it and saith nothing to several Texts alledged and nine Questions proposed but that I brought crooked Consequences and no plain Text c. The next work is he saith TO PROVE RESPECT OF PERSONS which are none of my words And he saith His 28. LYE I pervert that Text in Lev. 19.32 because I reade it as Beza renders it Thou shalt honour the PERSON of the old man But why is this a perversion of the Text when I have as good reason to follow his translation as any But 2. is not that which is done to the face of a man done to his person be it honour or dishonour And 3. are not these terms FACE and PERSON convertible as Isa 3.15 where it is said that The FACE of the poor was grinded was not this the person of the poor And whereas you charge me with lying in saying you deny respect due to Parents Masters Husbands Wives c. I cannot but wonder at you for I did not say so in any place of my book I say you did deny respect to persons which I prove ought to be because I am commanded to honour my Father and Mother c. I brought this to prove we ought to honour some more then others and you say I charge you with denying honour to Father and Mother c. But sure James thy Conscience is very guilty at this turn or else thou wouldst never have said because I brought those Scriptures to prove what I laid down that therefore I said you were guilty But hadst thou done fairly thou shouldst have spoke to the Scriptures and Arguments alledged and have shewed us in what sense the unjust Judge was blameable in not reverencing man and many other Texts which may be seen in page 39 40. To all which thou sayest nothing but quarrell'st about that I never said You go on and say That I Lye because I say Not one in ten shall give the same answer to a question if it be ask'd them severally and this thou sayest is a lye because thou sayest I never proved ten of you therein But James this is as true as the rest for I have proved twenty of you herein and to make it appear I will meet thee at any time and ask thee a question appertaining to the things of God and not one of ten shall give the same answer with thee the question being asked apart if they do I will be content to be call'd a Lyer but not before You say the next thing I would prove is That Christ had two Bodies But James why couldst not thou as well lay down the Proposition in my words as thine own my words are That Christ had a Body besides his Church and to the Arguments and Texts alledged thou sayest nothing but tell'st us a few of your own Notions as That thou wilt not dispute with me but sayest It serveth thee to know he is thy head c. But why didst not thou answer my Arguments alledged to prove what I urged in the case You go on and say You do not deny Christ taking flesh c. James I did draw thy veil from before the face of the people which thou hadst cast upon them and made thee speak somewhat plainly at the Bull and Mouth and now thou wouldst fain speak somewhat to cover over thy vile sayings but to this I shall speak anon And as touching the next thing which is that one of them said Christ was but a figure This he saith is a Lye because of the PRINTERS Errata who put page 54 of Sauls Errand to Damascius in stead of page 8. in which page he hath the words I charge though he saith there is no such saying in the book for this very thing was objected against him and he answers That Christ in the flesh was a figure And whereas I shew you that you have affinity with Gnosticks Manichees and Familists c. you answer in page 24. that it is not worth answering a cunning shift indeed but if I should say so to your questions by and by you were well enough served You go on and tell me that I have perverted the Scriptures c. but hast not shewed one Text wherein unless it be that of Lev. 19. which I have already shewed to be no perverting of it He goes on and because I say in page 45 of my book that all that I have writ against you is either from your own Mouthes or Writings you say This is a Lye but James in the same page about the middle of it you might have found these words namely That the Errors I charge you with are either such as fell from your own Mouthes or else such as your selves being charged with could not deny Now put all this together and what untruth have I told for did you deny any of those things that I say you did not deny And though you say the men were bloody persecuting Priests c. that charged you the more shame for you that you should call your book an Answer to their Petition and withall print their Objections your selves pretending to answer them and when all comes to all never deny the charge in the particulars I mention but say somewhat else in stead thereof which is nothing to purpose as you have done by me as any may see that reades your Answer both to my book and the Westmerland Petition which is a thing I never saw any further then as your selves did transcribe and print it He now comes to the Postscript at the end of my book and saith that because some saw my murtherous minde they did write down what he said Though that which they have writ to cover thy Assertion was not spoken at that time as many can witness that came out with me whatever you spake after I was gone And though you seem to carry it by witness you must know That your Witnesses are Parties being of the same faith with thy self viz. That Christ was not born after the flesh and it doth behove them to make a cloak for thee lest thy deeds sayings should be made manifest But whatever they have said that matters not since you confess all that I charge which is That Christ was not born after the flesh And how have you answered the thing I charge in the Postscript which is That it is all one to be born after the flesh as it is to be born according to the flesh and though I prove it all one in the 52 53 pages of my book yet thou makest no kinde of answer which shews that thou hast pick'd up this Letter to keep thee from the lash of the Law because thou sayest Some saw I had a murtherous design or else thou wouldst have answered what I say in the Postscript but that you did fear the light You proceed and in page 26. say that I say The Scriptures make no such distinction as born after the flesh and after the Spirit His 29. LYE
