GOD save you Ma­ster; You are wel­come home.

I thank you John. How do all my Neighbours?

Very well, Sir, God be prai­sed.

I am glad to hear it: But what makes you stare more at me [Page 2] now, than you were wont to do formerly? You wonder, I warrant, to see me wear a Sword and Cre­vat.

Indeed, Master, so I do: I never saw you in this Garb before.

There are great Altera­tions in the World, and it ought to seem no strange thing if I am some­what alter'd from what I was.

There are great Alterations indeed Master, but I cannot under­stand why they should make you leave off your Gown and Cassock. I hope you do not intend, Sir, to preach in your Sword and Crevat.

You need not fear it, Man, for I do not intend to preach at all: I must leave that to others who have better Authority to do it than I have.

Better Authority? I am sure you are a Minister, Sir, and I have heard my Father, who was a Cler­gy-man, and died in the beginning [Page 3] of the great Rebellion, often say, That once a Minister, and always a Minister; and that a Man's Orders could never be taken from him.

That is true, if a Man has such Orders as he ought to have; but I never was so happy as to have any such.

I beg your Pardon, Sir, I now guess what you mean, and tru­ly, Sir, it has been a great trouble to the whole Parish to hear that you was turn'd. But pray, Master (if I may be so bold) how could you officiate as a Minister, if you had no Orders? Or have you only since his present Majesty came to the Crown, discovered that you have none?

I knew it a long time before that happened.

I am sorry to hear you say so, Master; because there are some ill Men in the Parish, who, if this be once known, will clamour a­gainst [Page 4] you, as if you were a Man of no Conscience, in that altho you knew your self to be no Minister, you have officiated as one, and al­tho you knew the Church of Eng­land to be in the wrong, yet you instructed all your People to live and die in the Communion of it.

Whatever I may have done heretofore, I intend to do so no longer.

Shall we then lose you, Sir, presently?

I do not intend to offici­ate any longer amongst you, but I will send you a very good Curat.

And take the Profits your self, as you did formerly?

Ay John, Why should I not?

O, Master, it would be bet­ter to resign your Living: for, if he be satisfied in his Mind (will those ill Men say) that he is no Minister, why does he pretend to take care of [Page 5] our Souls? Nay, if he thinks no Man can be saved in the Communion of the Church of England, and there­fore has himself left it, what a wicked thing is it for him to con­tribute still to our being educated in the same Errors, and to take Mony for deceiving us by his Cu­rat after the same manner, as he for several Years has deceived us him­self. Excuse my Boldness, Master, I only tell you what Mr. G. and Mr. H. who never loved you hear­tily, will say of you.

You know John, I al­ways liked your freedom. Mr. G. and Mr. H. may say what they please, but perhaps it will not be long before I return to my Cure my self.

To tell you the Truth, Ma­ster, the whole Parish is very much against Popery; but if they must have a Popish Minister, I am very confident, that the generality of [Page 6] them would rather have you, with whom they are acquainted, than any Stranger whatsoever.

I am much beholden to them: Pray remember me to Esq F. and to every body else. Fare­well John.

Farewell Master.

PArson, Father, Lay-Bro­ther, What shall I call you? You are welcome home. In­deed you have served us a fine trick, to desert us when we stand in most need of you.

Sir, I am your most humble Servant: Pray, how does your Lady, and the rest of your good Family?

We are all, God be thank­ed, [Page 7] in good Health, but not a little concerned to hear that our Spiri­tual Pastor is become a Wanderer.

That Name rather be­longed to me before my return to my true Mother, who, with open Arms, has been pleased to receive her truly penitent Prodigal Son.

She is very kind to Pro­digals, for to my knowledg, she has received, with open Arms, many of that Character; but I do not think that Name to belong to thee, unless upon the account of Consci­ence, and of that, I fear, thou hast been as Prodigal as the best of them all.

However prodigal I may seem to be of it, nothing but Conscience could have caused this Change in me. I should never have forsaken the Communion of the Church of England, if I could with a safe Conscience have lived in it.

I am asham'd to hear thee talk of Conscience. Was it Conscience for thee to educate us and our Children for several Years, according to the Rules of that Church, in whose Communion thou didst not believe either us or thy self to be safe? Or, is it now Con­science in Thee to receive 120 l. per Annum, and to barter with some young Fellow for 30 l. to do that among us, which thou believest to be a Sin in him, and what will help to keep us still in a state of Damnation?

