Comparisons against him and thy rendring him a Persecutor of his Brethren agree with his being Dear W. P. This Noble man c as thy Brother F. Bugg and consequently thy self have rendred him being in thy Book pag. 73.74 As for their not mentioning any particular Doctrine or Vitious Life that others might know the matters alledged against them what wouldst infer that therefore the Pope's Bull against M. Luther was more reasonable or just That 's a mistake for thou confessest a Judgment to be given against that jealous rending and separate Spirit from which thou hast not cleared them but rendred them the more Guilty if thou beest their Representatives as impowered by them to write in their Vindication according to thy own reflection on us And was that no Reason then to give others notice and warning against such a Spirit Is Schism no Sin or not reproveable But how Unjust is thy Comparison I ask thee if thou darest say that Pope Leo that Atheist was in the same Sense Religion Gravity and tender Exercise toward M. Luther that in thy own Narrative thou hast rendred these Friends in that were concern'd in dealing with J. S. and J. W. at Drawell And I ask thee further If ever thou readst any such Acknowledgment Submission or Condemnation made by Martin Luther to the Church of Rome as the said J. S. and J. W. with thy own assistance made as satisfaction to their Brethren and the Church of God in general Though afterward thou comparedst it to a Rattle to please Children And hath a Christian Society no Power to reprove and judge a dividing self-separating Spirit in whomsoever it be that makes Rents and Schisms as well as Heretical Doctrine and Vitious or Scandalous living Mark them that cause Divisions and Offences and avoid them c. If thou grantest the Principle and such power in a Christian Society or Church what will thy attempts to Unchristian and Unchurch us avail unless thou canst prove us guilty of Vitious Lives and Heretical Doctrine Which if thou canst not then hast thou and thy party assumed a Power to judge of Spirits wherein you fairly give away your Cause and overthrow much of your own opposition to the Churches Power and Determination in such cases And your Judgment to Unchristian us or our Spirits being but your Imposition we shall as little value and the day will yet farther discover whose Spirits are Unchristian and whose Spirits are Christian. And 't is not thy boasting either of the Numerousness or Scores of thy party p. 23. that will decide the Controversie nor wouldst thou accept of such a Plea on our parts but doubtless esteem it no Christian Proof or Argument but an Imposition and begging the Question But seeing thou layest so much stress on thy Numbers and Scores I must tell thee that if they amounted to as many as the third part of the Stars which yet they are far short of that followed thee or owned thy Work of opposition strife they would be but wandring Stars and have lost their Habitations and Glory and are darkned whom the Dragon's Tayl has drawn and cast down to the Earth But blessed be the Lord our God the greater part of the Stars among us his People called Quakers have kept their Station and Splendor in the Firmament of his Power and in living Union Concord and Love wherein they live above that Spirit of Enmity and Discord which thou and thy party are in and which the Lord will yet farther discover and deliver those who are at unawares betrayed thereby yet have some secret Breathings unto him and that they may come into clearness of Judgment so as on the Restoration and increase of the number of the Faithful and Upright And by the spreading of the Gospel day thy Numbers shall decrease and many will come to see thee more and more in thy dark and mischievous attempts and how insuccesful and disappointed thou wilt be therein And those that come to be recovered and many Thousands that shall be gathered to the Lord and us his People shall be found better and more worthy than thy self and those that go out and separate from us § 3. W. R. is pleased to make a Charge and draw severe and seditious Inferences upon our Advertisement and conclusion of our Introduction especially against the Pen-man for vindicating the People called Quakers in their Church-Order and Discipline and writing in the Name of the People called Quakers when vindicated from his Scandals But he has very unfairly and dis-ingenuously left out the distinguishing expressions in the first as Peaceable Christian Conscientiously Christian Society p. 23. in the passage of ours viz. We the peaceable Christian People called Quakers are Conscientiously vindicated and cleared in our Christian Society Where 's then his exception against our vindication and writing in the Plural in the Name of the peaceable People called Quakers But that 1. We could not write in the Name of such as encouraged the publication of his Treatise entituled The Christian-Quaker in five parts who yet are a part of the People called Quakers saith he 2. Nor in the Names of such as are disaffected with laying Marriages before Womens Meetings And these are numerous and called Quakers quoth he To the first Answer No How should we write in their Names who encouraged the Publication of his said Treatise against us if any such were for they keep very obscure as not willing to be known in such encouragement It is a Book of Envy Strife and Discord and they no Peaceable Quakers who encouraged it 'T was the Peaceable People called Quakers that were concerned in our Vindication And therefore W. R. saith true as 't happens The Pen-man could not write in the Name of such as encouraged the Publication of his Book Whence it follows they were not of that Peaceable sort which he vindicated nor W. R's Book a work of Peace or in the least tending thereto but a great Abuse and Scandal to and against the very peaceable People called Quakers Secondly Nor are they who oppose our Godly Women's Meetings and laying Marriages before them so peaceable and clear in their minds in that point as we could wish they were and they should be better informed and hear Instruction However they also are concluded by W. R.'s words not to be of that Peaceable People called Quakers intended in our Vindication in that he saith The Pen-man cannot be understood to write in their Names when 't is most evident he did write in the Name of The Peaceable Christian People called Quakers Though W. R. as one in some wise Conscious leaves out the word Peaceable that he might with the greater colour draw his Charge and severe Inferences upon the Pen-man c. But such kind of slighty mean shifts will stand him in no stead when we strictly look into his Fallacious dealing And granting him that we cannot represent nor be understood to write in the Name of such
Quakers so called as encouraged the publication of his persecuting Books and Pamphlets against us nor of such as either oppose our Womens Meetings or laying Marriages before them or are disaffected there-with nor in the Names of the several Scores he tells of who gave Testimony in Writing against Charles Marshall and Sixty five more The greatest part whereof being known to be Faithful men of Sincerity and service in the Lord's work Nor in the Names of such as he saith appear Neutral in the present Controversie and yet own the same Principles which he and his party do Where is then their Neutrallity is it in having no concern of Conscience outwarly to appear on either party as W. R. saith Then they are only Neutrals in appearance but secretly of his party and Principles some whereof are very perverse and unpeaceable as well as unsound Now I say we grant that we of the Second day's Meeting did not represent such kind of Quakers as those of W. R. his party nor could they impower us in our writing for and representing the peaceable People called Quakers or that peaceable sort of Quakers who are for Unity Love Concord and Peace in the Church of Christ among us nor was it our intention to represent personate or vindicate such pretended Quakers as are in a Spirit of discord and strife causing and making Divisions Rents and Schismes in the Church first disturbing and troubling then reproaching the Society they sometime owned but only those of a peaceable Mind and Spirit and therefore his not knowing that we can represent any under that Name more than our own Second day's Meeting is a false insinuation for there are many Thousands of the People called Quakers yea of the most sincere and peaceable minded besides our said Meeting whose real sense and judgment in the matters treated on in our Book against W. R's great Book we have represented and who really do and will own the same Where now hath W. R. shown the Pen-man guilty of great Impudence in writing in behalf of the peaceable People called Quakers The word Peaceable in our Advertisement left out by him doth really distinguish it with respect only to the peaceable sort which are they that live in Love and Unity who may properly be termed The PEOPLE called Quakers as united in one Society and become one People and not dividing separate Spirits who are gone out from us And though in our Introduction we say the terms We and Vs are used sometimes in the Name of the People called Quakers when vindicated from his Scandals I say so still And this intends no other than the Peaceable People as before explain'd in our Advertisement and not any such pretended Quakers as W. R. his party and Abettors who are unpeaceable and turbulent to the Society and People among whom they sometime walked And therefore his roaring and clamouring out great Impudence Pride and height of such towring lofty spirited Persons as the Pen-man c. are but empty Clamours and Abuses as is also his Jealousie That the Pen-man counts himself one of the Representatives of Christ's inward Government who alone is Lord over the Conscience Whereas the Pen-man never so accounted of himself nor ever assumed to himself any such Government or Lordship over the Conscience as is peculiar to Christ alone but only accounts himself a Servant of Christ and a Subject under his spiritual Government And therefore W. R's still proceeding in his roaring and bitter Exclamation against him as That he would represent in Print as if the People called Quakers without râ—â—triction a Lye still were Persons impowering such an imperious Map of Pride and Drollery as the Pen-man shews himself to write in their Names The matter is answered before but yet I may further add as the Envy and Malice of this Adversary appears swelling high so his confidently repeated Falshoods and Abuses are numerous for we would neither so represent in Print nor yet did the Pen-man so much as pretend to be impowered to write by the People in general or without restriction and yet both in Charity and Christian duty might vindicate all them as the peaceable People caâ—â—ed Quakers who are really peaceable in their Spirits and Conversations And though there be some called Quakers who are unpeaceable in both such as W.R. and his party yet that cannot unpeople the other who are truly peaceable but rather unpeople themselves who are unpeaceable from being of that People Such our vindication of a peaceable People from the unpeaceable proves none of us Impudent nor any imperious Map of Pride and Drollery notorious Falshood c. as most unjustly rendred by an imperious proud Adversary For hath it not been frequent with us to vindicate the People called Quakers intending all those that might properly be counted a People in Peace and Unity and that from the general Aspersions and Calumnies both of open and secret Enemies And in this Controversie we vindicate them as that peaceable People who are sincere and faithful to God lovers of Peace Unity and good Order and whom W. R. and his party in their dividing and perverse gain-sayings are not able to unpeople nor justly to render themselves that People As for him and those of his party who promote his malicious persecuting defaming Books c. We cannot look upon them worthy to bear so much as the Name Quakers muchless to be deemed that People under the Title of Christian-Quakers whilst in their Unchristian spirit of strife and discord And they will yet more manifest themselves to be further remote from that peaceable People called Quakers if they Repent not and the peaceable and faithful who love unity and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ shall remain a people and live when all such spirits as lust to envy and contention shall be confounded scattered wither be driven back and come to naught in their evil Designs and wicked Attempts the Breath of the Lord shall scatter them for no Weapon formed against his Heritage shall prosper But alas our Adversary is still in a great fude and fret for our writing in behalf or in the name of the People called Quakers reiterating his Falshood again without Restriction p. 24 25. he should have said Peaceable People called Quakers But he goes on at an outragious rate on this subject confessing He wants words to represent the Action in as ugly a dress as it deserves And therefore when he hath as falsly asperst the Pen-man and set him out in as Vgly a Dress as he can so that the Devil and William Rogers have done their worst hitherto he supposeth a Comparison in the case against him but very unjustly in these words viz. Suppose a company of men never chosen according to Law should meet at Westminster and call themselves the Representatives of the People of England and accordingly in the Name of the People of England proceed to act as such Wouldst thou not abhor and detest the Action
