Spiritual c. Of this false Doctrine G. K. complained to the Quarterly Meeting at Philadelphia but no Answer could he have nor no blame nor condemnation must pass against their Brother J. Humphery for this false Doctrine tho' its near six Years since these Letters were writ Well Reader This is a Taste of the Doctrine and Faith of our Delaware Quakers though as I said before we hear the contrary Doctrine is now preached in London and thou mayst expect to find much more such like false Doctrine Clashes and Contradictions in the ensuing Treatise And I should have been glad if I could been easie without detecting the same but I have now done it and have it may be the last I shall be concerned in And whatever maâ—â—e my lot for this I am content knowning my Intentions proceeding herein to be honest and sincere Amen D. L. The Contents THe Introduction page 1. Chap. 1. The Dis-harmony Clashes and Contradictions of the Quakers in both their antient and later Writings p. 4. Chap. 2. Of Opposition at Vnity p. 46. Chap. 3. A short Summary of Citations from the Quakers Books shewing that they deny Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ p. 52. Chap. 4. Of calling Names for Religion p. 55. Chap. 5. Of Prophecyes p. 59. Chap. 6. Of Infallible Discerning p 61. Chap. 7. Of the Scriptures p. 68. Chap. 8. Of Magistracy and Government p 77. Chap. 9. O Persecution and Prosecution p 81. Chap 10. Friends Sufferings to be recorded by London Meeting p. 91. Chap. 11. Of Swearing p. 97. Chap. 12. Of Fighting Swearing and paying Tythes p. 202. Chap. 13. Of Miracles p. 810 Chap. 14. Of Life and Doctrine p. 113. Chap. 15. Sabbath Day Wheel turned round p. 118. An Appendix p. 121 Of In alliâ—lity p. 129 Oâ— Temporizing p. 130 Concerning Papists p. 134. A Postscript by way of Question to the Leaders of my Old Fâ—iends p. 137. A Proposition to meet our Adversaries in a publick Meeting concerning the matters contained in this Book p. 140. A Copy of a Letter sent to the Author by a Person of Note p. 142. INTODVCTION EXperience shews That the Quakers have always been exceeding Clamorons against those who have opposed any of their Doctrines especially in those books whose Authors are dead And yet notwithstanding no Christian Professors are moâ—e guilty than themselves not only of condemning Doctrines of Persons that are dead as diver of their Books testify but also guilty of Censâ—ring Persons too after their decease especially such as have been their opposers For this take one Example from W Penn viz. Reason against Raiâ—ing p. 163. Tho. Hicks complaining of E. Burroughs for giving ill Names to P. Bennit for asking Questions of the Quakers W. P. makes Thomas Hicks this Reply viz. 'T is Wicked with a witness and like a most irreligions Miscreant indeed God is my Record this day I would not to inherit more Worlds than there are Stars in the Firmament have so violated the Laws of Charity against the most violent of our deceased Opposers Vngodly Traducer whose Envy no doubt has fire enough in it to burn this good mans bones c. Note at what a rate he goes on considering the cause more like a Domineering Ranter then a meek and humble Quaker seeing himself is really guilty of Censuring and inveighing at â— Perrot one of there deceased Opposers as may be seen in his Book call'd Judas and the Jews And yet I know not that he got so much by so doing as to pay one Debt and much less so many Worlds as there are Stars in the Firmament but having not the Book at hand to cite particulars I 'll set down what John â—aylâ— and Jo. Feild Brethren of W. P say of the said Perrot after his decease p. 9. of their Loving Invitation viz. J. Perrot say they became a Troubler and Opposer and lost the Vnity of Friends in general and so was cut off from the Vine Christ and dyed miserably being in debt as the say See now here they censure one of there deceased Opposers to Damnation Behold the self-condemnation of these men their want of charity to the deceased Where has any of their Opposers been so Vncharitable to any of them after death especially But my present business is not at all about the Dead neither about Men nor Things that are Dead but against confused Doctrines now living viz. owned patronized and justified by men now living as witness the late general account given in the City Merurcy or News Book by the 24 Quakers at London And W. Bayly p. 568. opposing some Doctrine of a Quaker who was dead says As for that which is dead I have little to say one way or other I look not sayes he at the Person of any Living or Dead in that respect but it is that that lives that makes