Os the
observation
the last 30th January at Salters- Hall, Pinners-Hall, £3V.
Rehearsal - v1 - 1750
262, 263.
the author proposes a treaty betwixt the Gallican church and that of England, and fays, WE SHOU'd NOT lONC QUArrEl ABOUT THE PoPE'S supremacy.
Thus the Flying-Post.
C. Upon what terms does he propose this treaty?
O. Hang him, he covers himself so, that we cannot
reach him. He speaks vehemently against the Pope's supremacy ; and wou'd persuade the Gallican church,
that they are against it too : and has published their decrees to that, purpose made in the year 1682. And wou'd have a treaty set on foot, for them to reform with Bfci and that we shou'd both join against the church of Rome.
C. Was that a popish design ?
O. Yes, surely I what ! to propose a treaty, a treaty upon any terms with papishes, tho' against the pope and hisfupre macy I
And dosn't he lay, We shoud not long quarrel about the Pope's supremacy f
C. Upon what account does he fay that?
O. Upon supposition, that the Pope wou'd confine these Gallican decrees, which he thinks destroys this
supremacy the Pope pretends to.
C. Thea
The REHEARSAL.
197
C- Then indeed we shoa'd not quarrel long about the pe*s supremacy, if he wou'd give it up. Therefore at author, propos'd, That if the Pope wou'd not agree
the decrees of the Gallican church, they shou'd de-
him thac
, fy remacy,
favour of popery?
1 O. O. the treaty, the treaty, it Ipeaks of a treaty ! But iere is more against that author. It is faid, That, p. 270.
which hich he v cu d not disclaim.
did not cwn, and And was this a propofal
e ajj
t i ts, that the d religion, and that the church reform of
It is full to the point,
iut does that author fay so ?
O. No. He fays no such thing, nor any thing like it.
/"Romeis thesame.
C. That is something indeed !
ifet the Flying-Post proves it fully from these words,
Concors Romanœ & reformats ecchsta fides\ that if, be agreeing faith of the Roman and the reform'd
they
cbztrcfr. \ Now you know, if they agree, they tigree ! And if they agree, they are the samn I Is not this dmxn-
strarton ?
C. Yes. That they agree, wherein they agree! But
did that author fay, that they agreed in every thing, and that they differ d in nothing ? Then indeed they are the same ! But this seems but a part of the sentence. Why
did not Flying-Post quote the whole ?
O. The whole sentence is this,Concors Romano> & refor
mats ecclefire fides, neutrius opinio mihi religio est ; that
as has been interpreted to me, The agreeing faith of the Roman and reform church hut the opinion neither
my religion.
C. Well. Now 'tis all out, what have you to fay to
The Flying-Post thought he cou'd make little of it, he had set down the whole sentence therefore he took
no more than wou'd serve his turn.
O. But what thatfaith wherein the church of Rome
and we agree thought we were to agree in nothing with the papishes
C. Shall we not own God, because the papists do acknowledge him? Must we renounce the creed, because
K they
a 3
; :
? ! I
is
if it
it
is ?
d
of
is,
i98 The REHEARSAL.
they hold it ? Now, as I told thee in my Rehearsal, N. 20. the church of England imposes no terms of cm- munion but only those of the Apostles creed. But the church of Rome has added to these the I z new articles of Trent ; and imposes them as articles of faith. But if they wou'd let them be only opinions, they might be ar- gud by learned men, without any breach of communion :
faith.
which the Flying-Post has quoted one half, but what is
agreeable to the sense of all Christians ; and it is parti
cularly levell'd against the church of Rome, for turning these disputed opinions into articles of faith ; which are receiv'd, as Juch, by no christian church in the world but themselves, nor ever were. This is our dispute with the thurch ofRome.
O. Talk what you will, I'll have nothing to do with the church of Rome ; I'll converse with no papisties, tfco' it were to convert them ; I'll believe nothing they it- lieve, nor do any thing that they do, or ever did.
Which, were there nothing toforhid it, Is impious because they did it.
And after all, he's a rogut who wrote that Latin sen tence, and a downright papish, I'll warrant him ! they use to write Latin sentences. Why cou'd not he have put it in English, to give me the trouble of hunting for
And the common people, who understand them not, wou'd not trouble their heads about them. Now all churches make a difference betwixt probable opinions and articles of
Therefore I can see nothing in that sentence, of
an interpreter ? But he's a papish, for didn't he fay cm- tors f that's agreeing with Rome.
C. Have not I explain'd that to thee ? O. Ay, but didn't he fay it i
C. I told thee in what sense.
O. But didn't he lay it ?
C. What then? what canst thou inser? O. But didn't he fay it ?
C. I own it. What dost mean?
©. Their he faid it.
C This
The REHEARSAL.
199
C. Hhs is all's to be got, by taking pains upon Bayes ! Bray him in a mortar, he'll be Bayes still. So 'tis time to leave thee.
(2. ) O. Stay, stay, I have another stroke yet. What's that thou hast talk'd of creeds? Wb bate all creeds, and creed-makers. The Creed, the Lord s-prayer, and the Ten Commandments are set-forms ! and we have turn'd them off all together.
