A SEASONABLE TREATISE ON THE SCHOLAR'S REASONABLE ADDRESSES, That were delivered in a Petition to the Honourable Members of both Houses in Parliament assembled, Feb. 1677 / 8.  
Being a Collection out of the Civil and Common-Law, against Pluralities and Non-Residences. And for the Restraining and Preventing sacrilege and Simony, The present Pests of our CHURCH.  
— Grande doloris  
Ingenium est, miserisque venit solertia rebus, Ovid.  Et mihi quanquam propè nihil jam relictum est, quod perderem, si tamen ista impunè sustinenda sint, solatium erit iram potius quàm contemptum pati. Quint. 
Printed for the Author. 1678.   

erratas  
PReface. l. 1. for not sooner, r. no sooner, for mischange, r. mischance. for approaches, r. reproaches, for be my own Executioner r. been, &c. r. of Phil. & Baucis r. Tract Doctorum Juris, vol. 1. 2. 9. 10. 11. for Cobe, cook.  
Pag. 4. for plurium r. pluralitas, p. 5. sedalis, sedatis. Ibid. celebrant, Celebrat: p. 8. l. 21. for they perish, r. Sheep per. p. 19. for Aera, r. Egress. ibid r. a lucky( or rather) unlucky minute p. 19. for, nor ought not to, r. nor ought to be, ibid. last l. wherein whereby, p. 20. l. 2. rage r. age. p. 25. to procure, r. I can procure, ibid. his prospect r. this prospect p. 31. l. 23. leave out be made, p. 33. l. 16. is controulable, r. uncontr. p. 45. l. 17. leave out of. p. 48. l. 30. forbid, r. bid.   

THE PREFACE.  
I Had not sooner had a view of the Scholars Addresses, but I immediately upon it( like Juno upon the touch of a Flower) conceived a few indigested Notions, for which I could have no ease, till I had been delivered. Though I hope this of mine will not prove( like that of hers) an Off-spring of Discontent. Nor is it intended for a Mars, but a Mercury, a Harbinger of Peace. Having but a short time to give it form and to foster it in the mind, and being destitute of the assistance of any Muse to play the Part of a Midwife at my crying out; it is a mercy if the Parent escapes, but a wonder if the Abortive should live( without expecting it to be furnished with any exact perfections) especially if we consider the difficulties and many dangers, which even in their best Conditions threatening an unfortunate Birth, attend persons in travail with their Burdens. After this I was held in suspense, whether I should make it known to the World, or suppress, stifle, and throw it into some private by-hole, like some of the weaker Sex, who having had a mischange, smother their innocent Infants, to avoid a public Disgrace. For I was sufficiently sensible that Subjects of this nature could never be grateful or taking among gauled Persons, and therefore it cannot well be expected, but that whosoever meddles with such Subjects, should be liable to the scandal of being censured a malcontent: For indeed it is their interest to cast this malignant aspersion upon such( though undeservedly) that thereby they may pre-possess themselves in the favour of the World, and insinuate themselves into a good opinion, to save their own Bacon.  
I have red of one, that feigned himself Mad, that he might the freelier utter his mind to the People in reference to their Duties, and I had need at present to put the same Policy into practise myself, to avoid the approaches and fury I am like to incur by the displeasure of some Pluralists, whose Transactions indeed are able to make one really so: But we live not( thanks be to Almighty God, and our most Gracious King) in so miserable an Age, but we dare utter the Truth without a disguise.  
Though I know some prejudiced persons will endeavour to brand me with the reproachful and infamous character of being ill affencted towards the Church, for telling the truth( which Children and Fools are much addicted to.) And I must needs confess, I had rather be really a Fool, than to be the least suspected to deserve this Imputation, or guilty of some persons Knavery. But for all this, I expect to receive no more mercy at their hands, than Deserts show to young Plants. They will presently conclude that I am a Reprobate, and a most ungracious Child, for laying open the Nakedness of my Mother, the Church: Thus they blast and damn me e're I have time to recover myself.  
Truly I should have spared them the labour, and should have been as ready and forward to pass the Sentence upon myself, and be my own Executioner, could I have brought in myself attainted of any such Crime.  
But they must not think by imposing upon my modesty, to stop my Mouth with an obscene bawdy expression of their own, which( as it was occasioned by their recourses to them) may fitly be retorted to their Carnal Spouses; but( in my judgement) not in the least futable nor applicable to to the Spiritual one.  
For I harbour a better Opinion of my Mother Church, than that she should have any Secrecies( of that nature) which she would not willingly have her Children privy to, or which she might be ashamed to expose to public view, and divulge to the whole World. And I am obliged in conscience to believe, that those defaults, which go under her Name, are falsely imputed to her, being crept in without her Consent, and contracted by others Miscarriages, for which too many make her Nakedness a Covering.  
May it not be possible then to have a solemn Reverence and Honour for the Church, and be exempted from the Superstition of doing Homage to persons Vices? May not we bear a singular and due Respect to the Clergy, and not think some persons sins sanctified? Certainly this is so far from unhinging its Constitution and Frame,( which is the only pretext some of them have opposed in defence of their own Transactions) that it is the only means to preserve them entire; so far from being a Prejudice to her Health; that it proves the only Remedy against all approaching Diseases.  
Why should a man, in laying open the Misdemeanour of some few persons, be taxed for laying open the Nakedness of the Church, more than those Persons themselves in reproving others Faults and Vices? Why should a thing that is directed to few crafty men, reflect on the whole Church? Must the Church be turned to an Asylum, which was a Refuge for Offenders? Besides, does not the Church consist of Lay-men as well as Clergy-men? Do they not bear a part in her Harmony? Or are they so uncharitable, so rigorous to exclude the Lay-men? But I must beg their pardon and leave, to crave them the Benefit of the Clergy in this point. Some had rather be out of the World than out of the Fashion, and some had rather be out of the World, than out of the Church: Therefore we can claim right to the Sanctuary as well as they. But why should not every Tub stand on its own Bottom? Why must we fasten our Faults upon the Church? Is it not an affront sufficient to her Authority, to transgress her Laws, Canons, and Injunctions, but we must, after we have done, impute the Breaches of them to her?  
Our Exorbitances are not her Constitution, our Failings not her Frame, our Infirmities not her Nature? Our Fall is no more the Church's that disallows it, than the angels Fall is the Heaven's, that forbid it.  
The Church forbids our Enormities by good Laws and Canons; and yet must those of her own Family and Profession, whom she hath nourished and brought up as Children, whom she has encouraged as Ministers; must they burden her with reproach and a scandal? Does it behove them( like treacherous Serpents) to wound whom they pretend to embrace?  
Though all their pretences are in vain; the Church is pure and innocent, she vindicates her self in care, constitution, devotion, canons, injunctions, Orthodox Doctrine, Primitive Government, pure and orderly Worship, and a severe Discipline: But she does not justify Pluralities of Cures and Non-Residence; the Church forbids all extravagancies by wholesome Laws, and checks them by severe Canons, and disallows them by fair and just means imaginable, though some harken not to her Charms, charm she never so wisely.  
The Church took care in former times, that no Monks( i.e.) idle persons should take Livings of Bishops, or appropriate the Revenues of them to themselves, but that the Priests serving those Cures and Churches, might receive the Benefits; She accused them for engrossing wealth and trade, for impoverishing Parish Priests, &c.  
The Church gives liberty to enjoy the Comforts, privileges, and Ordinances, which Christ instituted: She allows us to do and enjoy, what is honest, reasonable, or just in reference to God, others, and ourselves; and barred us of no liberty, but of doing ill.  
My design is not( as some may censure) to fasten a general Ignominy and Odium upon the whole Clergy, nor yet upon all Pluralists, but by laying the Saddle upon the right Horse, to separate some Drones and Devourers of the Common-Wealth,( who Jocky-like, make it their trade and only business, to chop, change, and purchase for profit, without regard of honesty or conscience) from the most laborious, sparing, and faithful Bees of our Age. For with reverence I acknowledge( to some others shane, who having such Types to follow, come so far short of them, and being not able to look them in the Face, like those Eagles, whose eyes cannot endure the Sun-beams, are to be disowned as a Bastard-Race and illegimates) that our Church is abundantly stored and blessed with most pious, able, and faithful Ministers, whose worth and merit make preferment court their acceptance, and cause Pluralities without seeking to be thrown upon them, who can as freely wash their hands from them, as from detaining the Revenues from the right use.  
Though I must not abuse their modesty in enlarging myself on the Recital of the number of those persons, by making particular reflections thereupon; who by practising according to the Rules they preach to others, give evident proofs of a sound belief and expectation of another World; who in their charitable Actions and virtuous Lives and Conversations make a visible Image of an invisible Divinity, who, though in the middle of the World, are as it were out of it; being no farther concerned in it, than in their care of regulating its affairs.  
Such seem to anticipate Eternity, dum intr a tempus Aeternitatem auspicantur, whilst here within the narrow bounds of time, they make an Essay thereof.  
I say, we have some, whom the World may justly suspect to be Saints or some Celestial Inhabitants descended from above to view our Coasts, as the Story goes of the Gods, who in human shape formerly came down to visit the Coasts of Phrygia.  
And I hope this Tract being the only offering I have, will give no offence, if it may not procure your Favour, as that entertainment Philemon and Bauois did the Favour of their Guests. And were I to have my wish, I should soon make choice of that Blessing of which that honest old couple did.  
Esse sacerdotes delubraque vestra tueri  
Poscimus—   

TO THE READER.  
READER,  
I Confess I have been as little guilty of taking any pains, as some of those whom this is directed to. I desire to call nothing of it my own, but the pains( if there was any took) of collecting it from other Authors, and applying it in a kind of a disordered order to the several Addresses. Neither can it be laid to my charge, that I have played the Plagiary whilst I ingeniously confess my Authors, and prefix their Names to the Front, instead of my own.  

The Persons Names quoted and made use of in this Tract are these.  
The Council of Lateran. Vol. 1.  
The Council of Trent. Vol. 9.  
The General Councils. Vol. 11.  
Tractatus Doctorum Juris. Vol. 10.   

Sr. Ed. Cobe's Institutes of the Ancient Laws of England.  
Sr. Henry Spelman de non temerandis Ecclesiis.  
Sr. Sim. Degge.  
Ichabod: Or the five Groans of the Church, written by a Loyal Divine of our Church: Printed in 63.  
The Abridgements of the Ecclesiastical Laws, by Jo. Godolphin.    

