the next Instance brought to prove our Books unscripturally written Child Then the Scriptures are to be owned and believed as a true Testimony of what the Saints were made Partakers of in that Day Father Yes they are to be owned and believed and they that do not so they are to be denyed An admirable Confession to the Scriptures Is this the way to prove W. Smith's Book unscripturally written That there is not an Exhortation to read the Scriptures and that the whole scope of it is to throw Dirt upon them yea to deny them though J. Faldo himself tells us that W. Smith teacheth that those ought to be denyed that do not own them but the Truth is J. Faldo's Proofs against the Quakers are like Hebrew to be read backwards He hath a Faculty beyond the common rate of men to facilitate his own Confutation But he makes W. Smith further to Answer Thou must take heed Child of giving more unto the Scriptures then unto them belongs lest in so doing thou diminishest from the Glory of Christ What of all this May not People Idolize as well as undervalue the Scriptures Ought they to be put in the room of Christ Or is it ill done to exhort People to prefer Christ before the Scriptures How can J. Faldo call this part of W. Smith's Answer Unscriptural and yet believe those words of Christ be any part of Scripture Search or rather ye search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life they are they which testifie of me ye will not come unto me that ye might have Life Joh. 5. 39 40. I am the Way the Truth and the Life Joh. 14. 6. Christ himself here teacheth us to give him the Preference and implicitely rebuketh the Jews from expecting Eternal Life in the Scriptures rather then in Him who is the Way the Truth and the Life His last Instance is this Child I am sensible that there is something in my Conscience that lets me see my â—ecret Thoughts the Intents of my Heart but I have not known what it hath been nor hitherto have much regarded it Father That is the true Light c. Child But if I should turn to it and obey it when it reproveth me for Sin is there Power in it to save me from Sin and to deliver me from Iniquity Father Yes Child All Power in Heaven and Earth is in it c. Now judge Reader saith J. F. If all these things are contain'd in the Scripture But I will help the Reader to judge rightly in this matter and question not if by Containing he means as he ought the Substance of such Answers and not that they are so laid down to prove them to be according to Scripture and therefore Scriptural I st That it is God who searcheth the Heart tryeth the Reins and telleth unto Man his Thoughts the Prophet affirms and I know no body that pretends to Christianity denyeth it 2. The Apostle asserts That which may be known of God is manifest men for God hath shown it unto them Rom. 1. 19. 3. That it was the Apostolical Message That God is Light 1 Joh. 1. 5. 4. That whatsoever doth make manifest is Light Ephes 5 13. 5. That Christ who is God over all blessed forever is that True Light which thus enlightneth every man 6. That all Power in Heaven and in Earth belongs to Christ the true Light Now unless he denyes Christ to be God or Christ to be Light or that He the true Light so searcheth c. or that all Power in Heaven and Earth belongs to Him it will naturally follow that to say All Power in Heaven and in Earth belongs to God Christ or the Light of the World is Equivalent For we do not assert as some Ignorantly and some Malitiously have printed reported That all Power in Heaven Earth is in the Maâ—ifestation but in him that gâ—ves the Manifestation I have taken great Care with several others to explain our Belief in this matter if possible to prevent such Evil-minded Men as this Adversary from making so Ill and Use of our Innocent Expressions and giving their own monstrous Consequences for our Scriptural Principles Thus much to evidence to my Reader how groundlesly J. F. flung Vnparallâ—l'd Falshood and Confidence upon me for asserting that those Books before mention'd were generally written in a Scripture Style and with what Weakness he hath endeavour'd to disprove me I shall among a multitude of Instances that might be given produce 10. to show to my Reader with what Truth those Imputations belong to J. Faldo and how exactly he character'd himself when he bestow'd that Reflection upon me 1. J. Faldo affirms that W. Smith not only quoted never a Scripture writ unscripturally but that he had not one Exhortation to read the Scriptures nay that the main Design of the Book was to deny them and throw Dirt upon them yet J. F. thus cites him concerning the Scriptures Child Then the Sâ—riptures are to be own'd and believed c. Father Yes they are to he OWN'D BELIEV'D and they that do not so are to be DENIED To this let me add another notable Passage in the same Discourse cited by me in that very Page of my Rejoynder where my Challenge lay which he thought no Boldness to accept though he was so modest as not to be so bold with this Passage Quest Of what Service are the Scriptures as they are given forth and recorded without Answ MUCH EVERY WAY unto those than have receiv'd the same Spirit from whom they were