SOME REFLECTIONS Upon a TREATISE, called PIETAS ROMANA & PARISIENSIS Lately Printed at OXFORD. TO WHICH ARE ADDED 

I. A Vindication of PROTESTANT CHARITY, In Answer to some Passages in Mr. E. M's. Remarks on a late Conference.  
II. A Defence of the OXFORD REPLY to two Discourses there Printed. A. D. 1687.    
Shall vain words have an end? or what imboldneth Thee that Thou answerest?  Job. XVI. 3. 
OXFORD, Printed at the THEATER, Anno Domini 1688.   

Imprimatur.  
GILB. IRONSIDE. Vicecan. Oxon. August 13▪ 1688.   

To The READER  
IF the drudgery of writing were a Penance imposed upon this Author, he may now at last hope for a release; having sacrificed so much credit, with so great disadvantage to his Cause, that the Interest he designed to serve is concerned to sue for his Quietus. For though the scarcity of tolerable writers for the Papists did in some measure cover the meaneness of his other performances, it will hardly recommend these last Essays, which have sunk below the level of Catholic Pamphlets, and (what is yet harder to imagine) degenerated even from his own. His first efforts were indeed weak, but they aimed at our Capitol; and tho' neither the strength nor conduct, yet the boldness of the Adversary made them considerable: but now the Man that once attacked our establishment both in Church and State, is dwindled to an insidious hinter; disdains not to Transcribe two little hotheaded Enthusiasts; and to show the profoundness of his humility challenges nothing to himself but that which vitiates the work, the mixture of Reflections. His former pieces had something of grandeur in the Title; and looked like one of his Italian Hospitals; 
a Such is the Hospital of Fateben Fratelli Piet. Rom. p. ●4. It is a fair, hospital and hath no yearly Revenue. So p. 30. a fair house but hath nothing at all of competent Revenue.  which tho' worse endowed than an English Alms-house have a stately Portico, and a magnificent Frontispiece: but 
b Title.  this Faithful Relation, this 
c Pref. pag. 3.  little book is all of a piece; and has a Portal exactly proportionable to the Fabric. Heretofore his Style too, tho' obscure and intricate, discovered rather an ill management than want of sense: now 'tis generally somewhat below plainness; and when it is embellished, it is with 
d See Piet. Par. p 56. They watch amidst the ghastly horror of the night where death's domineering in the Hall. p. 4. Maids who run great hazard to lose that which may never after be recovered, are kept out of harms way. Pref. p. 3. The divine Sergeants came for his Soul that night. Piet. Ro. p. He that tumbles out of his Coach, sends away his Soul in Post-haste.  such childish flowers as the meanest Schoolboy would be whipped for.  
Is this then at last the great result of his leisure after so long deliberation? Is this that for which the four parts of Church-Government must still be postponed? and give way to the naked Epitome of a Spittle-Sermon? I confess I cannot imagine why he submitted to such an inglorious undertaking, unless he had some hope, ▪ this book might prove too mean to be regarded; and by its unworthiness escape the hard fate of confutation which has fallen so heavy on his other works. And this had certainly secured him; but that he was lately pleased to administer fresh Provocation; after a long silence had almost persuaded the world he began to understand his strength. But if He persevere in publishing, We shall always be ready to do him reason; and hope to convince him too (if it be possible) that he spoils everything he undertakes.  
I hope the Reader will expect no Apology for the slowness of these Reflections; which should have appeared much earlier, had we meant to meddle with this subject. But late as they are, I believe they will come to most men, before they have seen his Treatise; and by consequence, before an answer to it is expected. For as it is this Author's peculiar happiness that his works are never known till they are answered; so this in particular has been so little inquired after, that it rather seemed to be exposed than published.   

Some Reflections, etc.  
THERE have been many ingenuous Criminals, who have had little sense of Religion, but some of Honour; who, when they forgot to be Christians, remembered they were Englishmen; and tho' they were no good observers of the Laws of their Country, yet preserved a sense of those inbred obligations to it, which of all propensities to virtue, are the last shaken off. But so much generosity as this amounts to, is not frequent among our Roman Proselytes, who learn not only to defy the force of civil constitutions, but cancel the common instincts of Nature; and tho' they can by no statutes be induced to abjure the Kingdom, are easily persuaded to renounce their allegiance to it. Campian and Sanders first began, Parsons and Garnet carried on this holy war against their common Mother; which hath since been successively continued by all members and candidates of that Fraternity; men that have lost all claim to the title of Englishmen, unless we allow an Englishman to be what they define him, a Feudatory Vassal of Rome. And yet, tho' many of this Author's Predecessors have thus industriously aspersed their Country, they have been still so prudent as to spread their Calumnies at a distance: Antwerp and Rheims heard sad relations of our Sacrilege; Pasquin and Marforio, talked largely of our impiety; But it was a fresh piece of assurance to libel the English charity at Oxford, where the very walls confront the accusation, and our Author's own annual revenues proclaim it to be false and ingrateful. For it is not the Protestant Devotion only, against which these Reflections are designed, but the English liberality; and we are obliged to answer, not only as Sons of the Church, but as Natives of the Soil, and (what is more) as the heirs of a despised Munificence.  
To charge England with a want of Charity, and commend the most common exercises of it as new discoveries in this Island, is the Compliment of the Preface; and seems to look like a kind admonition: but afterwards to prefer the Roman charity as more exalted, and the French piety as more refined than ours, and to carry on the jest in a mortified stile with a show of gravity and seriousness; of so flat a Lampoon is the most virulent that ever was written. These groundless slanders of our Fathers and Benefactors, coming from one, who is maintained by them, would naturally force us to some harshness of Expression; and that notorious eminence of our Ancestors works, which has made it no difficult task to refute these calumnies, hath made it the more hard to refute them with candour, and to mollify an answer. It was therefore once thought requisite (that all occasion of contest might be avoided) barely to set the Monuments of English Charity in their true light; and to give them no other advantage than what they must necessarily receive, by being opposed to the French and Italian. But this would be a work of leisure, unless we would use no more exactness than this Author does in his; and though it is but due to the merits of our Ancestors, is far more than this Pamphlet can deserve. At present therefore it shall be sufficient to make some short Reflections on this Treatise; and to justify the necessity of making them; and that. First by Exposing the malice of the design; and 2dly by Proving the falsity of the insinuations in it.  
First then, I am not insensible, that some men, not only those who are influenced by prejudices, but others too of an easy nature, and an obedient reason, may esteem of this, as an inoffensive Treatise; and such as should rather excite our Emulation, than require our Censure. For there are some virtues so transcendent, that, as the necessity of them never enters into dispute; so ought neither the exercise, nor the due praise of them, wherever Exercised, to be prejudiced by our Contests. And if Charity and Devotion be the chief of those, in which all Parties centre, and agree, and which all equally think commendable; what ill-nature would it be in the Levite to Envy and lessen the praise of the Charitable, tho' dissenting, Samaritan? There can therefore be no sinister intention in the Commendation of Liberality, and a Panegyric on Devotion; or, if there should have been any seeming Grounds for suspicion, the Good well-meaning Author hath removed all occasion of jealousy; and openly protested, that the Scene of such public Piety's, being either Rome, or Paris, cannot in his judgement, give any just cause of offence: I confess therefore, I have not only this Author's word for it, that he is of this opinion; but his reasons that inclined him to it; and having considered both the weight of his Arguments, and made all just allowances for the measure of the Capacity, they were to work on, I must yet beg his Pardon, If I cannot believe him. And tho' I am far from apprehending any danger from the force of his reasons, yet to prevent the influence, they may have on some men's credulity; I shall be as much concerned to detect the artifice of the reflections, as the falsity of the slander.  
It is evident then, that ever since the first Reformers began to protest against the doctrine of Merits; and chose rather to rely on an imputative, than an inherent justice; those, who little understood the Energy of an active faith, represented them, as open Libertines; and the professed enemies of those works, which they could not think meritorious: This Calumny, that had scarce foundation enough to make it seem plausible, was yet universally received; and promiscuously used against the Lutherans in Germany; the Calvinists in France; and the Disciples of Cranmer in England. In all the Challenges from 
a 
See Willet. Syn. Pap. p. 960. Ful. Ec. Hist. l. 10. and Dr. Potter's Answer to Charity mistaken. p. 13.  
See Stapylton. p. 2. c. 10. Tom. 2. Quid tandem Protestants in Anglia pro tot Monasteriis; Ecclesiis, Capellis, Xenodochiis, nosocomiis dirut is erexerunt? vix unum pro mille destructis dabunt. These will not appear to be new discoveries in England to any one that will read,   Rheims, and Douai, they have still waved the defence of their faith and appealed to the test of works; and, with the obsolete arts of Porphyry, and Julian, fell from opposing the Christians Faith, to traducing their Morals. This Author now, having succeeded no better in his Arguments, than his Predecessors, betakes himself to this last asylum; He repeats the old slanders; but managed with more closeness and dexterity; and proves himself Master of as much malice, but somewhat less ingenuity. For, when we have fair, and open accusations, we know the extent of the Charge; but in doubtful Sarcasms, secret Ironies, and expressive Hints it is hard to fathom the depth of the Calumny. The doubt of things Evident is worse than the denial; and the uncertainty of the Scepticism is not designed as a favour to us; but a subterfuge to himself. In the beginning then, like a Man of art, he will graciously allow, that some of our old Forefathers (K. 
Pref. p. 4.  Alfred perhaps, or St. Cuthbert) have left us rich in the variety of the Public Monuments of their Munificence: Yet— This now is such a Concession, as only makes more room for the slander; and the Civility of the Preface imbitters the satire: it makes the ignorant Reader think him in earnest; and gives authority to the scandal; it is one of those gifts, that are snares; and is the kiss, that consecrates the treachery. For least the greatness of this Charity, which in general words is allowed, should gain any credit with the Reader, it is presently limited with the Yet that succeeds it; the grant is invalidated by the number of the Exceptions; and men are left to make an estimate of what we have, from what we want. He therefore proposes to our imitation Some Inventions of foreign Charity; which seem either not to be at all, or not so frequent here at home; and which happily may be thought worthy to be transplanted hither; Such are these; The 
Pref. p. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9  
a 18 Eliz. cap. 3. See Dalton. Tit. Poor. p. 129 etc. Shepherd & Bond 16. & Stow. Suru. Lond. p. 97.  Provision for exposed Infants; The 
b See the History of the Charterhouse.  Relief of Indigent Tradesmen, and decayed Gentlemen; The 
c See Burnet. Ref. l. 2. p. 222.  Maintenance of poor Orphans; The Erection of 
d See Wase's History of Free-Schools.  Free-Schools: The 
e See Coke Case Su●t. Hosp. fo. 20. 6. & see 19 Car. c. 4.  releasing of men imprisoned for small debts; The 
f See Bp. Hall Dec. 6. Ep. 8. Stow. p. 102.  Visitation of the condemn▪ d Criminals; The 
g Stat 11. H. 7. c. 12.  Giving advice to the Poor, Gratis; The 
h Coke 10. R●●. fo. 20. and Stow's Suru. of Lond. p. 100 and p. 110. p. 95. p. 106.  providing 
Pref. p. 5. & p. 4.  dowries for young Maids; and Work-houses 
i Stat. 7. ●ac. c. 4. 39 El. c. 4. etc. And if This Author still please to read over Stow's Survey of London; and Willet's relation of the Charitable works of Protestants; and Sr. Fran. Moor on Charitable uses; He will find all the several species of Charities, which he mentioned, practised as well in England, as Italy.  for idle Beggars.  
These now are the New Devices, and Patterns of foreign Charity; and the want of these only, and some few more, which he doth, and many more, which he could name, is the small defect; which, we are guilty 
Pref. p. 8. Praef. p. 1.  of; who otherwise are rich in the famous works of our Forefathers here at home.  
Here then ought we to breathe a little; and admire the happy wit of these Frenchmen, and Italians; who could so luckily hit on these New Devices, these ingenious exercises of Charity; which we, that are so far removed from the Sun, never Yet have, nor indeed ever could have dreamt of. And now, if a man were in love with digressions, he had never better opportunity to expatiate on the advantages, which travail hath brought to this Nation. To see how this Gentleman refines upon the dull heavy Patterns of domestic Charity, which tho' they were as like to these as the Poor would wish; yet they wanted the belle air of the French, and Italian bounty. Our Charity is promoted by monthly meetings, Quarterly Sessions, yearly Feasts; but where are our Confraternities, Compagnia's, and Sodalities? The London Piety hath been lately so great, that their Churches and Hospitals gained by their Conflagration; Yet still our Poor Hospitals are neither 
a Pi. Pa. p. 57  Sees, nor 
b Pi. Ro. p. 1.  Towns; nor is our Bishop's 
e Pi. Ro. p. 2.  Palace as big as a City. Oxford would buy out all the Roman Colleges; But yet must as justly yield to Sapienza, as Bethlehem to 
e Pi. Ro. p. 2.  Pazzorello;  
Now unless there be some new Charity in imposing well-sounding names on the Acts of it; and the munificence of the Donor is to be tried by the Pomp of the Title; it will not be easy to discern the preeminence 
c Pi. Ro. p. 100 and so Bozius de sign. Eccl. L. 5. c. 3. Leo 4tus Urbem condidit in Vaticano.  
d P. 67. R. Pa.  of foreign liberality; and therefore as hard to pardon the denial of the most apparent works of English and most of them, of Protestant Charity; which no man can be ignorant of, that hath breathed English air; that hath travailed ten miles in this Island; and knows a Free-School, or an Alms-house, when he sees it.  
Since therefore the Reflections are so severe; let us see what Ground there is for them; Let us see what preeminence the Romanists can justly claim in the Exercise of all Good Works, and of that chiefly, which they more Particularly insist on, Charity.  

a See Soave's Hist. Con. Tr. l. 2 and Decrees of of Con. Tr. § 6. Can. 32. etc.  First, than it is the known Doctrine of the Trent Council, that Charity is not only declaratory of our Faith; but Effective of our Justification; That He, who gives to the Poor, literally lends to the Lord; and is the Creditor of Heaven: as indeed he is by virtue of God's free promise but not for the merit of his works. Now the Notions of the Romanists in this point of Merit are so gross, and extravagant, that a Man, who is not inclined to Paradoxes, may reasonably doubt, whether any one act of true Charity ever was, or indeed can be founded on those Principles. For Charity exerts it-self in Free-gifts; and nothing is properly given; where the pretended Donor can demand an Equivalent. To give is to part with Right; and every Benefactor must necessarily put himself, if not out of the hope of receiving, yet out of the Capacity of requiring retribution. Whoever distributes his Mammon, and leaves himself the Power of Exacting a greater return; is no more liberal, than he, who puts his money to interest, and buys a title to an Estate in Reversion. If therefore we would make an exact Parallel between the Roman, and Protestant Charity; we ought not only to consider the largeness of the Expense, but the Generosity of the design; since Good Deeds are to be measured by the Ends, and Intents for which they are done; and there may be great Contributions, where there is no liberality. He that conveys alms to the Poor with an unwarrantable design, is an instrument of Providence but is no more charitable for being so, than the Raven, that fed Elijah. Our bounty therefore, should it be found more frugal, is yet more heroical, generous, and disinteressed: and neither can be the result of our Covetousness, nor the occasion of our Pride. But, upon an exact scrutiny, we shall find; that these different Speculations have not the expected influence on our Practice; and that the Giver not only distributes more freely, but more largely than the Purchaser.  
For (that we may use some Method in reflecting on this undigested heap of Calumnies) all Charity either respects the Christian, or the Man; either assists our Brother in his Spiritual wants; or supplies his temporal necessity.  
First then as to 
a See Pie. Rom. 96. 97 etc. Pi. Paris. P ●. etc.  Spiritual Charity; which is the less Popular, yet certainly the Greater Virtue.  

b Pi. R. p. 63.  If the instructing Novices in the mysteries of the Christian faith be the first of all the Spiritual works of Charity; he that reads our Rubric, considers our 
c C●n. 59 & 61. Jac. 1. 1603.  Canons views our Practice, will have little reason to accuse our care of young Christians, or 
d See Pi. Pa. p. 3. Pi. Ro. p. 63.  (because it sounds bigger) of Neophytes and Catechumeni. We use Manuals therefore as much as the Romanists; and esteem them as necessary, but not so sufficient; we teach them these only, as Preparatory instructions, and such as illustrate the Scripture, not supersede it; And till the Sacred Oracles shall speak intelligibly, till those Prohibited Books shall be licenc'd; their Adversaries will say, and that without either 
a Pi. Pa. p. 3.  affected malice, or Manichean Impudence, that they nuzle up their disciples in ignorance; tho' their Sermons should be as 
b See Pi. Ro. p. 80.  frequent as their Holydays; and their Manuals as numerous, as the Aves in them. And yet the Preaching at Paris too, is not so assiduous; but that it may be easily eclipsed, when Geneva is so near; and 
c See Dr. Reynold's Sion's Praise: and Dr. Potter's answer to Charity mistaken p. 14.  London at no greater distance. We might wonder therefore, that the Frequency of their Sermons should be recommended to our imitation; were it not done by the same pen, that praises the 
d See Pi. Ro. p. 83.  Eloquence of their Preachers; who, unless eloquence consists 
e 
See l. 2. Hist. Conc. Trid. of the Roman Preaching. Of which another writer gives this account.  
Predicatori usano vari artifici per commovere il suo auditorio monstrando d'esser rapiti in ispirito; & che Christo parli lo●●; & riveli, ponendosi alle volte cord all▪ collo, portando teste di morti: & in lu●go d' instruire il popolo consumano l● maggior parte della Predica▪ volg●nd● i'll paralare a Dio, all Crocefisso, & alla Madonna & il Popolo, per tale l' accet● a persuaso, che quello, che dice il Predicatore venga da Dio etc. Relatione ●●llo stato della Religione con Aggiunt▪ Gen. 1625. See also Sr. Edwin San●ys. c. 3. etc. 19   in bold Enthusiasms, affected confidence, and antic postures, may generally be ranked in the same Class of Orators, with this Author. Sure I am that in one more lasting method of Instruction, which is the printing of Nervous Sermons; we have outdone not only all Popish, but to speak impartially, all reformed Countries▪ and that more have been published at London within these twenty Years, than Paris can boast of within a Century; And this cannot be probably thought to proceed from the French Modesty, which hath seldom been famous; but from a due sense of the meaneness of those Prones, and postils, when devested of the Garniture of Action.  

