his Field and the Cattle to them and their Successors And as Murder and Whoredom introduced them so the Cunning and Coveteousness of the Clergy have continued them For when the Heptarchy became a Monarchy the Priests evermore would thrust in for a Share with the Conqueror and this Wrong Way came Tythes to be the Priests Right as he calls it But let this pretended Protestant answer me if he dare Was the Church then degenerated or no Was it not a Time of Popery Did not the first Martyrs except against her Was it Lawful for Princes to give away other Mens Goods upon the account for the pretended Expiation of their Sins Could the giving of them attone Is it not an acknowlegding of the Pope's Power to absolve Is it not a buying or bribing off the Guilt of Sin against Almighty God by Gifts to a Mortal Man and those extorted from poor People too Is this protestant Doctrine But above all is this instituting Tythes upon Inspiration Hell her own self was the Founderess of these things He may remember that there is better Antiquity for that Voice the Ancients report to have been heard that Day Constantine conferred those large Endowments upon the Church then for the Institution of Tythes and Rich Benefices I mean that Voice through the Heavens This Day is Poison poured into the Church Since which time it has been observed by the best Princes Wisest Counsellors and most moderate Clergy-Men that the Enrichment Impovering of Church Officers has been the Kanker of the Church and the Moth of the State 'T is not my Business to write a History but I recommend to the Inquisitive Reader Wickliff's Remonstrance The Plow-Man's Complaint Chaucer's Plow-Man's Tale walter Brute and W. Thorpes Examination in the Martyrology Pareus History of the Waldenses and Jo. Selden Men that ought not to pass for or be reputed Phanaticks especially by such who call themselves Protestants I shall only say 1st That they were the Peoples wholly 2ly It is now the Peoples Labour more then the Priests Land that brings the Encrease And Men ought not to be constrained to pay those they never hired nor to labour for those that profit them not 3ly They were given to expiate Murder and Adultery and uphold an Idolatrous Clergy upon Protestant Principles and therefore to be removed as were the high Places and Groves Idololatrously dedicated among the Jews 4ly Because it is most reasonable for a Man to believe according to his own Conscience not according to another Man's Conscience It is Unrighteous to persecute a Man for not maintaining that Religion which in his Conscience he believes to be false as wel as that it is the badge of a False Religion to persecute for Maintenance 5ly Though they may be confirmed by some Princes yet considering the End to which they were given to wit for the Maintenance of a certain sort of Religious Order now exploded whose Successors these are not so the ancient Constitution broken we can't see any Reason why they should remain unless any thing commanded is to be obeyed because Commanded and not because in it self Lawful Two things I cannot but observe First That he affirms The Clergy of England have not a Tenth much complaining that every one snips from them cujus contrarium verum For they not only snip but slice from every Body else I commend to his Perusal a Pamphlet entituled Omnia comesta a Belo where he will find a very particular Account of the Revenues of Arch-Bishops Bishops Arch-Deacons Deans Canons Prebends Rarsons Vicars petti-Canons Singing Men Choristers Organists Gospellers Epistlers Virgers Chancellers and their Attendents Delegates Registers and their Clarks Gentlemen Apparators Inferior Apparators Proctors c. I doubt not but FIFTEEN HUNDRED THOUSAND Pounds a Year will be the modestest Accompt that Computation will admit of which is but double the Revenue that former Monarchs have had for the Maintenance of their Family Crown and Dignity their Civil Justice Armies Navies and costly Embassyes If all this be to resemble Christ Jesus and his Apostles the Scripture has given us a very wrong Account of him and them The 2 d. thing I would observe is this That he has the Ignorance and Confidence to argue from the Super-excellency of Christ's Ministration to that of Moses That the Maintenance of the Ministers of the Gospel should proportionably exceed the Maintenance of the Priests under the Law Answ But certainly he is one of the first Men that made this wilde Interpretation of the Glory of the latter House excelling the Glory of the former as if Christ's House were outward or his Glory either Would he have one outward Temple figure out another as if Christ should bring in another Levitical Law to excell that of Moses Certainly the New Jerusalem after this Man's rate of Disputing must be an outward Structure of material Saphyres Emraulds Jaspers c. But there is a Pope and a Mahomet in his Belly whether he knows it or no For these Fleshly Conceits first set them to work upon their Pompous Worship neglecting