to the profâ—ssion of that Order was aftâ—rward â—â—de Deacon and Bishop in the then Clergy but upon the Death of his Father was in order to thâ— Civil Government absolved of his Vows by Pope Gregory the fourth went himself in great Devotion to Rome confirmed his former grant of Peter-pence to the 〈◊〉 obliged himself further to the Yearly payment of three Hundred Marks to Rome whâ—reof two Hundred were appointed by him to buy Oyl to keep all the Lamps burning in St. Peters and St. Pauls Churches at Rome and the other Hundred Marks was a Yearly present to the Pope and that he was the Pope's Creature All this spoken of Ethelwolf particularly the Priest passes silently over without the least touch or note and as one that is ashamed to confess and afraid to deny he puts me off with this sorry shift pag. 100. If T. E. had known what gives a man the just denomination of a Papist he would not have discoursed so absurdly What a pittiful come off is this Is this like a Disputant Wâ—y did he not take up the discourse and lay open the absurdity of it Would a man of his scantling of understanding and discretion let slip so fair an advanâ—age Who could have thought it Well that discourse however absurd or not remains unaâ—swered and the instances there gâ—ven to prove Ethelwolf a Papist are not disproved or any way removed by the Priest He tells us it is not every one that agrees in some Opinions with the Roman Church whâ— is a Papist since then all Christians in the World would be Papists ibid. But what 's this to the purpoâ—e is not this another device to avoid the matter Are the Instances I gave of Ethelwolf's being a Papist common to all Christians as well as Papists 'T is true indeed there are some Tenents common to Papists and all Christians as that there is a God that Christ is come and hath suffered for Mankind c. But are those things mentioned before of Ethelwolf of the Nature of these are they received in common by all Christian as well as by Papists Let me come a little nearer him He reckons himself not only a Christian but a Minister of Christ also Is what is related before of Ethelwolf consistent with his Christianity If not why does he thus abuse both his Reader and me by suggesting that what I there spake of Ethelwolf is agreeable to all Christian as well as Papists But if what is spoken before of Etheâ—wolf be not agreeable to all Christians but to Papists only I hope it will be sufficient proof that Ethâ—lwolf was a Papist Having said who is not a Papist he now gives us the definition of a Papist thus He is a Papist who professes himself a Member of the Roman Church and acknowledges the â—opes Supremaâ—y believing all the Articles of the Roman Church ' s Faith p. 101. This definition would exclude a great number of profest Papists from being Papists for many that have lived and dyed in the profession of that Religion and in communion with the Roman Church did not believe all the Articles of the Roman Church's Faith Most notorious are the Controversies which for many Ages have been maintained amongst the Religious Orders of that Church one sort most hotly and violently impugning the Faith and Opinions of the other yet all Papists So that to the constituting a Papist it is not of absolute necessity that he believes all the Articles of the Roman Church's Faith But if he profess himself a Member of that Church and be in communion with it that 's enough to denote him a Papist The other Priest in his Friendly Conference pag. 149. gave his Parishioner a Definition of Popery his words are these I cannot give you a more brief and true account of Popery then this That it is such Doctrines and superstitious Practices which by the corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancieâ—t catholick and apostolick Church Now if this be a true account of Popery and so true an one that he cannot as he sayes give a more true what truer account then can be given of a Papist then to say he is a Papist that holds such Doctrines and suâ—erstitious Practices c. Or he is a Papist that holds Popery But Popery is such Doctrines and superstitious Practices which by the Corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient catholick and apostolick Church Therefore he that holds such Doctrines and superstitious Practices which by the corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient catholick and apostolick Church is a Papist Now let us measure Ethelwolf by the Priests definition of Popery and see how far Ethelwolf will fall short of being a Papist That Ethelwolf held the Doctrine of the Caelibate or single life of Priests is clear from his taking upon him the Vow of Single Life when he entred his Monkish Order He held the Doctrine that the Pope had poâ—er to absolve and release him from his Vows and accordingly received an Absolution from the Pope He held the practice of burning Lamps continually day and night in the houses they called Churches and accordingly gave two hundred Marks a year to buy Oyl to feed the Lamps in two of those Churches and that in Rome Now if these Doctrines and Practices were superstitious if they were such as by the corruption of time prevailed in the Church of Rome if they were contrary to the true ancient catholick and apostolick Church which none I think but a Papist will deny then according to the Priest's Definition they are Popery and consequently Ethelwolf in holding them was a Papist But the Priest sayes King Ethelwolf did never profess himself a Member of the Roman Church ibid. Is not this strange What made him then seek Absolution of his Vows from the Pope What caused him to go in such great Devotion to Rome What moved him to give two hundred Marks a year to maintain the lamp-Lamp-Religion of the Roâ—an Church What induced him to settle a hundred 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 upon the Pope What led him to re-build the English School â—n Rome â—ounded at first by 〈◊〉 for a Seminary to train up the English Youth in the â—eligion of the Râ—man Câ—urch And how I wonder â—as he the â—opes Creature as in History iâ— recorded of him if he never profest himself a Mâ—mber of the Roman Church He adds that Ethelwolf and his Succâ—ssors were Vicarius Christ oâ—ning no Supreâ—m in their Kâ—ngdomâ— but Christ ibid. Certain it is that the Popes Supremacy was received long before Ethelwolf's time Perkins against 〈◊〉 acknowledges it begun openly and 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 Anno â—â—7 which was near two hunâ—â—ed and fiâ—â—y years before the Charter of 〈◊〉 for Tythes and â—e quotâ—s Sâ—gebert upon the year â—07 thus Boniface obtained of the Emperor 〈…〉 tâ—e Church of Rome should be the Hâ—ad
of the Church of Rome yea some of the Cardinals have done the like as Perkins shews â—rob pag. 48. And if it be true that he himself sayes pag. 123. that the putting the Apocrypha into the Canon of Scripture was never decreed till the Council of Trenâ— about a Hundred and Ten Years ago then before that time the Church of Rome it self had not the Apocrypha in the Canon of Scripture any more then the Saxons had and yet I think he will not say the Church of Rome was not Popish oâ— Idoâ—atrous before the Council of Trent In the close of this Section he sayes Finally if T. E. have either shame or grace let him Repent of this foul Slander which he hath as falsly as maliciously cast upon our fore-Fathers the pious Saxons But if T. E. will not Recant I shall leave it to the Reader to judge of his ignorance and impudence pag. 135. Because there is nothing in this but Scurrility and Railing instead of Reason I intend no Reply to it but will take notice of another passage or two in the same page §23 First he sayes The Saxons were more Orthodox in SOME points then ROME it self then was A goodly commendation Was Rome it self so Orthodox then in his account that he makes her the â—tandard to measure others by Rome it self no doubt was somewhat less corrupt then then in after Ages she grew to be yet he that with an impartial Eye shall view the state of the Romish Church in those times will find her far enough from being Orthodox And if the Saxon Church was not in ALL points so depraved as Rome it self then was yet was she also too unsound in Faith to be reputed Orthodox But secondly the Saxons sayes he differed from the present Papists in all the most material Articles of Faith being nearer in Opinion to the Protâ—stant Church of England It seems then they are not one with the Protestant Church of England but only nearer in Opinion to it then to the present Papists Yet in pag. 102. he sayâ—â— The Clergy of that Age were Gods only publick Ministers and pag. 112. he makes no doubt but they were the right Ministers of God which if they were how comes it that they were not positively one with the Protestant Church of England but only nearer to it then to the present Papists But wherein were they nearer to the Protestant Church of England then to the present Papists Not I hope in their shaven Crowns not in their Monkish Life not iâ— their Vows of continency not in their going on Pilgrimages not in their belief of Purgatory not in thâ—ir praying for the Dead not in their sacrificing for the Dead not in the worshipping of Relicks not in the praying to Saints not in saying Mass not in Latine service not in auricular Confession not in extream Vnction not in the use of Chrism not in the use of Holy Water to drive away Devils or of â—onsecrated Oyl to allay Storms and Tempests In these I â—row and such like things as these they were nearer the present Papists then the Protestant Church of England But thirdly He charges me with ignorance and impudence in supposing the Church so much corupted with Popery then that their very Donations were not fit to stand good or be enjoyed no not by a Protestant Ministry No sure not by a Protestant Ministry of all other for since it is denominated Protestant from protesting against Popery what can be more unsuitable to it then to subsist by a Donatioâ— which was made to uphold that which it hath protested against By a Protestant Ministry he means no doubt a true Gospel Ministry the nature and qualifications whereof if he rightly understood he would not think that such a Ministry hath a greater liberty to enjoy a Popish Donation then another but a less in as much as such a Ministry ought more especially to abstain not only from known and certain Evil but even from every appearance of Evil and not only to avoid the works of the Flesh but to hate even the Garment spotted with the Flesh. So that I account the Church so corrupted with Popery then that their Donations of Tythes are not fit to be enjoyed by any Ministry at all much less by a Protestant Ministry That the Church then was indeed greatly corrupted with Popery is evident by the many instances given of Doctrines and Practices received and held therein which beyond all contradiction have through the corruption of time prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient Catholick and Apostolick Church Nor is it likely it should be otherwise if we consider the Constitution of the Church here in those times For when Austin the Monk came hither from Rome and â—ound some reception here he sent to the Pope for advice and direction how to form settle govern that Church which he then was gathering and from the Pope he received Instructions in all particulars he desired to be informed in From the Pope he received the Power he here exercised and the Pall of his Arch-Bishoprick as his Successors generally did And the Religion and Worship which he brought with him from Rome grew by degrees to be the general Religion and Worship of the Nation For although the Profession of Christianity had been in this Island long before Austin came hither yet had it been much deprest by Heathenism and the remains of it shortly after extinguished by Austin and his Sectators Austin being dead his Successors for a long time after were such as the succeding Popes sent over hither Fox reckons them in this order Laurentius Mellitus Iustus Honorius Deusdedit which last being dead Oswi and Egbert Kings of Northumberland and Canterbury sent Wighard a Presbyter to Rome with great Gifts and Presents of Silver and Golden Vessels to Pope Vitalianus to be by him ordained Arch-Bishop but he delivering his Message and Presents to the Pope died at Rome before he could be consecrated whereupon the Pope writes a Letter to King Oswi commending his zeal and care and sends him some Relicks of the Apostles Peter Paul of other Saints as he calls them and to the Queen his Wiâ—e the Pope sent a Cross with a golden Nail in it withal he acquaints the King that so soon as he could find a Man fit for the place he would not fail to send him an Arch-Bishop Accordingly after much inquiry Theodorus at length was found but he being Born at Tharsus of Cilicia had his Crown clipt after the Eastern manner in imitation as they pretended of St. Paul so that he was fain to wait four Moneths till his Hair was grown that he might have the right cut as they accounted it that done he was ordained Arch-Bishop of Canterbury by Pope Vitalianus and soon after he set forward for England accompanied with Adrian and other Monks about the Year 668. This is that Theodorus who Fox sayes was sent into England by
