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
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
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
their Horns and putting them into the Fold and that he made fast the door and would not separate them until he had the other Sheep also that did not come with the Flock See what Doctrine this is as applyed to Christ the good Shepherd rendring him so severe to his Sheep as to gather shut up and keep so many Goats so long among them in his Fold to trouble bruise and hurt his poor Sheep with their Horns And also that Warning and Precept given in the said Paper to Friends for all to forbear judging any man any more upon any pretence whatsoever Can any that knew E. B. and the soundness of judgment understanding that he was attain'd to in the year 1661. believe that he was the Author of such Doctrine to all Friends as to judge no man under any pretence whatsoever A man well known severely to judge deceitful Workers and rebellious Ones as yea he testified plainly against John Perrot's spirit of Division is fully evinced in his Books and Writings And I dare presume E.B. never gave thee authority nor chose thee or Tho. Crisp to represent him in print so many years after his decease as the Author of the said Paper or warning to all friends To judge no man under any pretence whatsoever And yet thou art severely judging and reproaching others that are not of thy party as Apostates Innovators c. contrary to such an express precept doctrine espoused by thee as E. B's Testimony Besides the express contradiction to thy self in thus representing E. B. in print without his leave authority or consent what great abuse hast thou done to him his Memory Name and Testimony in exposing him in Print as Author of that which doth not so much as look like him or his Testimony or any Vision of his but in the said Doctrines both contrary to his Judgment and Practice I say what a horrid Abuse hast thou done to the Name and Memory of the dead in Christ and that by promoting a forged Subscription if thou canst not give sufficient demonstration and proof that Edw. Burroughs was the Author of the same Paper aforesaid which thou hast exposed in his name in Print If thou sayst it was delivered to thee with Edw. Burrough 's name to it I say that 's no proof of its being his for both I and divers others have seen a Copy of the same only with J. Perrots name to it and this more probably true that he was the Author for divers reasons than thy rendring E. B. the Author Again thou hast also exposed that honest and innocent Person Isaac Pennington in Print to serve thy own turn and thy parties as a Confirmation of thy work and that after his decease also for which I dare presume he gave thee no authority nor chose thee so to represent him in Print or to pick out of the middle diminish or curtalize his Writings or Testimony by leaving out the most material and explanatory precedent and subsequent Passages thereof to the great injury and abuse of his Intention for which his Son John Pennington was stirred up to vindicate his deceased Father and to detect thy abuse and Prevarication And am satisfied that neither Edward Burroughs nor John Crook gave thee Authority to quote or cite them or either of them in opposition to G. F. as thou hast John Crook especially in thy Epistle pag. 3. nor to tell the World in Print That his Testimony is agreeable to thy sence I do not believe J. C. will in the least own thee in thy work of Opposition and strife against many faithful Servants of Christ. Also thou and Francis Bugg have represented William Penn in Print on some passages pickt out of his Address to Protestants as in thy 66 and 73 pages which he never gave you power to do much less to represent him as if he were one in Judgment with you against his Brethren nor did he give thee or F. Bugg leave to discant upon and turn his words to serve your own turns nor to apply them against such his Friends in the Isle of Ely or else-where who are for Womens Meetings and laying Marriages twice before the Mens and Womens Meetings it is not to be supposed that he intended Fly Rome at Home as proper Admonition to them as thy Brother F. Bugg applies them as in the Authority and genuine sence of Dear W. P. p. 78. calling William Penn Dear Friend p. 65. This Noble Man c. p. 73. Which is to render W. P. exactly one of your own party and all this without his authority leave or consent But how comes he now to be Dear William Penn Dear Friend and This Noble man Hast not thou numbred him among the Persecutors of J. S. and J. W. as thou esteemest Charles Marshall and Sixty Five more as thy phrase is who signed the Paper thou art so much offended at p. 22 27. Was not William Penn