another But however G. Whitehead and the other Quakers have sent to the Pit all the Church of England and all the Christian World who do Profess Faith in the Three Persons of the Blessed Trinity And the Persons themselves not only the Word or Letters for these cannot be sent thither And shall those who not only Deny but Blaspheme Not only Blaspheme but send to the Pit of Hell O Horror to Repeat it the Persons of the Holy Trinity Shall these be Shrouded under an Indulgence which Expresly Spues out all such from Under its Protection who Oppose or Deny the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity Shall these be Included in this Toleration who will not Disown G. Whitehead for the Quotations above Cited but still think him a Teacher sent from God Let this Test be put upon the Quakers And see whether they will Part with G. Whitehead or the Toleration If they stick by George in this it is a Demonstration that they like this Doctrin he has Deliver'd But they have given us a Full and Authoritative Decision in this matter That they do still own and Adhere to not only these Doctrins before Quoted But All and Every Part of what has been Deliver'd by their Doctors ever since their Beginning In their Decretal Epistle from their yearly Meeting at London which is their Supreme and most General Councel for the year 1696. They do Re-Assert and Confirm All their Ancient Testimonies And that in All the Parts of it For say they Truth is one and Changes not And what it Convinced us of to be Evil in the Beginning it Reproves still This is to keep up their Infallibility And in this both Antidote and Appendix and in all their Late writings they strenuously Assert That they have not Changed at all at least in any Point of Doctrin And still stand by and Maintain All that they have Printed or Preach'd since they were Quakers And as if this had not been Enough they have Printed it in the Post-Man that none might be Ignorant of it I say not this That I wou'd have any Persecution as they call it Renewed against them I like not that Method for ther are Honest Well-Meaning Men among them and the Sincere tho' Deluded are most apt to put themselves into the way of Suffering which often Hardens seldom Converts them And they are worthy of a Gentler Method But the End for which I have mention'd this Act is first To do that Right to the Government as to Free them from the Scandal of Recognizing the Quakers as Protestants who Deny the Holy Trinity the Satisfaction of Christ and all outward both Sacraments and Priesthood therefore the Protestant Religion is not Answerable or Reproachable for Them Secondly I have Minded the Quakers of this That if neither Religion nor Good Manners can Restrain their Furie yet that out of Policie they wou'd learn a little more Decency towards the Clergy especially the Bishops who have it in their Hands to put the Penal Laws in Execution against them They not being Included within the Act of Toleration And since they Enjoy their Present Liberty meerly from the Grace at least the Good Nature of those whom of all Mankind they have Endeavour'd to Render most Abhorr'd I think it is but a Reasonable and very Favourable Composition That they shou'd Retract the Above Mention'd and other such like Base and most Scandalous Reflections which they have Cast upon the Church of England Her Priests and Bishops as well as All the Rest of Her Community For we say Leave is Light And that Favour is ill Bestow'd that is not worth Thanks at least Fair Vsage Now the Reparatation ought to be as Publick as the Injury Therfore the Easiest way I can Propose for the Quakers is That their Second-Days-Meeting which do sit every week in London shou'd Publish Under their Hands a Condemnation of the said Scandals and Abuses vented by Will. Penn G. Fox and others of their Writers against the Church of England Particularly These before Quoted and Suffer it to be Printed But most Especially what is above Quoted of most Hideous Blasphemy against the Holy and Tremendous Trinity of God But if they Remain Mute in this Matter as G. Whitehead says to the Ministers And Refuse to Right God and His Church from these Abuses cast upon Them which are in their own Nature Intolerable then may she justly say in Whitehead's words We do not intend to Ly under their Foul Calumnies Then Let The Cry Ascend Higher Then May they be further justly call'd in Question and Expos'd thereupon for their Neglect of Justice Then may the Bishops if they think fit send to their Second-Days-Meeting and Require such a Subscription and Submission from Them or otherwise That they shou'd Acknowledge the Doctrin of the Holy Trinity in the words of our Litany and Articles to Qualify themselves for the Benefit of the Act of Toleration At least to Disown what G. Fox G. Whitehead W. Penn and others of their Writers have said Blasphemously against it But if they will still Adhere to their Former Doctrin herein then have they totally Excluded themselves from the Act of Toleration And then if the Bishops do not let them know that it is in their Power to be Civil to them they will be Good-Natur'd indeed 2. But ther is nothing go's down so hardly with the Quakers as the Doctrin of Repentance because it Ruins their Pretence to Infallibility and Perfection And of all sort of Repentance they Hate that most which Requires them to make Restitution or Satisfaction for the Injuries that they have done Therefore they must stick to all the Calumnies and Outrage which they have vented against God and His Church and all others and to all their Beastly Nastiness and Loathsome stuff which Run out of their Clean Vessels They must by their Principles Return with the Dog to their own Vomit and the Sow to her Wallowing in the Mire This Notion of Perfection is such a sad Ingredient in the Principles of the Quakers as Eternity is in the Torments of Hell for it Confirms them in all their Sins and Hinders them from ever Returning G. Whitehead has Publish'd a little Book in December 1697 of which this is the Title A seasonable Account of the Christian Testimony and Heavenly Expressions of Tudor Brain upon his Death-Bed being a young man Aged about 17 years Published for Instruction and Caution to the Youth among Friends call'd Quakers where p. 2. you have this Passage At several times being Advis'd to Prepare for his latter End for if he Liv'd it wou'd be well and if he Died it wou'd be his Gain his Answer was He was not Conscious of any Action he had done that he shou'd be â—fraid of Appearing before God Almighty O Dreadful To see a Miserable Creature go to Death Harden'd against Repentance by this Pernicious Doctrine of the Quakers And to see this Recommended for the Instruction of other
