William Penn and the Quakers either impostors, or apostates which they please: proved from their avowed principles, and contrary practices. By Trepidantium Malleus.

QUESTIONS SENT TO William Penn.

Question 1.

WHether He, or any of them will, or dare stand forth and say, I desire no Par∣don from a Holy God, for any Imperfection in Thought, in Word, or in Action, in the close of a Day, of a Week, of a Month, of a Year, since his or their imaginary perfect sinless State?

I intreat them into whose hands this Book shall fall, to take notice, That I kept no Copy of my Queries to him, not intending them for open view, much less

for the Press; I dare not therefore pre∣tend strict exactness to words, but sense; and for this I dare challenge him to de∣ny it.

Now if they are as Perfect as Adam was before he Fell, as some have said, I say, he then needed no Pardon; if they be as Holy, as some have blasphemously said, as God himself, I say, God need not Pardon himself.

Perfection in Scripture is sometimes put in opposition to Hypocrisy. So all the Saints are Perfect; God so loveth Holi∣ness, that he calls the least degrees of Ho∣liness by this honourable name Perfection, to encourage men in the thoughts of their present acceptance with him, and to let them know the unshaken foundation is now laid.

So Noah, Abraham, Job, and others, are said to be Perfect, that is, no Hypo∣crites, but Sincere ones. Yet they were guilty of great and visible Sins, and made Confessions of them to God in this their perfect State.

The instance of Asa is most pregnant; it is said of him, That he put the Pro∣phet in Prison who Prophecied to him in the Name of the Lord; that he was

wroth with him; very great sins sure, and of a deep die, and one would think inconsistent with true Grace: When he was pained in his Feet he sought not to the Lord, but to the Physician; one would think he could be no Good Man; yes, says the Holy Ghost, He was no formal Hypo∣critical Man, he was good in the bottom; and how is this express'd, 1 Kings 15.14. Nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect with the Lord his God all his days. What is that? Without Sin? Then the sense is this, Asa committed very great sins, nevertheless he sinned not all his days.

Sometimes perfection is put in oppositi∣on to imperfection. This distinction is clear in the words of Paul, 3 Phillip. 13, 14. Not as if I had attain'd, or were already perfect; I press on: as many as are perfect be thus minded. In the first place he speaks of Perfection in opposition to Imperfecti∣on; I have not attained it, says he (if he had not, by the way, we have mad men running up and down among us that say, they have; but without the breach of Charity I dare be bold to assert, the Perfe∣ction they have attained to, is a perfecti∣on of Stupidity and Obduration); but saith Paul, I press forward; I have perfe∣ction

in my Eye, tho not in my Heart; as many as be perfect (that is, sincere, upright) be thus minded. For they that in the for∣mer sense are perfect, cannot be said not to have attained it, or to press after it. Job says of himself, of whom God gave this testimony, There was none like him in all the earth; a perfect man, that is, a sanctified man, 1 Job 1. If I should say I were perfect, that would prove me perverse; say it! no he detests it in the next words, I perfect (for those words are only found in the Original) I would not know my own soul, 9 Job 20, 21. Who can say his heart is clean? says Solomon; Yes, A Pharisee, a Papist, and a Quaker.

The Doctrine of Perfection, or a Sinless State, began among the Pharisees, who thought mental sins nothing; therefore Christ reproves them, convinceth them, that a Wrathful thought is Murther, an Unchast thought Adultery, a Covetous thought Theft; for these are contrary to the Divine Law, and stain the Heart of Man. The greatest wickedness that ever was acted by the most Profligate man in the world, was at first but a Thought, and his greatest sin virtually therein. The greatest Oak was once no bigger than an

Acorn; the Fire that Burnt London but a Spark.

I trouble not the Reader with the usual distinctions among the Learned, of a Per∣fection of Parts, and a Perfection of De∣grees. Not that I think them unuseful, but not so intelligible to all Capacities.

He sinneth in his highest acts of Love to God, that cannot say, I love God so well it is not my duty to love him more; nei∣ther have I reason to bewail the want of it. So I might enlarge about Time, Prayer, &c.

Now as this Doctrine began among the Hypocritical Hereticks in the Church of the Jews, so it was taken up by such in the Church of Rome, and carried on by such in the Protestant Church: I affirm, and am able to prove it, The Quakers borrowed their Expositions and Argu∣ments out of Popish Authors. Let any man compare Kellison the Jesuit, his Survey of the New Religion, and Barclay's Apologia pro Theologia vere Christiana, together, and speak his mind in this point.

I could never get any of our Perfectio∣nists (for so I often call them, as detesting them for this worst of Doctrines) to An∣swer this first Question, They desire no

Pardon of God for any Imperfection in the end of a Day — For fear, I think, God should take them at their word; few of them now pretend to it, or talk so much of it, for fear, it may be, they should be laught at, so many living and conversing with them, see so much pride, passion, unfair dealing, neglect of all Fa∣mily and secret Duties.

I remember one of Bristol, a Scholar, who tells us in Print, his outward name was Lawrence Steel (a Novice lifted up with Pride, and so fell info the Condem∣nation of the Devil) he once said to the Reverend Mr. Fairclough of that City, Not that I am Perfect, would I were; yet going on in Disputing (or rather Prating) he urged that much mistaken and abused place, He that committeth sin is of the devil; then you are so, said Mr. Fairclough to him, on your own con∣fession, according to the wrong gloss you give of the words. Instead of an argu∣ment for an answer, he fell into an angry fit, and so into angry words.

Question 2.

Whether George Bishop, of the City of Bristol (a Scholar) writing a Book call'd, A Looking-Glass for the Times, was not a most deceitful Writer, though then their grand Champion?

He saith in the Title page, That the quakers were most like to the ancient Christians, as was proved, in the Book, out of Eusebius, Socrates Scholastieus, Evagrius, and Dorotheus. Yet in the Folio is so far from such a proof, that he doth not at∣tempt it: But to do him right, he gives a true account out of those Authors; but such a description of Ordination by Laying on of Hands, Singing of Psalms, Swear∣ing against the Arians, and all other things, that prove them to be altogether unlike the Quakers, and like us.

