it by the following words viz. This being done under the form of Government contended for c. Which I am sure is a positive Lye for we have no such Action under the form of Government contended for among us as to obstruct any Marriage for Non-payment of twelve Pence for a Certificate Such practice is so far from relating to Church Government among us that 't was never own'd by us as to obstruct any Marriage on that account And what positive Proof hast thou That the Manuscript of the Primmer subscribed by G. F. and E. H. was sold for thirty Pound Enquiry has been made about this Accusation and 't is positively deny'd by the Person concerned though these Stories thou hast instanced as tokens of Apostacy and Innovation p. 5. And what if E. H. was a Clark for his yearly Salary does that hinder his Credit in his signing our said Treatise on behalf of our Meeting Or was his yearly Salary to extend to pay for all the many Certificates relating to Marriages and the Expences thereupon who many times was known to be deprived of his natural Rest in writing to serve Truth and Friends And was 't not lawful for him to have a Livelihood for his great pains in Truth 's service who lost his place and livelihood for Truth and ended his dayes in Peace One would think that W. R. should be ashamed to asperce or cloud his Reputation after his Death § 7. His Reflection upon the Barbadoes Meeâ—ers as he calls them about a Subscription and upon G. F. my self and consequently on A. P. who also was concerned with us as seeming to sew Pillows under their Armholes p. 4. appears Malicious as well as Unjust being a Subscription from the first exploded by us and since seen in its defects and condemned by themselves on our Christian Advice and real Dislike shewn them in our Epistle which W. R. is so partial and unjust as to omit the words containing our Judgment and Dislike of it Hath not he and Francis Bugg and Tho. Crisp herein exactly resembled the Devil the old Accuser of the Brethren in accusing the Innocent and charging Persons after Repentance with that which they have repented of which is Satan's unjust Prosecution And W. R. unjustly also lays hold of these friendly and tender Expressions wherein we shewed regard to Friendship and answered that which was tender and good in them For instead of shewing himself impartial and just he minces and clouds the matter on our parts only telling the Reader We seem to dislike the latter part thereof And in other parts seem to dislike the wording thereof p. 4 28. But is not so honest as to give the Reader a particular Citation and Notice of our real judgment in our own words in that case As in dislike of their opposing the Judgment of the Spirit of God in the Meetings to any particular Measure We plainly signified That this would be the way to bring them all from the measure of the Spirit in their own partiâ—â—lars 〈…〉 all must be left to the universal Spirit in their own measures thereof Now this would make the Belief which is in the Light and the measure of the Spirit in their own particulars not one with the universal Spirit c. The universal Spirit of God has unity with the least measure now as it was in the Apostles days who kept every one to their own measure which was both the great Rule and Line of the New Creature in the Believers and Saints then And in dislike of their subscription we signified That all are to give up to the Universal Spirit of God in their own particulars in which spirit they have unity and fellowship without outward subscription And further Now as for your Subscription to an outward Tye be above such things Now let the serious and impartial judge Is not here a manifest Dislike shown and Judgment given And therefore the greater Injustice in our Adversary to cite the Paper from Barbadoes either to prove us guilty of Aiming at Dominion and Lordship over Faith Conscience and Property pag. 4. or that the said Paper is one part of the fruits of the pretended establisht Government as he most falsly saith p. 27. And the Lordship over Estates and Consciences he infers thence He would deceitfully insinuate and charge upon us sewing Pillows under their Armholes calling them dear Friends with other tender Expressions which when he has cited without the words containing our Judgment as to Fact he then says THIS shews no dislike to the said Paper Which is a very deceitful and unjust way of writing in Controversie I would not deal thus by the worst Adversary in the World to entitle him to that which he has disowned and to leave out the words of Dislike and Judgment on the Mistake or Error so disown'd and to pick and take up those other words which are tender relating to the Persons and not to the Fact and then to cry This shews no dislike thereof c. What if THIS shews it not when enough besides shews it But is it indeed a Crime to call any dear Friends who do commit an Error or Mistake No sure that will not hold Did not Paul call the Corinthians DEARLY BELOVED 1 Cor 10.14 see James 1.16 compar'd with cap. 5. and yet some among them did Err were in Divisions c. 1 Cor. 3. And did he not call the Galatians BRETHREN Gal. 6.18 yet charges them with being Foolish Were not the seven Churches of Asia commended in many things when yet there were a few things against divers of them Rev 2 3 chapters O Dis-ingenious Person W.R. I am ashamed of thy Partial Unconscionable Unjust dealing Is this thy best way to prove us guilty of aiming at Dominion and Lordship over Faith Estates and Consciences How miserably comest thou off in thy Evil Attempts § 8. That We have given occasion to be rendred in some things as bad as Papists or as having a Papistical Countenance p. 5. is a notorious Slander And that in some other things we have given occasion to be rendred MUCH WORSE in our Practices and Treatments than the very Papists themselves p. 6. is also a foul Reproach And his excusing Pope Leo his Bull against Martin Luther rather than our Friends is no Proof but rather shews himself more on the Popes side than on our Friends having spoken more for Pope Leo the tenth than our Friends on the instance he gives to wit That in the Popes Bull forty two Articles of Doctrine held by the said Martin were mentioned and declar'd Erronious by which the World was notified of the reputed Crimes laid to his Charge But in the Papers subscribed by Charles Marshall Sixty five more against J. W. and J. S. nothing that may properly be termed particular matter of Fact or Erronious Doctrine is therein laid down unless their general words now following may be termed such to wit That they
