Menu - Title Page - Sec. 1 - Sec. 2 - Sec. 3 - Sec. 4
{Page 25} Some further Ground of our Satisfaction in Proceeding against keeping on the Hat in time of publick Prayer; especially, as we are now concern’d with these sort of Apostate Adversaries: which is not to dispute, but further to declare our Belief, and the Reason of our Practice in the Matter, and so leave all with the Lord.
XR4562 AS Man consists of Soul and Body, and as the Body is a kind of Form to the Soul, so whilst Body and Soul remain unseparated, there will and must be some Form suited to the Body, whereby to express the publick, Spiritual Worship performed by the Soul: such are Places, Words and Gestures; and in the Performance of such Worship the Body can no more be exempted from some Form or Expression, then can the Soul in its inward and spiritual Station. To deny this, is to denote a Man void of Sense and Reason; so that though we grant the outward & inward Coming of Christ, to have abrogated such Types and Figures as foreshewed a further Glory, yet Tokens and Demonstrations of present inward Reverence a Divine Honour to God in publick Performance of Worship, not only we never denyed, but do affirm them to be as adequate or proper to the Body, as are the Reverence and Honour to the Soul.
It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, in the solemn and publick performance of Prayer unto the Lord, to pull off our Hats, to express the Unvailing of our Spirits, and that reverent Submission and Supplication, which becomes poor Petitioners to come in, and offer up their Desires with, to the great King of Glory, and God of the Spirits of all Flesh; {Page 26} and God has made it a Token of inward Homage by the Requirings of his own Truth. And it is fit it should be observed, that these present Opposers not only acknowledg’d the People, call’d Quakers, to be a true Church whilst in this Practice (which I deny any Church to be that continues in the World’s Rudiments) and that they have frequently suggested us on this Occasion to be Retainers of; But that they have received heavenly Refreshment by those Prayers, that have been offered up by uncovered Heads: And that God should send forth such a Spiritual Ministry, so richly furnished, and rarely qualified, by the Divine Power and Wisdom of God a few years before, as the Author of the Hat confesseth, and that in, their Performance of Worship to God, they should be worldly, and vainly Ceremonious, can be no wayes consistent. And I do here appeal to all sober Persons, if after so large a Testimony, given to the People, called Quakers, as a true Church, and her Ministry and Worship as powerful and pure, before ever this Imagination came forth, it could be any thing solid, seasonable or edifying to introduce or trouble the Church with that Practice, which they acknowledge She was Blest, and Prosperous without.
But again, it denotes and signifies the Difference that is between Worship to God, and Ministry to Man; there is not equal Homage, indeed none at all in declaring God’s Will to Man, but the other is all matter of pure Homage, and to discover this Difference by some due and suitable Posture, is so far from being unlawful, that the contrary is very condemnable.
It is never to be thought reasonable by People not out of their Senses, at least upon our Adversaries Principles, that a Man should be moved to Pray, and yet in that Motion not moved to shew it. What! would they have a Man, when he is moved to pray, wait for another Motion to be led to discover it? But above all the rest, how do they that stand with their Hats on, testifie their Unity with him, that prayes (as they confess a Man may by the Spirit of the Lord) with his Hat off? I say, what {Page 27} greater Token do they give of their Joyning with such Prayers, then the Publican or Pharisee, who by that very Posture testifie their Dislike. But yet further, suppose a Hat-Man be moved to Pray with his Hat off, as they confess he may, what becomes of the rest of that Opinion in the Meeting? If they pull it off meerly as having Unity with his Prayer, then they are gone; for that is our Ground, who say, that Soul and Body, Prayer and Gesture must go together. If they say, it is upon them not to pull it off, Two things will follow; First, The Spirit of the Lord moveth People in the same Meeting, at the same instant of time, and in one and the same Duty, unto two Contrary things. 2dly, That they may have Unity with the Prayer, and not with the Gesture; with one Motion, and not the other. That they have Unity with the Prayer, and give, and wrap up their Spirits in the present sense that’s stirring in the Assembly, with his that is the Mouth, without an extra-ordinary Impulse to pray with him in their own Spirits; yet require such a Motion to Joyn with the Gesture: so that they can pray with the Man moved, but not pull off their Hat with the Man so moved. The Confusion, Contradiction and Absurdity of this Imagination ought forever to Justifie the Quakers Seasonable, Solid and Christian Proceedings against the Introducers and Abettors of it; for a Contradiction in Gesture, when Gesture stands upon Motion, is (proportionably) as real a Resistance against the Spirit, and committing of Disorder in Christian Assemblies, as in Matter of Doctrine, or any other essential part of Worship.
The generality of the Friends in the Nation renounced it; where I cannot but take an Opportunity to defend a Passage in a private, Letter writ by me, upon the Entreaty of one of John Perrot’s Disciples, in much Kindness, to satisfie and reclaim him, and cited by the envious Author of Tyranny and Hypocrisie Detected, pag. 25.
W. P. saith that God hath given greater Judgment to his Church, then to the individual Members of it, is a true Position1, and the Church of Rome errs {Page 28} not in that, but in accounting themselves a True Church: These are not my very words; a Disingenuity, if I am not mistaken this Author wrote once almost a whole Book against; however, I abide by the Passage: For if Christ bid individuals tell the Church, & yet the Church has no more Discerning or Judgements then they had themselves before such Appeal, & which can’t be better’d by it away with Reason: If in the multitude of Counsellors there be safety, respecting Worldly Matters, why not respecting Spiritual Matters? supposing, as we ever did, that Gods Power, Spirit & presence preside in any such Church, Body or Assembly. This is more then the Cavil deserves, but I was willing to express my mind more fully for the Readers Satisfaction.
This Innovation brought with it Division, instead of Unity; Confusion, instead of Order; Heart-burnings, instead of Love, and diverted the minds of some from the more weighty things of God’s living and spiritual Law.
Had it been never so Innocent, it cost more then it was worth, and their insisting so much upon it to the Disturbance of the Church’s Concord, was no small Evidence of the Wrongness of that Spirit, which introduced and maintained it. This shall sufficiently rebuke and judge, both it and them, that it added nothing to Life and Salvātion, nor to the Edification of the Body of Christ, which is the End of every true Motion; for it carryed neither interiour nor exteriour Homage, Service or Benefit in the least, either to Persons in their own Particulars, or to the Church in general.
And whereas they frequently have accused the Body of our Friends, which still remains, as they once confest, the Body of {Page 29} Christ, of being guilty of Popish Customs, in not being guilty of their Irreverence and that the Minds of People, were not yet inwardly and spiritually exercised in Worship, it is evident, that their new-fangled Practice, Dissent about it, and continual Defence of it, did more draw out the Minds of some people, and exercise and perplex them about Postures and Gestures, then ever they were before: so that what they falsly charge upon the Church is their own proper Character. Our Friends prudent Stop to this troublesome and endless sort of Innovation, deserves none of those Hard Names these scurrilous Libels give both them and their Proceedings.
But they object something G. F. and my self have writ against Hat- Honour, as that we should repute it an Earthly, vain, and mean thing2,minded only of Men in the Fall; that if pulling off the Hat were true Honouring or Respecting, Vile Persons would be the most Civil; Real Respect is a more substantial Thing, manifested by Obedience. This our Adversary quotes out of G. F’s Book, called, True Honour among the Jews; and mine, intituled, No Cross, no Crown; But they forgot to be so ingenuous, or on purpose would not be so just, as to tell People, that we writ against the fallen Honour of the Hat to Men. Because we deny it to Men, must we therefore deny it to God? No; but we therefore deny it to Men, because we give it only to God, as one of those Gestures, which outwardly distinguishes Worship to God from Ministry to Man. But this is their Drift & Ground of their citing those Passages, that if it be so Mean and Earthly a thing, to pull off the Hat to Man, how, comes it so Eminent a Gesture in Worship, and why not esteemed as earthly and empty a thing in respect to Worship as Civil Honour? I think I give the Force of their Objection, and shall as easily answer it.
That which gives Weight to any Gesture, is the Reason inducing to it, and both the End and Frame of the Mind in using of it. God’s Spirit has required this before ever J. Perrot was born into so much as the Profession of our Living Way, as a Testimony against the Ranting Spirit, that was then very rise in {Page 30} this 3 Nation, and hath continued it amongst us as a Gospel, Decent, and Reverent Expression, or Token of the Unvailing of our Spirits to God in Prayer; Now strip this Gesture, or rather empty it of this solid Reason inducing, and both take away that End, and remove that Frame of Spirit, in which that Gesture is used; and truly we may then very well repute it a mean and beggarly thing for the Sons of Men to bluster about. To have it in the Sence it is given to God, they can not. To have it without that Sence, is to have an empty, insignificant Gesture; And should we allow of it, what Distinction could be found to save us from performing that to Man which we do to God? since the Gesture denotes none, neither can (and our Adversary denyes a Way to judge the Meanings of an Inward Spirit by) Besides Man’s requiring it upon an earnest Thirst after Honour, that Posture which we only give to God in his own pure Worship, makes the Doing of it Sinful, if there were nothing else in it; and therefore we deny it to Men, at what time in the Reverence and deep Humility of our Spirits, we give it to God; out of which Sence it is nothing, but in it, acceptable and requisite. We also now that Men in the Fall can give but Fallen Honour; and [?] Gestures are invented or practised by a Fallen and Earthly Spirit, the Respect they set upon them is not the true Honour and Respect, but Fallen and Earthly; In this Sence it is we call it Fallen, Earthly and Vain. More Substantial things may be so reputed, as Prayer, &c. when not proceeding from a right Ground much more a Gesture relating to it. Our Adversaries do ill to conclude so general; They should have weighed, that as we can give it to God only in the Restoration out of the fallen Wayes and Worships of Men, so the Use of it in that Estate, must needs render it a Fallen, Mean, Earthly and Empty Thing, as indeed are all their Worships, who stand not in the Power and Spirit of God; much more, when any the like Practice is used to Mortal Man. But they further object a {Page 31} Passage in a Letter to Jo Perrot from R. Hubberthorn.
