as it concerns a holy Conversation or the worship of God is of any Service but until he come They err There are many outward Rules in the Scriptures of Truth that were given by the Spirit of God which have been and are of Service to many after Christ hath been witnessed come Again when they say Every latter Appearance of God is as death to the former The Expression is unsavoury and not sound For the Appearance of God or Christ do not kill one another but agree one with another and Co-operate to the work he intends thereby But when to this they add And this is our Case as well as any that did go before us c. They err egregiously For the Appearance of God in us did not bring Death to the former Appearance of God in others though to the false Appearances and Likenesses thereof it did Neither will any further Appearance of God hereafter bring Death or be Death or be as Death to this Appearance of God whereby God hath made known himself in and to his People in this Age. Again they say When the Appearance or Conversation must be measured by certain Rules it follows what is terms of Communion or is accepted with God may not be accepted with men This is a loose Expression and tends to let up Looseness Are not Sobriety Temperance Chastity Modesty Honesty c. certain Rules whereby Conversation ought to be measured If there must be no certain Rules for measuring Conversation how shall the most unruly Conversation be blamed reproved judged condemned and either reformed or rejected By these few Instances it may appear how much they are declined from Truth The God of Truth knows I have no other End in this Reply than to defend Truth and the Children of it against the slanderous Suggestions false Charges and wicked Insinuations of the Adversaries to lay Open their deceitful Dealing and to remove as the Lord shall enable me the stumbling-Blocks which they have laid in the way of the Week whereby they have caused some to fall into Misapprehensions and hard Thoughts of Friends without cause And I beseech the God of Mercy to open the Vnderstandings and clear the Sight of all those whose Simplicity has been betrayed by the Others Subtilty that they may see and escape the Enemies Snares and return to the true Fold from which they have been led astray A Reply to an Answer lately published to a Book long since written entituled A brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual c. THe Author of that Book called A brief Examination c. hath therein truly and soundly defined Spiritual Liberty declaring it to be two-fold True False according to the true and false Spirit which respectively leads into each The true Spiritual Liberty he defines to be Deliverance from Sin by the perfect Law in the Heart the perfect Law of Liberty Iames 2. otherwise called The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus that makes free from the Law of Sin and Death elsewhere stiled The Law of Truth writ in the Heart which makes free indeed as saith Christ If the Truth make you free than are you free indeed So that the Liberty of God's People stands in the Truth and their Communion in it and in the Perfect Spiritual Law of Christ Jesus which delivers and preserves them from every Evil Thing that doth or would embondage In this blessed Liberty it is not the will or wisdom of man neither the vain Affections and Lusts that rule or give Law to the Soul for the minds of all such as are made free by the Truth are by the Truth conducted in doing and suffering through their earthly Pilgrimage The false Liberty he defines to be A departing from this blessed Spirit of Truth and a Rebelling against this Perfect Law of Liberty in the Heart and being at Liberty to do our own Wills upon which cometh Reproof and Judgment This being the Basis of the work I thought fit to transcribe at large that the Reader may plainly see and understand what that Liberty is both true and false which was the subject of that Book and is now of this Controversie Against this Definition of Spiritual Liberty I do not find the Answerers of that Book for the Answer runs in the plural Number take any Exception For in the entrance of their Answer they say As to the Definition of Liberty Spiritually explained page the first We agree upon the matter But passing by some Questions and Answers in that Book tending to shew in some general Instances wherein and how far the Members of the Church of Christ may be left to their freedom They take-hold of a Question and Answer in the second and third pages which are thus exprest Quest. But doth not Freedom extend further than this for since God hath given me a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left to act according as I am free and perswaded in my own mind in the things that relate to God lest looking upon my self as obliged by what is revealed unto another though it be not revealed unto me I should be led out of my own measure and act upon another's Motion and so offer a blind Sacrifice to God Answ. This is true in a sense that is if thou art such a one that canst do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth then mayst thou safely be left to thy freedom in the things of God and the Reason is plain Because thy freedom stands in the perfect Law of Liberty in the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus and in the Truth which is Christ Jesus which makes thee free indeed that is perfectly free from all that is Bad and perfectly free to all that is Holy Just Lovely Honest Comely and of good Report But if thou pleadest thy Freedom against such things yea obstructest and slightest such good wholsome and requisit things Thy Freedom is naught dark perverse out of the Truth and against the perfect Law of Love and Liberty The Question as stated above the Adversaries find no fault with but approve and applaud often calling it a Weighty Question But for all that they either mistake or wilfully pervert it For whereas the plain and express Terms of the Question are these Since God hath given me a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left c. They in their Sophistical Glosses upon it vary the Terms and instead of God 's having given c. They render it where the Gift of God is received to profit withal And instead of I have the Gift of God in my self They put such as do adhere to it As if there were no difference or They knew or regarded none betwen God's having given a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and man's having received this Gift of
A REPLY TO AN ANSWER Lately Published to a BOOK Long since written by W. P. Entituled A Brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual c. By Thomas Ellwood 2 Tim. 3.13 Evil men and Seducers shall wax worse and worse deceiving and being deceived Rom. 16.17 Now I beseech you Brethren mark them which cause Divisions and Offences contrary to the Doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them Printed and Sold by T. Sowle at the Crooked-Billet in Holloway-Lane in Shoreditch 1691. THE PREFACE IN the Year 1681. there was a small Treatise published by a Friend under the Title of A Brief Examination of Liberty Spiritual c. The occasion of writing that Treatise was a sense the Author thereof had and an Observation he had made how much the Nature of that true Spiritual Liberty was misunderstood by some and the Name thereof abused by others in the Profession of the Truth who under pretence of being left to that Liberty in themselves and to their own Freedom therein both took liberty to do such things as were inconsistent with that true Liberty and with the Principle of Truth which they professed and despising those useful good and necessary Helps and Means which the Lord hath provided and furnished his Church or People with for the preventing and keeping out such Disorders Evils and Scandals as the unruly Nature of man through such a mistake of true Liberty might and would bring in did reject the Counsel Admonition or Reproof of their Brethren with a What hast thou to do with me Leave me to my own Freedom To reclaim if it might be those that were thus deceived and prevent others from being so the Author being pressed in Spirit for Zion's sake and for the Peace of Jerusalem and having a deep Sense as himself expresses of the working of the Enemy of Zion's Peace to rend and divide the Heritage of God did write the fore-mentioned Treatise for the Establishment of the Faithful Information of the Simple-hearted and Reproof of the Arrogant and High-minded as his Title Page sets forth As that Treatise had its Service and Acceptance with the Faithful and Simple-hearted So it has passed hitherto for between