A SNAKE in the GRASS Caught and Crushed.  
OR A Third and Last Epistle to a now furious, DEACON in the Church of England, The REVEREND Mr. George Keith, WITH Some Remarks on my former Epistles to him, especially That against Plunging in Baptism.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Pythagoras. 
By Trepidantium Malleus.  
LONDON: Printed for John Marshal, at the Sign of the Bible in Grace-Church-Street. 1700.   

A Third and Last Epistle to Mr. George Keith.  
Reverend Sir,  
WHEN Men Dethrone their Judgements, and Reason, and put their Humours and Passions in their Place, no wonder if they run as a Coach and Horses that have lost their Guide or Charioteer, here and there; every where, and no where: Such cannot only castrate Authors, but make Legions for Histories; and like Pioners of Rome, call for Fire from Heaven, but fetch it from Hell. This you will grant, some Bapts have lately done (vulgarly Anabaptists): They have employed a Socinian to Argue, and a worse to Rave; this Fire, all the Water in which such are plunged, cannot quench. But no wonder, when D. Russel was not ashamed to put Blessed Calvin in such a Hue and Dress, as if an incatnate Devil; and put not only Castellio, that rank Arminian, that called Solomon's Canticles a profane Book; but Servetus himself, that called the Trinity a Cerberus, in such glorious Array, as if a terrestrial Angel; for this was he burnt, not for being an Anabaptist.  
Felix quem faciunt▪ I am charged with a Notion never known before; That Baptizo signifies not once to Plunge in all the New Testament, though so many Critics say the contrary.  
1. These Critics say with me, and others, the Word signifies other ways, of washing too. So Leigh, who is instar omnium, and citys for me, Mat. 3.11. What say you to this Bapts? now if you leave them in one thing, why not I in another?  
2. Bernardus non videt omnia. They were fallible Men. Rhegius the famous Man of France, whose Life, Clark in his blundering way, hath written, found out the right Construction of Ovid.  
Nam vos mutastis & illas.  
Tho so many Generations before mistook it. M. Mead discovered the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the Doctrine, not of Devils, as we read, but Mediators, called by Hesiod and others, Demons. That the Genitive was not of the Efficient, but Matter: All now yield to this true Discovery, tho' New, I might name New Discoveries, as in Philology, Divinity, so in Philosophy, particularly the Ingenious Esquire Boyl.  
3. Yet this Discovery was not mine; I gave another the Honour of it, who since, I find had it from other Authors before his time. I confess I was the first Man that gave 'em the Name of Bapts, which, no doubt, will continue.  
The Blood of Beasts offered in Sacrifice, and the Water of Purification was by Pouring, or Sprinkling, not by Plunging or Dipping. John therefore that came in with his Baptism, cannot be supposed to have any Baptism but what harmonized with the Jewish one's; we find also, not only in the Law, but the Prophets, glorious things mentioned of Gospel Times, from this Practice, Isa. 2.15. So shall he Sprinkle many Nations.  
Ezek. 36.25. Then will I Sprink clean Water upon you, and you shall be clean. Look we farther; when the Gospel was Planted, and all fulfilled, how all is expressed Tim. 3.5, 6. They were said to be saved by the washing of Regeneration; how? shed▪ as Acts 2.17. Pouring of the Spirit proves all: I am of his Mind, who said, Baptising in Enon was so far from proving Plunging, That it disproves it. They therefore left Bathabara; says he, because the Waters were Deep, and not so fit for Baptism; and came to Enou, for the Rivulets there, were fit for Baptism but not Plunging.  
Reverend Sir, I am much importuned to Write you a Third Epistle about your Sermons at Turner's Hall, and G. Church lately Printed, but I long refused.  
1. Because I have often appeared for you▪ but I am Answered, that matters not, This is not ad Idem.  
2. Because I think I have done it already: I find but little you have said about the Liturgy, Ceremonies, and Episcopacy, but what I have Answered in my Apology▪ in my Letters to Mr. Lasly, and Friendly Epistle to you. I pray look on all once again: You approved then of what I did. How came you so soon changed? It would be an Abuse clapped on my Readers, to deceive them of their Time, and Money, to transcribe what they know I then wrote.  
