AN ANSWER TO THE Letter to a Dissenter, Detecting the many UNJUST INSINUATIONS Which highly Reflect on His Majesty, As likewise the many false Charges on the DISSENTERS.  
Published with Allowance.  
LONDON, Printed by Henry Hills, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, for His Household and Chapel; And are sold at his Printing house on the Ditch-side in Blackfriars. 1687.   

AN ANSWER TO THE LETTER to a DISSENTER,  
SIR,  
THE Letter to a Dissenter upon occasion of his Majesty's late Gracious Declaration of Indulgence, I have in obedience to your Command carefully perused, and must assure you, that the returning an Answer, tho' very easy, is yet unpleasant: For, as its Author has not offered any thing that is close and nervous, yet he has larded his Discourse with so many unjust Insinuations of what highly reflects on his Majesty, and with so many false Charges on the Dissenter, that a rehearsal of 'em, which is necessary for the Answerer to give, cannot well be, unless with such smart Repartees as may look over-severe, at least to some of the Author's Admirers.  
There is nothing more hateful unto me, than the dropping one word in any Concertation, that may look hard, and finding it impossible to give a full Answer to this Letter, without expressing those just Resentments the whole Contexture of his Harangue have made necessary, I should have been very glad to have been Dispensed with. But the Consideration of the Service I may do his Majesty and the whole Kingdom, by detecting the Vanity and Folly of the Author in connexion with your Injunctions, hath emboldened me to Resolve on as calm a Discussion of this Letter, as the Subject matter of it will admit.  
The whole of this Letter I find may be reduced to these Heads: False Charges against the Dissenter, Vile Reflections on his Majesty, and An Intimation of the Church of England's Repentance, with some little Artifices made use of to inveigle the Dissenter to act contrary to his avowed Principles, and real Interest.  
This I take to be a full Account of the Pamphlet, to all which I will give my Replies distinctly.  
To begin with his Charge against the Dissenter, as what is of least moment, and at which the Pamphleteer would only glance, and introduce it by way of Supposition, that, if possible, whenever occasion should make it necessary, he might, by saying he did not positively affirm it, fetch himself off from the reproach of being a False Accuser; but this way of reproaching the Innocent is so common, that by wise Men the very Insinuation, where the Charge cannot be made good, is looked on as very Unjust and Abusive. However, after this manner the Exclusion and Late Rebellion is laid at the Dissenter's Door, and their Ministers supposed to have Money sprinkled amongst them, to engage the People first one way, and now another, and therefore their Reasonings are not to be regarded, especially if they preach up Anger and Vengeance against the Church of England; That their Addresses don't flow from a Sense of his Majesty's Kindness, but from the Persuasions or Threaten used to obtain 'em; that tho' the Dissenters are against SET-FORMS of Prayer, yet are now content the Priests should indite for them; and instead of silently receiving the benefit of Indulgence, they set up for Advocates to support it, and become voluntary Aggressors, and look like Counsel Retained by the Prerogative against their old Friend MAGNA CHARTA.  
This is one part of the Gentleman's Letter, and these are the chief Reasons he presses the Dissenters with, to engage them against an accepting the Liberty his Majesty has most Graciously given them. It's this that is at bottom; for, (saith he) It might be wished that they would have suppressed their Impatience, and have been content for the sake of Religion, to enjoy it within themselves without the Liberty of a Public Exercise, till a Parliament had allowed it. But I'll appeal to any considering Man of the Church of England Communion, whether the Method this Gentleman has taken to wheedle the Dissenter, be either Christian or Prudent: For, what of Christianity is there in charging the Innocent, as being guilty of the most odious Crimes; or what of Prudence in railing on those whom they would ensnare into a Compliance with them?  
In the first place the Exclusion is charged on the Dissenters, and (as another Pamphleteer has it) it's the Nonconformists that by their meddling in the Matter of the Exclusion drew a new Storm upon themselves. And why must the Matter of the Exclusion be charged on the Dissenters? Was not that thing managed in the House of Commons by the Sons of the Church of England? Were not the chief Speakers in that House Church of England-men, and those who made up that House, ten to one, of her Communion? It has been, I confess, a common Practice for the Church of England, to do a bad thing, and throw the Odium on't on the Dissenter; but is this fair or just? If going ordinarily to the Common-Prayer, and taking the Sacrament according to the Usage of the Church of England, be a Test by which we may know one of her Communion, the Matter of the Exclusion must lie at her Door; And if thus much be not enough to  a Churchman, what is? She'll not (I hope) insist on the Doctrine of Nonresistance, as what is peculiar to Men of her Religion, lest thereby the new Masters of the Ceremonies, that are for a Repeal of the Test-Laws, be included within her Pale.  
