Christ's Lambs defend Epist. to the Reader p. 7. The Christianity of the Quak. Vindic. In Answer to Dr. Ford p. 13. And Charitable Essâ—â— p. 5. And we do also frequently read the Scripture in our Families many of us more than any other Books or Epistles whatsoever To prove the Quakers Denial and Contempt of the Holy Scripture pursuant to this abominable Lye Bugg saith viz. And not knowing a better way to manifest them I erected a mock Pillory and tried them and found them guilty on their own Premises p. 33. The more Insolent Impudent and Shameless thou F. Bugv and the greater thy Shame and Wickedness What convict us of Error by wilful Lies and Forgery and by notorious Scandal and Defamation As was thy mock Tryal and mock Pillory as well as thy mock Cage from whence we may justly return thy Calumnies against G. Whitehead upon thy self and can prove them against thy self viz. That F. Bugg is First A publick Defamer Secondly A wicked Forger Thirdly A wilful Lyar. Fourthly A gross Perverter Fifthly A false Glosser Sixthly A Deceiver i. e. of some Silly Ignorant Crâ—dulous and Enviour Persons not of any Impartial Wise or Judicious Oh horrible What a Christion a Convert a Church-man an earnest Contender for the Christian Faith as thou stiles thy self and yet guilty of such horrid Forgerâ— Scandal and Slander as thy said mock Tryal is made up off Good Lord deliver us all from such a People and such a Ministry as own such a sinful Wretch and Self-Condemned Malicious Apostate as thou art for a true Convert Thy Charge of Denial and Contempt of Holy Scriptures on the People called Quakers is expresly contrary to what thou thy self hast positively declared in Print and that even in the Name and Person of the said People pleading for our Testimony to Christ within and the Kingdom of Heaven within De Christ Lib. ch 1. par 2. This sayst thou we told this we proved to the People out of the Holy Scriptures and that although the Scriptures were good and a true Declaration of those things which were most surely believed by the Apostles and by us ought to be believed yet not the only Rule but still the Spirit of God which was the first Principle the Foundation Principle c. Thus far F. Bugg Pray note here 's F. Bugg when a pretended Quaker speaking truth herein and clearing himself and the Quakers from being guilty of the least contempt of Holy Scripture but on the contrary owning the same both as Holy and True and to be most surely believed whereby both himself and the Quakers did then i. e. in 1682 own the Divine Authority of Holy Scripture by his own Confession But F. Bugg since a pretended Church-Man tells the World gross Lies against the People called Quakers namely That they deny and contemn the Holy Scripture F. Bugg the Quaker spoke truth but F. Bugg the pretended Church-Man and Convert tells Notorious Shameful Lies and Calumnies T is an ill Bird that fouls its own Nests and One such Runagado is worse than three Turks His Reasons to prove that we do not believe the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture to be either blessed or holy are as false and impertinent as his Charge and but a telling Lies to prove Lies which therefore I thus oppose 1. 'T is false that we cast Reproachful Language and Contemptuous Expressions upon the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture 2. Not reading them in our Meetings for Worship is no Proof that either we have not the Spiritual and Living Worship of God among us nor any Evidence that we do not belihve the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture to be blessed or holy Our humbly Worshipping God in Spirit and Truth is what 's required of us by Jesus Christ and the Holy Scripture which therefore is Testimony of our Belief that the Doctrine thereof is Holy 3. 'T is false again that we say without Distinction to Preach out of them is Conjuration I am confident these Words were never spoken by the Quakers thus general and positive without any other Distinction or Exception about the Preachers and manner of Preaching 4. These are notoriously false that we lay aside aâ— useless the use of the Lord's Prayer Ten Commandments c. Seeing by the Spirit of Christ we Pray after that manner as he has taught and practise the Substance of the Commandments in that Love which is the fulfilling thereof 5. We are not conscious to our selves of denying the Ordinances of Jesus Christ either in not believing Sprinkling Infants to be of Divine Institution or in not practising John's Baptism which is that of Water not mentioned in Go teach all Nations Baptizing them Mat. 28. And This do in remembrance of me i. e. as oft as ye do it But of how long continuance and till what coming of Christ is the Question Though we believe this and all other Precepts both of God and Christ were holy under their several Dispensations yet it follows not that we must reeds still practise every thidg that was holy or else be condemned as not believing the Doctrine and Precepts of Scripture to be holy F. Bugg will make no good Logick of such Arguments and Consequences for that were to bring us back to the divers Washings Baptisms Tythes Offerings Pussovers and Circumcisions c. under ehe Law which were all holy in their first Institution and Dedication 6. 'T is also notoriously false that we do prefer our own Books Papers and Epistles before the Scriptures i. e. the holy Scriptures because some of them are occasionally read in some of our Meetings for both in our Ministry Books and Epistles People are often referred to the Holy Scriptures for proof and excited to read them and that they may understand believe and live according to the same by the Assistance of God's Holy Spirit And therefore we esteem and prefer the Holy Scriptures before our own Writings contrary to Bugg's false Aspersion upon the Quakers i. e. That they make void the holy Scripture by their Traditional Pamphlets His gross Lies of this kind are numerous the Lord rebuke his Lying Spirit and great Envy F. Bugg's Fourth Charge against the Quakers They deny the Ordinances of Jesus Christ as Baptism and the Lord's Supper We deny this Charge as laid down without distinction and that for our Reason F. B. cites viz. As for Baptism and the Lords Supper Scripturally considered in their several Dispensations in the Figure and Substance we confess and own To this F. B. presently answers This is false as their Books declare p. 45. What 's false He considers not he knows not what He answers very inadvertently are not Baptism and the Lord's Supper Scripturally considered both as in the Figure and in the Substance in the Type and in the Antitype I never heard any true Convert Christian or real Protestant say this is false before Was not John's Baptism with Water a Figure of
