Eyes and given them away to such as would deceive them as some have done And must all this be fathered upon the Spirit of God it being their constant pretension to have the Spirit of God directing and counselling them in all their Chamber-Affairs and Meetings May I not well cry out as one did in another case O Times O Manners Or rahter with the Prophet Jer. 2. 12. Be astonished O ye Heavens at this and be horribly afraid be ye very desolate saith the Lord. May not that complaint and lamentation be justly taken up against the Publishers and Promoters of this scandalous book of T. E. The wisdom of the Wise is perished c. But that which most of all seemeth strange to me and I believe will to many when duly considered that T. E. saith by way of Reply to my Defence the printed paper called The Causeless Ground c. which was That notwithstanding the Objections and severe Accusations that some have made against my late Books and a strict Examination of them by some that have so complained there is not any Line or Sentence in any of them that they have made to appear to contain any untruth or falshood in their either in matters of Doctrine or Faith See his book p. 49. This saith he hath nothing of Note in it Yea he saith farther supposing it were true in fact That no untruth or falshood had been discovered in my books â—et it hath Nothing of Note in it viz to excuse me he saying it was not the proper business of the Yearly Meeting which he alledgeth I strike at here as elsewhere to judg of the matters of fact contained in my books which were alledged to have been done in America by Persons not here to answer or give Account of them Is it not strange to blame a man for some things in his Books that are neither matter of Doctrine nor matter of Fact for what else can be contained in any books I know not And it 's strange that the Yearly Meeting should take up six Days and Two Meetings each Day to hear and examine matter of Fact altogether for in nothing they medled with my Doctrine and yet be so judged here by T. E. That it was not their proper business to judg of the matters of fact for by his Judgment against the Yearly Meeting they both medled and judged in that which was not their proper business But the Paper laid to be given out by the Yearly Meeting called A true account of the proceedings c. saith expresly And this Meeting agreed that after all the other publick affairs should be over as many Members of the yearly Meeting as could attend the Service together with all publick faithful Friends that are free should remain and continue the yearly Meeting to hear judg and determin and endeavour to quiet all the differences betwixt G. K. and others concerned therein Where it is plain that he calleth the Yearly Meeting did judg it their proper business to judg of matters of Fact and therefore T. E. hath given a contrary Judgment against them tho deceitfully he seemeth a great Patron in the case for which it may be supposed they will not give him thanks for this his so boldly contradicting them Now what the infallible consequences of this his so large and liberal concession are I leave to impartial and understanding persons to judge Nothing either in matter of Doctrine or Fact being supposed by his liberal allowance as the thing is true in it self to be discovered in my books of untruth or falshood it is contained in my books in matter of Fact 1. That some Preachers among the people called Quakers in America were charged by me to be guilty of vile Errors and Heresies repugnant to the Christian Faith 2. That some others of them did cloak and excuse them and that no such damnable Heresies and Doctrines of Devils were tollerate in any Protestant Society as these did among them in Pensilvania c. 3. That complaint being made to the Yearly Meeting at Philadelphia no due Censure was past upon them that were guilty but they were excused and defended by them 4. That they of the other side began the Separation and are guilty of it and not we 5. That our Apology is Just in our publishing these printed books and God was with us and owned us in our so doing Now all this was matter of Fact that I have so affirmed in my printed books and T. Elwood hath been so liberal to me to grant by way of supposition all this to be true and my books to contain nothing as yet discover'd of untruth or falshood yet for all this he thinks I am worthily blamed and judged by them he calls the Yearly Meeting and yet again he affirmeth it was not the proper business of the Yearly Meeting to judge of the matter of fact If all this be true in matter of fact as he alloweth it to be by supposition then I and my friends joined with me should not be blamed for charging some in Pensilvania with being guilty of gross and vile errors such as no Protestant Society would tolerate nor yet the Church of Rome Therefore whoever has blamed us for our so doing are not to be noticed the Charges being supposed by him to be true 2. Nor should he and others blame us for the printing and by his liberal Concession what he calleth the Judgment of the Yearly Meeting at London 3d m. last 1694. is void because he granteth us by his Concession this matter of fact That our Apology is Just and we are approved of God in our publick Testimony in way of printing and therefore by his liberal Concession the Yearly Meeting is greatly to be blamed for finding fault with us for doing that which we had a just Apology for And 3. He granting by his liberal Concession That what we have said in defence of our not being guilty of the separation in matter of fact is all true and hath nothing of untruth or falshood in it that both he and all others and what he calleth the Judgment of the yearly meeting have unjustly blamed us by laying the blame of the Separation at my or our door seeing he is so liberal to us by way of supposition That they of the other side and not we are guilty of it And surely 't is a most astonishing thing for him to allow by way of supposition That all is true that we have printed in our printed books relating to the particulars abovementioned and yet so to blame us as he doth for if all be true in matter of fact that we have printed in our books it is true that we are neither guilty of printing nor of the separation nor of falsly accusing any and therefore all such who blame us as guilty of these things are reprovable in a high degree But if he will restrict his words of so liberal concession that are delivered by him without the
