An Appendix to the foregoing Letter, being an Answer to Mr. Humphrey Hody's Letter, concerning the Canons at the end of the Baroccian Manuscript.  
Esse posse uno in loco aliquis existimat aut multos Pastores aut plures Greges?  Cyprian de Vnitate Ecclesiae, p. 110. 
Lingua Christum confessa non sit maledica, non convitiis & litibus perstrepens audiatur; non contra Fratres, & Dei Sacerdotes post verba laudis Scrpentis venena jaculetur,  p. 118. 
SIR,  
YOu will readily believe me, when I tell you the reading of your Letter gave me unaccountable delight; The clean Conceits, various Inventions, smooth Style, pat Similes, just Allegories, and sparkling Strictures could do no less; and you are too well acquainted with the force of your own performance, and my Sincerity, to think I have either need or design to flatter: Yet to take off all doubt, I will point out some of those particulars which gave me the greatest satisfaction; and if I now and then seem to laugh a little, pray consider, that great Pleasures are not soon quiet: Passions are like Waters, raise them once, and the Motion continues, tho' the Cause be over.  
I must confess when in your Preface to the published MSS. you had put yourself amongst the Nethenims, the hewers of Wood and drawers of Water for the Sanctuary, I scarce knew my Friend in so humble and so unseasonable a figure; but now you please to assume Characters more agreeable to your worth, I can see the Generous and the Brave in the habit of a Wrestler or Champion for the Church, which under that of a Tankard-bearer lay too much, and too dangerously obscured.  
In the second Page you enter the Ring; Nature hath given you Muscles and strength enough, and every way fitted your Person for the Belt; but, Sir, you must give me leave to say, that you are not skilled in the Terms and Expressions of the Field: For none ever conjectured he had given his Adversary a fall by the dirtiness of his hands; indeed that may 
Pag. 2.  prove he hath over-weighed, and thrust him down on his Face by Brute strength; but believe me, dear Sir, a fall comes from a neat Trip, and is always on the Back. Besides 'tis not fair to choose a Dunghill to wrestle on, and then complain your Adversary hath bespattered you. Perhaps there were never such foul Examples as the wretched Scribbler of your Treatise hath put together; and I am sure a Man cannot stir in them without kicking up a Lie, a Forgery, Idolatry, or Treason in your Face. Of all this I gave you early notice, and had not the Letter been intercepted, I am sure you would not have thought that Fort impregnable, one Stone of which I had not left upon another; nor mistaken, for old trusty Veterans, such raw, undisciplined, new raised, unarmed 
Pag. 3.  Phantasms, which were too empty either to defend or to aliright.  
Again, you conjecture by your Adversary's Passion, that he had a Fall; This was a very unlucky guess, when you was about to show so much yourself: Rapparces, Stabbers to the Heart, and 
Pag. 2.  Kno●kers on the Head are no very temperate and cool Words, especially when bestowed on Persons of Exemplary Humility, and known Meekness. But, Sir, you may remember who formerly called you Feroculus; but since you have taken some Degrees, and are commenced Ferocisfimus, as a learned man said when he read your Letter. In short, Sir, if not only foul Hands, but a dirty Mouth, and a Heart full of Passion will prove a Foil; I am afraid you mistook the Person, and thought your Adversary suffered that disaster which fell upon yourself. But since you are plentifully bespattered with Dirt, you intent to rub it off; 
Pag. 3.  'Tis a cleanly design, for which I hearty thank you, for since I must be some time in your Company, I would have it as inoffensive as I can: and therefore having taken leave of these filthy Metaphors, I hoped in plain cleanly English to understand the Cause of your present Concernment: But I am no sooner out of the Mire than I am thrust into the Smoke; After Dirt fly Squibbs and Crackers, 
Pag. 4.  of an Ancient Invention, and such as were thrown by the Philistines heretofore. The next time you enter into Controverfie, let me beg you to keep down your Imagination, and not think a little Penduel to be a War; and then we shall hear less of Mines, Forts, Powder, and old Soldiers, and write and read with less danger than we now do: Though I must confess it were ingenious (as you told a Friend of yours) to use Military Expressions when you was writing about Canons.  