given forth for unto such they are PROFITABLE and MAKE WISE unto Salvation and are unto them of Service for INSTRUCTION EDIFICATION COMFORT Rejoynd pag. 61. Is there no Exhortation lodg'd in these words And is this to Deny or throw Dirt upon the Scriptures If any shall object W. Smith's making the Spirit necessary to the profitable Reading of the Scriptures let them go to W. Tindal J. Bradford Bp. Jewel J. Philpot Luther Calvin Peter Martyr and others they will preach them the same Doctrine which I have observ'd in my Rejoynder and may easily be found in my Catalogue of Authors 2. My second Instance shall be this That he makes W. Smith call the Scriptures Traditions of Men Earthly Root Darkness Confusion Corruption All out of the Light and Power of God which he only asscrib'd to degenerated men their Worship Imaginations and Traditions See Quakerism no Christianity pag. 117 119. Vind. p. 41 45. My Rejoynder from pag. 141. to 157. 3. That the Quakers understand by Knowledge according to the Flesh the Vse of the Vnderstanding though santified Qu. no Chr. pag. 41. Vind. p. 24 25 My Answer p. 35. Rejoynd p. 424. 4. That I. Penington should call Visible Worship as sub the City of Abomintion Vind. p. 50. Rejoynd l. 194 195. 5. That by Traditions of Men we understand the Scripture or written Word Qu. no. Chr. part 3. p.
and that a considerable Book lay at his Door unanswer'd To this he gives me several Returns worth noting for something or other one is this That he perfectly knows the Contrary To what That I have twice defended our Belief The Quibble is here I have twice Writ but not twice Defended notable but he goes of late for a Critick however who say so John Faldo Doth he prove as well as say No such matter He would not be mistaken yet in asserting he transcends for he further tells us That I have not overthrown one Line of his books in which as he explicitely proves his own Impudence and Ostentation so implicitely he calls many far from Quakerism as he terms it Fools or Knaves for theâ—r contrary Judgment But to the next Reason My Prints have confirmed him which though no Evidence to others of the Reasonableness of his Belief yet a great one to me that that Scripture is fulfilling upon him Wicked Men shall wax worse and worse But this is not all He tells us That it is not a Considerable Book Who expeâ—ted J. Faldo should say any other But doth he not hold himself oblieged to help others to the same Creed if his Heat be any better then Mercenary should he not endeavour to disintangle those that otherwise opinionate of the Matter Doubtless he thinks it not less deserving his Pains then those his first Book pretended to refute If he doth he would have done well to point in what if he doth not why doth he not answer me as well as them Or why did he begin at all if he intended no to make good what he said But I would not be thoâ—gâ—t to imitate Pharaoh's putting the People to make Brick without Straw by urging him to defend that which indeed is indefensible Only it is worth our Notice that the Book is not considerable but prethee why I think so Ergo what It is not considerable This Way of arguing calls J. Faldo an Idle Meddler for ever writing an Half-Crown or Three Shillings Book to terminate here My Adversary is not Considâ—rable So much Wit Folly or Shuffle call it what he will would have saved him much Brain-work in the beginning but it may do the Man some good Folâ—s â—ay so of Experience dear bought and better Rep 〈…〉 late then never though its commonly judg'd to be a Repentance per force Well but ther 's more behind viz. Whatever Qualities my last Book had he tells me it is more then I knew that ever he saw it He is sure I never laid it at his Door by sending one of them to him If he had said by receiving one of them it had past him for I might have sent it it might have many ways miscarried But I will not press him with this nor talk either of Gnosticks or Over-Lashers to Lash him with And that I may right my self and shew him how willing I was it should lie at his Door I did to the best of my remembrance order him one and if it came not to his hand it neither accuseth me nor excuseth him J. Faldo sent me none of his and I think I never gave that for a Reason why either of them lay at my Door But it seems J. Faldo hath lately been at Bedlam and one would think so by the Story he tells an Impertinent one it is Some Body said something of W. P. c. but Who he knows not here is the Upshot What I should say I know not for he neither directs me to the Person nor House So I must be contented to leave it as I found it with J. Faldo and Bedlam a Place that suits the Relation He hath not yet done My Book is said to be printed in 1673. and it stuck in the Birth till many Months were past of the Year 1674. This hits the Book in the Head provided the Title-Page may stand for one But how doth J. Faldo know it stook so many Moneths in 1674 Which way came he so well acquainted with the Secrets of the Press But let us see what this Objection amounts to The Title is either printed first or last If first say in 73. would he have the Printer foresee all those Difficulties that may obstruct the