It is true by the ble, in a few leaves, he speaks of Jerom (and it may be some others) who were against taking of Oaths; which if true, is not material; for I knew one worthy Minister against it, and some private Christians; and would to God this were all the Controversie be∣tween

us and our Perfectionists. The Book cur'd me of the temptation which, I confess, induc'd me to read it.

Tell me, Was there ever such a cheat since Writing or Printing were known in the world? Did he think we would look no further than the Title Page, and take his word for all the rest? One of these Books for this rare admirable Discovery, was sent to every Doctor in the University in my time, which was twenty seven year since, for their Conviction and Edification. If any say, the Quakers were like them for Sufferings; so were the Protestants much more in Queen Mary's days, the Papist in Queen Elizabeth's days, the Non∣conformists in the Reign of King Charles the Second (that Papist in Masquerade, as he confessed on his Death-bed): No, he pre∣tends likewise in Principles and Practice. Since the Reading of his Book, I could never think of the Author without great detestation, as the greatest piece of Falshood and Impudence that ever appear'd in the world.

Yet our Perfectionists never testified a∣gainst this man; have call'd me a Persecu∣tor for thus telling the truth. I could name other Quakerish Writers of History, but will not.

Question 3.

Whether the Quakers, in the time of the violent Proceedings against Dissenters, begun about almost Fifteen years since, and continued about Five years, leaving the Places of their Publick Worship, for fear of Confiscation of Goods, Imprison∣ment, or Banishment, were not either No∣torious Impostors, or Notorious Apostates, acting on our Principles, after the severest Censure of them?

They have asserted in many, many, ma∣ny of their printed Books, Speakings, and private Conference, That it was unlawful for any to leave the Place of their Publick Worship for any Persecution whatever.

That they were moved by the Holy Spirit, sent by the Ever-living God, to testify to us, in the Name of the Lord, That we were Hypocrites, Carnal Persons, Lovers of the World more than of God, for not appearing openly. So Pen and others: Though we declared we so far were from thinking such an open Ap∣pearance to (as they phrase it) bear our Testimony to be Duty, that it was Folly.

Either, say I, when they themselves lest their Meetings, (which they generally did all England over, where the then Rage was fiery and burning) their Minds were changed about this thing, or not.

If they were not, they were Notorious Apostates, to live in the sinful omission of open Duties so many years, as many did, going up and down about their business, till, not Conscience, but King James's illegal, deceitful Toleration, brought them to those Places again. They observ'd not their own Message from God to us. And if we through ignorance must be damned, they much more for acting against their Light, and that after thousands of Prote∣stations to God and man of the contrary.

If their Minds were changed, (as Ri∣chard Vicarr confessed privately to me he believed they were) then were they No∣torious Impostors, to bring us a Message from the Devil, in the Name of the Lord. Then have they blasphemed the Name of the Eternal God, and belied the Holy Ghost. Then have they defamed, slan∣dered the Generation of the Righteous, and reprobated and damned them for an innocent, lawful, justifiable Action.

Know, Reader, that we ever asserted, That it was lawful to flee in a time of Persecution; Christ hath said it plainly, If they persecute you in one City, flee to another, Matth. 10.23. Be wise as Serpents, said the same mouth, and almost in the same breath, that said, be innocent as Doves. Had any of us been let down in a Basket over a Wall, as Paul was for fear of the Jews, Acts 9.24, 25. they would have made sport of us, though none were so weak in those days to do so of him.

We told them, That in a time of dan∣ger, it was lawful to withdraw, from the Example of the Prophets, Christ, the Apo∣stles. The Holy Jesus in this respect was not Holy enough for his Holy Brethren, (in pretence); observe Christ did as we do; his Brethren, who are said not to believe in him, objected and censur'd him almost in the same words as the Quakers (their Followers) do us the Followers of Christ?, John 7.1, 4. Jesus walked no more openly in Jewry, but walked in Galilee, because the Jews sought to kill him: There is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly: If thou do these things, shew thy self to the world, said his unbelieving Brethren to him.

All our Martyrs did as we did: These said (Barclay Apol. and Thousands of them) that by this were they known to be the People of God, That they were not found in Corners, kept the Places of their Pub∣lick Worship, which, if pull'd down, they stood on the Rubbish of them, and would have done so even to the death. But, say I, since they are known not to be the People of God, for they left those Places in the heat of Persecution. I, be∣ing once a Bristol man, will tell you what was done there, where were the chief Quakers. I will inform you what I know of this Lawrence Steel of Bristol, once a Candidate for the Ministry; who left us, and turned a Perfectionist, because of this Principle of theirs, yet left their Meeting∣place a long time. At last, when driven here by some hot quakers, he was taken only with six or seven persons, as I remem∣ber. He was sent to Gaol a half-year, for refusing the Corporation Oath; after the expiration of which he never went-more, and so continued to the time of his death.

R. V. another great man (especially in his own eyes) did the like; and all the rest, only Elizabeth Sterring, and Dorcas

Dole, two zealous Women, wrote a Book against them all, damning them, in the Name of the Lord, for leaving their Te∣stimony, contrary to their Manifestation from the Lord. They tell them of Da∣niel's opening his Windows; contemned their Plea, that God can hear in secret; and they drop this charitable, and I doubt not true passage by the way:

Had many of the Professors (for so they call other Dissenters) been of your Persuasion, they would not have done as you now do. Honestly said. Heaven forbid!

Is it not worth while to ask William Pen how he bore his Testimony? Did not he flee? Not Whitehead, after all his mock∣ings of others? They would set some to watch at doors, to see whether Inform∣ers did espy any of them coming into a House, warily (as others did) for a pri∣vate Meeting.

This was the great thing these men ever gloried in; it was a good Providence before this Liberty was given, that these men were tried and cast; else how had they now triumphed and exalted them∣selves above all others. The reason of all was this:

If there were taking away of Goods in one place, it was not so in another till now; therefore the Sufferers were helped by the Non-sufferers out of their Fund, (a com∣mendable Practice) but now the Storm comes on all, and no help. Every Qua∣ker now must stand (or rather run away) on his own Legs.

Question 4.

Whether it were not horrid Impiety to leave Ministers because of their Learning, and yet follow Pen and others because of theirs?

Latin was once the Language of the Beast, not fit for the mouth of a Christian. This, with Greek and Hebrew, were the Three Languages nailed at Christ's Cross; (but they have since cryed to them as the Jews to Jesus, Come down from the Cross); That Philosophy was Aristotle's Vomit; Serpents Meat in us, and yet An∣gelical Food in him.