composing of it in thy N. Rom. Arr. p. 10. And didst thou find the Date of 1665 on the said Letters or didst thou give it or who did Answer truly We may not be imposed upon by thy various uncertain Accounts or Equivocations in this Matter 5. Which of you have the Original Letter of J. A's And which of you are able to make it appear by comparing of Haâ—ds to be his as printed by thee as thou sayest p. 32. Which of you are so expert in his Hand that you can make it so appear ex certa scientia I greatly question it I am sure that John Audland believed in and confessed the true Christ of God according to Scripture as is fully proved in his Works cited in my Just Enquiry p. 26 27 28 29. and that he esteemed G. F. no otherwise than eminently Instrumental in Christ for his own and others help and comfort 6. What Blasphemy and Idolatry canst thou prove against W. P. and others in their Book Judas and Jews and in excusing Josiah Coa's Letter Thy proofless Clamours will not do to bear us down nor thy hideous out-cry and clamour that never greater Blasphemies were spoke by Man than by Fox For shame leave these thy Malicious Calumnies 7. What Blasphemy and Idolatry provest thou against John Blackling's Testimony that G. F. was blessed with honour above above many Brethren Were there not Elders worthy of double Honour And is not that Honour Eternal which God gives and is from above and wherewith he Honours them that Honour him 8. And that his Life Reigns i. e. the Life that G. F. partook of Is not Christ the Life of all his true Believers and Followers 9. His tender Words in the Lords Love were my Sâ—â—â—'s Nourishment If these were J. B's Words what Blasphemy or Idolatry was in them as believing G. F. Instrumental in the Lord's Love for his Souls Comfort Did not Paul say I have fed thee with Milk and not with strong Meat 1 Cor. 3. 2. And did not Christ's Ministers comfort the otints who were in Trouble by the Comfort where with they themselves were comforted of God 2 Cor. 1. 4. Were these Blasphemous or Idolatrous supposest thou F. Bugg Oh how filthy Loud and Clamourous art thou in thy Charges and how poor faint dull and short in thy proof Fr. Bugg's Third Charge against the Quakers That they deny the Scriptures by speaking contemptously of them c. Their Contemptuous Expressions of the Holy Scripture their contempt of the Holy Scriptures p. 32 33. We utterly deny these his Charges as both Calumnious and directly contrary to our Principles His Allegations are fully answered in these our Three Treatises viz. A Charitable Essay A Just Enquiry and Innocency Triumphâ—nt But he is so tenacious to his own Opinion and so Implacable that he 'll receive no Answer but repeat and impose his old worn Reproachful Stuff over and over again I am sure our Friends Books alledged by him if impartially viewed will clear them in this Case from either Denying or Contemning the Holy Scriptures And even that of News coming out of the North so often objected doth in divers parts of it clear the point both by the numerous Quotations of the Scripture in the Margents as also where it s therein said the Lord hath spoken by his former Prophets and what The Scripture And p. 8 Christ Jesus the Substance of the Prophets Ibid. The Testimonies of the Prophets of God and Apostles of Christ against false Prophets and the Works of the World owned And p. 12 13. The Scriptures and Saints Conditions and the Words spoken by the Prophets Christ and his Apostles owned And in Eternal Substantial Truths p. 17. The Life and power of God gave forth the Scriptures he saith Now could this be any Contempt of Holy Scripture No but the Contrary And where do the Quakers say that to preach out of them i. e. the Holy Scriptures is Conjuration There may be true Preaching out of the Holy Scripture by the Spirit of Truth and there is false Preaching by perverting the Holy Scriptures Bugg's own instance which is against them that study to raise a Living thing out of the Dead to raise the Spirit out of the Letter are Conjurers and Diviners their teaching not being from the mouth of the Lord p. 34. This is no proof of his general Charge that to preach out of the Holy Scriptures is Conjuration Quer. Where proves he these Words His Observation is also false That the Quakers call the Holy Scriptures Death Dust and Serpents Meat This is a foul perversion seeing they esteem the Holy Doctrine to be the Holy Scripture which he also has granted and agreed to And our distinguishing between the outward Writing or Books and the Holy Doctrine therein contained and between the Letter and the Spirit 2 Cor. 3. 6 7. This was no Juggle nor any Contempt of Holy Scripture as falsly suggested p. 33 36. The Holy Scriptures mentioned amongst those Writings which I. P. did bring to the Exchange And to this F. B. saith Surely they could not burn the Holy Spirit and that it seems they can call the Bible the Holy Scriptures for a Wicked Design p. 36. This is impertinent as well as Malicious for the Holy Scriptures therein mentioned was with the respect to the Doctrine therein contained for I must tell F. B. that it would shew Contempt to Holy Scripture even to the Holy Doctrine contained in the Bible if a Person should voluntarily offer to burn the Bible it self as the King of Judah did Jeremiah's Roll Jer. 36. though he could not â—urn the Word of the Lord. But to say the Bible or Books made up of Paper and Characters will decay and turn to Dust but the Holy Doctrine Word and Spirit from whence it came will endure This is no Contempt of Holy Scripture nor yet to the Bible His Saying G. W. holdly imposes upon the World that though they call the Scripture Dust c. yet they do not call the Holy Scripture so The first part he falsly imposeth upon me as he doth on the Quakers Not only that they call the Holy Scriptures Dust Death Serpents Meat Beastly Ware c. which is a horrible Calumny but also that they do not believe the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture to be either Blessed or Holy p. 38 39 Thus he imposeth his horrid and gross Lies against us upon the World as also that the Quakers never did beg Pardon of God for Christ's sake and that they do prefer their own Books Papers and Epistles before the Scriptures p. 40. These like the rest are gross Lies and contrary to our Testimonies extant in Print as in divers of our Books we positively declare That we prefer the Holy Scripture above all other Books extant in the World and also declare that we are truly thankful to God for preserving to us the outward Writings Scriptures or Books commonly called the Bible as in
