A REPLY TO THE ANSWER OF THE Amicable Accommodation. BEING A Fourth Vindication of the Papist Misrepresented and Represented: IN Which are more particularly laid open some of the Principal Methods, by which the Papists are Misrepresented by Protestants in their Books and Sermons.  
Published with Allowance.  
LONDON, Printed by Henry Hills, Printer to the Kings Most Excellent Majesty for his Household and Chapel. 1686.   

A REPLY TO THE ANSWER OF THE Amicable Accommodation.  
THE Answerer in his last seems to take his leave of me; And thus (says he, p. 30.) I take a fair leave of the Representer. But methinks, if he be not gone too far, I would fain have a word or two with him before we part. And 'tis chiefly in civility to ask him, How he does? For throughout his last Reply, he seems sick of Answering, having said but very little throughout the whole; and yet assuring his Reader, he has driven the matter as far as it will go, (p. ib.) Well, and is there no more than to be said, to that manifold Charge summed up against the Church of England in my last Discourse? Is that matter driven as far as it will go? I there drew out a Character of the Church of England, as lying under the same Charge of Scandals, Innovation, and Idolatry from a Dissenter, as the Church of Rome does generally from Protestants: And almost every Point urged with the same Proofs of Scripture and Reasons, which Protestants produce against the Papists. And all this he passes over with a light touch, and the most artificial way of Answering with saying nothing, as can possibly be met with.  
And first, tho' amongst the many Divisions of Dissenters, there are several, from whom the whole Charge might forcibly be urged, as the Rigid Anabaptists, the Quakers, etc. yet because this would oblige him to answer all the Arguments, and to show, they are not of equal force against the Church of England, as against the Papists; he upon good consideration, takes it as spoken from such a kind of Dissenter, which agreeing in many of the Points with the Church of England, cannot reasonably be thought to urge them against her. And so instead of giving them any farther Answer, he comes off with, The Dissenters did never charge the Church of England with this. The Dissenters do the same themselves. There is no Dispute between the Dissenters and Us about that. Did ever the Dissenters charge us with this? And so lets them drop without any farther Reply, tho' still standing in their full force against the Church of England, from most other Dissenters, excepting those he has picked out for better Expedition.  
Thus he gives the goe-by to the greatest part of the Instances. And for such other Arguments, as are there pressed against the Church of England, and that equally from all sorts of Dissenters, those he prudently says nothing to; 
Answ. to Pap. protest. pag. 131.  In observance I suppose of a Rule he had laid down before in a former Discourse, viz. The Greatest Wits can do no more than the Cause will bear; tho' a little Prudence would teach ME to say NOTHING in such a Cause, as will admit of no better a Defence. And therefore he says not one Word in Vindication of his Popish Prelates, of their Mitres and Crosiers, not a Word of praying to be defended by the Angels: Nothing of their calling upon the Birds, the Beasts and Fishes; of their crying out to Dead Men, in their most Solemn Devotions; of inserting the Apocrypha into their Liturgy; of their not wearing the Rochet, the Albe and Tunicle; of their prescribing Fasts, and not keeping them; of their formerly Praying for the Dead, etc. Not one word to all his own Reasons, which in his Discourses against me he has formerly advanced to prove us Superstitious and Idolaters; and yet there pressing with the same weight against himself and his own Church. And yet he's taking his leave on me, because the matter is driven as far as it will go.  
And is it possible then, that the Disputing Humour is so soon off? We have heard of nothing hitherto so much, as of Disputing, and Defending, and Justifying your Reasonings; of these repeated Challenges to the Representer, We'll Dispute it when you will: And now, as far as I see, when the Answerer is put to defend his own Church, and justify his own Reasonings, he's as cool, and as unwilling dispute as the Representer. 
Answ. to Am. Accom. p. 16.  No, We are not, say he, for pursuing every new Game, but will keep to our old Scent. Could any thing possibly be said, more coolly than this? Here's not a word now of Disputing or Justifying; if his Reasonings be shown to fly in his own face, as much as against his Adversary, he's well enough content to hear it, with scarce a word of Reply; because he's resolved to keep to his old Scent. And is not this something strange now, that He that should draw me out to dispute over the Bishop of Meauxes Exposition, and run over the whole body of Controversy, as to matter of Right, or de Jure, when I undertook for no more than to declare what our Church holds as to Matter of Fact; and would not take my waving it without many a Flurt and a Jeer: Now when it comes to his own turn of Disputing and Defending his own Reasonings, in a Case directly appertaining to our main Point of Representing, le's the matter fall very cautiously, and will scarce touch at it forsooth, because he'll keep to his old Scent. So that tho' he's for beating up for me, as many new Games as he can possibly find, for my diversion; for his part, he'll not follow the old one, unless the scent be very agreeable, which truly 'tis not when it comes to press him to the standing his Ground, and justifying his own Cause. I must pardon him therefore, it seems, as to this.  
But however, tho' he will not offer any defence against a Character, which seems to reflect upon his own Church, yet he'll endeavour to prevent all misunderstanding betwixt Her and the Dissenters, that might possibly be occasioned by such a Character. And because he finds it much easier to work upon their Affections by Fawning, than to convince their Judgements by Reasoning; He first tells them how Wise they are, 
Answ. to Am. Accom. p. 16.  and how Cautious; nay, how much Wiser they are grown now of late; and he hopes, they will grow wiser and wiser every day: Especially so as not to suspect Them or their Church of any Inclinations to Popery. 
Ib.  For whatever they have formerly suspected— I believe (says he) they will call it Popish and Antichristian no longer. And here he gives them a Reason or two, with which if they are not moved, they are much to blame. For he tells them, in how many things the Church of England agrees with the Dissenters. And first, as for their calling their Churches by Saints Names, that's much the same with what the Dissenters did themselves; and tho' they give them the Titles of Saints, 
Pag. 17.  yet he hopes the Dissenters are not so silly, as to think this to be any more than for Distinction. Then as to the Power of Absolution, there's no dispute between Us and the Dissenters: They and We agree, 
Pag. 19  says he; so that whatsoever the Common-Prayer-Book delivers, of the Priest absolving the Sinner, yet he assures them, there's nothing meant by this, but only what the Dissenters teach themselves, that is, to give Relief to afflicted Consciences, 
Pag. 21.  etc. So again as to a vow of Chastity; he and the Dissenters agree, that 'tis lawful to repent of it, and marry; 'tis presently a rash Vow, if the Temptation be but urging. But then as to the business of Pictures in Bibles, and Images of Moses and Aaron, etc. in Churches, 
Pag. 18.  there he curries with them closely, and assures them, that however these Pictures are in their Bibles, Printed by Authority, Printed at the University; tho' Moses and Aaron stand in most of the Churches, have Place next to the Commandments, are above the Communion-Table; yet that all this is nothing but the Extravagancy of Painters and Printers, a very late Invention, and a secret design of Papists, to reconcile the People by degrees to the use of Pictures and Images.  
Now I defy any man to bid fairer for the good Opinion of the Dissenters, than my Adversary has here done; who, for fear they should receive any ill impression in relation to his Church, from my Character, which is little more than in jest, throws these scandals upon her in good earnest; being resolved, that if his Church be to be scandalised, he'll have the doing it himself.  
But for the winning of the Dissenters, he goes on, and tells them; Although they have been Persecuted, that still they are not to complain of his Church: For that 'tis not so much the Church has done this, as the State, to secure itself from their Restless Humour, which has threatened the Public Peace. 
Pag. 21.  Now, how far this will agree with them I can't tell: But I am apt to believe, that if the Dissenters once reflect, how much more quiet they have enjoyed, since his Church's Power have been something checked, than before, they'll have some Reason to suspect, that in their former Sufferings, the Church has had the greatest share; especially since at this present the State is as secure without those Persecutions as ever, which is an Argument, it does not stand much in need of 'em. But I dispute not this matter, let them agree as well as they can; the business only is, to put the Saddle upon the right Horse.  
Another Reason he lays down before, 
Pag. 16.  by way of Prevention: And 'tis that however the Church of England, as it is represented in my Character, may bear some resemblance with Antichrist; yet he's confident the Dissenters will hence receive no prejudice, nor entertain any worse opinion of Her upon this score; because They are too Wise and Cautious to take Characters from open and professed Enemies. Now if this be true, and sufficient reason for his presumption, that the Dissenters are so Wise; I would fain know, how Wise he thinks his own Congregations to be, that is, such as go to Church; who have been receiving Characters of Popery these hundred and Fifty years, from the Open and Professed Enemies of the Papists; 'tis a Mercy they are not so Wise and Cautious as his Dissenters, otherwise the Pulpits might even have been silent, as to any thing touching Popery; since holding forth against such as they have Protested against, and owned themselves Professed Enemies to, they could have deserved no credit in their Characters. But 'tis well the Dissenters are so Wise; and from henceforward 'tis to be remembered, that whosoever undertakes to give a Character of his declared and open Enemies, and expects to be credited by his Flock, must needs think them not so Wise as they should be.  
But here again he comes over me with the Whip in hand, 
Pag. 17.  and having assured his Dissenters, that I have abused them, in Fathering upon them so soul a Character of the Church of England; he tells his Reader, that the Run of the Character is exactly to the tune of the Quakers, whose Cant the Author (as he says) is as well acquainted with, as if he had been either their Master or Scholar. And if this be so, I must confess it a very strange Providence, as having never heard twenty words from them in my Life, as I can remember.  
