small Summ which he receiv'd after the Fight at Preston That Josiah Coal was also a Soldier in service of the Common-Wealth and at Worcester Fight This was one of the Prime worthies of the Quakers a Preacher of Renown See his Blasphemous Letter to G. Fox in the Sn. p. 114. 115. Here the Treasons and Rebellion and Fighting of these Quaker-Leaders were Glory'd in instead of being Condemn'd by the rest of them in the year 1656. But since 1660 they have got a New Light they are now against all outward Fighting Treason and Rebellion Yet will not Censure any of their Ancient Traytors Fighters and Rebels for such were their Chief Apostles and led by the Infallible Light within But they wou'd have that Forgotten till a Day may come when as in 1656 they may again Plead these Glorious Merits of their Saints And in the mean time make a Mouth at us while they wou'd Pame them upon us as the only Lambs of Christ But ther is one of these Lambs that I have not yet Nam'd under this Head of Treason whom I must bring forth before G. W. to see what Character he will give us of him This Quaker in the year 1659 had a Dispute with one Thomas Smith in the Mayor's House at Cambridge soon after Sir George Booth had taken Armes for the King and was Suppress'd by the Rebels It is told in the Sn. Sect. xviii p. 228. How busy the Quakers were upon that occasion against the King's Interest and Boasted in it as their merit that they had given the first Intelligence to the Vsurpers against the Loyal Party and gave their Advice or Command and that In the Name of the Lord God! to cut off all the Cavaliers whom they had taken Prisoners They were Full of this their good service and very Vain of it And this Quaker whom I am speaking of taking his opponent Smith to be well Inclin'd towards the Royal Cause and having him in the Mayor's House he broke off from the Subject of Religion they were met about and Demanded of him whether he owned his Brethren the Priests who had so much stirred up the Rebellion against the present Government To which Insnaring Question the Quaker says Smith answer'd That he did not own them But that was said the Quaker because he saw they did not Prosper in their Designs But when they did Prosper as they did the year following then the Quakers were the only Royal and Loyal Party and said they had been so all along And accus'd these same Professors as they call'd the Presbyterians Independents c. that they had been the King's Enemies and therefore not fit to be Trusted by Him or to be suffer'd to Teach the People as shewn in the Sn. Sect. xviii Now G. W. tell us Plainly what do'st Thee think of this Quaker before mention'd we wou'd have thy opinion of him Was he then a Loyal Man when he call'd it Rebellion to assert the King's Cause against the Vsurpation that then obtain'd and upbraided others with being Concern'd in it If thou woud'st know his Name not to keep thee longer in suspence it is George Whitehead And this thee wilt find p. 25. of a little pretty Treasonable and very Blasphemous Book of his call'd Truth defending the Quakers c. Printed that same year 1659. said on the Title Page to be written from the Spirit of Truth in George Whitehead and George Fox the yonger I wou'd have thee Read it George It is as full of Heresies as a Dog is of Fleas Larded thick with Nonsense and Pride Prodigious And prithee George le ts have thy Censure of it the next time thou sets Pen to Paper if thou be'st not Tyr'd with that sport as well thou May'st considering thy Luck at it It is now 49 years since that precious Piece escapt thy Fist And if thee art not Grown Wiser as thou 'st Grown Older thou'lt verefie the Proverb no F l to an Old F l. It is told in the Sn. Sect. xviii How G. Fox and the Quakers stood out against the Restauration of King Charles II. to the very Last even in the Beginning of the year 1660. And yet Immediately upon the Kings Coming Home Run to him with Addresses of their Love c. I have one here to Add which came Lately in my way G. Bishop his Bitterness and Implacable Hatred to the King and his Cause is Particularly Insisted upon in the Sn. How he Preach'd and Commanded In the Name of the Lord That the Cavaliers who were then Prisoners shou'd be All put to Death This is in his Book of Warnings Printed in the Beginning of the year 1660 before the Restauration And now I find another Book of his warnings An. 1661. Directed to The King and Parliament to the Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. where p. 2. he Recommends the Innocent People the Quakers to their Protection as Those who suffer'd with you says he and by and under your Enemies who have Good will towards you c. And not Content with this Gross Dissimulation in Themselves he falls upon the poor Presbyterians for their Inconstancy and Turning about he upbraids them p. 18. with their being Vpwards and Downwards and Backwards and Forwards Now here and now there Reeling and Rouling Pinching here sometimes and Drawing as Contrary at another This needs no Application to the Quakers G. Fox his Aspiring to be Equal with God VII In the Sn. ther is set down a Tryal at the Assises and Depositions upon Oath that G. Fox and others of the Quakers did call themselves Equal with God c. To this says G. W. p. 25. That we ought not to take the Depositions of Adversaries against them This is Pleasant why if any of the Quakers had Depos'd this then they had been Apostats Judases c. as the Quakers have call'd their Late Seperatists and so Adversaries with a witness And all others are Adversaries of Course And if none of their words must be taken the Quakers may Blaspheme Rebel Murder Steal or what they Please For is not any one that wou'd Accuse them of any of these things an Adversary And an Adversaries word must not be taken But let alone Adversaries Has not G. Fox and others of the Quakers asserted the same in their Printed Books And are they not Quoted in the Sn. Sect. iii And has G. W. Answer'd to one of these Quotations No. Not to one of them yet he Pretends this Book of his to be an Answer to the Sn. And in the Contents he stiles the above Answer thus A False Charge against G. Fox c. Examin'd and Answer'd Yet this is all the Answer he has given to it In the same manner he passes off the Charge of their Assuming the Name of God and Christ to themselves and their Pretence to Perfection Equal Even to God c. He says to this p. 26. That it is False and Asserts the Contrary But Answers none of the Proofs See Sn.