And how canst thou think that we can do less than detest thy insolent Spirit by offering to write in the Name of the People called Quakers without Restriction when they gave neither thee nor any of thy Brethren such Authority Had the fear of God been before thine Eyes thou couldst not have attempted to have done so Wickedly p. 25. Here it is probable he thinks he hath given the Pen-man a deadly Blow but when the Devil and William Rogers have done their worst it comes to little Execution but to manifest his Envy and Folly He only shews his Teeth but cannot bite nor fasten for there is no just paralel in the case there is no such kind of Treasonable proceeding justly chargeable upon the Pen-man as is inferred in the Comparison The Pen-man did not call himself the Representative nor write in the Name of the People or of all those called Quakers without Restriction as he falsly saith nor pretend an Election or Authority from them so to do the matter is distinguished and answered before and yet the Pen-man might lawfully represent the Innocency of all true peaceable Quakers both as to Principle and Practice when abused and calumniated either as Vnchristian or Popish Imposers c. without Conviction like as this Adversary hath frequently misrepresented them And this may be done charitably freely and voluntarily in their Name and Vindication and in true Unity from a right knowledge of their Innocency declared Sense and Principles And hath not this been the Practice of many faithful Servants of Christ among us ever since we were a People to write both in the name vindication of the People of God called Quakers or of the Innocent People called Quakers c. as the Lord hath laid a necessity upon them and yet not to include those who are unfaithful or scandalous to Truth or any who are turned into Envy and Strife though they go under that Name Nor yet have they sought or needed to seek Commission from the whole People to write in their behalf being required of the Lord to write And did not many of the best reformed Protestants and Martyrs write in the name and behalf of the Protestant Church and Religion as the Book of Martyrs and other Histories and their own Writings shew of which numerous Instances might be given And did not the the Apostles of Christ often write in the Plural both in the name and behalf of themselves and the rest of true Believers and Fellow-members under the terms We and Vs and Our c. especially in that of 1 John 2.19 They went out from Us but they were not of Us for if they had been of Us they would no doubt have continued with Us see chap. 3.14 and 4.6 Here John wrote in the Name of his Brethren and Fellow-members and distinguished themselves from those that went out from them as we have our selves as a peaceable People from you that are gone out from us into a Spirit of Enmity Discord and Self-separation § 4. But W. R. since thou countest it such a horrid Crime such great Impudence Pride ugly Action Insolence c. to write in the name or on the behalf of People or Persons or in their Vindication without being impowered authorized and chosen by the same Persons or People Now observe well upon thy own principle and way of arguing what a Reckoning I have with thee Let us seriously enquire of thee Have all those Persons in whose behalf and Name thou hast written in the Plural under the Terms We Vs c given thee Authority or chosen thee to write in their Name and behalf Did John Story John Wilkinson and now the person in Cambridgshire whom thou and Francis Bugg contend for against the Record about his Marriage all give thee Authority or chuse thee to write on their behalf and to expose their Names in Print as thou hast done in thy state of the Controversie on their behalf Did they give thee Authority to write in their names and behalf as those Other Friends in Truth thou tellest of and representest Either they did or they did not if they did then they may be entituled to and are justly chargeable with thy work how perverse and abusive soever it be If they did not chuse nor authorize thee to write in their behalf and name then thy own Judgment returns upon thy own head as one guilty of great Impudence Pride towring lofty Spirit notorious Falshood ugly Dress c. to write in the name and vindication of Persons and to represent them who never gave thee Power nor chose thee to thy work Didst not thou pretend to write on behalf of thy self and other Friends in Truth concerned as in the Title-page of thy great Book and now to use the words Vs We or Our with respect to such as encouraged the giving forth thereof as in thy Advertisement to thy seventh part When now divers noted Persons who have appeared of thy party refuse to stand by thy Books and we know none of them that dare say they gave thee any such Authority or chose thee to be their Representative to write in their name and behalf as thou hast done against many faithful Friends whom the Lord is with and will stand by against thy crooked Spirit and Opposition but rather those thy Friends in Truth pretended on enquiry if they own and will stand by thy Books as it has been often asked them particularly at Devonshire-house in 1681. have answered That William Rogers must answer for himself if he hath done more than he can answer or wronged any They will not stand by him 'T is his own Act he must look to it c. Thus upon a pinch they leave him in the lurch to shift for himself they 'l not stand by him openly however they own him not for their Representative though he hath represented them and written as in their Name Person and Vindication as also represented them as Encouragers of the giving forth of his great Book falsly stiled The Christian-Quaker c. But to deal more closely and positively with thee in this matter how camest thou to expose Edward Burroughs Name in Print and to represent him as a Person of thy Principle and Judgment by a confused unsound whimsical Paper which thou hast printed in thy great Book with Edward Burrough's Name put to it and represented it as his Testimony and even in thy Title-page sayst it was given forth in the year 1661. by Edw. Burroughs and since the same is reprinted over and over by thy busie informing Agent Thomas Crisp as E. B's Vision but I am perswaded thou and he have grosly abused and mis-represented that Servant of the Lord E. B. by rendring him the Author of such Absurdities as are contained in that same Paper about the Shepherd and his Dogs c. particularly in that passage of the Shepherd's gathering the Sheep with the many Goats that did push trouble and hurt the Sheep with
approved Servants of Christ. How like a Popish Prelate yea like the Pope himself hast thou proudly maliciously imperiously acted against me and others of the faithful Servants Ministers of Christ Jesus Be ashamed therefore and confounded because of thy Insolent and Slanderous Abuses against the Innocent and particularly of thy gross Lye against me and others viz. That the holy Scripture is by us slighted p. 152. Be ashamed I say of this abominable Lye And for Confutation to thy abuse of me before read the following Certificate from Persons of better Credit than thy self Huntingtonshire From our Monethly Meeting at Godmanchester the 11th day of the 5th Moneth 1682. WHereas George Whitehead hath been evilly traduced in two Letters of Francis Bugg's and charged in one of them with behaving himself in Huntingtonshire like a Lordly Bishop or Popish Prelate lately Now we whose Names are subscribed do testifie We never in this County nor else-where at any time saw any such thing and that he is a man far remote from any such matter but do believe he is a true Labourer in Gods service and an humble Minister of the Gospel Matthew Kay Samuel Nottingham Tobias Hardmeat Robert Lister Jasper Robins John Wilsford John Aversett John Marshall William Starling Richard Snazdale John King David Tisoeth Thomas Lyster Richard Jobson 14 th And thy malicious scribling tends in divers parts of it unjustly to render us Obnoxious and Offensive to Authority by wickedly and falsly rendring the Proceedings of some of our Christian Meetings Tyrannical and Antichristian and comparing us to the Popes Councils to Popes c. And all this to Henry North Knight and the Magistrates too is next to prosecuting us for our Liberties or Lives So disgustful may be thy trumpeting and publishing in Print the Moderation of H. North Knight p. 194. and his mercifulness in taking notice of our threatned Ruin and preventing it c. as in thy Epistle Dedicatory to him that doubtless we think Henry North as a prudent man will not thank thee for thus trumpeting his Fame abroad in Print on behalf of Dissenters for such kind of Ostentatious dealing is offensive and hateful to great Persons of Prudence who would not have their goodness exposed to publick censure or reflection nor be represented as Persons Popular for any dissenting Parties I have many more things material against thy Book but I desire thee to accept of my Labour and honest Endeavours and what I have written thus largely to thee as an act of Christian Condescention and good Will for thy Conviction that thou mayst yet be abased and humbled unto Repentance and publick Condemnation of thy wicked and scurrilous Book if the Lord will yet please to give thee an Heart to Repent and acknowledge the Truth which thou hast deeply offended and sinned against with thy Lyes and Lightness And I desire to know if after the reading and perusal of this my large Letter thou art at all minded to relent and retract thy Book or any part of it and accordingly to give forth a plain Condemnation or Recantation as publick To this I expect answer shortly from thee otherwise trouble me not with any disingenious or scurrilous Letters Thy Abused yet Well-wishing Friend George Whitehead London the 3 d day of the 8 th Moneth 1682. Postscript since added Wherein F. B's fallacy about the Record in the Quarterly Meeting Book in the Isle of Ely his abuse of the Servants of Christ his Contradiction about William Penn his Scorn Malice and Ranting Doctrine are detected and reprehended WHen I was lately in the Isle of Ely I made enquiry about the account which thou F. Bugg givest in thy Observations pag. 52. viz. concerning a Minister thou knowest who thou mentionedst being recorded out of the Vnity for not taking his Wife according to the Order of Friends i. e. not publishing his Intentions before the Womens Meetings as hereafter will be further manifest sayst thou but not one recorded that ever thou remembrest for any breach of Gods Commandments pag. 53. For which acount thou referest any man to search the Records of your Quarterly Meeting Book in Hadenham in the Isle of Ely c. But upon my enquiry I find that Friends do positively give a contrary account and do plainly affirm that there were no Womens Meeting Then at that time in being in those parts or within that Monethly Meeting in Cambridgshire where the said Person lives who proposed his Intentions of Marriage but once before the Men And if so thy account must be notoriously false and thou mayst be horridly ashamed to divulge it as also of thy frequently saying He was recorded out of the Vnity whenas Friends only recorded That they have no Vnion with him in his so doing as thou hast cited it pag. 63. which is only relative to that particular Act viz. of his refusing to come twice to the Meeting and not in such general Terms to exclude the Person Out of the Vnity in all respects Therefore thou appearest fallacious in thy account As concerning the Paper of our sence and advice dated London the 27 th of the 3 d Moneth 1675. consisting of divers particular weighty matters which thou makest thy principal Instance of our Apostacy and Violence upon our first Principles of Vnion and about which thou hast so much scofft and derided at us I must tell thee that I know not one Person who subscribed thaâ— Paper but have cause to stand by it anâ— will stand by it though unjustly and defamingly smote at derided and contemned by thee And why didst not publish all our said Paper Thou sayst Thou hast taken enough to shew our Innovations and manifest Apostacies pag. 50. as if all that Paper were matter of such Proof which is a most slanderous Insinuation for thou hast not proved one of these Instances of our said Paper either a Violation to our first Principles of Vnion Antiscriptural or Inconsistent with the Church-Discipline Order and Government in the Primitive Times among true Christians as thou pretendest nor in the least tending to Apostacy or Antichristianism Thou hast taken upon thee to stigmatize brand and defame both our Testimony and the Subscribers particularly William Penn thou hast compared and rank't among such Vnchristian Societies Violators Innovators Apostates Pope's Council Arbitrary Authority c. Thou art very loud in thy Charge but mute in Proof and wanting in Argument And how dost thou herein agree with thy self where in pag. 133. thou callest William Penn This Noble Man and in pag. 135. Dear W. P. and in pag. 144. thou prayst for William Penn in these words viz. I pray God keep thee steddy and with a continual Dependency upon the Divine Revelation c. when thou hast represented the same Person W. P. Antichristian Apostate Innovator c. as if thou shouldst pray thus for him viz. Thou Antichristian Apostate I pray God keep thee steddy Such Absurdity doth thy Contradiction produce who