All the Harangues and Pulpits, I have been ever acquainted with here in England, (excepting some few of the Catholics of late) have been those of the Church of England; and if I have learned any Canting, it must have been, not from the Quakers, but from them. The truth of't is, in the drawing up that Character, I took no other model, but that of the Church of England against the Papists. There is scarce an Argument in the Character, but exactly Parallel to what the Church of England uses in her Defence against Popery; the grounds of the Arguments are the same; the manner of urging them the same, the Maxims; on which they stand, the same; and then then Reasons, which press them home, are they not the very same, which the Answerer himself in his former Discourses urges against me? I wonder then, how this comes to be a Quakers Cant? 'Tis strange men should know their own Picture no better; and that when they see a Copy of what they do, and say themselves, in the most serious concern, it should appear to them so unlike the Original: that what in themselves they deem Reasonable and Just, being shown them in a Reflection or Emblem, should seem nothing but Spiteful and Silly; as the Answerer says this does, (p. 17.) This is just as it happens with little Children, who when they are shown what Wry Faces they make, and how Scowling looks, will not easily believe they make so Ugly.  
Well, but now the Answerer had considered the whole Character, and begins to think at last, that in it I have ridiculed the Church of England. And thus (says he) this hopeful design of Representing and Misrepresenting, ends only in ridiculing the Church of England; 
Pag. 24.  a Liberty, which if we needed it, is not mannerly for us to use at THIS TIME. But wherein have I ridiculed the Church of England? I have done no more in my Character against Her, than what they have been doing these Hundred and Fifty Years against the Church of Rome; only what I have done in a kind of Jest, and without endeavouring to delude any body with such kind of Sophistry, They have been doing in the greatest earnest, and by it making good their Cause. And as for the mannerly and at this time, were there any ridiculing in my Case; is it not still as little manners to ridicule at this time the Religion of the Prince, as the Religion of the Subject? But I leave to the Ingenious and Impartial Reader to examine this affair of the Mannerly and This Time; I'll not judge, neither for myself, nor him.  
But however, notwithstanding this little displeasure of my Answerer, 
Pag. 24.  it clears up again with him, he pardons all frankly, and we are contented (says he) they should ridicule our Church, if they will permit us truly to Represent theirs. Here now we have a liberty granted of Ridiculing, which I resolve never to make use of, unless it be to show, how They ridicule the Church of Rome: But instead of returning my thanks for this favour, I am e'en resolved to beg another; and 'tis, that the Answerer will be pleased not to take that for Ridiculing in us, which in them he calls truly Representing: This would be a very Signal Favour indeed, if it could be obtained; but I almost despair. For by all that I can discover in their truly Representing, 'tis so unlike what he calls it, that nothing can be more underserving that Name. For let but an exact Copy be taken of what they do to the Papists, when they truly Represent them, as they call it, with all its methods and circumstances; let the same measures they use to them, be applied to any other Body or Society, even to their own Church of England, and if it does not appear to be down right Misrepresenting and Ridiculing instead of truly Representing, I'll even throw up the Cause, and grant the Papists to be as Black as they make them. This appears something already in the Character now examined, which he owns to be Ridiculing, tho' it be nothing but what they do to the Church of Rome, and there call it Truly Representing. But this I shall more clearly evince afterwards, when I have examined some other Parts of the Answer, where I shall have occasion of playing him the same Tune over again, a little more distinctly, without any Ridiculing, but in very good earnest.  
But first I must consider how he receives the Courtesy I did him in my last Reply. I must confess, I could not but be concerned, to see my Answerer turning and winding it, first through tedious Ten Sheets, and soon after through other Nine, and all to prove that the Word Misrepresented in the Title of my Book, was not to be taken in its Proper Sense. This to me was an Object of Compassion; and therefore to save him any farther Sweat, I thought fit to yield to his Pretensions, and give into his hands the full grasp of all that he had just before so earnestly contended for. And see now, how ill use he makes of this favour.  
For having so far complied with him, that the Word Misrepresented in the Title of my Book, is not to be taken in its Strict and Proper Sense; he would now willingly impose upon his Reader and Me, and persuade the World, as if I own the Protestants not to charge falsely any Doctrines or Practices on the Church of Rome, which she disowns: and that they do not teach their Flock, that the Church of Rome believes or practices, otherwise than She does.  
This, 
Answ. p. 4. 7. 8. 30. & alib. Amic. Accom. p. 6.  says he, at last, if I understand him, he confesses. Is not this stretching a Courtesy with a witness, and Misrepresenting the Representer.  
I yielded to him indeed, for Peace sake, that the Title of a Papist Misrepresented is not to be taken in its strict and proper Sense, as Misrepresenting signifies ONLY downright Lying or falsely charging matter of Fact, the WHOLE Character being not of that nature. And this with our Answerer is the same as to confess, That Protestants do not charge the Church of Rome with any Doctrines or Practices, which She does not own. So that it seems, because the Character of a Papist Misrepresented is not wholly made up of matters of Doctrine and Practices falsely charged upon the Papists; Therefore, (as our Answerer will have it) it contains nothing at all, wrongfully charged upon them; and Protestants do not in any thing Misrepresent the Church of Rome. 
Ans. p. 5.  And this he would have me plainly confess.  
But I must beg his pardon for this; I do not see he has made so good use of the last favour I did him, as to accommodate away my Senses and Reason, to do him another. No, Transubstantiation is not half so disagreeable to Protestant-Senses, as this is to mine. I could as easily confess, that Protestants do not at all Write or Preach against Papists, as that they do not Misrepresent them. And for the truth of this Cause, I dare stand to the Verdict even of a Protestant Jury. I'll give the Answerer choice-room enough; Let him pick out of all England, Twelve such Men who understand the Belief and Doctrine of Papists, all Good Men and True; and if they shall, upon examination, give in; That they know all to be true, which they have heard from Protestant Pulpits and Books concerning the Papists; I'll then yield up the Cause, and sit down contented with the brand of a Misrepresenter. Nay, I dare put it to a farther issue; If they do not own, they have heard and read several things charged upon the Papists, which they know to be false, I'll submit to the Answerer; and be obliged never more to disturb him with the Talk of Misrepresenting.  
But before we advance too far in this matter, let's see first, how it stands with the Character of a Papist Misrepresented; and examine, whether there be nothing there falsely laid at the Papist's door, enough for the Book to deserve such a Title: And whether the fathering on them such Doctrines as are there contained, and found in Protestant Authors, be not affirming more than is True, and charging on them Doctrines and Practices, such as they and the Church of Rome disown.  
And first, what does he think of Praying to Images, asserted as a Practice of the Papists, in the first Chap. of the Papist Misrepresented? Is not this imputing more to the Papists, than they either teach, practice, or maintain? Do they believe their Sins to be infallibly remitted upon Absolution, whether they resolve upon amendment or no? And yet this is laid to them Chap. 7. Do they believe the Pope can give them leave for a Sum of Money, to commit what Sins they please? And yet this is reported as their Doctrine, Chap. 8. Is it absolutely true, that they are never permitted to know their Commandments but by halves? Is it their Doctrine, presumptuously to rely on a Deathbed Repentance? Are their Sermons in Latin; or do they teach in Unknown Tongues? Is it true, that they Fired the City? Is he sure they Killed Sir Edmondbury Godfrey? Or will he put in for an Evidence, to Swear the Truth of the Damnable, Hellish Popish-Plot? And yet all these things, and more stand charged upon the Papists, in the Character of a Papist Misrepresented. Why then should the Answerer thus quarrel with this Title, as if the Papists had no wrong done them in such a Description? I know it is the Interest of such ill men, as have run down the Papists with these Charges and Accusations, and passed them upon the People for Gospel, to have them still reputed as Truths; lest the falsity of them being once confessed, they themselves should appear the Deceivers. But however they may be willing to pursue such Unchristian methods, to save their own Reputation; 'tis not for us to own the Belief of such Doctrines, which we acknowledge to be Injurious to Christ, nor to maintain such Practices, which would be a Scandal even amongst those, who know not God. And therefore because the Character of a Papist Misrepresented, contains such Doctrines and Practices, which Catholics neither own, teach nor believe; nay such as they abominate and detest, and are ready to lay down their lives, rather than embrace or approve; such a Character of a Papist, is nothing less than a False Character, a Misrepresenting Character, and fit only for the use of those, who have a mind to dispose their Followers into a temper of giving a better welcome to Turks, Atheists and Jews, than to Papists.  
I know 'tis thought necessary for the Establishment and Security of the Protestant Religion, that the People should be Preached into a dread of Popery: but let it be so; is it a Christian method to make use of Artifices to increase the horror? Why should every thing the Papists do, be stretched and strained, and forced, to make ti ugly? Why should the worst be made of all that belongs to them? 'Tis true, this is proper enough to win upon the Mobile, who make no distinction between Real and Artificial Monsters; 'tis well enough, where the interest is best maintained by the Madness of the People. But where's the Christianity all the while, where's Truth and Charity? Why should Praying to Images, Leave to Sin for Money, Forgiveness without Repentance, Trusting in a Deathbed Lord-have-mercy, etc. Why should seigned Crimes, and Imaginary Contrivances, etc. be urged against them, to make them the Object of hatred, and the Subject of a Popular fury? Why should it be pretended, that where these things stand charged against the Papists, they are not Misrepresented? I am sure where Protestantism is either grounded or confirmed by thus bug-bearing of Popery, 'tis not built upon the Gospel, nor is its strength from the power of Truth; and the using such unwarrantable methods, and taking so much pains for the dressing it into a Monster, is argument enough with Considering Men, to suspect something of the Undertakers.  
