as Impudence Nonsence Monstrous Stupidity and the like But I would know of the Representer whether there can be any just occasion for letting these words loose and to the Sense and Reason of Mankind I may appeal if there can be an occasion more just than this for 't is impossible we should have greater Evidence that any thing is true than we have that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is false and then I may ask the Representer whether it be not the greatest abuse that ever was put upon mankind This Argument therefore would bear a little more quickness than was thought convenient for the handling of the rest But here lies the sting of the Representer's Charge That Transubstantiation is a Subject in which so many Learned and Virtuous Men of the Christian World are nearly concerned To which I answer That 't is so much the worse for the Christian World but not for the Author of that Discourse For if indeed Learned Men and Virrtuous Men espouse such a Monstrous Doctrine as that of Transubstantiation there is not less but greater cause to exclaim both against them and it If the Representer thought that the Learning and Virtue of the Men should have gained some more reverence for the Cause than that Author had for it he may think so still for me I will not go about to question the Learning and the Virtue of many that hold Transubstantiation but 't is Transubstantiation still I think it is no question but there were many Learned and Virtuous men in Egypt who were nearly concerned in the business of making Gods of Things that grew in their Gardens and yet he had not been too blame that should have said it was Impudence Nonsence and Monstrous Stupidity to Worship and to teach others to Worship Leeks and Onyons Now for the Second Observation P. 5. That we have no news of any Success those Discourses had upon the parties designed I say if they had indeed no Success the Stater was the honester man not to say they had any tho he scaped here very well that he was not made a Misrepresenter for not confessing that they had none But upon this occasion the Representer is very angy It could not says he be rationally expected that those who chose rather to forgo all the interest and convenience of humane life than join with a Schismatick Congregation should be afterwards brought to Church by a few empty Discourses which making no more Converts than they deserved made as I can hear of none at all But why Schismatick Congregation and a few empty Discourses When men keep what their Adversaries would get from them and when they have disappointed all their designs they use to be pleased and in good humour and tho perhaps they may laugh heartily at their Antagonists for losing their pains yet 't is not so natural to rage against them as if themselves were the Losers I begin therefore to suspect that our Representer knows of some Success those Discourses had which he is not willing to own But be that as it will as we did not think the better of the former Performances for their having had some Success so neither should we think the worse of these if they have had none which may perhaps be imputed to the prejudice of the persons for whose good they were designed rather than to the pretended Emptiness of the Discourses themselves unless the Representer's word may be more securely relied upon for Empty Discourses now than for Empty Churches before We are sorry that is proves so difficult a matter to recover these men yet 't is some Consolation to us that we have lost so very few out of so great a body as the Communion of the Church of England makes And therefore if Discourses are to be judged of by their Success the Representer and such as he should have a care of boasting at this time of day Our design was not only to recover those that are deceived but likewise to keep those from Error that are in the way of Truth and therefore it may be reasonably presumed that our endeavours have had good Success upon the greatest part of those whom they were designed to serve tho not upon all But when I have told this man what perhaps himself knows that by these Discourses we have gained some from Popery to the Reformed Religion I will also tell him that if we had never gained so much as one it had been no disparagement to our Arguments since they have ways of fixing their Proselytes which we abhor of which I shall give this one Instance It is their Rule let otherr judg whether it be their Practice to require a dreadful Oath of all whom they can gain not to be prevailed withal Quocunque Argumento by any Argument to forsake the Communion of the Roman See This Oath is to be seen in the Pontifical under the Title of Ordo ad Reconciliandum Apostatam Hoereticum aut Schismaticum and if the Representer be importunate he shall have it next time at length To doubt only of any Point which the Church of Rome teaches is a sin that must come under Confession by which the Priest is sure to have notice when the Spirit of Truth begins to work and upon signal given to extinguish the first Motions of it We have a hard Task who are not only to oppose Reasons to Reasons and to the common prejudices of men but to produce Reason against particular Engagements and Oaths never to hearken to any Reason at all The Representer gives out himself to be a Convert and may therefore be presumed not to be ignorant of these things but to be himself intangled by an Oath to be moved by no Argument whatsoever to return to this Schismatick Congregation as he calls it and therefore in him it was great forgetfulness to ascribe the Steadiness of the English Romanists to nothing else but a Christian Resolution when he could not but know of some other Engagements that are amongst them which are not altogether so Christian Which I had not observed here if his Severity to the Stater had not led me to it for it was but the very Page before in which he set upon him with all his Eloquence for imputing the fulness of our Congregations to the Reasonings of the Divines without mentioning the execution of the Laws If I had been a Representer that Page I think would have kept me in some awe and hindred me from doing that in the very next which he calls telling Stories by halves As for the most cruel persecution which as he says those of his Communion suffered lately for not joyning with our Schismatick Congregation he describes it so terribly and assigns the Cause of it as positively as if this was a matter beyond our memory which he knows it is not But when a Man has a mind to exercise his Stile one Subject may serve him as well as another But to return to the
