Answer to the Rector of Bury, Text

Answer to the Rector of Bury · Text

AN ANSWER TO THE Rector of Bury's LETTER TO HIS FRIEND.

Wherein is ſhew'd, That He has effectually, tho' unwillingly acquitted the Diſſenters from his malicious Charge of their being Corrupters of the Word of God.

That his attempts againſt the Titles of the Pſalms, and Hebrew Bibles are Feeble and Inconſiſtent.

By JAMES OWEN.

Malunt neſcire, quia jam oderunt.

Tert. Apol Cap. 1.

Hi rumores turpiſſimos ſerunt, & quod ab ipſis egreſſum eſt, id ab aliis audiſſe ſe ſimulant, iidem auctores & exaggeratores.

Hieron ad Furiam.

LONDON: Printed by S. Bridge, for Tho. Parkhurſt at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapſide near Mercers-Chapel, 1699.

p. 1AN ANSWER TO THE Rector of Bury's LETTER.

JƲlius Coeſar reports of the Ancient Gallic Soldiers**De Bell. Gall., that at the firſt on-ſet they were more than Men, and at the ſecond leſs than Women. Such a Champion is the Rector of Bury, who has charged the Diſſenters with a Paſſion exceeding that of a Man, even ſuch as diſtinguiſhes the Accuſer of the Brethren, but finding himſelf warmly receiv'd, he conſults his own Safety by an inglorious flight, and would ſhelter himſelf in ſuch Refuges, as would be generouſly diſdain'd even by thoſe of the weaker Sex, whoſe Conduct is influenc'd by any Principles of Vertue and Honour: He is ſo vain as to compare himſelf to Scipio Africanus ††Rem. on Rem. p. 7., whoſe Policy (ſays he) I thought fit to make uſe of by carrying the War into the Enemies own Country, and to lay to the Diſſenter's Charge a Crime, &c Our renowned Engliſh Scipio is ſo fond of his Military Politicks that he cannot forbear mentioning them again in his Letter. I thought not improper ‖‖Letter, p. 19., ſays he, to carry the War into the Enemies own Countrey, and tax them with corrupting, Acts 6.3.

Here is a formidable War begun upon us, the Rector declares us all Enemies, becauſe the Note-maker and Mr. Calvin, as he pretends, had broken the Peace, and treats us with all the fierceneſs and malignity, which he reckons due to Enemies, eſpecially in a time of Publick Hoſtility.

p. 4One or two Perſons had diſpleaſed him, and inſtead of engaging them, like another Goliah he aſſaults the whole Body of Engliſh Diſſenters, together with the Church of Scotland. He lays to their charge things they knew not, and makes them Corrupters of the Word of God. He pretends they Printed Ye for We in Acts 6.3. And this he attempts to prove by Four Arguments.

1. The firſt Corruption happen'd in Cambridge in the Year 1638. 2. It favours the Diſſenters. 3. The Epiſcopal Party deſign'd not to corrupt this Place. 4. A Cameronian urg'd this corrupt Reading. Theſe are the Forces, with which he manages the War, as he calls it. I fully confuted his Arguments in my Remarks on his Corruption-Sermon. Sometime after he Publiſhes his Remarks on Remarks, wherein he pretends to confirm his Charge, and to recruit his Forces by the Addition of a Story or two, which he tacks to the Cameronian-Story. That Book is full of bitter and indecent Reflections on the whole Tribe of Diſſenters. In my further Vindication of the Diſſenters, I anſwered all his Four Arguments, expos'd the weakneſs and invalidity of 'em, which muſt of neceſſity affect the Author, and now and then I complain'd of his Injuſtice, want of Candor, Charity and Truth. The Rector, as I have Reaſon to believe, being Convicted of the wrong he had done us, and not being able to vindicate his Arguments any longer, Publiſhes a ſort of Letter to a feigned Friend (for real ones he has none in this Controverſie) wherein he offers not the leaſt Thing in Defence of his Three firſt Arguments, nor indeed could he with any colour of Reaſon, ſo that Three Squadrons of Mr. Scipio's Army are entirely cut off, nor had he the Courage ſo much as to attempt to recruit them: Nay, he tamely gives 'em up for Dead; and confeſſes,**Letter, Page 19. that the Life of the whole Arguments put together, depends on the Evidence of thoſe Matters of Fact. If his Cameronian Story, and the two other want Evidence, or do not affect the Diſſenters; then by his own Confeſſion, his Three other Arguments want Life. When he brought theſe doughty Squadrons firſt into the Field, he took it for granted they had Life and Strength in 'em, but now they are Dead and unſerviceable to him, who can help it? He ſhould have taken ſome Care to cover the Carkaſſes of his ſlain Regiments, and not ſuffer their offenſive Remains to infect the Air. But when a Valiant General is reduced to thoſe extremities, as to be able only to take Care of his own Perſon; he is to be pitied, if not excus'd, for neglecting an Act of Piety, to which his Heroick Nature wou'd have generouſly p. 5diſpos'd him. But he is not without ſome hopes, but the Cameronian-Story may inſpire Life into 'em, and give 'em a Reſurrection; and therefore he labours all he can to ſupport the Credit of it. The Story in ſhort is this. One Collonel Fairfax reported in a Publick Houſe at Rochdale to the Reverend Mr. Piggot and Mr. Milne, that a Scotch Cameronian had Cited this corrupt Place in a Publick Sermon.

To this I anſwer'd, 1. It is uncertain, whether Collonel Fairfax reported it, for Mr. Milne avers he never was in the Collonel's Company; ſo that the Report depends on Mr. Piggot's ſingle Teſtimony: And ſome ſay, this is not the firſt Brat, he has impos'd on the World. 2. If the Collonel reported it, it is but a ſingle Evidence, nor does he ſay he heard the Cameronian himſelf urge this corrupt Reading, ſo that what he Depoſes, is by hear-ſay, nor does he Name the Perſon, Place, or Time. Such a blind Evidence would look ridiculous in a Court of Juſtice. 3. I Publiſhed an Extract of the Vote of the General Aſſembly of Scotland, wherein they diſown this Corruption, and declare they never heard of any in that Kingdom, that apply'd that Text to prove the People's Power in Ordaining their Miniſters. This may ground a juſt Suſpicion, that the Story was invented in Rochdale, at a Publick Houſe, for it is not ſo much as known in Scotland, nor mention'd by ſuch of the Epiſcopal Diſſenters as have Publiſh'd abundance of extravagant Stories to reproach the Government there.

