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 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
of proving the Charge That G. F. takes the Name to himself he alledges That G. F. is so charged in the Lancaster Petition G. F. is so charged with taking to himself the Name of the Eternal Judge of Quick and Dead Though here E. P. misses again He is there charged That he professeth himself to be the Eternal Judge of the World And who did so charge him But his Persecuting Adversaries in Lancashire whose Charge he denies in the very Title of his Answer thereunto as well as in the Matter viz. The Answer of George Fox to the Matters falsly charged upon him by the Petition and Scedule aforesaid Now Edward Paye mayest thou not be ashamed to make that thy positive Charge to Defame a Person which thou hast but upon Trust from his Adversaries without taking notice of his Defence Was this Justice or any Judicial Course of Passing Judgment before both Parties are heard thinkest thou It seems thou art as Censorious as Credulous to defame others And how knowest thou the Lancaster Petitioners were Men of Credit and Repute that thou shouldest have more Reason to believe the Affirmative of so many than G. F 's Negative And why wast thou so positive in thy Charge as if thou hadst spoken ex certa scientia when now thou art put to it to plead the Credit of thy Authors and for the Reason of thy Belief of their Defamation Now who can think sayest thou that such a Number of Men should agree together in Charging G. Fox with a Falshood Although it is well known that 't is no New nor strange Thing for False Witnesses to arise and joyn together against the Innocent as they did against the Prophets against Christ and his Servants See Psal. 27.12 Matt. 26.60 Act. 6.13 And we have sufficient Instance thereof at Hand How apparent is it that Edward Paye and his Brother William Alcott c. and those that have approved of the Writing and Publication of E. P's Malicious Book stiled Antichrist in Spirit have agreed together as False Witnesses against us in their manifold notorious and gross Falshoods to Defame the People called Quakers That the Quakers do not own the Kingly Office of Christ that Dyed at Jerusalem no more no nor so much neither as the Kingly Office of G. Fox pag. 47 48. We utterly deny this Charge as contrary to our very Intentions and professed Principle The Matter is farther examined hereafter That they deny the Place where Christ our Highpriest is entred which is the Heavens Heb. 4.14 The Quakers deny Christ to be entred into the Glorious Heavens above p. 49. This is a notorious Falshood detected elswhere They deny the Blood of the Sacrifice Christ our High Priest offered upon the Cross and scornful Contempt they have cast upon it p. 50. The Lord who knows the contrary rebuke this Envious Lying Spirit How can they deny the Blood when they have owned it to be a principal Part of that Sacrifice offered for an Attonement The Quakers cannot believe the Priestly or Mediatory Office of Christ because they have no need of a Mediator If they are Perfect c. what need have they of the Mediatory Office of Christ p. 51. This Charge is falsly deduced for our sincerely believing a Perfection without Sin attainable by the Power of Christ in this Life this cannot oppose Christ's Mediatory Office 1. Because 't is by him that we attain unto that Perfection 2. 'T is by him that we must be kept in it 3. It is through him that we enjoy Life Union and Peace with God and receive all our Spiritual Blessings In Christ Jesus See Parnel 's Shield of Truth p. 12. where he calls Water-Baptism a Formal imitation and Invention of Men and so a meer Delusion p. 59. No He does not call Water Baptism so but sprinkling Infants for in the Place cited he saith I received Water upon my Face as my Parents told me which they called Baptism So that J. P. does not call it Baptism no more did the Baptists heretofore Smith's Primmer p. 39. Thy Baptism Bread and Wine rose from the Pope's Invention p. 59. Again the Charge is made far worse in E. P's recital of it viz. Thy Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper are the Pope's Invention See how barefacedly they can lye against the Truth p. 71. I find William Smith wronged in both these Charges and that very grossly in being charged for writing That Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper are the Pope's Invention This is a notorious Forgery for what William Smith renders the Pope's Invention was Sprinkling Water in a Child's Face making the Sign of the Cross in it's Forehead Godfathers and Godmothers to undertake for it Bread and Wine so used and received i.e. by a Sort of Priests and People as the Body and Blood of Christ which they tell them is Broken and shed for them and did not these rise from the Pope's Invention trow ye In opposition to our Belief and Profession of Christ's Merits and Work for the Salvation of Man our Envious Adversaries endeavour to fasten some strange Inconsistencies upon us or Absurdities as I may call them as perversly Stated and Construed by them quite contrary to our said Profession and to insinuate that our Belief of Redemption and Salvation by Christ is neither Redemption of Body nor Soul but only of a lost God and Christ p. 41 42. which are very Foul and Notorious Perversions and Falshoods One Instance E.P. gives is against G.F. about the Soul that it is part of God without Beginning or End and then it needs no Redemption for God did not send his Son to Redeem himself p. 41. This gross Perversion was Thomas Hicks's and now taken upon Credit by these too credulous Anabaptists E. P. W. A. c. But did G. F. say That the Soul of the Creature Man was part of God or of his being without Beginning or End No sure but that Divine Breath or Spirit which God Breathed into Man whereby Man became a Living Soul Wherein is a plain Distinction between that Divine Breath or Spirit of God and the Creature Man or his created Soul as may be seen more at large in G. F's Great Mystery quoted where he speaks of the Soul of Man being in Death in Transgression so Man's Spirit there not Sanctified and declares Christ the Bishop of the Soul Great Mystery p. 91. which therefore needs Redemption by Christ which cannot be said of God or Christ himself that he Needs or Wants Redemption what Gross and Silly Nonsense would that be to affirm These Adversaries may be ashamed of such gross Perversion and Abuse as their thus rendring the Quakers to confound the Being of the Creator and the Creature as if they were one and the same Being Another Instance is against G. Keith Speaking of Christ That he came to Save that which was Lost in Man's Heart and after speaking of Christ's Ministers
