A LETTER To the Honourable Sir ROBERT HOWARD, Occasioned by a late Book, Entitled, A Twofold Vindication Of the late Archbishop of CANTERBURY, And of the Author of the History of Religion.  
By Al. MONRO, D. D.  
LONDON, Printed for E. Whitlock near Stationers-hall, 1696.   

ERRATA.  
PAge 4. line 4. for this r. that p. 6. l. 21. r. elegancies p. 7. l. 8. r. accent. ibid. l. 15. r. Philosopher p. 8. l. 12. for to r. in ibid. l. ult. for innocence r. innoscence p. 9 l. 4. r. innoscence ibid. l. 9 r. innoscence ibid. l. 29. r. highlander p. 10. l. 7. r. Cameron ibid. l. 10. after more add of ibid. l. 19 for used r. and p. 12. l. 14. for Socinianism r. Socinians p. 13. l. 13. r. innoscence p. 16. l. 21. for Sixth r. Sixteenth p. 18. l. 11. after there add are p. 20. l. ult. r. Hero's p. 23. l. 29. r. Diminutive p. 26. l. 16. r. title.   

SIR,  
I Received your Answer to my Letter dated the 13th of April last, and I thank you heartily for your civility. In mine I gave you a short Account of the barbarous Treatment I met with, in a Book Entitled, A Twofold Vindication of the late Archbishop of Canterbury, and of the Author of the History of Religion. I presumed to address my complaint to yourself, because you was pleased to prefix an Epistle to that Book, in which I am exposed with greater contempt and severity than I deserve at your hands.  
I humbly suppose you proceeded upon the same Mistakes and malicious Informations, that provoked your two Anonymous Authors to so much Fury and Indignation. The ground of their quarrel is, that they take it for granted, that I am the Author of a certain Pamphlet Entitled, The Charge of Socinianism against Dr. Tillotson considered. This is the second time that I have been rudely and publicly accused on this very Head. I might reasonably expect, that your Two Philosophers would more narrowly examine the Matter of Fact, before they had abused an innocent Stranger in so scurrilous a manner; they are such as left me no opportunity to know their Names, or the place of their Residence: Nor am I now at liberty to make a stricter search where those Birds of darkness may be seen. We know without the Assistance of a Revelation, that he that doth evil hateth the Light.  
The Advertisement, which I printed in the Month of January last, in opposition to the Censures published against me, upon the foot of that Calumny, might (one may reasonably think) cover me from all Libels of that Nature, since I am ready to take my Oath, before any Judge, that I never had the least thought of writing any such Book, as the Charge of Socinianism, etc. in any former moment of my life: And so far from writing any Animadversions on your History of Religion, that I never saw it until the 16th of April, 1696.  
It may be, that your two Champions will impute this second Vindication to my fear and pusillanimity, and say, that I am some timorous and silly Creature, I dare not now avow what I have foolishly done: I am so lashed, that it is not fit to write any more, to provoke the Anger of such terrible Men, whose greatest Talon is calumny and impertinence. Nevertheless, I may venture to tell you, (hoping that your passions are more calm,) that I can prove, to a demonstration, by Witnesses of more unstained Authority and Reputation than any of my Accusers, that another is the true and sole Author of that Book: And perhaps he may, in due time, discover himself, if he can be secured against those Inconveniencies which may probably follow upon his being known. When your very learned Authors consider this, it may mortify their accurate Wisdom, to have thrown away all their Ammunition of Wit and Raillery before they discovered their Enemy. And now, Sir, I beg your pardon, if I have not the same opinion of their Morals, that you have of their Intellectuals. To rob a Man of his good Name maliciously, and without any certainty of matter of Fact, can as little be reconciled to the Rules of Honour as to the common Measures of Justice.  
The first of them endeavours (all he can) to represent me a Beast. The next makes me a Devil, tho' one of the weakest and silliest Orders. 'Tis happy for the Prisoner at the Bar when the Evidences contradict one another. However between them two I make a very sad figure. I am not now to entertain you with my thoughts of their Learning and Theology; they may Write or refute what Books they please: 'Tis time for me to interpose when they meddle with any thing that is truly mine. I arrogate to myself no man's performances. As for the the Book, that they seem to tear in pieces with so much bitterness and violence, I only read some few pages in it; And the Gentleman who gave me a Copy is ready to take his Oath, that, upon the delivery of the Book, I said to him, that I should never be able to read it to the end, it was printed in so small a Character.  
