him that sent it and that the Letter and Bearer both affirm this small Stone which he now holds betwixt his fingers and knows by his Senses to be a Stone and not a Man is yet the great Mogul in person and so is every Diamond besides that comes over and yet that Prince is still in his own Country Must that person now because of their Authority and greater skill think himself bound to acquiesce in their judgment against the testimony of sense or must he not renounce his senses to do it 2. He supposes further that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is as plainly contained in Scripture as it is in the Letter that the Transparent Stone then sent is a Diamond But that he knows we deny and when he can find these or the like words This Bread is turn'd into my Natural Body or is upon Consecration my true Substantial Body it will be time enough to prepare a further Answer for him The Question being not whether what God teaches is not to be believed but whether he hath so taught So that it still remains true what the Preacher charged upon him that in believing Transubstantiation a man must renounce his five Senses at once even hearing it self which will not only teach us to distinguish betwixt the Host's and the Priest's falling into the water though we are blindfold but we must in their way renounce that Sense to believe it when we hear all Mankind concurring in it that the report of Sense is to be believed and that in our Author's words To frame a judgment of the nature or substance of a thing we must depend upon Sense 5. The Pope alone cannot err and all others without some of his Assistance cannot but err Here are two Propositions 1. The Pope cannot err This our Author now calls an Opinion of some School-Divines whereas the Apologist shewed it to be the prevailing Opinion of their Church whether in respect of number or authority It 's the most common opinion of almost all Catholicks as Bellarmin It 's the Catholick Truth and what all Catholick Doctors teach in these days saith Suarez But to this not a word 2. All others cannot but err Here our Author is guilty of a new Misrepresentation It is charged upon us saith he because we believe the members of our Church to be fallible that therefore they cannot but err Where he changes the Proposition into a Conclusion by foysting in the word Therefore and then running it down as a most Illogical and absurd consequence but let him answer for the faults of it whose conseqeunce it is The consequence then be to himself and let the Proposition be the Preacher's that all others without some of his assistance cannot but err This is absolutely false saith our Author and so say I too but it is true Popery Let their Catechism decide the Case to that I appeal which thus delivers the sense of their Church upon it But as this one Church which the Pope of Rome is at the Head of Sect. 15. cannot err in delivering the Doctrine of Faith and Manners seeing it 's governed by the Holy Ghost So all the rest which assume to themselves the name of a Church must of necessity be engaged in the most pernicious Errors of Doctrine and Manners as being led by the spirit of the Devil Now here is the whole Calummy at large If men submit to the Pope and are in his Church they have the benefit and assistance of his Infallibility and are under the Guidance of it as secure as in the Ark of Noah but if they leave it they are drown'd in error and perdition And surely while they are in actual Error they cannot but err according to the known Axiom Quicquid est quamdiu est necesse est esse Because the Apologist before was modest and having not seen the Sermon it self and so not fully understanding the sense of it would neither too hastily condemn or acquit but after he had said what he thought fit upon it concludes If the Preacher went beyond this what Author or Authors he had for it I know not they do not at present occur to me our Author begins to exult saying It 's such a Consequence as the Apologizer himself knows not how to justifie nor need not as a Consequence for that 's his own and yet he has not goodness enough to acquit us from so foul a Calumny The matter it seems is foul and is prov'd upon them let him now she his goodness in confessing the Charge or more of his strength to prove it a Calumny Eighth Character of a Pulpit-Papist He is professedly edified in ignorance by his Church Praying and Prophesying in an Vnknown Tongue They make no other use or account of Confession than what profest Drunkards do of Vomiting The first shall be considered in another place Char. 14. As to the second The Apologist shew'd what is the sense of the word Prophesie in the 1 Cor. 14. which the Preacher there refer'd to viz. that the Apostle there understands by it the expounding the Articles of the Christian Faith and of the Scriptures that contain it But here our Author grievously mistakes him when he adds and to be the same as Preaching For that he affirmed not as well knowing that the Apostle is to be otherwise understood than of Vulgar Preaching 1. Because the Apostle there distinguishes it from Doctrine v. 6. 