was more talk about the visibility of the Church and D. T. said to this purpose The History of this matter is beyond both the Purse and the Capacity of the People A great many Pounds and Books are required A Priest or Candidate said 'T is in less room and was pulling out I think a little Book It sufficeth the People that they have heard Christ's Promise That there shall be a Society of men professing Christianity to the end of the World That they believe Christ will make good his word and that they find among us such Doctrine and Rules of Life as are in the Bible That the Greeks have always had Churches that among the Latins we have Catalogues of Witnesses against Romish Errors That a True Church may though not as such have many Corruptions And that the present Corruptions in the Roman Church were not formerly made Articles of Faith. That we had the True Faith before any Mission came from Rome That S. Gregories Faith was not that which Rome now teaches That here the Synods of the Second of Nice and Trent could not prevail That a Doctrine contrary to Transubstantiation had been taught in the Saxon Church and that he would prove such things as these out of their own Writers Mr. M. ask'd what Writers D. T. answer'd Beda and such Historians as Hoveden c. D. T. said moreover to Mr. P. asking after a distinct Church before Luther That he would shew him Christians in Bohemia making the Bible their Rule and protesting against the Errors of Rome And ask'd him If he should shew him out of Aeneas Sylvius Mr. P. did not desire it nor seem to know what Book that was Mr. M. had some while before ask'd D. T. who had said That we find the Bible which we now have quoted by the Ancient Fathers How he came to know they were Fathers To which Question he thought an Answer in that Place a condesension to an impertinence Hereabouts I think Mr. P. introduced a short Discourse about Transubstantiation and when D. T. had said as before that that manner of the Breads becoming Christ's Body was invented by Paschasius Radbertus M. P. in warm manner said What talk you of Paschasius Radbertus It was decreed in the Great General Council of Lateran where there were all the Patriarchs D. T. perceiving him to mistake so much in History and likewise err in time nigh Four hundred years for Paschasius flourished according to Bellarmin in the year 821. and that Lateran Council was held Ann. 1215. He turn'd to Mr. M. and said Why do you bring a man who has not common skill in History And then turning to Mr. P. he ask'd him Under what Pope that Council was held And his Memory did not serve him to tell Then Mr. D. A. C. addressing himself to him having a Breviary in his Hand in which the Trinity was pictur'd said Sir I can inform you under what Pope that Council was held 't was held under Innocent the Third Mr. P. being moved either by his Answer or his Book or Picture or all called him Buffoon D. T. then told Mr. P. he had transgressed against part of the Office of that day of St. Michael in which these words of St. Jude were read Michael the Arch-angel disputing with the Devil about the Body of Moses would not bring against him a railing Accusation but said The Lord rebuke thee And further D. T. ask'd him If all the Patriarchs were there in person or not Mr. P. replied By their Legats D. T. ask'd him Whether he had seen Father Walsh's late Book which contradicted what he said Mr. P. answered that Father Walsh was not his Pope Some of the words of Father Walsh the Franciscan are these There were not above 414 Bishops in the whole and none of all other than a Member of the Latin Church those very Two Patriarchs he means those of Hierusalem and Constantinople being themselves Latins and consequently not one of the Greek Church or of any other part or Church of the World among them By this time Mr. P. had produced a Breviary a written Collection of Quotations and Two large sheets of Quotations printed and would go to the Fathers D. T. desired first to speak to his Citation Hear the Church but still being denied he was contented to hear what he would alledge out of the Fathers with this Caution That he would not take them either for his infallible Judges or Rule but that seeing he had them on the side of his Church he would not part with them He began with his Breviary and read out of it part of that which is in the Margent construing it into English And the Sum of it was That before Consecration it was Bread but after it the Flesh of Christ And that Christ whose Word made things begin to be which were not before could much more bring it to pass that they should be what they were and yet changed into another thing which shews the opinion of the Author to have been that it was Bread and Christ's Body too if from this place we may find out his mind And then he nam'd S. Cyril's Catechism and then Justin Martyr and was going on to read many more Citations out of the printed Sheets entituled Speculum Ecclesiasticum but call'd it seems by their Hawkers The Soldiers Paper of which Title D. T. being ignorant his Man could not till Wednesday procure him a Copy of them D. T. Propos'd the fixing upon something after so long and noisie a rambling and call'd for Pen Ink and Paper and said he would begin with S. Ambrose and then go on to S. Cyril and J. Martyr in the order of Mr. P. and answering those Quotations there at that time he would afterwards as they