the difference And just as W Bayly sayes so it is For those citations following are the Doctrines of those now living tho' some of the first Authors be dead And my care has been to cite the Passages so large as to deliver the plain and full sense and meaning of their Authors to all intelligent Readers as they will find who please to examine and compare the same impartially But if through my distance from the Press some Errors or Escapes should pass Uncorrected I desire the candid Readers excuse or pardon seeing none are designed Lastly Whereas some Preachers of late to eyâ—se such confused Doctrines as follow tell the People That 't is easie to find seeming Contradictions in the Scriptures And why then may it not be so in our Friends Books To which I say they themselves in their Books give the reason why 't is so with the Scriptures which reason cannot hold as to their Books for W. Penn takes up several pages in his Rejoynder to shew to J. Faldo the Uncertainty of the Scriptures bringing Reasons to Prove them not the same as given forth but altered and corruptud so Joan Whitehead to the same effect in Refuge fixed also G. Whitehead in divers Books and S. Fisher at large in Rusticus c. all which shall be shewed hereafter Now this cannot be alledged of their Books because we have the first Impression of them and therefore they cannot be altered or corrupted So that this is too short a cover for this Mystry of Confusion which I desire all sober Readers well to Note Having thus premised shall now proceed to note some of the Contradictions and Clashes of the Quakers as I find them set down in their antient and latter Writings with some Observations on the same CHAP. I. The Dis-harmony Clashes and Contradictions of the Quakers in both their antient and latter Writings Numb I. SAnâ—y Foundat p. 13. W. P. saith Since the Father is God and the Son is God the Spirit 〈…〉 unless the Fathers 〈◊〉 and holy Ghost are 3 distirct Nothings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be â—â—eâ— distinct S. â—â—â—ances
consequently three distinct Gods Qrs. Plainness p. 2â— G. W. saith That the Distinction of the Father and Son are not only Nominal but Real Note here if G. W's Real distinction do not make the Father Son distinct Substances But W. Penn tells him they are distirct nothings Reconcile these who can Numb II. Quakers Plainness p. 24. G. W. saith we own that the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father And also that the Son is the mighty God the Everlasting Father the Prince of Peace Sandy Foundation p. 14. W. Penn saith If the only God is the Father and Christ be the only God then is Christ the Father which is Ridiculous and Shamefull Note how W P. calls his Brother Whitehead's Doctrine Ridiculous Shamefull Numb III. Qrs. plainness p. 19. G W. there declares that they cannot deviate from Scripture Phrase in their Creed For untill you bring us plain Scripture saith he that saith the humane Nature is the Christ which phrase is conscientiously scrupled we must rather patiently bear your censure than deviate from Scripture Language in our Creed But in p. 18. G. W. sayes Have we not plainly and often confest than the divine Nature or word cloathed with the most holy Manhood was and is the Christ Note cloathed with the most holy Manhood is not Scripture Language on phrase so that here he deviates from Scripture Language in his Creed in the very next page Pray what is this but Hypocrisie Numb IV. Sandy Founda p. 22. W. Penn saith Since Christ could not pay what was not his own Debt it follows that in the payment of his own the case still remains equally grievous since the debt is not hereby absolved or forgmen but transfered only Divi. of Christ Ans â—â— T. D. p. 16. How false and Blasphemous says G. W. this charge is against Christ I appeal to all sober Professors of Christianity viz. That when God required Satisfaction of Christ is was due from Christ. Now observe That as before W. P. Renders Geo. Whitehead's Doctrine Ridiculous Shamefull so here G. W. renders W. Penns Doctrine basphemous for holding that Christ had a Debt of his own to satisfy to God as W. P. more laregly affirms p. 22. of his Sandy Foundat Therefore as G. W. in his Quakers plainness p 20 says Pray you â—aptists agree upon a consistent Creed that you intend to stand by so now the Bapâ—â—sts may say Pray you Quakers agree upon a consistent Creed that you intend to stand by c. Again I cannot but observe that though G. Whitehead as before pretends that they concientiously scruple to deviate from Scripture Language or phrase yet I have not met with one Book