The snake in the grass: or, Satan transform'd into an angel of light. Discovering the deep and unsuspected subtilty which is couched under the pretended simplicity of many of the principal leaders of those people call'd Quakers.

SECT. X. Concerning the Quakers Infalli∣bility.

THis Section may seem need∣less, as being included in the former. For who pretend to an Equality with God, to the same Immediate Revelation with Christ, the Prophets, and Apostles had, must needs be Infallible. But I conceive it will be worth the Readers while to see how they Branch it, and Descend to parti∣cular Marks and Instances of their Infallibility. This Section therefore is like opening the Jugler's Box— And you may expect to see Ra∣reties.

I told you before how their Infallibility was Palm'd upon them by the Church of Rome. Of which they were so greedy, that they swal∣low'd it down by whole-sale; and wou'd have none of those Cautions, with which the Church of Rome us'd to Defend them∣selves, or else forgot them, in their Haste, and in their Hony Month while they were New∣fangl'd. Thus, while the Church of Rome plac'd their Infallibility on∣ly in their Church, or at most in the Pope alone, as the Head of it; the Quakers set up for it, All, and every One of them! There was an Infallibility for you! The Church of Rome had cunning Hiding Places, and if you attack'd the Infallibili∣ty of their Church, they wou'd not

tell you what they meant by their Church, nor where to find their Infallibility: some wou'd make you believe that it was in the Pope, as Head of the Church, and only Successor of Peter, to whom the Promises Super hanc Petram, and Tues Petrus, were made. But then some distinguished, and said, not in Peter alone, nor always, but on∣ly when he was in Cathedra; and some said that was with his Con∣clave; others said no; but only with a General Council. Again some plac'd the Infallibility in the Council above the Pope; others in the Pope above the Council; others in neither of them asunder, but on∣ly in both together: And lastly, some will have it none of all these ways, but say it is only to be look'd

for in the Diffusive Body of the Church. And then as to the Infallibili∣ty it self, some tell us that it relates to Manners as well as Faith; and to Practice as well as Theory: O∣thers will by no means admit of that; but confine it wholly to matters of Faith: And then it will be a long Dispute what shall be adjudg'd a Matter of Faith, and what not, but only as Relating to Faith.

These are long and intricate Mazes; and it requires no little Skill to be able to follow them thro' all these various Subterfuges.

But the Simplicity of our Quakers has depriv'd them of every one of these Helps. For as they place Infallibility in every single Quaker; so they confine it not to matters of

Faith, but extend it to all Persons and Things. To know all Mens Hearts, and all Things in the World, by their inward Light, without be∣ing told by any.

I am sure, by this time, the Reader is impatient to come to the Proof, to see if it be possible for Men to be possess'd with such an incredible degree of Enthusiasm: And I am willing to begin, that I may no longer lie under the su∣spicion of Imposing unjustly; or, at least, of Aggravating any thing against them.

G. Fox says plainly, Gr. Myst. p. 89. That they can discern who are Saint, who are Devils, and who Apostates, without speaking ever a word. Ibid. p. 5. That they have the Word of God, Christ which is Eter∣nal

and Infallible in their Hearts, to judge Persons and Things.

Thou (says he to his Opponent, p. 96.) not being Infallible, thou art not in the Spirit, and so art not a Minister, and art not able to judge of Powers that is not Infallible, nor Magistrates, nor Kingdoms, nor Churches.

Now which of the Quakers is it who have this Spirit, to judge thus Infallibly of Persons and Things, of Powers, Magistrates, Kingdoms, and Churches? And to discern Mens Hearts, who are Saints and who Apostates, and that without being told by any, as G. F. expresses it, without speaking ever a word?

This is told us in p. 7. of Ed∣ward Burrough's Epistle to the Reader of G. F's Great Mystery, where he

says, that this Infallible Spirit was given. To us (says he) every one of us in particular— And this Light gave us to discern between Truth and Error, between every false and right way, and it Perfectly discover'd to us the true state of All Things.

Thou say'st (says Fox to his Opponent, p. 107.) that the Holiest Man is not able to give an In∣fallible Character of another Man: Hast thou not in this discover'd thy self to be no Minister of Christ, or of the Spirit? Who cannot give an Infallible Chara∣cter of another Man, how canst thou Minister to his Condition? How canst thou see where he is? How canst thou see them that be turned from the Darkness, and that be in the Darkness, and

distinguish the one from the o∣other, and an Holy Man from an Unholy Man, that canst not give an Infallible Character of and Man's Estate.

And p. 94.

Have ye given your selves a Name of the Church of Christ, and is there not a Spirit of discerning among you? Have ye not manifested here that ye are Harlotted from the Church of Christ the Apo∣stles were of? And how can ye Minister or Teach People, if ye do not discern their states, how they stand before God? How can you commend your selves to every Man's Conscience in God's sight? How can ye present the Souls of Men to God, and see not their states

how they are in his sight? How come ye to have Fellowship in the Spirit? How can you or a∣ny Minister to the state and condition that People be in, and see where they are, and doth not see how they stand in God's sight.

Here the Quakers have Exclud∣ed all from the Church of Christ, from having any Fellowship in the Spirit, who have not this Infallible Spirit of discerning every Man's Heart.

And it is evident (as I will shew presently) that they did not dis∣cern George Keith, Francis Bugg, and many others, whom, for many years they own'd as true Quakers, and some of them as Mini∣sters among them, and boasted a

long time in their Gifts, and thought them to be Principal Pil∣lars among them, whom now they Vilifie as Wicked Apostates: And therefore by their own Argu∣ment, they are Harlotted from the Church of Christ, and have no Fellow∣ship in the Spirit.

Page 33. He that is not infal∣lible in his Council, and Judg∣ment and Advice, is not he in Er∣ror? And are they Ministers of Christ that are Fallable?

Page 105. G. Fox condemns all Protestant Churches, as well as the Church of Rome, for want of this Infallible Spirit, which the Qua∣kers ascribe only to themselves. These are his words.

