YOU desire, All your Dissen­ting Brethren to Consider, and then Answer.

I have Consider'd, but I cannot tell whether you suppose all Dissenters are your Brethren, or that all are your Brethren who dissent from you. If the first, It seems probable to me, that you have been either Educated in a strange Soyl, or have forgotten your Brothers Dialect; so that I can­not discern, that you are any other­wise a Baptist then only in Masquerade, and therefore am shy of owning the Relation: But if all that dissent from you, must therefore be reckon'd your Brethren, then I am in that Number, and because I think Mr Penn may not have so much leisure as my self at present to attend upon your Trifles, I intend to be in the first Rank of your Respondents.

I consider also that though you have proposed but Three Considerations, yet you have bolted out a Mulitude of Questions, which administer an occasion for as many more to be re­torted.

To your first Question, Then; What Validity or Security can any preten­ded or designed future New Law or Char­ter have, when we see so many of the present Laws we already have, may be, and are by the Dispensing Power Dispensed with?

So many of the present Laws— The Grievance then with you may lie rather in the Number, than in the Dispensing Power. His Majesty might with your leave perhaps have dispen­sed with some Persons, and some Pe­nalties too, but not with so many al­together.

One would think by that you would not have Quarrel'd at the [Page 4]Dispensing Fower, tho the Act for levying Twelve Pence a Week had ne­ver been Prosecuted, so as the Twen­ty Pound a Month had been Levied, nor if the Conventicle Act had been Dispensed with, so as the Thirty fifth of Queen Elizabeth had been rigo­rously Executed.

I cannot tell how many, but all the Laws that are Dispensed with, are Penal Laws of a like nature for mat­ters Ecclesiastical: Uniformity, Sa­craments, Oaths and Tests are the Subject of them all. If this be your Grief, you must be either a Conform­ing Baptist, or such a strange sort of a Baptist, as in my Forty Years Con­versation among them I have never met with.

But to come more close to your Question, What Validity can a New Law have, seeing so many of these we have alrea­dy are Dispensed with?

I Answer with a like Interrogation, I grant that the King may do what his Royal Pleasure is with his own, Does it thereupon follow, that He may do so likewise with what is mine? If I acckowledge and thankfully ac­cept His Dispensing with a Penalty, to which I am Obnoxious, because I take a Liberty in matters of meer Re­ligion, which I am not allowed by Statute Laws, Is it of necessary conse­quence that I therein acknowledge He may also impose a Fine upon me for lawfully using a Liberty when gran­ted to me by Law?

Its hoped the designed New Charter for Repeal of such Penal Laws as are inconsistant with the Doctrines of Christianity, will according to His Majesties Declaration, both maintain the National Religion, as it is now E­stablished by Law, and provide for such a Christian Liberty as may set at Ease and Secure the Consciences, Per­sons and Properties of all that will Live Soberly, Righteously and Godly in this present Age, whether they be Conformists or Non-conformists to the National Religion. And a Grant remains valid, tho a Penalty may be dispensed with.

But what if the New Law should have no more Validity or Security then these Old Ones that are Dispen­sed with? The Dissenters will yet be in so much a better Case by a New Law, as that they will then be Secur'd by Law, whereas till that be done, they are always subject to be Ruin'd under colour of Law. But why are you so Querulous at the Dispensing Power in this particular case wherein it is Exercised? The King declares his O­pinion, That Conscience ought not to be constrained, nor People forced in matters of meer Religion. This Principle is the ground of his Dispensation. Have you not lately observed, That divers Gentlemen, who being in Commission would not Execute these Penal Laws, and were therefore for a season laid aside, are now returned again into their former Stations, with Reputati­on, and the Love of their Neigh­bours? Have you not Read the Apo­logy for the Church of England with relation to the Spirit of Persecution, for which she is accused? How their former Errors are extenuated by In­stances, pag. 4. That tho the Party (in Parliament) of the Church of England did not perform what had been pro­mised by some Leading Men to the [Page 5] Dissenters (in procuring them a Bill of Ease) yet there was little or nothing done against them for about Nine Years; but they had their Meetings al­most as publickly & as regularly as the Church of England had their Churches. Do you not remember a Vote of the House of Commons in 1680. whereby it was Resolved, That the Proseeution of Protestant Dissenters upon the Penal Laws was at that time Grievous to the Subject.

