THE Anti-Christs and Sadduces DETECTED Among a sort of QUAKERS OR Caleb Pusie of Pensilvania and John Pennington with his Brethren of the Second Days Meeting at London called Quakers Proved Antichrists and Sadduces out of a Printed Book lately published by them falsly called A modest Account of the principal Differences in point of Doctrine betwixt George Keith and those of the People called Quakers in Pensilvania c. Being an ANSWER to the said Book Signed particularly by Caleb Pusie but expresly recommended in Print by John Pennington and approved by the Second Days Meeting at London With some few Remarks on John Penningtons late Book entitled The People called Quakers cleared c. And Geo. Whitehead his Postscript shewing some of their gross Perversions Falsehoods and Groundless Calumnies against G. K. And a POSTSCRIPT Containing an earnest Expostulation with the most Pious and Learned Persons whether in the Church of England or among other Protestant Dissenters and a serious Invitation unto them to employ some of their Time and Labour by their Pious and Learned Writings to oppose and refute those vile Errors boldly avowed and publickly broached in the late Printed books of some Leading Men among a Gang and sort of Quakrs By GEORGE KEITH London Printed for the Author and are to be sold at his House at the Golden Ball over-against Red-Lyon-street in White-Chappel THE Anti-christ's and Sadduces DETECTED Among a sort of QUAKERS IN the first place it is fit I should give the Readers some Information who the Second Days Meeting at London is It is a Meeting of the Ministry of them called Quakers of William Penns and George Whiteheads Party belonging to London and some of the Country that may happen to be present who Meet at Whitehart-Court in Lombard-Street every Second day of the Week and assume a Power to License and Approve of all Books that are to be Printed by any of their Party and have approved this Book falsely called A Modest Account and all the late scandalous Books of Thomas Elwood and John Pennington come forth against me and claim Authority over all other Meetings the Yearly Meeting perhaps excepted sending out their Circular Letters to all other Meetings in all parts of the World as they think they have occasion and to whom the Meetings from all places direct their Letters upon any occurrence of difference as the Churches and Bishops of other Countries had wont to direct their Letters to Rome which was the Rise of that Roman Hierarchy the which Meeting may be fitly compared to the Conclave of Cardinals at Rome but who is the Metropolitan of this new erected Hierarchy at London at present is not certainly known as whether W. P. or G. W. He doth acknowledg 1st differences in point of Doctrine 2. Principal differences How doth this agree with many of them called the Church Party here who say They do not deny G. K's Doctrine P. 8. As concerning the Sufficiency of the Light without something else that he saith you have made such a pudder about of late for this he brings a Proof from my Book Light of Truth p. 12. and 6. where I say the express Knowledg and Belief c. Is not universally of absolute necessity unto Salvation and so I say still annd so saith R. Barclay whom he abuseth as well as me for we both frequently caution and limit the matter saying the clear distinct express Historical Knowledg is not universally necessary See my Book Universal Grace p. 117. ad Finem But whereas he states the difference in point of Doctrine betwixt some in Pensilvania and me as if I said it were an Error to affirm ' the Light within were sufficient without something else which I never so said nor thought for the Light within is sufficient without not only something else but without thousands of somethings else But my assertion was and is ' The Light within is not sufficient to Salvation without ' something else which they blaming they ought to hold the contradictory assertion viz. The Light within is sufficient to Salvation without any thing else for two contradictories are not betwixt two particulars but one particular and another Universal now seeing they hold ' that the Light within ' is sufficient without any thing else it is plain they Exclude the Man Christ without us and his Death c. from being concerned in our Salvation P. 8. He basely forges me to say It is a real degree of Blasphemy to say this Light cannot make satisfaction for sins past citing pag. 38. 39. Refutation See the place I have no such words but plain contrary I say Refut p. 42. 43. Neither is the Saints greatest inward Righteousness or Holiness wrought in them by the Spirit of God an Atonement or Propitiation for their sins but Christ alone who Dyed for us the just for the unjust P. 9. He cites my Book Looking-glass for Protestants p. 10. That Magistrates may Preach which he thinks a contradiction to my late Testimony with Friends in Pensilvania that Friends of the Ministry should not meddle to be Justices and Judges in Criminal Cases but this is no contradiction for it is one thing occasionally to Preach or Teach or Exhort as any Christian can do and another to exercise the Office or Function of a Minister of the Gospel of Peace one day that saith Resist not Evil and our Weapons are not Carnal and another day to hang Men for Murder c. Which scarce any that profess to be Ministers do in Christendom but the Quakers in America P. 9. That I say of Christs Body now in Heaven It being no more a Body of Flesh Blood and Bones but a pure ethereal or Heavenly Body This he brings to prove a contradiction to my self leaving out the foregoing words Which remaineth the same in Substance that it was on Earth c. So that by my saying it being no more a Body of Flesh and Blood I mean it in the Apostles sense 1 Cor. 15. Flesh and Blood cannot inherit c. See my words cited by himself p. 10. a Testimony against the false and absurd Op. The Flesh that is mortal gross and corruptible is not the Flesh that shall be raised up immortal and incorruptible P. 12. He makes me to contradict my self in saying Presb. and Indep p. 133. The Express Knowledg of Christ his becoming Man and suffering was positively denied to be of necessity to Salvation but now I furiously quarrel with Friends about it that it is But his fallacy lyeth in this that I say the express Knowledg is not universally necessary but some knowledg if not express yet implicit is and this is no Contradiction P. 15. He Argues from my Book The Light of Truth p. 8. That the Light within is the only Christ and he saith p. 14. the word only admits of nothing else than Light Power and Spirit within Answ 1. Here it is manifest he placeth all on the Light within so that
Light Citing Rector Corrected pag. 150. But where is my Contradiction here Did I ever say That men may believe in the Light or Christ within and never at any time from first to last believe in Christ without either expresly or implicitly For this they bring no proof and I believe they can bring none Fifthly In pag. 26. they most Ignorantly and Antichristianly blame my sound Christian Assertion where I say The work of Sanctification is ascribed in Scripture to Christ's Blood and Sufferings as well as to his Inward Appearance and to both indispensably necessary and to Faith therein Thus we see plainly they place all upon Christ within and nothing upon Christ without O bold Antichristianism published in the Face of a Nation prosessing Christianity But wherein I have contradicted that Assertion they show not 6thly They bring me in guilty of a Contradiction for saying Nor is the outward Name that which saveth but the inward Nature Virtue and Power signified thereby which was made manifest in them c. But they no where shew how I contradict this I say still It is not the outward Name either of God or Christ that saveth without the Inward Nature Virtue and Power which Inward Nature Virtue and Power dwelt and dwells in all Fullness in the Man Christ Jesus and of whose fullness we all receive and Grace for Grace and all that believe in him who hath the fullness they receive rich supplies out of his Fulness daily of more Grace which they that do not believe in him do not receive Seventhly They charge me with Contradiction because formerly I said That these Gentiles had the Gospel preached unto them who were not under any outward Administration of the Gospel But they bring no place to prove where I contradict this Assertion as I do not at present contradict it but own it in a true sense and the former Distinction will serve here of express and implicit and I still grant that the Gospel implicitly is Preached to all Men in some measure after some sort Samuel Fisher calls it a Gospel-Dram somewhere in his Rusticus ad Academicos as I have read it in him but few have obeyed it as so preached but whoever did obey it I question not but they were accepted But here let it be Noted that whereas they would divert the Main Part and Branch of the Question which was and is betwixt them and me of the Necessity of our Faith in Christ crucified to our Salvation who are professed Christians wholly to the Case and State of the Gentiles who have it not outwardly Preached to them by the Ministry of Men or Books I have sufficiently proved against them at our late Meeting at Turners-Hall 11th of the 4th Month 1696. And in the printed Narrative that they have affirmed That it is not necessary to our Salvation to believe that Christ dyed for us c. This Charge lyeth at their Door which is the main Thing in Question But how the most Pious and Upright among the Gentiles were saved by Faith in Christ Crucified who had not Faith outwardly Preached is neither the great or chief Question nor so proper for us to determine seeing God hath ways to have done it unknown to us whose Ways are above our Ways as the Heavens are above the Earth and it may be one of these Secret things that belong to God and not to us till he please to reveal it Eightly pag. 30. They charge me with a Contradiction for saying He Christ left not the other Nations destitute of the Main and Principal Thing even the Manifestation of the Light c. which would have given them the Knowledge of God c But if they think or would have others to think that by the Main and Principal Thing I meant the Light within compared with Christ without in whom all fulness of Light and Grace dwelleth they both deceive themselves and seek to deceive others For by my following words it is manifest I call the Light within the Main Thing in Comparison with outward Things as is plain from my following words cited by them out of my Book pag. 12. Universal Grace and not in Comparison with Christ without in whom the Fulness of Light dwells As for their suggestion of my holding the Revolution of Humane Souls in pag. 31. and more particularly in pag. 3. of G. Whitehead's Postscript who calls it my Notion of Twelve Revolutions of Humane Souls they have rendred themselves so foolishly impertinent as well as malicious thinking thereby to cast a great Odium upon me for holding such an odd Opinion that I need say little or nothing in answer to them having so fully and plainly in the openness of my Heart answered to that Charge in my Printed Treatise called Truth and Innocency Defended in Answer to John Delavall who was one of the first that charged me with the same and since that no less than Four several Persons have charged me with it in Print whereby they have sufficiently manifested both their Folly and Malice besides the many Whisperings and Mutterings they have used and spread abroad against me far and near on that account their Folly is sufficiently manifested that not one of all my Accusers have brought the least Authentick Evidence against me to prove their Charge And as I have fully cleared my self in the case in my Answer above-mentioned Printed at Philadelphia some Years ago so in my Appendix to the Book called The General History of the Quakers lately Printed at London in this Year 1696. But let us hear G. W. his Evidence to prove his Charge against me He saith That I argued from these Scriptures John 11. 9. Psal 90. 4. 2 Pet. 3. 8. and some others If I mistake not saith he Is this like Infallible George Whitehead If he says I do let him give us a plain State of his own Opinion herein Now would such an imperfect and lame Evidence pass current before any Judicatory The thing is so and so if I mistake not And as to the Manuscript he mentions that I shewed him it is true there was such a Manuscript which I read both to him and George Fox wherein I did undertake to Answer to some Objections against the Universal Principle and there were some things in that Manuscript modestly proposed concerning the Revolutions of some Souls but no ways as any positive Conclusion but simply as an Hypothesis or Supposition and if such a Manuscript or the Contents of it were such a Crime in G. K. to render me an Apostate and gone from Truth why did not G. Whitehead before twelve Years past for so long ago it is since that Manuscript was read to him deal with me by giving me Gospel-Order since what I had writ in that Manuscript was so offensive to him after his telling me my Fault in private and I not amending should he not have observed Christ's order to have taken with him one or two more Matth. 18. 6. And if
