AN ANSWER TO A LETTER. FROM A Minister to a Person of Quality, showing some Reasons for his Nonconformity.  
AMongst the many Licentious Papers, which Seditious and Designing men in this present and sad Juncture of Affairs so industriously spread abroad, I find one with this Title, A Letter from a Minister to a Person of Quality, showing some Reasons for his Nonconformity; and should admire how a Person of those moderate Pretensions as A. B. (if I mistake not my Initial Letters) hath for these several years affected to be esteemed, should choose to appear in such Company. But that as it gins to be visible, this seems to him and others of the same Leven, to be the time to unmask themselves, and show that they are still true to the Solemn League and Covenant, which how tender soever they are of renouncing it, yet were not at all so when they had Power (or rather Force) to impose it. But an intended Reformation and Purity of Religion must answer all Pleas, and with Jehu they doubt not to call in others to see their zeal for the Lord, though it be as his was in slaying his Master. And 'tis not so far out of the memory of Man, to charge them with having done that once, and to implore the Divine Goodness that it may never be in their Power (I doubt 'tis too much in their Wills) to do it again. However I cannot but mind them, that these were the same Scruples of Nonconformity which prepared their Consciences for it; and let men dispute matters as they please, let them with Hazael when the Prophet wept, because of the evil he knew he would do the children of Israel, that their strong holds he would set on fire, and their young men would slay with the sword, and would dash their children, and rip up their women with child; let them (I say) with Hazael receive their rediction of their Barbarities with the Indignity he did, viz. Are we dogs that we should do this great thing? 2 Kings 8.11, 12, 13. Yet there is nothing can more probably convince them to be such, than their present barking; and I hearty pray God it may not too soon come to worrying the flock. 'Tis the Shepherd alas they at present run so fierce at, but the Sheep, Fleece, and Flesh too, must not expect to be free from their ravenous Jaws. Experti loquimur: and this I am bold to charge upon the Zeal of these men, who according to the account S. Paul gives of such, ('twould be too severe to transcribe their whole Character, let them that are at leisure peruse it, 2 Tim. 3.2, 3, 4, 5.) creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts. Only I could hope better of the Person of Quality, whoever she be, to whom he pretends to direct his Letter, and as to one of whom I have such hopes, I shall presume to dedicate this following Reply; beseeching her and all true Christians, that they henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, Eph. 4.14. that as 'tis in the foregoing Verse, they would seriously bethink themselves, that the way to come unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the Stature of the fullness of Christ, is to be in the unity of the faith; and as the Apostle adjures them by all the names and motives of kindness, Phil. 2.1, 2, 3. that must be by doing nothing through strife or vain glory: which did men really lay aside, could they at such a time as this especially, when the Religion of Christ is in so great jeopardy, than the Protestant Faith lies at stake, and we know not how soon our Candlestick may be removed, (I am ●●e we have Enemies enough to attempt it, and what is worse, Sins enough to deserve it) open the breach ●●der, and pride themselves in increasing the Confusion? This, Madam, is what I cannot but recommend 〈◊〉 ●our serious thoughts, and leave it to your own Conscience to make the judgement whether had A. B. ●●●●●r weight of Arguments than I hope to make appear he hath, it had been (I will not say pious, but) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉ble, to blow that Coal, that cannot but give new warmth to the common Adversary, and increase his Pleasure in seeing his Plot thrive by our Counsels, and ourselves both confounded by it. Madam, I cannot but speak my Fears; I cannot but naturally dread that the same Causes should have the same Effects. How much Rome hath already triumphed in our Divisions, (nor doth it heal our breach, that they have as great ones among themselves) our late Troubles are too sad an Instance; and that they are carrying on the same Design, that 'tis all one to them whether we fall by their or our own hand, (nay this is the more glorious effect of their Subtlety) we need make no doubt at all. Nor can it be any Aspersion or Calumny, to load our Dissenting Brethren with this Odium, when 'tis easy to prove, that in all their Divisions and Subdivisions, from the Presbyterian, Independent, Anabaptist, Fifth Monarchy Men, down to the Quaker, the Priests and Jesuits of the Romish Church have been the Engines on which all their dangerous Counsels have still moved; and so easy a thing is it for these Deceivers to transform themselves back again into what they were, before they appeared under these Vizors, that I must confess 'tis what I have often thought, and said to those I have conversed with, that Rome can never succeed in England, but under the Mask of Nonconformity. That considering (to do ourselves that right) we are in our Temper and Climate a serious religious People, there can never be any Method so successful for the Factors of Rome, as to bring us over to themselves, by teaching us to fasten the name of Papist upon the conscientious Conformist, by crying down the Church of England under the name of being Popishly inclined, though she be indeed the only Bulwark to defend us from it. The Church which the Romanists above all dread and oppose, as most sure to such Principles, as can never stoop to her Errors. And if it be a fault, that with reference to that Unity which is neither found among the Papists or Non-Conformists; if it be a crime, that we cannot but be Loyal to our Prince, that we cannot but live in charity towards our Neighbours, that we cannot but desire that our Religion in the public Offices of it should be intelligible, neither in an unknown Language with the Papists, nor as the uncertain sound of the Trumpet in the ex tempore Effusions of the Non-Conformists. If it be a fault, that no Pretence of Grace can teach us to Out men of their lawful Inheritances, that nothing can tempt us to Sacrilege, things from which I wish either Papist or Nonconformist could clear themselves. If they that cannot swallow a Steeple either with the Spire downward, lest it should prick their Conscience; nor with the Tower, lest the Wether Cock should appear at top, and show how the wind blows; as I think the Story is fastened on A. B. Yet shall make no scruple of swallowing Church and Church Land: nay if they are not belied, have already divided the spoil, and taken into their possession the houses of God, not considering that (as the Psalmist expresses it, Ps. 83.13.) God hath already once made them like a wheel, and as the stubble before the wind; that they are not yet so sure of the time, but that the wheel that lifts them up may bring them down. If I say the contrary things to what I wish they were not guilty of, be our unpardonable crimes, we must, we cannot but own and glory in our Infirmities.  