In short, How can Learning make us like Devils, and William Pen like an An∣gel? So that the Light within was almost turn'd to the Light without: Pen's Dictates.

Only some were more eagle••ey'd, and could look through men. Meade told a Friend of mine, That all Pen's Party were Factors for Popery: But that he himself was so Loyal, he would spend his All, his Blood, in the Service of this King. Ho∣nestly, said Meade, I believe thou speakest thy heart.

Reader, I must stop thee here for a while, and tell thee, Since the sending of this Question, I have been informed by some, who knew Pen as much as one man can know another, That Pen is indeed a grand Politician, a great Statesman, one that hath great command of words, (but an Inventer of some, which the Quakers use as to Un-religion a man, and the Bow∣ed-downness of Souls) but that he could not talk plain Latin with any man. They believed he could not turn a plain piece of English into Latin; That he was no Gre∣cian; That he understood little Logick, or Philosophy; and told me some of his Blunders in Natural Philosophy, too Comi∣cal now to relate. I was surprized.

And now, William Pen, seeing I am bet∣ter informed concerning thee, that thou hast more escaped the Pollutions of this Learned Age, than I, and Thousands of

others imagin'd, I beg thy pardon for abu∣sing thee; and clapping this Indignity on thee, and if Reformation may be thy security, and Repentance (that younger Brother to Innocency) set matters right, thou needst not fear such foul Aspersions for the future. However, something of Learning thou hast, Barclay more, but Sa∣muel Fisher most of all; that makes my Question to deserve an Answer. I know the Learned Quaker that gave Barclay the Collections in his Apology out of the Fa∣thers, as he told me. Sam. Fisher, and others, could come with their old hea∣thenish way of Disputing, testified against by the Spirit of the Ever-living God, by Syllogisms, Major, Minor, Conclusion, and Poetry too, condemned in others.

I wrote W. Penn, I would not trouble him with one Question more.

Whether it were not Hypocrisy to con∣demn all Wars (even Defensive) as un∣lawful, and Murther, when they were cal∣led to serve in this way Protestant Princes, and yet all was well for a Popish Tyrant? Because I knew he did not dare on many Accounts to give me a Reply.

After I had sent him these Queries, I went to his Lodgings, but he was not

there. One of his Friends there knew of my Letter, and told me that William Pen said, He loved not Controversies, (that is, I suppose, Questions he cannot answer; for Controversies are his work and trade) and that Books might inform me: But I know none, and I presume he neither. What Books vindicated George Bishop, that false, deceitful, vile Corrupter and Abuser of History? &c. What were the Titles of the Books? Who were the Authors? He could not afterwards tell me. This Friend of his told me very soberly and calmly, That if the Charge against the Quakers, of leaving their Meetings in a time of Persecution were true, for which they condemned us, I had a just Charge against them, and they ought to give me satisfaction. No Book meddles with these Questions.

The next morning I sent him another Letter, and told him what Excuses I had heard why he would not meet with me, which he knew not to be true; that I did believe he knew no Reply could be given, and therefore declined it; and that he had as good tell me so in plain words, as thus practically, and by interpretation. I had promised him if he could give me a satis∣factory

rational Answer to my Queries, I would turn Quaker, but not till then. And that I had some more Questions to propose to him, about which I desired his sober Consideration; and that I chal∣lenged him to a publick Disputation about them.

Question 5.

Whether it were not great Folly, or worse, to say, That bowing to a man was Idolatry, a Breach of the second Com∣mandment; a Sin, which rather than Mordecai would commit, he would run a Risk for his own Life, and the Lives of all the Jews; and yet after all this Ha∣rangue, turn this Custom of bowing to men, into a common Practice?

When we were reasoning with them once, Did not Abraham bow to the Chil∣dren of Heth, &c? They would reply, If Abraham were satisfied in it, we are not; following Scripture-Examples hath un∣done the world; and yet, of late years they observe that civil decent Cere∣mony.

By the way, Reader, give me leave to tell a pleasant, though plain Story. I knew two Grave, Learned Divines, who parting, bowed one to another. A zealous Quaker, in a great Fury, runs to them, and said to one of them, (a facetious man) Dost thou not know it is written, Thou shalt not bow down? The Minister looking on this ignorant, impudent Fool with Contempt, said to him, Dost thou not bow down when thou dost Sh—The Quaker replies, Thou art a Beast to talk so. And said the Minister, Thou art a veryer Beast if thou dost not do so. Nay, Priest, (said he) why talkest thou like a Beast? Why (said be) quotest thou Scripture like a Devil? alluding to that Scripture where the Devil setting on Christ, cites Scripture, of An∣gels preserving men that they hurt not their feet against the stones, but left out in all thy ways, Mat. 4.6. So the Quaker names, Thou shalt not bow down, but left out to graven Images.

Question 5.

Whether it were not unheard-of Dissi∣mulation, to tell Oliver Cromwell, Thus saith the Lord, I have put the Sword into thy hand—to

to destroy Idolaters, the Stuarts, and Ma••∣nants. And yet, after all, to tell K•• Charles II. That all this was Rebellion, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that they gave their Testimony against the m•• ther of his Father?

What George Fox and Burroughs did, well known: He that would fully und••∣stand this wickedness, let him read a li•••• Tract, done by a curious hand, call'd, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Snake in the Grass. The best Thing t•• ever was written on this Subject. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Pennyman's Papers, (once a Quaker) w•• hath, out of their Authors, shewn h•• they always shuffled Principles about ••∣vernment, Scriptures, Ministers, &c.

Question 7.

Whether it were not great wicked•• to pretend to Inspiration, Infallibility, P•• phecies, Miracles, and yet expound so 〈◊〉〈◊〉 congruous, and contrary to Scripture?

