THE Reformed CATHOLIC: OR, THE True Protestant.  MATTH. 24.26. 
There shall arise FALSE CHRIST'S and FALSE PROPHETS.  
LONDON, Printed for Henry Brome, at the Gun in St. Paul's Churchyard, at the West-end, 1679.   

THE Reformed Catholic: OR, The True Protestant.  
THIS Paper should have come into the World under the form of a Letter (as most Pamphlets of quality do of late) if the Author had not made a Conscience of covering the Simplicity of his purpose under any sort of Disguise; so that without so much as a single How do ye to usher it in, he comes point blank to the Business in the very Title. It may be looked upon, I know, as a thing of Ill Omen, to begin with an Alias: But there's neither Priest nor Highwayman in our Case; and yet there may be cause enough perhaps for a kind of Hue and Cry too; for 'tis a matter of great moment that every man should both go, and be known by his right Name; and (peradventure) never more necessary than in this juncture, and in this particular: And so to my Text.  
A Reformed Catholic (properly so called) is an Apostolical Christian, or a Son of the Church of England: A true Protestant may be so too; nay, and many times he is so; and many a Loyal, Orthodox, Reformed Catholic calls himself so; and (according to the stile of the Age) he may be well enough said and accounted so to be. But all this is only by Adoption, and without any colour for it in the Original of his Denomination. Now a Protestant, in strictness of speaking, is a Lutheran, which this Church does not in all points pretend to be, and then the Characteristical Note of a Christian is Catholic; so that the Appellation is too narrow for the Principle, and draws on the very same Implication in a Protestant-Catholique, which we make sport with in a Roman-Catholique, that is to say, the Soloecism of a Particular Universality.  
Here is enough already (I suppose) to furnish an Extract of as much Popery out of it, as may recommend some hungry Informer to a Mornings-draught; for we have a sort of people now a days, that will read a man's Heart through his Ribs, though they can hardly see his Nose on's Face; and that give more Credit to their Ears than to their Eyes. Now to ease the Reader in two or three peevish Points, if he should chance to be Over-critical and Imperious, I will tell him beforehand, in a few words, what he is to trust to.  
To the first Question or Objection fairly supposed; the Author is no Disguised or Concealed Papist, but of the Communion of the Church of England, trained up in the strictest way of it, and standing firm to it against all sorts of Provocation, Discouragement, Temptation, and Argument; and without warping to the Jesuits, either on the right hand or on the left.  
To the Second: He is not set on to write this Discourse, either directly or indirectly, by any Hint, Desire, or Appointment whatsoever; nor by any other Motive than the sense of what he owes to the Public, and to his Conscience, and the Consideration of some small Present from the Bookseller, if there be any thing got by't. (A piece of Good Husbandry that he has learned of his Superiors) He has no design upon any Place at Court in't, nor upon any Church-Lease; no not so much as a Reversion: And all this is True, by the Faith of a Poor Gentleman, that has worn his Doublet out at the Elbows in his Majesty's Service. It might be added, that he's grown Old and Careless, and that even Malice itself were lost upon him. Now under these Circumstances, I hope he may securely advance to tell you a little more of his mind.  
So far as Catholic and Protestant serve only as two several Names, intending the selfsame thing, (though the one by Propriety, and the other but by Translation) is is all one to me whether of the two any man calls me; all the danger is, the countenancing of an Ill Thing under a Good Name.  
The word Protestancy falls under a double acceptation; the one, as it denotes the Reformed Religion; the other, as it is taken for the Genus Generalissimum of all Dissenters from the Church of Rome. The former I do heartily embrace, as transmitted to us from our Forefathers, and Signed by the Blood of Martyrs; Authorised by the Holy Gospel, and by the Law of the Land; the common Bond of our Civil Peace, and (by God's Blessing) the Hopes and Means of our Eternal Salvation.  
Now to the latter Acceptation, I am not at all satisfied with it, and I have both Reason and Experience to warrant me in that dislike. As to my Reason; First, It is an Agreement upon an Opposition; and next, it is an Agreement of several Parties disagreeing among themselves, which carries the face rather of a Confederacy, than a Religion: For it is not the Opposing of Error, but the asserting of a Truth, that must do the work. One Error may be opposed by another, even in a Single Person; as one man Robs his Neighbour, and a third Robs him. Here's one Injustice opposed by another: So that as it is an Agreement in Opposition, 'tis a hundred to one there will be Error in't: But the Opposers themselves being subdivided, 'tis impossible it should be Right; for the very Essence and Soul of Religion are here wanting; that is to say, Charity and Unity. And for the Proof of this, beyond all Contradiction; let but any man look back into the late Troubles, and see, when the Factions had destroyed the King and the Church (which they called the Common Enemy) how they fell presently to the Worrying of one another; when the Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, Quakers, Seekers, Ranters, Antinomians, and twenty other wild sorts of Sectaries, under the title of Protestants, and under the pretence of opposing Popery, destroyed the very Cause they Covenanted to assert; a Protestant-Church, a Protestant-Prince, and a Protestant-People, filled the Land with Confusion, Sacrilege, and Heresy; made the English Nation a Reproach and a Scandal to the Christian World: And so soon as they had possessed themselves of the Power and Revenue of the Kingdom, every man's hand was against his Brother for the Booty.  
To proceed now to the matter of Experience: I would fain see any one Instance from the very Reformation itself, to this day, when ever there was a Clamour advanced upon this Point, of a Conjunct Opposition of Popery, that the Church of England was not struck at in the Confederacy; and that too, not by blind Inferences and tacit Presumption, but by Ouvert acts, and a Notoriety of Practice: That is to say, the Men that stickled under this Notion, did positively declare the Government by Bishops, to be Antichristian; and the Discipline and Common Prayers of the Church, to be Popery and Superstition; yes, and the Civil Administration itself also to be downright Tyranny. They did just like the Fellows in Hatton-Garden, that Stole Money and Plate, under the pretence of Searching for Priests; and for the Credit of the Exploit, they Robbed in Red Coats too, that they might the better pass for some of his Majesty's Guards. The Similitude runs upon All Four, for it was the very case of our pretended Protestants; under colour of hunting for Priests, they seized Money and Plate, and committed Robberies in the very Livery of the Government.  
This they did in Scotland, under the Queen Regent, and King James; and in England, under Queen Elizabeth; and twice in Scotland again, under the late King; and after that, in England: Two actual Rebellions more in Scotland, under this present King, and now God Bless us from another at Home; and all this from that sort of People that styled themselves Protestant's. The Principles, the Methods, and the Pretences the very same, from one end to the other.  