nine and ten Years free from the Cavils at least Publick of the Arrogant and High-minded till now that of late some of them who are of a restless Spirit and to whom it is uneasie to be or to let others be quiet have singled out that Book for a fresh Butt to shoot at make that a new Occasion to renew Contention and revive the old Controversie In order to this they have very lately published a Book in Answer as is pretended to several material Passages in that Book That Answer hath in the Title Page the Letters J. H. as standing for the Author's Name But since I have no certain knowledge who is meant by those two Letters and I find the general stile of the Answer both in the Preface and Book it self to run in the first Person Plural We which by the Advertisement at the End of the Preface I am told may be understood in respect of those of the same mind with the Author of that Book I chose in my Reply to entitle the Adverse Party to it without regard to any particular Person They labour much throughout their Book to fasten an ugly Imputation or Charge upon the Author of that Treatise they pretend to Answer of endeavouring to bring in a blind Obedience an implicit Faith Conformity before and without Conviction a Dependence on Men instead of a Dependence on God endeavouring to obtrude or set up Opinion or the likeness of Truth instead of Truth c. How far from Truth this Charge is the following Reply is intended to manifest How far from true Christianity a man must be that could be guilty of all this is manifest of it self The Adversaries therefore that they might not hereby too much disgust such of their Favourers as have not wholly cast off all good thoughts of him they thus traduce make as if they would in Charity excuse the Author from doing those things knowingly pretending to believe him both a better Man and more a Christian. But how unlike Christians they have dealt with him in Answering his Book the following Reply will in part discover Here in their Preface for the reason of his doing the things they slanderously tax him with they assign his being deceived through the mysterious working of the Enemy which that it may not seem strange they wish their Reader to consider how many have been deceived thereby both great and small and some at times hurried into things grosly Evil as killing their fellow-Creatures and yet at the same time think they did God service But as no good Christian ever did so So by the Comparison they have made they sufficiently shew what a sort of Christian they in reality esteem him to be Their Preface is so much both for matter and manner of the same Piece with their Book that much of what is in the Preface will be taken notice of in the Reply to the Book to which therefore for avoiding needless Repetitions I refer Yet because they have loosely scattered through their Preface many unsound Expressions which perhaps may not so fitly be handled in the Reply I will briefly touch a few of them here As Their calling the likeness of Truth a Third thing besides what is Evil and Good and saying that it stands betwixt Evil and Good though they bring it in with as As we may say will not hold weight but unsound For that which is only like Truth but is not Truth doth not stand betwixt Evil and Good but whatever it seems to be is really and directly Evil and stands in and with the Evil. So their making the Covering of the Soul where the likeness of Truth is received for Truth c. to be as the Linnen and Wollen-Garment forbid to be worm under the Law is an unfit and unsound Comparison For neither the Linnen nor the Wollen was Evil though as a Type of Sincerity and Singleness of Heart they were then forbidden to be worn in one Garment together but either the Linnen might lawfully be worn by it self or the Wollen by it self But the likeness of Truth that which is only like Truth but is not Truth may neither be received together with any thing that is Truth nor alone by it self without Truth So when they speak of Outward Rules they say Every adding of outward Rules shews a want of Christ's Government by his holy Spirit They mistake If it shews a want of any thing it shews a want of Subjection to his Government by his holy Spirit not a want of that Government Neither is Christ's Government by his holy Spirit incompatible with outward Rules but whatever outward Rules Christ by his Spirit gives are consistent with and agreeable to his Government by his Spirit So again when they say It is certain that no outward Rule
sign of a right Christian Mind and Spirit Again they say pag. 3. Either he believes his Answer is full to the Question or he believes and knows it is not If he believes and knows it is not full then must he not only not have asserted the Truth as above but also be conscious wherefore he did it not and we conceive there 's another of their Conceptions that must either be because he wanted ability or because he wanted Truth in his way Here are a pair of inconclusive Conclusions together pieced out with a shallow Conceit of their own which I should not have thought worth taking notice of but to shew the well-meaning Reader what false ways of Reasoning they work by to beguile the simple Amongst whom though such sort of Reasoning may pass for currant and perhaps be thought of some force by such as through yeilding to the Enemies suggestions against the Truth are become vailed and clouded in their understandings yet to the opened Eye the single Eye the inlightned mind it appears as indeed it is empty shallow trivial weak and false Now as to the Answer it self after all their vilifying of it it will appear to the honest-minded to be pertinent proper and full enough to the Question to which it was given The Adversaries I perceive expected an Answer to consist only in a Yea or Nay and they account the Answer not direct because as they think it does not directly affirm or deny But it is their want of skill if without offence they may be told so that makes them think an Answer not direct unless it be exprest by Yea or Nay As the Answer relates to the Question so the Question related to as being grounded on the Definition of spiritual Liberty which the Author had given before That therefore the Answer they except so much against may appear to be both proper full and direct enough to the Question I desire both the Question it self and the Definition of that Liberty propounded in it and on which it is grounded may be seriously and impartially weighed together The true spiritual Liberty on which the Question was grounded was defined to be Deliverance from Sin by the Perfect Law in the Heart the perfect Law of Liberty c. as is before set down at large And this Definition the Adversaries have subscribed to The Question that follows and is grounded upon this Definition of spiritual Liberty or freedom is this Since God hath given me a Manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left to act according as I am free and perswaded in my own mind in the things that relate to God c. Now consider since it is certain that this Gift of God is universal that the Manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal and yet no less certain that All who have this Gift in themselves are not subject to it that All to whom the Manifestation of the Spirit is given to profit withal have not received the Gift nay that of them who do profess to have received it All have not so received it as to profit therewithal to be redeemed thereby into the true Spiritual Liberty These things I say considered such a positive absolute undistinguishing Answer as the Adversaries expected and call for of a simple granting or denying the Question by a positive Yea or Nay without distinction or explanation could not in Truth have been given For that had been to say that none ought to be left to their freedom no not They who by receiving the divine Gift in themselves subjecting to it and growing up in it are truly thereby brought to the true Freedom indeed the Freedom that stands in Truth the true Spiritual Liberty Or that All ought to be left to their freedom in the things relating to Goâ—â— even they who through their alienation from God know nothing of either this true Libety or the Gift that leads to it or They that professing to know it and to have received it live not in subjection to it and so are not brought to the true Spiritual Liberty by it but have a freedom out of the Truth a freedom to do such things as the Truth condemns The Author therefore rightly distinguishing these different states answered aptly to the Terms of his Question granting the Question in a right sense but not in a wrong sense