by a Mediate or Immediate Inspiration or Revelation p. 21. And what follows If by neither of these ways we can resolve him then not to pretend to Immediate Inspiration And yet he himself pretends to Mediate or more Common Gifts of the Spirit and then confusedly tells of the use of these more immediate or common Gifts p. 19 20. And yet by these his pretended more immediate or common Gifts of the Spirit or rather mediate Gifts in his sense I presume he cannot resolve himself his Two Questions before nor can he upon his own Principle either resolve them or be resolved them either by any mediate or immediate Gifts For the immediate he has disclaimed he needs it not he says but pretends the Scriptures to be the Only Rule of Faith By what Rule then should he be resolved what those or any of those other things were that are not written John 20.25 Therefore he has insincerely and temptingly imposed unlearned Questions and Propositions which he does not believe can be resolved to his conviction or satisfaction and thereupon has past unjust Judgment against our having immediate Inspiration yet in contradiction to himself tells us of common and more immediate Gifts and Graces of the Spirit and of the use of these more immediate or common Gifts to help our Infirmities p. 19 20. Altho I presume he would be loath to have his own Judgment and Condemnation against us return'd upon himself on the same condition For 't is certain he that has not the Spirit of Christ is none of his And what are these more immediate Gifts and Graces of the Spirit he pretends to the use of seeing he and his Brethren pretend not to immediate or extraordinary Inspirations p. 19 20. There 's another Contradiction in the Case to prove their Call to Baptize People in Water He saith they have a sufficient Call for it from the Commission of Christ our Great Prophet who is to be heard in all things Matth. 28. Mark 16. and the frequent Examples of his Apostles c. So that we need not immediate Inspirations for our Call or Authority herein p. 21. Ans. Which is to tell us you may take upon you to be Preachers and Baptizers in Water without being inspired by Christ because he gave a Commission to his Disciples to teach all Nations baptizing them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost But 1. This is no proof that you are called by Christ to either 2. Here 's no Water mention'd in the Commission 3. And to baptize into that Name is a work of the Spirit attending a living and spiritual Ministry given and authorized by Christ himself which this proves not yours to be no more than that the false Prophets were true and truly commissionated because they said thus saith the Lord when yet God never spoke to them no more than Christ hath spoke to you to Preach and Baptize with Water when as you do both without his immediate Inspiration Commission or Spirit and consequently you do not hear him in all things 4. Neither does it follow that you hear Christ because you Preach and Baptize People in Water by imitation of others whom he sent to Preach and Convert People by his Spirit whereby they did Minister 5. You might as well argue that because Peter James John and Paul c. were Apostles and Ministers of Christ therefore we Edward Paye and William Allcott c. are Ministers of Christ. 6. If Reading Christ's Commission to his Disciples Mat. 28. Mar. 16. be sufficient authority for persons to turn Preachers and then to tell People they hear Christ because they read his said Commission and presume to take it upon them without immediate Inspiration from him why may not the Priests of England c. be his Ministers as well as you and why do you dissent from them Thus we see how you have proved your Call and Authority for what you pretend even as well as any sensual Impostors blind Guides and Deceivers may On Rom. 10.6.7 8. E. P. saith neither did the holy Apostle understand the Word here to be Christ p. 22. Ans. How does he answer the Questions then which the Righteousness of Faith gives answer to Say not in thy Heart who shall ascend into Heaven that is to bring Christ from above Or who descend into the Deep that is to bring Christ again from the dead But what saith it The Word is near thee c. Is this all one as to say the Scripture is near thee even in thy Mouth and Heart Or was the Enquiry after the Scripture Who shall ascend or descend to fetch me the Scriptures No sure Was not the antecedent Question of Christ And surely none can savingly believe with the Heart and in true Faith confess with the Mouth that God hath raised Christ from the dead so as to be saved but by that Living Word of Faith in the Heart which works a true and living Faith therein and therefore that Word of Faith which begets and works this Faith is Christ in Spirit who is the Author of this Faith otherwise the Questions who shall fetch Christ c. are not answered For where with the Heart Man believeth unto Righteousness and with the Mouth maketh Confession unto Salvation Rom. 10.10 he must