same they were from the Beginning and not Chang'd at all Do's it then seem Tolerable to our Clergy and Magistrates to Ly under the odious Names of Beast False-Prophet Dogs Witches Anti-Christs Devils Incarnate c Did the Quakers for their Vindication Indict Bugg at the Sessions in London and object to him their own Dayly Practice of Printing without License Did they Complain against him to the Secretary of State and upon a False Information That his Papers were Seditious and against the Government Procur'd them to be Seiz'd taken from the Book-sellers and Deliver'd into the Hands of the Quakers Did they Imprison William Bradford a Printer in Pensilvania seize his Letters or Types and Forc'd him out of the Dominions of the Quakers for Printing G. Keith's Defences against Them and Prosecuted likewise the Publishers and G. Keith himself for his Life Improving his Disputes against Them into a Design against the Government Are they so Watchful so Industrious so Impatient lest any Indignity shou'd be Past upon Them And must all orders of Men among us Ecclesiastical Civil and Military Bear their most Bitter Reproches without any Sign of Repentance And Court them and do them Favours for it or suffer them to Usurp Favors that were never Intended them It is Plain the Act of Toleration do's Except those who Deny in their Preaching or writing the Doctrin of the Blessed Trinity as it is Declar'd in the Articles of Religion That is in our 39 Articles These are the words of the Act. And it is as Plain that the Quakers have all along done it G. Fox says in his Great Mystery p. 246. The Scriptures do not tell the People of a Trinity nor Three Persons but the Common-Prayer-Mass-Book speaks of Three Persons brought in by the Father the Pope Here it is Plain that the Quakers do not Acknowledge that Trinity which is own'd in the Common-Prayer And the Common-Prayer-Book being every word an Act of Parliament it is Plain what Trinity is Intended in the Act of Toleration And the Opposers of That Trinity are the Persons Excepted out of the Act. To which the Quakers have no Pretence Unless they will Disown G. Fox herein They must likewise Disown Will. Penn who wrote a Book in the year 1668. to which he Gave this Title The Sandy Foundation shaken Or Those so Generally Believed and Applanded Doctrins of one God Subsisting in three Distinct and Separate Persons of the Impossibility of God's Pardoning Sinners without a Plenary Satisfaction Of the Justification of Impure Persons by an Imputative Righteousness are Refuted And p. 12. The Title of that Section is The Trinity of Distinct and seperate Persons in the Vnity of Essence Refuted from Scripture I know for a Pinch they will own the word Trinity as the Sabellians and Socinians meaning three Manifestations or Operations but not Three Persons But that is not the Trinity Intended in the Act. But the Trinity which is Profess'd in the Creed of St. Athanasius and more Briefly in our Litany viz. The Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Persons and one God This is that Trinity Intended in the Act of Toleration And which whoever opposes are Excluded from Claiming any Benefit by that Act. And this is that Trinity which the Quakers have and still do Oppose And therefore they are altogether Excluded from any Benefit of that Act. But their Opposing is not so Intolerable as the Manner of it Their Cursing and Damning Horresco Referens The Holy and ever Blessed Trinity into the very Pit of Hell And making it nothing but Conjuration Ther is a Book wrote by George Whitehead and three other Quakers viz. Christopher Atkinson James Lancaster and Thomas Symons of whose Character see Sn. Sect. vi n. v. p. 43. c. Intituled Ishmael and his Mother cast out c. Against Mr. Townsend a Minister in Norwich Where p. 10. they tell him And here is the three Persons thou Dreams of which thou wouldst Divide out of One like a Conjurer And ibid. He Mr. Townsend is shut up with the three Persons in perpetual Darkness for the Lake and the Pit This is thus Quoted by Christoph Wade in his Quakery slain p. 9. To which G. Fox Replies in his Gr. Myst p. 246. who Denies not the Quotation but Re-Blasphemes against the H. Trinity in the words above-quoted and more which you will find in the same place Christoph Wade wrote an Answer to this Gr. Myst which bears this Title To all those called Quakers c. To which G. Whitehead Replies in his Truth defending the Quakers An. 1659. And denies not the above Quotations out of his own Book Ishmael c. But as the Quakers use when Pinch'd he slips it over and takes no notice of it Not that he was Converted from his Heresie for in several other Places of the same Book he continues to Blaspheme at his old Rate against the H. Trinity as in p. 40. 41. c. But finding that the Matter was not thus Forgot being Re-Objected against them about the year 1690 in An Epistle to the Friends c. at their next General Meeting in London Subscrib'd N. N. Ther was Publish'd an Answer to this and two other Books wrote against the Quakers by Some of Them Intituled The Christianity of the People commonly call'd Quakers Vindicated c. Printed An. 1690. There p. 28. coming to this Objection they go a New way to work and lay the Fault Partly upon the Printer And Looks on the words as wrong writ or wrong Printed Wrong Writ and wrong Printed are two things But they Jumble them here that the Reader might mistake and overlook the Author and so think it only an Error of the Press But what was this Error Why they say That instead of And the three Persons it shou'd have rather been About the three Persons which makes it non-sense but not less Blasphemy But however was this taken Notice of by the Quakers in all that time from the writing of that Answer to Townsend which the Quakers say in this last book ibid. was about the year 1654. till this Book of theirs An. 1690 that is for the space of 44 years No. That is not Alledg'd But they say ibid. that G. W. Corrected it long since where he has met with that Answer How do's this Appear O you must take his own word for it for is not He Infallible But was not so Fatal a Slip of Infallibility fit to be Corrected in Print to Remove that most Hideous and Blasphemous Scandal which cou'd not be done otherwise For to what end was G. W's Correcting it with a Pen upon a Book that came in his way if he did it How shou'd this Un-deceive the World Who had never heard of it if he had not now told them And it is at their Pleasure how far they will Believe him This is like another Error of the Press which they let slip 28 years together See Sat. Dis. Sect. ii N. iii. p.