We says he (the Pope) and you (the Protestants, whom he calls Pro∣fessors)

are Apostatized from the Infal∣lible Spirit that the Apostles was in, In which we are come— For who witness these Conditions that they were in that gave forth the Scriptures, they witness Infallibility, an Infallible Spirit, which is now Possessed and Witnessed among those called Quakers, Glory to the Highest for ever.

This is dreadfully Astonishing! But I was much more surpriz'd to find the otherwise Ingenious Wil∣liam Penn laugh at his Adversary for not being Infallible.

There was an Anonymous Book wrote against the Quakers, call'd, Controversy Ended; to this Mr. Penn Reply'd in a Sheet of large Paper in Print, which he Entituled, A Winding-Sheet for Controversy Ended, which bears Date the 16 of the

12th. Month, 1672. In the first page, he catches up the Author, (whom he calls Henry Hedworth) for saying that he had been mista∣ken in the good Opinion he had before of Mr. Penn's Judgment and Conscience. How can he chuse (says Mr. Penn) who denies Infal∣libility? But if mistaken before, why not in the Quakers now? And so ad Infinitum, being so Fallible. And, p 3. Sect. 2. He Vindicates what George Fox had asserted of the Quakers Infallibility; for ha∣ving Repeated these words of G. Fox's (which were put as an Ob∣jection against him) How can ye be Ministers of the Spirit, and not be In∣fallible? And how can they but Delude the People, who are not Infallible? He makes this Reply. I Answer

(says he) G. F's words stand immovable for ever. And he gives this strange Reason to support himself and G. F. For, says he, He that is a Mini∣ster of the Spirit, is Infallibly for And in that Ministry, is Infalli∣ble, otherwise the Spirit's Ministry is Fallible. Which is such a Con∣sequence as this, that if any Man, who is lighted by the Sun, stum∣ble, or miss his way, the fault is in the Sun, which shew'd him a False Light. What else can be the meaning of that saying, that if a Minister be not Infallible, then the Ministry of the Spirit is Fallible? To make God himself Fallible, ra∣ther than we shou'd not be Infal∣lible.

But he comes quite off of this again in the next page and Sect.

And this, says he, Roundly checks his (Hen. Hedworth, his Opponent) saying, That I bestow'd 32 pages to prove George Fox's Spirit to be Infallible; For that belongs, simply to God alone, and then those that are led by it, which was my Question, and in which sense, He is, and all such persons are Infallible, as he himself confesseth, page 27. And if be fool'd himself by any other Belief of us before, let him look to that.

Here Henry Hedworth is made Infallible too! Whom, in this same Winding-Sheet (as above Quoted) he calls a very Night-Bird, and Va∣grant, Bursten'd with Folly and Re∣venge, a Busie-Body, Cavelling, Con∣ceited, Proud, Wrathful, Equivocating, Slandering, Cowardly Man, &c. all which Epistles, and all the rest

which the Quakers so Liberally be∣stow upon their Adversaries; may, by this Rule, belong to George Fox, or any other Infallible Quaker.

Nay, the Devil himself is In∣fallible, at this rate, for he has his Knowledge, as well as Being from God; Knowledge is Light: and if that Knowledge which comes from God be Infallible, then while the Devil follows that Light or Know∣ledge, he must be Infallible: And if this be all the Infallibility which the Quakers ascribe to themselves, it distinguishes them not from Wicked Men or Devils.

But, sure George Fox meant some∣thing more by it, when by it, he distinguish'd the Quakers from all other sorts of Men; and ascrib'd to them an Infallible Discerning

Spirit, to know the Hearts of Men, without speaking ever a word.

Of which I wish Mr. Penn wou'd afford us, I will not say an Infal∣lible, but an Intelligible Comment; for I protest, I say not this out of any Obstinacy or Perverse Tem∣per, but to be able to apprehend, if possible, what these Men wou'd be at: For they turn and wind this Infallibility of theirs at such a rate, that no Man can (I am sure cannot) know what they mean by it. Sometimes it makes them as Infallible as the Apostles, nay, as Christ Himself. But at other times, when they are press'd, they bring down this Infallibility to mean no∣thing in the World that does di∣stinguish them from other Men: Tho' it was upon the pretence of

this, that they did separate them selves from the Church, and from all other Men: For they said that they ought not to be Subject to, nor had need to be Guided by any Church, who had an Infallible Guide within their own Breasts; that is, each Particular Person for himself, as before is told.

But this pretence is now explo∣ded by the Separate Quakers; and Explain'd, at some turns, by the others, as above by Mr. Penn, to mean just nothing; that is, nothing which differences them from other Men; or any thing New, or other than what all Mankind have ever acknowledg'd, to wit, Tha•• every Man's Reason, Knowledge Conscience, Light within, or by what ever other Name or Names you

may express it, was given him by God; and so is an Inspiration or Breathing of His into our Soul. But this will no more prove it to be Infallible, or Sufficient, of it self, to bring us to Heaven, than it will follow that Man cannot die, because God Breathes into him the Breath of Life; or that he is Omnipotent, because his Strength comes from God. Omniscence and Infallibility is as much God's Attri∣bute as Omnipotence: And the Strength which God has given to our Bodies is as sufficient to climb up to the Skies, as the Wisdom or Light which He has given to our Souls was sufficient, of it self, to have found out the Redemption of Lost Man, by the Incarnation, and Sa∣tisfaction of Christ to God's Justice

for our sins; or if found out, to have paid that Price, and to have accomplished that whole won∣derful Oeconomy of our Salva∣tion, by our own Abilities: So very Insufficient is the Light within us, even tho' follow'd to the ut∣most, by its own strength, to car∣ry us to Heaven. And therefore the Quakers Preaching up the Suf∣ficiency of the Light within (as all of them, but the Separatists, do) is not only highly Derogatory to the Satisfaction paid by Christ for our sins: But it is Blasphemous in ascri∣bing to our selves a Power suffi∣cient to work out our own Salva∣tion; whereas no Wisdom, less than Infinite, cou'd have found out the Means, nor Power less than Infinite cou'd have Effected our Sal∣vation.

