thus one while calumniatest and revilest and another while flatterest and prayest for the same Person one while judging and condemning the said Person as Antichristian Imposer Innovator c. another while counting him Noble Man A Dear Man c. Thou exclaimest against Religious Societies Excommunicating Condemning a Person as out of the Vnity when it was but that They have no Vnity with him in his SO doing i e. in his irregular Proceeding out of Unity and Order with them in proposing his Intention of Marriage but Once to the Meeting and that in the Womans absence whilst thou thy self art like an exalted Diotrephes yea like a Pope with thy printed Bull Excommunicating Condemning Deriding and Contemning the Servants of Christ by Name in Print as William Penn George Whitehead Stephen Crisp Alex. Parker Thomas Salthouse John Burnyeat c. for proceeding and giving their Christian Advice Sence and Judgment according to their Consciences and inward Perswasions relating to good Order in the Church of Christ. Thus inconsistent art thou conceited proud Scorner and false pretender to Liberty of Conscience who hast given more black Characters and made a worse to speak ad hominem Record even in Print against these and divers other faithful Servants of Christ than only for a Meeting to Record in Manuscript their having No Vnion with a particular Person in his Irregular Proceeding in this or that particular act for thou hast recorded these before mentioned Servants of Christ by name as Antichristian Imposers Innovators c. and compared them to the Popes Council in Print and that in thy Book intended for the Magistrates as by thy Epistle appears pag. 3. Thus inconsistent and contradictory to thy self art thou in thy pretended Plea for Liberty of Conscience whilst thou art Defaming Condemning and Excommunicating many of the Servants of Christ among us for the exercise and testimony of their tender Consciences in their Christian Advice and Admonition which is all one as to seek to stop their Mouthes from preaching exhorting others c. And this is not all thy Inconsistency and Confusion the fruit of thy Malice and Treachery but thou hast presented such a one as Henry North Knight and the Magistrates with such abominable Lyes and Abuses as if like a malicious Informer and Incendiary the Devil and thou designed not only the perpetual Reproach of the People called Quakers but an Aggravation of their Sufferings and Persecutions against whom the chief ground of thy Book also is a gross Slander and great Lye viz. That their way of Compelling and Antichristian way of proceeding to bring to and force an Vniformity Epis. p. 4. And thus raging against our Friends in these terms viz. These Tyrannical Proceedings have been used by our New Spiritual Lords Epis. p. 6. with much more Infamy Slander and Scorn cast upon us in thy Book for which the hand of the Lord will be upon thee Thy Envy and Wickedness is judged of the Lord take heed how thou persistest in it lest he make thee an Example In thy sixth Chapter thou art according to thy wonted course of Malice and Scorn inveighing against our Womens Meetings falsly charging them with usurped Authority unlimited Power and Rule placed in their Meetings by G. F. and others which is a gross abuse and slander Also thou art inveighing against presenting Intentions of Marriage before them by both the Persons p. 118 119. And this is not all the Fruit of thy perverse opposition but in the same Chapter p. 123. after divers Citations thou bringest a comparison or instance of eating Flesh or Fish as being indifferent and free and then addest that These with ALL other outward Works be Things Indifferent and may be used and also left I must tell thee Francis that this Position makes void all Christian-Discipline good Order Church-Government leaving all loose and uncertain And we are sure thou hast here asserted corrupt Doctrine tending to practical Ranterism it self for here thou makest no exception thy assertion is general not only of eating of Flesh and Fish but of ALL other outward works that they be things Indifferent that may be used and also left See now if this be not sordid Ranterism this loose gain-saying Spirit leads into both to thy own contradiction where thou pretendest for Church-Discipline Order and Government as in thy Title page thou seemest to grant were in the Primitive times i. e. among the Primitive Christians as we understand But what Discipline Order or Government in the Church canst thou Conscientiously plead and be consistent with thy Position viz. That all outward Works be things Indifferent c How contrary to the Apostles Doctrine also is this for all good Works which God hath ordained we should walk in these are not indifferent to be used and also left outward works of Righteousness Justice Goodness Charity c. commanded of God are not Indifferent to be used and also left Solemn contracts and engagements in Marriage are not Indifferent Persons may not break solemn Contracts due and orderly Proceedings Men may not leave their Wives when they please as an indifferent thing But this Libertine Spirit that gave out and printed the said Ranters assertion in placing such Indifferency upon ALL outward works or things as that they may be used and also left hath thereby cast off all Bonds Limitations outward Discipline Order and Government of Truth relating to Conversation We have much more in reserve against thy Book which at present I do forbear adding for brevity's sake and refer the Reader to R. Sandiland's single Answer Entituled Righteous Judgment placed upon the Heads of malicious Opposers and persecuting Apostates against thy malicious Book and also to Tho. Elwood's Antidote against the Infection of William Rogers 's Book miscalled The Christian-Quaker c. Your Envy Confusions perverse in-and-out ways and hard Speeches are judged by the Lord and his Hand is against you therein and I question not but God will more signally determine the Controversie against that proud contentious Spirit of Envy Scorn and false Jealousie And Truth lives and shall live and reign over it all CHAP. VIII § 1. Thomas Crisp being joyned with William Rogers as a busie Agent in Division as also his abuse of George Whitehead by part of an old Letter from B. F. The reason of their being linked together in this Treatise B. F. his late Testimony on G. W.'s behalf against T. C. § 2. Notice taken of a few Passages in Thomas Crisp's Pamphlets The reason thereof particularly about Tythes His unsound Proposition His Injustice unto and abuse of John Crook in impertinently quoting his Authority in the case contrary to John's Principle and Testimony § 3. How dis-ingenious Tho. Crisp is in his Authorities and Citatioâ—s about Tythes And how like his Brother John Pennyman against our plain Language Of J. Pennyman's furious roaring Letter against G. F. c. containing the like unjust Reflections with W. R. T. C. c.