It is not enough for your two Philosophers to fall upon me like Madmen, and to abuse me for what is contained in the Book, but they must needs drop some Reflections that they think are peculiar either to my Person or my Country. If they had confined their Libels to the Subject matter, I would Judge it no part of my business to undeceive them: But when they make use of Arguments and Critical Observations, to prove that I am the Author of such a Book, their Reasons are so short and superficial that I may be allowed to examine them. The first says, pag. 33. that I was not able to keep my own Secret, but that it got abroad among a great many, that I was the Man, that thought myself qualified to censure the Doctrine of an Archbishop of Canterbury, and to encounter with the great Author of the History of Religion.  
This is impudence with a witness. Did I say so to himself, or to any other Trifling Calumniator? Is it not reasonable for him to let me know who this Gentleman is to whom I said any thing of this Nature? But this fair and ingenuous Dealing is not his way; it is enough for him that he was informed by some little Whisperer that I was the Author of such a Book. And your Philosopher thought this a sufficient proof; he was glad any Man was named, on whom he might so safely discharge his fury. But when he found it was some tame Illiterate Pedant, than he puts himself all in Armour, as all Cowards do, where there is no danger. If I confessed the matter of fact myself it is in vain to contradict it. In the mean time I presume to tell you, that whether he spoke this of himself, or whether he was prompted by others, that he is in the Strictest sense a Calumniator and a Liar. I confess these words are harsh, and are not ordinarily heard in the Conversation of Gentlemen. But if any thing can provoke this Impertinent Accuser to do himself Justice, I think it may warm him into some generous behaviour, to be so represented to his Great Patron. If he patiently endure the Character of a Liar, I do not envy him the honour of his invention; if not, he will let me know who was his Informer, as in justice and common sense he is obliged to do. And this is not answered by Writing of Pamphlets, and gathering together several incoherent Stories and Probabilities, but by an ingenuous acknowledgement of his wilful and unaccountable Forgery; for when he re-examines his Evidence, he will discover his own Precipitation and rashness. I gave occasion to no such Calumny, no not by the least inadvertence or indiscretion: And it is very hard to oblige me at this time of day to the Drudgery of Vindicating myself from Infamous Libels.  
You say in your Preface, that they are two very Learned Men. Men may be mad without too much Learning: I wish their civility and good breeding had been equal to their Learning. Nor is it a pin matter to me how Learned they are: I am sure they are very Impertinent to Libel a Man, upon the Public Theatre of the Nation, to whom they are as great Strangers in all Regards (either as to his life or accomplishments) as I am to the Emperor of Morocco.  
However, as far as I am concerned, it is needless to balk any of their Arguments. The question between me and your two very Learned Gentlemen is not any Common Place of Theology, but a matter of fact. I let pass all their Virulent Reproaches, that seem to be occasioned by the Book that they undertake to refute.  
The first Argument to prove me the Author of it is, that I did not keep my own Secret. Of this you very kindly put me in mind in your Letter, dated the 13th. of April. But how does he prove this? Very well, after his way; He says, that it got abroad among many People, that I thought myself qualified for such an Undertaking. Does it become a Man that sets up for an Accurate Philosopher to proceed upon Whisper, Hear-say, and Surmise, to the ruin of his Neighbour's honour and reputation. Was not he obliged to give the World a plain account of the Authority and honesty of him, upon whose testimony he built his Defamatory Libel. He must needs know, that a Malicious inconsiderate Liar sets thousands of People by the Ears every moment, especially such Informers as may be reasonably supposed our two Authors have conversed with. They heard such a thing, and there was no more necessary in their opinion to make one the Author of such a Pamphlet. But if a Report of this nature can bear the Superstructure of such a calumny, Men might have nothing else to do than to Write Vindications; they must run from one corner to another, without intermission, to publish their Defences and Apologies against every Rude and Impertinent Libel.  
The Philosophers advise us to be slow and wary in Drawing Consequences; yet, it seems, they have lost all their pains upon your two Precipitate Authors. We ought to treat no Man otherwise than the Golden Rule of our Blessed Saviour allows; Quod tibi fieri non vis, etc. There is nothing so Treacherous or fails a Man sooner than a transient Whifling report;  Tam ficti pravique tenax quam Nuncia Veri. 
But perhaps the next Argument is more Conclusive and Solid. He is very sure the Author is a Scot, because for positive he always Writes positive. To this he adds some Elegencies, or rather Improprieties that he thinks are peculiar to the Scots, viz. The Men above-told, the Reason above-told. And again; it makes all my flesh to creep.  
