that it is an outward and Visible Sign of an inward and Spiritual Grace given to us Ordain'd by Christ himself as a means whereby we receive the same and a Pledg to assure us thereof It is true the Assembly of Divines in their larger Catechism do in that question of their's what is a Sacrament put in an expression or two that point at some Opinions wherein they may be no more agreed amongst themselves than they are with some of our Church But then in their next question what are the parts of a Sacrament they give us the same account with that of our Church-Catechism only a little vary'd in the words viz. The parts of a Sacrament are two the one an outward sensible sign used according to Christs own appointment the other an inward and spiritual Grace thereby signifi'd by all which it is evident we are well enough agreed in the Common acceptation of the word Sacrament And therefore Secondly I proceed to shew that as our Church never did design or intend by the use of the Cross in Baptism to make any new Sacrament of it so according to the common Notion wherein we are agreed as to the word Sacrament there is not any semblance of a Sacrament it can justly be charg'd with And here I might not without some reason insist that as we are agreed in the Definition of a Sacrament that both the outward Sign must signifie an inward Spiritual Grace and also must have its express institution and appointment from Christ we that never suppos'd the use of the Cross in Baptism could confer Grace nor have ever made the least pretext to any Divine appointment for it ought not to be charg'd as introducing a new Sacrament when it hath no pretensions to any one thing that is of the Essence of a Sacrament But I am willing to follow the Argument as they have laid it They say therefore that however we do not call or account it an Holy Sacrament yet forasmuch as we bring a Ceremony into the Church which in the Significations of it seems tantamount to a Christian Sacrament we do thereby usurp the Prerogative of our great Lord and Master setting up our Posts against his Post and our Threshold again his Threshold This they say we do partly 1. as we make the Cross a sign betokening our Faith and Christian courage when in applying it to the Baptis'd Person we say we do it in token that hereafter he shall not be asham'd to confess the Faith of Christ Crucifi'd c. And partly 2. when by an intire Representative of our Church it is determin'd that by the sign of the Cross the Baptis'd Person is dedicated to the service of him that dy'd upon the Cross First they say that by making the sign of the Cross in token that hereafter c. we apply such Significations to it that run it into the nature of a Sacrament using it as an outward Visible sign of an Inward Spiritual Grace As to this we must ingeniously confess that we make use of no Rite or Ceremony in our Church but it is with this design that it should be Significant of some thing or other It would be an odd piece of pageantry indeed to use this or that gesture or action in our Religious services that should have no Signification at all in it and to account it therefore Innocent because it were Impertinent It is the Significancy of it that makes it useful or proper and if there were nothing of that in it it would be very disallowable But then though our Ceremonies are significant and any of them us'd as Memorative Signs to put us in mind of any Duty or Obligation toward God they are not therefore an outward Visible sign of an inward Spiritual Grace that is they are not in the nature of any seal or assurance from God of his Grace to us but hints and remembrances of some Obligation we are under with respect to God And that this kind of significant usages have been all along arbitrarily taken up without any Imputation of introducing a new Sacrament may be made out both from the practice of the Jewish Church notwithstanding the punctual prescriptions deliver'd to them by Moses From the practice of the Christian Church and that both in the very first ages of it and also in all the later Reformations that have been made First take we a view of the Jewish Church and herein 1. We may observe that in their very Passover about which both thing and Circumstances they had such express directions by Moses before they went out of Egypt yet did they in some ages following considerably vary not only in their time of keeping it which having been originally appointed on the Tenth they chang'd it to the Fourteenth day of the Month but in the gesture too In the first institution of it they were to eat it with their loins girded their shooes on their feet and staff in their hand and all as a token of the haste they were then in This gesture of eating the Passover it is not so certain how long it continu'd in the Jewish Church after their coming out of Egypt as it is unquestionable it was chang'd into a discumbing posture that is a posture wherein they took their ordinary meals long before the days of our Saviour and that so warrantably too that our Saviour himself used it And yet this very posture they had taken up if we will believe an Expositor that was no great friend to the Ceremonies of our Church had its Signification too for he tells us that they did it in sign of their rest and security otherwise than V. Ainsw in Exod. 12. 