he interfers with himself in his plea for liberty of Conscience § 4. W. R's Confutation to himself apparent in confessing That God hath afforded those helps governments in the Church which are not to be despised in a Paper signed by him among Friends at London 1673. His instance of W. P against the Penman groundless We clear'd from imposing a bâ—ind Obedience and W. Penn's own words farther cited to clear his intention for liberty of Conscience and from what § 5. W. R's unfair dealing and mistaken opposition against R. Barclay's propositions concerning the Power positive Sentence and Judgment of the Church of Christ as being binding in SOME CASES of consequence upon Believers the Spirit of Christ being the only proper Judge c. The point at length granted by William Rogers himself § 6. Wherein W. Rogers's discourse tends to Libertism blind Opposition Confusion and Ranterism A blind Refusal of Submission to what the Lord in his Servants requires condemned as well as blind obedience A Medium between both proposed to prevent a blind Refusal and blind Obedience Of W R's wrong Measures false Judgment and Suppositions Envy and Scorn Laughter hypocritical Lamentation Praying Cain's Sacrifice his lofty conceited and contemning way of writing § 1. IT is true and I am still of the same mind that having the great ends of true Religion and Christian Society in our Eye viz. An unspotted Life Love and good Works c. as the very intent of our care and proceedings in the Church of Christ we can the more easily concur and accord as to Circumstances and outward Methods and in the Wisdom of God so condescend one to another and accomodate matters as not to divide about them c. And I do not find that our Opposer produceth any seeming Contradiction to this Citation out of our Book as he endeavours upon our following words viz. We would be understood that those things commended among us as necessary for good Order and Holiness of Conversation are not recommended doubtfully or upon meer Supposition nor as matters of indifferency to be practised or rejected but in faith full assurance as answering Gods Witness and Truth in the Consciences and that such will meet with a tender Reception and not Opposition in all tender and upright hearts Where 's now the seeming Contradiction in this to the precedent Passage See what observation our Opposer makes upon them He observes That the Penman seems thereby to look three ways at once p. 36. though his sight and observation has greatly fail'd him herein as first In commending things necessary for good Order and Holiness of Conversation NOT as matters of Indifferency To this W. R. thus saith viz. Wherein I take the truest sense of his mind to be and that the first citation importing his readiness to condescend was to cover himself and others from the guilt of Apostacy and Innovation He is mistaken in his observation here there was no such intent nor necessity for the Pen-man to cover himself or others from that guilt for to commend things necessary for good Order and Holiness of Conversation not as Indifferent but Essential to such Order c. and a Condescention in circumstances and accomodating matters so as not to divide c. may very well stand together especially where there 's unity of spirit and affection for if there be true love and unity in the greater matters essential to good Order c. 't is more easie for such as are tender and upright-hearted to find out accomodation and concurrence in lesser circumstances So that still 't is to be understood they must settle in an union and concurrence at last otherwise how should they joyntly do business or service for the Truth or each other There 's no concurrence nor joynt-service where there 's confusion and contradiction But W. R. proceeds in his observation against the Pen-men viz. 2dly By his readiness to condescend to his Brethren which doubtless in that place he intends such as are upright hearted and mean well for 't is not fit to condescend to others and therein the indifferency before excluded is implyed He 's mistaken again in 's observation for there may be a tender and Christian condescention of the upright hearted among themselves in two respects 1 st In the stronger bearing with and helping the weak bearing the burden of the weak and not laying more upon the weak than what they are able to bear 2 dly In the wisdom of God finding out such accomodation in some lesser matters circumstances not so essential and indispensible so that there may be a general concurrence ease and peace of spirit in such lesser circumstances implying or including that indifferency before which is excluded the greater more weighty and necessary things relating to good Order holiness of Life c. For there may be such an indifferency in some circumstances wherein we may condescend to weak Brethren so far as the spirit of Christ will admit they being such as may not alter the property from being good and lawful nor disturbing to our Christian-society Yet there are other material things and circumstances relating our Christian society good order and holy living that cannot be made Indifferent And we plead not at all for empty Ceremonies in Church order or discipline but such as have a real service and good end in them nor are we for a Church whose ornaments are superstitious but for a Church which is gravely and purely adorned with Righteousness the fruits and services of pure Religion I confess W. R. has writ one remarkable Truth i. e. That 't is not fit to condescend to others viz. That are not upright hearted that do not mean well Very true And we have cause to keep to that Doctrine in reference to such as are turbulent and contentious Troublers of and scandalous to our society and profession See his third Observation on the same subject before as shallow as the rest viz. 3dly By the Pen-man's last cited Lines 't is plain that in his sence things recommended for good Order will have a reception with all upright Hearts Which compared with his readiness to condescend c. as before shews as if his condescention was intended to Brethren that were not upright hearted Here his sight fails him and he 's greatly mistaken again perverting the Pen-mans sense for though I affirm that those things recommended among us by Divine Authority and Evidence either as duty to God or Man or as necessary for good Order and Holiness of Conversation will have reception with all upright Hearts Yet it follows not that the condescention was intended to Brethren that were Not upright hearted or false For first Here 's not a limitation of time when all things necessary as before will have reception with all upright hearts So that there is a time and cause for condescention to them of low degree in regard of their weakness not insincerity Secondly Many upright ones