needs first feel that Living Word of Faith in his Heart to work that Faith in him which produceth that Righteousness in Man which attends Salvation 'T is true that I did complain of E. P.'s injurious way of Writing in accusing us with giving better or higher Titles to our own Books than to the Holy Scripture instancing that of H. Smith's Book where E. P. gave these words only for the Title A True and Everlasting Rule being but the first words of the Title and leaving out the next following in the same Sentence viz. From God discovered This I did deem very disingenuous Now to extenuate and excuse the Offence he asks me Does those Words from God discovered added to The True and Everlasting Rule diminish the Heighth of the Title p. 23. Answ. Yes as the first Part was only by E. P. attributed to the Book contrary to the Design of the Title and Matter contained in the Book to which the Title had plain reference as taken together entirely that True and Everlasting Rule from God discovered being the Holy Spirit the Eternal Light and Manifestation of Christ within or what may be known of God being manifest in Man plainly testified unto in the said Book as that True and Everlasting Rule that was from God discovered so the Perversion and Abuse is plain I think E. P. might have spared his Labour of giving the Reader a Breviate of what he Ironically calls The Sweet Convincing Language the Quakers use to treat their Antagonists withal unless his own Language had been sweeter and more convincing than it is and less Partial and Abusive in his Accusations as to Matter
The Contemned QUAKER AND HIS Christian Religion DEFENDED Against Envy Forgery In Answer to two Abusive Invective PAMPHLETS The One stiled Antichrist in Spirit Vnmasked The Other Railings and Slanders Detected Promoted by some Persons commonly called Anabaptists at Deptford in Kent who have unwarily begun the Contest Jer. 48.30 His lies shall not so effect it LONDON Printed for Tho. Northcott in George-yard in Lombard-street 1692. THE CONTEMNED QUAKER AND HIS Christian Religion defended WHereas in a small Treatise entituled Antichrist in Flesh unmask'd and the Quakers Christianity vindicated from the Malitious and Injurious Attempts of Edward Paye William Alcott and Henry Loader in their late Defaming Confused Book falsly stiled Antichrist in Spirit Vnmask'd I did near the Conclusion of the said Treatise seriously enquire only of William Alcott and Henry Loader in these four Questions following viz. I. Was Edward Paye Deputed and approved by your Congregation or any Select Assembly of Elders or Mininisters of the Baptized People or Churches to Write and Publish his said Book against the People called Quakers or did he do it on his own Authority and Head with your Approbation only II. What Ministers or Elders of your Churches besides your selves did peruse and approve of Edward Paye's said Book before printed and of the Printing thereof to Defame us as a People III. Is the said Edward Paye indeed esteem'd among you and your Society a good Christian a Person of a Godly and Sober Conversation of Sound Judgment Piety and Parts meet to manage Matters of Controversy about Religion IV. Do you intend to stand by him the said Edward Paye in all Matters that he has written in Charge both against certain Persons and against the People called Quakers in his Book Having also given my Reasons for these Questions in the said Treatise Antichrist in Flesh p. 26. Now let it be observ'd that to these Questions I find no answer from the said William Allcot or Henry Loader to whom they were put but a pretended and evasive Answer from Edward Paye himself having only his own Name subscribed a few Lines after but no William Allcot nor Henry Loader subscribed thereto but Edward Paye left to shift for himself and they slunk back for all they highly commended his Work and defamed us in their Commendatory Epistle to his other Pamphlet i. e. Antichrist in Spirit against us And yet as if he had a Plurality of Advocates to answer for him he gives us his slim Answer in the Plural thus viz. We will give an answer to G. W's impertinent Questions though I think they are not worth taking notice of His Questions are four but his Reasons for asking them vanish in answering the first And in the pretended Answer it is said E. P. did Write and Publish his Book by the Approbation of the majority of this Congregation and so he did not do it on his own Head neither did we see it needful to desire the Approbation of others herein though several have approved of it since p. 37 38. But what We are these give this Answer besides Edward Paye we find no Body's Name else to it but his own If by WE will give an Answer neither did we see it needful to desire the Approbation of others be meant William Allcot and Henry Loader why did they not put their Names to it Why do they now shrink back and decline their Brother in his Work seeing the Enquiry was so fairly made of them Can they or Edward Paye either reasonably