The pretended antidoe [sic] proved poyson: or, The true principles of the Christian & Protestant religion defended, and the four counterfit defenders thereof detected and discovered the names of which are James Allen, Joshua Moodey, Samuell Willard and Cotton Mather, who call themselves ministers of the Gospel in Boston, in their pretended answer to my book, called, The Presbyterian & independent visible churches in New-England, and else-where, brought to the test, &c. And G.K. cleared not to be guilty of any calumnies against these called teachers of New-England, &c. By George Keith. With an appendix by John Delavall, by way of animadversion on some passages in a discourse of Cotton Mathers before the General Court of Massachusetts, the 28th of the third moneth, 1690.

CAP. X.

PAg. 136. Ye say so little in defence of that ye call your Two Sacraments, (confessing withal, That the Scripture saith nothing of the word Sacrament) that I shall not spend Paper nor Time to answer all your Impertinencies, considering that I have said enough that may suffice to answer you in my former Reply to Pardon Tillinghast; for if Water-Baptism be no Gospel Precept, then surely sprinkling In∣fants is none; only I shall consider some of the grossest of them. Pag. 137. As for sprinkling, ye say, ye plead not for it, but for pouring Water, not on the fore-head only, but on the face: This seemeth a learned distinction, that may pass current among ignorant People; what dif∣ference

betwixt sprinkling and pouring? see∣ing all the Water ye pour is neither gallon nor pint, but so much as ye can hold in the hollow of your hand, which cannot well wet the whole face, and therefore is more sprinkling; but still, ye are to seek for a proof, that either sprinkling or pouring Water on a childs fac•• was ever commanded by Christ, or practised by any of the Apostles or Ministers of Christ record••d in Scripture. Ye say, Origine and Cyprian tell us, that the Apostles gave order for the baptizing of Infants, withal citing Augustin; but this is no Scripture-proof, and Authority of antient Writers, without Scripture, ought to be of no weight among true Protestants. The Church of Rome doth so argue for her unscriptural Traditions, and is more ingenu∣ous than ye, that she doth confess, There is no A••t••ority for Infant Baptism, but only the Tradition of the Church; and if ye have no better Autho∣rity than Tradition, your cause is desperate, and your Refuge to the Tradition of antient Writers, proveth you more Popish than Pro∣testant. And as for Origine, Cyprian and Au∣gustine, they lived long after the first Century, and ye can give no evidence in Church History that Infant Baptism was practised until Cypri∣ans time, past two hundred years from Christs Resurrection; and whereas while the practice of Water-Baptism continued in the Church, it was required, that before Baptism, the

Persons that were to be baptized should confess to the Truth, and also that they did confess their sins, and declare their Repentance and Faith, which Infants could not do, and there∣fore were incapable of Water-Baptism; to supply which defect, in after Ages the inven∣tion of God-fathers, that should confess and vow for them, was set up, that hath no shadow of ground in Scripture.

Pag. 139. Ye say, I fraudule••tly omit that clause, citing Luke 18.15, 16. For of such i•• the Kingdom of God. Answ. I do not fraudu∣lently omit it, but saw no necessity to repeat it, as having not the least seeming strength in it for Water-Baptism to Infants; for granting that those Infants, or such, belonged to the Kingdom of God, it doth not therefore follow, that they were baptized with Water; ye must show either Precept or Practice, but ye do neither; and that ye say, It is above the capa∣city of Children to receive the Lords Supper, so call'd, ye give no instance wherein that is more above their capacity, than to receive Infant Baptism by sprinkling or pouring, seeing both, ye say, are signs of spiritual Mysteries; and in Augustines time, that call'd the Supper was given to Children, or Infants; if they be un∣capable of understanding the thing signified by the one, so are they of understanding the thing signified by the other. Ye falsly alledge, That Contra-distinguished signifieth two Con∣traryes

the one to the other; but I did not un••e••stand any c••ntrariety betwixt John's Baptism and Christ'••, but only a diversity; nor doth the word contra-distinguished import any other contrariety, but as the Type hath to the Anti-type, i. e. counter-type.

