Judgment fixed upon the accuser of our brethren and the real Christian-Quaker vindicated from the persecuting outrage of apostate informers chiefly from W. Rogers, F. Bugg, T. Crisp, John Pennyman and Jeffery Bullock ... / by that contemned servant of Christ George Whitehead.

CHAP. III. (Book 3)

§. 1. W. R's Accusation of endavouring to take away his Credit: Next, to depriving him of his Estate, examined; and the just∣ness of our dealing with him, vindicated. What sore Reflection he has brought upon himself by his Complaint, and his acting the part of a Persecuting Informer, to render his antient Friends call'd Quakers, Obnoxious in the Eye of the Law and Authority. §. 2. His bitterly Inveighing against C. Marshall and many other Brethren. His unjust Instance of Pope Leo's Bull again. His and F. Bugg's Contradiction about W. Penn. Schism con∣demned in and by the Church of Christ, as well as Heretical Doctrine and Scandalous Living. The decrease of W. R's Number, and the increase and gathering of many faith∣ful to Christ and us his followers, foretold. §. 3. The Pen-man's writing in behalf and in the name of the peaceable People called Quakers, vindicated from W. R's severe and seditious Inferences. §. 4. W.R. called in question upon his own Principle, for writing in the name and behalf of (and representing) divers Persons, who never chose nor gave him Power, nor allowed him so to do (and his

abuse of E. Burroughs and I. Pennington) whereupon his severe Charge and Inference is all returned upon his own head. §. 5. W. R. and F. Bugg, their Reflections upon the Mee∣ting in the Isle of Ely, no proof of Friends Apostacy, but of their own Partiality and Injustice in their Representation of the mat∣ter. §. 6. W. R's again recited Lye about the Paper from Barbadoes, as being one part of the fruits of the pretended esta∣blisht Government, with other unjust Ag∣gravations thereupon, farther detected.

§. 1. TO prove that thy Adversaries would cause thee to suffer in Body and Estate, if they had Power; thou sayst, They have endeavoured, as much as in them lies, to take away thy Credit, which is next to depriving thee of thy Estate. And wherein to take away thy Credit? Thou sayest, The Pen-man hath given thee this sort of Treatment, either in relation to thy self or thy Book, viz.

Hellish Iealousies, Fiery Agent & Incendiary, his Heart is filled with Pride and Envy. As for William Rogers's Book against Church Government, 'tis outra∣giously Wicked, Clamorous and Abusive.

I cannot suppose, (sayst thou)

what he means by these his very words

[He is here treated far more mildly than his work deserves]

unless he believes that my work deserves corporal Punishment, or Confis∣cation of Estate. I cannot but again say, Bles∣sed be the Lord, that the Rigid Vncharitable Pen-man hath not Power so to do. [Thus far thou] p. 21, 22.

To all which I say, and that in the sight of the Righteous God, who is Judge of all, that I know no Treatment given thee, in these and the like Passages in our Book, than what thou and thine justly deserve, though in much else of ours thou art treated far more mildly, yea, more kindly than thy work deserves. And dost thou indeed judge, that we have endeavoured to take away thy Credit by such kind of Treatment? And that 'tis next to taking away thy Estate? What hast THOU then done against us; yea, against many of the peaceable People called Quakers? Hast not rendred us Vn∣christian, in notorious Blasphemy, Apostates, Innovators, Imposers of blind Obedience, Popish, Papistical Track, in Vnion with the Pope and his Party, more unjust than the Lords of the Spanish Inquisition (Yea, and at such a time as this, when I presume thou canst not be ignorant, how that many of our Innocent Friends are under severe prosecu∣tion and suffering, both in their Persons

and Estates) in the reign of Q. Elizabeth and K. James? How Uncharitable and Unjust? How persecuting Informer-like (all circum∣stances considered) is thy Treatment? And how Inhumane, tending to add to these our Afflictions? And yet complainest of our Endeavours to take away thy Credit, and consequently thy Estate, when thou art but justly reprehended, and no other Characters placed on thy Work and Envious Spirit, than what are just, and naturally belong thereunto. Hath it not been our practice from the beginning, to testifie against our Persecutors, and to reprove their Envy and Cruelty? Did we therein go about to bring corporal Punishment and Confiscation of Estate upon them? No sure. Canst thou take liberty to abuse and villifie so ma∣ny Servants of Christ in Print, and think they must all be mute under thy Abuses, and none to reprehend thee? No such matter. They that have but the least spark of holy Zeal, or but any Life or Soul for God, must needs be kindled in some mea∣sure against thy abominable Abuses and In∣jurious persecuting Work. It seems, thou valuest thy own Credit and Estate at a high rate above others: Thou seemest little to value the Credit, Liberty or Estates of ma∣ny others, (even of thy antient Friends, called Quakers) to brand and stigmatize

them, as thou hast done, with as Infamous Characters, yea, and as Obnoxious in the Eye of Law and Authority, as thou easily canst, and yet complainest of Endeavours to destroy thy Credit and Estate, when thou hast given the first occasion of the Re∣prehension and Judgment given upon thee and thy work of Malice. Thou hast begun the Fray publickly, and broke the Peace; now complainest of Vncharitable Treatment. First thou art Barking, Snapping and Bi∣ting, then art Complaining and Why∣ning, when a little Whipt for thy Folly, thy Pievish and Ugly Behaviour. Oh! In∣jurious and Partial Man! Hast thou done as thou wouldst be done by? For shame give over thy malicious and fruitless At∣tempts.