The Story of these Fanatical Conspiracies is almost as Nauseous as the thing itself is Detestable; only this last in Scotland methinks seems to Crown the Infamy of all the rest: For a Party that calls itself Protestant; a Party in full Cry upon the scent of Popery; a Popish Plot upon Oath too, at the same time upon the Life of the King, upon our Religion and Government; and that Plot, at that instant, under a strict Examination; the same Party at the same time also pressing for Justice upon the Conspirators, nay, and complaining of the remissness of the Prosecution, notwithstanding the most exemplary Rigour in the Case that ever was known in this Nation: For this Party, (I say) under these Circumstances, to fly in the face of the Government, let the World judge if ever there was a more Consummated piece of Wickedness. They raise a Rebellion, and make Religion the Ground of it; they declare a War against the King, and the Church, and yet write themselves Loyal Subjects and Protestants. They cry out of the Danger of Popery, and yet in the same breath, draw their Swords upon their Prince, in the very attempt of Crushing it; and all these Aggravations complicated in one act. Is it not high time then, after an Imposture that has cost this Nation so dear, to learn at last to distinguish betwixt a Religion and a Faction? Betwixt what men are, and what they call themselves? Is a Renegado ever the less a Turk for putting out English Colours? Are the Blessed Spirits ever the less Pure, for the Devils transforming himself into an Angel of Light? Is the King's Broad Seal one jot the less Valuable for being Counterfeited? So neither is our Profession. And he that dishonours Religion, or invades Authority under the Name of a Protestant, is no more to any sober man, than a Goth or a Vandal. Judas his Betraying of his Master was a most ungrateful and abominable Sin, but the doing of it with a Kiss, made it by many degrees the more execrable: And it was the height of the Prophet David's Affliction, the Circumstance of a Familiar Friend. Where's the harm now of saying, Have a care of False Protestants? The Author and the Finisher of our Faith, is (I hope) of Authority sufficient to justify that Caution. Does not our Saviour himself tell us that there shall arise False Christ's and False Prophets? and why not False Protestants? And does he not bid us take heed that no man deceive us; for many (says he) shall come in my Name, saying I am Christ, and shall deceive many? Does he not bid us beware of Woolves in Sheep's Clothing? And in his description of the Scribes and Pharisees, give us the very Picture of our Impostors.  
We have it upon the Credit of Dr. Tong and Dr. Oates, that the Sedition of 1641. was totally contrived and carried on by Popish Counsels; and that not only the Conventicles in that Bloody Revolution, but all our Separate Meetings to this day, and particularly the Scottish Commotions were and are Influenced by Priests and Jesuits, under the Masque of Professors of those several Persuasions. Have we not reason then to use all possible Circumspection, that we may not be imposed upon by such as these for Protestants? No man has a greater Veneration for the memory of those Protestants that suffered Martyrdom for their Faith; no man a greater Horror for the Irish, the Parisian, and several other Massacres; no man a higher Esteem, or a more Ardent affection for Protestancy itself, (so far as the Profession of the Church of England is intended by it) than I have. But for those Turbulent Spirits that lay about them as if Heaven were to be taken by actual Violence, whose Zeal outstrips Christianity itself, imposing upon the World their own corrupt and impetuous passions, instead of the Healing and Pacifique Motions of the Holy Ghost: These are a dangerous sort of People, and their ways are not only a Contradiction to the undeniable Principles of our Institution, but to the common Interests of Mankind, as well Individuals as Communities: For if it be true, that Charity is the great Lesson of the Gospel: If it be true, that Unity in Faith, and Unanimity in the things of Civil Government, would make up the most perfected Blessing that reasonable Nature is capable of in this Tabernacle of Flesh; then must it necessarily follow, that the nearer we approach to that Agreement, the better Christians we are, and the happier Men; and the further we depart from it, the more Wicked and the more Miserable we are. This is either true or false: If the former, there's no Treason in't; if the latter, we may burn our Bibles.  
Before I wade any further into this Controversy, it may do well, I think, to give some Reason, why upon this Subject, and at this Time; that the World may not take that for the Leaven of an Unquiet Humour, which in great truth, is only an act of Conscience in the discharge of a sober and a seasonable duty to my Prince and Country.  
To the undertaking of this Office, I have been induced, by the Audacious Liberties of the Press, in the matter of Religion and Government, endeavouring to possess the Multitude with False and Pernicious Principles and Opinions, and by Artificial Hints and Scandals to dispose them (now toward the meeting of this next Parliament) to a Partial and a Factious Choice: So that my Business is only to encounter and lay open the Vanity and Weakness of those Libels, and without confining myself to any one in particular, to sum up the Malice of them all, for so much as concerns our present purpose, and to submit myself to the Reader in a fair and short Reply.  
It is a Note worthy of Consideration, that all the Papers here in question, (even to a single Sheet) are the Work of Men exceedingly biased against the Established Government, as Republicans, Anabaptists, and other sorts of Dissenters from the Church; for the Publishers of these Papers are known every one of them, and most of the Authors. Now what advice toward the Honour and Safety of the Government, these People are likely to give, who are United in common Principles of Defaming, Discomposing, and even of Dissolving it, let Heaven and Earth be the Judges: And what work such a House of Commons would make, as these forward Undertakers would have, if they were to direct and influence the Election.  
Now if these be the Counsellors, let us see next if the Matter of their Writings be not answerable to the Character of the Men; and if it be not most evident that it is their very scope and design (so far from endeavouring the Peace and Settlement of the Nation) to poison the People with Seditious Maxims; to create Jealousies betwixt the King and his Subjects, and to Undermine the very Foundation of the Government.  
They support themselves with the Multitude, upon two General and Popular pretensions, Religion and Liberty: What Religion, or what Liberty, they do not say; but only fill the People's heads with a confused Notion of things, and wild apprehensions of Popery and Tyranny: And then their next work is under colour of stating the Privileges of King and People, to Erect Seditious Positions; and after all, to prescribe Remedies infinitely worse than the Disease: We shall now make it appear that the Religion they talk of, leads to all sorts of Impiety; and that their pretended Liberty is the ready way to Slavery. First, of Religion.  
As to what concerns Religion, they do all of them sing the same Song in their Queries and Proposals to the Freeholders and Electors of England, and unanimously agree in the same method of Advice to the People, how they are to govern themselves in their next Choice.  
Their first Caution is, To pursue the Discovery and Punishment of the Plot, (the Trojan Horse with an Army in the Belly of it.) To secure us from Popery; and that no Papist may be allowed to dwell in the Land; Nor any man chosen into the House, that shall dare to open his mouth for a Popish Successor: And all this attended with a Dreadful Enumeration of the Massacres, Fires, Treasons, and Devastations that have been wrought by the Popish Party.  
To this first Point, the Replicant most willingly subscribes, so far as stands with Christian Charity, and the Law of the Land: But then he cannot forget on the other hand, that the Counterfeit Protestant Horse of 1641. had an Army in the Belly of him, as well as the Trojan; and he that would be safe, must look both ways at once.  
Another Caution is, not to choose any man that is Popishly affected; or (as another hath it) Ill affected. But a third proceeds a little more warily, and recommends the choosing only of Sincere Protestants, and not Disguised Papists, who are ready to pull off their Masque, when time serves, and may be known by their Laughing at the Plot, Disgracing the Evidence, Admiring the Traitor's Constancy, etc.  
