The principles of the Quakers further shewn to be blasphemous and seditious in a reply to Geo. Whitehead's answer to the Brief discovery, stiled Truth and innocency vindicated / by Edward Beckham ..., Henry Meriton ..., Lancaster Topcliffe ...

VVHEREAS George Whitehead declares our Designs were to incense the Government against them, and deprive them of their Christian Liberty, 'tis evident we meddled not with their Per∣sons, but Doctrines, and desired not an Abridgment of any Li∣berty the Government thinks fit to allow them; but we would be loth Blasphemy and Sedition should be embraced as part of the Christian Faith, or that Men who profess them be reckoned as true Members of the Prot••st••••nt Church: all that we could hope for was, that a Mark might by Publick Authority be set upon such Principles, and thereby Persons check'd who endeavour'd to propagate them among the People; and whether any in Authority will think fit to do so, we know not. But we judg it agreeable to our Office and Ministry to contend earnestly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints, and to endeavour the stopping their Mouths that speak perverse things, as the brief Discovery shows Burroughs, both the Foxes, Howgil, and others have done; and especially in these following particulars.

CHAP. I.

Of the Light Within.

* 1.1'TIS the Observation of a learned Man, That there is always some truth which gives being to every Error, pure Falshood not being able to sub∣sist of it self, and therefore twines about some Truth for its Support and Succour: and it being a great Truth that Christ is the true Light which* 1.2 lighteth every Man that cometh into the World, i. e. by the Light of Reason, human Understanding, and natural Conscience; and all People perceiving they have a Light within that discerns some things to be good, and moves them there∣unto, and also checks for many things that are evil, and dissuades them from them; our Adversaries conclude that this Light is Christ himself, the true Light: whereas 'tis but a Ray from that Sun, an Illumination from the Father of Lights, and not the true Eternal God and Christ, as is their current and most fundamental Doctrine; for thus* 1.3 six of them together in the Defence of the People called Quakers, p. 14. tell us,

The Light within is Christ, and Christ is the Word that was in the beginning with God, and was God.

And the† 1.4 Authors of the true Light owned and vindicated, p. 10. argue thus:

If the Light which shines in the Heart of Man, be God and Christ, as we believe and teach, then 'tis impossible the Light within so taught by us, should ex∣pose us to Blasphemy against God, Christ, or the Holy Scriptures: But the Light which shines in the Heart of Man, is God and Christ.

And this the brief Discovery charged them with, quoting Fox's Great Mystery, saying, The Light which every one that cometh into the World is inlightned with (and Fox jun. saying, The Light in you) is not Conscience, for the Light was before any thing was made, or Conscience named. George Whitehead in his Vindication hereof makes a hideous Out••ry, Where's the blasphemous Principle? why tru∣ly in these words: The Light that is in us (as Fox jun. explains it, and as Rich. Ashby, and the rest above assert) is not made, and so by Consequence must be God.

When they speak of the Inbeing of this Divine Light in Believers, we hope they mean something peculiar to them, and not common to Beasts, which is nothing but the Presence of his Essence, and that is every where. We say then that Light which is in us peculiarly, and enlightens us, is but a Ray and Beam of that Eternal Light (as William Penn owns in many places) subjected in our minds; and to say that Light was not made is the Blasphemy, that Light being manifest∣ly distinct from the Enlightner himself, as the Light in a Room is distinct from the body of the Sun. To say that Light which is in the Room subjected in the Air there, is the Sun in the Firmament, is egregious Folly; and to say those beams of Light that are shed abroad in Mens Hearts and subjected there, are the very Eternal Sun of Righteousness it self, is Blasphemy, seeing they are but an effect of it. Truth is, the Essence of God enlightens nothing as barely present with it; if it did, then every thing would be enlightened where it is (for a Quatenus ad omne valet Consequentia) which is evidently false, but only where it actually effects and sheds its Light; and where that is subjected (sure they will not say that the Essential Light of God is subjected in our Minds, and so reduce him to an Accident) 'tis not possible for any Creature to understand or know any thing the more for God's being only present with it essentially, for then a Tree or a Brute wou'd be as knowing and understanding as Men are, but by something God effects in the Understanding, and is subjected there, which must be made; and 'tis Blasphemy to say the contrary.

William Penn in his Reply to an answer made to his Key, hath an Ex∣ception* 1.5 to this Instance, saying,

God does not enlighten Trees and Beasts by his Presence with them, because Trees and Beasts are not in Man's Nature, nor in any capacity for such enlightning.

Which is ma∣nifestly false: for every thing, tho not in a natural aptitude and fitness, is in a Capacity in relation to the Almighty and powerful Presence of God, that implies not a Contradiction. How rationally is Balaam's Ass* 1.6 taught to discourse with and reprove his Master? God could, if he pleased, make Birds of the Air discover the closest Treason, and the Beam out of the* 1.7 Timber cry out against the Oppressor; and turn a Stone into a Loaf of Bread:* 1.8 but then all these mighty things could not have been done by God's Essential Presence (for then every Ass would speak and discourse, and even that Ass wou'd have done it before; every Bird would tell News; every Beam wou'd cry murder, and every heap of Stones wou'd be a Batch of Bread, God being always present with every one of them) but by exerting some powerful Opera∣tions upon these Subjects; nay he did not create the World by being barely pre∣sent with the Chaos or Inane, for then the World would have been from Eter∣nity, but by his voluntary powerful Fiat which effected that change. In like manner the Illumination of Believers is not from any such Essential Presence with us, but by that same powerful Operation of God upon the Souls of dead Sinners, whereby he rais'd up Jesus from the dead, Eph. 1. 20. If God illumi∣nated us qua essentially present, he must illuminate necessarily, not ad placi∣tum, and he should always illuminate where present, not where he pleases. Let the Reader observe that Geo. Whitehead in his Vindication of George Fox here, flies from the Quakers Principle of the Light within being Christ, to the Light without them; no Body ever denied those Passages he cites out of St. John, to represent Christ: but then it is a personal Christ without them, and that

Light no doubt was before any thing was made, or Conscience named. But what was this to the purpose? Doth Christ say, John 8. 12. I the Light with∣in* 1.9 you am the Light of the World, or all things were made by me the Light within you? So that in pitying our Ignorance he betrays his own.

Fox jun. is cited by the Brief Discovery, p. 3.

I the Light will fall upon you and grind you to Powder, who will not own me the Light in you: I'll make you know that I am the true Eternal God which created all things, and that by me the Light all things are upheld; and that there is not another besides me can save.

He says the Light in us does, and we say the Light in us does not these wonders, being but a Beam of that Light which effects them; and to say it does is the Blasphemy. Again, for so poor a Wretch to personate the Great and Mighty God, without Commission from him, and say I'll do this and this, as Whitehead pretends he does, is Blasphemy. Whitehead* 1.10 pretends that the true Light gave him these Words to declare to the Inhabitants of the Earth; but have we not reason to fear he belies the Eternal Living God, in pretending his Commission (to declare such hard things against the Inhabi∣tants of the Earth) which he cannot produce? To counterfeit the King's Broad Seal is no less than Treason; and for such a little Worm to be so impudent as to pretend he has God's Seal to his counterfeit Commission, What is this but Blasphemy? For such a bold Fellow as Fox (as if he had been really commissi∣ed God's Attourny and Representative) to come strutting forth, I, I, I, at eve∣ry word in God's Name; I'll fall upon you and grind you to Powder; I'll make you know I am the Eternal God, &c. and this without any Commission from him: What softer Name can you find for this than Blasphemy? Had he been,* 1.11 as Brother Fox affirms, one Soul with God, and part of God equal with God, not distinct from God; none would have envied him such a stile of Majesty; the being so was Commission enough. If the Prophets or Apostles deliver'd their Messages in any such Stile, they gave, we are sure, better proof of their Authority than this Impostor. But how if after all, this Light of the Quakers be not any Beam of the true Light, but a spark from the Devil's Forge (and our Saviour tells us of a Light within that is Darkness) then 'twill be plain 'tis none but Fox himself, or the Devil that is in him, that thus cur••ets and vaunts, telling the World what mighty things he will do: they cannot make it ap∣pear 'tis Christ in them, while we can make it evident it cannot be so, as by other Arguments, so by the Doctrines it inspires them with, of which hereafter.

Brief Disc. p. 3. quotes Fox's Pearl, and why may not a Pearl come out of a Fox's Head? we have heard of one taken out of the Head of a Creature, every whit as full of Poyson if possible: But what says this precious Pearl? there you find the Fox ranting and swaggering in the same Majestick Stile as before, I, k, I, his Quaker-Light flashes there very terribly, like Lightning it burns where e••er it falls; read it over if you durst, and if thou came but believe it, 'twill surely make thee to quake and tremble, you'll have such a thunderclap from Jupiter Fox, as would make even Caligula to run under his Bed again to hide himself from it.—I'll break in pieces; I'll make Nations like dirt, I'll tread them into mire; I'll make Religions, Professons and Teachings, Gatherings of Heaps, Gatherings of Multitudes, Gatherings which they call Churches, I'll make mire of them—The Wrath of the Lamb is risen, the Scepter is gone out, the Throne is set, ye shall be shaken, ye D••••mers, ye Dreamers, ye Notion••••••,

I'll whirl you under Hailstones, Vials, Plagues, Thunders, Woes, Judgments are come amongst you, upon your Heads all Nations; the Rod is over you which must rule all Nations, Trumpets founding and sounded; the Just will rule, (and you ken well enough we trow, who those just ones are) the Lamb will have the Victory. Can this be the voice of the Spirit of the meek and peaceable Jesus, the bleating of the Lamb that is risen as he tells us, or rather the roaring of a Lion that wants his Prey? You may easily know what Spirit it is by its vomiting up such Flakes of Fire and Brimstone: For such a Wretch to pretend (as he does in the close of the Paragraph) that this rumbling Message he had seen and heard from the beginning, and was the Word of Life, when it was but a Flash of his own Wildfire and hair-brain'd Imagination; what's this but Blasphemy?

Again, Brief Disc. p. 4. cites George Fox's Book, stiled the Teachers of the World unveil'd; but George Whitchead grievously complains that we have left out somewhat which might have done him mighty service had it been called in: Well, he shall have fair play, let him take in what he pleases, the whole Book if he thinks fit, it will yet appear blasphemous enough: Hark how the Varlet struts; I am the Light of the World, by whom the World was made; a Blasphemy as appears by the former Paragraph, personating so boldly the Lord of Glory without his Commission: but the Caput Mortuum is in these Words, There is your Condemnation from him who of the Lord was moved this to write: He writes not this sure too in the Person of Christ, he tells you plainly 'tis from him who of the Lord was moved this to write; the Lord sure was never moved of the Lord: but he puts all out of doubt when he adds, Whose Name of the World is called GEORGE FOX. Here the Varlet sits as Judg of the World; and* 1.12 truly (as in the Quakers Challenge, p. 6.) a very unmerciful Judg, if he be like his Brother Eccles, who hangs all that fall not down and worship his imaginary Christ the Light within, tho they worship a Christ without them never so devoutly and sincerely. Come Protestants, Presbyterians, Independants, and Baptists, the Quakers deny you all, the Quakers are in the Truth and none but they. Good my Lord Mercy for this once, for some Primitive Christians and Martyrs of the Church; let not all these good Men, because they did not yea it and nay it as the Quakers, be sentenc'd to be hang'd up in Chains of darkness, because they cannot how down and worship the golden Image you have set up, an ima∣ginary Christ within, tho the true Christ, God and Man without them, they always lov'd and adored.

In the same Book and Page of the Quakers Challenge, Eccles amongst his* 1.13 Panegyricks of George Fox, has these words;

It was said of Christ that he was in the World, and the World was made by him, and the World knew him not: so it may be said of this true Prophet whom John said he was not.

Here's no complaint now made that we have left out somewhat, but ra∣ther that we have quoted too much; these words it seems, whom John said he was not, ought to be omitted, tho written from the Spirit of the Lord as well as Fox's Mystery, and proved to be so by the same Arguments that his was, his inward sense and feeling, he was sure of it; and now to disown these words, printed so long since, and the Error never discovered, nay so ost ex∣amin'd by the Court of Inquisition, the second Day's Meeting, and never put into the Index Expurgatorius—But, why, George, should such an Expression as this be disown'd? a poor, harmless, innocent Expression as he deems it;

for George cannot see a jot of Blasphemy in it, tho he says that George Fox was he that John said he was not, i. e. Christ himself. Alas, 'twas only a little want of skill in Language! for he, Good Man! was not skilful in Expression, but meant well, whatsoever he said. Sure, George, thou hast a notable Horo∣scope, to see into the Hearts of Men, let their words be what they will: but thou knowest we charge not their Meanings, but their Words with Blasphemy; and his Intention ought not to be considered, as thou sayest it should, if con∣trary to the plain import of his words.

Thou tellest us he was none of the most eminent or approv'd Quakers: Come, George, never be ashamed of Prophet Eccles, who was as zealous and self-denying a Disciple of Christ within George Fox, as ever St. Matthew was of Christ without him: for he forsook all, every Fiddle he had, and (which was more than that holy Publican did by his all) burnt them all to a Gittern or a Juice-tromp. But, saith Whitehead, he could not intend the World was made by George Fox; no 'twas impossible, being secur'd from such a Blasphe∣my by the Amulet of Infallibility. But we wonder why it might not as well have secured him from blasphemous Words, as Meanings: But how comes it to pass that a Quaker cannot intend Blasphemy, tho he speaks never so much; tho he says he was the Christ, the Person that John said he was not? Come, George, never stand mumbling of Thistles any longer, and chewing blasphemous Words so gingerly, sometimes this way, sometimes that; but spit them out of thy Mouth, as putid and stinking Blasphemy. But alas! what shall we do with our poor Infallibility in the mean time? Why even leave her to shift for her self, as poor people turn their Children out of doors a begging, when they cannot maintain them any longer.

George Whitehead here plainly disowns Eccles's Infallibility; and why may not we disown Fox's and Burroughs's, yea, and his Worship's too. God Al∣mighty grant that they may all at last see what extravagancies they have been fool'd into by a bold pretence to it, and in time flee out of that House, whose chief Pillar begins to crack.

Edward Burroughs (as the Brief Disc. p. 5.) returns an answer to this Que∣stion propounded to him by the Priest: Is that very Man, with that very Body within you, yea, or nay? To which he answers, The very Christ of God is within us, we dare not deny him. Whitehead says,

To instance this as a proof of* 1.14 Blasphemy, is to charge the Apostle with Blasphemy, who saith, Christ is in you.

But does that, or any other Scripture say, the very Man Christ, with that very Body, is in us? Either Burroughs▪s Answer is direct and honest, or it is not: If it be direct, he must say, that very Man Christ, and that very Body of Christ is within us; but that is such an evident Falshood, that it is beyond the power of any man alive to defend it, even of Whitehead himself, whose chiefest Faculty lies that way, to streighten the most crooked Doctrines, and set them right, and to shape the most ugly deformed Blasphemies, so that they shall appear most Divine Truths. How many Manhoods would there be, if the Man Christ were in every Quaker? As many as ever Transubstanti∣ation made. We heartily own his appearance in the Flesh and in the Spirit, his personal appearance in the fulness of time, and his spiritual appearance in every true Believer; but this is not the Man Christ and his Body being in them, which the Que∣stion was of. If the Answer of Burroughs be indirect, and nothing to the purpose, the

Question being of that very Man and his very Body; if his Answer, we say, was not direct, but shifting and shuffling to another point, as Whitehead intimates, when he says, p. 7. he means he is only spiritually in Believers; tho we agree the Truth, we cannot allow the Honesty of such an answer; nor can George Whitehead justify this dodging in him, it rendring him more like a Jugler than a Disputant. When you ask for your Mony again out of the Juglers Hand, be opens it, and shews you nothing but a Counter: The Question was ask'd, Is that very Man, with that very Body, within you? His Answer is (as White∣head tells us) he is in us spiritually, which no body question'd, viz. by his Graces and Influences. We may see how loth Whitehead is that Burroughs should be counted a Blasphemer. Well! for once we are content he should pass for a Jugler.

CHAP. II.

Of the SOUL.

THE Brief Discovery hath four Quotations out of Fox to prove his Blas∣phemy touching this. P. 5, 6. he says,

The Soul is brought up into* 1.15 God, whereby they come to be one Soul: He tells us farther, 'Tis of God's Being, and that it is not Blasphemy to say the Soul is a part of* 1.16 God: He also saith, The Soul is without beginning, and Infinite in it self: and in Saul's Errand, Fox saith, He that hath the same Spirit that raised up* 1.17 Jesus Christ, is equal with God.

One would think these are Blasphemies plain enough, and too hard for an Apology, unless by one that can make a Panegyrick upon Vice, and could represent Whoredom and Drunkenness so as to appear the greatest Instances of Chastity and Temperance. Why here's the Man! George Whitehead can do the feat: All these horrid Blasphemies, with a little hocus pocus of his Sophistry, are changed into true Quaker Orthodoxy.* 1.18

He begins with the first Citation, where Fox says, the Soul is one Soul with God. Here Fox has but lickt up the Froth from the mouth of Mother Juliana in one of her Enthusiastick raving Fits: She tells us,

We are substantially united unto God, our Soul is oned to God; between God and the Soul there* 1.19 is right ought; God is its Maker, to whom it is oned.

But Whitehead cries out amain, Where's the Blasphemy in this? He cunningly repeats a part of the* 1.20 Instance, which was an aggregate one, consisting of many parts; and then crows and triumphs, Where, where is it? Like him that hides the Body out of sight, and shews only a Finger or a Thumb, and then cries out, Where is the Man? Tho we believe this single Allegation out of Fox, if it were alone, would appear blasphemous enough. We have carefully read the Scriptures, to the number of ten brought as Witnesses, who yet say not the least that the Soul is one Soul with God; only 1 Cor. 6. 17. says, The man that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit. Now what an inference is this! because a man, who is a Body of Flesh and Blood, is one Spirit with God, which is not possibly to be under∣stood but he is one with him spiritually, therefore the Soul must be one Soul with God. We are one with God morally by Faith and Love, and other Gra∣ces

of the Spirit; or federally one by Compact and Covenant, as the Wife and Husband: but one Soul speaks a substantial Union with God. God and the Soul may be one (as explain'd before) nay in the same manner one Spirit, because God is a Spirit; but God and the Soul cannot any ways be one Soul, because God is not a Soul at all. Every good Man is one with God, but not one Man; and every good Soul is one with God, but not one Soul, because God is neither a Man, nor a Soul.

Thus we have considered this place by it self, and discovered its Blasphemy; let us now consider it with the rest of its Company, and you may see he means not a moral, but a substantial Union: He says the Soul is a part of God. (Then a part of God might sin, and repent, and be pardoned, or if not, be damned besides.) A part of God, we think, was never heard of, but in Fox's Philo∣sophy: He would have done well to have taught it to the Scholars of Cambridg* 1.21 and Oxford in his Learned Battledoor, among other his profound Aphorisms. He says again, 'tis without beginning, 'tis Infinite in it self, and nothing that is so but is the same with God. But George has something to say for him. Fox says, the Soul is a part of God: Whitehead saith (a part of God) appears to be by some Adversaries obtruded upon them; 'tis not Fox's Assertion, he only questions them in their own improper Terms; p. 8. For shame blush, if thou canst, and own the Blasphemy: Read the words over again, and thou wilt find there is not so much as a semblance of truth in such an answer. The Priest says, 'tis horrid Blasphemy to, say the Soul is a part of God: Fox positively denies (not questions) 'tis not horrid Blasphemy to say the Soul is a part of God.

* 1.22Whitehead vindicates Fox, where he says, the Soul is of God's Being:

Of God's Being, says he, relates to the Breath of God, that came out from God, and not to the Soul; no, no, 'tis only the Breath of God, that came out of God, that is of God's Being.

Read but impartially the Citation, p. 273. Gr. Myst.

'Tis not horrid Blasphemy to say the Soul is a part of God; for it, i. e. the Soul, came out of him (not the Breath of Life) and is of him.

And again, p. 100.

God hath all Souls in his hands; and is not this which cometh out from God, which is in God's Hand, part of God?

He had said immediatly before, our Souls are in God's hand, not God's Breath; and now, what was in his Hands must be a part of God. He complains of our disinge∣nuity for leaving out what might have cleared the point; whenas we aver no∣thing is left out of that Sentence which could serve his turn. He says plainly, p. 100. “that which came out from God, which God hath in his Hand, that Christ is Bishop of, is not this of God's Being? Now we read that Christ is the Bishop of Souls, never the Bishop of God's Breath. After all, let George Whitehead tell us what is meant by the Breath of God: Does he think that God really breaths, or has Lungs to breath with? or is it only a Metaphorical Expression? Is it an▪ more when 'tis said, God breathed into Man the Breath of Life, than he spake the word, and it was made? (as Whitehead owns, p. 9. l. 25.) Speech being caused by the Breath, and that is no more than a will to create: And it would have been the same, if he had said, he breathed a Be∣ing into the Sun or Moon, they being both created by his powerful Word or Breath, as well as the Soul. Now this Will or Word of God we doubt not but is God's Being, for it is himself; but this Will of God, can it be ever said, it came out from God, or was in the hand of God, or that Christ was

the Bishop of it? Can any thing that is God, as the Will, the Word, or the Breath of God is, come out of God? as if any thing of God could be divided or separated from God. And tho a Creature may be said to come from God, as an effect of his Wisdom and Power, which yet is an impropriety of Speech, tho tolerable enough; yet to say that which comes out from God, is a part of God, of God's Being, as Fox does, is rank putid Blasphemy.

Whitehead saith, p. 9. l. 19. his Friend speaks plainly in another place; and what is that to the Blasphemy he has spoken in this? Would you have a man blaspheme in every Line he writes? that were to outdo the great Blasphemer himself, who sometimes drops a Truth, tho it ill becomes the Father of Lies. We know no Amulet or Charm, no, not his pretended Infallibility he so much boasts of, could secure that Prophet from speaking Inconsistencies or Contra∣dictions sometimes; neither can plain Blasphemy in one place, be excused by plain Orthodoxy in another. Is it such a matter for Quakers to be inconsistent, as their Tutor was? to say sometimes, thou art the Son of the Living God, and sometimes, if thou be the Son of God. There is a spiritual Lunacy that possesses Quakers, so that they speak Orthodoxly by fits; they are not always in the raving mood of Blasphemy, tho the mad fit was upon Penn and White∣head (in the sandy Foundation, and in Light of Life) against the Trinity and the outward Blood; when their Moon, their Light within them, was at the Full: that Light waining now apace, they begin to speak soberly of both. To say then he could not speak Blasphemy in one place, because he is Orthodox in another, is idle and inconsequent.

Brief Discovery, p. 6. charges Fox for saying, p. 91. Gr. Myst. that the Soul is without beginning or ending, and is infinite in self. What says Whitehead to this? Truly not one word, but cunningly glides by to another point, which brings to mind a piece of Poetry:

When Broth's too hot for greedy Hounds, how they* 1.23 Will lick their scalded Lips, and sneak away.

Ah George! Thou sawest it well enough, and that it was too evident a Blas∣phemy to be excused; but Friends must not fall out, and call one another Blas∣phemers, tho they be so. But give us leave to stop thee in thy hast; and when thou hast read it once more, tell us upon the new Quaker Oath, As God is thy Witness, whether thou thinkest such words as these to be blasphemous, viz. that the Soul is without beginning and infinite in it self, and by consequence God. Why then dost thou not yield up thy Friend and Apostle to be bored through the Tongue for a Blasphemer? Two things we may take liberty to conclude from thy silence: 1st. That George Fox for once has been convicted of Blasphe∣my; and therefore we may call him a Blasphemer upon a nihil dicit. And 2ly, That when he said the Soul was one Soul with God, he must mean substantially one, because he makes it without beginning, and infinite in it self, that is, the same with God.

William Pen, in his Invalidity of Faldo's Vindication, lays it upon Fox's great* 1.24 Ignorance, saying, he observed no nicety of Expression. Truly 'tis evident he was ignorant enough; and tho we thought him always acted by a kind of Religious Madness, yet we never believ'd that too much Learning made him so.

The words abovesaid are nevertheless Blasphemy in themselves, tho it may be more excusable in him who speaks them ignorantly, than in another who does it knowingly. 'Tis Blasphemy to say there is no God, tho spoken by a Fool; and* 1.25 St. Paul blasphemed, tho he did it ignorantly. Again, we grant his Expressions were very vulgar, far from having any nicety in them, and therefore think 'twould have better become him to have kept to his Trade of mending of Shooes, than set up for a mender of Religion before he could speak sense; and tho his Ignorance might excuse Fox from so great a Guilt, yet we can never excuse his Impudence in laying all this Blasphemy at God's Door, by telling the World they were all from the mouth of the Lord. From mentioning his ignorance we can't forbear a short comparison of Brother Fox the Father of the Foxoni∣ans, to Brother Francis the Father of the Franciscans. Bonavent tells us St.* 1.26 Francis was a simple illiterate Man, his Conversion was owing to Dreams and Visions, as Father Fox's upon a Northern Mountain; he had no Teacher, but he learnt all by Inspiration, and the People flockt about him like a Madman, and gave him, the common Civility of such People to mad Folk, Dirt and* 1.27 Stones. Maffeius tells us that Loyola had hardly ever learnt his Letters, yet never without Visions and Revelations. Orlandinus tells you he never gave any Titles of respect; and Maffeius says, when he was brought before the Spanish Commander, he would not so much as pull off his Hat to him; that he ran up and down praying in the Streets: so that Quakery we now see is a little older than we thought, and derives its pedigree some 100 of years from antient and honourable Families, two great Saints of the Church of Rome, St. Francis, and St. Ignatius, tho rather from the latter. A Man would be apt to believe that these Authors wrote the Life of George Fox by Prophecy; truth is, you may take it to be the life of Loyola or Fox, which you please: but to return.

* 1.28Brief Discovery charges Fox for saying in▪ Saul's Errand, p. 8. He that hath the same Spirit that raised up Jesus Christ, is equal with God: To which White∣head* 1.29 answers, We deny the Words as there printed to be according to Fox's sense,* 1.30 or ours; and he tells us the words (he that hath) should be left out: It must be so, or I can't for my heart tell how to defend our dear Friend George Fox from the Imputation of Blasphemy, and then Panduntur Portae, we break down our Walls and strongest Bulwarks, and let in the deceitful Greeks upon us, and so our Troy is lost. No, those words (he that hath) must be left out. And had the Fool left out the little Monosyllable, no, when he said in his Heart there was no God, he had been as Orthodox as Brother Fox. But for once, George, deal a little sincerely with us, and tell us whether as the Words lie in the Ci∣tation,* 1.31 they are Blasphemy or no. In thy Charitable Essay thou tellest us it was only an accidental Mistake; an Excuse thou hast cut out for Fox, which may serve for every Blasphemy Quakers or any other can be charged with, slips of the Pen, accidental Oversights, innocent Mistakes, and 'tis a good Horse never stumbles; tho we are told yours never does, being infallible in all his paces. But George, do words slip accidentally from the mouth of the Lord, as those were said to have been spoken? does the Spirit of the Lord write blind∣fold, and at adventure? Had his Brother Fox been alive, he would not have been ashamed to father the Brat, being so like him in all its Features; neither would he have taken it kindly for thee to deny him such a friendly Office; and hadst thou not thought it a Monster, thou wouldst not have refused (as much

asthou hatest Godfathers) to have answered for it, notwithstanding a Mole, or a little blemish upon its Face, a small Mistake: But now these words (he that hath) must be discarded and cashiered. But, George, to be sure those words are found printed there, and have been so this 40 years, and not only in Fox's life time, but view'd and review'd by the second day's Meetings, and never yet amended or corrected, tho now when a more diligent search is made into your Principles, these words are disown'd and rejected; as stoln goods are thrown away by the cunning Thief, when the hue and cry is close at his Heels. We are glad however so hardy a Forehead as Whitehead's is, can blush at the Blas∣phemy of these words.

They are not Fox's, says Whitehead; but Francis Howgill very ingenuously* 1.32 owns that they are Fox's, and is ready to fall fowl upon Whitehead as well as his other Opponents (calling them even Beetles and Owls) for stumbling at such a Straw: The first thing thy dark mind stumbles at, says Howgill, is, that some have said (it seems Fox had Company with him) He that hath the Spirit of God is equal with God; and he labours to confirm it by adding, he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit, there is Unity, and the Unity stands in equality it self: Silly Creatures, and blind Buzzards, saith he, to be offended at so light, so trivial a Blasphemy. We expected Whitehead would have given Howgill a sharp rebuke for so bold a Reflection; no, he passes it over without any notice, for Friends must not fall out for a hard word or two; but when he labours to clear Howgill, whom we cited as justifying George Fox here∣in, he with great sincerity leaves out the first part of the Quotation, viz. The first thing thy dark Mind stumbles at is, that some have said, that they that have the Spirit of God are equal with God; and begins, He that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit; there is Unity, and the Unity stands in Equality it self—there is Equality in Nature, tho not in Stature. Here, says Whitehead, the Equality is placed between the Father and the Son, as the Union is between him and them: A most evident Falshood! such an one as if he has not Aes triplex circa pectus, his Conscience must feel Remorses for. Do but read the Words, He that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit: Is not the Unity here be∣tween the Lord and him that is joined to him? Is not here the Unity? and is it not this very Unity that is the Unity between God and Believers, which stands in Equality it self? Or else how would he have vindicated Fox's words, which he undertook to do, and by consequence calls George Whitehead as good as Fool for stumbling at them? It would not answer the Design of Howgill, which was to prove a good Man was equal with God, only to prove God the Father and God the Son are equal. Where Howgil says there is equality in Na∣ture, tho not in Stature, hear what Whitehead says to this, The Equality in Na∣ture relates to the Divine Nature, which the Child of God partakes of in mea∣sure. Did ever any one hear before now of an Equality to the Divine Nature in measure, i. e. a short, defective, unequal Equality? Equal in Nature to God in mea∣sure,* 1.33 may pass for another Blasphemy (or at least Nonsense) without measure.

Whitehead, p. 11. appeals to his Reader, whether he has not more right to put a sense upon his Friends words than we; so then, tho Fox's words were Blasphemy, yet we may be assured (for Whitehead says it) his sense and meaning was not so, it seems he wrote one thing and meant another, which William Penn in his Rebuke, p. 8. saith, is to be no better than one of the worst

of Knaves: when he said Equal, he meant not Equal; when he said Infinite, he meant not Infinite; when he said a part of God, he did not mean a part of God: so that we must read him as we do Hebrew, backwards This is a common muse Whitehead has made for the Fox to creep out of here, and in many other places, he meant thus and thus: but let this serve for a general Answer; We charge not their Meanings but their Words with Blasphemy; nor has G. White∣head, nor any Man else, a power to put what sense they will upon words, but they must be conceiv'd to signify what in the common usage and custom of the Country they import, that being Vis & Norma loquendi, the Force and Rule of speaking.

CHAP. III.

Of INFALLIBILITT.

AND now for Infallibility, the grand Sinew of Quakery and Popery too; and if we can but shake this Pillar, we certainly pull down the House upon the Heads of these Philistines: we say then, this is an Attribute incompatible with a Creature, even Angels in Heaven; for some of them have fallen, and that all do not so, is not to be imputed to the Perfecti∣on of their created Beings, but to the Will and Counsel of God establishing and upholding them; and 'tis Blasphemy for any Creature to assume this unto it self; and that it is such an incommunicable Attribute, is thus proved. If Infalli∣bility be the highest Perfection of the Understanding, to which nothing imagi∣nable can be added, then it must be an incommunicable Attribute of God▪ but it is such a Perfection, for it implys an impossibility of erring, therefore it must be an incommunicable Attribute of God: for he that hath such a Perfection, hath an infinite One; for nothing that is finite, but may have something added to it in point of Perfection; for God never acted yet ad ultimum virium, nei∣ther hath he made any thing so perfect in any kind, as he could: this were to say that Infinite Power could be exhausted, which were a contradiction, for then 'twould not be Infinite. Truth is, God gives no more Infallibility to the Christian, than the Sun does to the Traveller, who notwithstanding its clearest Light may err and wander if he will. That they attribute Infallibility to themselves, appears by what Fox says in his great Mystery (as the brief* 1.34 Discovery charges him) when the Priest said, The holiest Man that is, is not* 1.35 able to give an infallible Character of another Man, Fox answers,

Hast thou not in this discovered thy self to be no Minister of Christ, or of the Spirit, who cannot give an infallible Character of another Man? How canst thou* 1.36 minister to his Condition?

And he saith, Are they Ministers of Christ, that are fallible? This, hardy George ventures to vindicate; and first he complains* 1.37 we leave out material Questions; let's hear what they are, He that is not infal∣lible in his Counsel, Judgment and Advice, is not he in Error? which amounts to this Proposition, Every One that is not infallible, is in Error: and if this were true, we own there must be an Infallibility amongst good Men, or there would be none such; this only wants a little truth in the Consequence, that if not in∣fallible,

then in Error; either we must be Scepticks, or Gods; knowing nothing certainly, for all things infallibly. The following questions cited by him are of the same import, and confirm what the Brief Discovery charges upon G. Fox.

Now let's hear how Whitehead vindicates him, and evidences our great Dark∣ness▪ which he charges us with herein; he makes it a wonderful Error in us, and a Consequent of our Principle to maintain these four contrary Propositi∣ons.

First, That the Holiest Man is not able to give an infallible Character of another Man: G. Fox's Assertion was, that every Minister of Christ is able to give an infallible Character of another Man; which tho we deny, yet 'tis not consequent we must hold that none does (even the holiest of them) because we deny every Man is wise and virtuous, therefore we must hold there is none so. But to let go the Consequence for once, because we will have no more wrangling than needs must, we will come to the Proposition, and say as the Priest did to G. Fox, That the holiest Man that is, is not able to give an infal∣lible Character of another Man; and for this Reason, Because the holiest Man alive is but a Man, and cannot be vested with the incommunicable Attribute of the Deity, which is to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, there being no certain, much less infal∣lible Character to be given of a Man, but from the Lineaments of his Heart. We deny not but God may reveal to Persons the Hearts of others, and they may declare it to the World, as St. Peter did concerning Ananias; but he gave* 1.38 sufficient evidence, that God had revealed it to him by the miraculous death of Ananias, and upon that account his Declaration ought to be believed. But must we therefore credit every Gipsy or Fortuneteller, who pretends to give Charac∣ters as well as any? Nay further, when God revealed to Balaam such glorious things which he declared, was he ever the more infallible for publishing an in∣fallible Declaration?

The second Proposition he charges us with as a Consequence of the former Principle, is, That tho a Minister of Christ cannot give an infallible Character of another Man, yet he may minister to his condition; which is certainly true; and he may safely do it to all. For the clearing of which, let us distinguish upon the states of Men.

First, There is the general State of all Men, which is to be by Nature Chil∣dren of Wrath, of Disobedience, Enemies in their Minds to God; this we certainly know, because 'tis revealed to us by the Scriptures, tho we do not un∣derstand the particular state of that Man whether he be still in that state of Enmity: and it will be granted sure, we may minister to his Condition, by acquainting him with the methods of Reconciliation from Scripture, and with all manner of Arguments thence to his hopes and fears, to perswade him to em∣brace the Terms of it.

Secondly, As for the States of Men in particular, and that in reference either to Doctrinals or Practicals, we may minister to them in either.

First, As to Doctrinals, whether they be false Teachers or true, 'tis evident we may certainly know, or else why are we commanded to try the Spirits? which shews, they may be discerned of what sort they are, tho Satan does never so much transform himself into an Angel of Light: and that some have not the Spirit of God, whatsoever they boldly pretend, we are assured in that

the Scripture has revealed it to us; they separate themselves, having not the Spi∣rit,* 1.39 says St. Jude. So that we may distingush betwixt a Man of God and a dreamer of Dreams, between a Theopneust and a Demoniack, a real possessor of Divine Revelation, and a fantastick pretender to it. And if God should give him such immediate Revelation as he did to the Apostles, with an intent to oblige others to believe it, God will attest it by such miraculous Operations as the Apostles were enabled to perform, which are sure Evidences of a Di∣vie Comission, that they do not run before they are sent; and like the foolish* 1.40 Prophets in Ezekiel, follow their own Spirit, and prophesy out of their own hearts, saying, The Lord saith, and the Lord hath not sent them. And sure we may minister unto these, as we do now to Quakers, convincing them of their Errors, and reprehending of their Blasphemies.

Secondly, As to Practicals, we, alas, too certainly know of many that are in a very evil state, being common Liars, Drunkards, Whoremongers, Blasphe∣mers, &c. because the Scripture reveals it to us, that such shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: and sure we may minister to such Men, by using the same Arguments to their hopes and fears as before. But there are a sort of People who pretend to be Children of Light, Sons of God, that are yet Bastards, and not Sons; many a Wolf that lurks under a Sheep-skin: so that the appear∣ance can give us no certain Rule to judg by, and we can look no further, nor can we certainly know whether he be a Sheep or a Wolf, Devil or Saint, with∣out a Revelation: the Apostles themselves could not discern a Judas, tho our Saviour could; nor the Quakers a wanton Atkinson, till a great Belly reveal'd it to them. Yet we can minister to their Cases too, we can press upon them a sincere and universal Holiness, we can shew them the danger of Hypocrisy. Thus we can minister unto all, tho we know not certainly, much less infallibly, every Man's Case, till it be revealed to us. We desire to know of G. Whitehead, if a Person should come to him with a troubled mind, how he could discern, by the help of his Infallibility, where it pained or pinched him, unless he opened his Condition, and told him the cause of his Grief; and yet if he were sullen, and would not, he might minister Advice and Counsel to him. In none of these Cases, can we reach further than a certainty, far from a Quaker Infallibility; and in every Case, where we have not so much as a certainty, still we may and ought to minister.

The Third Proposition. We own, That a Minister that is fallible, is in the Spirit a Minister of Christ, tho he cannot discern another Man's State and Condition, so as to give an infallible Character of him. The Apostles were Ministers of Christ, and yet could give no such infallible judgment of the state of one amongst themselves, and therefore cry, Master, Is it I? and intreat their Master, who alone could do it, to discover the Traitor. Neither can the most infallible Quaker of them all, infallibly tell whether G. Whitehead himself he a right-bred Eagle Quaker, tho now listed into the number of their Apostles. One would imagine by his late coined Creeds, he were about to Keithize and warp from his antient Testimony, which God Almighty grant, and is the worst harm we wish him; neither would it be any dishonour to him to become an Holy Apostate, which the Apostle exhorts every Christian to be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, let him depart from iniquity.

The fourth is ushered in with a consequently; and therefore now, if ever, we shall have a Consequence, yea verily such an one which as naturally flows from our Principles, as the Tyber from the Thames; 'tis this, Because the holiest Man alive does not infallibly know a Man's spiritual State, he must not only be falli∣ble but uncertain in his Ministry. If we be fallible, we must be uncertain, a Consequence evidently false and foolish; for a Man may be certain by his sense and knowledg, not from the Infallibility of the Faculties, but from a rational Evidence that in the present Case he is not deceived. Whitehead in this agrees with his Brother Penn, who in his Answer to Faldo, saith, He that doth not in∣fallibly* 1.41 know, knows nothing certainly. They would fain make Certainty and In∣fallibility the same thing, which are vastly different: Certainty is an Affection that belongs properly to an Act of the Understanding, Infallibility to the Power and Faculty it self; and there is still such an Imperfection in the Power and Faculty of our Understanding, that it might possibly have been deceived, even in those things wherein we are certain it hath not actually been deceived; and our Certainty that we are not deceived, doth not arise from the Infallibility of the Power or Faculty, but from hence, that we have all the Reason in the World to believe, that in the present Case our Faculties have not deceived us. G. Whitehead at the Close of this Principle, makes it consequent, that we are not only rendered hereby fallible and uncertain, but blind and ignorant of the state and condition of others: How far ignorant of Mens States, we have shewn before, but by his leave not quite blind.