one of those sixty six Subscribers And dost not thou on this very occasion retort his words Let us fly Rome at Home What! must he therefore be a Persecutor of his Brethren and yet a Dear Friend Dear William Penn This Noble man c. in thy Book What Self-contradiction and manifest Flattery art thou and thy Brother Bugg like Parasites guilty of Pray lift up your Eyes and see your selves if not judicially given over to blindness and hardness of heart Take another Instance or two of thy Self-contradictory dealing Didst not thou expose a Certificate or Testimony as thou esteemedst it of Nathaniel Crips in Print against G. F. without any Authority from Nathaniel for so doing I am sure he confest as much to me and John Bouldron the 6th Moneth 1679. against thy publishing it in Manuscript as that thou didst it without his advice knowledge or order see our Book Accuser c. p. 172 And likewise that pretended Certificate or Testimony of Edw. Perkins which thou printedst against G. F. Edward confessed to me at sundry times and before divers Persons that he did not give any advice or consent to thy printing it for 't was printed without his knowledge And so we may question or suppose thou hast done the like in the rest or most of the pretended Testimonies against G. F. c. from those Women and others of Bristol c. Now may not I rationally take leave to reflect and argue ad hominem upon thee and according to thy own Terms thus Oh! thou Imperious Map of Pride towring lofty and Lordly Spirit insolent and conceited proud Vsurper how durst thou either write in the name or behalf of so many whom thou countest Friends in Truth and numerous too or expose the names of so many deceased Servants of Christ in thy Quarrel as if they were all on thy side and party when thy gave thee no power nor deputed thee so to do And thou must answer for thy misrepresenting them and abusing their Names Memories and Testimonies when the
be otherwise And indeed I can in Truth say That I never had a thought entred in my Breast that OUTWARD ORDER Methods Forms and Discipline were not to be exercised and proceeded in under the Government of Christ according as the Spirit of the Lord should direct and guide p. 42. Thus far W. R Observe He has here given a very fair and ample concession to Truth in words viz. 1st To the Apostles labours for the Churches establishment in the Faith and in the Power 2dly To the practice of that Form which the Power should lead them into 3dly To his care in the Marriage of his two Daughters and others that NO Proceedings in Marriages may be permitted in any such private Methods as may be scandalous to Truth 4thly To outward Order Methods Forms and Discipline that they are to be exercised and proceeded in under Christ's Government according as his spirit directs and guides Are they so A fair confession Had he alwayes kept to this method and language and so been consistent with himself the Controversie had been in a narrow compass But though he seems seriously to say That he never had a thought entred his breast that outward Order Methods Form and Discipline were not to be exercised and proceeded in under the Government of Christ I query on his contradiction how they should be exercised and proceeded in under Christs Government in his Church if so be it cannot consist with the tenor of the new Covenant for any to give forth outward Orders Sentences Decrees c Or if Christ doth invest none with Power from on high to establish such things relating to Conscience as outward Order Methods Forms Discipline c Or if no visible Persons be invested with power from Christ to execute outward Laws Prescriptions Order c How then are outward Order Methods Forms and Discipline to be exercised and proceeded in under Christ's Government And who are to exercise and proceed in them if not visible Persons May not they declare and practise outwardly what they have received from Christ inwardly How then shall the Law go forth of Sion and the Word from Jerusalem But if he grants that some persons are made instrumental under Christs Government to give forth good outward Methods Forms Order Discipline c. but not to be a bond on the Consciences of others who have believed in the everlasting Light This appears contradictory again William was thy proceedings in the Marriage of two Daughters and thy care that Truth might not be scandalized no bond upon thine or their Consciences How are outward Methods Forms Order and Discipline then to be practised and proceeded in under Christ's Government Must they be so practised exercised and proceeded in by Believers without Conscience or without Obligation or being binding upon their Consciences Strange Doctrine loose and confused and not consistent with any Religious