of controversie that G. W. has written but he himself diviates from Scripture phrase herein Likewise in Divinity of Christ by G. W. and G. Fox they begin in the Epistle with Commanding and charging Professors to bring express Scripture for their Doctrine saying whether do the Scriptures speak of three Persons in the Godhead in these express words Let us see where it is written Comâ— do not shuffle for we are resolved the Scripture shall buffet you about And where doth the Scripture speak of a Humane Nature of Christ in Heaven And where doth the Scripture say the Soul is part of mans Nature Give us plain Scripture without adding or diminishing Come let us see Chapter and verse c. Now may not the Professors say Come G. W. Come Quakers where doth the Scripture say the Distinction of Father and Son is not only Nominal but Real in these express words Let us see where it is written Come do not shuffle And where doth the Scripture speak or say the divine Nature cloathed with the most holy Manhood was and is the Christ And where doth thâ— Scrip-say these words The Light within every man Give us plain express Scripture for this your first and grand Principle of all without adding or diminishing Come let us see Chapter and Verse seeing you pretend you cannot deviate from Scripture phrase in your Creed Besides if G. W. does not hereby mean deceit and hypocrisie for what end does he pretend they cannot own this or that in their Creed if it be expressed in plain Scripture seeing they so often and plainly testify that the Scripture is not their Rule but the light within is their rule in Faith But for Professors to call for Scripture is but according to their principles because they own it for their rule Numb V. Sandy Founda p. 15. W. P. saith In the fullness of time God sent his Son who so many hundred years since in PERSON testified the virtue c. Quakers plainness p. 24. G. W saith The Title PERSON is too low and unscriptural to give to the Christ of God Numb VI. E. Burroughs p. 142. J. Buâ—joâ— said How are they deceived who own Christ no otherwayes then as he was before the world began E. B. Replys Here then hast discovered thy selâ— more plainly Did not the Saints own Christ Jesus the same yesterday to day and for ever for Salvation Quakers vindication p. 16. by G. Bishop We distinguish between Christ which was before the Foundation of the World and his being within the true Light the Body which he took of the Virgin c. Note here G. B. owns Christ otherwayes For Salvation than as he was before the world began for he makes 3 distinctions of Châ—ist Numb VII R. Huberthorns works p. 20. Preist says Christ himself was not capable of Faith and Repentance R. H. Replys Here I Charge thee to be a Lyar and a Slanderer for he was capable of Faith and Repentance Divinity of Christ Ans to T. D. p. 22. Christ he never did nor could sin says G. Whitehead Note does not G. W. here hold Christ not capable of sin And how then was he capable of Repentance Numb VIII Quakers Challenge by Solomon Ecclâ—s George Fox whose Name says he thou art neâ— worthy to take in thy Mouth who is a Prophet indeed It was said of Christ that he was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not so it may be said of this true Prophet whom John said he was not But thou wilt feel this Prophet one day as heavy as a Milstone upon thee c. G. W. excuses this in his serious search p. 58. Book call'd Ishmael c. p. 9. by G. W. One said It is all one to say the Scripture faith and God saith G. W. Replys Thou Blasphemous Beast dost thou make no difference between the Scripture and God! Here let all that reads this see thy Blasphemy Note upon what occasions they revile others for Blasphemy But G. W. excuses that real Blasphemy in his Brother S. E. and only sayes 'T is a little failure in syntax But let G. Whitehead tel me If a man should affirm it is all one to say His Book Ishmael saith and the
Spirit of God saith Whether this would be blasphemy since he asserts in the Title page That it was given forth from the Spirit of the Lord Pray Reader take good Notice of this for he can no ways answer it without baffling himself Numb IX G. F's Great Mystr p. 264 264 283. Priest sayes A man by his own power cannot get into Regeneration for they are dâ—ad in sâ—at and Trespasses G. F. Replys Some are sanctified from the Womb and some Children are holy so all are not dead in sins and trespasses and some Children were born of Believers And p. 355. Believers are the holy so the Believers Children A new Creation a holy Generation Divin of Christ Ans to T. D. p. 20. G. W. says Condemnation came