The Answerer therefore is mightily out, when he supposes it confessed by me, that there's no proper Misrepresenting, or false charge of Matter of Fact upon the Papists, in the Character of the Papist Misrepresented. I only yield to him, that the Character is not wholly made up indeed of these forged Accusations, but that 'tis a mixed Character, describing the Papists, as they lie under the false Charges, the Calumnies, Reproaches, Misconstructions, and Mistaken Judgements of their both Malicious, and Ignorant Adversaries. And therefore I informed him, that the Title of the Papist Misrepresented was not to be taken in its strict and proper sense, 
Am. Accom. p. 6.  as Misrepresenting signifies only downright lying, or falsely charging matter of Fact: But in its larger, or less proper sense, as it comprehends both Lying, Calumniating, Misinterpreting, Reproaching, Misconstruing, Misjudging, and whatever else of this kind. But this condescendence, which would have obliged an Ingenuous Adversary, has made my Answerer something peevish. And therefore now instead of his old Complementing Humour, he's grown very four, he's full of grudges, and something seems to grate upon his Stomach. Well, and what's the matter now? What reason of this so sudden Change? Why, it seems the Representer said, that the Papists are strangely Misrepresented; that many matters of Fact are falsely charged upon them; that they are calumniated, reproached, their Doctrine and Practices misinterpreted, misconstrued, misunderstood, etc. as was shown in his Character of the Papist Misrepresented: And all this the Answerer unhappily takes to himself, as if He were the Man accused for doing all this against the Papists, as if He and His were Arraigned of Lying, Calumniating, etc. Whenas the Representer spoke only in general, without so much as hinting upon any Party or Person in particular; and if I may vouch any thing for him, never thought of reflecting upon the Answerer, much less of giving him the Lie. 'Tis true, the Representer says, for the running down the Papists, and Misrepresenting them, besides their being Calumniated, and their Doctrines misinterpreted, many Falsities and Lies have been raised against them. But what does this concern the Answerer? Is this Complaint any Accusation against him? Suppose the Representer had gone a step farther, and had said, that the Papists have been injured by Perjury, Forgery, and Subornation too; would the Answerer have thought himself touched in this, and laboured to clear himself? 'Tis true, for a Man to be over-eager in quitting himself, when the Accusation is only General, is not the best Argument of his Innocence: But for my part, I never designed to accuse the Answerer, for I knew not the Man; neither have I any thing now to say against him, as to this Point; only that his over-solicitude to prove his Innocence, before he was accused, will be likely with some to breed a suspicion of Gild.  
The Answerer therefore must remember, that the Character of the Papist Misrepresented contains several unjust Charges of Doctrine and Practices, (tho' it be not wholly made up of these) such as the Papists neither own, nor believe. And that he is overhasty in persuading his Reader, that this Point is gained, and confessed by me. No, he must pardon me for this; I'll go as far as any Man for an Accommodation, but never so, as to subscribe to a falsity in a Compliment.  
Hitherto as to what concerns the Character: Now we are to consider, how true that is, which he so often repeats, of the fair dealing of WE in relation to the Papists. For some it seems there are, if he says true, that are so just and kind to the Papists, as not to Misrepresent them. For throughout the Answer we meet with nothing oftener, than WE are not Misrepresenters in a strict and proper notion of Misrepresenting: WE do not charge the Church of Rome with any matter of Fact, with any Doctrines or Practices, which she does not own. WE charge them with nothing that is false. WE do not misreport the Doctrines of their Church. WE do not charge men with saying or doing, what they never said or did. WE are no Misrepresenters. And truly I should be glad to know, who these WE are, to return them my thanks for this so kind Office; for really, as the World goes, 'tis no small favour done to the Papists, to say no more of them, than they own and believe themselves. For my part, did I know the Men, I would never permit them to lie obscured, under the General name of WE; no, I would particularise them to the World, and have their Names blazoned in every Street, upon Pillars erected to their Memory. For why? Are not such Men Prodigies of Virtue, of Truth, Honesty, and Justice? Men that never charged the Church of Rome with any matter of Fact, with any Doctrine or Practice, which she does not own: Men that never said the Church of Rome teaches, what she does not teach; that never condemned the Papists for believing, what they do not believe; nor accused them of saying or doing, what they never said or did; Men that never Misrepresented the Papists! Why, these are Admirable Men indeed, and not to be heard of every day. Were I assured of the being of such Men, I should begin to think Astrea was returned again, and that our Nation would in all likelihood recover her Credit, lost in the unhappy times of our late Credulous Madness.  
But I wish there be no mistake in this, it being so hard to imagine who these We should be. For now if he should mean by his We, We Protestants; We never accused the Papists of any Doctrine, or Practices, which they do not own; never charged them with any thing that is false; who could believe it? Would not this look like a Paradox, which if the Answerer will affirm, I believe he'll scarce find more than one to swear to? For is it possible that We Protestants never said any thing of the Papists, but what is exactly true; We never said they believe, what they do not believe; that they teach, what they do not teach; or that they did, what they never did? Is it possible this should be true? I would willingly give something for the sight of the Man that thinks so. For my part, I think it very hard to be believed: And if this be the meaning of the Answerer, and what he endeavours to persuade his Reader, I think of all the Misrepresentations of the Papists, that ever I met with, this of affirming all to be true, that has been said of the Papists, is the greatest; and I wish the Answerer much Joy for the Improvement. For this is nothing else, than to vouch for the truth of all, that has been ever alleged against them; and in three lines to assert and approve all that has been invented against them these hundred and fifty Years.  
But I think, upon consideration, I may take it for granted, that his WE that charge the Papists with nothing that is false, and are no Misrepresenters, are WE Protestants: for 'tis these he seems to vindicate, throughout his Books, and endeavours to wipe off from them the imputation of being Misrepresenters. And besides, if he speaks properly, the Answerer himself must come in, and make one of the WE; and for him, one may swear he's a staunch True Protestant, as never scrupling at any thing that's for running down the Papists, tho' it be currying favour with, and colloguing the fanatics; as he seems plainly to do, in his last Answer (p. 16. 18.) And more particularly, because being to speak against Popery, he's as large, as loud, as long-winded as you please, and is ready to Dispute against it without end, could he but find any, that would think it worth their while to try him. But being to speak in defence of the Principles and Practices of his own Religion (as he had occasion sufficient from the Accommodating Sermon in my last Answer) he's as Flat, as Short, and as willing to wave the disputing for it, as any Adversary can desire, which is as plain an Argument to me of his Persuasion, as if 'twas writ in his Forehead; there being only one Persuasion as I know of amongst Christians, which has its Name, Being and Support, not from what it is in itself; but from what it is not, in defying and Protesting against their Neighbours.  
We must suppose therefore now that his WE which are pretended so clear throughout his Answer, from being Misrepresenters of the Papists, are WE Protestants: but because he disclaims all Title to Infallibility, there's no need of taking his word for the truth of what he asserts; nor danger of affronting him, tho' we call in question the verity of what, he says, he has proved. And really, as my Case stands, I am obliged to question it: For if it be confessed true, what he says, that the Protestants are no Misrepresenters of the Papists, Then, I must needs own, I have highly injured the Protestants in complaining against them as Mis-reporters of the Doctrine and Practices of the Church of Rome, and holding out against them so long the charge of Misrepresenting. Why should I injure any body, especially so considerable a Number, as challenge that Name? No, I will do them no such wrong, and therefore, however Innocent our Answerer may pretend he has proved them; I'll here show the Papists have been always Misrepresented; and that ever since they have had Protestant Adversaries, their greatest Suffering has been, not so much from the force of Truth and Reason, as from Calumny and Slander, and all sorts of Misrepresentations.  
For the clearing of this, we must take along with us the true Notion of Misrepresenting, as 'tis now agreed on by our Adversary, who owns in his last Answer, That whosoever undertakes to declare any Action, 
Pag. 10, 11, 13.  Doctrine, or Practice of Papists, and does not deliver it as clothed with all its Circumstances, with the right Motives, due End and Intention, is in a proper and strict sense a Misrepresenter. Again, in his former Anser he has this laid down as a Principle. 
Answ. to Papist Pro. p. 17.  If we (says he, speaking of We Protestants) put our own Opinions of the Papists Faith and Practice into his Character, this is Misrepresenting; because a Papist has not the same Opinion of these things, which we have, and this makes it a False Character. So that here 'tis now to be supposed, that whatsoever Protestant in any thing relating to the Papists, either leaves out, or altars any material Circumstance, the Motive, Intention, End, puts any false Construction, or thrusts in his own Opinion into what he relates, is forthwith a Misrepresenter.  
And now to discover, how much the Papists have been always Sufferers from this Unchristian Artifice of Misrepresenting, we can take no better way, than to make enquiry into the several Methods used in Misrepresenting; and this not only in relation to Points of Doctrine and Belief, but likewise in matters of Fact and History: and tho' it be impossible to give an exact Catalogue of These, they being as Numberless, as the Ways are of Ignorance to mistake, of Envy to make false Constructions, of Malice to deceive; yet to touch at some few, will be sufficient to evince, whether the WE of the Answerer are as clear from misrepresenting and wronging the Papists, as he pretends. Or Whether the Papists are really, what they pretend to show them.  