g See Pi. Ro. p. 87. & 88  The Oratorians are not the only men, that visit the sick; nor are there wanting The Fathers of the Agonizants in England: only our Visitation, which is no less comfortable to the dying, is yet less dangerous to the living: it frightens not men into enriching an order, by 
h See Weavers Fun. Mon. p. 158.  impoverishing their heir; nor into expiating the sins of their life by a worse at their death. In short, They have little Reason to boast of Spiritual Charity, if they 
i Pi. Pa. p. 2. Pi. Ro. p. 98.  administer the Sacrament frequently to the People, but administer not all; 
k Pi. Par. p. 3. Pie. Ro. p. 81.  if the Sermons, which they give, are Extraordinary, and yet not equal to the Scripture they withhold; if 
l Pi. Ro. p. 98. Pi Pa. p. 3.  their Prayers are often repeated, and yet no more understood by their Hearers, than St. Bede by his Auditory of Stones.  
This then is their Spiritual Charity. The next thing, which this Author chiefly insists on, is the magnificence of their Churches and Hospitals; some of which we willingly own to be sumptuous, and shall assign the reason of their Foundation.  
When Rome had ingross'd the riches of most Nations in Europe, and had made the other Provinces as tributary to their Bishop, as they had been before to their Emperors; some methods were thought on, which might still improve this profitable devotion, and maintain the revenues of the Chamber, And since it was evident, that their treasure was much advanced by the offerings of Pilgrims, while there; and more by their favourable relations, when they returned; humane prudence advised them to consider, what motives, would most invite such advantageous guests to the City; and most oblige them in it. Stately, and Pompous Churches adorned with some reputed Relics, and feigned images were the most likely things to attract them; Good Hospitals, and kind receptives, the most probable motives, to induce them to a good opinion of the Place, and a Panegyric on those, that entertained them. Thus 
m See Onup. Panu. of the 7 Churches. And Warcup. p. 160. & Schrader. in Monum. Romae Edi. 1592.  the vast Churches, and Rich Shrines of Rome were built; thus the large Inns, and magnificent Hospitals were endowed, as things, that would certainly turn to account; and repay the Undertaker with interest.  
And as every Nation contributed to this Common Bank of the Treasures of Europe; so was it but reasonable that the Bank should maintain a College for the receipt of her liberal Votaries. But how can it be justly expected, that we should make equal provisions for Knights Errand in England, unless they brought equal gains to our Coffers? England was a 
n Se Mat. Paris in H. 3. est puteus inexhaustus etc.  Mine inexhaustible; and paid as much to Rome, as to her King; and if Rome would return the civility, we should not be backward to give a Roman College here in exchange for the English one there.  

o Ne●▪ ●ubium, quin omnibus certis & Acciden●ariis computatis, Papa singulis annis d●cem milliones Coronatorum undequaque corraserit: Hen. Took Leg. Arch. M●gdeb.  The Churches therefore and the Hospitals of Rome were built with design; and are instances not of the Pope's liberality, but their Policy. They are indeed Viscata dona; not the gifts of a generous Bishop, but the baits of a Miser. The Masters of Ecclesiastical Policy undertook a new Trade; their rich Altars, and Shrines succeeded in the place of their Circi, and Amphitheatres; And the latter show was far the more gainful.  
This Author than is very much deceived, when he mistakes them for Roman Hospitals, which are Ours; which were bought with our money; and with less than the Tenths of it; and which are not the Monuments of Italian Piety, but of English Folly.  
Thus these Fabrics were erected for bad Ends; nor are they applied to better uses. Some of which as our Author professes, are receptacles for Bastards only, and 
p See Pi. Rom. p. 108.  converted Whores.  
To use no discrimination in Charity between the good and the bad hath once been thought unblamable; but to make a difference, and to exclude all honest Christians, is a crime, that hath not usually been accused, because hardly supposed. But the Pope's revenues depending on the stews; 'tis but just, and grateful that those places should receive Prostitutes, which rose up at their Cost; and, like one of the Pyramids, were built with the price of sin. Rome found in its infancy the advantage of this Trade; and therefore still continues to be the Asylum of sinners. These Provisions then, however warmly recommended by this Author to us in England, will probably be thought unnecessary, till the return of the Celibate.  
But since we are not willing to insist on so ungrateful a Topick; we will proceed to consider, whether Rome may justly boast, if not of the good employment, yet at least of the wise management, and greatness of her Charity.  
First then, the care of the Poor is equally imposed on all Christian Communities; But the Method of that care is wholly undetermined, and arbitrary. For that the Impotent should be relieved is the injunction of Christianity; and consequently fixed, and settled: But that such Quota's should be assessed and thus distributed, such Funds raised and thus employed, is the dictate of Prudence; and therefore, upon the difference of Circumstances, admits alteration. A Defect in the former is a sin; a Failure in the latter but a less degree of wisdom; and, which may probably be the best management of Alms, is not the Dispute of a Divine, but a Politician. Some States, especially those who affect Pomp, and magnificence, have heaped up the national Charity in one Common Bank, or Prytaneum; and thence have solemnly distributed their Alms, or rather Pensions. Others have been more pleased with a shorter Circulation of Charity, and permitted it to be occasionally Expended within those Precincts, where it was levied. The former Oeconomy of almsgiving is more stately and Majestic; and, like the Inundation of Nile, makes a noise when it blesses the Land: the Latter, like a neighbouring Fountain, supplies Each small quantity of ground with a proportionate moisture; and carries with it less pomp, but more convenience. There have been those again, who have been induced by the generosity of their temper (I hope) rather than by any sinister motives of Pride and Ambition, to erect stately structures for Infirmaries; to change a Palace i● to an Alms-house, and build an Escurial for a Monastery; These naturally attract men's eyes; and the magnificence of the Fabric, the number, and garb of the Inhabitants, give the advantage in some Fanciful men's esteem to this mass of Cumulative Charity; Others in the mean time have not seen the necessity of crowding all the Poor of a Nation into one Hospital; but, giving them a comfortable salary, have permitted them to live in their old private habitations; where, among their known neighbours, and Relations, they may probably meet with better attendance, at less Charge; and live within meaner walls, with more complacency, and satisfaction. This then at present seems one great difference between the Roman, and English Charity; that the one consists of more Parts, but dispersed and diffused; the other of a less number, but those united into a whole: Theirs is not so much, but looks bigger; ours is less Compact, but of larger extent, and if not more creditable to the Giver, yet more Profitable to the Receiver. The Author may be satisfied of the truth of this from a very Authentic, tho' perhaps not a very acceptable Book; 
a See 43 Eliz. c. 2. 1 Jac. c. 3. 3 Car. 4. (2 Jac. c. 28.) 14 Eliz. c. 3. 14 Car. 2. c. 12. see More in his Reading on Charitable uses. Lond. 1676. 14 Car. 2. c. 9 Shesch c. 124. and Hern's Law of Charitable Uses explained. See Holinshed 3d Book Deser. of Britt. c. 5.  that of the Laws and Statutes of this Realm; If he would have been pleased to have perused those; consulted our Overseers, examined our Rates, took account of the 
b See 2 Ja. c. 7. 22 Jac. c. 18. 1 Jac. c. 27. 3 Jac. c. 4. Dalton. Tit. Poor p. 130. Tit. Stock of the Shire: And see particularly Prim. Eliz. & XIV Car. 2.  forfeitures, he might then have libelled his Country more considerately. For is not the 43d of Elizab. the largest Hospital for the Poor? and the best Infirmary for sick in the World? Are not more Revenues settled on that one Protestant Statute, than on the Annunciata of Naples, and S. Spirito of Rome? or, to speak deliberately, on all the Hospitals of Rome, and Paris jointly? And if that pious Law, and those that Second it, have not always in all their branches, and the largest extent of their words been fully executed; had it not been a more suitable Office for one that pretends to be an Advocate for Charity to press the execution of those noble, and more than Agrarian Laws, than to amuse himself, and upbraid us with the French Caprices, and Italian Inventions?  
So great therefore and so discreet is the Public Provision for the Poor; that, though in this bountiful Nation it cannot prevent, yet it might perhaps justly supersede our private, and occasional Charity. And here for the Honour of our Country I must observe, that whosoever builds an Hospital in England, only gives somewhat more to th● Poor at his Private Expense, than what they ought ●o have at the Public Charge; and is not more properly a Benefactor to them, than to the Nation. Whether now these Legal Provisions are the best methods of maintaining the Poor, and most conducive to their Interest; is a Question, that needs not be decided by the nice Enquiry of our Reason, but the plain Evidence of our Senses. For if the Happiness of the Poor be the End of our Laws, and aught to be the design of their Hospitals; we may then, from their better or worse Estate ordinarily make an estimate of the defect, or increase of Charity in a Nation. And here tho' the miserable state of the Poor in France, when heightened by no Extraordinary Barbarities, be notorious from the Consent of all Travellers, and Historians; and expressly owned by 
a Card. Perron in Per. p. 233. Paysans en Angleterre boivent t●us de bonne bierte, mangent de bon baeuf, & on n'en voit pas un qui ne soit vestu de drape. In Fran●… ils sont miserables deschirez. les Roy ●…evroient avoir quelque respect. See 〈◊〉 same in Gainsford's glory of Englan● c. 24.  one of their most eminent Cardinals, who openly declames upon the misery of the Poor in France, and the happiness of those in England: yet I shall be contented at present to wave better authority, and to take a Specimen of their happiness from this Author's own Pen.  
In the Deanery of Guise were found near upon five hundred People so excessively miserable, that they seize upon dead Dogs, and Horses which are the Wolves leave: And in the very To●n of Guise there are above 500 sick Persons who a● lodged in Caves, and Dens. Some of them have eaten no Bread in six, or seven weeks, not so much, as ●at, which they make of barley bran, which is the diet of those, which fare best; but their meat is Lizards, Frogs, and wild herbs. Pi. Par. p. 18. We have only met with rigorous dealings from our Creditors, cruelty from the Soldiers, who forcibly rob us of the small quantity of Bread, which we had. Pag. 14. There are above an hundred at St. Michael, who appear any Skeletons covered with skin, and their skins are like tawny Marble, and so dried up, that their teeth seem to be dry, and discovered. Pag. 16. 17. There are abundance, who are afflicted with Fluxes, and Fevers; others covered with Scabs and Purple-spots, Tumours, and Imposthumes: These infirmities were caused by eating wild Roots, and bread of Bran. Our ears are filled with pitiful lamentations, and out-cries for Bread. Pag. 17.  
These now are such horrible spectacles, as take our gifts by violence; and would extort a largess from a Nabal or a Judas. These make such sensible impressions on human nature, as compel us to sacrifice an alms to our own uneasiness, and the mere power of Sympathy. These force us to give by instinct; nor permit us to expect the slow dictates of Reason, much less the Commands of Christianity. So that, tho' it is not my design to undervalue the latest Acts of almost outdated Charity; yet we must necessarily own, that when the Motives are so forcible, there is a greater crime in the neglect of the duty, but less glory in the Performance: And here however it may be for Vincent de Paul's Credit to have taken some care of the sad remains of this Wretched Band; it is not much certainly for the honour of the French Nation, or of the 
a Pi. Par. p. 11.  Saintly Bishops thereof to leave such unheard-of calamities to the poor relief of a Private Collection. And were there ever now in this Uncharitable Island such Patterns of unparallelled miseries, as perhaps have not been seen in the world, since the siege of Jerusalem? If not; if our Laws take care not to remedy such calamities, but to prevent them; if they rather send Bread to the Poor when they are Hungry, than give them burial, when they are famished; Upon what grounds can any senseless Projector question the wisdom of his Prudent Ancestors, which, if once received in his beloved Country's would weigh down all their Carita's, and Lazarettoes? Private Foundations may perhaps succeed well, tho' they are the results of Fancy, and Caprice; But the Public Charity of a Nation is not to be founded on the tricks and devices of little designs, but upon solid maxims, and lasting Constitutions, which are really made for use, not show, and are more truly great, than stately. For 
a Pi. Ro. p. 1. This Hospital s●ems to to be rather a whole Town than one house.  Hospitals may easily swell into Towns, 
b Pi. Par. p. 51. Hotel Dieu, is a Sea, where it is continual High-water.  Infirmaries into Seas, and the Banks 
c See Ritratto di Roma Moderna p. 211. of the Moute della Pieta:- si paga una poca cosa per cento, per Mantenimento di quest opera. Which is thus expressed p. 39 Pi. Ro. No or at least, no considerable use paid; and in Theod. Amid▪ nulla saltem considerabili pro mutuata pecunia recepta usura: p. 93 Malines Lex Mecat. c. 13. p 34. In Italy there are Montes Pietatis, where the Poor may borrow upon pawns, and pay after the rate of 3 or 4 per Cent.  of Usurers into Mountains of Piety; but the Poor are not to be fed, nor the lame to be cured by a stretch of the Pen, and a senseless Hyperbole.  
We have hitherto ●●en on which side the Preeminence ly's not only in the End, and Scope but the Measure, and good management of Charity in General; we will now so much favour this Author, as to descend to his own Particular branch of it, and take a view of our Infirmaries, and Hospitals, and Schools, which are with us only the products of a Private, not a National Charity.  
When the Abbeys than were here dissolved, and 
d See 37 H. 8. c. 4. 1 Ed. 6. c. 14. see Dugd. Monast. Angl. p. 390. & p 406. Godw. Ann. H. 8. ad An. 1535. Antiq. Britan. in Cranm. Hospin. de orig. Mon. p. 273.- Propter graves, & multiplices eorum enormitates. Weev. Fun. Mon.  the crimes of the Religious industriously laid open; those apparent abuses of their Ancestor's Charity had naturally such an influence on most men, as would rather incline them to distribute their alms occasionally on their Neighbours, than bestow much on any lasting Foundation; which might soon be made a receptacle and seminary of impiety, and consequently obnoxious to dissolution. The Monks therefore were doubly injurious to the Poor of this Nation; first by intercepting the Alms of the former ages: and 2dly by preventing the bounty of the Latter. And yet such was the efficacy of our Faith, and so great the liberality of our young Josiah, that it broke through all these Reasonable prejudices, and 
e Burn. Hist. Ref. l. 1. A. 1553. p. 222.  signalised the beginnings of the Reformation with the most noble instances of unparallelled Charity: 
f Of the yearly number of those that are maintained in the Hospitals; see the spital Sermons, particularly Dr. Still lingfleets, Dr. Tenison's, and Dr. Hicks'.  Then rose that great Hospital of Christ-Church, which hath in this short space, maintained, and Educated above 12000. Children; and that without forcing them to beg their Bread in the Highways, 
g The young Boys of Letterd John's Foundation beg alms of good People. Pi. Ro. p. 30. see p. 42.  More Romano: or to be 
h Children of the Hospitals of les Enf●nts as well as the Blew-boys gain part of their livelihood by carrying Torches, etc. Pi. Par. p. 36.  Common Link-boys for their livelihood, which is the ingenuous method of French Education. Then were founded the two famous Infirmaries of St. Thomas, and St. Bartholomew, in both which near 4000 Patients are yearly cured and discharged, besides those that die under the care of the Hospital. Then lastly the Palace 
i See Pi. Par p. 47.  of Bridewell was changed into an Hospital, which yearly receives near a 1000 indigent, and miserable Vagrants. All these were the great, and yet not the only Foundations of the first of our Protestant Kings; all settled in one City only, upon the incitements of a Martyr of this Church; all built, or endowed in his first years, as an earnest only of his future Munificence. These noble Precedents of Royal bounty were so well copied out by Protestants of an inferior Rank, 
k Willet. Syn. p. 962. Camd. in Cantio.  Lambert, 
l 1 bid. & 1 Ed. 6. c. 14.  Cobham, 
m Camb. An. p. 286. & 189. Willet. 16.  Gresham, 
n Willet. 16. Coke in Le Case de Sutton's Hosp. Ful. l. 10. p. 65. & Hern's Domus Carthusiana.  Sutton, 
o Willet. 16. Fuller. 16. Sr. Jo. Harr. of Bishops p. 9  Whitgift, 
p Fuller. l. 10. p. 65. & p. 26. Quis nescit eum nobile Gerontocomium extruxisse, stipendioque dotasse; inibi multi pauperes utriusque sexus aluntur, & Catechisantur. Holland in Rob. Dud. p. 77. see also 13 Eliz. c. 13. see also Dugd. 3 Tom. Mon.  Leicester, etc. that almost 50 Hospitals were founded immediately upon the Reformation in little more than the same number of years; and, after due Scrutiny, I can justly not only repeat but continue the memorable assertion of an eminent 
q See Dr. Potter's answer to Charity mistaken. p. 13. Ld. C. J. Coke's Pref. 10. Vol. Rep. See Willet. Synopsis Papismi 19 Cont. Qu. 2. p. 961. & 962.  Judge; That more good works of Piety and Charity have been founded within this Realm during the Reign of our late Queen Eliz. than in many ages before. Indeed from the Aera of our late Reformation we may justly date the Progress of true Charity in this Island. And tho' the late execrable Rebellion (the original of which we now know) must necessarily put a stop to it during a considerable part of that Period; yet I dare deliberately affirm, that, within this short space, more and greater Acts of well-directed Charity have been seen among us, than from the arrival of St. Augustine to the Death of K. Henry 8th. And yet tho' these noble Results of Protestant Charity are so notorious; we need not however wonder that he should still reflect on our Hospitals, who is pleased to upbraid us with Foreign Schools, and Colleges. Never was a slander more unluckily fixed on us, who 
a See Wase's Essay to the hist. of Free-Schools.  are the happiest of all Nations in Europe in the large Endowments settled on our Schools, and Universities, by our generous Ancestors; some of them Protestants, many of them Kings, and Prelates of another Persuasion. And as no difference in Opinions can withdraw us from paying the most profound respects to their memory, so we can hardly with patience hear their noble works slighted, and ridiculed by one who rather chooses to write a Panegyric on the petty alms of a 
b p. 14. p. 19 29. Pi. Pa.  Spanish Bookbinder, a French Innkeeper, and a 
b p. 14. p. 19 29. Pi. Pa.  Sicilian Gentleman Usher.  
Here now, if we would insist on the vast Foundations of 
c See Duck's Gesta Chich. Wood in Coll. om. An. & Sti. Joh.  Chichely, 
d Wood in Coll. Aedis Christi.  Woolsey, 
e Jo. Budden. in vitâ Gu. Patteni. Full. Churc. Hist. l. 4. p. 188.  Wainfleet, 
f Willet. Syn. Pap. p. 960. Full. Hist. Camb. 146.  Mildmay, 
g Willet ib. Fuller. 16. p. 153.  Sidney. The mean Donatives of 
h Piet. Rom. p. 14. p. 55. c. p. 77.  Capranica, Salviato, and Palotta would make but a very small figure; and He that would equal foreign Colleges to theirs, must use a far larger Hyperbole, than when he increases the number of the Germane Students, and augments the Revenues of S. Spirito. But it is not my design at present to transcribe Woods, or Fuller: The Proof of things Evident is then only neceslary, when it is extorted by the Impudence of a Flat denial; and till then, it need not be granted to the timorous malice of sly Reflections.  
But in common justice to our Protestant Founders and Benefactors, we must acquaint the Reader (if he know it not) that even most of those Colleges, which derive their first Foundation from Catholic Kings, and Prelates, owe their present magnificence to Reformers; who have copied out herein Augustus' Pattern, and have changed Popish Brick into Protestant Marble. Few Foundations there are, that stand upon their original basis, without Protestant Supporters: where Halls only were left; they have been since Endowed; that is, changed from Italian into English Colleges: where mean Colleges were built; their structures, and Revenues have been so sensibly advanced, and improved, that apparently more is owing to the concurrence of Rivulets, than the greatness of the Fountain. Even that College, which hath the Happiness to be governed by this Editor, owes more to a Protestant Benefactor, than a Catholic Founder; and is less fortunate in its birth, than adoption. It boasts itself indeed of an ancient date, but proves it rather by old rolls▪ than tenors; so that as to the revenues of it, like Jason's Ship, it wholly consists of Additions. I am sensible this Gentleman is not much acquainted with the learned languages, but being of the Latin Church, and University College, I presume he may understand four Verses which are there gratefully preserved; and I recommend 'em to his consideration.  

