him And why did J. Faldo attempt it Certainly he did not design to confound T. Hicks To all this Confusion of his let me add his Vntruth He chargeth me with telling him at the Barbican-Meeting when he began to speak I was not there to dispute with him which is false to a Title Either his Ears were as infirm as his Voice was low or else he saith this to serve his present occasion however I said no such thing but understanding it to be him that spoak from some better acquainted with his * person I answered Thus the Noise of the Multitude was so great We could not hear what he said Though had I given that Answer he made for me I think it had been very reasonable since he never told us That he was One of the four besides more then that fixt Number had spoaken before him That the Quakers should clamour Hicks Hicks to answer my End and force his Silence is as true as the rest It was the Multitude that frequently and importunately cryed Hicks Hicks Hicks as looking upon it unreasonable that one who had shown himself so arch in abusing us should pretend such Inability to answer our Charge as that other Folks must mostly mannage his Affair But that to silence him was to answer my End is both to tell A and proclaim the good Opinion he has of himself as if it stood our Cause so much upon to have him silent and T. Hicks speak Poor T. Hicks this was not kindly done of J. F. but perhaps he meant it of his better Elocution and Skill in stating the Question recommended to us in his Curb to my Confidence Modest Man that he would be thought But what saith he to this part of my fair Offer That if in any thing his Charge be singular we should be ready to debate it at the same Meeting or Meetings with the Baptists to avoid Vnnecessary Contests since most of the Particulars of his Charge are taken in by the Controversie depending between us and the Baptists It is not only an Vntruth sayes J. F. but a meer Shift for in the One and Twenty Proposals to be debated by them there is not one of the Particulars of my Charge Besides in Position to be disputed on not only the Matter but the Form and each Term is of great Consideration Which is as much as to say if I understand J. Faldo's Meaning that after we have disputed the Matter of the same Questions with T. H. and his Three Assistants they must be disputed over again upon J. Faldo's new Model which one Nice and Humorsom Impertinency shall make Disputes both Endless and Useless Let him bestow his Skill upon T. Hicks his Cause wants it and do their utmost together But he would fasten an Untruth upon me for saying that most of the Particulars of his Charge are taken into that Controversie affirming That in our One and Twenty Proposals there was not one of the Particulars of his Charge To which I need say no more but this The Charge we exhibited against T. Hicks contain'd so many particular Charges I grant they related to Matter of Fact and in that sense the Particulars of J. Faldo's Charge against us were not explicitly there yet they that please to read what follows the One and Twenty Particulars as given in to the Baptists exhibited and read at Barbican and since printed in our first Account they will find that we offer after a full Consideration and Determination upon the foresaid Particulars to come to Doctrinal Points which are chiefly in Controversie between us and them upon T. Hicks 's Three Dialogues and I hope J. Faldo is not grown quite so desperate as to deny that most if not all the Particulars of his Charge fall in with T. Hicks's Attempts against us and that materially too I have heard as if such a Confession was one part of his Speech at the first Barbican-Meeting However if he denyes their Endeavours to have been so harmonious I offer to prove them so but could I not do it yet I made Provision for him wherein his Case is singular Besides I desire the Reader to take notice I did not say the Particulars of J. Faldo's Charge were exprest in the Catalogue of our Charge of Matter of Fact against T. Hicks but that they fell in with the Controversie which word Controversie takes in both Fact and Doctrine And since he could fall in with T. Hicks upon Matter of Fact at Barbican wherein he was not concerned there can be no just Pretence for him to refuse falling in with T. H. in Matter of Doctrine wherein he is concerned So that in short I am neither guilty of Vntruth who never said that most of the Particulars of his Charge were concerned in the One and Twenty Particulars of Fact exhibited against T. H. but in the Controversie which is most true nor yet of Shisâ—â—ng in referring him to our Meeting with T. Hicks since I therein only offer what his own Words and Practice countenance me in especially since I further added as before said That if in any thing his Charge was singular from that Controversie we should be ready to hear and fairly debate at the same Meeting to avoid fresh and unnecessary Contests One would think this were pretty fair to a Man under J. Faldo's Circumstances with us I leave the Reader to say where the Shift and the Vntruth lieth Only let me add Two Passages more that will not a little help him to make a true Judgmenr of the Man The one is his telling the World That by my Manuscript Letter to him I do in effect unsay all again that I said of accepting his Challenge in my Printed Answer and yet neither prints the Letter though but short nor that Passage he fastens his Consequence upon It s true I told him that it was our present Resolution to stick to the Matter of Fact against T. H. and so much he prints but what is that to the Purpose Will any scuh Passage bear an Ergo W. Penn unsaith all he said of Accepting