Pag. 140, 141. Ye contend, that Mat. 28.19, 20. mu••t be Water-Baptism, because the Apostles ever renounced doing any of th••se things, as begetting or converting men unto Go••, and baptizing with the Spirit by their own virtue. But ••his is a most poor Evasion, we do not say they either did or could do any of these thi••gs by their own virtue, that is not the thing in Controversie, for what they did they did not by their own Virtue, but by the Virtue and Power of Christ. Ye still beg the Question, (tho' to deny it ye call Infatua∣tion, but the Infatuation is your own) that Christ commanded these words to be used, as words of Institution, In the Name of the Father, &c. for we find not that he bid them say or repeat these words. Ye put a meer precarious gloss on Pauls words, (That he was not sent to Baptize) That he was not obliged by any necessity to do it ordinarily personally; And hendes, this is as much as to say, that Paul thought it enough to obey Gods Command by a Proxy, and so ye may as well say, he was not under any necessity to preach, but by a Proxy or Deputy; this is to abuse Scripture, and not to expound

it; for if Paul might obey one Command of God by a Proxy, why not all others? And thus ye teach men to excuse themselves from Personal Obedience to Gods Commands; it is enough, according to your gloss, that others obey for them; but would Paul thank God for not obeying a Gospel-Precept? and yet he said, He thanked God for not baptizing any of them, but some few: Paul might have baptized some without a Commission, as well as he cir∣cumcised Timothy.

Pag. 142. Ye say, Ye have alwayes professed your zeal for the inward Baptism with the holy Ghost: But this is a great Falshood and Con∣tradiction, when ye deny all present inward divine Revelation and Inspiration, and the real in being and Presence of Christ or God im∣mediately in the Saints.

Pag. 143. Ye most grosly pervert and abuse my words, because I said, Christ had an out∣ward Supper with his Disciples, when he did eat the Paschal Lamb with them, ye put this your false gloss on it, as if I said or thought, That he had the thing without the thing signified, i. e. that Christ ate the Passover hypocritically. Nothing can be more grosly alledged; for I said expresly, that the Disciples at that time when Christ had that outwa••d Supper with them, had an inward enjoyment ••f him given them by Christ, in the use of the Bread and Wine, see pag. 190. And by your many su••h

gross Perversions, that seem wilfull in you, ye show what men ye are. Ye alledge, The first Cup belonged to the Passover, Luke 22. But ye may as well say, so did the second; for ye give no Reason why one, rather than another; and ye may with as much colour say, that the second Cup did not belong to the Supper, be∣cause it is said, Luke 22.20. He took the Cup after Supper, &c.

Pag. 143. Ye alledge, I arrogate Gods Pre∣rogative, who only can judge the heart immediatly, when I say, your Sacrament hath no inward spiri∣tual signification unto you. But I speak not so simply nor absolutely, as I can and do appeal to the impartial Reader; for ye leave out my follow∣ing words, that qualifie them, viz. As ye use it, while ye altogether deny that the Saints are partakers of the Substance of Christ, or that Christ really and substantially dwelleth in his Saints, & while ye also deny all inward Revela∣tion of him, in these latter Ages. And thus I presume not to judge you, as if immediately I did know your hearts, but by your words ye are judged, even as I may judge of that man, who denyeth, that he hath eat any substance of Bread or Food, that he hath not received of Bread, &c. For as he who eateth Bread, receiveth the Substance of it into his body, so he who eateth Christ, the Bread of Life, receiveth some measure of him substantially into his Soul. And though this is denyed by many of you,

and as I said, in my former Book, the man•• lean and dead Souls among you, void of in∣ward and spiritual discerning, taste or savour too manifestly demonstrate, ye are generally strangers to the Supper of the Lord, [here Note, I say not universally, but generally] yet I have that charity, that some called Presbyterians and Independents, of the more sober kind, and who allow in part of inward divine Revelati∣on, and of a real inward indwelling of Christ in Believers, may truly know some-what at times of the inward and spiritual Signification of that Figurative Supper, yet not because of that outward manner of using it, but indeed because there is some secret breathing and de∣sires after the Lord in some of them, and such are sober, and tender, and not of a malicious and persecuting Spirit, as too many among you are, who continue to justifie the putting to Death our innocent worthy Friends at Boston; and thus our Charity is greater than yours; for ye call me a fearful Apostate, and so ye, and not I, arrogate Gods Prerogative, who only can judge the heart immediately; for ye can give no probable signs of my Apost••cy, seeing in the judgment of all sober Protestants, I own all the Fundamental and most necessary Do∣ctrines of the Christian Faith, and ye can charge nothing in my Conversation or manner of Life inconsistent with true Christianity; I have departed from no good thing either of

Doctrine or Life, that I had when among these called Presbyterians, I have only relinquished their Errors, and that will no more prove me Apostate, than Luther and Calvin their relin∣quishing Popish Errors, doth prove them Apo∣states, altho' the Papists have so charged them; yea, I have known Presbyterians accuse the In∣dependents for being Apostates. But as I value no•• your uncharitable Judgment against me, so I cannot but take notice how guilty ye are to blame me for Ʋncharitableness in judging, when ye are so deeply guilty in that very thing.