coming forth of the Book till 74. in order to set down 73 74 This were to make a Gnostick of him with a Witness or if he doth not his Book shall be charg'd with an Vntruth If the Title be printed last which I suppose is not common say in 74. and he sets down 74. he tells an Vntruth of the Book though not of the Title Should the Printer then have set it down 73 74. because some of the Book was printed in 73. this had been an Vntruth respecting the Title Page for that was all and only printed in 74. That ever a man that loved Reputation at the rate they that know him say he doth should be so Idle in Print Suppose his Observation true Is the Book therefore not Considerable or doth it not lye at his Door or is W. P. to be blamed which is the Business in hand What he would be at I know not unless he design'd to shew that he is a Critick and well skill'd in Annals but I am of Opinion that Baronius after the old Proverb may sleep in a whole Skin for all J. Faldo's Attempts His next Reason for not giving my Rejoynder any Return is as he sayes elsewhere Magnipotent I have two Thousand Pounds per ann in Possession as reported I may waste Paper but he Alas for him must write no more then is deem'd Convenient and Satisfactory I perceive that J. Faldo is govern'd much by Reports and that may be one Reasen why the Man reports so much Vntruth But if he will make the Report good I will give him a Years Rent and let him waste Paper or waste it in Paper and then call it an Answer to W. P. if he pleaseth I observe that his Want of it is the Reason of his not being a better Friend to the Printer for his words that He must write no more then what is deemed convenient imply that had he wherewithal he might Write and Waste and Waste and Write But what is the true English of this Apologetical Sentence It is to be suspected this viz. I must write no more then can be sold The Book-sellers do not deem more of my Writings Convenient and Satisfactory For I cannot believe that J. F. could not write what he deems both Convenient and Satisfactory But what is become of that greedy Appetite in Learned and Vnlearned after his Books not only certified by the Book-sellers but with a most nauseous Self Glorying proclaimed by himself in his Vindication For my part I know not what else to infer from all this then that his Books are become a Drug at least they so far stick undigested in the Peoples Stomachs if not unsold in the Booksellers Shops as there is neither Appetite
enough in the one nor Room enough in the other for more of the Labours of the Author of Quakerism No Christianity But he thanks me that I have put one Argument into his Mouth viz. Wherefore hath W. P. made such a Bussie against Mr. Hicks and me seeing he hath not toucht or much less answer'd the far greater part of my first Book Oh that J. Faldo would but learn to write Truth and not cover great Weakness and Baleness with so much Vntruth Have I not answered to every Charge in the first Book Examin'd 2 3 4 or 5. of his Witnesses at a time to each Charge that is Testimonies out of our Friends Books he brought to justifie it It seems then that my not fully Answering of his first Book is one Reason why he hath hitherto declin'd Publishing something against my second but had the Man been of this Mind before doubtless he would never have writ a Second But what saith J. F. to my second Book wherein I charge him in Point of Fact with so many horrid Abuses or our Principles and Writings Not one word unless that it is a considerable Book for Railing Confidence abusing Authors Impertinences Falshoods and unfaithful Giâ—â—ng what I pretend to confute What sence can be had against such a Flail Is this through the aboundings of the Man's Mâ—desty Am I not like to be cur'd of my Confidence by a Curb made up of such Links Certainly unless J. Faldo hath as little Brains as this Character of my Book shows him to have of Honesty he cannot think tkis Entertainment should prevail with me to step over the Kennel to meet such A If ever Man was wrong'd I am in that Expression though his Saying and Not Proving helps it a little I will at present overlook all but the last Ill Quality he fastens upon my Rejoynder and that is Not fairly citing his Reply I think I may say I have quoted the better half of his Reply into my Rejoynder and that with such Distinction as any Capacity may discern his Matter from mine And where he hath quoted One Line of mine I have quoted Three of his But I cannot think this the Way to Carb my Confidence or to Act the Modest Man To Charge and Not Prove Nay to Overlook so much Charg'd and Proved against him in my Rejoynder That is Vnfairly Citing us grosly Perverting what is cited Adding or Diminishing as best answer'd his Ends overlooking my Matter Arguments and evading the Strength of most of what he cited Charging Consequences unfairly drawn upon us for our Principles and abusing our Writings to maintain that Abuse which is not only prov'd in the Body of the Discourse but summ'd up at the End of my Rejoynder to help the Readers Memory And so far hath the Man been from Defending himself Doâ—trinally that he suffers himself to remain without all