OVr blessed Saviour himselfe, and also Iohn the Baptist ju­stly called the Pharises of their times, a Generation of Vipers and Hypocrites; And certainly the new resined Pharisees of our dayes are just the same, professing all good, yet practising nothing but what is evill and de­structive to the peace of the Church. The old Pharisees said of John Baptist, who came neither eating or drinking, that he had a Devill; of our Saviour (who came both eating and drinking) that he was a Glutton and Winebiber, &c. and that he also had a Devill: Of the same humour are our new nice Pharisees, if fasting at Church like honest Christians, or full fed in a Conventicle amongst their own li­centious Libertines, they are still the same, still going contrary to the the Orders of the Church, fasting when they are allowed to feast, and feasting when fasts are enjoyned. But these men go beyond the old Pharisees in this, that they are not content to deny obedience to Church Orders, but revile the Church as adulterous, for not confor­ming her selfe to their giddy devises. They are never so happy in their own opinions, as when they are casting foule indignities & aspersions on those whom Christ hath chosen, and his Church ordained to be the faithful dispensors of his word & Sacramets. Hence proceeds those scan­dalous reproachs against that sacred government, which Christ institu­ted in his Church. It is true, as Christ said to his Apostles, Menshal think they do God good service when they revile and persecute you It appeares nowby these mens practises, who think themselves almost capable of Heaven, If they can but raile at Gods faithfull Ministers and Ambassa­dors. Traducing their calling as diabolicall and Antichrist [...]an, [...]ropha­ning [Page 2]their practise and worship as Idolatrous and Superstitious, bla­sting their good names as odious and scandalous, and calumniating their lives as lewd and licentious; but why do I rake in this dunghill of blasphemies and reproaches? For what good language can Christs Messengers expect from such incendiaries, whose tongues are set on fire from Hel? What calamities this viperous generation hath brought on poore Germany is known to all and what it may bring on us is ve­ry much to be feared, by the monstrous encrease of these pestilent sects of late in this Kingdom? We see how they resist the Orders of our Church in troupes, and labour by their multitudes to effect that, which by plaine arguments and reason they cannot accomplish.

The patient and pious humble Remonstrance met with a plural ad­versary, a five headed monster, stiled Smecty m [...]u [...]s; Out of the same sea was revealed the second Beast with 7 heads, in armes against our Ly­turgy, (known by the name of [...]walphineramis) but that the mystery of ini­quity may appeare every day more abominable, Giles Calfines answers are discovered under this heathenish name, MT.ST.RA.IS.PH. And now that you may know him to be a true viper, you may see he hath eaten his way through the belly of his damme: Impudently proclaim­ing in his Title and Book, that the Lyturgy of our Church is no better than Popish Poradge, &c. Making the Church (too good a mother for such a bastard) no better than an harlot. He says he hath such argu­ments against it, as are unanswerable. A bold speech of an uncircumci­sed Philistim: Yet in the name of God I will throw one stone out of Davids sling at this Goliah, though I cannot put on Sauls armour, nor was ever wrapped in Samuels mantle. And now Sir, I must a little reason with you, if you will allow of any reason.