a very weak Inference of Sutcliff's from as weak a Proposition of Aquinas For this reason the Answerer thought fit to declare that he would not justify what he thought was to be blamed But if this Man was resolved to call what he pleased a Misrepresentation of his Church by his leave he should have asked the Answerer whether he would call it so too before it was lawful for him to bring in the Answerer confessing I know not what of our misrepresenting the Church of Rome For my own part I am resolv'd that if any particular Authors of ours have in any one Point misrepresented Popery in the least degree I will not do it for Company nor defend those that have done it But I am not a little pleas'd to find that when the Representer forsook the defence of his 37 Chapters and diverted to the business of transcribing all those Protestant Authors where he hoped to find some Instances of our misrepresenting he should yet come in with so lamentable an account on his part and not be able to produce any one clear Instance to support his Charge When I had read his Charge I was something amaz'd that considering how much has been written against the Errors of the Church of Rome since the Reformation by Men of different Abilities he should not have been able to make better work of his last impertinent design than he did And it will be to all impartial Judges an Argument that the several Writers of our Church have upon the whole matter observed a strange exactness of Truth in charging the Church of Rome when this Man was able to produce no more than he did for a colour to accuse us of the contrary But what do we think the Representer concludes in another place from the Answerer's declaring before-hand that he will not be answerable for every thing that has been said or done in opposition to Popery Why Pref. p. 26. says he then it seems now there are some Protestants that charge more upon the Papists than can be well brought off or justified and some Protestants are accused justly and not to be defended without partaking of their fault What of misrepresenting the Church of Rome But the Answerer did by no means confess that he had brought any pertinent Instances of that There may be such for ought I know and if there are let them bear it as I said before but as I say now the Protestants have been very honest and careful as to this business of Representing or surely we should have had one or two clear Instances of the contrary from this good Friend of ours unless we should say 't is all one to him whether his Instances be good or bad because he has a certain quality that will make them do whether they will or not Which I believe will be acknowledged by every one that considers those words of his which immediately follow If this had been as freely owned at first we had excused a great deal of Pains and Paper for I had never gone about to prove that Protestants misrepresent Papists P. 26. if the first Replier had thus ingenuously confess'd that Charge And because it was not owned I therefore found my self obliged to take some Pains about it that is P. 22. in my long Bill that was drawn up c. Well! He ha now done His worst for the next stretch beyond this will break him I confess that the Answerer did ingenuously declare against abetting any Man's Mispresentations But that he did ingenuously confess that Charge against the Authors that were produced is what I hope no Man living this day excepting the Representer only will have the face to say He I know took some pains to prove the Charge and the Answerer took a little Pains too about the business but surely he was as much beside himself as sometimes I would for Charity sake imagine the Representer to be if he was all the while ingenuously confessing it for I verily thought and do think still that he was all the while plainly and honestly confuting it But because upon this occasion I would be glad to understand with what Caution a Man must write that has to do with one of the Representer's Constitution I have severely examin'd what occasion this Man should pretend for the liberty he takes I find that as to one or two Instances the Answerer acknowledged a fault where the Charge was laid but he did not confess that it was Misrepresentation Sutcliff's was the plainest whose Inference from Aquinas he acknowledg'd to be very silly But as to all the rest he shewed that the Representer's Charge was either false or very foolish And that this Man was for the most part an egregious Misrepresenter in using those Authors of as ours he did So that 't is Sutcliff's Case that must bring in the Answerer for that same ingenuous Confession And the Reader is bound to believe that if we had at first confessed that Sutcliff made a silly Inference from as silly a Principle of Aquinas here had been a great deal of Paper and Pains excused and this Man had never gone about to prove that Protestants misrepresent Papists Doctr. and Practices of the Ch. of R. And yet after all p. 9 c. his first Answerer would not undertake for all that any Protestants had said of Popery but appeal'd to the publick and establish'd Doctrine of the Church of England Lastly he pretends in those six Leaves that besides what the Answerer confess'd Guilt appears plainly in the forced Excuses he made for the rest Now if he made but forced Excuses for them he had I confess done a great deal better to follow the Representer's Example who when some Popish Authors were charged for most vile and scandalous reports of us and our Religion was so very prudent as to make no Excuses at all for them Which gives me occasion to say here what the True reason was of the Answerer's putting together those few Instances how we have been used by those of the Roman Church We hoped this at least from the Representer's First Book that it would occasion such a clear and perfect stating of the Questions between us and the Church of Rome that the People of both Communions would be well prepared to understand afterwards the pertinence of the several Arguments and Answers that should be brought on either side Nor could any Man of Sense and Honesty imagine that his Book was good for any thing else but to lead to that With this purpose the Learned Author of the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome truly Represented complied in his Answer to the Representer But it was none of the Representer's Designs that People should know the True state of the Controversy but that they should believe his Representations and therefore he has ever since by one Wile after another declined closing with his Answerer and at last by raking for Instances of Protestant
They are both of them like a pair of Diamonds hard and sharp and nothing can cut the one so handsomly as his Fellow If they should chance to fall foul it would be indeed a Comical end of the Controversie and not unsuitable to the Representer who studied to make a Farce of it when he brought in his Phanatick Sermon But let them make what end of it they please there is a time when it is decent for us to give over that as hitherto Truth has lost no ground for want of Argument so it may lose no honour by want of Discretion I have given up the Representer and shall but once more trouble the Vindicator which will be more than enough for him since ere long he may expect from his Antagonist such an Account of the Articles of the Bishop of Meaux as will be esteemed by Judicious and Impartial men a Final Determination of that Controversie The CONTENTS of the ANSWER to the REPRESENTER HIS Extravagance in diverting to the Case of the Dissenters Page 1 And his Indiscretion in upbraiding us with their Sufferings Page 5 That the Discourse against Transubstantiation is not scurrilous Page 9 His Pretence that we have written against Popery without Success is false and impertinent if it were true Page 10 That the Papists are to thank the Representer for the Revival of these Controversies Page 13 That he now writes to praise himself and what he had written before Page 16 And presses upon us with meer Confidence and tedious Repetitions Page 21 That he is a False Representer because he has concealed one part of the Character of a Papist Page 28 The Folly of his Clamour that we pretend to know