Vana suum jactet Benedictum Roma; Benettum  
Ordo Reformatae Religionis habet.  
Ergo Domum qui Fronte octoque ornavit alumnis  
Aeternum nobis hic Benedictus erit.   
Nor have the Reformers more promoted learning by the Colleges, they have built; than by the Libraries they have founded; having herein as much the advantage of their Catholic Ancestors, as Sr. Thomas Bodley's Library has of Duke Humfrey's. When the third part of the Revenues of this Nation were spent in a Cloister; when the Clergy frequently ingross'd the white Staff's, and challenged the Seals by Prescription: When the wealth of the Kingdom was in the hands of the learned, (or rather, the less ignorant) part of it: then might it have been justly expected, that our Libraries should have surpassed that of Alexandria; and that little would have been left to be added by a Bodley, a Laud, or a Selden.  
But Learning was never restored, till Religion was reformed: The Monkish Barbarity had the same Exit with their superstition: And then at last Libraries were increased and Learning advanced; when there came in a Religion that could bear the test of it; I am not ignorant there were some few Desks of Books in their Abbeys; which as our antiquaries frequently complain, were lost, and scattered in the General dissolution: and yet if the Quality of these Musaeolums may be seen in their remains; and a true Idea of the Fabric may be taken from its ruins; we have good reason to imagine that the treasure was such, as rather received its price from the antiquity of the stamp, than the Intrinsic value of the Metal. Most of their Libraries may be reduced▪ to some few 
a See Bale and Pits de Scriptor. Anglic. who both borrowed their Catalogues from Leland, appointed by H. 8. to Survey the Libraries of the Monasteries.  Officials; the Legends of their Saints; a Catalogue of their Relics; the Charters of their foundation; the Annals of their Monasteries; and, above all, the Lieger Books and Rolls of their Manors. The Comparison of these little repositories of Learning with the Protestant Libraries, especially with that of the University of Oxford; would give us an easy, but a despicable victory; since, if we would draw a Parallel between His, and the most eminent Libraries elsewhere, we shall find, that, this younger Brother, like Benjamin, hath the greater portion. 
a See Dr. James. Ecloga Oxonio-Cantabrigiensis. & Bellum Papale.  Here the Fathers appear in their genuine dress; and are unacquainted with a Sponge. No Authors here suffer under the Inquisition; nor are maimed by an Index Expurgatorius. Not a leaf wanting in any of our Books, but what has been cut out by some honest Gentlemen, who saw it was not wisdom to attack 'em by any other method. Our Adversaries too are received into our Arsenal; nor do we fear, that our Soldiers should be dismayed at the sight of the Sons of Anak. So that if this, by reason of its far later date, should hardly equal the Vatican (which yet it surpasses) in the number of its Books; yet certainly in the freedom of access, and the ingenuity of the Management, it must be allowed to exceed it.  
But however Few and Mean, their Colleges are, Their Monasteries, we own, want neither 
b Nello Stato Ecclesiastic. in Italia Conventi di▪ Monache 272. Conventi di Maschi 388. Greg. Leti. Ceremon. Pa. 5. p. 155. Amstel. 1685. See Pi. Rom. part 3. cap. 3. p. 103. In England, says Bozius, Dena, millia Monasteria numerabantur (which is not much above 9000, more than ever were) but he is the same man that says there are in Rome Templorum tria millia. See Boz. de sign. Eccl. l. 11. c. 3. See Sir Edw. Sandys. c. 7. See Hosp. de orig. Monach. p. 274. Concil. Tom. 3. Del. Card. Conventuales ordines abolendos esse putamus omnes.  number nor riches. But here we are concerned to know, under what species of Charity, we should rank these Religious Houses, whose design is unwarrantable; whose rules are sometimes senseless, and more often impious, which usually proceed from a Caprice, and 
c He la Politica degli Ecclesiasiici e stata quella; Che ha introdotto nella Chiesa Romana tanti Conventi di Frati, e tanti Monasteri di Monache, non gia il solo Zelo della Religione, come altri pensano.  (to say no more) nourish Enthusiasm.  
At best 
d Quando in una famiglia si trovano set o otto fratelli poveri, à quali non se è permesso per la nobilita della lor nascita d'abbracciar professioni base, è una gran Commodita quella di pateri far Frati etc. Dial. Polit. Genev. Chovet. 1666. Si Caenobia in Anglia florerent, haereditates manerent penes primogenitos indicisae. Reiner. de Antiq. Bened. in Angl. p. 230.  they are esteemed among themselves the results rather of Policy, than Religion, and consequently more subservient to convenience, than Piety. They only give men opportunity of keeping up that, which the Italians so much admire, the Grandezza of a Family; and of making a Cheap and Gentile Provision for a supernumerary Son, and an Odd daughter. For an Honest Trade will taint Roman Blood; but a Cowl, and a Veil consists with Gentility. This is then the only piece of Charity which we want; or rather neither have nor want: This is that, the very footsteps of which our Prudent Ancestors have not suffered to remain among us; and yet this is that, which is the overweening hope of this Pamphleteer and the great design of this Treatise to introduce. For to what other purpose are all parts of it filled with the Praises of Persons single, disengaged, and sequestered from the world: 
a Pi. Pom. p. 107.  using no Beds but instead thereof Sacks, or bare boards; 
b Pi. Par. p. 66.  having one common habitation, one Purse, one Pantrey, and who are at such a distance from any real Propriety, that those cold words Meum & Tuum (the Source of all Dissensions) are banished out of their Society.  
These are the old and obsolete Praises of a Monastic life; and shall therefore receive an answer of no little standing, in the words of our Church 
c 3d. Part of the Homily of Good Works. .  
As for their wilful Poverty it was such; that when in Possessions, Jewels, Plate, and Riches, they were equal to or above Merchants, Gentlemen, Barons, Earls, and Dukes; yet by this subtle Sophistical▪ term Proprium in Communi, they mocked the world, persuading that notwithstanding all their Possessions, and Riches; yet they kept their vow, and were in wilful Poverty. But for all their riches they might 
a See this proved in Crusii Ep. Jesuit. 2 n. 7. & 8.  neither help Father nor Mother; nor other that were indeed very needy, and Poor without the licence of their Father Abbot, Prior, or Warden yet they might take of every man; but they miggt not give aught to any man, no not to them, whom the Laws of God bound them to help.  
Here we have the exact copy of the Pharisaical Corban; and as this, and the other Impieties of the Regulars, 
b Burnet Hist. Ref Pa. 1. l. 3 p. 189.  discovered at the dissolution of their houses in England, will not permit us to have any great opinion of their devotion; so the Present weakness of Spain and 
c ●eramente il veder le Citta del Pontefice le meno popolate di tutta l'Italia Dial. Polit Gen: Chovet. 1666.  Italy, 
d Nello Regno di Napoli Conventi di Monache 533 Conventi di Frati 680. Leti. p. 156. see p. 159.  which apparently proceeds from the vast numbers of the Religious there, hardly suffers us to think, that there is any Politic Convenience in maintaining them.  
Now then; if we had leisure to recapitulate the Charge, and the defence; we might see how justly Protestant's are accused of defect of Charity, who alone can be properly said to exercise any; how deservedly Englishmen are exhorted to a constant exercise of liberality, and a Prudent management of it, whose Legal Provisions are alone, and only are sufficient to answer 'tis true, and great designs; how ingenuously at last we are Charged with want of Hospitals, Schools, and Colleges; who in the former come behind few, in the latter exceed all Countries in Europe.  
For if we had an Index Expurgatorius to strip this little Book of its Rhetorical Flourishes; the Roman Colleges, and French Hospitals would lie in a far less compass. For than first he would probably have omitted those structures, 
a Such is Hospitale D. Mariae in Portico. see also p. 57  which are only proved to have been by doubtful Inscriptions; and which are now extant in no other Rome, but Sotterranea. And again, he would scarce have suffered the Reader to be troubled with 
b See Pi. Pa. p. 10. Mr Vincent had at first one only Companion; which soon after increased to 10 or 12, and ere this (as we may guests with probability) amounts even to thousands Pi. Par. p. 59 I am told there is a design to build eight or ten fair Halls; all to be furnished with beds; with white Fustian Curtains; with each one a Straw Bed, and a Feather Bed, and a Good Quilt etc. see also p. 60. and p. 61.  Platonic Structures; such as have no other Foundation, but in the mind of the Donor, or rather in the wishes of the Beggar. But it was an agreeable task for him, that would overthrow our Doctrine with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and future treatises, to depress the Honour of our works by Utopian Charity, and Intentional Hospitals; which we could easily have answered by giving him a large description of Mr. Cowley's College, and Mr. Milton's School. And lastly we should possibly have not so much receded from the Pattern of that Good Steward, whom he commends in the Preface, as instead of 
c Entrate, Che bastano per mantener▪ Cento giovani Tedeschi. P. 264. Ritratto di Roma Moderna: in Roma 1652. con licenza de Sup Compare this with Pi. Rom. p. 71. The Alumni of this College are 150 more or less.  100 to set down 150 more or less; or in the place of 
d A Rome il y a un hospital qui a 100 mil escus de fonds; ou mesmes les Gentilhomes, lors qui'ls sont malades, see font porter. Scaliger in Sca. Edit. Fabr. Groningae 1669. p. 206. Vide Praef. p. 2. Theod. Am. p. 16. Annuus hic cen sus ad centies mille aureos ferè ascendit.  100000 Crowns to put down about 37500l sterling.  
We see therefore that this Author is just in the Main; and doth not keep what he takes from us, but only transports it; he annihilates indeed and extenuates Hospitals at home; but then he erects, and augments them abroad; and so only robs Paul to give to Peter.  
We have already then taken a survey of the Foreign, and English munificence; It remains that we inquire whether his pretences to Devotion are better grounded, than those to Charity; and whether those 
a Praef. p. 4.  who pretend to enjoy more light of truth are inferior in the true fruits of truth, Goodworks. And here it is only necessary to make this Author speak intelligibly; to perform the office of an Expositor, and in it, that of an Answerer.  
A constant Practice then of a Right and Regular Devotion is certainly an evidence of a true, and lively Faith, because a necessary result of it, The Essence undoubtedly discovers itself in its Property; and is not only shown by it, but appears in it. If in this sense therefore, this Author would infer the sincerity of men's faith from the goodness of their works; he would be no more singular in his arguments, than in his discoveries, and this might deservedly be ranked among one of his new Italian Inventions. But now, because the reality of our Faith is to be judged by the intrinsic goodness of our works; is therefore the truth of our tenets to be tried by the outward appearance of our Actions? External Acts are as fallible signs of Piety, as Verbal expressions; we see no more men's devotion in the one, than we hear it in the other; and both may probably flow from an holy zeal; and both may possibly proceed from a gross Hypocrisy.  
But if we should admit, (which without fear of the consequences we safely may) That the truth of a Doctrine is to be tried by the outward Good works of its Professors, it was certainly to be hoped that such works should be assigned, as a Common Standard, which were evidently, and indisputably Good, or at least not apparently Bad. But now for this Author, to produce 
a See p. 2. Piet. Rom.  the Italian Idolatry and 
b p. 2 etc. Pi. Par.  French Superstition, as the best specimen of their Devotion, and Piety; is a frank confession indeed, which gives him for once the title of a faithful Relator; but a very unhappy Arguer. For when 
c See Praef p. 4.  in this whole treatise the Regularity of the Practice is proposed as a Proof of the truth of their Doctrine; here the truth of doctrine is assumed to justify the regularity of the Practice. And so to fill up the circle of the Argument, the Principles are apparently true, because they produce Good works; and the works are as apparently Good, because they flow from true Principles.  
This is such ridiculous Sophistry, as a man would not probably have been guilty of, that had never seen the famous University of Sapienza, nor reprinted 
d See Ars Rationis. Ox. 1673.  Occam. We allow him therefore, that there are 
e See Pi. Ro. c. 8 p. 93.  Dirige's and Trentals at Rome, and that there is no Sodality of the suffrage in England. We put the same limits to our Prayers, that God hath set to his mercy; and dare not ask that refrigerium for our Friends, which Abraham despaired of obtaining for his son. We own again that 
f Pi. Rom. p. 4.  their Churches are beauteously graced with the sacred furniture of Pictures; whereas our walls are plainly adorned with some holy admonitions only; and, among them, usually with the second Commandment. We willingly grant him therefore the whole credit of this Piety: we own their Obits, and their Images, their 
g See Pi. Ro. p. 90, & 91.  Confessional Chairs, and satisfactory Penance; we come not in as sharers in this Praise, nor envy them the monopoly of it. Thus far therefore the Author hath made Good his Claim: but hath thereby gained such a right, as will only prejudice his title to the true acts of genuine devotion. This Leaven insinuates itself into each part of the Mass, and a multitude of Erroneous acts will not arise to an accumulative virtue. The failure therefore of the Romanists in the Exercise of almost every act of Piety might easily be proved, were it not a task not long since anticipated by a 
a See a Discourse concerning the Devotions of the Church at Rome, especially as compared with those of the Church of England. Printed Lond. 1687.  Treatise, which is yet unanswered, and which is so full that it needs not be enlarged, and so late, that it needs not be repeated. However, since some men will not easily imagine so much Confidence, as the Papists always show in this Cause, to proceed from no shadow of advantage on their side; it will be requisite to consider, on what seeming grounds this assurance may probably be thought to be founded.  
Many men then, that measure things by the length of their shadows, take the dimensions of their Charity and Devotion from the Grandeur of Almsgiving, and the Pomp of Piety. The Pageantry of Images and 
b See Pi. Pa. p. 41.  Relics; the outward Severity of their Asceticks, and solitude of their Hermits; the Austerity of some of their Religious, and the Enthusiasm of others, naturally make a deeper impression on Fanciful men, and Easy women, than the strict, and regular exercise of a wise rational, and manly Devotion. A silent Groan, an inward sorrow, a long, and that a necessary and indispensable contrition make a less show, than the ceremony of a Fast, and the Luxury of a Fish-entertainment. The secret worship of an invisible object is a less popular act of Religion, than the adoration of an Image at Paris, and of the 
c Pi. Ro. p. 6.  Volto Santo at Rome. To feed the Hungry, and to relieve the Sick is the homely method of Northern Charity; But to build a stately 
a Pi. Ro. p. 14.  unendowed Hospital for the Poor to starve in gently, is, the more magnificent instance of Italian Liberality. When the 
b Pi. Rom. p. 62.  Florentines go before the Condemned Criminal two by two, covered over Head to the very Feet with black Frocks of Buckram; when the 
c Pi. Pa. o. 25.  Ladies of Paris carry the Porridg-Pot between two of them upon a staff all up and down the Parish; which they keep as bright as the Hollander doth his Andirons; it is natural for some men, that are pleased with odd sights; to judge of the truth of a Religion by the brightness of the Porridg-Pot, and the blackness of the Buckram. And seriously those are guilty of no better inferences, who pretend to be converted to Popery by the sight of a Religious Cavalcade, and the solemnity of a Procession. The Advantage therefore of this, as of all Superstition, lies only in outward appearance, and ceremony; and they, the essence of whose Religion consists in a show, are careful to keep up the shadow, that is, the Substance of it.  
Thus have I rather chosen to reflect upon the Work, than expose the Author; though the latter were not only a more easy task, but as justifiable an undertaking: for one that has dealt with us as he has, must not look for that quarter we can give a fair and open enemy. But it will not be advisable for him to make too bold with our good nature; or try the utmost extent of civility: especially one that lies so open, should take care not to be too provoking. Let it suffice that he has left us, and let us be quite rid of him; but let him not believe himself privileged by his desertion to libel our Church and University. If he must be busy, let him add examples to an old Rhetoric; or glean the Jansenists Logic; or pick straws out of Il Maestro di Camera; or busy himself with Immanuel Thesauro's bees: these are employments suitable to his capacity; and such as he may pursue without interruption. But if he will rise above his Form, tamper with Controversy, pretend to manage an Argument, degrade Kings, and asperse Countries; he must expect to be made acquainted with himself; and receive due correction for Assuming. It reflects upon the wisdom, which his long experience should have taught him, that when he designs to beg somewhat towards the finishing of Works already begun and attempted, he should lard his petition with the slander of his Country; and think to purchase at the expense of our reputation. But I hope the event will convince him of his mistake. For though I would exhort all men, and especially Englishmen to the constant exercise of Charity; I would likewise advise them, to know into what hands they deposit their money; for there may be Mountains of piety so unlike those at Rome, that instead of Interest gained, the Principal may be lost. If I can obtain this just request of the prudent Reader, I shall rest satisfied with the success of these Reflections; as being hereby indifferently well assured, that however the Particulars of this Treatise have been answered, the main design of it will be frustrated.  
FINIS.   