therefore 't is here inserted viz. Dear Friends you very well know our Christian Principle and Profession in this Matter both with respect to God and Caesar that because we are Subjects of Christ's Kingdom which is not of this World we cannot fight Joh. 18. 36 Yet being Subjects of Caesar's Kingdom we pay our Taxes Tribute c. according to the Example of Christ and his Holy Apostles relating to Christ's Kingdom and Caesars wherein we are careful not to offend Mat. 17. 27. and 22. 20. Rom. 13 6 7. Being also very glad and much satisfied in the many Testimonies given at this Meeting of our Friends Innocency quiet and peaceable Behaviour under the outward Government as becomes our Christian Principle and Profession Now the Reader may observe that our Yearly Meetings Epistles are not Laws and Edicts Imposed but Epistles tenderly recommended to the Consciences and Christian care of our Friends only 5. A False Glosser This also I deny being not conscious to my self of false glossing in this or any other instance he brings against me viz. The Quak. Vind. c. p. 2. F. Bugg accuses somebody for objecting against paying of Tithes under the New Covenant because abrogated by Christ c. On which he makes his Observation That by this they i. e. the Quakers have condemned the Martyrs and all Christians c. As in his Sheet p. 4. Whereupon he adds viz. Observe this false Glosser I did not say they condemn either Martyr or others who did refuse Payment of Tithes I neither said so nor will my Words carry any such intendment Rep. Neither did I charge thee with so saying but that the Quakers have Condemned the Martyrs and all Christians c. which makes no distinction And by what have they condemned them but by denying to pay Tithes under the New Covenant because abrogated by Christ. And how could this be a Condemning the Martyrs and all Christians in thy Sense unless thou concludest they were all for the payment of Tithes The Case is plain I did no accuse thee with saying the Quakers condemned the Martyrs or others who refused the Payment of Tithes but because in opposition 〈◊〉 Tho. Ellwoods saying They who pay Tithes uphold a Legal Ceremony abrogated by Christ and thereby deny Christ to be conâ— in the Flesh. Thou observed by this thâ— have condemned the Martyrs and all Christian yea Kings Parliament and People who pay or take Tythes Now doth not this plainly imply that the Martyrs and all Christians were for the payment of Tithes if the Quakers Testimony against Tithes be a condemning the Martyrs and all Christians I confess I cannot find how I am a false Glosser herein and against thee F. B. in this I fairly objected That thy Observation was too general upon the Martyrs for that both John Wickliff William Swinderby Walter Brute William Thorpe the Bohemians with others mentioned in the Book of Martyrs and others did bear Testimony against the Corruptions of the Popish Clergy and against Tithes and compelled Maintenance And were not these Martyrs Christians This was made a Principle Article against them by the Papists as more largely appears in the first Volumn of Martyrs in the Reigns of Richard the Second Henry the Fourth and Henry the Fifth 6. A Deceiver of the People This I also sincerely deny as a false and malicious Aspersion cast upon me and my publick Ministry it cannot reasonably be supposed to relate to any Personal or Circumstantial Mistakes if I have been under any but to my publick Ministry about Matters of Faith and Salvation concerning which I know him in whom I have believed whose Divine Power and Goodness hath preserved me from my Youth upward in sincerity towards him whom I have sought from my Childhood and therefore am not Conscious to my self of being a Deceiver of the People for my Eye is to the power and Spirit of Jesus Christ who hath made known unto me the word of Reconciliation and made me a Living Witness of him to the Consciences of many Thousands I bless God And F. B's Instance Judgment Fix'd Introd if the Lord did not lay a necessity upon me I should chuse to be mute but the Lord has laid a necessity upon me c. And what Proof is this of his Charge Where 's the Assumption I say so still he has laid a necessity upon me to preach the Gospel and to testify against Deceit Envy and Wickedness and I perceive not how this instance alledged agaisnt me can be any colour of Proof for his Charge Can my saying The Lord has laid a necessity upon me either to Preach or Write prove that I am a Deceiver of the People Doth not F. B. himself pretend the Assistance of God's Holy Spirit in his New Rom. Arraign p. 46. But I am sure a contrary Spirit has assisted him blown and puâ—t him up in his reproaching stigmatizing calumniating and rendring odious and obnoxious a Peaceable People and their Christian Testimony for which the Righteous Judge of all will deal with him and as for his Personal Detractions Defamations and bitter Calumnies cast upon me as Wicked Forger Wilful Liar Gross Perverter Publick Defamer c. I return them as before upon himself and rejoyce in the Lord my God over them And that I am counted worthy to suffer for his sake For I esteem the Reproaches of Christ greater Riches than the Glory of Egypt A FEW Gentle Reflections UPON T. C's Animadversions said to be Tho. Crisp's on George Whitehead's Book Entituled Innocency Triumphant TO evince the said T. C's Inadvertency and Impertinency as well as Malice and outrage in his unjustly Charging G. W. and his Abettors or Friends as proved guilty of Contempt of the Person of our Blessed Saviour the Holy Scriptures and Governours Perverseness and Falsehood justly chargeable on himself in his undertaking to be an Advocate for Fr. Bugg in his Bad Cause and gross Calumnies I finding a great part of T. C's Allegations against us to be taken upon trust from F. Bugg's Authority and before answered in the foregoing Treatise and divers other Answers I shall need say the less to many of his impertinent and senseless Quarrels but take notice chiefly of such as concern me and those Friends whom he calls my Abettors pursuant to his false Charge of being guilty of Contempt of the Person of our blessed Saviour i. e. Jesus Christ and the Holy Scriptures c. which Charge in good Conscience towards God and his dear Son Jesus Christ our Mediator I sincerely deny and testify against in the first place as contrary to my Christian Principle and Profession from my Youth upward Howbeit to prove G. W's Partiality and Contempt of our Lord Jesus T. C. saith viz. I shall here insert some of G. K ' s. Doctrines which G. W' s. Creatures opposed and about which chiefly the Difference was which G. W. represents but as pretended Fundamentals for says he about some fundamental Doctrines as
