you the Quakers do own Authority and Magistracy to be of Divine Institution Min. Now I shall answer your Question and that in the affirmative viz. that Temporal Authorities have power to establish Temporal Rights and this will evidently appear when it is considered that our Saviour never so medled in Temporal matters as to determine them as a Judge When two Brothers came to him for judgment in a Temporal matter he absolutely refused and disclaimed all such power saying Who made me a Judge c. He declared his Kingdom not to be of this World he took not upon him the judicial cognizance of any offence whatsoever He left the woman taken in Adultery and all other offenders to the ordinary course of Law His design was not to diminish the Authority of Princes but to fix in the hearts of men the true principles of holiness and goodness and to rule there as a Spiritual Prince whilst in Temporals he left them to a due observance of the Laws of their respective Countries It was upon this stumbling block that the Jews fell supposing the Messiah should be a Temporal Prince Par. What do you infer from all this Min. The inference I draw from hence is That in Temporal affairs an Argument drawn srom a Temporal Authority where the thing is equitable and reasonable is a good and convincing Argument and that in two respects 1. Because Christ having disclaimed all exercise of Authority in Temporal matters there is now no other way of determining them than by recourse to the Civil Powers 2. He hath so far confirmed these Powers that he has commanded a severe obedience to them Let every Soul be subject to the higher Powers Rom. 13. 1. Fear God Honour the King 1 Pet. 2. 17. and a great number more of the like importance And it 's very observable that those Powers they were then to be subject to and the King they were to honour were heathenish and tyrannical which teacheth us that Dominion is not founded in grace and that the demerits of Princes do not absolve Subjects from their duty of obedience Par. But suppose a tyrannical Power should give you that which is anothers Right and Property can you enjoy the same with a good Conscience because you have the same from a Temporal Authority Min. You mince my words for I do not say in every case a Temporal Authority can create a right to a Temporal Interest but in such cases only as are equitable and reasonable Par. Hold you to this Principle and your cause is lost Min. I shall not shrink a tittle from it Par. Shew me then what reasonable and equitable right you have to the tenth part of another mans Estate and Property Min. If Tithes be another mans Estate and Property the case will be clear against me but this is begging of the Question therefore I am ready to prove that Tithes are mine not his from whom I receive them Par. Then the Question will be here How you came by that Property in the Tithes you claim as your own Min. In order to the satisfying of this scruple I shall not insist on the Divine right of Tithes and the lawfulness of receiving from Melchisedec's Priesthood to whom they were paid which is an unchangeable Priesthood but shall ground my discourse upon that which is owned by all that will yield to the Authority of Scripture or Reason viz. that Maintenance in general to the Ministers of the Gospel is just reasonable and established by a Divine Authority Par. Pray let me hear where the Gospel has appointed that Maintenance you speak of Min. The Apostle hath done the thing sufficiently and cloathed it with words so emphatical that you shall not meet with more briskness and sharpness of style elsewhere See 1 Cor. 9. if you read his words there from verse 6 to the 12th you may find St. Paul quoting the Law of Moses and pressing the reasonableness of it verse 9. It is written in the Law of Moses thou shalt not muzle the Ox that treadeth out the Corn Doth God take care for Oxen or saith he it altogether for our sakes c. that is he appeals to them whether they that labour for us in the Word and Doctrine be not by that Law designed to be much more regarded by us and to have a Maintenance from us verse 11. If we have sown unto you spiritual things is it a great thing if we reap your carnal things that is have a temporal reward for our spiritual service verse 7. Who goeth a warfare at his own charges that is spends his own Patrimony when he is on the Publick service is it reasonable that we should plant your Spiritual Vineyard and not eat of the fruit of your Temporal Vineyard Shall we feed the Flock of Christ and not eat of the Milk of the Flock And when he writes to the Galatians he reminds them of this particular Gal. 6. 6. Let him that is taught in the Word communicate to him that teacheth in all good things or in all his goods as the Original imports where the Apostle enjoyns us to minister to the natural necessity of those that minister to our Spiritual necessity and all this according to God's Ordinance That they that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel 1 Cor. 9. 14. Par. I acknowledge these to be the Apostle's words and the reasonableness of them but this is no other kind of Maintenance than what the poor may require of us and which a voluntary contribution may answer and such a Maintenance as this the Apostles had and we allow the Preachers of the Gospel Min. That the poor have a right to such a provision from us as may be a supply to their necessities is evident from Prov. 3. 