attendance thereunto that he may thereby come to see and know what yet he doth not For if the Adversaries do yet none else I think will think that every man doth at all times so watchfully attend upon the Gift of God in himself that he doth not at any time miss or fall short of knowing the mind of God thereby He to be sure thought otherwise who said God speaketh once yea twice yet man perceiveth it not Job 33.14 Now this Slanderous Suggestion of the Adversaries is the more vile and wicked in them in as much as they know it to be a Slander and that very Book which they pretend to Answer doth plainly prove it so For in the 10th page of that Book called A brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual to the Question But if I do not presently see that Service in a thing that the rest of my Brethren agree in in this case what is my Duty The Answer is It is thy Duty to wait upon God in silence and patience out of all fleshly Consultations and as thou abidest in the Simplicity of the Truth thou wilt receive an Vnderstanding with the rest of thy Brethren about the thing doubted Is this to draw from the Gift of God in ones self to depend upon others for Guidance Yet the Adversaries say pag. 12. This to wit that something may be a Duty incumbent upon one though he be not perswaded it is his Duty is to impeach the Grace of God and Spirit of Truth to whose sufficiency so many Testimonies have been born as not now sufficient to lead all into all Truth Rep. No such matter They had no cause to suggest this no ground for it The Book they pretend to Answer denys it positively for asking where the fault is it says pag. 3. Is it thy weakness or thy Carelesness or If thy weakness it is to be born with and to be informed If thy carelesness thou oughtest to be admonished And a little lower in the same page it follows thus So that though thou art not to conform to a thing ignorantly yet thou art seriously to consider why thou art ignorant and what the Cause of such Ignorance may be Certainly it can't be in God nor in his Gift to thee mark that it must then needs be in thy self c. This is plain enough and this they could not choose but see picking up matter just before and after it which shews they had a design to abuse Friends and that makes their guilt the greater Yet thus they go on adding Falshood to Falshood For in their same page they say The Consequence of his arguing is to make us believe that somthing is a Duty incumbent upon us that we do not know and yet at the same time doth not let us know on whom we may depend Whereas as I have cited before he said expresly pag. 10. It is thy Duty to wait upon God in silence and patience c. So that he did let them know on whom they were to depend namely upon God Again they insinuate as if their not understanding their Duty were placed upon their Inability Whenas they know it is laid upon Carelesness Disobedience Prejudice c. But this they do on purpose to render Friends odious to their separate Party as if we held that somthing may be a Duty incumbent upon one which he cannot know which he is in no capacity of being perswaded of whereas indeed we hold no such thing For what is impossible for a man to know to understand or be perswaded of cannot be said to be a Duty incumbent on him But what he may know what he hath sufficient means to understand what he is put into a Capacity to be convinced and perswaded of by the Gift and Manifestation of the Spirit which God hath given him for that end may be a Duty incumbent on him although he through his Carelesness Negligence Non-attendance on the Gift or prejudice against the thing hath not received a certain Knowledge Understanding Conviction or Perswasion that it is his Duty Had the Adversaries taken the matter plainly and fairly as it was laid down in the Book they pretend to Answer They had not thus run beside the line But their manner is as is obvious to an observing Reader when they have pickt out a Sentence which they intend to oppose to turn it this way and that way to shift it to and fro to alter the form of it till they have varied it from the Author's Terms and Sense and fitted it to their own turn and service and then triumph over it Thus besides other Instances they have done in this particular case The sentence as they first quarrelled with it was this It is a dangerous Principle and pernitious to true Religion and which is worse it is the Root of Ranterism to assert That nothing is a Duty incumbent upon thee but what thou art perswaded is thy Duty No sooner had they drawn this forth but in their first modelling of it they slip in the words Conformity and Performance whereas Duty is one thing Performance of it another as I have noted before Then in the next place they frame up another Sentence in terms as they apprehend directly opposit to this and argue from one to t'other till at length they have slipt it quite beside its first and right bottom and set it upon a bottom of their own an Inability to understand Whereas the sentence is not that it is a dangerous Principle to assert that nothing is a Duty incumbent on thee but what thou art in a Capacity or hast means to understand or be perswaded of for there were