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. VII. (Book 7)

A Letter in Two Parts, Which was sent in Manuscript to Francis Bugg, Except two Passages left out in favour to him, unless he will further expose him∣self to danger thereby. (Book 7)

IN the first part, his fraudulent dealing against Samuel Cater about the 15 l. Fine. His Abuses against him and others. His Conceitedness, Pride, Scorn and Shallowness are detected and reprehended.

In the Second part of the Letter, relating to Francis Bugg's Book, is evinced, 1. His unjust Reflection on the people call'd Quakers, and his being turned Informer. 2. His Judgment in espousing and presenting false Doctrine against the divine Light of the Son God in man. 3 His unjust Charge, and the collection thereof against certain Persons among us by name, who are the Servants of Christ, and against our faithful Womens

Meetings. 4. His Instances for Proof of his Charge and Contempt, no proof thereof. 5. His Opposition to our Testimony for Mens and Womens Meetings in the Church of Christ; and his scoffing and smiting thereat, no proof of his Charge, nor of their having No Re∣lation to Scripture. 6. His upbraiding our sober and faithful Womens Meeting as an Idol, and comparing it to the Papists great Idol; rebuked. 7. The same Challenge re∣turned upon him, that we laid upon W. Ro∣gers, being unanswered by either. 8. His Rambling impertinently, not following the terms of the Challenge, which therefore is further urged against him. 9. His charge of Imposition plainly proved false by the conclu∣sive Recommendation of our Testimony in∣stanced by him. 10. His grosly belying and abusing G. W. and his Conscience about Condescention and Accommodation. 11. His scornful Forgery on a Certificate from Huntington Meeting: His falsly representing them therein, proved very wicked, on his own Concession. 12. His scornful de∣traction against R. Richardson, his Imper∣tinency and silliness in opposing DEACO∣NESSES, as found out of some Popish Author, &c. 13. His scornfully writing and reflecting on G. Whitehead; and his inso∣lent Reviling, Boasting, Abuse and Slander, confuted by Certificate from divers Persons of

Credit. 14. His trumpeting abroad the Fame of Henry North, Knight, &c. dis∣gustful. A Proposition and Advice to Re∣pentance and publick and plain Condem∣nation of his Wicked and Scurrilous Book aforesaid, with desire of an Answer shortly, &c. [But no such Answer (nor any) as yet return'd, being now above six weeks since this Letter was left at Ely Prison with Samuel Cater▪ to be conveyed to him] With a Postscript since added.

The First Part.

Francis Bugg;

UPon the perusal of thy two Letters lately sent me, the one directed to Samuel Cater in Ely Goal, and the other to my self, and the rest of the second day Mee∣ters (as thy terms are.) And since thou art become such an open contending Ad∣versary, I thought my self the more con∣cerned in Conscience to take some notice, and give thee my sence of thy proceeding and treatment in the Controversies thou hast so confidently undertaken, and become an officious Advocate in, that yet thou mayest be cautioned to stop thy pernicious Current, and destructive Race thou art running, and seriously bethink thy self, and Repent, before thy final Destruction▪ which I clearly perceive thy extraordinary Con∣ceitedness,

Pride, Scorn and Envy, &c. do tend to bring upon thee. By the way, I observe thy Allegations against Samuel Cater, about the old Difference between thee and him so long depending, touching the FINE laid upon thee for him, as a Preacher, for which thou confessest, That thy Cousin George Smith, as his Wifes Agent, made thee Restitution; and yet I perceive thou art uneasie under that Restitution (as thou callest it) thou seemest concerned that several Friends now bring up that old concern, since thou published thy Book. But how did George Smith make thee Restitution? Did not he proffer thee half the Fine to stop thy Tur∣bulency? but thou by Craft got beyond him for the whole, &c. wherein he and many more are greatly dissatisfied; and which, if the Friends in those parts give a circum∣stantial Narrative of the whole transaction, and of thy Selfish Craft, Over-reaching and Fraudulency in that case, and be as free in their Publication, as thou hast been a∣gainst many faithful Servants of Christ, in thy confused scurrilous piece of Imperti∣nent Prate, Malice and Scorn, I am perswaded it will greatly redound to thy Dis-repute and Infamy in the Eyes of all sorts of in∣telligent Persons, and lower thy Topsail to thy great abasement, shame and confusion of Face. Thou makest thy own terms for the

repayment of the whole 15 l. that thy Cousin George Smith (thou sayest) by S Cater's Wifes order, paid thee in Satisfaction for the Fine, thou suffered from him (as thou pre∣tendest) And now I have the Money (sayest thou.) But I never yet understood that Samuel Cater's Wife did order him to pay the whole 15 l. neither would he have done it, but that thou madest him believe, It was not for love of Money thou wouldst have the whole tendred, &c. for thy Word's sake▪ Thou confessest he first proffered thee 5 l. and when THAT would not do, he proffered thee 7 l. 10 s.

Thus far it seems was his proffer to pa∣cefie the business on thy part: The other part, to make it up 15 l. he did deposit, in expectation thou wouldst return it him, so he understood by thy smooth and crafty Pretensions, That THY END WAS NOT FOR MONEY, &c. Thus he, poor, well-meaning man was insnared, and S. Cater become the sufferer. But upon what account got'st thou the whole 15 l from him, see∣ing the Penalty of the Conventicle Act doth not exceed 10 l. upon a Hearer, for the Poverty of the Preacher, or in default of his payment? And yet hast thou the bold∣ness to assert, That if the Justice please, he may lay the 20 l. upon any single Person present, of the Hearers. But by what Law may he

do so; if the Pena••ty upon any one for a∣nothers Offence amount not in the whole, to above the sum of 10 l. as 'tis twice over limited in the Conventicle Act? For though the Justice be impowered to levy the 20 l. by Warrant, as aforesaid (as the Words of the Act are)

Vpon the Goods and Chattels of any such PERSONS, who shall be present at the same Conventicle, in case the Preacher be a Stranger, and his Name and Habitation not known, or is fled, and cannot be found, or in the judgment of the Justice, shall be thought unable to pay the same.

Note, that 'tis upon any such PERSONS, in the Plural, not upon any one Person the Fine is so to be levied; 'tis to be proportioned, so as that no one Person shall be lyable to pay above 10 l. for any one Meeting, in regard of the Poverty of any other Person or Persons, as the express Words of the Act are. See what a mistaken Lawyer thou art. And was not the said 15 l. an ar∣bitrary punishment of thy own inflicting, both Illegal and Extrajudicial? What an arbitrary Persecutor wast thou therein? Mayest thou not be ashamed to cry out a∣gainst Imposition, arbitrary Authority, and yet be such an arbitrary Imposer, and thy own Carver, to serve thy own fraudulent Enterprizes? IGNOBLE AND BASE! And now to excuse thy arbitrary, extor∣sive

Fraud, to assert that which is contra for∣mam Statuti•• in the case: Be ashamed of such Collusion. I cannot but take notice of thy saying, Thou toldst him thou wouldst have the whole tendred, which done, thou shouldst make it appear that thy End was NOT ONLY for Money. And how rarely hast thou mended the matter now? Thou madest him believe 'twas not for love of Money; but now to mince and smooth it over, thy end was not ONLY for Money: It seems thy end was then in a great part for Money; but thou shouldst have told him plain∣ly aforehand how far thy end was for Money, and how far 'twas not for Money, that so he might not have been defrauded out of the whole 15 l. and thereby poor Samuel Cater his Wife and Children sufferers in their Estate, meerly for quietness sake, from thy complaints and clamours; if thy end was not ONLY, but PARTLY for Money, thou mightst have been content with half of the 15 l. which G. Smith proffered thee; but it seems thy end was so WHOLLY for Money, that thou wouldst have the WHOLE Fifteen Pound, according to thy own account: Thus Selfish, Arbitrary and Avaricious wast thou. What a mean shift is it there∣fore for thee to say, Thy end was not ONLY for Money? We see what sorry shifts and slighty Subterfuges a bad Cause must have.

And as a person conscious to thy self, dis∣quieted and uneasie for a pretence, thou now makest this Proposition (namely) S. Cater's signing a Paper like this which fol∣lows, of thy own forming; and then thou wilt return the whole 15 l. Thy Paper is this, viz.