But now the Air clears again, and I begin to see the Cause of your disquiet: Pag. 4. you are accused for not publishing the Canons which are written in the very same Hand, and with the same Ink in which the published MS. is written, and immediately subjoined to the MS. in the same page, without any mark of distinction; and therefore by the Author of that Treatise designedly added to it. These Canons no way favour the design which you had in publishing that MS. (some of them expressly forbidding any Man to separate from a Bishop, unless deprived by the Sentence of a Synod,) and therefore were purposely omitted  
To this Charge you reply: The Canons were not collected, nor joined to the Treatise 
Pag. 4.  by the Writer of it; and give these Reasons. 1st, You never thought they were, pag. 4. 2dly, 'Tis possible the Stories & the Canons may be collected by two different Persons, though afterward they may be both transcribed by the same Hand, pag. 5. 3dly, The Treatise hath a peculiar Conclusion of its own, p. 6. 4thly, Between the Treatise and the Canons there comes in an Abstract or Summary of the Treatise, which stands as it were for an Index, p. 7. 5thly, The writer of the Treatise makes no mention of the Canons, never refers to them; and therefore cannot be supposed to have collected and subjoined them to the Treatise, p. 7. And 6thly, The Canons are not truly pertinent to the particular subject of the Treatise, pag. 9  
These you look upon to be unanswerable Evidences, both of your Innocence, and your Cause too; and sufficient proofs, that the Compiler of the Stories was not the Collector of the Canons: Upon the strength of these you rise high, despise the Judgements, and contemn the Reasonings of other Men; nor is this Presumption unnatural in him who can mistake Falsehood for Integrity, and call Trifles Demonstrations. This way of Writing, Sir, is no more Arguing than Stammering is Speaking; 'tis only a weak imperfect endeavour after it, but such as disgraces what it would imitate.  
For suppose, when you first transcribed that Treatise, you did not think the Writer added the Canons to it; yet before the Gr. and Lat. Edition you was sufficiently informed of other Men's Opinions, which 'tis easier to despise than to confute. Why then were they concealed, unless you found it necessary to deal with your Author as Painters do with a Face with one Eye? They show only the sound side. The Stories looked plaufible enough, but in the Canons there was some thing so disagreeable, that it was convenient it should be hid.  
Again, suppose it possible that the Canons might be added by another Hand; let me beg you not to conclude they were, for fear of two or three old Logical Maxims, which will grow very testy, if they once perceive their Authority contemned. Your third and fourth Reason only prove that your Author's Conscience began to stare him in the Face, and his Reading was at an end: that as he could find none, so he would forge no more Examples. But your fifth and sixth Reason, I must confess, would seem to conclude somewhat, had your Author been a Man of any tolerable sense: But when I consider how injudiciously he hath put his Tales together, and how impertinent many of them are to that purpose for which he hath made them, I can think no proceeding that is idle, unaccountable, and foolish, too mean for him, or disagreeable to his Character.  
But to draw this whole trifling Controversy into a narrow compass, 'tis evident from Cotelerius, that when one Joseph was put into the Throne of a Bishop unjustly deposed, many refused to communicate with him; The Composer of this Treatise endeavours to reduce the Refusers by the Examples of some Great Men, who upon the like occasions did not think it lawful to withdraw. But lest bare Story-telling should not do the work, he produceth Canons which peremptorily forbidden any separation from a Bishop: by these he endeavours to support the Chair of the Bishop in possession: and thus having Example backed by Precept, he thinks the Refusers must be constrained to a submission: This proceeding is natural enough, there is nothing of force in it; and when I find any thing at the end of a Treatise written in the same Hand, immediately subjoined to it; which carries no mark of another Author, and is agreeable to the Age, and serviceable to the main drift and design of the Composer of the Treatise, I must think it added by the same Author, unless you please to furnish me with a Reason to the contrary, better than any I have yet met with. Indeed you pretend to offer one, when you observe the Author uses his own Language in the Stories, but transcribes the very Words of the Canons, pag. 7. But pray, Sir, is it unusual, or is it not necessary to cite the very Words of Laws? Your Author might make Stories, but sure he was not considerable enough to be a Canon-maker; and therefore was bound to those Expressions in which Authority had put them. And your observation, that the Author always uses his own Style in the Stories, shows you have not yet had leisure to compare them with the Books out of which some part of them is taken.  