have Evil Designs despise Heavenly Dignities promote false Iealousies set up a kind of a standard of Separation pag. 6. And is not this matter of Fact to set up a standard of Separation Where then is his Comparison between Pope Leo the tenth and us And how were the Pope's proceedings in that respect far more just than our Friends as he signifies p. 6. See what Favour and Charity he has for the Pope more than for our Friends The causing or making Divisions and Separations in the Apostles days was then such matter of Fact as that they were to be marked and avoided that did so though our Adversary does not own this to be properly termed particular matter of Fact laid down when plainly mentioned in writing Thus I have considered him on his own terms and taken notice how he justifies the Pope's proceedings as far more just than our Friends whilst he would be reckoned against Popery § 9. That we would not be rendred like Papists is true but that the Pen-man seems to marr it all again in refering the Reader to a short Tract writ by our Friend R. Richardson is false And though both Heathenish Papistical and Protestant Authors of divers sorts as he saith are quoted in the said Tract 't is no reasonable Inference that therefore R. R. is like a Papist or like all those he quotes unless W. R. would like it well to be so reflected upon Argumentum ad hominem as resembling a Papist in his quoting Pope Leo's Bull against Martin Luther as having some more pretended ground whereon to place a Judgment and as far more just in his proceedings than C. M. and sixty five Friends more As also in his quoting the Parliament of Papists at Paris p. 31. Does not this then by his own reflection render him more like to a Papist than a strict Quaker Whilst he 'l needs have R. R. c. like Papists for quoting Heathenish Papistical or Protestant Authors yet he himself quoting Pope Leo's Bull against M. Luther and the said Parliament of Papists against our Friends Let him wind himself out from a Self-condemnation in this and other points of like nature if he can § 10. He seems much to upbraid us with the words Learned Friend R. R. he throws them over and over upon the Pen-man he often twits us with them and yet but in his 8th page he tells us of the Memory of the Learned Samuell Fisher. See how the man makes work to his own Confutation Though our words in the Copy were Learned in the Truth how the words in the Truth were left out I know not And yet a Person being Learned in any respect it can be no sin to say He is Learned whilst 't is not to admire outward Learning or Acquirement above its place which I am sure was not intended on our parts § 11. Of our saying That it is at least suspected for a great Slander viz. That some do look upon G. F. as that Prophet whom the Lord by Moses prophesied he would raise up Aad that he is not ignorant that such there are c. Our Adversary in his inference has perverted the words from at least suspected to only suspected and bear suspicion when as at least suspected implies more than a bear Suspicion And therefore his supposition thereupon and his Jealousie That the secret Reason was that on Conference with G. F. he could not in Truth deny the same And that he will not deny it p. 9 10. This is a Presumptious Imagination for I affirm G F. does deny the same in reference to himself as a particular Man or Person whose days and years are limited only the Truth of the Immortal Seed Christ in him as he is in every true Believer Male and Female he stands to maintain against all Opposers and persecuting Gain-sayers and Apostates And therefore his Jealousie That at length this Controversie as mannaged c. will occasion the discovery of great Idolatry pag. 10. shews that he suggests false things still upon Jealousie to render G. F. c Odious and Obnoxious That the Pen-man offers not a word to prove him â—uilty of sordid and foul Abuse against John Blaikling p. 10. is a sordid foul Untruth see our Treatise against the Accuser of our Brethren pag. 246. where we offer what he says against J. B. and others Writing or Signing any thing right or wrong and comparing him to a Parasite to an Earthly Prince Here 's more than one word offered to prove W. R's foul Abuse against J. B. c. who to add to his Abuse now saith J. B. has acted the part of a Sycophantizing Parasite in writing touching G. F. And what 's this but to render him a meer Tale-bearer and Flatterer or an Informing Flatterer for his own Ends and Advantage This still appears sordid and abusive thus infamously to brand any Friend or Person Conscientious towards God § 12. As for his ascribing Eternal Honour either to G. F's Life or to him or his Soul as joyned to the Spotless Life wherein J. B. can mean no other than the Life of Christ Jesus in him I do not understand that this can prove him a Sycophantizing Parasite For that Christ is our Life the Life of every true Believer is plain that Eternal Honour belongs to him is not disputed In the next place He that Honours me saith the Lord him will I Honour The Question is Whether this Honour is not Eternal a parte post that is Everlasting to the Souls of the Righteous whom God never forsakes Then how can any such ever loose that Honour that God gives And does our Adversary believe that nothing may be said to be Eternal that had a beginning as to Man Had not Eternal Salvation and Eternal Redemption a beginning as to the Creature yet Eternal But W. R. notes in the Margent That Eternal Honour is due to none but God who alone and not the words of Mortal Man is able to nourish the Soul which is Immortal And all this to confute John Blaikling Wherein he greatly perverts J. B's Intention and misrepresents his words for he spoke of the dropping of his tender words in the Lords Love and W. R. tells of the words of mortal man When the Apostle said Hitherto I have fed you with Milk and not with strong Meat Was this a Soul's feeding or nourishing yea or nay And was the Apostle's preaching the Gospel in a living Ministry only the words of mortal mam No sure For our Gospel came not unto you in word only but in Spirit and in Power His charge against G.F. that he hath described himself one unto whom Infallible Judgment hath been committed in all things is denyed by G. F. though he owns the Judgment committed to him of God in matters of Salvation and things Spiritual to be Infallible § 13. His Marginal Note appears manifestly untrue viz. That he has not written one word to shew that such a sense is his