2. Because of the way it was exercised in when one spoke after another agreeably to the custom of the Jewish Doctors in their Synagogues of whom Philo saith that one read the Bible and another of the more skilful 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 passing through places not understood expâ—undâ—d them 3. Because it was an extraordinary gift by Revelation v. 29 30 31 32. and reckoned as such amongst them c. 12.10 13.2.9 2. The Apologist shew'd farther it was not reasonable to fix this sence upon the Preacher because he must needs know it to be otherwise To this our Author briskly returns Marry if they never Preached contrary to what they knew this would be a good Rule And he has found it by woful experience to be a hard task to discover it though it has been plainly made out that some write contrary to what they know 3. He shew'd farther that the Preacher was speaking about Worship and so consequently it must be what is so accounted and therefore that this must be rather the Reading of Lessons out of Scripture and Hymns which are sometimes call'd Prophesie 1 Chron. 25.1 and which are in their Church-Service in an Vnknown Tongue This our Author passes by as also the Challenge following it But yet he will have it a Calumny whilst he asserts a thing of the Papists which in the common acceptation of the word is absolutely false But what if it was the common acceptation of the word if not the acceptation the Apostle takes it in in that place which the Preacher
of it For thus he saith If any make Exceptions against the Character of a Papist thus disguis'd as 't was drawn there in the Papist Misrepresented I 'le never quarrel upon that score let that be raz'd out But however tho he thus drops his own Apprehensions as well as he had his 37. Points of Representation and at once gives away half his Labour yet like a true Master of Defence he mounts the Stage again and renews the Fight for by the help of some Pulpit-Sayings he thinks he has given life to his otherwise dying Cause Let that saith he be raz'd out and these others take place which 't is likely are more Authentick What! more Authentick than his own Apprehensions O yes for its such a Popery and such a Papist as is describ'd by Ministers in their Pulpits In which there are many things charged upon them without either Truth and Sincerity and consequently 't is not without grounds they complain of Misrepresenting 1. But why the Pulpits Are not the same things in Books of Controversy and are they not there more fully explain'd and debated Thither therefore in reason we ought to be sent to understand how the Protestants Represent the Papist But then our Author had not had the opportunity of exclaiming against those high Places as he Phrases it from whence it seems they have received no little Damage or which is worse he had been engaged in a Dispute which is not his Province as he tells us p. 28. 2. But if some Pulpits have misrepresented them in some cases what is that to the Pulpits in general What is that to our Church He has been already told that we are far from defending such Misrepresentations if such there be That which we adhere to is the Doctrine and Sense of our Church as it is by Law established and what Representations are made agreeable thereto we undertake to defend and no other Can he think we are any more concern'd in the mistakes or infirmities of others then he thinks himself to be in the loose and extravagant opinions of their own Doctors Schoolmen and Casuists And is it not reasonable he should allow the same Law to others he is forced so frequently to plead in his own defence 3. But further supposing that some of the Pulpits have Misrepresented the Papist in some points and in those points he disclaims yet are there no points besides they differ in And if these were set aside would the Church of England and Rome be one What thinks he of the many points I find in the same Sermons he quotes that he civilly passes by Such as these That the Church of Rome is alone the Catholick Church out of which is no Salvation That the Pope is the Universal Head of that Church That that Church is Infallible What thinks he of Transubstantiation Purgatory Invocation of Saints Communion in one kind Divine Service and Scriptures in an Unknown Tongue Merit and Works of Supererogation the Worship of Images Implicit Faith Indulgences Deposition of Princes c. Lastly What thinks he of the great point he all along omitted as he is charged that a Papist doth not only believe the Doctrines defin'd in the Council of Trent to be true but also to be necessary to Salvation Are not these the Doctrines of the Church of Rome And are not the Pulpits as much employ'd in confuting these as those of praying to Images and putting their trust in them and the other Follies and Abominations as he calls them charged on his Church And do not the Protestants think as ill of those points he owns as of those he disclaims 4. But how come they of the Church of Rome to start this charge of Misrepresentation who are of all Churches in the world the most guilty of it Or how comes our Author to continue it who neither durst so much as vindicate others or himself when convicted of it The learned Author of the View enter'd the Field and threw down the Gantlet but our Author fairly slinks aside and leaves his Brethren to sink under the imputation of the soulest Misrepresentations And this is not to be wonder'd at when he has not one word of Reply to all the Accusations of that kind there produced against himself And yet to give a further Specimen how far this disingenuous quality has prevail'd upon his temper he still proceeds in the same course and to be quit with the Pulpits which he saith are forward in making characters of the Papists he is as forward in making characters of the Pulpits The business of so many Pulpits ten thousand open every week he saith is chiefly to make exceptions pick holes quarrel ridicule and the more excellent they are at their work the more they gain upon their Auditory And that he may not be wanting he will be at his