield to their Infirmities. Now whatever Liberties the Subject may claim, they are all founded upon such Grants of Princes or such Laws of Pro­priety as are at least confirm'd and ratifi­ed by Royal Assent. And then if you look into the most ancient and (as the Lawyers inform us) fundamental Consti­tutions of this Realm, I believe you will scarce find any other Liberties of the Sub­ject so firmly establish'd, as the Rights and Immunities of the Church; so that by the same right and with the same ho­nesty that you fancy the King may seize [Page 346] its revenues, he may as well chalenge a­ny mans Inheritance; nay, and reassume all the Demesnes of the Kingdome to the use of the Crown. So that whatsoever Liberties the Subjects of England may or do claim, this suggestion subverts them all, cancels all Propriety, and throws up every mans Estate into the hands of his supreme Landlord. Had it not been for the unfortunate adventure at Pic­quet, I am apt to believe you would have as little approved this Doctrine as your Neighbours. And it cannot but be so edifying with the Nobility and Gentry, that the Parliament will no doubt at the next Session think themselves obliged to see you sufficiently trinkled for your good advice.

But 'tis time to have done with your censure of the Clergy of all former Ages and all foreign Churches, and I will say no more in their behalf, because my age has not given me leave to be acquainted with the Patriarchs that lived either be­fore or immediately after the Flood, nor my Travels with the Bishops of Munster, Cullen, and Strasburgh. But your Ma­lice rises against the Clergy of our own Age and Nation, and for their sakes is it that you have bestowed this obliging [Page 347] Character upon the Clergy of all former Ages. And here that you may not be mi­staken, you begin with much circumspe­ction, your Oratio expurgatoria to the Bo­dy of the English Clergy, who have been ever Pag. 237. since the Reformation of the most eminent for Divinity and Piety in all Christendome. Though by the way I presume you mean not Hugh Peters for his Piety because he was hanged, nor J. O. for his Divinity because he deserves it, nor the Bishops for either, because you esteem them, as you would have us, no part of the body of the English Clergy. But whoever is meant, be sure there is mischief at hand, and it is near breaking out, for a Jacal does not more naturally attend a Lyon, nor Murther follow a Long-Parliament Fast, than malice does your most solemn and sweet-lip'd Apologies. And thus out it comes. Those you intend are only a Pag. 238, 9, 40. particular Bran of persons, who will in spite of Fate be accounted the Church of England, men that to encrease their own Splendour, care not though they set all on flame about them; men that have devested themselves of all Humanity and all good manners; men that would never endure any Overture towards the Peace of the Church and Nation wherein they lived; [Page 348] lastly, men that have always been for the most precipitate, brutish, and sanguinary Counsels. Now though the Character a­gree well enough, and you have ever been a deep Youth, yet I cannot think you intend either Hugh Peters his Bran, or J. O's Bran, or the Tryers Bran, or Usinulca's Bran, or any other Fanatique or Modern Orthodox Bran; but plain­ly and sincerely Arch-Bishop Land's Bran, the Bran that deformed the whole Reign of the best Prince that ever weilded English Scepter, the Bran of Ceremo­nies, and the Bran of Arminianism, in short the Bran that will not depart from the Church as 'tis by Law establish'd on­ly to save the credit of some sturdy Swiss that will not conform; for that is your only charge against them that they will not be brought to temper and moderati­on, nor make the least abatement to bring the honest Presbyterians off with some little reputation. But your mean­ing is better to be understood by the A­pologies you make to the Church of Eng­land it self. She has not a more dutiful and devout child than you, you cannot name her but you are immediately upon your knees, and begging her Blessing. And it even joys your heart to hear any Pag. 270.[Page 349] thing well said of her, and as it is by Law establish'd has such a stock of solid and de­served Reputation, that you could even weep for joy. And yet are you all this while most lovingly inveighing against her legal Establishments; Her three Ce­remonies you will not endure for all the World, because they are (you know) as it were Sacraments, and that because they want nothing of a Sacramental Na­ture but a Sacramental Nature, and so are (as you know too) a kind of Antisa­craments. And so obtruded upon the Church Pag. 219. that without condescending to these additi­onal inventions, no man is to be admitted to partake of the true Sacraments which were of Christs appointing. A dutiful ex­pression of your obedience to the Church as establish'd by Law, that she Tyranni­cally obtrudes Antisacraments to the prejudice of Christs own true Sacraments, than which worse need not be said of the most Antichristian Church in the World. And thus the Commissioners of the Worcester-house Conference obstruct­ed his Majesties felicity and the Nations settlement, because they thought it rea­sonable and convenient to stick to the present establishments of the Church till some proof of their unlawfulness was pro­duced; [Page 350] and because, when none could be produc'd, they would not condescend to that temper and moderation, as to change all her Constitutions without any other reasonable Motive than to salve the repu­tation of the Presbyterians, they must be branded for cunning and revengeful men. And good reason too, because the Non-conformists demand nothing, but what is Pag. 275. so far from doing us any harm, that it would only make us better. And yet all their demands are against our legal Esta­blishments; of which your worship is so enamour'd. And as for the Act of Uni­formity, and that superfoetation of Acts that followed after it, though they were all establish'd by Law, yet were they procured by trinkling, nay by Bishops trinkling, and for that reason serve on­ly to expose the Wisdome of King and Parliament to after Ages. Another spe­cial commendation of the Church of England as by Law establish'd, that its Legal Establishments are so foolish as to be a perpetual Testimony of the Law-makers Folly. Find me out a Fanatique in Hungary, Transylvania, Bohemia, Scot­land, Geneva, Pin-makers Hall, J. O's Congregation, that may not boast his deep respect and reverence to the Church [Page 351] of England upon as good Terms as your self. So that it is plain here you did but Personam induere of an honest Zealot, for say what you will you must and shall know, that all Zealots are not Rogues and Cut-throats. And after all your coun­terfeit reverence you mean no body else by this particular Bran than the Bishops and the Clergy of the Church of England as 'tis by Law establish'd. Upon them it is that you dispense forth this sweet Chara­cter with so much bounty, and in the very spirit of meekness.

And in the first place Arch-bishop Laud, cannot lye quiet in his Grave, but after a great many fair and foul words as con­sistent with themselves as the rest of your Book, you are pleased at length to score all the miscarriages of the late Kings Reign, and all the miseries of the late War upon his head and Conscience. I suppose because he was a man so learned, so pious, so wise, so studious to do both God, and his Majesty good service, you thought he was better able to bear it than some others whose reputation was not altoge­ther so clear and unquestionable. But poor Bishop Laud! this is hard measure, that when never any man's Innocence clear'd it self so gallantly from all the as­saults [Page 352] of Malice and Calumny, his vene­rable ashes should be thus insolently ar­raign'd by every bold and Fanatique Blockhead. For notwithstanding the vigour and activity of his mind, his zeal for the settlement and prosperity of the Church, his care to reduce Religion to sober and justifiable Principles, his Inte­rest in the Kings favour and Counsels, yet was he so wise and so pious in the con­duct of all his affairs; that when he was devested of all Power and Protection, when he was exposed to the violence and outrage of the people, when Calumny was let loose upon him, when he was treated not only without mercy but ju­stice and common civility, when Libels and Petitions against him were reward­ed, when tumults and clamours were in­vited, when he was even overwhelm'd with the number of Slanders, Jealousies, and Accusations, when he was prosecu­ted by some with the utmost Fraud and Artifice, by others with an unheard of malice and violence; when his Murther was decreed with an absolute Doom be­fore his Trial; when his impeachment was drawn up in the most heinous and aggravating terms, when the Evidence was managed with an unusual vehemence [Page 353] and animosity; yet after all this his In­nocence appear'd so clear, and his Inte­grity so unblemish'd, that not only his Judges but his very enemies were con­vinced and ashamed of their own Accu­sations. For when the particular Arti­cles of his Charge came to be examined; they proved after the expence of a great deal of time, and wit, and eloquence so trifling and silly, that they durst not ven­ture to proceed any farther against him in way of legal Tryal, and so were for­ced to condemn him (and he was the first and last that was ever so condemned) by Ordinance of Parliament without any o­ther Formality than bringing him once to the Commons Bar, for fashion sake; that he might not be condemn'd unseen as he was unhear'd; but condemn'd he was for no other Crime than that of cu­mulative Treason, that is what you please, and by this Impudence they might take away the life of any innocent man, if ei­ther they hated him, or he liked not them. But the Remarque that his Histo­rian has made upon the review of all their proceedings against him is so just and observable, that all Circumstances consider'd, it will appear the highest Act of Malice and Impudence that ever was [Page 354] before committed (for since it has been outdone) by any Age and under any Go­vernment in the World. Viz. ‘That as the predominant Party in the united The Life of A. B. Laud. Pag. 495. Provinces, to bring about their ends in the death of Barnevelt, subverted all those fundamental Laws of the Bel­gick Liberty for maintenance whereof they took up Arms against Philip the second: So the Contrivers of this mis­chief had violated all the fundamental Laws of the English Government, for maintenance whereof they had preten­ded to take up Arms against the King. It was (said they) a fundamental Law of the English Government, and the first Article in the Magna Charta, that the Church of England shall be free, and shall have all her whole Rights and Privi­ledges inviolable. Yet to make way unto the condemnation of this inno­cent man, the Bishops must be voted out of their place in Parliament, which most of them have held far longer in their Predecessors, than any of our no­ble Families in their Progenitors; and if the Lords refuse to give way unto it (as at first they did) the people must come down to the house in multitudes, and cry No Bishops, no Bishops, at the [Page 355] Parliament doors; till by the Terrour of the Tumults they extort it from them. It is a fundamental Law of the English Liberty, That no Free-man shall be taken or imprisoned without cause shewn; or be detained without being brought unto his answer in due form of Law. Yet here we see a Free-man im­prisoned ten whole weeks together be­fore any charge was brought against him; and kept in Prison three whole Years more, before his general accusa­tion was by them reduced unto parti­culars; and for a Year almost detain'd close Prisoner, without being brought unto his answer as the Law requires. It is a fundamental Law of the English Government, That no man be disseized of his Free-hold or Liberties but by the known Laws of the Land. Yet here we see a man disseized of his Rents and Lands, spoiled of his Goods, depri­ved of his Jurisdiction, devested of his Right of Patronage; and all this done when he was so far from being convicted by the Laws of the Land, that no particular charge was so much as thought of. It is a fundamental Law of the English Liberty, that no man shall be condemned or put to death [Page 356] but by the Lawful Judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land; that is, in the ordinary way of Legal Tryal: and sure an Ordinance of both Houses without the Royal Assent is no part of the Law of England, nor held an ordinary way of Tryal for the English Subject, or ever reckoned to be such in former times. And finally, it is a Fundamen­tal Law in the English Government, That if any other Cause (than those re­cited in the Statute of King Edward III.) which is supposed to be Treason, do happen before any of his Majesties Ju­stices, the Justices shall tarry without giving Judgment, till the Cause be shewn and declared before the King and his Parliament, whether it ought to be judg­ed Treason or not. Yet here we have a new-found Treason, never known be­fore, nor declared such by any of his Majesties Justices, nor ever brought to be consider'd of by the King and his Parliament, but only Voted to be such (without Precedent or Example) by some of those Members which sat at West-minster, who were resolved to have it so for their private ends, &c.’

Is not this right Presbyterian Ingenu­ity, to rebel against the King only for the [Page 357] defence and maintenance of the funda­mental Laws, and yet in all their pro­ceedings violate not only all the funda­mental Laws they pretended to fight for, but all the more fundamental Laws of nature and humanity? The Arch-Bishop was to be murther'd to please the Kirk, and with his blood was the Covenant to be seal'd; but then to prosecute him with so much violence, to load him with so much accusation, to tire him out with all the affronts and indignities of spite and zeal, to rake into his whole Life up to his very Child-hood to gather materials for an Impeachment, and yet after all this, when they were convinced of the inno­cence of his actions, and the inhumanity of their own proceedings, to condemn him as a Traytor and an Execrable Per­son, without, nay against a Legal Tryal, and then put him to death against all the Laws of the Realm, and all the Rules of Natural Justice, is such a prodigious piece of impudence as sufficiently discovers what kind of Creatures they were that were the contrivers and authours of his Murther. It is true Presbyterian impu­dence. But now are not you a right good natured Wretch to charge a man so learned, so wise, so pious, and so studious [Page 358] of doing God and His Majesty good service, of deforming the whole Reign of the best Prince that ever wielded the English Sce­pter; when the very men that murther'd him have left such an irrefragable te­stimony of his Innocence and Integrity, in that though they had the confidence to overwhelm him with Accusations, yet they had not the confidence to with­stand his Defence. And what more am­ple testimony could they have left to Po­sterity than when they had taken so much pains to murther him with some shew of Law and Justice, they should at last be forced to betake themselves to such ille­gal and violent proceedings, as were ne­ver put in practice before or after? Is this your additional Civility wherewith you consecrate the ashes of the deceased? Are these your Elogies of a man so learn­ed, so pious, so wise, so studious both of the Service of God and the King, that he deformed both? What accusatory spirit could desire better play against him than you have given in his Vindication? But however you recreate your self with believ­ing that your simple judgement cannot be­yond your intention (it seems when you print Books you intend no body should read or regard them beside your self) [Page 359] abate any thing of his just value with o­thers. And thus you never oyl your hoan neither but to whet your razor, and cut the mans throat whom you would seem to flatter and fawn upon. These leering and mannerly abuses that are sug­gested under pretence of friendship are much more impudent and malicious than down-right railing. Neither is there any hypocrisie so ridiculous, as to shrink back and protest all the tenderness in the world to a mans reputation, and yet at the same time of your own accord, and without any asking go about to blast it for ever with the most spiteful and vene­mous suggestions, and then think to wipe your mouth, and by a counterfeit smile or two make amends for all this treache­ry. And when you have stab'd a man to the heart, excuse all your officious vi­rulence by crying, whilst you are giving the mortal stroak, Sir, I beg your par­don, I intend no harm; and however I may in publique make bold to traduce your memory, yet still I recreate my self with believing that my simple judgement cannot beyond my intention abate any thing of your just value with others. So that it seems when you publish any thing to a mans disparagement you do not in­tend [Page 360] to be believed. It is a Dove-like Serpent that never stings but when it kisses too; but yet it is time for shame to give over this out-worn cheat, it is now too impudent and palpable to im­pose upon any mans credulity, it did you service thirty years since, when you de­throned his late Majesty under pretence of making him the most Glorious King that ever weilded the English Scepter; but you must not after so long an expe­rience of your hypocrisie and leasings presume so rudely upon the silliness of mankind, as to think at this time of day of cheating and abusing them with such ridiculous contradictions.

And now when you remark it as the great weakness of the late King that he Pag. 302. trusted his exquisite understanding to the Clergies keeping, it is plain you mean Arch-bishop Laud; and I pray with whom could he better trust it than a man so learned, so pious, so wise, and that studied to do both God and his Majesty good ser­vice? Here are all the Qualifications of an able and an honest Statesman; so that though the Clergy were not ordinarily so well fitted by education as others for Political Affairs, yet it is evident Arch-bishop Laud was, being both wise, [Page 361] and learned, and pious; and this is as great a character as can be given of any Favourite in any age. So that whereas you object it as the great over-sight and infirmity of his late Majesty that he com­mitted his exquisite understanding to the Arch-bishops keeping, you could not have given a greater proof of his wisdom than to make choice of a man so admi­rably qualified to do him service; nei­ther can you blame him for being igno­rant that God would not bless a Church-man Pag. 301. in Affairs of State, because he never intended him for that employment; when all Princes were as little aware of it as his Majesty, till you were pleased to in­form them. So that it must be consessed that he followed the best Light (that as J. O. speaks) God held forth as the horns in his hand to the believers of that Gene­ration; for then he had no reason to suppose that he could do better than to trust his Affairs with a man learned, and wise, and pious, not being bless'd with your Revelations from the high places of Armageddon. And yet for all this had the Arch-bishops precipitate, violent, ri­gorous, sanguinary, and extreme Coun­sels been followed, I am apt to think it had by the blessing of God been the most [Page 362] likely way to prevent all the mischiefs of the late Rebellion. He saw plainly enough what the Antimonarchical Fa­ction aim'd at, how they had prepared the People for Confusion, how they had encombred the Kings Affairs, and that there was no probable way of escape for his Majesty but by some violent break­ing through those difficulties in which they had entangled his Government. And if the Faction had been convinced by any thing but Declarations, that the King would not bear such insufferable Affronts against his Crown and Preroga­tive, it is at least to be supposed that they would never have attempted it with such open and impudent endeavours. But though he committed his exquisite under­standing to the Arch-bishops keeping, he kept his own sweet-nature and Gentle­mans Memory to himself; for being a person of an incomparable goodness, he was strangely easie to forget and forgive the boldest injuries; and that was all the use they made of his gentleness to encourage one another in their disloyal Practices, till at length they proceeded to demand his Crown; and when for meer peace and goodness-sake he had granted them one half of it, by vertue [Page 363] of that they fought for the other. And as little as the Arch-bishop gain'd upon them by his Priestly implacableness, the King gain'd much less by his Princely Condescensions. They were already resol­ved upon Rebellion; and then every thing was an occasion of Tumult, when they were resolved to tumultuare upon every occasion. And though the War be no more to be imputed to the Kings goodness than the wickedness of impeni­tent sinners is to Gods mercy, yet had they not shamelesly presumed upon that, they (though Presbyterians) could never have had the confidence to treat him as they did. Nay, so little did he work up­on them by the good-nature of all his condescensions, that they perpetually set themselves to pick quarrels and take ex­ceptions at the most obliging words; as for example, in the Bill of pressing and leavying Souldiers by Authority of Par­liament, when he had made a passionate Speech to them to move their pity to­wards the lamentable estate of his Pro­testant Subjects in Ireland, and to dis­patch their supplies for suppressing the Rebellion, and to avoid dispute and de­lay, he offers them to pass their own Bill (that they were then framing) though [Page 364] expresly against his undoubted Preroga­tive, so it might be done with a salvo jure, leaving the Debate to a better and more quiet season. How think you did these meek-natured men (that had they not been forced to it by Laud and Sib­thorpianism could never have lift up an ill thought against the King) requite all this tenderness and condescension, but immediately Vote a Petition (i. e. a Re­monstrance) to represent to his Majesty how he had violated the ancient, lawful, and undoubted Priviledges and Liber­ties of Parliament, by taking notice of any Matter (though it were Town-talk) in agitation in either House, before it was presented to his Majesty in due course of Parliament, and humbly beseech (i. e. threaten) him to make known the Per­sons, that by their Evil Counsels had in­duced him to it, that they might be brought to condign punishment, i. e. be affronted, and severely handled only for being acquainted with the King. Were not these men resolved upon it, to re­nounce all sense of Duty and respect to their Prince, that could seize such an ad­vantage of discontent in such a sad jun­cture of Affairs from such a slight and un­just occasion? And what way was there [Page 365] to deal with them but by such violent and precipitate Counsels as you impute to the Arch-bishop? They were (you see plainly from all their proceedings) proof against all the obligations of goodness and ingenuity, and then there is no way left but to suppress them by force and rigour; and if that fail'd, it was only because the Faction was grown too strong for the Go­vernment. And 'tis possible, nay likely, that if the King had through his whole Reign taken contrary Counsels and Courses, yet the event might have been the same, because however he carried Himself and his Affairs, they were re­solved to pursue their Democratical de­signs, and had as the world went Power and Interest enough so to confound his Government, till they brought him into a necessity of a Civil War.

But the three Rocks upon which this Man so learned, so wise, so pious, ruin'd the King and Kingdom, were Sibthorp, Arminianism, and the Scotch Liturgy, so as not to leave it in the power of the Re­bels to prevent the war. For they alas! Righteous Men! acted in the sincerity of their Hearts, and faithful discharge of their Consciences, and were only forced into Arms in Defence of the King, King­dom [Page 366] and Themselves by Sibthorp, Armi­nianism, and the Liturgy.

But as for the Story of Sibthorp and the Loan-money, in short, thus it hapned: In all the Parliaments under the late Kings Reign there was alwayes a strong Cabal of ill-affected persons, that resolved to lay hold on all Advantages, which way so­ever Affairs were managed, to embroil the Government, and bring the King in­to such streights as should make him ob­noxious to their Power; and to this pur­pose they put him upon expensive wars, and when they had so done, obstructed all Supplies by falling to complaints of Grievances, and disputes of Liberties and Priviledges, and Remonstrances against his Government, and Petitions of Re­dress, that is to say, by assaulting him with Demands and Threatnings, and however things were Reformed, yet these Malevolent Persons (as his Majesty Declar. March 10. 1623. expresses it) like Empyricks and lewd Ar­tists did strive to make new work, and to have some disease on foot, to keep themselves in request, and to be employed and en­tertain'd in the Cure, chiefly by raising jealousies and designs upon their Religi­on, a wicked Practice (sayes the King) that Ibid. they took up not for any care that they had [Page 367] of the Church, but only as a plausible Theme to deprave our Government, as if We, our Clergy, and Counsel, were either senseless or careless of Religion; with many other wic­ked Arts and Practices that the Declara­tion recapitulates, p. 8, 9, 10.

But the King being engaged in a fo­reign War in defence of his Unkle the King of Denmark by the Counsels and Perswasions of both Houses of Parlia­ment, with great promises of Assistance and Supply, and these being still divert­ed by endless Disputes about Liberties and Priviledges, and bold demands to abate the Powers of the Crown, he saw plainly (as himself declares) That they Ibid. only made use of the necessities grown upon him by that War, to inforce him to yield to Conditions incompatible with Monarchy. So that despairing of any good from the Seditious Spirits of that Parliament, he dissolves them. And in the interval, his necessities growing upon him by a new and sad disaster that had befallen his Un­kle the King of Denmark; ‘He com­mands Rus­worth's Collect. p. 418. his Council to Advise by what means and wayes he might fitly and speedily be furnish'd with Monies sui­table to the importance of the under­taking. Hereupon after a Consultati­on [Page 368] of divers dayes together, they came to this Resolution, that the urgency of Affairs not admitting the way of Par­liament, the most speedy, equal and convenient means were by a general Loan from the Subject, according as every man was Assessed in the Rolls of the last Subsidy. Upon this Result the King issues out his Declaration accord­ingly, but assuring the People, that this way (to which he was forced by the urgency of his Occasions) should not be made a Precedent for the time to come, to charge Them or their Po­sterity to the prejudice of their Just and Ancient Liberties enjoyed under his most Noble Progenitors: And pro­mising them in the word of a Prince, first to repay all such summs of Money as should be lent without fee or charge, so soon as he shall be any wayes ena­bled thereunto. And secondly, that not one Penny so borrowed, should be bestowed or expended but upon those publique and general Services, where­in every of Them, and the body of the Kingdom, their Wives, Children and Posterity, have their personal and com­mon Interest.’