There's a precious book I have often advertiz'd, which we have re-printed this year 1704, call'd De Laun's
Plea far the Non-consormi/Is, where, p. 15. the 27th ar ticle against the church of England The Apostle's creed; and the 28th is, The Athanasi an creed. Against which Dr. Buknet's History of the Reformation qaoted.
So that you battle us you must desend our creeds Look to yourselves We'11 not yield an inch to any <reeJf
C. That precious hook of De Laun's was burnt 20 years •go, as impious, heretical, and seditious.
0. And we 're so little asham'd of that, that we have put upon the very title page in this new edition and
think will be since those days
wherein we make the church of Eng land popish, in the fame things for which we make
our sine schemes,
recommendation The world's alter'd WVve put in the fame new edition
the church of Rome heathen. And so we reckon them heathens both together.
{3. ) C. Is this your moderation to the church of Eng land?
O. Very good they understood But come, must go on with thee. There another rod in
for thee. The Flying-post fays (ihid. ) that the cafe of the Regale, p. 179. violently against toleration pro
testant diffenters.
C. He speaks there ofthe toleration granted in Holland.
0. Ay, and wou'd have us excluded from any share of the government, as in Holland. But he's mistaken
That will never please us. K
C. He
it 4.
is
is is
! if
!
a
if !
it !
is,
p;
! I Iis
of
it it
!
y
200 The REHEARSAL.
C. He has some expressions there too, which I much more largely insisted on, in The principles of dijstnttrs concerning toleration lately printed. And /,
and Flying-post, and scandalous club may answer them, vou think sit ! And I weu'd desire you not to for the prssace, which shews, that it is the interest of all
dissenters in general, and the onlysecurity for the tolera
O. But what fay you to what is quoted out of his . preface, p. 1 1 . That he accuses the complying clergy with
hypocrijy ?
about the revolution ; and fays, that few or none of them were tnstt'd with the secret. He believes not fix of them are so much as suspected for it. And that when they came to comply with it, after it was estabtish d, . . many of them thought it necessary to take the ne•w oaths with a Declaration (at the fame time) of the fense and meaning
in which they took them.
This is barely told, without any reflection or ili words
whatsoever. There's no arguing or inferring from the case, good or bad.
But the charging this with hypoerijy,, lies wholly at the Flying-post's own dcor. Let him answer it how he
can.
This shews the moderation of these men towards the
church of England! They cannot hear her tumid without throwing reproaches upon her ; they have sill'd the na tion with violent and venomous pampblets againil her ; have printed tests of her loyalty, of her honesty, and of her christianity j and left her not one rag of any of the three. . And their gall boyls so over, that they can not contain themselves within any rules of decency, but
give
the church of England established in the
tion, to have
mott firm manner. And their endeavouring to under mine the church of England, will, if effected, blew them all up, and let them loose upon one another, as it did before. None of them can have any toleration, but un der the church of England.
The REHEARSAL. 201
give her the Billingsgate of rogues, rascals, villains, &c. And that they ought to be hunted like beasts of prey, and not suffer'd to Eve upon the face of the earth ! And at the fame time provoke them to answer for themselves ; and argue their guilt from their filence, and insult over them because they are filent ; for so they long were. And when at last some answers came out, with that weight
of reason, and clearness offact, that cou'd not be de ny d ; this provok'd their rage ten-fold more ! And then they cry'd out upon the church, as the aggressors who
had broke the peace, men of no moderation, whodesign'd to enflame the nation, &c. Though all those books wrote on the side of the church, against which such bellowings are made, were only vindications in answer to the hitter and most spiteful invectives of the whigs and disfcnt- irs. Of this I have spoke before, N. 15, 16, 17, 18. But repeat it again, that not only the folly, but the wickedness and perverse obstinacy ps these men may appear,
and be abhorrei by- all who have any freedom ofjudgment left, or common sense.
And some of the church of England ( for moderation
is got in there too ! ) have highly blam d their brethren
for answering to any of these or standing up in itstnee of the church and constitution. But no blame, or reproof to the dissenters for their making the attack, and
continuing it more furioufy every dSyi / No
! let
run / what can it do you! it snews your modera
tion !
There is one objection more which the Flying-post
brings from p. 30, 31. of the aforefaid preface, That
that author compares the clergy who don't oppose the act of submisston in K. Henry 8. to this time, Judas : which 'is nmsetise, unless it be an error of the press. But for what he wou'd be at : That author endeavour'd to solve our
Uws since the reformation from Era/iianifm ; and that not in a pasting expression, or so ; but employ'd Sect, bf. of his book purposely upon that head ; wherein parti cular notice is taken of that act ofsubmission. And m
the place quoted of his preface, p. 30. fays expressly, K 5 23fc*:
scandal
202 The REHEARSAL.
That he does not suppose that acl ossubmission to exited thus far. But if any do think it extends so far, then in deed he speaks against but still repeating the caution, p. 30. mean taken in thisfense] And p. 31. ttil
sense] And again, p. 32. mean, as before, taken the full Erastian sense. ] But the lying post kept this part of the evidence under his thumb, only to have ground of clamour!
For will presbyterian, and Scotch presbyterian fend Erastianism which they have abjurd, both
formerly and in their new associations and which they have made their grand objection against the church England?
With what face then can they charge their own loved principle as crime upon another
Even with their own face whosesnout, can get in, will make way for the whole body. They lose no thing for want of madesty and pressing
Who with their FACE creep through affairs, As pigs through hedges creep with theirs.
