THE Dissenting Casuist: OR, THE SECOND PART OF A DIALOGUE BETWEEN PREJUDICE, a Dissenting Country Gentleman, AND REASON, a Student in the University. BEING I A clear Justification of the Execution of the Laws against Dissenters. II. A Comparison of the Arguments on both sides concerning Monarchy in general. III. Concerning an Elective Kingdom, or whether a Lawful Successor or true Heir upon any Misdemeanours may be excluded. Saepe etiam Stultus opportuna loquitur. LONDON, Printed for T. Sawbridge, at the Three Flower de Luce's in Little Britain. 1682. TO THE READER. THE first Part of this Dialogue (being not above three Sheets) was designed only by way of Preface to this; I being forced to dig upon Rubbish, before I could come to their Mine of Gold: but really if you are impartial, you will conclude with me, that this is mere Rubbish too. If in the first Part they were represented as gross Fools, they must thank themselves for it, not me. If people talk idly, I cannot help it: I am sure if you will take the pains to keep them company, you may hear the same every day. But Ugliness does not care to have its Picture drawn. I am no common Pamphlettier, neither do I at all delight in it; being very well satisfied in my Conscience, that the Works of our Tribe will never be sent to Foreign Courts, or translated into another Language: I believe it is with most of them as it is with the Poets, they first get the Itch of writing in their Fingers, (being perhaps an Infection from the Pen they hold) and then it presently spreads over their whole Bodies, so that they can never be at quiet till they are scratching upon Paper. My design is only for the good of my Country; but if I signify but little toward it, my Zele and Loyalty will be commended. This Discourse is not leveled against any particular man, but against all their Arguments that have been, are at present, or are to come; and that is a bold word you will say, but read and judge. I have engaged with their Champions, condescended to the little ones, and resolving (as much as in me lieth) to clear the Country of all sorts of Vermin, I have dived into Stews, Haylofts, and Boghouses. If I have not been very exact in my Quotations on the Margin, I suppose every Author can find his own words out. I am sure I have not abused or misinterpreted his Assertions. Pardon pray the Printers Errata, and I am Your very Humble Servant, T. W. June 20. 1682. The Dissenting CASUIST: OR, The Second Part of a Dialogue between Prejudice a Dissenting Country Gentleman, and Reason a Student in the University, etc. Prej. Come, Sir, I am desirous of entering into a second Discourse with you; the Distraction of the Times makes me thoughtful, so that I find I am forced by my Conscience and good Nature to raise up as many Arguments as is fit and convenient for a man in my mean capacity. I keep several Persons in pay, sending them out to Taverns, Coffeehouses, etc. to see if there is any thing more to be gleaned and pic'kd up towards the maintenance of our Cause, and the heartening on of the Righteous, that they may not have reason to say, they are weary of these * Sh—— Sh—— te Carrying on. And truly I think myself as Loyal as he that keeps a Regiment of Soldiers at his own charge, and is hourly at his Majesty's Service. Well then, first, I say you Crape Gownsmen are rank Papists, downright Devils, though you hid your cloven Feet, though for the present you are pleased to put on the Garments of the Angels of Light. Your Pride, Ambition, Covetousness, etc. show that you are possessed. The Restauration of the Abbey Lands, and the pretended Riches of the Church, Cardinal's Caps, etc. the dear embraces of the gaudy painted Whore, are the Objects of your furious and extravagant Loyalty. Your Covetousness is so great, and * A Scandalous Libel called Speculum Crape-Gownorum Part. 2. there is such a vumerous Fry of you, that hunger and thirst after Maintenance, and so few bones in the Nation, that you snarl at all who do but pretend to share with you. We may easily discern whether the Good Pious Nonconformist Ministers, or the Priests of Baal, are the truest Levites, or the chosen of the Lord; the Actions of the former being wholly, and without the consideration of worldly Gain, directed to the Spiritual edification and recovery of Souls, to the preaching of the Lord Christ, etc. whereas the Zeal and Divinity of the latter must never mount or fly abroad, unless it be upon Wings that are adorned with silver and golden Feathers, unless for every Scripture Sentence so much Money is paid down as may recover the Preachers Spirits, render him in good Plight, that he may come up with the greater Assurance and Eagerness the next Week. Reas. I do not understand what you mean by all this Ribble Rabble, unless (that in your Judgement) 'tis a thing unbecoming and irreligious, that our Ministers do not preach, and perform their Spiritual Offices in any place, without a Promised Maintenance and Salary, or without Respect to things that are sordid and temporal. I am very far different from this Opinion, or do in no wise think it unbecoming, or that a care for a competency of living deserves the Epithet of Sordid. We know that men's Minds are now grown more carnal and sensual than ever, that really Christ's Kingdom is not of this World, nor in the Hearts of worldly men; that " Interest and Riches is the only God adored here, that the Man that can show a good Face, and an Acquittance for so much Money, shall gain more Respect and Honour than Virtue itself if she be naked. Alas! we have very few Philosophers amongst us that will admire Wisdom in her Rags. A Knavish Mahomet if he sets in a Throne shall gain more Followers than a True Christ if he once lay in a Manger. Men will scarce be convinced by the Doctrine of that Person who does owe him Money, or who is beholding to him for his Bread. 'Tis very requisite, yea and necessary, that they should be endowed with the greatest Plenty both of Riches and Honour; First, because as I told you, it gains them a greater Respect from their Auditors, who on this Consideration will more easily yield up their Hearts and Attention. Secondly, because there will be greater Encouragements, where they may not be liable to ill Fortune, and the Crosses and many Accidents of the World, or have their Studies interrupted, or that glorious design of making men eternally happy, swallowed up in Poverty. We often see what Authority the Presence of a Bishop has over his vast Congregation; whilst perhaps the Poor Curate is attended only by a few serving Maids, and very drowzily harkened to, though perhaps his Doctrine may be the same, or every whit as good. In my small reading I have found that heretofore * Justin. Idem fuit Rex & Sacerdos, and that many like Aaron have almost went hand in hand with the Moses or supreme Magistrate. I would not have you think by any means, that I am willing they should be encouraged to Luxury, or an ignoble Ease, or be pampered in any Vice; for, I suppose all this while if they should not have the discretion to manage themselves according to the strict Rules of Morality and Christianity, that there is a King and a Power above 'em, that will see they shall be otherwise disposed of. If men were truly judicious, and would respect them merely for their Function, there would be no need of these external Daub to set them off, none of these gildings on our Altars. Prejud. Methinks they should be contented with the Spec. Crap. p. 6. Tithes of Unity, Love, and Charity. Reas. Yes, if men would give it them, I am sure they would then rejoice as much in Self-denial and Want, (although I suppose a Self-denial in their Affluence too) and think themselves as great as they possibly could in all their Glories. I am sure you will not think I can have any other design than to speak my Judgement and Opinion. I am ashamed to see a reverend grey-headed man, profound in Learning, exact in Morality and purest Piety, after many years' toil and labour, become only a Chaplain to a toyish Lord; and then to be thrust up in a Garret, set at the lower end of the Table, rise at second course, and be thought only fit company for the Steward and Butler. I confess it might be more pardonable thus to use a young, raw, slovenly Fellow, who has crept into the Clergy unawares, whose mean Education and Dulness may somewhat deserve this; yet methinks they should not choose a person, whose Office is so sacred, for Formality sake, or that they may have occasion sometime or other to deride him. The Superciliousness of these Patrons make the Clergy so much despised, and the name of Parson to become so scandalous. They do it that they may be more securely debauched, and exalt themselves thus, that it may be thought impudence in the Fellow that says Grace to advise or recall them. Their wiser Ancestors did think it Preferment and Honour to enter into that Sacred Office; whereas these being foolishly ashamed of it, make us guilty of Jeroboams sin, and for the 1 Kings 13. 