love of God and God blessed our Meetings c. Thy First Charge against the Quakers is That they deny Jesus of Nazareth who was born of the blessed Virgin Mary to be Christ and the efficient Cause of Mans Salvation Here are Two Charges made one both which we positively and sincerely deny as contrary to our profest and known Principles The Scripture Texts proving Jesus to be the Christ c. p. 14 15 16. we ever have and do sincerely believe and own But that the Quakers â—â—ach the contrary as Bâ—â—gg â—aith we utterly deny as a gross Calumny imposed upon us His instance foâ—…roof of from Isaac Pennington's Question to â—…ssors wherein he distinguishes between Christ and the Body in which he came and between the outward Vessel and the Inward Life and not calling the Bodily Garment Christ c. i. e chiefly and in the first place Christ as I. P. explains himself is no Proof that the Quakers deny Jesus to be Christ for he did not consist only of an outward Body or Vessel he had both inward Life Soul and Spirit even as perfect Man much more as God And therefore Fr. Bugg's inference that the Quakers would divide the Humanity from the Godhead is false they are distinguished but not divided in the entire Being of Christ as also that they can never call him Christ but a Vail is falsly infinuated though his Flesh was called the Vail Heb. 10. 20. This Objection has been plainly answered as well as the Question Doth not the Name Christ belong to the whole Body c. In our Charitable Essay p. 4. which Fr. Bugg gives the go by to without Replication running the rounds to his old Objection Idem per Idem imposing and begging the Question he will neither see nor take Answers how plainly soever given thus impertinent and trifling he is But to clear Isaac Pennington in this Point he did not deny Jesus of Nazareth to be Christ but sincerely confesseth to the same Jesus Christ in his Works 2nd Part p. 18. in these Words viz. The Enemy hath raised up Jealousies and Prejudices against us as if we denied the Scriptures and Ordinances of God and that Christ that died at Jerusalem against which Isaac P. Answers viz. First That we do really in our Hearts own that Christ who came in the fulness of time in that prepared Body to do the Father's Will His coming into the World Doctrine Miracles Sufferings Death Resurrection c. in plainness and simplicity of Heart according as it is exprest in the Letters of the Scripture Secondly That we own no other Christ than that nor hold sorth no other thing for Christ but him who then appeared and was made manifest in the Flesh. And p. 19. ibid. The Lord hath shewn me in Spirit that they themselves are guilty of that very charge and that he will so implead them at his Judgment Seat which they cast upon us even of denying that Christ which died at Jerusalem to be Christ. Thus far Isaac Pennington What more plain and innocent Testimony could Man have given Where 's now either his or the Quakers denial of Jesus of Nazareth to be Christ as F. Bugg has over and over unjustly charged us Another Instance out of the Christian Quaker is that the holy Body i. e. of Christ was not instrumentally without a share of the general Victory and holy Priviledges obtained yet that the efficient and chiefest Cause was the Light and Life p. 18. This is so far from either denying Jesus to be Christ or the efficient Cause of Salvation that it is a plain Confession that Jesus Christ was both the instrumental and the efficient cause of Man's Salvation Instrumental in his Holy Body and Efficient by his Light and Life Seeing we preach no other Light or Life to effect Salvation but that of Jesus Christ. And we know of no true Understanding Christians but will confess that it was not the Humanity or Manhood of Christ only that effects or works Man 's Salvatian without the Divinity seeing as Man he saith I can of my Self do nothing as I hear I judge John 5. 30. Wherefore Fr. Bugg's Inference that they i. e. the Quakars have robbed the blessed Jesus of one of his eminent Attributes viz. of being the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation is notoriously false and impertinent like the rest Jesus Christ is a compleat Saviour As also is F. B's other That they insinuate by consequence that Him that was born of the Virgin He is no otherwise a Saviour than other good Men are p. 21. Which he has flatly contradicted by his Instance immediately following viz. If some Men in Scriptures are entituled Saviours because of their Contribution of their Trials Travels and Labours towards the Salvation of Mankind of much more right is that honour ascribed to Him who had the Spirit without Measure c. p. 21. Whereby its apparent that much more Honour of a Saviour is ascribed to Christ than to any other Men. Thus notorious is Bugg in his Contradiction to himself most unjustly to prove his Lying Charge of their Denying Jesus to be the Christ and the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation Oh Horrible Insolency and Self-Condemned Apostacy Now Fr. Bugg I query of thee 1. Didst thou when a Quaker deny Jesus to be the Christ. 2. Didst thou when a Quaker deny Jesus to be the efficient cause of Man's Salvation 3. Didst thou when a Quaker ever hear the Quakers deny Jesus to be the Christ in their Ministry 4. Didst thou when a Quaker ever hear the Quakers Deny Christ to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation 5. Nay didst thou deny Jesus to be the Christ or the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation when in the Name of the People called Quakers thou confessedst That in the beginning the inshining Light of Christ Jesus by his Heavenly Spiritual Appearance in the Hearts and Souls of his People was our Principle the very Foundation Principle and Corner Stone of our Building See his De Christ. Lib. 2d Part p. 24. 6. Didst thou deny Jesus Christ to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation in thy confessing to this inshining Light of Christ Jesus as the more sure word of Prophesie and that there was sufficiency in it being obeyed to lead to Salvation Or in thy confessing to the vertue and excellency of this holy Unction and to this word nigh in the Heart and to Christ Jesus the Second Adam as he is a quickening Spirit even to Christ within and thus People must wait to know him except they were Reprobaâ—es ibid. p. 25 26 27. 7. Didst thou by these Confessions deny Jesus of Nazareth who was born of the Virgin Mary to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation 8. What notorious and gross Contradiction to thy self is it then for thee to make ascribing the Salvation chiefly to the holy Light of Life in Christ and unto his Body instrumentally to be a denial of his being
