is to take upon him to be General of an Army as R B tells his Adversary page 45 of his Vindication The Question is how James and Peter Knew they should take upon them to Rule But in case these systems faile to satisfie a Man at a strait which I hope any experienced Souldier will confess and the daily new Inventions do fully evince What then is the Souldier to recurr to Is it not to that by which the first Man wrote the System That is his Reason And see if that can help him when his Book cannot Yea have there not been good Souldiers who could neither Read nor Write Yes General Lesly who did more for the Presbyterian Interest then Patroelus and Achilles both can do And will a Mathematician receive a Mathematical Proposition set down in a System hand over head without satisfying his Reason These are poor similes and rather hurtful then helpful to his Cause If by these he minds to prove That humane prudence can assure a man that he is a Child of God I am apt to suspect by his Book that he hath never troden this narrow Path himself Else he would have spoken other Language Next he comes to answer for his Brethren the Remonstrants and Publick Resolutioners comparing then indeed to Paul and Barnabas But he hath forgot to tell us which of them was in the right and to decide the Contraversie by plain Scripture to the stopping the mouths of the other Party but I doubt this would have puzled his prudence As for his Instance of Paul and Barnabas their contention was not for matters of Faith or Doctrine as Beza testifieth and the Scripture saith no where that they did not meet again But our Assembly Men never reconciled to this day But knowing this will not do he giveth a better Answer Saying The Corruptions of Men are only to be charged with this Ah! Lamentable The whole General Assemblie of the Church of Scotland corrupt men What guides then had such poor Laicks as I Put all this saith nothing except he decide the Contraversy by plain Scripture Which when he hath done I shall say It 's pity he was not present at the Assembly Next he falls upon some other Arguments which he tells us are scraped out of Bellarmine and therefore deserve no Answer Which Answer whether true or false I know not having never read Bellarmines Works But I find this is a fair shift to win off and an Hebergeon proof against any Dart. He spendeth his whole page 60. on Reflections First on James Naylor he might have remembered Major Weir But De mortuis nill c I disdain to scrape in that Dung-hill Next he compares us to the Papists saying As the Papists to cover the rest of their Abominations have invented a greater and more dangerous than them all that is Their Churches Infallibility So this Spirit of the Quakers knowing that upon tryal he will be found to be a Counterfeit hath taken the Counsel given by Alcibiades to Pericles that is To study how he may secure himself with the hazard of a Tryal And here he cites William Penn's Rejoinder Part. 1. Chap. 5. about the Man of Philippi I beseech the Reader to peruse the place cited by him that he may see him past all shame or care of being reputed an honest Man For First he says W. Penn useth it as an Argument to prove The Scriptures cannot be a Rule of Faith and Life whereas in the same Page W. Penn hath owned them for a Rule of Faith and Life tho not the Rule by way of Excellency nor as Patroclus saith the Primary Rule Secondly He makes no Argument of it but an Instance as he doth that of Ananias and Saphira That the Scriptures could not be a Rule to Peter nor Paul in these cases as he doth that also of flying or standing in the time of Persecution and asketh what do Professors mean when they advise People to seek the Lord in this oâ— the other Case Why do they not go seek the Scriptures rather and much more which for brevity lomit To evite all which he makes a Nonsensical Argument and denies the Antecedent when he had none And then falls a Railing for a whole Page together a part whereof I have set down above For Answer to which First The Quakers own no other Spirit but the Comforter whom Christ promised to send to Reprove the World for Sin for they never refused to subject the Spirits and Doctrines of Men to the Scriptures and therefore if he have called the Spirit of Truth a Counterfier the just God will Rebuke him for his Blasphemy And this poor Man who can pretend to no more Infallibility than the Pharisees of old who had the Scriptures as well as he and yet were found guilty of Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost may be affraid he be found in the same Case with them But I wish he may find Repentance Secondly The Presbyterians may be no less fitly compared with the Papists For their Doctrines being tryed by the Scriptures they being Interpreters themselves it is a meer sham to speak of a Tryal For whatever Interpretation doth not agree with the Analogie of Faith is to be rejected Now the Analogie of Faith is of their own composing so that Faith and Tryal and all is but Mans work and in fine a very cheat But next he must give us the most deadly blow of all Saying We are beyond the reach of a Conviction But the Reader may excuse him a little being now among his Brethren the Grecian Hero's Alcibiades and Pericles But who told him this that the Quakers were beyond the reach of a Conviction Sure not the Scriptures For there is no such Sentence in them all Nor the Spirit for he cannot indure Divine Inspiration the Capital Enemy of the Presbyterian Priesthood Who then Imagination A thing the Presbyterians call Faith The very counterfeit he hath been talking of just now Next he tells us That Prophesies of future Events may well be brought to the Scripture Test Then I beseech him tell me what Scripture Test could Noah his Prophefie of the Flood have been brought to Or George Wisharts Prophesie of the Cardinals being Killed in such a place and not in another In the close he saith Paul was Divinely inspired and the Actions were conform to Scripture consonant and warranted by the Promise of Christ C But it seems he hath forgotten what he said in page 39. Christ and his Apostles proved their Doctrines by the Scriptures who were Immediatly inspired as well as Paul But any thing will serve after such a fatal blow as he hath lately given Page 61. He saith The ground of their Arguments with which they stand and fall is this The Scriptures are not the Fountain it self but a Declaration of the Fountain Therefore they are not to be accounted the principal Original of all Truth and Knowledge nor vet the adequat Primary Rule of Faith
