rest to gaine a presumptive dependance upon men c. without true regard to Conviction or Perswasion Rep. If the drift of this Argument as they call it be like the rest then it cannot be to gain any dependence upon men on any consideration whatsoever without true regard to Conviction or Perswasion For that has not been the drift of any of the rest of the Arguments or matter in that Book But the drift of that Passage and of the rest also was to draw from a feigned pretence of being left to the Grace of God as a Cloak of Evil of any kind to a real acquaintance with subjection to and dependance on the Grace of God indeed This appears not only from several other Passages in that Book as Thou art not to conform to a thing ignorantly page 3. And It is thy Duty to wait upon God in silence aâ—d patience out of all fleshly Consultations page 10. The People of God ought to be left to the Guidings of the Spirit of God in themselves page 9. It is a great Truth that all are to be left thereunto Ibid but very plainly from the words immediately foregoing those which the Adversaries Cavil at For the Question being there put Ought I not to be left to the Grace of God in my own Heart The Answer there is That is of all things most desireable since they are well left that are there left for there is no fear of want of Vnity where all are left with the one Spirit of Truth page 4. This was far sure from a drift to gain a presumptive Dependence upon Men without true regard to Conviction or Perswasion And therefore it is evident that the drift of the Adversaries in suggesting this slander is to prejudice unwary Readers against Friends by misleading them into a wrong apprehension that Friends endeavour to draw them from the Divine Grace and holy Spirit in themselves to a dependence on men to act according as men shall direct them without true regard to Conviction or Perswasion in themselves But this is a foul slander upon Friends and a gross abuse to the Readers for indeed the contrary hereof is most true Friends as they have always done so now as much as ever do direct all to the heavenly Gift the saving-Grace that hath appeared the manifestation of the Spirit in themselves of it to learn and on it to depend for both Conviction and Conduct in their Religious Performances But as on the one hand they labour to bring every one to an acquaintance with this heavenly Gift in themselves and a true dependence on it for Guidence by it So on the other hand they caution all to beware that they be not beguiled by the Enemy in themselves who forms Likenesses of heavenly things on purpose to deceive and mislead thereby and for the same end transforms himself into an Angel of Light and take him for their Guide and Leader as too many have done instead of the Spirit of Truth and then demand to be left to the Grace of God in themselves when indeed they are gone from the Grace of God in themselves and oppose the manifestations operations and productions thereof in others So that the Controversy rightly stated and truly considered is not about being left or not left to the Grace of God for that all should be left to that was never doubted much less denyed by Friends but about being left or not left to that which is pretended to be the Grace of God but indeed and in truth is not it and by the fruits it brings forth sufficiently manifests that it is not it They say 't is true to plead this against our understanding is an abuse of the Plea and is little better than Heresie but none can be an Heretick that truly fears God therefore to plead this against this or that thing brought in by this or that Man or by this or that Assembly that we believe is wrong is so far from abusing the Plea that it may be a true using of it Rep. This is a very loose and trifling way of arguing having nothing cogent or conclusive in it The Passage they oppose is this To plead being left to the Grace of God against Vnity is to abuse the very Plea This was grounded upon and drawn from an undenyed Proposition that where all are left with the one Spirit of Truth they must be of one mind they can't be otherwise Now from this Proposition that All who are left with that is led by the one Spirit of Truth must be of one mind it fairly and naturally follows that for any to plead a being left to the Grace of God and led by the Spirit of God in themselves in order to countenance or defend a being of a contrary opposite mind from the rest that are led by the Spirit of God is to abuse the Plea and to commit as the Author of the Examination there says the greatest Contradiction to that very Doctrine of Scripture viz. that all should be guided by the Grace and Spirit of God in themselves for the End of that Doctrine is Certainty which the Author there confirms by several Scripture-Evidences as Ier. 32.39 Ezek. 11.19 Acts 4.32 c. This the Adversaries do not attempt to answer but turn the matter from pleading this against Unity to pleading it against Understanding which they say is little beâ—ter than Heresie and grant that to do thus is an abuse of the Plea But can nothing be an abuse of the Plea but using it against Understanding What if any have so little understanding in the things of God as to believe that God's People may be led by the one Spirit of Truth to disagree act contrary to and oppose one another in the things of God as the Adversaries say in their 16th page There is no necessity that they must agree in things Circumstantial is not this to abuse the Plea though it should not be done against Understanding but for want of Vnderstanding For the Plea of being left to the Grace of God in ones self is therefore said to be abused because used to an End and purpose directly contrary to that for which it was given For the end for which it was given is to bring men into Unity both with God from whom the Devil by Transgression divided them and with one another in the things of God in whom is no variableness nor shadow of turning And therefore to plead being led by it out of Unity and against Unity is to abuse the very Plea And surely if they go not against their Understandings they go much without Vnderstanding in concluding that because it is an abuse of the Plea to plead this against Understanding therefore for so they infer to plead this against this or that thing brought in by this or that man or by this or that Assembly that we believe is wrong is so far from abusing the Plea that it may be a true using of
rejected as a Novelty in the same Spirit wherein the World rejects the whole way of Truth as a Novelty Common and Universal matters therefore relating to the Church of God are not to be restrained to such things as have been commonly and universally received For the envious Seeds-Man was not backward to sow his evil Seed betimes and Captious Spirits have risen up early as well as now of late excepting against some one some an other thing in Doctrine or Practice yet pretending to own the Fundamental principle of Truth So that the most approved practice amongst Friends may perhaps fall short of having been in a strict Sense Universally received For Universal admits no Exception But by Common and Universal matters relating to the Church of God are to be understood matters of Common and Universal Vse and Service in the Church of God things not peculiar to this that or to'ther Member only but of common use or benefit to all the Members of the Body And that the Author so meant it his own words plainly shew page 5. Where he says Degree or Measure in the same Life can never contradict or obstruct that which is from the same Life for the common benefit of the Family of God Did Iude call the Salvation he writ of verse 3. Common because it was commonly received or because it was offered intended and tendred as a Common Benifit to all that would receive it And whereas the Adversaries say This of Conviction and Perswasion preceding Conformity hath been a Common and Vniversal matter or thing because commonly and universally received among us as a great Truth I Reply It is indeed a great Truth and hath been and is a common and universal Matter but not for the cause or reason they assign For if it had not been commonly and universally received among us as a great Truth yet it would have been a common and universal Matter relating to the Church of God because it is a Matter of common and universal Service and Benefit to all and every Member in the Church of God But since they here acknowledge that this Doctrine of Conviction and Perswasion preceding Conformity hath been commonly and universally received among us as a great Truth they do ill to insinuate which too frequently they do that Friends would draw any to a Conformity to any thing before or without Conviction or Perswasion In their 23d page They pick another piece of a Sentence out of the Book they pretend to Answer which they set down thus What comes from the Light Life and Spirit in one is the same in Truth and Vnity to the rest as if it rise in themselves This is seen in our Assemblies every day c. Now because they dare not directly gainsay this and yet are disposed to wrangle they pretend to know the Design of the Argument and quarrel with that The Design they say of this Argument is to gain a dependance upon the Teachings of God by Instruments equal at least to the Teaching of God immediately by his Spirit in our own hearts and this they say how plausible soever is not according to the Truth as 't is in Iesus Rep. Their surmise in this Case is wrong and Evil and therefore not according to Truth That which they suggest to be the Design was not the Design of that Argument as they call it But the plain and true Design of it was to obviat an Objection and cut off a false Plea for Disunion and Discord grounded upon variety of Measures and diversity of Gifts and Offices in the Body For the Author having put the Question page 4. Are there not various Measures diversities of Gifts and several Offices in the Body And having granted that there are proves that that variety and diversity of Measures Gifts and Offices in the Body administers no ground for Disunion Discord or Contrariety amongst the members of the Body since it is a false way of Reasoning to conclude Discord from Diversity Contrariety from Variety which having illustrated by an Instance of the various Senses in a natural Body without any Contrariety flowing from that variety he shews page 5. That Diversity of Gifts doth not infer Disagreement in Sense nor variety of Offices contrariety in Judgment concerning those Offices Then having from the concurrent Testimonies of the holy Scriptures set forth the Unity of God he infers that the Light Life and Spirit of God is at unity with it self in all and what comes from the Light Life or Spirit in one it is the same in Truth and Vnity to the rest as if it rise in themselves For this he appealed to the daily experience of Friends in our Meetings where the Living and sensible ones know that what comes from the Light Life or Spirit of God in any Friend that Ministers is felt received closed with and united to as Truth by those that in the same Light Life and Spirit wait as well as if it had arose in themselves this was the Design of the Author's words in that place as is apparent to any that fairly reads them and the Design was good But the Design of the Adversaries was Evil in surmising another Design without ground that they might make an occasion for Cavilling For they are fain to confess that there is no contrariety in the Spirit of God no Contradiction in the Spirit 's Teaching being all for one and the same end the good of Man by the Salvation of his Soul Nay they acknowledge There is so much Truth in what the Author hath said that when fairly stated they are content it should be as a Rule to measure the whole difference by And yet they spend about a couple of Pages in Carping at it They say betwixt God's Teaching by Instruments and Teaching immediately by his Spirit in our own hearts there is this Distinction or Difference that the first is but to prepare the latter to perfect Whereas the Scripture saith expresly When Christ ascended up on high he gave gifts unto Men some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints c. Eph. 4.8 11 12. So that hence it appears that the Teaching of God through such Instruments as he gives his heavenly Gifts unto for the work of the Ministry hath a further tendency and Service than but or only to prepare for those Gifts were given for the Edifying that is building up or Establishing of the Body of Christ and for the Perfecting of the Saints This shews the Adversaries for all their high Notions and fluttering Pretences are short of a right understanding and to seek in the work of the Ministry being ignorant of the true and full end of Divine Ministerial Gifts So again they say page 23. When the things of God do come from God's holy Spirit immediately they are then as the Oracles of God this shews they do not reckon them as the Oracles of God if they come from