the efficient cause of Man's Salvation Qu. Wither p. 22. Seeing that Light of Life was the Light and Life of the same Jesus Christ. And I think it is a real owning Jesus Christ who was born of the Virgin Mary to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation to confess that to his own holy Divine Light of Life Salvation is chiefly ascribed but Instrumentally to his Body And hath not the Apostle Paul the like Distinction where he confesseth we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Rom. 5. 10. Here 's Reconciliation by his Death and much more Salvation by his Life Wherefore F. Bugg's Consequence against us as bringing in Damnable Heresies Denying the Lord Jesus Christ to be a compleat Saviour p. 23. is a most foul and absurd Slander His instance in p. 23 that the Serpent is a Spirit and therefore that promised Seed which bruiseth his Head must be Spiritual And that Seed is Christ. To which I add consequently not only the outward Body or Flesh which he took upon him I cannot understand how this can be a Denial that Jesus Christ himself is the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation unless F. Bugg doth think that Christ was made up only of that outward Body of Flesh without any Divine Principle of Light and Life in him which I suppose he will not attempt to own or prove For though Christ took upon him the Seed of Abraham according to the Flesh and was the Seed of the Woman that bruises the Serpents Head even the promised Seed who through Death was to bruise under and destroy him that had the power of Death viz. The Devil yet he effectually doth it by his Divine Power Light and Life as the immediate and efficient Cause of Man's Salvation Wherein we still confess his Sufferings and Death in the Flesh Instrumentally to Contribute thereunto Christ Jesus as the promised Seed who came of a Woman made under the Law bruised the Serpent's Head both without us and within us without us through his Sufferings and Death by his Divine Testimony Word and Power within us by his Divine Life Light Word or Seed Spirit and Power which is all but one Christ himself not Two Christs nor to be divided Else how could we be born again of incorruptible Seed Or how doth that Seed remain in him that 's born again And is not that Seed Christ And is not the Word of Faith Christ in Spirit 'T is well that F. B. grants the head of the Serpent in Men shall be bruised Consequently this must be for their Salvation And Christ therefore as inwardly revealed by â—is Spirit and Power the efficient Cause there of Divers other absurd Consequences he draws upon us in this case not worth tracing His other Instances to prove his false Charge of the Quakers denying Jesus to be Christ and efficient Cause of Man's Salvation are most grosly applied and perverted as he saith by G. Fox's assuming Divine Attributes to himself p. 26 27. Which we must needs look upon to be a reiterated aspersion For where G. F. uses these Words I am the Light him by whom the World was made and doth enlighten every Man that comes into the World c. This he speaks in the Name of Christ and not of himself nor in his own Name as his following Words plainly shews viz. If you love the Light wherewith you are enlightened you will love Christ who saith Learn of me Now F. B. Dost thou in Conscience believe that G. F. assumes this to himself or that he himself made the World Or that he himself enlightens every Man 'T is very sad to see thee so hardened and wilfully perverse in thus perverting truth Thou knowest better and sins against knowledge in thy Calumnies against us F. Bug's Second Charge against the Quakers Their Books are Blasphemous and their practice Idolatrous c. This we utterly deny as a Calumnious Clamâ—uâ— against our Books and practice in general And therefore the more impossible for Fr. Bugg rationally to produce the Colour of proof thereof Wherefore I question him about his pretended Allegations 1. What Blasphemy or Idolatry was it for any of our Friends to write viz. Thou O North of England out of thee did the Branch spring and Star arise which gives Light to all the Regions round about in thee the Sun of Righteousness appeared c. 2. How proves F. Bugg that Fox's Disciples or Proselites as he scornfully calls them ecchoed back these Adorations to him as calling him the Branch the Star the Sun of Righteousness Alluding to Mic. 5. 2. Numb 24. 17. Mal. 4. 2. Zech. 3. 8. p. 31. I challenge Bugg to prove where the Quakers gave these Titles to the Person of George Fox or that he assumed them to himself Observe I have viewed over that Epistle of Edward Burrough's to the Camp of the Lord in England p. 64 65 66 67 where mention is made of the North of England and where the Branch did spring and the Star arise and the Sun of Righteousness appeared c. And G. F. is not so much as mentioned or named in all that Epistle and therefore Bugg has most shamefully belied and scandalized the Quakers in this point also not only in charging them that the Quakers Prophets give Witness to G. Fox instead of Christ that they call him the Branch the Star the Sun of Righteousness and put the North of England for the Town of Bethlehem N. Rom. unm Epist. to Ber. p. 2. But also because of our Testimony against this Horrid Lye and Abuse among others Bugg staged Twelve of us being Citizens Tradesmen and others of good Repute in his Mock Tryal wherein he condemns us for Perjured Persons to the Pillory with a form thereof in his N. Rom. Arraign to redicule and most grosly defame us both as to our Christian and Civil Reputations affected thereby Oh horrible Insolency and Wickedness in thee F. Bugg Thus wilfully to persist in thy Imposing gross Lies and Calumnies upon the World against us 3. What Divine Attributes did G. F. assume to himself in saying he wrote from the Mouth of the Lord or that he was cloathed with Righteousness p. 30. 5. How proves Bugg that to be a true and entire Copy of John Audland's Letter to G. F. which he cites p. 30 I deny his Citation and there 's reason to question the truth of it being also so often varied in Print and particularly from the Copy sent me by John Pennyman besides the Date of 1665 given it in the printed Libel entituled Some of the Quakers Principles c. gives more Cause to question the Truth of his Copy For that Date was Two Years after John Audland Died being in 1663 't is great Nonsense to suppose he writ it after he Died as appears by their Register of Burials in Westmorland And thou F. B. hast owned the said Libel and the