the Pope and with him divers other Monks of Italy to set up here in England Lâ—tine Service Masses Ceremonies Letanies with such other Romish ware c. Vol. 1. pag. 112. And Adrian the chief of those Monks was sent as Bede observes not only to assist Theodore but to have an Eye also over him that he introduced nothing after the Greek manner into the Church contrary to the Truth of the Faith received then from Rome Not long after in the time of this Theodore came over from Rome Iohn the Arch-Chanter or chief Singer sent hither by Pope Agatho to teach them how to sing here after the same manner as they sang in St. Peter's as they called it at Rome besides which he had particular instructions from the Pope to inform himself fully of the Faith of the English Church and at his return to Rome to give the Pope an account thereof Great care we see waâ— taken by the â—opes to frame the Church of England by the Romish square and that the English-Saxons did imitate the Church of Rome Bede shews when he sayes that Naitan King of the Picts having a desire to reform the Church in his own Dominion that he might do it the more easily and with greater Authority sought the assistance of the English Nation who he knew long before had ordered their Religion according to the example of the Holy and Apostolick Church of Rome which was then had in so great veneration with the Saxons that many of the Kings of this Island laid down their Scepters and went in devotion to Rome desiring to sojourn a while as Pilgrims on Earth as near the Holy places as they could that they might afterward be received the more familiarly in Heaven by the Saints And this sayes Bede was so customary in those times that many of the English Nation both Noble and Ignoble Laity and Clergy Men and Women seemed to strive who should get thither first And that it was thus in Ethelwolf's time may appear by his going in great devotion as Speed saith to Rome and there committing his youngest Son Alfred to the Popes bringing up as Fox Records together with his liberal presents made to that Church Thus â—eest thou Reader how devout the Saxons were to the Church of Rome and how solicitous and careful that their own Church might follow its example If thou wouldst further know what the Church of Rome then was which was cried up for the Mother Church she was full of Superstition Idolatry Blasphemy She was a worshipper of Images of Saints and of Râ—licks she prayed to Saints as Intercessors and Mediators between God and Man She prayed and sacrificed for the Dead She held the Doctrines of Purgatory Indulgences Merits Ear-Confession Pilgrimages and single Life of Priests To mention all her Corruptions and Superstitions were to write a Volumn Then for the Popes themselveâ— fit Heads enough they were for such a Body Their own Writers are not able to cover the infamy of their Lives The Author of Fascicul Temp. confesses Constantine the second whom he makes to have sate Anno. 764. to have been the fifth infamous Pope and Pope Ione he reckons for the sixth who so far as I can gather possest the Roman Chair within a Year or two after Ethelwolf was there to the irreparable infamy of the Roman Church And for the other Popes who sate in the latter end of that Century in which Pope Ione fâ—ll and in the beginning of the next nothing but what is scandalous can be said of them as Fascic Temp. confesses If we seek a Character of those times not only Fox in his Acts of the Church dividing the time from Châ—ist's Incarnation into divers Periods or Ages reckons the third Period of time from about 600. to about the Year 900. whicâ— comprehends most of the Saxons Reign and the earliest Tythe Donation the declining time of the Church and of true Religion But even Platina in vitae Steph. 3. well nigh a Hundred Years before Ethelwolf's Donation laments the Wickedness of the times in these words Nunc vero adeo refrixit pietas et religio non dico nudis pedibus c. i. e. But now Devotion and Religion is grown so cold that Men can sâ—arce find in their Hearts to Pray I do not say bare-Footed but even with their Hose and Shoes on They do not now Weep as they go or while they are Sacrificing as did the holy Fathers of Old but they Laugh and that impudently I speak even of those of the Purple Robe they do not sing the Hymns for that they account Servile but they entertain one another with Jests and Stories to stir up Laughter In a word the more prone any one is to Jesting and Wantonness the greater praise he hath in such corrupt manners This Clergy of ours dreads and shuns the company of severe and grave Men. Why so Because they had rather live in so great Licentiousness then be subject to one that counsels or governs well and by that means the Christian Religion grows every day worse and worse Thus Platina of the times before Ethelwolf And of the times a little after another Popish Writer cries out lâ—eu heu heu Domine Deus c. i. e. Alas alas alas O Lord God how is the Gold darkned how is the best Colour changed What Scandals do we read to have happened about these times even in the holy Apostolick seat What â—ontentions Emulations Sects Envyings Ambitions Instrusions Persecutionâ— O worst of times in which Holiness fails and Truth is cut of from the Sons off men â—ascic Temp. ad an 884. Thus hast thoâ— Reader a short view off those times those Popes those Churches by which thou mayst perceive both the degeneration and Apostacy of the Roman Church from the Simplicity and â—urity of the Gospel as also the dependence of the Saxon Church upon the Church of Rome its continual recourse and application to her as to its Mother and Nurse from whose Breasts it sucked that corrupt Milk which filled it with putrefaction and unsoundness ever after And very little if any whit at all did the Saxon Church differ from the Church of Rome but as Superstitions and Idolatries encreased in the Church of Rome so they were brought over hither and received here as fast as the distance of place would well permit Judge then whether the Saxon Church be not rightly called Popish whether Ethelwolf who gave Tythes was not a Papist whether the Clergy to which he gave them was not Popish whether the Religion which Tythes were given to uphold was not the Popish Religion and whether it becomes a Protestant Ministry who are so denominated from protesting against Popery to receive and exact that Maintenance which was given by a Popish Prince to Popish Priests to uphold Popery § 24. In his next Section the Priest urges thaâ— Tythes were not Popish because received by some of the Martyrs pag. 136. Tâ—is being offered
of all Churches Tâ—is was within a few years after Austin's coming from Rome hither and planting the â—oman Religion here From which time for the space of well-â—igh a hundred years all the Arch-Bishops of Câ—nterbury seven in number succâ—ssivâ—ly were Italians and Forreigners as Fox notes in his Martyrology vol. 1. pag. 121. shewing â—articularly in one of them Theodorus by Name that he was sent into England by Vitellianus the Pope to be Arch-Bishop of Canterbury whereupon this Theodorus took upon him the placing and displacing the Bishops at his Pleasure He turned out Cedda and Wilfride the Arch-Bishops of York under Pretence they were not lawfully consecrated notwithstanding says Fox they were sufficiently authorized by their Kings Wilfride hereupon went to Rome to complain but without redress Why did he not complain to his King if he was accounted Viâ—arius Christi Why made he his application to the Pope if the Pope's Supremacy was not then owned Besides if Ethelwolf and his Successors were Vicarij Christi owning no Supream in their Kingdoms but Christ how came it that they subjected themselves and their Kingdoms to the See of Rome making them tributary to the Pope by the yearly payment of Rome scot or Peter 〈◊〉 which was a 〈◊〉 Tax laid upon every House in England and paid to the Popes Treasury at Rome Hâ— adds further Tâ—at Ethelwolf did not hold all the Opinions of the Church of Rome and therefore was no Papist p. 101. That Ethelwolf was a Papist according to the account which the other Priest gives of Popery which he says is the tâ—uest Account he can give of it I have proved before That the holding every Opinion of the Church of Rome is absolutely necessary to the denominating a Papist I deny A great part of the professed Papists do not hold all the Opinions of the Church of Rome His Consequence therefore is false although he should prove his Proposition Suppose a man hold Purgatory Indulgences praying to Saints worshipping of Saints praying for the Dead sacrificing for the Dead worshipping of Relicks Auricular Confession â—ennance Absolution Pilgrimages Single Life of Priests Latin Services Masses Merits and abundance more of such like Romish Ware shall this man be denyed to be a Papist because he holds not every particular of the Church of Rome How absuâ—d were that Verily I cannot see what should induce this Priest thus to argue unless he should have apprehension that the account which his Brother Priest has given of Popery will take in him and his Brethren too as holding such Doctrines and superstitious Practices which by the corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient catholick and apostolick Church and has therefore to secure himself from the Imputation of Popery invented this new Definition of a Papist But when he cannot clear Ethelwolf from being a Papist he atttempts to justifie his Donation of Tythes though a Papist and therefore sayes pag. 101. If we should grant that Ethelwolf was a Papist yet neither would that make his Donation of Tythes void for an erroneous Opinion in the person who doth a thing good in it self as we have proved Tythes to be doth not make the Act void How lightly doth he speak of Popery how willing he is to extenuate it An erroneous Opiâ—ion It