From &at. March 10, to ;f>flt. March 17, 170s. N°33.
Os the observation the last 30th January at Salters- Hall, Pinners-Hall, £3V.
Ob. TN our last we were upon books charg'd upon JL parties, and innuendo and suppose upon thee,
my worthy partner and dear brother of Scotland the Fly
For we have dear brethren in Scotland and are not asham'd to own our confederacy.
But now he's upon thee, upon thee thyself directly, without quoting any other author, in his Flying-post of last Feb. 24. for the psalm thou faid'st in thy Rebear].
N. 29. was fung at Salters-Hall la& 30th of January. Coun. Pr'ythee let me alone desire none of rous
help, neither yours nor his. love no such seconds.
O. What
ing-past.
1
it, I; ! [I
I
a
;
a byof !
if
by
be of de a it
of
! ; ?
if it
if [in
[I a
The REHEARSAL.
203
O. What do'ft mean by help and seconds? We oppose
thee; don't we ? I'm fare we call thee ill names enough,
as many as thou'lt hear on the Thames, or ' at Billings
gate.
C. And they affect me both alike. Free leetve you
have to go on with all that artillery. But I am only afraid left any of you stiou'd speak well of me j that might render me suspected to all honest men. They
might be apt to fay, what has he done? to purchase the
good opinion of Observator, Flying-post, or any of the
scandalous club !
And it looks as if this were your defign ! for I can
not tell astory, but presently you two come in as vouch
ers for the truth of it ; tho' with hard words, to tover
the intrigue f
Thus I faid, that the cavaleade at Edinburgh was by
order of the privy-council there ; which some cou'd. hardly believe, it was so monstrous I Then comes Flying- post, and prints the very order for me ; and, that it might
not be forgot, Bayes prints it again in his next Obser vator of last Feb. 24. N. 90.
I was really tax'd by some friends for that psalm at 5 alters- Hall ; and they Were apprehensive my intelli
gence had fail'd me, and they expected it wou'd have
been denyd. Then comes Flying-post again, to help hi* friend at a dead lift, and vouches the truth of ana sets- down in many words in his of the fame Feb. 24. as.
does Observator in his of March 3d, N. 92.
And with such senseless excuses, as he were telling
all the world he play'd booty As, that there was Ser mon at the time and moreover, that the faid sermon had text That there's another translation of the psalms besides Stemhold and Hopkins. But especially, that was impojsible they cou'd mean as to the day, because
of their known loyalty! Insomuch that they wou'd tempt us to think, that the king cut off his own heads
and was prompted to none but the bishops and cava liers Let them name who else did and see how-
of that fort they Can sind in Salters-Hall The K prestyr
many
6,
I it,
I
!
so
it \
if
it by
I
it
it, a
it a
f
204
The REHEARSAL.
prestyterians vindication of themselves from the murder of K. Charles I. is the title of Se8. xiv. of Cassandra, N. I.
K. Charles II. is Se£l. This book the Flying-post names, and at it ; but
and Their endeavours to
restore
I I I
not a tittle to what is faid, andscolds prov d fully up-
This is their of ! been faid against it ! way answering
and they call it an answer !
O. As IVe. often told thee, thou'st got a silly trick
of proving ! and no proof will serve thy turn but matter offact ! which is neither civil nor mannerly! It spoils all conversation ! What ! does it become a gentleman to
prove ? It's like knocking a man down with a mallet. And whilst thou holds on in that way, no other answers flult thou get from us.
C. Wilt thou put me to proving too, that the fame thanksgiving psalm that was sung at Salters-Hall, was fung likewise at Pinners-Hall the fame day, that the
30th ofJanuary last.
O. What was May not that be by chance too
May not good wits jump? But I'll enquire, and
was not so, wo be to thee thou shalt be sure to hear from me. Otherwise you may take for granted, and make your most on't!
C. And so will. But have comment to make
thou little thinks on, upon your performance at Salters-
Hall, whereby we may guess, whether you had any
thing in your view, of the mournful subject of the
day.
Now suppose you had mind to turn this into, dey
of triumph and jubilee but withal to cover yourselves so, as that sliould not lay you open to the (as yet)
scandt of and (perhaps) the displeasure of the govern ment was the most proper ard easy method, in that case, to chooseaTRiuMPHAl subject, which might bring in triumphant psalm especially that one, which, be yond all the rest, points at, and names a particular day,
, on these heads, or any other. Only repeats the loyalty.
answers
of the prejhyterians over again ! as if nothing had ever
suidfact,
bU. it thejoyful day —-This the noble a3
O. Our
is
it
!
a
is, it ?
a
:It I
1
it, it
if I it
;
;
a
I a
!
if
?
The REHEARSAL.
205
O. - Our clark has a particular affection for that psalm, tho* upon mournful occasions. He fung it once at the-
burial of his ivife! But, as the bell clinks, the fool thinks, you may fancy what you will. But where's the proof?
you use to love proofs !
C. The best proof and comment of a man's words axe
his a£iions. Did you fast that day, and deny yourselves
a dinner ?
O. That you know we never do !
Or ever did, for any affliclion that besel the church or the crown ! We> wou'd not fast one •Ay>, to fave them both from ruin ! But w e have both fasted and pray'd to . pull them down !