Generation of Men call'd Quakers Printed 1654. subscrib'd by five of the then Ministers p. 83.84.85 where you will find more Instances as of Edmund Nuby's wife who went Naked through Kendal and after in Dec. 1653. came in the same manner into the Church at Kendal Another in the Same Posture about the beginning of January into Hutton Chappel at the time of Exercise as they word it Elizab Levens and Miles Newby Here they go by Couples Male and Female like the Beasts into the Ark went Naked up the streets at Kendal This was attested by Mr. Walker Minister at Kendal under his hand by his Letters baring Date 31. January 1653. Thom. Castel went as Naked as he was Born thro' the streets at Kendal the 10. January 1653. On Monday 28. Octob. 1653 one Thom. Holme of Kendal went as Naked thro' the Market-Place at Kirby Steven upon the Market Day and at his turning he said It is not I but God that goeth Naked And the week following another Great Ring-Leader of the Quakers one Taylour came to that Town And Denounced Woes against it for Rejecting that Prophet of The Lord whom He had sent to do signs and wonders in it All these Instances were in one Year within the Compass of 4 Months in and about Kendal when Quakerism was but 3 years old You may Imagin then how many more Examples might be Produc'd in other Places throu-out this and other Kingdoms and Nations where they have spread themselves in 48 years time now since they came into the World But if you say that these Testimonies are taken from Adversaries the 5 Ministers before Mentioned I Answer that in things of such Publick and Notorious Nature it cannot be suppos'd that they wou'd Print a Lye so soon that is Presently after as by the date of their Book such things were done when it wou'd have been in the Power of Every body in those Towns to Contradict and Expose them And if these Instances had been False it is not to be Imagin'd but that the Quakers in those times wou'd have Deny'd them But further we have both George Fox and James Naylor their Answer to this book of these 5 Ministers And they Both do allow these Instances to be True Boast of More of them And Defend and Justifie the thing as being Divine and From God G. Fox's Answer is in his Great Mystery p. 233. where as to these Persons going Naked he says This hath been a Figure of your Nakedness who are Egypt Spiritual and the Ethiopian Black And speaking of the Holy Prophets having been Signs to those in their Generations he adds such the Lord hath moved his Servants to give a True Sign amongst you and not a Lying who have their Cloathing of the Spirit which ye want which ye shall witness the Truth of the Lord God in the Sign if ever ye come into the True Cloathing of the Spirit of God By this no man can be sav'd who will not Allow and Receive these Beastly Im-Modesties of the Quakers as Divine and Heavenly Signs James Nayler in his Answer to this Book of the Five Ministers which he Intituls A Discovery of the Man of Sin Printed 1655. coming to that Point of their Going Naked he says p. 48. God hath made as many Signs among you as to go Naked in your Steeple-Houses in your Markets in your Streets as Many in the Northern Parts which is a Figure to you of all your Nakedness Here he owns many Instances of the like Nature in other Places I cou'd Produce more by name as of Daniel Smith Distiller of Malborrough in Wiltshire who about Twenty years ago went from Malborrough to Hull on purpose to shew himself stark Naked in the Church there which he did And I suppose the Friends have not forgot at least the Quaker that Marry'd her has not that Precious Servant Maid at Putney who came Quite naked into the Room where her Master had Company at Dinner and when some wou'd have cover'd her shame she thank'd them for their Love but wou'd not admit of that sort of Kindness But said that she was moved of the Lord to march quite round the Table in that same Posture which she did But why shou'd I heap up Instances of this their Beastliness seeing it is not Disputed but Justify'd And the Receiving such Obscene Bruts as Signs sent from Heaven made necessary to Salvation as you have heard from Fox But all sober Christians will rather look upon them as Signs of the Prodigious Delusions of the Devil to make Men believe even Women that Divesting themselves of all Natural Modesty And Exposing themselves Naked in Publick Naked Men and Women together as before is told and out-doing the very Impudence of the Stews is Consistent with that Shamefastness and Sobriety which is so strongly Inculcated in the Gospel of Christ But to think such Highly Englightned beyond the ordinary Measure and thereby to Commence Prophets and Prophetesses sent from God what is this but to have their Brains turn'd with this Enthusiastical-Madness and without straining the Matter to be Literally out of their Wits and Distracted What Greater Signs are shewn of it even in Bedlam And are not they as Mad who Defend and Justify these in their Madness Of which more hereafter 2. But as those who thus Expos'd themselves Stark-Naked In their Strange Singularities are to be Computed no otherwise than as Stark-Mad so these who in lesser Degrees act contrary to the Common Reason and Sense of Mankind are to be suppos'd Maddish for ther are Degrees of Madness Now if we see a man Abstract himself from all Human Conversation to be always alone to Grow surly and Morose silent and sullen when Accosted Exotick and Phantastical in his Dress shunning what any body else do's wear loving to Appear Singular in all his words and Gestures who will neither Speak Look nor Go like other men the Common observation of Mankind reckons of these as Growing towards Madness But if they say such a stress upon these as to think it a Sin to use the Common Language Habit or Salutations this is a Heightning of their Madness To make it as G. Fox do's a Sin for Women to have slit-Peaks on the Skirts of their Wastcoats Short Black Aprons or Vizard-Masks or for Men to wear Skimming-Dish Hats as he calls the little Hats or Vnnecessary Buttons on their Coats or Cloaks And to Pronounce all this stuff as from the Immediat Spirit of God! see Sn. p. 299. If this be not Madness I think Olivers Porter had hard measure to have his Preaching Confin'd to Bedlam when G. Fox was suffer'd to go Loose who said in his Journal p. 24. When the Lord sent me forth into the World He forbad me to put off my Hat to any and I was Requir'd to Thee and Thou all Men and Women they wou'd Down with all wordly Honour as long as they had no share in it Now in all the fore-mention'd
