" he, that fome of the warmer Puri- " tans had turned the Habits into Ri- " dicule, and given unhandfome Lan- " gunge to them that wore them ; " which, according to Mr. Strype, was " an Occafion of their being preft after- " wards with fo much Rigour: But " whatever gave Occafion to the Per- " fecution that follow'd, or whoever cc was at the Head of it, . fiuppofing the " Infinuation to be juf, 'twas very hard " that fo great a Number of ufeful " Minifters, who neither cenfured their Brethren, nor abufed their Indulg 4` ence by an unmannerly Behaviour, " should be turn'd out of every thing " they had in the Churchfor the Indif- " cretion of afew." 'Twas not a meer Report or Infinuation againft the Puri- tans, there fill remains fufficient Proof to fu,pport the Charge ; nor was it the Indifcretion of a few, but the general p. 187. Here again this Gentleman has changed the Words of the Author he quotes; for Mr. Strype fays (Life of Par- ker, p. tjq.. The Queen directed her Letter to, her « Archbithop, requiring him, with other Bilhops, in the Commiffion for Caufes Eccleftaiical, thatOrders might « be taken wherebyall Diverfities and Varieties among the °' Clergy and Laity, A S breeding nothing but Contention, and Breach of common Charity, and againft the Laws and " goodUfsge and Ordinances of the Realm, might be re. form'd and reprefs'd, and brought to one manner of Uniformity." Why fhould Mr. N. make no Mention of thofe .Contentions which were the very Ground of the Queen's Proceeding? Con-,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=