the efficient cause of Man's Salvation Qu. Wither p. 22. Seeing that Light of Life was the Light and Life of the same Jesus Christ. And I think it is a real owning Jesus Christ who was born of the Virgin Mary to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation to confess that to his own holy Divine Light of Life Salvation is chiefly ascribed but Instrumentally to his Body And hath not the Apostle Paul the like Distinction where he confesseth we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Rom. 5. 10. Here 's Reconciliation by his Death and much more Salvation by his Life Wherefore F. Bugg's Consequence against us as bringing in Damnable Heresies Denying the Lord Jesus Christ to be a compleat Saviour p. 23. is a most foul and absurd Slander His instance in p. 23 that the Serpent is a Spirit and therefore that promised Seed which bruiseth his Head must be Spiritual And that Seed is Christ. To which I add consequently not only the outward Body or Flesh which he took upon him I cannot understand how this can be a Denial that Jesus Christ himself is the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation unless F. Bugg doth think that Christ was made up only of that outward Body of Flesh without any Divine Principle of Light and Life in him which I suppose he will not attempt to own or prove For though Christ took upon him the Seed of Abraham according to the Flesh and was the Seed of the Woman that bruises the Serpents Head even the promised Seed who through Death was to bruise under and destroy him that had the power of Death viz. The Devil yet he effectually doth it by his Divine Power Light and Life as the immediate and efficient Cause of Man's Salvation Wherein we still confess his Sufferings and Death in the Flesh Instrumentally to Contribute thereunto Christ Jesus as the promised Seed who came of a Woman made under the Law bruised the Serpent's Head both without us and within us without us through his Sufferings and Death by his Divine Testimony Word and Power within us by his Divine Life Light Word or Seed Spirit and Power which is all but one Christ himself not Two Christs nor to be divided Else how could we be born again of incorruptible Seed Or how doth that Seed remain in him that 's born again And is not that Seed Christ And is not the Word of Faith Christ in Spirit 'T is well that F. B. grants the head of the Serpent in Men shall be bruised Consequently this must be for their Salvation And Christ therefore as inwardly revealed by â—is Spirit and Power the efficient Cause there of Divers other absurd Consequences he draws upon us in this case not worth tracing His other Instances to prove his false Charge of the Quakers denying Jesus to be Christ and efficient Cause of Man's Salvation are most grosly applied and perverted as he saith by G. Fox's assuming Divine Attributes to himself p. 26 27. Which we must needs look upon to be a reiterated aspersion For where G. F. uses these Words I am the Light him by whom the World was made and doth enlighten every Man that comes into the World c. This he speaks in the Name of Christ and not of himself nor in his own Name as his following Words plainly shews viz. If you love the Light wherewith you are enlightened you will love Christ who saith Learn of me Now F. B. Dost thou in Conscience believe that G. F. assumes this to himself or that he himself made the World Or that he himself enlightens every Man 'T is very sad to see thee so hardened and wilfully perverse in thus perverting truth Thou knowest better and sins against knowledge in thy Calumnies against us F. Bug's Second Charge against the Quakers Their Books are Blasphemous and their practice Idolatrous c. This we utterly deny as a Calumnious Clamâ—uâ— against our Books and practice in general And therefore the more impossible for Fr. Bugg rationally to produce the Colour of proof thereof Wherefore I question him about his pretended Allegations 1. What Blasphemy or Idolatry was it for any of our Friends to write viz. Thou O North of England out of thee did the Branch spring and Star arise which gives Light to all the Regions round about in thee the Sun of Righteousness appeared c. 2. How proves F. Bugg that Fox's Disciples or Proselites as he scornfully calls them ecchoed back these Adorations to him as calling him the Branch the Star the Sun of Righteousness Alluding to Mic. 5. 2. Numb 24. 17. Mal. 4. 2. Zech. 3. 