L —
—/,
Squire where you were very well entertain'd. And
C. I follow'd you that day from Salters-Hall to
was there no discourse at dinner concerning the day, the sermon, and the . ?
O. What rogues among ourselves ! we must look sharp to sind out thy spies! Cannot we be quiet for thee in our own houses and cabals ? Or, hast thou afa
miliar ? Come, what has he told thee ?
C. That there were several of your preachers there ;
and. that they were very witty! And speaking of the sermon, and the psalm sung that day, and naming several
texts proper, as they thought, to the occafion, one of them, whose name begins with an S , ■faid, if it had been his turn to have preached that day, he wou'd have
chosen for his text the words of Martha to our Saviour,
John xi. 39. Lord, by this time he stinketh, >
O. I prosess it was very ingenious ! and we laugh'd heartily at it ; I wiih I had faid that might have been thought wit. But was as capable of: as he for if had come into my head, could have faid as
well as he you C. wish.
wou'd learn to jest some other way than in scripture phrase, which observe frequent among
You cap texts as boys do verses.
O. And for the fame end, to six them better in our memories, that we may have them always ready at
hand For the words do us more service than the fense. C. But
. yotJ.
:
I
it !
it is
a
I I
I
it,
it
;
it
I
206
The REHEARSAL.
C But to oar business : Did you not really know
that lecTure-day of yours to be the 30th of Januarys Was it by meer chance, that you were all upon triumph that day in Saltcrs-Hall, Pinners-Hall, and we may sup
pose in the rest of your conventicles ? Was there not so much as a glance at the day, in all your merri ment, by this time be stinkitb? ZSc. Come, confess inge nuously.
O. O
thee ! Thou wou'dst bring me to confession.
! ! . popery
popery
! A priest, I'll warrant popish
C. Then I'll consess for thee :
dinary notice of this last 30th of January. For on sm- day the z8th, the royal proclamation for the observance of
the day was read in our churches ; which your church-
whigs, and occafional conformist's cou'd not but tell YOU. And you thence reasonably presuming, that this woa'd
be follow'd with very loyal sermons (as it was) upon the day, you set yourselves to the utmost oppofition you
durst, and resolv'd to turn it to a day ofjuhilee.
But it wou'd be some sort of vindication of you, if yon
cou'd shew, that in any of your meetings that day, you
bestow'd one tear upon the royal dust, or found die least fault with the villainous actors of that fatal tragedy.
O. We did not meddle with it at all ; and was there any more harm in that, than in some of your clergy, who on the 8th of this month, the day of her majesty 's accession, faid not one word of our late glorious K—— William?
C. What had that to do with the business of that day ?
Wou'd you have had a history of all her royal progeni tors? But you make this a mart of disaJsection in any
occafion ! you How then can
who bring not in the glories of K. — William upon every
acquit
the day set apart on purpose for the memory of the
maityrdom of the royal grandfather of the queen, and of which you were minded in the royal mandat read two days before, stand sullenly filent, and have not one
word to fay upon the occafion!
0. 1
You had more than or
yoursblves
? who upon
The REHEARSAL.
ao>
O. I tell you in mine of the 3 d instant. N. 92. That the aft of parliament, net any royal mandat, requires the
dissenters to observe that day.
C. They both require all the king's loving
eels.
0. But that not the difenters.
The sirst true word ever heard thee speak
who indeed con'd expect from those, who have print
ed lately, Adefence ofthe parliament 1640, and the people England, against K. Charles l. falfly and unjustly
c*Wd the pious martyr, Sec. London printed, 1698. Where they endeavour to make him as black as bell, and
charge the Irish massacre upon him which Calarny has since reprinted from Baxter and has occasion'd parti cular vindication of his majesty from that vile asperfion,
tt letter of present concern
1702. to which no reply has been made.
to a member parliament,
And
Who can expect from an Observator, who has, since her majesty's happy accession, triumph'd over the de collation and de-truncation of'her royal grand-father ami hid us not censure the wisdom and justice of our fore
sathers in that act As have several times told thee
to thy face, in my Rehearsals, and quoted thy Observa- turs; but thou stands mute, and will not plead, nor hast
one word to fay in thy own defence
Yet now sets up to
justify others. before quoted, N. 0. told thee in my Observator
92. That there such an alteration in principles — As not to
perpetual recrimination on parties. that this was not defign'd the makers
And suppose, the acl for the
'bservation the 30th January.
C. Read the a3 12 Car. 2. c. 30. and the royal
man-
fat pursuant to then thou wilt see what party there
design'd. And while the principles remain the fame, the party the fame, tho' the persons are chang'd.
But what mean'ft thou alteration of principles
there one single principle of forty-one that alter'd You? Name it. Isitthera&W power oi the people?
the doctrine of calling kings to account Do you
not, assert these as violently at this day, as ever they did in
Iste inC it a a so
by
is1 of
is it,
of
is
?
it
ofby I ; itI
of
is I of
of
? a is ;
J
fit hj
? by Is
I:
The REHEARSAL.
in forty one ? How then have you altered, except to the
208
I
hand in that murder, nor my father. And the crimes of
worse?
O. Itell thee in the fame Ohservator, that
had nt
the dead shou'd not be chargd on the living.