to all his Railing but before he had spoken six words Henry Sutton one of the Friends pull'd him down with great Violence and told the People he was one of the Wickedest of Men that he was a Limb of the Devil and Deserv'd to be Whipt at the Carts Ass c. To which Mr. Pennyman made no Reply Another time in the year 1680 in one of their Meetings at the Sign of the Bull and Mouth A fit Emblem of their Endowments Mr. Pennyman giving no other Provocation than this saying He that Loveth not his Friend cannot be said to Love his Enemy one of their Preachers J. B. standing on their Preaching-Place thrust his Stick with that Violence to Mr. Pennyman's side that forc'd him off the step whereon he stood and presently after struck him on the Face Another of their Preachers James Holliday being altogether a stranger to Mr. Pennyman told the People in his Sermon that Mr. P. was a Companion of one W. B. who had been one of their Ministers but as he said was turn'd a Common Cheat and that he wou'd have Ravish'd a Woman All which was Notoriously False And at their Great Tribunal the Yearly-Meeting at Grace-Church-street James Holliday being told of this his Abuse and false Accusation and that it was Expected he shou'd Publickly Acknowledge the wrong done therein he Reply'd That Vnless the Lord Requir'd it of him he wou'd not do it Another time the 24. Aug. 1681. Two other of the Friends Thomas Ruddiard and William Briggins from the said Preaching-place Affirm'd that Mr. Pennyman was Conversant and Intimate with one John Taylor a Ranter who they said had Hang'd himself being Guilry as some of their Ministers Declar'd of most Horrid wickedness as Blasphemy Whoredom Drunkenness and the like whereas Mr. Pennyman was never in Company with the said J. T. but was wholly a stranger to him as he then Declar'd But no Redress against the Precious ones for Lying and Slandering of those who Durst see Faults in the Perfect They will make no Acknowledgment or Reparation for the most Apparant Injury Vnless the Lord require them i. e. their own Light within which they make their only Rule and not the H. Scriptures much less any Human Laws so that ther is no Hold of these men Because they have but one Principle that is To do what they Please Nor is their Light within ty'd up by the Rules of Common Justice Morality or whatever is counted Sacred amongst Men. Here Holliday Refuses to make any Reperation for Apparent Lying and Slander George Whitehead Refus'd to Restore what another Quaker probably by his own Instigation had Stoln from Mr. Pennyman Unless as he said The Lord did Require him to Return it And G. Fox justify'd Theft and Sacrilege in Robbing of a Church by the same Principle See Sn. Sect. vii p. 94. Nay this is such a Foundation Principle with them That even in this Appendix where they are Smoothing over their old Errors they Dare not Dally with this but give several strokes up and down to shew that they will not own the Scriptures as Their Rule and upbraid those who make them a Rule p. 11. The Holy Scriptures say they which in this Nation is Commonly call'd the Rule of Faith And p. 51. They say of the Light within that it is The only True Guide of Men in matters Eternal and of Soul Concernment And we have and do Continue to say That whoever sets up any other Guide in opposition to this Truth and Light of Jesus Christ or Prefers any other thing before it they have not a Right Ground of Faith but all that are Obedient to this Certain and Right Ground of Faith according to the Degree Manifested unto them we Really own Here by the Truth and Light of Jesus Christ they mean their own Light within because they say according to the Degree Manifested unto them that is What they Think to be so Manifested unto them And whoever sets up the H. Scriptures or any other thing before this i. e. before that Degree or Measure of Light which is within Themselves they Pronounce them not to have a Right Ground of Faith Which is a full Confession to the whole Charge that has been laid against them upon this Head so that no Rules either of Natural or Reveal'd Religion must Supersede Direct Amend or Alter any thing of what their Light within do's Dictate to them because they take it to be The Truth and Light of Jesus Christ And whereas this Appendix do's Limit it to Matters Eternal and of Soul Concernment yet Will. Penn do's Extend it further p. 36. of his Preface to G. Fox's Journal where he says For being Quickned by it in our Inward Man we cou'd Easily Discern the Difference of things And Feel what was Right and what was Wrong and what was Fit and what not both in Reference to Religion and Civil Concerns And now what is it that is left out of the the Plenitude of this Power of their Light within The Holy Scriptures as well as our Laws must Bow to It And the State as well as the Church Fall down before It Is ther no Danger to Church or State from this Principle Is this a Principle to be Tolerated to be Encouraged And this Appendix do's tell us in Plain Language That as they have so they still continue to stand by it Sect. xvii of the Sn shews Apparently that their Principle is for Fighting that they have Fought and that Desperatly if you will believe their Chieftan G. Fox who as there Quoted p. 210. says that their Character in Oliver's Army was That they had rather have had one of them Quakers than seven men and cou'd have turn'd one of them to seven men For Enthusiasm is a Principle which will Hurry men seven-fold more than Covetousness Ambition or whatever other motives Prompts men to Fight And the Quakers being now so very Considerable both for Riches Numbers and Vnited Disciplin they are not to be Neglected especially upon this Account that as shewn in the fore-Quoted Sect. their Principle is against all Government but in their own Hands In their Invectives they Commonly Joyn the Beast and the False-Prophet together to be Destroy'd By the Beast they mean the Civil-Government and by the False-Prophet the Church Upon whom they Bestow as Ill-Names as any they have Bestow'd upon the Author of the Sn. And Devoted Them for Destruction as much as Him Therefore He may take it the more Patiently They have Freed Him from the Scandal of having it said What Evil has He done That such Men shou'd speak Well of Him And if these Wasps have Stung Mr. Wigan and Mr. Pennyman so severely without any Provocation why shou'd he think to escape who put his Hand into their Nest I cou'd give many more Instances of their like Treatment of others but I am afraid of Cloying the Reader with such Nauseous stuff and very willing to be Releas'd
