A REPLY TO AN ANSWER TO THE City-Minister's Letter FROM HIS COUNTRY FRIEND. WHat! more Letters still? Yes, one more, 'tis but common Civility, when the City-Minister sends to his Friend in the Country, that the Country-Parson should answer the City-Minister again, else it would be said, That the Country-Parsons are Country-Parsons indeed, and have no Manners. They were not true Church of England-Men without the Performance of due Ceremonies: A most kind Correspondence, a most harmonious Agreement! The City-mouse sends to the Country-Mouse, & the Country-mouse sends to the City-Mouse again. Nevertheless, these Sham-letters from Friend to Friend, for as such they must be looked upon, show such a vicious Humour of Writing, that the Author must needs be thought to be troubled with a violent Itch of scribbling. And what is all this for, but to Infect the People, not with their Itch of scribbling, but with the leprosy of their Obstinacy and Disobedience, and to make their Flocks as Scabby as themselves? These City and Country-Ministers see the Grandees of their Coat grow Popular and Gracious in the Eyes of the Mobile; and therefore now's the Time, they cry; our Dagon of Ecclesiastical pre-eminence is falling, the Philistines are like to seize the Ark of our Worldly Glory; and therefore help Mobile, now or never. And this Sultry Heat of Passion and Self-Interest it is that produces these Caterpillars and Locusts of Letters and Answers, that Prey upon the Blooming Fruits of Royal Industry to settle us in Peace and tranquillity. Among the rest is come forth, a Discontented Sheet of Paper, called, An Answer to the City-Minister's Letter, from his Country Friend; which runs thus. ANSWER. SIR, It is not for me now to aclowledge my private Debt to you for the Favour of your Letter, since the public is as much concerned in it as I; and if I may may judge of all, by the compass of my Neighbourhood and Acquaintance, I may assure you, They are not Insensible of your Obligation, though they are ignorant of the Author. REPLY. Here is Moral Justice, Thanks for the Letter, and the Proverb fulfilled to boot, Graculus graculo assidet; Like will to like, quoth the Devil to the Collier. Had the Country-Parson done less, the City-Minister must have been very angry; for it was out of Respect that he sent to his Friend in the Country, and had his Friend failed him this Basket full of Praises by the return of the next Carrier, he had done amiss: And surely the Citiz Incognito, must be strangely tickled, to hear that his Pamphlet took so among the Neighbourhood Here's the Mischief of it, That upon this Encouragement, there will be a Reply to this Answer, and a rejoinder to that, and a Sur-rejoynder to that again, and so there will be no end of these Disturbing shame Letters, as long as there is but a Private Press in London to divulge them. But here is not only a Present of Thanks, but a Wisp of fresh News too, out of the Country; more of the History of the Declaration: For says the Answerer, ANSWER. The Country, as far as my Intelligence reaches, has followed the Example of the City, and refused to red the Declaration of Indulgence, according to a certain Order, said to be the Kings, which we in the Country can scarce believe to be his; for it has neither been signified to the Ordinaries, according to the usual manner; nor could those that dispersed it give any account whence it came to them. I have heard indeed, That an Act of Council, concerning it, has been published in the Gazette; which I never saw, and if I had, I should scarce have thought authentic: For I always took that Paper, as for its Authority, to have been all of a Piece, and that we were no more bound to take notice of any Order published there, under any Penalty, than we are to believe all the News from Poland or Constantinople: Nay, though this Order had come to us in due Form, yet had we had great reason to suspect something of Surreption and surprise upon his Majesty in this matter, and that it could not proceed from his Majesties Free and Full Consent; for we cannot yet forget his repeated Professions of Kindness to us, and of Satisfaction in our Principles and Duty; and having done nothing since which might Forfeit his good Opinion; we are unwilling to believe, That it is his Majesties own Mind and Pleasure to Load us with such an Order, as we cannot execute with any Congruity, Safety, or Good Conscience. REPLY. Here is another Proverb fulfilled, Birds of a Feather will hang together. There was never any Contagion in the City, but it spread itself far into the Country: But why the Answerer should take such an Occasion as this, to quarrel with the Gazette, to spoil the Communication of the Gentlemen, in the Country Ale and Coffee-houses, since it is one of the greatest Divertisements of the Country-Parsons themselves, is very strange. There is no Body thinks they were so highly obliged to Credit the Gazette; however, the Order