agreed go on to the rest Mr. P. would go on and read further and did it so often out of those two Sheets repeating the names Justin Martyr Irenaeus c. that D. T. provoked with what he thought an unreasonable digression call'd the Papers his Ballads and said he might give them for Kites to his Boys which words were too light and he repents him of using them At last D. T. took the Pen and wrote down an Assertion to this effect That that was a spurious and late Book and none of S. Ambrose 's and that he would show it to be such Then he desir'd Mr. P. to underwrite that D. T. could not do what he there undertook M. P. refus'd and taking a Pen began to write his name to his Quotations in the printed Sheets but did not write as I think all his name there After which Mr. M. took Pen and D. T. delivering him the Paper he had sign'd in order to a regular proceeding he began to write the first words of these Questions Whether God Almighty hath left us any Guide or Guides to direct us in the Interpretation of Scripture in things necessary to Salvation Whether he hath
U. and Mrs. U. declared by themselves and the rather upon their taking notice of certain Arts of Lying not so much before observed by them she own'd that the aforesaid Stories were us'd by a Roman as Arguments to turn her I believe there might be false Stories to the prejudice of Mr. P. and his Friends but to the end that false Reports may not on either hand prevail this Account is written by D. T. which Mr. P. wheresoever he thinks it is faulty may please to correct Tho. Tenison A Pursuit of that which was said in the Conference about the three first Quotations viz. out of S. Ambrose de Sacramentis S. Cyril of Hierusalem in his Catechism and Justin Martyr in his Apology c. 1. FOR the Book de Sacramentis as not genuine it may suffice at present to say That though there was a Book written by S. Ambrose under that Title this is not it there not being found in this the Places which S. Austin cited out of that That the style is plainly more moderen and rude than that of S. Ambrose and his Age That the version of the places of Scripture mention'd in this Book is not the same with that which S. Ambrose uses in his genuine Works That this Book is taken notice of by the Writers of the 8th and 9th Age the time of the introducing of the Corporeal Presence The very eminent Cardinal Bona whose credit is greater than that of Alexander Natalis do's own all this the last words excepted Haec Ambrosius si tamen ipse horum librorum qui de Sacramentis inscribuntur Auctor est Testatur quidem Augustinus scripsisse Ambrosium libros de Sacramentis sive de Philosophia adverfus l'latonem quorum meminit lib. 2. Retract cap. 4. doctrina Christiana lib. 2. cap. 28. eosque peâ—iit sibi mitti à S. Paulino Ep. 34. sed illi vel perierunt vel alicubi latent longè diversi sunt ab his qui nunc extant ut patet ex sententiis quas ex illis citat idem August lib. 2. primi operis adversus Julianum cap. 5. tribus sequentibus De his verò quos hodiè habemus fecit primò ut dubitarem styli diversitas cùm enim opera Ambrosii ante aliquot annos haud perfunctoriè percurrerem 〈◊〉 ad hoc pervent visus sum mihi alterius lingue hominem ab Ambrosio prorsus diversum loquentem audire Tum animadverti loca scripturae in his citata non esse ejus versionis quâ in aliis libris Ambrosius uti consuevit Quaedam etiam in his reperi quae seculo Ambrosii minùs convenire visa sunt Nihilominùs à Scriptoribus octavi nani seculi laudantur saepiùs tanquam Ambrosii legitimus foetus quorum auctoritati cedens eos deinceps sub ejus nomine cujus est possessio semper cit abo It is true he says at the end of his Discourse that notwithstanding his Reasons before alledged he yields to the Authority of the Writers of the 8th and 9th Age and that seeing they are in possession he will henceforth cite this Book under the name of S. Ambrose But considering the Time and the Doctrine then preparing for the papal stamp who wants the fagacity of understanding to what purpose this Book was forg'd and then brought forth as out of its antient mouldiness And for the humility of the Cardinal's deference to such late Authority against his solid reasons and judgment all know what that means in the Roman Communion where Writers after knowing that they have said things against the genius of that Church do in the end submit all at her feet So did Des-Cartes whose principles are utterly inconsistent with Transubstantiation So did Molinos the Father of the numberless off-spring of the present Quietists For this is the Conclusion of his first amply licensed and then rigidly condemned Guida spirituale Il tutto sottoponga humilimente prostrato alla Correttione della Santa Chiesa Catolica Romana After all this I do allow that Mr. P. was the less to be blamed in this Quotation considered as a Romanist because he cited it out of his Breviary and believ'd as his Church believed Of this spurious S. Ambrose and of the doctrine of the Eucharist in the true S. Ambrose I will say more when more is required I will add only at this time these two things First The Author cited out of the Breviary suppose him S. Ambrose is inconsistent with himself if Transubstantiation be an Article of his Faith. For he saith in another place non iste panis est qui vadit in Corpus sed ille panis vitae aeternae qui animae nostrae Substantiam fulcit That is it is not that Bread which