are sufficient to convince these Men of palpable falshood and blasphemy This is Language for the Pulpit among the Hood-winked hearers but will trouble no unprejudiced Reader As to the great stress he layeth upon these words And these are they that testifie of me Therefore they are the Primary Rule Did he not say The Works which I do They hear witness of Me And if we may believe History the Sybills testified of him Doth this prove that they were the Primary Rule But the very foregoing Verse is to be considered And ve have not his Word abiding in you for whom be hath sent him ve believe not And verse 36. I have a greater Witness then that of John For the works which the Father hath given me to finish the same works that I do bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me Here let him consider that in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every thing is to be proven Our Saviour bringeth here four Witnesses The Testimony of John The Works which he did The Word of GOD abiding in Men and the Scriptures The contraversy is not whether any of these or all of them were Witnesses but which of them was the greatest and most Preferrable And if the Works which He then did were a greater Witness then the Testimony of John who was inferiour to none of the Prophets Then the Works which He now doth in the Hearts and Souls of Believers by His Word abiding in them in healling all their Infirmities quickning and enlightning their dead Souls and speaking peace to them is a greater Witness then the Scriptures He falls next upon R. Bs. Dilemma Which he saith hath not the weight of a Walnut It seems the hardness of the shell hath blunted his teeth that he hath not reached the Kernal For saith he If the words are to be taken in the Imperative mood as we have even now demonstrated then it is as clear as the Noon Sun c. But how hath he demonstrated it That the Word bears not the Indicative Signification as well as the Imperative is obvious to any that understands the Conjugations And the Scriptures brought to prove it I shall touch some of them Deut 17. 18 19. And be shall read therein all the days of his Life Ergo The Words John 5 39. Are to be taken in the Imperative Mood If this be not as wild a consequence as to say William Jamison is verus Patroelus by a Metempychosis Ergo The whole Church of England are Hereticks which he hath boldly asserted in his Adultory Epistle to his Patron I leave it to the Reader to Judge The next he brings is Deut 29. 29. The Secret things belong to the LORD our GOD but those Things which are revealed belong to us and to our Children for ever that we may do all the Words of this Law Ergo The Words of John are to be taken in the Imperative mood Who would follow such an Adversary at this Rate But seeing he is so good at Wall-nuts I will give him another of the same kind to break Either the Words of John the Baptist who was as great a Prophet as Isaiah were as much a Rule to the Jews when spoken by him as they are now to us when recorded in a Book or as the words of Isaiah formerly recorded in a Book or they were not If they were Then the Works which Christ worketh now in the Souls of His Servants must be a greater Witness then the words of John recorded in a Book As well as the Works he then did were a greater Witness But if he say they were not so much a Rule when spoken as when written I ask him how they came by that excellency by being Written Or was it the Council of I aodicea that gave it Page 43 He saith He hath broken one of the Horns of his Dilemma and made his Consequence a meer Nonsequitor And why Because he hath confessed saith he in a word That the Words of Christ and his Apostles as then spoken now recorded in Scripture were of themselves no less binding upon the Jews then these spoken by Moses and the Prophets But this hath strengthned the Dilemma for if they were as binding and yet needed a Rule to try them by Then the Writtings of Moses and the Prophets needed a Rule to try them by and that Rule another Rule Et sic infinitum That all Doctrines of Men may be tryed and ought so to be by the Scriptures was never denyed And hath no way given away his Cause But as for what follows That it might be lawful to imbrace any impulse or suggestion which he thought was the Spirit of GOD Without further Examination thereof is a gross untruth but ordinary to him and his Brethren And therefore he hath wisely foreborn to tell us where R Barkelay said so His third Scriptute is Acts 17. 11. He saith His Adversaries can find nothing to darken and deprive it and therefore he waves it Not being willing to meddle with what R B saith there To wit If the Bereans were oblidged to believe and receive Pauls Testimony because he preached the Truth to them by Authority from GOD Then their using them or his commending of them for using the scriptures Will not prove the scriptures to be the Primary Rule Yea more a Rule than the Doctrine they tryed by it For it the Doctrine preached by Paul to the Bereans had been but recorded in a Book it had presently become a Primary Rule The fourth is 2 Peter 1. 19. We have a more sure word of prophesie c. This place he will have to be meant of the scriptures His first proofi is Because saith he This presupposeth that there cannot be immediat Revelation where the senses go along And so their spirit is contrary to sense But this is an old Cavil against Christianity and brought on the stage by Julian the Apostat in his Book against the Primitive Christians This Doctrine said he sigbteth against common sense See Chron Carionis page 278. To this he addeth another Why should this Glorious Vision of which the Apostles had Divine and infollible Evidence c Be accounted uncertain and suspected in respect of the Spirit â— Answer Why should uld it be uncertain and suspected in respect of the scriptures And why should it become the Primary Rule when recorded in a Book and not the Rule when spoken immediatly on the Mount If thou say Because it is more obvious to sense then it seems thy Religion is more sensual than Spiritual His second Argument is That this Revelation according to us brings along with it its own self Evidence and perswades the Soul to embrace and close with it as Divine But this is both groundless and therefore false saith he because we assert that unless the Understanding be well disposed Revelation tho immediate is not evident Answer first He here brings nothing to prove this That it is groundless and
This must be a man of no Credit nor one that values a good name tho he begin his Book with it For if he can produce in that Book or Chapter such an expression of William Penns he shall surely cause Print a new Copie and insert it for I assure my Reader there is no such thing so that henceforth our Author deserves better to be called Simon then Patroelus Yea he out does Faldo for Faldo accuseth William Penn only for saying that the Body of Jesus was not the whole intire Christ Which Faldo labouring to prove and sometimes deny that any man having the use of his Reason might have been ashamed of he fully bemires himself and yet our Authors citation is more odious He cometh now to another false charge saying as these men deny CHRIST Himself So they deny consequently all the benefites purchased by him The Father of lies could scaroely have been more audacious tho perhaps more cunning then to have Printed himself a lier The First is proven to be aeâ—lie already let us hear what he saith for the Second For this he returns to his trade of forging citations and gives William Penns Sandie Foundation shaken 26. Thus Unless we become doers of that Law which Christ came not to destroy but as our example to fulfil we can never be justified before GOD nor let any fancy that Christ so fulfilled it for them as to exclude their Obedience from being requisite to their acceptance but only as their patern c. This Thread-bare citation hath been many a time cast in our teeth and tossed over and over to no purpose For William Penn hath so fully cleared himself of it that no honest man would have charged him or us with it as my Reader may see in Reason against Railing page 78 and Counterfeit Christian detected from page 22 to page 78 which were too