no danger in asserting that But it s a dangerous Principle c. to assert that nothing is a Duty incumbent on thee but what thou art perswaded is thy Duty There is some odds sure betwixt thou art perswaded and thou mayst be perswaded or thou art in a Capacity or thou hast means of being perswaded Yet the Adversaries confounding these Terms run on to the same effect For taking offence at the mentioning of seared dark dead Consciences in the Book they pretend to answer which the Author there mentioned to set forth the dangerousness of asserting as a Principle that nothing is a Duty incumbent on thee but what thou art perswaded is thy Duty for said he The seared Conscience pleads his Liberty against all Duty the dark Conscience is here unconcerned the dead Conscience is here uncondemned c. They say p. 13. There is a vast difference betwixt denying all Duty to God and believing nothing a Duty but what we are perswaded on The first say they deny all duty the latter owns all Duty that can be known Repl. This is a high and bold but not a safe expression To own all Duty that can be known is not an ordinary state But let us see who this first is that denys all Duty and who the latter The first that which pleads
rejected as a Novelty in the same Spirit wherein the World rejects the whole way of Truth as a Novelty Common and Universal matters therefore relating to the Church of God are not to be restrained to such things as have been commonly and universally received For the envious Seeds-Man was not backward to sow his evil Seed betimes and Captious Spirits have risen up early as well as now of late excepting against some one some an other thing in Doctrine or Practice yet pretending to own the Fundamental principle of Truth So that the most approved practice amongst Friends may perhaps fall short of having been in a strict Sense Universally received For Universal admits no Exception But by Common and Universal matters relating to the Church of God are to be understood matters of Common and Universal Vse and Service in the Church of God things not peculiar to this that or to'ther Member only but of common use or benefit to all the Members of the Body And that the Author so meant it his own words plainly shew page 5. Where he says Degree or Measure in the same Life can never contradict or obstruct that which is from the same Life for the common benefit of the Family of God Did Iude call the Salvation he writ of verse 3. Common because it was commonly received or because it was offered intended and tendred as a Common Benifit to all that would receive it And whereas the Adversaries say This of Conviction and Perswasion preceding Conformity hath been a Common and Vniversal matter or thing because commonly and universally received among us as a great Truth I Reply It is indeed a great Truth and hath been and is a common and universal Matter but not for the cause or reason they assign For if it had not been commonly and universally received among us as a great Truth yet it would have been a common and universal Matter relating to the Church of God because it is a Matter of common and universal Service and Benefit to all and every Member in the Church of God But since they here acknowledge that this Doctrine of Conviction and Perswasion preceding Conformity hath been commonly and universally received among us as a great Truth they do ill to insinuate which too frequently they do that Friends would draw any to a Conformity to any thing before or without Conviction or Perswasion In their 23d page They pick another piece of a Sentence out of the Book they pretend to Answer which they set down thus What comes from the Light Life and Spirit in one is the same in Truth and Vnity to the rest as if it rise in themselves This is seen in our Assemblies every day c. Now because they dare not directly gainsay this and yet are disposed to wrangle they pretend to know the Design of the Argument and quarrel with that The Design they say of this Argument is to gain a dependance upon the Teachings of God by Instruments equal at least to the Teaching of God immediately by his Spirit in our own hearts and this they say how plausible soever is not according to the Truth as 't is in Iesus Rep. Their surmise in this Case is wrong and Evil and therefore not according to Truth That which they suggest to be the Design was not the Design of that Argument as they call it But the plain and true Design of it was to obviat an Objection and cut off a false Plea for Disunion and Discord grounded upon variety of Measures and diversity of Gifts and Offices in the Body For the Author having put the Question page 4. Are there not various Measures diversities of Gifts and several Offices in the Body And having granted that there are proves that that variety and diversity of Measures Gifts and Offices in the Body administers no ground for Disunion Discord or Contrariety amongst the members of the Body since it is a false way of Reasoning to conclude Discord from Diversity Contrariety from Variety which having illustrated by an Instance of the various Senses in a natural Body without any Contrariety flowing from that variety he shews page 5. That Diversity of