other bodies in substance from what they were here on Earth which this Caleb Pusie hath affirmed 6 thly Where doth the Scripture say The Regeneration or Conversion of the Soul is only a purification from sin as the washing of a body besmeared with dirt when cleansed is a Purification and not a Transmutation as Caleb Pusey hath also affirmed as above And though I remain still in the same mind That no Article of Faith should be urged on any but what is contained in plain express words of Scripture or so agreeable to express Scripture as the common sense of all mankind that hears Scripture words must acknowledge as though it is not said in Scriptures That Egypt Arabia Palestine Mesopotamia are Places without us yet common Sense tells us so Yet I see not why I should be so confined to express Scripture words in things that I require no Man to own or believe as Articles of Faith but leave them to their Liberty and others take their Liberty to use great variety of other words and I think I may say it without vanity the manner of my Preaching and writing has been full as much Scriptural as to Phrase as most of the Preachers and Writers among the Quakers As for his querying pag. 56. where are the express Scripture words that say The four hundred pieces of Silver that Abraham Purchased the Burying Place with signifies four hundred Vertues I Answer The Scripture saith that as much though not expresly yet implicitly as it saith The Treasures we are to lay up in Heaven are Spiritual and Divine Vertues which are the true Riches and the Wells that Abraham Digged and Isaack signified the Spiritual Wells of Water within them and Egypt signified the power of Darkness and Canaan that slowed with Milk and Hony signified the Kingdom of God for the Old Testament abounds with such Allegories But if any do not believe my interpretation by way of Allegory on that place of Scripture while they and I own the literal Sense or any others of the like nature I am far from urging it upon them but leave them to their free Judgment and as God shall be pleased to Enlighten them For there are many things both in my Book called Truth Advanced so reproachfully mentioned by him and in many other of my Books wherein I may possibly differ from others in Judgment yet I leave them to their Liberty to Dissent as I desire to be left to my Liberty to believe as I judg God has perswaded me But such as differ from me so far and so wide as this Person doth Caleb Pusie and these of the Second Days Meeting that have Countenanced and Approved his most Antichristian Doctrines directly contrary to the great fundamentals of Christianity affirming Jesus of Nazareth to be nothing else but the Light within and saying The Light within is sufficient to Salvation without any thing else so Excluding our Lord Jesus of Nazareth his Death and Sufferings his Resurrection Ascension Mediation for us in Heaven all which are something else than the Light within from being concerned in our Salvation I can by no means own them to be my Christian Brethren but esteem them to be worse than Mahometans and than other Sober and Honest Heathens or Gentiles for their opposing so great Truths so plainly exprest in Holy Scripture and it is not the Light in them but gross Darkness that leads them into these abominable Errors and the very Spirit of Antichrist Possesses them and they are such Antichrists concerning whom John Testified 1 John 2. 18. and 1 John 9. 3. Every Spirit that Confesseth not that Iesus Christ is come in the Flesh is not of God And this is that Spirit of Antichrist c. For notwithstanding their seeming confessions to him yet seeing they own not Justification by his Blood outwardly shed and Salvation by Faith in him as he Dyed for us and Rose again their Faith and Confession is vain and Hypocritical G. K. London the 2d of the 4th Month 1696. Some REMARKS on John Pennington 's late Book entituled The People called Quakers cleared c. and G. Whitehead his Postscript Shewing some of their gross Perversions Flashoods and Groundless Calumnies against G. K. Pag. 3. THeir blaming me for appointing a Meeting to which their Consent was neither sought nor made Necessary Answ They got timely Notice a Month before-hand and were desired to be present and why might not I appoint a Meeting without their Consent to Detect their Errors and to show the Unjustness of their Sentence of Excommunication against me as without my Consent they appointed a Meeting to Excommunicate me I desired them again and again in former Prints to consent to Time and Place yea to appoint Time and Place and I should stand to their Appointment But they still refused Offenders use not to consent to their Tryal P. 3. Their charging me with Spleen and Malice I reject as false and fictitious P. 4. Their telling of two Books lying on my Hand unanswered and my having given them Ground to expect an Answer to two of them Answ To the first some of their own Church have sufficiently answered to show the Badness of their Cause in that Censure they gave against Thomas Elwood which was read at the Meeting at Turner's-Hall 11th of the 4th Month. 1696. and is Printed in the Exact Narrative pag. 46. To the second and all the other I answered at that Meeting and have sufficiently detected their Abuses Fallacies Perversions as well as False Doctrines though I have a great deal more in reserve But all impartial Men will clear me of any blame in not answering them in Print when I have offered to Answer them viva voce at a Meeting for there is no end of answering them in Print and they can and do more securely Forge Pervert and Abuse their Readers and me also in Print because they know few will be at the pains to compare their Books with mine to see who is innocent or blame-worthy But Face to Face and by Word of Mouth it is easily made apparent and beside as I have formerly told to print Books to answer all their Books is too great a Charge for me P. 4. They alledge ' I have vindicated their Principles from their Common Adversaries Answ Such as I did think were their Principles I did formerly vindicate but most of them which I did think were their Principles I have found of late were not their Principles though I retain them still as mine and I challenge them or any Man to prove that ever I did vindicate any of these four abominable Principles which I have proved G. W. and W. P. guilty of at the late Meeting 11th 4th Month 1696. and whereof the late Printed Narrative gives an Account And though they alledge I have changed my Principles yet they have not made it to appear nor I believe they ever shall that in any one Article of the Christian Faith that are
reckoned among the Simpliciter credenda I have changed any one Principle Only as to the Sense of some Places of Scripture relating to Water-Baptism and the Supper I own I have changed my Mind but to the better and also as to some other places of Scripture improperly alledged to prove some real Truths P. 4. to p. 10. As concerning these several Testimonies they bring out of my Books in all these pages I own every one of them still as things sincerely believed by me and I believe by many others also so far as they relate to Doctrine But that I held them forth as the Principles of the Teachers among the Quakers universally or as the Principles of G. W. and W. Penn seeing I have since found them so palbably to contradict them in their Printed Books I freely acknowledge my shortness and mistake therein But they most uncharitably alledge That it is hardness in me to have changed my Opinion or Perswasion of these men seeing they have given me so great and just occasion so to do by boldly defending and excusing these vile Errors The next thing they charge me with is my Inconsistency and Self-contradiction but this is a False Charge their manifest failure in their undertaking will sufficiently I hope prove The first Self-contradiction they think they have catched me in is what they bring in pag. 111 2. viz. That I said Nameless Bull pag. 11. Seeing this true Faith is wrought in God's ordinary way by Preaching therefore the true Faith of Christ's Death and Sufferings ought to be one of the first and chiefest things that every true Minister ought to Preach c. But they think I contradict this Way to the City of God pag. 3. The knowledge of his inward coming is that which is the more needful and in the first place as being that by which the true and comfortable use of his outward coming is alone sufficiently understood Answ As I have somewhere else said It is my Lot to have to do with Men that have neither so much true Logick nor Common Sense as to understand what a true Contradiction is Let any Man of common sense judge if it be a contradiction or least inconsistency to say The true Faith of Christs Death is one of the first things that ought to be Preached to bring Men to witness the true Faith of Christs Death and being made Conformable to his Death And also to say The knowledge of his inward coming is the more needful in the first place As it is no contradiction to say George Whitehead was one of the first Quakers in the North of England George Fox was the first Quaker But for the better understanding of the Case the distinction betwixt general Religion and Christian Religion is to be considered which distinction I have used in my Book called Divine immediate Revelation and Inspiration continued in the true Church Printed at London 1684. and which was read and approved by the Second Days Meeting when I was present and therefore G. W. is bound to own what is in that Book unless he will say their Ministers are changed in their Principles see pag. 44. where I also distinguish betwixt general Revelation in Men and special the general I said was common to all Mankind the special given to true Christians By general Revelation which is that common illumination given to all Mankind men are taught to know that God is and that he is the maker of all things and that he hath given a Law to Men in their Hearts which they are to obey and when they disobey this Law they make themselves guilty before God and by this general Revelation or illumination Men generally know that they are Sinners all having sinned and by this inward Law and illumination common to all men is the knowledge of Sin and of the Wrath of God that is due for Sin and by this General or Common illumination many of the Gentiles came so far as the Servants state and had acceptance with God as Servants but were short of the state of Sons because they had not the Faith in Christ Crucified according to Gal. 3. 