For the Question not opening the particular state of the Party demanding this freedom but being grounded only upon the Gift or Manifestation given which is applicable not only to all in the Profession of Truth how disorderly and scandalous so ever but even to all mankind and not mentioning the Parties having received the Gift in the love of it closed with it to an improvement of it to a profiting therewith and dwelt in a subjection thereunto which alone brings into the true Spiritual Liberty therefore the Author that he might divide his Answer aright said If thou art such an one that canst do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth as much as to say If thou art indeed come by thy subjection to the Heavenly Gift given thee into the true Spiritual Liberty and thy freedom stand in that then mayst thou safely be left to thy freedom in the things of God and the Reason said He is plain Because thy freedom the freedom thou wouldst be left to stands in the perfect Law of Liberty c. As much as to say thy freedom if this be thy state is the true spiritual Liberty before defined and therefore thou mayst safely be left to that both with respect to thy self and to the Church of Christ which thou art a Member of since that freedom will not lead thee to do any thing against the Truth but all for the Truth And herein it is evident the Author had direct Relation to that Definition of true Spiritual Liberty which he had given before and which the Adversary now agree to But on the other hand If thou who demandest to be left to thy freedom in the things of God art not come to this true spiritual Liberty but notwithstanding God hath given thee a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that thou professest in words to have received this Gift yet thou hast not so closed with and subjected to this divine Gift as to have profited therewithal and so art not come into this true Spiritual Liberty but by rebelling against the perfect Law of Liberty in thy Heart thou art gotten into a false Liberty a false freedom a freedom to do such things as are out of Truth then it is not safe either for thy self or for the Church of Christ which thou seemest to joyn with for thee to be left to this freedom of thine since that will lead thee to act not for the Truth but against the Truth to bring dishonour to the Truth disturbance to the Church
and destruction to thy self The Author therefore having granted that such as are come to the true Spiritual Liberty in and by the Truth should be left to their Freedom in that added But if thou pleadest thy freedom against such things as are Holy Iust Lovely Honest Comely and of good Report yea obstructest and slightest such good wholsome and requisit things thy freedom is naught dark perverse out of the Truth and against the perfect Law of Love and Liberty And thus to the Spiritually-minded who consider the Definition above given of Spiritual Liberty take the Question as it was stated by the Author himself I make no doubt but it will appear that the Answer given by him thereto was plain proper direct and full enough But the Adversaries shew what they would be at for they say p. 4. The Question affirmed as above is certainly not only true in a part or in a sense as he is pleased to say but it is true in every part true in the whole and every sense that a Position can be true in Nay it is so far true that if it can be wrong at all 't is only in a sense and that is only when misapplied Reply These few Lines yield much matter to be considered 1 st When they say the Question affirmed as above they must mean the Question as it lies in the Author 's own Terms and Book or as they have new modelled it formed transformed and deformed it perverted and wrested it to their own sense in their Book If they mean the latter they prevaricate foully If they intend the former viz. That the Question as stated and laid down or to answer their conceit affirmed in the Author 's own Terms is true that is is to be granted or held in the affirmative in every part in the whole and in every sense that a Position can be true in then since the Question assigns no other Qualification to the Party demanding to be left to act according to his freedom but that which is common to the most scandalous Professor to the vilest Apostate yea to all mankind namely that God hath given him a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that he hath the Gift of God in himself which many that have it rebel against and are so far from profiting with it that they do despight unto it it will follow according to the Adversaries sense that All such as God hath given a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal All such as have the Gift of God in themselves how disobedienâ— soever they are to it how Heady and High-minded soever how unruly and turbulent soever how factious and quarrelsom soever in the Church must notwithstanding be left to act as they are free though they are free to act what is out of Truth and the Church be obliged to own and receive them as Brethren and fellow-Members in their so acting But though this be the Consequence of the Adversaries Arguing yet it is directly contrary to the Apostle's counsel Rom. 16.17 2 Tim. 3.5 Secondly when They say The Question is true in every part true in the whole and every sense that a Position can be true in And then add It is so far true that If it can be wrong at all 't is only in a sense They seem to me to run at once into an Uncertainty and a Contradiction A contradiction in admitting it capable of being wrong in any sense after they have so positively affirmed it to be true in every sense An Uncertainty in saying If it can be wrong at all which shews They haesitate They doubt They are not well assured They are but in the Uncertainty And themselves say in the same page but a few lines lower An Vncertainty admitted for the Truth in this case stands in the nature of a Lye To this they add another Paradox for having said If the Question be wrong at all 't is only in a sense and that is only when misapplied They add But the misapplication of this weighty Question when affirmed doth neither destroy it in its self nor in the least take away the true use This in a Parenthesis They bid us Observe And truly they must be observant Readers indeed that can observe any Congruity of Sense or Reason in this Passage or understand how that can be misapplied to any one which according to their sense is applicable to every one But it is very probable that what They here say of this weighty Question as they so often call it is intended rather of the Question or Position they have made for they have turn'd it from one to to'ther than of the Question propounded by that Author for they here immediately subjoyn their Creed as if they deduced it from the Question but in such Terms as are only in their own Question not in his Thus they word it Therefore we believe where the Gift of God is received to profit withal and truly adhered to there must be a Liberty to chuse and refuse things according as such are perswaded even from the Babe in Christ to the Strong Man and so to all states in Christ I suppose they mean This shews how little they understand the Question and the ground of it For the Babe in Christ he that is truly in Christ though but in a Babish state abiding in him can do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth though he may not be able to do so much for the Truth as a Strong Man or Father in Christ can do He that hath so received the Gift of God as to profit therewithal and doth truly adhere thereunto be his measure of growth or stature therein what it will yet abiding and growing up therein That will lead him to chuse and with freedom to embrace whatsoever is Holy Just Lovely Honest Comely and of good Report So that such as one in that Capacity wherein according to the Author's Answer to the Question concerning being left to act as he is free c. he may safely be left to his freedom in the things of God Thus after all their Clamour against the Answer to the Question as no way deserving to be reputed a true Answer not worthy of that name of no use or service with respect to the Controversie worth nothing nothing to the purpose c. because not large enough not comprehensive enough as they think to take in All They with all their stretching and wresting have brought it but to the same pass to them only that are in Christ. And they tell us pag. 7. That Man must be made a New Creature and must travel through the whole Mystery of Iniquity before he can come into Christ and that though the Enemy that fallen Angel can go with Man into every Remove while man is fitting and preparing yet into Christ he cannot come So that with them a man being come to be in Christ is out of the Enemies reach Thus though exercising themselves