this account Now he would not be thought that his Principle is against visible Order and Form of Government under Christ's Dominion Nor against some visible Persons being exercised in some outward Order under his Government Thus far the point is granted and gain'd upon him and his Concession thereto the farther confirm'd in deeming our rendring his great Book to be against Church-Government outward Methods Orders and Rules c. A false Assertion Though we cannot reckon that Book of his to look with a better Face in the mian purport and Series of it especially considering his Third part from what 's mentioned in the Title and against R. Barclay's Book for Church-Government and in many other places and passages of that Book and in his Epistle in this his 7th part he is smiting at Establishing an outward Vniformity outward Things outward Directory c. But now we must take his meaning and principle to be not against visible Order and visible Form of Government under Christ's dominion nor against visible Persons being exercised therin How then shall we understand his meaning and principle Why did he not then more plainly distinguish it first and brought the Controversie into a more narrow compass and not have writ thus confusedly and shatteredly one while against another while for visible outward Order and Form of Government under Christs Dominion in his Church As in this Treatise the matter is further Evinced against him hereafter But wherein lies his Charge of Prevarication He gives us to know it is in twining the Word REPRESENTED into CONCERNED pag. 43. We are yet to seek and study how to find this Prevarication pretended considering the purport tenure and conexion of his Words For though now he owns visible Persons to be exercised or concerned in an outward Form of Government and Order under Christ's Dominion yet not that his inward Government is represented by them yet his Distinction before excluding visible Persons not only from representing Christ's inward Government but also from being invested with Power to execute i. e. to minister give forth or put in practice outward Laws Edicts c. in an outward Form of Government Visible appears to bespeak his sense than to exclude them from being concerned in an outward Form of Government and Order in the Church of Christ under his Dominion For if they do in no sense or degree represent Christ's Government how are they concern'd in it And if they have no power to execute minister or put in practice outward Order and Form of Government visible How are they either exercised or concerned in an outward form or order of Government under Christ's dominion But this is now granted us in the Affirmative So then wherein must we understand W. R's opposition to lie against outward Order outward Form of Church-Government outward Laws Edicts Rules Prescriptions c I presume not against any of his own making but against such as he calls G. Fox's c. as he has told us of a slighting G. F 's Rules Methods and Orders with respect to Church-Government see the Accuser c. pag. 83. But then I would know whether it is against all or some that G. F. has writ or given out If he says not against all but some then I intreat him to let 's know what SOME they are particularly What Instructions Rules or Methods they are he Condemns and that he deems condemnable as evil or unlawful in themselves We have divers times prest for a Catalogue of them that the Controversie might be more plainly distinguishable and brought into a narrow compass which now lies not only prolix and tedious in W. R's Books but also scattered confused and ambiguous in his Writings wanting in many places the supplement of his latter Thoughts and Meanings So that when he has write one Book it wants another to declare its meaning he has taken a great compass to write a very little matter in § 4. For his distinction between the words Represented and Concerned he says That many thousands are exercised in an outward Order under the Government of the King who if they should thence declare that they are the Representatives of his Government 't would be deem'd a Mood of Speech tending to the annihillating of the King's Prerogative And concludes the like in relation to Christ's Prerogative p. 43. But herein the man is under a Mistake in this Allusion his skill in the Law and the King's Prerogative and Government has fail'd him in this point For the King's Government is represented in all Courts of Judicature legally acting in his Name and by his Power whereby the King is look't upon to be present in all his Courts Yea every legal Minister and Conservator of the King's Peace even from the Justice to the Sheriff Constable or Peace-Officer does in his place and legal Office in some degree represent the Kings Government in the doing Justice and Conservation of his Peace And this no ways lessens but promotes the King 's legal Prerogative For the King in the Eye of the Law is Justitiarius Capitalis the Head or chief Justice and hath his subordinate Ministers and Justices under him legally impowered by him according to his just and legal Prerogative Now seeing W. R. is so much out and has lost his aim in his Comparison these things are mentioned to rectifie his Judgment And the Comparison as now stated may be better applied to Christ's Kingdom and Government who though he be the chief Overseer and Shepherd the great Apostle and Minister the great Ruler and Governour c. he has his Overseers his Apostles his Ministers and Servants and Helps in Government which is none other than Christ's Government in his Church and Kingdom and under his Dominion which I hope our Opposer dare not deny however he differ with us in the Application § 5. As concerning an Angry Waspish Pen wherewith thou twice over chargest the Pen-man adding That the more he stirs therewith the more will the Cause which he espouseth stink pag. 17 44. I must tell thee first I never met with a more Angry Waspish Pen than thy own though thy Malice and Wickedness hath been in divers parts of our Book deservedly reprehended thou hast in much thereof been mildly treated 2 dly I know no cause espoused by us therein than the Cause of Christ his Church and People which will live and remain sweet and pretious to all the upright in Heart when thy malicious Work and corrupt Cause will more and more appear naucious loathsom and stink above ground till swept into the Pit from whence it came and which thou art very near and without Repentance canst not escape it 3 dly What occasion have we or any of us given thee to rage and roar against us and like a persecuting Informer to go about to expose us in Print tending to disgust Authority and to bring more severe Persecution upon us as seeming to be at Vnion with the Papistical party
What worse Persons upon Earth could our Adversary have compared G. F. and Friends unto or brought in Comparison against them in Church Proceedings or Spiritual Censures Behold his horrid Injustice and Envy CHAP. III. § 1. W. R's Accusation of endavouring to take away his Credit Next to depriving him of his Estate examined and the justness of our dealing with him vindicated What sore Reflection he has brought upon himself by his Complaint and his acting the part of a Persecuting Informer to render his antient Friends call'd Quakers Obnoxious in the Eye of the Law and Authority § 2. His bitterly Inveighing against C. Marshall and many other Brethren His unjust Instance of Pope Leo's Bull again His and F. Bugg's Contradiction about W. Penn. Schism condemned in and by the Church of Christ as well as Heretical Doctrine and Scandalous Living The decrease of W. R's Number and the increase and gathering of many faithful to Christ and us his followers foretold § 3. The Pen-man's writing in behalf and in the name of the peaceable People called Quakers vindicated from W. R's severe and seditious Inferences § 4. W.R. called in question upon his own Principle for writing in the name and behalf of and representing divers Persons who never chose nor gave him Power nor allowed him so to do and his abuse of E. Burroughs and I. Pennington whereupon his severe Charge and Inference is all returned upon his own head § 5. W. R. and F. Bugg their Reflections upon the Meeting in the Isle of Ely no proof of Friends Apostacy but of their own Partiality and Injustice in their Representation of the matter § 6. W. R's again recited Lye about the Paper from Barbadoes as being one part of the fruits of the pretended establisht Government with other unjust Aggravations thereupon farther detected § 1. TO prove that thy Adversaries would cause thee to suffer in Body and Estate if they had Power thou sayst They have endeavoured as much as in them lies to take away thy Credit which is next to depriving thee of thy Estate And wherein to take away thy Credit Thou sayest The Pen-man hath given thee this sort of Treatment either in relation to thy self or thy Book viz. Hellish Iealousies Fiery Agent Incendiary his Heart is filled with Pride and Envy As for William Rogers's Book against Church Government 't is outragiously Wicked Clamorous and Abusive I cannot suppose sayst thou what he means by these his very words He is here treated far more mildly than his work deserves unless he believes that my work deserves corporal Punishment or Confiscation of Estate I cannot but again say Blessed be the Lord that the Rigid Vncharitable Pen-man hath not Power so to do Thus far thou p. 21 22. To all which I say and that in the sight of the Righteous God who is Judge of all that I know no Treatment given thee in these and the like Passages in our Book than what thou and thine justly deserve though in much else of ours thou art treated far more mildly yea more kindly than thy work deserves And dost thou indeed judge that we have endeavoured to take away thy Credit by such kind of Treatment And that 't is next to taking away thy Estate What hast THOU then done against us yea against many of the peaceable People called Quakers Hast not rendred us Vnchristian in notorious Blasphemy Apostates Innovators Imposers of blind Obedience Popish Papistical Track in Vnion with the Pope and his Party more unjust than the Lords of the Spanish Inquisition Yea and at such a time as this when I presume thou canst not be ignorant how that many of our Innocent Friends are under severe prosecution and suffering both in their Persons and Estates in the reign of Q. Elizabeth and K. James How Uncharitable and Unjust How persecuting Informer-like all circumstances considered is thy Treatment And how Inhumane tending to add to these our Afflictions And yet complainest of our Endeavours to take away thy Credit and consequently thy Estate when thou art but justly reprehended and no other Characters placed on thy Work and Envious Spirit than what are just and naturally belong thereunto Hath it not been our practice from the beginning to testifie against our Persecutors and to reprove their Envy and Cruelty Did we therein go about to bring corporal Punishment and Confiscation of Estate upon them No sure Canst thou take liberty to abuse and villifie so many Servants of Christ in Print and think they must all be mute under thy Abuses and none to reprehend thee No such matter They that have but the least spark of holy Zeal or but any Life or Soul for God must needs be kindled in some measure against thy abominable Abuses and Injurious persecuting Work It seems thou valuest thy own Credit and Estate at a high rate above others Thou seemest little to value the Credit Liberty or Estates of many others even of thy antient Friends called Quakers to brand and stigmatize them as thou hast done with as Infamous Characters yea and as Obnoxious in the Eye of Law and Authority as thou easily canst and yet complainest of Endeavours to destroy thy Credit and Estate when thou hast given the first occasion of the Reprehension and Judgment given upon thee and thy work of Malice Thou hast begun the Fray publickly and broke the Peace now complainest of Vncharitable Treatment First thou art Barking Snapping and Biting then art Complaining and Whyning when a little Whipt for thy Folly thy Pievish and Ugly Behaviour Oh! Injurious and Partial Man Hast thou done as thou wouldst be done by For shame give over thy malicious and fruitless Attempts § 2. Again 't is observable how bitterly thou still inveighs against Charles Marshall and the Sixty five Persons more about the Paper touching J. W. and J. S. as judging it In some respect to be much like the Bull given forth by Pope Leo the Tenth against Martin Luther Anno 1520. But yet in one main Point greatly differs for sayest thou in the Bull there are Forty two Articles of Doctrine condemned and the Bull ordered to be read in every place that the matters for which he was prosecuted as an Heretick might be known But in the aforesaid Paper subscribed by Charles Marshall c. There is no mention of any perticular Doctrine or Vitiousness of Life for which they are persecuted by their Brethren p. 22. Thus far thou Whence three things are to be observed 1 st That the said Paper is compared to the Pope's Bull as much like it in some respect 2 dly That it s deem'd worse than the Pope's Bull in not mentioning any particular Doctrine or Vitious Life against J. W. and J. S. 3 dly That they who subscribed the said Paper were persecutors of their Brethren Whereof thou knowest William Penn was one How foully hast thou asperst and represented C. M. and W. P. c. in these things And how do these
their Horns and putting them into the Fold and that he made fast the door and would not separate them until he had the other Sheep also that did not come with the Flock See what Doctrine this is as applyed to Christ the good Shepherd rendring him so severe to his Sheep as to gather shut up and keep so many Goats so long among them in his Fold to trouble bruise and hurt his poor Sheep with their Horns And also that Warning and Precept given in the said Paper to Friends for all to forbear judging any man any more upon any pretence whatsoever Can any that knew E. B. and the soundness of judgment understanding that he was attain'd to in the year 1661. believe that he was the Author of such Doctrine to all Friends as to judge no man under any pretence whatsoever A man well known severely to judge deceitful Workers and rebellious Ones as yea he testified plainly against John Perrot's spirit of Division is fully evinced in his Books and Writings And I dare presume E.B. never gave thee authority nor chose thee or Tho. Crisp to represent him in print so many years after his decease as the Author of the said Paper or warning to all friends To judge no man under any pretence whatsoever And yet thou art severely judging and reproaching others that are not of thy party as Apostates Innovators c. contrary to such an express precept doctrine espoused by thee as E. B's Testimony Besides the express contradiction to thy self in thus representing E. B. in print without his leave authority or consent what great abuse hast thou done to him his Memory Name and Testimony in exposing him in Print as Author of that which doth not so much as look like him or his Testimony or any Vision of his but in the said Doctrines both contrary to his Judgment and Practice I say what a horrid Abuse hast thou done to the Name and Memory of the dead in Christ and that by promoting a forged Subscription if thou canst not give sufficient demonstration and proof that Edw. Burroughs was the Author of the same Paper aforesaid which thou hast exposed in his name in Print If thou sayst it was delivered to thee with Edw. Burrough 's name to it I say that 's no proof of its being his for both I and divers others have seen a Copy of the same only with J. Perrots name to it and this more probably true that he was the Author for divers