Defence against my Charges But he hath told us very seasonably His farther Writing is not deem'd Convenient or Satisfactory A great deal of Wiâ—dom believe me in the Dâ—emers and a great â—hare of Submission in tâ—is Adversary I confess it is no Argument to do Indiscretly a third time because a Man hath done so twice before Had I return'd him a Seurrilousc Frothy Evasive Pamphlet like his Reply to his great Book I should have blam'd my self not him but I did conscientiously consider it and bestow'd a large grave Discourse upon it faithfully citing and I hope as fully enervating it But to this he objects that seems the Strength of his Sheet if there be any in it that is That he made 12 Citations out of our own Books and brought 13 Texts of â—cripture to prove one Point of many that I took buâ— 2 of each which granted makes nothing against me but proves himself Weak to say no worse For either each of them he brought was pertinent or not If not then his urging them calls him Impertinent If pertinent I answer'd the Law that saith In the Mouth of two Witnesses c. for I examin'd Two I thought of his Considerablâ—st and sound them nothing to his Purpose but that he had aggravated his Evil by grosly Abusing our Books to prove his Infamous Charge Now I would fain know if it became not J. Faldo rather to have shown how weakly I invalidated his Evidence and prov'd him as Abuser of our Words then to tell the World I took but Two into Consideration for if he be gone upon them he is gone upon all for they are not a Jot more to his Purpose if so much as those examin'd And I did not holy my self oblieged to answer every impertinent Line in his Book If I skipt the Strength of his Evidence or that those I left had something not exprest or implyed in the other it had been proper for him to have particularly and expresly excepted against me all which he not doing his Objection is frivolous and amounts to no more then a mean Shuffle But he tells the World That also a whole Chapter of Apostolical Inspirations lye at my Door untoucht and that they may judge at what rate I have answer'd his Book Poor Man Is this all he can do after he hath thought fit to give us a second Book Must his first be his Asylum still Why did he not tell T. H. and W K. so to excuse his coming to Barbican Is he for Disputing notwithstanding and yet not for Writing It seems then that it is not deem'd Inconvenient to Dispute but Write Well! But why will J. Faldo drop things against himself and as he terms it put Instances in my Mouth to prove him a most Disingenuous and Impudent Person for did I not tell him That what concern'd us upon the Point of Inspiration I had treated at large else where and there was no need of a Repetition Now hath he shown or attempted an Enervation of that Nothing less Or that we were concern'd in that more then in his 4th Chapter No such Matter Or hath he given us one Reason why I ought to have consider'd it Or dare he say the other contain'd not the Matter of it What more can we say to a Man of this Fore-head I told him of Scores of Passages given by him under our Name he had not so much as cited Person or Book for as well as abundance willfully abused by him that he did cite To all which he is as mute as if I had never accused him or he had nothing to say in his own Vindication Is his Recrimination suppose a Reason for it in its place a valid Answer Would he have thought this enough to his two Books How easily could we have told J. F. Thou hast abused our Religion Books and Persons but would he have accepted this as a sufficient Answer or Rejoynder He tells the World of our Denying the Man's Nature or Man Chirst Jesus and brings a Company of wrested and misapplyed Sentences to vail his Abuse from the
Vulgar who most faithfully and honestly believe it and never speak or write undervaluingly of it But because we press and exalt his Spiritual Appâ—arance or Christ as come in Spirit to the Soul for its particular Redemption the Work of our Day the other being granted on all hands therefore men of his Leaven inser That we make void the ourward Coming Sufferings of Christ and utterly deny and reject him as he is the Man Christ Jesus I wish for their sakes that thus traduce us they were as far from drawing such Consequences as our Faith is from countenancing them Of this I have spoak so largely both in my Answer and Rejoynder disingenuously overlookt by this Adversary But he faults me for saying That W. Smith 's Catechism is scripturally written c. but never takes notice of his unworthy Assertion nor my Answer as he ought to have done The Matter was this J. Faldo making use of this Instance to prove we preferr'd our own Writings before the Scriptures viz. That we call'd our own Sayings Books The Voice of the Son of God was uttered forth by him c. Truths Principles Shield of Truth c. I answer'd that those Titles were given with respect to that Divine Truth they declar'd of and testified unto not in Comparison with the Scriptures That not one of those Books were destitute of Scripture but it either generally writ in a Scriptural Styl or particularly defended by express Scripture cited therefore of necessity