upon all men Death past upon all men for that all have sinned p 24. Again Christ dyed for all so all were dead in Sins and Trespasses c. Note is not here a little failure in syntax too else how is it that G W. contradicts G F. a Proâ—â—es indeed But pray take a view and see if the Children of believers in the Light are not Children of Wrath too as well as others or let us know by what Marks we shall distinguish their Children to be a holy Generation Numb X. Jos Coal Ans to â—o New-man p. 332. If by the Body of Flesh which Christ had he means his Church then I am one with him for his having that Body after his Ascention I never denyed nor intend to do and such a Body we own Christ had after his ascention Again W. P. Rejoynder p. 312 The true Church is become Christs Body Again in Refuge fixt p 90 41. Christ hath a Body or is in a Body suitable to his Spirit consisting of heavenly flesh and Bone Again he saith Wheresoever the Spirit of Christ is that is in the Body of Christ. I. Pennington Quest p. 20. For that which Christ took upon him was our Garment even the flesh and blood of our Nature which is of an earthly perishing Nature but he is of an Eternal Nature Mark Tho' nothing be of an Eternal Nature but God yet here one holds Christs Body of Flesh and Bones to be such whilst the other holds the Church to be his Body But pray had the Church no beginning Can that be Eternal But this and the rest in these Passages let who can explain and reconcile them for it passes my skill to do it Numb XI Saul's Errand by G.F. p. 14. Christ is one substance of all Figures and HIS FLESH is a Figure But I. Pennington as above holds his Flesh to be of an Eternal Nature Note the Contradiction and false Doctrine of both these or if G. W. please a FAILURE in Syntax Numb XII Chr. Quaker p. 97. by W. P. Now nothing can bruise the head of the Serpent but something that is also internal as the Serpent is but if the Body of Christ were the Seed then could be not bruise the Serpents head in all because the Body of Christ is not so much as in any one and consequently the Seed of the Promise is an holy and spiritual Principle of Light Life Power that being receiv'd into the heart bruiseth the Serpents head because the seed which cannot he that Body is Christ Foundat of Tythes p. 238 240. by T. Ellwood Nor do the Quakers ascribe Salvation to the following the Light within but to Christ Jesus to whom the Light leads If any one expects Remission of sins by any other way than by the death of Christ renders the death of Christ useless Note the confused Clash of these 2 Champions W. Penn is for all the work to be done by the Light within T.E. denyes it to be done by the Light within no not so much as Remission of sins Numb XIII G. F's Catechism p 69. The Light within which they hate is their condemnation which is the Salvation of all that believe in it T. E. as above Nor do the Quakers ascribe Salvation to the following the Light within c. Come let 's see if T. Ellwood with all his Sophistry and false glosses can reconcile these two assertions Numb XIV Ed. Burroughs p. 285. J. Bunâ—on said These Qrs. believe that Salvation was not compleatly wrought out for sinners by the Man Christ Jesus E. B. answers Here thou art a Lyar. W. P. Reas age Rast. p. 16. saith The Light which in all ages was the just mans path is ever was ever will be sufficient and saving Thus also J. Coal p. 329. That Christ is not a Saviour as Man but as God Let W. Penn reconcile these if he can and tell us how the Light is the Man Numb XV. Ed. Burroughs p. 283. J. Bunion said The Qrs. perswade Souls That that Man that was born of the Virgln Mary is not above the stars E.B. answers This is another Lye Sword of the Lord dr p. 5. Your imagined God beyond the stars is utterly denyed restified against by the Light Pray compare these Also Note Sa. Jennings dissent from his Brethrens Religion unless he dissembles in scrupling to say Thou art a Lyar p. 34. state of the case Numb XVI Chr. Quaker by G. W. p. 212 The man's mistaken if the suppose that we plead for the Righteousness of a Creature i. e. Christ as Man or man 's own Righteousness which he himself is enabled to perform as the cause of our Justification c. W. P. 