least restriction and may be justly taken universally they being an universal assent by way of supposition to my universal proposition respecting matter of fact on both sides to matter of fact only with respect to the things or words done or said by them of the other side as reported by me in my printed books yet his concession even in this restricted and narrowed sense will sufficintly excuse us in the Judgment of all sincere Christians for by his concession in this narrow sense of matter of fact as only respecting what is said or reported in the books to be said or done by them of the other side If it be granted by his supposition that they are charged to be guilty of saying such words as contain in them more vile and gross Heresies and Errors as no Christian Society would tolerate and that complaint being made to the Yearly Meeting and some other Meetings they would not suffer due censure to pass upon them and that they changed the Meeting from the Bank to the Center on purpose to force me to meet with them against my conscience as Th. Wilson did witness That I said and so began the separation Then wherein can we be justly blamed For the 3 things wherein we have been blamed are taken off by T. E. his concession in the Judgment of all sincere Christians 1. That we have falsly charged them with vile and gross Errors Now T. E. alloweth by way of supposition that all these charges are true and not false as W. St. his saying To preach faith in Christ within us and in Christ without us is to preach 2 Christs Th. Fitzwater's saying in Prayer O God that died in us and Robert Yeoung his saying He did not find Christ without in all the Scripture and that Christ when he ascended was separated from his Body and Th. Lloid's saying Christ within did all which was opposed by J. W. saying that he did not believe for Christ without did somethings when he died for us and Th. Fitzwater his saying he owned no Man Christ Jesus in Heaven without him but the grace of God within him and his saying he had not learned that Lesson whether it was the Godhead or somewhat else that Christ took of the Virgin that was nailed to the Cross and some of them saying God was not present in all his Creatures as Herbs Grass and the Monthly Meeting at Philadelphia excluding the Man Christ Jesus our blessed Mediator and Saviour from having any part or concern in our salvation and by condemning me for saying the Light within is not sufficient to salvation without something else c. These are but a part of the vile and gross Errors charged on them in matter of fact which being supposed to be true that they are truly charged by T. E. his concession and they of the other side refusing on due complaint to pass any due censure on the Persons that were guilty Who that hath a Christian heart and spirit within them but must needs judge and say that to deny such to be our Christian Friends and Brethren is no false charge nor reviling 2dly To be separate from such after due Gospel-Order given them though as is said we began not the separation was not blame-worthy in us but our Christian duty for I judg no other Christian Profession in Christendom would own such to be their Christian Brethren And 3dly That we could do no less in conscience but bear our Testimony against them after the most publick manner and that was by Printing seeing the People called Quakers have printed against them that have been guilty of far less gross and vile Errors And to say that such gross Errors and the Persons guilty of them should have been cloaked and covered by us after due pains was taken to reclaim them and rejected by them is a great reflection on the Body of the People called Quakers if so the Body of them did so cloak them and would more tend to the Dishonour of Truth and Reproach of our Profession in general than any thing I know ever happened among us But I cannot think the Body or Generality of Friends nay nor the Plurality will take this imputation upon them though T. E. would fix it on them for he affirmeth I am Justly blamed by the Judgment of that he calleth the Yearly Meeting at London which he takes to be the Representative of the Body for my publick Testimony against these vile Errors supposed by him to be truly and justly charged in matter of fact and therefore by his sense the Yearly Meeting and Body of Friends represented by them Judg it a Vertue or Duty to cover and cloak them which is not only against the whole current of the Holy Scripture and the Example of the Primitive Christians and the general Practice of all Christian Societies at this day that publickly condemn any that should be found guilty of these or the like Errors but is against the sense of some Heathen Writers one of them having said and who is worthily commended for so saying Alitur vitium vivitque tegendo i. e. Vice is nourished and gets Life by covering it Indeed this hath been the thing that many of all Professions have charged upon the People called Quakers That they cover and cloak vile