My Clerk told me in­deed, that I must expect to be se­verely censured by some of the Pa­rish; but I did hope to have met with better Usage from Esq F.

What honest Man can forbear to be a little concerned, when he sees such doings amongst those who pretend to teach others their Duty.

The Apostles themselves were reviled, and a many ill things were reported of them, and I ought not to expect to fare other­wise, who am gone over to a per­secuted Church.

This is meer Cant, as thou very well knowst: But I would have Thee take care, lest thy Conversion prove not the occa­sion of a sort of lesser Persecution, even from those of thy own Religi­on. For to live in the Communi­on of one Church, and to be all the while of another, is so scandalous a Practice, that it deserves a seven Year's Mortification; and were I to be thy Confessor, I would swinge you with a vengeance, before I gave you Absolution. Pray tell me one thing, Have you received Or­ders from the Church of Rome, or not?

I have not.

Nor will be permitted [Page 10] I suppose, in haste, before you have made some better Satisfaction to the Church for the Scandal you have given it by your double-deal­ing. Let us see you set out a Nar­rative of your Conversion, with a cloud of Witnesses to justify it. Let us see you answer some of those troublesome Papers which the He­reticks at London daily set forth, and then perhaps you shall be put into a Capacity of injoying a Li­ving, not your own, for that is Meat for your Masters, but some smaller one of 30 or 40 l. per An. which is a good Competency for one that durst not declare till t'other day, who must not expect to feed upon such Delicacies, as belong only to those who have deserved well all their Life-time in the Service of the Catholick Cause.

What I have done has not been with a prospect of any present Advantage. It is my great­est [Page 11] Reward and Comfort▪ that I am in the right way to Heaven; and I hope that it will not be long before your self and others are perswaded to forsake their Errors, as I have done.

You must then produce better Arguments than the World has yet seen; for certainly no Cause was ever more bafled than yours of late has been.

I wonder why you should say so, since it is built upon an in­fallible Foundation: Whilst the Re­formation relies wholly upon the uncertain Reasonings of every par­ticular Person, and gives liberty to every one to believe what he pleases.

What you call an infalli­ble Foundation, has been sufficient­ly shown to be but a sandy one. But what you mean by the uncertain Reasonings of every particular Per­son, and by giving leave to believe [Page 12] what a Man pleases, I do not well understand.

My meaning in short is this. That the Rule of Faith of the Reformation being Scripture, as each Person of sound Judgment in the Church understands it, what­ever any particular Person judgeth to be the meaning of Scripture, will be to him his Rule of Faith; and therefore since different Persons do put different Interpretations upon the Scripture; nay, since the same Persons do interpret it at one time one way, and at another time ano­ther, it must necessarily follow, that the Principle, upon which the Re­formation is built, is very uncertain. For one Man may be of one Per­swasion, another of another, a third of one different from both. Nay, the same Person may change his Perswasion twice or thrice in a day, and yet continue still a true Son of the Reformation.

I do now guess what you would be at, and perceive that you are well acquainted with a Book called Pax Vobis.

That is a notable Book.

I allow it to have a great deal of Wit, more of Malice, but nothing of Argument.

The Book has sold won­derfully, which is a sign that it has Argument in it.

It is no sign amongst us of the Reformation, for we read Books of all sorts, and are pleased with every thing that is well done in its kind, whether with Argu­ment or without it, whether writ­ten by an Enemy or a Friend. And this is such a freedom, that I would not part with it for all the World. So that if I had no other Argu­ment against your Religion, this to me would seem sufficient, that, if I had once embraced it, and such a sort of Book as Pax Vobis should [Page 14] come out against it, I should not dare, without a License, to peep in­to it but should think it a Book as much to be avoided as Chillingworth, Dr. Stillingfleet's Rational Grounds of the Protestant Religion, or the Bible it self.

Nay, the Reformation gives you freedom enough; for it al­lows you not only to read any Books, but to be of any Perswasion, if you judg it to be agreeable to Scripture.

You have expressed in short the whole design of that Book, in which, altho there are seven Dia­logues, yet is there no more said in all of them to prove his Conclusi­on, than in any one of them.

May not a Man use dif­ferent Arguments to prove the same thing?