And now, Sir, having considered all you have to say about the Canons, you must excuse me from attending on your Triumph, in which you so indecently lead a very great Man, (the same who gave you Information 
Pag. 8. & 15.  of every thing you know concerning this M S.) who fell into an unconsiderable mistake, which yet he hath rectified in his answer to your Book, only because he had not leisure to be accurate about Trifles: for the way which you go is too foul for me to wait upon you in. Yet Curiosity will force me as far as your enchanted Castle, pag. 19 to see the Issue of that notable Adventure. But here all my Expectation is quite dashed: for when I thought to find the Knight armed, mounting the Ramparts, and breaking down the Walls, Modesty comes on, turns him into a Pioneer, and sets him to cast up Works to enclose a SPIRIT, as wise a design as theirs was who hedged about a Cuck●ow.  
To be serious. An Acquaintance of mine bids me tell you, your Guantelet is taken up, not by a Party, but a Single Person; and your Challenge is accepted: He hopes you will observe the Laws of Combat, and not bring any Spells, Charms, or unlawful Weapons into the Field: (to speak out of Metaphor) that you will be plain, Civil and Even in your Writing; That you would leave your Intricate Allegories, your Pride and Insolence behind you; and not indecently fall out of fits of Rai●ing into as violent ones of Prayer: but dispute like a Scholar, and like a Christian.  
He desires likewise you would not produce such Examples, as that repeated one of Photius, pag. 17. nor conclude that Constantine did not design to banish Athanasius for his Life, because he afterward repent he had banished him at all, pag. 23. To such Instances and such Conclusions he will think it sufficient to reply, that they ought not to be made or produced by any Man of Honour, Integrity, or Sense.  
If you grant him these few reasonable Requests, he is very ready to engage upon the Principles of St. Cyprian, and the Practice of that Age; and to make short work of the Controversy, thus states it from matter of fact: But I need go no further, you are a wise man, and this ●i●t is enough for you to guests, how I would state it; and you may do it with more safety than I can: but if you know not what I mean, conselt the 
* This was no legal Repeal, because Edward the 2d was alive, and lawful King, or else Edward the 3d could never have been so) in the time of that first Parliament of Edward the 3d, and consequently Edward the 3d was at that time an Usurper, and the Proceed of that Parliament null and void.  85th page of the? Grand Question, and then guess how I would state it, and the matter of fact being so stated, then let the Question be; Whether the Expulsion of the Bishops, and the placing of new ones in their Sees, by an Act of State, and without a Synodical Sentence, for not taking such New Oaths, be not Schismatical? The Case is truly what I dare but hint to you, and you may begin the Dispute as soon as you please; provided you procure us the same freedom and safety to answer fully to the point, as you take to Challenge and Object.  
And before (to use your modish Phrase) I subscribe a Vale, I must beg you to pass by one small Mistake in my last Letter (if ever it comes to your Hands) about Joseph the Presbyter, which yet I think I have corrected in the Margin; and in requital I shall take no notice of twenty greater in yours. I shall not examine your Criticism about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nor tell the World you produce, p. 43. for your own Reading what you gather up from Co●elerius's Observation. And besides all this, I shall own the Obligation, admire this single Instance of good Nature and Condescension, and continue  
Jan. 1st. 1691. Your Faithful Friend and Most Humble Servant.  
FINIS.