8. p. 31. I challenge Bugg to prove where the Quakers gave these Titles to the Person of George Fox or that he assumed them to himself Observe I have viewed over that Epistle of Edward Burrough's to the Camp of the Lord in England p. 64 65 66 67 where mention is made of the North of England and where the Branch did spring and the Star arise and the Sun of Righteousness appeared c. And G. F. is not so much as mentioned or named in all that Epistle and therefore Bugg has most shamefully belied and scandalized the Quakers in this point also not only in charging them that the Quakers Prophets give Witness to G. Fox instead of Christ that they call him the Branch the Star the Sun of Righteousness and put the North of England for the Town of Bethlehem N. Rom. unm Epist. to Ber. p. 2. But also because of our Testimony against this Horrid Lye and Abuse among others Bugg staged Twelve of us being Citizens Tradesmen and others of good Repute in his Mock Tryal wherein he condemns us for Perjured Persons to the Pillory with a form thereof in his N. Rom. Arraign to redicule and most grosly defame us both as to our Christian and Civil Reputations affected thereby Oh horrible Insolency and Wickedness in thee F. Bugg Thus wilfully to persist in thy Imposing gross Lies and Calumnies upon the World against us 3. What Divine Attributes did G. F. assume to himself in saying he wrote from the Mouth of the Lord or that he was cloathed with Righteousness p. 30. 5. How proves Bugg that to be a true and entire Copy of John Audland's Letter to G. F. which he cites p. 30 I deny his Citation and there 's reason to question the truth of it being also so often varied in Print and particularly from the Copy sent me by John Pennyman besides the Date of 1665 given it in the printed Libel entituled Some of the Quakers Principles c. gives more Cause to question the Truth of his Copy For that Date was Two Years after John Audland Died being in 1663 't is great Nonsense to suppose he writ it after he Died as appears by their Register of Burials in Westmorland And thou F. B. hast owned the said Libel and the
i. e. Samuel Waldenfield lately took occasion to repair to the said Bishop of Glocester having the reputation of a moderate Person and shewed him Fr. Bugg's said Pamphlet and Epistle dedicated to him and this very Passage of his Submission as not knowing but he had delivered it first in Manuscript to the Bishop for his Perusal and Correction Which when I enquired of him about the Bishop answered he had never seen it before nor knew the Man Whereupon I shewed him how preposterous it was for F. B. to expose his said Pamphlet in Print to general Judgment before he had the Bishops Judgment about it and how inconsistent with his said offer of his Book to his Perusal and submitting to his Censure the Matters therein How insincere F. B. was herein is obvious It seems he was resolved to traduce and asperse the Quakers in Print first that the Bishop might not have the opportunity to prevent him therein Though for a Pretext and Colour he Complements the Bishop with his Conditional Submission to his Censure and Judgment whether he had wronged the Quakers or not Did not this tend to make the World believe he had the Bishops Privity or Approbation therein or otherwise that he would not have divâ—lged what he had writ because offered to the Bishops Perusal and Censure who knew nothing of it until 't was gone out into the World What a Mockery and plain Abuse was this tending to make the Bishop suspected of giving Countenance thereto To whom we shewed also Bugg's other Book against us stiled New Rome Arraign with his Mock Trial and Condemnation of Perjury and Pillory against us and the Occasion thereof which Calumnies the Bishop disowned and could not allow of such Treatment And I thought meet to give this hint thereof to do the Bishop so much Justice that he might not lye under the suspition of giving Countenance to this our Implacable Adversary in these his Calumnies and bitter Invectives against us As I did in the Postscript of my late Answer Innocency Triumphant For Henry Goldwell Justice of Peace and late Member of Parliament to whom F. B. dedicated his other Scandalous Book stiled New Rome Arraigned without his Privity or Knowledge as he confessed and for which he also told some of us he severely advertised F. Bugg when he saw it in Print with his Mock-Trial Perjury and Pillory against us being sensible it was a Reflection on his Reputation to be rendred or suspected as the Patroniser or Countenancer of such Scandalous Pamphlets And 't is to be much more hoped that the said Bishop will advertise F. B. for endeavouring to shelter himself under his Countenance or Reputation In point of Civility I thought meet to shew the said Bishop of Glocester this foregoing Passage relating to him about F. b's Dedication in Manuscript before 't was printed because I had such occasion to make use of his Name in Print that he might not be offended which he was not but took it well from us Samuel Waldenfield being then also present with me However whatever we suffer there is a just and all-seeing God that will judge righteously do rightly and finally determine the Controversie between the Two Seeds the Righteous and the Wicked To Him the Righteous Judge of all we commit our Innocent Cause Friendly Reader my Concern in this Controversie is designed only to vindicate Truth according to my understanding thereof and to do particular Persons wronged so much right as to their Principle as by referring to their own Explications for