reasons than thy rendring E. B. the Author Again thou hast also exposed that honest and innocent Person Isaac Pennington in Print to serve thy own turn and thy parties as a Confirmation of thy work and that after his decease also for which I dare presume he gave thee no authority nor chose thee so to represent him in Print or to pick out of the middle diminish or curtalize his Writings or Testimony by leaving out the most material and explanatory precedent and subsequent Passages thereof to the great injury and abuse of his Intention for which his Son John Pennington was stirred up to vindicate his deceased Father and to detect thy abuse and Prevarication And am satisfied that neither Edward Burroughs nor John Crook gave thee Authority to quote or cite them or either of them in opposition to G. F. as thou hast John Crook especially in thy Epistle pag. 3. nor to tell the World in Print That his Testimony is agreeable to thy sence I do not believe J. C. will in the least own thee in thy work of Opposition and strife against many faithful Servants of Christ. Also thou and Francis Bugg have represented William Penn in Print on some passages pickt out of his Address to Protestants as in thy 66 and 73 pages which he never gave you power to do much less to represent him as if he were one in Judgment with you against his Brethren nor did he give thee or F. Bugg leave to discant upon and turn his words to serve your own turns nor to apply them against such his Friends in the Isle of Ely or else-where who are for Womens Meetings and laying Marriages twice before the Mens and Womens Meetings it is not to be supposed that he intended Fly Rome at Home as proper Admonition to them as thy Brother F. Bugg applies them as in the Authority and genuine sence of Dear W. P. p. 78. calling William Penn Dear Friend p. 65. This Noble Man c. p. 73. Which is to render W. P. exactly one of your own party and all this without his authority leave or consent But how comes he now to be Dear William Penn Dear Friend and This Noble man Hast not thou numbred him among the Persecutors of J. S. and J. W. as thou esteemest Charles Marshall and Sixty Five more as thy phrase is who signed the Paper thou art so much offended at p. 22 27. Was not William Penn one of those sixty six Subscribers And dost not thou on this very occasion retort his words Let us fly Rome at Home What! must he therefore be a Persecutor of his Brethren and yet a Dear Friend Dear William Penn This Noble man c. in thy Book What Self-contradiction and manifest Flattery art thou and thy Brother Bugg like Parasites guilty of Pray lift up your Eyes and see your selves if not judicially given over to blindness and hardness of heart Take another Instance or two of thy Self-contradictory dealing Didst not thou expose a Certificate or Testimony as thou esteemedst it of Nathaniel Crips in Print against G. F. without any Authority from Nathaniel for so doing I am sure he confest as much to me and John Bouldron the 6th Moneth 1679. against thy publishing it in Manuscript as that thou didst it without his advice knowledge or order see our Book Accuser c. p. 172 And likewise that pretended Certificate or Testimony of Edw. Perkins which thou printedst against G. F. Edward confessed to me at sundry times and before divers Persons that he did not give any advice or consent to thy printing it for 't was printed without his knowledge And so we may question or suppose thou hast done the like in the rest or most of the pretended Testimonies against G. F. c. from those Women and others of Bristol c. Now may not I rationally take leave to reflect and argue ad hominem upon thee and according to thy own Terms thus Oh! thou Imperious Map of Pride towring lofty and Lordly Spirit insolent and conceited proud Vsurper how durst thou either write in the name or behalf of so many whom thou countest Friends in Truth and numerous too or expose the names of so many deceased Servants of Christ in thy Quarrel as if they were all on thy side and party when thy gave thee no power nor deputed thee so to do And thou must answer for thy misrepresenting them and abusing their Names Memories and Testimonies when the
draw the outward Jew off from the observation of their outward Ordinances to the Word and Law in the heart and because the new Covenant was not to be like unto the old he therefore appeals To every Ingenious and Impartial Reader whether it can consist with the tenor of the new Covenant for ANY to attempt the establishment or giving forth of outward Orders Prescriptions Sentences or Decrees to be a Bond upon the Consciences of those who have believed in the Everlasting Light especially those of the Gentiles stock his Chr. Qua. part 1. p. 73. How now William Is not here general Opposition c. detected and answered in our said Treatise Accuser c p. 88 89. Another Instance is where W. R. saith viz. We have no ground either from the Word of the Lord the appearance of Christ or from the Scriptures of Truth since Christ's appearance in the flesh to expect that any should be invested with Power from on high to establish such things relating to the Conscience i. e. outward Orders Prescriptions Sentences Decrees as before much less that the Children of Light under the new Covenant should be led by the eternal Spirit and Word in the heart unto such Conformity his Chr. Quaker part 1. pag. 75. What sayst thou yet William to these plain Instances out of thy own great Book Surely hadst thou but taken a more strict and serious notice of them as plainly cited in our Treatise thou wouldst not have charged any of us with false Suggestion or Forgery in representing as if thou hadst wrote against outward Orders Forms Discipline This is no Forgery nor Prevarication William Peruse thy great Book a little better with our Observations upon it in our said Treatise Consider in calmness if thou mayst not be ashamed thus to evade and deny thy own words and of thy clamour and saying That not a word is cited nor yet can be out of any thing thou hast written that may carry such an import viz. as if thou hadst wrote against outward Orders Forms Discipline c. in a general way p. 41. Thou writest That in one Book which thou denyest the plain import of as well as the matter in another saying and unsaying Be ashamed therefore and also of thy roaring and belching out such Slanders and Falshood also as The impious prevaricating Pen-man doth not quote any sentence of mine confuted c. p. 42. What hast thou done less than wrote against outward Orders Forms Discipline c What means thy saying before That we have NO GROUND either from the Word of God Christ or Scriptures to expect that ANY should be invested with Power from on high to establish such things as before Is not here general Opposition both to such things and to such a Conformity Please to review another instance or two of thy Opposition as before viz. 1 st Where in the Title-page of the 3d part of thy Christian-Quaker where to the inward Government of Christ thou opposest visible persons being invested with power from Christ to execute outward Laws Prescriptions Orders Edicts or Decrees in an outward Form of Government visible c. See now how general thy opposition is and detected in our Treatise Accuser p. 117 118 119 to p. 137. 2 dly The comparison before-cited between the Pope who is a visible man in accounting himself invested with Power to execute outward Laws Edicts and Decrees on the one part and the Pen-man and some of his Brethren on the other part herein thou sayst thou placest not much difference between them c. p. 18. of thy 7th part Who can here reasonably understand thee otherwise than that thou opposest the Doctrine or Principle it self as well as the Pope viz. That any visible man is invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws Edicts and Decrees under Christ's Government lest thou shouldst resemble the Pope For we may rationally take it for granted in those things doctrines or principles wherein thou comparest the Pope any of us thou wouldst be lookt upon as of a contrary mind and judgment that thou mightst not be thought like the Pope in any thing whereof thou condemnest others as either like him or as not much differing from him otherwise thy comparisons or similitudes do condemn thy self as well as others whom thou smitest at And so if thou countest it Popery or resembling the Pope to say That a visible man or men are invested with power from Christ to execute or put in practice any outward Laws Edicts or Decrees under Christ's Government then we must take thee as saying and as we have understood thee That no visible man or men are so invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws c. Which still shews thy oppositions and objections before rehearsed and clears thy opponent from the foul Imputations of Impious Prevaricator down right Forger Impious Prevaricating Pen-man c. and thy self a notorious Slanderer therein as well as shews thy inadvertency and overly shuffling and foully slubbering over matters under debate and controversie and with what blunt and dull tools and weapons thou art toiling and fighting Howbeit we may hear W. R. a little further in his attempts to clear himself and prove his charge of false Suggestion Impious Prevaricator c. he alledges chiefly two things viz. 1st That he owns the Government of Christ in his Church knowing that 't is his right to govern his Church which W. R. also confesseth The Pen-man signifies he understands by Church-Government Observe by the way this is general and not an Answer sufficient to clear him 't will not do his business Against whom did he alledge this when we never questioned Christ's Government in his Church But the Pen-man and his Friends viz. the peaceable People call'd Quakers own Christs Government both in the inward and in the outward parts of it both as he governs and rules immediately by his Spirit and instrumentally by his faithful Servants invested with power and wisdom from him as before explained which I find not that W. R. hath owned with any consistency or clearness but has appeared very inconsistent opposit and frequently contradictory both to us and to himself in the matter saying and unsaying first in one Book then in another as is fully evinced in our Treatise entituled The Accuser c. as from p. 83 to p. 91. and from p. 204 to p. 227. and also in this 2 dly He alledges that he has testified That the Apostles labours were to establish the Churches in the Faith and in the Power leaving them so established to be in the practice of THAT FORM which the Power either had or should lead them into Moreover saith W. R. My proceedings in the Marriage of two Daughters within three years last past and frequent concern amongst Friends in taking care that no proceedings in Marriages may be permitted in any such private Methods as may be scandalous to Truth shews my practice and principle to
Place or Person At that rate it may be a hard matter to prove Negatives against thee indeed Though thy charge be never so false so long as thou canst prevaricate and also vary the matter from a popular and publication to a particular Person Time and Place and neither tell us who when or where as FROM these kind of Declarations frequently publisht among the People called Quakers TO this Doctrine had been publisht amongst us Yet I did not mention either Time Place or Person p. 47. Like as to say You must take all the matter upon my Credit You must pin your Faith upon my Sleeve If you deny and judge what I say as an abuse I have a cunning way to shift it instead of making probation I can tell you I did not mention Time Place or Person 'T is void of sound Argument for you to go about to prove any sort of Negatives c. But William this kind of shifting and then retorting and scorning will not gain thee Credit nor Reputation in thy mean and feeble attempts to prove the People called Quakers frequently under such a kind of Ministry as is in it self Popish and tending to Introduce Popery it self according to thy own Inference that is Ignorance instead of Wisdom Bondage instead of Freedom in Christ Ignorance as the Mother of Devotion c. Answered in our Treatise ACCVSER c. p. 6 7 8 9. And not only so but that some blind Zealots are Principled to have an Eye to the Brethren instead of the Light in himself as in thy Postscript to thy Christian-Quaker But we can as well and truly deny that such Declarations as afore are frequently published among the People called Quakers and judge it a horrid abuse and reflection on the said People as we can deny that Jesuits frequently Preach among them which is also an Abuse of some and which thy Charge resembles And 't is no absurdity to prove Negatives in some cases either in Popular or Personal actions if Testimonies of Eye and Ear witness may be of any Credit As for Instance The Question was put to a Meeting here in London the greatest part being antient grave Friends Where ever they heard such Doctrine preacht among the People called Quakers as To exclude or shut out Wisdom Reason of all kinds without Distinction and to have an Eye to the Brethren instead of the Light in themselves And they never heard such Preaching nor any such Doctrine preached among the People called Quakers at all either in City or Country much less frequently And their with many others negative Testimony may be of credit in this case else how should we answer those that falsly accuse us with Jesuits frequently preaching among us but by our negative Testimony from our certain knowledge of those that do preach among us that they are no such Put case any of our peaceable Meetings should by our Persecutors be charg'd with committing a Riot at such a time and place We deny the Charge and declare it to be utterly false and produce evidence and proof sufficient and credible in contradiction to it that our Meeting at such a time and place was in a peaceable posture and nothing of violence or hurt done offered or threatned c. Here we prove a Negative that our Meeting was no Riot by proving the Affirmative that it was Peaceable And what 's frequently preached among us in our publick Meetings is as publick as they And set case a Person be falsly accused for committing Burglary at such a time and place and he produces