same they were from the Beginning and not Chang'd at all Do's it then seem Tolerable to our Clergy and Magistrates to Ly under the odious Names of Beast False-Prophet Dogs Witches Anti-Christs Devils Incarnate c Did the Quakers for their Vindication Indict Bugg at the Sessions in London and object to him their own Dayly Practice of Printing without License Did they Complain against him to the Secretary of State and upon a False Information That his Papers were Seditious and against the Government Procur'd them to be Seiz'd taken from the Book-sellers and Deliver'd into the Hands of the Quakers Did they Imprison William Bradford a Printer in Pensilvania seize his Letters or Types and Forc'd him out of the Dominions of the Quakers for Printing G. Keith's Defences against Them and Prosecuted likewise the Publishers and G. Keith himself for his Life Improving his Disputes against Them into a Design against the Government Are they so Watchful so Industrious so Impatient lest any Indignity shou'd be Past upon Them And must all orders of Men among us Ecclesiastical Civil and Military Bear their most Bitter Reproches without any Sign of Repentance And Court them and do them Favours for it or suffer them to Usurp Favors that were never Intended them It is Plain the Act of Toleration do's Except those who Deny in their Preaching or writing the Doctrin of the Blessed Trinity as it is Declar'd in the Articles of Religion That is in our 39 Articles These are the words of the Act. And it is as Plain that the Quakers have all along done it G. Fox says in his Great Mystery p. 246. The Scriptures do not tell the People of a Trinity nor Three Persons but the Common-Prayer-Mass-Book speaks of Three Persons brought in by the Father the Pope Here it is Plain that the Quakers do not Acknowledge that Trinity which is own'd in the Common-Prayer And the Common-Prayer-Book being every word an Act of Parliament it is Plain what Trinity is Intended in the Act of Toleration And the Opposers of That Trinity are the Persons Excepted out of the Act. To which the Quakers have no Pretence Unless they will Disown G. Fox herein They must likewise Disown Will. Penn who wrote a Book in the year 1668. to which he Gave this Title The Sandy Foundation shaken Or Those so Generally Believed and Applanded Doctrins of one God Subsisting in three Distinct and Separate Persons of the Impossibility of God's Pardoning Sinners without a Plenary Satisfaction Of the Justification of Impure Persons by an Imputative Righteousness are Refuted And p. 12. The Title of that Section is The Trinity of Distinct and seperate Persons in the Vnity of Essence Refuted from Scripture I know for a Pinch they will own the word Trinity as the Sabellians and Socinians meaning three Manifestations or Operations but not Three Persons But that is not the Trinity Intended in the Act. But the Trinity which is Profess'd in the Creed of St. Athanasius and more Briefly in our Litany viz. The Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Persons and one God This is that Trinity Intended in the Act of Toleration And which whoever opposes are Excluded from Claiming any Benefit by that Act. And this is that Trinity which the Quakers have and still do Oppose And therefore they are altogether Excluded from any Benefit of that Act. But their Opposing is not so Intolerable as the Manner of it Their Cursing and Damning Horresco Referens The Holy and ever Blessed Trinity into the very Pit of Hell And making it nothing but Conjuration Ther is a Book wrote by George Whitehead and three other Quakers viz. Christopher Atkinson James Lancaster and Thomas Symons of whose Character see Sn. Sect. vi n. v. p. 43. c. Intituled Ishmael and his Mother cast out c. Against Mr. Townsend a Minister in Norwich Where p. 10. they tell him And here is the three Persons thou Dreams of which thou wouldst Divide out of One like a Conjurer And ibid. He Mr. Townsend is shut up with the three Persons in perpetual Darkness for the Lake and the Pit This is thus Quoted by Christoph Wade in his Quakery slain p. 9. To which G. Fox Replies in his Gr. Myst p. 246. who Denies not the Quotation but Re-Blasphemes against the H. Trinity in the words above-quoted and more which you will find in the same place Christoph Wade wrote an Answer to this Gr. Myst which bears this Title To all those called Quakers c. To which G. Whitehead Replies in his Truth defending the Quakers An. 1659. And denies not the above Quotations out of his own Book Ishmael c. But as the Quakers use when Pinch'd he slips it over and takes no notice of it Not that he was Converted from his Heresie for in several other Places of the same Book he continues to Blaspheme at his old Rate against the H. Trinity as in p. 40. 41. c. But finding that the Matter was not thus Forgot being Re-Objected against them about the year 1690 in An Epistle to the Friends c. at their next General Meeting in London Subscrib'd N. N. Ther was Publish'd an Answer to this and two other Books wrote against the Quakers by Some of Them Intituled The Christianity of the People commonly call'd Quakers Vindicated c. Printed An. 1690. There p. 28. coming to this Objection they go a New way to work and lay the Fault Partly upon the Printer And Looks on the words as wrong writ or wrong Printed Wrong Writ and wrong Printed are two things But they Jumble them here that the Reader might mistake and overlook the Author and so think it only an Error of the Press But what was this Error Why they say That instead of And the three Persons it shou'd have rather been About the three Persons which makes it non-sense but not less Blasphemy But however was this taken Notice of by the Quakers in all that time from the writing of that Answer to Townsend which the Quakers say in this last book ibid. was about the year 1654. till this Book of theirs An. 1690 that is for the space of 44 years No. That is not Alledg'd But they say ibid. that G. W. Corrected it long since where he has met with that Answer How do's this Appear O you must take his own word for it for is not He Infallible But was not so Fatal a Slip of Infallibility fit to be Corrected in Print to Remove that most Hideous and Blasphemous Scandal which cou'd not be done otherwise For to what end was G. W's Correcting it with a Pen upon a Book that came in his way if he did it How shou'd this Un-deceive the World Who had never heard of it if he had not now told them And it is at their Pleasure how far they will Believe him This is like another Error of the Press which they let slip 28 years together See Sat. Dis. Sect. ii N. iii. p.