26. This same distinction of general and special Revelation in other terms I held forth in my Book of Universal Grace approved also by the Second Days Meeting and Printed in the Year 1671. which is about 25 Years ago see pag. 8 9 10. of that Book where I largely treat of a twofold inward Appearance of Christ in Men the first and second and how the first prepareth for the second and how the first is not to be rested in but that we ought to press forward into the second pag. 9. ad finitum And I said the first was that of the Law the second that of the Gospel pag. 8 The former that of the first Covenant the latter that of the second Covenant And I say expresly pag. 8. ' The Gospel lay hid within the Law as within a Vail which the outward Tabernacle did plainly figure and hold forth And notwithstanding that I have held forth this distinction in Print 25 Years ago yet many of my present Adversaries cry out against it as New Doctrine and contrary to Friends Principles And it most evidently appeareth from the express Words of my Book of Universal Grace pag. 120. That I did not then hold that the Light within was sufficient to Salvation without any thing else or without Christ's outward coming and his Obedience Sufferings and Death as my Adversaries Caleb Pusie and the Second Days Meeting that hath approved his Book do affirm and as these Men also do who have given out their Scandalous Book called The People called Quakers cleared for I say expresly in that pag. 120. The Light within and Christ's outward coming with his Obedience Sufferings and Death are both sufficient useful and necessary in their own kind and way Consummating and being Consummate in another And here Note that though I did not say Christ within and Christ without are two Christs yet I said his Light within and his Coming in the Outward with his Obedience Sufferings and Death were two things Consummating and being Consummated in one another Now to wipe off the Injurious Charge of my Adversaries G. W. and J. P. in this particular which I thank God I can as easily do and all other their Injurious Charges against me as Paul did throw off the Viper from his Hand I say conform to the Doctrine of my former Books and in good Consistency with all the passages in them the Light within which in a true sense is God and Christ the Eternal and Essential Word is to be Preached in the first place to Heathens and Gentiles or any other called Christians who have not any true knowledge of God or fear and reverence of him and to all bold and presumptuous Sinners and briefly to all Men whatsoever not really and truly converted to the Christian Religion to bring them in the first place to some
knowledge of And but that it would be too tedious a digression and not so proper here I could easily shew how weak their Arguments are against it as it is common to them as well as others to use weak Arguments to defend Truth and oppose what they call Errour And let them make the worst of it they can suppose that twelve Years ago most of which time since they have owned me in Unity with them I was in an Error in holding the Revolutions will that prove I hold them still And seeing they judge me changed greatly in my Principles of late Years why may they not judge me also changed in that Or what ground have they to think I am not If they say because I have not cleared my self of the Charge I say I have done it sufficiently several times in Print and oft by Word of Mouth That I hold it not either as any Article of the Christian Faith or as any positive Dogma in Philosophy yet I dare not nor will not positively condemn it universally until I see better and stronger Arguments than they have as yet brought against it And if it be so great and dangerous an Error why do they not refute it in Print and Answer to all these things brought in favour of it as a probable Hypothesis in the 200 Queries which hath been in Print upwards of 12 Years For they have Scribled and Printed many Books on Matters far less material than this is But since G. Whitehead hath Printed that which I committed to him as a Secrecy without my Consent it s well it was no such Matter as might have brought any real Infamy on me it s too probable if he could have revealed any Secret that would have taken away my Life he would have done it But I had no such Secret to impart to him or any that I need be afraid or ashamed for their revealing it Pag. 33. In their Head on the Glorified Bodies of Christ and the Saints they are Guilty of such gross Perversions as none but Men infatuated would be They infer That I have very Carnal Conceptions of the Resurrection at present like those Sadduces Matth 22 29. And why Because I say in Truth Adv. pag. 11. Paul distinguisheth between the Belly and the Body saying God will destroy the Belly but he doth not say he will destroy the Body for seeing after the Resurrection of the Dead Men shall need none of the Meats of this corruptible World nor shall they need a Belly to put them in as Guts and Draught or any gross parts as Men have now Let the Reader observe these mens Infatuation and Nonsense Do these Words prove that I have Carnal Conceptions of the Resurrection like those Sadduces Did not the Sadduces altogether deny the Resurrection But doth my saying that after the Resurrection of the Dead they shall need neither Belly Guts nor Draught nor any gross parts prove that they shall have them O astonishing Blindness And they are again guilty of the same Perversion or rather downright Forgery in their pag. 34. ad finem by their most false insinuating against me as if I did hold That the Resurrection-Bodies of the Saints shall have Belly Guts and Draught For say they had G. K. retained these Sentiments of Spiritual Bodies when he wrote his bulky Book stiled Truth Advanced he needed not have told us of Belly Guts and Draught But how did I tell them that Men after the Resurrection shall have them By no means but that they should not have them because they shall have no need of them and surely what they need not they shall not have as not to need in Scripture-phrase is not to have Rev. 21. 23. But that I remain in my Ancient Faith of the Resurrection-Body as formerly is clear from that very Book cited by them to wit That the Body that is raised shall be a Spiritual Body not gross material Flesh but wonderfully changed in manner and condition yet retaining the same Substance the Husk or drosly part excepted see particularly pag. 113 and 119. ad finem And that this was my Faith thirty Years ago is evident from my Answer to the 30 Queries of the Bishop of Aberdene above-mentioned and particularly noticed in the Collection of R. Barclay's Books called Truth Triumphant pag. 2. In which Answer that was extant thirty Years ago I expresly say in answer to the Bishop's Question which was Shall that same Body in Substance which dyeth be raised again at the last Day Answer Yea as far as a Natural Body and Spiritual Body is the same It is sown a Natural Body it is raised a Spiritual Body Where it is plain I both believed and declared it shall be the same Body in Substance that dyeth and shall be raised though wonderfully changed in Condition and Quality from Natural to Spiritual And this Answer was given in the Year 1666. being the third Year after I came among the Quakers and which I gave conform to John Crooks Words in his Truths Principles wherein I judged him before ever I saw him to be of the same Mind and Faith with me in that great Article of the Christian Faith as well as in others and since that I have spoke with him and had it from his own Mouth Pag. 35. As to their 5th Head concerning Water-Baptism and the Supper whereon they spend seven pages reciting some Passages in my former Books with their Uncharitable Observations and they are at great pains to show an Inconsistency and Contradiction betwixt my former Books and my late Book called Truth Advanced in reference to Water-Baptism and the Supper and that from some few Queries I proposed at the end of that Book only proposed by way of Query and not as Positive Conclusions for I expresly distinguish them from the Positive Conclusions going before being each ten in number And as to the Ten Positions I judge many or most called Quakers of the more intelligent sort will stand by them and may well enough own them without any Inconsistency to their former Principles And here I appeal to the Impartial Readers whither it be not great disingenuity in them to charge these Queries simply proposed by me as Queries but plainly distinguished from Positions upon me as plain Positions when to some of their unsound Assertions expressed as Queries but whose plain Sense did import them to be Positions they have made that excuse They did but Query as lately at Turners-Hall some of G. Whitehead's Advocates did plead in his behalf Is this to do as they would be done by And how extreamly Uncharitable they show themselves not to me only but to all Christendom in so severely accusing me for my Charitable Title to these Queries saying tending to Love Peace and Unity among all the Sincere Professors of the Lord Jesus Christ who hold the Head and build on the true Foundation and yet differ in some lesser matters they so severely tax me for this as
by their Censure it is evident they think none such to be found in all Christendom but themselves who hold the Head and build on the true Foundation for thus they say VVhich whosoever pleases to bestow the reading on will see whose Communion he labours to insinuate himself into next as holding the Head and only differing in some lesser Matters But unless they be so Unchristianly uncharitable as they too evidently show they are as to judge none in Christendom differing from them in Profession to hold the Head or are sincere Professors of the Lord Jesus Christ but they only Why should I be blamed for owning my Christian Communion with them in things that are not simply unlawful Ought I not to be of David's Mind who said I am a Companion of all them that fear thee c. But more particularly as to the Case of Water-Baptism and the Supper as I have freely declared of late Years viva voce so now as freely I publish it in Print That I am not ashamed to own my general Mistakes I have been under concerning divers Places of Scriptures particularly relative to Water-Baptism and the Supper as Matth. 28. 19. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. and some other places of Scripture relative to some other matters especially in the Misapplication of some places to prove certain Truths which these places did not prove a thing but too common to many Writers and to none more than to some called Quakers for though every place of Scripture prove some Truth yet every place proves not that Truth in particular which some may bring for to prove it and I am so far from being ashamed to publish this Confession that I have great Peace and Joy in it and I also declare that I am justly ashamed that I have been so long deceived and byassed with such weak Arguments as both they called Friends and I have used being too much influenced and byassed by their pretended authority to perswade and draw away the Minds of People from the true Sense of these places of Scripture And the Arguments that we have mostly used against these two things are so weak that they have the same force against the Bible it self and all Books and outward Testimonies and outward acts of Worship and therefore are void in themselves for seeing they have no force against the latter they have as little against the former However I continue in my faithful Testimony against the abuse of these things and the dead empty and formal way that too many practise them and except the Lord be found to bless and accompany them who use them with his Power and Spirit they are but as empty Shadows and Shells But who find the Lord to bless them with his Presence I judge them not and in this I am not singular for divers of good Note among the People called Quakers even Preachers have said the same or equivalent as particularly John Crook and Robert Barclay And it can no more be an evidence of my Apostacy to correct my former Mistakes on these two places of Scripture Matth. 