's Serious Apology p. 148. Death came by actual sin not imputative therefore Justification an of Life came by actual Righteousness not imputative Note Whether is the Error of both these or the Contradiction greater Numb XVII G. F's Great Mystery p. 248. There is no man self denyed and justified in the sight of God but by Christ alone Note Does not G.W. above oppose G F. here who holds Justification by the Man Christ unless it be proper to say God in the sight of God justifies man Numb XVIII W. P's Rejoynder p. 287 No present work how good soever can justifie any man from the Condemnation which is due for the guilt of sin that is past Sandy Foundat p 16 Gods Remission is grounded on our Repentance as above Justification in by actual Righteousness Note A Self-Contradiction unless Repentance actual Righteousness be no present work Numb XIX W. P's Rejoynder p. 300. That Body did not conâ—titute Christ he is invisible and ever was to Vngodly World Guide to the blind p. 49. Christs first appearance to the world was in the flesh and the fleshly eye saw HIM Just so the Priests as Fisher says Believe it one of these two ways Sometimes one way then another Sometimes both ways this and t'other See S. Fishers Works p. 748. Numb XX. G. W's Light Life p. 13 As to Christ being in every man that 's not our affirmation nor words but that there is a Light of Christ in every man W Smith 's Catechism p 57 That
the Debt of our sins as he is God because then the Father Spirit being God they also pay the Debt Nor not as Man he being Finite as above Nor not as God Man as W. P. in that page expresly affirms A Little of G. Whiteheads help here might do well to word the matter so as to reconcile this Doctrine of W. P. and G. F. Numb 56. R. B's Apology p. 95. Wherefore as we believe he Christ was a true and real Man so we also believe that he continues so to be glorified in the Heavens in Soul and Body Note W. P. says as above Christ as Man was finite viz. came to an end But here R.B. says he continues a real man in Soul Body so is not finite Chuse which of these you will believe Numb 57. G F's Gr. Mysâ—ry p. 90 Priest says There is a kind of Infiniteness in the Soul but it cannot be infiniteness in it self G F. answers Is not the Soul without beginning coming out from God returning into God again Note W. P. as above holds the Soul to be properly the man And here according to G F. this Man is without bâ—ginning if no beginnâ—â—g then no end which is not only Infinite â—ut also Eternal And yet Mark the Confusion W. P. before denys the Man Christ to be Infinite Numb 58. G. W's Div. of Christ p. 27. The God whom we serve and bâ—lieve in is infiniâ—e the only wise God and nothing relating to him or his being finite Sandy Foundat p. 20. W. P. there calls the Man Christ The Finite Impotent Creature Note the Clash unless the Man Christ be not relating to God Here I cannot but take notice that tho' W. Penn blasphemously calls the Man Christ the finite impâ—tent Creature yet he afterwards in his Reas against Rail a above and in other Books calls his Body a holy Body as if he thought that way to salve and excuse his former gross Doctrine or at least to hood-wiâ—k his Readers so as to let them see that he has so reverent esteem of Christ as to call his Body a holy Body after he haâ—â— so irreverently call'd his whole Man the finite impotent Creature Again I observe W.P. to be one with his 24 Brethren that in the City Mercury or News Book owns and and defends these sayings first in the Battledoor viz. All Languages are to me sayes G. F. no more but Dust who was before Languages were Next in J. Pâ—s Collection p. 199. But to the end of all Dâ—sputâ—s and Argumeâ—ts I am come for before they were I AM says James Parâ—ell To Pre-exist is to â—ave a being before where 't is plain the declare themselves at least to pre-exist and yet W. P. denys the Apostles to pre-exist for in his Rejoynder p. 299. he says Paul did not pre-exist Christ did Now is not this a setting themsâ—lves above the Apostles and equal with Christ For Christ pre-existed G. Fox and Ja. Parnell pre-existed but Paul did not pre-exist says VV. P. Nay further I find in pag. 1. of the Book of the two women at Malta D. Baker is not only for having his Friends the Quakers to pre-exist but also declares them to be Eternal saying O ye Eternal and blessed Ones whilest the man CHRIST must be calld The finite impotent Creature by this high and elevated dust and ashes VV. Penn. I shall now return to insert a few more Contradictory Clashes and so haste to another head Numb 59. W. P's Rejoynder p. 13 That Christ his coming was but Mark but to bring the world to a more improved knowledge and large enjoyment of that divine Power Wisdom Life and Righteousness which former Ages had comparatively but an obscure sight and imperfect sence of And p. 296-300 he justifies this saying viz. That which Christ took upon him was but a Garment even the flesh blood of our Nature which is of an earthly perishing Nature