goes into the Body but the Bread of Life eternal which sustains the substance of the Soul. Now what a Judge has Mr. P. chosen toward the deciding of a Controversie in which he is not reconcil'd to himself Secondly This Author in all probability has been further tamper'd with for he would scarce have said that in the Breviary seeing he own'd the Canon of the Mass in his time to run otherwise than now it does in the Roman Missal and to assert that the Elements were the Figure of Christ's Body Sècondly For the Testimony of S. Cyril it was not that cited thus in the Speculum S. Cyril Alexandrinus c. For Mr. P. spake of S. Cyril of Jerusalem and tho' he did not produce the words yet he said they were those in his fourth Mystagogical Catechism I say now as I then did That the place was long ago fully answered The place of S. Cyril is by a Romanist M. W. thus rendered Tho' you see it to be Bread yet believe it is the Flesh and the Blood of the Lord Jesus Doubt it not since he had said This is my Body And for a proof instances Christ's changing Water into Wine The Answer is this and it is a true one We acknowledge that the words of S. Cyril of Jerusalem were truly cited but for clearing of them we shall neither alledge any thing to the lessening the Authority of that Father tho' we find but a slender Character given of him by Epiphanius and others Nor shall we say any thing to lessen the Authority of these Catechisms tho' much might be said But it is plain S. Cyril's design in these Catechisms was only to possess his Neophytes with a just and deep sense of these holy Symbols But even in his fourth Catechism he bids them not to consider it as meer Bread and Wine for it is the Body and Blood of Christ. By which it appears he thought it was Bread still tho' not meer Bread. And he gives elsewhere a very formal account in what sense he thought it Christ's Body and Blood which he also insinuates in his Fourth Catechism for in his first Mystical Catechism when he exhorts his young Christians to avoid
all that belonged to the Heathenish Idolatry he tells That on the Solemnities of their Idols they had Flesh and Bread which by the Invocation of the Devils were defil'd as the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist before the Holy Invocation of the blessed Trinity was bare Bread and Wine but the Invocation being made the Bread becomes the Body of Christ. In like manner says he those Victuals of the Pomp of Satan which of their own nature are common or bare Victuals by the Invocation of the Devils become prophane From this illustration which he borrowed from Justin Martyr his second Apology it appears that he thought the Consecration of the Eucharist was of a like sort or manner with the prophanation of the Idolatrous Feasts so that as the substance of the one remained still unchanged so also according to him must the substance of the other remain Or if this will not suffice them let us see to what else he compares this change of Elements by the Consecration In his Third Mystag Catech. treating of the consecrated Oil he says As the Bread of the Eucharist after the Invocation of the Holy Ghost is no more common Bread but the Body of Christ so this Holy Oyntment is no more bare Oyntment nor as some say common but it is a gift of Christ and the presence of the Holy Ghost and becomes energetical of his Divinity And from these places let it be gathered what can be drawn from S. Cyril's Testimony And thus we have performed likewise what we promised and have given a clear account of S. Cyril's meaning from himself from whose own words and from these things which he compares with the Sanctification of the Elements in the Eucharist it appears he could not think of Transubstantiation otherwise he had neither compared it with the Idol-Feasts nor the consecrated Oyl in neither of which there can be supposed any Transubstantiation I will at present add only three or four Notes about this place of St. Cyril First that the Romish Translator Grodecius has as should seem to help this matter in his way render'd the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by sub specie panis sub specie vini under the shew of Bread and under the shew of Wine instead of in the Type or Figure of Bread and in the Type or Figure of Wine Secondly that just before the words cited in favour of Transubstantiation he uses these But in the new not Law as the Translator has it but Covenant the heavenly Bread and the Cup of Salvation sanctifie Soul and Body as the Bread agrees to the Body so the Word to the Soul. It should hence seem that the Body of Christ meant by St. Cyril was the Word and that both Bread and the Word were received by the Communicant Thirdly that St. Cyril's Third Catechise of the Illuminate or baptized opens the Sense of the Fourth Mystagogical Catechise for there he speaks in a very high strain of Consecrated Water and advises the Persons to be baptiz'd to come not as to common Water but as to the spiritual Grace given together with the Water Fourthly It is much to be doubted whether this be the Book of St. Cyril of Jerusalem for besides that Gesner saies he saw that Book in the Ausburg Library under the Name of John of Constantinople the Author forbids his Hearers to be Frequenters of Spectacles in Theaters or of Horse-races in Hippodromes for this there was no occasion at Jerusalem since it had become Christian there being