When the King and his Council had [Page 369] Voted the Loan, they commanded Laud then Bishop of Bath and Wells to draw up certain Instructions to be communi­cated to the Arch-bishops, Bishops, and the rest of the Clergy of the Realm, to stir up and exhort the People to express their Zeal to the true Religion, their Duty to the King, and their Love to their Countrey, by a chearful complyance with his Majesties Commissions. And in this was represented the Afflicted Condition of the Princes and States of the Reform­ed Religion in all parts of Christendom (some being over-run, some diverted, and some disabled to give assistance:) The distress of his Unkle the King of Denmark, the great danger of losing the Sound, and thereby the Eastland and the Hamborough Trade; the Confederacy of the Pope, the House of Austria, and the French King to root out the Protestant Religion; the great Fleets both of France and Spain at that Instant endeavouring to block up Rochel; together with their Land-forces on the Coast of Brittain rea­dy to invade us. And what more impor­tant Motives could have been press'd to perswade thePeople to a ready and chearful Contribution? What more powerful and plausible Arguments could [Page 370] have been put into the mouths of the Clergy to win their Auditories to a du­tiful Compliance both with his Majesties Desires and Necessities? And this among other things brought forth Sibthorp's Ser­mon; and the man did well, and as be­came his Function, to perswade the Peo­ple that they ought in point of Consci­ence and Religion chearfully to submit to all such Taxes as were imposed upon them by Royal Authority without mur­murs and disputes. But if he intermed­led (as it is said he did) with the Kings Absolute Power of imposing Taxes with­out Consent of Parliament, according to the Laws and Constitutions of this King­dom, he went both beyond his own Com­mission, and against the Kings Declara­tion. For what had he to do in the Pul­pit with the Rights of Sovereignty, and the Priviledges of Parliament? It was none of his business to adjust the disputes of his Superiours, and he had no Autho­rity either from God or the King to inter­pose in Affairs of State; his Office was to recommend the Piety, and the Necessity of their Contributions; and though pos­sibly they were not under any enforce­ments of Complyance by the Constituti­ons of this Realm; yet to urge it upon [Page 371] their Consciences from the Common Principles and Obligations both of Na­ture and Christianity, that could not but effectually enforce their complyance with so good a King in so pious and necessary a work. But if he exceeded his Commis­sion by taking upon him to teach the Laws of the Land, and determine the Rights of the Prerogative, though he cannot be justified, yet he ought, as cir­cumstances then stood, to be in a great measure excused; because he did it at a time, when the King could not in the usual Parliamentary method obtain suf­ficient supplyes to preserve his Honour and Safety, but by Concessions shame­fully contrary to both; and that might provoke a warm man to lavish out be­yond the bounds of prudence and discre­tion. And as for Manwarings Case I need say little to it, in that it was the very same with Sibthorps, only it is observa­ble, that his Prosecution was carried on with all eagerness by such Members as Pym and Rous, men that took advantage of such imprudences, only to give coun­tenance to their own clamours; and con­firm the jealousies they had blown into the People against the King, by the in­discretion of a Countrey Vicar: though [Page 372] if there were at that time any designs of absolute Government, it was to be impu­ted to their Impudence, for when they assaulted the Royal Power with their bold and unreasonable demands, they forced it to stand upon its own guard, and then it was none of the Kings fault if he were necessitated to act sometimes by vertue of his meer Prerogative, be­cause there was no other way left to pre­serve himself or his Government; in that they had brought things to that pass, that nothing must be done unless he would either grant away all his Power to them, or keep it all to himself; for they would not share the Sovereignty with a single Person, and under pretence of priviledges of Parliament assumed the Royal Supre­macy; and as soon as they had Power and opportunity, it is well known how confidently they put in practice the very same courses, which they resisted as Acts of Arbitrary Government in the King; so that if He were at any time to have recourse to extra­parliamently proceed­ings, it was not from his own choice or inclinations, but purely from the rude­ness and insolence of their demands, which were so insufferable, that the case was plain, that he must sometimes govern [Page 373] without them or not govern at all. And what is to be done in that case the Law of self-preservation determines. I know this may be pretended, where there is no such necessity, but that I cannot help if men will abuse a just pretence to au­thorize unjust actions. It is enough to my purpose that it is plain in the case of the last King, that he never made use of his Prerogative till the Parliament be­gan to challenge it; and then he could make use of nothing else; and the dis­pute then was not whether the Preroga­tive should govern, but whether it were vested in him or them, and that brought forth the War; they fought for the Crown, and when the Parliament had won it, they were resolved to wear it, and exercised all the Jurisdictions of So­vereign Power by vertue of their Parlia­mentary Supremacy.

But to return to Manwaring, it is a great instance of the Presbyterian Huma­nity, that though the poor man had beg­ged their pardon with all the expressions of sorrow and humility, yet no less pu­nishment would appease their fury, but to be imprisoned during their pleasure, (i. e. for ever) to be fined a thousand Pounds, to be suspended three Years, [Page 374] and to be made uncapable of any farther Ecclesiastical preferment, with many o­ther heavy tokens of their displeasure, and all this only for his too eager Zeal and forwardness in the Cause of Loyalty, and so his Majesty understood it, and therefore punish'd him with preferment accordingly, to defie their pragmatical­ness, and to encourage such as promoted his and the Kingdomes service, though they might fail in a point of Prudence. But as for those persons that openly refu­sed the Loan, and affronted the Kings Commissions, and would rather suffer Imprisonment than comply in so easie and reasonable a Demand, they plainly shew­ed they had forgot that respect they owe to their Prince, and that duty they owe to God; who so severely requires them to obey, not for their wrath only, but for Conscience sake, so that it was a ma­nifest and unpalliable Breach both of Loyalty and Religion. Especially when it was so very manifest that the King was forced upon all extraordinary courses purely by the stubborness of Presbyterian Parliaments; and when they had such unquestionable assurance both from his own Temper, that he could do nothing but what was just and honourable, and [Page 375] from his Royal word that he would be always as tender of his Peoples ancient and just Liberties, as of the Rights of his Crown and Soveraignty. In these plain Circumstances as things stood between him and his Parliaments, punctilios of Law were superseded. For when it was so manifest that their demands were dis­loyal and unreasonable; and withal that on one hand their designs were worse than their Declarations, and on the o­ther that his Majesty never intended any thing but the Peace and prosperity of his Kingdomes, that was sufficient motive to overrule all good Subjects and inge­nuous men not to endanger all by stand­ing too curiously upon precedents and and niceties of old Custome. But when these men first put the King upon his ne­cessities, and then defeated him of his supplies, and so forced him upon extra­ordinary courses, and then resisted his Authority, and affronted his proceed­ings, and animated the people to stand it out against his Commissioners, and raised a disturbance and discontent through the whole Nation; and all this when they knew his Majesties occasions so urgent, and his designs so just and pious; I dare determine that whatever they were by [Page 376] the Laws of the Land, they were most notorious Rebels by all the Laws of the Gospel, though what they proved after­ward we all know, it being these very men, I mean as many of them as persist­ed in their stubborness (for some of them were converted to a more orderly tem­per by the mere power of shame and mo­desty) that were the great Authors and Ringleaders in the Long-parliament Re­bellion.

The next fatal Rock upon which this man so learned, so wise, so pious ruin'd both King and Kingdome is the Rock of Ar­minianism; for it seemed he and the Bishops had in order to setting up a new Pag. 297. kind of Papacy of their own here in Eng­land, provided themselves of a new Reli­gion in Holland, Arminianism, which though it were the Republican Opinion there, yet now they undertook to accommodate it to Monarchy, &c. But I beseech you (Sir) that are so deep a Statesman to in­form a poor sucking Divine which way Arminianism is concern'd for or against Monarchy. As for its Orthodoxy I have not a word to say, especially when it has been so sufficiently determin'd by the Sy­nod of Dort and the Assembly of West-minster, i. e. all the Modern Orthodox [Page 377] Divines of Hungary, Transylvania, Bohe­mia, and so downward to Pin-makers Hall; though how it should at all con­duce to Popery, I must confess it is be­yond my comprehension, when the con­troversie has been always more or less di­sputed in all Nations, under all Govern­ments, by all Sects and all Religions; and is bandied as much by the Divines of the Church of Rome, as by those of the Reformation. And therefore when you upbraid us that in the late beating up the Pulpit Drums against Popery, some were so ignorant as to fight the Papists with Arminian Arguments, you would have done well to tell us the Ear-mark of an Arminian Argument. I always thought they had been equally concern'd with o­ther Protestants against the Pope, and that the Arminians (howsoever otherwise heterodox) agree no more with some Papists in some things, than the Calvi­nists agree with other Papists in other things; so that their differences have no relation to their common Cause against Popery. But to what purpose is it to talk to a Gamester of matters of Divinity? For you understand none of these things but write purely by roat; you find grie­vous outcries of Arminianism in the [Page 378] Long-Parliament Speeches and Declara­tions, and you thought you might serve your turn of it as they did theirs. It was an hard word that the people understood not at all, i. e. as little as themselves did the thing, only they taught them to hate and abhorr it as Children do Bugbears and Hobgoblins. So that in those days Arminianism and Popery went always hand in hand, and if they had a mind to blast any mans Reputation, it was but sticking this name upon him and his bu­siness was done; and among other Arti­fices to give better Countenance to the Cheat, a counterfeit Letter was framed to the Rector of the Jesuites in Bruxels, in which they inform him with what Art and success they had planted here the Sovereign Drug of Arminianism to purge the Protestants from their Heresies, and to make a Party against the Puritans, that were their only dangerous enemies, with abundance more of the like impu­dent stuff, though by whom it was writ­ten, it was never yet discover'd, yet by several passages in favour of the Puritan Faction it is evident enough to all sober men, that it was a mere Gullery of their own devising. And agreeably to this they were always very liberally bestow­ing [Page 379] their stroaks upon the Monster of Ar­minianism. I desire (Mr. Speaker) that Mr. Rous his speech in the Parliam. 1628. [...] Rush. Collect. Pag. 646. we may consider the increase of Arminia­nism, an errour that makes the Grace of God lackey it after the will of man; yea I desire that we may look into the very belly and bowels of this Trojan Horse, to see if there be not men in it ready to open the Gates to Romish Tyranny and Spanish Mo­narchy: for an Arminian is the spawn of a Papist, and if there come the warmth of favour upon him, you shall see him turn in­to one of those Frogs, that rise out of the bottomless Pit; and if you mark it well, you shall see an Arminian reaching out his hand to a Papist, a Papist to a Jesuite, a Jesuite gives one hand to the Pope, and another to the King of Spain, &c. These were won­derful tricks for the deep Worthies of those times, but now nothing but an in­corrigible blockhead could either believe that they were very serious, or if they were, that they were not very silly. And yet however Arminianism (whatever it is) may stand in relation to Popery, it was a new Religion that the Prelates brought from Holland, and though it were the Re­publican Pag. 297. Opinion there (because that Facti­on was there accused of designs to reduce that Common-wealth under the Spanish [Page 380] Government) they undertook to accommo­date it to Monarchy. And they were no doubt deep Youths that could reconcile a Republican Religion to a Monarchical Interest; nay not only so, but make that the very Engine to screw up the Prerogative to an absolute Power. They must be very cunning men, and certain­ly could never have miscarried as they did, were it not that God is resolved ne­ver to bless Church-men in their State­trinklings. Otherwise I would request you to tell me in the name of Machiavel which way the Kings Prerogative is con­cern'd, whether God Almighty decreed from all Eternity to create ten Myriads of men, nine whereof he peremptorily resolved to doom to everlasting misery for the Glory or rather Ostentation of his uncontroulable Power and Domini­on, and that they might not frustrate the purpose of his Good-pleasure (as they call it) resolved again by one device or other to draw them, or rather than fail by his own irresistible Instigation to drive them into such practices as might deserve, and by consequence justifie the severity of his proceedings. Though this seems to make very much for the lawfulness and the di­vine Right of arbitrary Government, [Page 381] yet I never heard of any Calvinist that urged his opinion in this matter in behalf of the absolute and unhoopable Supremacy of Kings. Neither do I understand what it imports to any form of Government, whether a man be a Supralapsarian or a Sublapsarian, and suppose he proceed as far as Gomarus in asserting absolute and irrespective Reprobation, I would fain know wherein lyes the Republicanness of his opinion, and by what trinkling di­stinctions and subtilties the Bishops were able to accommodate it to Monarchy. At least all these Speculations of absolute and arbitrary Dominion are easily de­feated and over-ruled by Calvin's practi­cal Doctrines of Government, viz. that it is the duty of the Common people and their Trustees to assert the liberty of Sub­jects against the Tyranny and wanton­ness of Kings, and that if they grow li­centious and exorbitant in the use of their power, it is then incumbent upon the popular and inferiour Officers to re­strain and moderate their Excesses. One such blunt assertion as this is enough to baffle all the dry and speculative Conse­quences of notional Decrees; for these only swim in men's fancies, whilst there are perpetual or at least too many occasi­ons [Page 382] of reducing that to practice. And though the Consequence is very obvious that if God disposes of his Creatures by an arbitrary Decree and without regard to the merits of the Cause (for so he acts according to the Predestinarian Do­ctrine, by which he pre-ordains the great­est part of his Creatures to everlasting Destruction, and that he may not be de­feated, pre-ordains them too to as much sin as may deserve it) that then his Vice­gerents may govern the World by his own measures, and destroy any of their Subjects as they see cause for the Interest and Glory of his or their own Empire. Yet how it comes to pass I do not know, or perhaps I do know, the followers of Calvin have always been as eager in de­crying Civil as Ecclesiastical Idolatry, and to avoid the very peril and suspicion of it, have every where treated Kings as roughly as if they had taken them for a Race of Capons. It were easie to adde a great deal more gloss upon this hard word, but this may suffice to convince a wiser man than you (if he needed it) that it had not the least real concernment in the di­sputes of Monarchy or Popery; but be­ing some Foreign Monster that no body understood, it might conveniently serve [Page 383] at all turns for a standing pretence of jea­lousie and suspicion.

The third Rock, upon which this man so learned, so wise, so pious ruin'd both King and Kingdom, was, the imposing Pag. 303. the English Liturgy upon the Kirk of Scot­land. Now as to this (to be short) you must know that this very thing was co­venanted and subscribed to by the first Reformers, when they Petition'd Queen Buch. Hist. Scot. l. 19. Elizabeth's aid to expel the French; and was in some measure put in practice, till in the Minority of King James the Scotch Reformation was (as all the rest were) over-run by the Bramble, and so the Li­turgy was by degrees neglected, to make way for the new invention of extempore Prayers, in which (if we may relie upon the Kings word) the Mass Johns prayed Large De­clar. con­cern. the tumults in Scotland, printed, 1629. sometimes so ignorantly, as it was a shame to all Religion, to have the Majesty of God so barbarously spoken unto; sometimes so seditiously, that their Prayers were plain Libels, girding at Sovereignty and Autho­rity; or Lyes, being stuffed with all the false Reports in the Kingdom. But King James as soon as he came to the use of his Royal Understanding, reflecting upon the rudeness and sedition of their Pray­ers, ‘immediately as became a religious Ibid. [Page 384] Prince, bethought himself seriously how his first Reformation in that King­dom might begin at the publique wor­ship of God, which he most truly con­ceived could never be happily effected, until such time as there should be an unity and uniformity in the publique Liturgy and Service of the Church established throughout the whole King­dom.’ And to this end a publique Li­turgy was compiled by the Bishops and others of the most Eminent Clergy, and presented to the King by Arch-bishop Spotswood, and being approved and rati­fied by Royal Assent was sent back for the use of the Kirk; though (as it hap­ned) it took no great effect, by rea­son of his Quarrel with Spain that fol­lowed immediately upon it, and of his Death that followed not long after it. But upon some Addresses from the Cler­gy of that Kingdom his late Majesty re­solved to pursue the Pious and Princely design of his Royal Father, to which pur­pose he caused the same Service-Book to be sent back to himself, that after his pe­rusal and alterations (if any should be foundnecessary and convenient) it might likewise receive his Royal Authority and Approbation. And after many and se­rious [Page 385] Consultations with the Bishops and Clergy of that Kingdom, it was at length approved and publish'd, special care be­ing taken (I still relye upon the Kings Ibid, word) that the small alterations of it, in which it differs from the English Liturgy should be such, as might best comply with the minds and dispositions of the Scots, and prevent all grounds of fear or jealousie, and chiefly to avoid all mis­construction, that some Factious Spirits would have put upon it as a badge of that Churches dependance upon the Church of England, if it had been the same with the English Service-Book toti­dem verbis. And this was the Liturgy that no doubt might be an occasion of exasperating the Bramble-Faction that were already ripe for Rebellion, and re­solved to improve all disgusts whether just or unjust, real or pretended to au­thorize their disloyal resolutions.

But to let you into the main Mystery; the circumstance that gave life and vi­gour to their designs was the Act of Re­vocation that it seems hapned to be set on foot not long before, by which the King intended the Revocation of those Lands of the Church, that in the minority of King James the Great Men had to the [Page 386] prejudice of the Crown seized on and shared among themselves, to which the Occupants having no other Title beside impudent Sacriledge and Usurpation, the King thought he might justly challenge them for his own Use at least from the present Possessours. A course warranted (as himself still tells me) both by the Laws of that Kingdom, and the frequent examples of his Royal Progenitors. And this (you may believe) was provocation enough to put them into an uproar, and the People were perswaded (as I am in­formed by a good Authour from the mouth of a Noble Lord) that the in­tendment of the Act was to revoke all former Laws for suppressing of Popery and setling the Reformed Religion in the Kirk of Scotland; and this raised such Tumults that the King was forced to de­sist from the prosecution of the Act under that Title, and to carry it on, though with much opposition, under another Name of a Commission of Surrendries; a thing so offensive to the stomachs of the Lords of the Erection (as the Lay Impro­priators were there call'd) that they could never digest it; but first (accord­ing to the usual method) vented their choler in Libels, and then in Rebellion. [Page 387] For though they were satisfied for their Tythes to the utmost farthing, according to the Rates of purchasing in that King­dom; yet this fretted them, that they saw themselves rob'd of the dependence of the Clergy and Laity upon their Power, and of that Sovereign Command and Superiority which they had by the tye of Tythes exercised over them seve­ral wayes (as the King will inform you.) And this was the reason of State, beside the ease of his Subjects, that moved his Majesty to issue out this Commission: For before the greatest part of the Laity were Vassals by Tenure, and all the Cler­gy slaves by custom to the Nobility. And therefore they immediately set them­selves to work the People to a disaffe­ction to his Majesties Government, and to perswade them that these were the contrivances of the Bishops, and that un­der them there were dangerous innova­tions design'd upon their Religion. So that 'tis plain (as the King observes) that before either the Service-Book or Book of Canons, so tragically now exclaimed against, were thought on, the seeds of Sedition and discontent were sowen by the Contrivers of the Covenant, first upon the occasion of the Revocation, [Page 388] next upon occasion of the Commission of Surrenders, and lastly, upon occasion of his denying honours to some of them at his last being in that Kingdom, of which he has there given a large and particular account; and this brought forth first pri­vate traducing his Government, and then publique Libels. And now by this time Sedition was grown so ripe and ready to seed, that it wanted nothing to thrust it out, and make it shoot forth into an open Rebellion, but some fair and spe­cious pretence: They could not yet compass the Cloak of Religion, whereby to siel the eyes, and muffle the face of the Multitude, for by none of the three for­mer Occasions could they so much as pre­tend, that Religion was endanger'd or impeach'd: But so soon as they got but the least hint of any thing, which they thought might admit a misconstruction that way, they lost no time, but took Occasion by the fore-lock, knowing that either that or nothing would first facili­tate, and then perfect their designs. Now the occasion they took of fetching Reli­gion within the reach of their Pretences was the new Liturgy. And this produ­ced (I still relye upon the Kings Autho­rity) the late wicked Covenant, or pre­tended [Page 389] Holy League. Though follow­ing the pattern of all other Seditions they did pretend Religion, yet nothing was less intended by them. For when they had (sayes the Royal Understanding) re­ceived from us full satisfaction to all their desires expressed in any of their Petitions, Remonstrances or Declarations, their persisting for all that in their tumultuous and rebellious Courses, doth demon­strate to the world their weariness of be­ing govern'd by us and our Laws, by our Council, and other Officers put in Au­thority by and under us, and an itching humour of having that our Kingdom go­verned by a Table of their own devising, consisting of Persons of their own choo­sing: A Plot of which they are very fond, being an abortion of their own brain, but which indeed is such a mon­strous birth, as the like has not yet been born or bred in any Kingdom, Jewish, Christian or Pagan. Of which he after­wards describes a particular Plat-form, as Pag. 54. it was put in practice at Edinburgh. And thus observe it; you shall still find a Com­mon-wealth and Sacriledge at the bot­tom of all Rebellion, that appears under the mask and pretence of Religion. And it was these men that raised the Tumults, [Page 390] and trinkled the Rabble into all those disorderly courses that by degrees brought forth the Covenant and the War. And it is pretty observable, that the first Remonstrance at Edinburgh was made in the name of the Men, Women, Children and Servants, who being urged with the Book of Service, and having con­sider'd the same (the Children as well as the rest) humbly shew, &c. These were followed by the Burghours, and the Bur­ghours by the Gentry and Nobility. And so at length did the Scotch-war break out, in which the Liturgy was no more concern'd than the Children of Edin­burgh, whose tender Consciences (it seems) were offended at it, though in truth they deserved to be soundly whipt for beginning a War for the Cause, when the Cause was too good to be fought for.