Rome How like a silly Sophister hast thou argued Mayest thou not blush and be ashamed of such silly Impertinent yet abusive Scriâ—ling vain Shews fallacious and abusive Similitudes But Truth has defaced thy Pictures and Images and discovered thy empty Shews and Legerdemain Tricks thy Pride and Scorn against the Innocent Thou proceedest in thy Similitudes viz. 3dly The Popish Clergy think it not fit that the Laity should undertake to treat on points of Divinity or concern their heads with that otherwise than to receive those things in the sence the Clergy teacheth This bespeaks little of any difference at all between the Pen-man and the Popish Clergy â—nd why so The Pen-man on the occasion of my writing some-what touching Doctine thus saith viz. This man who is thus discomposed in his work should not have medled so much with points of Divinity which he appears so little skilful in p. 18. What was thy design in this Instance but to render the Pen-man and our second days Meeting so far at unity with the Popish Clergy as not to allow the Laity to treat on points of Divinity Thou mightst as well have said that we think not fit that any Lay-men should preach among us which were notoriously false and against our selves and Practice and contrary to our constant Testimony who are no Clergy-men but Lay-men so called Besides our saying Thou shouldst not have medled so much with points of Divinity was not because thou art one of the Laity and not a Clergy-man but because of thy discomposedness in thy work and thy appearing so little skilful in some points of Divinity thou didst medle in See now how perverting and fallacious still thou art in thy similitudes But to proceed on thy Fallacies viz. 4thly Some have esteemed the Authority of the Pope above the Authority of an Oecumenical or General Council but some others the contrary yet both have agreed that the Authority accompanying the one of them hath been the highest in the Church from whence no appeal on Earth In this I cannot of knowledge place much difference between my Adversaries and the Romish Church because I know not but that G. F. may be by some declared to be invested with a greater Authority than the General Meeting neither can I deny but that the General Meeting may be by others esteemed to be invested with greater Authority than he p. 19. See now what amounts thy Similitude unto here Thou canst not of knowledge place much difference c. because thou knowest not but that G. F. MAY BE by some so declared c. Instead of shewing Resemblance or a Similitude and seeming Union between us and the Romish Church now thy proof is come to I KNOW NOT BVT c. and to a G. F. MAY BE c. And then again thou canst not deny but that the General Meeting may be by others esteemed c. as before So thy May-be's are thy Discoveries before pretended See thy impertinent trifling But thou knowest that the Authority and Power of our Meetings has been frequently declared to be the Power of God which is the same in all Meetings of his faithful People We place not the Authority upon any Meeting or Number of Persons meerly as a Meeting but upon the Presence and Power of Christ in that Meeting for he is our great and wonderful Counsellor § 6. 5thly What Cry for Justice is it thou complainest hath not been hearkned unto in London when relating to G. F Was it a Cry for thee to be heard against G. F. in his presence or absence or was it Justice for thee to be heard read the Papers or Indictments against him when he was many Miles distant It seems thou art for Judgment against G. F. but who must be the Judges and where the Judicature Not thy self and Party for ye are a party extream against him not those thou hast judged Apostates and of party with G. F. for they are incompetent in thy own account for thee to appeal to not the World for they are unmeet to judge of spiritual differences for the Saints shall judge the World If thou sayst 'T is the Church of Christ thou wouldst appeal to for Justice against G. F. this grants the Church a Power of Judgment and Determination in matters relating to Conscience contrary to thy own Principle and Doctrine And then where is that Church of Christ thou wouldst appeal unto that is neither of thy party nor of G. F's Now consider where thou art run And why dost thou go on with thy jealous Reflections upon the Pen-man when thou canst neither write positively nor hast proof against him saying It is well if the endeavours of the Pen-man who peradventure may expect advance by Vsurpation in the Government contended for be not as great to keep off the stroke of Justice when as relating to G. F. as Cardinal Scomberges were to keep off the Reformation from the Court of Rome c. p. 19. What proof is all this against the Pen-man but to expose thy Malice and dubious as well as proofless Reflections to open censure Instead of Proof thou presents us with thy If and with thy Peradventure Whereas the Pen-man can appeal to the righteous Judge of all and Heart-searcher against thy Defaming and false Insinuation of expecting advancement by Vsurpation in Government keeping off the stroke of Justice both which my Soul loaths As an humble Subject under Christ's Government I only oppose the stroke of the envious revengeful Spirit in thee and other Apostates c. as I really judge it my Duty 5 thly And what if it be reputed That G. F. originally called Ministring Friends to General Meetings Yearly or was Instrumental therein as thou sayest p. 20. Doth this seem to have union with the Popes calling General Councils consisting of the Clergy Did not the Primitive Apostles and Elders sometimes assemble and that long before there were Popes or their Councils Were they therefore to be compared to the Popes and their General Councils Our placing the Ground of the Controversie on an opposite dark Spirit on thy and thy Abettors part is true and so it is also that thy opposition to many Faithful Servants of Christ was the Fruit of Darkness and no just comparison with the Bishop of Bitonto's commendation of Pope Paul the third nor with his exhorting all to submit to that Council which if they do not it will be justly said the Popes Light is come into the World and men love Darkness better than Light as thou cites him in this blasphemous Doctrine and to add to this Unjust and Impertinent Instance or Similitude thou insinuatest by Query Whether that Expression may be a proper Looking-glass for the Pen-man and G. Fox to see their Faces in when they conclude it the Fruit of Darkness not to submit to their Councils and outward Directories I shall leave to the consideration of the unprejudiced understanding Reader Thus far thou p. 20. What
