himself is to be given to the Images of Christs Cross My Adversary is horribly netled and upbraids me with an hard Forehead in charging him with a notion of Invocating Images when he says he has no such word or hint I suppose he means in his Nubes Testium What notions he may have of this or what he does in his private Oratory I cannot tell nor did I charge Him in particular with Invocating Images But this I do charge upon the Church of Rome in general that She doth formally Invocate and pray to the Images of Christs Cross and that the worship of Latria is according to the Doctrine of her greatest Divines to be given to them He cannot but know that this form of Prayer is used by that Church and that it is directed to the Wood of the Cross O crux ave spes unica auge piis justitiam reisque dona veniam Hail O Cross our only Hope increase Righteousness to such as are pious and give pardon to such as are guilty For this Practise of the Roman Church was the true Ground and Reason of that opinion that Latria is due to the Image of the Cross This my good Friend hath shewed long ago that it was one of the grounds which Aquinas went upon when he determined Latria to be due to the Cross because the Church in praying to the Cross speaks to it as if it were Christ himself O crux ave spes unica c. And more Authors there are which say the same thing as Marsilius ab Ingen who asserts that the Cross as a sign representing the object of Worship and as a Medium of it is to be adored with Latria and the reason he fetcheth from the practice of the Church O crux ave spes unica auge c. So Catharinus saith That the opinion of those who say Images are not truly and properly to be worshipped but God to be worshipped before an Image is repugnant to the Practice of the Church because we direct our gestures our words and signs of adoration to the Images to which likewise we burn Incense and we worship the Cross saying O crux ave spes unica c. So likewise Dominicus Soto we ought to worship the Images themselves for the Church doth not say we worship thee O Christ but thy Cross and O crux ave spes unica c. In like manner Phil. Gamachaeus a Doctor of the Sorbon saith that the Cross and Image of Christ as they represent him ought to be worshipped with the Supream worship of Latria because Christ himself is the reason of the adoration and because the Church doth so worship the Cross O crux ave spes unica c Besides all this we are told a remarkable Story of one John Egidius Canon of Sevil that he was forced to make a publick Recantation for denying the adoration of the Cross because it was contrary to the practice of the Church when it saith O crux ave spes unica auge piis justitiam reisque dona veniam And after all this let this wonderful Discourser tell us whether these things be not True And whether these things be not acts of Latria And whether abundance of Divines more both before and since the Council of Trent have not maintained this Latria to be due to the Image of the Cross And whether this Latria be not much more than common Respect and Reverence And whether any Church of England man or any Protestant ever pretended to give such a sort of Respect to the Communion-Table or to the Sacramant or to the Name of Jesus or to the Bible so as upon his knees to pray to it Spes unica auge piis justitiam reisque dona veniam Either the man understands not that which he calls the doctrines of Catholicks so well as We Protestants do or else he is guilty of shameful disingenuity for disguising and dissembling things thus out of a sinister design and then for flying upon Me as if I had done the Innocent Papists wrong by making more noise and raising more dust about their Worshipping of Images then there ought to be 2 Since he hath so palpably misrepresented the sense of his own Church 't is madness to conceive that he would rightly represent the sense of Ours which I shall now in the next place consider to satisfie you that I have done our Church no wrong which is another thing he lays to my charge Alas good man how careful is he that the Church of England may not be injured For the clearing of this too I shall refer you to our Book of Homilies because without all question it contains the publick sense of the Church of England which he may be sure we well know as blind combatants as we are and which we will with all our Zeal and Abilities defend what Triflers soever he takes us to be The particular Homily I intend is that against peril of Idolatry consisting of three parts And because I am willing to prevent an objection which may be made by this Discourser out of our Learned Mountague viz. that he admitted the Book of Homilies as containing godly and wholesome exhortations but not as the publick dogmatical resolutions confirmed of the Church of England therefore I shall offer these Five things briefly to your consideration 1. That the former Book of Homilies in the time of K. Edward the Sixth was set out as the Homilies of the Church of England and as godly and wholesome Sermons containing Doctrine to be received of all men doctrinam ab omnibus amplectendam as appears by the Article concerning it Anno 1552. 