little Observation that need to be informed How many that have walked for a while some for some years with Friends in the Profession of Truth have turned their backs thereon and gone off some into the Sea again some into Nets What has been the general pretence of these but want of Liberty the way of Truth was too strait for them they wanted a broader way How many even of them that retained the Profession of Truth have slept aside some into one odd thing some into another under pretence that they had Freedom so to do Did not they that ran out in I. Perot's business plead being left to their Freedom to their Liberty They did so and by that Plea were some to my knowledge betrayed into that snare Now since it is evident by the Instances given that in the true Church in all times there have been as to outward Profession Bad as well as Good wrong as well as right what can be more reasonable than that there should be in the true Church such a Power as may enable those that are right to acquit themselves their Principle and Profession from the Disorders of whatsoever kind committed by them that are wrong which they can never do if those that are wrong may exempt themselves from being called to account and reproved for their Disorders by alleadging that what they have done they had Liberty and Freedom in themselves to do Now this hath happened in a great part through a misunderstanding and misapplication of true Spiritual Liberty For though all that have received and are indeed guided by the Grace of God and Spirit of Truth are to be left to it to act for God in the Liberty and Freedom that it gives Yet for any to infer from thence that every one that pretends to the Grace of God and Spirit of Truth though it be too apparent that they are not subject thereunto must be left to that Freedom which they call and in one sense rightly enough their own to that Liberty which they have set up in and for themselves though it leads such to thwart oppose gain-say and disturb the rest of the same Society this is not right but whatever else may be pretended is both wrong it self and an Inlet for that which is wrong For the meaning of that Plea that every one ought to be left to his Freedom c. Is this that none should be accountable or answerable to the Church or Congregation they are reputed to be of for what they do that is not simply Evil or Evil in it self as the Adversaries in their Book distinguish so that although what they do be disorderly and that which either directly or by Consequence tends to bring scandal and trouble upon the whole Society it is enough to stop the Churches Mouth for such an one to say I have Liberty and Freedom in my self to do so or so And thereupon the Church may not judge may not reprove may not blame such an One but must be obliged to own and receive such an one as a Friend a Brother in the Truth though walking out of Truth as a member of the Body though acting against the Body This were to set up a false Liberty to overthrow the true Liberty to give Liberty to Particulars and take it from the General which to do were contrary to Truth and to true Reason For surely how much Liberty soever a Part may claim the whole may claim as much And therefore if each Particular hath Liberty to choose or refuse things according as they are perswaded the things are right or wrong which it is fit they should Why should not the whole have like Liberty to receive or refuse such Persons with respect to Membership according as they are perswaded that such Persons so acting are in or out of that Spirit in which the true Membership stands But this Liberty the Church should be deprived and debarred of if she were bound as the Adversaries would bind her to own and receive for members all such as make any Profession of Truth though walking and acting contrary to Her and as she believes to Truth under pretence that they walk and act according to their own Liberty and Freedom He that would shun the Cross of Christ in any Testimony that Truth leads to hath scope enough under this Plea to do it He that for advantage or fear will break Christ's Command and Swear can say he hath freedom so to do and is not perswaded in his own mind of the unlawfulness thereof He that to shun Sufferings will pay Tythes to the Hireling-Priest He that will Marry by the Priest or take in Marriage one that is not in the Profession of Truth hath the same Plea for his Shelter and so in other Cases of Evil. This the Adversaries saw but saw not how to Answer And therefore in their 5th page having said There 's but one Objection and that is that this leaving all to act according as they are free c. is to give Liberty to Evil they add Which we may speak to in another place And so they shift it off in this place And having thus given it the Go-by here never give any direct Answer to it that I observe throughout their whole Book In their 19th page they touch it but presently start back and slide off of it again There they say What can hinder the putting this in practice but the Devil in the likeness of Truth perswading this was to give Liberty to Evil Then add 'T is a mistake to think this is to give Liberty to Evil while our End we are sure bears witness to the contrary Rep. They are sure What Assurance doth their saying they are sure give to others Their witness-bearing as it is of themselves and for themselves may perhaps reach no further than to themselves But suppose Charity should extend it further and on that foot it should be granted that their End or Intention is not to give Liberty to Evil. Doth it therefore follow that that unlimitted Plea for leaving every one so to act according as they are free and perswaded in their own minds as not to be accountable for their actings may not give Liberty to Evil May not People have a wrong freedom a freedom to do Evil and a false Perswasion in their own minds that that wrong freedom is a right one notwithstanding that God hath given them a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal if they do not and it is too plain that too many do not obey and follow the leadings of that good Spirit that they may profit thereby But what Answer do the Adversaries now give to that One Objection which they took notice of in their 5th page and then made a shew as if they would speak of it in another place Truly none at all But instead of answering it which was reasonably to be expected from them they excuse themselves but very poorly from Answering for after they
Grace and Spirit of God in my own Heart had answered Yea That is of all things most desirable since they are well left that are there left for there is no fear of want of Vnity where all are left with the one Spirit of Truth They must be of one mind they cannot be otherwise To this the Adversaries say That those that are truly left with the one Spirit of Truth must and will agree we grant and therefore where difference is carried on to the breach of Charity one side at least must be wrong but which ought in God's fear to be inquired the greater Number cannot determin it Rep. Here they grant that those that are truly left with the one Spirit must and will agree and yet at the same time suppose they will differ and which is more that they may differ and yet neither side be wrong if the difference be not carried on to the breach of Charity How they will reconcile these their different Notions I know not But since they yield that one side at least must be wrong where difference is carried on to the breath of Charity Let the Difference between them and Friends be looked into and inquiry made in God's fear on which side the Breach of Charity began that it may thence appear according to their own Proposition which side is wrong And in this Disquisition we will not expect any advantage from being the greater Number though they may give us leave to put them in mind that when and where an Argument from the greatest Number with respect to particular Places seemed to lie on their side they have not failed to urge it Now in order to a right understanding how Charity came to be broken in the carrying on of this Difference it should be remembred that when some things were recommended to the Churches relating to Christian Discipline in order to prevent such disorderly and scandalous Practices as under an abuse of our Principle of true Christian Liberty a Spirit of Looseness and Libertinism was introducing some shewed themselves dissatisfied therewith and