He says he ascribes this Infallibility originally and principally to the Spirit* 1.42 of Truth (one would have thought it might have been wholly) which as it is it self infallible, so is the teaching of it, saith he. Yes verily, the Spirit's teaching is very infallible; but is he sure that every Man alive, ••ay that any Man alive does infallibly follow the Spirit's Teachings? is it impossible it should be other∣wise? It must be therefore a wonderful Opening in G. Whitehead to tell us, That so far as we are led by the Spirit, we are assured by it, and led into sound Judgment, Certainty, and full Assurance, &c. Whenas the difficulty lies here, to prove that fallible Creatures do at any time infallibly follow the Spirit's Instruc∣tions: neither can we take it for Gospel what Prophet Parnel says, That whoever* 1.43 are guided by the true Light, cannot walk contrary to it; no more than he that is guided by the Light of the Sun cannot stumble nor stagger tho he shuts his Eyes, or be drunk: unless he means they that follow the guidance of the true Light cannot but follow it, while they follow it; an Identical Proposition, which Fools assert, and no wise Man can deny.

Again, he adds,

If there be no discerning of Spirits, no infallible Cha∣racter* 1.44 to be given of Men, then Christ's Sheep may follow Strangers, Dogs, Wolves.

Alas, poor Sheep, that cannot discern the Shepherd from his Dog. If they will consider, the Sheep may know a Shepherd, if he be rightly called, and minister to the Sheep according to the Instructions of the chief Shepherd of the Sheep: They may be true Shepherds in relation to their Flocks, tho in relation to God they may be Wolves, and so reckoned at the last Day; but the Sheep sure may hear such a ones Voice, and follow such a Conduct, tho the men be wicked and ungodly, whilst their Doctrin is true. 'Twas our Saviour's direction to the Multitude, and to his Disciples also, concerning the Scribes and Pharisees (who were the wickedest of men) Whatsoever they bid you observe,* 1.45

that observe and do; but do not ye after their Works. There was once a Wolf in Sheeps clothing (as they will acknowledg) amongst themselves, whom they thought to be very instrumental in bringing many out of our Darkness into their Light, while he taught men to follow the Light as the only Rule, and stoutly declaim'd against an imaginary God, and a carnal Christ beyond the Stars. Oh how they flock unto him by shoals! Poor Lambs! how they suck at the Breasts of this Wolf, as at their own natural Dam. For all their inward sense and instinct, they run bleating after him for spiritual Food and Refreshment, being deceived by the Sheepskin Covering that he wore: His Wenching and Fornicating, which were the Wolf in him, were not discovered till some time after. Leeds, in his Trumpet sounded, p. 64. tells us of a counterfeit Quaker, who, tho a silly Woman, could put a cheat upon their pretended Spirit of dis∣cerning how she travel'd from Meeting to Meeting through several Countries, and held forth most powerfully, and was entertained by Friends as a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to their great refreshment and admiration, and never discerned to be no Quaker, till discovered by others: So that now they admit none to travel upon Truth's account without Certificates. Whitehead, in his Quaker plainness, tells us they have a record in peoples Consciences; but now they must have a record in their Pockets too, or their Friends will not receive them upon a Conscience-Re∣cord. Who doubts but Judas was wicked enough? yet the people might hear him and follow him, whilst in his Doctrine he followed the Instructions of his Master: Nay, there is no doubt he might convert some by his Ministry, and they receive Nourishment from this Wolf (as Romulus and Renues from ano∣ther) seeing the efficacy of the Ministry depends not so much on the worth of the Minister, as upon God's Grace. Far be it from us to plead for the profane and scandalous; we could heartily wish there were no more of such Wolves in the Church than there are of the other sort in the Kingdom, because (tho God may cooperate with the Ministry of such, if their Doctrine be according to Truth and Godliness) yet he does not so usually do it, unless their Preach∣ing be accompanied and enforced with the visible Doctrine of a holy Life. Remember Judas was one of the Twelve sent out by Christ to gather a Church; and it were an impeachment of the Divine Wisdom to say he made choice of an* 1.46 Instrument which was no ways fit for the work. As for the two Scriptures* 1.47 which he produces, when he tells us what he brought them for, whether to prove Infallibility or Transubstantiation, we will return an answer.

* 1.48But there is another Quotation out of G. Fox, given him by the Brief Discovery, which George Whitehead is pleased to take no notice of; and it is* 1.49 this. He says to the Priest,

Thou not being infallible, thou art not in the* 1.50 Spirit, and ••o art not a Minister of Christ, and art not able to judg of Powers that is not infallible, nor Magistrates, nor Kingdoms, nor Churches.

So then it seems Powers, Magistrates, Kingdoms and Churches, are to be judged at this infallible Bar. 'Tis to be feared 'twas this Judgment of such a Light within, that c••ndemned and cut off the Head of one great Magistrate in our own Country; for nothing can stand before its High Court of Justice, all Pow∣er* 1.51 in Heaven and Earth (as W. Smith in his Primer saith) being given to it. Let the Magistrates look to this; perhaps ere long they may find it as necessary for their preservation to cause People to renounce the Authority of a Pope with∣in, as of a Pope without. Whereas Edward Burroughs was charged in the

Brief Discovery, as saying Hereticks are infallibly known and discerned by the* 1.52 Spirit of God in the true Church of Christ, and by every Member of the same; George Whitehead endeavours to justify him, by desiring the contrary may be* 1.53 inverted upon us; and then, saith he, it must be thus:

That Hereticks are not infallibl, known and discerned by the Spirit of God in the true Church of Christ, nor by the Members thereof.

But, George, wilt thou never play fair with us, always dropping the Card out of thy hand, that may spoil thy Game? Shouldst not thou have said by every Member thereof? No, that were too invidious; and it would have been hard to have brought off Brother Bur∣roughs handsomly, for making too large a stretch, if he had said, every Mem∣ber; therefore he cunningly shuffles in an Indefinite for an Universal, The Members of the Church, which cannot imply every individual Member, as Burroughs said, but may mean some few of them, as the Church-Representa∣tive in their yearly Juncto. But does not Burroughs expresly say,

Hereticks are known infallibly by the true Church of Christ, and every Member there¦of?

And is this a fair Conversion of such a Proposition, to say, The Mem∣bers thereof? Whitehead hath some Scriptures, which he hopes may help him at a dead lift, to prove this Infallibility of discerning amongst the Quakers: but 'twill easily appear they have not the least disposition to testify to this Infallibili∣ty; nay, that 'tis impossible to wring such a sensless Blasphemy from them: for can any imagine the Scriptures of God should go about to set up another God, which they would do, should they assert another infallible? Yet give us leave, out of pure Love to them, to rescue them from such barbarous violence, that they may only give their voluntary and unconstrained Testimony in this mat∣ter. We will begin with the last, being a reserve he places the greatest Con∣fidence in. Enoch prophesied of this: Behold the Lord cometh, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he* 1.54 would have it rendred, in ten thousands of his Saints, and denote only Christ's coming in the Spirit into his Saints; and then it must be only a Christ in them must execute Judgment upon the Ungodly, and convince them, &c. and so Christ will have as many Courts of Judicatory as there are Saints, in which he shall judg and condemn Sinners. But all this while, tho Christ in executing Judgment be every where infallible in judging or discerning, how proves this the Saint is so, in whom he is? But perhaps he means, every Saint must be infallible in his Judgment, having such an infallible Director and Mover within him: But the Lameness of this consequence is shewn before; it will be still with us as with our Watches, tho the Spring be never so strong and good, yet by reason of some Cracks and Bruises it got by the fall, there may be some Errors and Stops in the motion even of this Masterpiece of the Creation, which was at first so fearfully and wonderfully made by God. But after all, 'tis plain the word (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) must be rendred, as in our Translation, with; and it was never otherwise interpreted by any Christian Writer than of the coming of Christ to Judgment with his Saints, to this day, till it fell into Quaker hands. We have a parallel* 1.55 place; He came with thousands of his Saints. So, The Lord my God shall* 1.56 come, and all the Saints with thee. At the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ with* 1.57 all his Saints: Which he explains, by being caught up together in the Clouds to* 1.58 meet the Lord in the Air. Mind but the Context, and it will necessarily ••••ad to this Interpretation. St. Jude tells us of a sort of Libertines risen up amongst* 1.59 them, whom he would not have to Batter themselves that they should escape

the just severity of a righteous God, if they continued such: therefore he minds them, that tho God most wonderfully saved the Children of Israel, his peculiar People, from their Egyptian Bondage, yet he destroyed them for their Infidelity, and also tells them how severely he dealt with the mutinous Angels, that he* 1.60 clapt them up in everlasting Chains of Darkness, to be reserved to the Judg∣meet of the last day. From them he descends to Sodom and Gomorrha, whose Wickedness provoked God to involve them in a dreadful Ruin; and yet the out∣ward Fire, which burnt down their Cities, was but an Emblem of those eternal Flames which were to be indured by them afterwards. Having thus described the Fate of these great Sinners, he presently inveighs against their Filthiness and Impurities, telling them, that to such is reserved the blackness of Darkness for ever; and that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, foretold the Judgment which should befal such men, in these words: Behold the Lord cometh to execute Judgment, even this Judgment, which St. Jude had spoken of before; Chains of Darkness; the vengeance of eternal Fire, and Blackness of Darkness for ever: He cometh with ten thousands of his Saints. Sure not Christ in his Saints; for Christ even then was come in many of his Saints, and that Vengeance was not executed upon those Sinners, and as yet they felt not the least scorching of those Flames: But Christ shall come with them to execute this Judgment at the last Day.

* 1.61The second Scripture is Eccles. 5. 8. it should be Eccl. 8. 5. A wise man's Heart discerneth both Time and Judgment. What a Text is this to prove the In∣fallibility* 1.62 of discerning who are Saints and who are Devils: He might e'en as well have proved from hence every wise man to be a judicial Astrologer, able to give certain Judgment of Times and Seasons, Rain or Wind, Famine or Pestilence.* 1.63 Next, 1 Cor. 2. 15. is called in as a witness, which says thus: He that is spiri∣tual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of none. Here again wants the word infallibly; neither doth the Apostle say, the spiritual man judgeth all Men, but Things. We cannot but allow the spiritual man judges all things by the assistance of the Spirit; but then this (all) must be restrained to what went before, all things that are revealed to him in the Gospel: All things there revealed, that are necessary to Salvation, the spiritual man, the Spirit assisting him, may certainly discern by the Gospel of Christ (which is the Christian's Rule) good or evil, true or false, which can never be done by the Rule or Stan∣dard of Fleshly Wisdom. Further, the Text says, he cannot be judged by any, viz. fleshly-minded men: Being taught by the Spirit of God, he is not to stand before the Tribunal of carnal Reason, neither is he to stand or fall by such a Sentence; as 1 Cor. 4. 3. 'Tis a small thing for me to be judged by you, or* 1.64 of Man's Judgment: And indeed what need he regard what such men talk of him and his Religion, no more than he should heed what the blind man's judg∣ment is about Colours or Beauty. All this while where is the Infallibility of every Member of the Church in discerning who are Saints and who are Devils? But above all, his Ignorance, or much worse, is to be wonder'd at, to think he* 1.65 could suborn 1 Cor. 6. 1, &c. as a witness to such an Infallibility of discerning, when the Text speaks plainly of civil Disserences between Believers: and is it not the Apostle's main design to take them off from seeking redress of wrongs at the Heathen Tribunals, where the application would be scandalous, and the Judgment partial, but rather to refer the matter to some Christian Friends?

If there be a wise man to be found amongst you, let him judg; but must every Umpire or Arbitrator needs be infallible in their Judgments? Does this suppose that the Christians of those days could penetrate into the very Hearts and se∣cretest Actions of the Litigants, and upon the first sight of them could dis∣cover who it was that did the wrong, and who that suffer'd it, without any fur∣ther search into the business, by examining Evidences, only by the immediate Revelation of the Spirit of God? If Quakers could do this, we would readily subscribe to that Doom which Fox pronounces against all Rulers, Judges, Justices, Lawyers, &c. and give our consent for the cutting down such a fruit∣less* 1.66 Tree, and set up Quakers in the room of them, who can discern which are the Just and Righteous, which the wrong Doers and the wrong Sufferers, with∣out the tedious and expensive trouble of sending for Witnesses from York to Westminster, without such dilatory Forms of Allegata & Probata, or feeing the Lawyers with Guineas to plead our Cause: if they do but look them in the Face, they can tell you from the Spirit of the Lord, who it was that stole the Horse, or rob'd the Glover's Till, &c.

Next poor Job must be wronged by him, even as much as by his censorious Friends: He is a Witness (as George Whitehead saith) to this Blasphemy; but let us not take his word, since we find he has abused as great Saints as him. What then says holy Job? Cannot my tast•• discern perverse things? And we dare* 1.67 refer it to any that hath any taste at all, whether he can discern Infallibility here. God hath given us sensible Faculties, to enable us to discern sweet and bitter, hurtful or healthful things to these Bodies of ours; as also rational Faculties to discern what is good or evil, true or false, for the welfare of our Souls: there∣fore he has given us Infallibility of discerning who are Saints, who are Devils. Truly, Reader, both you and we had need of Patience (as the Apostle speaks) to be continually vexed with such Impertinencies as these. Just thus deals he* 1.68 with St. Paul: Let the Prophets speak, and let others judg. 'Tis well our Bibles have escaped the Censure of the second days meeting; we should have had Infallibility trump'd upon us in every one of these Texts, as from the mouth of the Lord, by those bold Inquisitors, who sit every week to correct and a∣mend every Message from the Lord, before it is licensed to go forth into the World. We doubt not but this dead and killing Letter, this Serpents Meat (the Scriptures) must have undergone the same sate e're now, but only, thanks be to God, it was printed long before Quakery was born. Heb. 5. 14. is another* 1.69 of their convincing Proofs: Those that are strong have their Senses exercised to discern both Good and Evil. 'Tis a wonder he missed that Text, which seems fuliest of all to his purpose: For God doth know, that in the day you do eat* 1.70 thereof, your Eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as Gods knowing both Good and Evil; viz. you shall infallibly know them as God does. It would have been very pertinent, only for one thing, that such an Infallibility was the Doctrine of the Devil▪ Well, Mal. 3. 18. must do the business or nothing: Then shall ye return* 1.71 and discern between the Righteous and the Wicked, between him that serveth God, and him that serveth him not. Here is not a word of Infallibility neither; and if this place be further examined, it will speak as little to the purpose as any of the rest: You may see how they murmur at God's Severity towards his own People; 'Tis a vain thing to serve God, and a man gets nothing thereby: If we* 1.72 were never so wicked, proud, and Tempters of God, we should fare as well

as we do; they that swear, for ought we see come off as well as they that pray. Well, says God, stay but till the Resurrection: Non est judicandum de operibus Dei ante quintum Actum, there is a time coming when you shall see a difference, a time when I make up my Jewels, a time of the Revelation of the righteous Judgment of God; then shall ve return, Convertimini, come to a better sense of things, ••ou shall see a difference, how much it avails to be re∣ligious, when I shall separate the Sheep from the Goats, and send one to Hea∣ven, and the other to Hell. Does this infer we can infallibly discern in this World, who are Saints and who are Devils? And yet George Whitehead gives* 1.73 this Testimony of himself, I witness this truth fulfilled in me; then shall ve discern between the Righteous and the Wicked. Rainaldus in his Ecclesiasti∣cal* 1.74 Annals (as Dr. Stillingfleet in his Enthusiasm of the Church of Rome cites* 1.75 him) tells us that Philip Nereus had a faculty given him to smell Souls, and would often desire Persons to empty the Jakes of their Souls; perhaps with other Le∣gacies he left to his Faternity, he may have bequeathed his Nose to the Quakers, by which they are enabled to discern Souls: for such another Testimony Fox is said to have given, when he pretended, he could see into the Heart of Mr. Nichols of Carlisle, declaring him to be a Hypocrite, but could not tell his Name,* 1.76 when he was asked. But Revelations are as common with these Men, as Reason with others, whenever they have a mind to defame or bespatter any. A great many more instances of their pretending to Infallibility might be added to* 1.77 these. George Whitehead in his Voice of Wisdom, tells Danson, he was not wor∣thy to be a Minister, who pretends to no Infallibility in the Ministry. Thus* 1.78 Fran. Howgill asserts, That which is not infallible is carnal, and all who are guided by the Spirit of Christ are infallible. As to any thing he hath said more upon this head, we may venture to leave it to thy Judgment, Good Reader, whilst we pass to another point.

CHAP. IV.

Of PERFECTION.

'TIS the usual Sophistry of this People to cover their Errors under some equivocal Expression or other. They have a high value for the Blood of Christ, but they mean the inward Blood, as Sol. Eccles told Por∣ter. Paptism and the Lords Supper, O what an esteem have they for them! But they do not mean what you and we and all the World besides understand by them; but a spiritual Baptism, and a feasting with Christ in the upper Room of the Heart. They own the Saints Union with Christ: but then 'tis not a moral or federal Union, but a substantial one. Every Christian owns Perfecti∣on in a right sense, as far as is consistent with our present state: the Quakers own the word as well as we, but then 'tis in a sense incompatible with our human frailty; a sinless one, free from the least failing and infirmity. As Bur∣roughs saith, God doth not accept any, where there is any failing; a Condition unattainable in this Life. Where a word is equivocal or ambiguous, and hath

two Senses, as Perfection hath in the Scripture, we would sain know why it should not be understood in that sense which agrees with universal Experience, rather than in that which contradicts it. Let us ask the boldest Quaker of them all, dare he come strutting forth with the bragging Pharisee, God I thank thee I am not as others are, the Men of this World; I am as pure, as spotless as the holy Angels themselves; when I have searched every corner of my heart, I cannot find the least Sin to be lamented; the whole Day, Month, or Year past, not a word amiss, or a thought out of order; I find no need of Repentance, or God's pardoning Mercy, or of Christ's outward Blood to purify me, who am so perfectly clean? Solomon gives the same Challenge, Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my Sins? his meaning* 1.79 is, Who dares say it, or can say it justly? for he tells you there are those that say it, yea a whole Generation who were pure in their own eyes, yet not washed* 1.80 from their Filthiness. 'Tis a wonder the Quakers have not pleaded this Text for the Antiquity of their Religion, it being, you see, as old as Solomon. But 'tis strange any Christian, that has heard never so little of the Bible, of the Lives of the Apostles, Prophets and Martyrs, should talk so proudly of Perfecti∣on and a sinless State, which this People of all men have the least reason to challenge. But were it so with us, Job's expostulation would have been but rea∣sonable, Shew me wherefore thou contendest with me? and every 〈◊〉〈◊〉* 1.81 he had suffered from God might have been esteemed as an unjust and cruel Exe∣cution of an innocent Person. If this were true, Repentance and Faith in the Blood of Christ ought to be discharged the service. How come we to be com∣manded to put on the whole Armour of God, if it be the Doctrine of Devils, as* 1.82 G. Fox affrms, to preach that Men shall have Sin, and be in a warfare so long* 1.83 as they be on Earth? But to take the Quotations as they lie: Whereas Mr. Caw∣drey said, surely they cannot be perfect here or hereafter in Equality, but only in Quality; Fox answers, Christ makes no distinction in his words, but* 1.84 saith, Be ye perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect; and as he is, so••••re we; and that which is perfect as he is perfect, is in equality with the same thing which is of God and from God. Now where is the Blasphemy I pray, cries White∣head? 'Tis strange he should ask, when Fox asserts good men to be perfect as God; and that as he is, so are they in Equality with him: had he said, as G. Whitehead does here, 'Tis not for any Man or Men to be perfect God; but perfect men, true Men, as their heavenly Father is true God (tho these Expressi∣ons are far from being distinct and clear as we wish them, and as their follow∣ing words are) Men after God's own Heart in sincerity and truth; none of us would have quarrelled him for it. But to oppose Men when they say, That the Saints are partly sinful and falling in their best works, as Fox did Mr. Caw∣dry* 1.85 there, and Phil. Langford for fa••••ing St. Paul was not freed from the Act* 1.86 of Sin, whilst in this Life; and that tho Faith turns us from Sin, yet we are subject to Sin, the Act of Sin, whilst in this mortal Body: to oppose Men, we say, for speaking thus, and tell them they are ignorant of Christ, and this is not sound Doctrine; speaks him a Pleader for absolute Perfection, and a sin∣le••s, state in this Life, which we had Reason to censure as blasphemous. When some Libertines broacht the same Doctrine, and patroniz••d it by the same Text, Be ye perfect, &c. they were as severely brand••d by a learned Man, who told* 1.87 them, it was most impudently wrested to establish their most flagrant Wicked∣ness

* 1.88herein. And as to absolute Perfection which Fox assert in this and the fol∣lowing Quotations (tho Whitehead would avoid the Odium of it) we aver it not attainable by any mere Man in this state; the Scriptures teaching us, that in many things we offend all, Jam. 3. 2. that there is not a Man that sinneth not, 1 King. 8. 46. and there is not a just Man upon Earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not, Eccl. 7. 20. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive our selves, and the truth* 1.89 is not in us, 1 John 1. 8. which made David cry out, Enter not into Judgment with thy Servant, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified, Psal. 143. 2. and hereupon our Saviour teaches us, not more humbly than truly (whatsoever either Pelagians or Quakers think of it) to pray daily, Forgive us our trespasses. But they have thrown this Prayer out of their Houses and Meeting-places as Apocryphal, as an old Almanack out of date in this their new year of Reve∣lation. And we shall add another Proof from thy self, George, which will con∣vince thee sure, that there are failings amongst the best in this Life, even amongst the Quakers themselves. In thy Epistle to Friends, 1689, thou makest a la∣mentable* 1.90 complaint of Quakers Failings, that few of them had their minds exer∣cised* 1.91 in Prayer and Meditation; that too many had their Hearts taken up with these fading Objects; that they were degenerated into Pride, Height of Spirit and Apparel, contrary to Gravity, Modesty, Sobriety, Plainness, Simplicity, Innocency and Humility. We should con thee thanks, George, for this plain and honest Testimony, but only we are afraid it dropt from thy Pen unawares; thou didst not consider sure: What, a Quaker and confess Failings in Friends? Can Infallibility ever trip or stumble? Thou didst not perhaps consider how thou hast here exposed the Friends to the Pit and the Lake, for Brother Bur∣roughs hath told thee, that God will accept none of them who have any Fail∣ings: or perhaps thou mayst think, because Fox says that Perfection is given to every Quaker in particular, that all these Imperfections don't hinder the Per∣fection of a Quaker; or that in them they are no Faults or Failings: and so tho thy Testimony be very true, we have no reason to thank thee for it, yet we should be very glad to hear that when thou prayest among thy Friends, thou shalt make as frank and open confession of Friends Sins and Failings to God, that you may obtain Forgiveness, as you have done to men.

Now if after all this, the Scripture in several places stile some Men perfect, and exhort all thereunto, it ought to be understood so, as neither to contradict plain Experience, nor other Testimonies thereof, which assert no Man to be with∣out* 1.92 Sin, whilst he is in this state; and therefore Divines well say, that our* 1.93 Perfection in this Life either refers to Sincerity and Uprightness, or to our Endea∣vours* 1.94 and Strivings after it, which cannot be an absolute Perfection, since Additions* 1.95 may be made thereunto, and yet such are there stiled perfect; or to a ripe well confirmed and settled Habit of true Holiness, when the Soul is established in* 1.96 Faith, Love and Hope; The God of all Grace make you perfect, establish, strengthen, settle you. Or else 'tis a Perfection of Parts, not of Degrees; with reference to which a Child is as perfect as a Man, and Christians in this Life have the Seeds of all Graces planted in them by the Holy Ghost, tho they are not grown up to the highest degrees. Or else they are stiled perfect compara∣tively,* 1.97 with respect to those that are less so. Or lastly, our Holiness is the same* 1.98 for Kind and Quality with that of God's and Christ's (and therefore said to* 1.99 be perfect) tho not for Equality. These and the like Distinctions give us a

true Notion of our Perfection in this State, which is far different from that we* 1.100 shall attain unto in the Life to come, where the Spirits of just Men are said to* 1.101 be made perfect; and when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. And whereas G. Whitehead asks, Was not Per∣fection of Holiness, Righteousness, and Purity, the Apostles Doctrine, Intent and End of their Ministry? No doubt, so far, as that they pressed upon Chri∣stians a striving after the highest measures attainable in this Life: because when they had done their uttermost, there was yet a plus ultra, a higher measure that might be attain'd to. And a learned Man shews that when St. Paul exhorted the Hebrews to go on to Perfection, he means nothing else by it but the state of* 1.102 Manhood, which consists in a well-settled Habit of Wisdom and Goodness. This is plain; first, from ver. 11, 12. where he more fully explains his mean∣ing; We desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance* 1.103 of Hope unto the end: That ye be not s••othful, but followers of them, who thro Faith and Patience inherit the Promises. Secondly, from the latter end of the fifth Chapter, where we discern what gave occasion to this Exhortation; he* 1.104 there distinguishing Christians into two Classes, Babes and strong Men, i. e. perfect and imperfect, both of which he describes at large. And from thence* 1.105 this learned Person asserts, That the utmost height to which the Scripture ex∣horts* 1.106 us, is nothing more than a steady habit of Holiness. That place of St. John, purifyeth himself even as he is pure, speaks not their attaining to Per∣fection equal with Christ's, but their taking him for their Pattern daily to regu∣late themselves by; and the Term even as signifies an Analogy, i. e. a Pro∣portion,* 1.107 Sutableness, and Agreeableness, not an Equality. Another place he cites to prove this Perfection of Purity; but that speaks of the whole Church,* 1.108 which the Apostles and other Ministers were constituted to render exact and or∣derly fitted in every part, in which there should be no Chasm, no Luxation, but every thing duly placed with great Coherence and Agreement; and this Church he compares to a Body, and Christ to the Soul that animates it: and as the Soul, when the Organs of the Body are by degrees strengthened, puts forth its Powers, till the Body comes to an Age of Consistency; so is the Church actuated by the Spirit of Christ, till it comes to a consistent State, and at last the Holy Jesus presents it to his Father without spot or wrinkle; but 'tis not so whilst in this Life. And after all this, Is it not Blasphemy to say, That 'tis the Doctrine of Devils to preach that men shall have Si••, and be in a Warfare as long as they be on Earth? since they are not absolutely perfect, and therefore win have Sin inherent in them at their best state, and adhering to their best Works. See this Doctrine of Perfection discoursed of by Dr. Lucas in his Religious Per∣fection, or the third part of the Enquiry after Happiness, with reference to the* 1.109 Quakers. Tho that good Man is so candid that he will hardly believe the Qua∣kers* 1.110 designed any thing more by their asserting Perfection in this Life, than the arriving to a steady well-settled habit of Wisdom and Goodness, which he may be convinced of by what we have already quoted, and a••o••, peru••ing* 1.111 Geo. Fox's Great Myst. in the several pages here refer'd unto, page 4. line 19. p. 7. ult. 12. med. 24. l. 15. 27. l. 11. p. 30. med. us{que} ad fin. p. 37, 38, 39, 40, 41. ult. p. 51. med. p. 124. ult. 125. per ••ot. 133. ult. p. 137. med. 156. ult. 157. init. 159. ult. 160. init. p. 231, 232, 243, 251, 252, 253. ult. p. 257, 258, 277, 279, 280, 282, 286, 288, 293, 307. ult. 318. ult. 320.

med. And also by consulting a Piece, called, Ishmael and his Mother caff•• out, p. 3. in Quarto, where George Whitehead's, and three other Quakers Answer to their Adversary was in these words,

But thou and thy Generation hates this, and says, that there is no Perfection to be attained here: O thou blind Guide! did Christ ever command any thing that might not be accomplished? or did he speak of being perfect not till after death? here thou dost deny the very End for which Christ came, who came to take away Sin, and in him is no Sin, Mat. 1. 21. 1 John 3. 3, 4, 5, 6. & 1 John 5. 18, &c.

So also pag. 12.

Thou sayen (say these four Quakers to their Adversary the Priest) the most eminent Believer sins in many things. O thou Blasphemer and Slanderer of the Just (reply then) when wilt thou cease from thy Lies and Blasphemy? where dost, or canst thou prove such a Scripture as the most emi∣nent Believer sins in any things, when the Scripture saith, He that believeth is born of God, and he that is born of God sinneth not; for whosoever sinneth, hath not seen him, neither known him; and he that commieteth Sin is of the Devil? and there's thy condition, and he is thy Father who is the Father of all Liers as thou art, 1 John 3. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

But more plainly and directly from that Account Will. Baldwinson gives in a Letter of his dated Jan. 14. 1653. and attested by three others, where he de∣clares, that before a company where James Naylor and Richard Farnsworth were setting out this Doctrine of Prefection, he demanded of them in these words; Friends! do you hold that a Man may attain to that height of Per∣fection in this Life, to be as perfect, as pure, as holy, and as just as God himself? And he asserts that they jointly reply'd, Yea, and they were so. For which look The Defence of the Snake in the Grass, Part the First, pag. 88.

But that the best of Men were liable to commit Sin, the Man after God's own* 1.112 Heart, David, found it so, and confessed it; and the Church of God complained that their Righteousness was as filthy Rags; not that their Righteousness was Sin, but that Sin cleaved to, and blemished their best Performances: as clean Wa∣ter running through a Channel not perfectly clean, contracts some Soil. Nei∣ther do we say that this Pollution makes the Work cease to be good, or puts the doer into a state of Damnation, because God for Christ's sake forgives the Imperfection, and reputeth the Duty good for the sake of that part which his own Spirit wrought.

And are we not in a state of Warfare whilst on Earth? when the Apostle saith,* 1.113 That the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the Flesh, and these are contrary the one to the other, (and therefore there will be a War betwixt* 1.114 them) so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. And I delight in the Law of God after the Inward Man. But I see another Law in my Members warring against the Law of my Mind. And-to what end did holy Paul so nicely describe the whole Armature of a Christian, if it were to hang up for a show only, as rusty pieces are wont to do in a time of Peace. No, he directs to put them on, tel∣ling us our Warfare is not so much with evil Men, as with evil Spirits. We wrestle not against Flesh and Blood, but against Principalities, against Powers, against the Rulers of the darkness of this World, against spiritual Wickedness in high Places:* 1.115 Wherefore take unto you the whole Armour of God, &c. God himself published this War first in Paradise, declaring that our Lives should be a continual Warfare* 1.116 with the Devil. I will put Enmity between thee and the Woman, and between thy

Seed and her Seed; it shall bruise thy Head, and thou shalt* 1.117 bruise his Heel. See here God himself denouncing the War that Enmity put, which is the ground of our Warfare, which began near the beginning of the World it self, and has been ever since carried on, and will be so between Christ and his Servants on one side, and the Devil and his Angels on the other, to the end of all things below. And therefore we think it ill became W. Pen, to deride Holy Men (who car∣ry on their Warfare by humble Confession and earnest Prayer, which brings them Aid from Heaven 〈◊〉〈◊〉 saying,

Alas poor Souls! are you not at Have Mercy upon us Miserable Sinners, there is no Health in us from seven to seventy?

And was not this the Cry of penitent David, and the humble Publican; and shall these devout Supplicants be mocked by such a Wretch as Will. ••en? But says G. Whitehead,

Alas! is not sign of Laughter at them, but of Lamentation and Pity over their miserable State?

Is then their State so miserable above all others, when they open their Case to a Physician that can and will assuredly help them upon their earnest Application to him? Thus God directs his People to take to them words, and say, Take away all Iniquity, and receive us graciously; which* 1.118 is in effect to say, Have Mercy upon us miserable Sinners: and when done peni∣tently and sincerely, he has promised to shew Favour thereupon; I will heal their Backslidings, and love them freely. So that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this Case they were no Ob∣jects of his Pity; and alas, there is no sign of it, as it comes from W. Pen, who reckons such a Practice greatly Erroneous and grosly Ridiculous: and let us ask W. Pen and G. Whitehead, whether they would not take it as a bitter Sarcasin, should we say, Alas, poor sinless Cater, to fall a Whoring and Wenching after sixty years of Age, it would be thought sure a jea•• at their pretended Perfecti∣on; so that Alas may sometimes be spoken by way of Contempt as well as of Pity. What he adds, that W. Pen pitied them, because they were always con∣fessing but never forsaking, is an unworthy Reflection and base Falshood; when 'tis evident, those who are oftnest in these Devotions make the greatest Pro∣gress in subduing and mortifying their Sins, tho none of them can obtain so per∣fect a Victory, as not to be troubled with the remains of Sin any more; nor are we herein Sin's Advocates (as we are falsly charged) we are far from pleading its Cause, but mournfully complain of it as our Burden, and long for that time in which we shall be free, not from its Power, but from its Presence: How joy∣fully could some of us sing our Nunc Dimittas, and welcome a Winding-sheet, which can only wipe us perfectly clean.

To that of Edward Burroughs, George Whitehead answers, His meaning is, that* 1.119 is his common Refuge, a Refuge that lies out of our Reach; he meant well, tho his words be never so blasphemous. Well, let us hear if his meaning be any thing better. God doth not accept Men in their failings in Duty; but by his leave, tho God does not accept Men for their failings, yet he graciously accepts them thro Christ, whilst they are under them; and to say he does not, is not only to mean, but to say the very same thing with Burroughs, That God doth not accept any where there is any failing. And to shew thou fully agreest with Brother Burroughs in this, thou hast commended one of absolute Perfection to us for our Imitation, who boasted, when a dying, to his Friends about his Bed,

that he was not conscious of any Action that he had done, that he should be afraid of appearing before Almighty God: it was Tudor Brain, a Lad of about seventeen years old; this was even the last Breath he drew, and was it not sweet and edifying? can you imagine how greedily Friends suck'd it in as a sweet smelling Savour; how their Souls were refresh'd and nourish'd by it, as a most heavenly Expiration? (Poor Child! that had only learnt to parrot so presumptuously, as he had been taught a little before by his Parents; neither at Age, God knows,* 1.120 nor at years of Discretion: yet this poor Boy is set forth by Whitehead as a Pat∣tern for us to imitate). A Doctrine that utterly cancels the Gospel Covenant and its gracious Terms, laying a Milstone upon our Shoulders that the strongest Sampson is not able to bear. Whitehead tells us, there are some that complain their best Duties are sinful; but upon the strictest search, he will hardly find any among us, who hold Duty to be a Sin, i. e. that Duty is no Duty. What we hold herein is, That every Duty we perform to God is good, because it is a Duty; but for the manner of its performance, it is not so well, but it might be better; some chilness of Zeal, distraction of Thoughts, make a great Abate∣ment, but yet we are accepted therein, thro the Grace of the Gospel. The old Covenant Terms were strict and rigorous; but 'tis the merciful Condescension of the Gospel, since we are not sufficient to pay the whole Debt (and if our Almighty Creditor should exact it, we must all to Prison) to compound with us and accept of what we can, and forgive us if we pay what we are able.

Whitehead says, Our Acceptance is in Christ, which is very true, but incon∣sistent with their Doctrine of Perfection; for what need they a Saviour's Media∣tion, who are not chargeable with any failing, who fulfil the Law and answer every demand of Justice, as Burroughs saith, or God will not accept them? their own Perfection shall speak for them. St. Paul says, Who shall condemn? it is Christ that justifieth. But if Burroughs say true, and they can answer every De∣mand of Justice, they may say 'tis I that will justify my self; my own Actions shall speak for me; surely nothing can condemn, if the Justice of God cannot. In citing this Passage of Burroughs, Whitehead complains we have dropt some∣what which might have done him a kindness, viz. these words, But those that love God, keep his Commandments, and they are not grievous. All which we own, but that his Commandments are not grievous, and his Burden is light, is owing not to our natural Strength and Ability, but to the gracious Terms of the Go∣spel Covenant, which imparts a larger measure of the Spirit to enable the Chri∣stian, and also accepts Sincerity instead of Perfection, which is directly contrary to what Burroughs asserts here, viz. That God does not accept any, where there is any failing, who does not fulfil the Law and answer every demand of Justice, which Experience, as well as God's Word, assure us none is able to do: so little do these foregoing words contribute towards the rendring those Orthodox, which the Brief Discovery charges upon him; and if these People in particular should pretend above other Men to be without failings, 'twould but make them the more ridiculous, which in this matter they are already even to Con∣tempt.

He says we oppose the Urim and Thummim, Light and Perfection; but do we oppose the Urim and Thummim, whilst we assert it to be only in the Breast∣plate of our great High-Priest, but not upon the Breast of every, or any Saint on Earth?

CHAP. V.

Of Immediate REVELATION.

THE Brief Discovery charges Whitehead and Fox jun. with saying, That* 1.121 which is spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any, is of as great Autho∣rity as the Scriptures and Chapters are, and greater. This undervalu∣ing the Scriptures, with respect to their own Writings, is not a careless stumble of their Pen, but deliberate and design'd; for wherever they treat of Scrip∣ture, 'tis in the same Strain, not varying from the Analogy of this Faith:

If ever you will own the Prophets, Apostles, or Christ himself, you will own our Writings given forth by the same Spirit.

You may as well condemn the Scriptures to the Fire, as our Queries; and in this* 1.122 place Whitehead gives the preheminence to their Writings, says, They are of as great Authority, and greater. Here he complains again of Injustice, because we left out some explanatory words, as he calls them in the same period; the words are these (which rather darken than enlighten the matter) as Christ's words were of greater Authority when he spoke, than the Pharisees reading the Letter: never sure was there so cross, so perverse an Answer; was the compa∣rison made between the Pharisees reading the Letter, and the Quakers Speak∣ings, or between the Scriptures and their Speakings? The Question ask'd was, Whether they esteemed their Speakings of as great Authority as any Chapter in the Bible? And the Answer was direct enough, They are as great, and greater too. But when they prefer their Writings to the Scriptures, he does not, as he tells us, mean the Scriptures, but the Pharisees reading them. If the Pharisees were such A B C-Darians, that they knew not how to read a Chapter in the Bible as it ought to be; yet the Bible is of the same Authority still, read by a Pharisee, or an Apostle, tho perhaps not of the same Efficacy: and the Scrip∣tures, whensoever spoken, or by whomsoever, tho they have not the Spirit who speak them, yet (whatever Whitehead says in the close of that Paragraph) the Scriptures, by whomsoever spoken, we must obey, and not, as he says, deny.

In the next Paragraph he bids us note,

That the Comparison is placed upon the Spirit of Truth speaking in Man in the first place, and through and by the Ministers thereof in the next place.

A wonderful opening, and amounts to thus much; The Comparison is placed upon the Spirit of Truth speaking in Man in the first place, and in and through Man in the second place: He con∣cludes (we suppose) from hence, as he should have said, the Spirit speaking in and through them, as in and through the Apostles, hath not lost its Authority and Power since it gave forth the Scriptures, therefore their Writings must be of the same Authority with the Scriptures. This were true, if the Spirit spake in us or them as through a Trunk (as the Devil did through the Images when he uttered his Oracles) but he speaks in us or them, whilst he assists us in our Speakings and Writings; so that 'tis not the Spirit, but we that speak and write by the assistance of Christ's Spirit; which assistance is given us accord∣ing to what degree our Lord pleases (as Whitehead acknowledges) to us, in* 1.123

such a degree as overcomes not the Infirmities of our Nature so, as that we should not be liable to some Mistakes; but to the Apostles in such a degree as left them liable to none in their speaking, or delivering the Scriptures to the World; and the Miracles that they wrought were an abundant Evidence to all Men thereof.

And to shew that which he says in the next, viz.

That the Spirit of Truth immediately ministring in Man, is of greater Authority or Power than the Chapters are without the Spirit, is very vain or worse:

for which are those Chapters in our Bible, that are without the Spirit or its Authority, since every Chapter, sure they will acknowledg, is as much the Dictates of the Spirit as their Teachings are? And it must be an Atheistical Consideration of the Scrip∣tures, to look upon them, as Whitehead does here, without the Spirit.

* 1.124As for his Profession, that they acknowledg the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be of Divine Authority, and prefer them above all other Writings, &c. 'tis Protestatio contra factum; he only professing he does not do a thing, even whilst he is doing of it. Whereas he says, the Spirit of God speaking in the Soul, is of greater Efficacy, Power and Authority than the Scripture without, it is a captious Assertion; for Efficacy, Power and Authority, are not the same thing, and therefore as joined together, we can neither affirm nor deny: for of greater Efficacy and Power it may be, but not of greater Authority, unless they will say the Spirit is of greater Authority than the Spi∣rit, it being the same Spirit (we are sure) that wrote the Scriptures, which they pretend speaks in them. All this while he hath not offered to prove their Speakings to be of greater Authority than the Scriptures, tho he said it very ab∣surdly and blasphemously: For can there be any Authority greater than that which is Divine? and this Divine Authority Whitehead here saith, they (the Quakers) sincerely acknowledg the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testa∣ment to have. We think now 'twould be but just to forbear charging the Priests with ignorance, as he frequently does, since 'tis a spice of that which makes his Discoverer so confused here.