And tho' we are Commanded, Phil. 2.12. to work out our own Salvation, that is, to perform the Conditions which are requir'd on our Part. That does not make the Light within the Efficient Cause of our Salvation, or give it any Title to Infallibility, more than ver. 13. of the 4th Chap. in the same Epistle, can Entitle us to Omnipo∣tence, because St. Paul says there, I can do all things.

But if any cou'd pretend to In∣fallibility from the Countenance of some Texts in Scripture, they will be found to have the best Title to whom the Quakers wou'd most un∣willingly grant it. For it is Writ∣ten Prov. 16.10. A Divine Sentence is in the Lips of the King, and his Mouth Transgresseth not in Judgment.

If either Pope or Quaker cou'd shew such a Text for either of their In∣fallibilities, we shou'd never have done with them.

I fansie I hear George Whitehead answering of this Text thus. That Kings Lips and their Mouths were only made Infallible by this: But that they might Transgress in their Hearts, and with their Hands, and make Signs with Head, Eyes, or Feet, for Unrighteous Judgments, or Subscribe tho' not Dictate wicked Decrees.

If he think that this is making too bold with him, I learn'd it from himself in his Sheet call'd, A Charitable Essay, Printed in Answer to Fr. Bugg's New Rome Unmask'd; there, p. 6. he Answers the be∣fore-mentioned Quotation out of

G. Fox, that they (the Quakers) cou'd discern who were Saints, and who Apostates, without speak∣ing ever a word, and he puts it off Ingeniously thus, That they cou'd discern it by their Lofty Looks, Wanton and Scornful Eyes, Envious and Fallen Countenances. And so, without speaking ever a word. What! Do you think that the Quaker In∣fallibility is limited to speaking on∣ly? they can make an Infallible Judgment of Men's Hearts, and tell who are Saints and who Devils, by very Winks and Glances! But if Envious and Fallen Countenances be such sure Marks of Devils, I wou'd advise some Friends to go to the Dancing-School, and learn a more Gentle and Graceful Mien: For it wou'd be a sad thing to be made a

Devil of, for scrouling down ones Head, or their Hat hanging o∣ver their Eyes!

Therefore, George; Hold up thy Face and look like a Man! Come, be Brisk, and tell me, by Yea and by Nay, is not this very hard Fishing for Infallibility? Thou, and thy God-father Fox can know a Saint from a Devil, without speak∣ing, but not without a little Min∣cing and Prinking; if Thee but once see him Peep, or Trip it through the Floor a turn or two, Thou couldst spy the Cloven Foot present∣ly.

Alas! Poor George! Is the Infal∣lible Quaker dwindled down to a meer Gypsie, or Paltry Fortune-Tel∣ler, to nothing but a little Skill in Physiognomy!

Ah! George! What a Blessed Spirit wouldest Thee have thought Satan, if Thee hadst seen him, when he was Transform'd into an Angel of Light!

Thou hast seen him, George, so Transform'd, and hast so mista∣ken him.

But smaller Juglers than he, can easily deceive these Infallible Phy∣siognomists.

In the very Dawning of the Quaker Light, when their Infalli∣bility was spick and span new, be∣fore those Miserable Flaws, which have been since Discover'd in it, in the year, 1655. the very year after Quakerism came first to London, there happen'd a Notorious De∣tection of George Whitehead's Infalli∣bility by Signs and Faces, as well

as of George Fox's, without speaking ever a word.

For so it fell out, that a Preci∣ous Brother, one Char. Atkinson, being in Prison in Norwich, for the New Faith in the Infallible Light, prov'd Carnally Fallible in Dark∣ness with a Dear Sister, the Maid of Thomas Symons, who was like∣wise one of the Infallible.

Now these put so good a Face upon the matter, that neither by their Lofty Looks, Wanton and Scorn∣ful Eyes, Envious and Fallen Counte∣nances, were they discover'd.

Nay, tho' there was some su∣spicion of it, and, as R. Hubber∣thorne tells some other Infallible Friends, J. N. F. H. and E. B. in his Letter from Wramplingham, Dated the 9th Day of the 5th

Month, 1655. while (as Hubber∣thorne saith) in the Wisdom of God we were searching it out, and in his Will, waiting for his Counsel— Yet all this notwithstanding, and that in his said Letter, he desires that George Fox may be acquainted with it, and names George Whitehead too by Name (whose Letter to the fore∣said J. N. F. H. and E. B. Da∣ted the 9th of the 5th Month, is added to the abovesaid Letter of Hubberthorne's, in the Copy which I have seen) I say, notwithstand∣ing of all this, neither G. Fox, G. VVhitehead, nor any other of the Infallible Gang, cou'd find it out, till Christopher Atkinson, Pricked, as he said, with the stings of his own Conscience; did freely, and of his own accord confess it, and

Sign'd a Paper of Condemnation of himself for this wicked Fact, Dated in Norwich Gaol the 3d Day of the 5th Month, 1655. and gave it, as an Act of Penance, and of the Sincerity of his Repen∣tance to three Friends, John Stubbs, VVilliam Cotton, and Tho. Symons.

But these not regarding the Sa∣credness of the Seal of Confession, or being not acquainted with it; and fearing that this wou'd be known, and so reflect upon the in-errable Society, and preferring their own Honour, to the Honour of God, and the Restoring of a Laps'd Brother, did resolve to Reveal his Confession, and then Renounce him; which they did (and pretended that it was by the special Direction of God) by send∣ing

his Paper of Confession to the Magistrates (tho' they thought them to be the Children and Ru∣lers of Darkness) which was un∣der-written in these words.

The above-written being declar'd to me, I am mov'd of the Lord to make it known to you that are the Rulers of this City, that the Truth of God may be cleared, and he to bear his own ini∣quity, who hath done this wicked Deed, which is hated of them that dwell in the Light.

This from me, Tho. Symons.

But now, how do you think they contriv'd to salve their Infal∣libility that cou'd not find out this of Christopher Atkinson till he told it himself?