unwilling to admit the use thereof pretending that they did not see the service of the things recommended Though this Plea was seen to proceed from weakness in some and want of a true watchfulness unto and waiting upon the heavenly Gift in themselves which would have given them a true sight and sense as it did their Brethren both of the want and of the usefulness of the things recommended yet while they kept quiet out of Contention and open Opposition Friends tenderly bore with them and carried themselves Brotherly towards them endeavouring in the love of God as occasion offered to open and inform their Minds in the things concerning which they profest to doubt But long it was not ere they abusing the tenderness of Friends towards them grew high and heady contentions and quarrelsome endeavouring publickly and labouring much in private to gather into a Faction and make a Party Which when they had in some measure effected having by evil Surmises and false Reports betrayed and misled many young Convinced Ones and some that were but weak in Judgment as well as picked up others that went discontented whose 〈◊〉 Spirits and disorderly Conversations had â—â—â—â—â—red them of the esteem they coveted amongst Friends they then appeared more openly to oppose revile and vilifie those things which before they pretended to the doubtful of and not to see a need of or service for calling them in Contempt and Derision Men's Orders human Edict Canons Constitutions Prescriptions Papists Impositions Innovations Bulls c. not sparing any reproachful Term which they thought might beget or increase in their Proselited Party a dislike of the things recommended and a dis-esteem of Friends This their unruly and turbulent behaviour gave occasion to Friends to reprove them and exhort them to study to be quiet and have regard to the Churches peace And surely had they indeed had any regard to the love of their Brethren to the peace of the Churches of Christ to the Reputation of Truth in the world or to the honour of that holy Name of the Lord by which we are called they would never have begun much less have carried on a Difference 〈◊〉 so high a Breach of Charity as they have done and that about such things as some of themselves have declared to be in their esteem but trifles small things of little or no 〈◊〉 But notwithstanding the Endeavours the Labours and Travels that were used by Friends to have reduced them to a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they grew still higher and higher in their Opposition and 〈◊〉 Carriage till at length they made not only a Breach of Charity but of Meetings also â—ending off from Friends and setting up separate Meetings of their own for themselves and their Party to meet apart in in separation from and opposition to the constant settled Meetings of Friends not only with respect to the outward Affairs and Business of the Church but even with respect to publick Worship too And in several printed Books and Papers written by some and industriously spread by others of them published the difference to the world exposing Friends as much as in them lay to the Contempt and scorn of the Prophane as Apostates Innovators Idolaters setters up of Images Idol-Prophets possessed with the Spirit of Belial and the like and not only to the Government but even to the Rabble also as a treacherous Company Introducers of Popery and but one step from it c. and that in a juncture of time when the then present discovery of the Popish Plot had exasperated the Nation against all that were but suspected to favour that Communion That this is the true state of the Case though but briefly set forth I appeal to all Friends that understand it and hereupon leave it to all such to judge in the fear of God whether the Adversaries be not they that have made this Difference and carried it on to the Breach of Charity and are therefore according to their own Conclusion WRONG The Adversaries having granted in their 16th page that those that are truly left with the one Spirit of Truth must and will agree they in the same page add But that there must be an Identity of Opinion as say they we think the School-men call it that is a Sameness of Mind and Oneness of Iudgment to Circumstantial Ceremonial or Shadowy things is sooner said than proved and savours more of Curiosity than any real Necessity Rep. It may perhaps be thought to savour more of Curiosity or something else as Vain-glory Self-conceit or a fond Affectation of being thought to have converst with School-men than of any real necessity or common Discretion for them to tell us what the School-men call Sameness of mind especially unless they could have done it upon better assurance than an as we think They had better have kept in the School of Christ where they might have learnt Sameness of mind and
Oneness of Iudgment with God's People in the things of God than have puzzled their brains about Identity of Opinion and made themselves ridiculous by Cracking of their Converse with School-men But leaving them to their thoughts and the School-men to themselves they might have learnt from the Author of the Book they are so angry with if it had pleased them to have taken notice of it that there is a difference between Sameness of mind and Contrariness of mind between Oneness of Judgment and Opposition of Judgments But if I may tell them so without offending them too much the word Opinion with respect to Religious matters is fitter for the School-men thâ—n for any that would be taken for a Quaker Nor is it aptly or properly expounded by the word Iudgment For Iudgment implies Certainty and should be Positive whereas Opinion is but Suppositive importing uncertain or doubtful Thought They complain pag. 16. that the Author of the Book they would Answer hath not made a difference between Circumstantial things and such as are truly Essential Yet they themselves have not yet told us what things they account truly Essential They said indeed once pag. 5 There are some Outward things so far Essential to true Religion as those that do contrary to them may be detected of Error But they have not particularlized what those outward things are nor whether they intend them for absolute Essentials But they are in the dark and in Confusion and no wonder having kickt against the Light and that wholsome Order which the Children of the Light have in the Light received They say Though all that fear God must and will agree in things truly Essential yet there is no necessity that they must agree in Circumstantial things Rep. This seems to me as if they should say All must agree in things Essential but they may differ disagree wrangle jangle contend and fall to pieces as much as they will about Circumstantial things There is no necessity that they must agree in them Strange But whence should this Liberty of disagreeing proceed Are not all to be led by the One Spirit of Truth into all Truth into Circumstantials as well as into Essentials Or will the Adversaries say that in Essentials indeed the Spirits Guidance is to be expected but for Circumstantials every one may choose for himself and please his own humour If they will grant which methinks they should scarce care to deny that into Circumstantial things all ought to expect and may receive the Spirits guidance and leading as well as into those things which they call Essential will they then find any room for the Disagreement they contend for Can any one of a sound mind think that the one holy Spirit of Truth will lead his Followers to contradict one another in Practice any more than to contradict one another in Words If all are led by the Holy Spirit he will undoubtedly lead them to agree not to disagree in whatsoever he leads into Of the Primitive Christians it is written The Multitude of them that believed were of one Heart and of one Soul Acts 4.32 Was it only in such things as are accounted Essential Or was it in all things then relating to Religion amongst them even in those things that were rather Circumstantial than Essential It may seem to be spoken more immediatly of those things for it follows in the Text Neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own but they had all things Common Yet none I suppose will affirm that the Community they had of Goods and outward Substance was Essential to Religion for then they that hold not that Community of Goods would want an Essential part of Religion In their 17th page having surmised before that some Circumstantial things have been over-valued they say On the other hand some seeing this as a certain wrong the Enemy hath aggravated the matter to make both wrong c. Here