sufficient Evidence that he lodged at an Inn twenty or thirty or forty Miles off at that very same time when the fact was done Here he proves a Negative i. e. that he did not commit the fact § 2. To thy saying viz. If in his sence I mis-express my self then my meaning shall not be taken to excuse the defect p. 47. That 's not true for wouldst thou be so low in thy Mind and so ingenious as either to confess such mis-expressing or defect where we meet it and clogg thee with it in thy writings and not be tenacious therein it would the more excuse thee and shorten the Debate I do not at all find that thou canst come clearly off as either a just or righteous man in thy Allegations and Instances in thy Postscript for thy proceeding to print and publish thy great Book by thy principal instance of the printed Epistle of two Sheets by Anne Whitehead and Mary Elson which thine when nigh printed did occasion for that could not be the occasion of thine when 't was not in being till thine was almost finished in the Press Thou producest no Plea to clear thy self but what 's presupposed anticipated and way-laid in our said Treatise pag. 26 27. However by thee impertinently slighted as Impertinent That the said Epistle was thy principal Instance for thy so proceeding is no false Assertion as thou wouldst make it is evident from thy own account on which 't is grounded The matter is fully evinced in our said Treatise under the tenth Disaffection from page 19 to pag. 37. Thy alledging Thou only assertedst Promulgation of the said Epistle to shew that they were the first Publishers in Print but not the first Printers Of what That there are Divisions c This will not clear thee nor evince thy Righteousness in proceeding to print and publish thy Book on thy Instance of the said Epistle of two Sheets which on this occasion was chiefly thy concern to evidence and mention and that in pursuance of thy own Justification to prove thy Righteousness in proceeding to Print which the other Instances given by thee about the publication of Divisions by Declaration by Manuscript do not answer nor seem to parallel but that chief one of Printing And what the said printed Epistle of two Sheets though the greatest part of thy great Book was printed before that was writ To thy now confessing That they i. e. Mary Elson and Anne Whitehead c. were the first Publishers in Print but not the first Printers Then their Publication could be no just plea nor instance for thy proceeding to Print as thou didst Thy not being the first Publisher but they does neither excuse thy intention as Righteous nor thy act of first Printing 'T was the bulkiness of thy Book that prevented its first Publication and the smallness of theirs though not writ till after a great part of thine was printed that did expedite its publication Thy saying Thou only assertedst Promulgation of the said Epistle is an evasion 'T was in pursuance of thy pretence of Righteousness in thy proceeding to Print as well as to promulgate or publish thy Book of Divisions that thou gavest that instance of the said Epistle being printed And as a supplement in thy Postscript to what thou hadst writ in thy Preface and Introduction which thou judgedst might give sufficient satisfaction to every Impartial Reader but
lest the Ignorance of any should be so great as not from thence to perceive the Righteousness of thy proceeding to Print they might by these Instances in thy Postscript which therefore relate to the same proceeding that the Preface and Introduction do See the case is plain 't is no evading it Therefore thou appearest not ingenious in thy Allegation viz. He represents not the state of the case aright for my own words were these viz. My Present proceeding to Print the word Present they leave out which could not relate to any thing more than the Postscript because the very Postscript informs the Reader that All the Treatise excepting the Postscript Index and Errata was then printed p. 49. This will not render thee either a sincere or just man in thy proceeding William we do not leave out the word Present in the citation of thy words for 't is incerted in our citation of thy own words relating both to thy Preface Introduction and Postscript all alledged for thy present proceeding to Print and to evince the Righteousness thereof And thou knowest in thy own Conscience that either thy Word PRESENT must relate to more than thy Postscript or else thou wast very Impertinent and defective If when in a Postscript by additional and supplemental Plea or Reasons to all that precedes in thy Preface thou art going about to make out the Righteousness pretended of thy present proceeding to Print and publish Divisions we must thereby understand it not to relate to any thing more than thy Postscript Then we must take thy meaning to be as if thou must have more plain and convincing Reasons for thy proceeding to Print thy Postscript of but four Sheets than for all the rest of thy Book of near four score Sheets And yet the plea in thy Postscript appears to supply what thou hast said in thy Preface in Vindication of thy publishing in Print thy Historical Relation or great Book of Divisions I cannot perceive that thou hast herein writ either Ingeniously Conscientiously or Consistently And thou mightest have seen how thou wast aforehand obviated which might have prevented thy present impertinent Excuses and vain Allegations if thou hadst but taken serious notice of the following recited passage in our Treatise viz. And further If to evade the charge of Fallacy and Injustice Deceit and False cover laid on W. R. in this matter he flies to his Grammatical sence of his Words and pleads his Intention c. as thinking himself safe in both 1 st We say His present proceeding to Print cannot in reason be confined to his Postscript wherein the Words are nor answer the SOME of the People called Quakers he tells of that have judged him wicked as for intending to Print against Friends Post. p. 25. whom he undertakes to answer in that case nor vindicate him as to his Historical Relation mentioned in the same page which includes his Book which therefore cannot be confined to nor included in his Postscript 2 dly The Reasons he gives in his Postscript to prove himself Righteous in his proceeding to Print cannot relate only to that his Postscript but to his whole Book because they are added for a supplement to his Preface to the Reader and his Introduction to the first and fourth parts of his Treatise which Preface and Introduction concern his whole Book or Historical Relation as he calls it And which Preface and Introduction he thinks may give sufficient satisfaction to every impartial unprejudiced Reader But lest the Ignorance or Blindness of any should be so great as not from thence to perceive the Righteousness of his present proceeding to Print c. he gives his additional Reasons and Instances in his Postscript the chief whereof is that relating to the two printed Sheets which came to his Hands the 8th of November 1680. as aforesaid wherein the supplemental Reason given was more clearly to evince the pretended Justness of his proceeding to Print than he had done before in his said Preface or Introduction as that it was even to prevent such great Ignorance and Partiality as would hinder any from perceiving his Righteousness in proceeding to Print which therefore must needs relate to more than his Postscript And William I find no Contradiction as thou accusest between our signifying That the two Sheets aforesaid was the Principal Instance for thy proceeding to print and publish thy Book that is to prove thy Righteousness pretended therein as 't was made appear from thy own Words AND signifying that thou declaredst a far higher necessity i. e. a great concern of Conscience c. That the Epistle of two Sheets aforesaid was thy principal Instance Reason or Allegation to prove the Righteousness pretended of thy proceeding is no down-right falshood as thou falsly renderest it but true for 't was CHIEFLY thy concern to give that Instance of the said Epistle after other Instances of less concern and less to the purpose of Printing c. And that thou also placedst a higher necessity on thy proceeding than the said two Sheets is also true The first was produced as a principal instance or cause to evince the Righteousness of thy proceeding to print an Historical Relation c. The second was thy own Assertion for the necessity of thy proceeding pretending it for the clearing of thy Conscience c. Such necessity pretended of proceeding was higher than thy said Instance or Reason for it as between an Immediate necessity of doing a thing and an outward Reason or Instance for doing it Where 's now the Contradiction If there be any it must be thy own in placing such occasion on the said two Sheets as to be so chiefly concern'd at them and yet a more immediate necessity of Conscience c. before that The Premises of this point considered in reference to thy being so chiefly concerned to instance the said Epistle of two Sheets thy Charge that a down-right Vntruth is the Subject occasioning his Words p. 49. which thou callest Drollery falleth to the Ground as a down-right Falshood That which thou callest Drollery in conclusion of that Detection we made of thy unrighteous and fallacious Vindication of thy proceeding to Print c. I am perswaded it hit thee and touched thee as in a way of answering a Fool that is such a one as is highly conceited and wise in his own Eyes according to his Folly And how natural and suitable that passage thou callest Drollery is to the subject and occasion given on thy part unto which it relates I leave to the impartial and ingenious Reader to consider and judge upon perusal of the whole matter concerning that point as 't is handled in our said Treatise entituled The Accuser of our Brethren cast down under the 10 th Disaffection from p. 19. to p. 37. Unto all which William thou hast but given an Impertinent Fling and the slie GO-BY to the substance even the most part thereof § 3. Whereas upon thy Confusion and
Christian-Quaker c. in five parts Instead of a solid Answer or sober Vindication of thy self from their Charge against thee as being of an abusive lavish Tongue of a rude insolent and imperious Behaviour in Men's Meetings and speaking prophanely of the Power of God To these things thou sayst viz. All which I return as Dirt unworthily cast on me Such their Calumniations are meerly because of my zealous opposing them and others c. And then further sayest There are few men so weak as on serious consideration to believe GENERAL CALVMNIATIONS against a man once well esteemed by the Calumniators Let this be minded and their Answer duely weighed and then 't will appear that nothing of weight in the said Book is written against me p. 79. Thus far thou Oh miserable Evasion Fallacy and Falshood with what Conscience couldst thou thus write William as if their said Book and Answer consisted but of General Calumniations against thee What reason is there to credit thy general denyal which I am sure is a shameful and notorious Untruth Take one instance out of many more wherein they charge thee with particular matter of Fact and that is about the Paper of Condemnation or Submission which was exhibited and owned by J.S. and J. W. at the Meeting at Drawell in Yorkshire Anno 1676. when afterward they were minded to extenuate or take off the weight of it not owning it according to the common acceptation of A Condemnation c. as the said Friends of Bristol relate Hereupon they do particularly charge thee William about the same Paper in these Words viz. And William Rogers who confessed he drew it for J. S. and J. W. reported There was nothing in it and that the most Innocent man amongst us might own it and never hurt himself and that it was not better than a RATTLE to please Children See their said Book entituled An Exalted Diotrephes Repre p. 13. And not only in this but in divers other particular matters they also charge thee home in their Book and also signifie that they do not think it necessary at present to particularize thy prophane speaking concerning the Power of God no more than they have already done concerning thy horrible unsincere dealing with the Brethren at Drawell c. Exalt Diotreph p. 17. Now William didst not thou render thy self horribly unsincere in declaring the said Paper which thy self drew up no better than a Rattle to please Children after thou knewst that J. S. J. W. had tendered it as satisfaction to their Brethren and the Church of God in general as their own and thy Words are in it Didst thou think to please those Brethren and the Church of God in general with a Rattle for Children Oh William was not this particular matter of Fact and that very gross and absurd How didst thou resemble the Ranters therein and bewray great and horrid Deceit to have entred thee I cannot in Charity think that the Devil had got so much hold of thee at that instant when thou drewst up that said Paper at Drawell as to intend it only as a Rattle to please Children for thy own Narrative bespeaks better and more serious things of Friends and Brethren in their proceedings there towards J. S. and J. W. Surely then thou wast in a better and more serious and sincere mind at that time But I rather think the Devil prevailed with thee afterward after thou hadst eaten the Sop among the Disciples and in the time of thy and parties discontented and murmuring Consultations Satan entred thee to devise that deceitful and Ranter-like cover and evasion of the said Paper being but As a Rattle to please Children Though at first tendred as Satisfaction to the Church of God in general Thus thy Fallacy in particular matter of fact is detected also in slighting and huffing off the said Friends Book but as General Calumniations and therefore nothing of weight in it when there 's such particular matter of notorious Fact charg'd upon thee in it as thou canst not get over nor acquit thy self of And what men are so weak on serious consideration as to believe thy general Calumniations against either Persons People or Society once well esteemed by thee a Calumniator Or to esteem thee and thy Abettors The Christian-Quaker and all whom thou calumniatest to be Apostates and Innovators according to