do not presently or immediatly see every thing that is recommended in the wisdom of God to be practised but must have time to weigh and consider matters before the Lord first in order to receive a clear understanding and judgment from him before they act therein So that in the mean time there must be a tender condescention patience and forbearance on all hands towards such not to look upon or judge their want of present clearness and their present fear to act because thereof an act of Refusal or Rebellion on their parts No no far be it from us knowing that such upright hearted ones even when but in a poor low and weak state will not oppose refuse or gain-say any thing they at present see not that 's either in it self good and honest or necessary for good order and society their uprightness tenderness honesty and fear towards God preserves them from contention and blind opposition in such cases whilst given up tenderly to wait till God reveal that unto them whether immediately or instrumentally which for a time they have not clearness in And be sure he will not be awanting in his divine counsel and openings to such § 2. To his charging the Pen-man with a groundness Complaint of Printing against G. F. without first proceeding judicially or hearing of matters face to face p. 39. Groundless Complaint is an untruth there was manifest ground for that complaint on W. R's own confession and principle viz. his enveighing against judging any man without hearing him Judging the merit of the cause without hearing the same Judging and Censuring a Person unheard in the defence of himself as being a grand Mark of Apostacy as in his Preface to his Christian-Quaker That W. R. has so ipso facto judged and condemned G. F. and others in divers things unheard in their own defence we have produced divers sufficient and unanswered Instances in our Treatise entituled The Accuser of our Brethren cast down and particularly his false construction on G. F's words viz. Do not make Bargains with that which is out of the Truth On which W. R. concludes a design of Imposition and so far as in G. F. lies to obstruct Friends from bargaining with such whom he condemns as having no right to bargain buy or sell until they answer by Condemnation or else that his meaning was that G. F. would not have Friends discourse with such nor yet to agree about any orderly Conference in order to a Reconciliation or Hearing of Differences c. concluding it must be one of these two meanings because a third he could not think of as the matter is fully treated on in our said Treatise Accuser p. 146 147 148 149 150 c. in which W. R's judgment and both his supposed Meanings are proved untrue But still to aggravate the matter against G. F. he saith He has used the utmost of his endeavours to obtain a Meeting with him for such an end that is for a hearing of matters face to face at several times since his last being in Bristol in the year 1677. and it will not be condescended to saith he p. 39 40. This still the more confirms the Complaint against him viz. his Printing against G. F. yea judging and condemning him without hearing the matters face to face for which he is condemned which is an extradicial and injurious proceedure and grand Mark of Apostacy so to do according to W. R's own judgment And his pretence That such a Meeting will not be condescended to will not excuse the fact that is his judging and censuring a Person unheard in his own defence c. as a grand Mark of Apostacy He might have had patience and rather waited an opportunity for meeting with G. F. than have condemned him in Print in divers things unheard in his own defence and that on his own false Suggestions Meanings and Constructions contrary to his own Doctrine which is become his own Self-condemnation § 3. Now wherein doth the Pen-man's false Suggestion and Vnchristian-like Treatment consist to prove him an Impious Prevaricator or down-right Forger as W. R. terms him p. 41. See how he attempts proof in these words viz. I shall at present cite only a few Instances thereof in his own words quoth he viz. p. 73. His main work is still to invalidate the Authority and Sentence of the true Church Pag. 87. Which answers and confutes W. R. in opposing outward Directions Methods and Forms relating to Church Government Pag. 88. His principal Objection against outward Orders Prescriptions Sentences Decrees Form of Church Government Discipline c. P. 91. His gain-saying and general Objections against us in relation to Church Government and Order amongst us the People called Quakers P. 261. Which answers his general opposition to outward Order Form and Discipline Thus hath W. R. cited our words by pieces Now if it be made appear that these things are justly laid to W. R's charge from his own words and sence thereof I hope he 'l see cause to be ashamed of his clamour of false Suggestion impious Prevaricator c. In order to which I thus directly proceed First That his work has been to invalidate the authority and sentence of the true Church On Mat. 5. and chap. 6. he saith Wherein there 's not the least tittle to countenance this sentence That the positive Sentence or Decision of the Church in matters of Conscience may be obligatory on Believers as in the third part of his Christian-Quaker p. 64. And his contest against those who he saith have approved a Plea for such a Church Government as claims a power of deciding matters relating to Conscience and outward things on occasion of Differences about worldly Estate and that others ought to obey such Decisions which says he in its natural consequence hath as we take