suppose that we as a People defamed and injured by E. P. will accept of his own Answer or Justification of his perverse Work and himself too and believe that he says true in saying That he did Write and Publish his said Book by the Approbation of the majority of their Congregation at Deptford For my Part I do not believe him herein in Point of Charity I do not suppose the majority of the Congregation or Hearers of the Baptists at Deptford are so grossly corrupted and deluded into Envy and Prejudice as really to believe and approve of such a Bundle of Malicious and Numerous Slanders Forgeries Notorious Lyes Perversions and Abuses as are contain'd and apparent in the said Pamphlet styl'd Antichrist in Spirit by Edward Paye and many of them repeated in his second and highly approved by William Allcott and Henry Loader But if either the majority or minority of their Congregation have given their Approbation for the Writing and Publication thereof as is pretended I and others of us should be very sorry for their sakes that they should be so miserably deluded as not only to believe but approve of the Publication of such gross Slanders and Defamations against their Innocent Neighbours as are contained in the said Pamphlet And that they should be so implicit and blindly credulous of such gross and notorious Falshoods and Reproaches invented by envious Persons and Persecutors And you E. P. W. A. and H. L. who have so far deluded any of your Hearers have much to answer for and a sad account to give before the Righteous Judge of all But now seeing the Writing and Publication of E. P's said Envious Pamphlet i. e. Antichrist in Spirit is at last so far dedicated to the majority of the Baptist's Congregation at Deptford as having their Approbation it may not be unseasonable to shew them and others some of Edward Paye's and William Allcot's notorious Falshoods Slanders and Perversions contained therein and in his last Pamphlet also stiled Railings and Slanders c. which I shall here recite in their own Words as in Charge against them and all that approve or publish them to their Shame and Disgrace The Holy Scriptures this Generation of Men i. e. the Quakers contemn and vilifie Commendatory Epistle by William Allcott and Henry Loader to Antichrist in Spirit and that the Quakers are great Enemies to and Contemners of Holy Scriptures p. 20. This is their General and a most odious Charge which in our very Souls and Consciences in the Sight of God we the said People do utterly deny with Detestation and I find that all their pretended Proofs do fail of any real Proof of the Matter charged the chief whereof being hereafter examin'd more particularly That the Quakers prefer their Lying Pamphlets above the Scriptures p. 9. Their pretended Proof is That G. W. affirms That which is spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any is of as great Authority as the Scripture and greater p. 11. quoting Apology p. 49. In which Apology no Pamphlets at all are preferred above the Scriptures but the immediate Living Ministry of the Holy Spirit within above the Letter the Divine Inspiration which was before the Scriptures were written for they proceeded from it I am very unfairly and unjustly dealt with in this Charge my Intentions and Words perverted after the Word Scriptures in mine or Chapters are here left out and after the Word Greater all these
following are left out viz. as received and proceeding immediately from that Spirit and spoken in the Sense thereof as Christ's Words were of greater Authority or Power when he spake than the Pharisees reading the Letter and them in whom that Spirit speaks not and their Speaking we deny whereby I did prefer the Spirit in it's Living and Powerful Ministry above the Letter but not a Word of preferring any Pamphlets to the Holy Scriptures God knows it never entred into my Heart to prefer any Pamphlets or Books extant in the World much less Lying Ones before the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament but do prefer and esteem them before all other Books or Writings extant whatsoever When Humphry Smith 's True and Everlasting Rule came in date the Scriptures became no better than an Old Almanack this from a Story of Tho. Hicks against one Tho. Holbrow though we know no such Person Dialogue p. 27. to which Edward Paye c. addeth these Words viz. These are the Men that in their Pamphlets profess so high an Esteem for the Holy Scriptures Antichrist in Spirit p. 13. Pray observe here These Men here accused with esteeming the Scriptures no better than an Old Almanack are therein most wickedly belied and scandaliz'd being those of us who publisht the Paper in Print entituled The Christianity of the People commonly called Quakers asserted wherein we sincerely declare the quite contrary to what 's here implicitly charged by E. P. c. against us namely That we do believe and own the Holy Scriptures contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration c. Tho. Hicks in his