3. they had in Egypt 2. Another instance in the Jewish Church might be that of the Altar of Witness which Phineas after he had made a jealous enquiry upon approv'd of as a standing memorial Josh 22. that they on the other side Jordan profest the true God had Relation to the other tribes and a Right to the Service of God in the Tabernacle of the Congregation 3. But that which seems to come nearest us is what the Jewish Authors do frequently take notice of and that is that as to those whose Office entitled them to the Anointing which by all that doth very evidently appear were only Kings and Priests although the Anointing Oyl as to its confection and ingredients and the manner of doing it as one would think were particularly enough prescrib'd by God yet did the Jews amongst themselves bring in the use of a Significative sign in doing it which seems no where dissallow'd or charg'd as an invasion of Gods Holy Institutions this was to Anoint the Heads of their Kings with the figure of a Crown and their Priests with the figure of an Hebrew ב Maimon II. Melachim or the Greek χ. Not to add that the Synagogue Worship the Rites of Marriage the form of taking Oaths and the like things that had
saies nothing that the divine Spirit confines his Influences and Operations to the Vnity of the Church in such Conformity not only makes such Conformity necessary to Salvation but imputes to the Church the Damnation of many Thousands of Souls who might expect to be saved upon other Terms That the Divine Spirit confines his influences ordinarily to the Unity of the Church I do assert but that this is in Conformity to the Church of England I do not assert For Conformity to the Church of England is not Essential to the Unity of the Catholick Church for every Church has authority to prescribe its own Rites and Ceremonies of Worship in Conformity to the general Rules of the Gospel And therefore though the Unity of the Church is necessary to intitle Men to the ordinary influences of Gods Grace and consequently is necessary to Salvation yet Conformity to the Church of England is not necessary to the Unity of the Church because Christians who live under the Government and Jurisdiction of other Churches may and do preserve the Unity of the Church without conformity to the Church of England Obedience indeed and Subjection to Church-Authority in all Lawful things is necessary to the Unity of the Church and necessary to Salvation and consequently it is a necessary Duty to conform to all the Lawful and Innocent Customs of the Church wherein we live but this does not make the particular Laws of Conformity which are different in different Churches to be necessary to Salvation unless you will say the Church has no Authority but only in things absolutely necessary to Salvation which destroys all the external Order and Discipline of the Church and charges all the Churches in the World with destroying Mens Souls if any persons be so Humorsom and Peevish as to break Communion with them for such Reasons But such kind of Cavils as these you may find answered at large in the Vindication of the Defence and thither I refer you if you desire to see any more of it Thus Sir I have with great patience answered your Questions not that they needed or deserved any Answer but that you might not think your self too much despised nor other weak People think your Questions unanswered And now I have given you an Answer I shall take the Confidence to give you a little Ghostly Counsel too which you need a great deal more than an Answer I have not troubled my Head to inquire Scrupulously who you are nor do I use to trust Common Fame in such matters but though I know not you yet I perceive you know me and if as you say you have often p. 1. heard me with great Satisfaction and as you hope not without edifying thereby I think it would have become you to have treated me with a little more Civility than you have done if it be in your Nature to be Civil to a Clergy-Man And I wish more for your own sake than for mine you had done so for I thank God I have learnt not only by the precepts and example of my great Master but by frequent Tryals to go through good Report and evil Report and to bear the most invidious and Spightful Reflections with an equal mind But as contemptible as a Clergy-Man is now these things will be accounted for another day For it is very evident that you have a great Spight at the whole Order whatever personal kindness you may have for some Men they are but a Herd of Clergy-men and you know no other use of a Bishop but to oversee admonish and Censure those who are apt to Preface go beyond their due Bounds I confess this way of Railery is grown very fashionable and I perceive you are resolved to be in the Mode and to be an accomplisht Gentleman but I never knew a man that was seriously religious who durst affront the Servants for their Masters sake But you Sir are in the very height of the fashion and think their Office as contemptible as their Persons generally are thought to be you hope to be saved without understanding the Notion of Church-Government as 't is intreagued by Clergy-men of all sides And I hope you may be saved without understanding a great many other things besides Church-Government or else I doubt your Salvation may be hazardous But this is too plain a contempt of all Church-Authority for though the Church of Rome has usurpt an unlimited and Tyrannical Power under the Notion of Church-Government yet what has the Sound Church of England as you own it done What occasion did I give for this Censure who