in the Flesh and Antichristian 〈…〉 a plain Indication that 't is for Conscience sake they that are truly Conscientious and Faithfuâ— among us cannot pay them And their believing they are abrogated by Christ and therefore â—…e Payment thereof a denying him to be come in â—…e Flesh is the greater Argument of their beâ—â—g conscientious to Christ in refusing to pay â—â—em And therefore F. B's opposing our haâ—â—ng Favour tended to affect the most Tender â—nd Conscientious among us And 't is not T. C's â—o No that will excuse him nor his daring to â—…y such an Uncharitable Thought never entred â—…B's Heart that will clear either of them from â—ncharitableness towards us in this point What profound heart-seeing Judge hast thou T. C. â—ade thy self herein it seems very high Preâ—â—mption in thee but without Probation thus acquit thy Brother Bugg's Malicious Heart â—…en from Uncharitable Thoughts as if he â—ere arrived to a very high pitch of Perfection â—…ove thy self who confessest thy self to be an â—â—perfect Fallible Sinner in thy Imrod And no â—â—ubt as Fallible in this thy profound Judgment â—â—d Vindication on thy Brother Bugg's Heart â—nd as Fallible and Sinful thou appearest in â—ondemning G. W. as wicked and his Spirit as â—…t the Spirit of Christ and that upon a strange â—â—esumptuous and severe Exercration upon thy â—â—lf in thy following Words viz. p. 5 6. I have here taken notice of but some of G. W' s. â—…ess that by the Fruit he brings forth you â—ay be capable of judging into what Root he is graftâ—â—â—… and I am so well satisfied that his Spirit is not â—…e Spirit of Christ nor he as he falsly pretends a â—â—stant Servant of Christ that I do now in coolness and not in heat of Passion give him and his wickeâ—â— Abettors that advantage to improve their Intereâ—â— and Power therewith i. e. the Spirit of Christ against me that I may end my Days in Infamy 〈◊〉 an Example to others if his Spirit be that 〈◊〉 Christs Thus far thou T. C Now observe here what a fearful Execratioâ— or Curse thou hast conditionally denounced against thy self resembling that Oath God doâ—… to me and much more if c. 1 Sam. 20. 1â— 2 Sam. 3. 35. 1 King 2. 23. and appears no leâ—â— than an Oath of Cursing in a high degree anâ— all to prove G. W. wicked not led by the Spirit 〈◊〉 Christ nor a Servant of Christ. For if he 〈◊〉 so or his Spirit be of Christ then with tâ—â— Spirit of Christ we may improve our Intereâ—â— and power against thee and so as that thou may end thy Days in Infamy as an Example c. Thâ—â— this be no proof at all against G. W's Spiriâ— but rather the contrary that thou art not 〈◊〉 a Christian Spirit nor led by the Spirit 〈◊〉 Christ who forbids all Swearing and coâ—mends Blessing and not Cursing by thy voluâ—tary bringing thy self under such an Oath 〈◊〉 Execration yet the Spirit of Christ in us not willing thou shouldest perish or dye undâ—â— thy own Curse though thou hast reason to feâ—â— it's coming upon thee for thy great Envy aâ—â— horrible Presumption herein if thou dost nâ—â— Repent SOME BRIEF REMARKS ON T. C's BOOK MY testifying against F. B's Seditious Treatment as thereby endeavouring â—o incense the Government and stir up the Mobb â—gainst us as being New Rome Perjured Perâ—ons c. proves not me Seditious as is falsly reâ—orted p. 9. unless T. C. will own himself Seâ—itious by the same Argument because he acâ—uses G. W. to be guilty thereof Yet Buggs â—eigned Pillory T. C. confesseth was not well don'e â—ut then to extenuate and excuse F. B's Crime â—e places it on high Provocations c. telling â—s Oppression may cause a Wise Man to err p. 9. 〈◊〉 seems he would not have him rendred Mad â—â—o ' his Mock-Trial and Pillory was no small piece of Madness But is this all the Judgment and Condemnation T. C. has to give against Bugg's cruel Mocking and gross Forgery in his Mock Trial and Condemnation of Honest Men to Perjury and Pillory which appeared no other than the Tragedy of a furious Incendiary and Persecutor and a work of Envy Outrage and Scandal to incense the Government and Mobb against us which to testifie against could not be seditious on our parts as T. C. mistakes in his Inference On that Saying his Flesh is a Figure p. 26. The form of a Servant and Fashion of a Man are of the same Import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. 2 6 7. and not in Contempt given to Christ. Where is the Term Flesh understood the Person of â—ur Lord Jesus Where did J. P. say that the Flesâ— or Body of Christ is of an Earthly Perishing Nature p. 27. though ours be I am not convicted of acquitting the Guilty 〈◊〉 accusing the Innocent by inverting F. B's Aâ—gument against J. Pennington upon himself viz Now if he to wit Christ took ours and ours â—e a perishing nature ergo his was perishing or it wâ—â— not ours Quoth F. B. This being spoken oâ— Christ's Flesh and Blood 't is apparent F. â— run into the same Error he falsly accuses J â— with for he cannot deny that Christ took upâ—â— him the Flesh and Blood of our Nature Hâ—â— 2. 14. And that ours is perishing Whenâ—â— F. B's Consequence is Ergo his was perishing 〈◊〉 it was not oâ—rs thereby he plainly has inâ—eâ—reâ— Christ's Flesh and Flood to be of a perishing Nature And thou T. C. canst not wind him out of this Snare nor make F. Bugg innocent or sound in his Logick against which I excepted viz. I deny his Ergo though our Flesh be perishing as in us it was not perishing when assumed by him See Innocency Triumph p. 23 24. How far the Name of Christ belongs to every Member but chiefly to him the Head is fully demonstrated in my Charitable Essay p. 4. which thou dost not Answer but quarrelest impertinently Where dost thou prove that the Person of our Lord Jesus consists of Flesh if none do oppose his Flesh or Body to his Soul or Life as thou sayest p. 26. Thou wouldst know where the Flesh of Christ as distinguished from his Life and Soul is called Christ in Scripture p. 28. Answ. 'T was Christ that died but how as to his Flesh not as to his Soul or Spirit That the Person Jesus of Nazareth we do not exclude or deny to be Christ p. 29. If by Person thou meanest both Soul and Body he being a Compleat Saviour Qu. 1. Can the Bodily Garment taken literally be called Christ 2. And is a Person made up of Body or Flesh only 3. What is a Person truly and properly Though Him is sometimes given to the Body yet more properly to the Son of God for whom it was prepared or to the entire Christ. I know no Contemptuous Speeches or Expressions of our Lord Jesus or Scriptures excused p. 12. 29. consequently much less owned by me And though I
