THE OBSERVATOR VINDICATED, OR AN ANSWER TO Mr. Smythies' REPLY TO THE OBSERVATOR: Together with a brief, but just, Censure on his SERMON annexed to it.  
— Pudet haec opprobria nobis  
Et dici potuisse, & non potuisse refelli.  
LONDON, Printed for Walter Davis in Amen-Corner. 1685.   

AN ANSWER To Mr. Smythies' Reply TO THE OBSERVATOR.  
SIR,  
HAVING lately seen a Pamphlet of yours, entitled a Reply to the Observator; together with your Sermon annexed to it, and finding by the Title-page thereof, that it had run through no less than three several impressions; I thought verily that there must be something more than ordinary in it, in that it went down so well; and that that sure must needs be a very choice dish, which the Stationer had thus thrice served up in so short a time. This whet my appetite to see what was in it, and made me greedily set myself to the reading of it. But no sooner had I gone through some few pages thereof, but I presently found it to be nothing else but Cramben ter coctam; a nauseous publishing of that thrice, which no ingenious man would have cared once to have had a sight of; and indeed had it fallen only into the hands of such, it must have grown stolen upon the Printers; who, instead of being at the trouble of a second, and third impression of it, must have been at some pains for the getting off the first.  
But the unthinking multitude are yours, and the Stationer's best friends: for these swallow down any thing, just as men do Pills without either chewing or tasting them; and therefore as they have swallowed three impressions of your Pamphlet already, so they may threescore more; and yet no man, that understands himself or what he reads, be inclined to think any thing the better either of you, or of what you writ.  
But to let you see, how little you have advantaged either your cause or person, by exposing yourself in print as you have done; I doubt not but to make it plainly appear to every impartial Reader (you yourself being one of them) that your Reply to the Observator, is so far from vindicating you, in the matter charged against you, that it confirms the charge, and more fully proves it on you. Thus when you are charged for breaking the Orders of the Church, in the matter of Sponsors, what is it that you say in your own Vindication? why, you tell us of a story of your going to the Bishop, to know his pleasure about it; but what does all that tittle-tattle of your going to the Bishop signify? but only to tell us plainly, that you did indeed break the Orders of the Church, but not without his Orders for it. This is the first time that I ever heard a Bishop had power to give such Orders: he may indeed, by virtue of the Canonical obedience I own him, order me to observe the Rules and Canons of the Church; but, by what power or authority he can appoint or permit the breach of them, I understand not. When therefore you went to the Bishop, to consult with him about this affair; you had been better advised, had you gone and consulted with the Rubric of the Common Prayer; which is the unquestionable rule you ought to go by: of the Authority whereof if you do in the least doubt, let me advise you (instead of going to the Bishop to consult about it) to go and consult with the two Acts of Parliament for the Uniformity of public Prayers, and Administration of the Sacraments: and then consider with yourself, whether any single person's authority can dispense with the observance of that, which is not only confirmed and ratifyed by the whole body of the Clergy, the Church representative, but is likewise incorporated into the Laws of the Land, and has the Supreme Power of the Nation for its Establishment. But Oh! the invincible necessity of complying with the humours of the people! which is such as no law can control, or withstand the force of: and therefore if Mahomet will not come to the mountain, the mountain must go to Mahomet; if the people will not submit to the Government, there's no help for it but, the Government must submit to them.  
