E. says he himself pleads that there is no Salvation unless we have a â—inless Perfection and as if Christ had never dyed positively affirms Wheresoever there is Sin there is also Condemnation for which he sets pag. 97. of my Book in which no such words are to be found as he has put down in the first part of this Sentence viz. That there is no Salvation unless we have a â—inless Perfection these not being my words but his own And the latter part he hath grosly perverted making those words Wheresoever there is Sin there is also Condemnation to import as if Christ had never dyed for which there is no colour at all For the End of Christ's Coming and tasting Dâ—ath was not to take away the condemnation only and leave the sin remaining but he was manifested to take away our sins 1 Joâ—n 3. 5. to destroy the works of the Devil vers 8. Not only to take off the Condemnation due for those Works and leave the Works standing but to destroy the Works themselves And where Sins are not taken away where the Works of the Devil are not destroyed there the Condemnation is not taken off but remains as the Apostle proves Rom. 2. 9. Now this Doctrine doth not at all deny the Death of Christ nor derogate any thing from the Vertue and Power thereof but confesses and exalts it in that it ascribes to him the whole work of taking away not only the condemnation but the sin also of not only taking off the guilt but destroying the works of the Devil too whereas the contrary Doctrine doth import that Christ hath not compleated the Work he came to do while it supposes him to take away the Condemnation but leave the Sin remaining whenas he was manifested on purpose to take away the Sin and to destroy thâ— Works of the Devil But as if the Priest thought it not enough to pervert my words and fasten on them a suggestion by no means deducible from them he thus goes on Now he that looks for Salvation by his Perâ—ection doth hold that Popist Doctrine of meriting Salvation by good Works But who is he that looks for Salvation by his Perfection The Quaker does not who does It is one thing to believe Perfection attainable to aim at it and press after it but it is another thing to look for Salvation by it Patience Humility Meekness Temperance Charity and other Christian vertues are not only desirable but I suppose he 'l grant attainable But must they who seek after and obtain these Vertues needs look for Salvation by them it is no fair consequent and had he had the last of these Vertues he would not have suggested this foul slander He adds there And he that proudly sayes he hath no Sin to be remitted râ—nders Christ's death as useless as he that believes he shall obtain remission by his good Works He that speaks proudly Sins in so speaking But that must not be charged on him who speaks the Truth in humility That remission of Sins is to be received through the Blood of Christ the Apostle Paul expresly sayes to the Ephesiâ—eâ—s c. 1. 7. and Colossians c. 1. ver 14. Now he who hath thus received remission of his Sins and with an humble and thankful Heart acknowledges it can he be said to render Christ's death useless when he attributes the remission of his Sins to Christ's Death If any one sayes his Sins are remitted when they are not he is to blame and deceives himself If any one expects remission of Sins by any other way then the death of Christ he renders the death of Christ useless But surely he that in Truth and Humility acknowledges he hath received remission of Sins through the death of Christ doth not thereby render the death of Christ useless but altogether useful since without it his Sins had not been râ—mitted And thus the Quaker does to the refutation of the Priest's slander and the discovery of his evil mind in suggesting the Quaker will be found more a Papist then K. Ethelwolf But whether Ethelwolf were a Papist or no it is much alike to the Priest for he sayes We conclude therefore that the Quaker falsly accuses our Ancâ—stors in calling them Papists and their Clergy Popish and in affirming they were acted by evil motives And yet sayes he if all these had been as true as they are false it had been hurtful only to themselves but doth not at all make their pious Donations of Tythes to God and his Ministers to be void pag. 109. What Ethelwolf was who gave Tythes viz. first a Monk in Orders then absolved from his Vows by the Pope a great Benefactor to the Pope and to the Church