Shall the Justices that did not Exe­cute these Laws gain Esteem by it? Shall the Church of England excuse her self from the charge of Severity by her not Executing these Laws for Nine Years together? Shall the Com­mons in Parliament Vote the Execution of them a Grievance? And may not the King extend his Compassion to­wards his Dissenting Subjects, and say They shall not be Executed? To make such a signal Act of Grace the ground of a groundless Jealousie, and cause of Contention, to say no worse of it) is highly Disingenuous, and discovers a very froward and perverse Dispo­sition: But let us consider your next knot of Questions.

Have we, or can we have any higher Power here in England then King, Lords and Commons in Parliament As­sembled? The Laws that are now Dispen­sed with, and rendred useless, were they not made by that Power? Can your New Charter be made by any higher or other Power? Do you think there is any Tempo­nal or Spiritual Power here in England a­bove the Dispensing Power? And can you make it appear to us? To these Questi­ons you desire Mr Penn would let his Brethren and you know his Mind honestly.

In his stead I answer, We have no Law Makers, but King, Lords and Commons in Parliament Assembled, but yet we are in England, as well as in o­ther parts of the World, under a Law to God, and thereby each Man is obli­ged to preserve within his own Breast the Answer of a good Conscience, from which no Law of King, Lords and Commons can absolve him; and hence it is that we have many Fundamental Maximes of Law grounded upon the Law of God, and common Reason of Man­kind, as well respecting the Soveraigns Prerogative, as the Right of the Subject, not written in Acts of Parliament, but in their Nature so invariable, That (as our Lawyers tell us) Acts of Par­liament made against them are void in themselves. And if this Opinion be true, these Fundamental Maximes of Law, whether in Spirituals or Tem­porals, tho they may be for a season by a particular. Act of Parliament in­terrupted, they are not thereby vaca­ted, but still retained, and will at one time or other again discover their Vi­gor. Acts not contradictory to these Fundamental Laws may be useful for a season, but not having that innate Stabi­lity as Fundamental Maximes have, may afterwards become useless, impro­per and grievous to be put in Executi­on; hence those common distinctions between Malum in se, & malum prohi­bitum. And subseqent thereto, in many cases a power or no power of Dispensing, That which is unlawful in it self to be done, as Murther, Theft, Trespass, and the like, cannot be made [Page 6]lawful by any Law or Dispensation whatsoever. That which is lawful in it self, but becomes unlawful, because prohibited by a particular Statute, may be Dispensed with, so as no particular Person be Damnified by that Dispen­sation, and not otherwise. Among the many Vicissitudes of Succession to the Crown, between the two Houses of York and Laneaster, Do you think there were no Laws in being, made in the Raign of a King of one of these Branches (in Fact) dispens'd with by his Successor of the other Branch, till they came to be Repealed in Parlia­ment? Were the Oathes of Fidelity and Obedience made to the Line Inter­rupted, required to be taken by all Judges, Justices, Sheriffs, and other Officers Commissionated by the other Line which succeeded, until they were Repealed in Parliament? In the va­rious changes of the National Religion, between the Reigns of King Henry the the Eighth and Queen Elizabeth, were all Penalties imposed by Laws respect­ing Religion, exacted without any Relax or Suspension, till those Laws were Abrogated in Parliament. In the first Year of King Henry the Fourth a whole Parliament held in the Twen­ty first of Richard the Second was Re­pealed: In one of which Laws then made, divers Pains of Treason were ordained, whereby, as the Act of Repeal says, No Man did know how he ought to behave himself to Do, Speak or Say for doubt of such Pain; and if that Law had been Religiously observed till the moment of its Repeal It could never have been repealed. In the Se­cond Year of Richard the Third, a Statute made in the First of the said King was Dis­pensed with by Proclama­tion. Vaughans Rep. pag. 353. Now I would gladly hear what cause my pretended Brother Baptist has to Quarrel at his present Majesties gracious Dispensing with Laws inflict­ing Temporal Penalties for Ecclesiasti­cal Matters, and rendring them use­less for the present, in that respect only, till they can be Repealed in Par­liament. And wherein the exercise of this Dispensing Power has exceed­ed what has been in Fact done by his Royal Predecessors, and admitted may be lawfully done by our greatest Law­yers. But to proceed,