A Vindication of Protestant Charity, in Answer to some Passages in M. M's. Remarks on a late Conference.  
SInce the Protestant Churches, Hospitals, and Schools, are so frequent in this nation; and so obvious to every man's eye; we have just reason to imagine, that they, who still pretend to be ignorant of them, do not in one point only decline the use of their senses. For is it otherwise possible that the Roman Lazarettoes should be more visible than the English Hospitals? unless by some new rule of optics, the Object appears larger, when it is at a greater distance. Whatever respect therefore others may have for this Gentleman, I cannot think him very careful of his own reputation, who is the Author of so severe, and yet so groundless a Calumny. Where there is a considerable distance either of time or place, where the matter of Fact is secret, or the Witnesses scarce, a slander is more readily believed, or at least more hardly confuted. But the plain, and bold denial of things done in our own Nation, in our own time, is a Poison that carries with it it's own Antidote. Wherefore tho' the confutation of such evident, and notorious falsehoods be a very easy task; perhaps it may be difficult to excuse the impertinence of confuting them. However because, this Topick hath been confidently 
a See Boz. de sign. Eccl. tit. Magnif. and Stapylton. p. 2. 10. to 2. etc. and Tho. Car. Pi. Par. p. 242. and Hill against Abbot. p. 145.  insisted on by many eminent Papists; and because an error long asserted with more than ordinary assurance, often gains a proportionate belief among the inconsiderate, it may seem worth while to undeceive well meaning men, who are not parties to the slander, but misled by an Implicit Faith.  
As to the other part of Mr. M's. Remarks, it is not my business to consider it; much less shall I concern myself to lessen the repute of the Author. I shall only observe, that, since he confidently affirms so much, and proves so little; they very well understood his Talon, who in these late Contests, employed him not as a Disputant, but an Evidence. Had he kept within that Sphere, we should not have thought ourselves concerned with him; But since, he has been pleased to show his reading in the Oxford Treatises; and among his Remarks, to insert this following Observation; we shall only examine the truth of it, and then commit him into better Hands.  

a See Remarks. p. 21. see also p. 17. 15, 19, 20, 22.  I am not ignorant, that some Hospitals, Almshouses, and Churches have been built by Protestants: 
b For some proof of what is here said, see a book lately printed at Oxford, called Pietas Romana & Parisiensis; By which in some measure the rest may be guessed. Marginal note upon this Observation Remarks. p. 21.  But there is no more Proportion between Dr. Tenison's two Parishes and a couple of the poorest Vicariges in Wales, than there is between the Monuments of Catholic Zeal, and whatever of that kind hath been done by Protestants. It will be a great while before the Reformation builds the fortieth part of what it hath pulled down. Nay, (supposing that this poor Nation is not to return to its ancient Religion) there is more likelihood, that Reformations following one another, like Egyptian plagues, the succeeding ones should still devour what the preceding left; than that men, who have taken Sacrilege for the service of God should endeavour to repair any part of what is already destroyed.  
This Remark now, if devested of the Usual Civilities, will amount to these two Propositions.  

1. That the Monuments of Catholic Zeal were pulled down by Protestants; and that consequently they have taken Sacrilege for the service of God.  
2 That the Protestant Alms will not be equivalent to the fortieth part of Catholic Charity before the Reformation.   
That both these assertions are false, any one knows, that is less ignorant than this Gentleman seems; and therefore it is for his satisfaction chiefly, (for few will be exempted out of the other Predicament) that I'll prove them so.  
First then; were it not the custom of some men to give the title of Catholic Princes to Reformers; and, when it seems advantageous, to return the Compliment; it might justly be wondered, upon what account, the first Defender of the Catholic Faith bears the Character of a Protestant. He was a Man too much wedded to his own notions, to espouse Luther's Doctrine, which he had pretended to confute; and too little forgetful of injuries, to patronise his cause, who had treated him, rather like a Disputant, than a King. The Protestants were never more exposed to the fiery trial than in his time; and had as little reason to think him a Reformer, as the Jews once had to mistake their Persecutor▪ for Messias. The Dissolution of Abbeys, lest it should seem the act of a Protestant, was immediately seconded by the 6 Articles; and even that was no more, than what had been attempted by Popish Parliaments; & in some measure 
a See of Ed. 2. alienations of Ch. Lands, in Johnston's Assurance of Abbey Lands. p. 40.  completed by Precedent Kings; the suppression of Religious houses being only a copy drawn from Protestant Henry the 
a Centum Prioratus Monachorum alienigenarum Henricus 5tus ante dissolverat. Cambd. 1 Bri. p. 11. See Fabians Chr. A. 1414. & 2 H. 5. & see also in A. D 1410.  5ths' original. Either Hen. 8th was of the same Religion with Gardiner and Bonner; or, (what little commends those pillars of Catholicism,) they pretended to be of the same with him. There is no colour then for calling K. Hen. 8. a Protestant; but that this Gentleman hath somewhat to say against him, and therefore wishes him to have been so. If all are Protestants, that deny the Pope's Supremacy, we may stortly expect the reestablishment of the Edict of Nants; If all are Reformers, that are esteemed Sacrilegious, Charles Martel, and Boniface the 7th would be in our Number, and as many Bishops, as would probably make out our Succession. Wherefore none of our Considerable Historians, tho' they were no great Friends to Abbeys, have ever claimed Hen. 8th; and those Popish writers, who have had no good opinion of his Acts, 
b Reiner. de Ant'q Benedict. in Angl Aperte constat ipsum in iis solum articulis doctrinae Christianae discessisse ab avita fide, quae ipsius libidini, & avaritiae contraibant; nempe in Primatu Pontificis, & vitae communis Monachorum & Regularium suppressione. See also p. 226. Even Sanders dares not call him Protestant, but with his usual modesty, Alter quidam Mahumetes. l. 1. de Schism. Angl.  have not yet dared wholly to disown him. They were Papists only that first by their 
c See Nic. Clemang. de corrupto Eccl. stat c. 2 21 and 23. Erasm. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in Epist. ad Rust Mon.  corrupt manners drew down the odium of all good men upon those noble Foundations; they were Popish Parliaments that offered the revenues of them 
d Vid. Hist. Walsingh. in Rich 2. de Parl. Gloc.  to Rich. 2d, and actually gave them to H. 8th: They were Popish Heads who 
e See Rob. de monte de immutatione ordinis Monach. & W. Thorn in his Chron. p. 1781. Edit. Twisd. Lon. 1652 Temporibus Henr. 8 nullum ●ere repertum est. monesteriam ubi non adulteriorum, stuprorum, incestarum libidinum, sodomiaes, nefandorumque flagitiorum plurima non reperirentur vestigia, eaque & testibus comprobata. Hosp. de orig. monaster p. 273. See Antiq. Britan. in Cranm. & Pol. Virg. p. 121.  being partly obnoxious for their Crimes, and partly corrupted 
a See Dugd. Hist. Warw p. 803 etc. L. Herb p. 442. Godw. An. 1589 & and 1535.  by the prospect of a greater allowance 
b See Weever Fun Mon. p 100  basely resigned even before the Act of Parliament, and treacherously gave up the bounty of their Founder, and betrayed the Rights of their Successors. It was lastly a Popish Prince that enforced, and a 
c See Dugdale Hist. Warw. p. 802. and the Oxford Editor is of opinion that even Cromwell was a Papist too. See Church Gou. part v.  Popish Bishop, that was a main Agent in contriving those surrenders: and all the part that Latimer acted in that fatal Catastrophe, was only a persuasive, that the Revenues of those religious Houses might still remain entire to the Church, and be appropriated to better uses. That the suppression of Abbeys therefore should be imputed to Protestants is part of the same figure, by which we are charged with the Cecilian Plot; and the murder of King Charles the first.  
However if Sacrilege, and want of Charity did not come into the world with the Reformation, this Gentleman is so civil, as to say, (if we please) that it only usherd it in. It went before it, 'tis true, as bad manners go before good Laws: but where a natural connexion should be shown; to infer a necessary agreement from a bare Precedence of matter of Fact, is Logic which this Gentleman never learned at Oxford. The Papists thought they had some reason to hope that 
d See More in hist. Prov. Angl. Soc. Jesus l. 10. Non immerito augurantur omnem quae nuper facta est rerum mirandarum conversionem non ad restituendam sed ad abulendam cum tempore haeresin pertinere: p 503. See also D. du Moulin's Epistle.  the late Civil war would have usherd in their Religion. And yet had I no other grounds to think them rebellious, my reason would have hindered me then, as my civility doth now, from giving them that title.  
But Secondly, the Subject of our next Inquiry, is the comparison of Popish and Protestant 
a See Remarks p. 17.  Charity, as to Almshouses, Hospitals and Churches. And here it might be justly expected, that the disproportion of years should be accounted for; and that no man would think our Hospitals any more than those of Rome should be built in a day. However because the conquest is the greater, by how much larger the allowances are; we are willing, that the ancient Charity should show itself in its full growth; in which certainly if at any time it appeared before the dissolution of Abbeys. At that time there were in England 
b This is the exact number of the Hospitals in England according to Harpsfield, Cambden, Speed Weever etc. and in Rome there are only viginti quinque Hospitia Publica aegris curandis aptata etc. Stap. de magn. Rom. Ecc. l. 12. c. 11.  110 Hospitals, if we take in all that bore the name; otherwise, considering the Revenues, very few of them will bear proportion to an English Alms-house, or to some of the famed Infirmaries of Italy; the revenues of some of them amounting to 1l; of others to 2 l, 3 l, 4 l, and of some even to 6l and upwards. And most of these being either Appendages to Monasteries, or at least under the government of Regulars; those who were designed Assistants to the Sick, engrossed the Revenues, and distributed to the others only some mean largesses, some Pepper Corns, as acknowledgements of Right. And whereas not only those Hospitals but most of the Monasteries too, had been chiefly designed (
d See their Charters in Dugd. Mon. 1, 2, etc. ad Pauperum Hospitalitatem— ad susceptionem Pauperum & infirmorum.  as appears in their Charters) to keep up hospitality, 
c Bona in usus alios damnabiliter conversa contra dicti hospitalis fundationem. Dugd. Monast. Angl. p. 390, & p. 406. Cum Hospitale S. Bartholomaei ad sustentationem infirmorum antiquitus fundatum erat, & jam de fratribus sanis & validis contra ipsam fundationem occupatum existat etc. See. 3. Tom. Monast. p. 95.  and to supply the defects of alms, and national contributions; the Practice of the Religious was so little agreeable to the intents of their Founders; that (as 
a Giral. Itin. Camb. l. 1. c. 3. De 13 ferculis vel 14 quae sibi de solo consuetudinis jure deberi contendunt, tempore famis, & inediae priusquam unum ad tempus intermitterent, aut à consuetudine vel in modico recederent, terras monasteriorum & mansiones in faenebrem praedam perditum ire, & quod crudelius est, Pauperes ad januas catervatim obire permitterent. & perire. See also p. 83. 16. Masson. de Ep. Urb. l. 6. in Cl. 5. Religiosi quam professi videntur, paupertatem prae cunctis mortalibus exosam habent.  ancient and one of their own writers observes) they would not purchase the lives of the famished poor at their gates, with the retrenchment of the least part of their luxury. Sic patrimonia Regum Eleemosynae Pauperum profligantur: And if any person will impartially consider the just complaints in Paris, and 
b See Knyghton l. 2. c. 14. Talibus abstrahere nocentes divitias opus est charitatis. Apud nos Christiani mendicant ut apud eos panem Paterini manducent. See M. Paris in H. 3. p. 346. & p. 596. & p. 727. & passim. Edit. Tiguri 1589. p. 727. Si pauperum Esurientium clamor insonuit haec erat illius (prioris de Thetford) pectore cura minor.  Knyghton against the Regulars avarice, he will easily make a just estimate of the sad condition of the Poor of this nation; when their revenues were managed by stewards, who seldom were so just as instead of 50 to set down 5. Nay even those of them, who seemed a little more conscientious than the rest, did seldom distribute more than the 
c See Dugd. in Warw. He that brought the complaint upon the suppression of Abbeys in Holinsh. p. 1050 says it was much amiss, that a great part of the land that was given for alms to the Poor should be spent on a few superstitious Monks, who gave not 40l in alms, when they should have given 200 etc.  45th part of their annual revenues.  
Thus had the Monks promiscuously used the treasures of the poor, as their own; and therefore that Popish Prince, who first seized on their revenues made too little a distinction between them: leaving nothing for the Reformers to do, but either to restore to the poor that share of the Lands, whereof the Monks first, and afterwards the Popish Parliament had deprived them; or to give them an equivalent in 
d See 43. Eliz. c. 2. 1. Ed. 6 c 14.  Legal Provisions. The former method was more suitable to the opinion of our 
e See Godw. An. ad An. 1540 And in Rerum Eccles Com. p. 158. Poterant, lnquiunt Nostri, aedificia scholis ac literis praebere domicilia, opes ac possessiones in pios egentium usus conferri, colendae hospitalitati destinari  Divines; who upon the supposal (I believe) of some inherent sanctity, always pressed a restitution in specie: the latter was embraced by our Statesmen; as being the less specious; yet more safe. For had Ed. 6th redeemed some of those Monasteries, and converted them into Hospitals, or Bishops Sees, we may plainly discern, from the fortune of Westminister Abby, what a Revolution they must have expected under Qu. Mary. Fabrics, if kept entire, might have reverted; but the Rates of the poor will not probably be employed to the maintenance of Regulars.  
I shall repeat nothing of what I formerly said concerning those excellent Laws: but may add, that even the Penal Statutes which now seem so dreadful to some men, are so many instances of our Charity to the poor, and only force the obnoxious to a compulsive liberality.  
This hath been our national munificence. And if M. M. will be pleased to peruse the Autorities which I 
f See Dr. Willet in his Synopsis Papismi who p. 1219. hath wrote a faithful account of 600000l distributed in alms within 60 years after the Reformation in the City of London only. Stow and, he that contiwed him, have made another Catal. true for what it mentions, but defective, and only chargeable with faults of omission. Sr. Fr. More, and his Editor Geo. Duke Esq have in the reading on 43 Eliz. c. 2. given great instances of the Protestant Liberality. See also Hol. p. 1313. p. 1962 and 1376. Read also Herns Domus Curthusiana, and particularly p. 200. See Sr. Ed. Coke 10 lib. Rep. who himself founded an Hosp. in Norfolk. Fuller Ecc. Hist. l. 9 p. 185. p. 212. l. 10. p. ●. and those Authors, which are cited before  here present him with, he may easily be satisfied, that the Charity of Private Persons was not inferior to that of their Representatives. How many Dioceses and Shires are there now in England which have not so much as one Alms-house and Hospital? Yet to want both was the unhappiness of 
b In the Catalogue of Hosp. in Speed and Hurpsfield; you will find none in Westmoreland, Lancashire. Cheshire, Carlisle. Hereford-shire etc.  more than one Shire or Diocese, before the general Dissolution. The redemption of Captives, the enlargement of Prisoners, the dowry of poor Maids, the erection of Free-schools, the restitution of Tithes, and other more ordinary works of Charity, were not only the constant attendants, but the necessary results of the Reformation.  
But since I have formerly insisted upon these, I shall purposely avoid all repetition; and shall only take leave to answer a common & that a plausible objection. For since there were 
c See 27. H. 8. c. 25. and 22. H. 8. c. 12▪ 1 Ed. 6. c. 14.  few Laws made for the relief of the Poor before the Reformation, & there is no probability that they were not then maintained tho without Laws; It hath been hastily concluded, and too easily granted; that whatever small Stipends the Monks allowed to the Poor, their Hospitality was extraordinary; and that, upon the failure of that, the pressures of the Poor first required a Parliamentary remedy.  
I will not deny, but some indigent Persons might receive a sensible loss at the overthrow of Abbeys; and tho' that might be one, yet I think, what I am going to assign was the chief Cause of that sudden alteration. Anciently, when every inferior person; that could probably be reduced to extremity, depended on some Baron, either as a Servant, or Villain; every such Lord lay under an indispensable obligation, especially in those days of Hospitality, to support him in his weakness, who had employed his strength in his service. But when H. 7th's Law diminished this dreadful power of the Nobility, by setting up almost an equal balance in the Commonalty, the Tenors were altered; and dependencies almost every where ceased: so that no man having a particular obligation to succour him that had lived independent, the Charge necessarily fell upon the Community. Poverty therefore entered in upon the change of Tenors, not of Religion; nor was the result of our Ecclesiastical, but our Civil liberty.  
2. That the Churches of this Island suffered much by the Reformation, signifies no more to any one that understands this Author's sincerity, than that they were increased by it. For if we speak in reference to the Fabrics, few men that have either seen or read of our Ancient Churches will deny the 〈◊〉 to our Modern Architecture. The 
b See Speed. p. 801. Lord Herb. p. 444. and Willet. p. 1220.  Building of so many Churches immediately after the Reformation; the repair of almost all of them under K. James; the late, and sudden erection of so many in London; and the daily progress of that stately Temple of St. Paul; are no very convincing arguments of the Sacrilege of Protestants. And since amidst our present unhappy Contests, our Charity to the building of that magnificent Edifice doth not cease, I cannot but compare it to the courageous Purchase of that Roman, who bought the Ground in the Suburbs, while Hannibal laid siege to the City. Pompous Edifices were always the works of a secure, and flourishing Church: and that the Primitve ages of Christianity erected no more, was not their crime, but their Adversaries; not the result of their covetousness, but insecurity. And therefore tho' it be some men's interest to foment jealousies, and then to accuse them; there is no rational man but will see, that Men that still carry on so noble works, do firmly rely on his Majesty's promise; and give Him more thou a Paper assurance of their confidence in it. 
c See Stow's Chronicle continued by Hows pag. 892. at the year▪ 1607. See also Gainsfords Glory of England. lib. 2. cap. 17.   
But since there is reason to suppose, that the notion of Church extends farther, than to the stones of it; we may conclude, he that Charges the Reformation with the decay of Churches, conceives part of their revenues to have been diminished by it. Happy had the Church of England been if some that discoursed much of Sacrilege, had been careful to avoid it; and not alienated those settled revenues, of which God even in Heathen Countries is esteemed the Proprietary. But Selden, Linwood, and Dugdale will assure us, that not only Exemptions, and Modes, but even Appropriations of Tithes, and that to Orders originally 〈◊〉, were of an elder date than the Reformation. 
d See 3. Appropr. to an Hosp. Dugd. Monast. p. 43●. Ecclesiae Appropriatae dicuntur, quae populi intercedente autoritate cum Regis, & Episcopi consen●u, Monasteriis, & Hospitalibus exiliter dotatis concessae ●amd. Brit. p. 1116.  Most of the Monasteries and Hospitals were built upon the ruins of the Seculars; and it was an easy, but unacceptable Charity, that only presented God with Achan's wedge, Ananias' land, and Belshazzars Vessels. Appropriations, then, Exemptive Bulls, Conveyances of all the Tithes, or of part of them, were the sad inventions of another Communion; Our business it hath been, (as Sr H. Spelman, and Mr. Fuller can inform him,) to redeem their crimes, and repair the sad ruins of this Church. Many Protestants have voluntarily surrendered up those Tithes, which the Monks first invaded; more have increased the 
e See Dr. Ryves' Vicars Plea. and Dugd. Hist. Warw p. 20.  stipend of those poor Vicars, who before were forced to live on the errors of their flock; with design perhaps, that they mightly under the greater obligation of deluding them. That our Clergy then is in a better condition than those Seculars were, is well known both to us, and them; and perhaps this Consideration hath chiefly engaged Mr. M. to cast a favourable eye on Dr. Tenison's Parsonage. 
p Remarks. p. 119.  Might not this Parsonage of St. martin's keep 30 Regulars who always were maintained for very little, at least with the Convenience of an house to dwell in? The frugality of the Regulars, is notorious; but the Charity of this supposition puts me in mind of as frugal a manager of Ointment; 
q Mark. 14. 5. 3.  which might have been sold for 300 pence, and given to the Poor.  
Lastly, The Schools of this Nation, on which this Author was so prudent, as not to insist, were then rare, and unendowed; nor could it be justly expected, that Religion, should much promote Learning, which itself was advanced by Ignorance. He need not therefore be much skilled in Antiquity, that would write the history of English Schools, few of which will be found to antedate the latest rise of the Reformation. And were not this evident from Authentic Histories, the gradual improvement of Learning among us would sufficiently assure us of the increase of this Charity. For what did that age produce, that did not savour of the Cloister, and carry with it a relish of Monkish Barbarity? The Regulars were very rich, and equally ignorant; the Seculars were like them in all things but their wealth; and the Laity had only learning enough to contemn the Clergy. So that if the Jesuit Mr. M's friend prove no better a Schoolmaster than the Ancient Regulars did; the Youth of this Nation will gain by his Instructions, as his own Cause does by his Arguments.  
Since the Protestant Charity therefore is much superior to the Popish, it can want nothing to appear so, but only Ostentation, We are better at giving Alms▪ which our Saviour strictly commands; They at sounding the trumpet, which He as solemnly forbids. We keep not so much, as the plain Memoirs of our Alms, and decline the justice of History; while theirs are constantly improved by all the artifices of Rhetoric. 
f In hoc Xenodochio ingenui Cives suis sumptibus tractantur. (viz S. Spiritus) Bossard. Top. Rom. p. 19 and of the Lateran. Multi nullius rei indigentes, eo se deportari curant; ac propriis impensis curari Ib. p. 372. & Scal in Scaligerianis p. 206.' En Payant irs y sont fort bien traitez &c.  The Inns that receive Guests, are called Hospitals, and the reckoning that is exacted, an acknowledgement, or gratuity. 
g Malyne▪ s Lex Mercatoria c. 13.  Usury is too gross a name for Mountains of Piety; but a Contribution of four in the Hundred is a necessary support of the Charges of the Bank. The Pomp of the Rich Temples is painted in full; but 
h Sed per totum orbem nulla templa incultiora sunt, & ruinam magis minitantia, quam Cardinalium. Schrader: in Mon Rom. imp. 1592.  the ruins of others are cast into a shade. 
i Warcup. Schrader.  The Bounty of Gregory XIII. appears on the Stage; but the Sacrilege of Sixtus V. lies behind the Scenes. 
k ●anson counts 300 Churches in Rome Others 305. But Bozius tria Millia. Boz. de sign. Eccl. l. 9 c. 5.  300 Churches may easily arise to 3000; and he is no well willer to Rome, that will not contribute a Cipher. Nor are their Edifices, less deceitful, than their Orators; but seem designed to countenance the Hyperbole; and, like fires, that rather shine then warm, are more pleasing in their aspect, than profitable in their influence. Their Alms is fitted to the eye of the Spectator, and therefore easier seen; Ours to the necessity of the Receiver, and consequently better felt. The Seas of their Charity (for so they are styled) appear more diffusive, as having a larger surface; Ours are less noisy, as flowing in a deeper Channel; which therefore necessarily seem less, at a transient view; and have never the advantage; till they are fathomed.  
FINIS.   