Then no such Reasonings had we had, if so be, the Free Spirit of the Lord had been minded.4 which is not to be limited, neither to the keeping on the Hat, nor off the Hat in time of Prayer.
But what adds this to their Cause, in Defence of which they brought it? Who go about to limit the Spirit, and not we, as R. H. also sayes; for our Business is to be limited by the Spirit, and not to limit it, or, to out-run it. I hope, none will infer from thence, that Men ought to keep their Hats on; Or, that the same Spirit would lead to those contrary Gestures, as say some of J. Perrot’s Followers: For R. H. meant nothing less; but he was sure, if they had kept to that free Spirit (that had already limited to, and confirmed the pulling it off) there would not have been such Reasonings about keeping of it on, or off; and why? because they would have felt a Pre-conclusion, which would have setled them out of the Reach of the Bondage that Spirit of Delusion had brought them into: For the Liberty of the Spirit stands not in being moved to contrary things, that is Ranterism; but in being freed from every high Thought, and exalted Imagination, to abide in the Order of the Gospel. But our Adversary, who can at times, and for his own Ends engage for any Cause, tells us J. Perrot’s Defence, that he did not enjoyn the Practice; for he left all to the Free, Universal Spirit, pag. 24. But after this, our Adversary, if he would have defended J. P. to Purpose, he should not have told us, pag. 32, 33. that J. Perrot had received Command against it from the Lord God of Heaven and Earth in his Captivity at Rome, to testify against the Custom and Tradition of Taking off the Hat by Men, when they go to pray to God: And the Truth is, he did at other times call it a Romish Tradition. But what follows from these two Passages that so greatly justle at one another? Does not the first imply, that a Man may Lawfully pull off the Hat in Prayer; and the latter expresly judge it as a Tradition of Men? Either his Command was False, or he was Deceitful in his Answer to our Friends; For that a Man may be left to his Liberty, whether he should practise the Traditions of Men in the Worship of God (upon J. Perrot’s Pretences to Divine Motions altogether {Page 32} in Worship) is the height of all Contradiction; yet this is the Doctrine of J. Perrot, as we have it delivered to us by his Apologizer: To give Liberty to pull it off, or put it on, as it was with People to do, and yet that he was commanded of God to testifie against it positively and generally, as a Tradition of Man; As if People might use, nay, be moved of God, to perform in his Worship any of the Traditions of Men, which God himself had given express Sentence against. It is not short of Blasphemy it self. And for Our Friends, that is, G. F. G. W. and others, which this Man sayes, owned J. Perrot’s Motion for Rome, and counted him a good Friend, p. 32. They do aver that they denyed that Motion, and never so reputed him. However it be, this Apologist, vowed to our Disgrace, bestirs him self not a little in Defence of J. Perrot and his Followers, as if first he loved the Hat on in Time of Prayer, which he denyes in it self; Secondly, as if he believed and allowed of Motions, which he both denyes and scorns; Thirdly, as if he liked a true Quaker, and was not so much displeased at the Light, as at Peoples Leaving or Confining it in its Leadings and Requirings; Who by his great Envy to our Persons, shows his Hate to True Quakers; and by his base Conclusion from the Pretences of both Parties to have been led to a Contrary thing by the Light within, That the Light is a kind of Miserable, Uncertain Thing; and waiting to be ordered by it, a very Dubious piece of Business, to the Disgrace of Christ’s Light; Reviling then, as well the one Sort as the other, and bringing his Blow well nigh as hard upon the Hat-Men as upon us, see pag. 23, 24, 25, 71, and ult. In which the Drift of his Business is to drive People off from the Leadings of the Light, instead of Pleading on the behalf of these Apostates being led into that Practice by it, as he vainly doth, p. 32, 33. Let Disingenuous W. Mucklow, and Furious J. Pennyman see to what pass they have brought their Affairs, who under the Pretence of proving the Quakers Apostacy from the Teachings of the Light, have furnisht a Man with Complaints against us, who could so little dissemble his Dis-like against the Principle it self, as to conclude Uncertainty, Confusion and Blasphemy to attend that very Assertion about the Light’s Teaching, which {Page 33} the People, called Quakers, in the beginning made, and is by this Adversary in other places, on these Apostates account seemingly pleaded for. Let them glory in this Man’s Endeavours, if they will; Their wicked Hypocrisy and great Trachery are herein manifest beyond what may at this time be said by us: They loved the Motions of the Principle at an odd rate that set a Man to defend them that is an Enemy to them. His Conclusions prove what I said in mine Introductoction, that it was against the True Quakers and their ancient confest Principle he chiefly levelled his Scoffs, Nick-Names, Reflections and gross Perversions, and not meerly against us as False Quakers, or Persons gone from our first Principle.
To prove this, behold how, and why he triumphs! That our Principle admits of no Means whereby to discern one immediate Teaching from another. Perrot sayes one thing, and Fox another; Who is in the right? or to that Purpose.
It would have done well if W. M. and J. P. had answered this Objection, before they furnisht him to plead their Cause and defend them to be in the Right, from those Motions their own Apologist denyes any Certainty to; and I may now take Occasion to ask him, why he is so peremptory in his Censures of us to be in the Wrong, who denyes any Certainty of Judgment of either side? How comes he so Certain in Condemning and Justifying? Partial Man! But no greater Evidence can well be given of the Wrongness of J. Perrot’s Spirit, then has been already related; viz. The Disturbance of the Church; The Unprofitableness of the Thing; The Scandalous Laps and Apostasy of himself and several of his Followers, and the Judgment others Zealously past against themselves whose Simplicity had been betrayed. The Fruits testifie what Spirit it was, though, upon our Adversary’s saying That there is no inward Test or Tryal of Spirits, at least implying so much, he contradicts Scripture, and undervalues the Gift of God; For he had as good to say, That a Wrong Spirit, covered with fair and undeniable Pretences, is not discernable by the Light and Spirit of God within; A Man may be Wrong within, and Right without, have the exact Form, but not the Power of Godliness. What can try Spirits, but the Spirit? No Writing can tell me a Wrong from a Right Spirit in the {Page 34} ground though it may describe good and bad Fruits, and from such Actions Men may by a Writing describe the Right from the Wrong; But what gives to relish, tast or savour a Wrong Spirit in Sheeps Cloathing beside the Heavenly Instinct of the Divine Nature? As People are turned to that they can discern, as saith the Apostle, The Spiritual Man judgeth all things, (that is, of right he may) and is judged of no Man (that is, not discerningly of the meer Natural Men) And as the Spiritual Man’s Discerning is from the Spirit that searcheth out the deep things of God; so is God the Judge and Law giver to his People under this Dispensation. If the Gospel-Fellowship be in Spirit, True Christians must have an Inward Tast and Sense of one anothers Spirits; and what gives to savour aright at the same time gives to relish a Wrong Spirit. The same Objection he makes against the Light may be made against the Spirit, (which is but another Name for the same Principle) and I hope, he will not dare to say that any Confusion can follow upon holding that Men under the Gospel ought to be led by it: Yet, this granted, suppose Men pretending to be led by the Spirit, to be gone from the Spirit; or that two equally pretending to be guided by it, differ, as Paul and Barnabas and Peter, what should determine? No Writings of the Old Testament could, at least without Meanings; and the same Difficulty lyes about the Meanings of Scripture as about being led by the Spirit. In this Case what shall be done? Surely the Spirit must not be upbraided nor branded: Neither will it follow, That there is no Judge; for Christ is the great Judge, appointed of God. the Spiritual great Prophet that speaks from Heaven, and in his own time will give Judgment to the View of all Men. In the mean while he satisfies the Minds of those who are truly led by his Spirit; and Withering, Decay, Murmuring, Complaining, and finally Apostasy will follow upon the Pretenders as is fulfilled in the present Judasses. This hath been largely argued elsewhere, yet I was not willing to let this Passage of our Enemies pass unconsidered, which indeed is the Strength of his Book, and what the ablest of our Adversaries can say against us an this account.
I have proceeded thus far more particularly in Defence of {Page 35} the Church, against the Apostate Adversaries and their Apologist, about the Argument by them made about the Hat, and those Discords that issued; In which I hope, I have not exceeded the Bounds of Truth and Moderation.
For the latter Objection, which is directed not so much against the Body of our Friends, as a select Number of Ministers and Elders devoted, as he falsly and scoffingly suggests, to the Promotion of G. F’s Authority and Interest, I can with all Clearness and Sincerity, and that in the Name of many Brethren, give this following Testimony.
G. F. I would have all to know, seeks not Himself, but Christ, and as becomes a true Apostle, and Servant of his Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, Early and Late, in Season and out of Season, with incessant Pains and Care (not being Burthensom unto any) endeavours to promote the Work of God in the Earth; and is so far from Lording it over any, that he daily serves all for the Truth’s sake, thinking no Labour too great, nor Condescension too mean, whereby he may be Serviceable to any, in what concerns their Eternal Well-fare; and this some of these Apostates must needs know. He has approved himself, and still doth among us, to be a Man of God, and a True Prophet of the Lord; and as such, we do Value him, and the Rage of Men shall not Dis-settle us from our Sense and Regard of him, who seeks not himself, nor his own things, but the Things of God, that Christ, and his Power alone may be exalted in the Hearts of all People, and all Flesh humbled; and for this alone are all publick Labourers of Value with, our Friends, and no otherwise Respected or Regarded then in the Lord, which is not Tyranny, but Duty: Wherefore those Terms, of Foxonian, King George Fox, Foxonian Leaven, G. Fox and his Party or Adherents, are with many more, Words of Scorn and Abuse; he has no such intended Lordship, nor are we of his Party, but God’s Free-Men, and True Christians, being with him Baptized by One Spirit into One Body; the Unity of which these smiting Apostates and their abusive Libeller can never break.