Clean Vessel of a Quaker an Hear-say is enough for an Infallible Demonstration And They can Pronounce I can Assure you of it tho' in a Negative as of his never having Converted any Quakers Now if this shou'd Provoke him to Name Names in Print which I am Morally assur'd he can then ther wou'd be Boasting with a witness But the Quakers are as Infallibly sure That he either Has or Intends to urge this as an Argument for his Attonement and Reconciliation tho' Appen do's not tell with whom But whoever they be I can Assure them says it the Argument is False Now Suppose that he never urg'd this as an Argument of his Reconciliation with any Body nor Ever had any such Intention as all that know him do Believe he do's not think it a Matter of that Merit Well but How can be Perswade others if he had a mind to it of what he is not Infallibly Assur'd Himself What not of his own Thoughts and Actions No. For he is a Foul Vessel that is He is one of the World and so a Child of Darkness because not a Quaker And such have no Right to know their own Thoughts But the Quakers know their own and all other mens too And that Infallibly or else they are the Greatest Lyars in the World and their Fox was a Conjurer by his own Confession See Sn. p. 33. to 37. and p. 284. SECT VI. Their Defence of not taking off their Hats or Giving Civil-Titles Consider'd And of their Plain Language as they call it in Theeing and Thouing Both of which are shewn not to be Merely want of Manners But a Form'd Design to Subvert Government when it is in Any other Hands but their Own For that they think None but Themselves have any Right to Govern I Come now to Sect. vii of Prim. Heres And to Examin the Answers given to it by Appen The subject is The Quakers stiffness in not taking off their Hats and Giving men their Civil Titles Of which we just now spoke Obiter But we will Examin their Answers more thoroly They begin in Appen p. 48. And first this is call'd a Ridiculous Charge And so indeed it is in this Sense as it is a Charge of a most Ridiculous Whim if it were no worse for it is not only a Proud and Senseless Singularity but it is a Contempt of Government and Dissolution of Order and the Difference of Relations that men bare to one another which God Ordain'd and without which the world cou'd not Subsist And therefore it is brought in Prim. Heres Next to Sect. vi which treats of the Quakers Contempt of Magistracy and Government as a Plain Instance of it To this says Appen in their Courtly way He Falsly and Foolishly Insinuates this that is taking off our Hats and Giving men their Civil Titles to have been Commanded by the Apostles c. They mean That ther is no Command in Scripture for taking off ones Hat That is Literally a Hat They wou'd have the word Hat nam'd And here they are Pretty Secure for ther were no Hats worn in those Days nor many Ages after But surely these Quakers are not so Dull as not to know That it is the Respect and Honour which is Due to our Superiors that is here Treated of tho' the Manner of Expressing it may Differ according to the Custom of Several Countrys Thus Vn-covering of the Head is not us'd as a mark of Respect in Turkey Therefore they do it not there even in Presence of the Grand Segnior There the Quakers may have this Liberty of Conscience But if they wou'd observe the Scripture Literally as they Pretend they shou'd put off their Shoos instead of their Hats For that was then the Token of Respect thus Moses was Commanded to put off his Shoos when he Approch'd to the Bush not to take off his Hat Now if the Quakers wou'd have Texts for shewing Respect to Superiors they may have Abundance Honour to whom Honour is Due c. And if Taking off ones Hat be us'd as a mark of Paying Honour or Respect then it is Included in this Command And the not doing of it is an Express Breach of this Command And it is not in our Power to Appoint what shall be the Manner of Paying Honour we must Submit in that to the Custom of the Country where we Live You find frequent Instances in Scripture of Falling Prostrate to Kings and Worshiping of them with our Faces bent down to the Earth and not only to Proud and wicked Kings but to David and the Best of them None came into their Presence without Paying of this Honour to them And this was a Great Deal more than Bare Taking off ones Hat We never find That either Christ Himself or His Apostles Refus'd to Give all the Respect and Civil Titles that were Customarily Paid even to Heathen Magistrates He acknowleg'd to Pilat that his Power was from Above St. Paul gave Felix the Title of Most Noble Even when Felix call'd him Mad and Ask'd Pardon for speaking Dis-Respectfully to the High Priest tho' Judging him Contrary to the Law A Quaker wou'd have call'd him if he Durst a Chemarim Baal's Priest Serpent Dog Devil as they have call'd our Bishops and Magistrates when they were out of their fingers And as Christ and His Apostles so those our H. Fathers in the Church who succeeded them did both Practice and Command the same Honour to be Paid to all Magistrates and Superiors Yet Appen says That this is a Pretence so Idle that he the Author of Prim. Heres may as soon find in those Early times the taking Snuff after his Manner to be Declar'd Heresie This was by way of Wit because he Supposes that Author takes Snuff But I 'll tell thee Appen That if taking of Snuff were by the Custom of this Country as Great a Dis-Respect to Superiors as keeping on my Hat I wou'd think that Author or any other who did it Guilty of as much Ill-Manners as a Quaker But if they set up such Dis-Respect as a Principle and made Themselves Distinguished by it I shou'd Condemn it even as a Heresie for such I think it to Dissolve the Good Order of the World and set Mankind Loose from the Distance and Duty to Superiors and to Teach this as a Doctrin of Christ However against the Quakers this holds good by their own Principles if it be any Sin which has been fully Prov'd to be not only Heresie but even a Denying of the Lord who Bought them For thus say they in Truth defending the Quakers which is said in the Title Page to be Written from the Spirit of Truth in George Whitehead and George Fox the Younger p. 39. 40. All Hereticks are subverted and do sin and in Sinning they Deny the Lord that bought them for Every Sin is a Transgression of the Law And whatever sin they Commit against Christ therein they Deny him Here we see the Necessity of
