As for his not suffering Women to speak in the Church, no sober Person that I know of pretends to it. That learned Paraphrast, indeed, who lays so much Stress on the _Natural Subjection_, provided this Prerogative be secur’d, is willing to give up the other. For he endeavours to prove, that Inspir’d Women, as well as Men, us’d to speak in the Church, and that St. _Paul_ does not forbid it, but only takes care that the Women should signify their Subjection by wearing a Veil. But the Apostle is his own best Expositor, let us therefore compare his Precepts with his Practice, for he was all of a Piece, and did not contradict himself. Now by this Comparison we find, that though he forbids Women to teach in the Church, and this for several Prudential Reasons, like those he introduces with an _I give my Opinion, and now speak I, not the Lord_, and not because of any Law of Nature, or positive Divine Precept, for that the Words _they are commanded_ (1 _Cor._ xiv. 24.) are not in the Original, appears from the _Italick_ Character, yet he did not found this Prohibition on any suppos’d want of Understanding in Woman, or of Ability to teach; neither does he confine them at all Times to _learn in Silence_. For the eloquent _Apollos_, who was himself a Teacher, was instructed by _Priscilla_, as well as by her Husband _Aquila_, and was improv’d by them both in the Christian Faith. Nor does St. _Paul_ blame her for this, or suppose that she _usurp’d Authority over_ that great _Man_; so far from this, that as she is always honourably mention’d in Holy Scripture, so our Apostle, in his Salutations, _Rom._ xvi. places her in the Front, even before her Husband, giving to her, as well as to him, the Noble Title of, _his Helper in Christ Jesus_, and of one _to whom all the Churches of the_ Gentiles had great Obligations.