27. where it 's called their due and right and Alms-giving is elsewhere called Righteousness Now suppose some charitably disposed persons should give certain Lands and Tenements to every Parish for the Maintenance of the Poor and the same is confirm'd by the Law because we do not meet with any Command in Scripture to set apart such Lands or that any did actually entail them to such uses have therefore the Poor no right to those Lands and are the Tenants under no Obligation to pay their respective rents That our case is the same will be evident to every understanding man So that by the same Argument you endeavour to destroy Tithes you will destroy also all the Hospitals in England Par. You start from your Question which is not concerning Maintenance but Tithes You say that they that preach the Gospel ought to live of it that is it takes care for the livelyhood of those that are the Preachers of it but where doth it appoint Tithes for that livelyhood Min. If you will grant that Maintenance in general is due by the tenor of the Gospel you will sufficiently justifie Tithes from all the idle cavils which are brought against them Par.
wherein and the Accuser must make good his Charge Par. You are very faulty in intimating that the Quakers can produce no Texts against Tithes for you cannot be ignorant that they have produced several as that in Jeremiah 5. 31. The Prophets prophesie falsly and the Priests bear rule by their Means Isaiah 65. 11. Every one for his gain front his quarter Min. I must confess I have seen these in many of their Books and by some Quakers they have been urged to my self but when I reflect hereupon I cannot forbear concluding that they discover not only a sottish ignorance but downright dishonesty herein Par. Make good your charge Min. Can there be more sottish ignorance than to apply Jeremiah's words either against Tithes or the Maintenance of the Ministry under the Gospel and that I may manifest their folly let me tell you a story parallel to this case Two men disputing when Guns had their first invention One said that a certain Monk as he was making some Chymical Experiment accidentally found out Powder c. and consequently Guns must come after The other dated their original to be of as long a standing as David's dayes because he saith in one Psalm O Lord I have kept thine Ordinances which was impossible for him to have kept had there not been Guns then Par. Why do you bring in here this idle story Min. To convince you that the Quakers use the Prophets words as idly and as little to the purpose For it is as proper to say that Ordinances signifie Guns in the Text quoted as to say that Means in the Prophet's sense signifie Tithes Maintenance or any other Estate The Priests bear rule by their Means that is by the means or procurements of those false Prophets or by reason of them And Solomon tells us that by means of an whorish woman a man is brought to beggery not by reason of her Estate but by her means i. e. by reason of her inticements it so comes to pass Par. I must confess this is an oversight but wherein doth their dishonesty appear Min. That will be as apparent as their ignorance They say Tithes are unlawful why then is it said Mal. 3. 8. Will a man rob God yet ye have robbed me but ye say wherein have we robbed thee in Tithes and Offerings Par. You are to conceive that Malachi lived during the continuance of the Law and Burrough's will yield that Tithes then were of Gods commandment of heavenly ordination c. What then signifies the Text in Malachi for Tithes in the time of the Gospel Min. Here it is that Quakers discover their dishonesty in acknowledging Tithes of an heavenly ordination under the old Testament and yet condemn them by producing Texts out of the Prophets who lived under the same dispensation which they knew did both allow and command Tithes Par. I must confess I am not furnisht with a Reply to this how well soever others may Min. I told you before that Tithes and other Church Revenues have been setled by those that were actually seized of them in Law now if the Quakers can prove from the Laws of God or right reason that it 's not lawful for every one to do what he will with his own and consequently that he may not settle Tithes Lands or Moneys upon the Clergy then they do something to the purpose if not they do but beat the Air with empty words and you have reason to look upon them as indeed they are a company of Cheats and Impostors Par. All this while you do not consider that Tithes are a great oppression to all sorts of people concern'd in the payment of them Min. So all Tenants may as reasonably say that the payment of Rent to their respective Landlords is a National burthen and oppression Par. There is not the same reason for every Landlord will tell you that he or some for him purchased their respective Tenements upon a valuable consideration Min. But the main question is behind Whether they purchased the Tithes with those Tenements if not where is your grievance Par. Do you suppose then that Tithes are no