them over night next day when I sent for them not one of them was to be had When he is Dead that too must pass the Index Expurgatorius with the Rest of his Works If Quakerism be not out of Fashion before that time which I Hope he may Live to see If they wou'd Call in or Commit to the Flames all their Old Editions I shou'd be very well Pleas'd to Rake no More into them But let them and their Heresies Die together And let the Present Quakers slide Gently from their Errors without the Shame of Recanting For it is their Conversion not Victory over them that we seek But when these Old Quaker Books are still kept as Sacred Relicts by the Generality of the Ignorant and Besotted Quakers And their Now Governing and Subtile Teachers in all the Apologies they have of Late Published still Pretend to stand by and Confirm All the Testimonies and Writings of their Ancient Friends and that In all the Parts of them And that they are thus Enjoin'd by the Yearly Epistle of their General Council as supposing them all Infallible and Dictated by the Immediate Inspiration of the Holy Ghost as they Horridly Pretend yet are not Afraid to Alter Correct and Amend them It becomes Necessary and our Duty to Search out and Expose them That being the Most Likely Means to Open those Eyes which are not Seal'd up to their own Destruction And now let others think That if the Figure of Quakerism be so Abhorrent even as Represented to Us in their Re-Printed and Corrected Books How ten times more Deform'd and Frightful it wou'd Appear if taken off their first Rude Draught if their Original Books were Expos'd to Publick view if the Publick wou'd take some Method to have them Collected and Reserv'd in some safe Place till ther shou'd be no Longer Use for them but what they first Deserv'd the Animadversion of the Hang-Man and a Faggot In the mean time Let the more sober among the Quakers Reflect how the Words of their Prophets give a Certain sound as Boasted in the Title-Page of BVRROVGH's Trumpet before Quoted when they are Chopt and Chang'd as we have seen and made Speak the Language of Every Turn tho' in Direct Opposition to one Another And if their Words are the Immediate Dictates of the Holy-Ghost as they Blasphemously Pretend then must the Curse of Adding to or Diminishing from the Word of God Light upon those who have Added or Substracted or Alter'd any thing in Any of these Quaker-Writings Which Curse they May Read in the Book of Rev. xxii 18 19. To have their Part taken away out of the Book of Life and out of the Holy City and from the things which are written in this Book And to have the Plagues which are written in this Book added unto them This they must take to Themselves or else Confess as the Truth is That the Words of these Quaker-Prophets were not Wrote from the Spirit of God And if so then because they do Pretend to be so Written they must be Acknowleg'd to have been Wrote by the Spirit of Blasphemy that is the Devil And that this is the Spirit which has Possess'd these QVAKERS To Sir Thomas Lane Lord Mayor of London HAving been Lately Summoned before Thee by Dr. Linford and Marmaduke Hopkins who are more Diligent to seek thy Warrant to take Our Goods than to seek us thereby shewing That it 's Ours more than We they desire and Love Which to us shews That they have no more Right to esteem themselves Ministers of Christ than as such to take Tyths or Plead for them For Christ said to his Ministers freely ye have received freely Give He did not Advise nor Teach That if any would not Give they should take from them whether they would or nay Therefore Consider whether such who take by force abide in or transgress the Doctrine of Christ If they Transgress as certainly they Do who abide not in his Doctrine Then his Apostle declares their Condition 2. John 9. And we Intreat thee Mayor seriously consider how he either bids God speed to such or assists them in such a Work For Thou and All must receive a Reward from the hand of the Righteous God According to your Works We have also herewith sent a small Collection out of the Book of Martyrs Fol. 669.670 To shew that the Priests have no Right to Tythes and that it was anciently so Testified by other Consciencious men besides us and made an Article against them as well as it is against us Read and consider the following Collection is the Request of us who are Sincere Well wishers to the Mayor and All men and truely desire that We nor any Other may Do that here that we cannot Answer hereafter in the Great Day of Account John Feild Will. Bingley The Collection IN the New Law neither Christ nor any of his Apostles took Tythes of the People nor Commanded the People to pay Tythes neither to Priests nor Deacons But in the 1000 year of Our Lord 211. One Pope Gregory the 10th Ordained Tythes First to be Given to Priests Again Paul saith He was not Chargeable unto them but with his hands got his Own Living It were Good Councel That all Priests took Good heed to the Heavenly Learning of Paul not Charging the People for their Bodily Livelyhood And Paul saith since the Priesthood is Changed its necessary a Change also be made of the Law so that Priests Live without Tythes For the Priests that Challenge Tythes say in effect That Christ is not become Man nor that he Suffered Death for man's Love Again the Taking of Tythes and of such other Duties that Priests Challenge now wrongfully neither Christ nor his Apostles Challenged nor took such Duties Therefore these taking of Priests now are to be called and holden The Sclanderous Covetousness and because of the Covetousness of Priests and Pride it stirreth God to take Vengeance both upon Lords and Commons which Suffer Priests Charitably This is Verbatim according to the Original Letter which I have in my Possession The Collection added out of Fox's Martyrs is not as here set down But gather'd out of several places of the Answers of one Will. Thorp an Ignorant Zealous Man but no Martyr in the Reign of Hen. 4. I wou'd not Mend any of the words to make sense of them as In the 1000 year of our Lord 211. but give them just as Quoted by the Quakers Who took what was for their Purpose 1. To make Tythes to be Anti-Christian as being a Denyal of Christ's having Come in the Flesh 2 That the Clergy are not to be supported Nor so much as God Speed be given to them 3 That the Vengeance of God is upon both Lords and Commons who suffer Priests Charitably The Arguments of the Quakers against Tythes I have Promised to Consider in a Treatise by it self But I have Printed this Letter of theirs to shew what Moderation they now at