2. That the Second Book of Homilies wherein this against peril of Idolatry is one was also judged to contain godly and wholesome Doctrine as well as the former Book and therefore was appointed to be read as the former was in all Churches diligently and distinctly Which plainly argues that it was set out also in the name of the Church of England and as containing Doctrine to be received of all as the other was judged to contain 3. This particular Homily whereof I now speak was upon a point of National concernment and in the judgment of our Church about a most important case of Conscience Besides it was conceiv'd and penn'd upon the greatest consideration and judgment as we find by that variety of choice Learning in it beyond what is to be found in all the Homilies beside And 't is remarkable too that 't was intended not only for the information of the people but also for the instruction of Curates themselves and men of good understanding as appears by the Title of the Third Part of it So that if any other may yet this Homily cannot be thought a meer popular Sermon for it is not so popular but rather the Decisive and dogmatical resolution of our Church in this Case about Images 4. As the Learned Mountague doth not deny but that this Homily contains the publick
well become the mouth of one of the Hinds Calves But you know the strain of this Generation is mightily alter'd since seven years ago when they thought themselves obliged by the singular Humanity of Church of England-men to give them far different Characters That it seems is nothing now His great design is to shew that the Church of Rome and England agree in three Points concerning 1. The Historical Use of Images 2. The Commemorative Use of Images 3. The Respect and Honour due to Images Now though all this be nothing to the History which my angry Adversary quarrels with for that would be True still notwithstanding all this could he prove it yet I am content to go along with him in his undertaking and if I am not fouly deceiv'd he has undertaken an Impossibility an Essay perhaps towards his undertaking to do a Miracle next Let us see a little by comparing the Sense of both Churches 1. For the Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome we know enough of it and too much of all Conscience She has Pictures and Images he says for the Instruction of the Ignorant that so they may be acquainted with those Sacred Persons of Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles 'T is for this end saith our Discourser they are set up And is this all How comes it to pass then that She has too the pretended Pictures of the most Holy Trinity Is it not that people may be acquainted with the Invisible Immaterial Incomprehensible and Infinite Deity also A Rare way indeed especially for the Ignorant to conceive Right and True Notions of the Divine Nature 2. He says the Church of Rome hath Images for the Commemorative Use of them to excite people to give God thanks for his favours and to admonish them to Conform their Lives to such Examples Well we quarrel not about this nor do we blame any men for looking on the Pictures of Saints to this purpose especially if they find it has this power upon them But yet I must tell him that this cannot justifie their having such Representations as I mention'd before For when God the Father is pictur'd like an Old Man with a long Beard and all the Three Persons are pictur'd like Three Heads upon one Body what influence such strange Representations can have to excite any man to Thankfulness and Conformity doth I confess pass my poor Trifling Understanding to conceive 3. But this is not all for the Church of Rome hath Images that they may be Worshipt also This is clear even from the Council of Trent and the Roman Catechism nay our Discourser himself Grants it But then to soften the matter he says two things which I must a little consider that you may the better understand the state of the difference between Church and Church 1. He tells us That though the Church of Rome teacheth that due Honour and Veneration is to be given to the Images of Christ c. Yet it is not for any Divinity or Virtue that is Believ'd to be in them for which they pag. 11. are to be Worshipp'd or that any thing is to be asked of them or any Confidence to be placed in them But how doth he know that this is not Believ'd 1. I appeal to his own Conscience if he doth not think that Thousands of his Communion do verily Believe it For what else can be the reason that one Image is so devoutly and solemnly Ador'd rather than another Or why is it done in one Place rather than in another Or why do so many Pilgrims undertake such long and tiresome journeys to Loretto and other Oratories rather than to others for the worshipping of some special Images What is the meaning of all this but that poor people are taught to Believe