THE FIRST ADDRESS.  
THAT no Person be authorised to take or hold any more than one Cure of Souls, with as many sine-Cures, Prebends, deaneries, and other Dignities as a Man's Opportunity, Friendship, or Merits can promote him to. That every Incumbent be immediately compelled to resign his first Cure or Cures to the Bishop of the diocese, and that the Bishop should appoint able Men to supply during the present Incumbents time, allowing Fifty Pounds per Annum; the Over-plus deposited in some public Treasury, towards the purchasing in some of the Impropriations of Corporations and Market-Towns, that are destitute of Salary, and where is most need of Pious and Learned Men.  
The Multitude of Men( our Universities abound with) Eminent both for Learning and Piety, may seem to render this Petition very just and reasonable; who( though some whereof are above Twenty, others above Thirty Years standing) could never rise higher than a poor Curacy of twenty pounds a year: Many of them never had the benefit of that, nor could ever have a fair Opportunity or Proposal tendered, wherein they might( with a safe Conscience) have exercised their Talents; Whilst others in the interim engross two or three Livings,( besides an accumulation of Dignities) residing upon neither, nor yet allowing Competent Salary for others to supply. Through which means Parsonage and Vicarage-Houses fall to decay, Vices are unreproved, the Sick unvisited, the Poor unrelieved, with many other Omissions, which occasion Faction, dissension, and Atheism; and undoubtedly is( though probably is modestly inserted in the Address) one main ground of the decay of Piety and contempt of the Clergy.  
It is fully decided by the Decrees of the Holy Councils, 
Vid. Tractatus Doctorum, vol. 9. fol. 3.  quòd de jure communi non potest quis habere plura Beneficia Ecclesiastica curata, 
Nam in talibus non videtur esse jus, Vol. 1. f. 47.  &c. That no person can expect Shelter or Patronage under the Umbrage of the Common-Law, for encroaching Pluralities of Cures of Souls, in one, nor in divers bishoprics.  
Yet they held some Pluralities, or Pluralities in some respects to be lawful; as such as require not Residency by Statute or Custom, Or such that have not Cures of Souls annexed. Such Pluralities( saith Innoc.) may be allowed of; ( dummodo non sit nimia multitudo) And he thought, 
Tract. Doctorum. vol. 9. fol. 3.  quòd non sit peccatum talia plura tenere, that it is not a sin to be a Pluralist in such Livings. The consequence that may be inferred, is this; That he thought it a sin to be a Pluralist in Church Preferments that have Cures of Souls. Hence was that saying of St. Bernard, Qui non unus said plures in beneficiis, non unus said plures in suppliciis: He that is not one but many in benefice, shall not be one but many in punishments.  
Pluralities were allowed of in these cases. 
Ibidem. Jo. in d. c. Sanctorum enumerat casus speciales, in quibus potest quis habere plura benef.( viz.) propter Ecclesiarum paupertatem quando nulla de se sufficit ministrum sustentare. Propter Clericorum paucitatem, nam ex hac causa uno Clerico possunt conferri omnia beneficia. Ubi una est intitulata, altera commendata. Quando una dependeat ab altera. Item ex dispensatione Papae.   
( 1) When the Churches were so poor, that neither by itself could maintain a Minister.  
( 2) Where there was scarcity of Clerks.  
( 3) When the one is had by title, the other by commendam.  
( 4) When two Churches are united, or the one depend upon the other.  
And lastly,( which marred all) when the Pope dispensed with them.  
For his frequent dispensing with Pluralities and Non-Residencies without number or measure, 
Sir Sim. Degge.  brought the Canons and Decrees of the Councils to no other purpose or effect, than to augment his own Revenues.  
Some questioned whether his Holiness's Bulls or dispensations could reach to Pluralities of benefice or no; it being very improbable he should command Pluralities, 
Sol. dicit quod mandatum non extenderet ad plura benef. quod non est verisimile, quod communiter velit mandare Pluralitatem quae prohibita est regulariter. Cap. ad apostle. extra de excerpt.  which were regularly prohibited.  
When the Pope was said to be invested with Power to dispense with all things in the Positive Law, 
Plurium Beneficiorum non est de purè bonis, nec de purè malis; quia si talis esset Papa non dispensaret: said de mediis iisque non indifferentibus secundum suam naturam, imo plur. beneficiorum est demediis quae sunt absolute mala. Tract. Doct. Vol. 11. Fol. 188.  the councils could hardly tell, how to term Pluralities of benefice, or in what rank to place them; whether amongst things simply good, or simply bad. Though they were too obvious to any mans common sense and Reason to be adjudged de pure bonis. Yet they durst not assert the contrary, for fear of incurring his Holinesses displeasure. For they must never have expected his Holinesses Indulgence, or Pardon, had they judged them de purè malis, or of things simply evil, in this they would have seemed to charge him, that he dispensed with unjust and evil things: therefore, for the prevention of danger on both sides, they thought it the safest way to determine them to be de mediis, between both: as neither de purè bonis, nor de purè malis. Yet they allowed them to be such media, or between-boths as were absolutely evil, 
Quia malum videtur, quod unus habeat plura, cum vir in uno posset servire been.  because it seems not to be good nor just, that one should encroach Pluralities, since he can scarce perform the duties of one thoroughly and well.  
Sir Simon Degge quotes a Canon out of the general Council of Lateran, 

Canons against Pluralities.  
Statutum est quod quicunque receperit aliquod beneficium habens curam animarum annexam, si prius tale beneficium obtinebat; eo sit juro ipso privatus, & si fort illud retinere contenderit, alio etiam spolietur, is quoque ad quem prioris spectat donatio, illud post receptionem alterius conferat cvi merito viderit conferendum.   in the year One thousand two hundred and fifteen. That whosoever having a Cure of Souls already, shall accept of such another Cure, should be deprived of the first: and in case he should seem unwilling to deliver it up, being made voided by his acceptance of the latter, that he should lose both; and that the Patron may present another clerk.  
By the same Council it was Decreed upon, 
Cone. Later. sub Alex. tertio, Frederico I. Imp. sedalis inter eos simultalibus celebrant.  Plura Ben ficia non esse uni committenda, nec unum inter duos dividendum. That Pluralities of benefice ought not to be committed to one mans care, &c. And in another place it was determined, Quod qui sufficiens Ecclesiasticum habuerit beneficium, si de alio Literas Summi Pontificis obtinuerit, prioris beneficii non factâ mentione, dignum est eum à Judicibus non exaudiri: That whosoever having one sufficient Church-Preferment, shall procure a Dispensation for another, without making mention of the former, should not be heard.  
Sir Simon Degge cites an Act established against Pluralities, in the Twelfth year of King Henry the Eighth. That if any Person or Persons having( that is, being Instituted) one bnfice with Cure of Souls, being of the value of Eight pounds or above, shall accept and take another with Cure of Souls, and be instituted and inducted into Possession of the same; that then immediately after such Possession had thereof, the first bnfice should be voided.  
And that it should be lawful for every Patron having the advowson thereof, to present another; and the Presentee to have the benefit of the same, as though the Incumbent had died, or resigned; and that any Licence, Union, or other Dispensation contrary to the Act should be voided.  
Residence by him that hath a Preferment in the Church with Cure of Souls, was held by the greater and better Opinion of the Council of Trent, to be of Divine Right, and that therefore the Pope had no power to dispense with Non-residence. The consequence we infer, with Sir Simon Degge, is this, that it is against Divine Right,( or at least, that it is not of Divine Right) for any person to hold more benefice than one with Cure of Souls, because the same person cannot be resident upon two Livings at one and the same time to discharge his duty, which requires a constant attendance.  
Thus the Ancient councils, as well as the Canons of England have always complained against Pluralities of Cures and Non-residence, being two( for the most part) inseparable Pests of our Church.  
And they have been as much discountenanced at the Common Law, 
Vide, Si Simon Degge's 4 and 7th. cap. 1 Book.  in that the Parliament of England in all Ages most strenuously endeavoured to restrain the Exorbitances of the Pope, and the Court of Rome though he made the endeavours of all good men ineffectual: for several times they brought in several Complaints against these enormities, and stood upon their Prerogative so much, that they made bold with his Holiness, when his power was in England at the highest, and when the Kings of England were not accounted as Heads of the Church.  
We may easily judge how agreeable Pluralities are to Gods service; nay, how prejudicial they are to the advance of Christian Religion, and how unbecoming and dishonourable, especially to the Protestant Ministers, were it from no other consideration, than whence they had their Original. For the Council of Lateran( as Sir Simon Degge observes) in the twenty ninth Canon; 
Cum fuit in hoc Conc. prohibitum, ut nullus diversas dignitates Eccles. & Pl. Eccles. Parochiales reciper. Et contra Sacrorum Canonum instituta, &c. circa sublimes tamen & literatas personas, quae majoribus beneficiis honorandae sunt( cum ratio postulaverit) per sedem Apostolicam poterit dispensari, &c.  reduces all the Qualifications to the Pope's Dispensations, where it was Decreed, That no person should accept of divers Ecclesiastical Dignities and Pluralities of Parochial Churches, against the Decree and purpose of the holy Canons; yet this was dispensed with by the Pope upon some extraordinary occasions.  
Dispensations seem still to carry with them a Tincture, and have too near a relation and analogy with indulgencies which are related to be procured men, whereby they being assured aforehand of their Pardon, have liberty to Transgress; so Dispensations are sought for the same end, ( viz.) That Men may freely and without danger of being damnified, hold and act contrary to good Councils, Canons, and Statutes.  
For Dispensations( like Pardons) suppose Misdemeanours and Offences intended, if not already committed; the breaches of Statutes, and a Penalty incurred for those breaches. Therefore as Pardons cannot, so neither can they properly be said to be granted to persons not in fault.  
Though we may be the better enabled to judge of the sad and manifold grievances, the Church of England in this juncture labours with, upon the account of Pluralities, by the fruits and ill consequences that necessary attend them: marked by Sir Simon Degge, 
Res ipsa loquitur plura Beneficia, potissimum quibus Cura Animarum submissa est, non sine gravi Ecclesiarum damno ab uno obtineri; cum unus in pluribus Ecclesiis ritè officia persolvere nequeat, aut rebus earum necessariam curam-impendere.  out of another Council. Where it was concluded, that many benefice, especially, having Cures of Souls annexed, could not possibly be held by one, without great damage done to the Churches, in that one could not reside upon both at the same time.  
Hinc( saith Pope Damasus) ainae negliguntur, Oves pereunt, Morbi crescunt, haereses & scismata prodeunt, Ecclesue destruuntur, socerdotes vitiantur & reliqua mala proveniunt. Hence Mens Souls are neglected, they perish, Diseases grow hot, heresy and Schism break forth, Churches fall to decay, Priests are corrupted, and other Mischiefs come about.  
Plurality therefore is not one single Pest of our Church, but is always and necessary attended with a whole Train of Mischiefs. For where is Plurality, there is inevitably Non-residence, and where is Nonresidence, there must needs be Omissions of several main duties incumbent upon the Minister; such as the want of a narrow and careful inspection into the Condition of his Flock, and remissness in the due performance of Sacred Offices, which a good and faithful shepherd cannot in conscience neglect, for indeed, with what face or pretence of honesty can any Clergy-man expect his Tithes from his Parishioners, that neglects the welfare of their Souls? upon what account can he suppose them to be his deuce? Are not they the just compensations of a Ministers labour and care? And certainly it cannot be expected, but that he; who valves not the Sheep, so much as a flock of their wool, should let the Sheepfold go to ruin. So that a Pluralist by his Non-residence from one( at least) of his Livings, must prove a Dilapidator: being very improbable he should keep that House in repair, which he never makes use of.  
Where the Law allows of Plurality, it was done upon good grounds: and it had been an excellent Law, had it been advanced, but now it produces little more effect, than the transferring the power of Dispensations in this case from the Pope, and scattering it among the Nobility, and others; so that the Churches grievance at this day is become greater than ever: for Dispensations were not so numerous formerly, being they were fetched all from Rome, came flowly, and were dearly bought. Neither were Persons capable to qualify Chaplains so numerous in those days as now they are grown.  
For there are above a thousand Qualifications now in England by Service only, besides Chaplains of the King, 
Sr. Sim. Degg's First Book.  Queen, Princes of the Blood, and Dowagers; and probably there may be as many more qualified by birth and dignities.( 1.) Such as are all the Brothers and Sons of temporal Lords and of Knights born in Wedlock. And though in this there seems to be no provision made for the Sons of Popes, Abbots, Priors, &c. Nor for any Bastard, yet some there are, who procure dispensations to have Pluralities of Livings, to maintain such.  
( 2) Such as are dignified in the Universities, as all Doctors and bachelors of Divinity, Doctors and bachelors of the Common-Law.  
If all persons qualified had Pluralities, there would be hardly any left for such that are not qualified; excepting such Livings which amount not to ten pound a year in the Kings Book,( of which there are above 4300 in England) and these are not thought worthy of Pluralists acceptance; For they catch not now adays at the least Livings,( though at first they crept into the Church, upon account Churches Revenues were so small, that they were not able singly to maintain a Minister.) And all the best Livings in England are taken up and held by Pluralists; and how many of them are there, that hardly vouchsafe to visit either of their Flocks in a whole year, but such times as they come to take the Fleece? How many commit them to the care of poor, unable, and raw Curates, because they are the cheapest sort of Cattle,( as they call them?)  
Whilst they feast abroad at Noble-mens Tables, or take their ease upon their Prebends or deaneries; how many poor parishioners( that have a share in the Tithes as well as they) for want of that Hospitality, they should keep, are ready to starve? and what is most of all to be pitied, and lamented, how many poor Souls for want of better instructions, through their negligence, are in danger of Perishing?  
Being nature and duty oblige all Children to succour Parents: The Church, having no place else to apply her self to for help and refuge, now in her weakness extends her hands to the Nobility, and as it were languishing, implore their aid, and begs upon her blessing, that they take her Extremities into their Considerations, which undoubtedly with the Benediction of Heaven, and the Prayers of the poor Clergy, will attend them and their Posterity; if they prove so kind and dutiful to their Mother, as to become so much selfdeniers, as to lay aside the privilege of qualifying: or in case the Nobility will not lay it aside, she hopes to find remedy and ease in part, if not a cure for the whole, from the Arch-bishops, that have power of the same, or from his Sacred Majesty, who( under Christ) is her Head and governor; in denying Confirmation.  
The with-drawing of His Majesties Royal Grace and Favour, and the contracting of their Honours Influences, and other ways mixed with severity and sweetness, contrived in time, by their Piety and Wisdom, may reclaim these straying persons, and reduce them to themselves. And indeed, their present condition requires it; for they being like Men desperately Feverish, often coveting what may feed their Disease, should be stinted and forced to restrain themselves from indulging their appetites in too plentiful and injurious a Diet.  
For if it be agreeable to the Rules of Common Law, That a Temporal Officer should be deprived of his Commission, and lose his Office for a Non-user, or for unfaithful and disloyal dealing therein: I see no reason why it might not be so in Spiritual Affairs; that the Incumbent should have his Dispensation Annulled, and lose his bnfice for absenting himself from it; or for being unfaithful in his Charge, whilst he neglects those many poor Souls committed to his care: as it must be necessary with him, that holds Pluralities, in that he cannot be resident upon both at one and the same time.  
And if those Monopolists of many Livings, besides Dignities, apprehended it injurious to be deprived of one or two, I will appeal to any sober Mans Reason; and dare refer it to their own Breasts, whether it be not more inhuman to suffer many hundred of as ingenious and Orthodox Men as themselves, to starve for want of Bread, whilst they wallow and tumble in superfluities.  
Therefore it is but Reason and Justice, and a singular Act of Charity, that this fatal Liberty should be taken from them, that they might be settled in a Blessed Necessity of adhering faithfully and constantly to one.  
It was held a point adverse to Christian Faith, to admit of more Wives than one into ones Bed, and contrary to the Law of Nature. For it is written, That every Man may have his Wife, but not Wives, 

