Articles of Faith then surely they were such before else the bare determination of them would not have made them such Besides if there were Truth in what he sayes that the particulars he has mentioned had not been determined as Articles of Faith before Ethelwolf's time nor could have been Popish without such a determination yet very many other Instances may be given of Doctrines and Practices properly Popish sufficient to prove not the Church of Rome in general only but the then Church of England also which was a Member of that and for at least seven continued Successions received her Metropolitan Bishop out of the Romish Church to be Popish according to the Definition his Brother Priest has given of Popery in his Friendly Conference pag. 149. § 21. But to clear those times from the imputation of Popery he undertakes to reply to the Instances I had given in my former Book First he sayes Fâ—r those pag. â—01 the Quaker lays not much streâ—â— upon them and there are some of them allowed by the best Protestants and all men that understand Antiquity know those â—ecretal Epistles to be forged which first attributed these Constitutions to those early Popes Is not this a pretty way of replying to say his Opponent lays not much stress on them what may one not answer after this rate Next he sayes there are some of them allow'd by the best Protestants but which are they why did he not distinguish betwixt those he doth allow and those he doth not allow The Instances were The use of Holy Water to drive away Devils said to be Instituted by Alexander the first The Consecration of Chrism once a Year by Fabianus That all should stand up at the Reading of the Gospel by Anastatius That Wax Tapers should be Consecrated on the holy Sabbath by Zozimus That Processions should be made on Sundayes by Agapetus Some of these he sayes are allowed by the best Protestants but which they are he keeps to himself Lastly he sayes All men that understand Antiquity know those Decretal Epistles to be forged which attribute those Consâ—itutions to these early Popes Whether those Epistles be forged or no I will not undertake to determin nor need Iâ— for I delivered not those Instances upon my own Authority but gave the Authors out of whom I gathered them namely Fasâ—ic Temp. Platina and Burdegalensis to which more might be added if need were But suppose what he â—ayes that those Decretal Epistles are forged yet all men that understand Antiquâ—ty know that the things there instanced were in use before Ethelwolf's time and therefore must needs be instituted before So that his exception against the Decretal Epistles is but an idle shift for if it should be granted that those Constitutions were not made by those early Popes to whom they are attributed yet certain it is they were made by Popes earlier then Ethelwolf's Charter for Tythes which is enough to prove that Popery had made her â—ncroâ—chments in the Church before this dear Donation and famous Charter was made Thus we see his tripartitâ— Answer comes to just nothing and doubtless he spake considerately when he said pag. â—â—4 I will content my self to Reply to the Quaker's Instances for it can hardly be supposed he could expect by this Reply to content any boâ—y but himself But perhaps he look't upon those things as too immateriaâ— to deserve his notice and therefore coâ—tentâ—d himself to pass over them as lightly as he could as before he did Ethelwolf's being absolveâ— from his Vows by the Pope going on Pilgrimage to Rome and making such liberal Donations to uphold Superstition there But now that he comes to instances which he accounts more material it is to be hoped he will give a more material Reply First â—aith he concerning deposing of Kings T. E. saith Pope Zachary took upon him to depose K. Chilperick and absolved his Subjects from their allegiance Thus he sayes is a Forgery invented by the Champions of the Pope's Supremacy but denyed by the French who do assure 〈◊〉 that the deposing of K. Chilperick was done by Pipâ—n himself by the consent of the whole Kingdom of France before any notice was given to the Pope about it pag. 125. That the Reader may be the more able to judge of the Truth of this matter I will give him the words of the Authors themselves by whom it is delivered so many of them as I have by me which are but a few in respect of the many by whom this passage is recounted First therefore the Author of Fascic Temp. ad annum 744 sayes thus of Pope Zachaâ—ias Ipse Regem Francorum scilicet Hylderienâ—â— deposuit in locum ejus Pippinum instituit quia utilior fuit Et hic patet potesta Ecclesiae qâ—anta â—uerit hoc tempore qui regnum illud famosissimum transtulit de veris haeredibus ad genus â—ippini propter legitimam cauâ—am i. e. He deposed the King of France namely Hylderick and set Pippin in his place because he was more useful And here sayes he it appears how great the power of the Church was in this time in that he Translated the most famous Kingdom from the true Heirs to the Race of Pippin for a lawful cause platina though he mentions not the deposing of Childerick yet the setting up of Pippin by the Pope he does in these words At Pipinus regnandi cupidus legatos suos ad Pontificem mittit eumque rogat ut Regnum Franciae sibi auctoritate sua confirmet Amuit Pontisex ejas postulatis atque it a ejus auctoritate regnum Franciae Pipino ad judicatur i. e. But Pipin having a desire 〈◊〉 Reign sends his Ambassadors to the Popeâ— and 〈◊〉 him to confirm the Kingdom of France to him BY HIS AUTHORITY â— The Pope grants his requests and so BY HIS AUTHORITY the Kingdom of France was adjudged to Pipin Burdegalensis sayes of Pope Zachary Chronograph l. 2. ad annum 741. 〈◊〉 caepit Francos juramento 〈◊〉 absolvere i. e. This Pope was the first that absolved the French from their Oath of Allegiance For which he quotes Aemil. lib. 2. And a little after of Childâ—rick he hath these words Childerico 〈◊〉 Rege in Monasteriam truso Pipinus concilio Pontiâ—icis a Galliae Proceribus Rex declaratur eta S. Boâ—ifacio Germanorum Apostolo inungitur i. e. Châ—lderick the French King being thrust into a Monastery Pipin is by the counsel of the Pope declared King by the Nobility of France and ancinted by St. Boniface the Apostle of the Germans Iohn Fox in his Book of Martyrs Vol. 1. pag. 116. â—ath it thus By the Authority of the said Arch-Bishop Boniface which be received from Pope Zaehary Childericus King of France was deposed from the right of his Crown and Pipinâ—â— the betrayer of his Master was confirmed or rather intruded â—n Perkins against Coccius prob pag. 223. sayes Depositio Childerici Francorum Regis suit a Proceribus et Popâ—lo
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-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
That Offa the magnificent King granted out of his Kingdom a set Rent or Imposition called Rome-scot to St. Peter's Vicar the Bishop of Rome and himself obtained of the said Bishop of Rome that the Church of St. Albane the Protomartyr of the English Nation might faithfully collect and reserve to their own use the same Rome-scot throughout all the Province of Hertford c. We sâ—e now what respect what regard what obsâ—rvance what veneration what subjâ—ction and obedience was used towards the Popes of Rome by the Kings and Clergy of England even before Ethelwolf's time much more was it increased afterwards as times grew worse and Popes higher That the Church of Rome was then idolatrous and that grosly too in the Worship of Images I have shewed before as also that divers Monks were sent into England by the Pope to set up their Latin Service Masses Letanies Ceremonies and other Romish Ware here That this Romish Ware was set up here cannot be doubted since Theodore one of those Monks which the Pope thus sent was made Arch-Bishop of Canterbury From all which let the Reader judge whether the Clergy of those times was Popish or no. But if they were 't is much alike for ought I seâ— to the Priest For he says pag. 102. Suppose again the Saxon Priests had been Papists that would not have made the Donation of Tythes invalid because Tythes are God's Right and the Grant was intended to God So that how bad soever the Clergy was to whom Tythes were given 't is all one the Donation if he may have his will must stand But why Because says he Tythes are God's Right But how come Tythes or Tenths to be Gods Right more then Nineths or Eighths He begs the Question on and gives it for proof He adds The Grant was intended to God He said himself but a few Lines before It was for the Maintenance of the English Clergy using the words of Ingulf Universam dotaverat Ecclesiam Anglicanam i. e. He endowed the whole Church of England But suppose the Grant intended to God must all Grants stand then that were intended to God A notable way indeed to revive all the old Grants and Donations which in the thickest Darkness of Popish Ignorance were by blind Zeal and superstitious Devotion given to Holy Church as they called it and intended to God But what thinkest thou Reader makes this Priest play the Advocate thus for God and stickle so hard for God's part is it his Care for God or his Love to himself thou shalt see anon the Reason He intends to make himself God's Receiver and therefore no wonder if he talk so much of God's part But he sayes The Clergy of that Agâ— were God's only publick Ministers It seems then he can be content to call the Popish Clergy God's publick Ministers but I hope he sees the consequent that then thâ— popish Church was God's publick Church and the popish Worship Gods publick Worship also and where then was the Church Worship and Ministry of Antichrist so much cry'd out against by God's Confessors and holy Witnesses in almost every Age Were they the publick Ministers of God who believed and held the Doctrine of Purgatory of praying for the Dead of sacrificing for the Dead of praying to Saints of worshipping Relicks of Auricular Confession of Pilgrimages of Consecrations of Water Oyl Salt Crism of Latin Servicâ— Masses Letanies and other