* 1.125Such Expressions as those above, thou thoughtest fit to excuse to G. Keith in a Letter to him; for there thou confessedst, thou hast been too short and dubi∣ous in some Words or Exprestions, as not fully explained in thy former Writ∣ings, which may easily be helped by some ingenuous or charitable Explication or Emendation.

First, by the way, Here is thy Infallibility left to its shifts, tho Thomas Dan∣son and his Brethren were once no Ministers of Christ for disclaiming of it; and F••x tells us, Whoever speaks a word, and not from the Mouth of the Lord, is a Witch and Conjurer. I hope, these short and dubious words, that need the help of some ingen••ous and charitable Person to explain and amend them, were not from the Mouth of the Lord; yet they were from the Mouth of G. Whitehead to be sure: and if thy Prophet calls thee Witch and Conjurer for them, tho•• must e••en take it patiently from one that spake every word from the Mouth of the Lord, unless thou wouldst have him rather recorded for the Conjurer than thy self.

* 1.126But, secondly, They are short, it seems; what thou sayest in thy Nature of Christianity, I am afraid was a little too long, viz. We have no Scripture Proof that Co••••st exists outwardly at God's right hand; which would have been as

good Doctrine as you could have wisht, if the Reader would be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 charitable and ingenuous as to throw out (No). And here where thou sayst, That which is spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any, is of as great Authority as the Scriptures, and greater, seems to be too short: Let but the ingenuous Reader be so kind as to put in that word (not) and 'tis admirable orthodox; and he is very uncha∣ritable, that will not help a poor Man out of the Bryars when a word will do it.

Thirdly, Thou sayst, Ingenuity and Charity might explain them and amend them for thee; methinks, this were work might very well become thy self. And this is all at present we have to desire of thee, that thou wouldst correct and amend those blasphemous words, we and others have charged thee with, i. e. re∣nounce them, and give us other words more plain and orthodox in the room of them. Brief Discovery, and Fr. Bugg have taken some Pains to shew thee a few of them; and we should be glad to see thee mending and correcting them: and when thou hast mended thy own, when thy hand is in, thou wouldst do well to be so charitable to thy Brethren, to amend few words of theirs: and if thou dost but once set up the mending Trade, we promise we will find thee mending work enough out of your own Authors for thy self and a Journy-man too.

G. Fox tells us the Priests say, The Apostles were Eye-witnesses, and under∣stood* 1.127 by Immediate Revelation from God, inspired with the Gift of the Spirit, more than any Man could hope for since: And saith, they do not pretend to any such Gift, nor depend upon any such immediate, miraculous Revelation from Heaven. To which G. Fox answers, Then all may see now in this, what you received, that hath been from Man, which is not from Heaven immediate, nor the Gifts of the Spirit, nor received the Gospel by the same means the Apostles did, who were not the Eye-witnesses as the Apostles were, neither have ye at∣tained to the same Knowledg and Understanding as the Apostles did, nor re∣ceived it from Heaven, &c.

But we deny this silly consequence, That because what we receive is not by immediate Revelation, therefore it must be from Man (tho Man may be a means by which it is received) and that it is not from Heaven, nor the Gift of the Spirit, nor the Gospel neither, because not received by the same means the A∣postles received it (to let go the nonsense that the Apostles received the Gospel by means, and yet immediately, viz. without means) for the Gospel is the same, whether received by the Ministry of Men, or without it: for what∣ever those Holy Men of God, the Prophets and Apostles, have through the Assistance of the Spirit written and sent down to us, we consonantly there∣unto preach unto our People; and therefore may truly say, As they delivered, so we preach, and so ye believed. But alas, it seems it cannot be the Gospel we received, because we are not Eye-witnesses, as the Apostles were; we cannot say with St. John, That which was from the beginning, which we have seen with* 1.128 our Eyes, and our Hands have handled of the word of Life: Because we had the fortune to be born sixteen hundred years after the Gospel was preached and confirmed, and so wanted the Happiness of a personal Converse with our Sa∣viour, and had not the honour to feast with him in Cana, to be with him in the Mount, in Galilee, in Samaria, to see the Draught of Fishes, the Multiplication of Loaves, and all his other Miracles; because we did not see him in the Gar∣den, upon the Cross, after his Resurrection, or when he actually ascended into

Heaven; or at least were not wrapt up into the third Heaven with St. Paul, and had not the abundance of Revelations that he had, therefore we know nothing of the Gospel, tho we have as rational an evidence as the nature of the thing will bear 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that which all wise men were satisfied with, who never expected to 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 ••to the same capacity, or to be in the same circumstances with the 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Di••ciples of our Lord as to this matter. But we fear 'tis another Gospel they pretend to than ours, their Gospel being only a manifesta∣tion of a Christ within, his inward Life, Death, Blood, Resurrection and Ascen∣sion, which they pretend to feel, taste, and see within them every day.

In the close of this Citation, George Fox would have all People judg, and so would we too, whether it may not be the same Gospel preached now by the Ministry of Men, and from Heaven too, that was received by the Apostles immediately from God; since we give sufficient evidence, that 'tis the same we preach, which we received from them, tho we do not teach immediatly from* 1.129 God, or by Revelation. The Gospel, he saith, is the Power of God, and therefore immediate. 'Tis true, the Gospel is stiled both the Power and Wis∣dom of God; and they are immediatly in God, for they are God. But then, that the Gospel (which had a beginning) is so called, is not properly, but figu∣ratively, as the Cause may be predicated of the Instrument; for the Gospel is an Instrument of God's Power and Wisdom for the Salvation of Believers. It may innocently enough be said, Preaching the Word of God by a lawful Mi∣nister is the Power of God, because the Power of God makes use of this means for the conversion of Thousands; but then 'tis meant secondarily or subordi∣nately, not originally and supremely.

There is a heavy complaint made for our omitting (after these words, They are in the same Power, Understanding, Knowledg and immediate Revelation from Heaven, that the Apostles were in) those in the close of the Sentence, That un∣derstand the Gospel; as also those, And they that be in another cannot understand it. Which amounts to thus much: Every one that understands the Gospel, is in the same Power, Understanding, Knowledg, and immediate Revelation from Heaven, that the Apostles were in; and they that are not can never understand the Gospel; when 'tis evident a man may understand the meaning of the Gos∣pel by the help of common Illumination without any special enlightning, much more without immediate Revelation from Heaven. But this is their general Sen∣timent and Opinion: Geo. Fox says the same with Whitehead, not only here, but in his Journal, p. 22. and Pen in his Answer to Faldo, p. 58, 64. Now for the honour of the Scriptures, that they may not ly under the Popish Imputation of so great obscurity, we shall prove that they who are not in the same Power, Understanding, Knowledg, and immediate Revelation from Heaven that the A∣postles were in, may yet understand the sense of the Scriptures in things neces∣sary to Salvation.

The Scriptures are plain in themselves; a Lamp unto our Feet, and a Light unto our Paths, Psal. 119. 105. and their Words manifest their Sense to us, as other Writings do, if we have but the use of rational Faculties, and the common Illumination of the Spirit of God. And it were contrary to the Goodness and Justice of God to enact Laws, and make our Obedience to them necessary to Salvation; and yet propound them so darkly and obscurely, that none should be able to understand them, unless they enjoyed the same Power, Under∣standing,

Knowledg, and immediate Revelation from Heaven with the Apostles, which to be sure the greatest part of those they wrote unto, viz. the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, and others, never did. Besides, the Scripture obliges all to whom they are delivered to believe and obey, and therefore to understand both the Promises and Precepts thereof, tho they have not attained to the same Understanding, Knowledg, and immediate Revelation from Heaven which the Apostles had; nay, wicked men, who are far from any such Know∣ledg and Revelation, &c. are yet bound, if they have the Scriptures, to under∣stand them, since they sin if they do not; Mat. 22. 19. Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures, says Christ to the Sadduces; and the consequence is evident, be∣cause God never obliges to an Impossibility.

Besides, they will not sure deny, but we may understand the Scriptures of St. Whitehead, St. Pen, St. Fox, and St. Burroughs, without the same degree of the Spirit the Apostles were acted by; and why not of St. Peter and St. Paul, who sure were able to speak as clearly and intelligibly as the former? We under∣stand well enough what the Friends mean, when they say, Infant Sprinkling is from the Devil, and the Pope; when they say, the Priests are Devils, Dogs, Beasts, Hirelings; and many more such Characters drawn to the life by those Artists in Railing. See Fox, Hubberthorne, Truth's Defence, and many more. And if we cannot understand your Scriptures, why are we invited to read them, who are carnal, destitute of the Spirit, of the Spirit we hope they were wrote by?

Again; Did not Julian, Celsus, and Lucian understand the sense and mean∣ing of the Scriptures, and many Articles of our Faith contained therein? Did they not scoff and jeer at them? not sure at Ink and Paper, dead Letters, but the sense they imported? They knew the meaning of those words well enough, A Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and laugh'd at them as an impossible Fiction: They well understood the sense of that Scripture, 1 Cor. 15. 42, 43, 44. (even better than William Pen, who has allegorized away the literal meaning to a spiritual Resurrection) and therefore scoffed at it as a Romantick Dream. And Celsus (who, as Origen tells us, boasted that he knew all the Christian Doc∣trines) derided both the Holy Virgin (asking if God were in love with her Beauty) and the descent of the Holy Ghost in the shape of a Dove, the Voice from Heaven, the coming of the Wise men, &c. as may be seen, l. 1. p. 30, 31. Orig. contr. Cels. These sure were not in the same Power, Understanding, Knowledg, and immediate Revelation from Heaven, that the Apostles were in; and yet by a very common Illumination could discern the sense and meaning of many Scriptures, But we may instance in one more, and he a great Quaker too, that certainly was not in such Power and Understanding, &c. the Apostes were in, and yet understands the Scriptures well enough to his cost: the Devi•• we mean; for he believes them, and trembles.

The Scriptures he brings, p. 18. parag. 5. prove nothing but what we have owned before: Mat. 11. 27. No man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him; and hath not the Son revealed him to every one of us by the Scriptures? To the same purpose is that place, 1 Cor. 2. 9. And the things of God knows no man, but the Spirit of God: By the common Illumina∣tion of the Spirit he is enabled to understand the sense of that Revelation, and by a more special one to understand it savingly, i. e. to believe and obey it; and all this without the same Power, Knowledg, Understanding, and immediate

Revelation from Heaven that the Apostles were in. And we are taught of God, and by the Spirit (John 6. 45. Isa. 54. 13. Jer. 31. 33.) when we are taugh by the Scriptures, they being the means used for our instruction; which is all that is observed in the Margin of the old Bible (in Q. Elizabeth's days) by hearing of his Word, and inward moving of his Spirit, the Spirit cooperating with those means. And the following Note upon Jer. 31. 33. has only refe∣rence to that more plentiful effusion of the Spirit in the days of the Gospel than was afforded under the legal Ministration; which tho no body ever denied, or yet by granting shall need to render less useful and necessary the preach∣ing of God's Ministers, or the reading of the Scriptures.

The Priest had said,

Thou dost not speak in that degree of the Holy Ghost as the Prophets and Apostles did, that spoke forth Scriptures.

To which George Fox answers, p. 213. Gr. Mystery, Thou canst not know Scriptures, but by the same degree of the Spirit the Prophets and Apostles had. But p. 19. l. 14. Whitehead seems to boggle at this expression, saying, Now the Scripture (i. e. the whole Scripture) cannot be truly known ('tis like he means all the dark Visions, Mysteries, and Revelations, which no private Christian is concerned to under∣stand) but by a high degree of the Spirit, if not the same; but presently comes to confession that the true knowledg of the Scripture must be obtained by a degree of the same Spirit. Instead of the same degree of the Spirit, it is now a degree only of the same Spirit, which all know to be vastly different; and yet thus the words should have bin wrote at first, for they were so intended, says this excellent Vindicator, had not Fox's Infallibility nodded whilst he was writing, and so mistakingly wrote the same degree of the Spirit, for a degree of the same Spirit.

And now for a close of this Head, 'tis a thing much to be lamented, and ought by all sober Christians to be seriously laid to heart, that such persons as both the Foxes, Parnello, Eccles, and a great many more of the Gang, who can scarce speak or write good sense, should dare to challenge Inspiration, and immediate Revelation from Heaven equal with the Apostles themselves, a thing not to be claimed without the greatest certainty in our selves, and the highest evidence given to Mankind; since the Glory of God, the Authority of the Scriptures, the State and Welfare of human Societies, as well as the Interest of the Christian Religion, and the Souls of so many thousands (easily intangled by such pretences) are deeply concerned therein. May we not* 1.130 be convinced from the accounts given us by many learned and impartial Writers (mentioned in the Margin) that evil Designs, inward Heats, melancholy Fancies, Satan's Suggestions, nay, the want of good Arguments, have frequently taken sanctuary under this sacred Cover? It were easy to make good this by Instances, some from He∣reticks in the primitive times, others from the Enthusiasts amongst the Romanists, and very many from the Secta∣ries of late days both at home and abroad; as the persons cited, and others have largely done. The Anabaptists flew high with this Claim, and it was* 1.131 their Blind to carry on every design: Their Founder Nich. Storke boasted of Dreams and Visions, rejecting the Scripture, as being a carnal and literal Rule, saying, God spake to him by an Angel, and revealed to him his Will in

Dreams, promising him the place of the Angel Gabriel, and the Empire of the World. See the Short History of the Anabaptists of High and Low Germany, chap. 2. p. 6. His Follower Tho. Munster pretended the like Communications from God, and would fain have gained Luther to his side; but he wrote to the Senate of Mulhaysen (a famous Town in Thuringia) to beware of that Wolf. John Becold, a Taylor, afterwards called John of Leyden, carried on all his Designs by a pretence of immediate Revelation from Heaven; and the great Mischiefs caused thereby are abundantly known, above a hundred thousand being kill'd by occasion of these bloody Inspirations. John Matthiz, or Matthias, the Baker of Harlem, had Secrets reveal'd to him, which God had not reveal'd to others, he being Enoch the second High Priest of God, and was in effect perpetual Dictator at Munster. Yea, Herman the Cobler profess'd himself a true Prophet,* 1.132 and the true Messiah. These, with Knipperdolling, Tuscocurer the Goldsmith, and many more of that Sect, pretended Inspirations from Heaven for all they did and said, and at all turns made known their Revelations to the People, which betraved them to Ruin and Destruction, which made Melancthon severely cen∣sure them, saying,

These Fanatical Dotages are accursed: And we (in opposition to such who assert new Revelations are to be expected from* 1.133 God) do declare, that God out of his infinite Goodness having revealed his Will to us in the Gospel, other Revelations are not to be expected.

And 'tis evident, Revelation has been pretended for very ill purposes among the Quakers themselves; one of them replying to his Creditor, 'Tis revealed to* 1.134 me that I owe thee nothing. Thus Mary Gadbury pretended a Revelation to get some Cloth from Mrs. Woodward: And there were two Quakers near Stukely in Yorkshire, whose Consciences bidding them destroy Original Sin, they appre∣hending their Mother was the Fountain thereof, went and murder'd her. A∣greable to the Practices of some of the Anabaptists beyond Sea, who being drunk with Enthusiasm (the spiritual Lunacy of this Schismatical Age, as a* 1.135 Learned Man calls it) committed many such wild Freaks: One of their Sect being in his prophetical mood, call'd his Father, Mother, Brother and Sisters to him, and commanding his Brother to kneel down, cut off his Head with one Blow, crying out, The Will of God is done. Thus John of Leyden, led by his prophetical Spirit, wrote several Conclusions, which he commanded the Preachers to teach the People; the sum of which was, That men are not tied* 1.136 to one Wife, but may have as many as they please (and he had fifteen for his share) which when they refused, he declared, the Doctrine was revealed to him from Heaven, and commanded the first Opposer thereof to be beheaded, which was done presently.

These, and the like Extravagancies made a Learned Man declare,

That* 1.137 it was a dangerous Principle to assert, That immediate Revelation, or Inspi∣ration, is not ceased, but is a standing and perpetual Gift in the Church of Christ; and that this Spirit is not like the Spirit in the Primitive times, to be tried by the Scriptures and Reason, but both of them are to be tried by it, as Barclay in his Theses asserts.

And he very well observes further,

That a∣mongst all the miraculous Gifts taken notice of in the New Testament, there is no mention made of Heroical Impulse, by which men were sometimes irre∣sistably moved from the Spirit under the Jewish Oeconomy to execute Judg∣ment* 1.138 in an extraordinary manner upon the Enemies of God: for God being

the Political King and Legislator of the Jews▪ did, as other absolute Mo∣narchs do, in some special Exigencies send men with extraordinary supra∣legal Commissions, to do present execution upon great and dangerous Offenders, without staying for the ordinary process by Law; but our Saviour (one end of whose coming was to put an end to the Jewish Oeconomy, and who came not to destroy mens Lives, but to save them) gave no such Gifts unto Men: There is to be no Fire from Heaven, nor no Phineas's under the Christian Dispensation; accordingly, the first Apostolical Ages of Wonder were utterly ignorant of killing Impulse and Zeal.—And let us, saith he,* 1.139 a little more particularly reflect upon that blasphemous Doctrine of the Qua∣kers concerning a spiritual Ministry and spiritual Worship, whereby they pretend that the Holy Ghost now comes down upon their Assemblies, as it did in the Apostles time, and moves them to preach and pray by inspira∣tion, without any regard to Condition or Sex.

Hence when they meet together, they sit hanging their heads in a silent dumb manner, till the Spirit, as they pretend, shall move some body, it is indifferent be it Man or Woman, to preach or pray: Accordingly they call their Preach∣ing, Prophesying, and precariously say, that they have the Spirit of Adoption by which they call God Father; and that the Spirit in the inspired Minister maketh intercession for them with unutterable Groans: that they groan sufficiently we grant, for sometimes in their Meetings they do nothing else; but if their groan∣ing or vocal Devotions be from the Spirit, how comes it to pass that the Spirit never moves them, as it did in the Apostles days, to pray and prophesy in un∣known Tongues? When we shall see in their Assemblys, as the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles did in the Primitive Christians Meetings, that they have the Gift of Tongues, and the gift of interpreting thereof; when together with the Gift of Tongues, we shall see that they have, as the Christians had, all the other miraculous Gifts; when we shall see that they shew themselves to be Pro∣phets, and spiritual in receiving what this Apostle hath written (in particular, that a Woman should not speak in the Church) as the Commandments of God: And lastly, when with all this they shall preach no other Doctrine than what the Apostle hath preached, and the Catholick Church received, then we will believe, if they be lawfully baptized, that it is the Spirit which is speaking in them, and that God is in them and among them of a truth; but till then we must believe them all to be Impostors, or Enthusiasts, or Blasphemers of the Holy Ghost.

Thus he, enough to silence all their pretences to immediate Inspi∣ration,* 1.140 which has been the common Stal•• of each fanatical Party to influence the People by; so the Libertines would boast of their Intimacy with God, and all* 1.141 their talk was de Spiritu, of what Communications they had from the Spirit (as Calvin notes.) Henry Nicholas, the first nominated Elder of the Family of Love, pretended to Visions and Revelations, and Conferences with Angels, and said, He was raised by the highest God, ••anointed with the Holy Ghost, god∣ded with God in the Spirit of his Love. Casp••r Swenkefield pretended to the Spirit, and Enthusiastical Dreams, called for spiritualness, and the Spirit, and the* 1.142 internal Word, revealed his fancys to Luther, who sharply rebuked him, but to no purpose, Pertinacy cleaving to the Plague of Heresy, says our Author: his Errors are there recited, they were condemned by a Synod at Norimburg, Anno 1554, and by the Confession of the Divines of Mansfield 1555. who tell us, he

had vexed the Church thirty years. That American Jezabel (as she is cal∣led) Mrs. Hutchison, deceived and drew away many, boldly asserting,

that her peculiar Revelations about Events to fall out were as infallible as any parts of Scripture, and that she was as much bound to believe them as the Scripture, for the same Holy Ghost was the Author of both.

It were endless to recite what is said of this sort of People, who all deluded the World with the Pretence to Visions, Revelation, and immediate Teachings from the Spirit, which was the shield they laboured to secure themselves by when assaulted by the Ministers of the Gospel; and therefore we have great reason to caution our People against itching Ears, and the being fond of new things, but more especi∣ally to avoid those who pretend to new ••ights and Revelations, as being but Wolves in sheeps clothing, remembering that 'tis recorded, to the great praise of the Bereans, that upon St. Paul's preaching they searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so. To the Law, and to the Testimony; If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them: which shows that this ought to be their rule to try all Doctrines by.

CHAP. VI.

Of the SCRIPTURES.

GEO. FOX in his Piece, stiled, News coming out of the North, written* 1.143 from the Mouth of the Lord, &c. saith, Your Original is Carnal He∣brew, Greek, and Latin—A learned Man reading this, won∣dered, and well he might, how Latin came to be an Original; and we cannot guess, unless it be to make a court to the Church of Rome, which has decreed the vulgar Latin to be as infallible and authentick as the Greek and Hebrew; and had he brought in the Latin Service, as well as the Latin Bible, we had been Al-a-Mode Roman. Who knows, tho not he, yet his infallible Successors may one day make that authentick too? Oh this Infallibility can do strange feats when it pleases. But he goes on,

Your Word is carnal, the Letter and the Light is carnal, the Letter—their Original is but dust, which is but the Letter, which is Death: and their Gospel is but Dust, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which is the Letter.

To this Geo. Whitehead answers here,

That the Letter it self is not made up of spiritual Matter, or of lasting materials, but of such as will decay and turn to dust.

A wonderful discovery, That your Gospel Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are not printed with never-failing Ink, and upon immortal Paper! he tlls us, in Innocency Triumphant, p. 17.

they mean no more than the Writings, abstractly considered as in Paper and Ink, and false Ministers, dead preach∣ing and commenting on them.

Well, George, if thou hadst but as much ho∣nesty as wit, tho in that there is but bare measure, thou wouldst not abuse us with such a trifling Answer; Was ever any thing properly called Carnal, that was not capable of being made spiritual, Carnality being only the want of Spirituality in a Subject capable?

And 'tis as improper to say, Ink and Paper are carnal, as a Stone is blind; would it not be a wise business for one to discourse of a carnal Dog, a car∣nal

Horse, a carnal Tree, or a carnal Block, as if there were those that could be spiritual? But further, who ever thought the innocent Letters of the Alpha∣bet, and the Scrivener's Bottel, should be accused as carnal, or Hebrew and Greek should have the fortune to be censur'd as carnal Languages, and not French, Spanish, or Italian, unless it was because Hebrew and Greek were the first Languages whereby the Doctrine of Salvation was conveyed to the World, without the least mention of Light within, unless with a note of infamy (if the Light in thee be darkness) O! 'tis this carnal Hebrew and Greek which has done us all the mischief, that has chok'd us with this Serpents meat. But Fox tells us, We Dogs, Serpents, Swine, feed upon the Letter, which is Death; tho we think 'twas never heard that ever any fed upon the Letters of the Alphabet, and a Bottle of Ink, and took them for his dinner; or how Pen, Ink, and Paper should kill any, unless he were such a Fool as to choke himself by swallowing his Bible. No, no, Quakers are not so silly, tho wicked enough, to think so▪ there's no question but 'tis somewhat conveyed to us by their Letters and Lan∣guages they have their spight at, as appears further by what he saith here,

Your Word is Carnal, and your Light is Carnal, your Gospel is Dust, Mat∣thew, Mark, Luke, and John, which is the Letter.

Sure our Word, our Light, our Gospel, our Matthew, Mark, &c. are somewhat else besides Ink and Paper; and if not Pen, Ink, and Paper, they must be somewhat con∣veyed to our knowledg by them. But he tells us, they mean only our dead preaching and commenting on it: so then, God be thanked, the Letter is alive again, and 'tis only our preaching and commenting on it is dead; tho Fox in direct opposition to him, says, 'tis the Letter is dead. But let us a little ex∣postulate with the two Georges herein: Why are they not as bold and plain with their own Writings, as they are with the Scriptures? are they not Pen, Ink and Paper as well as these? or are the Ink and Paper of Fox, and Bur∣roughs's writing made of more lasting materials than our Bible? How comes it to pass then that they are not Dust, and Death, and Serpents Meat, as well as the Scriptures? No, they are all messengers from Heaven, given from the Mouth of the Lord, sealed with the Eternal Spirit: What care is there to guard the honour of their own Writings (see Snake in the Grass, p. 102.) To you this is the Word of the Lord, says Fox, every where of his Scribbles. No, no, yours are not dead, and killing, Serpents Food; they are all Manna, Quail, Honey and the Honey-Comb, our Souls Nourishment, as Coal said of Fox's Book; a good stomach surely he had which could feed so savourly (as some Africans are said to do) upon Guts and Garbage, nay on Snakes and Serpents: In the mean time St. Paul's Scriptures are but Dust, Husks, Rottenness, scarce Dogs∣meat. 'Tis true, of late they give the Scriptures better names, but 'tis their cunning Artifice very highly to complement and caress this Favorite of the Peo∣ple, especially when they have some Act of Parliament to procure which may tend to their advantage; and when their turn is served, perhaps you may hear of them under their old Character, and they may be as much Serpents Meat as ever. That place, 2 Cor. 3. 6. which they often quote to depreciate the Letter of Scripture by, is understood of the Legal ceremonial Dispensation, which the Apostles were not made Ministers of; and in that place the Law is the Letter that killeth, and the Gospel the Spirit which giveth Life, as will appear plainly to them who attentively read the following Verses to the end of the Chapter.

Lawson's Brief Discovery, p. 9. saith,

The Ministers are Babylon's Merchants, selling beastly Ware for a large price, the Letter, which is Dust and Death.

A very high complement to the Ministers, as if they were no better than a compa∣ny of Pedlars that cheat the Country, selling the excrements of Beasts cunning∣ly drest up, for choice Perfumes: but our comfort is, we fare as well as the Ho∣ly Scriptures, for they are the beastly Ware we sell, as follows; the Letter, which is Dust and Death. Here George begins to open against the injustice and fals∣hood of this Quotation, saying, the Quotation runs thus, selling beastly Ware for a large Price, all the week time heaping up a rabble of Notions into the Brain: And there he stops, as Balaam's Ass could be got no further for the Sword; truth is, had he gone any further, he would have felt the point of it, which was in these words, the Letter which is Dust and Death; so that beastly Ware relates not only to the rabble of Notions in our Brains, but to the Let∣ter also.

George says again,

This was never spoken of the Ministers without exception,* 1.144 but of the false Ministers.

Geo. we thank thee for nothing, we know who they are very well that are the false Ministers in your account, even my Lord of Canterbury, and all the Bishops and Priests of the Nation, that take Tithes, as Rob. Barclay; that Antichristian apostatized Generation, the National Ministry:* 1.145 And as Smith says, They are the false Ministers which preach Christ without:* 1.146 so that all the Christian Ministry in the World are here rank'd as well as ours, amongst a company of cheating Pedlars; And when he says, He ex∣cepts the Ministers that are not the false ones, he excepts none but them∣selves.

Br. Discov. p. 9. quotes Saul's Errand;

All that study to draw a living thing* 1.147 out of a dead, the Spirit out of the Letter, are Conjurers:

neither is Fox alone,* 1.148 for Lawson says the same,

The Priests of the World are Conjurers, raising dead doctrines out of the Letter, dead reasons, dead uses, dead motives.

We have proved before 'tis not the Scripture as it is barely Ink and Paper, but as containing a System of Doctrines necessary to be believed and practised for our Salvation, which they profanely call a dead Letter, which is yet that ve∣ry salutary Letter the Spirit himself hath written to his Church: Besides, how can we, or the Devil himself, draw any Doctrines Reasons or Uses at all, from Paper and Ink abstractly considered, as G. says, but from some doctrinal Pro∣positions contained under those Letters; and so there will be no such need to conjure to raise a living thing out of a living, viz. the Word of Life, or a spi∣ritual Doctrine from the Spirit's Letter: yet thus all the Ministers of the Gos∣pel, from Christ's time to this day, are villainously traduced by the yea and nay Men, as a company of Magicians and Sorcerers that work by the Black Art, that preach out of the Scriptures as out of a conjuring Book; and no doubt those Wretches would not be much concerned to see them burnt with the rest of those* 1.149 Books of Sorcery, thereby to spoil the Priests trade of conjuring by them.

Here again G. upbraids us of partiality, for leaving out some passages of Fox,* 1.150 wherein he distinguishes between the Letter and the Light, the Letter and the Spirit; while, by his good leave, the Letter containing such Doctrines as above∣said, is the Light as David says, the Spirit's Epistle to us, containing lively Di∣rections in our way to Heaven, the lively Oracles of God, which are quick and powerful, and therefore there needs no conjuring to raise Spiritual matter out of them.

As for what he adds, ibid. Mic. 3. 11. that the Prophet prophesys against such Priests that preach for hire, we can't imagin how it comes to be fetch'd in here, unless it be a device to start another Subject before us about Tithes, on purpose to divert us and draw us off from the pursuit of their Blasphemy: only, by the way, we say our Tithes are no Hire; neither did we ever hear that it was accounted Wages what was paid to a Man out of his own, of that which was due Debt before.

* 1.151Brief Discovery quotes Truth's† 1.152 defence, saying,

'Tis dangerous to read the Scriptures, which the Prophets, Christ, and his Apostles spoke forth free∣ly.

G. Whitehead clamours hideously, the Qotation is abused; for he says the* 1.153 words are these:

Tis dangerous to read, and to make a trade of that which the Prophets, Christ, and his Apostles spoke forth freely, and to give mean∣ings to it contrary than it is.

We have not now the Book by us, and there∣fore are forced to yield him his Quotation; neither do we see any great hurt it will do us as he hath stated it; for he makes three different Sentences of it, joined together by two Conjunction Copulatives, 'tis dangerous to read them, and to make a trade of them, and to give contrary meanings to them: so that with him every one of these is dangerous, both to read them, to make a trade of them, and to pervert the sense of them, which is Blasphemy. Nay further, we say 'tis a profane Slander upon the Scriptures, to affirm that they are dan∣gerous to be read by any, tho they wickedly make a trade of them, or per∣vert their Meaning; 'tis only that wicked Merchandize and Perversion that is so dangerous: nay, to say 'tis dangerous for Men to read the Scriptures, that read them with a design to pervert and scoff at them; such a design is dangerous, but not their reading, the reading the Scriptures being a good means to bring them into better Temper and Sobriety. 'Twas happy for St. Austin that he heard that Sermon of St. Ambrose, tho it's said he went with a pur∣pose to flout and jeer at him: and the Officers had no reason to repent them* 1.154 of their coming to Christ, though they came with a purpose to take him Pri∣soner, who were so happily taken by him; they could not, for never man spake like him. So then this must still go for a Blasphemy against the Scriptures, that* 1.155 it's dangerous to read them, as 'tis to make a trade of them and pervert them: As for what he says, 'Tis dangerous for any to read them for an unlawful end, we say 'tis not the reading them is dangerous, but the propounding an un∣lawful end is dangerous; such a man that hath such ends, may safely read them, though he may not safely read them with such ends. Come, come, G. never stand mincing of this gob, 'twill go down well enough with other Friends. Isaac Pennington very ingenuously tells us,

That Knowledg gain'd by the Letter of the Scripture makes a Man wise and able in his Head to oppose Truth, and brings him into a state of Condemnation, Wrath, and Misery beyond the Hea∣then, and makes him harder to be wrought upon by the Light than the very* 1.156 Heathen.

This Citation of Faldo, Will Penn quotes and owns. Well said Isaac, thou sayst the Knowledg gain'd by the Letter makes us worse than Heathens, and it must be very dangerous sure to read such a Letter that will make us all turn Heathens or worse; perhaps to Will. Penn this seems to be no fault to* 1.157 make us Heathens, since with him to be an Heathen and a Christian is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one: He says every meek and patient Man is a Christian; he argues largely for Heathens to be Christians.

Thomas Elwood justifys this, That moral Heathens are very good Christians,* 1.158 and pleads for his Master Penn at large: so that a Man may learn the Prin∣ciples of Christianity out of a Seneca, or a Socrates, as well as out of a Bible. Well, whatever Whitehead may think, if Isaac says true, that the reading the Scriptures will bring us into an Estate of Wrath worse than Heathens, we can't but think it sadly dangerous to meddle with them; and if Will. Penn be to be be∣lieved, the Scriptures are at leastwise needless, and 'tis but a wise caution to cast them quite out of their Meetings.

* 1.159Brief Discovery quotes Fox and Hubberthorn† 1.160 again, saying, You might as well condemn the Scriptures to the Fire as some of our Queries; and also giving this Reason, Because our giving forth Papers and printed Books, is from that same immediate Eternal Spirit of God. G. says 'tis a great Evil to condemn the Scriptures to the Fire, or any of their Books given forth by the Eternal Spi∣rit of God; as without question all those are that are authorised by their se∣cond Day's Meeting, nay, all that they have spoken or printed, or else they must be Conjurers that have so spoken and printed, if not from the mouth of the Lord: you may be sure Fox's Great Myst. and Burrows's Works were so, for they stoutly witness it in the beginning of them. May the Bible as well be burnt as these? Most impudent Blasphemy! To compare such Writings full of Ignorance, Blas∣phemy, Barbarisms, Nonsense, Contradictions, pouring out such Filth and Na∣stiness upon God's Ministers, not to be read but when a Man stands in need of a dose of Physick to make him vomit! Must such Stuff come in competition with that holy and heavenly System of our Religion the Scriptures, that are able to make a Man wise unto Salvation? Ah G. may we as well spare all the Bibles the World as such Writings? This thou cunningly insinuatest while thou only sayst, 'Tis dangerous to burn them both; but rebukest not in the least that blasphemous comparison, That 'twas as well to burn the Scriptures as their Writings; but speakest as if it were equally wicked to burn either, which Fox and Hubberthorn have spoke out plainly: yet sometimes the Bible is the best Book in the World, though now it be no better than a nonsensical Battledoor, and may as well be burnt. We have known the time when such a comparison as that would have made their Tongues have hist with an hot Iron; though we are accounted Persecutors, we rather desire their Tongues should confess the Blas∣phemy than so hiss for it.

'Twere an easy matter for us to pretend to immediate Revelations and Inspi∣rations, such as the Apostles had, as well as they, and we could cry as loud as they, This is from the Mouth of Lord, a Message from the Great God, and could prove it too by the same Argument that they prove theirs by; we are sure of it, and we could cluck and call Shoals of Followers after us among the credulous Multitude, as well as they: but we dare not be so bold with God, as to set his Hand and Seal to every Fancy and Dream of our own, and call it divine Revelation; nor dare we be so treacherous to the Souls of Men, as to loobel them into a snare by false Lights, or to hold up an Ignis fatuus before them, which God knows some are apt enough to follow, thereby to lead them into Pits and Precipices: could they prove their Revelations as convincingly as Christ and his Apostles did theirs, we should not envy them the comparison. What multitudes of Miracles were wrought by them before multitudes of inqui∣sitive and prying Enemies, confest by the most malitious of you; such as out∣did

all the pretended and apelike imitations of the Devil's Instruments. Moses's* 1.161 Serpent swallowed up all the Serpents of the Egyptian Sorcerers, and St. Paul could strike Elimas the Sorcerer himself with Blindness for all the power of his magical Inchantments.

Good Sir, immediate Revelation, such as Christ's and his Apostles were, is of greater consequence than to be taken upon trust; do you think we will be put off with such Miracles, as Fox's Journal boasts of, for the proof of it, such as were done no body knows where, nor when, having no witnesses to them; published 20 or 30 years after they were said to be done, or with such Tricks as Simon Magus is said to have done in his own name, which made some say he was the power of God, or such as were done by the Jewish Exorcists, In* 1.162 the name of Christ we adjure thee by Jesus whom Paul worshippeth: Because they saw St. Paul do so many Miracles by Faith in the name of Christ, they thought they might do the same by using it as a Spell or Charm.

Fox indeed thought it would add some Authority to his Delusions if he could commend them to the World with such a Divine Attestation, and therefore wickedly pretends to it; his Battledoor is filled with all the learned Languages which he tells you were as nothing, but as Dust to him; and G. underwrites his name to several Pages, to beget an opinion, that he could speak with Tongues: some Quakers have told us, they thought verily he had attained to it; several have tra∣velled to convert the Turk and Pope, presuming upon the Gift of Tongues, as the Apostles had; and when they came before them could speak nothing but Mother∣English, which gave them occasion to admire nothing so much as their Impu∣dence and Madness: and it was evident at last G. Fox for his Polyglot Battledoor was more beholding to his Gifts of Gold, than his Gift of Tongues.

One of them gets an heap of Wood, and lays it in order, and expects Fire from Heaven, as the Prophet Elijah had obtained at his request; but the poor Man went away troubled, and almost angry with God Almighty that he would not come at his call.

Eccles offered to fast a vye with any of us for 7 days and 7 nights: And a* 1.163 Jury found that Parnel had starved himself by attempting to imitate our Sa∣viour's Abstinence: Well, but tho these Miracles had the Misfortune to mis∣carry, if they will be thankful, we will help them to two that were Miracles in∣deed; one was wrought by G. Fox in his Professors Catechism,

And is not (he* 1.164 says) the Pope the Mother of all your observing days, &c.

Here's a Man con∣verted* 1.165 into a Woman, and that a Pope too; perhaps you may think this was Pope Joan that was the Mother of this observing days, &c. no, we can assure you, to maintain the credit of the Miracle, which the envy of some would overthrow, it was a Man, and the Name Pope Father signifies as much, else it should have been, Is not the Popess the Mother of, &c. If this will not pass for a Miracle, nothing will; you shall have another if you please, reported by Will. Smith:

Those things, says he, calied Baptism, and Bread and Wine, arose from the Pope's Invention:

Here we have a Man inventing and devising before he was born: for neither Pope nor Popery appear'd in the World till 600 years after the practice of them. We must needs own these to be Miracles, and to carry a suffi∣cient Evidence and Demonstration with them, but 'tis of their Ignorance and Folly.

Indeed Will. Catton in his moderate Inquiry abandons all Pretences to them,

and Whitehead does the same; says he,

They would have a Sign, that* 1.166 they might believe, but none must be given them but that of Jonah; for they are an adulterous Generation, that seeks one, saying, shew us a Sign, or work us a Miracle, that we may believe:

Profanely abusing that instance of our Saviour, who had wrought Signs and Miracles sufficient for their conviction, but not to gratify their Curiosity. Our Saviour was pleased to work a great many among the unbelieving Jews, but not a Sign can we get from these new Revelation men, tho we beg never so hard for it: Methinks they might give an adulterous Generation one for pity sake, and we will ask no more.

* 1.167Pen tells us, There is no need of Miracles, because they pretend not to a new Mi∣nistration. But, by his leave, he does to new Revelations. Truth is, they now begin to be ashamed of their pretences to them, and to lessen their Authority as much as may be; to disparage the Grapes, as the Fox in the Fable, because out of their reach.

* 1.168Shewen speaks as if they had done no good for the conviction of the World; a gross Untruth, tho it signifies little, if there had not been many convinced by them, if they have been an apt and a rational way of conviction, as they must certainly be, when God shall exercise his Almighty Power in working them for our conviction: Therefore to reject the Gospel after such means of Conviction, is the Sin against the Holy Ghost, that cannot be forgiven, as appears Mat. 12. because hereby we reject the best evidence that God Almighty could lay before us for our conviction.

Shewen (ibid.) tells us that Conversion and Regeneration are greater Miracles than those outward ones wrought by Christ or his Apostles. If this were grant∣ed, yet they are not so proper to convince, because not visible: they can be no evidence to an Unbeliever, because not seen by him. We are sure the other Miracles were the Evidence Christ and his Apostles appeal to every where; nei∣ther would the Almighty Power of God have been so often engaged to work so many Miracles to satisfy the curiosity of Spectators, as Juglers shew their Tricks, but to convince people of the Divine Testimony of those that wrought them.