what Popery is better than the Papists Page 29 His Offer to receive us into the Church of Rome upon the Terms which he propounds considered Page 31 That we cannot with a good Conscience accept his Offer Page 32 That if we could he can give us no Security against Old Popery Page 33 That if he were able to secure us we have no reason to think that he is willing Page 34 His Insincerity in telling us that he detests some Doctrines and Practices with which his Answerer charged the Church of Rome and in refusing to say what they are in particular Page 35 The true meaning of these Offers to receive us upon the Profession of his New Popery Page 38 And this exemplified by the Terms upon which the Converts of the City of Orange were reconciled to the Church of Rome P. 39 That he has abused Mr. Montague by a False Representation of his Judgment concerning the Homilies of our Church P. 45 That he continues his Charge of Misrepresentation upon some of our Men without replying to the Answers made in their Defence P. 49 But makes bold to say that the Author of the View confessed what that Author clearly diproved Pag. 53 His Pretence for declining a particular Answer to the View Pag. 57 His pleasant way of proving that he has not forsaken the Defence of his Double Characters Pag. 58 A brief Rehearsal of the Representer's Performances Pag. 66 The CONTENTS of the REPLY to the VINDICATOR THAT the Apologies of the New Converts in France are a clear Evidence both that the Distinction between Old Popery and New Popery is generally understood there and that 't is not a Distinction without a Difference Pag. 71 That he strives in vain to shew the Case of Monsieur Imbert to be no Argument of such a Difference Pag. 78 That the New Popery is offered for the sake of the Old one Pag. 82 The Good-Friday Service of the Missal as to the Worship of the Cross once more explained Pag. 83 How Matters stand between Mr. de Meaux Mr. Widenfelt and Father Crasset as to the Worship of the B. Virgin. Pag. 85 The Vindicator's Rule to know the Churches Sense in these things by her General Councils and by her Universal Practice considered Pag. 88 That if there be another way to know the Churches Sense in Doctrines of Faith besides her Voice in General Councils and Two Poperies be made to appear that way the Vindicator gets nothing by Councils P. 90 That if there be no other way yet even by this way it is demonstrated that they have Two Poperies amongst them Pag. 93 That the Vindicator has brought things to that pass that he makes Councils as insignificant as the Representer has made the Scriptures to be Pag. 101 That to avoid Two Poperies he has in truth not left so much as One Popery amongst Papists Pag. 105 But after all the ill Language we have from the Vindicator here for not granting that his is the True Popery and the ill Usage we should meet with elsewhere for contending that it is the True one is a sensible Demonstration of Two Poperies Pag. 106 A final Defence of our Charge against the Council of Trent about the Veneration of Reliques Pag. 107 Of Judging of the Churches Sense by her Universal Practice Pag. 110 The Bishop of Meaux's arguing against the Pagans from their Practices shewn to be good against the Church of Rome Pag. 111 That the Vindicator has utterly ruined the Representer's Designs Pag. 113 And at the same time betraied the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition too Pag. 118 Particular Replies to what remains in his Full Answer Pag. 120 AN ANSWER TO THE REPRESENTERS REFLECTIONS UPON THE STATE and VIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY HIS first Reflection upon the Stater is for Misrepresenting the case of the Dissenters Had the Stater done so the Representer had business enough of his own to let them speak for themselves But he had a better opinion of himself than so Hitherto says he I have been concerned with such who have most unjustly traduced and exposed the Doctrine and Faith of our Church Pref. p. 1. and now of late an upstart sort of Misrepresenter has called upon me who pretends to give an account of the Present State c. Which is just as if he had said Have not I for this three years and upwards so mauld the Traducers and Exposers of Papists that they feel it to this very hour How then durst this upstart sort of Misrepresenter shew his head as if there were not such a Man as I in the Nation To this tune he begins which is not seemly in a Man whose Character requires more Humility and Modesty than this comes to For I am told he is a Reverend Father which makes me the more sorry for him I am resolved to be very Civil to the Representer but as he has behaved himself I am at a great loss how to express it His falling upon the forementioned Author as a Misrepresenter and the pretence upon which he does it too is so very much out of the common Road of pertinence that I know not what to do with him It looks as if he had been a little unsettled with that overweening opinion I mentioned just now and then
imployment to be engaged with such a Writer as this for if you confute his Charge and his Arguments he falls a commending himself and his Book as fast as he can and if you make it plain that you have confuted him and that he has nothing to reply he takes occasion to write another Book and to commend himself the faster for it and to rant as much or more than he did at first Which makes me almost wish that the Defender had not promised an account of these Reflections For the Man's Confidence will serve him seven years hence as well as it does now and I doubt something better for his Force encreases as that of Anteus did with his Falls 'T is impossible that ever he should want Matter for he can repeat the very same to the Worlds end if he lives so long and tho' it has been considered by his Answerers never so particularly 't is all one for that he is grown past taking any notice of such things For a little variety he has no more to do but to study some ridiculing Harangue and to gather Flowers from Bartholomew-Fair the Pall-mall the Gaming Houses P. 1 8 17 19. the Hind and Panther and such like for the adorning of his Characters and so he is compleatly furnished for a new Book To which we can have no more to say than to that which we had just before it unless it be to admire the man's Confidence which we have admired so much already that when we are a little more used to it we shall not admire it at all That he has hitherto behaved himself in this manner is what himself and all the world knows that has taken notice of this Controversy or at least he has been very careful that they should know it now if they could be ignorant of it before The Author of the View had deduced the whole Dispute from the beginning and it was made exceedingly plain that this man had dropt the Defence not only of every Point he began with but of those very pretences upon which he did so and the worst of all was that the same Author had made him as it now appears sick of his last Reply too where he had diverted himself with so many things that were nothing to his first business This now was a very great streight and there was no other way to be taken but either in Prudence to sit still and so let the world forget what was past or with exceeding Modesty to confess that a man may be mistaken and so forth or with the excess of the contrary quality to do as the Representer has now done For now he has taken