Theſe things are enough to invalidate his Cameronian Story with all unprepoſſeſs'd Perſons, but the Rector, whoſe Talent lies in collecting and improving Stories, wou'd have the World believe Matter of Fact is very true, becauſe

1. 'Tis plain, the Collonel believ'd it, nor would he entertain a Story without good ground, Page 20.

Soldiers and Travellers are not the moſt exact in examining the grounds of every Story they hear, and perhaps report again over their Liquors to divert the Company. 'Tis plain, that Perſons of a more ſacred Character can entertain groundleſs Stories, and entertain their Hearers with them, for want of better Matter to fill up their Hour, though perhaps the Rector is the only Man that borrows materials for his Sermons out of the Can-Office.

If the Collonel had good ground for his Relation, why had he not nam'd the Perſon, Time and Place? There is good Reaſon, I confeſs, why theſe Circumſtances ſhould be omitted by the Collonel and the Rector, that we might be put beyond all poſſibility of detecting the falſity of the Report.

p. 6I obſerv'd that ſuch a blind Evidence, where Perſons, Time and Place are not nam'd, wou'd look ridiculous in a Court of Juſtice, but the Rector good Man, does not pretend to obſerve the troubleſome Forms of Juſtice in the management of his Charge.

He Anſwers.

2. Such Teſtimonies are not ſufficient to ground a judiciary definitive Sentence upon, yet they are oftentimes believ'd by the Court.

By his own Confeſſion the Rector is an unjuſt Judge, for he has poſitively condemn'd us without Evidence. The Deſign of his Sermon, and Vindication of it, is to prove us Corrupters of the Word of God and the Evidence is blind, and wou'd not paſs in any Court of Juſtice, but that of the Rector's, as himſelf is forc'd to acknowledge. He may Believe and Judge as he pleaſes, but while he produces no other Evidence to Condemn us by, but what wou'd acquit us in all Courts of Juſtice; we will take leave to appeal from his unrighteous Sentence, to the ſober and rational Sentiments of Mankind.

He wou'd do well to tell us what ſort of Faith that is, which Courts of Juſtice give to a blind Evidence, which he ſaith, they often Believe. The Papiſts have brought an implicite Faith into the Church, but the Rector is the firſt Man that brings an implicite Faith into Courts of Juſtice. He makes them to believe an Accuſation againſt John a Nokes and John a Stile, that Mr. Some-body has committed a very great Crime, as ſuppoſe corrupting the Word of God; but the Deponent knows neither the Man, nor his Name, nor his Countrey, nor the Time when, nor the Place where the Offence was committed; nor can he ſay any thing of the Matter, but by hear-ſay. Will any Body in his ſound Mind believe this Evidence?

Surely our Learned Judges are not ſuch Credulous Coxcombs as the Rector makes 'em to be, nor can I think him ſuch a one himſelf, though for ſome Reaſons he thinks fit to abuſe the World; I preſume he has more Senſe than to believe his own Evidence, but it's no ſtrange thing for Perſons, abandon'd to unreaſonable and injurious Paſſions to abuſe the very Courts of Juſtice, that wou'd reduce them to the inoffenſive Government of Reaſon.

But an Evidence (as he proceeds) may be ſufficient for private Conviction, which will not be allow'd of in Publick Forms of Juſtice, Ibid.

It's hard to underſtand what he means by Private Conviction. Does he mean by it, that it's lawful to defame a Man upon any blind Evidence provided it be done behind his Back and in Private? This is to wound a Man's Reputation in Secret, and inconſiſtent with the Character of a Citizen of Sion, Pſalm 15.

p. 7Or does he mean upon ſuch an Evidence, we may entertain a Private Belief of a Man's being guilty, but can't Publiſh his Guilt, because the Evidence is not according to the Publick Forms of Juſtice. Why then had not the Rector contented himſelf with his Private Faith concerning us, and not Publiſh'd our pretended Conviction to the World? A Publick Conviction ought to be according to the Publick Forms of Juſtice by his own Confeſſion, and therefore he is ſelf-condemn'd for receding from the allow'd Rules of Juſtice.

The Rector has but one other Refuge left, and if that fails him, his Cameronian Story faſtens upon him an indelible Reproach. Paul ſaith he, accuſes ſome of the Corinthians, and he had it from ſome of the Houſe of Cloe, whom he mentions not, for diſparaging him. His Letters are weighty and powerful, but his bodily Preſence is weak and contemptible, 2 Cor. 10.10. Here was neither Perſon, nor Time, nor Place named, and yet Paul believed the Report, page 20.

To which I Anſwer.

1. How does the Rector know the Apoſtle had this Information from ſome of the Houſe of Chloe? He doth not ſay ſo, 2 Cor. 10.10. But the Rector has a ſingular Faculty in diſcovering Secret Matters or rather in making bold Conjectures. He finds that thoſe of Chloe had inform'd St. Paul, that there were Contentions at Corinth, when the firſt Epiſtle was Written, 1 Cor. 1.11. And therefore he concludes, they muſt be his Informers when he wrote his Second Epiſtle, which was at leaſt ſome Months after.

2. It was not neceſſary to Name Perſons, where no queſtion was made of the Matter of Fact, and yet it does not follow, but the Apoſtle knew well enough, who the Perſons were. He had good Evidence of the Truth of the Report, otherwiſe he had not mention'd it with ſo much Aſſurance. And perhaps, he ſuppreſs'd their Names, becauſe he wou'd not expoſe 'em to Publick Reproach, but by an indefinite Reproof reduce 'em to Repentance, 1 Cor. 4.6.

3. When I ſaw the Name of St. Paul, I began to hope the Rector was coming to himſelf, and willing to imitate that great Pattern of Sincerity and Charity, which he ſo much recommends in one of his Epiſtles, to which the Rector refers us; 1 Cor. 13. but I ſoon perceiv'd my Error, and found that the Rector had read thoſe Epiſtles, not with deſign to Practice that Charity which thinks no Evil, 1 Cor. 13.5. But to draw in St. Paul to his Party to Patronize a falſe Accuſation, tho' the Unhappineſs of it is, St. Paul mentions a Matter of Fact that no Body diſown'd; that he cou'd have prov'd on the guilty Perſons, had they deny'd it; and it never enter'd into Paul's p. 8mind to charge the whole Church of Corinth with the ſupercilious Cenſures of the few falſe Apoſtles, that were there; but our Rector mentions a Fact that no Body knows any thing, of, that he cannot prove, tho' he has left no Stone unturn'd in attempting it, and in Imitation of Haman, not of St. Paul, he imputes the ſuppoſed fault of one Perſon, and that a Scotch-man, to the whole Body of Engliſh-Diſſenters.