§. 2. Again, 'tis observable how bitterly thou still inveighs against Charles Marshall and the Sixty five Persons more, about the Paper touching J. W. and J. S. as judging it In some respect to be much like the Bull given forth by Pope Leo the Tenth, against Martin Luther, Anno 1520. But yet in one main Point greatly differs; for (sayest thou) in the Bull there are Forty two Articles of Doctrine condemned, and the Bull ordered to be read in every place, that the matters for which he was prosecuted as an Heretick might be known. But

in the aforesaid Paper, subscribed by Charles Marshall, &c. There is no mention of any per∣ticular Doctrine, or Vitiousness of Life, for which they are persecuted by their Brethren, p. 22. [Thus far thou.]

Whence three things are to be observed, 1st, That the said Paper is compared to the Pope's Bull, as much like it in some respect: 2dly, That its deem'd worse than the Pope's Bull, in not mentioning any particular Doctrine or Vitious Life against J. W. and J. S. 3dly, That they who subscribed the said Paper, were persecutors of their Bre∣thren. Whereof thou knowest William Penn was one: How foully hast thou asperst and represented C. M. and W. P. &c. in these things? And how do these Compari∣sons against him, and thy rendring him a Persecutor of his Brethren, agree with his being Dear W. P. This Noble man, &c? as thy Brother F. Bugg, and consequently thy self, have rendred him, being in thy Book, pag. 73.74.

As for their not mentioning any particu∣lar Doctrine or Vitious Life, that others might know the matters alledged against them; what, wouldst infer that therefore the Pope's Bull against M. Luther was more reasonable or just? That's a mistake, for thou confessest a Judgment to be given a∣gainst that jealous, rending and separate Spirit

from which thou hast not cleared them (but rendred them the more Guilty, if thou be∣est their Representatives, as impowered by them to write in their Vindication, accord∣ing to thy own reflection on us.) And was that no Reason then to give others notice and warning against such a Spirit? Is Schism no Sin, or not reproveable? But how Un∣just is thy Comparison? I ask thee, if thou darest say, that Pope Leo (that Atheist) was in the same Sense, Religion, Gravity and tender Exercise toward M. Luther, that in thy own Narrative thou hast rendred these Friends in, that were concern'd in dealing with J. S. and J. W. at Drawell? And I ask thee further, If ever thou readst any such Acknowledgment, Submission or Con∣demnation made by Martin Luther to the Church of Rome, as the said J. S. and J. W. with thy own assistance, made as satisfacti∣on to their Brethren, and the Church of God in general? Though afterward thou comparedst it to a Rattle to please Chil∣dren. And hath a Christian Society no Power to reprove and judge a dividing, self-separating Spirit, (in whomsoever it be) that makes Rents and Schisms, as well as Heretical Doctrine, and Vitious or Scan∣dalous living? Mark them that cause Divi∣sions and Offences, and avoid them, &c. If thou grantest the Principle, and such

power in a Christian Society or Church, what will thy attempts to Unchristian and Unchurch us avail, unless thou canst prove us guilty of Vitious Lives and Heretical Doctrine? Which if thou canst not, then hast thou and thy party assumed a Power to judge of Spirits, wherein you fairly give away your Cause, and overthrow much of your own opposition to the Churches Power and Determination in such cases? And your Judgment to Unchristian us or our Spirits, being but your Imposition, we shall as little value; and the day will yet far∣ther discover whose Spirits are Unchristian, and whose Spirits are Christian. And 'tis not thy boasting either of the Numerousness or Scores (of thy party) p. 23. that will de∣cide the Controversie; nor wouldst thou ac∣cept of such a Plea on our parts, but doubtless esteem it no Christian Proof or Argument, but an Imposition, and begging the Que∣stion: But seeing thou layest so much stress on thy Numbers and Scores, I must tell thee, that if they amounted to as many as the third part of the Stars (which yet they are far short of) that followed thee, or owned thy Work of opposition & strife, they would be but wandring Stars, and have lost their Habitations and Glory, and are darkned, whom the Dragon's Tayl has drawn and cast down to the Earth. But blessed be

the Lord our God, the greater part of the Stars, among us his People called Quakers, have kept their Station and Splendor in the Firmament of his Power, and in living Union, Concord and Love, wherein they live above that Spirit of Enmity and Discord which thou and thy party are in, and which the Lord will yet farther disco∣ver and deliver those who are at unawares betrayed thereby, yet have some secret Breathings unto him, and that they may come into clearness of Judgment, so as on the Restoration and increase of the number of the Faithful and Upright: And by the spreading of the Gospel day, thy Numbers shall decrease; and many will come to see thee more and more in thy dark and mis∣chievous attempts, and how insuccesful and disappointed thou wilt be therein. And those that come to be recovered, and many Thousands that shall be gathered to the Lord and us his People, shall be found bet∣ter, and more worthy, than thy self, and those that go out and separate from us.