From these he concludes the Author not only to be Scot, but a Highlander. Now, upon supposition that these were Idioms of the Scotish Dialect, his ridiculous conjecture would scarcely make up a probable Argument, if there was but one Scots-man in the Isle of Britain: But when there are so many thousands of them, his guesses vanish into a Dream, and proves that there are greater flaws in his reasoning faculty, than there are Improprieties in the Scottish Dialect. May not those Foreigners, who learn to speak English, put their own Idiotisms in English words? Are there not some English that frequently converse with those, as well as with the Scots? Are there not several Counties in the Northern parts of England, that differ in their Phrase as well as in their Account from those in Kent, and Middlesex? Are there not some other People in the World, besides the Scots, who have different Phrases and Idioms from the English? And have not they also a dependence upon the Monarch of Great Britain, as well as the Scots? and this may oblige them frequently to reside in or about the City of London.  
Let our very learned Philosophers view his own Argument again; he may easily find he hath not been so slow and cautious in drawing his Consequences as he ought to be. Are there not some Englishmen, that, for reasons best known to themselves, now and then make use of Scottish Phrases? If any of these suppositions hold true, his Argument, to prove me the Author of such a Book, is the most precarious, weak, incoherent Conjecture that ever dropped from a Man's Peneus  
But, Sir Robert, I have more to say to this Argument, it is this; that one of your Authors takes those words to be Idioms of the Scottish Dialect, which no Scotchman ever heard of: For my part, neither in their Writings nor Conversation did I ever remark any such Phrases, as he sets down for Arguments, to prove his Author to be a Scotchman; such as these, the Man above told, the reason above told. And the difference between the Scottish and the English Language, is not in those imaginary Improprieties, that he fancies may distinguish the first from the last, but rather in this, that We of Scotland, (besides a different Accent) retain a great many of the Old Saxon words, which are not now used in England: But they that understand the English Language accurately, understand also those Saxon words, some of which may be met with, in the Old Version of the Psalms, daily read in the Churches. And if he be so squeamish as not to read that Version of the Psalms; he may read Milton's Poems, and Chaucer's Works, where he may see many of those words that distinguish the Scottish Idiom, from that which is now used in England. The difference is not to the misplacing of words, but in the Phrase itself, the first may proceed from the inadvertence of an Author, either Scottish or English: And it is a very bad Argument to prove that the Author of such a Book is not an Englishman, if I meet with an unusual word, or an impropriety in his compositions. There is no fixed true Standard for the English Language, and therefore every day we see new Words, as new Books do appear; and several of them so harsh in the sound, and so little used, that immediately they vanish unto their former darkness and solitude. Thus have I read in a late Book the word (impunibly) (and in a Book written against Mysteries too.) But I suppose no Man will reasonably conclude, that the Author was either Scot or English, only from this unusual word.  
To come a little nearer: If I might venture to reason, as your Philosophers seems to do, I would prove that the Author of the History of Religion is not an Englishman; for in the 96th Page, I meet with a word which very few Englishmen know or ever heard; for there the Author says, that the mistakes and opinions which proceed from innocence do not make Men guilty, that is to say, from their weakness and ignorance.  
How much weakness and ignorance there may be employed in the word (innocence) I cannot tell; it may have in it all the Mysteries of 
* Vid. Seld. de Dis. Syris.  Abracadabra, for any thing I know; for I never read it before. Nor do I admire the word (Impersonation) in the Author of the Charge of Socinianism, no more than I do the word (Innocence) both of them want Authority and Custom, to preserve them from being banished out of ordinary Conversation.  
Perhaps your Author built his Confidence, not so much upon the strength of his critical Remarks, as upon the Authority of his Informer; yet, to mortify him and his choleric Neighbour; I may be allowed to tell you, that the Author of the Book, Entitled, The Charge of Socinianism against Dr. Tillotson, was never in Scotland; so far from being beyond the River of Tay, that he never was on the other side of Tweed, nor any City or Village in that Ancient Kingdom.  
One of your Authors tells us, (speaking of Mr. Atterbury) that Students do not hold themselves obliged to reason accurately and closely, as other (common) Men must, but, by leaping over some intervening suitable Propositions, may skip from Tumult to King Pipin; or, what ●s as good, from Historian to Scorner.  