Errors and Heresies as well as wicked practices among them I am heartily sorry that T. E. has given so great Occasion by this his scandalous book to confirm them in their Opinion concerning them But I bear my Testimony against it and so I hope will thousands more that the Body of Friends is not guilty of the charge One thing more I would have you notice That notwithstanding T. E. his loud clamour against me in his scandalous book for my printing my late books in which is discover'd by his supposition nothing of untruth or falshood in matter of fact and he chargeth nothing against me in matter of Doctrin wherein I blame some Preachers in America for their vile Errors repugnant to the true Christian Faith as above-mentioned and by his liberal concession supposing it to be all true that I have charged them with by another liberal concession and assertion of his near the end of his Book p. 72. I am excusable and ought not to be blamed his words being these And this know for certain Friends that the way to recover the deceived is to discover lay open and witness against the deceivers And surely by his liberal concession supposing it to be true in matter of fact that I have charged upon some Preachers in America as above-mentioned they are deceivers for they who treach false Doctrine and vile Errors such as no Profession in Christendom would tolerate are deceivers and they have deceived some in these parts Therefore out of his own mouth he hath cleared me to discover lay open and witness against them It 's like the man was so intent in his thoughts that he thought this saying would be a
glad to have kept Meetings with many or most of the People of the Meeting of the other side after the Separation was begun believing and knowing that they were in great measure beguiled and led astray by their Leaders that they were too much given up to follow yet retaining a measure of Simplicity but we could not meet with them in Peace after their Leaders on the other side had begun the Separation not having freedom given us or Permission peaceably to exercise our gift among them but were always interrupted and molested when we met together and otherwise most unchristianly abused And thus I hope I have sufficiently shewed the good Consistency betwixt my saying I and my Friends had Unity with the most there at that Meeting considering the Circumstances then of that Meeting and yet did remain in a Separation both of Spirit and outward Fellowship from many of that Meeting both then and since and the same Answer here given may serve to answer the same Objection and Accusation made against us very unduely in the Book called The Christian Doctrine and Society of the People called Quakers page 18. of the said Book XXIII page 47. His Perversion of my words about the word many and very many in my saying it was my charitable Perswasion that the worthy Name Christian doth belong to very many of that People where by very many he construeth my Sense to be only these few I had an experimental proof of through intimate Conversation and frequent verbal Communication with since I came last into England But this is a gross Forgery and Perversion for I did really mean not them only but all them whom I have at any time formerly bad Experience of their Christianity by intimate Conversation and verbal Communication either in England or any other part of the World that have given me no occasion to think otherwise of them as many have not though some have and my Charity leads me to believe and judge that there are very many called Quakers that are true Christians both in Faith and Practice that I have had no outward knowledge of but I cannot in Charity esteem them Christians who have unchristian'd themselves either by their bold and open contradicting the great Truths of Christianity or by their persecuting and otherwise unjust and wicked Practises XXIV page 48. His Perversion of my words that though I said in my last Book called The causless ground c. I have not charged the People called Quakers either in the general or in the plurality he will needs have it to be understood only of these few I have intimately conversed with since I came last into England Oh! How hath prejudice blinded him But how can he or I either be positive to say the People called Quakers are good Christians either in general or in the plurality when Geo. Whitehead hath told us in his printed Epistle printed about four years ago at London and was re-printed in Penstlvania called A Christian Epistle to Friends in geneneral c. That few sincerely seek the Lord c. And very few have their Minds and Spirits really and inwardly exercised in frequent Prayer and daily Supplications to God or in heavenly Meditation or spiritual Contemplations in Gods pure and spiritual Laws Ways Judgments and Works or in holy Scriptures by the Holy Spirit which opens them but too many have their Minds Hearts and Affections taken up with these fading Objects and things below or overcharged with the love of Riches Caâ—es and Cumbers of this Life to compass the Earth wherein many a good Talent has been hid and poor Soul buried in Captivity And concerning Friends Children and young Persons he saith It 's but few in Comparison that come in at that door viz. the work of Regeneration And who will say that the worthy Name of Christian doth belong to such And yet by G. W's charge they must be at least the plurality when very few do otherwise though some formality and something of the form of Truth as he saith they may have by outward Education But let none think I blame G. W. in this it may be a true charge for what I know to the contrary but why should I be so much blamed for charging neither the generality nor plurality but some particulars when