the Scripture must also partake with them in common of those famous Titles And thus far have they the Preference that they are quoted on purpose to give the Truth we write of greater Credit What is that greater Credit then to be exactly agreeable with them This and more I gave for Answer He replieth thu I leave it to my Reader to give a Name to this Passage the like to which for a daring Vntruth the World hath scarcely been acquainted with yet the Man pretends besides all other Graces to * Infallibility It is frequent with him and that Sort of Adversaries to fling Infallibility in our Teeth and here he doth it with manifest Derision as if it was a greater Evil to be Infallible then to Err but let the Reader know that we do not so much as pretend to any such Thing as meer Men for as such Humanum est crrare but in our Judgment of the Things of God so far as we receive it from the Grace of God And if this be a Piece of Quakerism in Opposition to Christianity in J Faldo's Account the Scripture must answer for it only I cannot but take Notice how he beats the Air who either defends or opposeth any Religion upon Fallible Grounds In many a large Libel I could produce where there is not one Quotation of Scripture W. Smith in his Directory for Religious Principles consisting of above 200. Pages hath not one Scripture quoted not one Exhortation to read the Scriptures but as his main Scope denyes and throws Dirt upon them This was J. Faldo's Reply I shall now contract the Substance of my Rejoynder to it First I did not say that there was not one Book without plenty of express Scripture but that those Books whose Titles he quoted were either generally in a Scripture Style or particularly defended by plenty of express Scriptures Secondly To confute me he produceth one of those Books wherein he saith one Scripture was not quoted as if that was sufficient to prove it was not written generally in a Scripture Style one half of the â—uestion Upon which I made him this Challenge to give me one Book out of a Scripture style that is not Controversial or any Controversial Book without express Scripture cited If he could not his vain Insulte should fall upon his own Head In this particular though he has ove lookt all the rest of my Discourse in Defence of our Faith Writings and Principles he undertakes me in his pretended Curb to my Confidence in these words To accept W. P 's Challenge is no bold thing and to shew his unparallel'd Falsehood and Confidence I shall need to give you but a few Instances out of W. Smith's Catechism and Primer But J. Faldo Three instances few enough to be sure prove 200 Pages generally unscriptural the Terms of the Question Methinks this shews more Confidence then a Man that undertakes to Curb another Man's Confidence ought to have but all J. Faldo's sayings are to be construed cum grano salis But to the first Instance Child I would know Father how it is concerning those things call ' Ordinances as Baptism Bread and Wine which are much used in their Worship Father Why Child as to those things they rose from the Pope's Invention And then the Priest gives it to the People and tells them that it is the Blood of Christ shed for them when it is Wine and not Blood Smith's Catechism pag. 39. I see nothing unscriptural in either Question or Answer unless J. Faldo quibbles upon the Pope 'T is true he rose not till several hundred years after the Scriptures were written but if there be a use of those things call'd Sacraments invented by the Pope after another manner then they were ever practised by the ancient Christians which is undeniable with J. Faldo and that scuh an unscriptural use may be called an Invention and that the Pope be a Man â—ea the Man of Sin as also J. Faldo I suppose and many more do conceive and all this Scripturally then I hope it cannot with any sober Pretence be deny'd but that W. S's Answer is very Scriptuâ—â—l But what makes this great Pretender to Truth and Modesty decline taking any notice of that Charge I publisht against him upon occasion of his most gross Abuse of W. Smith upon these words who would needs have it that W. Smith calls the Lord's Supper the Pope's Invention when I expresly proved out of the same place that W. Smith intended it of the present Practice of them and not of any primitive Institution W. Smith's words are these The whole Practice of those things as THEY USE them had their Institution by the Pope and were never SO ordained of Christ for he did not ordain Sprinkling of Water in a Child's face or to make a Sign of a Cross in his forehead nor God-fathers and God-mothers to undertake for it neither did he ordain Bread and VVine to be SO or after that Manner used and received If this be to make Baptism and the Supper Popish what becomes of his Antipaedobaptists and all Protestants that maintain the same respectively But most evident it is VV. Smith intended not that Baptism and Supper used by the Ancient Christians but most true it is that J. Faldo made VV. Smith to intend so I leave the Reader to give a Name to this Carriage the like to which for a Daring Perversion I yet know nobody guilty of J. Faldo and T. Hicks excepted Now for