they seem willing to own themselves faulty provided they may fix some fault too upon those they design to asperss But they may be supposed to understand their own Guilt better than anothers If they are truly sensible that the Enemy hath made them wrong let them return to that which can make them Right They add It is our danger and will continue until the Spirit of the Son of God be more plentifully poured forth upon us that can say Father forgive them they know not what they do This say they is that which we want and should truly wait for that the great Deceiver the Occasion of all Strife and Trouble among such as fear God might be cast out c. Rep. That saying Father forgive them they know not what they do if it be spoken according to Truth and in the Spirit of the Son can be spoken only of such as know not what they do The Iews of whom the Son of God so spake Luke 23.34 knew not what they did in Crucifying him that came to save them Paul bears them that witness 1 Cor. 2.8 Now it is one thing not to be able to say of Opposers Father forgive them they know not what they do from a belief or perswasion that they do know what they do And another thing not to be able to say of Opposers Father forgive them they know not what they do from a want of the Spirit of the Son which alone can inable in Truth to say so though there be a perswasion that the Opposers do not know what they do Now this it seems is the state of the Adversaries the want of the Spirit of the Son of God plentifully poured forth upon them that can say of such as oppose them Father forgive them they know not what they do This say they is that which we want and should truly wait for that the great Deceiver might be cast out c. That this relates to themselves appears by the Advertisement which they give at the end of their Preface where they say the word We may be understood in respect to those of the same mind with the Author of their Book Their want of this shews their Condition to be bad their not truly waiting for it shews it to be worse And since they acknowledge the great Deceiver the Occasion of all Strife and Trouble among such as fear God is not yet cast out it is no wonder that he hath thus long deceived them and yet doth deceive them out of whom he is not yet cast and through them occasions so much strife and trouble to those that truly fear God But as if they had already forgot what they have here acknowledged they in the next page say As we can truly say Father forgive them they know not what they do we are not without hope But they deceive themselves if they think they can truly say that while they want the pouring forth of the Spirit of the Son of God upon them in and by which alone that
the Light Life or Spirit of God through Instruments But the Apostle Peter who knew as much as they and is fitter to be believed than they saith If any Man speak let him speak as the Oracles of God c. 1 Pet. 4.11 So that the Apostle it seems understood no other but that the things of God when Ministred as of the ability which God giveth were as the Oracles of God though spoken by or through Man To make way yet for more wrangling they reason after this manner either say they all that do speak in our Assemblies or Meetings speak from the Light Life and Spirit or all do not if all do so speak prove it if all do not so speak then you must give us a certain Rule to know who do so speak and who do not Rep. At the end of their Preface they give an Advertisement that where the Term You is found in the following Discourse namely in their Book they intend the Author viz. of the Book they pretend to Answer and those of his mind And where the term We is also used in their Book it may be understood in respect to those of the same mind with the Author of that Book of theirs So that You and We are there set for Characteristical Notes or distinguishing Terms between Friends and them Friends being intended and denoted by the word You and themselves by the word We. Now since Your and Our are but Derivatives from You and We each ought to follow its own Primitive And since by the term We they would have themselves to be understood it is but reason that by the term Our Assemblies or Meetings their own Assemblies or Meetings should be understood not the Assemblies or Meetings of Friends especially seeing they have Meetings of their own properly their own set up themselves in their own wills and choice in a Spirit of separation from the Meetings of Friends and in opposition to them Now if we take them in this Sense when they say as before Either all that do speak in Our Assemblies or Meetings speak from the Light Life and Spirit or all do not I shall easily grant what they say they take for granted that all that speak in their Assemblies or Meetings do not speak from the Light Life and Spirit of God if any do But if they mistook themselves here and by Our Assemblies or Meetings intended the Assemblies or Meetings of Friends and so put the Question whether all that speak in the Meetings of Friends do speak from the Light Life and Spirit of God or not I Reply No For many of the Adversaries themselves who are gone into a wicked separation from Friends and instead of abideing in the Light Life and Spirit of God are got into an ungodly Spirit of Wrangling and Quarrelling Rayling and Reviling Envy Bitterness and Restless Contention do notwithstanding thrust into Friends Meetings and there take upon them to speak though they or their Party have openly denyed Friends in Print This is such a work of darkness and horrible Hypocrysie as manifests that such speak not from the Light Life or Spirit of God But whereas they say You must give us a certain Rule to know who do so speak and who do not or otherwise you must leave us to receive or refuse according to the best of our understanding which they repeat over and over biding us Observe either you must give us a Rule as above or you must leave us free c. I Reply Friends have always directed and left them and all others to that which makes free indeed the Truth Iohn 8.32 And their insinuating the contrary is a foul Slander and a wicked Design I would to God they who are run into Enmity to and separation from Friends would leave us free and not impose upon us their Preaching and Praying which they have been often told Friends cannot receive or own And whereas they say both here in page 24. and elsewhere We take it for granted that you can give no such Rule I Reply They mistake taking that for granted which they ought not That Light Life Spirit Grace or Truth which Friends have always directed them and all unto is a Rule a certain Rule to know who speak from it and who do not And they that abide in it and are attentive to it do know who speak from it and who do not who are acted by it and who are not and know accordingly what and whom to receive and what and whom to refuse For the true Sheep know the true Shepherd's Voice Iohn 10.4 and 27. which is more than words But there is a difference between being left to this Light Grace or Spirit of God in our selves to receive or refuse according to that and being left to our own understanding to receive or refuse according to the best of that as the Adversaries would be left For Man's understanding as it is a natural Faculty must be illuminated by this heavenly Light and Spirit of God before it can receive or know the things of God because they are Spiritually discerned 1 Cor. 2.14 Well therefore did the Wise-man advise Trust in the Lord with all thine heart and lean not to thine own understanding Prov. 3.5 In the close of their 24 page They say We may safely conclude where Conviction and Perswasion are disallowed that Government ceaseth to be true Rep. But where is that not amongst Friends I am sure This they have suggested over and over but without proof without colour The contrary has been asserted and proved over and over again and again and that by undenyable Evidences from that very Book they pretend to Answer As thou art not to conform to a thing ignorantly page 3. The People of God ought to be left to the Guidings of the Spirit of God in themselves page 9. It is a great Truth that all are to be left thereunto ibid. And again If thou dost not presently see that Service in a thing that the rest of thy Brethren agree in it is thy Duty what to do not to Conform without or against Conviction or Perswasion but to wait upon God in silence and patience out of all fleshly Consultations c. page 10. These plain Testimonies one would think were enough to stop the clamorous mouth of slanderous Envy They begin their 25th page with a Passage which they single out of the 6th page of the Book they pretend to Answer And they word it thus They that walk in the Light have Fellowship one with another 1 Iohn 1. Whence he saith 't is easy to conclude that those that go out of Fellowship go out of the Light c. Upon this they spend about four pages in meer Cavilling And to make the more way for their Cavilling they miscite the Passage leaving out a word of small sound but of great force in the present Case because a strong Emphasis lies upon it For whereas the Author's words were they that go out