Comparisons against him and thy rendring him a Persecutor of his Brethren agree with his being Dear W. P. This Noble man c as thy Brother F. Bugg and consequently thy self have rendred him being in thy Book pag. 73.74 As for their not mentioning any particular Doctrine or Vitious Life that others might know the matters alledged against them what wouldst infer that therefore the Pope's Bull against M. Luther was more reasonable or just That 's a mistake for thou confessest a Judgment to be given against that jealous rending and separate Spirit from which thou hast not cleared them but rendred them the more Guilty if thou beest their Representatives as impowered by them to write in their Vindication according to thy own reflection on us And was that no Reason then to give others notice and warning against such a Spirit Is Schism no Sin or not reproveable But how Unjust is thy Comparison I ask thee if thou darest say that Pope Leo that Atheist was in the same Sense Religion Gravity and tender Exercise toward M. Luther that in thy own Narrative thou hast rendred these Friends in that were concern'd in dealing with J. S. and J. W. at Drawell And I ask thee further If ever thou readst any such Acknowledgment Submission or Condemnation made by Martin Luther to the Church of Rome as the said J. S. and J. W. with thy own assistance made as satisfaction to their Brethren and the Church of God in general Though afterward thou comparedst it to a Rattle to please Children And hath a Christian Society no Power to reprove and judge a dividing self-separating Spirit in whomsoever it be that makes Rents and Schisms as well as Heretical Doctrine and Vitious or Scandalous living Mark them that cause Divisions and Offences and avoid them c. If thou grantest the Principle and such power in a Christian Society or Church what will thy attempts to Unchristian and Unchurch us avail unless thou canst prove us guilty of Vitious Lives and Heretical Doctrine Which if thou canst not then hast thou and thy party assumed a Power to judge of Spirits wherein you fairly give away your Cause and overthrow much of your own opposition to the Churches Power and Determination in such cases And your Judgment to Unchristian us or our Spirits being but your Imposition we shall as little value and the day will yet farther discover whose Spirits are Unchristian and whose Spirits are Christian. And 't is not thy boasting either of the Numerousness or Scores of thy party p. 23. that will decide the Controversie nor wouldst thou accept of such a Plea on our parts but doubtless esteem it no Christian Proof or Argument but an Imposition and begging the Question But seeing thou layest so much stress on thy Numbers and Scores I must tell thee that if they amounted to as many as the third part of the Stars which yet they are far short of that followed thee or owned thy Work of opposition strife they would be but wandring Stars and have lost their Habitations and Glory and are darkned whom the Dragon's Tayl has drawn and cast down to the Earth But blessed be the Lord our God the greater part of the Stars among us his People called Quakers have kept their Station and Splendor in the Firmament of his Power and in living Union Concord and Love wherein they live above that Spirit of Enmity and Discord which thou and thy party are in and which the Lord will yet farther discover and deliver those who are at unawares betrayed thereby yet have some secret Breathings unto him and that they may come into clearness of Judgment so as on the Restoration and increase of the number of the Faithful and Upright And by the spreading of the Gospel day thy Numbers shall decrease and many will come to see thee more and more in thy dark and mischievous attempts and how insuccesful and disappointed thou wilt be therein And those that come to be recovered and many Thousands that shall be gathered to the Lord and us his People shall be found better and more worthy than thy self and those that go out and separate from us § 3. W. R. is pleased to make a Charge and draw severe and seditious Inferences upon our Advertisement and conclusion of our Introduction especially against the Pen-man for vindicating the People called Quakers in their Church-Order and Discipline and writing in the Name of the People called Quakers when vindicated from his Scandals But he has very unfairly and dis-ingenuously left out the distinguishing expressions in the first as Peaceable Christian Conscientiously Christian Society p. 23. in the passage of ours viz. We the peaceable Christian People called Quakers are Conscientiously vindicated and cleared in our Christian Society Where 's then his exception against our vindication and writing in the Plural in the Name of the peaceable People called Quakers But that 1. We could not write in the Name of such as encouraged the publication of his Treatise entituled The Christian-Quaker in five parts who yet are a part of the People called Quakers saith he 2. Nor in the Names of such as are disaffected with laying Marriages before Womens Meetings And these are numerous and called Quakers quoth he To the first Answer No How should we write in their Names who encouraged the Publication of his said Treatise against us if any such were for they keep very obscure as not willing to be known in such encouragement It is a Book of Envy Strife and Discord and they no Peaceable Quakers who encouraged it 'T was the Peaceable People called Quakers that were concerned in our Vindication And therefore W. R. saith true as 't happens The Pen-man could not write in the Name of such as encouraged the Publication of his Book Whence it follows they were not of that Peaceable sort which he vindicated nor W. R's Book a work of Peace or in the least tending thereto but a great Abuse and Scandal to and against the very peaceable People called Quakers Secondly Nor are they who oppose our Godly Women's Meetings and laying Marriages before them so peaceable and clear in their minds in that point as we could wish they were and they should be better informed and hear Instruction However they also are concluded by W. R.'s words not to be of that Peaceable People called Quakers intended in our Vindication in that he saith The Pen-man cannot be understood to write in their Names when 't is most evident he did write in the Name of The Peaceable Christian People called Quakers Though W. R. as one in some wise Conscious leaves out the word Peaceable that he might with the greater colour draw his Charge and severe Inferences upon the Pen-man c. But such kind of slighty mean shifts will stand him in no stead when we strictly look into his Fallacious dealing And granting him that we cannot represent nor be understood to write in the Name of such