he hath charged many more with things as bad as Errors in Principles and that publickly in Print beside that Errors in Practise do commonly go along with Errors in Principle But it seems strange to many as well as to me that Errors in Principle as Pride vanity of Apparel Covetousness Envy Backbiting may without offence be publickly reproved by word of Mouth in Meetings and also in Print but Errors in Principle must not be reproved and witnessed against either in publick Meetings or in Printed Books Do Errors in Practise as Pride vanity of Apparel Covetousness Envy and the like when publickly witnessed against in Print or in Meetings open the Mouths of Adversaries and grieve faithful Friends less than Errors in Principles unless it be said that reproving Errors in Principles reflect upon the Preachers but reproving Errors in Practise reflect only upon the People but if any of the Preachers be guilty why may they not and ought they not to be as publickly reproved as the People unless we respect Persons and that both for their Error in Doctrine and Practise Is it not a just charge upon some called Preachers which Christ charged upon the Scribes and Pharisees They loved the Praise of Men more than the Praise of God and therefore cannot beat to be reproved for it hath been the general default of Teachers and Leaders of the People in former times to hide their own Faults and expose the Faults of others especially of such as did not flatter them and gave them not honour enough before Men. And nothing can be said against my Printed Books in reference to my publick witnessing again the Errors in Principles whereof some are guilty in Pensilvania and elsewhere but what may be as much said against G. Whitehead his reproving these great Vices and Immoralities among many called Friends having the Name and form of Truth Have my Books tended to the dishonor of God disservice to Truth reproach and grief of Friends for my Printing against the vile Errors whereof some called Friends are guilty And hath not G. Whiteheads printed Epistle had as much that tendency for his printing against the vile Practises of many more than ever I charged But in reality I judge and many others do judge that the faithful witnessing against Mens gross and vile Errors either in Doctrine or Practise is no proper and direct cause of such Effects as the dishonour of God the disservice of Truth the reproach and grief of Friends but on the contrary the proper and direct cause of Gods being honoured Truth cleared the Reproach removed and faithful Friends comforted with a publick Testimony borne against such publick Sins and
as my Book expresly testifieth to which he appealeth See page 18 at line 22 where it is expresly said that at the yearly Meeting he did withdraw viz. G. K. at the Meetings desire and yet they did nothing to bring W. S. to Conviction But my Book page 14 cited by him sheweth that my refusal to go out was at the quarterly Meeting that was half a year thereafter where I give my just reason why I refused to go out viz. because my Accusers refused to go out also So that this is a gross forgery in matter of Fact and yet he makes it the Foundation of his Superstructure in excusing them why they delayed to give Judgment page 19. So this is a double forgery one built on another V. pag. 22. He falsly alledgeth that the yearly Meeting at Philadelphia was not at a stand to determine whether the Doctrine was true or false but if they were at a stand at all it was saith he to determine whether the Charge exhibited against W. S. by G. K. was true or false But the contrary of this I have fully proved out of my Books to which he refers for in the Judgment they gave the 4th Month 1692. which was both defective and out of Season like Mustard after Meat they grant that Proof was made by two Witnesses that the Charge exhibited was true and if they had been at a stand on that Point it is not like that they would have given any Judgment against him at all but such as it was they grant they did not publish it either then or till nine Months after and though they most deceitfully pretend for an Excuse their being prevented by reason of my unruly Behaviour and extream Passion as they are pleased to call it yet this cover is too narrow for what hindred them all that nine Months and why did they contradict the sound Judgment of a monthly meeting at Philadelphia passing due Censure upon W. S. six Months thereafter it is sufficiently apparent from this it was no cordial nor sincere Judgment nor did they all that time intervening bring W. S. to any Conviction but mightily supported him as an innocent Person But whereas T. F. alledges page 20. a Determination then it seems was given by his own acknowledgment But I answer seeing it was not sincere but hypocritical as appears by their contradicting the Judgment of the Monthly Meeting that gave it sincerely and duly and also that it was not published nor W. S. brought by them to any Conviction but supported by them it might well be said to be as good as none at all they making it void by themselves and when they published it or another like it after nine Months as an Abortive out of due time they did not own the words spoke by W. S. to be any Offence against God or Christ but to sound and tender Friends as I have formerly shewed in my Book called The Plea of the Innocent and for which I justly call it as every sincere Christian will call it so a bare Shadow or Formality VI page 23. He falsly and most ficticiously alledgeth that Th. Fitswater sufficiently proved his Charge against me for which he refers to my own Books but this is a great forgery for his Charge was That I denyed the sufficiency of the Light and this his four credible Witnesses did not