Quakerism no popery, or, A particular answere to that part of Iohn Menzeis, professor of divinity in Aberdeen, (as he is called) his book, intituled Roma mendax Wherein the people called Quakers are concerned, whom he doth accuse as holding many popish doctrins, and as if Quakerism, (so he nick-names our religion,) were but popery-disguised. In which treatise his alleadged grounds for this his assertion, are impartialy and fairly examined and confuted: and also his accusation of popery against us, justly retorted upon himself, and his bretheren. By George Keith.

SECT. XII, BY ANOTHER HAND. Wherein we are further vindicated from the Imputation of Popery unjustly cast upon us, and how much more truely it agreeth to our Oppo∣sers, is evidenced by a short Ac∣count of many weighty particu∣lars, wherein they agree with Ro∣manists against us.

I Suppose the Reader by the perusall of the For∣mer Treatise is sufficiently informed and perswa∣ded how much I. M. and his Brethren have abus∣ed us in casting upon us the Imputation of Popery, and how innocent we are of that charge. But their crime is so much the greater that they falsly charge us of that, of which, themselves are highly guilty, which briefly to demonstrat for Thy further satis∣faction is the business of these two last Sections. If we consider the principles and doctrins of the Romanists and those of I. M. and his Brethren and those of the Quakers; there is no man of reason can deny, but that they aggree Ten Times more with the Papists, then doe the Quakers, as will thus easily appear.

First, The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren

agree as to their notions and distinctions of Trinity and Persons: which the Quakers deny; who though they confess Father, Son, and Spirit, and that these three are one, (according to the Scripturs;) yet deny the School-mens uncertain notions and un∣scripturall, terms of TRINITY and PERSONS so here the Papists and I. M. agree against the Quakers

Secondly, The Papists and I. M. and his Breth∣ren agree in affirming that Infants are really guiltie of Adams sin before they committ actually any of their own, which the Quakers deny they are, untill they actually sin; though they acknowledge a Seed of sin in Infants conveyed unto them by reason of A∣dams transgression.

Thirdly, The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree in denying there is a Saving, Evangelicall, Supernatural Light in all men, by which, they may be saved without the use of other outward means, if GOD necessarly abstract them from them, both af∣firming that such as have not the Scripturs or some to preach to them or baptise them &c must of necessi∣ty perish, unless the Lord make use of some extraor∣dinary means. All which the Quakers deny, who though they believe the Scripturs and outward know∣ledge of CHRIST to be both very usefull and com∣fortable, and absolutly necessary to be believed by such as GOD conveyeth it to; yet can not think GOD so unmercifull or unjust as to damne those for not believeing that, which he never affordeth them an occasion to hear, who if they obey and follow the LIGHT, (which is the Gospel preached in them,)

may come to be saved.

Fourthly, The Papists and I. M. agree in affirm∣ing that humane learning and naturall parts are more Essentiall qualifications to Ministers and Preachers then the Grace of GOD, averring that men may be true Ministers without the Grace of GOD, but not without the other, which the Quakers deny and condemne.

Fifthly, The Papists and I. M. agree in deryving the power of their Ministry by ane outward successi∣on, which together with the use of outward ordina∣tion they judge sufficient to constitute a Minister though he want ane inward call from GOD'S-Spirit reckning people are obliedged to hear him and look upon him as a Minister, because of this outward formality of ordination, without questioning his in∣ward call. Whereas on the contrary they agree in affirming that whatever inward call from GOD'S- Spirit a man have, he ought not to be heard nor re∣ceived as a Preacher, untill he obtaine this outward approbation. All which the Quakers deny as An∣tichristian.

Sixthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree in affirming that the Clergie ought to be a distinct sort of Persons distnguished from the rest of the people by their BLACK COATS &c. So that it is not lawfull for Honest Trades-men, such as was the Apostles to preach, who have not past their AP∣PRENTICE-SHIP at the University, and there Learned the ART and TRADE of Preaching. But the Quakers say the contrary, believing all may

prophecy if moved thereunto, and that ane honest trade is no-wayes inconsistent with a Gospel Minister.