the Challenge c Or therefore W. Penn will never proceed to Matter of Doctrine because he first resolves to stick to Matter of Fact the Method agreed upon The other Passage is this For my part though I shall not refuse any Opportunity offered to defend the Christian Religion from its Adversaries yet I expect that Mr. Penn shall undertake to defend the Quakers and himself especially from my Charge intire as it is exhibited and until then I shall look on him as declining it At what rate I decline a Meeting and how well J. Faldo proves it impartial men may judge But one would think by what he saith as if he were another Tertullian and the Quakers a pack of obstinate Heathens He is unfit to defend Christianity whose Works prove he doth not understand it unless the Jew outward with all his Envy be the Jew inward or a froward Pharisee a good Christian No No. J. Faldo we affirm hath first charged impious Errors upon us and then abused our Writings to countenance them with And though this be largely and effectually discovered in not only my Answer at which he let fly a squibbing Reply but in my Rejoynder too being a more particular Resumption of the whole Controversie and unto which he never yet made any Return we see he hath Forehead enough to insinuate as if the Quakers still remained undefended This is the man that undertakes to Cure my Confidenct who begs so unreasonably and importunately and doth as good as threaten if I refuse his Terms and which aggravates the Matter he would have People believe that I shift defending the Quakers whilst he is yet so manifest a Debtor to our Defences Well but for all this that it may sufficiently appear we neither did not do decline a Meeting with him Let it be observed 1st That I gave him timely Notice of our Wheeler street-Meeting with an Invitation to be there and went more in Expectation of him then T. Hicks from a Report that T. H. would not but that John Faldo intended to be present though both thought fit to be absent 2dly If he yet thinks it convenient to imbrace that â—ffer already made viz. To be one of the four a Place he confesseth to have accepted at the Barbican-Meeting even about another man's Fact Or Lastly If through the Apprehension he hath of T. H's ill Elocution and great Conceit he hath of his own Oratory with his better Skill at Forming and Terming the Question he can prevail with the Baptists to be their Mouth in the present Controversie we shall through God's Assistance be ready to embrace any convenient Time and Place for a free and publick Meeting And that he may not think himself unconcerned in this Proposal nor want any Encouragement we can well give him to accept it I do hereby offer at such a Meeting or Meetings first To prove him as well as T. Hicks an Abuser of us and our Writings by Forgery and Perversion And next to maintain those Doctrines which are indeed believed and asserted by us to be Scriptural and therefore Christian And if this will not please him I shall not think my self oblieged to gratifie every nice and critical Humor he is troubled with but leave him to tire himself with the Pain of his own manifest and merited Disquiet Though my Soul beseecheth Almighty God if it please him to turn him and the Hearts of our Enemies that they may see how much they wound Christianity in pretending to defend it and grieve that Holy Spirit which would lead them into Holiness Meekness Patience and Love by these Tempestuous Assaults upon the Faith Practice and Persons of their Harmless Neighbours 12th 9th Mon. 1674. I am a Real Friend in the Vniversal Principle of God to all men and therein seek Peace with all men William Penn. THE END I never saw him before and he asserts in his this printed Paper that he never saw me till the Barbican Meeting yet several Moueths before in his printed Vindication he saith he had spoaken with me
Vulgar who most faithfully and honestly believe it and never speak or write undervaluingly of it But because we press and exalt his Spiritual Appâ—arance or Christ as come in Spirit to the Soul for its particular Redemption the Work of our Day the other being granted on all hands therefore men of his Leaven inser That we make void the ourward Coming Sufferings of Christ and utterly deny and reject him as he is the Man Christ Jesus I wish for their sakes that thus traduce us they were as far from drawing such Consequences as our Faith is from countenancing them Of this I have spoak so largely both in my Answer and Rejoynder disingenuously overlookt by this Adversary But he faults me for saying That W. Smith 's Catechism is scripturally written c. but never takes notice of his unworthy Assertion nor my Answer as he ought to have done The Matter was this J. Faldo making use of this Instance to prove we preferr'd our own Writings before the Scriptures viz. That we call'd our own Sayings Books The Voice of the Son of God was uttered forth by him c. Truths Principles Shield of Truth c. I answer'd that those Titles were given with respect to that Divine Truth they declar'd of and testified unto not in Comparison with the Scriptures That not one of those Books were destitute of Scripture but it either generally writ in a Scriptural Styl or particularly defended by express Scripture cited therefore of necessity the Scripture must also partake with them in common of those famous Titles And thus far have they the Preference that they are quoted on purpose to give the Truth we write of greater Credit What is that greater Credit then to be exactly agreeable with them This and more I gave for Answer He replieth thu I leave it to my Reader to give a Name to this Passage the like to which for a