it no less tendency than to claim Power over our Properties as well as Consciences as in the first part of his Christian-Quaker Note A sad but fallacious consequence detected in our Treatise Accuser from pag. 53 to p. 76. Is it not plain that W. R. has here endeavoured to invalidate the authority and sentence of the true Church by us pleaded if neither obligatory on Believers in matters of Conscience nor in outward things Or if the Church may not be allowed a Power of making decisions in matters of difference either relating to Conscience or outward Estate according to Mat. 18.17 and 1 Cor. 6. of what validity is the authority sentence or power of the Church with W. R What 's more plain against him than his own words before recited Secondly That he has opposed and objected against outward Orders Forms Discipline Prescriptions Sentences Decrees his Gain-saying and general Objections and Opposition to outward Order Form and Discipline relating to Church Government c. see how he argues the case against outward Orders Prescriptions Sentences Decrees c. under the new Covenant viz. because the Apostle's labour was to
thy Judgment in calling the Light in men which thus dictates their duty Their natural Light derived to them from their first Creation Herein thou hast wrongfully informed H. N. and the Magistrates about the Principle the Light in men contrary to the Quakers Testimony born from the beginning concerning the Light in men which is according to the holy Apostle's Testimony John 1.4 9. that In the Word or Son of God was Life and that Life was the Light of men And that this is not a natural or created Light but a Supernatural and Divine Light of the Christ Jesus the Son of God 3 dly And now Francis having thus misrepresented our Principle to the Magistrates and so mis-informed them about the Light in men Thou proceedest upon an unjust charge of Impositions against certain Persons chiefly concerned owned and approved among the People called Quakers whom thou scornfully callest G. Fox and those of Party with him and hast exposed the Names of some of them in Print whom thou meanest by that Party as William Penn George Whitehead Stephen Crisp Alexander Parker Thomas Salthouse John Burnyeat p. 51. And what hast thou to charge all these with that thou hast printed a Book and informed the Magistracy against them It is The mischief of Impositions The inconsistency betwixt the Church-Discipline or Order and Government erected by those and THAT in the Primitive times as in the Title of thy second part It is also That there is Violence done to our first Principles of Vnion Consequently Tyranny introduced and our Society turned Antichristian p. 32 33. According to W P's Proposition in his Address thus falsly applyed by thee against himself and the rest of us before-named Now Francis I must plainly tell thee this Inconsistency and Violence charged by thee against us we utterly deny and the Instances thou givest do not at all prove it As first G. F's Paper for Women's Meeting distinct that they might be in the practice of pure Religion to visit the Fatherless and the Widows and to see that all be kept from the spots of the World c. As 't is cited at large by thee p. 33 34 35 36 37. Now Francis where 's the Inconsistency charged Can there be an Inconsistency where there 's no Contradiction nor the least opposition Thy judging such Women's Meetings as are for the Practice or Promotion of pure Religion in the practical parts of it inconsistent with the Christian-Discipline Order and Government in the Primitive times doth bespeak not only that thou dost not well understand what Inconsistent means but also that thou hast undertaken a Charge thou art never able to make good And thy charge of Violence done to our first Principles of Union is worse than Inconsistent And thy scornfully telling of the Women's Charter and New Order is no Proof man of thy Charge Where 's the Inconsistency and Violence that 's charged done by the faithful Womens Meetings among us or by any of us by encouraging them to meet for those Religious and Charitable ends and services mentioned How hast thou acted the part of an ignorant conceited Scoffer instead of proving thy Charge before cited Besides the very self-same Paper writ by G. F. which thou hast cited as an instance of our Inconsistency and Violence was received owned and approved at a Quarterly Meeting at Kendal in Westmorland in the Year 1671. And another written in approbation thereof and subscribed by some of thy own party as John Wilkinson Richard Stephanson Henry Garnet and Twenty one more Friends for encouraging of the Women's assembling and Religious Charitable Services before proposed both which are cited at large in our Book Entituled The Accuser of our Brethren from pag. 98 to p. 102. Thus contradictory art thou to some of thy own Brethren in thy condemning the same Paper as an Imposition Inconsistency and Violence to our first Principles which they so plainly approved of 4 thly Again in pursuance of thy unrighteous Charge before cited thou recitest four passages out of a Paper of ours dated London the 27th of the 3d Moneth 1675. which was given as our Judgment and Advice in certain things needful for good Order among us as we believed The first Passage thou hast cited is that for Marriages to be at least twice propounded to the Meetings that are to take care therein c. before they are accomplished c. Now where 's the Inconsistency here with the Discipline in the Primitive Christian Church or the Violence done to our first Principles of Union Instead of proving thy charge by this instance we have in thy Observation a piece of Scorn and Mockery viz. This notable if not universal Council Their new stamped Government p. 42. Oh! be ashamed of such Scorn and Folly Is this thy proof of thy charge Is it a violation to our first Principles of Union to have Marriages proposed at least twice to the Meetings concerned both Mens and Womens where both are established However to be twice proposed to such Meetings as are established and to take care therein to understand that the Persons be clear and Friends satisfied before the Marriage be accomplished And this has been these many