seems then Popery in his Opinion is but an erroneous Opinion I alwayes thought Popery had been at least one degree worse then a bare Erroneous Opinion But suppose it for the present to be but an erroneous Opinion yet may not an erroneous Opinion be sufficient to make void an Act which flows from that Erroneous Opinion and is designed to uphold that Erroneous Opinion as this Donation of Tythes did The Opinion which was the cause of this Donation was this That this Gift would be a means to appease the Anger of God obtain remission of Sins and Salvation of his Soul This was to say on more of it a very erroneous Opinion and from this erroneous Opinion did spring the Donation of Tythes Now this Opinion which was the cause being thrown aside and rejected the Donation which was the Effect is void of it self according to that known Maxim Sublata Causâ tollitur effectus i. e. When the Cause is taken away the Effect is taken away also Nor was this Donation Erroneously grounded in respect only of the Remission and Salvation expected by it but also in respect of the Personâ— to whom and the Service for which it was given They to whom Tythes were then given were not the Ministers of Christ but his Eâ—emies and that Religion which Tythes wâ—â—e given to support was not the true undefiled Religion and uncorrupted Worship of God but the false corrupted Religion and Worship of the degenerate Church of Rome Whaâ— he sayes of the Act or thing being good in it self hath no place here unless he could as really prove as readily say that Tythes are good in themselves How Tythes or Tenths are good in themselves any more then Ninths Eights Sevenths or any other number I confess I do not understand But sayes he pag. 101. If all the good acts of Papists in the true sense and all their Charters and Donations be void meerly because â—ade and done by Papists then all the Charters of our Kings all the endowments of Hospâ—â—als and Schools Magna Charta and all publick Acts for some Hundreds of Years before K. Henry the eighth would be void Which Principle sayes he would destroy the Maintenance of the Poor the Priviledges of Cities and the Freedom of all English Subjects With him in this part agrees the other Priest in his Vindication pag. 303. urging for instance Magna Charta to both which one and the same Answer may serve This is all grounded upon a mistake â—nd I doubt a wilfull one too His interest diswades him from distinguishing as he ought between Religious and Civil Acts. What the Papists did as men as Members of a Body Politick is one thing what they did as Christians as Members of a Religious Society is another Though in their Religious capacity they were wrong yet in their civil capacity they were right they were really men they were truly Members of the Political Body though they were not truly Members of the Body of Christ their Kings were true Kings their Parliaments were true Parliaments their Civil Government a true Government though their Church was not the true Church The making void therefore this Charter of Tythes which had direct Relation to their Religion and was designed to suâ—port their Church and Worship which was false doth not at all shake much less overthrow those civil Acts Laws Charters and Priviledges which in a civil capacity as Members of the Body politick and with relation to the civil Government which was true were made or enacted by them He grounds his Thesis on a false Hypothesiâ— when he sayes If all the good Acts of Papists in the true sense
Christian Temples but also advanced their Veneration commanding them most ethuically to be increased c. This was about One Hundred Years before Ethelwolf's Donation of Tythes and if the Church of Rome which was then the Mother Church to England was so Idolatrous then what may we think she was in Ethelwolf's time one Hundred Years after and what may we suppose that King himself to be who was so great an Admirer of her and bountiful Benefactor to her He sayes Thirdly I instance in Miracles and Intercession of Saints taxing Bede with these points of Popery and the Saxons of his time To this sayes he pag. 131. I reply That if the belief of Miracles make men Papists then T. E. and his Quakers are all Papists for they believe they are immediately taught which is a stranger and greater Miraclâ— then any they can find in all Bede's History What a miserable shift is this Is this Reasoning or Railing would any man that had either a good Cause or good parts have shewed so much weaknesâ— to give a meer Quibble instead of a solid Reply In his 28 Sect. pag. 161. He charges me though very unjustly as in its place c. 5. S. 4. I have shewed with evading all serious Answers by some petty Cavil Judge now Reader if himself be not here guilty of what he there charges upon me Hath he not in this very place evaded a serious Answer by a petty Cavil But this is an usual way with him when he is hard set and willing to avoid the matter I alledged that long before Ethelwolf was Born Popery had made her encroachments in the Church among many instances whereof that I brought one was the belief of strange kind of Miracles wrought by the Relicks of Popish Saints nor only so but by thâ— Wood of the Cross and by Holy Water also This I proved by divers quotations out of the Ecclesiastical History of Beda the Saxon. To which after his prophane Iest he replyes It is not unlikely but some extraordinary Miracles might be wrought at the first Conversion of the Saxons the more easily to Convince that rugged People and the want of human learning in that Age might occasion the credulous reception of more then was true and yet we must not condemn them presently for Papists ibid. He that will take the pains to read Bede's History particularly his third Book 2 11 13 and 15. Chap. and his fifth Book 4. Chap. may there find relation of Miracles as palpably Popish as any in the Roman Legend And if it should be granted that Miracles were then wrought to Convince that People it must be supposed that those Miracleâ— if wrought by the Power of God were wrought to Convince them of the true Faith and Worship of God and to establish them in it But the Miracles mentioned in those Chapterâ— of Bede's History to which I have above refer'd tend not to the setting up of the true Worship of God but a false Worship even the Worship of the Church of Rome in the veneration and adoration of Relicks of Popish Saints of the Wood of the Cross of Holy Water and of consecrated Oyl which all men know to be a part and a corrupt part too of the present Romish Religion So that in these things the Saxon Church then appears to have been in the same condition in which the Church of Rome both then was and now is He sayes They might be credulous and apt to be imposed upon but that was their infirmity and amountâ— but to Superstition not to Popery ibid. He forgets his Brother's Definition of Popery Friendly Confer pag. 149. That it is such Doctrines and SUPERSTITIOUS Practices which by the corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient Catholick and Apostolick Church So that if those things recorded by Bede to be wrought and believed by and among the Saxons were such superstitious practices as by the corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient Catholick and Apostolick Church then they are Popery and they by and amongst whom they were so wrought believed and received were Papists but no Protestant I hope will deny the instances above given to be superstitious Practices to have prevailed in the Church of Româ— through the corruption of time and to be contrary to the true ancient Catholick and Apostolick Church Besides if as he sayes they might be credulous and apt to be imposed upon and so could be excused as he would have them upon the score of their Infirmity yet who I pray were they that took the advantage of their credulity and did impose upon them were they not their Priests their Clergy and what were they mean while If the People werâ— credulous and easie to be beguiled and imposed upon the Priests were not less crafty and ready to imposâ— upon them and beguil them But was not this the same Priest-hood to which Tythes were afterwardâ— given who thus imposed upon the credulous People and deluded them with lying Wonders As for Intercession of Saints he sayes If I mean that the Saxons prayed to the Saints as their Intercâ—ssors with God I do egrâ—giously wrong them pag. 132. About what time the Opinion of the Intercâ—ssion of Saints was received in the Church and how understood Perkins in his Problem of the Church of Rome pag. 87. c. shews First he sayes it was altogether unknown in the Church of God for the space of two Hundred Years after Christ. After which time Origen he sayes and other Fathers disputed concerning the Saints Intercession for us but very diversly and doubtfully untill the Year 400. From that time it seems to have been a received Opinion For the Ancients he sayes pag. 89. teach that the Saints do interceed not only openly by Praying but interprâ—tatively also by meriting or deserving of which he there gives many instances and concludes that among the Anâ—ients the Saints are made immediate Intercessors to God for us From this belief of the Saints Intercession sprang the custom of Invocation or Praying to Saints which Perkins shews was not in the Church for three Hundred and Fiâ—ty Years after Christ but began to creep in about the Year 380. and after the Year 400. he sayes the Ancients sinâ—ed and were guilty of Sacriledge in praying to the Saints of which he gives many Instances some whereof shew that the Saints were prayed to as Intercessors to God yea as Mediators between God and Man For Paulinus in natali 3. in Faelicem sayes Exora ut precibus plenis Meritisque redonet Debita nostra tuis i. e. Pray O Faelix that he would forgive us our Sins for the sake of thy full Prayers and Merits And Fortunatus in vita Martini lib. 2. thus intreats Martâ—n Inter me et Dominum Mediator ad esto benigne i. e. Be thou O Martin afavourablâ— Mediator between the Lord and me Noâ— was this Opinion of the