3. Because I think some things in the Sermons are too triflng and unfit for an Answer, as your Gloss on these Words. He that breaketh one of the least of these Commandments, shall be called the least in the Kingdom of God. So the Rushing of many Waters, and other Places brought for your Confusions in your Liturgy. To Cite, for Episcopacy, Psalm. 45.16. Isaiah 60.17. Is such playing with God; I dare not do it with Mr. Keith, somewhat like the Exposition you gave of that Text. The dead cannot praise thee; Those that be dead in Sin, in your Loyal Sermon Printed five Years since.  
I was, Sir, your Herrer in G Church; in the Afternoon, when I came there, I saw the Reader with his Spectacles on his Nose, and both with Eyes close to the Book, thus reading Prayers to his God. No Eyes nor Hands lift up to Heaven in any praying Posture, but both as nailed to the Book, for fear of not reading right, as if the Poor Man had not lost only the Power of Godliness, but the very Form of it too. Many Ignorant Profane Men in Prayer, that never send their Hearts to Heaven, send their Eyes and Hands ●twards it.  
Mr. Keath, let you and I talk privately; for it would not be safe to ask you openly, whether you can believe, That the great God, the Blessed Jesus, the Holy Spirit, ●ever sent qualified Men for their Work (for unqualifyed one's run before they are sent) to read other men's Prayers to God? Were it not for some Penal Laws yet in force against Dissenters, I should go near to say, That for such a one to read other men's Prayers to God, is not only as Scandalous, but ten times more so, than to read other men's Sermons to the People? When the Apostle tells the Church, the Gifts God gave Men, Tongues, Interpretation of Tongues, Prophesying, Interpretations, etc. Never mentioned he the poor, poor, pitiful poor Gift of Reading.  
When the Jewish Church was in its Swadling-Clouts, and fed with Milk, taught by many Ceremonies, God made every one of them himself, not they; yet then there were no Forms, no Liturgies for the Priests to read, or People to hear when they came together.  
As weak as they were, they were not so weak. Who dares now impose under the Gospel-Dispensation, when the Church is become a Man, and much more, as of the Grace, so of the Gifts of the Spirit is now poured out.  
You pleading up Conformity, unhappily chose this Text, (the best to caution us against it.) Luke 1.6. And they were hath Perfect, walking in all the Commandments, and Ordinances of the Lord, blamelessly.  
1. Why, good Mr. Keith, were Zachary and Elizabeth commended for walking in all the Commandments and Ordinances of Men? No, the Pharisees were severely Censured for this by our Lord, and so the Churches by Paul. With an in vain do you worship me. And I am afraid of you. I hope, Sir you have not lost your Senses, if you were so weak to think we had lost ours.  
2. Can you charge any of us, against whom you most set your sellf at that time, with not walking in the Commandments and Ordinances of God? Your Work lay then not with the Quakers. Zachary observed Circumcision, Sacrifices, etc. Not washing of Hands, Philacteries. We observe Baptism and Lord Supper, not Cross nor Surplice: No wonder. I overheard a Clergyman say in the Church; your Sermon was nothing to the Text.  