§. 3. W. R. is pleased to make a Charge, and draw severe and seditious Inferences upon our Advertisement, and conclusion of our Introduction, especially against the Pen-man, for vindicating the People called Qua∣kers in their Church-Order and Discipline,

and writing in the Name of the People called Quakers, when vindicated from his Scan∣dals. But he has very unfairly and dis-in∣genuously left out the distinguishing expres∣sions in the first, as [Peaceable, Christian, Conscientiously, Christian Society, p. 23.] in the passage of ours, viz. We the peace∣able Christian People called Quakers are Conscientiously vindicated and cleared in our Christian Society. Where's then his exception against our vindication and wri∣ting in the Plural, in the Name of the peace∣able People called Quakers? But that, 1. We could not write in the Name of such as encouraged the publication of his Treatise en∣tituled, The Christian-Quaker, in five parts, who yet are a part of the People called Quakers. (saith he) 2. Nor in the Names of such as are disaffected with laying Marriages before Womens Meetings; And these are numerous, and called Quakers (quoth he) To the first; Answer, No: How should we write in their Names, who encouraged the Pub∣lication of his said Treatise against us (if any such were, for they keep very obscure, as not willing to be known in such encou∣ragement.) It is a Book of Envy, Strife and Discord, and they no Peaceable Quakers who encouraged it. 'Twas the Peaceable People called Quakers that were concerned in our Vindication: And therefore W. R.

saith true, as't happens; The Pen-man could not write in the Name of such as encouraged the Publication of his Book. Whence it fol∣lows, they were not of that Peaceable sort which he vindicated, nor W. R's Book a work of Peace, or in the least tending thereto, but a great Abuse and Scandal to, and against the very peaceable People called Quakers. Secondly; Nor are they who op∣pose our Godly Women's Meetings, and laying Marriages before them, so peaceable and clear in their minds (in that point) as we could wish they were, and they should be better informed, and hear Instruction: However, they also are concluded by W.R.'s words, not to be of that Peaceable People called Quakers intended in our Vindication, in that he saith, The Pen-man cannot be un∣derstood to write in their Names; when 'tis most evident he did write in the Name of The Peaceable Christian People called Quakers. Though W. R. as one in some wise Consci∣ous, leaves out the word [Peaceable] that he might with the greater colour draw his Charge and severe Inferences upon the Pen-man, &c. But such kind of slighty mean shifts will stand him in no stead, when we strictly look into his Fallacious dealing.

And granting him that we cannot repre∣sent (nor be understood to write in the Name of) such Quakers (so called) as en∣couraged

the publication of his persecuting Books and Pamphlets against us, nor of such as either oppose our Womens Meetings, or laying Marriages before them, or are dis∣affected there-with, nor in the Names of the several Scores he tells of, who gave Testi∣mony in Writing against Charles Marshall and Sixty five more. (The greatest part where∣of being known to be Faithful men of Sin∣cerity and service in the Lord's work) Nor in the Names of such as he saith appear Neu∣tral in the present Controversie, and yet own the same Principles which he and his party do. Where is then their Neutrallity? is it in having no concern of Conscience outwarly to ap∣pear on either party, as W. R. saith? Then they are only Neutrals in appearance, but secretly of his party and Principles, some whereof are very perverse and unpeaceable, as well as unsound. Now I say, we grant that we of the Second day's Meeting did not represent such kind of Quakers as those of W. R. his party; nor could they im∣power us in our writing for, and represent∣ing the peaceable People called Quakers, or that peaceable sort of Quakers, who are for Unity, Love, Concord and Peace in the Church of Christ among us, nor was it our intention to represent, personate or vindi∣cate such pretended Quakers, as are in a Spirit of discord and strife, causing and

making Divisions, Rents and Schismes in the Church (first disturbing and trou∣bling, then reproaching the Society they sometime owned) but only those of a peace∣able Mind and Spirit; and therefore his not knowing that we can represent any under that Name, more than our own Second day's Meeting, is a false insinuation; for there are many Thousands of the People called Quakers, yea, of the most sincere and peaceable minded, besides our said Meeting, whose real sense and judgment (in the matters treat∣ed on in our Book, against W. R's great Book) we have represented, and who real∣ly do and will own the same. Where now hath W. R. shown the Pen-man guilty of great Impudence, in writing in behalf of the peaceable People called Quakers? The word Peaceable in our Advertisement, left out by him, doth really distinguish it, with respect only to the peaceable sort, which are they that live in Love and Unity, who may properly be termed The PEOPLE called Quakers, as united in one Society, and be∣come one People, and not dividing separate Spirits, who are gone out from us. And though in our Introduction, we say the terms We and Vs are used, sometimes in the Name of the People called Quakers, when vindicated from his Scandals. I say so still. And this intends no other than the Peaceable People,

(as before explain'd in our Advertisement) and not any such pretended Quakers, as W. R. his party and Abettors, who are unpeaceable and turbulent to the Society and People among whom they sometime walked. And therefore his roaring and clamouring out great Impudence, Pride, and height of such towring lofty spirited Persons as the Pen-man, &c. are but empty Clamours and Abuses, as is also his Jealousie, That the Pen-man counts himself one of the Repre∣sentatives of Christ's inward Government, who alone is Lord over the Conscience. Where∣as the Pen-man never so accounted of him∣self, nor ever assumed to himself any such Government or Lordship over the Consci∣ence, as is peculiar to Christ alone; but only accounts himself a Servant of Christ, and a Subject under his spiritual Govern∣ment: And therefore W. R's still proceed∣ing in his roaring and bitter Exclamation against him, as That he would represent in Print, as if the People called Quakers, with∣out r••••triction (a Lye still) were Persons im∣powering such an imperious Map of Pride and Drollery, as the Pen-man shews himself to write in their Names. The matter is an∣swered before; but yet I may further add, as the Envy and Malice of this Adversary appears swelling high, so his confidently repeated Falshoods and Abuses are nume∣rous;