As Pen and I heard George Whitehead to in Bristol, on Prov. 9.1, 4. Wisdom h•• built her a house—She cryeth, Whose simple, let him turn in hither; and for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that is void of understanding.—A sim••••

thing, said he, is a thing unmixt, pure? So he that is Holy, h••th no Sin. Now ••hough the latter part of the Verse ex∣plains the former, yet this mighty man of theirs, that hath printed so many large Books, could not see it. Besides, though the word Simple be an equivocal word in English, yet not so in Hebrew, for here it fignifieth foolish. That a Quaker, about a year since, in Cullington, prophesied from the Lord, All Women that are with Child this Year, shall die in Childbirth; which was far from being true, though some in that Case were in great fear. If this cost any of them their Lives, I cannot contradict it, if any should say, that this false Pro∣phet deserved to die, as much as any Thief or High way-man whatever.

Reader, know, these men condemned all Human Literature, and asserted Inspi∣ration. But can the Spirit in a Quaker, contradict the Spirit in the Scripture? They say, That as if a man speak through a Cane, it is not the voice of the Cane, though it pass through it, but the voice of the Man: So it is not the voice of the Quaker, but the voice of the Spirit. I needed no more to prove them Deceivers,

but hearing them. Yea, some have p•••• tended to Miracles.

One came into a House where a Chil∣lay dead, and said to the People, Weep no the Child is not dead, but sleepeth. And, i•• imitation of the Prophet, 2 Kings 4.3. Stretcht her self on the Child, saying, In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Name of Jesus of Nazareth, arise. I sup∣pose, Reader, I need not tell thee, that th•• Soul of the Child returned not to it again•• A Story well known, and by whon•• among Bristol Friends.

A Quaker told me, that it was said George Fox could, by Inspiration, speak a•• Languages where the Lord sent him, an•• restored a Man to Life who broke hi•• Neck. Impudent Falshoods!

I knew a Woman, about 22 years since who must fast 40 days, and 40 nights, b•••• soon died, and would have eat, but cou•• not. L—S of Bristol, before named asserted he was as much Inspired as wa•• the Prophet, yea, as Balaam's Ass. Thi•• Inspired Ass, after a continued idle Life fell ill of the Diabetes, by drinking alway•• Red-streak Cyder: When on his Death Bed, he said to his Physician, (Dr. Griffin) who told me the Story, I shall not die, •• shall be in such a place by such a day; If

should now die, the Lord would reveal it to me. But the Fool soon turn'd up his Trotters, and died.

The Spirit, say they, is Infallible. What then, doth it make us so? God is Omni∣potent, Omnisicient, doth he make us so? This L—S (the Inspired Ass) once found out a notable place of Scripture for taking away Baptism, and the Lord's Sup∣per: Isa. 3.1. For behold, the Lord takes away the stay of bread. There is the Sup∣per, said he, and of Water, there is Baptism; as honest Mr. Blinman a Minister had it from him, and told me the Story.

Now who would talk with such profane Wretches, thus playing with Scripture!

AFter this I receiv'd a Letter from Wil∣liam Penn, who told me, That he had con∣sulted some Bristol Friends, and they told him, I was a Hot-headed man, and a Persecutor of them; and that if I were Sober and Temperate, he would spend an half hour with me, though much business lay before him.

To whom I presently replied in a Let∣ter, That I was never taken for a Wet Dissenter; that it was very unfair to put me off with such an excuse; For what if I should say, I had consulted my Friends

about him, and that they told me, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was a Roman Catholick, a Plotter for •• Popish Tyrant against the best of Kings But said I, away with such trash. Tha•• I did suppose R.V. was the Man, no•• with him, who was my Accuser; h•• knew the contrary, that I received him civilly in my house, he me in his; tha•• many Quakers could testifie, that I ha•• been very kind to many of them, shew•• kindness to their Sick when I was in th•• same Goal with them; that I once pai•• the Fine of one and caused his Goods t•• be returned.

He bids me in his Letter to take my course; but I observed added not, h•• feared not, as men commonly do; which now I have done, and let him try what he will gain by it.

READER,

Seeing William Penn would not (that is in plain English, could not) Answer my Questions; I will treat thee more fairly, I•• will Answer thine which may be in thy Heart.

Question 1. What is William Penn?

I will tell you some things he wrote, and what I have heard from credible Wit∣nesses that knew him; then judge you, not I.

He in the Reign of King James the Se∣cond saluted him thus, That he was the most Illustrious Example of Integrity, that for his Conscience sake ventured the loss of Three King∣doms. Now it is well known, the exclu∣ding Parliaments never Treated with him, nor made him any Proposals about Re∣ligion.

He also then told the world, there are not Papists enough in London to make the Coal fires, and yet here is such a cry of the danger of Popery.—To that Objecti∣on, Shall we Tolerate Idolatry? If Pope∣ry (said he) be Idolatry, He makes an If of it. Now he that at that time should say, There was no danger of Popery, must be a Knave, or a Fool; a Fool, if he thought as he said; a Knave, if he said as he thought not. Now Penn was no Fool. There were Papists enough in

London once to burn the City; whether enough or no then to make the Coal-fires. One that knew him very well told me, he was no more a Christian than a Mahume∣tan; for they believe Christ to be a Good Man, and that W. Penn (as he thought) believed not now either Christ's Divinity, or Humanity.

I will tell you one Story more of William Penn, and then speak your Minds; I have had it from good hands, that Mr. Charles Nicholets hath often declared, that when the late K. J. preferr'd him for a Paper of Verses in commendation of his Vertues, offering him first to be Ranger of his Park, which he refus'd, afterwards by making him Licenser of the Press, that he gave a Li∣cense to a Book against Popery; William Penn ask'd him, What he meant to Li∣cense a Book against the King's Religion? Why, said Mr. Nicholets, I am no Papist, and though I have Licensed Popish Books (which I know I should not) yet I will not deny a License to a Protestant Writer. So Penn was much displeased, and caused him to be turn'd out of his Office. My Friend told me he would give it on Oath Mr. Nicholets so told him.

Question 2. What are the Quakers?

Quakerism is the sink of all Heresies: Some Quakers are Socinians, believe not the Trinity, nor Divinity of Christ; some be Sabellians, they believe Christ's Divini∣ty, but not the Trinity; some of them have respect to Scripture-Authority, others regard them no more than an old Alma∣nack, not containing any Duty for us, but for others in their day. Some are for, others against Womens speaking. A Qua∣ker came from a Meeting and told a friend of mine, I have heard Nine Women speak this day, but a Man may put in an Egg∣shell all the sense they spake.