Plots too and follow what he calls Oat's Divine way of Information He had tried once before to form a design of this kind when he would have Sermons preach'd many years ago against Popery to contain severe reflections upon his present Majesty But that he was soon made sensible of and has not a syllable to excuse And yet he will be again at his Innuendo's for thus he lays the Scene Methinks the Pulpits saith he should be more tender of their Soveraign than to venture upon the same Method which he before charges them with with the Son which prov'd so fatal to the Father and dangerous to the Brother But I fear the excess of jealousie for their Religion puts them upon being too bold with their Prince and that by a just judgment of Heaven they are blindly practising the very principles they have so often charged upon the Papists making their Churches Interest the center of their Religion Preaching Faction instead of Faith c. Such expressions as these are not thrown out at all adventure and we may soon guess what they tend to and it 's a fair warning Thus far for the Pulpits but to shew what a Talent he has at Character-making he will furnish us also with that of the true Son of the Church of England viz. A Genuine Son of the Church of England is to have a good stock of this implicit Faith by him and to believe and speak though he knows nothing at all Again This is to the Protestant Tune If a man can't tell how to run down Popery though he knows nothing of it he 's no true Son of the Church of England So that quarrelling and ridiculing is the work it seems of the Preachers and a delight in it the temper of their Auditors and to speak all at once Ignorance and Arrogance Slander and Impudence are in his opinion the Ingredients of a true Son of the Church of England This is the faithful Representer the soft Adviser the prudent Cautioner the impartial Character-maker the Preacher of Charity the Detecter of Impostures
refers to But what if it be not the common acceptation of the word but that it 's taken vulgarly for foretelling things to come Who then is the Calumniator 2. They make no other use of Confession than what profest Drunkards do of Vomiting Our Author saith This is a most putid Calumny and that the Vindicator dares not defend but only that so it is in the practice of many of their Church This he complains of and with good reason but then what shall be said of one that after he has told a story of one that declaim'd against the Papists for a Generation of Vipers and a profligate sort of men knowing but two Families and those good men from thence takes occasion to exclaim But this is to the Protestant-tune if a man can't tell how to run down Popery though he knows nothing of it he 's no true Son of the Church of England This is Case for Case But was this all the Apologist had to say in defence of the Preacher did not he produce Authorities of their own as to the General practice Did he not refer to their Doctrines and Penances and the Taxa Camerae Apostolicae in confirmation of it This had more become him to have answered than to put a Case Ninth Character of a Pulpit-Papist It consists of three Paragraphs 1. He pays his Devotions to Saints Canonized for Money and Treason Here the Apologist charges the Sayer with an alteration of the Preacher's words from which he would bring himself off by saying it's an insinuation which to the Hearers is as good as an Assertion whereas the corruption was that he turn'd a Particular into an Universal Here our Author observes against the Apologist 1. That he proves first it may so happen which is as much to the purpose as for one to say the Church-of-England men are corrupters of God's Word because 't is possible they may be so But the case is far otherwise for if there be no certainty but that the Pope may Canonize a Rebel for a Saint then there is no certainty but that the Saint may be no Saint And then what become of the Devotions of the Supplicants as those to Thomas à Becket at whose Shrines were more Offerings made than to Christ himself 2. He saith it has been done and in the next line comes in with an instance where it had like to have been done The instance was of Maria Visitationis where indeed it was not done but that it was not was more from the King of Spain's Jealousie than the Pope's Sagaciousness who sanctified her by Letters under his own hand Our Author I perceive dares not so much as name this Instance 3. As for the Instance of Thomas à Becket he saith he was Canoniz'd not for Rebellion and because he adhered to the Pope against his Prince but for his Virtuous Life and Martyrdom and the attestation of his Sanctity by undeniable Miracles Not for Rebellion as if that would be exprest in the Reasons for his Canonization I have read it was a Moot question Whether he was damn'd for Treason or Glorified as a Martyr I think it not worth the while to decide it but leave our Chronicles and our Author to struggle about it But it minds me of a story told by Bellarmin of one that was worshipped for a Martyr and yet appear'd afterward and told them he was damn'd 2. They pray to a Crucifix of Wood or Stone as well as to Christ himself and attribute as much satisfaction to it as to the Blood of Christ. Our Author rejoyns that This is every word an Infamous Falshood And continues Though the Vindicator appeals to the Words and Forms of some of our Prayers and then says That if words will make it plain the Preacher was not mistaken yet this is so childish a plea that methinks it ought to be beneath a Divine especially a man of conscience to charge so gross an