But that I may not any longer detain your Ladyship from a particular Reply to the Letter, which I profess to dedicate to you, as the Minister doth his, leaving it to your impartial judgement to determine of the Reasons he offers for his Nonconformity, which he grounds upon, as he calls them, Three grand Declarations required to be made by all those who will conform: the first concerning the Book of Common Prayer, the second concerning taking up Arms against the King, the third concerning the Solemn League and Covenant; with reference to all which, saith he, (especially the first and last) I have had hitherto insuperable Objections against the making any such Declaration.  
And in all these I shall follow him step by step, in what he objects and argues against them. Only I cannot but observe the Pomp in which he dresses his Scruples; and that though one of them be against the very Fundamentals not only of ours but all Government, I mean that of Taking up Arms against the King; which in truth, is to make good the Lawfulness of the Solemn League and Covenant, 'tis necessary he should assert, The Covenant in its nature and design, and as 'twas applied and made use of by the first Contrivers of it, having a direct tendency to Rebellion; and for them that inbottom upon Rebellion in the State, to profess and defend Schism in the Church, is but suitable to the Synod's Principle of Disobedience, from whom both proceed. This being observed, I now go on to trace him in the distinct Paragraphs of his Letter, in the third of which he sets forth, that the first Declaration concerning the Book of Common Prayer is to be made in these very words, viz. I A. B. do declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the Book, entitled, The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England; together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches; and the form or manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons.  
Madam, here is required assent and consent, yea unfeigned assent and consent; and that it may be is one of his chief Scruples that he may not prevaricate with Authority, were there allowed but a little Equivocation in the case, and the Dissenter permitted to give an assent and consent which were not unfeigned, the Task had not been so intolerable; but to require such an assent and consent as thus searches men to the bottom, and beats the Hypocrite out of all his Subterfuges, who can bear it? And that not only in this Book of Common Prayer, but in the Book of God itself: for so he argues in the fourth Paragraph, telling us, That he questions whether many a sober man would not scruple to declare so much concerning any copy of the Bible now extant in the world in any language whatever, even the Originals themselves not excepted, which by transcribing may have their faults, and therefore every thing contained in them not to be unfeignedly assented and consented unto. But to see then on how weak a foundation his Argument stands, viz.  