Why! most Cleverly! As we have it in another Letter of the a∣bove R. Hubberthorne to E. B. F. H. Ger. Roberts, and the rest, from Gissing, the 5th Day of the 5th Month, 1655. wherein he a∣scribes this Confession of C. A's to a miraculous Force upon him from God, and against his own Will. And therefore we are left to suppose (if we please) that it was obtain'd by their Prayers. His words are these. VVhen it was intended by them (Christopher Atkinson and the Maid) to have been hid, they were forced from the witness of God in them to Declare it, and own their Condemnation.

And here was a greater Miracle than if they had found it out of themselves; if they could prevail

with God to force the very Guilty Parties to confess it, against their own Wills.

And therefore no thanks to them— And therefore these Qua∣ker Confessors were not bound to Conceal the Confession which C. A. made to them in Prison; nor to seek to Restore him, but rather to Drive him farther into Despair, by quite throwing him off, and disowning him.

There was much more tender Regard shew'd to some Young Wo∣men, who had given a Confession in VVriting to John Bolton of their Frailty in the Flesh, as is told in the Spirit of the Hat, Printed, 1673. p. 43. but it was hush'd up, be∣cause (as the Quaker Author De∣clares) it touched many Eminent ones in

the Ministery; who from day to day resorted unto them, and giving them these Appellations: Innocent Lasses, and Daughters of Sion.

Instances can likewise be given of some of their She-Preachers (whom they call Traveling Friends) that went abroad to propagate the Faith, and to settle the Churches, who got something in their Jour∣ney which made them Propagate and Travail, even according to the Letter.

It is not good Manners to name Names upon such an Occasion. Yet, if the Friends will plead Ig∣norance, something may be done for their Satisfaction. But let the shame lie at their own Door. It is but ask and have.

But we may make a little more bold with the Mens Infallibility. And I will not go to Mean ones. The great James Naylor was brought upon his Knees before their Church, where George Fox Presided, to acknowledge his Failings. And I saw, in George Fox's own Hand, this Sentence a∣gainst James Naylor, viz. Friends shall not be judged, for judging of him, J. N. This was preserv'd by one present (among many others) when he wrote it. This James Naylor suffer'd himself to be Ho∣sanna'd into Bristol, as Christ was into Jerusalem. And I have told you before of G. Fox's ascribing not only the Names and Titles of Christ, but his Power and Virtue, to himself; and others of their Prea∣chers

Invoking and Worshiping him, as God, in the Stile and Attributes of God.

These are much more dreadful Failings than those (before spoke of) of the Flesh, than those of W. W. of Hallelujah Fish (the Saints know whom I mean) and several others whom I cou'd name. And I had not mention'd one single Person, if it had not been against Pretenders to Infallibility; which Plea leads us Naturally and Ne∣cessarily into this sort of Redar∣gution: as giving a Man a Fall is the shortest and plainest Con∣viction that he is not Almighty. And I am very sure that all the knowing among the Quakers will believe that it was meerly the ne∣cessity of the Argument which

forc'd me to expose the Failings of any; for that if it had proceeded from any Inveteracy or Malice, Catalogues might have Been pro∣duc'd, instead of single Instances here set down, and those at great Distance.

But I hope what has been said will be sufficient (and then it has reach'd my Purpose) to cure Men of this most mistaken pretence to Infallibility; grounded upon the Infallibility of the Spirit of God: as if nothing cou'd proceed from Infallibility but what was Infallible; or from Omnipotence, but what was it self Omnipotent.

But tho' God Omnipotent and In∣fallible did Create all things that are; yet there is VVeakness, Error, and Sin in the World.

Of all which there is not any Instance so great, as of those who deny this, who are not sensible of their own VVeakness and Falli∣bility, but pretend to Perfection and that even Infallible.

But let such consider, that it is a just Judgment from God, to give up those to follow their own I∣maginations, who, of their own Heads, durst presume to leave those Guides (the Bishops of the Church) under whose Government God had plac'd them; and to rend the Body of Christ by a cause∣less, and Desperate Schism.

So that even their Error may, in this Sense, come from God, that is, as a Judgment upon them.

And for this cause (says St. Paul, 2 Thess. 2.11.) God shall send them

strong Delusion, that they should be∣lieve a Lye. And if the Prophet be deceived (Ezek. 14.9.) I the Lord have deceived that Prophet. And it was the Lord who put a Lying Spi∣rit into the Mouths of Ahab's Pro∣phets, 1 Kings, 22.23. Now whether it be such a Spirit or not, which is in the Mouths of the Qua∣ker Prophets, we have a plain Rule whereby to know, Deut. 18, 20, 21, 22. The Prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my Name, which I have not Commanded him to speak—even that Prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine Heart, how shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? VVhen a Prophet speaketh in the Name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath

not spoken, but the Prophet hath spo∣ken it Presumptuously; thou shall not be afraid of him.

Here is a plain Touch-stone, which cannot be mistaken. And the case of the Quakers is so hard, that if we can prove but one False Prophet among them, the In∣fallibility of all and every one of them must be a Deceit; because (as above-quoted out of Ed. Bar∣rough) the Infallibility is asserted to belong to every one of them in parti∣cular.

And I need not Travel far to find Instances undeniable, upon this Head. But I will be as mer∣ciful in Exposing them as I can. Therefore, without telling Names, the Friends do know that there is a Quaker Glover in Cheapside, Lon∣don,

who had his Till Robb'd, and that a Quaker Prophet came to him, and told him he was sent from God, to Reveal to him, in the Name of the Lord, that his Maid Servant (who was likewise a Qua∣ker) was the Person who had Robb'd him. The Maid, being thus Charged, stood resolutely in asserting of her Innocency. But the Prophet endeavour'd to bear her down by his Prophetick Authority; and bid her not deny it, for she was seen do it. Who saw me? said the Maid. The Prophet reply'd (with a Monstrous assurance!) The Lord saw thee. This prevail'd so far with the Glover that he had his Maid before a Magistrate, who was persuaded, the more to ter∣rifie her, to send her to Newgate,

where she was threatned with the Irons, or put in them: But no∣thing cou'd extort any Confession from her, and having no Evi∣dence against her, at length she was dismiss'd from the Prison; but her Master (the Glover) believing the Prophet, turn'd her out of Doors.