One would think, that the distance between an unusual Phrase, and a Scotch-Highland, is as wide as that between Tumult and King Pipin; or that between an Historian and a Scorner. I see, that Students are not the only Men that reason loosely, and incoherently; there are other Sparks who pretend to digest nothing but Self-evident Propositions, and accurate Infallible Deductions from clear Premises; and they sometimes mistake the Mark as much as the former, who are said to owe their false reasonings to dark keeping, and other Infelicities of their Education. I cannot perceive 
Vid. Preface of the Twofold Vindic.  how the Highlander was forced to make up the Comical part of the Book. I suppose Buchanan and Cameran were greater Critics than the two Philosophers; and they were both of them Scotch-Highlanders. But when I consider the petulance and temper of our Authors; I am afraid, the naming of any of our Countrymen, to remove their Mistakes, may savour more meanness than Condescension.  
His observation that the flesh of a Highlander creeps, is as New to me as the Phrase: I am sure, there are several of them, that he thus Lampoons, would be very apt to make his Flesh tremble, if they knew him, and that withal he continued obstinate in his scurrilous rudeness. National Reproaches make up the divertisement used Witticisms of Porter's and Buffoon's. I know no Country but may boast of its Heroes and Excellent Men; And they, who are forward to make comparisons, are never reckoned into the number; they are Knights of a lower Order, such as pass all their Campaigns in Taverns and other places not sit to be named. In these, there may be dangers; but, I humbly suppose, very little Honour.  
'Tis true, our Soil is not so fertile as the more Southern parts of the Island: Our Sun seems to be sick for several Months in the Year; nevertheless, the common Character of the Scot's prae fervidum Scotorum Ingenium, may be thought (generally speaking) more true than that which he is pleased to bestow upon his imaginary Adversary, Viz. That his Northern frozen head could not perceive the Socinian Subtleties. I thought they were a Sect that pretended to advance nothing (nay, allow of nothing) but plain and undisputable Propositions; that they were so slow and cautious in drawing Consequences, that nothing short of Mathematical Evidence could satisfy them: And when I was reading the Book that occasioned this Letter, I meet with the following words; For as to report and the Whispers of those Sagacious Men, who so certainly know all Authors, they are so oft mistaken, that, except it be here and there a Student, no body heed: them, or rather every body abhors them.  
Yet, this very sagacious Philosopher; this very Man of Evidence and Demonstration, without any other proof, than a slender Whisper or an Impudent lie, finds out all Authors, and knows them exactly, as if he had been conversant with them from their Infancy. But if his Conjecture stumble upon a Highlander, than such a contemptible Creature must be crushed to death. But Men of valour use not to draw their Swords at so a great distance, they approach their Enemy with less noise: and they that pretend to Philosophy trust more to their Arguments than to their Fury and Indignation. It is certainly so and so as he concludes; it can be no other than such a one; there are Improprieties in the Book, and none else could be guilty of them but that one Man; and then, by such accurate reasoning, his creeping Witticisme must get abroad. I would advise this unknown Gentleman once more to consult the trifling Informer that gave him his intelligence, and ask him but a few plain questions, viz. Whether he had his information from me? Whether he himself is familiarly acquainted with me? Whether, after all he be a Man of any Honour or Justice? Whether he is resolved to appear to make good the Charge? One may reasonably presume, that a 
vid. pag. 51 of the Towfold Vindication.  very Learned Author would not be so very Confident, unless the Authorities, that he built upon, were strong enough to support the weight of his Insolence and Buffonery.  
The next Author treats me with the same virulence and contempt that the former does; but he may appear, even to himself, a very ridiculous Fellow, that, with so much wit, undertakes the defence of such particular Propositions as I myself lately proved (I hope plainly enough) against another tribe very different from the Socinianism, in a small Treatise entitled, An Enquiry into the New Opinions, Printed for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's-head in St. Paul's Churchyard. And this Book appeared, with my name, a considerable time before his scurrilous Libel was Printed. I instance but in one particular, which I advance in that Essay, and it is this; that our Blessed Saviour complied with those Rituals in the Worship of God among the Jews, which had their Rise and Original only from human Authority: Nay, I think the Opposite Doctrine, that allows of nothing in the Solemnities of Worship, but what is founded upon express Divine Institution, to be the source of all Bigotry and Enthusiasm. God is to be Worshipped, and that in Unity and Society. If this be allowed, several Rites and Ceremonies must be Practised and enjoined, which have no Institution but in the Prudence and determination of our Superiors. If the angry Gentleman read this little Book that I have named, he may then be more able to pass his Decretory Sentence, how far the Contemptible Professor is of Mr. Knox's Principles. He or his Neighbour, (I do not now remember which of the two) not only lashes me as being tainted with those Principles of Sedition and Confusion, that were so warmly Propagated by Mr. Knox, but he says, that all the Episcopal Clergy of Scotland, tho' they forsook Mr. Calvin and Mr. Knox in the question about Church Government, yet, in points of Doctrine, they have varied nothing at all from Mr. Knox Author of the Reformation there.  