of Rome in particular and in a word the Popes Creature What motives induced him to give Tythes viz. to obtain thereby Remission of his Sins and the Redemption of his Soul What Clergy that was to whom he gave Tythes viz. Popish Priests and Monks corrupt in Doctrine corrupt in Practice corrupt in Life corrupt in Manners What the Religion of those times was viz. praying to Saints praying for the Dead sacrificing for the Dead worshipping of Relicks Aâ—ricular Confession going on Pilgrimages extream Vnction Chrisâ— holy Water Purgatory Latine Service and saying Mass with abundance more of the like nature hath been related before And what a kind of Protestant that Priest is who will deny this to be Popery and them to be Papists that held them I leave to the Readers judgment Many more instances might be given to shew how foully the Church of that Age was over-run with the Romish Leprosie but these I take to be sufficient to satisfie any true Protestant And indeed to what purpose were it to add more when the Priest here sayes That if all this had been true that they that gave Tythes had been Papists and the Clergy to whom they gave them had been Popish and the motives on which they gave them had been Evil yet it had been hurtful only to themselves but doth not at all make their Pious Donations of Tythes to God and his Ministers to be void So that it seems be they good or bad that gave be they good or bad to whom they gave be the motives good or bad which iuduced them to give he regards none of all this 't is the Gift he looks at and so long as he can enjoy that he matters not whence or how it came But seeing he having prostituted his both Reason and Conscience to the libidinous desire of advantage and interest regards not how he comes by it I will only recommend to the Readeâ—s consideration how ill it becomeâ— them who pretend to be Protestant Ministers to lay claim to the gift of a popish Prince given to maintain a popish Clergy and Worship and upon such motives as are not only evil but directly contrary to Protestant principles § 15. In the former Obâ—ections which the Priest made in my Name against the
their institution from Popery was with relation to that Chartâ—r of Ethelwolf which the Priest grounded their Dedication on and to the Definition of Popery which he then gave of which more hereafter However I see no necessity either to affirm the Church was Popish as early as Irenaeus and Origen or to recant what I have said in my former Book concernâ—ng the institution of Tâ—thes For he hath not proved and I deny that Tythes were instituted required or paid in the times of Irenaeus or Origen or well-nigh two hundred Years after But of the times in and about which Tythes began to be thought due and as so paid which Selden is positive was not till about the end of the fourth Century and the beginning of the fifth and of the State of the Church then and some what earlier also not to speak my own Sense I will give the Reader a short View and submit it to his judgment About the Year of Câ—rist two hundred as early as Origen Prayers Offerings and Sacrifices for the Dead began to be in use in the Church Tertullian who lived in that time mentions these things in his Book De Corona Militis and sayes They sprang from Tradition As early also was the Opinion of Purgatory received in the Church and believed Both Tertullian and Origen held it as Perkins confesses Problem page 175. Much about the same time crept in the Opinion of the Intercession of Saints departed this life from which sprang the Custom of Praying to Saints And though for some time this was disputed amongst the Learned of those times yet towards the latter end of the fourth Century much about the same time that Tythes began to be thought due this Custom of Praying to Saints grew in use in the Church And Perkins acknowledges that the Antients especially after the year four hundred did not only sin but were guilty of Sacriledge for they some itmes place sayeâ— he their Hope Faith and Confidence in the Saints of which he gives divers instances page 93. Reliques began to be had in veneration and to be carried up and down and flocked aâ—ter about the Year three hundred idem p. 81. The going on Pilgrimage came in fashion about the Year three hundred and twenty and prevailed so fast that about the end of that Century it was made a part of the Worship of God idem pag. 119. The use of Chrisme was