Was it not a lovely sight to hear you declaring against Schism, who soon leapt from Turner's Hall, after the Sacrament received, to a public Church? To tell us, you were only as a Catechist there, or that the Bishop gave his Consent, is poor thin Sophistry; what is his Lordship such a Plenipotentiary, as if all Power were given to him in Heaven, and in Earth, That he can make Schism no Schism, and laymen's Preaching lawful, without Ordination? You were pleased to tell us, That there were no lawful Sacraments, where was no lawful Administrator. That no Man was a lawful Administrator but one Ordained by a Bishop, etc. That all other Churches wanted what was integral (Episcopacy): I thank you, that on my Letter to you, you were pleased to leave this out in the Printed Sermon. Dared you thus to fly in the Faces of the Reformed Churches, Holland, Geneva; and now blessed be Cod, Scotland, and other Churches who own Presbytery, and that by Divine Right? For those Protestant Churches that have Bishops, they only preside in Synods, and out of them are as other Men; no Spiritual Courts, etc. Such an Episcopacy, and Bishop usher's Episcopacy, many Presbyterians would yield to. You know Bp. Jewel, Bp. Davenant, and others; Even Mr. Hooker himself in his Eccles. Pol. as well as honest Bishop Crofts in his Naked Truth, abhorred your Notions. These never thought Episcopacy of Divine Right, nor doubted the validity of Presbyterian Ordinations beyond Sea. You cannot be ignorant, That when two Scottish Ministers were made Bps. in the Reign of James the 1st. when one objected their not having Episcopal Ordination, how sharply he was reproved by a Prelate and others for his Objection? Laud, that Semi-Protestant, talked as you do; he and you have but little Thanks from your own, for such bold Assertinns: If you are a Laudensian already, Sir, what will you be next? A Cardinal's Cap was offered him. I hope God will keep you from the Temptation. When one talked before the present Bishop of London at your rate, he gravely and wisely said, He was ●ot there to judge Christian Churches, These wild Notions I have considered in my two forenamed Books, and there I refer; and if you think it convenient to Reply, Answer me there as well as here. It was not long since you told the Anabaptists they were in the right about the Subject and Form of Baptism: Some are pleased to say, I Cured you of these Errors. Then Independency was the best Government; but for Presbytery, I confess you never had a good Word then; and why? because they were not pure enough in admission to the Lord's Table: Yet gave a jump to Episcopacy (I thought you would as soon turn to the Church of Rome.) You are now gotten among pure Communicants: The Church was lately in the Wilderness, and you had found in the Revelations she would not come out these Thirty Years. Well, seeing the Mountain will not come to Mahomet, Mahomet will go to the Mountain. Seeing the Church will not come out of the Wilderness to you, you are gone to her in the Wilderness (so it is) to get her Blessing too whilst you live. You than told your Friends, Baptism was an Ordinance of Christ, but there was not an Administrator upon Earth.  
To be plain, I wish, That as you have long left the Quakers for talking of a Christ within, not of a Christ without; you have not run among them that talk of a Christ without, not of a Christ within. I was not a little surprised, looking lately into your Quakerism no Popery, A Book done with all imaginable Subtlety, to find you assert Perfection in the Quakers Sense and Phrases, and with Robert Barclay on 1 John 1.8. to distinguish, aliud est peccare, aliud peccatum habere. And what I found in your Immediate Revelation, you may imagine. Are you not changed in Principles? Had W. C. harped on these things, I had never written my Reprimand. Whoever heard you  
1. Hearty in the Confession of sin to this Day?  
2 Sigh, or shed one Tear for deluding Thousrnds of Souls to Quakerism, Deism, as you now call it?  
How come you to have so many good Words for the Papist in the Sermon I heard?  
I am informed, you are desired to tell us where (as you say) Mr. Baxter said, The Sign of the Cross was no more than the putting of a Thread about a Man's Fingers, to put him in mind of what he would remember.  
1. Women and Children more do thus then Wise Men.  
2. I remember no such Words of his, tho' I have read so many of his Books. But he declared often he could not conform here. In his Life written with his own Hand, he called it p. 199 a Hemane Sacrament, a Transient Image: Are not your Studies filled not only with Calvin's Work, but Mr. Pool's Synopsis, the Works Of Dr. Owen, and other great Dissenters, as well as our Studies with some of your Bishop's Works. When, where and how got Bp. stillingfleet. Bp. Tillotson and other Bishops and Clergymen, their Learning. That you talk at such an idle rate, as if the Cabalistical Notions were still working in your Head, or Transmigration of Souls, That all our Souls were in Adam's Head, as Legions of Devils in one Man; Are you ●u●ed ●ere?  