† 1.1 Memorandum, That I S. Cater do hereby testifie, that is my judgment, That all Friends in the Mini∣stry, where they are Strangers, ought to tell the Name and Ha∣bitation upon the appa∣rent sight of the Infor∣mers coming into a meeting, taking friends names in writing, or otherwise, in order to convict the Meeting, that so we may all stand in a like suffering capacity. Or if any have not freedom thus to do, that then they

ought to make satisfa∣ction to such who suf∣fer for them through their concealing their Names and Habita∣tions; and that such as refuse to perform his or their part in either of these two Propositions, ought from thenceforth to be reputed blame-worthy, and noted as such▪ Witness my hand, the day above-written, per me.

[Thus far thy Prescription.]

Further adding, viz. I say, signe this Paper, or one like it, and I will return the said 15 l. for the reason aforesaid. And this thou e∣steem'st a Condescention sufficient.

Thus art thou become a Dictator and Prescriber and Imposer upon others: Here thou hast made a general Rule and Prescrip∣tion, as condition of thy returning the 15 l. to S. C. [such an improbable condi∣tion as thou couldst not reasonably suppose would be complied with. Thus in∣sincere thou appearest.] Here's a Canon, an Edict of thy framing, who hast made a

great part of thy Book against Canons, Pre∣scriptions, Rules, Edicts, Orders, Excommu∣nications, &c. How consistent art thou in thy work? yea, and if the Ministers will not observe this thy Canon to perform it, then to be reputed Blame-worthy, and noted as such; and this thou wouldst have S. Cater subscribe. But thy Canon or Prescription is illegal, lame and defective; yea, it exceeds the severity and extent of the Conventicle Act, which no where compels all Friends in the Ministry, where thy are strangers, to tell their Names and Habitations upon their apparent sight of Informers coming into a Meeting and taking Friends Names in writing or otherwise; nor are any of the Meeters compelled by Law to tell their Names to Informers.

Thus Arbitrary, Illegal and Foolish too art thou in thy Canon and Constitution; thou wouldst enforce upon Friends of the Ministry, where they are strangers, who sometimes may be silent in a Meeting, and sometimes ministring when Informers come in to take Names, by thy Canon the Mini∣sters in silence must tell their Names and Habitations to Informers, and those that are ministring must stop to tell the Infor∣mers their Names and Habitations. This illegal Imposition of thine I further except against, in that it tends to gratifie the In∣formers,

and forward them in their designs and prosecution, for a more speedy and easie Conviction; * 1.2 for if they get their Names thus readily told afore∣hand, as thy Canon and Prescription re∣quires, they go present∣ly to the Justices, swear the Offence, and cause the Conviction in the absence of the party concerned. In consideration of which, di∣vers of us, even of late time, in the Meetings at Westminster have not had freedom pre∣sently to tell our Names to Informers and Officers, to leave them to inform the Justices what they please upon Oath, with∣out controul, in our absence, but rather we have chosen to go to the Justices, that there we may tell our Names to them, and have opportunity to object to their faces against any Mis-informations. Thus thou hast fail∣ed and shewed thy shortness and shallowness in thy imperious and illegal Prescription and Imposition.

As for thy pressing for the Preachers who are Strangers to tell their Names, as afore∣said, and so to be in an Equal capacity with the Hearers in suffering.

1st, We cannot make a Law to enjoyn them

to tell their Names to Informers, which the Law requires not: I know none that re∣fuse to tell their Names to the civil Magi∣strate. We know the Preachers generally are most struck at, and most liable to suffer, and the Penalties are most severe upon them, as 20 l. for a first, and 40 l. for a second Offence (so called) and if Stran∣gers, they are not wholly free from Sufferings (as thou sayest.) But all Preachers more lyable in the first place to suffer Imprison∣ment, &c. than others, being most envyed and aimed at by the Persecutors.

2dly, We cannot in point of Christianity, Truth or good Conscience, deem the Preacher an Offender, if we own his Mini∣stry, So as to lay an Obligation upon him not only to tell his Name to Informers, but to be the greatest Sufferer. Truth's interest and cause is but one in Minister and Hearer, and Christian love leads us therein to sym∣pathize and suffer one with another in Spirit; yea, and outwardly too, if there be necessity, and not to make preaching the Gospel an offence, any more than meeting or hearing it Preacht, seeing the Labour, and Pains, and greatest Hazard common∣ly is the Preachers, the advantage thereof is the Hearers. And if we have true Unity with the Gospel Preachers, we shall not complain against them, because of the

Fines, nor think our selves to be bound under thy Prescription or Canon, who art both in Dis-union with them, and Enmity against them, much less to follow thy Craf∣ty method, to pay our selves out of their Estates, when fined for them, or for their not telling their Names to Informers on sight, &c.

3dly, If thou makest the Preachers such Offendors, as that for want of telling their Names to Informers, they must be Respon∣sible to the full, or wholly for the Fines laid upon Hearers on their account, and thereupon thy Eye is so severe upon them, as if they were the greatest Offendors. This is but the same Spirit that's in the Persecu∣tors and Informers, that's not in unity with, but in Enmity against the Gospel-Ministers. This would not lay down its Life for the Brethren, that will not suffer 5 l. or 10 l. for them: And then I presume there's no danger of thy suffering much on that account, who couldst so craftily repay thy self the whole 15 l. from Samuel Cater.

In this very Action, and thy malicious Book, thou appearest a Person more ready to turn Informer against the true Ministers and Servants of Christ, than to lose 10 l. on any of their account, by thy offensive Characters and Popish Comparisons thou hast put upon them, particularly upon George

Fox, William Penn, George Whitehead, Ste∣phen Crisp, Alexander Parker, Thomas Salt∣house and John Burnyeat, whom thou hast represented in Print as Apostates, Anti∣christian, Innovators, Imposers, Popish, &c. for their Christian advice in divers particulars, cited by thee in thy printed Book, De Christiana Libertate, with thy scandalous defaming Observations upon them severally, from page 32. to page 57. to prove thy Unjust charge of doing Violence to our first Principles of Vnion, which they and we all utterly deny.

4thly, And the more like an Informer hast thou appeared, in ambitiously dedi∣cating thy Book to a Great Man, i. e. Henry North, Knight, and in shewing that thou designed it for the Magistrates, in pretend∣ing to have laid before them a clear Demon∣stration for Liberty of Conscience; thy Book being in two Parts, as is confest in the Title, and both Bound up and made to go in one: So that if the Magistrates see the first Part for Liberty of Conscience, (which is not thy own) they are liable to see thy second Part, wherein (as an Enemy to Christian-Liberty) thou art bitterly in∣veighing and clamouring against many faithful Servants and Ministers of our Lord Jesus Christ (who are well approved a∣mong the People called Quakers) for their

signifying and giving their Christian Ad∣vice and Sence, in things needful to be practised in the Church, whereby thou art opposing the Liberty of their Consciences, which they have in Christ Jesus; and art endeavouring to expose them as obnoxious and offensive to the Magistrate and out∣ward Government, rendering them Ty∣rannical and Popish, like the Pope's Councils, &c. Thus false Informer-like, thou hast broke all Bonds of Christian Friendship, Society and Church-Order, and hast acted the part of a treacherous, persecuting In∣former, in the very nature, purport and series of thy Book.

And I doubt not, but thy Infamous work will become odious to all Serious, Religi∣ous and Impartial Dissenting Protestants, the more it comes to Light, and to be strict∣ly scand, and that thou wilt appear there∣by not only as a turbulent, but perfidious, treacherous Person, and malicious In∣former against thy own Society, and there∣fore not to be trusted by any other Societies or People, on any Religious and sociable account.

Thou hast also in thy Letter scurrilously abused and misrepresented S. Cater, J. Parks, and my self, and also the Womens Meeting, as That Samuel Cater had 10 l. presently sent him out of the Treasury from

London: And that The Women's Meeting ga∣thered so much Money for James Parks, upon his pretence of being Robbed. Both which I have made enquiry into, and find them false in Fact; Samuel Cater belyed, the Women's Meeting belyed, and James Parks belyed, in the state of these Accu∣sations. Be ashamed therefore of such Abuses, or produce Proof both of Fact and Circumstance, as stated by thee. Be a∣shamed also of thy saying, James Parks acted the part of an Oliverian Preacher, or G. W. once at Snare-Hill, or like some SVCH PENSIONERS.