metâ—inks the Modesty and Wariness of my Expression might have won upon him to have pardoned such an Omission and thereby have oblieged me to have done him the like Kindness another time But since he stands so upon it let us see what other Statute he has brought and whether I am guilty indeed of a Mistake in this case or no. He says The very first Law in the Statute-Book is a Grant for the Church's injoying her Rights inviolable What then Is there any mention of Tythes in that Grant or was it a Law made for the payment of Tythes Not a Tittle of Tythes is in it How then was this a Parliamentary Law made for the payment of Tythes when neither Tythes nor Payment are so much as mentioned in it This was a Confirmation of Liberties to the Church but not a Law made for the payment of Tythes nor do I yet think the Priest will find though he turn the Statute Book over again any Law made directly for the payment of Tythes before that which I have quoted which if he do not instead of fastning a Mistake in this case â—pon me hee 'l find a Charge of a woâ—e nature return upon himself The next Mistake he charges me with is that I say This Statute of 27 Hen. 8. was made by a popish King and Parliament Whereas says he that very Statute declares the King Supream Head of the Church of England as T. E. may see if he read it over And how they can be Papists that have renounced the Pope's Authority I cannot well understand sayes he ibid. He needed not have taken the pains to inform me that Hen. 8. had assum'd the Supremacy before the making of that Statute since I had advertised him of that in the same page out of which he pretends to pick these mistakes pag. 333. where I say Henry 8. being more Papist then Protestant though he had transfer'd the Supremacy from the Pope to himself and believing as most of the other Doctrines of the Church of Rome so that of Tythes being due to God and Holy Church in the twenty seventh Year of his Reign made a Law for the payment of Tythes c. But that which he either cannot or will not understand is how they can be Papiâ—tâ— that have renounced the Popes Authority Truly though he has not deserved much kindness of me yet I will take a little pains to inform him how this may be and in order thereunto I will begin with the definition of Popery which his Brotheâ— gives in his Conference pag. 149. Popery is sucâ—â— Doctrines and superstitious Praâ—tices which by the Corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the Trâ—e Ancient Catholick anâ— Apostolick Church As this is Popery so â—e thaâ— holds believes and uses such Doctrines and Pâ—acticeâ— is a Papist but so did Hen. 8. after he had renoâ—nced the Pope's Authority and assum'd the Supremacy to himself And if Herbert who writ his Life may find credit with the Priest he will tell him pag. 369. that though he separated from the obedience oâ— the Roman Church yet not from the Religion thereof some few Articles excepted Of which more full Teâ—â—imonies we may find in Fox's Acts and Mâ—numents and in Speed's Chronicle The six Articles were â—naâ—ted after the Popes authority was â—eâ—ounced and after this Law for the payment of Tythes was made also which Articles were for the establishing of Doctrines grosly Popisâ— viz. Transuâ—stantiation the half Communion the single Life of Priestâ— Vows of perpetual Chastity private Masses and auricular Confession and stood in force all his time And many suffered Maâ—tyrdâ—m under him after he had renounced the Pope's Supremacy as Laubert Barns Askew and many others who to be sure were no Renegadoes but such as certainly sealed their Testimony with their Blood Besides he might have learnt from his Brother Priest that Hen. 8. did establish the six bloody Aâ—ticles to shew himself as ill a friend to Protestants as to Tythes Vindication pag. 305. which if he had considered might perhaps have helped to open his understanding a little in this dark and difficult point However by that time he has read and weighed what has now been offered concerning it I hope he may begin to understand how they could be Papists that had renounced the Popes authority and then I expect he should withdraw his action and not charge me with a mistake in saying the Statute of 27 Hen. 8. for the payment of Tythes was made by a Popish King and Parliament But he sayes I mistake a Statute made in 32 Hen. 8. c. 7. for a Statute made in 37. Hen. 8. Who but would take this man to have been Domitian's Schollar he is so ready-handed at catching Flies What a grand mistake was this to set 37 foâ— 32 A mistake it was however But common ingenuity would rather have imputed it to the Printer than the Aâ—thor especially considering how ill the Book is Printed throughout He knows well enough that till he had made a second Correction of Errors his own Book was not free from such mistakes if it be yet And if I could have taken the same Course 〈◊〉 had not had this Straw to stumble at He adds that I bring in Protestant King Edw. 6. for a Popish confirmer of Tythes He wrongs me in that My words are these pag. 334. In pursuance of these Laws of Hen. 8. â—is Son and Successor Edward 6. made another grounding is upon those which his Father had made before This is not calling Edw. 6. a Popish confirmer of Tythes § 11. But he takes great pains to prove Tythes a Free-hold and spends several pages about it using great earnestness therein and calling me Heretick for but so much as questioning it I do not profess my self a Lawyer and therefore will not take upon me to Answer all his Law-quotations lest I should need the same Excuse that he at last is fain to make pag. 188. Ne sutor ultra crepidaâ— But I observe he sayes pag. 185. that In the very Statute of 32. Hen. 8. There is mention made of an Estate of Inhâ—ritance or Free-hold in Tythes By this I perceive he confounds the Claiâ—s of Priest and Impropriator for that Clause in the Statute hath plain relation to the Impropriators a directing how and where Lay-men possessing Tythes and being thereof disseized may have their Remedy The words of the Statute run thus And be it further enacted c. that all cases where any Person or Persons which now have or which hereafter shall have any Estate of Inheritance Free-hold term Right or Interest of in or to any Parsonage Vicarage Portion Pension Tythes Oblations or other Ecclesiastical or Spiritual profit which now be 〈◊〉 which hereafter shall be made temporal or admitted to be abide and go to or in temporal Hands and lay uses and profits by the Law and Statutes of this Realm shall hereafter fortune to be disseised c.
Carnal minds may imagin I have learnt to know my self better than to ascribe to my self or my own Abilities any of that Honour which is due to the Power of Prevailing Truth Iudge Reader whether from those Expressions my Opponent had any just ground to tax me with bragging of my Learning But as an Argument of my want of Learning yeaâ— gross Ignorance as he is pleased to term it Ep. p. 3. he charges me with mistaking another Basil for Basil the Great This he takes out of that Chapter of my Book which treats of Swearing and his Brother Priest in his Vindication of the Conference objects the same against me in his Chapter of Swearing in Answer to mine When I shall come to that part of the Vindication I intend to give an Accompt oâ— that Passage and therefore to avoid needless Repetitions omit it here yet thought it needful to intimate thus much here lest â—y Opponent should so far mistake himself as to think I was willing to shift it Some Testimonies I have taken out of Fox's Martyrology or Book of Martyrs the various Editions of which render Quotations out of it very uncertain and sometimes suspected the Book which I have used is of the sixth impression in two Volumns printed at London in the year 1610. These things premised I now recommend the following Discourse to thy most serious perusal and thee to the Guidance of that good Spirit which leads into all Truth THE INTRODUCTION WHen Demetrius the Silver-Smith of Ephesus perceived that by Paul's preaching his Trade was like to decay he call'd his Crafts-men together and thus bespake them Ye know said he that by this Craft we have our Wealth Moreover ye see and hear that not â—lone at Ephesus but almost throughout all Asia this Paul hath perswaded and turned away much people saying that they be no Gods which are made with hands so that not only this our Craft is in danger to be set at nought but also that the Temple of the great Goddess Diana should be despised c. Acts 19. 25 26. The Case hath fallen out somewhat alike with our English Deâ—etrius the Author of the Book called The Right of Tythes asserted c. who finding his Diana â—otter by a stroke received from the last Chapter in a Book of mine called Truth Prevailing written in Answer to one from his Party called A Friendly Conference and apprehensive of greater Danger if timely course were not taken he gives the Alarm to his Fellow-Crafts-men and bespeaks him much to the same purpose as did the â—phesian Silver-Smith of old He said then This is the Craft by which we have our Wealth This sayes now This is the Oyl by which our Laâ—p is nourished the â—ay by which our Army is maintained page 13. He said then This Paul hath perswaded and turned away much People saying they be no Gods which are made with hands This saith now When I consider how easily so plausible a Discourse meaning that Book of mine might 〈◊〉 some well-meaning men out of the right way c. pag. 4. Again The Obstinacy which the unhappy Quakers contract from such false Insâ—â—uations as these of T. E. in this Case of Tythes c. pag. 6. Again Our Changers of Religion mainly seek to overthrow these things to that end have sent out T. E. as their Champion pag. 15. with more to the same purpose He said then Not only this our Craâ—t is in danger to be sâ—t at nought but also that the Temple of the great Goddess Diana should be despised This sayes now They would glâ—â—ly stir up the People to take away our Books and Subsistence from us pag. 14. To stop the Oyl that nourishes our Lamp and force us to disband for want of Pay pag. 13. And not only so but wise and pious men look upon them as designing to disturb the Kingdom destroy Learning ruin the most famous of all Protestant Churcheâ— pag. 14. To overthrow not only the Ministers and their Maintenance but also the Peace of the Church and Religion whose safety he sayes depends upon that Maintenance pag. 15. He raised the People into an uproar and filled the City with Confusion crying out for about the space of two hours Great is Diana of the Ephesians This man abounds with confusion also having little strength of sound Argument or sorce of solid Reasoning but crying up the sacred Maintenance Divine Tribute Righâ— of Holy Church c. And indeed the main difference that doth appear between that Demetrius and this is that he though he sought the destruction of the Apostle did not bespatter him with approbrious Language whereas this man hath endeavoured to besmear my Name with all the ignominy reproach and obloquy his evil Nature could prompt him to and his worse Education furnish him with of which these that follow are some This poor Retailer pag. 3. Our strutting Quaker pag. 16. Obscure and empty Quaker pag. â—7 This skulking Adversary pag. 19. This poor Quaker is as bold as he is Blind pag. 35. This Quaker hath learnt to Cant pag. 40. He hath the impudence pag. 113. This ungracious Chaâ— pag. 122. The Quaker is a manifest Lyar pag. 〈◊〉 This insolent Quaker pag. 161. T. Elwood is a 〈◊〉 Wretch pag. 173. Though T. E use the name of Popish Priests to gull the People yet he is one of their Iourny men pag. 179. He is an inspirado pag. 18â— A wild Quaker pag. 190. This double-tongu'd and false-hearted man pag. 195. His own base humor pag â—00 Common experience preclaims him a Lyar ibid. This seditious Libeller pag. 201. Is not the Quaker a Knave pag. 212. This malicious Slanderer pag. 214. This black-mouthed Slanderer may publish his own Venemoâ—s impieties pag. 233. This Reader is the Language wherewith he treats me notwithstanding which he hath the confidence to Brand me with Railing for calling Tythes the Priests Delilah the very Darling and minion of the Clergy This he sayes is Ill Language pag. 11. and Scurrillity pag. 12. which he will not meddle with But if this be ill Language and Scurillity by what Name I marvel shall that Language of his pass which is before recited Doubtless if Railing be not Reasoning as he truly sayes his Book is so replete with Railing that there is little room for Reasoning in it And though he terms that expression of mine Scurrillity and sayes he will not meddle with it yet can he not forbear but in the very next page catches up this which himself accounts ill Language and Scurrillity and throws it at the Quakers calling Tythes the Quakers Delilah the very Darling and Minion of that Sect pag. 13. And so transported he is with passion against the Quakers that he sees not the absurdity he runs himself upon in taxing the Quakers with railing at Tythes in the very same Line wherein he calls Tythes the Quakers Delilah the very Darling and Minion of that Sect Is not this contradictory And as