A VINDICATION OF THE Oxford Reply To two Discourses there Printed A. D. 1687. Concerning the Adoration of our Blessed Saviour in the Eucharist, From the Exceptions Made to it in the Second Appendix to a Compendious Discourse on the Eucharist Published from the same Press.   

A Vindication of the OXFORD Reply, etc.  
IT is now a twelvemonth, since there was published at Oxford a Reply to two Discourses there printed, concerning the Adoration of our Blessed Saviour in the Eucharist; and a Copy of that Reply presented to the Publisher of those Discourses. Since he cannot pretend to the common excuse of avocations (for he has not so much business God be thanked as he once expected) I ought not to think it fair, that he has stayed his Answer till the Pamphlet he replies to would in all probability be forgotten; and now returns such costive animadversions upon a piece of it: yet I neither complain of the fewness of his exceptions taking it for granted he could make no more; nor yet of his delay, because what we have at last, is I hope the more considered and the Gentleman has now done his best. His whole Appendix contains twenty six pages whereof near one half is taken up with a long Harangue very wide from the purpose of answering my Reply; and fitter to create a new Controversy than determine the old. What it will do we shall see in due time; but first let us examine in what condition the Reply is.  
The Appendix tells us there were printed at Oxford, 
* Ad. p. 191.  two Discourses, the Design whereof was to show the incertitude and inconstancy of the Church of England, from whence it will follow that none can trust or rely upon her authority etc. And then complains 
p. 191.  that both the London Answerer, and I spend our Learning against Transubstantiation, he cannot say altogether from, but not much to the purpose. The harder our fate, who must be led out of the way by the Discourser, and then accused of straying by the Publisher. But how should we fathom such a deep contrivance, as the writing of a Book with a design which the Book never says one word to? Dull as we were! we guessed at the Design by the Title! and thought we were to confute the Book, which we did, Paragraph by Paragraph; and now it seems we might do so without ever hurting the Design. This it is to deal with men of intrigue, that have Designs and Religions which cannot be discovered by any thing they say or do. Yet as luck would have it, the word waveringly though but once mentioned, gave the Replyer some suspicion; who thereupon invited the Publisher to produce what he could upon the subject, with assurance it should be Answered. Now after a twelvemonth's consideration out it comes— the Author took those two articles to be a manifest and sufficient instance. We that have not a twelvemonth to bethink ourselves, must return this sudden answer, that as we take it the case is otherwise; and so for aught I see it must rest, till our Author is at leisure for something else besides taking. As for Transubstantiation▪ I confess I thought and so I told him, it was nothing at all to his purpose; but why should he say so? For if he be the Papist he pretends, he ought to think it very much to the purpose: which I hope will be considered by them whom it may concern; that hereafter they may gauge his head, before they trust a Controversy in his hands.  
These unhappy miscarriages have put him into very ill humour, which breaks out so often and so indecently, 'twill go near to spoil the sale of his Book of Education. Sometimes it entertains him to think we shall be Damned; at others, that we may be turned out; or at least reproached by our Founders at the day of Judgement, as malae fidei possessores: which hint would have better become another mouth; for if his rule hold, Sr. Simon Bennet will have something to object to University College, which St. Cuthbert will not be able to answer. Sometimes he is transported beyond the temper he affects, and falls into downright scolding, when he thinks upon the freedom wherewith his follies were exposed in the Reply. Tho' 'tis I if any one that have reason to complain; who had much rather meet a man with whom I might be serious; but am forced by a trivial objecter to fall into a low way of answering; and to weigh against my adversary am fain to waste. But for my part I pardon him my share of all his hard thoughts and speeches, since he owns I am a true member of the present Church of England; an honour I prefer to whatever can be offered by him that tempted my Antagonist to desert her; and think it will more than balance all the calumnies that either of them can invent. Our Church too will pardon him the reproachful appellation of New, since he seems to bestow it at random; and gives it in the same breath to his own old Church the Puritans. Neither shall we be concerned when he reminds us of our Antipuritan Predecessors, whom it seems the Puritans accused as being Popishly affected; as if those good men could not slander, nor those wise men be mistaken, Our present Church has been traduced upon the same score by the Party that set on the Puritans: but thanks be to 
p. 191.  God, the scandal is now so manifest that even this Gentleman with all the liberty he takes, dares not fasten it upon our present Church. When the edge of these Satyrs is rebated; there remains nothing but the cry of Zuinglianism, which recurrs in these papers like the Ave Maria in the Rosary, repeated as often in proportion to as little purpose. To answer it once for all we must acquaint our Author, that if the Zwinglians hold as Mr. Hooker says they do (whose authority for once we may safely prefer to the Discourser's) they and we are agreed about the Eucharist in all that is essentially necessary: but then they hold more than a bare reception of the Benefits of our Savior's passion. But if they hold no more than such a bare reception (which is often affirmed in this Apendix, but never reconciled with the note upon Reply p. 14.) then the name of Zuinglian is impertinently and falsely put upon the Church of England, for She holds more as is proved at large in the Reply.  
It seems it was long deliberated, whither it were 
p. 192.  requisite to answer the Reply; upon which occasion we have a very Catholic discourse; for 'tis equally fitted for all Books and Arguments whatever; I find myself no farther concerned in it than to thank him for the word deturned; because till now I wanted a name for his Conversion. At last it was resolved, not to leave his Religion (which he calls Truth) to defend itself; which would have been hard upon it, being weak and all alone; and therefore he has published first, a short Treatise written many years ago, of an hundred and two and forty pages, which contains nothing but the two Discourses shortened into five times more room, and so may now be called old, 
p. 192.  for one reason more than he assigns. To this he has added two Appendices: in which he says so little to his Adversaries, that we must correct the Title of his Book, and call it a Discourse with two Compendious Appendices; The second of these which is levelled against half my Reply, is short and meek in comparison of that of the first; but as short as the Entertainment is, it has a long grace of six leaves before it: wherein I allow the Author to show his modesty 
p. 193  in applauding his own pious endeavours; and his prudence in collecting the righteousness of his Cause; for if to be ridiculous be the Index of a righteous Cause he has acquired a Title that admits of no competition: but of all loves let him not twit us with his Loyalty; because we know when it was objected, Do you hold then that Kings may be deposed? and who it was that answered Why what should we do with 'em else?  
Reserving the Harangue to be considered in its proper 
Ad. p. 203.  place, let us now pass to his Examen of some few particulars of the Reply; which begins p. 203. He omits the first Chapter, and he does prudently; there's a great deal in it too notorious to deny, which yet it is not wisdom to own. To the second he's so very obliging as to grant it seems to be to purpose; but he dislikes the words little alterations, and that for divers reasons.  
1. Nothing is little in the Church's Terms; especially in our most venerable and solemn worship etc. True; but if the greatness lie not in the words, but in the end and meaning; that being preserved, we want to be instructed, why it is so great a matter to change the words; especially when the words have been abused, and deturned from their genuine signification.  
2. Not little that Article upon which they chiefly 
p. 203.  justify their departure from the Church etc. It seems then, we do justify our departure; should we grant that He can justify his desertion, we would own it were no little concession. But to come to his Argument, it will then be sense, and not before, when he proves that our Church's practice in reference to that Article argues a change in her Doctrine; which it does not, as we shall see immediately.  
3. Not little, which contains the Terms of the Church's Communion, etc. This looks the likest sense, and pertinence, of any thing this Paper urges; and shall therefore receive the more full and distinct Answer. And first to prevent all cavil about words, it must be noted, that Terms of Communion are of two sorts. 1. Terms of Catholic Communion: i. e. such as are necessary to our holding Communion with the whole Catholic Church. 2. Terms of particular Communion; i. e. Such as any particular Church may require her Members to submit to. The former are Essentials of Faith and Worship; appointed by God himself; which no Church has power to add to, alter, or diminish: the latter, are a kind of By-Laws; such as every particular Church has power to make, and does make, for the sake of Order, and the well governing those of her Communion, in things left undetermined by Almighty God. These in accurate speaking are Rules of Government; but are called Terms of Communion; because the Church that makes them, has power to exclude from her Communion all her Members that obstinately refuse them; as all Government essentially implies a power to punish the transgression of its just Laws. 'Tis with reference to the former, that we justly accuse the Papists for imposing devices of their own, some unnecessary, other ungodly Articles, 
p. 203.  as Terms of Communion in the first sense: and with reference to the latter, that we justify our Church's power of imposing, against the exceptions made by Protestant Dissenters. For 'tis evident that Terms of Communion in the first sense, are of unchangeable obligation; but taken in the second, they are variable, according as the exigence of affairs in a Particular Church shall require, and the wisdom of its Governors direct.  
Now an explicit Declaration and Subscription of the Article of the Real Presence, is at most but a Term of Communion in the second sense; because that Article contains not the essentially-necessary Doctrine of the Catholic Church concerning the Eucharist but only a Corollary drawn from that Doctrine: which though it be true as the Church of England holds it, and the Popish notion be very false; yet an explicit knowledge and profession of either of these things, is not necessary to Salvation: nor is any Church bound to extend the Terms of her Communion so far as the explicit owning every truth; or explicit rejecting every thing that is false. From whence it follows 1. That our Church might lawfully require or wave an explicit Declaration and Subscription of this Article: require it, because true; wave it, because not essentially necessary. 2. That her doing either one, or tother, or both alternately, argues no change or wavering in her Doctrine; for to take or not take notice of a Corollary, does not change the Proposition it depends upon.  
But to justify yet farther the Proceedings of our Church in this matter, the Replyer told him (p. 4.) that she had not always thought it requisite to make the Declaration and Subscription of this Article a Term of her Communion; as indeed she had not; but rather 
p. 203.  used it like a Civil Test, to discern who were qualified to bear Office in the Church; And to make and impose such Tests as may enable the Government to confide in them they employ, is a piece of wisdom which all Governments practice; and which no man can accuse if the matter of the Test be not evil. Besides our Church did not do this out of pure choice, but absolute necessity. For finding all endeavours used to ruin her, by two seeming contrary Parties; which alternately prevailed as the Court-Interest varied; she saw it necessary to cut these Diamonds with one another; and so far countenance the weaker, as might help to balance the prevailing party: not despairing, but in time, by God's blessing upon good endeavours, the honest-minded men on both sides might be brought to see their Error, and return to the Unity of the Church. Now the Article of the Real Presence was at that time a very proper Test, to discover who inclined to either Party: for men had not yet learned to hold Communion with Us, and receive our Sacraments against their Conscience; nor to declare their Assent and Consent to our Establishment, and make the most solemn protestations that they are of Us, while their heart is at Rome: though we have since learned that all this may be done; and I wonder the Examiner knowing by whom, never urged it for a Spirits being in two places at once; since it seems to be a better instance than any he has given in his Pamphlet.  
4. 5. His two last Reasons are in effect already answered. For [4.] Whatever it is lawful to impose, it is lawful to secure the observance of by what Penalties the Government thinks fit. And [5.] If the Church did vary from any old Form, it was because 
p 203.  that Form had been abused to countenance Superstition and Idolatry.  
In the next Paragraph He's grieved, that we think 
p. 204.  that design impertinent, which he says was the very primary intention of the Author as is plain enough. It might be impertinent for all that: and it was so plain and primary that the Author never spoke to it; so that to know it we must know his heart; 
* See below p. 57  which the Publisher of all men living ought not to expect of us. He adds, that the Author proves irrefragably, that our Church has wavered in her Doctrine: I suppose he means unanswerably; for nothing being urged he might well conclude nothing could be answered. After this, he repeats his old Narrative of what befell the Real Presence; the Doctrine whereof was according to him thrown out, and in his cleanly phrase licked up again: thus despairing to convince our understandings he tries to work upon our Stomaches. But we have already said enough to the charge of wavering; and Tautology which is nauseous in itself, becomes more so by his example. Having finished his Narrative, he adds a politic, tho' not so pertinent a Reflection about persecuting Dissenters; who if they would be eased, must fee him to hold his tongue; for if such a manager undertake it, their cause is irrecoverably lost.  
His next Remark is, that Either the Replyer knows 
p. 205.  that all Catholics declare they detest the adoration of any creature, etc. The Replyer never judges of the Examiner's Catholics by what they declare. But if all true Papists detest the adoration of a creature, that Gentleman is none, who proffered for a halfpenny to declare that he terminated his worship upon the 
p. 205.  very Image itself.  
I reserve the next Paragraph till I come to the fellow of it pag. 209. and must now admire the Examiner's constancy, who having been so often taken in the very act of misquoting, follows the trade still with so great assurance as to falsify my own Reply, to my face. If there be (says he) no real participation, as this Replyer afterwards every where confesseth etc. I wish for the Readers ease he had named somewhere; but to supply that defect I will name him a place or two.— The Body which now exists, whereof we partake— is therefore verily and indeed received, and by consequence said to be really present; because a real participation etc. Reply p. 14. And by virtue of this Spiritual and Mystical yet real participation we receive the benefits consequent to it. p. 18.— the Church of England, which does not hold a bare reception of the benefits but a real participation of the Body etc. p. 31. Which passages (to name no more) confess no real participation just as he confessed Popery, when he writ and signed a paper (yet in being) that denied it. If the Reader desire a farther taste of his sincerity, the note upon p. 13. will furnish him sufficiently. We are 
p. 213.  there ranked among them that pierced, or deny, or disbelieve our Savior's words, though the charge be as false as the English. We are there charged with owning our receipt of the dead Body, and dead Blood of our Lord; though in the place by him quoted we say expressly, that since the Body broken and the Blood shed▪ neither do nor can now really exist, they neither can be really present, nor literally eaten or drank, nor can we receive them, etc. It is there found necessary to declare that that the same Body which was immolated whilst upon earth, remains (tho' now glorified) till the end of the world; as if the Replyer had denied this, or had not said that the Glorified Body now sits at the right hand of God, and shall there continue till the restitution of all things pag. 13. and the Body that is glorified, is numerically the same that was broken pag. 14. Nay he spares not his own dear self, but in kindness to the Replyer for whom 
* App. p. 193.  he is ready to sacrifice his life and all that he hath, he says that he and his Catholics content themselves to believe and know that our Lord in this Sacrament is become to us a quickening Spirit; tho' they know they shall scarce content the Pope and the Council of Trent, unless they believe and say a great deal more. These and many more such passages that occur in this Appendix will probably amaze the Reader, if he know not the Examiner's avowed principle, which he says is to lie, and to forswear himself deliberately for a good purpose.  
We have seen in this last Paragraph how he proves 
p. 205.  by the Replyer's own confession that there is no Real Presence. But this being the main point of difference upon which this Replyer insists, the Examiner resolves to search a little deeper: that is, to repeat the old Tale, with as little truth and judgement as he told it us before. Though to do him right, he has added some Sentences which afford a large field of fresh matter. For a sample, we'll run over one of 'em. Now 
p. 206.  it cannot be imagined that the Liturgy-makers should translate the words of the Mass— Why the words of the Mass? if the Form was older than the Mass? as it must be if it were of that Antiquity he allows it: or Why translate? when he just before owns the addition of divers words, which is contrary to the rule of translating, unless the words added explain and 
p. 206.  illustrate the Original. He says indeed these words more effectually conclude the Popish notion; but it is by asserting the quite contrary. For the form is The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee etc. i. e. the Body which was offered for thee upon the Cross, the Sacrament whereof the Priest holds in his hands. But to return to his charge against the Liturgy-makers; 'tis that they should intend to give the English words a quite different signification from the Latin, without giving any notice of it to the People. Should we for argument's sake suppose, we cannot with truth grant, that the true signification of the Latin is as he pretends; because that form was in use before Transubstantiation was thought of; and indeed the Reformers did not introduce a new meaning of the form, but restored the old. But of this too they should have given notice. So they did, if Writing, Preaching, Printing▪ suffering Imprisonment and Martyrdom were sufficient to give notice: at least they gave such effectual notice, that the very Mechanics in those days understood both the Popish and Reformed Doctrine, much better than the Publisher and his Catholics do in ours. He goes on;— That the people who had been brought up to understand (not the Latin Service I hope, 'twas well if the Priest did that; no, but) the Real Body of our Lord by corpus Domini— custodiat etc. (as they still understand by the Body of our Lord in the English Form, if they are of the Church of England) that they the next day should hearing the same words in English understand only the Real benefits &c. (which they never were taught to understand) and not understand how these benefits could be eaten (which they need not and perhaps no man can understand) or given by the 
p. 206.  Priest or how they were given for, rather than to the people (since they knew that only the Elements were given by the Priest, to the people, as Symbols of the Body and Blood which were given for the people) as neither how they should preserve the receivers Body (i. e. to everlasting Life, which they knew they did not; but that it was one of the benefits of receiving Christ's Body that it should preserve the Receiver's Body and Soul to everlasting Life; which neither the Elements, nor the natural Body itself if received only by oral manducation could do)— that all these things should be done, (of which not one was pretended) looks so heinous that truly our Author and the Catholics have too great a kindness for the Church of England than to impose upon her (He means charge her with) such abominable prevarication, sufficient to drive away all men from her Communion. In good time. I suppose the false English was put in to salve the lies: for not only our Author but our Editor too, has both for the Church and himself too great a kindness than to accuse her for prevaricating: No; he detests prevarication, more than Image-worship: no halfpenny shall induce him to declare for that; for he knows by experience what it is; and left the Church of England's Communion only to avoid it.  
Thus we see how much work a man of art can cut us out, when he searches a little deeper. The Reader who I doubt before this is tired as well as I am, will dispense with so particular a search of the rest of this deep Paragraph; wherein every sentence in proportion to its length is no less obnoxious than this. The aim of the whole is to convict the Church of England of wavering, and the proof is, that He says it; 
p. 205. p. 2●●.  which to any man that knows him, is a sufficient argument he does not mean it.  
And so we might dismiss this Paragraph, if it were not 
p. 2●7.  for one passage, in which it is hard to determine whither Folly or Blasphemy be most conspicuous. To K. Edward's second, which is the latter part of the present form, Take and eat this etc. He excepts and says This what? Individuum vagum, or perhaps nothing, if nothing consecrated as it seems. But why it should seem so to Protestants, who have not renounced their senses he does not tell us. They see well enough, that This is a piece of the Consecrated Bread, which the Priest holds in hand when he says take and eat; and are astonished that a seeming Christian should object to their form, what will equally make against our blessed Saviors own words. When he said Take, eat, this is my Body; do this etc. they are satisfied none of the Apostles ever said This what? individuum vagum, or perhaps nothing; or if any one did, it was Judas.  
The Examiner repeats this irreverence p. 211. where he says this form is nonsense, or to most unintelligible. And tho' our Blessed Saviour said This is my Body which is given (or broken) for you, our Examiner calls the dead body An irreverent (to say no worse) expression p. 196. repeats the censure p. 213. and cannot forbear to call the use of this expression an honour; of which let him enjoy the shame, for never was Irony more unseasonable. Such irreverence is too great a crime to be chastised by a private hand; 'tis an iniquity to be punished by the Judge. But what better can we hope for from that bold man, who alleging in behalf of Popery that our Saviour said this is my body; and being answered that according to the Fathers, he meant the Figure of his body; replied without more ado Why then he lied.  
I cannot now stay to inquire the meaning of that 
p. 207.  uncouth word Genevized which he afterwards interprets by being infected with Geneva, but leaves us to seek what disease Geneva is the name of. Nor shall I accuse, but applaud him for his false English; for a man that can write no Sense, is safest when he writes no Language. But I hasten to the next Paragraph, 
p. 208.  which begins with a few untruths, said and answered before; and so proceeds to examine the Replyer's instances How a real reception may be of a thing really absent: Locally absent good Sr. if it be possible for once to leave an old wont; for Locally was the word the Replyer used in the place cited 
* Reply. p 14, 15. ; and thought it the properer word for this purpose, having no design till he becomes one of your Catholics, to prove that a thing can be really present at the same time that it is really absent. You might have spared your attemt to explain away the instances, had you considered what the Replyer says p. 14. That there may be a real reception, though the thing received be not locally or circumscriptively present, or literally grasped in the arms of the receiver. And again p. 16. That a thing may be said to be really received, which is so consigned to us, that we can readily employ it to all those purposes for which it is useful in itself, and we have occasion to use it. For if these things be true, as till they are confuted I must think they are, the Reader will easily perceive, that the instances retain their force, notwithstanding your different exposition; and that it will not serve your purpose to pretend they may bear another interpretation, unless you prove that they cannot bear mine.  