Shall your New Charter have a Penal­ty inserted to be inflicted on the Infringers or Breakers of it or no? If not, What will your New Charter signifie? Not three skips of a Lowse: And if it hath a Penalty, Cannot any King by his Prero­gative and Authority Royal Dispence with the Penalty? And what will it signifie then?

This pretended Baptist's Resolution of the first of these Questions is as Weak as it is Idle, and both that and the others, may receive a satisfactory Answer.

Such a New Charta as is desired, if no Penalty be annex'd, may be very significant in many respects, (1) It may be materially good and obliging to Obedience by its innate Vertue, on pain of Condemnation by the Divine Law; and in that respect of greater signification, and much more desirable then such Laws as are materially Bad, and cannot be obeyed without Breach of the Law of God. (2) This New [Page 7]Charter may, without annexing any Penalties, Repeal all those Penalties, by which Persons are compelled to perform Acts of Divine Worship, contrary to their Understanding, Faith, and a Good Conscience, and put it out of the Power of any Dispensa­tion to revive those Laws, or to im­pose Penalties of the like kind. (3) Such a New Law may without any Pe­nalties by its simple Declarations put an issue to that, which is now unrea­sonably made the ground of all our Contests, and confirm to us all those Laws by which our Liberties and Properties are preserved.

But presuming it may also have Pe­nalties inserted to be inflicted on the Infringers or Breakers of it, These may be so qualified as not to be Dis­pensed with; (if under the colour thereof evil minded Men do not prac­tice upon the Soveraign Power: For in such a case, if the Soveraign Power cannot Dispence with the Penalty of a Statute Law, it may be divested of such means as are necessary for its own Pre­servation, (but in any ordinary case, if any Person or Body Corporate receive particular Damage by the breach of such a New Law, He or They may if the Legislators please, be Intitled to a particular Action by the same Law, and recover Damages against the Breakers of it,Vaughans Rep. pag. 334, 342. at the Kings Suit, by Indictment, or Presentment, or by a Special Action, with which the King cannot Dispence.

The Instance you give, to put us out of Doubt, in Mr Langhornes Words, touching the Kings Right in Dispensing with Penal Laws, I shall not Repeat, but only observe, That the Opinion you cite (however you may do it in scorn) carries such an Evidence in it for a Dispensing Power (not in ordinary Cases, as that Author has well observed) but upon extraor­dinary Occasions, when the King in his Wisdom shall find it necessary, as calls for more Cunning then I yet per­ceive in you, to raise any material Ob­jection against it.

Qu. Now where is the assurance then of Mr Penn's New Charter?

Ans. Our Assurance will lie not on­ly in the Authority of the Legislators, equal to any other Law, but also in the Authority of the Matter, which will command an Assent in every Mans Conscience assoon as he reads it, Not to do that to another, which he would not have done to himself. Our Assurance will be in our Love and Affection One towards Another, as Neighbours con­cern'd to promote the common Inte­rest of the Realm. In the Watch­fulness of all Parties against any one particular Faction, if any such should rise up, and attempt to inthrall the Consciences of all the rest, in our thankful and dutiful Behaviour to­wards our Soveraign for breaking off those intolerable Yoaks we could not bear, and setting us upon such a last­ing Foundation, both for our Civil and Religious Liberties, as with a discreet Care and Management of them may remain firm to Perpetuity.