abomination upon such a frothy pretext And then he gives his reason I must confess that if the Vindicator had only the Words and Forms of their Prayers to plead in Vindication of the Preacher without attending to the sense and reason of the thing that it might be as childish and frothy as he represents it and he would have Deut. 32.1 and the Benedicite used in our Church against him as our Author argues But if he had read on he would have found that it was the words as necessarily including such a sense and that the Apologist did covertly refer him to the Papist Represented and not Misrepresented Our Author now confesses himself to be the same that wrote the Papist Misrepresented and Represented and should be therefore concern'd to have defended it against the forecited Answer In which was shewn 1. That the Cross in the Church of Rome as it's Representative so is Consecrated by an Office on purpose composed for it 2. That at the Consecration of it they pray that the Lord would bless the Wood of the Cross that it may be a saving remedy to Mankind a stability of Faith an increase of good Works and the Redemption of Souls and that Christ would take this Cross into his hands and that all that offer it may by the merit of this Cross be delivered from every Sin they have committed 3. That it 's esteem'd upon Consecration to have those Virtues communicated to it 4. That they adore it even with Latria the Worship they give to God and direct their Prayers to it 5. That those Prayers are without a Figure and in a proper Sense applied to the Material Cross. This the Author of that Book proved 1. as that throughout the Cross is distinguished from Christ because they pray to Christ to bless the Cross and that he would communicate such Virtues to it 2. From their own Authors such as Soto Catharinus and Aquinas 3. From the severe Censures of those who held otherwise as was the case of Johannes Aegidius Canon of Sevil and Imbert of Bourdeaux and the Curate of Pomyrol Our Author talks of a Forehead of these that make up against them it 's a Word I am not us'd to but he must have somewhat like it that allows this Practice to be worse than Heathenish and a gross Abomination and yet lets all this to this day lye unanswer'd and thinks to put us off with the same crude Replies that stand there confuted In Conclusion it appears to be no more true that they are defamed by the method used in the Church of England than that the Church of Rome is the Mother-Church of the Church of England as our Author suggests 3. Making a particular Confession of our Sins to Men instead of keeping up wholesome Discipline is the way to corrupt it and tends to the debauching both Laity and Clergy Here our Author spends what he has to say both against Preacher and Vindicator in shewing special Confession to be allow'd
conclude that this could not be giving leave to sin for so long time to come which so far exceeds the term of mans life But though it gives not leave to sin it 's sure a pardon for sin and he can no more have a pardon for a Thousand years past who has lived but fifty or sixty than have an allowance for a Thousand years to come And the Doctor said not that they grant by Indulgences leave to sin for many Thousand years to come but that they granted Idulgences for many Thousand years to come But what saith our Author to these prodigious numbers of years It 's saith he only the releasing of Penances which being assign'd in proportion to the sins for some sins three years penance for others five might with some careless Christians amount to that degree that for fifty years of life they might possibly have 5000 years penalties due to their sins And we shall add for him the 32000 of Sixtus the 4 th and the ten hundred thousand of John the 22 th Well supposing this account of it to be right and that an Indulgence is only a relaxation of such Penances as are due to the offence Yet what a leave or at least encouragement is here given to sin when a man that has deserved to undergo 5000 or 30000 or ten hundred thousand years of Penance shall by a Bull of a Pope be discharged from all this for saying three short Prayers or five Pater-Nosters five Aves and a Credo But supposing the Sinner is so careless also that after that he has run up the score to so high a sum he has not procured such an Indulgence and that the 5000 and the ten hundred thousand years Penalties remain due where is it that he is to undergo these Penalties And where is it that the Church in his notion appoints assigns and inflicts them After all methinks he had better have said with some of their own Church that the Relaxation doth not avail as far as is promised but it 's so declared that the Faithful might be excited to give and the Church deceives them Thirteenth Character of a Pulpit-Papist This he distributes into nine Particulars 1. If he be false and deceitful to Mankind yet Euge bone serve all is well and he in an instant is thought worthy of a better Kingdom This he saith is absolutely false For this he gives two Reasons 1. That Falshood and deceit are no where recommended or taught by his Church As if his Church would directly establish such Propositions And yet the Council of Constance comes near it when it asserts Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks 2. He saith I am certain no man of what Church soever so guilty can have admittance there but by a sincere repentance and restitution This is the received Doctrine of his Church and I hope in their dealing they practice it as much as any Here he turns off the case in hand from the publick to the private