This same Popishly and Ill affected, lies open to several Exceptions; for one Man is made Judge of the Thoughts of another, which is only the Prerogative of Almighty God. I have heard of a man that was Indicted for Whistling; but never, till now, of any Man that was Incapacitated to serve in the House of Commons, for Thinking. Beside the Unreasonable Latitude, and the Horrible Iniquity of the Judgement; for if this be admitted, no man living can be secure: It involves the Innocent with the Guilty, and puts a man out of all possibility to acquit himself. And then forward; It is but turning the Tables, and the Blot is hit on the other side: For why should not I be as well allowed to pronounce another man a Disguised Protestant, as he to judge me a Disguised Papist, and the same Liberty of Marking him too? You shall know him by his Shiboleths; for the Old Covenaent sticks in his Teeth still, and the whole mystery of his Profession is wrapped up in that Oracle of the Privileges of Parliament; the King's Just Power and Greatness; the Protestant Religion against Popery, and Popish Innovations; the first point being wholly Incomprehensible, and the other two, like Jugglers Knots, fast or lose at pleasure.  
This equal Freedom being granted on all sides, takes away all Faith, Confidence, and Correspondence in Humane Society. I know no difference in the World betwixt one man's Infallibility and another's; nor any (but in Terms) betwixt a Private man's Infallible Light, and the Pope's Infallible Sentence: Nor is there any one Usurpation in Popery, that is either Grievous to the Conscience, or Dangerous to the Government; but a man may show very near an Equivalent of it in Schism.  
As to the Marks of distinction betwixt a Sincere Protestant and a Disguised Papist; the Immorality of Laughing at the Plot, savours more in my opinion, of an Unmannerly Fool, then of a Disguised Papist; though for my own part, I am so far from Laughing at it, that it wounds my soul, the very thought on't. Disgracing of the Evidence were something indeed; but to make a man a Papist for admiring the Traitor's Constancy, that, methinks is very hard, and not answerable to what one would expect from an Advocate for Liberty of Conscience. It is much easier to relinquish an Opinion, then for a man to divest himself of Natural Affections; and more unreasonable to claim a freedom in the one, than to refuse it in the other. I must confess, I do admire that Constancy, and if I were to die for so doing, I could not but admire it still: And these Impressions are Humane, and not to be resisted.  
We fall now into the Old Track of the whole Party: They call for Toleration; complain of Persecution; cast all their Sufferings upon their Worshipping according to their Consciences; and then this Lamentable Condition of theirs must be Remonstrated to the whole Nation. Of these four Points in order.  
In the handling of their Plea for Protestant Dissenters, there are many things to be taken into Consideration. First, Is it in matters of Conscience, or only of Fancy, wherein they desire to be Indulged? If the latter, the upholding of a Law is certainly of much greater concern, than the gratifying of a Caprice. Now on the other side, if they demand it upon an Exigent of Conscience: First, why Plurally, for Dissenters? When one man cannot honestly undertake for another man's Conscience: Besides that (Secondly) They ask an Indulgence for several Parties, of divided Consciences and Opinions: And in short, they would have the Magistrate favour all the Consciences, that will not endure one another's. Again; They should do well to explain what they mean by Protestant Dissenters, upon points of Conscience; whether all in general, or only such and such Parties: If all in general, Heathens must be Tolerated as well as Christians, for they have Consciences as well as we: Or if it be restrained to Christianity, it opens a door to Heresies, more detestable than Paganism itself. So that an Universal Toleration is utterly Unlawful; and a Partial Toleration on the other hand, is as Ineffectual; for upon a Plea of Conscience they may all claim alike: So that it is an Act of Uniformity still, to those that are Excluded; and it is not fair, in the Government, to favour one half, and exasperate another, where all may as well be taken in, as any. Beside, upon the supposal of a Limited Toleration, who shall judge which are fit to be admitted, and which not? If the People, every man justifies himself, and then we are upon an Universal Toleration again. They tell us stories of sound Faith, good Life, and of distinguishing betwixt Fundamentals and not Fundamentals; which is only treading of the same Ring still; for it may be every body's Plea as well as any man's: That which the Magistrate judges one way, the People shall determine another; and one man's Fundamental Truth shall be another's Fundamental Error, which will introduce as many Religions as Fancies; bring Factions into Families as well as into Governments, and make the People both Parties and Judges: And it is not to say that the Word of God shall be the judge, for that's only a Rule by which we are to judge; and by Erroneous judgements it is made the Foundation of all Heresies; For when every man may make his own Creed, there's nothing so Impious, but he'll show you a Text for't. Moreover, the very Pretence of Liberty of Conscience is frivolous; for Conscience is out of the reach of Humane Power; and the freedom of Thought, no Law can either punish or take away.  
But it is the Liberty of Acting, as well as of Thinking, that they insist upon, which upon the whole matter, is neither more nor less than a Licence to do what they please. The League in Flanders, under Maximilian; the Holy League under Henry the 3d. of France; Muncer's Outrages in Germany; the Murderers of Henry the 4th. and the P. of Orange; and all the Villainies of the late times here at home, were acted under the Masque of Religion. It is not for the restraining of Opinions that Laws are provided; but for the preventing of Ouvert Deeds of Violence, and they are any punished for Action, not for Conscience. Neither have we any means of distinguishing betwixt Faction and Religion, if every man's word shall be taken for his own Conscience; and than it is a dangerous way of dividing a Kingdom against itself.  
Take notice all this while, that they urge a Toleration, no body knows for whom, or for what. Where are their Articles? where is the Model of their Accommodation? or how is it possible to contrive any Common Expedient to gratify them? For nothing less than a total Liberty of doing what they list, will please them, which must inevitably produce the Dissolution of the Government. If they would have the wilder and more extravagant Sects excluded, why do they plead for All in general, and not rather particularise the Opinions and Parties that they would have Indulged? But they dare not do this, for fear of disobliging the rest, their business being to Unite all Factions in the Quarrel; when yet you may as soon bring Heaven and Hell together, as reconcile them in Religion; so that either they ask an Impious thing, in the allowance of all, or an Impracticable thing in propounding any Limitation, upon a Plea of Conscience. But the truth is no more than this: They ask a thing which can neither be granted, nor so much as understood; and the People are transported with the sound of Loyalty and Religion, to the desire of things wholly Inconsistent with either Piety or Government.  
We should do well to take notice, that against this Plea, for Liberty, there is on the one side, the Authority of a Law, and the solemn judgement of the Church for the Equity of it; and on the other, the King's Personal and Political Conscience for the Execution of it. There is also the Duty of a Subject for the Obeying of it; and the same reason that Authorises an Invasion of this Law, may as well Invalidate all the rest. Now the Counterpoise to all this weight, is (at best) only the naked Conscience of some private Persons. The People's Consciences call for Liberty; and the Governor's Conscience requires Order: Their Consciences will not down with this Law, nor this Law with such Consciences: Which of the two now shall yield to the other?  