4. I cannot think St. Paul got his Information in an Ale-Houſe, or from a Soldier of Fortune, or that he wou'd have been ſo credulous as the Rector's Courts of Juſtice, who oftentimes believe a ſort of blind Evidence, that affects neither Perſon, Time nor Place. The Apoſtle had more Wiſdom and Honeſty, than to receive ſuch malicious Accuſations. Suppoſe the Church of Corinth had remonſtrated to St. Paul, that they knew of no Perſon that had diſparag'd him, and that they diſapprov'd of ſuch a Cenſure; can any Body imagine but his Candor would have acquitted them, except he could make good his Charge by poſitive Proof. Thoſe of the Church of Scotland, have diſclaim'd the Error of the Preſs, which the Rector Charges upon them, and affirm they neither know, nor can learn, that ever any in their Nation did apply that Error to the People's Power in making Miniſters. But the Rector, charitable Man, ſtands to his Accuſation, and wou'd feign have it paſs for Truth, tho' he offers not any thing that looks like the ſhadow of a Proof.

So much of the Cameronian Fable.

As to his Story of Mr. Jolly's alledging this corrupt Reading, in Diſcourſe with Mr. Elliſon at Duckenfield-Hall: I told him, that He and Mr. Elliſon are well-advis'd in their Reports; the one tells a Story of a nameleſs Cameronian in another Kingdom, the other Names his Perſon, but you muſt find him in another World, for he was Dead before this Report of him was Publiſh'd; they are reſolv'd to put us out of all hopes of being ever able to examine the Truth of their Tales.

The Rector anſwers, There are thoſe that can tell Mr. Owen, there was ſuch a Miniſter as Mr. Jolly, there is ſuch a Place as Duckenfield-Hall, &c.

How does this prove the thing in Hand? Does it follow, becauſe there was ſuch a Man as Mr. Jolly at Duckenfield-Hall, and ſuppoſe engag'd with Mr. Elliſon in ſome Diſpute about Church-Government. That he muſt be a. Corrupter of the Word of God? This is as concluding, as the Rector's Argument concerning Cambridge, 1638. He found there as he thought five or ſix Presbyterians among Two Thouſand p. 9Scholars, therefore they were the Authors of the Corruption in Acts 3.6.

Mr. Elliſon's Teſtimony is a ſingle one, and againſt a Dead Man, who cannot Anſwer for himſelf.

True, ſaith the Rector, but no Judge, but upon ſuch Teſtimonies wou'd Decree the Nuncupative Will of a Deceaſed Perſon good and valid, p. 21.

No Judge wou'd Decree a Nuncupative Will good upon a ſingle Teſtimony. Our Law requires the Oaths of three Witneſſes, if the Eſtate bequeath'd be conſiderable; nor doth it admit any Teſtimony of a Nuncupative Will after ſix Month, unleſs it were committed to Writing within ſix Days after making the ſaid Will, Stat. 19. Car. II. Cap. 3. So careful is the Law to prevent Frauds and Forgeries, reſpecting the Dead. I inquire not, whether there are not more than ſix Months between the reporting of this Story, and the Time of the pretended Diſpute, and whether it was Written within ſix Days after. Be that Matter as it will, Mr. Elliſon's ſingle Evidence againſt the Dead is not legal, as the Rector ignorantly inſinuates

I am told, that Mr. Jolly was look'd upon as Presbyterian in his Judgment, and it is not likely he wou'd urge a corrupt Text to vindicate an Opinion, that was inconſiſtent with his Principles.

So much of the Duckenfield-Hall Story.

I ſhall ſpeak a Word or two to the Bolton-Story, which is this. A Gentleman, now living in Bolton heard ſome Diſſenters cite Acts 6. as the Cameronian did, and they appealed to the Scotch Bible.

To this I anſwer'd, that I ſuſpected the Truth of this Story, becauſe few of the Scotch-Bibles are miſprinted, as I made it appear by a Catalogue of the Editions, the two that were miſprinted there were under the Biſhops.

The Rector wiſely over-looks this, as he does moſt of my Book, but according to his uſual Modeſty; he ſaith, The Story is an unexceptionable Proof of what it was produced for, p. 21.

That part of it that concerns the Scotch-Bibles, I have detected to be falſe. When a Man is found to falter in one part of a Story, the Credit of the whole is juſtly ſuſpected.

The Bolton Gentleman is alſo a ſingle Witneſs, and Names no Perſons, nor appears above Board himſelf Truth needs not ſneak into Corners, it dares ſhew it's Face, and fears no Oppoſition. There is ſomething of Myſtery in it, that this Witneſs conceals his own Name, and thoſe of the accuſed Diſſenters. I am apt to think they may be alive as well as the Gentleman. I ſuppoſe, if they had been Dead, we ſhould have had their Names enroll'd with Mr. Jolly's. But ſuppoſe theſe Stories had been true, they cannot affect the whole Body of Diſſenters.

p. 10I have now anſwer'd all that the Rector has to ſay in Confirmation of his Charge, and appeal to the World, whether this Man has done us common Juſtice. All his Four Arguments are dwindled into one, which contains Matter of Fact. He confeſſes himſelf, that the Life of the whole Argument put together, depends on the Evidence of thoſe Matters, of Fact which makes his Fourth Argument.

Now ſince his Matters of Fact want legal Evidence, his Three former Arguments, which he has deſerted, are deſtitute of Life by his own Confeſſion.