Didst thou ever tell me of any thing thou hadst against me at Snare-Hill? I am not Conscious to my self, but am sure thou dost shamefully belye me and J. P. in calling us Pensioners. What Pension, Wages, or yearly Stipend dost thou charge me or us withal? What an unconscionable De∣famer art thou? Dost thou know what Pensioner means? This is somewhat like thy espousing and printing the Report of Nicholas Lucas's saying, That I went up and down to Cheat the Country. And thy affirm∣ing, That truly my Behaviour hath manifested the truth thereof, page 150. of thy Book.

Thus in thy Letter before, sent after me in Manuscript, without the least occasion given thee by me, that I know of; since

which to amend the matter of thy Scan∣dalous defaming abuse of me, before ci∣ted, thou addest this Parenthesis, viz. [I reckon he meant not of Money, but the People of their Liberty they have right to] Which is also a Slander and base come-off, and thousands of God's People are able to testifie against these thy defaming and inso∣lent Lyes. I never was accounted a Cheat and Pensioner before. As also in thy calling Thomas Rudyard LYING LAWYER, for saying, Thou paidst thy Money Voluntarily before Distress was made on thy Goods: This I shewed Thomas Rudyard, and he counts it a foul abuse, slander and defamation upon his Person and Employment, to call him Lying Lawyer, supposing thou placest his Lying upon the word Voluntarily. If thou didst pay or deposit thy Fine on thy Appeal, and so prevented Distress (as he understood thou then didst at that time) he accounted it Voluntary, in respect of the Law, because the Act of Parliament in that case doth not compel thee to pay thy Fine upon entring thy Appeal; for that the Appeal may be entred within one weeks time after the Fine is paid, OR Distress made; so that 'tis in the Appealants choice whether to pay the Fine or suffer Distress first; for the Particle OR is disjunctive between both. Where is now the LYING LAWYER?

Art not thou herein manifest to be the LYING DEFAMER, that hast so little regard to the Reputation or Credit of others? Where's thy Conscience, or do∣ing as thou wouldst be done by?

Thy Envy and Defamation stops not here, but thou hast falsly accused us (of the Second days Meeting) with loving to have the Pre-eminence: He that searches and knows our Hearts, sees and will judge thy false Judgment and Abuse in this and many other things; as also in thy false and abusive Insinuation in telling of the Sums, Gratuities and large Pensions, privately extended to such (speaking of James Parks) and others of his Fraternity: And which far exceed THAT of the Bason and Platter, we usually, and with too much confidence (sayst thou) bespatter the Professors withal, seeing we do the same thing for which we condemn them only a little privater. [Thus far thy false and abusive Accusation against such as James Parks and his Bre∣thren.]

Oh horrid Impudence and Falshood! be ashamed hereof: Thou heapest up Slanders and Defamations against the Innocent, for which God will rebuke thee. 'Tis not unknown how many of us spend our Strength, Labour and Substance in the ser∣vice of the Lord and his People in many re∣spects, wherein I for one have not had the

least share, though now by thee rendred a Cheat and a Pensioner. Oh! blush and be ashamed of such abominable Lyes and scur∣rilous Detractions.

To conclude thy Letter, on thy falshood against the Womens Meeting gathering Money, &c. thou scornfully inferrest, that therein they have forfeited their Charter, mentioned in thy Book, p. 37. and deserves a COERANTO to be brought, &c. I cannot but take notice what a liberty thou takest to scoff, mock and jeer against our Religious Christian Womens Meeting, and how abusive and silly thou art therein, al∣though thou hast often scornfully twitted me with the words LEARNED FRIEND, in thy Book and Letters, as if it were such a great Crime to ascribe that to any Friend, whilst yet thou art ambitious to shew thy self a learned Person. Here to shew thy Learning in the Latin Tongue, thou tellest us of a COERANTO, which is no good Latine to be sure, and thou mayst be que∣stioned in what Language thou hadst the Expression. * 1.3 I sup∣pose thou hast lately heard Dis∣courses of Quo Warranto about the City-Charter, upon which from thy own imaginary conceit thou writest us COERANTO in a large Italick Character, that it may appear how learned and skilled

thou art in Latine and Law; and likewise we must have a Latine Title to thy Book, second Part, i. e. De Christianâ Libertate: But where thou learnedst this Title, and what stress or Emphasis canst thou place upon its being in Latine more than if it had been in English, i. e. Concerning Christian-Liberty? For Liberty of Conscience asserted, is not the English of thy Latine Title, but va∣ries from it in the Terms, as well as in the Nature of it: And thy prosecution for Li∣berty of Conscience, as asserted by thee, ap∣pears a Liberty not only in opposition to Persecution, but also to our Godly Care, Advice, Counsel and Admonition, relating to good Order and Church-Government amongst us, and testified unto in our Paper opposed by thee in thy Book (from page 41, to page 51.) And if this must be the ex∣tent of thy Christian-Liberty, thou mightst better have entituled thy Book, Pro Li∣bertate Carnali; for it seems the Liberty pleaded for by thee, admits not of Spi∣ritual Censures, Reproofs, Advice or Judgment, according to Christ's Law ex∣hibited, as appears by thy scurrilous op∣position & infamous Characters thou givest to our said Paper, partly cited in thy Book, and most Unchristianly and Unjustly made thy great Proof of our Doing Violence to our first Principles of Vnion, and consequently

turned Antichristian; and such thou render∣est William Penn, George Whitehead, Alex∣ander Parker, Stephen Crisp, Thomas Salt∣house, John Burnyeat, whose Names thou hast exposed in Print, as the Persons un∣justly charged by thee. But we have not yet concluded thy Learning in Coeranto, but must view a little more of it in thy Book, on the passage thou hast borrowed on trust from William Rogers his Transla∣tion, as he confesseth, for which we have only his own Authority in these Words, (viz.) Which for the sake of some, I thus Translate, (7th Part, Christian Quaker, p. 62.) 'Tis in thy 125, 126, 127, 128 pages, out of Bishop Hooper; the first Words, Scitis quod res sancta, et vera quo magis examinatur. Thou accepts his Translation hereof in these words, KNOW YE, that by how much the more, &c. Here Scitis, the very first Word, which is, Ye know, in the Indicative, is falsly translated know ye, as Scite in the Imperative; whereas by Scitis in this place was intended Indication, Demonstration, or Proof, and not imperatively Teaching; and likewise Nam quod variis modis tentatur; ac probatur, modo pium ac sanctum FVERIT, Jacturam ab hostibus nullam sentit, is thus translated (viz.) For that which is tryed and proved after various manners, if IT HATH BEEN, &c. instead of IT SHALL BE;

for FVERIT is exact future (as they term it.) Many things of the Types and Sha∣dows under the Law, as Tythes and Offer∣ings, &c. have been holy, but shall not be again, afficitis is made afflict instead of affect, and also Legem & Evangelium Dei, are translated The Word of God, instead of The Law and Gospel of God; then at last Judicio, is, to the Judgment, when it should be more properly by the Judgment▪ But the most material Mistake is in the very first word Scitis, falsly translated, as to the Mood.

But these Instances are only to shew thee what a ridiculous Novice and Ludibrie thou hast rendred thy self, both in Writing and Print, even to School-Boys: I saw lately a School-Boy of Eleaven Years old Laugh at thy Absurdity, as a Person wise in thy own Conceit. Yet whilst thou wouldst make a show and flourish of Learning, thou hast here taken a false Translation upon an implicit Faith and blind Credulity: Thou that art such a fierce opposer of im∣plicit Faith and blind Obedience, and hast so often scoft at me for the Words, Learn∣ed Friend, in reference to R. R. I wonder thou art not ashamed of such scornful treat∣ment, and medling so often with Latine, when I find thou canst not write true Eng∣lish in many things.

This is only a small Check to thy Pride and empty Conceits, this not being one of the absurdest Faults or Falshoods thou hast presented the World withal. Come down and be humbled before the All-seeing God.

From thy antient Friend, and yet Well-wisher, though insolently abused by thee, G. Whitehead.

Middlesex, the 22d day of the 7th Moneth, 1682.

The Second Part of the said Letter.