the Preface of thy book Thou goest on and sayest in the latter end of p. 2. that thou wilt not trouble thy self to answer every particular of my vain stories c. Truly I do believe that thou wouldst be as much troubled to answer to them and prove them so as ever thou wast in thy life and therefore it was cunningly thought on by thee to ease thy self of the trouble and call them Lyes vain stories and slanders Here thou hast done like thy self Thou goest on and quarrelst with my Epistle to the Churches and sayest If my brethren with me have denied the Faith of Christ and set up a Faith of their own it is like my work will be welcome To this I have answered already in my Reply to thy first Page and because I will not call this another Lye I shall onely say it is the former Lye reiterated the second time Thou leapest over my Epistle to the Reader and sayest nothing to it though therein thou wast more concerned then in the Epistle to the Churches and from thence comest to speak a little to little purpose in pag. 3. of thy book and that is That you shall not contend whether the world call you that which is true or that which is false when they call you Quakers If so then why hast thou troubled thy self so farre as to call them Ishmaels Brood that call you so Your jugling and lying at this turn which I charge you with in the second and third pages of my book thou sayest nothing to but that thou wilt not trouble thy self whether the world truly or falsly call you so Oh shameless wretch dost thou say thou art Nick-named when thou art call'd Quaker And when I have used arguments to prove thee a Lyer in saying The world Nick-names thee because thou namest thy self so thou shakest all off with this that thou wilt not contend whether they call'd thee truly or falsly His 3. LYE But by the way if they did call thee truly then thou art a Lyer in saying they Nick-named thee Thou goest on and in page 3. of thy book thou tellest me that I lyed in saying you foamed at the mouth in your tremblings c. But James remember that it is not thy bare saying I lye that proves it so and thou doest pretend that so I may repent to inform me better But am I better informed that you did not foam because you say I lye in charging you with foaming Reade and judge and yet this is all you bring to inform me better And whereas you say That though it was cast upon you in the Westmerland Petition and you did not answer to it it doth not follow you say that the Charge was therefore true To this I reply That if you had overlooked those passages in the Charge then indeed there might be somewhat in what you say But you printed those particular passages how that you were charged with swellings and foamings and that in young children and yet say nothing to the untruth of them And though I have again urged the same things yet you say nothing to your swelling and roaring though it be charged to be in young children And whereas in your Answer you deny foamings yet you do not deny any other part of my Charge By this the world may see thy wickedness that thou wavest the most material things and saist nothing to them And whereas thou sayest I lyed and the Petitioners lyed in saying you foamed I demand why both my self and the Petitioners have not better ground to say thou lyest in denying it seeing thou hast waved answering to it both when your selves did print the Charge and also when I did charge you with it afresh in my book But I do think that this was one thing that James was not willing to TROUBLE himself with answering for I perceive and so may the Reader if he mindes my book and his Answer That he could not tell how to deny what I and the Petitioners of Westmerland did charge against them You now proceed and in the latter end of page 3. and page 4. you say that I can finde nothing of the TRUTH you preach that I dare accuse you of Well said James thou wilt speak Truth sometimes though it be against thy Father the Devils will for tou sayest That I can finde nothing of the TRUTH you preach that I dare to accuse you of Indeed that 's true for I dare not accuse any for holding Truth But then it seems if I have accused you of any thing that you preach it is of the Lyes you preach This must needs follow for if as thou sayest I dare not accuse thee of the Truths you preach and yet do accuse you of many things that you preach as my book declares at large then it follows that all that I accuse you with is of the Lyes you preach for you have justified me that I did not dare to accuse you of the TRUTHS you preach But in the 3 and 4 pages of thy book thou sayest That I do accuse you of somewhat that you never preached viz. That you say Nothing must be called Gods Word but Christ This you say is none of your Doctrine His 4. LYE But I wonder who hath ever heard you unless it be such as are deeply drenched in hypocrisie and have learned your art of Equivocation but will say the same thing that I say of you You say also That I lye in saying you deny the Scriptures to be the Word of God His 5. LYE c. But have not I proved it from your own writings pag. 6. of my book And do you not reprove in many places of your books the People and Priest for calling the Writings The Word Oh shameless man to call me a Lyer for saying nothing of them but what I have under their own hands And where my arguments against thee are of that force that thou knowest not how to answer them Thou tellest the Reader That it is false in my sense to say thou deniest the Scriptures to be the Word of God James do not juggle for I did not say you denied the Scriptures to be the Word of God in my sense but in your own words that may be found in the books I have cited and which are owned by you But to proceed James jumps through the 7 and 8 pages of my book where I make it appear That they give those Titles to their own Pamphlets that they will not give to the Scriptures and thereupon do demand a question To all which James answers not a word Reader remember what James said at first namely That he would not trouble himself to answer all and by this he frees himself very cunningly from answering to the most material things I urge against him He comes now to speak to the third Error I charge them with and that is That they preach they are infallibly sent and cannot prove it To this