Pag. 144. Ye grosly abuse and pervert my words, when ye alledge, That I say, ordinary eating, as it is the common Duty of all men, is the Supper of the Lord. I said no such thing; but that often in the use of outward eating and drinking, being sanctified and blessed by the Word of God and Prayer, we have, together with the outward ••••ting, eat the inward and spiritual Bread; and together with the out∣war•• Cup, ••••re drunk that spiritual Drink, and withal, remembring the Lords Death, and what he hath done and suffered for us: And I distinguish betwixt the Saints more solemn eatings together (upon frequent occasions, where their thus eating together was a figure or sign of their inward Communion) and their daily eating a part; and withal, I declared, how in all our eatings and drinkings, and at all times, we should remember the Lords Death

even until his last coming, and to the end of the World, see pag. 188, to 19••. And when the Saints outwardly eat together, and then also inwardly eat of that inward and spiritual Food, and have together an inward enjoyment of the Lord in their hearts, that may be called the Supper of the Lord (which both may be without and with the outward eating) but I did not say, nor do I now say, that alwayes when the Saints eat outwardly at their ordi∣nary Meals, they eat together inwardly, but that the times are very frequent of their out∣ward and inward eating together at one time, wherein they remember the Lords Death, and praise him, as for all his Mercies, so for what he hath done and suffered for them; and this Solemnity may be well used by any Number, as well small as great, and without any Gown-Man or ordained Priest, either of Pope, Pre∣late or Presbyter; for all the Faithful are a Royal Priesthood unto God; and there is no shadow of ground in Scripture, that Saints may not eat and drink together, remembring the Lords Death, with Prayer, and Blessing, and Thanksgiving, and enjoying an inward and spiritual Communion together, though they be ever so small a Number, and though having no Priest outwardly ordained, as above said. And seeing outward Ordination of Priests or Presbyters, either by Pope, Prelate or Presbyter (none of whom have any inward

and immediate call) is a meer human Invention (as John Owen, whom ye esteem your reverend Brother, hath sufficiently proved) and that ye lay the main stress of this Ordinance, its being observed or practised hereupon, that some ordained Minister consecrate it, or Inde∣pendent Pastor, which is of no better Authority than the former. Ye can never prove that that ye call the Supper, is any thing beyond what is frequently practised among us, even as outwardly, although as to the inward, to Gods praise, we know we have the advantage incomparably beyond all of you. And instead of proving that your eating together hath any advantage above ours, ye say, Ye think your Supper is beyond ours, as being an holy Ordinance of Gospel Worship, and ours is only the common Duty of all men. But as ours is not the com∣mon Duty of all men (as ye falsly alledge) so yours is not an holy Ordinance of Gospel Wor∣ship; for it is essential to all Gospel Worship to be performed in the Spirit, because God is a Spirit; but ye plead, That men, called Mini∣sters, who have nothing of true Piety, or the Spirit of Truth and Holiness, may consecrate the Bread, and make it a Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord.

Pag. 145. Ye commit another gross Abuse, falsly alledging on me, that I said, All outward eating and drinking is a natural and necessary sign of the inward, see my Book, p. 192. I say not All

outward eating & drinking, but I say, such a figure as is natural and necessary to be used by us all, &c. where ye may see, I restrict it to Believers; so that the outward eating and drinking of Believers, is a natural and necessary sign or figure of the inward, to Believers (but not to Unbelievers) as the whole outward World is a figure of the inward and spiritual, as Paul doth expresly call it, 1 Cor. 7.31. But where∣as ye say, There is not one Syllable, expresly nor consequentially intimating any such thing there; ye show your great Rashness, or Ignorance; for in the Greek (to which I did refer) the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Latine, Scema, and Englished, Scheme, that most commonly signifieth figure, and is expresly translated Figure, in that very place, by Pasor, a zealous Protestant, in his Lexicon, thus, Figura hujus Mundi preterit, i. e. the Figure of this World passeth away. Hence in all Mathematical Schools, in teaching Geo∣graphy or Astronomy, we call the draught or figure proposed in the Lesson, the Scema or Sceme; and any ordinary School-boy, or com∣mon Shepherd or Plow-man may inform you, that this visible World is a Figure of the in∣visible, and the outward a figure of the in∣ward, which is a common Saying in the mouthes of men generally, and is further con∣firmed by Paul, saying, The invisible things of God are understood by the things that are made, Rom. 1.20. and by the fore-cited Saying of