Every Wh••m was once a Message from the Lord; but now that folly is so mani∣fest to all Men, that they are more so∣ber.

One came to another and said, Thus saith the Lord to thee James Nobbs, thou art this and that; the Man heard all patient∣ly, and then said, Hold thy Tongue thou prating Fool, for the Lord knows I am not James Nobbsae.

Another had a Revelation to go with a Message from the Lord from Oxon to Ab∣bington, Five Miles; when he return'd in the close of the day, his Wife (who was no Quaker) ask'd him, Whether he had delivered his Message? No, said he, the Man was not at home, he is gone a great journey. O thou Child of a Man, said she, Dost thou think the Lord sent thee to a Man that was not at home? Which, as I re∣member, made the Man more sober.

In my younger days on a Temptation, I confess, I sought converse with the chief of them I could meet with, to try their Perfection and Attainments above all others: I found (as others know that went amongst them on the like Temptation) their hearts, heads, and hands were all in the world; no Family, or Secret Prayer minded, their Children's Souls neglected; some of them said, they would teach them to be Sober and no more. I first read G. B's Book, then Conversed with R. B. of Oxon, a great Quaker, but he was a vile Jester, said he to one, I can prove thou art an Atheist, How said he? Thus, Art thou a Wise Man or a Fool? No Wise Man, replied the Man, then said B. Is it not said, The fool hath s••id in his heart there is no God, &c.?

J. L. of Plimouth (who for his Boun∣ty, which indeed was very great) was a most frothy abusive Jester, though his Name founds with a delicious Air every where among them, yet a filthy and wick∣ed Jester was he.

J. M. of Pensilvania hardly escaped whipping a few years since for Lying with his Maid, who had thus Punish'd others for the same Vice, he being there a Justice of the Peace, and a great Speaker.

How they painted out one another in Print in their open Meetings in Bristol for Drunkenness and other Vices is well known. He that would read their Blas∣phemies, let him read Rogers's Book, a Quaker of that City, what he says of Fox and others; and yet these were the Perfect Sinless Creatures all the while.

In their Letters one against another, they would begin on both sides, This is the word of the Eternal God from me to thee, Thou art an Hypocrite.—Some must Blas∣pheme; Reviling of Ministers was a Me∣ritorious work. Some reported of Mr. Hughs, once of Plymouth (the best Man that ever that Town was blest with) that he would drink Fifty Glasses of Sack at one Meal. Say it as often as they would, I dare say not one believed it.

Every common thing was from God. Read the Snake in the Grass, a Book worth Gold. Let Penn, or any other answer it if they can, I am sure it much concerns them to do it. I saw a Letter from a Quaker to his Sweetheart, no Quaker, and he began thus:

In my Bed, the other Night, a word passed through me: Here was my Person, but my Heart was with thee.—I can remember no more of the stuff, such bring all Reli∣gion into Contempt. What saith the Scri∣pture, said one to me, Every Tub must stand on his own bottom?

They saluted one of their Leaders as the only begotten Son of God, who lay from everlasting in the bosom of the Father. He received of some Divine Honour, as was proved.

I knew a Minister disturbed in Preach∣ing by a Quaker Woman. He got her at last into discourse of practical matters, in which she betrayed so much ignorance, that she got away as fast as she could. An unhappy Boy followed her to the Church∣door, I pray thee, said he, tell me who sent thee here to day? Who, said she, God. No, said the Boy, I am sure God never sent thee here; for if he had, thou hadst never spoken so

many things contrary to Scripture. And for my part, said he, I cannot tell what to say to it, for I cannot easily imagine the Devil sent thee here; for I thought be had more wit, than to send such a Fool as thou art about his work. She never disturb'd them after.

The heads of many of their Children are Dungeon dark about Scripture, only learn some of their Cants.

Question 3.

Do not many Ministers mistake, and that grosly in some words, and in their Exposition, and in their Doctrines too; and many Hearers talk ignorantly as well as Quakers?

The Answer is easy: They pretend not to Infallibility, or Inspiration; but ac∣knowledge the imperfection of their Un∣derstanding, as well as Faith and Affection, and the necessity of Human Literature, and much studying: But this is not the Case of the Quakers, but the quite contrary. Now if I prove a man that pretends to Inspiration in all that he preacheth, (and that therefore he needeth not the know∣ledge of Tongues) to speak quite contra∣ry

to the Scripture, and says the Spirit tells him, that is the meaning of such a Scri∣pture, which is as obvious as the Sun, to be quite contrary to what the Spirit there intended; I prove that man to belie the Spirit, and so to be a Cheat and an Im∣postor. And this is done thousands of times by these Quacks in Divinity.

The great mistakes of some of our Mi∣nisters, arise from their want of the cul∣ture of good Education. How often is it with us, as in those times of Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12.31. He made priests of the lowest of the people?

They expose themselves and work to Contempt. I pray all true Protestants, un∣der what Denomination soever, to take care in this respect, that their Preachers be not gifted with Ignorance and Confi∣dence, like Quakers Speakers.

The Stories of the three motions of the Sun, and the one was when he stood still; and the four sort of Seekers; one was them that never sought, are well known: but I will name some, not commonly talkt of which I had from worthy persons, who know the truth of them, by men which are, it may be, adhuc in vivis.

One preaching on that Text, Psal. 139.14. I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Read, I am fearfully and wonderfully mad. The e being left out by a mistake of the Printer, this Observation was drawn from the words, (and drawn to purpose it was) That the best Saints may fall into mad Fits. On goes Mr. Parson, to shew what mad Fits the Saints may fall into, 1. Of Anger. Anger is a short Madness—Till the Hearers thought he had been wonderful mad indeed.

Another Tradesman sets up for a Prea∣cher, and to work goes he, on that Text, Nahum 3.8. Art thou better than populous No? (which No is taken to be Alexandria in Egypt.) Now, Beloved, saith the pow∣erful Preacher, I shall inquire into two things.

1. What No was. 2. Why he was call'd populous. No was the eighth person, a Preacher of Righteousness, and he was call'd populous, because all the world was once in his Ark.

Another Reverend Mechanick, very lately preach'd a Sermon, and a Funeral one too, on that Text, Psal. 39.13. O spare me, that I may recover strength, before I go hence, and be seen no more.