the Holy Pure Self-denying Spiritual Religion of Christ Jesus and his Apostles who neither practised nor set up any Shadowy and Ceremonial Worship not settling themselves in Splendid Livings to lead Easy Quiet and Voluptuous Lives Freely they received freely they gave not as our Adversary ridiculously understands it that they gave their Miracles but sold their Preaching Indeed the Spirit of a Pompous Anti-Christ who pleads for State under a Self-denying Gospel Christ's Kingdom is not of this World and yet he pleads for the Grandeur of a Worldly Worship Ministry and Maintenance we may allow him therefore and his Tribe to be Worldly Christians but not true Followers of that Jesus who said when he was in the World I am not of the World which leads me to the next Section concerning the Ministry §. 4. Of Ministers of the Gospel In Defence of the Church of England's Ministery he tells us that they have first the Testimony of their own Conscience that they are furnished to that Office 2ly the outward Call of the Church by Imposition of Hands and Prayers Answ If the Ministers of the Church of England have the Testimony of their Conscience it must be either a True or a False Testimony If a False then not truly called upon our Adversary's Principles If True then Infallibly so and consequently both every Man hath an Infallible Witness in his own Conscience and the Preparation and Call of this Witness is the Inward Call to the Ministery Now how this can be without Revelation and Inspiration I know not But it seems Ministerial Qualification must be judged of by the Witness in the Conscience which is the Overthrow of the Priest's Cause and Doctrine But I deny that the Priests act upon this Inward Testimony for they are afraid of being made manifest to the Conscience And when we urge this Inward Manifestation they
in you that was also in Christ Jesus who being in the Form of God thought it not Robbery to be equal with God And He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of One for which cause he is not ashamed to call them Brethren Again They that are joyned to the Lord are One Spirit and He that doth Righteousness is Righteous even as He is Righteous To deny this is to deny the most Heavenly Benefit we have by Christ namely Unity and Fellowship we have with the Father and with the Son That it was an Unity not an Equality especially in the Sense he takes the Word the faithful Narrative of that Proceeding printed in the Year 1654. will further testify How great then must this Man's Miscarriage be who to render a good Man an Impostor turns Forger himself but God will reward him The next Pair he pitches upon to prove his Assertion is Maenander and James Nailer The one for affirming Himself to be sent from the invisible Regions to be the Saviour of Man-kind And James Nailer for asserting himself to be Christ and accepting Hosannah's and Divine Worship in the Streets of Bristol Answ What Maenander was I know not and it is hard believing a Character of any Man when it is given by his Enemy But sure I am that James Nailer never asserted himself to be the Christ of God Neither did he ever deny Him that appeard at Jerusalem to be the Lord 's Christ as his Writings plentifully declare especially one Paper written by him to the then Parliament when a Prisoner in Bride-wel Christ Jesus the Emmanuel of whose Sufferings the Scriptures declare Him ALONE I confess before Men for whose sake I have deny'd what ever was dear to me in this World that I might win him be found in him and not in my self whom alone I seek to serve in Body Soul Spirit night day according to the Measure of Grace working in me even to that Eternal Spirit be Glory and to the Lamb forever But to asscribe this Power Virtue to JAMES NAILER or for that to be exalted or worshipped TO ME IS GREAT IDOLATRY So having an Opportunity given with Readiness I am willing in the Fear of God the Father in Honour to Christ Jesus and to take off all Offences from every Simple Heart without Guile or Deceit His third Comparison lyes betwixt Photinus who is said to have denyed the Trinity and G. Fox as guilty of the same Error in his Account Answ I can find no such place in the Book so called Either our Adversary sets up for a New Controvertist or he dishonestly shunned giving us the Page But I am willing to believe that he took it as he found it in some other Adversary for any thing reported or printed against a Quaker is ground enough for an envious Priest to accuse him But what if G. Fox denyed the Unscriptural Expressions viz. The Trinity of distinct and separate Persons must it necessarily follow that he denyed the Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father Word and Spirit We justly renounce those Barbarous School-Terms as not suited to God's Heavenly Manifestations but the dark Conceits of some Popish Doctors His fourth Comparison is made between Soâ—inus and James Nailer in that the one denyed the Satisfaction of Jesus Christ and look'd upon