Yes, he may: But this Author has not done it; for to prove his Conclusion, he makes use of the same Argument in every Dialogue, [Page 15] with variety of Reflections upon several Persons and Things.

Is he not to be commen­ded for it?

He is to be commended for his variety of Reflections; for this makes his Book pleasant. But when he would pretend to make out so material an Objection against the Reformation, it cannot sure be so very commendable, to make use of the same Argument over and o­ver again.

But this seems to be an allowed Practice amongst you: for altho all your most considerable Objections have been answer'd an hundred times; yet are we daily troubled with them, as if they had never been heard of before; and almost every Fortnight out comes that a­stonishing Question, Where was your Church before Luther?

If he makes use but of one Argument, it is however such an Ar­gument [Page 16] as ought to perswade every honest Man to forsake the Refor­mation, which is founded upon a Principle that gives a Man leave to be in England a Protestant, in Ger­many a Lutheran, in Hungary a So­cinian; and to change his Religion as often as he pleases.

This is all out of Pax Vobis: But how does it appear that a Man may thus change his Re­ligion from that Principle, That the Scriptures, as any Man of sound Judgment interprets them, are the Rule of Faith?

Because a Man may al­ter his Judgment, and interpret Scripture otherwise than he did; and since he may lawfully stick to that Interpretation which he him­self puts upon it, he may change his Religion as often as he thinks fit to alter his Judgment.

That does not always follow: for a Man may perhaps [Page 17] think fit to profess an alteration of his Judgment without any just Reason, or without having made any inquiry, whether he may safe­ly do it or no; and if he does so, the alteration of his Judg­ment is so far from being a Rea­son why he should change his Re­ligion, that it is in it self a great fault.

But suppose he does find Reason to alter his Judgment, may he not then change his Religi­on?

Yes, he is bound to do it, altho he should change Truth for Error.

And so he may turn from one thing unto another, un­til he has turn'd as often as there are Points in the Compass, and be a true Child of the Reformation all the while.

He is bound to alter his Perswasion as oft as he meets with sufficien [...] Arguments to con­vince him that he ought to do so. But there is a great deal of difference between what is Truth, and what a Man believes to be so. A Man is bound to act accord­ing to an erroneous Conscience, un­til he is better informed; but it does not therefore follow, that his Conscience is not erroneous; or that if he has had opportuni­ties of undeceiving himself, he is not in a very dangerours Condi­tion. Now the Author of Pax Vobis would insinuate that those of the Reformation do believe that to be true, which any Church, or particular Persons judg to be so, and that there is a Liberty allowed amongst them to profess, or deny any Tenets whatsoever.

How can it be otherwise, since there are such different Opini­ons amongst them, [...] some of them have so often changed their minds, and yet have still continued true Members of the Reformation?

The Reformation is a word which denotes all those, whe­ther Churches or Persons, which have left the Communion of the Church of Rome. Now it may hap­pen that some of those which have left that Communion, may separate from it by degrees, others all at once; that some of them may main­tain some of that Church's Errors, and others may maintain Errors as bad as any which she holds. But does it therefore follow, because all these are stiled Members of the Reforma­tion upon the account of their not living in Communion with the Church of Rome, that they are all in the right, and that a man may lawfully hold whatever is maintain­ed by any of them?

They all pretend to sound­ness of judgment; and their com­mon Rule of Faith is, Scripture as interpreted by men of sound judg­ment.

The Rule is good, but their pretences are not. For a man may think his judgment to be sound, when it really is not; and although he is bound to adhere to that inter­pretation, which for want of sound­ness of judgment he puts upon Scri­pture, yet the interpretation is not therefore at all the truer, nor can it be an indifferent thing for me or any one else to approve or not to approve of it.

One would think that it were an indifferent thing, when there are and have been so many great men amongst you who main­tain Opinions contrary the one to the other, and yet all pretend to truth, and to be true Members of the Reformation.

I tell thee once again, That a man is said to be a true Member of the Reformation by being supposed to have left the Communion of the Church of Rome; but yet that eve­ry one who has left that Commu­nion, may not in all respects main­tain what is Truth, although he may pretend to it. And therefore a man that has left that Communion, is still obliged to make a strict in­quiry whether it be lawful for him to embrace the terms of that other Communion into which he has ad­mitted himself; and after he has done so, not to desert it without good reason.