1. That to assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by this Book, etc. is to assent and consent to any Errata or faults that may escape in the transcribing the true copy. 'Tis (I confess) a new way of reasoning, and such as I think a man of understanding cannot be in the least guided by; for by that means there's nothing in the world, the most undoubted Articles of our Faith, and unquestioned Fundamentals of Religion, (I need give no other Instance than himself doth in the Bible which contains these) that aught to be assented and consented to: but 'tis trivial to insist on such a Cavil, and therefore I shall leave this to every man to consider with himself, whether in matters of another nature, and of the most weight concern in this World, such as our Lives and Fortunes; we do not think we may safely assent, and consent to the contents of any writings that pass an Estate, confirm our Liberties and Properties, unless we likewise subscribe to the Errata, which in the frequent copying out, and transcribing the Records, or Enrolled Deeds may happen; 'tis absurd to call those Errata the contents of such writings, and if they were so, yet neither would such a scruple affect us here, because to what is contained is added likewise what is prescribed in and by the Book, and unless A. B. can show that the Errata are likewise prescribed in and by the Book, that there is some Rubric to confirm them, his Argument (I am ashamed to give it that name) will be altogether Captious and Nugatory. Again,  
2. He insinuates that for any persons to require assent and consent in this manner is to suppose themselves Infallible, this is the sum of his 5th Paragraph. But how odious an inference is this, and how destructive of the Reason of all Laws? Must not by this Argument every Lawgiver be supposed to be infallible, the end of all whose injunctions are to be assented and consented to; and if Men refuse to yield the obedience required, they know, and are to abide by the Punishment or Sanction of the Law, and yet never any yet urged that against their Laws. And is it any more that is done here, we require not this assent and consent from all that will be Christians, the Declaration reaches not Men in their private capacity, but only such as shall desire to come into any public charge in the Church; and if it be necessary there should be a Rule for Uniformity (they thought so I am sure who devised and imposed their Directory) 'tis necessary that Men subscribe to it, subscribe to it not as an absolute Rule of Conscience, but as a Rule of Peace and Order; and this is all the Church requires that they so far submit their Will and Understanding to their Governors, as for these ends, to conform to what they have prescribed. Nor doth a Man violate his Conscience, who if there be nothing sinful in the thing required, shall submit to what is prescribed, although it may not altogether suit with the measure of his inclination or Judgement: No not though he doth this with the most unfeigned assent and consent, because unfeigned Assent and Consent, what ever his Paraphrase on these words imply to the contrary, doth not suppose every thing so required to be assented and consented to, to be in the highest degree of perfection, but to be such as for the great Ends aimed at, he can freely and truly comply with; such wherein he dares not, at least will not, advance his private Sentiments above the deliberate Acts, and constitutions of those whom God hath set over him, and whom 'tis his duty to obey in indifferent things.  
And is it any more than this that we profess, notwithstanding his cavil at it, that 'tis our firm persuasion that there is nothing in the whole Book contrary to the Word of God, or to sound Doctrine, or which a Dodly man may not use, or submit unto with a good Conscience. Now though this be our persuasion, yet (saith he) 'tis not every Man's persuasion, and therefore unreasonable to force others to the same profession: Upon this Reason no Law can be of force, because there is nothing so good, so pious, so useful, but some may not be of the persuasion that 'tis so, nay 'twould be unreasonable to require either the belief of a God, or obedience to any moral precept, because some may have been found so Atheistical as to deny the one, and so profligate as to disown the other. But to see then what is the strong Reason he backs this with, viz. with those words of St. Paul, Rom. 14.22. Hast thou Faith, have it to thyself; i e. in his Gloss, force it not upon others, compel them not to think as thou thinkest, believe as thou believest, declare as thou declarest; study thine own and thy neighbour's peace better, and the rather because thou are a fallible Creature, and mayst be in an Error as well as any other. Now I would ask our scrupulous Nonconformist, whether that Rule be given to the public Officers in the Church, or the private Christian? If to the private Christian, it concerns not our Case, if to the Magistrate or public Officers in the Church, why then is there a Rule laid down by him otherwhere, to reject the Heretic, Titus 3.10. Are any, at least do any pretend to be so firmly persuaded of what they hold as the Heretic? Is not obstinacy the constant concomitant of all their Opinions? Or why is every Soul commanded, in the preceding Chapter Rom. 13.1. to be subject unto the higher Powers, why are they that resist the Power, said to resist the Ordinance of God, and told further, that they shall receive to themselves Damnation? Why v. 5. is it farther continued, and that upon the Reasons added v. 3, 4. that they must needs be subject not only for wrath, but also for Conscience sake? What, I say, is the meaning of this, with what is farther pressed in that whole Chapter, if all is to be presently blown away with our having Faith to ourselves, to ourselves too in the sense that those Men too often have it, that they will allow it to be no where but in their Conventicles, no where but in that Separation, which St. Judas tells us, v. 19 is sensual, having not the Spirit. How is the Conscience concerned in our Obedience, if nothing in no sense may be required from us to believe or declare: If because the Magistrate is a fallible Creature, and may be in an Error as well as any other, he must study his and his neighbour's Peace better than to force his