Instances the Quakers have made themselves as Mad as any ever were in the World And have been so esteem'd at Rome and other Places where they had never been before as they were at first when they Rose up amongst us only the Common use of it now has abated of the Strangeness but nothing of the Irrationality and Madness not to speak of the Breach of Justice or Religion for Honour is as much Due to our Superiors as either Fear or Tribute and Equally Commanded Rom. xiii 7. and to Deny it is Immorality and a Sin besides the Singularity and Proud-Humility which Entitles it to a High Degree of Madness And in this the whole Body of the Quakers is Involv'd In making Themselves free from Sin and Equal with God 3. But thirdly wou'd not that man be Counted Mad who shou'd Fancie himself Exempted from the Common Condition of other Mortals to be as Bright and Glorious and Impassible as an Angel And is it not as much to think our selves as Pure and Impeccable as they even while we feel our own Frailty and Imperfections in Dayly and Frequent Instances Yet still to Cry that we are Pure and without Sin Nay Perfect even as God! And Equal to Him and One with Him in very Nature and Substance and a Part of Him Can any Madness be Imagin'd beyond or Equal to this And G. W. p. 88. gives his Consent to secure such Persons in Bedlam if we can find any such among them that we can plainly Prove to hold the Same Now whether this be not Plainly Prov'd in the Sn. Sect. ii iii. and iv I leave to the Reader And G. W. do's neither Deny nor Answer one of the Quotations there Produc'd But stoutly Denies the whole Charge without so much as Attempting to Invalidat any one Particle of the Evidence Which I think I may Modestly say is very like the Answer of a Mad-Man In Assuming to be Prophets 4. But I will put the Case lower than that of Aspiring to be Equal with God Suppose then that a Poor Country Lad shou'd come to London and hapning upon a Rich Widdow shou'd presently fancie himself to be some Duke or Great Prince and as such shou'd Issue forth his Proclamations Commissions c. wou'd not G. W. give me leave to think this fellow a little Craz'd But suppose he shou'd set up for a Prophet sent Immediately from God as Elijah was And as such shou'd take upon him to Dictate to Kings and Emperors and Command them In the Name of the Lord to Give forth Prophesies and affix to them Thus saith the Lord c. And suppose he Cou'd shew no Credentials at all for this High Commission only bid Men take his own word for it wou'd not this make him much more Extravagantly and Blasphemously Mad Now how many Mad-Men of this sort have we had among the Quakers Even Fox their Original and all the way down as many as have Wrote or almost that have Preach'd or Spoke amongst them This is a Talent without which whosoever speaks is a Conjurer as Fox has Determin'd in his Westmorland Petition p. 5. in his Saul's Errand p. 7. and elswhere as shewn in the Sn. Ther is one particular Instance put in the Front of the Preface p. xi of the First Edit of the Sn. it is p. 281. of the Third Edit where a Prophetical Curse is set down of Confusion against George Keith And it is not a Hasty Rash Curse in Passion or so as is usual among the Profane Cursers and Swearers of the World But it is a Deliberat Grave Curse in Cold Blood set down in Writing and sent to George Keith it bears Date the 17th of the 4th Month. 1695. And is subscrib'd George Whitehead And begins in these words Thus Saith the Lord. And it is written not in the Name of G. Whitehead as any Thought or Prognostick of his own but every word in the Person of God as speaking to G. Keith Because thou hast poured Contempt upon My Servants I will assuredly bring Confusion upon thee c. Now for this George Whitehead thus to assume the Stile of the most Extraordinary Prophets of God and to Fancie himself one of them I think will be Judg'd a Greater Degree of Madness than if he had Fancy'd himself to be a Duke or a Prince for a Prophet Immediatly sent from God is certainly Cloath'd with a far Greater Honour than any that can be Bestow'd by the most Splendid of Worldly Titles Therefore this is no ordinary mistake or such as cou'd befall any Man in his Wits Nay farther to shew the Excess of G. Whitehead's Madness Suppose he shou'd think that this Prophetical Curse of his against G. Keith to be not only Equal to any Prophesie Recorded in Scripture but of Greater Authority than any Chapter in the Bible wou'd any body in this case Excuse him from the very Height of Madness And for this see his Truth defending the Quakers An. 1659. p. 7. where this Question was Demanded of him Do you Esteem your Speakings to be of as Great Authority as any Chapters in the Bible And he sets down his own Answer in these words That which is Spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any is of as Great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and GREATER This he Repeats again in the same words in his Serious Appology An. 1671. p. 49. And Quotes his former Book to shew that this was not spoke by Chance but was a standing Principle among them Now then if G. W. will say That the Curse which he sent to G. Keith was Spoken by the Spirit of Truth he owns by his own words that it is not only of As Great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are but of GREATER And then I think we need no further Proof of his being Stark-Mad But on the other hand if he will to save himself from this Imputation Acknowledge that that Curse was not Spoken by the Spirit of Truth then must he own himself Guilty of a most Notorious Blasphemy to Dictate thus in the Person of God and make God to speak his Lies and the Delusions of his Besotted Brain And if this be not put upon the score of Madness then ought G. Whitehead to suffer the Punnishment of a Blasphemer Therefore he shou'd Return his Thanks to those who are so Merciful as to Prove him only Non Compos as of Felo de se to save his Chattels and his Carcass too But this is not only as to this Curse against G. K. that is but one Instance among many nor only as to G. W. but it Reaches to All that the Quakers have Deliver'd In the Name of the Lord not only against Particular Persons but the whole Church of England the King the Bishops and Priests and the Lawyers too they are Particularly mark'd out for Destruction if ever the Quakers do Prevail they are the Midianites whom we must Vex that is Destroy see