33. most part force us to take in the meanest of the People. If you would throughly weigh these things, you would be far from having them stripped of what they have, or that they should follow the pretended self-denial of the Saints, but that rather they should be higher advanced and honoured. Prejud. This Courtier-like way of yours, in standing upon these Punctilios Honour, this impatiency of Affronts, shows that your Minds are tied to your carnal Hearts, that Honour and Preferment is your only aim. The meekness of our Brethren, their Philosophical neglect of the World, will teach and instruct you otherwise. They think themselves as Servants to all, and know that by being the least, they do become the greatest; that if they themselves do not provide Scrip and Shoes, it will be provided for them. Reas. Apology for Ninconformist Ministry. I understand you cannot or will not see so far as other men. Mr. Baxter very proudly tells you, he refused a Bishopric, and confesseth he hath so good natured and so kind a Flock already under him, who allowed him a very competent and large Maintenance. They are for pulling down Bishoprics, and for dividing Inheritances, that all of them, who are now excluded as Rebels and Traitors, may then come in for a share. Their sin of separating from us, as I shall prove to you anon, is wilful and devilish; Ibid. and if so, according to their own Confession, common Drunkards, Swearers, Fornicators, are rather to be tolerated in a Commonwealth. Do you think that these have the spirit of meekness in them, or the least spark of true Piety, who fly in the faces of the King's Officers, when they come to disturb their seditious and disloyal Meetings; contend with them as if 'twas their Inheritance, openly defy Heaven and the Ordinance of an Onipotent God? " Not but that an Ass resisteth his Master as much by standing still or running back, as if he had kicked at him. If their Conscience tells them they must needs preach, and by no means hid their Talon, if dispensing the Word is their only aim, let them go and plant the Gospel amongst the Indians, where perhaps there will be no Authority to resist, no commission of such deadly sins. But they object and say, they do not understand their Language, and if they should try at it, they could arrive but half Ibid. way, speak it imperfectly and very disorderly, which would be apt to procure derision and disesteem. What do these deep sanctified holy men start at such trivial things, who profess themselves ready every minute to undergo Imprisonment and Death for the Name of the Lord Jesus? Away, 'tis such nonsense and ill arguing that a Boy may discover it. I believe we must think of a Pensylvania for them too, and ship them off by the next fair Wind. I am as much against Persecution as any man; there is no one pitieth the poor Protestants in France more than I do; but I am far from calling the execution of the Laws against our Dissenters Persecution, yea it is a thing necessary and commendable, without which true Piety can never flourish, nor Church and State ever be at quiet. Those in France were called by their King, the meek, the willing, the best Subjects in the world, as if he was sorry his Religion forced him to such hard usage; whereas of our false Protestants it has been long ago declared, that they are a perverse generation, and that for Subjects 'tis impossible to have worse. Believe it Sir, 'tis true as a Good Divine has said before Dr. Sprat Serm. Apr. 20, 82. me, There is scarce any one that adheres to this Party, but either he, or some of his near Relations, have been already forgiven; they carry about with them the black guilt, not only of Rebellion, but of an ungrateful Rebellion after Pardon received: A sin which the Devil himself is not capable of committing. Prejud. Sir, I will not believe one word what you say; but pray did not Peter and Paul preach the Gospel though Baxt. Apol. they were forbidden by the Jews that were in Authority? I tell you, if their Conscience assures them that they are in the right, and that they must preach the Gospel, the Authority of Kings and Emperors to the contrary signifieth nothing: We must obey God rather than Man. Reas. We must obey God in a good cause rather than Man in a bad one; but if we can obey God and Man too, and do not, we are in a very desperate condition. But S. Peter and Paul knew and had assurance from the immediate hand of God, that it was his will that they should preach the Gospel, and that the Commands of the Jews were in no wise to be obeyed. But I cannot see how this Instance pleads for you, who have no such assurance and command to resist Authority. And that you have no such manifest assurance, that you cannot pretend Conscience in this case, that your sin of separating from us is wilful and devilish, and ill natured, as I promised you a little before, I shall come now to prove it. I suppose you are not ignorant that Conscience is divided into three parts. First, into a gainsaying or resolved Conscience. Bishop Sanderson. Secondly, into a scrupulous Conscience. And, Thirdly, into a doubtful Conscience. I mean by a resolved or gainsaying Conscience, a Conscience where there is true grounds, plain and manifest Texts of Scripture to back it on, or plead for it. Now that Dissenters cannot say 'tis out of this Conscience they resist, that they cannot show any true grounds, any manifest and plain Texts of Scripture, I shall say no more but appeal to their Writings, and to the whole World, if it be not true; Whether this their grand Reason, We must obey God rather than Man, does determine whether the thing commanded is lawful or not lawful, whether it is enough to make a resolved or gainsaying Conscience, or is any true Argument for their Nonconformity. A scrupulous Conscience is that where the Conscience does incline one way, where it is not fully resolved, and in every particular satisfied, as being built only upon Probabilities. A doubtful Conscience is that where the Scales hang even, without inclining one way or the other, so as the weak and fickle man cannot well resolve which way he should take. Be therefore in either of these the Nonconforming Conscience, why I say the Injunction of Authority does overrule either of them. I will give you advantage in an Example; Suppose a Prince commandeth his Subjects to serve in Ibid. a War that is unjust, where there may appear to the understanding of the Subject great likelihoods of such Injustice; why I say for all this the Subject is bound to fight in this quarrel, nay he is deep in Disloyalty and Treason if he refuse the Service, whatsoever pretensions of Conscience he makes for such a refusal. And this I am confident you yourselves will acknowledge. Neither need he trouble himself that he shall bring the guilt of innocent blood upon his head, for the blood that is unrighteously shed in that Quarrel, he must answer that set him to work, not he that spilt it. And truly it is a great wonder to me, (I speak it without passion) that men that are able to weigh the force of Precepts and Reasons, that bind Inferiors to yield obedience to Superiors, should be so nonsensical and irrational, as to be otherwise minded in our case, which is of the like nature. When there is a certainty and an uncertainty, we must let the uncertainty go, and cleave to that which is certain. The general Rule is certain, that we must obey the Magistrate in all things not contrary to the will of God; but the particular is uncertain, whether Conformity commanded by the Magistrate be contrary to the will of God or no, (I say 'tis uncertain with you, because I suppose you are scrupulous and doubtful of it.) Wherefore I say, if you cleave to an uncertainty before a certainty, persist in Nonconformity, uncertain with you whether lawful, rather than to a certain and positive Command of submitting to Superiors; I say you show yourselves to be wilfully blind, wilfully irrational, your sin to be devilish and ill natured, the Proposition that I was to prove. Good God that the Apostle should command thee positively and plainly to obey for conscience sake, and thou shouldst infer from hence, that thou shouldst disobey for conscience sake too. That you should submit yourselves to 1 Pe. 2. 