Thus all the Forces of this mighty Warrier are routed**Iſaiah. 28.15.Isa 28:15, and tho' he has made Lies his laſt Refuge, this alſo not only fails him, but expoſes him to the vindictive Stroaks of victorious Truth, whoſe Triumphant Chariot he follows with ſuch a diſpirited Aſpect, as if he wou'd move the Compaſſions of the Spectators, and implore the kind Interceſſions of his Reader, that his expiring Reputation be not made a Victim to the juſt Reſentments of injur'd Innocence. One while he is content to ſurrender the Intereſts of his Reputation to the Diſſenters, p. 26. He hopes they'll be ſo kind to him, as not to condemn him for Fool, or Knave, or Impudent, or Blaſphemer, Ibid. Our Scipio Anglicanus cries Quarter, and hopes for Mercy at their Hands, tho' he has injur'd them to the utmoſt of his Power. He knows the Men, that they are like the Kings of Iſrael, of a merciful Diſpoſition, but then he ought to make his addreſs with a Rope about his Neck, as the Syrian General did before him; humbly acknowledging his Crime, and I dare Promiſe for 'em, they'll paſs a very favourable Sentence upon him. Another while he pretends, he could have anſwer'd every Paragraph in my Vindication, but to what Purpoſe? When ſhall we have an end? p. 26. Who dare Queſtion the Rector's Abilities to Anſwer my Book, ſince he gives no Proof of 'em? But to what Purpoſe ſhould a Man, who is ſufficiently baſtinadoed procure to himſelf more blows? It is a wiſer part to end the Matter, let him ceaſe his unjuſt Criminations, and we ſhall ſoon make an end; and until he does ſo, let him expect the Chaſtiſement that is due unto bold and obſtinate Calumniators. He complains I give him hard Words, to which I anſwer in the Words of Veſpaſian the Emperor, Qui Prior laceſſivit ſeipſum Praerogativâ dignitatis privavit. The Rector by publiſhing ſo baſe and groundleſs a Calumny, and attempting to juſtifie it againſt the moſt convictive Reaſon, has forfeited the Benefit of thoſe Civilities that are owing to a fair Adverſary. He brags he has made War upon us, and then complains of hard blows.

p. 11His Sermon, and the Defence of it, abound with the rudeſt Invectives. But he pretends, that he has engag'd himſelf by Promiſe not to Anſwer a Fool according to his Folly, Prov. 26.4. Which he ſays, he'll religiouſly obſerve, Lett. p. 1. He promiſes not to give ill Language, (Ibid.) and in the ſame Breath calls, me Fool. It ſeems, to call a Man Fool is no ill Language with the Rector, whatever it was in Chriſt's account**Mat. 5.22.Matt 5:22. How religiouſly he obſerves his Promiſe, the Reader may obſerve in ſeveral Inſtances. In p. 19. he compares us to Malefactors that have Brow enough to aſſert their Innocence, when the Halter is about their Necks. In p. 23. he ſaith, they ſeem to by of the Humor of that leud Soldier, who excus'd himſelf thus, that the Commandment is, thou ſhalt not, but not I ſhall not. In p. 26. he ſuggeſts by way of Query, Whether Mr. O. has not done what in him lies to deſerve the Character of a great Rogue, for affirming that the Rector had given him that Character in his R. R. p. 58. to which Mr. O. ſtill appeals. It is true, he does it by a ſly Inſinuation, and becauſe I take notice of his calling me ſo, he pretends that I miſrepreſent him, and deſerve that Character for ſo doing. I only mention theſe things as inſtances of his Religious Performance of his Promiſe, not to give ill Language. Naturam expellas furca licet. Can the Ethiopian change his Skin?

He falls foul on the Note-maker, p. 22. in whom I am not concern'd: It wou'd have look'd more honourable in the Rector to have anſwer'd his Arguments, than to ſet up for Informer General, to accuſe the whole Body of Diſſenters of a Crime he can never prove upon 'em.

In p. 23. he reflects on Mr. Baxter, but not a word of his corrupting the Scripture, by leaving out theſe in Acts 15.28. Since I ſhew'd him the like Omiſſion in the Homilies of the Church.

He wiſely overlooks this Crime, which he had aggravated in the Epiſtle before his Sermon, and in his Remark upon Remark But now he ſilently diſmiſſes Mr. B. whom he cannot Condemn without involving himſelf and the Church of England in the ſame Sentence.

Now ſuppoſe a Man of Mr. Gips his Temper, ſhou'd take up his Arguments againſt Mr. B. and retort it upon the Church of England; by affirming, that the Church hath cunningly left out the Word (theſe) merely to ſupport her Propoſition, and hath not had the Ingenuity to confeſs her Error, nor yet the Courage to Palliate it with any excuſe ††Epiſtle before his Sermon.no, nor has her Champion, the Courage to do it for her, tho' he has been told of it ‖‖Ibid.. And he is the more concern'd to do it, becauſe he has ſubſcribed p. 12her Homilies, which the Diſſenters have not done, and ſo made himſelf acceſſory to the Corruption.

Though the Rector has diſingennouſly deſerted the Church, and left her unvindicated under the odious Imputation of corrupting the Word of God, I will be ſo juſt to her, as to acquit her from ſo black a Charge. It was not the Deſign of the Compilers of the Homilies, nor of Mr. B. to quote the very Words of Scripture, nor was the Omiſſion of the word theſe deſign'd for any ill ends by either of 'em.

I ſhall now return to the former Part of his Letter, and can't but take notice what an Artiſt the Rector is in methodizing his Epiſtle. The principal Controverſie between him and me; was, Whether the Diſſenters were corrupters of the Word of God? The other about the Titles of the Pſalms, and the Corruption of the Hebrew Copies came in accidentally, and therefore I threw it into a Poſt-ſcript by it ſelf, that it might not interfere with the main Point in debate.

The Rector being ſenſible that he is quite baffled in the principal Controverſie between us, and having nothing material to offer more upon that Subject, begins his Letter with Animadverſions on my Poſt-Script, and comes not to the main point, viz. His charge exhibited againſt the Diſſenters of corrupting the Word of God, untill P. 19. and then ſpeaks next to nothing of it. All he has to ſay to the principal Subject in debate, takes up but Three Pages of his Letter, which conſiſts of Twenty-ſeven in all. Had he been able to ſay more to it, to be ſure he would have done it, for he ſtill ſhews his Good-will to the Cauſe; and would have the World believe the main charge is beyond all Controverſie, P. 19. Since he can defend it no longer, he wou'd perſwade us to be ſo good Natured, as to let it paſs without any further Controverſie; and if we don't, we are like thoſe Malefactors that aſſert their Innocence, when the Halter is about their Necks, &c. P. 19. If our Accuſer had the Honour to be our Executioner, I ſee we muſt expect little Mercy at his Hands, We muſt all undergo the Fate of Saul's Seven Children, who were hung up before the Lord for their Fathers Sin. And it would be no Relief to us to aſſert our Innocency, for we muſt bear the Error of the Scotch-Cameronian. And if we ſay, this is hard meaſure, to Impute the fault of one Man to all Diſſenters, the Rector Anſwers, that this muſt needs be juſt, becauſe Saul's offence was Reveng'd upon Seven of his Children. R. R. P. 48. The Rector is a Man that loves to harp upon the ſame String in all his Compoſures, and were we to ſtand at his Bar, I much doubt, whether he would allow us the Benefit of the Clergy; and if ſuch a favour were granted us: I fear we ſhould ſcarce read our Neck-verſe, without being condemn'd for Corrupting the Word of God.

p. 13But to return, from this Hanging Digreſſion, to his Animadverſions, on my Poſt-Script, wherein I aſſerted, the Divine Authority of the Titles of the Pſalms and the purity of the Hebrew Text.