up a pretence which he dropt the Defence of but in his Second Reply viz. See View p. 24. That his Answerer did sometimes appeal to private Authors and so all that he has said ought to go for nothing An Answer says he is set forth to amuse the World as the fashion is Pres p. 9. with the banding and tossing to and fro of many School-Questions but never coming to the point of disproving the Character of a Papist Represented or endeavouring to shew that the Faith as there stated was not really the Faith of Catholicks nay this was scarce so much as offer'd at except in Two or three Points which yet ought to have been the main design of the Answerer and the only way of giving it a just Reply Thus he presses upon us with mere confidence in which tho possibly he might feel no checks from his own Conscience yet 't is something strange that he should not fear his Readers Knowledg for that Author had sufficiently disproved the Character of a Papist Represented if to shew from Point to Point that it was no sincere Character be to disprove it He made it plain that almost every where too much was put in or too little as might best serve the design of setting the Papist out fairly to the people The Representer should have shewn that the Answer came short of that Account which the View gave of it That every Question was particularly and exactly stated View p. 3 4. That the Sense of the Church of Rome about it was shewn by the Decrees of their Trent Council or their Roman Catechism or their publick Offices and their most approved Divines and Casuists as the matter required And by the way all the false Colours of the Representer were taken off where he thought it for his purpose to lay them on too Foul on his Misrepresenting or too Fair on his Representing side If this was done as it was said and so done that the Representer has long since dropt his Two or three Exceptions against it and never from the first ventured upon a particular Reply to it surely he has been rubbing hard ever since to come forth now and think to put us off with saying that the Answer never came up to the Point c. Indeed he brings over Two or three Particulars again in this Preface which he Represented upon in his first Book But is it to compare his own Characters with his Adversaries Answer and to shew that he had not come to the Point No such matter I assure ye but only to let us know That when they represent themseves right we call it New Popery which he would make the world believe is all that we now have to save our selves from being accounted Calumniators which he pursues with such noise in saying the same thing over and over again that if Repetition of little Matter and more Words were an Argument of Truth he would be the most convincing Writer that ever set up for the Cause For setting aside the Prophets that cried from Morning to Noon O Baal hear us I think no man has out-done the Representer in this kind of Eloquence especially when it came into his head to be revenged on the Pulpits those High-places the Pulpits for all the mischief they have done to Popery and to inveigh against that unlucky distinction between Old and New Popery He tells us P. 8. That several things were heard from the Pulpits which were found not to square with Truth and that from those High-places the innocent Hind had been made to look like Tygers Wolves and Bears All is true Representing when Popery is to be shown from the Pulpits P. 12. In this manner did Protestants treat Papists in this manner are they now handled by Protestants and yet all must pass for true Representing And because the Cathâ—licks will not own that to be their Faith and Religion as it stands thus stretched and racked upon Protestant Tenters and Hyperbolies the cry is now forsooth they are ashamed of their Old Religion and have brought in a New Popery A poor shift God knows No we are not ashamed of our Old Religion To us the Old and the New is all the same c. But this Cant of New-Popery must be kept up to save the
the Representer has made for us One thing I am sure of that the Converts of the City of Orange were received upon such easy terms in point of Declaration that if Subjection and Communion had not been to follow one would have look'd upon the whole Transaction as a solemn Jest between the French General and the Bishop of Orange on the one side and the Citizens of Orange on the other The Passage is very remarkable and instructing and therefore I shall not think much to set down the Articles of Reconciliation as I have received them from hands of unquestionable credit 1. The Citizens of the Town of Orange that are under written considering that it is the Will of God of which Kings are the principal Interpreters that all Christians should reunite themselves into the same Church To testify their submission to the Order of the Divine Providence and that which they bear to the Holy Intentions of the King do intreat of his Majesty that his Troops commanded by the Count de Tessé should depart from them and that the Expence which has been or shall be made by them be levied upon the whole State without distinction of Religion We Order the Execution of the present Article according to the full Tenor of it Tessé 2. They declare that they do reunite themselves to the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church after the manner which that Church do's use to believe and to profess all the Christian and Orthodox Truths contained in the Holy Scripture which God hath manifested to the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists following the Interpretation and Sense of the Universal Church and renouncing all Errors and Heresies contrary thereunto 3. That for their great Consolation and Edification every Sunday before the Service there shall be read a Chapter of the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament in French according to the Translations approved by the Church and that all the Divine Service which is performed in Latin shall be explained in French by the Pastors of the Church 4. That they shall invoke no other besides God the Father Son and Holy Ghost 5. That they shall not believe that it is necessary to Salvation to have any other Intercession and Mediation than that of our Lord Jesus Christ towards God the Father 6. That they shall not be obliged to render any Divine Honour to Images which shall be in the Church 7. That they shall adore Jesus Christ in the Eucharist who is Really Spiritually and Sacramentally contain'd in that Adorable Sacrament 8. That this Consolation shall be given to the Faithful that they shall communicate in both Kinds if the Universal Church shall think it convenient Done at Orange the 11th of Nov. 1685. We James d' Obeilh by the Grace of God Bishop of Orange Abbot and Count of Montfor Counsellor of the King in all his Councils have admitted these who are countersigned to the Reunion of the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church upon the Conditions expressed in the Eight Articles above written Done at Orange this 13th of Novemb. 