And you must suppose this warm Man, laying about him, beating the Air, O! my Friends, said he, is one Scripture word, and is used by Daniel three times in one Verse, Dan. 9.19. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken. Spare is another Scripture word, and is joined with Shield and Buckler.

I remember Col. Crook told me a Story of Col. L- preaching in a great Church in Ire∣land on that Text, The Spirit and the Bride say, Come, Rev. 22.17. The i, by a mi∣stake of the Printer, that should have been put after the Letter r, was put before it, and now most devoutly and fervently goes our Preacher to work, and reads. And the Spirit and the Bird say, Come. Now en∣quiry is made, what is meant by the Bird? the Church: what Bird was the Church here compared to? Some, said he, think the Nightingale: As if the Man had consulted many a Commentator to find out the My∣stery. Others thought the Dove. and now a Comparison is made between the Church and the Dove for Innocency, Chastity, Pu∣rity.—

Another setting up for a Preacher, in a Parish I knew, would speak something from those words (from, no doubt nothing

to) that in all things he might have the prehe∣minence; when he came to this hard word he could not read it well, but said, That in all things he might have the p r e pre h e he m i mi n e n c e nence, pre∣heminence, Colos. 1.18.

I lately saw the Notes of a Tradesman that had been a Speaker thirty years (leaving his Trade) full of prodigious nonsense. The world abounds with them. The Bishops have too often Ordained such, I knew one who gave a Spiritual receit; Take a pint of Repentance, with a quart of Faith, and so walk forth into the fields of Meditation.

I knew also one that was made Deacon, and told this story at his re∣turn; When we sate down at Table my Lord bid me Eat, he had Two or Three Questions to ask me; Eat thought I, I fell a sweating, sure my Lord will ask me Questions in Divinity, and in Divini∣ty, said he, I am one of the silliest Rogues in the world; pray, said my Lord, Is such a Great Man come to Town? No, my Lord: O thought I, that the other Questions may be no harder; pray, said the Bishop, When doth he come to Town? He is ex∣pected, my Lord, very speedily: Where

doth he lodge when he comes, said the Bishop? My Lord, at such a place. When, said he, I heard what the Questions were, I fell to it.

Now such Fellows justify our Quakers in their work. If one Tradesman, why not another?

Obj. But the Quakers, say some, Preach very Powerfully.

Poor sense, and a powerful Voice, will not do. I cannot believe ever God sends Fools about his work, and such as expose it to contempt. Too many justifie the Quakers in their affected tones, theatrical gestures, contrary to plain express words of Scripture, 2 Titus 7. In doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity; Ʋncorrupt∣ness, respects the soundness of the matter of our Doctrine: Gravity, the manner of our delivering it: Sincerity, the Principle from which all should come, and end to which all should be directed.

And for our Hearers, many of them are much more ignorant than any one would suspect; I know a Man of a great Estate, an Entertainer of Ministers, who asked lately one of them at his house, Whether Abraham were not a Protestant,

and the Canaanites Papists? Whether Joseph that we read of in Genesis, that was sold into Egypt by his Brethren, was not the same Joseph that we read of in the First of Matthew who was Espoused to the Virgin Mary?

If you say, What difference then be∣tween their ignorant Speakers and ours? Much every way. Theirs despise Scripture and helps, Providence puts into their hands of being better informed, and pre∣tend to Inspiration, and so blaspheme the Spirit, and talk how they can confound any of the Priests by the Spirit; when others are ashamed of their folly, and not flee in the face of an Instructor. I have heard such say, Wilt thou talk to me against what I feel and handle of the word of Life? Alluding, no doubt, to the 1 Epistle of John ch. 1. v. 1. John lay in the bosom of Christ, and his natural hands handled the natural body of him who is call'd the Word of life. To question them is to question the Spirit. I am unwilling to say all I think, and know of such filthy dreamers, clouds without water, Jude 12. Is it not able to make a Wise Man sick to hear what I have heard in their Assem∣blies remote from Religion, Reason, and

Gravity. For a half-witted Fellow and a Jackpudden, that unmans himself to stand up and say;

I have been in many places in Kersendom, and I will never sell my reason to think Christ came to save men from sin, and yet sin to be in them — And now my Freinds ah, may you fe feel ah, the life ah, and the power ah —

Now you must suppose this was some notable Traveller that had compass'd Sea and Land to make Proselytes, according to 3 Matthew 15 verse; and sure if his reason were to be sold he would be most lamentably chous'd in a woful pennyworth that should buy it; Thou fool and blind, said Christ in another case to your elder Brethren, 23 Matthew 15. Cannot you believe a Physician should come to give Physick, or give a Man ease in order to perfect Health in time, if pains, atches, or any disorders be in him from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot.

The Women I observed, and Women like Men, when they heard their affected modes, would according to their frequent custom say, La, La, La, La, &c.

Now tell me, Reader, Whether such a speech of incoherent Blasphemies were not

able to make a Man purge both ways. In the time of great danger, when Twenty pound was to be paid by the Speaker, they would seldom speak. Therefore I re∣member when an Informer came into a Quakers Meeting, he was very busie to find the Speaker, that he might pay the Money; Where is your Speaker said he? Up stood a Quaker, Thou art he.

In many Meetings nothing is said, some times only one place of Scripture; I have heard that when they sate a long time and said nothing, a Quaker was moved to speak a place of Scripture, and, in my opinion, he chose the most suitable place for them, he stood up and said, O ye fools when will ye be wise; and down he sate again. When indeed!

When these sinless Creatures fall out (which is not seldom) you would think they had gone down to Hell to fetch their Rhetorick from thenee, fouly charging and condemning one ano∣ther. But presently the Devil transforms himself into an Angel of Light, the Old Man was stirr'd in them; nay, their chief Leaders complain of one anothers Pride and ill Temper, and say, Their hearts are ready to break for Friends Disorders.

And yet they the Perfect, Sinless, Pure, In∣nocent Lambs all the while.

I am not more assured that Turcism is not of God, than that Quakerism is not; or than that I have proved it in this Book. I declare before all the world, That I am ready at an open Dsputation to prove my Charge against them. If what I have writeen recover any Quakers, I shall re∣joyce: Why should we despair, seeing the recovery of the Honest and ingenious George Keith, Pennyman, and many more? However, I cannot but hope (or more than hope) this will prevent the fall of not a few who till now knew not the Men, as I and others have long known them, to be some of the greatest Doctri∣nal, (if not Practical) Enemies to Christ that ever were in any Age, that would sometimes call themselves by the Name of Christians.