exspecting benefit by them have Consciâ—ntiously refused to pay them Did they disband or threaten it nothing less They rather Ralliâ—d their Forces together either by Law or force without Law have fallen upon the Spoil taken sometimes three sometimes five or six times as much as they pretended to be due to them So that it is not likely while Plunder may be had the want of Pay will disband theâ— But while this Priest talks of being forc'st to disband for want of Pay I doubt he forgetâ— the Nature of his Warfare and the Cause for which he pretends to be engaged Is not he one that takes upon him â— Cure of Souls and can he so easily quit his Station Will he leave the Souls of the People for a Prey to the Enemy because he has not the pay he desires Surely then it is otherwise with him then it was with the Apostle Paul who did not say If ye Pay â—e not you 'l force me to disband if ye stop the Oyl my Lamp will go out without Tythes I cannot Preach but A necessity is laid upon me Yea Wâ— is to me if I preach not the Gospel â— Cor. 9. 16. But this Priest does not appear to be under that necessity of Preaching but rather under the necessity of giving over if he be not paid to his content nay he seems to understand no other Wâ— but that of having the Oyl stopped and wanting Pâ—y The Parishoner in the Friendly Conference pag. 160. was pretty near the mark it seems when he said The Covetousness of the Clergy hath given us occasion to fear that bereave you of your preferments and you would soon abandon your Profession And that Priest understood better how to Varnish over his Cause then this hath done for he answered more warily I hope said he many of 〈◊〉 can appeal to the searcher of Hearts that we embraced the Ministry upon better grounds then temporal Interests Whatever the grounds were upon which they embraced their Ministry tempâ—râ—l Interests it seems by this Priest are the grounds upon which they will quit it want of Pay will force them to disband 'T is much if this Priest be not one of those of whom his Dr. Sr. the Author of the Friendly Conference speaks when he sayes pag. 11. It cannot be expected to be otherwise but that some men for a corrupt Interest will intrude themselves into these sacred Offices Or at least one of those of whom the same Author complains in pag. 160. of his Friendly Conference where he sayes The secular care of some of the Clergy for the Maintenance of their Families have been excessive some such it seems there are among them and he is as like to be one as another for indeed the excess of his Secular care bespeaks him An Intruder for a corrupt Interest The Iews he sayes have a Proverb Sine farina non est lex pag. 14. i. e. Without Meal there is no Law And have not the Priests a Proverb also Sine farina non est Evangelium i. e. Without Meal there is no Gospel If his metaphors of the Lamp and the Oyl the Army and the Pay be thought too weak to bear my Inference out I will add what he in the next page tells us Tacitus sayes of the State with his own application thereof to the Church There can be no quiet to the Nations without Souldiers no Souldiers without Pay nor no Pay without Tribute on which therâ—fore the common safâ—ty doth depend Even so sayes he no Peace in the Church without Ministers no Ministers without Maintenance nor no Maintenance without these publick Contributions on which therefore the safety of Religion doth dâ—pend The plain English of this is No Tythes no Ministers no Meal no Gospel for all is made to depend upon Tythes No Ministers without Maintenance no Maintenance without these publick Contributions namely Tythes no other maintenance it seems will serve the turn on which therefore namely Tythes the safety of Religion doth depend So that take away Tythes and down falls Religion but that must be understood of their Religion only whose Subsistance depends upon Tythes and I hope not of all theirs neither I am not willing to spend time in tracing him step by step through all his crooked turnings and windingâ— wherein he often contradicts himseâ—f one while making the Quakers to be acted by meer Coveâ—ousness in denying to pay Tythes pretending Conscience to save their Purses supposing this kind of Godlines great Gain pag. 12. insinuating that the Quakers find their Harangues against Tythes very taking with the Covetous and Atheistical with those who care not much for any Religion and therefore like the cheapest best pag. 14. Another while The Quakers Obstinacy in this case of Tythes exposeth them to more Sufferings then all their other Errors p. 6. One while I am a bold Antagonist pag. 5. Another while The Quakerâ— dare not engage the Priests Army pag. 13. Anon T. E. singly provokes the Priest to take up this Argument pag. 18. And which is beyond all the rest he calls me both a daring Adversary and a sculking Adversary in one and the same page But I pass over these and many other of like nature being desirous to try what further Strength and Force of Argument this great Warriour hath brought forth in the Defence of Tythes then the Author of the Friendly Conference had done before him CHAP. 1. § 1. TO make out the Divine Right of Tythes there are three Periods he sayes p. 19. to be considered 1. Before the Law 2. Under the Law 3. The Time of the Gospel Concerning the â—st Period before the Law sayes he to his Dr. Sr. you said very little in your Conference as not designing to mannage this Argument But why did he say so little Was it not because he had but little to say and as I observed in my former Answer Though he pretended to be a Minister of the Gospel yet he took the Law for the surer holding and therefore betook himself chiefly to that No sayes this Priest to excuse him 'T is evident you laid aside this Weapon of the divine Right not out of any distrust of the Argument but in very Truth you seem to have been loath to cast Pearls before Swine who understand not the value of them pag. 17 18. Was his Parishioner then a Swine with whom he discoursed on that subject whom he called his Good â— Friend and Neighbour pag. 1. to whom he bore such true Friendship pag. 2. whose serious Inclination Modesty and Humility he commended and the Expressions of whose Affection he accepted in all gratitude pag. 3. He hinted indeed before pag. 6. of his Friendly Conference that the Priests People were Beasts and lean Beasts no fatter for all the feeding but then they seemed to have been Kine he stroak't so much Mâ—lâ— from them but this Priest has explain'd the matter and declared them arrant Swine not considering that he hath made
People the Farmers the Husband-men who lived not in the Cities but in the Country-Towns and Villages were by this Donation obliged to pay the Tythes of the Increase of the Lands which they manâ—red and occupied What need had there been then of such a Tribute out of the Cities This instance of Constantin's Donation if it be allowed to prove any thing will rather prove that Tythes were not then paid then that they were But the Truth of the Donation is questioned Cusanus sayes thus of it Sunt mâ—o judicio illa de Constantino Apocrypha i. e. Those things concerning Constantine are in my judgment Apocryphal that is obscure and doubtful Many other Authorites Perkins produces to prove the Donation of Constantine false Problem pag. 15. But whether it be false or true it speaks nothing of Tythes and therefore is the less to be regarded The Priest goes on thus It were endles's to relate all the Constitutions of pious Emperours either to enlarge the Revenues of the Church to preserve its Liberties or to secure the Donations made by others Let that one Law which is so full for the Divine Right of Tythes serve instead of many instances pag. 89. I cannot but take notice how short-winded this Priest is when he comes in earnest to produce his Authorities He talks big before-hands and gives great expectation of what he will do but when he comes to the Point how mean Alas is his performance in respect of the preparation he makes What a noise did he make of Councils ere now Who that heard him would not have almost thought that All the Antient Councils had been called on purpose to settle Tythes upon the Clergy And yet after all this heaving and swelâ—ing the great Mountain hath brought forth but one Mouse and that a little one too I mean his high talk and great preparation hath produced at last but one Authentick Council that mentions Tythes if that one be Authentick and that but a Provinâ—ial neither And now that he is slipt from Councils to the Laws of Kings and Emperours he instances one of Constantine the Great of suspected Credit that has no mention of nor relation to Tythes and then immediately sayes It were endless to relate ALL the Constitutions of Pious Emperours c. as if he had almost wearied himself with relating so many before whenas indeed this was the first and only one that he had so much as named And how poorly afterwards doth he come off when he sayes Lâ—t that ONE Law which is so full for the Divine Right of Tythes serve instead of MANY instances Can any one doubt who observes his manner of writing that this is only a Flourish to hide his penury It had been worth his while though he had taken a little the more time for it to have given us some of the most material of those MANY Constitutions of Pious Emperours which he sayes it were ENDLESS to relate and it is not to be questioned but so he would could he have found amongst them All any that had spoken but favourable of Tythes But since no more are to be had let us look the more intently on this he doth give and see whether it deserves to serve instead of Many instances He words it thus pag. 89. The Tythes by God's Command are separated for the Priests that they which are of Gods Family may be sustained by his Portion and therefore they cannot by any human Priviledge be given to Lay-men lest the Supream Authority should therein prejudice the Divine Commandment I see no reason for his calling this a Law which is rather a Declaration by Doctrine then a Constitution by Precept If it be a Law he might have done well to have acquainted his Reader who was the Law-maker He neither tells us who was the Author of it nor in what Age 't was made but sets it down bare and naked as I have here Transcribed it only in the Margin he hath this reference Cod. l. 7. Tit. de prâ—scrip But though he conceals the date of it yet that Passage in it therefore they cannot by any Human â—iviledge be given to Lay-men speaks it to be of mucâ— later Birth then he would willingly have it pass for However let the Age and Author of it be as they are it deserves not the name of a Law much less of such a Law as in the Case of Tythes may serve instead of many instances for it injoyns nothing but only supposes Tythes separated for the Priests by God's Command and declares they therefore cannot by any Human Priviledge be given to Lay-men This peradventure may some-what concern the Civil Magistrate and the Impropriators but not the Case in hand In the same place he sayes A parallel Law to this we find in Authenticis ti eod It may be so But where he found it there it seems he thought fit to leave it for he sayes not a word more of it But going on nearer to King Ethelwolf's time he sayes K. Ethelwolf might know how the Religious K. Riccaredus had confirmed the Decrees of the first Council of Hispaâ—is about paying Tythes Anno. 5â—0 Nor could he be ignorant what Charles the great had done in settling Tythes on the Church about 100. years before K. Ethelwolf's Donâ—tion pag. 90. The Story of Riccaredus I am a stranger to and like to be for him for he has not been so fair as to acquaint his Reader whence he took it That of Charles the great was about the year 780. far enough short of his boasted Antiquity and of the earliest dayes of Christianity falling indeed in a time when the Church was miserably depraved and corrupted and growing every day worse and worse as I shall have occasion more particularly to shew when I come to Ethelwolf's time And though the Priest sayes This Emperour who gave Tythes was so far from Idolatry that he called a Council to condemn the use of Images and write against them himself Yet Corruptions enâ—ugh were there then in the Church beside the use of Images to prove the Religion he profest to be Popish according to the definition of Popery given by the other Priest in his Friendly Conference pag. 149. where he sayes I cannot give you a more brief and true Account of Popery then this That it is such Doctrines and Supperstitious Practices which by the Corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the True Antient Catholick and Apostolic Church Now that the Doctrine of Purgatory of the Intercession of Saints deceased of Monkish life and the Calibate or unmarried life of Priests and that the Practice of Praying for the Dead of Sacrificing for the Dead of Praying to Saints of Going Religiously on Pilgrimage as a part of Divine Worship that the use of Chrism and of Exteam Vnction were received in the Church long before this Charles his time I have already shewed That these Doctrines and Practices by the corruption of time have