instituted by Pope Sylvester about the Year 330. Extream Vnâ—â—on was Decreed by Pope Innocenâ— the first in the Year 402. Monkish Life began about the Year 260. idem pag. 226. The Caelibate or single Life of Priests began to be Preacht up by or before the Year 300. And about the Year 380. it was commanded by the publick â—udgment of the Church and a Vow of perpetual chastity declared necessary and injoyned idem pag. 192. By these few instances the Reader may give a guess at the State of the Church in those dayes wherein Tythes began to get up How much worse it grew afterwards in the following ages when Tythes came to be settled and established by Laws I shall have further â—ccasion anon to shew In the mean time I proceed to examine the Authorities the Priest urges from the Decrees of Councils § 5. As an Introduction to his Conâ—iliary Testimonies he gives his Reader a Note paâ— 8â— First sayes he Let it be noted That 〈…〉 be certain Tythes were paid from the earlieâ—â— daâ—es 〈◊〉 Christianity yet it waâ— not for a long time directâ—y iâ—joyned by aâ—y human Law either Ecclesiastical or Civil which shews the first Christians 〈◊〉 they were obliged to pay them by the Law of God pag 84 This is a Note worth the noting He sayes It is certain Tythes were paid from the earliest days of Christianity The earliest dayes of Châ—istianity Why did he not say pagâ— 67. Oâ—e Reason why Tythes are not mentioâ—ed in the Newâ— Testament by namâ— is To avoid all occasion of Scandâ—l to the Jews whose Priests were then in Possession of them Would the 〈◊〉 have been offended at the mention of Tâ—thes in the New-Testament which they were not like to see and would they not have beeâ— offended at seeing Tythes paid by the Christians to their Ministers Did he not there say Maâ—y things were suffered a while to run in their oâ—d chanâ—el till the whole Jewish Polity was Destroyed And will he now make Tythes to be turned out of their old Channel â—nd to â—un in a new one from the earliest dayes of Christianity before the â—hole Iewish Poâ—ity was Destroyed Did he not there say It would have been used as a prejudice to the young beginnings of the Gospel if the Preachers had presently claimed the Maintenance which others were legally inâ—tated in And will he here say The Chrisâ—iaâ—s did pay to their Preachers the Maintenance which others were legally instated in and that from the earliest dayes of Christianity Did he not say â—â—g 71. The State of the Church in the Apostles dayes was such that Believers though they werâ— willing could not have opportunity to pay Tythes regularly nor could the Gospel-Ministâ—rs receive them And will he here say Tythes were paid from the earliest dayes of Christianity And that this is certain too Certainly this desâ—rves to be nigro carbone notatum Noted with a black Cole He had forgot perhaps that his Brother Priest whom he defends had said in his Conference pag. 157. I confess the Apostles had not the Tythes in their dayes the Levites themselves were in Possession of them which they kept during the continuance of their Nation and Templeâ— Besides you ought to consider that Tythes or any other fixed Maintenance was utterly inconsistent with their unfixed State of Life being to Preach the Gospel in all Nations they became an improper Maintenance for them aâ—d besides you are to consider that the Apostles needed them not for as they had their Gifts so their Maintenance by a Miraculous Prâ—vidence Here one of the Priests sayes Tythes or any other Maintenance was improper for the Apostles and utterly inconsistent with their Stateâ— That the Apostles neither needed Tythes nor had Tythes nor could have had them if they would because the Levites Possest and kept Tythes during the continuance of their Nation and Temple which was not utterly Destroyed till about thirty seven Years after Christ's Death The other Priest sayes It is certain Tythes were paid from the earliest dayes of Christianity Is not this pretty How justly might I here reâ—ort what he most unjustly threw at me pag. 59. One of these must be false for indâ—â—d there is a manifesâ— coâ—tradiction Let them lay their heads together again and see if they can reconcile it But it seems however this early payment of Tythâ—s was not for a long time directly enjoyned which was seasonably noted by him to excuse himself from giving some early constitution either Ecclesiastical or â—ivil for the so early payment of them But this Non-Injunction