itself was affixed to the Declaration, and that they ought to have believed. But their Ordinaries would not sand them abroad, and so they were both agreed, the one not to Dispense them, and the other not to receive them, which no way excuses, but rather heightens the Act of Refractory Disobedience. But these Thomas's are so far from Believing the Gazette, that they will not Believe the King's Order itself: They have no Faith in By the Kings most Excellent Majesty, and the Lords of His most Honourable Privy Council; but tax the one with surprising, and the other with being surprised, which is to tax the Council with Collusion, and the King of a Haughty and Undecent Piece of Arrogance, which none but Persons of the Answerers Temper durst ever have aspired to: An Insolence beyond that of the Giants themselves, thus to Assail the very Heaven itself of sovereignty and Majesty. As if his Majesty did not Consult and Know what was Congruous, Safe and Proper for such a Lettermonger's Conscience as this, as well as himself. And now he comes to the Point, and proudly advancing his Reasons above the Kings, positively tells the World, That his Party cannot execute the Order with any Congruity, Safety or Good Conscience, For, ANSWER. I. As to his Majesties Declaration, We of all His Majesties Subjects are the least concerned in it; and with all Duty be it spoken, we cannot see, that our Legal Establishment receives any Addition by this Declaration. For there are yet, Thanks be to God, no Penal Laws to which our Congregations are obnoxious, and therefore we do not stand in need of any Toleration; yet it is upon Us only that the Reading of it is imposed. An Act which cannot well be Construed otherwise, than as a soliciting and tempting our own People to forsake our Communion. If this Declaration must needs be red in any Religious Assemblies, in reason surely it should be in those that wholly owe their Subsistence to it. It would better have become the Roman than uhe Protestant chapels. But in the Roman Church, Indulgence hath another signification; and belongs to those only that frequent their Churches, but not to such as believe them: For with them this is the only Sin that is not capable of Indulgence; but the Priests desire to be excused, lest while they proclaim Toleration to Others, they bring an Interdict upon Themselves. Or why, I pray, was not Father Pen ordered to Publish it in his Meetings? Or the worthy Mr. job, the reputed Father of this Project, why had not He the benefit of his own Invention, and a Patent for being the sole Publisher of it within his own Pound? Or why was not my Lord Mayors Private and Elect Congregation thought worthy of so great a Grace? Surely it is not to draw upon us the Envyy of the Dissenters, that the Honour of publishing this Declaration is imposed upon Us alone, when it belongs to all other Communions in the Kingdom except our own; and if we refuse it, I hope it will be imputed to our Modesty; for we are not ambitious of being Impertinent, or busy-bodies in other Mens Matters. REPLY. There is no weight at all to be laid upon this Argument, either seemingly or really. For if the King be Master of his own Kingdom, and his own Subjects, he may Order his Declarations to be red where he pleases. Are not they sole Opposers of the King's Conscience? Are not all the Churches and chapels of the Kingdom in their Possession, which of Primary Right belong to the King? Or else why do they pay him Tribute of their First Fruits? And why then may not the King order his own Declarations to be red in his own Churches and chapels, to the end that their Congregations as well as other Assemblies may be made sensible of his Majesty's universal Clemency and Kindness to all his Subjects? Not as Trapans, to tempt the People to forsake the Communion of the Church of England, which is but a groundless and scandalous Insinuation of the Answerer. And whereas he says, the Church of England-Men are no way concerned in the Toleration, so much the more reason have they to be thankful for the Enjoyment of their Liberty, and to testify their Gratitude, by Reading in their Churches those Orders which the King Commands to be red; the Refusal of which is a flat Contempt of Royal Authority, and savours rather of Slight and Privacy, then of good Conscience. So that the Answerer might have spared his reflections upon Mr. Pen and Mr. job, and the Lord Mayor's Select Congregation, which do but show the malice of the Answerer's Heart; and the grudge he bears to the Indulgence which they enjoy under the favour of Royal Protection. He comes now to a Story, and tells us; That ANSWER. A certain Person, much Greater than he deserves, but perhaps not so High, is said to have used the Words of Rabshaketh upon this occasion, That the Church of England Clergy should Eat their own Dung, Isa. 36.12. This Sentence might better have become a Messenger of the King of Assyria, than a pretended counselor of