C. Will you take such an excuse from the papists, or any others ? Were not our forefathers as much dead the 5th of November, 1604, as on the 30th of January, 1648? These are guilty and senseless excuses! As I told thee, parties remain, while principles remain.
C. Upon what terms does he propose this treaty?
O. Hang him, he covers himself so, that we cannot
reach him. He speaks vehemently against the Pope's supremacy ; and wou'd persuade the Gallican church,
that they are against it too : and has published their decrees to that, purpose made in the year 1682. And wou'd have a treaty set on foot, for them to reform with Bfci and that we shou'd both join against the church of Rome.
C. Was that a popish design ?
O. Yes, surely I what ! to propose a treaty, a treaty upon any terms with papishes, tho' against the pope and hisfupre macy I
And dosn't he lay, We shoud not long quarrel about the Pope's supremacy f
C. Upon what account does he fay that?
O. Upon supposition, that the Pope wou'd confine these Gallican decrees, which he thinks destroys this
supremacy the Pope pretends to.
C. Thea
The REHEARSAL.
197
C- Then indeed we shoa'd not quarrel long about the pe*s supremacy, if he wou'd give it up. Therefore at author, propos'd, That if the Pope wou'd not agree
the decrees of the Gallican church, they shou'd de-
him thac
, fy remacy,
favour of popery?
1 O. O. the treaty, the treaty, it Ipeaks of a treaty ! But iere is more against that author. It is faid, That, p. 270.
which hich he v cu d not disclaim.
did not cwn, and And was this a propofal
e ajj
t i ts, that the d religion, and that the church reform of
It is full to the point,
iut does that author fay so ?
O. No. He fays no such thing, nor any thing like it.
/"Romeis thesame.
C. That is something indeed !
ifet the Flying-Post proves it fully from these words,
Concors Romanœ & reformats ecchsta fides\ that if, be agreeing faith of the Roman and the reform'd
they
cbztrcfr. \ Now you know, if they agree, they tigree ! And if they agree, they are the samn I Is not this dmxn-
strarton ?
C. Yes. That they agree, wherein they agree! But
did that author fay, that they agreed in every thing, and that they differ d in nothing ? Then indeed they are the same ! But this seems but a part of the sentence. Why
did not Flying-Post quote the whole ?
O. The whole sentence is this,Concors Romano> & refor
mats ecclefire fides, neutrius opinio mihi religio est ; that
as has been interpreted to me, The agreeing faith of the Roman and reform church hut the opinion neither
my religion.
C. Well. Now 'tis all out, what have you to fay to
The Flying-Post thought he cou'd make little of it, he had set down the whole sentence therefore he took
no more than wou'd serve his turn.
O. But what thatfaith wherein the church of Rome
and we agree thought we were to agree in nothing with the papishes
C. Shall we not own God, because the papists do acknowledge him? Must we renounce the creed, because
K they
a 3
; :
? ! I
is
if it
it
is ?
d
of
is,
i98 The REHEARSAL.
they hold it ? Now, as I told thee in my Rehearsal, N. 20. the church of England imposes no terms of cm- munion but only those of the Apostles creed. But the church of Rome has added to these the I z new articles of Trent ; and imposes them as articles of faith. But if they wou'd let them be only opinions, they might be ar- gud by learned men, without any breach of communion :
faith.
which the Flying-Post has quoted one half, but what is
agreeable to the sense of all Christians ; and it is parti
cularly levell'd against the church of Rome, for turning these disputed opinions into articles of faith ; which are receiv'd, as Juch, by no christian church in the world but themselves, nor ever were. This is our dispute with the thurch ofRome.
O. Talk what you will, I'll have nothing to do with the church of Rome ; I'll converse with no papisties, tfco' it were to convert them ; I'll believe nothing they it- lieve, nor do any thing that they do, or ever did.
Which, were there nothing toforhid it, Is impious because they did it.
And after all, he's a rogut who wrote that Latin sen tence, and a downright papish, I'll warrant him ! they use to write Latin sentences. Why cou'd not he have put it in English, to give me the trouble of hunting for
And the common people, who understand them not, wou'd not trouble their heads about them. Now all churches make a difference betwixt probable opinions and articles of
Therefore I can see nothing in that sentence, of
an interpreter ? But he's a papish, for didn't he fay cm- tors f that's agreeing with Rome.
C. Have not I explain'd that to thee ? O. Ay, but didn't he fay it i
C. I told thee in what sense.
O. But didn't he lay it ?
C. What then? what canst thou inser? O. But didn't he fay it ?
C. I own it. What dost mean?
©. Their he faid it.
C This
The REHEARSAL.
199
C. Hhs is all's to be got, by taking pains upon Bayes ! Bray him in a mortar, he'll be Bayes still. So 'tis time to leave thee.
(2. ) O. Stay, stay, I have another stroke yet. What's that thou hast talk'd of creeds? Wb bate all creeds, and creed-makers. The Creed, the Lord s-prayer, and the Ten Commandments are set-forms ! and we have turn'd them off all together.
There's a precious book I have often advertiz'd, which we have re-printed this year 1704, call'd De Laun's
Plea far the Non-consormi/Is, where, p. 15. the 27th ar ticle against the church of England The Apostle's creed; and the 28th is, The Athanasi an creed. Against which Dr. Buknet's History of the Reformation qaoted.