tedious to insert here but hath brought an indelible brand of infamy upon Thomas Hicks whereof it seems our Author covets a share In page 186 He contemns at the old rate of forgery and falsly accusing us first of Socinianism and then of Popery saying R B denyeth not that his Doctrine of Justification is all one with that of the Council of 〈◊〉 He citeth for proof of his Calumny Apol page p37 139 and Vind Sect 8 N 9. Where faith he He accuseth Luther and the Body of the Primitive Protestants as great Deprivers of the doctrine of Justification and doers of as great hurt by this their Doctrine as ever they did good by what they pulleddown of Babylon A grosser lie nor a greater forgerie was never Printed in this Age What shall men do when they deal with such audacious slanderes But Patroelus tell me seriously didst thou think that any who Read thy book would be at pains to compare it with the places cited If they did how could thou think to escape the black Character of an infamous forger Doth not R B in both places cited dispute largely against the Papists And in his Vindication doth he not challenge J Brown for Patronizing the Papists But thy Forgerie is more then manifest in the latter part of thy charge Wherein thou sayes he accuseth the Protestants as doers of as great hurt by this their Doctrine as ever they did good by what they pulled down of Babylon R B's Words are these For in this as in most other things He Luther is more to be commended for what he pulled down of Babylon then for what he Built of his own Let the Reader from this one citation Judge of our Authors Candor and whether this perversion be not wilful as well as malicious In the next place he giveth us a whole page and some more of Hicks and Faldo's stuff so fully answered and the Perversion thereof so fully detected by William Penn that the Authors themselves durst never attempt their Vindication But it seems our Author thinks these of his own stamp will believe him implicitly and the Books he hath forbidden them to read and so thinks himself secure but he being manifested to be a Forger as above I hope the Reader will be at the pains to read William Penns Book against Hicks and Faldo where he will find all these Citations fully handled which were superfluous to transcribe here In the end of page 187. He saith with the like facility I could shew That the Doctrine of the Quakers is in every point contrary to the Doctrine of Christ Truly it is easie for a man who loves to make Lies and makes no Conscience of so doing to vent and Print them But what is now sweet in his mouth may prove bitter in his belly But he proceeds saying I shall content my self with one great Instance Viz The Resurrection of the Body concerning which the Quakers are down-tight Saducees This is another like the rest And to return a lie upon him I shall first say We believe according to the Scriptures a Resurrection of the Dead of the Just and unjust So that this unjust Adversary here chargeth us very falsly For we can justly say If in this Life only we have hope in Christ we are of all men most miserable Nor were we ever charged with denying the Resurrection but only of that same body Niomerical Concerning which we willingly assent to what the Apostle hath said 1 Cor. 15 from verse 35. to the end And 2. Cor. 5. 1. 2 3. Which Beza â—nterprets of the Resurrection And if our Author will be wiser then the Spirit of GOD I must leave him there and remit him to cultivate his Reason better by conversing with some of the Modern Philosophers As Henry More and others and particularly Kenelm Digby in his Observations upon Religio Medici page 343. I shall offer him only two Sentences of his First All sublunary Matter being in a continual Flux and in bodies which have internal Principles of Heat and Motion which continually transpireth out to make room for the fresh Supplies of new Aliement So that in process of time all is so changed that the body of the Young Man is not the same body of the Old Man and so one body sinneth and another suffereth Secondly That which giveth the numerical individuation to a body is the substantial Form as long as that remaineth the same tho the matter be in a continual flux and motion yet the thing is still the same It is evident that Samenes This-nes and That-nes belongeth not to matter by it self but only as it is distinguished and individuated by the Form The rest of his Work to the end of this Chapter being nothing but the foul Vomite of two malicious Forgeries already answered deserves no answer Chapter VI. Of Perfection HERE he beginneth with insolent and insulting Language and then with more then his usual Candor sets down R B's eight These But lest I should have mistaken him he returns to his Priestine State and Old Principles Saying and afterwards he saith That there
Rusticus ad Clericum OR THE PLOW-MAN REBUKING THE PRIEST In ANSWER to Verus Patroclus Wherein the False-hoods Forgeries Lies Perversions and Self-contradictions of WILLIAM 〈◊〉 are 〈◊〉 By JOHN ROBERTSON Vtque dâ—vâ—â—â—â—â— verum Nebulas Manes 〈…〉 aucupunt Pariuntque Monstraâ— qâ—â—is nec est pes nec caput â—eu vacua Magnos aâ—â—â—innitus cient Prov 4. 16. For they sleep not except they have done mischief and their sleep is taken away except they cause some to fall 17. For they eat the Bread of Wickedness and drink the Wine of Violence Printed in the Year 1694. Rusticus ad Clericus OR THE PLOW-MAN REBUKING THE PRIEST In Answer to VERVS PATROCLVS c. FRIEND AS Our Neighbours and Countrey-Men who are acquainted with our Principles and Practises know us to be Lovers of all Mankind such as seek the Good of All and the prejudice of none So we have no such Enemies as the Clergie now Regnant and some of their bigotted Disciples whom they have bewitched with fair words and smooth speeches to believe all they say without examining whether it be true or false This Tribe of Lying Levites have now for many years made use of all the unworthy Methods their Wiâ— and Malicé could invent to Blacken Desame Slander and Misrepresent Us This is no New thing It is but the Doctrine of Demetrius the Silver Smith For they wâ—ll know that if people were taught to believe according to the Scriptures that GOD would reach his people himself And that be who knoweth not Christ in him to teach him is a Reprobate That they who know him not thus let in to the Conscience to parge it from deadworks and to Reign as King Lord and Lawgiver are at best but nominal Christians Than certainly their 〈◊〉 Trade of Preaching for hyre would be at an end for upholding whereof all his bustle is made in the World All their clamours concerning the Scriptures Christ Trinity so called original sin c. Are but meer pretences For let an Angel from Heaven teach any thing contrary to the Westminster Consession and Catechisms though never so consonant to the Holy Scriptures he must expect â—â— better acceptance from these Men then to be branded with the odious name of Heretick as if they alone had becti commissionate to sect bounds to the Faith of all Mankind My Reader must not expect from me a long and Rhetorical Introduction who have been more accustâ—med to use Pâ—ough then the Pen for nigh Thirty Years together I was 〈…〉 and but 〈◊〉 in the City And therefore if I treat mâ—â—â— Adâ—erâ—ary with any lets decorâ—â—â— then he may suppose to be due to a man of his Robe I hope my Rustick Education