that there is a Divine Virtue in Images and a greater Virtue in some Images in some Places then there is in others I know this Discourser speaks just as the Council of Trent did for 't was there defined that there is no Divinity or Vertue in Images for which they should be Worshipped c. 2. But then I ask him Secondly how he knows that the Council of Trent it self was in good earnest Or that their mind really was that men should not believe any Vertue to be in Images especially if they be Consecrated I am sure there is good reason to believe that their Definition was only a Copy of their Countenance to stop the mouths of a clamorous World. And for your satisfaction I will refer you to a very Learned Author whom this Discourser hath done me the singular favour to call my Good Friend meaning that Eminent Person Dr. Stilling fleet I heartily thank him for entitling me to the friendship of so Great a Man and very thankfully own his friendship sincerely acknowledging my self Beholding to him as for some private favours so especially for his Learned Works whereby he has be friended us all and I heartily wish that this Discourser would suffer him in that respect to be a good Friend to Him too To that purpose seeing he has singled out Dr. Stillingfleet as my good friend I will deal with him at present out of a Book of my Friends which I have by me desiring the Doctors leave that I may mention him under the character of my Good Friend And as to the sincerity of the men at Trent in this particular I would fain see how my Adversary can defend it after what has been said by my good Friend touching the Publick Acts of the Roman Church at the Consecration of Images especially Defence p. 640. seg at the Consecration of a New Cross and those little waxen Images called Agnus Dei's For are not these Consecrations for the procuring of Virtues to those Images and that people may receive Benefits by worshipping of them by means of those Virtues If this Discourser understands his own Church he cannot but know this to be True and if he be ingenuous he cannot deny it For at the Benediction of a New Cross there is this Prayer in the Pontificale and he may find it Transcribed and Translated by my good Friend We pray thee O Holy Lord Father Almighty Everlasting God that thou wouldst vouchsafe to Bless this Wood of thy Cross observe the expression hoc Lignum crucis tuae this Wood of thy Cross that it may be a wholesome Remedy to mankind a strengthener of Faith an increaser of good Works the redemption of Souls a Comfort Protection and Defence against the cruel darts of Enemies And again let this Wood be sanctified in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Ghost and let the blessing of that Wood on which the Holy Members of our Saviour did hang be in this Wood that such as Pray and Bow themselves down for Gods sake before this Cross may find Health of Body and Soul. Besides this in the Ceremoniale Romanum there is this Prayer among others at the Consecration of the Agnus
Dei's Do thou vouchsafe to Bless to Sanctifie and Consecrate them that being sanctified by thy abundant benediction they may receive the same Virtue against all the Diabolical Wiles and Frauds of the Evil Spirit that no Tempest may prevail against such as devoutly carry them with them that no Adversity no Pestilence no Corruption of the Air no Falling Sickness no Storms at Sea no Fire no Sin may have power over such as carry these Images and Worship them Now can any man conceive after all this that no Virtue is believed to be in any Images when it is so expresly prayed for that it may be given to them Can we imagine that the Council of Trent would have men be perswaded contrary to what is said in the Publick Offices of the Church concerning the Virtue of these Images Or that the Pope who owns that Council and whose business it is to Consecrate these things after this manner doth believe it was the Councils meaning to deny all virtue in Images To this I will add out of my good Friend an Admirable Piece of Infallible Poetry which Pope Vrban the Fifth sent to the Greek Emperor with Three Agnus Dei's partly because they shew the Popes opinion of the wonderful Virtues of these Images and partly because they are such extraordinary Verses for Language for Numbers for Fancy and for Rhime too that they ought to be kept in some Thesaurus Poeticus among some Pia Hilaria in the Vatican made by his Holiness himself for neither Virgil nor any other old Prophane Poet no not the Sibylls themselves ever did the like and I will transcribe them in hopes that for the Honour of it some Sanctified friend of the Hinds may attempt an Imitation of them in English Balsamus munda cera cum Chrismatis unda Conficiunt Agnum quod munus do tibi magnum Fonte velut natum per Mystica Sanctificatum Fulgura de sursum depellit omne malignum Peccatum frangit ut Christi Sanguis angit Pregnans servatur simul partus Liberatur Dona defert dignis Virtutem destruit ignis Portatus munde de fluctibus eripit