So that you battle us you must desend our creeds Look to yourselves We'11 not yield an inch to any <reeJf
C. That precious hook of De Laun's was burnt 20 years •go, as impious, heretical, and seditious.
0. And we 're so little asham'd of that, that we have put upon the very title page in this new edition and
think will be since those days
wherein we make the church of Eng land popish, in the fame things for which we make
our sine schemes,
recommendation The world's alter'd WVve put in the fame new edition
the church of Rome heathen. And so we reckon them heathens both together.
{3. ) C. Is this your moderation to the church of Eng land?
O. Very good they understood But come, must go on with thee. There another rod in
for thee. The Flying-post fays (ihid. ) that the cafe of the Regale, p. 179. violently against toleration pro
testant diffenters.
C. He speaks there ofthe toleration granted in Holland.
0. Ay, and wou'd have us excluded from any share of the government, as in Holland. But he's mistaken
That will never please us. K
C. He
it 4.
is
is is
! if
!
a
if !
it !
is,
p;
! I Iis
of
it it
!
y
200 The REHEARSAL.
C. He has some expressions there too, which I much more largely insisted on, in The principles of dijstnttrs concerning toleration lately printed. And /,
and Flying-post, and scandalous club may answer them, vou think sit ! And I weu'd desire you not to for the prssace, which shews, that it is the interest of all
dissenters in general, and the onlysecurity for the tolera
O. But what fay you to what is quoted out of his . preface, p. 1 1 . That he accuses the complying clergy with
hypocrijy ?
about the revolution ; and fays, that few or none of them were tnstt'd with the secret. He believes not fix of them are so much as suspected for it. And that when they came to comply with it, after it was estabtish d, . . many of them thought it necessary to take the ne•w oaths with a Declaration (at the fame time) of the fense and meaning
in which they took them.
This is barely told, without any reflection or ili words
whatsoever. There's no arguing or inferring from the case, good or bad.
But the charging this with hypoerijy,, lies wholly at the Flying-post's own dcor. Let him answer it how he
can.
This shews the moderation of these men towards the
church of England! They cannot hear her tumid without throwing reproaches upon her ; they have sill'd the na tion with violent and venomous pampblets againil her ; have printed tests of her loyalty, of her honesty, and of her christianity j and left her not one rag of any of the three. . And their gall boyls so over, that they can not contain themselves within any rules of decency, but
give
the church of England established in the
tion, to have
mott firm manner. And their endeavouring to under mine the church of England, will, if effected, blew them all up, and let them loose upon one another, as it did before. None of them can have any toleration, but un der the church of England.
The REHEARSAL. 201
give her the Billingsgate of rogues, rascals, villains, &c. And that they ought to be hunted like beasts of prey, and not suffer'd to Eve upon the face of the earth ! And at the fame time provoke them to answer for themselves ; and argue their guilt from their filence, and insult over them because they are filent ; for so they long were. And when at last some answers came out, with that weight
of reason, and clearness offact, that cou'd not be de ny d ; this provok'd their rage ten-fold more ! And then they cry'd out upon the church, as the aggressors who
had broke the peace, men of no moderation, whodesign'd to enflame the nation, &c. Though all those books wrote on the side of the church, against which such bellowings are made, were only vindications in answer to the hitter and most spiteful invectives of the whigs and disfcnt- irs. Of this I have spoke before, N. 15, 16, 17, 18. But repeat it again, that not only the folly, but the wickedness and perverse obstinacy ps these men may appear,
and be abhorrei by- all who have any freedom ofjudgment left, or common sense.
And some of the church of England ( for moderation
is got in there too ! ) have highly blam d their brethren
for answering to any of these or standing up in itstnee of the church and constitution. But no blame, or reproof to the dissenters for their making the attack, and
continuing it more furioufy every dSyi / No
! let
run / what can it do you! it snews your modera
tion !
There is one objection more which the Flying-post
brings from p. 30, 31. of the aforefaid preface, That
that author compares the clergy who don't oppose the act of submisston in K. Henry 8. to this time, Judas : which 'is nmsetise, unless it be an error of the press. But for what he wou'd be at : That author endeavour'd to solve our
Uws since the reformation from Era/iianifm ; and that not in a pasting expression, or so ; but employ'd Sect, bf. of his book purposely upon that head ; wherein parti cular notice is taken of that act ofsubmission. And m
the place quoted of his preface, p. 30. fays expressly, K 5 23fc*:
scandal
202 The REHEARSAL.
That he does not suppose that acl ossubmission to exited thus far. But if any do think it extends so far, then in deed he speaks against but still repeating the caution, p. 30. mean taken in thisfense] And p. 31. ttil
sense] And again, p. 32. mean, as before, taken the full Erastian sense. ] But the lying post kept this part of the evidence under his thumb, only to have ground of clamour!
For will presbyterian, and Scotch presbyterian fend Erastianism which they have abjurd, both
formerly and in their new associations and which they have made their grand objection against the church England?
With what face then can they charge their own loved principle as crime upon another
Even with their own face whosesnout, can get in, will make way for the whole body. They lose no thing for want of madesty and pressing
Who with their FACE creep through affairs, As pigs through hedges creep with theirs.
From &at. March 10, to ;f>flt. March 17, 170s. N°33.