Dialogue I. p. 24 25. and Edward Paye c. on his Credit Falsly and Wickedly Personate the Quaker thus viz. When we make use of Scripture it is only to Quiet and Stop their Clamours that plead for it as their Rule but for us had the Scriptures never been we could have known what is therein contained I hope quoth Edward Paye the Reader by this may perceive the Reason why the Quakers talk so much of Scripture in their Paper Observe we own not the Scripture we seemingly allow it but our End in this is only to stop their Clamours that plead for it as their Rule You see here quoth E. P. the condescending Spirits of these Men c. Antichrist p. 15. We do in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ utterly deny this Passage and Declaration as laid down in the Quakers Name and Person as no Declaration or Speech made or thus declarable by the Quakers on their Principle but a Horrid Abusive Forgery of Thomas Hicks long since detected and which you Baptists now may be horribly ashamed to bring forth or suffer to be renewed in Print The Names they i. e. the Quakers give the Holy Scriptures viz. No better than an Old Almanack a Dead Carnal Letter p. 18. But on second Consideration E. P. deems it a difficulty to prove that the Quakers do now in the present Tense say The Holy Scriptures are but a Dead or Carnal Letter as his other Pamphlet Raylings p. 23 24. and yet chargeth them in the present Tense with giving such Names to the Holy Scriptures but now 't is a Difficulty to prove his own Charge Among the Names which E. P. falsly chargeth the Quakers to give the Holy Scriptures viz. That they are the Precepts and Traditions of Men p. 18. That Obedience to the Scriptures is the Harlot's Child p. ibid. These are both utterly denyed by us the said People and the pretended Proof of the first is hereafter examined and proved false The latter I really believe could never be so said nor ever was held by the Quakers so to term sincere Obedience to the Holy Scripture but rather to reflect upon an Hypocritical Profession and Imitation of some Shadows and outwardward Things and neglecting the Substance of the New Covenant Dispensation That the Heaven they i. e. the Quakers intend wherein the three Divine Witnesses bear Record is No where else but within their Mortal Corrupt Bodies they intend no other Heaven than what is within them Antichrist in Spirit p. 20 21. This is expressly contrary to our known professed Principle of the omnipresence of God and his Spirit both in Heaven above and in Earth beneath and whom the Heaven of Heavens cannot contain And I take the Charge to be but E. P's own Consequence which he himself has drrawn from some Words he has partially and mincingly taken up against James Parnell Thomas Lawson Edward Burroughs c. First For a Pretext quoting James Parnell's Book as he calls it Satan's Design Discovered But I know no Bok of James Parnell's so entituled upon the Reviewing the Titles of his Books nor any of the rest quoted that oppose or disown God's Omnipresence much less that the People called Quakers are guilty of any such Charge I would desire E. P. if he will still be so injurious as to reassume this Charge against the People called Quakers that he would yet be so ingenious as fairly and fully to cite the whole Passages of the Authors quoted by him relating to the Matter intended and for Proof of his Charge without his own Consequences and Perversions That if it shall appear that any of them have opposed or denyed the Omnipresence of God or his Eternal Spirit we may shew our dislike thereof But I believe there 's enough in our Friends Books to clear them if honestly viewed and cited and we have great cause to Question and detect his unfair Citations as I have this following Instance against my self for Proof of his said Charge 8. Quoting Dipper plung'd Christ without us is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites and Muggletonians Antichrist in Spirit p. 22. But E. P. in his other Pamphlet Railings p. 29. varies in his Repetition of his Charge thus viz. G. W. Dipper plung'd Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scripture-Language c. Observe here in the one it is Christ without us where after Christ E. P. leaves out God-Man a Person i. e. without us which I said is not Scripture-Language c. In the other it is Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scriture-Language where after Christ he leaves out God-man again and yet both charged by the same Credulous Person E. P. though both be falsly cited and unjustly charged upon me as mine For to Tho. Hick's strange Phrase viz. Jesus Christ God-man a Person without thee Dial. p. 9. My Answer was This is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites and Muggletonians who profess a personal God denying him to be an Infinite Spirit Dipper plung'd p 13. Wherein my Objection was not against the Words Jesus Christ without us for he is both without us and within us but my Question was of the Words God-man a Person without us including God as well as the Man Christ Jesus as