Was it proper to tell us at Turner's Hall, That you believed M. Penn and the Quakers, would find Mercy with God, notwithstanding their Errors, and yet offer to prove, they owned not one Article of the Christian Faith; and yet that Faith in a outward Crucified Christ, was necessary to Salvation. These are Mysteries I cannot fathom, nor any Man else.  
2. Is it proper to tell us what Refreshment you find at Common-Prayer? (Once in Quakerism) I knew a Man that would say all Drinks were sweet to him, strong or small, fresh or dead. One said, he found great Refreshment, when he saw the King's Head cut off.  
3. Was it proper to tell us of your Conversion and Change of Heart before a Quaker, and when so? No, Sir, deceive not yourself, you were no Convert when you made so light of Sin, etc. And deluded so many Thousands, and I am bold to say it without the breath of Charity, if you were not converted since, you never were cdnverted at all.  
4. Was it proper so much to value yourself for your Catholic Charity, and yet be so severe on a sudden on the best Reformed Churches? Well, Sir, when you are a Bishop, or a Beneficed-Man, if Persecution came again, I will never live in your Diocese, nor in your Parish. You tell us Timothy was a Bishop. I pray how many thousands or Hundreds by the Year had my Lord Bishop? Was Timothy's Diocese as large as the Bishop of London's! etc. In Ephesus most of them were Pagans; was he the Bishop of these too? he Drank too little Wine, and preached too often, in season and out of season to be a Bishop. These take Care of Mint and Cummin; not of the weighty matters of the Law.  
Sir, if your Zeal for your new gaudy Spouse, in all her Trinklets, be such that there can be no Intimacy, I pray you there may be no Enmity. Preach Repentance, Faith, and Gospel Obedience; and if it pleased you to decline such Frequent and sever lashing others, the Quakers themselves, as well as us in the Pulpit, consider, at your leisure, whether it be not best.  
Excuse my not following you at large, not only for the reasons before named; my Referring you to my Apology, and first Frinedly Epistle to you; but to be plain, it would be a burden too heavy for my Shoulders, to bear the Expense of all the Impresions of all my Books, were I not, of late more concise than once. I may be larger in time; perhaps you may hear from more than one, you change often and yet Confident still; Are the Dissenters indeed the Cause of the Profaneness of your Church, by not complaining in the Spiritual Court? They would be angry should we tell them why we do two not, what Man was ever Excommunicated for Drunkeness, Whoredoms, Swearing, or other sins in the two last Reigns, or to this day, though under a good King? Seek to win the Quakers by kindness; and mention not their private Concerns in the Pulper. which I ever hated to make a Place of Controversies and Contention.  
I am brought to this work with very great difficulty; I desired fit and greater Men to appear. They refused charging you with former Disputes against the Trinity etc. and yet declareing you ever were sound in the Faith; so that, say they, you are if this be true, a Sound Quaker (or unsound one if you will) still. The importunity of my Friends hath prevailed with me to this Third and Last Epistle to you; I pray you, as a Wise Man, give over, your weak Pleas for your Ceremonies, as that the Saints in the Revelations appeared in white. Why have you not Crowns on your Heads and Palms in your Hands too? If the Surplice makes you look like Saints above, what do the Black Gowns under make you like? So that if this Ceromony represents any thing, It is the Hypocrite who is a Saint without, and a Devil inside; or such a Whited Wall as Paul named the High Priest, o● whom he said, God shall smite thee on the mouth.  
L me ask you at parting, some plain Questions? How wicked a thing is it to excommundcate or swear to read a Writ of excommunication, (if occasion be) against some of the best of Men, for Toys and Trifles? When the Fox was set to keep the Geese, King Charles the Second a Papist, to protect your Church, you know what was done by Men that perhaps would smile to hear any talk seriously of Christ and the Life to come.  