Os the observation the last 30th January at Salters- Hall, Pinners-Hall, £3V.
Ob. TN our last we were upon books charg'd upon JL parties, and innuendo and suppose upon thee,
my worthy partner and dear brother of Scotland the Fly
For we have dear brethren in Scotland and are not asham'd to own our confederacy.
But now he's upon thee, upon thee thyself directly, without quoting any other author, in his Flying-post of last Feb. 24. for the psalm thou faid'st in thy Rebear].
N. 29. was fung at Salters-Hall la& 30th of January. Coun. Pr'ythee let me alone desire none of rous
help, neither yours nor his. love no such seconds.
O. What
ing-past.
1
it, I; ! [I
I
a
;
a byof !
if
by
be of de a it
of
! ; ?
if it
if [in
[I a
The REHEARSAL.
203
O. What do'ft mean by help and seconds? We oppose
thee; don't we ? I'm fare we call thee ill names enough,
as many as thou'lt hear on the Thames, or ' at Billings
gate.
C. And they affect me both alike. Free leetve you
have to go on with all that artillery. But I am only afraid left any of you stiou'd speak well of me j that might render me suspected to all honest men. They
might be apt to fay, what has he done? to purchase the
good opinion of Observator, Flying-post, or any of the
scandalous club !
And it looks as if this were your defign ! for I can
not tell astory, but presently you two come in as vouch
ers for the truth of it ; tho' with hard words, to tover
the intrigue f
Thus I faid, that the cavaleade at Edinburgh was by
order of the privy-council there ; which some cou'd. hardly believe, it was so monstrous I Then comes Flying- post, and prints the very order for me ; and, that it might
not be forgot, Bayes prints it again in his next Obser vator of last Feb. 24. N. 90.
I was really tax'd by some friends for that psalm at 5 alters- Hall ; and they Were apprehensive my intelli
gence had fail'd me, and they expected it wou'd have
been denyd. Then comes Flying-post again, to help hi* friend at a dead lift, and vouches the truth of ana sets- down in many words in his of the fame Feb. 24. as.
does Observator in his of March 3d, N. 92.
And with such senseless excuses, as he were telling
all the world he play'd booty As, that there was Ser mon at the time and moreover, that the faid sermon had text That there's another translation of the psalms besides Stemhold and Hopkins. But especially, that was impojsible they cou'd mean as to the day, because
of their known loyalty! Insomuch that they wou'd tempt us to think, that the king cut off his own heads
and was prompted to none but the bishops and cava liers Let them name who else did and see how-
of that fort they Can sind in Salters-Hall The K prestyr
many
6,
I it,
I
!
so
it \
if
it by
I
it
it, a
it a
f
204
The REHEARSAL.
prestyterians vindication of themselves from the murder of K. Charles I. is the title of Se8. xiv. of Cassandra, N. I.
K. Charles II. is Se£l. This book the Flying-post names, and at it ; but
and Their endeavours to
restore
I I I
not a tittle to what is faid, andscolds prov d fully up-
This is their of ! been faid against it ! way answering
and they call it an answer !
O. As IVe. often told thee, thou'st got a silly trick
of proving ! and no proof will serve thy turn but matter offact ! which is neither civil nor mannerly! It spoils all conversation ! What ! does it become a gentleman to
prove ? It's like knocking a man down with a mallet. And whilst thou holds on in that way, no other answers flult thou get from us.
C. Wilt thou put me to proving too, that the fame thanksgiving psalm that was sung at Salters-Hall, was fung likewise at Pinners-Hall the fame day, that the
30th ofJanuary last.
O. What was May not that be by chance too
May not good wits jump? But I'll enquire, and
was not so, wo be to thee thou shalt be sure to hear from me. Otherwise you may take for granted, and make your most on't!
C. And so will. But have comment to make
thou little thinks on, upon your performance at Salters-
Hall, whereby we may guess, whether you had any
thing in your view, of the mournful subject of the
day.
Now suppose you had mind to turn this into, dey
of triumph and jubilee but withal to cover yourselves so, as that sliould not lay you open to the (as yet)
scandt of and (perhaps) the displeasure of the govern ment was the most proper ard easy method, in that case, to chooseaTRiuMPHAl subject, which might bring in triumphant psalm especially that one, which, be yond all the rest, points at, and names a particular day,
, on these heads, or any other. Only repeats the loyalty.
answers
of the prejhyterians over again ! as if nothing had ever
suidfact,
bU. it thejoyful day —-This the noble a3
O. Our
is
it
!
a
is, it ?
a
:It I
1
it, it
if I it
;
;
a
I a
!
if
?
The REHEARSAL.
205
O. - Our clark has a particular affection for that psalm, tho* upon mournful occasions. He fung it once at the-
burial of his ivife! But, as the bell clinks, the fool thinks, you may fancy what you will. But where's the proof?
you use to love proofs !
C. The best proof and comment of a man's words axe
his a£iions. Did you fast that day, and deny yourselves
a dinner ?
O. That you know we never do !
Or ever did, for any affliclion that besel the church or the crown ! We> wou'd not fast one •Ay>, to fave them both from ruin ! But w e have both fasted and pray'd to . pull them down !
L —
—/,
Squire where you were very well entertain'd. And
C. I follow'd you that day from Salters-Hall to
was there no discourse at dinner concerning the day, the sermon, and the . ?