tender Conscience towards God or Christ which requires all to be done in his name and to his glory But after all our Opposers variations inconsistencies and whirlings he is fled to this Refuge or rather Subterfuge viz. That his writing shews dislike to Man's Pretence to establish outward Orders relating to matters of Conscience as the Order of the Gospel or to take upon him the giving forth of any outward Rules c. relating to Faith and Discipline in the Church with intent that they should become a Bond upon others to submit thereto further than from a Recommendation unto the Conscience a service may be seen therein according to the measure of Light given c. pag. 41. Observe 1 st This censures only MAN's PRETENCE to establish outward Orders relating to Conscience c. 2dly Man's taking upon him to give forth any outward Rules in Faith or Discipline in the Church with intent they should become a Bond upon others to submit further than from a Recommendation to the Conscience a service MAY be seen therein according to the measure of Light given c. Whereupon 't is to be noted first That this does not oppose the Spirit of Christ making use of man or men as instrumental to establish or give forth outward Orders Rules c. relating to Conscience Faith or Discipline in the Church to be submitted unto 2 dly Nor such outward Orders Rules c. as a service may be seen in according to the measure of the true Light given But only a dislike to MAN's PRETENCE TAKING VPON HIM therein Which I understand is intended as without the true Spirits Guidance Which appears still to be an Abatement and Extinuation of his more general reiterated Opposition and Noise against ANY giving forth outward Orders Prescriptions c. or being invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws Orders c. under Christs inward Government because the new Covenant and its Law is inward For now he only opposeth Man's Pretence and Taking upon him in these cases and who must be Judge that he is but a Pretendor and an Actor in his own will if the Rules Directions or Laws he declares or gives out be in themselves Honest Lawful and Just yea Convenient and Needful not of Man nor by the Will of Man Were not this to judge of Spirits without outward evidence or proof against them But if our Opposer would place the Controversie against some Rules Orders c. among us as being in themselves either unjust unlawful or dishonest and could make sufficient proof thereof that would both greatly narrow and soon determine the Controversie For that can be no good nor true Spirit that gives forth bad or unjust Laws otherwise we have no reason to give credit to him in his bitterly smiting with words of hatred against any Men or Persons among us whilst speaking ministring or acting things just lawful or honest and needful as bound in Conscience to declare and advise others to practise and which he must grant them Liberty both to speak and act or else hee 'l miserably interfer with his pretended Liberty of Conscience Seeing whatsoever things are honest just and of good report are to be thought on and practised That W. R's great Book aforesaid as it is against R. B's Book for Church-Government is against Church-Government so far as it relates to an outward Form of Church-Government outward Order Rules Methods c. And this is no Prevarication as now he renders it as is evident from divers passages before recited and by himself frequently contradicted § 4. Also 't is a manifest falshood where W. R. saith That the Prevaricating Pen-man doth not quote any Sentence of his confuted by his asserting in a Paper dated London 26th of the 3d Moneth 1673. That God hath in his Wisdom afforded those Helps and Governments in the Churches which are not to be despised being in subjection to Christ the one Head and Law-giver c. This was signed by W. R. among other Friends pag. 42. If no visible Persons be invested with Power from
't is Conscience obliged not a blind affection So 't is not to impose a blind Submission though some's want of perswasion may probably proceed from their being hardened through Rebellion as R. B. intimates Anarch p. 67. And their contradiction in that case will not excuse them from being guilty of disobeying God because it is from his Spirit the sentence proceeds and 't is their duty both to see receive submit to what 's justly required The intent of the Spirit of God in giving forth Judgment or Sentences through his Servants to end Controversie c. doth not bespeak or intend any design of such Imposition as to enforce any upon a blind Submission or Obedience in such a hardened Condition for the Spirit of Christ strives with them to open their Eyes and enlighten their Understandings that they may see and know in their own Consciences first their Duty and then submit in what is according to the will of God being the judgment of his Spirit which makes its way with its own evidence to the Consciences and Hearts of Persons if not wholly harden'd through Rebellion against God's Spirit in themselves For the Testimony of the Lord is sure making Wise the Simple The Commandment of the Lord is pure ENLIGHTNING the Eyes Psal. 19. 