Spirit of Truth in George Whitehead and Geo. Fox the younger as it is said on the Title-Page of this Book And p. 7. That it is of as Great Authority as the Scriptures and Greater this puts it past a Jest and ought to be Animadverted upon as a most Outragious Blasphemy And shews moreover the Mad Delusion of these Quakers that they are out of their Wits and their Brains turn'd by an Enthusiastical Distraction For as before has been shewn the meaning of the word Figure in this Dispute is a Type or Shadow whether Christ was a Type or Figure of something else i. e. of the Light within Vs And to Prove this by the Figure that is the Shape or outward Appearance of His Body and Raiment being Chang'd in His Transfiguration upon the Mount if these Men believe themselves is such a Portion of Ignorance as sets them not out of the Rank of Children But their thinking it to be Divine Inspiration makes them Mad-Men and Blasphemously so Then again to make Figure even in this sense that they wou'd take it to be the same as an Example which is Express'd in both the Answers of G. F. and G. W. this is not to know at all what they say but to set down words at Random For let Christs Transfiguration be a Figure in whatever sense yet how is it an Example to Vs Are we to be Transfigur'd while upon Earth as He was upon the Mount And must the Cloaths we wear become White and Shining as His was then Who wou'd have found fault with Hubberthorn for saying that Christ was to be an Example to Us Tho' the word But cou'd not have past even there To say that Christs coming in the Flesh was But an Example as if it had been Intended for nothing else And neither G. F. nor G. W. find any fault with this But of Hubberthorn's tho' it was objected but Justify Hubberthorn in the whole For it is the very Quaker Doctrin viz. That the Birth Sufferings and Death of Christ are but Types or Examples of all those things to be Perform'd more Eminently within Vs what Christ Did or Suffer'd Outwardly they make but the History and even Facile Representations as before has been said of what was to be Accomplish'd in Man Where the Atonement and Satisfaction for Sin is made by the Birth Sufferings c. of the Light within and not by any thing which Christ suffer'd Outwardly for Us. For that we must Suffer the same our selves even Eternal Burnings and are Justify'd only by what We suffer or the Light suffers In us And not by the Sufferings of any Christ without Vs as before shewn p. 61. And this Regeneration wrought by the Light in our Hearts they make to be a greater Mystery than the Incarnation of Christ and His taking our Flesh upon Him in the Womb of the Blessed Virgin who according to them was But a Type or Example of their Virgin Hearts where the True Christ is Born c. But G. W. has another Text for his Figure it is Heb. i. 3. where Christ is said to be The Express Image of His Fathers Person Which G. W. will have render'd thus The Express Figure of his Fathers substance He gives no Reason for the Fault he finds with our Translation Yet I suppose he gave all he had But however what use can he make of it That Christ was the Figure or Example of His Fathers Substance what is the Example of a Substance And was Christ an Example to His Father Alas poor Quakers Every thing goes wrong with them But Pursue this Antidoie G. W. says p. 39. That the Quakers do own that Christ's outward Blood is a Part of His Sacrifice But George what Part is it this was put in but to Amuse And by what is said above if it be a Type tho' the Chief Type it can be no Part of the Sacrifice or Atonement for let me ask thee George Is not the Light within sufficient without something else was ther no Atonement before Jesus suffer'd under Pontius Pilate or was it the Vertue of that Death and Sacrifice of Jesus which did operate backward to those before Him by Faith in Him who was to Come or was ther then another Atonement before He came if so was not that Atonement Perfect then the outward Blood was no Part of it Or were ther Two Atonements was that First which the Quakers suppose made by the Heavenly Body which as G. Fox says was Crucified when Adam fell was that Perfect and Sufficient If so what needed Another was the other which follow'd 4000 years after any Part of it And if not a Part then how is it a Part now But George thy Light and Life p. 55. has been before Quoted p. 97. where thou opposes the outward Blood of Christ being Any way Meritorious to Salvation Yet here thou allows it us as a Part of the Sacrifice Great wits have short Memories G. W. in the same p. 39. offers two mighty Arguments why the Quakers do not make Christ without but the History and the Light within the Mystery or Substance First Argument The Quakers make him Christ no otherwise than the Father has Appointed and made Him to be This was strong And in favour to George I pass it without any Reply Second Argument He Christ as in Himself is the Substance of all Shadows and the fulness of Light and Life Who Doubts it George But what Christ do'st thee mean Thee say'st As in Himself did'st thee not mean by this The Light within yea verily then thy meaning is that the Light within is the Substance of all Shadows And this is the very thing that is Charg'd upon thee and thy fellow Quakers Why did'st thee not say that the outward Jesus of Nazareth who was Nail'd to the Cross was the Substance of all Shadows That wou'd have been speaking Plain But that was none of thy meaning But by this Dodging way which thy Sincerity uses we see thy meaning plain enough 1. Their Spiritual Body of Christ which they Suppose He â—â—d from Eternity And their Denial of his now Human Body in Heaven X. Yet they have a Salvo even for this tho' full of more Contradictions for as before shewn p. 13. c. they have a Notion of a Body which Christ had all along before His Incarnation And which sort of Body they now allow him to have in Heaven but not that Body which He took of the B. Virgin in which He Suffer'd Dy'd and Rose again And by the help of this Private Notion of a Body they Deceive many People who know it not in their Confession to the Body of Christ now in Heaven as if they meant the same Body that we do which they do not but they mean it only of that Spiritual Body of the Second Adam's Nature as they Phrase it which they say Christ or the Light had before the First Adam was Created And they say that this