Years practised among us and I know no true Union broken thereby nor any violation done to our first Principles thereof Be ashamed therefore of thy fruitless attempts in giving such an high charge against us when thou canst make no proof it 5 thly Concerning our Testimony on behalf of Mens and Womens Meetings in the Church of Christ as for their Rise and Establishment being in the counsel of God and for the encouraging Faithful and Grave Women therein and to admonish them that discountenance or weaken their Hands in the Work and Service of the Lord c. Thou callest this A Decree a decretal Order This New fashioned Edict p. 45 46. And sayst It has no relation to Scripture-Authority Precept or President no relation to the Example of the Holy men of God recorded in Scripture nor any command of God or Jesus Christ. Why no Relation to them How provest thou that what because we have not every particular circumstance of Persons and things exprest Whence it follows not that this has no relation to Scripture or President c. Holy Women and Sisters in the Faith Elder Widdows that were honourable and Deaconesses did many Religious and Charitable Services in the Primitive Christian Churches What then might they not meet and confer together for one anothers help and encouragement in those Services they had and were frequently imployed in Can it either be a violence to their Principles of Union for such to meet together or have their Assemblies no relation to Scripture What contrariety thereto have they Surely we alwayes accounted our Religious Meetings to serve one another in Love consistent with our Union and the Principles thereof And so for Godly Women to meet for those Religious and Charitable ends and Services for which their
approved Servants of Christ. How like a Popish Prelate yea like the Pope himself hast thou proudly maliciously imperiously acted against me and others of the faithful Servants Ministers of Christ Jesus Be ashamed therefore and confounded because of thy Insolent and Slanderous Abuses against the Innocent and particularly of thy gross Lye against me and others viz. That the holy Scripture is by us slighted p. 152. Be ashamed I say of this abominable Lye And for Confutation to thy abuse of me before read the following Certificate from Persons of better Credit than thy self Huntingtonshire From our Monethly Meeting at Godmanchester the 11th day of the 5th Moneth 1682. WHereas George Whitehead hath been evilly traduced in two Letters of Francis Bugg's and charged in one of them with behaving himself in Huntingtonshire like a Lordly Bishop or Popish Prelate lately Now we whose Names are subscribed do testifie We never in this County nor else-where at any time saw any such thing and that he is a man far remote from any such matter but do believe he is a true Labourer in Gods service and an humble Minister of the Gospel Matthew Kay Samuel Nottingham Tobias Hardmeat Robert Lister Jasper Robins John Wilsford John Aversett John Marshall William Starling Richard Snazdale John King David Tisoeth Thomas Lyster Richard Jobson 14 th And thy malicious scribling tends in divers parts of it unjustly to render us Obnoxious and Offensive to Authority by wickedly and falsly rendring the Proceedings of some of our Christian Meetings Tyrannical and Antichristian and comparing us to the Popes Councils to Popes c. And all this to Henry North Knight and the Magistrates too is next to prosecuting us for our Liberties or Lives So disgustful may be thy trumpeting and publishing in Print the Moderation of H. North Knight p. 194. and his mercifulness in taking notice of our threatned Ruin and preventing it c. as in thy Epistle Dedicatory to him that doubtless we think Henry North as a prudent man will not thank thee for thus trumpeting his Fame abroad in Print on behalf of Dissenters for such kind of Ostentatious dealing is offensive and hateful to great Persons of Prudence who would not have their goodness exposed to publick censure or reflection nor be represented as Persons Popular for any dissenting Parties I have many more things material against thy Book but I desire thee to accept of my Labour and honest Endeavours and what I have written thus largely to thee as an act of Christian Condescention and good Will for thy Conviction that thou mayst yet be abased and humbled unto Repentance and publick Condemnation of thy wicked and scurrilous Book if the Lord will yet please to give thee an Heart to Repent and acknowledge the Truth which thou hast deeply offended and sinned against with thy Lyes and Lightness And I desire to know if after the reading and perusal of this my large Letter thou art at all minded to relent and retract thy Book or any part of it and accordingly to give forth a plain Condemnation or Recantation as publick To this I expect answer shortly from thee otherwise trouble me not with any disingenious or scurrilous Letters Thy Abused yet Well-wishing Friend George Whitehead London the 3 d day of the 8 th Moneth 1682. Postscript since added Wherein F. B's fallacy about the Record in the Quarterly Meeting Book in the Isle of Ely his abuse of the Servants of Christ his Contradiction about William Penn his Scorn Malice and Ranting Doctrine are detected and reprehended WHen I was lately in the Isle of Ely I made enquiry about the account which thou F. Bugg givest in thy Observations pag. 52. viz. concerning a Minister thou knowest who thou mentionedst being recorded out of the Vnity for not taking his Wife according to the Order of Friends i. e. not publishing his Intentions before the Womens Meetings as hereafter will be further manifest sayst thou but not one recorded that ever thou remembrest for any breach of Gods Commandments pag. 53. For which acount thou referest any man to search the Records of your Quarterly Meeting Book in Hadenham in the Isle of Ely c. But upon my enquiry I find that Friends do positively give a contrary account and do plainly affirm that there were no Womens Meeting Then at that time in being in those parts or within that Monethly Meeting in Cambridgshire where the said Person lives who proposed his Intentions of Marriage but once before the Men And if so thy account