Faith, to what in his Conscience he thinks best for the Subject, why are there then any public Sanctions in the World? Why is not every thing iniquity, that is decreed by Law? Men might be ashamed of this Reasoning, especially when if they do but remember what they did in their own Trials of the Abilities and Capacities of Ministers to be received into the Church, 'twas not then hast thou Faith, have it to thyself; no 'twas necessary the Probationer should be able to give an account of the most secret workings of his Faith, of the beginning and progress of his Conversion, as though every one who is born of the Spirit be as the Wind, that bloweth where it listeth, and we may hear the sound thereof, but cannot tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth, John 3.8. they searched so deep, were so blasphemous, and Sacrilegious, as to take to themselves the place of God to search the Heart, and to try the Reins, and be satisfied with none for their Candidates, but the Godly and Regenerate: nay, and when Men came up to all their Marks of Trial, yet if there were not one more of being of their Church and Party, they might indeed have their Faith to themselves, without any hopes of being approved and accepted by their sanctified Triers. This was then the Liberty of Conscience they gave, This indeed their Tyranny beyond that of Egypt or Babylon. And the complaint they now have is, that the Laws of the Land (all which they then violated in the gross, and I fear long for the same happy Toleration) and the Governors of the Church in obedience to those Laws, require their Compliance to what, as to the matter of it, as A. B. himself Par. 7. confesses, he hath nothing to say against it. And Par. 6. I would to God they had required no more in Conformity, than Use and Submission: that is, that men should use and submit to the Liturgy. And what more is required? I am very confident did they use the Liturgy in their Meetings, did they recommend Conformity to it to their Followers, though they had never declared their Assent and Consent, Authority would never have concerned itself to repress them. Although 'tis inexcusable to say, There is nothing they can say against the Liturgy of the Church of England, that they can use and submit to it, and yet not be willing to declare the same. Nay, is not such a Confession more than any Declaration, because whatever man may declare for the outward Peace of the Church, yet the confessing of the things to be declared is the voice of Conscience, and such an Acknowledgement as I doubt they will not find a Salve for, when the secrets of all men's thoughts shall be made known. I wish they would timely consider, what 'tis by their Example and Authority to hold back so many poor Souls from doing what they dare not say is unlawful! what 'tis more than once, (pray God the Ferment the Nation at present is in, do not work itself into it!) I say more than once to have kindled a Rebellion! They may think what they will of Success, the Booty and Reward of prosperous Mischief, yet will it not be bitterness in the end? and can those men that hold out the Argument, persons most of them who were actually engaged in the last Troubles, and most of them men of Years, think, that should they escape the Violence they stir up, it cannot be long  Nature would call upon them to give an account (how comfortable an account let them consider) to say no worse. I would speak as charitably as I can of their mistaken Zeal. But 'tis our Zeal too they are offended at, that beyond what our preceding Governors did with reference to this Book of Common Prayer, we thus strictly enjoin, that Ministers do declare their unfeigned assent and consent. All that they required being, That it should be read and used, and the Rites and Ceremonies of it to be duly observed. And was that all they required, and yet could they then find in their hearts to rise up against such Meekness and Lenity? Or is not the Case very different from what it then was? Are not the Men we have to deal with, those who were gone off from all Obedience to Church or State, and is it not reason we take some Pledge of them for their future Integrity? Is any man found guilty of a much less heinous Indictment, and yet discharged without giving Sureties for his Behaviour? If there were nothing else, 'tis necessary men should show their actual repentance, in what they have actually offended. Shall men who have broken through Oaths of Allegiance to their Prince, and of Canonical Obedience to their Diocesans; men who have subscribed the Canons and Articles of the Church, and have prevaricated in both; men that gave the early Test of what they were driving at, as (we are not without Instances of this nature before the breaking out of the last Civil War) to require, when called to it, in order to their Degrees in the Universities, that they might Subscribe in their own Sense? Shall I say, such men be displeased, if we cannot take the Viper into our breast, without pulling out the Sting, that we dare not admit men of these Principles and Practices, to come into the Church, without giving such Caution of their being in good earnest, as may justify those in admitting them who have the care of the public, and should be very bad Pastors of Christ's Flock, should they knowingly receive Wolves instead of Sheep intot he Fold. Although when all the Care is taken that can be, I doubt not, some such there will be, some such whom these men teach to be Hypocrites, in so serious a Profession, as that of a Minister, those, I mean, whom they pity in their Conformity, as doing what they would not do, if they were not forced to it. Alas, good men, 'tis the restraint that is upon them makes them do what they do, and therefore as a Shiboleth to their party, how do they Curtail the Prayers? With what Negligence and Oscitency do they read what they do not curtail, forgetting that whatever they may think, God will not be mocked, 'tis his Name is called upon, his Spirit is present, and cannot but judge the falsehood of such a Heart: However, these are the men that do their work: these are they whom they countenance among us, and these, whom we cannot but be ashamed of, and compassion the poor misguided people, who are taught to look upon those as Holy and Godly Men, who thus professedly offer the Sacrifice of Fools.  