And now consider whether you had not been better advised to let this busi­ness of the War alone, when you can no other way bring your Clients off with reputation, unless the King will be con­tent to suffer Himself, his Royal Father, and his Loyal Subjects to be impeach'd of their Rebellion? For the blame of it must light somewhere; and therefore if the Covenauters Cause were too good to [Page 391] be fought for; as little Logick as I under­stand, I understand so much, that then the Kings was too bad to be fought for; and that is enough for one Conclusion. But whatever was the occasion of the War, whether the Arch-bishop of Can­terbury and the Vicar of Brackley, as you will have it; or Ignoramus and Mr. Sel­den as a second concludes; or the School-men and the Universities as a third ob­serves; whether (I say) any or all of these accidents might contribute to it, I am not concern'd, because occasions of mis­chief are unaccountable for their being so, in that men that have a mind to it may make any thing an Occasion, and yet still the occasion shall be as innocent as (I believe) the Children of Edinburgh were: But if instead of the Occasion you desire to be satisfied in the cause of the War, seeing you have been at so much pains in transcribing an huge Gazet to Pag. 280. give me satisfaction, I think my self at least a little obliged to give you my opi­nion, and if that be not sufficient to satis­fie you, I shall only advise you to take heed of being too inquisitive, for assure your self your Party will have but little reason to con you any thanks for de­manding any farther satisfaction. Inpri­mis [Page 392] then it hapned in this War (as it does in all others) that there were some gene­ral Causes that were set on work by some particular Circumstances. As,

1. The unusual ignorance of the Com­mon People concerning their Duty and Obligation to the Government, every man supposing himself as much Master of his own Estate, as if he had lived out of all Society; and expecting that the King should be able to maintain the Common Safety without his particular Contribu­tion, and this (you may easily imagine) makes them apt to murmur and tumul­tuate in all such straits and necessities of the State as require Money and Taxes.

2. The seditiousness of Persons of bro­ken and shatter'd fortunes, and as there are great numbers of such at all times, so are they alwayes with the formost to pro­mote Disturbances in all States, because it is very possible they may make their Condition better, but impossible they should ever make it worse.

3. The great numbers of well-mean­ing men, that are usually carried down with the stream, so that though possibly they were never disobliged at Court, nor infected with Seditious Principles against the State, nor addicted to Fanatique Fa­ctions [Page 393] against the Church; yet are easily over-born with the noise of a whole Kingdom to joyn with that Party that pretends with most confidence to zeal for the publique good. These with many others are the Materials and common Principles of all Rebellion, but they ne­ver or very rarely come into action, un­less they are put upon it by some other particular and emergent Causes. And these were plainly

The Insolence and Seditiousness of the Presbyteran Preachers; for it seems the Clergy of all Parties as well as all Ages can be mischievous enough, because those that can do most good may for the same reason do most harm, and therefore it is as ordinary for some to obstruct the Cle­mency of Subjects as it is for others to ob­struct the Clemency of Kings. Now it is certain these men had gain'd a mighty esteem and reverence with the People, partly by the confidence of their pre­tences, stiling themselves Gods Ambassa­dours, and chalenging as much submis­sion to their Doctrines, as if they had wrought Miracles, or produced written Credentials from Heaven; partly by the vehemence of their tone and gesture, and the particular manner of acting their Ser­mons; [Page 394] but chiefly by the subject matter of their popular discourses, in which they were alwayes very sparing of their re­proofs against the gainful vices of trades­men, such as fraud, cozening, and cove­tousness; and on the contrary very pro­digal of their declamations and suggesti­ons against such miscarriages as were pro­per to the Government: And by in­veighing perpetually against oppression, they seem'd to take part with the People against their Superiours. But that which gave them more Authority than all this over their minds, was a certain way they had got of raising unreasonable and un­avoidable troubles of Conscience, by which means they continually kept great multitudes of well-meaning persons in perfect slavery and subjection to their own good-pleasure. Now by the advan­tage of all these Artifices it was easie for them to infuse any poyson into the minds of their Proselytes. And what Princi­ples they taught them in reference to the establish'd Government, they are so vul­garly known, and so sufficiently record­ed, that I suppose it is now very super­fluous to inform the world: It is enough that there is not one Aphorism of mis­cief and rebellion, that they did not im­pose [Page 395] upon the People under the obliga­tion of a Christian duty; as it is largely and distinctly proved out of their own words in the Book of dangerous Positions and Proceedings, that is an exact Collecti­on of all the Treason in the world. Do but read it over, and then tell me what peaceable and orderly Subjects they are like to prove, whose Consciences are act­ed by such lewd and desperate Princi­ples. But though the Puritan Preachers from their very beginning never spared themselves nor their lungs against their Governours; yet under the late Kings Reign by reason of the remiss Govern­ment of Arch-bishop Abbot, they be­came more bold and boysterous than ever, and especially when they perceived his Majesty so sincerely addicted to the Church of England, and so resolutely bent to reduce all Factious Dissenters to order and obedience, they began to think the cause brought to its last gasp, if he pro­ceeded without check to his designs; and therefore they bestir themselves, and thrash the Pulpits to exasperate the Peo­ple against the Government of the Church, and inveigh in the coarsest and most bitter expressions against that of the State. And thus by the zeal and mad­ness [Page 396] of these men, were the People at length preach'd out of all sense of their Duty and Allegiance, and by the perpe­tual roarings and bellowings of these Ge­neva Bulls were perfectly amazed into Rebellion. And that indeed was their powerful preaching to raise Armies, and beat up the Alarm to a Civil War. If any man shall be at leisure to peruse those Humiliation-Sermons, that were contriv­ed to sanctisie the Cause, he shall meet with such wretched and horrible abuses of Religion, as the wickedness of all for­mer Ages is not able to parallel. What horrid work did they make with the Word of God? How shamelesly did they urge the Prophesies of the Old Testa­ment, in defiance to the Precepts of the New? And with what intolerable pre­sumption did they load his Majesty with every burthen they could pick up against Moab or Babylon? Their impertinence was almost as bold as their impiety. And the People were rarely taught any thing beside Treason and Blasphemy. And thus were they preach'd into Arms, and converted into Rebellion; they press'd Horse and Foot out of every Text, and then arm'd them with Spite and Zeal, and that (you know) is an over-match [Page 397] for wisdome and courage. And if the Pulpit were their Poast (as you say it is) they in the strength of modern Orthodoxy, immoral Grace, and Capon grease made it good against all Enemies whatsoever.

These were the Trumpeters to the War, the next are the Leaders, and they were first ignorant and half-witted men that were blown up with a great conceit of their own sufficiency in Politiques, that had made Remarques upon Aristotle and Tacitus, that could tell stories of the Grecian and Roman Common-wealths, and begin a Speech with Sparta and Ly­curgus, and talk an hour together of the power of the Tribunes, and the privi­ledges of the People of Rome, and de­monstrate out of History, that when Au­gustus taxed the whole World, he did it not by vertue of his own Imperial Pre­rogative, but that it was granted to him by Vote and Authority of the Senate; that he being a wise Prince avoided all appearances of Absolute Sovereignty, that he submitted the management of his Power to the censure of so discreet a Consistory; and sometimes labour'd to resign all his Authority, and lay Himself and his Diadem at their feet, and at last was not by all their importunity to be [Page 398] entreated to accept of the Empire, but with a proviso of resigning his Charge, as soon as ever he had setled the Common-wealth in Peace and Safety, and there­fore only renewed the Lease of his Go­vernment every tenth year at the peti­tion of the People. Beside, that he a­voided the Titles of Dictator, and Rex and Dominus, as much as a Mariner does a Rock for fear of splitting, setting the fate of his Father Julius before him (for he too was murther'd) as a Sea-mark not to affect too great and glorious Attributes, lest he might have ship-wrack'd both the State and Himself upon the Rock of a proud or an offensive Title. This (Mr. Speaker) was the moderation of wise Princes in former Ages; they had a de­ference to the wisdom of this house, and a fatherly care for the Liberty of the Subject; They were not wont to call Parliaments, only when they were forced to it by their own necessities, to be the spunges of the Common-wealth, and by their means to squeeze the Subjects mo­ney into their own Coffers, and when they had served their own turns disband them; but to advise and consult with their great Council about the great Af­fairs of State. We have (Mr. Speaker) [Page 399] a Gracious Prince, but he is abused and mis-led by Evil Counsellers; we owe all the Mis-governments of the State, and the Affronts of this House to their Ty­ranny and Insolence. And if they will not know their Duty, however let not us forget our Trust. We have now an Opportunity put into our hands, his Ma­jesty is engaged in an expensive War, and cannot hold out without Supplyes, and therefore before we Vote that, let us present him our Remonstrances, and grant him Subsidies upon no other con­dition, than that he will first redress all our Grievances. This (Mr. Speaker) was the wisdom of Sparta and Athens, and by this method of proceeding they kept the Liberties of the Common-wealth invio­lable against all the attempts and en­croachments of Tyranny. This was the language of Parliaments in the late Kings Reign, and by these pedantick sto­ries did the ill-affected Members of the Puritan and Republican Faction obstruct and embroil all Affairs, till they plainly run the Kingdom into a necessity of a Civil War. Not that I believe they had all of them any form'd design to subvert the Government, no doubt many of them were wonderfully satisfied if the Com­pany [Page 400] would but take notice of, and ad­mire their learning; and to this purpose the same Speeches would serve indiffer­ently at all times, and upon all occasions, whether they had or had not cause of complaint. And to deal plainly with you, I have read most of the Long-Par­liament Speeches over, and though I know you will chide me for calling a whole Parliament Coxcombs, yet it is bet­ter to call them so than worse; yet this censure I dare pass upon them without any suspicion of arrogance within my self; That they were for the most part no bet­ter than School-boys Declamations, that seem'd to be made for no other end than the exercise of Wit and Rhetorique, and the Topicks from which they raised their Harangues were equally serviceable in any Cause pro or con, such as Aphorisms; Similitudes, and Sentences out of ancient Authours, but as for true reasoning they rarely seem'd to pretend to it, or endea­vour after it; in short, all their Dis­courses were much like yours, and ac­commodated to People that took Confi­dence for Reason, Non-sense for Myste­ries, and Rudeness for Wit; and a judi­cious man that compares them would al­most suspect your Book to be only a Re­hearsal, [Page 401] or rather an Epitome of their Speeches, though I am not apt to con­clude that you read them over on pur­pose to write after their Copy, because I know I it is as natural for bad wits to jump as good. There is a way of popu­lar and impertinent talking, that is com­mon to the pedantique Haranguers of all Ages. But they declaimed so long upon idle stories of Rome and Athens, and little sayings of Cato and Seneca, till they in so­ber earnest challeng'd so much of the So­vereign Power, under pretext of Liber­ty of the Subject, and Priviledge of Par­liament, as left nothing of Prerogative to the Prince, beside a little Pageantry of State and an empty Title. So that un­less his Majesty would tamely have re­sign'd his Crown, and disclaim'd all Re­gal Authority, he had no other way left to defend it from violence but by force of Arms. They had already begun to seize, and there was no way to make them unfasten but by knocking off their fin­gers.

But that which contributed as much as any thing to these disorders was the great resort of our young Gentry about that time to Geneva for Capons and Edu­cation; where being throughly instruct­ed [Page 402] in the principles of Modern Orthodoxy (and there every Tradesman and Lay-Elder was able to inform them) they ge­nerally return'd home disaffected to the establish'd Government both of Church and State, and furnish'd with Doctrines of Divinity suitable to their Principles of Policy; and by this means Calvin ob­tain'd as great an Interest and Power in the House of Commons as Lycurgus, and scarce a Speech could be made without his Institutions, and the distich of Praeter Apostolicas, &c. And so (Mr. Speaker) though Mr. Calvin the ablest Divine in the world since the death of the Apo­stles, exact an entire obedience to all Princes whether good or bad without exception or dispensation. ‘So that sup­pose Instit. l. 4. c. 20. §. 24. a negligent and slothful Prince, who has no care at all of the publique safety; who is so intent of his own pri­vate, as to make markets of all Laws and Priviledges, and to expose his Ju­stice and Favour both to open sale’ (so that according to Mr. Calvin, a Prince can­not take money for any place in Court with­out Tyranny) ‘who drains his Peoples purses to no other end, than to main­tain a vain and wastful Prodigality; and who spends his time in nothing more, [Page 403] than either the rifling of the Subjects houses, the deflouring of their Wives and Daughters, the slaughter of the innocent, &c. And though it be al­wayes implanted in the Souls of men not more to love and reverence a just and vertuous Prince, than to abominate and detest an ungodly Tyrant.’ Yet even in this case he requires Duty and Obedience from the Subject to such a Magistrate as the Minister of God. And to this purpose (Mr. Speaker) he has ad­mirably explain'd all Texts both of the Old and New Testament in favour of the Prerogative and Supremacy of Kings. But then (Mr. Speaker) we must under­stand both him and our selves aright, that when he restrains us from executing ven­geance upon Licentious Princes, ‘this must still be understood of private per­sons. Sect. 31. For if there be now any popular Officers’ (and such he knows there are every where without an if) ordained to ‘moderate the licentiousness of Kings (such as the Ephori of old set up against the Kings of Sparta, the Tribunes of the People against the Roman Consuls, and the Demarchi against the Athenian Se­nate, and with which Power perhaps, as the world now goes (and yet he [Page 404] knows the Christian world now to go so every where without a perhaps) the three Estates are furnished in each se­veral Kingdom, when they are solemnly assembled:) So far am I from hindring them from putting a restraint on the exorbitant Power of Kings, as their Office binds them, that I conceive them guilty rather of a perfidious dissimula­tion if they connive at Kings, when they play the Tyrants, or wantonly in­sult over the Common People; in that they basely betray the Subjects Liber­ty, of which they know they were made Guardians by Gods own Ordi­nance and appointment.’ This (Mr. Speaker) is our Case, we are entrusted by God and our Countrey with the Peoples Liberties, and we must give an account to both for the faithful discharge of our Trust. And wherever the fault lyes I dare not pretend to know; but this I do know, that we have (God be praised) as Gracious a Prince as ever wielded Scepter, and yet I know not by what means, though perhaps I do know, his whole Reign is de­form'd with Tyranny and Absolute Go­vernment. Mr. Speaker, it concerns us to look about us, our Lives and Liberties and (what is dearer) our Religion lyes at [Page 405] stake, let us then take Courage, and what­ever it cost, see this licentiousness curb'd, and the force of Law restored. No doubt but the King will be advised by his great Council; or if he will not, it is our duty to snatch him from a Precipice; however we must not be so slothful and perfidious as to betray the Subjects Liberty, of which (we know) we were made Guar­dians by Gods own Ordinance and appoint­ment. And thus had they got out of Mr. Calvin a Jus Divinum for the Long-Par­liament Rebellion; and under this pre­tence of being Trustees for the Peoples Liberties, they plainly usurp'd the Kings Supremacy. Nothing must be done in the Government of the State without their Advice and Approbation, and any proceedings that they disliked (and yet they disliked all that were done without them) became immediately illegal, and till they are redress'd all Government must be laid aside, and if the King hap­ned at any time to do any thing contrary to some idle precedent of Sparta and Ly­curgus, it was a manifest subversion of the Fundamental Laws. And thus by this fooling, and the help of Calvin came they at length to challenge the Sove­reignty to themselves, and to set the [Page 406] Crown upon their own heads, that is (as we all know) to suffer the King to do no­thing without them, and to assume a Power to themselves (as oft as they judg­ed it expedient) of doing every thing without the King, and this made these Pedants as troublesome in their demands as were the Rebels by design, till they had challenged every branch of the Re­gal Power.

Both these and the Zealots were ex­cellent Tools of Sedition, but they were no more than Tools, the Master-work­men were the cunning and reserved Members of the Republican Faction. For it is plain enough, that all things were govern'd in both Houses by a Cabal of such as had from the beginning (as ap­peared afterwards) a design upon the alteration of the Government. And these men were able upon all occasions to form themselves into all shapes and all parties to drive on their designs; and it was not so much their business to make Speeches, and complain of Grievances, as to perplex and obstruct the Kings Af­fairs, and by any artifices make him ob­noxious to their Power, and when that was grown great enough they under­stood their own work. Their usual trick [Page 407] was to appear alwayes with the first to comply with the Kings designs and de­sires; and when by that means they had brought him into straits, they still left him; v. g. they were perpetually putting the King upon expensive wars by great promises of assistance, and accordingly seem'd alwayes the most chearful and li­beral voters of Taxes; but yet they were sure to raise so many disputes and difficulties about other matters, that the supply was either altogether diverted or came alwayes too late. This was the par­ticular unkindness that the King com­plain'd of in all his Parliaments. But by leaving him thus perpetually in the lurch, they forced him at length to make use of some extraordinary courses; and then they presently made their advan­tage of that, to raise their clamours and complaints of Arbitrary Government, and nothing could stop their mouths till his Majesty had not only done severe pe­nance, but made ample Restitution by some special Act of Grace, whereby he granted away some considerable Branch of his Power. And so they would for a while receive him into favour again, and then anon play the same game over a­gain; and by this means they at length [Page 408] grew so much upon him, and gain'd so many advantages of him, till perceiving their own strength they command him to resign his Regal Power into their hands, or if he refuse, to stand upon his own guard, and defend himself as he can by force of Arms. And that was the con­test of the war, who should wear the Crown, He or They.

It was these men chiefly that invited back the Kirk-Army after they had a­greed to Articles of Pacification, and re­turn'd home satisfied with the Kings Con­cessions, and the abolition of Episcopa­cy, that was indeed the pretence of the Covenanters Rebellion, but very far from being the end of those men that set them on. Their business was only to bring the King under a necessity of calling a Par­liament for Money, and for that he was to pawn his Crown into their hands, and buy supplies at the price of his Sove­reignty. And it succeeded accordingly, for the King having been at a vast ex­pence in his first Expedition, was forced to summon a Parliament for fresh Sup­plies; but they no sooner met than they justified their Dear Brethren (as they call'd) the Kirk-Rebels, and so fall to their old complaints of Grievances and [Page 409] Arbitrary Government, and the illegal Proceedings of the Kings Ministers of State; and these things they must and will have redress'd, before they will take any business of money into conside­ration, and so long baffled the Kings ex­pectations, that he having no hope of any Supply from them, dissolves them, and resolves to cast himself upon the as­sistance of his better affected Subjects, and accordingly finds the greatest part of his Gentry and Nobility so sensible of their own Duty and Loyalty, and of those affronts that were put upon his Regal Power by these men in the late and for­mer Parliaments, that by their own vo­luntary Contributions they raised an Army more than sufficient to have redu­ced the Rebels to obedience. But being over-ruled by the advice of some that were alwayes too near to all his Coun­cils, and that were no friends to his Pre­rogative (though perhaps they were no enemies to Monarchy) he condescends to a Treaty, and that concludes (as these men would wish) in referring the whole Controversie to the decision of a Par­liament. And this produced the fatal Long-Parliament, that chiefly consisted of the most Seditious Members of all his [Page 410] former Parliaments. For though the greatest part of the Gentry were loyal and dutiful enough, yet it so hapned, that the Commonalty had been preach­ed into malecontentedness by the Puri­tan Preachers, they thought no man a Pa­triot of his Countrey, or fit to be trusted in Parliament, that was not a profess'd enemy to the Prerogative, and that did not oppose Taxes and Tyranny: And if any one had been so stubborn as to de­serve punishment for Sedition, and had been imprisoned or gon to Law with the King for the non-payment of a Sess of twenty or forty shillings, that gain'd him the hearts of the whole Countrey; and so upon the merit of their sufferings it came to pass that the most eminent Per­sons of the Presbyterian Faction came to be so generally elected Knights and Bur­gesses in this as well as all other Parlia­ments of his Reign; but now their dis­content was heightned partly by their former (just) imprisonments, partly by that affront, that (as they supposed) was put upon them in the dissolution of the late Parliament; And therefore having once again got possession of the House, and perceiving the Kings necessities to be greater than ever, and withall their [Page 411] own Party to be stronger and more numerous than ever, they resolved to appear more boldly than ever, and to make something of so great an advantage. And so they immediately fall upon accu­sing the King and his Ministers of all the crimes that could render them odious to the people; they charge him with designs of reestablishing the Roman Re­ligion, of subverting the fundamental Laws, of setting up Arbitrary Govern­ment, of laying aside all Parliaments, with a Thousand other Clamours and Calumnies, making use of every Acci­dent to raise matter of Accusation. And if you will look into the grand Remon­strance of the state of the Kingdom (that was the first Declaration of the War) you will find that they imputed all mis­fortunes whatsoever to the King and his evil Council. The loss of the Rochel Fleet, the diversion of the War from the West-Indies to the successess attempt up­on Cales, the Peace with Spain, the breach with France, the dissolving of former Parliaments for their stubborn­ness; the destruction of the Kings Tim­ber in the Forest of Dean, the Monopo­lies of Sope and Salt, the Sale of Nuzan­ces, the design of Coyning Brass money, [Page 412] the depriving seditious men of the com­fort and conversation of their Wives by close Imprisonments, Misdemeanours in all Courts of Justice, Bribery, Extor­sion, and buying of Offices, Suspensions of painful, learned, and pious Ministers, the decay of Trade, the loss of Mer­chants Ships by the Pyrates of Dunkirk, with all other good or bad Accidents that befel the Government, were impu­ted 1. To the Jesuited Papists who hate the Laws, as the Obstacles of that change and subversion of Religion, which they so much long for. 2. To the Bishops, and the corrupt part of the Clergy, who cherish Formality and Superstition, as the natural Effects and more probable Supports of their own Ecclesiastical Ty­ranny and Usurpation. 3. To such Coun­sellours and Courtiers, who for private ends engaged themselves to further the Interest of some foreign Princes or States, to the prejudice of his Majesty and the State at home. Though the Root of all this mischief was a Malignant and perni­cious design of subverting the fundamen­tal Laws and Principles of Government, upon which the Religion and Justice of this Kingdome are firmly establish'd. And then the common Principles, by which [Page 413] they moulded and govern'd all their particular Counsels and Actions were 1. To keep up a misunderstanding between the King and his people by their Leasings. 2. To keep down the Purity and power of Religion. 3. To bring in Arminia­nism. 4. To trinkle the King against his Parliaments. Where, by the way, you may see that you are not the first Au­thour of your own notions; your whole Book is but a short Rehearsal of the Re­monstrances, Speeches, and Declarations of the Rebels. But now must all things stand stock still till these and a Thousand grievances more are redress'd; his Mini­sters must be impeached of high Trea­son; and if he expected any comfort from them, he must buy it with the blood of his best Subjects and his fastest Friends. But you cannot here reasonably expect a compleat account of all their Injustice, their Folly, their Impudence and their Hypocrisie, when the whole World can scarce contein the History of their Wic­kedness, I am sure it can never equal it. However it is plain that they were now resolved upon the Rebellion, and so made demands accordingly. For the summe of all their Messages, Remon­strances, and Declarations was only to [Page 414] chalenge the Soveraign Power it self, and all the parts and branches of the Pre­rogative. They petition'd no more than that the King would be pleased to betray and give up his Friends to their Malice, as in the Pique of the five Members; that he would deliver up all Castles and Forts, and the whole Power of the Militia into their hands; That they might have the choosing of all the Lords of his Council, and of all great Officers of State, the Go­vernment and Education of his Children, the Power to hang Delinquents as they shall think fit, and the liberty of except­ing whom they pleased out of the Kings general Pardon; and that no Peer be permitted to sit in the house of Peers but by consent of both houses. Upon these and the like Terms, to which they stuck with an impregnable Obstinacy from first to last, they would apply themselves to settle his Revenue, and supply his neces­sities, and make him the most glorious King that ever wielded the English Scep­ter. But otherwise if he should offer to relieve himself by any extra-Parliamen­tary courses it was a breach of his sworn Trust, and a dissolution of the Govern­ment; and if any of his Subjects obeyed or assisted him, it was Treason against the [Page 415] fundamental Laws of the Land. This was as much as if they had plainly told him (and the King understood them so) Sir, it is in vain to expect Peace or Mo­ney from us unless you will be content to forgo your Crown and Royal Dignity, and to resign all your Power into our hands. This was right Presbyterian Loy­alty, and is I hope sufficient to cap your idle stories of Sibthorp, Arminianism, and the Scotch Liturgy. At least I am sure it is, after all your Hectoring and Achilli­zing about the late War in defyance of the Act of Indempnity and Oblivion, a­nother brave cast of your Modesty to up­braid my Insolence for summoning in all Pag. 75. the World, and preaching up nothing but Repentance, and so frequently calling for Testimonies, signal Marks, publick ac­knowledgments, satisfaction, recantation, &c. For as I take it here are sufficient materials and motives for Repentance. They are obliged to repent of casting a­way an hundred thousand Lives only to dethrone the King, and erect the Scep­ter of the Lord Christ; a cause, that they themselves now confess by deserting it, as foolish as that was knavish. And this is at least suspicion of guilt enough to oblige men to look about them and [Page 416] reflect seriously whether it may not lye upon their Consciences. Nothing crys so loud either for Repentance or Ven­geance as Blood, it requires the deepest Sorrow and Contrition to wash it off; so that if they were at all sensible of their Crime, or thought it a Crime at all, they would never put us to call for tokens of Repentance, they would overdo enough of their own accord in Expiation, and by the Frankness and Ingenuity of their Confessions quickly satisfie all the World of the sincerity of their change. But when they will not be brought to take a­ny notice of their former practices, or to make any acknowledgment of their former Crimes: when some of the most serious and upright of them protest their Non conviction of any guilt, and declare themselves so well satisfied in all their actings in the War that they cannot, nay that they dare not ask God forgiveness (and yet they did not think the Cause too good to be fought for.) When none of them have been so ingenuous as to beg their Princes pardon, or to make any promise of better behaviour for the time to come; in short, when they have given us all the symptoms of hardness of heart and impenitence, and yet notwithstand­ing [Page 417] all this boast the merits of their party and chalenge their Princes favour and in­dulgence from the great security that he ought to have of their peaceable and loy­al demeanour, this I think is a very impu­dent affront both to the Clemency of their Prince, and the Ingenuity of Man­kind. Especially when after they had beheld all the dire consequences of their rebellious Acts and Ordinances they were so far from acknowledging their folly, that upon the Restauration of the seclu­ded Members by the General, one of the first things they voted was to vote themselves innocent, and to lay all the mischief and wickedness of the War up­on their murther'd Prince. Thus far the Presbyterians and Independents were e­qually concern'd, but that the Presbyte­rians were no farther concern'd, they may thank the Ambition and Treachery of Oliver Cromwel more than their own good intentions. They had stript the King of his power, they had imprison'd his person, and what had they to do more after all the affronts and indignities they had offer'd him, than what the Indepen­dents did after they had wrested the Su­premacy out of their hands? For it is certain there was no living for them in [Page 418] safety if ever he (whom they had reason to suppose their irreconcileable enemy) were restored to his Throne and Sove­raign Power, and then if they had beha­ved themselves so that they could not safely trust him, that was an unremove­able Bar to his restitution. And though it is possible that they never intended to attempt his life, yet they carried things so high through the whole Progress of their Rebellion, as at least to make it ex­pedient, nay necessary for their own pre­servation; and if they had intended it they could scarce have used him more scurvily than they did. They caused his own great Seal to be broken, and a new one to be made in defyance to his Authority. His propositions of Peace and his offers of personal Treaty were of­ten denyed; an Ordinance was made, if he presumed to come within the line of Communication to secure i. e. seize his person; It was voted Treason and death without mercy for any of his Subjects to harbour and conceal him, and when Sir Thomas Fairfax was made General, the Clause for preservation of his Majesties person was left out of his Commission. And in the Scotch Declaration of 46. all their concern and care of the Kings per­son [Page 419] was only conditional, viz. as far as it was consistent with their own designs, that is (as they word it) the Preservation and defence of the true Religion, and Li­berties of the Kingdomes. That is, as you may see by their propositions that they made as the only terms of Peace, if he would resign his Crown and (which is worse) take the Covenant, they would suffer him to live; otherwise they were absolved from all Obligations towards his person, and for the preservation of his life. And when he was fall'n into the hands of the Independents and so in dan­ger enough, the question was propoun­ded to the Kirk, whether it were lawful for them to assist the King in the recove­ry of his Kingdome, and it was resolved in the Negative, and in answer to that Clause in the Covenant that was object­ed to them, for defence of the Kings per­son, they determin'd it was to be under­stood in defence and safety of the King­domes. These men no doubt are fit to be trusted that can think to satisfie them­selves and the World with such an impu­dent and ridiculous interpretation of Oaths as this. But however they intended to dispose of his person, the Rebellion as far as they avowed it put him out of his [Page 420] Throne, and setled all the Regal Power (which they call'd arbitrary Government) upon themselves. And for Subjects to take away their Princes Authority by force of Arms is little less impudent and wicked, that after that to take away his life.