13, 16. every Ordinance of Man for the Lords sake: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, is the earnest desire of S. Peter and God himself. Prejud. But, Sir, for all your haste; if you affirm that an uncertainty and a thing controvertible, (the Supreme Power determining the case) does find the Subject not to dispute the Authority or his Obedience; I say you are in a mistake. For all those Articles of Faith, as Worshipping Images, Charge of the Tory Plot maintained, p. 4. Transubstantiation, etc. are controvertible, und uncertain, and in dispute between us and the Papists; but though the Authority of Angels should command me to believe and comform to these things, I ought not to do it. Reas. You must understand me in things indifferent in the matter of Ceremonies, and the like, where the Conscience does not gainsay, and is not otherwise resolved. Now that I should not consent to the Worshipping of Images and Transubstantiation, etc. I have clear positive proof, the one being expressly forbidden in the second Commandment, the other in a clear Text of Scripture, and being repugnant to my Senses and common Reason. And this is the sense of the * Mr. L'Estrange. Author, whom the Pamphlettier pretends to bring to an Absurdity, being first pleased to mistake his meaning. Prejud. I have met and read of Arguments, that seem to make it out, that our Dissenting Brethren act in all things according to Divine Truth; that the Execution of the Laws is a downright injury, abominable injustice and persecution. And though I have scraped them out of a scandalous Libel, they seem to be pretty tolerable. First he says, that Spec. Crape. the generality of the Dissenters are good men, and that they fully answer the description of a good man, Psalm 15. that is, they behave themselves dutifully and obediently towards the Civil Magistrate, and justly towards their Neighbours. And though perhaps he cannot justify every individual person, nevertheless he hopes you will not be so imprudent as to throw a whole Quarter of Wheat away, for the mixture of a Peck of Tares. Reas. The whole Body of them resist and murmur at the Authority that commands them to raise their Meetings, and therefore how can you have the impudence to say, they are dutiful and obedient toward the Civil Magistrate? One swears the D. of Y. is a Traitor, that he fired the City, nay that the King himself had a hand in it; makes it his business to undervalue men, and undo them in their Credits, giving out that they are broken and bankrupt, etc. Another that was formerly a Crony to S. Stephen sends B. the Hop-merchant. Hop Poles to be turned into Protestant Flails, drinks to the Memory of a pious Traitor, and nothing but Blood and Wowds if the Company refuses it. Then there is another with a long Chin swears all the Bishops are Papists, and that he in time will strip them of their Lawn Sleeves, and make them look as ridiculous as so many Jack Daws without their Feathers. And here's one that being weary of secret Faction, comes forth boldly, and prosecutes people at Law for Scandalum Magnatum, and then if he thinks he has vexed and tormented them, he will go no further, will let fall his Suit, and for half a minute be at quiet. He grins like a Dog, and in the evening walketh about the City, and like a Lion seeketh whom he may devour. Here is a Company sent to Taverns and Coffee Houses to dispute the case, to blow the Coals with a stronger Breath, and if it be possible to make it flame out. These are to make Bonfires, raise Tumults, and as if it were a perpetual Whitsun Ale, they stop every Passenger, force him to drink a Health to My Lord— and The good old Cause his Lady. And will any one make me believe, that these are not Jugglers, Baxters, and owen's, and Humble Moderators, etc. behind the Curtain, that guide these Puppetae by a secret Spring, and send them dancing into the world? A Conventicle in short is a Nursery for packed Juries, Injustice, and Rebellion; and to invert what you say, a Quarter of Tares, and scarce a Handful of Wheat in it. But if there should be any good men, any Gouges now See the Trial of Char. I. his Judges. alive amongst them, they must far as some of our late Kings foolish Judges, who were only Hearers, and did sit only for Company, but were hanged (though against their wills) for Company too. Prejud. But the man says, they do exercise according to the Liturgy of the Church of England. The Liturgy of the Church of England contains no more Spec. Crape. than only Truth; The Dissenters speak and pray according to Truth: Ergo— The first Proposition you yourselves will grant, for if the Liturgy contains any thing besides Truth, it contains a Lie, etc. which you will never own. And then that the Dissenters preach nothing but Truth, nay the Truth of Truth, Divine Truth all the world will grant. Reas. No, I myself will never grant it. I will show you a Book called The Dissenters Sayings one of these days, where if you don't find their Doctrien to be faithfully collected, and in them cursed Lies, the Lies of Lies, Hollish Lies, I will be contented to take that punishment upon me, which the Dissenters deserve. But as to the Argument, the Author shows he had forgot his Logic at this time; there be two Brethren of it, and very much like it in another Author: If Impotency be a sufficient Tory Plot, p. 15. & 19 cause for dissolving the sacred tie of Marriage, because the main end of Marriage, the propagating Mankind, is thereby frustrated; it may be equally reasonable to debar the D. of Y. the Espousal (a pretty Conceit) of the Government, who is perverted to an utter incapacity of answering the ends of it. Again; If a Papist can exclude (unlawfully) a Protestant, a Protestant may (unlawfully) exclude a Papist. And of another Author, whom I have forgot at present, that would prove the Scripture not to be the Word of God, because the Word was made Flesh: Ergo— This by the by; now to the main point. If the Liturgy contains nothing but Truth, they that speak and pray according to Truth, speak and pray according to the Liturgy. If this Glass contains nothing but Wine, he that drinks up the Wine swallows down the Glass. Look upon your Argument a second time, and tell me if you dare that there is Consequence in it. A man that stands upon Bow Steeple, and repeats the Commandments, that preaches. Christ and him crucified, in Highways and Ditches, speaks and prays according to Truth; yet notwithstanding this person shall be looked upon as irregular and profane, and punished accordingly. In short, the Liturgy of the Church of England is a certain Form and Manner agreed upon by Authority for the better Utterance of the Truth, and therefore he only that acts according to this Form and Manner, comes to Church, etc. does act according to the Liturgy of the Church of England. Prejud. Sir, this is an Argument that we have cherished for these many years, and I am sure 'tis impossible for you to confute it in so short a time as you pretend to do. We lose our