Quakers so called as encouraged the publication of his persecuting Books and Pamphlets against us nor of such as either oppose our Womens Meetings or laying Marriages before them or are disaffected there-with nor in the Names of the several Scores he tells of who gave Testimony in Writing against Charles Marshall and Sixty five more The greatest part whereof being known to be Faithful men of Sincerity and service in the Lord's work Nor in the Names of such as he saith appear Neutral in the present Controversie and yet own the same Principles which he and his party do Where is then their Neutrallity is it in having no concern of Conscience outwarly to appear on either party as W. R. saith Then they are only Neutrals in appearance but secretly of his party and Principles some whereof are very perverse and unpeaceable as well as unsound Now I say we grant that we of the Second day's Meeting did not represent such kind of Quakers as those of W. R. his party nor could they impower us in our writing for and representing the peaceable People called Quakers or that peaceable sort of Quakers who are for Unity Love Concord and Peace in the Church of Christ among us nor was it our intention to represent personate or vindicate such pretended Quakers as are in a Spirit of discord and strife causing and making Divisions Rents and Schismes in the Church first disturbing and troubling then reproaching the Society they sometime owned but only those of a peaceable Mind and Spirit and therefore his not knowing that we can represent any under that Name more than our own Second day's Meeting is a false insinuation for there are many Thousands of the People called Quakers yea of the most sincere and peaceable minded besides our said Meeting whose real sense and judgment in the matters treated on in our Book against W. R's great Book we have represented and who really do and will own the same Where now hath W. R. shown the Pen-man guilty of great Impudence in writing in behalf of the peaceable People called Quakers The word Peaceable in our Advertisement left out by him doth really distinguish it with respect only to the peaceable sort which are they that live in Love and Unity who may properly be termed The PEOPLE called Quakers as united in one Society and become one People and not dividing separate Spirits who are gone out from us And though in our Introduction we say the terms We and Vs are used sometimes in the Name of the People called Quakers when vindicated from his Scandals I say so still And this intends no other than the Peaceable People as before explain'd in our Advertisement and not any such pretended Quakers as W. R. his party and Abettors who are unpeaceable and turbulent to the Society and People among whom they sometime walked And therefore his roaring and clamouring out great Impudence Pride and height of such towring lofty spirited Persons as the Pen-man c. are but empty Clamours and Abuses as is also his Jealousie That the Pen-man counts himself one of the Representatives of Christ's inward Government who alone is Lord over the Conscience Whereas the Pen-man never so accounted of himself nor ever assumed to himself any such Government or Lordship over the Conscience as is peculiar to Christ alone but only accounts himself a Servant of Christ and a Subject under his spiritual Government And therefore W. R's still proceeding in his roaring and bitter Exclamation against him as That he would represent in Print as if the People called Quakers without râ—â—triction a Lye still were Persons impowering such an imperious Map of Pride and Drollery as the Pen-man shews himself to write in their Names The matter is answered before but yet I may further add as the Envy and Malice of this Adversary appears swelling high so his confidently repeated Falshoods and Abuses are numerous for we would neither so represent in Print nor yet did the Pen-man so much as pretend to be impowered to write by the People in general or without restriction and yet both in Charity and Christian duty might vindicate all them as the peaceable People caâ—â—ed Quakers who are really peaceable in their Spirits and Conversations And though there be some called Quakers who are unpeaceable in both such as W.R. and his party yet that cannot unpeople the other who are truly peaceable but rather unpeople themselves who are unpeaceable from being of that People Such our vindication of a peaceable People from the unpeaceable proves none of us Impudent nor any imperious Map of Pride and Drollery notorious Falshood c. as most unjustly rendred by an imperious proud Adversary For hath it not been frequent with us to vindicate the People called Quakers intending all those that might properly be counted a People in Peace and Unity and that from the general Aspersions and Calumnies both of open and secret Enemies And in this Controversie we vindicate them as that peaceable People who are sincere and faithful to God lovers of Peace Unity and good Order and whom W. R. and his party in their dividing and perverse gain-sayings are not able to unpeople nor justly to render themselves that People As for him and those of his party who promote his malicious persecuting defaming Books c. We cannot look upon them worthy to bear so much as the Name Quakers muchless to be deemed that People under the Title of Christian-Quakers whilst in their Unchristian spirit of strife and discord And they will yet more manifest themselves to be further remote from that peaceable People called Quakers if they Repent not and the peaceable and faithful who love unity and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ shall remain a people and live when all such spirits as lust to envy and contention shall be confounded scattered wither be driven back and come to naught in their evil Designs and wicked Attempts the Breath of the Lord shall scatter them for no Weapon formed against his Heritage shall prosper But alas our Adversary is still in a great fude and fret for our writing in behalf or in the name of the People called Quakers reiterating his Falshood again without Restriction p. 24 25. he should have said Peaceable People called Quakers But he goes on at an outragious rate on this subject confessing He wants words to represent the Action in as ugly a dress as it deserves And therefore when he hath as falsly asperst the Pen-man and set him out in as Vgly a Dress as he can so that the Devil and William Rogers have done their worst hitherto he supposeth a Comparison in the case against him but very unjustly in these words viz. Suppose a company of men never chosen according to Law should meet at Westminster and call themselves the Representatives of the People of England and accordingly in the Name of the People of England proceed to act as such Wouldst thou not abhor and detest the Action