for we would neither so represent in Print, nor yet did the Pen-man so much as pretend to be impowered to write by the Peo∣ple in general, or without restriction; and yet both in Charity and Christian duty, might vindicate all them as the peaceable People ca••••ed Quakers, who are really peaceable in their Spirits and Conversations: And though there be some called Quakers, who are unpeaceable in both such as W.R. and his party; yet that cannot unpeople the other, who are truly peaceable, but rather unpeople themselves, who are unpeaceable, from being of that People: Such our vin∣dication of a peaceable People from the un∣peaceable, proves none of us Impudent, nor any imperious Map of Pride and Drollery, no∣torious Falshood, &c. as most unjustly ren∣dred by an imperious proud Adversary. For hath it not been frequent with us, to vindicate the People called Quakers? in∣tending all those that might properly be counted a People in Peace and Unity, and that from the general Aspersions and Ca∣lumnies, both of open and secret Enemies: And in this Controversie we vindicate them as that peaceable People, who are sincere and faithful to God, lovers of Peace, Unity and good Order, and whom W. R. and his party, in their dividing and perverse gain-sayings, are not able to unpeople, nor justly to ren∣der

themselves that People. As for him and those of his party, who promote his malicious, persecuting, defaming Books, &c. We cannot look upon them worthy to bear so much as the Name Quakers, much∣less to be deemed that People under the Title of Christian-Quakers, whilst in their Unchristian spirit of strife and discord: And they will yet more manifest themselves to be further remote from that peaceable People called Quakers, if they Repent not; and the peaceable and faithful, who love unity and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ, shall remain a people, and live when all such spirits as lust to envy and contention, shall be confounded, scattered, wither, be dri∣ven back and come to naught in their evil Designs and wicked Attempts; the Breath of the Lord shall scatter them; for no Weapon formed against his Heritage shall prosper.

But alas! our Adversary is still in a great fude and fret for our writing in behalf, or in the name of the People called Quakers, (reiterating his Falshood again) without Restriction, p. 24, 25. he should have said, Peaceable People called Quakers. But he goes on at an outragious rate on this subject, confessing, He wants words to represent the Action in as ugly a dress as it deserves. And therefore when he hath as falsly asperst the

Pen-man, and set him out in as Vgly a Dress as he can (so that the Devil and William Rogers have done their worst hitherto) he supposeth a Comparison in the case against him, but very unjustly in these words, viz.

Suppose a company of men, never chosen ac∣cording to Law, should meet at Westminster, and call themselves the Representatives of the People of England, and accordingly in the Name of the People of England proceed to act as such: Wouldst thou not abhor and detest the Action? And how canst thou think that we can do less than detest thy insolent Spirit, by of∣fering to write in the Name of the People called Quakers, without Restriction, when they gave neither thee nor any of thy Brethren such Au∣thority? Had the fear of God been before thine Eyes, thou couldst not have attempted to have done so Wickedly, p. 25.

Here it is probable he thinks, he hath given the Pen-man a deadly Blow; but when the Devil and William Rogers have done their worst, it comes to little Execu∣tion, but to manifest his Envy and Folly. He only shews his Teeth, but cannot bite nor fasten; for there is no just paralel in the case; there is no such kind of Treason∣able proceeding justly chargeable upon the Pen-man, as is inferred in the Comparison: The Pen-man did not call himself the Re∣presentative, nor write in the Name of the

People (or of all those) called Quakers, without Restriction, as he falsly saith, nor pretend an Election or Authority from them so to do; the matter is distinguished and answered before, and yet the Pen-man might lawfully represent the Innocency of all true peaceable Quakers, both as to Prin∣ciple and Practice, when abused and calum∣niated, either as Vnchristian or Popish Impo∣sers, &c. without Conviction (like as this Adversary hath frequently misrepresented them) And this may be done charitably, freely and voluntarily in their Name and Vindication, and in true Unity, from a right knowledge of their Innocency, de∣clared Sense and Principles; And hath not this been the Practice of many faithful Ser∣vants of Christ among us, ever since we were a People, to write both in the name & vindi∣cation of the People of God called Quakers, or of the Innocent People called Quakers, &c. as the Lord hath laid a necessity upon them, and yet not to include those who are un∣faithful or scandalous to Truth, or any who are turned into Envy and Strife, though they go under that Name? Nor yet have they sought or needed to seek Commission from the whole People, to write in their behalf, being required of the Lord to write. And did not many of the best reformed Protestants and Martyrs write in the name

and behalf of the Protestant Church and Religion, as the Book of Martyrs and other Histories, and their own Writings shew; of which numerous Instances might be given. And did not the the Apostles of Christ often write in the Plural, both in the name and behalf of themselves and the rest of true Believers and Fellow-members, under the terms, We, and Vs, and Our, &c. especially in that of 1 John 2.19. They went out from Us, but they were not of Us; for if they had been of Us, they would no doubt have continued with Us; see chap. 3.14. and 4.6. Here John wrote in the Name of his Brethren and Fellow-members, and di∣stinguished themselves from those that went out from them, as we have our selves, as a peaceable People, from you that are gone out from us, into a Spirit of Enmity, Discord and Self-separation.

