Manners? The Good among them know the People love them, and that
nothing but their own mis-behaviour draws them into Contempt. Any
Minister, tho' he was but of mean Understanding, yet if he had other
good Qualities, if he liv'd soberly, and did his Duty religiously,
that ever such a Man was pickt out to be the Scandal of his
Neighbours, or a Ridicule of the Stage. Whence is it then, that the
Clergy are so angry? If you hook but one of them, all the rest are
upon your Back, and you can't expose his Vices without being an Enemy
to the Church: And in this, _Priests of all Religions are the same_.

But after all, why shou'd Mr. _Collier_ blame Mr. _Dryden_ for making
_Dorax_ exclaim against the _Mahometan_ Priest? Or how can that be a
Prejudice to the Character of the Christian Clergy? Is it not natural
for such a one as _Dorax_ to say as much, and especially against such
a one as the _Mufti_ in the Play? And does Mr. _Collier_ blame Mr.
_Dryden_ for writing naturally? I think it is a Fault throughout Mr.
_Collier's_ Book, that in his Criticisms of the Plays, he never
considers the Person who speaks; that is, Whether 'tis not natural for
a Man of such a Character, to say such a thing? It wou'd have been of
more Service to have proved, That no Person is to be brought on the
Stage to say an ill thing, and then he had thrown away all the
Profaneness, which is so much an Offence, at once. But if such Persons
are to be represented, there is not so much Reason against any of our
present Plays, as is urg'd by Mr. _Collier_; for you must allow a
Coquett to talk like her self, a Lover to vent his Passion in
Raptures, and a Rake to speak the Language of the Town.

I have already told you, That I am far from vindicating the present
Stage. I don't know a regular Play, or that ought to be represented on
a regular Stage; yet I know a great many Plays that I would not loose