Ceremonies of the Church of Rome By this Reader thou mayst guess what a kind of Minister he himself is He adds The Donors supposed them a good Ministry and as such endowed them for they esteemed them to be God's Receivers p. 103. There 's no doubt but the Donors supposed them a good Ministry but that Supposition doth neither make nor prove them so And seeing they were not what the Donors supposed them to be there is no reason why that Donation should stand which was made upon such a mistake and without which it had not been made For it cannot be supposed the Donâ—â—s would have made such a Donation had they not by Mistake supposed that Ministry to which they made it to be what it was not and Reason would that what was done upon a mistaken Supposition should when the Mistake appears be â—oid But if all that has been given upon wrong Suppositions must stand his Office of Receiver may in time grow very considerable for not here to mention all other popish Gifts what does he imagine the Turks think of their Priests Do not they suppose them to be a good Ministry and as such endow them Do not they esteem them to be God's Receivers Whatever Donations then amongst them have been made or shall be upon this Supposition shall be valid and in force according to his Argument in succeeding Ages and if ever the Turks should be prevailed upon to assume the Name and Profession of Christianity though otherwise sufficiently erroneous and corrupt this Priest stands ready to be the Receiver of what was given to the Turkish Priests up on the same Reasons by which he claims what was given to the popish Priest viz That the Donâ—rs supposed them to be a good Ministry and as such endowed them that they esteemed them to be God's Receivers that the Grant was intended to God that if there had been a Fault in the least that would not prejudice the Masters Title and that if they had been a Turkish Clergy and forfeited their own Right they could not forfeit his The other Priest one may see has the Office in his Eye already for he says Suppose the Turkish Empire through God's Mercy should be converted to Christianity may not the Muffti himself and those whom T. E. calls Emaums which are the Turkish Priests together with all the Mosche which are their Temples and Revenâ—es now belonging to them be reconsecrated to Christianity Vindic. pag. 314. Judge now Reader whether with these men all be not Fish that come to Net and whether it is likely they would stick at any thing that is like to be gainful who have already contrived a Reconsecration of the Turkish Priests Revenues But to go on The Author of the Right of Tythes pursues his Argument to the same purpose again pag. 104. sayes he of Ethelwolf 's Clergy If they were erroneous neither Prince nor People knew it and they did not give these to maintain their Errors but to maintain that which they believed to be a good Ministry and the true Worship of God and therefore the Donation remains good May not all this be said of the worst state of the Roman Church nay may it not be said of the very Turk whom I mention not for comparison but illustration sake Does either Prince or People know that their Priests are erroneous or do they endow them to maintain their Errors nay do they not give their Endowments to maintain that which they believe to be a good Ministry and the true Worship of God But must those
that the Mystery of Iniquity which began to work in their dayes hath continued working ever since and in every Age successively hath brought forth more and more of its work So that Popery was not All brought forth in a Day nor in an Age but was introduced gradually And as the true Religion of Christ was instituted prosessed and practised some time before it was distinguished by the Name Christian. So the false Religion was received also before it was denominated Popish yet this false Religion was really in its Nâ—ture Popish before it obtained to be called Popish as the true Religion was really in its Nature Christian before it received the Name Christian. He therefore that will receive whatsoever he finds practised or commended in the Church before the Name of Popery prevailed may be very likely to receive something which was brought forth by the working of the mystery of Iniquity and is really and truly of the Nature of Popery But the Priest sayes as he has said before more then once If the Saxons in K. Ethelwolf's tiâ—e were Papists it will not follow that all their Donations are void I say so too Some of their Donations were meerly civil made by them as men and Members of a civil Society but this of Tythes was the product of their Religion and of that part of it wherein they were most corrupt So that although All their Donations are not void yet if any at all of their Donations are void there is none which with more reason should be so then this of Tythes Again he sayes Suppose they were Papists in some things yet it follows not that giving Tythes was a Popish Act for all the Acts of Papists are not Popish But I have proved that the giving of Tythes was a Popish Act proceeding from such Motives and attended with such Circumstances as are repugnant to true Protestant Principles But sayes he pag. 121. The Protestants have disputed as much and as well for Tythes as ever the Papists did If by Protestants he means his Brethren the Priests I wonder not at all at it Tythes are their Diana the Oyl that nourishes their Lamp pag. 13. No wonder then if they dispute foâ— Tythes and that much too but how well let others judge Yet commonly the Dispute ends on their parts with Club-Law and in the case of Tythes an Imprisonment and trebble dammages are Ratio ultima Cleri the Clergy's last Argument and many times their first too but alwayes the strongest and that they most rely on He adds It is a Popish Opinion That the Bishop of Rome can exempt men from paying Tythes 'T is so indeed but it is the subsequent of another Popish Opinion That the Bishop of Rome can injoyn men to pay Tythes So that the particular exemption from Tythes and the institution of Tythes are deâ—ived from one and the same Power And if the payment of Tythes had not been settled and established by the Authority of the Bishop of Rome the Opinion of his power to exempt men from paying Tythes had not prevailed as it did But do not these Popish exemptions remain still among the Protestants Those Lands which the Pope made Tythe free are they not Tythe free still What signifies that I pray Is that an argument of the divine Right of Tythes and that Tythes are due by the moral eternal Law Or is it not rather a fair intimation that Tythes are indeed but of human Institution and that from the Bishops of Rome too whose exemptions are in force and observed here even to this day Then he sayes I begun too low by far for if Popery came not into the Church till about seven Hundred Years after Christ according to T. E's proof then Tythes were much ancienter then Popery for they were paid sayes he and declared to be due to the Church at least five Hundred Years before In all this he is wrong For first I have proved Popery did come into the Church before seven Hundred Years after Christ before any settled payment of Tythes Next he neither hath proved nor can prove by any Testimony of credit in this case that Tythes were paid and declared to be due to the Christian Church at least five Hundred Years before He may talk of the Apostles Canons and Clement's Constitutions and be laugh't at for his pains but no Authentick evidence of those times can be produced to prove the payment of Tythes The oldest of his Authors that mentions Tythes is Origen who grounded his judgment on the Lâ—vitical Law and thought it necessary that that Law should stand in force according to the Letter which could not be consistent with Christianity But although Origen was a learned man yet Perkins says he was Errorum plenus full of Errors and Hierom calls his Writings Venâ—nata Venemous and among the rest of his Errors Purgatory was one as witnesseth the same Perkins against Coâ—â—ius Probl. pag. 175. So that if he will fetch Tythes from Origen he may take Purgatory along with them if he please However he shall find that some of those Opinions which afterwards were most rightly denominated Popish were by the Mystery of Iniquity brought into the Church as early as his earliest mention of Tythes let him climb as high as he can § 20. But to clear Tythes from a Popish Institution he sayes pag. 122. That most of those Doctrines which are properly called Popery and which first caused and still justifie the Protestants separation from Rome were not maintained as Articles of Faith 〈◊〉 noâ— in the Church of Rome it self at the time of this Donation Anno 855. Of this he gives several Instances pag. 123. the first is this The Marriage of Priests was not forbidden till the time of Gregory the 7th above two hundred years after For this he cites Polid. Virgill de ver invent l. 5. c. 4. But how unfairly he has quoted his Author and how foully he hath abused his Reader let Polydore's own words shew in the place cited where having declared how it fared with the Eastern Priests in that case he adds At occidentalibus paulatim est Connubium abrogatum Syricius enim priums â—acerdotibus et diaconis ut ait Gratianus distinctione 82. â—onjugio interdicit qui circiter annum salutis humane 387. federe caepit i. e. But Marriage was taken from the Priests in the West by degrees For Syricius who began to sit in the Roman Chair about the year of man's Salvaâ—ion 387. was the first that forbad Marriage to Priests and Deacons as Gratian says in his 82 Distinction Idem instituit says Polydore ut quicunque aut viduam aut secundam duxisset uxorem ab ordine sacerdotali pelleretuâ— sic per hoc voluit ut deinceps Digamus ad officium facerdotis non admittertur i. e. The same Syricius ordained that whatsoever Priest had married a Widow or a Second Wife should be put out of his Priesthood so by this he would not have any one that