upon the Author of the Sn. to Justify these Works and to produce the Original Copy But may not that Author more Reasonably Ask him how this Passage of E. B's came to be Twice Printed without any Correction And why it was never taken notice of as any Mistake these Forty years that it has been Printed till just now Suppose that Author had been taken Napping at any False Quotation or Charge upon the Quakers and shou'd put it off from the Printed Sn. and bid the Friends Produce the Original Copy and accuse them of Quoting him Vnfairly and Partially because they Quoted out of his Printed Book I desire to know from the Quakers particularly from G. W. Come George I 'll take thy word for once but not to make a Custom of it tell it now in good sober sadness woud'st thou have so Excused him woud'st not thou have made an Hideous Out-Cry and Clapt thy Wings for Victory But mark me George I do not mean only a bare Error of the Press or what cou'd possibly be so constru'd but a whole Passage such as this of E. B's and not only saying such a thing but going about to Prove it as he there do's That the Sufferings of the Quakers were more Vn-just than the Sufferings of Christ Why Because says he What was done to Christ was Chiefly done by a Law and in great part by the Due Execution of a Law c. But that it was not so with the Quakers which he there Indeavours to shew most Horridly Blaspheming As to his Arguments I Referr to Sat. Dis. p. 82. But as to our present business G. W. is brought at last to say in the same page p. 254. We will not stand by the Comparison Well This is something This is the first Confession that ever we got from the Quakers They will not stand by the Comparison of their Sufferings and Christ's But what then will they do as to E. B. who made the Comparison Will they say that he was in an Error No. Barr that For he gave forth all he Wrote as the Immediate Word of The Lord God And all his Editors G. W. c. have Attested this for him And he stood the Highest among the Quakers next to the Great Fox himself Who has Determin'd as before Quoted That whoever speaks and not from the Mouth of the Lord is a False Prophet and a Conjurer And if E. B. was a Conjurer then G. W. may come in and All of them And then let the Quakers see how they have been Led Let them Now see Here G. W. says it in the Name of the Rest We will not stand by E. B's Comparison for indeed it is Blasphemous to the Highest Degree And thereby you are given to understand That you are not hereafter to Trust any Quaker Books that are Printed even tho' Publish'd and Recommended by the Greatest amongst you For such are E. B's Works And if now after they have been put so many years into your hands as the Words of The Lord Part of them is Disown'd how can you be secure of other Parts of them or any Part of them at all How are you secure of G. Fox's Writings or of any others of your Prophets Have you seen all their Original Copies You must either Disown G. W. in this Affront he has put upon E. B. or Down comes All whole Quakerism at one Blow Ther is but one Book amongst you that I can hear Except G. Fox's Marginal Notes of Oleser c. before mention'd which will Escape by this Rule if that will It is Humphry Norton's for I have seen a very Ancient Manuscript of it which for ought I know may be the Original It was Printed at London for so I sind it Quoted in a Book of Roger Williams's call'd The Great Fox duggâ— out of his Burrows p. 45. And this Precious Passage cited out of him where he is after the Quaker-fashion Ridiculing the Second Coming of Christ in these words Is not Christ God and is not God a Spirit You look for a Christ without you From what Coast or Country shall He come What Country-Man is He you stand Gazing up to the Clouds after a Man but we stand by you in White chiding of you Thus as he is there Quoted How it is in the Print I know not for I have not seen it but in the Ms. it is p. 71. thus Whence must this Christ come you wait for And in what Generation And of what Family And out of what Country And of whom must He be Born That they may no longer be Deceiv'd by you who have kept them Gazing after a False Christ Well may it be call'd Gazing but leave it and mind those in White Apparel which Reproves you for it Act. 1.10 11. by which they mean their own White Lights within I suppose R. Williams might take it short These are among several other Queres of the like Nature which Humphrey put to the Professors Ther is Abundance of such Blasphemous Hideous stuff in that Book which shews Demonstratively what the Genuine Doctrine of the Quakers is concerning the Resurrection Ascension and Second Coming of our Lord Jesus turning it only to the Rising Ascension and Coming of the Light within them The outward Christ H. Norton here calls a False-Christ He was a Great Apostle of the Quakers sent into Ireland thence to the West-Indies And most Highly Recommended by Edw. Burrough and Francis Howgil two Principal Pillars to be Receiv'd by the Friends as a True Messenger of the Lord. But because this Book is but in Few hands and those of the Friends who will not now let it be seen I have in the Collection added a Trans-script out of the Ms. of some Passages in it worth the Readers Notice which Abundantly Confirm the Charges given against the Quakers and I thought this more Proper than to Thrust them in here out of their Place where we are Considering of the Quakers Manner of Defending themselves against these and other such like objections 8. The Last of their Cleanly and Clever Method Their falsifâ—ing the Sense of what is Objected against them For which by W. Penn's Rule they are Excluded from being Christians of Answering which I shall Mention at Present is Their Ignorant or most Commonly Wilful Mistaking of what is objected against them and so Answering Quite out of Purpose That by starting of new Game they may Divert the Pursuer from the Cent of an Absurdity or Heresie in Distress This they think a venial Politique in Themselves But this Mote becomes a Beam in their Brothers Eye And when they Charge it against others then they can see Clearly into the Heinousness and Utmost Deformity of this Sin Then they Improve it into a Total Loss of the Character or Name of being a Christian. This is one of the Heads upon which W. Penn wou'd Prove Thom. Hicks his opponent not to be a Christian in his Reason against Railing p. 158.