{Page 36} I shall touch upon their Aggravations about not Marrying, Burying, &c. before I come to those other Reflections made against G.F. our Ministry, and My self, and all before I end my Share in this Re-joynder.
First, He is pleased to say, That we deny them Trading, Marrying, Burying, and all Ecclesiastical & Civil Priviledges to those that dissent from us. p. 7. These were the Aggravations I before promised to observe.
But alas! What shall we say to a Man thus Hardy, and resolved to be Wicked, that he may render us so? Did we even forbid Men Trading, or endeavour to take People off from Trading with them? J. Pennyman can say no such thing without Lying; for several have lovingly frequented his Shop, since he Enviously visited and disturbed our Meetings: And how many do we daily trade with, that are not of us, in Love and full Assurance of their Honesty.
For Marrying, I referred the Author of the Spirit of the Hat to the Apostle’s Dehortation, Be ye not Unequally Yoaked together. It seems, if we cannot own Persons to be of us, that are not of us, we must be abused. This made the present Apologizer (if I am not out of my Guess) Angry and Enraged with us at first. ‘Tis not meer Talking of Christ, and hammering out a few Notions in the meer Strength of Man’s Will and Wisdom, that makes a True Christian; therefore we could not receive him for our Sect-Master, that angers him. And for Marriage, we cannot have Unity with any in that solemn Performance of Marrying, who are acted by a Wrong Spirit, and so gone out of the Union of the Body of Friends: We do not deny them that are so Married, to be Married at all, as this Enemy would conclude, though to be Married in the Unity we can never own them.
As to our denying of Burial unto such Apostates, my words in the Book, called, The Spirit of Alexander the Copper-Smith Rebuked, carry no such unnatural Sense. Two things I denyed (1.) That we therefore denyed them a Burial, because we should {Page 37} alwayes refuse it as of us, whilst they continued in that Dissenting Spirit from us. (2.) That we Usurped their Property. To the first, sayes our Adversary, The (Quakers) would not suffer such to stink above Ground, but he should be buried, not among the Catholicks; but as Hereticks in Spaine or Italy, p. 19.
Behold the Candor of this Interpreter! What a strange Improvement has he made of my Saying? much more resembling the Carriage of that sort
of Catholicks (he likens us to) against such pretended Hereticks, as the poor Waldenses then, we do in the Case of Burial.
I say again, That as our Friends intended upon their first Purchase of a Burying Place, that their Dead Bodies should lie together from the People of distinct Wayes, which is warranted from Abraham’s Practice in Genesis; so do they not desire, that such as have been of them, and have afterwards run out, should lie among them, unless it be the Desire of the Deceasing Parties, or that they declare their Unity with Friends: yet we would not by any means be thought to deny any Person whatever a Buring-Place, though we could never allow it to them as one of us, since that were most unnatural. I would fain know, if this Adversary would observe no Distinction in this Case? or what Injury there is done, in making that Difference, when Dead, which was observed by the deceast Party himself, when alive? For the Property that he sayes some of them have, ‘tis true, and was never denyed; but that we usurpt it, we did and do reject as a Slander: They never desired their part of the Collection that bought it, nor did we ever refuse to repay it, but are ready to be quit with them when they will; a Perverse Apostatized Generation! For Ecclesiastical Priviledges, I know not what he means; and those Scoffs ill become a Man that pretends to Religion: Such Priviledges, as are the peculiar Right of every true Member of Christ’s Church, it must be confest, that such Starters aside from the Primitive Fellowship of it, do deprive themselves of Church-Priviledges; we don’t. But this, sayes he, is more then any beside the Papist dare pretend to; the Protestant, or Church of England challenges no such Power, p. 5. But he that has ventured to tell so many False Things of us, may dare to bestow {Page 38} one upon her, especially when it is considered, that he is a Concealed Person, and may be False and Base with Security. Does not the Church of England, both Excommunicate, and stir up the Civil Magistrate against such as dissent from her in meer Circumstances? Does not the long Difference between her and the ancient Puritans, Presbyterians and Independents, Baptists, and Us more particularly, sufficiently Disprove that Bold, Assertion? But we pretend not to Imitate any; but really act according to that Understanding and Sense which God given us in these things, and in which we commend our selves to him, being herein willing to abide his Judgment.
To the Rest of those Cruelties he makes us guilty of, he doth, with the Author of the Spirit of the Hat, charge us with Pulling down5, Haling out of our Meetings and consequently wanted only Power to punish them; adding, That my Appeal to God’s Witness in all Consciences, for our Vindication, shows me greatly to be lamented, as either Blind or Impudent; That we have also Pusht, Pincht, Kickt and Trod upon Feet and Toes, sending us to Francis Chadwell for Proof thereof.
But, to say nothing of his Ill-Language, my Appeal stands as it did; and as before, so now I will put it between Impartial and Moderate Men, if ever we so used any Conscientious Inquirer, or Opposer? No, nor any else after that manner represented by our Adversary; and God will plead our Innocency against him, in the Hour of his Rigteous Judgments, he shall not go Uncondemned down to his Grave.
For Francis Chadwell, he is a Man of no Conscience, nor Credit, in what relates to us; I my self have known him grosly guilty both of Lying and Tipling: No frothy Stager is less to be regarded in Religion, then this Man’s Witness, a Light, Scoffing, Taunting, Tumultuous Person; who after an Hundred Solid Confutations, One of which had been enough to strike an Ingenuous Man to the Heart, has continued to Bawl and Disquiet our Meetings, time after time: His Aim hath been to raise up an Envious and Scoffing Spirit in People against us, Jeering, Laughing, Houting, with such Unseemly Carriages, as wholely unbefit him for a Witness against us; He had {Page 39} as good as confest, that he has been Hired by some Professors to Disturb us, and told me, If I would give him Five Hundred Pounds he would be a Quaker too; yet, this is our Socinian Adversary’s Serious, Conscientious Inquirer, or Opposer.
He also brings in one William King, whom he sayes, We Haled out of our Gallery in Grace-Church Street, with such Violence, that he hath scarce felt the Stairs, but that he hath often felt our Cruel Hands, witness G. Whitehead’s Pinching him in the Arm, at Jer. Clark ’s House; and that We would not suffer him a Prisoner among us, though for the same Cause, and all this for some Disagreement in Judgment.
I confess, I have no great Acquaintance with the Man; but first, deny that ever he was Haled out of Grace-Church Street, or any where else; but it may so happen, that he offering to keep the Meeting when ended by our Friends, the People pressing out, and he speaking, might bear him away with a Croud, which, hath fallen out to many that have been Speakers, and not Opposers: perhaps some disturbed and hindred of Hearing, may on their own Account have shoven him, or put him by; what’s that to us?
For G. Whitehead’s Pinching him, it is like the rest, full of Slander; He is known to be a Man of more Temperance and Command of himself, if he had been provoked. ‘Tis true, He took him by the Sleeve to turn him to a Looking-Glass, that he might behold his Envious and Passionate Countenance, as G. W. avers, and others present: But had it been true, how one Pinch can prove that he had OFTEN felt our Cruel Hands, Unbyassed Readers may best judge.
That he was a Prisoner is confessed; that we Refused him to be among us, is denyed: But that we were not in Unity with him, we are not afraid to own. I know not that I ever spoak to him but once, and that was in New- Gate, being a Prisoner my self; and if he will speak Truth, he can say nothing hard of me. For G. Whitehead’s Charging Henry •awson not to entertain him, is false; For what is it but to suggest, that we would Refuse him common Hospitality? ‘Tis true, that G. W. as in Conscience- bound, warned them of him, as one of the Ancient {Page 40} Creepers into Houses, Disaffected to the Brethren, and Prone to Discords (as by his frequent Disturbances in our Meetings is evident) therefore not to entertain him as one in Unity with us; but if he, or any of them want (supposing first their Lawful Endeavours to procure sufficient Maintenance) I know not one among us, who would not readily Administer to their Nceessities.
But we gave out a Paper against John Pennyman when he was in Prison6, and would not spare that grave, ancient Gentle-Woman Ann Mud, who being MOVED to speak a few Words, T. Matthews pulled her away by Violence, and that we were the People in former Dayes that vexed, and disquieted all Sorts of Religious Assemblies, and clamoured against those as Persecutors, that obtained their Peace by Thrusting and Carrying us out.
But I will tell him first, that our Paper against John Pennyman was as necessary to clear us from that Instigation of the Devil that led him to give up to burn the Scriptures of Truth, and the Writings of Friends (which were some of those Papers) this Apologizer (fitted for all turns of Deceitful Evasion) calleth Wast, pag. 37. under the Pretence of the Motion of God’s Spirit, as for an Innocent Man, in Sight of a Murder, to clear himself from being guilty of so heinous a Fact, We delighted not at his Imprisonment, for we were wounded by the Cause of it; and had great Reason to deny that Action, which brought a Reproach upon our Principle and Practice that never belonged to either. God’s Spirit hath hitherto lead us to Read, Believe, Obey and Witness the Scriptures, and not to tare them, as did our Adversaryes Orthodox Elizabeth B•rens (p. 52.) in the height of Rage before mine Eyes; and offer to burn them, as did his so much Commended and Defended John Pennynman. I perceive, this Socinian Author denyes our Testimony by his Dislike of it, and consequently owns that Wicked Position, that the Spirit of God may lead a Man to burn the Scriptures of God; against which our Testimony was mainly directed.