3 dly Then what power or freedom can any Minister or Servant of Christ have to leave any liberty for a believer to refuse submission to the judgment of the Spirit of Christ in his servants or believers where Christ leaves none or to grant that he may not see it his duty to submit and thereupon to refuse when the spirit of Christ who knows the Creatures capacity gives the Judgment and requires Submission There 's no just ground nor pretence for such Indulgence which tends to Rebellion and Ranterism but rather for the Servants of Christ to be faithful and stedfast in their Testimony and Judgment which they know is both in it self Just and proceeding from his Spirit Whether it be by others received or rejected He that hath an Ear to hear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches which doth many times speak through Instruments as formerly And further 't is neither a false sence nor wicked construction to say That our Opposer being for a Liberty for Believers to refuse to submit on account of not seeing it their duty Therefore that Believers who are members of Christ's Church may refuse submission to their Brethren in things that are in themselves Just and Reasonable according to the Law of Truth in the Conscience on pretence of not seeing it their duty c. I do sincerely profess I do not find a more natural construction that our Opposers own Words being without distinction will bear all material and precedent Causes and Circumstances of this very point in Controversie considered For first The Submission pleaded for by R. B. among Believers and in the Church was to the Judgment and positive Sentence proceeding from the Spirit of God or Christ in his Church and Servants Secondly Our Advâ—rsary's opposing the Church of Christ's having Power in any cases of Conscience to give positive Sentence or Decision which may be obligatory on Believers rendring this a Government over Believers contrary to the Principle of Truth and Liberty in Christ Jesus See Accuser c. from p. 62 to 81. When no other Submission is pleaded for nor any other intended by us than to such Judgment or Sentence as originally proceeds from the Spirit of Truth which is agreeable to the will and mind of God Now doth not our Adversary's opposition tend to divide Believers and the Church of Christ as well as from a true sight and performance of their Duty in cases wherein the Spirit of Christ gives the Judgment which must needs be just and reasonable For to the Question Whether the Church of Christ hath Power in ANY CASES of Conscience to give positive sentence which may be obligatory upon Believers R. B. Answers affirmatively SHE HATH Anarch p. 48. To which W. R. replyes This Government over Believers is contrary to the Principle of Truth and Liberty in Christ Jesus Doth not this plainly imply that in NO CASES of Conscience a Believer is bound to submit to the positive sentence of the Church of Christ or other Members thereof but that a Believer may refuse Submission On the account of not seeing it his Duty to submit This is W. R's great pretence and supposition and this in ANY CASES of Conscience without distinction The terms of the Question and Opposition before cited being general Which supposed Blindness and Discord in Believers I cannot grant him against any true or sincere Believers who are faithful to Christ in their measures of Grace received such will neither want a sight of those Dutyes or things the Spirit of Christ teacheth and requireth of them nor submission one to another therein but in humbleness of mind submit themselves one to another in the fear of God Ephes. 5.1.21 Here the Younger submits to the Elder and all one to another being clothed with Humility for God resisteth the Proud but giveth Grace to the Humble 1 Pet. 5.5 This Humility and Submission was among the Primitive Christians and was very commendable among them and none but the Proud oppose it And farther the Sentence Judgment and Determination proceeding from the Spirit of Christ in the midst of his Church is Binding in Heaven and Earth and he that will not hear the Church where Christ is in the midst is to be accounted as an Heathen Man More-ever our Lord Jesus Christ knows how much or how little a burthen to proportion and lay upon his sincere and true Followers from the greatest to the least of them suitable to