Thus far the Presbyterians and Indepen­dents were equally guilty, and went hand in hand like dear Brethren; they both com­bined to depose the King, though, when that was done, the perfidious Indepen­dents did not only shake off their dear brethren, but turn'd all their ownweapons upon themselves. And thus as they enter'd into Covenant in defence of King and Par­liament, so did these enter into an Engage­ment in defence of the Parliament and Ar­my; meaning (as they did) that as the King was virtually in the Parliament, so was the Parliament virtually in the Army. And thus was their silly and sensless Distinction of the King's personal and politick Capa­city turn'd upon themselves. And the same Articles and Demands that the Parlia­ment sent to the King, they sent to the Parliament, and baffled all their Excuses by Precedents from their own Principles and Proceedings; v. g. Their Charge a­gainst the eleven Presbyterian-members by the Example of the Archbishop and [Page 421] the Earl of Strafford, when they plead­ed that they could not legally procede against them till the particulars of their Crime were specified; and so they acted over all the same Knavery again, till they at length proceded to crown all their wickedness with the Kings murther. But the fraud and malice, the injustice and folly, the impudence and hypocrisie of these men is so notorious that it need not be reported, and yet so, unconceiv­ably horrid that it would scarce be cre­dited. They committed all the boldest impieties in the world not only under the greatest shews of Religion, but by Authority of divine Impulse: they still sought the Lord for all their wickedness, and they were directed to all their Mur­thers and Perjuries by his deep and hid­den discoveries of himself to his secret Ones: They made no more of an Oath than other men do of a Complement; they would swear an hundred times backward and forward to follow the Re­volutions of Providence; and the Rump, when they had murthered the King, ab­solv'd themselves by their own Vote from Perjury; it was but voting the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance to be null and void, and they were as innocent as if they [Page 422] had never taken them. But to say all in one word; their Rebellion was not on­ly against the King, but against Monar­chy it self, that is to say, against all Kings. And I remember I have seen an humble Testimony for God in this perillous time, by a few, who have been bewailing their own and others Abominations, and would not be comforted, until their Redeemer, who is holy, be exalted in Righteousness, and his Name, which has been so much blasphemed, be sanctified in the sight of the Nations, subscribed by J. O. and some other secret ones. In which, having witnessed against all the Backslidings and Abominations of many from the Publick Good Old Cause, and bemoaned the Rebuke that was poured forth upon the Rump and Bare­bones Parliament, they procede to witness in all humility and fear against the setting up or introducing any Person whatsoever, as King or chief Magistrate, or an House of Lords, or any other thing of like Import, under what name or title soever, or any o­ther Power arising from the Nation, as a Nation upon the old corrupt and almost ru­inated Constitution; apprehending that the great Work of taking the Kingdom from man, and giving it to Christ, hath had its beginning in the Revolutions we have been [Page 423] under. And then positively they do witness for andhumbly assert, that the Right of ma­king and giving Laws unto Men is originally in God, who hath given this Power as well as the Execution thereof, unto Christ as he is the Son of Man, and therein made uni­versal Lord and Sovereign over the whole World; and under Christ as his Ministers a certain number of men qualified and limit­ed according to his Word, ought to be set a­part to the Office of chief Rule & Govern­ment over these Nations as part of Christ's universal Kingdom. So that you see J. O. is a profest enemy to the present Government of the State upon the same Principles that he is a Non-conformist to the present Esta­blishment of the Church. He is bound in Conscience to abhorr and oppose Mo­narchy in pure Obedience to the Institu­tions of Christ, as King of Saints and Na­tions, having appointed in his Word a certain number of Men to be set apart for the Office of chief Rule and Government o­ver these and all other Nations in the World. Now I think it is convenient that men who have openly witnessed such Principles as these, should at least be bound to unwitness them, before they are too confidently trusted by the pre­sent Government. J. O. was absolutely [Page 424] for the divine Right of a Common-wealth but a very little before his Maje­sties Restitution; for this Declaration was publish'd after the Cheshire Insurrecti­on, upon occasion whereof he threatens to witness with full evidence to the Convi­ction of all Upright ones against the abo­minable Malignity, Treachery and Enmity of many in eminent Power and in the pub­lick Ministry; and then I dare appeal to your self whether it would not become him to recant such a positive Principle of Rebellion as this, before he can with any modesty boast his own and his Parties Allegiance to the present Government. At least if he refuse this when he is up­braided to it, that is an undoubted evi­dence of his Constancy to his old Prin­ciples, and then judge you whether it is fit for such a man to claim a Liberty of publick talking in any Common-wealth, when he is under a tye of Conscience to subvert it. And yet it was upon this oc­casion that I fell to preaching Repent­ance and calling for signal Marks and Ac­knowledgments, &c. when with all the scorn and indignation in the World he spit at my bare suspicions of their Loyal­ty, in that (as he has the confidence to affirm) they give all the security for it that Surveigh, p. 296.[Page 425] mankind can desire, from their profest duty, principle, faith and doctrine. And this Impudence I must confess provoked me to deal somewhat more roundly with him, and to let him see how great and how many obligations himself and his party lay under to a publick Repentance. Of all which you have taken no notice but only to wonder at my Insolence, and that signifies nothing but only to shew your own. The grounds and motives that I have laid before you to exhort you to this duty are plain and undeniable; they are too many to be here repeated, you may (if you please) find them in my Reply to J. O. from p. 629. to p. 641. If you can quit your selves of them (as I am sure you never can) I will give you as many more; but till the old Scores are discounted, there is no need of a new Reckoning; and as you love your selves be advised never to call for any. And now you see upon what reason I demand­ed signal Marks, it was none of my own Motion but his Challenge; though with­out that, it had been pertinent and in­genuous enough, unless they would learn more sober Principles. However I had never taken any notice of his former Blasphemies, had I not been driven to it [Page 426] by his own Impudence. I was not so disin­genuous as to object his or any mans per­sonal Miscarriages to the disparagement of a publick Cause, though you have ra­ked up the faults (as you suppose them) of several particular Members of the Church of England against the Church it self; such Topicks as these are too dir­ty to be used in any but a bad and a baffl­ed Cause. And as for J. O. himself, though I have heard many strange stories of him, I scorn'd to publish any one Report to his disadvantage, and have charged no­thing upon him but what himself thought good to publish to the World: Neither in truth should I have done that, but that (you see) I was forced upon it by his own provocation, as I would clear my own Candour and Sincerity. And I pro­test that if he can convict me of any one Forgery, it shall not suffice to ask him forgiveness upon my Knees, but I will make him as publick a Recantation, as I think he owes to his King and Countrey. And as for the truth of all those Princi­ples of Blasphemy and Rebellion that I have produced against him out of his own Writings, I will appeal to his own Conscience and Ingenuity. And if my Citations are true, I shall trouble my self [Page 427] no more about them, but leave it to the company to judge of the consequences of such Tenets, and to himself to consider under what duty he lyes to the publique upon their account. And how far you your self were engaged, or whether at all I scorn to enquire; and though by the Principles of your Book you seem to be full as bad as he, yet really I think him as much worse than you as a well-meaning Zealot is more cruel than a Souldier of fortune, you only fight for pay, but he for spite and zeal. And now what if I do Pag. 251. inculcate the late War and its horrid Ca­tastrophe, and will needs have it to be upon a religious account? And so I will, and you know too well how demonstratively I have proved it out of their own Decla­rations. In answer to all which you are only so civil as to suspect that I have been better acquainted with Parliament Decla­rations Pag. 280. upon another account. But it is no matter upon what account I came acquainted with them; whatever it was, this I learn'd into the bargain that Religion was the main pretence of their Rebellion, or as J. O. expresses it, their only design was to set on foot the great work of taking the Kingdom from men and giving it to Christ. But sure you think [Page 428] the Children of England as forward as the Boys and Girls of Scotland were, when you suppose me formerly so well acquainted with Parliament Declarati­ons. I was no doubt an Arch-rebel when I was a School-boy, and when I should have been conning my Lesson was draw­ing up Remonstrances, and was at least one of Iretons Adjutatours, and assistant at the penning the Armies Remonstrance from St. Albans. Unless I were so preg­nant a Youth, it can scarce be suspected how I should be so well acquainted in former times with Parliament Declarati­ons. For unless this formerly relate to the time before his Majesties Restauration, it loses its malice (& that is all it was intend­ed for) in that there can be no very great ground of suspicion of any great design of mischief in perusing them since; how­ever be that as it will, this no doubt is susficient to bring J. O. off when he is plainly baffled, and you have not one word to say in his defence, then to drop any rude suggestion, and that will or may serve turn to divert people from at­tending to the Argument. Be it there­fore known unto all men, that J. O. had so much confidence and so little wit as to affirm, that the Cause of Religion was [Page 429] not pretended or concern'd in the late War, and that I have demonstrated this to be no less than impudent Leasing. And so Sir you may proceed. This horrid Ca­tastrophe Pag. 251. was twenty four long years ago, and after an Act of Oblivion, and for ought you can see, it had been as seasonable to have shewn Caesars bloody Coat, or Thomas a Beckets bloody Rochet. Twenty four long years ago! that is almost beyond my memory, but if it had been so many hundred years ago, and if J. O. had de­nied that the King was murther'd so long since by Fanatique Rebels, I would have convicted him of impudence, though there had been ten thousand Acts of Ob­livion; and if he had denied that Caesar too was murther'd, I would have shewn his bloody Coat; and when I have to do with the Papists, I will hang out Thomas a Beckets bloody Rochet too; it is a very good instance, to shew the inconvenience of having the Clergy of any Kingdom subject to a foreign Power; and if ever the Pope recover his Authority in Eng­land, it will alwayes be so again, and sometimes worse, because they must be bound to obey his Decrees, not only a­bove, but against the Kings Commands. But yet whilst I have to do with Fana­tiques, [Page 430] such as J. O. and your self, that instead of having any compunction for the late horrid Catastrophe, discharge its guilt wholly from your selves upon the King and his Loyal Subjects, to such (I say) I must and will shew the Scaffold at Whitehall. Especially when notwith­standing it was twenty long years ago, many of the same men that were noto­rious instruments in that bloody Rebel­lion, are still in spite of gratitude and Mercy mustering up the People under their ancient Heads and old Principles. Yes! but the Chief of the Offenders have long since made satisfaction to justice. Now Pag. 251. you say something, when you can assure us that they are hang'd indeed, that (whatever Harrison threatned at his exe­cution) is some competent security, and I think for that reason, the King for the time to come need never fear the same High Court of Justice that murther'd his Father. We are satisfied then as to the good behaviour of all that are dead, but can you undertake for the Survivers? Oh yes no doubt. For they are all so weary that he would be knockt on the head Pag. 252. that should raise the first disturbance of the same nature. This is only the security Mr. Calvin has given us for the peaceable [Page 431] deportment of single persons, and it is very likely that if any one man should begin a Civil War, he would be knockt on the head. And I believe if Colonel Ven­ner, or the Cow-keeper, though they had forty men to assist them, should cry hey for Woodstreet! hey for King Jesus! it is not improbable but that they may have their brains beaten out. But the thing we fear is lest whilst they take li­berty to propagate their Principles, and enlarge their Party, they should in time grow once more into a body strong e­nough to fight the battels of the Lord, and set up the Kingdom of Christ, that is (as J. O. has explain'd it) a Common-wealth. And what though at present you are so weary, yet you may have time to gather breath, and if you have, then it seems we have no security, when it is only your being tired and out of strength that keeps you from being unruly. But what is it that you are so weary of? no­thing but Laws and Government, as is too manifest from your restlesness and impa­tience under all restraints. Are you weary of your Principles? Do but assure us of that and we shall never desire any more security; but if you are not, as soon as you can get wind, we are still just as we [Page 432] were. But the King has so obliged the Non-conformists Pag. 252. by his late mercy, that if there were any such Knave, there can be no such fool among them, that would ever lift up an ill thought against him. Now indeed you have nickt it to purpose, next to their being hang'd nothing can secure their Loyalty like gratitude and good­nature. They lift up an ill thought a­gainst the King after he has so much ob­liged them! It is impossible! It is against the nature of the Beast! Away with the Guards! Save so much money! the Pres­byterian has pass'd his word, and can you desire a better hostage? Oblige him but once, and he is your own for ever. It is not in his power to do an ungrateful action, and now he is so much beholden to the King, he is no more able to lift up a disloyal thought against him than to re­move mountains. This I must confess goes a great way, and as far as any thing next to the Oaths of Allegiance and Su­premacy, but yet after all it will not do so effectually as hanging, for what if the King should ever happen to disoblige them again? why then, unless they are very weary there is an end of all the Pres­byterian Loyalty. I know (though I have not the honour to have that inti­mate [Page 433] acquaintance that you have with him) he is a very civil and well-bred Gentleman, and knows how to conde­scend to their infirmities, and to humour them like Children, and when they have caught cold, desire them to be cover'd, but yet I know withall that they are so pee­vish, and so apt to take exception, that let him carry himself never so swimming­ly, he can never avoid it, but that some­time or other he must before he is aware fall under their displeasure, and then (if ever they get him within their power) they will be disposing of him as they were all along of his Father according to the Covenant. But what strange News is this? The Fanatiques obliged! I could scarce have believed it, though I had read it in the Gazette, I am confident it is more than the King himself knows. Will you give me leave to carry the in­formation to any of his Secretaries of State, and when I have done, will you promise to justifie it? I must confess his Majesties Indulgence (all things consi­der'd) was a very obliging kindness, yet I am sure his Royal Father laid upon them ten times greater Obligations than that amounts to; he granted them every thing they asked even to one half of his [Page 434] Kingdom, and yet how he obliged them we all know. And (as I understand it) the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion was none of the smallest Obligations, at least it was much greater than the Declarati­on of Indulgence, as much as it is really more comfortable for men to enjoy their lives and estates than to have their wills. Yet I cannot find any remarkable effect it ever had upon their ingenuity; but that they still continue as peevish and un­peaceable as ever. Not but that they have suffer'd as well as ever men did, and are ready to'do so still, only that it is so hard a Chapter for men in their con­dition Pag. 252. to suffer extremities patiently, that some think it impossible, and therefore though they are never so angry at the Government, and impatient of the Laws, yet for all that they may be, and (if we may take your word) are of as meek and passive tempers as any men in the world beside, seeing it is impossible to flesh and blood to bear the extremities, that they suffer, patiently, so that in the result of all, it seems they suffer as patiently as any men living, only because it is impossible for any men living to suffer patiently. Yes, but if there were any such Knave, there can be no such fool among them. But [Page 435] of their wisdom we are secure enough al­ready, and only desire a bond of their honesty. And since fools (as you think) are less dangerous than Knaves, the kind­ness had been greater, if you would have been surety to his Majesty against their more possible Knavery. And yet though you had given us these and ten thousand ensurances more of their Loyalty, they would not do without testimonies, signal marks, publique acknowledgements, satis­faction and recantation, because men that have been so deeply engaged in so hei­nous a crime, if they are sensible of it, can never be supposed to satisfie them­selves with a slight repentance; and therefore whatever other assurance they can give from their being hang'd, weari­ed, and obliged, it is of no force nor use to the publique, in that if they are in good earnest, these would be the begin­nings and first pangs of repentance, so that when they plainly refuse to acknow­ledge their fault, there needs no other proof of their being hardned in it, and whenever they have opportunity, return­ing to it. But it seems they have done more than all this. For no sooner has the Pag. 275. King shewn them his late favour, but I and my Partners reproach them for being too [Page 436] much friends to the Prerogative. They friends to the Prerogative! just as the Devil was to the Scriptures; they make the same use of it to the King, as he did of them to our Saviour, only to perswade him to break his own neck. Do we not know their Principles too well to be­lieve that their seeming acceptance of his Majesties Indulgence proceeds not from any acknowledgement of his Supremacy to make or suspend Ecclesiastical Laws? Do they not challenge these Immunities as due to them by Divine Right, and which were before wrongfully detain'd from them? Their end in magnifying the Kings Indulgence is not to confirm his just claim of Supremacy in Church-con­cerns, when they deny nothing more ve­hemently, but because they hope by this seeming compliance so to encrease and strengthen their own Party, as that they may be able to distress the Episcopal Go­vernment, and then the Royal Suprema­cy. So that we are so far from reproach­ing them with being too friendly to the Prerogative, that their seeming comply­ance with it upon their Principles is the greatest evidence of their treachery a­gainst it. When they claim by Divine Right an absolute exemption from this [Page 437] part of it, and if the King or Parliament exercise any of this Jurisdiction over them, they call it Tyranny and a viola­ting of the Divine Majesty. So that they Pag. 250. fight for the Prerogative, just as they did for the King, against it self. And they cannot but be zealous Assertours of it above the Laws, when as they will not obey the Laws, so they will not ac­knowledge that. And therefore it is not out of any friendship that they have to the Prerogative, that they thus mag­nifie the Kings pardons and dispensations, but only out of hatred and opposition to the Government, because by this means they suppose some part of the su­preme power to be lopt off, and then they are hearty friends to any thing that abates of that. They are right Gibellines, for any thing or any interest to make di­sturbance; for King or Parliament, or either or neither for their own ends and to oppose the Guelphs. In the late War when the King declared against them and the Parliament for them, they then fought for the Parliament against the Preroga­tive. But after all the fatal Consequences of that Rebellion the King and Parliament both observing their Sea-marks joyn toge­ther to root up their principles of Schism [Page 438] and Sedition, and then they declare a­gainst both for the Prerogative of God and every man's Conscience. And now the King lately for reasons of State, and perhaps to make an experiment of their good nature, being inclined to suspend for a while the Penalties of the Laws in force against them, then hey for the Pre­rogative above all Laws and Parliaments; and they preach up nothing but Sibthor­pianism and Absolute Government, because it was the Rock on which the last King rui­ned. They care not what becomes of King and Parliament and Kingdom too, so they may gratifie their own Pride and peevishness. Not that I believe they have all formed designs against the State, (they are most of them too simple to en­tertain thoughts so great) but yet they are easily acted by those that have; they are conceited and froward, and apt to pick quarrels and take offence at the present management of affairs, be it what it will. And if they are not court­ed as well as humour'd by their Govern­ours their proud hearts are liable to a certain Infirmity, that is very troublesom, and they are presently reflecting upon the Histories of former times, the Roman Em­perour, the King of Poland, Alexander [Page 439] the Great, the King of Spain, the Queen of Sweden, the Flea Tyrant, and the sturdy Swiss, and a thousand more not such idle stories, but that they can tell how to make use of them as well as Kings. And if Kings will not be instructed by these Examples to behave themselves du­tifully towards their Subjects, they know how to take an Antipathy to Regal Go­vernment, and then he is bound to be so civil as to refrain the use of it, however not to press it upon them, but if he have so lit­tle sense of common humanity as not to yield to their Weaknesses, he makes him­self an hard hearted and inflexible Tyrant; and if he have so little discretion as to trust his Understanding to the Clergies keeping, and to know nothing beyond Cere­monies and Sibthorpianism (i. e. to take any care for the Execution of Ecclesiasti­cal Laws) if he ruine his Government up­on that Rock by forcing them to rebel (shrewdly against their Wills poor Inno­cents!) he may thank himself and his im­placable Divines. This is all your friend­ship to the Prerogative in matters of Re­ligion, to make all exercise of Ecclesia­stical Power Acts of Tyranny. And you are so far his Majesties friend as to advise him to be so satisfied with the abun­dancePag. 246.[Page 440] of his Power, as to abate of its exer­cise by his discretion. But though you are always excusing your self from medl­ing with State affairs by reason of your private breeding, your modesty, and your not having been bound Prentice to the Trade of Kings; and on the contrary accusing me for presuming to instruct and advise Princes, yet are you always too prescribing to them Rules of Wisdome and Discretion, teaching them when it is requisite to screw up, and when to let down their Prerogative, how to humour their Subjects, to condescend to their Infirmities, and bid them to be cover'd in their presence, and sometimes (as here) to be content with having their Power without exercising it. Whereas I have no where read them any Lectures how to govern their Islands, but have only (as became a dutiful Subject) asser­ted their power against your principles of Anarchy and Rebellion. And if they will forgo any part of it to condescend to your Infirmities, they are more compe­tent Judges of their own actions than I am, and therefore I shall never censure them for it, though I must confess they would be better natur'd than I think I should be in their Cases. Though alas! [Page 441] it is pity but you should be humour'd, after all this experience they have had of your meekness and simplicity, and after all that assurance you have given them of your peaceable resolutions and princi­ples, viz. that whereas you have here­tofore embroil'd the Nation in a civil War for nothing, and though you are now convinced of it your selves, yet you will not so much as acknowledge it, be­cause (forsooth) it would be a blemish upon your Reputation, and therefore you will admit of no terms of Peace un­less we will condescend to your unreaso­nable humours only to save your paltry credit. And if we will not, we may look to our selves, you will make good your own party. And then if upon this the Government shall think it a little ne­cessary to restrain you in these bold and factious courses, it is Tyranny and a vio­lation of the Divine Majesty. You and your Consciences are exempt from all their Laws and are in the hand of God a­lone; and that is all your real owning of the Prerogative. Though if at any time it lets you alone in all your extravagan­ces and suffers you to break the Laws, you are then such friends to it as no men more. You are for or against any thing [Page 442] so you may but have the comfort of affronting Authority. All that I have hitherto discoursed concerns only those Non-conformists that at least pretend to Sobriety; but as for all the inferiour Sects though they never agreed in any thing but in their implacable Zeal against their Prince, yet I never troubled my self so much as to exhort them to Repentance, because they have the privilege of all o­ther mad men to do mischief without being responsible for it, and therefore are not to be discoursed or advised into their wits, because being insensible of the mischief they do, they can only be bound and restrained from doing it; and to give them their Liberty is not only to suffer them to act any extravagance they have a mind to, but to spread and propagate the Infection of their Madness: For there is no Frenzy in Religion that the lower sort of the People are not too apt to be tainted with; so that instead of allow­ing them Conventicles it were more proper to build them Bedlams, no­thing can govern them but Chains and Keepers.