by calling what I propose Crooked Consequences See if the man be not here at a Nonplus or else how could he have the face to intitle his book an Answer to mine when he first leaves out the first two pages of my book where I shew their jugling about their Name Quakers and that they have lyed in saying The world Nick-names them so and to this he saith nothing but That he shall not contend whether the world call them truly or falsly when they call them so Again I spend other two pages to prove that they do give such Titles to their Pamphlets as they will refuse to give to the Scriptures And this I prove by their own books as the Reader may perceive and to this he sayes not one word Again I do print the substance of two Conferences where he is so miserably Nonplus'd that he cannot tell what to say to them but onely tells his Reader that I do adde words that were never spoken and diminish Truth to make my self a cover with a Lye This is all that he saith touching the two Conferences contained in the 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 pages of my book as any one may see that reades the fifth page of his book and yet he hath got such a stock of impudence as to call his book an ANSWER to mine Again I propound twelve Quaeres in the 19 20 21 pages of my book And to these in stead of answering them he proposeth questions of his own for so I call them because he hath left out the most material terms of mine in his transcribing them by which they become his own questions and not mine and to these twelve Quaeres he saith as little as to the other Again the like answer he gives to the nine Quaeres in page 25 26 of my book and the sum of his answer is That they are crooked Consequences See page 14 of his book He now comes to answer the sixteenth Error I charge upon them which was that one of their Scribes did ask a Minister of the Nation Whether he had the Light that did inlighten every one that comes into the world when he had before told him That every one HAD that Light within him This I charge as a piece of inconsistency in these that would be counted perfect To which he replies That Christ did ask the disciples who they said he was and yet they had the Light within them that revealed him to be the Son of God But what 's this to the case in hand the case in hand is not whether a man may ask a question for the further confirmation of a thing that is in question as our Lord did his Disciples in a time when there was various opinions of him But whether after a man hath preached a thing that concerneth EVERY man whether it be not very ridiculous to ask the same man to whom he hath preached whether it concerns him Where doth Christ or any wise man ask such a question Again Christ demands this question of them that owned him what their opinion was of him but he asked the question of a man that disowned the Light to be in every one So that this being considered I demand Whether Christ ever asked a man that did disown him and his Light whether his Light was within them or no as this man hath done for he asked the question of one that was a Minister of the Nation whom they all say disown the Light of Christ He passeth over the second instance of their inconsistency and saith not a word to it I do suppose as he said at first that these were some things he would not TROUBLE himself with answering and indeed I think it would trouble him to answer them and therefore he cunningly lets them alone He comes to say something to the third in stance I bring of their inconsistency and that is that though they pretend to own the Scriptures yet one of them said to Parson Camelford of Staveley-Chappel That he might as well have burnt the Scriptures as his Quaeres He answers That it doth not prove all my false accusations cast upon them c. To this I reply That I have not spoke or writ any syllable of untruth concerning you and further it doth prove all that I charge against you about the case in hand and all that I do urge in the foregoing pages about your slighting the Scripture For for any one to say that a man might as well burn the Scriptures as his Quaeres doth not this prove that your design is to eat out the honour of the Scriptures and build up the honour of your contradictious stories And whereas in a Parenthesis you question if there was any such that said so Fie James do not I in p. 29. of my book cite those passages and tell thee That they are in a book call'd Truths Defence which is owned by you all and yet you question if there be any such Dost thou think that book did write it self and if not why shouldst thou question whether there be such a man as saith those words in his book for the words are there asserted as I have transcribed them But James thou wouldst willingly be ignorant of this story because it doth so much lay open your hypocrisie and double-dealing about the Scriptures And further is not this book bound up and owned by you among the rest of your Works and yet thou wouldst fain make the Reader believe that there was no man among you that published such a thing Thou passest over my fourth instance of your inconsistency and sayest not a word to it which would trouble thee too much to answer it and that is That one Tomlinson in his book call'd A word of Reproof p. 11. did blame the Ministers of the Nation for doing that they had no Rule for when they prayed before or after Sermon this book is also owned by you and bound up with the rest of your stories and yet Edward Boroughs did pray after Sermon before hundreds of people at the Bull and Mouth near Aldersgate To this inconsistency among themselves he says not a word but leaps over it He proceeds and saith The fifteenth Error I charge is a Lye which is That they study deceitful terms that look with two faces c. James it is not thy saying I Lye in charging you that proves it to be a Lye as any one may see in page 30 of my book And for all thou sayest A man may affirm a Negative yet that will not serve thy turn for that is not the question but Whether a man being charged with speaking a thing that is Negative for that 's the case doth not equivocate in saying He spake no such Affirmative He comes now to answer the eighteenth Error I charge and that is Their Lying First in saying They are perfect and sin not This he saith is a Lye of mine own and shall rest upon my head till