Does not every Member of the Reformation pretend to have reason on his side?

But the great question is, whether he has reason or no.

Sir, I cannot stay with you at present any longer; but before I go, I will leave with you one familiar [Page 22] instance, which seems to me to be a sufficient confutation of that whole Book which we have discoursed of.

I long to hear it.

Suppose the Emperor of the Turks should turn Christian.

I wish he would.

You mean Roman Catho­lick.

Unless he turns Roman Catholick, he might as well never turn Christian.

We will let that alone at present. You may well think that after his conversion he will be very desirous to have his people turn, as well as himself; and you must needs allow it to be very reasonable for the whole Empire to do it.

Nothing can be more reasonable.

Now suppose one man turns, because thoroughly convinced of the Excellency of the Christian [Page 23] Religion; Another retains his won­ted kindness for his old Mahumetan way of Worship, but yet for fear of losing by it, turns too. A third, to gain somewhat by it, which he knows not otherwise how to get, turns Christian, although his senti­ments are the same with those of the second. A fourth has some high flying hopes, and although he does not turn at present, yet he is ready to do it when ever it is required of him. It is therefore lawful to turn Christi­an, or to be ready to turn, to save by it, or to get by it, or in hopes of getting, for this reason, or for that reason, or for any other reason whatsoever.

You are pleasant, Sir; but I do not perceive the consequence of this Discourse.

Think on it, and you will find it to be as good a consequence, as that which your Author so much insists upon.

[Page 24]But I can stay no longer, Parson, Farewell, I should be glad to see you at my House.

I shall not forget to wait upon you.

You must forgive me for calling you Parson, still. I protest I cannot forget my old Compellati­on.

Sir, I am your Servant.

SIR, your humble Ser­vant. This is kindly done. I find you Catholicks have more Charity than some would make you to have.

I am always true to my word, Sir.

In lesser matters you mean.

Nay in the greatest.

We will not dispute that Point. You are heartily welcome, although I must frankly tell you, Not so welcome as you were wont to be. Pray will you sit down.

I fear I shall disturb you, Sir.

Not in the least; I was diverting my self with the famous [Page 26] Pamphlet which we talked of when we were last together; and am glad you are come, that we may have a little more chat about it.

I do not doubt, but that you have read it over long before now: Pray Sir, what do you think of it?

I have read it over twice or thrice, and think of it, as I told you when I was with you; viz. That the Book is a pleasant Book, but that there is little of Argument in it; and that which it has, does not at all prove the Conclusion.

The men of the Reforma­tion, I suppose, do not much like the Conclusion.

I know not what others like; I, for my part, like every thing that is well proved.

Let me intreat you to take the Book, and as you turn over the leaves to give me the Contents of every Dialogue, and let us consider toge­ther, with what strength he proves, [Page 27] That, according to the Principles of the Reformation, a man may change his Religion as oft as he pleases; and that it is an indifferent thing, what opinions a man holds.

Does he not in his first Dialogue show you the facility of such a change, p. 5.? And give you instances of those who have made it, p. 7.?

Does he not tell you how readi­ly they of different perswasions, join together in the same Worship, p. 8?

That the Synod of Charenton has allowed it, p. 9?

Does he not instance in the seve­ral Changes which have been made here in England, p. 10?

And in the Opinions of several Doctors who have allowed Here­ticks to be members of the Church?

In his second Dialogue he makes mention of great differences a­mongst those of the Reformation, concerning their Rule of Faith; but [Page 28] that it is resolved at last into the judgment of every particular person.

He then quotes several gross opi­nions of Calvin and others, which he declares to be the Doctrine of the Reformation, and that they may be believed by any man what­soever.

Pray go on, Sir.

In his Third he shows, That every Woman and Cobler, ac­cording to the Doctrine of the Re­formation, may preach and instruct others, and hold several Blasphe­mous Tenets, which he there gives an account of.

In his Fourth he relates other wicked Tenets of the Reformation, especially such as encourage looseness of manners.

In his fifth, Such as have respect to Christs having establish'd a Church; to the truth of what he and the Apostles taught; to the dis­agreement about the Canon of [Page 29] Scripture; to the changing of Scrip­ture; to the Doctrines of Justifying Faith, of Works, of Gods Grace, of the keeping his Commandments; all which wicked Tenets he makes it appear, that several of the Refor­mers have held, and therefore that they are the Doctrines of the Reformation, and may lawfully be held by any Member thereof, if he will adhere to his own Principles.