1685. John James Bishop of Orange The Representer may I think see in this Example that he is out-done in his own way and that there are in the World more mild and inoffensive Representations of Popery than his own and some provisions for saving the Consciences of the Reformed which himself has not made But I would know of him whether he do's believe that those who united themselves to the Roman Church with these Cautions can be reasonably judged to have proceeded with satisfaction in themselves and about what they did Or rather whether there be not all the Signs that one can have in a thing of this Nature that being distressed between a troublesome Conscience on the one Hand and Count Tessés Troops on the other they capitulated as well as they could for their own quiet and granted what they did to be delivered from the Souldiers and no more than what they did if by that means they might pacify their own Minds A very miserable Case most certainly And that which is yet more to be lamented is that these things should be done by Christians upon Christians Let the Representer take it into his serious Consideration and I believe it will be one of those things that he will always forget to put into the Character of his Papist Represented But why must the Minds of Men be racked in this manner Why must they be brought under the most dangerous Temptations to cheat themselves and for the gaining of rest from outward Miseries to betray the Tranquillity of their own Consciences and be constrained to play such Tricks with them as if one Man should chuse to put upon another he would be accounted no better than a cunning Knave He that cannot see the true Reason of this unmerciful dealing and that too by this very Example can see but little It is Vnion that is to say Submission to what they call the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church that must be by these means or by any means carried on This we meet with at the very head of the Provisions and again at the foot of them in the Bishop's Certificate Nor are any of the Reformed to expect otherwise but that this shall be expresly insisted on But because the poor People knew that Union to that Church carried dreadful Things along with it therefore they strugled and it seems they gained one of the prittiest Limitations of that Vnion that ever was heard of viz. To believe and to profess all the Christian and Orthodox Truths contained in the Holy Scripture which God hath manifested to the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists But then this Limitation would make the Vnion very insignificant for thus one may be united to the Turk viz. to believe and to profess all the Christian and Orthodox Truths contained in the Holy Scripture And therefore something must be added to that and certainly greater Artifice on both sides shall seldom be seen than what is shewn in putting in these words after the manner which that Church dos use which may indifferently refer either to reuniting or believing The People may understand it of being united to the Roman Church after the manner it uses till the Bishop teaches them to understand it of believing the Christian Truths of the Scripture after the manner of that Church And so by understanding the Scripture after the Interpretation and Sense of the Vniversal Church the Bishop has his meaning and they have theirs as long as he will suffer them The most jealous Princes never treated more nicely for their Honour than these poor Protestants did for their Conscience and their Masters for the Church of Rome And considering that they had but two hours allowed them to unite to the Roman Church before the last Extremity should be used upon refusal and that there were Difficulties on both Sides the Protestants consulted for their Consciences as much as it was possible for Men to do
the Homilies and Mr. M. meant the same thing which this Man may shew a fault in when he can viz. that more Care is necessary at some times to secure People from Image-worship than at others though our Religion which will not allow us to worship Images be the same at all times If he thinks that the Homilies stretch their Hyperboles too far let him compare them with what Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Minutius Felix and other Antients say of the same Subject and then tell 〈◊〉 more of his Mind But since as Mr. M. judiciously observ'd their severe Reflections against all use of Images whatsoever are to be interpreted by the danger of being seduced to Idolatry which the Christians were in in those Times so may the less hyperbolizing of our Homilies bear a good Construction with reference to These Times in which we are sure Images are worshipped by certain People that the Representer can tell of with no less Devotion than the Pagans worshipped theirs The Reader I hope will now excuse me for taking no more notice of his protesting against the distinction of Old and New Popery his declaring that their Belief is always the same and his lamentable Complaints that we are Misrepresenters Pref. p. 20 21. and that we rake together some odd Opinions out of private Authors c. that the Heads upon which our Representing stands are so many Fallacies and Sophistry c. For if a Man after the Particulars of his Book have been particularly answer'd will still betake himself to general Out-cries and makes as if he intended to go on in this way as long as he lives he ought to know at last that he may do so without any more disturbance and that no body will go about to answer him And so I come to consider his Reflections upon the View of the whole Controversy with the Answer to his last Reply It seems the Stater as he observes had so good an Opinion of it that he thought it would put an End to the Controversy The Representer says that he is almost of the same Mind And I say that I am altogether of the same Mind And so there is one thing in which we do all of us almost agree But why is the Representer almost of that Mind Because the Answerer had said so little to that long Bill which was drawn up against the Members of his Church Pref. p. 22. wherein the Crime of misrepresenting is laid to their Charge that besides what he confesses the very Guilt appears so plainly in the forced Excuses he makes for the rest that there 's little need of any more besides reading his Defence to see how far they are from being innocent So that by his own Confession he brought in a long Bill against some of our Church wherein the Crime of misrepresenting is laid to their Charge And the truth is it was long enough considering that it had neither Truth nor Pertinence as it was particularly shewn him in the Answer to his last Reply For I must add that the Answerer brought in a longer Answer of about 28 Pages to the Particulars of the Representer's Bill not omitting any one Charge upon any one of our Authors where there was direction to the Passage by Page or Chapter And I do assure the Reader that those six or seven Lines of his which I transcribed just now out of his Preface is all the Reply that he has given to that Answer And I desire the Reader to remember and consider that that tedious Charge of his the Defence of which he now so visibly forsakes was manifestly brought in to supply the place of defending his 37 Points of Representation nay and of defending his very Pretences for forsaking them And yet that now at last he forsakes the Defence of those Imputations upon particular Authors by which he hoped to divert the Reader from an expectation of Replies pertinent to his first undertaking Now therefore I apply my self to the Representer and desire him to take as much notice of what I say as if there was a Finger against it in the Margin That because he was so very modest as not to offer the least