our own Prince, though some make a Question to which King he belongs; but God be thanked we are not yet so straightly besieged, as to be reduced to that Extremity; and though by the permission of God we should be reduced to so miserable a Condition, we should, I hope, by the Grace of God, be content to endure that and worse Extremities, if possible, rather than Betray or Surrender the City of God. But before that comes, it is possible that the Throat that belched out this nasty Insolence, may be stopped with something which it cannot swallow. REPLY. As for this Tale of a Tub, or story of a Great Person, which he likens to a Messenger to the King of Assyria; other Men have as little reason to give credit to it, as he has to believe the News from Poland or Constantinople, in the Gazette. But whether true or false, they were only Words; not worse than the late actual Persecution of the Dissenters, which was very near reducing many of those People to the same Necessity, by Impoverishing Fines, and Starving Imprisonments. From this story the Answerer proceeds to his Second Reason, in these Words, ANSWER. II. Besides there are some Passages in the Declaration, which in Conscience we cannot red to our People, though it be in the King's Name; for among others, we are to red these words, We cannot but hearty wish, as will easily be believed, that all the People of our Dominions were Members of the catholic Church. Our People know too well the English of this, and could not but be strangely surprised to hear us tell them, That it would be an Acceptable thing to the King, that they should leave the Truth and our Communion, and turn Papist. The Wish of a King when solemnly Declared, is no light insignificant thing, but has real influence and effect upon the Minds of Men. It was but a Wish of Henry the Second that cut off Thomas Becket, then Archbishop of Canterbury. Councils and Courts of Justice too often bend to a King's Wishss, though against their own Inclinations, as well as against their Rule: And can we imagine that they can have no force at all upon the Common People; therefore we cannot in Conscience pronounce these words in the Ears of the People, whose Souls are committed to our Charge. For we should hereby lay a Snare before them, and become their Tempters, instead of being their instructors; and in very fair and reasonable Construction, we shall be understood to solicit them to apostasy, to leave the Truth of the Gospel, for Fables and the Mistakes of Men: A reasonable and decent Worship for Superstition and Idolatry; a true Christian Liberty for the most intolerable Bondage both of Soul and Body. If any will forsake our doctrine and Fellow-Worship, which yet is not ours, but Christ's, at their own peril be it: But as for us, we are resolved, by the Grace of God, to lay no Stumbling-block in their way, nor to be accessary to their ruin, that we may be able to declare our integrity with St. Paul, That we are pure from the blood of all men. REPEY. Here is a notable Comment, as the Answerer believes, upon the King's hearty Wish. And yet if it be that they themselves are what they call themselves, the Catholck Church, certainly the King may be thought to wish on their side, That all the People of his Dominions were of their Opinion. But the Answerer has dived deep into the King's meaning, and interprets catholic Church to be turning Papists. Though grant it were so; yet when a Person is fully persuaded of the Truth of the Religion which he professes, and believes in Conscience that he is in the Right, it is a usual thing for such to wish that others were of their Persuasion: And yet the Wish of Princes never made such a Conversion as the Answer to the City-Minister's Letter dreads, upon the idlest Surmises in the World. Because the Wish of a King cut off Archbishop Becket, therefore the King's Wishing, will make the People turn Papists. And therefore the Reading of the King's Wish, is an Aloes Pill which they cannot swallow, not knowing what Influence it may have upon their Congregations. What greater Disparagement can there be to the laborious Preaching of the Churchmen of England, that the People should be so ill grounded in their Principles, and so wavering and unstable in their Faith, as to be wished out of their Religion? This is a Surmise so idle, and a Fear so voided of sense, that the Answerer may seem to have borrowed this Argument from the Table of Fortunatus's Wishing-Cap. But there is another Passage in the Declaration puts the Answerer into a great Sweat. For says he, ANSWERER. III. In the next place we are to declare in the Kings Name, That from henceforth the Execution of all, and all manner of Penal Laws, in matters Ecclesiastical, for not coming to Church, or not receiving the Sacrament, or for any other Nonconformity to the Religion established, or for, or by reason of the Exercise of Religion in any manner whatsoever, be immediately Suspended, and the