must be notoriously false and thou mayst be horridly ashamed to divulge it as also of thy frequently saying He was recorded out of the Vnity whenas Friends only recorded That they have no Vnion with him in his so doing as thou hast cited it pag. 63. which is only relative to that particular Act viz. of his refusing to come twice to the Meeting and not in such general Terms to exclude the Person Out of the Vnity in all respects Therefore thou appearest fallacious in thy account As concerning the Paper of our sence and advice dated London the 27 th of the 3 d Moneth 1675. consisting of divers particular weighty matters which thou makest thy principal Instance of our Apostacy and Violence upon our first Principles of Vnion and about which thou hast so much scofft and derided at us I must tell thee that I know not one Person who subscribed thaâ— Paper but have cause to stand by it anâ— will stand by it though unjustly and defamingly smote at derided and contemned by thee And why didst not publish all our said Paper Thou sayst Thou hast taken enough to shew our Innovations and manifest Apostacies pag. 50. as if all that Paper were matter of such Proof which is a most slanderous Insinuation for thou hast not proved one of these Instances of our said Paper either a Violation to our first Principles of Vnion Antiscriptural or Inconsistent with the Church-Discipline Order and Government in the Primitive Times among true Christians as thou pretendest nor in the least tending to Apostacy or Antichristianism Thou hast taken upon thee to stigmatize brand and defame both our Testimony and the Subscribers particularly William Penn thou hast compared and rank't among such Vnchristian Societies Violators Innovators Apostates Pope's Council Arbitrary Authority c. Thou art very loud in thy Charge but mute in Proof and wanting in Argument And how dost thou herein agree with thy self where in pag. 133. thou callest William Penn This Noble Man and in pag. 135. Dear W. P. and in pag. 144. thou prayst for William Penn in these words viz. I pray God keep thee steddy and with a continual Dependency upon the Divine Revelation c. when thou hast represented the same Person W. P. Antichristian Apostate Innovator c. as if thou shouldst pray thus for him viz. Thou Antichristian Apostate I pray God keep thee steddy Such Absurdity doth thy Contradiction produce who
sense to wit That he and some others of his party seem to be only for a select company of Elders and Deacons to order in Church Affairs about the Poor Marriages c. p. 11. What then means his exclaiming so much against our Meetings about Church Affairs as being an uncertain number of uncertain qualified Persons and his Brethrens Paper of Separation in Westmerland quoted by him plainly limiting to Chosen men Chosen Imployed and Authorized by the Churches see our said Treatise pag 119 120. Now if his sense was not for a select company then he and his Brethren Subscribers of the said Paper are of contrary senses But then how does he consist therein with himself in his charging us with Vsurpation and upbraiding us p. 19. with such a form of Church-Government as hath admitted of no rightful Succession or Constitution by Election c What Foundation or Certainty can we find in this mans writing One while he is comparing us with the Pope another while he charges us with Vsurpation for want of rightful Succession or Constitution of any Supream Person or Persons pag. 19. This is the man that would seem to oppose Popery so much whilst he is bringing a Popish plea of Succession against us But this is like much of his Work I wish he were better composed § 14. He pretends greatly to be for an Amicable Conference p. 12. whilst he is so far from Amity that he has appeared an open Enemy abusing and reviling us in Print And what if his Letter was not read publickly at our yearly Meeting at the time of its being delivered What reason had Friends to interrupt their publick and weighty concerns of Truth with the then reading of an Adversary's letter especially seeing divers of us took care to answer him therein so soon as the Meeting was over and were not wanting afterward to give him a Meeting thereupon His charging us with a piece of meer Hypocrisie and Deceit for pretending to Amicable Conference is a sordid Abuse to my knowledge For many of us have not been awanting in that case but have been ready to Amicable Conference before W. R. and some of Party with him turned open Adversaries Gain-sayers and Enemies to us whose Enmity has made them especially him uncapable of Amicable Conference And he may be ashamed of his pretended seasonable Hue and Cry after the Name of the Pen-man his Hue and Cry shews his own Complexion and Image not to be innocent And his Charge of the Fruits of manifest Injustice that his Letter was not read in our yearly Assembly being he says a Letter from a Friend especially when not Excommunicated This is unjust and untrue in the first place and shews an imperious Lordly Exalted Spirit thus to charge us with manifest Injustice And why so but because we did not serve his turn we did not observe his time and manner in reading his Letter when and where he would have had us We did not lay all the weighty Affairs of Friends and Truth aside presently to read William Rogers's Letter we did not gratifie his Irregular interposing and therefore we must now be censured in Print charg'd with Irregularity Answering without order of the Meeting Lordship and slavish Submission fruits of manifest Injustice c. He seems very hot on this occasion and a Person very strict and zealous for Regularity and Order of the Meeting when he thinks it may serve his own turn But at other times he hugely exclaims against Outward Vniformity Orders outward Rules Prescriptions Directions Imposition c. But now it seems it is against such as are not of his own setting up or imposing And yet he most highly justifies whatever he has written which we either pretend to answer or to shew dissatisfaction in as remaining undetected and in no respect unbecoming a Christian Pen p. 14. We have only his own Self-commendation for this wherein his Self-confidence and wilful Blindness is to be wondered at CHAP. II. § 