especially in his time no such Sports and Places there that I have ever read of So in three Quotations the two first are taken out of suspected Authors yet I will allow the Catechisms to be ancient and to be ascrib'd to St. Cyril by Sophronius and St. Hierom yet they note that he compos'd them in his youth 3. Touching the Quotation out of Justin Martyr it was this in English and read out of the abovesaid Sheets called Speculum Ecclesiasticum by Mr. P. S. Justin. c. I suppose in Charity that Antonio for Antonino is the mistake of the Printer but'tis a mistake of some body else when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated As the Word of God Jesus Christ our Redeemer being made man c. instead of by the Word of God or the Divine Spirit Jesus Christ being made flesh c. But to pass to something more material I observe first That the foregoing words of Justin which are very considerable are omitted viz. That at the end of the Eucharist the Ministers distribute to every one present that he may partake of the consecrated Bread and Wine and Water c. Justin calls it Bread after Consecration as St. Paul did before him I observe secondly that Justin interprets himself whilst he saies It is not Common-Bread as if he had said It is Bread in its Nature but being consecrated and made the Figure and Pledge of Christ's Body it deserves a higher Name and indeed this is a Key to the Expressions of most of the Fathers and particularly to St. Cyril as has been already shown and it is plain to those who read the Fathers with Attention that they use such Language in relation to the Water in Baptism as they do in reference to the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist without teaching a Substantial change so Greg. Nyssen despise not the Divine Washing nor make light of it as Commmon I note thirdly that Justin affirms of the consecrated Bread and Wine that they nourish the Body and that therefore he is no Teacher of Transubstantiation which removes the Substances which nourish the Body And now how far is it from the true Art of Thinking and the sincere love of Truth to draw a Proof for a pretended Article of Faith from the high and hyperbolical Phrases of the Ancients by the same reason if the World should last 14 or 1500 years men might conclude that the Church of England taught the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence as well as the Church of Rome she having used these words in the Office of the Communion at the Consecration of the Elements Grant that we receiving these thy Creatures of Bread and Wine according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christs Holy Institution in remembrance of his Death and Passion may be Partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood. An Account of Doctor Tenison 's and Doctor Celgat 's going to the Savoy to Mr. Pulton UPon October the 3d. 87. Dr. Tenison and Dr. Claget went to the Savoy about Five at Night After having found Mr. Pulton the Jesuit in his Lodgings there Dr. Tenison desired him to call to them any one of his Friends that he might hear the Discourse which he was about to offer After being twice or thrice pressed to it by Dr. Tenison he call'd one in the Habit of a Jesuit a Grave and Civil Person his Name was not asked Then Dr. Tenison apply'd himself to Mr.
kept my Word of sending my first Copy to you and have not sent abroad one single Line but after your Receipt of this seeing you have begun on this manner I will let the World know the whole Truth so far as my Memory with all due helps will serve me and from Truth I would not willingly swerve a Tittle For the Story of my going to the Savoy to ask your Pardon it is made very common though I do not charge you with it and if you be curious about Places and Persons I will name some of them to you I never said I came to give you a second Challenge Nor did I come to beg of you to forbear your talking of this Matter in your Pulpit but to Expostulate with you about the unfitness of that way and to understand whether you would keep to the Method you agreed on at the end of our rambling Talk rather than Conference and to tell you that in my Judgment it was most becoming The Jesuit your Witness did not differ from me in this Opinion nor Doctor Claget who was mine I did purpose as I told you to send something to you about your Account but having perused it I perceived you might by comparing it with mine see what you omitted what you mistook and what as to me it seems you sometimes added I will therefore save you the trouble of my Notes upon your Narrative though perhaps in due time I may help others who may not carry my Account in their Heads with such Animadversions I believe in this as you do that it may be fit to Print the whole for the quieting of People who are as yet in suspence and seeing you put me in Mind of it I resolve by that way to ease my self of the trouble of transcribing Copies You have my Letters and I yours and your Account and with this I send you mine together with a pursuit of my Discourse about your three first Quotations Do with them what you please and write what you please further and I will take the like freedom My Stationer which I did but just now know of is at Oxford so that I must elsewhere apply my self but this I promise you that as soon as I send any thing to the Press I will give charge to the Printer to conveigh to you by way