Instances the Quakers have made themselves as Mad as any ever were in the World And have been so esteem'd at Rome and other Places where they had never been before as they were at first when they Rose up amongst us only the Common use of it now has abated of the Strangeness but nothing of the Irrationality and Madness not to speak of the Breach of Justice or Religion for Honour is as much Due to our Superiors as either Fear or Tribute and Equally Commanded Rom. xiii 7. and to Deny it is Immorality and a Sin besides the Singularity and Proud-Humility which Entitles it to a High Degree of Madness And in this the whole Body of the Quakers is Involv'd In making Themselves free from Sin and Equal with God 3. But thirdly wou'd not that man be Counted Mad who shou'd Fancie himself Exempted from the Common Condition of other Mortals to be as Bright and Glorious and Impassible as an Angel And is it not as much to think our selves as Pure and Impeccable as they even while we feel our own Frailty and Imperfections in Dayly and Frequent Instances Yet still to Cry that we are Pure and without Sin Nay Perfect even as God! And Equal to Him and One with Him in very Nature and Substance and a Part of Him Can any Madness be Imagin'd beyond or Equal to this And G. W. p. 88. gives his Consent to secure such Persons in Bedlam if we can find any such among them that we can plainly Prove to hold the Same Now whether this be not Plainly Prov'd in the Sn. Sect. ii iii. and iv I leave to the Reader And G. W. do's neither Deny nor Answer one of the Quotations there Produc'd But stoutly Denies the whole Charge without so much as Attempting to Invalidat any one Particle of the Evidence Which I think I may Modestly say is very like the Answer of a Mad-Man In Assuming to be Prophets 4. But I will put the Case lower than that of Aspiring to be Equal with God Suppose then that a Poor Country Lad shou'd come to London and hapning upon a Rich Widdow shou'd presently fancie himself to be some Duke or Great Prince and as such shou'd Issue forth his Proclamations Commissions c. wou'd not G. W. give me leave to think this fellow a little Craz'd But suppose he shou'd set up for a Prophet sent Immediately from God as Elijah was And as such shou'd take upon him to Dictate to Kings and Emperors and Command them In the Name of the Lord to Give forth Prophesies and affix to them Thus saith the Lord c. And suppose he Cou'd shew no Credentials at all for this High Commission only bid Men take his own word for it wou'd not this make him much more Extravagantly and Blasphemously Mad Now how many Mad-Men of this sort have we had among the Quakers Even Fox their Original and all the way down as many as have Wrote or almost that have Preach'd or Spoke amongst them This is a Talent without which whosoever speaks is a Conjurer as Fox has Determin'd in his Westmorland Petition p. 5. in his Saul's Errand p. 7. and elswhere as shewn in the Sn. Ther is one particular Instance put in the Front of the Preface p. xi of the First Edit of the Sn. it is p. 281. of the Third Edit where a Prophetical Curse is set down of Confusion against George Keith And it is not a Hasty Rash Curse in Passion or so as is usual among the Profane Cursers and Swearers of the World But it is a Deliberat Grave Curse in Cold Blood set down in Writing and sent to George Keith it bears Date the 17th of the 4th Month. 1695. And is subscrib'd George Whitehead And begins in these words Thus Saith the Lord. And it is written not in the Name of G. Whitehead as any Thought or Prognostick of his own but every word in the Person of God as speaking to G. Keith Because thou hast poured Contempt upon My Servants I will assuredly bring Confusion upon thee c. Now for this George Whitehead thus to assume the Stile of the most Extraordinary Prophets of God and to Fancie himself one of them I think will be Judg'd a Greater Degree of Madness than if he had Fancy'd himself to be a Duke or a Prince for a Prophet Immediatly sent from God is certainly Cloath'd with a far Greater Honour than any that can be Bestow'd by the most Splendid of Worldly Titles Therefore this is no ordinary mistake or such as cou'd befall any Man in his Wits Nay farther to shew the Excess of G. Whitehead's Madness Suppose he shou'd think that this Prophetical Curse of his against G. Keith to be not only Equal to any Prophesie Recorded in Scripture but of Greater Authority than any Chapter in the Bible wou'd any body in this case Excuse him from the very Height of Madness And for this see his Truth defending the Quakers An. 1659. p. 7. where this Question was Demanded of him Do you Esteem your Speakings to be of as Great Authority as any Chapters in the Bible And he sets down his own Answer in these words That which is Spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any is of as Great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and GREATER This he Repeats again in the same words in his Serious Appology An. 1671. p. 49. And Quotes his former Book to shew that this was not spoke by Chance but was a standing Principle among them Now then if G. W. will say That the Curse which he sent to G. Keith was Spoken by the Spirit of Truth he owns by his own words that it is not only of As Great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are but of GREATER And then I think we need no further Proof of his being Stark-Mad But on the other hand if he will to save himself from this Imputation Acknowledge that that Curse was not Spoken by the Spirit of Truth then must he own himself Guilty of a most Notorious Blasphemy to Dictate thus in the Person of God and make God to speak his Lies and the Delusions of his Besotted Brain And if this be not put upon the score of Madness then ought G. Whitehead to suffer the Punnishment of a Blasphemer Therefore he shou'd Return his Thanks to those who are so Merciful as to Prove him only Non Compos as of Felo de se to save his Chattels and his Carcass too But this is not only as to this Curse against G. K. that is but one Instance among many nor only as to G. W. but it Reaches to All that the Quakers have Deliver'd In the Name of the Lord not only against Particular Persons but the whole Church of England the King the Bishops and Priests and the Lawyers too they are Particularly mark'd out for Destruction if ever the Quakers do Prevail they are the Midianites whom we must Vex that is Destroy see