where either their Words are perverted or seem dubious in the manner of Expressions their own more full and clear Demonstrations ought to be taken notice of in point of Justice to them And where the whole Body or People called Quakers are wrongfully charged about their Principles from particular Persons 't is an absurd way of arguing whether it be from any one 's defective or dubious manner of Expressions or our Adversaries own perversions and misrepresentations And in that case to manifest Truth and to do the said People right as to their Principles c. I find it the plainest way to have recourse to their Concurrent Testimonies and Harmonies of their Writers and Books to evince the truth of their Principles to others And this Method which I do sincerely observe all Religious and Christian Societies will allow of and not condemn a whole Body of Sober Religious People or Christian Society for any particular shortness in manner of Expressions for that were very partial and unjust And I doubt not but the Lord our God will stop the Mouth of Iniquity that 's open against us and clear our Innocency more and more that his Truth may prevail over Deceit and Envy and the Upright in Heart shall see it and rejoyce in the Lord and in the prosperity of his blessed Truth over his and their Enemies From a Servant of Christ George Whitehead London the 3d. of the 2d Month 1694 Reader Note That the omission of the Names of our present Opposers in the Title is 1. Because of the Contempt brought upon them by their great Envy and outrage 2. Lest their Names in the Title should cause some to refuse inspecting this Treatise In opposition to the great Abuses Misrepresentations of F. Bugg and his Advocate Tho. Crisp against us the following Testimony which was lately delivered to the Parliament is added WE whose Names are underwritten being in Christian Society with the People commonly called QUAKERS Do in good Conscience Declare and Certifie all Persons concerned 1. That we sincerely believe and Confess That Jesus of Nazareth who was born of the Virgin Mary is the true Messiah the very Christ the Son of the Living God to whom all his Prophets gave Witness And we do highly value his Death Sufferings Works Offices and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind together with his Laws Doctrine and Ministry 2. That this very Christ of God was and is the Lamb of God that takes away the Sins of the World who was slain was dead and is alive and lives for evermore in his divine eternal Glory Dominion and Power with the â—ather 3. That the HOLY Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are of divine Authority as being given by Inspiration from God 4. And that Magistracy or Civil Government is God's Ordinance the good ends thereof being for the Punishment of Evil-doers and Praise of them that do well And we know of no other Doctrine or Principle preached maintained or ever received among or by us since we were a People contrary to these before mentioned Signed in Behalf of the said People Thomas Lower William Crouch William Ingram William Meade William Macket Philip Ford Francis Camfield John Edge Thomas Hutson Charles Marshall Josiah Ellis Gilbert Latey Theodor Eccleston Joseph Wassey Thomas Cox John Bowater Benjamin Antrobus William Philips Edward Brook William Townsend John Hall George Oldner Thomas Barker Abraham Johnson Tho. Twinbarrow
love of God and God blessed our Meetings c. Thy First Charge against the Quakers is That they deny Jesus of Nazareth who was born of the blessed Virgin Mary to be Christ and the efficient Cause of Mans Salvation Here are Two Charges made one both which we positively and sincerely deny as contrary to our profest and known Principles The Scripture Texts proving Jesus to be the Christ c. p. 14 15 16. we ever have and do sincerely believe and own But that the Quakers â—â—ach the contrary as Bâ—â—gg â—aith we utterly deny as a gross Calumny imposed upon us His instance foâ—…roof of from Isaac Pennington's Question to â—…ssors wherein he distinguishes between Christ and the Body in which he came and between the outward Vessel and the Inward Life and not calling the Bodily Garment Christ c. i. e chiefly and in the first place Christ as I. P. explains himself is no Proof that the Quakers deny Jesus to be Christ for he did not consist only of an outward Body or Vessel he had both inward Life Soul and Spirit even as perfect Man much more as God And therefore Fr. Bugg's inference that the Quakers would divide the Humanity from the Godhead is false they are distinguished but not divided in the entire Being of Christ as also that they can never call him Christ but a Vail is falsly infinuated though his Flesh was called the Vail Heb. 10. 