desir'd them to begin with the Scriptures and prove the Contradiction of my Doctrine first to the holy Scriptures and then it was time to Consider these men's Books Samuel Jennings in a publick Meeting at Philadelphia on a first day said it was not necessary to prove me guilty of Heresie whereof they had accus'd me from the Scriptures but from Friends Books for said he the Question betwixt G. K. and them is not who is the best Christian but who is the best Quaker And though I still desir'd them to bring their Scripture proofs yet they for most part waved that and continued clamouring that my Doctrine contradicted Will. Pen. Geo. Whitehead and other Friends which I did not know all that time that it did for though the places they quoted out of their Books seemed much to favour my Adversaries yet I was not willing to think so but labour'd to retain my Charitable perswasion of them putting the most Charitable Constructions upon their Words as was possible so farr as I had read the passages in their Books that seemed to interfere with me At last I came to a firm Resolution in my mind to Come for England having first writ to George Whitehead and other Friends of the Ministry about our differences desiring to know their sense they seemed to blame me for the separation but in great part to approve of my Principles but the words in their Epistles were so dubious like the Heathen Oracles that as to the main difference of Principles betwixt my Adversaries and me in Pensilvania it was rather increas'd by their Epistles then allayd my Adversaries Construing them one way and I and my Friends another way After I arrived in England and came to London And had some private Conferrences with George Whitehead and William Penn about these very Principles of the sufficiency of the Light within to Salvation without any thing else by the something else that I did plead for declaring that I meant the man Christ Jesus and his most holy and perfect Obedience unto death for our Sins and his Intercession for us in Heaven I began easily to perceive that they greatly differed from me in those great things yet they did seek to hide themselves as much as they well could mainly and almost only blaming me for the Separation and making a breach in Pensilvania and the neighbouring Provinces among Friends But by degrees the difference in Principles betwixt them and me began plainly to appear before they Excommunicated me at their yearly Meeting in the Year 1695. For at a large Meeting of Friends of the Ministry where were many Country Friends about two days before the yearly meeting in 1694. William Penn accused me for seeking to bring in a new method of Preaching Christ and Faith in him differing from that of Friends and that new method was to preach the Man Christ without us and his Death and Sufferings in order to bring people to know the Divine Principle within them and the work of Regeneration And at the said Meeting G. W. blamed me for affirming that all the Light and Grace that any men had in any age of the World was the effect of Christ's Obedience unto death for us and argued against it thus Men had Light and Grace before Christ came in the Flesh to perform that obedience can the Effect be before the Cause this plainly enough let me see into G. Whitehead's Principles he had the same strength of Argument but that 's none at all against any mens having Remission of Sin by Christ's death before he came in the Flesh why can the effect be before the Cause I told him a Moral effect can be before its cause and oft times is and gave an Example how a man by a Contract or Covenant buyeth a House or Field and posesseth it before the Money is paid the Condition of the Covenant being that the Money is not to be paid until such a time so by Virtue of the Covenant of Grace which respected Christ to Come and the satisfaction he was to make to divine justice by his Death and Sufferings for mens sins past as well as to come all the faithful had remission of sin and inward Light and Grace as well before he came as since And some Months after this at a publick Meeting of the Quakers at Ratcliff by London William Penn did publickly oppose my testimony and charged me to be an Apostate and that I endevoured to pluck up the testimony of truth by the roots And at the same time He told the Auditory that Friends saw no great need to preach the Faith of Christ's Death and Sufferings for all England had that Faith and all Christendom had it but it did not profit them * Reader by this Argument it should not be Preached at all With many Abusive words all which he father'd upon a transport of the glorious power of God at the next yearly Meeting when I Complain'd upon his so abusing me Yet they have after all this sought to hide the differences in Doctrine betwixt them and me from publick notice so that in their sentence of Excommunication they blame not my Doctrine nor Morals in any particular thing but cast out some general charges against me for being turbulent c. and seperating my self from the Church of Christ But their unchristian dealings with me as well as Antichristian Principles have sufficiently proved them not to be a Church of Christ though still I have that charity to diverse among them that they belong to Christ and his Church but not as respecting that visible Society that has less the face of a Church than any Society of Protestants any where in the world A third Reason is that this publication of the foregoing Relation will be a true Evidence and Witness for me that as to the great fundamentals of the Christian Faith I am not changed from what I was Twenty years ago when own'd among them and for many years after acknowledg'd by them that I was in the Unity And that therefore it is manifest to be a Calumny and false Accusation rais'd by some Malicious Persons among the Quakers against me that I am Apostatised from my former Principles of Christianity and have embraced new notions or Priests and Professors Principles as they are pleased 〈…〉 that formerly I had relinquished and from a tentation that I had let prevail over me to seek and affect preheminence over my Brethren and not finding my desire and end answered in that I sought occasion to differ from them and purposely chang'd my Principles that I might have a ground of Strife and Contention with them all which the Righteous Judge of the whole Earth and the searcher of hearts knoweth to be false and injurious charges I have sufficiently in my late Printed Books proved that I am the same in all Principles of Truth that I was formerly and wherein I am changed in some lesser matters of Perswasion it is to