and Transforming to Every Turn XII He comes in the next place p. 37. to answer their Conforming and Transforming to every Change and Turn of Government that happen'd in their times and brings a witty Distinction he says they did not Change In point of Worship Principle Faith or Discipline This they borrow'd from the Church of Rome which only with the Quakers pretend to Infallibility And when Press'd with their many Rebellions and Treasons which they have Rais'd and Fomented their Hypocrisies and Dissimulations Breach of Faith and other Immoralities of their Popes c. then they come in with the Distinction which G. W. here uses That their Infallibility stands nevertheless Firm and Sure that is as to Matters of Faith Of the Difference betwixt the Pretensions of the Church of Rome and the Quakers to this Distinction it is spoke to in the Sn. Sect. vi n. 1. And I shall have occasion hereafter to speak further of their Infallibility only for the Present let us take Notice That here G. W. owns all the Quaker-Treasons and Rebellions their Trimming Conforming Transforming c. still as the Cards turn'd Moreover their Cursing and Damning the King and all the Loyal Party their Encouraging the Rebels and Vsurpers of England to shed more Blood and carry Slaughter and Destruction into other Countries throughout all Europe and even to the Ends of the Earth And all this not only as their own Advice or Direction But as the Immediate Command of God and Given forth in His Name and by His Authority As is shewn at Large in the Sn. Sect. xviii However what cares G. W. for all this they are Safe as to Worship Principle c But in the same Sect. it is shewn That after the Restauration 1660. the Quakers did quite Alter and Change their Principle as to Fighting or else they Ly'd So that here is Changing of Principles too George And many other Principles besides this even quite thro' all or most of your points of Doctrin which of Late you wou'd Chop and Change and Face about from your Ancient Testimonies they being Discover'd past Defence But never the less Infallible for all this What signifies a Lying Cursing Damning Blasphemous Traiterous and Nasty Infallibility so it be Infallible Still so Worship so Principles be sound tho' this Infallibility is their Main Principle But Infallibility is not the Article we are now upon It is the Quakers Changeability and Vnconstancy and from hence as G. W. quotes the Improvement made of it in the Sn. p. 285. it is p. 227. of the Third Edit Judge whether these be sound Principl'd men that can Turn Conforme and Transform to every Change according to the Times whether these be fit men to Teach People Now do's not the Reader think that these are the words of the Sn. spoken of the Quakers which I thought because they are truly applicable to them till I turn'd to the Place and there I found That they are the very words of a Declaration of the Quakers after the King came home 1660 only Recited in the Sn. and they Pointed them against the Presbytcrians and other Dissenters who had been Trimmers under the several Vsurpations and therefore urg'd against them that they were not sit to be Admitted as Teachers of others who had been so Vnconstant and Wavering themselves But to shew how Cursorily G. W. Read over the Sn. if ever he Read it All he was soon weary of it he thought that these words which he Repeats out of the Sn had been spoken against the Quakers and therefore he crys out upon them ut Supra p. 37. These are still Deceitful and Envious Suggestions Thus handsomly giving himself a Box on th' Ear for the Deceit and Envy are the Quakers being their own words Well! Really this George is Excellent Company He cannot hear an Ill word said but he must apply it to the Quakers Guilty Conscience Like the man who hearing some cry out a Whore in the street ask'd how they came to abuse his Wife But these are still Deceitful and Envyous Suggestions Therefore George come along with me to the Next Their making no Confession of Sin or Praying for Pardon XIII In the Sn. p. 313. and 314. of the First Edit Sect. xxiii N. vii of the Third Edit it is told that the Quakers out of their Conceit of Absolute and Senseless Perfection in themselves do never Pray for Remission of Sin as Supposing they have none to be Forgiven And there is Publick Notice given in these words If any can give Evidence that ever he heard at any Quaker Meeting Remission of Sins Pray'd for he is Desir'd for the Vindication of the Truth to Declare it All this G. W. passes over Nor do's he himself say that ever he heard the Quakers Pray for the Remission of their Sins But he takes hold of a Charitable Prayer of the Author 's for them bemoaning the Desperateness of their Condition who will not so much as Ask and therefore have no Promise to Receive Pardon for their Sin Their way being Blockt up by a Proud and Blind Conceit of their own Perfection from Seeking or so much as Wishing to Return from their Sins Therefore Prays that Author for them The Lord help them and hear our Prayers for them since they will not Pray for themselves Of these only words G. W. takes hold And first he after his Christian Manner Returns him Reproaches for his Prayers just Trans-versing our Saviour's Command to Return Prayers for Reproaches Thus have they learned Christ But he says that the Author of the Sn. has herein Notoriously Belyed the Quakers in saying that they do not Pray for themselves Remember George that the Prayers which are spoke of in that Place of the Sn. are Prayers for the Remission of Sins of these only was what above is Quoted Spoken and if Thee meanest any other Thee Dodgest George and Actest not Sincerely tho' very like a Quaker Therefore we will suppose to save thy Reputation that Thee do'st mean by the Quakers Praying for themselves their Confessing of their Sins and Praying for the Forgiveness of them And now George tell us Did'st Thee ever hear such Prayers in any Quaker-Meeting Did'st Thee ever Pray after this fashion among the Friends No. Thee canst not say it How then are the Quakers Notoriously Bely'd in saying they do not Pray for themselves when in the same Place it is over and over again plainly Express'd that the Praying there spoke of is for the Remission of Sins and of no other sort of Prayers and the Reason given shews it viz. That the Quakers think themselves to be Perfect and without Sin and therefore do not make any Confession of their Sins or Begg Pardon for them Now what has this to do with any other sort of Prayers of which G. W. wittingly and willingly Means what he says here of the Quakers Praying for themselves when he knew that it was meant quite otherwise in the