Truths Principles by J. Crook If Christ had not â—yed Man must have peâ—ished in sin this being the way found out by God to recover him Note Here 's one Christian he grants the merit of Christs coming and Death But W.P. makes the benefit of his coming to be no more but to shew man more plain what he saw before as through a glass perhaps thinks he mends â—he matter by often calling the Body A holy Body whilst yet he renders that earthly perishing Numb 60. G. F's Gr. Mystry p. 222. Priest says Câ—rtâ—â— is witâ—out his Saints in respect of his Bodily presence G. F. answers Hâ—w then are they of his flesh and his bone W. P. Chr. Quaker p. 97. The Body of Christ is not so much as in any one Note This W P. is still clashing against G. F. almost on every hand Numb 61. W. P's Address to Protestants p. 119. Let us saith he but soberly consider what Christ is and we shall the better know whether Moral men are to be reckoned Christians What is Christ but Meekness Justice Mercy Patience Charity Virtue in Perfection Note Tho' W. P. Allegoriâ—es Christ and makes him nothing but Virtues yet his Brother G. W. tells W. Hâ—râ—orth as above â—hat Christ is something else viz. a MAN consisting of Spirit Soul body the same Body as dyed or he only words the matter so to deceive the People Observe now That tho' these two mens Books quarrel about Doctrine yet they agreâ— in praising one another for G VV. in Qrs. plainnesâ— p 5 calls VV. P. A sincere hearted and zealous Man and VV. P in one of his Books does as â—uch for G. VV. And 't is abundance of Books these two men have written yea more by halâ— than ever I have seen nor do I desire to see them for truly I find Confusion enough in those I have seen yea more than I intend to â—emonstrate at this time here being enough to shew the reason why they have not profited the People at all W Penn says Christ left nothing in writing Chr. Quak. p 114 Christ wrote no Books But they have not followed his Example in this and yet he says Christ was their Example But Note further tho' W. P. will have Moral men to be Christians yet R. Habberthorn denys that Christ oâ— Gods gift is obtained by moral means and in p 33. he calls them Lyars that so affirm So let the Reader judge who is the Lyar in this case Again I cannot but mind W. P 's devised distinction and unscriptural Expression if it were no worse in calling the Man Christ The FINITE and IMPOTENT Creature and yet G. VV. in his Introduction to Divinity of Christ says We judge that such Expressions and words as the holy ghost taught the Apostles and holy Men mentioned in the Scriptures are most meet to speak of GOD and CHRIST and not the words of mans VVisdom and devised Distinctions since the Apostles days Now is not here a doublâ— face they carry in seeming
discern But which is to be lamented some are so blinded by their Preachers crying out All is Lyes that they 'll scarce believe thâ—se things No not this of Rob. Ewer tho Publickly proved Take one Passage more for Infallible Discerning from Richard Hubberthorns Works patroniz'd by G. W. and others p. 21â— he there tells a Priest That they are Lyars that say the Ministers of the Gospel do not know who are Elect for they could discern the Elect from the World So these Teachers that know not the Elect says he and yet exhort all their Hearers to believe and lay hold on Christ their preaching iâ— vain And these Priests says he tho' they take Sums of Money of their Hearers yet they know not who are elect among them Come on my old Friends come prove your selves try your selves and let us know next time you print whether by this your Rule there be one Gospel Minister now left amongst you But to wheel round about and knock all down again W. Penn says in his Rebuke p 22. We ascribe not Infallabiliâ— to Men but to the Grace of God and to men SO FAR as they are led by it Behold Reader and note this Rhetorick well For are not other Professors yea ALL men in the world SO FAR â—nfailable as well as Quakers here W. P. has given away the Quakers cause and set them on even ground with others But says G. W. I cannot give away our cause for we have sufficient evidence of discerning of Spirits Timerous Râ—viler p. 3. Thus George thinks fit to keep up his Confidence with bare Say so 's though he cannot but know that the world knows his Say so 's to be false And I have known a silly Women cheat their pretended Spirit of discerning who travelled from Meeting to Meeting through several Counties being bravely received entertained by Friends undâ—scerned till discovered to be no Quaker by others And such things as these has made them