will excuse me and the rather because I have little or no knowledge of him but what I gather from his Book which at first view gave me no good Character of him by his falsing soul upon the Bishop of Andrews Certainly no generous man will strick a fallen Foe And although he would 〈◊〉 that he did not complain for stopping his book yet is evident that he exposeth the Bishop and his Brethren to the Fate of his Predecestor if the Rabble would but take the Allarum The next thing I learn of him is that he is a Presbyterian Preacher 〈…〉 his seeking a License from the 〈◊〉 of Andrews be no great sign â—â— his Zeal and seems to intimate that if the Prelate should get a new Throw for the Chair our Author might be brought to cry peccavi Pater c. If information hold and if such then consequently a sworn Enemy to all Mankind except those of his own Fraternity by the Solemn League and Covenant Yea his being a Clergie man is dangerous For as Machiavel tells us they have been now for more than a thousand years forming and setting up an interest distinct and separate from all the rest of Mankind And when the Popish Clergie were justly extruded because of their Cruelty and Insolency Lo here we have their Successours no less insolent ctnel and covetous if they had but power And this was foretold by the same Machiavel in his Letter to Zenob page 28. who faith thus But this I will prophesie before I conclude That if Princes shall perform this business by halves and leave any root of this Clergie or Priest craft as it is now in the ground Or if that Famous Reformer fled some years since out of Piccardie to Geneva who is of so great Renown for Learning and Parts and who promises us so perfect a Reformation shall not in his model wholly extirpare this sort of Men Then I say I must foretell That as well the Magistrate as this Workman will find themselves deceived in their Expectations And that the least Fibra of this plant will overrun again the whole Vineyard of the LORD and turn to a diffusive Papacie in everie Diocie perhaps in every Parish c. Whether we have seen this prophesie fulfilled by the Disciples of the same Reformer Calvine let the unbyassed Reader judge The next thing in his praeludium all his work being like a Stage play is That albeit this Knight Errant with his Achillean Armour and Titanian Boldness words borrowed from himself from the Blind Poet hath bid Defvance to all that profess christianity And hath concluded them all except his own way Hereticks Yet in opposition to the Quakers he calleth in for Auxihary Forces a Prelatick Preacher and an Independent and chiefly an Anabaptist whom in his book he calls wicked and abominable as the Pharises joyned with the Sudducees Herodians and Romans to crucifie CHRIST As for the Prelatick Clergie he saith it is infected with the Hemlock of Pelagianism And in his Frontispecce he hath told you their Fate that is They are to be rejected But what more Is then no Civil Sanction follows upon Presbyterian Excommunication If it 〈◊〉 the Sâ—ing it will be nothing regarded â—â—t of old it was not so For the first step 〈…〉 â—urse thâ—◠〈…〉 prâ—scribe And â—â— brought in alive thâ—â— there was in stoâ—e prison◠〈◊〉 Bâ—â—â—shments Axes and Halters for Heretiques And our 〈◊〉 is so 〈◊〉 delighted in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it seems he covets the offiâ—e but Blessed be the LORD the Civil Magistrats are now become â—â—eâ— than to be the Clergies 〈◊〉 And their â—oâ—g experience of the HONEST and PEAâ—EABLE PRINCIPLES of the QVAKERS hath confirmed the Magistrate in a â—etter Opinion of Them As â—â— the 〈◊〉 of his Adulatory Epistle to his Patron I shall only say that he hath rather 〈◊〉 theâ— oblidged his Patron by â—â—pousing him to such a Cast-Mâ—â—â—ress as is the Controversie against the Quakers which never Man yet underâ—ook but caâ—e off with Disgrace After he hath sufficiently and a little more then become a Protestant rated the Episcopal Party he faâ—â—â— to the 〈◊〉 of his Dedication About the end whereof he hath these words Go on therefore my Lord espouâ—â—ng the Cause of the true Protestant
Interest in opposition to Popery and whatsoever hath attendancy thereunto By this tendency he certainly intends not so much the Quakers as the Episcopal Church which may be seen in the 15th page of his Dedication But he must give me leave to tell him that the Episcopal Church of England hath done and suffered more for the Protestant Interest than all the Presbyterians in the World And the three hundreth Lives laid down in the dayes of Queen Mary were of more service to the Protestant interest than an hundred Thousand â—ost by the Solemn League and Covenant And yet both Prelatick and Presbyterian Churches departed from the Protestant Principles in that they have first set up to themselves an absolute Authority in matter of Faith and Worship 2ly That they have not contented themselves with Excommunication but have persecuted such as could not comply And 3ly By this persecution thy have rendred themselves guilty of all the Apostacle Hypocrisie and Dissimulation of such have as complyed out of meer fear which three things as none of the least causes of seperation have been charged upon the Church of Rome And frequently casts in her teeth by all Protestants Yet hath the Ruling Clergie of every Protestant Church followed her footsteps how soon they got Power For this see a paper caled the third part of Naked truth Printed 1681. I need not here mention the many troubles Wars Devastations and Miseries brought upon Europe by the Romish Clergie these 1000 years bypast But to come nearer home and in our own Age Have we not seen the execrable Murther of One King the banishment of Another the loss of an Hundred Thousand Lives and infinite Treasure the ruine of our Native Country not yet recovered And all this to satisfie Ambition and avance of a contentious Clergle Yea and such contention as amounted to no more than whither the Precess of their Assembly should be constant or moveable And whither he should be called Moderator or Bishop which King Charles the first calls the Skirts or Suburbs of Religion And yet alace Men have so mancipated their Judgements to the dictats of the Clergie they own that there is great cause to fear a Relapse I shall earnestly desire my Country-men to consider what brought us to the present condition we are in but the artifices of the Clergie The Popish Clergie having got a King of their own Religion have incessantly cryed on him that the Churches Colledges Rents Revenues Tythes and Benefices were of right theîrs And that it was Sacriledge to keep them out of Possession The Episcopal Clergie had the Reformation to plead the sad sufferings of their predecessors and the Law of the Nation their own piety and Moderation as they pretended But the Presbyterians think they have been but lately put from it by the Prelates they had gained it by the Sword and that Major Vis is a good Right and they have been still attempting it since the year 1666 And clamouring that the Nation is under a Solemn Oath by the Covenant to extirpate all others and establish them So that we are brought into this present confusion only to satisfie the ambition and avarice of the Clergie The Honour and the wealth is the Bone of contention settled Revenues Tythes and forced Mantainance and while the Civil Magistrates patronizeth any one of the