But what benefit might we now expect from this Indulgence here, if it were granted? Or rather, in the first place, what colour of Conscience, or of Reason is there in the very demand itself (all the aforesaid Exceptions over and above). Is it, first, Reasonable for them to ask what they themselves think unreasonable to grant? Or to claim such an allowance to themselves, as a point of Conscience, which they themselves, upon a point of Conscience, refuse to others? For there is not any one Party in the whole mass of Dissenters, that does not deny the same freedom to others which they do jointly challenge to themselves: Nay, in their very Propositions to his Majesty in the Isle of Wight, Mar. 1647. they Excepted the Use of the Common Prayer, when they gave Liberty to all other sorts of Worship. (To which Concession they were then Compelled by the Circumstances of that juncture.) Their Refusal must proceed either upon the Right of the thing, or upon Reason of State. If they did not like our way, neither do we approve of theirs: Or if they excluded us out of a respect to the Public Peace, the Government hath still the same reason against them.  
But we shall better understand the Party, from their own words, wherein we shall first, take a short view of their Opinions in matter of Faith and Religion. Secondly, How they stand affected, one Party to another: And Thirdly, Their Positions and Practices, with Relation to the Civil Government.  
As to their Opinions, first see some Extravagances of the Sectaries, Cited by a Presbyterian, out of their own Writings, in Edwards' Gangrena, from P. 18. to 27.  
They say that the Scriptures are Insufficient and Uncertain. God the Author of Sin, even of the Sinfulness itself. That the Magistrate ought not to punish any man for denying of a God, if his Conscience be so persuaded. That every Creature is God, an Efflux only from God, and shall return to him: That there is but One Person in the Divine Nature. That the least Truth is of more worth than Jesus Christ himself. That the Doctrine of Repentance is a Soul-destroying Doctrine. That 'tis as possible for Christ himself to Sin, as for a Child of God to Sin. That the Moral Law is of no use at all to Believers. That Peter Trouble, after the denial of his Master, issued only from the weakness of his Faith. That Infants rise not again. Nay, he speaks of a Sectary pleading for a Toleration of Witches, with several abominable Instances. And he charges the Nursery and Increase of them upon the Presbyterians; and that it was their Indulgence, not Episcopal Connivance that wrought our Mischief in that kind. They agree (says he) with Julian the Apostate, Libertines, Atheists, Unclean, Incestuous, Drunkards, Sabbath-breakers, Liars, Jugglers, Slanderers, Proud and Boasting, Insolent, Outrageous, Hypocritical, False.  
The Sectaries on the other hand call the Assembly, Antichristian, Romish, Bloody, Plagues and Pests of the Kingdom, Baal's Priests, Soothsayers: The Presbyterian Government a Limb of Antichrist, Tyrannical, Lordly, an Egyptian Bondage. An Anabaptist said, He hoped to see Heaven and Earth on fire, before Presbytery should be settled; and to see it trodden under foot, as the Bishops. Sterry himself says, The Seed of God hath two Capital Enemies, Romish Papacy, and the Scotch Presbytery. See what the Presbyterians say now to a Toleration.  
It is much (says the London Ministers Letter to the Assembly,) Jan. 1.45. that our Brethren should separate from the Church, but that they should endeavour to get a Warrant to Authorise their Separation from it; and to have Liberty (by drawing Members out of it) to weaken and diminish it, till (so far as lies in them) they have brought it to nothing. This we think to be plainly Unlawful.  
And then the Harmony of the Lancashire Ministers, p. 12. Toleration would be the putting the Sword in a Mad man's hand; a Proclaiming Liberty to the Wolves, to come into Christ's Flock to prey upon his Lambs.  
Toleration makes the Scripture a Nose of Wax; a Rule of Faith to all Religions. And this is the great Rabbi of the Party. rutherford's free▪ Disp. p. 360.  
Liberty of Conscience, and Toleration of all, or any Religion, is so Prodigious an Impiety, that this Religious Parliament cannot but abhor the very naming of it. Bailey's Dissuasive Epist. Ded. 1645.  
It is unreasonable (says the Defender of the London Ministers Letter to the Assembly, Anti-toleration, p. 16.) that Independents should desire that Toleration of Presbyters, which they would not give to Presbyters.  
Let it be observed from hence, that these people do first demand of the Government that Liberty which they deny to one another. And Secondly: That they pretend to do it upon Conscience, and yet hold the thing itself to be absolutely Unlawful; so that they justify the Conscience of our denying it to them, by the Conscience of their refusing it to others. And the only way to evade this, is to discover all; by confessing, that though they now beg a Toleration from the Government, yet if they get power in their hands, they'll make a Conscience again (as they did before) of allowing any freedom to the Government.  
It is a clear case, that their demands are unwarrantable, Impracticable, Unreasonable, and not grounded upon Conscience, but directly in Opposition to it; as we have it under their own hands.  
Let us try now if we can discover what the design is, since it appears manifestly what it is not; and that, not only from the Reason of the thing, but from their own deeds and writings; and those matters also, and Positions, expounded by Practice.  
One thing remarkable is this; That they have been still Fishing in Troubled Waters, and taking advantage of all Distresses, and necessities of the Government. Did not Cartwright, Coppinger, Arthington, and Hacket, take their time for that Execrable Conspiracy against Q. Elizabeth, when she was just upon the very point of securing the Reformed Religion against the Power and Church of Rome? Did not the Sectaries in 1641. take the same advantage against the late King, when his thoughts were wholly taken up about suppressing the Irish Rebellion? And did not the latter Scotch Tumults take the same advantage of his Majesty's being under many troublesome Circumstances about the Plot; and when the People's minds were prepared to take Ill Impressions in the matter of Government? So that the very Timing of this Revived Clamour for Liberty of Conscience, looks suspiciously; and the more, because their Meetings here have of late been very little interrupted.  
To run through those pestilent Principles, which the Heads of the Sectaries have Published in their own Names, were endless. Wherefore I shall content myself with some of their General Positions, and refer the Reader to Husband's Collections, or the Authors themselves for the rest; as Milton, Goodwin, Rutherford, and a hundred more.  
They make the Lords and Commons the Supreme Power; nay, the People themselves, in some cases; Princes, they say, may be deposed and put to death: They distinguish betwixt the King's Person and his Authority, the Letter of the Law, and the Equity of it; and appeal from the Written Law to the Law of Nature; and according to these Maxims they govern their Proceedings.  
But will you see now the price of all our Blood, and Confusion?  
Upon their Petition to his Majesty for a Reformation of the Liturgy, the King most graciously issued out a Commission for a Review of the Book of Common Prayer: An equal number of Learned Divines, both Episcopal and Presbyterian were appointed to meet about it, and to agree upon such Alterations as should be thought most Necessary. His Majesty earnestly desiring that the Ministers would not totally lay aside the Book of the Common Prayer, but read those parts against which there could be no Exception. Now instead of most necessary Alterations, and those to be agreed upon by Both Parties, they Published a new Liturgy of their own, under the Title of the Reformation of the Liturgy, (which was indeed the Abolition of it.) I'll give ye only a taste of some of their Important scruples that are cast into the Balance, against the Unity of the Church, and the Peace of the Kingdom: They turn Wedded Wife into Married: Dost thou Believe into do you Believe; and all this I Steadfastly Believe, into this I do Unfeignedly Believe.  