But to follow A. B. in his Argument, he proceeds (Parag. 8.) to explain what is meant by Assent and Consent; Which (saith he) with reference to the party assenting relates to his understanding; and with reference to the thing assented to, relates to the truth and rightfulness of it. And with reference to the party consenting, relates to his will; and with reference to the thing consented to, relates to the goodness, expediency, and behoofulness of it. According to which Action (saith he) when I declare my unfeigned assent to all and every thing contained in, and prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer, 'tis as to what is true and right, and not to the least error in it from top to bottom, not in any Rite or Ceremony, not in the form and manner of making, ordaining, and conscrating Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, no not so much as in pointing the Psalms, or in any other tittle or circumstance. So again, when I declare my unfeigned consent, etc. it is as if I had declared, That I hearty and cordially close in, and choose every thing mentioned and prescribed in the said Book as good and expedient, as most eligible and behooful to be done, practised, and observed. And this is the reason, he adds, why he dares as well eat hot fire coals, as declare his unfeigned assent and consent, etc. because many things are therein contained and prescribed which he deems scarce right and true, (however right and true he doth deem them) much less good and expedient to be done and embraced. To which in sum I answer as above, that 'tis not necessary to the assent and consent here required, that every particular person should take upon him expressly to determine in all these Points; 'tis sufficient that nothing is sinful: much less doth it become his Humility to oppose the Opinion he hath of a thing's being good and expedient, to the Sense and Reason of his Governors; 'tis matter of Obedience belongs to him, and it little avails whether he thinks it expedient, as long as those to whose Judgements he hath as much reason to incline as to his own, especially in a thing that himself dares not say is sinful, though he think it so. But to weigh what the things are which he scruples, and pitches only upon two or three, viz. 

1. The Order of reading the holy Scripture, Parag. 9  
2. The Order of Ministration of Baptism.  
3. The Order of the Burial of the Dead.   And with these he concludes his Paper, Parag. 19  
Now to examine how far these are real and just Scruples of Nonconformity.  
First, As to the Order of reading the holy Scripture, Parag. 9 the Exception is, because many Books of the Apocrypha are commanded to be read, and some Books of the sacred Canon are wholly left out; some of them but part to be read, some of them curtailed and mutilated, as to the several Chapters contained in them. Where I cannot but observe a very different Zeal in A. B. Paragr. 4. he had said, That he questions whether many a sober man would not scruple to declare his Assent and Consent, concerning any Copy of the Bible now extant in the World, in any Language whatsoever, even the Orginals themselves not excepted, because by transcribing it may have faults. I am very glad to find him now so concerned for the holy Scripture, and there's no honest Church of England-man, who will not join with him in it. Only we desire that our Governors be not blamed, if according to their best discretion they have chosen out such parts of Scripture to be read in the Congregation, which are most intelligible, if they omitted others, such as many Chapters of the Chronicles and Revelation are, which they thought would not be for the Edification of a vulgar Auditory: And if they have mixed some of the Apocrypha, they are withal such parts of it, as may be of wholesome Instruction, and for their equailing these with the holy Scripture, properly so called, 'tis sufficient that 'tis in our Articles declared, what Books we look upon as Canonical, what as Apocryphal, and that we neither disguise, nor recommend either, but under their proper Names: And whether this be a Reason to break Communion with a Church, let any man Judge, especially since 'tis no new thing to recommend Books that are not Scripture to be kept, and exposed in the Church to public use, such as Erasmus his Paraphrase, Foxe's Martyrology, etc. and yet these are not scrupled at.  
His next Scruple is,  
Secondly, Against the Order appointed for the Ministration of Baptism, and that upon these three accounts. 

1. Because of Godfathers and Godmathers.  
2. Because of the Cross.  
3. Because of what is annexed to the end of the Sacrament.    
I. He doth not approve of the strict requiring of Godfathers, and Godmathers, to stand as Sureties, and Undertakers for the Child to be baptised, viz. That he shall renounce the Devil, and all his Works, and constantly believe God's holy Word, and obediently keep his Commandments. But whether A. B. approve them or no, I can show him those that did approve them very early in the Church, and that the common Consent of the whole Church, both Eastern and Western, hath ever since run along with that Practice. But to weigh his Reasons, and those of such moment, that they are sufficient with him, as I just now observed, to justify his deserting the Communion of the Church; for, 

1. Because it is unscriptural.  
2. Because in the interim the Father of the Child is left out.  
3. Because Godfathers and Godmothers are generally brought to the Font to avouch a great untruth, and make themselves obnoxious of lying, and perjury in the Face of God and the Church.    
To the first, that 'tis unscriptural: 1. 'Tis not necessary it should be mentioned in Scripture, 'tis sufficient if the Practice of the Church confirm it, and it be not against the Rule or Analogy of Scripture. Besides; 2. It cannot be supposed it should be prescribed in Scripture, the receiving of Persons by Baptism there, being upon their own actual Faith, and before there was any constituted national Church, wherein this Order could be observed, and 'twas sufficient that the Children were admitted then to Baptism, as they were into the Covenant, that is, by the Faith of the Parents; which is the Reason why they are now capable of the Ordinance; and were the taking in of Godfathers only abundans cautela, 'tis the first time that any deserted a Church, because it took the best Care it could of its Members. Nor is it reasonable in the second place,  
2. To Object, That in the interim the Father of the Child is left out, when the receiving the Child suppose the Father concerned in it, because 'tis through his Faith he is in the Covenant, and as to his particular engaging for the Child's Education, he must be worse than an Infidel, if he do not take care for those of his own House.  