daring Vntruth the World hath scarcely been acquainted with yet the Man pretends besides all other Graces to * Infallibility It is frequent with him and that Sort of Adversaries to fling Infallibility in our Teeth and here he doth it with manifest Derision as if it was a greater Evil to be Infallible then to Err but let the Reader know that we do not so much as pretend to any such Thing as meer Men for as such Humanum est crrare but in our Judgment of the Things of God so far as we receive it from the Grace of God And if this be a Piece of Quakerism in Opposition to Christianity in J Faldo's Account the Scripture must answer for it only I cannot but take Notice how he beats the Air who either defends or opposeth any Religion upon Fallible Grounds In many a large Libel I could produce where there is not one Quotation of Scripture W. Smith in his Directory for Religious Principles consisting of above 200. Pages hath not one Scripture quoted not one Exhortation to read the Scriptures but as his main Scope denyes and throws Dirt upon them This was J. Faldo's Reply I shall now contract the Substance of my Rejoynder to it First I did not say that there was not one Book without plenty of express Scripture but that those Books whose Titles he quoted were either generally in a Scripture Style or particularly defended by plenty of express Scriptures Secondly To confute me he produceth one of those Books wherein he saith one Scripture was not quoted as if that was sufficient to prove it was not written generally in a Scripture Style one half of the â—uestion Upon which I made him this Challenge to give me one Book out of a Scripture style that is not Controversial or any Controversial Book without express Scripture cited If he could not his vain Insulte should fall upon his own Head In this particular though he has ove lookt all the rest of my Discourse in Defence of our Faith Writings and Principles he undertakes me in his pretended Curb to my Confidence in these words To accept W. P 's Challenge is no bold thing and to shew his unparallel'd Falsehood and Confidence I shall need to give you but a few Instances out of W. Smith's Catechism and Primer But J. Faldo Three instances few enough to be sure prove 200 Pages generally unscriptural the Terms of the Question Methinks this shews more Confidence then a Man that undertakes to Curb another Man's Confidence ought to have but all J. Faldo's sayings are to be construed cum grano salis But to the first Instance Child I would know Father how it is concerning those things call ' Ordinances as Baptism Bread and Wine which are much used in their Worship Father Why Child as to those things they rose from the Pope's Invention And then the Priest gives it to the People and tells them that it is the Blood of Christ shed for them when it is Wine and not Blood Smith's Catechism pag. 39. I see nothing unscriptural in either Question or Answer unless J. Faldo quibbles upon the Pope 'T is true he rose not till several hundred years after the Scriptures were written but if there be a use of those things call'd Sacraments invented by the Pope after another manner then they were ever practised by the ancient Christians which is undeniable with J. Faldo and that scuh an unscriptural use may be called an Invention and that the Pope be a Man â—ea the Man of Sin as also J. Faldo I suppose and many more do conceive and all this Scripturally then I hope it cannot with any sober Pretence be deny'd but that W. S's Answer is very Scriptuâ—â—l But what makes this great Pretender to Truth and Modesty decline taking any notice of that Charge I publisht against him upon occasion of his most gross Abuse of W. Smith upon these words who would needs have it that W. Smith calls the Lord's Supper the Pope's Invention when I expresly proved out of the same place that W. Smith intended it of the present Practice of them and not of any primitive Institution W. Smith's words are these The whole Practice of those things as THEY USE them had their Institution by the Pope and were never SO ordained of Christ for he did not ordain Sprinkling of Water in a Child's face or to make a Sign of a Cross in his forehead nor God-fathers and God-mothers to undertake for it neither did he ordain Bread and VVine to be SO or after that Manner used and received If this be to make Baptism and the Supper Popish what becomes of his Antipaedobaptists and all Protestants that maintain the same respectively But most evident it is VV. Smith intended not that Baptism and Supper used by the Ancient Christians but most true it is that J. Faldo made VV. Smith to intend so I leave the Reader to give a Name to this Carriage the like to which for a Daring Perversion I yet know nobody guilty of J. Faldo and T. Hicks excepted Now for
86. My Answer pag. 250. 6. That the Quakers mean by the Vail that is over People their Belief of the Man Christ Jesus born of the Virgin Mary to be now existing in Heaven Ibid. p. 87. Vind. p. 93. My Answer pag. 251 252. Rejoynd pag. 395 396. 7. I take occasion to censure mens adding their Comments and Glosses fram'd from Study TO any part of the Scripture and J. Faldo cites me as complaining of such as frame them from the Study OF the Scriptures as if Studying OF the Scriptures and mens Adding their own Glosses TO the Scriptures were one and the some thing Vind. pag. 42 43. My Rejoynd p. 159. 8. From E. Burrough's making the Light of Christ within to be one in Nature with the Spirit of Christ J. Faldo infers That the Quakers hold the Soul to be God as if that had been said of the Soul which was said to the Light of Christ shining in the Soul or that they were Synonymous Vind. from p. 75. to 87. Rejoyndr p. 348 349 350. 