Luther, That in all Creatures we see a Declara∣tion and Signification of the holy Trinity. And whereas I said, That in our outward eatings, sometimes we do use both inward & outward Prayer and Thanksgiving, and sometimes only inward; this in a way of Scoff, ye call, A new way of Consecration; whereby ye declare your selves too great strangers to inward and men∣tal Prayer, performed only with the heart and mind; for if ye did rightly understand inward and mental Prayer, ye would acknow∣ledge that the outward eating is sanctified by the Word of God, and by inward Prayer, as well as both inward and outward, but the out∣ward without the inward, hath no virtue to sanctifie the Creatures of God; and yet cer∣tainly ye give too much cause to judge, that your outward Prayer wanteth the inward, when ye allow both the Members & Ministers of your Church to be Members and Ministers, without all inward Holiness, or working of the Spirit of God. And how the Prayer of Unholy Men, (as ye allow your Ministers may be, that consecrate the Bread and Wine to be the Sacrament of the Supper) can consecrate, sanctifie, or make holy, ev•••• ••es Instruments, these Elements, is as strange a Paradox, as how an unclean thing can bring out a clean, or one contrary another.

Pag. 146. Ye alledge, That the Seventh day was appointed, viz. for a Sabbath, before the Fall,

and so was no Type of Christ. But the former ye barely alledge; for that the Seventh Day, its being said to be blessed, &c. (suppose a natural or common Day) before any mention is made of the Fall of Adam, no more proveth its Institution before the fall, for a Sabbath, than that it can be proved, there were di∣versities of Languages before Babel, because Languages or Tongues are mentioned, Gen. 10.5.20.31. and yet in the following Chap. vers. 1. its said, The whole Earth was of one Language; for divers things are recorded in Scripture by Anticipation.

Pag. 147. Ye say, Heb. 4.9, 10. it is said, Christ entred into his Rest; and doth that mean, that he entred into himself? Answ. It is not said that Christ or God entred into his Rest, but That God ceased from his Works; but allow it, That Christ entred into his Rest, is not That that he entred into that Glory he had with the Father before the World was? and can God or Christ have another or better Rest than Himself? or can any natural or common Day be a Rest unto God? O blind Man! Ye call an inward Day, Non-sence, but it is because ye have not sence to understand it: Is not the Day of Gods Power, and the Day of Salvation, mentioned in Scripture, an inward and spiri∣tual Day? Ye say again, If I can find an in∣ward Seventh Day in Scripture, it will be a rare Invention. I Answer; As I find Moon and Sun

inwardly and spiritually understood in Scrip∣ture, so I find seven Days, and a Seventh Day inwardly and spiritually understood, see Isa. 30.26. but this to you is still a Mystery. And whereas it is the outward and natural Sun that constitutes common and natural Days, there∣fore did Origine, Augustine, and many others conclude, That the seven Days, mentioned Gen. 1.2. and Exod. 20. could not be com∣mon and natural Days, for there was no Sun until the fourth Day, nor Firmament until the second, nor dry Land and Sea till the third.

P. 147. That God altered the Sabbath from the Seventh Day to the First, ye meerly alledge, without any proof, as your common manner is. I suppose ye are not so ignorant as not to know that Calvin, the Father, so called, or Founder of the Presbyterian Church, and the French Protestants generally, and also the Dutch, tho' they keep the First Day for worship, after the manner of primitive Christians, as we also do, yet do not judge it to be the Sabbath, or com∣manded by divine Institution; & we set apart that day worthily and commendably, with other Protestants, neither for any betterness in it, simply as a Day, nor as being command∣ed for a Sabbath, but in honour of our Saviours Resurrection, after the Example of the pri∣mitive Christians in the Apostles days, men∣tioned in Scripture, and that we see a great conveniency and service in it, to keep a Day

weekly unto the Lord, and as said the Apostle, He who keepeth a Day, keepeth it unto the Lord, and that Day rather than another, because of Christs Resurrection on the first day of the week, and the worthy Example of primitive Christians, recorded in Scripture.