prevailed in the Church of Rome I have proved before by the unquestionable evidence of Protestant Authors and whether these Doctrines be true or false whether these Practices be Superstitious or no whether or no both the Doctrines and Practices be contrary to the True Antient Catholick and Apostolick Church let the true Protestant judge If these Doctrines and Practices are not Superstitious if they have not prevailed by the corruption of time if they are not contrary to the True Antient Catholick and Apostolick Church then am I under a mistake But if they are Superstitious if they have prevailed through the corruption of time if they are contrary to the True Antient Catholick and Apostlick Church then are they Popish according to the Priests own definition 〈…〉 and consequently Tythes so far as he derives their institution from those who were in the belief and use of these Superstitiouâ— Doctrines 〈◊〉 Practices had their institution from Popery But 〈◊〉 this more when I come to Ethelwolfs time What hath been said in this place with relation to Charles the Great may opportunâ—ly also giveâ— check to the Priest's over-bold Assertion in his following words when he saith that Before the time of King Ethelwolf Tythes were settled on the Church in most parts of the Christian World eveâ— by Civil and Ecclesiastical Constitutions as well as Voluntary Donations c. pag. 90. I call this an over-bold Assertion because First I know he herein affirms more by a great deal then he is able to prove and Secondly If he could make such a general settlement appear yet would not that acquit Tythes from the blemish of a Popish Institution iâ— as much as I have proved before even by the Priests own definition of Popery that Popery had made her encroachments in the Church before the time of Charles the Great § 9. Hitherto he has travelled Forraign Countries to seck a Right to Tythes and has taken mucâ— pains to little purpose Now he begins to look Homeward where I am of Opinion he will speed no better He had a mind in his way to brand me with ignorance but he wanted an occasion for it Where therefore he could not find a way he resolved like the Carthaginian Captain to make one Hereupon he sayes pag. 91. He perceives all along I 〈◊〉 the very Birth of Tythes in the Year 855. For this Suggestion he has not the least colour of reason For if the Birth of Tythes were dated as he sayes in that Year it was 〈…〉 but 〈…〉 but his Brother 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 them that date by fixing on Ethelwolf's Câ—arter for the ground of his Claim to Tythes which was made in that Year The Argument was his own the Method and order of his Discourse was at his oâ—n choice Had he designed an elder Birth to Tythes he might have given them an elder Date if he could But he thought fit to Date his Claim to Tythes from Ethelwolf's Donation which out of Spâ—lman I shewed was made in the Year 855. and thereupon I said pag. 2â—9 If he had any Charter or Settlement of Tythes of older Date then that of Ethelwolf which was about the Year 855. he should have produced it and probably so he would However since he did not I have no reason to think he 〈◊〉 any â—lder I took the oldest he thought fit to give and did not take upon my self to Date the Birth of Tythes but shewed the Reader in what year my Opponent had dated his Claâ—m â— But having liberally bestowed his Brothers ignorance upon me and thereby got an occasion to insinuate that I am miserably mistaken he goes about to set forth a more anâ—ient date of the Birth of Tythes then that of Ethelwolf's Charter And fiâ—st he brings in Fletâ— the Lawyer expounding the word Church-esset to signifie a certain measure of Corn which every one of Old gave to the holy Church about the time of St. Marâ—â—n ' s Feast as well in the time of the Brittains as the English adding that it was after called first Fruits From hence he infers That by this account there was a kind of Tythes paid by the Brittains before the coâ—â—ing of Austin Pray mark his word a kind of Tythes he himself it seems for all his usual confidence would not adventure to call it simply Tythes but a kind of Tythes What mâ—ans he by that Was this certain measure of Corn the tenth part of the Crop he sayes Every one of Old gave this certain measure of Corn but doubtless every one had not a Crop of Corn growing But waving this and his other Conceits of the Saxoâ— words Ciric-sceat or Ciric-set signifying the Tribute of the Church or the Church Seed with what else he urges out of Malmsbury Spelman and Lindenbrogius concerning first Fruits of Seed Tribute of Corn together with the Law he cites of K. Ina commanding the payment of the Caric-sceat on the Feast of St. Martin under a severe penalty all which are nothing to the present purpose unless he could prove that this Church-esset and Caric-sceat were really and properly Tythes which I deny I go on to his next quotation the Epistle of Boniface to Cuthbert Arch-Bishop of Canterbury in which he tells me I shall find Tythes by name Only by the way seeing he hath mentioned K. Ina for a Patron of Church Revenues I desire the Reader to take a little notice of thâ— corruption and superstition of that Age and Church in which K. Ina lived and for whose sake he made that Law He built sayes Speed the Abbey of Glasenbury and garnished the Chappâ—l thereof with Gold and Silver and gave rich Ornaments thereto as Altar Chalice Censer Candlesticks Bason and holy Water Bucket Images and Pale for the Altar He instituted also a certain Yearly payment to the See of Rome known afterwards and challenged by the name of Peter Pence and casting off at last his Regal Authority he went to Rome where in the habit of a Religious man he spent the remainder of his Life By this the Reader may perceive what Religion K. Ina was of who besides his other Superstitioâ—s was a sâ—tter up of Images in the Church and declared his Communion with the Church of Rome not only by his Donation to it but by entring and leading a Monkish life in it And what the Church of Rome at that time was in point of Idolatry is notorious to all that have conversed in the Histories of those times and observed the great 〈◊〉 occasioned about Images and Image-worship between the Emperors Philippicus Leo the third on the one hand and the Popes Constantine Gregory the second and Gregory the third under one of whose 〈◊〉 Ina went to Rome on the other hand the Emperors endeavouring the destruction of Images the Popes with the Clergy cls stoutly maintaining and defending them And under two of these Popes were two Councils called in Rome on purpose to establish Image-worship Now to his quotation out of
Intercession of the Saints and consequently the custom of praying to the Saints the private Belief and Practice only of some but the same Perkins pag. 94. tells us that the Invocation which in former Ages was of private devotion began to be publick about the Year 500. for then sayes he Petrus Gnaphâ—us mixed the Invocation of Saintâ— with the publick Prayers of the Church for he is said to have invented this that in every Prayer the Mother of God should be named and her divine 〈◊〉 called upon and Gregory the great adds he about the Year 600. commanded that a Letany of Prayers to Saints should be sung publickly This is spoken of the Church in general Now concerning the Church in this Nation it is to be noted that this is that Gregory who sent over Austin the â—onk to Plant the Romish Religion here and whose Successors for many Years after had the ordering of the English Church and making Bishops in it and for the space of one Hundred and Fifty Years at least the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury were Italians or other Forreigners of the Popes placing How those Italian Prelates that came out of the Bosom of the Roman Church did form the Church here I leave to the Readers judicious consideration adding only to shew the devotion of the English then to the Roman Church that Beda in his Eccles. Hist. l. 4. c. 5. sayes Oswi King of Northumberland was so greatly in love with the Roman and Apostolical Institution that had he recovered of an Infirmity whereof he died he intended himself to have gone to Rome and there to have ended his dayes as Iâ—a Offa Kâ—nredus with other of the Kings of this Land afterward did in Monkish Orders as â—ox reports And that Stow in his Annals pag. 157. speaking of the English Monks unwillingness to change their manner of singing which they had reâ—eived from Rome sayes As they that had been â—ver used not only in this but in other sâ—rvice of the Church to follow the manner of the Roman Church Now inasmuch as the Church of Rome did pray to Saints as their Intercessors with God and the then Church of England was in subjection to the Church of Rome and had thâ— Roman Church in so great veneration and esteem since the same Pope Gregory that sent Austin to set up the Popish Worship here did appoint a Let any of Prayers to â—aints to bâ— sung publickly and since it appears by Bede and others that the Opinion and Belief of the Saints Intercession was received and held by the Saxons in those times what reason can there be to doubt of the Saxons praying to Saints as their Intercessors with God If they believed them Intercessors at all with whom could they think they interceded but with God And if they believed they interceded with God for them what should hinder their praying to them as their Intercessors with God especially seeing that Church from which they received both Doctrine and Discipline did so But a passage there is in Bede's Eccles. Hist. l. 5. c. 22. from which the judgment of the Saxon Church in the point of Intercession and Mediation of Saints may pretty well be guessed at Adamnan a Scotch-Abbat coming Ambassadour into England about the Year 720. visited the Abbey of Wire in the Bishoprick of Durham of which Ceolfride