And first, one way of Misrepresenting the Papists is by charging their Doctrine with Blasphemy and Profaneness, not otherwise due to it, but only through the Ignorance or Malice of him that draws the Consequence. This is the admirable Gift of Mr. Sutcliff in his Survey of Popery, where he lays upon the Papists the most Infamous Positions of the Heathens, and then gives his Reasons for it, such as are more for his own Confusion, with understanding Men, than to the prejudice of those he writes against. Thus he says the Papists Blasphemously make Christ not only a Desperate Man, without Hope, but also an Infidel without Faith. And Why all this Only, because Aquinas, (p. 3. q. 7. art. 4.) says, that Christ seeing and enjoying God from the first instant of his Conception, could not possibly have Faith or Hope in him, which always suppose the Absence of the Object, that is, respect the Divine Essence not seen and not enjoyed. And this is reason enough for Sutcliff to cry out against the Papists, as Blasphemously making Christ, both a Desperate Man, and an Infidel. Certainly such a Piece of Divinity was never heard of before out of a Country Church. 
Answ. to Pap. protest. pag. 11.  And yet such as it is, My Answerer is not ashamed to Print it over again; making this profound Reason of Sutcliffs, a sufficient discharge of him from being a Misrepresenter; quarrelling with me, for curtailing the Author, in setting down this his charge against the Papists, without his Reason that backed it.  
Another way of Misrepresenting the Papists, 
A Catech. truly representing the Doctrines of the Church of Rome. Pag. 56.  is in pretending to deliver their Doctrine, and then to insert something, which is notoriously false, and absolutely detested by them; this is what is done by the Author of a Catechism lately Published, who undertakes to give a Systeme of Popish Doctrines truly Represented, according to their own most received Authors, and Councils, and coming to speak of IMAGES, he says the Papists PRAY TO THEM; which is so foul a Misrepresentation, 
Pag. 17.  the the Author of the Answer to the Papist Misrepresented plainly Condemns me, for making it a part of my Misrepresentations, as if 'twere never Charged against the Papists. This, says he, would insinuate, as tho' WE did directly charge them with PRAYING TO their Images, 
Ib.  without any farther respect: Which we are so far from charging them with, that I do not know of any People in the World liable to that Charge. Thus what one Protestant asserts positively, as the Doctrine and Practice of the Papists, another Protestant rejects as a Misrepresentation so foul, as not to be imputed to the worst of Infidels.  
But however, foul as it is, 'tis not only found thus in a Grave Catechism, but something like it in a Sermon too, viz. of J. Thomas Rect. of St. Nicholas; Preached at Cardiff, before the Bailiffs and Aldermen, 
Pag. 21.  1679, where amongst other Gospel-truths, he gives his Auditory to understand, that the Papists do not only Worship Martin's Boots, Georg's Scabbard, Crispin's Paring-knife, Thomases her Shoe, and joseph's Breeches, but do likewise CALL UPON THEM too. Which is to make them again more stupid Idolaters, than the worst of Heathens; but 'tis by a Misrepresentation, however agreeing with that Year of Oats' blessed Discovery, yet much better suiting with some other Place, than the Pulpit.  
Another like this, is that of the Answer to Catholics no Idolaters, who says, 'tis the common Answer of Catholics, that their Adoration of the Eucharist cannot be Idolatry, because they Believe the Bread to be God, just as the Worshippers of the Sun believed the Sun to be God. Which is so absolutely false of the Catholics, that on the contrary they believe, that whosoever believes the Bread to be God, as the Heathens did the Sun, and adores it upon that consideration, must of necessity be an Idolater in adoring it.  
Another way is in framing some heathenish Absurdity, and then laying it on the Papists, as their Doctrine and Belief, when 'tis only a Malicious Inference drawn from some abuse, or from an obscure expression in some petty Author; and this we find in the Archbishop of York so often quoted, who Represents the Papists as believing Christ to be Saviour of Men only, but no Women; that Whoredom is allowed by them all the year long; and several other such abominable Positions, which are no better than the Doctrine of Devils.  
Such Deductive Absurdities, are those which Dr. St. according to what the general Current of his Discourse Represents, endeavours to persuade his Credulous Reader, to be Doctrines of the Roman Church, viz. That it holds no necessity of Repentance, but only once in one's Life. That the Roman Repentance obliges none to the forsaking their sins, or a Reformation of Life. That the Sacraments confer Grace, on any Receiver of them, tho' never so unprepared. That Indulgences discharge Catholics from doing the best part of their Religion. Which may be seen related and confuted in a Discourse entitled, The Roman Doctrine of Repentance and of Indulgences, vindicated from Dr. Sts. Misrepresentations. The like is to be seen in John Fox's Acts and Monuments, where (besides the infinite mistakes and abuses in relation to his Martyrs) in considering some chief Points of the Catholic Doctrine, in less than three leaves, he has falsified them in above one Hundred and twenty Instances; that is, as his Answerer words it in his plain Language, has uttered more than a Hundred and fifty Lies: as is made appear in the Examen of John Fox's Calendar, p. 3. p. 412.  
Another way is in Falsifying Authors for the Proof of some Extravagant Doctrine upon the Church of Rome. And this is done several ways: As first by the Archbishop of York, who reports it a Tenet of the Papists, That the Pope can make that Righteous, which is unrighteous. And then quotes L. 1. Decret. Greg. Titulus 7. Chapter the Fifth, which Titulus of the Decretals consists only of Four Chapters, and nothing mentioned in them all, besides what concerns the Translation of Bishops. Other Tenets of the like stamp he imputes to the Belief of the Church of Rome, and then quotes St. Thomas and Bellarmine, etc. in such Places, where either the Matter or Place is not to be found, nor any thing like it.  
This is done another way, by endeavouring to prove some Folly upon the Papists, out of their own Authors; and then bringing in the Authors quite contrary to their own Sense and Words: This is exemplified in a Sermon several times Printed, 
Last Edit. 1686.  and now lately with Dr. Tillotson's name to it, where p. 2. he says, Learned Persons of the Church of Rome do acknowledge that Purgatory cannot be concluded from the Text (1 Cor. 3. 15.) And then affirms, Nay ALICE that Estius contends for from this Place is, that it cannot be concluded from hence, that there is no Purgatory. Which yet, tho' preached at Whitehall, and before His late Majesty, is not ALL that Estius contends for. For Estius in his Explication upon that Place of St. Paul, speaking of Purgatory concludes with these plain words, Itaque hac ratione poena Purgatoria animarum, ex hoc Pauli loco bene & solid colligitur. Wherefore, says he, upon this consideration from this place of St. Paul the Punishment of Souls in Purgatory is well and solidly gathered. Which is little less than a Contradiction to what the Dr. asserts of him. Dr. Cumber is something good at this too, who in his Advice to Catholics, endeavours to make appear that St. Gregory condemns the Doctrine of Catholics concerning the not marrying of Priests, maintaining as he says, that it is lawful for such of the Clergy, as cannot contain, to Marry: And yet whosoever consults the place, will find St. Gregory, to speak only of such of the Clergy, as are extra Sacros Ordines constituti, Not yet in Holy Orders; which is not at all contrary to the received Doctrine of the Church of Rome, as the Dr. is willing to represent it, but what at this day they teach and practice; so that in this he evidently falsifies the Father. Something after the same manner, he in another place treats Bellarmine; endeavouring to prove him a Blasphemer, for saying, that a Man may be his own Redeemer: whereas Bellarmine in the place cited, does not say so of himself, as the Dr. represents him; but only sets down the words of Scripture, in which Man is so called; and by explicating in what Sense they may be understood, without any injury to Christ, defends the H. Scripture from the imputation of Blasphemy. Which, methinks, is not so ill an Office, as to deserve the Title of Blasphemer, for doing it.  
The Old Dr. Willet amongst many others, has an excellent one of this kind, who in his Synop. Papism. will needs prove the Pope to be Antichrist out of St. Bernard, in these words, Their own Witnesses shall speak; Bernard says, Bestia de Apocalypsi, cui datum est os loquens Blasphenias Petri Cathedram occupat. The Beast in the Apocalypse, to which a Mouth was given speaking Blasphemies, possesses the Chair of Peter. By which he will persuade his Reader, that the Bishop of Rome, according to the plain words of St. Bernard, is the Beast in the Apocalypse and Antechrist. 
Ep. 125.  Whenas 'tis contrary to St. Bernard, who in that Epistle, speaks very honourably of Pope Innocentius, animating him to the performance of his Duty with Courage; and in the words mentioned reflects only upon a certain Usuper, who by violence invaded the Chair of Peter, and banished Innocentius the true Bishop out of Rome. The late Discourse concerning the Devotions of the Church of Rome plays upon this String too, where p. 52. speaking of the Papists, They tell us, says he, there is a vast number of Sins in their own nature Venial— for the pardon of which there is no need, or occasion for the Mercy of God. Which is a Doctrine they neither own nor profess; but absolutely contrary to their Belief. And tho' he quotes here Escobar for this Absurdity, there is not one word of this to be found in him, in the place cited: But above all in this kind, 
Escob. trac. 2. exam. 1. c. 4.  I think Dr. Taylor bears away the Bell in his Dissuasive from Popery, in which he shows an excellent Talon of forging strange Doctrines, and Fathering them on Catholic Authors: And then for his quotations which he pretends to lay down out of Fathers and Catholic Writers, the greatest part of them are either strangely wrested to a sinister sense, or not found at all in the Original, or else unpardonably corrupted: As his Answerer makes appear, who Examined them with his own Eyes, as he professes, in the Original Authors.  