* 1.169Fox says, they are in the same Power, Understanding and Knowledg the Apostles were in, and immediate Revelation from Heaven that they were in. There was one Petrus Johannes, a Franciscan ••riar, got many Followers after him, called spiritual men, Fratricelli: They all agreed their Doctrine was from God by immediate Revelation, and that all the Writings of that Petrus were revealed to him. Their Doctrines are there reduced to these 4 Heads:

1. Evangelical Poverty. They were not to pamper with delicate Diet, or spruce up themselves in gay fantastick Habits, no Lace, nor Points, nor Rib∣bons; they were to be all leathern men.

2. The Doctrine of Perfection. They had no failings neither.

3. The unlawfulness of Swearing. It seems nothing but yea and nay would down with them.

4. Opposition to the carnal Church. Would not any one believe a Metemp∣suchosis here, and that the Soul of Petrus Johannes was entred into Fox, and we were Quakers now after the Order of St. Francis? But come let us ask these Revelation-men a Question: Can they shew me any reason why we should believe them so extraordinarily inspired as Christ and his Apostles, any more than Munster, John of Leyden, or Muggleton? Either I must believe every one

that pretends to it, or I must have some reason why I should believe one rather than another. We would fain know what other rational proof they can bring of a Divine Revelation, than Miracles? Can we imagine that a Wise and Righ∣teous God should call immediately, and send persons into the World, for no∣thing but to be laught at, giving them no Gifts nor Signs, whereby they may be distinguish'd from other folk, and certainly known to be so called and com∣missioned, that men might obey them? We would fain know what other Signs* 1.170 are there that may convince a rational person, but Miracles? It was a Maxim amongst the Rabbies, that whenever God sent a Prophet to a People, he gave him a Sign or a Wonder, that the People might know God had truly sent him; and therefore the Jews would not be satisfied without a Sign from* 1.171 Christ: And St. Peter calls to the men of Israel, Hear these words, says he; I preach no other Jesus to you, than him that is approved of God by Miracles, and Wonders, and Signs done in the midst of you, as your selves know. And our Lord himself is pleased to make his appeal to them, John 10. 25. The Works that ••do in my Father's name bear witness of me. V. 37, 38. If I do not the Works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, tho you believe not me, believe my Works. And John 15. 24. If I had not done the Works that no man did, they had not had Sin: And if it had not been a Sin not to have believed the Son of God himself without a Miracle, sure it would not be a very great one, if we should reject the testimony of Cobler Fox without one.

Brief Discovery, p. 10. quotes Burroughs, p. 47. saying,

That's no command from God to me, what he commands to another; neither did any of the Saints which we read of in Scripture, act by a Command which was to another, not having a Command to themselves. Smith speaks plainly,* 1.172 The Scriptures have no authority of themselves to oblige us.

No, Will? We hope George Fox's Commands have authority of themselves to oblige, especial∣ly those weighty Commands about slit Peaks, short black Aprons, Vizard-masks, ••••immindish Hats, to thee and thou Men and Women, tho St. Paul's have none. How useless does that render the Scriptures to us! for if we have a Command in our selves from the same Spirit that gave them forth, that inward Command will be sufficient to oblige us, if there were no other in the Scrip∣ture; so that that were altogether ne••dless. But that's not all; for Burroughs* 1.173 tells us, They that take up a Command from the Scriptures, are in the Witchcraft. Good Mr. Burroughs! wouldst thou take such an answer from any of thy Ser∣vants, that God it seems must be forced to take from you, should you command them to do a lawful thing? No, Sir, we thank you; till we have a Command in our selves, thy Command is of no authority to oblige us at all. But thou wouldst take it much worse sure, if they should say, thou wert a Wizard, or in the Witchcraft, if they should obey thee. Or would Quakers take such an answer from their People, when they have been speaking to them from the mouth of the Lord? And yet that lewd Wretch is so bold and impudent, as to tell us, that when God Almighty commands his Servants, they are no less than Witches and Devils, and have familiar conversation with that Fiend, that take up a Command from his Scriptures.

* 1.174Fox jun. says, You took it from the Letter, and never received a Command from God for it: As if the Command he received from the Letter had not been from God. A Command it seems it was, but not from God. We wonder then from

whom it was; it was not sure from the Devil, as Burroughs intimated just now, when he said, He that takes up a command from the Spirit, is in the Witchcraft.

Whitehead speaks of Pen to the same purpose, saving,

No command in* 1.175 Scripture is any further obliging to any man, than he finds a Conviction upon his Conscience, otherwise men should be engaged without or against Convicti∣on.

And again be says against Faldo,

The reason of our obeying the Scrip∣ture* 1.176 is Conviction, Manifestation, and drawing of the Light.

So that of themselves they have no more authority than an AEsop's Fables▪ all the autho∣rity they have is from those Convictions and Drawings of the Light within: and no man sins in not obeying Scripture Commands, till he's convinc'd he's bound to obey them; so that their Power to oblige us does not arise from the Authority of God that gave them forth, but from our Convictions, that is, they have none till we think they have. Sure Mr. Pen forgot himself; for elsewhere he tells us,

'Tis a dangerous Principle, and pernicious to true Religion; nay,* 1.177 that it was the root of Ranterism, to assert nothing was a Duty, but what we were persuaded was our Duty.

We see great Wits have but bad Memo∣ries. We shall next prove that the Scriptures have authority over us, without such a Command, Conviction, Manifestation within us. Thus,

If there be a sort of men that have sinned grievously in not having obeyed the Precepts of the Gospel, which never had these new Revelations, Manifesta∣tions or Convictions, then those Revelations, Manifestations, and Convictions, are not the reasons of Obedience; but there have been, and yet are, many such: Ergo. The Minor thus:

St. Paul before Conversion, the Jews, the Scribes and Pharisees, sinned gri••∣vously in not obeying the Precepts of the Gospel, tho they had no such Revela∣tions, Manifestations, and Convictions: Ergo.

1. The Scribes and Pharisees sinned, it's evident; how many Woes are de∣nounced against them for their Unbelief? And that St. Paul sinned, 'tis as evi∣dent: how many bloody Crimes is he charged with? He breathed out Threat∣nings* 1.178 and Slaughter against the Church; and says Christ, Saul, said, why per∣secutest thou me? See how he charges himself; I was a Blasphemer, Persec••••••,* 1.179 injurious.

2. That they had no such Revelations, Manifestations, or Convictions, is as evident That the Jews, Scribes and Pharisees knew not it was their Duty to embrace that new Discipline, our Saviour says, That they did it ignorantly: nay, they had,* 1.180 as they thought, Manifestations, &c. to the contrary; for in all their opposi∣tions to Christ and his Gospel. they thought they did God service. The same may be said of St. Paul, he knew nothing of the Power of the Lord Christ, till he was informed by a Vision: Says Paul, Who art thou, Lord? and he answer∣ed,* 1.181 I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest. He also pleads for himself; Because I did* 1.182 it ignorantly.

As for the two nameless Scriptures G. W. mentions; which he saith we had left out, the first is an exhortation not to do those things whereof they were ashamed: The Scripture he means, we suppose, is Rom. 6. 21. What fruit had you of those things whereof ye are now ashamed? This is brought to prove, no Command in Scripture is obligatory any further than I have a conviction, &c. 'Twas fit we should tell the Reader this, or else he could never have thought so. G. we cannot but wonder what fruit thou hopest to gather from this Scripture, but Shame, who

wouldst fain prove such a Doctrine from it, which is every whit as apt to prove the contrary: and yet thou art not at all ashamed of such an abuse of those holy Writings. The second nameless Scripture, we suppose is Rom. 1. 19. which speaks nothing at all to the case of Conviction, but seems rather to countenance the sufficiency of the Light within without the Scripture, which some of thy Brethren have brought it for. The words are, That which may be known of God, is manifested within. But what, is there nothing needful to be known of Jesus Christ with∣out? what he hath done and suffered, and taught us for our Salvation? No,* 1.183 George, when Wad•• says our Saviour instructs to abide in such a Faith, which confideth in himself without us, thou tellest him plainly, That was false Doctrine, that is, thou meanest, since we have a Christ within.

Whitehead, p. 22. l. 4. complains of our Partiality: He tells us,

'Tis evi∣dent that E. Burroughs means special Commands, as to baptize, preach, and* 1.184 pray.

The same W. Pen says. But, G. Edward Burroughs's Proposition was universal, no Commands, &c. But the Quaker Commentary is quite spoiled, if you will not allow them a liberty to interpret Universals by Particulars, Ne∣gatives by Affirmatives; by no Commands he must mean some.

* 1.185He tells us again,

There are universal moral Commands and Prohibitions, which are universally binding to Mankind, but chiefly from inward Light and Conviction.

Which is very false: Had Man stood in Innocency, his own Reason unobscured (which is Light) might have been sufficient to have instruct∣ed him in the practice of Justice and Honesty, &c. but alas, now there's a Thief in our Candle, a thick Mist about our Understanding, that clouds it so, as that we are ready without other helps, to take the most brutish Immoralities to be laudable Virtues, as in those unscriptural Countries of Africa and America. There∣fore Almighty God in his Love to Mankind, the first Edition of his Laws being so blotted and effaced, is pleased to set forth a new one more correct in the Holy Scriptures, wherein we read them in a clearer and fairer character than in that old blur'd and blotted Book of Nature: and therefore the Scriptures being a clear∣er discovery of the Mind of God, may oblige us sure as well as that inward Light, that is so dark and dim, and somewhat more; and yet tho now our inward Light be so weak and glimmering, we have Light enough left us to discover, that this Scripture Revelation is from God, and to inable us to understand the sense of it in things that are necessary; and if we have not that special Revelation, whereby we are inabled to believe and love the Doctrine of it, and conform to it, yet we are bound to believe, &c. because 'tis our fault if we have not that special Light: for God will never be wanting with his special Grace to those that use that common Light as well as they are able; and if men do what they can do by their common Light, God will certainly help them with his special Grace to do what they cannot do without it.

* 1.186Whitehead says again,

They that go to prayer or preaching in their own wills and time, or perform any other Acts of Worship or Devotion towards God, without the moving of the Spirit of God, 'tis Will-worship, and not ac∣cepted.

But, George, we had thought a Christian could never have gone to Prayer, &c. but he must be moved by the Spirit, it being the Spirit's Command to pray always; or if thou meanest some inward Motion, we have met with none that went to Prayer, that did not find some inward motion and disposition to it: If thou meanest yet a more special Impulse of the Spirit, and that (the

Spirit being a Wind that bloweth when and where it listeth) we are not to ad∣venture rashly upon that Duty before we feel those powerful Gales upon the Soul, which we must wait for as the Seaman for his Wind; why may not a man pray that he may have such assistances?

But, George, how often do you preach and pray too in your own will and time, not at all waiting for the spiritual Blasts? you seem to have a power to command that Wind to be at your beck and lure, and can appoint time and place for it. Good people are told they shall have a precious Exhortation, and a devout Prayer at—Life and Spirit at such a time and place. One thing we wonder at, that you can never make this Wind blow into your Houses, where you have not a Prayer for a month or a year together: As Dan. Leeds informs us (who was a Quaker twenty years) in his Preface to the Trumpet sounded out of the Wilderness of America, p. 2.

That he remembers well his Mother being a religious Woman, used oft to take him aside to pray with her upon his knees; but as soon as she turned Quaker, he heard no more of that kind of exercise.

And your great Prophet Sol. Eccles, says in his Musick Lecture, p. 25.

Where they are (viz. the Professors) I was in Performances, in Family Duties, in Hearing, in Reading, in Fasting; but when I came to bend my mind to that of God in me, then I began to be a Fool, insomuch as I durst not give thanks for the Victuals that was set before me.

What thou sayest concerning Sacrifices and Oblations, we say that neither Prayer now is,* 1.187 nor offering Sacrifices of old was Will-Worship; and God did not blame that People because they performed those Services, but because they relied upon and trusted to them as the only Duty required of them for Salvation.

To these Quotations give us leave to add another, which is worth them all for* 1.188 its Antiquity; 'tis of one Almericus, Student at Paris, as great an Enthusiast as themselves: He cries out,

Now was the time of the Holy Ghost, in which the use of Sacraments was to cease, and all external Administrations; and every one was to be saved by the Inspiration and inward Grace of the Holy Ghost.

The Mendicant Friars defended this Doctrine, and Pope Alexander the 4th* 1.189 was their Protector: So that you see these Doctrines of Quakers are but the Sink and Drainings of Popery. We care not if we add another out of the Spiritual Exercise of the Jesuits:

'Tis the great perfection of a Christian* 1.190 to keep himself indifferent to do what God shall reveal to him, and not to determine himself to do what he hath already revealed and tanght in the Gospel.

No, Fox, thou art not the Father of the Quakers, as some have* 1.191 thought; but Almericus, and the Jesuits, and Papists, have only put out that Brat to thee to nurse it for them, and we own it hath battled prodigiously at thy Breasts, and grown to be a very formidable Monster.

CHAP. VII.

Of the RVLE of FAITH.

BRief Discovery quotes Parnel, p. 16. line 33. Shield of Truth, p. 11. say∣ing,

He that saith the Letter is the Rule and Guide of the People of God, is without, feeding upon the Husks, and is ignorant of the true* 1.192 Light.

Burroughs is also quoted, saying,

The Scriptures are not the Rule and Guide of Faith and Life, but the Spirit of God: This is the current Do∣ctrine of the Quakers, you may see it in Parnel's* 1.193 Collect. Smith's Primmer.

* 1.194 Fisher speaks plain English, and tells us, Scripture is not the Voice of God; tho the very Dribbles of a Quaker are from the Mouth of the Lord. The same says* 1.195 Pen, Reason against Railing, p. 32. yea all of them, Not the Scriptures, but the Light within is our Rule of Faith and Life.

* 1.196 By the way observe how this symphonizes with your Testimony before the House of Commons; the form of your Confession there was this, I believe with my Heart, and confess with my Mouth, that the Scriptures are a divine and* 1.197 exact Rule of Faith and Life; yet you must know the Quakers are always the same, and sweetly agree with one another, as their Brethren the Papists do, tho they have never so many Opinions, and differ as much from one another as Lines in the Circumference, yet you must believe they are all one for all that, because they meet in the same Center of Unity the Pope. So the Quakers, let them differ never so much, yet in spight of Sense and Reason, there is nothing but Harmony and Unity amongst them, because they all follow the same un∣erring Light, tho it lead them into never so many contradictions.

We would fain know whether their Light within be their Rule, when they call us Sorcerers, Devils, Gimcracks, Wheelbarrows, Tatterdemallions. White∣head says, The Scripture allows these Names, p. 68. l. 26. Thus far then sure you will allow the Scripture to be a practical Rule to guide and countenance you in the Work of railing and reviling, for the great Honour and Respect you give them, you keep them to do your dirtiest Drudgery, to authorize you in your Billinsgate Rhetorick. But because this Principle is so generally held by Quakers, that the Light within is the Rule, and not the Scriptures, and of so vast an Importance, we shall inlarge a little the more upon it: but first we shall lay down some preliminary Propositions.

1. We do not say the Scriptures are a Rule to us as written, tho they are so when they are written.

2. We do not suppose that the Revelation of the Mind of God in Scripture is a general Rule to Chr••stians, Jews, and all our Forefathers from Adam, be∣fore the Mind of God was committed to writing.

3. We positively assert, that neither God, nor Christ, but the Mind of God revealed to Mankind, either written or unwritten, is a general Rule. The un∣written Revelations, before the Scriptures were put into writing, and the writ∣ten ever since: And further we say, That revelation of the Mind of God, con∣veighed

to us by writing in all things necessary to Salvation, is the only com∣pleat and general Rule to us to whom it is so conveighed, for our Faith and Practise, and not God, nor Christ, essentially or substantially considered, nor any immediate Revelation; not that we deny all immediate Revelation in these last days, but we say God does not ordinarily bestow it, and that because he hath taken care in his Providence, that in this last Age there shall be no need of it, having provided the Scriptures as a Supplement of that want; neither if there should be such immediate Revelations to a Person now as formerly to the Apos••les, yet carrying not the same Evidence to us, to oblige us in our Faith and Practice, as the Apostles Revelations did, they can be no Rule to us; they that have them, and have good assurance they have so on God's Name, let them believe and obey them if they please.

1st. We prove the Light within can be no Rule to us:

1. Because it teaches not all things necessary to our Salvation: the Light with∣in could never have instructed us about the Fall of Man, or our recovery by Jesus Christ; how then could it have been the Rule of our Faith as to these Par∣ticulars? Sure you dare not deny but these are necessary to be believed. We had had a deep silence of this thing to this day, had we not had tidings of them in our Scriptures, or some other Revelations of them; we could never have known there had been a Spirit of Christ, or a Scripture, as they call it, for they dare not call it Trinity, as if there were some Magick in that Latin word, but from the Scriptures: And if the Light within be the same with Christ, and the Spi∣rit of Christ, as Quakers say, I must believe first that there is such a Light, such a Christ, and such a Spirit of Christ (which I cannot do but by the Scrip∣tures) before I can believe any thing upon their Authority, unless I must believe a Doctrine upon the Authority of a Rule, of whose Being and Existence I have no Evidence sufficient to induce me to believe it; so that the Scriptures only can be the Rule of such a Faith. The Truth is, the Light within is not the Rule, but the rational Sight, or Eye rather whereby we discern our Rule, advise and consult with it: How ridiculous would it be to say, Christ, or the Spirit of Christ, is our Rule (who is our Rule) tho his Laws are so? he's our Judg, and Guide, rather than our Rule, and he judges and guides us by the Rule and Laws of the Holy Scriptures.

2. Because we are yet at uncertainties where to find that Rule, that we may be guided by it; if the Light within be a guide to us, we would be glad to know whose Light it is that hath the honour, whether that Light in Whitehead, or Pen, or Burroughs, or Hubberthorn, for without our Compass how can we steer a right Course? and therefore we intreat you to tell us, whether we are to go to London, York, Bristol, or Rome, for our Christians Rule.

If they say the Spirit it self is our Rule, 'tis no more than to say, the Light within us, or the Light the Spirit of God ••heds into our Hearts, is so; for the Spirit, substantially considered, is no Rule to any; for so it guides and teaches none, but as it effects and sheds abroad a Light into our minds to guide and di∣rect us by (as is proved before) which Light being different in every one of us, for, as they phrase it, 'tis in every one of us according to our different incasures; so that we cannot have one and the same Rule of Christianity common to all, but as many Rules as there have been or will be Men in the World to the World's end; which was an inconvenience God Almighty thought fit to obviate in the

beginning by sending our first Forefathers a Revelation concerning the Seed of the Woman, the Sabbath, Sacrifices, and other Doctrines of Faith and Means of Worship, a settled standing Rule they were to walk by; he did not leave every own to his own Light to hammer out and invent a Rule for himself: and now in these last Ages God hath given by a particular Revelation of his Mind, tho conveyed to us in ten thousand Bibles: any one that pleases may know where to find our Rule, 'tis in our Bibles; and if we had a mind to it, we could tell where to search for the Popish Rule, in the Tomes of their Councils; but we think it not worth our pains: but where to find the Quakers Rule, we should be beholding to him that will inform us.

Again, how shall I know which are those Dictates of the Spirit of God, that I may not be deceived in the choice of my Rule, seeing I have no Rule to judg∣them by. Will not every Fancy, and strong Inclination of Man, vicious or vir∣tuous, be ready to put in a Plea, for that honour to be accounted his Rule? One Man hath an unsatiable thirst after the glittering Glorys and Honours of this World, why may he not pretend to that Spirit of God that moves him to climb that Precipice? Another hath a brutal lustful Inclination, why may be not pretend he hath a vehement impulse of the Spirit upon him to commit For∣nication and Adultery, as a Speaker in Maryland, Tho. Thurston, pretended* 1.198 to a Woman when her Husband was absent in England? See Bugg's Pilgrim.* 1.199 Another that hath a violent inclination to Sodomy, as Mather relates of Clark a Quaker Speaker; why may he not pretend 'twas a motion of the Spirit of God lead him to it for love of the Creature? Another, whose fingers itched to be robbing a Till, or a Church, why might he not pretend, as one did, he was moved to it by God▪s Spirit, having no Rule to judg by but the Spirit in every Man? and you may be sure that no Man's Spirit will bring in its Verdict a∣gainst it selt.

If they say the several individual Lights in the several members of their yearly meetings (that make up our great Luminary collectively) is their Rule, what must poor Quakers do all the interval of this meeting, being all that while without a Rule, without Light (for it seems the Light in particular* 1.200 Quakers is too weak and glimmering) sufficient to guide them in their course? which was the reason, when some hard Questions were propounded to the Pen∣sylvani in Quakers the other day, their Light being so dim that they could not answer them by it, they were sam to send to London for more Light to resolve them by.

We hope they will not say 'tis their inward Light in specie, as abstracted from the several individual Quaker Lights, is to be our Rule to guide us. We say a Species operates nothing, as it does not exist, but in Individuals: it was not homo in specie that begot Geo. Whitehead, or Will. Pen, but some unhappy indi∣vidual Man, to be a Plague and Pest (God permitting) to our common Christianity.

3. Because this Rule is uncertain, and mutable. A Rule ought to be fix'd and steady: as we ought to have a rational Evidence that it was constituted so to us by a sufficient Authority (which their Light within hath not) so a Rule ought to be a certain standard to measure by, that never alters, as is the Scripture, the same for 1600 years together: but their Light within, how oft hath it turn∣ed even to every Point of the Compass?

Some years since their Light within taught them, that the Scriptures were Dust, Death, Serpents meat; but now it seems it teacheth them that they are given by inspiration, and they are the Holy and Sacred Scriptures: A few years since it told them their own Writings were to be preferred before them, but now we know not what Wind hath turned the Cock, they are the best Books in the World.

Sometimes it hath strictly forbidden to go to Law,* 1.201

Now as for our selves (say they) so many as walk in Christ Jesus, we have one Judg and Lawgi∣ver appointed to us by Christ Jesus; and we may not go to law with one another as Men, being come to Christ.

But in Serious Search† 1.202 it gives them a liberty; it says, some of them are necessitated to make use of the Law to maintain their just Rights and Properties. It was never christ's Faith to sue and contend, says Naylor, Living Faith, p. 7. We sue no Man at the Law, but are sued by them, Shield of the Truth, p. 3. But Tho Elwood's Light within taught him otherwise; In civil Cases 'tis no injustice, saith he, for a Man to recover his Due by Law, Truth prevailing, and detecting Error, p. 361. see Christianity no Enthusiasm, p. 108. cap. 7.

Sometimes their Rule is against fighting with a carnal Weapon, as in their Declaration to King Charles the Second; but we have reason to think their Rule will direct them to other things as soon as they have opportunity. J. Pennyman in his Remarks upon Christ's Lambs defended, p. 1. cites a Quaker Minister say∣ing, We direct all Peopel to the Spirit of God in them; and if that leads them to fight, I have nothing to say against it: this is in a Quakers Book where Foreign Letters are recorded, p. 4. Whitehead in his Lambs Defended owns it, p. 34, 35, 36, 37. see the Remarks p. 4. Burrows in a Declaration in the Name of all the Quakers,* 1.203 says, he might command 1000 and 10000 of his Saints in that day, to fight in his Cause, as the Pensilvanian Quakers did for their Sloop; but* 1.204 then it was as Magistrates, not as Quakers. Wars belonged to the Jewish Ad∣ministration,† 1.205 which had its End, says Geo. Bishop in his Looking-glass, p. 203. Quakers deny that it is lawful for Christians to fight and kill one another in fighting. Barclay in Q. no Popery, p. 100. But others of them have both allow∣ed and followed Wars; and John Tompson, owned by others as a Quaker, was Master of a Ship, fought stoutly, and killed many of the Dutch; Tyranny and Hypocrisy Detected, p. 22. see Christianity no Enthusiasm, Cap. 7. p. 108.

The Spirit in Quaker Plainness, p. 23, 24. tells them, the Distinction between the Father and the So•• is not only nominal, but real. The Spirit in G. Fox tells us another story, that Christ is not distinct from the Father.* 1.206

The Spirit in Whitehead teaches him, that God the Father, and God the Son were Coworkers. But in his Light and Life, p. 47. we see the Light face about a∣gain, What nonsense (says it there) is it to tell of God being Cocreator with the Father?

In Quaker Plainness, the Light tells us, p. 24. the title of Person without us, is too low to give to Christ; but their Spirit in Pen's Sandy Foundation, p. 15. changes its note, saying, the Son for many hundred of years in person testified. Thus the Spirit teaches one thing to day, and another thing tomorrow, and if it chance to hit upon it, the same as at the first again.

John Swinton, as we are told (Tyran. & Hypocr. detected, p. 39—42. and, Spirit of the Hat, p. 35) wrote a Paper in the express Motion of God, who

justified him in every tittle of it; and yet after this about four or five years, he retracted and denied the Spirit in which 'twas wrote, saving, 'Twas sit for the fire, and was done in an hour of temptation and weakness; the account is large and deserves reading, says the learned Author of Christianity ••o Ent••••••. p. 112.

Sure the Christian must do his business very ill▪ that goes by such a waxen leaden Rule that bends every way, and sits it self either to strait or crooked, as you please; things are true or false, just or unjust by that Rule, according as fancy or interest sways it; it hath authorized Tyrannies, and changes of Ty∣rannies, to be all from God Almighty; and when they obtained it, fawned up∣on, and flattered them as much as lawful Governments of late, which before it had condemned as Antichristian, as one observes.

4. The Light within cannot assure us of this Fundamental Principal of the Qua∣kers, that the Light within is to be our Rule, a general Rule to all of us, as Pen as∣serts, because that Light tells none so but Quakers: besides, that is to bear witness to it self, and resolves it self into this Argument, It is so because we are sure it is so: which is the ground that every Man hath for his Error; for every one that holdeth it thinks he's sure of the Truth of it, his Inward Light tells him so.* 1.207 G. Whitehead commends Ben. Furly's Letter of Retractation, where he says, That Actions of Men are sometimes influenced by good and evil Spirits, tho they perceive it not: So then they may casily think all Actions are influenced from the good Spirit, having no certain measure to try the Spirits by; and neither Pen nor Whitchead can tell (for want of such a Standard) any more than Furly, when they are acted by a good Spirit, and when by a bad.

5. To conclude, If the Light be our Rule, we hope no Quaker will think a∣miss of us for what we have wrote against them, for every Man hath the Light within him, and must act according to it, which we seriously declare we have here done; and if you should say what we have wrote is false and erroneous, How could we help it? It seems our Light ought to be our Rule to square our Actions by, which (God knows) we have done exactly.

2ly. We shall prove the Affirmative against Quakers and Papists, that the Scriptures are such a Rule as we spoke of before, tho this Truth be sufficiently vindicated by our Divines against the Romanists, and lately by G. Keith in his Deism of W. Pen; yet we shall, ex abundanti, cast our Reason into the Balance.

1. Then if matters contained in the Scriptures be such a Declaration of the Mind of God, that whosoever believes and practises neither more nor less as ne∣cessary to Salvation, shall be saved, then they are a Rule of Faith and Life to them to whom they are given; but they are so: Ergo. Psal. 19. 7. The Law of the Lord is perfect; viz. Such a Declaration as thus bounds us on both sides, or it could not be perfect if it did not bound us thus, viz. give Salvation to him that believes all things it makes necessary, and nothing more as so: Without doubt the Scripture is such a Rule; according to their agreement or disagreement to it, all things are right or wrong in Spirituals; for if a Man deviate from it in any thing it makes necessary, he's wrong and perishes; and if he touches it, and squares with it in all such Points, he's right, and shall be saved; hence 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. All Scripture is given by Inspiration from God, and is profitable for Doctrine, Reproof, Correction and Instruction; that the Man of God may be perfect, throughly furnish'd, &c. Howghil denys the word (is) to be in the Text, he tells us 'tis an addition of the Translator, and it should be thus, All Scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable, &c.

No Atheist or Papist could be more industrious to find out every little Criti∣cism, that they think may weaken the Authority of the Scripture, as if there were some Scriptures that were not of Divine Inspiration, speak out Man: Are there any such Scriptures, yea or nay? and tell us which they are, and rescue our Faith from its bondage to such an Impostor.

Thou Wretch, to go about to take away the Bread of Life from us, that Di∣vine Nourishment of our Souls, and think to feed us with thy whipt Bubbles, We could better spare the Sun than this Candle of the Lord, and have nothing left to guide us but the Quakers Snuff, or a few Sparks from their Forge; know then, tho 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be not exprest in the Text, yet the Conjunction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is there, tho thou hast made so bold as to leave it out to make the better sense of thy Blasphemy: shouldest thou have put in that Conjunction, what nonsense would it have been; it would have been thus, all Scripture given by Inspiration, and is profitable; the copula and, methinks should couple like Sentences; and the for∣mer part of the Text cannot be a sentence without a Verb: and if it must be like Sentences, the Verb in the former part must be is as in the latter; and so it runs as we well translate it, is by Divine Inspiration, and is profitable: rather than the Scripture should be a perfect Rule, Howgil would make it perfect nonsense.

2. The Scripture must be our Rule, for we are to try all things by it, and hold fast that which we find streight and right: nay by that we are to try the Quakers Rule it self, 1 John 4. 1. we are to try the Spirits; What, must we try the Spirit by the Spirit? 'tis evident we are to bring it to some Rule or Ballance, to find out its just weight and rectitude, for there are many Spirits that walk now about, and haunt our stuary ground, the Spirit of Muggleton, Fox, and Naylor; and there is one Spirit to be sure that challenges it as its right to possess it and dwell there: and by what rule shall we determine the Controversy but by Scripture? there's none of these Pretenders can challenge any greater Authority over our Faith than others, only the Scriptures, which are the Letters missive and circulatory of the Spirit of God to his Church, have such a right, which have their Authority confirmed by such a Seal as cannot be counterfeited by Men or Devils, and therefore may oblige us to believe them, and that Spirit which agrees with their testimony.

'Tis utterly false what Smith says, That the Spirit was the rule to them that* 1.208 gave forth the Scriptures. We say not the Spirit it self, but the dictates of the Spi∣rit, which were as much a rule to them when written, as when spoken to them.

This does not exclude the Spirit from having any thing to do to direct us what to believe and how to live; for the Scriptures are the Spirits Rule, given to guide us by: Besides, the Spirit of God opens our Eyes (too much closed up since the fall) so that we may the better perceive and believe the things con∣tained in the Scripture, and stir up our affections to embrace them: observe the Rule our Saviour sends us to, Mat. 21. 42. Did you never read in the Scriptures? Ver. 22, 29. Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures. Acts 8. 35. He began at the same Scripture, and preached unto them Jesus. Acts 17. 2, 11. Paul reasoned with them out of the Scriptures. Acts 2. what a long Sermon St. Peter preach∣eth there, from the 14th almost to the end, all out of the Scripture. Luke 24. 17. as also 32. he opened to them the Scriptures, Moses and the Prophets were the Text he preach'd on. Ver. 46. he carries their attention to what was written.

Joh. 7. 38. He that believeth on me (not as the Light) but as the Scripture saith. John 19. 37. another Scripture saith, all along they are sent to the Light with∣out them, to see what the Scripture saith. John 20. 9. their want of Faith in Christ's Resurrection is attributed to their ignorance of the Scriptures; strange, the Light could not have informed them. Philip corrects not the Eunuch for poring upon, and scraping in the Scriptures, as Fisher does in his Velata Revelata, p. 845. Such Men, says he, as the Scribes, are ever scraping in the Scriptures, neither does he call them to mind the Light within: Away with this dead Letter, this Dust will choak you, this Serpents Meat will poison you. Ver. 35. he opened his Mouth, and began at the same Scripture, and preached Jesus. But when shall we hear a Quaker begin a Sermon from a Text of Scripture? By the way, you see a Man may preach Jesus from the Letter, Acts 18. 24. Apollo was mighty in the Scriptures, the Scripture was the Sword of the Spirit, Ephes. 6. 17. by which the mighty Man and Evangelical Hero hewed down the Enemy before him, they were not able to stand before the Dint of his Scripture-charge, he mightily convinced them out of Scripture, ver. 28. Paul in his Dis∣pute about Justification, Rom. 4. 3. crys, What saith the Scripture? Rom. 11. 2. Wot ye not what the Scripture saith? he brings all his Proofs from the Letter of Scripture, Rom. 15. 4. all our comfort flows from those Wells of Salvation; all written for our Learning, that we through comfort and patience of the Scrip∣tures might have hope. And should these envious Philistines be suffered to stop up these Wells? 2 Tim. 3. 15. Paul commends Timothy that from a Child he had been well acquainted with this Rule; so that he became a Workman that needed not be ashamed. The Scriptures you see in the Apostles days, as many as were written, were the only Rule they appealed to. Fox jun. for above 200 Pages hath vehement Exhortations to mind the Light, but not a word of reading the Scriptures in that whole Book; Esa. 8. 20. To the Law and to the Testimony; if they speak not according to this word, they may pretend the Spirit of God, and a Light within if they will, but they have no light in them, says the Prophet. That such an one as W. Penn should please himself with such a Gimcrack, as to say in his answer to Faldo, By the Law and the Testimony are meant God and Christ: seeing then, William, we are saved by Christ, we are saved by the Law: 'Tis much Mr. Pool should forget to grace his Synopsis with this Criticism; if thou hadst any respect for Scripture, sure thou wouldst not dally and play with it so wantonly.

We conclude then that the Scriptures are a Rule to them they are given to, and 'twas never denyed by any in the Christian part of the World, but Quakers, besides Atheists, Deists, and Papists, and we envy them not the Honour of such Company.

Whitehead says, p. 23. l. 7.

They don't slight the Scripture; nay, p. 17. l. 4. They acknowledg them to be divine, and prefer them before all other Books in the World. We do them wrong to lay such an heinous Crime to their charge.

Alas poor Quakers! to be so hardly censured, when they call the Scriptures Dust, Serpents Meat, killing, and deadly, this is all for the pro∣found Veneration they have for Scripture.

When they say their own Speakings are of equal Authority, nay to be pre∣ferred before them, nay the Scriptures may as well be burnt as their nonsensical Scriblings: This is yet for the great respect and honour they bear to the Scrip∣tures.

When they tell us the Scriptures have no authority of themselves, not so much as that golden Legend of Father Fox's Journal, unless we have a C••m∣mand again from within; that is, they have no authority, unless we think they have: nay when they say 'tis Blasphemy to say they are the Word of God, and they are no rule at all to us: All is for the wonderful deference they have for those ••••••••ed Books.

For shame ••ir, after all the Wounds you have given to the Scriptures, to add Mockery and Scorn to Stripes; and after you have spit upon them, reviled and buffeted them, to put the Purple and the Crown upon them, as the Jews did up∣on their Author; after such Indignities, to cry out, O how we love and honour them! after the Treason to bestow the Kiss!

See Will. Penn's Courtship to the Scripture* 1.209 but especially Sam. Fisher's† 1.210: He calls the Scripture a Nose of Wax, and it's capable of being made no other, a Character he took from the mouth of a Jesuit, Andradius; but Quakers we hope like it never the worse for that: We could easily shew you that all the Arguments that Fisher and Pen use to prove the Scriptures are not the rule of Faith, are the same the Papists have used this 100 years; if they had been 7 years at School at Rome, they could not have spoke Italian plainer than they have done. A little further Fisher tells us, he and the Quakers have put it to the question, how it may be known infallibly that the Scripture is all of God, and not a cunningly devised Fable. He tells us of the uncertainty of Transla∣tions, the various Lections, and the loss of many Portions of them, which they needed not have taken such pains about, for the Papists have done that before; and Penn in the forecited place hath mustered up a great many more such Popi•••• Objections against the Scriptures, which were cast in our dish by Papists, and as often answered before Quakery was born; but all that you must understand is said for the great respect they bear to the Scriptures.

Reader, if thou desirest to see more of such respect to the Scriptures, see Parnel, p. 16.

You Teachers are doting upon Scriptures without, with your dark Minds, with the blind Pharisees seeking for life where it is not to be found. P. 18.

We can do all things without the Scriptures, or any thing without.

Solomon Eccles coming into a Church at London, naked and besmeared with T—d, carrying his ••ands fu••l of the same Filth, compared it to the Bible which the Minister carried in his hand into the Pulpit.

Fisher in his Velara Revelata, p. 845. says, Such Men as the Scribes are ever scraping in the Scripture, to find God, yet never know him, nor see his Shape. To call our love to the Scriptures a sensele••s Dotage, to compare David's Hony and Hony-comb, as he calls the Word, to a stinking Excrement, and our read∣ing the Scriptures to a Brute's scraping or rooting in a Dunghil, must needs manifest a mighty respect they have for those Writings. By the way, does not Fisher deserve to be accounted Angelicus Doctor, for talking of the Shape of God? how glad would some Papists be if he could shew it them, that they might draw his true Picture by it? Lorreto Market would go near to be spoiled by it, and most of her Votaries would come thronging hither sure to worship an Original.

But as a further Testimony of their respect for Scripture, hear what Smith* 1.211 says, Reading in the Scripture that there were some that met together, exhorted

one annother, edified and comforted one another, they observe and do as near as they can what is the Saints practice, and so conceive a Birth in the same Womb, and bring it forth in the same strength that others do; these are Bastards and not Sons, for these adulterous Births have provoked the Lord and g••••••••••ed his Spirit. What an hellish Sm••ak is this, a Belch sure from the bottomless Pit; to say that our meeting together according to Scripture, Examples to exhort, comfort, and edi∣sy one another, is no better than going to a Brothel-house, for there can be no∣thing but Bastards got by it, and adulterous Births: This may pass for another Quaker-Panegy rick upon Scripture.

Penn calls Searchers of Scripture (as Faldo quotes him, p. 113. and in his Answer Penn does not deny it) Lettermongers. We suppose, though he differ in expression from his Brother Smith, his intention is the same, he means Whore∣mongers, or Bastard-getters. All these Quotations have we brought to prove Friend Whitehead's Assertion, That Quakers have a marveilous Honour for the Scripture, though we believe he••ll hardly be so grateful as to give us thanks for our pains.

In a Testimony from the Brethren in London, met 66 together, signed Farns∣worth, Parker, Whitehead (see Brief Discovery, p. 11. l. 5) they say,

If any difference arise in the Church, we declare and testify that the Church with the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, hath power without the assent of those that differ, to hear and determine the same; and if any of ours will not submit so to be tried, nor submit to the Judgment given by the Spirit of truth in the El∣ders and Members of the same, being consistent with the Doctrine of such good antient Friends as have been and are found in the Faith, agreeable to the witness of God in his People, viz. the Light within, then we testify in the name of the Lord, that he or she is to be rejected and joined with Heathens and Infidels.

Mark we pray, if he or she kick against their Judgment, consistent with the Doctrine of antient Friends, and agreeable to the Light within: Here is no notice taken of the Scriptures, how agreeable or disagreeable soever it be to them. And p. 23. l. 26. yet Whitehead hath the face to say this makes no∣thing against them. It seems to be a small fault or none with G. to take away the Commission God hath given to the Scriptures to be Judg of Controversys in matters of Faith. The Question, G. is not whether the Church hath any Pow∣er in matters of Religion, which is all thou provest from Mat. 18. 17. and we know none deny it.

1. If it be exercised about indifferent matters in Discipline and Worship, we allow her not only a Judgment of discretion to discern what's fit to be im∣posed, but also an authoritative Judgment to oblige her Members to obedience, or else she would have less Authority over her Members, than every Master hath over the Servants of his Family.