Let us now suppose these People had their Askings: Let any man but show me from the Minority of King James, to this hour, where they were not the more violent and importune upon yielding (even to the hazard of a downright Rebellion) and the Author shall give any man his Head, for the Precedent: Did not the Assembly in 1578. impose upon the Parliament in Scotland, fall foul upon the Archbishop of Glasgow, and the whole Order? pass a Decree against their Votes in Parliament; command them to renounce their Temporal Titles, and Civil Jurisdiction, and set their Quarriers at work for the demolishing of Glasgow Cathedral? (which had been done too, if the Tradesmen had not by force prevented it.) And did they not grow bolder and bolder upon the King's Lenity; and Command the Bishops, upon pain of Excommunication, not to Officiate as Pastors, without Licence from the General Assembly; and likewise order the Patrimony of the Church to be disposed of as they should see meet? And did they not after that, make a Violent and Treasonous Seizure of the King at Ruthven, and justify it when they had done? And so on by degrees, till his Majesty was forced, by a Tumult at Edenbourgh, in 1596. and the Ministers Bond of Confederacy immediately upon it, to a Resolution of Rigour and Severity; which (as Spottswood observes) gave him more quiet and security for the future.  
His Majesty was no sooner entered upon the Government of England, but he was Assaulted in 1604. with the same sort of People; and at a Conference at Hampton Court, this Question was put, How far an Ordinance of the Church was Binding, without offence to Christian Liberty? Whereupon the King gave this short Answer, Let's have no more of these Questions, but Conform, at your Peril. So that they gave him no further trouble upon that subject. And this was Queen Elizabeth's Case too, to the hazard both of her Life and Government; till by that severe Act against them, of the Thirtyfifth of her Reign, she gave herself ease for the remainder of her Life.  
What did the Late King gain by his Indulgence to the Scots in 1637. but farther Indignities and Contempt? First, the Service-Book and Canons were their Grievance; then the Five Articles of Perth, though established both by the General Assembly and Parliament; The High-Commission next, and then the Bishop's Session in Civil Judicatories. His Majesty gratifies them in every point: Insomuch, that they had nothing further to complain of, but that the King would not Abolish Episcopacy, and admit the Authority of their Lay-Elders; upon which point they broke out into an Open Rebellion. After this, upon the Interview of the two Armies at Berwick (when the King had them absolutely at his Mercy) upon their Supplication for a Treaty, he Trusted them again, and concluded upon a Pacification; of which, the Covenanters did not keep so much as one Article.  
Upon his Majesties Return to London, he passes the Triennial Bill; Abolishes the Star-Chamber and High-Commission-Court; Passes an Act for the Continuance of the Parliament; and in fine, denys them nothing but his Crown and his Blood; and then by Virtue of what he had given them already, they took away the rest, and stripped him of his Friends, his Authority, his Revenue, and his Life.  
They minister great cause of suspicion in their very stile and scruples: Why do they run so much upon Ambiguities? As the settling of Religion in its due Latitude; a due and necessary Reformation; sound Belief; Principles Congruous to a National Settlement; the King's Just Rights; Importance of Interests; Stated Order in the Church, etc. What is all this, but a jumbling together of so many Amusements, to pass a Colourable Pretence upon the People? And it signifies just nothing, but what Construction they shall think fit to allow it. If they would offer any Pertinent, Intelligible, and Practicable Proposition; and say, what Injunctions they would have abated; what Parties they would recommend for these qualifications; where to find them, and who shall judge of them. If they would State their Demands, and say, This is all we ask; and then rest there: If, as they plead for all Dissenters, they would produce some Common Instrument, or Commission, to show that they are Authorised by all to Solicit in their Names, and to treat upon such or such Points; and to go no further, the business might be brought yet to some rational Issue.  
As their Style is exceeding Dark and Mysterious, so are their Scruples of an Extraordinary Quality too. They cannot kneel at the Sacrament, but they can hold up their hands at the Covenant; they can dispense with the Oath of Allegiance, and yet make a scruple of disclaiming the Solemn League: They can swallow a Schism (or worse) and yet a Ceremony chokes them. Add to all this; many of those very persons that promoted our former Troubles, this very way, are now at work again upon the same Pretention; and may, without breach of Charity, be suspected to have the same design, and to remain in a state of Impenitency, if they have not manifested their Repentance by some Open Recantation: For (according to the Casuists) Public sins require Public Confessions.  
It is an Ill sign too, for a man to leap upon the sudden, from matter of Conscience to Reason of State; and in the same breath, of a Petitioner, to become a Reformer. It would seem a strange thing, for a man to request a special favour from the Master of a Family, and at the same time to put affronts upon his Domestics, and to tell him that his Servants were all of them a pack of Rascals; which is not much from the point now in hand.  
We have had abundance of Advice to the Freeholders' of England, toward the Choice of this next Parliament; as Sober and Seasonable Quaeres; England's great Interest; the Free holder's Choice, and twenty more; and all of them agreeing in the general Heads one with another: They tell us who are fit to be chosen, and who not.  
The former, such as will remove and bring to Justice evil Counsellors; Corrupt and Arbitrary Ministers of State; Detect and Punish the Pensioners of the former Parliament in the face of the Kingdom, and they must choose such as will secure us from Slavery.  
The People are directed on the other side, not to choose a man that has been reputed a Pensioner, no Court-Officer, or whose Employment is durante bene placito; no Ambitious men, or non-resident, that live here in Town, and seek Honours and Preferments above.  
This is the Counsel of England's Grand Interest: And methinks, in these Qualifications, there is both too much, and too little. As to the point of Evil Counsellors, Corrupt Ministers and Pensioners, he should have done well to have advised them all manner of Caution and Circumspection, for fear of mistaking their Men. This was the way that brought the Earl of Strafford, and the Archbishop of Canterbury to their Ends, under the Notion of evil Counsellors too, though perhaps, the most necessary Instruments that ever this Nation enjoyed, for the Common good both of King and People. So that as it is a great Service to bring Corrupt Ministers to Public Justice, it is yet a lewd Method to make the Rabble the Executioners, and to punish Maladministration by Sedition: For in this Case the Good and the Bad fall indifferently without distinction; and instead of drawing here and there a piece of Rotten Timber toward a Reparation, they fall foul upon the main Pillars and Supporters of the House; so that all falls into Ruins. And then the mark of a Reputed Pensioner goes a little too far; for it lies in the power of two or three Malevolent Tongues to make any man so. They that made the last King a Reputed Papist, shall much more easily make any of his Majesty's Subjects pass for Reputed Pensioners.  
The total Exclusion of all Court Officers, or Bene-placito-men, is yet worse: For this sets up a direct Opposition betwixt the King and his People; as who should say, Trust no body that wears any Token of the King's favour. And the same reason disables him as well to any other Trust whatsoever: So that the King's Countenance is a kind of Incapacity. And it is the same thing with those he calls Ambitious Men; as if any Application to his Majesty, made a Man unfit for the Service of his Country. He should have done well to have warned them against the Known Enemies of the Government, rather than the Suspected Servants of the King.  
The Freeholders' Choice is a very Martin Mar-Prelate. His Language against the Clergy is too corpse for an Honest man to repeat after him, but he has ranged them in good Company; for he says that they lay out themselves, to accommodate their Masters with the veriest Villains that can be picked up in all the Country; that so we may fall into the hands again of as Treacherous and Lewd a Parliament as the Wisdom of God, and Folly of Man has most miraculously freed us from. Methinks some of the Members of that Parliament should concern themselves to call for Justice upon so foul a Scandal.  