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'
Clean Vessel of a Quaker an Hear-say is enough for an Infallible Demonstration And They can Pronounce I can Assure you of it tho' in a Negative as of his never having Converted any Quakers Now if this shou'd Provoke him to Name Names in Print which I am Morally assur'd he can then ther wou'd be Boasting with a witness But the Quakers are as Infallibly sure That he either Has or Intends to urge this as an Argument for his Attonement and Reconciliation tho' Appen do's not tell with whom But whoever they be I can Assure them says it the Argument is False Now Suppose that he never urg'd this as an Argument of his Reconciliation with any Body nor Ever had any such Intention as all that know him do Believe he do's not think it a Matter of that Merit Well but How can be Perswade others if he had a mind to it of what he is not Infallibly Assur'd Himself What not of his own Thoughts and Actions No. For he is a Foul Vessel that is He is one of the World and so a Child of Darkness because not a Quaker And such have no Right to know their own Thoughts But the Quakers know their own and all other mens too And that Infallibly or else they are the Greatest Lyars in the World and their Fox was a Conjurer by his own Confession See Sn. p. 33. to 37. and p. 284. SECT VI. Their Defence of not taking off their Hats or Giving Civil-Titles Consider'd And of their Plain Language as they call it in Theeing and Thouing Both of which are shewn not to be Merely want of Manners But a Form'd Design to Subvert Government when it is in Any other Hands but their Own For that they think None but Themselves have any Right to Govern I Come now to Sect. vii of Prim. Heres And to Examin the Answers given to it by Appen The subject is The Quakers stiffness in not taking off their Hats and Giving men their Civil Titles Of which we just now spoke Obiter But we will Examin their Answers more thoroly They begin in Appen p. 48. And first this is call'd a Ridiculous Charge And so indeed it is in this Sense as it is a Charge of a most Ridiculous Whim if it were no worse for it is not only a Proud and Senseless Singularity but it is a Contempt of Government and Dissolution of Order and the Difference of Relations that men bare to one another which God Ordain'd and without which the world cou'd not Subsist And therefore it is brought in Prim. Heres Next to Sect. vi which treats of the Quakers Contempt of Magistracy and Government as a Plain Instance of it To this says Appen in their Courtly way He Falsly and Foolishly Insinuates this that is taking off our Hats and Giving men their Civil Titles to have been Commanded by the Apostles c. They mean That ther is no Command in Scripture for taking off ones Hat That is Literally a Hat They wou'd have the word Hat nam'd And here they are Pretty Secure for ther were no Hats worn in those Days nor many Ages after But surely these Quakers are not so Dull as not to know That it is the Respect and Honour which is Due to our Superiors that is here Treated of tho' the Manner of Expressing it may Differ according to the Custom of Several Countrys Thus Vn-covering of the Head is not us'd as a mark of Respect in Turkey Therefore they do it not there even in Presence of the Grand Segnior There the Quakers may have this Liberty of Conscience But if they wou'd observe the Scripture Literally as they Pretend they shou'd put off their Shoos instead of their Hats For that was then the Token of Respect thus Moses was Commanded to put off his Shoos when he Approch'd to the Bush not to take off his Hat Now if the Quakers wou'd have Texts for shewing Respect to Superiors they may have Abundance Honour to whom Honour is Due c. And if Taking off ones Hat be us'd as a mark of Paying Honour or Respect then it is Included in this Command And the not doing of it is an Express Breach of this Command And it is not in our Power to Appoint what shall be the Manner of Paying Honour we must Submit in that to the Custom of the Country where we Live You find frequent Instances in Scripture of Falling Prostrate to Kings and Worshiping of them with our Faces bent down to the Earth and not only to Proud and wicked Kings but to David and the Best of them None came into their Presence without Paying of this Honour to them And this was a Great Deal more than Bare Taking off ones Hat We never find That either Christ Himself or His Apostles Refus'd to Give all the Respect and Civil Titles that were Customarily Paid even to Heathen Magistrates He acknowleg'd to Pilat that his Power was from Above St. Paul gave Felix the Title of Most Noble Even when Felix call'd him Mad and Ask'd Pardon for speaking Dis-Respectfully to the High Priest tho' Judging him Contrary to the Law A Quaker wou'd have call'd him if he Durst a Chemarim Baal's Priest Serpent Dog Devil as they have call'd our Bishops and Magistrates when they were out of their fingers And as Christ and His Apostles so those our H. Fathers in the Church who succeeded them did both Practice and Command the same Honour to be Paid to all Magistrates and Superiors Yet Appen says That this is a Pretence so Idle that he the Author of Prim. Heres may as soon find in those Early times the taking Snuff after his Manner to be Declar'd Heresie This was by way of Wit because he Supposes that Author takes Snuff But I 'll tell thee Appen That if taking of Snuff were by the Custom of this Country as Great a Dis-Respect to Superiors as keeping on my Hat I wou'd think that Author or any other who did it Guilty of as much Ill-Manners as a Quaker But if they set up such Dis-Respect as a Principle and made Themselves Distinguished by it I shou'd Condemn it even as a Heresie for such I think it to Dissolve the Good Order of the World and set Mankind Loose from the Distance and Duty to Superiors and to Teach this as a Doctrin of Christ However against the Quakers this holds good by their own Principles if it be any Sin which has been fully Prov'd to be not only Heresie but even a Denying of the Lord who Bought them For thus say they in Truth defending the Quakers which is said in the Title Page to be Written from the Spirit of Truth in George Whitehead and George Fox the Younger p. 39. 40. All Hereticks are subverted and do sin and in Sinning they Deny the Lord that bought them for Every Sin is a Transgression of the Law And whatever sin they Commit against Christ therein they Deny him Here we see the Necessity of