As to the Firſt of theſe, the Rector does not pretend to Anſwer my Arguments for the Divine Authority of the Titles, or to Vindicate his own againſt it; and the Reaſon of this omiſſion is obvious: For where he thinks he has any thing, that he can take Advantage of he lays hold on it. He ſays, P. 2. That I give him Words of Braſs, by pronouncing him a Blaſphemer, for ſaying that many of the Titles were to no Purpoſe at all. I did not expreſly call him ſo, but what I ſaid I ſay again. That it wou'd have look'd more modeſt in him, to have ſaid, we underſtand not the uſe of many Titles; than boldly, if not Blaſphemouſly, to Charge the Spirit of God with Impertinencies, Vind. P. 44. And in another Place to ſay, that Pſalm, 72 20. Is manifeſtly falſe if the Title be true, R. R. P. 13. Many would call this Blaſphemy, but I do not. It is a very poor Shift, by which he would mollifie his Words, the Titles are to no Purpoſe at all; that is, they are not uſeful to unfold Myſteries, Let. P. 2. To no Purpoſe, and to ſuch a Purpoſe are very different things; ſuch as do not unfold Myſteries may be uſeful to other Ends.

But they are more myſterious, ſays he, than the Pſalms themſelves; and the Spirit of God would not explain, Obſcurum per Obſcurius. All are not ſo, and thoſe that are obſcure to us, might be otherwiſe to the old Hebrews.

Greg. Nyſſen obſerved (as the Rector adds) that there was not an entire Agreement between, the Chriſtians and the Jews about the Titles, which Mr. O. has declin'd to Anſwer to, P. 3. You ſee, tho' the Rector cannot Anſwer my Arguments, nor defend his own, he ſtudies every little Advantage. I told him, I had not Greg, by me, tho' I ſee nothing in him as he repreſents him, that makes againſt my Argument. There is not an entire Agreement, between the Greek Bible which was in the Hands of the Chriſtians, and the Hebrew Bible to this day, in many more things than the Titles of the Pſalms, and yet we receive the Hebrew Bible as Divinely inſpir'd; and ſo we do the Titles of the Pſalms.

But, if the Rector cannot defend his old Arguments, he hath found out a new one, which is this: The Titles of the ſeveral Books of Scripture, are not Canonical; and the Titles of the Pſalms muſt run the ſame fate, P. 3, 4, 5. And why ſo good Sir?

1. The Titles of the Books of Scripture, are acknowledg'd to be human Additions; I never met with any Author, Jewiſh or Chriſtian, that affirms them to be Canonical; but the Titles of the p. 14Pſalms, are reputed Canonical, by the Chriſtian and Jewiſh Doctors; and commented upon by them as ſuch, whereas they rarely take notice of the Titles of the Books of Scripture, except it be now and then, to tell us that they bear ſuch Titles.

2. The Titles of the Books of the old Teſtament, in our Hebrew Bibles are put by themſelves, as diſtinct from the reſt of the Books; and are made the running Titles in the top of the Leaves. But, the Titles of the Pſalms are made part of the Pſalms themſelves, in all our Hebrew Bibles, in which the Title, if there be any to the Pſalm, is always the firſt Verſe.

3. All the Books of the Bible have Titles, but ſo have not all the Pſalms; If they had been human Additions, it had been as eaſie to have given a Title to each Pſalm, as to each Book of the Bible, but the ancient Jews, who durſt not add to the Word of God, would not prefix Titles to thoſe Pſalms, which originally had none.

The Books of the Prophets, as he goes on, are thus entitled, the Book of the Prophet Iſaiah, &c. I cannot think the Inſpir'd Prophets ſet theſe Titles on the head of their Books.

Here the Rector thinks aright, for the Title he mentions is to be found only in the Engliſh Tranſlation; the Hebrew and Greek Bibles which he had not diligence enough to conſult, have no more than Iſaiah.

He nibbles at a conceſſion of Mine, that it was a prevailing Opinion, that all the Pſalms were pen'd by David, what then, demands he, will become of the Title of the 90. Pſalm? P. 5.

I obviated this Query in the very next Line, out of Theodoret, who ſays, David wrote it, but adapted it to Moſes. I told the Rector that I preſum'd the Titles were left out of the Liturgy Pſalms, becauſe they were deſign'd to be Sung. Vind. P. 53. 'Tis my very Plea in Defence of the Church of England**Letter, Page 6., ſaith he: But you muſt thank me for it, Mr. Rector, for you thought of no ſuch Plea in your Sermon, but call on the Diſſenters, to prefix the Titles to the Singing Pſalms, if they be part of Scripture. I objected, that in the Pariſh Churches, the Pſalms that want Titles are read. True, ſaith the Rector, 'tis the fault of ſome, the crime of others, the unhappineſs of others, who cannot prevail, with their People to bear a part in the rehaerſing of them; for the order of the Church is, that they be ſaid or ſung, ſaid, that is at leaſt repeated alternatim, by Miniſter and People, which is a Species of ſinging. P. 6.

If the order be ſay or ſing, Firſt, how can it be a Fault, a Crime, p. 15to ſay the Pſalms and not to ſing them, the Rubric allows both, and therefore both are lawful. No wonder the Rector charges us with Crimes he cannot prove, ſince he doth ſo by his own Brethren, he makes 'em Criminals for doing what the Rubric bids 'em do.

Secondly, I thought ſaying and ſinging, being mention'd disjunctively, were different things, but with the Rector, ſaying is a Species of ſinging. Does not this Man Ridicule the Rubric of the Church, by makeing it ſpeak Non-ſenſe? ſay or ſing, that is, according to the Rector's Expoſition, ſing or ſay. This looks like defaming the Common-Prayer, for which I remit him to the Cenſure of his Ordinary.

Thirdly, I never yet cou'd ſee any Rubric or Canon for reading the Pſalms alternatim, Authors make mention of alternate ſinging, which was us'd with great variety in ancient Times.