Speaking strictly according to the Letter Otherwise it is a sort of Be-Lying the word and Deceiving of the simple Re-ader which may in time tend much to the Damage of the Pe-ople Ther is the same Reason for the one as the other But ther is no Pride in this No Contempt of Magistracy and Government No Exalting of Themselves and making Themselves Equal to Dignities and Powers And their Pretence for Conscience in this is so very Ridiculous that no Hereticks before the Quakers ever had so much want of Sense as to fall upon any thing Like it Ther is no Parellel to be found for it in all the Ancient Heresies Therefore it is not Mention'd in Prim. Heres But Appen wou'd have it in And in he has it Talking of the Singular and Plural Number were High things Believe it and Deep Learning to those Sorry Souls who first set up Quakerism See the Account of their Original as given by Themselves in Sat. Dis. Glean Sect. iv N. 2. p. 85. This was the Reason they made at first such a filthy noise about the Singular and Plural they were fine Hard words And made the Quakers look Considerably in a Country Town It was such a Glorious Discovery that G. Fox puts it among his Openings See Sn. Sect. xxiii p. 33. to 37. And Pretends to have had it by Inspiration But now after all suppose the Quakers themselves these Nice Criticks shou'd be found Guilty of the Heresie of False-Grammar as well as the more Vn-Learned part of the world It is common with them to use the Accusative for the Nominative Case to say Thee for Thou As how do'st Thee do wilt Thee tell me c. And is it not as Great Heresy to put one Case for another as one Number for another Tho' as I told you before we do not put one Number for another but the word You is with us both Singular and Plural as the word Sheep to Descend to your understanding or to come nearer to you Swine Next Review of Heresies that you Publish let this Vulgar Error be set in the Highest Rank and write your selves Sheepes or Swines which you like best or to which you are most Like But you say if You be Singular what use have we for the words Thee and Thou O yes for Variety Two Strings to your Bow As if I shou'd call Appen a Sheep or a Mutton a Swine or a Hog Let some of these be your Name Hereafter for you have no Name as yet but that of Quakers which you say your God-Fathers gave you in Scorn With your Christianity you have Lost your Names too For what Name have you for your Flock now through the world Is it that of Christians That do's not Distinguish you from other Communities which bear the same Name Is it the Pe-ople of God That others take to themselves too You are the First Nameless Society that has yet appear'd O but I forgot your Name is Hidden from the World Wou'd your Heresies were so too The time is Coming when Both shall be Forgot unless for Detestation Appen is very Angry p. 49. That G. Fox shou'd be Depriv'd of the Glory of being an Original by shewing the semblance of his Wickedness in Judas but herein Fox's Cubbs are an Original that they call themselves not by His Name or by any other Judas's Followers were call'd Gaulonites or Galileans but Fox's nothing at all indeed they were not fit to be Nam'd But why was not Judas an Original to Fox in the Point before mention'd of Contempt of Magistracy No not in the Point of the Hat because Judas wore no Hat No nor likely any Leathern Britches and Fox had both nor in Thee and Thou because Judas did not speak English And then as says Appen G. Fox has in his own Foolish and False words The Glory of being an Original Whose Foolish and False words Certainly he means this for the Author of Prim. Heres But they are not his words he only Quotes them from Will. Penn who Boasts thus of G. Fox in his Preface to Fox's Journal p. 31. That Fox was No Man's Copy c. so that Appen must take Home again his Complement of False and Foolish and Place the Saddle upon the Right Horse Unless he thinks it was False and Foolish to Quote Will. Penn's Noble Character of his Beloved Fox of whom he Exults thus in the same Preface Many have done Vertuously in this Day But thou Dear George Excellest them all But to make an End of this Head Appen says p. 50. As for our Hats we pull them not off in Civility yet we pay Civility to all Men. You mean some other way but not in that So say you ibid. we give Honour to whom Honour is Due It has been told before whom they are to whom you think it Due But if you think that any Honour at all is Due to our Magistrates then this Particular Honour of the Hat and Civil Titles are Due because they are Requir'd Honour is as much Due to our Governors as Tribute And you may as well say we will Pay Tribute to whom Tribute is Due but we will not Pay this Particular Tribute which is Requir'd We may as justly Cut and Carve for our selves what sort of Tribute as what sort of Honour to Pay We must Pay that which is Requir'd or else we are Offenders Unless we can shew some Positive Prohibition of God against it And therefore it Returns now upon the Quakers since they Acknowlege some Honour to be Due to shew where God has Forbidden that Particular Honour of the Hat or other Address than Thee and Thou else they are Transgressors as well against the Law of God as of Man If they say that their Light forbids it for they can shew nothing else then may it not Forbid any other sort of Honour as well as the Hat or Titles or any sort of Tribute as it has done Tythes Trophy-Money c. So that all our Laws all Order and Government among Men all things whatsoever lie at the Mercy of the Quakers while they Refuse to let Scripture or any thing else be a Rule to their Light but set It up Paramount as the Rule and Standart to Confirm or to Annul all Laws Customs Constitutions even the Holy Scriptures themselves As Ample as the Commission given to Jeremiah over the Nations and over the Kingdoms to Root out and to Pull down and to Destroy and to Throw down to Build and to Plant. If it be not so and that the Quakers will say They are willing to take the Holy Scriptures for their Rule Then let them shew any Scripture which Forbids that Particular Honour of the Hat or of Civil-Titles Otherwise let them Confess That the Light which has told them so is Darkness But the truth is They do not Acknowledge the Holy Scriptures as their Rule which is shewn before p. 29 30. And Will. Penn has this Year 1699 Printed tho'