3. Much less can it bear any weight with considering men, that he insinuates, The Godfathers and Godmothers being generally brought to the Font to avouch a great untruth, and make themselves obnoxious of lying, and perjury, in the Face of God, and the Church: Because if they are guilty of this, this is their abuse, of what is well intended, and that can no more make against the having Godfathers and Godmothers for the Child, because 'tis possible they may neglect their Duty, than it doth against Baptising the Child at all, because he may not answer the intents and purposes of that Solemn Vow, or of admitting the Father himself to be a Sponsor in this case, because he may be careless in the matter. Besides, not to admit Godfathers and Godmothers, might in some cases be totally to debar the Child of Baptism, because it may so fall out that the Father may be dead before the Child is born, and then how shall he be offered to Baptism?  
And as for A. B's Supposition, that A Parent should tax his Gossips with their neglect, and the great mischief accrueing to the Child upon that very account, doth he not much more tax himself, who shall make such an Argument against this practice, which can signify nothing, if he do but discharge his own Duty? How fallacious a conclusion is it, because men neglect their Duty, therefore they are not to be engaged in it!  
II. And then as to his Reasoning against the Cross, Par. 13. 'tis so trifling, that I wonder with what Face any can urge it, viz. Because whereas 'tis said, We receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock, and do sign him with the sign of the Cross, in Token hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the Faith of Christ crucified, etc. Now, saith he, this word In token is to him a mere Riddle; 'tis much it should be so, there being no word of a more vulgar use, and implies as much as a sign of Remembrance, which is the very sense to which 'tis here applied, Only he hath a sense to wrest it to, in which he knows the Church of England never took it, and therein he gives a mighty Proof of his Charity, that he cannot join in Communion with the Church of England, lest some other of less understanding than himself should mistake the sense of one word in the Liturgy: 'tis I confess an extraordinary sort of Zeal, to make another's want of Judgement the measure of my Religion. But there's a farther design in that, than every one observes, put a false gloss upon the Text, and then condemn it of Heresy, misinterpret the words, and impeach the Church of the ill consequences. But what then is it we must spell out of this mighty Niceness? I am, saith he, apt to believe the generality may much mistake it (mistake it then it seems they must, before they can misjudge it) as if when it is said in Token, it had been said In Virtue and Power of this Sign; another man it may be would be apt to believe that they could not thus mistake it, it being altogether Foreign from the use of the word so to understand it. But 'tis all one, put the rub in the way, that you may be sure not to lose your pains in proving 'tis necessary it should be removed. For my part, I cannot tell how any thing but an industrious love of mistaking could have given him that sense of the word, and indeed, who besides himself ever so understood it? Did the Ancient Fathers plead so much for it in any other sense than Christ commanded his Disciples, to take up their Cross and follow him? Are they to imitate their Master in doing this in the whole course of their life, and may they not so much as use a Sign to express it to others, or to bring them in mind of their Duty themselves?  
Was not the Cross, the name, and reproach of it, that which deterred so many from the early profession of Christ's Religion, and is it now an improper Symbol, whereby to confess themselves not ashamed of it? Or are Signs less lawful, than words to imprint the same?  
'Tis frivolous to say, 'tis too like a Sacrament upon a Sacrament thus to add the sign of the Cross to Baptism, because the Church of England never so explained it, no, she is at pains to explain it otherwise, and give the just Reasons for retaining it in the 30th Canon first published, Anno, 1604. However, this will not excuse A. B's expression in the beginning of Par. 12. where he says, That the baptising the Person ipso facto, exhibits a Virtue and Power, to every worthy partaker of it, to fight against Sin, the World, and the Devil, this I say will not excuse his expression from looking too like the Sacrament's conferring Grace, ex opere operato, which had any but a zealous Nonconformist said, He would not have escaped the imputation of Popery.  
What is continued, Par. 13. That though Christians in the Primitive times might use the Cross, yet the very same Reasons which might put them upon that use with a reference to the Heathens, should now move them wholly to disuse it, with a reference to the Papists, because what professors then did, was to distinguish them from Pagans, who scorned the Cross, with every Token and Sign of it, (it seems the word Token is not such a mere Riddle, but A. B. can understand and use it) and by Parity of Reason we should now forbear so doing, to distinguish ourselves from the Idolatrous Papists, who superstitiously adore the Cross, foolishly, fond, and wickedly signing themselves with it upon every Occasion. But if they abuse what the Primitive Christians so Religiously used, why should not we rather restore it to its right use? Or if their Abuses must abolish the thing, then why done't we part with our Baptism too, because 'tis the Ceremony with which they admit into the Church, and do so much corrupt the use of it?  