was then Abbat The Scot it seems had the wrong cut on his Crown not after the Mode of St. Pâ—ter but after the fashion of Simon Magus which the English Abbat observed and reproved the Scot for He excused it by the custom of his Country protesting that although he was Shorn like Simon Magus yet in his Heart he abhorred Simon 's Infidelity and desired to follow the steps of the blessed Princâ— of the Apostles St. Peter To which the English Abbat replied That as he desired to follow St. Peter's Deeds or Admonitions so it became him to imitate his manner of Habit whom he desired to have for his Advocate with God the Father quem apud Deum patreâ— habere Patronum quaeris or as Fox renders it Whom you desire to have a Mediator between God and you On which word Mediator Fox in his Margin vol. 1. pag. 114. gives this Note There is but one Mediator between God and Man Christ Iesus plainly shewing he understood by this Sentence the Saxons made other Mediators between God and Man besides Christ Jesus But leaving this to the Reader 's censure I proceed The Priest sayes pag. 132. There is but one thing more wherein the present Church of Rome is charged with Idolatry and that is in adoring the Host or Body of Christ which they say is Transubstantiate in the Sacrament but neither in this sayes he were the Saxons guilty for they did not believe Transubstantiation no not in K. Edgar's dayes An. 9â—5 He said before pag. 123. the Doctriâ—e of Transubstantiation was not received for a point of Faith till the Lateran Council above one Thousand two Hundred Years after Christ No wonder then if it were not believed by the Saxons But that will not â—cquit the English-Sâ—xon Church from the charge of Idolatry any more then it will the Church of Rome which hath been by many sufficiently convicted of Idolatry long before that â—aâ—eran Council in the Year 1215. wherein Transubstantiation was made a point of Faith And though the Priest sayes This is the only thing more wherein the present Church of Rome is charged with Idolatry yet doubtless he must be very forgetful or much too favourable to the Roman Church For Rainolds de Romane Ecclesia Idolatria against Bellarmine and others of the Popish Patrons doth charge the Church of Rome downright with Idolatry not only in the worshipping of Saints Images and the Sacrament of the Euâ—harist but of Relicks also and of Water Salt Oyl and other Consecrated things which out of the Papists own Books he proves in the assumption of his â—rgument l. 2. c. 1. And that the Saxons followed the Church of Rome in these things is too well known to be denyed §22 More Instances he sayes he could give to prove that the Saxons were like the Protestants in the most fundamental matters but that two shall suffice at present 1. of the merit of good Works 2. of the Canon of Scripture For the first of these he offerâ— some sentences out of Bede and Alcuin against the merit of Works which if faithfully given may serve to shew the judgment of those particular Men but are not sufficient to prove the general received Opinion of those times much less of the after times wherein Ethelwolf lived and gave Tythes for Bedâ— dyed in the Year 735. 120. Years before Ethelwolf's Donation as the Epitome of his Ecclesiastical History shews and Alcuin was one of Bede's Hearers as Burdegalensis testifies And if the private judgment of some particular Men be made the measure of the general Opinion he may thereby excuse the Church of Rome all along â—rom this and
the Laws unless they be equal in all Capacities But this to use his own term is a wretched untruth for my Inference is not grounded on such a Maxim I said not that they must be equal in all Capacities but that if one claimed in a civil capacity the other in a spiritual their Claims then would not agree nor the pretended Parallel hold There is a difference between being equal in all Capacities and claiming in quite contrary Capacities If one man claims in a civiâ— capacity and another in a spiritual capacity and both by the same human Laws surely 〈◊〉 that claims in a spiritual capacity is therein opposite not only to him that claims in a civil capacity but to the Laws also by which himself claims which are of a civil Nature and therefore cannot properly and rightly be made use of to maintain a religious and spiritual claim But he sayes The same Laws do give equal temporal Rights to persons of all kind of Capacities for the same Estate he sayes may be enjoyed by Iudge first then by a Souldier then by a Merchaâ—t then by a Woman and all these in their several 〈◊〉 may have an equal Right to this Estate though they be every one of different Capacities pag. 149. Though he sayes the same Laws give equal temporal Rights to Persons of all kind of Capacities yet among the Instances he gives to demonstrate his Assertion there is never an one of his Capacity and therefore it reaches not his case His Instances of a Iudge a Souldier a Merchant a Woman are all civil of the same Nature with the Laws by which they claim but so is not the Priest he claiming in a capacity of a contrary Nature to the Laws by which he claims for the Laws are human and civil but the capacity he claims in is Spiritual and Religious He has one instance more but that no more to the purpose then the former Suppose sayes he pag. 149. the King have by the Law a temporal Right to one Estate and some of his Subjects an equal Right to another Eâ—â—ate you shall hear says he T. E's wise way of arguing The King claims a temporal thing so doth the Subject the King claims by a temporal right so doth the Subject the King hath no need of Scripture to prove his right no more hath the Subject yet for all this their Claim is not one and the same they must stay there the King must acknowledge himself no more a King then the Subject or else the cases are not parallel In this as in the next his Sophistry is evident This is not as he floutingly calls it my wise way of arguing but his foul way of perverting Arguments I argued not between a King and a Subject but between a Priest and a Parishioner showing the contrariety of the Capacities in which they claimed This â—e turns off from the Priest to the King as if the King's case and the Priest's were so just alike that whatsoever is said of the Priest's case must needs agree to the King 's whereas the Priest's case is as contrary to the King 's as it is to the Parishioners for the King claims in a civil capacity as well as the Parishioner but the Priest claims in a Religious capacity contrary to both A King and Subject may well have equal right to their respective Estates by the same Laws because though the qualifications under which they claim differ in degrees yet they differ not in Nature they are both civil and both oâ— the same Nature with those Laws by which they claim But with the Priest it is quite otherwise The qualification under which he claims Tythes is quite contrary to that under which the Parishioner claims his Estate and no less to the Laws also by which himself claims Tythes The rest of this Section he spends in Railing and most part also of the rest of his Book in which I do not intend to encounter him as being neither able nor willing to match him therein His following Sections therefore being fuller of reviling Language then solid Arguments and more replâ—â—e with â—ailing then with Reason I shall make the fewer Remarques upon and the rather for that I have in a deliâ—erate progress through all his three Periods of time sufficiently disproved already all his pretences of a divine Right to Tythes and made it maniâ—est tâ—at the Institution of Tythes since the times of the Gospel was Popish that Popery had made her encroachments in the Church before Tythes were settled on it that those settlements of Tythes that were afterwards made proceeded from a blind zeal and superstitious Devotion grounded on Principles repugnant to the true Christian Religion which I recommend to the consideration and Conscience of every serious Reader and proceed In his 27. Section he quarrels at three passages of mine One is the description of a Ministers maintenance from Luke 10. 7 8. and Matth. 10. 11. Against which he objects pag. 156. That if this order of taking Meat and Drink then were a perpetual and general rule to all Ministers to the World's end so must also all the rest of the rules their mentioned be That does not follow If some of those Rules had relation to that particular service only yet this of maintenance was more general and therefore he may observe that when our Saviour afterwards gave his more general Commission for the preaching of the Gospel to all Nations he made no new Provision for their maintenance which argues he intended the continuance of that which he had before appointed and this also is confirmed by the practice of the Apostles afterward especially of the Apostle Paul who though he was not imployed in that particular Message on which the other Apostles were sent for he was not converted till some Years after yet refers directly to the maintenance there appointed Have we not power to Eat and to Drink 1 Cor. 9. 4. So that we see the Apostle understood that maintenance which Christ had at first appointed was to continue and accordingly asserts his power to receive it long after that particular occasion on which it was first given was over and yet he did not observe those other directions which were given on that particular occasion for he both preach't to the Gentiles and had Money in his Purse and that of his own earning too The next passage is this He says pag. 157. I saucily ask Kings and Princes where Christ gave them power to alter that Maintenance and set up another in the room of it arrogantly telling them 〈◊〉 Corah's phrase they take too much upon them c. The sauâ—e is of his own making the question only mine and that made not to Kings and Princes but to the Priests for when I had asked Where hath Christ given power to any man to alter this Maintenance and set up another in the room of it I add Doubtless if any such authority were given it concerns them