20. This Objection has been plainly answered as well as the Question Doth not the Name Christ belong to the whole Body c. In our Charitable Essay p. 4. which Fr. Bugg gives the go by to without Replication running the rounds to his old Objection Idem per Idem imposing and begging the Question he will neither see nor take Answers how plainly soever given thus impertinent and trifling he is But to clear Isaac Pennington in this Point he did not deny Jesus of Nazareth to be Christ but sincerely confesseth to the same Jesus Christ in his Works 2nd Part p. 18. in these Words viz. The Enemy hath raised up Jealousies and Prejudices against us as if we denied the Scriptures and Ordinances of God and that Christ that died at Jerusalem against which Isaac P. Answers viz. First That we do really in our Hearts own that Christ who came in the fulness of time in that prepared Body to do the Father's Will His coming into the World Doctrine Miracles Sufferings Death Resurrection c. in plainness and simplicity of Heart according as it is exprest in the Letters of the Scripture Secondly That we own no other Christ than that nor hold sorth no other thing for Christ but him who then appeared and was made manifest in the Flesh. And p. 19. ibid. The Lord hath shewn me in Spirit that they themselves are guilty of that very charge and that he will so implead them at his Judgment Seat which they cast upon us even of denying that Christ which died at Jerusalem to be Christ. Thus far Isaac Pennington What more plain and innocent Testimony could Man have given Where 's now either his or the Quakers denial of Jesus of Nazareth to be Christ as F. Bugg has over and over unjustly charged us Another Instance out of the Christian Quaker is that the holy Body i. e. of Christ was not instrumentally without a share of the general Victory and holy Priviledges obtained yet that the efficient and chiefest Cause was the Light and Life p. 18. This is so far from either denying Jesus to be Christ or the efficient Cause of Salvation that it is a plain Confession that Jesus Christ was both the instrumental and the efficient cause of Man's Salvation Instrumental in his Holy Body and Efficient by his Light and Life Seeing we preach no other Light or Life to effect Salvation but that of Jesus Christ. And we know of no true Understanding Christians but will confess that it was not the Humanity or Manhood of Christ only that effects or works Man 's Salvatian without the Divinity seeing as Man he saith I can of my Self do nothing as I hear I judge John 5. 30. Wherefore Fr. Bugg's Inference that they i. e. the Quakars have robbed the blessed Jesus of one of his eminent Attributes viz. of being the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation is notoriously false and impertinent like the rest Jesus Christ is a compleat Saviour As also is F. B's other That they insinuate by consequence that Him that was born of the Virgin He is no otherwise a Saviour than other good Men are p. 21. Which he has flatly contradicted by his Instance immediately following viz. If some Men in Scriptures are entituled Saviours because of their Contribution of their Trials Travels and Labours towards the Salvation of Mankind of much more right is that honour ascribed to Him who had the Spirit without Measure c. p. 21. Whereby its apparent that much more Honour of a Saviour is ascribed to Christ than to any other Men. Thus notorious is Bugg in his Contradiction to himself most unjustly to prove his Lying Charge of their Denying Jesus to be the Christ and the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation Oh Horrible Insolency and Self-Condemned Apostacy Now Fr. Bugg I query of thee 1. Didst thou when a Quaker deny Jesus to be the Christ. 2. Didst thou when a Quaker deny Jesus to be the efficient cause of Man's Salvation 3. Didst thou when a Quaker ever hear the Quakers deny Jesus to be the Christ in their Ministry 4. Didst thou when a Quaker ever hear the Quakers Deny Christ to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation 5. Nay didst thou deny Jesus to be the Christ or the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation when in the Name of the People called Quakers thou confessedst That in the beginning the inshining Light of Christ Jesus by his Heavenly Spiritual Appearance in the Hearts and Souls of his People was our Principle the very Foundation Principle and Corner Stone of our Building See his De Christ. Lib. 2d Part p. 24. 6. Didst thou deny Jesus Christ to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation in thy confessing to this inshining Light of Christ Jesus as the more sure word of Prophesie and that there was sufficiency in it being obeyed to lead to Salvation Or in thy confessing to the vertue and excellency of this holy Unction and to this word nigh in the Heart and to Christ Jesus the Second Adam as he is a quickening Spirit even to Christ within and thus People must wait to know him except they were Reprobaâ—es ibid. p. 25 26 27. 7. Didst thou by these Confessions deny Jesus of Nazareth who was born of the Virgin Mary to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation 8. What notorious and gross Contradiction to thy self is it then for thee to make ascribing the Salvation chiefly to the holy Light of Life in Christ and unto his Body instrumentally to be a denial of his being