And thus I have gone through all the Heads contained in your Book, relating to the Do∣ctrinal part, and have showed our agreement in every one of them, with the holy Scriptures, and also with famous Protestants, and Antient Writers, call'd Christian Fathers, except in that one matter of Infant Baptism, wherein if we differ from many of these called Antients in one thing, ye differ in another; for they generally judged it absolutely necessary to Sal∣vation, which ye, as well as I, judge an Error in them, and these called Baptists commonly, who may be judged as good Protestants as ye, deny your Infant-Baptism, as a humane Inven∣tion; and yet ye have no other: And if this doth not unchristian them, so nor can it us; and ye deny their baptizing into Water such, who have been baptized, when Infants; why then may ye not allow the same Charity to us, that ye, viz. the more fober part both of Pres∣byterians and Baptists, so called (tho' the more Rigid sort call one another Hereticks) allow one to another, and that we allow to the sober, and tender, and honest hearted of you both,

yea, and to such in all Professions, where the Head and Foundation is held, which is Christ? & we have that Charity, that there is a sincere sort among all Professions, who belong to God and Christ, and tho' they have wrong Notions and Conceptions of some things belonging to Christian Doctrine, and have not a form of sound words, in delivering some matters of Faith, which is a great hurt unto them, yet they have some true inward sence of Christian Truth and Doctrine, and their faith and sence may be partly sound, where their words, where by they express it may be very unsound; for many have a right sence and feeling of things, whereof they have not a right Elocution, Utterance and form of Speech, as in Naturals, so in Spirituals, as when Men taste Money, and their taste of it is the same, yet they differ in the Names they give it, or in some subtile and curious Questions about the Nature of it, or the nature and manner of tasting it, that is not so very material. So men may have some real sence and experience of the workings of the holy Spirit, & inward divine Revelations and Inspirations, that work and beget in them some measure of true Faith, Hope, Love, and other Christian Virtues, and yet by the Pre∣judice of Education, and wrong outward tea∣ching, or ill wording of things, may give wrong Names to things, yet God forbid we should unchristian them, simply for a Mistake,

or defect in not giving proper words & names to things; and yet many things of Contro∣versie, among single hearted men, lie but in words, and such should have a regard to that which is good, tender and sensible one in ano∣ther, where it is felt: But where a persecuting and malitious Spirit, and great hardness of Heart prevaileth in any, these are not to be regarded as Christians, whatever they profess. So I would have you all to know, all the sober and tender hearted People of New-England, and else-where, whether called Presbyterian, Independent, Baptist, or Episcopal, yea, and others, holding the Head, and being sincere in the main, That we can, and do own that your sincerity, altho' we cannot but differ from you in matters both of Doctrine and Practice, wherein we find you to err from the path of Truth, and so far as we have together attained and are agreed in all good things of Christian Doctrine or Practice, let us walk by the same Rule, and live in Charity one with another.

Pag. 148. In your Reflections on that I call∣ed, A Call and Warning to the People of Boston, &c. first, ye falsly charge me, That I arrogate as much to my self, as any of the Prophets of Old had, of an immediate Mission from God. But let that Paper be considered, and it shall not be found that I arrogate or assume any thing equal to the Prophets of Old, only I did, and I

do still affirm, That I had the Word of the Lord to declare to the People of Boston, &c. and it was as a burden unto me, until I had delivered it; & he who hath not Gods Word, as it liveth and is the Word of Life in his heart, is no true Minister of Christ, but every Mini∣ster of Christ is not either Apostle or Prophet, in that high and eminent sence that is frequent in Scripture. Ye charge me with, 1st. Lying, 2dly, Slandering, 3dly, Railing, 4thly, False Doctrine, 5thly, Non-sence; but all this ye alledge without proof, as your manner is: Sharp Speeches are not Railing always, but commendable in some cases; for both Christ, and the Prophets and Apostles used them to men of your Generation, & your Speeches are more sharp against me & my Friends than ours are against you; and which are most deserving, we freely leave it to the Lord, and his Witness in mens Consciences. Ye would six Non-sence on my words, that I said, Your Self-actings of all sorts, in that ye call your Duties and Perfor∣mances, ye are to repent of, &c. Where it is clear, by that ye call your Duties, I did under∣stand, (and so might ye) your Preaching, Pray∣ing, Singing without the Spirit of God, and them pag. 149. ye call Dirt and Dung; and yet ye continue to offer up this Dirt and Dung unto God, but remember that God will cast the Dirt & Dung of your Sacrifices on your faces, and the Dung of your solemn Feasts, according