sometimes lay down such sayings that are to be understood chiefly and eminently and not exclusively as Labour NOT for the meat that perisheth doth this therefore prove that believers are not to labour for earthly bread at all but eat the bread of idleness as you do in like manner is this saying of Pauls to be understood who though he was not chiefly and eminently sent to baptize but to preach the Gospel yet he also did baptize as the same place 2 Cor. 1.14 16. doth declare Now if Paul did baptize it was either in the Name of God and Christ or his own Name but it was not in his own Name for this he denies ver 13. when he saith Either were you baptized in the Name of Paul Well then if he did baptize in the Name of Christ then I quaere Whether it be not great wickedness to do a thing in the Name of God or Christ that Christ never commanded and therefore I say Pauls saying he was not sent to baptize doth not prove that therefore John was decreasing if by decreasing you mean that the things that John was a Preacher of should decrease for John was a Preacher of Repentance as well as Water-baptism And may you not as well say That he decreased in one thing as well as another And to the last branch of the quaere I say That in the sense Paul was a Minister of Christ and was not sent to baptize a man may be a Minister of Christ now But did you ever finde a Minister of Christ in all the New Testament that did not baptize at all or that said as you do That Baptism with water is not Gods Command 15 Quest Your next question is seeing the last of Matthew is your strength for Water-baptism I ask Whether one may not be baptized into the Name of Father Son Holy Ghost without being dipt in carnal water also whether all you dip in water you baptize into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if the first of these be Yea and the later No then I conclude that carnal dipping is not the thing Answ As for thy word carnal water it is a word of thy own and therefore I have nothing to say to it But as touching the rest of the question I say That the former is Nay and the latter Yea to use your own phrases for none were ever baptized into the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost that were not baptized with water and do thou prove it if thou canst without a crooked Consequence and I will believe all you say and the latter is Yea for we do not baptize any but we do it in the Name of Father Son and holy Ghost 16 Quest Doth every one that reades the Bible hear the Word of God or hath every one the Word that hath a Bible and what difference is there between the ministration of the letter now and that in the Jews time BOTH denying the Faith which is the gift of God and will that save now more without the ministration of the Spirit then in their dayes Answ First every one that reads the Bible READS the VVord though it is true that many can reade that do not hear Again 2. every one that hath the Bible hath the VVord if by VVord you mean the written Commands of God and his Promises to them that obey and his Threatnings to them that obey not And whereas you ask me what difference is between the ministration of the letter now and that in the Jews time since both denied the Faith which is the gift of God c. I wonder at thy ignorance James doth not Paul say 2 Cor. 3.7 that the ministration written with Letters was glorious and was not that to the Jews in the Jews time and yet thou hast the face to say That the ministration of the letter in the Jews time did deny the Faith of God and so thou sayest now But where hast thou a text for this that proves the ministration of the letter to deny the Faith of God at any time is not this one of thy brain-sick Notions And whereas you ask if it would save now without the Spirit more then in their dayes I say That question is needless for neither then nor now can men be saved without Gods Spirit But what 's this to thy purpose who saith That the ministration of the letter in the Jews time and now do both deny the Light and Faith which is the gift of God For shame man leave off thy talking of God without thou couldst speak more to purpose and less to his dishonour 17 Quest VVhether that righteousness that a man reades in the letter sets him to do the like without Faith which is the gift of God or the leadings of the Light of Christ the ministration of the Spirit be the righteousness of Faith or Self-righteousness Answ The letter no where sets men to do the righteousness which it calls for without the Faith of God and Christ 2. To the latter part of your question I answer That the righteousness of Faith which men have by the Light of Christ and the ministration of the Spirit is not self-righteousness Thus have I plainly and faithfully transcribed thy questions and answered them which in reason thou couldst not expect since thou hast left mine unanswered And were it not but that thou wouldst have been wise in thy own conceit I should scarce have taken the pains and if thou shouldst joy in the strength of thy Quaeres know That the joy of the hypocrite will be but for a moment till my Answer can overtake them Postscript READER SOme passages thou hast for which there is but his Yea and my Nay and therefore that you may know on which side the truth lieth examine my former book and his Answer and see if that he hath not accused that book of many things that were neither in the book nor the Authors heart and by that thou wilt perceive that he that will not stick to belye me in a matter so publickly made known as my book is will not matter to do the like and worse concerning what I spake more private And also compare this Reply with his Answer and see if I have falsly related or perverted any saying in his book but have faithfully and impartially transcribed them and see if I have omitted replying to any thing that is of weight or indeed to the lightest thing that doth but look like an Argument and see also if he hath not left out many Arguments and many Pages to which he saith nothing and whether he hath not added to and taken from most things that he mentions of my book and then attempts to answer it And whereas he would excuse his Error of denying Christ born after the flesh by saying That that which is born after the flesh is flesh and that which is born after the Spirit is Spirit Whether by the rule of Contraries it doth not undeniably follow That that which is NOT born after the flesh is not flesh and then what doth he less then deny Christ to be made flesh by the perverting those Scriptures Joh. 3. and Gal. 4. whatever he saith to the contrary Consider and weigh things aright and the Lord give you understanding in all things VALE Reader thou art desired to correct these two mistakes and all others thou meetest with of this or any other kinde Page 30. lin 21. for fifteenth reade seventeenth p. 35. l. 14. for page 14. reade page 19. FINIS REader These may certifie That Jer Ives did not utter any such thing as James Nayler falsly charges upon him viz. As that all good was not of God neither did he deny Faith and obedience to be Gods gift but in the sense mentioned in this Reply Neither did he say any of those things as That the Wilderness where John baptized was in Jerusalem c. And we do further certifie That the account he hath given of that Conference at Gerard Roberts in this Reply to James Nayler is true we being there all the time and heard none of those things save what Jer Ives hath here acknowledged and given an Account of in this his Answer to that lying Letter Witness our Hands John Fry Rich. Cleiveland William Nash REader Whereas James Nayler denies that ever he knew of the fetching the last Letter mentioned in this book which Letter was to prove he had writ some things that was false concerning Jer Ives Now these may certifie That it was publickly declared to his face That the Letter should be fetch'd for to prove him a Lyer and accordingly it was and when the Letter came he was gone though it was told him If he would stay the Letter should be produced to prove his false speaking though in his book he denies he knew of the fetching of it Witness my Hand this 21 of July 1656. John Fry