2. As for things that are necessary to Salvation, we think our selves only obliged to submit our Faith and Practice to the Authority of God in the Holy Scriptures, and not to the Authority of any Church pretending to Infallibility, meeting to∣gether in Treat or in Gracechurch-street. So then that which we find fault with you for, is a profane neglect of Holy Scriptures, in determining matters of Faith or Doctrine: that your Church should censure its Members only for this cause, that you will not submit to the Authority of the Churches Judg∣ment, consistent with the Doctrine of antient Friends, and agreeable to the

Witness of God in them; and that all this while here's not the least mention of the Scripture. The reason of Submission to the Doctrine of their Church is, it seems, its consistency with the Doctrine of antient Friends, and the Witness of God in them. The Judgment of antient Friends, and a whimsical Witness called the Light within, fetch'd from Terra incognita, must be set upon the Bench, and authoritatively judg and determine all; and the Scriptures must be turned out of office for some disservice sure they have done the Quakers. Accordingly Keith was sentenced as an Heretick, not from Scripture, but from Friends Books: So Jennings told him to his Face, He was not to prove his Heresy from Scripture, but from Friends Books; and the question was not now, who was the best Chri∣stian, but who the best Quaker: and therefore they produced a Book of W. Pen's, instead of Scripture, to prove Keith an Heretick, and no Christian: And indeed it would be a hard task to prove a Quaker to be a Christian, if they had not somewhat else to prove it by than Scripture. See G. Keith's Heresy and Hatred, printed at Philadelphia, 1693. The Truth of this Story Whitehead only que∣stions, he dares not deny, p. 24. l. 6. Now, George, is all this nothing to the purpose, as thou pretendest? Do not all the Protestant World, but our newly espoused ones, and the Papists, resolve their Faith into the Authority of God in the Holy Scriptures, and not into the Authority of a Montanus, and his Pa••••∣clete, or the Roman Pope, with his Council, or Cardinals, or his Holy Gh••st he could send about in a Male, or the Authority of our English Pope Fox, with his Pigeon whispering Divine Doctrines in his Ear, like another Mahomet? This was a deadly Blow at the Head of thee, George, tho thou cunningly dissemblest it: Thou wert loth any one should take notice of thy broken Pate.

CHAP. VIII.

Of the Person of CHRIST.

BRief Discovery, p. 12. l. 10. charges Fox in Saul's Errand, &c. p. 14. for saying, Christ is the Substance of all Figures, and his Flesh is a Figure: and in Truth defending Quakers, p. 20, 22. Christ's coming in the Flesh is but a Figure. To this Whitehead, p. 24. l. 33. They mean by Figure an Example. The same says Father Fox, Saul's Errand, p. 8. He is the Example and Figure, which are both one. Whitehead proves it, because 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Greek frequently sig∣nifies Example. But, George, what sense is here? The coming of Christ was an example, tho it be good enough, Christ come in the Flesh is so. Again, what if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Greek signify Figure, and Example, must Figure in English signify so too? What if Liber in Latin signify a Child and a Book, must a Child in English sig∣nify a Book too? Did ever any understand by the English word Child to be meant a Book, or by the English word Figure to be meant a Pattern? Had he said Christ's coming in the Flesh was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it might have been understood to have meant Example, because that word is often interpreted so; but the word Figure never. George, why shouldst thou thus dodg and shuffle with us? for once be so ingenuous as to own your antient Testimony, or openly disown it, That Christ's Flesh is a Figure of Christ within. So Hubberthorn, and also Fox, Saul's Errand, p. 14. and Pen in his Rejoinder, p. 336. says, Those Trans∣actions of Christ were as so many facile Representations of what is to be accomplish'd* 1.212 in Man. And Whitehead himself learnedly proves it, because Christ was trans∣figured, which could not possibly have been, as he argues with great Quaker Subtilty, if he had not been a Figure. He says again, Men need not be direct∣ed* 1.213

to the Type for the Antitype, nor yet to Jerusalem, either to Jesus Christ, or his Blood, where our Jerusalem Christ is but a Type: And what could he be the Fi∣gure or a Type of, but a Christ within, as W. Pen above plainly? And White∣head cannot name any thing else, but their Christ within to be the Antitype; and so all that Christ did and suffered must be a Figure of what is done within; the Shadows of the Law that typified Christ were but Shadows of Shadows,* 1.214 and Figures of Figures; and the Person of Christ, his living and dying at Jerusalem, were no benefit to us, but as they figured and typified this Christ within: He taught as a Figure, died and rose again, and sits at the Right Hand of God as a Figure. And thus by making Christ without a Figure, they have made him a very Cypher.

Well, but tho Whitehead owns Christ's Flesh to be a Figure, he storms at it, p. 24. l. 25. when we affirm that he should say, Christ's Flesh is but a Figure. George, we have not that Book at present by us; we'll let that go as it will, we are sure W. Pen speaks plain enough in his Sandy Foundation, p. 26. Christ is but our Example. And again (ibid.) He's but our Pattern. And Whitehead owns Fi∣gure and Pattern are the same thing, viz. synonymous, p. 24. l. 33. But thou may∣est say this is by consequence only; because Pen says but an Example, therefore he must say but a Figure. Tho this consequence sufficiently affects G. Whitehead, who says, Figure and Pattern are all one; yet see a little further: Pen says plain∣ly,* 1.215 The Paschal Lamb was not the Figure or Type of the outward Christ, but of the Light within, of which Christ himself was but a Figure. Whitehead doth not deny* 1.216 but Pen hath the very word [but] there; he only denies that was the Quakers Doctrine, or that it was his. But George, was not this also the Doctrine of Hubberthorn? and didst not thou stoutly defend the same in Truth defending Quakers, as the Gag for Quakers, p. 67. l. 8. charges thee to have done? And is not that an owning of what Hubberthorn asserted, That Christ is but a Figure? But to compound the matter, supposing the word [but] be not in thy Truth defending Quakers, if thou wilt confess those Expressions of Pen and Hubber∣thorn were blasphemous, we will ask thee pardon for the Mistake, contenting our selves to have proved that you have owned him oft to be a Figure of Christ within, without the word [but]: for then he must be either the Figure of himself or of another Christ within, or only of some Graces and Influences Christ sheds in our Hearts, which are figuratively Christ: All which are Absurdities too gross for any but a Quaker, that would also advance Christ within to be that Principal, and render Christ without as a Shadow only.

Brief Discovery, p. 12. l. 17. quotes Great Mystery, p. 206. saying, The A∣postles preached Christ crucified within, and not another, him that was raised from the Dead, th•••• Lord Jesus Christ within, he that was manifest in the Saints, that was he, and not another; for the other is the Antichrist. If there be any other Christ than he that was crucified within, he's the false Christ; and he that hath not that Christ that is risen and crucified within, is a Reprobate; the Devils and Reprobates may make a talk of him without. Whitehead, in his Antidote, p. 28. says, We may believe the History of that outward Christ, but not trust in him as an Object of our Faith; and that the Light within is sufficient without any thing else. Pen, Reason against Railing, p. 32. allows only such an historical Faith. And, Truth defending Quakers, p. 65. Whitehead says, We are not to confide in Christ without us.

Reader, we have so many Quotations of that sort that offer themselves to us out of their ••ooks, that they are e'en ready to suffocate us with the stink of them. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 (Satan's Design discovered, p. 19, 25.) says, By preaching Christ in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the De•••••• gets his work done here on Earth.

Bayly, how rarely does he comment upon Col. 3. 1, 2, 3. Where Christ sitteth* 1.217 at the Right Hand of God.

Did Paul, says he, speak Truth and Honesty to the People, think you? or did he mock them when he bid them seek things that are above; or did he speak of Impossibilities to them? For if he meant up there, where the visible Moon and Stars, the visible Heavens are, how was it possible, or wherein was it any ways profitable for them to seek things up there, or what things were they there to seek?

How! has Heaven nothing worth seeking after? when there is hardly any thing else worth seeking, so long as God and Christ, and Saints and Angels inhabit there. They that do not diligently seek after things above, may (unless they repent) find a place too hot for them below.

Whitehead says,

Quakers do not find that God and Christ above the Clouds,* 1.218 as the Baptists imagin, at such a distance: for they never ascended thither to seek their Christ there themselves, to find him; and so they are like to be without both, while they tell us of a God and Christ beyond the Clouds, where they cannot come.

Whitehead says again,

We have no Scripture* 1.219 proof, that Christ exists outwardly at God's Right Hand. What or where (says he in a scoffing manner) is God's Right Hand, is it visible or invisible?

Ah, George, there is a time a coming when such Scorners of the Right Hand of God may find he hath a Left Hand for them. This is very the marrow of Quaker∣ism, and runs almost through every of their Writings: Christ within does all.

We have not done yet with their Christian Testimony of a Christ without them. Smith says,

The false Ministers preach Christ without; in the Folio* 1.220 Edition lately printed they have added the word [only] for very shame.

Fox says,

The Devil is in thee, and thou sayest thou art saved by a Christ without* 1.221 thee.

Ah, George, we cannot but be concerned for thee (tho we know thou hast as great an art in gilding over false Coin as any) to think what thou wilt do with this impudent and brazen-fac'd Blasphemy, how thou canst wash it over, so as to make it pass in so quicksighted and prying a World as we live in: If we should help thee out a little, thou must say nothing; for we would not truly be thought to be of the Trade. 'Tis but putting the word [alone] into this Quotation,

As the Devil is in thee, if thou thinkest to be saved by Christ without thee alone.

Thou mayest use the same Artifice with some other of thy Quotations, and they may pass pretty well a while, till they be worn a little, or those troublesom Fellows, the Snake, Keith, and Bugge, shall bring them to the Touchstone: However, having so Divine a stamp upon them, as Fox, Whitehead, and Bayly, with this Inscription about them, Tremulorum decus & tutamen; no doubt but they will go currently enough among the Friends, tho they were all Brass. We can't but throw another into the Scales to make good weight: 'Tis Howghil's; he says,

All you that have wearied your selves in* 1.222 seeking, amongst Graves and Tombs, for a Saviour; I say unto you, while you look without you, your Eyes may consume in their Holes, and your Ex∣pectations fail.

Sure this word outward is a great offence to the Stomach of a Quaker; an outward Word, and outward Sacraments, and an outward Christ. If they would also lay aside their outward Meats, outward Drinks, outward Clothing, the Controversy would soon be at an end.

Before we pass from this point, we must mind the Reader, that G. Keith was prosecuted in Pensylvania for preaching Christ without, as well as Christ within. Two of their Ministers witness this against him, and no other false Doctrine was charged upon him. The very truth is, 'tis this Christ without us is the only Saviour who saves, as by the merit of his Death, so by effecting the Graces of the Spirit in us, which are not substantially and personally Christ,

but called so by a Metonymy, as the Effect for the Cause: And Christ is not pre∣dicated of a Christ within, and a Christ without, univocally; for the Nature of Christ is only communicated to the Person of Christ without, while the Name is only given to Christ within, to his Graces and Image, by a Figure. So that here are not two Christs; for Christ without is only personal, substantial, Christ within figurative. There is a King at Whitehall, and there is a King in the Par∣lour; but not two personal Kings, only one that is personal, and the other that is figurative, being his Picture only, which is called so. And therefore to say we are saved by another Christ than that which is within, does not infer two personal and substantial Christs, but a substantial one and a figurative one, viz. his Image, Graces, and Influences, called so by a Metonymy or a Metaphor. And now to say, They are no Ministers of Christ that preach Christ without us, and The Devil is in thee, if thou thinkest to be saved by a Christ without thee, and Devils and Reprobates may make a talk of him without, are Blasphemies sure we can make no blacker by any aggravation. As to what Geo. Whitehead says con∣cerning these Exprestions wanting their due Points, and putting the words, that was crucified, in a Parenthesis, as well as several others in this Quotation, we have spoken to in the Epistle to the Reader.

But behold more frightful Apparitions still, which that Worthy Person the Author of The Snake in the Grass, in his most admirable Defence thereof, takes notice of, Part I. p. 131, 132. and Part II. p. 108. Burroughs calls our Christ we pray to, an Idol God, and a dead God:* 1.223 Atkinson, an Imaginary God, and a Carnal Christ; and Lawson, as Cassin charges him, p. 36. tells us, That the Lord Jesus, whom we profess, is accursed. Fox quotes the very Page of Cassin in his Great Mystery, p. 142. and answers it; but denies nothing of this Charge, That he should say, our Jesus is accursed. And yet the Jesus whom we* 1.224 worship, is that Jesus whom all the Christians in the World, and all the Angels of God worship. The Apostle saith, Such an one speaketh not by the Spirit of God, that calleth Jesus accursed. Vox faucibus haeret: Our Pens are ready to drop out of our Hands, while we are only repeating this Blasphemy. Whenever the Devil hath one too big for his own Mouth, for fear of choaking, he hath ever some Quaker or other (who never keck at it, tho never so great an one) to mouth it for him. Great God, to suffer such Venom to be spit upon thee by such a speckled Creature; for such an one to curse our King and our God, and yet look up, and not to be struck dumb at the uttering of such a Blasphemy! The Im∣punity of such a monstrous Villany, if we had doubted of it before, were alone enough to convince us there must be a Judgment to come.

CHAP. IX.

Of WATER BAPTISM.

BRief Discovery, p. 13. charges them with blaspheming the Ordinances of Christ, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Smith says,1 1.225 Our Baptism, Bread and Wine, are the Pope's Invention. Pen says,2 1.226 Water Baptism is no more in force than Circumcision. Fox says,3 1.227 Our Baptism and Sacraments are Cain's Sacrifice. Fox says,4 1.228 Your Baptism is carnal, and their Communion is car∣nal. Whitehead says5 1.229 in his Answer, Your Water, Bread and Wine is carnal.

Thou hast indeed, George, a notable art in giving answers nothing to the pur∣pose; for the Authors before cited say,

Our Baptism, our Sacraments, our Communion, are carnal, and Cain's Sacrifice, and invented by the Pope:

Now Water, and Bread, and Wine are not those, but the outward part of them, which with the inward and spiritual Grace make up the Sacraments; and hence they are not carnal but a spiritual Ordinance.

He tells us again, that Will. Smith says only, that Infant Baptism was of the Pope's Invention. Good Reader, see the Primmer as above quoted, The Child's Question was not concerning In∣sant-Baptism, but how it was concerning Baptism, Bread and Wine;

Why Child, says the Father, as to those things (those things sure were the things in question) they arose from the Pope.

We matter not what he says afterwards, 'tis that place we charge with blaspheming Water-Baptism, an Ordinance of Christ.

Whitehead justifies Pen for saying,

Water-baptism is no more in force than* 1.230 Circumcision; he tells us 'tis to be rejected, because it is shadowy, and of a pe∣rishing nature:

he knows we do not hold that Water, Bread and Wine are our Sacraments; what then if they perish, as long as the thing signified, which is the best part of the Sacrament, does not so? By such an Argument we might prove the Passover must presently have been abolished, for the Lamb was a perishing Creature, to be slain, and eaten up immediately; but sure there was somewhat signified by it that lasted a little longer, even till the coming of Christ in the Flesh, as the thing signified by the Elements of our Sacraments will abide till Christ's coming to Judgment.

In fine, one says, Baptism and our Sacraments are carnal, Cain's Sacrifice: Another says, Baptism and our Sacraments were from the Pope: Another, they are no more in force than Circumcision, and therefore to be laid aside. Our bu∣siness therefore shall be next to prove, they are Ordinances of Christ, and the neglect of them is a contempt of an Ordinance of Christ, and their scurrilous Reflections upon them a blaspheming Christ's Ordinances; and because Water∣baptism is a Sacrament they raise most and their chiefest Arguments against, we shall speak to that first.

We know the Cry is, Give us plain express Scripture for Water-Baptism: Nothing will pass with them for Scripture proof but what's express. John Stubs, in his Epistle before Whitehead's Divinity of Christ, hath these words;

Do the Scriptures speak of three Persons in the Godhead, in these express words? let us see where it is written; come do not shuffle, give us plain Scripture, let us see in what Chapter is printed Abstract, Relative, and Concrete;

while it's evident enough that Scripture-Consequences are as good proof as ex∣press Texts of Scripture: Do you think the Lord Jesus knew how to dispute with the Sadduces, and prove a Doctrine out of Scripture? Prove if thou canst, say those Cavillers, the Resurrection of the Dead from Scriptures. Christ pre∣sently proves it out of Exod. 3. 5, 6. as we find Mat. 22. 32. where his medium is God's saying, I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. If some of thy Brethren had been by, and heard our Saviour offer such an Argument out of Scripture to prove the Resurrection, would not they have retorted briskly, Good Sir, what's this to the Resurrection? give us plain Texts of Scripture that the Dead shall rise again: would not they have presently given it out (tho the Sadduces we find had more modesty) how shamefully they had run down and baffled our Saviour; and that he had not a word to say for himself, not one word of Scripture to confute them with, because he brought nothing but Scrip∣ture consequences against them. We would know what express Scripture you have for your Negative (as well as for several other Doctrines) that Water∣Baptism is not an Institution of Christ, and yet 'tis a Doctrine that Quakers be∣lieve to be Divine, which yet they only endeavour to prove by Scripture-conse∣quence, tho horridly forced and strained. Now let us see whether we can offer better to prove our Water-Baptism.

1st. The first Scriptures, for we shall here give you two together, are John 3. 26. They came to John, and said to him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jor∣dan, to whom thou bearest Witness, behold the same baptizeth, and all Men come to him. And, John 4. 1, 2. The Pharisees heard how that Jesus made, and bap∣tized more Disciples than John, tho Jesus himself baptized none, but his Dis∣ciples. Here we see Water-Baptism was instituted by Christ long before his Death, to be an initiating Ceremony, whereby Jewish Converts were admitted into the Society of Christians; so that we find our selves obliged to prove these four things:

• 1. That it was Water-Baptism that was spoken of in these Texts.
• 2. That hereby Christ admitted Converts into his Society.
• 3. That they were only Jewish Converts that were so admitted at first.
• 4. That all this was done by Christ's Command, and so was his Insti∣tution.

1. That 'twas Water-Baptism spoken of in the 3d and 4th of John; that it was an outward Baptism, and not a Baptism of the Holy Ghost, is clear, because the Pharisees, and John's Disciples too took notice of it: so that it could not be a thing inward and secret, but somewhat outward and obvious to mens obser∣vation; nay that it was not only outward, but by Water too, is as apparent, because we see it in those Texts of St. John compared with John's Baptism: the Pharisees, as well as John's Disciples are here offended, that Jesus made and baptized more Disciples than John, whose Baptism was undeniably such. The words in John the 4th without an Ellipsis, are read thus, Christ baptized more Disciples than John baptized; and what reason can we have for interpreting baptizing in the last place in a different sense from baptizing in the former, especially since the exception taken, John the 4th, was by the Pharisees, who neither cared for, nor knew of any other Baptism than that of Water? It had been an odd comparison for a Pharisee, Jesus baptized more with the Holy Ghost than John did with Water, who had never heard of that spiritual Bap∣tism; and had they heard of it, the Pharisees could never have had that honour for our Saviour as to think him so Divine a Person as to be able to baptize with the Holy Ghost, whom they also so maliciously reproach'd and persecuted. Fur∣ther it is said, J••sus himself baptized not; can it be said that Jesus himself bap∣tized not with the Holy Ghost? 'twas that chiefly wherein his Commission to baptize did excel the Baptist's, that he should baptize with the Holy Ghost, who indeed had only power to do it: so that it must be meant with Water.

2. That hereby he made Disciples to himself, that is, entred them into the Society of Christians; 'tis evident he did not disciple them for John, or enter them into the Society of his followers; for John's Disciples would not have been so much offended then, for such multitudes Christ had brought into their Master's School: John 3. 25, 26. they were envious, and look'd upon it as a competition between their Master and another new one set up amongst them; Rehold (say they to John) Christ baptizeth, and all Men come to him, ver. 30. He quiets their discontents, by saying, He must increase, while I must decrease; it had been an odd way of John's being diminished, to have such multitudes of Disci∣ples brought into his School by Christ. Again, 'tis evident, he did not by his Baptism d••sciple them to John, because John's Disciples and Jesus's were under a different Government, Mat. 9. 14. and the Disciples of John were offended at it, that they should be tied to so severe Rules of Mortification, as frequent Fast∣ings by their Master, while the Disciples of Christ injoyed a greater liberty, thy Disciples fast not. Again 'tis evident, he did not by Baptism disciple them for

John; for this would have lessened Christ, and made John the greater of the two, and Christ would have been but John's Minister and Chaplain, to bring him in Profelices, and John must have increased, and Christ must have decreased thereby. Again, the Disci∣ples of John that turned Christians, were sain to be baptized again, Acts 19. to ver. 7. Ver. 3. they had been baptized with John's Baptism; ver. 5. they were baptized again in the Name of the Lord Jesus; so then Christ's Baptism could not be John's. Again 'tis evident, John's Disciples and Jesus's were not the same, John 1. 35, 37. for two of John's Disciples left him, and followed Jesus; they being then different Societies, there must be a different admission to them. Again, this Baptism, as all other Baptisms were, was used as an initiating sign into a distinct Society under another Master; the Jews that were baptized unto Moses, were Moses's Disciples, John 9. 28. and those whom John bap∣tized were the Disciples of John; and why should not they whom Jesus baptized be the Disciples of Jesus? 'Tis therefore very idle for the Quakers to say, this Baptism of Christ was the same with John's, and so was temporary as his was; they might as well have said, it was the Baptism of Moses. Thus have we proved the second, That Christ made and baptized Disciples to himself, and not to John.

3. That they were only Jewish Converts that were admitted to Christ's Baptism at the first, for as yet Christ had not extended his care any further than the Jewish Church, till after his Resurrection, only to the lost Sheep of the House of Israel; and of these he baptized, and made Disciples, as M••ses and John had done before.

4. The last thing we are to prove is, That the Biptism of Christ mentioned in those Texts, was not a bare practice of Christ, in compliance with either Jews or John's Baptism, but an Institution and a Command of Christ: Our reason is, because it is said, John 4. 1, 2. Jesus baptized more Disciples than John; th•• Jesus baptized not, but his Disciples: And it cannot be understood how Jesus did what his Disciples did, unless they they did it by Christ's Order or Command; if they had run on headlong with∣out an Order from Christ, it could not have been said that Christ baptized, but the Disciples had baptized upon their own heads. 'Tis not said Christ baptized, and no more, for then it might have been look'd upon only as the practice of Christ; which is not per se obligatory without a Precept: but 'tis said Christ baptized, howbeit no•• Christ but his Disciples, to let us know there was not only bare Practice, but his special Order and Command to his Disciples, without which they would not have done it, nay Christ would not have suffered them, neither could it have been said that Christ bapti∣zed, if they had baptized without his Order; but it is ordinary to attribute that to the Prince himself, that is done by another according to his Command and Order; and there∣fore Christ not doing it himself, if he did it all (as the Scripture says) he must do it by commanding others to do it.

2ly. The next Scripture is Matth. 28. 19. Go teach and baptize, &c. We shall prove that this was the same Water-Baptism that Christ had instituted, John 4. He only here renews the Command, whereby he doubles the Obligation to, and inlarges the Com∣mission of the Disciples, now to go and disciple all, both Jew and Gentile, all Nation•••• and our reason why it must be the same, is, because we have a word in Mat. 28. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that signifies the very same that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 does in the 4th of John, to make Disciples, and the same word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 used there too: neither is there any reason why Christ should set up a different Baptism for one and the same end to make Disciples, from what he had appointed before to make Disciples by; had he intended so, he would certainly have given some caution, being about to institute a Baptism of another kind, lest we should mistake this new and more glorious Baptism of the Spirit to be no more than that other elementary one he had commanded before, and they had been used to to that very hour. He repeats the Command again, because the first Commission would not serve his purpose, seeing he was to ampliate and inlarge the Terms; having just now laid down his Life for all the Nations of the World, he puts a Clause into their Commission now, to instruct all Nations in the Rudiments of his new Religion, and then baptize them, that they may be the more capable of the benefit of his Sufferings.

3ly. The next Text proving Water-Baptism to be instituted of Christ, is Act. 10. 47. Can any one forbid Water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? Here are several Arguments to prove Water-Baptism was an Institution of Christ.

1. The Holy Ghost was received before as preparatory to this Baptism; so that the Baptism in the Text could not be the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, therefore of Water.

2. Can any one forbid it? If any of these Gentlemen had been present, would he not have started up immediately,

Can any one forbid? Good Sir, tell us who ever commanded us, when or where were we bidden to dabble the Disciples with a little Popi••h Holy∣Water? you an Apostle of Christ, and peremptorily inforce things upon the Disciples that are not now in force, (as our dear Brother W. Pen hath testified) to offer up such a carnal Cainitical Sacrifice to God, and tell People 'tis an Ordinance of Christ: behold we stand up here,

in the Power and the Spirit of the Lord God, to witness against thee. And we know not what St. Peter could better have replied to them, than St. Paul once said to the Corinthians, What I have received of the Lord, I have delivered unto you; and it be∣ing a Command of our Lord and Master, you are impudent Servants to forbid it, if the practice had been nothing but an exercise of Liberty, and pure Condescension, as W. Pen* 1.231 says in his Reply to the Answer to his Key, if it had not been settled by Authority.

3. St. Peter issues out an Authoritative Command, that they should be baptized, v. 28. he commanded them to be baptized: The imposing such a Command upon the Disciples, would have been an usurpation upon their Christian Liberty, as the practice of it would have been superstitious enough, if he had not had Divine Authority for his Warrant.

4. He commands them to be baptized, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as in Matth. 28. 19. and Acts 19. 5. but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, by the Authority of Jesus; and the Holy Ghost by varying the Ex∣pression here from that in those Texts, seems purposely to countenance this Interpreta∣tion: to command a thing to be done in the Name of a Person, was ever thought to be by his Authority; 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I have judged in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my Spirit, with the Power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver, &c. In the Name, and in the Power and Authority, are here all one.

4ly. Another Text is Acts 22. 16. Ananias said to Paul, Arise, why tarriest thou? and be baptized; for, &c. Anani••s leaves it not here to Paul, as a matter of Liberty or Conde∣scension to the Jews; here's a peremptory Command, as in the foregoing Citation, A∣rise, and be baptized, and that quickly too, why tarriest thou? And this must be Water∣Baptism, for he must arise, and put himself into a posture to go to some place of conve∣niency, as a Brook or River, to be baptized in, and not tarry in the least; he should not need to have got up and travelled in such haste for the Holy Ghost, who is not limited to any place or time.

Again, this was a Baptism he had in his own Power, as that was in the Power of the Disciples in the former Citation, or else they would not have been commanded to have been baptized; it had been both a folly and injustice to command them what they had no power to do: now the Baptism of the Holy Ghost was not in their Power, they could not give themselves that Baptism, nor St. Peter, nor Ananias neither; and if it had been the Baptism of the Holy Ghost that was spoken of in this Text, it had been a more proper me∣thod for St. Peter, Ananias, St. Paul and the Disciples, to have fallen upon their knees to God, and have prayed that he would bestow that heavenly Gift upon them, rather than bid them be baptized and take it themselves, as Peter and John had done, Acts 8. 15, 16. they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost.

5ly. Another Text is John 3. 3, 5. Except a Man be born again of Water and the Holy Ghost, &c. Whatever be the sense of being born again, we are sure that Water is Water, and not the same in this place with the Spirit of God; if it were so, the words would have this ridiculous sense, Except a Man be born again of the Spirit and the Spirit: further, if they were the same thing, a Copulative were needless, which ever uses to join two different things together, and not the same thing to it self; and if it be Water-Baptism, it must be of Christ; besides, there would never have been affixt such a Reward to it if it had not been a Duty.

2. We have a great many Scripture-Instances for the Practice of Water-Baptism, besides those before named; sure they will not say, but that the Apostles baptized as Christ commanded them, in J••h. 4. and Ma••ih 28.

1. The first Scripture is, 1 Cor. 1. 14. Crispus and Gaiu•• were baptized with Water, for St. Paul would not have thanked God, he baptized so few of them with the Holy Ghost; and those many other Corinthians, Acts 18. 8. can't be supposed to have been baptized any otherwise than those their Fellow Citizens.

2. The second Scripture, is Act. 19. 3, 5. Unto what were ye baptized? He does not ask whether they were baptized with Water, he did not doubt of that; no•• by what, but unto what? They answer, Unto John's Baptism▪ As soon as they were better instructed, they were baptized agen into another and better Service, into the Name of the Lord Jesus, by such Water as they had been baptized with before: For he sc••upled not the Water they had been baptized with, but only asks into what Discipline or Society, John's or Christ's?

3. The third Text, is Acts 8. 38. the Eunuch was baptized with Water; for Philip and the Eunuch went both down into the Water. In the same Chapter, v. 1••. Simon himself believ'd, viz. seemed to do so, and he was baptized too: they will not say sure, such a Wizard as he was baptized with the Holy Ghost▪ In ver. 1••▪ 16. he prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost; for as yet he was fal∣len upon none of them, only they were ba••t••••ed into the Name of the Lord Jesus. We think we shall not need to prove, that Water Baptism hath been the Practice of the whole Christian World, to this day, 'tis sufficient we have shewn several Com∣mands out of Scripture, for Water-Baptism, and also several Instances wherein it hath been practised in the Apostles times; but not one single Instance can we give in the Scripture, where its said▪ Go, and baptize, or be baptized with the Holy Ghost; not one Text, where the Baptism practised in Scripture, is called the Bap∣tism of the Holy Ghost. It would have been a very gracious Condescension to our Weakness, if by the Baptism of Water, so often mentioned in Holy Scripture, there had been nothing meant but the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, to have delivered it to us in more plain and express Terms, and called it in some place or other, the Bap∣tism of the Holy Ghost, and told us 'twas not Water-Baptism, was commanded or practised, since we, poor ignorant Creatures, are so apt to take Water for Water, and a Command for a Command, and had always been accustomed to that of Wa∣ter: Besides, such a continued Chain of Practices from Christ's Ascension to this day, must needs inser either Christ's Institution, or their gross Superstition. We have shewn before, that this Baptism was not John's; and if the Apostles were the Authors and Beginners of such a Practice, we would be glad to know whether it were in their own wills or no, whether they had a Revelation and Command in them∣selves, from the Spirit of Christ within. Edw. Burrows says,

For you to go* 1.232 without the moving of the Spirit in your own wills and strength, God hares this, and upon this is his wrath. And Whitehead says, To baptize, preach, and pray,* 1.233 they that perform these Acts in their own wills, without the moving the Spirit, they are not accepted therein, but rejected of God.

We hope they will not say that the apostles baptized in their own w••lls. and it was but a carnal C••••nitical, popish Sacrifice, they offered herein: If they had not a Command in themselves, supposing they had had none from without, they were Will-worshippers; and if they had, they must have it from Christ.

Again here was such a Privilege annext to this Water-Baptism, Regeneration, Re∣mission

of Sins, Titus 3. 5. Joh. 3. 2, 5. Acts 2. 38. and 22. 16. as proves it to be more than the dabbling the Face with a little common Water, as they profanely scoff, a Privilege cou'd never have been joined to it but by Christ's Authority. Again how∣ever it might have been practised in compliance▪ it could not have been imposed upon the Churches by Command (he commanded them to be baptized) of any Authority less than Christ's, without great Superstition.

Further we prove, that all the Scripture Instances can't be meant of Baptism with the Holy Ghost, because Baptism with the Holy Ghost in some measure, was always preparative to that Baptism; no doubt there were further improvements of the Mea∣sures afterwards, that were the Gifts of the Holy Ghost accompanying Water Bap∣tism, and they were to expect the Holy Ghost in the falled and most ample measure after Christ's 〈◊〉〈◊〉; some measure of the Holy Ghost was always required to sit and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Men for it And when it is said Acts 8. 16. as yet be was fallen upon none of them, it can't be meant the Holy Ghost was not come upon any of them in any measure, at all before; the Quakers themselves will not say so sure, who tell us the Light and the Spirit are in every one, that was evidently spoken, as appears in the 2 Uses following of the Gift of Miracles, that Simon so ambitiously affected. See Act 8 12 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they believed, they were baptized. 37. If thou believest with all thine heart. Acts 2. 41. T••••y that gladly received the Word, were baptized. Act. 16. 14, 15. Lydia, as soon as her heart was opened, was baptized. 33. The laylor and his whole House, as soon as converted, were baptized streightway; all this could not be without some previous Gift of the Holy Ghost to them, to put all out of doubt See Acts 10. 47. Can any forbid Water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? Farther, Baptism was appointed as a means whereby the inward Baptism of the Holy Ghost was given; and therefore the Scripture-Baptisn was not the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, Acts 2. 38. Be baptized, and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost, as also Fphes. 5. 26. that he might sa••ctifie and cleanse it, with the washing of Water, &c. and Joh. 3. 5.

Farther, Water Baptism was appointed by Christ, as an initiating Sign whereby Believers were to be admitted into Christ's visible Church, and no Man can be ad∣mitted into a visible Society, by a Sign that is invisible, as Baptism with the Holy Ghost is: By Baptism we list our selves into Christ's Company, take the Mil••ary wath of Fidelity to him; and being baptized, we are reckoned Christ's Soldiers and Se••v••••••s, Joh. 4 1. He baptized, and made Disciples, made them visible Disciples by baptizing them; which could not be by Baptism with the Holy Ghost, which is al∣together secret and invisible; the ••f••e as s••on as ever Men were converted, they were baptized▪ Acts 22. 16. Why tar••••est thou, &c. So Lydia, as soon as her heart was opened Acts 16. 14, 15 so he Jailor, ver. ••3.

〈◊〉〈◊〉 Baptism was the outward Sign, Mark, o•• Character, appointed by Christ, whereby the S••c••e••y of Christians are known and distinguished from all other Societies in the World: It were strange if any Society should be distinguished and known from an their, by that which is invisible, as Baptism with the Holy Ghost is.

1. 'Tis evident the Church must be a visible Society, being a City upon an Hill, Matih 5. 14 The Quakers themselves are a Society, distinguished by some Marks and Characters, o•• how should we k••••w who were of the Quaker Church, and who not? Th••y have their Marks I say, but far from Christ's Appointment they are yeaing and ••••ying and loudly decrying the outward visible Marks of Ch••••••••s In∣stitution. The Disciples of Moses, as they were distinguished by their Circumcision,

and therefore they were called by Horace, Curti Judaei; so by their Baptism▪ and John's Disciples by their Baptism, and Christ's by his: This was the Badge and ••••¦very the Christians wore, to let the World know whose Servants they were▪ and that they were not ashamed of their poor Master that gave it them; therefore when they were baptized, they were said to put on Christ, Gal 3. 17 and when Men renourced their Christianity and turned Turks, they laid aside this Livery, and took up 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Circumcision, and spit at the mention of the Name of Ch••ist, and from thence are accounted true Musselmen; so that Quakers by rejecting Water Baptism, ar••g•••• half way to Turky.

There was a memorable Advertisement from Dorsetshire; 'tis before the Answer to Mr. Den's Quaker, no Papist, in the Gag for Quakers, of a strange Discovery made o•• many Witches in and near Sh••rborn, they were near 200 of them at one Meeting, most of them Quakers, and Anabaptists; it tells us 3 Men and 2 Women, formerly Qua∣kers, committed to Dorch••ster Goal, where they were Prisoners at the w••iting of that Advertisement, confessed upon Examination, and since their Commitment, to sundry Persons, who have visited them, that when the Devil first appeared to them, and tempted them to be Witches, before he would admit them into that Sacred Ord••r, he caused them to renounce their Baptism; and truly the Devil had s••me reason for this, to make them tear off the Livery of their old Master, his greatest Enemy, before he took them into his Service; besides in Baptism they had renounced him, and all his Works; and he thought it necessary such a Covenant should be cancelled, before they entred a new League with him; and if Quakers had doubted the Truth of this, in those days, they might have gone and visited their Friends in Goal, as hundreds did, and been satisfied from their own mouths. The Devil, in our days, need not put most of our Quakers to the trouble of renouncing Baptism, who never receiv'd it, and so are in a more appropriate disposition to be taken into that Service. Margaret Bradl••, and Mary Langhorn, perhaps might commence Witches without such a So∣lemnity▪ these Quaker▪ Witches would have taken away the Life of their Brother-in∣Law Winder, by a false Accusation at Carlisic Assizes; they were eminent Teachers amongst the Quakers, neither did they ever disown them for their Villainy: See Snake, 305. 306, 307. and no doubt there have been hundreds more such Instances, that have bewitched multitudes into horrid Ravings, Yellings, Foamings and Convulsions, as soon as they have come into their Meetings: You may believe in every one of them, as well as those of Sh••rborn, the principal Article of the Contract was, if ever they received it, to renounce Baptism.

Oh how Converts of old, in Times of Persecution, would crowd to Baptism▪ though they burut for it; they would run through the Fire to Water Baptism, ambiti••us of the honour of being known to be Christ's Servants, which they were by b••ing baptized. Had Quakers lived in those days, they would never have been known to be Christians, by a little yeaing and naying only for a Mode of Speech, their Christ being no such Man as the Heathens were incens'd against, nothing but Meekness Patience, Temperance, Chastity, &c. which the Heathens were great Admirers of. No Brother Heathen would never have hurt a Quaker, they are these wicked Christians the Quakers cry out of as their Persecutors, as the Christians cried out of the Heathens, Quakers and Hea∣thens, are too good friends to fall out for a Yea and Nay.

As for their Objections out of Scripture, if need had been, we could have brought most of them as Proofs of the Doctrine they have brought them to oppose; thei•• Go∣liah Argument is from the 1 Cor 1. 14, 15, 16, 17. I was not sent to baptize, but to

preach the Gospel. We shall not need to prove, that this is Water-Baptism here spoken of, having proved it before: Besides they acknowledge it; which I believe they would never have done, but only that they might screw an Objection out of it against Water-Baptism; for hence they observe to us. Paul an Apostle was never sent to bap∣tize with Water, or otherwise, why should they not yield the same word signifies the same thing in other places? By the way let us premise, when a Doctrine is proved by such Arguments, the Command of Christ, the Practice of the Apostles, and the whole Christian Wo••ld to this day, 'tis not to be overth own by one Objection out of Scri∣pture, that may bear a sence as well agreeing with that Doctrine, as the sence that opposes it. Our Arguments should first be answer'd; which because they cannot do, they busie themselves in finding out difficulties: If this were enough, the Being of God, and Existence of Souls, Doctrines as demonstratively proved, as any in the World, might be overthrown; for the Atheist hath found difficulties enough to puzzle and perplex them: But though this way of theirs be a very fallacious Artifice, yet we stall no be afraid to grapple with their Objections, this mighty one in particular.

But why doth St Paul thank God he baptized so few, if an Ordinance of Christ: 'Tis evident he baptized some; and if he had not been impower'd by Christ to baptize, I would have been presumption in him to have bapazed any body. But why so few? As in the 15th. 'tis answered by himself, lest any one should say, I baptized in my own name. You may observe from v. 10 how childishly they began to range themselves into Sides and Parties; one was for Paul, another for Apollos, as if they had only baptized, and made Disciples to themselves, to set up as many Sects of Christians, as they had done of Philosophe••s, under their several Masters. Ver. 13. Do you think, says Paul, you were baptized into the Name of Paul, or Peter, or Apollos? I thank God, says he, as it happen'd, I baptized none of you, that you may have no pretence for such a Schism under my Name; he does not thank God they had not been baptized, but that he had not done it, for the abovesaid reason: But you will say then, su e here was a great stress laid upon Water Baptism, because there were so few thus baptized: A Consequence indeed! because he baptized so few, therefore there were no more bap∣tized. May not a Man as justly inferr the contrary, though there have been multitudes of them baptized, yet I have baptized but few of them, especially if you compare this place with Acts 18. 8. where a great many other Corinthians were baptized as well as Crispus and Gaius. But ver. 17. St Paul says, Christ sen: him not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel. We answer, every Apostle, besides a general Commission, had commonly a particular Mission: Their general Commission gave them Power and Au∣thority through the whole World to preach; bu•• because that had been too numerous a Parish, and it would have been impossible for them to have executed those Powers, by p••eaching to every Person in the World, it pleased God by a secret Motion and Im∣pulse of the Spirit, to send them into several Quarters, one to the Gentiles, another to the Jews, one in••o Spain, another into the Indies, to preach there▪ for the more orderly and effectual execution of those Powers in the World. St. Paul had Power and Authority in his Commission to baptize all, as well as preach to all; but that these Powers might be executed in the best manner, such as might tend most to the Glory of God, and the Edification of the Church, it being impossible he should preach to all, and baptize them too, by a particular Instinct of the Spirit, to appoint and order him to lay out his Abilities chiefly in preaching, that being a Work of greatest Difficulty and Importance, his Talent also lying most for that Work. And St. Paul might have said, I was not sent to preach the Gospel to the Jews, viz. by my particular Mission,

as he says here, I was not sent, viz. by a special Mission to baptize them: That the* 1.234 Apostles had such particular Calls and Missions, as well as universal Power and* 1.235 Authority, 'tis evident from the Scriptures.* 1.236

Or it may be Answer'd the common way, I was not sent chiefly to baptize: That* 1.237 was not the chief Part of his Commission, but to perform the more necessary and* 1.238 difficult Part of it, to preach, to dispute with, and convince Gain sayers; for our* 1.239 greater Parts and Abilities, as also greater Courage, was required then to baptize;* 1.240 yet he carefully deputed others for that Service, and so might well enough have been said to have baptized too, as Christ, 4 Joh. 2. and Peter also, Acts 10. 48. having commanded them to be baptized, it was certainly impossible the Apostles should have been able with their own hands, to have baptized such Multitudes they converted, Christianity had spread over all the Quarters of the known World before the Apostles left it, and could Twelve Men be thought sufficient for such a Task of Baptizing? And is it not agreeable to Reason, that when a Person hath a Commis∣sion authorizing him for two eminent different Services, that are impossible both to be performed by him alone; to interpret the Meaning of that Commission, to be, that he should lay out his Time, and Strength, in the most necessary, and important Ser∣vice, and depute some others for the rest, seeing it may as well be done by other hands as his?