state of affairs and has not one word in vindication of what the Apologist laid to their charge especially in that notorious instance of the Pope's solemn Oration made in the Conclave in commendation of the Assassination of Henry the Third of France As our Author has here broke one sentence of the Preacher's from another and set in the midst what belongs to the Sermon of Alms So he has wholly omitted Assertion 14 th in the Apology viz. If the Pope and his Emissaries say the right hand is the left the Papists are bound to believe it which is there made good by four several Arguments But here our Author is modest and has left it to shift for it self and his Church under the heavy charge of it 2. No man can be a Papist but he whose eyes are blinded by Education or he who puts his own eyes out by Atheism It 's in the Sermon No man Therefore can be a Papist c. which refers to what was there before said and the description the Preacher had given of Popery viz. 1. That the Pope can dispence with the Laws of Nature and against the Old and New Testament 2. That the Word of God is a Nose of Wax a Dumb Judg and dead Ink. 3. That the Pope is another God upon Earth and that if he declares the right hand is the left we ought to believe him And then follows No man therefore can be a Papist but c. The Question here is not about the Lives of Papists as our Author would have it but about the character of Popery And then it remains to be considered whether the Preacher was right in his representation of it and in the Authorities he produces for it But instead of bringing the case to an issue our Author in his Good Advice left out what went before and the Marginal Quotations of what he cited from the Sermon and now has offer'd no manner of Reply to nor so much as taken notice of the Apologist's Argument 3. The Council of Trent expresseth its allowance of picturing the Divinity it self and accordingly the Pictures of the Trinity are ordinarily to be beheld in the Popish Churches This is a new point our Author has substituted perhaps thinking this look's somewhat better than an Answer to that he has omitted but yet I shall take it in my way Here the Preacher 1. Appeals to their Doctrine and for which he quotes the Council of Trent 2. To their practice and use As to the first our Author saith it 's false since the Council delivers just the contrary taking care that if it happens that the Histories of the Holy Scriptures be painted or figured that the people be taught the Divinity is not therefore figur'd or painted as if that could be seen with corporeal eyes or represented in colours Sess. 25. Now here I observe 1. Our Author represents the case as if the Picturing of God and the Trinity in their Churches was much like what Aaron pleads for the Golden Calf I cast it into the fire and there came out this calf as if it was what they find in their Churches have been placed there by they know not whom and are like those that are to be seen it seems in the frontispiece of some Bibles and Common-Prayer-Books of the Church of England that come from an obscure uncertain hand but what they themselves do not regard If it happens c. saith the Council thus far indeed our Author goes with the Council but why did he leave out what immediately follows and why did he not read it as the Council reads it If it happens that sometimes the Histories and Narrations of Scripture be Painted or Figured when that shall be expedient for the unlearned people So that it 's not an accidental thing but designedly done as an Expedient for instructing the unlearned people But however the Preacher saith that of the Council which the Council denies that they picture the Divinity
Protestants that agree with the Papists Character of them There are few Papists but have some Relations Neighbours Correspondents Acquaintance or Conversation with some Protestants What I require of them then is to compare these Protestants they know with the Ideas Notions and Characters of a Papist-Protestant that is with the Notions that have been taught them by their Priests Pulpits and Books Let 'em tell me upon due Consideration whether they are meer Atheists and worship the Devil and act in defiance of their own Conscience and Profess the Broad way leading to Destruction and grant Libertinism to the highest degree of Wickedness c. 2. It 's Contingent as the same Persons and People may be good and bad better and worse in divers States and Circumstances If this be a good Argument it will always be so in all Ages and Cases and go where you will and take them where you will you will always find the Papist to answer our Authors Character and never to come up to the Pulpit-Character of him But I dare say our Author will not allow this to be a fair Method of proceeding and that for Example a Protestant should describe a Papist according to the great number of Matters of Fact which with our Author he may find by Writers of their own charg'd upon them such as Massacres Vsurpations Murders of Princes Treasons Plots Conspiracies Persecutions the vicious and scandalous Lives of some of her chief Prelates Popes their Pride Covetousness and Luxury as likewise the ill Examples of other Ecclesiastical Dignitaries as of Cardinals Bishops Priests their Ignorance Simony Oppression Cruelties Excesses c. And I may add the dissoluteness of manners prevailing throughout the Papal Dominions in some Ages Was ever this the State of the Papacy If it was as our Author cannot deny then why may not we take the Character of a Papist from such an age as well as the Age or Place where we live Or why not