* 2 App. p. 205.  A leaf or two before he takes it ill to be taught what he should say; and we that he should put us upon the hopeless task of instructing him. I know no remedy 
p. 205.  but either his saying what he should say, or ceasing his pretences to be what he is not. But if this advice displease him, may we tell him what he should not say? If we may, we will advise him not to say those men he cannot answer are men of no authority, without a better reason than that it must suffice he thinks 'em so; for we doubt in this particular he imploy's his avowed Principle. Cranmer, Bradford, and Fox are so justly valued by all men of understanding, that it would be too assuming in a puny Discourser to scorn their authority in any case: but in this, where all the question is about their opinion, to reject them as incompetent witnesses of what they hold▪ is a plain indication to what straits the Examiner is driven. So likewise the Book of Homilies whose authority is so venerable with us, is by him disregarded as a book designed only pro tempore to serve a turn. It has served that turn above one Century, and I hope will serve it many more; after the Discourses have served another turn. To carry on the humour the Book called Foxes and Firebrands, which 
p. 209.  gives us the account we quote, from original papers of Qu. mary's own, is a dirty pool, which the Replyer has fished and found nothing. Not so much indeed as he finds in this dirty Appendix; but something, which it seems the Author of it cannot answer. However Dr. Burnet shall not scape for saying that It was not thought fit to cast off Superstition all at once. Superstition then (says the Examiner) that ancient form was, which notwithstanding had remained so many hundred years already, and the whole Church for all that time was guilty of Superstition. No; the form was not superstition, but had been abused to countenance superstition and something worse, for as many of those hundreds of years, as had passed since the Defining 
p. 2●9.  of Transubstantiation: though not by the whole Church neither; but only by a Faction in the corrupt Roman part of it— But how came it to pass that they tolerated Superstition so long? Because they were to wait their Superiors time to abolish it; and not reform by Bellarmine's Popish rule, of Rebelling quando aderant vires.— But must ill be done that good may come of it? Not by our Principles; but by other men's it may, unless lying and forswearing be no ill.— But why would Q. Elizabeth introduce superstition again when once ejected? Q. Elizabeth did no such thing; but took care when she restored the form, that the people should be taught the wholesome use of it, according to the sense of Antiquity, long before Popish superstition was devised.  
In the next place he condems Policy (that is common Prudence) as an evil ingredient in Church-matters; and if we may judge by his Conduct, is in earnest. And will now prove that They (i. e. in Grammatical construction the Reformers, though I suppose he means their Proceedings) were neither Political, Expedient, nor Lawful, For 1st. It was not Political, to introduce a Division which— raised Commotions and Civil wars. The Alterations were not Papists; and 
a Take our Author's own words. And the same thing may be collected from the many risings in several Countr●s that were in K. Edward's days, chiefly for matter of religion. First in Somersetshire and Linc●lnshire; then in Essex, Kent, Suffolk, Norfolk, Cornwall, Devonshire; and afterward also in Yorkshire. Which risings of the Laity in such numbers for their former way of Religion would ●ot have been, had no their Clergy justified it unto them Church Government. part. V. p. 139.  we read of no Rebellion then raised in England, upon that score, but what was raised by Papists. Perhaps it was not Policy in the Church of England not to suspect them; but it was Charity; and 'tis no great Policy at this time, to reproach her with it tho' it were impolitic. 2d. Not expedient, to introduce Antimonarchical Principles; By what? by the alterations of the Rubric? this consequence is as obscure as the Design of the Discourser. Unhinging men's consciences; an effect the Examiner never felt; his, turns so easily, we may conclude it is well hinged, and the hinges very well oiled. But the Reformers diminished the power of the Clergy. i e. They would not let them pretend to make God, and trample upon the neck of his Vicegerent: but how this does manifestly oppose Kingly Government, will remain a secret, till Popery has banished common sense out of the world. When that's done, probably we may know too, how the people might be, and were kept in obedience to God and their Sovereign by the Popish Clergy; notwithstanding the men that adhered to them were the only Rebels that we read of. 3d. Nor were the alterations lawful; because not made by the lawful Ecclesiastical Magistrates. This argument, were it sifted to the bottom, would go near to be ill taken; but I shall content myself with what is said to it in the Answers to Church Government. part. V.  
Another argument of the change of the Doctrine was 
p. 205.  the omission of divers significant if not necessary Ceremonies, particularly taking of the Bread or Patten etc. This argument is out in matter of fact; for we deny that the true Church of England men did omit this Ceremony. Particularly Bishop Jewel did not; in whom the Replyer instanced, both as a competent witness of the Church's sense; and one who by our Adversaries own confession, was not guilty of that omission. He will oblige us if he name but one so Authentic a man that did omit it. If he cannot we shall conclude they all practised it; especially since the nature 
p. 210.  of the action (as the Replyer told him) implies the use of that Ceremony, But Therefore the more shame (says the Examiner) on them who made it not necessary. No; the sillier they (if there were any) that needed an express direction; and the wickeder they, that with design consecrated so aukwardly as to omit it. Such particularities are not requisite, unless to direct some Monks who scarce know their right hand from their left; and accordingly we meet 'em in the Mass-Book: or to some such Conformists as the Examiner once was, who perverted the common usage with a dishonest intent; and so made it afterwards necessary to restore even this direction. Which (as the Replyer farther told him) now it is restored, is but as it was in K. Edward's first book, a marginal note, directing when to use the Ceremony, not a Rubric to enjoin the use of it. For even in the present Common Prayer Book the use is not enjoined, but supposed, as is manifest from the Rubric before the Prayer of Consecration.  
That Telesphorus put the Gloria in Excelsis in the Mass, is a Monkish legend, younger than the Mass, which is yet much younger than Telesphorus. That this hymn was the Angel's congratulation for our Savior's coming into the world; or rather that the hymn now so called begins with the Angelical congratulation, we need not to be told, for we are allowed to read the Bible: but that the Benedictus qui venit was their (i. e. the Angels) congratulation for our Saviors triumphant entry into Jerusalem, is a thing I did not know before. Had the Examiner consulted Aquinas, he might have saved this blunder, and learned a better reason why these two Hymns are made use of. Populus devote laudat divinitatem Christi cum Angelis dicens Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus; & humanitatem cum pueris dicens Benedictus qui venit, etc. Aquinas apud Cassandrum. Liturg. cap. 25. pag. 54. But I am not yet satisfied that Benedictus qui venit etc. is so pertinently put into the beginning of the Office, if according to the Examiner it be said to congratulate Christ's coming to be present upon the Altar. For the Papists say he does not come till a good while after: at the precise nick of time when the Priest has pronounced the last Syllable of Hoc est enim Corpus meum. Wherefore Benedictus qui venit would do better in the Postcommunion, when they think he is there; than to congratulate his being there when they declare he is not.  
'Tis impertinent to tell me what the Sanctus has been 
p. 211.  called, since it is commonly called the Trisagium now; as is manifest to any one that reads, unless we must renounce our senses in every thing relating to the Eucharist. And there's very good reason to call it so, if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify thrice, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 holy; which perhaps the Examiner might have known, but that Graecum est etc. is an old Maxim of the Monks. He should have known too, or not pretended to any skill in Antiquity, that 
a Sunt autem hoc loco duo quaedam advertenda unum quod duplex est Trisagion. Istud nimirum de quo nunc agimus omnibus Ecclesiis common: & illud quod Graeci quotidie, Latini semel in anno Graece simul & Latin concinunt in magna Parasceve; nempe Sanctus Deus, Sanctus fortis, Sanctus immortalis etc. Card. Bona. Rerum Liturg. lib. 2. cap. 10. §. 5. pag. 555.  the name Trisagium is given to two several forms; both mentioned in a Synodical Epistle of Felix III. 
b In these words. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Labbe. Concil. Tom. IU. p. 1063.  where he likewise tells a fine tale that has passed upon divers other writers, how the later (the Examiner's) Trisagium, being miraculously sent from Heaven, the use of it was first appointed by Proclus Archbishop of Constannople: 
p. 211.  though the Reader that is not fond of Legends may find a more rational account in Photius' Collections 
a Cod. 222. p. 314. Editionis Graecae Haeschelii.  out of Jobius Monachus. But the Trisagium most anciently used in the Celebration of the Eucharist, is yet extant in the Apostolic Constitutions 
b Labbe Concil. Tom. I. p. 479.  and is this; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So exactly does the truly ancient agree with our present form: and so little truth is there in what the Examiner would insinuate, that the other (introduced by Proclus) was the ancienter form; as if (to use a Convert's expression,) he were fated to be always in the wrong.  
The Replyer doubted (p. 7.) that some of the Discourser's quotations were not very judiciously chosen, tho' the thing for which they were quoted, at the same time he granted to be true. The place in Eusebius he expressly showed to be impertinent; which made him suspect the other two, which he had neither leisure nor the books by him to examine. Now the Appendix saying nothing of Eusebius, the Author plainly gives him up: and he says it is not worth while to Vindicate the others, and for once is not mistaken. Notwithstanding he will add what he finds in S. Ambrose's works, l. 4. c. 5. de Sacramentis. I will not now return that this book is so notoriously spurious that the Examiner himself durst not ascribe it to S. Ambrose; nor will I except to the matter quoted, which is true, and agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England, if we take it in the Author's, not the Quoter's sense: for our present inquiry must be, not whether it be true, but pertinent; which it cannot be, if the form to which we answer Amen be a prayer: and the form is The body of our Lord Jesus 
p. 211.  Christ which was given for thee, preserve the Body and Soul to everlasting life. Now admitting the form implies this assertion, what thou now receivest is the body of our Lord, which he that answers Amen, confesses to be true: yet still the whole form is a prayer, and he that says Amen to it, answers Amen to a prayer; unless the Examiner believe that the implying something assertory, makes a petition cease to be a prayer; which would be so ridiculous a notion as never dwelled in the same head with common sense.  
Concerning the omission of these words [in these holy mysteries] the Replyer who pretended only to guests the true reason, said it might be purely accidental. And it might not be so says the Examiner: For they have a signification contrary etc. If they have so, the Reply there told him, that was cause enough to omit them, because they would assert an Opinion contrary to sound doctrine, and the declared judgement of the Church: to which I find nothing returned.  
The Replyer observed (p. 7.) that no fault was found with the second form, which is entirely agreeable to the words and end of the Institution. Wherefore now it is decreed that some fault shall be found with it. And first it is Faulty enough certainly because contrary to the former book; which to prove was the Author's chief intention; wherefore he never urged one word in proof of it. But we want from the Examiner a better reason than the variety of expression, to prove a contrariety in the matter; least among other inconveniences, this Appendix which is all Tautology, prove only a heap of contrarieties. Of his second exception I have given my opinion already; and shall neither repeat that, nor consider the two next Paragraphs wherein there is as much truth and pertinence as there is good manners. 
p. 211.  The Examen gives me no occasion to add to what I said in my Reply. I say and prove; the Examiner denies and calls names; and who takes the better method must be left to the Reader to determine.  
He proceeds and tells us that Calvin and Beza are 
p. 212.  mentioned, because by them were the English Reformers much directed, though our Author does not tie himself to speak only of the Church of England men. No; if he did he would speak to some purpose, which to do is no part of his Character. Whither our Reformers were so much directed by Calvin and Beza may be questioned: the Replyer fished a shrewd reason, out of that dirty pool Foxes and Firebrands why they were less directed, than otherwise they might have been. But if they were so much directed, 'tis the more probable, their direction was not approved where it was not followed. And if this be true 'tis still the more trifling and impertinent to oppose their judgement to the Church of England, which is all that the Reply contended for. That which follows about Conciliators in general, I dare trust to do it's own business; and come to Mr. Thorndike, for whose memory I have a great and just esteem, though I think him no proper man to determine the point in question, for the reasons mentioned, pag. 19 and 61. of the Reply. What I say of him, is partly from his writings, and partly of my own certain knowledge, as, if it be requisite, I can prove: but the Examiner only pretends that he was rightly quoted by the Discourser; which I think I acknowledged plain enough in the Reply; and I now acknowledge it again, not without some satisfaction, that the Examiner dares not say so much of any other Author quoted by him. For what relates to Dr. Taylor in the next Paragraph, viz.  
The quotations out of Dr. Taylor are most true, is 
p. 212  undoubtedly a fault of the Compositor, and would have been among the Errata, if the Printer as well as the Writer had delcared against Prevarication. The Discourser was charged with misquoting Dr. Tailor; because he quoted him by halves, and as Patron of an opinion he expressly declares and writes against. If this be true, the quotations out of Dr. Taylor are most false: If the Examiner did not think it true, what need of bringing off the Discourser by a Calumny upon Dr. Taylor? But since it is lawful to calumniate for a good end, we are told that Dr. Taylor was an inconstant, forgetful, ignorant man, and one that vented many indigested and incoherent notions. Well but how is this proved? No, it is not to be Proved, but it seems so. But perhaps we are once more mistaken in our Author's Design: we thought him to be quoting, and he good man, was only weeding, and picking out the tares from the wheat: and he was in the right of it; for if what he calls tares be suffered to grow among the wheat, it will go near to spoil his harvest.  
He does not remember Dr. Taylor any where sustains 
p. 213.  (as this Replyer doth) that Protestants may use the same terms as the Catholics, and yet in a quite different sense. Great judgements have sometimes bad memories; the more the pity that the trade the Examiner drives, requires a very good one. But to help his memory, I refer him to Dr. tailor's book of the Real Presence; the first section; from the eighth Paragraph to the end: where he will find that Dr. Taylor considers one by one the Terms that the Papists use; and shows that Protestants use the same but in another sense which he defends; from whence we gather, that he sustained they might do this; and very good reason they had for it, since the Fathers did so before them. For the truth is (as abundance of Protestant books, that neither are 
p. 213.  nor can be answered, have demonstrated) that the Popish Faction in the Latin Church, having perverted the language of Antiquity, and given it a novel and absurd meaning, the Reformers as in other cases so in this too restored the primitive usage, and taught the people what the Fathers meant as well as what they said. Now instead of this the Examiner would have had them tell the world that their words were like Jacob's, but their intention (which is vulgar Latin for their hands) like Esau, for than they had come over to his Party, which now looks melancholy for want of company and plainly confess their haeresy; for else they are never like to be convicted.  
In the entrance of the next Paragraph, he gives us an ill name; in the close he comforts himself with the hope of our damnation; which is the best argument I find in him, of his being a true Papist. I wonder what has discomposed him; but sure his passion has a little hurt his understanding, he gives so perverse an account of the Doctrine asserted in the Reply. To prevent the errors into which he may betray the common Reader, I shall once more give him this short and plain account of what I said there. The words of institution require us to eat the Body broken, and drink the Blood shed; which we cannot do literally, because the body broken and the blood shed neither do nor can now really exist. But the worthy receivers of the Sacrament, do figuratively eat that body, and drink that blood, when they really eat and drink the Symbols of them. And the good effect, which God has annexed to this by his gracious institution, and accomplishes by his marvellous power, is a real Union with the living, glorified body, whereby the Communicants are made partakers of the Spirit of Christ their Head; and receive the benefits 