What a stop and hindrance would this have been, if the Apostle, had slayed every where to baptize their Conve••ts▪ n••y▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was impossible, they being so great a P••t of the World, yet sometimes they did it you see, when it was no impe••••ment to them in their main Design: Had it not have been in their Commission to have done it at al., they had greatly sinned, if all the Children of the Province of Canterbury, were brought to the Arch-Bishop to be baptized by him, he might not say, when I was made Arch∣Bishop of this Place, and sent to this See. I was not not sent to baptize the Children of this numerous Province, though I have a Commission to baptize as well as any Parish-Minister of the Province, but chiefly to exercise a Patioral Care, of Govern∣ment, among them.

See Gen. 45. 8. It was not you that sent me hither, but God. Though they sold him into Aegypt, but it was principally God's doing.

1 Tim. 2. 14. Adam was not deceived, but the Woman being deceived, was in the Transg••••ssion, viz the Chief in it.

Mat. 9. 13. I'll have Mercy and not Sacrifice. Jer. 7. 22. I spake not unto your Fathers, nor commanded them, concerning Burnt Offerings or Sacrifices, but I com∣manded them, saying, Obey my Voice. Yet God had commanded those Cities under pain of Death. The meaning is, they were not the chief part of the Command, but rather the Off••••••ng and Sacrifice of a broken and cont••i••e Heart; 'twas the in∣ward part that was signified by this, that God chiefly required of them, and when the outward was performed without the inward, he tells them, he never required it at their hands, see Isa 1. 11. Suppose the Quakers should deny, that outward Sacri∣fices were ever commanded by God, or that the Jews did ever practise them, and they should interpret all that is said of Sacrifices of the inward, as they do of Bap∣tism, and should produce the Texts above quoted, and the First of Isa▪ to prove God did not command them, which are more clear and positive against outward Sacrifices, than that one Text they have brought out of the Corinthians is against Water∣Baptism: If they should not be convinced by those numerous Texts might be brought out of Exod. Gen. Numb. &c. with the Practice of the Jews from Moses's Time,

for the Proof of the one, as by those plain and pregnant Texts cited by us, together with the constant Practice of the Apostles, and all the Christian World to this Day, for the Proof of the other, we shall despair of ever finding out a Method of convincing them, but as one says, that of Bedlam: Sure enough, if the Quakers had such Texts as these forementioned, against Water-Baptism, what Shouts and Triumphs should we hear of? If God had said he never commanded Water-Baptism, he was weary of it, his Soul hated it, yet had they found them, they would have proved no more against outward Baptism, than the other did against outward Sacrifices, Come G. dissemble no longer with us, the true Reason, if thou wouldst deal plainly with us, why Water-Baptism is rejected by you, is not because the Scripture commands it not, but because you have no Command in your selves about it; and as for that Dry, Dead Letter, that Nose of Wax, the Scriptures, as you call them; no matter what they say to us, without such a Revelation: What have we to do with the Command that was to the Apostles? They are dead and gone, and the Command of baptizing all Nations died with them. But yet methinks, as the Apostles were bid to baptize all Nations, all Nations were required to be baptized, and all Nations are not yet dead, and gone; and therefore there should be some left alive, to baptize them, unless the Apostles were commanded to baptize when dead.

CHAP. X.

Of the LORD's SUPPER.

NExt we shall Vindicate the Supper of the Lord, by Bread and Wine, from their profane Contempt, that also according to them, is but a Trick of the Pope's to cheat the People with, a Shadow, for Substance, Carnal, Cainiti∣cal, and to be discharged the Service as well as the Passover,

* 1.241Brief Discovery, All which Abuses are justified by the common Voucher for* 1.242 Quakers, G. Whitehead. One would think the Words of St. Matthew, 26. 26, 27, 28. as also St. Luke, 22. 19. 20. should be plain enough to determine this Controversie, While they were eating, viz the Pas••over, Christ took Bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to his Disciple••, and bid them take and eat, for it was his Body, viz. The Sign or Symbol of his Body: He also took the C••p, and blessed it, and gave it them, and commanded them all to drink of it; yea, this was his dying Command, which ought to make the greater Impression upon us, if we truly loved him, plerique postr••∣ma memin••re: Yea, he condescends to give a Reason (though his Command is Rea∣son enough of its self) such an one, as adds to the Obligation of the highest Autho∣rity, the Obligation of the greatest Gratitude, for that is the Blood of the New Testa∣ment, which is sh••d f••r many, say Christ, for the Remission of Sin••. St. Luke tells us, it was to be a Commemoration, Ordinance, Do this in remembrance of me. St. Mark, 14 23 says, They all dr•••••• of it. St Paul, 1 Cor. 11. 23. says, he received the same Ordinance from Chr•••••• and that it was to continue till Christ's coming to Judgment; for they were to th•••• forth the Lord's Death till he come, why is it else called the Lord's Supper, but because the Lord himself instituted it? Ver. 20. And upon this Account he aggravates their Profaneness. 22, 23. Because it was an Abuse of an Ordinance of Christ, and threatens it terribly. 27, 28, 29, 30. He lays the Guilt of the Blood of Christ upon them, threatens them with Diseases, and Sicknesses in this

World, and Damnation in the other: Harsh Sentences, for eating a little common Bread, drinking a little common Wine, unworthily; besides, what a solemn and se∣rious Preparation is here required? 28. But let a Man examine, &c. We can't think such a strict Examination of our selves is required of every one before he eats his Dinner, and that for want of it he should be damned. Ver. 27. 'Twas not for drink∣ing of his own Cup, or his Friends, but the Cup of the Lord, unworthily; And must such a solemn Ordinance of Christ's be dress'd up with such disgraceful Titles, upon its forehead, Popish, Carnal, Cainitical, to expose it the more to the Scorn and Contempt of their Vulgar, and Rabble Quakers.

* 1.243Whitehead in Answer to the Snake, and in his Innocency and Truth, &c. stumbles at the Word Sacrament, and says 'tis not to be found in Scripture, applyed to these* 1.244 Mysteries. But G as long as Sacrament is a Word apt enough to express the Na∣ture of the thing, why shouldst thou make such a stir about a Word, and shew thy self as Pedantical as a pert School-Boy, with his Unde derivatur? Where canst thou find In∣fallibility, and Friend, Meetings &c. expresly in Scripture? Yet thou contendest ve∣ry earnestly for these things. We are sure the Word Sacrament is as Scriptural, and more expressive of the thing we use it for, than those you use to express an Order of Men by, set apart for Holy Ministration, viz. Conjurers, Thieves, Robbers, Witches, Devils, Beasts, Blood-hounds, Moles, Tinkers, Sodomites, &c. Can any thing be more expressive of the Nature and End of this Mystery, than a Word that signifies to bring an Holy Thing (such is the Death of Christ) to our Minds: But G. if thou wilt, we will compound with thee for this, we'll not be such Logomachists as to fall out for a Wo••d; give us but the thing, and call it, if tho•• wilt, by its Scripture Name, the Lord's Supper.

* 1.245He tells us again,

Till he comes, is meant, till Christ comes spiritually into our hearts; and Christ was not then come so to the Corinthians, and that was the Rea∣son of the Celebration of this Ordinance was continued so long.

We had thought Christ had been come to every Man alive, for he enlightens every Man that cometh in∣to the World; and therefore is come to all. But he says the Corinthian•• were not then the purest Christians; yet we doubt not, but some of them were as pure as the Quakers: We may presume so far••, of Paul, and Apollos, Cris••us and Gaius; and it were hard, if Christ had not appeared spiritually, to any one of that great Multi∣tude baptized with them, Acts 18. 8. Yet St. Paul speaks to all the Corinthians, What I have received, that I have delivered unto you. We hope also the Disciples of Christ, who all received, had some little appearance of Christ in them, as much as W. Pen, and thy self; and some Primitive Christians, and Martyrs, might be almost as pure as you, whoever took it, even when going to their Last Home, at Death, as their Viaticum, as a Cordial to comfo••t and revive their Spirits, and fit them for their Last Conflict, at a Stake, or Furnace. Truly G. the purer Men are, and the more Christ be come into their hearts, the more worthy they are: The Apostle intimates, such are the fittest to participate of this Ordinance, which you wickedly affirm 'tis but to continue till we are so. The Apostle exhorts, at the Peril of mo••t dreadful Judgments, to as great a Measure, and proficiency of Grace and Holiness, as they can attain to; so let them eat, and so let them drink, &c. No, says G.

When they are come to that measure, they need not do it.

One would think such Men have most reason to re∣member the Death of Christ, who have felt most of the comfortable Effects of it themselves; unless they will say, because they have Christ within them, they need no Shadows or Images, to remember him by; or because they have Christ Crucified

within themselves, they need not send their Thoughts, and Meditations, a Pilgrimage to J••rusalem, to reflect upon the Pain•• and Agony, the Contempt and Scorn, was suf∣ffered* 1.246 there▪ Smith says,

We believe that Christ in us doth offer up himself, a liv∣ing Sac••••fice unto God for us, by which the Wrath and Justice of God is appeased* 1.247 towards us.

Again Smith,

They are false Ministers, that preach Christ without. We that are pure Quakers, (which the Corinthians were not, it seems, not a Man of them) have Christ and his Death within us, What need we trouble our Memories* 1.248 about Calvary, or J••rusalem? The Lustful, Atheistical, Schismatical and Drunken* 1.249 Corinthians, ma•• have leave to remember, and shew forth his Death (because he* 1.250 is not yet come to them) if they please.

Whitehead says,

They were to wait* 1.251 for the coming of Christ, to make them better.

No doubt of it G. and the better* 1.252 they were, the Apostle•• say, they would be the fitter to receive these Mysteries, S••. Paul exhorts to worthy Receiving▪ neither does he set a Measure, or Limit to their Wor∣thiness: We a••e confident ••e never ••e••red they could be too worthy, though now •••• d••••s ••••••s the eminency and h••ighth of Worth, in some sort of People, that keeps them from receiving▪ as having now no need of it. Whitehead at last yields,

There might* 1.253 be a good ••••tention, in the first Proposals and Practice of the Memorials of Christ••, Death among the Corinthians to remember and shew forth Christ's Death, till they knew more of his Life▪ ••o set forth in an unblameable state.

G. if we understand thee ••ight, thou meanest that unblameable State that Christ arrived to: And there∣fore your perfect, ••inless Quakers, who have arrived to that State they need not trouble themselves any more with the Blood of Christ, having no more Sins to purge, or par∣do••, they are come to the unblameable State, and therefore they remember it no more, unless it be in scorn, to thank him for nothing, as by and by you may ••••e. What can this ••end to, but to evacua••e and render of none effect to these unblameable Men, the Death and Blood of Christ without them, therefore they have laid aside the Ordina••ce for the Co••••emoration of it, a mean and low Dispensation, a meer Shadow, now the Substance is come into them: Whatever they say they mean, this must be their lewd Atheistic•••• Thoughts▪ if they agree with their Words.

Whitehead, ibid.

Wonders at our urging Christ's Celebration of the Lords Supper, as Obligatory, forasmuch as we do not imitate that Last Supper in all its Circumstan∣ces.

He mentions only One, and that's the Passover, with which it was attended, which we do not celebrate with the Supper.

He might have gone on, and reckon'd up many more Circumstances, if he had pleased: We do not Celebrate in that Habit, that Posture, the same Time of the Day, nor to the same Number, nor to such Apostles. But then good G. you must for∣bear to Administer another Ordinance, which is your Preachments, in Breeches and Doublets, and Cravats: You must get the Sandals, and the Seamless Coat▪ which were without doubt, the Habit Christ preach'd in; the Substance of an Ordinance may be the same, though it appear in various Circumstances. As George Whitehead would be the same, with his Whigg and Beaver, out of a Barber's Shop, wash'd and comb'd, as for a Wedding; the same I say, as if he should the next day appear* 1.254 like Prophet Eccless, all over besmeared with Excrements; or as his Brother 〈◊〉〈◊〉 going in a Rapture from Paris to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that stood up to the Neck in mi••e and filth, to represent to his Companion, ••he fi••thiness of Sin he liv'd in. But G. we have a little more to say upon this Point, That Christ himself allowed it should be re∣ceived* 1.255 without the P••ssover; for, Did not Paul Celebrate the Supper of the Lord without it? And, Hath he not told you he Celebrated it as he receiv'd it?

* 1.256Whitehead says, Christs last Supper was a consummation and fulfilling of the Jewish solemn Feast under the Law; though that be precarious enough, yet if that were granted, must the Lords Supper therefore have its end, and determine presently? the quite contrary may fairly be inferred, that it ought not: the Antitype that consummates and fulfils the T••pe, always continues after the Type is vanished. The Passover is abolished, but Christ our Passover continues for ever; the legal Priesthood might be a Type of the Spiritual, under the Gospel the former is done away, we hope the latter will stand awhile not∣withstanding your Quaker rage against it: Can any one understand what thou meanest by consummating and fulfilling, unless to put an end to them, by somewhat that may abide, except thou thinkest the Supper of the Lord came for nothing but to destroy these Feasts and die.

* 1.257He says again, it was condescended to, because of the weakness of many: That is a very good Reason why it should continue still, because there will be Weaknesses among us, while we are on this side Heaven, for all the arro∣gant boasting of our Perfectionists. And we hope you will not grudge at the Ministration of this Ordinance unto us weak ones.

* 1.258He says again, he will not condemn them who are conscientiously tender in the practising that which they believe to be their Duty, viz. the receiving of the Sacrament. What, not condemn them George, for receiving so religiously a Carnal, Cainitical Ordinance, instituted by the Pope? But (ibid.) thou de∣sirest they may come under that higher Dispensation of spiritual Communion. Only we have one Question to ask thee before we part: Was that Sacrament commanded by Christ or not? if not commanded, thou oughtst to condemn the Administrator and Communicants too, as superstitious Will-worshippers, for setting up a way of serving God, that he never appointed; and if it were com∣manded, thou oughtest not only to forbear censuring, but highly approve of the Zeal of those that duly and conscientiously receive this Ordinance.

He confesses (ibid. p. 115.)

The Abuse of the Substance or Mystery doth incur Damnation, grievous Diseases, if you rest and stick in the shadow, and neglect the Substance.

Here we are very good Friends again, and so we shall part with him; for it's very true, to stick in the Shadow, and neglect the My∣stery, doth incur Damnation: But does not this allow us to use the shadow, or we could not stick in it; no George, I hope we shall not stick in it, tho we use it as a means to obtain the Mystery. Ah George! thou wast not in this good mind, when thou wroted'st that accursed Book, which thou called'st Light and Life; where thou vilified'st the Mystery, the Blood of Christ, laughed'st and jeered'st at it, as an useless and unprofitable thing. See p. 64.

The shedding of the Blood of Christ, let out by a Spear, was the Act of wicked Men, and the Spear an Instrument of Cruelty, which to lay the meritorious cause or stress of our Justification upon, is false Doctrine.

He might have known it was not only the Act of the Soldiers, but Christ's own Act also; ••lay down my Life for my Sheep, and lo•• I come to do thy Will, O God; it was not the murderous Act of the Soldiers, but the voluntary Resignation of himself to the Will of God, that made Christ's Death a Sacrifice, he gave himself a Ransom for all.

See Reader, if thou durst look upon such a Gorgon's-head, such monstrous Blasphemi••s; we can't but be astomshed while we are a writing them: See

* 1.259what Sport he makes with the outward Blood.

I pray, says he, what's the Price so much talk'd of, that both satisfies God, and saves Man?

The saving virtue of the outward Blood of Christ, he counts a Tale and a Story People have gotten by the end to talk of; though the Scripture says, we are bought with a Price, and we have Redemption through his Blood; this is but a little Scrip∣ture tattle and prate. He says further,

Whereas so much mention is made of the Blood-shedding, and so much Efficacy and Virtue seems to be derived from it. Mark, it only seems to be derived from it. Alas poor deluded Christians! How have you been cheated by the Evangelists and Apostles, and a Company of Hireling Priests, ever since the Apostles Days, to cause you to rest and rely so confidently upon a Sunbeam or Shadow, to catch at an Apparition or a Phantasm, a meer Semblance and Appearance.

But further, if you turn in you shall see greater Abominations than these.

Is it not (says he, ibid.) a Spiritual Supernatural Virtue, Power and Efficacy, that cleanseth, saveth, and justifieth; if it be, how then can it proceed from the shedding of the Blood outwardly?

If it perished and be not in being, Pag. 16.

Where is the Blood? is it in being or no, or did it sink into the Ground and corrupt?

How then does it cleanse, justify, redeem and save? Pag. 17.

That Blood that saves is in being, and not corruptible; for we are not redeemed with corruptible things.

Thou mayst remember George, The Lamb was slain, Rev. 13. 8. from the Foun∣dation of the World. He was not actually crucified from the beginning, but the virtue and merit of his Death might reach to the beginning of the World, though not then in being; and why not to the end of it too though not in being? The Purchase may be enjoyed either before or after the Payment of the Price; and if it be not in being, we may enjoy the benefit of it by Faith. He asks again, p. 55. whether any thing be of Eternal Merit or Worth, that is not everlasting; and then scoffingly upbraids us, as not being well agreed what Blood of Christ we should assign that Virtue and Efficacy to, whether to that which was let out of his Side by the Soldier's Spear after Death, or that Blood that drop'd from him in his Agony: and at last confidently resolves, that the Blood of Christ that cleanses us, &c. is the Life of the Spirit, and that this is the Blood of the Covenant. Here we have the outward Blood of Christ thrown out of Doors by Whitehead, as if it were but the Blood of an Ox or Sheep let out at the Shambles, only because the Scripture speaks so much of the Blood of Christ, and we must not affront its Testimony too much: They tell us of an inward Blood of Christ, a Blood never heard of before, neither in Scripture, nor any of the Writings of Christians from the Apostles times, till Satan in these last Ages of the World opened a Vein in Fox's Crown, and so furnished us with plenty of it,

Ah how willingly would you be rid of the outward Christ, as well as the outward Blood of Christ; as the Jews Joh. 9. 22. they would have thrust him out of their Synagogues long ere now, but for fear of the People, though in effect they have cast out Jesus of Nazareth as well as his Blood, only drest up one as Michael dealt with Saul, a counterfeit Phantasm, as like him as they can, which they call a Christ within. Ah George, thou wilt one day find it bet∣ter to have remembred the Blood of Christ at our Communion, with Raptures of Joy and Thankfulness, than thus to have remembred it in your Light and

Life, with Scorn and Contumely. No wonder you abandon and explode the Ordinance of the Lords Supper, which was instituted as a Commemoration of the outward Blood of Christ; which if it were as thou hast wickedly repre∣sented it, would not be worth remembring.

God open thy Eyes, and give thee Repentance; for belching out such Blas∣phemies against that Blood, and grant that thou mayst feel the Virtue of that which thou hast so much vilifyed, and experience the merit of it in the pardon of thy so great Blasphemies.

What G. Whitehead says, p. 27. ult. touching their giving Liberty to all, is so little to the purpose, that nothing need to be returned to it; the Charge (in the Brief Discovery, p. 13, 14. quoted from the Spirit of the Hat) standing firm against them: Fox saying,

What! Liberty to the Presbyter? No. To the Independent? No. To the Baptist? No. Liberty is in the Truth,

(which if it has any sense must be this; no Liberty to any but those that are in the Truth) equivalent to that of the Papists (as the Quotation takes notice) who say,

What! Liberty to the Sectary? No. To the Hereticks? No. No Liberty out of the Church, say they; No Liberty out of the Power, says Fox;

which amounts to the same: as one Quaker wrote to another in their bemoaning Let∣ter call'd the Spirit of the Hat; which plainly refers to a Liberty from external Coercion and Force, because it speaks of such a Liberty as they could give to, or take away from Presbyters, Independents and Baptists. And therefore when George Whitehead says in answer hereunto, there's no true Liberty but in the Power and Spirit of the Lord; and William Pen calling it a Spiritual Liberty, is nothing to the purpose, Spiritual Liberty being wrought within, not given by Men without, that which no mortal Man can give or take away; neither do Presbyterians, Independants, or Baptists (whatever Power the Quakers may come to) fear their Spiritual Prisons, Chains, or Fetters, but their ma∣terial ones. And whereas George Whitehead shifts to another corner, telling us in canting words, 'tis a Liberty in truth; and adds, 'tis for Unity, Society and good Order against the Spirit of Strife, Division and Separation: What is this to Presbyterians, Independants, and Baptists, who were the persons spoken of? Were they ever taken into your Society, or did they turn Quakers, that you should be concern'd at their making any Division or Separation from you, un∣der pretence of Liberty of Conscience? All this is to amuse the Reader, and lose the true Case in hand; which was to show that the Quakers, had they as much Power, would afford as little Liberty to Dissenters from them, as any of the Persecuting Priests, or Powers of the Earth, as William Pen calls them, yea even as the Papists themselves; of which Instances enow might be given wou'd it not swell this piece too much, which has already exceeded the Limits we design'd it: Some are given by the worthy Author of the Snake in the Grass, 3d Edit. p. 63, 64, &c. But we leave this, and proceed to another Head.

CHAP. XI••.

Of Government.

SEditious Principles against the State is the second thing we charg'd them with; the bare Representation of which wou'd, we had hop'd, have prevail'd with any (who design'd to clear this People of Blasphemy) to own the Ma••ignity of such Passages as those, which the Brief Discovery quoted from their Authors: but we find our selves deceived herein, George Whitchead, coming forth as a Champion, prepared to vindicate and defend them, making their Authors Prophets, and their Sayings prophetical Passa∣ges touching Government: but whoever shall consider the dire Effects, those wild Prophesies of Munster, Phifer, John Matthias, John of Leyden, and the rest of that Gang, had upon the Civil Government of those places they came unto, will acknowledg there's great reason to discourage such an extravagant Spirit, whatsoever Pretences it makes to prophetick Inspiration: For how did these Prophesies not only lead them into all Impurity (as we have shown) but in∣cited the People to run upon their Magistrates, and deprive them of all Autho∣rity and Power; and none have followed them more in those pretended Pro∣phesies and Revelations than the Quakers: and that their's were not so influen∣tial upon the English Nation, as the others were upon Munster, and other pla∣ces, is to be attributed to that Sobriety of Temper the greatest part were in∣duced with, and that Freedom from Arbitrary Opprassion the others were liable to; as also to their Experience, what a Condition for several years they had been brought unto by turbulent and unquiet Sects. Our first Charge is, That they are Enemies to Kingly Government; and this the Passages we quoted from Burroughs, George Fox, and others, did clearly evince; nay, not only their Aversion to Monarchy, but to the Person of King Charles the 2d. as a Review of them will make manifest.

Edward Burroughs speaks thus (p. 244.) The Lord is risen to overturn, to over∣turn Kings and Princes, Governments and Laws:—And he will change Times, and Laws, and Governments, and there shall be no King ruling but Jesus, nor no Government of Force, but the Government of the Lamb, nor no Law of Effect, but the Law of God; all that which is otherwise shall be ground to Powder. And (p. 507.) he says further; But as for this People (i. e. the Quakers) they are raised of the Lord, and established by him, even contrary to all Men, and they have given their Power only to God, and they cannot give their Power to any Mortal Men, to stand or fall by any outward Authority; and to that they cannot seek, but to the Lord alone. What saith George to all this? truly he dares not recite it all; but after he had gone a little way, stops as if he had seen a Spectre. The Lord is risen to overturn, to overturn Kings, Princes, Governments and Laws, and he will change Times, and Laws, and Govern∣ments, &c. and there he is at a full stand, hoping his Reader wou'd never meet with more of it: And those, he says (p. 28.) were prophetical Passages, wrote 1657, and yet spoken in the present tense, the Lord is risen, not will arise: very true George. Some of us can well remember to our Sorrow, how

the Lord in his Wrath did then rise, and for the Punishment of our Sins did overturn (by such wicked Instruments as the Quakers, who gloried in their having a hand in that overturning-work) Kings, Princes, Governments and Laws. Edward Burroughs prophesies, says George Whitehead; but 'tis of things past, or present, which he saw accomplish'd when he wrote them, and there in wisely caution'd the Quakers (would they have heeded it) never to go beyond their Ken; and had they done so, without foolishly venturing upon things to come, neither they, nor their Prophesies, had been exposed to so much Shame and Scorn as they have met with. But suppose these Prophesies were of things to come, such Generals coming to pass would no more establish Burroughs a Pro∣phet, than it would have done John Lilburn, and others, who foretold the downfal of their Enemies; but if any Revolutions had happened for 20 years after, in any parts of the known World, they should have been brought in to have vouch'd him a Prophet of the Lord; for George Whitehead wou'd have his Reader observe, That these Prophesies were directed to all the World, un∣der the Title of a Standard listed up, and an Ensign held forth unto all Nati∣ons: a large Province indeed, for him to pretend unto, when he gave not the least sign to any of these Nations, by which they should be convinced, that he was commission'd as a Prophet from the Lord unto them; whereas all Persons of old that pretended to be Prophets, came attested with some sign or wonder, as we have shewn before: And yet (p. 46.) saith George Whitehead, Edward Burroughs was a Man truly inspired with the Spirit of God, and of Prophesy (tho God never gave the World a convincing Proof thereof) but what may not such Enthusiastick Persons vent to the People, under the pretence of Prophe∣sy, if the Character of a Prophet may be allow'd them, without giving any Evidence thereof, if for such stuff as this Burroughs must be said to be inspired with the Spirit of Prophecy? What shall we say to Anna Trapual, who ex∣ceeded both the Quakers, and most of the other Pretenders in exce••sive Fastings, and in foretelling several things that came to pass afterwards.—She wou'd fast sometimes 9, 11, 14 Days.—She was told by the Spirit, of the Sol∣diers* 1.260 coming to London; she had a Vision of the Scots everthrow before Dunbar; of the Fight with Holland; of the dissolving the Long-Parliament; and several Visions of Oliver's being Protector, which she was troubled at; and foretold Gidcen's (i. e. his) being laid aside: yet after all she brands the Quakers, as a delirous deluded People.—Let them tell him (viz. Oliver) of his Sins, and tell him with Humility and Tears; not as those deluded Spirits, that go running about the Streets, and say, we have such Visions and Revelations, who come out with their great Speeches of Vengeance, Judgments, and Plagues: Oh but thine who come from thee, thou givest them Humility, Meekness, Bowels, Tears, (which was indeed most like to the true Prophets,* 1.261 who were mightily affected with the Miseries they foresaw coming upon a People) but how cheap and mean is Prophesy made by such as Fox, Burroughs, and others of their Order assuming it. Let the Reader please to observe what trifling things they advance as Prophesies, rather than lose the Honour of be∣ing accounted Prophets: Upon the proclaiming King Charles 2d. some Queries* 1.262 were sent to the Quakers, which this Edward Burroughs answered. The first Query was,

Whether you, or any of you, that did pretend to Inspiration and Revelation, did foresee, or was it reveal'd to you, that ever Charles

Stuart should be proclaimed King, to reign in England any more?

Now ra∣ther than be thought in the dark here, see what he reckons up for Visions and Revelations from God. This, says he, was not contrary to that, which some of us have seen. For thus much was said by George Fox, in a Letter to Oliver Cr••mwel:

What, and if for and because of thy Wickedness in the sight of God, he should raise up the Cavaleers, and make them Instruments in his hands to accomplish his Wrath upon thee, even like as he made thee once his Instrument to overthrow them.

Here, saith Burroughs, the thing was believed to be possible; and it is now come to pass, even as was seen and believed: Spectatum admissi risum ten••atis.

Was ever such things call'd Visions and Revelations before? Because the thing was possible for God to do (tho' it was not done in Oliver's Days, which the passage in that Letter seems to refer unto, nor yet neither during his Son's Rule and Government; God was pleased to make others, and not the Cava∣liers Instruments in his hand against his Sons) therefore that was a Revelation to Geo. Fox, that K. Charles II. should return to his Crowns again; (if Fox had such a Revelation, he was strangely disobedient to the Heavenly Vision, in writing as he did to the Presbyterians just before the Restauration, as you will see by and by:) such another Prophecy we have in the next words given forth by Burroughs himself; and yet the Letter was wrote December 1659. when almost every one, but such blind Beetles as these, did foresee it: But what said the Oracle then? It tells the Cavaliers,

That the same Spirit of Pride, Oppression and Idolatry was entered into their Enemies, and did live in them in as high a measure as it had done in the Cavaliers; and their Iniquities were well nigh finished, and the Lord would one way or another correct and rep••ove them.

But mark it, the Prophet was presently at a loss:

for whether (says he) the Lord will ever make use of you (Cavaliers) to reprove them, as he did of them to reprove you; this I determine no••, but leave it to him who can do whatsoever he will, by what Instruments he pleaseth.

—A most wonderful Revelation, that God should some way or other rebuke notorious, open, and universal wickedness, especially in Men of Publick Place and Station, when St. Paul tells us the Wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness, and unrighteousness of Men; and we have so many instances thereof from Scripture and our own Experience—But his Prophecy gave little hopes to the Cavaliers, since he reminds them therein, that though they had made many attempts to be revenged on their Enemies, they had not prosper'd; the Lord had hitherto always defeated them, and bow'd them down under a People as unwor∣thy as others; and Ch. Stuart must either be converted to God (he was it seems at that time wholly estranged from him) and ruled by him, or else he can never rightly rule for God in this Nation; and then he did believe it was not impos∣sible, but that he might be a Rod upon them that had once smote him. Who would not travel a great way to be resolv'd in his Doubts by such a famous Prophet? Truly, had the Oracles of the Heathens been no clearer, or more to the purpose than these Prophesies, the Priests of Apollo would have had but a miserable Trade of it; and yet says Burroughs, it appears that these things, in a great measure, were foreseen and prophesied of.—And yet he presently after tells them, that his Prophecy was nothing but a rational Observation of things; for 'twas, says he, verily believed that such a thing would be; your Enemies

having so acted and proceeded as to destroy themselves, and so bring you in over their heads; though they little intended the thing, yet the effect of their pro∣ceedings could hardly prove otherwise than to destroy themselves, and make room for you; and these things I observed, saith he. So that all the Divine Revelations hereof shrunk at last into a prudent and rational Guess, which he made upon their indiscreet management and ordering of matters. Such ano∣ther Prophet was Stephen Crispe, who seeing the Nation engaged in a dangerous War, and London at the same time suffering by a dismal Fire (September 1666.) began to foretel a sad time coming upon all the Inhabitants (except his own Party) and positively says it shall be before seven times (which the Friends no doubt, understood to be seven years) should pass over them: for thus he speaks,

Friends, I am the more drawn forth at this time, to visit you with an Epistle,* 1.263 because the Lord has given me some sight of his great and dreadful Day and Workings in it, which is at hand and greatly hastens, of which I have some∣thing to say unto you, that you may be prepared to stand in his Day, and may behold his wonderous Workings amongst his Enemies, and have fellowship with his Power therein (to be sure they must joyn with their King and assist him against his Enemies.)—And as concerning those succeeding times, the Spi∣rit of the Lord hath signified that they will be times of horrour and amaze∣ment to all that have, and yet do reject his Council: for as the Day of his Forbearance, Warning and Inviting have been long, so shall his Appearance amongst those that have withstood him, be fierce and terrible; even so terrible, as who shall abide his Coming, for the Lord will work both secretly and open∣ly, and his Arm shall be manifest to his Children in both.—And because of the hardship and sorrow of those Days, many shall seek and desire Death rather than Life.

Had this been the Day of the general Judgment, who would have doubted the truth of what was here said? but as they believe no such particu∣lar Day shall outwardly be, so 'twas a Day that should come upon the wicked Inhabitants of this Nation, who had so long withstood the Warnings and In∣vitings of their Teachers; whereupon he proceeds,

Ah! My heart relents and is moved within me in the sense of these things, and much more than I can write or declare, which the Lord will do in the Earth, and will also make haste to accomplish amongst the Sons of Men, that they may know and consess that the Most High doth rule in the Kingdoms of Men, and pulleth down and setteth up according to his own Will, and this Men shall do [mark that] be∣fore seven times pass over them, and shall be content to give their Glory to him that sicteth in Heaven. That is, if we may interpret so great a Myste∣ry,

all Kings and Princes shall be forc'd to yield up their Crowns, Scepters and Coronets into the hands of the Quakers King, that he may give them to his Servants, for the Meek must inherit the Earth; and he assur'd them 'twould not be long.—

Before seven times pass over the wicked, they should be forc'd to yield up all to the Most High,

who pulls down and sets up whom he pleases, It were endless to trace these Men in all their Follies of this kind, who so ex∣tremely doted upon uttering Prophecies, that they could not write a Pamphlet without giving a cast of their Skill herein. We will mention but one passage more, though that alone is sufficient to confound these Persons for ever, and make them asham'd of such a Lying Spirit, as has all along possessed their Pro∣phets: One Richard Crane soon after his Majesty's Restauration, wrote a Piece

* 1.264styl'd, A Strict Account of Babylon's Merchants, &c. where he welcoms the Loyal Clergy (who had suffered so long and so much for their King) with these Pre∣sages (no doubt out of great affection to his Majesty, for they were then be∣come the only Royal Loyal Men of all the Dissenters, and had ever been so, if you will take their own word)

Go to, ye Merchants of Babylon who are now bringing forth and exposing to Sale your old Cankered, Rusty and Moth-••a••••n* 1.265 Ware; you gather some heat from the Sun (K. Charles II.) that is newly risen, and from it receive some small Vigour, and are like the Insect, and Rep∣tilia of the Earth, who creep out of their holes at the Sun's warmth, by which they are vivified.—Yet know such are not permanent, but the withdrawing of the Sun's heat from them, soon return to their holes, and some perish; you may take this as a Figure, there is a Cup prepared for you, being mixed with Plagues, Woes, Miseries, Sorrows, Torments and Eternal Burnings, which you shall not pass, for you are found from the Lord worthy, and a treble Portion is to be given unto you.—In some things you parallel Simon and Elymas the Sorcerer; you are discovered and known to be as you are, viz. Antichrists, Deceivers, Sorcerers, and Ravening Wolves; Flames, Flames, Flames of Fire is prepared by the Lord to consume you as dry Stubble.—Woe is me for the Day which I see is coming upon you from the Lord, and all them you have made drunk by puttng your Bottle of Poyson to their Noses, who have drunk deep, and so are become one in Nature with you: It had been better you had never been born; it had been better for you that you had been strangled in your Mothers Wombs, and still-births had been presented to them, than living Children into their Arms. Oh! What shall I say concerning you? God's Everlasting Decree is sealed against you: Burnings, Burnings, Burnings with unquenchable Fire is your Portion from the Lord God of Heaven and Earth.—Oh! I have seen Eternity, I have seen Eternity, and a dreadful Day is very near at hand to be revealed: Oh, the overflowing Scourge! Oh the Besom of Destruction! Oh the Plagues and Vengeance that is to be poured out upon the wicked in this Nation, both Priests and People. Howl, howl▪ Hireling Priests of all Orders, for the Wine-press of the Wrath of God Almighty is even near to be trod, into which you are to be cast, for the Lord God hath spoken it, and he will not repent; a treble Portion, a treble Portion of the Plagues of God Almighty you are to have above all others.

Thus this famous Quaker-Prophet Divin'd about Forty Years ago, but with what truth the Event has shewn. And now Reader, 'tis strange any Person should at this time of Day stile the Issues of these hot-headed Persons Prophetical Passages, when Divine Providence has so ordered matters, as to encourage every one to hiss them off the Stage. We very well know what little reason there is to expect Prophesies in these latter Days; nay, that a Rational Intellectual Chri∣stian* 1.266 Knowledge is (as the Learned Dr. Mer. Casaubon observes from Aquinas) to be preferred above all Prophecy, to whom Maimonides (the Aquinas amongst the Rabbins, as he there calls him) does agree in many places of his More Ne∣vochim, making Rational Intellectual Divinity the highest degree of Prophecy; who has also a Chapter (of very good use, to keep Men from running them∣selves out of their right Wits) touching Moderation to be observed in Con∣templation: The Man who can enjoy his natural Wit and Reason with So∣briety, and yet affects Raptures and Alienations of Mind, has attained to a

good degree of Madness without Rapture, which makes him so much under∣value sound Reason, the highest Gift of God, Grace excepted, which is but the Perfection of Reason, or the Reformation of Corrupt Reason, as the same Learned Man speaks (Cap. 2. ult.) And that the Quakers, who so much affect* 1.267 these things, are all of them touch'd with Madness, is prov'd beyond any just contradiction, by a Worthy Author. It has been the Fare of these Modern Prophesies to continue in vogue but a short time, by reason of their evident failure as to Truth, discover'd by the Event and Issue of things; for a Mis∣carriage, but in a Cicumstance, is enough to make the whole Prophecy su∣spected of Imposture, whereas never one word which God spake fell to the* 1.268 ground, as the Scripture most abundantly assures us; and for this reason per∣haps the Seventy chose to render Vrim and Thummim by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Manifestation and Truth, because especially by these two were God's Oracles distinguish'd from the Devil's; God's being eminent for Perspicuity and Truth, and the Devil's for Obscurity and Falshood: God hath given us this Character to know a False Prophet by, Deut. 18. 22. When a Prophet speaketh in the Name of the Lord, if the thing follow not nor come to pass, this is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; and there∣fore we may rest assured, that what God speaks with his Mouth, he will fulfil* 1.269 with his Hand, 1 Kings 8. 15. Famous for a while were the Predictions of Grebner, but what esteem are they now of? A Learned Man tells us the Year 1572 (when the new Star appear'd in Cassiopoia) was the Epocha, or beginning of his Prophesies, and he ended them at the Year 1613, which he supposed to be the Day of Judgment (having no other ground for it, than the Numeral Letters of the Latin word Judicium, which in all makes the Number.) He prophe∣sied great matters of Henry IV. of France, (which proved clean contrary) of Queen Elizabeth and other Princes which never came to pass.—Men are prone to believe any thing they would have, and any words which seem that way they lay hold of, saith that Judicious Man upon them: How did the Predictions of those three pretended Prophets (Kotterus, Christina, and Drabicius) delude the* 1.270 People for a while, and (which was much to be wondered at) that Excellent Person also Joh. Amos Comenius, whose other Works praise him in the Gates, that he greatly Reverenced their Persons, Recorded and Published their Visions and Prophesies, under the specious Title of Lux in Tenebris. But God has cloathed all those with Shame and Confusion, who have relied upon the Pro∣phesies of such Men, by frustrating the Tokens of these Lyars, making the Di∣viners mad and their Knowledge foolish, Isai. 44. 25. And we earnestly wish and pray that the Quakers and all others, who are fond of them, would at length own the folly and danger hereof, in either assuming to themselves or attributing to their Teachers a Divine Prophetical Influx and Inspiration, when there's all the evidence imaginable, that the Father of Lyes, and not the God of Truth was the Author of these spurious Prophesies, that by the false he might derive a suspicion upon the true ones, or abuse the Minds of Men with vain Hopes or panick Fears: Oh, let not any of us, who own our Saviour for our Prophet, receive the Devil for our Oracle; if we be sick or weary of things present, shall we resort to the God of Ekron (by attending to any Pro∣phecy of his incitation) for Quiet and Resolution? Can the Devil be thought able to answer any Questions concerning things to come? Isai. 41. 23. Chap.