We shall see that by and by: Pray give me the sense of the two last Dialogues.

In the beginning of the sixth he inveighs against the Church of England, for pretending to im­pose upon her Members, her Inter­pretations of Scripture, which is no more than what is done by the Papists, and is directly contrary to the Doctrine of the Reformation. In the latter end thereof, and in the beginning of the seventh, he shews, that according to the Principles of [Page 30] the Reformation, a man may believe all the Doctrines of the Popery; that several of the Reformers have believed several of them; and that the only difference betwixt the Pa­pists and the Reformers in this case, is, That the former believe their Doctrines to be true, upon the Au­thority of the Church; the latter, because they judg them to be agree­able to Scriptures.

He avers in his Conclusion, That according to the Principles of the Reformation, no Doctrine or Tenet whatsoever can be wicked or blas­phemous, but that all are sacred and solid Judgments; and reflects very sharply upon Dr. Stil. for making Jupiter to be the Supreme God.

He is very witty upon the Doctor, and would fain perswade him to turn Pagan; and I believe if the Doctor would be ruled by him, he could teach him how to do it, without ever turning from being a Christian.

[Page 31]But since you have given a brief account of this Book, pray let us reckon what the whole thereof a­mounts to.

As far as I can perceive, the sum of all is no more than this, That several of the Reformers have chan­ged from one thing to another, and that some of them have held most gross and scandalous Tenets; and therefore since every man is bound to follow his own Judgment, he may according to the Principles of the Reformation lawfully embrace any Opinion or Doctrine whatsoever.

That is indeed the Sum of what he has said, and to what the Reformation will never be able to give any satisfactory answer.

Be not too hasty, good Sir, in your Inferences. Because men are of different opinions, and will be so as long as the World endures, does it therefore follow that every one allows all opinions lawful, and [Page 32] that it is the same thing what opini­on a man holds.

Any man would think so; since they allow it to be law­ful to change their opinions as oft as they in their own judgments shall think it reasonable so to do, and e­very man believes all the while his opinion to be true.

Does every one who be­lieves his opinion to be true, believe the opinion of others, which is con­trary thereunto, to be true also?

By no means; for as this Author tells you, p. 2. Each par­ticular Congregation constrains as much as it can, all people to be­lieve its own Tenets; Protestancy would have us all be Protestants, and would root Lutherans out of the World, as well as Popery; Lutherans would, if they could, draw all to their own net; Presbytery esteems it self to be the best of all, and would crush Protestancy if it [Page 33] could; but that if we look upon the whole body of the Reforma­tion, as it includes all Reformed Congregations distinct from Po­pery, there is a holy extension of Spirit and Liberty for to be either Lutherans, Presbyterians, Protestants, and any thing but Popery.

Those words, and what follows, make a certain sound in a mans ears, but I do not perceive a­ny great matter to be in them. They rather imply a Contradiction, than any thing else.

For if the several parts of the Re­formation believe their own opini­ons to be true, and would have all others to embrace them; how can the whole Body, which consists of the parts, be truly said to allow a liberty of believing what every man pleaseth?

They may not only allow a li­berty, but may assert it to be ne­cessary that every one should fol­low [Page 34] his own judgment, although he be never so much mistaken. But where do they allow it to be an in­different thing whether he be mista­ken or no?

What think you of the Sy­nod of Charenton in France, held a­bout the year 1634, which expresly says, that for your Salvation, it is all alike whether you be a Calvinist, Lu­theran, or of any other Congregati­on?

To cut you short in this matter; It is not to be supposed that I who am a Layman should under­stand what Synods have determin'd, or what are the Opinions of parti­cular Learned men in these and such like cases, and therefore cannot tell whether this Author has rightly re­presented matters or no.

Why should you think o­therwise?

Because there are some people in the World who give them­selves [Page 35] a great liberty of represent­ing things either truly or falsly, as they judg it to be most expedient for their present purpose.

Why do you suppose this Author to have done so?

He may have done so for ought that I can tell; but I do not suppose that he has, but rather chuse to allow all his Representations to be true; and yet I cannot see what other effect his Book can have upon the mind of any judicious man, than the giving him some little sensual pleasure in the reading of it.

