A Modest CENSURE OF THE Immodest Letter TO A DISSENTER, Upon occasion of His Majesty's late Gracious DECLARATION FOR Liberty of Conscience.  
By T. N. a true Member of the Church of England.  
Published with Allowance.  
LONDON, Printed, and are to be Sold by Randal Taylor. 1687.   

A Modest Censure of the Immodest Letter to a Dissenter, etc.  
SIR,  
THE Letter to a Dissenter by T.W. which you sent me the last Week, I have perused, and find it very spitefully endeavouring to persuade the Dissenters, 1. To suspect the Kindness of His Majesties late Gracious Declaration; And 2. To use their Interest against the Establishment of that Liberty by Law, which he therein Graciously Indulges to all His Subjects.  
The Letter itself is like a Pleasure-Boat, richer in the Trimming than in the Lading. The Language of it, I confess, is very smooth and Gentile, but his Suggestions are too sour and severe, and his Style too sharp when it touches upon the Government; nor could any Man speak so Evil of Dignities (as he does) without Scandal, even tho' it could be said with truth.  
The Character T. W. gives of himself in the first Page, is, That he is a Protestant at large, who will not let his thoughts for the Public be so tied or confined to any Subdivision of them, as to stifle his Charity, which is become so necessary at this time for their mutual Preservation; and yet one would think by his Letter, that his tender Conscience had catched the Cramp with his too much stretching, and that he was insensible of what dropped from his Pen; for after he had charged the King with the worst of Crimes, One that would not only falsify his Word with them at first, but give them no Quarter at last, and drawn his Picture like one of the Squint-eyed Italian Pieces, which present us with a Saint on the one side, and a Monster on the other, and the Church of England with haughtiness, and the rigidness of her Prelates towards Dissenters, and the Spirit of Persecution, he would make us believe, pag. 4. that no sharpness was in his Style, nor any Gaul mingled with his Ink, because Healing was the only thing he intended, and that he would not expose any particular Men, how strong soever the Temptation might be, and how clear the Proofs to make it out, whereas in truth, for what appears to me by his Lower, his Skill seems Chief to lie in a quick Hand for Lancing and Cutting; and pag. 3. he is the worst at Healing of any Writer that ever pretended to it; Never any State-Mountebank offered more improper Plasters for Tender Consciences, and should he ever set up his Protestant Bills, I should rather send the Dissenters to his Friend Burnet or Ferguson, than to him, for a Cure of their Distempers, neither of which ever Preached up more Vengeance against the Church of England, pag. 5. than he has done, at which, he must forgive me, if I am both surprised and provoked, and startled to have an Eye upon him; for when a Man comes so quick from the one Extreme to the other in such an unnatural Motion, he has taught me how much it concerns me to be upon my guard, pag. 3. I can as little guests at the Author's Religion, as at his Name; he seems to me to be some degraded Courtier, who having been outed of his Employment, gins to Harangue upon what he has lost, and to satisfy, not his Reason, but his Revenge, resolves to plume his towering Fancy over the King's and Church's Interest, and doubts not but to make a Prey of both in the end, if by his Seditious Methods he can hinder a good Correspodence between the King and his two Houses of Parliament, when he shall think sit to call them, or at least to make himself more considerable than now is he, by being troublesome; whatsoever he be, I dare say he is no legitimate Son of the Church of England, nor will she ever give him her Blessing, till he beg the King's and her Pardon for the Disloyalty of this Letter.  
Now, tho' I am not at all accountable for the Dissenters, whose Separation from the Church of England I have always lamented and condemned; yet my just zeal for that Church, makes me impatient to find one who pretends to be of her Communion, by his sly Insinuations Libelling both the Government and Her too. The Father's danger makes Craesus' dumb Son to speak; and on what better occasion can I (hitherto a silent Spectator) begin to speak, than for the Vindication of the Father of my Country, and my dear Mother, which will, I hope, Apologise for all my other Weaknesses, whilst I represent to you, how ill it becomes a Member of the Church of England, to persuade any Subjects into an ill Opinion of their Prince, and to represent Her as an Enemy to his Clemency to any of his Subjects, of what Persuasions soever in Religion.  
I begin with the First Design of this Letter, which is to persuade the Dissenters into a suspicion of his Majesty's Kindness. This is the first thing he offers to their Consideration, pag. 2. What reason they have to suspect their new Friends. Now by the sequel of the Discourse it is manifest, that by their new Friends he means those whom the Declaration represents for their Friends, and that being the King's Declaration, it's the King and his Council, whom he must needs mean by their New Friends, and consequently it is the King's Expression of Kindness to them in his Declaration, that he would have them to suspect. But how ill such a Design becomes a Member of the Church of England is very apparent. For she hath always taught her Children not only, not to Resist, but to Honour the King, and consequently never allows them to speak evil of, much less (upon weak Surmises) to charge him with the basest Disingenuity, viz. a Design to cheat all that trust him. At his Majesty's first approach to the Throne, we all unanimously concluded it our Duty to believe and trust to his Royal Promise, and seemed with a becoming Zeal to suspect the Loyalty of all such as disinherited in the least the sincerity thereof. And what reason can we have to be weary of well doing?  