Innocency above Impudency OR The strength of Righteousness exalted ABOVE The Quakers Weakness and Wickedness IN A REPLY To a Lying PAMPHLET call'd Weakness above Wickedness Published by J. Nayler in Answer to a Book Entituled The Quakers quaking By which his notorious Lyes are made manifest and the Truth of the said Book justified By JEREMIAH IVES Job 11.3 Should thy lyes make men hold their peace Isa 9.15 The Prophet that teacheth lyes he is the tail Zech. 3.13 Thou speakest lyes in the Name of the Lord. 1 Tim. 4.2 Speaking lyes in hypocrisie LONDON Printed by J. Cottrel for R. Moon at the Seven Stars in S. Pauls Church-yard 1656. To the READER READER THese Lines are sent out after a lying Pamphlet published by the Quakers who are indeed quaking or else they would never tell so many notorious Lyes as I shall shew thee they have told in their late Book call'd Weakness above Wickedness wherein thou wilt finde that they have made Lyes their refuge though they call themselves The Seed of God and The Generation of the Just for did ever the Seed of God or the Generation of the Just say That a man hath not done that which he did do or that a man hath done that which he never did Nay it is rare to finde any of the Seed of the Devil grown up to that degree of Impudence as to charge a man with publishing that which he never published and with concealing that which is published to the world in print as these men have done by me But surely they think that no man will take pains to compare book to book but will believe all that they say but sure the wise have learned otherwise though the simple believe every thing I shall therefore desire thee to compare their Answer to my Book with the Book and both with this Reply and see if ever any men have lyed with that stock of Impudence as these men have done Indeed I am no Prophet nor the Son of a Prophet but sure I am that these men are filling up the measure of their Iniquity and that very greedily as though their hearts were hardened from fear and as though they had made a league with Death and with Hell were at an agreement otherwise the fear of either would have taught them to have laid aside their wickedness which they still inlarge the borders of till such time wrath comes upon them to the uttermost and the Lord say of them That they shall be called the border of wickedness and the pecple against whom he hath indignation for ever Oh therefore that while God gives them space to repent they may repent if there be any place for repentance for them before the Lord give them over to the plagues of their own hearts as I fear he hath done many of them already These are the desires of my Soul in the behalf of those of them who have not sinned unto death and I hope shall be whatever they say of me while I am JER IVES Innocency above Impudency OR The strength of Righteousness exalted Above the QVAKERS Weakness and Wickedness THe Apostle in his Catalogue of the evils of the latter times 1 Tim. 4.2 reckons up such as speak lyes in hypocrisie having their Consciences seared with a hot iron to be none of the least who by a shew of Self-denial in Marriage and Meats c. should introduce by their heeding seducing spirits Doctrines of Devils and surely this Prophesie aimed much at the men call'd Quakers which I shall make appear God assisting me by what follows in answer to their Book call'd Weakness above Wickedness And for the more orderly proceeding herein I shall first speak to the Title-page of it where they are pleased to call their book THE QUAKERS DEFENCE c. Here I do observe one thing That my book hath made these men own themselves Quakers for they were ashamed of their Names before and usually call'd themselves Such as were NICK-NAMED Quakers yet now they call their book The QUAKERS Defence So that here they did tell a notorious Lye His first LYE in saying The WORLD did Nick-name them Quakers when they give that Name to themselves I now come to the book it self where he begins and sayes pag. 1. That the Apostle well knew what he said when he desired the Saints prayers That he might be delivered from men without faith c. Truly the Devil speaks truth sometimes and so do you in saying The Apostle well knew what he said but surely you are no Apostles that speak things you know not and are vainly puft up with a fleshly minde as appears by what I have said in my last and shall yet further make manifelt in due place Thou tellest me His 2. LYE That I deny the Faith of God which is the gift of God in his Saints c. This I never did either by word or writing And though he ought to have proved that I denied the Faith being he chargeth it upon me yet he brings no proof at all but his bare assertion I shall therefore give the Reader some sayings of mine and leave him to judge whether they look like the words of a man that did deny the Faith of God and set up a Faith of his own as he falsly accuseth me As first in my Epistle to the Churches I call upon them to take heed that they were not spoiled of their joy and confidence they had in CHRIST JESUS and that they would let none of the words of OUR LORD JESUS slip out of their minde and that they would have high and honourable thoughts of the SCRIPTURES and that they would prize the Ordinances of GOD and pag. 16. of my book I do exhort that men would take heed of turning the Truth of GOD into a Lye Nay doth not he tell me That I did confess that Christ lighteth every man that comes into the world in his answer pag. 5 And do not I all along through my book profess Christ to be the SAVIOUR OF THE WORLD and JUDGE of the World and is not this the Faith of God and yet this man sayes I deny the Faith of God In the second page he insists upon some things which he saith I spake at Gerrard Roberts house which I shall take notice of hereafter because he is so full of Tautalogies and speaks very often in his book of something relating thereto and therefore it will be lost labour to speak to any thing till I come to speak to the whole The rest of the second page hath little besides but a pack of swelling words of vanity as Vain Philosophy Deceitful Craft Unreasonable blasphemous Doctrines Cursed Art charging me with setting up the spirit of the Devil and that I had mustered up a heap of Lyes and a heap of Subtilty c. Let me tell thee James these words had done well when thou hadst proved me so and then they would better have become the Conclusion then