from another Country as well as from our own This indeed our Author sometimes refers to For saith he This That 't is only mistake and passion makes Popery so deform'd a Monster every one will conclude to be true who has taken a prospect of Holland and those Towns of Germany in which Papists and Protestants live together in one Corporation under the same Laws and making use in some places even of the same Churches too and this with such Freedom Amity and good Correspondence that their different Communion cannot be easily discovered and a man that should come out of England with his Head glowing with our Pulpit-Popery would not be easily convinc'd of the being of any Papists there Now 't is certain the Papists here and there are of the same Church Principles and Faith and 't is no Difference in this kind makes them there like other Men and here like Monsters but 't is because there the Papists are what they are and here they are made to be what they are not but what their Maligners please to render them I might here shew how far our Author is out in matter of Fact that tho these live together yet it is with great difference However supposing what he saith to be true yet that is no fit way to judge of their Religion by since whatever Freedom Amity and good Correspondence they have or exercise is not from their Church Principles and Faith but from other reasons which are Political such as Interest and Self-preservation c. For if it was from their Church Principles and Faith Popery would be all over the World the same Popery as it is in Holland and the places of Germany he speaks of But there is a vast difference betwixt Popery and Popery betwixt Popery when it is alone and Popery when it is diluted with Protestantism And if we would know what it is the fairer way to judg of it is where it is alone not as in Holland and Germany or England but as in Italy Spain Portugal and I may add now in France For there is the Church Principles and Faith in puris naturalibus and if we are to be referred to judg of what it is by the Lives and Practices of its Professors thither in reason we are to go pass we over the Alps and the Pyrenean Mountains or indeed the narrow Seas and there we may take a better View and Prospect than in a few Converts here who yet I doubt will generally be found without being rigorously observ'd not to have chang'd their Lives for the better no more than their Religion 2. After all this is not to the purpose For the Question is what is Popery and whether the Pulpits have truly represented it or not And Popery certainly was not there describ'd from the Lives of the present Professors of it in this Nation but from its Principles and the Practices of their Church in Conformity to those Principles Our Author surely will acknowledg that Popery is always the same that it is what it hath been and it hath been what it is and if so his way must conclude against it self unless he will say in all Ages and all Countreys Men of that Religion have lived alike and therefore to know whether the Pulpits have represented Popery aright or no we must go not to the Lives of any Age or Place alone nor to the Refinements and Expositions of a new Generation but to the Authorities the Preachers went upon But this is a troublesome task and what suited not our Author's temper or design and so he quitted the one for the other It 's a pleasant Entertainment to write a Character or a Representation the Pen runs smoothly along when it has Comparison before it and all the business is to describe invite or inveigh but when there are Breaks and Interruptions when it is to argue closely to manage an Argument or to Answer it it requires another sort of Talent and what our Author warily avoids And if he is beat out of his Road and the Artifice has been detected yet it shall go hard if he finds not out some Retrenchments to secure himself Thus has he proceeded from Representation to Reflection from Reflection to Protestation from Protestation to Accommodation from Accommodation to Reflection again from Reflection to Caution from Caution to Character and at last for the ending of this Controversy to prospect that is from the Principles and Practices of the Papists he appeals to their Lives amongst us This is his last Refuge and if that fails him it is but to find a new Title or Method and then he appears without Wound or Scar. And he may in the Conclusion of his Book tell the World what Feats he has done what Religious Frauds he detected and how unsuccessful he render'd them in his first Book So that if his Reader be as credulous as he himself is confident â—nd secure in his own good Opinion this may be a Windingsheet to the â—ontroversy
and his Adversaries be eternally silenced But if the Reader casts his Eye a little back he will see from Point to Point how he has left the Cause to shift for it self And whereas now it had become him to have discharg'd himself from so gross an Imputation we must be contented to have one answer to that and all the rest that they are too impertinent to deserve any Such we are to account the Charge of his Representing by halves of continuing his Misrepresentations without Replying to the Answers of his not answering the View of his common but vain Allegation that we pretend to know Popery better than they themselves of his abusing Mr. Montague of his Insincerity particularly when he offers to receive us into the Church of Rome upon his Representing Terms and when he professes to detest some Doctrines and Practices charged upon the Church of Rome c. But here he will say I make too much haste for the