What if Anabapristry had gotten the Ascendant; were in its Zenith, were it unlawful to withdraw, or separate, if it had the stamp of Authority? If Presbytery were so. Can Mr. Lashly and other Episcoparians comply? what becomes of your Plea, about the Jewish Church, if not?  
How odious was it to tell the World, what Encouragement you had to come among Dissenters? which to my certain knowledge, was a mistake? what London Noncon Ministers ever visited you, myself excepted?  
Tell me plainly, and like a Man, why not a Cross in the breast at Prayer, with those good Christians as you call them of the Roman Church as well as one in the Forehead in Baptism; with our Ceremony-Mongers in your Church?  
Why not Holy-Water, to signify the Sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus, as well as a Surplice, or Sacrum Pallium, to signify Purity? Or would you conform to these, if the Law require them? If you say, No, why not as well as to those you conform too? If you say, Yes; what end is there of these Fooleris, or vain additions to the Divine Law? Is this to stand fast in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath set us free?  
If you say, as I hear you do; a Surplice is no more than a Gown; what Man should you go to your Table (or a Place nor so sweet) with it? This would be accounted a Profanation of the Holy Garment.  
Dare you take Ignorant, Scandalous, Sponsors in Baptism, to make them perfidious by a Humane Law. Or to say over the Graves of the greatest Atheist, Heretic, or Debauch? you hope he is gone to Heaven.  
Did you ever read Acts 20.28▪ That you talk of Ephesus having a Diocesan? Or know you no better an Evangelist, but to make him a Prelate? Answer what others and myself have said of these Matters.  
Do you not, with a Blush, look on your late Ordination in a Chamber, without one word of Prayer to God, or Counsel to you But what was in the Service-Book? The Bishops generally do their Work more solemnly and gravely. Was it thought any thing good enough for you?  
If Cross kneeling, or other Ceremonies were lawful, but not necessary, as you all say▪ How dare you impose them on us that think them sinful? Read Rom. 14. Baptism shall not be administered, if the Parents consent not to, the Cross. The Lord's Supper shall not be administered to the best of Men all their days, if they cannot kneel. Answer this to God another Day, if you can. You impose on Christ, as well as us, to dedicate a Child by a Humane Superstitious Sign to him.  
If a Book of Sports, or any other wicked Paper were to be read, would you not seek for a Distinction, to bribe Conscience? for Conscience may be so. What will you do on the 30th of January, etc. In your Shop of false Hearts and Faces too? A disjointed Fabric. Put Preferment in the other Scale. Is it proper to Invite any Men into a dangerous Pest-House, by telling them they may live there? He that consorts with Pelicans, cannot but smell of the Wilderness, etc.  
Was it not expedient, bottoming you Bursiness on, 1 Luke 6. To have considered the difference between the Jewish Church and Christian? How far the first was National (tho' I acknowledge I own it not to be so, in that Sense as is commonly said) Have we one Highpriest, etc. Go then to the Church of Rome. What Church could Zacary or Elizabeth, if they separated, go into, etc.  
My Old Friend, but new Enemy, you have a Male (many Males), in your Flock: ability of speaking aptly to God by Prayer, and to the People by Counsel in Sacraments, and other Ministerial Administrations: Offer not to the Lord a corrupt Thing, for he is a great King: Offer it to thy Governor; see whether he would accept it: Should Ingenious Mr. Keith make a Speech to K. William, and in the close pray for his welfare; would he be pleased to see him take out a Book and read another Man's Speech and Prayer before him▪ Would you, could you read the Liturgy in your Family, Morning and Evening? I believe not: You generally approve not of the lazy Creatures, that do, (though they may plead that Ignorance you cannot): If not, tell me Sir, at parting: Can you imagine God is well pleased with that lazy, careless Worship of yours in his own House, That you, or not only most serious Men; but sober Men cannot be pleased with in their own? Is this to stir up the Gift of God in thee? Dare you to offer to the Lord that which cost you nothing▪ If you do create me any Trouble for my Plainness, as some think you will; I plead, you are the Aggressor, I only the Defendant▪ I am against any Dissenters beginning with you, if you with us, I pray give us leave to Reply and vindicate our Cause against your Charge, if not, to be plain, we will take it. If you are set already on Persecution, do your worst, I only say of myself: The Will of the Lord be done.  