unde Morte repentina servat Sataneque ruirâ Si quis honoret eum retinet super hoste Tropheum Parsque minor tantum tota valet integra quantum To all which my good Friend subjoyns a remarkable Passage out of Azorius their great Casuist that it is not to be Question'd but the Pope himself having made Prayers over these Images they will have the effects prayed for if they be used with that due Reverence and Devotion which is required And perhaps there is scarcely a true bred Romanist in the World that Questions it which is the Reason of that wonderful opinion and value they have of them and of those superstitious Uses they put them to and if my Adversary be such his denying of Virtue to be in Images can be nothing but Art to create in people at this critical juncture a favourable and kind opinion of Popery by softning a matter that is so offensive and by blinding mens eyes till they get their Noses under their Girdles But if he were in some foreign Parts he might have as little thanks as Monsieur de Meaux hath had for putting a New Face upon Holy Church as if he were ashamed of the good Matrons Warts and Wrinkles 2. To soften the matter more yet this Discourser insinuates Secondly that the Worship given by them to Images is nothing but an Honorary Respect and Reveverence which other Christians give to the word of God to the Sacrament to the Communion Table c. Wherein he says the Church of England agrees with the Church of Rome and therefore he blames me for running it down under the name of Image-Worship without examining the doctrine of mine own Church For the clearing of this I shall briefly do these three things 1. Shew what that Worship is which according to the Church of Rome is given to Images 2. How far the Church of England differs from them in this particular 3. I shall consider the Proofs he brings of this pretended Agreement And when this is done I hope you will be satisfied that I have not spoken against Image-Worship without good grounds and consideration 1. What that Worship is which according to the Church of Rome is given to Images For the right understanding whereof it is to be noted 1. That there is a great deal of difference between Worship properly taken and that which we call Reverence and Respect All mankind especially Christians have ever made a vast distinction between these things And it deserves this Discoursers consideration that no less a man then Epiphanius condemning those to be Idolaters who worship't the Holy Virgin expresly said that Mary is to be Honoured but God to be Worshipped and that no man is to Worship the blessed Virgin. The Second Council at Nice themselves acknowledg'd this distinction and so have all the Divines of the present Church of Rome when they have endeavour'd to prove that Images are not only to be Honoured Respected and Reverenced but to be Adored too Therefore this doughty Divine the Discourser is not a little out in Confounding things that are so evidently Distinct For that which all the World saith is Worship he says is only Honour and Respect the same thing by whatsoever Name it be express'd and whether you call it Honour or Worship or adoring or whether it be said to be Honorary Religious or Divine or whether it be deemed Absolute or Relative worship 't is it seems equally alike to Him For in his opinion 't is only wrangling about Names a Dispute about a Word fine Notions and pretty entertainments for School-debates but no concern of Religion or Conscience as he tells us Pag. 24 25. 'T is pity the man was not born long ago to instruct the World better for we Trifling Protestants have ever thought with the Ancient Christians that to Respect the Picture of Christ is one thing and to Adore it is another that to Bow down to it is more than to set it up that to lye prostrate before it is more then to keep it clean and that there is a Medium between tearing it in Pieces and honouring it with Kissings and Bowings and Genuflexions and Praying before it and offering up Lights and Incense and the like We ever thought that Divine Worship was to be given to God alone that it was no needless contention whether the Honour due to God is to be given to the work of mens hands and that this was a great case concerning Religion and Conscience but it seems all this is nothing upon the matter 't is but a little sort of Respect and you know what She is that after she has been unfaithful to her Husband wipes her mouth as if she had done no harm and so the lewdest woman may excuse her self that what some Folks calls Adultery is nothing but a dispute about