as it concerns a holy Conversation or the worship of God is of any Service but until he come They err There are many outward Rules in the Scriptures of Truth that were given by the Spirit of God which have been and are of Service to many after Christ hath been witnessed come Again when they say Every latter Appearance of God is as death to the former The Expression is unsavoury and not sound For the Appearance of God or Christ do not kill one another but agree one with another and Co-operate to the work he intends thereby But when to this they add And this is our Case as well as any that did go before us c. They err egregiously For the Appearance of God in us did not bring Death to the former Appearance of God in others though to the false Appearances and Likenesses thereof it did Neither will any further Appearance of God hereafter bring Death or be Death or be as Death to this Appearance of God whereby God hath made known himself in and to his People in this Age. Again they say When the Appearance or Conversation must be measured by certain Rules it follows what is terms of Communion or is accepted with God may not be accepted with men This is a loose Expression and tends to let up Looseness Are not Sobriety Temperance Chastity Modesty Honesty c. certain Rules whereby Conversation ought to be measured If there must be no certain Rules for measuring Conversation how shall the most unruly Conversation be blamed reproved judged condemned and either reformed or rejected By these few Instances it may appear how much they are declined from Truth The God of Truth knows I have no other End in this Reply than to defend Truth and the Children of it against the slanderous Suggestions false Charges and wicked Insinuations of the Adversaries to lay Open their deceitful Dealing and to remove as the Lord shall enable me the stumbling-Blocks which they have laid in the way of the Week whereby they have caused some to fall into Misapprehensions and hard Thoughts of Friends without cause And I beseech the God of Mercy to open the Vnderstandings and clear the Sight of all those whose Simplicity has been betrayed by the Others Subtilty that they may see and escape the Enemies Snares and return to the true Fold from which they have been led astray A Reply to an Answer lately published to a Book long since written entituled A brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual c. THe Author of that Book called A brief Examination c. hath therein truly and soundly defined Spiritual Liberty declaring it to be two-fold True False according to the true and false Spirit which respectively leads into each The true Spiritual Liberty he defines to be Deliverance from Sin by the perfect Law in the Heart the perfect Law of Liberty Iames 2. otherwise called The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus that makes free from the Law of Sin and Death elsewhere stiled The Law of Truth writ in the Heart which makes free indeed as saith Christ If the Truth make you free than are you free indeed So that the Liberty of God's People stands in the Truth and their Communion in it and in the Perfect Spiritual Law of Christ Jesus which delivers and preserves them from every Evil Thing that doth or would embondage In this blessed Liberty it is not the will or wisdom of man neither the vain Affections and Lusts that rule or give Law to the Soul for the minds of all such as are made free by the Truth are by the Truth conducted in doing and suffering through their earthly Pilgrimage The false Liberty he defines to be A departing from this blessed Spirit of Truth and a Rebelling against this Perfect Law of Liberty in the Heart and being at Liberty to do our own Wills upon which cometh Reproof and Judgment This being the Basis of the work I thought fit to transcribe at large that the Reader may plainly see and understand what that Liberty is both true and false which was the subject of that Book and is now of this Controversie Against this Definition of Spiritual Liberty I do not find the Answerers of that Book for the Answer runs in the plural Number take any Exception For in the entrance of their Answer they say As to the Definition of Liberty Spiritually explained page the first We agree upon the matter But passing by some Questions and Answers in that Book tending to shew in some general Instances wherein and how far the Members of the Church of Christ may be left to their freedom They take-hold of a Question and Answer in the second and third pages which are thus exprest Quest. But doth not Freedom extend further than this for since God hath given me a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left to act according as I am free and perswaded in my own mind in the things that relate to God lest looking upon my self as obliged by what is revealed unto another though it be not revealed unto me I should be led out of my own measure and act upon another's Motion and so offer a blind Sacrifice to God Answ. This is true in a sense that is if thou art such a one that canst do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth then mayst thou safely be left to thy freedom in the things of God and the Reason is plain Because thy freedom stands in the perfect Law of Liberty in the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus and in the Truth which is Christ Jesus which makes thee free indeed that is perfectly free from all that is Bad and perfectly free to all that is Holy Just Lovely Honest Comely and of good Report But if thou pleadest thy Freedom against such things yea obstructest and slightest such good wholsome and requisit things Thy Freedom is naught dark perverse out of the Truth and against the perfect Law of Love and Liberty The Question as stated above the Adversaries find no fault with but approve and applaud often calling it a Weighty Question But for all that they either mistake or wilfully pervert it For whereas the plain and express Terms of the Question are these Since God hath given me a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left c. They in their Sophistical Glosses upon it vary the Terms and instead of God 's having given c. They render it where the Gift of God is received to profit withal And instead of I have the Gift of God in my self They put such as do adhere to it As if there were no difference or They knew or regarded none betwen God's having given a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and man's having received this Gift of
Grace and Spirit of God in my own Heart had answered Yea That is of all things most desirable since they are well left that are there left for there is no fear of want of Vnity where all are left with the one Spirit of Truth They must be of one mind they cannot be otherwise To this the Adversaries say That those that are truly left with the one Spirit of Truth must and will agree we grant and therefore where difference is carried on to the breach of Charity one side at least must be wrong but which ought in God's fear to be inquired the greater Number cannot determin it Rep. Here they grant that those that are truly left with the one Spirit must and will agree and yet at the same time suppose they will differ and which is more that they may differ and yet neither side be wrong if the difference be not carried on to the breach of Charity How they will reconcile these their different Notions I know not But since they yield that one side at least must be wrong where difference is carried on to the breath of Charity Let the Difference between them and Friends be looked into and inquiry made in God's fear on which side the Breach of Charity began that it may thence appear according to their own Proposition which side is wrong And in this Disquisition we will not expect any advantage from being the greater Number though they may give us leave to put them in mind that when and where an Argument from the greatest Number with respect to particular Places seemed to lie on their side they have not failed to urge it Now in order to a right understanding how Charity came to be broken in the carrying on of this Difference it should be remembred that when some things were recommended to the Churches relating to Christian Discipline in order to prevent such disorderly and scandalous Practices as under an abuse of our Principle of true Christian Liberty a Spirit of Looseness and Libertinism was introducing some shewed themselves dissatisfied therewith and unwilling to admit the use thereof pretending that they did not see the service of the things recommended Though this Plea was seen to proceed from weakness in some and want of a true watchfulness unto and waiting upon the heavenly Gift in themselves which would have given them a true sight and sense as it did their Brethren both of the want and of the usefulness of the things recommended yet while they kept quiet out of Contention and open Opposition Friends tenderly bore with them and carried themselves Brotherly towards them endeavouring in the love of God as occasion offered to open and inform their Minds in the things concerning which they profest to doubt But long it was not ere they abusing the tenderness of Friends towards them grew high and heady contentions and quarrelsome endeavouring publickly and labouring much in private to gather into a Faction and make a Party Which when they had in some measure effected having by evil Surmises and false Reports betrayed and misled many young Convinced Ones and some that were but weak in Judgment as well as picked up others that went discontented whose 〈◊〉 Spirits and disorderly Conversations had â—â—â—â—â—red them of the esteem they coveted amongst Friends they then appeared more openly to oppose revile and vilifie those things which before they pretended to the doubtful of and not to see a need of or service for calling them in Contempt and Derision Men's Orders human Edict Canons Constitutions Prescriptions Papists Impositions Innovations Bulls c. not sparing any reproachful Term which they thought might beget or increase in their Proselited Party a dislike of the things recommended and a dis-esteem of Friends This their unruly and turbulent behaviour gave occasion to Friends to reprove them and exhort them to study to be quiet and have regard to the Churches peace And surely had they indeed had any regard to the love of their Brethren to the peace of the Churches of Christ to the Reputation of Truth in the world or to the honour of that holy Name of the Lord by which we are called they would never have begun much less have carried on a Difference 〈◊〉 so high a Breach of Charity as they have done and that about such things as some of themselves have declared to be in their esteem but trifles small things of little