And how canst thou think that we can do less than detest thy insolent Spirit by offering to write in the Name of the People called Quakers without Restriction when they gave neither thee nor any of thy Brethren such Authority Had the fear of God been before thine Eyes thou couldst not have attempted to have done so Wickedly p. 25. Here it is probable he thinks he hath given the Pen-man a deadly Blow but when the Devil and William Rogers have done their worst it comes to little Execution but to manifest his Envy and Folly He only shews his Teeth but cannot bite nor fasten for there is no just paralel in the case there is no such kind of Treasonable proceeding justly chargeable upon the Pen-man as is inferred in the Comparison The Pen-man did not call himself the Representative nor write in the Name of the People or of all those called Quakers without Restriction as he falsly saith nor pretend an Election or Authority from them so to do the matter is distinguished and answered before and yet the Pen-man might lawfully represent the Innocency of all true peaceable Quakers both as to Principle and Practice when abused and calumniated either as Vnchristian or Popish Imposers c. without Conviction like as this Adversary hath frequently misrepresented them And this may be done charitably freely and voluntarily in their Name and Vindication and in true Unity from a right knowledge of their Innocency declared Sense and Principles And hath not this been the Practice of many faithful Servants of Christ among us ever since we were a People to write both in the name vindication of the People of God called Quakers or of the Innocent People called Quakers c. as the Lord hath laid a necessity upon them and yet not to include those who are unfaithful or scandalous to Truth or any who are turned into Envy and Strife though they go under that Name Nor yet have they sought or needed to seek Commission from the whole People to write in their behalf being required of the Lord to write And did not many of the best reformed Protestants and Martyrs write in the name and behalf of the Protestant Church and Religion as the Book of Martyrs and other Histories and their own Writings shew of which numerous Instances might be given And did not the the Apostles of Christ often write in the Plural both in the name and behalf of themselves and the rest of true Believers and Fellow-members under the terms We and Vs and Our c. especially in that of 1 John 2.19 They went out from Us but they were not of Us for if they had been of Us they would no doubt have continued with Us see chap. 3.14 and 4.6 Here John wrote in the Name of his Brethren and Fellow-members and distinguished themselves from those that went out from them as we have our selves as a peaceable People from you that are gone out from us into a Spirit of Enmity Discord and Self-separation § 4. But W. R. since thou countest it such a horrid Crime such great Impudence Pride ugly Action Insolence c. to write in the name or on the behalf of People or Persons or in their Vindication without being impowered authorized and chosen by the same Persons or People Now observe well upon thy own principle and way of arguing what a Reckoning I have with thee Let us seriously enquire of thee Have all those Persons in whose behalf and Name thou hast written in the Plural under the Terms We Vs c given thee Authority or chosen thee to write in their Name and behalf Did John Story John Wilkinson and now the person in Cambridgshire whom thou and Francis Bugg contend for against the Record about his Marriage all give thee Authority or chuse thee to write on their behalf and to expose their Names in Print as thou hast done in thy state of the Controversie on their behalf Did they give thee Authority to write in their names and behalf as those Other Friends in Truth thou tellest of and representest Either they did or they did not if they did then they may be entituled to and are justly chargeable with thy work how perverse and abusive soever it be If they did not chuse nor authorize thee to write in their behalf and name then thy own Judgment returns upon thy own head as one guilty of great Impudence Pride towring lofty Spirit notorious Falshood ugly Dress c. to write in the name and vindication of Persons and to represent them who never gave thee Power nor chose thee to thy work Didst not thou pretend to write on behalf of thy self and other Friends in Truth concerned as in the Title-page of thy great Book and now to use the words Vs We or Our with respect to such as encouraged the giving forth thereof as in thy Advertisement to thy seventh part When now divers noted Persons who have appeared of thy party refuse to stand by thy Books and we know none of them that dare say they gave thee any such Authority or chose thee to be their Representative to write in their name and behalf as thou hast done against many faithful Friends whom the Lord is with and will stand by against thy crooked Spirit and Opposition but rather those thy Friends in Truth pretended on enquiry if they own and will stand by thy Books as it has been often asked them particularly at Devonshire-house in 1681. have answered That William Rogers must answer for himself if he hath done more than he can answer or wronged any They will not stand by him 'T is his own Act he must look to it c. Thus upon a pinch they leave him in the lurch to shift for himself they 'l not stand by him openly however they own him not for their Representative though he hath represented them and written as in their Name Person and Vindication as also represented them as Encouragers of the giving forth of his great Book falsly stiled The Christian-Quaker c. But to deal more closely and positively with thee in this matter how camest thou to expose Edward Burroughs Name in Print and to represent him as a Person of thy Principle and Judgment by a confused unsound whimsical Paper which thou hast printed in thy great Book with Edward Burrough's Name put to it and represented it as his Testimony and even in thy Title-page sayst it was given forth in the year 1661. by Edw. Burroughs and since the same is reprinted over and over by thy busie informing Agent Thomas Crisp as E. B's Vision but I am perswaded thou and he have grosly abused and mis-represented that Servant of the Lord E. B. by rendring him the Author of such Absurdities as are contained in that same Paper about the Shepherd and his Dogs c. particularly in that passage of the Shepherd's gathering the Sheep with the many Goats that did push trouble and hurt the Sheep with