Another way mightily in fashion for the Misrepresenting the Papists, is by putting them upon the same File with Infidels and Pagans, and by such comparisons to imprint in the Vulgar a Notion of the Papists being no better than Infidels. This is a great Topick with the Bishop of Kilmore, in his Sermon Preached at St. Warbroughs in Dublin a year ago, The Pagans (says he p. 12) had their several Titular Gods for several places; for Delphos Worshipped Apollo, Crete Jupiter, and Ephesus Diana: And so in Popery, England Worshipped St. George, Scotland St. Andrew, Ireland St. Patrick, etc. Again, In Paganism they had several Gods to pray to— and so in Popery. In Paganism several Professions had several Gods— So in Popery. Lastly, to these, says he, both Pagans and Papists build Churches, erect Altars, etc. This is the way this Prelate has of setting forth the Papists. And one reason why he deals so civilly with them, as to render the Papists no worse than Heathens, he gives in his Preface to the said Sermon, because we have the Word of the King (says he) to defend our Religion. An admirable return of this Royal Favour, to persuade his Majesty's Subjects, that the Papists and Infidels are much of a Piece. And yet This Sermon, is deemed by this Good Prelate a Defence of the truth, 
Pref.  and a very seasonable Intimation of our (Protestant) Resolution of being True and Steady to our Laws, Oaths and Duties.— And let the Romanists take it as they please, they must expect a great many such. And really as to this, I think his Lordship is much in the right; for a great many such we have met with. But I must take the liberty to tell his Lordship, that if this be the method of defending his Religion, and an argument of his being True and Steady to his Duty; that (besides a great deal more that might be said to it) 'tis only done by Misrepresenting; and that tho' he's obliged to Preach against Popery, as he says, to the utmost of his Wit and Learning, 
Pref.  that here's no more Wit or Learning in this, than what every petty Sophister might find without much ado, to make the Protestant, Turk, and Jew all one, because they all agree, in maligning and defaming the Papists.  
However this way of calumniating, his Lordship has not the honour of inventing, 'twas first devised by those Divines the Compilers of the Book of Homilies, who besides this almost word for word, have variety of other Scurrilous ways, as comparing the Papists with the Horse and the Ass, and such like, exactly calculated for the Rabble. 'Twas afterwards taken up by the Psalm-makers, who finding David to have never a True-Protestant Hymn, added that of From Turk and Pope defend us Lord. And because this seemed to some of too soft a strain, 'Tis since raised a Note or two higher, and I think even to Ela in a good hearty Family Prayer to be said Morning and Evening, added to the end of the singing Psalms in a Common-Prayer-Book, Printed at Oxford, in the year 1683, in Twelves, wherein 'tis said O Lord raise up faithful Distributers of thy Mysteries— contrarily, confound Satan, Antichrist with all Hirelings and Papists. Which seems the effort of a True-Protestant Charity, not only to link Satan, Antichrist, and the Papists together, but to wish them all overtaken with the same Confusion.  
Another way there is, in pretending to declare the Devotions of Catholics, and then to insert something that is absolutely false as to the End or Intention, for which they perform them: This the Discourse of the Devotions of the Church of Rome, is admirable good at; as p. 56. where speaking of the frequent Repetition of the Names of Jesus and Mary, in the Jesus Psalter, etc. he thus gives the reasons: Now their saying the same thing so often over (says he) is not contrived to help and assist Devotion, or prevent Distraction, or as a Repetition of what is more than ordinarily important, or for any other good or prudent Reason; BUT OUT OF PURE VANITY AND OSTENTATION, OR AS IT WERE EVEN TO FLATTER OUR BLESSED SAVIOUR OR THE SAINT WHICH THEY PRAY TO. This is his reason he gives of our Devotion, and 'tis as Heroic a way of defending the Truth, by Calumniating with a Magisterial Confidence, and throwing dirt blindfold, as ever I met with. I am sure 'tis so unbecoming, that if he should with the like positiveness, interpret any thing belonging to the State or Civil Government, 't would not be called a bare Misrepresenting, without a— at the end of't.  
But the Bishop of Kilmore will not give way to any in this kind of daubing, and if the Papists be not black enough, it shall be none of his fault: What he does, is upon Oath and Duty, and therefore he's the more hearty: And his talon being in Similitudes, as he before compared the Papists with the Heathens; so now he honours them with the Comparison of Esop's Dog; and then soon finds a staff to beat them. Somethere are (says the Prelate in the same Sermon, p. 10.) Who with Aesop 's Dog, snatch at the shadow and lose the substance; that is, place the WHOLE Worship of God in Bodily Exercise, and External Adoration; as howing before a Crucifix, in creeping to a Cross, in running a bare-leged Pilgrimage,— in hanging down the head for a day like a Bulrush,— in Pixes and Paxes and such like fripperies. Thus he truly Represents the Devotions of the Papists, as he's bound by Oath, and yet without Truth, or Conscience. For is it true, that their WHOLE Worship of God consists in these bodily Exercises, as his Lordship calls them? Do they not teach their Followers to Worship God by internal Acts of Love, of Fear, of Reverence, of Honour, of Resignation, by an hearty Oblation of all they have, or are, and that no external Action is acceptable to God, without the Heart and Soul going along with it? How comes it then, that their WHOLE Worship of God is in these Bodily Exercises? But I must not urge too far; spreading of these Calumnies his Lordship takes for his Duty; and as long as he pretends to His Majesty's Word, for his abusing us, I must be silent; tho' I have great reason to think, his Lordship's mistaken, and that he stretches His Majesty's Word farther than 'twill go.  
Another way there is, in laying on the Colours with so much craft on the Papists Tenets, that tho' they are the very same with what the most Learned Protestants hold themselves; yet they shall appear so Foul and Monstrous, as if nothing less than a certain Damnation attended their Abettors. This is done in several Instances: As when the uncharitableness of the Papists is to be the Theme, and the Alarm to keep the drowsy Flock from nodding; how Unchristian are they rendered, for not allowing Salvation to any out of their Church, for giving the Protestants no better portion, but with those on the Left hand of the Judge! Dr. Tillotson, plays this Tune roundly in his before mentioned Sermon, p. 22. Where inveighing against the uncharitableness of the Papists, he labours Heartily to create a good Charitable Aversion in his Hearers towards them. And after he has spent some pages in this; he at last in a Rapture of Charity concludes, p. 27. I have so much Charity (and I desire always to have it) as to hope, that a great many among them, who live Piously, and have been almost Enevitably detained in that Church by the prejudice of Education and an invincible Ignorance, will upon a general Repentance find mercy with God. One would have expected, by his earnest condemning the Papists, and the Preamble of this Conclusion, to have met with some extraordinary Piece of Charity, both for the Reformation and example of the Papists; and yet after all the outcry and bustle, he want allow one more grain of mercy to the Papists, than the Papists do to them; that is, only to such, who having lived piously, and truly Repent of their sins, have an Invincible Ignorance to atone for all other errors of the Understanding; which is the very Doctrine of the Papists in respect of such, who die out of the Communion of their Church. But now whether Dr. Stillingfleet has even so much Charity as this for the Papists, 'tis not easy to tell. For he declares positively, that all those who embrace Popery, must, by the terms of Communion with that Church, be guilty either of Hypocrisy or Idolatry; either of which are sins inconsistent with Salvation. Now if the Doctor were Judge, what are become of the poor Papists? Are not they all damned in the Lump? And yet this is the Protestant Charity, which condemns the Papists for uncharitableness. To say the Papists must be guilty of sins inconsistent with Salvation, is but to say they are Damned in another Phrase. And if the Doctor can find any expedient to save them after this, he must make Heaven gate as wide as the Portico to the Turkish Paradise, where there's passage for the Dog, the Camel and the Whale. Thus when Protestants and Papists say the same thing of each other, 'tis strange how Antichristianly-black the Papists are made, when the Protestants have the laying on the Colors.  
Another way yet there is, in undertaking to declare the Tenets of Catholics; and after having raked together some odd and extravagant Opinions of some Authors, to set them down for the received Doctrine of the Church; and 'tis presently true Representing, if there be but an Author's Name to support the pretence; and most especially if the said Author be allowed and not condemned after the publishing. This is a most fashionable way, trodden hard in Books and Pulpits. The Archbishop of York approves it mightily. And so if he can but cite Bulgradus, Vessel. Grovingens. or Dist. 96. that's enough to make any Extravagancy to pass for an Article of Faith: And then if the thing happen to be disproven and shown a Misrepresentation, 'tis at lest a Popish Misrepresentation; and this serves still to promote the Cause, to make the Papists odious. This is a Method so unwarrantable, that if followed by all Parties alike, in exposing their Adversaries, 'twould soon make all Christendom, only so many Divisions of Infidels. One little Example will clear this. For suppose now any Popish Preacher in his Pulpit beyond Sea, in a Country where his Auditory understands but little what Protestants are, should let slip his Text, and following our Mooish way, should be so unjust to his Flock, as not to spend his Glass in instructing them in their Duty, or reforming their Lives; but making use of some little Arts, should place his main endeavour in provoking them to a good hearty aversion against Protestants; and should thus expose them: My Dear Christians, stick fast to the Truth of the Gospel, preached by Christ and his Apostles, and delivered down to you by a continual Succession of Pastors and Teachers, and the Practice of the Faithful in all Ages: But above all, beware of such, who make Divisions and Schisms in the Church of God, such as cry out, Christ, Christ, and Reformation, but are nothing but the Forerunners of Antichrist. These call themselves Protestant's; the Name you have scarce heard of, as being no where in Scripture, Fathers, nor Antiquity; but their wicked Principles and Practices have filled the whole Earth. They have outdone even the Heathens, and those that know not God, in all sorts of Wickedness and Impiety: And this the few Good Men that are amongst them own themselves: One Eminent for his Writings, and known by the Author of the Whole Duty of Man, confesses it to them and the World, 
Deeay of Christian Piety.  that they have broken down not only the banks of RELIGION, but of CIVILITY too: And so universal a depravation is there, says he, amongst us, that we have scarce any thing left, to distinguish us from the most Barbarous People, but a better Name, and worse Vices. Do you see how under the pretence of Reforming, they have brought Corruption into the World, that even they themselves own it, and yet go on, under an empty Title, of being the Chosen People of God? This same thing is confessed and owned almost in the same words, by another Good Man now of late, who before his Prelate in a Visitation Sermon, delivers it for Gospel, that they are so wicked, that they cannot be thought the Servants of God: We can never (says he) make them (our Enemies) believe that we are the Servants of the Living God, 
Sermon at the Visitation of the Bishop of Norwich, by Sam. Crisp. 1686. p. 25  or have a just sense of Devotion, while they see that we have nothing to distinguish us from the Worshippers of a False God, but a Better Name and Worse Vices. But then, that you may neither doubt of the truth of this, nor yet wonder at it, he gives a sufficient Reason in the same Sermon, where he says, that their Guides and Ministers, who should lead and direct them to Good, do instead of this, encourage them to Vice and Faction. When the Clergy themselves (says he, p. 14.) have given EXAMPLE and ENCOURAGEMENT to Men, to break the Church's Laws, and contemn her Authority, no wonder that VICE and FACTION appear insolent and daring. You see then, they have not the Fear of God in their Hearts nor Actions, and you see the Reason of it. This is all hitherto in respect chiefly of God; but now in respect of their Neighbour, they have no Charity for any, that are not of their mind; but for their own Brethren, they think themselves bound to help and assist them, tho' engaged in the foulest of Villainies and Crimes.  