or no 〈◊〉 But notwithstanding the Endeavours the Labours and Travels that were used by Friends to have reduced them to a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they grew still higher and higher in their Opposition and 〈◊〉 Carriage till at length they made not only a Breach of Charity but of Meetings also â—ending off from Friends and setting up separate Meetings of their own for themselves and their Party to meet apart in in separation from and opposition to the constant settled Meetings of Friends not only with respect to the outward Affairs and Business of the Church but even with respect to publick Worship too And in several printed Books and Papers written by some and industriously spread by others of them published the difference to the world exposing Friends as much as in them lay to the Contempt and scorn of the Prophane as Apostates Innovators Idolaters setters up of Images Idol-Prophets possessed with the Spirit of Belial and the like and not only to the Government but even to the Rabble also as a treacherous Company Introducers of Popery and but one step from it c. and that in a juncture of time when the then present discovery of the Popish Plot had exasperated the Nation against all that were but suspected to favour that Communion That this is the true state of the Case though but briefly set forth I appeal to all Friends that understand it and hereupon leave it to all such to judge in the fear of God whether the Adversaries be not they that have made this Difference and carried it on to the Breach of Charity and are therefore according to their own Conclusion WRONG The Adversaries having granted in their 16th page that those that are truly left with the one Spirit of Truth must and will agree they in the same page add But that there must be an Identity of Opinion as say they we think the School-men call it that is a Sameness of Mind and Oneness of Iudgment to Circumstantial Ceremonial or Shadowy things is sooner said than proved and savours more of Curiosity than any real Necessity Rep. It may perhaps be thought to savour more of Curiosity or something else as Vain-glory Self-conceit or a fond Affectation of being thought to have converst with School-men than of any real necessity or common Discretion for them to tell us what the School-men call Sameness of mind especially unless they could have done it upon better assurance than an as we think They had better have kept in the School of Christ where they might have learnt Sameness of mind and
Oneness of Iudgment with God's People in the things of God than have puzzled their brains about Identity of Opinion and made themselves ridiculous by Cracking of their Converse with School-men But leaving them to their thoughts and the School-men to themselves they might have learnt from the Author of the Book they are so angry with if it had pleased them to have taken notice of it that there is a difference between Sameness of mind and Contrariness of mind between Oneness of Judgment and Opposition of Judgments But if I may tell them so without offending them too much the word Opinion with respect to Religious matters is fitter for the School-men thâ—n for any that would be taken for a Quaker Nor is it aptly or properly expounded by the word Iudgment For Iudgment implies Certainty and should be Positive whereas Opinion is but Suppositive importing uncertain or doubtful Thought They complain pag. 16. that the Author of the Book they would Answer hath not made a difference between Circumstantial things and such as are truly Essential Yet they themselves have not yet told us what things they account truly Essential They said indeed once pag. 5 There are some Outward things so far Essential to true Religion as those that do contrary to them may be detected of Error But they have not particularlized what those outward things are nor whether they intend them for absolute Essentials But they are in the dark and in Confusion and no wonder having kickt against the Light and that wholsome Order which the Children of the Light have in the Light received They say Though all that fear God must and will agree in things truly Essential yet there is no necessity that they must agree in Circumstantial things Rep. This seems to me as if they should say All must agree in things Essential but they may differ disagree wrangle jangle contend and fall to pieces as much as they will about Circumstantial things There is no necessity that they must agree in them Strange But whence should this Liberty of disagreeing proceed Are not all to be led by the One Spirit of Truth into all Truth into Circumstantials as well as into Essentials Or will the Adversaries say that in Essentials indeed the Spirits Guidance is to be expected but for Circumstantials every one may choose for himself and please his own humour If they will grant which methinks they should scarce care to deny that into Circumstantial things all ought to expect and may receive the Spirits guidance and leading as well as into those things which they call Essential will they then find any room for the Disagreement they contend for Can any one of a sound mind think that the one holy Spirit of Truth will lead his Followers to contradict one another in Practice any more than to contradict one another in Words If all are led by the Holy Spirit he will undoubtedly lead them to agree not to disagree in whatsoever he leads into Of the Primitive Christians it is written The Multitude of them that believed were of one Heart and of one Soul Acts 4.32 Was it only in such things as are accounted Essential Or was it in all things then relating to Religion amongst them even in those things that were rather Circumstantial than Essential It may seem to be spoken more immediatly of those things for it follows in the Text Neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own but they had all things Common Yet none I suppose will affirm that the Community they had of Goods and outward Substance was Essential to Religion for then they that hold not that Community of Goods would want an Essential part of Religion In their 17th page having surmised before that some Circumstantial things have been over-valued they say On the other hand some seeing this as a certain wrong the Enemy hath aggravated the matter to make both wrong c. Here they seem willing to own themselves faulty provided they may fix some fault too upon those they design to asperss But they may be supposed to understand their own Guilt better than anothers If they are truly sensible that the Enemy hath made them wrong let them return to that which can make them Right They add It is our danger and will continue until the Spirit of the Son of God be more plentifully poured forth upon us that can say Father forgive them they know not what they do This say they is that which we want and should truly wait for that the great Deceiver the Occasion of all Strife and Trouble among such as fear God might be cast out c. Rep. That saying Father forgive them they know not what they do if it be spoken according to Truth and in the Spirit of the Son can be spoken only of such as know not what they do The Iews of whom the Son of God so spake Luke 23.34 knew not what they did in Crucifying him that came to save them Paul bears them that witness 1 Cor. 2.8 Now it is one thing not to be able to say of Opposers Father forgive them they know not what they do from a belief or perswasion that they do know what they do And another thing not to be able to say of Opposers Father forgive them they know not what they do from a want of the Spirit of the Son which alone can inable in Truth to say so though there be a perswasion that the Opposers do not know what they do Now this it seems is the state of the Adversaries the want of the Spirit of the Son of God plentifully poured forth upon them that can say of such as oppose them Father forgive them they know not what they do This say they is that which we want and should truly wait for that the great Deceiver might be cast out c. That this relates to themselves appears by the Advertisement which they give at the end of their Preface where they say the word We may be understood in respect to those of the same mind with the Author of their Book Their want of this shews their Condition to be bad their not truly waiting for it shews it to be worse And since they acknowledge the great Deceiver the Occasion of all Strife and Trouble among such as fear God is not yet cast out it is no wonder that he hath thus long deceived them and yet doth deceive them out of whom he is not yet cast and through them occasions so much strife and trouble to those that truly fear God But as if they had already forgot what they have here acknowledged they in the next page say As we can truly say Father forgive them they know not what they do we are not without hope But they deceive themselves if they think they can truly say that while they want the pouring forth of the Spirit of the Son of God upon them in and by which alone that
it For here is not only no Coherence between their Premises and Conclusion but a plain departing from the terms of the Proposition which was a Pleading this of being left to the Grace of God in themselves against Vnity Which word they wholly leave out and instead thereof put in to plead this against this or that thing bâ—ought in by this or that man c. This shews their shuffling and idle way of arguing However we deny that any thing believed or practised as a Religious Duty among us was brought in by any man oâ— men as men but by the Spirit of the Lord opening Counsel in the hearts of his Servants and throuâ—h them recommending the use of such things to the Church of Christ and opening the hearts of such as waited singly in the same Spirit of Truth to receive close and joyn with the same from an inward sense Conviction and Perswasion that the things so recommended were of God In which we have been and are abundantly confirmed by the sweet and powerful presence of the Lord with and amongst us in the use thereof evidencing to our Spirits his accepting us therein And if the Adversaries believe those things to be wrong that doth not prove they are wrong though it may prove their belief and themselves wrong In their 21th page They quote another passage out of the said Book in these words I must say unto thee Friend what if thou wilt not be left unto the Grace and Spirit of God in thy self Here they break off with an c. omitting the rest of the Sentence which in the said Book follows thus nor wait for its mind nor be watchful to its Revelations nor humble and quiet till thou hast received such necessary manifestations but pleadest against the Counsel of the Spirit of the Lord in other faithful Persons under the pretence of being left to his Spirit in thy self by which means thou opposest the Spirit to the Spirit and pleadest for disunity under the name of Liberty Their Answer is Then such do the thing that is extreamly Evil. Rep. No doubt of that But when they do so what is to be done in the case Are they to be left to their Liberty and Freedom in doing the thing that is extreamly Evil Is the Church bound to own them receive them acknowledge and admit them not only for Members but Ministers and Preachers while they are doing the thing that is so extreamly Evil Or in case they disturb her godly Care and Practice and grow Contentious and exalt their Judgment against her as the Adversaries have done hath she power from God to exhort admonish and reprove them and if they persevere therein in his Name to refuse any further fellowship with them till they repent of their Evil as in the 10. pag. of the Book they pretend to Answer is laid down but not taken up answered or taken notice of by them that I find Having nimbly answered to the former Quotation Then such do the thing that is extreamly evil they immediately