Francis Bugg;

NOw concerning thy Book, stiled, DE CHRISTIANA LIBERTA∣TE, or Liberty of Conscience, &c. 1st, I observe thou beginest unjustly to ac∣cuse and reflect upon the People called Qua∣kers in the very Title page, in these Words, viz. And the mischief of Impositions amongst the People called Quakers, &c. In two Parts. And that thou concernest the Magistracy with it, both in thy Epistle dedicated to H. North, Knight, (as being obliged to publish it for the Information of the Magi∣stracy, &c.) as also in thy Epistle, directed

to the Noble Bereans, thou concernest the Magistrates, as having in the Book prefix∣ed (i. e. thy first Part) laid before them many weighty Arguments for Liberty of Conscience, &c. So that to the Magistrates thou hast given thy Information against the People called Quakers, as having mischie∣vous Impositions among them; which we ut∣terly deny; and thy Scornful Malicious Book proves it not. Thus thou art turned Informer to the Magistrates against an In∣nocent suffering People, whom thou hast so long walked amongst: How darest thou appear in their Meetings, and thus act the part of a treacherous, malicious Informer against them, even to the Magistrates? Oh! Blush and be ashamed of this thy hate∣ful Work.

2dly, Thou having entituled thy self to to the matters contain'd in a Treatise, en∣tituled, Liberty of Conscience asserted and vindicated, by thy high Commendations gi∣ven of it to H. North, as Being perswaded it will be of Good Service; and (in thy Epistle to the Bereans) A clear Demonstration, &c. And in thy Preface to the Reader, of the Author, thou thus sayest, viz. His Judg∣ment upon this Subject, is my Judgment.

Now observe what this Author's Judg∣ment is concerning the Light in men, whereupon he chiefly placeth his Demon∣stration

for Liberty of Conscience. In page 4. he saith, viz. Their Natural Light, deri∣ved to them from their first Creation, dictating to them what they ought to do, and what not, and enabling them to pass a Judgment upon themselves of their due behaviour towards God, &c. With some other passages of like na∣ture in the said Treatise.

Here (Francis) thou hast presented H. North, and the Magistrates with unsound and unscriptural Doctrine, and appearest Apostate, and corrupt in thy Judgment, in calling the Light in men (which thus dictates their duty) Their natural Light, derived to them from their first Creation: Herein thou hast wrongfully informed H. N. and the Magistrates about the Principle, the Light in men, contrary to the Quakers Testimo∣ny, born from the beginning concerning the Light in men, which is according to the holy Apostle's Testimony, John 1.4, 9. that In the Word, or Son of God, was Life; and that Life was the Light of men; And that this is not a natural or created Light, but a Supernatural and Divine Light of the Christ Jesus, the Son of God.

3dly, And now (Francis) having thus misrepresented our Principle to the Magi∣strates, and so mis-informed them about the Light in men. Thou proceedest upon an unjust charge of Impositions against cer∣tain

Persons, chiefly concerned, owned and approved among the People called Quakers, whom thou scornfully callest G. Fox, and those of Party with him; and hast exposed the Names of some of them in Print, whom thou meanest by that Party, as William Penn, George Whitehead, Stephen Crisp, Alexander Parker, Thomas Salthouse, John Burnyeat, p. 51. And what hast thou to charge all these with, that thou hast printed a Book and informed the Magistracy against them? It is The mischief of Impositions; The incon∣sistency betwixt the Church-Discipline, or Order and Government erected by those,* 1.4 and THAT in the Primitive times (as in the Title of thy second part.) It is also, That there is Violence done to our first Principles of Vnion; Consequently Tyranny introduced, and our Society turned Antichristian, p. 32, 33. (Ac∣cording to W▪ P's Proposition in his Ad∣dress, thus falsly applyed by thee against himself, and the rest of us before-named.) Now Francis, I must plainly tell thee, this Inconsistency and Violence charged by thee against us, we utterly deny, and the In∣stances thou givest do not at all prove it,

As first, G.F's Paper for Women's Meeting distinct, that they might be in the practice of pure Religion, to visit the Fatherless and the Widows, and to see that all be

kept from the spots of the World, &c.

[As 'tis cited at large by thee, p. 33, 34, 35, 36, 37.]

Now (Francis) where's the Inconsi∣stency charged? Can there be an Incon∣sistency where there's no Contradiction, nor the least opposition? Thy judging such Women's Meetings as are for the Practice or Promotion of pure Religion, in the practi∣cal parts of it, inconsistent with the Chri∣stian-Discipline, Order and Government in the Primitive times, doth bespeak not only that thou dost not well understand what Inconsistent means, but also that thou hast undertaken a Charge thou art never able to make good. And thy charge of Violence done to our first Principles of Uni∣on is worse than Inconsistent. And thy scornfully telling of the Women's Charter and New Order, is no Proof (man) of thy Charge: Where's the Inconsistency and Vio∣lence that's charged, done by the faithful Womens Meetings among us, or by any of us, by encouraging them to meet for those Religious and Charitable ends and services mentioned? How hast thou acted the part of an ignorant conceited Scoffer, instead of proving thy Charge before cited? Be∣sides, the very self-same Paper writ by G. F. which thou hast cited as an instance of our Inconsistency and Violence, was

received, owned and approved at a Quar∣terly Meeting at Kendal in Westmorland, in the Year 1671. And another written in approbation thereof, and subscribed by some of thy own party, as John Wilkinson, Richard Stephanson, Henry Garnet, and Twenty one more Friends, for encouraging of the Women's assembling, and Religious Charitable Services before proposed, both which are cited at large in our Book, En∣tituled, The Accuser of our Brethren, from pag. 98, to p. 102. Thus contradictory art thou to some of thy own Brethren, in thy condemning the same Paper as an Imposi∣tion, Inconsistency and Violence to our first Principles, which they so plainly approved of.

4thly, Again, in pursuance of thy unrighteous Charge before cited, thou re∣citest four passages out of a Paper of ours, dated, London, the 27th of the 3d Moneth, 1675. which was given as our Judgment and Advice in certain things needful, for good Order among us (as we believed) The first Passage thou hast cited, is that for Marriages to be at least twice propound∣ed to the Meetings, that are to take care therein, &c. before they are accomplished, &c. Now where's the Inconsistency here, with the Discipline in the Primitive Chri∣stian Church, or the Violence done to our

first Principles of Union? Instead of pro∣ving thy charge by this instance, we have in thy Observation a piece of Scorn and Mockery, viz. This notable, if not universal Council: Their new stamped Government, p. 42. Oh! be ashamed of such Scorn and Folly! Is this thy proof of thy charge? Is it a violation to our first Principles of U∣nion, to have Marriages proposed at least twice to the Meetings concerned? (both Mens and Womens, where both are e∣stablished) However, to be twice proposed to such Meetings as are established, and to take care therein, to understand that the Persons be clear, and Friends satisfied, be∣fore the Marriage be accomplished? And this has been these many Years practised among us; and I know no true Union bro∣ken thereby, nor any violation done to our first Principles thereof: Be ashamed there∣fore of thy fruitless attempts, in giving such an high charge against us, when thou canst make no proof it.

5thly, Concerning our Testimony on behalf of Mens and Womens Meetings in the Church of Christ; as for their Rise and Establishment, being in the counsel of God, and for the encouraging Faithful and Grave Women therein, and to admonish them that discountenance or weaken their Hands in the Work and Service of the Lord, &c.

Thou callest this A Decree, a decretal Order; This New fashioned Edict, p. 45, 46. And sayst, It has no relation to Scripture-Authority, Pre∣cept or President; no relation to the Example of the Holy men of God recorded in Scripture, nor any command of God or Jesus Christ. Why no Relation to them? How provest thou that? what because we have not every parti∣cular circumstance of Persons and things ex∣prest? Whence it follows not that this has no relation to Scripture or President, &c. Holy Women and Sisters in the Faith, Elder Widdows that were honourable, and Dea∣conesses, did many Religious and Charitable Services in the Primitive Christian Church∣es: What then might they not meet and confer together for one anothers help and encouragement in those Services they had, and were frequently imployed in? Can it either be a violence to their Principles of Union for such to meet together? or have their Assemblies no relation to Scripture? What contrariety thereto have they? Sure∣ly we alwayes accounted our Religious Meetings, to serve one another in Love, consistent with our Union and the Prin∣ciples thereof. And so for Godly Women to meet for those Religious and Charitable ends and Services, for which their Assem∣blies are intended, must needs be consistent with the same Principles of Love and

Union, and tend to the Increase thereof, and not to the Violation thereof, as thou hast falsly charged. Upon our Admonition,

Not to discountenance or weaken their Hands in the Work and Service of the Lord.