28. 19. and 1 Cor. 11. 26 Which mistakes of mine were That I judged the Apostles were not commanded to practise these things and did not practise them by Command but by Permission of which I am now convinced of the contrary more than it will prove John Crook an Apostate which they will not dare to say who hath owned the same viz. ' That the Apostles and Primitive Believers did do these things by Command And J. N. in his Love to the Lost hath said as much Yea both J. N. and Stephen Crisp allow the practise of the Supper at this Day to weak Believers as is evident from their Books in Print Pag. 43. They blame me for opposing it as an Error That the Garden of Paradise was some part of this visible Earth and for my saying the Hebrew Word translated to dress signifies to Work in it blaming my saying It cannot be well understood that it needed Dressing after the manner of our common Gardens Now whereas G. Whitehead hath approved this Book and boasts that I have fallen into other Hands to deal with me c. Let us see how their Hands at present agree Ye see they blame me for opposing it as an Error that the Garden of Paradise was some part of this Visible Earth and will needs have that it needed Dressing after the manner of our common Gardens But in plain Contradiction to this G. Whitehead in his Printed Book called A Serious Account in 35 Reasons c. Giveth this as one of his 35 Reasons why the People called Quakers have left the Men called Priests pag. 23. Reas 9. Also the Priests Ignorance and Gross Darkness saith he hath appeared who have affirmed That the forbidden Fruit which the Serpent tempted Eve to eat of was an Apple From which Dream of theirs the picture of a Snake and an Apple in its Mouth in a Tree with the Image of a Man a Woman are set up at the beginning of Bibles and in many other places from which some have imagined that the Serpent which beguiled Eve was a Visible Creature or Beast of the Field which for that time had power to speak and to present an Apple to deceive Eve withal when as God said to Man and Woman before the Fall Behold I have given you every Herb hearing Seed which is upon the face of all the Earth and every Tree in the which is the fruit of a Tree yielding seed to you it sha'l be for Meat Gen. 1. 29. and the fruit of such a Tree that beareth seed is an Apple So that could not be the Forbidden Fruit And the Serpent was that which tempted Man from the Simplicity of the Truth and through subtilty led him out from the Innocency and Life wherein God had placed him to feed upon the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge which was desirable to the Carnal or Woman's part that was not content with the pure innocent and simple Being wherein God at first placed Man over the rest of the Creation Now if the Trees of the Garden were not visible and particularly the Tree of the forbidden Fruit as G. W. saith it was not then to be sure the Garden by his judgment was not visible as an Apple or any other visible Fruit growing on this visible Earth and seeing he gives this as a Reason why he left the Men he calleth Priests And it is now his own Faith by the same Reason all the Quakers should leave him In the next place let us hear what G. Fox saith in that famous Book called his Journal pag. 17. ad finem Now saith he was I come up in Spirit through the Flaming Sword into the Paradise of God all things were new c. I appeal to all Intelligent Readers whether G. F. did mean by the Paradise or Garden here any part of this Visible Earth And if any think he meant it of any part
were they armed with Truth and Righteousness they needed not have complained of want of due preparation its odd and a new sort of Language for one called a Quaker to tell us of his not being prepared the Scripture saith 1 Pet. 3. 15. Be ready always to give an Answer to every Man that asketh you a Reason of the Hope that is in you When I was most falsly and uncharitably accused by John Voughton John Field and Thomas Ellwood at the Yearly Meeting 1694. I sought no Particulars of Quotations and Pages referred unto nor did any intimate to me before-hand the particular Passages in my Books that they justly excepted against I intirely relyed on the Assistance of God to help me what to answer to the many false Accusations and Perversions that my Accusers used against me and I found him a present help to me I had offered in Print before to Tho. Elwood that he would appoint Time and Place and I would stand to his Appointment And I make the same Offer to you again I freely allow you to serve me as I have served you Give out your Advertisement in Print appoint your Time and Place and let me have your Charge without your Proofs until we meet and then bring them forth against me I premise God permitting to meet you provided the Meeting be free and open to all Sober Persons A POSTSCRIPT Containing an Earnest Expostulation with the most Pious and Learned whether in the Church of England or among other Protestant Dissenters and a serious Invitation unto them to employ some of their Time and Labour by their Pious and Learned Writings to oppose and refute those vile Errors boldly avowed and publickly broached in the late Printed Books of some Leading Men among a Gang and sort of Quakers IT may seem strange how it comes to pass that while so many Pious and Learned Men are judged to be found in this Nation not only of the Church of England but among the Dissenters and Nonconformists there are found so few among them all that do imploy their Gifts to oppose such Vile Errors as are boldly and avowedly promoted among a sort and Gang of the People called Quakers not only as bad as any Popery but much worse than the worst of Popery in divers respects and I am confident if such Antichristian Errors and Heresies were but the tenth part so avowedly broached in the City of Rome or any where else in Popish Countries these esteemed Watchmen among them would be more alarmed to oppose them by Word and Writing than most among Protestants do which would seem to cast a great Reflexion on the Protestant Churches if some able Men and of good esteem among them both for Piety and Sound Knowledge be not awakened to bestow some of their time and labour by their Writings to oppose such Vile Errors and such a Work would be so far from unbecoming the ablest and most valuable Persons in this Nation for Piety and Learning that it would turn much to their Honour and real Advantage to bestir themselves in this Work It frequently happeneth that Books are more valued and the Contents of them the more regarded and considered and the more universally read and recommended that Persons of publick Note and Fame when Pious and Learned are the Authors of them And whereas many of the chiefest Teachers and Leaders among the People called Quakers have formerly with great boldness provoked such as have differed from them to publick Disputes viva voce and have oft gloried over them who refused to answer them that their Cause was bad and that they had not Truth on their side and in these days there was no such Cry to be heard from them as now That such publick Disputes will offend Authority and break the Civil Peace yea how oft have some of their Teachers assaulted the National Ministers in the Face of their Congregations and provoked them to dispute with them and on their refusal have cryed out against them to be Fugitives and Hirelings when the said National Ministers way of Religion and Worship was approved by Authority and that of the People called Quakers was not Would it not therefore be a most equal reasonable and commendable Practise for any Persons of true Piety and solid Learning moved with the Zeal of God's Glory and love of Truth and with a Holy Indignation against these Vile Errors that are publickly avouched by some Leading Men among the Quakers as appeareth both by their former and later Printed Books and with a tender Compassion to the Souls of so many Thousands in this Nation that are in danger to perish by the Infection of these Errors openly and publickly to call them forth to a publick Hearing and to press them by earnest Perswasions to retract and condemn those vile and damnable Errors contained in their Books or if they continue to justifie them to refute them openly in the Face of their own Meetings and in the presence of them that do so much admire and follow them And thus to serve them at they have served others and with what Measure they have met to others with the sone to mete to them again And it would be a Commendable and Praise-worthy thing for the Civil Authority to encourage such a Practise throughout the Nation that Men of true Piety and solid Learning might be allowed and Countenanced to Refute these Vile and Abominable Errors of these chief Teachers and Leaders anong them called Quakers in their Meeting-Houses at the end of their Meetings or at other fit times Surely such a Practise as this as it is no ways inconsistent with the Civil Peace and Liberty of Conscience granted to Dissenting Protestants notwithstanding of the idle Clamour of such Men who have an Evil Conscience and a lad Cause would be more effectual to Preserve the True Protestant Christian Religion in these three Nations than all the severe ways in former times used against then of Fines Imprisonments c. And though it is far from me to desire the least Suffrings to come on these Mens Persons or Estates yet if such a zeal were raised in them bearing Authority in this Nation to give order that all such Books of them called Quakers as can readily be found as great store of such there are that contan such Vile and Abominable Errors to the dishonour of the worthy Name of Christ and the Christian Religion and the great danger of many Souls be diligently searched and examined by the most Pious and Judicious Persons in the Nation and after due search and Examination be found guilty that by publick Authority all such Books may be suppressed and witnessed against I may freely say these Men should have no just Cause to Complain that their Books should be so dealt with for they have done the like to Books that have opposed their gross Errors witness a Parcel of Books writ by me some Four Years ago that came to London from Pensilvania opposing the