prove against me but it was quite another thing that the Monthly Meeting of the other side the 26th of the 3d Month 1692. alledgeth they proved against me viz. That I did not believe the Light was sufficient without something else Now because T. E. judgeth both these one and the same he hath plainly excluded the Man Christ without us from having any part or concern in our Salvation for the Man Christ Jesus without us and his Death Sufferings Blood c. are something else than the Light within and thus by the Judgment of G. Whithead against Jeffrey Bullock who fell into the same Antichristian Error he is gone from the Light into Imaginations and contradicteth his former Testimony in his Book called The Foundation of Tithes shaken page 238. where he saith Nor do the Quakers ascribe Salvation to the following the Light within he should have added the word only but they ascribe Salvation to Christ Jesus to whom the Light within doth lead those that truly follow it and page 240 he saith If any one expects Remission of Sins by any other way than the Death of Christ he renders the Death of Christ useless VII page 25. He falsly alledgeth That I account the beginning of the Separation at Philadelphia from somes going away at the Monthly Meeting the day before the adjourned Meeting and upon this Foundation of forgery he builds a false Superstructure for though some going away from that monthly Meeting was a preparation to the Separation yet I did not reckon that the beginning of it but their going away at the adjourned Meeting the next day following where three great Instances of their beginning the Separation appeared First Their disowning the Meeting Secondly Upon that Foundation their going away Thirdly Their denying the Judgment of that Meeting to be a true Meeting and refusing to suffer it to be Recorded but that the Meeting could not adjourn because the Book and the Clark was gone is so ridiculous that 't is not worth mentioning though that 's the chief or rather the only reason given by T. E. For what else is this but to sett the Clark in Friends Meeting where the Papists sett the Pope So that as Papists argue without the Popes Authority there can be no general Counsel in like manner Without the Clark and his Book there can be no Meeting of Friends qualified to judge of Church Affairs VIII page 27. He falsly alledgeth that the Meeting adjourned was surreptitiously obtained which he grounds on a forgery or fiction of his own devising as if twenty nine of them might be loose or raw Persons I may much more justly say his scandalous Book is surreptitiously come out in Print being contrary to the Mind of many Friends and to Gospel Order professed by himself and all professed Friends viz. That none expose another in Print or Print against another till he be disowned by the Meeting to whom he belongs after a fair Tryal had But so it is that I have had no such Gospel-Order given me nor hath it been in the least intimated to me That any Meeting in London where I now live hath denyed me But I Printed nothing against any in America till Gospel Order was given them and was rejected by them IX page 28. He falsly alledgeth That I tell no Year when the monthly Meeting in the first Month last was But the contrary to this is to be seen in my Book page 19. where I shew that the monthly Meeting that gave Judgment against IV. S. and T. F. was the 27th of the 12th Month 1691. And it plainly appears from my Book
good Apology for his printing against me taking it for granted that he hath proved me to be a deceiver But whether he hath not failed in his proof I leave to all truly judicious and impartial to judg after they have duly perused and weighed my Answer which I hope e're long to make publick He did not well consider that what did seem to make for him against me would really make for me against him and all Others that approve his scandalous book and blame me for that which this his assertion clears me of thus shewing himself to be no wise nor well experienced Soldier to put his own best Weapon into the hand of him he supposeth to be his Adversary The Answer to T. Elwood mentioned in this Epistle called A seasonable information c. I intend God willing to make publick with the first convenience if nothing be done forthwith by that party that hath approved and promoted his book to call it in and disown it I remain in true Love Your Friend in the Truth George Keith POSTSCRIPT to Tho. Elwood ANd because as the Scripture saith of making many books there is no end I do here in a Christian humble spirit not like Goliah but like little David confiding Only and Alone in the Lord and in his powerful Name assisting me make this proffer to Th. Elwood or any others that approve and promote his book at any place and time that he or they will appoint at London providing it be some Meeting-place of Friends that is large and all sober and moderate persons whether Friends or friendly people have freedom to be present to meet him and them and to prove him guilty of gross Forgery in matters of fact Perversion Misrepresentation and false Accusation in many Particulars and also that he is guilty of false Doctrine and Contradiction not only to the holy Scriptures but to some of his own former books And it is as just and reasonable in me to demand a publick free Meeting with him and them that approve and promote T. E. his book in order to prove him guilty of gross Forgery c. as it was in G. W. and W. P. and others concerned wherein I was one to demand a publick and free Meeting with the Baptists in order to prove Th. Hicks guilty of the like Crimes and the Baptists yeilding to such a Meeting at Friends demand how can I be blamed in demanding the like Justice or they excused if they