A brief relation of the irreligion of the northern Quakers wherein their horrid principles and practices, doctrines and manners ... are plainly exposed to the view of every intelligent reader : together with a (brief reply) to some part of a very scurilous and lying pamphlet called.

A Reply to that part of Nailers Relation, which concerns Master Fo∣thergils, and my own discourse with him at Orton.

HE saith, many Christian friends did desire his coming to Orton. Who those were, or whether desirous of his coming or no, I did not inquire, since we know too well that such guests as he, may be had upon very easie terms. He is indeed for any way but home, or where he hopes to find entertainment, and then the feat is to pretend that either by voyce or revelation, or at least by the intreaty of their Bre∣thren they were called thither. And it is probable upon this last score, Nayler came to Orton. Fox was heard to say a few dayes before, he thought God would give him a Call to speak at Orton shortly. But thither came Nayler in steed of Fox, and with him a great company of all sorts and both sexes; where true it is, that some Ministers were, but that any multitude or number of people was drawn together by their procurement, is utterly false. As for his temptations by the Ministers, and their Intentions of violence against him, and the appearance thereof afterwards, his paper when he writ it would have answered him with a blush, if it had been capable of shame.

The Relation which Nayler, or some for him makes of the confe∣rence betwixt our selves and him that day, is very confused, imperfect and false. Briefly and truly thus it was; Mr. Fothergill, Minister of Orton, wished the Constable to do his Office so far, as to ask Nailer by what Authority, and to what end he had drawn together that mul∣titude. Nayler replyed, the end of his coming thither, was to declare what God had revealed in him.

If so, said Mr. Fothergill, that thou comest to instruct the people, it is a good work, if so be thou hast a lawful calling so to doe. Then shewing him an Ordinance of Parliament, forbidding any to preach publickly, but such as were lawfully called thereunto, he asked what calling he had to do so. Nayler answered, he had a calling. If so, said M. Fothergil, it is either Extraordinary, or Ordinary, one, or both, or neither, which I rather believe. To which Naylers reply was, that di∣stinctions were from the seed of the Serpent. Yea, said M. Fothergil, what saist thou then to that distinction, 1. Iohn 5. 16. There is a sinne

unto death, and a sinne not unto death. I spake of thy distinction, said Nayler, though indeed he spake of distinctions generally. But leaving this discourse, Nayler affirming that there was no other kind of call to the Ministery? but such as the Apostles had M. Fothergill proceeded to give some instances of extraordinary calls in the Prophets and Apo∣stles: and of ordinary calls, as in the successive Ministers of the New Testament by Imposition of hands. And lastly, of both in the exam∣ple of Paul, of whose immediate and extraordinary call we reade, Acts, 9 And of his mediate and ordinarie call, by Imposition of hands. Acts 13. 2. Against this Nayler spake many words to little purpose, out of Gal. 1. And when he saith, he could have no answer though he asked 3. times whether the imposition of hands, Act 13. 2. were Pauls calling to the Ministerie, it is untrue. For he was answered then, that it was his ordinary or mediate cal to the Ministery among the Gentiles, and a confirmation of that extraordinary cal, which he had before. Not said Mr. Fothergil, as though that extraordinary call had not bin of its self sufficient, but that the Churches consent and approbation being hereby signified, he might be the more welcome to, and the better re∣ceived of the Gentiles, to whom he was sent. Nor doe we judge amisse, if we think that the Lord hereby would also signifie, what man∣ner of calling to the Ministery he intended to continue in the Church to after ages.