Christ's Baptism with the Spirit And of the Washing of Regeneration Which was greater And was not the outward Supper Bread and Cup in Commemoration of Christ's Death a Figure also of his Inward Spiritual Supper Eating and Drinking with him in his Kingdom Who said he except ye eat my Flesh and Drink my Blood ye have no Life in you Where then is the falshood in our confessing Baptism and the Lord's Supper in the Figure and Substance F. B. quotes E. Burrough's Works p. 51. The Bread and Wine is visible and carnal a figure of a Spiritual thing And what then are they Spiritual or the Substance which is Christ That 's Popery which the Martyrs opposed who esteemed the outward Elements the Bread and the Cup figurative or a Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ spiritually receivedly Faith What great Error then can F. B. prove against us therein He farther cites E. B. in this point as follows p. 45 viz. For Christ never since he was sacrificed brake the Bread and drank the Cup with his Disciples p. 581 instead of 518. We do deny and do say it is no Ordinance of God neither was it ever commanded of him or practised by the Saints but is an Institution of the Whore of Rome c. This F. B. renders E. B. to say of the Bread and the Cup being cited in the next antecedent Words as here Oh sad what a gross Perverter art thou F. B This has been often thy fallacious manner of Citation to abuse us as 't is plain that which E. B. here says we deny as never commanded of God nor practised by the Saints but â— Romish Institution was Sprinkling or Baptizing Infants calling it the Baptism into Faith c. as in E. B' s. p. 518 before quoted and not breaking of Bread and drinking of the Cup ' as given by Christ unto his Disciples E. B knew this was some time practised by Believers ' but not the other and it had been more ingenious for F. B. to have convicted him of Error about Sprinkling than to mis-represent him Though I grant E. B. in p. 518 objects against their manner of breaking Bread and drinking Wine among the Unconverted and Unregenerate as not commanded of God nor practised by his Saints But does not call the breaking of Bread and drinking Wine a Popish Institution of Rome as he does Sprinkling Infants and their calling it the Baptism into the Faith This point is answered in the Quakers Vindication p. 2. col 1. But F. B. is more expert in mis-representing traducing and railing than in rational Argument or fair Disputation As to our Exception against Sprinkling and seeming thereby to allow of Dipping p. 46. we except against the one as unscriptural and allow of the other as once Scriptural in its proper Dispensation F. Bugg's Fifth and Sixth Charge against the Quakers That they undervalue the Death and Sufferings of Christ and exalt their own Sufferings above the Sufferings of Christ above the Sufferings of the Apostles above the Sufferings of the Martyrs or any Christians since the Days of Christ c. We deny these Charges as expresly contrary to our Principle and publick known Testimonies both highly valuing and exalting the Death and Sufferings of Christ above all other His charging the Quakers to exalt their Sufferings above the Sufferings of Christ imports as if they so lifted up extolled dignified or rendred their Sufferings more excellent than Christ's This is a most gross Calumny cast upon the People called Quakers and as expresly contrary to their Intention and Principle Though F. B. takes advantage at some Words of E. B's which he partially cites adding the Words called Quakers and as unfairly construes against the Quakers in general as where he saith Q. Mary's Days brought not forth a Suffering more cruel F. B. leaves out in many respects which many respects he explains to be about trivial Matters as for not putting off the Hat thee or thou to a Person and denying the circumstance of Swearing and Hundreds suffering on Suspicion when nothing could be charged against them and that this was contrary to Magna Charta Thus E. B. reflects upon the Arbitrary Proceedings of those in power in 1657. Though I cannot warrant all his comparative Expressions but grant that the Passage objected against E. B. in this place was not so well worded as intended according to his own Explication For by greater and more cruel Suffering I cannot think E. B. so senseless as to intend in all Respects as that the People of God in our Age have undeâ—gone greater and more cruel Sufferings than all the Primitive Sufferers Apostles and Martyrs in the Ten Persecutions no sure but in some respects wherein they did not suffer then upon such small Pretences as many did in Cromwel's time without any such pretext of Law as the Jews pretended against Christ. However tho' the Sufferings of the People of God among us was far short of the Sufferings in the Apostles Days and in the Ten Persecutions c. yet F. B. gives