particular Reply to those Answers to his Charge therefore his continuing that Charge is the greater Impudence With all my Soul I wish that the Gentlemen of the Church of Rome would imply other sort of Men to write against us for this Man carries on the Controversy not only to the disparagement of their Cause in particular but to the discredit of Religion in general But since I have such a Countenance to deal with I must not think to let even those six Lines go without some particular Answers to them For tho he can with a good Grace drop his own Challenges and Undertakings one after another and as he once said gravely turn over I know not how many Pages of ours without offering a word to any one Particular that he finds there and never change Countenance for the matter Yet we are to watch every Line of his and unless we intend to have another Book from him we must prove that the Sun sets before Midnight if he should happen to deny it He pretends that his Answerer said so little to his long Bill c. What should I say to this Should I print over again here the 28 Pages which were taken up in refuting those Cavils of the Representer Or is it not enough that I do now forbid him to make any Replies to the Particulars of that Answer He pretends that the Answerer confessed something Besides what he confesses says he So that if he may be believed the Answerer has confessed that some of those whom he mentions have misrepresented the Church of Rome But this is adding Sin to Sin For he confess'd no such thing and I will add that he had no cause to confess it These words indeed I find in the Answer Did ever either of his Adversaries undertake to justify all that any Protestant Divine or Historian has at any time said in opposition to Popery Or was it not possible to give a more honest account of Popery than he did without such an Undertaking And again Tho it be no part of our business to bring off every thing that has been said or done by Protestants yet I shall a little examine what our Representer has charg'd those with whom he has singled out to expose them to the World For my own part where his Accusations in whole or in part fall justly there they shall lie for me nor will I make another Man's fault my own by going about to defend it But is this confessing that Misrepresentation was proved upon any one Author that was charged with it The Answerer it seems was resolved as became him never to wrangle either for a Friend or against an Enemy and he found in the long Bill one or two filly Sayings of Protestants which this Man called Misrepresentations for instance
at last with all his might to make this same Popery if so we must call it to be not the Popery of the Church but a Popery rather in the Church and because 't is of so large a Spread and is manifestly upheld by the Authority of the Great Ones therefore some good Words were now to be given it to save the Reputation of the Church which else will be in great danger of the Similitude of a City that permits to Rob and Kill without contradiction or rather of a City that rewards Robbers and punishes Honest men Wherefore says the Vindicator Every thing Pag. 7. I hope that any one fancies to be ill is not therefore to be reproved And is it come to this at last We had been in good hands I see if we had come into the Church of Rome upon the Representers Terms For was it not the Representer that said He would as soon be a TVRK as the Answerers Papist Now the Answerers Papist was the Old Papist And therefore it was notably and boldly said That he would as soon be a Turk as Our Papist For one would at least conclude from thence that the Expounding and Representing Party would have stood stoutly by us if we had come in rejecting all that Popery as we used to call it which the Representer had so bravely rejected But if we had taken the Bait had we not been finely angled up For what says our Representer's other self the Vindicator Why truly Every thing he hopes that any one Fancies to be ill is not therefore to be reproved It seems then that the Representer did but fancy those things to be ill which not he in his misrepresenting side but the Answerer charged upon them as Popery Or shall we say that these Men understand one another and that he did not fansie them to be ill but for the present thought good to say however that they were monstrous ill things and that he would as soon be a Turk as the Answerers Papist But I rather think they did not lay their Heads together upon this Business but that in the desperate estate to which the Vindicator's Cause was reduced by the clear Testimonies of such a Popery amongst them as the Representer rejects with detestation he found himself obliged for the credit of his Church and perhaps for his own safety to remit of his Rigour or rather to take off his Disguise a little without asking the Representer's leave and so he hopes that every thing that any one fansies to be ill is not therefore to be reproved But the Representer has the less reason to be angry with our Vindicator because this Gentleman has made as bold with himself as with his Friend The Vindicator too once fansied that it was an ill thing to Worship the Image of our Saviour or the Holy Cross with Divine Worship upon any account whatsoever But Cardinal Capisucchi came in the way and so every thing that the Vindicator himself fansied to be ill is not therefore to be reproved Nay he was not content to let the Old Popery get up again but he has been pleased to sink the New one as much For tho Cardinal Capisucchi says so and so yet seeing others of the same Communion reject this and are NOT CENSVRED BY THE CHVRCH it plainly follows that his is not the necessary Doctrine of the Church Pag. 7. And what he says in this case is applicable to all others Alas for New Popery for it declines apace we had thought it had been shewn us for the True Ancient Standing Sence of the Church And now the most that can be said for it is that it is not censured by the Church It seems then that these Expounders and Representers are but a Tolerated Party One step more backwards makes them not to be so much as Tolerated and the next news we shall hear is that they are Intolerable But by the way what Church does the Vindicator mean by saying that he and his are not censured by the Church I fansie he means the Invisible Church which cannot now be seen because no Council is sitting The Fathers that sate at Trent do not start out of their Graves to declare these Gentlemen Heretically inclined and the Books of the Council do not rise up and fly in their Faces For if we mind what the Authority of the now Living and Visible Church declares in this case we see that they who reject this Old Popery as we call it are censured by the Church and to mention Imbert no more the instance of Aegidius Magistralis Canon of Sevil in Spain is a Conviction to the Vindicator of something that I will not name For he was forced to abjure these two Propositions as Heretical 1. That the Images of Saints are not to be adored with the same Adoration with which the Prototypes are adored 2. That the Cross is to be worshipped only with an Inferiour Adoration This very Instance being produced by the Defender out of Capisucchi Pref. P. XIV XV. who left it for a Caution and a Conviction to such Men as in good earnest maintain our Vindicators Doctrine for the Vindicator to mention Capisucchi's Doctrine and to say in the