deny it G. K. A Seasonable Information and Caveat Against a Scandalous Book of Thomas Elwood CALLED An Epistle to Friends c. Whereas Th. Elwood hath Printed a Scandalous Book against me called An Epistle to Friends c. in great disunity and against the Mind of many Friends and contrary to the Gospel Order Professed by us although approved and promoted by a Party equally prejudiced against me for my faithful Christian Testimony to the Truth of Christ Upon a diligent Review and Examination of his scandalous Book I find in it at least fifty several Perversions and Misrepresentations and divers of them downright Forgeries and Fictions in matter of Fact and false Accusations the which in Order follow with their several respective Answers I. HE falsly accuseth me in his Title Page of a Spirit of Contention and Division that as he saith hath lately appeared in me and some few others that joyn with me who have made a Breach and Separation from Friends in America For seeing by a Spirit of Contention he meaneth it in the worst Sense as Contending against faithful Friends or Separating therefrom This is a false Charge we remain in Unity with faithful Friends in America and elsewere and contend only against Error and wicked Practises and are only separate from Unbelievers and such as the Scriptures command us to be separated from Rom. 16. 17. A Place of Scripture cited in his Title Page which makes against him for they in America whose unjust Cause he hath taken to defend hath caused Divisions and Offences contrary to the Doctrine of Christ and therefore we ought to avoid them and there is a godly Contention we ought to be found in so as to contend for the Faith once delivered to the Saints Jude 3. And we are commanded to be separated from Unbelievers such as these are from whom we were separated in America though they themselves began the Separation and not we And these he calleth some few are about Sixteen Meetings II. pag. 9. He falsly accuseth me that I blame Friends That they were gone too much from the outward to the inward this is a down right Forgery I never blamed any for going too much to the inward for it hath been my Perswasion and that from a true Experience that the more any Man doth come to the inward even to the Grace and Gift of God in his Heart the more he hath a due esteem of Christs Death and Sufferings and precious Blood that was shed for the Remission of Sin and the more his Faith is increased in Christ as he dyed for us and rose again and is our Mediator in Heaven But because I have blamed some Persons for not rightly and fully Preaching Christ without and Faith in him as well as in Christ within therefore he hath forged this Fiction against me That I blame Friends that they were gone too much from the outward to the inward but from his manner of falsly charging me it plainly appears as well as from the words of some others that it was their Sense to preach Christ without and Faith in him it draws from the inward and from the Gift of God within but this is both false and contrary to the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles recorded in the Scriptures III. pag. 15. He falsly and unjustly chargeth me with Robert Hannoy's Book as if it were mine both for Matter and Stile and that I cast it upon him For as I have divers times declared as I had no hand in the Printing it but was against it so divers things in it that seemed to some most offensive I was not concerned in though as I have also freely delared and is well known to many divers of the words contained in some of these Queries I spoke them in the yearly Meeting and so far I was concerned but not in Printing them IV. He not only falsly accuseth me but is guilty of an absolute Forgery and Fiction in matter of Fact That I refused to go out at the yearly Meeting in Philadelphia held in the 7th Month 1691. and that my refusal to go out was the occasion of their delay to give Judgment against W. Stockdale for which as a proof he cites my Book called Some Reasons and Causes c. pag. 14. But let the Reader that loveth to see with his own Eyes read that Book and he will find no such thing either in that page or any where else for I went out at the yearly Meeting when I was desired
our Society But this is altogether false I own no other Door but Christ and he both as sincerely believed in not with a bare literal historical Faith but a divine spiritual Faith begot in our hearts by the Spirit of Faith and as sincerely confessed the sincere living Confession flowing from a sincere living Faith in the heart XXXVIII pag. 61. His perversion That I make a bare profession verbal confession or Declaration of Principles Doctrines and Practises the Terms of Church-communion This is false I make them not the Terms at all when the profession is but barely verbal but when the Confession or Profession floweth from the living Faith of Christ and from his Life in the heart I said and still say they are secondary Terms of Church-Communion the inward life of Christ in the heart being the principle XXXIX p. 61. His perverting of my words to a wrong sense never intended by me my words being The Causless Groâ—â—â— p. 8. But that some Principles and Doctrines and points of Faith are necessary to be agreed upon c. and to be owned professed and declared by us to be as it were the Terms c. As if my sense were That men were to contrive and cut out their own Terms But how doth prejudice blind and byass him Knoweth he not that men may well agree together in one faith by the Spirit 's inward working in their hearts as well as they may agree together in one prayer by the Spirit without contriving and cutting out their own Terms I mean not by agreeing or agreed an humane political contrivance or design