me indeed and which is worse false News too How chance he quoted no Author of his News Is not that a sign 't is News of his 〈◊〉 making I confess I never heard before that in the very beginnings of Christianity there were any such Canons made or any such Diocesses as he dreams of It behoves him therefore to set forth his Author left himself be repuâ—ed and that deservedly a Raiser and Spreader oâ— falsâ— News But in the mean time let us â—ift his News a little and see how well it hangs together He told us but now that Tmothy and Titus werâ— fixed at Ephesus and in Crete and that by the Apostles themselves though he does not know by whom yet we find not only the Apostle Paul sendâ—ng Tychicus a dear Brother and faithful Minister in the Lord Ephes. 6. 21. to the Ephesians 2 Tim. 4. 12. But Timothy also at Corinth at Athens at Thessâ—lonica at Philippi at Rome c. So likewise for Titus whom he fixes in Crete Doth not the Apostle speak of sending Artemas and Tychicus thither and of sending for Titus to Nicoâ—â—lis Tit. 3. 12 Doth he not intimate that Zenas and Apollo one of whom was an Expounder of the Law the other an eloquent Preacher of the Gospel were at Crete ver 13 â—nd did not Titus himself travel up and down into divers Cities and Countries in the labour of the Gospel Was he not at Corinth once and again anâ— went he not also unto Dalmatia 2 Tim. 4 10 Now if Timothy and Titus had been fixt as he fancies at Ephesus and in Crete if Bishops and Pastors had been fixt by the Apostles in all eminent Churches in the several Cities they had converted and if in those times in which fell the very beginnings of Christianity there had been any such Diocesses as he dreams of or any such strict Canons as he conjectures made against the Clergy of one Diocess going into another to officiate Pray how did Tychicus Apollo and otherâ— observe those Canons when they went as they did to Ephesus and Crete On how well did Timothy and Titus obey them when they went to officiate at Corinth Thessolonica Philippi Româ— and other places which according to this Priest were distinct Diocesses belonging to otheâ— men into which by the Canon they were strictly forbidden to go to officiate Doth not this discover the emptiness of his story and manifest the falness of his News But we may guess at his date of Christianity by the after-Instance he gives of a Canon of the General Council of Chalcedon the date of which he willingly leaves out but that Council was held according to Genebrard under Pope Leo the first in the Yeaâ— 454. Was this in the very beginnings of Christianity No nor of the Apostacy from Christianity neither for much Corruption both of Doctrine and Practice was in the Church before that time Thus Reader thou mayst see what his confident talk of strict Canons and Diocesses in the very beginnings of Christianity is come to Would any man of honesty ingenuity or modesty impose such falshoods upon ignorant Readers or expose such folly to judicious Eyeâ— He talks also pag. 225. of a Synod among the Britains held by S. Patrick anno 456. but without any mention of Parisâ—es and very confidently takes for granted that long before the Popes of Rome so much as directed any thing hâ—re the Brittains had fixed Arch-Bishops Bishops and Priests by which if he means those Priests were fixâ—d to Parishes as now they are which I observe he doth not expresly say but only that they were fixed they may believe it that dare take his word for it but prove it he never can Selden in his History of Tythes Chap. 9. Sect. 1. shews the contrary But the division of Parishes aâ—ong the Saxons the Priest ascribes to Honorius the fifth Arch-Bishop of Canterbury about the Year â—4â— or to Theodorâ—s the next bâ—t one in that Sea 〈◊〉 tâ—enty or thirty Years after Hence I perceivâ— he thinks he hath sufficient ground to deride me for asking If it was not a Pope that divided Provinces into Parishes and set up Parish-Priests Whether Parishes were divided by Honorius Theodorus or some other of later time I think not worth Inquiery I know the common Opinion attributes this work to Honoriâ—s which yet is doubted by many and some of great judgment It sufficeth my purpose that whether Parishes were set out and Parish-Priests fixt thereto by Honorius or Theodorus it was done by the Pope's power for either of these received his Archiepiscopal Authority from Rome Honorius says Bede Eccles. Hist. l. 2. c. 18. received the Pall of his Arch-Bishoprick from Honorius at that time Pope of Rome and withal a Letter in which the Pope grants to this Honorius Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and to Paulinus then Arch-Bishop of York to whom also he sent a Pall this power at thâ—ir request that which soever of them should die first the surviver might by the authority of the Pope's Command make such an Ordination of another in his room as should be pleasing to God This shews they received their authority from the Pope and what they acted by that authority was done by the Pope's power If therefore Honorius as Arch-Bishop of Canterbury divided that Province into Parishes and set up Parish Priests therein it cannot be denyed but those Parishes were divided and Priests set up by the Pope whose Instrument Honorius was therein and by whose power it was done And thus seems Caâ—den to understand it in his Brittania pag. 100. wherâ— he says When the Bishops of Rome had assigned several Churches to several Priests and 〈…〉 unto them Honorius Arch-Bishop of Canterbury about the Year of our Redemption â—36 began 〈◊〉 to divide England into Parishes as we read in the History of Canterbury So that he refers this Act of Honorius to the Bishop of Rome not oâ—ly in point of power but of example also In imitation then of what the Popes had donâ— and by vertue of Authority received from the Pope were these Parishes set out and were Parish-Priests at first set up whoever was the Pâ—pe's Agent therein The Priest conâ—ludes this Section thus And now says he we see T. E. hath neither Learniâ—g nor Truth in him who attributes our fixing to a â—ope when the Apostles themselves shewed the way in this Practice not intending that any â—agabond Speakers should be allowed after once the Christian Church was settled pag. 22â— I am better acquainted with my self than to pretend to any great store of Learning and with his manner of writing than to regard his Râ—flection on the Truth of what I have written With great readiness I submit both to the Censure of the judicious and impartial Reader But as little Learning as he is pleased to allow me I have enough at least to let him see that for all his great stock of Learning wiâ—h the conceit of which he is so over-blown
by just and lawful means to do And for that Book it self of Cyprians de Vnitâ—te Ecclesiae out of which the Priest makes this quotation for Tythes although it be not wholly rejected yet is it suspected to have been corrupted in more places then oâ—e Perkins against Coccius sayes expresly of it Cypriano liber de unitate Ecclesia corruptus est ad stabiliendum Primatum Petri Problem pag. 14. i. e. Cyprians Book of the Vnity of the Church is corrupted to establish the Primacy of Peter of which he gives divers instances The Priest goes on To this sayes he of Cyprian we may add the Testimony of that antient Book which â—ears the Name of â—lements Constitutions What would not he stick to add how adulterate sâ—evâ—r that might seem to add some fresh colour to his decayed and dying Cause Tâ—ese Constitutions which bear the Name of Clement are less Authentick if less can be then those fore-mentioned Canons which are called Apostolical Perkins in his Problem against Coccius pag. 8. proves from Eusâ—bius â—uffiâ—us and others that There are many things 〈◊〉 under the Name of Clement Romanus of which having given diverâ— instances he adds The eight Books aâ—so of Apostolical Constitutions written by the same Clement desâ—rve no greater credit And for Selden's Opinion of them take it in his own words For Constitutiâ—ns of the Church if you could believe thosâ— supposâ—d to be made by the Apostles and to be Collected by Pope Clement the first you might be sure both of payment in the Apostles times as also of an express Opinion as antient for the right of Tenths But â—o man that willingly and most grosly deceives not himself can believe that this Constitution or divers others there are of any time near the Age of the Apostles but many hundred Years after The little worth and lâ—ss Truth of the whole Volumn is enough discovered by divers of the learned and it was long since branded for a Counterfâ—it in an â—eâ—umenical Couâ—cil Synod 6. in Trullo Thus he in his History of Tythes c. 4. pag. 42. and much more to the same purpose in his Review of that Chapter but this I take to be sufficient to detect the falsness of those Constitutions and my Opponents weakness in urging them His next Author is Ambrose out of whose Sermons 33. and 34. he takes two quotationâ— The first thus It is not sufficient for us to bear the Name of Christians if we do not the works of Christians now the Lord Commands us to pay our Tythes yearly of all our Fruits and Cattel pag. 80. The Particle now in this quotation is not in Ambrosâ— but added by the Priest The other quotation is long but to the same purpose and that which seems most material â—n it is the latter clause that of all the Substance which God gives a man he â—ath reserved the tenth part to himself and therefore it is not lawful for a man to retain it Here he sayes The Lord Commands us to pay Tythes yearly and that he hath reserved the tenth of all to himself but the Text he offers in proof thereof he fetches from the Levitical Law which neither is obliging to Christians nor do the Priests themselves claim by it nay they renounce it as may be seen both in the Conference pag. 133. and in the Right of Tythes pag. 46. What avaâ—â— these Testimonies then to theiâ— Cause which are drawn from that Law which they themselves disclaim were it never so undoubted that the quotationâ— themselves were genuine which yet there is very great cause to