Qu. But who can tell what King we [Page 8]may have after our present Soveraign whether so mercifull, or so just? Or what Skeriffs the next King may chose, and what Returns of Parliament Men they may make? For you know the Forfeiture on the Sheriffs making a false Return is no great matter, and cannot a King par­don it by his Dispensing Power or Autho­rity Royal? What will, nay what can your new Charter then signifie, when it either is or may be, (according to your own Doctrin) Invalidated, Disanulled, or Annihilated in an instant.

Ans. If there should be raised by my Querest, or any other like him, such a perverse Spirit and behaviour in any Party of Men, as to prevent the Nations selted enjoyment of these Priviledges we now have as Men and Christians, by his Majesties Prudence, Justice and Clemency, who can tell (indeed) what the sad Conse­quences of it may be? But if Duty, Reason and common Interest prevail, here is nothing offer'd that should cause any Man to slack his utmost di­ligence and endeavours to arrive at the Settlement proposed by a New Charter. For what do these Queries tend to, or what of any weight do they con­tain? For,

First, Does William Penn, or any party of Dissenters propose any such Methods to be persued, as may ad­vance Prerogative to that degree, as to Invalidate, or Annihilate all our Laws?

Secondly, Is not the National Religion, as it is Stiled in the first place to be maintained, and as well secured, as any old or new Law can make it, with such a Liberty for consiencious Dissen­ters from it in the worship of God (Exploding of all Lisencious­ness) as may free them front future inconveniency upon account of Religion.

Thirdly, Is any thing suggessed that by a new Charter, greater power should be given to the King for choosing of Sheriffs, then now he has, or that the penalties upon a Sheriffs making false Returns, shall be less then now then are? or any thing else to render our Case worse then it is.

You take it for granted, I know, that which I do not know, nor your self neither, as I suppose, that the Sheriffs Forfeiture, who shall make a false Re­turn is no great matter, or that which the King can pardon, or dispence with. The Case of Sr Samuel Bar­nardiston wherein he had a Verdict and Eight Hundred Pounds damage given against a Sheriff for a false Return, may inform you otherwise; and certain­ly a new Charter will not make it less Penal then now it is, but if it should ever happen, notwithstanding a new Charter, as it has heretofore happen'd notwithstanding our old Charter, that Knights and Burgesses should not be duly chosen; the same Fate may at­tend such a Parliament, as did that of 38 H. 6.

[Page 9]I now come to your second Con­sideration, wherein you pray Mr Penn to consider, What his New Charter can signifie, so long as there is a High Commission Court, or a high Commission for Ecclesiastical Affairs set up? Cannot those Commissioners take any of your and our Preachers, Teachers, or Ministers to Task when they please? Cannot they, when they have a mind to it, suspend Mr Pen, or George Whitehead, Mr Alsop, Mr Lobb, Mr Mead, or Mr Bowyer, as well as the Bishop of London, &c. Cannot the Court when they will, or shall think fit, or be commanded, sus­pend, silence or forbid any or all the Dissenting Ministers to Preach any longer in their Meetings, if they will not Read any Declaration or Order whatever, that the King shall set forth and require them to Read? Remember the Magdalen Colledge Men; Re­member also that Sawse for a Goose is or may be Sawse for a Gander.

Ans. The case of Magdalen Col­ledge is published at large, you may Read it if you please, and Answer it if you can, especially the para­lel case in Edwards the Sixth time. But pray what is that to a New Charter? If wrong Judgment was given by the Court (as you per­haps suppose) in that case, do you make no disserence between Dis­pensing with a Law, and wrong Judgment given against a Law (if any such should be) in Westminster Hall or the Ecclesiastical Court