The same may be said of the Rebellion, but the Replier to the Oxford Clergies Reasons against Addressing having fully cleared up this Matter, I will wave it, being assured that the Church of England hath no reason to Glory, as if none of her Sons nor Clergy had any hand in it.  
Ay, but the Dissenting Ministers have Moneys given 'em to carry on the Design. But where is the Man who has received one Farthing from the Roman-Catholic for carrying on any Popish Intrigue? This looks like an old Story, which some Years ago was spread by a Dignified Clergyman within the Line of Communication, who was so bold as to fasten it on a worthy Gentleman now dead, but who at that time gave Challenge, which was not during his Life, nor to this hour, taken up. And what is it that tempts this sort of Men to talk after the old rate? Have they any new Instances that makes 'em so brisk in their Accusations? Let them make it out against one Nonconforming Minister, or forbear this Invidious way of casting Reproach on the Guiltless.  
However, for once let us suppose that some Dissenting Ministers have received Money from those in Authority for some Service they did the Government, What is this to the promoting a Popish Design? Multitudes of the Church of England have been raised to great Preferments for the Services they were supposed to have done the Government, but was it in good earnest because they promoted Popery? This Letter insinuates, as if the Papists also promoted the late Persecution against Dissenters, and yet we remember well, who Preached up Persecution before the Lord Major of this City, and who also was made a Dean: But was it because he designed Popery? Moreover it's well known, that a certain Bishop in the World, if one under a suspension still bears that Name, who procured at least 200 l. to encourage a Church of England Doctor to persecute the Non-conformists, and was this for the sake of Popery? In a word, we give the Challenge to any Man to prove that the Papist did at any time give one Farthing to a Dissenting Minister; or that the Dissenters did Receive from the Government the fortieth part that Church of England Ministers have received.  
If any Church of England Men have been sensible of the Miseries they have by their severe Laws exposed the Dissenters unto, and in compassion have given some Relief, the Dissenters no doubt will thankfully acknowledge it, but then they must add, that unless the Church of England Men must be esteemed Papists because of the Alliance there is between their Principles, this is not a receiving Money from Papists: But let the Truth be brought to Light, and let the Church of England Charity to Dissenting Ministers be discovered, and 'twill appear that it's not to be compared with what the Church of England hath taken from 'em. Moreover it's well known, that when some Gentlemen on their Dying Reds to express their Affection to Dissenting Ministers have given 'em Legacies, they have been deprived of 'em. And where is the Dissenting Minister, who Preaches up Anger and Vengeance against the Church of England? Name the Man, that we may know who he is, and what repute he has amongst the party; and 'twould be also an Act of Justice in him to direct us to the People who received their Addresses from a Priest, and to the Priest that made 'em.  
If the Gentleman cannot clear up these Points, as I presume he cannot, how specious soever his pretences may be, his untruth won't much advantage the Church of England, nor will that Church have much cause to Glory in such an Advocate, who doth not only charge her for Persecuting the Dissenter, but makes no other Plea, but what leans on the ●eeblest Foundation, even on Injustice and False Accusations. And if this be her best Refuge, her Quarrel with the King (it's hoped) cannot hold long, for these generally are the last.  