Thou maketh this observation, viz. See what a strict and severe admonition is uttered forth, even as if it had come from the Pope's Council of Jesuits and crafty Fryars, [Scoffing and Smiting still at the Womens Meetings] p. 46, 47.

How now (Francis) is this thy treat∣ment and comparison of us? Hadst thou no better than the Pope's Council of Jesuits and crafty Fryars to compare us unto, in our Testimony and Admonition? Oh! be ashamed of such foul, sordid, and scornful, and false treatment, who instead of pro∣ving thy Charge of Inconsistence and Vio∣lence, as before, now abuseth us, mocks and scoffs, and scandallizeth us, like a con∣ceited proud Fool.

6thly, Be ashamed also of thy scornfully upbraiding us with our Womens Meetings, as an Idol of our own erecting; and asking, Why should it not publickly be brought to Light, and made as manifest as the Lord Cromwell made the Papists great Idol, to wit, the Rood of Grace (which had goggling Eyes, and would smile when a good Gift was offorded to it) when he caused it to be brought to Paul's Cross, where

the People tore it all to pieces, in King Henry the 8ht's time, p. 47.

Oh, thou ungodly Wretch and malicious Informer! is this a fit Comparison and In∣stance to present the Magistrates with, against our Christian, Religious, Charitable and Sober Womens Meetings? And dost thou under such an abominable and odious Comparison thus expose them to the Magi∣strates, for their Meetings, to be torn to pieces? Thou vile Wretch, blush and be ashamed of such malicious, scornful and defaming Impertinences, thus instead of proving thy before-cited Charge, to act the malicious, reviling and false accusing Informer against God's People; then scornfully concludest thy Observation with these words, viz. This notable, not Scriptu∣ral, but Anti-scriptural Edict, p. 48. Which is a false Conclusion, without Premises, and a shameful begging the Question, wherein thou art an Imposer; for not one sentence or word in all that said Paper of our sence and Advice hast thou proved ANTI-SCRIPTVRAL, or directly contrary to Scrip∣ture, as thy terms are, p▪ 79. Thou shouldst then have shewn us what Scripture forbids either faithful Womens Assembling, or those Religious and Charitable ends and services proposed, which their Meetings are

intended for? I dare challenge thee in this to prove thy charge of Anti-scriptural.

7thly, I do affirm, thou art so far from making good thy Charge, that for all thy Attempts, I have still occasion to return the same charge upon thee that we did upon William Rogers, which for a pretence thou citest, but dost not answer it, p. 39. viz.

What new and unchristian Doctrines and Practices are we fallen into? We find no proof nor discovery thereof in all thy Book.

I do profess seriously (however thou scoffingly callest me a notable serious George)

I see no cause nor reason thou shewest for the great noise & rumble thou makest about outward Laws, Prescriptions, Orders, Edicts or Decrees, outward form of Government, Apostacy, Innovation, Impositions, Lording over Faith, over Conscience, &c. (To which I may add thy terms, Womens Charter, Grant, Confirmation, New Order, Decretal Order, New fashion'd Edict, Popes Council, Papists great Idol, Canonical Rules, New spiritual Lords, Decrees, Canons, Edicts of Men, Tyrannical proceedings, &c.) whilst thou shewest to us no unjust, no unlawful nor uncomely Order or Proceedings amongst us, as a People, nor yet givest us any Catalogue or Instance of those Impositions, Innovations, New Doctrines or Practices brought in and received amongst us, which

are INCONSISTENT with our first Te∣stimony to the Light and Grace of God within, and teaching thereof, or thereby condemned as Evil, or wholly unnecessary in themselves (as our words are.)

8thly, This thou dost not answer, but Marvellest that G. Whitehead should have the Confidence thus to call for a Catalogue of New Orders that are introduced among us; or rather (sayst thou) Impudence to deny such things as are every Moneth put in practice among us. And therefore sayst, thou wilt bring forth Proof and President; first the Confirmation of the Foundation of the Womens Meetings, namely, G. F's Order by a general Council held at London, 1675.

To all which I must tell thee, thou dost not follow the terms of the Challenge, but ramblest impertinently, telling us of New Orders, such things, the Confirmation of the Foundation of the Womens Meetings, &c. but provest not those things (nor one thing) practised among us as a People; or that first Confirmation, as thou falsly callest it, to be Inconsistent with (or contrary to) our first Testimony to the Light and Grace of God within, and teachings thereof. 'Tis not thy making a noise with New Orders, De∣crees, &c. shall serve thy turn in this point; but I challenge thee to prove that the set∣ting up and encouraging our faithful

Womens Meetings are contrary to the Light and Grace of God within and teach∣ings thereof. This is matter thou hast un∣dertaken to bring proof and president for. This is close to the terms of our Challenge, and thou hast but made shuffling, slubbering work about it.

9thly, Moreover, what we propounded in our Paper aforesaid, (which thou callest The Confirmation by a general Council held at London, Anno 1675. and which thou hast instanced for proof of thy Charge of In∣consistency and Violence, and consequently as Antichristian) was tenderly concluded in these terms, viz.

All which we recommend to the Evidence of Gods holy Witness in the Hearts of his People. * 1.5

Why didst thou not take notice of this Con∣clusion, to have prevented thy false charge of Imposition, wherein thou hast contra∣dicted thy Brother William Rogers; for he hath divers times assented to and own'd the giving advice and counsel by way of Recommendation, distinguishing that from Im∣position, as his own Books and Words are evidence. But thou cryst out, Impositions,

Inconsistency, Violence to our first Principles of Vnion, on that very same Paper which is concluded by way of Recommendation to the Evidence of Gods holy Witness in the Hearts of his People. And to this and other Papers of Advice, Judgment, &c. thou hast opposed Liberty of Conscience, and so made void Spiritual Censures, contrary to the very Author thou hast printed, owned and espoused, as being of the same Judgment with thee, where he saith, pag. 138. part 1.

'Tis very fit, that wheresoever you will sup∣pose Errors to be sprung up, all the means Christ hath appointed for that end should be used to suppress them, and reclaim Men from them: Let their Mouthes be stop∣ped with sound Doctrine and Spiritual Censures. The only Question is about the use of the Temporal Power in such things.— Principles and Opinions in the Mind were never extinguished by the punishing the Body.

Here his Liberty of Conscience pleaded, is not from spiritual Censures, as thou hast per∣verted it, but from corporal Punishments.

10thly, Whereas in our Book, Accuser, &c. pag. 127. we signified, that having these things in our Eye, viz.

The great ends of true Religion and Christian Society, a godly Care over one another, provoking one another to Love and good Works, we can the more easily concur

and accord, as to Circumstances and out∣ward Methods; and in the Wisdom of God so to condescend one to another, and accommodate matters, as not to divide about them, &c.

Against this thou exceptest, in these words, viz. p. 96. I marvel that the Author of the Accuser, &c. which is said to be G. Whitehead, should have the Confidence thus to appear in Print, when his own Consci∣ence tells him the contrary, instancing R. Smith of Colne, as not admitted to have his Wife, because he would not go into the Womens Mee∣ting: The grand Opposer was G. W.—It may evidently appear how far G. W. was from Accommodation or Condescention, which he fallaciously pretends to the World, in order to deceive them, to cover their Deceit, Hy∣pocrisie and Arbitrary Church-Government, Dominion and Lordship, &c. p. 97.

And to aggravate the matter against G. W. in page 129. thou sayst, That the pretence of the Author of the Accuser, to Condescention and Accommodation is fallacious and false, and a meer piece of feigned Hypocrisie to amuse the Reader and delude the World. And likewise in pag. 150. thou art smiting at G. W. on the same account.