thy Judgment How wilt thou clear thy self from a meer begging the Question in both which is never likely to be granted to thee as the case stands according to thy own terms and supposition cast upon us for our owning our selves to be the Church of Christ p. 45 61. thou having been once in society with us and didst well esteem of us but now not only gone out from us but turn'd bitter Enemy against us whilst no probation made on thy part either of our violating or disserting our first Principles of our Christian Union and Society which thy Brother F. Bugg hath most sillily yet maliciously attempted to prove against William Penn Stephen Crisp John Burnyeat Alexander Parker Thomas Salthouse and My Self from a Paper signed by us from a yearly Meeting Anno 1675. wherein the sence and tender advice of the said Meeting is propounded in several matters of moment all which in conclusion are recommended to the Evidence of Gods holy Witness in the Hearts of his People Where 's now the Imposition Antichristian Apostacy or Violence done to our first Principles of Union charged on us by Francis Bugg from this very Paper aforesaid in his Book De Christiana Libertate W. R. dost thou allow of the said Paper thus recommended as a sufficient proof of the Subscribers Apostacy and Imposition I am sure thou hast exprest the contrary Now W. R. and F. B. clear your selves from begging the Question if you can by plain Evidence of your own Christianity and our Apostacy William thou farther calumniatest and abusest our said Bristol Friends in thy Postscript saying R. V. is known to be as busie to go in the Second day's Meetings Errands as an hired Apparitour is to go in the Errands of a Bishops Court And that R. S. and C. H. thou takest to be fitly qualified to say ANY THING right or wrong to defame thee accusing one of them with a Lying Spirit entred him p. 79 80 These Persons of Bristol whom thou calumniatest are well known both to their Neighbours and others who I am perswaded will not give credit to thee therein Thy scornful Invectives against them will go but a little way with those who know the honesty and good Repute of the Persons whom thou here writest against and their deep suffering with many more for Conscience towards God which it appears thou hast little regard to or sence of who whilst they are suffering under strait Confinement and Duress in a Nacious Goal in the City of Bristol for their tender Consciences as they were when this thy Book 7 th part came forth and as
George Whitehead Stephen Crisp Alexander Parker Thomas Salthouse and John Burnyeat whom thou hast represented in Print as Apostates Antichristian Innovators Imposers Popish c. for their Christian advice in divers particulars cited by thee in thy printed Book De Christiana Libertate with thy scandalous defaming Observations upon them severally from page 32. to page 57. to prove thy Unjust charge of doing Violence to our first Principles of Vnion which they and we all utterly deny 4 thly And the more like an Informer hast thou appeared in ambitiously dedicating thy Book to a Great Man i. e. Henry North Knight and in shewing that thou designed it for the Magistrates in pretending to have laid before them a clear Demonstration for Liberty of Conscience thy Book being in two Parts as is confest in the Title and both Bound up and made to go in one So that if the Magistrates see the first Part for Liberty of Conscience which is not thy own they are liable to see thy second Part wherein as an Enemy to Christian-Liberty thou art bitterly inveighing and clamouring against many faithful Servants and Ministers of our Lord Jesus Christ who are well approved among the People called Quakers for their signifying and giving their Christian Advice and Sence in things needful to be practised in the Church whereby thou art opposing the Liberty of their Consciences which they have in Christ Jesus and art endeavouring to expose them as obnoxious and offensive to the Magistrate and outward Government rendering them Tyrannical and Popish like the Pope's Councils c. Thus false Informer-like thou hast broke all Bonds of Christian Friendship Society and Church-Order and hast acted the part of a treacherous persecuting Informer in the very nature purport and series of thy Book And I doubt not but thy Infamous work will become odious to all Serious Religious and Impartial Dissenting Protestants the more it comes to Light and to be strictly scand and that thou wilt appear thereby not only as a turbulent but perfidious treacherous Person and malicious Informer against thy own Society and therefore not to be trusted by any other Societies or People on any Religious and sociable account Thou hast also in thy Letter scurrilously abused and misrepresented S. Cater J. Parks and my self and also the Womens Meeting as That Samuel Cater had 10 l. presently sent him out of the Treasury from London And that The Women's Meeting gathered so much Money for James Parks upon his pretence of being Robbed Both which I have made enquiry into and find them false in Fact Samuel Cater belyed the Women's Meeting belyed and James Parks belyed in the state of these Accusations Be ashamed therefore of such Abuses or produce Proof both of Fact and Circumstance as stated by thee Be ashamed also of thy saying James Parks acted the part of an Oliverian Preacher or G. W. once at Snare-Hill or like some SVCH PENSIONERS Didst thou ever tell me of any thing thou hadst against me at Snare-Hill I am not Conscious to my self but am sure thou dost shamefully belye me and J. P. in calling us Pensioners What Pension Wages or yearly Stipend dost thou charge me or us withal What an unconscionable Defamer art thou Dost thou know what Pensioner means This is somewhat like thy espousing and printing the Report of Nicholas Lucas's saying That I went up and down to Cheat the Country And thy affirming That truly my Behaviour hath manifested the truth thereof page 150. of thy Book Thus in thy Letter before sent after me in Manuscript without the least occasion given thee by me that I know of since which to amend the matter of thy Scandalous defaming abuse of me before cited thou addest this Parenthesis viz. I reckon he meant not of Money but the People of their Liberty they have right to Which is also a Slander and base come-off and thousands of God's People are able to testifie against these thy defaming and insolent Lyes I never was accounted a Cheat and Pensioner before As also in thy calling Thomas Rudyard LYING LAWYER for saying Thou paidst thy Money Voluntarily before Distress was made on thy Goods This I shewed Thomas Rudyard and he counts it a foul abuse slander and defamation upon his Person and Employment to call him Lying Lawyer supposing thou placest his Lying upon the word Voluntarily If thou didst pay or deposit thy Fine on thy Appeal and so prevented Distress as he understood thou then didst at that time he accounted it Voluntary in respect of the Law because the Act of Parliament in that case doth not compel thee to pay thy Fine upon entring thy Appeal for that the Appeal may be entred within one weeks time after the Fine is paid OR Distress made so that 't is in the Appealants choice whether to pay the Fine or suffer Distress first for the Particle OR is disjunctive between both Where is now the LYING LAWYER Art not thou herein manifest to be the LYING DEFAMER that hast so little regard to the Reputation or Credit of others Where 's thy Conscience or doing as thou wouldst be done by Thy Envy and Defamation stops not here but thou hast falsly accused us of the Second days Meeting with loving to have the Pre-eminence He that searches and knows our Hearts sees and will judge thy false Judgment and Abuse in this and many other things as also in thy false and abusive Insinuation in telling of the Sums Gratuities and large Pensions privately extended to such speaking of James Parks and others of his Fraternity And which far exceed THAT of the Bason and Platter we usually and with too much confidence sayst thou bespatter the Professors withal seeing we do the same thing for which we condemn them only a little privater Thus far thy false and abusive Accusation against such as James Parks and his Brethren Oh horrid Impudence and Falshood be ashamed hereof Thou heapest up Slanders and Defamations against the Innocent for which God will rebuke thee 'T is not unknown how many of us spend our Strength Labour and Substance in the service of the Lord and his People in many respects wherein I for one have not had the least share though now by thee rendred a Cheat and a Pensioner Oh! blush and be ashamed of such abominable Lyes and scurrilous Detractions To conclude thy Letter on thy falshood against the Womens Meeting gathering Money c. thou scornfully inferrest that therein they have forfeited their Charter mentioned in thy Book p. 37. and deserves a COERANTO to be brought c. I cannot but take notice what a liberty thou takest to scoff mock and jeer against our Religious Christian Womens Meeting and how abusive and silly thou art therein although thou hast often scornfully twitted me with the words LEARNED FRIEND in thy Book and Letters as if it were such a great Crime to ascribe that to any Friend whilst yet thou art ambitious to shew thy self a learned
decide and that thou mayest see that there are others can see and discover thy Ignorance and shallow Conceits as even in this thy Objection against Deaconesses concluding That only R. R. hath found out some History or Popish Author which says there were Deaconesses as well as Deacons In this thou hast shewn as well a great deal of ignorance of History as scorn and contempt yea not only Ignorance in that but Presumption too and as little Learning to be sure in other respects to place the proof of Deaconesses so indifferently upon some History or Popish Author as if there were so little difference or distinction but that if it be some History then it may as well be said some Popish Author however thou knowest not whether it be some History or Popish Author But to correct such Ignorance and Presumption there are Histories and Authors which are not Popish yea divers Protestant Authors which affirm Deaconesses to have been in the Primitive Christian Churches and they were called Diaconissae and even in Rom. 16.1 Paul himself called Phaebe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. a Deacon which is a Word borrowed of the Greek in Latin Ministra in English A Servant or Minister I hope thou wilt not call Paul a Popish Author writing so to the Romans And on Rom. 16.1 1 Tim. 5.9 Deacon is said to be a Title of Office or Administration given sometimes to Women vide The Christian-Dictionary by Thomas Wilson Bagwell and Andrew Simpson to which also agrees Edward Leighs Critica Sacra and T. C's Greek Lexicon on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given to Sister Phaebe in Rom. 16.1 We have William Cave's Lives of the Primitive Fathers for the three first Ages of Christianity and that even in the time of the Emperor Trajan there were Deaconesses that suffered that were examined upon the Rack see fol. 21. As also I find in a Book entituled A Brief of the Bible's History by Enoch Clapham Printed 1608. who writ against the Romish Idolaters fol. 162. And in fol. 171. He thus affirms For the Deacons all almost easily grant that there were two sorts of Deacons or Church-Servitors the first of Men Acts 6.3 c. 1 Tim. 3.8 The second of Women 1 Tim. 5.9 c. Rom. 16.1 That the first had the charge of gathering the Benevolence of the Saints especially every first day of the Week 1 Cor. 16.1 That the second attended the Sick Impotent it is by many held Thus far this Protestant Author besides many other Protestants that might be cited in this very point some whereof I told R. R. of who says He has many others he has not produced and Challenges you to bring one approved Author to shew that Women had no Service in the first Churches And though the Rhemists grant there were Diaconissae or Deaconesses I do not find that Dr. Fulk doth oppose them in that but about their being concerned in the Sacraments and in their Superstitions Nunneries denying Marriages c. as the Papists would have them For as to Deaconesses and their Services in the Christian Churches there is great concurrence of History and antient and modern Writers as well Protestants if not more as Papists And therefore thy placing it upon some Popish Author does greatly manifest not only Ignorance but rather Presumption Pride and Contempt against faithful Women's service in the Church of Christ And I can assure thee that I had not these precedent and other Citations from R. Richardson but mostly from my own search and observations on the Authors themselves though R. R. may be better credited in his Affirmation on Knowledge than thy self in thy ignorant Negation 13 th Again I take notice of thy Charge against me in thy said printed Letter to our Meeting in London p 178. where scornfully writing against and reflecting on G. W. his preaching and disputing for Womens Meetings in Huntingtonshire Thou goest on in these words viz. Where he took too much upon him and behaved himself more like a Lordly Bishop or Popish Prelate than an humble Minister of Christ and by me at this time is and stands impeached as an Enemy to Christian-Liberty a Vsurper over the Conscience the which I stand ready publickly to assert maintain and vindicate p. 178. Thus far thou in thy insolent Reviling and Abuse boasting of thy pretended Impeachment against me But I have met with no lawful nor due Impeachment from thee in any Gospel judicial way Thou writest thus against me to the Friends of our Second day's Meeting in London but they cannot own nor receive any such pretended and proof-less Impeachment against me upon thy bare Accusation nor that thou hast any Jurisdiction to impeach me as by thy unjustly comparing me to a Lordly Bishop or Popish Prelate and rendring me an Enemy to Christian-Liberty an usurper over the Conscience But this is but like thy accusing me as a Cheat at having gone up and down to cheat the Country after thou hadst flatter'd and fawn'd in another Letter and intreated my assistance for the ending of the Controversie as one that could do much in the matter but now revilest me all to nought boasting how ready thou stands Publickly to assert maintain and vindicate And what But that G. W. took too much upon him in Huntingtonshire and behaved himself more like a Popish Prelate c. An Enemy to Christian-Liberty And what worse Marks and Characters of Infamy couldst thou have cast upon me and what more severe Excommunication or Bull couldst thou have exhibited in Print against me How like an exalted malicious prating Diotrephes how like a Pope how like the Accuser of the Brethren hast thou acted Thou accusest scornest and railest but provest nothing of matter charged And can any reasonably think thou hast thy Proofs in readiness against me out of Huntingtonshire of these black and infamous Characters thou hast cast upon me Thy own bare Accusations are no Proofs to be sure The Lord rebuke this thy envious dark Spirit And he will rebuke it But Francis art not thou thy self against Christian-Liberty of Conscience and an usurper over the Womens Consciences so far as thou canst in thy perverse and ignorant opposition against Womens Meetings who have a Conscience towards God and our Lord Jesus Christ therein VVhat Liberty of Conscience dost thou allow them therein or to me in preaching and discoursing in Huntingtonshire or elsewhere thus to send out thy Roaring Bull against me in Print without first either enquiring of me or hearing me and my Accusers if there be any besides thy self face to face What kind of illegal Precipiancy art thou guilty of and yet none more ready to make a great clamour against Excommunications Orders Edicts c. than thy self Oh Imperious Proud Conceited Person Blush and be ashamed of such Abusive Inconsistent and Self-contradictory Work Be ashamed of thy assuming such Power of Excommunication to thy self over thy Elders Antient Friends and Brethren who are