Had that poor Maid been ei∣ther Threatened or Flattered into a∣ny Confession, here had been a Prophet as great as Elijah! But however the Prophet stuck to his point, and those who were so inclin'd, believ'd him rather than the Maid.

But (Alas!) this Story did not end here. For the Devil ow'd some Body a shame. And these Quaker Prophets resolv'd to try

their hands round, since they had begun, and see if they could terrifie some or other to Confess to their Infallibility: and then all the Na∣tion shou'd have been Deafened with their Miraculous Gifts.

In order to this, soon after the Glover had turn'd off his Maid, as above-said, there came to him, in the Power and Spirit of the Lord, as he Blasphemously pretended, one John—another Quaker Prophet, and told him, that as God sent Pro∣phets to the Children of Israel, so had he even now Prophets among his People; that he was a Prophet sent to him from the Lord, and did pronounce to him in the Name of the Lord God, that his Apprentice, then present, was the Person who had Robbed him.

The young Man, the Apprentice tho' a Quaker, knew his own In∣nocence; and therefore did bold∣ly, before his Master, confro•••• this Prophet; and that with so much assurance and such Circum∣stances as overcame the Prophet's Confidence; who, thereupon, own'd to his Master and to him, that he was mistaken in the Per∣son, for that it was not the Ap∣prentice who had Robb'd the Till. The Glover then asked the Pro∣phet if he had spoke of this to any? The Prophet said, Yea, to one Ro∣bert a Friend, and a Shooe-maker in Martins, near Aldersgate. Then said the Glover, Thou canst do no less than to clear my Apprentice to him, which he promis'd to do. And away went the Apprentice

with him, to see his Reputation vindicated, When they came there, and the Quaker Shoe-maker had gone with them into a Room, the Pro∣phet being loath to fall to his work, sat silent, Humming and Groaning as if moved by the Spirit, till the Apprentice, having wait∣ed very long, minded him of the end of their coming there, and related to the Shooe-maker how the Prophet had confess'd himself mi∣staken in charging the Robbery upon him, and had come there on purpose to own so much be∣fore him (the Shooe-maker) because he had aspers'd him to the Shooe-maker: And therefore desired the Prophet to proceed, and perform his Promise. But the Prophet, having bethought himself, gave

no answer, but continu'd in his Humming posture— The Shooe-ma∣ker seeing the distress of the Pro∣phet, interpos'd very seasonably, and said to the impatient Appren∣tice, Perhaps, he desireth some longer time to consider of it. And turning to the Humming Prophet, said, Doest thou not John? Yea, cry'd the Prophet, hastily, finding himself reliev'd. And the Apprentice was forced to return to his Master, without the satisfaction which was promised. But, on the contrary, John the Pro∣phet, upon second thoughts, found it best to stick to his Infallibility; and therefore return'd to the Glover, and repeated his Charge, in the Name of the Lord, against the Ap∣prentice: But after this, the Rob∣ber was taken, Robbing a Till at

another Shop; and, among other of his Robberies, Confess'd that he had Robbed the Till of this Glover. Then was this Prophet again con∣founded. And nothing left to the Friends to salve up the Deceit of this Prophet, otherwise than by concealing it. But they see, it is not conceal'd; nor a great many more Instances, which, if they will join Issue upon that point, shall be produc'd.

Only, for the present, let me mention one yet more Notorious, and Remarkable mistake in a greater Prophet and Preacher of theirs call'd Solomon Eccles: And the Proof is not Hear-say, but un∣der his own hand, in a Letter of his, which he did not send but car∣ry, and deliver to a Fellow Quaker of

his, one John Story, who was one of the Opposers of the Womens Preachings, and the Jurisdiction of the Womens Meetings, set up by G. Fox, as an Ordinance of Christ. This Letter bears Date the 1st Day of the 1st Month, 1677. and is Printed by Thomas Crisp (another Quaker Opposer of this Prelacy of the Women in their Church) in his Babels Builders, &c. The first Part, Re-printed at London, 1682. Where he likewise tells us that for the greater Solemnity, Solomon Eccles carry'd with him two Emi∣nent Friends, and Espousers of G. Fox and his Party, to be present at his delivery of his own Letter to this Back-sliding John Story; in which Letter, being Usher'd with so great Ceremony, after very

sharp Reprehensions to the sai•• John, for opposing himself to their Great Apostle G. Fox, he Denounces thus, This is the word of the Lord to thee (says he) That this Year shalt thou (John Story) die, because thou hast taught Rebellion a∣gainst the Living God.

Note, That as T. Crisp tells us, in his Book above-Quoted, this John Story was, at that time, ill, and not like to live long.

And to Men possess'd with such Enthusiasm as the Quakers are; and Languishing under the Infirmi∣ties of Sickness, such a Cordial as this administred with such Cir∣cumstances of Terror, might have wrought the Effect it fore-told; which, in all probability, was Solomon's Design; and if he had

not liv'd to see himself prov'd to be a False Prophet, he might have been hang'd for a real Murtherer.

But this John Story liv'd about four years after this; to the Eter∣nal Confusion of the Quaker pre∣tence to Infallibility.

But that is not all. If losing their Plea to Infallibility were all, they wou'd still stand upon the Common Level with other Men. But now it is made apparent that that Spirit which possesses them, is the very Spirit of Lyes, which is the Spirit of the Devil; and con∣sequently that their Light within is Darkness; and then as our Saviour said, O how great is that Darkness!

How Great indeed, to see a miserable Wretch possessed with the Devil, pronounce his Delusi∣ons

as the Immediate Revelation of God, with a This is the Word of the Lord.

And the same horrible Blas∣phemy is in all pretended Extraor∣dinary Inspirations from God.

O therefore let those Christians beware who are led away with Pretences to the Spirit, in any Men, not only Against but Beside that which is Written.