gross Errors of some called Quakers in that Province which were designed to have been Sold in single Books and dispersed through City and Country for a general Service But the Quakers here at London gave large Money to the Man that had them that they might get them all into their Hands on purpose to suppress them as accordingly they did and hinder the Service of them and these very Books generally lie in these Mens Custody suppressed unto this very Day and some of them have burned others have torn and trod under Feet in open view Books that have opposed their vile Errors Advertisement WHereas there is lately Printed a Scandalous Libel against me with this Title Master George Keith at Turners-Hall in Philpot Lane London in 1696. contradicting c. Signed only with two Letters W. C. wherein he laboureth in vain to prove my Inconsistency and Contradiction betwixt my Book of Immediate Revelation and the late Exact Narrative the Author of which Scandalous Libel seemeth to profess himself to be a Member of the Church of England but his Speech bewrayeth him to be a Counterfeit and rather one of that Gang and sort of Anti-Christ Quakers above-mentioned seeing he doth so eagerly patronize them against the known Doctrine of the Church of England as well as of all true Christians I give this publick Intimation that I desire this W. C. to appear and meet me at any convenient time at our Meeting-place at Turners-Hall which time I allow him to appoint and give Notice of before-hand and I doubt not but by God's Assistance to prove him guilty of divers Forgeries and palpable Falsities Perversions and Wrestings of my Sound Woros contained in his said Scandalous Libel together with his base Reflexions and False Surmises against me And if he refuse this my fair Proposal it will be manifest he is a Cowardly Spirit and smiter in the dark and as well Unmanly as Unchristian thus in a Clandestine way by palpable Falsities and Perversions to seek to deceive his unwary Readers and to divert me from a Business of greater Concern by his trifling And I judge no Impartial Observer of the state of this Controversie betwixt my open and professed Adversaries G. W. and W. P. and others of their party and me will think me obliged to Print Answers to such Clandestine Enemies and Smiters in the dark or to regard their Nameless Libels which might prove as much an Unprofitable as an Endless Work I also desire the Friendly Reader to take notice that the Corrections and Explanations of some Passages contained in my former Books which I have freely declared did need Correction in some things and Explanation in others are in great part already given in this Treatise and indeed the greatest Mistakes that I find I have been under were my mis-understanding these places of Scripture Matth. 28. 19. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. and others the like places relating to these outward Practices of Baptism and the Supper which in the foregoing Treatise I have freely acknowledged and this may suffice at present to silence the Clamour of such that cry out I should first acknowledge my own Errors before I charge others with their Errors For as I had done it in general in the first place so since I have done it in particular in great part and may yet more fully do it as God shall be pleased to give me an Opportunity But I bless God I have no such Errors to retract or correct as my Adversaries have for put all my Mistakes and Errors together in one Bundle and they will not weigh the one thousand part of the weight that one of these four Errors do weigh that I have proved my Adversaries guilty of both in the Exact Narrative and in this fore-going Treatise and in other late Treatises And were but my Adversaries so sincere and ingenuous to acknowledge either in general or in any particulars wherein they have been mistaken and need to correct their Sentiments it would give great Satisfaction to many as well as to me But this they will hardly do nay it is impossible they can do it so long as they seek to keep up in their credulous Followers their esteem of their Infallibility and beside to own that they are changed from their former Sentiments would be either to acknowledge themselves as great Apostates as they now charge me to be for some small change in me touching lesser Matters or rather to clear me of that foul Charge of Apostacy they have so invidiously cast upon me And it is great dis-ingenuity in them and Hypocrisie to blame me for saying I did not know they held such Principles till of late times for it is certain that as these their Erronious Principles were unknown to me which I call Anti-Christian and Sadducean so what they call my Presbyterian and Priestly Principles were unknown to them or if they did know them they were great Hypocrites if they judged them false not to discover them before now For whereas now they commonly say I hold Priests and Professors Principles I know no such Priests and Professors Principles that I now hold but I am able to prove I have held them ever since I came among the People called Quakers as touching all the Articles of Faith commonly called the simpliciter credenda and wherein I am changed in my Judgment as to the Sense of these places of Scripture relating to Baptism and the Supper I can prove my agreement with some of chiefest Note among the People called Quakers therefore for that I am no Apostate Some of the Chiefest of these False Contradictions the foresaid Libeller hath unjustly charged upon me that prove him extreamly Ignorant or wickedly Impudent Pag. 5. That an Unbelieving Iew is no Christian That a Believing Iew in Moses time was a Christian That which makes one a true Christian is the Spirit of Christ the anointing in him Faith in Christ without us wrought by the Spirit of Christ in us is universally necessary to make Men true Christians Pag. 6. The History or Historical and express Knowledge and Faith of Christ crucified is not universally necessary to make Men true Christians Some Knowledge and Faith of Christ crucified though not the Express and Historical yet Implicit is universally necessary to make Men true Christians The Manifestation of God in the Flesh of Christ and his Incarnation is a greater Mystery than mens Regeneration Christ's inward Ministry and Teaching by the Spirit in our Hearts is more than his outward Ministring and Speaking was to them who outwardly heard him and saw him Pag. 7. Christ crucified in whom the Fulness dwelleth is a greater Mystery than Christ in the Gentiles Jesus Christ revealed in Man is the Foundation of the true Church Note I did not say Christ only within c. Pag. 8. Christ without us as he is both God and Man the Emmanuel as well as his inward Appearance in us is the Object of Saving Faith The Internal Revelation of Christ is the formal Object of Faith Note His Ignorance in not understanding the distinction betwixt the material Object of Faith and the formal Object also betwixt the objectum formale quod and objectum formale quo maketh him think the two above-mentioned Passages to be Contradictions but for his Instruction I send him to R. B. his Apology on that Head and his and my Answer to the Students of Aberdene Pag. 11. The wisdom described Prov 8. is Christ the very fulness of God Note His abominable Forgeries and Falsities in saying I give all these Names he mentions p 11 to the Light within which is a notorious Falshood as the Reader will see that will be at the pains to view the several pages he refers to for though some of these Names I give to the Light within yet not all of them but some I give to Christ as he is both God and Man and I divers times in that same Book and near to these places that he cites call the Light within a Measure of that Fulness of Life and Spirit whose Fulness is in the Man Christ without us The Light in us is the Voice of Wisdom the Path of Wisdom a Measure of that Fullness See my Book Immediate Revel pag. 117. 243 245. Mary was the Mother of Christ according to the Flesh and in that respect Christ is the Seed of the Woman in the literal sense of Gen. 3. 15. And as in all his Instances he grosly prevaricates so he is guilty of most gross Forgery in saying That I Allegorize his Birth in the Flesh and his Miracles Crcucifixion and Resurrection But his Ignorance proceeds from his not understanding to distinguish betwixt an Allegorical Allusion warranted by Scripture and turning the true Literal Sense of places of Scripture into an Allegory so as to destroy or make void the Literal Sense which I have proved G. W. guilty of But this Libeller has proved no such thing on me and he is most shamefully deceitful in saying the Word away we must justly drop on both sides I having accused G. W. that he hath Allegorised away Christ's Births Burial Resurrectionn and proved him guilty of so doing in my Narrative by Allegorising away the Literal Sense of these places of Scripture Isaiah 9. 6 53. 9. and 1 Cor. 15. 8. Believers are the Mother of Christ in an Allegorical Sense not grounded on Gen 3. 15. but on Matth. 49. 50. and Rev. 1â— 5. And in this Allegorical Sense Christ is formed in the Saints Gal. 4. 19. and by his Power in them he the Seed of the Woman bruiseth the Serpent's Head London the 24th of the Month called July 1696. G. K. ERRATA Pag. 9. line 29. for servants read parents p. 11. l. 17. after is r. a part in p. 22. l. 50. r. ad finem p. 26. l. 11. after books r but think that I did so distinguish p. 29. l. 40. r. deisme p. 34. last line for general r several p. 35. l 47. r. Man and Woman Of Christ Crucified Citing Way cast up p. 113. false quot true quot p. 131. * That was Peter Bosse Note These few Lines are but a small part of many more English Verses made by the said John Homes that he spread abroad having this Title The Fighting Quakers Expedition in Pensilv
the man Christ Jesus of Nazoreth without us is nothing of Christ but as his Assertion and Consequence is Blasphemous so it follows not from my words for as I then said so I still say Christ is but one and there are not two Christs one within and another without but it will not follow that there is nothing of Christ without us but what is within us Suppose Caleb Pusey's Head is without the House and some or most of his Body is within the House as is possible the Caleb Pusey that is within is the same that is without yet there is something of him without that is not within it is the same Body of Water in the Complex that is in the Thames and in the Sea yet it follows not that there is nothing of the great and vast Body of Water but what is within the Thames But when Men that have neither Learning nor good Exercise of Human Reason will meddle to Dispute we see how ignorant they prove themselves to be in the face of the World or how they expose themselves in Print neither to be true Christians nor Men of true Reason he had better kept with working at his Mill being by profession a Miller than enter into a Dispute of matters wherein he is so grosly ignorant But seeing the Second Days Meeting at London hath countenanced his Book and the Quakers generally at London allow it to be Sold next door to their Meeting-house in Grace-Church-street they make his ignorance unbelief Saducism and Antichristian Doctrine to be theirs And seeing my Book called The Light of Truth in Answer to R. Gordon was approved by the Second Days Meeting and that he would infer from my words That Jesus of Nazareth cannot be something else than the Light Power and Spirit within it is plain that it is both their Sense and his that Jesus of Nazareth is nothing at all of Christ without us which is a plain contradiction to themselves and to himself in his following words But no such consequence doth really follow from my words P. 17. He so mingles my words with his own that no man can distinguish the one from the other but the Reader that doth not compare my words in my own Book with his Citations would think them to be mine for whereas my words are in the pag. cited by him For whereas thou not only affirms that Salvation and Justification hath a necessary respect to Christ his taking on him the form of a Servant or Man in the outward and humbling himself therein even to the outward Death which we also grant God having so ordered it to be c. He makes as if I said his words are for as G. K. saith the Lord having ordained it so to be how can or dare we say therefore that he was or is not sufficient by his Light Power and Spirit to save without something else But see Reader his Forgery I say no such words but my words are a plain contradiction by necessary consequence to his presumptuous assertion for seeing God had Ordained it so to be as I have said that our Salvation and Justification hath a necessary respect to Christ his taking on him the form of a Servant in the outward therefore it evidently followeth that God could not save us without respect to the Man Christ in the outward otherwise he could or should contradict his own Ordination but as God cannot lye so nor can he contradict his own Counsel and Ordination and therefore the presumption is his and not mine And seeing they grant that God in the Man Christ without us cannot save us without an inward work of his Power and Spirit within us to Regenerate and Sanctify us which is a Truth and yet is no Reflection on his Sufficiency and Omnipotency so nor is it any reflection on him that God in us cannot save us without the Man Christ without us for