having most treacherously and inhumanly murdered Ethelbert King of â—ent did thereupon give the tenth part of his Goods to the Church and founded Monasteries The latter having occasioned the Death of her Husband Earl Ethelwold murdered her Son in Law King Edward did found Religious Houses for Monks Nuns To EXPIATE that I may use the words of a great and learned Antiquary and make SATISFACTION for that most foul and hâ—inous Fact wherewith so wickedly she had charged her Soul by making away King Edward her Husband's Son as also to wash out the murdering of her former Husband Aethelwold a most Noble Earl c. Camden Brittan pag. 262. And that these Acts and such like of those and other Princes of those times have been thus taken and understood by men of Note and Learning appears not only by the last quoted Authority but also by the Testimony of Fâ—x who compiled the Book of Martyrs He in his first Volumn pag. 110. enumerating the many Monasteries and other Religious Houses founded and endowed before Ethelwolf's time says thereupon The End and Cause of these Deeds and Buildings cannot be excused being contrary to the Rule of Christ's Gospel for so much as they did these things seeking thereby MERITS with God and for Remedy of their Souls and REMISSION of their Sins For Proof whereof he produces a Charter of King Ethelbald above fifty years older then that of Ethelwolf granting certain Priviledges to Religious Men in which aâ—ter the Preamble are these words Qua propter ego Ethelbaldus Rex Merciâ—rum pro amore caelestis Patrie et remedio animaâ— mea studendum esse previdi ut eam per bona opera liberam efficeâ—em in omni vinculo delictorum i. e. Wherefore I Ethelbald King of the Mercians for the Love of the Heavenly Country and for the Remedy of my Soul have foreseen it needful to endeavour by good Works to make my Soul free from all bond of Sins â—rom which senteâ—ce Fox observes how great the ignorance and blindness of those men were who lacking no Zeal only lacked Knowledge to rule it withal seeking sayes he Salvation â—ot by Christ only but by their own deservings and MERITORIOUS deeds And in pag. 123. setting down the Charter of Ethelwolf so dear and precious to the Priests upon these words in it Pro remissione animarum peccatorum Nosâ—rorum he hath this Note Hereby sayes he it may appear how when the Churches of England began first to be indued with Temporalities and Lands also with Priviledges and exemptions inlarged moreover and that which specially is to be considered and lamâ—â—ted what PERNICIOUS Doctrine was this wherewith they were led thus to set Remission of their Sins and Remedy of their Souls in this Donation and such other Deeds of their Donation contrary to the information of Gods word and no small derogation to the Cross of Christ. Thus far Fox by which the Reader may at once see both the Opinion and Practice of Ethelwolf's Age in this matter and also the Censure of this Ecclesiastical Writer in thâ— early Age of Protestancy Yet the Priest sayes pag. 106. This Popish Doctrine of Merit and expiation by good works is not so old as that Age which he infers from some directions given by Anselm to those who visited the Sick in which is mention of being saved by the death of Christ as also from the words of Popâ— Adrian who calls as he sayes Merits a broken Reed c. The Popish Doctrine of Merits and Expiation by good works was not on a sudden and at once received in the grossest sense in which it hath since been hâ—lâ— but by degrees and for a while remission of Sins was attributed to the death of Christ and good workâ— joyntly which is the reason that in the writings of those elder times mention is made of the death of Christ and of good works promiscuously and the work of Redemption Salvation Remission indifferently ascribed to each This the Priest seem not ignorant of when he sayes pag. 10â— We may perceive they did not think this good work ALONE could expiate their Sins or merit Salvation wiâ—hout God's Mercy As for the judgment of Anselâ— Adrian or any other such it is not conclusive in this case for we are not so much to regard what was the private judgment of some one or few particular Persons as what was the general Opinion of the theâ— Church We find in Queen Mary's time when Popery was as its height when Dr. Day Bishop of 〈◊〉 came to visit Stephen Gardiner the bloody Bishop of