two last Points he has reply'd to in the Close But truly it 's after such a manner and so faintly as if he hop'd 't would be overlook'd As for Example As to the first he Replies This offer may be said to have been answer'd over and over But the matter of Fact defeats all those Answers and is a Demonstration that they are nothing but shuffling Now what is this matter of Fact and where is this Demonstration That follows For whilst a man may be received upon those Terms and yet cannot be received unless he assents to the Faith of the Church 't is evident that in that Character the faith of the Church is truly Represented Any one that reads this would be apt to think that the matter of Fact had never been questioned or had been prov'd to a Demonstration beyond possibility of Reply But besides what has been before answer'd to it over and over as he confesses it was particularly considered by the Answerer to his Reflections and the offer 1. shew'd to be a ludicrous one made without good Faith and with no other meaning than to put some colour upon his deceitful Characters of a Papist 2. It was replied further that suppose we could accept and should be accepted upon the Terms he propounds yet we have no security that when we are in this Representer either can or will if he could save us from being prest to profess and practice that Popery which he either denies or conceals And that because on the one hand we are certain that the prevailing part of his Church holds that which he either rejects from his Faith or says nothing of and that agreeably to their Councils and publick Offices And on the other hand we have no reason to believe his Authority in the Roman Church to be considerable enough to carry on his Representation when the turn is once serv'd Here the Answerer appeals to the case of Imbert of the Physitian at Goa and last of all to that of the poor Citizens of Orange p. 39. The Answerer shews further that we have not any good reason to trust him he having not given us any reasonable assurance that himself rejects that Popery which he exclaims against And last of all he puts this question Whether he would refuse us if we desired to come into the Roman Communion with that which we call old Popery To all which our Author replies after this manner 1. Our new Adversary has one cavil here to put in viz. That the Character of the Papist represented is not a good Character because the Faith of a Papist as stated under each Article is not All his Faith. Our Author has been so unkind as not to refer us to the Page for these words he pretends to quote from the Answâ—â— and I think after a careful perusal I may safely lodg them at his own door as an instance of his Misrepresenting Faculty Any one that knew the Answerer and is conversant in his way of writing knows well he had too clear a head to express himself in so insipid and nonsensical a way as our Author would fasten upon him and so as to argue against the truth of the Character because the Faith of a Papist as stated under each Article is not all his Faith. But however the Argument is not so obscure as his Answer to it is impertinent as might be shewn were it to the purpose before us 2. He proceeds This man has still another scruple That if he should come into our Church upon the terms I have proposed whether I will be security that he shall not be prest to profess and practise that Popery which I have either deny'd or conceal'd To this our Author answers after a surprizing manner Marry saith he if he means by that Popery the Pulpit-Popery I 'le give him the same security I have my self viz. the Assistance of the Holy Ghost promised to his Church which will never permit it to lead her members into such Abominations He may have the security too of a good conscience which cannot be prest to the profession of so much evil But what is his security worth or how can he plead the Holy Ghost's Assistance for not being led by her into such Abominations when she pleads it for their belief and practice Our Author would be understood that he calls not an Image or Crucifix out of its name when he saith it's an Image of wood or stone and that he speaks consonantly to the sense of his Church when he saith the Image is not adored or pray'd to but Christ or the Saint in the Image And yet the French Physician was clap'd up in the Inquisition for the former and the Condomian Imbert was imprison'd for the latter And surely the Inquisitors of Goa and Archbishop of Bourdeaux are themselves of that Church which he saith has the promise of the Holy Ghost c. And who shall decide this case or what security have we against 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—tians fate if at Goa or of Imbert's if in the Diocess of Bourdeaux Well but however saith he a man may have the security of a good conscience which cannot be prest to the profession of so much evil How not be prest What is pressing if the Dragoons of Orange be not What if not the Prison of Bourdeaux What if not the Inquisition at Goa O but Conscience cannot be prest to the profession of it A very comfortable inducement to comply with the Terms of the Representer For you may come into the Church upon them and if whâ—n come in the Church will oblige you to profess abominable things however Conscience is free and the Inquisition it self cannot force it and if you be sincere you will never be prest by that or any external violence to the profession of so much evil It 's well our Author is not at Goa to have his sincerity try'd But yet he hath not done For he adds 3. In this the Answer above given he may see his