not Publish'd except to the Friends for their Book-Sellers Refuse to Sell them unless they know to whom they Refus'd it to some that I imploy'd A Discourse of the General Rule of Faith and Practice of which the whole Argument is ex professo to Prove That the Scriptures cannot be that Rule Wherein all the Popish Artillery is Muster'd up against the Holy Scriptures being the Rule It has Receiv'd a very Substantial Answer by G. Keith therefore I say no more of it here But to take Notice of the Deceit of the Quakers in their Quoting of Scripture For to what Purpose do they Quote them when they Own them not to be the Rule And Consequently will not be Determin'd by them This is only to Amuse and to bear a Face as if they Own'd the Scriptures And to use them ad hominem against those who do Acknowledge them Yet they have no Proof but what they Pretend from Scripture for their Foundation-Principle of The Light within which they make the only Rule being Christ and God They cannot say that the Light within do's tell them this of its Self For then it wou'd tell others so Seeing they make it Common to all Mankind And if it tells None so but the Quakers or if it do's not tell all Others so as well as the Quakers then how is it the General Rule to All Men as the Quakers wou'd have it Therefore they have Recourse for this to Joh. i. 9. That was the true Light which Lighteth every Man that Cometh into the World And to other Scriptures which they Wrest to their own Destruction And yet they will not Own the Scriptures for the Rule But when Pinch'd they Fly back again to their Light-within This is all they have for their Principle of the Hat and their Sulleness which they call Gravity But I wou'd have them Distinguish betwixt the Gravity of an Angel and a Devil Both are Grave But if an Angel Appear'd we must Suppose with his Gravety the Greatest Sweetness and Attraction that can be On the other hand if a Devil Appear'd he wou'd be Grave too but it wou'd be an Abhorrent and Frightfull Gravity like that of a Lyon when he was going to Devour or of a Mastiff Dog with Grin and Snarle Ther is nothing Exotick or Sour in the Gravity of Religion It is all Decent and Comely It is the Beauty of Holiness But in a Quaker-Meeting Especially their Silent Ones their Phiz and Meen Hats pull'd over Eyes their Habit their Grunts and Dogged Demureness the Deformity of Holiness is Drawn to the Life No Stranger but wou'd think himself at a Bedlam or a Funeral or as indeed it is among a Company of People Possess'd and Bewitch'd But if he saw them fall to their Convulsions and Quaking-Fits their Rolling and Roaring Fomeing Swelling and Yelling as at first was Common among them I dare say it wou'd never bring into his Mind the Extasies and Tremblings of the Holy Prophets thro' the Excess of the Revelations given unto them which the Quakers urge as their Precedent But rather that of Feinds in their Torments For the Devils believe too And Tremble as the Quakers do I have now gone over the Several Heads Mention'd in Prim. Heres And Consider'd the Defences which Appen has Produc'd for them This brings him to his Conclusion Wherein is Nothing but what has been Answer'd already Only their Vapouring How Bravely they have Acquit themselves Which I leave them to Enjoy And Hasten to the Last Section that I may have Done SECT VII The Asurdity and Blasphemy of the Quakers Notion of the Light Within They hold That ther is no Natural Light or Reason in Man But that All in him is Divine 1. I Now go on to Examin the Defence of Will. Pen against the Friendly Expostulation with him in Prim. Heres This begins in Appen p. 53. And it says p. 55. That the Author of Prim. Heres wou'd have Will Penn to suppose That nothing but the Divine Light cou'd Reprove of Evil. But Says Appen I have looked and find no such Supposition And therefore no further Notice need be taken of the Consequences he draws as depending on that Supposition This is Positive and Impudent to a Degree that cou'd befall none but a Quaker He says he has Look'd Therefore I beseech the Reader to Look too The Charge is in Prim. Heres p. 20. where the Pages of Will Penn's Primitive Christianity are Quoted viz. p. 29 30. and 31. And a short Account of them given to wit That the Scripture makes no Distinction between Natural and Spiritual Light That Will. Penn Provokes any to give so much as one Text to that Purpose That he makes it as Absur'd as to talk of a Natural and Spiritual Darkness within That he says That ther are not Two Lights from God in Man that Regard Religion Not that Reproves or Condemns a man for Sin These are the words in Prim. Heres I must ask the Reader 's Pardon for Trans-Scribing them And also for Setting down Will Penn's words more at Large to satisfie the Importunate and Guilty Clamour of this his Appen to Amuse those who have not Lookt into the Books Will. Penn first supposes what All Agree to That ther is a Light in Man which as he words it yields him the Knowledge of God And likewise Reproves or Discovers that which offends Him But whether this can be done by the Natural Light or only by the Divine Light in Man is the Question Or whether ther be any such Natural Light in Man that can do Both or Either of these Now take Will. Penn's own words in Answer to this p. 29. It is Granted says he that what we call Divine and some Mistakenly call Natural Light can do Both. Secondly If this Light be Natural Notwithstanding it doth Manifest our Duty and Reprove our Disobedience to God they wou'd do well to Assigne Vs some Certain Medium or Way whereby we may truly Discern and Distinguish between the Manifestations and Reproofs of the Natural Light within from those of the Divine Light within since they Allow the Manifestation of God and Reproof of Evil as well to the one as the other Let them give us but one Scripture that Distinguishes between a Natural and a Spiritual Light within They may with as much Reason talk of a Natural and Spiritual Darkness within All this is in p. 29. and 30. and p. 31. he pursues the same Argument Neither is there says he so much as one Scripture that affords Vs a Distinction between Light within and Light within or that there are really Two Lights from God in Man that regard Religion And p. 32. Therefore there are not Two Distinct Lights within but one and the same Manifesting Reproving and Teaching Light within And that this One and but One Light within is not any Natural Light he Particularly Explains and Distinguishes with Exactness that none can unless wilfully mistake him