Thus when the Scots, under pretext of Reforming Religion, had invaded their Prince's Authority, and by the Preaching of John Knox and other headstrong Ministers, says their own Author, had been persuaded, that it pertained to them to reduce by force their Prince to the prescript of Laws; and wanting some assistance to effect it, they sent to Queen Elizabeth for Aid. And here what says Sir Rich. Baker, 
Sir Rich. Baker, p. 475. Printed An. 1653.  a Protestant Historian? Amongst other Considerations, It seemed no less, says he, than an IMPIETY not to give aid to the Protestants of the same Religion. So that tho' they are confessed by him, to have pretended only a Reformation, not by chance; but rather plotted of purpose, according to the Suggestion of Headstrong Ministers, to encroach upon the Prerogative of the Crown; and to demand aid from abroad, by violence to reduce their Prince, (which is to be as great Traitors as can be) yet 'tis an Impiety (says he) not to help them in their Rebellion, since they are Brethren of the same Persuasion: Holy Brethren believe me, thus to deem it a Duty to join hands in Rebellion, and to be Traitors for Religion-sake!  
You see what their Doctrine is in regard of Foreign Princes. And do you think they have any better respect for their own? Yes, if He be of their Religion, and thinks as they think. Otherwise they'll beg his Pardon: as now if he should be a Popish one, for Example; what deference would they have for him? You may learn it from one of their own Leaders in the Gospel, who with a very Remarkable NOVERINT, 
Jovian, p. 96.  or BE IT KNOWN, delivers a Doctrine of a most rare piece of Gallantry, with a most admirable Resolution of confronting such a Prince to his face, and making the contempt of him a Duty. And that none may question in the least this their Respectful Divinity, this Author delives it yet plainer in another Place (p. 80.) Where making a Discourse with some prospect of a Popish Successor; He thus openly speaks their common sense: So far (says he) are all those, who are so tender of the Succession, from having any tenderness for a Popish Successor, that they dread him like the PLAGVE, and therefore would have had Provisional Laws made, to bind up such an One, and put him under very CLOSE LEGAL CONFINEMENT, in case he should be King. This is what the better and most Loyal Part of them, were willing to afford such a Prince; but for the others; Nothing would serve (says he) the other Protestants, but an Act of EXCLUSION, backed with another for an ASSOCIATION. Do you see, my Dear Flock, what new sort of Christians these are, what their Charity, what their Loyalty; what they look upon their Duty; How far the Best of them can go, how far the Worst.  
Well might that One Good Man confess, that they have broken down the Banks not only of RELIGION, but of CIVILITY too; and that their Vices are more heinous than those of the most Barbarous People. And what he confessed, you yourselves have now seen proved, to the scandal of the Christian Name, out of their own Authors; and those not obscure ones, or raked out of the Dust; but of the most Eminent amongst them, to be found in all hands, read every where, and never reproved or condemned by any; so that you have all the reason in the World to conclude, that 'tis the sense of their Church, whatsoever some of the more subtle of them may pretend to the contrary.  
But I must not harangue too long, I know it will not please; and really it even nauseates me even in this manner to carry on a piece of Sophistry, which I have seen and heard so often practised in earnest, in the weightiest concern, by the Soberest Men, and in the most Sacred Places. This will suffice, to let any considering Man see, what use may be made of Authors; how easy 'tis to make any Party Odious to the Multitude, and however Christian it may be, yet with how little difficulty it may be Painted as Black as Hell, if a Man will be so unjust, as to pass these kind of Misrepresenting Arguments upon the People for the Gospel.  
These are some of the Methods, by which the Papists have been Misrepresented, in relation to their Tenets of Doctrine and Belief; now I must take another short turn, and examine, how many ways, the Papists have been Misrepresented, in relation to some matters of Fact and History; and by that time, I hope, the Reader will discover, whether it be without reason, that the Papists complain of being Misrepresented.  
One way there is in letting Avarice, Envy, or Malice give ill Names to things, and then passing them upon the Crowd for no better, than they are thus stamped by these Passions. This was a method very serviceable in the time of the Reformation; when there was no need of more, than nick-naming the most Sacred things, and presently they became Unhallowed. Thus we find related by Dr. Heylyn; The Grandees of the Court, casting many an envious Eye upon the Rich Hangings, the Massy Plate, and other things, which adorned the Altars in those times, did no more than call them Corruptions, and presently they were no longer fit for Churches, but only for Private use, and seized them. The Candlesticks, Crucifixes and Shrines had Superstition stamped on them, and forthwith were made a spoil. The Protector Somerset did no more than pitch upon Three Episcopal Houses, Four or Five Churches, a Chapel and Charnel house of St. Paul's, and calls them Superfluous; and they are immediately blown up, and make proper Materials for his New Palace Somerset-house. St. Margarets-Westminster too was condemned to the same fate, upon the sentence of Unnecessary: But the Workmen that were sent to demolish it, being disturbed by the Clubs and Staves of the Parishioners, 'twas again judged Convenient for their use. This was the Method in those Reforming times, when, as we may read in Heylyn, Covetousness, Ambition, and Envy set up for removing Corruptions out of the Church; when Profit and Interest was to give Orders, and Violence to Execute; when Sacrilege and Rapine were the best means for the bringing in the Purity of the Gospel. But because this may be all seen at large in some Historical Collections gathered out of Protestant Authors, lately Published, I'll remit the Reader to them, where he'll easily discover how considerably the Art of Misrepresenting contributed to the outing of Popery.  
This same method it was that King Henry the Eighth, Luther, etc. made use of, when by Luxury and Rapine they began to reform the Extravagancies of their times, and make way apace for Protestantism to enter into the World. If the Pope will not consent to the Irregular Passions of that Prince, and permit him to take a second Wife, while his first is alive; the Power, that is the Curb to his Lust, is forthwith Antichristian, 'tis a Usurpation and Foreign Power; and with such hard names, 'tis rendered as odious to the People, as 'twas to him; who by this means throwing it off, passes for a Good Christian amidst his Vile Extravagancies. If Luther has a mind to Marry, and his Vow of Chastity stands in his way, he does no more than nickname it a little, calling it a Rash and Inconsiderate Vow, and he's as free to Marry as the best of them; his Vow is no farther a Let to him, and he now contracts according to the Prescript of the Gospel. And if he thinks a Nun will make the best Wife; he does no more than make her Vow as Foolish as his, and the business is effected without any more ado, no farther Scruple; they forthwith become a most Evangelical couple. This same way we have seen trod over of late by Honest Sir William, who by the Name of Popish Trinkets and Trumpery, made a spoil of Chalices, Crosses, the Images of Christ and his Saints; and by a rare knack of turning Guineas into Medals; Pearl-Necklaces into Beads; and Watches into Relick-Cases, made them fit for Seizure according to Law, to the great benefit of the practitioner, and much edifying of his Brethren, who could not but have a holy envy for his Zeal.  
Another way there is in telling a Story to the advantage of the Cause, in putting that side outwards as will serve turn best, and keeping underboard whatsoever is not for the purpose; and sometimes 'tis only the turn of the hand, the winding of the breath, a pat Phrase, and presently a Devil's made of any thing. Thus when Sir Rich. 