§. 4. But (W. R.) since thou countest it such a horrid Crime, such great Impudence, Pride, ugly Action, Insolence, &c. to write in the name or on the behalf of People or Persons, or in their Vindication, without being impowered, authorized and chosen by the same Persons or People. Now ob∣serve well upon thy own principle and way of arguing, what a Reckoning I have with thee: Let us seriously enquire of thee,

Have all those Persons in whose behalf and Name thou hast written in the Plural (under the Terms We, Vs, &c) given thee Au∣thority, or chosen thee to write in their Name and behalf? Did John Story, John Wilkinson, and now the person in Cambridg∣shire (whom thou and Francis Bugg contend for, against the Record about his Marriage) all give thee Authority (or chuse thee) to write on their behalf, and to expose their Names in Print, as thou hast done in thy state of the Controversie on their behalf? Did they give thee Authority to write in their names and behalf, as those Other Friends in Truth thou tellest of and repre∣sentest? Either they did, or they did not; if they did, then they may be entituled to, and are justly chargeable with thy work, how perverse and abusive soever it be; If they did not chuse nor authorize thee to write in their behalf and name, then thy own Judgment returns upon thy own head, as one guilty of great Impudence, Pride, towr∣ing lofty Spirit, notorious Falshood, ugly Dress, &c. to write in the name and vindi∣cation of Persons, and to represent them who never gave thee Power, nor chose thee to thy work. Didst not thou pretend to write on behalf of thy self, and other Friends in Truth concerned, as in the Title-page of thy great Book? and now to use the words

Vs, We or Our, with respect to such as en∣couraged the giving forth thereof, as in thy Advertisement to thy seventh part? When now divers noted Persons, who have ap∣peared of thy party, refuse to stand by thy Books; and we know none of them that dare say, they gave thee any such Autho∣rity, or chose thee to be their Representa∣tive to write in their name and behalf, as thou hast done (against many faithful Friends, whom the Lord is with and will stand by, against thy crooked Spirit and Opposition) but rather, those thy Friends in Truth pretended (on enquiry, if they own and will stand by thy Books) as it has been often asked them, particularly at Devon∣shire-house, in 1681. have answered, That William Rogers must answer for himself, if he hath done more than he can answer, or wronged any: They will not stand by him; 'Tis his own Act, he must look to it, &c. Thus upon a pinch they leave him in the lurch to shift for himself; they'l not stand by him openly however; they own him not for their Representative, though he hath represented them, and written as in their Name, Person and Vindication; as also represented them as Encouragers of the giving forth of his great Book, falsly stiled, The Christian-Quaker, &c.

But to deal more closely and positively

with thee in this matter, how camest thou to expose Edward Burroughs Name in Print, and to represent him as a Person of thy Principle and Judgment, by a confused, unsound whimsical Paper, which thou hast printed in thy great Book, with Edward Burrough's Name put to it, and represented it as his Testimony, and even in thy Title∣page sayst, it was given forth in the year 1661. by Edw. Burroughs, and since the same is re∣printed over and over by thy busie inform∣ing Agent Thomas Crisp, as E. B's Vision; but I am perswaded thou and he have grosly abused and mis-represented that Servant of the Lord E. B. by rendring him the Au∣thor of such Absurdities as are contained in that same Paper about the Shepherd and his Dogs, &c. particularly in that passage of the

Shepherd's gathering the Sheep with the many Goats, that did push, trouble and hurt the Sheep with their Horns, and putting them into the Fold; and that he made fast the door, and would not separate them until he had the other Sheep also, that did not come with the Flock.

See what Doctrine this is, as ap∣plyed to Christ, the good Shepherd, ren∣dring him so severe to his Sheep, as to gather, shut up and keep so many Goats, so long among them in his Fold, to trouble, bruise and hurt his poor Sheep with their Horns. And also, that Warning and Precept

given in the said Paper to Friends,

for all to forbear judging any man any more, upon any pretence whatsoever:

Can any that knew E. B. and the soundness of judgment & understan∣ding that he was attain'd to in the year 1661. believe that he was the Author of such Doctrine to all Friends, as to judge no man under any pretence whatsoever? A man well known severely to judge deceitful Workers and rebellious Ones, as (yea, he testified plainly against John Perrot's spirit of Divi∣sion) is fully evinced in his Books and Wri∣tings. And I dare presume E.B. never gave thee authority, nor chose thee or Tho. Crisp to represent him in print (so many years after his decease) as the Author of the said Paper or warning to all friends, To judge no man under any pretence whatsoever: And yet thou art severely judging and reproaching others that are not of thy party as Apostates, Innova∣tors, &c. contrary to such an express precept & doctrine espoused by thee, as E.B's Testimo∣ny. Besides the express contradiction to thy self in thus representing E. B. in print, with∣out his leave, authority or consent, what great abuse hast thou done to him, his Memo∣ry, Name and Testimony, in exposing him in Print, as Author of that which doth not so much as look like him or his Testimony, or any Vision of his, but in the said Do∣ctrines both contrary to his Judgment and

Practice? I say, what a horrid Abuse hast thou done to the Name and Memory of the dead in Christ, and that by promoting a forged Subscription, if thou canst not give sufficient demonstration and proof, that Edw. Burroughs was the Author of the same Paper aforesaid, which thou hast ex∣posed in his name in Print? If thou sayst, it was delivered to thee with Edw. Burrough's name to it: I say, that's no proof of its be∣ing his; for both I and divers others have seen a Copy of the same only with J. Perrots name to it; and this more probably true, that he was the Author, for divers reasons, than thy rendring E. B. the Author.