Reader, I do assure thee by my Obser∣vation, and the Observation of others, that this People that were wont to talk against Pride, are some of the proudest Persons upon Earth; so Proud, that though they have condemned putting off the hat, and kirching, as Sins, yet some tell you in plain terms, they expect it of

you, and take it amiss if you do it not, as the abovenamed L. S. said to a Friend of his and mine. And as great is their Pride, so great is their ignorance; so that some Wise Men leave them, and are ashamed. Mr. S. of Bristol seldom, if at all, goes to their Meeting, though at their first appear∣ing one of their most Learned Advocates; he troubleth not himself much now about Mens Souls, but is well acquainted with what is good for their Bodies (especially his own) by which he much obligeth his Friends, not Quakers, but any Men of Civility, Churchmen and others. A late Writer, Mr. Norrice, hath made this People not a little to value themselves, by fa∣vouring their Opinion about the Light within; and by telling the world, That he more dreaded one Barclay, than an Ar∣my of Bellarmines or Stapletons; which make me doubt he is not well acquainted with the latter, though with the former. I doubt that young, rash, (though ingeni∣ous) Gentleman, hath a design to make a new Party bearing his Name, whose grand Particularity is this, that we must love no∣thing complacentially but God; I hope whilst he retains this Notion, he will con∣tinue in Celibacy; for he is not fit for Mar∣riage,

forgetting that of Solomon, Let her breasts satisfy thee at all times, and be tho•• ever ravisht with her love.

Yet by the way observe, he asserts, That God not absolutely considered, but rela∣tively, is to be the Object of this Love. This is indeed to make our selves the end, God the means. To love our selves more than him. Thus he, that pretends to ex∣alt the Love of God, hath debased it above all men. I hope some learned Bi∣shop or Clergy-man, will soon take this conceited Man, and cut him up, and send him to the Tribes in Israel, with a see, consider, and speak your minds; who hath asserted, that the Quakers Cause calls for their most Learned Pens, and they may triumph in the Victory if they get it.

The Quakers ignorance discovers it self on all occasions. G. Fox would call Prea∣chers, Conjurers: But, to do him right, he was none, as all know, that read his Books, or heard him talk. George White∣head, that hath writ so much, is a Noto∣rious Dunce, as proved before.

Mr. Speed, Mr. Vickris of Bristol, never speak among them, who are Men of Parts and Sense. I will imitate the Quakers way of speaking, and judge; what if

you heard such stuff as this, though some∣times better, in their greater Meetings, where contrary to their first Principles, many of them forbid Womens speaking, or the speaking of Nonsensical Fools, that talk at this or the like rate.

Frunds,

I am moved by the — to speak unto you, though I know not what I shall say. Noah was a Perfect Man, yet some say Men cannot be Perfect, or without Sin, yet Noah was so; and his Son Cham was Cursed for uncovering his Father's nakedness, when drunk. Judas was the Traytor, and bore the Bag, and cared not for the Poor. It is said, he that taketh Kirjah Sepher. — Now that is the Spirit of the Book: Now look, Fru••ds, the Heart is the Book, and the Spirit is the Light within. It is said indeed, I forbid a Woman to speak in the Church; but the Priests are in the dark mind, and understand it not; by the Woman is meant the Flesh, and by the Husband is meant the Devil; but they in the Witch∣craft cannot see it; but I say, look to the Light within you. Frunds, If you have motions to a Woman, and do not do the act; or desire to take another Man's goods, and do not do it, you Sin not. Mary

Fisher had leave from the Lord to go fro•• New-England to save her life, when other•• had not. Now they used carnal Weapon•• Paul said, These hands have ministred to •• necessities. And whatsoever doth mak•• manifest, is Light. Now we abhor th•• Papist Transubsistation and Infannibility, and many things be taken figuratel•• When I shoed a Horse the other day, th•• Horse went the better; so you, if you lo•••• to the Light within you, ah the pure Ligh•• The Priests use Heathenish words, such a•• be not in Scripture, as Sacrament, &c. Th•• word of the — is come upon m•• I am to read a Letter from Friend F. o•• P. though we read not Scripture, th•• was of old, yet we may what comes fro•• the pure streams. One came to me 〈◊〉〈◊〉 know, where John Steeplehouseman dwel•• whom he prophanely call'd Mr. Chur•••• man; but I bid him defiance for Wo••∣shipping the Beast. They say, if you 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Persecuted from one City, flee to anoth•••• But these Hell-hounds understand no•• they be Baals Priests, Hirelings, a Gene••∣tion of Vipers; for it is revealed unto 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Flee to another, is to the City, Heave•• O Frunds flee there; flee there Frund There is none that doeth good (they say) 〈◊〉〈◊〉

not one; but David said after, O that the salvation of Israel were come out of Sion. The Priests say, this world shall in time end, but they be in the dark, and make Solomon a Lyar, who sayeth, yea he sayeth, One generation passeth away, and another cometh, but the earth abideth for ever; now mark, Frunds, what abides for ever, shall never end; but they be Sorcerers, Wolves in Sheeps cloathing. They say, That when the outward fleshly Christ was Crucified, the vale of the Temple was rent in twain, and the Rocks rent, and the Graves were opened — But they be blind Guides that lead the blind, and so both fall into the Ditch. I am moved to tell you, Frunds, (and now the two thumbs must be put against the Breasts) that this is meant Mens Hearts were torn, Hearts as hard as Rocks; what think you, Doth the Scripture tell you of outward Temples, and outward Books? Do not, F••unds, strike any one after the manner of Men; for Paul saith, Lay hands suddenly on no man. The world is angry if we Honour them not by putting off our upper Covering, and say Thee to them; but abide you in the Light, &c. They talk much of Paul's Epistles; But what do they tell us of the

Epistles of Apostatizing Jews? And they talk of Abraham's Faith; we must be better than they in their day. They tel•• us what David and what the Apostles did 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but being led by Example hath undon•• the world. Now, my Frunds, the Peo∣ple of God of old were Quakers; Mose•• was a Quaker, for he said, I exceedingly quake and fear; and Habakkuk was a Qua∣ker, for his lips quivered; yea they were all Quakers, for they taught Righteousness which is the very Principle of the Qua∣kers; yea, I say, so do the Quakers say•• Now the world saith, That the Body of Christ is gone to Heaven, but it turned to the dust. They say the Scriptures be Gold's Word, but they lie, they be dirt, Ser∣pent's meat; some Frunds threw their Bibles into the fire, and they perished, and therefore are not God's word. Frunds. It is often said, and truly, the Scripture•• and the Body of Christ be the Two great Harlots that have deceived the world; many things in Scripture are evil; in on•• place Circumcision is commanded, in ano∣ther place forbidden, &c.