It has had good effect a­mongst some people; and a certain man of Authority in a certain Uni­versity, publickly owns himself in all companies to have been convert­ed by it.

Every man, in every place of Authority there, is not always the wisest or the honestest man in the University; but whatever your [Page 36] certain man may say, I am of opini­on, That if this Book makes no more Converts any where else, than 'tis likely to make in an Ʋniversity; there has been no small pains taken to little purpose.

You will allow, I suppose, that this Author may have said e­nough to convince any man in the University, or out of it, of the ab­surd Opinions of several Reformers.

He may do that indeed, if all the Stories which he tells, are true.

But how do these mens Errors concern me? or what will it avail to perswade me to relinquish my Opinion, (which is the great de­sign of this Book) that others are, or have been mistaken?

My Business is to to enquire, Whether the Terms of that Com­munion to which I belong, are just and equitable; and since, God be thanked, I find them to be so, I do [Page 37] not intend to forsake that Commu­nion, because others are not, or have not been of my mind.

But the Synod of Charen­ton tells you, that you may, if you please.

I am not certain, whe­ther the Synod of Charenton tells me so, or no; but if it does, it will not weigh at all with me, since the Church of England tells me no such thing; but having prescribed such terms of Communion, as are Just and Orthodox, declares those Members to be guilty of Schism, which depart from her.

She would, I know, arbitra­rily impose her Rules and Interpre­tations of Scripture upon her Mem­bers; and what is this else, but a Spice of Popery, for which she ne­vertheless pretends to have so great an aversation?

This indeed your Author objects several times; and if it be a [Page 38] Spice of Popery, I heartily wish that Popery had nothing worse in it; but you are both under a great mistake, to fancy any agreement betwixt Popery and the Church of England in this matter; for Popery requires an intire Submission, with­out any previous Tryal or Examina­tion; you must believe and pra­ctice what the Church prescribes, because she requires it. Whereas the Church of England gives you leave, nay desires you to examine the truth of her Doctrines, and the lawfulness of her prudential provisi­ons and orders, and so depends not upon her own bare Authority, but is ready to justifie to every one of her Members the reasonableness of her commands, which is plain and honest dealing, and ought to give great satisfaction to every wise and honest man.

I wonder why you should so magnifie the Church of England, [Page 39] which has as much establish'd this liberty of believing what we please, as any other part of the Reforma­tion, having in a few years chan­ged and establish'd different Religi­ons by publick Acts of Parliament, as this Author has made out, p. 10.

It never troubles my head, what Changes and Alterations have been made, or how they have been made. That which I am concerned to know is, Whether the present settlement is contrived to promote Virtue and Goodness, as it ought to do, and whether it contains nothing contra­ry to the Word of God.

Pray, Sir, is it lawful to settle one thing at one time, and the quite contrary at another?

I do not say so: They who at any time settle what is de­structive of good Manners, or con­trary to the Word of God, do amiss. There is no such thing at present setled in the Church of England, [Page 40] and therefore what care I how things were heretofore, or by what steps and degtees they came to be so well setled as they are.

Great alterations cannot be com­pleated in a moment; and it requi­red some time to bring men out of that darkness in which they had so long sat; and if we were to be brought back again to that conditi­on in which we then were, thirty or forty years might well be allow­ed to effect it in; for how hasty so­ever some folk may be, it is not so easie a work to convert millions on the sudden: And besides, when men are blind, they are much more wil­ling to have their sight restored, than when they see very well, to suffer their eyes to be put out.

I had thought that all Re­ligious Congregations, and Pre­tenders to Piety, had at their first be­ginning been in the height of their perfection.

That is one of the most silly things which your Author in­sists upon, p. 39. for Truth, after it has been obscured for a great while in any Nation, cannot be made immediately to recover its wonted brightness; and when great oppo­sition is made against it, it is very well, if at first it gets any ground at all.

And therefore although a certain Gentleman has taken a great deal of pains to show how indecent and im­proper it is to call King Hen. VIII. the Postilion of the Reformation; yet does that expression very well declare his Courage and Resolution in first undertaking so hazardous an Enterprize, as well as the Effects thereof; his dashing all that were near and about him, as well as his receiving some dirt himself.

