The government then still clung to its purpose of persuading, if possible, the Church of England Parliament to approve the Indulgence, and it even cherished decided hopes of success. ‘Were the Indulgence only practically carried out, people would get used to it: after the King had once irrevocably expressed his will, they would not wish to estrange him completely, nor to provoke him by fruitless resistance into becoming a decided enemy.’ To this effect spoke William Penn. He reminded the Episcopal Church ‘that its connexion with the crown formed the principal basis of its authority at that time; it had made the prince great in order itself to secure greatness by his aid. There was a king on the throne whose interests it had once zealously defended, and who wished to remain its ally except in the one point which concerned the persecution of those who held other creeds; would it separate from him on this ground? It would certainly not be able to hinder the relief of the Papists during his lifetime; but if it assented to the General Indulgence it would at once satisfy the instinct of the Protestant Dissenters for self-preservation and attract them to itself; none, certainly, of their different sects wished that the Catholic Church should become the national Church; even after toleration had been granted the Episcopal Church would remain the dominant one, maintained no longer by force but by the approval of all parties, which would be won by its compliance, and would seek to support it.’