question For what likelihood is there that Ambrose or any other of those Ancient Writers could so far forget himself as from a particular Precept given to the People of the Iews to infer that God hath Commâ—nâ—ed Christians to pay Tythes yearly c But that the Writings of those Fathers as they are called have been corrupted in general men coâ—versant in History are not ignorant and in particulary Ambrose his Sermons arâ— by Perkins accounted Spurious or Counterfeit Problemâ— page 20. Next to Ambrose he brings Epiphanius pag. 81. saying The Scripture exhorteth the People that out of their just Labours they should give to the Priests for their Maintenace First Fruits Oblations and other things To this a twofold Answer is to be given 1. That here is no mention of Tythes and though the Priest for want of better proof would fain have first fruits understood for Tythes yet so contrary is it to all reason that no man of Judgment can be in danger to be so misled 2. When he saith the Scripture exhorteth the People to give the Priestâ— First Fruits for their Maintenance since we are certain no Scripture of the New-Testament doth so exhort he must necessarily be understood to speak this with relation to the Levitical Law which as it was designed for and given to so it did particularly concern the Iewish Nation not the Christians And that the Payment of Tythes were not in use in Epiphanius his time nor accounted necessary Selden proves from Epiphanius his own words in Heres 50. The whole Passage as it lies in Selden's History of Tythes Review c. 4. pag. 461. take as followeth When he viz. Epiphaniuâ— tells us sayes Selden of the Tessuresdeâ—atitae or those which thought the holy Easter must be kept on the 14th Moon according to the Law given to the Iews for their Passover and that because they apprehended that the keeping it otherwise was subâ—ect to the course of the Law he sayes that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is they do all things or agree generally with the Church saâ—ing that they were too much herein addicted to the Iewish Custom And in his Argument against them he shews that the Course hath not reference only to the Passover but also to Circumcision to Tythes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Offerings Wherefore as he goes on if they escape one curse by keeping their Easter according to the Law of the Passover they thrust themselves into many other For saith he they shall find them also accursed that are not Circumcised and them cursed that pay not Tythes and them cursed that Offer not at Ierusalem Let any man now sayes Selden consider if this Bishop that was least unacquainted with the Customs of the christian-Christian-Church understood not clearly that no necessary or known use of payment was among Christians in his time of Tythes no more then oâ— Circumcision or Offering at Ierusalem Doth he not plainly reckon it as a thing not only not in Christian use but even equals it with what was certainly abrogated Is not his Objection shortly thus Why do you not observe Circumcision and Tything and Offerings also at Ierusalem which are all subject to the like Curse And because some kind of Offerings indeed were in use among Christians therefore in the Objection he providently ties them to Ierusalem But of Tything he speaks as generally as of Circumcision Thus far Seldâ—n of
Boniface he sayes pag. 92. If I desire to have the name of Tythes as well as the thing among the Antient Saxons I may find in the Epistle of Boniface to Cuthbert Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Anno. 745. That the English Priests in those dayes were maintained by the taking the daily Oblations and Tythes of the faithful Hitherto he has found neither the thing nor the name among his Saxon Evidences but has given only some ill grounded Conjectures that Church-esset and Ciric-sceat might signifie a kind of Tythes And what he has now found in the Epistle of this Arch-Bishop Boniface comes much too late to clear Tythes from the blemish of Popish Institution For if he could prove an Institution of Tythes in this Nation a general Dedication of Tythes or any positive Law commanding the payment of Tythes here as early as this Epistle of Boniface which yet is far from early in comparison of the earliest dayes of Christianity yet unless he could also wipe away for covering will not seâ—ve those foul Spots and filthy Stains those gross Corruptions and Superstitions wherewith the Church was 〈◊〉 that time and before miserably polluted and deformed all he can say will not acquit Tythes from a Popish Institution even according to the Notion his Brother Priest has given of Popery But though through the blind devotion of that Age some of the most superstitiously Zealous might not improbably give Tythes yet hath not he given or met with any Law Constitution or Synodal Decree of that time of undoubted Credit injoyning the payment of Tythes This very Cuthbâ—rt to whom the fore-cited Epistle of Boniface was written being then Arch-Bishop of Canterbury called together the Bishops and Prelates and held a great Synod near a place called Clomeshâ— the Decrees of which Synod Iohn Fox hath set down particularly in his Acts and Monuments of the Church upon the Year 747. in which Year that Synod was held But in all those Decrees there is not the least mention of Tythes No Constitution yet appears Civil or Ecclesiastical for the payment of Tythes And as for Boniface himself from whose Epistle the Priest would prove the settlement of Tythes in England before Popery take but the Character that Fox gives of him in the place fore-quoted and then think as thou canst of him the Religion and times he lived in First he taxes him with maintaining superstitious Orders of lascivious Nunâ— and other Religioâ—s and restraining the same from lawful Marriage Then he adds For so we find of him in Stories that he was a great setter up and upholder of such blind Superstition and all Popery Who being admitted by Pope Gregory the second Arch-Bishop of Magunce and indued with full Authority legantine over the Germans builded Monasteries Canonized Saints commanded Relicks to be worshipped c. Item sayes he by the Authority of the said Arch-Bishop Boniface which he received from Pope Zachary Childerious King of France was deposed from the right of his Crown and Pipinus betrayer of his Master was confirmed c. From this Boniface adds he proceeded that detestable Doctrine which now standeth Registred in the Popes Decrees Dist. 40. Cap. Si papa which in a certain Epistle of his is this That in case the Pope were of most filthy living and forgetful or negligent of himself and of the whole Christianity in such sort that he led innumerable Souls with him to Hâ—ll yet ought there no man to rebuke him in so doing for he hath Power to judge all men and ought of no man to be judged again Now Reader weigh and consider with thy self what manner of Bishop this Boniface was what a Religion he profest what times he lived in and then tell me whether or no Popery had not made her encroachments in the Church in the time of this Bishop Boniface Next to the Epistle of Boniface before mentioned the Priest offers a Collection made by Egbert Arch-Bishop of York in the Year as he says 750. of all the Canoâ—s that were made in the Councils before his time and whâ—ch were in force in England among which Canons he sayes pag. 93. there is frequent mention of Tythes as particularly in the 4. 5. 99. and 100. The words of the fourth Canon he gives thus That the People be 〈◊〉 in the right manner of Offering them to Gods Church The words of the fifth Canon he sets down thus That the Priest shall take them and set down the names of those who gave them There he stops omitting the rest of that Canon which in the Latine thus follows et secundum Autoritatem Canonicam coram testibus diviâ—ant et ad ornamentum ecclesiae primam eligant partem secundam autem ad usum pauperum atque peregrinorum per â—orâ—â— manus misericorditer cum omni humilitate dispensent tertiâ—â— vero sibimet ipsis Sacerdotes reservent i. e. and according to Canonical Authority shall divide them before Witnesses and shall chuse the first part for the Ornament of the Church The second part they shall with all humility most mercifully distribute with their own hands to the use of the Poor aâ—d of Strangers but the third part the Priests shall keep for themselves I have Transcribed this only to shew the Priest's Craft in concealing it He would have the benefit of this Canon he would use the Authority of it to prove his Claim to Tythes but he would not have the People understand how and to what uses Tythes were appointed by this Canon to be imployed How great a charge are the People now at in maintaining the Poor and in repairing and adorning those Houses which they call Churches over and above their Tythes to the Priests whereas this Canon which the Priest urges for the proof of his Claim to Tythes commands expresly that the Tythes being divided into three parts two parts of the three should be bestowed upon those publique uses and the Priests to have but the one third part that remained But now alas the Priests swollow the whole tenths the two parts as well as the third and the People are fain to make New-Levies to defray those publique charges from which by this Canon they were to be freed But be this spoken by the way only Now to the Canons themselves He sayes they were collected by Egbert about the Year 750. but by whom and when were they made Doubtless that had been very material but he has not a Syllable of it but delivers it in the gross for a Collection made by Egbert of all the Canons that were made in the Councils before his time c. But by what Art did Egbert collect Canons that were not made till after his death For that some such are â—n that Collection which bare his name Selden gives more then probable reasons First he sayes The Authority of the Title must undergo a Censure Then he adds Who ever made it supposed that Egbert gathered that Law and the rest joyn'd with it out of some