his Passion only as an Example The other in that he affirmed The End for which Christ did suffer was to be a living Example to all Generations Love to the lost page 56. Answ He has not truly delivered the Opinion of Socinus whose Books shew however mistaken about Christ's Divinity that he ever esteemed his Death and Passion to have more in it then a bare Example Nor has he faithfully dealt with J. Nailer in this Quotation For first I find not the Words as cited and next the Word ONLY is by himself omitted which alone renders the Passage heterodox Suppose then that J. Nailer writ that Christ was in his Suffering a living Example to all Generations Is there no Difference between Christ's being in his Death and Passion Only our Example which he charges upon Socinus and Christ's being our living Example in Suffering which he attributes to J. Nailer How can there be a Comparison where there is so great a Disparity The First is denyed by all that own Christ The Last is owned by all that do not deny Peter who thus writ to the scattered Brethren For even hereunto were ye called because Christ also suffered for us leaving us an Example that ye should follow his Steps 1 Pet. 2.21 His fifth Comparison he makes between the Valentinians the Quakers The Former he sayes arrogated to themselves a Knowledge beyond Christ and his Apostles The Latter impudently throw away the written Word of God delude the credulous Vulgar with new fangled Revelations which he thinks he has prov'd by two Inances 1. That Th. Hollbrow a Quaker to One that urged Scripture answered What dost thou tell me of Scripture which is no more to me then an Old Almanack 2. That Fox and Hubberthorn in a Book called Truth 's Defence say The Scriptures are no standing Rule and it is dangerous for ignorant People to read them Answ To the first I say there is great Difference between one that was no Quaker and one that was or is a Quaker We have examined the matter and by all we can find both that Saying is not true as charged and it is of an ancienter date then the coming of any of our Friends into those Parts therefore not the Saying of a true Quaker To the second I return thus much 'T is true there is such a Book and it was written by G. Fox and R. Hubberthorn but he has not given us so much as one Page to direct us to the Passage So that either People must read till they find it or else take his Perversion for our Assertion Unworthy Man does he think us such Wretches that we deserve not common Justice Methinks Justice should not be denyed where so little Mercy is shewn But to answer the Instance Our Judgment about the Scriptures being the Rule we have already delivered And in what sense it is Dangerous to read them their own Book will declare 'T is dangerous say G. Fox R. Hubberthorn to read the Scripture in order to make War against the Saints to give carnal Expositions upon them Meanings contrary to them and to make a Trade of them but Blessed is he that doth read and doth understand them If this prove that Sleight to Scripture our Adversary would suggest them to be guilty of then let us be condemned But God's Witness in every unseared Conscience will acquit them and judge him for corrupt Citation and hard Speeches who dares to cry thereupon Are these not as Impudent Hereticks as the Valentinians whom he represents to have arrogated to themselves a Knowledge above Christ
we would tyranically use our selves But he thinks he has enough against us in this Expression All Governours ought to be accountable to the People and to the next succeeding Rulers for all their Actions which may be enquired into upon occasion This sayes our Adversary with a great Rant borders upon Treason respecting his Majesty the King of England Answ But what if he was not then in England but a sort of People that held this very Principle and who had sworn to God before Angels and Men to mantain it and broke their solemn Oaths Was it not Argumentum ad hominem to such a Generation And does not our Adversary know that there are Elective Governments in the World and annual Choice of Officers in our own Country that are accountable both to the People and their Successors But since he has brought the King of England's Name on the Stage upon this Occasion I shall briefly tell him and the World two things and let Men relish them as they please First That it is not for the Interest or Honour of his Government for any to be over officious in the enlarging his Prerogative beyond those bounds the excellent fundamental Laws of England have circumscribed the whole Government with No Princes Crown in Europe stands more firm then his upon English Law The Law gives both Right and Might It has been the part of such as dare not trust their Lives and Actions with the Law to whisper unlimited Power into the Ears of Prines but their ultimate Aim was not their Soveraigns Greatness but their own Protection We are no Sycophants yet we fear God and honour the King 2 ly It is not our Business to