III. His third exception, Against Order used in the Ministration of Baptism, is, because of what is annexed to the end of the Sacrament, viz. It is certain by God's word, that Children which are baptised dying before they commit actual Sin, are undoubtedly saved. Par. 14. I would, saith A. B. they had quoted the place, for I confess mine own ignorance, that I know no such word in Scripture: But what then, may not that be certain by God's word, that is not there in terminis? Is there no such thing as the Analogy of Faith, as the collecting, and inferring any thing from Scripture (and that which is so, is certain by God's word) which is not laid down there in Proposition? May it not be according to the Tenor of God's Word, because 'tis not found there in so many Syllables, that Children which are baptised dying before they commit actual Sins, are undoubtedly saved. What think we of St. Peter's telling us, 1 Epist. 3.20, 21. Where speaking of those that were saved in Noah's Ark by Water, he subjoins the like Figure whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us, and Mark 1.4. is not Baptism said to be for the Remission of Sins, such it is in itself, such it cannot but be to those that rightly partake of it, and if Children do this, if by this they are actually brought into the Covenant of Grace, whilst they break no Law, as 'tis only by Actual Transgression they can do this, is it any question that they are undoubtedly saved, that is, put at least into a Salvable condition? I shall not need to add that Christ saith of such, i. e. of little Children that come to him, and 'tis by Baptism only that they can come, is the Kingdom of Heaven. What he fills his 15 Par. with, concerning the Children of wicked Parents, who are yet baptised, and many of them die immediately after baptism, is a most unreasonable and uncharitable inference, because to put the Child in Covenant, 'tis not necessary the Parent be any more than an Outward Professor of the true Religion, 'twas so with the Jews, it must be so with the Christians: And as for what he infers from the second Commandment, which, saith he, giveth some scruple to his Faith, viz. of God's punishing the Iniquity of the Fathers upon their Children, to the third and fourth Generation, hath been always interpreted upon Supposition of their continuing in the Sins of their Fathers, and 'twas upon the Jews erring in this point, which their Proverb of the Father's eating the sour Grapes, and the Child's Teeth being set on edge, that God himself is at pains to rectify the mistake, and lay it down as an Eternal Truth, That the Soul that Sins shall die, that the Child shall not bear the Iniquity of the Father, Ezek. 18.  
His Supposition of a Christian King's conquering a Country of Pagans, Mahometans, and Jews, and compelling all their Infants forthwith to be baptised, and some of them expiring before they have committed actual Sin, Par. 17. is wholly remote from the Question, the Church of England supposing such only as are the proper Subjects of Baptism. And for his merciful Butchering Infants, as he continues his Supposition, Par. 18 before they have committed actual Sin, that so without any father hazard, they might have the Possession of Eternal life, 'tis impious to suggest, and blasphemous from hence to argue the Power of any mortal wight over Souls, because he can be the Instrument to Baptise, and then to kill the poor Infant, because should this be admitted, 'tis not he that Baptises, but God that gives the Title by his Baptism to Heaven, and it's not to be doubted but many a wicked Villain hath been the Instrument to send a Martyr to Glory. I am sure the Church hath always thought most charitably of those Innocents' Pilate murdered; and 'tis to be doubted, those who are so keen and bitter against them, would not argue as they do, had they but some of the Meekness and Humility of Children.  
His 18th Parnell falls under the Answer we gave to his 16th Parnell To conclude this head therefore, What is, or is not in the power of man is not the Question, but rather what is the End, and design of the Sacrament, what the Use for which 'tis prescribed, what the sense God himself hath put upon it.  
That Odium he would load the Minister with, That shall deny to Administer Baptism to them, who come not according to the Rule of the Church, or to question whether it would be Baptism or no, to pronounce the Form over the Child of an unbelieving Parent, are besides our Argument, 'tis sufficient that he hath no Title so to do it, that he is more serious in his Function than to be knowingly unjust, either to the Trust, the Church, or God himself, as I may say, hath reposed in him.  
Thirdly, The last scruple with which he shuts up his Paper, is, with reference to the Order for the Burial of the Dead, particularly that Passage of it: For as much as it hath pleased God of his great mercy to take unto himself the Soul of our dear Brother here departed, we therefore commit his Body to the Earth, etc. I have only this to say, that 'tis in the Judgement of Charity we pronounce this, of all, That some there are of whom we may say it in great assurance of their happy Translation, that 'tis not necessary the words in great mercy should refer to the persons taken away, for it may be mercy, and great mercy to them who suffered by their Injury, or ill Examples, supposing them to be such, in which no show of Godness did appear. Besides, I do not think, that when I give my Assent and Consent, it is necessary it should reach the sense of the words any otherwise than they relate to their proper subjects; some there are, of whom this may, and aught to be said, and 'tis a poor Cavil against the Communion of a Church, that her Offices are framed to suit those who are her real Members. Nor have I ever thought the Person officiating, obliged to use this Form of Burials entirely in all Cases; nor that it had been however either necessary, or Christian, to prescribe another, indeed it had been a Contradiction, because 'tis supposed to be Christian Burial we give by it, and however this be generally used, yet 'tis well known, there are those to whom she denies her Office of Burial, and something I conceive may even in lower Cases be left to the discretion of the Priest, especially with the Advice of his Ordinary: In a word, the Church provides for those that ought to have Christian Burial, and those to whom it doth not belong, are not the supposed Subjects of this Office.  