That other Minister, that the Relator contemptuously cals Priest, was my self. I told him then, that seeing he denyed the Office, and teaching of all the Ministers in England without exception, and did pretend, that himself, together with his fellow speakers, were the one∣ly true Ministers and Messengers of Christ, that we desired to know his Faith, and to hear from him if we might, the summe of that Do∣ctrine of the Gospel which he came to preach. I told him further, that our selves and the Countrey in general did look upon him, and his fel∣low speakers as seducers, such as preached another Gospel, and another Jesus then we had preached: and that therefore for the clearing of himself, and the satisfaction of the Countery and our selves there pre∣sent, it was but meet that he should give us them, desiring it some ac∣count of his saith. And to do that I told him, I hoped he would not be unwilling, seeing the Apostle Peter exhorts all Christians to be ready to give a reason of the hope that is in them, to every one that asketh.

To this he replied nothing, but stood as one that had nought to say. I then asked the people there present, if they did not generally desire

to hear something from him, touching his Faith in some of the main principles of Religion. To which many of them said it was their desire.

Whereupon I intreated Nayler to answer plainly to a few questi∣ons which I desired to propound to him.

The first Question I propounded was whether he believed the Holy Scripture to be the very Word of God.

To this he answered, there was no word but Christ, which he would have proved out of Iohn 1. 1. In the beginning was the Word, &c.

I told him we did not deny Jesus Christ to be the Word, but did be∣lieve him to be the Essential Word of his Father. I further told him (according to that distinction of the Word into Verbum Deus, & Ver∣bum Dei) That the Word was twofold, The Word, that is God, which is Iesus Christ, and the Word of God, which is the Holy Scripture. Then altering the former question a little, I asked him whether he did be∣lieve the Holy Scripture to be the written Word of God.

To which, after many words to no purpose, being pressed to answer positively, he said. It is not the Word of God, there is no written Word.

The next question, I asked him was, Whether he that speaks or teaches that which is directly contrary to the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture, is to be lookt upon as one speaking from the immediate in∣spiration of the Spirit, though he pretend to do so.

To this be replied. The Word and the Spirit are one.

What said I, do you understand by the Word, when you say the Word and the Spirit are one. He said, by the Word, he meant Christ. I told him we did believe Christ and the Holy Spirit to be one God, and that if that was the matter of his answer, That Christ and the Holy Spirit are one, it was impertinent to my question.

I then put the case touching my self thus. If I (said I) should pre∣tend to preach from the immediate assistance of the Spirit, and preach that which is repugnant to the Holy Scripture, whether would your self believe that the Spirit of God spake by me or no?

To this he answered as before, I say (saith he) The Spirit and the Word are one.

I told him, he did not answer like a rational man, and pressing him to answer plainly, and not so cloudily and darkly as he did indeavour to do: that those were Auditors could not understand what he meant, divers of his followers that were there present, said altogether almost the devil spoke in me, the Serpent spoke in me.

I told them that was a pure Language that became a Quaker better then a Christian.

His Disciples there present desired he should propound some que∣stion to my self. I told them upon that condition he would answer me plainly to some questions I further desired to put to him, I would answer him to any Question of his as plainely as I could.

He then asked me how I could prove my self to be a Minister of Je∣sus Christ.

I told him that-I had been called and ordained to the work of the Ministery, by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery, and that the Lord had been pleased mercifully to furnish me with some (though very mean) abilities for the discharge of that work, and that it had been my endeavour to preach the Gospel sincerely, and that I desired, and as farre as the Lord assisted, laboured to walke as became that Doctrine.

He told me I did not live as became a Minister of Christ.

I asked him wherein he could accuse me.

He said I preached for hire, and suffered my self to be called Master, contrary to the command of Christ.

To the first I replied, that for the terms hire, or wages, they were used in Scripture, that our Saviour speaking of those that labour in the Gospel, saith, The workeman is worthy of his hire: And that the Apostle scrupled not to say he received wages. Accordingly I told him I tooke hire, or received wages for Preaching of the Gospell, But did not preach for it, did not make that the end of my Mi∣nistery.