There was a time when we thought any, the least diffidence in the King's repeated Promises to be the most disobliging thing in the World, and such as would be resented accordingly; we had then Courage and Conscience enough to stick to our Principles, and shall we now be so easily frighted out of our Wits and Loyalty, as some Neuter-passive-Royalists are, whom we see driven from their old Principles, as some silly Birds are from their Food by Men of Clouts, an empty windy Noise, or a senseless Scarecrow dressed up by any Pamphleter, who envies their Happiness. O foolish Galatians, you did run well at first, who has hindered you of late from holding on in the same good old way of Duty to God and the King, who has been Indulgent to you beyond a Precedent, and done nothing to disoblige you, but in keeping you from biting and devouring one another you know not why? And who will harm you, if you be followers of that which is good? I am one of those, who am so valiant as to have none of those Fears and Jealousies about me which our Author speaks of, nor do I think, that he himself who acts this timorous Part before the Dissenter, does believe himself, but only pretends it, in pursuance of some other dark Designs, for which his Letter (as black as it is) would blush if they should be brought to light. The King has done all things that in him lies, to create a Confidence in him, and all things conspire to give us Ease, Satisfaction and Security, if we are not wanting to ourselves; and therefore we have great reason to be extremely pleased and obliged, and to show the Nation (that part of it which is without, as well as that within the Pale of the Church) that we are so; for this is such a piece of Good Manners as will be a ●●●●●…ian Duty, and not a Court Compliment; and the Virtue of it is the gloater, because it is now become necessary for the preservation o● the Church of England, and the justification of her avowed Principles of Loyalty. We have hitherto been taught absolute and unconditioned Obedience for Conscience sake, and practised it in opposing the black Bill of Exclusion, for which our Divinity as well as our Policy was arraigned by some such Protestants at large, as the Author of this Letter, at least our want of Foresight and palpable Inadvertency. And shall we not now retain the same Integrity and Wisdom, and the same Consciences void of offence towards God and Man? Wherein hath our Gracious Sovereign been worse than his Word to us? Ours is the National Religion still, our Revenues and Privileges are as great as ever, our Churches are as well filled, our Sacraments as much frequented, our Ministers as much respected, at least, as they were in the late King's time, the present State of the Church of England is as flourishing as ever we knew it, and so Exemplary is the King's Self-denial in the Exercise of his own Religion, that he hath not taken any one Church or Chapel throughout the Kingdom for himself, or those of his own Communion, which was ever dedicated or appropriated to ours by Law, so little cause does he give us of Repining, and so much of Rejoicing and Gratitude.  
The first Reformers in Germany (as whoever peruseth Sleidan's Commentaries may observe) repeated their Addresses of Thanks to the Emperor, as oft as he renewed his Promise of Protection: and when something had been done in the Chamber of the Empire, that seemed to them an infringement of former Grants, 
Sleid. Comment. l. 10. Edit. Argentor. 8. p. 292.  and some suggested his Design to oppose them by a War, upon his Gracious Declaration, in a Letter to them, of his Resolution still to Protect them, they made a new Address of Thanks for delivering them from their new Fears, by renewing his Promise. And tho' in like Circumstances some of the Church of England, who had put such Bounds to their good Breeding, as our Author cautions others to do, proved resty, and refused to repeat their grateful Acknowledgements for his Majesty's late Gracious Declaration to Protect them in the first place, lest such an innocent and usual piece of Good Manners should be interpreted to be the Approbation of the King's whole Declaration; yet others acted more agreeable to the forecited Precedent, by renewed Addresses on that occasion: whereby they declared, that they still believed him sincere in, and faithful to his Promise, notwithstanding all the Suspicions, that by Malcontents were whispered to the contrary. And let the World judge, whether 〈◊〉 have not acted more agreeable to the Loyal Principles of the Church o● England, than this Author, who not only suspects the Ingenuity of his Sovereign's Promise, but writes on purpose to propagate his Suspicions among the rest of his Fellow Subjects. They cannot by Words or Writing treat the King worse, who have an opinion of his Idolatry, than he does; nor can the Church of Rome herself be worse at Healing than he is, who pretends so much to it; and therefore 'twill be fit for Dissenters to pause upon his Methods, before they believe them, or have so good an opinion of them or him, as not to be upon their guard when he accosts them, like one fully resolved that his over-merits of the Crown should never do him prejudice. And if it be Moral Parricide to wound the Reputation of him whom these three Kingdoms deservedly Honour for their Common Parent, and Father of their Country (except his licentious Pen can give us a Dispensation for that too, and secure us by a Non obstante to the Divine Law, that God will not think the worse of us for it) the true Sons of the Church of England will not take his Judgement to be any intellectual Standard, nor be seduced into so crying a Sin by his subtle Devices. His whole Letter betrays such groundless Fears and Jealousies of the King, and drives on an Interest so very destructive to the Crown and Church of England (of which I profess myself to be a Member) and declaims with so deep a Resentment against her Persecuting Humour, that how sincere soever his Address may seem to them, who judge of his Sincerity by the clearness of his Style, more than by the weight of his Reasons, and have Minds prepared to be deceived by his malicious Insinuations, because he tells them; that they come from a friendly Hand; yet I am one of those who have neither Faith nor Charity enough to believe Him to be either a good Subject, or a true Son of the Church of England. And I must beg his pardon, if I am both surprised and provoked, to see that in the Condition we are now put into by the Laws, and the ill Circumstances we lie under, by having the Persecution of Dissenters, and the want of Loyalty to the King laid to our charge; We who pretend to be true Sons of the Church of England, should endeavour to make ourselves and others more uneasy, and obnoxious to the Present Authority which God hath set over us. And methinks he seems to be sore put to it, when out of a desire of revenge he teaches Dissenters to run to their old Methods of Embroiling the Kingdom, with too much haste to consider all the Consequences, and hopes to instigate us of the Church of England to run along with them to the same excess of riot. They must be unreasonably valiant who dare follow such Advice, and such an extraordinary Courage at this unseasonable time, to say no more, is too dangerous a Virtue to be commended by any good Christian or good Subject He had need to go upon certain Evidence, who charges his Neighbour, much more his Prince, with sinister Intentions and Treachery in his Kindnesses; otherwise he violates the natural Obligations of Justice and Charity, as well as the Loyal Principles of the Church of England. What then may we judge of T. W. who in the Name of the Church of England takes such pains to persuade the Dissenters that their New Friend, their Gracious King, is a treacherous Man; especially considering the weakness of those Reasons wherein he grounds his Suspicion, and which come now to be Examined?  
The First I find pag. 2. That the Dissenters are not the King's Choice, but his Refuge, after the Church of England hath refused his Courtships.  
That he might the better teach Dissenters to cast off their new Lovers, he persuades them that they had before made their ineffectual Courtships to the Church of England, and been scornfully rejected by them, and must either drive a Contract with them, or despair of good Fortune for ever; and that if their sudden Passion have not blinded them, they must needs see, they Court them not for Love but Interest. Which to me seems (to speak as softly as may be) a very rude Insinuation, such as T.W. would never have used, had he not wanted the Bounds to his Ill Breeding, which he would have others put to their Good Breeding. An Insinuation that equally wrongs the King and the Church of England, who would no more be guilty of putting her King to his Shifts, than such a King as ours would stoop to such mean ones. Did not his innate Clemency and Compassion to his Subjects (perhaps to an Excess) prompt him to it, I see no necessity of his Circumstances that could drive him to Court the more despicable part of them, as the Dissenters are reputed to be.  