1. W. R. questions Ellis Hookes's Credit and grosly abuseth our Meeting in London for writing in behalf of our publick Meetings and People called Quakers § 2. Of the inward Government and spiritual Kingdom of Christ in his Church How far his Ministers or Servants are concerned therein as Instruments in his hand Not strictly Representatives thereof Our Propositions therein unanswered by W. R. He evades and gives the GO-BY to them § 3. His late opposition to visible Persons being invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws Orders c. in an outward form of Government now Overthrown by himself and the point gain'd upon his own Variation and Concession and he farther questioned in the point § 4. His mistake in his Allusion against representing the Government of the King and concerning his Prerogative W. R. unskilful in the point § 5. Of the Cause espoused by us no other than the Cause of Christ his Church and People W. R. like a persecuting Informer his work tending to bring more severe Persecution upon us his representing us as in seeming Vnion with the Papistical party and comparing us with Popes the Church of Rome c. Devilish Malicious and Fallacious yet most silly and impertinent and his Resemblances full of Falshood and his Similitudes abusive and shallow bringing great Reflection upon himself acting the part of a silly Sophister yet proud and scornful § 6. W. R's Cry for Justice against G. F. and who must be the Judges and what Judicature qustioned His malicious dubious proofless Reflections upon the Pen-man Ministring Friends and yearly Meetings and comparing them to the Popes General Councils and his Instance of the Bishop of Bitonto's Commendation of Pope Paul the third with his Blasphemous Doctrine about the Light prov'd unjust and the Similitude impertinent and grosly false c. His accounts against Popes c. gathered out of the History of the Council of Trent he unjustly applies to our Friends § 7. His Similitude of Disumon with the Pope to render us worse than he And his Comparison between our Friends and the Popish Lords Inquisitors and his uncharitable Censure about punishing his Body and taking away his Estate all unjust Of our standing by our Treatise entituled The Accuser c. § 1. HIs questioning the Credit of Ellis Hookes A Clark for his yearly Salary as he calls him and insinuating against the Meeting for whom he was a witness as not meriting the Name of Sober Conscientious Quakers and as being infatuated c. cap. 2. p. 15. And why so but because they wrote in the Name of publick Meetings in the Name of the People call'd Quakers Does this prove them Infatuated or unworthy the Name of Sober Conscientious Quakers 'T is a wonder he is not ashamed thus manifestly to scandalize and abuse so many Conscientious Sober and Understanding Persons when he knew not who they were in particular Have we not often writ in the name and behalf of our Friends
People call'd Quakers in their Vindication from the opposition and abuses of Opposers and Gain-sayers of Truth in matters known to be universally own'd by them and this both with their tacit Consent and Approbation Must we seek for a Deputation from the People called Quakers throughout England c. in all Cases wherein there is a present necessity of their Vindication when generally abused in Print by Adversaries of divers sorts For I tell W. R. he merits not so much as the Name of a Quaker in abusing at least the major part of them in Print as he has done to render them Popish Odious and Infamous and rather justifying the Pope and Lords of the Spanish Inquisition p. 21. than many of them And his disaffected Party are not so numerous as he would have us think p. 23. far short to be sure of those he writes against and abuseth in Print for his smiting at the publick and faithful Ministers who are approved of most generally by the People called Quakers is a Reflection and Scandal upon that People § 2. Our observation on the 42d Disaffection shews that our Objection lies not against the outward Government under which we live nor yet against the inward Government of Christ for Christ's inward Government in his Church and his spiritual Kingdom and extent thereof as also our innocent Conversations towards the outward Government we have plainly asserted in our Treatise against the Accuser pag. 114 115 116 118. Though W. R's words are cited at large more fully to shew his sense and distinction upon the inward Government of Christ where he adds viz. Which is not represented by Persons visible by carnal Eyes invested with Power from him to execute outward Laws Prescriptions Orders Edicts or Decrees in an outward form of Government visible Wherein we reasonably took his Objection to lie as much against visible Persons being so invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws Prescriptions c. and against an outward Form of Government visible in his Church as against Christ's Government being Represented by Persons visible But now he pitches his Objection upon the word REPRESENTED questioning Whether it is not a Contradiction in common sense to conclude That Persons visible can be the Representatives of the inward Government of Christ Which was not our Assertion nor did we conclude that Persons visible are the Representatives of Christ's inward Government in a strict sence absolutely or solely as in Christ's stead And therefore his Objection supposes that to be our position which we never asserted Yet not to loose nor lessen any part of Christs Government we have plainly asserted That 't is exercised by him both Immediately and Instrumentally in his Church Immediately and principally by himself and Instrumentally in some measure by his Ministers and Servants as well as he teaches and instructs both Immediately and Instrumentally as in our first and second unanswered Propositions about Church Government And therefore as we prefer Christ's inward and immediate Government by himself as Principal and his governing Instrumentally by his Servants But in some Measure as our words are this shews that we do not render them the absolute Representatives of his inward Government and spiritual Kingdom though we may truly and tenderly assert They do