find out a way to help their Spirit of Discerning by admitting none now to travel on Truths account as they call it without Certificates so that tho' G. W. in Qua. plainness c. tells us They have a Record in Peoples Consciences yet now they must have a Record in their Pockets or else I 'll assure them their Friends will not receive them by their Conscience Record Let them deny this if they dare and tell me how many Friends comes over Sea hither or goes hence to other Countries to preach by their Conscâ—ences Record without their Pockeâ— Record And thus is G. W 's Dec it seen with their Sufficient Evidenâ— of Spirituall Discerning aforesaid Baâ— had almost forgot how that of late years their infaâ—â—ibility seems to be run out of particular Persons into the Body of Friends or Church as G W demonstrates in his Apost nâ—end p. 4 16. there he declares them the Quakers To be THE People and Church of God and so to be Infallible and CANNOT ERR noâ— be deceived But where is this Body of Church sure not that Meeting of Ministers at Robert Ewer's House in Philadelphia No Sam. Jenings lets us know 't is at London for in his Speech at that Yearly Meeting 1694 he declared That the Meeting in America depended on that at London So then it seems the Meâ—â—ings else-where are but Members of that Body at London and 't is clear that the Members so depend on the Body that if the Body dyes the Members cannot live This indeed is the Foundation Principle of Old Rome And here Samuell Jeâ—ings has shewed us where New-Rome is Indeed I lately read how that the Quakers in England presented six Publick Addresses to the late King James in four years time but in five years that King WILLIAM had reigned they had not presented one to him And dous not this then shew that those Quakers who thus addressed King James are as near a kin to the Papists as Sam Jenings I also read one thing more viz. That the Pope once set up Womens Meetings for the increase of Faith among the Waldenses and I cannot find that ever any else has done the like beside Geo. Fox c. and yet I have searched the Scriptures and some Church Histories too and 't is pitty that they have no other President but the Pope for those Meetings are certainly of service in Deeds of Charity and Hospitality In divers other things there seems a very great Harmony between Old Rome and Sam. Jenings's New Rome which I am not desirous to repeat now This know for certain Friends that the way to recover the deceived is to discover lay open and witness against the Deceivers see T. Elwood's Epist p. 72. Therefore since this Truth has chanced to drop from T. E's Pen I shall add that though my old Friends oft bless themselves thus viz. WE are redeemed from a vain Life Conversation more than any Society in Christendom WE are the ONLY Proâ—essors of Truth and WE are in the Truth and ALL OTHER Professors are OUT of the Truth Land so says the Pharisees We are not as other men We give Alms We Fast twice a week c. Yet I must now say for them We Quakers do not nor never did out-do the Papists in general as to Life Conversation but herein the Righteousness of Papists Quakers doth so harmonize that it made the late King James say as I have an account in his discourse one with R. Barclay That if he were disposed to change his Religion he would turn Quaker No marvel then why But I cannot well oâ— it giving one instance more about the Foundation Principle of Old Râ—me or top stone of Popery See Plain Dealing c. by P. Living stone page 12 20 22 where treating about that he calls the form of Truth viz. giving the Hand the Hat and going to Meetings he says Friends that stand in the Life and are in the Body know that there is not NOR CANNOT be preservation out of the Body for they that are out of the Body of Friends are out of the Faith And the Lord hath chosen the Quakers a peculiar People above ALL People upon the Earth and we are to turn to no other People c. Mark just so the Papists say There is no Salvation or Preservation out of the Body or Church And that they must believe as the Church believes or they cannot be saved as he further says p. 23. They that believe not as the true Church believes CANNOT be saved but this we know of an infallible Certainty that WE being faithful in the Truth those that are gone from us are of another Spirit and Not of the Faith of the TRVE Church The very same the Papists say WE are the true Church and All that are gone from us are not of the Faith of the true Church Pray consider where these Quakers are And also whether Old Rome can lay a greater Necessity on such low exteenal Ceremonies as the Hand