three in Possession of those We need expect no quiet but take away the Bone and the Dogs will cease Having done with his Dedication I must tell thee then shall expect none from â—he Being Nullius addictus Jurare in 〈◊〉 Magistri But I must look back to his Frontispeece where he begins will Verus Patroclus What he intends by this We must consider Either he intends the Quakers his own Book or himself If he intends is the Quakers he is greatly mistaken For if we may believe Tradition Patrocius was a souldier at the siege of Troy and borrowed Achilles Atmour to fight against Hector by whom he was killed Now the Quakers are so far from borrowing Carnal Weapons That they have beat their own swords into plow shears c. and resolve to learn War no more If he intend his own Book he hath yet erred lot we read that Patroclus was à very man like one of us and had tongue and teeth as well as our Author But if he intends himself I wonder how he calls himself the True patroclus But it seems that by reading Virgils ath Eclugue he hath dâ—â—â—med that Plato's great year was come Atque lterum ad Trojan Magnus mittetur Achilies And that he is the very patrochus so being assured of his Fate he attacks the whole Christian World with great confidence If therefore I some times call him patroolus some times our Author and some times mine Adversary I hope my Reader will understand me He begins his preface to the Reader with a jealousie about the acceptance of his Book not without cause He had told us before in his Dedication that it could not be judged altogether superstuous Because of the Hemlock of pelagianism wherewith the Bulk of the Prelatick Clargie is infected Yet fears after all this it may be called an Iliad after Homer c. And therefore that his Babie may not be neglected he tells the causes of its production over again and tho he told us it was designed for his Patron as a Testimony of his gratitude for his education Yet here it comes to be a Publict concern and he gives us three Fathers who have beget this Monstrous Birth upon one Mother his Brain Viz. The danger of this deadly disease The prximoity of it and the readiness of its possions to broach Books It seems he means Truth to be this dangerous disease but it is so to none but such pedantick Chaplines as he who gets their Bread by lies Not is it dangerous to any but the Clergie because its followers decry their Tyths their Belly their God As for its proximity I know no sober man but likes their Neighbourhood even the moderate among the Episcopal Teachers And as to their Broaching of Books This is great impudence who was troubling him Hath he seen any controversie written by the Quakers since the Year 1679. And now when the LORD had moved the hearts of the Civil Magistrats to give them a little respite from their sad sufferings Beholld this Gladiator attacks them and by all the lies Forgeries and false Accusations that he can invent to defame provokes them again to enter the Lists in the defence of that Blessed Testimony which will for ever stand over him all such forgers And how unwilling we have been to broach Books may appear by our long delay to answer this Bable Yea had not some of their Preachers at Aberdeen and in the West vainly boasted that it was unanswerable We had not yet thought it worthy to be noticed The next thing that occurs is that he accuses the Nation of negligence for not comparing the Doctrine
doth the Scriptures themselves in distinction from the Spirit As 2 〈◊〉 3. 6. Except Patroclus intend to turn Socinian who understood this place on Scriptures to be meant of the Gospel or Scriptures of the New Testament as may be seen in the Cracovian Catechism Page 162 163. Asserting the Holy Spirit to be the Ipsum Evangelium and at best to be but a certain hope of Eternal life promised to us Secondly they call the Scriptures Writings Is not this plain Soots for Scriptura Or what difference is there betwixt Scriptures and Writings It seems the fault is that the word is not a little Latinized But every Quaker is not so good a Linguist as Patroclus His third charge is that the Quakers call them them a letter about the meaning whereof nor two are agreed Now Patroclus I pray thee for once deal ingenuously with me and ommiting many other instances answer only these two First if the Scriptures be so plain and obvious to every well disposed intelect as your party word it how came the whole Ministry of Scotland to differ so faâ—r in the year 16â—0 about so easle a case as whether it was Lawful for the Mallignats to fight for their Native Country against a Forraign Enemie And secondly It is well known that about the year 1661 after divers Presbyterian Ministers were suspended from the exercise of their Ministry who notwithstanding did not submit but continued preaching and gathered to themselves congregations in the desart to the great distuâ—bance of the Nation On the other hand in the year 1689 several hundreds of the Episcopal Ministers have been suspended and their Flocks left destitute Yet all of them have submitted and are silent Now seeing both parries acknowledge the same Scripture Tellme I pray thee whether they be agreed about the meaning and bring me plain Scripture to decide these two contraversies â—t eris mihi Magnus Apollo After this in Page 7 he falls upon citations where he promiscuously and at all adventures cites Hicks and Fâ—lâ—â— upon whose Bankrupt Faith he layes no small stress I alwayes doubted Patroclus to be no sound Presbyterian For sure they who could not allow Malignants to fight for their Native Country would never allowes Sectaries to contend for the Faith which certainly is more Precious then all outward things But especially they being men who by their open forgeries and falsehoods have forefeited their Credit with all Honest Men I shall be at the pains with one or two of them tho they desorve no notice In Page 8 he ciâ—es one N L Cited by Hicks and saith he evinced by him against Pen That if the Bible were burnt as good an one might be writ these words Hicks saith were spoken by N L To one he knows very wâ—ll upon publishing this in his Book N L gives forth a Testimony under his hand dated London 29th 3d. Moneth 1673 denying he ever spoke such words or any thing like them calling it an abominable lie wicked slander and appeals to GOD to clear his ◠〈◊〉 But after some search Nicholas is sent to one Henry Stout to prove the matter who at last gave his Testimony in write under his hand thus I Henry Stout of Hartford never in all my dayes heard Nicholas Lucas speak the words nor any of the like importance or tendencie as charged on him be Tho Hicks nor before any man else that I can call to mind But am satisfied in my conscience that he hath most grosly wronged N L To which I subscribe H Stout So now let the Reader judge what seared Consciences and Brazen faces these men have or our Patroclus to cite such a base and false calumny The second Citation is that of William Penns Rejoynder Page 70 73. We have good reason to deny them to be the rule of Faith and Judge of contraversy which can neither give nor govern Faith nor Judge of Contraversies If he added the rest I should have left it to the Reader to Judge without more And therefore I shall only add these following words as they ly Viz. As the many different perswasâ—ons in the World fully prove For then all that have the Scriptures would