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
and yet I did not call you Anabaptists on that score nor in derision as is wrongfully suggested p. 12. but only for distinction-sake my words at first being the People commonly called Anabaptists p. 1 'T is far from me to design any derision or to put any ridicule upon the People so called from E. Paye's particular abuses for I hope as some of them are more honest than himself so many of them will be ashamed of his malicious Pamphlets tho' he pretends the Approbation of several since p. 38. which we have little cause to credit without their own testimony for some eminent among that People have declared their dislike of his work already And it will be far more for their credit and reputation to stop him from his scribling to defame others than to suffer him to persist therein And as to his Challenging any to charge and prove against him any thing unbecoming a Man and a Christian respecting either Life or Principles Human Frailties excepted p. 38. I ask him if to bear false witness against his Neighbours to belie slander and defame them to take up reproaches against them to pervert and corrupt their words to gather up credit and publish their Adversaries malicious Defamations against them all which E. P. is proved notoriously guilty of be either becoming a Man or a Christian or be to do as he would be done unto What an easie matter is it for a wicked person to write malicious Pamphlets at that rate Or must these Enormities be reputed only as Human Frailties Will his Religion and Conscience allow him to slander to lie to defame others and yet for all that to be a moral Man and good Christian and Minister to others I am sure the just God will not so esteem him nor any one else in such a state Upon a serious View and Observation of the Method which he E. Paye c. has taken up against the People commonly call'd Quakers I find it thus 1. To quote and cite divers of their Adversaries Invectives against them 2. To mis-cite and abuse some of their own Authors Books and Writings against them sometimes leaving out the most emphatical Expressions in the middle and sometimes in the end of a Sentence and many times the most explanatory part of their Answers thereby greatly altering perverting and corrupting matters contrary both to the Authors own Words and Expressions 3. To invent and forge notorious falshoods contrary to our express Christian Profession and Perswasion 4. From such indirect and unjust Premises to draw his own perverse and evil Consequences against the People called Quakers in general to render them and their whole Society and Profession as odious and obnoxious as he can 5. Divers of his Authors to whom he has given credit and whose odious defamations he has raked up against us were persecuting Priests and others of party with them who were as much enemies to the Baptists as to us and long since answered and refuted 6. He is so credulous as he seems to take all for granted that such Adversaries have maliciously writ against us but in many cases takes no notice of our Answers to them and where he doth he is very subject to pervert mince curtailize and abuse them as before Now I am perswaded the Ministers and People of the baptized Societies would not be thus served after such injurious Methods And to me and divers others 't is a wonder that those Ministers and Elders of that Society who appear more discreet and judicious than this injurious Adversary E. P. do not give a severe check to him and put a stop to his perverse and contentious Scribling tending to Strife and to aggravate Divisions and cause Animosities among Neighbours and to make Breaches wider among People and rather seek Peace Mutual Love and Charity among all for I must tell them these crooked Methods which E. P. takes will be no small disrepute and disparagement to them that are of the same Society with him or that own him as a Brother or Minister among them And since in conclusion of his last he has given us a Threat as if he would frighten us That if he be foolishly provoked we may it is like have a quarterly Packet to keep our Fame in remembrance And truly if he will be so foolish as to be foolishly provoked or to make a foolish Provocation the ground of his Packets or Pamphlets against us we shall have little cause to be affrighted or deterred by his Threat from making our Just Defence and now since he has so loudly alarum'd us he has given us occasion to watch him narrowly and warily really believing he 'l make no great earnings of such his undertaking nor advantage of his atchievements but bring Infamy upon himself and an unnecessary Charge upon others and be no small Disparagement to his own Society I have traversed the Controversies long since and I bless God that he has made me a Witness for his Truth and for Christianity in Life and Power even from my Youth upward against Deceit Envy and Hypocrisie that I have seen in these our Adversaries and Opposers what personal Detractions or Reflections I meet withal I value not my Innocence and Christian Conversation being well known to many and my inward Peace with the Lord in my own Conscience but wherein I find the Truth abused and God's Heritage reproached I am constrained in God's holy Fear and Zeal to stand up for Truth and in its Vindication against its Adversaries and Gainsayers and their Contradictions and hope ever shall so long as the Lord gives Life and Ability And I humbly thank the Lord my God who hath hitherto helped and supported me and many more in his Work and Service and in Christian Love and Good-will towards all Men. G. Whitehead The Conclusion I Have hitherto been mostly on the Defensive Part to remove these Adversaries Calumnies and Misrepresentations of our Principles much I have to except against divers of their Unsound Doctrines particularly about the great stress they lay on their Water-Baptism and what they call The Lord's Supper 't is easy to make it appear that they exactly run parallel with the Rhemists in the manner of their defending ther Water-Baptism and the great Weight they place upon it contrary to Scripture and the Doctrine of the Ancient Protestants Please to take a View of some of these Baptists Doctrines and some brief Observations and Questions upon them as followeth 1. That by Baptism i. e. Water-Baptism we must put on Christ and so become Members of his Mystical Body Heirs of the Promise of the Holy Spirit c. Antichrist in Spirit p. 69. Observ. This is Popish Doctrine and contrary-to the Apostle's See 1 Cor. 12 13. 2. That the highest Attainments or greatest Measures of the Holy Spirit do but fit Men for Gospel Ordinances p. 64. Whereof their Water-Baptism is rendred a Sacred or Holy one p. 57 63. Qu. Where doth the Scriptures say That