affixeth and subscribeth the Name of Edward Burroughs as the Author and Giver forth of the same I remembring that I had read a Paper of the like Import among the Papers of John Batho when living did search into them after his decease and among the Letters of John Perrot which John Batho choicely kept and transcribed with his own Hand I found the same Paper above mentioned without any substantial variation of matter with John Perrot's Name subscribed at length which if duely weighed and compared with the Writings and Stile of E. B. and J. P. seems according to my best discerning much more likely to be the Stile of John Perrot than of Edward Burroughs Further I am well assured that the Hand-writing of that Paper is John Batho's which I have reason to know by the many Years Co-habitation and intimate Acquaintance that I had with him and his Hand-writing who hath often expressed to me a more than ordinary respect to and admiration that he had of John Perrot his Ministry and Writings which occasioned his Diligence and Care in transcribing his Epistles and Writings of which he left a large Parcel behind him at his decease This I am a Witness of and do give this Testimony in order to the undeceiving of the Simple in that particular and the vindicating of that worthy Friend E. B. from W. R's Mis-representations in this matter Bristol the 2d of the 10th Moneth 1682. Laurence Steel WE whose Names are hereunto subscribed have also perused and compared the above-mentioned Paper touching The scattered of Israel c. with that William Rogers recites in his Book entituled The Christian-Quaker wherein he assigns Edward Burroughs to be the Author thereof And upon strict Examination we find it to be the same in Substance differing only here and there in some Words which alter not the sence and appears to be only by the Writers mistake on one hand or other We have also compared the said Paper with John Batho's Books of Accounts and divers other Papers and Epistles transcribed under his own Hand and do most apparently discern that the above-said Paper is the same Character with them and the same Hand-writings We also further testifie that at the end of the said Paper John Perâ—ots Name as Author thereof and not Edward Burroughs is subscribed at length by the same Hand And if William Rogers or any else desire a sight of the said Paper Epistles and Books we do freely offer our selves ready to shew it them Witness our Hands Charles Harford Richard Snead Richard Vickris Dated in Bristol this 2d of the 10th Moneth 1682. SErious Reader please to take notice that since the writing of the second Section of the eighth Chapter containing a Charge against T. C. for his dealing unjustly and injuriously by John Crook in the aforesaid citation which I sent him a true Copy of about Tythes c. as stated by T. C. I received John Crook's own Answer by Letter dated 6th of the 10th Moneth 1682. plainly importing his dislike and Testimony against such publication of his Name and Citation contrary to his Principle and Practice signifying That if T. C. hath done him right in the Quotation he is sure he hath wronged him in the Intention by making his Words speak any thing at all touching Tythes And that his Paper which is only in Manuscript near twenty Years since writ on another occasion Cannot with any ingenuity be referred to the Payment or Non-payment of Tythes And that by a Book writ by him and Printed 1659. against Tythes together with his own clearness from the payment thereof it is evident He cannot reasonably be supposed to favour the Payment of them Thus far J. Crook hath ingenuously and plainly intimated and given his judgment which compared with my Exception before doth confirm it against T. C. his disingenuous and injurious Citation reflecting on J. C. and his Testimony who concludes his Letter Account in these Words to me viz. What I have said may satisfie those that are willing to be informed aright and for others that will not be contented except their Humour of Conceitedness be gratified they need not greater Judgment here than to be their own Tormentors and hereafter to be left to the Judgment of the great Day when every man shall receive a Reward according to his Deeds Thy Brother in the Truth of the Gospel of Jesus John Crook CHAP. IX § 1. Why notice is taken of Jeffery Bullock in this Treatise some Reasons given § 2. His charge of mens Inventions false Doctrines Of the Church of Rome c. Visible Church-Government that 's altogether Antichristian testified against § 3 Christ's Government in his Church how Invisible and Visible vindicated from Jeffery Bullocks opposition to Elders Mens Meetings and Womens Meetings c. § 4. Our Reverence to God in our Prayers and reverent Deportment and Conscientiousness therein both in uncovering our Heads Kneeling c. vindicated from his false Objections § 5. His fallacious dealing with our Doctrine about the Seed of God in man The matter truly stated against his Falshood § 6. Of his disowning the arising of the Seed of God in man § 7. Our preaching Salvation and Justification by the Man Christ the Son of God and his being our Way to the Father questioned by J. Bullock here vindicated § 8. His Ignorance of the innocent Birth or Babe Immortal and of Gods appearance and speaking by his Son and his opposing the inward feeling of Life His slanderous repetition against us about God being held in Bondage testified against and the matter opened as what it is that suffers and what is in Bondage in man His denying Christ to be the only Way to the Father again with a Collection of his Erronious and Atheistical Doctrines § 9. His opposing Justification Salvation and Condemnation by that Christ that suffered proved Erronious and against his Mediatorship and Scripture-Testimony J. B. confounded about two Christs c. § 10. His opposing Christ's coming of David c. And his asserting that his Soul dyed that he internally dyed And his holding the Mortality of the Soul of man proved Erronious and Atheistical and abundantly contradicted by himself and his Preaching § 11. His asserting the Scriptures to be the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge whimsical and erronious and disowning our Friends Book Letter and Testimony and yet confessing them to be in the Letter of the Scriptures contradictory to himself and his Books against us § 12. His practical contradiction in separating himself from others and preaching in our Friends Meeting at Sudbury His erronious Denyings and Doctrines sumed up and denyed by the true Christian-Quakers The Conclusion by way of Solemn Appeal and Supplication to God § 1. COncerning Jeffery Bullock's four Pamphlets slanderously charging us with Antichristian Doctrines and an Antichristian Government or a visible Church-Government that 's altogether Antichristian as in his One Blow pag. 9. c. Some may ask me Why
of the Quakers are false Doctrines and Antichristian because that God's Appearance is not by his Son Christ Jesus to us p. 3. Answ. Thou art guilty of Antichristian Doctrine and Anti-scriptural also in denying God's Appearance to be by his Son Christ Jesus The Mediator for what God is to us for our Salvation and what good we receive from him for our Souls and what we are unto him in our Obedience as acceptable to him 't is all IN and Through our Lord Jesus Christ the Mediator J. B. That God who is a Spirit should be held in Bondage and Captivity by his Creation or by the Power of Darkness is contrary to Right Reason So that it must needs follow by plain Argument that not only the Creature but the Power of Darkness too hath had Dominion over God contrary to sound Doctrine and is Blasphemy pag. 5 6. GROSS ERRORS Answ. This thou hast often unjustly and slanderously repeated upon the Quakers and herein I testifie against thy Abuse and dare Challenge thee to prove out of any of our Writings that 't is the Quakers Doctrine That either God is held in Bondage or Captivity by his Creation or that the Power of Darkness hath Dominion over him We utterly deny the Assertion and Expressions as Blasphemous but do say the holy Spirit is grieved and the Seed of God burdened by the Iniquities of the World which suffering is in Condescention on Christ's part and not for want of Power or Dominion over the Devil or Wicked men for he bruiseth his Head hath Power to subdue condemn and punish them and his own Arm to bring Salvation to him J. B. Another of their Doctrines That all are to come to the Son of God Christ Jesus whom they say is in them and that he is the only Way to the Father which Doctrine I do deny because it is God who both was and is a Spirit which hath first appeared in and to the Sons and Daughters of men after sin c. Therefore every one is to be first turned to God in their own particulars and NOT to the Son of God p 8. Gross Errors Answ. This Erronious Denyal and Doctrine of thine against coming to the Son of God as the only Way to the Father is but the same reiterated over and over The Father and the Son are not divided in the work of Regeneration I and my Father are one saith Christ No man cometh to the Father but by me But 't is no marvel that thou hast denyed Christ the Mediator to be the way to the Father and so opposed his Mediatorship for thy Denyals and Oppositions appear more Gross Erronious and Antichristian against Christ himself and the holy Scriptures in thy Antichrist's Transformations 1st In thy not owning Justification or Condemnation by Christ that dyed without the Gates of Jerusalem which thou confessest to be the ground and main Difference that arose between some of the Quakers and thee p. 10. 2dly In thy asserting That Christ's Soul dyed p. 19. And so thy holding the the Mortality of the Soul in general 3dly Thy asserting That the Book of the Scriptures both was and is the fruit which the Tree of Knowledge bears p. 22. 4thly Thy affirming That there is Two Christs p. 23. Thus thou arguest § 9. J. B. It is no where written in the Scriptures that we shall either be justified or condemned by that Christ which dyed without the Gates of Jerusalem but it is written By Grace ye are saved and by Grace ye are justified and 't is also written By the Light of the World ye are condemned and not by Christ that dyed without the Gates of Jerusalem Antichr Transf p. 17. Answ. Here again thy erronious Blindness is apparent who seest not how consistent being saved and justified by that Christ who is the very Christ of God to whom all the Prophets gave witness AND being saved and justified by his Grace both which the holy Scripture testifie Isa. 53.11 By his Knowledge shall my Righteous Servant justifie many for he shall bear their Iniquities This was a Prophecy of the same Christ that suffered and Mat. 1.21 She shall bring forth a Son and thou shalt call his Name Jesus for he shall save his People from their Sins and verse 23. Behold a Virgin shall be with Child and shall bring forth a Son and his Name shall be called Emanuel which being interpreted is God with us And Luke 2.11 For unto you is born this day in the City of David a Saviour which is Christ the Lord. And that Grace by which we are saved is that Grace of God which comes by Christ see also Tit. 2.11 12 13 14. Where the saving Grace of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all Iniquity c. are testified of and therefore Salvation by that Christ through his Grace are not Inconsistent J. B. Now if Salvation be by that Christ that dyed without the Gates at Jerusalem then are all the Gentiles perished that were in the World before that Body came into the World Antich Trans p. 18. Answ. Thy consequence is erronious for that very Christ the Son of God was and is Mediator and Saviour from the beginning his outgoings were from of Old he was spiritually in being by his Life Light Spirit and Grace before he took upon him that Body prepared of the Father to do his Will John bore witness of that Man Christ saying He that cometh after me is preferred before me for he was before me John 1.15 And again vers 30. After me cometh a man which is preferred before me for he was before me Therefore the Man Christ Jesus was before he came in the Body or Flesh He was that spiritual Rock which all Israel drank of his Life was the Light of men from the beginning and all the generations of the Righteous did spiritually pâ—rtake of the benefit of Christ as Mediator both before and after his Coming in the flesh they vertually pertook of the Sacrifice of the Lamb of the vertue of the Blood of the Covenant for Remission and were saved by the Life of this Mediator by Faith they pertook of the spiritual Advantage of his suffering and sacrifice who was as a Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World and as in the fullness of time his coming and suffering in the flesh and his tasting Death for every man and his giving himself a Ransom for all were for a Testimony in due time of God's great kindness to Mankind So Christ's coming in the flesh an eminent Dispensation from God ordained and decreed in great love to Mankind So that thereby a greater and more eminent discovery and breaking forth of his Light and Glory in the Gospel Day and Dispensation was manifest in due time which Glory the holy spirit of Christ in the holy Prophets testified of as that which should follow his sufferings and in him are all