If the Dissenters you name, or you who pretend to be a Baptist, be of the Clergy of England in the Eye of the Law, and hold Ecclesiastical Affairs and Benefits, they or you may for Mis-behaviour be suspend­ed from them by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. But why do you fancy that a New Charter (by which it is expected that Penalties for matters of meer Religion will be repealed) should be made to signifie nothing, by the Ecclesiasti­cal Commissioners which now are; I can easily fore-see that a New Char­ter may make that Commission in the cases you mention to signifie nothing; but I cannot imagine how that Commission should make a New Charter insignificant. As to the silencing of Dissenting Mini­sters, its evident as the Law now is, their reading or not reading the Kings Declaration in their Meetings will not prevent it, if the King with­draw his Favour, nor is there any cause to give the Ecclesiastical Com­missioners any trouble about them; for as the Laws now are there are other Ecclesiastical Courts, which with the aid of the Justices at their Sessions are sufficiently impowred to Censure, Fine, Imprison, Banish or Hang them for their Non-con­formity to the Religion Established by Law.

You exhort us to see before we Leap, whether the Words in the Orders set forth in the Gazett, for contempt of his Majesties Authority will run no further then just Mr Penn will have it. And ask, Can he stop the Current of it [Page 10]when he pleases? and say, If he could, we are not sure he would; for formerly he had no great kindness (we know) for us Baptists and other Dissenters, and if he could and would we are not sure of his Life, how long; therefore it will be the greatest piece of Weakness and Folly in the World for us to Danee af­ter his and the Jesuits Pipe alone, con­trary both to all common Sence and Reason, and our own general Interest.

Ans. How do you make out your Inference, That to do as you say is the greatest piece of Weakness and Folly? I take it to be altogether as great folly to Dance after your Pipe in Company, contrary to common Sence, Reason and Interest, as af­ter Mr Penn and the Jesuites alone; surely in this you take the Dissenters to be very forgetful of what their Senses so lately testified, when un­der the feeling Prosecution of Pe­nal Laws, and to be unreasonably ignorant of their Interest in de­siring those Penal Laws may be Re­pealed in Parliament, and a due Liberty of Conscience Established in their room. But for what cause do you reflect upon Mr Penn? I take it as a certain Evidence, that all Pamphlets on this Subject, that are interlaced with personal Reflections asserted on Surmises, without proof, are designed to promote Factious Dissentions, rather then to Unite in one common Interest, and heal our uncharitable Divisions. I have known Mr Penn for many Years, and have been credibly informed by others, that from his Age of Seventeen Years he has been an inti­mate Associate with the most emi­nent of Dissenters, that when he was of Christ Church Colledge in Oxford, he was fined for his dissent from the Religious Ceremonies of the Colledge: He suffered many Hardships in his Fathers Family on that account, has been a constant Advocate these Twenty Years for the Liberty we enjoy and hope to to have confirm'd: I have heard of many good Offices he has done at Court, both for Dissenters and Conformists; & that he has improved that Favour which has been shewn him by his Prince, both before and since his Ascending to the Throne, for the Benefit and not to the Pre­judice of others: I have not known of any rich Presents or Rewards that have been given or required for any of his Services, or any Em­ployments he seeks or accepts of. How his pleadings for Liberty of Conscience has or can tend to the improvement of his Revenues, I cannot apprehend neither; there­fore if you will free your self from the suspition of an ill De­sign, and a groundless Aspersion, tho Mr Penn may be no Friend to such pretended Baptists and nominal Dissenters as you are; its incumbent on you to shew wherein he has ma­nifested that he had formerly no great Kindness for those that are really such upon this account.

I pass by your trifling about the enlarging or limiting Authority by the power or will, length or short­ness of Mr Penn's Life, and proceed.

[Page 11]Thirdly, To consider above all what Security or Validity this New Charter can be of, when there is a standing Ar­my kept on Foot? Whether Guns will hear Reason, or Dragoons mind Char­ters or Arguments? your reference to their practice in France, if we are not strangely Infatuated and given up to Ruin and Destruction; your Query whether their Carriage and Quartering will agree with a New Charter for Liberty, and if Mr Penn be a Friend to Liberty for Liberties sake, you de­sire an honest, clear nnd satisfactory Answer to these Three Points.