have expresly confined the Exercise of Church-Authority to Church-Communion to receiving in and putting out of the Church And if Resol of Cases p. 39. the Church be no Society I would desire to know what it is and if be a Society how can any Society subsist without Authority in some Persons to receive in and to shut out of the Society But the truth is tho you pretend to be in Communion with the Church of England you make the Church it self a very needless and insignificant thing for you know no necessity of Communicating with any Church you will not allow it to be Schism to Separate from the Church you think it a pretty indifferent thing whether Men be Baptized or not or by whom they are Baptized what your Opinion is about the Sacrament of the Lords Supper I do not know though if you are consistent with your self I doubt that is a very indifferent Ceremony too Truly to deal plainly with you I think you have more need to be taught your Catechism than to set up for a Writer of Books and let me in time warn you what the consequence of this way you are in is likely to be which is no less than a contempt of all revealed and institute Religion and consequently of Christianity Natural Religion may subsist without any positive Institutions but revealed Religion never did and never can for when God Transacts with Mankind in the way of a Visible Covenant there must be some Visible Ministers and Visible Sacraments of this Covenant And when the Evangelical Ministers and Sacraments fall into contempt Men must think meanly of Christianity and return to what they call natural Religion which is a Religion without a Priest and without a Sacrifice which cannot save a Sinner but by uncovenanted Grace and Mercy which no Man can be sure of and which no Man shall find who rejects a Priest and Sacrifice of Gods providing And to convince you of this you may observe that the contempt of the Notion of a Church of the Evangelical Priesthood and Sacraments is originally owing to Deists and Socinians to those who profess to believe in God and to worship him according to the Laws of natural Religion but believe nothing at all of Christ or to those who profess to believe in Christ but believe him only to be a meer Man and a great Reformer of Natural
a Subject as he doth in his own Cause when he is a Superiour we believe there would be presently an end of this Controversie For let men talk as gravely as they please about the danger of obeying the Publick Laws with a Doubting Conscience Yet I dare appeal to themselves whether they would not think it very unreasonable for any Domestick of theirs over whom they have Lawful Authority to live in Contradiction to the Private Rules and Orders of their Family upon a pretence of doubting whether those Orders were Lawful or no. If a Parent for Instance should command his Son to sit uncovered before him He would not take it for a good Answer from the young man to say Sir I am doubtful whether it be not unlawful to use any such Ceremonies to Men and therefore I pray excuse me if I do not pay you that Respect you require If a Master should order his Servant to provide Dinner for him on the Lords Day and he should reply I would do it with all my heart but that I am in doubt whether it be not forbidden by Gods Word to do any Work on the Sabbath I am not indeed perswaded that it is forbidden but in the mean time I am not satisfied that it is Lawful and therefore till I be resolved in this Point I pray Sir be pleased to Pardon me Would now a Parent or a Master think these Answers Reasonable would he take them in such good part as to think his Son or his Servant had done nothing but what they were bound to do in thus refusing to obey his Commands No I dare say he would not but on the contrary would tell them you are my Son or my Servant and you must leave it to me to judge what is fit for me to command and for you to do I will take care to command you nothing but what is lawful and justifiable But in the mean time you must not think by your foolish Doubts and Scruples so long as you confess you know nothing unlawful in what I bid you do to control my Orders and Commands that I think neither becomes you to do nor me to suffer I dare say most men would judge this a very fitting and just Reply in such a Case And if so it is a strong Argument that we are all naturally apt to think that in purely Doubtful Cases our Superiour is to be obeyed notwithstanding our Doubt and that if in any Case we think otherwise it is where our own Liberty and Interest are concerned and where consequently we may be justly presumed unequal Judges as being prejudiced in favour of our selves Fifthly Let me add this one Consideration more and I have done If in meerly Doubtful Cases our Superiours have not a Power of Determining us what will their Authority signifie If it be not of weight enough when the Scales hang even to turn the Ballance it is truly the lightest thing in the World Indeed it is worth nothing and there will not be left Power enough in those that are to govern us for the securing in any tolerable degree the Peace and Happiness of the Society they are to govern For I pray consider What can there be so wisely Commanded or Provided for either in a Family in a City or in a Kingdom but may be liable to exception and become a matter of Doubt to some Person or other There is nothing in the whole compass of indifferent things and such chiefly are the Matters of