but a mean and partial Account thereof namely of a few Imprisonments and some small Distresses c. In the Twenty Five Years he was amongst the Quakers he might have remembred also the cruel Whippings and tedious Imprisonments close Confinements many of God's People have met withal here in Old England together with cruel Beatings Stockings Stonings c. As also the sad Accounts from New England of the cruel and barbarous Whippings Cutting Ears Hanging and putting to Death divers of our Iunocent Friends there I may not say this was so cruel as the Sufferings in the Days of the Apostles and Ten Persecutions c. But these being inflicted by Professors of Christianity in Old and New England it seemed more sinful and unjust in them than in the Heathens who pretended to no such Religion and Profession One remarkable Passage of Fr. Bugg's pursuant to the Fifth and Sixth Charge against the Quakers I must needs take some notice of In his Sheet to the Parliament he puts a Query viz. Whether was greatest the Sufferings of the Quakers or the Sufferings of Christ To which Bugg saith G. W. gave no direct Answer but glossed it over as his usual way is for if he had answered that the Sufferings of the Quakers had been greatest as their Doctors teach a gross Lie by the way the People would have been ready to Stone him for Blasphemy Again if he had said the Sufferings of Christ had been the greatest he had then given the Lye to E. B. So that he was in a great strait like the Pharisees of old their Predecessors Thus far Bugg p. 47 48. Now F. Bugg I pray thee see and I wish thy Ministers William Smiâ—hies and Isaac Archer may see what a notorious wilful Liar thou art in this very point in saying G. W. gave no direct Answer to thy Question but was in a great strait To evince thy wilful Lie herein
do but review thy own Query and G. W's direct Answer therein in the Quak. Vindic. p. 2. viz. To Bugg's Query 5. Whether was the Sufferings of Christ or the Sufferings of the Quakers greatest 1. In the First place we answer the Sufferings of Christ in the nature of them both inward and outward in Agony of Soul and Pains of Body by that most cruel Death of the Cross following that of Scourging and Crowning with Thorns 2. It was most unjustly and wickedly inflicted by his Persecutors the Jews and Heathen yet worse'in the Jews because they might have known better and because they prosecuted him upon false Witness And as Christ's Sufferings were most Cruel and Unjust both as to the Nature thereof and the Dignity of him that suffered so he was a most acceptable Sacrifice and sweet smelling Savour to God and his Suffering and Sacrifice of Universal Advantage and Benefit to Mankind in that he died for all Men and and gave himself a Ransom for all that all might be capable of Redemption and Salvation through him Now pray observe that G. W. gave a direct Answer to Bugg's Query viz. Whether was the sufferings of Christ or the sufferings of the Quakers greatest G. W. c. answers directly viz. 1. The Sufferings of Christ in the nature of them c. 2. Christ's Sufferings most exalted and esteemed because of the Dignity of him that suffered And this was obvious to Bugg's Eyes in Print in our said Vindication and therefore then F. B. must needs be a notorious wilful Liar herein in affirming G. W. gave no direct Answer to thy Query but was in a great strait And as to E. B's intention and Principle he exalted Christ's Sufferings in their worth dignity and merit above all other Men's as appears by his own and many other Friends Testimonies highly valuing and exalting the Death and Sufferings of Christ. E. B's Confession of Faith in his Works p. 252. Confesseth Christ Jesus as the High-Priest of God the one Offering for Sin who takes away Sin and makes Intercession And p. 441 He also confesseth a being washed and cleansed from all Unrighteousness by the Blood of Jesus by which their Sins are remitted who walk and abide in his Light c. He saith See also a Book Entituled The Son of Perdition Revealed Printed 1661 wherein Ed. Burroughs and G. Whitehead truly thus confess p. 2 4. viz. As Thousands can witness who have heard us both preach up and contend for the free Grace of God to all Men and thereby i. e. by the Grace of God Christ tasted Death for every Man and died for all Men and gave himself a Ransom for all Heb. 2. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 6. 2 Cor. 5. 14. 1 Joh. 2. 