But you have something farther yet to offer in your Vindication; which is, that you have often, both from the Desk, and the Pulpit, commended the practice of the Church; and answered the Objections of the Dissenters against it: But had you not the Bishop's Orders for that too? or did you do it of your own accord? if you did, the Church is infinitely beholding to you for your commending the practice of those things, which she has positively enjoined the performance of: as if a commendatory discourse of yours in such things, were more to be regarded, than the Church's Authority, in her positive injunctions of them. But to commend what the Church has commanded, is not all that you have done on her behalf; for you have likewise answered the Objections of the Dissenters against her; and yet, such obstinate people are they, that they will not be answered by you; for you tell us, that, upon the present Vicar's requiring the Orders of the Church to the duly observed, and your compliance with such Orders, the Dissenters (notwithstanding you have so well answered their objections) will not be brought to comply with them; but either send for Non conformists to Baptise their children, or let them remain unbaptised. But now, since you are so good at answering Objections, I desire you to answer one of mine: now the thing, which I Object against you, is your justifying yourself, in breaking the Orders of the Church, by your having the Bishop's for it. For how does his Orders, for breaking those of the Church, justify you in the breach of them? does his being criminal make you ever the less guilty? how you have answered the Objections of the Dissenters, I know not; sure I am, that your own dissent, in the particular you are charged with, cannot to God and your own Soul be answered by you; unless you repent of it: other means, to acquit yourself by, I know not of. But of this there appears nothing at all in your Reply; but rather much the contrary: for there though you tell us of your ready compliance with the present Vicar's Orders, who hath required that the Orders of the Church be duly observed, (and God's peace, and the Churches be with him for it) yet I perceive something, as well as you; which is, that you are still hammering upon the ill consequences, that will follow upon such observance, and thereby plainly show, that it is not the Orders of the Church, but those of the present Vicar you have regard to. So that had you but such another Vicar to consult with, as you had formerly; you would certainly be at your old Nonconforming tricks again, (which I find you have a months' mind for) and think a compliance with the humours of the people to be much more necessary, than obedience to the Orders and Constitutions of that Church, which (by trimming in it) you would be thought to be a sound member of. And thus you see, how well you have Vindicated yourself of the first crime charged against you; your christening without Sponsors: which, by your own confession, you stand charged with, and have not as yet, by any thing you have said, acquitted yourself of the guilt of.  
I come now to the other thing charged upon you; which is your christening without the sign of the Cross: and here likewise you own the matter of fact, but positively deny, that the Orders of the Church were broken by it. Now in asserting this, you assert a manifest falsehood; the opposite whereto is a most plain and evident truth; which is, that the Orders of the Church were broken by you; and that more ways than one. For first, that which you make to be the cause of your omitting the sign of the Cross, (to wit, the gaining of a Proselyte) is a thing not allowed of by the Church, which permits the omission of it, only in the case of private Baptism, and then only for expeditions sake, as to the present use thereof. For if the child, who is after this sort Baptised do afterward live; she requires that it be brought to Church; where, after the Congregation is certified of its being duly Baptised, the Minister is to demand the Name of it, of the Sponsors; which being by them pronounced, he is to proceed to take their engagement for it; and then, saying the words prescribed for the sign of the Cross, to sign it with it. Now how well you observed the Orders of the Church in this particular, let any man judge; nay, be you yourself the judge of it. This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the first manifest falsehood, in your asserting, that the Orders of the Church were not broken by you, in what you did, but this was not the only thing, you broke the Orders of the Church in. For in the 2d. place it appears plainly, by what you say, that your private Baptism was only the public Baptism administered privately: otherwise what do you mean, by saying that the reason of your omitting the sign of the Cross was only to gain a Proselyte to the Church? when, in the case of private Baptism, the present use of the Cross is no ways enjoined you by it: but then only in case the child do live to be afterwards brought to Church; as has been . Which being most undoubtedly true; how should the omission of that, be a means to gain you a Proselyte to the Church, the use whereof, in the present case, is not where enjoined you by it? 'Tis plain therefore that your private Baptism was only the public Baptism administered privately. So that this is another particular, wherein the Orders of the Church were broken by you. And therefore, by your being so positive in asserting that they were not, you give yourself the lie; which a man, that will be so uncivil as to give himself, must take, and there is no help for it. But then, in the 3d. place, what a most preposterous course, did you take to gain a Proselyte to the Church, by an action that bears a direct opposition to the Rules and Constitutions of it? here again your action gives you the lie, and flies directly in the face of you; and the honesty of the one, is the best comment on the integrity of the other: that is, your breach of the Orders of the Church plainly tells us what Proselytes you are for gaining into it; such as, like yourself, are Nonconforming Conformists: who are some of the worst Enemies the Church has; in that they herd themselves in it, only to lay it waste, by breaking down the enclosures of it. These are such Proselytes, as the Church had never greater reason, than now, to be afraid of; and therefore ought the Governors and Pastors thereof, narrowly to observe the motions of those, who are the gainers of them.  