The Author of the Seasonable Quaeres does not only recommend the same Cautions with the rest, but calls his Majesty himself to Shrift, and puts the Question, whether Prorogation and Dissolution of Parliaments, at such a time as this, does not fill the hearts of Protestant Subjects with evident fears of destruction?  
And Secondly (says he) Whether it be not high time for all the Protestants in England, to Resolve as one man, that they will stand by, and maintain the Power and Privileges of Parliament, together with the Power and Just Rights of the King, according to the Laws of the Kingdom, so as the One may not entrench upon the Other.  
The former Expostulation upon the Reason of the Kings Proceedings, would have been more taken notice of perhaps, if it had not been followed with one of the most Audacious Challenges that this Licentious season has produced; for the meaning of it is, to encourage a direct Rising, as if the King and the Parliament were going together by the Ears, (forgive the Expression) and the People to interpose, to see fair Play.  
This is the very Trace of the Old Covenant: They must resolve to maintain no body knows what on the one side; (for the Privileges of Parliament are past finding out:) But than they are to stand by the King, on the other side, with a Limitation; only in his Just Rights, and of those Bounds, they themselves are to be the Judges. This Epithet was applied to the Late King's Case, by those very men that cut off his Head.  
The Author of England's great Interest, having directed the Good People what persons to choose for the ensuing Parliament, and whatnot. His next work is to instruct them in the Knowledge of their Powers, which he divides into three Rights or Fundamentals. The First is Property, that is, a Right and Title to their own Lives, Liberties, and Estates. For the Law (he says) is Umpire between King, Lords, and Commons; and the Right and Property is one in kind, through all Degrees and Qualities in the Kingdom. Mark that.  
Why does he not say that the King is Umpire betwixt King, Lords, and Commons, as well as that the Law is so? For the Law is only the King's Pleasure made known; and the whole Force and Authority of it, is but an Emanation from Sovereign Power. And then for his Three Fundamentals: As I am a Commoner of England myself, I should be loath to lose any Right of an English man; and yet as I am a Loyal Subject also, I should be as unwilling to encroach upon the Privileges of the Crown. I do not know what he means by his one in Kind; with the Emphasis of Mark that upon it. If it be, that the People have as much Right to their Lives, Liberties, and Estates, as the King himself has; though it be true in some sense, it will not hold yet, as he would have it understood. For the People may forfeit their Lives, Liberties, and Estates, but the King cannot forfeit His: Wherefore Mark That too.  
His Second Fundamental is Legislation: Or, the Power of making Laws; for no Law can be made or Abrogated (he says) in England without them.  
It is not Candidly done, to call that the very act of Legislation, which is only Consultive and Preparative towards it. The making of Laws, is a Peculiar and Incommunicable Prerogative of Sovereignty; so that to place the Legislative Power in the Commons, is to make them Supreme; and to set a King of England once more at the Commons Bar. Beside that, his Inference is as Inconsequent, as his Assertion is Dangerous. As if a Law must necessarily be made By th●m, because it cannot be Made or Abrogated Without them. Does he that furnishes the Ingredients, therefore make the Medicine, because the Medicine cannot be made without the Ingredients? What signifies the form of an Instrument to the passing of an Authority or Obligation, without Signing and Sealing? Yet the one cannot be done without the other. Does the Council that draws the Conveyance, pass away the Estate; because the Act could not have been good without him? And again, the Law in this Case, is no other than a Promise under the King's Hand, passed to the People, and partakes of the Nature of other Promises. It was made by the Promiser, and cannot be discharged without the Consent of those to whom it was Promised.  
His Third Fundamental is Executive, and holds Proportion with the other two, in order to complete both their Freedom and Security; and that is their share (as he says) in the Judicatory Power; in the Execution and Application of those Laws that they Agree to be made.  
A Judicatory Power without Authority to Minister an Oath, is to me, I must confess, a new thing: And now for the word Agree; though it may be pertinent enough to his purpose (for there needs no more to the Undoing of the most Regular Government upon the face of the Earth, than First to turn the People's hearts against it, and then to possess them that they have a Legal Remedy in their Own hands.) Yet that word (I say) in this place, is very improper; for it is but a Request presented to his Majesty for his Approbation. The Request or Bill, is no doubt, agreed upon; but it were an Uncouth kind of expression for a Petitioner to say that he does Agree that his Petition shall be Granted.  
The Business it fairly pushed already: But the Publisher of a Pretended Speech lately Printed, carries it a step further.  
If a Prince (says he) be Born to a Kingdom, who is either Lunatic, or otherwise disabled to do the Kingdom any good, shall not the Subjects, in this Case, proceed to choose another, who may preserve the Kingdom, when otherwise it must of necessity Perish? As lately in the Case of Portugal, they chose another to Succeed, because of the Disability of the former.  
This is, in plain terms, a Deposing Principle: For if a King may be Removed, in such Case of Disability, the People being made Judges of the Case, it is but their saying that he is not sit to Govern, and the work is done.  
There is a Sheet Printed under the Title of A Plea, etc. that has more Brains and Art in it then ordinary. He says that a King is not for his Own, but his Subjects sakes only; and that we have, in truth, rather Title, etc. to Him, than He to Us: Adding, that when Kings themselves be Ill Ones, God not only approves of their Removal, but even himself does it: This he supports upon Texts extremely misapplyed.  
Let it be agreed now that a Prince is rather Constituted for the good of the People, than the People for the advantage of the Prince. But let it be granted also on the other side, that Providence has made Order so necessary to the well-being of Mankind, that Tyranny itself is yet more Tolerable than either Anarchy, or Sedition: So that in the matter of Obedience to Superiors, we find our Convenience, even in our Duty. He seems to infer, that because God himself does many times remove Ill Kings, that therefore he approves of our doing so too. But First, we are not to draw Gods Extraordinary ways into Precedent. By the same Rule, Plunder was formerly justified upon a Scriptural Commission for the spoiling of the Egyptians. Secondly: The very admittance, that an Ill King may be Removed, makes way to the destruction of a Good one; for 'tis but saying he is so, to make him so, and it leaves him barely at the mercy of the People: And this is not all neither, for it turns up the very Root of Government, and casts Humane Affairs into a Circulation of Confusion. The Two Houses Deposed the King; the Commons, the Lords; the Multitude they Deposed the Commons; and all upon the same Charge of Misdemeanour. So that the Trustee being still accountable to those that Entrusted him, the Order of Government is Inverted, and the last Appeal lodged in the Rabble.  
It is a strange thing that our Protestant Dissenters should so Unanimously agree in their Methods of Opposing Authority, and yet keep at so great a distance in all things else; for how scrupulous soever they may seem to be in set forms of Devotion, they are the strictest People of the World, in the observance of a set form of Wrangling with the Government: For an Outcry of Persecution does as naturally follow a Plea for Liberty, as one foot follows another.  