could He through weakness could not eat They through weakness of sight could not see what their Brethren saw could not Act as their Brethren did at least pretended so Now as the Apostle gave a cautionary Let not to him that was strong Let not him that eateth dispise him that eateth not Rom. 14.3 which Friends observed towards the Adversaries not despising nor rejecting them for their apparent weakness but bearing with them and carrying themselves tenderly towards them So he gave another cautionary Let not to him that was weak by whom as I noted the Adversaries are here represented Let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth Had the Adversaries observed this Caution 〈◊〉 the Apostle and not judged their Brethren in and for those things which their Brethren saw to be their Duty and were satisfied and conscientiously concerned in and which themselves acknowledged they had not a clear sight of the Difference in probability had not come to what it now is But the Adversaries forgeting the Apostles Counsel fell to judge their Brethren and that in the most provoking and reflecting manner under the names of Apostates Innovators Idolaters Setters up of lordly Dominion Vsurpers of Authority over Conscience Introducers of Popery c. and that in Print And never gave over till they run themselves by open war into that open Separation in which they now stand In their 35th page they fall again upon their old odd Notion of making Circumstantial and Shadowy to signifie the same thing Rep. Herein they err for want of considering the proper nature of each Every Shadow is a Representation of some particular Substance which it is a shadow of But every Circumstance is not Representative There are Circumstances of Time Place Gesture c. belonging to every Action yet is not every such Circumstance a Representation of some particular Substance Therefore every Circumstance is not a Shadow In meeting together to worship God there must be a time to meet at a Place to meet in These are Circumstantial to the worship for which the Meeting is but they are not Shadows If the Adversaries think they are pray let them assign the particular Substances of which they are Shadows and which as Shadows they represent But for ought I see they make all things to be Shadows but the Spirit of God For they say they must be Substance or Shadow and they admit nothing to be Substance but that which leads into all Truth and they add The Substance is God's holy Spirit that only and alone guides into all Truth So that after their Shadowy way of Reasoning the Gospel Dispensation should be as Shadowy as the Legal was or else there must be no external Appearance of Worship under the Gospel And yet they acknowledge There should be no Shadows in Christ's Government But if there should be no Shadows in Christ's Government and all External Acts of Worship according to their notion are but Shadowy then there must be no external Appearance or Acts of Worship under Christ's Government And what then would this shadowy shady dark Reasoning of theirs bring things to I wish the more single-hearted of their beguiled Proselites would well observe this and consider what Shadows of Christians they have made or would make them In like manner they blunder about the Circumstantial and Essential puzzling themselves and their Reader to no purpose for want of applying the words Circumstantial and Essential to their respective and proper Relatives for they must relate to something that which is but Circumstantial to one thing may be Essential to another Outward Motion or motion of the outward Members is Circumstantial to man not Essential to his being for a man may be a man without outward motion But this outward motion though it be not Essential to man's Being yet it is Essential to his Walking Talking Eating c. For walking talking eating cannot be without some outward motion of the outward Members As it is thus in Natural so in Religious Matters Outward Performances are but Circumstantial not Essential to Religion simply considered as in it self and strictly taken in the abstract But those very Performances which are not Essential to Religion it self in that strict fense may be Essential to the Outward Profession and external Exercise of Religion And indeed no outward Profession of Religion can be made no external Exercise of Religion performed without the Circumstance of some outward Act or Medium Which shews that outward Performances outward Acts or Mediums are Essential to the Being of outward Profession or Exercise of Relion though not to Religion it self in that strict and abstractive sense before mentioned I write this not with respect to any particular Medium Act or Performance but in a general way with respect to every Outward Performance that relates to the right Exercise of true Religion And to check the too confident Conclusion which the Adversaries over hastily draw thâ—â— whatsoever is not Essential to Religion according to their undistinguished sense of Essentials is without more ado a meer-Shadow The Author of the Book they pretend to Answer in his 9th page thereof having shew'd that the Plea which the Adversaries make viz. I must mind the Spirit of God in my self though true in it self yet ought not to be so applied as to disregard the Preaching or Writings of Christ's enlightned Servants because by them applied properly to the Preaching or Writing of false Prophets and Seducers concluded thus I say the Doctrine is true but not exclusively of all external Counsel or direction therefore false in application where men are allowed to have had the fear of God and the mind of his Spirit and are not proved to have acted in their own Wills and Wisdom or without the Guidance of the Spirit of God about the things of his Church and Kingdom Here the Adversaries open wide and a grevious Out cry they make p. â—7 c. Two main Exceptions they take against this One at the words have had the fear of God and the other at the words are not proved to have acted c. Against the first they alledge that such as may have had the fear of God may now be without it And to give a flurt at the Author they add As well as himself who used to have good Arguments but now wants them Against the second they urge that since every fact must be committed before proved they may have acted in their own will and not yet fully proved Now that this is a meer empty Cavil and carping at words only will appear by the Author 's own words in the place fore-cited where he expresly calls the Persons he spake of Faithful Brethren and Christ's enlightned Servants So that it is evident he used that other way of Speech afterwards upon the Adversaries Concession and to bind them the faster who how meanly soever they thought of Friends then allowed them to have had the fear of God and the mind of his