grievance Min. None at all neither to the Landlord nor Tenant Par. Prove this Min. You cannot be ignorant that every Purchaser buys his Land according to the Rent it gives and every Tenant payes Rent according to the conveniencies he enjoys Now if a Tenant stand charged with Tithes Taxes chief Rents and the like these are computed to every Occupant according to which he models his Rent and though he pays these dues and duties as they are called yet are they no inconvenience to him because he pays less Rent in consideration thereof Neither is it any inconvenience to the Landlord because his purchase was according to that Rent and the Land he bought he knew or might have known was lyable to these charges Par. Here must needs be some mistake for were I to sell my Estate I could not have so much for it by a considerable sum because it stands charged with the payment of Tithes And if this be no grievance judge you Min. But pray satisfie me whether you gave not as considerable a sum less upon this consideration when you bought it if so will you sell what you never bought Where then is that intolerable grievance which I perceive is no where to be found but in the mouths of Fanaticks and ill affected people Par. But I pray you resolve me thus much where the Apostles had Tithes Glebes and the like Min. I confess the Apostles had not the Tithes in their dayes and you ought not to bring this for an Argument because they could not have them if they would for they were not only persecuted by the Civil Authority but the Levites themselves were in possession of them which they kept during the continuance of their Nation and Temple Besides you ought to consider that Tithes 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 and besides you are to consider that the Apostles needed them not for as they had their Gifts so their Maintenance by a miraculous Providence Luke 22. 35. And he said unto them when I sent you without Purse and Scrip and shooes lacked ye any thing and they said Nothing Par. Ought not you then to be in all things as were the Apostles Min. If you conciude that we must be in all things as were the Apostles then must you of the Laity now do as the Laity did then who sold their possessions and laid them down at the Apostles feet Acts 4. And I can argue the one with the same reason you can the other But I have one Query wherein I shall desire your answer Whether the Quakers think it lawful to pay the King his Revenues Par. You know the Quakers willingly pay the King all his dues which they do for Consciencesake
Meat-offerings Sin-offerings Shake-offerings Heave-offerings and the Shewbread as also of all Eucharistical Sacrifices the breast and the shoulder and the Offerings for Purification I say besides these the Priests were to have the First-fruits of Wine and Oyl and Wool Deut. 8. 4. yea and of all things else which the Earth brought forth for the use of man the First-fruits of the Dough Numb 15. 20 21. So that when all things were computed there was not left five parts instead of nine to the owners And therefore you being eased of the charge and trouble of all those payments and offertories to the Priests which the Jews paid as supernumerary over and above their Tithes you have little reason to grudge the Gospel-Ministers that proportion allowed them by the Christian Laws which is much short of what was allowed to the Legal Minister Par. I understand by what right the Levites demanded their Tithes and the rest namely by the Law of God but then by what Law of God do you demand your Tithes now under the Gospel Min. Let me here tell you that those that insist upon the divine right of Tithes derive them not from Levi but Melchisedec Par. It was not the tithe of Hay and Corn that Abraham paid to Melchisedec but the spoils of War Min. It 's not material what the particulars were out of which Abraham paid his Tithes but whatever they were he paid them as a Tithe and Melchisedec received as a Priest And if you consult the original you will find that it was not a voluntary gift of Abraham's but as a due received by Melchisedec for the words would properly be rendred he tithed Abraham Par. That I may draw my matter into as few words as I can I frame my argument thus If the Clergy of England now possessed of Tithes can show a precept where God has commanded them or an example where the Apostles did actually receive them I shall be satisfied in the point but if neither can be made good then do not the Clergy with an ill conscience enjoy them Min. Your argument will appear very weak till you make good the consequence of it Par. There can be no mistake in the consequence for certainly precept or example in Holy Scripture must be the guide of all our actions Min. I will shew you the mistake by your own way of arguing It hath pleased God to bless you with a competent Estate you challenge so many acres of ground in such a Field and so many acres of meadow in such a place part of which you enjoy in dernise from your Landlord and part you hold in fee being the inheritance of your Ancestors and Family Now to make you a good property in this Estate you must shew either some positive Scripture for your right to hold the same or an example from Christ or the