Humane Laws but some Person or other will be found to doubt whether it be fit or lawful And if such a Doubt be a just Reason to deny Obedience to the Law or the Command in what a condition are all Families and Corporations and Societies in the World What will be the Consequence of such a Principle Why certainly nothing but perpetual Jars and Disturbances and Confusions For Instance If whenever a Prince declares War against his Enemies it should be supposed Lawful for any Subject to withdraw his Assistance from his Soveraign in Case he doubts whether that War be a Lawful War or no in what a sad case would that Prince or that Kingdom be that is to be supported and protected upon these Terms Every man is hereby made a Judge of the Merits of a War and though he be never so Ignorant never so Unexperienced never so Ignorant never so Unexperienced never so unable to make a Judgment of these momentous Affairs of the Kingdom yet if some Rumours or uncertain Stories have reached his Ears that make him doubt whether this War was lawfully begun or no Why he is upon this Principle warranted to deny not only his Personal Service but his Contributions towards the Charge of that War But these Consequences are intolerable and therefore the Principle from whence they flow must needs be thought intolerable also III. Having thus given the reasons of our Assertion I come now in the Third place to answer the Arguments that are brought on the other side All the Arguments I have met with against the Doctrine we have been establishing may be reduced to Three and of those three the First I have prevented by my stating the Question the Second I have already answered in my Proofs of our Assertion so that the Third only remains to be spoken to However I will name the two first The First Argument is drawn from the mischievous Consequences of our Doctrine For say they If a man should think himself obliged in every doubtful Case to be determined by the Command of his Superiours it would be the ready way to involve him often times in most grievous sins As for instance if a man should so halt between two opinions as to doubt whether Jehovah or Baal was the true God as the Isralites sometimes did and at the same time as it then happened among them the Chief Ruler should command that Baal should be worshipped Why now in this Case say they according to your way of resolving Doubts the man must be obliged to worship an Idol and to renounce the true God This is the Argument But it is no Argument against us Because in the stating of our Question we have excluded all such Doubts out of it as do proceed from a mans Gross and Criminal Ignorance of his Duty as it is Apparent and Notorious that the Doubt in this Instance doth On the contrary we are as forward to acknowledge as they that if any man do an Action that is plainly contradictory to the Laws of God it is not his Ignorance and much less his Doubtfulness that will excuse him though he do it in obedience to his Governours So that though this Argument would fall heavy enough upon those that plead for an Absolute Blind Obedience to Authority in all things indiscriminately which no man of the Church of England doth Yet it doth not at all touch us who only assert That where we doubt equally whether an Action be Lawful or no
one in this Question a lawful command of our Superiours for fear of some evil that may by chance happen to some others through their own fault and we prove it by this reason which our Dissenting Brethren must own for true and good because every one is bound to have a greater care of his own than others Salvation and consequently rather to avoid sin in himself than to prevent it in his Brethren If it be here asked as it is by some whether any human Authority can make that action cease to be Scandalous which if done without any such Command had been criminal upon the account of the Scandal that followed it I Answer that no Authority whether divine or human can secure that others shall not be Offended by what I do out of obedience to their Commands but then it doth free me from all guilt and blame by making that to become my duty to do which if I had done needlesly without any great reason and my Brother had been hurt and his Conscience wounded by it might have been justly charged with uncharitableness greater or less according as the Scandal was more or less probable to follow This must be granted that the Laws of God or Man otherwise obligatory do not lose their binding force because of some Scandal that may possibly happen from our Complyance with them or else all Authority is utterly void and insignificant and every Man is at liberty to do all things as himself pleaseth for to borrow the words of the excellent Bishop Sanderson To allow Men under pretence that some offence may be taken thereat to disobey Laws and Constitutions made by those that are in Authority over us is the next way to cut the sinews of all Authority and to bring both Magistrates and Laws into contempt for what Law ever was made or can be made so just and reasonable but some Man or other either did or might take offence thereat Whether such a Constitution or Command of our Superiours be Scandalous or no every one must judge for himself and so according to his own private opinion of the goodness or hurtfulness of what is required he is free to obey it or not which is directly to dissolve all Government and to bring in certain disorder and everlasting