If this Man's knowledge in Theology was equal to his skill in our History, he would certainly make the saddest figure that ever appeared, that is to say, he would be all over Innocence in its true Original and Insignificant Notion, so much below a cipher that there is no Room left for him in Arithmetic. Therefore he may be advised to let the Clergy of Scotland and their Doctrine alone; they are not yet so low, after all the oppressions and contradictions of sinners that they have endured, as to want an Apology against the Rail of an inconsiderate Calumniator, who knows as little the Persons, that he thus bespatters, as he does the Author of the Charge of Socinianism, etc. Let him read Dr. Forbes Bishop of Edinbourg his Considerationes Modestes, and then let him tell me whether he was in all points of Doctrine of Mr. Calvin or Mr. Knox's Sentiments: And he was a Person whose Character and Learning was more likely to make Disciples amongst the Clergy of Scotland, than the two Reformers that he is pleased to name. Nevertheless, Calvin ought to be mentioned with honour, because of the purity of his stile, and other extraordinary accomplishments.  
Some of our Clergy may have their differences amongst themselves about the Doctrine of Predestination and Freewill, but then this is no reproach peculiar to Scotland; these are Common Places in Divinity that divide (not Churches from Churches but) Men from Men. Those questions have been disputed in all Ages, and will remain dark to the end of the World, even to the Socinians themselves, who pretend to banish all mysteries. I believe the Infinite Incomprehensible Power of God, and that he is the first cause of all things; in him we live, move, and have our Being. I believe him also infinitely Good, and that he loves us better than we can do ourselves, and that he governs the World by Laws just, holy, and excellent. I Worship him under this Idea of Original Goodness and Power; and I am very sure, that none of the true and necessary deductions, from these two great Attributes, can be at variance with one another. If I, (who am but Dust and Ashes,) neither can see, nor happily explain their agreement in all Minute instances, it is my Ignorance and Weakness. The Good I do is from God, the Evil altogether from myself: And this is a short Confession of what I think all Men ought to adhere to, in those Intricate and abstruse questions of Predestination and Freewill.  
I am not now inclined to enter into any particular disquisition concerning the Original of Sacrifices; nor had I ever the least thought of writing Animadversions on any Sermons Published by the Late Archbishop Tillotson; most of them as were Printed before the Revolution I read with great satisfaction; and those that since appeared I only read some of them, as I met with them accidentally in the Booksellers-shops, being not in an humour to buy New Books, when I knew not how long I could keep such as I had formerly purchased.  
Then your Philosopher recommends to me that I should read Spencer and Outram. I love him the better that he converses with such Authors, who are as much above the Common Level of Systematick Writers as their Learning exceeds his own modesty and good nature.  
The former Author draws a Picture of me in little. I am not concerned much to view it, tho' the Lineaments and Features had been more true: but as they are extremely ugly and extravagantly false, he may lay it up in his own Closet, to entertain himself with it, when he is in his Hypochondriack fits. The first strokes of his Tableau are Historical, and terminate only in my Person, and such as the Author of the Charge of Socinianism is not at all concerned in. In the mean time, I think myself obliged to give him no account of any part of my life, unless I knew him better: And if I did, perhaps I might still continue in the same resolution. He accuses me to have charged the late Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of Sarum, and the Author of the History of Religion of Socinianism: And he adds this most accurate Reason, because I mistake the Doctrine of the Church and the Arguments she useth for the Socinian Doctrine and Reasons.  
Whether any of those Gentlemen now named were, or are Socinians, is more than ever I intent to inquire. It is a very new thing to me to hear that the Church useth Arguments for the Socinian Doctrine and Reasons.  
It is true; one of his eminent Authors accused me of being the Author of the Charge of Socinianism, in the Month of December 
Vid. Vind. of the Bishop of 8. p●inted for Mr. Chiswel. pag. 105 106.  last; a mercenary malice and profound ignorance were but some of the virtues he allowed me. I heartily forgive him those precipitate ramblings I have suffered since that time some things more terrible than the disdainful strokes of his Pen, I am apt to think that his Credulily led him into this mistake. It is the unhappy lot of most, who are advanced to Eminent. Stations, to be haunted with, Sycophants, false Accusers, Liars, and Tale-bearers. If they guard against the malignity of such Vermin, their Virtue is more than ordinary; and if they do not hear with both their ears they are certain plagues to human Society.  