And what is it that provokes the good Man to persuade us, that the Dissenters Thanks are Extorted? Doth he think that the being delivered from a violent Persecution is so inconsiderable a kindness, that the Dissenters can't be sensible of it? Are grievous Imprisonments, the spoiling 'em of their Estates, the ruining of their Families, such small matters, that the Deliverance cannot Merit the Name of a favour? Or, are the Dissenters so used to such Calamities and made so Brawny, that they are not capable of perceiving so much? Is it impossible for them to distinguish Ease from Misery? If so, whose fault is that? Is it not the Persecutors that have so ill entreated them? It's true the Church of England did by her Rigour, so over-aw them, that they durst not Petition the King for ease; and after his Majesty most Graciously gave it them, the Dread and Confusion they remained under was so very great, that the Dissenters could not easily recover themselves, and make that hast they should, to render the King their humblest thanks. But this is not for the Honour of the Church, first to frighten the Dissenter and make him move slowly, and then reproach him for not making more haste. And this is not all, for the Dissenters do no sooner Address, but they become Voluntary Aggressors, and look like Counsel retained by the Prerogative against Magna Charta. This is a run from one Extreme to another, they are first charged for not rendering thanks willingly, and yet then are made Voluntary Aggressors for rendering such unwilling thanks, who look like Counsel retained against Magna Charta. Are not the Dissenters then in a most deplorable condition? If they do not Address, they are a People that can never be obliged by benefits, nor fit to be Tolerated, as one Church Doctor assures them; if they do Address, they are for Prerogative against Magna Charta. And why against Magna Charta? Is it against the Great Charter of England, that a good Subject enjoy his Civil Rights, and Properties? The Dissenters, at least the greatest part of 'em, take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and thereby show themselves to be good Subjects, and why then must they be deprived of their Civil Rights, for the sake of a Religion that hurts not the Government? Some say, that by the Fundamental Constitution of our Government all Laws against the Law of God are ipso facto void and null, and may not the King prevent the Execution of such vacated Laws? Others tell us, that to be of this, or that, or the other Religion, is not a Crime at Common Law, it is but Malum Prohibitum, and yet Religious Meetings have been made Routs and Riots, (even the supposed Intention to serve God, hath been thus interpreted) which are mala in se. And why may not the King prevent these abuses of the Law? The Dissenter is also told, that 'tis against Magna Charta to disseise the Subject of his  or Liberty, but by Lawful Judgement of his Peers, and yet by the Conventicle Act, and the Oxford Act, the Dissenters have been disseised of both without any such Judgement of their Peers, and may not the King hinder this? There have been also great Lawyers who aver, that the 23d. of Elizabeth affects not a Protestant Dissenter, and yet many have been ruined by this Act, and may not the King put a stop to this Injustice and Violence on the Subject? It's also told them, that 'tis against Magna Charta to Amerce a Freeman any other ways than after the manner of the fault, saying to him his Contenement and , and yet Convictions have been, unknown to the accused party, Recorded, and Warrants have been granted out for 8, 10, 12, or 14 Conventicles at once to the Disseising the Freeman of all he has. It's true, a great Lawyer declared, that no Conviction could be Legally Recorded until the party accused was summoned to show cause; but another yet living was of another Opinion, and gave life to Clandestine Convictions, as a Justice of Peace and a great Lawyer did grant out Warrants on Prophetic Oaths, that a Meeting would be the next Day or Week following; But the King has delivered them from all these Miseries, and yet may they not give thanks, unless they set themselves against Magna Charta?  
Furthermore it must not be forgotten, how much the Church of England have exalted the Prerogative when they were in hopes of having it employed against the Dissenter, and nothing more certain than that Qui sentit commodum, & incommodum sentire debet, and therefore how much soever the King Exercises his Prerogative, in this respect the Churchmen must be silent, and that in matters Ecclesiastical the King can dispense, no Man of Learning that I could ever hear of, but doth acknowledge it, and others affirm, that the King can in matters Civil dispense with whatever is but malum Prohibitum. But for these things consult nigh's Discourse, and the Replier to the Oxford Reasons against Addressing.  
In a word, if the King had been of the Church of England's Religion, not only the Dispensing Power, but the Legislative would have been (as heretofore it has been affirmed to be) lodged in the King's Breast; but if the King be of another Religion, he must be deprived of all his Prerogatives: But whatever the present sentiments of the Church of England are, it's very manifest, that according to the frame of our Government, as described by the Church of England Men heretofore, the King could not only dispense with Laws, but the Prerogative is so very much above all Laws, that even those Commissions granted by Prerogative against Statute-Law must be regarded more than that Law. It is not therefore the Prerogative that our Churchmen are angry with, but the Exercise of it to the Relief of others. 'tis the Dissenters Liberty that vexes them.  
For though it be known, that the Dissenters lie under manifest Convictions of Conscience, that it's their Duty to worship God in their Way, that their Privacy was but the Effect of a Violence laid upon them, which is no sooner removed, but they return to their Duty; yet for the sake of Religion, contrary to their Consciences, they must lay aside the Public Worship of God, and all this to gratify their Persecuting Friends of the Church of England, and must wait till a Parliament, that is against Liberty of Conscience, give 'em Liberty. For the great thing the Dissenters desire, is a Parliament that will concur with the King in Establishing Liberty by a Law, and for desiring such a Parliament they are exposed by our Gentleman to the severest Censures.  