What Courtships of the King, or from Men of his Communion, the Church of England hath rejected, I know not; and what Applications soever shall be made to her in the first or second place, I doubt not but she will receive with that Respect and Duty which becomes her.  
But the next Insinuation is more considerable;  
That there is no Alliance between Infallibility and Liberty, pag. 4. That it is the bringing together the two most contrary things in the World; and that their Absolution for the mortal Sin of promising it, is to be had upon no other Terms than their Promise to destroy them; which they will be the easier tempted to do, because in truth they have no Inclination, no not so much as to give them any Quarter, but to Usher in Liberty for themselves under that Shelter; for which he refers them to Mr. Coleman's Letters, and the Journals of Parliament, where they may be convinced, if they can be so mistaken as to doubt; And that they cannot forbear, even in the height of their Courtship, to let fall hard words of them, because their cruel Nature is not to be restrained from starting out, as disdaining to submit to the Usurpation of Art or Interest. Now to show the weakness of all he suggests on this Head, I shall offer these Two Considerations.  
1. Whether there be not some difference between the Church of Rome offering Liberty to Heretics, and a Gracious King of that Communion, promising Ease to his Subjects? For however cruel toward Dissenters, the Principles of the Church of Rome can be supposed to be, the Sweetness of his Nature may correct them, or the Generosity of his Courage over-bear them. A Papist may be a Friend to Liberty, and a known Enemy to Persecution, and our present King, upon whom you squint, was always so, and ever will be. There is no Religion so bad, but there may be very good Men among the Professors of it; however inexorable to those it calls Heretics, Popery can be thought to be, there are many Papists (we know) merciful Men. And who more worthy of that Character than this Prince, whose Clemency hath hitherto so flatly given the Lie to all former Characters of a Popish Successor? Were it not then more fair, and just, to believe this Declaration sincere, because made by so good a Prince, than to suspect it of Treachery, because we have a bad opinion of his Religion? And that the Obligations of Natural Religion will prevail more with him to be still merciful in his Proceed, and faithful to his Promises, than the supposed Principles of Popery, to betray those that rely on his Royal Word, which is as currant as his Coin?  
Our Confidence in our Prince's Word, which is as sacred as his Person, will be our greatest Prudence. We can never trust our Lives and Fortunes in safer Hands than his, to whom by our Addresses we have so unanimously tendered them, at which his Enemies and ours are not a little nettled. If we are any of us afraid of his Power, it is not his Fault but our own; take not mine, but St. Paul's word for it, Do that which is good, and you shall have praise of the same; but if you do that which is evil, you may well be afraid yourselves, and make us so too, for he bears not the Sword in vain, but is the Minister of God for revenge, to execute wrath upon them that do evil. He has obliged us ever since he came to his Throne in such a Princely manner, as to puzzle our Understandings, as well as our Gratitude, we are as safe and secure as we can desire to be, whilst he lives, and he is content we should be as true to our God as to our King.  
2. And yet it is no such Paradox as he pretends, pag. 4. that Popery should be a Friend to Liberty, or the Pretenders to Infallibility tolerate Dissenters, and live peaceably with them. That there have been great Cruelties acted by Men of that Communion, is out of question; and this Author acknowledges (p. 10. l. 16.) that there have been Prelates of our Church too rigid: And as these are now convinced of their Error, in being severe to Dissenters, (as he saith p. 16. l. 1.) is it not possible that those may see their Mistake too? especially since they pretend to Infallibility only in Matters of Faith, not in Fact, or the Conduct of their Practice. However, what hath been practised in other Places, is not altogether unfeazable among us. For besides the Toleration of the Three Religions in Germany by the Treaty of Munster, Dr. Burnet (whom he will not deny to be an authentic Historian) in a late Account he gives of his Travels (pag. 289.) acquaints us, That Charles Lewis, late Prince Palatine, seeing of what advantage Liberty of Conscience is to the Peopling of a Country, not only allowed the Three Religions (the Calvinist, Lutheran, and the Roman) to be Professed there, but built a Church for them all Three, which he called The Church of the Concord; in which they all had (in the Order above set down) the Exercise of their Religion; and yet he maintained the Peace of his Principality so entire, that there was not the least Disorder occasioned by this Toleration. The like Toleration, without the least Disorder, the same Person tells us (p. 286.) is maintained at Francfort. And who is so great a Stranger abroad, as not to know, that the Cantons of Switzerland are made up of Protestants and Papists, all united by their common Interest, notwithstanding their Differences in Religion. And in two of those Cantons (as the forecited Author assures us, pag. 27.) Apenzel and Glaris, both Religions are tolerated, and capable of equal Privileges. And in some Bailiages, conquered in common by the Cantons of Bern and Friburg in the Wars with Savoy, the two Cantons name Bailiffs by turns, and both Religions are so equally tolerated, that in the same Church they have both Mass and a Sermon, and that with such equality, that on one Sunday the Mass gins and the Sermon follows, and on the next Sunday the Sermon gins and the Mass comes after it, without any disorder or murmuring.  
These Instances are undeniable Evidences of the consistency of Popery with Liberty of Conscience, so that whatsoever Arguments can be produced to prove the contrary, are like Zeno's Reasonings against the possibility of Motion, confuted by the noise of Diogenes' Trample, that disturbed his Lectures. It's in vain to argue that Papists cannot live peaceably where they are tolerated, or that they cannot tolerate others, where they have Power, since we can produce such plain Matter of Fact both for the one and for the other. And since some Papists live peaceably with Protestants, and allow them to enjoy equal Freedom with themselves, in the Exercise of Religion, a Pretence to Infallibility may be consistent with Liberty, without building upon a Foundation of Paradoxes, which he says is so dangerous; And this Suggestion is no concluding Argument, that the King intends to deceive the Dissenters, and oppress all other Parties but his own.  