Gifts doth not infer Disagreement in Sense nor variety of Offices contrariety in Judgment concerning those Offices Then having from the concurrent Testimonies of the holy Scriptures set forth the Unity of God he infers that the Light Life and Spirit of God is at unity with it self in all and what comes from the Light Life or Spirit in one it is the same in Truth and Vnity to the rest as if it rise in themselves For this he appealed to the daily experience of Friends in our Meetings where the Living and sensible ones know that what comes from the Light Life or Spirit of God in any Friend that Ministers is felt received closed with and united to as Truth by those that in the same Light Life and Spirit wait as well as if it had arose in themselves this was the Design of the Author's words in that place as is apparent to any that fairly reads them and the Design was good But the Design of the Adversaries was Evil in surmising another Design without ground that they might make an occasion for Cavilling For they are fain to confess that there is no contrariety in the Spirit of God no Contradiction in the Spirit 's Teaching being all for one and the same end the good of Man by the Salvation of his Soul Nay they acknowledge There is so much Truth in what the Author hath said that when fairly stated they are content it should be as a Rule to measure the whole difference by And yet they spend about a couple of Pages in Carping at it They say betwixt God's Teaching by Instruments and Teaching immediately by his Spirit in our own hearts there is this Distinction or Difference that the first is but to prepare the latter to perfect Whereas the Scripture saith expresly When Christ ascended up on high he gave gifts unto Men some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints c. Eph. 4.8 11 12. So that hence it appears that the Teaching of God through such Instruments as he gives his heavenly Gifts unto for the work of the Ministry hath a further tendency and Service than but or only to prepare for those Gifts were given for the Edifying that is building up or Establishing of the Body of Christ and for the Perfecting of the Saints This shews the Adversaries for all their high Notions and fluttering Pretences are short of a right understanding and to seek in the work of the Ministry being ignorant of the true and full end of Divine Ministerial Gifts So again they say page 23. When the things of God do come from God's holy Spirit immediately they are then as the Oracles of God this shews they do not reckon them as the Oracles of God if they come from
as it concerns a holy Conversation or the worship of God is of any Service but until he come They err There are many outward Rules in the Scriptures of Truth that were given by the Spirit of God which have been and are of Service to many after Christ hath been witnessed come Again when they say Every latter Appearance of God is as death to the former The Expression is unsavoury and not sound For the Appearance of God or Christ do not kill one another but agree one with another and Co-operate to the work he intends thereby But when to this they add And this is our Case as well as any that did go before us c. They err egregiously For the Appearance of God in us did not bring Death to the former Appearance of God in others though to the false Appearances and Likenesses thereof it did Neither will any further Appearance of God hereafter bring Death or be Death or be as Death to this Appearance of God whereby God hath made known himself in and to his People in this Age. Again they say When the Appearance or Conversation must be measured by certain Rules it follows what is terms of Communion or is accepted with God may not be accepted with men This is a loose Expression and tends to let up Looseness Are not Sobriety Temperance Chastity Modesty Honesty c. certain Rules whereby Conversation ought to be measured If there must be no certain Rules for measuring Conversation how shall the most unruly Conversation be blamed reproved judged condemned and either reformed or rejected By these few Instances it may appear how much they are declined from Truth The God of Truth knows I have no other End in this Reply than to defend Truth and the Children of it against the slanderous Suggestions false Charges and wicked Insinuations of the Adversaries to lay Open their deceitful Dealing and to remove as the Lord shall enable me the stumbling-Blocks which they have laid in the way of the Week whereby they have caused some to fall into Misapprehensions and hard Thoughts of Friends without cause And I beseech the God of Mercy to open the Vnderstandings and clear the Sight of all those whose Simplicity has been betrayed by the Others Subtilty that they may see and escape the Enemies Snares and return to the true Fold from which they have been led astray A Reply to an Answer lately published to a Book long since written entituled A brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual c. THe Author of that Book called A brief Examination c. hath therein truly and soundly defined Spiritual Liberty declaring it to be two-fold True False according to the true and false Spirit which respectively