For his ancient, grave Gentle-Woman (as he calls her) she hath been so Unhappy as through her Excess of Affection to J. Pennyman, to be a Sharer with him in his perverse Out-Cryes against {Page 41} us; yet I can scarcely think that she will attest any such thing: But if it were true, as I believe it to be false, it can be no Valid Argument against the Faith, Worship or Actions of the Body of the Quakers. But, why MOVED? me-thinks, here and in J. P’s Case, he hath learned to pronounce Moved, as if he believed the Spirit in these Dayes used any such thing. Is he angry with us for resisting Ann Mud’s MOTION, who himself, p. 32, 33, 71. denyes the Certainty of any such thing? but Envy blinds Men. We shall also grant that we are the Men whom the Eternal God from time to time raised to testifie against the Hireling Teachers that took Money for that which was not Bread, but were like Wolves in Sheeps Cloathing, devoured the Flock, and made a Prey of the People; and God hath blessed us in that Service, for before a Gathering, there was to be a Scattering: And God made us Instrumental to turn People from Darkness to Light, from the Power of Satan unto God, by directing their Minds to the Gift of his Holy Light and Spirit, which discovers the Deeds of Darkness, convinceth the World of Sin, revealeth the Mind and Will of God, and gives Power to the Creature that believes in it, to obey and do it.
For this Testimony in the hirelings Synagogues, did the False Jew or Christian Hale, Tere, Beat, Bruise, Knock down, Stock, Whip, Imprison, with many such like Horrid and Inhuman Actions which became not our Adversaries Interest (though an Impartial Historian) to mention: But, have we been no otherwise disturbed? or have we so used our Disturbers? Our Faithful Chronicles of the Bloody Tragedies of that Professing Generation will tell future Ages other things. O the Partiality of this Socinian Apologizer for our Disturbers! But to close this. Either our Adversary condemns our former Testimonies against the Priests in their Steeple-Houses, or he does not; if he does, he cannot justifie the Senseless Bawlings of Proud and Envious J. Pennyman, Francis Chadwel and the like Disturbers of our Assemblies, upon his own Comparison. If he justifies their Disturbances of us, especially those given by his Prime and Singular Witness F. Chadwel, with what Face can he censure our Serious & Solemn Admonitions, or Reproofs in {Page 42} the National Synagogues. Let it be as it will with him, we expect an higher Judgment, and to that shall we gladly yield.
And for those two or three Stories of the Wantonness & Uncleanness of some particutar Persons among us, though it is spoken to in some following Testimonies, yet I have thus much to say; J. W’s. Name is Basely and Falsly used by the Libeller, though he could not have mentioned it but upon Information from some of these Defaming Apostates, whom God will judge, for endeavouring to Murder the Reputation of an Ancient, Solid, Faithful Labourer in God’s Work. Shall Ifs and may be’s conclude Men Guilty? It is not the first Mistake W. M. if he be their Informer, hath committed, whose Jealous Surmising Soul can scarce do any thing else in Cases relating unto us, as I have experienced: His Worth is lighter to the Man, his Name is brought int to slander, then the Chaff to the Wheat.
For the Two Young Women, concerning whom M. Y’s. Information is cited, they were examined; Childish, Toyish7, and Unseemly Carriages were with much Contrition confest: but for any such gross Wickedness, as was and is suggested by these Men, they said it was false, if there was a God in Heaven. For M. Y. we shall say no more till we have a more express Account of his Concernment in that Libel, or Information mentioned therein: We see no Name to it, and might as well suspect that with other things; however, our Friends behaved themselves in that Matter as became God’s People to do.
For T. M One Story is cleared by the Woman’s Testimony, and W. M’s. Malice discovered. For his common Uncleanness under Pretence of
Physick, &c. We know not how to allow it for several Years since dealt withal by our Friends, and in particular by a Physician about it; and what there was {Page 43} any just Ground to Condemn him for, he was judged8, his other Unwatchful Carriages denyed, and his Conversation turned form by our Friends.
Lastly, Suppose these Enemies of God, and his Work, and People, could Say and Prove Ten Times as much; shall those Miscarriages bring many Thousands of People out of Request, and go for an utter Blast upon their Faith, or Way? Vain Men! Should we tell the Stories of the Abominable Practices of both such Apostates, and some Envious Professors; what of Sin could we not find several that have profest their Way guilty of? But we will make no Musick for the Atheist. Has not every Miscarriage, as Known, been Reproved? Yes; Every Unfruitful Work of Darkness, as by the Light within, when known only to the Party Offending, so by the Light in our Friends, as a Church, when known to them. Is not this Gospel-Order? Or must some raw Slips of Unwatchful Persons Antichrist our whole Society?
Reader, These Things and Persons objected, have been several Years since examined; who were Innocent, Acquitted; and who were Guilty, Condemned, according to the Righteous Law of God: And upon this old Condemned Stuff, it is our Enemies feed, with this they Arm themselves against us, and upon this Quagmire, as their best Foundation, they stand. In short, They have been False to God, Abusive to his People, Hurtful to the Moderate, and basely Treacherous to their Ancient Friends. If being Base to God and Men can render Men Christian, then they deserve to be so accounted of: But till Religion cometh to be read Backwards, let them go for Enemies to Christianity, and Murderers of Natural Affection,
To conclude, Our Ministry is of God; it stands in the Power of the Living Spiritual Gift of God, to testifie against all Ungodliness: And if any Particular has ever slipt, and brought Dishonour to the Truth, such hath been Reproved in Righteousness, and only Received upon Unfeigned Repentance; which is God’s Way. But to Publish, Proclaim and Aggravate Miscarriages of Any to the World, who profess {Page 44} Religion, committed many years ago, Examin’d, Judg’d, and they Forgiven, upon Repentance, by the Lord, and therefore Received again by us; and all this done with Design to Blast our Credit, Disgrace the Way we profess (though they were no way concerned to meddle or interpose) To do all this, I say, is not to be acted by the Spirit of God, but That, of an Accursed Ham, and Treacherous Judas; and the Lord will avenge our Cause, we doubt not, in due time.
But an Hainous Blasphemy is laid to the Memory of Josiah Coale9, by this Angry Agent, in behalf of these Apostates; and that is, a Passage in a Letter writ anciently by him, in his Life-time to G. Fox, viz.
That G. F. was the Father of many Nations.
But what Blasphemy is in this? Is it any more then to say, That by him, as an Instrument in the Hand of God, People of many Nations have been by him begotten to God? Was not Paul a Father of many Nations, who begot the Corinthians, that were Greeks, and the Romans, that were Latins? But further.
Whose Life hath reached through us thy Children, even to the Isles afar off, to the begetting of many again unto a lively Hope, for which Generations to come shall call thee Blessed.
Very well; And what Blasphemy lodges in these Words! Is not that which is the Life of one Good Man the Life of another? Were not the Christians of old by One Spirit baptized into One Body? What Life G. F. had was from Christ Jesus, and it was no other Life J. Coale writ of: And I hope, The Life of Christ is one in All; and who can limit it? And Josiah Coals, with others, were Children in the Sense afore-mentioned; and that Life through those Children, by him (instrumentally begotten, did reach to those Isles afar off, unto which he and others went to preach the Everlasting Gospel. Paul reached to the Churches, though afar off, 2 Cor. 13 10. He was Present in Spirit, though Absent in Body; for, I verily, as Absent in Body, BUT PRESENT IN SPIRIT, have judged already, as though I were present — In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered, and MY SPIRIT in the Power of the Lord Jesus Christ, cast forth (and taken in too upon Repentance, without {Page 45} going to the Lord Major and Aldermen) 1 Cor. 5.3, 4. His Life and Hope was through Timothy, Titus, and others, extended unto many. And why shall not Generations to come call an Apostle Blessed; and bless the Name of the Lord for him, respecting the Benefit any such one might be in God’s Power to a People? Is not the Memory of the Just Blessed? Prov. 10.7. And did not the Lord by his Prophet say of Israel his People, I will make thee an Eternal Excellency, and the Joy of many Generations? Isa 60.57. What if J. Coale had so spoak of G. F. and God’s Israel now? Would it have been Blasphemy? But these Err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the Power of God, like the Jews of old.
But yet again, whose Being and Habitation is in the Power of the Highest.
And so is the Being and Habitation of every Child of God, or else he is in the Power of the Lowest, the God of the World, whose Habitation is in Darkness. Are we not to turn away from such as stand not in the Power of Godliness? And did not the Apostle go, to turn People from the Power of Satan unto the Power of God, which is the Power of the Highest? And is it notwithstanding Blasphemy to stand in it, or testifie of one that doth stand in it, that he doth so stand? Oh the Idle Opposition! but great Envy of our Enemies! They seek nothing less then the Blood of this Upright Man, as the next Words, and their Aggravation of them prove.
In which Thou Rulest & Governest in Righteousness, and thy Kingdom is establisht in Peace, and the Increase thereof is without End.