further Execution of the said Penal Laws, and every of them, is hereby Suspended. What! All, and all manner of Laws inmatters Ecclesiastical? What the Laws against Fornication, Adultery, Incest? for these are in Ecclesiastical matters. What! All Laws against Blasphemy profaneness, open derision of Christian Religion? Yet these crimes are punishable by no other Laws here than such as have been made in favour of the Established Religion: How shall the Lords day be observed? What shall hinder covetous men to Plow and Cart, and follow their several Trades upon that day? since all the Laws, that secure this observance, and outward countenance of respect to the Christian Religion, are by this general expression laid aside. REPLY. Heaven's bless us! What a Din and Noise is here about the word All, and All to no purpose. For the People are to understand, that the signification of All Penal Laws in Matters Ecclesiastical is restrained, to the Exercise of separate Worship in Matters of Religion. The Abolition of which Laws does not give the least Liberty to Fornication, Adultery, Incest, Blasphemy, or Breach of Sabbath, as the Answerer so vainly and with so much out-cry pretends. For all these misdemeanours are punished as well by Statutes of the Common Law, as by the Ecclesiastical Courts. And therefore all these Exclamations are merely scar Crows set up against Reading the Declaration. Arguments distilled out of the Answerers Brain, by the chemistry of his burning Zeal for beloved Ecclesiastical Tyranny; since there is not so much as one Law that is in force to secure the Observance of Divine Worship, or outward Countenance of Respect to Religion, laid aside by this General Expression. Besides that, all new Laws explain themselves, and secure what they would not have repealed by all the necessary Proviso's imaginable; and this no Question but the Act for a General Toleration would do, whenever it came out. And therefore the same Advice may be given to the Answerer, which Ovid gives his Friend that was afraid of his own Shadow. Desine mitem animum vano infamare timore Saeva quid in placidis Saxa mereris aquis. But the Answerer has found out more Choak-Pears still. For says he, ANSWER. Besides these words, for not coming to Church, or not receiving the Sacrament, or for any other Nonconformity to the religion Established, cannot in Conscience be red by us in our Churches, because they may be a temptation to young unguided people to neglect all manner of Religious Worship, and give them occasion of depriving themselves of such opportunities of grace and salvation, as these Penal Laws did often oblige them to use. For being discharged attendance on our Service, they are left at liberty to be of any Religion or none at all: Nay Christian Riligion is by these general terms left at discretion, as well as the Church of England. For men may forsake us to become Jews or Mahometans, or Pagan Idolaters, as well as to be Papists or Dissenters, for any care taken in this Declartion to prevent it. And even of such as pretend to be Christians, there either are or may be such Blasphemous Sects, so dishonourable to our Common Lord and Master, as are incapable of all public encouragement and allowance; for that would involve the Government in the Imputation of those Blasphemies, and the whole Nation in that curse and vengeance of God, which such provocations may extort. Wherefore it is not out of any unreasonable opinion of ourselves, nor disaffection to Protestant Dissenters that refuse to publish this Indulgence, but out of a tender care of the Souls committed to us, especially those of the weaker sort, to whom we dare not propose an Invitation to Popery, and much less any thing that may give countenance or encouragement to Irreligion. It is said indeed, that we are not required to Approve, but to red it: To this, Sir, you have very well answered, That Reading was Teaching it; or if it be not so absolutely in the nature of the thing; yet in common Construction, I am afraid it would have been so understood. But we do not stand in need of this Excuse, for if there be any Passages in it, that are plain Temptations to Popery or Licentiousness; it cannot consist with our Duty either to God or the Church to red them before our People. REPLY. The Remainder of this Paragraph rests upon false Consequences and wrong Conclusions. For the words, for not coming to Church, or not receiving the Sacrament, or for any other Nonconformity to the Religion Established, is no temptation to young unguided People to neglect all manner of Religious Worship. Nor does the discharge of their Attendance on the Service of the Church of England, leave them at liberty to be of no Religion at all; as if there were no way to Heaven but the Church of England Road. For the Abolition of the Penal Laws does not design the Allowance of Licentious Atheism, but Christian Liberty. For tho' the words of the Declaration are General, they only