As for the other thing you are charged with, namely, your omitting to pray for the Duke of York; I must say this in abatement of your charge; that you are not in this particular (as you are in the other two) guilty by your own confession. For here we have you positively denying the matter of fact, and bringing some hundreds of your constant Auditors to attest the truth of what you say; of which I was none; and therefore cannot say one way or other, having never so much as heard of your name, before you had exposed it in Print; and made it public, to your own shame, and disgrace. But though I am thus a perfect stranger to your person, yet having studied men, as well as books, and endeavoured to understand the one by the other; give me leave to tell you, that if the Proverb, Ex ungue leonem, be true; that is, if a man may know the Beast by his paw; I have seen enough under the hand of one Mr. Smythies, Curate of Cripplegate, to convince me that he is not a man of that temper he pretends himself to be; but may shrewdly be suspected to be a Wolf, only in Sheep's clothing. And therefore, whether he omitted to pray for the Duke, or no, it matters not; who, questionless, had the bill of Exclusion gone forward, would have more readily excluded him his prayers, than ever he put any person into them.  
As to your valuing yourself upon your being called Tory, in the days of Whiggism; let me tell you, that the very worst of Trimmers now, would have passed for such in those days: but there being since an alteration in the times, but none in you; you must remain, what you were then, a rank Trimmer still. But you value not opprobrious names, you tell us, so long as you are faithful and industrious in the discharge of your Office. Very industrious indeed in you have been in the discharge of it; even to the going beyond the bounds of your duty, and fetching a compass out of the Pale of the Church, to bring your Proselytes into it. But now how faithful you have been in the discharge hereof, let the forementioned instance of the course you took to gain a Proselyte, be a most pregnant and convincing proof. There is another thing, you tell us, is objected against you; and which, by means of some spiteful people, as you call them, came lately to the ear of his Majesty, and that is your being an associate with Dissenters: now those spiteful people, as you term them, would from any man's mouth, but that of a spiteful Trimmer, have been termed Loyal. But how do you justify yourself in this particular? why, by telling us, that in your being so, you are no greater a friend to fanatics, than our Great Master was to Publicans and Sinners. But how does our Saviour's conversing with these, justify your conversing with Dissenters? you must not reckon them amongst Publicans and Sinners; for if you do, as great a friend as you are to them, they will, I can assure you, be none to you. Our Saviour's example therefore, in the present case, stands you in no stead at all; it had been much more to your purpose to have found him conversing with the Scribes and Pharisees; who were righteous much after the same manner your fanatics are; in that they were Separatists (as their very name imports) upon the account of the good opinion they had of themselves, and of their being better, and holier than other men. Now our Saviour (and by the Authority of whose example you think to justify yourself) was so far from associating himself with those, that he every where declines it; and, instead of treating them kindly at any time, denounces no less than eight several woes at once against them; for their Hypocrisy: and, at another time, tells them plainly, that he came not to call such righteous persons, as they were, but sinners to repentance. So that you see, our Saviour's kindness to Publicans and sinners will not justify yours to Republicans and Schismatics. These being those disorderly walkers the Apostle (2 Thess. 3.6.) enjoins you to withdraw yourself from, which, however strictly there enjoined you, is that you cannot well do; lest you should want Compurgators for your Loyalty: neither are they willing, I believe, that you should withdraw yourself; lest they should want one for themselves: which is such a kindness as you cannot in gratitude deny them. For, according to the Proverb of Scabunt se mutuo muli, one good turn, you know, requires another. But now, after all this great love and kindness owned betwixt you and the fanatics; how comes it to pass, that you have the confidence to tell us, that the greatest kindness, you ever did for any Dissenters from the Church, was for a family of Papists; whose whole estate was unjustly kept from them, by a Protestant Dissenter? Now what you did for these Papists, was nothing more than purely an act of justice: and is the doing any man common justice, such a mighty act of kindness in your esteem? it is so, it seems, when done to a Papist. And therefore lest your party should take this ill at your hands, and think you Popishly affected for it; you presently tell us, that you think you could as soon be a Jew, as a Popish Christian. Now, was this well said, or no, do you think? might you not have used a little softer expression? and said, that you could as soon be a Turk, as a Popish Christian? (for the Turks, you know, have some small Reverence for our Saviour; whereas the Jew has none; but spits in his face, and treats him with scorn and contempt) And would not your Tekelites have liked that expression, altogether as well as the other; I am apt to believe they would; however you must have a care of complying too far with the humours of the people; lest such compliance, as brought you once to omit the sign of the Cross, for bringing a Trimmer into the Church, bring you at last to omit the Cross itself, for bringing the Jew in thither.  