But as for your own part we are will­ing to excuse you from signal Marks, &c. because you have given such mighty [Page 443] proofs and demonstrations of your Loy­alty and Good-will to the King by that wonderful Zeal that you have upon all occasions shewn for the Act of Oblivion and Indemnity, which as you have or­der'd the matter was enacted purely in favour of himself and his own Party. You have brought things to that pass, that were it not for that, you might erect a new Court of Justice, and hang them all for any thing they have to plead in their own defence. For as you tell the story, they are the only guilty persons in re­ference to the late Rebellion. Your Charge against his Royal Father is the very same with the Inditement that was peferred against him both by and before the high Court of Justice, only the man­ner of your Expressions is suited to the alteration of time and circumstances. But he fought against a Cause that was only too good to be fought for, he began a War against the Religion and the Liber­ty of his Subjects, and forced them to take upArms in their own defence against Tyranny and Arbitrary Government; for so you would have called it had you written in those happy days, though now the word is Sibthorpianism, i. e. (as you describe it) an endeavour to invade his [Page 444] Subjects Proprieties and subvert the Fun­damental Laws, and for that Cause only involve his Kingdoms in a long and bloo­dy War. And though he were sworn to maintain all the Ancient Constitutions of the Realm, yet he deformed his whole Reign with indefatigable pains to de­stroy them, and when he perceived that he could obtein his wicked and tyranni­cal Ends no other way, he pursued them through all parts of his Dominions with Blood and Violence, and at last upon this Rock ruined himself and his King­doms. So that all the mischiefs of the late War are to be scored purely upon his head; but as for all those that took up Arms against him, their Cause was so over-just and warrantable, that it was only too good to have been fought for. And now what could you have said worse of the worst Prince that ever wielded Sceptre, than what you have here said of the very best? However, this methinks is but an odd way of en­suring the good Behaviour of the Non-conformists for the time to come, when you stand upon the Justification of their Innocence for the time past. And it shews you to be a man of Judgment, whilest you have so little Wit as to appeal to [Page 445] their former Practices as a sufficient Secu­rity of their future Peaceableness, and by their harmlesness (poor Lambs!) in re­ference to the late War encourage us to trust to their good Nature and Modesty for ever. For if they were so innocent as to that Rebellion, saving that they fought for a Cause only too good to have been fought for, they are safe enough from ever fighting for any Cause too bad to be fought for. And yet I shrewdly suspect we owe this very declaration of the Causes being too good to be fought for, rather to your Cowardize than your Loy­alty; for it seems you think all Causes cost too dear when they are bought with danger or blood, and though both their Religion and their Liberty were invaded you would have advised them rather than fight to let them both go. And as little as you would have fought for the Good old Cause, you would have fought much less for his Majesties Re­stauration in that it was forsooth to do it self without our Officiousness, you had Pag. 303. not leased if you had said against it too. However his Majesty, for any thing you would have had done for him, might have been beyond Sea still, unless God would have been pleased to have restored him [Page 446] by miracle, and have march'd before him as he did before the Camp of Israel, and rain'd down fire from Heaven upon the Rump and all their Adherents. For Pag. 304. men ought to have trusted God, and not have taken the Work out of his hands by their own Officiousness, he knows how to bring all things about in their best and pro­per time. And these are pretty good evi­dences of your good-will to his Majesties Government. First, in that you scarce commend any thing of it since his Return beside the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion; and then secondly, in that you are so much concern'd to disclaim the Merits of those Persons that were Actors and In­struments in it, by denying the Efficacy of any humane means towards bringing it to pass, and casting it intirely upon the immediate Care of divine Providence. So that if it were to do again you would advise his Subjects to forbear all endea­vours of his Restauration, and leave it to be brought to pass by the Providence of God, or suffer it to do it self without their Officiousness. We understand you. But now have you not made an admira­ble Apology for the Loyalty of the Non-conformists by denying that they can possibly be ever guilty of any such thing [Page 447] as Rebellion? for if the late War were none, it is certain there never was nor will be any, and I think upon this suppo­sition, and upon this alone, we may pro­nounce them both innocent and secure as to this Crime. But thus we see that when­ever the Cause of Non-conformity ap­pears at top, the Good old Cause ever did and ever will lye at bottom; or (as your self express it) if it were a War of Religi­on, i. e. Fanaticism at top, it was a War of Liberty, i. e. a Commonwealth at bottom. That is, your old and your new Cause, and you sink into it with the dexterity of fat Sir. John Falstaff. In a word, it is your close and comfortable Importance. And now after all your kind and courtly Expressions almost in every page towards the Act of Oblivion and Indemnity, and on the contrary rating me for shewing no more respect to it than to remember some old stories in despite of its Autho­rity, and lastly commanding me to let all Pag. 253. those things of former times alone and mind my own business: You your self have not made bold with it at all, by reviving the Adventures of Sibthorp and Manwa­ring, and raking into all the Deformities of the late King's whole Reign, and transcribing a long History out of a cer­tain [Page 448] long Gazette of the true Cause and Original (as you dream) of the Rebelli­on. So that we now perceive your mean­ing in all this idle noise about the Act of Oblivion is to limit the Remembrance of the late War to such occurrences as you think may be of advantage to such as acted in and for the Rebellion; but as for the suffering and loyal Party, they▪ must be obliged and conjured to seal up their Lips and smother their Resentments; however if I had been profane or disin­genuous in offending against the sacred Act of Oblivion, I am sure you have out­gone me, have done that and more. For that looks back no farther than the year 37. but yet there are some old Sibthor­pian Gentlemen still alive that might possibly have had an hand in carrying on Impositions of money in the late Kings Pag. 282. time, and thereby contributing not a little to our late Wars; now these men are still obnoxious to Justice for all their Misde­meanours notwithstanding the Act of In­demnity; and therefore if Ceremonies and Sibthorpianism were the Cause of the War, the guilt of all that blood that was spilt in it must lie upon their heads, and the King may bring them to Trial for all the Miseries they brought upon his [Page 449] Kingdoms, for the Murther of his Fa­ther and the loss of an hundred thousand Subjects, and all for Sibthorpianism and Laud. Is this your Gentleman's memory to remind his Majesty of things too old for an Act of Oblivion, so old that if you would let them alone, they would be forgotten of themselves without it? And though you would oblige him (as he is a Gentleman) to forget that ever the Presbyterians rebelled against his Father and took away his Crown and Sove­reignty; to forget that ever the Inde­pendents beside that took away his Life; to forget that they and all the other Se­ctaries join'd forces to expel himself out of his own Kingdoms, and keep him in banishment for ever, and that he was re­stored in spite of all their zeal and ma­lice; and lastly to forget that since the time of his Restauration none of them ever had the Grace to ask Forgiveness for their former Leasings or to give him any Assurance of their future Allegiance. A man had need learn the Art of Gentle­mans Memory to forget all these things that are so fresh in the minds of men; but yet notwithstanding all this you your self do and would have him remember some old Gentlemen of those times that [Page 450] are still alive, that were the cause of all our miseries, that deserve to be brought to condign punishment, and that his Ma­jesty may at any time do it, any thing in the Act of Oblivion and Indempnity notwithstanding. And now upon review of all these stories that I have told you of former times, you would as I take it have done much more wisely if you had altogether let them alone and minded your own business.