Tho you closed your Sermon I heard, without one Word of Prayer to God, I will not end my Work so with you, who, as I am informed, every where Preach against all Dissenters. The Lord rebuke thee.  
And now Mr. Deacon, let me know your Office, and how you come by it? A Deacons Work is to take care of the Poor. Have you left the Word of God to serve Tables? A Deacon to Preach, to Baptise, and give only one Element in the Lord's Supper, is not a Creature of God's making, but Man's, or— To Ordain; to Preach, and not permit to do it without a Licence after; what shall we call it? You may go up and down with your Prayer-Book to Baptise, and so regenerate more than we Noncons can do by all our preaching. For when you have mumbled out a few Words, and Baptised a Child, he is regenerated and born of the Spirit, immediately; and if he die before he hath committed any actual Sin, he is undoubtedly saved.  
Since we are all guilty of Schism in our Meetings, when you were not so at Turners-Hall, because you had the Bishop's leave, as you pleaded: Do you think, if the Bishop gave us leave to do as we do, we were clear of the odious Crime of Schism you and your Fraternity charge on us? If we be in danger of going, to Hell for Schismatics, will he not have so much pity on our Souls, to speak one word to save us from endless Misery? Were you a Catechist, as you say, what Catechism taught you then, or who were the Children, or younger sort so taught? You chose a Text, raised Doctrines, made Uses as others do to my Knowledge. This Plea was the most Nonsensical Harangue I ever heard from Mr. Keith.  
When you talk of the Ignorance of some Scottish Presbyterians. I pray remember Thousands of the Sons of the Church. What get you by such Stories as these you talk of? Of a Scottish Presbyterian that Catechised a young Man in the Church.  
Q. Who made Man? A. God. Q. Who made Woman? A. I cannot tell, that is not in my Catechism. Q. Who made the Deel. (Devil)? A. I cannot tell. Minist. God made him. A. Did he? I think it was the worst Days mork that ever he did▪ Do not such Ignorant Cattle abound every where?  
Seeing you, and many of your Communion often urge Mr. Baxter's Authority, or Opinion against us. I pray you consider, How in his English Nonconformity, a large Book, written since the Revolution, he tells us what manner of Saints be in your Church: He says a certain Doctor of Physic gave an Account, That Eight Hundred Persons, in such a time, died of the French Pox in London.  
Now said the Brisk Old Gentleman; if Enquiry were made, I doubt not, there could not be found Eight of those Eight Hundred, but what were of your Church, except some good honest Women, who got it of their Husbands of that Communion. He that pretended to give an Answer to that Book, Wrote like one who understood not Five Pages in it. But what a Noise is hear? Mr. Baxter said this, and Mr. Baxter granted that. What then? It may be a foul, a very foul Error for all that. Mr. Baxter was neither yours nor ours. He disowned himself to be a Presbyterian, we thank him. You that talk so much; oh the excellency of Peace and Union, but will not part with Ceremonies for it. Consider the Story Mr. Alsop told Dr. Stillingfleet, almost Twenty Years since. They were like that Gentleman, who pretended to be at Deaths-Door for a Coy Lady that refused him, but she being importuned by his Friends to accept the Gentleman, and save his Life, said let him then Clip his Whiskers. He being told this, replied, I will not part with one Hair of my Face for any Lady in the Land. King Charles pleased himself with the Story and its Application, and said Mr. A. gave a true Character of the Men he described.  
You see, Sir, I am not yet in the Number of your Defamers. I dare not say if George Keith, and not William Pen, had taken the Chair when George Fox died, we had never heard of George Kieth, the Reformed Quaker. I believe Dr. Hicks, and Mr. Lashly two strenuous Advocates for the Church of England, have reconciled you to Liturgies, Ceremonies, ●nd Episcopacy. They who call you Aesop, forget what a Wise Man Aesop was, and who said; He hath made us, and not we ourselves.  