This you say, It is no indignity to call the Service Book Porradge, by a metaphor, because fat Cooks out of the Popes Kitchin composed it. I had though (my unlettered many lettered brethren) that Cooks did make Porradge within, not out of the Kitchin, and if it had been com­posed by the Popes Cooks, it would never have had so many arguments against Popery, as may with small paines be deduced from thence. If it be Porradge it is milk Porradge made of the fincere milk of the word, and boyled before the Pope had either Cook or Kitchin, at least allow it to be as Giles Calfine affirmes good wholesome Porradge well ea­soned and well crummed, &c. If there be any thing that doth not a­gree with your nice pallate, it is hearb of Grace, whereof there is good store; an ingredient which you cannot abide, because it will vex your fleshly desires. But if the whore of Babylon did chop into it (as you say) weeds of Idolatry, to poyson the children of Grace; The blessed Reformers did by their Porradge as Elisha did by those (whereof the [Page 3]sons of the Prophets cry'd out, saying, there is death in the pot, that is, not throw them away, but cure them, by putting therin the fine flower of Gods Word, and making them conformable to the truth. So that there is now nothing in them, but that which is in for our nourishment and comfort; and I dare confidently affirme that never any child of Grace perished by any night-shade or Colloquintida in the Porradge. But you say, the name Lyturgy and Masse are used promiscuously by Jesuits, and therfore the Lyturgy is unlawful. A pretty formal argument, the word Communion and Sacrament are used promiscuously by us and the Papists by the same argument wee should not receive the Lords Supper, be­cause Papists agree with us in the name: By this you may behold on what slender argument your found opinions are grounded. But, you say, Na [...]nes are the Images of things, and therfore the Lyturgy is either a Lethargy of Will-worship, or a Mass [...] of Idolatry. Well bowl'd Bre­ther Nicholas, but that one is too wide, & the other too narrow. Ten­terdon Steeple is the cause of Goodwins sands, the more Logical argument of the two; if the Name be always the Image of a thing, then every one that is named John must be as good as S. John, and he that is called Peter as S. Peter. I warrant that is the matter that S Paul was so wick­ed before his name was altered, because he was King Sauls name sake. I by this can see the reason why you delight to give Scripture names to your children, because you thinke their names will make them good; when as wee see these poore children, being misled by their parents & separating from Gods Church into Conventicles, loose all Religion & God too, while they run a whoring after their own invention [...], and worship the Calves of their own imagination. But again the name being the image of a thing, you hence assirme that bowing to a name is bowing to an Image; Ergo, it is Idolatry tobow to he name of Iesus. If this be your Logick, God keep me from your conclusions. You have I beleeve forgot bow a worthy Gous: did of late vindicate this part of worship; but I will beare with your short memory seeing you have al­most spoyled it by hearing long winded Sermons. But now comes another of your great arguments, that the Lyturgy is taken out of the Popish Brevia [...]y, and therefore it is unlawfull. I can tell you that the Lords prayer is taken from thence, will you therfore say it is unlawful? Your Brethren do as good, for many of them will not use it; the Apo­stles Creed is there too, but those Articles are now no part of your saith; Turner is your Apostle; (but I am sure his Creed will never save your soules) the ten Commandements are there too, but the World, the Flesh and the Devill are so potent in your affections, that you will not keepe them, and therefore desire not to heare them. But if the Papists mix with our Prayers their superstrtious ones, must not we therfore use the good ones? The Divell confessed Christ to be the Son of God, so did Peter, yet our Saviour never blamed Peter for using the Divels confes­sion. [Page 4]Next you find fault with the translation of the Psalmes in the Liturgie; for answer to this, pray understand (if you can) that the Psalmes in the Service booke were never yet allowed of by any Pa­pists, but were one of the first translations since our blessed Resorma­tion, and authorized by Act or Parliament for publike Service. This last which is the best translation, was done by King Iames his Com­mand, and by him appoynted to be read in Churches; and if they were (as I wish they might) be enjoyned by Parliament to that use, I dare say, none would refuse to read them instead of the old. Next you find fault that we use Gloria Patri, instead of praise the Lord: It seemes you thinke holy duties enjoyned are unlawfull to be perfor­med, for what is Gloria Patri, but praise be to the Lord?

Another frivolous Cavill you have against reading parts of Chap­ters, as in the Epistles and Gospels; he is a foole they say, that can say nothing, and rather than you will have nothing to say, you will talke like a foole; for tell me (good Sir) is it not lawfull nor commendable on such occasions to take those parts of holy Writ only, as are agreea­ble and pertinent to the time and occasion? If you will not allow a part of a Chapter, do not allow a Chapter of a Booke; for the division of bookes into Chapters was not originall, but of latter times, done few ages ago. I will give you one instance more delightfull to your fleshly desires; Why is your Mutton your own deare dish, brought to your table by the joynt, and not by the whole sheep? and why do you cate but part of that joynt only, such as you best like, and not all of it; you cannot give me a reason of one, but I can returne it to you in be­halfe of the other, only this one excepted: that this your trade of Pamphleting will not maintaine so great a table, as a whole sheep e­very meale, and two legged Mutton into the bargaine.