because he mentions not one Argument brought by me at that time in favour to it but in stead thereof charges me with something that I never said Whereas if that Letter were the sum of the Conference as possibly he may make some believe why then did not he write the Arguments I brought for the proof of what I then said and his Answers to them which the Letter speaks nothing of And as touching the particulars charged in his Letter and so often repeated by him as though he wanted matter I shall first speak to the first and that is That I said a man might understand the Scriptures without the Spirit of God To this I answer and that as I then told him That though all the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God and Christ could not be understood without Gods Spirit which the Scripture saith shall lead into all truth yet much of the Scripture might be understood by men that had not the Spirit as Thou shalt not kill and Thou shalt not steal and the like and the Scribes and Priests Mat. 2.4 understood by the Scripture that Christ should be born in Bethlehem as it was written by the Prophet though they had not the Spirit and surely they understood that Scripture right for accordingly he was born in the same place This I did answer at that time though he hath left it out and yet omission of any thing that he saith is counted an evil The next thing is that I said The Faith by which a man is saved is not the gift of God To this I did answer then and so I do now That it is not so the gift of God as you imagine by your Enthusiastical dotages as That men should meet together and neither say nor do towards the work of Faith till they are immediately inspired with your quaking dotages in this sense I do still deny Faith to be Gods gift yet in the sense that all those Scriptures say Faith is the gift of God I do freely own it as my book doth declare page 37. wherein I have these words That men have nothing but what they have received especially any light or knowledge of Jesus Christ according to 1 Cor. 4.7 The next is that I said The obedience of Believers was not the gift of God To this I answer as before That we being at that time discoursing about the point of Baptism and I then asserting That God was to be obeyed in that as well as others of his Commands Thou didst answer That they must wait till obedience was given them To which I did reply That God did not give obedience to his people in the way that thou didst expect it as to sit still and do nothing till men were immediately inspired to it And in this sense I do still deny That obedience is the gift of God though I do believe and am generally known to teach that to him that hath improved his talent God will give more and that he that doth his will shall know of his Doctrine And in this sense I do believe obedience to be the gift of God according to those Scriptures by you alledged and yet I say None of those Scriptures prove your obedient actions which you so call to be Gods gift You go on and say that I said Whosoever speaks that which men understand not is a Fool and a Barbarian His 9. LYE These were not the words James but indeed when thou hadst spoke a great while to us and then at last when I made some Reply upon thy words thou didst answer That thou spakest in a language that I could not understand and so thou saidst upon the like occasion at our Meeting in Beech-lane before many witnesses as I have shewed in page 10. of my book call'd Quakers quaking Hereupon I did answer according to that of the Apostle That he that speaks in an unknown tongue is a Barbarian and if I said a Fool I think I might 〈◊〉 prove it Not but that I did then and do still believe That Christ spake many things and so did his Apostles that the world could not understand because of their hardness of heart You charge me further with saying That none was baptized with the holy Ghost but they wrought Miracles I said not so but that none were baptized with the holy Ghost but they COULD work Miracles His 10. LYE and so I do say still till thou canst prove it for not one Text by thee alledged proves the contrary You tell me that I said His 11. LYE All good was not of God This is another of thy Lyes and I leave it to thee to prove Though it may be I might say That All the good you glory in is not of God and so I say still For you are of the Generation that call good evil and evil good but otherwise I believe with all my heart that God is the Fountain of all good according to the Scriptures You go on and tell me that I said Christ was not a Minister of Circumcision And so I say still till thou canst prove it And though in thy Letter thou chargest this for an Error yet thou dost not bring one Text to prove he was a Minister of Circumcision See thy deceit Again thou chargest me with Error in thy Letter in saying The Law was not given by Christ and yet dost not give me one Text to prove that it was given by Christ for the Scripture saith The Law was given by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ Joh. 1.17 and yet thou hast the face to call this one of my blasphemous Doctrines Thou tell'st me in thy Letter His 12. LYE that I said The wilderness where John preached was in Jerusalem James this is like thee and thy Father for what man in his right wits ever said a Wilderness was in 〈◊〉 unless there be one at the Bull and Mouth at Aldersgate which is the likest one of any place in a City that ever I heard of He further saith His 13. LYE That I said the River Jordan was in Jerusalem This is false for I know that Text well in Mat. 3. that saith Ierusalem went OUT to be baptized of John in Jordan therefore I could not think Jordan was in Jerusalem But however it is as reasonable to think that Jordan should be in Jerusalem as it is for you to teach That Jerusalem is IN YOU You go on and tell me that I said His 14. LYE I could foretell things to come without the Spirit This thou sayest is Witchery To this I answer That this is another of thy Lyes to say that this is Witchery for the Pharisees did foretel things to come and had not the Spirit when they said Matth. 16.2 Luk. 12.54 55. They knew when it would be heat and rain before it came to pass and Christ bare them witness that this was true and the Priests Scribes by the Scriptures did know that Christ