Baker in the beginning of Queen Mary.  Baker has a mind to Paint Queen Mary deep in Blood, he thus Tragically begins: Hitherto Queen Mary's Reign had been without Blood: but now the Cataracts of Severity will be opened, that will make it rain Blood. Thus he draws the lines of Antichrist in her Face: And see upon what score; For now, says he, on the Eighth of August the Duke of Northumberland, Marquess of Northampton, and Earl of Warwick, were Arraigned at Westminster-Hall Condemned and Executed for High Treason, for Proclaiming the Lady Jane Grace Queen of England, in opposition to the true Heiress. And this, which in a Protestant Prince, on the like occasion, is termed the executing of Justice, giving deserved punishment to Traitors, etc. in Queen Mary is nothing less than the opening Cataracts of Severity, and the raining of Blood. This same Misrepresenting Artifice is made use of on all occasions, in every thing relating to Queen Mary. Nothing can be heard of, when her Reign is made the proof of the Text, but Cruelty, Blood, Fire, Faggots, Stakes, Smithfield; nothing can serve to parallel those times, but the persecutions of Decius and Dioclesian, and she is so in all things set out, as if little better than a Heathen, and swimming in the Blood of of the Martyrs. This is her Picture. But if we should view it a little, and consider, whether she has no wrong done her; might not we ask; What, and how much this Blood was, what the occasion of its being spilt, and what the Provocation given? And here we shall have an account of some Protestant behaviour: of Praying for the death of their Queen in Meetings, that God would shorten her days; of a Gun shot at her Preacher in the Pulpit, of Cats hung on Gallows, with their Heads shorn, and something like Vestments, in derision of her Priests; of a Dog held up in the Church by the Legs, in derision of the Elevation of the Host; a gallantry of one of Fox's Martyrs; of several other provocations by Tumults, Seditions, and Rebellions: And that after this, for the security of her Crown, She put in execution Laws not made by Her, but enacted long before by her Ancestors Rich. 2. Hen. 4, & 5. Now one would think to be just to Crowned Heads, the Blood should not be exposed alone to the People; but likewise the occasions and provocations given, even according to Law, and then let things go as far as they will: but to Misrepresent the Papists, Stories must be Told and Preached by halves; otherwise they will turn to no account with the People, and serve nothing to the Interest of the Cause.  
But to see now how much there goes in the telling a Story: Queen Elizabeth put to death Two hundred persons upon the score of Conscience, without any actual Crime or Misdemeanour against the Ancient Statutes of the Land, but only against the Law of her own contriving; a Law so cruel, that the like is scarce to be found even among the Mahometans, who tho' they have conquered many Christian Nations, yet never, as I have heard of, made it Treason for the Natives, to profess their own Religion, or maintain their Pastors. And tho' this and much more was done by this Princess, yet she is set forth with that advantage, that she is a Meek, Merciful, tenderhearted, Saintlike, true-Protestant Queen: While her Sister, who put to death not Three hundred, of which number, those of the greatest Note were Traitors in the highest Degree, others Guilty of the most intolerable abuses both to Church and State, and liable to death by the Ancient, and known Laws of the Nation; such as Dr. Heylyn and Dr. Pocklington both Protestants, in their Book Licenced and set forth by Authority style Schismatical Heretics, Factious Fellows, Traitors and Rebels, and She is no better than a Cruel, Bloody, Hard-hearted, Popish Tyrant. Thus according to this Reformed Method, there needs no more for the making a Protestant Saint or a Popish Fiend, than a little turn of the breath, and the mere knack of making the Narrative: And if there be not Misrepresenting in this, I never heard of any.  
Another way there is in spreading the guilt of some few Papists upon the whole of that Communion; so that if any of them are catched in a Villainy, 'tis immediately suggested, that what These did, was according to the Principles of their Religion, and not so much to be charged on them in particular, as on their Church, which encourages them to such wicked undertake. After this manner the Powder. Plot is managed, which tho' it was in all likelihood a contrivance of the good Lord Cecil (as Osborne a Protestant Historian plainly confesses,) 
K. J. p. 36.  yet because a few Papists were proved Actors in it, the guilt is forthwith thrown upon the whole body of them, their Religion Calumniated, and they Condemned as Destructive to Monarchy, and unfit to live under a Protestant Prince. Now however it may be nothing but truth, that Digby, Faux and their complices were as black with this Treason, as they are commonly Painted; yet hence to spread the Scandal upon the Papists without distinction, to cry out against the Bloody Papists, the Barbarous Papists, and by such innuendos to incense the Multitude, and lead them into false conceits, that this was a design of the Catholics in general, according to their professed Principles and Doctrine, is an unwarrantable proceeding, unbecoming the Desk, and nothing better than a Misrepresentation: Yes as unjust a Misrepresentation, as it would be in any one at this day, who to drive on a Faction, should get up into the Pulpit, with the Bible in hand; and after having given a large display of the Traitorous, Bloody, and Inhuman doings of the late Rebels in the West, should at last throw it upon the Church of England; crying out against the Bloody Church of England- men, the Cruel Church of England- men, their Rebellious Principles, abominable Doctrines, and Practices of Men not to be tolerated in a Monarchical Government; and this because he proves the Duke that Headed that Rebellion, to have been a Member of that Church, with some others that joined hands with him. For be it never so true, that some were thus really chargeable with this Rebellion, nay, that at their deaths they never owned it as a Crime; (which yet the Powder Plotters did) yet still to charge the guilt upon the whole of that Communion, can be done no otherwise, than by the fashionable Artifice of Misrepresenting.  
Another way there is in putting malicious Constructions upon indifferent things, and running down a Party upon false surmises. This was the Case of the Papists some years' since; When they enjoying a little rest by the merciful Indulgence of the late King of Blessed Memory; behold on a Sudden they are rendered obnoxious to the Government, as abusing the Royal Favour, and Plotting against his Majesty's Subjects. A great quantity of long devilish Knives are discovered, made on purpose by the Papists, for the cutting all the Protestants Throats; this was the Protestant cry, and thus was the matter fairly Represented by them. Upon this the Papists, the Cruel Bloody Papists are to be no longer suffered, their Priests are ordered into Banishment, and so the point was gained. When the whole truth of the Story, was only some parcels of Knives made publicly, to be transported for the use of the Plantations. But this served the Protestant Interest; and the People's heads by this are full of the Bloody-minded Papists.  
Another way is by making a Plot of every thing. Thus in the year 1666. 
In the Plates of Common-Prayer-Book Printed at Oxford, An. 1680.  was that dreadful Judgement of the Fire improved into a Plot of the Papists. How many Papists were taken with Fire-balls in their Pockets? How many apprehended in the very Act of throwing Fire-balls into Windows? How many Thousand Papists were in Arms at Temple-bar, and the Country alarmed to suppress them? And at the latter end, not one word of all this true; but only a true Protestant Representation of a thing that never was: And yet very much to the purpose of enraging the multitude against the Cruel, Bloody Papists. For by the frequent buzzing of these kind of Gospel-truths, the Vulgar within a while became so throughly convinced of the damnable industry of the Papists in throwing Fire-balls, that they began to think, that Heaven itself could not now consume a Protestant Sodom, without making use of a Jesuits hand to throw the Fire and Brimstone.  
No Fire therefore happens after this, but the Papists have a hand in't: If Southwark be Fired, 'tis the damnable Papists do it; if the Temple be Burnt, 'tis the Devilish Papists are blowing the Coals. And thus these repeated Misrepresentations are made use of, to create an aversion in the People's hearts against Popery; and are the Evangelical proofs to convince the Multitude, that its Doctrine and Practices come all out of the School of Antichrist.  
Another Text out of the same Gospel, was that Anniversary Misrepresentation, of the Papists contriving the Death of King Charles the First. This was an unparallelled Barbarity Acted in the face of the Sun: the Actors and Contrivers are as public as the noon-light, and yet those who at other times are Scrupulous of distrusting their Senses in a Case where God himself speaks; here in defiance to all their Senses, in contradiction to all that was seen and heard, give credit to a Monsieur's Invention, who comes out of France with a Tale, and lays this Royal Blood at the Papists doors. But this still serves the purpose, the deeper the Papists are Painted in Blood, the more the People are convinced of the truth of the Reformation.  
Another way is by making a Plot of nothing: Thus it happened in the year 1679, When the People having been by these and a Thousand other such like Gospel-policies, most Apostolically satisfied of the Principles of the Seditious, Traitorous, Barbarous, Cruel, Bloody-minded Papists: And being now so moulded and disposed, that nothing could seem incredible concerning Those, that were thus detestable and odious, outcomes the Garagantua Misrepresentation of them all, that is the Divine Oats, with his Popish Plot. And here the Papists are overwhelmed with that fury, that never were poor People in greater distress. The Plot was as dark and confused as the Chaos, its monstrosities were beyond all the Fables of the Talmud or Alcoran; that 'tis impossible even to be related, without a touch of that madness, that then possessed the Nation. And yet the whole was received with that welcome and credit, that what would have been questioned in the very Scripture, was entertained without any Scruple: The Dr. having a grant of that Power, which is denied even to Heaven itself, that is, of verifying contradictions. 'Tis strange to consider, how easy it was then to swallow Screwed Guns, Handkerchiefs and Pillow-beres; with how little difficulty Troops of Pilgrims, and whole Armies with their Black-bills went down. And why all this welcome to Fictions and Nonsense? Only to defeat Antichrist, and to root out Popery. A rare new way, I confess, of fight against the Devil (as 'twas pretended) with his own Weapons. But Misrepresenting does always the best Execution against the Papists; and therefore the Plot is carried on with all possible Vigour and Zeal. But hitherto only of the least part of these Plots and Misrepresentations, the chief is yet to come, and that is the carrying up of these Inventions of Wicked men into the Pulpit, and thence with the Finger in the Bible, and a Preamble of Harken to the Word of the Lord, dispensing them to the People for Truths. These are the Misrepresentations above all justly to be complained of, that into That Place, which ought to be set apart as Sacred, for instructing the People to Salvation, and sowing the Seed of God's Holy Word, such things should be preferred, as had nothing of truth in them: Nay, that what Ungodly men reported, vouched and swore to, to the evident Peril of their Souls Damnation, should take place with the holy Text, should be insinuated into the People for Truths, nay be confirmed by proofs of the Gospel, and be delivered out, as something relating to the way to Heaven: So that what was Damnation at the Bar, became Salvation from the Pulpit. And all this not in any indifferent matter, but in a concern of Credit, Reputation, Honesty, and Life; and this not of one Man (which yet would have been a great impiety thus to have defamed from the Pulpit) but of many Families of many Thousands.  
