4. I am acquainted with a Gentleman, who for some Years has not gone to Church, having taken offence at those Practices I was now writing upon. This Man, you must know, had an extraordinary Veneration for the profound Learning (so he thinks much reading and common-placing to be) of a certain Eminent Divine, who had a fat Bishoprick bestow'd on him by King _William_ and Queen _Mary_. But he to requite their Kindness, when a Bill was brought before the Lords, declaring the King and Queen's rightful and lawful Title to the Crown, not only opposed and voted against it in the House; but when it had passed, he entred his Protestation against it in the Journal. Nay (said this Gentleman) if King _William_ be only King _de facto_, then the Bishop is _de facto_ only. Truly Sir, you may believe me, that I was amaz'd at this Relation; for (as I then said) though most Men look no further, than only to get Mony _de facto_, and do not with much strictness inquire _quo jure_; yet 'twas strange that any Man should protest that he had no right to that Estate, which he openly continued in Possession of. But I was soon answer'd by this his former Admirer, that if that Bishop had strengthened his own Title to the Bishoprick from King _J._ I might cease my wonder. I am indeed sorry to hear Stories of this Nature, especially when they assure me of the Truth of 'em, and when I see the ill Consequences of them. For though nothing be more certain than that the Baseness and Falshood of Man can never disprove the Truth of God; yet when Men are highly Scandaliz'd, and greatly deceived by those for whom they had Esteem, and by whose Authority they in great measure governed themselves, they will stretch their Conclusion beyond their Premisses, and disown Religion in their Principle, because 'tis disregarded by some great Men in their Practice.