should be born in Bethlehem though they had not the Spirit Was not this to foretel a thing to come and yet this is not Witchcraft though thou art pleased to call it so The rest of your Letter consists of Baptism For answer thereto I shall refer the Reader to my book call'd Quakers quaking pag. 25 26 and 38. Thus much as touching thy Letter and thy Charge going before it which is the same with the Letter except some things which thou chargest me for omitting which were spoken at our Conference at the Bull and Mouth near Aldersgate and them thou sayest are First His 15. LYE That I should say Christ lighteth every one that comes into the world and yet deny that this Light was within every one that comes into the world This thou sayest I have omitted to cover Lyes But let me tell thee James That if this Light spoken of in Joh. 1. had been in thee thou wouldst have been ashamed to tell thy Reader That I did diminish this from the Discourse to make my self a cover with a Lye when these very words are once and again repeated as page 49. of my book call'd Quakers quaking and page 51. in page 49. I have these words viz. That I did not oppose the saying of Joh. 1. which is that Christ inlightens every one that comes into the world but your saying which is that every one in the world hath the Light within him spoken of in that Text. Again in page 51. I have these words In like manner he viz. Christ lighteth every one that comes into the world inasmuch as he useth means for the bringing the world to the Light THOUGH ALL HAVE NOT THIS LIGHT WITHIN THEM James I have put it into Capital Letters that thou mayest without a Pair of Spectacles see thy self a Capital Lyer for thou art so impudent as to tell me If I had been honest I would have published the whole Truth and this fore-mentioned passage is one of the sayings thou lyingly tell'st thy Reader that I did diminish to make a cover for a Lye when I printed it word for word See his Answer to my book page 5. The next Lye he tells his Reader is That I omitted to print another passage that I spake in the Conference His 16. LYE which was That the Heathen had a Light that convinced them of sin but this Light was not within them James surely thou canst not forbear lying for do not I say page 52. that they might have a Light among them that might not be within them What is this less then what thou sayest I omitted and is this false Doctrine may not God use means and send his Light among people to convince them of sin that they may reject and not receive into their hearts Was not the great Light Jesus Christ among many who did not receive him within them by believing And yet thou art so ignorant and shameless as to call this a deceit and false Doctrine The next thing thou chargest me with is That I did omit the printing of that saying which thou sayest His 17. LYE I spake at the Bull and Mouth viz. That Christ pardoneth the sins of every one that comes into the world Now James thou hast fearfully diminished the Truth to make thee a cover for thy Lye for thou leavest out these words that I said namely That Christ was said to be the Light of the world or to lighten every one that came into it as he was said to take away the sin of the world inasmuch as he did graciously afford meanes for the pardoning the sins of the world though every man should not have his sins pardoned This indeed I said and to this purpose I spake in page 51. of my book which is just contrary to what thou chargest for I say He doth not pardon the sins of every one thou sayest that I said Christ did pardon the sins of every one He now proceeds in his 10 page to attempt an answer to the fourth Error I charge upon them and saith His 18. LYE I count it an Error that they bear Testimony to the Light of Christ which lighteth every one that comes into the world and That I count it an Error in them for holding That the Spiritual Light of Christ is sufficient to teach in all the wayes of God c. and That their Error is for saying the light of Christ is Spiritual and within To all this I answer 1. That the Reader may see that in thy fore-going Letter thou hast laid to my charge things that I never said for thou that wilt adde to and diminish from my words that are published in print wilt not stick to do the like unto words that were spoken more privately For where do I charge any of the fore mentioned things upon you for Error I challenge thee to shew it me in any page of my book or else confess thy wickedness before God and men and that thy sin may appear at this turn I shall desire the Reader to peruse the fourth Error I charge upon you in page 18. of my book where I do not charge it as Error That you testifie to the Light of Christ that is spoken of Joh. 1. but the words are that you say Every man hath a Light within him that will teach him to worship God rightly And thereupon it is that I do ground my twelve Quaeres page 19 20 21. of my book and not whether it be an Error to testifie to the Light of Christ as thou falsly suggestest for though it be a Truth as I often declare in my book That Christ is the Light of the world yet it is an Error and an unwritten Conceit to say That EVERY MAN hath a Light within him that will teach him to worship God aright without any other means vouchsafed And in what page of my book do I count it an Error in you for saying The Spiritual Light of Christ is sufficient to teach in all the wayes of God as thou falsly saith I have His 19. LYE Nay do not I say and doest not thou confess in page 10. of thy book that I say It is sufficient c. And where canst thou shew me that I charge it upon you as Error for saying The Light of Christ is sufficient as thou falsly hast declared Again where do I charge it upon you as Error for saying His 20. LYE The Light of Christ is spiritual and within as you say I do Do I say any such thing in my whole book No no I have not so learned Christ and yet this you say is the Error I charge upon you For shame James leave off lying and speak truth from thy heart for my charge is not That you say the Light of Christ is Spiritual and within but that you say it is WITHIN EVERY MAN that comes into the world that 's the Error I charge and in stead of answering that which I object