In your next Paragraph, you tell us, that you have suffered in your reputation, by being kind in the distribution of other men's Charity, (where you were not limited by the Donor) to all that were in excessive want, without respect had to the Opinion of any. But now, notwithstanding this Profession of yours, I much question whether, if a Jew, or Popish Christian had come in your way, you would not (unless limited by the Donor) have been kinder to the one, than to the other; or at least made it cross or pile, which should have been relieved by you. And now, after all this, you are pleased to tell us, That you are content to suffer in your good name; since this hath been the lot of divers others, who are a thousand times more deserving than yourself. That there are divers in the Nation ten thousand times more deserving than yourself, is a matter that very well deserves belief; as being a thing past all manner of doubt: but now, that such as these, have suffered, in like manner, as you have done, is far enough from being alike credible: and therefore, before it gain credit with me, I must have some farther proof of the truth thereof, than barely your saying of it. However, supposing it to be true; does their suffering the same with you, make your case one jot the better or theirs ever a whit the worse? Our Saviour himself was in the very same condemnation with the two Thiefs, that suffered with Him; and yet, I hope, you will not say, that He was ever the less Innocent, or they ever the less criminal? the application is easy and obvious; and therefore I leave you to make it. But some of the most eminent Divines of the Church of England have been falsely accused, you say; well, supposing again this to be true; I ask you again, whether their being falsely accused, does make your accusation ever the less true? If it does not, to what purpose is it mentioned by you? unless it be slily to insinuate the truth of your own innocency, from the falsehood of their accusation: but this is a cheat too gross to pass upon any man; for who would think ever the better of a Malefactor, who, to salve his reputation at the Gallows, should say, that it was many an honest man's fate to be hanged, as well as his? the application here likewise is very easy; and therefore are you again left to make it. So that you see, 'tis not the hard rubbing your crimes, against other men's innocency, which will fetch off the guilt of them.  
As to the Magistrate you speak of, on whom some think, as you tell us, that the Observator has been throwing his dirt, all, that I have to say, is this; that the Observator's business is not to throw dirt upon any man, that does not deserve to have it cast on him: in whose farther Vindication (as to what I have seen of his papers) give me leave to tell you; that there is no dirt, that he hath thrown upon any man, but what will, in your endeavouring to wipe it off, stick close upon your self: there being not a person in the whole herd of the Faction, reflected on by him, whom he has not treated, with more civility, than he deserves: and therefore when you tell us of some, whose Loyalty, and Conformity to the Laws of God, the King, and the Church, lie more in their talk, than in their practice: if, among those some, you reckon the Observator for one; I must tell you plainly, that I hearty wish, and that for the sake of all those Laws you mention, that your Loyalty and Conformity to them, had lain half so much, either in your talk or practice, as his hath unquestionably done in both. Here therefore, instead of wiping off the dirt from your Magistrate, you are casting it on the Observator, but 'twill not stick there. For he is a person of too untainted a reputation for his Loyalty, ever to have it Flyblown by the breath of a stinking Trimmer.  