Person Here to shew thy Learning in the Latin Tongue thou tellest us of a COERANTO which is no good Latine to be sure and thou mayst be questioned in what Language thou hadst the Expression I suppose thou hast lately heard Discourses of Quo Warranto about the City-Charter upon which from thy own imaginary conceit thou writest us COERANTO in a large Italick Character that it may appear how learned and skilled thou art in Latine and Law and likewise we must have a Latine Title to thy Book second Part i. e. De Christianâ Libertate But where thou learnedst this Title and what stress or Emphasis canst thou place upon its being in Latine more than if it had been in English i. e. Concerning Christian-Liberty For Liberty of Conscience asserted is not the English of thy Latine Title but varies from it in the Terms as well as in the Nature of it And thy prosecution for Liberty of Conscience as asserted by thee appears a Liberty not only in opposition to Persecution but also to our Godly Care Advice Counsel and Admonition relating to good Order and Church-Government amongst us and testified unto in our Paper opposed by thee in thy Book from page 41 to page 51. And if this must be the extent of thy Christian-Liberty thou mightst better have entituled thy Book Pro Libertate Carnali for it seems the Liberty pleaded for by thee admits not of Spiritual Censures Reproofs Advice or Judgment according to Christ's Law exhibited as appears by thy scurrilous opposition infamous Characters thou givest to our said Paper partly cited in thy Book and most Unchristianly and Unjustly made thy great Proof of our Doing Violence to our first Principles of Vnion and consequently turned Antichristian and such thou renderest William Penn George Whitehead Alexander Parker Stephen Crisp Thomas Salthouse John Burnyeat whose Names thou hast exposed in Print as the Persons unjustly charged by thee But we have not yet concluded thy Learning in Coeranto but must view a little more of it in thy Book on the passage thou hast borrowed on trust from William Rogers his Translation as he confesseth for which we have only his own Authority in these Words viz. Which for the sake of some I thus Translate 7th Part Christian Quaker p. 62. 'T is in thy 125 126 127 128 pages out of Bishop Hooper the first Words Scitis quod res sancta et vera quo magis examinatur Thou accepts his Translation hereof in these words KNOW YE that by how much the more c. Here Scitis the very first Word which is Ye know in the Indicative is falsly translated know ye as Scite in the Imperative whereas by Scitis in this place was intended Indication Demonstration or Proof and not imperatively Teaching and likewise Nam quod variis modis tentatur ac probatur modo pium ac sanctum FVERIT Jacturam ab hostibus nullam sentit is thus translated viz. For that which is tryed and proved after various manners if IT HATH BEEN c. instead of IT SHALL BE for FVERIT is exact future as they term it Many things of the Types and Shadows under the Law as Tythes and Offerings c. have been holy but shall not be again afficitis is made afflict instead of affect and also Legem Evangelium Dei are translated The Word of God instead of The Law and Gospel of God then at last Judicio is to the Judgment when it should be more properly by the Judgment But the most material Mistake is in the very first word Scitis falsly translated as to the Mood But these Instances are only to shew thee what a ridiculous Novice and Ludibrie thou hast rendred thy self both in Writing and Print even to School-Boys I saw lately a School-Boy of Eleaven Years old Laugh at thy Absurdity as a Person wise in thy own Conceit Yet whilst thou wouldst make a show and flourish of Learning thou hast here taken a false Translation upon an implicit Faith and blind Credulity Thou that art such a fierce opposer of implicit Faith and blind Obedience and hast so often scoft at me for the Words Learned Friend in reference to R. R. I wonder thou art not ashamed of such scornful treatment and medling so often with Latine when I find thou canst not write true English in many things This is only a small Check to thy Pride and empty Conceits this not being one of the absurdest Faults or Falshoods thou hast presented the World withal Come down and be humbled before the All-seeing God From thy antient Friend and yet Well-wisher though insolently abused by thee G. Whitehead Middlesex the 22d day of the 7th Moneth 1682. The Second Part of the said Letter Francis Bugg NOw concerning thy Book stiled DE CHRISTIANA LIBERTATE or Liberty of Conscience c. 1 st I observe thou beginest unjustly to accuse and reflect upon the People called Quakers in the very Title page in these Words viz. And the mischief of Impositions amongst the People called Quakers c. In two Parts And that thou concernest the Magistracy with it both in thy Epistle dedicated to H. North Knight as being obliged to publish it for the Information of the Magistracy c. as also in thy Epistle directed to the Noble Bereans thou concernest the Magistrates as having in the Book prefixed i. e. thy first Part laid before them many weighty Arguments for Liberty of Conscience c. So that to the Magistrates thou hast given thy Information against the People called Quakers as having mischievous Impositions among them which we utterly deny and thy Scornful Malicious Book proves it not Thus thou art turned Informer to the Magistrates against an Innocent suffering People whom thou hast so long walked amongst How darest thou appear in their Meetings and thus act the part of a treacherous malicious Informer against them even to the Magistrates Oh! Blush and be ashamed of this thy hateful Work 2 dly Thou having entituled thy self to to the matters contain'd in a Treatise entituled Liberty of Conscience asserted and vindicated by thy high Commendations given of it to H. North as Being perswaded it will be of Good Service and in thy Epistle to the Bereans A clear Demonstration c. And in thy Preface to the Reader of the Author thou thus sayest viz. His Judgment upon this Subject is my Judgment Now observe what this Author's Judgment is concerning the Light in men whereupon he chiefly placeth his Demonstration for Liberty of Conscience In page 4. he saith viz. Their Natural Light derived to them from their first Creation dictating to them what they ought to do and what not and enabling them to pass a Judgment upon themselves of their due behaviour towards God c. With some other passages of like nature in the said Treatise Here Francis thou hast presented H. North and the Magistrates with unsound and unscriptural Doctrine and appearest Apostate and corrupt in