**Epiſt. 36.Baſil ſaith, the Congregation was divided into two Parts, and ſung alternately one to another.

††Chr. 1 Cor. 14. Hom. 36. ad finem.1 Cor 14Chryſoſtom ſeems to allow the People no part in ſinging, but the ecchoing out, of the laſt Word of the Verſe, foreign —, He that ſingeth, ſingeth alone, and all the reſt Eccho forth the laſt Words. And it may be, this is the meaning of the Council of Laodicea, Can. 15. Wherein they forbid all ſinging in the Church, except by the Regular Singers.

Gregory the Great, forbids any to ſing in the Church but the Inferior Orders, as the Sub-Deacons, &c. Lib. 4. c. 88. Perhaps he had an Eye to this Canon. Dionyſius, who goes under the Name of the Areopagite, ſays, that the Biſhop with the whole Eccleſiaſtical Order ſing the Sacred Hymns, Eccleſ. Hierarch. c. 3. It ſeems the People were wholly excluded from the Publick Praiſes. The way of ſinging alternately is very ancient, ſome derive it from Moſes and Miriam, Exod. 15.21. And Miriam anſwered them, &c. But it is uncertain how Miriam and the Women of Iſrael ſung, whether they ſung in their Dances, the very ſame Words that Moſes and the Men of Iſrael ſung, or whether they ſung the firſt Verſe of Moſes's Song by way of Intercalation, as the Burden of that Song; and it may be foreign anſwer'd, ſignifies no more than ſhe ſaid, in which Senſe the Word Anſwer is us'd in the New Teſtament, Matth. 11.25. But its evident here, that it was different from the Manner of reading the Pſalms with us, for Miriam and the Women ſung the firſt Verſe of Moſes Song, and with us the Miniſter reads the firſt Verſe of the Pſalm, which the People neither Read nor Sing.

It ſhould ſeem by Joſephus, that the Levites only ſung in the Temple p. 16at Jeruſalem **Antiq. Judaic. XX. 8.. The Eſſenes, as Philo affirms, had one chief Singer, who ſung alone until he came to the laſt Words, then all the People join'd with him‖‖Euſeb. Hiſt. II. 16. Edit. Chriſt. & Philo de vitâ Contempl..

This way of Singing by Parts was uſed by the ancient Heathens, as appears by that in Homer ††Iliad. à verſùs fin., who repreſents the Muſes ſinging alternately.

foreign.

The firſt Man that appointed Antiphons or Reſponſory Singing in Conſtantinople was Chryſoſtom, in Emulation of the Arians, as Socrates affirms. Eccl. Hiſt. VI. 8.

Nicephorus aſcribes the Invention of Antiphons to Ignatius, who in a Viſion heard the Angels praiſing the Trinity in Reſponſory Hymns, which he thereupon introduc'd into the Church of Antioch. Eccl. Hiſt. XIII. 8.

But be this matter as it will, there is no Precedent that ever I could meet with for Reading the Pſalms alternately, nor cou'd I ever find either Canon or Rubric for it in the Church of England. And if there be neither, it looks like a piece of Will-Worſhip, that can neither be warranted by the Laws of God nor Man. It ſeems neither decent nor orderly, nor agreeable to the Apoſtle's Rule, that a Woman ſhould not ſpeak in the Church: And in our Pariſh-Churches, they ſpeak as loud as the Men. If Reading be Teaching or Preaching, as ſome Doctors of the Church have affirm'd, particularly the preſent Biſhop of Derry, our Reading Women uſurp the Office of Teachers in the Church, and thereby ſtrengthen the Hands of the Quaker's Women-Preachers. This way of Reading the Pſalms, fills the Congregation with a confus'd noiſe, that the Ignorant that cannot Read, underſtand not one Word that is ſaid. Cyprian Condemns tumultuous Lopuacity in our Devotions.

Non paſſim ventilare preces noſtras inconditis vocibus, nec Petitionem, commendandum modeſtè Deo, tumultuoſâ Loquacitate jactare, De Orat. Dom.

I affirm'd, That the not Reading of the Titles (in the Parochial Aſſemblies which I had mention'd a little before) was an Innocent Omiſſion, but the Rectors attempt to thruſt 'em out of the Holy Canon was Vile and Impious.

The Rector applies this Omiſſion to the Diſſenters, and cries Hem! An p. 17on Innocent Omiſſion? no, ſaith he, 'tis a Sacrilegious Omiſſion, Lett. P. 7. This blind Combatant, by attempting to wound his Enemies as he calls them, Stabs his own Friends, and makes them guilty of a Sacrilegious Omiſſion: The Diſſenters do read the Titles of the reading Pſalms.

The Rector proceeds in the next Place to conſider the Hebrew Copies, which he ſays are much corrupted, and becauſe St. Jerom aſſerts the Purity of 'em; he perſecuttes him with the ſame malignity as he does the Diſſenters. I rebuk'd him in my Vind. for his indecent Uſage, of ſo Holy and Learned a Father, and ſo eminent a Champion for the Chriſtian Cauſe, againſt all ſorts of Oppoſers, I refer the Reader to his Character, and my Defence of him againſt the Rector's Calumnies, Poſt-Script C. 3. He ſeverely Cenſures Mr. Baxter, both in his R. R. P. 61. and in his Lett. P. 23. For expoſing the Infirmities of the Fathers, to whoſe Zeal and Learning, we owe our Religion under God; and yet flings all the dirt on St. Jerom, one of the moſt eminent of 'em, which Malice and Rage and intemperate Zeal, (they are his own Words of Mr. Baxter) could furniſh him with. He treats him more baſely than ever Ruffinus, his profeſs'd Adverſary has done. His Great Name in the Chriſtian World is too venerable to ſuffer any Diminution by the Rector's ſelf-condemning reflections, and needs not any Apology of mine. Therefore I will conſider what he has to offer againſt the Purity of the Hebrew Bibles, which he wou'd have us believe are corrupted in material Things.

The Truths of Revelation, ſays he, are to be ſought for not out of the Hebrew Texts only, nor out of the Lxx. only, but out of both together, with all other antient Tranſlations, and the numerous quotations of Scripture in the Fathers. P. 11. The meaning of this Harangue, is, that there might be patch'd up a compleat Bible or a perfect Syſtem of reveal'd Truths out of the Hebrew, Lxx. other Tranſlations and Quotations of the Fathers; but none of theſe alone contain all Truths of Revelation. The Papiſts ſend us to the ancient Fathers for the Senſe of Scriptures, but the Rector remits us to them for the Scriptures themſelves. He wou'd do well to favour the World with a Compleat Collection of the Truths of Revelation, out of all theſe Stores, which are inacceſſible to the Unlearned, and he is the more oblig'd to do it becauſe he has condemn'd our Corrupt Bibles to be burnt.