44. 7. Or is he willing, if able, to do it with any fair and single Intentions? Have the Beams of the Sun of Righteousness put out all the Fires on his Al∣tars? Have the Glory and Power of the Divine Oracles and Miracles spoiled his great Trade of Lying Oracles and Wonders, and shall our Credulity and Va∣nity encourage him to drive this secret and little Trade of Prophesies? The particular advice God gavethe People by Jeremiah in a like Case, deserves now* 1.271 to be recommended to them: Hearken not to your Prophets, nor to your Diviners, nor to your Dreamers, for they prophesie a Lye unto you. And 'tis worth our Con∣sideration, that those who in these last Ages have pretended to them, are Men either extremely Ignorant, or very Vicious, or strangely Fanciful, or Hypocon∣driacal; for Men that are best disposed by their great Wisdom and Holiness, as also by the Evenness and Serenity of their Tempers to receive these influ∣ences of the Holy Spirit, do neither feel nor desire them whilst they consider those vehement Transports, Consternations, Tremors, Enigmatical Visions must create great uneasiness to them; which the faculties of those Holy Men who were actuated by the Spirit in order to Prophecy, most frequently underwent thereby, which makes them value it as a happiness, that God hath delivered us to the Conduct of that sure word of Prophecy the Holy Scriptures, and the Dictates of clear and renewed Reason.

But to return to the Quotation out of Burroughs; George Whitehead to excuse him tells us p. 29.

That what Prophesies are for Christ's Kingdom they must own, viz. that he shall rule the Nations, and in the midst of his Enemies, and that the Kingdoms of this World shall become the Kingdoms of God and his Christ; which, says he, the Holy Scriptures do expresly warrant and testifie.

But how idle and impertinent is this, when he knows none of us (Priests or People of the Church of England) who do not own the Scripture-Prophesies concerning the Kingdom of Christ, or the Government of the Lamb, when∣as we assert them in a great measure fulfilled already, since so many Earthly Kings have willingly submitted to the Spiritual Government of our Lord, ac∣knowledging his Scepter above theirs, and yielding themselves freely to be his Subjects; yea, counting it a greater honour to be Membra Ecclesi••, Mem∣bers of his Body, than Capita Imperii, Emperors of the World: but we never read that the Spiritual Kingdom of Christ should be so troublesom to Earthly ones, as to extirpate and overturn them, or that the Scepter of the Lord Jesus should, like Aaron's Rod, swallow up the Scepters of all Earthly Princes, as Burroughs asserts. But now George, if thy fright be over, let us survey the other part of the Quotation:

There shall be no King ruling but Jesus, nor no Government of Force, but the Government of the Lamb; nor no Law of effect but the Law of God.

—Canting words that signifie nothing but to inspire People with a disgust of the Government, if it does not set up Quakers in Authority over the rest: But pray resolve us, did not Christ reign whilst Constantine, Theodosius, Justinian, and other Godly Kings and Emperors ruled, who were Nursing Fathers to the Church, and brought their Glory and Honour into it, who sway'd their Scepters in Sub-ordination to their Saviour, and exercised their Authority for the promoting his Religion? and now could he truly say (in opposition to such) there should be no King ruling but Jesus, nor no Government of Force, but the Government, &c. since all that which was otherwise, viz. the Heathen Persecuting Power, was by the means of

Constantine ground to Powder; and why might not Jesus be said to reign when K. Ch. II. came to the Crown, who professed his Religion, restored his Church to her pristine Glory, and own'd himself a Member thereof? let George White∣head tell us in good earnest, whether he thinks with his Brother Burroughs, that there ought to be no other Government in the World, but that of Jesus? and we urge it the rather because the Letter (our Scripture) tells us that Jesus Christ was pleased to own another Government, to which he himself paid Tribute and Obedience, and disclaim'd all Temporal Authority, saying, My Kingdom is not of this World, and therein taught his Disciples and Followers what to do, even to submit to those Rulers in whose Dominions they are born and live, and not withdraw their Obedience out of pretence that they are Subjects to him, as Burroughs does in the following part of the Quotation.

As for this People (the Quakers) they are raised of the Lord, and established by him, even contrary to all Men, and they have given their Power only to God, and they cannot give their Power to any Mortal Men, to stand or fall by any outward Authority.

Words not only Seditious, but direct Treason against the Government of any Kingdom; as if it were in the Power of any Natu∣ral-born Subject, under the pretence of being a Christian, to withdraw his Allegiance from his lawful Prince, contrary to the Doctrine both of St. Peter and St. Paul, 1 Pet. 2. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. Submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake, whether to the King, or to Governours sent by him, for so is the will of God; the w••i••h well-doing (i. e. with the constant practise of Obedience to them) ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men; as free, but not using the liberty for a cloak of maliciousness (as redeemed by Christ, but not making that a pretence for disobedience to the Magistrate, that because you have given up your Names to Christ, you cannot give your Power to any Mor∣tal Man, to the service of the King or Government) but as the Servants of God. Honour all men, love the brotherhood, fear God, honour the King. Thus St. Paul exhorts the Roman Christians; Let every Soul be subject to the higher powers, which* 1.272 how can they be, if they withdraw their Obedience and Assistance when call'd for, and say they cannot give their Power to any Mortal Man, to stand or fall by any outward Authority? when as the same Apostle adds, speaking to the Christians, Ye must needs be subject not only for wrath, (for fear of the Magi∣strate's Power) but for Conscience sake (out of regard to the Command of your Lord and Master Christ, who have made Obedience to Magistrates a part of his Religion); and therefore, herein they rebel not only against the Law of the Land, but against the Law of Jesus, whom they pretend to be their King and only Ruler: But King and Parliament can make no Collars for the Necks of Quakers, they are established contrary to all Men, and to any outward Autho∣rity they cannot seek, but to the Lord alone; though now they can creep and cringe to Parliaments as well as any other.

The next Citation is from George Fox, who p. 31 of his Great Mystery, saith,

That the Quakers are in the Power of God, and in the Authority of the Lamb, above all Houses, and into Houses creep nor, but are upon the Throne: Not standing about the Throne as Angels do, those daily Atten∣dants on the King of Glory;

but they are upon the Throne, as well as Christ: and who knows but ere long they may croud him out, and reign alone? But this, saith George Whitehead, “is no doubt meant Spiritually, not Literally:

Then the Sense must be this, they are above all Spiritual Houses, and into Spiritual Houses creep not, for they are upon a Spiritual Throne, for other∣wise their being upon a Spiritual Throne can be no reason why they should not creep into Material Houses; for all Quakers, as Whitehead here owns, are upon a Spiritual Throne, and yet can nestle into these Material Houses, and some very fine ones too: We are therefore afraid, George, thy Brother Fox had a farther design even at these Material and Earthly Thrones. But says White∣head p. 29. l. 9. He must mean Spiritually, for they are not upon an Outward Throne; No, God be thanked for it; but Burroughes in a Declaration tells us,

They are the right Heirs to it; 'tis their Right of Inheritance, they are Kings de* 1.273 Jure, though not de Facto; 'tis their Heirship to possess the utmost parts of the Earth, and doubt not, ere long, to tumble down the Usurpers out of their Thrones, though at present they must bear.

'Tis true, the Scriptures every where encourage the Servants of God to persevere in their Christian Course, with the hopes of a Crown and Kingdom, but the time of their Reign is not yet come, they are not already upon the Throne; but Quakers it seems are, and therefore it must be a different one from that promised by God here∣after to the Saints. As an evidence of the truth of what George Fox said, White∣head quotes Job 36. 7. with Kings are they, (viz. the Righteous) on the Throne, and are exalted; but George's are Kings upon a Spiritual Throne: and is not this Text then cited very pertinently to prove Quakers upon a Spiritual Throne? The truth is, they cannot stay for the promised Kingdom after Death, Kings they must be presently, and a Throne they must now possess; but whe∣ther Eternal, Spiritual, Material or Figurative, they know not; so* 1.274 Coale tells George Fox,

He was a King and ruled in Righteousness, and of his Kingdom there was no end.

But E••ihu going upon this Principle, That God could not be so severe to them that were dear to him, insinuates that Job must be a Hypocrite, for God uses to exalt his Friends and true Servants unto Thrones, and not throw them upon Dunghils; he makes them even Com∣panions for Kings, and by way of Hyperbole says, they set them upon the Throne with them; the expression is Figurative, for 'tis not said they are Kings upon the Throne, but on the Throne with Kings; meaning in short no more than what's express'd in the close of the verse, they are exalted and ho∣noured even by Kings, though we do not remember Quakers ever so honoured by any, save by the late King, some of them being admitted, though not to sit with him on's Throne, yet in his Closet, and lean too much on his Bosom.

Brief Discovery, p. 15. quotes Truth defending the Quakers, p. 9, 10. wrote by Whitehead and George Fox Jun. who being ask'd, whether they did not say, That the Magistrate, who made Acts of Parliament, and doth not re∣ceive them from God, as Moses, doth act contrary to the Law of God: They answered, The Magistrate that is sent of God, he receives the Law from the Mouth of God; and he is the Prophet whom Moses spoke of, Deut. 18. 58. An Answer notoriously shuffling: The Question being, whether the Magistrate, that is sent of God receives the Law from God, as Moses? The answer is, if sent of God he receives the Law from the Mouth of God; but does not say as Moses. No doubt, thou wer't sensible, George, that the Laws of Magistrates are not accompanied with those Ap∣pearances of Terrour and Amazement which Moses's Laws were; and therefore [as Moses] must be drop'd. Well George, we will abate thee the thick Cloud,

the Thunder and Lightning, the Smoak and the Tempest (Exod. 19.) with which Moses's Law was attended. Must every Law of the Magistrate be from the Mouth of the Lord, as Moses's was, or else he that made it is not sent of God? then every Law of the Magistrates, even that for burying in Wool∣len, may be prefac'd: God spake these Words, as well as the Ten Command∣ments, or else the Magistrates that make them are not sent of God. And th•••• all the Magistrates in the World are exaucthorated by a dash of Whitehead's Pen, who made Laws which came not from the Mouth of God, as the Ten Commandments did. Our Magna Charta, and other Statute Laws may oblige us surely to Obedience, tho not of equal Authority to our Bibles. But White∣head complains, the last Words are mis-quoted; instead of he is the Prophet, it should be, he hears the Prophet whom Moses spoke of. We had the Book it self when we wrote the Quotation, tho now it be out of our hands; and can't but wonder, that three of us together, should be so dimsighted, as not to dis∣cern, he is, from he hears: Howsoever George, the Objection we make, is, thou seest strong enough, without any support from that Passage. We desire there∣fore thy clear and positive Answer, whether the Magistrate be sent of God, who makes Laws, and yet does not receive them from God, as Moses. This is what was objected against thee, and thy Companion Fox Jun. that you had affirmed formerly; and tho Friends may be satisfied, yet do not believe that wise Men will think thou hast conquered the Objection (as the French use to conquer our Fleet) by running away from it. There is a bloody Charge laid against George Fox, in the Brief Discovery, p. 16. where out of his Book, cal∣led several Papers given forth to Presbyterians, &c. (just before the Restoration of King Charles II.) these Passages are cited;

Friends, to all you that desire an Earthly King in England, &c. whether Presbyterians, or others.—Did the Elders of Old, in the Days of Christ, or the Apostles cry up any King but Christ, to have any King to rule over them but Christ? And doth not the Priests and Presbyterians cry for an Earthly King, and will have Cesar?—And do they not in this crucify Jesus? Are not all these Elders, which will dote so much on an Earthly King, Traytors against Christ? Do you read, that there were any Kings since the Days of the Apostles, but among the Apostate Chri∣stians? for Christ is King alone. I say, that is the false Christ, that doth not live upon the Head of Kings. They that be true Elders, never go about to set up an Earthly King over them to rule. Herod the King was mad at the Child Jesus.—There is the Fruit of Earthly Kings.—And hath not this been witnessed in England? &c. Ignorant and foolish People that wou'd have a King. And what Work J••shua made with Kings; how he brought them out of the Cave; a fit place for them,—and all these Novices Chris∣tians, that are crying up Earthly Kings.—And we know, that th••se Kings are the spiritual Egyptians g••t up since the Days of the Apostles.

We are concerned George, to think how thou can'st wash thy great Apostle c••••an from these Stains; thou mayest crack thy Brain, and strain thy Conscience too, and yet be forc'd at last to give him up, as a most seditio••s Villain: No doubt these Passages were a mighty Evidence of the Quakers Affection to Monarch••; and in particular to the Monarch, which was then returning, Charles II. and yet in the May following, Burroughs wrote a Pamphlet, stiling it a Visita∣tion of Love unto the King, and those called Roya••ists, as if they of all Men had

been the most tender, and indearing of all his Subjects. And there he says, That George Fox did foresee and believe, that he wou'd return as our King un∣to us, which wonderfully agrees with his Usage of him in these Quotations; as the Jews Hosannah in one place, did with their crucify him in another. But to be plain, these are Passages as full of Venom and Poyson, not only against Earthly Kings in general, but the late King Charles in particular, as possibly could be; for when the Presbyterians joyn'd with the Royalists, and God had bowed the Hearts of them all, as the Heart of one Man, to bring back their King, what could be more mischievous and malicious, than to tell the Presby∣terians, who were very active in this Affair;

That in this they crucified Jesus, and were Traytors against Christ; and that the true Elders never went about to set up an Earthly King over them to rule, for Christ is King alone?

And truly our bold George (tho daring enough) yet durst not encounter with this fell and monstrous Dragon, the very sight of him daunts his Courage, so that he keeps at a prudent distance; and tells us only in general, that Fox, in rallying thus upon Earthly Kings, meant only such as were persecuting Kings: Alas! that you should so much mistake my Friend and Brother, George Fox, he good Man, made no Reflection herein upon King Charles II. tho indeed 'twas he the Priests and Presbyterians doated so much on, and were so desirous to see in England once again; he meant all this only of such as were Persecu∣tors, like Herod, who was mad at the Child Jesus, such Kings as the Gentiles, or Heathens wou'd set up, such as Tophet of Old was prepared for; I am per∣swaded, he never intended to reflect upon any good Kings; for I have known him speak well, and give good Commendation of our present Kings, saith George Whitehead. A mighty favour, and pity but it should be recorded to Posterity. Well then; when Fox inveighed so bitterly against Kings, it was only persecuting Kings he aimed at, says his Brother George Whitehead; and the serious Reader (as he calls him) ought to note, That he has a right to in∣terpret his Words the best way, as he told him, p. 11. But let the World judg of the Folly and Falshood of such a Vindication, when we have open'd the Charge in all its Branches.

First,

To all you, says Fox, who desire an Earthly King in England, whe∣ther Presbyterians, or others.

Here's no mention of a wicked persecuting King, but an earthly one; neither do we know any, either Presbyterians, or Episcoparians, that are very fond of a wicked persecuting King, tho they can patiently submit, when it pleases God for their Sins to place such an one over them.

Secondly,

Did the Elders of Old, in the Days of Christ, or his Apostles (saith Fox) cry up any King but Christ?

as if Paul had never appealed to one on Earth besides Christ; nay, and Christ himself had not owned another, and commanded tribute to be paid to him, tho he was a Persecutor; and Christ himself was condemn'd to be scourged and crucified by his Vice-Roy.

Thirdly, But Fox goes on;

the Priests and Presbyterians cry up an Earth∣ly King, and will have Cesar.

The Quarrel you see, is against an Earthly King, not against a wicked persecuring one, or else he must make them the same; and so all Earthly Kings are Nero's and Dioclesians.

Fourthly, He adds; “And do they not in this crucify Jesus? The Phan∣tasm of a Christ within the Quakers, by defending and upholding our

Earthly Kings, we do: Hereby we keep the Quakers Jesus out of the Throne, which we suppose is the Crucifixion they mean.

Fifthly, He proceeds:

Are not all these Elders, that will doat so much upon an Earthly King, Traytors against Christ?

This sure speaks them to be against Kings themselves, tho never so well qualified; for he does not say, wicked persecuting Kings, but only Earthly Kings: so that all who obey them, are Faux's and Catesby's, Traytors to King Jesus: but it would even make an Enemy pity them, to see what a miserable shift poor George is put to, that he might defend this Clause of his Brother Fox. He tells us p. 29.

That we vary in our Citation hereof, from the Author of the Snake; we saying the Elders, and he the Christians, that will doat so much on an Earthly King, are Traytors against Christ.

But could George Whithead think to blind his Reader, by throwing such Dust as this in his Eyes; what injury to the sense and aim of the Quotation is this? especially since George Fox used both the Words; saying, Are not all these Elders, Christians, that will doat so much of an Earthly King, Traytors against Christ? And our using the Word Elders, and not Christians, opened a way for thee to escape (had it thou discern'd it;) for the Scripture tells us of such Elders as were indeed Traytors against Christ, who wou'd have no King but Caesar, Joh. 19. 15. which no doubt thou wouldest have return'd as an answer to us, had'it thou been aware thereof: but Bernardus non videt omnia, the most quick-sighted see not always every thing before them. Let's proceed to the next.

Sixthly,

Do you read (says he) That there were any Kings since the Days of the Apostles, but amongst the Apostate Christians?

A most infamous Brand upon all the Martyrs, and Confessors of old; and upon all the devout Christians in Constantine's Days, who are by this severe Censure, mark'd as Apostates, for owning any King but Christ, for Christ, saith he, is King alone; 'tis not persecuting Kings he here objects against, but all Kings whatsoever. Nay,

Seventhly, He tells us,

That is the false Church, that doth not live upon the Head of Kings.

Then Wee to the Church of England, who teaches her Children to sit at the Foot, and not ride over the Heads of Kings; and well is it for the Church of Rome, who has more than once kick'd off the Crowns of Princes. A most excellent, and distinguishing Note of the true Church, and wou'd do well to be added to the other Notes of Bellarmine, in the next Impression.

For they (says Fox) here, that are true Elders, never go about to set up an Earthly King to rule over them.

Which shews what Kings are here meant; when he saith, That 'tis the false Church, that does not live upon the head of Kings, of all Earthly Kings, tho some of them may be so very devout and religious as to bring their Honour and Glory to the heavenly Jerusalem,* 1.275 and be nursing Fathers to the Church of Christ.

Eighthly,

Herod the King was mad at the Child Jesus;—there's the Fruit (saith he) of Earthly Kings; they are all a Company of persecuting Herods, who wou'd murder the Child Jesus if they could, Dragons that stand by to devour the Man-child as soon as 'tis born; and send out a Flood (a Flood of Persecution) to swallow him up.

Here is such an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such a Panegyrick upon Kings, as we defie any Milton or Goodwyn, Ludlow or Amynter; yea, any infernal Orators to pattern.

Ninthly,

Poor England, saith Fox, can testifie this, what bitter Enemies they have been to Christ Jesus, witness Edw. 6th, Q. Elizabeth, K. James 1st, and K. Ch. 1st, and can we expect better from K. Ch 2d?

(for he it was who then was upon his Return, and is not this a most base Slander and Defamation of our English Monarchs, who since the Reformation (except one or two, and their Reigns were but short) have been great Exemplars of Piety, or else of Goodness and Compassion, so that we may pray to God to continue us but such whilst we continue a Nation, and we shall still be the happiest People of any we know under the Sun. But, says he,

hath not this been witnessed in Eng∣land? Oh yes, oft have these good Men the Quakers born their Testimony* 1.276 against Kings, as persecuting Herods, who were mad at the Child Jesus, and therefore were they cut off in wrath, as Burroughs speaks, and therefore foolish People that would have a King.

Tenthly, Our Friend George Fox would have us remember Joshua, and how he dealt with Kings:

Oh! For a Joshua, (a Cromwel, or Lambert) what work he made with Kings; he brought them out of the Cave (a fit place for them) to Execution, as we know who was brought out of his Prison to the Scaf∣fold:

A most wicked insinuation, that all our Kings were like the Canaani∣tish Race, which God had marked out for Destruction, and fit only to be immur'd in a Cave or Dungeon, or like Bajazet, to be shut up in a Cage, and never to be led forth but in a Halter.

Lastly, Fox tells them,

These Kings are the Spiritual Egyptians, got up since the Days of the Apostles, hard Task-Masters, under whose Bondage we have been held a long time, and shall never be freed till a Moses, some eminent Quaker (it may be William Penn's Son) undertake our Re∣demption, and lead us to Canaan;

for what a fine Prince would he make, as one of the Amsterdam-Quakers said, pointing to him, as he walked by his Fa∣ther's side to the Stadt-House there, attended with a numerous Train of Qua∣kers: (See Defence of the Snake 2d Part, p. 174.) and what are these Kings but Egyptians, whom we must have drown'd in another Red-Sea?

Now what sayest thou, George, to these Eleven Articles of Treason and Se∣dition exhibited against thy Friend George Fox? We thought 'twould be too fulsom for thee to swallow the Charge whole, and therefore have minc'd it, that thou mayest taste the sweetness of it bit by bit. Thus spake their Oracle George Fox, nor do we paint him in any Colours but what he then appeared in; and let the Reader but impartially weigh both the things and the time they were written in, and see if he can make any better of it. But White∣head's best plea is his last, p. 31. l. 19. he tells us these Offences were pardon'd by divers Acts of Indemnity. Pray, says George, let this be observed at last George, Thou art fain to plead thy Pardon; did ever Man flee to Sanctuary that was not conscious of his guilt? A Pardon, though it frees from Punishment, yet it plainly infers the desert of it: This George, we do observe as thou bid∣dest us, and you have found to your comfort, the Government have observed it too, neither they nor we have ever gone about to hang you for your former Treason; what we desire is, that you would only ingenuously acknowledge the desert of them.

And farther, Was it not a sweet Complement to the House of Lords (a part of the Ancient Government of this Realm) to be saluted by the same Person

(writing to the Council of Officers) thus,

What a dirty nasty thing is it to talk of a House of Lords amongst us?

Here's the Right Honourable the House of Lords (part of the Fundamental Constitution of the English Nation) bespattered, and besmeared by the soul Mouth of an inspired Rabshekah, for such a vile Person to insult upon the Great Princes and Noblesse of a Kingdom, because at that time cast and kept out from a share in the Government by a Re∣bellious Rabble, speaks him fit to converse with nothing but the Mob, and to be Chaplain to Captain Tom: He that will pretend to sweeten this, may next undertake to perfume the Jakes: George Whitehead, who uses not to be very nice, holds his Nose and gets away as fast as he can, answering this Charge by even saying nothing to it. But notwithstanding this spight they had to the House of Lords, we remember them creeping and suing to them, that their Yeas and Nays might be taken for an Oath; 'twas, no doubt, a great Provoca∣tion to Quakers, that their Word, or upon their Honours, might not be as good a Testimony as any Lords of them all, which cannot be forgiven by them that are in the Spirit of their great Apostle George Fox, who in Construction called them dirty Peers. But the Priest must not so scape the Lash of this great Cen∣sor George Whitehead, who says,

These Men (who wrote the Brief Disco∣very,) in their Margin, have noted the Quakers as against Kingly Go∣vernment,* 1.277 against the House of Lords, the House of Commons, against Judges, Justices and Constables, against Lawyers and Lords of Mannors; they should (says he) rather have added against Covetous Persecuting Priests, but this they omitted, it touching them to the quick.

—Good Man! the Men who wrote those things, are known to be as little of a Covetous, Perse∣cuting Temper, as any of the Meek and Lamb-like Teachers amongst the Quakers; one of whom Preached and Commanded in the Name of the Lord, that all the Cavaliers that were then Prisoners (taken in St. George Booth's* 1.278 business) should be put to death: Harmless Man! that never wish'd them ill for all this; for the same Person tells the King. Archbishops and Bishops the very next Year,

That they were fellow-sufferers with them, and had great good will towards them.

—

But alas, there was Corruption, says George Whitehead, p. 32. in the Monarchy, House of Peers, House of Commons, amongst the Judges, Justices, Lawyers;

and 'twas the Corruption, not the* 1.279 Office George Fox spake against, if you please to believe Whitehead: Truly we find no Government will please the Quakers long, because there is Corruption in all, and so there will more or less, whilst Men are Men; but we judge them of a very turbulent and unquiet Spirit, that will therefore be content under none.

But for a while we must leave the Civil Government and pursue another Game whereunto we are led: Now slay the Priests of the Lord,—

—Neve foret Terris securior arduus aether, Affectasse ferunt Regnum Coeleste Gygantes.

Heaven's no more safe from Gyants fury now, Than once the Kingdoms of the World below.

Let the Tythes and Glebes be sold; saith George Fox, and given to the

Poor;

a small Box of Oyntment for our Saviour, a slender Portion devoted to Christ and his Ministers, and yet repined and grudged at by these Wretches. What need such waste say they? and to palliate it, they are taken with a Ju∣das-fit of Piety, to bestow it upon the Poor, although God hates Robbery for an Offering; neither can a pretence of Charity ever hallow or sanctifie such a villanous and profane Sacriledge. They had cursed us sufficiently before,* 1.280 these Balaams not standing upon that nicety which their Brother Balaam did. How shall I curse whom God hath not cursed? but from every place without either fear of God or reverence for Man, from Hill to Hill, from Pisgah to Peor, have they poured out the most bitter execrations against the Servants of the Most High, though to their great grief they found Nos non habemus Deum sequa∣cem, that with all their Offerings they could not bribe him to their parts, our God not being a God that will lye, who hath promised to be with us to the end of the World; God hath blessed, and all the Balaams in the World cannot reverse it: They have called us Greedy Dogs, Wolves, Babylon's Merchants, Gor∣mondizing Priests, and doom'd us to the Pit and the Lake; but now they find their causeless Curses have done us no hurt, our Innocency proving a Sove∣reign Antidote against the venemous bites of these Vipers; they are for trying another method, and 'tis a blow at the Roor, which they doubt not but will do the business, and that is the taking away our Maintenance, the de∣nying us Oyl to feed our Lamps, which will then go out of themselves. Oh! these Priests, these naughty Priests are they that spoil our designs, like St. Am∣brose's being in the Room, hindered all the Conjuring, and therefore we must* 1.281 get rid of them some way or other: Demostenes's Apologue will sute our Case very well; When the proud Macedonians insisted vehemently upon the Athe∣nians, delivering up their Orators into his hands, who had disswaded the Citi∣zens from a Surrender, he tells them the Wolves offered to make Peace with the Sheep, upon condition the Sheep would give up all their Dogs to them, who never left bawling and barking; so that the poor Sheep could not take a minutes rest; the silly Sheep gull'd with such specious pretences, yielded to the motion. You may imagine how the Wolves were overjoy'd at the News, who could now rend and tear, and feast themselves without inter∣ruption: Oh! 'tis these waking Priests that discover us, we can't break into the Fold, but they are presently opening upon us, we can't steal a Lamb from thence, but we hear them bawling incessantly; there's no good to be done till these Priests be either hanged, or starved, this Whitehead, (p. 32. l. 21.) neither denies nor palliates, but a upbraids the Priests for having so tender a sense for so much Injustice; “I suppose, says he, this most touches and offends some Priests concerned; indeed George, it could not but concern us to have a Company of Banditi, and Thieves break in and rob us of all we have; but, blessed be God, there's a better watch kept over the Church by God, and the Government, than to suffer her to be plunder'd and spoil'd by such a Crew. That Quaker who wrote a Perswasive to Moderation, printed 1685, speaks as if he had forsaken such Company, and resolved to live honestly for the time to come; he'll have nothing to do with the Priests Lands, or Goods:

Far be it from me (saith he in his Preface) to solicit any thing in diminution of the just Rights of the Church of England, let her rest protected where she is:

This Man if not honester, is yet wiser than his Brethren, in kindly yielding us our Tythos and

Glebes, that he cannot keep from us. Next all the King's Parks and Rents must be sold for the relief of the Poor, and White-hall with all his great Houses, and all the Steeple-Houses made Alms-Houses for the Blind and Lame; 'tis some comfort they have provided us such good Company, they intend to starve King and Priest together; and we verily believe that Tythes, Glebes, White∣hall, the King's Parks and Rents, whenever they go, will be sold at one time; God preserve us from Quaker Rage, who like mad Folks fly upon every one they meet, and are fitter to be confuted with Chains than Arguments; for when our Bell and Dragon had devoured the Lands of the King and Church, the Monster was not satisfied without a second Course of Lords Fines, and Lawyers Fees:

Let the Fines which belong to the Lords of Mannors be* 1.282 given to the Poor, saith George Fox, and away with Cap-men and Coif-men, Twenty Shilling Counsellors, Thirty Shilling Serjeants, and Ten Groats At∣tornies, which will not tell Men the Law without 10 s. 20 s. or 30 s.

These Gentlemen of the Long-Robe are best able to plead their own Cause against such Scoundrels as understand nothing of the Charge of an ingenuous Education, besides the great Pains and Study must be undergone, to fit Persons for such a worthy Employment.

But Priests and Lawyers are reckoned by them as the* 1.283 great Oppressors of the Land, as George Fox jun. speaks, and if any Lawyers be now offended thereat, we leave them to plead their own Cause, saith* 1.284 Whitehead, if they can.

But Whitehead tells us, some were rather for Common-wealth duly qualified,* 1.285 than a Monarchy that was oppressive and persecuting. A Common-wealth, if duly qualified, wou'd it seems, please some very well: But how shall we get one duly season'd for the Pallate of a Quaker? as for Baptists, Presbyterians, Independents, Episcoparians, they deny them all; it must be such an one, as is dress'd up, and is served in, from Grace-Church-Street. Oh delicious Govern∣ment! This, no doubt, would go down, rather than this oppressive persecu∣ting Monarchy.

There are some, it seems, amongst them for a Common-wealth, duly qua∣lified; then if they could get Monarchy laid aside, you cold make a shift with some other Government, besides that of Jesus; tho Fox, in his several Papers, saith, Christ is King alone; and News cut of the North, tells us, Jesus Christ* 1.286 will rule alone: yet some of you we see can be content, that Christ should make room for a Common-wealth, to govern but by no means a King.

But Whitehead wou'd put us off with this, That many honest Men were* 1.287 rather for a Common-wealth, than for an oppressive, persecuting Monarchy (tho by the way we must tell him, that the Primitive Christians were not so nice of their Skins, but could submit to be scratched, and rent by a tearing Bramble, when set over them by God, as well as cheared by the fat and resreshing Olive:) But what is this to the purpose here? Is not Fox's Outcry* 1.288 against Earthly Kings? Peruse again Fox's several Papers, and News out of the North, as before quoted, and see if thou can'st find the least Title of a perse∣cuting Monarch mentioned their: Besides, may not a Common-wealth be as prosecuting as a Monarchy? withous doubt; and therefore George, it was wa∣rily said, That there were some for a Common-wealth, whilst others more agreeably to their first Apostles Principle, could willingly throw off all, that their Christ might be King alone.

* 1.289Whereas they had been charged with great Inconstancy, like the Polypus, changing Colours, according to every thing that was next it; for Oliver now, for Richard afterwards, then for the Committee of Safety, then for the Rump, the Council of Officers, for any thing that is uppermost. Whitehead to excuse them, gives us an Instance in Samuel, who could calmly pay his Allegiance unto Saul, tho before he was against it, and displeased at the Peoples desiring a King.

* 1.290But the true Case was this; The People were under a Theocracy God, was their King; and by desiring an Earthly King, they rejected the Rule, and Go∣vernment of God, which Samuel was bound in Duty to deter them from; and yet when God had said to Samuel, Hearken to their Voice, and make them a* 1.291 King; he submitted as became him, and anointed Saul. And could they have shown us such a Command from God, to set up Oliver, the Ru••p, the Com∣mittee of Safety, &c. whom they adored alternately, as their Idols: We shall cease to reproach them for the Agility of their Consciences, in turning so quick at every Change. There was once a famous Doctor (Andrew Pearn by Name) Master of Peter-house in Cambridg, who had a Conscience so flexible, as to com∣ply with every Governour which was uppermost. King Edward, Queen Ma∣ry, Queen Elizabeth; he caused a Fane to be set upon the Chappel, with a Crown on the top of it, and A P wrote on the sides; and being told, how nimbly A P turned about with every Wind; he answered, A P never turned, but when the Crown turned too: A P could not turn so nimbly, but A Q can turn as fast, and give the same reason for it also, if they say, these some had a Command from the Spirit, their Light within; we think such a Spirit de∣serves to be look'd narrowly to, tho but in some of you since it is so changea∣ble, that it can creep, and cringe to any (Wat Tyler, or Jack-Straw) that has but Power enough to ravish the Crown fro•• the right Owner, (and will but cherish this Nest of Vipers under their warm Wing) tho they have no other Title thereunto, than a Highway-man has to the honest Travellers Putse, the greatest strength, and most outrageous boldness. But can you forbear smiling at Whithead's boasting of the Non-Resistance, and Passive Obedience of the Quakers, in bearing pariently so many Fines and Imprisonments in the late Times; which is no more Evidence of it, than what Raynard gives us in his Chain: How passive soever their Obedience was then: 'Tis yet remembred, how active their Rebellions had been in the Days of Oliver, and the Rump, the Glory of which they were as loath to lose then, as of their Passive Obedi∣ence now, and theresore boasted of it.

But alas! saith George Whitehead,

There was Corruption in the Monarchy,* 1.292 House of Peers, and Commons, amongst the Judges, Justices and Lawyers, and 'twas the Corruption, not the Office, which George Fox here speaks against:

'Tis not, we confess, good Breeding, to give the Lie to any Man; but should we do it to him in this thing, our being necessitated thereto, wou'd be a just excuse, having no other way to answer him; and we appeal to any, who will but impartially read what is cited out of Fox and Burroughs; how they brand all Earthly Kings, without exception, good and bad, as Arbitrary Usurpers, with House of Lords, and Commons, chosen by the People, railing at that Method, tho called the Birthright of the People, and own'd as the right Constitution of that part of the Government: As George Fox Jun. does in his Works. Had not Burroughs a very loyal Heart, when he said, 'Twas thro

Ignorance that the People subjected themselves to Hereditary Governours,—or to the Government, standing in a single Person successively?—and our Nation hath been under the Bonds of Slavery in this respect, &c. But we wou'd fain have G. Whitehead consider, what work his Explication ••makes of G. Fox's Reasonings; when Fox said,

Did any Elders, in the Days of Christ, or his Apostle, cry up any King?

he meant; did any of them cry up the Corruption of a King; when he says,

Do not the Priests and Presbyterians cry up an Earthly King?

he meant the Corruption of an Earthly King; and when he said,

That Kings are Spiritual Egyptians;

he meant the Corrup∣tions of Kings are spiritual Egyptians. Deliver us from such trifling, 'tis both a tiresom and useless Imploy, to be engag'd in pursuing and catching Flies.

We come now to George Fox Jun. who vented as much Rancour against chusiug Members of Parliament, by the Voices of his People, as his Talent enabled him, and yet endeavoured to be vindicated by his Brother Whitehead.* 1.293

A Parliament, chosen by the Voices of the People are not (saith he) like to govern for God, or the good of his People (no doubt he knew a much better way, that none but Quakers should come to the Poll) and this he spoke from the Mouth of the Lord too; for this that I declare to you, the Lord by his Spirit, of Wisdom and Understanding opened in me.

This Method of* 1.294 the Peoples chusing their Representatives, by a Majority of Voices, was, you see, infinitely displeasing to God (if we believe Fox) tho nothing seems more reasonable to us, than that they, who act in our stead and name, should be chosen by us. But besides, particular Revelation from God, touching this:

The Scriptures, he tells, are point blank against our English Usage herein; and if you will, says he, believe them, then may vou see, that a Parliament chosen by most Voices, are not like to act for God, or the good of his Peo∣ple.

Well, let's hear what the Scriptures say herein; he names three. The first is John 15. 19. If ye were of the World, the World would love his own; but because ye are not of the World, but I have chosen you out of the World (to be sure these Words, because ye are not of the World, &c. refer particularly to the Quakers, they are not of the World, but chosen out of the World;) therefore the World hateth you. In our Saviours' Days, the World was made up of Jews and Gentiles, who soon shew themselves most bitter Enemies to the Christians; but is England made up of such? do these chuse Parliamen-men for us? no doubt then, Christianity wou'd soon be decreed against, and Ju∣daism or Heathenism by Law, be established: But what does this make against us, when the whole Kingdom owns the Christian Religion, and none are cho∣sen but the Professors thereof? Is he not a rare Prophet to this Nation, as he stiles himself, thus to interpret the Scripture to them? His next place is Matt. 7. 13. Wide is the Gate, and broad is the Way that leadeth to Destruction, and many there be, which go in thereat. This we are sure is wide enough from the thing 'tis quoted for; and if we come not nearer in the last, we must get a Quakers Translation of the Bible, to find something for their turn▪ Rom. 9. 27. is his other place; Tho the Number of the Children of Israel be as the Sand of the Sea, a Remnant shall be saved. He that can read here, that a Parliament chosen by most Voices cannot act for God, and the good of his People, must look through a Glass, unknown to all Interpreters, since the Apostle's Days, to the time of the Quakers. Most prodigious Boldness, to father all this stuff up∣on

the Spirit of the God, and the holy Scriptures, and make the World be∣lieve, that this wise Constitution of our Ancestors, in electing Members by the Voices of the People, was condemn'd by them: he had a mind, no doubt, the Army should interpose, and hinder the Commons from their free Electi∣on; for to them in particular, did he direct his Message. But we cannot but remark the Wariness and Wisdom of George Whitehead, in this particular; who, tho he would willingly speak a good word for his Friend, (for certain∣ly,* 1.295 George Fox, Jun. says he, had an honest intent, in what he wrote of this Subject) yet thinks not fit to go too far in this Matter. Pray observe, says he.

That I do not in the least design to oppose the People's fair and lawful Elections, according to the true and just Intention, and Constitution of Par∣liaments:

No truly George, thou did'st therein very wisely; for that is a nice Point, and dangerous to touch much upon, at least at present, 'tis too ear∣ly a day to promote such a design as yet, we must be quiet, till the blessed time of our raign is come, and then we'll damn all the ungodly Priviledges, which the wicked call People's Birthrights, and make as great havock of their Charters, as was done in the late Reign: we'll closet every Man of them, and make them promise to give their Votes for our Light within, that we may have a Parliament to govern for God. Thou wer't more plain and ingenuous with us George, p. 64. Where thou sayest,

Thou would'st not be understood in any∣wise, to oppose the People's legal and just Rights to Elections:

No George, whatever thy meaning and intention be, we know thou would'st not be under∣stood so, whatever Faux and Catesby designed against the Government; yet good Men, they would not be understood to have designed any such thing; such a design is to be a Dark-Lanthorn Business. If thou wouldest not be un∣derstood, thou mightest even have kept it to thy self, and not so foolishly have opened thy very Heart to us, in justifying thy Brother Fox, who so not oriously opposes the Peoples choice. But how then can'st thou vindicate thy dear Bro∣ther, who positively asserts, that a Parliament chosen by the Voices of the Peo∣ple, is not like to govern for God, or the good of his People? (if not, then to be sure he wou'd have them chosen some other way:) Nay, says he,

The chusing of Parliament-men, according to the Custom of England, which is called its Birthright, stands in respect of Persons, and not in Equality:

Oh! this is a very unequal, and unjust way of chusing Parliament-men. And we see, says he,

The People have been in great blindness, in contending for Parliaments so chosen (a blind buzzardly People, that will be always con∣tending for this way, and not let the Saints chuse alone, who only have right to do it.) I must deal plainly with you, says he, (and we think very unman∣nerly too, but according to the Quaker's guise) in the sight of God, who has made me a Prophet to this Nation.

This was rare and delicious indeed, fit for the season 'twas written in, when there was no King in Israel; and so eve∣ry Man wrote, and said what was right in his own Eyes: But now it may be dangerous to speak it over again; and therefore, says George Whitehead, pray observe,

That tho I wou'd help our Friend at a dead lift, I do not in the least, design to oppose the Peoples fair and lawful Elections, according to the true and just Intention, and Constitution of Parliaments.

No; we now pretend great Honour to Parliaments thus chosen, tho our Brother George Fox ••ail'd against it in his Days as intollerable. And we reprinted his Book (to

keep up his Testimony against this way of chusing Parliaments) several Years after King Charles return'd, and we are not alter'd in the least, our Principles being no other now, than they were at first: Indeed we may see Cause other∣wise to word the Matter; but our Intentions are the same as George Whitehead tells us; which Words we leave to the Consideration of wise Men, notwith∣standing all his Palliations of them. But Burroughs's scurrilous and unsavorory Language is not to be vindicated by all his Endeavours, stiling the Ministry the* 1.296 Whore that rode upon the Beast, and the Kings and Parliaments of England, the Beast that carried her; for 'twas they, that by Laws, settled the Mainte∣nance of the National Ministry, and not the Usurpers in the late Times, who were more ready to take it away, and wanted not Encouragement from the Quakers, who with great Impetuousness urg'd them unto it.