Upon this our Adversary takes frequent Occasion scoffingly to call him, King George; suggesting him to be so vile an Impostor, as to assume unto himself the Compleat and Peculiar Dignity, Dominion and Authority due to Christ. See Pag. 53 54, 55. Which Blasphemy, I am of the Mind, our Adversary thinks deservedly Punishable after the Severest Sort of Death. But he unworthily traduceth that Good Man, and layes the Harmless Scripture-Expressions of a departed Servant of the Lord, upon the Tenters or Rack, that he may stretch them to his own Vile and Bloody Purposes. Hath this Man forgot that there were ever such Passages writ, as these? The Good Seed are the Children {Page 46} of the KINGDOM, Mat. 13.28. The KINGDOM of God is within, Luke 17.20. The Saints shall JUDGE the World, 1 Cor. 6.2 3. But ye are a ROYAL Priesthood, 1 Pet. 9.2. And thou (the Lamb) hast made us unto our God KINGS and PRIESTS, and we shall RAIGN on the Earth, Rev. 5.10. And I appoint unto you a KINGDOM, as my Father hath appointed unto me, that ye may Eat and Drink at my Table in the Kingdom, and JUDGE on Thrones the Twelve Tribes of Israel, Luke 22.29, 30. It is the Father’s good Pleasure to give you a KINGDOM, Luke 12.23. who hath translated us into the KINGDOM of his dear Son, 1 Col. 13. [the Untranslated therefore Rage] Wherefore we have received a KINGDOM that cannot be shaken, Hebr. 12.28. [they then had it] I beheld, and the same Horn made War with the Saints, and prevailed against them, untill the Ancient of Dayes came, and JUDGMENT was given to the SAINTS of the Most High; and Time came that the SAINTS POSSESSED THE KINGDOM, WHOSE KINGDOM IS AN EVERLASTING KINGDOM, Dan. 7.21, 22, 27. By all which it is manifest, that it is the Priviledge of every Saint and Child of God to be a King, a Royal Priest, to have a Kingdom, and to Rule, Govern and Raign in Righteousness and Peace without End. So that Josiah Coale, and every Heir and Co heir with Christ, Rom. 8.17. doth as well Raign in an Everlasting Kingdom of Righteousness as G. F. doth, or shall do; for we have One Faith, One Baptism, One Power, One Lord, One Kingdom. Where let it be noted, that by all these Titles and Priviledges, we only mean and understand, Dominion over, Not Bodies nor Souls, Not Flesh nor Blood; but in the Sense of the Apostle, Ephes. 6.12. Principalities and Powers, the Rulers of the Darkness of this World, and Spiritual Wickednesses in High Places, which center in the Invisible, Dark Power of the God of the World, that since the Beginning hath drawn and acted Man, out of God’s Counsel and Power in which the Kingdom stands: For though we walk in the Flesh or Body, we do not War after the Flesh; for the Weapons of our Warfare are not Carnal, but Mighty through God, to the pulling down Strong Holds, casting down Imaginations, and every high Thing, that exalts it self against the Knowledge of God, 1 Cor. 10.4, 5. And as our War and {Page 47} Weapons, so our Kingdom is not Carnal, but Spiritual; not of this World, but that which is without End; and of this we are not ashamed.
It may not be unseasonable to take Notice of that Passage in his Book so often mentioned, eagerly insisted upon10, and aggravated to the height of Ananias’s Belying the Holy Ghost, viz That G. Fox, this Great Prophet (as he in Abuse calls him) should break open and alter the Contents of John Whitehead’s Letter, which (as he said) was writ in the Name of the Lord, and that to a quite contrary Sense; making the Letter to judge those that kept the Hat on, whereas J, W. therein justified both, those that kept it off, or on. Thus, saith our Adversary, doth G. Fox belye both John Whitehead and the Holy Spirit of God, and that knowingly. He proceeds, Oh Prodigious Impudence! He that counterfeits any Man’s Name in a Matter of any Concernment deserves to be exposed on the PILLARY, AND TO LOSE HIS EARS; HOW MUCH GREATER * PUNISHMENT DOTH HE DESERVE that Counterfeits both the Name of God and Man, in a Matter of Religious Concern. This, sayes he, is the Course that G. F. took to make his Injunctions to be observed.
But this is the Course more truly to make the Impiety of this Adversary more Notorious. For first, G. Fox never opened his Letter, nor made any Alteration in it at all, that I dare affirm in so many Words; much less that he belyed the Holy Spirit; and least of all, that he did it willingly. I perceive by his Conclusion, he acknowledges that the Holy Ghost as really moved in J. Whitehead as in Peter, contrary to his own Principle. Any thing will they All grant that they may Slander or Injure us in the Minds of the People. How knows he it was a True Motion? Doth he not deny it may be known? If so then, how dare he be so positive in the Censure of G. Fox? Will he make the Motion Uncertain, and yet certainly judge G. F. for a Forger, who was yet Innocent? I leave it to the Reader, what to call this part of his Tale. Secondly, J. Whitehead gave Power by Letter at that time to the {Page 48} Brethren of London, to supervise and alter it, as they should see convenient: and no otherwise was G. F. concerned in it, then as one assenting with other of our Friends, that according to Power given and their best Understanding, did alter it for the better, and herein did J. W. testifie his Unity and Fellowship; for the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets: So that what was done, was no more then what J. Whitehead left Power to do, and which the Scripture justifies. Wherefore Prodigious Impudence belongs not to G. F. but this hardy Adversary; and Prodigious Cruelty, Persecution, if not Murder too, is he guilty of that would have him not only Pillary’d, and lose his Ears, but his Life too, or something very near a kin to it. This is confirmed page 33. where he charges us to be Blasphemers, and that such ought to Dye by the Law of God in former times; The Consequence is plainer then his Power to execute it. Oh the Mercies! Oh the Forgiveness of these exceeding Meek, Suffering, Bruised Little Ones! as they would have as think, But, Oh Deceitful and Blood thirsty Generation! who have endeavoured what in you lies, to betray with your Treacherous Kiss of pretended Love to our Souls, our Faith, Reputations and Lives too, into the Hands of some Bloody-minded Jews, who are not of the Circumcision in Spirit, but lust against those that are, that they may be stirred up against us; But God will reckon with you and them too, for these things.
This Adversary takes an Occasion to fasten a Lye upon a Paper set forth in the Name of the Quakers; but he sayes, writ chiefly by G. F. and G. W. in saying, That we have paid our Taxes and other Dues more then any People, according to our Abilities. When (sayes our Adversary) their Neighbours know all over England there are (at least) some Taxes or Assessments, which they have peremptorily refused. But why must we be branded for Lyars because of that Saying, or our Adversaries base Aggravation? I do affirm, That we have been oversest more then any; and Paying those Extream Assessments gives good Ground for Saying what we did. But indeed, some Hat-Spirits perhaps could not say so; but why? Because some of them are so leavened into another Spirit, that they almost question the Payment of any, as M. Boreman, now called M. Pennyman, did*.
{Page 49} I must not be plainer, least the Cabal further represent me one that exposes Person to the Lash of11 Government. Wherein we can pay we do, what ever they come for, and in some Cases wherein we cannot, answer their Demands for Christ’s Peaceable GOSPEL sake. They commonly Take three times the Value, seldom, if ever Returning any again; But this our Adversary calls no Paying: Sure I am, it is Loosing more then our Adversary dare adventure; for if I mistake not, he can send out all those things rather then suffer, though perhaps against his Conscience also.
Well, but, if we will believe him, there is such an Arrogant, Imperious and Audacious Paper given forth by R. Farnsworth, A. Parker, G. Whitehead, J. Coale12, J. Whitehead, T. Loe, S. Crisp, T. Green, T. Moon, T. Brigs, and J. Parks, as he thinks, was ever given forth by Mortals. A Charge too great, and a Reflection so sharp, that it had need be one of the worst Papers that was ever writ. Now let us hear what it is.
- They allow not such to have Dominion in the Church, who exalt themselves above the Body of Good and Ancient Friends.
Now, what hateful thing did they deliver in this wholesome Christian Saying? It seems, this Enemy of God, and true Righteousness, would have liked us better, if Bad Friends had been suffered to exercise the Dominion over the Body of Good and Ancient Friends. But he starts out thus, That by the Body of Good and Ancient Friends is meant G. Fox and his Adherents; which sort of Interpretation well becomes such a Caballistick Writer; for after those Allowances, I will misrender the best Cause, Pretences or Actions in the World. It is an arrant Falshood: He was then far from them; Neither had they him in their Eye in doing it, but God’s Honour, and the Churches Peace.
{Page 50} 2. That such as are not in Ʋnity with the Ministry and Body, have no Gospel-Authority to be Judges in the Church: And that it is abominable Pride, when any Particular will not yield TO THE WITNESS OF GOD IN FRIENDS.
But what is the Matter with our Adversary? Hath he lost his Wits that he makes this so Criminal? Are any to be Judges in that Church they have no Unity with? and amongst the Ministry they deny, or are at distance from? Strange Contradiction.
But why is it so Hainous, to call such Proud or Self-willed, who resist the Witness of God in Friends? Certainly the Expressions are sound, unless Scripture be defective: He that can see any thing in them, that deserveth such hard Words, as this Billings-Gate Rhetorician bestoweth upon us, has better Eyes then I.
3ly, But they say, That the Church (without Dissenters) has Power to Determine Controversies.
Very well; and is it not true? Are the Dissenters from the Church part of the Church they dissent from? For Shame! Thou Learned, and talk so Idly? Scripture declares, That God has given the Power of Determination to his Church: All the World knows, That Dissenters are not of that Church they dissent from; therefore the Church without Dissenters, has that Power of Determination.
4ly, and 5ly, But they add, That such disapproved Ministers, ought to leave off Ministring till they are Reconciled to the Church: And if approved Ministers degenerate to Division, the Church has Authority to deal with them in the same manner; and that no such Persons Writings should be publisht with Consent, &c.
What of all this? He that can call this Imperious, Audaoious, &c. can call any thing. To allow, that Dissentious Preachers and Writers are by the Church they dissent from to be approved of in the Course of that Ministry and Writing, is such a Bedlam, Boundless Piece of Stuff, that none but one, who thinks it Dangerous to be of any Party, would be the Author of such a Wild Expression.
6ly, But they advise, That such whom the Holy Ghost had made {Page 51} Over-seers should not admit of the Weak to that Trust, nor such as seek not the Good of all: which All this Disingenuous Wrester interprets, The great Body of George Fox and his Party; But Men of Wisdom and Moderation will not, I am confident, so spoil the Text with his Comment.