Who break the Unity of the Church (which Christ calls the tear∣ing of his own Body to pieces) and forsake the Communion of their lawful Bishops; (whom Christ has left as his own immediate Repre∣sentatives, and Vice-gerents, and as the Principles of Unity in their Re∣spective Churches) upon preten∣ces of Extraordinary Inspirations in

those Teachers whom they have heaped to themselves: For Ex∣traordinary Inspirations are not to be Credited, unless vouch'd by Mi∣racles; which God always sent to attest to his Extraordinary Commissions: And if they are pretended to come from Him, and are not, then it is a Demonstration that they come from the Devil.

And let us take this one Mark more to judge when such Inspirati∣ons are from God, or from the Devil.

Those from the Devil generally tend to Schism and Rebellion; as in that of Jeroboam and the Ten Tribes, who broke off from the Priesthood of Aaron, as well as from the House of David; and set up oppo∣site Altars to that of Jerusalem.

But, on the other Hand, tho' God sent many Prophets to Re∣prove the Kings and the Priests; yet they neither Rebell'd against the Kings, nor set up opposite Altars against those of those wicked Priests: But as they paid all Du∣tiful Obedience to their Persecuting Kings, and suffer'd Martyrdom un∣der them, without Resistance: so did they always keep in the Com∣munion of those same Priests whom they had Provok'd and Reprov'd, and paid all due Obedience to their Sacred Authority, and never wou'd Countenance any Separate Commu∣nions set up in Opposition to Their Communion, at the same time that they were Denouncing the Judg∣ments of God against them for their manifold Iniquities and Preva∣rications.

And when our Saviour himself came into the World, he did not Separate from the Publick Worship, and Communion of the Jewish Church. But in the same Chapter (Mat. 23.) where he inveighs most se∣verely against their Wickedness, he Guards their Authority as Sacred and Inviolable; and, to shew that the receiving of Christianity it self was no Exemption from paying all O∣bedience to them, he Commands his own Disciples, as well as the Multitude, to pay them all man∣ner of Obedience.

Then spake Jesus to the Multitude, and to his Disciples, saying, The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses Seat; All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do.

And the Apostles, after our Sa∣viour, frequented the Jewish Tem∣ple, Luke 24.53. and observed their hours of Publick Worship▪ Acts 3.1. Acknowledged the Anthority of their High Priest, and submitted themselves to him, as to one invested with God's Com∣mission, as to God's High Priest, even when he was judging them unjustly, and Commanding them to be smitten contrary to the Law, Acts 23.3, 4, 5.

And they frequented the Jewish Temple, and Liturgy, tho', they had Separate Meetings for the break∣ing of Bread, and other Institutions of the Christian Religion, which they cou'd not have in the Jewish Communion: from which they did not abstain, while it lasted in the

World; that is, till the Destri∣ction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

By all which Examples we are instructed how strongly we are to adhere to the Publick Communion of the Church; and to suspect all pretended Inspirations which wou'd draw us away from it.

But this concerns the others of our Dissenters as well as the Qua∣kers: Let us return to them. And we shall find their Infallibility dis∣prov'd, not only in particular In∣stances, such as that fore-mention∣ed of Solomon Eccles, and the Glover's Prophets.

But 2dly, in whole Floods and Parties; for Francis Bugg, and ma∣ny others have come openly off from their Communion, after having liv'd many years with them; and

as Zealous Quakers as the best: But now Detect their gross Errors Publickly and in Print. But,

Thirdly, Those among them who continue still Quakers, have notwithstanding joyn'd in dispro∣ving their Pretences to Infallibility, and discovering many other Dam∣nable Heresies and Doctrines of De∣vils among them, Denying the Lord who bought them, &c.

From which Diabolical Errors George Keith being Converted, he has endeavour'd to strengthen his Brethren; and has gain'd many; and has Separated them in a distinct Communion from the other Qua∣kers; who call these Separatists, Apostates, and False Brethren, that have Erred from the Faith: And the Separatists say the same of Them.

Now if their above-told Pre∣tences to Infallibility do hold, then it will follow that these their for∣mer Opinions, which the Separa∣tists now Condemn, were True Then, and False Now. Nay, that they are both True and False even Now; because some Qua∣kers do now hold them to be True, and others contend as Zealously that they are False: Then the Se∣parate Quakers, and the others do not differ, tho' they Damn one another; nor are they Separate, tho' they be Separate. All these Contradictions must be Reconcil'd, or else it must be granted that G. Fox and others have grosly Erred, who asserted, that They (the Quakers) and every one of them in particular were Infallible; as above is Quoted.

And that they cou'd discern who were True Quakers, and who were only False or Pretended ones, without speaking ever a word. For either Francis Bugg (who liv'd 25. years in their Communion, their Secretary, and a Principal Man a∣mong them) G. Keith (who as Sam. Jennings tells us in his State of the Case, hereafter mentioned p. 2.) was 28 years of their Communi∣on. Yea (says he) most of that time a Preacher amongst us, a Vindica∣tor of us, and others were true Quakers or not. If not, why were they own'd as such all that time? Then G. Fox, nor any of them had an Infallible discerning Spirit, to which they have falsly preten∣ded.

But if Keith, Bugg, &c. were True Quakers; then True Quakers are not Infallible. And then G.F. &c. (who said they were Infallibile) were led by the Spirit of Delusion, and not by the Spirit of Truth.

But that nothing may be want∣ing to the full Conviction of this,

Fourthly, The Infallibility of the Private Spirit, or of each Particular Quaker is now Damn'd by their Church; and their Infallibility is now Reduc'd by them (as in the Church of Rome, whence their first Inspi∣ration came, as told before, and wherein it naturally ends) to that of their Church.

For Proof of this,

First, Their Meetings or Churches in Pensylvania, &c. in America, have Censured G. Keith, and other Se∣paratists

there, for not submitting to their Judgment, which these Churches have given forth against them.

This appears in the Account of the Proceedings There against the said G. Keith, &c. in the Year 1692. which was Published by G. Keith or some of his Party, and Printed in the Year 1693. under this Title, New-England's Spirit of Persecution transmitted to Pensyl∣vania, and the pretended Quaker found Persecuting the True Christian Quaker, in the Tryal of Peter Boss, George Keith, &c.