Tract. Doctorum vol. 10.  
Inimicum est fidei Christianae virum habere plures Uxores, imo juri naturali contrarium, cum scriptum sit Habeat unusquisque suam non suas, propter Fornicationem evitandam. Et ideo Papa non posset Dispensare ut quis plures haberet Uxores; quia contra fidem Papa non potest dispensare, &c.   to avoid Fornication. And the Pope himself could not allow, That any Man should have Pluralities of Wives, because he cannot dispense with things repugnant to Faith. One would judge it as repugnant to a Ministers Principles and Conscience to admit of Pluralities of benefice into his embracings, as Pluralities of Wives into his Bed.  
For every Minister,( as he is Christ's Representative,) ought to make his Church his Spouse, as being Consecrated and bound to each other, with a pure and Spiritual tie and union. She would not have the World so much as share with her of his Affections, but would enjoy them entirely to her self.  
And to this purpose it was wisely decreed upon in the Council of Lateran and others, 
Conc. Later. sub Alex. tertio Frederico primo Imperatore celebratum.  held under Alex. the Third; Quod Clerici se immiscere negotiis non debent: That Ministers ought not to intermiddle with, nor entangle themselves in secular Affairs, that being freed from such encumbrances, they might give up themselves to their Studies, and wholly devote their time, their Labours, and themselves to the Church. And questionless upon this account God allowed the Church that competency in Tithes and Offerings for their moderate use and maintenance; that they might not be forced to spend that time in picking their Livelihood, which should be otherwise employed.  
By several Councils General it was agreed upon, Quòd clerici villas ad firmam tenere non debent, vel Ecclesias: nec causa lucri negotiari, vel à laicis villas habere: That they ought not to deal in Farms, nor for Lucre sake, in any manner of traffic. Yet how many doth our Age afford, that so violently are carried on to serve their own worldly Interest, as in the interim to forget their engagement to the Church? All those promises they made, all those reverential Oaths they took, when they were first enrolled in her Service, are quiter forgotten. She finds her self contemned and put out of favour, whilst they fond court, hug, and embrace the World as a new Miss.  
Well therefore might the Church grow jealous and call such persons fidelity and constancy to question, when she perceives herself not made a true Spouse, but an Harlot; whilst they commit Spiritual Whoredom, either by seeking Pluralities, as variety, to gratify their lustful Appetites, or by cashiering her and leaving her destitute, whilst they go abroad a whoring after their own Inventions; whilst they, as it were by divorcements, absent themselves and put her off: She must needs betake her self to her mourning Garment, gird her self with Sackcloth, and bewail her loss and miseries in her Widow-hood.  
Damasus, 
Qui talia praesumunt, videntur mihi( ait) esse meretricibus similes, quae statim ut pariunt, infantes suos nutricibus tradunt educandos, ut suas citius libidines expleant. Sic isti Infantes suos( i.e.) populos sibi commissos aliis educandos tradunt, ut suas libidines expleant,( i.e.) pro libitu secularibus curis inhient, &c.  one of the better sort of Popes compared such Ministers to Harlots; For,( said he) as Strumpets set out their Infants to Nurse, as soon as they be delivered, that they might the sooner recover themselves to pursue their usual lustful Sports and Games of Iniquity: So they deliver their People over to others care, that they being freed of that trouble, might devote themselves to the Sensualities of the World, and have time to pursue their own Secular Ends.  
Neither ( saith he) did God teach, nor did the Apostles ever institute these things: For, he that undertakes a Cure, ought to perform the Charge of it personally himself, and with his own hands to present his Maniple to God, and not by the Curates Hands. It is said, Take heed to yourselves, and to all the Flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Over-seers, &c. Act. 20.25. Hath the Holy Ghost made this Man an Overseer of the Flock, and can be presume to appoint another whom he will?  
I would fain be resolved in one thing, that is, Whether the Curate, as he is an Overseer over one of the Pluralist's Flocks, be made an Overseer of that Flock by the Holy Ghost, or by him? I do not know what Monsters they make of their Curates( which they put to no other use than to stop the holes that are picked in their Coats, whilst they think to excuse their own misdemeanours with them) For my own part, I take their Curates and them equally qualified in respect of their Orders, and the one to be as much a Minister as the other in reference to the Call; unless they will assert, That some have not been called by God to the Ministry. Indeed I had reason to suspect such a thing myself; and now they have confirmed me in what I suspected before, I shall think some of them to have had that other by-call. But to return to my Quaere.  
If therefore he replies, That his Curate was not made Overseer by the Holy Ghost, but by him, because he made choice of him, and so came in by his means; he confirms the former Allegation ( viz.) That some persons invade and usurp the Ministry, as being not sent by God. Besides, I have him on the same Lock to boot; for in the same sense he cannot be said to be made an Overseer by the Holy Ghost, because he came into his Living by his Patron's means and favour, or by the strength of his Purse.  
But I suppose that he will grant that his Curate was made Overseer by the Holy Ghost: If so, Is the Flock the Curates as he is Overseer, or is it his? If it be the Curates,( as it must necessary be) let him tell me, whom the Fleece of that Flock properly belongs to. I will desire his patience but in one thing more, then I will dismiss him for this time, which is this; Whether he thinks the Holy Ghost appoints any to be Overseers and not allow them the Overseer's maintenance: Or, which is more improbable, Whether he makes one an Overseer or Labourer, and allows another to reap the Benefit; If he asserts this, the Conclusion, that may be inferred, will prove of ill consequence to him.  
If we should offer a word or two by way of enquiry into the Grounds of this Monopoly of Cures of Souls, I wonder what they can allege. I am certain there is little or no probability of honesty or piety on their side; let their pretence be what it will: They may have some crafty cunning evasions, and false specious Colours to irradiate their self-ends, sordid designs and contrivances withal; that is usual; for 'vice never appears in her own proper shape and habit.  Fallit enim vitium specie virtutis et umbra. 
But we can soon discern true honesty from a pretended fictious one. A Vizard soon falls off of itself, or is taken off: If therefore such men with borrowed and adscititious Feathers may happen for a time to cheat our sight, we shall know them at long run by their Flight.  
Were such mens designs just and honest, or any ways laudable, then it were lawful; and if so, then the Action likewise, being the result of their Design, would be of the same nature: And if the Design and Action were lawful, then they needed not a Dispensation; for we need not procure Dispensations or Pardons for the doing of any good and virtuous Action. Therefore they design and act what is neither just, honest, lawful, nor any ways laudable; and consequently, what is consistent neither with virtue, Religion, nor Piety.  
Though I own, and would have all aclowledge the Kings prerogative, in that he may,( as he is often graciously pleased) remit the Penalties of the Law; yet they are not to be accounted the less faulty.  
A Malefactor, having escaped his Executioners hands by virtue of a Reprieve or a Pardon, cannot say, that he never deserved to be Executed, because he is not: this being others Clemency, not his Deserts.  
Though it be a gross Parallel, yet I see but little difference, but that the one sues not for his Pardon, or Dispensation, to escape the Penalty, till he hath transgressed; the other before, and so being assured of a good come off, goes on with courage to pursue his Interest and self-designes; and I shall leave it for others to determine, which deserves most compassion and is most to be excused; in that the one designedly, and politicly breaks the Law; the other oftentimes rashly and inconsiderately.  
Yet, not that I hold the Crimes to be equal, or of the same nature, but that,( let them be of what degree or nature soever) to be pardonned or( allowing them their own term) to have them dispensed with; argues not, that they have not been at all committed. To be freed from the Penalties incurred, absolves not any from the guilt contracted.  
Therefore, I would not have any, fond to flatter up, or wilfully delude themselves,( as too many do; especially, when Interest favours the Design) by fancying that to be no breach of Statutes, where is probability, or assurance of escaping the Penalty. In vain are their endeavours of persuading others to a belief, that they would not have acted contrary thereunto, were not they so assured, thinking thereby to clear themselves; for this makes no escape for them.  
In the first place, their procuring leave or Dispensation,( which is the only Shield they usually oppose for their own defence) affords them but little shelter or safety: and indeed, this pretext is so far from defending them, that it argues plainly against them, they have made a Rod for their own backs.  
It is fit impudence should be extremely shameless, not to blushy at so great absurdities. What piece of sauciness could you compare to that of ones asking your leave to break your head; as if a-by your leave Sir, were sufficient satisfaction for the Affront? What greater piece of Impudence can there be produced, than that of requesting leave to commit which one ought not; nay, that( as it shall appear anon) which he knows to be Repugnant to Divine and Human Law? Does not this Impudence aggravate the Offence, and render persons for more criminal than those, whose Pardons are sued and procured for Offences committed, without craving leave?  
There is but small hopes of any, when once arrived to this pitch and degree. He is ready qualified for any Attempt, that hath lost all shane, cast off all blushes of Modesty; 'vice hath its full career; farewell Virtue, for ever adieu to thee, Honesty!  
— Nam quis  
Peccandi finem posuit sibi quando recepit  
Ejectum semel attrita de front ruborem?  
Besides, Actions, which require Pardons and Connivances, are supposed to include something of turpitude and illegallity, and to have deserved Punishment, and they cannot deny some of them, but they have entertained designs in their Minds; which, when put into Action, required Dispensations and Pardons: which were a long time a taking Form, and a Fostering there; and as it were Acted, before they were cast into Actions, and brought into public view. And when Mischiefs are hatched inwardly, nothing obstructs, or procrastinates their Aera's or Birth, but the lack of fit opportunity, or( rather, unlucky,) a lucky Minute.  
The Testimonies not only of Scriptures, but of Heathens may be sufficient Arguments to convince shane, and teach some Divines their Lessons. For we learn of them, that the harbouring of a thought within ones self to perpetrate villainy, renders the person guilty of the Fact.  
— Scelus intra se tacitum qui cogitat ullam,  
Facti crimen habet.  
Mischiefs indeed, when thought upon, are even then conceived, and are as it were the Embryo's of greater and more dangerous Events; which though as yet in the Womb, having not attained to their perfect shapes, are not, nor ought not to be accounted less hurtful. For the very Eggs of venomous Creatures are venomous.  
And as there is not the least 'vice, but may be in capacity of admitting daily growths, and fresh accessions, wherein, in process of time it may arrive to its full ripeness and bulk.  Nullum scelus desinit ubi incipit. 
So neither is there any villainy grown up to such a rage and maturity, but once had a Beginning, and cried as a Babe in its Cradle.  
Nemo repent fuit turpissimus.— Nec quisquam ind caepit, quo incredibile est pervenisse.  
Innocency and Integrity shake not off their acquaintance of a sudden, they leave not a man all at once, but by degrees, Et ne in maximis trepidet audacia, diu vires in minoribus colligit.  
I aver therefore thus much, our thoughts are not so free, but we ought to be accountable for them, as well as for our Actions. For what reason is there, that the Actors of Treason should be punished, and the first plotter and contriver should escape? An outward forced compliance is no true real performance of the Laws; nor does it denominate a Subject truly Loyal. Our very thoughts and imaginations must stoop and do them homage. For, — Patitur poenas peccandi sola voluntas.  
The next Quaere is, What End or Design they do or can propose to themselves in desiring, and holding Pluralities, having Cures of Souls annexed to them: Is it the advantage of many benefice, or the charge, that is their Motive? If for advantage or lucre only they embrace Livings, certainly they had the same End, in taking their Orders; and if so, then their Call was not Lawful, being not from God, and a due Reverence to the Dignity of their Profession, but from sordid worldly by-respects and self-Interest. Then they are Mercenary and Hirelings, making merchandise of Mens precious Souls. Can any think there can be greater Cheats, Jugglers, or Deceivers in the World, than such persons that very solemnly appear in a Pulpit( now and then when they think fit) to put a trick upon God; as if they had been solemnly Ordained to delude Souls, mock God, deceive the World, and undo Men, for a few hundreds yearly.—  
That Person whosoever he be, that is remiss in the due and strict performance of his Office and charge, or performs them for filthy Lucre-sake, and makes a Trade of the Ministry, may be accounted as little worthy of the name of a true Minister, as a debauched, irreligious, profane and Atheistical Person is of the Character of a real true Christian. He can justly claim no more a title and propriety to Tithes and Offerings( being the Benefits or Wages which God hath given to the Church for their use, and only theirs that serve her, though others often usurp and pervert them,) upon the account of his Ordination; than the other can aright and title to the Benefits and advantages of Christ death,( being granted only to the true, faithful, and penitent,) upon the account of his christian.  
But I know this sounds so abominable in their Ears, that they will bid an absit to it, and loathe it at the first proposal. It is the charge therefore of many benefice they desire, Covetous Hypocrites! Do they know what it is to take the charge of a Cure of Souls; or at least, to take a care of that charge? Do they consider, that they are as shepherds, that must give an account to their Heavenly Master, who delivered so many Souls to their keeping? Is it so easy and slight a business to watch over a Congregation, as being accountable for them, that they should procure more benefice? as if one mans care could not wholly be employed and taken up in one Cure of Souls. Can any presume to say, he can attend one cure of Souls duly and well? especially, if he seriously considers, what it is to answer for an Immortal Soul, being the purchase of Christ's Blood. And yet can he in conscience desire Pluralities of Livings; when each Living brings so many hundreds of Souls more to his care?  
But they think to stop this Gap with another parcel of Curates: These Curates( it seems) are very necessary Cattle, yet dog-cheap; methinks they might afford to bid more for every head than they do, if they stood in no stead but for such Jobs as these.  
Though I do not see how they can order them or well take hold of them to put them in, and make them serviceable for their turn in this place, any more than before.  
It is said, Because the Shepherds preached not for my Flock, therefore O ye Shepherds, hear the Words of the Lord; thus saith the Lord God, Behold I am against the Shepherds, and I will require my Flock at their hands, neither shall the Shepherds feed themselves any more, for I will deliver my Flock from their mouth, that they may not be Meat for them.  
Will therefore the Flock be required at their hands, or at their Curates hands? For either they themselves must stand accountable for those Souls, or deliver them over wholly to the Curates charge, for him to be answerable, and be at his own peril for the loss of any.  
If the Flock be required at their own hands, what reckoning can they make, what account can they give of those Souls, whereof they seldom or never took any cognizance, when they appear before the Tribunal of God?( if they believe they must appear there:) Unless they can flatter up themselves, that they can satisfy their Heavenly Master, with that second hand Account which they receive from their Curates. But they must not think that God will be pleased with such slubber'd accounts, or that he will be so easily satisfied for so many poor Souls, that perished through their negligence. If they think to excuse and save themselves by Curates only, why do not they without any more ado, serve God by Curates? It is said, If thou lovest me, then feed my Lambs; but if they feed Christ's Sheep by Curates, they may as well love him by Curates?  
Besides, their Commission is, Go ye, and teach all Nations, not sand your Curates to teach all Nations, and take ye your pleasure. I will appeal to themselves, whether they allow any Servant of theirs the liberty to introduce whom he listeth into their Service, whilst he takes his pleasure abroad: Whether they would not judge it a sufficient reason to turn him off; yet, are not they Servants? And will they presume to bring whom they will to God's Service, whilst they enjoy their ease and pleasure.  
But if they deliver them over wholly to their Curates, and discharge themselves from that care and duty, and the Flock be required at the Curates hands; then the Curates are the Labourers, and not they. And yet do they receive the tithes in consideration of their labour and care over the Flock?( to which, upon any other account they cannot lay claim.)  
I am confident, there is hardly one among them, but will be ready to assert, that they earn them dearly; and upon the detainment of the least Mite of their Tithes, their Sermon, though it be a digression from the Text) the next Sunday must certainly be railing against sacrilege. And that the Labourer is worthy of his hire, is worn thread-bare; being oftener inculcated into their Parishioners minds, than any Text in the Scripture; and they will hardly grant the person that believeth not this, the benefit of the Clergy: but without any more ado, will be sure to take care, Huic nigrum vitio praefigere Theta.  
If therefore,( I say) the Labourer, and only he, be worthy of the hire; how, or upon what account can a Pluralist claim Title or property to the Tithes of that Parish or People, whereof the Curate is the Minister, and not he himself? and that the Curate is Overseer or Minister of one of the Pluralists Livings, and that too by the holy ghosts appointment, has been already sufficiently proved.  
For though they be of Divine Right,( as Sir. Henry Spelman hath most incomparably proved,) yet they were Dedicated to the Churches use, and cannot be supposed by any sober person to have been designed for any, but such as Personally served the Church.( For I cannot call another mans service or work mine.) So that Tithes are not maintenance for a Minister, quatenus Minister, or Man in Orders; but a Maintenance for him only, that performs the duty enjoined: they are the wages for his work.  
Otherwise those many thousands that are Ordained, and want Employment, need not be reduced to such Extremities; nor be so near starving as they are, but might claim their shares of Tithes, and live either upon the public and other mens Labours, or ex rapto, as many do, invading other Mens Right, whilst they Usurp the profits of more benefice than of one, for in Conscience they can assert them to belong no more to them, than the farthest person in Rome can to him. For a Ministers Titles or Property can extend no farther than his Care or possibility of performing the charge.  
And I suppose to procure, the sober and serious part both of Clergy and Laity to agree with me in this; That every one that is a true Minister, and undertakes a Cure takes it, or at least, ought to undertake it with regard only of the right end, which is to watch over his Congregation, for the saving of their Souls; but he that takes his Prospect, will find business enough to employ his whole care and studies in one Cure of Souls, to perform it well and thoroughly. And I will appeal to any impartial person, whether he that aimeth not at this end, can be thought deserving of one, or worthy of the name of a Minister. Therefore we may infer, that no true Minister will desire to encroach Pluralities of Cures, or to be Non-resident; or at least, that a Minister cannot do either of these, without bringing himself under suspicion of an Impostor.  
It is far more tolerable for a man, that has but one Living, to entertain an assistant, than for a Pluralist. For as it is lawful for a Minister to have one Cure of Souls; so it may be as Lawful and Just to keep a Substitute to help him, if he finds the charge of that Cure too much for one Persons performance. But a Pluralist, that serves perhaps one himself, and his other Cures by Assistants, or all by Assistants, cannot allege the same reason. For he cannot pretend, that he keeps Curates to assist him, because he is not able of himself to perform the duties, there being no necessity imposed upon him, of holding more than he is able to go through. Who presses him against his Conscience to embrace Pluralities? who thrusts him under that burden, he cannot bear; or lays such Injunctions on him which he is not capable of performing? Were the Livings got out of their hucsters hands, we could find able Men enough to supply them. Why do not they rid themselves of that over-much charge and trouble, by resigning them up, and washing their hands from them,( Judas like, when he delivered up the pieces of Silver he took for betraying Christ?) Their own Consciences( were there no other persuasive Motives) should engage them so to do.  
said trahit invitos nova vis: aliúdque cupido,  
Mens aliud suadet, meliora videntque probántque,  
Deteriora sequuntur.—  
But whilst there is profit in the Case, it goes against the Misers to part with them, though they are very sensible, that it is no point of honesly to detain them.  
— Null●m  
Credunt esse nefas animam praeferre pudori,  
Et propter vitam vivendi perdere causas.  
They will venture to shipwreck virtue, Truth, Honesty, Credit, Conscience and all, to save a little Pelf. They enjoy themselves in spite of the World, and Solace themselves in this, that Foxes never fare better than when cursed: bibunt & fruuntur Diis iratis. When money is in dispute, all other respect is laid aside.  — Quid enim salvis infamia nummis? 
They count every occasion happy, wherein they may pursue their Interest and Ambition, not regarding the justice of the Act, but the Reward. Those Livings are theirs they say, because they came by them, by hook or by crook, or by the Silver Hook; it is no matter how, all is Fish that comes into their Net.  Unde habeamus quaerat nemo, said oportet habere. 
Nothing comes amiss to them; they hold all things possible and profitable, to be convenient and legal. And were there as much probability of procuring them, as is of advantage to be made out of them, they would purchase three or four more.  
For I declare, that I have the charity to persuade myself to no better an opinion of any person, who being possessed of one advantageous Living( which might afford any reasonable moderate man an handsome honest competency) desires the engrossment of more, but that he would( and might with as safe a conscience) daily dispense with new additions of benefice ad infinitum, were they as dispenseable in other respects. For it is as repugnant to a good Conscience, and as dishonourable to the Profession, to hold three as twenty; in that one man is as little capable of himself to supply three as twenty, and as capable to serve twenty as three by Substitutes.  
And it is an ill sign( especially when one's Confines are not too straight) to go to the very utmost of one's Limits, to the very extreme inch of one's allotted Liberty. No thanks to a man that desists in his Progress, when there is no probability either of safety or of advantage to proceed, when a non ultra opposes the current of his Desire● and stops his Careir; and he that touches his Limits seems to transcend them. He that encroaches upon the Landmark, may be suspected to have a mind to go beyond it, and trespass upon his Neighbours Ground.  
When a man devours all that is set before him, picks the Bones and scrapes the Dish, would not one judge his insatiated Appetite to crave for more, and that he could dispense with the other Bit or two, could he come at it?  
One may have Pluralities, if he takes them not in pursuit of self-interest and covetousness, 