to Mal. 2.3. And surely, seeing by your own confession, your Prayers are Dirt and Dung, they cannot be that pure Offering which God pro∣mised his People should offer up unto him, Mal. 1.11. 6thly, Ye say, Prophets do not use to call men to Repent of their holding the Truth as it is in Jesus, and his Call is nothing else. Ans. I bid you not Repent for your holding the Truth in Jesus; for that is false, ye hold it not in Jesus, but as ye hold many Errors in Doctrine, so ye hold something of Truth in Unrighteousness, according to Rom. 1.18. and I bid you Repent of your Hypocrisie, Pride, Vanity, Blasphemy, hard Speeches, Cruelty, &c. 7thly, Ye say, Pro∣phets had wont to show some proof of their Call; but ye alledge, I have shown none; but ye have not told what proof they used to show, or what proof John, a great Prophet, showed to the Pharisees, for he wrought no Miracles; their ordinary proof was, Hear the Word of the Lord, and Let the Lord be Witness, and this is my proof, who do not equal my self to any of those Prophets; it sufficeth, that I am one of the least of the Servants of Christ. But it is hard to prove a thing to be White to a blind man, or that I speak to a deaf man: When ye can prove, that ye have Ears to hear what God saith in his Servants, or that your Ear•• are open to hear, I can prove, That God spoke by me unto you; but ye shut your Ears against Gods Call, as many did of Old, and said, The

Lord hath not spoken, when he did speak. I say it with Sorrow, if ye were not blind, ye might see some of the Judgments of the Lord begun to be executed upon you, which I was made, with great sorrow to declare, I did feel were to come upon the People both of Boston and New-England, if they did not speedily Repent; & though Ye have not considered and laid it to heart, yet some have, and more I hope will, for their Amendment; but as for me, I have not desired the Evil Day to come upon you, but greatly desire, if it be the good will of God, that ye may find Mercy to Repent, and so his Wrath that is began to kindle against you, may be quenched. And though I told you, That whatever Doctrine cannot be proved from Scripture, is to be rejected, whatever pretence men may make to Immediate Revelation; yet this doth not reach me, for I bring no Doctrine but what I prove from Scripture; but as for the Call that Gods Servants used to have, they proved it not by Scripture, but by the living Voice of God speaking in them, to all who have an Ear open to hear, but your Ear is shut, as so was Pharoah's Ear, against God's Call in Moses, though accompanied in him with great Miracles; and as some believed, that saw no Miracles of old, so many did not believe, that did see them; and so would it be now, if Mi∣racles were wrought.

In your Appendix, which containeth a poor empty shadow of Answer to my Letter unto you, I need not take notice of all your Imper∣tinencies, nor reply unto them, as judging it loss of time and paper. Ye say,

1st, Ye hope, ye have now given a satisfactory Rea∣son, why ye called my Letter a Blasphemous and Heretical Paper. But your hope will prove vain, I freely leave it to all that are sober, and able to judge in these matters. 2dly, Ye think, ye have now found spiritual Weapons, if the Word of God be the Sword of the Spirit, Ephes. 6.17. But the Word of God ye are ignorant of, and also of the Scripture that testifie of it, and ye have only wrested and abused some pla∣ces of Scripture, to defend your bad Cause, as I have made sufficiently already appear. 3dly, Ye say, your preaching is open, and ye shut out none, but those that will not come. But this is a poor excuse, do ye not deny, to give us a fair hearing, when if any come to answer to your false accusations, and gain-say your false doct∣rine, before they can speak one sentence they are carried away to the Goal? 4thly, Ye alledge, when I came unto you, your Liberties were taken away. But this is a notorious False∣hood; ye had all the Liberty that we or I had, or could be desired: None of your Meet∣ings were disturbed by them in Authority, nor no Prohibition to hinder you fairly to debate things of Religion, only ye had not power