I offer'd four Arguments for the Purity of the Hebrew Copies, which I vindicated and confirm'd.

The Rector touches at the firſt, over looks the Second and Third, and ſplits the Foruth into Two.

My firſt was, That the Hebrew Bible was incorrupt in our Saviour's p. 18Time, becauſe he never charg'd the Jews with corrupting the Scriptures.

No more, anſwers he, do the Apoſtles Charge them with corrupting the LXX. P. 11. I don't ſay the LXX. was corrupted at that Time, there were Authentick incorrupt Copies of it even in Origen's Time. They were corrupted, ſaith he, before Ezra's Time, (according to moſt of the Fathers) and therefore much more between Ezra and Chriſt, P. 12.

Clemens Alexandrinus and moſt of the Fathers ſay, that the Scriptures were loſt, not corrupted in Babilon, and reſtored by a Spirit of Inſpiration by Ezra **Strom. l. 1.. The ſame is affirm'd by Ireneus and Euſebius ††Hiſt. Eccl. v. 8.Eccl 5:8Admitting they were corrupted before Ezra's Time, of which there is no certainty, it does not follow they were corrupted after, becauſe the Maſora, which was invented in Ezra's Time, was an effectual means to preſerve the Purity of them; this was my Third Argument, but the Rector takes no notice of it. Beſides, the Captivity cured the Jews of their Idolatrous Diſpoſition, and made them more Zealous for the Purity of the Law, as appears in the Hiſtory of the Maccabees. He ſaith in his R. R. P. 22. the Hebrew Bibles were not corrupted in any material Thing till after the Deſtruction of Jeruſalem, and now they were corrupted before the Birth of Chriſt.

This Man cannot for his Life agree with himſelf. He overlooks ſeveral things in the Confirmation of my Firſt Argument, with my Second and Third, and hopps to the Fourth Argument; That the Jews, neither could nor would corrupt the Hebrew Bibles.

I prov'd they could not, becauſe there was a Pure Copy in every Synagogue in the World, beſides thoſe in the Hands of the Chriſtians, which wou'd ſoon have detected an attempt of that kind. I Quoted Auſtin and Jerome in confirmation of the Argument; and I added that the watchful Providence of God wou'd not have ſuffer'd ſuch an attempt to proſper.

He Anſwers only to this laſt Part of my Argument. That Providence has permitted various readings in the New Teſtament, p. 12. So it has in the old alſo, but what is this to the Jews making bold with the Scripture in prejudice to Chriſtianity and corrupting them in very material Things, as the Rector affirms, R. R. P. 22. The various readings of Ben. Aſher and Ben. Napthali are of uncertain Original, and Capellus himſelf, a more skilful improver of what may ſeem to impair the Authority of the Hebrew Text; confeſſes that they are trivial, and not in matters of any Moment.

The Rector excepted againſt the Purity of the Hebrew from Juſtin p. 19Martyr, who charg'd the Jews with corrupting the Scriptures.

I prov'd, that Juſtin Martyr ſpeaks of the Greek Verſions of the Bible, and quoted his Words at large. This the Rector cannot deny, but ſaith he, the Father examined not only the Copies uſed in the Jewiſh Synagogue (i. e. thoſe of the LXX.) but in all likelihood Hebrew Copies too, p. 14.

Juſtin no where mentions any Corruption of the Hebrew, but he expreſly mentions the corrupting of the LXX. nor does the Rector; but ſuppoſe he examin'd the Hebrew Copies; He cannot affirm it, though he thinks he was acquainted with the Hebrew and Syriack. If I ſhould grant he underſtood the Hebrew, it does not prove the Corruption of the Hebrew Text. But it is more probable he did not underſtand the Hebrew, becauſe he miſtakes the Etymology of Iſrael, which he derives from Iſra a Man and el Strength, q. Homo vincens Virtutem. The Rector defends this Etymology, and ſaith by virtutem he means God the Strength of Iſrael, 1 Sam. 15.29. p. 13.

He betrays his own Ignorance of the Hebrew, by vindicating Juſtin's skill in it, for Iſra does not ſignifie a Man in Hebrew. Iſh ſignifies a Man, but Iſrael is from foreign dominatus fuit praevaluit, and foreign God, as Moſes explains it, Gen. 32.28. foreign, becauſe as a Prince thou haſt Power with God, as we well render it. Juſtin explains what he means by El foreign Power, no other God but the God of this World, for he makes Jacob's Victory over the Angel a myſterious Repreſentation of Chriſt's Victory over Satan, foreign, the Devil came to him, which is that Power which is call'd the Serpent and Satan.

**Juſt. M. Diab. cum Tryph. p. 277, 278. Edit. Sylburg.Juſtin's foreign ſignifies the Devil, which the Rector by an unparallell'd Blunder makes to ſignifies the true God, where he reads foreign, he only quotes the Text of the LXX, but does not profeſſedly give the Signification of Iſrael, as he does in this Place.

The Rector deſerts his Voſſian Argument of the Corruption of the Hebrew Chronology. He propos'd it out of Voſſius, and made the beſt Improvement he cou'd of it, R. R. p. 25, 26. But now he is not at leiſure to vindicate it, ſo that Voſſius muſt ſhift for himſelf. And whereas the Rector poſitively affirm'd Two. Thouſand Years to be loſt in the Chronology of our Hebrew Bible, and that the World muſt be Six Thouſand Years Old when Chriſt came; I ſuggeſted, That he cannot prove that Chriſt is come in the Fleſh, without rejecting the Authority of our Engliſh Bibles in Point of Chronology. The Rector Anſwers: He can prove it by the LXX, or he will p. 20ſuppoſe the Hebrew Chronology right, and then it is not neceſſary to follow the Jewiſh Principle of Six Thouſand Years, p. 15.

If the Rector prove it by the LXX, he renounces the Authority of our Engliſh Corrupt Bibles in Point of Chronology, which I ſaid he muſt do by his Principle: If he admits the Hebrew Chronology, he rejects the LXX. I perceive he is unreſolv'd which of the Two Chronologies to follow, but let him at his leiſure chuſe which he pleaſes, he ſtill confirms my Argument. As to the Inſtance of Cainan in Luc. 3. if the Rector be not ſatisfied with what Dr. Lightfoot offers, whom he does not fairly anſwer, let him conſult Pol. Syn. Crit. or Gregory of Oxf. his foreign, or Dr. Fowler the preſent Biſhop of Gloceſter.