to be Honour'd with the same Honour and Worshipped with the same Worship that is given to the Object whereof it is the Image And hence Mr. Montague concludes Cap. 22. That Popish Practice and Popish Doctrine fetcheth in all and runneth out into the Extravagant Idolatrous Blasphemous Doctrine of Religious Adoration either primary or secondary absolute or respective to that of Thomas Cabrera Vasquez the Devil and all Sir I hope by this you are satisfied that the Church of England is not in any the least measure for an Image-worship as this Discourser hath the Confidence to affirm pag. 20. And that in the account I sent you I have not abused mine own Church nor exposed mine own Church nor injured my Mother or any of my Mothers Sons which was the Principal thing I was to convince you of And now as to what concerns immediately my self I am in comparison regardless His ill Langague I can patiently bear and take it for an Honour from a man of his Kidney Yet there are some few things more which I must take a little notice of for my Vindication Whereas I told you 1. That the first making of Pictures proceeded partly from Hereticks the Gnosticks 2. That it came chiefly from the fond inclinations of Gentile-Converts 3. That there was no such thing as the use of Images in the Primitive Ages 4. That 't is contrary to an express Canon of the Council at Eliberis And fifth that in the opinion of Epiphanius it is contrary to the Authority of the Scriptures This Discourser not undertaking in the least to Disprove all or any thing of this pretends only that I have shot this bolt against the Church of England and have disgraced Her who as he supposeth is for Pictures and so by the consequence of my Discourse must be for that which came from Hereticks and Heathens that which was not Primitive that which is repugnant to Canons nay indeed that which is contrary to the Bible This is his charge against me pag. 9 10. To which I answer First That what he supposeth he hath not proved nor is it true that the Church of England is fond of Pictures in Churches the contrary I am sure doth plainly appear nor hath she allowed of them as far as I know by any publick Act of Hers since the Reformation Secondly By looking over the Homily I mention'd against peril of Idolatry by good luck I find those very particular Arguments which this Discourser cavils at to be used and urged by our Church her self The First pag. 135 and 137 of the late Oxford Edition The Second She alledgeth at large pag. 120. The Third She shews at large throughout the Second Part of that Homily The Fourth She cites on her side pag. 128. And the Fifth She urges and makes a large use of pag. 116 117. So that if my angry Adversary thinks fit to strike the Second time he may think it reasonable for him to turn his hand from Me upon our Church who saith the same thing let him strike at Her if he pleaseth though I can tell him before-hand that such blows as His will do our Church no harm let him do his worst For several leaves next following he saith nothing but what I have already considered But then Pag. 20. He chargeth me for managing the controversie with the Papists without ever stating the Question or declaring what the Papists hold unbecoming a Scholar But he should have consider'd that my business was not to enter into a Casuistical dispute about the Lawfulness or Vnlawfulness of Image-worship but to give an Historical account of matter of Fact upon a Question whether it be an Innovation or No And this was fairly stated nay as far as I perceive by my Adversary invincibly decided and I should have thanked him if instead of giving me scolding words and running off from the Point he had fairly consider'd and answer'd what I had written like a Scholar and an ingenuous man that is not apt to be angry with any one for using Books In the next page he asks me if it be lawful for Protestants and Catholicks as he calls them to have an interiour Respect Honour and Reverence for holy Images how comes it to be so unlawful and abominable for Catholicks to signifie and express outwardly this same Respect Honour and Reverence which is so comendable for all Christians to have inwardly in their Souls Certainly that Honour and Reverence which in the Heart is Christian cannot but be Christian in the expression and 't is very Absurd to think a Duty can become Idolatry by professing it As to this 1. I first observe a strange sort of Climax for first he expresseth it is lawful to have an interiour respect for Images then he grows a little and calls it a commendable thing and at last he calls it a Duty whereas if we consider what he means by Respect Honour and Reverence it is neither Duty nor commendable nor lawful as the case may stand to have it for Pictures and Images nor a Christian thing either in the Heart or in the Expression But Secondly as to the point it self I must ingenuously and plainly tell him that I do not understand what substantial and solid grounds any man hath to have an interiour Respect Honour and Reverence for Pictures as Pictures and as distinct things from other Furniture and Garniture of a Church where they are I am very confident that the Ancient Christians had no such interiour Respect but hatred rather and that not so much upon Prudential considerations but upon necessary reasons because such respect was thought to be contrary to Gods Law. 2. But then if weak people will so far comply with their own Natures