You have seen plainly, that the Papists do allow Living and Liberty to Protestants under them in Germany, by the Treaties of Munster and Osnaburgh, that they have alternative Election of Magistrates, and that neither Party does, or is allowed to disturb other in the Exercise of their Religion in Public, and that all others with a free Conscience, without Disturbance or Inquisition, shall Exercise their Religion in their own Houses privately, and in the Neighbourhood, where, and as often as they please; and therefore we have less ground to suspect their doing it sincerely here in England, where 'tis more their Interest, because the King is so great a Lover of his Country, that he will never give the Power into those few Hands of the Catholics, against the more numerous Party of his Protestant Subjects, and consequently more able to Serve him against his potent watchful Neighbours, who would catch at such an opportunity to stir up. Wars against him both Abroad and at Home. The King knows that he is sure of the Hearts and Hands of all the true Sons of the Church of England, and he will never oppress them to make them Hypocrites, or to lose their Services.  
His next Suggestion of Suspicion is from the Instruments of this new Friendship, pag. 4. whom for Arguments sake (designing to make them out of love with them, and to question their Integrity) he supposes to be suspicious Persons. And are not all such Hypothetical Arguments as easily blown away by supposing the contrary? I will easily grant him, that they are bad men, who Preach up Anger and Vengeance against the Church of England, pag. 5. But as the King discourages all such kind of Discourses in his own Chaplains, so we may charitably suppose, that whoever use them, are none of his Instruments, who designs Ease to Dissenters without Vengeance against the Church of England. And therefore they who act that choleric Part, are, I am sure, none of the King's Instruments. You maliciously suggest, that the Mediators of this new Alliance have been formerly Employed in Treaties of the same kind, and there detected to have acted by Order, (by whose you do not tell us, but leave us to our guess, nor by whom so detected) and to have been impower'd to have given Encouragements and Rewards, and that this is an Argument to suspect them. Nay, you come farther home, and insinuate that the King hath given them a Commission, and not improbably a Dispensation in the Case of Truth, when it may prejudice his Service that Employs them, (Calumniare audacter aliquid haerebit) and would have the Dissenters look upon them as Ambassadors sent to lie Leaguer, i. e. Ad mentiendum Reipublicae causâ. You suppose there are some Men Employed by him who have Means and Authority to persuade by Secular Arguments, and that they in pursuance of that Power, have sprinkled Money among the Dissenting Ministers, and that this is an Evidence of the Deceit intended; and that many unfortunate Men (whose Names you will not be tempted to discover) have fallen under this Temptation, who for fear their Frailty should be discovered and exposed, will continue it, whose Arguments, tho' never so specious, are to be suspected, because they came from them who have Mortgaged themselves to severe Creditors, who expect a rigorous observation of the Contract, let it be never so unwarrantable; and these are the Dog-Stars of all the malignant Influence against which you declaim: But how came you to be privy to all this, unless you were once One of the same Cabal, and one who hired them to Preach up Anger and Vengeance against the Church of England? If there be any such inflaming Eloquence in the Conventicles, I will easily grant it to be as unseasonable as your Pamphlet, and they who act this choleric Part, upon what Forfeiture soever they are obliged to it, are very corrupt Men, no doubt, (almost as bad as yourself) and their Wages in the next World, without Repentance, will be Death, and that Eternal, whatsoever they hope to get by it in this.  
The last of his Insinuations, is from the great Endeavours that are used to Court Addresses, it being improper for the Benefactor to press Men to be Thankful, and an Argument that he intends to Snare them by their own Acknowledgements, as he suggests pag. 7. But to allude to his own Comparison (a little after,) our Great Sovereign is not of so mean a Spirit, as to solicit for Love-Letters; He entertains the Grateful with Respect, but when did he ever Court the Ungrateful to give him Thanks? I have heard of Instances, wherein he forbade the moving of some to Address that needed Courting, but never the contrary, except from this Author. It may be some Persons, ashamed of the Ingratitude of some of their own Party, were active to remind them of their Duty, but it is an incredible Calumny, that the King should Court, much less Threaten, or cause to be Courted or Threatened (as this Man affirms, pag. 7.) any to Thank him for those Favours, which not the expectation of Applause, hut his own innate Goodness hath produced. No, it's the more Glorious to be Thankful to him, because such is his Clemency, that with safety to our Temporal Interest we may be Ungrateful.  
I have heard indeed, that as many Bishops as were then in London, did meet together, upon the sense of their Duty to draw up an Address of Thanks to the King; which having done, they sent down Copies of it to some of their Brethren, one of which, and he as good a Casuist, and as far from the Court as any of his Bench, having seriously perused and considered it, gave this Judgement of it, That he highly approved it, as prudently Penned, and such an Acknowledgement of his Majesty's Signal Favours to the Church of England, and all her Members, as their Gratitude and Duty indispensably obliged them to pay. And he not only Subscribed it cheerfully himself, but used his best Diligence to procure Subscriptions of the Clergy to it in his Diocese, and having received some nameless Letters (like this of T. W.) to dissuade him from Addrese, and among the rest those called the Oxon. Reasons, he answered them all, to the satisfaction of all thinking Men, who saw them, and concluded, That he saw nothing in them that looked like a Reason against it, only some groundless Fears and insignificant Jealousies; and that if the Clergy at this time, and in these Circumstances we now are, should general and obstinately deny in an humble Address to give his Majesty Thanks for so Gracious a Promise of preserving that ALTAR from being overthrown, at which yet he did not worship, he feared it would give him too much cause to say, That he had little Reason to protect them, who so peremptorily refused, as the Motion of their own Bishop, to Thank him for it. And others wished, that the niceness of particular Men, where in truth no need was, did not at last hazard the whole; and so indeed it must have done, had not his Majesty, in imitation of HIM whom he Represents among us, of his great and undeserved Mercy been Kind to the Unthankful, and according to his accustomed Goodness spared the Church for the sake of the smaller visible number that were in it; so great Grace may, if they are not past cure, heal their Infidelity and Revolt from their Duty, especially when they are thus invited to believe, and adhere to a Prince, of whom we have had sufficient Experience, that