is pretended by one Party This is falsly represented and perverted against G. W. in the first Part who did not represent those of G. K's Doctrinâ— mentioned but as pretended Fundamentals although T. C. has this falsehood pretended Fundamentals divers times over in his Introduction Whereas my Words are as is pretended by one Party relative to divers Accounts lately published in Print of some â—ate Divisions and Disputes about several Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith as is pretended by one Party which therefore at least some whereof I grant to be such and do not call them pretended Fundamentals But that the late Division is pretended to be about them according as my Words are clear in our small Treatise referred to viz. The Christian Doctrine and Society of the People called Quakers p. 1. one of which Fundamental Doctrines which he says G. W. represents but as pretended Fundamentals is That Christ is in Heaven in his glorified Nature of Man Body and Soul God and Man both Introduction p. 2. And where have I contemned or opposed this Doctrine How Inadvertent and unjust art thou T. C. in this Do not I plainly declare in the same Treatise p. 3 That as Man Christ died for our Sins rose again and was received into Glory And p. 5. That Christ's Body that was Crucified by the power of God was raised from the Dead and that the same Christ that was Crucified ascended into Heaven and Glory and that his Flesh saw no Corruption it did not Corrupt But yet doubtless his Body was Changed into a more Glorious and Heavenly Condition than it was in when subject to divers Sufferings on Earth c. Where 's now the Contempt of his Person Mayst thou not be ashamed of thy false abusive Charge From my Saying the same Christ that was therein i. e. in the Body or Flesh Crucified thou falsly inferrest So then he that was nailed to the Cross and pierced was not Christ p. 24. Here thou quarrellest with the Apostles Doctrine and Language 1 Pâ—t 3. 18. Being put to Death in the Flesh And ch 4. 1. Christ hath suffered for us in the Flesh. 1 John 4. 2. Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh And 2 John 7. And many Deceivers are entred into the World who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh. Mark here Christ suffered in the Flesh and Jesus Christ come in the Flesh. Was this to deny him that suffered on the Cross to be Christ or to Conâ—emn his Person No sure How sillily hast thou deduced many Inferences of this kind against us as if thou wert minded to be Litigious Again Thy inferring That he who was nailed â—o the Cross was not Christ but a Body a Vail a Garment of an Earthly Perishing Nature p. 24. Here again thou pervertest and abusest us Where did we ever say that he who so suffered was not Christ but a Body a Vail c. Seeing 〈◊〉 was Christ that suffered in the Flesh and his â—â—esh was called the Vail Heb. 10. What Contempt to Christ or Denial of him was such Sayâ—â—g And where did ever any of us say that â—â—s Body that was nailed to the Cross was of a â—â—rishing Nature seeing his Flesh saw no Corâ—â—ption But thy great Offence is about Iâ— Pennington's â—ords viz. We can never call the Bodily Garâ—…t Christ p. 26 c. And what then is this 〈◊〉 Undervaluing or Contempt to Jesus Christ â—25 Is it not as true literally as a Man's Garâ—ent cannot be the Man himself that wears it â—â—d may it not be as true figuratively as Christ's Flesh was the Vail And that without any Contempt to him his Body or Flesh called the Vail Unless thou canst prove the Holy Apostle a Contemner thereof who used the same Expression He i. e. Christ hath Consecrated for us a new and living way through the Vail i. e. his Flesh Heb. 10. 20. That Christ Jesus as to his entire Existence or Being doth not consist only of the Body or Flesh that was Crucified Thou grants as much not only in thy Confessing his Person as joyned to the Godhead Power Life and Soul was called Jesus and the Saviour p. 24. But also his being the Anointed as well as the Anointing p. 5. For Christ was before Abraham and David in Spirit called him Lord and he was that Spiritual Rock that all Israel drank of As for excusing Errors and Contempt of our Lord Jesus falsly charged on J. P. and being liable to be charged therewith p. 26. I am not conscious to my self of so doing by discovering his Intention and by his own Explications of the Words objected against him viz. As either that the Vail which was Christ's Flesh or that the Bodily Garment we can never call the entire Christ as intimated by his own Words chiefly and in the first place Christ as in one of his Questions 'T is strange that thou should shew so much Envy against that Innocent Man as to charge him with Contempt of our Lord Jesus who did more sincerely believe and confess him both in Principle Doctrine Charity and Innocent Conversation than thou hast done whose sincere Confession is also evinced against thy Brother F. Bugg By the Term Vail we neither undervalue Jesus nor set his Light above himself as is implied against us p. 25. For though every degree of Divine Light in us is of and from Christ Jesus yet 't is greater and more as in him in whom the fulness is as is more fully cleared in our said Treatise of our Christian Doctrine Concerning the Flesh of Christ being a Vail Heb. 10. thou grants was in respect to Man and so the Figure may be proper as intended by the Apostle If so then that Vail was not the entire Christ though the Name was given both to his Soul and Body in Scripture jointly and severally if by the Term Flesh be commonly understood the Person of our Lord Jesus where then dost thou prove that the Quakers contemn the Flesh of Christ considered either Spiritually or Litterally And though the Person of Christ I find but once mentioned in Scripture 2 Cor. 2. 10. from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in facie Christi vel Conspectu Christi in the Face or Sight of Christ. Yet understanding thy meaning I am not minded to quarrel with thee about Words and Terms To thy excusing F. Bugg's false Charge of Denying Jesus of Nazareth against us p. 25 I do not perceive thou canst make any good work of it upon his Instances where he makes our confessing Christ in us and witnessing him nearer us than at Jerusalem as J. Naylâ—r did c. to be a denying of Jesus of Nazareth or confessing that Divine Principle i. e. the Word the Life or Spirit of Christ to be the Foundation Principle of Living Faith and Knowledge of Christ in his Spiritual Appearance in us I cannot see how this can be a Denying of Jesus of Nazareth any more than the Apostles preaching