But one of the most surprising and impertinent strokes of your Author's Libel is, that he charges me to have accused yourself of ingratitude to K. James, for I never heard of your name until this Book was put into my hands by one of my Friends: And I am as much qualified to write the lives of all the Irish Kings before the Conquest, as I am to give any tolerable account of any part of yourself. As for your Book entitled, the History of Religion, I never saw it until the 6th of April 1696. So far have I been from writing any Animadversions upon it. And if did, they should be very short. And I had rather communicate them to yourself, than print against an Author that I have not the honour to be acquainted with. The Book seems to be designed against 〈◊〉 Persecution, and mystery. The word (Preist-craft) is of late become very fashionable in the mouths of some; who are no great Patterns for Philosophical Gentlemen to imitate. If by Priest-craft is intended the sacred employment of a certain Order of Men, who, by their Office and Character are obliged to superimend the Solemnities of Public Worship: Such Men are no less necessary to the Preservation of the State than to the Administrations of Religion. And the Persons so employed, (even in their Lowest ebb of Interest and Reputation,) are too strong to be attacked by any private Gentleman in Europe. I argue now from what is Present and Visible, and not from the more divine and excellent considerations of Religion, because, what is felt and seen is much more valued and considered; than the Original Distinction between Good and Evil, or what may be pleaded from the terrors of an Invisible State. I confess the Argument is not so Philosophical and Sublime, but it is such a one as now I offer to your own consideration how far it ought to regulate the Practice of any Man, who lives in a Nation, where the Priests are so able to assert; from the best Topics, their Distinction and Character, and the Priesthood itself is guarded by so many Laws.  
As for Persecution, I hope, I am as much an enemy to it as any other in the World. But since Conscience may be pretended when faction and sedition are intended, I think, the State may be left to judge for itself in all things relating to its own preservation; and therefore the Good Laws, that have been made, to preserve the Beauty and Order of God's House; may be reasonably and charitably put in execution to prevent such Confusions as must needs follow, where Giddiness and Enthusiasm are upper most. We may suffer hard things from Ecclesiastical Laws that are severe; but human nature itself, common sense, and civility are banished where a Boundless Scepticism prevails.  
Arbitrary Power is most frequently declaimed against by such as are invested with no Power: But it is very hard to oblige the Sovereign Powers of the World to give an account of all their Actions; and if they did, the Body of the People can never perceive the Reasonableness of what they do, even when their measures are most Divine and unquestionably just. If I should say that I know no reason why I am committed to the Gatehouse, I would be thought very Impertinent, tho' I should stumble upon the truth. No Governors are obliged to let every body know what they do at all times.  
If there are mysteries in the Government of the World, it may be more reasonably presumed that that there mysteries in Religion which we ought to believe, tho' we can never fully grasp nor comprehend them. When Men have done their best, there is some thing dark in the object of Faith. If we have good reason to believe, that the Revelation, which contains the Articles of our Religion, proceeds originally from God, and that we do not mistake the plain signification of those Words, in which it is conveyed, we may, with the greater safety, believe that such and such Propositions are true, tho' they be above the comprehension of our Reason. We cannot say, that we fully understand the Essence of any the least Created being, far less the Infinite and Eternal Mind, who made the World and governs it. We believe, that his power is beyond our thoughts and Incomprehensible; but can any Man confidently say, that he himself has a full and adequate Idea of what is Infinite or Incomprehensible?  
Sir, I have kept you too long on this subject. I would humbly entreat either or both of the two Calumniators to be a little more wary in their Libels. 'Tis an easy thing for them to put it to a fair Trial whether I can read Greek or Latin, or whether either of them can Speak any other Language than what his Mother taught him. As for the reflections thrown upon the Universities of Scotland, those Societies are above the Censures of an unknown Trifler; his tongue is an Unruly Evil, it is full of Deadly Poison. I cannot tell how 
Jam. 3. Chap. 5. 8. 9  oft he blesses God with it; his greatest talon is to curse Men made after the Similitude of God.  
One of them recommends to me two very good Books; and I thank him for his kindness. I think, he himself had need to read over again Crellius Ethics; And if that be troublesome, he may cast his eye upon a most excellent Sermon against Evil-speaking, Published by one of his eminent Authors. And now, Sir, your two Philosophers may ask one another, whether they know the Person they have so impudently Calumniated? Whether the Authority they proceeded upon be so firm as to bear the weight of their notorious Forgeries and Lies? Whether ever they heard that there was any Professor in any University of Scotland at any time, since their first foundation, so ignorant as they represent me to be. But if they built their Calumnious stories upon the Authority of one of their Eminent Bishops, I may be allowed to tell them, that I was already at some pains, in the Month of January last, to undeceive their Author as to this Calumny. Then there was a Libel Published against me; and it seems it was below his Eminence to retract an injury he had done to so mean a Person. It is much more easy eloquently to extol the Morals of Christianity, than to practise self-denial and humility: Pride, Popular Applause, and Vanity do animate Men to the first; but nothing short of a profound Resignation to the will of our Blessed Saviour can terrible us to practise the latter.  