9. Because E. B. rejected that Carnal Notion that confines the Infinite Omnipresent God to a Residence only above the Stars he makes no Difficulty of inferring that we deny the Manhood of Christ Jesus As most absurd as base Q. no C. p. 9 10. My Answer p. 14. Vind p. 9. Rejoynd p. 420. 10. From our affirming that such a kind of Reading of Scripture as the Pharisees used and to those Ends makes men harder to be wrought upon to true Conversion then the Heathen J. Faldo infers that reading the Scriptures and getting Knowledge thence puts Men into a worse Condition then the Heathen and that there 's scarcely anything more Dangerous then reading the Scriptures Yea he accuseth us of Charging the Miscarriages of Mens Souls on the Knowledge the Scripture by God's Blessing both convey Vind. p. 21 37. Rejoynd p. 126 127 425. Thus much and I wish here had been no occasion for this to evidence the false and unworthy Practice of J. Faldo against the Writings and Sayings of our Friends in order to compass his Designes I shall now give some touch upon his Confidence since he hath intituled me to an unparallel'd share and counts himself the fit Person to Curb me for it J. Faldo began with us in a great Book called Quakerism No Christianity I answered him in a Book intitled Quakerism a New Nickname for Old Christianity against this he put forth his Vindication unto which I made my Rejoynder consisting of TWENTY THREE CHAPTERS in which I vindicated our Principles striping them of those frightful Vizards and hateful Disguises he put upon them confirm'd them by many Scriptures and Reasons and to compleat our Defence produc'd iin favor of the whole above TWO HUNDRED TESTIMONIES out of both ancient and modern Authors Besides all this I faulted his Conduct and Behaviour in this Controversie in above FOUR HUNDRED PARTICULARS and that under distinct Sections most of which were not less unworthy of a good Christian yea an honest Heathen I will say of any fair Controvertist then the Ten I just now mention'd Notwithstanding this great Obligation upon him either to answer my Book or ente Muter to any farther Proceed in this Debate in my Absence at the first Barbican Meeting beâ—ore a great Concurse of People after T. Hicks had won the Goal by running Alone the Man as one in Love with such Romance-Trophys starts up like some Herald at Arms bids Defiance to the Quakers and their Religion gives forth his Challenge to W. Penn to dispute him I that he would and instead of his Glove flung a Paper to bind it which when all came to all was but some of the Contents of his first Book twice largely answered and because no farther Notice was taken of this Giant partly by not receiving his Paper so soon as might expect and partly by reason of these other Contests that claim Precedency That he might not be thought NoBody when so many strove to be Some-Body against us he prints it without all consideration had to my Rejoynder or so much as an Apology for his Silence to it which at least had become a Modest Person to give After all this can any man think J. Faldo Bashful or one that is so out of Love with Confidence in himself as that he is fit to Curb it in others Me thinks he should not believe that repetitious Farthing or Half-penny Paper feat enough toi excuse him or so sufficient to acquit him of old Debts as that without any Breach of Modesty or common Honesty he might encrease his former Score by fresh Charges It is but reasonable that he should make good what he hath done first and not that we should gratifie every importinent tautological Humor of J. F. But what saith John Faldo to this part of my Answer to his Challenge viz. But that I may acquit my self of that Duty incumbent on me for the Truth I do hereby signifie That in as much as the Controversie depending between T. Hicks c. and us takes in the most of the particulars of his Charge we freely consent that he should come in with them for a Share as Confederate in the same work and use his utmost Abilities to maintain his Accusations And if in any thing his Charge is singular we shall be ready to hear and fairly debate it at the same Meeting or Meetings to avoid fresh and unnessary Contests as much as justly may be To this he thus Replieth 1. I must fall into a Confederacy which the Antipaedo-baptists in the same Work Hold a little Mr. Penn If I have my Option I must deal with you singly More confuse rather then assist But it seems I must be wholely at your Appointment for although you had consented that in your Contest about Mr. Hicks's Dialogues there should four of each Party have Liberty to speak yet I no sooner began to oppose you being desired to be one of the four but you told me you were not to dispute with me but Mr. Hicks and call'd to T. Hicks and were follow'd by the Quakers Clamours of Hicks Hicks which answer'd your End and forc'd my Silence Contradiction and Falshood make up this Paragraph Was he not of the Confederacy when he tells us himself that he was not only a Party with them but One of the four pitcht upon to mannage their Cause But if he have his Option he must deal with me singly It is time for him indeed who hath been a double-dealing so long But certainly if the man were not more then ordinarily fond of hearing himself talk or extravagantly ambitious of a single Crown he would be contented with a Partner but this Option holds no Concord with his Adoption into the Confederacy He hath begun already as one of the four what hinders that he should not continue so But he thinks that more then one confounds rather then assists If so what made T. Hicks have three to help