he is as truly God without us and incomparably more manifest in the Man Christ without us than in us P. 19. He saith I exposed Friends to the World in Print for retaking a Sloop without ever admonishing them before hand for it and that when I reckoned my self an Elder in the Church among them Answ This is a gross falshood and Forgery I Printed nothing about their retaking a Sloop till a considerable time after 28 of the Ministers had Excommunicated me at Philadelphia to which Sentence some that gave a Commission to retake the sloop by force of Arms did put their hands and all the rest consented and they have disowned me to be any Member of their Church and how then could I own my self to be any of them which I did not So that this whole passage is false and a wilful piece of Forgery P. 20. He also alledgeth That I came to them and commended them for what they did and said It was very well done adding methinks you should consider these things Answ But what proof brings he for his Affirmation None at all and he having sufficiently discovered his gross forgery in other things rendreth his credit of no value in this and I well remember that at the retaking of the Sloop I was not in the Province but that I commended them that they had done well to send Armed men to retake the Sloop I affirm is an absolute forgery for it never was my Principle since I was called a Quaker and I have many to bear me witness that it hath been my constant Principle that Friends should not in any case use the Carnal Sword and the same Principle Robert Barclay in his Apology hath largely asserted and whom we have quoted and it is well known that many of greatest note among the Quakers hath declared the same And suppose I did say that they who did retake the Sloop did well which I do not remember all this might have been well said without any contradiction or equivocation for it was Peter Bosse and one or two more with him in a little Boat having neither Gun Sword nor Spear that retook the Sloop when a great many Armed Men that filled several Boats stood off at a distance and were afraid to come within shot and so the praise of that work belonged to him and not to them and the Magistrates did ill reward him for they not long after Fined him 6 Pounds and put him in Prison for some passages writ to Sam. Jennings in a private Letter and kept him in Prison 20 miles remote from his Family till the Magistrates that were Quakers and had cast him into Prison were turned out of the Government by G. Fletcher who was made Governour of Pensilvania by a Commission from K. William and Queen Mary and how soon he came unto the Government he Released him after inquiry that they had nothing justly against him See a further Account of this in the printed Tryal of G. K. T. B. and Peter Bosse first printed at Philadelphia and Reprinted at London And
his time in the City of Leichfield as he declareth in his Journal and how he went in Blood a great way and was commanded to pull off his Shoes c. This and some other like passages has occasioned some to think G. F. favoured the Revolutions but I do not say he did And whether the Disciples did not hold that Doctrine that said Master who hath sinned this Man or his Servants that he was born blind and many other places of Scripture there are on which he might as much and much more query concerning the Revolutions as any expressions he hath mentioned of mine as well as he might query concerning the Revolutions all Friends generally who hold That God hath given to every one a day of Visitation wherein he may be saved and that a Time of God's long suffering is extended to every one wherein he may repent and be Converted seeing many Dye in the Morning as it were of their Age without all signs of Conversion and have had but little Time given them between their Birth and Death wherein to Repent And as to his Question If an honest Indian or Poor infant dye without that outward Knowledg c. He quite misseth the matter I never affirmed the absolute necessity of an outward Knowledg universally to Salvation besides that properly all knowledg is inward and not outward the subject of it being the mind and understanding that is inward And seeing it is certain that there are honest men both among Indians and them called Christians that are not born again I return his own Query upon him to Answer what becomes of them when they dye seeing without being born again there is no entring into the Kingdom of God and what becomes of many called Quakers and others that before they dyed had no signs that they were arrived at that high state of a sinless perfection for tho Friends have earnestly contended for the Doctrin of Perfection as attainable by the Grace of God in this Life yet they have generally acknowledged that many in whom the work of Sanctification is begun have not as yet arrived to that state but have many sinful imperfections remaining in them and the Flesh lusting against the Spirit now let him tell me or any for him what becomes of such when they Dye and I may give him the like Answer or some better what becomes of honest Indians when they Dye if he or they say they who are in measure Sanctified but not Perfected in Sanctification before they Dye are made perfect in Holiness at the instant of Death tho this Answer Friends have blamed when given by those against whom they have contended yet if they think fit to allow of it as current now as it will in great part end the Dispute about Perfection and Answer the great Objection about the Popish Purgatory so it is as valid to Answer that Question What becomes of honest Gentiles that before they Died had no Knowledg nor Faith of Christ Crucified to wit that it is given them at the instant of Death by the internal Operation and illumination of the Holy Spirit But if any say this Answer is more alledged than Proved I reply it hath the same probability in the one case as in the other P. 30. To prove my inconsistency and contrariety with my self in the Doctrine of the Resurrection with a most blasphemous presumption he finds fault with Scripture Doctrine it self and like a scoffing Sadducy or rather Atheist goeth to fix a contradiction on the Scripture it self for thus he brings me in contradicting my self that which riseth is the mortal that puts on immortality and the corruptible which puts on incorruption citing my Book called A Testimony against that absurd Opinion p. 3. But in another place p. 10. he citeth me saying The Flesh that is mortal and corruptible is not that Flesh that shall be raised up immortal and incorruptible And citing my Book called Truth Advanced he brings me saying of that which riseth That it is a pure noble part that consumeth not nor corrupteth And then he querieth If that which riseth be the corruptible p. 31. how is it that that which riseth is incorruptible and corrupteth not again Now Reader I desire thee to notice how he quarrels not so much with me as with the Scriptures to prove a contradiction in them for my saying That which riseth is the Mortal that puts on Immortality and the Corruptible that puts on Incorruption this is plain Scripture 1 Cor. 15. 53. For this Corruptible must put on Incorruption and this Mortal must put on Immortality And for the next Citation which he makes a contradiction to the former it is also most plain and evident in the Scripture The Flesh that is Mortal and Corruptible is not that Flesh that shall be raised up Immortal and Incorruptible for the Scripture saith Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God 1 Cor. 15. 50. And surely that is the Flesh that is Mortal and Corruptible And p. 37. That which thou sowest thou sowest not that Body that shall be And v. 42. It is sown in Corruption it is raised in Incorruption c. And to his question which implyeth a negation and opposition to plain Scripture I answer That which riseth is incorruptible and corrupteth not again because it is made incorruptible and immortal by the mighty Power of God and to question the immortality and incorruptibility of the Bodies of the Saints after they are raised from the Dead is to suppose that they shall dye again and has this necessary consequence that they shall sin again for the wages of sin is Death But this contradicts the Testimony of Christ and all his Holy Prophets and Apostles and is a plain Introduction to Epicurism and Atheism And that I said in my Book Truth Advanced which he findeth fault with as being a contradiction that that which riseth is a pure noble part that consumeth not nor corrupteth This I say still and is no contradiction for in my Book in that very place cited by him p. 113. I bring a similitude of a grain of Corn which very Similitude the Scripture bringeth to demonstrate the Resurrection 1 Cor. 15. 37. Now all but fools and idiots know that as there is a Grain of Corn that corrupteth and turneth to Earth or Dust so there is another part in it that is more Noble that corrupteth not but by the corruption and dissolution of the other part is as it were set out of Prison and gets a new Life and Multiplication and as true Philosophy and right Reason and Ocular Experience teacheth that the generation of one thing followeth the corruption of another yet there is something in the new generated thing that was in the old corrupted thing so every Husbandman that has common sense knoweth that his Seed which he soweth doth not all perish or rot in the ground but a part remaineth in every Grain that multiplieth except in some extraordinary
case of immoderate Rains and Colds that altogether destroy the Seed in the ground as sometimes happeneth and then he expects no Crop unless he sow again And that this man will needs meddle with Philosophical matters to confirm himself by false Notions in gross Sadducism and opposition to the plain Doctrine of Holy Scripture is a lamentable case and that he hath got the Second Days Weekly Meeting at London to approve his book in order to disperse it all over the Meetings of the People called Quakers to corrupt and leaven them more and more into Sadducism and unbelief who have been in any degree formerly corrupted as I find too many are and to spoil and defile the minds of young People is yet more lamentable Page 32. He goeth on not so much in contending with me as against the Scripture it self But that which seemeth mightily to vex and disquiet his Thoughts is that he cannot conceive how there can be an incorruptible part lodged or placed in the corruptible body and how the body can have any incorruptible part in it before the Resurrection for then he thinks it would be both corruptible and incorruptible at once and also it needs not be changed from an incorruptible body to an incorruptible body And what change is that I question if any Sadducee did ever argue so ignorantly against the Resurrection of the body as this bold ignorant doth Shall I send him to his Mill or own Trade of grinding or sawing Timber for further instruction Doth he not know that Corn hatâ— two parts in it the one Husk the other Meal And hath not a Tree in it two parts the one Wood the other Bark And is not the one more Noble than the other And when a man eateth Corn with the Husk and swalloweth down at least a good quantity of the Husk or Bran together with the Food that is mixed with it doth the Husk become any part of his body or rather doth it not belong to the Excrement with other gross parts of the food Is there not in all food one more Noble part that becometh not Excrement but is transmuted into real flesh in man And did not what our Saviour eat turn into his real flesh and become incorruptible seeing his flesh saw no corruption And was not his body of flesh that did not see corruption yet further changed after his Resurrection and Ascension from a lower degree to a higher degree of Glory Bus if it were not for the sake of others to whom I hope this may be serviceable I should think my time lost to trace this ignorant man that is so