Seventhly, The Papists and I.M. with his Brethe∣ren agree in affirming that Preachers are not to wait to speak as the Spirit gives them utterance; but ought to study it in their Closets before hand, and then when the BELL ringeth repeat over before the people, as the School-boyes doe their Lessons, and the Commedians their parts upon the stages. But all this is denyed by the Quakers.

Eightly, The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree that Ministers ought to have a SET-LIMI∣TED-HIRE; and ought not to supply their wants with their hands, as did the honest Apostle Paul, but sit at ease and feed of the fat, and cloath them∣selves with the finest of the woole, and take from such by violence and poinding, as cannot for conscience sake hear them, and so receive none of their spiri∣tuals. But all this the Quakers deny as Antichristian

Nynthly, The Papists and I. M. and his present Prelatick Bretheren (not his OLD PRESBYTE∣RIAN and INDEPENDENT FREINDS) agree in affirming that all Ministers are not alike; but that there ought to be DIOCESIAN BISHOPS over the rest, whom men must call MY LORD. Which is denyed and condem∣ned by the Quakers as Antichristian.

Tenthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree, in affirming that men may, yea, and ought to pray, preach and doe all other acts of worship, when they please, whether they be moved and influenced

by GOD'S Spirit or not, which the Quakers deny as will worship and superstition.

Eleventhly, The Papists and I. M. with his Bre∣theren agree, in affirming that Water-Baptism is the Baptism of Christ, and a standing Ordinance of the Church of Christ, which the Quakers deny.

Twelfthly, The Papists and I. M. with his Bre∣theren agree, in affirming that INFANT-SPRINK∣LING is an Ordinance of the Gospell, which the Quakers deny,

Thirteenthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Bre∣theren agree, in affirming that the partaking of the visible Signs of B••ead and Wine, is a Sacrament or standing Ordinance in the Church of Christ, Which the Quakers deny.

Fourteenthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Bre∣theren agree, that it is lawfull for Christians to swear which the Qu••kers according to the express com∣mand of Christ, doe deny.

Fifteenthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Bre∣theren agree, that it is lawfull for Christians, to fight and KILL ONE-ANOTHER in fighting, which the Quakers deny.

Sixteenthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Brethe∣ren agree, in the bloody Antichristian Tenet of PER∣SECUTION, in affirming that the Civil Magistrat may lawfully Kill, Banish, Imprison and poynd men for their Opinions in matters of Worship and Doctrin, which Doctrin the Quakers deny.

Seventeenthly, The Papists and I. M. with his Bretheren agree, in affirming it lawfull for men to

Knell, Bow, and take off their Hatts One to another, and in the use of vain Titles, Complements and Cringeings, &c. all which things the Quakers deny.

Eighteenthly, The Papists and I. M. and his Bretheren agree, in asserting the lawfulness of Game∣ing, Sporting, Playing, and all such•• other things, as Danceings, Singings, acting of Commedies, use∣ing of Lace, Ribbands, plating the Hair, and such other kinde of Superfluities, all which the Quakers deny.

I could have instanced severall other particulars, some whereof are in the former part of this Treatise included, but this may serve abundantly to prove the matter in hand: for since it cannot be denyed, but that I. M. and his Bretheren doe agree in those before mentioned particulars, and that joyntly in op∣position to the Quakers, who then can deny but that there is more affinity betwixt I. M. and the Pa∣pists, then betwix•• the Quakers and them. And if I. M. and the Papists agree in many more particu∣lars, and that more weighty against the Quakers, then he himself can alleadge the Quakers doe with Papists against him, then let the Rational Reader judge whether he had any reason to upbraid us with affinity with Papists, to whom he is farr more near a kin. As for his Popish charges against us, we have vindicated our selves from them, let him if he can clear himself from these, he is here charged with. If he confess the agreement, but affirm that both he and Papists are right in these things, and we wrong in denying them. However this will be

hence so farr apparent, that he is more one with Papists then we, and therefore had no reason to ac∣cuse us of Popery. But as to these particulars, both I and some others of my Bretheren have already proven how they and Papists doe in these agreements against us contradict both Truth and Scripture, and that in severall Books already published, which lye at their door unanswered.