add but on the other hand what if they are left with the Grace and Spirit of God which they may or at least some for any thing that he hath said Rep. May they so That 's strange They that will not wait for the mind of God's Spirit not be watchful to its Revelations nor humble and quiet till they have received such necessary Manifestations but plead against the Counsel of the Spirit of the Lord in other faithful Persons under the pretence of being left to his Spirit in themselves and so oppose the Spirit to the Spirit and plead for Disunity under the name of Liberty may they for any thing that he hath said who hath said all this here and more elsewhere be left with that is led by the Grace and Spirit of God in this But say they What care has he taken What remedy has he provided that true Liberty and Freedom of Speech may be maintained Rep. Let them shew if they can when or where true Liberty and Freedom of Speech hath been denied by Friends That it hath been indeed by the Adversaries may be proved if need require But it may well be supposed what sort of Liberty and Freedom of Speech they would maintain by the Licencious Liberty they have taken and used in speaking of and against such Persons and things as they dislike a Liberty to rail at and revile those whom they call their Brethren under the Names of Apostates Innovators Introducers of Popery Setters up of Imâ—ges Idolaters Idol Prophets a treacherous Company c. a Liberty to mock at scoff jear and deride the order and discipline of the Church of Christ under the contemptuous names of Canons Constitutions human-Prescriptions Mens-Inventions Edicts Bulls c. This is the Liberty and Freedom they have hitherto used both in speaking and writing how true and fit to be maintained let all that live in Truth judge To the Author's Question whether he may not exhort to the practice of what he is moved to press to the practice of they Answer We graunt he may c. Adding It 's not our Duty to obey him because he says it but because we know or at least are perswaded that what he says is true page 22. Rep. Neither that Author nor any Friend besides ever exhorted or desired much less pressed as a Duty on any to obey him or to do any thing of a Religious concern because he said it but have alwayes directed to that which would give every one a certain knowledge and Perswasion of the thing so exhorted to There was therefore no need for the Adversaries to fence themselves against that which was never offered them But they delight by such suggestions to insinuate evil surmises into the minds of their beguiled Proselites In their 22. pag. They quibble upon the words Common and Universal for citing these words out of the Book they pretend to Answer viz. But therefore are not the Members of one mind and Iudgement in common and universal matters relating to the Church of God They answer There is not much doubt in this when truly understood but we are to mind say they that we be not deceived and imposed upon as to what is or ought to be accounted common and universal matters Hereupon they give us their notion thereof both affirmatively and negatively thus By common and universal matters we understand and we hope say they according to Truth what has been commonly and universally received and not new and novel things that have not been so received Rep. This is not according to Truth which is free and illimitable whereas this would lay a Limit and Restraint upon God from opening the way of Truth and Righteousness further and further and from adding such helps and means for the Propagation thereof and preservation of his People therein as he in his unsearchable Wisdom shall see need of For every fresh Discovery may on this pretence be slighted
Spiritual Body would infer and bring in a Liberty and allowance for the members of that Body to disagree among themselves to contradict and oppose each other in and about the self same matter and thing relating to the Family or Church of God That this was his Intention appears most plainly in his 4th page Now in order to convince such of the weakness unreasonableness and falseness of that Plea he used the Comparison which the Apostle had made drawn from a natural Body wherein notwithstanding there are divers Members and various Offices to which they are adapted yet is there no disagreement among them no Contrariety Contradiction or Opposition So that the Adversaries in this Cavil do but in effect carp at the Apostle at the Holy Scripture and at the Spirit of Truth by which it was written But I come to particulars of their Answer Having said 't is plain his intention is to gain a Dependance upon what he calls the Church they add And that he makes infallible as she relates to Men. Rep. This is a notorious Falsehood not to be fastned on any thing in his Book and that I suppose they were sensible of for they do not attempt to quote any passage of his in proof of it but endeavour to prop up this by setting another Falsehood to it which is this That she must relate to Men is clear the Difference say they being betwixt Men and Men. This is false as well as the former The Difference is not betwixt Men and Men if it were it would relate to the things of Men such things as are common to Men as Men. But the Difference is between Spirit and Spirit and relates to the things of the Church not of the World of Christians not of Men as Men. But the Adversaries in their carnal minds distinguish not between Men and Christians Next they say He makes no provision in all his Book to the contrary by allowing Conviction to precede Conformity Rep. Doubtless the Adversaries are come to an high degree of obstinate hardness that without remorse they can so often repeat so foul a Falsehood as this How many places have I already cited out of that Book in which they say he makes no provision at all for this which plainly convict them of Falsehood and Slander therein when he said page 3. Thou art not to conform to a thing ignorantly was here no Provision at all made for Conviction to precede Conformity If they were not to conform ignorantly then surely they were to know be perswaded convinced before they conformed So that here was a good provision made that Conviction should precede Conformity When to the Question Ought I not to be left to the Grace and Spirit of God in my own heart He Answered Yea that is of all things most desireable c. page 3. and 4. when he said page 9. The People of God ought to be left to the Guidings of the Spirit of God in themselves and again It is a great Truth that all are to be thereunto left was here no Provision at all for Conviction to precede Conformity what better Provision could have been made for allowing Conviction to precede Conformity than to declare that God 's People ought to be left to the Guidings of God 's Spirit in themselves Is it not from the Spirit of God in ones self that Conviction or Perswasion of Duty is to be accepted and received will the Spirit of God lead them that â—e left to the Guidings of it to Conformity before Conviction no sure The leaving therefore of God 's People to the Guidings of God 's Spirit in themselves was the best Provision could have been made for Conviction to precede Conformity When to the Question If I do not presently see that Service in a thing that the rest of my Brethren agree in in this case what is my Duty He Answered It is thy Duty to wait upon God in silence and Patience out of all fleshly Consultation and as thou abidest in the simplicity of Truth thou wilt receive an understanding with the rest of thy Brethren about the thing doubted was there no Provision at all here for allowing Conviction to precede Conformity Did he say thou must Conform before or without Coviction whether thou seest the Service or no Whether thou hast received an Understanding about it or no Nay did he not positively exclude that and obviate this Cavil by saying directly It is thy Duty to waite upon God c. And what was such an one to wait upon God for to be lead into Conformity before Conviction no sure but to receive Conviction from God therefore he there added And as thou abidest in the simplicity of Truth thou wilt receive an Vnderstanding c. Nay so far was he from favouring much more from pressing Conformity before Conviction that having declared as before the Duty of such an unconvinced doubting one he adds also what is the Duty of the Brethren towards such an one thus And it is their Duty whilst thou behavest thy self in meekness and humility to bear with thee and carry themselves tenderly and lovingly towards thee Can any be so impudent as yet to say that he makes no Provision in all his Book to the contrary by allowing Conviction to precede Conformity Nay the Adversaries themselves say of him page 16. That they believe he desires all should be Guided by God's Spirit Doth this look like leading into blind Obedience like drawing to Conformity before Conviction like drawing to a Dependence upon Men as they often suggest against him how abominably wicked are they herein In their 30 page they quarrel at some particular passages in the large Quotation they gave before relating to the Metaphor of a natural Body As first they say The Author seems to make the Church immediately joyned to Christ for her Head as the natural Body 〈◊〉 joyned to the natural Head Rep. Doth this offend them It is then because they do not know the true Church nor her strict Conjunction with or to her Head Do they indeed think the true Church is not immediately joyned to Christ for her Head were they of that Church they would think otherwise It concerns them to consider whether they are not such as the Apostle complained of Col. 2.19 for not holding the Head from which all the body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and knit together increaseth with the increase of God The same Apostle exhorting the Ephesians not to be tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine by the slight of Men and cunning Craftiness whereby they ly in wait to deceive Ephes. 4.14 adds But speaking the Truth in love may grow up into him in all things which is the Head even Christ from whom the whole Body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every part maketh increase of the Body unto the edifying of