preaching People to a lost God a lost Christ and then E. P. c. cries out of G. K's being Inspired by the Prince of Darkness to talk of a lost God and a lost Christ to be Sought and Saved p. 42. Oh horrid and abominable Falsifying and Perversion See G. K's own Answer and Detection to Tho. Hicks in this very Matter entituled George Keith 's Vindication from the Forgeries and Abuses of Thomas Hicks shewing that when he speaks of a lost God and a lost Christ he saith whom they i. e. People had lost and from whom they were separated by their Sins And this Hicks and his Brother E. P. take no Notice of in their Citation or False Inferences much less of G. K's Vindication p. 8 9. viz. The Plain and Open Sense of my Words is this That as Jesus Christ came to Seek and Save the lost Souls of Men and to Raise up and Recover the Image of God in Men again so all the true Ministers of Christ Preached People to God and Christ near them whom though Men had lost yet were near unto them to save them and to bring them into the enjoyment of him and Fellowship with him His other Instance in p. 42. is against James Naylor's Love to the Lost falsly quoting p. 30 47 48. citing him thus viz. That there is a Seed to which the Promise of Redemption is which Seed is that which ONLY wants Redemption and that Christ is the Elect Seed And then draws this Consequence from a false Position That Christ came to Redeem Christ. We do not find the Citation true no more than we own the Position we find not that his Words are That this Seed Christ ONLY wants Redemption but WHEREIN only Redemption is seen and received namely That in the promised Seed Redemption is only to be seen and received by Man or the Creature that wants it Now I find a Distinction in J. N's Writing of the Seed as between the Seed Christ who is the Redeemer and the Seed of Abraham i. e. Believers whom Christ Redeems the Children of the Kingdom the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed And this Distinction appears in J. N's own Words following That 't is the Seed of Israel whom Christ redeems as J. N. saith and tells man no further art thou Redeemed by Christ Jesus And that Salvation IN the Seed is placed and the Heritage of Faith is the Seed that is Redeemed which all who know Redemption by the precious Blood of Christ are redeemed from the vain Conversation for this End he gave himself for us to redeem us from ALL Iniquity thus far J.N. Love to the Lost p. 59 60 61 62. concerning Redemption but no such Words as that the Seed which is Christ ONLY wants Redemption Is it not a great Shame and Reproach to Religion that any Preachers should be so Credulous and Envious as to receive such down-right Lyes and gross Perversions to Reproach their quiet Neighbours and thus confidently to Expose them to the World as these Anabaptist Preachers have done and thereupon to roar out and cry Blasphemous Absurdities Gross Contradictions to Truth p. 43. When such Absurdities and Gross Contradictions are their own Malicious Forgeries against us Fomented and Exposed by Thomas Hicks and on Trust from him by Edward Paye Henry Loader and William Allcott Whereas Christ hath all Power in Heaven and Earth given him and he is our Saviour and Redeemer and as he had Power to lay down his Life and take it up again so his own Seed of Life Word or Plant in the Soul though for a Time under Suffering and the Load of Man's Iniquity he hath Power to Raise it up and therein to bring forth an Immortal Birth and Holy Generation which is his Seed whom he shall see as the Fruit of his Soul's Travel Such his Condescension and Humiliation under Suffering both inwardly and outwardly argues no Deficiency nor Impotency in Christ himself who is the very entire Christ of God in whom all Fulness dwells and who received the Spirit not by Measure but 't was his own free Love and Act of pure Condescension and Humility to descend into the Heart of Man to Redeem and Raise up Man his Soul and Spirit out of his Fallen and Captivated Estate and from under the Bondage of Corruption who in that State ONLY wants Redemption and not Christ for how much soever he Suffers or is Spiritually pierc'd or grieved by Men's Iniquities he can take unto him his great Power when he pleaseth and ease himself of his Enemies and his own Arm can bring Salvation to him We never Entertained or Believed any such Doctrine as these Adversaries enviously and falsly insinuate as that the Seed Christ ONLY wants Redemption for so to render him Impotent were to oppose his All-sufficient Power and Dignity but that 't is the Soul of Fallen Man and Woman that wants Redemption and not Christ who is the Redeemer and Saviour of it this does plainly appear to be our Belief from our Apprehension of the Nature and Being of the Soul of Man as a Creature and not the Creator viz. That the Soul of the Creature Man is not God nor Christ But the Spiritual Being and Principal Part of Man Created