confusion every one doing what is good in his own Eyes 3. It is said that Avoiding of Scandal is a main duty of charity May Superiours therefore at their pleasure appoint how far I shall shew my charity towards my Brothers Soul then surely an inferiour Earthly Court may cross the determinations of the High Court of Heaven This Mr. Jeans urgeth also out of Amesius but it is easily replyed That here is no Crossing the determinations of God since it is his express will that in all lawful things we should obey our Governours and he who hath made this our duty will not lay to our charge the mischiefs that may sometimes without our fault through the folly and peevishness of Men follow from it and certainly it is as equal and reasonable that our Superiours should appoint how far I shall exercise my charity towards my Brethren as it is that the mistake and prejudice of any private Christians should set bounds to their Power and Authority Cancel the publick Laws or that every ignorant and froward Brother should determin how far we shall be obedient to those whom God hath set over us either in Church or State But to give a more full Answer to this we must know that tho charity be the great duty especially of the Christian Religion yet duties of justice as they are commonly called are of stricter obligation than duties of charity and we are bound to pay our debts before we give an alms Now obedience to Superiours is a debt we owe to them which they have right to exact of us so that they may accuse us of injury if we perform it not But a great care to hinder sin in others or not to Scandalize them is a duty of charity which indeed we are obliged unto as far as we can but not till after we have given to every one what is his due and right It is therefore no more Lawful for me saith the forenamed most Judicious Bishop Sanderson to disobey the lawful Command of a Superiour to prevent thereby the offence of one or a few Brethren then it is lawful for me to do one man wrong to do another man a courtesie withal or than it is lawful for me to rob the Exchequer to relieve an Hospital According to that known saying of St. Austin Quis est qui dicat ut habeamus quod demus pauperibus faciamus furta divitibus Who is it that saith it is lawful to steal from the rich what we may bestow on the poor or to refuse to pay Taxes on pretence that you know those who have more need of your money To this Mr. Jeans replies Suppose saith he the care of not giving offence be in respect of our Brother but a debt of charity yet in regard of God it is a legal debt since he may and doth challenge it as due and we do him wrong if we disobey him Here I grant indeed that both are required by God at our hands that we should be obedient to our Superiours and that we should be always ready to shew charity to our Brethren but then I say this is not the charity which God requires when I give to those in want what is none of mine own This is not an instance or expression of that love and kindness which by the Law of God we owe to our Brother to do him good by wronging our Superiours God hath obliged Servants to be merciful to the poor to their power as well as to be true and faithful to their Masters but that is no part of the mercy which God requires from them to give away their Masters goods without his leave tho it were to those who stand in great need of relief God hath Commanded all Christians to have a great care of being any occasion of their Brothers sin or fall but then this must necessarily be understood only of things subject to our own ordering and management In all cases wherein we are at our own disposal we are bound charitably to regard our Brother But in instances where our practice is determined by Authority our Superiours only are to consider the danger of Scandal we must consider the duty we owe to them this being a matter wherein we cannot shew our charity without violating the right of our Superiours It remains then in the words of another great Bishop in what case soever we are bound to obey God or Man in that case and in that conjunction of circumstances we have nothing permitted to our choice and consequently there is no place for any act of charity and have no Authority to remit of the right of God or our Superiour and to comply with our Neighbour in such
full of Comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification As to the Doctrine of Supererogation this is confuted Article 14. Voluntary Works besides over and above Gods Commandments which they call Works of Supererogation cannot be taught without Arrogance and Impiety For by them Men do declare that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do but that they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is required whereas Christ saith plainly When ye have done all that are Commanded to you say We are unprofitable Servants As to making simple Fornication a meer Venial sin Our Church will endure no such Doctrine For as in the Litany she calls Fornication expresly a deadly sin so hath it ever been accounted in Our Church one of the most deadly even considered as distinct from Adultery As to the Church of Romes Damning all that are not of her Communion the Church of England is guilty of no uncharitableness like it and never pronounced so sad a sentence against those in Communion with the Church of Rome as great a detestation as she expresseth in the Homilies especially of her Idolatrous and Wicked