In Mr Penn's stead give me leave at present to return you an answer, by asking you some Questions; Is the Western Rebellion, slipt out of your mind? Was there no occasi­on given for multiplying Dragoons? Is Soveraign Power so limited by our Laws, as that it cannot make use of such means as are of apparent and absolute necessity for its own preser­vation? Did you ever know of any Army wherein no dissorders were committed in their Marches, or Quarterings? Are our Dragoons without any discipline, for reform­ing or punishing abuses when they are complained of?

Do you, and such as follow your Examples, take a right course to avoid such mischiefs, being done in England by Dragoons, as are com­mitted in France? I am as far from defending any of their disorders, or desiring their continuance longer then needs must, as I am from belei­ving you to be a Baptist.

But sure I am, whatever you are, your Reasonings are very unsavory, and unsafe, tending to fasten us un­der that Bondage, you seemingly advise us to avoid; for to deal plainly and honestly with you, (as you desire Mr Penn to do) I see no way to escape the dissorders that are either felt or feared, but by gi­ving His Majesty full satisfacti­on, not only of our Fidelity, but of our Affection also to his Person and Government, in complying with what he shall propose, for maintenance of the National Religi­on, and all the possessions of the Clergy, as Established by Law, and abolishing all such Penalties for Non-conformity to the National Re­ligion, as may be found inconsistent with the common Right and Rea­son of Mankind, Doctrines of Chri­stianity and Interest of England.

I shall now consider your closing points (1) In the mean time it ap­pears to be highly the Duty of all Men as well Dissenters as others, who have Votes in choosing Parliament-Men, a­bove all to choose such Faithful Patriots as will take care of these things already hinted, and others that may be brought before them; that our Liberties, our Laws, and our Lives may be preser­ved from ill designing Men, and from fu­ture Quo Warranto's, and all the high Violaters and Infringers thereof called to accompt, and justly punished; this will well become them, and secure us, more then any titular Charter what so­ever.

[Page 12]If you had only advised the choosing Faithful Patriots for Par­liament-Men, without cutting out their Work, your advice might have been sound; or if you had on­ly looked forwards that our Liber­ties, and our Lives might be pre­served from ill designing Men; and our Laws so settled, that all good Subjects may equally share in the benefit of them; your Advice might have been seasonable; for it is evident that our Circumstances require as wise and moderate Men, experienced in civil and Religious affairs, as every Parliament in Eng­land did; and if the Nation be bless'd with such a Choice in the next Par­liament, all sober persons, may by their wise Councels be out of fear of suffering Prejudice by future ac­cidents of State: But at this juncture to talk of calling to an Accompt, and punishing all such as you may reckon high Violaters and Infrin­gers of our Laws and Liberties is very unseasonable: Pray tell us since you undertake to Chalk out the way for a Parliament, and pro­pose the Work you would have done by them, how far they are to look back, and where and with what sort of Men you would have them begin; with such of the Cler­gy, or of the Lawyers, as were the first Advancers of Prerogative a­bove your measures; or with the Dissenters for thankfully accepting the Kings Indulgence, and making use of the Liberty he has been plea­ed to grant in their peaceable and Religious Assemblies? after so ma­ny Convulsions in the State, Plots and Counter-plots as we have known in our Age. The same things to be liable to Penalties at one season, which at another time have been marks of the greatest Loyalty; sober Men cannot but think it is high time to adhere to, and persue those Royal Methods, that have been with good success begun, and are proposed to be set­tled on terms of lasting security and Peace.

If the Case should be proposed to any Assembly (your self being in the company) in reference to any Man that you can mark out as it was by the Jewes, in reference to the Adulteress before our Saviour, That he who is without Fault should cast the first Stone, your supposed Criminal might escape by the As­semblys going out one by one, from the Eldest to the last convict in their own Consciences; and if you should have the confidence to stay behind the rest, it might be no good evidence of an awaken'd Conscience; but if Peace-makers have singular marks of favour al­ways attending them, certainly such worthy Patriots as at this sea­son shall be found in that Work, repairing our Breaches, healing our Divisions, setling our Civil and Religious concerns, that who­ever will conscientiously discharge his duty to God, his King and his Neighbour, may not only enjoy Peace and Truth in his Days, but leave it on like terms as a Blessing [Page 13]to his Posterity, will deserve the highest marks of favour from all good Men, and may therein also expect a Blessing from Heaven.