and certainly known as the Tares in the Parable at the first sight were to be Tares Ah how would this loose Spirit that is got up in some turn Spiritual Zion the inclosed Garden of God into a Plowed-Field However it is to be hoped Their applying the Parable of Tares to themselves may help to make some others understand them better than hither to they have done And their pleading for a Toleration for Tares to grow in the Church for of the Church and its Members they here treat not of the World may give some a further sight of their Design for sheltring Evil and what they aim at in this Plea than ever they had before After they have shewed the utmost of Immoderation in managing the Difference on their own part they now at length begin to preach Moderation to Others If say they this Difference cannot be ended manage it with more Moderation they might have added than themselves have done and in that love of God that it may be shewed the Lord is at hand to gather different apprehensions into a better Temper They might have added than Themselves have hitherto been in Rep. But why did they not think of this Moderation before they published their many scandalous and malicious Books to the defaming of Truth and Friends to the world as much as in them lay Why did they not preach this Moderation to their own Party at Reding and other Places to have gathered them into a better temper for a worse they could hardly have been in than to keep Friends out of their Meeting-Houses wherein they had a just and legal Property and expose them for divers Years together to those hardships that Heat and Cold Rain and Storms of Weather bring They who have done the greatest mischief by their Immoderation that they can begin now to recommend Moderation to others And they who have done their utmost to dishonour the God of Truth and Peace before the People by publishing their wicked Books and setting up their separate Meetings do now take upon them to exhort Others to Moderation Otherwise say they you will dishonour the God of Truth and Peace before the People Is not this Hyprocrisie in grain They add pag. 46. You must agree together quietly or part friendly or you are no Preachers of Righteousness whatever your Principles of Truth may be Rep. To what end do they propose this now so long after they have actually parted from us They have had their separate Meetings these many years And more than a year ago some of them gave us to understand in Print that they had chosen to meet apart and had withdrawn But since they did neither agree quietly with us while together nor did part Friendly when they withdrew does it not follow upon them according to their own words that They are no Preachers of Righteousness whatever Principles of Truth they may hold They urge the Example of Abraham and Lot for parting by agreement But they do not take notice that that was only a parting of outward Habitations and that through Necessity because the place was not large enough to hold them So that this was not a Religious parting muchless a parting through Opposition of their Spirits Yet this was in the Vncircumcised state too for Circumcision was not instituted till after this But they would do well to consider that Lot who took his Choice and parted from Abraham the Friend of God came to great Loss and suffered deeply thereby For though at first remove he pitched his Tent but towards Sodom Gen. 13.12 yet quickly after we find him settled in Sodom chap. 14.12 And he had not long been there before he was made a Captive and was glad to be rescued by him he had parted from O that all that are in danger of being beguiled betrayed and led away by this Dividing Spirit and its Agents would consider these things in a Spiritual Application and beware of Separating from God's Friends lest by the pleasantness of the Plains where liberty freedom room and scope may be had to walk at will they be allured to pitch their Tents towards mystical Sodom and by degrees drawn into it It follows in their Book But why cannot you agree together whilst you own one and the same righteous Principle Rep. By this it seems as if owning a Principle were Terms of their Communion To own the Principle of Truth is one thing to hold it keep to it and obey it is another Many do the one that do not the other Many own the Principle of Truth in words that never came into Obedience to it and some that have departed from obedience to the Principle have yet retained a verbal Acknowledgement of it And of them that have made Profession of the Truth and afterwards turned their Backs upon it how few are there that do not own the Principle They find fault with something or other in the Society to make themselves an Out-let that they may thereby slip out and shake off the Yoke of Christ which is as uneasie to the Wrong as easie to the Right But they commonly cry up the Principle still Do not Pennyman Crisp and Bugg own in words the same righteous Principle still Let me turn the Question then upon the Adversaries and ask them Why cannot you and those men agree together whilst you and they own one and the same righteous Principle Nay why cannot you and they agree in other things as well as in contending against Truth and writing Books against Friends They add You came out together have you not done the greater and cannot you do the less That 's strange Rep. That 's not so strange as they would make it Israel of old came out of Egypt together and with them a mixt multitude Exod. 12.38 or as in the Margin a great Mixture But all they that came out together did not agree to travel on together No some grumbled and murmured at the Hardships in the way Some emulated and repined at the superior Gifts and Graces of their Brethren Some let in and cherished Evil Surmises and false Iealousies concerning their Brethren as if some of their Brethren took too much upon them and lifted themselves up above the Congregation and sought a Principality or Lordly Dominion over the rest Numb 16. Thus wrought the subtil Enemy after divers manners to divide scatter and turn aside some after one manner some after another Some were swallowed up of the Earth and perished in their Gain-saying Some were for making themselves a Captain in opposition to the Captain God had made and for returning again into Egypt the Land of Darkness out of which they came up together Others were consumed by the Fire of the Lord which in hot Indignation brake forth against them And all the Murmurers fell in the Wilderness Now all these things as the Apostle says hapned unto them for Examples and they are written for our Admonition 1 Cor. 10.11 Therefore Murmur not ye as some of them also Murmured and were destroyed of the Destroyer ver 10. That which remains of the Adversaries Book is mostly a Recapitulation or contracted Repetition of their foregoing Reasonings grounded upon a false Hypothesis or Supposition that Friends would impose new things as matters of Faith and terms of Communion and would bring in blind Obedience by pressing Conformity before Conviction and the like which I hope the Reader will find to his Satisfaction refuted before That therefore I may not swell this Book with unnecessary Repetitions I will only recommend to the Reader 's Observation what after all their Outcry against bringing in new things as they call them the Adversaries themselves grant in page 48. in these words Any Particular or any Assembly of the Community may offer what is new if they sincerely believe it good and Serviceable without breach of Vnity or at least of Communion but say they we cannot find to the bringing of new things in as matters of Faith or terms of Communion that any Assembly have any more power than a particular Person Rep What Power an Assembly may have more than a particular Person I list not here to dispute because I would not like them pick occasion of Debate and Quarrelling But since Friends have not offered any of the things the Adversaries except against under the Notion of new things as matters of Faith to others or as terms of Communion but have only offered such things as they sincerely believe are good and Serviceable let it suffice that Friends have herein done no more than the Adversaries here grant may be done by any Particular or any Assembly of the Community without breach of Unity or Communion The Breach therefore of Unity and Communion that now is betwixt them and Friends must lie and doth at the Adversaries Door who by the heady willful violent and turbulent Opposition they made to obstruct and hinder Friends from proceeding on in the use and practice of those things which the Friends sincerely believed and do yet believe to be good and Serviceable have run themselves into open War and that in Print against Friends and into open Division and Separation from Friends So that it is They have broken themselves off from the Unity Communion and Society of Friends both inwardly in Spirit and outwardly also in Religious Exercises The Lord if it be his good pleasure give them yet a clear sight and true sense of the great Evil and Mischief they have done against God his Truth and People that in the sense thereof they may be truly humbled and bowed down before him and brought to such an honest and sensible Acknowledgment thereof as may evidence their sincere Repentance that through Judgment they may find Mercy and obtain Remission from him THE END Of the Mistakes committed in Printing the most material that have been yet observed are here noted to be Corrected Others of less moment as mis-spellings mis-placing of Letters or Stops the Reader is desired to amend in reading PAge 10. line 21. read is in pag. 20. line 8. r. reprove l. 13. for immoral r. Evil p. 22. l. 33. for not yet r. nor yet p. 23. l. 25. after dispensation make Commâ— p. 40. l. 13. f. present r. recent p. 44. l. 1. r. Iohn 6.56 p. 50. l. 27. r. Peter p. 52. l. 9. f. of Evil r. for Evil. p. 63. l. 12. f. prevent r. pervert