refer to a future Act, which the Answerer may be sure will be more exactly and particulary penned. And indeed Duty and Respect to his Prince, would have taught the Answerer more Manners, than thus all along to build the feeble Structure of his Fears and Jealousies upon the general Terms of the King's Declaration, loaded with Mis-construction, and taken in an ill Sense; more especially since they admit so easily a more candid and sincere Interpretation; and that indeed it is a mere piece of Folly, if not worse, to think that His Majesty by his Indulgence intended to set open a Gate for Licence of Irreligion. Nor is it only Unmannerly but Disingenious, to put the Kings Declaration thus upon the Rack, on purpose to extort from it a Confession of Crimes, which was never intended, nor ever so much as dreamed of. Besides, the disparagement it brings to that which would be thought the choicest of the Protestant Churches, as if it had abandoned the Pillars of sound doctrine, to lean upon the feeble Supports of Spiritual Tyranny and Penal Laws. So that the refusing to red the King's Declaration, can never be thought such a Zealous Care of Souls, as the Answerer pretends, but a Zealous Agony to pull down one Pope, and set up in his room as many Popes as there are Parish-Churches in the Kingdom. ANSWER. As for the Dispensing Power, and the Oaths and Tests required to qualify Men for Offices Military and Civil, I must leave them to the Consideration of those who are nearer concerned, and therefore reasonably presumed to understand them better. Nor do I envy his Majesty the use of his Popish Subjects, though I do not know what Service they may be capable of doing more than other Men. This Nation has for some Time made hard Shift to subsist without much of their aid, and against the Wills of several of them: But now they are become the only necessary Men, and seem to want nothing but Number to fill all Places Military and Civil in the Kingdom; in the mean Time, the Odiousness of their Persons, and the Insolence of their Behaviour, with their way of Menacing of Strange things, makes some Abatement of the Merit of their Service. REPLY. As for what the Answerer here leaves to the Consideration of those that are nearer concerned, there needs no further Replication to it. And for his granting his Majesty so kindly, the use of his Subjects, let them thank him, that are most, nearly obliged. However, he has given them such a Brand with his Pen, by the Character bestowed upon them of Odious, Insolent, and Menacers of Strange Things, as lays a terrible Censure upon the Choice of their Persons: Which shows him to have wrote his Answer in Heat of Blood, without either Charity or common Civility: And when all comes to all, deserves no other Answer, Than that of Clodius accusat Moechos. But now he comes to his Conclusion. ANSWER. Lastly, The Respect which we have for his Majesties Service, will not permit us to red the Appendix to the Declaration: Where the Flower of the Nobility and Gentry of this Kingdom are something hardly reflected on, as Persons that will not contribute to the Peace and Honour of the Nation; because they would not consent to the Taking away the Laws against Papists, that they may be put into a Condition to give us Laws. The Persons here reflected on, we know to be the Chief for Ability, and Interest, and Inclination to serve the King, and therefore cannot do his Majesty that Disservice as to be Publishers of their Disgrace, and make ourselves the Instruments of alienating from His Majesty the Affections of his best Subjects. Nay, we find in ourselves a strange Difficulty to believe that this could come from His Majesty, who has Experienced their Faithfulness upon so many and Pressing Occasions. This could not well proceed from any but a Stranger to those Honourable Persons, and the Nation, and a greater Stranger to shane and Good Manners; and what have We to do to Publish the Venom and Virulency of a Jesuit? REPLY. A very respectful Conclusion truly; to quarrel with the Appendix to the Declaration, which whosoever reads, must certainly aclowledge, that never any thing was said with more Glory, or a more studious and solemn Care of the public Weal. And yet this Country person, according to his usual Way of Mis-construction, will have it to be a hard Reflection upon the Nobility and Gentry of the Kingdom, As Persons that will not contribute to the Peace and Honour of the Nation; and this he calls, the Venom and Virulency of a jesuit, So Virulently does this same Country Sophister flatter the Nobility and Gentry at the expense of Royal Reputation. But such false Glosses upon the Royal Text as these, are too Plain and Notorious to prevail upon the Judgments of the Nobility and Gentry of this Kingdom, who will sooner believe the candid Expressions of their sovereign than the wrested Fictions of a Country Expositor. Allowed of, June 27. 1688. London Printed for W. M. MDCLXXXVIII.