Doth not such a day as this (says our Quaerist) loudly call for Repentance, that Protestants have been Persecuting each other; and for Unity in affection among all Protestant Subjects, whether Conforming or Dissenting in some lesser Points; and that as Brethren, they Unite in such a Combination of Conjunction, as was in Q. Elizabeth's time, with good Success to defend the Crown, Religion, and Kingdom, against the Common Enemy of Mankind?  
Since the Persecution of this Age lies so heavy upon him, and that nothing will serve his turn, but the Uniting of Protestants in such a Combination as was in the days of Q. Elizabeth, it will not be amiss to look a little into the Behaviour of the Protestant Dissenters in those days, and the Indulgence which they received from that Gracious Princess.  
The Non-conformists that Fled, in Q. Mary's time to Frankfort, and went off from the English Reform Catholics there, to the Protestant Dissenters at Geneva, these Non-Conformists (I say) returned for England upon Q. Elizabeth's coming to the Crown; and for the first ten years of her Reign, plied her so hard with Libels, Clamours, and Seditious Consultations, that betwixt the Papists on the one hand, and the Protestant-Dissenters on the other, she had much ado to secure the Peace of her Government: And not being in Condition to venture upon any course of Rigour or Severity, the Protestant Dissenters in the 14th. year of her Reign, Erected a Model of their own; called it the Church, Libelled the Queen, Parliament, and Lords, and afterward entered into a Formal Conspiracy against her Majesty and Council; which being detected, some were Executed, and others Imprisoned: So that, at last, by one severe Law of the 35th. of her Reign, she put an end to that Confederacy.  
Here was the Unity of the Combination our Pamphleter speak of; and we'll give ye now the Provision itself that did the business, with the Prescribed form of their Submission. The Penalties were Imprisonment, without Bail or Mainprise, for being present at Unlawful Conventicles. The Offender to be discharged, if within three months he made his Open Submission and Acknowledgement, in the Form by the said Statute appointed. But in case of Recusancy, to Conform within that time, he was required to Abjure the Realm; and in case of refusing to Abjure, or of not departing within a Limited time, or of Returning without Licence, to be proceeded against as a Felon, without Benefit of Clergy.  

Here follows the Form of Submission.  
I A. B. do humbly confess and acknowledge that I have grievously offended God, in Contemning her Majesty's Lawful Government and Authority, by absenting myself from Church, and from hearing Divine Service, contrary to the Godly Laws and Statutes of this Realm; and in using and frequenting disordered and unlawful Conventicles and Assemblies, under the pretence and colour of Exercise of Religion: And I am heartily sorry for the same, etc.   
You see here what Quarter was both given and taken under Q. Elizabeth, which shows that the Quaerist was little read in History, to appeal to the Practices of those times, either for the Innocence of the Party, or the forbearance of them. But hear what England's Interest says to this matter.  
Oh 〈◊〉 lay to heart (says he) the Grievous Spoils and Ruins that have been laid upon your harmless Neighbours for near these twenty years. Sixty pounds distrained for Twelve. Two Hundred for Sixty: The Flocks taken out of the Fold; the Herd from the Stall: Not a Cow left to give Milk to the Orphans, nor a Bed for the Widow to lie on: Whole Barns of Corn swept away, and not a Penny returned. And all this, for Worshipping of God according to their Conscience. If you (says he to the Freeholders') will either Compel or Persecute yourselves, or choose such as do, you hate the Papists, but not Popery.  
This is so Errand a Cant of Begging, as if the Protestant-Dissenters had served their Trade in moorfield's; and it runs too, in the very Tone and Style of their Petitions and Admonitions to Q. Elizabeth, and so down by a clear Succession to this Instant. There were Citations, Degrading, and Deprivations; some in the Marshalseas, some in the White-Lyon, some in the Gatehouse at Westminster, others in the Counter, or in the Clink, or in Bridewell, or in Newgate. How many good men's deaths have the Bishops been the Cause of? How many have they driven to leave their Ministry, and live by Physic? Men have been miserably handled with Revile, Imprisonments, Banishments, etc. If this Persecution be not provided for, great trouble will come of it.  
Under K. James, no man (they said) could be assured of his Lands or Life. And under the Late King, how were these poor People Oppressed by Fines, Imprisonments, Stigmatizing, Deprivations, Suspensions, Excommunicated, Outlawed, Beggared, Proceeded against with punishments Pecuniary and Corporal; nay, Death itself: And now they are at the same lock again.  
But what are these People (for the Love of God) that are thus miserably used all this while? Why truly (if we may take their own words for't) under Q. Elizabeth they were Loyal Subjects, and Gods faithful Servants; most Worthy, Faithful, and Painful Ministers, Learned and Godly, Vnreproveable before all men; the Strength of the Land, and the Sinew of her Majesty's Government. Under K. James, they were men of Conscience, Preservers of the Churches Right, and Asserters of the Holy Discipline. Under the Late King, they took up the Titles of Men of Tender Consciences, Well-affected; Men that had the Power of Godliness, Painful, Laborious Preachers of the Word; Faithful in their Generation, and Men Zealous in the defence of the Protestant Religion, the Privileges of Parliament, and of his Majesty in his Just Rights. And in our days, they call themselves Lovers of God's Ordinances, and Enemies of all Humane Inventions; a People Zealous of Religion; sound in the Faith, Intelligent, Sober, Numerous, Peaceable, Orthodox: The Ceremonies they look upon as an Excess; they descent from the outward Order of Worship, (for the Conscience will Interpose in the Dictates and Injunctions of men, in Divine Worship) All these People agreeing in this common Complaint, that they are Persecuted for Worshipping according to Conscience. Whether they do well or ill; whether they speak true or false; whether they have Reason on their side, or not, in these Remonstrances let the Reader judge.  
Let it be first observed, that the Author dates this Persecution from his Majesty's Return; near these twenty years (he says) as if there had never been any such thing before; whereas from the time of Q. Elizabeth's Act abovementioned, to the very Act for Uniformity, (the late times excepted) the Church was never without a Legal Provision for the preventing and suppressing of Conventicles; and the much Law more Rigorously put in Execution. Beside that, as they were more or less Indulged, the Nation was still more or less at quiet.  
Observe again, that there's no notice taken of the Liberty of the Late times, or the deplorable Effects of that Licence, though the Presbyterians little Finger was heavier than the Loins of the Bishops, in the point of Restraint, as we have showed already, from the mouths of the other Sectaries. But they are too prudent to fall foul one upon another, when their business is to join in a Confederate Party against the Government: So that they are now One and All, and every separate Opinion stickles for all the rest: And then comes on the Cry of the Orphans and Widows against the Cruelty of the Oppressor: Sixty pounds Distrained for Twelve; Two hundred for Sixty, etc. Methinks the Plaintiff should have been so ingenuous, as to have reflected upon the Persecutions that other Men suffered even from these People that now complain of a Persecution; and that they suffered for Worshipping according to their Consciences too, and they had not only Religion on their side, but Law also; whereas the other founded a Rebellion upon a pretended scruple of Religion, and opposed the Rules of Christianity and Civil Authority, both in one: But it is a Persecution to them, to be kept from Persecuting.  