their Capacities He knows our Weaknesses and is touched with the feeling of our Infirmities and hath raised up a Spiritual fellow-feeling of one anothers states and conditions that we might bear each others Burthens the strong to bear with and help the weak and so fulfill the Law of Christ. But seeing our Opposer at length to acquit himself gives us this Concession pag. 45. viz. I do say a Believer in Christ ought to submit to any reasonable just Judgment answering the Truth in the Conscience when it relates to him let it spring from whom it will I shall say the less in this point But William hast thou been always of this mind If thou hast thou art very inconsistent in thy writing and greatly wrongest thy self by Self-contradictions and then what signifies all thy opposing R. B. for pleading a consciencious Submission in Believers to the positive judgment or sentence which as he saith proceeds from the Spirit of God in some or other of their Brethren in the Church of Christ What amounts all thy work of Opposition and Gain-saying unto Now a Believer in Christ ought to submit to any Reasonable just judgment let it spring from whom it will And sure all judgment proceeding
And as for those Papers so long since given forth by me not discerning what spirit did then influence me for so it is that the actions of men are many times influenced both by good and evil Spirits though they perceive it not how much soever the Notion of Spirits ridiculed by the Atheistick Philosophasters and wild Wits of this age I did many years since recall them and make it my request that any that had them in their custody might make no further ill use of them and to have found the contrary since has been no small grief to me especially to see so often repeated these personal Reflections by me used against G.F. and G.W. whom I truly honour in the Lord for their works and labours of Love However I would not have any malicious Persons from hence take occasion to think much less to say or represent that I have hereby revoked or do in the least intend to inervate any of the words in that or any other Paper so far as they are assertive of a just and equal Liberty of Conscience For I do firmly believe That there is no Principle maintained amongst Mankind that stands upon fâ—â—â—er Foundations that is more becoming the Rulers of this World in their respective Dominions nor more agreeable to the Life and Spirit of Christianity than is that of Liberty of Conscience Neither let any man on the other hand think or say That I do hereby in the least hinder the Church of Christ from judging condemning and testifying against things and Persons by the Spirit of Christ for preaching things which those persons erring from the spirit of Christ may judge not only to be allowable as their Christian Liberty but even look upon to be their very duty For as the Principle of Liberty of Conscience is in it self most reasonable and christian so is this latter of denying All Iudging upon any account most unreasonable blind and foolish And they that cannot see that these two Principles of Liberty and Judgment are not only consistent but very harmonious with each other are to be pitied for their weakness and half-sightedness of which perhaps God giving life and ability I may at another time say more In the mean while I wish heartily that all that profess and name the Name of Jesus the Prince of Peace would seek peace and ensue it Benjamin Furly Now Tho. Crisp and the rest concerned see by these Lines how far B. F. hath distinguished the point in Controversie and cleared himself upon a better understanding concerning the said Letter and against the perverse use thou hast made of it in Print to reproach me withal § 2. And since thou hast causlesly aspersed me with it and so far censoriously exposed me in Print as thou hast done when I sought no occasion against thee nor designed Controversie with thee and seeing thou art grown so hardy and confident as to make thy self such a publick Agent and Advocate for W. R. and his Party in the Controversie I have not yet done with thee but am concerned further to take notice of a few Passages in thy Pamphlets which I look upon as very corrupt and perverse and contrary to our antient and constant Testimony born among us on behalf of Christ. The first is in thy Pamphlet stil'd Several Testimonies 3 d Edition which is also printed in others of thy Pamphlets in these words viz. pag. 26. I fear you take more care for the strict Observation of your own Orders and Traditions than the Truth in the Heart for if any use not your Language or observe not to do just as others in Tythes or other CIVIL RIGHTS which the Laws of our Land require and ought to be observed unless God by his Spirit in