as to suffer their Affections to run out after these things doth it follow that they may express their Affections as they please If the Divine Law requires me not to bow down to an Image or if the Reason of the thing requires me not to bow because such Religious Bowing is a Token of my absolute Subjection which is due to God alone am I not bound to think my self abridged of this my fondly desired Liberty I will put two Cases which are somewhat like the Cases my Adversary puts pag. 14. Suppose I had a Reverence and Affection for the Popes Nuncio which I declare I have not would it be lawful for me in the construction of our Laws to kiss his hand upon my Knee to serve him upon my Knee to crave Audience of him and to shew him all the very same Respects which I owe my Natural Prince Would not this look like a breach of that Allegiance which is due to the Father of my Country Certainly no Judges ought to excuse my Sin for being so Disloyal nor would any Prince pass me by uncensured for acknowledging a Rival in his Country Or suppose my Adversary were a Married Man and his Wife should have a kind Respect for another person and
express that Respect after a lewd manner making this her defence and plea 'T is true my dear Husband I had an interiour Respect and Affection for such a man 't is true I did express and shew my Affection to him but I did this because he is your Friend he is your picture he is like you for all the World What I did therefore was out of true Respects to you I kist him and hugg'd him and the like but 't was out of honour and affection to you all the Kindness and Love I shew'd him passed to the Prototype and 't was for your sake I hope you will not call this Adultery because I did it out of Respect to you no 't is not Adultery 't is only Honour and Veneration to your Image What if a fellow in the Neighbourhood calls this Adultery He is a man not to be believed though he urgeth such a Commandment in the Bible He is one of a Factious Temper a multiplier of needless Contentions a blind Combatant a Trifler a furious One a singular Illuminate one that 't is uncertain what Church he is of and the only thing certain is that he is no Papist he is no Papist Husband but a Canting man that disputes about a word Adultery he calls it but 't is not so 't is Respect and Honour and Affection to you But he is no Papist if he were he would be of another mind because it was for your sake and out of Interiour Respect to you that this was done Supposing this I say I will leave it to my Adversary to consider seriously with himself whether he would accept of this as a fair and reasonable Excuse desiring him to apply it and to remember that Idolatry is compared in Scripture to Adultery and Fornication if he has not quite forgotten the Book among so many Legends He taxeth me for treating the Second Nicene Council with abusive Language because I said they were a pack of Greeks that were neither the Wisest nor the Honestest men in the World. Had I said this without sufficient grounds or could this Discourser prove I had Mis-represented them I were to blame But whoever shall impartially consider the proceedings of that Council I believe will soon be of my opinion for the thing proves it self If my Language doth not please him it is not half so much as the Three Hundred Fathers at Frankford bestowed upon them as he may see by the Caroline Books out of which the Church of England calls them an Arrogant Foolish and ungodly Council If I say they establisht Image-worship it is no more then what Second Part of the Homily against peril of Idolatry all the World knows and Hinemarus said the same thing who lived near that time and knew enough of the matter And if they be Ridiculous my Adversary may thank Them for it they made Themselves so Some of their Arguments I industriously conceal'd because they are so very ridiculous that I fancied my Relating of them would not be Believed He pretends pag. 31. That the reason why Images were not used in the Primitive Ages was because it was Inexpedient and Vnseasonable Christians then living among Pagans and Jews But if he pleaseth to consult Clemens Alexandrinus Origen and other of the Primitive Writers who knew their own reasons best he will find that they insisted not upon the Vnseasonableness but upon the unlawfulness of having Images because they thought it contrary to Gods Commandments I wonder the man should so much as pretend not to understand pag. 34. how Pope Gregory the Second contradicted Gregory the First But now I think on 't he is not apt to believe his Senses For the thing is as clear as the Sun to any one that can Read and will trust his Eyes that Gregory the First wrote against Image-worship and the Second of that name wrote for it And though the Latter endeavour'd to excuse himself and his party with this pretence That they did not worship Images as Gods yet my Adversary knows that the old Heathens said the same thing and therefore this could no more acquit this Pope than it could the Pagans from the charge of Idolatry He pretends I am kind to the Heathens as if my meaning was to excuse them from Idolatry so the better to fix this crime upon the Papists and hereupon he makes a long Harangue The very truth is I never intended to excuse either or take off the Load from one to lay it upon the other But this I say and the thing is manifest that upon the same grounds that the Romanists justifie Their worshipping of Images the old Heathens justified Theirs And lest I should be thought a singular Illuminate should I make a comparison between both as to that I say further that the Church of England her self hath long ago done a great deal more of that kind then I am willing to do at this time of day In the Third part of the Homily I mention'd before She hath at large compared the Idolatry of the one with the Idolatry of the other both as to the Images themselves and as to the manner of worshipping them I refer you to the place beseeching you to read it not for your Information only but for your diversion and pleasure too After this it is insinuated pag. 37. That I have destroyed not only the Credit but the very Being of our Church in a manner our Ordination our Succession our Authority of Preaching and all this by my writing a poor Pamphlet against Image-worship A man of Sense would wonder at the consequence but the Reason it seems is because our Church was once in Communion with the Church of Rome so that if the one be Idolatrous the other must Cease But my Adversary knows our principle to be this That the Church of Rome is really a Church as to the Essentials of a Church though a very Vnsound and Corrupt one as to Her additions and how our Communion with that Church could bring such a Contagion as can Un-Church us is a thing which we cannot understand But this among some other mean considerations which are now objected against Me have been objected formerly against my good Friend and have been abundantly answer'd at the end of his Excellent Defence and because I am not willing this Pamphlet should swell with things said over again I refer you to that piece where you will find this and some other cavils fully answer'd which are scatteringly thrown by this Discourser about bowing towards the Altar and at the name of Jesus c. Next follows which I believe was the Principal thing intended by my Adversary a sly and artificial Application to our Dissenters as if they had the same reason to depart from our Church as we had to depart from the Church of Rome Now the reason of our departure was because we could not possibly continue any longer in the Communion of that Church without being knowingly guilty of many damnable Errours and Sins If this be the case between 〈◊〉 and our dissenting Brethren I will depart from the Church of England to morrow though not to the Church of Rome But God be thanked all reasonable men are convinced that the case is not the same And my Adversary is malicious and vain in saying pag. 38. That Since the greatest part of those things upon which the dissent is founded are such as have been instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome why should the Dissenters receive them from the Church of England whilst these same Church-Guides who press the observance take so much pains to prove those from whom they receiv'd them to be Idolaters What Did the Church of Rome Institute those things whereon the Dissent is founded I think they may be Idolaters to the Worlds end and yet our Constitutions remain unspotted Was the Episcopal Government Instituted by the Church of Rome Was our Liturgy compiled by the Church of Rome Was the Sign of the Cross and a few more of our observances Instituted by the Church of Rome This is a vanity to be despised and upon this Point I will Engage in a Controversie with this Discourser when he pleases or dares In the mean time I take the Liberty to tell him that his Trick will not Take all of Us are sensible what the meaning of this is and who they are that stand behind the Curtain to inflame us to set us at further variance with one another to drive on a Third interest and at last to laugh at our folly if we can be made to serve it In the Conclusion of all my Adversary gives me a gentle lick for reflecting upon Me and the Letter I sent you he says the Author is to be excused the whole is nothing more then a Letter and every body knows that a Letter however proper it may be to the person to whom 't is directed is many times very absur'd when 't is divulg'd and made Common we 'll Excuse therefore the Writer but really he is to blame that Publish't it To this I answer in a few words that if this Discourser and his Party will forgive me the writing of that Letter I know you will forgive him that Publisht it and I believe all considerate and honest men will forgive us Both and as for this Discourser whatever his Sin is he knows I suppose where to have a pardon too if he has but Money I am Sir Your Most Faithful and Obedient Servant July 26th 1687. FINIS