And now, Sir, to answer those few questions, which you sedately propose to the Observator. The first whereof is, whether if mens calmly treating the Protestant Dissenters, speaks them Trimmers, his wonderful mildness and gentleness towards Popish Dissenters does not make him justly liable to the charge of Trimming? to this I answer; that the charge of this wonderful mildness and gentleness of his towards the Papists is a most malicious slander. However for the proof hereof, you instance in his endeavouring to shame and ridicule the Popish Plot; and for making good the truth of this, you refer us to the Observator, Aug. 30. this Observator I have consulted; and find it to be so far from ridiculing the Popish Plot, that it gives us a true state and account thereof: and therefore if you had taken a quarter of that pains for lessening the Fanatic Plot, which he has done for giving us a true state of the Popish one; (which is by you maliciously called shamming of it) you had taken infinitely too much: there being that vast odds between them; and ten thousand times more proof for the one, than for the other. Hitherto therefore, there appears no such wonderful kindness of the Observator towards the Papists. But what shall we say then of his being ready, on all Occasions, to do that justice to the Papists, as to acquit them of the Murder of the late King, by laying it on the fanatics? this sure, though an act of pure justice, yet being done for the Papists, must, in your esteem of it, pass for a wonderful act of kindness towards them. But what now? if he has been thus wonderful kind to them, must he presently, to purge himself of the suspicion of Popery, or of being Popishly affected, declare, as you have done, that, notwithstanding the justice he has done them, he could as soon be a Jew, as a Popish Christian? No, there's no need for it: he has taken a much better course for the clearing himself from being a Papist, having taken the Sacrament on it, that he is none. And therefore, though he should own a greater kindness for the Romish Church, than for the Jewish Synagogue, and own likewise a greater charity for those, that pay too much reverence to the Cross, than for those, who treat it with scorn and contempt; yet will none, but a Trimmer of a Protestant, ever think him the more inclining to the Church of Rome, or believe him to be a Trimmer for it. When therefore you demand of him, whether you may not speak to him in his own dialect, and in most of his own words as followeth; why this is right Trimming, etc. I answer, no; for those words, as used by him to you, are most pertinent and proper; but as used by you to him, are plainly ridiculed by you; and sound no better out of your mouth, than those words of the Apostle, of obeying God rather than man, do out of a Phanaticks; which words, when used by the Apostle, were most significant; but out of the mouth of a Fanatic (who, under the pretext of Conscience of obeying God, rather than man, obeys neither) are intolerable.  
Your 2d. demand of the Observator is, whether he did more foolishly, or spitefully, in ask, whether, by the Prince of this World, he meant the King of Great Britain, or the Prince of the Air? in answer to which, I demand of you, whether you did more foolishly, or Phanatically, to suggest, as you do, that the Laws of Christ, and the Laws of the Land, are at odds with one another? and that the putting the latter in execution against the Dissenters, is a cruelty inconsistent with the mildness and lenity of the former?  
Your 3d. demand of him is, whether his supposing (as he often does) that men, who have once imbibed Fanatic principles can never become sincere Comformists, be not to suggest, either that the Arguments to Conformity are of little or no force, or that the Clergy are too weak to urge them? to which I answer, that it suggests neither: but the thing, it plainly suggests to us, is the incorrigible obstinacy of the Faction; who have the stubbornness of the Jew in them: and therefore as soon may we expect, that the Aethiopian should change his skin, and the Leopard his spots, as a factious and thorough-paced Fanatic become a sincere convert.  
As to your 4th. demand of him; wherein there are several impertinent Queres tacked together, I answer, that, in his taking notice of Seditious and Fanatical discourses from the Pulpit, he neither assumes to himself the Office of a Bishop, nor charges them with the neglect of it: but, like a worthy Patriot, strenuously maintains the Post he has undertaken; and makes good the character of a Loyal and Faithful Observator: who having heretofore diligently observed every motion and step, which the Faction made towards the late Rebellion, raised by them, is every way the fittest person (as being the best able) to judge of the like steps and progress, they are now making and setting on foot again, towards the raising of another. Such a Spy, as this, is exceeding useful in the Government, for Observing the motions, and behaviour of such, as, under a pretext of supporting, slily endeavour the Subversion of it; and therefore may very well be allowed, in some cases, to animadvert on the Discourses of the Pulpit; as for instance, in the Case of the Dissenters Say, where he has meddled with the Discourses of the Pulpit to some purpose: and what if, to these Say of the Pulpit, he should, in the next Edition of them, add some of yours from it? might not all this now be done by him, and yet he neither go beyond the bounds of his own duty, or charge the Bishops with the neglect of theirs? but all this is done, you say, upon no better evidence than the tales of Gossipping Busy-bodies, or malicious people; now, if the tale be true, what matter's it, who tells it; and what if some are as busy in bringing their help to quench a popular flame, as others are to kindle it? and when the flame is begun, and the Faction has put the Government into a tottering condition; what if some are as ready to support it, as others are to shake and undermine it? whilst, under a pretence of bearing one another's Burdens, they are putting themselves into a readiness of posture for bearing away the Government itself upon their shoulders. And indeed 'tis but saying to the Faction at any time, instead of the Philistines, that the Papists are upon them; and, Sampson like, they are ready to arise, and unhinge the Government, and to bear away with them the main supporters thereof; all fear and reverence towards their Superiors, together with religion, property, liberty, laws and all.  