be of one perswasion as it is most certain those are who have walk by the one Spirit Let the Word be joyned and then Judge The other part of his Citation is Page 73 thus in short the Scriptures are not the Rule but a declaration of Faith and knowledge Here he stops But I intreat the Reader before he trust these men to be at the pains to read the Book Cited by him There he shall see wither William Penn and his friends deserves to be called disparragers of the Scriptures and that it looks more like malice and interest that acts these men than the love of Truth The rest of his Citations at least many of them I never saw nor read but in such books as his Page 9. About the end he falls upon a long Citation of William Penns rejoynder concerning the Canon The Authority of those who gathered it the Transcribers and their dissentions the exactness of the coppies And lastly that some learned men of our times tell us of little less then 3000 several readings in the Scriptures of the Nâ—w Testament in Greek Answer Can he say William Penn hath lied in what he hath Written If he do I will produce him Protestant Authors who confess no less But if he had added the rest of William Penns words he had done more honestly but not so much to his purpose and therefore I will do him the kindness to set down a few of them Farr be it from me saith William Penn to Write this in any the least undervalue of that Holy Record It 's only to shew the weak foundation my Adversaries foundation stands upon I believe great and Good Things of them and that from no less evidence then the Eternal VVord that gave them forth Which hath often times given my Soul a deep Savour of these blessed Truths it declares of c And after many such expressions he concludes We accept them as the Words of GOD Himself And by the assistance of his Spirit they are read with great Instruction and Comfort I esteem them the best of Writings and desire nothing more frequently then that I may lead the Life they exhort to Thus William Penn Whereby the Reader may perceive the malice and disingenuity of Patroclus in concealling the Words which would have vindicated him from that soul charge of vilifying the Scriptures And I desire the Reader will only compare Patroclus and his Party with the Pharaseâ—s who while they extolled the Scriptures were found the murderers and persecuters of CHRIST and his Apostles Having thus dissingenuously dealt with William Penn he fails upon R. B. in these words On the other hand of this Ethnick Army R. B. Assaulteth the intrinsick Arguments and Divine Characters imprinted on the Scriptures Citing his Apologie Chap 2. That
these two calumnies against us as I hope shall be seen in its place His Seventh is that they asserted the possibility of fulfilling the Law If he had said that we assert a possibility of keeping the Commandments of GOD not of our selves but through the Grace of GOD. We own this charge and think it no error but a sound and great Truth As for the word Law we are not under the Law but under Grace And here according to his custom he inserts a gross lie upon R. B saying for the denyal of which R B promised continually to rail upon all the Reformed It seems the man hath dreamed this For I am certain he can never tell where or to whom he promised any such thing What he undertakes in his fourth Chapter we shâ—ll see how he proves it His eight instance is that they denyed the perseverance of the Saints In this he also misrepresents us for we have alwayes asserted that there is a state of Confirmation in Grace attainable by all and attained by in any which cannot be fallen from And that some have made shipwrack of Faith and a good conscience cannot be denyed His Ninth instance is their denving of the Resurrection of the same body and referts to the fifth Chapter of his book But whatever the Apostle Paul saith in I Corinth 15. We do willingly believe and acknowledge and if this Man hath any thing more revealed unto him concerning the Resurrection then what Paul tells us he will do well to publish it His Tenth is that they deny the Sacred Trinity and the Divinity of Christ which he also deceitfully chargeth upon us referring to his 4th Chapter wherein I hope his deceit shall be detected The Just GOD who searcheth our hearts and knoweth the contrary will certainly reward this false accuser according to his work except he repent His Eleventh instance is That they asserted The Ministers of the Gospel ought not to be tyed to the explaining of the scriptures that all in the Church ought to speak by turns c. And that the Ministers ought to have no certain Stepend This instance hath three accusations To the first we say If any man speak let him speak as the Oracles of GOD and according to the Grace given him so let him Minister Not that we are against the explaining of scripture by a Minister as he is led thereto by the Spirit of Christ But that in his Preaching he should be tyed thereto only we see no reason for it for either this tye upon him is by Divine or Humane authority If by Divine authority let our author produce it and it shall be no more disputed And if by human authority as indeed the whole Presbyterian Ministry is Then this tye is not binding upon any true Gospel Minister But he may teach exhort admonish as GOD giveth him utterance not contrary but according to the Scriptures without taking a Text and telling his own dark imaginations from it His Second accusation is that all in the Church ought to speak by turns This is another gross lie for we never said that all in the Church ought to speak but we are not ashamed with Paul to say 1 Corinth 14. 13. For yee may all Prophesie one by one yet not all in the Church for as the same Apostle sayeth No man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost His Third accusation is That the Ministers ought not to have certain Stipend It is strange that this malicious adversary can represent in its true and genuin collours but twines and twists like a crooked Serpent to fasten some reproach upon innocent men Can there be a more certain Stepend then the free benevolence of true Christians to a true Christian Minister Or do any of our Ministers complain of wanr or come to begg of the Presbyterians but he should have said we were against a forced mantainance by Horning poinding Imprisonment Adjudication of Lands by which tools ye exact Temporals from such as will have none of these things ye call Spirituals And herein we have many Martyrs and good Protestants for us as ye cannot but know altho this degenerate and self seeking generation have forsaken their paths and have followed the way of Balaam who loved the wages of unrighteousness His twelfth Instance is They denyed that a Christian ought to be a Magistrate or in any case make Warr to take or administer Oaths Or trouble any man upon the account of his Religion Or to prohibite any kind of Religion Here are five bold accusations again whether they were doctrines of these Anabaptists I know not nor am I concerned I think it is very unlike that such fighters as they were said to be would deny all Warrs to be Lawful But to the first I Answer It is a horrid and shameless Lie And for instance some of us have been Magistrates partieularly Gavine Lawrie in the Province of East New-Jarsey in America to the great satisfaction of 〈◊〉 the Inhabitants In this place a certain Presbiterian Preacher