A REPLY TO AN ANSWER Lately Published to a BOOK Long since written by W. P. Entituled A Brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual c. By Thomas Ellwood 2 Tim. 3.13 Evil men and Seducers shall wax worse and worse deceiving and being deceived Rom. 16.17 Now I beseech you Brethren mark them which cause Divisions and Offences contrary to the Doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them Printed and Sold by T. Sowle at the Crooked-Billet in Holloway-Lane in Shoreditch 1691. THE PREFACE IN the Year 1681. there was a small Treatise published by a Friend under the Title of A Brief Examination of Liberty Spiritual c. The occasion of writing that Treatise was a sense the Author thereof had and an Observation he had made how much the Nature of that true Spiritual Liberty was misunderstood by some and the Name thereof abused by others in the Profession of the Truth who under pretence of being left to that Liberty in themselves and to their own Freedom therein both took liberty to do such things as were inconsistent with that true Liberty and with the Principle of Truth which they professed and despising those useful good and necessary Helps and Means which the Lord hath provided and furnished his Church or People with for the preventing and keeping out such Disorders Evils and Scandals as the unruly Nature of man through such a mistake of true Liberty might and would bring in did reject the Counsel Admonition or Reproof of their Brethren with a What hast thou to do with me Leave me to my own Freedom To reclaim if it might be those that were thus deceived and prevent others from being so the Author being pressed in Spirit for Zion's sake and for the Peace of Jerusalem and having a deep Sense as himself expresses of the working of the Enemy of Zion's Peace to rend and divide the Heritage of God did write the fore-mentioned Treatise for the Establishment of the Faithful Information of the Simple-hearted and Reproof of the Arrogant and High-minded as his Title Page sets forth As that Treatise had its Service and Acceptance with the Faithful and Simple-hearted So it has passed hitherto for between nine and ten Years free from the Cavils at least Publick of the Arrogant and High-minded till now that of late some of them who are of a restless Spirit and to whom it is uneasie to be or to let others be quiet have singled out that Book for a fresh Butt to shoot at make that a new Occasion to renew Contention and revive the old Controversie In order to this they have very lately published a Book in Answer as is pretended to several material Passages in that Book That Answer hath in the Title Page the Letters J. H. as standing for the Author's Name But since I have no certain knowledge who is meant by those two Letters and I find the general stile of the Answer both in the Preface and Book it self to run in the first Person Plural We which by the Advertisement at the End of the Preface I am told may be understood in respect of those of the same mind with the Author of that Book I chose in my Reply to entitle the Adverse Party to it without regard to any particular Person They labour much throughout their Book to fasten an ugly Imputation or Charge upon the Author of that Treatise they pretend to Answer of endeavouring to bring in a blind Obedience an implicit Faith Conformity before and without Conviction a Dependence on Men instead of a Dependence on God endeavouring to obtrude or set up Opinion or the likeness of Truth instead of Truth c. How far from Truth this Charge is the following Reply is intended to manifest How far from true Christianity a man must be that could be guilty of all this is manifest of it self The Adversaries therefore that they might not hereby too much disgust such of their Favourers as have not wholly cast off all good thoughts of him they thus traduce make as if they would in Charity excuse the Author from doing those things knowingly pretending to believe him both a better Man and more a Christian. But how unlike Christians they have dealt with him in Answering his Book the following Reply will in part discover Here in their Preface for the reason of his doing the things they slanderously tax him with they assign his being deceived through the mysterious working of the Enemy which that it may not seem strange they wish their Reader to consider how many have been deceived thereby both great and small and some at times hurried into things grosly Evil as killing their fellow-Creatures and yet at the same time think they did God service But as no good Christian ever did so So by the Comparison they have made they sufficiently shew what a sort of Christian they in reality esteem him to be Their Preface is so much both for matter and manner of the same Piece with their Book that much of what is in the Preface will be taken notice of in the Reply to the Book to which therefore for avoiding needless Repetitions I refer Yet because they have loosely scattered through their Preface many unsound Expressions which perhaps may not so fitly be handled in the Reply I will briefly touch a few of them here As Their calling the likeness of Truth a Third thing besides what is Evil and Good and saying that it stands betwixt Evil and Good though they bring it in with as As we may say will not hold weight but unsound For that which is only like Truth but is not Truth doth not stand betwixt Evil and Good but whatever it seems to be is really and directly Evil and stands in and with the Evil. So their making the Covering of the Soul where the likeness of Truth is received for Truth c. to be as the Linnen and Wollen-Garment forbid to be worm under the Law is an unfit and unsound Comparison For neither the Linnen nor the Wollen was Evil though as a Type of Sincerity and Singleness of Heart they were then forbidden to be worn in one Garment together but either the Linnen might lawfully be worn by it self or the Wollen by it self But the likeness of Truth that which is only like Truth but is not Truth may neither be received together with any thing that is Truth nor alone by it self without Truth So when they speak of Outward Rules they say Every adding of outward Rules shews a want of Christ's Government by his holy Spirit They mistake If it shews a want of any thing it shews a want of Subjection to his Government by his holy Spirit not a want of that Government Neither is Christ's Government by his holy Spirit incompatible with outward Rules but whatever outward Rules Christ by his Spirit gives are consistent with and agreeable to his Government by his Spirit So again when they say It is certain that no outward Rule
sign of a right Christian Mind and Spirit Again they say pag. 3. Either he believes his Answer is full to the Question or he believes and knows it is not If he believes and knows it is not full then must he not only not have asserted the Truth as above but also be conscious wherefore he did it not and we conceive there 's another of their Conceptions that must either be because he wanted ability or because he wanted Truth in his way Here are a pair of inconclusive Conclusions together pieced out with a shallow Conceit of their own which I should not have thought worth taking notice of but to shew the well-meaning Reader what false ways of Reasoning they work by to beguile the simple Amongst whom though such sort of Reasoning may pass for currant and perhaps be thought of some force by such as through yeilding to the Enemies suggestions against the Truth are become vailed and clouded in their understandings yet to the opened Eye the single Eye the inlightned mind it appears as indeed it is empty shallow trivial weak and false Now as to the Answer it self after all their vilifying of it it will appear to the honest-minded to be pertinent proper and full enough to the Question to which it was given The Adversaries I perceive expected an Answer to consist only in a Yea or Nay and they account the Answer not direct because as they think it does not directly affirm or deny But it is their want of skill if without offence they may be told so that makes them think an Answer not direct unless it be exprest by Yea or Nay As the Answer relates to the Question so the Question related to as being grounded on the Definition of spiritual Liberty which the Author had given before That therefore the Answer they except so much against may appear to be both proper full and direct enough to the Question I desire both the Question it self and the Definition of that Liberty propounded in it and on which it is grounded may be seriously and impartially weighed together The true spiritual Liberty on which the Question was grounded was defined to be Deliverance from Sin by the Perfect Law in the Heart the perfect Law of Liberty c. as is before set down at large And this Definition the Adversaries have subscribed to The Question that follows and is grounded upon this Definition of spiritual Liberty or freedom is this Since God hath given me a Manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that I have the Gift of God in my self should I not be left to act according as I am free and perswaded in my own mind in the things that relate to God c. Now consider since it is certain that this Gift of God is universal that the Manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal and yet no less certain that All who have this Gift in themselves are not subject to it that All to whom the Manifestation of the Spirit is given to profit withal have not received the Gift nay that of them who do profess to have received it All have not so received it as to profit therewithal to be redeemed thereby into the true Spiritual Liberty These things I say considered such a positive absolute undistinguishing Answer as the Adversaries expected and call for of a simple granting or denying the Question by a positive Yea or Nay without distinction or explanation could not in Truth have been given For that had been to say that none ought to be left to their freedom no not They who by receiving the divine Gift in themselves subjecting to it and growing up in it are truly thereby brought to the true Freedom indeed the Freedom that stands in Truth the true Spiritual Liberty Or that All ought to be left to their freedom in the things relating to Goâ—â— even they who through their alienation from God know nothing of either this true Libety or the Gift that leads to it or They that professing to know it and to have received it live not in subjection to it and so are not brought to the true Spiritual Liberty by it but have a freedom out of the Truth a freedom to do such things as the Truth condemns The Author therefore rightly distinguishing these different states answered aptly to the Terms of his Question granting the Question in a right sense but not in a wrong sense For the Question not opening the particular state of the Party demanding this freedom but being grounded only upon the Gift or Manifestation given which is applicable not only to all in the Profession of Truth how disorderly and scandalous so ever but even to all mankind and not mentioning the Parties having received the Gift in the love of it closed with it to an improvement of it to a profiting therewith and dwelt in a subjection thereunto which alone brings into the true Spiritual Liberty therefore the Author that he might divide his Answer aright said If thou art such an one that canst do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth as much as to say If thou art indeed come by thy subjection to the Heavenly Gift given thee into the true Spiritual Liberty and thy freedom stand in that then mayst thou safely be left to thy freedom in the things of God and the Reason said He is plain Because thy freedom the freedom thou wouldst be left to stands in the perfect Law of Liberty c. As much as to say thy freedom if this be thy state is the true spiritual Liberty before defined and therefore thou mayst safely be left to that both with respect to thy self and to the Church of Christ which thou art a Member of since that freedom will not lead thee to do any thing against the Truth but all for the Truth And herein it is evident the Author had direct Relation to that Definition of true Spiritual Liberty which he had given before and which the Adversary now agree to But on the other hand If thou who demandest to be left to thy freedom in the things of God art not come to this true spiritual Liberty but notwithstanding God hath given thee a manifestation of his Spirit to profit withal and that thou professest in words to have received this Gift yet thou hast not so closed with and subjected to this divine Gift as to have profited therewithal and so art not come into this true Spiritual Liberty but by rebelling against the perfect Law of Liberty in thy Heart thou art gotten into a false Liberty a false freedom a freedom to do such things as are out of Truth then it is not safe either for thy self or for the Church of Christ which thou seemest to joyn with for thee to be left to this freedom of thine since that will lead thee to act not for the Truth but against the Truth to bring dishonour to the Truth disturbance to the Church