As to your fifth demand, I answer, that the Observator's reflecting on some Doctors of our Church, for dedicating Books to the Earl of Shaftsbury, (that Tony of a Peer) cast no unmannerly reflection upon his Majesty for making him his Lord Chancellor, when he did: but for you to make such a question, is, doubtless, saucily to intermeddle in affairs you understand not: for his Majesty, who is a Wise and Understanding Prince, did, questionless, very well understand the temper of the man, at the time he conferred that High Honour on him. But what if his Majesty thus raised him up, either to lay the greater obligations to loyalty on him, or for the same cause that God did heretofore Pharaoh, that his disloyalty to his Prince might be the more conspicuous by his fall? (as Lucifer's that fell was) or for other reasons of state, and ends of Government best known to his Majesty? must Titus' Oats, and others of his Fraternity immediately fall to making an Idol of this Chancellor, by worshipping of him? when his Majesty saw this, and that the people fell a bowing to him, and he again to the people; and that they mutually worshipped one another; 'twas high time, His Majesty thought, to break this Idol of a Chancellor in pieces, or rather, by throwing him down to the bottom of contempt, to make him burst in sunder with discontent. In relation to whom, all that I have to add farther, is hearty to wish that, since a double portion of his unquiet spirit still rests among the Faction, the curse, which befell him, may likewise befall them; and that the envy, which the Faction have at the prosperity of His Majesty's late good success in his proceed, may be the rottenness of their bones, as the like envy in him was the rottenness of his.  
As to your sixth Quere, wherein you ask the Observator, Who that Trimmer was, who being judicially interrogated about somebodies receiving the Sacrament, and after several interrogatories, replied that it was sitting, but very decently? I have nothing more to say, but only to tell you, that since you boast of those vast numbers, you have brought to the Sacrament, and of their exact Conformity to the Orders of the Church in their receiving of it; I desire to know of you, whether to gain a Proselyte to the Church, you never did in that particular break the Orders of it? that is, never administer the Sacrament to any, that could kneel, in any other posture than that of kneeling? now if, by the Oath you have taken not to administer it otherwise, you will tell me, that you are ready at any time to take the Sacrament on it, that you never did; you shall then be discharged from all suspicion of being the above mentioned Trimmer: but till I know, that you are ready to purge yourself after this manner, you will shrewdly be suspected, either to be that individual Trimmer, or at least one of his Fraternity.  