* 1.297He further rells us,

That when G. Fox had rung such a dreadful Peal in the Ears of Kings, Rulers, Judges, Justices, Lawyers and Constables, that they must all down and cease, and that the Saints should sing, rejoice, clap their Hands and be glad thereat, because the Lord Jehovah would take the Go∣vernment from them and reign; yea Jesus Christ would rule alone, and all those should be cut down with the same Power that cut down the King that* 1.298 reigned over the Nation.

Whitehead tells us this was wrote in the Year 1655, and he appeals to the whole Nation, whether the Tree of the then Government in England hath not been cut down and removed. A most wise and worthy Observation, design'd if he could to blind the Readers Eyes with; for Fox's Prophecy (as George Whitehead calls it, p. 34.) was that the Government should be taken from all these for Jesus Christ to rule alone: The King that reigned over the Nation was cut down, and all Rulers, Judges, Justices, Lawyers, and Constables were to be cut down, with the same Power which cut down the King, and never to have these any more; then we were to have another Earthly King, for Jesus Christ was to rule alone. And we appeal also to the whole Nation, whether we have not all these Officers still, Rulers, Judges, Justices, and Constables, every Branch of that fruitless Tree (as he call'd it) blessed be God, we have them spring from a better Root, though he had so thoroughly blasted them with his Thunder. Did George Fox design hereby to make way for King Charles II. to come and rule over the Nations, in the room of his Father, (who was cut down) and erect the same Government, which he had done? we trow not; for the Lord Jehovah was to reign, and Jesus Christ was to rule alone. As for the King who had once reigned over the Nation he was cut off, and by Fox's several Papers given forth (taken notice of p. 16. of Brief Discovery) they desired no more Earthly Kings; and indeed they made no more of Crown'd Heads, than of Quoif-men and Cap-men, whom they pack'd after him.

Whereas the Quakers presented a Declaration to K. Charles II. 1660. against all Plotters and Fighters, saying therein,

All bloody Principles and Practices, we, as to our own particulars, do utterly deny, with all Outward Wars, and Strife, and Fighting with Outward Weapons for any end, or under any pre∣tence whatsoever:

And this is our Testimony to the whole World, &c. George Whitehead takes it very ill that we should make this Marginal Note against it—Which Government, (viz. by Kings) that they might not sup∣port, they declare against the use of the Carnal Weapon; but what more natural

when as they not only used the Carnal Weapon before (to support the Rebels) in fighting against K. Ch. I. but boasted of their Services therein, as more extraor∣dinary than other Mens, one of them being better at that sport than seven others, and might be turned to seven other Men; and this they did besides their Estates (if they had any) paying their proportion in Taxes and Customs, which is all the support they now afford the Civil Government (as he acknowledges;) and which thousands amongst them cannot do by reason of their Poverty, and there∣fore ought to support it by their Personal Assistance, when called thereunto, but now they declare against fighting with Outward Weapons, and this they say is their Testimony to the whole World.—But their Light dictated this to them but just then, as Edward Burroughs confesses; for several of them had been engaged in the Parliament Service in the Wars,

But we are now (says he) bet∣ter informed than once we were, for though we do now more than ever* 1.299 oppose Oppression, and seek after Reformation, yet we do it not in the way of Outward Warring and Fighting with Carnal Weapons and Swords.

So that we may observe, by the way, that all their Principles are not now the same they were, when they were first a People, as Jos. Wyeth asserts (see Brief Discov. p. 26. 27.) and another of them who tells us,

God is the same, Truth is the same, his People the same, and their Principles the same; for they were once for fighting with Carnal Weapons, but now says Edward Burroughs, they are bet∣ter* 1.300 informed; and we do certainly know and so testifie to the World (as they say in their said Declaration to K. Ch.) that the Spirit of Christ which leads us into all Truth, will never move us to fight and war against any Man with Outward Weapons, &c.

And yet, alass! They not only may be, but 'tis evident they are mistaken herein; for now they can fight with Carnal Weapons, as we have a famous Instance in the printed Tryals of George Keith and others in Pensilvania. It fell out that some Pirates took a Sloop of the Quakers, which put them into great distress how to regain their Sloop, and yet preserve their Principle of not fighting with Carnal Weapons; but that was impossible, as the Case now stood, and truly they might lose all their Sloops, and all their Goods too, if they would not oppose Force to Force, which at last was resolv'd upon, and by so doing, they retook their Sloop, and made some of the Pirats Prisoners. Nay, in a Letter sent to Dan. Leeds by a Person of Note, which he printing in his Trumpet (p. 145.) an account is given him touching one Wal∣ter Clerk, an Ancient Quaker Preacher, and now Governor of Rhode-Issland,

That he had given several Commissions to Masters of Vessels, and Privateers to fight the French, and also had Commissioned the Officers of the Train∣Bands under his Government, sometimes heading the said Train-Bands himself, on his lofty prancing-Steed, Soldier-like, citing for his Defence Eph. 6. 12.

We wrestle not against flesh and blood, &c. And Edward Burroughs himself says,

We have chosen the Son of God to be our King, and he hath chosen us to be his People, and he might command Thousands, and Ten thousands of his Saints at this Day to fight in his Cause, &c.

(as in Brief Discovery, p. 22.) But he adds,

We cannot yet believe that he will make use of us in that way, though it be his only Right to rule in Nations, and our Heirship to possess the uttermost parts of the Earth; but for the present we are given up to bear and suffer.

Against these Passages was this Marginal Note made [And may reassume it, viz. the use of the Carnal Weapon, when they shall judge it meet]

which Geo. Whitehead says look like a very invidious Design ••••••••••ise Suspicion and Jealou∣sy in the Civil Government against them; but let any one judg whether it be not an Infe∣rence proper from these and the like Citations out of their Writings. Such Passages may well awaken the Government to ••••re and caution, that we suffer not by the Pretences of Meekness and Humility in such Me whose Teachers have laid down Principles so destruc∣tive, and that was the only reason of our mentioning them: When as the Quakers by their renewed Declarations, and pretended Messages from Heaven, would not suffer Oliver to rest, but resolved to put him upon fighting work enough; and had he been as enthusi∣astick as they, his Sword must have been sheathed in the Bowels of all the Nations round about him: For thus did they rave,

O Oliver! arise and come out, let not another take thy Crown, but let thy Souldiers go forth with a free and willing Heart, that thou mayst rock Nations as a Cradle:

and then comes forth the broad Seal of Heaven which they affix to the Commission they brought him, This is a Charge to thee in the presence of the Lord God. Prodigious Madness! which one would think could proceed from no Society but that of Bedlam.

* 1.301This passage and the next (cited in the Brief Discovery) Geo. Whitehead cannot disown, but says he has not the Books: but it matters not, for he can answer them without Book, i. e. nothing to the purpose, saying, Oliver and his Officers and Army had a day and Power given them, and so had Nebuchadnezzar and Rabshakeh with his Hosts. But he very well knew the design of quoting them, was to shew how eager the Quakers once were for using the carnal Weapon, and what dangerous Beautefeu's they had been, who endeavour'd to kindle a Fire that should consume Nations and Kingdoms; yea to mani∣fest with what a Gust and Relish they remembred the Slaughters made of the Royal Party, all the Glory of which they gave to Oliver: For thus Geo. Roffe (in his Book stiled, The* 1.302 Righteousness of God) speaks to Oliver Cromwell:

Thus saith the Lord, I have chosen thee amongst the thousands of the Nations, to execute my Wrath upon mine Enemies, and gave them to thy Sword with which I fought for the Zeal of my own Name, and gave thee the Enemies of my own Seed to be a Curse and a Reproach for ever, and made thee an Instrument against them; and many have I cut down by my Sword in thy Hand, that my Wrath might be executed upon them to the uttermost.

'Twas sure a mighty pleasure to some Persons to be satiated with Blood! God grant them better Tempers, and no opporunity to be so gratified for the future.

* 1.303As to Geo. Fox's Letter to the Council of Officers complaining that many Quakers were disbanded out of the Army who had been mighty serviceable there; and Eurroughs's De∣claration in the Name of all the Quakers, telling the Nation how dreadful they were to the Wicked (to the Cavaliers to be sure, who, as Whitehead says, were for Swearing,* 1.304 Cursing and Damning, &c.) and what right they had to possess the utmost parts of the Earth, tho for the present they did bear and suffer: To these, being so notoriously obnoxious, Geo. Whitehead is pleased to say nothing, but according to his shifting way tells us he has* 1.305 answered them in another place. (viz. in Christ's Lambs defended; a most proper place to do it in, for these were meek Lambs indeed, but fought like Dragons, since as Geo. Fox there says, they could turn one of them to seven Men, and had rather have one of them than 7 others) but upon perusal it appears so frivolous that we think he was asham'd to repeat it the 2d time to the World, which he has not in other places been nice or shy of doing, especially where so much Learning was shown, as in his Discourse, about* 1.306 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

CHAP. XII.

Of their ASSEMBLIES, &c.

GReat care is used to preserve their Assemblies, their Fund or Exchequer, the Regi∣ster of their Sufferings, &c. from having an evil Eye cast upon them by the World; telling us (for reflecting upon these) that we seem to be influenced by some treacherous Judas's or envious Apostates; and that we might not mistake whom they meant, he immediately mentions Mr. Bugg and Mr. Keith being quoted by us as to these things. As for what we have cited from Mr. Bugg's Books, if he has wronged them in that,

or by false or forged Quotat••ons, we desire they would ••ar••••••est it by a particular Notation of them, and then appeal to the Honourable House of Commons, to whom he has tendred se∣veral of his Papers, that they would inflict a condign Punishment on him: But we are well ••ffured that his Truth and Sincerity herein will abide the Test of their severest Scrutiny. G. Whitehead knows he had lately an opportunity (could he have made good his Accusations) of exposing Fr. Bugge before several of those Worthy Members in the House of our Rt. Re∣verend Diocesan in London; but what did he get by the Attempt but shame and confusion before so great a Presence? And as for Mr. Keith (who is now received into our Church, and deservedly respected by all the Members thereof) his excellent Learning, and, which is better, his great Modesty and known Sincerity, sets him as much above those that defame him, as a Chalice of pure Gold is in price beyond sounding Brass, or a tinkling Cymbal. However, let us see what Defence he is pleased to make for the things we reflected on.

* 1.307Concerning their Assemblies, he here in good conscience affirms, That they are all Re∣ligious* 1.308 Meetings; and afterwards particularly says, That their monthly, quarterly, and year∣ly Meetings, with their first Day and weekly Meetings, are upheld in the Name of the Lord for his Worship and Service. So then all their Meetings, monthly, quarterly, yearly, with their First-day and weekly Meetings, are Religious ones; and if so, how can they answer their not having them all open and free for every one to come into, that have a mind to do so? Is there not a Clause in that Statute (which gives them Liberty) that provides expresly for this?

Provided always, and be it enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That if any Assembly of Persons dissenting from the Church of England, shall be had in any place for Religious Worship with Doors lock'd, bar'd or bolted, during any time of such meeting together, all and every such person or persons that shall come to, and be at such Meeting, shall not receive any benefit from this Law, but be liable to all the Pains and Pe∣nalties of all the foresaid Laws recited in this Act for such their meeting, notwithstanding his taking the Oaths, and his making and subscribing the Declaration.

Yes; but George Whitehead answers, p. 43.

As to the Door of our yearly Meeting being kept by some Person or Persons, this we hope is no Offence in it self, the Door not being locked, bar'd or bolted, as prohibited.

But, George, is it not clearly the design of the Act,* 1.309 that all Meetings for religious Worship (as thou expresly sayest your yearly Meeting is, as well as the others upheld in the Name of the Lord for his Worship and Service) should be free for every one that pleases to come unto them? And does it not as much defeat the intent and aim of the Act to have the Doors secur'd by persons who shall hinder any from entring, as to have them locked, bar'd, or bolted? Thou hast, we see, a tender concern for the Letter of human Laws (tho the Letter of the Divine Law is but Dust and Death with you) but this is shamefully to baffle the meaning, whilst thou strictly observest the Letter of the Law, it designing all Religious Meetings should be open, not clandestine and secret; that nothing blasphemous, heterodox or profane should be published there, but present notice might be taken thereof: yea, that under the pretence of Religious Wor∣ship there should not be any caballing against Church or State, which is always done pri∣vately, and in the dark. But this intent of the Law you defeat by setting persons about the Door, that none but whom you please should enter in: and because the Door is not lock'd, bar'd or bolted, you conclude you make no breach of the Law, tho your cunning herein has deceived you, if any would proceed to try it; it being a Maxim with that great* 1.310 Lawyer, That Cases out of the Letter of a Statute, yet being within the same Mischief, or cause of making the same, shall be within the same Remedy that the Statute provides. But that we may note your Inconsistency herein, we observe, that in a Book called A just Censure, you* 1.311 say, These meetings are not intend•••• for Worship: So that as it serves your turn, they are either Religious or Political. If we speak of your Fund, for maintaining of which you raise Mony by Collection, Oh! then 'tis a Religious Meeting for the care of your Poor, and nothing else: for you have no mercenary Teachers, they singer none of it; tho we could, and that from good hands, tell you other things: But if we tell you of the Doors being guarded by men set on purpose to keep People from entring in, then 'tis no Religious but a Civil Political Assembly, not intended for Worship.

* 1.312As to what we cited from Mr. Keith, Geo. Whitehead puts us off to Th••. Elwood's An∣swer hereunto; and to be even with him we refer him to the Reply made by an excellent

Pen to Tho. Elwood, viz. the Piece call'd Satan disrob'd, which his Friend Tho. Elwood never thought fit to make any rejoinder unto, and we would advise him as Friends never to undertake it. What we observed further, that when the King and Parliament were so gracious as to include the Quakers in the Act for Toleration, it was with this condition, That nothing therein should be construed to exempt them from paying of Tythes (nay,* 1.313 as we have been credibly informed, their leading Men did then promise some of the Bishops that their People should duly and honestly pay them) yet notwithstanding in their year∣ly Meeting 1693. they order that all Godly care should be taken against the grand Op∣pression and Antichristian Yoke of Tythes, &c. This Geo. Whitehead does not in the least deny (to show their Gratitude and Ingenuity for the Favours re∣ceived) but labours to strengthen their Testimony by some of the Marty••s, who were he says of their mind herein, especially one Wm. Thorpe: This Wm. Thorpe was indeed a zealous but ignorant Man, who lived in the Beign of Henry the 4th, but was no Martyr. As if our Lord had not said upon a like occasion, The Labourer is northy of his Hire; and* 1.314 St. Paul had not sufficiently confirm'd the Ministers Maintenance by asking the Corinthi∣ans* 1.315 these short but smart Questions: Am not I an Apostle? And if so, how comes my Con∣dition to be worse than the rest of that rank? Have not we Power to eat and to drink, to be maintain'd s••mtu Eccl••si••••, at your cost whom we have preached unto? Nay, have we not Power to lead about a Sister, a Wife, as well as other Apostles, particularly the Brethren of the Lord and Cephas? Have not we as well as they a right to carry about our Wives and Families, and have them maintained by the Churches we come unto, as Peter and others? Or I only and Barnabas, have not we Power to forbear working? Why should we be denyed the Privilege common to all the rest?* 1.316 Nay he adds v. 11. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things? shall we not deserve Meat and Drink and other necessaries at your hands, when by our Ministry ye are inroll'd in the Book of Life, and made Heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven? Do you count it such a mighty thing that you afford us and our Familys Maintenance? truly 'tis no such great matter. But this Argument is too large to be entred upon here, and we the rather wave* 1.317 it, because 'tis not only done already, but promised by a worthy Person to be considered, which is already come out with respect to the Quaker Arguments against it, in a Treatise by it selt.

Touching a Register kept of their Sufferings (inflicted for the breach of the Laws) 'twas so evident and notorious, that Geo. Whitehead could not deny it; for their yearly E∣pistle 1693. found fault with their Monthly and Quarterly Meetings for not sending up* 1.318 full and complete Records thereof, and charged them to take more care for the future. But it seems they were too full to be true; for Mr. Pennyman, who was one of them about 20 Years, was greatly scandalized at the false Returns which were made, which tho proved to be false, they entred in their Register as true. And whereas the worthy Author of Sa∣tan Disrob'd had observ'd and remark'd this, viz. That in this Register there were ma∣ny groundless and many downright Falshoods, which 'tis fit the World should know, be∣cause they took great care to swell this Register, and had threatne 〈◊〉〈◊〉 publi•••• it to after∣ages; Geo. Whitehead crys out,

Pray observe, what a likely Story 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is, h••w should* 1.319 he know what is recorded in such a Register, if he never saw it no•• read it, as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pre∣sume he has not?

whenas he might have easily satisfied the Reader 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Au∣thor came to know it, if he would but have cited the whole Quotation, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 him in the Words following, that Mr. Pennyman gave the World an account there•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••••ad seen, read, and found fault with their unrighteous Practice therein: and yet Geo. Whitehead, good man, knew not how the Author of Satan disrob'd should know this, when t•••• ••••••ter part of the same Paragraph he cited, declar'd it (who so blind as those that will not see?) and then he makes his Reader believe that 'twas all a sham, just such a•• ••ne as he would put upon us in the following lines: for that Person having said they threatned to pub∣lish this Register of their sufferings to after-Ages;

No says Geo. Whitehead, 'tis ••n asper∣sion that the Author of the Snake, and Satan disrob'd, hath unjustly cast upon us, and 'tis not the first neither, for I know of none amongst us, says he, who have so threatned to publish it to after-Ages.

And you may be sure there's none have done so if this great

Cenfor Librorum know not of it, few coming-forth without being submitted to his Ex∣amen: But are there none then? recollect thy self good George, and blush if thou canst* 1.320 at so notorious an untruth, when we believe thou canst not but know that Wm. Pen says; Our faithful Chronicles of the Bloody Tragedies of the professing Generation will tell future Ages other things. And in his Rejoinder, p. 410. he saith, New Provocations ••nay give Occasion for their Register to come abroad to the Nation more compendiously than ever. And R. Barkle•• as he* 1.321 glories that thro their Faithful Testimony in the hands of the Lord, That Antichristian and apostatized Generation, the National Ministry (most meek and Lamb-like words) has received a deadly blow by our discovering and witnessing against their forc'd Maintenance and Tythes, which we have testified by many cruel Sufferings of all kinds; so he adds, As our Chronicles shall make known to Generations to come. This, we think, threatens the Na∣tion with a dreadful Storm at last, which has been so long a gathering. But to make the Measure of what the Quakers have suffer'd heap'd up, press'd down, and running over, we desire George Whitehead to insert in their Register what those Friends suffered which* 1.322 Dan. Leeds has given him an Abst••••ct of from the hands of their own Brethren about De∣laware, at Burlington, and other Places in East and West Jersey; and see if Quakers, when they have Authority and Power, are not as very Persecutors as any Professors or wicked Ca∣valiers. Oh! their Sufferings, their Sufferings must perpetually ring in our Ears, since (if* 1.323 you believe their great Burroughs) they are greater and more unjust than in the days of Christ or of the Apostles, or in any time since; for, says he,

What was done to Christ or to the Apostles, was chiefly done by a Law, and in great part by the du•• Execution of a Law, &c.

Which is so horrid and blasphemous, that the repeating of it makes us tremble, notwithstanding what George Whitehead says so largely in excuse, at least in mitigation, thereof: but his Reader would have thought him much more a Christian to have utterly censur'd and condemn'd such vile and wretched Expressions, than made the least Apology for them; and so we are sure, would any Church of England-man have done, had he found such a wicked Passage in any of the Writings of those of his own Communion. But we would desire G. Whitehead, as much as he contemns Fr. Bugg and his Postcript to the Brief Discovery, seriously to consider the Parallel he gives between the Quakers Sufferings and those of the Apostles and Martyrs, and tell us if there be any Comparison. These things we cannot but reflect upon, there are many things of a publick Nature which we have purposely omitted, and some that we have but gently touch'd up∣on, because we leave them to the Wisdom and Prudence of our Rulers in Church and State, fince what Inf••••ence they may have upon our Peace and Quiet, is their Province and not ours to take care of.

To the Clergy of the Diocess of Lincoln.

WHereas Francis Bugg has been very Useful by his Writings, in detecting the Blasphemies and Immoralities, and confuting the Errors of that Un∣believing Party in this Nation called QUAKERS, I do hereby recommend Him to your Favour, and his Writings to your Perusal; that by them you may see how much you are concerned to be watchful over the Souls committed to your Charge, that they be not infected with the Contagion of those damnable Doc∣trines taught and published amongst them; as also to endeavour the Recovery of those ignorant and well-meaning People that have been deluded by the cunning Insinuations, and false Pretences of the Leaders of that Party, who lie in wait to deceive, and use all Art and Diligence to spread their Errors, and increase their Numbers; in which they are very apt to pride and boast themselves.

I do also desire you to represent the Services of the said Francis Bugg in this kind, to the Gentry, and others, that are well-disposed, to incourage those who indeavour to defend the true Christian Religion against the Teachers of such Blasphemies and pernicious Errors. This Fr. Bugg has done with great Expences, as well as great Trouble, Travelling about, and Printing, and giving away several useful Books; of which you may have Account from himself and others.

Ja. Lincoln.

May 24. 1700.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Dr. Cudworth's true Notion of the Lord's Sup∣per.
• * 1.2

  John 1. 9.
• * 1.3

  viz. Richard Ashby, Tho∣mas Bonnet, John Hubbard, John Fidde∣man, Daniel Philips, Tho. Buckingham.
• † 1.4

  viz. Rich. Ash∣by, John Fid∣deman, and John Cade.
• * 1.5

  P. 52.
• * 1.6

  Num. 22. 28.
• * 1.7

  Eccl. 10. 20.
• * 1.8

  Hab. 2. 11.
• * 1.9

  Joh. 1. 3.
• * 1.10

  P. 4. l. 3.
• * 1.11

  Cited Brief Disc. p. 5. l. 31.
• * 1.12

  See Snake in the Grass, p. 20.
• * 1.13

  Brief Disc. p. 4, 5.
• * 1.14

  2 Cor. 13. 5.
• * 1.15

  Great Mys••e∣ry, p. 91.
• * 1.16

  ibid. p. 100.
• * 1.17

  P. 8.
• * 1.18

  Cressey 15 Re∣vel. of Divine Love, c. 49. 112.
• * 1.19

  Ch. 5. 12. 46. 105.
• * 1.20

  Ch. 56. p. 144.
• * 1.21

  See a Trumpet founded by D••n. Leeds, p. 17. Numb. 26. where the same is asserted by Geo. Fox, in his Epistle to Geo. W••. Di∣vin. of Christ.
• * 1.22

  P. 8. l. 7.
• * 1.23

  Quarles.
• * 1.24

  P. 353.
• * 1.25

  •• Tim. 1. 13.
• * 1.26

  De Vita Franc. c. 1. Sect. 2.
• * 1.27

  Vita Igna. l. 1. c. 1. l. 1. n. 44. e. 16.
• * 1.28

  P. 6.
• * 1.29

  P. 9. ult.
• * 1.30

  P. 10. init.
• * 1.31

  P. 5. col. 2.
• * 1.32

  P. 232.
• * 1.33

  See Wyeth's Switch, p. 20.
• * 1.34

  P. 107.
• * 1.35

  P. 6.
• * 1.36

  P. 33.
• * 1.37

  P. 11.
• * 1.38

  Acts 5. 3, 4.
• * 1.39

  Vers. 19.
• * 1.40

  Ezek. 13.
• * 1.41

  Pag. 36.
• * 1.42

  P. 12. l. 18.
• * 1.43

  P. 23. l. 12.
• * 1.44

  P. 12. ult.
• * 1.45

  Mat. 23. 3.
• * 1.46

  2 Cor. 2. 17.
• * 1.47

  1 Thess. 1. 5.
• * 1.48

  P. 7.
• * 1.49

  P. 96.
• * 1.50

  Gr. My••••.
• * 1.51

  P. 13.
• * 1.52

  P. 7.
• * 1.53

  P. 13.
• * 1.54

  Jude v. 14. 15.
• * 1.55

  Deut. 33. 2.
• * 1.56

  Zach. 14. 5.
• * 1.57

  1 Thess. 3. 13.
• * 1.58

  Chap. 4. 17.
• * 1.59

  v. 4.
• * 1.60

  v. 6.
• * 1.61

  Eccl. 8. 5.
• * 1.62

  Char. Essay, p. 6.
• * 1.63

  1 Cor. 2. 15.
• * 1.64

  1 Cor. 4. 3.
• * 1.65

  1 Cor. 6. 1-6.
• * 1.66

  News out of the North, p. 20.
• * 1.67

  Job 6. 30.
• * 1.68

  1 Cor. 14. 29.
• * 1.69

  Heb. 5. 14.
• * 1.70

  Gen. 3. 5.
• * 1.71

  Mal. 3. 18.
• * 1.72

  v. 14.
• * 1.73

  Truth defend∣ing, &c. p. 24.
• * 1.74

  Anno 1380.
• * 1.75

  Num. 25.
• * 1.76

  See Christ. no E••thus. p. 73.
• * 1.77

  P. 47.
• * 1.78

  P. 22.
• * 1.79

  Prov. 20. 9.
• * 1.80

  Prov. 30. 12.
• * 1.81

  Job 10. 2.
• * 1.82

  Eph. 6. 11.
• * 1.83

  Gr. Myst. p. 101.
• * 1.84

  Br. Disc. p. 7.
• * 1.85

  P. 281.
• * 1.86

  P. 279.
• * 1.87

  Mat. 5. 48.
• * 1.88

  Ad stabilien∣dam suam fal∣sissimam impi∣etatem impu∣dentissime de∣torquetur.
• * 1.89

  Bez. in Mat. 6. 10.
• * 1.90

  P. 7.
• * 1.91

  P. 10.
• * 1.92

  Gen. 17. 1.
• * 1.93

  Job. 1. 8.
• * 1.94

  Psal. 37. 37.
• * 1.95

  Phil. 3. 12, 13, 14, 15.
• * 1.96

  1 Pet. 5. 10.
• * 1.97

  1 Cor. 2. 6.
• * 1.98

  Mat. 5. 48.
• * 1.99

  1 Joh. 3. 3.
• * 1.100

  1 Pet. 1. 15, 16.
• * 1.101

  2 Pet. 1. 4.
• * 1.102

  Chap. 6.
• * 1.103

  v. 11, 12.
• * 1.104

  Heb. 5.
• * 1.105

  v. 12, 13, 14.
• * 1.106

  Dr. Lucas Rel. Per. 2d. edit. 3. pt. of Enq. p. 5, 6.
• * 1.107

  1 Jo. 3. 3.
• * 1.108

  Eph. 4. 12, 13.
• * 1.109

  Chap. 2.
• * 1.110

  P. 22, 23, &c. 2d Ed.
• * 1.111

  See also Geo. Keith's 4^th Narrative, P. 10. to 22. concerning their sinless Per∣fection.
• * 1.112

  Psal. 91.
• * 1.113

  Gal. 5. 17.
• * 1.114

  Rom. 7. 20, 21.
• * 1.115

  Eph. 6. 12, 13.
• * 1.116

  Gen. 3. 15.
• * 1.117

  Ecce Jehovam secialem! ecce po∣sitam inimicitiam in cajus Exorcitio sundarur hoc quicquid est Militiae! ecce primaevam belli istius denuntia∣tionem, quod ab Incunabulis mundi gestum est, etiamnum geritur, & geretur ad sinem seculi inter Chris∣tum cum suis ex unâ parte, & Di∣abolum ex alterâ cum suis Asseclis. Arrowsm. l. 1. c. 1. Sect. 5. Tact. sacr.
• * 1.118

  Hof. 14. 2, 4.
• * 1.119

  P. 1••.
• * 1.120

  See White∣head's Account of this Touth's Death, p. 2.
• * 1.121

  P. 8.
• * 1.122

  Answ. to the Westmorel. Petit. p. 30.
• * 1.123

  P. 17. P••r. 2.
• * 1.124

  P. 17. l. 3, 4, 5.
• * 1.125

  Letter of the 3d day, 3d month, 98. See Keith's 3d N••••. p. 66.
• * 1.126

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.127

  Myst. p. 24.
• * 1.128

  1 John 1. ••.
• * 1.129

  Rom. 1.
• * 1.130

  Sleidan's Comment, 5th and 10th Books. Ross's Appendix to his View of all Religions. Casaubon of En∣thusiasm. Spencer's Vulgar Pro∣phecies. Rutherford's Surve of the Spiritual Antichrist. Short Hi∣story of the Anabaptists in Ger∣many.
• * 1.131

  Rutherford, p. 6, 7, 8.
• * 1.132

  Hist. of the A∣nabapt. chap. 3. p. 21.
• * 1.133

  Melanct. de numero sacra∣ment.
• * 1.134

  See Christiani∣ty no Enthusi∣asm, pag. 125, 126.
• * 1.135

  Dr. Hicks. Short History of the Ana∣baptists, p. 51.
• * 1.136

  P. 24.
• * 1.137

  Dr. Hicks's Spirit of En∣thusiasm exor∣cis'd, p. 37, 38.
• * 1.138

  P. 39.
• * 1.139

  P. 40.
• * 1.140

  Calv. adv. Libertines, c. 2.
• * 1.141

  See Ruther∣ford's S••••vey of the Spiri∣tual Antichrist, cap. 9. p. 55, 56, 57, &c.
• * 1.142

  Rutherf. cap. ••. p. 15, 16, &c. Id. Part 2. p. 211.
• * 1.143

  See Brief Dis∣cov. p. 9.
• * 1.144

  P. 20. l. 19.
• * 1.145

  His Anarchy, p. 41.
• * 1.146

  Primmer, p. 8.
• * 1.147

  P. 7.
• * 1.148

  His brief Dis∣covery of the threesold state, p. 7, 8, 9, 10.
• * 1.149

  Acts 19. 19.
• * 1.150

  P. 20. l. 29.
• * 1.151

  P. 9. l. 31.
• † 1.152

  P. 101.
• * 1.153

  P. 21. l. 6.
• * 1.154

  John 7. 45, 46.
• * 1.155

  Ibid. l. 16.
• * 1.156

  Invalid. of Fal∣do's Vindie. p. 124.
• * 1.157

  His Address to Protestants, p. 118, 119.
• * 1.158

  See his Answ. to Keith's Narrat. p. 75.
• * 1.159

  P. ••. l. 2••.
• † 1.160

  Truths De∣fence, p. 2. and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 4.
• * 1.161

  Acts 13. 11.
• * 1.162

  Acts 19. 13.
• * 1.163

  Serious Search p. 58.
• * 1.164

  P. 13.
• * 1.165

  Quakers Quib.
• * 1.166

  Quakers Plain∣ness, p. 34.
• * 1.167

  Quakerism a new Nick∣name, p. 15.
• * 1.168

  P. 153.
• * 1.169

  Emericus di∣rect. inquisiti∣on. p. 2. quest. 15. error 35.
• * 1.170

  Maimon. de fundam. legis, c. 7. §. 11.
• * 1.171

  Acts 2. 22.
• * 1.172

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.173

  P. 105.
• * 1.174

  P▪ 5.
• * 1.175

  P. 22. l. 21.
• * 1.176

  P. ••.
• * 1.177

  Brief Exam. P. 3. printed 1681. see Brief Discovery, P. 14.
• * 1.178

  Acts 9. 1, 4.
• * 1.179

  1 Tim. 1. 13, 14.
• * 1.180

  Luke 23. 34.
• * 1.181

  Acts 9. ••.
• * 1.182

  1 Tim. 1. 1••.
• * 1.183

  Truth defend∣ing Quakers, p. 65.
• * 1.184

  Reason against Railing, p. 102.
• * 1.185

  P. 22. l. 15.
• * 1.186

  P. 22. l. 6.
• * 1.187

  P. 22. l. 10.
• * 1.188

  Spondani An∣nales. A. D. 1204. n. 17.
• * 1.189

  Mat. Paris Hist. 909.
• * 1.190

  P. 31, 32. printed, 74.
• * 1.191

  Stillingfleet's Fanaticism, &c. p. 341.
• * 1.192

  P. 515.
• * 1.193

  P. 71.
• * 1.194

  P. 10. Light & Life, 17.
• * 1.195

  Howgil. 68, 7••, 251.
• * 1.196

  Fisher's Mes∣sages of the Lord, p. 19, 21.
• * 1.197

  History of Quakerisin, p. 53.
• * 1.198

  P. 138.
• * 1.199

  Mather's An∣swer to the Switch, p. 4. G. Fox's Great Myst ••. 77. ult.
• * 1.200

  Defence of the Snake. Collect. p. 15. Numb. the first.
• * 1.201

  An Account from the Child of Light, p. 19.
• † 1.202

  P. 43.
• * 1.203

  Printed 59.
• * 1.204

  P. 8.
• † 1.205

  See Leeds, p. 145.
• * 1.206

  Gr. Myst. 142. Quaker Plain∣ness, p. 24.
• * 1.207

  Judgment fix∣ed, p. 268.
• * 1.208

  Primmer, p. 10.
• * 1.209

  Re••••inder, p. 1••••.
• † 1.210

  Additional Append. p. 21.
• * 1.211

  Morning∣Watch, p. 22, 23.
• * 1.212

  Truth desend∣ing Quakers, p. 20.
• * 1.213

  Light and Life, p. 8.
• * 1.214

  See further for this purpose, G. Kei••h's 4th Narra••. p. 41, 42, 43, 44, 45.
• * 1.215

  C••r••stian Qua∣ker, p. 97.
• * 1.216

  Truth and In∣〈8 letters〉〈8 letters〉, p. ••4. l. ••.
• * 1.217

  P. 596.
• * 1.218

  Light and Life, p. 40.
• * 1.219

  His Nature of Christianity, p. 41.
• * 1.220

  Primmer, p. 8.
• * 1.221

  Great Myst. p. 250.
• * 1.222

  P. 39.
• * 1.223

  Sword of the Lord drawn, p. 5.
• * 1.224

  1 Cor. 1. 2, 3.
• 1 1.225

  Primmer, p. 6.
• 2 1.226

  Reason a∣gainst Rai••ing, p. 108. 109.
• 3 1.227

  P. 4.
• 4 1.228

  News come out of the North, p. 1••.
• 5 1.229

  P. 26. l. 12.
• * 1.230

  P. 27. l. 3.
• * 1.231

  P. 127. l. 20.
• * 1.232

  P. 47.
• * 1.233

  P. 22. l. ••.
• * 1.234

  Acts 5. 20.
• * 1.235

  Acts 8. 25. 26.
• * 1.236

  Acts 9. 11.
• * 1.237

  Acts 16. 10, 9.
• * 1.238

  Act. 19. 20. 22.
• * 1.239

  Acts 23. 11.
• * 1.240

  2 Tim. 1. 11.
• * 1.241

  P. 713.
• * 1.242

  P. 26.
• * 1.243

  Sect. 14.
• * 1.244

  P. 26. l. 14.
• * 1.245

  Antidote a∣gainst the Snake, p. 112.
• * 1.246

  New Cate∣chis••, 134.
• * 1.247

  Primmer, p. 8.
• * 1.248

  1 Cor. 5.
• * 1.249

  1 Cor. 15.
• * 1.250

  1 Cor. 11.
• * 1.251

  1 Cor. 1.
• * 1.252

  Answer to the Snake. 112.
• * 1.253

  Answer to the Snake▪ 172 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.254

  Polandinus, n. 68, 69.
• * 1.255

  Ans. to Snake, p. 112.
• * 1.256

  Answer to Snake, p. 112.
• * 1.257

  Ibid. p. 114.
• * 1.258

  Ibid.
• * 1.259

  Light and Life, p. 52.
• * 1.260

  See the Cry of a Stone, p. 4, 5, 6, 7, &c. and p. 20, qa••ted in Chris∣tianity no En∣thusiasm, p. 96, 100.
• * 1.261

  Jer. 9. 1.
• * 1.262

  A Visitation of Love unto the King, and the Royalists. p. 4, 5.
• * 1.263

  An Epistle to Friends con∣cerning the pre∣sent and suc∣ceeding Times, p. 13, 15.
• * 1.264

  Rich. Crane's Strict Account of Bab. Merch. printed for Tho. Symons at the Bull and Mouth, &c.
• * 1.265

  See Will. Ma∣ther's Answer to the Switch for the Snake, p. 10. in the Appendix.
• * 1.266

  Casaubon of E••thas. 2d Edit. cap. 3. p. 270, 171.
• * 1.267

  Defence of the Snak in the Grass, Part 1st. from p. 42. to p. 72.
• * 1.268

  See Numb. 23. 19. Josh. 23. 14. 1 Sam. 3. 19. Es. 14. 24. Hab 23. Mat. 5. 18.
• * 1.269

  Mr. M••de in his 93 Letter to Mr. Hartlib. lib. 4. p. 878.
• * 1.270

  See Dr. Spen∣cer's Vanity of Vulgar Pro∣phesies, cap. 1. p. 6, 7, 21. cap. 5. p. 85.
• * 1.271

  Jer. 27. 9.
• * 1.272

  Rom. 13. 1.
• * 1.273

  See the De∣claration in the Brief Dis∣covery, p. 22.
• * 1.274

  His Letter is at the end of the Snake.
• * 1.275

  Rev. 21. 24.
• * 1.276

  See Snake p. 206. 3d Edit.
• * 1.277

  Pag. 32.
• * 1.278

  George Bishop's Book of War∣nings, printed in the begin∣ning of the year 1660.
• * 1.279

  See Defence of the Snake, part 1. p. 86, 87.
• * 1.280

  Num. 23. 9.
• * 1.281

  Plut. in De∣most.
• * 1.282

  Fox to the Parliament of the Common∣wealth of Eng∣land, p. 5, 8.
• * 1.283

  See Whitehead, p. 33.
• * 1.284

  Pag. 35.
• * 1.285

  Pag. 31.
• * 1.286

  Pag. 18.
• * 1.287

  Pag. 31. lin. 17.
• * 1.288

  Judg. 9.
• * 1.289

  See Pennyman's Quakers Con∣tradictions, sect. 17. p. 6.
• * 1.290

  Pag. 31. l. 30.
• * 1.291

  1 Sam. 8. ult.
• * 1.292

  E. Burroughs's Advice to the ••arl. 1659. but this Paper is it seems left out in his Works re∣printed 1672. See Pennym••n's Quakers Con∣tradictions, sect. 20.
• * 1.293

  Pag. 32, 33.
• * 1.294

  See the Brief Discovery, p. 17.
• * 1.295

  Pag. 33.
• * 1.296

  Brief Discove∣ry, p. 18.
• * 1.297

  Whitehead's Truth and Inno∣cency vindica∣ted, p. 35.
• * 1.298

  Brief Discove∣ry, p. 19.
• * 1.299

  In his Visitat. of Love to the King, p. 10.
• * 1.300

  See George Keeth's 4th Narrative, p. 30, 31.
• * 1.301

  P. 21.
• * 1.302

  Ibidem.
• * 1.303

  Brief Discove∣ry, p. 21, 22.
• * 1.304

  P. 38.
• * 1.305

  P. 39.
• * 1.306

  Truth and In∣noc. p. 25.
• * 1.307

  P. 39.
• * 1.308

  P. 41.
• * 1.309

  P. 41.
• * 1.310

  Coke's Inst. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••.
• * 1.311

  P. 26.
• * 1.312

  Brief Discov. p. 22, 23, 24.
• * 1.313

  Brief Discov. p. 24.
• * 1.314

  Luc. 10. 7.
• * 1.315

  1 Cor. 9. 1, 4, 5, 6.
• * 1.316

  See Clem. Alex. lib. 3. lib. 7. Stro∣mat. and Euseb. from him, lib. 3. cap. 30. of his Eccles. Hist. as well as Modern Writers, Piscat. Parcus, Crel∣lius and Slicting. in loc.
• * 1.317

  The Author of the Snake in the Grass.
• * 1.318

  Brief Discov. p. 25, 26.
• * 1.319

  Truth and In∣nocency, p. 44.
• * 1.320

  Judas and the Je••s, p. 41.
• * 1.321

  Anarchy, p. 42.
• * 1.322

  Trumpet sound∣ed, &c. c. 10. p. 91, 92, &c.
• * 1.323

  Br. Dise. p. 26.