Again, thou hast also exposed that honest and innocent Person Isaac Pennington in Print, to serve thy own turn and thy parties, as a Confirmation of thy work, and that after his decease also, for which I dare presume he gave thee no authority, nor chose thee so to represent him in Print, or to pick out of the middle, diminish or curtalize his Writings or Testimony, by leaving out the most material and explana∣tory precedent and subsequent Passages thereof, to the great injury and abuse of his Intention; for which his Son John Pen∣nington was stirred up to vindicate his de∣ceased Father, and to detect thy abuse and Prevarication. And am satisfied, that

neither Edward Burroughs nor John Crook gave thee Authority to quote or cite them, or either of them in opposition to G. F. as thou hast John Crook especially, in thy Epistle, pag. 3. nor to tell the World in Print, That his Testimony is agreeable to thy sence: I do not believe J. C. will in the least own thee in thy work of Opposition, and strife against many faithful Servants of Christ.

Also, thou and Francis Bugg have repre∣sented William Penn in Print, on some pas∣sages pickt out of his Address to Protestants, as in thy 66 and 73 pages, which he never gave you power to do, much less to repre∣sent him (as if he were one in Judgment with you against his Brethren) nor did he give thee or F. Bugg leave to discant upon and turn his words to serve your own turns, nor to apply them against such his Friends in the Isle of Ely or else-where, who are for Womens Meetings, and laying Marriages twice before the Mens and Wo∣mens Meetings; it is not to be supposed, that he intended [Fly Rome at Home] as proper Admonition to them, as thy Brother F. Bugg applies them, as in the Authority and genuine sence of Dear W. P. p. 78. calling William Penn, Dear Friend, p. 65. This Noble Man, &c. p. 73. Which is to render W. P. exactly one of your own

party; and all this without his authority leave or consent.

But how comes he now to be Dear William Penn, Dear Friend, and This Noble man? Hast not thou numbred him among the Per∣secutors of J. S. and J. W. as thou esteemest Charles Marshall and Sixty Five more (as thy phrase is) who signed the Paper thou art so much offended at? p. 22, 27. Was not William Penn one of those sixty six Sub∣scribers? And dost not thou on this very occasion retort his words [Let us fly Rome at Home?] What! must he therefore be a Persecutor of his Brethren, and yet a Dear Friend, Dear William Penn, This Noble man, &c. in thy Book? What Self-contradi∣ction and manifest Flattery art thou and thy Brother Bugg (like Parasites) guilty of? Pray lift up your Eyes and see your selves, if not judicially given over to blind∣ness and hardness of heart.

Take another Instance or two of thy Self-contradictory dealing; Didst not thou expose a Certificate or Testimony (as thou esteemedst it) of Nathaniel Crips in Print against G. F. without any Authority from Nathaniel for so doing? I am sure he con∣fest as much to me and John Bouldron the 6th Moneth, 1679. against thy publishing it in Manuscript, as that thou didst it with∣out

his advice, knowledge or order; see our Book, Accuser, &c. p. 172

And likewise, that pretended Certificate or Testimony of Edw. Perkins, which thou printedst against G. F. Edward confessed to me at sundry times and before divers Per∣sons, that he did not give any advice or consent to thy printing it; for 'twas print∣ed without his knowledge. And so, we may question or suppose thou hast done the like in the rest, or most of the pretended Testimonies against G. F. &c. from those Women and others of Bristol, &c.

Now may not I rationally take leave to re∣flect and argue, ad hominem, upon thee, and according to thy own Terms thus, Oh! thou Imperious Map of Pride, towring lofty and Lordly Spirit, insolent and conceited, proud Vsurper! how durst thou either write in the name or behalf of so many, whom thou countest Friends in Truth, and nume∣rous too? or expose the names of so many deceased Servants of Christ in thy Quarrel, as if they were all on thy side and party, when thy gave thee no power, nor deputed thee so to do? And thou must answer for thy misrepresenting them, and abusing their Names, Memories and Testimonies, when the chieftains of thy own party dare not stand by thy work, nor own thee for their

Representative, but leave thee to stand by it thy self, as thy own. What an unjust and false Representative hast thou shewn thy self, by thy own rule and manner of Re∣flection upon others? though I am apt to think that some few have privately encoura∣ged thee in thy travail, who now are afraid publickly to stand by thy deform'd, inform unshapely and monstrous Birth, begotten and brought forth by the old Accuser of the Brethren; though some are not ashamed to promote and expose it to Sale, but it will turn to their own shame, and be their burden at length.