Tractatus Doctorum Juris vol. 1. f. 47.  
Potest quis esse I luralis, ubi talis habens non habet propriè concupiscentiam proprii commodi, said solùm tendit ad honorem Dei et utilitatem Ecclesiarum, nec attendit honorem, said on us appetite et laborem administrationis; talis potest esse Pluralis, et sine dispensatione, dummodo sit bona, industriosa et literata persona, quae meliùs regeret plures ecclesias quam alius unam dum, tamen residentia non requiratur.   but for the public good: If his Ambition tends only to the Honour of God and the Utility of the Church. If not profit, but the charge be the Motive, that invites him to embrace them: Such a one( saith Innoc.) may be a Pluralist,( and that without a Dispensation) if he be an Industrious and Learned Person, that can govern and guide two Churches, better than another can one: But yet it was with a Proviso, that Residence was not required.  
There was not any such thing known as Non-residence in the Western Church, many thousand years after Christ. And indeed Residence was held to be of Divine Right by the mayor part of the better sort of Ancient Prelates and Fathers of several Councils; and undoubtedly it had been fully determined to be so, had not the Pope made the Endeavours of all those good men ineffectual.  
I do not see how a Pluralist upon the acceptance of the second Cure, or any Non-resident persons can absolve themselves from Perjury: being every Clerk at his Institution and Induction into a bnfice, that hath Cure of Souls, takes( or ought to take) an Oath to be resident thereupon, unless I am much mistaken: though, if I am, I hope they will pardon my ignorance, since it is not Ignorantia affectata; for truly I could never yet meet with that opportunity of being Instituted and Inducted into a Living, to have any experience of that Oath. We are environed with Pluralists, we can hardly tread upon any Glebe-Land, that is not taken up by them. Quid agimus? inquam, undique vallo Pluralium clausi s●mus.  
And though qualified and dispensed persons are exempted from Penalties, 