This is the seventh time in two pages that G. Fox is brought in, as the Explanation of the Word Body, who was then close Prisoner at Scarbrough, where no Letter was suffered to come to him, and who never knew of any Paper till sometime after its being out. O the Implacable Envy of these Men! I have hitherto waited for that Arrogant, Imperious and Audacious Passage, which might have raized up our Adversary’s Choller, and whetted him to this Degree of Scolding; but find no worse then what I have transcribed and justified, this last excepted, and I think it justifies it self: such as seek the Good of all are certainly Fittest. If he dare tell us his Name, and meet me by Day (as he can post up his Scurrilous Title-Pages on the City Posts, with Flambeux or Links, and a Guard by Night) I will any where, and in any sober Auditory maintain the Truth of all these Particulars, and their clear Consistency with Scripture and Reason, on whom he has bestowed so many hard Names.
But ‘tis to be lamented of his Cabal, that he should with his Passion and Hate divulge so much Ignorance, as to cry out, That (he thinks) the Pope himself hath never taken such Power as to determine in Matters of this Nature and Manner, but in a general Council. Poor Man! Brand us he would one way or other: Has he never read the Council of Trent, nor considered, among many others, the Life of Paul the 3d? Is he to be informed of that Controversie long on foot between the Jesuits and the Doctors of Sorbon, and the Followers of Jansenius? I thought Councils had sometimes been as meer Cyphers in-Italy, as Parliaments are in France.
But this Man is as Kind to Elizabeth Barns, one of that Backsliding
Spirit, as he represents me else where Unjust to M. Boreman that was13; For though she has Torn the Bible (calling it in my hearing, the Pope’s Idol, the Professors Idol, and the Quakers Idol (an Incredible Thing with {Page 52} J. Faldo and T. Hicks) and committed more then a small History of shameful Miscarriages since; yet is he pleased to tell us, That she, seeing the Ministers exalted themselves, cryed out, while R. Farnsworth was preaching, You have whored from the Lord. Farnsworth (sayes our Adversary) replyed, Thou art a Whore; but for fear of being too great a Forger, he brings it afterwards thus in a Parenthesis, or the Whore; This Michael Stanclift called Unsavory: For which, sayes this Secretary, he was cast out, as calling the Spirit of Truth Unsavory.
Oh the Wretched Work these People make! Will our Adversary justifie her Interruption of R. F. in Preaching, who condemned it in us, who did it after a more seasonable and justifiable manner a little before? Yes, that he will. But does he think R. F’s Reply Unsavory, and not E. Barns Outcry, who only returned her own Word to herself? Yes, that he will. Strange! But does he take E. Barns word, Whore, in a spiritual Sense, as Degenerating; and will he seem to understand R. F’s word, Whore, only in a Common and Proper Acceptation, as a Dishonest Woman? Yes, that he will. Well, but was it Unsavory so to reply, and not in E. Barns, so to interrupt and speak? Yes, that it was, implies this present Apologist, both of himself and M. S. O Monstrous! O Partial! But perhaps M. S. apprehended that R. F. meant by Whore, an Unclean or Dishonest Woman in the Sense before-mentioned, and then there might have been some Ground for his Answer; but if M. S. took R. F. in the sense in which he spoak it, to wit, that she was gone out of her Habitation (that is, the Truth) turned Harlot in Spirit, and so was become Clamorous (as speaks the Wise Man) and should notwithstanding call that Unsavory, it was a Sign, that he had more Unity with that Unclean, Ranting, and Envious Spirit in E. B. then the Friends of Truth, that generally judged her: And truly in that Case it was time for them to tell that Angry Old Man their Mind of him; In which, they did but that, which I dare answer for, before the great and terrible Judge of Heaven and Earth.
{Page 53} Mine Own Defence from the most Considerable Reflections, made by this Libeller against Me.
HE is pleased both to Jeer and Prophane, upon this Passage in the Spirit of Alexander the Copper-Smith Rebuked, We require not Men to practise what they are not convinc’d of14; but we will be well satisfied with any Member’s Dispractice of an Orderly Performance, once Chearfully owned. For this he calls me a Deep-studied Man, and the Passage, a Learned Distinction. Let the Learned (sayes he) vail to W. Penn; but (as one recalling himself) probably he writ by Revelation.
But what Answer do all these words give? O, but ‘tis all one; for two Negatives (sayes he) make an Affirmative in English. What, if there be but one, for two I can not find? but he at last, like a Dim-sighted Man, has fumbled out the Matter, as he thinks, to wit, That we require not Men to leave off to practise what they have practised, Cujus Contrarium ve•um. For shame! What! no more Understanding, and yet pretend to write Books? Are not my words expresly otherwise? But I say again, 'Tis one thing to introduce a Practice not at first known, when our Adversaries spoak such Glorious Things of our Faith, Worship, Order and Ministry, and require the Conformity of any of the Church to it; and quite another Business, for any of the Church to dispractise, as a Romish Tradition, and Tradition of Men, or leave off any orderly Custom God brought his Church first forth in, and which all once own’d and were in the Practice of. But I begin to dispair of making this Caballistick Libeller any honester towards the poor Quakers.
But the Author of this Libel hath so little Conscience, {Page 54} as yet to say, That the Quakers allow no Liberty to Presbyterians, Independents and Baptists, because they are not in the Power of Truth15: but sayes he, W. P. never wants a Salvo for George, let him say what he will; he means it, sayes W. P. not of Outward, but of Inward Liberty, and yet W. P. knew it was spoken to one who pleaded for Liberty of Conscience about his Hat.
But thou Libeller, was he a Presbyterian, Independent or Baptist? or does this prove that I would defend G. F. Let him say what he will? Art thou a Man pretending to Truth or Honesty, that art so Untrue and Dishonest to thy Opposer? But I know no such thing that it was spoken of a Hat-Man; this I know from G. F’s own Mouth, and what I have frequently heard him say on this Subject,
That the Conscience were within, and nothing could give it Liberty from the Thraldom of Sin, but the Power of God within.
He thus Distinguisht from the common Use of the Word, which is the publick Exercise of Conscience; so that what he meant of the Inward State of the Conscience to God, they pervert to the outward Exercise of publick Worship. Now, because the Presbyterian, Independent and Baptist generally deny, that ever the Conscience can be Free or at Liberty from Sin, he queried, What! Liberty to the Presbyter, &c. answered thus, No Liberty out of the Power of God, Christ Jesus and such as have Liberty, but not in Christ Jesus, the Power of God, it is in old Adam, and are to be turned from. No Man that is not eaten up with Prejudice, and a Party with these Traducers, can think that G. F. ever intended any other Liberty then what was internal, as the Conscience is. I could desire that both sides in this very Instance, might be the Measure of the Truth, or Dishonesty of either; for I am in no one thing of this kind better satisfied, then in the Wilful Abuse of our Adversaries, and our own Unblemisht Innocence. God will Reward all according to their Works, Amen.
He tells us, There was a Complaint against me of divers Lyes16, Calumnies and Abuses, committed by me, in my Book, intituled, The Spirit of Truth, &c. carried to the Bull and Mouth, to the Body of the Quakers, then sitting there, by half a Score of Citizens and others, but they were not admitted.
Answ. ‘Tis true that I writ such a Book, and that they came with such a Complaint; but a Lye, a Calumny and Abuse, that God will Revenge, if not Repented of, to call any part or parcel of it either Lyes, Calumnies or Abuses. H. Hedworth was nipt for his Nameless, Scurrilous Letter; Dull and Angry Man! he could never Answer it, therefore strove how he could Defame its Author. Notable Controvertists indeed! first write Books against Persons, and instead of Answering, cry out for Justice, as if I had committed some Enormious Fact in Confuting his Libel: But what Non- sense is it for People to come to a Body for Justice, which they so manifestly disown, and these Nameless Authors constantly vilifie? Indeed they are grown so Angry at our honest and quick Defences, that some are fallen to Personal Criminations, and others to downright Menacing us with Judges, Courts of Justices, and Corporal Punishments; A Crew of Petulant Disputants and Bloody-minded Adversaries. Well, but what Reception found they? G. Whitehead, sayes he, told them, He would shew it to W. Penn, if they would set their hands to it. And was not this Reasonable? Should Men Complain and not Subscribe the Complaint? Such Dark-Lanthorn Acts become not good Men. But it was shewn to Stephen Crisp also, and left signed in his Hands, who told them, that he had shown it to me, and that I had answered it in Print. And was not that the best Way, that what came by Print, should go by Print? They know their Malice is ready, and they think their Wits are so too; and all know, they have their Presses open: What! must we not defend our selves without being brought upon Tryals? Before what Court did we endeavour to bring them for beginning with us? The World may by this see, what a Way such Peevish Persons would take to be uncontroled in their Writings, had they so much Power as they have Pride and Passion. But this is not all; For upon my Saying in my Winding Sheet that Anabaptists came to Bull and Mouth to demand Judgement against W. P. for ALL being in the Place of MANY, and asking, whether they were not well employed; at which he cryes out in the Strain {Page 56} of some Great Don. What Penn, Is this the Custom of G. Fox’s Court to Jeer the Poor Petitioners? No, Libeller, 'tis neither G. Fox’s Court (as thou scoffingly calls it) nor did I Jeer; nor were they that came, Petitioners: we neither Scorn nor Bely them, as is falsely charged upon us. And though there were more particulars; yet that the Printers putting All instead of Many, was one of them, is granted; and that I never said, They came with no more: what I did say will sufficiently clear; therefore this Libeller hath both scorned and bely’d me, and Abus’d and Jeer’d G. Fox &c. which indeed is most times the Work of a concealed Author. Well, but 'tis for this, he is pleased to confer upon me the Knighthood of the Post, which I thus far accept of, that I stood my Post when he ran away; but be it as it will, his Reeling upon it hath broken his own Head against it, whether I would or no. But one Reason why he so entitules me, is my Swearing the Truth of what I either know to be False, or do not know to be True. This, I suppose, may startle every Reader that remembers I am called a Quaker, and have writ against Swearing: But the Man had a notable Way to come off, in which he is singular. 1. in case our Words go for Oaths. 2ly, in that our Appealing to God is an Oath, pag. 49. But before his Charge will reach us, he must first prove, That we ever broke our Words so solemnly given, as he pretends; and secondly, That an Appeal to any thing is a Swearing by that unto which the Appeal is made: But the Man being of late Years turned Schollar, may be forgiven his Ignorance in Definitions, as I heartily do his Malice.