Apostles that they had Freeholds and Copyholds or else if you cannot so do will you not fall under the same condemnation you have past upon us Par. I shall soon discover your fallacy by telling you that I enjoy my estate as a temporal right Min. If then the consideration of a temporal right be sufficient to satisfie your conscience in a temporal enjoyment by the same reason I can hold my Tithes without any wound to my conscience Par. Do you call Tithes a temporal right Min. Is not that temporal which contributes to my temporal subsistence but to put the thing out of all doubt our Laws have made them a Free-hold Par. If Tithes are temporal rights how come you to â—…all them spiritual preferments Min. All Tithes are not so called because all impropriations are held in a Lay-fee and others are called spiritual preferments not in respect of the profits but the persons who are capable of them and therefore are they vulgarly called spiritual preferments because enjoyed by spiritual persons But I pray let me ask you what you have to shew for your estate Par. I will answer you upon condition you will resolve me a like question Min. Agreed Par. I have a good Deed. Now what have you to shew for your Glebe and Tithes Min. I have a good Terrier and Endowment Par. Prove that Terrier and Endowment to be right by the Law of God Min. So I will when your Deed is made good by the Law of God Par. It 's sufficient that my Deed is approved by the Laws of the Land Min. So 't is sufficient that our Tithes are setled by the same Laws When you have said all you can against them they will be found to be as equitable as any other property whatsoever And if you judge us unjust in taking of the tenth by the same argument you will condemn your selvcs of nine times greater injustice for taking of the remainder The sum of all will amount to this that Tithes are due by either Divine or Human right or both If we enjoy them by a Divine right as we do at least a Maintenance in the general you kick against the pricks in with-holding them If by Human right you will involve your property in the destruction of ours because none of the Laity can shew any other right to their temporal properties than Human Laws And if we have both Divine and Humane right to our Tithes as they are a setled Maintenance we enjoy them by the strongest title in the world So that the Quakers will hereby be proved to be no better than robbers of God in with-holding them Par. Before we proceed any further in this controversie there is one material point to be discussed which will bring the business of Tithes to a speedy issue and 't is this Do you suppose that temporal Authorities have sufficient power to establish temporal rights Min. I suppose you will think it a needless question to be askt Whether the Quakers own any Temporal Authority or no though many of their practices may justifie the absurdity of such a Query yet I shall presume they do for Government is so essential to the well-being of the World that even a private Family cannot subsist unless some undertake the conduct of it and if a Kingdom have no Laws so that every one may do what is right in his own eyes such a Kingdom must needs be brought to desolation through the abundance of divisions that will be therein Yea Christ himself hath so far honoured Government that he submitted himself not only to the private authority of his Parents but also paid homage to the publick Government as you may see in that remarkable instance in giving Tribute though he was put to the expence of a miracle for it And Government is so far approved by God that we are expresly commanded to be subject to it and to obey them that have the rule over us Hebr. 13. And no less punishment than damnation is threatned to them that resist Rom. 13. 2. Par. I believe that what you say is Gospel and so I 'le assure
How so Min. The Gospel you hear commands a Maintenance be provided for the Ministry and the Civil Powers and Nursing Fathers of the Church have set out Tithes for that Maintenance so that if Tithes were not due by a Divine Appointment they are now due by a voluntary dedication of them Par. How does any such voluntary dedication appear Min. You need not scruple this point would you but give your self the pains of consulting Antiquaries or Church Histories especially that famous Charter of King Ethelwolf set down at large by Ingulf where you will find the whole History of the thing to the full satisfaction of any whose prejudices do not obstruct the free use of their Reason Par. I am apt to believe what you say without any further inquisition into the thing but then I suppose they were given in a blind and superstitious zeal which makes all void to us Min. This is another mistake For Tithes being given to God for the Maintenance of his Ministry no blemish in the dedication of them can alter their Property To make my assertion good a parallel case in Scripture shall be produced That which comes most near it is the case of the Two hundred and fifty men who offered Incense Yet there was a vast difference between them The Two hundred and fifty offered in a stubborn rebellious manner and these in an ignorant zeal as some suppose but we do not grant But that which will give us most light into our present case are the Censers which were so offer'd which you will find notwithstanding that damnable sin committed in the consecration of them yet because they were offer'd to God they were not to be alienated to common uses Numb 16. 