same breath that they who reject it are not censured by the Church is of a piece with his Sincerity every where else Well but let that pass and let us consider what will come of this if it be true that they are not censured by the Church Really this is but a small encouragement to take Popery upon the Representer's Terms For that which is not now censured by the Church may in good time be censured by the Church Perhaps you will say there is no reason to fear it But in my mind there is for as I said before the Credit of this New Popery has sunk extremely in a Month for in truth the Vindicator has degraded it from being Popery as we observed some time since Now if it be not so much as Popery it may in a little time grow to be Heresie and then the Censures of the Church will follow as fast as can be In the mean time it is not Popery And so farewel to the Representer's Undertakings which are overthrown beyond all recovery unless he faces about and recovers his Credit by beating the Vindicator out of the Field with his own Hand The Representer at first gave us a two-fold Character of Popery One was of That Popery which the Papists own and profess as appears in the Title Page of his First Part. In his very first Article of Praying to Images the Popery which the Papists own and profess amounts to this That properly they do not so much as Honour Images but only Christ and his Saints This is the Popery of the Representing side What now says the Vindicator He very honestly acknowledges that there is a private Sentiment in the Church against this that will have the Image of Christ worshipped with
the same Worship as Christ himself and what does he conclude upon it Why that any one may hold which side they please as an Opinion or suspend their Judgment but neither side is truly what you ought to mean by Popery And therefore I conceive that if neither side be Popery the Representers side is not Popery but a private Opinion which the Church has not yet censured as the Vindicator says Now what the Vindicator said in this Case is applicable to all others where the Answerer plainly shewed that the Eminent and Leading Men of the R. Church were of a different Sentiment from the Representer Whereas therefore the Representer either promised or threatned great matters in his Introduction I 'll endeavour says he to separate these Calumnies and Scandals from what is REALLY THE FAITH AND DOCTRINE OF THE CHVRCH I 'll take off the Black and Dirt which has been thrown upon her and set her forth in her GENVINE Complexion I 'll Represent a Papist whose Faith and Exercise of his Religion is according to the Direction and Command of the Church The Vindicator has on the other hand knocked him down at one blow For says he So long as the Church determines not the Dispute any one may hold which side they please as an opinion but neither side is truly what you ought to mean by Popery This shews that I was not much out of the way when I noted the great hazard of these Expounding and Representing designs The truth is it was so nice a work that in prudence they ought to have committed it to one hand and the Representer should have been the Vindicator For while they are two and and each of them driven to straits one of them being pressed on one side and the other on another side the danger was great that each of them would shift for himself a several way and be exposed to the Reproaches of one another Thus it happened that the Representer being pressed by his Adversaries for not having fairly Represented Popery was fain at last to make a Rule to know the Churches Sense by which might serve his turn and what should that be but the Currant passing of his Book amongst Catholics for this he thinks was enough to shew that the Doctrine of it was Authentic But the Vindicator being pressed with the Opposition that is made in the Roman Communion to the Doctrine of the Exposition and perceiving that Currant passing would not serve his turn he I say comes out a Month after the Representer and will not allow any thing to make Doctrine Authentic under the express Words of a General Approved Council and he has utterly undone the poor Representer's Rule of Currant passing which he thought was enough to shew that his Doctrine was Authentic Nay the unfortunate Vindicator has blown up the Exposition of the Bishop of Meaux as well as the Characters of the Representer which indeed could not be avoided because one must necessarily follow the Fate of the other For the Bishop's Exposition was solemnly pretended to be An Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church in Matters of Controversie that is to say An Exposition of Popery But the Bishop has expounded many things for the Doctrine of the Catholic Church which other Members of the same Church condemn and so long as the Dispute remains undetermined neither Side is truly what you ought to call Popery And therefore the Bishop should have called his Book An Exposition of his own Private Sentiment concerning the Doctrine of the Catholic Church Thus I say he should have called it or else he should have found out another Vindicator Nay because the greatest Grace that his Doctrine seems now to have from the Church is That it is not censured by the Church The Title should have been a little more wary by running thus An Exposition of the Bishop's Private Sentiment which the Church has not yet censured concerning the Doctrine of the Catholic Church But because in truth the Living Church has begun to censure his Doctrine and they who have censured it are not censured for it The Title should have been yet more warily contrived thus An Exposition of the Bishop's Private Sentiment which Sentiment is not contrary to the express Words of a General Approved Council Then perhaps the Vindicator might have done something in discharge of the Duty of a Vindicator But as the case stands he ought henceforward to change his Name and to write himself the Betrayer of the Bishop of Meaux's Exposition but by no means the Vindicator of it Which himself so well understood that he thought fit to pass over all the Letter of the Defender to the Bishop and he gives this substantial Reason for it Because the Letter concerns not him the Vindicator nor the Doctrine of the Catholic Church which he is to vindicate In good time But the Letter sorely concerned the Bishop and the Doctrine of his Exposition Pag. 8. and therefore if it does not concern the Vindicator you are not to wonder at it because there have been great Changes of late and now the Doctrine of the Bishop's Exposition is one thing and the Doctrine of the Catholic Church is another I may without breach of Modesty say that hitherto I have given the Vindicator a Full Reply And I believe the Reader would be well satisfied that I should drop him here and leave his following Cavils to be confuted by any one that will take the pains to compare him and the Defender together But then this would be a Pretence for another Book and for some boasting that he is not answered A little therefore must be said to what remains Pag. 8. And 1. By many of the Roman Casuists allowing the Defamation of an Adversary by false Accusations as the Defender said in his Table it is so plain by the Book that he meant no more than that they maintained it to be but a Venial Sin that the Vindicator himself has not questioned it and therefore it was a mere Cavil to tax the Defender of Falsifying in this business tho to incourage the Vindicator to do well another time thus much he is to be commended for that he limited his Accusation to the expression of Allowing which he found in the Table This Sir as you here word it is a False Imputation Even where he does ill I am glad that he does no worse But to speak to the thing They that make one of the basest things in nature to be but a Venial Sin cannot reasonably be otherwise understood than that they intend to make it easie for their own Party to commit it And tho they flourish never so fairly with that Rule that No Evil is to be done that Good may come of it yet there are so many little ways amongst them of clearing themselves from Venial Sins that when so foul a Wickedness is made but Venial it can be with no other design than to encourage men to it