Christian Liberty if we must be forced to obey this Form. We lose our Christian Liberty, when by Human Laws things indifferent are determined either the one way or the other: Now Ceremonies and Liturgy are indifferent things, if they were not determined by Authority; And why Ecclesiastical Constitutions should 1 Arg. determine us precisely to one side in the use of indifferent things, which God and Christ have left free, I know no Reason. By inducing a necessity upon the thing they enjoin, 2 Arg. they take upon them to alter the nature of things, and make that to become necessary which is indifferent, which God only can do. It makes these indifferent things of absolute necessity unto 3 Arg. Salvation, forasmuch as it is necessary to Salvation to do that which he is bound in Conscience to do, (and you say we must in Conscience obey Superiors;) so that by this device Surplice, Organs, Kneeling at the Communion, Bowing at the Name of Jesus, etc. are necessary to Salvation. I say, all this is a grand Imposition upon Christian Liberty. Reas. I will answer these Arguments with as much brevity as I can, and abstract from the large Discourse which Bishop Sanderson affords you. To the first Argument I answer, That the determining of any thing in unam partem, taketh not away a man's Liberty. For the Liberty of a Christian to any thing indifferent Bishop Sanderson. consisteth in this, that his Judgement is thoroughly persuaded of the indifferency of it; and therefore 'tis the determination of the Judgement in the Opinion of the thing, not in the Use of it, that taketh away Christian Liberty. For Example: If my Friend invite me to Supper, shall I not promise him to come, because the Liberty I had before to go or not go will be determined by making such a Promise? It is a very vain power and indifferency, that may not be brought into act or actually determined; but God made no power in vain, as is long ago agreed upon both by Philosophers and Divines. To the second Argument I answer, That the nature of the thing enjoined is not changed, but still indifferent; though for some conveniences there is an Order to use them added to that Indifferency. To the third, 'Tis the Obedience that is necessary to Salvation, as being immediately commanded by God, and not the things commanded, for they are still indifferent. A Master commands his Servant to go to Market, or wear a Livery, the Servant is bound in Conscience to obey his Master; but his going to Market, or his wearing a Livery, the things supposed to be commanded, by every one must be concluded to be indifferent, and not at all necessary to Salvation. Prejud. 'Tis Popish to say, Humane Laws bind the Conscience as much as Divine. Reas. The Papists teach this Doctrien not only in respect of the Obedience, but of the things commanded; which we do only in respect of the Obedience. I would desire again, that our Dissenters would consider, whether the pretence of a purer Religion, or the loss of Christian Liberty or Conscience, will excuse them. Corah's Rebellion was upon these pretences, and though he Numb. 6. was not actually in Arms, but did only associate against and separate from the Government, yet God punished him with a most severe death. Again, our Ceremonies and Methods were agreed upon Sir William smith's Speech, De. 5. 1981 by a Parliament, had the consent of both King and People. Which when I have seriously thought on, raised my admiration, how any man can think himself hardly dealt with, when he is required to comply to that, to which he had before consented: or that he should think it reasonable that separate Assemblies or public Conventicles, should be permitted in opposition to the established Government. I cannot understand it otherwise, but that these persons who frequent Conventicles, and give themselves up to be ruled and directed by their Teachers, allow these Teachers both Infallibility and Supremacy; and not only so, but also a Legislative Power, to make what Orders they think fit, which is indeed to lose your Christian Liberty, and to make a Prince and a Pope in every Congregation. Besides, these public Conventicles proclaim our Divisions to the world, discover our weaknesses, and must needs cause a potent neighbouring Prince to cast his Eye upon us, who will not want the suggestions of Ambition and Interest to try his Fortune; and if he should, who can withstand him we being thus divided? Methinks the ill consequences which may be foreseen to arise from such plain demonstrations of a divided Nation, should prevail upon the most tender Conscience, not to be guilty of any thing that brings such certain ruin to his King, Country, and Protestant Religion; especially having Liberty according to Law, to exercise his Religion in his own way, in his own house, with his own family, and an addition under Five more; which indeed is too great a kindness, and more than they will ever deserve? If a Kingdom can be safe, when it has persons in it that Sir William smith's Speech, Apr. 24. 1682. confederate for the mutual assistance of each other, upon all occasions, when they will spare no pains or cost for the advancement of each others Interest, when they scarce trade with any other but themselves, and have no manner of commerce with any of the Church Party, or any Loyal man. If to set up a Commonwealth in a Kingdom is safe, I desire they may enjoy themselves without any further molestation; but if not, if on these accounts, we are in very dangerous conditions, we must apply ourselves to the Remedies, to the due and strict Execution of the Laws to prevent it. You see I don't insist upon old stories of 41, because some of you have been so good or so cunning as to disown them; whatsoever I have mentioned is almost at this very day to be seen. This is the time for Union, now or never; that great Mountain, as you are pleased to term it, and that pretended hindrance, (viz. the Obligation to renounce See the Act of Uniformity. the Solemn League and Covenant) has its end; for it was to cease March 28. 1682. as you may see in the Act of Uniformity. If I be not deceived, Mr. Baxter promised us when that time came, to throw off his Nonconformity, and convince the world that he was naturally meek and peaceable, and that it was not Obstinacy or a blind Prejudice that made him separate from us all this while. I wish he would be as good as his word, and bring his Party with him, that Strife and Janglings, Seditions and Rebellions, might die amongst us; that that Unity might be preserved, which God looks upon to be his greatest Attribute, that Men might not be forced to confess themselves Christans, that those ungrateful and hard Laws might be wholly thrown by, which I am sure the Apostles themselves, if they were alive, and in our Circumstances, would make use of. Prejud. You are extremely out of the way, they are the only Christians in the Nation; Popery had long ago come in upon us, had not their Pious, Godly Zeal opposed it; though you maliciously aver, that it will never prevail, unless it take Presbytery in its hand, unless a Conventicle covers it: but all this while you have spent your Forces against seditious Meetings, against the Persons that separate from the Church, and yet you have as real Enemies that lie unseen in your own Bosoms. As you told me heretofore that there were Popish Tories and Protestant Tories, so I find there are Conventicle whigs and Church whigs; these latter (though conforming to the Ceremonies of the Church, and swallowing down every thing that is given to them) being as averse to the Government as the former. Wherefore, since the bare Execution of the Laws against Conventicles does in no wise reach them, or will stop their Mouths, since you pretend to be so good and skilful in Expedients and Remedies, I desire to be satisfied what your Art and Policy would be pleased to prescribe in this Case. Reas. Truly these are dangerous Enemies, and make us think them to be so, and be the more concerned, because they are of our own Household. I am amazed at a professed Knave, an impudent, barefaced Hypocrite, nay one that