the Heart doth forbid or any do really for Conscience sake refuse But if one cannot do so must he therefore judge his Brother That may be required of one that may not be required of another for Growth or Measure may differ Rom. 14. AND J. Crook saith We read of Cain and Abel two men performing the same Action attended with the same Formalities c. and yet the one accepted and the other rejected In like manner may two Persons be found in contrary Actions Postures Gestures and yet both accepted of God for if I should lay a Bond upon my self therein I transgress the liberty of the spirit either as to time constancy or place or if another should lay a Bond upon me or put a Yoke about the Neck of the Disciples this is no more justifiable than the former To the first part being thy words I must tell thee thy Proposition is unsound and inconsistent with our antient Testimony as well as Contradictory in its self Vnsound in that it bespeaks thou art not principl'd against the Payment of Tythes in this Gospel day and hast not retain'd a true or certain Judgment against them in thy esteeming and accounting of them amongst Civil Right but Rites in thy other Pamphlet which ought to be observed and implying that a Brother is not to be judg'd for observing or paying them I am sure this is contrary to the Testimony born and received among us from the beginning And to thy granting that God by his Spirit in the Heart may forbid them or that for Conscience sake some refuse them as if the Spirit of the Lord did allow one Brother to pay Tythes as a civil Right and forbid another or that from a different Growth or Measure of Grace one Brother may be required to refuse the Payment of Tythes and another Brother not so required and therefore not to be judged for the Payment of them being both under the same Profession and Dispensation Is not this Inconsistent Babylonish yea and tending to apparent Ranterism to render the Spirit and different Measures thereof so contrary and opposite in its requirings in a matter so eminent weighty as that of Tythes wherein our manifest Testimony hath been so positive and the Sufferings of many so deep and heavy for not paying Tythes and whereof the very first breaking forth of the Light and dawning of the Gospel Day did convince many Thousands when their Eyes were first opened to see the Corruption of that Ministry which is upheld by Tythes and forced Maintenance therefore T. C. thou art gone from the Light that first convinced thee in thus confusedly arguing for Tythes and thy Proposition is loose and fallacious and there 's no such contradiction in the different Measures of Grace and Spirit received from God as thou absurdly implyest If ever thou knew'st or wast sensible either that Tythes were ended by Christ or that the Ministry upheld by them is none of Christ's Ministry thou couldst never suppose that any measure or degree of his Grace or Spirit would allow or lead any who have been really convinced of the Evil thereof in the payment of them if thou wert not gone from the true sence and measure thereof in
Nations and Families of the Earth blessed and saved who believe and walk in his Light J. B. All the World was freed from their Offerings for sin by that one Offering reconciled to God by the death of his Son But we must be redeemed justified and also saved by a measure of the same Life that dwelt in the Son in which Life the Son of God offered up his Soul and Body to be crucified to the Death a Sacrifice once for all Then NO Salvation to the Souls of the Sons and Daughters of men by him that dyed without the Gates at Jerusalem p. 19. Anti. Transformations Answ. An erronious Inference still and most blindly reiterated for if we must be saved by that Life that was in the Son of God how darest thou deny Salvation to the souls of Mankind by him that so suffered and dyed seeing we are reconciled by his Death who dyed and rose again and Death has no more dominion over him And hast not thou confessed that we are reconciled by his Death so we shall be saved by his Life Well by whose Life by the Life of the very same Christ of God who as concerning the flesh was put to Death And was his Death then no ways conducing to our Salvation How are we then reconciled by it Is Reconciliation no degree of Salvation Surely thou art under great Contradiction and gross Mistakes in this matter To thy Objection That Mary saith her Soul did magnifie the Lord and her Spirit did rejoyce in God her Saviour p. 21. And that God said Look unto Me all ye Ends of the Earth and be saved p. 23. This is no proof that his Son Jesus Christ was No Saviour for God saves by his Son God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself God works by the Mediator and Jesus Christ who is the Saviour and the Redeemer is both truly God and Man Inseparable But how comest thou off in answer to the Objection made against thee viz. If no Salvation by that Christ that dyed without the Gates of Jerusalem then thy Doctrine implyeth two Christs which we do not profess nor preach nor own for in words thou over and over tellest us of that Christ that dyed without the Gates and that he was the Son of God the Christ of God c. What sayst thou to this Review thy following words J. B. viz. Now that there are two Christs it is plain according to the Scriptures for there is both the true Christ and Antichrist p. 23. Rep. Oh sad and lamentable How absurdly blindly and erroniously hast thou answered here The Objection or Question against thee was not about Antichrist but about the True Christ who is the very Christ of God who was crucified at Jerusalem and is in his Saints by his Light Life and Spirit whom thy Doctrine tends to render Two Christs and so to divide the True Christ but we testifie he is but One As to us there is but ONE GOD the Father of whom are all things and we in him and ONE Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him 1 Cor. 8.6 And of this ONE Lord Jesus Christ the true Apostles testified as One and the same Christ though he variously appeared according to what is written of him 1 Cor. 15. 3 4 5 6 7 verses of his Death and Resurrection and how he was seen of many And last of all he was seen of me also saith Paul as of one born out of due time v. 8. This was ONE and the SAME CHRIST still § 10. J. B. Now Christ he neither came of David nor yet of Israel according to the Flesh not as to his outward appearance as he was a visible Man but he came of David and Israel both according to the Spirit And this is the Spirit whom God hath exalted both as a Prince and a Saviour Anti. Trans p. 23. Answ. This is a gross Mistake and Contradictory to plain Scripture see Rom. 1.3 4 5. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord which was made of the seed of David according to the Flesh and declared to be the Son of God with Power according to the spirit of Holiness by the Resurrection from the dead by whom we have received GRACE and Apostleship for obedience to the Faith among all Nations for his Name see also Rom. 9.5 But thou sayst He neither came of David nor yet of Israel according to the flesh quite contrary to the Apostle's testimony Which shall People believe thee or the Apostle Surely not such a blind muddled confused dark and dull Soul as thou art I wish thee with the Light of Christ within on the holy Scriptures to recollect thy self better that thou mayst repent and condemn and call in thy muddled confused distracted whimsical and mad Pamphlets that would be the safest way for thee upon all accounts for thou hast no matter of Religion to suffer for thy hope being in this Life only according to thy Principle of the Soul's Mortality J. B. He that dyed without the Gates at Jerusalem he was the Christ of God being one with the Spirit of God but it was the Womans part that dyed that was his Soul and Body Now Christ as he was a visible Man and made of a visible Woman made under the Law he INTERNALLY DYED as to his SOUL and BODY Antichrist's Transformations pag. 19. Answ. Oh poor Jeffery Whither art thou run in thy whimsical Conceits and distracted Imaginations one while to DENY Jesus Christ the Son of God to be the Way to the Father another while to DENY Salvation by him another while to DENY the Immortality of his Soul and here most erroniously to AFFIRM That his Soul dyed and that he internally dyed as to his Soul Oh! Antichristian and Antiscriptural Doctrine For though he was put to death only as to his Body his Soul dyed not with it for he said Father into thy Hands I commend my Spirit Luke 23.46 see Acts 7.59 And to the penitent Thief To Day shalt thou be with me in Paradise Luke 23.43 Therefore his Soul or Spirit dyed not with the Body he did not internally dye he dyed only as to the Body being put to death as concerning the Flesh and rose again the third day according to the Scriptures and Death has no more dominion over him And although it be said He hath poured out his Soul unto Death This concerned the travail of soul and sorrows of death which he was under the sence of when he said My Soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death Matth. 26.38 whilst yet his soul was living and immortal in its own being praying and making intercession unto the Father For pouring out the Soul or Heart sometimes in Scripture imports an earnest supplication to God and travail in Prayer Psal. 42.4 I pour out my Soul in me And Psal. 62.8 Pour out your Heart before him God is a Refuge for us The soul of Messiah was poured out