And thus far have I vindicated the wisdom and the honesty of the Clergy of all Ages from Noah's flood through all the four Empires quite down to the late Rebellion, the fatal consequences whereof a wise man would have thought might have served as sea-marks to direct them to avoid the Rocks, but the former Civil Pag. 240. War it seems cannot make them wise, nor his Majesties happy Return good-natured, but they are still for running things up un­to the same extremes: So that by their behaviour ever since his Restauration they have given him no encouragement to Pag. 305. steer by their Compass; with a great many more sad stories that represent them as such fierce and cruel Beasts of prey, such in­humane Pag. 240. and hungry Canibals, that one would expect to hear how they every [Page 451] where eat up their Parishoners Children; as fast as the Presbyterians do the Race of Capons. But these are no more than ge­neral words that any man may throw out against any man, I against you, or you a­gainst me, or a third against us both, and a fourth against him, and so on eternally, eternally in infinitum; and therefore they signifie no more than all the rest, and as little need as they deserve any Answer. But beside these you have given us in some of their particular misdemeanours, and them I shall a little consider, and be­cause it is time to have done, run them off with all possible speed and brevity. First then it has been observed, that when­soever Pag. 310; his Majesty hath had the most urgent occasions for Supply, they have made it their business to trinkle with the Members of Parliament, for obstructing it, unless the King would buy it with a new Law against the Fanatiques. And hence it is, that the wisdom of his Majesty and the Parliament must be exposed to after Ages for such a superfetation of Acts, &c. But this con­cerns not me, let the King and Parlia­ment answer it, as they will clear them­selves from the imputation of folly, and if they have no more wit than to be over-reached by being trinkled, yet certainly [Page 452] they have more than to suffer you to call them fools for it, for they tell me that none but fools expose their wisdom. But pray, how do they trinkle the King and the Members? Do the Bishops play with him at Picquet in the Parliament House, and give the sign to each other? If they do, they do it among themselves, and then neither you nor I are privy to their under-hand dealings, and their false play, and so can give no competent account of the course of the Game. At least I think it better becomes us both to leave these things to the Gamesters themselves; and I am sure it is not done like a Gentle­man, that has had his breeding in the Ordinaries, when he is no more than a By-stander, and has not so much as a Bett at stake, to raise quarrels among the Gamesters by throwing in his own im­pertinent jealousies and suspicions of foul play. Had you gon but half a Crown with King and Parliament, and then have given the sign when you spied the Bishops trinkling, you might have done very ho­nestly, but yet very ungentily. But when you were quite blown up long since by the Dignitary, and have now nothing left to be cheated of, and cannot have the least concern how the Game goes, unless [Page 453] it be now and then to pick up a Barato or so, for such an one as you (I say) to meddle is an insufferable piece of impu­dence and ill-breeding; and had you done the same ill office between Gentle­men at an Ordinary, as you have between the King, Parliament, and Bishops, you would have been kick'd out of doors. But as for my part I dare not touch any thing that is done within those walls; though as for, their behaviour out of the house, I could never perceive but that they are very honest and wel-bred Gentlemen, and you have nothing to object to the contrary, but that they are a little unci­vil to the Non-conformists, in that they will not allow them the liberty of having their own Wills, though they know how much their nature and constitution re­quires it. Especially when they demand Pag. 275. nothing (that you know of) but what is so far from doing us any harm, that it would only make us better. You know what they demand! If you do, you know more than themselves, or at least more than they would ever yet declare. This is but an idle thing, still to give us your pe­remptory opinion of things in general, without abetting it with some particular proof or instance; If you had underta­ken [Page 454] to tell us what alterations they do demand, and then shewn that they would be so far from doing us any harm, that they would only make us better, you had done something to some purpose, but otherwise you have only declared your own opinion, as any confident man might have done as well as you, and if he had, he might as well have held his tongue too. But now by the leave of your In­solence, though I know not all their de­mands, yet this I know, that some things that they do demand, would be so far from making us better, that they would over-turn not only the Church of Eng­land, but all the Churches in the world. Their main grievance (you know) is at the three Ceremonies, and that upon this Principle, because they are unscriptural Symbols, so that their quarrel against them would not be superseded by their bare removal, in that there would re­main behind other significant Ceremonies as unscriptural as they, and by conse­quence as liable to the same exception. And therefore it is to no purpose to con­descend to any of their particular scru­ples, unless we could withal remove the Principle upon which they are bottom'd. But that is made plainly impossible from [Page 455] the very nature of things, seeing there are (as I have often told you, but am for­ced too often to rub up your dulness, be­cause you have no list to understand) no Ceremonies determined in the Scriptures saving only the two Sacraments, and see­ing it is impossible to perform any Di­vine Service at all without some other exteriour Solemnities. Let them choose what they please, they cannot avoid fall­ing under the same exception, and the very simplicity that they seem so much to affect can plead as little precedent from the word of God as any custome or fashion whatsoever. And it is too noto­rious, and has been too often told them how they themselves continually pra­ctise against their own principle in all the circumstances peculiar to their own way of worship, and if they do not apply it as well against themselves as the Church of England, it is only because they are humoursom as well as unreasonable. At least this exception is so infinitely nice and peevish, that though it can, yet it ne­ver will be satisfied. What trains and labyrinths of distinctions are they forced to plant only to defend their Argument, when they should be proving it. Some Ceremonies are natural, some customary, [Page 456] some catholique, some topical, some law­ful, and some unlawful, that are all but idle stories of their own devising, rather to excuse than justifie their pretence. And what Master of them has skill or au­thority enough to range all Ceremonies under their proper heads? and when he has done it, what ground has he to de­termine the lawfulness of these and the immorality of those? With innumera­ble more such curious nothings, as had never been so much as thought of, had not these men been so proud and stub­born, as to think, that when they had once started an absurdity, they were ob­liged to stand to it. But their discourses upon this Argument are in your judge­ment so frivolous, that though that is none of the deepest, nor your self the most mo­dest man in the world, yet you are asha­med to own them. For when you come to that part of the Controversie, you po­sitively disclaim and defie their master-objection as too ridiculous in it self, and below the wit and wisdom of the men that make it, and have not ventured to justifie any thing in that whole matter beside the nipping Quotation out of the 5th. Epistle to Marcellinus. So great a Cast is it of your arrogance to tell us, [Page 457] that you know of no enmity the Non-con­formists Pag. 275. have to the Church it self, but what it was in her power alwayes to have reme­died, and so it is still. When it is so lit­tle in our Power to remedy their Griev­ances, that it is not in the power of na­ture; and though we change and reform as much as they would have us, and as often as they have done themselves, it will do nothing towards removing their enmity, if they have any other grounds for it beside humour and peevishness, and if they have not, I am sure it is least of all in our Power to remedy that. We may convince them, but we can never make them good-natured, unless they will give their minds to it. And where­as you upbraid us so perpetually with the Conference of Worcester house, as if His Majesties Commissioners had cun­ningly and revengefully obstructed the Accommodation, when the Abatements demanded by the Non-conformists were so reasonable, and might so easily have been complyed with; Do you at all know what were the abatements they demanded to bring them off with Consci­ence? To let you see your considence, I tell you they demanded none at all, but the question being solemnly put to them [Page 458] (and that as I am told) in his Majesties presence, whether they knew of any thing in the Liturgy, with which they could not comply without sin, they all declared their own satisfaction, but only desired some abatements for the ease of weak Brethen, or rather as you tell us bluntly, to bring themselves off with some Pag. 306. little reputation. For they as well as all the rest of mankind are men for their own Pag. 275. ends too. What an Apology is here, that these men who had trinkled the whole Nation into a Covenant against Prelacy and Antichrist, who had drawn vast numbers of well-meaning People into Rebellion against the best Prince that ever wielded English Scepter; who had contributed to involve their Native Countrey in a bloody war, and brought upon it such an heap of calamities, as we all know succeeded one upon the neck of another, and all this under pretence of the necessity of Reformation. And yet now when they were convinced in their own Consciences that they had so horri­bly abused both themselves and the peo­ple, and had thrown away the lives of an hundred thousand men for nothing, instead of condescending to any acknowledge­ment of their errour, and doing something [Page 459] towards preventing the like mischiefs for the time to come, they on the con­trary resolve to persist in their Schism and opposition to the Church, unless she will condescend to them in some unrea­sonable demands, and that too only for fashion sake to salve their Reputation, i. e. to make the people believe that there was some reason for all the disor­ders of the Rebellion, and to leave it upon Record to Posterity, that the Church at last saw it reasonable if not ne­cessary to condescend to their demands, and to redress their Grievances. Do you think they had not come off with much more Reputation, if they had ho­nestly confess'd their mistake, and en­deavour'd to disabuse the people, and shewn the uprightness of their intentions by the frankness of their Repentance, than thus openly and impudently to pre­varicate with the World by declaring that though they knew no sufficient ground for Separation, yet because sepa­rated they were and that into Rebellion as well as Schism, they must keep their party together, and secure them for ever returning to the peaceable Communion of the Church, unless something by all means be first done to bring them off [Page 460] with Reputation, that the people might not have any cause to abate the great opi­nion they had either of their wit or their honesty. Surely a right modest and tender­hearted petition, that no terms of Peace and accommodation may be thought of, unless they may first be publickly declar­ed innocent, and then you know as well as I, who are thereby declared guilty. Here the conference begun and here it ended. The Presbyterians themselves have print­ed an account of all proceedings of the Commissioners of both perswasions. And there you may see that one of the first things proposed to them was that if they had any thing to object against the Litur­gy as any way sinful and unlawful for us to Sect. 5. joyn with, it is but reason that this be first proved evidently, before any thing be al­ter'd; it isno argument to say that multi­tudes of sober pious persons scruple the use of it, unless it be made to appear by evident rea­sons that the Liturgy gave the just grounds to make such scruples. For if the bare pre­tence of scruples be sufficient to exempt us from obedience, all law and order is gone. To this what do they reply but that possibly it might be unlawful for them to impose it, though not for others to joyn with them in its use when it was imposed. Though for [Page 461] the proof of this they thought good to refer it (as they still do all their disputes when they are baffled) to the day of Judgment, till which time they resolve to continue peevish and quarrelsome. But if they had undertaken to prove it, yet still it was but possible, and that not upon the exceptions of wise men but the scruples of weak brethren; to which it was replyed, on the contrary we judge that Sect. 6. if the Liturgy should be alter'd as is re­quired, not only a multitude, but the gene­rality of the soberest and most loyal Children of the Church of England would justly be offended, since such an alteration would be a virtual confession that this Liturgy were an intolerable burden to tender Con­sciences, a direct cause of Schism, a super­stitious usage, which would at once both ju­stifie all those which have so obstinately se­parated from it, as the only pious tender Conscienced men, and condemn all those that have adhered to that in Conscience of their Duty and Loyalty, with their loss or hazard of Estates, Lives, and Fortunes, as men superstitious, schismatical, and void of Religion and Conscience. But for all this they boldly give in their excep­tions against every part of the Liturgy, not upon any pretence of Conscience, [Page 462] but because it was not conformable e­nough to their own Directory, and for that reason must the book of Common-Prayer be wholly laid aside, and instead of it a new form of their own compiling imposed. These were their least demands and they were very modest ones. And no doubt but upon a little moderation and temper of things, i. e. upon the least abate­ment to bring them off with Conscience Pag. 306. (though there was no such thing as Con­science pretended in the case) and which insinuates into all men, some little Reputa­tion, they would never have stuck out. That is to say, do but give them their wills to all intents and purposes, and upon those terms it is possible they may condescend to an accommodation. But what did these implacable Divines of the Church of England do to defeat this design of e­stablishing a new Heaven and a new Earth? Why! to shew that they were men Pag. 306. like others, even cunning men, reveng­ful men (beside their drilling on and trin­kling out the foolish Act of Uniformity) they made several unnecessary Additions on­ly because they knew they would be more in­grateful and stigmatical to the Non-confor­mists, v. g. in the Litany to false Doctrine and Heresie they added Schism, though it [Page 463] were to spoil the Musick and Cadence of the Period. This Bran is never to be refined, and this obstinacy of the Clergy ever will be (as it ever has been) the greatest Ob­stacle of the Clemency, Prudence, and good Intentions of Princes, and the esta­blishment of their affairs. When all things and all persons were so towardly prepared toward an accommodation, if they would but once have consented on­ly to abolish the establish'd Liturgy, and set up a Geneva Directory, and what had all that been, had not they always been for the most bruitish and precipitate Counsels, but instead of yielding to so reasonable a demand, they like cun­ning and revengeful men, foist in a new Prayer against Schism, because they knew it would be stigmatical to the Non-conformists. Though you knew the re­flection lights purely upon the Church of England, because as you have admirably demonstrated out of Mr. Hales, Schism rhimes to Ism. But let them look to that, your grievance is that they have spoiled the Musick and Cadence of the Period. If they have, far be it from me to pa­tronize such Crimes, I must confess I have no very good Ear, but yet as far as I am able to discern, the Period [Page 464] runs off as roundly as ever. But if Schism do offend your ears, yet however that is no offence to your Con­science, though it seems Rebellion (ano­ther word you might as well have ex­cepted against) is offensive to neither. And now in this whole Affair compare the Precipitate Counsels of the Church of England with the yielding Temper of the Presbyterians, and then judge you what Party it was that obstructed the Kings design of Accommodation. He issues out his Commission to reform the Litur­gy, if there were any need; now (say the Presbyterians) nothing will ever do it but our our old thorough way of Refor­mation utterly to abolish and lay it aside for ever; that was their easie Method, and the result of all their moderate Counsels. No, say the Bishops, unless you will find something sinful and unlaw­ful in the Liturgy we are well enough already, and need nothing more than to join heartily in our Prayers to Almigh­ty God against Schism and Rebellion. And what could be more cruelly and re­vengefully done than to injoyn Presby­terians but to pray against Schism and Rebellion, and rather than ba [...]e them that (though it were to save their Reputati­on) [Page 465] spoil the Musick of a Period? They will never leave these precipitate, bruitish and sanguinary Counsels; Neither the civil War, nor the King's Return, nor the softness of the Universities, nor the gentle­ness of Christianity can make them wise or good-natured. And though they have had so much experience, how ex­cessively the Non-conformists are to be obliged by Condescensions, and how easily the last King won their hearts by yielding to their demands, in so much that from the year 40. to 48. they would sooner have been knock'd on the head than have lift up an ill thought against him, and had he not fatally ruined himself, whether they would or no, they had made him the most glorious King that e­ver wielded the English Sceptre. What ungrateful Creatures then are these Church-canibals, when the Non-confor­mists have all along done his Majesty such signal services, yet now after such an happy Restauration (happy, I say, because it did it self without their Officiousness) they should not suffer him to comply with their Infirmities. Nay they are grown so unreasonable, that they will not de­stroy the Church as it is by Law establish­ed only that the Leaders of the Factions [Page 466] may have their wills and save their cre­dits. Were there ever such inhumane Canibals as these? Were ever any Beasts of prey so fierce and cruel to those of their own Kind as these men are to their dear Brethren? Deny a Presbyterian his Will! it is a cruelty not to be equall'd by all the Engines of Torture, the Podo­strabae, the Dactylethrae and the rest; it exceeds the Tyranny of Julian's Persecu­tion, and the inhumanity of a Jewish Zea­lot. I see they are incorrigible, and it is not in your or my Power to help it, and should we go about it, they would be too hard for us, for they are cunning men and understand how to trinkle; and therefore let us let them alone and leave them to the implacable hardness of their own hearts, and the irreversible doom of the day of Judgment, when J. O. hopes to rejoice in seeing all the Vengeance and Indignation that is in the right hand of God poured out unto Eternity upon the souls of such wretches as these. And thus have I (I think) sufficiently displayed the rude­ness of your spite and malice against the Clergy of all Ages, but of your own in particular; I shall make no farther re­flections upon it, seeing that has always been their Fate ever since Balaam's days, [Page 467] that is the first Precedent we meet with of the preaching of such Creatures as you, and as I cannot hear that ever you spoke before, so I believe you had never open'd your Mouth at all now but only to censure and reprove the Blindness of the Prophets. I have detected spite and ma­lice enough against the Clergy, and now I think it worth the while to discover the▪ Bottom of all this wrath and Indig­nation, and certainly it can not be any matter of less importance than the for­tunes of Caesar and the Roman Empire, and if you will listen, in short this it was. It Pag. 282, is not many years ago that you used to play at Picquet; and there was a Gentleman of the Robe, a Dignitary of Lincoln, very well known and remembred in the Ordina­ries. Now you used to play Pieces, and this Gentleman would always go half a Crown with you, and so all the while he sat on your hand, he very honestly gave the sign, so that you were always sure to lose. You af­terwards discovered it, but of all the money that ever you were cheated of in your life, none ever vexed you so, as what you lost by this occasion. And ever since you have born a great grudge, &c. You imagine he gave the sign, but how do you prove it? I have been informed by impartial [Page 468] By-standers that he did not give the sign: But that (as all Gamesters are wont to do) when you lost your Money, you were angry and rail'd at him; whereas (as they tell me) his Eyes were so bad that with­out Spectacles he was not able to discern a Spade from a Club; unless this sinister Accident hapned a great many years ago, and then to remember it now is a dispa­ragement to a Gentlemans memory, if not an Affront to the Act of Oblivion and In­demnity. But does this become the Mo­desty of a Gentleman of private Condition and Breeding to think that Kings have nothing else to do than to concern them­selves and their Crowns in your gaming Picques? Is this your manners because you have upon good reason (i. e. because you were once cheated) taken up a Par­ticular Aversion against the Clergies dis­posing your money, that therefore all wise Princes must take this for a warning to shut the Bishops out of the Lords house, and to keep them from fingring their Subjects money? I am confident you have some Clergy-blood running in your Veins, your malice is so implacable. Some one of your Ancestors has as well as the Emperour Julian been in Orders sometime since the Flood, if not since [Page 469] the Reformation; and then no wonder if his indelible Character have for ever sowr'd and tainted the Gentility of his Family. Otherwise certainly it is im­possible a Gentleman should ever wreck his Malice against a single Dignitary upon the Clergy of all Ages. However this runs you up into one of your own petty Di­lemma's; for if you descended of Clergy-ancestors, then (as you know) you are no better than a Canibal to be so fierce and cruel against your own kind; if you did not, then what a sad blemish is it to a Gentleman's Memory and Breeding (though never so private) to wreck your revenge upon the whole Order from the beginning to the end of the World for the fault of one man? But Picquet, that vilainous Game that has done more mis­chief to the Discipline of our Church than Printing or Gun-powder. 'Twas an happy time when the Clergy under­stood no other than the old Elsibeth Game of Post and Pair, and never plaied higher than two pence a dozen, so that if any of them were so ingrateful or so dishonest as to cheat his Patron or his Patroness, it made no great Commotions in the Common-wealth. But since the Inven­tion of the vilainous Game of Picquet, at [Page 470] which Gentlemen, though of private Con­dition and Breeding are wont to play Pieces, such is the mischief, that a Cler­gy-man cannot rook one of them, but an Address must immediately be made to King and Parliament to keep their hands off from fingring the Subjects money, and a Book must be written to prove that all that wear Canonical Coats in all Ages are worse Robbers than Thieves and High-way-men. What ill fortune pre­ferred this unhappy Dignitary of Lin­coln, that by one Wink in a Corner has done more harm to the Church of Eng­land than an hundred schismatical Di­vines with all their sweaty preaching. Happy had it been for the King, happy for the Church, and happy for himself, that is to say, thrice happy had it been, had he never climed that Pinacle. But thus we see from what small Beginnings the great­est Actions and Alterations take their rise; the late bloody War was begun by the Pickthankness of a Vicar of Brackley, and for any thing we know the Kingdom may be embroiled afresh by the Pick­pocketingness of a Dignitary of Lincoln; for if ever J. O. and your self be able to trinkle the secret ones into Rebellion, we may thank this cheating Dignitary for [Page 471] all that follows. O Picquet! Pic­quet! how hast thou disturbed the peace of mankind! That Gamesters should be more implacable than Divines! Modern Orthodoxy, Manwaring, and Sib­thorpianism have not caused so great di­sturbance in the Common-wealth, as the Picques of Losers against those that rook them. Bless me from this accursed Game, if I cannot win a few pieces but I must endanger the Church and all, and its Re­venues must be seized to revenge your injury, and repair your fortune. Sir, this is too implacable for a Gentlemans Me­mory. But poor wretch wert thou cheat­ed! It was the very grievance of Bartle­mew Cokes, he too poor Gentleman could not endure this Naughty Town, because he could not go to a Gaming Ordinary, but he was sure to be rook'd of all his money. But Bat yet was a good-natured Gentleman, and easily reconciled, and it is the common fate of all Gentlemen of private condition and breeding. Come, come then be friends and say no more, and we will buy thee a new Muff and Pe­ruke, nay rather than fail, we will pre­sent thee with Coach and Horses and Li­veries, and thou thy self instead of coarse Drugget shalt wear Sympathetick Silk, [Page 472] thy Pockets shall be full of Guinies, and thou shalt again frequent the Gaming Ordinaries with as much credit, and as big looks as ever, we will buy off such an implacable Gamester at any rate. And if ever hereafter any Clergy-man shall presume to cheat you, then write on and spare not, we deserve no mercy if we will take no warning. And if we will not, paint us out in our own colours, dress us up in Sambenita's with all the flames and devils in hell. Tell all the world, that the highest pinacle of Eccle­siastical Pag. 11. felicity is to asswage their Concu­piscence and wreck their malice. That the Pag. 239. same day they take up Divinity, they devest themselves of humanity, &c. That the Pag. 241. reach of their Divinity is but to Persecuti­on, and an Inquisition the height of their Policy. That they are the only men, who in an affair of Conscience, and where per­haps Pag. 249. 'tis they are in the wrong, are the only hard-hearted and inflexible Tyrants, and not only so, but instigate and provoke Princes to be the Ministers of their Cruelty. That they are so exceeding pragmatical, so Pag. 299. intolerably ambitious, and so desperately proud, that scaroe any Gentleman may come near the tayle of their Mules. That they are enough to deform the whole Reign of [Page 473] the best Prince that ever wielded Scepter; that they make it their business by their lea­sings to keep up a misunderstanding between Kings and their Subjects. That they trin­kle Pag. 310, with the Members so shamefully, as to expose the wisdom of his Majesty and the Parliament to After-ages. That is to say, the Clergy (as such) are a company of proud, and leacherous, and cruel, and in­humane, and bloody, and tyrannical, and leasing, and trinkling Knaves. This I think is revenge enough for a more im­placable Provocation, than being only a little trinkled at Picquet, especially for one, that were it not for this sinister ac­cident (I wish this Dignitaries eyes had been out when he over-look'd your hand) is so great a lover of the Church of England, that it joys his heart to hear any thing well said of it, and so great an Pag. 277. admirer of the English Clergy, that he believes that ever since the Reformation Pag. 237. they have been of the eminentest for divi­nity and piety in all Christendom. And so true a friend to the Bishops of England, that he has for their Function, their Learn­ing, and their Persons too deep a venera­tion to speak any thing of them irreverent­ly. To what strange passions will this gaming transport men! Who could ever [Page 474] have thought that one that loved and honour'd the Clergy at this rate could ever have been betrayed into such rude and abusive expressions by a little bad fortune at Picquet? Who could suppose it, that one that was educated in the Church of England should for the loss of a few Pieces become such a fierce and over-doing Renegade, as to spit in the face of every Clergy-man that comes in his way, to curse solemnly his Parents for his birth as well as his education, and to animate all his acquaintance to the massacring of the whole Order? This I believe is such an height of revenge and cruelty, that with all your reading you will never be able to find out an exam­ple to equal it among the Clergy of all Ages, unless the Priests of AEthiopia, who were wont to send peremptory Com­mands to their Kings to dye at their pleasure. From whom I am apt to think the Canibals of the Race of Capons de­scended, because of their antipathy to the Race of Kings: For if they do not so openly claim, yet they do as confi­dently exercise the same tyranny over them.

But beside this unhappy adventure at Picquet, there is another weighty reason [Page 475] of your displeasure against the Clergy of all Ages, which though it be not so broad­ly express'd, yet 'tis sufficiently intimated, viz. That in some age or other they have been a little uncivil to Gentlemen, for it Pag. 294. was come they tell you to Jack Gentleman. They tell you; what they tell you? They of Charing-cross, or they of the Secret ones? The former they (wise men say) never say true. The latter they (all men know) are sadly addicted to leasing; but though it were both they, nay though it were all they of the Modern Orthodoxy, Hungary, Transylvania, &c. what they so­ever it were, we have no very great en­couragement to trust your Report, and that for two very good Reasons, first, be­cause it is possible that they might mis­inform you; and secondly, it is not im­possible but that you might misreport them to us. Did not they tell you, that the very minute of the conception of my Pre­face Pag. 13. was immediately upon His Majesties issuing his Declaration of Indulgence to tender Consciences? Did not they tell you that about the days of Bishop Bramhal, there Pag. 43. were a sort of Divines of the Church of England, who could never speak of the first Reformers with any patience? Did not they tell you that some of my Books are al­readyPag. 46.[Page 476] sent beyond Sea for curiosity to the scandal and heart-burning of the Reformed Churches? Did not they tell you that Cats are wont to whet their Claws against Pag. 81. the Chairs and Hangings? But the Vir­tuosi tell me it is false, and that they only stretch themselves by hanging their claws in them when they grow sleepy. Did not they tell you that the main de­signs of my Ecclesiastical Policy were to assert the unlimited Power of the Civil Magistrate, and the absolute subjection of Conscience to all his Commands, to destroy the Grace of the Gospel, and turn it all into a Fable, to recommend the Perse­cution of tender Consciences, and the To­leration of Debauchery? Did not they Pag. 123. tell you that Julian was the most bloody persecutour of all the Roman Emperours? Did not they tell you that there were no Pag. 148. Non-conformists and Presbyterians in Sar­danapalus his dayes? when there have alwayes been ill-natur'd People from the beginning of dayes. Did not they tell you that I who slew all men with my own single strength had two Assistants? Did not they tell you that without the sign of the Cross our Church will not receive Pag. 219. any one to Baptism. Did not they tell you that there was a great Prelate of the Pag. 218. [Page 477] Church of England that writ a Book of the Seven Sacraments? Did not they tell Pag. 230. you that Augustus Caesar, though he was so great an Emperour and so valiant a man, was yet withal so shameful a Coward, as to be as much afraid of a new word, though it were single, as a Mariner of a rock for fear of splitting? Did not they tell you that the King has so obliged the Non-con­formists, Pag. 252. that they can never hereafter lift up an ill thought against him? Did not they tell you that the Bishops did upon the Pag. 268. publishing the Declaration, give the word, and deliver Orders through their Ecclesi­astical Camp, to beat up the Pulpit-drums against Popery? Did not they tell you that I have all along impropriated all the Pag. 279. Loyalty from the Nobility, the Gentry, and the Commonalty, and dedicated it to the Church? Did not they that have seen both tell you, that in Arch-bishop Lauds time our Church did exceed the Romish in Cere­monies Pag. 297. and Decorations? Did not they tell you that I have cast this mischievous Pag. 307. aspersion upon▪ His Majesty of thinking to convert the Revenues of the Church to his own use? Did not they tell you that you writ your Book against the King and the Clergy, and the Church of England with­out Pag. ult. prophaning and violating those things [Page 478] which are and ought to be most Sacred? With an hundred idle stories more that I could tell you, if any body would be­lieve them. But these are their leasings, and by these you may see that you have as little reason to trust your Friends as we have to trust you. It is plain, you have not declined the acquaintance, nor Pag. 280. avoided the Company of the Non-confor­mists, you are abundantly furnish'd with Leasings. And we may a little judge of the Truth and Ingenuity of the rest by a Rapper that is still behind, and that I had almost forgot, viz. That it was an Apho­rism Pag. 139. of a great Prelate in the last Kings time, that the King had no more to do in Ecclesiastical Matters, than Jack that rub'd his Horses heels. I have heard, that one, who was since a great Prelate, was brought into the Long-Parliament Inqui­sition for such a saying as this, and that the Indictment was managed against him by Pym and Rous, and the rest of the Mo­dern Orthodox Members that would not be trinkled, and though he was proceed­ed against with an unheard of Malice and Violence, and all the pains and arts in the world were made use of to make good the Accusation, yet the tale was so destitute of all manner of proof or evi­dence, [Page 479] that they themselves were con­vinced of its falsehood, and forced for shame (though sore against their wills) to let fall the Charge and acquit the Gen­tleman. So modest a wretch are you still to keep up a calumny that has been so notoriously convicted of falsehood and impudence by nothing less than a Long-Parliament scrutiny. But this it is when men will pick up their Stories in the streets, at Charing-Cross and in Lincolns-Inn-fields, and report things upon the meer credit of vulgar hear-say, without ever examining their truth, nay with re­solving to put on a bold face for em­proving the lye to their own purpose. Somewhere in all your Travels, or some time in all your life; you have heard some body tell some such story of some Clergy-man, though whether a Prelate or no Prelate you do not remember, and whether the Person that told it you, thought it credible or not, you as little care. The story would serve your turn, and gratifie your spite, and so you re­solved the first Book you writ to set it off with all aggravating circumstances that the world may thereby take notice of the insolence of these Prelates. And in the strength of your confidence it [Page 480] might have passed hereafter without con­trowl for no unlikely story, were it not a Lye upon Record by having been lucki­ly brought into Parliament. But after all, what if it were come to Jack Gentle­man? when it was only spoken of such ill-bred Clowns as you, that thought it the mark of their Gentility to despise a Clergy-man, and abuse Mr. Parson, and that would affront their own father, if they had met him upon the Road in his Canonical habit. And such (especially if they are broken Gamesters) I still say are no better than Jack Gentlemen, I am sure there is no true Gentleman but would scorn and abhorr such Porterly rudeness, so that none can be concern'd in or often­ded at the Expression, but such Jacks as had their Breeding at Charing-Cross or in Lincolns-Inn-fields.