have a strong Fansie that the Good Advice is the Representer's own But the Vindicator's good Words of it will not I guess make amends for undoing the Representer in his main Chance 7. For that Parallel which the Defender required to the account of things in Q. Elizabeths time for which Dr. Heylin is quoted this Man says no more than to this purpose That if it were not for some hot-headed Spirits these brangles about Religion might be ended Which is as much as to say that he insinuated something which his Superiours have forbidden him to own It seems that it was to be insinuated but not spoken plainly But because he forbears I shall do so too and refer my self to the World if he has not now made Nonsence of the Application of Heylin's Account 8. As to his being a Spy upon the Defender his Vindication of himself is the very Master-piece of his Answer For no Man that closely attends to his Words can tell whether he denies or confesses it tho to a Superficial Reader he seems to deny it His Words are elaborately put together and tho I am in very great haste yet I must needs let the Reader see them If I reflected upon your preaching it was from meer report but he might be at Church when he did not reflect upon the Defenders preaching for I assure you Sir what you were told of my being sometimes a part of your Auditory is like many other Stories which you abound with in all your Writings I suppose too from hear-say But if the Defender were not told of it but saw him at Church then this comes not within the Case because he had it not then from Hear-say but from Eye-sight Again if the Defender were told of it then indeed he had it from Hear-say but he might hear the Truth for all that The Vindicator was afraid of Proof and I advise him to be so still That which follows is just such another pleasant Strain it concerns the Sunday Night Conferences but the Reader shall go for that himself as he likes the other But whereas upon this occasion of the Defenders Preaching he bids him ask his Conscience Whether they who acknowledge only One God whom they must adore can be guilty of such a Horrid Crime as to give Divine Worship to Saints I have asked the Defender about it who has also asked his Conscience and in the name of his Conscience he says That they may be guilty of that Horrid Crime And more then that he intends to give these Men such Reasons for his Conclusion as he is in his Conscience persuaded cannot be fairly answered In the mean time I will give the Vindicator a Question for his Question and desire him to put it to his own Conscience Whether a Woman who acknowledges only one Husband to whom she must pay Conjugal Duty can be guil-of such a horrid Crime as to give her Husband's Bed to another And then let him use a little Conscience in the Application 9. For what next follows That he would not be thought to have abused the Defender's Auditory that the Defender had better give up the Cause that he gave ill Language and justified it that he believes every idle Report of the Bishop of Meaux Pag. 11 12. rather than his Vindication and his explaining of the Word Reveries this shall all pass off quietly 10. And so should his next Reflexion too but that he is so warm upon it that he must not be neglected The Defender had affirmed those Expressions of St. Germane St. Anselm and the rest of 'em concerning the Virgin which Crasset had transcribed to be horrid Blasphemies This the Vindicator could not endure The Defender therefore transcribed them out of Crasset and left the Reader to judge What now says the Vindicator Why truly he knew not well what to say To confess plainly that they were Blasphemies would be to vindicate the Defender To deny it plainly was yet a little too soon for tho New Popery was drawing on it had not yet breathed its last He took a middle Course and thus informs the Defender Pag. 12. Had you only said that Father Crasset had collected such Passages from those great Saints as if taken in that strict and dogmatical sense he brought them for might be called Blasphemies that Father must only have answered for them This Man has a notable Gift of Speaking and saying nothing which does him great service at a pinch He does not say That if those Passages were taken in that strict and dogmatical sense for which Crasset brought them then they might be called Blasphemies for this had been to bring Father Crasset upon his back with all those great Saints which Crasset had already raised up against Widenfelt And yet he does not say That if the Defender had said what he supposes for him that Father Crasset could have brought himself off No he answers more warily That that Father must only have answered for them which it may be he could and it may be he could not Now here he should have ended For Crasset may take himself to be sacrificed in what follows But to lay them to those Holy Saints Charges to call them Superstitious Men their Expressions horrid Blasphemies is what truly pious Ears cannot hear without Indignation For Father Crasset is in an ill case if to lay the Holy Saints Expressions in Crasset's sense to the charge of the Holy Saints be what truly pious Ears cannot hear without Indignation But I beg the Vindicator's Pardon for now I see how Crasset may be brought off again or rather the Vindicator For perhaps that which pious Ears cannot hear is not every Particular by it self but altogether i. e. pious Ears may hear those Passages laid to the charges of the Saints even in Crasset's sense but that therefore those Saints should be called Superstitious Men and their Expressions Horrid Blasphemies as they were not by Crasset but by the Defender this is what truly pious Ears cannot hear without Indignation Now after all this dexterity he has not offered to shew that those Passages which the Defender produced are not horrid Blasphemies or that they are capable of a good sense If the Reader has forgot them he may go to the Defender for them p. 89 90 c. and then he will be satisfied that all this shuffling comes to no more than this that the Vindicator cannot bear any thing that reflects dishononourably upon his Great and Holy Saints but his pious Ears can hear Expressions from them that do blasphemously reflect upon Almighty God without any Indignation at all 11. The Defender produced those Prayers and Ceremonies in the Consecration of a Cross which to him seemed to be Magical Incantations rather than Prayers The Vindicator to be even with him says That we use the like Prayers and Ceremonies in the Consecration of Churches and Chappels Now if we do then I for my part will say