Winchester lying then at point of Death and began as Fox relates to comfort him with words of Gods promiâ—e and with the free justification in the Blood of Christ our Lord repeating the Scriptures to him Winchester hearing that What my Lord quoth he will you open that Gap nâ—w then farewell all together to 〈◊〉 and such other in my case you may speak it but open this Window unto the people then farewel all together Martyrol vol. 2. pag. 1622. None I think can doubt but the Doctrine of meriting Salvation and of Expiating Sins by good works was then generally believed in the grossest sense by the Church of Rome and yet we see by this inâ—tance some of thaâ— Church had a private Judgment otherwise and some of the worst of that Church too For scarce did Bonner himself send more Sheep to the Roman Shambles then did this Buâ—cherly Bishop of Winchester who as Fox observes in the place fore cited on the day that Ridley and Latimer were burnt at Oxford deferr'd his Dinner till about four of the Clock in the afternoon reâ—using to eat till by a Post from Oxforâ— â—e had certain intelligence that the Fire was kindled upon those Godly Martyrs Thus we see some of the worst of the Romanists did not hold all the Opinions of the Church of Rome yet neither doth that prove either that those Romanists were no Papists nor yet that the Church of which they were Members did not hold those Opinions But the Priest as if he hoped to wind himself off from the Objection by criminating the Quakers says To merit Pardon and Salvation by good works is now a Doctrine of the grosser Romanists and I fear of some Quakers also who sleighting merit and necessity of Christ's Death ascribe Salvation to the following the Light within p. 10â— In this he slanders the Quakers I reject his Charge and in the Name of the Quakers deny it Let him name those Quakers that sleight the Merit and Necessity of Christ's Death I solemnly declare I know no such and yet I think if any such there were I might as well pretend to know them as he Nor do the Quakers ascribe Salvation to the following the Light within but they ascribe Salvation to Christ Iesus to whom the Light within doth lead those that truly follow it Herein he hath wronged the Quakers as in his next words he abuses me T.
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
parts to themselves cannot vouchsafe to impart the fortieth portion thereof among the poor people of that parish that is so fruitful and profitable unto them It appears then the Poor were maintained out of the Tythes not only among the Iews in the time of the Law but in this Nation also till of late that the Priests have jâ—stled out the poor whose Names they made use of to get Tythes by at first and now ingross all the Tythes to themselves leaving the poor upon the Parish's charge So that the Parish though they pay their Tythes never so exactly and to the full are fain when that is done to begin again and make nâ—w Lâ—vies upon every man's â—state to supply the wants of the Poor And whether in this respect also the charge is not heavier on the people now let the indifferent Reader judge § 22. He spends his next Section in quarrelling with me for asking Whethâ—r it was not a Pope that set up Parish-Priests The occasion of the Question was this The Author of the Conference as this Priest in his Right of Tythes pag. 223. reports him had given two Reasons why the Apostles took no Tythes 〈◊〉 Noâ— of the Iews because their own Priests were in possâ—ssion of them 2. Not of the Gentiles because of their unfixt Station To each of these I returned an Answer in my former Book pag. 351. then askt this Question Seeing the Apostles state of Life was unfixt who I pray fixed your state of Life who divided Provinces into Parishes and set up Parish-Priests was it not a Pope For this Question the Priest derides me with a great deal of scorn and says Right of Tythes pag. 224. Never did any man pretend to 〈◊〉 of things he understood so little as T. E. doth of Ecclesiastical matters This All-knowing Quaker says he doth not understand that the Apostles themselves fixed Bishops and Pastors in the several Citiâ—s they had converted Timothy at Ephesus Titus in Crete giving them Commission to ordain and fix others in lesser Cities He were a knowing man himself if he were able to prove this Was Timothy fixed at Ephesus Titus in Crete By whom The Apostles themselves he says but how does he prove it He says it and that 's all Methinks since he judg'd I do not understand this he might have been so curteous to have offer'd some proof of it By which of the Apostles may it be supposed that Timothy and Titus were fixt as he expresses at Ephâ—sus and in Crete Paul was as likely to have been the man as any other for by his Ministry they both were converted to the Faith of the Gospel with him they seem to have most conversed and from him they received those Epistles which are inscribed to them Yet so far was Paul from fixing Timothy or Timothy from being fixed at Ephesus that we find he was sent by the Apostle into Macedonia Acts 19. 