Liberty, say you, is indeed a Fine Word, but Remember Brethren what the Apostle Peter hath told us, That some there were, that while they promise them Liberty they themselves are the Servants of Corruption? And Observe what Follows; [...]or of whom a Man is overcome, of the same he is brought in Bondage, And then you ask (I suppose Mr. Penn or my self) How Do You. How will you like that Word?

Answer, I like it as part of Holy writ, Teaching me (1) Not to abuse that Liberty whereunto I am called by the Gospel, (2) To prize that Liberty in the Gospel which is indulged me by my Soveraign and to promote what in me lyes, the Establishing of it by a New Charter (3) Not to hearken to you, or any, which perhaps did never feel the want of this Liberty, and would misguide me, and take an Occasion to deceive me of it, by talking of Li­berties of another Sort which signi­fie nothing to me or any other Con­scientious Dissenters, if we be depri­ved of this (4) as inducing me (for the better understanding of the Text you cite) to consider the Con­text by which I am caution'd not to hearken to any such, as promise me Liberty, who are themselves overcome by, and in Bondage to their own Fleshly poluting Lusts, (5) as instructing me by certain Characters to discern what sort of Persons they are who (by enticing Words) would beguile me of my Liberty; chiefly such as despise Government, are Presumptious, and not afraid to speak Evil of Dignities: And with this short Paraphrase, I may after your Example, ask, How do You; Or how will you like that word?

In this I agree with what you say, The Name of Liberty signifies nothing without the Substance. And that which the Dissenters desire and endeavour af­ter, is that such a Liberty may be ob­tained, and secured by a New Charter to Perpetuity as is substantial: But in this we may differ, if you think a present Liberty signifies nothing, for it is now, and will be at all times, so long as we can enjoy it, the present comfort of our Lives, and of so great value, that I think he that has felt the want of it, will not easily be enticed to make a For­feiture of his present Liberty, by taking any such course as you steer to Secure Penal Laws for Coertion of Conscience under the Name of Substantial and English Liberties, If these Penal Lawes be the Goose you advise us not to part with for stick­ing down a Feather; and the Bird in the Hand, I cannot Guess how you came to be a Baptist; sure I am you do not shew your selfe in the Colours of an English Anabaptist, for your course tends to the b [...]d­ing of Heavy Burthens on their and other Dissenters Shoulders, which its most likely you never did, [Page 14]nor will touch with one of your Fingers.

You exhort us, To be of one mind as Brethren, to let Brotherly Love and Charity continue, and tell us, nothing will save us but Ʋnion. Pray take your part in the Exhortation let Brotherly Love have a beginning (for I fear that is not yet settled between us) and then I doubt not but the profitable Experience of the Exercise of it will give it a continuance; If you are for uni­ting, be content to part with those Offensive Weapons that have cau­sed our divisions, let our Civil Liber­ties as Men, and our Religious Li­berties as Christians be settled upon sure Foundations, let tem­poral penalties, for dissent in spi­rituals be set aside, and the hard Names of Sedition, Felony Treason be sever'd from such things as are in no manner offensive to the Ci­vil Goverment, but meer Opinions, and peaceable Exercises subsequent in matters of Religion. Let us learn to be kindly affectionate and Compassionate as Men and Neigh­bours ought to be one to another, whether True Believers, Misbelievers, or Ʋnbelievers, and then there will be no ground to fear that the Cor­ruptions or projects of Rome, Gene­va, France, Holland, or any thing else should ever dis-unite us, or be able to gain any advantage by attempting to sow amongst us the Seeds of Dissention.