of due notice the first Sheet that shall be wrought off All things on my part shall be fair and I am not your Enemy unless which God forbid you will account me so for telling the Truth but can still very heratily Subscribe my self SIR Your Friend as far as oblig'd by the Gospel of our Blessed Saviour Tho. Tenison Mr. Pulton 's PAPER sent in his first Letter with Dr. Tenison 's Animadversions upon it Mr. Pulton's Paper AS the concern I had that the Truth might appear to a Soul that was in search of it made me willing to enter on a Discourse of that Subject with you so I humbly beg that nothing but Charity and a true Sense of Zeal may appear in what may happen to be writt by either of us not to the Scandal but to the Edification of all such as may peruse our Papers You having therefore been pleas'd in our late Conference to assign the Holy Scriptures for the Rule of Faith I desired of you the Favour to know what assurance you had that the Volumes you call Holy Scripture are the undoubted Word of God and this having been the main Point of our four hours Discourse I humbly crave a more clear and positive Answer then I could then obtain You were pleas'd to say the Bible had been handed down to you from the Apostles Then I desired the Favour to know who they were that had so handed it down to you you replied the Universal Church Whereupon I demanded what you meant by the Universal Church You answered That you mean't all those several Bodies who make up the number of Christians Then I farther pressed to know whether all these made up one true Church or no. You said there was something true in each of them but would assign none void of great corruption Upon which I replied That the Volumes which wholy relied on corrupted Authority could have no assurance of being the pure true and certain Word of God. And here we stuck near 2 hours I never being able to obtain a satisfactory Answer I humbly therefore crave to be satisfied 10. Whither receiving the Scripture from the Universal Church you have received a Canon common to all distinct Bodies of Christians If not that you farther explicate what you mean by taking the Scripture from the Universal Church 20. How the Universal Church consisting in Members disagreing in Faith can give you a true and certain Rule of Faith. 30. If when you begann you pretended Reformation there was any Church in being which had that precise Canon you have now and explicated it as you do If so be pleas'd to assign where it was and how you took your Scripture from it As for what related to Transubstantiation and Real Presence it having been a Question thrown in by the by I desire it may be remitted to the second place and having cleared the present difficultie where the stresse of the Discourse lay we will then pass to particular Controversies if you please Dr. Tenison 's short Notes upon this PAPER 1. IT calls the Boy a Soul who was in search after Truth whilst at the same time Mr. P. was satisfy'd that the Boy had never acquainted his Father his Master his Minister with his Doubts till after he had been at Mass and was by his Master and Mistress accused of having been guilty of unsufferable lying and neglect of Business and of the growth of both since he had had Conversation with a Romish Apprentice and Mr. P. and others of that way It is not a thing to be easily credited that a Soul that is in sincere and diligent search after Truth of Doctrine should at the same time become more sinful than formerly in the invention of Lyes and more sowre in Nature and more faithless in the duty of his Calling 2 Mr. P calls the Rule of Faith and the proving the Holy Bible to be that Rule the main Point Whereas it was indeed the Point he desir'd to begin with but it was not that which the Boy had mention'd but the inconsistence of Luther about the Sacraments and his pretended Colloquie with the Devil which therefore was in true order to be begun with But in this there is too much Art for the People may be amused by talk about the Copies of the Bible and the Tradition of them and carried into the dark and so be led the more easily by those who with the greatest Confidence call themselves Guides seeing they are not themselves Masters of critical History but they are more capable of more particular Points as Ex. gr of the Communion in one kind which the People can find
to be contrary to the Bible and therefore that which is tenderest they are not so willing to touch in popular Conferences It is enough if they can get them to the Authority of their Church and then the obedient Child swallows whatsoever the Mother gives it 3. It is said no particular Answer was given it will be found otherwise in the account of the Conference But if a sufficient Sum be tendered and Mr. P. be out of humour to receive it he ought not to complain that he cannot have his Debt paid him If Dr. T. had said less certainly it had not been out of unreadiness to answer seeing in that matter he was prepared he having publish'd a Tract about the Rule of Faith of which a second Edition came forth but a while ago and no Answer has been yet made to it whether out of contempt of the imperfections of it or for other Reasons he cannot tell And here seeing Self-defence is not vanity he takes occasion to make mention of another Tract scribbled by him against the Romish Author of the Protestants Plea for a Socinian at the latter end of which