But let us suppose that to gratify their Persecutors, the Dissenters would venture on one stretch of Conscience; and though when they could not Worship Publicly without Trouble, yet were resolved to hold on in that Worship, and will now, whilst they may be at ease, leave off all Public Worship, I say, for once let us make the Supposition: But than would not this be sufficient to justify all the Clamours, they have been loaded with above Twenty Years together, of being the most giddy and obstinate People alive, who know not how to live, but in contradiction to the Government; and would not this provoke the King to conclude, that it's not Religion but Faction and Sedition they are for? And would not our Clergy have endeavoured to fix such Thoughts of the Dissenters on his Majesty's Mind? And might they not have continued their Privacy till Doomsday for any Relief a Parliament would give 'em? How then can any Man of Conscience, or of mere Humanity, be angry with this persecuted People, because they thankfully accept of Liberty, and are desirous that it may be Established by Law? But this is not the worst part of the Pamphlet, there remaineth what cannot but turn the Stomach of any Loyal Person against it; for Reflections of a more odious Nature cannot be cast on any Man of Honour, than this Pamphleteer has cast on the King.  
In the First place, he insinuates that the King gives not the Dissenter this Liberty, of Inclination, but of Necessity. These New Friends, saith he, by whom he must mean his Majesty, and those of his Religion, did not make you their Choice, but their Refuge, they have ever made their first Courtships to the Church of England, and when they were rejected there, they made their Application to you in the Second place; that the King being a Papist, is not to be believed; for the Papists are no more able to make good their Vows, than Men married before and their Wife alive, can confirm their Contract with another. Besides, he further suggests, as if his Majesty would imitate a Neighbouring Prince, in destroying all Protestants; for he saith, If in the Height of this great Dearness, by comparing things, it should happen, that at this Instant there is much a surer Friendship with those who are so far from allowing Liberty, that they allow no Living to a Protestant under them: Let the Scene lie in what part of the world it will, the Argument will come home, and sure it will afford sufficient ground to suspect. And in another Page, the Prerogative is brought in retaining Counsel against Magna Charta, and in answer to an Objection, in which 'tis said, that the Church of England is never humble, but when she is out of Power; The Reply is, That this is not so in FACT; For whatever may be told the Dissenter at this very Hour, and in the Heat and Glare of their Sunshine, the Church of England can in a moment bring Clouds again, and turn the Royal Thunder upon their Heads, blow 'em off the Stage with a breath, if she should give but a smile or a kind word, the least glimpse of her Compliance, would throw them back into the State of Suffering, and draw upon 'em all the Arrears of Severity, which have accrued during the Time of this Kindness to them. But this is not all, for it is further insinuated, as if the next Parliament shall be chosen by the King, and not by the People, that no Liberty of Debate shall be left the Members of either House, but the Roman Consistory shall be made Lords of the Articles.  
All this, and much more is to be found in the Pamphlet, and what can be the meaning of all this, But that the Bigoted part of the Church of England, if ever they were Loyal, are fallen from their Loyalty, and have outdone the most Seditious Scribblers? For what can be said worse of any Prince? What was ever said worse of Charles the Second, by any Factious Party? Or what can be said worse of any Man living? The Lashes given our King are most severe, and look like an Interpretation of their Doctrine of Nonresistance. And if a Fear that others shall enjoy but a like Ease with themselves, stir up all this Choler against their Sovereign, may we not fairly conclude, that if they had been in that Suffering Condition the Dissenters have been for Six and Twenty Years together, they would have stirred up many a Rebellion? And what shall we think of those, who so very much applaud all this, as too many of the Church of England Communion have done? But do these Gentlemen think that this is the way to take with Dissenters? Will they, who by their Sufferings for many Years together could never be provoked, will they (I say), now their Sorrows are removed, imitate such Churchmen, and fly in his Majesty's Face for the Grace he affords 'em? If you think they are so like yourselves, Time will demonstrate your Mistake. For to be under a Prince of a Different Religion from themselves is no new thing to them, they have known how to suffer under such, and how to enjoy Peace and Quiet when it's their Prince's Pleasure to give it 'em, and they cannot but pity you, to see how you wince and kick, assoon as you find your Prince doth in good earnest dislike your Religion and Conduct.  
And how is it that this Gentleman dares to contradict his Sovereign? The King declares that it has been a long time his Principle, that Conscience ought not to be constrained, nor Men punished for m●er Religion, and that it has been against his Royal Inclination to persecute any for their Consciences, and also his Resolve that if ever it came into his Power, he would put a stop unto it, as he now has done, and whose Word is to be regarded? That of a Prince, who knows best his own Heart, and whose Word, till the Time that he shown Mercy to the Dissenter, has been entirely depended on by the Church of England, or this Gentleman's, whom we have found to insinuate several Falsities in this very Pamphlet?  