he will no more recede from his Promise, than he would fly from his Enemy in the Day of Battle. If the nature of Thanks be so unavoidable a Consequence of being pleased or obliged, (as our Author confesses) and they will presently show themselves in Looks, Speeches, Writing and Actions; then they from whom Thanks do not naturally flow, upon so just and great an Occasion, are to be reckoned among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those unholy and unthankful Men, whom the Apostle foretells us will arise in the latter days, who not only will give no Thanks, but have none to give, If our Obligations were less, and our Sense of the Religion of Gratitude, as little as our Authors; yet I wonder he should be offended at such an innocent and usual piece of Good Manners. He would make us suspect him for one of the Members of Forty Eight, who Voted no more Addresses to be made to the King; for he is so mightily nettled at these weekly Addresses of Loyal Men, from all Parts of the Kingdom, that he would make us believe, if we consulted the Bills of Mortality, we should find some numbers murdered by them. He tells us that the Priests (who are not proper Secretaries for the Protestant Religion) made the first Draughts of them; A Scotchman would take the liberty to tell him, that he were very good Company, and an Englishman would wonder how he came to be so privy to this Secret, unless he were at their Elbows when the Priests Indicted them. These extravagant Acknowledgements (as he calls them, extravagantly enough) which he pretends all the Post-horses are tired with carrying Circular Letters to solicit, give us a Copy of his Countenance; And that where Persuasions cannot delude, Threaten are employed to fright Men into a Compliance (but where, or by whom, he knows not); And that the manner of getting them did extremely lessen their value; And that the Thanks which filled the Gazettes, were either Trifles or Snares, which either signified nothing, or a great deal more than was intended by them who gave them. By all which he proves himself a greater Master of his Pen than his Passions, that his Wit is more than his Manners, and that his Republican Zeal has, like a Cormorant, devoured his Charity to his Fellow Subjects, and his Loyalty to his Prince. Do not his Objections to his Majesty's Belief now hinder him from seeing his Virtues, whilst he instigates others to discredit and disobey him? One would think he himself, who pretends to be a Son of the Church of England, made but a Jest of the Doctrine of Nonresistance, whilst he is so fearful of the Submission of his Fellow Subjects, to the King's so just and reasonable Expectation from them. Is not our Peace at Home, and our Prince's Reputation abroad, of more value than to be hazarded for want of a Compliment, as he calls it? If I did not think it a Task too hard for me, to persuade a Man so bewitched with a turbulent Spirit as he is, to grow more peaceable; and thought he were not so far gone in his new Passion, but that he would hear still; I would not be discouraged from dissuading him to rely on a Deathbed Repentance. If he have not engaged himself in the Ways of Faction, in an Association beyond Retreat, and be not hurried on by his first Heat, I would request him to look back upon what he has written, before it be too late, and not sacrifice the true public Interest of the Nation to his private Revenge; which will speak him a Man of good Morality and Understanding, as well as a great Wit: But I fear, that as he has betrayed too much Weakness, in entertaining and propagating these groundless Fears and Jealousies, by which he speaks his Spleen, and not his Conscience; so he will show too much Obstinacy to forsake and recant them, being none of those who thinks himself obliged to obey for Conscience sake.  
And now I leave T. W. to review his own Reasons, and consider, whether they be not too weak to acquit him from Uncharity and Disloyalty, in charging his Sovereign with Treachery in the Declaration of his Mercy to Dissenters, or (which is much the same) in persuading Dissenters to suspect him: And the worst I wish him is, that the sense of his Gild may make him a true Penitent. I proceed to the Second Part of his Design, which is  
To excite the Dissenters to use their Interest against the Establishment of that Liberty by Law, which his Majesty's Clemency hath Indulged to them.  
If he can persuade the Dissenters to throw the King's Declaration of Indulgence at his Head, which is within the Bounds: he has set to his Good Breeding, and to throw away their present Advantages, and to stay for the Liberty of the public Exercise of their Religion till the Parliament allow it them, and to satisfy themselves with those imaginary Advantages of which they can hardly fail in the next probable Revolution, if by an unseasonable Activity they lose not the Influence of their good Star, which promises them every thing that is prosperous, for that all things seem to conspire to their Ease and Satisfaction, if by too much haste to anticipate their good Fortune, they do not destroy it; Such a prevailing Eloquence as this, would speak him an Orator beyond compare, and would give us cause to conclude by the Effect it had upon them, that the Dissenters had not yet been so long restrained from their Liberty, as to have any strong Appetite to enjoy it again: but the Indians, I believe, may as soon catch Monkeys with a Mousetrap, as he can draw in the Dissenters with such a dull Device as this, to destroy themselves by using their Interest against the Establishment of that Happiness by a Law, which his Majesty's Clemency hath already Indulged them. For this purpose, pag. 8. he insinuates the Irregularity of the Declaration in point of Law, which whether it be so or no, is certainly not so fit to be determined in a Pamphlet, as in Westminster-Hall, which already hath given its Opinion in favour of the Prerogative. And after that, it is (methinks) no small Presumption to Censure the King's Actions as irregularly done, which proceed upon such special Verdict for their Legality.  
As the King does not need the Dissenters Thanks to justify his Declaration in point of Law, so neither do the Papists doubt of the Legality of his Power of Dispensing with them for his Time, but they desire to have the Royal Favour made more lasting to them by a Law.  
Besides, is it not very strange, that Men should generally acknowledge the King a Right to Dispense with Penal Laws against Theft and Murder, which are founded upon a Divine Sanction, yet question his Right to Dispense with those against a Conventicle, which can make no such Pretences? Or that this should lay a Foundation for the breach of all Laws (so saith this Writer, pag. 9) and that should not? Or that Dissenters should look like Council Retained against Magna Charta, for thankfully receiving the Benefit of this, and Felons never be so Censured for that? But if (as he presumes to affirm) the Declaration be irregular, it's not a little difficult to comprehend, how this becomes an Argument against Endeavouring to have the Liberty granted by it, Confirmed by a Law; since the Invalidity of their present Grant should in all reason make them more solicitous for such a Confirmation, as may preserve the Liberty they are so desirous to enjoy.  