Principles and Practices She is satisfied to Condemn the gross Corruptions of that Apostate Church and leaves her Members to stand or fall to their own Master nor takes upon her to Vnchurch her And as to the remaining most Immoral Principles and Practices of the Romish Church which are all as contrary to Natural as to revealed Religion the greatest Enemies Our Church hath cannot surely have the forehead to charge her with giving the least countenance to any such There being no Church in Christendom that more severely Condemns all instances of Unrighteousness and Immorality Thirdly The Church of England is at a mighty distance from the Church of Rome in reference to their Publick Prayers and Offices Whereas our Liturgy hath been by many Condemned as greatly resembling the Mass-Book all that have compared them do know the contrary and that there is a vast difference between them both as to matter and form Although some few of the same Prayers are found in both and three or four of the same Rites of which more hereafter To shew this throughout in the particulars would be a very long and tedious task I will therefore single out the Order of Administration of Infant-Baptism as we have it in the Roman Ritual and desire the Reader to compare it with that in our Liturgy and by this take a measure of the likeness between our Liturgy and the Mass-Book c. there being no greater agreement between the Morning and Evening Services and the other Offices of each than is between these two excepting that besides the Lords Prayer there is no Prayer belonging to the Popish Office of Baptism to be met with in ours For the sake of the Readers who understand no more of the Language that the Popish Prayers and Offices are expressed in than the generality of those that make use of them take the following account of the Popish Admonistration of Infant-Baptism in our own Tongue To pass by the long Bedroul of Preparatory Prescriptions the Priest being drest in a Surplice and Purple Robe calls the Infant to be Baptized by his Name and saith What askest thou of the Church of God the God-Father answers Faith The Priest saith again What shalt thou get by Faith The God-Father replies Eternal Life Then adds the Priest If therefore thou wilt enter into Life keep the Commandments Thou shalt Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart c. and thy Neighbour as thy self Next the Priest blows three gentle puffs upon the Infants face and saith as if we come all into the World possessed by the Devil Go out of him O unclean Spirit and give place to the Holy Ghost the Comforter Then with his Thumb he makes the Sign of the Cross on the Infants Forehead and Breast saying Receive the Sign of the Cross both in thy Forehead and in thy heart Take the Faith of the Heavenly Precepts and be thy manners such as that thou maist now become the Temple of God After this follows a Prayer that God would always protect this his Elect one calling him by his Name that is Signed with the Sign of the Cross c. And after a longer Prayer the Priest laying his hand on the Infants head comes the Benediction of Salt of which this is the Form I exorcize or conjure thee O Creature of Salt in the Name of God the Father Almighty ✚ and in the Love of our Lord Jesus Christ ✚ and in the Power of the Holy Ghost ✚ I conjure thee by the Living God ✚ by the true God ✚ by the Holy God ✚ by the God ✚ which Created thee for the safeguard of Mankind and hath ordained that thou shouldest be consecrated by his Servants to the People entring into the Faith that in the Name of the Holy Trinity thou shouldest be made a wholesome Sacrament for the driving away of the Enemy Moreover we Pray thee O Lord our God that in Sanctifying thou wouldest Sanctifie ✚ this Creature of Salt and in Blessing thou wouldest Bless it ✚ that it may be to all that receive it a perfect Medicine remaining in their Bowels in the Name of the same Jesus Christ our Lord who is about to come to judge the quick and dead and the World by fire Amen This Idle and prophane Form being recited the Priest proceeds in his Work with the poor Infant and next putting a little of this Holy Salt into his mouth he calls him by his Name and saith Take thou the Salt of Wisdom and adds most impiously be it thy propitiation unto Eternal Life Amen This ended with the Pax tecum God Almighty is next mockt with a Prayer That this Infant who hath tasted this first food of Salt may not be suffered any more to hunger but may be filled with Celestial Food c. Now follows another Exorcising of the Devil wherein he is conjured as before and most wofully becalled And next the Priest Signs the Infant again with his Thumb on the Forehead saying And this Sign of the Holy Cross ✚ which we give to his Forehead thou Cursed Devil never dare thou to Violate By the same Jesus Christ our Lord Amen And now after all this tedious expectation we see some Sign of Baptism approaching for the Priest puts his hand again on the Infants head and puts up a very good Prayer for him in order to his Baptism The Prayer being ended he puts part of his Robe upon the Infant and brings him within the Church for he hath been without all this while saying calling him by his Name Enter thou into the Temple of God that thou mayest partake with Christ in Eternal Life Amen Then follow the Apostles Creed and the Pater Noster But after all this here 's more exercise for our Patience for the Priest falls to his fooling