But he saith that in the first place they courted the Church of England. And for what? Was it not to press them to be willing, to take off all Penal Laws and Tests, in pursuance of his Majesty's most Christian Principle? And if your Church of England has been so obstinate in opposing not only so great a Prince, but so Christian a Principle, must the Dissenter take pet, because they were not first Courted? No Sir, the Church of England's rejecting the Applications made to her sufficiently discovers her Resolution to abide by her old Doctrine of Persecution, and therefore the Dissenters have the greatest Reason in the World to beware lest they lose this Opportunity, and fall under the lash of your Penal Laws once more. They can't forget how oft you have said, that the Papists are much better than the Presbyterians, and that you would rather turn Papist than Presbyterian, and they are still afraid, that your not complying with the King, is, because you long for another opportunity to persecute afresh.  
'Tis true we know that amongst the Gentry of your Communion there are many Resolved to do their utmost for the Ease of the Dissenters, and they have, as there was occasion, expressed their Dislike of violent Methods to convince rational Men; but amongst the Clergy, there is only a sprinkling here and there, and at this very Time many can't forbear their Railing against Dissenters, but of this more by and by.  
You in the next place tell us, that Papists are no more able to make good their Vows, than Men married before, and their Wife alive, can confirm their Contract with another. And is this consistent with your Addresses of Thanks for his Majesty's Declaration by which he promised to protect the Church of England? What, are there no Men of Honour amongst the English Papists? What, no Regard to be had to the Word of a King if a Papist? Is not this a casting dirt in his Majesty's Face? Were it needful, I could give you several Instances of Men of Honour and Truth to their Word amongst Papists, and I know of none that ever doubted it, when it was for their Interest as it is in this Case.  
But who can without horror consider that wretched Insinuation by which our Prince is linked with another who will not suffer a Protestant to live within his Government? Methinks this Liberty which so very much displeases the Gentleman, should convince him of his Madness. Our Prince is not only of a contrary Principle, but has had the Advantage of seeing the mischievous Effects of Persecution, not only at home, but abroad, and therefore takes quite contrary measures, and yet he is to be suspected. Verily if a Dissenter had said half so much of Charles the Second, every Pulpit would have rung on't, and have condemned him for a Traitor, a Rebel, and what not, and that without the Help of Innuendo's. They would have said, What can more evidently discover the Designs and Purposes of their Hearts, when they represent their Sovereign under so black a Character? But these very Men think they have a Privilege and may innocently Revile the Lords Anointed, and therefore they go on to tell the World, that the Prerogative is retaining Counsel against Magna Charta, as if the King intended nothing less than the Ravishing his People of their Civil Rights and Privileges, even because he endeavours strenuously their Restoration and Establishment.  
The King would have all things reduced to the ancient Constitution of our Government, therefore would have none of his good Subjects deprived of their Civil Rights for the sake of their Religion, and would by all means have Liberty and Property to be looked on, as too Sacred to be touched for an harmless Opinion, and yet because this displeases our persecuting Clergy it must be interpreted a setting up Prerogative against Magna Charta.  
And that the Dissenter may understand the Reason of all this Boldness with their King, the Gentleman assures us they have him at their Command. He is perfectly a Dependant on them, and that because they frown, the King runs unto the Dissenter for Refuge, but if they would but smile, or speak a kind Word, 'twould be enough to engage Him to forget all his Promises and turn the Royal Thunder against the Dissenter. Thus he first represents the King's Religion to be such as races all Principles of Honour and Truth out of his Royal Heart, and then tells us, that the King's Case is so desperate and deplorable, that though he is now gone to the Dissenter for Shelter, yet if the Church of England, will give him one smile, he'll break all the Promises he made them, and notwithstanding the King has promised his Pardon for all that is past, their smile, or a kind word from them would draw upon the Dissenters all the Arrears of Severity. But who can read this with less Horror, than I am in at the writing it? If this be Church of England Loyalty, I must make use of this Litany, From Church of England Loyalty, good Lord deliver me. For after what a dismal rate do they paint out our Prince? and if our Prince had been such an One, in what a calamitous Condition would the English be? I dread the Rehearsal of it, and therefore I will only apply myself unto the English Gentry, who most undoubtedly will discover their Abhorrence of all such scurrilous Pamplets, and must beseech them to consider what a plunge this Gentleman would hurry both them and the Dissenters into, could he but obtain his aim; especially considering how he would persuade us to believe that the King designs to send down his Congè d' Eslire to every County, City, and Corporation in the Kingdom, for the Choice of Parliament-men, and take away the Liberty of Debate from the Members of both Houses.  