His Arguments to me seem very weak against this mighty Power of Dispensing, which needs not the Justification of a Parliament, tho' the Penal Laws and Test want their Repeal, which I hope they may have in good time, without endangering or destroying our Religion, or Properties. But our Author thinks this a proper time to put the Prerogative in Pickle, for some other Generation that can better digest it than the present; and in pursuance of his Designs, he makes the Laws spurn against their Maker; which is not the way to secure our Religion, but to make our Church the more odious, by practising that which she professes to abhor: She has taught her Sons to believe, that no Power on Earth can give Licence for the doing of that which is Malum in se, an Offence in its own nature, and so declared by the Divine Law; but that Malum prohibitum, which in its own nature is indifferent, and becomes an Offence only because some Law of the Land makes it so, she thinks may be dispensed with, according to the King's Discretion, whom she allows to be the proper Judge of Public Necessity. 'Tis impossible for Human Lawmakers, who have no pretence to Infallibility, or a perpetual Divine Assistance, to foresee all particular Accidents, Mischiefs, and Inconveniences which may happen in particular Circumstances by or from the making of any particular Law; And therefore there must be some Power always visible and in being, to Suspend or Dispense with such Laws, as the Public Good and Safety of the People, or an emergent Necessity requires, which is by Law in the King, who is the Head of the Public Good, and the Fountain of Justice and Mercy; which Power is so united to his Royal Person, that he cannot transfer, give away, or separate the same from himself, as all the Judges of England resolved, (Lord Coke lib. 7. fol. 36.) nor can he bar himself from that which is so inherent in him, and inseparably annexed to his Royal Person, no not by an Act of Parliament; for by so doing he would cease to be King, (Coke lib. 7. pag. 14.) the most he can do, is only to agree, that he will not use that Right but in extraordinary Cases and Occasions, when in his Princely Wisdom he shall find it necessary for the Public Good: Nor is his reassuming to Exercise such a Right, any Breach of his Promise or Oath at his Coronation, but a making use of that Condition employed in his Agreement, as to such particular Cases, and such present Circumstances. The King cannot Repeal, and totally make void the Law by his own single Power without a Parliament, but Relax, Suspend, and Control it for a time, with respect to the Advantages or Necessities of his People he may, which is a temporary Repeal, or the laying the Law down to sleep for a time in a legal way, which is a sufficient Discharge to them who are Commissioned under him, and by his Authority, to put them in Execution. Our Author knows, that the strict keeping of Lent is enforced by great Penalties in our Laws, viz. 2 & 3 Ed. 6. cap. 19 & 6 Ed. 6. cap. 33. 5 Eliz. 5. and yet that the King was never questioned the Power of Dispensing with them all, either by Judges, Bishops, or Parliament, but his Power in these Points has had an universal Admittance, with a Nemine contradicente; and why then should it be arraigned only in Dispensing with those Penal Laws relating to Religion against Conventicles or Recusants?  
In his next Attempt he seems to imitate the last and desperate Shift of the King of Moab, when he took his eldest Son that should have Reigned in his stead, and offered him a Burnt-offering upon the Wall, to move the Israelites, by that Instance of his Misery and Desperation, to pity him, 2 Kings 3.27. For, to move the Dissenters Compassion, he sacrifices the Reputation of his own Mother the Church of England, confessing, pag. 10. that she out of revenge, for the rough usage she met with from the Dissenters in the time of their Reign, upon the late King's Restauration made the Penal Laws against them; and lest they should imitate her Faults, he cautions them against seeking to be revenged, by attempting the Repeal of them. Whether this Instance of his Desperation will be as successful as the King of Moab's, and prevail with his Adversaries to quit their Advantage, I know not; but if it do, they are certainly very good-natured Adversaries in both the Acceptations of the Phrase, whether it denote the excess of their Kindness, or the defect of their Understandings. Some Men are so Spiderspirited, as to suck Poison out of the sweetest Flowers: For my part, I cannot think so ill of those Great Men, who suffered with so much Christian Patience for their Loyalty, as that they came from under the Rod breathing nothing but Revenge against their Persecutors. It is a more just Account, and suitable to the Character of their Piety and Loyalty, that what they then did in Severity against the Dissenters, was not from private Revenge, but from the Necessities of the Kingly Government, to which the Dissenters had been very pernicious, and which they thought could not be safe, at that time, without the suppressing of them.  
But if his Suggestion were true, that the Penal Laws against Dissenters were made out of Revenge, what Argument is this against their endeavouring the Repeal of them? Unless it were Criminal to seek for a Release from the Injuries that Revenge hath laid upon them, or a Sin to flee from the Avenger of Blood into the City of Refuge. To Retaliate Injuries is a Crime, but to seek for Protection and Ease from them is not. And I see not but that the Dissenters, if they be (according to his Character of them, pag. 10.) Men of good Morality and Understanding, may thus argue, The Church of England, after the late King's Restauration, sacrificed its Interest to Revenge, in making the Penal Laws against us, and therefore we may lawfully, for our own Ease, endeavour the Repeal of them, and not lose the present Opportunity to rescue ourselves out of her avenging Hand.  
But to mend the matter, he tells us, pag. 10. that the Common Danger had now so laid open the Mistake, that all former Haughtiness of the Church of England toward them, is for ever extinguished, and hath turned the Spirit of Persecution into a Spirit of Peace, Charity and Condescension. A fit Argument to infer this Conclusion, Therefore the Dissenters ought not to endeavour their own Ease. Whereas this seems the more natural Inference, That therefore the Church of England will now join her Endeavours with them for the Repealing of those Laws, the Enacting and Execution of which he imputes to a Spirit of Persecution.  
But to do the Church of England right against these malicious Suggestions, I am sure her Principles are against Persecution, or any thing of Violence and Cruelty toward any for Religion; And whatever may have been the Practices of some rigid and violent Persons of her Communion, the most Wise, Pious and Learned of them, have still declared it unlawful to make any Sufferers for their Conscience, unless where it interferes with the Peace and Safety of the State: They would have no Man's invincible Persuasion in Religion be made High Treason, as it was in Sir Tho. More's and the Bishop of Rochester's Cases. The Opinions in Religion that are inauspicious to the Government, they think aught to be punished, not because they are Errors in Religion, but because they are Seditious and dangerous to the Government. Now when they are, and when they are not so (as the change of Circumstances in the State may alter their Prospect on it) the Government is more proper to judge than the Church, and when that thinks its Safety not endangered by the toleration of them, she is not for punishing them. According to which Principle, by the same Reason that she was for making the Penal Laws formerly, she may now be for their Repeal, because the Government thinks itself safe without them. And this (I think) is almost the only thing wherein T. W. doth not Misrepresent her, That now she is really for the Ease of Tender Consciences; not (as he brings in her Enemies suggesting, p. 12.) because she wants Power to Oppress, but because the change of Circumstances in the Government, makes the Opinions of Dissenters, whether Protestant or Popish, not so dangerous to the Peace of the State, or the Authority of the Civil Powers, as formerly they have been. And this she may modestly conclude, because the King and his Council have thought fit to Indulge them, whose Interest obliges them to be most Impartial, and whose Experience in State Affairs makes them most able to judge of such things.  