Marrâ—age These were the same sort of Guests mentioned by Luke who were in the Highways and Hedges and yet we see this great King did not command or impower his Servants to use any other Compulsion to them than an Invitation As many as ye shall find â—id 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Marriage Thuâ— that place in Luke being aptly explained by this in Matthew it appears that those words Compel them to come in import no more than Bid or Invite them to the Marriage Besides if we look further into the Parable we shall find that when the King taking a view of his Guests saw one there which had not on a wedding Garment and asked him Friend how camest thou in hither not having on a Wedding Garment The man was speechless and the King commanded his Servants to bind that man Hand and Foot and cast him into utter Darkness Which plainly proves he was not brought in against his Will he was not driven in by force nor dragged in by Head and Shoulders for if he had he had then had a fair Plea to make a ready Answer to return to the Question How camest thou in hither c I was driven in by stripes I was drawn in by force I was brought in against my will might he have said Had it been so he needed not have been speechless as it seems he was And how again could it have stood with the divine justice of that great King to sentence a man to be bound and cast into utter Darkness for coming in thither without a Wedding Garment if the man had been brought in by force against his own mind and that too by his Command But it is manifest that no such forcible violent penal Compulsion as the Priest aims at was commanded or intended by our Saviour in this Parable and consequently that the word compel in this place Luke 14. 23. is misunderstood at least misapplied by the Priest and his Yes surely is surely false But he urges the Judgment of Augustine That to compel Men to that which is good is very lawful and an Act of necessary Charity to their Souls yea a duty of Christian-Princes c. pag. 235. Is it so How chanced it then that they who being invited to the Supper came not were not â—ompelled to come Doth the Priest think the Maâ—teâ— of the House who made the Invitation did not know what Charity was necessary to thâ—ir Souls or was ignorant of the duty of a Christian Prince Would he have omitted an Act of such necessary Charity had it indeed been Charity or neglected a duty had it been a duty But let us examin this Position and see if there be any thing of truth or reason iâ— it The Position is That to compel men to that which is good is very lawful and an Act of nâ—cessary Charity to their Souls yea a duty of Christian Princes First who shall judge whether the thing to be compelled to is good or no They that are to be compelled or he that is to compel If they that are to be compelled may judge it is not likely that they should judge that good which they must be compelled to for if they judged it good they would not need to be compelled to it If he that is to compel must judge then whatsoever he shall judge to be good be it never so bad that must bear the name of Good and all must be compelled to receive it Secondly concerning Christian Princes the like dissatisfaction may arise Possibly they who are compelled to that as Good which they believe is not good may question whether they are Christian Princes that so compel On the other hand what Prince is there throughout that part of the World which is called Christendom that is not ready on all Occasions to assert himself a Christian Prince Now therefoâ—e if every one that holds himself a Christian Prince not only lawfully may but also both in point of duty and as an Act of necessary Charity to the Souls of others ought to compel men to that which he judges good what hinders then but he whose Ancestors received from Rome the Title of Most Christian King and who professeth himself a Son of the Church of Rome lawfully may yea must according to this Position both as his own duty and as an Act of necessary Charity to their Souls compel all Protestants in his Dominions to the Romish Religion which he judges good Thus Reader thou seest the horrid Consequence of this false and Antichristian Position But this is the old Argument of the Papists long since exploded and detested by men of Reason and Ingenuity though sometimes as now made use of at a pinch of need to countenance a corrupt and selfish Interest But he shews himâ—â—lf a right Romanist He hath not only the Popish Argument for Persecution but the Popish Cloak also to cover himself withal It is not says he pag. 236. the Priests compel them but the Laws of the Land The Priests indeed see them in desperate Heresies and most wicked Sâ—hism and in pity to their Souls admonish them warn them 1 Thess. 5. 14. and labour to convince them by Arguments yea at length they use the Censures of the Church and finally as the last remedy complain to the secular Magistrate c. What did Bonner more or the worst of Popish Bishops They did not use to Burn meâ— themselves but they got a Law made that such as they declared Hereticks should be Burnt and then they sentenced those for Hereticks that would not bow to them and their Inventions and prayed the Magistrates to burn them What odds in all this between the Popish Priests and these save only that these are not yet come to Popish Fire and Fagot as himself well observes pag. 237 But besides this is it all true that the Priest says here Do they descend by these steps to their Church-Censures and secular Complaint Do they admonish Do they warn Do they ever attempt to convince by Arguments Whom of a thousand is lie able to name for an Instance of such procedure yet he says This is no more than S. Paul threatned 2 Cor. â—0 6. and acted also in delivering the incestuous Corinthian to Satan punishing his outward man for the health of his Soul 1 Cor. 5. 5. S. Paul indeed did admonish often did warn frequently did labour to convince by Arguments and that earnestly but I never read before that he complained to the secular Magâ—â—â—rate or so much as threatned so to do I am sure the Scriptures he hath quoted will not justifie this Assertion But if S. Paul did not complain to the secular Magistrate then this which the Priests confesses they do is more than S. Paul did and the Priest in saying it is no more is found in a downright Falshood But to proceed I said in Answer to the former Priest If Christ gave no Authority to his Apostles to compel any to hear them to be sure
pag. 333. Had T. E câ—eared his Brethren from the Imposture he had effectually convicted me of virulency I hope the Reader will here find my Brethren so effectually cleared from the Priest's false Charge of â—mpâ—sture that he will see the Priest effectually convicted of virulency even according to his own confâ—ssion But leaving that to the Readâ—â—'s judgment let me now take the liberty to Expostulate a little with the Priest and ask him why he did not Answer those Grounds and Reasons which in the Book before-quoted out of which he piâ—k't this passage to cavil at the Quaker gave why we deny the World's Teachers He charges me with leaving my Argument to catch at or play upon a word or phrase Vindicat. pag. 311. But has not he charged his own guilt upon me Has he not here catched at and plaid upon a word or phrase and let the Arguments pass untouched Again his Brother Priest says in another Case though without Cause as I have already shewed The Quakers may be ashamed to let the Objection grow old and â—ver-worn before they have either confessed the Truth or â—ade some satisfactory Reply thereunto Right of Tythes pag. 240. But how long have these Objectioâ—s lain against the Priests it is little less than twenty years since they were first printed Might not they well be ashamed if they were not past shame who in all this time have neither confessed the Truth nor made any Satisfactory Reply to the Objections This Priest could find in his heart to look among the Grounds and Reasons there given to see if he could find any thing to carp at but let whoso will answer them for him He had not it seems Ingenuity enough to confess the Truth nor Courage enough to undertake a Reply to the Reasons Nay he did not so much as attempt to answer that one Reason out of which he took his Cavil viâ— That they are such Priests as bear Rule by their Means That they are indeed such is too notorious to be denyed and according as their Means are greâ—ter or less so do they bear more or less Rule over the people What Parish is it that knows not this bâ— sad Eâ—perience Yet hath he neither confessed the Truth of this nor made any much less a satisfactory Reply thereunto Besides in that very page out of which he catched that word he hath so played upon the Priests are charged to be such Shepherds that seek for their Gain from their Quarters and can never have enough which the Lord sent Isaiah to cry out against c. Isa. 56. 11. They are charged to be such Shepherds that seek after the Fleece and clothe with the Wool and feed on the Fat which the Lord sent Ezâ—kiel to cry out against c. Ezek. 34. They are charged to be such Prophets and Priests that Divine for Money and Preach for Hire which the Lord sent Micah to cry against and whilst we put intâ— their Mouthes they preached Peace to us but now we do not put into their Mouthes they prepare War against us Mic. 3. 11. May not these Priests be ashamed to let these Objections and many more in the same Book lie near Twenty Years against them and neither confess the Truth nor make any satisfactory Râ—ply thereunto Had it not beeâ— more for this Priest's Credit to have endeavour'd at least to remove these Objections by a sober Answer to the Grounds and Reasons in the fore-mentioned Book given than to catch at a word as he has done and only play upon a Phrase to exercise upon it his abusive Wit and Sophistry as he most falsly charges me to have done But let this suffice to manifest the Injustice of these Priests in charging the Quakers and me with those very things which they themselves are so deeply guilty of § 30. Now for a Conclusion of this Treatise I recommend to the Reader 's diligent Oâ—servation the following Particulars as a brief Râ—capitulation of the whole 1. That Tythes or an exact tenth part were never due by the Law of Nature by the eternal moral Law Thatâ— there is no Eternal Reason for that part nor Internal Rectitude in it 2. That Abraham's giving the Tythes of the Spoyls to Melchizedec and Iacob's Vowing to give the tenth part of his Increase to God being both of them spoâ—taneouâ— and frâ—e Acts are no obliging Precedents to any to give Tythes now 3. That Tythes are not now due by vertue of that Mosaick Law by which they once were due that Law being peculiar to the Iewish Polity and taken away by Christ at the dissolution of that Polity 4. That Tythes were never commanded by Christ Iesus to be paid under the Gospel nor ever demanded by any of the Apostles or other Ministers in their time That there is no Direction no Exhortation in any of the Apostolick Epistles to the Churches then gathered for the payment of Tythes either then or in after times That there is no mention at all of Tythes they are not so much as named in any of the New-Testament Writings with respect to Gospel-Maintenance although the Maintenance of Gospel-Ministers be therein treated of In a word That Tythes were not either demâ—nded or paid in the first and purest Ages of the Christian Church 5. That those Donations of Tythes which are urged by the Priests from Ethelwolf and others were made by Papists not in their Civil but Religious Capacity and were the Effects of the Corruption of Religion 6. That Tythes being claimed as due out of the Profits only those Donors could extend their Donations no further than to tâ—e Tythes of those Profits that did belong to themselves and of which they were the right Owners But the prâ—seâ—t Profits not belonging to them but to the present Occupants who are as really the right Owners of these Profits that arise now as they then were of those Profits that arose then and the present Occupants who are the right Owners of the present Profitâ— not having made any Donation of Tythes it follows that Tythes are not now due by vertue of any Donation from the right Owners 7. That the Laws which have been made for â—he payment of Tythes not making nor intending to make the Priests a Right to Tythes but supposing they had a Right to Tythes before if that Supposition prove to be false as it plainly and evidently doth and it now appears that in very deed the Priests had â—o right to Tythes before then haâ—e the Priests no Right to Tythes now by vâ—rtue of these Laws For those Laws not intending to make the Priests a 〈◊〉 Right but by mistakâ— supposing they had an old one that old one being trâ—ed and â—â—oved 〈◊〉 they have now neither old nor new Tâ—us it appears that the Priests have no Right to Tythes by the Law of God no Right to Tythes by the gift of the right Owners no Right to Tythes by the Laws of the Land 8. Tâ—at Tythes as taken in this