Your last and worst argument is against the Letany, which (you say) is not the stumpe or limbe of Dagon, but the head of the Masse booke, in which you say are nothing but repetitions, and a multitude of words, as Good Lord deliver us, heare us &c. ridiculous invocations, Magick spels, and no beeter than conjuring. Oh horrid Prophanation of true zealous devotions! stop thy mouth audatious Blasphemer, and blush for the abuse of those cries for mercy, and short ejaculations for and ience at the Throne of grace.

Looke on Psal. 136. and see if there be not more repetitions in these very words, for his mercy endures for ever: See also our Saviours pra­ctise, Matth. 26. praying three times the very same words, Father if it be possible let this cup passe from me: Can you teach David and our Sa­viour? will you charge them with vaine repetitions? He that is wise in his own conceit is a foole; but take heed, pride goeth before a fall, and an high mind before destruction. You have great need to say one part of the Letany, from all blindnesse of heart, from pride, vaine glory, [Page 5]and hypocrisie, from envy hatred and malice, and all uncharitablenesse, &c, Look I beseech you to an extemporary prayer of one of your own trib; how many vaine and impious Tautologes have you there, a dozen ex­pressions of one thing; crying good Lord, mercifull Father, gracious Lord, &c. three times in a breath to stop a gap, and keep his tongue in play, prophaning the name and attributes of God, to fill up his non-sence, and helpe out his dull invention. Lastly tell me, do you ever thinke to come to heaven by conjuring? Can you come thither with­out the Incarnation, Nativity, Circumcision, Temptation and Agony, the death and buriall, the glorious Resurrection and Assention of Christ? This it is to cast most glorious pearles before Swine, who will be sure to trample them in the mire. You need no other answer but the whipping post or gallowes, that dare defame the mysteries of Salvation. But though you will call it conjuring, it shall ever bee the chiefe part of my publike devotions, and I will adde this to my pri­vate Letany.

And now Sir, having in some measure layed open the invalidity of your arguments, I crave leave a little to rub you by the elbow for your jeering; I perceive you are a carnall man fleshly minded, you love Mutton well, but cannot away with Porridge: Take heed you do not surfet your selfe, too much of your straight-laced Mutton it wil bring you to a Consumption, and then good Porridge well seasoned and well boyled, will prove the best nourishing dyet to restore your decayed nature.

You are I perceive a Cook too, but no ordinary Cook, for you ne­ver would dresse Porridge.

One of the Popes fat Cooks you are not, for they put poyson in the Porridge, You are then a leane Cook, & for your leanesse you may thank your Mutton. You are no ignorant Cook, but one that is well expe­rienced, one that knowes the whore of Babilon well, and cannot abide her, because shee is out of your reach. For if shee were neare you would be one of her best customers, having as good a desire to the flesh as the best. Experience is gained by old age, so it seems you are an old Cook; and then (if the name be the image of a thing) you are a Cook-old. But will nothing down with you but Mutton, sure your stomach is very strong. Your extemporary exercises are but raw meats full of crudities, but you know where to vent them, and no carryon will kill an old Crow. The learned Clergy you wil not heare, for they [Page 6]are Baals Priests you say. But you love strong backed men, as Potte [...] and Carmen, inspired Weavers, and soule-curing Coblers; such as were Ieroboamb's Priests made of the lowest of the people. I [...]e ceive you hope to gaine something by their Calves. But to return to the mat­ter in hand, and come to a Conclusion; since I perceive you are such a great Mutton monger, pray what part of the Mutton shall I assigne. If I allot you the head, you may thinke I account you a Sheeps head, (blow your R [...]ms Horne, and assemble your tribe to a consul;tation) if the neck, you will say, I jeere your stiffe neckednesse. The shoulders you are content to keep for Fryday nightsu spper, with the helpe of a good fat Coney for your digestion. The breast and loynes you and your Brethren love dearely. But above all, I commend unto you the rumpe, and least you should blend legs with your sisters, I will take the legs and begone.