I will not enlarge upon a matter so Odious, so Unchristian as this. I hope this hint will be enough for the Answerer to consider, that 'twas none of the greatest Modesty in him to brag, how clear WE were from charging the Papists with saying or doing, what they never said or did. When these Innocent WE have done all this against the Papists, and Fifty times more into the bargain. For this is only a Taste of what may be done at large, if it be required, for our Justification; it being no great Task instead of so many Sheets upon this Subject, to furnish out so many Volumes.  
But I forbear at present, and will only call upon the Reader to consider; That if Misrepresenting, be, what 'tis agreed upon above, viz. to set false Constructions, to alter or change the Motives, End, Intention or Circumstances of Things; Whether the Papists have not some Reason to cry out against this Unchristian Dealing; when (as it has been made appear) there is scarce any thing belonging to them, either as to their Faith or Practice, wherein they have not been wronged by Adversaries, and which has not been injuriously set forth to the People, under some of these Disguises.  
For my part, the whole matter is so clear to me, that I do not at all wonder at the Temper of our People at this day in respect of Popery, who have a notion of it in their heads so Foul and Monstrous; that to be a Papist with them, is the same thing as to be Cruel, and Bloody, to be without Soul or Conscience, and to be given o'er to all sorts of vice and Extravagancy. And that Papist, who is thought by them only a Fool or an Hypocrite, is highly in their Favour. Some indeed have not yet concluded, which is worse, the Turk or the Papist; and are not resolved which side shall have their Good Wishes; whilst others at first sight prefer the Mahometans, and think Them of the Two, the nearer allied to Christendom. Then for the Jews, they are still more agreeable than the Papists; and for a Man to turn Atheist, is tolerable enough; A Green-Ribband-Man is much more suitable: Yes any thing, Good Lord, but a Papist.  
Thus it stands with the People, and amongst them may take place as to this, many a Grave and Sober Face. But that they are of this Temper, I do not (I say) at all wonder. For when I consider the manner how the Papists have been treated; that Ten thousand Pulpits have been for many years declaiming against them; where every Man has had a liberty of exposing them as he pleased, as was most taking with his Auditory, and best suiting with the Times: Where every Man has represented Their Doctrine, as he pleased; has charged it with what Consequences and Interpretations, he pleased; has exposed their Practices, as he pleased; has put on them what Constructions he pleased; has expounded their Authors, as he pleased; has made Narratives of them, as he pleased; has made them as Guilty, as he pleased; has made Truth, and Gospel of any thing against them, as he pleased. That besides this, infinite numbers of Pamphlets and other Books have been constantly and carefully Published, for the promoting the same Cause, for increasing Fears and Jealousies, advancing Suspicions, and obliging the People to a Conscientious Hatred of Popery: When I consider, I say, this, and reflect upon the many other ways, by which the Papists have been handled, left to the Mercy of every Pretender, and made to be that, which every Weak, Idle, Passionate or Malicious Brain thought fit to make them; 'tis no strange thing at all to find the People to have a less aversion against the Turks and Jews, than against the Papists; and that all the most horrid Sins against the Twelve Commandments together, are not half so Foul and Damning with them, as that one of Popery (as they conceive it) is by itself. For these Means that have been taken to effect this, are so well proportioned to this end, and do so naturally work People into this Aversion and Hatred; that were Christianity itself treated and exposed to the People for some years, in the same manner and method only, as Popery already has been, I am confident, 'twould be the same crime within a while with them, to become a Christian, as now 'tis to turn Papist.  
But in the mean time this Method is so unjust and so unbecoming all true Christian Candour, under which, the Papists have been suffering these so many years, that I cannot in Charity wish it to befall the Worst of Enemies. And did Charity allow me to seek any expedient for the ruin of any one's Credit and Reputation, and rendering him the Object of a Popular Hatred, I would consult no farther, but only desire he might take his portion with the Papists, and be treated no worse than they have been all along, by their adversaries. After what manner this has been, I hope the Considering Reader, who has perused what has been already said in this Discourse, does by this time comprehend. I gave some hint of it before in a former Answer, called the Amicable Accommodation, in which under the Person of a Dissenter arguing against and Defaming the Church of England, I discovered in what manner the Papists are handled, by the Protestants.  
But this is taken by some by the wrong handle, and therefore can afford it no better a Title than of Light, Scurrilous, and Jesting, and are willing to persuade their Readers, 
Def. of the Expos. of the Doct. of the Ch. of Eng, p. 85, 86.  that the Character of the Church of England, as 'tis there drawn, is nothing better than a Controversial Lampoon; and that since every Idle word is to be given account of, what apprehensions ought the Author of it to be seized with, who instead of having any True Zeal for Truth, has made a Droll of Religion, widens the Divisions of the Church, and finds a harmony in her groans! This is a very severe Charge; but the Comfort is, I am in good Company; for 'tis not only the Amicable Accommodation stands thus indicted, but the Vindication of the Bishop of Meaux, and the Defence of the Late King's Papers, which (if any one will be so Civil, as to take this Author's word for'r) does not Vindicate, but Ridicule; and is both void of Charity to his Adversaries, and of respect to the Persons and Church He defends.  
Besides this, he has urged the charge against them all, in the bitterest expressions imaginable: Nothing is heard of in Two whole pages, but of their art of Palliating, want of Fairness and Civility, laying aside Moderation, falling into a vein of Lightness and Scurrility, forgetting that Religion is the Subject, and Christians and Scholars their Antagonists. Their Mean Reflections and Trivial jestings, their Ridiculing, their want of Charity and Respect, their Writings Accommodated to the Genius of Sceptics, who divert themselves at the expense of all Religion; and being not designed to satisfy the Sober and Conscientious of either Side, etc.  
Now what This Author seems here at first sight to require, being nothing but Moderation, Candidness, and Civility in Answerers of all sides, I cannot but highly commend; but then again, when I look farther into him, and see him wishing for Moderation in the deepest satire, condemning the want of Civility in Others, with the most Exasperating Reflections of his One, writing against the Passion of his Adversaries, with his own Pen steeped in Gall; when I hear him desirous of laying down his Dearest Blood for the redressing the Evils of the Divided Church, and at the same time most Uncharitably exposing Antagonists, even such as nothing belonged to his Province, under the most Odious Characters imaginable, I cannot tell how to take him in earnest; he seems but to make a serious Droll, and brings into my mind, what I have heard of one, who Preaching on Shipboard to correct the extravagant Swearing of the Mariners, after many arguments to convince them of their Profaneness, at length to press the matter home to them, Swore Bloodily, They would be all Damned if they did not leave off Swearing.  
But however it be, I'll Answer for myself, and do here assure this Zealous Author, notwithstanding all his hard words, that there's no more of jesting in my last Papers, than he may find in any Parable or Emblem, in which tho' the Persons may be feigned, as in that of the Trees choosing a King; yet the thing signified or intended, is real and serious. So that though, it may be, never any Dissenter pressed all those things against the Church of England in the manner I have there urged them; yet that there is shown the Exact Method how the Church of Rome is struck at by Protestants, is what is intended most Seriously and without any drolling in the least. And therefore if he finds any Ridiculing in the Arguments, Mean Reflections or Trivial Jesting in the urging them, I can only tell him, that the Copy must be like the Original; and that he that undertakes to show, how Protestants Ridicule the Church of Rome, does not Jest, when he does it in something that looks Ridiculous. And if he is sensible that this way of handling Controversies, does rather exasperate, than heal our Divisions, I am sincerely of his mind. But then think, that for the preventing it, he ought rather spend his Zeal upon such of his Brethren, who by thus Ridiculing play the Controvertists in good earnest, with their Bibles in hand; than upon Adversaries, who only detect the Sophistry, and by Emblem show how 'tis done.  
If he has therefore so much esteem for the Salvation of men's Souls, and the Truth of Religion, as he pretends, let him show himself so in a most Christian Action. Let him but turn to such of his own Communion, who have given this bad Example, and win so far upon them, as Publicly to make Restitution to such Innocent Persons, of the Credit and Good Name, which They have Publicly helped to take away: To remove that Uncharitable Opinion, they have Imprinted in the very Souls of their Hearers, against their Neihgbors, by vain Rumours, and groundless Surmises; let him prevail upon them never more to Preach to People's Passion, instead of their Reason: never more to inflame the multitude by Preaching to them Dreams and Visions; nor to advance every unsouled Informer to the Authority of an Evangelist. Let him see, that they play not with their Neighbour's Reputation, and Religion, and run them both down with idle Stories, such as are Authentic enough for a Plot-Catechism, but not for a Pulpit. Let him endeavour that their Arguments and Methods for the defeating of Popery, be not such as any Jew may take up to strike a● Christianity, and every Atheist to make a shame of all Religion. Let him advise them with a late Preacher, That their Zeal against Popery betray them not into some of the worst Principles, that are charged upon that Church. 
Crisp. ●isit. Ser. p. 23.  That while they are Zealous for their Church, They continu● Loyal to their King. That whilst they Preach up the principles and Loyalty of their Church, they have a care of proving themselves no Members of it, by their instilling Suspicions and Jealousies; by their telling their Flock of a Cloud hanging over their Heads, and at the same ti●● Prognosticating its Dissipation. Let him employ his best endeavours o● this side a while, to redress these evils; and I dare engage, (notwithstanding) all the complaints he has against his Adversaries) The Nation will enjoy more Peace, His Church will have less Divisions, and the King better Subjects.  
FINIS.