to persecute as formerly, and your Sun of Per∣secution was set. 5thly, Ye falsly alledge, I boast of my great Conquest; for I only publish your Cowardice. And that ye say, Ye suppose ye have made my Cake appear to be Dough, it is but a supposition, and hath nothing of truth in it. 6thly, Ye say, Ought not the Shepherd to be aware when the Wolf comes to his Flock? But suppose I were a Wolf, (as I thank God I am not) when the Wo••f cometh among your flock openly, should the Shepherds abscond, and not give the Wolf an open Assault? Is this the way to defend your Flock? unless ye did judge, that by your open appearing in a publick Dis∣pute, ye would discover your weakness. 7thly, Ye say, Ye knew I was a Quaker, and therefore doubted my design. But I told you plainly what my design was, viz. To discover you to be Teachers of false Doctrine in many things. 8thly, Ye say, I give no demonstration, that I came in the Will of the Lord unto you▪ But ye should say, ye are blind, and cannot see it, as all false Teachers and Persecuters were, who did not acknowledge that the true Servants of God, who came unto them, were sent of God. 9thly, Ye falsly, and without all shadow of proof, say, It was of God, doubtless, to leave him in the hands of Satan, to be thus acted: I value not your false Judgment, further than to pitty your great Blindness. 10thly, Ye say, I have set you a President, viz. To Lye and Rail, but ye

follow it not. But let all sober and impartial Readers judge, whether ye have not both Lyed and Railed most grosly; and tho' I have used some sharp words towards you according to your desert, as Gods Servants have done for∣merly against men of your Spirit, yet my tender Conscience beareth me witness, with the help of God, that I have neither lyed nor railed upon you. 11thly, Ye say, It hath been proved, that I bring another Doctrine, than that of Christ. But ye say it, and that is all: And whereas I told you, an Heretick (tho' I am none) should be twice admonished, before he is rejected; Ye answer, Have I not been more than so? But I say, I never to this day received Admonition from any Church, Presbyterian or other, ac∣cording to due Church Order, as Christ hath instituted; and though I have had divers De∣bates, some in writ, and some by word of Mouth, with divers Opposers, yet that saith nothing that ever I was duely admonished, ac∣cording to Christs Order, nor rejected out of any Church Society; for these I had to deal with were only private Persons; and therefore ye are impertinent to mention, for your ex∣cuse, either John Alexander in Scotland, whose Book I have many years ago answer'd in print, and my Answer to it is now in New-England, or these Baptists (who are judg'd by many of you to be Hereticks) at Barbycan in London, or any at Hampton; Publick Disputes are one thing,

and an orderly Church Admonition or Censure, is another. But whereas ye mention Salem, your insinuation faileth you, I writ a fair Let∣ter to the Priests at Salem, to have some dis∣course with them before the People, but they refused, and I had no further medling with them. And tho' ye grant that Christ and the Apostles disputed with men of ill Principles, yet ye must not dispute with me, because I am worse than any of those, and grown beyond Admo∣nition: But this is your bare alledgance, and none will believe you, but who are blinded with the same Prejudice as ye are. But ye give me no Answer, why though ye will not receive Quakers into your Houses, yet some of your sort will receive their Goods, taken from them by force, because they could not for Conscience sake give you Maintenance. That your preaching in your publick Houses, are insti∣tuted means of our Conviction, ye take for grant∣ed, without proof; nor can we believe you, so long as ye are declared Enemies to the Inspi∣ration of the Spirit of Truth, that doth only qualifie Peachers to convince men of their Errors. But ye forget how ye contradict your selves in two weighty particulars, 1st, That we are past Admonition, and Incorrigible; and yet your Preaching in your publick Houses, are means of our Conviction, but not your Con∣ference with us in private Houses: If we are past Admonition and Incorrigible, how can your

Preaching be a means of our Conviction, any more than private Conference in your private Houses? If it be a Duty to preach to us, is it not also a Duty, when ye are desired, to dis∣course with us in private, at least before Wit∣nesses? 2dly, Ye are guilty of another great Contradiction, That because I am a Heretick, and worse, ye must not dispute with me, but reject me; and now at last ye dispute with me in Print, that is a more open way of dispute, than by word of Mouth; or can ye find any ground in Scripture to warrant you to dispute with me in Print, and yet to forbid you to dispute with me by word of Mouth?

My comparing you to Turkish Pyrates that hang out false Colours, ye say, holds not Parrallel; but that I can freely leave to the judicious and impartial Readers. But it seem∣eth, all your former Reasons were but made or feigned, not real, why ye refused a pub∣lick Dispute with me; therefore ye proceed to give other new Reasons, that ye think will appear more sollid. First, therefore ye begin again to say, It was not in your power to grant it it to me, to have a publick Disputation with you, without laying your selves obnoxious to the then Government, who had expresly forbidden the Peo∣ple to take liberty of any publick Meeting together on any occasion on the week dayes, besides the usual 〈…〉〈…〉 to this I ansvv•• 〈…〉〈…〉 ••¦cture,