meddle with Government but to obey or suffer for Conscience sake can our Adversary ask more Several of us have been the faithful Servants both of Him and his Father and God knows their Kindness is not changed with their Religion though it admits not of their former way of shewing it And this I may truly say in general That not only our Principle leads to no such Nice and busy Medlings but we are actually unconcerned in any such things We speak not this out of Fear or Flattery the Truth has placed us far above both but knowing the World will never be good till every one mends one and that God's Grace has therefore universally appeared and yet doth in the Hearts of Men It 's both our Desire Duty Practice to endeavour after that Holy Righteous and Innocent Life it leads to and that as well for others as our selves Of Swearing But he sayes Inasmuch as we refuse to swear before a Lawful Magistrate we contradict the Word of God and throw away the greatest Tye any Prince hath upon his Subjects Insinuating as if we had been dabling with the Jesuit in this matter Answ 'T is strange that such an Illiterate sort of Mechanicks and Rustick Rabbyes as he is pleased to call us should hold such Correspondence with one of the most learned Classes in the World But as there is more Difference between us and the Papists then the Protestants the Papists by how much the Protestants have many things that are Popish and we have not so have I ever found these silly thred-bare Slanders to be the Refuge of Shallow Heads and Weak Causes But I would have all know as I have else-where said The Ground of Swearing is either through Distrust of Honesty in Him that swears or Weakness in Him to whom the Oath is made The first takes in all the Swearing that is now in the World the last those Oaths God condescended to make to the Jews So that it is either an extraordinary way of Evidence to awe Witnesses into Truth or an extraordinary Way of Promising to work Belief in the Incredulous Now Incredulity and Dishonesty are both Unchristian For as none are Christians but those who are buried with Christ by Baptism and are raised up unto Newness of Life so in that pure Law of the Spirit of Life Swear not at all is recorded And so far is this from Contradicting the Word of God that the great Word of God hath so enjoyned us for all our Adversary's Paraphrase upon it to wit Swearing in Communication for the Swearing prohibited was such as the Law allowed as Bp. Sanderson well observes It was not needful that Christ should forbid what was forbidden in it self or was alwayes Unlawful which Swearing in Communication was is as by the third Commandment Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain Christ brought forth a Righteousness that needed it not for that Grace Faith and Truth which came by Jesus Christ take away the Necessity of an Oath Consequently so far as any are in that Incredulity or Dishonesty which needs it so far they are not the Followers and Disciples of Christ nor qualified with his Evangelical Righteousness Indeed 't is a shameful thing and very dishonourable to the Christian Religion that they who pretend themselves to a Christian Society should be so un Christ-like to want and use the scareing and affrighting Asseverations dispensed with in some of the weakest times of Knowledge by which to assure one another of their Faith and Truth In such Cases where is their Evangelical Link and Tye of Unity Certainly a true Christian 's Yea should be Yea and Nay Nay that is in Answer to all Questions whether it relate to matter of Evidence or Promise they should speak the Truth and mean and do what they say which is enough This Truth is so natural that it is familiar with some to say I had rather take his Word then the other's Oath which shews how much Honesty is more credible then Swearing This made the primitive Christians not only Refuse to Swear by the Fortune of Caesar but to swear at all telling their Judges in their Answers It was Unlawful for a Christian to swear And Bp. Gauden himself assures us that they were so strict and exact that there was no need of an Oath among them Yea they so kept up the Sanctity and Credit of their Profession among Unbelievers that it was Security enough in all Cases to say Christianus sum I am a Christian And that if any urged them further they repeated this as the only Satisfaction they would give The Veracity of their Word And that he might further shew how dishonourable and needless a thing it was for Good and Holy Men and true Christians to Swear he brings in the Whole Body of the Essaeans several wise Heathen Christian Fathers Indeed it was a primitive maxim Non oportet ut vir qui Evangelice vivit juret omnino It behoves not that a Man of an Evangelical Life should swear in any Case And this Doctrine was closely follow'd by Crysostome Theophylact and several other ancient Christian Doctors Nor were the Heathen wholly insensible of the Truth of this Matter as Bp. Gauden further informs