And thus your Gibellineship having unloaded your whole Leystal upon the Clergy, and dress'd them all up in Sam­benita's, painted with all the flames and Devils in Hell, as if they purely by vertue of their Office and Character were more addicted to all kinds of wickedness, e­specially revenge, falshood, and cruelty, than all other Orders and Professions whatsoever. Which if it were true, you [Page 481] have said enough to prevail with Kings, never hereafter to suffer such vile men to trinkle and tamper with their affairs, and though it were possible that they should light upon a man of Learning, Pie­ty, and Wisdome, yet he will be sure to deform their whole Reigns by his Ig­norance, Knavery, and Folly. Thus (I say) having rescued their Royal and ex­quisite Understandings from the Clergies keeping, you, notwithstanding that you were never bred up to the Trade, that you are not a competent Judge of their actions, that you are conscious to your self of talking impertinently when you meddle with such matters, that you cor­rect my presumption for taking upon me to instruct Princes in the Rules and Mea­sures of Government; Notwithstanding all this you your self take them all to task, tutor them like School-boys, read them long politick Lectures from Precept and Example, and as if you were the Skipper of the State, talk to them of nothing but Sea-marks, and Buoys, and Rocks, and Sands, and Charts, and Compasses, &c. And if they will not steer by your Compass, and abate of the exercise of their Power by their discretion, they are sure to ruine all upon the Rock of absolute Govern­ment. [Page 482] And to gain the greater Credit and Authority to your wise Instructions, you vaunt your own great and long Ex­perience; I my self have oftentimes seen Pag. 242. Kings do strange things and unreasonable in my Opinion, and yet a little while, or sometimes many Years after, I have found that all the men in the World could not have contrived any thing better. Now it seems you think your self for all your counter­feit and impudent modesty, a competent Judge of their Actions. But here is An­drew de temporibus again, what a general acquaintance have you with Kings time out of mind as well as with the Clergy of all Ages? And now by vertue of your long Experience and shrewd Observati­on you think your self qualified, and no man more, to be Sir Pol. to all the Prin­ces in Christendome, and you have advi­sed them as gravely as Sancho himself could have done how to govern their Islands. Such is your miserable stupidity that there is not the least imaginary Er­rour that you have falsely objected to me, into which you have not precipitated your self with all the Circumstances and Aggravations of an affected Cox-comb. And whoever compares your Lectures must conclude Sancho to be much the [Page 483] deeper Politician. For the result of all your Instructions to Princes how to go­vern well is to advise them not to govern at all; because the Body is in the power of Pag. 250. the mind, and the mind in the hand of God, so that to punish the body for the mind is to make the Innocent suffer for the Guilty, and to punish the mind, when it is in the hand of God is to violate the Divine Majesty. And now if both the minds and the bo­dies of his Majesties Subjects are entirely exempt by Divine Right from his Autho­rity, what a mighty Emperour was San­cho in comparison to the Kings of Eng­land, for you know how he served Mr. Doctor Pedro Rezio of Agnero when he would not suffer him to eat his meat at quiet, and though his body were in the power of his mind, and his mind in the hands of God, yet for all that his High­ness made bold to lay his Doctorship neck and heels for his Impertinency, whereas according to your Measures, when the King suffer'd the Law to pass upon Hugh Peters and Colonel Venner, he did not on­ly violate his own but the Divine Majesty. And though the Cow-keeper declared War point-blank for God himself, yet he had his outward Tabernacle fairly su­spended; by a mere carnal, humane In­stitution, [Page 484] for which the judge must ex­pect to give an account at the day of Judgment for violating the Divine Maje­sty. But in truth this solemn and frown­ing Non-sense is so horribly ridiculous, that I am perfectly ashamed to expose it. And yet it is the result not only of your own Book, but of all the Books of your own Party, whilst they make the Con­science subject to God alone, and impute all the Actions of the outward man to that inward Principle, and then what has the Magistrate to do with any of his Sub­jects, when their bodies are purely in the power of their minds, & their minds in the power of God. There is avast deal more of such wretched stuff that I shall pass by, because I perceive every body has wit e­nough to discern it at first sight by their own natural Sagacity. Only one deep Aphorism I cannot omit, no more than you can your idle stories, because Kings may make use of it for their own advan­tage, viz. that as reasonable men are to be govern'd by reason, so are Consciencious Pag. 250. men by Conscience. What you mean I nei­ther know nor care, but this advantage I can make of it for the use of Kings, that then his Majesties Conscience (if you will allow him any) has a Sovereignty over [Page 485] the Consciences of his Subjects, and since blashemous Consciences have been con­scienciously burnt, and rebellious Consci­ences conscienciously hang'd, 'tis a power­ful Evidence of the Necessity of a Consci­encious Government in the Kingdom of Conscience, and that his Majesty as he knows best may conscienciously reduce all sturdy Consciences to acquiesce con­scienciously in his and the Churches most consciencious Discipline. For as he has a royal Understanding and a Gentlemans Memory, so has he an imperial and super­lative Conscience, by virtue whereof he is able to exercise a Consciencious Dominion over ten thousands of his Consciencious little Kings, and by virtue of this it was that Hugh Peters being a rea­sonable man was reasonably hang'd, and a consciencious man was conscienciously hang'd; and if ever hereafter the Con­sciences of any Subjects shall drill them into the like consciencious Freaks against the sovereign Conscience, that may in­flict the same consciencious Punishment upon them by virtue of its consciencious Authority; and this I take to be the on­ly Consciencious meaning of these words that Consciencious men are to be dealt with only by Conscience. And thus [Page 486] though by your former Maxims you had deposed him from exercising any Autho­rity over his Subjects, yet now by this you have reenthroned him in his full Power by making his Conscience King of their Consciences; so that it con­cerns him to look to his Conscience lest he lose his Kingdom, in that they will not have their Consciences governed by any thing but Conscience. But seeing there is little hopes of perswading his Majesty out of his Government, you pro­cede in the next place to prescribe him worshipful Rules and Measures how to manage it discreetly by a preposterous duty and slavish regard to the Will and Insolence of his Subjects. Not a word, in all your Book, of exhortation to them to be obedient, all your Advice is thrown away upon Kings to be discreet and to connive, and not like the hard-hearted-inflexible-tyrant Clergy exasperate the People to Rebellion by the extravagan­cy of their just Power, but to be so sa­tisfied with having abundance of it, as to be content to abate of its exercise by their discretion. To condescend for peace sake and the quiet of Mankind to such things as would break a proud heart before it would bend (you are all for humbling [Page 487] of Kings;) not to exact obedience too much to the establish'd Laws, lest they require things impossible, unnecessary and wanton of their People: upon all Occasions to give them good words and humour them like Children, to consider the Temper of the Climate, the Consti­tutions of their Bodies and the Antipa­thies of their Stomachs. And if all this will not prevail, but his Majesty still prove a stubborn and untractable Pupil, he must be taught to reflect upon the histo­ries of former times, and consider the Catastrophes of such pragmatical Kings and Governours, as would not humour their Subjects like Children nor consider their Infirmities, and when they had got a Cold force them to be covered. Sir, what do you mean by all this? Do you not think the King a well-bred Gentle­man that you read him these Lectures of Civility, as if he were not respectful and mannerly enough to his Subjects? If you Pag. 278. do not mean mischief, why do you speak of it in his time? Why stir such an odious, seditious, impertinent, unseasonable dis­course? Pag. 318. Why take this very minute of time but that you have mischief, to say no worse, in your heart? This is plainly written with Pag. 264. an evil eye and aim at his Majesty, and the [Page 488] measures he has taken of Government. For if he be so uncivil as not to condescend to his Inferiours, so indiscreet as not to connive at their Infirmities, so inhuman [...] as not to yield to their Weaknesses, so ill-bred as not to desire them to be cover­ed when they have got a Cold. Nay if he be so hard-hearted as when any of them have an Antipathy to any thing (for in­stance a Flemish Antipathy to Monarohy, a Consciencious Antipathy to Obe­dience and a Fanatick Antipathy to Morality) as to cram these things down their throats in spite of their stomachs, he is an hard-hearted and inflexible Ty­rant, and then every body knows the stories of the Roman Emperour that was stab'd, of Alexander the Great that had almost lost all, of the Queen of Sweden that was forced to resign, of the sturdy Swiss that would not conform, and all the other idle stories, that they know how to make use of, if Kings will not. But I beseech you what grounds have you for these fears and jealousies of Incivility? Did his Majesty ever turn his Kingdom into a Prison? Did he ever weary out his Subjects so at home, as to constrain them to seek a more hospitable habitation among Salvages and Canibals abroad? This was [Page 489] the incivility that deformed his Fathers Reign, and the Rock upon which we all ruined; but the King observes his Sea-marks, and has learnt more manners, and is not so uncivil as Alexander the Great and his Royal Father were, as to force them to rebel by forcing them to conform. And though I have not the honour to be so intimately acquainted with his Majesty as to give him a Te­stimonial of the unblameableness of his Life and Conversation, as you have very obligingly done, yet thus much I dare say for him, that he is as ci­vil and good-natured a Prince as e­ver wielded the English Sceptre, so that you need not doubt but that he will upon all occasions give his Sub­jects good-words, though they give him bad ones, and humour them like Chil­dren, though they are never so froward and deserve to be scourged. And there­fore, during his Reign, you have no more ground to fear any danger of Inci­vility than I have of Popery; so unne­cessary and unseasonable are your Le­ctures of good manners at this time, when his Majesty (God be praised) is as well provided of a Royal Nature as a Gentle­mans Memory. Thus far have you in­structed [Page 490] him how to govern his Island by way of Precept, but now we procede to the more instructive Topick of Example; and here you have strung up (as Sancho did his Proverbs) an hundred idle stories of the fatal Catastrophe of ill-bred and uncivil Kings, to fright him into meekness and good manners; to which you might (in my opinion) have added one more, how the Subjects of Great Britain (be­cause their King would not humour them like Children, when they had a mind to play with his Crown) nip'd his Preroga­tive, suck'd his Blood, subverted his Go­vernment, and set up a glorious Regi­ment of their own. I verily believe to have trumpeted this in his Majesty's ears (as much as I am out of your Books for it) would have been a more pertinent story for the use of Princes than Alexander the Great that had almost lost all, the Roman Emperor that was stabb'd, the sturdy Swiss that would not conform, and the frolicksom Queen that gave the blank Town seal, of which there came no harm. But yet from these you threaten Kings with as much Effrontery, as if you had them standing before you upon the Stool of Repentance, whilst you lecture to them with the state of King Gill Scotch [Page 491] modern Orthodoxy, with politick-Notes and Observations upon Emperors Roman and Grecian, Kings and Queens, School­boys and Schoolmasters. I shall as brief­ly as I can examine them, to prove you as very a Rat-historian as I have proved you a Rat-divine.

Your first Tale is of a Roman Empe­rour, who when his Captain of the Life­guard Pag. 244. came for the word, by giving it un­handsomly, receiv'd a dagger. I suppose you mean Caligula, who (as Suetonius re­lates) was stabb'd by Sabinus, whilst he gave the word (not as you will have it) for giving it unhandsomly, the murther ha­ving been plotted aforehand, and though Josephus (you know) had a peculiar grudge against that Emperour, as a most implacable enemy to the Jewish Nation, and therefore to disgrace him as much as he can, affirms that he was stabb'd im­mediately upon giving for the Word the name of a lewd woman (though in Sue­tonius the Word is Jupiter, the most sacred Word in their Religion) yet will you there find that it was the execution of a premeditated Conspiracy, and that the main cause of it was his frequent railing upon this Captains cowardize. This is a Caveat to Kings, not to presume too [Page 492] much upon their own Wit, and their Subjects good nature, and if they will be drolling upon them, they may thank themselves if they receive a Dagger for a Repartee. I have heard of another Ro­man Emperour, who gave the Sword to the Captain of his Guard, requiring him to use it for his defence, if he govern'd well; but if not, to turn the point of it against himself. As also of a Prince of Brabant, who granted to his Subjects, if himself or any of his Successours should ever attempt to violate their Ancient Priviledges, a full Power of proceeding to the Election of a New Governour, what disturbances ensued hereupon, and how Kings approve the example I know not, but this I do know, that it was very weakly done to submit their Actions so entirely to the judgement of their Sub­jects, and put it within the power of any Malecontent either to murther or depose them. But being got into the Roman Empire, I am (you know) in my own kingdom, and therefore when you ask me, whether had I lived in the dayes of Pag. 241. Augustus, I should not have made an ex­cellent Privy Counsellour to him? for his Father too was murther'd. I would have been Privy Counsellour to Augustus with [Page 493] all my soul, were it not that he reign'd so long ago; so that had I ever been of His Privy Council, I must either have been dead fifteen hundred years since, or at least have been so very old, that by this time I should have been altogether unfit for any publique employment, though I had descended of your family of the de Temporibus, otherwise I know not any Emperour of them all of whose acquaintance I should have been more ambitious. He was a Prince admirable for the wisdom and magnanimity of his mind, for the sweetness and facility of his manners, he was one that delighted in nothing more than the entertainments of wit and ingenuity. Virgil, and Horace, and Varius were admitted into his retired and cabinet Conversation, as well as Agrippa and Mecaenas, they were not only his Domesticks, but his Familiars and his Confidents, they conversed and laughed together as friends and companions. And now who would not take it kindly to be honour'd with the favour and familiarity of so great a Prince, a Prince of so good and so sweet a disposition, a Prince so free from froth and groans, a Prince so much to be admired, for that Majesty which sat upon the forehead of his Mascu­line [Page 494] Truth and generous Honesty. But had I been of his Privy Council, I am confi­dent I should never have given him my Advice to sacrifice three hundred of the Nobles and Citizens of the best Quality to the Ghost of his murther'd Father, be­cause his Natural Father old Octavius was not murther'd, but being a Civil Gentle­man of private condition and breeding, and never having suffer'd any of his Te­nants to be uncover'd when they had got a cold, dyed quietly as he lived. But as for his Unkle J. Caesar his adopted Fa­ther, the case is plain, he was a bold and venturesom Gamester, that out-trink­led the Senate, and cheated them of the Empire of the whole world (for it was an usual thing for the Gamesters of those dayes to throw at all.) Now this was too great a stake to be rook'd of, and they such implacable Gamesters, that out of pure revenge, when they had lost all, and he would refund nothing, they made no more ado but stabb'd him, though as for your part you are the most irreconcileable Loser I ever heard of, you are not content to wreck your malice up­on the man that cheated you, but for his sake you run a muck at the whole Pro­fession, and vow the destruction of all [Page 495] Clergy-men dead or alive, that ever were or ever shall be. However had I been Mecaenas, I would have strugled a little more than two dayes before I would have suffer'd him to abandon Cicero to Mark Anthonies revenge, whom it seems (for he was a great Gamester too) no­thing would satisfie but his enemies life, only because he had so horribly paid him off in the Parliament House with sharp speeches, which it seems the Great Man when he was run down call'd railing. But Augustus was bound in honour to protect him, not only out of respect to his wit and eloquence, but because he was the Creatour and first Patron of his own for­tune. In that by his means he first gain'd the good affection of the Lords of the Se­nate, and by their means (you know) he at length obtain'd an unhoopable Empire. Though indeed some of your State-Poli­ticians are willing enough to excuse him, in that, first, if Cicero did him any service, it was not out of any love to him, but out of hatred to Anthony (for Senatours too are implacable in their Picques as well as Divines and Gamesters) but chiefly out of affection to the Senate, because it seems there himself Reign'd, just as the Presby­terians, when it was too late, would have [Page 496] joyn'd with the Royalists, not out of any Kindness to the King and his Party, but hatred to Cromwel and his Sectaries, and zeal for their holy Discipline, by which they hoped at last to rule all, and set their feet upon the necks of Kings. And second­ly, because it was necessary to remove the fiercest of all Factions out of the way, for the quiet and establishment of his new de­sign'd Monarchy. In that the most obsti­nate both of the Nobles and Commons being singled out in this bloody Proscri­ption, and the odium of the cruelty (by the cunning behaviour of Augustus) lying upon Anthony and Lepidus, when he had once rid his hands of them, he was pretty secure ever after from being troubled with any attempts of the old democrati­cal Gentlemen to recover the old demo­cratical Liberty: So that by this means he had no need of one of your High-Courts of Justice, that ungrateful work was done to his hand by these wicked men. Or if he had been put to it, he would never have been so bloody as the late Tyrant was, who would not be satis­fied with the Kings murther, but went on to assassinate such other of the Nobility, that had been most eminent for Courage and Loyalty, only to terrifie the Kings [Page 497] Loyal Subjects from all attempts of their duty, and indeed to affright them out of the Kingdom, when they saw their lives every day at the mercy of a rude and a spiteful Tyrant. And you know when it was put to the question at a Council of War, whether all the Royallists should be massacred, and carried in the negative by no more than two Votes. But now how all this story of Augustus comes in, I can­not imagine, for I do not remember that I have any where perswaded the King to a Proscription, at least it might have been pertinent before the Kings Judges had made satisfaction to Justice, but to what purpose it serves now, I profess again is past my understanding. The next shred of History belongs to the King of Polands Taylour-Parliament, who because the King would not near their Mode, have suffer'd Pag. 244: the Turk to-enter, as coming nearer their fashion. If the King of Poland have a Tay­lour then he is no unhoopable Prince. But in this (as I take it) you are flatly contra­dicted by the more authentick testimony of your own Gazets, and I do not believe this is yet recorded in any other History, However Parliaments may learn from hence, if the King will not be ruled to [...]all in Turks and Scots, and that is ano­ther [Page 498] Principle of Modern Orthodoxy. And it has so vile an Innuendo (as Lawyers speak in actions for scandalous words,) that if it have any reference to our King, of whom you are speaking all along, and bringing your reasons and re-inforce­ments for gratifying the Non-conformists, it is an impudent entrenchment upon his Majesties Crown and Prerogative. For the Polish Kingdome being Elective and not Hereditary, the Parliament deal with their Kings, as the Subjects of King Gill, and King Osbolston are wont at certain sea­sons of the year to deal with their Sove­reign Masters, barr him out, and keep him out, till he subscribe first to what Articles and Conditions they are pleased to pre­scribe him, or else there is no coming in there for him to play Rex among them. Friend, you dance upon the high-ropes, and by your Politique Lectures endanger your head as well as your neck. 'Tis un­safe to play tricks so high, as you do when you meddle with his Majesties Crown, and compare it with that of Poland (for else you bring it in impertinently) when our English Constitutions know no Inter­regnum, nor is it in the Power of our Par­liaments to choose or refuse what King they please. Take heed, remember what [Page 499] the Turk did when he mounted the high Rope, if you will be shewing your ambiti­ous Activity, it is lightly you will some time or other break your Neck.

From the King of Poland according to the method of your Chronology you march over all the Roman and Turkish Empire, and there find 1900. years ago an Instance to prove of what dangerous Consequence it is to impose new fashions upon the People, for even Alexander the great had almost lost all he had con­quered Pag. 244: by forcing his Subjects to conform to the Persian habit. Take it for a warn­ing, O ye Kings, (how great soever) how you impose fashions whether of Tunicks or Pantaloons upon your Subjects, for e­ven Alexander the Great lost all the East-Indies, Medes, Persians, Asia, Africa, as far as the Mountains of the Moon, and the Head of Nilus, died a beggar, was outed of all his Conquests, and all for forcing his Subjects to conform. If you would have a Law enacted that no man shall hereafter dare to bring over any new Fashions from France, but that Vests, Perukes, Tunicks, Cimarrs, &c. shall continue the English fashion inviola­ble and unaltered to all Ages, let the Tire-men and Tire-women look to it, [Page 500] and see you answered, I am not concern­ed. But he that runs may all along read your design of Modern Orthodoxy, and in­structing wise Princes to look to it, have a care what they do, and force not their Subjects to conform to any habit civil or sacred, in that Alexander the Great had almost lost all he had conquer'd by for­cing his Subjects to conform. But this is one of your leasings, for Alexander the Great never lost a foot of what he had conquer'd, and therefore not almost all, but died unconquer'd, and to his dying day lost not one foot either by seeming Friend or Foe, Grecian or Persi­an, by forcing his Subjects to conform or not conform. Will you never be asha­med of your Leasings? But as for the great danger that Alexander was in, as I remem­ber, it followed a fair time after and arose from another Cause, viz. that he disown­ed Philip for his Father, and would by all means be complemented as the Son of Ju­piter, it was this which gave occasion to the sedition for which Philotas died. But if this goodly story were true and you would prove any thing out of it, it signi­fies nothing but against King and Parlia­ment for making a Law to force all Sub­jects to conform to their habit and fashi­on, [Page 501] and is only a sly insinuation against the foolish Act of Uniformity, by which they have not only exposed their Wis­dom to after Ages, but endanger'd all at Present; for Alexander the Great, &c.

The next Story is of the King of Spain, Pag. 244. who, when upon a Progress he enters Biscay, is pleased to ride with one Leg naked, and a­bove all to take care that there be not any Bishop in his Retinue. From hence be ad­vised O Kings, whenever you take a Pil­grimage for Scotland, to travel bare-foot­ed, and to take no Bishop in your Reti­nue, as you would avoid a solemn League and a Kirk-rebellion. Though if you will yield to stand upon the Stool of Repen­tance, and there suffer Mass John to rate both your self and your royal Ancestors for a Succession of Lowns and Tyrants, and acknowledge the sins of your house and your own former ways, and give sa­tisfaction to the People of God in both Kingdoms, and take all this with Kingly wisdom and meekness, they may perhaps present him as the Biscains do the King of Spain with a leather-bag full of Maravides (60. whereof make a Crown) but yet withal forbid him to touch it with the end of his Lance. Or if his English Sub­jects should grow so capricious, that no­thing [Page 502] will please them but the King must appear ridiculously before them to make them sport and humour them like Chil­dren, he must be wise and gratifie their Childishness, as the King of Spain does the Biscainers, lest they grow touchy, angry and rebel. And as for what you suggest of their Scotch Antipathy to Bishops, from thence it is come to pass that they are be­come the most Barbarous People of all Europe, always excepting the afore-excep­ted the Canibals of the Race of Capons; so as that they will not have any Traffick with any other Countreys, nor mix with any other People for fear of corrupting their Language and Gentility, though that is little better than wild Irish, and they little better than Jack-gentlemen. And though they have some dark and general Notions of Christianity still re­maining among them, yet are they since their Picque against Bishops fallen into such rudeness and ignorance, that they have scarce any knowledge at all of the particular Articles of their Faith and Pre­cepts of their Religion; and so it must be, wherever there is no superiour Clergy, the poor Parish-priests will in process of time become as ignorant and barbarous as the Common People.

[Page 503] The next Story is of a Certain Tyrant Pag. 244. that demanded subsidies of so many Bushels of Fleas. But because you will not or can­not tell us when or where this same Ty­rant does or did live, nor what his Name is or was, I have good reason to suspect ei­ther that it is but an idle Story or he some Jack Gentleman. Though what you would make of it I cannot devise, unless it be that if the King should impose some trivial things and ceremonies as are in your Judgment not worth a Flea, and fine or punish the People for Non-payment of such Niceties, he had as good be quiet, and would get but little by distraining, and should be called Tyrant for his pains. So that if the King exact Obedience and Uniformity to the establish'd Laws, he is worse than the Flea-tyrant, seeing the Non-conformists cannot pay it in Consci­ence, and seeing withal they desire no Al­teration, but what is so far from doing us any harm, that it would only make us better.

The next is a Story of a certain Queen that being desired to give a Town-scal, sat down naked on the Snow and left them Pag. 245. that Impression, and other Town-seal could they get none for their hearts, if they would be content with that, well and good, she would part with no other, and [Page 504] though it caused no disturbance, yet Kings do not approve the Example. But if it caus­ed no disturbance the Story might have been spared. But how come you to know that Kings do not approve of the Exam­ple, that you dare thus confidently pub­lish their Opinion, when I dare say you cannot name two Kings that ever heard the story. Will you never learn Modesty? But why do you not tell us the Name of this Queen, and City, and Countrey? It could not be the Queen of the Amazons, because her whole Territorie, as Travel­lers, that have been there, tell me, lies within the Tropicks and just under the Equinoctial, and there they tell me too it never snows. So that I doubt it must be the Queen that reigns in Terra incognita, Dowager to the Tyrant that has his sub­sidys paid him in Fleas by the Bushel, mea­sured to him in good Tale by Jack Gen­tleman. But whoever she was or where­ever she lived the Politick Emprovement of her story runs thus. There was a cer­tain German Princess (bold Bettrice by name) that being either mad or maudlin played a sluttish Trick somewhere before the worshipful Mr. Mayor and his Bre­thren, and though their Worships were not so implacably offended at her Maje­sties [Page 505] rudeness, as presently to pass a Vote of common Council for taking up Arms to revenge the Affront, so that there fol­lowed no disturbance in the State from the extravagance of the frolick, yet Kings that never heard of it do not (as they have told you their minds) approve of the Ex­ample. But rather take it for a warning to behave themselves mannerly and mo­destly before their Subjects. Though I cannot see why they should be so much deterr'd from it by this Example, when no harm that we read of ensued upon this freakish use of her Prerogative. But had the Consequences proved never so fatal, I am apt to think that Kings, though you had not represented them, would not have been very forward to approve or follow the Example, because Royal Sense can never be much delighted with sitting upon the cold Snow.