the Word of Faith nigh in the Heart c. However thou art chargeable with Bugg's Charge in this Case which results in this Proposition from his own pretended Proofs viz. That to affirm Christ in us or that which may be known of God in us or Christ nearer us than Jerusalem is to deny Jesus of Nazareth Wilt thou stand to this Proposition yea or nay according to Bugg's said Charge and Allegation in his Sheet If thou wilt then it will appear who is in the Spirit of Anti-christ G. W. or T. C. For whether is it not as much Anti-christian to deny Christ come in the Spirit as to deny Christ come in the Flesh And for F. Bugg's Paper to the Parliament thou grantest so far as it may affect any truly conscientious Quakers it s not well and thou believest he would not damage such p. 14. But how know'st thou that When contrarywise like a Busie-Body in other Mens Matters and malicious Incendiary he did interpose with his inveterate Lying Pamplet to the Parliament against the People called Quakers even at that very interim when our Friends were petitioning the House of Commons for ease to the said People in general in case of Oaths Did not this tend to obstruct favour being shewn them With what Face or Conscience then canst thou say thou believest he would not damage Conscientious Quakers when his Invective Pamphlet made no such distinction For shame Man do not excuse such an act of apparent Malice and Intrusion who also hast farther shewn how thou dost second Bugg in Malice and Partiality where thou sayest Liberty of Conscience is but just and reasonable for such as are truly conscientious if they could be truly distinguished from G. W. and some such as he is the opportunity G. W. may have thereby may be of ill consequence p. 14. Here thou shewest thy self offended at G. W. and his Friends having that Liberty 't is well thy Horns are short that thou hast not power to ruin us but only to bark and hiss and grin at us Thy Mercy would be that of the Wicked which is Cruelty and thou shews what thou wouldst be at namely to incense the Government against us about our Marriages and Non-payment of Tithes the latter thou art greatly concerned about for Liberty of Conscience forsooth for the free Payment of them p. 15 16 17 18 19 20. And who hinders such whose Consciences are for the Payment of them if there be any such But we â—now very few beside thy self who alledge Conscience but rather Compulsion for the Payment thereof And therefore thy Charge of Reflections on the Laws and Government of the Nation and of Pride and Insolence and deserves the Cognizance of the Ministers of State p. 15. and Contempt of the Government with much more of such inveterate Consequences against us about this case of Tithes all this is a great indication of Malice Rage and Revenge more than Reason on thy part the Civil Government need not thee to be an Informer and Instigator therein against us either because of our Non-payment of Tithes or our Christian Testimony against them For it is a Case well known to the Government ever since we were a People and many of them have so much Charity much more than thou hast as to believe it is not in Contempt to the Government of the Nation that we refuse the payment of Tithes but purely because it is a matter of Conscience to us as our deep Sufferings Imprisonments and Sequestrations on that account de demonstrate whether our Consciences be rightly informed or no in that Case However 't is an easier matter for T. C. to rail against us and to villiâ—â— those among us that have given Testimony and Reasons in print against the Impositions oâ— Tithes in this Gospel Day than for him to answer or refute such Reasons Why does he no answer T. Ellwood Besides his supposing that a there were Tithes before the Law so he know not but that there may be after that Law 〈◊〉 abolished p. 19. And who then abolished thaâ— Law that gave the Priesthood a right to takâ— them if that Law was of Divine Authority it must be abolished by Divine Authority anâ— one had that Divine Authority to abolish them â—ut Christ. Therefore it was by his Divine â—uthority they were abolished Now then it â—emains for T. C. either to prove that Christ reâ—ewed the Law for Tithes or bring an Authority above his to enforce Tithes again But presume he 'll not attempt either of these consequently he does not refute what he cites against Tho. Ellwood by his I know not but â—ere may be viz. That they who pay Tithes uphold a Legal Ceremony abrogated by Christ and thereby deny Christ to be come in the Flesh which is a mark of Anti-Christ And whereas T. C. takes up F. Bugg's Objection viz. That by this they have conâ—â—mned the Martyrs and all Christendom Kings â—â—rliament and People who pay or take Tithes aâ—â—inst which I objected his Observation is too â—â—neral upon the Martyrs because some did â—…ar Testimony against Tythes Hereupon C. chargeth me with being very fallacious â—…d with wilful wickedness and why so â—his is very harsh for saith he F. B. doth â—…t say all without Exception But I say his â—ords are general that by this the Quakers 〈◊〉 condemned the Martyrs as well as all â—â—ristendom And by what but by their Teâ—â—â—mony against the Payment of Tythes beâ—â—â—se 't is in opposition to Christ's Abrogation â—…r the Words who pay or take Tythes cannot be â—ative to any of the Deceased Martyrs for â—…y can neither pay nor take Tythes and therefore if Bugg had intended an Exception of the Martyrs who denied Tithes he should have said they have condemned such or so many of the Martyrs who have paid or taken Tithes for who do pay or take Tythes is in presenti and not in preterito The matter seriously considered I must needs look upon T. C. to be very uncharitable in deeming me fallacious and wilfully wicked in this point And I am still confirmed in my Consequence upon F. Bugg's Observation against our seeking Favour of the Government viz. So that if we cannot for Conscience sake pay Tithes he will not allow us any favour of the Government if his uncharitable Attempts may take effect And I do not find how T. C. can invalid this Consequence by his excusing Bugg in saying viz. And not as G. W. would wickedly insinuate that if any cannot for Conscience sake pay Tithes they should have no favour No no such uncharitable Sentences are toâ—… near of kin to G. W's own Spirit to come from F. B. far be it from him I dare say it never entreâ— into his Heart such an uncharitable Thoughâ— p. 17. To the first part I answer the very Instancâ— which F. Bugg and T. C. chiefly strike at in thiâ— point viz. That Tythes are abrogated bâ— Christ and the Payment thereof a Denial oâ— his coming