I take it for granted that my greatest Accuser is now convinced, that I never wrote any such Book as the Charge of Socinianism, etc.] Yet because the same Libel is again Propagated by the industry and malice of two unknown Slanderers, I think it fit to subjoin to this Letter the Advertisement, that I was forced, (some Months ago in to Publish in my own Defence: And he that reads the Bishop's Vindication, Printed for 
pag. 105, 106.  Mr. Chiswel in St. Paul's Churchyard, may easily understand what is either expressed not insinuated in the following Paper. There are some words in it which might have been spared, but if compared with the Character bestowed upon me, perhaps many more might have been added, without any Censure from the Impartial World. If the open injustice, that I met with, made me then so free, the peevishness, which may be occasioned by imprisonment, may extenuate the Reprinting of it, since the Loads of Reproach thrown upon me, by your two scurrilous Champions, are but some Larger Annotations on the Original Character, in which I was then represented in such taking colours to the view of the Nation.  
Sir, I now make an end of this Letter, and I presume to ask but the same question that I humbly desired you formerly to consider, namely, what reparations you think are due to an innocent Stranger so unworthily abused. I forbear to aggravate the Injustice that is done to me in your Preface, as well as in the other parts of the Book, for I believe you wrote it carelessly, and you thought that your two Hereos were as infallible in their censures, as they appeared to you accurate in their Reasonings. I heartily forgive you; and I wish you may be, for the time to come, more critically nice in examining those Reports that have no other beginning than Malice, Nonsense, and Impertinence. Sir, I am in all Sincerity and due respect,  
Your very humble Servant, A. MONRO.   

THE following Advertisement was Printed in the Month of January last, to undeceive such as might be imposed upon by those Libels which then charged me with the same Calumny that is now sufficiently removed by this Letter.  
AN ADVERTISEMENT By A. M. D. D.  
WHereas it hath been talked by some idle and impertinent People, that I am the Author of a certain Book, entitled, The Charge of Socinianism against Doctor. Tillotson, etc. I think it fit to declare, that I never was the Author of any such Book, charging him or any other with Socinianism. And I further declare, That I was never enticed, prompted, or encouraged by any Man (dead or alive) to write any thing of that nature. And I am ready to take my Oath, in the most solemn manner, to confirm the truth of all this, if duly required thereunto.  
When I have said so much, I think I am but little concerned to answer any Libel intended against me upon this occasion, in which I am sensibly struck at, by some distinguishing innuendoes, (tho' not particularly named,) as the Vindicator himself acknowledges. The several reflections, in a short digression of a late Book, leveled at me, are but some common places of Reviling, which only proves, That the Author was very angry. One may venture to draw this Consequence from what is said Page 105. and 106. of his Vindication, without the imputation of either Ignorance or Malice. No modest Man loves to be put upon the unpleasant Task of defending himself against Reproaches of this Nature. It is barbarous to invade a Man's good Name, upon slender and foolish Surmises. The Rules of Humanity oblige us to more Compassion and good Nature: But most Men had rather talk of Generosity than practise it. If we truly understood the Precepts of Natural Religion, we would be the more prepared heartily to believe that which is Revealed.  
It is a great Infelicity to continue for any considerable time, under the dominion of a brutal Passion: And it is very difficult to hide it, where once it hath got the Ascendant. Art and Memory may give a Man the slip, and Nature will appear in its own Colours. It is uneasy to act a Part, even when we are much accustomed to it. I thank God, I was never made a Tool to serve the Passions or Interests of any particular Man or Party: I still retain the liberty of my Thoughts and Actions under all my Disasters. If I am obliged to my Friends, I am resolved to be Grateful: I am very sure, none of them gave my Enemies any Commission to upbraid me with their kindnesses. Cruel Mockings do ordinarily attend the State of the Oppressed: And Philosophy, as well as Justice has deserted the Earth. What St. Paul hath said of the Primitive Christians is, in a peculiar manner, true of the Clergy of Scotland, if there be not another Life, They are of all Men the most miserable. I pray God they may possess their Souls in patience.  