tells us himself, though he embraces with one hand, he will stab with the other. It would be looked upon as Injustice and Arbitrary Government, if such a Law was enacted Now, as was heretofore in Rome, hindering private Cabals, restraining all Tavern-Politicians; Sueton. but they must thank themselves, if we fly to the utmost extremity of Justice, rather than suffer ourselves to be basely undone. But since we cannot force them to a compliance, since they are so maliciously wise, and understand themselves so far, as to sin within an hairs breadth of the Law, and come within an inch of Treason, let us try if Arguments will signify any thing with these white and black Traitors, these giddy Republicans, if spreading their Errors before their Eyes will make them see their no-Interest and Folly. We know (that besides their little Cavils and Pecks at See the 1st part of this Dialogue. the Ceremonies and Constitutions of the Church (which we have in our former Discourse vindicated) that their two grand Topics are, whether a Free State (as they call it) or a Commonwealth is not more convenient and more to be desired than Monarchy. And secondly, Whether a Popish Successor, or a Successor that does not please the humour of the People, for certain Misdemeanours, cannot be Excluded? or, (which is almost the same) whether England is not an Elective Kingdom? I shall not be over curious in these Points, or desire the assistance of Cobweb Antiquity to lead me; but whatsoever of Reason or Religion lies in my way I shall unfold it to you, having always thought, that though a Custom is never so ancient, that it derives its Pedigree from Adam, yet if it is discovered to be sinful and inconvenient, that no one is obliged to follow it. Prejud. But to the Point, I say a Commonwealth is more to be desired than Monarchy. I will argue only from the Conveniences of the one, and Inconveniences of the other. 1 Arg. First, Monarchy professes itself accountable to none but God, so that its very Nature is inclined to Tyranny; whereas a Commonwealth is a Government styled by all Politicians, Free. There's Venice and the United Provinces what Wonders have they done! The first having stood a See the Plea against Monarchy, printed in the year 1652. Bulwark for above a thousand years against the Turk; and the latter from her Infancy a Wall to the King of Spain's Enchroachments. 2 Arg. In a Monarchy, its Issue being married to Foreigners, the Crown may be transferred from one Strangers Head to another, whereas in a Commonwealth, we and our children may enjoy it. 3. Arg. God gave Kings to the People in his wrath, and that scandalous Adoration usually given to Princes, had its beginning from the bitter root of Idolatry. 4 Arg. Monarches are commonly ambitious and covetous, ungrateful, swayed by the foolishness of Women, and Favourites; whereas Many are not so apt to be intoxicated Ibid. with the fumes of Power and Flattery. 5 Arg. Kings are more in danger of violent Deaths; and 'tis observed in every Family, within three or four Generations the Heir is an absolute Fool, whereas a Senate never dies, and is perpetually wise. Ibid. 6 Arg. In a Monarchy the Kingdom may descend upon an Infant, and the Succession may be long in dispute, and so the State must be without Government till he comes to years and Discretion, whereas there is no such thing in a Commonwealth. I could reckon up several more inconveniences in Monarchy, but 'twould be tedious to you and me too to recite them all: wherefore I shall only conclude, that it is a mere Imitation and Ape of the Pope, the one being Vicar General for things Temporal, the other for Eternal. Reas. That's only a little Rhetoric, for Kings and Monarchy was before ever the Pope, or his pretended Predecessor S. Peter, was thought of. The hopes of a share in Government, and that silly childish desire of Change, has prevailed upon you. But that I may show you conveniences in Monarchy, and inconveniences in a Commonwealth, I say, 1. In a Monarchy the private Interest is the same with the public. The Riches, Power, Strength, Reputation of the King, arise only from the Riches, etc. of the Subject; for if the Subjects be poor and scandalous, the King must be so too. Whereas in a Commonwealth the private Interest being separated from the public, each Senator shall snatch for himself and his Family, and lazily broodingover his Bags, from the misery and leanness of the People grow fat and happy. 2. All the conveniences that you will attribute to one General in an Army, as having no Partner, does not force his Soldiers to Divisions, as they are not molested with contrary Counsels and Commands, the very same you may conclude in Monarchy. 3. There cannot be so much Secrecy in the Counsels of a Multitude, as there is in a Monarchy; a thing which is so essential to the preservation of the State. 4. In a Commonwealth there certainly will be Distraction in Opinions, so that they will not help but hinder one another; and if there is no business for them abroad, they will make War amongst themselves, and oppose one another for particular Interests at home. So Venice and the United Provinces, (which by the by do place several things wholly in their Duke and Prince of Orange) if Action had not employed their thoughts, I dare engage would long ago have grown Plotters and mischievous, and by a dozen years continued peace would have been undone. 5. A Commonwealth is more inclining to Arbitrary Power and Tyranny than Monarchy, though placed in one Man, that is mad, extravagant, foolish, and Popish; and though he professes himself accountable to none but God. A Commonwealth is more subject to evil Counselors and Flatterers, nay rather than want they will flatter by turns to serve each others Ambition. The Favourites and Kindred of Monarches are but few, of an Assembly many; so that every one will look to be respected, and desire that his Ambition and Covetousness may be satisfied. Besides, they too profess themselves accountable to none but God; for if they have the Power in their own hands, to whom can or will they be accountable? Or, since they have so many Friends, who will be forced more to Ingratitude and Knavery, or have more occasions to be Rogues than these? 6. I wonder you a Republican should think it an inconvenience, that the Monarchy should descend upon a Fool or an Infant, when for a while comes in a Council or an Assembly, so much beloved and desired by you; from which he could not have the understanding to descent or contradict. 7. The Admission of a Foreiner and Stranger to a Kingdom is not always an inconvenience; for that King James was a good Prince, that the Union of the Kingdom is an happiness to us, every body will affirm. 8. Monarches and Kings are certainly sent by God, good or bad; the former being a blessing, the later a punishment, sent from Heaven upon a Nation. I know that 'tis very common with some men, to infer from 1 Sam. c. 8. 1 Sam. c. 8. that God sent Kings in his wrath, and as a curse and affliction to his People: But if these men are any ways inclined to find out the Truth, they will see that 'twas a Bad King that God sent in his wrath, the Government of Kings being long before in other Nations, to which Israel (rejecting God for their Monarch and Guide) desired to be like, and which provoked him to anger. And then solomon's saying, In the multitude of counsellors Pro. 11. 14. is much safety, has been very often in their mouths; as if Solomon, who was himself a Monarch, had given advice that a Parliament Government and a Commonwealth was the best. The meaning of the words is this, that 'tis M●●slerus, 〈◊〉, etc. Groti●●, etc. good and convenient, when a Monarch goes to war, to listen to the advice of many Friends, that so having all things laid open, he may choose that which pleases him best, or is most necessary; that to proceed with discretion and deliberation is the most probable means of safety. But after all this I do acknowledge, that there is no Government without inconveniences. Indeed I will grant you many to be in Monarchy; yet let the inconveniences be never so great, I am sure Civil Wars, Amarchy, and Confusion, will outweigh them all; which must necssarily be in a Commonwealth, and which shall be the only Answer I give to your Arguments. Monarchy has the fewest and least inconveniences, is the most honourable, most exact, and most perfect Government, as being after the example of one God, who first presented us a Pattern. 