§. 5 Again, to prove thy false charge of Apostacy and Innovation against us (p. 26.) thou insistest on a Record in the Quarterly Meeting Book at Haden∣ham in the Isle of Ely about * 1.1 a Marriage, shewing Friends dislike of the man∣ner of proceeding and dis∣union there-with. The Question is, Whether the person concern'd gave thee Authority to expose this in Print to make him a subject of the Controversie, and proof of our Apostacy? If not, as I presume he did

not, but rather F. B. from whom, thou sayst, thou receivedst it; then hast thou shewn thy self no Friend to the Person concerned, in exposing his name in Print, in a matter that tends to his disrepute and disgrace, and that in plain contradiction to thy own Prin∣ciple and Judgment against us; and yet the ground of Friends dissatisfaction in that case, thou dost not demonstrate, (wherein thou hast done partially and unjustly, which necessitates this discovery) but sayst, It is for not proceeding exactly in that outward new formed Method: Whereas 'twas an Inno∣vation or new Method that Friends were offended at, viz. propounding the Mar∣riage but once to the Meeting, and that in the Womans absence (with whom he in∣tended Marriage) which is both a new Me∣thod and Imposition on Friends, upon his bear word and credit, without the Woman's Testimony from her own Mouth, which should have been allowed Friends, and that at two sundry Meetings, from both the Per∣sons concerned; which is no new formed Method, but that which has been many years among us, and is a necessary and com∣mendable Method, both for enquiry into the Persons clearness from other Engagements, and tending to a general satisfaction of Friends in Truth. And this Method doth neither invalidate nor derogate from that

antient Advice of Friends, cited in thy 4th Chapter concerning Marriage, pag 66. viz.

Let it be made known to the Children of Light, especially to those of the Mee∣ting, to which the parties are Members, that all in the Light may witness it to be of God, and that no Scandal may rest upon the Truth, nor any thing done in secret, but all things brought to the Light, &c.

This is general, and was wholsom advice. And there is no particu∣lar Method used among us, but it tends to the same good end, (viz. for the satisfaction and Testimony of all in the Light) and doth not in the least contradict or lessen it▪ Where's then the Antichristian Imposition, Apostacy and Innovation, thou chargest in the Contents of thy fourth Chapter? Is it in proposing Marriages twice (or at two sundry times) to the Meetings the parties b••long to? and that by both the parties concerned, to prevent Scandal and Clan∣destine proceedings, and that Friends in the Light may witness it to be of God, which is our Method; and in which the Person aforesaid did not proceed, in his pro∣posing his intention of Marriage but once, and that in the Womans absence (as Friends have given account) and for which cause Friends expressed they had not Vnion with

him in so doing: But it seems thou hast, in being so officious an Advocate for him a∣gainst Friends for their Conscientious dis∣like recorded against such an Example or President; and scoffing at our Women Friends in the Isle of Ely, as (thou sayest) may be accounted of the QVORVM, p. 24. Is this thy proof of Antichristian Imposition, Apostacy and Innovation against us? Where's thy Christianity, Conscience, Religion and Order pretended? Oh! be ashamed of thy Scornful, Unchristian and Infamous At∣tempts. And also it was no Friendly part in thee, to endeavour to expose the Quar∣terly Meeting of the Isle of Ely in Print to publick censure, on the bare Information of Francis Bugg, thy Informer, (who has shewn himself, a Party and open Adversary against that Meeting) rendring it no bet∣ter than an Imposing Church, a False Church, p. 74. against whom thou hast joyned in Judgment with him, without hearing that Meeting's own defence and answer to Francis Bugg in the case: is this thy judicial and equal proceedings? Oh for shame, give over thy partial and impertinent Scribling! And what if the said Quarterly Meeting, would not once hear F. Bugg's Letter, nor suffer it to be read? It appears he has not behaved himself so well and obligingly to that Meeting, as to engage Friends there to

lay by their other concerns, to hear his Let∣ter against their proceeding: They were not ignorant of F. B's turbulent Spirit; witness his troublesom work, his ignoble, base and crafty dealing against Samuel Cater about the Fine, &c. a particular ac∣count whereof is expected from G. Smith and Friends of the Isle of Ely, who know the transaction in the Circumstances of the subtil Intreague, which possibly may be a Rebuke to Francis Bugg his Immorality in the ••ase, & corrupt Conscience, as well as to his Pride and Insolence, as an Ensample to Posterity, which I really think he deserves, if he'l not study to be quiet towards Friends his peaceable Neighbours.

In his said Letter to the Quarterly Mee∣ting at H••denham in the Isle of Ely (and which is printed in thy Book, part 7. p. 72.) though he flatteringly begins with Dear Friends, he accuseth them about the Record against J. A. as excluding him out of the Vnity of Friends, and with Excommunication, &c. Wherein he has dealt prevaricatingly and falsly, as appears by his and thy own account of the Meeting's Record, which is, That they have no Vnion with him in THIS HIS SO DOING: Which relates to that parti∣cular Act, and not wholly to exclude the Person out of the Vnity in all other things as one Excommunicate, &c. Yet he proceeds Reflectingly, telling them of Stigmatizing,

laying stress where God hath laid none—Ex∣communicating about such things which are at best but mens Traditions, and Impositions— Imposing false Church. Applying William Penn's words, This noble Man's words (as he flatteringly stiles him) [Fly Rome at Home] to the said Quarterly-Meeting, which were never so intended by W. P. Thus thou and F. B. have abused W. P. in Print, shame∣fully perverting his words and intention, who never could intend to bid a Quarterly-Meeting Fly Rome at Home, either for testi∣fying against such Irregularity as proposing a Marriage but once to a Meeting, and that in the absence of the Woman concerned; nor yet for justifying upon the Method of proposing the Marriage twice before con∣sumated. Is this that Rome at home which Thou and F. B. would have Friends to Fly? (for I take thee and F. B. to be in great Union now in your work, seeing you appear so joyntly together in Print, and to charge Friends with Imposition, Immora∣lity,* 1.2 &c. as thou hast done.) But he deals partially, as thou hast done, in not manifesting the occasion of Friends dissatisfaction, he charging them with Ex∣cluding the aforesaid Person, what in them lies, out of the Vnity, Excommunicating, &c. In which he placeth the Controversie but about manifesting his intention to Marry;* 1.3

and then crys, Behold the Crime! But shews not what it is in the manner of circumstan∣ces of it. Thus partial and covered you are in stating matters.