And for being called Master, I told him that I was not ambitious of that Title. That my name was T. H. and that it would please me very well to be called by that name. I said further, when our Saviour saith, Matth. 23. and 10. Be not ye called Masters; he doth not simply forbid them to be so called no more, then in the foregoing verse he forbids children to call an earthly Parent Father: but that he there forbids such proud and ambitious affectation of Titles of respect as was in the Scribes and Pharisees.

Away, Away, saith Nayler with your Expositions of Scripture. The Scripture is not to be expounded, and God will adde to such as Ex∣pound them, all the plagues written in that Book.

I replyed, that the Apostles knew the meaning of this Precept of Je∣sus Christ, and were obedient unto it, and yet suffered a Title superior

to that of Master to be given, to them, Iohn 12. 21. and Acts 16. 30. and that they reproved not them that so called them, which they would have done, if it had been unlawful for them to have been called Master, and that Iohn 20. 15. Mary Magdalen called our Saviour Sir, supposing him to have been the Gardiner. [The Greek word transla∣ted Sir, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and doth properly signifie Lord, and is as Linguists know, a Title of greater respect then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. the term used, Mat∣thew 23. 10.

The next question I asked him was not as he saith, Whether Christ was ascended into Heaven as Man, (that was in another place about 5 dayes after) which yet some of their speakers have denied and ar∣gued against:) but whether he did believe Iesus Christ to be true God and true Man also in one Person. And first said I, whether dost thou believe Iesus Christ to be true God?

The question I asked, because I had heard that some of them had affirmed that Christ was no more then another man.

In steed of replying to this question, he stood like a man astonisht, and said nothing at all.

I desired him to answer, telling him he need not be affraid or asha∣med to confesse Christ before men: and that if he should desire my self to tell him my Faith concerning Iesus Christ my Saviour, I would doe it with all chearefulnesse, yea though in the presence of his pro∣fessed enemies.

He there faintly bad me Answer the Question he had propounded to me. I told him I had done so, but that we might not lose time, I desi∣red him not to trifle, but to answer in five words, and plainly. His spirit here it seemes began to move him, and while we thought he had been about to shape some Answer to the foresaid Question, he slipt into one of their speakings, exhorting the people to look only to the light, and to Christ within them, and not to look forth, telling them they had no need of any teacher without, with other such stuffe. When he had proceeded a little while, I interrupted him, and told him that we came not thither to heare a Seducer, and such a one we took him to be, and that we are commanded in the Holy Scripture to beware of false Prophets, and to avoid them that are known to be such. Then urg∣ing him again for the cleering of him self, to let us hear what was his faith concerning Christ, and first for that particular above mentioned, concerning Christ his deity, he utterly refused.

When we saw we could not get a word more from him, we quietly

departed and left him in the field, with as many as pleased to stay with him.

The Quakers relation saith the people cryed out saying, let us heare him, &c. a notorious untruth, that any did speak such a word there mentioned, save some of their own faction that did desire he might go on in his Speech.

Their relator saith also, there could be no peace, that some kept close about Nailer, to keep him from the violence of some that came a∣long with the Priests, but they raged so, that he and some other friends received stripes.

Reader, beleeve them not, their words are as light as wind and va∣nity. All that had the colour of any affront offered to Nailer was on∣ly this, and that, a good while after we were once away. A young man in Orton Parish as Nailer was going down the hill set his staffe or foot before him. I doe not now remember well whether, and caused him to stumble, but he fell not; for which Act this poor man was In∣dicted at the Sessions, and fined 20. s. so ready were the Justices to appeare against any that offered the least shaddow of violence to them.

A little after the Author of that lying relation saith. That the raging Sodomites waited about the Door to do mischief and kept shouting a bout the house, &c.

Inquiring of this particular since, some of the Townsmen told me, that it is true; there were some little Boyes and Girles that made some noise about the house while Nayler was speaking. These were his raging Sodomites: Upon these they also bend the bow of their tongue, and spend these words of Gall.

Notes

• Nayler saith, to this Question, he could get no answer.