in Prayer and Supplication to the Father whilst in great sorrow and deep suffering for Mankind even when he bore the Sin of many and made intercession for the Transgressors Thus his soul was poured out and made an offering for Sin that he might see his Seed and the effect of his Souls travail and be satisfied and through all Reign with the Father in the same Glory which he had with him before the World began So that the Messiah reigneth in Life Glory and Immortality blessed forever and his Saints shall reign with him for evermore But thy Error ends not here in asserting that Christ's Soul dyed seeing thou hast publickly opposed the Immortality of the Soul in my hearing and the hearing of many more and hast affirmed The mortality of the Soul of man that it dyes with the Body And so denying future States Beeings and Rewards of mankind Thou knowest Jeffery I have laboured with thee at sundry times and before several endeavoured to Convince thee of thy Atheistical Error in this very point and many are my Witnesses therein But thou hast appeared wilful dark and pertinacious in thy blind dark and confused Imaginations whereupon I have exhorted thee and do exhort thee to give over Preaching and telling People of saving their Souls by the Word and of raising of our Souls out of the Grave of Sin and Death by the Light and Power of God within when thou dost not believe any Immortality of the Souls of Men more than of a Beast as I have told thee to thy Face when the Beast dyes there 's an end So what gross Hypocrisie is it in thee so often to Preach in Friends Meetings at Sudbury in opposition to our Friends and to pretend as if thou hadst such a great Regard to Peoples Souls that they might be saved raised up and delivered from Sin in this Life when thou hast nothing further to propose to them than only a Hope in this Life a Happiness in this Life a Portion in this Life which is so short and uncertain that the dayes of Man here are compared but to a Shadow and to a Cloud that vanishes and as being swifter than a Post or than a Tale that 's told and swifter than a Weavers Shuttle c. So that if we have hope in this life Only we are of all men most miserable But I cannot take thee as a Person consistent with thy self in this thy Atheistical Doctrine of the Soul's Mortality no more than in other things for thou art manifestly inconsistent and contradictory to thy self in this matter for in thy Pamphlet i. e. GROSS ERRORS thou hast confessed That Christ's Soul never was captivated p. 4. And That the Blessing is to God's invisible Creation within the Sons and Daughters of men as that cometh to be begotten by a measure of divine Life into a true and living Faith the which invisible Creation sayest thou or the Souls and Vnderstandings of men and women over the which Death that power of Darkness hath invisibly reigned p. 3. And That Ministry which is sent of God it is to the Souls and Vnderstandings of Men and Women That so their Souls may be turned to the Light or measure of divine Life which hath appeared to their Souls p. 4. As also thou sayest That God's appearance is both to the Souls and Vnderstandings of the Sons and Daughters of Men even whilst they are altogether Children of the Vnrighteous Nature and Spirit for that very end that so they may be quickned and also raised up and so come to be changed they being made partakers of the Divine Nature pag. 7. Query How then dost thou affirm that such Souls are Mortal This change in such Souls does not only bespeak their Immortality but their being Immortally happy Is not that Soul or Birth immortal that 's capable of partaking of the divine Nature or that doth partake thereof Can that Soul dye with the Body or end in Mortality No no the very Souls of the Wicked and impenitent workers of Iniquity shall live in Torment where the Worm dyeth not and the Fire is never quenched Christ's instance of Dives and Lazarus doth really intimate the two different states hereafter see Luke 16.22 23. c. How grosly Erronious and Contradictory art thou in this point and farther to thy own confutation addest viz. Thus the Sons and Daughters of Vnrighteousness come to be made the Children of Righteousness they being changed and also lifted up by the Spirit of Life from under the power of Death into the Kingdom of God with him to reign over the Power of Death even as the Son of God did in the dayes of his Flesh p. 7. How now Jeffery These passages relating to the Soul's conversion and their being made partakers of the Divine Nature and being lifted up into the Kingdom of God are some of thy better sort of Preaching but thy Doctrine of the Soul's mortality or the Soul 's dying with the Body doth allow the Souls of the Children of men even of the Converted but a very short share and uncertain time in the Kingdom of God if but in this Life only O Jeffery give over thy troublesom hypocritical Preaching in our Friends Meetings for shame and never pretend such a concern for the Conversion and Salvation of Peoples Souls whilst thou holdest this Atheistical Opinion That they are all Mortal Keep at home and give over such Hypocritical Preaching for 't is neither Conscientious nor Religious § 11. Now concerning the Scripture thy Doctrine followeth J. B. in his Antichrist's Transformations p. 22. saith viz. For the Book of the Scriptures both was and is the Fruit which the Tree of Knowledge bears And in his Testimony against the Quakers false Doctrine as he falsly calleth it page 19. He saith thus viz. The Book of the Scriptures is part of the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge I say that the Book of the Scriptures is the Fruit that the Tree of Knowledge bears Answ. This Doctrine is not only Unscriptural but a dark erronious Imagination and Whimsie of thy own Thou knowest not whereof thou affirmest and hast plainly contradicted thy self herein by confessing not only That the Scriptures are opened by the Spirit of Truth but that They were given forth by the Word of Life p. 22. and 29. Thou farther proceedest like a whimsical self-opposing and contradictory Person in these words viz. Let all that read your Book and also the Letter that was given me which I disowned which Letter is printed in my first Book and they may easily perceive that the Line of your Testimony is in the Letter and Book of the Scriptures and not in the Light and Law written in the Heart Thus in thy Testimony p. 19. Here thou hast at one dash confuted and overthrown thy own Work and knockt down thy own evil cause at one blow Thou hast undertaken to detect the Quakers Errors and many of the Doctrines of the leading
Quakers as Erronious Antichristian c. And To give a Testimony against the Quakers false Doctrine as thou falsly callest it even in the Titles of thy Pamphlets but now confessest our Testimony is in the Letter and Book of the Scriptures Thus hast thou denyed and opposed that Testimony which is in the Book of the Scriptures and not only So but most erroniously opposed the Light and Law written in the Heart thereunto when as they do agree and the Scripture cannot be broken Therefore Repent of thy vain and Antichristian opposition Another Contradiction is in thy following words viz. J. B. Your Paper to the Churches is not to be owned by the Churches inasmuch as it was written from a sight or a sence and not in and from the Spirit of Revelation Now whatsoever is written declared or given forth in the sight or in the sence is not to be owned Antichrist's Transformations p. 2. And p. 25. ibid. I disown that to be any true Ministry for God who in their Declarations do exhort both Friends and other People to come to a sence and to wait in a sence and continue in a sence for God is not a sence neither is his Spirit a sence But in plain contradiction â—ereto p. 9. Lazarus was raised and so must we be raised by the same Voice Spirit and Power must we come both to FEEL and Witness Christ the Light within to be our Resurrection and our Life by FEELING and Receiving his Power revealed from Heaven c. Observe Here thou hast confessed to the Truth of Feeling and witnessing Christ Feeling and receiving his Power c. contrary to thy opposing and denying what 's written in the sense and exhorting Friends c. To come to wait and continue in a sence whereas there is a spiritual sence and feeling of divine Life there are spiritual Sences to be exercised by the holy Spirit to discern between good and evil There is a spiritual seeing tasting and handling of the Word of Life but thou hast lost these Senses thou art out of they right Senses which makes thee so Sensless and Nonsensical in thy scribling and full of rambling confused Whimsies Delusions and dark Imaginations which are the effects of thy Disobedience to and Apostacy from the Light of Christ within which convinced thee long ago § 12. And now I would have thee observe thy manifest and practical Contradiction to a Passage in conclusion of thy Gross Errors Postscript The Passage is this viz. J. B. It is an Antichristian Spirit in all which leads People under what Profession soever to think of themselves above others or to be in a better state than others or to separate themselves from others although their Souls may have seen by the Light within them beyond others yet these ought not to separate themselves from others for they have been Children of Darkness as well as others for if they do separate themselves from others then this holds forth a certain Testimony that they do think of themselves above others and also to be in a better state than others are in so that this is all Antichrist's work Answ. Why dost thou then separate thy self from others that is from the Church of England for by this Proposition thou oughtst not so to separate nor to frequent the Quakers Meetings nor to preach in them whether thou thinkest thy self in a better state than those of the Church of England or not or that thy Soul hath seen by the Light within beyond them as doubtless thou thinkest thy self herein above them On this Proposition of thy own thou oughtst not to separate nor to preach in the Quakers Meetings And if thou didst not think thy self to see with the Light within beyond them of the Church of England there were no reason for thee then to separate from them Behold thy Practical Contradiction and Ranterism in thy Proposition or Doctrine against separating from others on the account of seeing with the Light beyond them which is to maintain a confused mixture and society in Worship between those that see with the Light and those that see not with it between the Seeing and the Blind the Children of the Light and the Children of Darkness for thy opposing a Separation from others is without distinction and yet thou art in a Separation from others Why separatest thou from the National Worship and makest thy self a Preacher at the Quakers Meetings in Sudbury when they disown thee thy Preaching and Corrupt Erronious and Antiscriptural Doctrine As Thy Denying Christ the Son of God to be our way to the Father Thy Denying Salvation or Condemnation by the same Christ that suffered Thy Denying the Immortality of the Soul of Christ Jesus or of any other Souls of Mankind and affirming That his Soul dyed and that he internally dyed as to his Soul c. And thy asserting The Book of the Scriptures to be the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge And thy Denying the Arising of the Seed of God and Christ in man And thy Denying to come to a Sense and to wait in a Sense in thy self and opposing preaching from a sight and sence as in thy Antichrists Transformations p. 2 25. Thy dark and erronious Doctrine and Preaching in these things the True Christian Quakers utterly deny with many other dark erronious Positions Whimsies Contradictions and blind Oppositions Falshoods and Abuses foolish and unlearned Questions in thy Pamphlets here omitted as also thy Hypocritical Preaching in pretence For the good of Souls For the quickning of Souls For the raising up of Souls For the converting of Souls That Peoples Souls may partake of the divine Nature and be lifted up into the Kingdom of God c. Which though this be the best sort of thy Preaching and in the best words thou hast yet while thou denyest the Immortality of the Soul and concludest They all dye with the earthly Tabernacles and so a total end of all This thy gross and Atheistical Error is enough to evince thy abominable Hypocrisie and Irreligiousness in the best sort of thy Preaching And therefore give over thy preaching in our Friends Meetings hold thy Tongue lay thy hand upon thy Mouth keep at home and seriously bethink thy self and remember from whence thou art fallen and then condemn retract and call in thy Erroneous and Antichristian Pamphlets Remember I have herein given thee the safest Counsel in Love and Friendship to thee and to thy Immortal Soul which shall remember me when thou art awakened under the hand of thy Righteous Judge who is the Judge of all to whom I can sincerely appeal and commit my Christian and faithful Endeavours concerning these Controversies and Differences with thee and the rest concerned in this Treatise you being all concerned in one Spirit of Opposition Prejudice Strife and Enmity though thou hast exceeded the rest in thy Doctrinal part in presumptuously attempting such an Antichristian Confutation of the Quakers Doctrines And with my solemn