p. 213.  purchased by the Sacrifice of the dead body, by being united by that Spirit to the living body. Which living glorified body is therefore verily and indeed received; and by consequence may be said to be really present in the Eucharist. This I thought had been declared and proved plain enough in the Reply. The Examiner confutes it by saying he does not understand it. But if all must be rejected that is liable to that exception, there will be as little sense in the world, as there would be honesty if his other Principles prevailed. For a farther explication (if it be requisite) I refer him to the famous Sermon Preached by Archbishop Usher before the house of Commons Feb. 18. A. D. 1620. And to a late admirable Treatise called a Summary of the Controversyes between the Church of England, and the Church of Rome. Sect. IU. and V. which when he has perused, if he does not yet understand, I can only tell him in his own words that the fault is in the organ, not the object. For to understand his notion, is not more impossible to a man of sense, than not to understand our Doctrine after so much plain Demonstration.  
If the Lutherans are the only men that are truly called Protestants, than the Papists call the rest of their Adversaries out of their names. But this reflection is something worse than that upon the Trisagium; for Protestant comes a protestando, and that is not Greek.  
The Zwinglians assert no real presence of our Lord's body at all, but of the benefit only of his passion: but they believe all that is requisite to assert it; all the grounds that the assertors pretend for it: and it seems the Examiner knows this, and giveth notice of it to the Replyer, as if he had not said it himself in the Paragraph under consideration.  
The note upon pag. 16. is so choice a heap of Confusion, 
p. 214.  that it seems to be the Author's Masterpiece. If it be not too presumptuous to guests at his Design (which it may be, like that of the Discourses, would be incognito) I should think he had a mind to confute the latter part of the sixteenth page of the Reply. His method confirms my suspicion; for he neither gives my words, nor my meaning, nor confutes what he substitutes in their room. For example. A thing may be really present two ways, is the point the Examiner encounters. A thing thus really received may be said to be really present two ways, are the words of the Reply. The objection is there are many other ways of presence. But are there not those that I assign? which are sufficient for my purpose of explaining how the Sacrament and the res Sacramenti, are, the one Physically, the other Morally but both really present? To this he answers with his leg. A Physical presence is a local presence says the Examiner. A Physical presence (now we speak of a natural body) is local, says the Replyer. And is this true? If it be, (as I find it not denied) I am safe though it should be true, that the presence of a Spiritual body is not local: which answer and the other that is tacked to it, are yet more absurd upon another score; because they assert the point that I contend for, viz. that our Savior's body is not locally present.  
But to wave the impertinence, and examine the truth of this Argument. That there is both a natural and a spiritual body; and that each of 'em has properties divers from the other; we are very well satisfied; because this is very intelligible in itself, and plainly revealed in Scripture. But still both the one and the other is a body; and therefore must have all the Essential properties of a body. A body devested of these, yet a body still (i. e. the Examiner's spiritual body) is no real being, but an 
p. 214.  absurd inconceivable notion; and no more a body than one of his many passages that have neither Grammar nor meaning in 'em is a Proposition. Now one of those Essential properties without which a body cannot really exist, is to have dimensions; for matter and quantity are not really distinct. Another is to be finite; for every body is a creature. A third is to be Unum numero; for whatever really exists is so. And it is utterly inconceivable how these three essential properties can be attributed to a body, unless that body be supposed to exist in some one determinate finite space: which space the Philosophers (speaking of a body) call a circumscriptive Ubi, or in one word, place; so that locality or being in a place, cannot possibly be removed from a body, without removing those properties, without which a body cannot exist. We may indeed allow a precisive, but not a negative abstraction of them; for a body may be considered, but cannot exist by halves: we may choose whither we will consider more than one or two properties; but the body really existing cannot choose but have them all: wherefore though we may consider it, not as having them; we cannot consider it as not having them. But cannot God by his Omnipotence, remove all these properties of a body? Yes undoubtedly; but than it ceases to be a body. God can create, annihilate, and change at his pleasure: he can make that which is a body cease to be so; but he cannot continue it a body, when he has removed that which makes it be a body, unless he can verify a contradiction. Now the question depending is concerning a body really existing, and continuing still a body; which the Examiner would (as he calls it) spiritualise; that is, abstract it into nothing. For if a body occupy no place, it has no dimensions; if no dimensions, no quantity; if no quantity, no matter; if no 
p. 214.  matter, it is no body. If it be not unum numero it does not really exist. Abstract all these, and what remains is the Examiner's notion of a body really existing.  
And as no man of sense can ever frame a notion of such a body, so no Philosopher ever thought of a name for the Ubi that belongs to it. We read of a circumscriptive Ubi, that belongs to a body; a definitive Ubi to a spirit; the repletive Ubi of Almighty God. But the Ubi that belongs to the Examiner's spiritual body wants a name: and if I were to give it one, I would borrow a phrase from the Discourser, and call it an Autocatacritical Ubi, which being explained proves a Nullibi; wherein nothing exists but the Examiner's Body of Divinity.  
Now for the second evasion, of a miraculous presence, effected by the power of Almighty God. The Protestants (we have often told him) dispute not the power but the will of God in this particular. Our argument proceeds not upon what God can do, but upon what he will, and what he has revealed. Wherefore it is nothing to the purpose though it were proved, that God can do what the Examiner contends for, unless it appear he will do it, which we doubt is impossible to be proved. So that it were better to let alone the subject of God's omnipotence, upon which they often talk Blasphemy, and never advantage their cause. Of God's not verifying contradictions, we shall have farther occasion to speak by and by. In the mean time if to be something and nothing be a contradiction; it implies one that the Examiner's spiritual body should exist.  
To proceed. A Moral presence is called Sacramental, says the Examiner:— either Physically or Morally, to which we reduce Sacramentally, are the words of the Reply. Now for his objections. This (viz. what he 
p. 214.  quotes) is a novel interpretation. First how does this appear? secondly if it did, what's that to the Reply? The Church used Sacramental for real, as opposed to receiving by Faith. If he mean the primitive Church this is false too; but how does he pretend to prove it? it is said before: but by whom or where it is not said: But what is it to be morally present, if not that a moral entity (as grace holiness etc.) are present? The benefits of our Lord's passion are present to, and enjoyed by us; but what is this to the real true presence of his Body? The benefits of our Savior's passion are conferred on us, by virtue of our real union with his glorified body which is therefore verily and indeed received, and by consequence said to be really present, notwithstanding it's local absence; because a real participation and union, must needs imply a real presence, though they do not necessarily require a local one. Reply. p 14. But neither are these benefits given us in this Sacrament, but are only apprehended of us by Faith. I cannot distinguish whether he advance this as his own doctrine in opposition to ours; or as ours in opposition to ourselves; though 'tis so inconsistent with the doctrine of all Churches, that 'tis fit for him to affirm. One would think he should not deny that the Sacraments confer grace; or that grace is one of the benefits purchased by our Savior's passion; or say that grace is not conferred at all, unless it be conferred all at once: yet some of these things must be done to make this objection sense. In sum this Replyer seems to flutter, if he does but seem so, 'tis well enough; for 'tis odds but what seems to the Examiner, neither really is, nor seems to any other man Wherefore he heapeth up such a parcel of insignificant words and distinctions that it is lost time to examine them. And 'tis little better to examine 
p. 214.  the reasoning of one that can no more make a Syllogism than he can a Convert.  
However I will not leave this Paragraph yet; 'tis so very honest, pertinent and judicious. There is a real presence of a body which is always local. This is false, but that which the Reply maintains, That the Physical real presence of a natural body is always local, is true, and not denied. There is also a spiritual and virtual presence: Who doubts it? Distinct from Real and Moral? Who ever said it? Spiritual we acknowledge as before; but this is real and not virtual only. And when we say a spiritual and virtual, we neither say virtual only, nor exclude real. And what is virtual if not the effects of our Lord's passion? what are all these to the real presence of our Lord's body, the only question? the effects of his passion are communicated in such a manner as infers a real presence of his body. This is proved at large in the Reply, pag. 13. & seqq. where this Real presence is called virtual, not in opposition to real (as this fond man seems to fancy) for 'tis mentioned as one sort of real presence; but to distinguish it from Local which is another sort; and the reason of calling this virtual, is because it is effected by the communication of the body's virtue, as the other is called local because effected by the body's being in loco: and because our Savior's very body is really in Heaven as in loco; yet really united to us, and received by us, and so imparts its virtue upon earth; it is said to be Physically and Locally present in Heaven only, yet morally and virtually present upon earth; and really present both in heaven and on earth. Which being observed, we may dismiss the two next Paragraphs that pretend to take the Replyer in a contradiction; for all that is 
p. 215.  farther said in them has been considered already.  
Only there remains this passage The Papists always acknowledge a local presence; The contrary whereof is true, And so it may be for any thing said by the Replyer. His words are They, however they express themselves, understand a Local Presence; which they may do, and not acknowledge the Term. He does not say they own the word; for he knew it was denied in the Catechism ad Parochos and he never allows himself to lie for a good purpose; but he says that however they express themselves they understand the thing; and so they must do if they see to the bottom of their own notion; because they assert such a presence as cannot be corporal unless it be local too. Not that I take corporally and locally for the same; or can think him that 
* App. p. 195.  says I do, so shallow as to believe himself; but corporally in their sense avoidable infers locally. This 
* See his Letter to P. Martyr in his Scripta Anglicana p. 547.  Bucer was aware of; and by his example I chose to assign this as the difference between us and the Papists because it is both a necessary consequent of their Doctrine, and a most manifest conviction of their error. For really, essentially, substantially, corporally, may all be used in a sound sense, but locally can not: yet a Popish Corporal presence must be local; though a local presence be so manifest an absurdity, that even they disclaim it, who are not ashamed to renounce both sense and reason, in other points relating to the Eucharist.  
In the note upon pag 20. he has found out a pleasant excuse for the Discourser's stumbling. We talk of the truth of a body, and he turns it to the truth of a Proposition. 'Tis pity his Talon went no farther than the Printing of a Logic; a little Metaphysics would have been serviceable; and prevented this second stumble. 
p. 215.  The note upon Ineffable mystery, is to me an example of one; for I cannot imagine what it drives at. The Discourser misapplyes the words of our Divines; the Replyer gives their true meaning; the Examiner is angry that the words they use, and the meaning we assign, are not opposite to one another.  
What a choice Remark the next is will appear by 
p. 216.  setting down the words of the Reply and the Discourse which are as follows. But admit the Real Presence be ineffable; what then? He conceives it is so because of something in it opposite and contradictory to reason. Reply. Cap. 4. pag. 20.— Here also I find Protestants, and especially our English Divines generally to confess the presence of our Saviour in the Eucharist to be an ineffable mystery (which I conceive is said to be so, in respect of something in it opposite and contradictory to, and therefore incomprehensible and ineffable by human reason) For thus Calvin etc. Disc. concerning the Rubric. cap. 3. p. 13. §. 20. n. 1. 1. Where is the Replyer's fault now? Why he leaves out the word seemingly, which was never in; as also he omitts it where it does come in a good while after, §. 21. upon another occasion; where it seems to be nothing to the purpose. For the question there is, Why we may not believe one Contradiction as well as another? And 'tis granted that we may; because we can believe none at all. That which is a contradiction is impossible; and therefore that which seems one is incredible: the being, or only seeming may signify something to the possibility; but to be or seem is all one in respect▪ of the credibility. But now to give a full decision in this point Take notice (says our Examiner) that no Catholic affirms, God can make two 
p. 2●●.  Contradictories to be true. Here I doubt the word seemingly is left out not altogether out of inadvertency; as also in that which follows that there is no Contradiction in their Doctrine of the Eucharist. But if no Papist believe that God can effect any thing which implies, and not only seems a Contradiction; and if no points of their Doctrine really are, but only seem contradictory; how comes it to pass that when we charge them with holding things that contradict, they instead of denying the charge, accuse us of limiting God's power? why do they bestow all their pains in setting forth God's omnipotence, which would better be bestowed in taking of the seemingness of the Contradiction? The Examiner (to do him right) makes an offer or two 
a App. p. 195.  in his Harangue; let us see with what success.  
To be here and not here (he says) may be a Contradiction, but to be here and there is none. But to be here and there is to to be here and not here—. We must know that he has Printed a book of Oratory; and that a 
b Comp. Disc. p. 18.  Contradiction in terminis is a thing not unusual with Orators to make the acuter expression. But if this will not pass; what say we to the Miracle of the five Loaves? This I take to be an Argument ad hominem; and am sorry I was not more particular when I mentioned it to one of the Examiner's Correspondents, and said I wondered that the Papists did not urge it in the dispute about the Eucharist. But I meant it as a plausible Argument against the testimony of sense; and now it is judiciously applied as an instance of a seeming contradiction. It may be the Examiner sees where the Contradiction lies; but to grieve us keeps the secret to himself; For if we solve it, we must first find it; which without 
p. 195.  his assistance we cannot do, and so he's safe enough. In another Discourse, 
* Concerning Celibacy. p. 11.  he published an acute project for threading of Camels; He is now upon the same design, and says the thing is possible with God. I am loath to think that any thing that wears a gown, is either so weak or so ill read, as not to know that our Saviour's words are a proverbial expression of an extreme difficulty, not an absolute impossibility. But does not the Text add that the things which are impossible with men are possible with God? Yes it does; but it speaks of things, not of contradictions: God is able to do any thing; but whatever he does is something; and what a contradiction pretends to mean is just nothing. And lest the Examiner should cavil because S. Luke says in another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, no word shall be impossible with God; we must tell him, that passage is quoted from the Septuagint version of Gen. XVIII. 13. and that as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew, so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in their version frequently signifies a thing; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to do a thing, as any man will quickly find that looks but in Kircher's Concordance. To conclude, the Scripture teaches us, and all Christians are agreed, that God can do many things which man can neither do nor conceive; but it never teaches us he can do a thing which is nothing; that is, verify a contradiction; I may say, a seeming contradiction, if we mean that which seems one to a thinking man; for nothing in Scripture can seem one to a man that considers. And the sum of what we hold in this particular is briefly this. That which seems a contradiction, while it seems so, is incredible; because all men are agreed that if it really be one, 'tis impossible: and he that will convince us that a seeming contradiction is possible, must prove that it only seems one, but really is none at all; which is 