The next is a Queen too, and she al­most as bold a Virago as the former who­ever she was, and it is the Queen of Swe­den Pag. 245. who said Io non voglio governar le be­stie, but afterwards resign'd. But I don't believe she understood one word of Itali­an before she went to Rome, or if she did it is certain the People of Sweden did not, so that though she did speak to her People [Page 506] that displeasing word Bestie, I do not see how that could cause her Resignation. But the true and manifest Reasons of it were on her Subjects part, their natural fierceness and inclination to wars, that made them loath to be bestrid by a Pet­ticoat, and therefore they lean'd to her Kinsman the General, and her declared Successour; and on her own part a ca­pricious desire of foreign Travel and Conversation with more refined wits. But however from hence let Princes be in­structed to flatter the meanest of the Peo­ple, lest if they speak contemptibly of them, they depose them for their morose­ness and want of breeding.

The next Novel is of the Revolt of Switzerland from the Emperour and its turning Common-wealth, only upon oc­casion of imposing a civil Ceremony by a capricious Governour, who set up a Pole in the high-way with a Cap upon the top of it, to which he would have all passen­gers to be uncover'd, and do obeysance. But one sturdy Swiss that would not con­form, thereupon over-turn'd the Govern­ment, as it is at large in history. One stur­dy Swiss that would not conform—this is your Modern Orthodox Language—that would not conform—so Alexander [Page 507] the Great had almost lost all, because he would force his Subjects to conform—But to what would he not conform? not to a Civil Ceremony; a Civil Ceremony! how much less to a Religious Ceremony, that is no less than an as-it-were-a-Sacra­ment. But however to give you the short of the story it runs thus. The Switzers were declared a Free People some hun­dreds of years before for their good ser­vice against the Saracens, and at the time you speak of they had no desire to re­nounce their dependence upon the Em­pire, but upon the House of Austria as an Hereditary Fee. And their casting off their Obedience to the Prefect sent by the Em­perour Albert of that Family, was contri­ved long enough before the Hat was set upon the Pole, and this not by a Rout and Tumult, but by the direction of the Chief Magistrate the Baron of Altinghuse. But the Prefect knowing of the design (to make short work of it) set up the Cap and Pole as a tryal and discovery of the Malecon­tents. So that this was no more the cause of their revolt, than the Kings setting up the Royal Standard at Nottingham was of the long-Parliaments Rebellion, who had before in several cases challenged, and as far as they were able, seised on, his Power, [Page 508] and by consequence deposed him from his Sovereignty. From hence let wise Princes beware of forcing their Subjects to be uncover'd unseasonably, i. e. when­ever they have got a cold, or are out of humour; and it is good advice to the Parliament to have a special care that they injoyn not the Quakers nor others to put off their Hats, whether in Courts of Judicature, the Parliament House, or Chambers of Presence, nor injoyn them a Leg, or a Cringe, or a Bow as they love the Kingdom, for one sturdy Swiss that woul'd not conform, &c. And that which is more material good Sir Pol. you may hence infer, that they had need make a Law, and Enact, that no Wagg by any trick, wile, or stratagem in earnest or jest use any endeavours to make men put off their Hats, as they pass by the three Poles at Tyburn, for fear of turning the King­dom into a Common-wealth again, if they will be wise, see the consequences, and observe the Sea-marks, for one sturdy Swiss that would not conform. This is right Modern Orthodoxy, and you had done well to have added the judgement of a Professour of it in the Corporation of Losarne, scituate on the Lake of Lemane, on what point of the Compass (you Tra­vellers [Page 509] are so critical) I dare not deter­mine, though this I dare, that it is not far from the Town of Geneva. Viz. That it was well done of the Switzers to free them­selves Bucan. loc. Commun. of their subjection to the House of Au­stria, when the Princes of that House had exercised more than ordinary cruelty in most parts of the Countrey; as David might lawfully have kill'd Saul, though he did for­bear to do it, lest he should give an exam­ple to the people of Israel of killing their Kings, which other men prompted by Am­bition might be like enough to imitate a­gainst himself and his Royal Posterity.

The King of Spains losing Flanders is the last piece of News that makes up this Gazet, and this hapned (according to the information of your Correspondent) by setting up the Inquisition. But this story is so like that of Alexander the Great, that I need only deny it, and say, that as Alexander dyed seised of all his Acquists and Conquests; so neither has the King of Spain lost Flanders by the Inquisition, because it is in force there to this day, as you may see and feel too, if you will but take a voyage to Ostend with an English Bible in your hand, and talk there as free­ly of the Clergy of the Church of Rome as you have here of the Clergy of the [Page 510] Church of England. And as for the Uni­ted Provinces it is evident that he was stript of them by the Fate of War, and whatever was the cause of the War was the occasion of his loss. And that (as it usually happens in the like cases) was set on foot by divers concurrent accidents, as bring­ing in Spanish and Italian Forces by Charles the fifth in his Wars against France, a grie­vance unknown to the Flemmings in the Reign of former Princes, and it was a­gainst these foreign Troops that the States made the first Remonstrance. The natu­ral Insolence of the Spaniards that could not but exasperate the peoples hatred a­gainst their pride and oppression. The peculiar haughtiness of Philip the se­cond, that made him neglect and disob­lige the Natives, and confer all Offices of Trust and Honour upon Strangers. His absence from the Provinces, and leaving them to the Government of a subordi­nate Minister, whereas they had always shared in the residence of all former Princes. And if you will consult the Prince of Oranges Declaration in the head of his Army, you will find the main grie­vance to be this, that the States of the Pro­vinces were forcibly restrain'd from hold­ing, according to custom, their general [Page 511] Assemblies. But besides all this the Ne­therlands were the very Sanctuary and Rendevouz of all the Calvinists from Eng­land, France, and Germany, and the Ana­baptists from Westphalia and other parts, and these quickly poison'd the people with their own principles of Sedition and Anarchy, so that being, before the Go­vernment was aware, grown strong and numerous, that made work for the Inqui­sition, which though it soon check'd their growth, yet it did little towards a total suppression of the Party, partly by rea­son of the tenderness of the Dutchess of Parma the then Regent, and partly by the Envy and Ambition of the Belgick Lords, who underhand opposed all proceedings against Sectaries and Hereticks, and en­couraged their seditious practices, so that between them both the wise and resolute Ministry of Granvel was rendred not on­ly successess but withal odious to the peo­ple. For as he was a man of extraordi­nary Wisdome, Courage, and Fidelity, that sincerely pursued his Masters interest, faithfully executed his Commands, and kept up the height of his Authority; so being an Implacable Divine, he saw to the bottom of the Projects that were carried on by the discontented Lords, and fore­saw [Page 512] the tendency of Factions in Religion to disorders and seditions in the State. And therefore was severe and rigorous in the execution of Laws, as knowing that nothing else could ever reduce the peo­ple to any peaceable temper after they were once possess'd with such ill Princi­ples and ill humours. But for this by the advice of the Dutchess and importunity of the Lords he was removed, and the ri­gour of Edicts remitted, and that for the present seem'd to appease all tumults and discontents. But by that means the dis­senting and discontented Party in a little time grew so considerable as to put the King upon his former resolutions of force and rigour, but it was now too late, they were grown too strong for the Govern­ment. When the Venom was too far spread, they applyed the Antidote, that did then rather irritate than expel the Poison. And now too late the Dutchess of Parma saw and bemoan'd her loss of Granvil. But so the War broke out with that bruitish rage and fury of the people, that their Leaders repented their own rashness, and join'd when it was to no purpose with the Governess to suppress Tumults and Insurrections. And what were the Events and Traverses of that [Page 513] long and bloody War you know better than I, it is enough that at length in the middest of these Confusions the Estates of the Provinces take an opportunity to seize the Government into their own hands, and set up a new Common-wealth and a new Religion. And this (as an ingenious Gentleman tells me) was not a little ad­vantaged by a particular Accident, viz: Whereas in most, if not all other parts in Christendom, the Clergy composed one of the three Estates of the Countrey, and thereby shared with the Nobles and Com­mons in their influences upon the Go­vernment; That order never made any part of the Estates in Holland, nor had any vote in their Assembly, which consisted only of the Nobles and the Cities, and this Province bearing always the greatest sway in the Councils of the Union, was most inclined to the settlement of that Profession, which gave least pretence of Power or Jurisdiction to the Clergy, and though he applies the Observation only to Religion, yet it is as true of the Govern­ment, in that as we all know the Estates of Holland were the head of the Rebelli­on: so that after all your Politiques you see that the King of Spain lost the United Provinces purely for want of Trinklers. But [Page 514] supposing the truth of your story, the con­sequence you would make of it is to deter Princes from exercising an Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over the Consciences of their Subjects, lest they exasperate such as are tender into Rebellion. Or because the Church of Rome abuse their Government into Tyranny, therefore we must have none at all.

And now it were worth while to know what your meaning should be to beat up and down thus industriously through all Histories for such idle stories as these, and then to apply them as Caveats and Sea-marks, and directions to Princes, without ever being in the least concern'd to cau­tion Subjects against the like wantonness upon the like occasions. What else can your meaning be but to inform the world what slight pretences will serve the turn at some lucky junctures of affairs both to cause and to warrant Rebellion. And the result of all your discourse as address'd to his Majesty amounts to this, that by these examples he may learn to condescend to the childish humours of his Subjects, and give place to their follies and extra­vagances whenever they grow head­strong, and have a mind to take advan­tage of being quarrelsom for every trifle. [Page 515] 'Tis wise advice, and such as would quick­ly make him so glorious a King, as the Long-parliament made his father, who gain'd so little by his condescensions to their peevishness that he thereby only emboldned them in their Impudence, till in a little time no less would satisfie them, but to demand the whole Sovereignty it self, and when it was denyed them, to fight for it. In short, I can make neither more or less of all this politique Lecture to his Majesty than I can of Bradshaws speech at the High Court of Justice, where he ju­stifies their proceedings by raking up (as you have done) Examples Ancient and Modern of killing and deposing such Ty­rant and Traytour Kings, as would be forcing their Subjects to conform. But be­side the wise instructions you have drop'd upon his Majesty and all other Sovereign Princes to humour their subjects like Chil­dren, and to use their Power with so much caution and tenderness, that they may not have any pretence of disturbance howso­ever capricious and unreasonable, i. e. in short to beware of governing their peo­ple for fear of offending them. Beside this general care for the welfare of Man­kind, your sage Wisdom extends it self to the Kingdoms of Gill and Osbolston, and [Page 516] wonderfully concern'd you are to settle and preserve a good Understanding be­tween Ushers and School-boys, and to this end have you enrich'd the Politiques of the World with divers shrewd and en­lightning Observations against the Illegal and Arbitrary Government of whipping School-masters. ‘I never remarked so Pag. 88. irreconcileable and implacable a Spirit as that of Boys against their School-ma­sters or Tutours. The quarrels of their education have an influence upon their Memories and Understandings for ever after (then they are not Gentlemen.) They cannot speak of their Teachers with any patience or civility, and their discourse is never so flippant nor their Wit so fluent as when you put them upon that Theme. Nay, I have heard old men, otherwise sober, peace­able, and good natur'd, who never could forgive Osbolston, as the younger are still inveighing against Dr. Busby. It were well that both old and young would reform this Vice, and consider how easie a thing it is upon particular Grudges, and as they conceive out of a just censure to slip either into juveline Petulancy or inveterate Uncharitableness.’ 'Tis all remarqued like a Senatour, that Pag. 243.[Page 517] reflects upon the Histories of former Times and the present transactions to regulate himself by in every Circum­stance. Though yet here, methinks, you shew more kindness to the Pre­rogative of School-masters than to that of Kings, in that you address your advice of Peace and Condescension as well to the Subject as the Sovereign, whereas in your former Admonitions you applied your self and your sage discourses of Mo­deration to the Government alone, with­out the least intimation of advice to Sub­jects to beware of peevishness and incivi­lity to their Superiours. However it is to be hoped that Schoolmasters will here­after lay aside their Rods and their Feru­la's to avoid these implacable Grudges of juvenile Petulancy, and learn by the Ex­ample of their brother Kings to condescend to their Boys for peace sake and the quiet of Boykind, and upon all occasions to give them good words and humour them like Children, and from all these fatal conse­quences of whipping, which can only serve as sea marks unto wise Schoolmasters, to avoid the causes. And never hereafter to brandish their Rods against Truants, Loi­terers and Rob-orehards, remembring the implacable, Ballads of Tom Triplet, the [Page 518] stabbing of the Roman Emperor, the Tai-Ior-Parliament of Poland, the danger of Alexander, the King of Spain's progress into Biscai, the Resignation of the Queen of Sweden, the Revolts of Switzerland and the Low-countreys, and an hundred more that I could tell you but idle stories, Pag. 246. and yet Kings and Schoolmasters can tell how to make use of them; for where there is so great a resemblance in the Effects, there Pag. 87. must be some parallel in the Causes. (You have put Tacitus his nose out of joint for sententious Politicks.) But above all it concerns them to consider that God has in­stated them in the Government of their Pag. 249. Subjects with that incumbrance of Reason, and that incumbrance upon reason of Con­science (as if Conscience were an incum­brance upon Reason and Reason upon Government.) Men therefore are to be dealt with reasonably and consciencious men by conscience. And then that the Body is in the power of the Mind, so that corporal Pu­nishments do never reach the Offender, but the innocent suffers for the guilty. And the mind is in the hand of God, and cannot cor­rect those perswasions which upon the best of its natural Capacity it has collected, and therefore to punish that is to violate the di­vine Majesty. To what purpose is it to [Page 519] scourge the outward Boy, your corporal punishments never reach the Offender but the innocent suffers for the guilty: it is the mind that is the truant and the dunce, and if that will not con its Lesson, is it justice that the poor innocent Back­side should do penance for anothers sloth and idleness? It is only for implacable Divines to be thus cruel and sanguinary. And then as for the Mind that is in the hand of God, and cannot correct those false Concords and unlucky Tricks which up­on the best of its natural Capacity it has col­lected, so that to punish that is to violate the divine Majesty. And now lay by your Rods, my Masters, break your Ferula's, burn your Grammars, tear in pieces your Dictionaries and your construing Books, mure up your School-doors, leave your declining of Nouns and Verbs, construe no more Greek and Latin, break up School, and keep an universal Play-day throughout the whole Nation, for Tru­ants must not be whipt, and if you at­tempt to take down their Breeches, you offer plain violence to the Laws of Na­ture and of God. For he has put their Bo­dies into the Power of their Minds, and their minds he keeps in his own hands; and therefore if you scourge them you do [Page 520] not only punish the Innocent for the Guilty (which no sort of men are so bru­tish to do beside the Clergy) but the dis­grace and the blame of all lights at last upon the divine Majesty, in that the Mind is wholly in his hands, and all its Actions whatsoever must be entitled to his Pro­vidence. A blessed Account of Govern­ment this! but yet such as is absolutely necessary to the exemption of Conscience from the Commands of Authority, by as­cribing all the Extravagancies of Man­kind to the Will of God, that has put up­on them a fatal Necessity to do whatever they do. And then 'tis in vain for the Ci­vil Magistrate to think of forcing his Sub­jects to Obedience by Penalties, when they are over-ruled to the contrary by an almighty and irresistible Power. This is a fit Cover for so foul a Cause.

But now if you had come to me, I could have told you an hundred more idle stories, that you and Kings and School-masters would know how to make use of that would better have filled up your Politick Lectures, and done more advan­tage both to your cause and your self than all that you have rak'd together. I will recommend but one to you, in which I am sure the King and Parliament, [Page 521] the three Kingdoms with the Isles adja­cent, together with all the Plantations that lie out of hearing are more nearly concerned than in any of your Politick Tales, not excepting the Queens own Broad-seal, and to make you expect no longer it is the famous story of Massanello. And if ever you come to be a Parliament­man, because you may be modest at first and fearful of speaking, I care not if I lend you a Speech before I conclude. And thus you must manage it and your self.

First you must rise up and take out you Gold-watch (if it be not at pawn for the Picquet disaster) and though it do not go, or be down, yet look on't in the first place however, not transiently, but stay your Eye upon it, till you can­not longer do it handsomly without too apparent Prostitution of your design, than combing your Wigg shake it with a Grace, make up your Mouth betwixt a smile and a simper, look upon the Presence with some Pity but more scorn. And then begin, Mr. Speaker, and there pause again, for it becomes you to seem modest at first; and so after a frown or two more with your mouth, and as many smiles with your Forehead, procede in good earnest without any more faces and pre­faces [Page 522] to be wail the evil, the fatal, the sad Consequences, the mischiefs many and great, that threaten the Kingdom's ruine and turning it to a Common-wealth a­gain, by the Apple-mongers and old Wo­men in the Strand, Charing-cross, and all a­long by White-hall as far as Westminster in the Face of the Street and all By-stand­ers, selling and exposing to sale from day to day whole baskets full of Pippins, Pare­mains, Russettings, and old Apple Johns. Whereas one sturdy Swiss (for I am sure he will run in your head) and here you must beg Mr. Speakers pardon, and cor­rect your self, and say you meant one sturdy Fisher-boy (and that you must ob­serve for a certain Rule, though you are out never so much, yet for all that still to go on) I say Mr. Speaker one sturdy Fisher-boy by that fatal occasion of over-turning an Apple-womans basket, over-turn'd all Naples, his name was Massa­nello, and the story is true. And though Mr. Speaker you may at first think it but an idle story, yet all circumstances duly weighed, it may some time or other prove of fatal and dangerous consequence to the Common-wealth. There is Mr. Speaker beside Punchanello's Audience a great concourse of Boys whipping Giggs, [Page 523] and of Lacqueys playing at the wheel of Fortune, as I my self have often remar­qued, or if you will not relye upon my single observation, my Lord Chief Ju­stice, and Sir Edmond Godfrey are able to inform you. Now Mr. Speaker, beside what may ordinarily happen at any time in scuffles between the Boys, or the Lac­queys, or the Porters, it may so fall out that some pleasant and humorous Gen­tleman, one of the Cock-wits of the town, as he is passing on by Charing-Cross to White-hall, either for the intrinsick wit of the frolick it self, or to make a noise by boasting the adventure in the privy Gallery, should either by himself, or the officious Ministry of his Foot-boy over-turn a whole Settle of Apple-baskets; that must of necessity make a scramble, a scramble a scuffle, a scuffle a tumult, and then that may lightly come to pelt­ing of Apples, and that to tumbling in the kennel, and that to bloody noses, and then be sure (Mr. Speaker) hell is broke loose, as I have observed in my Book of Aphoisms and Similitudes, when the Scots enter'd England upon as slight a Cause, viz. to fight for the Jure Divino of throwing Cricket-stools at Divine Ser­vice. And what follow'd thereupon is yet Pag. 148.[Page 524] within the compass of most mens memories. Mr. Speaker, I would not willingly be such a sool as to make a dangerous similitude that has no foundation, for every similitude must have if not all, yet some likeness. That is to say, (for it will be sometimes requisite for so deep a States-man as you to ex­plain your self) there is no likeness with­out some likeness. But this (Mr. Speak­er) I am sure of, that War was begun by the Women and Children and Servants of Edinburgh, as you may see in the first Remonstrance presented in their names to the Lord Chancellour of Scotland. And so if it should happen upon this occasion at Charing-Cross, that any Massanello (and believe me Mr. Speaker all Kingdoms are full of Massanello's) should head the Tu­mult, what else can lightly be expected, but that they should either betake them­selves to White-hall, and there revile the King to his face, for requiring things im­possible, unnecessary, or wanton of his peo­ple, for not considering the Laws and Cu­stomes under which they have been former­ly bred (as when under the Long-Parlia­ment, the Rump and Committee of Safety they had the Priviledge of raising Tu­mults against their Governours) for not giving them good words upon all occasions, [Page 525] and humouring them like Children; for not being so civil as to condescend to their infirmities, and if at any time they have got a cold, forcing them to be cover'd; in brief, for not observing the constitution of their bodies, and the antipathy of their sto­machs. But if they shall pass by White-hall (as Mr. Speaker no body knows the motions of Tumults) then what can be expected, but that they should immedi­ately to Westminster one and all, and so beset this House, and offer violence to the Members for being so foolishly trinkled, and burthening the Subject with such a superfetation of Acts. And therefore (Mr. Speaker) to be short, my humble moti­on is, &c. But here you know how to go on by your self, it is only to move and desire the House for a quarter of an hour together by repeating the same Pre­mises all over again, that neither Apples, nor Pears, nor Nuts, nor any other incen­tives of scrambling may be sold between Charing-Cross and Westminster-hall for fear of Massanello's and sturdy Swisses. Do but speak it confidently, and with a good Grace, and then I am sure the Speech it self deserves more regard, and is of closer importance to the King, Parliament, and Government, than all your idle stories [Page 526] from Alexander the Great down to the Great King Gill. I am content (if you will keep your own counsel) you should have the honour of the Motion, and I doubt not but it will be thought so serviceable to the Common-wealth, that if your Ef­figies be not set up in the next Nich to King James in the Royal Exchange, yet you can never fail of having your Statue erected among the foremost of the Dirt-basket-Justices.

And now I have done, and hope by this time you perceive, that though one night may make some men gray, yet three­score years cannot make others wise. And therefore I would advise you to meddle no more with Ecclesia­stical Polities, for I plainly perceive that Divinity is a Trade (that God be thanked) you are not of. And that truly the reason why God does not bless you in tampering with matters of Religion, is, both because he never intended you for that employment; or if he did, you have neg­lected to fit your self for it by Education. So that if you must be scribling, betake your self to your own proper trade of Lampoons and Ballads, and be not so un­advised as to talk in publique of such matters as are above the reach of your [Page 527] understanding, you cannot touch Sacred things without prophaning them. To con­clude, though it was the Opinion of most wise men, that there was nothing more needful to answer your Libel, than only to desire the world to compare it with my Discourses; yet others, who over­powr'd me to this Reply against the bent of my own inclinations, thought it expe­dient that I should lay you thus open, though it were only to let those weak People, that once seem'd to admire and applaud you, know that they had so lit­tle judgement as to approve the most de­spicable Trifler that was ever guilty of ink-shed. And as for what concerns your self I shall say no more, than to assure you, that if you will learn modesty by this Correction, and so give over Trans­prosing and the Good Old Cause, you shall ever hereafter find me as much your friend as ever heretofore. But as for my Reply I fear it not, for if you will keep to the Reason of the Argument, I know You and all your Party cannot answer; and if you will play the fool again, that will not serve your turn a second time; the very people that once magnified your Wit, now laugh at the silliness of your Pamphlet. At least, I think I have so suf­ficiently [Page 528] chastised your folly, that if you should be so rash as to continue trouble­some, there will be no need of a second Correction, you will be laught at, and scorn'd enough without being exposed by any beside your self. However I have something else to do than to write a Book against every ignorant and con­ceited man that has nothing else to do than to throw out his impertinent scrible against me. And therefore I shall only desire you to recommend me to all your Friends at Charing-Cross and in Lincolns-inn-fields, and so bid you heartily fare­well.