but a divine agreement XL. p. 60 61. His perversion first in most fraudulently putting a false gloss upon my words about the word agreed on and next deceiving and abusing his Reader as if I did put the same gloss upon R. B. his words p. 48. of his book The Anarchy Also his most disingenuous endeavouring to make the Reader believe I wrong R. Barclay in citing some words of his and that because I cite not so many of his words as he thought fit to cite after me in that place p. 48. But I cited as many as were sufficient to prove That it is R. Barclays Doctrine and Testimony that Principles and Doctrines and the Practices necessarily depending on them are as it were the Terms that have drawn us together and the Bond by which we became centered into one body and fellowship and distinguished from others yet not this so the Bond but that we have also a more inward and invisible the Life of righteousness And in my book called The Reasons and Causes of the Sep. p. 24 25. I have cited R. B. his words at great length to confirm his agreement with me in this particular which he will never be able with all his silly quibles to overthrow But when he cannot fairly dispute he goes to pervert and invent false things first he quarrels with the word agreed but I did not say R. B. used the word agreed but it must needs be his sense That whoever believes the same Doctrine by the Operation of the Spirit of God in their Hearts they must needs agree in that faith Secondly he saith R. B. doth not make a bare profession verbal confession any Terms at all and no more do I and to suppose I do is an invention of his own Thirdly he saith The Principles Doctrines and Practises themselves he calls not the Terms and Bond strictly and properly but as it were But that manner of Phrase as it were doth not hinder that they are truly in his sense the secondary Terms or Terms in part and that properly enough but they are not the only or principal but the inward Life of Righteousness as man's body may be said as it were to be the man and yet not the principle part of the man for that is the soul XLI p. 62. His gross perversion insinuating that in my book Some Reasons and Causes c. p. 16. I had cited R. B's words but it was not his words but his Doctrine that I mention in that place as to the substance of it but not as to that particular Circumstance of answering to some plain questions with yea or nay This Circumstance I did not say was in R. B's book but the substance of the Doctrine but all his proof that it is not his Doctrine is that he assures the Reader it is not but let the Reader compare my Citations at length in my Reasons and Causes of Sep. p. 24. 25. and he shall find it is his Doctrine notwithstanding T. E. his boldly affirming it is not XLII p. 58. His perversion by insinuating That all the most necessary Principles and Doctrines of our Faith both common and peculiar are published and made known by the general Consent Advice and Approbation of the most Judicious Wise and Understanding Friends now alive In answer to my proposition desiring it might be so he saith by way of insinuation Is that a new thing to be done now I reply it is a new thing yet to be done and I believe he is not able to shew me that book where it is done by general consent for it is not the consent of a few or of the Second Days Meeting at London who take too much upon them and have published and recommended books that Truth cannot stand by that I mean but the general Consent of the most Judicious Friends the which if it were done were not to be imposed but to be recommended to other Friends XLIII p. 62. His perversion as if I said That the lesser matters of plain Languages and plain Habit c. were so the Terms of Friends Communion as if every one should thereby be intituled to our Communior who speak the plain Language wear plain habit but I neither said nor thought any such thing XLIV p. 62. His perversion in owning these lesser things when sincerely performed to be fruits effects and signs of that inward and invisible Life of Righteousness but not the Terms so much as in part as if fruits effects and signs joyned with the inward life of Righteousness were not a part of these Terms which is as much as to say because the body is not the whole man therefore it is no part of a man XLV p. 64. His error and perversion in laying more weight on these lesler matters of plain language plain habit c. than on the outward profession and confession to the great Doctrines and Principles of the Christian Faith This is apparent from his words XLVI p. 64. His perversion in falsly charging me That I spurn disdainfully at the advice given me to retract the bitter Language as some call it in my books whereas I modestly promise to do it when they have told me what hard or bitter words I have given to any that are not due unto them withal desiring some to give me their good Example Is this any disdainful spurning XLVII p. 64. His