'Tis true, if you imagine a Plato's Commonwealth, think that there is no such thing as Interest in the world, that every one is for the public good, the Government you plead for might seem somewhat plausible. But whilst Man carries Nature about him, whilst Craft, Pride, Covetousness, and the Devil is in Mankind; whilst there is scarce ten righteous persons amongst us, to stop the judgement of Fire and Brimstone on our Nation, that Gen. 18. false intoxicating Notion of Liberty that you have got, that desire of being like beasts in a wilderness, wild and uncontrolled, that eagerness of a Commonwealth Government, must necessarily cast us into ruin and destruction. Prejud. But all this while I am for a Commonwealth. Now let us consider whether England is not an Elective Kingdom, whether the true Heir or lawful Successor, if not pleasing to the People, cannot be disinherited. Let us consider, First, the Legality, and the Practice of ancient times. Secondly, the Equity of it, and the unreasonableness of a contrary Doctrine. 1 Arg. As to the Legality and Practice of former times, I could tell you stories from Egbert down to Mary Queen of Scots; so that I don't question but every one will make Observations from it, that it has been the constant Opinion of all Ages, that the Parliament of England had an unquestionable power to elect, limit, restrain, and qualify the Succession as they please, and that on all occasions they have put their power in practice; and that the * Daniel, Henry I. Historian had reason for saying, that Seldom or never the third Heir in a right descent enjoyed the Crown of England. 2 Arg. As to the Equity, and unreasonableness of a contrary Doctrine; I say it tends directly to subvert the Government, and to put the Life of the King regnant in the hands of the Successor. The next Heir may commit Rapes, Murders, and Treasons, burn Cities, betray History of Succession for the Earl of H. Fleets, may conspire against the Life of his Prince; and yet after all if he can by flight or force save himself, till some of his Accomplices can get the King dispatched, in spite of all Laws and Justice he must come to the Crown and be innocent. Though passive obedience, and the forgiving of private Tory Plot. injuries, is laudable; yet Offenders and Offences against the Government are of another nature and consideration. In case of Minority, Madness, Folly, the trial of the King's Sufficiency, is without question in the Parliament. And if that be allowed, shall wicked and contumacious Plea for Elective Kingdom. Principles and Practices be exempt from their cognizance; since the Fool or Madman cannot be liable to so severe a Censure, as he that employs his wit to the destruction of the People? The Crown is not a bare Inheritance, but an Inheritance History of Succession, Ibid. accompanying an Office of Trust; so that if any man's Defects render him uncapable of the Trust, he has forfeited his Inheritance. Reas. To the first Argument I answer, First, though the disinheriting a true Heir was the Practice of some of our Ancestors; yet from thence it does not follow, 'twas legally and lawfully practised, for (as you have heard several times) Though a thing has been often done, it is not therefore well done. Cromwel's Usurpation will not justify another hereafter; neither ought the late High Court of Justice to be a Pattern and Model to Posterity how to erect the like. Now whether the Precedents of our Forefathers were equitable or righteous, comes under your second Head, where you pretend to show the Equity of it, and the unreasonableness of a contrary Doctrine, to which I shall speak anon. But a while to the Legality of it. I am sure we can show more Precedents of Kings holding their Crowns by right of Primogeniture, than they can to the contrary; it being desired by most Monarches of the Christian and Heathen World, though sometimes a Factious and Disloyal Party grows to be so numerous, as to bilk them in their Endeavours. And though we cannot determine who is the nearest in the Family, in a long Line of Succession; (as sometimes I have heard you object) yet whom we think in our Consciences to be the person, we must submit to him as if he were the real true one. The Bond of Allegiance, (whether sworn or not sworn to) being, as it were a Law of Nature, perpetual and indispensable, shows the Illegality, which, though perhaps it may not oblige us to Successors in the Life-time of our present Sovereign, yet at his Death it certainly enjoins us to see him safe in the Throne, to look upon him as true Heir and lawful Successor, being the Issue of the deceased Sovereign, and not to join with an equivocating Party, who do interpret the Oath of Allegiance Tory Plot. to mean him to be the Lawful Successor, whom a discontented sort of People are pleased to call so, or set up. Besides, though we should grant that 'twas the Practice of our Ancestors to legitimate and illegitimate as they please, that they had the Power to Elect, Limit, Restrain, or Qualify as they thought convenient, you will agree with us, that 'twas by the Consent of King, Lords and Commons, or in case the King was dead, of Lords and Commons; why how is this applicable to the case of the D. of Y. where there was only the single Votes of the Commons, which never were perfect Laws, or had the same force by themselves, as if the King and Lords had consented with them? The King and Lords rejected the Bill, and above the third part of the Nation thanked them for it; wherefore I conclude that the Practices of our Ancestors are nothing to the purpose, and your beloved History of Succession (written for the satisfaction of the Earl of H. but confuted sufficiently already) and your Stories from Egbert to Mary Queen of Scots, by this to be utterly confounded. But if you do ask me, Whether, if the K. should die, I think the Lords and Commons would do the feat? I answer no otherwise, but that 'tis a vain thing to imagine it will or can ever be done, seeing the former too daily protest against it, nay, and S. himself gins to recant. Now that the King and Lords had Equity on their sides in so doing, that the Doctrine, though contrary to yours, is not unreasonable; I shall show by giving full Answers to your Arguments. To the second Argument. Though I grant your Supposition, that the next Heir should commit Rapes, Murders, etc. were mad and foolish, I say, 'tis not in the Power of the House of Commons to exclude him from the Crown, neither can there be shown one Precedent that they may imitate, seeing 'twas always allowed that the House of Lords had as much, or more Authority than they, and the King a Negative Voice. Neither doth this tend to the Subversion of the Government, if this irregular Heir should come to the Crown, but rather to the establishment of it, it taking away any Success that the the scandalous and unjust imputations of a giddy Rabble might make for the future upon one that is innocent. If Immoralities and Crimes would do the business, a present Monarch would not want Enemies that should asperse and depose him. The Doctrine of Passive Obedience ought to be embraced by the public as well as the private, for though I agree with you, it may not be observed in respect to Foreign Affronts and Abuses, yet Subjects ought to observe it in respect to their Prince, being at all no dishonour to the State. And though I grant you too that a Crown is an Inheritance accompanying an Office of Trust, yet I cannot yield that a House of Commons, nay, if they were joined with the House of Lords too, the King declaring to the contrary, are capable Judges, whether the Heir can be defective of that Trust, or forfeit his Inheritance. And though he were really