to the Power of Preaching to Baptize or any Special Command but puts the Case and the whole Dispute was concerning the Obligation that lay upon us to Perform all our Duties to God or Man And whether the Commands in Scripture did lay any Obligation upon us to observe them And this the Quakers Positively Deny or that ther Arises any Obligation to Duty or that any Command is a Duty except what is Enjoyn'd by their own Light Within as W. Penn Expressly See Sn. p. 92 93. so that Burrough here spoke the Genuin sense of the Quakers which G. W. knew well enough But wou'd Turn and Shift it as you have seen For this Principle do's indeed Out-Date the Scriptures like an Old Almanack And Resolves All and Every thing into their Light within that is what every man Pleases to make of it and sets men at Perfect Liberty from all Rules or Laws whether Divine or Human. G. W's Defence of Himself for the Same Wherein is Shewn That the Quakers are Direct Deists And the worst Sort of them XVI But now in the next Place let us hear G. W's Defence of Himself for a much more Gross Expression than that of Burrough's Which stands Quoted in the Sn. next to that of Burrough's Sect. vii p. 110. it is p. 342. of the First Edit The Quotation is p. 49. of G. W's Serious Apology where it was Demanded of him Do you esteem your Speakings to be of as Great Authority as any Chapter in the Bible To which G. W. Answers in these words That which is spoken by the Spirit of Truth in any is of as Great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and GREATER This has been Quoted and spoke to before And he has Excus'd it in a wonderful manner He says p. 43. that what he meant was only this To Prefer the Preaching with Divine Authority according as Christ did to the bare Reading of the Letter as the Pharisees did which was not says he at all to Lessen the Authority of Holy Scripture But George it is to make the Quakers and Thine own self Particularly to Preach with Divine Authority according as Christ did And then All your Writings and Preachments are as Good Scripture as any He Spoke Nay Greater when spoke by you than His when only Read which was Plainly and Truly thy Meaning Thou didst Grant out of Modesty that His words and Thine were of Equal Authority But that the Difference only lay in the Advantage that words have when spoken viva voce more than the same words when written and only Read And in this Sense Thy Preaching is of Greater Authority and Power than the Scriptures and of as Great as when they came out of the Mouth of Christ Himself so that George thou art come off finely The more Excuses thou make for a Bad Cause they make it still worse and worse The Longer you stand in a Mire you sink the Deeper Ther is nothing will do George but sincere Repentance which cannot be without a Plain and Honest Confession of so Foul Blasphemy and Luciferian Pride to the High Scandal of Christianity Therefore Give Glory to God and take Shame to your selves and then God will Forgive you and God and Man will Love you and with the Angels of Heaven will Rejoyce at your Conversion Why shou'd you think it so Grievous to own that you have been Mistaken and Deceiv'd Who has not It is Glorious and Praise-worthy to Confess and Return from an Error And that Day that you shall Own and Acknowledge your Mistakes they shall be no more Mention'd unto you But till then we must Expose them because many others Simple and Well-Meaning Souls are Caught in your Snares O! at last Lay your hand upon your Heart and think what Mischief you do what Good it is in your Power to do The Lord give you a Heart to think of it and open your Eyes to see your Errors and the Truth And be not so much Provok'd by the Opposition that is Given to you as thereby Prompted to Consider and Reflect Seriously whether these things are so whether they are falsly Charg'd upon you And what occasion you have given in your Writings and Preachings for all that Clamour that is Rais'd up against you And by such as cannot Possibly have any other End or Design in it but to Detect those Errors so Pernicious to the True Christian Faith Such Principles as Prefer what you call the Immediat Teaching of the Spirit IN MAN to the H. Scriptures of God as you Re-assert in the fore-cited p. 43. Such Principles as must make you think that Curse you sent to G. Keith before spoke of to be of Greater Authority than any Chapter in the Bible as likewise the False-Prophesie of Solom Eccles against John Story and many others to be Nam'd Such Principles as make men Inscribe whatever comes into their Heads to the H. Spirit of God and to Give forth Curses Blasphemies and Treasons Blood and Destruction and the most Beastly Nastiness In the Name of the Lord God! and to think them of Greater Authority than any Precept in the Scripture The Letter of the Scripture says Thou shalt not Kill But Fox Burrough Bishop and other Quakers Quoted in the Sn. Sect. xviii Command Oliver and the other Vsurpers In the Name of the Lord God Almighty not only to Destroy all the Cavaliers and Priests in England but to carry their Armes into France Italy Spain c. and there to Kill and Slay Abundantly The Letter of the Scripture says Thou shall not Steal but G. Fox in his Great Mystery p. 77. Justifies the Stealing of an Hour-Glass from the Priests And as for any being moved of the Lord says he to take away your Glass from you by the Eternal Power it is Owned Now G. W. in this Place p. 43. Prefers the Teachings of the Spirit IN MAN to the Letter of Scripture Now here is the Teachings of the Spirit in G. Fox c. Opposite in Terms to the Letter of the Scripture Or will he say That these were not the Teachings of the Holy Spirit in Fox c And then we may easily know whose Teachings they were Will nothing Convince these men To see G. Fox say of Stealing By the Eternal Power it is Owned And G. W. to Prefer this to the Letter of the Scripture To the Plainest Commands wrote by the Finger of God Himself Here is the Mystery of Quakerism to throw off the Scriptures from being a Rule to them And Giving themselves wholly up to be Guided by what they call their Light within that is whatever they are strongly Perswaded of for they can give no other account of it Nor any Rule to know that they do not mistake the strongest Delusions of Satan for the Light of Christ As certainly they have done in the Instances before us and hundreds more mention'd in the Sn. their Inward Light Leading them Directly Counter to the very Letter of