a wrong jealousie of me That I intend no breach among faithful Friends But whether his words do not savor of deep Prejudice and want of Charity in saying he cannot but express his fear that I have been instrumental to draw many more from the blessed Unity and fellowship of the Gospel than ever I brought into it for which he saith the doom was long since set Ezek. 18. 24. For that I have been Instrumental to draw any one from the blessed Unity he can never prove and the doom that is set Ezek. 18. 24. belongeth to himself but not to me if to be guilty of so many Forgeries false Accusations and Misrepresentations be a turning away from his Righteousness which formerly he either had or at least seemed to have There are divers other gross Perversions and false Accusations in his Book that I pass by judging these noticed by me are more than ever he will be able fairly to answer and to clear himself of His bitter Language and Revilings calling me Vain page 9. charging me with an impetuous height of Mind setting my self in an exalted Spirit of Pride and Self conceit c. page 10. and with Insincerity double Dealing falseness of Spirit great Hypocrisie great Deceit as having no Conscience as being an open Opposer and the greatest despiser of the Spirits Teachings page 10. 13 14 15 16 20. c. I shall take no further notice of then to appeal to all impartial Persons whether T. E. be not highly guilty of that Vice which he unjustly would cast upon me as being a Man that have no Bridle to my Tongue because that with sharp words I have reproved the gross Errors and wicked Practises of some in America c. But must he and these joyned with him take the liberty to give me the worst of Names and the foulest reviling Language without proving me guilty of deserving any one of them for What can he say worse of any Man than he hath said of me and all this pass as Piety and true Religion in him If he and they blame hard and sharp words universally especially given to them not yet denied to be of the same Society then why doth he give them to me if he alloweth they may be given in some Cases the merit of the Cause and what case is proper is duely to be examined and left to the Judgment of impartial Men which I freely do and chiefly and most principally to that most just and impartial Witness of God in every Mans Conscience to which every Man must stand or fall His saying page 72. The way to recover the deceived is to discover lay open and witness against the deceivers having noticed in my printed Epistle that may serve as a Preface to this my Answer I shall not faither consider here but that it serveth wholly to my purpose and nothing to his seeing be hath not proved me a deceiver in the least particular as an Apology to excuse both this my present Reply to his scandalous book and to all my other books relating to these differences and the rather that it cometh from the mouth or pen of a professed adversary But whereas he alledgeth it is strange I should complain of the yearly Meeting for not condemning the Friends there viz. in Pensilvania without all hearing conviction or tryal which it must have done had it condemned them who are absent and distant several thousand miles I answer I did not complain of the yearly Meeting there being no word of the yearly meeting mentioned in all my printed paper but whereas they who gave out that Paper called A true account of the Proceedings c. advised me to call in my printed books I put them in mind that in order to a true reconciliation they should have advised them of the other side to call in their false Judgments and to give out a Testimony acknowledging their error in several passages of injustice towards me which they might have done by way of advice tho without giving a formal Judgment against them being absent But if they thought it not Just to give a Judgment against them of the other side being absent what hindered them from giving a Judgment against S. Jennings being present and who had chiefly injured us and me in particular as also against Th. Ducket who was present And why have they given a Judgment against our Friends in Pensilvania and West-Jersey who were not present any more than they of the other side by giving out a contradictory Judgment to what was given out by the Yearly Meeting at Burlington signed by 70 persons And seeing it is an undeniable rule of Justice not to Judge the person that is present in the absence of his Accusers but that the accusers and the accused be both present in person why did they judge me in the absence of my Accusers in Pensilvania If it be said they had sufficient evidence from my printed books so had they as sufficient evidence from their Manuscripts and Letters signed with their own hands of the Other side and therefore it was not according to the rule of true Justice to have given any Judgment against me tho present in my accusers and opposite parties absence unless they had dealt impartially with respect to both and laid equal weight on the authentick evidences I produced against them from their own Manuscripts signed with their own hands and the true Copy of the Court-Sessions signed by the hand of the Clerk as on my printed books And both sides being alike absent or present two of their side the third deceased present and three present on our side it is an apparent quible and shift to give it as a Reason why they of the Other side in Pensilvania had not Judgment passed against them being absent and yet to judg G. K. his Friends who also were absent and to Judg him in the absence of his accusers and if they think it was sufficient to have S. Jennings and Th. Ducket present to be his accusers by the rule of Justice it was sufficient to have G. K. and Th. Budd to be present to be Sam. Jennings his accusers so the case is as broad and long the one way as the other and either G. K. should not have been Judged or at least Sam. Jennings should not have been so connived and passed by yea so publickly countenanced and owned and G. K. so publickly censured and hardly treated as both then and since HIS Postscript I am little concerned to take notice of being a pretended Reply to two things in the printed paper of R. H. which he and some others so highly aggravating it was and is still expected by many that T. E. would discover in the several particulars of it wherein he is so highly guilty the which he not having done leaveth a suspicion in the minds of some that he had better to have removed by a full and particular Answer to the whole than to nibble only at these