Tractatus Doctorum Juris vol. 11. f. 188.  
An Dispensatio Papae supper pluralitate beneficiorum incompatibilium reddat tutum Dispensatum in foro poli et conscientiae: hoc opus et labour.   as not being within the Laws; yet they are not, nor ought not to be exempted from their Duty. How do they expect to be quitted in the Court of Conscience and Heaven? I question whether these Dispensations will stand good there.  
I will leave others to judge, whether any persons, that made conscience of an Oath or dreaded a Deity, could be( as some were) viri scenae servientes, men framing themselves to all times, sordidly complying with all changes and humours, sticking fast to their Livings, when others were cashiered; and certainly they that value not Oaths, can really be of no Religion( let 'em pretend what they will) and consequently are not fit to bear Office in Church or State.  
But supposing there were no Oaths to be swallowed, I am sure there are several Canons strictly require Residency; which indeed is so necessary and essential to a Cure of Souls, that take that away, it cannot any longer be called a Cure. Pluralists and persons Non-resident make not Cures of their benefice, but Sine-Cures. And what can be more absurd, than that a Man should have an Office and Title in the Church, and desire to be exempted from his Duty? We may smell them out; it is the Profit, and not the Charge they desire.  
They cannot allege the scarcity of Ministers a reason for their holding Pluralities: For if they can find Curates to supply them, we can as easily find Ministers; and that there is good store of them( God be praised for plenty) we cannot deny: And Pluralists themselves can say, Curates are the cheapest Cattle that are going.  
Neither can they assert, that there are but few able sufficient men among those many, that have stolen into Orders: For if they are able to be Curates and serve for other men, why may they not be as able to take those Cures, and serve them in their own Names and for themselves? Certainly, if they have Parts to preach the Gospel, they may be thought worthy to live by it.  
Or if they are insufficient, why were they Ordained? who were the occasion of insufficient and unable Ministers? we know what they drive at; but let them not think to put it off so, and acquit themselves, by accusing the Reverend Bishops, by fastening their Malignity with that dishonour upon their Dignities, because they are not as yet themselves arrived thereunto. For let me tell them by the by,( without any disparagement too) that there are as able and Orthodox men as some of their Worships, that pretend to find fault with them, and yet want Bread, whilst others roll in excess and superfluities: whilst some look big with their abundance, and swell with their Preferments; others a● Orthodox are forced to be wrapped up in Poverty, and lose themselves in poor employments. I say as Orthodox, for the wisest men have not always the best fortune attending them. Some have not had the f●●tune to be Fools or Knaves enough to be her 〈◇〉 It is natural to Honesty and Ingenuity to be 〈◇〉.  — Probitas laudatur & alget. 
If therefore Clergy-men thus by Dispensations can make Cures( as in effect generally some make them) be made Sine-Cures, why may it not be as tolerable for any Lay-men, having Livings in their gifts, or procureing them elsewhere, to put in Curates to supply them? for they are served but by Curates, when they are in Pluralists hands; and Lay-men can serve them by Curates as well as they. Neither can they claim more a Title and property to Tithes upon the account only of being Ministers, or capable of performing the Duties, as long as they neglect them; than others, that are utterly incapable for the performance of them. For Tithes are the Wages for ones work.  
Therefore I see no reason, why Lay-men may not; provided, they allow competent Salary,( which many Pluralists do not) to ingenious Men, to supply those Cures, who have given Testimony of their sufficiency by real performance of Exercise for their Degrees, which many that are possessed with Pluralities never did; nor ever would have attained to their Degrees, had it not been for a Mandamus, or the forfeit of Caution-mony; by virtue whereof, some( Magot-like) have crawled thereunto, who now allow not competency for others to supply, nor think it agreeable with their own health and constitution to Officiate, unless for recreation,( when the Spirit moves them) one part of the day, once a month. And many think that too short an interval, for the culling and cunning of other mens Writings, that it may be delivered with greater applause, than the Assistants, who for a little livelihood are constrained to Preach twice a day; besides all weekly duties; having not allowance towards the Purchasing Books, nor the most necessary rags of Apparel. So that some are ready to Petition for the repealing of the Act for burying in Flannel, that they may have it living, to cover their Nakedness.  
Nor is this small pittance to be enjoyed without many frowns and much slavery: whether Cowley intended his Curse for them, I know not; I am certain they are fallen under it: 
If there be any whom I truly hate,  
Let Observance, and dependence be his Fate.   
He that would be harboured in some Pluralists favours, must learn to Censure and Damn all others for light and rash words, and in the interim admire their enormities as Policy and Prudence, in swallowing solemn Oaths contradictory to one another, for the keeping of their benefice in all junctures of times. He that will not resolve to fashion himself to these mens humours, must never expect their influence to be of any long continuance; so that the most necessary qualification required in a Curate is, that he frames himself like unto the Flatterer in the Poet.  
Arguet, arguito, quicquid probat ille, probato,  
Quod dicit dicas, quod negat ille neges.  
Riserit arride, si flerit, flere memento,  
Imponat leges vultibus ille tuis.  
None must deny the assertions he pleases to belch, or contradict, what his discretion holds is controulable. If he be merry, the Curate must laugh; if he be sad, the other must mourn. The Laws of the ones Countenance must be written in the others forehead.  
Thus some persons insolency reduce others to want and contempt; thus a small part of the Ministry( to the Churches shane, that is blessed of God with abundance and honour) to the disparagement of true Religion, and discouragement of Learning, reduce the other to small Contributions, poor dependencies; so uncertain, and so base, that men of ingenious Spirits and Learning, must detest them, who cannot endure, when they do the work to beg for their Wages, and that not without sordid compliances and flatteries with vile avaricious Men in their vilest humours.  
They are the shepherds( they tell us) and we Curates are the Doggs. Neither will they keep such Doggs, and bark themselves. Poor miserable Curs! that are fain to watch the Sheep, Dum Pastor dormit supinus, whilst the shepherd sleeps voided of Care.  
Now I am come so far, it will not be amiss, for the Confirmation of this, to record the belches of some Pluralists; who partly occasioned this Discourse. One person having several ingenious men tendering their Services to assist him in his Cures, with much gravity made shift to reply, That he fancied the Common to be over-stock'd— Whether it was his own I know not, I shall leave others to judge, how becoming a Divine was this sentence. He little considered, that such Drones, such an ignavam pecus as himself,( by their engrossment) made the Common bare, and the Cattle so cheap: whilst that cannot satisfy one hungry Maw of theirs, which might content many moderate persons; whilst those Preferments are engrossed by one of them, which might handsomely maintain Twenty; whilst those Revenues are profusely squandered away and lost upon the folly, pride, and superfluity of one Family, which might provide for the necessary, and honest occasion of four or five.  
Nor was the saying of another, at a Coffee-house, before several Trades-men, that were speaking of a Minister, who published a Book somewhat tending to Atheism; less absurd and unsavoury, where he took an occasion( as justly he might) to inveigh against the Author, but in these words; I wonder,( said he) at his imprudency, that he should cry down his own Trade: for what Mercer, or Draper would discommend and disparaged his own ware or fashion, that keeps them employed and brings in profit? at which Expressions the whole Comyany blushed,( excepting himself) and from his premises inferred this consequence, That some Ministers make a Trade of their Function and Religion. Some of the company backed and confirmed the same by relating a passage of a grave Doctor,( having now above eight hundred pounds per annum, in Tithes and Offerings, &c.) who though not in capacity to Preach himself, yet would not permit an other to make use of his Pulpit, except he had twenty Shillings for his standing, saying, that his Pulpit was his Market-place.  
To these I could add many more absurd sayings of many, though I shall mention but one person's more, who lately declared, That when his present Assistant went from him,( whom he was resolved to turn off next quarter day) that he would pick one out, that should not be able to say boo to a Goose, besides reading of Prayers, and asking for his Tithes. Far more ingenious were the expressions of a Sheepheard-boy, upon the sight of four or five Black-coates riding by, crying to his Companion, Locky, locky, the Country is overrun with Parsons. I am sure a few Parsons have overrun all the Parsonages.  
This seems to be too remote a digression from the Text, therefore I shall return to my next Argument;( as they say) being taken from the consideration of many receiving several hundreds yearly in Tithes and Offerings,( which is most of all intolerable in Pluralists) without impending scarce any part thereof according to their Primitive Institution.  
The resolutions of many ancient councils, and a multitude of other Fathers, and Doctors of the Church in their several Ages all concur in Opinion, that Tithes are of Divine Right, and belong justly to God, as his demain and inheritance.  
According to the Resolutions and Decrees of the same councils and Fathers, 
Ut ipsi Sacerdotes suscipiant decimas & secundum Authoritatem canonicam dividant coram testibus, & ad ornamentum Ecclesiae primam eligant partem, secundam ad usum pauperum atque peregrinorum per eorum manus miscricorditer cum omni humilitate dispensent, tertiam vero sibimet ipsis reservent, &c. Conc. in unum corpus coll. Tom. 17. f. 489. & Tom. 20. f. 298.  they were designed for three ends: For the Maintenance of the Ministers. For the Reparation and Ornament of the Church. And for the Relief of the Poor.  
This division was agreed upon and established by a Canon in the time of King Alfred: and it has been approved of by Canons of our own, for which Sir Simon Degge cites one, 
Parsons councillor, Chap. 7. Book. 1.  that might put every Clergy-man in mind, that the poor had always a share in Tithes with him.  
By the Councils it was ordered, That what person soever, 
Con. To. 20. f. 459. Item placuit ut Episcopi, Presbiteri, Diaconi & quicunque Clerici, qui nile habentes ordinantur, & tempore Episcopatûs vel Clericatùs sui agros vel quaecunque praedia nomine suo comparant, tanquam rerum dominicarum invasionis crimine teneantur, nisi admoniti in Ecclesia eadem ipsa contulerint. Si autem ipsis propriè aliquid liberalitate alicujus, vel successione cognationis obvenerit, faciant ind quod eorum proposito congruit, &c.  having nothing before he was Ordained, shall hereafter purchase any thing by the Ministry, should be guilty of Invading Gods inheritance, unless he took care to restore and annex it to the Church; but if he had any other obventions fallen unto him any other ways, he might dispose of them or to whom he pleased.  
In another Council it was Decreed, 
Con. Later. Sub Alextertio, Fred. Primo Imperconst. Clerici de his quae intuitu Ecclesiae acquisierunt, nullum de jure possunt condere testament. Nec de mobilibus per Ecclesiam adeptis facere liceat Testamentum.  That Clergy-men should not by a Will dispose of the things they got by their Care and looking after the Church. Neither had they power and freedom so much as at their Death, to bequeath their movables acquired this way, to any of their Successors.  
Thus Clergy-men were obliged in point of gratitude to restore all whence they had first received it, 