2. And it s also testified that in many more Books of ours the free Grace of God i. e. in Christ to all and Christ's Dying for all Men is declared And p. 4. ibid. Reconciliation of the World hrough Christ's Death and his being a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood clearly confessed Thus far E. B. and G. W. Thus highly have they exalted Christ's Sufferings for the Good of Mankind but thus have they not exalted their own or any other Mens or Peoples whaâ—ever Therefore the Quakers exalt Christ's Sufferings above their own and all others consequently Bugg has greatly wrong'd the People called Quakers in this point in his Fifth and and Sixth false Charge before cited Some of Bugg's Railery and Lies added under the same Head against the Quakers viz. Gross Lâ—ars Grand Impostors Impudent Cheats Yea Ellwood Richardson and the most Learned among them As they have shewed all the Contempt they can to Jesus of Nazareth calling him a Vail a Garment c. To the Scriptures to the Ordinances and Ministers of Jesus of Nazareth with great Incharity p. 56. Here F. B. thou hast lied to purpose both against the Living and the Dead I dare say Tho. Ellwood and the Learned among us who are yet alive can testify against thee and the Devil too who is the Author of these thy Horrid Lies And that their Preachers never lost Fifty Pounds p. 57 is another notorious Lie for I in particular with many others have lost many times more by Informers and Imprisonments Whereas F. B. is offended at my calling him so often Bugg p. 59 60 calling me thereupon Insolent and Imperious George What 's he then in calling me only Whitehead and another Fox and another Ellwood and another Richardson Was this Pride Insolency or Imperiousness in him If he says 't was for Brevities sake so saâ— I for I have often mentioned his Name at â—engtr but sometimes F. B. for Brevities sake He has also told me he would not go a step to meet such a proud imperious Fellow as in his Letter to me Dated Feb. 16th 1693. Pray what Humility has F. B. shewn herein And this is not all but he thinks thereupon to debase me by upbraiding me with my former Estate saying G. W. came amongst the Quakers Anno 1652 a poor Boy about Fifteen or Sixteen Years old travelling on foot and hath so gathered up his Crumbs though chiefly at other Mens Tables that he scorns to call him that fed him and his Friends at his Table by his proper Name p. 60. Though he somewhat mistakes as to Time and Age yet that Poverty I am not at all ashamed of it was for Christ's sake that I was made low and poor I was no whit behind F. B. in Education though I was made willing to walk on foot and deeply to suffer by Imprisonment as I did and many other ways even in my young Years wherein the Lord was with me as he still is I bless his Name And as for being fed at F. B's Table I think 't was not very often whether Three or Four Times I remember not and I suppose it was not without some Invitations by him to his House Didst not thou F. B. invite me to thy House sometimes Surely it was not then intended to upbraid me in Print with seeding at thy Table Thou wast then more a Man and of more Civility 't is pity thy Conversion to the Priests and Levites should so much deprive thee both of Compassion Natural Affection and Civility However since 't is thy pleasure thus to upbraid me I offer thee reasonable Satisfaction let me have a true Bill how oft I have fed at thy Table and what each Meal of mine comes to according to the usual Rates of Ordinaries and I will pay it or cause Payment to thee God willing To thy Six Charges against G. Whitehead 1. A Publick Defamer I deny thy Charge the Terms thereof considered in the common and evil Sense But why a Publick Defamer what because he writ that F. Bugg was turned Informer a Self-Condemned Apostate c. The latter is largely proved against thee in my several Answers as in Innocency against Envy The contentious Apostate c. A Charitable Essay
is pretended by one Party This is falsly represented and perverted against G. W. in the first Part who did not represent those of G. K's Doctrinâ— mentioned but as pretended Fundamentals although T. C. has this falsehood pretended Fundamentals divers times over in his Introduction Whereas my Words are as is pretended by one Party relative to divers Accounts lately published in Print of some â—ate Divisions and Disputes about several Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith as is pretended by one Party which therefore at least some whereof I grant to be such and do not call them pretended Fundamentals But that the late Division is pretended to be about them according as my Words are clear in our small Treatise referred to viz. The Christian Doctrine and Society of the People called Quakers p. 1. one of which Fundamental Doctrines which he says G. W. represents but as pretended Fundamentals is That Christ is in Heaven in his glorified Nature of Man Body and Soul God and Man both Introduction p. 2. And where have I contemned or opposed this Doctrine How Inadvertent and unjust art thou T. C. in this Do not I plainly declare in the same Treatise p. 3 That as Man Christ died for our Sins rose again and was received into Glory And p. 5. That Christ's Body that was Crucified by the power of God was raised from the Dead and that the same Christ that was Crucified ascended into Heaven and Glory and that his Flesh saw no Corruption it did not Corrupt But yet doubtless his Body was Changed into a more Glorious and Heavenly Condition than it was in when subject to divers Sufferings on Earth c. Where 's now the Contempt of his Person Mayst thou not be ashamed of thy false abusive Charge From my Saying the same Christ that was therein i. e. in the Body or Flesh Crucified thou falsly inferrest So then he that was nailed to the Cross and pierced was not Christ p. 24. Here thou quarrellest with the Apostles Doctrine and Language 1 Pâ—t 3. 