thou answerest that which I never objected as my book at large will manifest You proceed in page 11. to answer my Quaeres and therein thou answerest to that I never asked For 1. I ask What need there is of the Scripture to declare the minde of God if it may be known without it every whit as well And you say I ask His 22. LYE What need there is of the Scriptures to declare the minde of God importing to the Reader as all may perceive both in the Question and Answer That I was a man that judged them needless But might he not as well have accused Paul for saying Preaching was vain when he he saith If there be no Resurrection THEN is our preaching vain as tell his Reader that I ask what need there is of Scripture when I said What need is there of Scripture to declare the minde of God if it may be known without it every whit as well as they pretend So that this fills up the measure of his Lyes Again I ask Whether by the Light which is in EVERY man ALL men may come to know a Virgin had a Son c. And you say I quaere Whether THAT Light will shew a Virgin had a Son which was not my quaere for I know that THAT Light which is Christ will shew this and all other Truths But what 's this to the question I ask viz. Whether this Light be in every man c. Which term EVERY MAN ALL NATIONS and THE WHOLE WORLD thou deceifully leavest out of most of my quaeres and so makes them speak another thing and then goest about to answer them as any one may see that reades my book and compares thy Answer to it and therefore let these instances suffice for the rest wherein the Reader may see thy deceit and also what-snuffling answers thou givest to the Twelve Quaeres viz. That all those things I quaere thou sayest and much more were made known by the Light within c. This is the substance of thy Answer But James how doth this answer the Quaeres which asketh thee Whether EVERY MAN hath a Light WITHIN him that will bring him to know that a Virgin had a Son and that Christ rose from the dead in three days c We believe That by a Light within these things were revealed to some men but that 's not our question but this viz. Whether there be in EVERY MAN a Light that will shew him these things proposed in the Quaeres page 19. And when I ask you What need there is of your preaching and writing to inform the world if the Light within the world can do it without you You answer in page 11. That there is need of preaching to direct people to the Light Oh miserable darkness what can the Light within without any other means direct people to the whole will of God and cannot this Light direct people to it self without you Is not this just as if a man should say That the light of the Sun will shew men every thing but it self You answer the fifth Error I charge which was That one John Lawson said The Day of Judgement was past already saying It may be seen whether he own it or no by them that reade the book And so it may if they reade but the 35 page of Sauls Errand to Damascus which is the book I cited for that purpose To the 6 and 7 Errors I charge which is against one George Fox for saying That he was the Eternal Judge of the World and the VVay the Truth and Life You answer That I prove this like the rest viz. as I did foamings at your Meetings because you did not deny it See page 12. of your answer To this I reply and that as I have said viz. That if any shall print to the world that they are charged with swellings foamings quakings and roarings and also that these things are found among them in little children and when they come to answer it shall onely deny to be guilty of one of these and say nothing to the rest may not a man rationally conclude these men guilty of all the rest especially considering it is testified by many witnesses who are better to be believed then themselves In like manner I still say That the Petitioners of Lancaster did witness this against Fox and he did not deny it viz. That he said he was the Eternal Judge of the VVorld and the VVay Truth and Life Now what clearer proof can be made of any thing among men then to witness what is charged and the person charged deny it not and yet James says this is no proof I pray if this must not go for proof how will you prove any thing to be true that one doth not see The eighth Error I charge is That George Fox said He that took a place of Scripture and made a Sermon of it or from it is a Conjurer This thou wouldst excuse by saying These were not Georges words but the Accusers Indeed this is like the rest But how dost thou know they were not Georges words Canst thou have the face to say that they are NOT his words when he though he prints the Charge and Answer to it doth not deny it himself Here thou exceedest Fox himself for impudency Nay doth not Fox answer in page 7. of Sauls Errand to Damascus that he that raiseth the Spirit out of the Letter is a Conjurer And how far doth this differ from the charge But however is it not more reasonable to believe the men that witness this against him seeing he denies it not then thee who wilt deny that for George which he denies not for himself The tenth Error I charge is upon George Fox for saying The Scriptures are carnal and thou tell'st me That this is a Lye But James how darest thou say it is a Lye when George himself in his printed answer to it would not tell the Petitioners that charged him with it They lyed but in stead thereof evades the charge by saying The Letter of the Scripture is carnall The eleventh Error I charge is upon one Leonard Fell which through the PRINTERS mistake is printed Hill and that was That he said Christ had no Body but his Church To this thou repliedst That thou doest not know that name and therefore thou makest no answer to the charge Herein thou wast glad to be ignorant else thou mightest have looked into the book and page I cited for the proof of it and easily have found it was the Printers mistake The eleventh Error I charge is against one John Lawson who said He had been in Hell but was now in Heaven Thou sayest It is plain the Saints have witnessed being in Hell and Heaven also VVhat jugling is here I charge him with saying HE had been in Hell but was now in Heaven and you tell us of the Saints of old that some of them had been in Heaven and Hell as Jonah was in