Con. Lat. To. 27. fol. 452.  
Cum officiis caritatis illis primò teneamur obnoxii, a quibus nos beneficium accepisse cognoscimus: é contrario Ecclesiastici quidam Clerici, cum ab Ecclesiis suis multa bona perceperint, bona per Ecclesias acquisita, in alios usus transfer praesumant: hoc igitur quia & antiquis Canonibus inhibitum est, nos etiam nihilominùs inhibemus. Indemnitati itaque Ecclesiarum providere volentes, sieve intestati decesserint, sieve aliis confer volverint, penes Ecclesias bona percipimus remanere.   and least there should be any that might presume to usurp and pervert it, the Canons and Decrees of the holy councils, always providing and taking care of the Church; strictly enjoined all to be left in the Churches Possession.  
Tithes says( St. Augustin) are a tribute due unto needy Souls. God reserved the Tenth part for himself, and he that engrosseth them, invadeth other mens Goods.  
Tithes( says Sir Henry Spelman) are Consecrated to God, 
Sir Henry Spelman de non temerandis Ecclesiis.  and ought not to be profaned by secular use. They are devoted and sanctified unto the Lord, and ought not to return to worldly Employments.  
All things offered to God are Consecrated, 
Con. To. 22. fol. 601. Omnia quae deo offeruntur, consecrata habentur, ut quae Ecclesiae sint, sine duvio Christi, qui sponsus ejus est sunt.  and what belongs to the Church, belongs to Christ as he is the Churches Spouse.  
Church Revenues are termed Oblations, 
Res et facultates Ecclesiae oblationes appellantur, quia domino offeruntur: et vota suat fidelium & pauperum patrimonia atque precia peccatorum, si quis illa rapuit, reus est damnationis Annaniae & sappihirae, &c. Ibid.  because they are offered to God: They are the Vows of the Faithful, the Patrimony of the Poor, &c.  
Thus we see that they have been termed holy in all Ages, and so ought of right to be esteemed by us; considering the ends and uses, for which they serve: Every devoted thing is most holy to the Lord, Lev. 27.28. They are fastened to the Church, by virtue of their Donation, that they cannot safely be taken away or otherwise disposed of. They being Sacred things and dedicated to holiness, are corrupted and prophaneed, when not distributed upon pious and charitable accounts. And Sir Henry Spelman their best friend assigns those Ministers, that receive more than an handsome competency, no other denomination than that of sacrilege: which he himself defines to be a divertion of Holy and Ecclesiastical things to profane and Secular use.  
I do not see by what Law of God or Man a Clergyman may turn his Tithes into a Secular Estate, or any other private advantage, any more than a Lay-man: without being guilty of annulling the Interest which God and his Church hath in them, and for which they were Instituted, as that hospitallity the sick feeble men may be maintained, alms given, and other Charitable deeds done: For it is not only the Lay-man in not paying them, that denies God's right and title to them: but the Clergy-man likewise that receiveth them, by usurping and alienating them from the Churches use: for God has Tithes only when they are employed in his service.  
Let them weigh how God( from whom they claim them) had the Tithes they have and to what intent: let them but think seriously with themselves, what account will be exacted of them, especially, those that receive those salaries and Wages: yet totally neglect the duty, and misspend all the Church Revenues upon their own private occasions; while the Canon of the Apostles would not permit the Bishop to challenge ought to himself, or to dispose among his kindred and friends, but to Administer them tanquam Deo intuente, to the Poor and Fatherless. And consonant to this, is that place which Sir Henry Spelman quotes out of Caudrie's Case, where he saith, The Abbot might not dispend the free alms( much less the Tithes) upon his Secular Friend, but in Hospitality for the Poor, the Fatherless, and Stranger.  
Tithes were never accounted as Temporal, nor were they transferable as other Temporal Inheritances were; 
Huges Parsons Law, ch. 26. & ch. 27.  And though they might have been given in exchange for other Temporal Necessaries, and perhaps for Temporal Inheritances;( though the latter was not only much questioned, but strictly interdicted:) yet it is to be noted, That the same was betwixt Religious and Ecclesiastical Persons, and not betwixt them, and Lay-men.  
For before the Statute of 32 H. 8. ch. 7. mere Laymen were thought no way capable of Tithes; nor could any man Sue for the same in the Ecclesiastical Court, except he were a Spiritual, or Ecclesiastical Person. And to this purpose Mr. Hughes in his Parsons Law, quotes a place, where it was determined, That no man should Sue for Tithes but the person; and that if he joineth another Lay-man in the svit with him, his svit shall abate. And Godolphin in his Book, entitled the abridgement of Ecclesiastical Law, in forms us; 
Ch. 23. Sect. 6.  That none at the Common Law were qualified to receive Tithes, but either an Ecclesiastical person, or a mixed one, as the King.  
Thus we see, that Tithes were separated from common uses, without all right or liberty of returning thither again; being fastened to the Church as her dowry, were not to be Entailed upon our own Posterities, no more than the Priesthood itself: 
Sir Henry Spelman.  for it is not with us( as with the Jews) Entailed upon Araon and his Sons; but thine, mine, and his, the Sons of Nobles, Gentlemen, and Peasants, while all alike able, are all alike interested in the Churches Preferments, which in our Nation is the sole spur and the only reward for Learning.  
Let him look to it,( saith Saint Augustin, in a Sermon of his) for how many Men soever die in the Parish, for hunger of the murdering of so many Men shall he appear Guilty before the Tribunal Seat of the Eternal Judge, because he kept back to his own use what was committed to him by the Lord for the Poor. He therefore that desireth to gain a Reward, or to obtain a Remission of his Sins, let him pay his Tithes, and be careful to give alms to the Poor out of the other nine parts, but so, that whatsoever remaineth over and above moderate Diet, and convenient Apparel, be not bestowed in Riot, and Carnal Pleasure; but laid up in the Treasury of Heaven by way of alms to the Poor: for whatsoever God hath given unto us more than we have need of, he hath not given it unto us particularly, but hath committed it over unto us, to be distributed unto others, which if we dispose not accordingly, we spoil and rob them thereof.  
Certainly, if Saint Augustin enjoined Lay-men to perform such Acts of Charity, it cannot be supposed, that Clergy-men were exempted. One would rather judge the stress of this Injunction to lie heavier indeed upon them than any else, as being more obliged than any to lay out whatever exceedeth moderate Diet, and convenient Apparel, by way of alms to the Poor, and not squander it in Riot and Carnal Pleasure, or turning it to private advantage; for whatever they receive upon the account of being Ministers, is separated from common use, without any right or liberty of returning thither again. God is the owner of Tithes: and Sir Henry Spelman saith, The Ministers are only as his Trustees, and as his Almoners that should faithfully dispense them to his Pensioners, the Poor, the Fatherless, the Stranger, and the Widow. Now let them inquire, what the duty is, that is incumbent on a Trustee: Let them consider how they have them, and ought to dispose of them. For it is much to be feared, that at the last and general Audit, they will find them great clogs to their Accounts.  
That God claims the Title and Interest of them to be in him, and not in the Priest, nor in the Levite; is apparent from that, when He saith, Ye have Robbed me of my Tithes and Offerings. This may plainly convince them, 
Sir Henry Spelman de non temerandis Ecclesiis.  that they are but the usufructuarii, having the use and profit of them, but not the Titles or Property.  
And to this purpose Dr. 
The abridgement of the Ecclesiastical Law ch. 20. sect. 3.  Godolphin makes a remark, That such as Impropriators are so denominated, for that now and hereby they are as owners of a Fee-simple, by reason of the perpetuity of their Title, whence called Proprietarii; whereas the Parsons of any Ecclesiasticla bnfice are properly, regularly, and ordinarily accounted but usu-fructuarii: nor were they any other Originally, and not Domini, as having any right of fee-simple in them.  
It cannot be supposed, that any Statute did either alter or intend to alter the Primitive Nature and use of Tithes. Or if it did design an Alteration; I do not see, since they are things Spiritual, and de jure Divino, how human Laws should make them Temporal, as they are made when turned to private and secular Estates and advantage, being by these means alienated from the Churches use. For it is not sufficient for the preservation of the Spirituality of Tithes, to be in Ecclesiastical Persons hands and Possessions. For they may be as much profaned by them, as by Laymen, when usurped and not disposed of to those uses they were first designed for. And sacrilege( being not only the taking away, or stealing some Sacred thing, out of some public Sacred Place, as a Church-Bible, or the Calice; but the turning Ecclesiastical and holy things to profane and Secular use,) may be as soon committed by the one, by perverting the right and proper end of Tithes; as by the other, by detaining them from the Minister: his maintenance being but one of the three ends for which they were designed. Though this can be no encouragement to any to detract the least from what belongs to the Church, for the with-drawing of Tithes, is a neglecting of our duty to Almighty God, for he calims them as due to him.  
Of the same nature( saith Sir Henry Spleman) That Origionally they were of, 
His Book De non temerandis Ecclesiis pag. 94.  of the same ought they still to continue, manente subjecto, manet Consecratio & Dedicatio; Time, Place, and Persons do not change them. When left to Posterity, they are still holy. Therefore it may be a question, Whether the entailing them upon our Posterities be not an alienating from the Church and if so, Whether those persons that make them over from the Church to their Successors, may not be attainted of the same neglect of their duty to God, with them that with-draw them? Or whether the Church may not justly lay claim to Estates Purchased with her obventions, in the behalf of the Poor, her Ministers, and of her own self.  
Not but that I hold it Lawful for Ministers to make provision for their Wives and Children,( though there are but few that do it) if they have any: for humanity itself obliges us to this duty. But then this Provision must be made by legal honest means; we must not rob Peter to pay Paul, whilst we supply our own Relations wants, by doing some notable prejudice elsewhere. That is not Charity which is done by uncharitable Actions: we must not deplume the Poor for the present, to clad our own Posterity for the future. We must not starve the needy to provide Superfluities for others, nor must we commit sacrilege in order to the prevention of any ones wants, though he be our dearest and nearest Relation. And though Charity begins at home, yet we should not always confine it within our own Walls, it must take the Air sometimes, and its walks abroad; for Christ teaches us a newer Lesson than what the Proverb suggests unto us; he enjoins us to suffer our Charity to be equally extended to such as are equally objects thereof.  
Thus it is notoriously apparent, how Tithes were first intended, and that they were never designed for purchasing Secular Estates, or to be any ways perverted to any private Interest; much less for the maintenance of any idle person. For( saith Sir Henry Spelman) they are vowed and delivered up into the hands and Possession of the Almighty,( and that not for superstitious and idle orders, but merely for the maintenance of his Divine Worship, and the Ministers thereof;) they are not now arbitrable, nor to be revoked by any, to the detriment of the Church. Where we may take notice by the way, that the Labourer is the Minister; and that Tithes are as little Arbitrable, and to be revoked by one Clergyman from another, that performs the duty; as by a Lay-man from the Minister: for a Minister may be guilty of Usurping them as much as Lay-men, if they receive them, and not do the work of the Ministry. Neither do I indeed conceive any great reason, why any man that performs not this great work( which ought to have been the sole end, and design of his taking Orders) can be termed a Minister, for if he is a Minister, he must be a Minister of the Gospel of Christ; and there is no other way to show, or prove ones self to be such, but by Preaching and( to the utmost of ones power) propagating the same.  
It was decreed by the Councils, 