Mr. Meredith's Question about being judg'd by another or going on our own head is answer'd tho not so fully as by another Pen and to be perpetually answering Questions answered already is a Task which a person of good breeding will not impose till the Answer first given is refuted by him It is true there was one who cited a few lines of the latter Tract who if he had cited a few more had spoil'd his design of Misrepresentation His words are these If you have seen the Answer to the Protestants Plea for a Socinian you 'l find there Pag. 26. he points it out for the mark of a Right Socinian to make Reason the Rule of the Scriptures Such a one says he makes Reason the Rule of the Rule He goes no farther for that which follows shews the Author to have spoken of their Reasonings not of Reason it self which if any Man allows them in their own Doctrines he in effect does yeild them the Cause That which there follows is this Though he the Right Socinian thinks a Doctrine is plain in Scripture yet if he believes it to be against HIS REASON He assents not to it And P. 27. A Man of this Church of England suspects not Reason it self but his own present Art of Reasoning whensoever it concludes against that which he reads and reads without doubting of the Sense of the Words If the Representer can come no nigher the Likeness he may if he please lay down his Pencil D. T. owns that this is a Digression but he judged it better seeing there was no more needed to write a Paragraph in defence of himself against a publick unjust Cavil than to trouble the World with a whole Book 4. Whereas it is said that by the Universal Church Dr. T. said he meant the several Bodies who make up the Number of Christians which Mr. P. afterwards calls distinct Bodies Dr. T. did not use that Phrase For his Words were remarkable enough that he meant by the Universal Church what he called it every Lords Day before Sermon the Congregation of Christian People dispersed throughout the World. And he added that he took in the Testimony of Jews and Heathens and might believe Men sincere when they spake against themselves and that he also took in the Roman Church in the better Ages and honest Men in it who in the corrupter Ages gave Testimony against its Corruptions as they arose And he always inserted this Caution that he took this Testimony from such Universal Consent with Considerations of the Persons as agreeing Witnesses and not from their Authority 5. There is Craft in putting in the words distinct Bodies as if the Being of a Church could not be continued and the Corruptions of it opposed and relinquish'd without going forth to some other Body of Men free from all such Corruptions Mr. P. may please to answer Dr. T. in this Point about the Church of the Literal Israel besides which there was then no other Church and enlighten him by the Resolution of this Query whether there may be a Reformation in a Church without leaving of it The Learned Dr. Jackson said it long ago That our Church was in the Romish Church before Luther's Time and yet in it neither as a visible Church altogether distinct from it nor as any native Member of it To his Arguments and Explications at present I refer Mr. P. tho there are others of other kinds of equal weight and clearness For the rest the aforesaid Account of the Conference will shew how far this Paper of Mr. Pulton's is true and whether it contains a fair Proposal when it offers in Exchange for the Contents of it that which is really thinner Stuff and much shorter Measure The Account written by Mr. Pulton A True Account of a Conference had about Religion between Dr. T. and A. P. on the 29th of September 1687 in Long-Acre London Dr. T 's Note MR. P. scattered Copies of this Account and Dr. T. saw three of them on Monday October the 10th Dr. T. and Mr. P. spent their time very ill if so lame an Account as this of a four-Hours Conference be a true one How far it is from the whole Truth has been already shewn in Dr. T 's fuller and more impartial Relation And it is so ill repeated that Mr. P. having by so doing made it his own may take the whole to himself For Dr. T 's part he will not be his Stirrop to be let down and taken up at his Pleasure That which is against him is omitted by him and that which he thinks is for him is added tho never spoken Mr. Pulton's Account ON Monday there came a Youth to A. P. who desir'd to know if he was willing to accept of a Conference with D. H. concerning Religion He answer'd that he was But on Tuesday it was told him Dr. T. would be the Person he must meet at 3 in the Afternoon on Thursday Accordingly the Parties met on the said Thursday being Michaelmas Day A. P. came with one Witness no Priest Dr. T. alone And when the Doctor excepted against the Gentleman A. P. was willing he should retire and pitch'd upon another who casually came in at the same time tho not so much as known by name to A. P. If the Doctor would have no Witness present then A. P. desir'd all might depart except the young Man upon whose account they met the Room being now full The Doctor not assenting to that a A. P. press'd much that whatsoever should be said on either side might be writ down but this not being accepted of the Subject of the Conference was proposed by A. P. who desir'd the Doctor to give the young Man b a Rule of Faith which might keep him in the Church of England After some Preambles the Doctor was pleas'd