defective, Mad, and of ill Principles, they must for all that submit, and bear with him; his Power being as much the Ordinance of God, as the Power of the wisest, best Prince in the World. These are but Subjects to the King, while living, or to his lawful Heir, when dead, (by which lawful, you must think Natural Affection meant the nearest of Blood) and in them to be placed the Sovereign Power. Now if the two Houses could dispose of this Sovereign Power, you must think they had as great or greater in themselves, than the Sovereign or highest Power; which to affirm is Nonsense. The King hath his Authority from God, and to him Sir William smith's Speech. alone he is accountable: He hath the Laws only from his People, by which he ought to govern, which Laws you Dissenters mistake for the Authority. The King therefore ought not to be importuned by the People to do any thing contrary to what he judges lawful, for he alone must answer for the irregularities, not they. But to go a little farther with the Equity of it. Do Ibid. you think it reasonable, that a man should be punished in praesenti, for a fault to be committed in futuro? If a Bill had been presented to a Grand Jury against a Man, upon presumption he would commit such or such a Crime a year hence, surely they would never find the Bill. This of the D. of Y. is of the same nature. His being a Papist cannot be a fault, until he was to succeed to the Crown, and that is uncertain whether ever or never. But if God hath made an Election, it is not for you to say, Nolumus hunc regnare. It would be to question Divine Wisdom and usurp upon God's Prerogative, in whose hands are the issues of Life and Death, and all other Events, to which all men in prudence ought to submit, because they know they must do it whether they will or no. Fears and jealousies ought not to make People extravagant. Disputes of Succession are dangerous. The controversy between the House of Y. and Lancaster had almost drowned us in our own Blood, if the Good God in his infinite Mercy at last had not relieved us. I cannot see why People should be so desirous of an Elective Kingdom, seeing Disorder in the mean while must tyrannize; and seeing Burgesses, Aldermen, and Mayors of little Corporations cannot be chose without Tumult, Noise and Confusion, an unanimous Consent being seldom or never heard of amongst them. We murdered and deposed the Royal Father, and we have seemed to repent in dust and ashes, cried mightily, and requested of Heaven that the sin might not be laid to our charge, that the bitter cup might pass from us; and shall we be so impudent and ungretefully wicked, as to murder him again in his Posterity? We shall not be excused at the great day, because we have persisted in our iniquity, neither will God be frighted into a forgiveness. 'Tis their right, and nothing but an immediate Voice from Heaven can make it otherwise. Prejud. Electing and Excluding had been practised by Gods own People, and countenanced by God. What else is the meaning of Gods giving the Kingdom of Israel Tory Plot. to Saul of the Tribe of Benjamin, the youngest of Jacob's Sons; or to David the younger of his Father's Sons, and of the Tribe of Judah; while none of Reuben's Offspring ever sat upon the Throne? Or if God may by Prerogative dispense with this Law, how came David to put Adonijah by the Throne, and seat Solomon in it? After Solomon there was not one bad Prince longer endured, than the People were constrained out of mere necessity: to whose destruction also they were oftentimes incited by God himself. Reas. Your own Author in two or three Leaves after confutes himself, and tells you the Commands and Examples in the Old Testament, cannot countenance such an Assertion, nor can the Civil Constitutions of the Jewish Tory Plot. Oeconomy oblige any Christian Kingdoms, there being very special Reasons to the contrary. As God had a special Prerogative for giving his Kingdom of Israel to Saul, so had David too, when he excluded Adonijah and gave the Kingdom to Solomon, it being by the immediate direction of God himself. But now God forbearing to speak to us immediately from Heaven, sends us word, that The fear of a King is as the roaring of a Lion: Prov. 20. 2. whoso provoketh him to anger, sinneth against his own soul. That we should not touch his anointed, nor do his Prophet's harm. Speak thou to us, and we will hear thee; but let Exod. 20. 19 not God speak to us lest we die. This is a most absolute obedience to Moses. Concerning the Right of King's God speaketh by the mouth of Samuel, and saith, This 1 Sam. 8. 11, 12, etc. will be the right of the King which you shall have to reign over you; he shall take your sons, and set them to drive chariots, etc. He shall take your man-servants and your maidservants, and the choice of your youth, and employ them in his business, etc. So that whatsoever he will inflict on you, it must by no means be resisted. But let us hear what the Gospel says, The Scribes and Pharisees Mat. 23. 2, 3. sit in Moses chair, and therefore all that they shall bid you do and observe, that observe and do. Where can there be a more simple Obedience implied, and what can command Subjection more plainly? Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake, for conscience sake. I know that grand Impostor and Mountebank Buchanan, with his Zany Milton, explain these places as if they were spoken to the scattered and weak Christians, that they should be subject out of policy, because they had not opportunity and strength to resist. But it seems very strange to me, that if common prudence only and self-preservation were in the case, that the Apostle should urge it with so much vehemency and extravagance, that they should be desired to live for the Lords sake, and for conscience sakc, when afterwards they so eagerly strove to die for it. Is there not plain positive Practice consonant to these Doctrines? Did not Christ, as soon as he was seized on by the High Priests Officers, severely rebuke the great Apostle St. Peter, for but once using the Sword? Blame an untemperate Zeal, proceeding from an unreasonable Passion, without any Call to his Superiors? Chide him for wounding the High Priests Servant, though he was performing a most unjust action; but, he being commissioned by Public Authority, taught, that every Private Mam must submit to him? Will you think too that Christ did this out of policy, because he was too weak to struggle with them? No, he tells you, he could have fummoned more than twelve Legions of Angels to his immediate rescue. But he would not employ them as a triumphant Dr. Sprat, Serm. Ap. 20. 12. Host, but as an Harmonious Choir, to sing peace on Earth, good will towards every one of you. If it is then forbidden on the Penalty of Death, of perishing by the Sword, to rebel against those most cruel Tyrants, most fierce Enemies to the Christians, Monsters of men, either of no Religion, or a false one, and yet a disgrace to Heathenism itself; If however, on the most Solemn Obligations of Conscience, they were not to be opposed, much less destroyed by any Christians; what can be said greater, or more august than this? What stronger, what more Sacred confirmation can be given to our conscientious obedience to another manner of Authority? By how many ties, Temporal and Eternal, are we bound to yield a faithful Subjection to our Christian Kings? under whose Protection many Subjects prosper, though against their Wills; Kings, who are the best nursing Fathers of the best Church in the Christian World. Prejud. Christ and his Disciples might well bear with this; for their Kingdom was not of this world. They came Joh. 18. 