That such and worse Speeches have been made in thousands of their Assemblies, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 doubt not, and I am ready to give an ac∣count

of the things, as their assertions, that I have read in their Books, or heard in hearing them, or talking with them.

Because many are decoyed by the Qua∣kers mode of Speaking, as most agreeable to Scripture, as Thou to a Single Person, not you, which word we use, Thou, not You, to God: I will consider it.

We are no more bound to Scripture modes of communication, than to Scri∣pture dresses; and because many, many weak ones are deceived by these specious pretences, I will plead this case, Bildad said to Job only, 18. Job 1, 2, 3. How long will it be ere You make an end of words? How long shall we appear vile in your sight? for be teareth— Why may I not say You to one, as well as Thou to many? When God delivered the Law on Mount Sinai, Thou shalt not kill — Spoke he not to Thousands? We borrow this from the French Vouz; for they have no other word to a single Per∣son, we took You from it. We despise not the word Thee to a King (as they often say) in all cases; he that Marrieth him to his Queen, saith, Wilt thou have this Woman? He that gives him the Lords Supper saith, The Body of Christ given for Thee, preserve thy Body and Soul —

What if men agree such a word shall sig∣nifie such a thing, is not that sufficient?

Quem penes arbitrium est & jus, & norma lequendi.

Barclay's Objection is vain, What if (Apol) says he, a ••cholar should say to his Master Vos amas, Vos legis; I say we put the Verb als in the plural number in English; we say not You lovest, you read∣est, but You love, you read.

I put it to their Conscience, Is it Sinful thus to speak? If not, Why then trouble they the world about nothing?

I am not willing to run out much into other things that many have written well of; Read Faldo's Quakerism no Christianity; who hath done his work like a Work∣man; and the aforementioned Tract which will commend it self, and to which little need be added.

And now tell me Reader, What think∣est thou? Was there ever such a giddy Ge∣neration upon Earth? As great Apostates from Reason most of them are, as from Reli∣gion. It is true some few Men among them have shap'd their Notions for them, and

made them more intelligible than once they were. When such a Question as this hath been under Consideration, Whether it were Lawful for their Women to Speak in their Meetings; I have been Answer'd, That Jesus Christ was Crucified, and that the Priests accused him, and Pilate con∣demned him, &c.

I remember I have read, Where dost thou read, thou Hireling, that ever any of God's Messengers stood on a Carnal Pulpit? When that Scripture hath been urged, 8. Nehem. 4. And Ezra stood on a pulpit of wood, and read the law, and gave the sense; the Answer hath been, What hast thou to do with Ezra? Ezra was a Holy Man, and thou art an Hypocrite. Or when the Question hath been about Swearing, and that Scripture hath been urged, 10. Rev. 6. The Angel swore by him that liveth for ever and ever, Time should be no more; the Answer hath been, But to which of the Angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee? Some say, That Ministers must not be paid, be∣cause it was said, The Priests bear rule by their Meant, 5. Jer. 31. That Ministers must not use helps in Reading, for Paul would not meddle in another man's Line.

Some have asked one another, Hast thou experienced that Scripture in thee, The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood? The Answer hath been, Yea, The Spirit was in them, and the Spirit was not to be tried by any thing, Scri∣pture, nor Man's Reason. So that a Man had almost as good go into Bedlam and talk with the Wise Men there, as with ma∣ny of our Inspired Quakers: I advise any that engage with them, to get a Promise of Two things:

1. To end one Argument before en∣trance be made on another.

2. To have as much time allowed you to speak, as you allow them.

So have I understood some of them, and there hath been some coherence, or consistency in our discourse. When they have multiplied words, and crack'd ma∣ny of them, and run on to things nothing to the Question, they go away and say, That such Ministers could not say a word to them, or could not resist the Spirit by which they spake; that a She Friend should silence any Priest of them all; though they have talk'd such prodigious Nonsense,

that might make any Man sweat to hear them.

If I knew such glorious nonsense among their Leaders by my little (and yet too much) converse with them, I may easily imagine, how much they that hear them often meet with such triflings.

May what I have said be an Amulet to prevent infection from their poisonous Doctrines, especially such as are incompa∣tible with true Grace: As the Doctrine of Perfection, of a Christ within in oppo∣sition to a Christ without.

This word Outward is in great Contempt with them. The outward word (the Scriptures) the Outward Christ, (Christ Crucified) and some an Outward Heaven (that Glorious State above).

Baptism and the Lord's Supper were Outward Ordinances.

But why do not these Men Contemn Outward Meats, and Outward Drink••, and Outward Cloathing? If they did, the Con∣troversie would soon be at an end.

And now, William Penn, I once more de∣clare to thee, and all the world, that I am ready to meet with thee at an open Dispu∣tation, when thou wilt, to de••••te the Questions before us, or the main Question, which is this;

Whether your putting in practice our Prin∣ciples, by you condemned (as you say) from the Lord, in the time of Persecution, doth not most certainly and evidently prove you to be either Notorious Impostors, or Notorious Apo∣states?

There is nothing more evident to me, and I suppose to thee, that so it is: Then is the Mask fall'n off thy Forehead, and let me ask thee, or rather thou thy Con∣science, a few Questions.

Question 1.

Art thou not ashamed to hear Folly, False∣hood, Ignorance, father'd on the Holy Spirit by thy Followers?

Question 2.

Dost not thou frequently do what they condemn us for, use Philosophical Terms and Distinctions in thy Writings, which they say is from the Serpent?

Question 3.

Couldst thou understand any Physician or

Lawyer, speaking of Physick or Law, in that way these do of Religion?