in the Image of God and Divinely Inspired and Enlightned by its Creator and Redeemer who formed the Spirit or Soul of Man within him for the Soul or Spirit of Man as distinguished from the Body is often in Scriture rendred one and the same thing more livingly perceived and felt in that Divine Light and Life of Christ whereby our Souls live to God than by any Philosophical or School Definitions Edward Paye's Second Pamphlet styled Raylings and Slanders Detected Examined WHereas in my late Brief Treatise entituled Antichrist in Flesh unmasked I did complain against the Envy and Persecuting Spirit of Edward Paye and his Abettors William Allcott and Henry Loader as appearing Envious against our present Liberty 1. By seeking to make void one Condition thereof which was our Profession of Faith In the three Divine Witnesses in Heaven c. according to 1 Joh. 5.7 and acknowledging the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration being sincerely owned by us before the Parliament when proposed to us and accordingly accepted and more fully inserted in the Statute for Exempting their Majesties Protestant Subjects dissenting c. from the Penalties of certain Laws and therein confessed to be a Profession of their Christian Belief 2. That in Contradiction thereunto these Persons aforesaid have grossly Belied and Misrepresented us the People called Quakers accusing us with vilifying and contemning the Holy Scriptures and with saying We own not the Scriptures but seemingly allow them and that the Quakers are great Enemies to and contemners of Holy Scriptures Epist. and p. 14. and 20. of their first Pamph. Antichrist in Spirit both contrary to our Sincere and Christian Profession and
the Prophets and Apostles did for something commanded in Scripture is and may be truly in it self a Duty for all but cannot be truly understood nor performed without the Assistance and Guidance of the Holy Spirit and that Spirit will not be wanting to assist in both as truly heeded 5. I never knew our Friends the Quakers so called deny the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust though probably your gross Sense thereof but we have only pleaded for the Spiritual Celestial and Glorious Bodies in the Resurrection as far excelling the Natural Earthly and Corruptible Bodies and sincerely believing the Holy Scriptures in that Case Luke 20.35 36. Joh. 5.28 1 Cor. 15. Hosea 13.14 Phil. 3.20 6. I never knew our Friends the People called Quakers deny the Body of Christ that suffered to be raised from the Grave or Sepulchre but divers declare their Belief to the contrary namely That his Flesh saw no Corruption or did not Corrupt but rose again the Third Day and that Christ in the same Body Ascended into Heaven yea also that he ascended far above All Heavens that he might fill all things 7. As to that Point of your Water-Baptism and your Bread and Wine you must excuse us we are not yet satisfied that they are Gospel-Ordinances and to continue always in Force under the Gospel and New Covenant-Dispensation being a Dispensation of Substance and not of Shadows nor do we believe that you Baptists have any immediate Call from Heaven to Baptize People in Water nor that your observing Breaking of Bread or Drinking of Wine can properly be called the Lord's Supper either in the Figure or in the Substance yet we do not Despise or Contemn either Water-Baptism or Breaking of Bread as we are falsly accused as once practised nor as observed by such now as are Conscientious therein from a Belief that 't is their Duty to observe the same we charitably think they mean well therein but wish they might more mind and partake of the Substance both as to the Spiritual Baptism and the Bread of Life from Heaven for their poor Souls Relief and Safety in Christ the Substance 8. We never held that pernicious Tenet of Believing That no Blessedness is to be enjoyed by the Saints after Death as is most unjustly insinuated against us from Suggestions grossly false p. 9. and elswhere detected 9. We never denyed Justification by Christ's Works Righteousness and Merits much less call it a Doctrine of Devils as we are most horridly belied p. 9. as is clearly evinced 10. We are not ashamed to say and affirm That Christ is the Light of the World and that he is that True Light that enlightens every Man coming into the World and that God is our Light and our Salvation and is not this Divine Light within think ye Doth not both God and Christ in some degree appear within to be known within suppose ye else how should that which may be known of God be manifest within seeing there 's no knowledg of God but by Christ 11. And as to Billingsgate Complements charg'd and for Moderate and Mild Treatment of our Antagonists The truth on 't is the former I like not but the latter I am truly for Moderation and Mildness even in treating Antagonists if they are any whit Treatable Rational or Fair Opponents But if I find an opposing Adversary guilty of Envy Lying Forgeries gross Perversions