and all their Charters and Doâ—ations be void meerly because made and done by Papists c. For I do not say that all the good Acts of Papists in the true sense are void but I say that thâ—s Act the Donation of Tythes was not a good Act being given to maintain that Ministry which was not the true Ministry of Christ but a false Mâ—nistry and to upholâ— that Worship which was not the true Worship of God but a false Worship Nor were all their Charters and Donations void meerly becauâ—e made and done by Papist but this Charter of Tythes is therefore void because made to support and sustain a Religion and Worship by which God was dishonoured So that I impugne not all the good Acts of Papists meerly because done by Papists nor indeed any good Act of theirs in the true sense neither seek I to evacuate all their Charters and Donations or indeed any of them meerly because made by Papists but I impugne this Donation and Charter of Tythes as an evil Act proceeding from the erroneous unsound and corrupt judgment of Papists and tending to uphold and maintain an erroneoâ—â— unsound and corrupt Religion and Worship Safe then and sound may all the good acts of Papists in the true sense all their civil and political Acts Laws Charters Grants and Donations the maintenance of the Poor the Priviledgeâ— of Cities and the Freedom of all English Subjects stand and remain inviolate and untoucht notwithstanding the enervation of this Charter for Tythes § 13. The second Objection which he offers in my Namâ— is this That Tythes were given to maintain thâ— Popish Clergy This he sayes is a mistake pag. 102. for sayes he It was for the Maintenance of the English Clergy who had a Patriarch of their own in those dayes and were a Church of themselves not holding all the Opinions of the Roman Church nor professing any Canonical obedience to the Pope and therefore they cannot justly be called a Popish Clergy That Tythes were given to maintain the English Clergy is not doubted But what then Does their being an English Clergy acquit them from being a Popish Clergy Cannot an English Clergy be Popish I wish with all my Heart it could not But what I pray was that Clergy that drank such great Draughts of Protestant Blood in Q. Mary's time was it not both English and Popish Since then an English Clergy has been Popish now vain a shift is it in him to say Tythes were not given to maintain the Popish Clergy because they were given to maintain the English Clergy But this English Clergy had he sayes in those dayes of Ethelwolf a Patriarch of their own Had they so How much was Ethelwolf then overseen in sending to Pope Gregory for absolution from his Vows when he might as well have had it from his own Patriarch at home What was the matter was the Patriarch busie or out of the way or did not Ethelwolf know there was one But who I pray was Patriarch in his time what was his Name When began the Patriarcâ— at of England and how long stood it Out of what Legend I wonder did the Priest take this Fable that he quotes no Authority for it This Patriarch doubtless must be a man of a very soft and easie temper to let the Pope send over his 〈◊〉 hither to be Arch-Bishops of canterbury the chief Seâ—t of his Patriarchat and send his â—egats hither to call and govern Councils And when Thâ—odorâ—s the Italian Arch-Bishop of Canterbury took upon him to displace Wilfride Arch-Bishop of York was not Wilfride very much to blame to neglect his own Patriarch and go to Rome to complain to the Pope What Patrâ—arch alive but a very good natured Man would haâ—e endured all this But I am partly of the Opinioâ— when it comes to the upshot we shall find no other Patriarch of England but the Pope or some Deputy of his who being in the time of the Council at Nice one of the four Patriarchs of the Christian World as it was then called took in these Western parts into his Patriarchat And when Gregory Bishop of Rome dispenced with the English in the case of Degrees prohibited he did it sayes Perkins as Patriarch Problem pag. 204. Whence it appears that England was then subject to the Patriarch of Rome which it would not have been if it had had a Patriarch of its own He adds They were a Church of themselves not holding all the Opinions of the Roman Church nor professing any Canonical obedience to the Pope What he means by their being a Church of themselves I understand not They were such a Church of themselves as the Pope sent his Creatures to be arch-Arch-Bishops in They were such a Church of themselves as whose Councils the Pope sent his Legats to govern They were such a Church of themselves as in case of grievance had recourse to the Pope for redress And for the Opinions of the Roman Church that they held them all I will not say but I dare affirm they held enough to justly denominate them a Popish Clergy Whateveâ— the Opinions of the Church of Rome then were that thâ—se were in Communion with that Church is notorious and that some time before Ethâ—lwolf Pope Vitellianus sent Theodorus over into England and divers Monks of Italy with him to set up here in England Latine Service Masses Ceremonies Letanies and such other Romish Ware c. if Fox and his Testimony may be taken whose very words these are Martyrol vol. 1. pag. 112. And what Observance they paid to the Pope may be not only gathered from that passage in Arch-Bishop Wilfride's address to the Pope wherein speaking of Thâ—odore by whom he was turned out he sayes Quem quidem pro eo quod abhac Apostolicae sedis summitate directus est accusare non audeâ— i. e. Whom in as much as he hath been directed by this high Apostolical See I dare not accuse And from Rainolds De Rom. Eccles. Idolatria Where in his Epistle pag. 13. He tells the English Semiâ—aries that about the Year 800. the King of England Revereâ—cing the Pope as St. Peters Vicar gave him Yearly a Penny out of every Family c. But also most plainly concluded from the words of Florilegus cited by Camden in his Brittania pag. 411. where mentioning divers Priviledges of the Monastery of St. Albanes founded by K. Offa and endowed by him and his Successors he giveth this for one that The Abbat or Monk appointed Arch-Deacon under him hath pontifical Jurisdiction over the Priests and Lay-men of all the Possessions belonging to this Church so as he yieldeth subjection to no Arch-Bishop Bishop or Legate save only to the Pope of Rome To the Pope of Rome then it appears this Abbat notwithstanding all hiâ— Priviledges did yield subjâ—ction How much more then did the rest of the Clergy who were not priviledged as he was yield obedience to the Pope The same Author there likewise adds
Donation of Tythes he left out the instances I had given to prove the Donation popish and took no notice of them In this which next follows he leaves out some and gives the others false I to manifest further the corruption of that time and Apostacy of that Church did set down what the Clergy on their part undertook in consideration of the said Charter to perform as in Spelman's Brittish Councils I found it thus It pleased also Alhstan and Swiâ—hin the Bishops of the Churches of Shirborn and Winchester with their Abbats and the Servants of God to appoint that upon the Wednesday in every Week all our Brethren and Sisters in every Church should sing Fifty Psalms and every Priest say two Masses one for K. Ethelwolf and another for his Nobles that consented to this Gift for a reward and for an abatement of their Offences And that they should say for the King so long as he lived Oremus Deus qui justificas for his Nobles also while they lived Pretende Domine but after they were dead for the deceased King by himself and for the deceased Nobles in common c. Instead of this he hath these words pag. 109. Some slighter Cavils he hath pag. 292 293. As fi â—st his calling the Clergy of that Age Apostates and corrupt for being so grateful to their Benefactors as to engage to sing David's Psalms and to make Prayers twice a Week for them that God would reward their bounty and pardon their Sins What is there in this at all like my quotation unless it be the word Psalmes Do I call them Apostates and corrupt for being grateful to their Benefactors Or do I not note the manner of their expressing their gratitude as an instance of their Apostacy and Corruption in that they undertook to say Masses for them both Living and Dead instead of which he sayes they engaged to make prayers for them Yet he is fain to confess pag. 110. they called these Prayers Missas but sayes they were far different from the Missal of the Church of Rome whose Offiâ—â—s he sayes were first brought in here by Osmund Bishop of Sailsbury Anno. 1096. But in that he speaks wrong For long before Osmund's time 300. Years at least under Pope Adrian who according to Genebrand entred the Popedom in the Year 772. about eighty years before Ethelwolf's Donation the Roman Missal made as they say by Pope Gregory was by decree of a Council at Rome with the help of a Popish Miracle commanded to be universally received and used The Story whereof for brevity here omitted is set down at large by Durundus in his Rationale l. 5. c. 2. and out of him and other Authors by Iohn Fox in his first Volumn of the Book of Martyrs pag. 117. This Decree for the establishing Gregory's Missal and making it universal was vigorously prosecuted by Charles the Emperor not only threatning but punishing those that refused it and burning the other Service Books where-ever he â—ound them insomuch that as Fox observes Gregory's Service had only the place and hath adds he to this day in the greatest part of Europe And that it was received used here in England as well as in other Countries not only the Devotion this Nation then had to the Church of Rome and the influence Charles the Emperor had upon the English may make it probable But the occasion of Osmund's bringing in that Service which was called the Use of Sâ—rum set down at large both by Fox and Stow doth fully and plainly prove Fox vol. 1. p. 166. sayes Thurstan coming out of Normandy with