came to him and complained of his Hearers That contrary to their Contract made with him they refused to pay him for Preaching Whereupon both parties being heard He decerned that during the time contained in the Contract they should pay him Which was a great disapointment to the Brethren As for the unlawfulness of Oaths and Warrs under the Gospel We owne it and have abundantly proven it in many Treatises yet unanswered And as for Libertie of Conscience it wont to be the great cry of the Presbiterians when they were under persecution themselves But being now the Church triumphant in Scotland they may perhaps change their tune But for this he may Brother the Author of Melius Inquirendum And if it be the duty of the Magistrate any kind of Religion to prohibite then sure Reformation of Religion does not belong to the Commonality as John Knox saith Yea if this had been only the Office of the Magistrate Presbytrie had never reigned in Britan. But to take these accusations in the Complex and compare them with these of Julian the Apostat against the Primitive Christians And Reader will find a greater agreement then betwixt us and the Anabaptists Philip Melanchton in his Chronicon Carionis page 278. Scripsit ipse libros contra Christianos c Thus Englished He also wrote Books against the Christians or the doctrine of the Church In which Books He chiefly debateth the forbiding of Revenges He saith They take away Magistracie Judicial Sentences Punishments Lawful Warrs And infinitly confirm Robberies And Lastly That this Doctrine fighteth with common sense and taketh away the Nerves of humane Society Behold Reader the Doctrine of our Author His thirteenth and last Instance is concerning the Sacraments so called wherein I think the man hath not been well in his Witts when he ranked us with Anahaptists But because these things are to be handled elsewhere I shall here wave them Now Reader I
Man Coeternal with GOD is a meer fancie For George Keith calls the Heavenly Man the First Born of every Creature as the Apostle also doeth and never asserted that he was Man from all Eternity I need not trouble further abont G K they having promised a full answer to the Book and I think he will hardly refuse to enter the Lists with this Graecian Here But I shall give a citation to chaw his Cude upon as he words it and so leave this matter Melan bron Car page 274 citeth Socrates Scholastious for three Cannons of the Counsel of Syrinum The second of which is Si quis cum Jacob non filium tanquam hominem Colluctatum esse dixerit sed noâ— gonitum Deum aâ—t Patrem Deum Anathemasit After his Dilemma and a little railing Telling we are worse then Arrians or Socinians and such like stuff not worthy to be transcribed He at last falls upon the Light calling it a meer chymerical None-entity Seeing there is nothing more contradictory then that either the Soul or the Body of a Man can he every where or from Eternity That it was from Eternity is his false Alledgiance and none of our Assertions And for its Vbiquity he may see Quak eonfirmed in the place before cited That the Seed and Life is in Him in the fullness as in the fountain or spring but in us as the streams in Him as the Head in us as the members And as the Light is principally in the Body of the Sun yet diffuseth it self through the whole world Even so the Light of Christ the Sun of Righteousness As for his Relicts of the Image of GOD in Adam that quenched spunk of his Extinguished Lantern he might have left it alone for any Advantage he made by it last In the beginning of page 83. He takes a very singular fitt of Railling and Lying He sayes in favours of this Spiritual Antichrist or Antichristlan Figment which they account for their Christ They decry vilifâ—e and do what they can to overthrow whatever ought to be dear and precious to a Christian for what will they not deny seeing they deny the Godhead of Christ They therefore with open mouth blasphem and deny Jesus Christ as a Person without them c. What will this Man stick to assert who after so many accounts of our Faith in this matter can with an hardned face and I may say a seared Conscience assert such gross untruths For which I wish the LORD may grant him Repentance But as the Poet saith Nam quis innocens arit quis tristiore liberabitur nota si eriminare sufficit I hope the World hath learned by a long Experience that a Clergie Man is not alwayes to be trusted I had almost said seldom when he turns accuser of the Brethren But to a muse or rather abule his Reader he gives us a bundle of Citations upon the Authority of his Friend Mr. Hieks as he calls him so sully answered in the very places cired by him and our Doctrine sully cleared in this matter That if the man had not been past all shame he would not have dared to revive the Dottages of that defated Forger Who durst not again attempt to answer for himself But this Authors impudence must be more then ordinary who hath throughout his whole Pamphlet been crying out against us as one both with Anabaptists and Soceniaus whom in page 89 he calls wicked and abominable And yet in this place he takes them for his fellow Souldiers against the Quakers This is certainly as bad as to receive the Mallignants into the Army Yet common to the Chieff Priests Seribes and Pharisees in former times But what is the matter he intends by all these Citations Namely They deny saith he Jesus Christ as a Person without them distinct from Christ in them For cleating of this matter to all unbyassed persons I shall state the matter thus That Christ is with and in his Saints is a Doctrine so fully testi fied to in the Scriptures that no Christian will deny it Matth 28. 20. And lo I am with you alwayes even to the end of the World Which Beza saith is meant of the manner of the presence of the Spirit c But is absent from us in Body In which Body we acknowledge him a Person without the Saints distinct from them As William Penn hath told thee tho thou had the Candour to conceal it But that Christ the LORD from Heaven the Quickning Spirit is one in the Saints and another distinct Person without them we deny And such as affirm it make two Christs See John 14. 20 23. and 15. 4. 5. and 17. 23. Rom 8. 10. 2 Cor 13. 5. Gak 1. 16. Cok 1. 27. Revel 3. 20. But in the end of these Citations He must have a second hit at H Forside Is this to tell us again That Christ as man hath a will contrary to the will of his God-head No But for saying that the word Humane is no Scripture Language but saith our Author the thing imported is found in Scripture He might have minded that the word Humanus may be derived from Humus the Earth as well as from Homo And that the Body of Christ now in Heaven is an Earthly Body is a very gross Notion Again page 84. He returneth to Hicks and Faldo but citeth us no page running at random And truly Patroclus this is an easie way of writting Books if to publish all the Lies and Forgeries devised and maliciously vented against the Quakers be an honest Imployment thou might have had another Book of that kind written before we noticed this I shall only take notice of one of the grossest of them he nameth Edward Billings but citeth neither book nor page to which George Whitehead in the Appendix before cited by our Author saith it is gross and blasphemous to say that the Mysterie of iniquity lyeth in the Blood of Christ Now Reader consider this Mans honesty who but he that would be accounted such himself could adventure his reputation upon such Authority as this Or would spread such impudent calumnies and forgeries after they had been proven so fully to be such certainly it must be a bad cause that need such Pillars to underprop it But I intreat thee Patroelus for the future speak Truth and shame the Devil In page 185 he transcribes a deal of Faldo's stuff alledging we render the Passion Death and Resurrection of our LORD JESVS at Jerusalem altogether vain and idle actions and that we call the Body that our LORD took off the Virgin only a Garment and that it is no constituent part of CHRIST A heap of gross and unparaleled lies To prove all which he citeth William Pen his Rejoynder part 2 Chap. 9. Saying thus Whereas it is said that it was revealed to Simon that he should not die till he should see the LORDS Christ is to be understood of a Spiritual sight or of seeing the Christ within Certainly