stubborn and presumptuous in his ignorance and it might seem like casting Pearl before Swine that so dares to tread under his dirty feet such precious Truths of Scripture But I hope what he arrogantly treads under and his ignorant Sadducean Fraternity with him others will gather up and value for the worth of them And besides the Scripture Similitude of Corn I brought another Similitude in that same Page of my book p. 113. comparing the mortal and corruptible body of man to a Mass or Mixture that hath both Gold and Dross in it which Mass is an Heterogeneous body and is not pure Gold And though Gold is not in the highest or strictest sense incorruptible yet it is the most incorruptible of all Metals or Minerals or other such visible bodies and therefore in comparison of many other bodies it may be said to be incorruptible Now why may it not be said of a Mass that hath both Gold and Dross in it it is a corruptible body for all Heterogeneous bodies are corruptible and yet it hath that in it which in a certain respect is incorruptible for we know not any thing that can corrupt it seeing it endureth the hottest fire that can be put to it P. 33. My Similitude taken from the Soul of Man that remains the same in substance after its sanctification that it was before when unsanctified and defiled with sin he saith is short of the matter for such a change is surely rather a purification than a transmutation even as the washing of a body besmeared with dirt when cleansed is a purification and not a transmutation But still this ignorant presumptuous man runs himself rashly upon the sharp pricks Formerly he hath laboured in vain to destroy the felicity of the body of a Saint and now he laboureth as much in vain to destroy the felicity of his Soul that he makes the work of Regeneration in the Soul of Man to be nothing else but a purification from sin as when a Body besmeared with dirt is cleansed that is a Purification and not a Transmutation I never heard nor read a more ignorant and nonsensical Assertion This is like that other most nonsensical Assertion of one of their great Preachers here at London Jacob Talner and a Member of their Second Days Meeting who said in a publick Conference at Turner's Hall London 28. 3d. month 1696. desired by himself That Adam before his Fall was neither Holy nor Righteous nor Wise and from this False Assertion he brought an Argument That Spiritual Death could not be an effect of Adam's Sin Both which Assertions are flatly contrary not only to Scripture but to the common manner of Preaching among the People called Quakers and this he boldly affirmed in the hearing of some hundreds many of which were his own Party What is this but to make the Souls of the Saints nothing but as so many Tabulae Rasae washed Tables without any Beautiful Colours or lively Portraiture on them Is then the Image of God in the Saints no positive thing but a Freedom from sin or a Negation of it Is Holyness nothing but a Negation of unholiness Is the ardent Love of God in the Saints nothing but a meer negative of hatred of God Doth not the Scripture plainly distinguish betwixt the finishing Transgression and bringing in everlasting Righteousness O wrerched ignorance And O lamentable shame that falls upon the Second Days weekly Meeting of the People called Quakers for approving such Antichristian Doctrine worse than Heathenism for I never heard that ever any Heathen Philosopher said or taught That Virtue in the Soul of a Man was nothing but the absence of Vice The Holy Scripture doth not only Teach us That the Saints are washed but Sanctified and Transformed Rom. 12. 2. And what is now become of G. Foxes frequent Doctrine in his Preaching and Printed Epistles That Christ the Second Adam brings up them that follow him not only to the state of the First Adam that fell but unto his Image that never fell and is the Holiness of the Second Adam nothing but a freedom from sin and unholiness he may as well say Heat is nothing but the absence of cold Sweet is nothing but the absence of Sower or Bitter Light is nothing but the absence of Darkness and that the best things are meer Negatives and nonentities and
body should be the body that is raised why should any among themselves especially have asked such a needless question as with what Body do they come I answer Such who asked that Question were such among them that said there was no Resurrection of the Dead as such there were 1 Cor. 15. 12. How say some among you there is no Resurrection of the Dead And therefore Paul thought it not needless to propose their Question on purpose to answer it and that he might take occasion thereby the more fully and amply to declare it His second Question is Would not the Apostle have answered more to the matter I answer He answered very well to the matter after he had reproved them as Fools for querying from their unbelief and their ignorant manner of arguing against it as many do at this day he proceeds to show the manner how it is raised having in the foregoing Verses proved the Truth of the Thing he doth next show the manner of it and the Question which he answers is not concerning what is raised or who are raised but how are the Dead raised and with what manner or with what quality of body do they come so the truest and best Translation out of the Greek which hath it not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. not quo corpore sed quali corpore not with what but with what quality of body do they come But this their querying was a sort of arguing against the thing it self of the Resurrection And by an Argument which they thought to take from the manner of it they argued against the thing it self even as the Sadducees argued with Christ against the Resurrection from the false conceit of the manner of it that they had as if the Body were to be raised up in the same manner as it is now so as to be fit for generation and the use of marriage which Christ confuted so many at this day and especially this Sadducy Caleb Pusie and his Sadducean Fraternity in Pensilvania and here in England and elsewhere they argue against the Resurrection of the Body it self from the manner of it as thus If the same body for substance shall be raised then it must be raised for manner such as it is now but that is impossible Now the Apostle answers by donying that it shall be raised in the same manner but it shall quite be changed and transformed not transubstantiated from mortal and corruptible and Natural or Animal to immortal incorruptible and spiritual Oh say they this connot be this would be a Transubstantiation like that of the Papists But I say this Caleb Pusie and his Fraternity that profess to hold a Resurrection of the body but not of that same substance fall in with the Popish Transubstantion for Transubstantiation is a change of a thing from one substance to another as the Papists say and therefore Caleb Pusie and his brethren who deny that the body is the same in substance but changed from one substance to another are clearly one with the Papists in their absurd Doctrine of Transubstantiation And thus the Pit he and his Saddueean brethren have digged for me he and they are fallen into both together And it is manifest Hypocrisie in Caleb Pusie and his brethren for him and them to say they think it not necessary to be curiously prying into the manner of it when they are most absurd in determining the manner of it contrary to all Scripture and Reason For they will needs have it that the change is a change of the substance and not of the Quality and Condition The Body say they that the dead are raised with is another body in substance so they will needs have it But then let him tell us when the deceased Saints get this other body that is another in substance I suppose he will say with his brethren in the same ignorance and unbelief G. W. and W. P. that they get it immediately after Death for they both argue against the deceaed Saints expecting any Resurrection of the body that this implies the Soul to be in a kind of Purgatory or Disquietness till the supposed Resumption of the body Page 41. He chargeth G. K. to be guilty of belying the Magistrates at Philadelphia Printing That the Magistrates not only countenanced the hiring men to fight but also gave them a Commission so to do signed by Three Justices of Peace whereof one was a Preacher citing Appeal from the 28 c. And from thence he justifieth their Persecution against G. K. in fining him Five Pounds But now how he proves this to be false first he saith it was more than they had power to do being Civil Magistrates But this is no Proof for ignorant men such as they were might go beyond their power However he grants if it was not a Commission it was a Warrant of a Hue and Cry signed but by Two Justices of Peace and neither of them a Preacher But what Proof brings he for this None but his bare Affirmation But so it was that some of them who received the Commission told us it was a Commission signed by Three Justices whereof one of them was a Preacher And when this very matter was debated before the Yearly Meeting at London 3d mo 1694. Samuel Jennings pretending it was not a Commission but a Hue and Cry Thomas Lower contradicted it in my hearing and the hearing of many others saying it could be no Hue and Cry for no Hue and Cry had any power to extend beyond dry Land but this was to go to the Water which I leave to men better skill'd in Law to determine However whether a Commission or Hue and Cry which is but a Nicety of Phrase in Politicks and worldly Government it confirms the substance of what was affirmed That some Quakers signed a Paper commanding and giving power to men by Force of Arms to retake a Sloop which is sufficiently known to be against the professed principles of the Quakers here in England who have witnessed by divers Printed Books and Testimonies That they are against all use of Carnal Weapons so much as in self-defence and have declared against Ship-masters that were Quakers their carrying Arms so much as in self-defence Page 41. Another falshood he chargeth on G. K. is That he said the Ministers there viz. in Pensilvania bad ingrossed the Worldly Government And this he offereth to prove to be false for there were many that were not Ministers nor Quakers neither then in the Government But this he only saith and it is a notorious Falshood well known to them that lived there for on the contrary very few but Quakers were Magistrates and for most part Preachers and these few that were not Quakers nor Ministers they were but as meer Cyphers the Ministers ruled all and did all and the small number of the rest signified nothing in that properly called the Province of Pensilvania and Ministers were not only