O. What rogues among ourselves ! we must look sharp to sind out thy spies! Cannot we be quiet for thee in our own houses and cabals ? Or, hast thou afa
miliar ? Come, what has he told thee ?
C. That there were several of your preachers there ;
and. that they were very witty! And speaking of the sermon, and the psalm sung that day, and naming several
texts proper, as they thought, to the occafion, one of them, whose name begins with an S , ■faid, if it had been his turn to have preached that day, he wou'd have
chosen for his text the words of Martha to our Saviour,
John xi. 39. Lord, by this time he stinketh, >
O. I prosess it was very ingenious ! and we laugh'd heartily at it ; I wiih I had faid that might have been thought wit. But was as capable of: as he for if had come into my head, could have faid as
well as he you C. wish.
wou'd learn to jest some other way than in scripture phrase, which observe frequent among
You cap texts as boys do verses.
O. And for the fame end, to six them better in our memories, that we may have them always ready at
hand For the words do us more service than the fense. C. But
. yotJ.
:
I
it !
it is
a
I I
I
it,
it
;
it
I
206
The REHEARSAL.
C But to oar business : Did you not really know
that lecTure-day of yours to be the 30th of Januarys Was it by meer chance, that you were all upon triumph that day in Saltcrs-Hall, Pinners-Hall, and we may sup
pose in the rest of your conventicles ? Was there not so much as a glance at the day, in all your merri ment, by this time be stinkitb? ZSc. Come, confess inge nuously.
O. O
thee ! Thou wou'dst bring me to confession.
! ! . popery
popery
! A priest, I'll warrant popish
C. Then I'll consess for thee :
dinary notice of this last 30th of January. For on sm- day the z8th, the royal proclamation for the observance of
the day was read in our churches ; which your church-
whigs, and occafional conformist's cou'd not but tell YOU. And you thence reasonably presuming, that this woa'd
be follow'd with very loyal sermons (as it was) upon the day, you set yourselves to the utmost oppofition you
durst, and resolv'd to turn it to a day ofjuhilee.
But it wou'd be some sort of vindication of you, if yon
cou'd shew, that in any of your meetings that day, you
bestow'd one tear upon the royal dust, or found die least fault with the villainous actors of that fatal tragedy.
O. We did not meddle with it at all ; and was there any more harm in that, than in some of your clergy, who on the 8th of this month, the day of her majesty 's accession, faid not one word of our late glorious K—— William?
C. What had that to do with the business of that day ?
Wou'd you have had a history of all her royal progeni tors? But you make this a mart of disaJsection in any
occafion ! you How then can
who bring not in the glories of K. — William upon every
acquit
the day set apart on purpose for the memory of the
maityrdom of the royal grandfather of the queen, and of which you were minded in the royal mandat read two days before, stand sullenly filent, and have not one
word to fay upon the occafion!
0. 1
You had more than or
yoursblves
? who upon
The REHEARSAL.
ao>
O. I tell you in mine of the 3 d instant. N. 92. That the aft of parliament, net any royal mandat, requires the
dissenters to observe that day.
C. They both require all the king's loving
eels.
0. But that not the difenters.
The sirst true word ever heard thee speak
who indeed con'd expect from those, who have print
ed lately, Adefence ofthe parliament 1640, and the people England, against K. Charles l. falfly and unjustly
c*Wd the pious martyr, Sec. London printed, 1698. Where they endeavour to make him as black as bell, and
charge the Irish massacre upon him which Calarny has since reprinted from Baxter and has occasion'd parti cular vindication of his majesty from that vile asperfion,
tt letter of present concern
1702. to which no reply has been made.
to a member parliament,
And
Who can expect from an Observator, who has, since her majesty's happy accession, triumph'd over the de collation and de-truncation of'her royal grand-father ami hid us not censure the wisdom and justice of our fore
sathers in that act As have several times told thee
to thy face, in my Rehearsals, and quoted thy Observa- turs; but thou stands mute, and will not plead, nor hast
one word to fay in thy own defence
Yet now sets up to
justify others. before quoted, N. 0. told thee in my Observator
92. That there such an alteration in principles — As not to
perpetual recrimination on parties. that this was not defign'd the makers
And suppose, the acl for the
'bservation the 30th January.
C. Read the a3 12 Car. 2. c. 30. and the royal
man-
fat pursuant to then thou wilt see what party there
design'd. And while the principles remain the fame, the party the fame, tho' the persons are chang'd.
But what mean'ft thou alteration of principles
there one single principle of forty-one that alter'd You? Name it. Isitthera&W power oi the people?
the doctrine of calling kings to account Do you
not, assert these as violently at this day, as ever they did in
Iste inC it a a so
by
is1 of
is it,
of
is
?
it
ofby I ; itI
of
is I of
of
? a is ;
J
fit hj
? by Is
I:
The REHEARSAL.
in forty one ? How then have you altered, except to the
208
I
hand in that murder, nor my father. And the crimes of
worse?
O. Itell thee in the fame Ohservator, that
had nt
the dead shou'd not be chargd on the living.
C. Will you take such an excuse from the papists, or any others ? Were not our forefathers as much dead the 5th of November, 1604, as on the 30th of January, 1648? These are guilty and senseless excuses! As I told thee, parties remain, while principles remain.