must follow All must be left free or None must be left Reply They are very quick at their Consequences But it concerns them to see that their Consequence contains no more than their Premises When they say All must be left free what All do they mean All that are called Quakers or only All that are in Christ from the Babe in Christ upward If they say only All that are in Christ according to the Description they have given of being in Christ what more or other is that than the Author they carp at had said before If they mean All that are called Quakers that 's more by their leave than is in their Premises For there they say Therefore we believe where the Gift of God is received to profit withal and truly adhered to there must be a Liberty to chuse and refuse things according as such are perswaded even from the Babe in Christ to the strong Man c. And sure they will hardly say that All that are called Quakers have so received the Gift have so adhered to it have so profited with it as to be really in Christ and that according to their forecited Description of being in Christ though but in a Babish state or degree They were therefore too hasty in their Conclusion that All must be left free or None They should have remembred that the Definition of true Spiritual Liberty to which they say they agree was Deliverance from Sin by the perfect Law of Liberty in the Heart a being made free indeed by Christ the Truth All have not this freedom They cannot be left to it who neither have it nor know it Must therefore None be left to it although they know it and have it They should have considered that Spiritual Liberty was declared to be two-fold True and False So that there is a false Liberty a false freedom as well as a True a Liberty to do our own Wills upon which comes Reproof and Judgment Examinat of Lib. Spir. p. 1. Would they have All nay would they have any left to this freedom to this Liberty to do their own Wills in Opposition to God's Will That would bring Reproof and Judgment indeed Now because it is a pleasing and desirable thing to man's Nature to be left to its Freedom to be at Liberty to do or not do what it pleases and how it pleases in Religious as well as in Civil matters whereupon it may sound harsh in the Ears of some that any should not be absolutely and unquestionably left to their own Freedom to do what they think fit without being accountable to others Therefore that I may remove all grounds of Offence and Stumbling on this occasion out of the way of such as are honest-minded I am willing here as briefly as with plainness I can to open the matter further First therefore a little to explain the Terms and shew what is meant by those words Not to be left to ones Liberty to act as one is free c. I take the meaning thereof to be that no Person who doth profess to be a Member of a true Christian Society ought or hath right to plead any Exemption upon the account of his Liberty or Freedom from being called to an Account by that Society which he professes to be a Member of in case such Person shall do any thing repugnant to the Principles of that Society or tending to the Defamation or hurt thereof But that every such Society hath power to call any such professed Member to an Account in order to inform him and open his understanding if he be weak and dark to Reprove Rebuke and Exhort him to Repentance if he prove heady wilful contentious and Unruly And if he obstinatly persist therein to refuse any further Fellowship with him until he manifest true Repentance This is the Power the utmost Power that the Church of Christ claims namely to Inform Instruct Reprove Admonish Exhort to Repentance such of her professed Members as go astray and if nothing less will serve to refuse Communion with the Impenitent and those that reject her and declare them not to be of her Now that it may appear how reasonable as well as needful it is that there should be such Power in the Church of Christ I desire the Reader in the next place to consider that in the best Religious Societies of men there have always been as to outward Profession Good and Bad True and False Right and Wrong With Israel of old there came up out of Egypt a mixt Multitude or a great mixture Exod. 12.38 Besides which many of the Israelites themselves when they came to be tryed in the Wilderness proved to be Murmurers Complainers Gain sayers and Rebellious So that the Apostle rightly observed they are not all Israel which are of Israel Rom. 9.6 In the Christian Church at the first gathering thereof many that walked a while with Christ so far as to be reputed his Disciples wont back and walked no more with him Iohn 6.66 How it was afterward in the Apostles times the Epistles of the Apostles sufficiently show There were in the Church at Corinth some that were carnal and walked as men 1 Cor. 3.3 There were many the Apostle tells the Philippians that so walked that they were the Enemies of the Cross of Christ Phil. 3.18 There were some in the Church at Thessalonica that walked disorderly 2 Thes. 3.11 There were some in the Church in Fergamos that held the Doctrine of Balaam who taught Balack to cast a stumbling-Block before the Children of Israel to eat things sacrificed to Idols and to commit Fornication for by that name doth the Holy Ghost call those unlawful Marriages of Believers with Unbelievers which Balaam taught Balack to draw the Children of Israel into with the Midianitish Women Rev. 2.14 There were some also in that Church as well as in the Church in Ephesus that held the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans ver 6. 15. Which by Ecclesiastical Writers is delivered to have been Community of Wives as well as of other things And sure enough it was some great Evil which Christ exprest his Hatred of There was in the Church in Thyatira the Woman Iezabel seducing like Balaam to Fornication c. Not to fetch instances out of every Church there were some that walked after the Flesh in the Lust of Uncleanness 2. Pet. 2.10 These were presumptuous self-willed despised Government and spake Evil not only of Dignities but of things they understood not ver 12. Yet these were great sticklers for Liberty for They promised Liberty to such as they allured being themselves mean while the Servants of Corruption ver 19. Of whom a more full description may be seen in the rest of that Chapter and in the Epistle of Iude. Thus it was in those times How it hath been in our time since the Lord first gathered us to be a peculiar People to himself they must have had but little Experience or made but
have told us They are sure their End is not to give Liberty to Evil they add But to Answer All the Objections that may be made as it would take up too much time so perhaps we may not know all that may be advanced so we shall Omit that till we are better informed of them as also till more fitting Opportunity do occur Rep. A dull Come-off Who that were shameless might not at this rate avoid Answering any Objection that lies hard upon them by pretending it would take up too much time to answer all Objections and that perhaps they may not know all that may be advanced They told us in their 5th page There is but one Objection and that is That this is to give Liberty to Evil and they made a kind of Promise to speak to that in another place Why did they not answer this One Objection which themselves had advanced Now because they know not what to say to it nor how to Answer that One Objection they pretend it would take up too much time to Answer all the Objections that may be made and that perhaps they may not know all that may be advanced Is not this pittiful Shuffling Is not this mean Trifling for men for such men for men so cryed up as some of them are Perhaps say they we may not know all that may be advanced What then should that hinder them from taking notice of what they did or might know of what was advanced Did not the Book they pretend to Answer enumerate several Particular Evils which the Enemy by that Plea of leaving every one to act as he is free c. is introducing a Liberty to as Paying Tythes to Hireling-Priests Marrying by the Priest Declining a publick Testimony in suffering times or hiding in times of Persecution Worshipping and respecting the Persons of men and Observing the World's Holy-days and Mass-days as they call them Why did they not Answer these that were advanced as there phrase is Did they want to be better inform'd whether These are Evils or no They could not but know that most of these Evils have been closely charged as the Fruits of that Spirit they are now joyned to And their so slightly slipping over them now is no good sign that they are wholly clear and free from them They boast indeed of Life and Conversation but distinguish not that I observe betwixt Conversation Civil and Religious betwixt that which relates to the World and that which more especially respects the Church of God 'T is true they say in general words p. 43. with respect to Lives and Conversations Place your Iudgment upon what is Evil and spare not for there it will stand for we plead not for Evil in any And again We grant that any may reporve Evil and what is Immoral c. p. 46. But their explaining Evil by the terms Immoral and simply Evil as in pag. 39. where they say If Nothing that is simply Evil or Immoral can be charged upon your Brethren c. And in p. 44. Though nothing that is Immoral or Evil in it self can be proved against them shews they mean by Immoral such open Prophaneness and Debaucheries as Human Laws correct And so notwithstanding their pretending Not to plead for Evil in any their Plea may indulge and countenance those Evils before mentioned of paying Tythes to the hireling Priest of being married by the Priest c. and of marrying such as are out of Truth yea out of the Profession of it yea and of all the Disorders that heady and unruly Persons are capable of committing against Church-Society by raising and fomenting Strife and Contention amongst Brethren by drawing and gathering into Parties Sides and Factions by making Schisms Rents and Breaches by running into down-right Division and open Separation All which are Evils and such Evils as the Judgment of Truth always was is and ought to be placed upon But seeing the Adversaries hide themselves under the Terms Simply Evil or Immoral let me ask them more particularly Whether it be not an Immoral Act for any one to deprive Another by force or fraud of his just Right and Property They know what of this kind has been done by some of their own Party at Reading and other Places where they have forcibly kept Friends out of their publick Meeting-Houses and deprived Friends of their just and lawful Right and Property in those Meeting-Houses contrary to all Right and Justice Now though Truth 's Judgment hath been placed and doth stand and abide upon this Evil and upon the Authors and Abettors thereof And though being so undeniable in fact and so gross in nature some of the Adversaries are ashamed or afraid to plead for it Yet which of them all has joyned with Friends in placing the Judgment of Truth upon it and upon them that are more immediatly guilty of it Nay do they not rather own and joyn with such as have been and are most guilty in this case and receive such of them as are Preachers to preach and pray amongst them In their 5th page they take a slight notice of the latter part of the Author's Answer where he said But if thou pleadest thy Freedom against such things yea Obstructest and Slightest such Good Wholsom and Requisit Things namely such things as are Holy Just Lovely Honest Comely and of good Report as he had mentioned just before thy freedom is naught dark perverse out of the Truth and against the perfect Law of Love and Liberty In the reciting of which I observe they slip over these words obstructest and slightest as being Conscious perhaps that they have done so and have no colourable defence to make for their so doing Their Answer to the rest is this This is still to the same Tune here is a Iudge implied but not set forth 't is not say they the Spirit of Truth but some outward thing whatever it is and they add We know not where he will fix c. Rep. To the same Tune They were in a jolly Humour sure when they borrowed this Phrase from the Ballad-mongers So pag. 17. they say Shall we Pipe to the same Tune for Company Truth would have taught them more Gravity and it is to be hoped their beguiled Proselites will observe and take notice what a frothy Spirit they are guided by But though they say The Judge is not set forth but only implied and by theâ—â— saying Whatever it is they imply they know not what it is nay they confess in plain Terms they know not where he will fix yet in this tuning strain they as boldly as blindly that is confessedly not seeing or knowing what it is adventure to affirm 'T is not the Spirit of Truth By which the Children of Truth know that the Adversaries in this Judgment are out of Truth In the same airy Vein they go on thus But since we know not where he will fix to say no more 't is dark to be sure Then as if on