But the said Meeting would not hear his Let∣ter: What great Crime was that? To this thou sayst, viz. Should the Supream Power in this Nation have treated our Friends so as not to hear our Addresses,* 1.4 many Goals might at this day have remained full of honest Friends, who have been discharged from their sore Imprisonments. There's no parallel in the case between Friends tender Addresses to Authority for Relief of Friends in Di∣stresses, Goals, &c and F. Bugg's ••••••lecting abusive Letter to Friends, in vindication of an Irregular Practice, unwarrantable, and tending to a corrupt fleshly Liberty, as that of Proposing the Marriage but once to the Meeting, &c. Howbeit, 'tis a marvel thou wilt grant us so much Truth, as that our Ad∣dresses have at any time had so good effect with Authority, as to obtain the enlarge∣ment of so many honest Friends out of their sore Imprisonments. This is more than some of thy Party have owned. However, considering thy Concession herein, 'tis the worse requital in thee to villifie and abuse such in Print as have been most industrious with the supream Power in the Sufferers be∣half, as to my knowledge thou hast very

evilly requited and treated some such, rather like a revengeful Persecutor, than a Helper of the oppressed.

So thy Charge of Immorality on the Quarterly Meeting in the Isle of Ely, for not hearing F. B's Letter, and instancing the Parliaments admitting us to represent our Agrievance,* 1.5 &c. are still both unjust and no ways parallel. For if we had given the like occasion against the Parlia∣ment, that thou and F. B. have against us, they might very well have rejected our Ap∣plications, as Persons insolent to, and contemning of Government; should we have rendred them no more rightly in Go∣vernment than you have our Meetings for a Church of Christ, how should they have accepted our Addresses? As if we should have told them, they were a false, usurping, imposing, apostate Parliament, they might justly have rejected our Addresses.

§. 6. Moreover, 'tis a shameful Lye and Abuse for thee again to recite the Paper from Barbadoes, As one part of the fruits of the pretended establisht Government, p. 27. since that Paper was so far from being own'd as any part of the fruits of that Go∣vernment establisht (which was by Christ, we affirm) among us, that we have both plainly manifested our dislike thereof; and

the Persons concern'd in it in Barbadoes have themselves retracted it, as is since pub∣lickly evinced in Print; yet thou art so unconscionable as to render both G. Fox, my self, &c. as shewing no dislike to the said Paper, p. 28. Oh shameless Prevaricater and Abuser! Thou canst not but otherwise understand divers Passages in our Letter about it to Barbadoes, which clearly bespeaks our real dislike of it, as thou confessest G.F. &c. would seem to discourse a little of something amiss, &c. 'Tis evident G. F. &c. dislike some part of the said Paper, &c. p. 29. Seem to dislike the latter part thereof, p. 4. But little indeed thou makest of that part of our discourse, but art rather willing to ex∣pose us unjustly to publick Censure, on those words of ours which appear most friendly, tender and obliging, and falsly to represent us, as shewing no dislike to the said Paper. Adding also another gross Untruth and self-contradiction in the case, viz. That the Pen∣man is espousing a cause contrary to antient Testimonies, &c. p. 30. And further sayst, G. W. smoothed up the Barbadoes Meeters with this Expression, We know you aim at the best things, p. 82. What smoothing was this, when we had plainly shewed them their Mistake? We are sure then 'twas not to smooth them up therein: And may not some aim at good (yea, the best) things,

and yet be mistaken in some cases? What Absurdity then have I committed, in telling them (whom I believed had a good mean∣ing, though otherwise mistaken) they aim'd at the best things. Thou hast put my Name with G. F's at length, with an &c. instead of A. Parker's, to two or three ••ines thou hast cited in the conclusion of our Let∣ter to Barbadoes, as an instance wherein we shew no dislike to their Paper, because we call our selves Their dear Friends, &c. Is this thy [More anon] to shew that I would now be as a Lord over my Brethrens Consciences and Estates? p. 25. For I presume 'tis me thou intendest; and if so, 'tis false and abusive. [O righteous Judge of all, and Heart-searcher! plead thou my Innocency, and rebuke this Spirit of Envy, Falshood and Slanders that's risen upon against thy faithful Servants.]

Whereas our charitable, tender and friendly Treatment of them in Barbadoes rather shews, that we were not willing to reject, exclude or unfriend Persons for one or two Mistakes, than to seek Lordship over them or theirs, who otherwise were so well meaning, as that we had cause to believe, that God would rectifie their Judg∣ments, and set them to rights in all their Undertakings. So that 'twas enough for us to shew our dislike or disunion with them

in that particular thing wherein they were mistaken or erred.

Notes

• * 1.1

  I tenderly forbear exposing the Per∣son's name at pre∣sent, believing that 'twas not by his or∣der or consent that W.R. & F B. have made him such a subject of printed controversie; as also hoping that he has more charity & ten∣derness in him than to allow of their malicious Books.
• * 1.2

  Pag. 27.
• * 1.3

  P. 72.
• * 1.4

  P. 26.
• * 1.5

  P. 27.