In page 44. he tells me, that since I love not to be called bare William17, as the Quakers do, but do almost beg my due Title of J. Morse, he thinks it be equal that he calls me Mr. Penn. But I could wish he would let us know what to call him, who scarcely studies our Destruction more, then to conceal himself in compassing it? I am contented to be called by my Name; but this scornful Libeller, besides his Nick-Names, often robbs me of halfe of it, and that after this very Passage, which shews how little heed is to be given to his Words. But because he quotes us a book to prove my Ambition, I will give the Reader an Account of {Page 57} the matter. Some Letters past betwixt J. M. and J; on his part he used Thou and Thee, conforming himself to that Language to me, which I knew he practised not to other People, I told him it ill became one as Angry with the Quakers as himself to imitate them in Ʋsing that Distinction in Language, which he otherwise denyed, saying. I loved Foxes should appear in their own Skins. This is the Substance of that Petition, this present Adversary represents me to have made for Titles of Honour against which he knows I have writ, and blamed me for so doing; But what twigs will not such drowning Causes and Defenders catch at, to endeavour to save an irrevocable Life?
I am now come to what our Adversary takes high Advantage at, as if
he had enough to blow us all away at one Breath18; That I should exclaim for Proof of that Passage in the Spirit of the Hat, that our Ministry was Vitious and Wanton, and that Strumpets were amongst them. And that John Pennyman was willing, as he publickly declared in Gratious Street, to answer my Challenge, and that I should come with J. Osgood, J. Claypole and William Brand, to his House next day for a particular Charge, which (sayes this Adversary) he soon drew up and sent to W. Penn, to which (he sayes) according to my wonted Modesty, I replyed, That we wondred to see so empty an Account, after so great a Charge publickly exhibited, that before we met about it, we would know if this were all, he intended; for we would not have our Charge by piece meal. Thus, saith this Libeller, These great Champions evaded, &c.
To all which Reader, take this Faithfull Answer. A Challenge I made to prove that Infamous Charge; and it is as true that J. Pennyman made us believe some such thing as is said (to say nothing of his insolent Carriage) But this I boldly affirm, for I have his Letter by me, there was scarce one of these 24 particulars that so much as related to that Infamous Charge, upon which my Challenge was grounded. To accept my Challenge upon one thing, and to offer to answer it with another, shows their own Shortness, and not our Cowardness. What he said to the Purpose, was no more then the Charge it self contained, and {Page 58} Matters. Is this to Answer our Challenge? Unjust Men! that in your Nameless Pamphlets would Rape us of our Reputation, which you have never yet dared to our Faces to Question. God can best rejoyn to such Replies, and with him we leave both our Cause and Innocency. Oh, but, sayes our Adversary, We will come to a Tryal with you before 12. Judges, six of each side, equally disinterested, and in case we fail of such a Number of Persons, we are willing in case of Difference about them, to refer the Umprage to the Lord Major of London, or any Aldermen, or Common-Council Men: But as great Knaves as ye would make us, I hope, ye do not think us such Fools, as to accept a Challenge from no Body; for such I call an hidden Author: Let us see, Who he is, and What he would be at? Can any wise Man think, that, if such Infirmities were, this scurrilous and blindfold Way of using us, ought to prevail with us? No, as we deny far the greatest part of his Stories, especially as aggravated, so shall we not debase our Christian Authority so far, as to be accountable to every Fleering, Scoffing, Busy-Body Adversary; We can Reprove, and Exhort, & Exercise Church Discipline in the Power of Christ Jesus, without running to twelve Judges. Let these Nameless and Shameless Adversaries first go with the Ungodly, Numerous Miscarriages of their own Parties, and make them Judges in that Respect: We need none to give us Discerning or Judgment; Christ has furnisht us already, and doth in all Occasions. But had these things been all true, as represented, yet not being Injurious to any of our Adversaries, it no wayes concerneth them to be satisfied in our Proceedings; nor are we accountable to them by any Law of God or Man, upon their Envious Requirings. Runnegades Informations are no Proofs. Hath any Wronged them, they shall be Righted so far as we are able; But have any slipt, must we therefore divulge it? Or are we therefore no Body of Christians? Though the Principle be never so perfect, Men are no longer so then in Comformity to it. The Ancient Christian Churches had the Spirit of Truth; yet some Failers attended some of her Members for Want of keeping that {Page 59} Watch they ought, must the whole Church of Christ therefore be defiled or condemned, and the Eminent, and Laborious Servants of God therefore discredited? Or should the Apostles have gratified the inquisitive Jews, Heathens or Backsliders, about any Miscarriages within themselves, who were too apt to charge them with far more Vile Practice then any instanced in either of these two Malitious Pamphlets. There is no Church, or Religious Society whatever that thinks it self obliged to inform every Envious Busy-Body with the Infirmities of any accounted Members, which is, to publish it in Gath, and tell it in Askalem; Or the Time, Manners, and Matter of any of her Censures, unless the Facts themselves have been notorious, or are Injuriuos to those without: Let any of them give me an Instance to the contrary if they can. It is Prejudice to Religion it self to divulge Censures beyond the Reach of Offences, since it is to divulge the Offence it self; We shall therefore give no such Ill President, by gratifying the Minds of our Clamorours Adversaries, and some Vagabond Treacherous Quakers: The Church is neither accountable to her Publick Enemies, nor her Apostate and disowned Friends. J. Pennyman and W. Mucklow, with the rest of the Corish Company first cry out of Evils committed; and next, against the Order establisht to prevent or judge them, The one must be called, The Camp defiled, and the next, Tyranny or Arbitrary Government. This hath been judged Years since, and they now feed upon. In short, The Libel is hereby answered; What is Right is Defended, and what is Wrong, was long since, and in the Order of the Gospel Condemned: And if this will not satisfie, We recommend our Cause and Persons to God, who is hastening to bring forth that Fatal and Unanswerable Argument of Astonishing Judgment upon the Inhabitants of the Earth, which will prove us to be the People which God hath gathered by the Power of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead, who is become out Light and Life, the Head of our Body, in whom we stand, and for whom we now suffer upon the Earth, to whom be Glory and Dominion for ever.
{Page 60} But to render me yet further Odious, and as a great Testimony for G. Fox’s being accounted King of the Quakers, and that Lordliness we exercise, he tells the World, That William Penn did not speak unadvisedly19, when he writes of his Membership in the Quakers Body. That it is an Honour more desirable then to be a Companion of Kings.
Reader, his Wrestling lies here; Whereas I, in the Humility of my Soul preferred, that Living and Spiritual Membership, Almighty God in his Rich Mercy hath given me among this People (whose Portion outwardly hath been Suffering of all sorts) abundantly before the visible Pomp, Grandeur and Pleasure of being the Companion of Earthly Kings, he turns it to the being a Companion to King G. Fox, as he mockingly calls him; besides the Absurdity which follows such a Construction: For what is it but to say, That I prefer my being a Companion of a King, before being the Companion of Kings, and that of such an one too (if he must be one) as hath not One to a Thousand, if to Ten Thousand, with other Kings; This is to render me Foolish, and not Ambitious. But I never understood that Membership in any Body was to have a Principality before, especially as I placed the Comparison. I am perswaded, if he thought one so easily obtainable, he would not long decline being of some one Party or other, though now upon his present Principles, a very Stragler; Every thing and Nothing.
Well, Though what I am is far enough from being either Prince or Prince’s Fellow, in our Adversary’s Sense; yet I have found such a Station, in which is that Peace, which I justly prefer before all Worldly Dominion.
But this Libeller angryly proceeds; For ought I see W.P20. calls all of us that are Married Rogues, our Wives Whores, and our Children Bastards. But the Drift of this Scurrilous Consequence is to bring me and my Relations under these hateful Epithetes. This is like a Man, that would tell a Lye of himself to fasten an ill thing upon another; But he will not be thought to be without a Reason for {Page 61} this Unreasonable Consequence; For he will not call her, sayes he, by his, but her Widdow’s Name, consequently, she is a Whore, and her Child a Bastard. Such dirty Names become so dirty a Pamphlet. I administred no just Occasion for such Reflection: I called her not by that Name to fasten Dishonesty upon her; for I never intended any thing so gross, but to denote who she was, being better known in her Singularities by her old, then by her new Name. But if this Man had travelled no further then Holland it self, he might have learned, that Women are seldom, if ever, called by their Husbands Name; Are their Husbands therefore Rogues, their Wives Whores, and their Children Bastards?
But that he may stoutly vindicate him, and wrake his Displeasure upon me, he proceeds. Is it because they were not married by the Law of the Land? that is as strong against himself; therefore the true Reason of his Abusing them, must be their not being married in the Way of the Quakers.