about Impositions Prescriptions c. The Spiritual Christian who hath the Power and Form of Godliness distinguished and vindicated both from the Formal Christian and Loose Apostate who deny both Power and Form § 4. The unsound Doctrine of Robert Rich espoused by T. C. tending to Ranterism About Forms Prescriptions Impositions c. R. R. a false Accuser like the rest of these Apostates His Authority made use of by T. C. and F. Bugg invalid J. Perrot's Spirit and Language appearing in these present Opposers § 5. About T. C's Marrying by a Priest and his Wife 's condemning it His rendring the holy Spirit contradictory to it self in the matter of Tythes His Answer to John Field dirty scurrilous and impertinent His abuse of his Wife and Friends in the case misrepresenting them in his Prejudice and Vncharitableness judging and defaming others contrary to his own warning He himself reprehended and warned § 6. His endeavouring to extenuate his Offence about Marrying by a Priest paying Tythes His Instance and Allegation in the case but slight covers And he proved Irreligious and Fallacious in his preceeding and arguing contrary to the Profession and Testimony of a real Christian-Quaker § 7. His Judgment about Tythes as it accords with W. R's still unsound loose they not excusable in the Declension and Apostacy § 8. His Reply to Stephen Crisp disingenious and fallacious A Catalogue of some of the notorious Falshoods and Slanders therein His Reviling and foul Detractions against Stephen Crisp. § 9. Concerning the Paper which W. R. and T. C. have published and printed in Edward Burroughs's Name To the scattered of Israel c. Their implicit Credulity and Confidence therein and abuse of Edward Burroughs with Reasons given by a Certificate and Testimony to shew it in most probability to be John Perrot's and not E. Burroughs's Paper All which is recommended to Serious Consideration § 1. WHereas Thomas Crisp hath of late time struck in with William Rogers and his party as a busie Agent in Division and as hot and violent in his abusive Language and Reflection as the most of them for want of better Argument and Reason he is also gotten into the same kind of stile and strain with W. R. and F. B. against promoting Government Orders Customs Forms Prescriptions c. as in several of his late Pamphlets called Testimonies I find also that these Opposers have recourse to one anothers Writings and quote each other and thereby show their own Authorities for themselves in the Controversie for want of better Proof as W. R. cites F. B. in his seventh Part from page 64 to page 75. and F. B. quotes W. R. and Tho. Crisp's Babels Builders in his 112 page of his said Book De Christ. Lib. and Thomas Crisp in his fifth part Babels Builders quotes something he calls Q. Vn. M. which I understand to be a pernicious Pamphlet of John Pennyman's which F. Bugg has threatned us with in several Papers so that these Opposers seem to be joyned together in one and the same Spirit of Division Opposition and Separation and therefore may well be linked together as Persons concerned in one and the same Interest and not only so but I find a Paper in T. Crisp's third Edition which he calls George Bishop's Testimony against a Paper of Orders which is the very same Paper that Jeffery Bullock some Years ago cited against us in his Pamphlet stiled Antichrist's Transformations and which the said Jeffery Bullock did so publish in Print against G. Whitehead J. Whitehead T. Green T. Briggs A. Parker J. Coule R. Farnsworth T. Loe S. Crisp J. Moon J. Parkes by Name who are struck at for no other cause but a Paper wherein we gave our Christian sense and seasonable advice which we see no cause to Repent of and therefore G. B's Paper cited by the said Jeffery Bullock and Thomas Crisp in opposition to that of ours proceeded from a mistaken Judgment and is Uncharitable against us as well as Erronious in divers parts of it But the Author is gone I shall say the less and charitably believe God took him away in Mercy and that if he had remained to this day he would not have stood by these Gain-sayers in the evil use they make of his Paper in Print against so many of the Servants of Christ. But I have not done with T. Crisp for his so often printing part of a Letter from B. F. to me when he was under a Cloud and mistake in the Controversie and Division occasioned by J. Perrot c. against Friends for putting off their Hats in Prayer in which Letter I and some others are reflected upon and charged That if ever any separation be it will be through mine and some lording rigid driving Spirits against which I have in humility appealed to the Lord to plead my Innocency in the Consciences of all concerned my labour having been and still is for Love and Unity among God's People and I take it not only unkindly from T. C. but as his Injustice and an Abuse so often to bring forth that piece of a Letter in Print against me which was before published and printed more fully by some malicious Adversaries in their Pamphlet stiled Tyranny and Hypocrisie printed in the year 1673. In answer to which I desire T. C. and the rest of the party concerned would now accept and consider B. F's own late Testimony seeing the Lord in mercy has reduced him to a better understanding and judgment than he was in when he writ the said Letter Benj. Furly's Testimony follows WHereas I understand that sundry persons to me unknown have divers times formerly and now again lately published in Print certain extracts of a Letter written by me as I take it about sixteen years ago to G. W. keeping up and feeding thereby a Spirit of Contention and Strife This is in brief to signifie That what has hitherto been done of this nature has been altogether without my order consent or privity for my soul hates that Spirit of Prejudice Enmity and Contention by which some men though perhaps poor men not knowing by what spirit influenc'd what spirit they gratifie and what spirit they grieve and wound in this their work so acted led and driven As for so many of them that are meerly under a mistake I do from my heart pity them and am touched with the sence of their Condition as having laboured under the same snares Wherefore my earnest desire for them is That they may be made sensible of that which they seem so earnestly to contend for yea even for them that are so tinctur'd and leaven'd with Prejudice that they do wittingly and with some degree of Malice foment Contention I cannot but desire if it be the will of God that they may through Judgment come to know Repentance and through Repentance receive Mercy and Remission in and by the Blood of Jesus Christ to whom all such do doe despight