And although but little then was done in comparison of what was done afterward, yet was it well for [Page 42] us that so much was done; and I had much rather have lived in the lattter end of his Reign, than in the days of our King John, when his Ho­liness was pleased to shut up our Church-doors, and would not be prevailed with to open them until the King upon his knees had resign­ed his Crown unto his Legat Pan­dulphus.

After the Reign of King Edw. 6. the Reformation came to no true Settlement until the days of Queen Elizabeth, since which time the al­terations have been very inconsider­able; neither do I see what occasion we have for any more. But if any should happen, as long as nothing were established contrary to the Word of God, I could freely comply with them.

That is according to the Principles of several Reformers, who complied with the several Changes as fast as they were made.

If their compliance was after the manner of honest Mr. Chil­lingworth, who when he was in the right way suspected he was in the wrong, and thereupon went out of it; but upon the discovery of his mi­stake, returned immediately into it again, they were to be commended for it. But if they turned out of in­terest, what do you tell me of them? If they were Knaves and Hypocrites, I do not intend to increase their number.

Is it not a scandal upon the Reformation, that such men should be of it, who give themselves the liberty of doing whatever seem­eth best in their own eyes?

The Reformation, as I once before told you, is a word, and signifies no more than the forsaking the Church of Rome; and what ob­jection is it against any mans leaving the Communion of that Church, That amongst those who have left it, [Page 44] there are as bad, if not worse, than those who continue in it.

What if amongst the Reformers, there be found a Vicar of Bray, or an A. P. in an University, must it needs follow that you and some o­thers will do as they did, if there were occasion? Think of that a lit­tle, because some men are always turning when 'tis convenient so to do; will you allow their Carriage to be an objection against all Con­verts?

Well Sir, it is a very wic­ked thing, that they who stile them­selves Reformers, should be guilty of such practises, and hold such Blas­phemous Tenets as this Book assures you they have done.

Dost thou think that I value any man barely because he is a Reformer, if his Faith be Erroneous, or his Life scandalous? For instance, if you could make me believe that one of the Reformation drinks, till [Page 45] he drinks Healths to the P—though perhaps when time was he would have drunk it t'other way; that a second Reformer is so indifferent in his Religion, that he cares not to de­fend his own Church to be a true Church. And that a third out­swears the boldest Collonel in the King of Polands Army, and drinks confusion to all Religions, till at last he drinks an Health to the D— I think you cannot desire more libe­ral Suppositions against our selves, than these are. Nay, I make no que­stion but you may find some mere Time-servers, some Drunkards, and common Swearers, and very scan­dalous debauched persons, not only in the Reformation at large, but even in the Communion of the Church of England. Pray Sir, mark what I say, and make your best on't; our Do­ctrine is pure, and so is our Form of Worship; but alas! the actions and lives of many of us are not so. But [Page 46] must not I therefore respect those worthy Gentlemen whose lives are unblamable, and who by their Wri­tings and prudent demeanor have given such reputation to the Christi­an Profession, and to that Excellent Church of which they are Mem­bers?

Why, Sir, you are very free indeed with your own Com­munion, some of which you care not, if they be thought as bad as any of those Doctors which the Author of Pax Vobis makes mention of.

What if they be? Is it a sin to leave the Communion of the Church of Rome, because there are such as these out of it?

As there are a great many bad men amongst those of the Reforma­tion (and if there be any who hold it lawful for every man to believe and practise what he pleases, I rec­kon those to be the worst of all) so [Page 47] there are a great many good men too. As there is error amongst some of them, so is there truth amongst others; and if any part of the Re­formation ever had the latter, I am sure the present Church of England has. And therefore although I do very much suspect that the Author of Pax Vobis has not done fairly by the Reformers, yet granting all that he has said to be true, I am firmly resolved (and I have great reason to be so) notwithstanding all the differ­ent and perhaps Blasphemous Opini­ons of others; Notwithstanding the various changes and alterations which have been made by our fore­fathers, To continue firm to the pre­sent establishment, and so I believe will all the considering people that are in the whole Nation.

Come, Sir, we will talk no more about these matters.

Only let me add one thing before we go: That you of the Church of [Page 48] Rome have at this time the least rea­son to find fault with the Heresies, Schisms, and extravagant Tenets of some of the Reformation, since it is so visible that they are like to do you better service than your best Argu­ments.