to have allowed the time of your Le∣cture to a publick Dispute. 2dly, If ye had given this Reason for your denyal at first, without all doubt a liberty could have been most readily procured unto you, from the then Government. 3dly, Many of the People took a far greater liberty afterwards, not only to meet openly, without leave of your then Go∣vernour, but to do a great deal more, &c. But if it was unlawful to dispute with an Incorrigible Heretick, why do ye now insinuate, that had it not been for laying your selves obnoxious to the then Government, ye would have given me a publick Disputation with you? Surely ye do greatly forget your selves, to write such Contradictions. Secondly, Ye say, Ye knew none of your Hearers had any scruple about your Do∣ctrine. But what then? ye should be ready to give a Reason of your Hope to every one that asketh you, and to convince Gain-sayers, if they be out of the way, and ye in it. Thirdly, Ye say, Ye knew there would be no holding of me to any Law or Rule of Disputation, partly because a Quaker, and partly by Reports of me, and that I would bring all to my Revelations, &c. But who seeth not the weakness and shallowness of these Fig-leaf Reasons? These called Quakers are known to be men of Reason, and many of them know as well as ye, how to hold to the true Laws of fair Dispute, and false Reports of me I value not; it never was nor is my way

to bring any matter of Dispute (leaving the Scripture) to inward Revelation; but if I cannot prove the Doctrine, whereof I charged you to be false, from Scripture, I should be silent; and Ye and the Readers may see, I have not left the Scriptures, and run to in∣ward Revelations (tho' I own, that without inward divine Revelation no man can have a right understanding of Scripture) for proof against you, but hold to Scripture end Scrip∣ture-proof, in a way of fair Reasoning. 4thly, Your last Reason is as false as any of the rest, That I had declared my self at once in opposition to almost all the fundamental Articles of Religion, which have been maintained almost Seventeen hun∣dred Years by the Church of Christ. The false∣hood of this will sufficiently appear, from both my first, and this latter Book, to all sober and judicious Readers. And whereas ye say, Who but Mad-men would expose these to be pub∣lickly debated? Why then have ye exposed them that ye call Fundamentals (but are no Fundamentals of Christian Doctrine, but Fun∣damental Errors, that false Churches have been built upon) now to be publickly debated? Why do ye thus declare your selves, by your own confession, to be such Mad-men, to debate them so openly in the face of the Nations, both in America & Europe, yea, much more openly than they could have been by 2 or 3 hours dis∣course before two or three hundred People?

And that ye your selves gave the rise to this so publick way of disputing in Print, is evident from the words of your Letter, saying, If he would have a publick Audience let him Print.

I desire the Reader to take notice, That what Testimonies of antient or latter Writers of good esteem among Protestants, I have cited in this Treatise, is not for want of sufficient proofs of Scripture Testimony, on every head of difference betwixt our Opposers and us; for I have brought sufficient Testimonies of holy Scripture to confirm every one of these heads, as the judicious and impartial Reader may ob∣serve in both my Treatises; but because these men who are our Opposers, thinking to render our Doctrine odious, do accuse it, either as Novel, or as Old Heresies revived by us, and as contradicting almost all Fundamentals of Christian Religion for almost Seventeen Hundred Years past, held by good Christians; Therefore I found it convenient to cite these Testimonies, to show our agreement, not only with the holy Scrip∣tures, but also with other Writers of good esteem among Protestants, even in these very Heads, called by our Opposers Heresies and Blasphemies, that their Ignorance and Par∣tiality may appear, and their evil Design to render the Truth Odious, may be discovered.

In the end, I desire the Reader to take notice how that after C. M. and his Brethren have been disputing against all divine Inspiration, as a most absurd and false Doctrine, so much as to suppose it remaining or in being, whereby men may be assisted to preach or pray, yet in his Postscript to his Thanksgiving Sermon, printed in 1690. he giveth an account of some prophe∣cying Boyes and Girles, and other Men & Women now in France, that both pray and preach by Inspiration; and he saith expresly, He dare not say what Authority or what Original is to be assign∣ed unto these Inspirations. But seeing, according to his Doctrine all divine Inspiration is ceased, he ought to conclude, they are not of God, but of the Devil; but because he dare not so con∣clude, he alloweth it to be possible they may be divine; which is a manifest Contradiction, and giving away his Cause; as also that he al∣loweth, that Girles and Women may preach and pray in Christian Assemblies, which the Priests of N. England have so much opposed. G. K.