Conc. To. 35. f. 553.  
Si quem Clericorum aut Laicorum in tantum malorum omnium radix cupiditas occupaverit, ut alicujus Ecclesiae seu cujusdam secularis beneficii bona, census, fructus, emolumenta, seu quascunque obventiones, quae in ministrorum ac pauperum necessitates converti debent, per se, vel per alios, vi vel timore, seu quacunque arte aut quocunque colore in proprios usus convertere et usurpare presumpserit, seu impedire, ne ab aliis, ad quos jure pertinent, percipiantur, is Anathemati tamdiu subjaceat, quamdiu bona res, fructu●, qu●s occupaverit, vel qui ad eum quomodocunque etiam ex donatione suppositae personae pervenerit, Ecclesiae ejusdem administratori integrè restituerit, &c. Clerici qui nefandae hujusmodi fraudis et usurpationis hujusmodi fabricater seu confentiens fuerit, eisdem poenis subjaceat, nec non quibuscunque Beneficiis privatus sit, & ad alia Beneficia inhabilis efficatur, &c.   That if Avarice had seized upon any Clergy-man, or lay-man so far, as they should presume any ways or by any pretences to turn the profits of Ecclesiastical or Secular benefice, which ought to be employed in supplying the necessities of the Ministers and Poor, to their own private uses, usurp or detain them from those, to whom of right they do belong, should be liable to those Anathemata, or Curses against sacrilege, with which the Donor bound them against surprisal, until they washed their hands from them, and restored them to him that served the Church: and that whatsoever Clergyman shall have a hand in such Usurpation, should be deprived of his Livings, and be incapable of holding any more hereafter, &c.  
I question whether those persons, that engross Pluralities of Livings, may not be guilty of that Crime of Usurpation and Detention; whilst they disseise and wrongfully keep out the Curates of their lawful Rights and Interest to them: for if any man can claim any more right or property to Tithes, than merely the use of them; certainly it must be he, that performs the duty, for which they were Instituted. And it has been sufficiently proved, That as one person cannot undergo the charge of more Cures of Souls than of one: so neither can one in Conscience lay claim to the profits of more than of one Cure. Every one should drink of the water of his own Well, eat of the milk of his own Flock, shear the wool of his own Sheep, live by the fruit of his own Vineyard.  
It is much therefore( I say) to be questioned, whether by their Engrossments they do not destroy God's Interest in them, whilst they destroy that end for which God hath designed them: ( viz.) For the maintenance of him only that performs the duties of that Church, whereunto they belong; and they are allowed to the Ministers, as Wages for their service done to the Church. For it is not the having of a mere Title to a Living or Church, that denominates one truly a Minister; but the faithful undertaking and performance of the charge of that Church.  
One Clergy-man therefore by monopolising benefice, and turning the profits of them to his own private advantage, perverts Tithes from the right use, and injures another as much, as a Lay-man can, by not paying them; all is but perverting and corrupting them, though by different persons: and Tithes do as little belong to the one, as to the other; if we once remove that consideration of performing the duties incumbent upon every Receiver thereof.  
Though there is no reason or consequence( and God forbid it should be any mans desire) That the Institution be made Null, because of the succeeding misdemeanours and abuses committed against them; for God is the Proprietary or owner; as it hath been Evidenced by several: for as much as he, who is the true owner of such Donation, cannot possibly in any wise offend; whatever his Receivers entrusted under him, do: neither may the gift itself be therefore justly seized upon or taken away.  
Now if detention of Tithes be sacrilege in a lay-man, can we assign it a milder denomination in a Clergy-man? I would willingly allow them their own Benefit( I mean that of the Clergy,) yet it will hardly excuse them; for one would be apt to judge the Crime of a higher degree, when committed by the latter, if circumstances( as certainly they do) add to the malignity of the Act. If therefore it be inexcusable in the one, how comes it about, that it should be commendable and allowed in the other? I will say thus much for our qualified men, That they have one qualification superadded; being capacitated above all others to improve 'vice( though not virtue) to a higher species of Evil.  
All that they allege is, That they do allow competent Salaries( being poor pittances of their short Benevolences) to their Curates; and that they are provided for, answerable to their parts. Truly, I cannot conceive, how they should judge what is sufficient for others, that know not the extent of their own unsatiable Appetites. Besides, this is an Opprobrium victis. Is it not a sad thing to have ones miseries thus augmented by reproaches? Is not their condition miserable enough, in that they are forced to live upon such scant allowances, without being censured, as undeserving of any more? Have they Parts for the calling of the Ministry, and have they not parts for the Maintenance? Are they worthy to discharge the Cures, and are not they worthy to enjoy them? Some men would fain persuade their Curates to be mear naturals, and if they could bring them once to that pass, as to refuse money, then they have their own desire: but this they will hardly effect; for Nature hath contrived a cunning way to please us all, she supplies our defects of Wit, with a good conceit of ourselves; there is scarce one of us, but thinks himself abundantly stocked with Natural Parts; though we make assiduous Invectives against Fortune for dealing so niggardly by us, in the Dispensations of her Gifts. Though in effect it is the same thing as it stands with them now; for they keep the curates so short, that they will hardly afford them the opportunity of a refusal.  
Certainly, if Poverty and Ignorance render part of the Clergy contemptible, we may easily guess, who are the cause of their Poverty, and consequently of their Ignorance; having not where-withal to procure Books for their improvement. And that part, which thus make the other despicable, must needs bring upon themselves an equal Contempt, with an Odium to boot. Do not we see how the People forsake them, as self-seekers? How the Gentry Censure them, as unconscionable? How some of their own Profession abhor them, as Invaders of their Places, and Preferments? The Law can hardly secure them. Authority can scarce protect them from all the affronts and bassles, that malice and fury suggest to an incensed People. The sober and serious part both of Clergy and Laity are amazed to see such Covetous Men to make up a part of the Church; who by their irregularities and misdemeanours, instead of bearing a part in her Harmony and keeping Concord, interrupt it, and cause Discord.  
One has strongly endeavoured to remove the Imputation of contempt from the Clergy, 
In a Book entitled, A Vindication of the Clergy, &c.  or( at least) to prove, That neither Poverty nor Ignorance could infer contempt, but withal ingenuously confesseth, that he himself was never much in love with the former,( though he recommends her to others,) how far he might be engaged to the later, I know not; his Patronizing her, shows somewhat of an Engagement and Obligation; for though he tells us, he intended it not, yet he writes an ample Panegyrique in her commendation;( for which many of us must aclowledge ourselves to be highly and over-head and ears obliged unto him.) I remember Erasmus, in his Moriae Encomium, introduces Folly,( whose property it is so to do,) making a speech in her own Praise: and for ought I know, Ignorance being nearly allied to her, may presume to claim the same Prerogative.  
The same person tells us, That the Church of England is not so rich, fat, and well-liking as She has been, and consequently, not able to settle such plentiful Portions upon her younger Children, as She would; where he supposes, all that are destitute of benefice to be the younger Children, let them be ever so deserving, and of long standing. Truly a very pretty excuse: I do not see nay likelihood, that the Church should ever be in a capacity to make better provision for them, whilst the Elder take all. Certainly, She never designed to starve her younger Children. It is they that have learned this Turkish Inhumanity, to put the younger Brothers to Death, whilst the Elder Reign.  
Pluralities are the ruin of Scholars, as well as of Churches, they necessitate them to dangerous Discourses and Thoughts. Must they provoke their Brethren to Discontent, by taking up all the encouragements of their Studies, all their employments and hopes? How many hopeful young men in City and Country are forced to want, or which is worse, to live upon their small Pensions, and what is natural to Parts and Ingenuity to despair their Fortunes, and to envy them? Hence it is,( saith one) That they so readily, hopeless of any Regular favour, apply themselves to Popular applause, that their compliance may gain among the Vulgar, what their Merits could not among them.  
Upon this in short time, must needs ensue great Ignorance of true Religion, and the service of God; and thereby great decay of Christian Profession: for what encouragement is there left, for any to apply themselves, or their Sons, or any other that they have in charge, to the Study of Divinity, when after long and painful Studies, they have Prospect of nothing, whereupon to live; especially, when they see themselves brought to that misery, as to be undone by their own Brethren?  
Were it not a Sin, methinks the ill consequences of Pluralities might sufficiently dissuade them; for they daily sink under Envy. They give occasion to them that seek occasion of censuring them, which disgraces them. The discontent of others endangers them. They incense their best Friends to be enemies, to their Orders and Calling. They provoke God, that hitherto upheld them, by abusing the Maintenance, which he allows for his Service, and Servants, to their own advantage. I shall insist no longer upon this point, having already sufficiently demonstrated, how adverse Pluralities, especially of Cures, have been in all ages to Canons, Laws, Statutes and Decrees of Councils, ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church: though for their further satisfaction, I desire them to have recourse to the One and Twentieth Chapter of Hughes person's Law. And to the Four and twentieth Chapter of Godolphins abridgement of the Ecclesiastical Law, where he tells us, what an ill President the Court of Rome has been, and how mischievous to the Common-wealth of Christendom; in that the Temporal Princes in imitation of the Pope have used their Prerogative to dispense with their Penal Laws, and Statutes; when as before they caused them to be Religiously observed. Laws were Established with an intent to be strictly kept: and could Men lay aside those Covetous humours of theirs, there need not be such breaches as these in them.   

THE SECOND ADDRESS. That none may be admitted into Holy Orders, or into any Ecclesiastical Promotion, that have not arrived to a Master of Arts Degree.  
THE reasonableness of this appears from the Multitude of raw Youths, who hasten out of the Universities to teach others, when as they themselves are scarce initiated in the first Fundamental Principles of Religion; and little apprehending the danger of Simony and Perjury, run themselves upon Precipices, by embracing Preferments upon unlawful and dishonourable Proposals.  
It is a great pity, that several large Parishes, 
Parson's counsellor, 1 Book, Chap. 7. ( as Sir Simon Degge well observes) should be left in many places to the care of some Boys, that came but the other day from School, and perhaps fitter to be there still; whilst the Shepherd that takes the Fleece, either Feasts it out in his Lord's Family, or takes his Ease upon his Prebend or deanery.  
Though it is not to be questioned, but our Churches Ordination is Legal and Regular in its Circumstances and proper in its form, being derived from the Primitive Bishops as they were Ordained by the Apostles, and they, by Jesus Christ: yet if the great Calling of Ministers be fallen below its Native Glory, and Primitive Reverence, the World cannot impute this decay to any thing, so much, as the solemn Investure of raw Young Men thereunto. They can hardly have any esteem in the World, Men being naturally inclined to despise them for their Youth, being( as One saith of them) unstable in their Ways, unsettled in their Minds, weak in their Discourses, unexperienced in their Behaviour, not Even, orderly and stayed in their Conversation; to the grief of all good Men, that highly esteem all Ministers for their Works-sake, to the joy of those evil Men, that have ill-will at Sion; who cry, Aha, Aha: so would we have it. And a Prejudice once fastened upon Mens persons, often renders their Instructions regardless and their Doctrine wickedness.  
It was Cupids effeminate Face and Youth, made Phaebus give such a contemptible reply, Quidque tibi, Lascive puer, cum fortibus armis?  
The same Lack of Discretion, and Tender Years, that made Phaeton ambitious to drive the Suns Chariot, rendered him incapable, and caused his Father to repent of his Promise, and to dissuade him.  
And it is much to be feared, That want of Discretion makes many Striplings so hastily to intrude into Orders, and Repent at their leisure; who for their rashness must expect to be condemned by the People, and to have the same retort from them, by way of Scorn, as Phaeton had from his Father Phaebus, by way of advice.  
Magna petis Phaeton, & quae non viribus istis  
Munera conveniunt, nec tam puerilibus annis:  
Nescius affectas.—  
We could hearty wish, That this Petition were brought to effect; or that there were a stint contrived some other ways, till they that are already ordained could be in some measure provided for. For they are so numerous, that they wish earnestly for War, that might sweep a great parcel of them away; and in case they cannot procure Chaplains places, they are ready to list themselves for Common Soldiers, and think it a Preferment too, as the times go with them now; choosing rather to play at a small Game at Sea, than stand out, or starve themselves upon Land.  

THE THIRD ADDRESS. That every Patron, both Spiritual and Temporal( excepting his Majesty and the Royal Family) be required to take an Oath, before whom your Honours shall think meet: That He, or any other( to his Knowledge) never did, nor will Receive any thing, nor require any Promise directly, or indirectly for Presenting, &c. as well as the Clerk, that he gave nothing for being Presented, &c.  
THis may not seem to be too unreasonable and Peremptory a request to any; nor can the Patron himself think this Oath any great Imposition; especially, if he pleases to reflect upon the difficulty, or indeed the Impossibility of being invested into any Ecclesiastical Promotion, without contracting the guilt of Simony or Penjury. Hence it is, that they, who are endowed with fence of Religion, dread a Deity, and make Conscience of an Oath, can hardly procure wherewithal to subsist, being the best Preferments are frequently purchased for the most undeserving persons.  
For it is usual for some Patrons,( when a small Living falls) having as right special an Irish Oak, as ever sprung out of English Soil; or an old Horse to recommend to their young Levites, to close with the best Chapmen;( and if I may make bold to use another persons expressions) they require no more latin skill in their Clerks, than to render ( quantum dabis?) for either of the Commodities, into Current English money. Thus they put off some over-ridden foundered Jade or other; or perhaps the poor harmless wretches must be wheedled, and unawares drawn into the Noose of Matrimony, with some Pregnant Niece or Abigail, without any other Dowry than that intrinsic worth she has within her, I mean, the Hans-en Relder. And the poor Clerks only Comfort is, that it is ready cut and dried to his hand, and hopes the Issue to be of a good breed and a right strain. God forbid, that this Censure should be passed upon all Patrons; for I am sure we have some who can freely Sacrifice their Lives with their Estates to serve the Church; yet our Age can afford too too many instances of unworthy, sordid corrupt Practices of this nature. And if there be any, that are so far degenerated, and fallen from that true genuine English Spirit, as to forget Honour and Honesty, by exposing a Living to Sale, and stooping to such base Bribes; take it for granted, we need not be long a finding out same Simon, as forgetful of Conscience, to bid money for the same.  
Some colleges too in the Universities afford us something of this Nature; when a Man cannot procure a Resignation of a Fellowship, without giving a brace of Hundred pounds for a Key of a Study.  
Did all Patrons condescend to take this Oath, they would lay thereby no greater Obligation upon themselves, than what they were already obliged in point of Honour, Honesty, and Conscience, to stand to: therefore I dare presume thus far, That persons of good honest Intentions, and generous Thoughts will not,( as they need not) scruple, or take it as an Imposition. And indeed were both Patrons and their Clerks, or either of the Parties as honest, as they should be, there would be no need of this Oath at all. Therefore many could wish the Oath were taken by the Patrons as well as by the Clerks, and more strictly kept; or quiter laid aside: for I do not think that Simony would be ever the more frequently practised, than now it is, if this Oath was abolished. And( as the case stands now) there is almost a Necessity imposed upon the Clerks, either to the breaking his Oath, if he expects to be possessed of a Living, or else utterly to lay aside the thoughts and hopes of being ever Preferred. So that( since he has entred into Orders, and taken the Calling of Ministry upon him,) he is rendered incapable of any other worldly employment. And so consequently, he is reduced to this misery, either to be out of capacity to subsist and live in the World, or put himself into a capacity to live, by pawning his own Soul, and leading the whole course of his Life in a continued Perjury.    