22. To Corinth 1 Cor. 4. 17. That he was with him at Athens when he writ to the Thessalonians 1 Thâ—s 1. 1. and 2 Thes. 1. 1. That he was sent to Thessalonica 1 Thes. 3. 2. 6. to Philippi Phil. 2. 19. That he was with the Apostle at Rome when he writ to the Collossians Col. 1. 1. In Prison with him there and released Heb. 13. 23. sent for by the Apostle to Rome again not long beforâ— his Death 2 Tim. 4. 9 21. So also for Titus hâ— was sent by the Apostle to visit the Corinthians afteâ— the first Epistle was written to them 2 Cor. 2. 12 7. 6. 12. 18. went afterwards again to visit thâ— Câ—rinthians and carried the second Epistle to them was sent for by the Apostle to come to him to Nicâ—polis where he intended to Winter Tit. 3. 12. Anâ— after all this we find him gone into Dalmatia 2 Tiâ— 4. 10. If these be Arguments of their being fixt at Ephosus and in Crete I confess I do not understand what he means by the word fixed Will â—e ground the fixation of Timothy at Ephesus on the words of the Apostle Paul 1 Tim. 1. 3. As I besought thee tâ— abide still in Ephesus c. or of Titus in Crâ—te on the words of the same Apostle Tit. 1. 5. For thâ—â— cause left I thee in Crete he will find them both quickly uâ—fixt again and travelling from Coâ—â—try to Country to visit the Churches to preach the Gospel or to minster to the Apostles and that after these Epistles were written to them But let us suppose for the present his Position to be true viz. That the Apostles themselves fixed Bishops aâ—d Pastors in the several Cities they had Converted Timothy at Ephesus Titus in Crete giving thâ—â— commission to ordain and fix others in lesser Cities and see how miserably he wounds himself and his Brother too with his own Weapon The Apostles he says took no Tythes of the Gentiles because of their unâ—â—xt Station Tythes or any other fixed Maintenance was utterly inconâ—istent with their unfixed state of Life Confer pag. 157. Yet the Apostles themselves fixâ—d Bishops and Pastors in the several Cities they had Converted Timothy at Ephesus Titus in Crete c. Did ever man that pretended to understanding so contradict and confound himself He gives their unfixt station for the reason why they did not take Tythes yet in the same Breath says Tiâ—â—thy 〈◊〉 fixed at Ephesus Titus was fixed in Crete the 〈◊〉 themselves fixâ—d Bishops and Pastâ—rs in the severâ—â— Cities they had converted A fixed state then according to him it seems there was amongst them in the several converted Cities and yet notwithstanding this their unfixt state was the reason why they did not take Tythes 〈…〉 the man that in derision calls me the All knowiâ—g Quaker This is he that sayâ— of me Never did any man pretend to write of things he understood so little as T. E. doth of Ecclesiastical matters Let him see now and be ashamed of his own weakness and learn for the future to speak witâ— more modesty of others He goes on thuâ— concerning me pag. 224. He knows not how Eusebius and other Historians reckon up the very Persons in all eminent Churcheâ— â—â—dained and fixed there by the Apostles Is he sure he speaks Truth in this How knowâ— he but that I do know what Euseâ—ius and other Historians say in this case as well as himself witâ—out offence to him be it spoken I know no reason why I may not But how much or little soever I know I 'le assure him I know more both in Eusebius and other Historians also than I could ever yet find Faith to believe and if I mistook him not he seem'd to be somewhat of the same mind in pag. 131. Again he says ibid It will be News to him to tell him That in the very beginnings of Christianity wheresoever the Gospel was once planted there were strict Canons made agaisnt the Clergy of one Diocess going into another to officiate This is News to