Neither does this Clamour keep itself within the bounds of Spiritual matters, but breaks in upon the Civil Administration, and alarms the Multitude with the terrible apprehensions likewise of Tyranny and Slavery. Wherefore we are enforced to oppose the sensible Experiment of an actual Tyranny and Slavery to the artificial and imaginary fears of it; to leave all Mortals without excuse, that shall read these plain and well-meaning Papers, if ever they should fall into the same mistakes again.  
The taking away of men's Goods and Liberties, the forcing of their Consciences, and tying them up to an Implicit Obedience to the Decrees of Government, are terrible things, I must confess: But yet much worse sure, where they run directly against the Stream of a Received Authority and Usage, then where the so doing is Warranted by known Laws and uninterrupted Practice.  
There are several sorts of Persecution: A Persecution in matter of Conscience, Good Name, Propriety of Goods and Estate; Freedom of Person, and that is the most odious Aggravation of Persecution, when it is set up in defiance of a Public Law, and Introduced under a colour of kindness to all these Interests. We will be as short in these Particulars as we can, and leave the Reader to say where the Odium of the Persecution lies.  
First, to the point of Conscience. It was the judgement of the Late Royalists, that they were obliged in Conscience and Duty, to pay Obedience to the Laws, both Civil and Ecclesiastical; and with the hazard of their Lives and Fortunes, to endeavour the preservation both of the Church and State. The Protestant Dissenters pretended the same respect for the King and Church, with the Royal Party: And when by Popular Pretexts they had ingratiated themselves with the Multitude, they played their Game the contrary way, and took up Arms against the Government, which they Swore to Defend. Now see at what a rate they treated, not only the Friends of the Government, but the Government itself.  
There were a hundred and fifteen Ministers Ejected, within the Bills of Mortality; beside Paul's and Westminster; and in proportion, all the Nation over, for refusing to comply with the Schism; and they were not so much as suffered to take the Employment of either a Schoolmaster or a Chaplain, but under heavy Penalties. Several of our Divines were Choked up, and Poisoned in Peterhouse, and other Goals, either for Worshipping according to their Consciences, or Refusing to act against them. No Man admitted to Compound, or so much as Live in the Parliaments Quarters, without Swearing. Men were Sequestered for not joining in the Rebellion; for assisting the King according to the Law, and for not Covenanting, though in express Contradiction to the Oath of Allegiance. Upon the Abolition of the Common Prayer, severe Penalties imposed upon any man that should use it; and their own Directory imposed upon a Forfeiture too; nay, they would not allow the King himself, in his Distresses, the Comfort of any of his own Chaplains, nor so much as the benefit of a Common-Prayer Book: And at Fife in Scotland, there was an Oath given at the Communion, not to take the King's Oath, nor any other than their Own.— Was all this an Invasion of the Liberty of Conscience or not?  
Touching a Persecution now, upon the point of Good Name: Though the whole course of the History is full of Virulent and Unchristian Reflections, I will only refer myself to that Diabolical Libel of Whites Centuries of Scandalous Ministers; wherein, without any regard to Truth or Modesty, they have exposed so many Reverend Names to Infamy and Dishonour. In one word; After they had represented the King himself for a Tyrant, and an Idolater, it was but Consonant that they should cast Reproaches upon his Party.  
Touching the Freedom of our Persons and Estates, the whole course of the late War, was but one continued Usurpation upon our Rights to both: Noble men's Houses turned to Prisons, and People Committed, without knowing either their Accusers, or their Offence: Some clapped on Shipboard to be Transported, no body knew whither; and others sold into Plantations for Slaves. To say nothing of those that fell by the Sword, in the Defence of their Country; or otherwise past the hand of the Executioner, in Justification of their Religion and Allegiance. There was no taking of Threescore pounds for Twelve, in those days; nor of Two hundred for Sixty. But they took All for nothing; and there was no Living among them for any Honest man, that would not Prostitute his Conscience. And who are they now, but either the very persons, or men however of these very Principles, that acted these Outrages upon Us, and yet now complain of being Persecuted themselves? When they startle the Common People with the Notions of Cruelty and Slavery, as a matter now in Prospect; methinks they should Blush at the Memory, and upon the Gild of those Real Calamities which we have both seen and felt, wherein our Blessed Sovereign had yet a greater share than any of his Subjects.  
They Abolished Kingly Government; Sold the Crown-Lands; Imprisoned and Murdered the King; made it Treason to deny the Supremacy of the Commons; turned our Churches into Stables; Burnt our Communion-Tables, and profaned the very Ashes of the Dead. Let but any man read Scobels Acts, and say, if the English were not in those times, and under these Protestant Dissenters, the most Despicable Slaves in Nature. See their Tax upon the Fifth and Twentieth part, their Excises upon Excise; their Assessments for the Maintenance of the Army, and their Monthly Taxes for the same end. Ninety thousand pounds; Sixscore thousand pounds, Sixty thousand pounds, Sequestrations, Seizing of People's Rents and Debts, Appropriating to themselves the profits of Tonnage and Poundage, and Compositions for Wards. Authorising the breaking open of Locks, and Examining upon Oath for discovery of Delinquents Money and Estates. All this is as well known, as the very fact of the War itself; and if we have a mind to lie down under the same Bondage again, let us believe the Stories of Arbitrary Government and Superstition, that these People tell us of, and they shall just so help us out of it again, as they did before.  
There should be something further said to their pretence of being Persecuted for Religion; but I find little to be added to what is already delivered. The Law stands still: They press upon the Law, and yet cry out, that the Law persecutes them. We may lay down this, I think, for a Maxim; That whosoever tells us that he makes a Conscience of Complying with the Discipline of the Church, and yet manifestly makes none at all, of undermining, nay and of blowing up the whole frame of the Government, that man is most undoubtedly an Hypocrite.  
To Conclude: What's the meaning of this Remonstrating to the People? They are no Judges of the Controversy: But they do well however, in a Cause, where Force does a great deal more than Argument, to make their Application to the Multitude, with whom Clamour and Pretence are of more Value than Modesty and Reason. It is a most Ridiculous Contradiction to common sense, to believe these men to be in earnest; for if they were, they would never Defame the Government, at the same time that they beg a Dispensation from it.  
Their Demand is Unreasonable, the thing itself only Notional and Impracticable. By Liberty of Conscience, they mean a Freedom of doing what they please, which necessarily implies a total Dissolution of the Laws. They offer it only as a Decoy to the People; and when they have gained Compassion to themselves (like Beggars that move Pity by showing Ulcers of their own making) their next business is to draw Contempts upon the Government, and after that, to enter without more ado, upon the Great Work of Reformation. Let me do this Right however to the Independents: I do not find that Party to have given the Government any trouble since his Majesty's Return; but that they have kept themselves clear of all these late Broils: And if Authority had the same sense of them, with the Author of this Pamphlet, they would be found both in their Principles and in their Manners, to have the most reasonable Claim of all sorts of Dissenters, to a favourable allowance from the Government. God in his Mercy open our Eyes, that we may know our Friends from our Enemies.  
THE END.