The Rector thinks, that the true Reading of Deut. 32.8. ought to be according to the number of Angels, becauſe Jerom read it ſo, p. 17.

Jerom translated the LXX. into Latin, and ſometimes reads according to the Hebrew Verity, ſometimes according to the LXX. He arraigns the 1 Sam. 2.17. which he ſaith is Corrupted, and to be Corrected by the LXX, p. 17, 18.

I have conſulted the Place, and find a perfect Agreement between the Hebrew and the LXX. The Poor Man's fancy is ſo vitiated with Ideas of Corruption, that if he do but look into the Hebrew Text, it appears corrupt and impure unto him. He has dwelt ſo long upon this Subject, that he can ſcarce think of any thing elſe but Corruption, Corruption. The Thought is natural enough, if he apply'd it to the proper Subject, namely to his own Writings, and not to the inſpired Volumes. He has found another Corruption in Deut. 33.6. where the Hebrew wants not, He adds, That the Criticks take a great deal of Pains to patch up the Hebrew Verity, but without any Satisfaction to me, I profeſs, p. 18.

I deſpair of ſatisfying this hypercritical Man, but for the Satisfaction of the Reader, I will take notice of two Things. 1. The Hebrew is, foreign Let his Men be a Number, which may be apply'd to a great Number, as well as a ſmall, and ſo the Reading will be, Let his Men be many, and thus it agrees with the LXX, foreign. Let me add, that foreign may be rendred Dead Men, ſo ſome tranſlate the Word in Iſa. 41.14. foreign ye Dead Men of Iſrael, and ſo the Reading will be, Let thy Dead Men be few. If foreign be rendred few, as it is by our Tranſlators, and the Words are a Bleſſing and not a Curſe, as he pretends they muſt be, if not be left out. 2. Not is frequently omitted in the Hebrew, and to be ſupply'd from the foregoing Sentence, as in Iſa. 28.27, 28. and 23.4. Pſalm 91.4, p. 215. and 9.18. I deſire the Learned Reader to conſult theſe places in the Hebrew, many more might be mention'd to the ſame Purpoſe. It may be the Rector will ſay, theſe alſo are Corrupted.

He takes notice that Jerom ſpeaks doubtfully of two other Places in the Old Teſtament, as if they were Corrupted, p. 18.

But Jerom does not poſitively affirm, as the Rector doth; by how much he was more Learned than the Rector, he was ſo much the more Modeſt. Jerom ſaith, We know not certainly, whether it was ſtruck out of the ancient Copies, or added by the LXX. The Rector ſaith with a daring boldneſs, I have made good my Aſſertion, that the Hebrew Bibles have been Corrupted in all Ages, p. 19.

The Rector has a ſingular faculty in making good his Aſſertion, without either vindicating his own Arguments, or anſwering mine to the contrary. The Truth is, his Aſſertion is ſo very bad, that a more accompliſh'd Artiſt than himſelf, wou'd be at a loſs how to make it good. It puts me in mind of a Story or King James the firſt, as ſome of his Nobles were exerciſing themſelves at leaping, lays the King pleaſantly to 'em, you talk of leaping, I wou'd leap over yonder Wall, and pointed at a high Wall that was near 'em; Yes, Sir, ſays a Paraſite that ſtood near him, I believe your Majeſty cou'd leap over it: Hold Man, reply'd the King, I did not ſay I cou'd leap over it, but I wou'd do it, that is, if I were able. The Rector ſhews his good Will to confirm his Aſſertion, and has made ſome feeble attempts in his R. R. to attack the Maſora, the Fence of the Law**Maſora eſt ſepimentum legis. Elias Levita,, but the Wall is too high to be leap'd over, and too ſtrong to be broken down, and therefore in his Letter he wiſely declines it, leſt he ſhou'd break his Shins, and be forced to a diſhonourable Retreat.

But is he in earneſt, when he ſays the Hebrew Bibles have been corrupted in all Ages? And has he made this good ? It ſeems all Ages are comprehended in the Time of Ezra and Juſtin Martyr for he mentions no more; and he has not prov'd, that they were corrupted then. Our Bibles muſt be Corrupt indeed, if every Age has been practiſing upon 'em. According to the Rector, it has been the Work of every Age to Corrupt the Bible. It's well, if he allows us any ſound part in it, for that which has been always in the Corrupting, muſt be a very Corrupt Thing at laſt. The Rector ſwou'd at leaſt have paid as much deference to the Holy Bible, as he wou'd to the Prophane Works of Homer and Virgil, which none will ſay, have been corrupted in all Ages. It's a little unlucky, that this Man cannot quarrel with the Diſſenters, but he muſt quarrel with the Bible p. 22alſo. He might have left the ſacred Volumes alone, though he were diſpos'd to reproach us. However he has one Conſolation, that he is not ſingular in his Hypotheſes, for he has Mahometans, Papiſts and Deiſts in his Intereſt, who unanimouſly charge our Scriptures with material Corruptions.

I ſhall add one thing more, and I have done. The Rector's Letter which bears Date, April 8. 1699. came not to my Hands, until Aug. 16. nor did I hear any thing of it, before I ſaw it. I preſume the Rector deſign'd it for the Private Ʋſe of his Friend, of whoſe Candid Acceptance he was well aſſur'd, and not for ſuch ill-natur'd People, as will take nothing upon Truſt, but Critically examine his weak Reaſonings, and vindicate themſelves from his unjuſt Criminations. He publiſh'd his Letter, as Ariſtotle did ſome of his Books, concerning which he ſaith, I made 'em Publick, as if I had not made 'em Publick **foreign. Gell. Noct. Attic. XX. 4.. He told us above, that his blind Evidence of the Cameronian Story may be ſufficient for Private Conviction, though not to be allow'd in Publick Forms of Juſtice, p. 20. Perhaps this Epiſtle, which manifeſtly recedes from the Laws of Juſtice, was deſign'd for Private Conviction. However, ſince it came accidentally to my Hands, and no return is made to it by his Ʋtopian Friend, I have been ſo kind to the Rector, leſt he ſhould think himſelf ſlighted; as to Anſwer his Letter with all the plainneſs and faithfulneſs, which may ſeem neceſſary to regulate his Faith towards the Scriptures, and Charity towards his Brethren.

FINIS.