Here thou hast brought my name upon the Stage in Print, but hast most grosly belyed me and abused me, as to my Con∣science,

in saying it tells me the contrary. Be ashamed of this thy presumptious bespat∣tering and abusing me in Print; for my Conscience tells me, I was real in what I proposed in Condescention and Accommodating matters, and that I was no deceiver therein, as thou proudly slanderest me. The Con∣descention and Accommodation was to those that had the great ends of true Religion, Christian care and love one to another in their Eye; it was to the upright and tender hearted, and not to the exalted, hard and wilful. And I gave my Christian and tender Advice to the Person who then pro∣posed his Intention, in order to convince him of the reasonableness of what I propo∣sed, and he shewed no reason against it, but remained stiff and pertinacious, which I cannot impute to a real tender Conscience; the woman was tender and flexible, and of a better Spirit. Therefore be ashamed of abusing and belying me in Print, as for ap∣pearing in Print contrary to my Conscience, as thou hast shamefully belyed me, and so falsly informed the Magistrates against me, as about Condescention and Accommodation (and divers other things) about which I must farther tell thee, The condescention of primitive Christians was to them of low de∣gree, the strong in bearing with the weak, bearing one anothers burthens, and so fulfil∣ling

the Law of Christ. The Persons unto whom the Condescention was, were in a measure of the same faith and love; it was not to false Brethren (such as thou art) or to false Apostles, deceitful Workers, who caused Divisions, &c. false Brethren that watched with an evil Eye, to such the true Apostle gave not place by subjection, no, not for an hour: What Apostolical con∣descention was then given to them? There was an Apostolical authority and sharpness, against such evil Agents of Strife and Di∣vision (such as thy self) that they should be marked, as well as a condescention to weak (yet upright-hearted) Brethren.

11thly, In the Certificate, printed by thee from Huntington-Meeting, to the Quarterly-Meeting in the Isle of Ely, about the said R. S. his publishing his Intentions of taking to Wife A. O. of Aldred, but grieved some Friends by rejecting their Counsel; After some Friends, there's this Parenthesis added, viz. [Perhaps Richard Jobson and Tobias Hardmeat, G. Fox's two principal Studs in that Country.] This looks like a scornful Forgery of thy own framing and addition; And I find no Ad∣vertisement to distinguish or except it as thy own, as thou hast done in thy Letter to W. P. about the Copy of Orders Recorded as Your Canon (as thou scornfully callest

them) in the Quarterly—verbatim, Paren∣thesis excepted (sayst thou) p. 139. Remem∣ber thou hast confessed, That to expose and falsly represent a People, would be very wicked; and such a Practice is, and ever was hated of God & good men, p. 208. Yet after thou hast pro∣mised to recite the said Certificate, p. 96. thou hast, as before, inserted the said scornful Parenthesis, viz. [Perhaps R. Job∣son and T. Hardmeat, G. Fox's two princi∣pal Studs in that Country] p. 97, 98. Unto which thou hast subscribed Jasper Robins, Edward Neel, William Whitehead, James Parris, Thomas Bundy, Richard Tayler, Tho∣mas Bagly, Nathaniel Cawthorn, Nathaniel Neel. Now I am perswaded, that these very Persons, Jasper Robins, and the rest, if they come to observe the said scornful Parenthesis inserted in their said Certifi∣cate, unto which their Names are subscri∣bed, as well as the rest of it, and that without such Advertisement or Exception, as before, they'l look upon it, and judge it as thy own Scurrility and gross Forgery, and thereupon they may testifie against thee, for exposing and falsly representing them in Print, to that which is none of theirs, and that therefore thou hast done that which is very Wicked, a practice that is and ever was hated of God and good Men, according to thy own Sentence.

12thly, Whereas in thy printed Letter to Friends of our Meeting in London, thou sayest, That R. R. needed not be admired by G. W. in Print, for his great Learning, nor perhaps had not, only he hath found out some History, or Popish Author, which sayes, there were Deaconesses as well as Deacons; which (sayst thou) was helpful to G. W. in his Preaching and Disputing for Womens Meetings lately in Huntingtonshire, and elsewhere, &c. p. 178.

Thou mightest have forborn these and other scornful Detractions, cast upon R. R. and my self, and upbraiding him with, Oh! Profound Learning, Logick &c. He can easily answer thy Impertinencies and Silli∣ness, and evince thy Pride and Conceit, in meddling with Learning and Logick, which thou hast so little of. As for R. R. he is known to be learned both as a Man and a Christian; yet not admired by me for any acquired parts; though without offence, he may be allowed his due in those things, without admiration or boasting, and there∣in to be prefered to thy self, who neither writest good English, nor understandest di∣vers words of Learning thou makest use of improperly and impertinently, which I do not mention to detract from and upbraid thee, meerly because of such defect in Learning, but rather as a Reproof to thy

high Conceit, and busying thy self so much in Scribling, and that about matters be∣yond thy capacity to mannage, or render a Reason to decide, and that thou mayest see that there are others can see and discover thy Ignorance and shallow Conceits, as even in this thy Objection against Deaconesses, concluding, That only R. R. hath found out some History or Popish Author, which says, there were Deaconesses as well as Deacons. In this thou hast shewn as well a great deal of ignorance of History, as scorn and con∣tempt; yea, not only Ignorance in that, but Presumption too, and as little Lear∣ning to be sure, in other respects, to place the proof of Deaconesses so indifferently upon some History or Popish Author, as if there were so little difference or distinction, but that if it be some History, then it may as well be said some Popish Author; however, thou knowest not whether it be some Hi∣story or Popish Author. But to correct such Ignorance and Presumption, there are Hi∣stories and Authors which are not Popish, yea, divers Protestant Authors, which af∣firm Deaconesses to have been in the Pri∣mitive Christian Churches, and they were called Diaconissae▪ and even in Rom. 16.1. Paul himself called Phaebe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (i. e. a Deacon, which is a Word borrowed of the Greek) in Latin Ministra, in English A

Servant or Minister. I hope thou wilt not call Paul a Popish Author, writing so to the Romans. And on Rom. 16.1. 1 Tim. 5.9. Deacon is said to be a Title of Office or Administration, given sometimes to Women, vide The Christian-Dictionary, by Thomas Wilson, Bagwell, and Andrew Simpson; to which also agrees Edward Leighs Critica Sacra, and T. C's Greek Lexi∣con on the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, * 1.6 given to Sister Phaebe, in Rom. 16.1. We have William Cave's Lives of the Primitive Fathers for the three first Ages of Christianity, and that even in the time of the Emperor Tra∣jan, there were Deaconesses that suffered, that were examined upon the Rack (see fol. 21.) As also I find in a Book, entituled A Brief of the Bible's History, by Enoch Clapham, Printed 1608. who writ against the Romish Idolaters, fol. 162. And in fol. 171. He thus affirms,

For the Deacons all almost easily grant, that there were two sorts of Deacons, or Church-Servi∣tors; the first of Men, Acts 6.3. &c. 1 Tim. 3.8. The second of Women, 1 Tim. 5.9. &c. Rom. 16.1. That the first had the charge of gathering the Bene∣volence of the Saints (especially every first day of the Week, 1 Cor. 16.1.)— That the second attended the Sick & Im∣potent,

it is by many held.

[Thus far this Protestant Author, besides many other Protestants that might be cited in this very point, some whereof I told R. R. of, who says, He has many others he has not produ∣ced, and Challenges you to bring one ap∣proved Author, to shew that Women had no Service in the first Churches.] And though the Rhemists grant there were Dia∣conissae or Deaconesses, I do not find that Dr. Fulk doth oppose them in that, but about their being concerned in the Sacra∣ments, and in their Superstitions, Nun∣neries, denying Marriages, &c. (as the Papists would have them.) For as to Dea∣conesses, and their Services in the Chri∣stian Churches, there is great concurrence of History, and antient and modern Wri∣ters, as well Protestants, (if not more) as Papists. And therefore thy placing it up∣on some Popish Author, does greatly manifest not only Ignorance, but rather Presump∣tion, Pride and Contempt against faithful Women's service in the Church of Christ: And I can assure thee, that I had not these precedent (and other) Citations from R. Richardson, but mostly from my own search and observations on the Authors them∣selves; though R. R. may be better credi∣ted in his Affirmation on Knowledge, than thy self in thy ignorant Negation.

13th, Again, I take notice of thy Charge against me, in thy said printed Letter to our Meeting in London, p 178. where scornfully writing against, and re∣flecting on G. W. his preaching and disputing for Womens Meetings in Huntingtonshire. Thou goest on in these words, viz. Where he took too much upon him, and behaved him∣self more like a Lordly Bishop, or Popish Pre∣late, than an humble Minister of Christ; and by me at this time is, and stands impeached as an Enemy to Christian-Liberty, a Vsurper over the Conscience, the which I stand ready publickly to assert, maintain and vindicate, p. 178.