In your last Quere to thc Observator, you ask him, whether it were not more advisable, that, for the future, he should suffer those to live in quiet, who are no less loyal, but far more peaceable than himself? To which I answer, that this is nothing else, but to beg the question; by taking it for granted, that he has not done, what you say is most advisable: but let one single instance be produced to the contrary; and I'll undertake for him for the future, that he shall take your advice. Wherefore, since you tell us, that no good man will ever think, that Rebels or Disturbers of the Government can be too severely lashed by his pen; let me desire you for the future, not to be so sensible of the smart, when you find them lashed by it. And thus I have answered the several questions, proposed by you to the Observator, and might now therefore, take leave of your Reply to him; but that I there find some other little things objected against him; the first whereof, is his profanely entituling one of his Papers, An Edifying Discourse concerning bearing one another's Burdens; now, how come your discourses to be so sacred, that the Observator cannot use one of them for his Title-page without profanation of it? Again, another objection against him, is, that his Papers are commonly read by a sort of men, who take occasion from them to revile and censure any whom they dislike; and that thereby very innocent persons greatly suffer in their reputation. Now supposing this true; are his Papers one jot the worse, because some men by misapplying them, abuse and make an ill use of them? no man sure, will say they are: for then the Scriptures themselves, the very best of Writings, may be impeached, as well as his; for these likewise are read by a sort of men, who take occasion from them to censure the worship of the best Established Church in the whole World, and to revile and vilify the discipline and Government thereof: but now the Scriptures surely are herein no ways , nor is the ill use, that some men make of them, to be in any wife charged upon them, any more, than it is to be charged upon the wine, that some men are so wicked, as to debauch themselves and others with it. So that you see, innocent persons may be traduced by means of the Observator's Papers, and yet the Observator's Papers, be all that while very innocent of the abuse of them. Again, you tell us farther, that there are some, who have suffered by his pen, who yet have been very kind to his purse: but what is this, but to tell us, that the Observator is no Mercenary Scribbler? none, that may be bribed to write in favour of any man, who is not as hearty a lover of the King, and as true a Friend to the Government, as himself is: but as for all such, as are so; let them be but once known to him, and whether they are kind to his purse, or no, I'll undertake that he shall be so to them. Others again you tell us of, who, to your knowledge, have had a great honour for his Name and Family, and yet have been traduced by him: now here again, I must undertake for him, and tell you, that if there be any such, as you speak of, and who likewise have a just esteem for him upon the account of his steady and unshaken loyalty to his Prince, (which, to the immortal honour of his Name, ought never to be forgotten) and yet have suffered from his pen, or been traduced by it; he shall, not only hearty beg their pardon for it, but shall for the future, court their friendship; and have the same honour and esteem for them, which they have for him.  
And now, you having thus let fly at the Observator, and discharged yourself of all your rancour and malice against him, (but with no better success than one that lets off a Gun, which by reason of the foulness thereof, recoils upon himself) you tell us in the conclusion of your Reply, that you hope he will, e'er long, either be persuaded, or commanded to forbear his publications; are at least leave Ecclesiastical matters and persons to whom they belong. In answer to which, all that I have to say, is; that since he meddles with nothing either in Church or State, but what the interest of both obliges him to meddle with; none that wish well to either, will hope as you do; but rather believe that it were Zions and Jerusalem's interest (for whose sake you tell us you cannot be silent) that such as you were put to silence. And whereas you tell us, that you doubt not but in a short time, many Dissenters will understand their errors and become lovers of the Church; give me leave to tell you, that I hope many in a much shorter time, will understand the Dissenters themselves, and be not only true lovers of the Church and State, but of the Observator likewise for the sake of both; whose interest he has all along so hearty embraced and maintained, and in the defence thereof has bravely stemmed the torrent of a most violent and impetuous Faction, and stood the shock of a turbulent and rolling multitude; outvying, as it were, hereby the immoveableness of the rock itself: in as much as the madness of the people (the rage whereof he has born the violence of) is more boisterous and raging, than is the Wind and Waves. Hereby likewise, making up the character of Horace's just and upright man; who stands so immovably fixed in his station, as not to be thrown from it, although the Orbs themselves crack and fly in pieces about his Ears.  
And thus having done with your Reply, and vindicated the Observator from the malicious calumny of it; I come now to make some brief reflection on your Sermon annexed to it; and here indeed to deal ingenuously with you (which is that which in your Preface to the Reader you desire of him) 'tis not the plainness of it, which I dislike in it; but that spirit of Phanaticism, which it savours of, and which runs through the whole of it. But the Sermon, you say, shall speak for itself; and so it does; and says just as much for itself, as you do for yours: that is, it plainly tells us, to what party it belongs; and who they are it is designed for the service of. Whatever Discourses therefore of this kind, you publish in your own Vindication, will to every impartial Reader, appear no other, than so many several Parts to the same Tune of Trimming. Wherefore instead of making any particular animadversions on your Sermon, I shall make this general one for all; that it is a piece calculated for the Meridian of the Faction of London and Middlesex, but may without any sensible alteration, indifferently serve for any Conventicle of this Kingdom whatsoever: of the justice of which reflection I leave every impartial Reader to judge; and you to think as you please of,  
SIR, Your, etc.  
FINIS.