37. Speak unto Eleazar the son of Aaron the Priest that he take up the Censers out of the burning c. for they are hallowed From hence you may learn how dangerous a thing it is to meddle with any thing that hath been given to God For you see the reason given why the Censers were not alienable was because they were hallowed by being offered before the Lord. Therefore saith a Learned Rabbi they were unlawful for a common use because they had made them Vessels of Ministry Par. I have often heard that Tithes were given at the first by the Pope and therefore not to be endured in a Nation that hath renounced all communion with him Min. This I know is one of the popular Arguments of the Quakers to cast a mist before the eyes of their ignorant Followers but suppose it had been so they would not have been less hallowed than the Two hundred and fifty Censers were and so consequently the alienation of them no less impious yet I deny your assertion that Tithes had their institution from Popery And I have good grounds for what I say for Tithes were setled upon the Church before Popery had made her encroachments in it For Popery is not of that antiquity as some do vainly and falsly boast Though they shew their old shooes and mouldy bread yet upon a strict enquiry they will be found to be but so many Gibeonitish Cheats and that their tenents and corruptions are not of that antiquity as is pretended by them However that you may have a distinct answer to your Question give me first your notion of Popery Par. I call all such Doctrines and Practises Popery as are held in the Church of Rome Min. That this is a wrong notion of Popery will be very evident if you consider that the Doctrine of the blessed Trinity the Incarnation Passion Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord is believed in the Church of Rome Par. I cannot but confess all this to be true Then I pray do you tell me what is Popery Min. I cannot give you a more brief and true account of Popery than this That it is such Doctrines and Superstitious practises which by the corruption of time have prevailed in the Church of Rome contrary to the true ancient Catholick and Apostolick Church Where we agree in any points of Religion there is no more reason to call us Papists than there is to call them Protestants The Socinians maintain the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures the Church of England doth the same shall we therefore be branded with Socinianism By which instance you may see the Quakers folly in their charging Tithes with Popery But to make it more clear do you think that Cranmer Hooper Ridley Latimer Tayler and Bradford were inclinable to Popery Par. I suspect them not in the least for they sealed their detestation of it with their blood and were eminent Martyrs for the Protestant Cause in the bloody dayes of Queen Mary Min. Then I hope you will have a better opinion of Tithes since these in their time were receivers of them As also of the Common-Prayer-Book since some of those good men did assist in the compiling of it Par. Hereafter for their sakes Tithes shall never be reputed Popish by me yet methinks you have not proved yet the Divine institution of them Min. Is it not sufficient that I have proved Maintenance in general a Divine institution and that Tithes have been set out for that Maintenance but that you may be eased in this scruple let me tell you a story There happen'd to be a publick disputation in Germany before the Elector of Saxony concerning Tithes one side vigorously maintaining that they were due by the Laws of God arguing that Tithes were paid to the Priesthood of Melchisedec and so consequently that Tithes were still in force with the Priesthood further arguing that no Law is abolished whilst the reason of it continues still in force now there is as much reason for Tithes in the times of the Gospel as there was in the times of the Law And lastly they argued from that Analogy which the Apostle makes between the Levites Maintenance under the Law and the Ministers Maintenance under the Gospel even so hath the Lord ordained c. The other side as briskly maintaining that Tithes were due only by the Laws of the Land When they had all spent their Arguments the Elector himself gave the determination thus One party I perceive saith he is for the Divine another for the Human right of Tithes yet both sides agree and acknowledge them to be a right therefore according to my duty to maintain right I am bound to justifie and uphold Tithes After all this out-cry against Tithes do the Quakers think the paying and receiving of them to be a sin Par. Do you think that all this stir could have been if they thought it not a sin to demand and receive Tithes Min. What is sin Par. The transgression of the Law 1 John 3. 4. Min. Now shew me a Law against Tithes If it be the transgression of a Divine Law shew the Text if of an Human Law shew the Statute 'T is the Opponents part to prove and if we be faulty you must shew