Thus far thou in thy insolent Reviling and Abuse, boasting of thy pretended Im∣peachment against me: But I have met with no lawful nor due Impeachment from thee in any Gospel judicial way. Thou writest thus against me to the Friends of our Second day's Meeting in London, but they cannot own nor receive any such pre∣tended and proof-less Impeachment against me upon thy bare Accusation, nor that thou hast any Jurisdiction to impeach me, as by thy unjustly comparing me to a Lord∣ly Bishop, or Popish Prelate, and rendring me an Enemy to Christian-Liberty, an usur∣per over the Conscience: But this is but like thy accusing me as a Cheat, at having gone

up and down to cheat the Country, after thou hadst flatter'd and fawn'd in another Letter, and intreated my assistance for the ending of the Controversie, as one that could do much in the matter; but now revilest me all to nought, boasting how ready thou stands Publickly to assert, maintain and vindicate. And what? But that G. W. took too much upon him in Huntingtonshire, and behaved himself more like a Popish Prelate, &c. An Ene∣my to Christian-Liberty. And what worse Marks and Characters of Infamy couldst thou have cast upon me? and what more se∣vere Excommunication or Bull couldst thou have exhibited in Print against me? How like an exalted, malicious, prating Diotrephes? how like a Pope? how like the Accuser of the Brethren hast thou acted? Thou accu∣sest, scornest and railest, but provest no∣thing of matter charged: And can any rea∣sonably think thou hast thy Proofs in readi∣ness against me out of Huntingtonshire, of these black and infamous Characters thou hast cast upon me? Thy own bare Accusa∣tions are no Proofs to be sure. The Lord rebuke this thy envious dark Spirit: And he will rebuke it.

But (Francis) art not thou thy self against Christian-Liberty of Conscience? and an usurper over the Womens Consci∣ences (so far as thou canst) in thy perverse

and ignorant opposition against Womens Meetings, who have a Conscience towards God, and our Lord Jesus Christ therein? VVhat Liberty of Conscience dost thou allow them therein? or to me in preaching and discoursing in Huntingtonshire, or else∣where, thus to send out thy Roaring Bull against me in Print, without first either enquiring of me, or hearing me and my Accusers (if there be any besides thy self) face to face? What kind of illegal Pre∣cipiancy art thou guilty of! and yet none more ready to make a great clamour against Excommunications, Orders, Edicts, &c. than thy self? Oh Imperious, Proud, Con∣ceited Person! Blush and be ashamed of such Abusive, Inconsistent and Self-contra∣dictory Work! Be ashamed of thy assuming such Power of Excommunication to thy self over thy Elders, Antient Friends and Brethren, who are approved Servants of Christ. How like a Popish Prelate, yea, like the Pope himself hast thou proudly, maliciously & imperiously acted against me and others of the faithful Servants & Mini∣sters of Christ Jesus? Be ashamed therefore and confounded because of thy Insolent and Slanderous Abuses against the Innocent; and particularly of thy gross Lye against me and others, viz. That the holy Scripture is by us slighted, p. 152. Be ashamed, I say, of this abominable Lye.

And for Confutation to thy abuse of me before, read the following Certificate from Persons of better Credit than thy self.

Huntingtonshire. From our Monethly Mee∣ting at Godmanchester, the 11th day of the 5th Moneth, 1682.

WHereas George Whitehead hath been evilly traduced in two Letters of Francis Bugg's, and charged in one of them with behaving himself in Huntingtonshire like a Lordly Bishop or Popish Prelate, lately. — Now we whose Names are subscribed, do testifie, We never in this County, nor else-where at any time, saw any such thing; and that he is a man far remote from any such matter; but do believe he is a true Labourer in Gods service, and an humble Minister of the Gospel.

• Matthew Kay,
• Samuel Nottingham,
• Tobias Hardmeat,
• Robert Lister,
• Jasper Robins,
• John Wilsford,
• John Aversett,
• John Marshall,
• William Starling,
• Richard Snazdale,
• John King,
• David Tisoeth,
• Thomas Lyster,
• Richard Jobson.

14th, And thy malicious scribling tends, in divers parts of it, unjustly to render us Obnoxious and Offensive to Authority, by wickedly and falsly rendring the Proceedings of some of our Christian Meetings Tyran∣nical and Antichristian, and comparing us to the Popes Councils, to Popes, &c. And all this to Henry North, Knight, and the Ma∣gistrates too, is next to prosecuting us for our Liberties or Lives.—

So disgustful may be thy trumpeting and publishing in Print the Moderation of H. North, Knight, (p. 194.) and his merci∣fulness in taking notice of our threatned Ruin, and preventing it, &c. as in thy Epistle De∣dicatory to him, that doubtless we think Henry North as a prudent man will not thank thee for thus trumpeting his Fame abroad in Print, on behalf of Dissenters; for such kind of Ostentatious dealing is offensive and hateful to great Persons of Prudence, who would not have their good∣ness exposed to publick censure or reflecti∣on, nor be represented as Persons Popular for any dissenting Parties.

I have many more things material against thy Book; but I desire thee to accept of my Labour and honest Endeavours; and what I have written thus largely to thee, as an act of Christian Condescention and good

Will for thy Conviction, that thou mayst yet be abased and humbled unto Repent∣ance and publick Condemnation of thy wicked and scurrilous Book, if the Lord will yet please to give thee an Heart to Re∣pent and acknowledge the Truth, which thou hast deeply offended and sinned against with thy Lyes and Lightness.

And I desire to know, if after the read∣ing and perusal of this my large Letter, thou art at all minded to relent and retract thy Book, or any part of it, and according∣ly to give forth a plain Condemnation or Recantation as publick. To this I expect answer shortly from thee, otherwise trouble me not with any disingenious or scurrilous Letters.

Thy Abused (yet Well-wishing) Friend, George Whitehead.

London, the 3d day of the 8th Moneth, 1682.

Postscript since added. Wherein F. B's fallacy about the Record in the Quarterly Meeting Book in the Isle of Ely, his abuse of the Servants of Christ, his Contradiction about William Penn, his Scorn, Malice and Ranting Doctrine, are detected and reprehended.

WHen I was lately in the Isle of Ely, I made enquiry about the account which thou F. Bugg givest in thy Observations, pag. 52. viz. concerning a Minister (thou knowest who thou mentionedst) being recor∣ded out of the Vnity, for not taking his Wife according to the Order of Friends (i. e.) not publishing his Intentions before the Womens Meetings, as hereafter * 2.1 will be further manifest (sayst thou) but not one recorded that ever thou remembrest for any breach of Gods Commandments, pag. 53. For which acount thou referest any man to search the Records of your Quarterly Meeting Book in Hadenham in the Isle of Ely, &c.

But upon my enquiry I find, that Friends do positively give a contrary account, and do plainly affirm, that there were no Wo∣mens Meeting Then at that time in being in those parts (or within that Monethly Mee∣ting) in Cambridgshire, where the said Person lives, who proposed his Intentions of Marriage but once before the Men; And if so, thy account must be notoriously false, and thou mayst be horridly ashamed to di∣vulge it, as also of thy frequently saying, He was recorded out of the Vnity; whenas Friends only recorded, That they have no Vnion with him in his so doing, as thou hast cited it, pag. 63. which is only relative to that par∣ticular Act (viz.) of his refusing to come twice to the Meeting, and not in such general Terms to exclude the Person Out of the Vnity in all respects: Therefore thou appearest fallacious in thy account.