leads into each The true Spiritual Liberty he defines to be Deliverance from Sin by the perfect Law in the Heart the perfect Law of Liberty Iames 2. otherwise called The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus that makes free from the Law of Sin and Death elsewhere stiled The Law of Truth writ in the Heart which makes free indeed as saith Christ If the Truth make you free than are you free indeed So that the Liberty of God's People stands in the Truth and their Communion in it and in the Perfect Spiritual Law of Christ Jesus which delivers and preserves them from every Evil Thing that doth or would embondage In this blessed Liberty it is not the will or wisdom of man neither the vain Affections and Lusts that rule or give Law to the Soul for the minds of all such as are made free by the Truth are by the Truth conducted in doing and suffering through their earthly Pilgrimage The false Liberty he defines to be A departing from this blessed Spirit of Truth and a Rebelling against this Perfect Law of Liberty in the Heart and being at Liberty to do our own Wills upon which cometh Reproof and Judgment This being the Basis of the work I thought fit to transcribe at large that the Reader may plainly see and understand what that Liberty is both true and false which was the subject of that Book and is now of this Controversie Against this Definition of Spiritual Liberty I do not find the Answerers of that Book for the Answer runs in the plural Number take any Exception For in the entrance of their Answer they say As to the Definition of Liberty Spiritually explained page the first We agree upon the matter But passing by some Questions and Answers in that Book tending to shew in some general Instances wherein and how far the Members of the Church of Christ may be left to their freedom They take-hold of a Question and Answer in the second and third pages which are thus exprest Quest. But doth not Freedom extend further than this for since God hath given me a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left to act according as I am free and perswaded in my own mind in the things that relate to God lest looking upon my self as obliged by what is revealed unto another though it be not revealed unto me I should be led out of my own measure and act upon another's Motion and so offer a blind Sacrifice to God Answ. This is true in a sense that is if thou art such a one that canst do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth then mayst thou safely be left to thy freedom in the things of God and the Reason is plain Because thy freedom stands in the perfect Law of Liberty in the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus and in the Truth which is Christ Jesus which makes thee free indeed that is perfectly free from all that is Bad and perfectly free to all that is Holy Just Lovely Honest Comely and of good Report But if thou pleadest thy Freedom against such things yea obstructest and slightest such good wholsome and requisit things Thy Freedom is naught dark perverse out of the Truth and against the perfect Law of Love and Liberty The Question as stated above the Adversaries find no fault with but approve and applaud often calling it a Weighty Question But for all that they either mistake or wilfully pervert it For whereas the plain and express Terms of the Question are these Since God hath given me a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left c. They in their Sophistical Glosses upon it vary the Terms and instead of God 's having given c. They render it where the Gift of God is received to profit withal And instead of I have the Gift of God in my self They put such as do adhere to it As if there were no difference or They knew or regarded none betwen God's having given a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and man's having received this Gift of
omit the doing of what you may believe is good in this Sense than for others to receive what they believe is wrong And this they speak in order as they pretend to discontinue the Difference Rep. They state not the Case fairly on either hand for what they would have us omit they call only what we may believe is good whereas they are not ignorant that we have declared we believe those things to be not only good but required by God of us as our Duty On the other hand when they speak of others not receiving them they call it what they believe is wrong whereas they have not adventured to charge those things with being positively wrong but have alleadged they did not see the Service of them or as some of their Party have elsewhere stated it they had great cause to be jealous several things proposed were not from Heaven but of Man for in their Birth into the Church they seemed not to bear the heavenly Image There is some ods surely between Belief and Iealousy between Believing a thing to be wrong and having a jealousy that it was not from Heaven but of Man especially when that Jealousy hath no greater ground than a seeming not to bear the havenly Image Thus they craftily extenuate on the one hand and aggravate on the other But when each comes to be rightly stated and set on its true bottom it will appear to