36. Charge of the Tory Plot maintained. not to divide Inheritances. Which rather implies than denies, that such whose Kingdom is of this World may dispose of Inheritances. Reas. Truly the Christians Kingdom too is not of this world, for if it were, they would be of all men the most miserable. They came to imitate Christ, to submit to every Ordinance of Man as he did, to bear afflictions, to follow him through a Sea of Blood, though 'twere thorough the wilderness of Popery, and most severe inconvenienees. There is not a Virtue in the whole Life of our Saviour Mr. Manninghams' Sermon, Dec. 7. proposed to our imitation, which has not for its Appendage that which the Animal man calls Misery; tho' it proves in the event, the only winging of the Soul, the highest exaltation of humane nature, which had never been honoured with the Union of God, if it had not been in order to suffer. Prejud. 'Tis a good thing in private men to bear Afflictions patiently, not to run into an evil to avoid them, to glory in their tribulation. But when, Sir, the State is concerned, when the question is, whether they must suffer a Popish Tyrant to reign over them when they can-hinder it, they will tell you they don't think themselves bound to such narrow, private Apprehensions of things, neither will State Policy allow of such directions as passive obedience would give them. They will not Spec. Crape. part 2. call those things evil which you may. A Captain of a Man of War being like to be taken by the Enemy, is bound to sink his Ship, and blow up it may be three or four hundred men, rather than deliver his Charge to the Enemy. One would think it an evil in itself to destroy so many innocent Souls; yet unless this be done, the Captain shall be shot to death by the Laws of War, and looked upon as an Enemy. Reas. Suppose I do grant in some special cases, that State Policy ought not to call those things evil which private men do, (as requiring satisfaction for injuries offered by a Foreign Kingdom, which I hinted to you before;) how does this excuse Subjects from committing an evil against their Prince, who are commanded as Subjects to bear with him, and obey him. Then your Instance in a Captain of a Man of War, does not hold true, for 'tis seldom or never practised, that he shall be shot to death, if he is in those circumstances, and unless he is under suspicion of Treachery. Neither ought he upon any account to sink the ship, or destroy so many innocent Souls; and if he is punished for the Non-performance of it, his Punishment is severe and unjust? Religion binds us not only to our Personal Capacities, but as to our Relative and Politic too, as we are incorporated into Kingdoms, Families, and other Societies. Dr. Wallis, S. Resurrection asserted. As Societies are made up of single Persons, so the acts of Societies, and of Persons related, whether sinful or virtuous, are in God's account the Acts of particular Persons; and are in those Persons punished and rewarded according to their Deserts, both in this World and in that which is to come. And thus the Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, with those about them, are said to suffer the Vengeance of Eternal Fire, when indeed it is the Persons of those Cities that do suffer. These are the words of a Learned man, who is said to be a wellwisher to your Party, but I hope he is belied. Prejud. If we must bear every thing as Subjects, that is inflicted upon us, if we cannot choose the Person to reign over us, where is the Liberty of the Subject all this while? Reason. What, will you commit Treason, and plead the Liberty of the Subject? Have you not free Trade, free liberty to buy and sell, to choose your own Habitation, your own Diet, your own Calling and Profession, educate your own Children as you think fit, etc. If any thing is to be decided between the Sovereign and Subjects, is there not an Appeal to the Laws? Have not your Lawyers free liberty of Speech to plead for you? and does not Majesty itself condescend to their Judgements? Are you loaden with Taxes? are your Estates taken from you, and have not you leave to take upon you so much Impudence and Ingratitude, as not to give one part in a hundred to him who protects all you have, and gives you your very Being, etc. Is not the Government according to the Established Laws, and has not the * King's Speech to the Parl. at Oxford. King declared it shall be the Standard and measure os his Actions? You pine and murmur because you cannot have the Liberty to be Rogues and Rascals. I do certainly believe a Popish Plot, and, though I will be more candid than other men, as not to think there is a Presbyterian one; I am sure you, as single men, without any Combination, outdo the Papists in their Villainies. When any of your Herd is hurt, you, his fellow Swine, run about him, and gruntle against the Government, and by right or wrong resolve to relieve him. You would take a Monarch's Crown from his Head, and call it the Privilege of a Parliament. Those that own themselves to be but the Great Council to a Sovereign, are desired by you not to behave themselves as Counsellors, but like Sovereigns too. The Prophecy of Mercurius Menippeus in the Year of our Lord 1641. IF the Londoners by this time have not enough of Parliament, may they still consult Images, and adore a Representative; still quarrel with Superstition, and never be at rest. They will perceive at last what kind of Physic is Reformation, and being drunk once a day. Sure all the Women in the City are with Child by Baxter and the Devil, that they ever since longed for Presbytery. For, were Altars Plea enough to offer up the Bishops? Must good Abel suffer for his Sacrifice? Sure his Masqueraded Holiness was the Pope, and Justice on Ben. Harris ' s Ears, Auricular Confession. Pl——— ket strived to bring in Popery, and was executed like the Poor Ass for drinking up the Town Moon. The Dunghill is sweeter than the Jakes, and Doctor Salamanca. Caesar' s Tragedy is best presented in the Senate, and Westminster is the ready way to the Tombs. There has been none of late disguised but the three last Parl———— nts, and a Hangman. Henceforth take heed of Vizards, though never so holy, though there is the Liberty of the Subject, and making a Glorious King in the case. 'Tis the thief's best play to kill the Judge, and the Dissenters to rail on, and be for Excluding. What Wolves besides these but would have tended such a Romulus? Such an Elias what Ravens but would have fed? A Prince whose goodness might rather fear Idolatry than Injury, deserved rather to be prayed to than spit upon, made a Saint in our own Nation rather than to be sent into Scotland. A Prince, whose Merits were so far above all Flatteries, that the oiliest Courtier was as scandalous, as that Chemist, Fidler, Buffoon, Painter, Rhymer, Railer, Drunkard, See Absalon and Achitophel, a Poem. Glutton, Zimri; as foolish as those Rabsheka's of No Popish Successor. Give the King no Money. A Prince, whose Innocence has taught the * wholeNation Allegiance, and made Pilk——— ton See the Addresses. a non est inventus Royalist; and kept turncoat, Curse ye Meroz, Mushroom Hickeringhil, a long time from being damned. A Prince, for whom College and the City Charter do die Martyrs; and for whom Tony Coop— undertook a Vindication. But now, alas, poor Potapski is become Captive to his Charge. The good Apostle converts his Gaoler; Who with the other Viper, Prince Pretty-man, do kiss his hand, and are innocent. For they knew he dispossessed so fast, they could not find Devils enough to bait him. Had Bet——— I that railed at him, been on the Bench, or wore his Chain longer, * according to the Story, etc. I will hold five Guinnies he had been Tyburned before Christmas, and the ill looked Dagon should have fell before the Ark. 'Tis a Question, whether he is more miraculous now for curing Disloyalty, than he will be hereafter for curing the Evil. Grant, O Lord, the King a long Life, that his years may endure throughout all generations. Let him dwell before God for ever: O prepare thy loving Mercy and Faithfulness, that they may preserve him. Defend the Duke, O Lord, and let his Enemies have no advantage against him, nor the wicked Dissenters approach to hurt him. Open the Eyes of the three last Parliaments, and let them confess before thee, that they have done those things which they ought not to have done; and left undone those things, which they ought to have done; and that there was no help in them, etc. Amen. So Prayeth T. W. FINIS.