Answ. Suppose us neither to have been married by the Law of the Land, this Officious Apologist might have saved the Comparison till I and my Wife had proved our selves as great Bedlams as they shewed themselves
at Merchant-Taylers Hall, to the great Scandal of Religion, the Trouble of Wise and Sober Men, and the Derision of the Multitude. Is that which was once by you improv’d to the Disgrace of the Quakers, now vindicated against them? It seems it had been ill done in the Quakers, but is very defensible in John Pennyman. We are contented with the Distinction, and the Apology for it. No Wonder their Books are printed for Francis Smith the Anabaptist, to vend, who (as I am informed) was one of the Orderers of the Disorderly Feast, being seen with several others of that Sect that day as busie among the many Pasties, as he hath been since in selling their Libels; who by the way promised in my hearing, Never to get Printed, or Sell any Books that contained Personal Reflections: but Gain with such [?] Godliness. All I can say, is, We are not deceived in him. There is a certain Harmony amongst them, that very well suits the Cause they promote.
But he sayes, I am not singular in Judging so hardly concerning Persons not married after our Way; For, sayes he, other Foxonians (a Scoffer) have done the like in their Writings.
{Page} This Author will by no means pass for either Lyar or Reviler, who, as in other Passages, so in this, hath proved himself both: We deny not those to be Marriages, which are not according to our Way, but we should unjustifiably differ from the Common Way, if we did not believe our own to be most according to the Example of the Holy Men and Women of old. We countenance no Clandestine Marriages, as we have Reason to believe John Pennyman’s was: for he came not to Merchant-Taylers Hall to be Married, but to declare he had taken Mary Boreman to be his Wife, whose Consent was only guessed at by her Silence; but when, how, and before whom he did it, is known to few, if any: We could ask Questions, that would put them very hard to it, but we delight not in medling with such stuff. To conclude, We therefore call her his Wife, because he confesseth her to be such; but not upon those plain, publick and orderly Proceedings towards God, Relations and Friends, as which are owned and practised by us the People of God, called Quakers.
But he hath not done with me yet; for he counts it special Malice, that I so described Mary Pennyman in her Apparel, as if, saith he, W. P. were as intimate with her, as he said to be with Gulielma Mar. But M. Pennyman is better known for an Honest Woman, then W. P. is for a Man.
There is little Reason that I should believe, that this Man hath Courage enough to question my Honesty to my Face, who was afraid to put his Name to his Slander. I Envy not M. Pennyman her Honesty, and am very well contented with mine own; however it may be represented by mine Enemies, who are too Partial to be Judges, and instead of Confuting, can only Revile me, which shows no great store of Honesty in this Slanderer. My Reflection upon M. Pennyman’s Apparel was Just and Righteous; I knockt her own Spirit with her own Weapon. Were our Ministers Degenerated because they wore better Cloathes? and was M. Pennyman more Regenerated in leaving off her mean ones? Yes, for she sayes, that having come through her Sorrow, the Out-side is little to her. Would not the same Excuse serve us? It seems it is no hard Matter for her to endure {Page 63} Richer Apparel, that is, of her own Back, but not upon another’s; Ranterism is lodged under this Liberty, which leads to what she once judged as unbecoming Truth. But me thinks her higher Attainments might allow her Equals and Betters to wear Camelit, whilst she wears Silk; they are all, I know, good in their Places; but Hypocritical, Self-Righteous Pretences are not to pass without Rebuke. But I cannot imagine, what should induce this Libeller to reflect upon my Intimacy with Gulielma Mar. and that in such suspected Terms, as if she were another then the Party he represented me to be married to a little before; for he presently reflects Dishonesty upon that said Intimacy, telling us at the Tale of it.
That M. P. is better known for Honesty then I am; as if that Intimacy rendered me as culpable, as if it had happened between M. Pennyman
and my self. It were well, if he had been so cautious else-where in telling of Lyes, as he is here in speaking the Truth; But do what we can, the Folks of this Man’s Strain will make that a Ground of Reflection upon a Quaker, which is very allowable in themselves. He tells you above, I was married, and had a Child, and a little below that I WAS SAID to be INTIMATE with G. M. that is, with the Person that is my Wife, as if it were to render a Man suspect to be intimate with one’s own Wife. Whether there be most of Folly exprest, or Slander intended in this way of Writing, let the Moderate Reader judge. But because the Reflection as well extends it self to her as to me, I will only say thus much in her Defence, She needs none: and to be questioned from so foul a Mouth, is a great Addition to her Credit, but his own Guilt. His Comparison of her with M. Pennyman, that formal Piece of Hypocrisie, giveth but such as know both, the better Mean to judge of either; The well known Innocence, Meekness and Faithfulness of the one, more lively setting out the Deceitfulness, Pride and Treacherous Apostasy of the other.
In short; Who would be well spoken of by such that choose Vertuous Persons to speak Evil of, and Apostates to Commend? But all this, and many more Rude & Defaming Speeches must I and mine expect from this Perverse Generation, who have rewarded us Evil for Good. What Scurrility, Railing, Nick-Names, {Page 64} Mocks and Jeers are vented against us, with other Servants of the Lord? But in all these things our Eye is to him, for whose sake alone (he is Record) we are become Marks for Furious Men to shoot their Arrows at; But the Lord is our Pavilion, and his Strength our Fortress: He covers our Heads in these and all other Battels (at what time these Creeping Judasses and Envious Libellers lurk and hide) so that we are not moved. We recommend our selves to his peculiar Care and Providence, that in his Holy Truth we may live, and rather then relaps, for it constantly dye, that, whether we Live, or whether we Dye, God may be Magnified in the Earth, and that shall be our exceeding great Recompence of Reward.
And for these Apostates, who once dipt with us into the same Dish, and fed at the same Table, who have tasted of the Word of God, and the Power of the World to come; but have betrayed the Spirit of Truth to the Spirit of Delusion in themselves, and given him & his Motions into the Hands of the False Christian of this day, to Deride and Scorn, and who have had so little Regard to the Profession, as to bring it under Reproach, and to the Common Law of Friendship, as Treacherously to divulge the Secrets of some of their ancient Acqaintants; and finally, who have endeavoured the Disgrace and Hazard of the Lives and Liberties of some of the Servants of God, because of their Faithful Testimony against their Apostasy; I must tell them, and do in the Counsel of God, Their Bands shall be made strong, and that Eternal Power at which they strike, reigns over their Dark, Dividing Envious Spirit, in the Hearts of that People, they have called by so many Scoffing Names; and more then a Mill-stone will it be about their Necks, and the Weight of all these Wicked and Treacherous Doings, will God bring upon them, in a Day, and an Hour, when they shall not be able to escape the Rod of his Fury. Ah! Poor Men! What have ye been doing? Verily, your Damnation slumbers not; and the God, whose Name you have caused to be blaspheamed amongst the Heathen, will one Day require these things at your Hands, and Recompense Vengeance in Flames of Fire for all your Hard Speeches and Sinful Contradictions against the Holy Spirit of Truth, and those who are led by it. I am not in any {Page 65} Rage, God knows; but I am grieved for you. I could wish a Place of Repentance might be found, if the Lord saw good, though I rather fear, your many and grievous Provocations have shut the Door against you: For as Core and his Associates were outwardly swallowed up of the Earth; so hath the Earthly, Sensual and Devilish Spirit of the World received you into the Bowels of it, and you are become as really One against our Lord and his Anointed in this Generation, as ever Pilat, Herod, Judas and the Jews were combined against Him and His in the Dayes of his Flesh; Who have strengthened the Hands of the Mocker and Scoffer; greatened the Envy of Professors, and made the Atheist glad. But may this Lamentable Course your Disobedient, Watching-for-Evil, Slippery Backbiting and Exalted Spirit hath brought you into, with the sad Consequence of being hardened therein, be a perpetual Warning upon the Minds of all, who make Profession of God’s Eternal Truth, that they be not high-minded, but fear; minding their own Conditions, and their Growth and Increase in the Work of the Lord, that so Love and Unity may be preserved, and all Watchings for Evil, Distrusts, Surmisings, Emulations, and whatever makes for Discord or Dis-affection, may be judged out, and the Sowers of that Spirit that leads thereunto, turned from, and rebukt in the Power and Authority of God, who is able to keep us and preserve us unto his Heavenly Kingdom, to whom be Everlasting Glory and Dominion, Amen.
Now, The Just shall live by Faith; but if any Man draw back, my Soul shall have no Pleasure in him,
Hebr. 10.38.
And because Iniquity shall abound, the Love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the End, the same shall be saved,
Matth. 24.12, 13.
And THIS GOSPEL of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the World, for a Witness unto all Nations, and then shall the End come.
Verse 14.
Menu - Title Page - Sec. 1 - Sec. 2 - Sec. 3 - Sec. 4
How came this Letter into this Socinian’s hand? Doth not this prove a Cabal? and that Quondam Quakers, now Apostates, are their Spies? was this my Reward for a loving and curteous Letter, which kindly invited him to my House, for further Satisfaction? Treacherous Person! to give it up into proclaimed Enemies Hands (such Baseness is like an Apostate) and not to grapple with one part of its Strength, so dis∣ingenuous an Adversary.↩
Tyr. & Hyp. Detect. p. 9, 60, 61, 62.↩
Ibid. p. 24↩
page 14,15.↩
pages 16.17.↩
pg. 51.↩
pg. 50↩
pag. 19.↩
p. 19, 20, 21, 29.↩
But is not this to render us Obnoxious to the Government? I abhor that Practice: But Base & Self-Ended Spirits are to be humbled, and not think themselves fit to cry down other Peoples Religion, that have by Treachery, Persecution and Falseness too much reproacht all Religion; Let tehm leave Scribling & Snarling with their Writings & Repent.↩
p. 29, 30, 31, 32.↩
p. 52, 53.↩
p. 11.↩
p. 13.↩
pag. 43.↩
See Plain Dealing pag. 7.↩
pag. 48, 58, 59.↩
pag. 55.↩
pag. 56.↩
No comments:
Post a Comment