18. Being put to Death in the Flesh And ch 4. 1. Christ hath suffered for us in the Flesh. 1 John 4. 2. Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh And 2 John 7. And many Deceivers are entred into the World who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh. Mark here Christ suffered in the Flesh and Jesus Christ come in the Flesh. Was this to deny him that suffered on the Cross to be Christ or to Conâ—emn his Person No sure How sillily hast thou deduced many Inferences of this kind against us as if thou wert minded to be Litigious Again Thy inferring That he who was nailed â—o the Cross was not Christ but a Body a Vail a Garment of an Earthly Perishing Nature p. 24. Here again thou pervertest and abusest us Where did we ever say that he who so suffered was not Christ but a Body a Vail c. Seeing 〈◊〉 was Christ that suffered in the Flesh and his â—â—esh was called the Vail Heb. 10. What Contempt to Christ or Denial of him was such Sayâ—â—g And where did ever any of us say that â—â—s Body that was nailed to the Cross was of a â—â—rishing Nature seeing his Flesh saw no Corâ—â—ption But thy great Offence is about Iâ— Pennington's â—ords viz. We can never call the Bodily Garâ—…t Christ p. 26 c. And what then is this 〈◊〉 Undervaluing or Contempt to Jesus Christ â—25 Is it not as true literally as a Man's Garâ—ent cannot be the Man himself that wears it â—â—d may it not be as true figuratively as Christ's Flesh was the Vail And that without any Contempt to him his Body or Flesh called the Vail Unless thou canst prove the Holy Apostle a Contemner thereof who used the same Expression He i. e. Christ hath Consecrated for us a new and living way through the Vail i. e. his Flesh Heb. 10. 20. That Christ Jesus as to his entire Existence or Being doth not consist only of the Body or Flesh that was Crucified Thou grants as much not only in thy Confessing his Person as joyned to the Godhead Power Life and Soul was called Jesus and the Saviour p. 24. But also his being the Anointed as well as the Anointing p. 5. For Christ was before Abraham and David in Spirit called him Lord and he was that Spiritual Rock that all Israel drank of As for excusing Errors and Contempt of our Lord Jesus falsly charged on J. P. and being liable to be charged therewith p. 26. I am not conscious to my self of so doing by discovering his Intention and by his own Explications of the Words objected against him viz. As either that the Vail which was Christ's Flesh or that the Bodily Garment we can never call the entire Christ as intimated by his own Words chiefly and in the first place Christ as in one of his Questions 'T is strange that thou should shew so much Envy against that Innocent Man as to charge him with Contempt of our Lord Jesus who did more sincerely believe and confess him both in Principle Doctrine Charity and Innocent Conversation than thou hast done whose sincere Confession is also evinced against thy Brother F. Bugg By the Term Vail we neither undervalue Jesus nor set his Light above himself as is implied against us p. 25. For though every degree of Divine Light in us is of and from Christ Jesus yet 't is greater and more as in him in whom the fulness is as is more fully cleared in our said Treatise of our Christian Doctrine Concerning the Flesh of Christ being a Vail Heb. 10. thou grants was in respect to Man and so the Figure may be proper as intended by the Apostle If so then that Vail was not the entire Christ though the Name was given both to his Soul and Body in Scripture jointly and severally if by the Term Flesh be commonly understood the Person of our Lord Jesus where then dost thou prove that the Quakers contemn the Flesh of Christ considered either Spiritually or Litterally And though the Person of Christ I find but once mentioned in Scripture 2 Cor. 2. 10. from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in facie Christi vel Conspectu Christi in the Face or Sight of Christ. Yet understanding thy meaning I am not minded to quarrel with thee about Words and Terms To thy excusing F. Bugg's false Charge of Denying Jesus of Nazareth against us p. 25 I do not perceive thou canst make any good work of it upon his Instances where he makes our confessing Christ in us and witnessing him nearer us than at Jerusalem as J. Naylâ—r did c. to be a denying of Jesus of Nazareth or confessing that Divine Principle i. e. the Word the Life or Spirit of Christ to be the Foundation Principle of Living Faith and Knowledge of Christ in his Spiritual Appearance in us I cannot see how this can be a Denying of Jesus of Nazareth any more than the Apostles preaching