neglecting the Reason his Adversary gave for his denyal and then exclaims But why should I take notice c Now should not our Author rather have enforced this Reason If it had been worth his while he had not skipt over it But when he perceives it will not do it is enough for him to say John Brown hath done wonders why should I take notice c. Next he comes to Matth 14. 19. Which R B sayes according to our Author will as much prove a Sacrament as the places of the Gospel and the Epistle to the Corinthians ordinarly brought can do it Here Reader thou hast another instance of his deceit for clearing whereof I shall set down R. Bs. words he asketh What signifieth CHRISTS blessing of the Bread breaking giving it to his Disciples desiring them to eat Answer Christ blessed the Bread break it and gave it to his Disciples to eat and they to others where themselves confess no such Sacrament or Mystery as they would have here is reduceable see Matt. 14. 19. Mark 6. 41. Now let the Reader judge of this mans ingenuity But sayes he R. B. never inferred any thing of this kind from simple blessing but from other things considered with blessing such as this is my Body this is my Blood And the unrepealled command and Institution 1 Cor. 11. and the like What Foppery is this Doth he think to inferr the real Presence from these words this is my Body Or will his meer assertion satisfie that 1 Cor. 11. was a command for continuance of of that Sign For to call it the institution is nonesense being institute before Paul was a Christian but to use his own words he hath done as well as he can and is to be excused if he would but cease to boast That which followes is no better where he citeth R. B. saying he saith indeed that the institution of the Sacrament 1 Cor. 11. was a permission c. When will this man learn to deal honestly upon R. B's saying That 1 Cor 11. Will not prove the necessity of its being now performed J B sayes That then it was an act of will worship and superstition R B Answereth What is done by permission for a time is not Will Worship and Superstition c Now it concerned our Author to prove that there was no Institution of this Rite before this Epistle to the Corinthians And in that case he had delivered his Brother and made it an act of Will-Worship For his saying That R B granteth there was a Command for this Practise is nothing to his purpose for he did not say this was it but another before it And so this was no Will-Worship to the Corinthians nor any proof for its continuance The next is about washing the Disciples feet and his express Command that they should wash every one anothers feet To which he answereth John Brown hath shewed disparity And that R B saith meer nothing but calleth him a Pope This every Man that will be at the pains to read the place will find to be a gross untruth but this is ordinary His next in page 234. Where he citeth Acts 20. 7. to prove that the circumstances are not to be observed The words it seems are when the Disciples came together to break Bread Paul preached unto them and therefore say our Adversaries This was a Sacramental Eating no circumstance to be observed A singular Consequence and well worthy our Author May he alwayes dispute thus against us And 1 Cor 11. 18 20. I desire he may tell us next what relation it hath to his matter In the next place he begins with Acts 2. 42. And complains that R B denyes this to be meant of the LORDS Supper But herein he accuseth Beza who in his notes upon this place saith The Jews used thinn Loaves and therefore they did rather break them then cut them So by breaking of Bread they understand that living together and the Banquets which they used to keep The Reader may see what trouble it is to trace him to no purpose But he cometh again to Acts 20. 7. And saith R B slighteth his Adversaries Reason Which is another gross Lie as the Reader may see Vind page 172. But why doth he not bring some thing to help his Brother and not tell us he hath done all When all Intelligent and Unbyassed Men judge he hath done more hurt then Good to his own Cause And yet this Section is nothing but a meer Elogie upon J B's Book In Answer to Numb 20. Saith our Author R B bringeth nothing but meer Assertions false Suppositions such as that the Corinthians were supperstitious in that they at all practised this Duty of the LORDS Supper I acknowledge he must be sharper sighted then I who can see these words in R B's Vindication upon Numb 20. or any where else But being near the close he begins to Dream again and may perhaps be Simon next because he was Patroclus last and sure he is more like the first for Lying and Deceit is the best part of his work To R B's Saying That 1 Cor 11. 26. Is to be understood of Christs Inward and Spiritual Coming Apol page 341 and his Vind page 173 He giveth no Answer But it is needless at all to impugne this distinction it s own groundlesness sufficiently doth it This is like a mighty Man and well worthy a Groecian Hero And now he is come to his ultimus conatus which he must excuse me to tell him is of all his Book the most ridiculous For to conclude from the Abrogation of Rites Signs and Ceremonies That preaching the Gospel was also abrogate To prove this he saith it will as well follow from Col 2. 20. That preaching the Gospel is abrogate as from verse 16. and Rom 14. 17. That the LORDS Supper is abrogate I shall therefore set down the Words and leave it to the Judgement of the Reader Rom 14. 17. For the Kingdom of GOD is not meat and drink but Righteousness and Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost Col 2. 16. Let no Man therefore judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of an Holy Day or of the new Moon or of the Sabbath Dayes I shall now add his Citation for abrogating of preaching Col 2. 20. Wherefore if ye be dead with CHRIST from the Rudiments of the World why as tho living in the World are ye subject unto Ordinances Touch not Taste not c. Now if the LORDs Supper as used by you be not Meat and Drink I know nothing what Bread and Wine are But what a Commentary will this 20. verse need to cause it intend preaching of the Gospel I remember the Presbyterian Dialect was wont to run thus To hear Sermon was called a Haunting of the Ordinances And to abstaine was called a dishaunting of the Ordinances And therefore it seems he understands the word Ordinances in the 20. verse for Preaching He must shew us what relation Preaching