The State was then in such real or imaginary Dangers as it is not now; The Succession of the King to the Crown is not now in Dispute, nor is Dominion believed to be founded in Grace, if such Times should come again, the old Severities might be soon reinforced: Whilst we are in no danger of them, let us put them into a Condition of Ease and Safety frankly, that they may have no just Prejudice against us or our Religion, and that the King, who is entitled to the Service of every Subject of his, of what Persuasion soever, by the Law of Nature, and the Common Law of the Land (of which no Act or Parliament can, or aught to bar him) may make use of their Persons and Services, according to his own Discretion. Why should not his Catholic Subjects be equally capacitated to render him Service, and be united with us in the same Bonds of Duty and Allegiance, tho' they cannot accord with us in Matters of Religion? Why should we show so much Violence in those Points of Faith, of which, perhaps, we can show no certain Evidence? The decrepit World, in the twilight of its declining Age, may be easily mistaken in the Colours of Good and Evil, true or false. Their Merits have been great of the Crown, and their Sufferings more than Ours, and why then should we repine, to see the long deserved, & deferred Rewards of their Loyalty conferred upon them at last? Let our only Emulation be who shall serve him best. Princes are not to be Catechised in bestowing their Honours or Offices, nor could we think he had any true Zeal for his Religion, if he should not countenance and preserve them, at lest caeteris paribus, with others, if not before them. Suppose our repining should provoke him to turn the Tables upon us, and to employ no Officers or Servants about him but Roman-Catholics, whom could we reasonably blame but ourselves. Let the King unite them and us in one Camp and Court in God's Name, and let there always be a Religious Correspondence between them and us in the Service of so great and so good a Master. To dispute his Power in this Case, were to deny him the choice of his Servants, which we should think a Wrong to the meanest of us to be deprived of; and also to rob him of the Militia of the Nation, to diminish his Regal Authority, and to deprive him of the Services of a great part of his Subjects, from which no Act of Parliament can restrain him, because the Law of Nature gives it him.  
As to the Men of Taunton and Tiverton, who were formerly Stigmatised for their Rebellion, they are now the more eminent for returning to their Loyalty, from which they made so notorious a Defection, and should be embraced by us accordingly with great joy, as returning Prodigals. And some of the Quakers, who were formerly known to be accomplished Men, of good Parts and Breeding, are with a Non obstante to their Religion, taken into his Majesty's Protection, for which they give him Thanks with a Grace that very well becomes them; which, as new a thing as it is, and as much as our Author is surprised at it, is not a thing utterly incredible. It is far from a Miracle to see so Gracious a Prince as King James the Second is, to cherish and reward the Loyalty of his Subjects Hearts in spite of their Hats, or their more shameful Mistakes in Matters of Religion. The Prince's Power is not limited to his morose Humour; He can, as oft as he is so disposed, be Gracious to them, who have been undutiful to him, Reprieve and Pardon whom he has justly Condemned, without acquainting him or the Confessor with the Reasons of so sudden & effectual a Change, he may alter his own Mind without altering the Nature of other Things. If a Man repent of his Crimes and the King Pardon him, and he amend his Life in order to obtain God's Pardon too, our envious Author laments his entire Resignation, and looks upon his Endeavours, now he is Converted himself, to strengthen his Brethren, as an  Task, and looks upon them as squeezed out of him by the weight of his being so obnoxious; by which he squints at a Person who has Honour and Courage enough to call him to an account for it, if he knew where his humble Servant T.W. were to be found, whom he believes to be better at his Pen, than any other Weapon.  
What he saith of the Church of England's Provocations, p. 12. may be subscribed to by all, as an Instance of her excellent Temper, if his Letter, which is an Exception against it, do not hinder, if yet there be any reason to blame her for the Rashness and Indiscretion of one of her Members, when the rest bore the Reproaches of so many malicious Pamphlets, without quarrelling eithere the Government or the Dissenters: These Provocations like a Storm of Hail upon a strong House, cause more Noise than Prejudice. She is ready (he saith pag. 13.) rather to suffer, than to receive all the Advantages that can be gained by a criminal Compliance, And if she refuse only criminal Compliances, I am persuaded she will never suffer under this merciful Prince, who requires no Man to play the Hypocrite, or act against his Conscience.  
The Reflection, pag. 13. savours much of T. W's Spirit, who cannot forbear Libelling the Government; for what ground hath he but his own Fancy to insinuate, that the next Parliament will not be Elected freely, but by Congee d'Eslire, and the Men Returned whom the King nominates, whether Elected or no? And that when Returned, they will not be allowed the liberty to Debate freely in Parliament, but obliged, without Examination, to do whatever they are desired. For doth not he in his very next Paragraph contradict himself? wherein he saith, that the Papists themselves do not rely upon the Legality of the Declaration, and therefore are so very earnest to get it Established by Law. For they are not so blind, but that they can see there will be no more Security in a Law made by a Parliament illegally chosen, and under restraint in their Votes, than in a bare Declaration; and that the next Turn of Government would regard that less than this. So that if it be their Interest to have a Parliament to secure their Liberty by Law, it is equally their Interest to have one freely chosen, and free in their Votes. And what reason is there to suspect Men will act contrary to what they know to be their Interest.  