justices but Criminal Judges a thing no where so practised that I know any where in Christendom beside But however whether G. K. was rightly informed in these Particulars or not that was not the Thing he was fined for but for calling Sam. Jennings an ignorant presumptuous and insolent man and saying he was too high and imperious in worldly Courts And this was and is well known to be a Truth And he since remains sufficiently under that Character And have not many called Quakers used greater liberty than all this to reprove the Pride of greater Men in Magistracy here in England in Times past under their sharp Persecutions And for a witness to it let the Trial of William Penn and William Mead Printed at London declare as well as other Printed Trials and Books not a few But it is but waste of Time and Paper to answer to all his Impertinencies One thing is greatly worth noticing That though these men showed great warmth to fine imprison and otherwse prosecute for some pretended Offences against them that were had they been real but small and had better become them to have passed them by being not against them as Magistrates but as Quakers and Neighbours Yet they did not only tolerate but support and countenance Persons guilty of blasphemous Speeches against both God and Christ and with an unbounded Liberty did abuse me in particular as well as my Friends one of them in a publick Meeting calling me Wicked Fellow another calling me Ranter wicked Man while I was in Prayer on my Knees in the Meeting And though they would not allow us to distinguish betwixt them as being Quakers and Magistrates yet they did so distinguish when they told us They were not for fighting as Quakers but as Magistrates which how apt and proper a distinction it was for them to use I leave to the intelligent to judge Page 46. He saith Now to be plain This is to shew That G. K. may be as well as others have been a man of great Knowledge in Chronology yet being led by a Wrong Spirit what doth it profit But how hath he proved that G. K. is a man of a Wrong Spirit What One Evil Thing hath he proved against me in all his book either in Doctrine or Conversation I know none Though I have proved him guilty of many And taking it for granted That G. K. on extraordinary great Provocations and Abuses did drop once or twice some unadvised yet true Expressions doth this prove him to be a man of a Wrong Spirit He hath been more ingenuous than all his Adversaries who have far exceeded him in heat and hard words to acknowledge it which I never knew that any of them did Page 47. He pretends he has got a great Advantage against me upon the Account of a Citation out of my book called Truths Defence page 169. which he recites though not so truly as is in my book But however as it is I agree to it as to matter and substance And though he saith Page 53. That they do not question that in the least that G. K. is of another mind now It is a false Insinuation I remain in the same mind still That I would have nothing urged nor pressed as Articles of Faith but what is delivered to us in plain express Scripture-words which is the substance of that large Citation And it is as false in him to say That this was so often desired but could not find place viz to take their Confession in express words for this we never refused but I said again and again We shall take your Confession in Scripture-words as many can bear me witness provided ye will condemn your Errors that are contrary either to express Scripture-words or to the plain and manifest Sense of them obvious to every intelligent Christian But this they would never do And whereas he querieth How know we that they have a Sense contrary to Scripture-words I answer They have sufficiently discovered it not only by One or Two unsound Expressions but multitudes of them as their Letters and Manuscripts there and the Printed Books here sufficiently prove And we need go no further for a Proof than the most gross and Antichristian Expressions and Sayings of Caleb Pusie himself in this very Treatise For whereas he hath plainly affirmed p. 15. ad finem That Jesus of Nazareth cannot be something else than the Light Power and Spirit within Now can there be any thing more contrary to express Scripture than this Assertion Was not Jesus of Nazareth a real man consisting of Soul and Body in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily and who above measure was filled with all fullness of Grace and Truth And is that Body and that Soul and that Fullness nothing else but the Light within us Oh Abominable Nonsense and Perversion and Contradiction to Scripture and all true Reason He may as much say The great body of water in the Ocean with the Channels and Places that receive it is nothing else than the River Thames and that little narrow Tract of Earth in which it runs And at this Rate whatever is declared of Christ as born at Bethlem or conversing with his Disciples in Judea teaching them and working mighty Signs and Miracles among them And lastly Crucified on the Tree of the Cross at Golgotha must be understood of nothing else but the Light Power and Spirit within If this be not as great and gross Ranterism as ever was among men I leave all sober Christians to Judge Again seeing he pretends so much to express Scripture let him tell me 1. Where doth the Scripture say That Jesus of Nazareth is nothing else than the Light Power and Spirit within I am sure it is no where to be found in the Holy Bible but in Antichrist's Bible it may be found and is found 2. Where doth the Scripture say That the Light within is sufficient to salvation without any thing else or that it is an Error to say The Light within is not sufficient to salvation without something else Which Two being contradictory if the one be false the other must be true 3dly Where doth the Scripture say it is sufficient to Eternal Salvation only to believe and obey the Light within without all Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified and raised again seeing the Scripture plain contrarywise makes it the Terms of Salvation in great part to confess with the mouth and believe with the heart that God hath raised Jesus from the Dead Rom. 10. 9 10. 4thly Where doth the Scripture say The Blood that was shed without the Gates of Jerusalem is not that Blood whereby we are justified which was John Humphreys Assertion a Minister in Pensilvania which we could never get him nor any of you all to condemn and no wonder for G. W. in his book Light and Life hath said as much 5thly Where doth the Scripture say The bodies of the Saints at the Resurrection shall be
the Garden they should not have been afraid for they were already saefe But doth not the Scripture say God's Mercies are over all his Works and doth not the Clemency and Mercy of God extend to them that are not yet in Christ have they not that understanding to distinguish betwixt the Mercy of God in general to all Men and his Mercy in special to Believers and seeing they will needs have this Place where Adam hid some outward Trees on this Earth by the same Carnal Mind they must understand that this walking of God was an outward and Bodily walking and his Voice an outward and Bodily Voice and so they make not only Adam but Moses who writ these Words to be an Anthropomorphit and Mugletonian or rather the Father and Founder of the Anthropomorphits and Mugletonians for Mugleton himself draweth his Arguments from his Carnal Understanding of these Places as these Men do Pag. 44 They also blame me for saying Adam and Eve's Nakedness was the fruit of Transgression And they argue against it by Quering What Sign or Token of Impudence is it in People to endeavour to cover their Nakedness I Answer Taking Nakedness Metaphorically as I do in that place Gen. 2. as it is taken Rev. 3. 17 18. It is a sign of Impudence to endeavour to cover their Nakedness Have not some called Quakers gone naked through the Streets as a sign of the People's Nakedness And what Nakedness was that Is not Sin a Nakedness metaphorically taken and when Men cover their Sins with false and sinful Excuses it is a sign of their Impudence as is too manifest in these men George Whitehead and John Pennington And what Nakedness was that of the Serpent Gen. 3. 1. for as I said in Truth Adv. p. 25. the Hebrew Word is the same in both places viz. Gen. 2. 25. and 3. 1. Was it bodily Nakedness that he wanted some outward Garment to cover it And can we suppose that God who cloatheth every Lily of the Field made Adam without a suitable Cloathing Did he not Crown him with Glory and Honour Psal 8. 5. And if his Head was not naked how could his Body be naked But it is not to be supposed that Aadm's Cloathing before the Fall was any other than that Beauty and Glory that God had put on him both with respect to Soul and Body but this gross Ignorance of these Men here touching Adam's state before the Fall is like that of their Ignorant Brother of the Ministry Jacob Talner who asserted in a late Meeting at Turner's Hall before some hundreds That Adam before the Fall had neither Holiness nor Wisdom nor Righteousness and denyed that either Spiritual or Temporal Death was the effect of Adam's Fall and used the very same Argument against G. K s Ministry that the Papists used against the People called Quakers and all Protestant Ministers calling for Miracles or Church-Authority Another most foolish and ignorant Argument they bring against my saying God cloathed them inwardly with the Righteousness of the Lamb. They say Did he cloath them with the Righteousness of the Lamb and yet at the same time debar them access to the Tree of Life See Gen. 3 21 22. What strange Doctrine is this But at the same time is their addition If by the same time they mean the same Instant or Hour I say nay But the time was not long betwixt their Fall and their Restoration so far as they had access to Christ signified by the Tree of Life What they call monstrous Doctrine of a Body a top of a Body is none of mine but their own invention and foolish arguing Is a Mass wherein there is a mixture of Gold and Dross a Body a top of a Body They quarrel with my Translation for rendring the Word Rib to be Side and though I bring several places of Scripture to prove it a true Translation they bring nothing to disprove it Surely a Side of Adam bears more proportion for Adam's Wife than a Rib. Plato a Heathen had a better understanding of Man's state before the Fall then these Men have for all their high pretence to high divine Illumination and they who in their conceit are first in the ranck of Christians are last in many respects for their extream Ignorance beyond most Professors of Christianity I shall not need to Notice his idle and impertinent Clamour against what he calleth my Arbitrary and Extrajudicial Proceedings and new Court of Judicatory and as contrary to the intent of the Law having sufficiently answered it in any Preface to the Printed Narrative But I cannot but observe his great Hypocrisie and Impudence in his saying He is not conscious to himself of Error either in reference to the Resurrection Christ's Satisfaction or Sacrifice or his visible coming again in his glorified Body without us to raise the Dead at the Great Day of Judgement Seeing I have proved him Guilty in all these things as manifestly as the Light at Noon-day in the Printed Narrative and in that Meeting at Turners-Hall 11th 4th Month 1696. to which I expect his Answer before they Print any more But whereas he accuseth me That I have dealt very unfairly by him in leaving out Blood and Bones after the Words Body of Flesh I Answer There was no unfairness in it seeing it was no designed Omission but an oversight either in the Print or Transscribing and the adding Blood and Bones to the Word Flesh doth not in the least excuse his gross Error For if Christ did rise with the Substance of his Flesh so did he with the Substanc of Blood and Bones for he could not eat and drink after his Resurrection without Blood in his Body and if he hath the Substance of his Flesh now in Heaven though wonderfully changed in Conditon from Animal to Spiritual surely he hath also the Substance of his Blood so much as remained in his Body and also of his Bones But that he seems pag. 6. to apply my words the Husk or Drossy part not the true Body to Christ's Body as if I held his Body had any husk or dross in it is unfair in him for I hold no such thing nor ever did He is very impertinent and weak in his complaining That I gave them no Copy of that he falsly calls the Particulars of my Indictment or Charge before Tryal or of the Books and Pages referred unto therein for a due preparation to answer alledging I would not be so served or surprised I sent them and particularly I sent him to his House a printed Copy of the Advertisement wherein the Four Heads were particularly expressed that I charged them with and which I have made good against them G. W. that prosesseth so great skill in Law and has more Law than true Gospel in his Books knoweth that it is not the manner of Indictments suppose my printed Advertisement had been such as it was not to put in the Evidence against the Delinquents or Criminals and