differ about them But as that were wicked to imagin So I wish the discovery of so many absurd and false Notions as have here in a few Lines dropt from them may awaken them and others to consider what Spirit it is they are guided by When they say they believe nay are sure God hath left such things as they except against unmeasured on purpose that Men might agree that Christians might never differ about them I take their meaning to be that God hath therefore left such things free that some may practice them others not practice them according as either sort like or dislike them without taking offence at each other therefore Now if this be their meaning this is of force against themselves to clear the things they except against from having Evil or harm in them for if there were any Evil or harm in them God would not leave any of his People at liberty to use them And then all the Clamour and Out-cry Division and Mischief the Adversaries have made is against things which they cannot in Truth say have any Evil or harm in them In their 10th page the Adversaries take up another Question out of the forementioned Book which in that was thus laid down But must I conform to things whether I can receive them or no Ought I not to be left to the Grace and Spirit of God in my own Heart The Answer was to the first part of the Question Nay to the last Yea. This Answer they seem to like for they say of it This is fairly said we must confess But as fairly as it was said they unfairly alter it in taking upon them to explain it for reciting the Author's Answer viz. to the first part of the Question Nay that is say they Thou ought not to receive things against Truth Whereas the first part nor any part of the Question was not Ought I to receive things against Truth But it was Must I conform to things whether I can receive them or no Betwixt which Answer and their explanatory Gloss there is no small difference both in words and matter For it is one thing Not to conform to things because I cannot receive them which may be and yet the things be agreeable to Truth and the fault in me only that I am not in that which would lead me to receive them And it is another thing Not to receive things against Truth which none ought to receive and which it would be Evil in me to receive and conform to if I could But though in this they deal not fairly by the Author yet by his Answer it is evident that none is put upon Conforming to any thing that they cannot receive But all are left to the Grace and Spirit of God in their own hearts which is that that leads into the true Spiritual Liberty before defined though not to the freedom of their own unruly Wills to oppose obstruct revile and vilifie those things which they say They cannot receive and them that have received and do practice them muchless to rend divide separate from them and yet break in upon them and force upon them their Preaching and Praying as if they were still of them though apparent Enemies to them But though they seem to approve his Answer at the first yet they soon find fault with it again because they think there is not sufficient Provision made by him for withstanding the things if the fault be in them Repl. How may we suppose he could admit the fault to be in the things which he prae-suppos'd to be good wholsom and requisit Or how can the fault be in the things if God has left them as the Adversaries say unmeasured that is if I reach their meaning free for his People to practice or not practice He would not leave any thing for some of his People to practice which others of his People could not practice from a fault in the thing it self And although from the Author 's asking Is the fault in the thing themselves They would gladly catch an advantage to infer that It is fairly implied if not granted that the fault may lie on the side of the things brought in yet they fall short in that also for Interrogatvies have sometimes the force of Negatives The Apostle when he said Is there Vnrighteousness with God Rom. 9.14 did not imply muchless grant that there might be Unrighteousness with God But they add that The fault doth lie in the things for any thing he hath said to prove the contrary Repl. It seems they expected a proof of Negatives That were needless 'T is enough that they have not proved a Fault in the things they reject and despise When they attempt that a disproof thereof I believe will not be wanting They say We may conclude such as bring them in viz. the things they say are suggested as the ground of Difference are reputed Leaders Repl. I say such as raised the Opposition at first and made the Division thereby and led into the Separation thereupon were reputed and were Leaders among them They add p. 11. The Leaders may do more harm in bringing in things that are wrong than others can do in Opposing some things that may in some sort be right Repl. If this be true to any purpose yet it is nothing to this purpose The things they complain of for being brought in they have never proved to be wrong nor ever can therefore there has been no harm done by bringing those things in as their Phrase is But the harm has been done by the heady and unruly Opposition they have made against those things that are right They say The Leaders have caused the People to err and the effect was that the People led by them was devoured Repl. This is rightly applicable to themselves The Children of Light in the Light see it and lament over them Their Leaders have caused them to err and by following them they have been led into that Separation which unless by Repentance they quickly return from will certainly destroy them Again they say The way to prevent the danger is by allowing freely Conviction and Perswasion to precede Conformity Repl. This is an evil Suggestion by which they would insinuate that Friends did press Conformity before Conviction and Perswasion which is utterly false contrary to our Principle and contrary to our Practice That it is contrary to our Principle the Book and place they here pretend to Answer evinces For there the Author having put the Question Must I conform to things whether I can receive them or no Answers directly and positively Nay And even so they cite his words In the same place also he says Thou art not to conform to a thing ignorantly yet thou art to consider why thou art ignorant and what the cause of such Ignorance may be What can be plainer That it is contrary to our Practice also is matter of Fact Let the Adversaries therefore prove if they can that Friends
Liberty against all Duty is expresly term'd the seared Conscience in the Book place the Adversaries pretend to Answer The dark Conscience and the dead Conscience are not there charg'd with that with pleading Liberty against all Duty or denying all Duty How then know the Adversaries but the dark Conscience may find a place among the Latter among those that believe nothing a Duty but what they are perswaded of And how then will it hold that the Latter they that believe nothing a Duty but what they are perswaded of do indeed own all Duty that can be known Will the Adversaries upon second thoughts advisedly and consideratly assert that All they who believe nothing a Duty but what they are perswaded of do really own all Duty that can be known I don't think they will Nay I find they begin already to flag from it within two lines for they immediatly subjoyn thus The first denying all Duty is Evil but the Latter as they own all Duty that they know so c. Here it is not as above all Duty that can be known but all Duty that they know If they own all Duty that they know 't is well But there is some odds sure betwixt owning all Duty that they know and owning all Duty that can be known But so little constant to themselves so little consistent with thenselves are the Adversaries so loose and regardless of the terms they write in that Do know and Can know Are known and Can be known seems to be alike with them They add As the Latter own all Duty that they know so may they wait truly to know what God is pleased further to shew Rep. I grant they may so I wish they would so and it is that which All are exhorted to But if they do not so what then What may be may not be And I suppose the Adversaries will grant that as they may so it is not impossible but that they may not wait so truly as to know what God is pleased further to shew And then if by reason of their not waiting or not waiting so truly and rightly as to know what God is pleased further to shew they fall short of miss and deprive themselves of the knowledge of what God is pleased further to shew or what God requires as a Duty of them will their falling short through their own default and missing the knowledge thereof make it not to be a Duty to them There were indeed times of Ignorance the Apostle saith at which God winked But now he hath commanded All men every where to Repent Acts 17.30 Why now Because now the Gospel Light the discovering Light the universal Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world is arisen and broken forth by the inshinings whereof every one is put into a Capacity to know and understand what God requires of him After all this in pag. 14. They tell us They believe where the Gift of God is received to profit withal and truly adhered to nothing is a Duty incumbent upon such but what they are perswaded on Rep. Here now they have given it another stretch What was spoken with direct relation to a state of Carelesness Disobedience Prejudice c. or a seared dark or dead Conscience they apply to such as have received the Gift of God to profit withal and truly adhered thereto and make their Inference from that misapplication What they speak pag. 13. concerning Circumstantial things being called requisit things on the score that we could not as they say know dead dark and seared Consciences without them hath nothing in it but an unsavoury Scoff fit to discover what frothy Spirit it came from But when they ask in the same flouting manner if those Requisit things that keep out or make known those dead dark and seared Consciences c. can keep out Hypocrites I must tell them that is in one sense a difficult matter For truly I think there can hardly be a grosser sort of Hypocrites found than those that having publickly printed Friends to the world to be Apostates Innovators Introducers of Popery Idolaters setters up of Idols with much more of that kind and having upon that score as they pretend separated from us and set up separate Meetings of their own will and no yet come whether we will or no into our Meetings in shew and pretence of joyning with us in Worship and impose upon us to hear them Preach and Pray among us and require to be received and owned by us therein after they have so publickly disowned us and departed from us But though such Hypocrites will not keep out but will thrust in yet they cannot keep themselves from being discovered but are known to be what they are In their 15th page they carp at an Expression taken out of the 