Wresting and Turning my Words to a contrary Sense than they naturally import or ever was intended by me then I hope I may tell and shew him his evil and injurious Work and justly reprehend him for the same and yet I not be justly deem'd guilty of Billingsgate Complements or Rhetorick either for I can make no better of a gross Lye or Forgery than 't is nor give it a better Character than it deserves or that lying Spirit from whence it comes which I have plentifully met with in Edw. Paye's Works of Envy against us for which I think he justly deserves to be paid off by just Reprehension And of his mild Treatment you may hear anon To excuse his envious and scornful Story from our Persecuting Adversaries the Westmorland Petitioners about Sorcery cited in his other Pamphlet against the Meetings of the People called Quakers p. 7 8. Antichrist in Spirit Now E. P. saith viz. For my part I have seen them Quake and Foam at the Mouth besides several that have been Eye and Ear-Witnesses of it Railings p. 10. But neither tells us the Persons nor in what Meeting or what Place he saw them in both those Postures nor who else besides himself were the Eye and Ear-Witnesses thereof And what reason have we to believe his Testimony any more in this than in many other notorious Falshoods And Corrupt Notions and Deceivable Gestures p. 11. he hath not proved against us But instead of Proof is now fain to beg Questions and come to his Supposition viz. Suppose you formerly used to Quake Tremble Roar Swell and Foam at the Bull and Mouth in London the Westmorland Petitioners may say true c. p. 11. See how faintly he comes off for those Westmorland Petitioners and their Story to render us odious As for Quaking and Trembling I ask him If these be the Deceivable Gestures which he accuseth us of And as to Roaring Swelling and Foaming which he would fain Insinuate against us I neither know nor remember these Gestures among our Friends at the Bull and Mouth Meeting or elsewhere in London ever since I knew the Meeting in that place which has been above 34 Years E. P. grants Christ present in Spirit but the reason of Fasting his being personally taken from them into the glorious Heavens above beyond the Stars and they obliged to Prayer and Fasting c. till his second personal Coming p. 15. Whereas Christ assigned another cause of Prayer and Fasting even when personally present with his Disciples for the casting out the unclean Spirit Mark 9.29 and the Apostles approving themselves Ministers in Watchings in Fastings by Pureness c. 2 Cor. 6.5 was not because of Christ's personal or outward absence And as for your being obliged to Prayer and Fasting 'till Christ's second personal coming I do not believe you 'l fast so long G. W. denies not Quaking and Trembling quoth E. P. p. 16. And what then Was that all the Instance the Westmorland Petitioners were brought for Does that prove either Sorcery or a Diabolical Spirit Swellings or Foamings in our Meetings as they insinuated or deceivable Gestures as he has accused us Where proves he Quaking and Trembling without exception deceivable Gestures Or so called in Scripture Pag. 18. E. P. I have it 's true examin'd the Quakers Appeal by way of Charge against Tho. Hicks wherein they charge him with Lies and Slanders and Forgeries And I have perused Mr. Hicks 's Answer to their Appeal where Mr. Hicks clears himself both of Lies and Forgery I find his Answer to their Appeal subscribed
esteeming the Holy Scriptures but the Precepts and Traditions of Men as most unjustly is charged upon the Quakers by E. P. and consequently by his approvers William Allcott and Henry Loader who had need to retract this and the rest of their Charges which are notoriously false in fact And E. P. thou hast no cause to boast or insult over us touching the Writings and Sayings of our ancient Authors which thou hast so foully wrong'd and perverted and when thou hast made Lies upon them then falsly to say they directly contradict the Quakers new Faith when by deceitful Perversions false Citations base and falacious Forgeries thou hast attempted such Contradiction as thy self and abettors may for ever be ashamed of and hast great cause to renounce and explode the same rather than we our ancient Friends Writings And to evince thy contempt and scorn thou shalt take no notice at all of the confused Profession of Faith that G. W. makes p. 34. No thou art too big too great too high in thy own proud Conceit to take notice of what such a mean contemptible person as G.W. or any of us testifies of our Belief how sincere soever But I must tell thee if thou goest on in this thy wicked Course of Defaming and Scandalizing us I hope we shall take further notice of thee and thy base malicious Work to thy own and abettors perpetual shame to keep your Infamy in remembrance and when we have fully cleared our Consciences I doubt not but the Righteous Judge of all whose People thou hast evilly entreated and reproach'd will meet with thee and rebuke