In Answer to this, was Publish'd a Vindication of the Proceedings against G. Keith, &c. call'd, The State of the Case betwixt the People called Quakers in Pensylvania, &c.

in America, and George Keith, with those seduc'd by him into a Sepa∣ration from them.

This was wrote by Samuel Jen∣nings, a Quaker Justice of Peace in Pensylvania, and one of the Prose∣cutors of G. Keith and the Separa∣tists, and Printed in London in the Year 1694. To which G. Keith hath Printed a Replication, Entitul∣ed, A further Discovery of the Spirit of Falshood and Persecution, &c.

I will not trouble my self nor the Reader to say any thing either for or against the manner of these Proceedings of the Old Quakers a∣gainst their Modern Separatists; let them implead one another as to that. All I am, at present, con∣cern'd for, is, that their Churches have Censur'd these Separatists; and

consequently given Judgment a∣gainst the Light within Particular Persons; which was the Original Pretence, and only Infallible Guide of the First Quakers: And, upon this only ground, they exclaim'd against any Church assuming Au∣thority over any Man's Private Spirit, or his Light within, as Anti-Christian, and Diabolical: and gave this as the Reason of their Separa∣tion from the Church of England: And yet now Condemn the Pre∣tence of the Light within others who Separate from them.

Nay more, they flie to the Bra∣chium Seculare, when it is on their side, for G. Keith and other of their Separatists were try'd before Samuel Jennings and other Quaker Justices of Peace at their Sessions in

Philadelphia, &c. and some of them were Imprison'd for Printing and Publishing Defences for them∣selves, without Licence (tho' it be their daily Practice in London, most, if not all their Books Here being Printed without Licence) they Issu'd Warrants (one is inserted in the above-nam'd Narrative, New Englands Spirit of Persecution, &c. p. 4.) against the Printer and Pub∣lishers of a Vindication of Georg•• Keith and his Separatists, Entituled An Appeal from the Twenty Eigh•• Judges to the Spirit of Truth, &c.

The 28. Judges were 28. o•• their Ministers who had pass'd Sen∣tence against G. Keith at Philadel∣phia the 20th of the 4th Month 1692. As a person without the fea•• of God before his Eyes, &c. An••

they Published a Paper of this Judgment against him. In An∣swer to which came out the a∣bovesaid Appeal, for which the Printer (William Bradford) was Ap∣prehended and put in Prison, and his Letters seiz'd (whereby he was disabled to support his Family, and at last forc'd to quit that Coun∣trey and fled to New-York) and one John Mackcomb (a Taylor) was pro∣secuted for Dispersing one of them; his Name is inserted in the abovesaid Warrant. And Sam. Jennings was one of the Five Justi∣ces, who Sign'd the Warrant.

But the Pretence in the said Warrant was for Reflecting upon Their Majesties Justices of the Peace in the said Appeal; for some of these 28 Ministers who judg'd

George Keith, were likewise Ju∣stices of Peace, as the abovesaid Samuel Jennings, &c. Yet how se∣verely do they inveigh against Mi∣nisters in our Church being Justices of Peace!

But this double Capacity of Justices and Ministers serves them in stead in other matters, as in the Case of the Sloop above-mention'd. But I must not omit to acquaint the Reader that the ground of this Prosecution against G. Keith was his Preaching Christ without, or a Personal Christ in Heaven, besides the Light within, which, he said, was only the Spiritual presence of Christ by his Light and Life, in all his Children.

Upon this G. Keith was accus'd for Preaching Two Christs, i. e. a

Christ without, besides the Christ within. And so, Denying the suffi∣ciency of the Light within, which Light the other Quakers say is suffi∣cient, without the Man Christ Jesus.

This Sam. Jennings (after their manner of mumbling Thistles) will not Confess, but dare not De∣ny.

If they took no Offence at Preaching a Christ without, and thought this not derogatory to the sufficiency of their Light within, Why was G. Keith accused for this, and nothing else? What need was there for the Ministers of the Qua∣kers (as Thomas Fitzwater, and Will. Stockdale) to appear as Witnesses against G. Keith, for Preaching that Doctrine, and no other, even as his Adversary Sam. Jennings him∣self

gives the Account? Why was this the business of so many Meetings, and of so great stir a∣mong them, and at last of an open Separation, if the Quakers do, in good earnest, believe in a Christ without them, or in a Personal Christ who suffer'd, and dy'd for us, and now Reigns in Heaven in the same Body? For G. Keith is not so much as Accus'd for Preaching any thing else but this. And I think this as good as a Demonstration, That (however they endeavour to mince the matter) they do not Re∣ally believe in any other Saviour than their own Light within; which they call Christ, and so endeavour to amuse us.

But, Reader, take notice, that (as it is told in G. Keith's Apology

above-said, call'd, New England's Spirit of Persecution, &c. p. 2. and own'd likewise by Sam. Jennings) a Meeting consisting of at least six∣ty Monthly Meeting Members gave Judgment in Vindication of G. Keith, against his Accusers, T. Fitzwater and W Stockdale, the sub∣stance of which was, That they shou'd forbear Preaching and Praying in Meetings till they had Condemned their Ignorance and Unbelief, &c. But at the next Quarterly Meeting, a Party withstood the said Judg∣ment, and said, That the Persons being Ministers, none but them of the Ministery were fit to Judge. Which many (says the Account) thought relish••d too much of Popery. But, as above-told, after this, an Assembly of Twenty Eight of their

Ministers met together at Philadel∣phia, and Publish'd a Paper of Judgment against G. Keith, the 20th of the 4th Month, 1692. in answer to which, he Publish'd An Appeal from these 28 Judges to the Spirit of Truth, &c. In Reply to which, these Ministers, being likewise Justices of Peace, Issu'd their Warrants against the Printers, Publishers, &c. as above is told.