For my part, I love my Solitude and Retirement; and the oldest Books in Divinity better than all the later Essays and Explications. When my Ecclesiastical Superiors inform me, That my endeavours to serve the Church, are impertinent or unseasonable, I cheerfully submit to their Authority, as I have always done, ●n their and my) more prosperous Circumstances.  
What is observed by my Accuser is certainly true, viz. That some Men have an Art of Writing to disparage the side they write for. For this very reason, some hasty Productions have been committed to the Flames; and others, which perhaps deserve the same Illuminations, are suppressed.  
If he had left me half dead under the Cloud of general Strictures, there might be some hopes of a Resurrection; but he thought it convenient to set me in a better Light: I must be ferreted from one Dominutive unto another, until the Multitude fix their Eyes upon me. A Triumphal Arch must be raised, where such a contemptible Creature was slain; and therefore he adds, That it is probable, the Party will desire their Journeyman to forbear writing, and reserve himself for Fight, in which he is better practised.  
One that reads this last stroke may be made to believe, that some time or other I have fallen into Quarrels and Contentions, very unbecoming a Presbyter, whereas the true story, that is thus disguised into an Invective, is no more, than that I was persuaded by a Relation of mine (than Lieutenant-Colonel to my Lord Dumbarton's Regiment) when I was very Young, to go abroad with him: I complied with his Invitation: I stayed in France about two Years and a half: And tho' I was Listed in that Regiment, I was under no restraints that might divert me from any part of Learning that I had a mind to: That Scene was quickly over; I returned to my 〈◊〉 Country and former Studies. This innocent 〈◊〉 of my Life made up a part of the Presb●… Libel at Edinbourgh, Anno 1690. and it appeare● 〈◊〉 so ridiculous, that I thought it should never be revived again by any Man thereafter.  
To have been a Soldier, is a Reproach only in the Opinion of some few Men, who understand Libelling better than the discipline of War. The Greatest in all Age's thought, that, the Liberal Sciences, and the knowledge of Arms are not at such odds with one another. Julius Scaliger and Monsieur Des Cartes, (to name no more) were Soldiers. The truth is, I am not ambitious of being called a Journeyman: And I am surprised to find so mean a World placed so near another, that is so usual and so manly. Some Men forget nothing but the Decorum's due to their Character: It is fitter for such to give hard Names, than for me to return an Answer. Notwithstanding of all this, I thank God, I was never obliged nor inclined to Fight, nor yet engaged in any Rencontre that could make me incapable to serve at the Altar.  
It is no part of my business to know or inquire what Books are written against my Accuser or any of his Friends and Acquaintance dead or alive. I think it very hard to publish scandalous Reports against a Presbyter, before he is either heard or examined. The Laws of Nature and Nations condemn this practice: And the Evangelical Canon requires, that no Accusation ought to be received against an Elder, but before two or three Witnesses.  
Clandestine Libels are more Malicious than when a Man is particularly named. It is a sad Misfortune to be made the Property of every little Intelligencer. If groundless Stories, and unexamined Falsehoods are published for Truths, what then comes of the Peace of Human Societies? I pray God convince all Men, that are engaged in such Designs, of their Error and Injustice; and in the mean time deliver me from the Malice of such as I never provoked.   

A Copy of Sir Robert Howard's Letter to me, dated the 14th. of April 1696. being an Answer to my first unprinted Letter.  
SIR,  
YOur Letter found me very ill in a sit of the Gout, yet I was unwilling (notwithstanding my pain) to seem so uncivil as to give you no Answer. In short, Sir, the two Treatises were sent to me, be-before they went to the Press, to peruse; And by reason of the kindness showed to me and the great abilities I saw in them, I prefix a short preface to them, having also the opportunity to say something to Mr. Atterbury, who, in a Sermon at Whitehall before the Queen, had ventured to treat me very ill. But when these Papers were brought, I neither knew nor was told from whom they came: But the first seems to say that you did not keep your own Secret, but that it got abroad among many that you were the Author. And the second sets down your name, and tells you at the beginning that I hardly knew his face. This, I confess made me take it for granted that it was yours. But if it is not, which I believe upon your affirmation, I confess, I think, they ought to ask your pardon, which if ever I know them I shall invite them to do. For your Printed Paper, there is not a little in it that concerns any thing I ever knew or said. As to your Person, I am so far from having any quarrel or animosity, that I am rather sorry that this Letter should find you in restraint. I wish you all freedom and remain,  
SIR, Your humble Servant, Ro. HOWARD. April 13 1696.  
FINIS.