William the Conqueror and being made Abbat of Glastenbury fell out with his Monks to such an height that from Words they went to Blows by which divers were Wounded and some Slain the occasion whereof was that Thurstan contemning their Quire Service then called the Use of St. Gregory compelled his Monks to the use of one William a Monk of Fiscaâ— in Normandy Stow in his Annals of England pag. 157. upon the Year 1083. relating the same matter sayes thus This Man Thurstan among other his Fellows despising the Song called Gregory's Song began to counsel the Monks to learn the Song of one William of Festamps and to sing it in the Church which to do when they refused as they that had been ever used not only in this but in other service of the Church to follow the manner of the Roman Church sudainly on a day with a company of Armed men brake into the Chapter-house c. and so goes on to relate the Skirmish which being beside my purpose I omit and only observe from these Testimonies first that this Roman Mass instituted by Gregory and bearing his Name and by Pope Adrian his Roman Council appointed to be used in all places was received and used here in England before the Conquest secondly that the English Clergy had been ever used not only in this but in other service of the Church to follow the manner of the Church of Rome thirdly that this Missal of Gregory thus by decree of Council made universal and then received and used here in England was in substance the same that was used afterwards both here and elsewhere untill the time of Reformation Fox saying expresly that Gregory's Service had only the place and yet hath to this day in the greatest part of Europe But that the Reader may the better judge whether these Masses were such innocent things as the Priest doth here represent them whether the Priests that said them were the right Ministers of God as pag. 112. he makes no doubt they were whether the People that used them were nearer in Opinion to the Protestant Church of England then to the present Papists as pag. 135. he sayes they were And whether if they were so it is not greatly to be lamented take here a Story out of Bede shewing what Opinion they had in those times of the vertue of their Masses In the Wars between Ecgfrid and Edilrâ—d Kings of Northumberland and Mercia a Young Man named Innua one of Ecgfrid's Souldiers was lâ—ft for dead among the Slain where after he had â—ain a Day and Night recovering sense and strength he got up intending to escape to his Friends but falling into his Enemies hands he was made a Prisoner and after his Wounds were â—ured he was bound that he might not get away But no Bonds would stay upon him but alwayes at a certain hour fell off Of which Bede gives this reason This Young man had a Brother a Priest named Tunua who was at that time Abbat of a Monastery called from his Name Tuâ—uacestir This Abbat hearing his Brother was slain went to search out his Body among the dead and found a Corps so like his Brother's that not doubting it to be the same he took it up and buried it in his Monastery and took care that Masses were said often to obtain pardon for his Soul by the celebration of which
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-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
other unsound Doctrines since there is scarce a Century wherein somâ— or other have not delivered themselves contrary to the common received Opinions of that Church Stephen Gardiner himself in Q. Mary's dayes discovered to Dr. Day Bishop of Winchester how he understood the Doctrine of free Iustification by Christ as out of the Book of Martyrs is noted before yet no man I think will question whether the Church was then Popiâ—h or no oâ— whether the Popish Doctrine of merits was not then commonly and generally received That very Pope Leo the fourth whom Ethelwolf went in such devotion to see towards whom he was so liberal and to whom he committed his Son Alfred to be brought up being ready to joyn Battel with the Saracens at Ostia thus prayed O God whose right Hand lifted up St. Peter that he was not droâ—ned when he walked upon the Waves and delivered the Apostle Paul from the bottom of the Sea in his third Shipwrack hear us favourably and for the MERITS OF THEM BOTH grant c. Plat. in vita Leon. 4. li. But what the common Opinion was of the merit of good Works among the Saxons may be collected from the Tenour of the Charters of their â—eligious endowments which as they often sprang from some flagitious Wickedness so they usually declare the intendment of the gift to be for the Salvation or Redemption of the Donors Soul or for the Remission of his and his Ancestors sins or some such-like Expression as plainly imports an expiation or satisfaction for Sin And that this is not my judgment only but that they were thus understood by men of note in former times hear the judicioâ—s Camden who in his Brittania pag. 262. speaking of a Monastery founded by Q. Aelfrith saith Q. Aelfrith Built a Monastery to EXPIATE and make SATISFACTION for that most foul and hainous Fact wherewith so wickedly she had charged her Soul by making away K. Edward her Husbands Son as also to wash out the Murthering of her former Husband Aethelâ—old c. And elsewhere pag. 254. speaking of Ambresbury in Wiltshire he saith In that place afterward Alfritha K. Edgar's Wife by Repentance and some good deed to EXPIATE and make SATISFACTION for Muthering of K. Edward her Son in Law built a stately Nunnery c. And Fox in his Acts of the Church Vol 1. pag. 120. enumerating the many Religious Houses that were built in England in the sixth seventh and eighth Centuries hath these words thereupon Thus ye see what Monasteries and in what time begun to be founded by the Saxon Kings newly converted to the Christian Faith within the space of two Hundred Years who as they seemed then to have a certain zeal and devotion to Godward according to the leading and teaching that then was so it seemeth again to me two things to be wished in these foresaid Kings first that they whâ—ch begun to erect these Monasteries had foreseen the danger c. secondly that unto this their Zeal and Devotion had been joyned like Knowledge and Doctrine in Christ's Gospel especially in the Article of our free Justification by the Faith of Jesus Christ because of the LACK whereof as well the Builders and Founders thereof as they that were professed in the same seem both to have run the WRONG way and to have been DECEIVED For albeit in them there was a Devotion and Zeal of mind yet the end and cause of their Deedâ— and Buildings cannot be excused being contrary to the Rule of Christ's Gospel for so much as they did these things seeking MERITS with God and for REMEDY of their Souls and REMISSION of their Sins as may appear testified in their own Records c. Thus he Whence its plain that he who undertook to write an History of the Acts and Monuments of the Church and may well be thought to understand something of those times as well as this Priest concluded that although the Saxons in those dayes whom the Priest so often calls his pious Ancestors and famous Tytâ—eâ— givers were Zealous according to the teaching that then was yet they had not the true knowledge and Doctrine of Christ's Gospel especially in the point of justifiâ—ation but for lack thereof were deceived and ran the wrong way seeking remedy of their Souls and remission of their Sins by the merits of their works And for proof that they so did Fox there sets down the very same Charter of Ethelbald which this Priest brings to prove the Right of Tythes pag. 94. which Charter being by Fox set down in the place fore-cited toward the end of his second Book he there adds as followeth By the contents hereof sayes he may well be understood as where he saith Pro amore calestis partie proremedio animae pro liberatione animae et absolutione delictorum c. i. e. For the love of the Heavenly Country for the remedy of my Soul for the delivering of my Soul and for the pardon of my Sins c. how great the IGNORANCE and BLINDNESS of these men was who lacking no Zeal only LACKED KNOWLEDGE to rule it withal seeking their Salvation NOT BY CHRIST ONLY but by their OWN DESERVINGS and MERITORIOUS deeds And the same Fox but two pages further entring upon the Reign of King Ethelwolf sayes This Ethelwolf as being himself once muzled in that order was alwayes good and devout to Holy and Religious orders insomuch that he gave to them the Tythe of all his Goods and Lands in West-Saxony with liberty and freedom from all servage and civil charges Whereof this Charter instrument beareth Testimony after this tenor proceeding much like to tâ—e Deâ—aâ—ion of Ethelbald above mentioned Then râ—citing the Câ—arter even that vâ—ry Charter so hug'd and so exâ—ol'd by these Priests and therein finâ—ing these words Pro remissione animarum et peccatorum nostrorum i. e. For the deliverance of our Soulâ— and the remission of our Sins he adds Hereby it may appear how and when the Churches of England began first to be indued with Temporalities and Lands also with Priviledges and Exemptionâ— enlarged moreover and that which specially iâ— to be considered and LAMENTED what PERNICIOUS Doctâ—inâ— was this wherewith tâ—ey were led tâ—us to set REMISSION of their SINS REMEDY of their Souls in this Donation and such other deeds of their Donation CONTRARY to the information of God's word and no small derogation to the Crosâ— of Christ. Thus far Fox which I have set down the more largly that the Reader may see what his judgment was of the Religion of those times wherein this Donation of Tythes was made and may himself be the better able to judge whether I here wronged the People and Clergy of those times in calling them Papists The Priest's next and last instance of the Saxons not being Papists is their keeping the Canon of Scripture entire and rejecting the Apocrypha from being of divine Authority But this if they did so will not clear them from being Papists since many