Our Author knows who they were who were Returned out of every Burrow, by virtue of the Letters Missive from the Faction in the City, and instead of Election were satisfied if they could get but a double Return, when the Power of the Committees of Election was more significant, and to worse Purposes, than the King's Congee d'Eslire; And whereas he farther suggests, that our Methods of Enacting Laws in England will be reduced to those of Scotland, and that the Papists shall be made Lords of the Articles over us, and yet endeavours to wheadle the Dissenters into a fond Persuasion that the Parliament will offer them an Indulgence without including the Papists: To give him a Cooler for his Conceit, they have told him already, that this Way of his will catch none but Woodcocks, and that they can see and break through it at pleasure, and so his Road is quite spoiled: And for our parts, the Church of England has taught us to value the Merit of Obedience above the Liberty of Debate, which such Men as he would turn into Licentiousness, and Liberty of Aspersing, if not Altering the Government.  
What he insinuates, pag. 15. of the danger, lest if the King, and those of his Communion, be gratified by the legal Establishment of their Liberty, they will at the next Step attempt theirs that helped them, and after the Dissenters squeaziness in starting at a Surplice, force them to swallow Transubstantiation, is another of those malicious Suggestions, which have been sufficiently Answered at the beginning of this Discourse, it looks like a Plot to pelt out the Protestant Religion with Sugar-plums, so ridiculous is it and unreasonable. The sum of all is, that T.W. pretends to be an Ambassador from the Church of England, to invite the Dissenters to join with her in a League against the Roman-Catholics, promising every one Liberty when the Parliament meets, except only the King and those of his Religion: which makes me to question his Credentials, and suspect him for a Cheat, since all the genuine Sons of the Church of England have their Good Breeding better bounded, than to be civil and obliging to all Men but their Prince.  
He is like a Man in a Trance, rapt into the Religious Cause of the Church of England none knows how; he blames her Sons for going too far in compliance with the Romanists, and yet complains, that they are not only deserted, but prosecuted, but when and how he leaves us to guests; nor do we know what Weight of Power it is they lie under to avoid the Burden of being Criminal; which whilst he maliciously suggests, he speaks like Council Retained by his old Friends the Republicans in Forty Eight, against the Prerogative, which has done nothing yet in this King's Reign or his Predecessor's, to fall thus under his Displeasure. Our Gracious Sovereign hath already done more for our Church, than the most sanguine of her Sons ever looked for, which gives us reason to believe that he will never be sorry for doing what we desired. Liberty of Conscience is more than pretended to be given by him, and yet there is no Freedom or Property to be sacrificed for it neither, as far as yet appears, or we believe is ever like to do. The King intends not to unhinge the Establishment of the Church of England, for that he can no more do, than he can be unfaithful; He only desires Safety, and the Protection of the Laws for those of his own Communion, and other Dissenters too, which (however peevish Men may be, at the first motion) will appear so reasonable upon second and more sedate Thoughts, that however (p. 17.) the odds be Two hundred to one in the number of us and them, yet there will be no such odds in the Votes for and against their Indulgence.  
I am as loath as he is, that we should throw away all Human Means of preserving our Religion (p. 17.) and I doubt not but that the Wisdom of the Nation may find Human Expedients to secure it to us, without Infringing the natural Liberty of Subjects by severe Tests, or tyrannising over their Consciences by Penal Laws. Sure I am, a peevish provocation of a Prince, whose Spirit and Power are equally great, is no Human Means of its Preservation.  
Our Author's great fear is, that the Thankers of the King will be Repealers of the Test in the next Parliament, which would bring them under such a Scandal as would make them odious to all Mankind; from which that he may the better deter them, he tells them, that by rescuing themselves from the severity of one Law, they will necessarily give a blow to all the rest, and that the Price of their Liberty will be no less than the giving up their Right in all the Laws, which were a losing Bargain indeed, to draw such a Mischief as this upon themselves. But whether those Methods which he proposes to them, will not more infallibly destroy them, I hope the Dissenters and the Church of England men will consider well, before they follow them, It concerns us all to take heed, that in acting for the preservation of our Religion, we do not expose it to more imminent and apparent danger.  Tanti non est ut placeam Tibi perire. Martial. 
If nothing will gratify our Author but what will displease and disserve the King, let his Pretexts be never so specious, he shall not entice us into a sinful Compliance, we will follow the Golden Rule, to do to others as we would have them do to us in like Circumstances.  Arma tenenti, omnia dat qui justa negat. 
Our obstinate and unseasonable stiffness hath made some Alterations already in Public Affairs and Administrations, and may provoke his Majesty to do those things in his Displeasure, which may be more prejudicial to our Religion than the Repealing of the Test can be, the making whereof she abhorred and opposed as much as she could, and cannot remember the Author or Occasion of it without Detestation. And I hope the King's Old Friends will not put the King to such shameful Shifts, as to fly to his New for any Justice they can do him in this or any other kind. If they should fail of their Duty in this kind, their Mother Church will not bless them, nor be displeased to see the Father of the Country correct such ill-nurtured Children as are too big for her Discipline. I question not but that the next Parliament will do what the King and all good Subjects expect from them. The King is assured of the Affections of his People in gross, they have already Presented him with their Lives and Fortunes in their repeated weekly Addresses, and therefore he will be sure to find it by their Loyal Representatives, who will never sail to give him that Satisfaction in a Parliamentary way, which they have already done in a Popular one; for they would wrong us as well as him, if they should not give him that Satisfaction in Formalities of Law, which our Devotion hath already designed and dedicated to him. All true Sons of the Church of England rejoice, and are pleased in his Majesty's Government, and doubt not but a good Correspondence between him and his two next Houses of Parliament will put the Balance of Europe into his Hands; but if once a Spirit of Jealousy should be raised between him and us, to fright us from the Repealing of the Test and Penal Laws, what Disadvantages may accrue to our Nation or our Religion, I tremble to think. We had need do something more than ordinary, to atone for the innocent Blood that has been shed upon the Testimony of a few perjured Villains.  
Thus, Sir, I have given you my Opinion of the Pamphlet you sent me, which was certainly writ with a very ill Design against the King, & no good Intention for the Church of England, whom it represents (as it would persuade her to be) obstinately engaged, not only against the Religion, but against the Interest of her Prince too, attempting to draw Men to suspect his Mercy for Treachery, and inviting Dissenters to Combine against his Gracious Designs for the Ease of all his Subjects; which I am persuaded the Church of England by her Compliances without obstinacy, as far as without deserting her Religion she may, will in the Event demonstrate to be black-mouthed Calumnies.  
FINIS.