With out a Compliment, I know I yet Love you, and value you for those acomplishments God hath blest you with? you are a Man of Thought, and if it plea●●d you to Visit, as before, you should be as Welcome to me as ever without harping on any unpleasant String, but seeing you refuse this, and love not a Dissenter, I only say, I am sorry I have lost so good, so Ingenious a Friend, to serve whom I wolud yet ride or go far. Give over Preaching up, every where, Conformity to the vain Traditions of Men, or censuring the best of Churches: But Cry aloud, spare not, Lift up your Voice like a Trumpet, show to the lazy Prelates and Priests, their Transgresions; and to the Drunken, Swearing, Whoring, Members, and Communicants of the (so Called) Church of Eegland, their Sins▪  
I never doubted, but among you, on the one Hand, and the Anabaptists on the other, are found some as God like men as are in the World; and pray, you may be in the Number, I hate the least thought of doubting any Man's Integrity or State, for his Opinion in these Matters. I dare not say, such a Man wrongs his Conscience, Sins against his Light: I did not, when I read (or rather said without Book) the Liturgy or attended on it. Neither may Mr. Keith, as far as I know, The Searcher of Hearts knows from what Principles, he Acts, and what ends he propounds to himself▪ He now knows, or may know; and Men and Angels shall know another Day. Blessed is the Name and Memory of Humble Bp. Usher Devout Bp. Hall, Holy Dr. Cannot (and others and Zealous Dr. Hornick of whom I know extraordinary instances of Converse with Heaven; May the Name and Memory of my Dear Old Friend Mr. Keith be blessed also.  
Some ask us, may a Man be saved in the Church of England? Yes, what need then of Nonconformity?  
I ask. May a man live on Barley-bread and Water? Yes, What need then of good Meat and good Drink?  
May a Man live and go up and down London streets Winter and Summer, naked, above the Waste? Yes, A Jacobite did it several Years, what need then of a shift or Coat, about these Parts. May a Man be in a House with them that Dye with the Itch, Small Pox, or Plague itself, and yet live? Yes, what need then leaving that House? Need enough, though the Separation were called Schism, and forbidden by the civil Magistrate with penal Laws.  
I suppose you will quickly hear from others; If from Mr. Owen, I pity you: Consider, I pray you what he hath done above most Men, about Ordination by Presbyters, not Bishops As many Reformed Quakers have gone back again on the News of your Conformity, so I doubt more will. Are you to be made a Biship? Have you not been already Consecrated in a Dream? I would rather you were s 〈…〉 times then once otherwise. M 〈…〉 know the Story Bp. Latimer mentions in one of his Sermons, of a Bishop that thundered when he saw one of the Bells want a Clapper; one pointed to the Pulpit, there is a Bell that hath been without a Clapper for two years past, provide one there. Mind not, great Sir, Toys and Trifles, with the neglect of the great Matters of the Law. The good words you have for the Papists, do the Dissenters a kindness, under your keen Censures of them. Grotius had not one good Word for Calvin; gets up all the little Stories he could agginst him, a● Judica●, prout 〈…〉 mas, & odisti; amas, & odisti, prout libet, etc. Nay, toucheth him as to his Morals; when learned Papist have been his Compurgators here; as Mr. Baxter hath learnedly, and unexceptionally proved in his Key for Catholics, yet he had many a good word for the Catholics (for so he always called the Papists) at last he says, That Humour or a spirit of opposition (or words of the same import) made some charge them with Idolatry, when they were no more guilty of it, than the Jews in looking towards the Ark, and about Transubstantiation, he talks of Transelementation. Grotius Appendix. Are not such good Sons of the Church of England, which in her Homilies and Liturgy, charges the Church of Rome with Idolatry?  
FINIS.