p. 195.  more than any man does or can do for the seeming contradictions in the Popish Doctrine of the Eucharist.  
His last refuge is from three places in S. John to collect that our Saviour when upon Earth, was also in Heaven; i. e. his natural body was in Heaven and Earth at the same time. There's another place in S. John, viz. VIII. 58. of which he will do well to learn the meaning, and then perhaps in time, he may come to understand these. And that's all that I think requisite to say at present. For as for himself, his very quoting these places by an old rule (taken notice of Reply p. 8.) is to me an argument he mistrusts them: and for other men I'm pretty well assured, that none who are able to tell twenty, can read the texts and allow the inference.  
To return to the Examen. The Close of the Paragraph 
p. 216.  last considered looks as if it were a waggish artifice to betray the common Reader into a distrust of his senses, the better to prepare him for digesting Transubstantiation. For the words are They (the Papists) believe it (their Doctrine of the Eucharist to be plainly revealed by our Savior's own words and S. Paul's (v. foregoing Discourse. p. 18) yet neither in the 18th, nor any other page of that Discourse, is there one argument from our Saviors or S. Paul's words to prove a Popish Corporal Presence: at least I found none; tho' (to borrow an elegance from the Author) 
* Comp. Disc▪ p. 23.  I made a Cursory over it. Men may fancy he refers like other writers, and had now promised to be awake, and speak to purpose: but he that thinks him capable of fair dealing, Would to God he would but try him.  
The Author may pardon me this resentment, since he has his revenge before hand; for it cost me the reading his Discourse to find my error, and be fully satisfied the 
p. 216.  Press was not in fault, but the Writer; who designed his Reference to belong, neither to the Clause it was subjoined to, nor yet to the whole Paragraph, but only to the former part of it concerning seeming Contradictions. Of these indeed he speaks in that eighteenth page; and determines very learnedly p. 19 that God cannot verify a formal contradiction; but no man can tell what does formally Contradict without an express revelation. This proves a mighty compliment to a late Writer; whom I always took to be a great master of Reason, but not till now to be inspired; I mean the Author of the absolute impossibility of Transubstantiation demonstrated. When I hear how the Examiner evades the formal contradictions that Book exposes, he shall know more of my mind; till than I leave his Compendious Discourse in those better hands that have already undertaken it.  
Dr. Taylor had said, that The Doctrine of the Trinity does as much violence to Philosophy, as Transubstantiation: which words being capable of an innocent meaning, the Reply explains it, and assents to 'em so explained. The Examiner objects that Transubstantiation is a Contradiction, and wisely leaves it with the Reader; who he hopes will be heedless enough to infer, that therefore the Doctrine of the Trinity is a Contradiction too. This, your thorough-paced Papists do not scruple to affirm in print; but our Author is a Neophyte, and modest; or perhaps he was aware, the Consequence will not hold. For if one does as much violence as the other, it by no means follows that both of 'em do the same; no more than he that kills a man with a Sword, does the same violence to his life, or does it in the same way, though he does as much as he that beats out 
p. 216.  his brains. Every Freshman knows the meaning of as much in this kind of speech; and if You tell him that a Straw is as much a substance as Goliath, has more wit than to return, But Goliath was a giant of six Cubits and a span high. Nor will any of 'em be persuaded Dr. Taylor meant more than this, that the Doctrine of the Trinity is as truly too hard for Philosophy to explain, as that of Transubstantiation; because (as the Reply said p. 22.) natural reason cannot frame an adequate notion of either: so they both offer absolute, and in this respect equal violence; tho' they do it upon different accounts, and in divers ways; which makes a vast alteration in the case, when we come to talk of credibility. For example; Transubstantiation involves millions of millions of contradictions, and is therefore both inconceivable, and incredible; for no man can conceive, or assent to, a thing that has no meaning at all. Again, there are some Mathematical notions, which no man can fully comprehend; which are therefore inconceivable, tho' not only credible, but demonstrable. Once again, there are some Divine supernatural truths which transcend a finite capacity; and are therefore inconceivable, yet not therefore incredible, but rather the contrary: for nothing is more rational than to think that the infinite nature of God must needs surpass man's finite Understanding; and the narrowness of human capacity can by no means be the standard of Divine truth. But of this passage of Dr. tailor's enough is said in the Reply, without any answer yet returned: I refer my Reader to it, (p. 21.) and proceed.  
'Tis a strange antipathy our Examiner has to Greek, and Latin; if he meet but a line of either it puts him into fits, and makes him talk idly for a whole 
p. 216.  Paragraph. There's a line in Bishop Andrews (Praesentiam credimus; nec minus quam vos veram) which the man had most grievously mistaken; 
a Reply p. 25.  the Replyer without taking advantage of his blundering did but give him the words, and set him right in the meaning; and see what a remark this produces.  
Pag. 25. Bishop Andrews' famous saying (which the Replyer would falsely translate or interpret;) The Real Presence which we hold is as Real as the Corporal which the Papists hold. Which proposition is both false in itself, and falsely fathered upon Bishop Andrews. For they who believe only a figurative presence, believe not so much as they who believe a real also. For it is to say, That he who believes a real absence, believes a real presence.  
The Bishops saying would have been a very famous one indeed, had he said what the Examiner reports; but he never used to word things so unskilfully: so that tho' the proposition be not false, yet 'tis falsely fathered upon Bishop Andrews, as our Author very honestly confesses. I dare say he neither did, nor owns this thing with design; but his fit is strong upon him; else he would not have betrayed so important a secret, as that he and his Catholics believe a presence that is only figurative and real also: which is just as Mr. Hobbs, (
b Vide 1. Append. p. 156.  to whom he went to school with Bishop Cranmer) held more than Bishop Bramhal; because the Bishop held only Liberty Mr. Hobbs held that, and Necessity besides. But the Conclusion of the Paragraph solves all: there we find that a presence only figurative is a real absence; a few lines before, it was a real presence; and he that thus takes 'em for 〈◊〉 same may very well hold 'em both. If our 〈◊〉 would have taken advice, and consulted honest Walker's 
p. 216.  Particles, he had probably found the difference between nec and non, which might have prevented these mistakes. Or even Mr. P. (as I fancy) could have served him as far as this goes: who perhaps may have Greek too, enough to construe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which will answer half the next Remark. For the case is this. Of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. III. 21. I gave this meaning That the heaven of heavens must contain him (i. e. his Natural body) till the times of restitution of all things: not aiming at a literal version, but to give the sense of the Original. Now says our Examiner, with an eye as I suppose on our Translation The word is not contain, but receive. Neither is it the heaven of heavens, nor his Natural body, but only whom the heaven must receive. Yet the whom here signifies Christ's natural body; and the heaven, means the heaven of heavens; and to receive in this case is all one as to contain. This meaning of the Text and the Argument from it, are so very plain and common, that I need not farther insist on 'em. If any man think they are evaded by saying That our Savior's body is not now endued with natural properties, but spiritual; such as being at once in two places, having no dimensions and the like; I give him joy of his Understanding; but shall never offer to dispute with him. Wherefore neither shall I meddle with the former part of this Remark; which only tells us that Christ in his Incarnation had a natural organical body such as ours; but now in his Glorification has a spiritual body, such as the Examiner has devised for him; a verier Phantom than Martion made him in his Incarnation.  
In the next Note, (which to our exceeding great comfort is the last but one) we are told that our 
p. 216.  Author's quotation out of St. Austin's cura pro mortuis is true and pertinent. But if our Author had so managed it, that St. Austin might seem to say what he did not say in that place, and plainly contradicts in divers others, the quotation is not true; and if St. Austin did not speak of the Martyr's bodies, it is not pertinent; because the point in question was, Whither a body might be in two places at once? and St. Austin was quoted in favour of the Affirmative. But it matters not (says our Examiner) whither the Martyr's bodies are spoken of by St. Austin. For our Replyer p. 29. seems not to dare affirm, that a Spirit cannot be in two Ubies: but if it be a contradiction S. Austin needs not inquire; if not a contradiction, neither is it for a spiritual body to be so. The Replyer indeed waved disputing about a Spirit's Ubiety, because it was nothing to the purpose; for* (as he had already intimated) though a Spirit could be in two Ubies, it will not follow that a Body may be in two places at once. And the crutch that is now brought to support this lame consequence (I mean the Examiner's notion of a spiritual body) is the staff of a broken reed, which instead of removing the absurdity objected, introduces a great many worse. But to put this case beyond seeming, the Replyer dare and does affirm, that neither a Spirit nor any other creature either is or can be in two discontinued Ubies or Places at the same time; for he's very well assured he can prove when there is occasion, that the contrary opinion implies a formal contradiction. If it be a contradiction (says our honest Examiner) S. Austin need not inquire; leaving us (if we are so careless) to subsume, that he did inquire; and therefore thought it 
Reply pag 24.  no contradiction. This is a very great piece of address; 
p. 216.  for 'tis certain S. Austin did inquire; but not if a body might be in two places at once (that, in forty other places he peremtorily denies) but taking it for granted that the Martyrs did relieve their Votaries, and could not do this without a Miracle; the thing that he enquired of, was the modus how this Miracle was wrought. For solution, he assigns divers modi; of which the most difficult may (as far as concerns this case) be explained without a contradiction; or asserting that a Spirit is at one and the same time in two discontinued Ubies: but still the point is so intricate, he professes 'tis past his understanding; he cannot determine, and therefore cares not to dispute, but contents himself with the certainty of the thing. Upon the whole matter, the point in debate is; Whither S. Austin favour this opinion that a body may be in two places at once? and it appears, 1. That St. Austin says directly and frequently that a body cannot. 2. That he no where affirms a spirit can, but rather the contrary. 3. That if he had said a spirit could, yet the consequence from a spirit to a body will not hold; 4. That it is not pretended to hold, except in the case of the Examiner's spiritual body, which is proved an absurd inconceivable nothing; which there is not the least shadow of appearance that either St. Austin or any man of reason ever thought of. I know that Cuthbert Tonstall in his dotage about An. 1554. employed his notion of a spiritual body, to defend the Corporal presence; 
a In his Book de veritate corporis & sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi in Eucharistia. Lutetiae. apud Vascosanum A. D. 1554.  and for aught I find, he was the first that did so: and he did it with a tenderness which argued his distrust of it; tho' his was but a phlegmatic absurdity in comparison of our Author's highly rectified 
p. 216.  nonsense. But Cuthbert stood alone, till the Discourser joined him, and refined upon him; and if none believing, yet none expressly confuted him, 'twas because he did what our Author and Publisher show▪ d have done, he put his age to his book.  
And since we are so near a Conclusion, that we may the more easily part friends, we'll suppose the Examiner to have done this; and allow the infirmities of age to plead for those following mistakes, which would hardly be forgiven to a younger pen. When he said that my quotations from S. Austin do not in the least contradict the doctrine of the Church; good man he meant the Church of England, and only forgot he had declared; and 'twas only the frailty of an old memory made him say and forget to prove that 
p. 217.  the quotation from Tract. 30. in Joh. is perfectly against the Replyer. Perhaps it may be difficult to excuse his telling us that S. Austin says that Homo secundum corpus etc. after having first said that our Saviour was in divers places (in heaven and earth) in his life time by the omnipotence of Almighty God; and that he was whilst upon earth in heaven also by the power of God; since no such thing appears in the context of any of my quotations; nor indeed in any other passage of S. Austin's writings. However we'll impute even this mistake to old age (which impairs a man's other faculties as well as his memory) and content ourselves to set both him and the Reader right, by giving him S. Austin's own words 
a 
Et sic venturus est illa angelica voce testante▪ quemadmodum ire visus est in coelum, i● est, i● eadem carnis forma atque substantia, cui pro●ecto imn. or alitat●… d●…t, naturam non ab●…nlit. Secundum hanc formam n●…n est puta▪ does ubique diffusus. Cavendu est enim ne ita divinitatem astr●…mus ●… veritatem corporis 〈◊〉 A●…d Dardanum. Epist. 187. (vulgo 57) § 1▪ p. ●…8▪ Edit nov. Paris.  
Nos itaque sic audiamus Evangelium quasi praesentem Dominum— Quod enim pretiosum sonabat deore Domini, & propter nos scriptum est, & nobis servatum, & propter nos recitatum & recitabitur etiam propter posteros nostros, & donec seculum finiatur. Sursum est Dominus; sed etiam hic est veritas Dominus. Corpus enim Domini in quo re surrexit, uno loco esse (potest: or rather a●…●…vo, Gratian, Lombard, and Aquinas read it) oportet: veritas ubique diffusa est. Idem. Tract. 30. in Joh. §. 1. p▪ 516. 517. ●…dit. ejusdem.  
Semper enim ibi erat Christus quo fuerat rediturus; sic enim venit ut non recederet. Unde alio loco ait, Nemo ascendit in coelum nisi qui descendit de coelo, filius hominis qui est in coelo: non dixit qui fuit in coelo. In terra loquebatur & in coelo se esse dicebat. Sic venit ut inde non abscederet; sic rediit ut nos non derelinqueret. Quid miramini? Deus hoc facit. Homo enim secundum corpus, in loco est, & de loco migrat, & cum ad alium locum venerit, in eo loco unde venit non erit; Deus au 'em implet omnia, & ubique totus est, non secundum ●patia tenetur locis. Erat tamen Dominus Christus secundum visibilem carnem in terra, secundum invisibilem majestatem in coelo & in terra. Idem. Tract. & in Joh. §. 9 p. 524. Edit. ejusdem.  . For the truth is I'm so heartily tired, that I willingly quit the advantage this Paragraph affords me, to be at quiet: For the same reason I return nothing to the last angry remark, but only desire him to put on his Spectacles, and once more read and consider the places I refer him to 
b Disc. concerning the Rubric. cap. 3. §. 32. pag. 23. Ars rationis. Oxon. è Theatro. lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 73. Reply. cap. 4. pag. 29. . Perhaps the wisdom of second thoughts may show him his mistake; if not, I'll instruct him in my next.  
Having said what I thought was requisite in my own Vindication, some may possibly now expect my Reflections upon our Examiner's Harangue. But I cannot easily persuade myself to deal with a man of his Character any more than I needs must: and I hope it may be time enough to consider that Harangue, when the rest of my Reply is Examined and Vindicated. I am encouraged to expect another Appendix very speedily; and it may be as this first has in great measure prevented, so the next may wholly supersede the trouble of a set Answer. For this Harangue is made up of two parts, answerable to the two Discourses; the former concerns the Real presence; the latter, the Adoration of our Saviour in the Eucharist. What we have in the Former depends wholly upon a new and singular notion of a Spiritual body, which (besides many other pretty tricks it has) can be at once in two places, notwithstanding the seeming Contradiction. Now of this, the Examen has already given me occasion to say what I hope may be sufficient: and if it appear to my Reader that there neither is nor can be such a body, the Examiner may take his new nothing and hang it on his sleeve, with the rest of his Discourse that hangs upon it; for we have no farther obligation to trouble ourselves about it.  
Thus the first part of the Examen has afforded me great relief; if the second be but as obliging, what would otherwise prove a double trouble' will then be dispatched at once, to the Readers ease as well as mine. For I think we may be equally willing to be rid of an unthinking man, who talks as if his Soul were a match for his Spiritual body, and as this has neither quantity nor quality, so that had neither sense nor reason. Wherefore I attend the motions of his next Examen; and he promises fairly not to weary my expectation. For he says if it please God to continue their strength, they will not be long in my debt. Whenever they come out of it, I'll take care (God willing) to give 'em a receipt; but I hope they will not make such payment as they have done now, all in clipped money, and three parts in four of it brass.  
FINIS.