be no more according to Truth for Friends to omit the doing of that which they believe to be not only good but their required Duty than for the Adversaries to receive what they did not see the Service of but were jealous was of Man because it seemed not to bear the heavenly Image However sure I am it had been more according to Truth for the Adversaries to have been Quiet and not run headily against what through want of sight and true Sense they were jealous of than either for them to have made the Opposition Disturbance Division and Separation they have made Or for Friends to have omitted the doing that good which they believed the Lord required of them and felt him by his Spirit leading them into and by his good presence owning them in And indeed a readier way could hardly be proposed for obstructing all Duty in any Society than to injoyn those who believe it to be their Duty to omit the doing of it because others are jealous of it However their here proposing that Friends should omit the doing of what they believe is good c. as a way or means to discontinue the Difference shews that notwithstanding their loud Clamours and reiterated Outcries against Friends for Imposition Imposition Imposition it was not Friends imposing upon them that gave the occasion of the Difference but it was Friends refusing to be imposed upon by them to omit the doing of their believed Duty and to be driven by their impetuous Opposition out of the practice of those things which they believed were required of them It was not enough to the Adversaries not to be imposed on themselves but they must have us omit the doing of what we believed to be good and our Duty to do Was not this Imposition on their parts who so often cry out of being imposed upon What they say in their 41 page with Allusion to the building of Babel of Old and Confusion of Tongues that ensued therupon needs no more in this place than their own Application there of to themselves for they deliver it in the first Person Plural WE Was not We of one Language say they whilst We truly travelled c. But when We found Shinar a Plain and took up Our dwelling there in the likeness of Truth then did not We as others before Us begin to build c. Now this they appropriate to themselves by the Advertisement they have given at the end of their Preface to the Reader where after they have said Where the Term You is found in the following Discourse we intend the Author and those of his mind they add And as the Term We is also used it may be understood in respect to those of the same mind with the Author of this that is their Book Let them take it therefore to themselves to whom if to any it of right belongs For they have been long hunting for a Plain a place of more Room Scope and Liberty finding Truth 's way too strait and narrow for them and at length have found one where they have taken up their Dwelling in but the likeness of Truth if in that They have built up a Separation which they designed for a lofty Tower to preserve them from what they were in no danger of In position from those they call their Brethren How they have sped in their undertaking may in some measure be gathered by this that some of their Fellow-Builders in that work have since submitted to the Ministry of the Parish-Priests to go no further So that as those Babel Builders of old met with that they shunn'd viz. to be scattered abroad c. Gen. 11.4 8. So these to avoid an imagined Danger of Imposition from their Brethren have betook themselves to the Parish Priests where Imposition is avowed How far they are divided in Language while some are mumbling their Mattins in the old Mass-Houses I leave themselves to consider But that they do agree and are one in Spirit as well such of them as are already gone off to the Priest as such as are not yet to write against the Innocent to Reproach Revile Raile at Slander and wickedly bely Friends a late scurrilous Book of Francis Bugg's and another of Iohn Pennyman's compared with others written by other of the Adversaries plainly shew Which Books came out so near in time with that I am now Replying to as if there had been an Intelligence held and Correspondence carried on between the respective Authors They say page 41 For you to call such Pleas as those Leave me to the Grace of God and to the Spirit of Truth loose Pleas c. We look upon it as of dangerous Consequence what though some may abuse them will you take them away and with them freedom of Speech Rep. We do not call those Pleas looâ—e with respect to the Pleas themselves which we acknowledge are sound and good but with respect to the Spirit by which and the end to which those Pleas have been pleaded by the Adversaries which was by a loose Spirit in order to let up Looseness without controul Therefore we take not away the Pleas but the abuse of them Nor do we take away freedom of Speech but in Truth 's Authority reprove that exorbitant Liberty of Rayling at Reviling and Reproaching Friends and exposing Truth to the Worlds contempt and scorn under pretence of freedom of Speech In page 42 they ask Why may not you be cautioned to beware of Formality Rep. We are often cautioned so as they that frequent our Meetings know And