As concerning the Paper of our sence and advice, dated, London, the 27th of the 3d Moneth, 1675. (consisting of divers particular weighty matters) which thou makest thy principal Instance of our Apo∣stacy and Violence upon our first Principles of Vnion, and about which thou hast so much scofft and derided at us; I must tell thee that I know not one Person who subscribed tha•• Paper, but have cause to stand by it, an••

will stand by it, though unjustly and defa∣mingly smote at, derided and contemned by thee. And why didst not publish all our said Paper? Thou sayst, Thou hast taken enough to shew our Innovations and mani∣fest Apostacies, pag. 50. as if all that Paper were matter of such Proof; which is a most slanderous Insinuation; for thou hast not proved one of these Instances of our said Paper either a Violation to our first Principles of Vnion, Antiscriptural, or Inconsistent with the Church-Discipline, Order and Government in the Primitive Times among true Christians, as thou pretendest, nor in the least tending to Apostacy or Antichristianism. Thou hast taken upon thee to stigmatize, brand and defame both our Testimony and the Sub∣scribers, particularly William Penn, thou hast compared and rank't among such Vn∣christian Societies, Violators, Innovators, Apostates, Pope's Council, Arbitrary Autho∣rity, &c. Thou art very loud in thy Charge, but mute in Proof, and wanting in Argument. And how dost thou herein agree with thy self, where in pag. 133. thou callest William Penn, This Noble Man, and in pag. 135. Dear W. P. and in pag. 144. thou prayst for William Penn in these words, (viz.) I pray God keep thee steddy, and with a continual Dependency upon the Divine Revelation, &c. when thou

hast represented the same Person W. P. Antichristian, Apostate, Innovator, &c. as if thou shouldst pray thus for him, (viz.) Thou Antichristian Apostate, I pray God keep thee steddy. Such Absurdity doth thy Contra∣diction produce, who thus one while calum∣niatest and revilest, and another while flat∣terest and prayest for the same Person; one while judging and condemning the said Per∣son as Antichristian, Imposer, Innovator, &c. another while counting him Noble Man, A Dear Man, &c. Thou exclaimest against Religious Societies, Excommunicating, Con∣demning a Person as out of the Vnity, when it was but that They have no Vnity with him in his SO doing, (i e. in his irregular Pro∣ceeding out of Unity and Order with them, in proposing his Intention of Marriage but Once to the Meeting, and that in the Wo∣mans absence) whilst thou thy self art (like an exalted Diotrephes, yea, like a Pope with thy printed Bull) Excommunicating, Condemning, Deriding and Contemning the Servants of Christ by Name in Print, as William Penn, George Whitehead, Stephen Crisp, Alex. Parker, Thomas Salthouse, John Burnyeat, &c. for proceeding and giving their Christian Advice, Sence and Judg∣ment, according to their Consciences and inward Perswasions, relating to good Order in the Church of Christ.

Thus inconsistent art thou, conceited proud Scorner and false pretender to Li∣berty of Conscience, who hast given more black Characters, and made a worse (to speak ad hominem) Record even in Print against these and divers other faithful Ser∣vants of Christ, than only for a Meeting to Record in Manuscript their having No Vnion with a particular Person in his Irregular Proceeding in this or that particular act; for thou hast recorded these before men∣tioned Servants of Christ by name as Antichristian, Imposers, Innovators, &c. and compared them to the Popes Council in Print, and that in thy Book intended for the Ma∣gistrates, as by thy Epistle appears, pag. 3. Thus inconsistent and contradictory to thy self art thou in thy pretended Plea for Liberty of Conscience, whilst thou art Defa∣ming, Condemning and Excommunicating many of the Servants of Christ among us, for the exercise and testimony of their tender Consciences in their Christian Advice and Admonition, which is all one as to seek to stop their Mouthes from preaching, exhor∣ting others, &c. And this is not all thy Inconsistency and Confusion, the fruit of thy Malice and Treachery; but thou hast presented such a one as Henry North, Knight, and the Magistrates with such abominable Lyes and Abuses, as if (like a malicious

Informer and Incendiary) the Devil and thou designed not only the perpetual Re∣proach of the People called Quakers, but an Aggravation of their Sufferings and Persecutions; against whom the chief ground of thy Book also is a gross Slander and great Lye, (viz.) That their way of Com∣pelling, and Antichristian way of proceeding to bring to and force an Vniformity, Epis. p. 4. And thus raging against our Friends in these terms, (viz.) These Tyrannical Pro∣ceedings have been used by our New Spiritual Lords, Epis. p. 6. with much more Infa∣my, Slander and Scorn cast upon us in thy Book, for which the hand of the Lord will be upon thee: Thy Envy and Wickedness is judged of the Lord; take heed how thou persistest in it, lest he make thee an Ex∣ample.

In thy sixth Chapter thou art, according to thy wonted course of Malice and Scorn, inveighing against our Womens Meetings, falsly charging them with usurped Authority, unlimited Power and Rule, placed in their Meetings by G. F. and others; which is a gross abuse and slander. Also thou art in∣veighing against presenting Intentions of Mar∣riage before them by both the Persons, p. 118, 119. And this is not all the Fruit of thy perverse opposition, but in the same Chap∣ter, p. 123. after divers Citations, thou

bringest a comparison or instance of eating Flesh or Fish, as being indifferent and free; and then addest, that These with ALL other outward Works be Things Indifferent, and may be used, and also left. I must tell thee (Francis) that this Position makes void all Christian-Discipline, good Order & Church-Government, leaving all loose and uncer∣tain: And we are sure thou hast here as∣serted corrupt Doctrine, tending to practi∣cal Ranterism it self; for here thou makest no exception; thy assertion is general, not only of eating of Flesh and Fish, but of ALL other outward works, that they be things Indifferent, that may be used, and also left: See now if this be not sordid Rante∣rism; this loose, gain-saying Spirit leads into both, to thy own contradiction, where thou pretendest for Church-Discipline, Or∣der and Government, as in thy Title page thou seemest to grant were in the Primitive times, (i. e. among the Primitive Christi∣ans, as we understand.) But what Disci∣pline, Order or Government in the Church canst thou Conscientiously plead, and be consistent with thy Position (viz.) That all outward Works be things Indifferent, &c? How contrary to the Apostles Do∣ctrine also is this? for all good Works, which God hath ordained we should walk in; these are not indifferent to be used, and

also left; outward works of Righteousness, Justice, Goodness, Charity, &c. command∣ed of God, are not Indifferent to be used and also left: Solemn contracts and engage∣ments in Marriage are not Indifferent: Persons may not break solemn Contracts, due and orderly Proceedings: Men may not leave their Wives when they please, as an indifferent thing. But this Libertine Spirit that gave out and printed the said Ranters assertion, in placing such Indiffe∣rency upon ALL outward works or things, as that they may be used, and also left, hath thereby cast off all Bonds, Limitations, out∣ward Discipline, Order and Government of Truth, relating to Conversation.

We have much more in reserve against thy Book, which at present I do forbear adding for brevity's sake, and refer the Reader to R. Sandiland's single Answer, Entituled, Righteous Judgment placed upon the Heads of malicious Opposers and persecu∣ting Apostates, against thy malicious Book; and also to Tho. Elwood's Antidote against the Infection of William Rogers's Book, mis∣called, The Christian-Quaker, &c. Your Envy, Confusions, perverse in-and-out ways and hard Speeches are judged by the Lord, and his Hand is against you therein; and I question not but God will more signally determine the Controversie against that

proud contentious Spirit of Envy, Scorn, and false Jealousie: And Truth lives, and shall live and reign over it all.

Notes

• † 1.1

  Francis Bugg's Pro∣position implyes a Contradiction; for if Samuel Cater subscribe the Instrument, he ought not to have his Money by the tenure of it, because he told not his Name. If he do not subscribe it as his judgment, then he also ought to have his Money again, accor∣ding to F. B's tenet of Christian Liberty, As not seeing it his duty; ergo he may not, or at least ought not to be compelled to suffer for it.

  Another contradicti∣on is from the ground of his Law or Canon, viz. the equality in suffering For by his Rule a poor Minister must suffer 20 l when a rich Hearer, whom he ministers to, but 5 s. And he on the apparent sight of the Informer must tell his Name, when the other, but when he is asked it. Oh equal levelling Law! Are not the chil∣dren of the world wiser (looking on us as Le∣vellers) to make the rich Hearers pay the poor Preachers penal∣ties, as well as they look on them obliged to maintain them, on their own supposition.
• * 1.2

  Marg. added, Yet I do not limit Persons in this case; there may be a special occasion to tell Names for the sake of others, but not to make that a ge∣neral Rule — Friends are to be left free to Gods counsel.
• * 1.3

  Q. added, If it be not Dog-Latin?
• * 1.4

  Thy Charge collected.
• * 1.5

  Query added. I do serious∣ly ask William Rogers, if this Paper of ours, thus Recom∣mended, be sufficient proof of Imposition, and being tur∣ned Antichristi∣an? I desire plain Answer hereunto, in re∣lation to what he has granted for a Recom∣mendation, &c.
• * 1.6

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mas. and Fem.
• * 2.1

  Yet I find it not So ma∣nifest after∣ward in thy Book at all.