THE FOURTH ADDRESS. That a general Table of Fees and deuce pertaining to the Spiritual Court be Established, with Penalties for the Reception of more than what the Table expresseth.  
THe unjust dealings( it seems) of some corrupt Under-Officers, that lately exacted upon some poor Clerks, in demainding above Eight pounds Fees for Institution and Induction, without any Canon or Statute for the famed; caused the preferring this Address to the Parliament.  
It is made a question by some, Whether any thing at all ought to be taken or given for Letters of Orders, Institution, and Induction: and it is thought to be a thing of so long and frequent a practise, that use only hath made it seem Lawful; by which means, it is swallowed as a due Fee, without any further examination or inquiry into the matter.  
Sir Simon Degge quotes Decrees of several Councils, 
Chap. 5. Book. 1.  and Canons, against selling of Orders, or the like, which forbid any thing at all to be given for them, and seem to render those Fees we call Ancient and Just, Unjust and Exacted.  
We may assign the denomination of a Fee, or what term we please to what is given for Orders, Institution, and Induction, &c. but thus it is commonly argued, that what cannot be procured gratis, must be supposed to be paid for, but what is paid for is bought, and what is bought by one, must be sold by another. What validity this has in it, I know not; for I see no reason still, why we should not pay for the Instrument of Orders, Letters of Institution, &c. therefore we suppose these Fees to be in lieu thereof, and for no other end or design. But then to this Effect, Sir Simon Degge quotes Canons of our own, 
Parsons councillor, Book 1. Ch. 5. The second Edition.  that limit the Clerks Fee to Twelve pence, for Institution and Collation, and Sixpence for Letters of Orders. Now whether those Fees in those days, when these Canons were made, were equivalent to these of ours, I know not.  
In the same Chapter, he quotes a Statute, that punishes, as well the Giver, as the Receiver of a greater Fee or Reward, than the ordinary and just Fees for to be Ordained or made Minister, &c. but that the stress of this Punishment is more severe, and lies heavier upon the Clergy-man, than the Officer; in that the Officer forfeits but Forty shillings, the Clergy-man Ten Pounds, besides a Seven years incapacity of holding Livings, that lies upon him.  
Therefore we hope this will not seem beneath the consideration, or unworthy of any persons undertaking and promoting it, since it is of no small Importance. For the Officer,( knowing his Penalty to be but light, and payable with what he extorts from the Clerk over and above) if he is minded to be so base and corrupt, may demand what he will, the Clerk being never the wiser;( especially, since Fees vary in every diocese,) being not able to contradict him, or perhaps the Circumstances of that neck of time( as it does often fall out) not permitting him to stand to argue the case, or go to disprove him: so that the Clerk frequently commits Simony unawares to himself, or against will; and hazards those Penalties mentioned in the Statute, did any person well know how to question him: which we might easily know, were there such a Table once agreed upon.   

THE FIFTH ADDRESS. That all Appropriate Vicarages be augmented,( where the Profits will bear it) to a Hundred pounds per Annum. Because there are many now that are not endowed with competent Salaries.  
THese Appropriations anciently and Originally came from the Pope, afterwards tolerated by Kings. And it was resolved, That none could be capable of an Appropriation, but a Body corporate or Politick-Spiritual which have a succession. 
Godolph. abridge. of Eccles. Law, Ch. 20. s. 8.  For that the Effect of an Appropriation, as to the first Institution thereof, was to make the Body politic perpetual Incumbent, and to have the Rectory, and that he hath the Cure of all Souls of the Parishioners, and therefore he must be a Spiritual Person.  
And Sir Henry Spelman saith, 
De non temerandis Eccles. pag. 4, 5.  That they were but Parsonages with Cures of Souls annexed, and Appropriated to a particular abbey, or some religious House. And that one of their own Fraternity did duly officiate the Cure; until the Statute of R. 2. Prohibited the Appropriating any Church, unless a Vicar be conveniently endowed to red Divine Service, and keep Hospitality.  
Thus Appropriations were charged with Cures of Souls, and they that had them, were subject to the burdens, that lye so heavily upon the Head of every Minister: Therefore at their Original, they were made only to Spiritual persons, as were qualified to Administer the Sacramental Ordinances, and perform Divine Service themselves: It being held a thing Abominable, both against the Law of God, and the Law of the Realm, to grant Appropriations to such persons as were not capable of these performances. For Beneficium non datur nisi propter officium: and truly it is fit, that he that refuses the Duty, should go without the bnfice.  
But since the end and use thereof is changed,( and that for the worse) from what it was at the Original Institution thereof. For though first they were granted only to Ecclesiastical Persons, since the grant thereof has been gradually enlarged and extended to such as were not capable of performing such duties, 
abridge. Eccles. Law, ch. 20. Sect. 2.  as were required; or at least, to such that would not perform them. Now we see Appropriations are become as Lay-Inheritances, and adapted as well to persons Secular, as well as Ecclesiastical; who take the Profits thereof to their own proper use, hardly maintaining a Vicar upon the place to serve the Cure.  
Neither do I see any reason, why the King, by His Letters Patents may not appropriate a Church Parochial, which was before Presentative, to a Lay-Corporation, all the members of the Corporation being mere Lay-men, as well as to Spiritual persons, since those Spiritual persons that have them, make them over now to Lay-men. They are now made Lay-Parsonages, and the one may be called a person imparsonee, that is person No-Parson, as well as the other.  
Though these spiritual Monopolies were not quiter suppressed, 
Ibid. Sect. 3.  as has been by several formerly endeavoured; yet there were Laws made that took care in making provision for the Vicar; for it was ordained by the Kings, that in every Licence of Appropriations, it should be expressly appointed, that the Diocesan of the place should take care to provide an annual competency, or convenient sum of money, to be yearly issuing and paid out of the Parsonage-Fruits of that Parish, towards the maintenance of the Poor thereof; and for a sufficient subsistence and endowment of the Vicar. And those Appropriations were not good in Law, 
Ibid. Sect. 12.  that had not sufficient endowment for the Vicarage, which was appointed by the Ordinaries, as they thought fit.  
But now we frequently see others sacrilegiously rob the Church, to enrich themselves, whilst the Vicars their Deputies have nothing for their service, but those small offals and refuse of Tithes, as might be well spared out of the weightier Granaries thereof. Thus the poor Vicar shall have something like a certain portion, which is nothing as it were, 
Ibid. Sect. 2.  considering how plentifully the Church is endowed, whilst the Abbot and the Covent, and their Lay-Successors shall be the Parsons, and receive the main profits, and so live by the Altar without waiting on it, and be rebaptized by the Law with the name of Parsons Imparsonees.  
Therefore upon these Statutes it will concern the owners of Churches Appropriated since 15 Ric. 2. to see, 
Vide Sir Henry Spelman De non temerandis Eccles. pa. 5.  That out of the Profits of the Church, a convenient sum of money be yearly paid to the poor Parishioners, and a Vicar Endowed; as the Statute of the 15 of Ric 2. appoints; or else the Statute 4 H. 4. avoids the Appropriation, and then the Church becomes again Presentative.  
Now let them, whether they be Clergy-men or Laymen; and especially the former, seek and satisfy themselves; whether they having these Tithes and Appropriations, are not tied in Law and Conscience, or in the Law of Conscience, to perform the Duties.  
A Lay-man was thought uncapable of having a Church Appropriated to him, because he could not take upon him the Cure of Souls that went always with the Church. But if Spiritual Men omit, and neglect the Charge of those Cures; or not undergo them themselves, they are to be esteemed as unworthy of them, as the other is uncapable.  
Sir Henry Spelman saith, Tithes are in Common-Law termed Spiritual things, because they are annexed to the Spiritual Office; and not that they belong to Spiritual Men, without any consideration of this Office. Therefore I do not see now any Man, whether Spiritual or temporal, can take and Usurp those Tithes, being things annexed to the Office of a person, and think himself exempted from that Office. The Sheep must not be without a Shepherd, nor he without the milk of the Flock, and he is the shepherd that hath the Cure of the Souls. Neither ought any to live by Church allowance, but they that do the Church Duties. Ministers can not, or at least ought not to receive Tithes under pretence only of being in Orders, and for nothing else, any more than Lay-men, for they as little belong to the one as the other, this duty being once removed; owners of Appropriations seem to be ill Presidents to the Owners of Impropriations. Though the former frequently exclaim against the latter; yet I do not see any great difference between an Appropriation and Impropriation, saving only this; the one being obtained from the Crown for ever, the other from some Clergy-men for Lives, or so many years.  
If therefore the Impropriators be said to be Sacrilegious( as some have Censured them) because they do not resign up their Right and Title; or because the person that serves the Church and has the Cure of Souls, hath not the Tithes. I do not see how the owners of Appropriations, or Apropriators can free themselves from the same imputation. For the one partey allows him who serves the Cure as much as the other. And Appropriations, as well as Impropriations, with their Oblations and Tithes are made Lay and Temporal, as long as the Owners thereof make them over to Lay-men by Leases; and they hold the profits ad proprium suum usum, as much as the Impropriators; besides the one belong as little to the Church as the other, and is as much alienated as the other.  
The Church hath no more of the Tithes of either of them, than what is laid out upon him that serves her, or upon the Poor of the Parish.  
We heard of several, who were persuaded presently upon the reading of Sir Henry Spelman's Treatise, to restore to the Church their Impropriations; I wish he were yet living to persuade a Restitution of Appropriations.   

THE LAST ADDRESS. That if there be any idle debauched Clergy-men, who live more scandalously, and to a greater dishonour of Religion, than those who have dispensations for Pluralities and Non-residency, that Bishops be impowr'd upon the Testimony of two Witnesses immediately to suspend them from their office and bnfice without any further demurs or proceedings in Law.  
I shall not be very prolix upon this Head, being it has a relation to the first; nor indeed could I insist any longer upon it, for the Printer interrupted my pen; Otherwise I would have spoken more at large or perhaps less and more to the purpose. The Time being short I shall only add a word or two( as their usual Phrase is) by way of exhortation to some of them, and conclude as abruptly as themselves, with a so much at this time.  
Some men have had the confidence to preach against Pluralists, and Non-resident-persons, when they themselves were possessed of Pluralities of Cures. I would that such persons do apply to themselves what they preach to others.  
That they would take bead how they clamber over fences of duty; break through Hedges of right, trespass upon hallowed enclosures: how they get wealth into their possession through usurpation or detension of spoil and rapine, which they ought to disgorge.  
That they would take heed they do not deem their mite of grace a Talent, their Mole-hill a Mountain, their smoaking-flax, the strong and blazing flamme of some mighty Bonfire.  
That they take care to pull first the Beams out of their own eyes, that they may with more perspicuity discern the Motes that are in others.  
That they do apply what they red and preach to their own consciences: as well as boast of laying it home to scar others. That they truly be what they persuade to.  
For all their preaching will be of little efficacy, if it be not seconded by Examples: being the nature of man is more apt to be guided by Examples than by Precepts; especially by the Types of men eminently learned, and of great repute for piety and godliness. Such men are as Looking-Glasses to the places where they live, by which most persons dress themselves. They must therefore( as an unknown Author saith) look their lives be such, as may show they believe themselves, whilst they go about to persuade others. He that shall with never so pressing arguments dehort a man from that sin, which he himself at the next opportunity commits, will never he supposed to have any real ill opinion of it, but rather, so passionate a love, that he is jealous any but himself should have its embraces; and then surely this will be so far from averting, that it will excite the appetite of the other to taste of that which he sees is thought so desirable, as to be monopolised.  
Persons can never bring any to contemn the vanity of worldly greatness by exclaiming against it, if in the mean time, they themselves delight in nothing more, than to be clad in Purple and fine linen, and fare deliciously every day. For the requiring us to contemn this world in hopes of a better, is( as a Learned Divine of our Church saith upon another account) just like the commendation of the excellency of fasting at a full meal; and of the conveniency of poverty by one, who makes the greatest hast to be rich.  
That persons may not therefore offer so great a contradiction to their Doctrine by their Examples, Let them with Christ make choice of a life, remote from all suspicion of designs upon this worlds Goods.  
Things that are set in some high and eminent places, do naturally attract mens eyes to them: so that eminency of condition wherein Ministers are placed, render their actions more observable. They are like the City our Saviour speaks of, set on an hill, and have by that advantageous situation, the means of making their light shine farther than other mens. And therefore it ought to be their constant care by the bright lustre of their exact and exemplary conversation, to enlighten the whole sphere wherein they move. Would they make this their united design, what a happy constellation of auspicious Stars would they prove, by whose benign aspect the sterility of vulgar minds may be cured, and even those clods be inspirited and rendered capable of excellent productions: for there is a heavenly power and efficacy in their good examples to draw others to Piety. And a compulsive power in their ill examples to constrain others to the evil they do. Ministers therefore( especially in these days, ought to take heed lest by any wicked example or compliance, they build men up in sin, and bring destruction not only upon themselves, but others.  
Gods Laws are the good man's rules, and good examples are his motives and encouragements. Men are riveted and more strongly rooted in the truth received, by reflecting on the sound judgement and spotless lives of them that publish and maintain it. Such men cannot be ignorant of the Vulgars enquiry, which is more, what Ministers do, than what they say: and the eye has been more operative and affecting than the ear.  
There is hardly any that can have compassion on those men that dehort others from the vanities of this world, whilst they themselves are taken( as we say) ipso facto, still labouring in their Avarice. Now if there were no other motives to reduce such persons from those covetous humors to themselves, Methinks the serious reflection upon the judgments that have befallen Estates purchased with Tithes and Offerings, and Families therein concerned; might frighten them to themselves,( for the fear of Hell hath driven some to Heaven.) Those examples might sufficiently mollify the most obdurate disposition, awaken the most supine and dazzle him that is most perspicacious in discerning Motes through Beams; or that is qualified with that blind zeal of inveighing against stealing, whilst guilty of sacrilege.  
FINIS.