What he concludes all with of our adding in the Collect, that when we shall departed this life, we may rest in him, as our hope is this our Brother doth, is, what hath no insuperable Objection in it, there being none so bad, but for whom we ought to hope the best: The Thief upon the Cross, we know, found mercy, and what may be the deal of God with the most profane wretch in the last minute? What may be the Temptations he hath had to encounter? What his Trials we know not: We see the Fall, but cannot tell what his Wrestle were. And therefore which is the surest, the most Christian way, that the Church chalks out, and I am sure we have reason to rejoice, that we are of a Church whose Charity is extensive, and I pray God, our dissenters never give us Occasion to forfeit that Character; that if they have the tenderness they boast, they would exercise some of it as towards those who in all their contradictions, cannot but pray for, and pity them; so towards those poor Souls they have hitherto seduced, and cannot but know, that whatever their pretences are, why themselves do not conform, yet they can never answer it to Almighty God, that they so shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men, as neither to go in themselves, nor to suffer them that are entering to go in, Matth. 23.13. To whom amidst all their long Prayers, their Zeal to compass Sea and Land to make Proselytes, their Nice distinguishing of the lawfulness of an Oath, whilst themselves live in the avowed defence of Perjury. For such is their solemn League and Covenant taken, and persisted in against that Oath of Allegiance, which they have, or aught to take to their lawful Prince, and urged as a reason why they cannot conform. Their exactness in paying (as I may say) Tithe of Mint, Anise, and Cumin, in being precise in lesser things, whilst they omit the weightier Matter of the Law, Judgement, Mercy, and Faith, Obedience to their just Superiors, Charity to those that live in greater strictness of Life than themselves; their making clean the outside of the Cup and Platter, with the likeness they too much bear to whited Sepulchers, I shall only leave them to consider how far what is so often denounced by Christ, Matth. 23. may concern them, viz. Woe unto you Scribes, and Pharisees, Hypocrites. And now, Madam, I cannot but conclude with this short Caution to you, and all others, whom A. B. and his Brethren, are the Occasion, either by their Words, or Example of withholding from Conformity, That you would seriously consider what 'tis to live in Disobedience to your lawful Governors, especially in those things which A. B. himself tells you he can say nothing against, Par. 7. consider who 'tis hath told you, 1 Sam. 15.23. that Rebellion is as the Sin of Witchcraft, and Stubborness is as Iniquity and Idolatry. There's nothing so opposite to the Rules of Morality, and Religion, to the Worship, and acknowledgement of a God, and his Providence (for all this is implied in Witchcraft, Iniquity, and Idolatry) as Rebellion, and Disobedience to lawful Governors in their lawful Commands, and God knows like Idolatry, and Witchcraft, nothing with which foolish Men are so much bewitched, no Idol equal to that of their own Brain, the Inventions, and Imaginations they set up to themselves: God in his Mercy to this tottering Nation forgive, and prevent the mischievous Designs of those Sons of Belial, who are now carrying on both in Church, and State, and open the Eyes of all the truly conscientious, to see the things belonging to their Peace, even in this their day: There seems still to be a day, and a price put into our hand, if we have the heart to make use of them, God forbidden we should be such Fools to neglect the opportunity: I am sure if we be, no Apology we can make, will clear us from being of the Plot against our Religion, and Country; if we must fall (I speak it to all good Subjects, all good Christians, and amongst them I conjure A. B. and his Brethren, as they will answer it at the day of Judgement, when the secrets of all Hearts shall be laid open) yet let not ourselves contribute to it, let not that be the fatal Complaint, Thy destruction was of thyself O England.  
Madam, this is what so few hours leisure, as I have had to peruse A. B's Letter, and return a Reply to it, would allow me to rejoin to his Objections, against the first Declaration, concerning the Book of Common Prayer, and as he goes on with his Scruples against the second, and third Declaration, viz. concerning Taking up Arms against the King, and the Solemn League and Covenant, I shall endeavour, through God's Blessing, to find time to resolve them, if not with much hopes of doing good on their Leaders, (alas! men that act with design, and are fond of setting up themselves against Authority, are not so easily converted) yet of reducing some of those honest, well-meaning Souls, whom they have led astray, nor do I ask God's Blessing upon my Labours, any farther than he, who knows all Hearts, knows that what I writ is out of an entire Love of his Religion, and Truth, in which I am  
Your real, and faithful Servant, etc.   

Printed for JOHN BLYTHE, at Mr. Playford's Shop in the Temple.