The Truth of it is, the Gentleman has not spared to blacken the King, and thereby has acted the part of a brisk Clergyman very notably; for who could believe what this Man saith, and not immediately endeavour a present Freedom from the Oppression that he must have in prospect? But the Dissenters knowing how much he loads them, and their Ministers with his false charges, and feeling the Grace and Clemency of the King in rescuing 'em out of the Hand of the Church of England, are abundantly satisfied both of the Impudence and Ill Design of the Pamphleteer.  
And as he doth thus treat the Dissenter and his Most Sacred Majesty, so, that he might leave no Artifice unattempted, he would fain lick over the Sores of his beloved Persecutors, and saith, If you had now to do with those Rigid Prelates, who made it matter of Conscience to give you the least Indulgence, but kept you at an uncharitable Distance, and even to your more Reasonable scruples continue stiff and inexorable, the Argument might be fairer on your side, but since the Common danger hath so laid open that mistake, that all the former haughtiness towards you is for ever extinguished, and that it hath turned the Spirit of Persecution into a Spirit of Peace, Charity and Condescension.  
In answer hereunto, I am glad to find any Man, who seems Zealous for the English Clergy, as this Gentleman doth, to be so sensible, that the Clergy have been rigid, that they have made it a matter of Conscience to give the least Indulgence, and that they have been Proud and Haughty. But I am afraid that few of the Persecuting Clergy are so sensible of their Error as this Man would have us believe, for it's manifest that there are many of 'em, who continue their old Pulpit Rail, and whilst their hands are tied, their Tongues and Pens are at work. With what scorn and contempt do they express themselves, when they speak of a Dissenter, and how do they daily threaten, that they hope for a time to be Revenged on them for accepting of Deliverance from their Violence? And at this time they do their utmost to prevent their Assembling themselves together for public Worship, and as the Persecution began in a turning the Dissenter out of the Halls, so where the Clergy can prevail, there none are permitted the Conveniences of these places; and where they have Tabernacles to dispose of, they'll let 'em Rot or commit them to the Flames, rather than that the Dissenters shall have the Advantage of Building Convenient Meeting-houses with them; yea, one of the most renowned of their Dignified Clergy would rather the Parish should bear the loss of an Hundred pounds, than part with a Tabernacle to any Man, that would not give bond, not to employ any part of it towards the Building a Meetinghouse for Dissenters. And is it not Natural to conclude, that as they at this very time do their utmost to discourage the Dissenter, they would still do much more had it been in their Power? Besides, we have the greatest reason to conclude, that those of the Clergy who are for the giving ease to the Dissenter will take the opportunity, and fall in with the King, and not talk after the rate this Man doth, nor act after the manner these others do.  
Really Sir, I am almost tired, and therefore must beg your Pardon, that I only observe further to you how apparent it is from what this Gentleman insisteth on, that our Persecuting Clergy have been the Papists Tools; Think a little, saith he, who they were that promoted your Former Persecutions, and then consider, how it will look, to be Angry with the Instruments, and at the same time to make a League with the Authors of your sufferings? So that the Papists are said to be the promoters of the Persecution, and the Church of England their Instruments, their Tools; and if the Papists be driving on ill designs, what can they desire more than that all things should run into confusion, and let the Church of England take heed they be not their Tools in this too. And why must not the Dissenter enter into a League with the Papists to put a stop to all Persecutions? The Church of England, it's like, entered into a League with them in the Persecuting work, but the Dissenter must not join with them in endeavouring the peace and quiet of the Nation. Verily this sort of Men are greatly to be pitied; and I being hearty sorrowful for their misfortune, must beg leave to tell you, that in the midst of all this noise the True State of the Case lies here; the Church of England Clergy are for joining with the Papists in a fresh persecution, but the Papists, and the Protestant Dissenters are agreed to do their utmost to prevent all Persecutions for the future in this Land, and this is the thing that vexes our humble and good Natured Clergy, and the Attempt of the Author of this Letter is to wheedle the Dissenters, and persuade them to give all the Countenance they can to the Persecuting Clergy. But how Wisely, let the Reader Judge.  
I am Yours.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
If the Gentleman be not satisfied with thus much, but is resolved to continue his False Charges, etc. He shall have enough in my next to let the World know what manner of Men our Clergy and their Creatures are.  
FINIS.