Here is a many-forked and in∣volved Infallibility; one Meeting Justifying, another Condemning G. Keith; and all for the very same Doctrine. There were in America, sixteen Meetings against G. Keith, and as many for him.

This will not only overthrow the Infallibility in each particular Person among them, but even

of their Churches or Meetings.

However their Churches or Meet∣ings assuming an Authority over the Light within particular Persons, totally destroys their Original pre∣tence of Infallibility in particular Persons.

Secondly, And besides this first Proof in Pensylvania, there is ano∣ther yet more Express and Posi∣tive, call'd; The Barbadoes Judg∣ment. The Dispute was this very Point, whether they were to ad∣here to the Spirit or Light in each particular Person, or to the Judg∣ment of their Church or Meetings. And it was Resolv'd as follows.

At a Quarterly Meeting at Ralph Fretwell's House in Barbadoes, the 23d day of the Tenth Month, 1680.

I desire to give up my whole Concern, if requir'd, both Spiritual and Tem∣poral, unto the judgment of the Spirit of God in the Men and Womens Meet∣ings: As believing it to be more accor∣ding to the Universal Wisdom of God, than any particular Measure in my self, or any particulars with which the Men and Womens Meetings have not Unity.

This Judgment was subscrib'd by 39 Men, and 43 Women: in all 82.

And the Party that sent the a∣bove-said Judgment, writes thus: This Paper hath been Promoted in sun∣dry Meetings since, and subscrib'd: some few have Refused: in Abhor∣rence whereof, other Persuasions have Posted it.

This you have in Babel's Builders before Quoted, p. 4. There are

further Testimonies to this in some of the Quakers Principles, &c. be∣fore Quoted, p. 14, 15. where the words of some of them are set down as followeth.

'Tis true, Friends in the be∣ginning were turned to the Light in their own Consciences, as their Proper Guide; but when it pleas'd the Lord to gather so great a Number into the Know∣ledge and Belief of the Truth, as were in few years gathered; then the Heavenly motion came upon George Fox as the Lord's Anointed, as being the Great Apostle of Jesus Christ; and as one whom the Lord had ordain∣ed to be in the place amongst the Children of Light, in this our Day, as Moses was amongst

the Children of Israel in his Day, to set forth Methods and Forms of Church Government, and to E∣stablish Monthly and Quarterly Meetings, of Men, and of Wo∣men distinct from Men; and these Meetings are since called the Church; whose Counsel, Advice, and Judgment (as occasion shall offer) is to be submitted unto by every one, who Professeth him∣self a Member of the Church. And, saith George VVhitehead, We are to Believe as the true Church Believes, &c. Christian Quaker, Part 1. p. 9. 1680.

I was told by one present at the Quaker-Meeting at Radcliff on Sunday the 17th of February last, 1694/5. that Mr. Penn having Prea∣ched, and after George Keith rising

up, and Expounding some Scrip∣ture in another manner than Mr: Penn had done, that Mr. Penn stopt him, and solemnly Denoun∣ced these words against him, In the Name of the Lord, I Pronounce him an Apostate, over his Head.

Upon which occasion, I have these few Questions to ask.

1. Whether this was a Sentence from Mr. Penn himself, or from their Church? If the latter, it comes in the Class just before-mention'd, of their Church-Authority over the Light within particular Persons.

But if the former, then here is Private Light against Private Light. And Mr. Penn will please to tell us by what Authority he Pro∣nounc'd this Sentence against G. Keith, in the Name of the Lord. If

by an Ordinary Commission, of Succession to Christ and the Apostles by Regular Ordination: That I should be glad to hear. But if by an Extraordinary Commission, such as the Prophets and Apostles had, we wou'd desire such Credentials as they had, that is, Miracles. Otherwise, any Reason why this is not rank Enthusiasm; and liable to the Sentence of those who spoke In the Name of the Lord, when He had not sent them.

Mr. Penn owns the Enthusiasm, but does not shew the Miracles: for he said publickly in their last Yearly Meeting, in May, 1695. in Excuse, or Justification of his above-said Sentence of Apostacy against G. Keith, That he was then so Transported with the extraordinary Power of God upon him, that he knew not

whether he was sitting, standing, or kneeling, when he spoke the words.

But whether this Enthusiasm pro∣ceeded from Divine, or what other Inspiration, will be best known from the Doctrine it supported, and which was the ground of the Con∣test. And it was thus told to me by one who was present, viz.

That Mr. Penn, at a former Meet∣ing, had Explain'd this Scripture, 1 John 1.7. The Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin, in this man∣ner, That the Blood was the Life, and the Life was the Light within.

This Resolves all into the Light within; which (as will be further shewn) they make to be the Archi-Type and Substance of what Christ's outward Body, Blood, and all that He did, or suffer'd in it, were but the Types and Shadow; and so of

much less Value and Consequence to our Salvation. But, to go on with our present matter of Fact,

At the fore-mention'd Meeting the 17th of Feb. 1694/5. G. Keith, taking occasion to Discourse upon the above-said Text, 1 John 1.7. did Expound it in a quite diffe∣rent manner from what Mr. Penn had done (but without naming of Mr. Penn); Said, that it ought to be taken Literally; that it was the outward shedding of Christ's Blood, which cleanseth from sin; and that this was not to be Resolv'd into the Light within, nor to be Spiritua∣liz'd away from the Letter: For that this was overthrowing of the Faith. Upon which Mr. Penn rose up, and Interrupted him, in the middle of his Discourse (which I am told is contrary to the Method

and Freedom of their Meetings, and Church-Discipline) and taking it to himself, and his former Exposi∣tion of that Text, which is told above, he inveigh'd, not with∣out great Passion, against G. Keith, concluded with the Sentence of Excommunication above-told; and stopping G. Keith from any Reply, immediately Dissolv'd the Assem∣bly.

I will not here enlarge upon the Subject matter of this Dispute betwixt them,; because it will be fully Discuss'd in the following Sections. Particularly Section 12, 17, and 18.

But for the present, I only ap∣ply it to the point of their Church-Authority, over the Light within par∣ticular persons, which was their O∣riginal and Great pretence.