9th page of that Book which they pretend to Answer It is this A Saying may be true or false according to the Subject Matters it is spoken upon or applied to They say We believe he has missed the Truth there And repeating it pag. 44. they say That we believe is a mistake for we think Truth 's Testimonies are not false because some may misapply them Rep. The Author's words are not that Truth 's Testimonies may be true or false c. But that a Saying may be true or false c. Now we know every Saying is not Truth 's Testimony And yet even that which is a true Testimony when spoken of or applied to a right Subject may not be a true Testimony when spoken of or applied to a wrong Subject When the Apostle said I have fought a good Fight I have kept the Faith c. Henceforth is laid up for me a Crown c. 2. Tim. 4.7 8. This was a true Testimony as spoken of or applied to him But this same saying if applied to or spoken of Iudas Demas or any other Apostate or wicked Person would not have been true but false But though they Cavil at this saying from him yet they could be content the same fort of Expression should pass for Truth from them when they thought to serve their own turn by it For in their 4th pag. blaming his Answer to that Question which he said was true in a sense they say it is so far true that if it can be wrong at all 't is only in a sense and that is only when misapplied Misapplying then it seems can make a Right saying Wrong when they hope to get some advantage by it else not Doth not this shew both great Partiality and a captious mind So also they wrangle much about that Expression The Root of Ranterism Whereas they might easily have seen it to be a Metaphorical or Figurative Speech to shew that that Assertion was a Radical or Fundamental Principle or Doctrine of the Ranters from which as Fibres from a Root other erroneous Tenets did sprout forth and grow up But this shews their propensity to Contention and Quarrelling Now
and certainly known as the Tares in the Parable at the first sight were to be Tares Ah how would this loose Spirit that is got up in some turn Spiritual Zion the inclosed Garden of God into a Plowed-Field However it is to be hoped Their applying the Parable of Tares to themselves may help to make some others understand them better than hither to they have done And their pleading for a Toleration for Tares to grow in the Church for of the Church and its Members they here treat not of the World may give some a further sight of their Design for sheltring Evil and what they aim at in this Plea than ever they had before After they have shewed the utmost of Immoderation in managing the Difference on their own part they now at length begin to preach Moderation to Others If say they this Difference cannot be ended manage it with more Moderation they might have added than themselves have done and in that love of God that it may be shewed the Lord is at hand to gather different apprehensions into a better Temper They might have added than Themselves have hitherto been in Rep. But why did they not think of this Moderation before they published their many scandalous and malicious Books to the defaming of Truth and Friends to the world as much as in them lay Why did they not preach this Moderation to their own Party at Reding and other Places to have gathered them into a better temper for a worse they could hardly have been in than to keep Friends out of their Meeting-Houses wherein they had a just and legal Property and expose them for divers Years together to those hardships that Heat and Cold Rain and Storms of Weather bring They who have done the greatest mischief by their Immoderation that they can begin now to recommend Moderation to others And they who have done their utmost to dishonour the God of Truth and Peace before the People by publishing their wicked Books and setting up their separate Meetings do now take upon them to exhort Others to Moderation Otherwise say they you will dishonour the God of Truth and Peace before the People Is not this Hyprocrisie in grain They add pag. 46. You must agree together quietly or part friendly or you are no Preachers of Righteousness whatever your Principles of Truth may be Rep. To what end do they propose this now so long after they have actually parted from us They have had their separate Meetings these many years And more than a year ago some of them gave us to understand in Print that they had chosen to meet apart and had withdrawn But since they did neither agree quietly with us while together nor did part Friendly when they withdrew does it not follow upon them according to their own words that They are no Preachers of Righteousness whatever Principles of Truth they may hold They urge the Example of Abraham and Lot for parting by agreement But they do not take notice that that was only a parting of outward Habitations and that through Necessity because the place was not large enough to hold them So that this was not a Religious parting muchless a parting through Opposition of their Spirits Yet this was in the Vncircumcised state too for Circumcision was not instituted till after this But they would do well to consider that Lot who took his Choice and parted from Abraham the Friend of God came to great Loss and suffered deeply thereby For though at first remove he pitched his Tent but towards Sodom Gen. 13.12 yet quickly after we find him settled in Sodom chap. 14.12 And he had not long been there before he was made a Captive and was glad to be rescued by him he had parted from O that all that are in danger of being beguiled betrayed and led away by this Dividing Spirit and its Agents would consider these things in a Spiritual Application and beware of Separating from God's Friends lest by the pleasantness of the Plains where liberty freedom room and scope may be had to walk at will they be allured to pitch their Tents towards mystical Sodom and by degrees drawn into it It follows in their Book But why cannot you agree together whilst you own one and the same righteous Principle Rep. By this it seems as if owning a Principle were Terms of their Communion To own the Principle of Truth is one thing to hold it keep to it and obey it is another Many do the one that do not the other Many own the Principle of Truth in words that never came into Obedience to it and some that have departed from obedience to the Principle have yet retained a verbal Acknowledgement of it And of them that have made Profession of the Truth and afterwards turned their Backs upon it how few are there that do not own the Principle They find fault with something or other in the Society to make themselves an Out-let that they may thereby slip out and shake off the Yoke of Christ which is as uneasie to the Wrong as easie to the Right But they commonly cry up the Principle still Do not Pennyman Crisp and Bugg own in words the same righteous Principle still Let me turn the Question then upon the Adversaries and ask them Why cannot you and those men agree together whilst you and they own one and the same righteous Principle Nay why cannot you and they agree in other things as well as in contending against Truth and writing Books against Friends They add You came out together have you not done the greater and cannot you do the less That 's strange Rep. That 's not so strange as they would make it Israel of old came out of Egypt together and with them a mixt multitude Exod. 12.38 or as in the Margin a great Mixture But all they that came out together did not agree to travel on together No some grumbled and murmured at the Hardships in the way Some emulated and repined at the superior Gifts and Graces of their Brethren Some let in and cherished Evil Surmises and false Iealousies concerning their Brethren as if some of their Brethren took too much upon them and lifted themselves up above the Congregation and sought a Principality or Lordly Dominion over the rest Numb 16. Thus wrought the subtil Enemy after divers manners to divide scatter and turn aside some after one manner some after another Some were swallowed up of the Earth and perished in their Gain-saying Some were for making themselves a Captain in opposition to the Captain God had made and for returning again into Egypt the Land of Darkness out of which they came up together Others were consumed by the Fire of the Lord which in hot Indignation brake forth against them And all the Murmurers fell in the Wilderness Now all these things as the Apostle says hapned unto them for Examples and they are written for our Admonition 1 Cor. 10.11 Therefore Murmur not ye as some of them also Murmured and were destroyed of the Destroyer ver 10. That which remains of the Adversaries Book is mostly a Recapitulation or contracted Repetition of their foregoing Reasonings grounded upon a false Hypothesis or Supposition that Friends would impose new things as matters of Faith and terms of Communion and would bring in blind Obedience by pressing Conformity before Conviction and the like which I hope the Reader will find to his Satisfaction refuted before That therefore I may not swell this Book with unnecessary Repetitions I will only recommend to the Reader 's Observation what after all their Outcry against bringing in new things as they call them the Adversaries themselves grant in page 48. in these words Any Particular or any Assembly of the Community may offer what is new if they sincerely believe it good and Serviceable without breach of Vnity or at least of Communion but say they we cannot find to the bringing of new things in as matters of Faith or terms of Communion that any Assembly have any more power than a particular Person Rep What Power an Assembly may have more than a particular Person I list not here to dispute because I would not like them pick occasion of Debate and Quarrelling But since Friends have not offered any of the things the Adversaries except against under the Notion of new things as matters of Faith to others or as terms of Communion but have only offered such things as they sincerely believe are good and Serviceable let it suffice that Friends have herein done no more than the Adversaries here grant may be done by any Particular or any Assembly of the Community without breach of Unity or Communion The Breach therefore of Unity and Communion that now is betwixt them and Friends must lie and doth at the Adversaries Door who by the heady willful violent and turbulent Opposition they made to obstruct and hinder Friends from proceeding on in the use and practice of those things which the Friends sincerely believed and do yet believe to be good and Serviceable have run themselves into open War and that in Print against Friends and into open Division and Separation from Friends So that it is They have broken themselves off from the Unity Communion and Society of Friends both inwardly in Spirit and outwardly also in Religious Exercises The Lord if it be his good pleasure give them yet a clear sight and true sense of the great Evil and Mischief they have done against God his Truth and People that in the sense thereof they may be truly humbled and bowed down before him and brought to such an honest and sensible Acknowledgment thereof as may evidence their sincere Repentance that through Judgment they may find Mercy and obtain Remission from him THE END Of the Mistakes committed in Printing the most material that have been yet observed are here noted to be Corrected Others of less moment as mis-spellings mis-placing of Letters or Stops the Reader is desired to amend in reading PAge 10. line 21. read is in pag. 20. line 8. r. reprove l. 13. for immoral r. Evil p. 22. l. 33. for not yet r. nor yet p. 23. l. 25. after dispensation make Commâ— p. 40. l. 13. f. present r. recent p. 44. l. 1. r. Iohn 6.56 p. 50. l. 27. r. Peter p. 52. l. 9. f. of Evil r. for Evil. p. 63. l. 12. f. prevent r. pervert