thy Envious Spirit To extenuate thy notorious Lie and Forgery against Geo. Fox of taking the Name of the Eternal Judge of quick and dead to himself quoting p. 6 7. of Saul's Errand Now thou art fain to beg the Question viz. Why may not G. F. take the Name to himself as well as approve of those blasphemous Titles given him by Jos. Coal in his Letters from Barbadoes p. 35. cited in Antichrist in Spirit p. 43 44. Ans. The Charge here of approving and giving blasphemous Titles is very high against two persons deceased who we believe ended their days in peace and my present Answer is 1 st I have cause to question whether the said Letter be truly and intirely copied or cited from the Original by thee E. P. 2 dly I do not believe 't is an intire Copy 3 dly Whence hadst thou thy Copy and Credit thereof And what Persons that are no Parties nor Adversaries to us will attest thine to be true and an intire Copy according to Jo. Cole's original Letter 4 thly If thou canst not produce the Original then what validity is thy Charge of if the Credit of all the Copies thou canst produce be called in question for want of impartial Witnesses or the Original to compare them with For I do really question the truth of thine and when thou givest an unquestionable Copy thereof probably I may give a further Answer for I doubt not but I can clear that honest Man Jos. Cole from giving any blasphemous Titles and that from his own printed Testimonies and G. F. also from receiving by his known publick Christian Profession unto Christ Jesus both as God and Man according to the Holy Scriptures And where and when did G. F. say in a Meeting I have power to bind and to loose whom I please p. 36. What Meeting and who are Witnesses of this Story I do not believe it To prove E. P.'s false Charge That they i. e. the Quakers say that Christ hath no Body but his Church Antichrist in Spirit p. 29. This being shewn not to be the Quakers Saying but something like it objected against One Person by some persecuting Priests as in Saul's Errand p. 2. Now E. P. again is fain to beg the Question and shuffle viz. And why may not G. F. deny Christ to have a personal Body besides or distinct from his Church as well as G. Whitehead Dip. pl. p. 13. Ans. I am the Person here falsly accused again they are none of my words or negation nor so much as mention'd in the place quoted in Dipper plung'd p. 13. but the terms God-man a person without thee question'd as not Scripture-Language answered before which was not on the Question Whether Christ hath a Body distinct from his Church Also answer'd presently Whereas E. P. objects against what I said in answer to Tho. Jenner's saying Christ sitteth at the right-hand of God in Heaven with a Natural Body And accusing us with saying Christ hath but one Body E. P. should have been so ingenuous as to have recited my whole Answer in that case in our Apology p. 33. quoted by him p. 37. and that will clear me from his impertinent Objection against the words viz. They should produce Scripture that say Christ hath two Bodies Here E. P. leaves out a Natural and a Spiritual which is very unfairly done And in the Question Where doth the Scripture say that Christ's glorified Body in Heaven is of Human Nature After Is he leaves out a Natural Body and as his terms are whereby I grant that Christ hath a Spiritual Glorious Body of his own Also E. P. takes no notice of my Explication in these words viz. If T. Jenner supposeth that we intend the Natural Bodies of Men to be the Body of Christ without distinguishing between them he is mistaken for the Natural Body and Spiritual Body are two And if Christ's Body in Heaven be Natural whose Body is it that is Spiritual Glorious c is it Christ's yea or nay And I further add in my Answer Apol. p. 34. If so be Christ's Body in Heaven be Natural then where the Apostle said he shall change the Body of our lowness that it may be fashion'd like unto his glorious Body Phil. 3. This were all one in Jenner's sense as to say he shall change and fashion our Body which is Natural like unto his Natural Body c. By all which I grant Christ's own glorious Body in Heaven distinct from those natural Bodies of Men on Earth though I must own a Spiritual Vnion or Oneness between that and his Church so as his Body in its Fulness is but One Body And in my Appendix to reason against Railing p. 23. I plainly confess I believe he hath a Spiritual glorious Body distinct from all these earthly sublunary Bodies and that the Heaven that must receive him is above and larger than the Hearts of Men Append. p. 24. To E. P.'s repeating that J. Parnell calls Water-Baptism a formal Imitation and Invention of Men and now addeth that He J. P. saith so p. 37. whereas it was plainly shewn him that he did speak this of Sprinkling Infants which E. P. calls Baptism and yet saith the Name Anabaptists belongs not to them p. 13. And why so If Sprinkling Infants be Baptism are you not Anabaptists when you Re-baptize them or Baptize them again