to teach them all things they have not the Spirit at all These are not my words as he that will consult the place may see but an inference of his own made on purpose to abust me And the other Priest in his Vindication pag. 284. though he nibbles at the same passage yet neither doth he quote it as this Priest doth nor charge me with affirming that If the Saints have not the Spirit in them so as to teach them all things they have not the Spirit at all But sayes The Quaker seems to fancy that if the Spirit be not with Believers in this immediate manner his is not with them at all Observe now Reader how I am dealt with between these two Priests One of them sayes positively that I affirm The other sayes The Quaker seems to fancy The one sayes I affirm if the Saints have not the Spirit in them so as to teach them all things they have not the Spirit at all The otheâ— sayes The Quaker seems to fancy that if the Spirit â—e not with believers in this immediate manner he is not with them at all And yet these Priests both one and t'other pretend to repeat the self-same sâ—ntence out of my Book and that in my own words Is this faiâ— dealing Yet upon this and his former mistake of immediate teaching he sayes pag. 137. All that T. E. allows for Saints got their knowledge in an Instant as the Apostles did This also I reject for a slander Nor do I believe that the Apostles got their knowledge as he says in an instant But that they grew in Grace by the Grace in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ as the Apostle Peter exhorted the Saints 2 Pet. 4. 18. and as Paul did the Colossians chap. 1. ver 10. But from these false Premises he draws this lame Conclusion Either therefore he must deny these Holy men were taught immediately and then by his Rule they could have no knowledge in divine things or else he must confess Truths were not revealed to them by degrees But there is no necessity for this For I will suppose those Holy men were taught immediately in respect of the manner of teaching not in respect of time They might be taught by the Spirit of God in their own Hearts without the help of outward means and yet those Truths which they were thus taught might be revealed to them by degrees The Wind that bloweth where it liâ—teth bloweth also when it lifteth and â—e that turns the Key of David opens and shuts at his own pleasure Upon my saying Those good men Godly Martyrs lived at the very dawning of the Day of Reformation He thus sports himself Very pleâ—sant sayes he Let 〈◊〉 then ask the Quaker what Hour of the Morning it was when his other Martyrs as he falsly calls them Thorp Swinderby Brute and Wickliffe lived If it was but Day-break in Cranmer's time it was dark as mid-night in Wickliffe's if Cranmer and Bradford had but little Light Wickliffe and Thorp had none at all and therefore unless they had Cats Eyes they could not see then pag. 138. Surely his flouting humour was up when he writ this and he was resolved to indulge his Genius whom soever he spatter'd But letting his unhandsome expression pass which is obvious enough to every Reader that has not Cats Eyes I reply to his question that what ever Hour Thorp Swinderby Brute and Wicâ—liâ—â—e lived in or how dark soever it then was they had light enough given them to discover that Tythes were but an human Institution ought not to be paid And though they lived before Cranmer in times of greater Darkness and not see so many of the Corruptions of the Church of Rome as Cranmer and his Associates did yet they saw some and what they did see was as really a Corruption and their Testimonies against it ought as â—ell to be received as the Testimonies of those other Martyrâ— against other Corruptions afterwards Nor ought those earlier Testimonies to be weakned much â—ess rejected by the example or practice of later Martyrs since both the former and later are by the same Historian recorded to be good and godly men stout Champians and valiant Souldiers for the Truth of Jesus Christ all bearing Testimony against the Corruptions and Superstitions of the Church of Rome though not all against the self-same particular Corruption For Wickliffe inveighed against the Pride Pomp Luxury and temporal Possessions of the Clergy Brute denyed all Swearing and Thorp denyed to Swear upon the Bible the evil of which was not seen by many of the Martyrs that came after And even among those of greatest note and eminency in point of Learning who were not only contemporaries but Co-sufferers as I may say with respect both to cause and time there was not in all things an equal discovery and sight of Corruptions and Romish Superstitions For â—ooper being elected Bishop of Glouster in King Edward the sixth dayes when Cranmer himself was Arch-Bishop of Canterbury refused to be consecrated in the Episcopal vestiments or habit and to take the Oath used in the Consecration of Bishops both which he complained were against his Conscience and therefore petitioned the King either to discharge him of his Bishoprick or to dispence with him in those things which were offensive and burdensom to his Conscience And although he thereupon obtained Letters from the King and the Earl of Warwick to the Arch-Bishop in his behalf yet so little did Cranmer anâ— the other Bishops discern the Superstition and Evil of those things that as Fox observes they stood earnestly in defence of the aâ—oresaid Ceremonies saying It was but a small matter that the fault was in the abuse of the things not in the things themselves that he ought not to be so stubborn in so light a matter and that his wilfulness therein was not to be suffered Nor would they yield to his consecration but upon condition that sometimes he should in his Sermon shew himself Apparrelled as the other Bishops were which Fox in plain terms calls a Popish attire and sayes that Notwithstanding that godly Reformation of Religion that began in the Church of England besides other Ceremonies more ambitious then profitable or tending to Edification they used to wear such Garments and Apparel as the Popish Bishops were wont to do which he sayes tended more to â—â—perstition then otherwise and sayes he when Hooper was appointed to Preach before the King he came forth as a new Playeâ— in a strange Apparel on the Stage having for his upper Garment a long Scarlet Chymere down to the Feet and under that a white Linnen Rochet that covered all his Shoulders upon his Head he had a Geometrial that is a foursquared Cap albeit that his Head was round What cause of shame says Fox the strangeness hereof was that day to that good Preacher every man may easily judge Martyr Vol. 2. pag. 1366. Thus seest thou Reader that what
Hooper Conscientiously scrupled and refused as an offence and burden to his Conscience and what Fox who wrote the Story affirms to be Popish and Superstitious Cranmer and other of his Associate Bishops saw no Evil in which I mention not with any design to detract the same of those worthy men whose honour and true excellency stood not so much in knowing much though much they knew as in being faithful to what they knew nor to intimate any discordance among them who I make no doubt agreed full well in a good resolution to oppose all Popish Errors so far as they had a clear discerning of them which Apology to men of candor needless I am in some sort constrained here to make to obviate and if it may be to prevent the unjust Cavillations of my very disingenuous and captious Adversaries But I therefore instance this case of Bishop Hooper to manifest that amongst such as to be sure were no Renegadoes but real Martyrs all the Superstitions and Corruptions of the Roman Church were not equally discovered to all but that sâ—me saw that to be Popish and rejected it which others not seeing to be so continued in but their continuing in it makes not the thing it self less evil or the Testimony of others who have seen and decry'd it less considerable with those who look through the Eye of Reason not of interest the like is to be said in the case of Tythes If some of the Martyrs did not see Tythes to be of Popish Institution and therefore did continue the use of them that practice of theirs doth no more prove that Tythes are not of Popish Institution then their using and wearing the pontificial Garments doth prove those Garments were not of Popish Institution which Bishop Hooper denyed as Popish § 25. The Author of the Friendly Conference in his Vindication pag. 306. says The Quaker should have told us what those many things are which were allowed by them Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. and since plainly condemned by others I conâ—ess I did not think it needful in a thing so obvious to have instanced particularâ— but since it seems he expected it he may take if he please the fore-mentioned for some But withal I would have him know I take notice how unfairly he deals with me altering my words that he may make an occasion to abuse me For whereas I said pag. 307. We 〈◊〉 divers things which they took little or no notice of plainly condemned and zealously witnessed against by others He pretending to repeat my words sayes The Quaker should have told us what those MANY things are which are allowed by them and SINCE plainly condemned by others Where besides the manifest alteration of my words he thrust in the word since only that he might have a Stone to throw at me for thereupon he sayes I suppose by these others 〈◊〉 means such as himself or such factious and schisâ—atick Spirits Wheâ—eas my words in the place fore-cited do evidently refer to former times for after I had said We find divers things which they took little or no notice of plainly condemned and zealously Witnessed against by others I immediately added Who are acknowledged to HAVE BEEN in their respective times Confessors of and true Witnesses for God against the Corruptions and Superstitions of the Romish Church as well as they How is it possible this man could thus have abused me if he had not designedly set himself to it Yet this is the man that in his Epistle complains of my dishonesty in mis-stating his Book But he will not allow Wickliff Swinderby Brute and Thorp the Name of Martyrs but sayes pag. 309. of his Vindication Never a man of these was a Martyr But why Because a Martyr is one that seals his Testimony of the Truth with his Blood and Wickliffe not being burned till Forty One Years after his Death what Blood I pray sayes he was lefâ— in Wickliffe's Bones after they had been Buried Forty One Years The others he also denyes to have been Martyrs because as he sayes their Ends were unâ—ertain pag. 308. The word Martyr properly signifies a Witness and is applicable to them who make confession of the Truth and bear witness to it but more especially and per exâ—ellentiaâ— to them that suffer for the Truth And though it is commonly understood of them that suffer unto death yet inasmuch as many Sufferings which extend not unto Death are as grievous and cruâ—l as death it self I see no reason why such as faithfully and constantly undergo such Sufferings not baulking their Testimony for fear of Death should be deprived of their Palms and excluded from the Catologue of Martyrs who it may be were as fully resigned to Death and could as willingly and cheatfully have undergone it if it had been inflicted as they did those other hardships they endured or as others who actually suffered Death However since no man ought to execute himself they who boldy coâ—fest the Truth and faithfully bore witness to it patâ—iently suffering whatsoever was laid upon them for the sake thereof whether he will allow them to be called Martyrs or not their Testimony I hope ought not to be rejected nor themselves despised reproached and villified as we shall see anon they are As for Wickliffe Fox calls him a valiant Champion and though he died quietly at Lutterworth in Leicestershire yet great and grievous troubles underwent he as Fox in his Stoâ—y repoâ—ts and as 〈◊〉 in his Brittania intimates pag. 518. Swinderby the Priest denyes to be a Martyr because Fox sayes Whether he dyed in Prison or whether he escaped their Hands or was burned there is no certain relation made But he conceals that Fox in the same place adds that a Law being made in the beginâ—ing of the Reign of Hen. 4. against the favourers of Wickâ—iffe under the Name of Lollards certain Priest was thereupon Burnt in Smithfield who by divers conjectures appears to him to be this Swinderby Martyrol pag. 4â—8 who was before condemned by the Bishop of Hereford pag. 436. Brute is by the Priest denyed to be a Martyr because Fox sayes What â—nd he had I find not Registred But Fox shews that although at that time when he appeared before the Bishop of Hereford it is likely he escaped yet a Year or two after by the instigation of the Bishops the King issued forth his Commission with great sharpness and severity against the said Brute and his Abbettors which argues that the said Walter Brute did persist in his Testimony against the Church of Rome Thorp he will not admit be to a Martyr because Fox sayes his end was uncertain But Fox leaves not the matter so Foâ— he sayes By all conjectures it is to be thought that the Arch-Bishop Tho. Arundel being so hard an Adversary against those men would not let him go Much less is it to be supposed that he would ever retract his Sentence and Opinion which he so valiantly maintained before the Bishop
neither doth it seem that he had any such recanting Spirit Again neither is it found that he was burned Wherefore sayes Fox it remaineth most like to be true that he being committed to some strait Prison according as the Arch-Bishop in his Examination before did threaten him there as Thorp confesseth himself was so straitly kept that either he was secretly made away or else there he dyed by Sickness as he instances in Iohn Ashton another of Wickliff's Followers who was so served Martyrol pag. 500. Now though the manner of these mens deaths cannot be certainly known yet certain it is that they were devouâ— and godly men and zealous against the Romish Errors so far as they discerned them And if we may take his character of them who writ their Stoâ—y he calls Swinderby a worthy Priest and true Servant of Christ Martyrol pag. 437. Of Brute he sayes that In the tractation of his discourse may appear the mighty operation of God's Spirit in him his ripe knowledge modest simplicity his valiant constancy his learned tractations and manifold conflicts sustained against God's Enemies pag. 438. Thorp he calls a good Man and blâ—ssed Servant of God pag. 500. A Warriour valiant under the triumphant Banner of Christ pag. 485. And tells his Reader He shall behold in this Man the marvelous force and strength of the Lord's Might Spirit and Grace working and fighting in his Souldiers and also speaking in their Mouthes according to the word of his promise Luk. 21. ibid. In all which either Fox was much mistaken in the men or this Priest in his Right of Tythes has most exceedingly injured them For he renders them Apostates calls them Renegadoes scoffâ— at their knowledge and sayes Cranmer Hooper Ridley c. are much disgraced by the parallel pag. 139 140. Surely if the men the times wherein they lived considered were guilty of some weaknesses or infirmities it had much better become this pretended Protestant to have mentioned them at least with common civility had it been but for the Cause sakâ— in which they were engaged then thus to fall on them in reviling Language and defame them for Apostates and Renegado's In which he seems rather to exceed then imitate the foolish out-rage of the Papists against Wickliffe for they burnt the Bones of Wickliffe only Forty One Years after he was dead but this Priest seeks to distain and blemish the Name the Memory and the Testimonies of these four men together which have flourished well nigh three Hundred Years And so angry is he at them that I speed the worse at his hands for having mentioned them For forgetting in his heat that he said at the beginning he would not meddle with scurrility he here falls downright upon me and sayes I am a manifest Lyer in giving such Renegadoes the name of Martyrs which Language as it credits not him that gave it without any provocation that I know of from me so it hurts not me to whom it is given nor would I have taken notice of it at all but to manifest the temper of my Adversary and the liberty of nameless Writers But he fathers one part of his calumny upon Fox and sayes Most of these Opposers of Tythes recanted openly and proved Apostates as Mr. Fox himself confesseth But in this he does Fox wrong For first he no where calls them Apostates nor is it likely he thought them so by the character he gave of them Neither secondly doth he confess that most of them recanted openly for of Wickliffe and Thorp he mentions no such thing at all And what he speaks of Swinderby it waâ— not so properly if well considered a Recantation of what he held as a Denyal of Articles laid to his charge in such terms as he did not hold them which afterward himself explained and maintained As for Brute Fox doth not tax him with retracting any thing at all but only shews that he submitted himself principally to the Gospel of Iesus Christ and to the determination of Holy Kirk and to the general Councilâ— of Holy Kirk and to the sentence and determination of the four Doâ—tors of holy Writ that is Augustine Ambrose Icrom and Gregory and to the correctâ—on of the Bishop of Hereford pag. 461. And surely the character which Fox gives of Brute and of the mighty operation of God's Spirit in him doth not imply he thought Brute either an Apostate or Renegado But suppose it had been so as he opprobriously objects that most of these Opposers of Tythes had recanted their Opinions yet if afterwards they returned and stood to their Testimony must it not be received If they had fallen by infirmity might they not rise again by Repentance and must their after Testimony be rejected because of a former slip I could namâ— him the Man if I judg'd it necessary who for his Testimony against thâ— Church of Rome endured divers Years Imprisonment sustained many a sharp Conflict and bore the brunt of many an hard â—attel against the Popish Bishops yea stood his ground against them even to sentence degradation and after all this was drawn either by threats or flattery to sign a Recantation to the great diâ—â—onour of his Cause and wounding of his Conscience yet this Man shortly after retracted that Recantation resumed his Testimony against the Church of Rome and died a famous Martyr doing himself an exemplary piece of justice upon that Hand with which he had subscribed the Recantation But notwithstanding this man's slip his Testimony for God against the Idolatries and Corruptions of the Romaâ— Church are justly had in very great esteem But to proceed The Priest sayes Right of Tythes pag 139. As for the knowledge of T. E's Martyrs we may guess at the size thâ—reof by that senseless saying of one of them viz. That one of the ancient Doctors S. Jerom he thought did affirm that those Priests who take Tythes deny Christ to be come in the Flesh. This which was spoken by William Thorp whom Fox calls a good man and blessed Servant of God yea a valiant Warriour under the triumphant Banner of Christ the Priest calls a senseless saying an idle thing and in derision scossingly sayes We may guess at the size of their knowledge by this But does this become him Is tâ—iâ— at all like a Protestant what could Harpsfield Harding or any other of the Popish Champions have said more contemptuously But he not only denyes this Sentence to be Hierom's but that any ancient Doctor did ever say so idle â— thing In which he deals worse with Thorp then did Arundel the Popish Arch-Bishop to whom Thorp urged it and under whom he suffered for the Arch-Bishop did not deny his quotation but blam'd him for picking such sharp Sentences out of the Scriptures and out of the Doctors against the Priests which was an implicit acknowledgment of the Truth of his Allegation Thus Reader thou seest the contempt these Priests have of any that speak against their corrupt