by the inward Assistance of the Power and Spirit of Christ in some measure livingly represent or signifie declare and shew forth the inward and spiritual Government of Christ as being his faithful Servants and Ambassadours yea some are called Ambassadours in Christ's stead in and through whom Christ ministers instructs commands orders and rules And the holy Ghost made some Overseers and appointed Helps and Governments in the Church as we have laid down in our third Proposition Especially for the sake of the younger and weaker Members Children and such as are of under Age as to Truth and experience in the work of the Lord. Our Adversary answers not this Proposition which is so plain tender and submissive to Christ in his behalf and preference And therefore W. R's inferring and charging the fruit of a confused Anarchical Principle on us in reference to our said Disaffection follows not in Truth but rather shews it to be the fruit of his own Prejudice and Enmity From whence also his scornful Question proceeds viz. Whether the Pen-man hath known and hath in pivate a Catalogue of the Names of such visible Persons whom he may esteem the Representatives of Christ's inward Government pag. 16 17. He fallaciously obtrudes and imposes his word REPRESENTATIVES still in this case upon us extending it beyond our Intention and what our words will bear craftily evading and giving the GO-BY to our Propositions in the Case where we signifie That IN SOME MEASURE Christ governs Instrumentally c. see our five Propositions in our said Treatise against the Accuser of the Brethren p. 114 115 116. § 3. Whereas we took his opposition to be against visible Persons being concerned in an outward form of Government and order in the Church of Christ. Hereupon he shews himself very angry and exclaims against the weight of the Pen-man's Iniquity charges him with Prevarication insinuating as if according to my Principle says he there were not visible order and form of Government under Christs Dominion nor any visible Persons exercised in any outward Order under his Government p. 43. Whereby he has now plainly granted that according to his Principle there is both visible Order and a form of Government under Christs dominion and Visible Persons exercised in an outward order under his Government for in the two contraries his disowning the one owns the other his opposing the Negative grants the Affirmative herein But he then should have writ more distinctively consistently and plain in telling us What visible and outward form of Government and Order he would set up And what has he so much exclaim'd against and not to have appeared so general in his opposition to outward Orders Forms Rules Prescriptions Decrees c. as he has done in divers passages of his Book and particularly that in his first part of his Christian-Quaker p. 73. in his opposing the Establishment or giving forth of outward Orders Prescriptions Sentences or Decrees as a Bond on the Consciences of Believers rendring this more like the Old than the New Covenant And his opposing Visible Persons being invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws Prescriptions Orders Edicts or Decrees in an outward form of Government visible as 't is plain in the Title-page of his third part The frequent Reiteration of these and such like passages and Words shew his Objection was against Visible Persons being impowered by Christ to execute or minister outward Laws Orders c. in a visible and outward form of Government else what needed he write so slightily frequently against outward and visible form of Government outward Laws Edicts Prescriptions Orders Decrees c What 's all his Noise come to on
this account Now he would not be thought that his Principle is against visible Order and Form of Government under Christ's Dominion Nor against some visible Persons being exercised in some outward Order under his Government Thus far the point is granted and gain'd upon him and his Concession thereto the farther confirm'd in deeming our rendring his great Book to be against Church-Government outward Methods Orders and Rules c. A false Assertion Though we cannot reckon that Book of his to look with a better Face in the mian purport and Series of it especially considering his Third part from what 's mentioned in the Title and against R. Barclay's Book for Church-Government and in many other places and passages of that Book and in his Epistle in this his 7th part he is smiting at Establishing an outward Vniformity outward Things outward Directory c. But now we must take his meaning and principle to be not against visible Order and visible Form of Government under Christ's dominion nor against visible Persons being exercised therin How then shall we understand his meaning and principle Why did he not then more plainly distinguish it first and brought the Controversie into a more narrow compass and not have writ thus confusedly and shatteredly one while against another while for visible outward Order and Form of Government under Christs Dominion in his Church As in this Treatise the matter is further Evinced against him hereafter But wherein lies his Charge of Prevarication He gives us to know it is in twining the Word REPRESENTED into CONCERNED pag. 43. We are yet to seek and study how to find this Prevarication pretended considering the purport tenure and conexion of his Words For though now he owns visible Persons to be exercised or concerned in an outward Form of Government and Order under Christ's Dominion yet not that his inward Government is represented by them yet his Distinction before excluding visible Persons not only from representing Christ's inward Government but also from being invested with Power to execute i. e. to minister give forth or put in practice outward Laws Edicts c. in an outward Form of Government Visible appears to bespeak his sense than to exclude them from being concerned in an outward Form of Government and Order in the Church of Christ under his Dominion For if they do in no sense or degree represent Christ's Government how are they concern'd in it And if they have no power to execute minister or put in practice outward Order and Form of Government visible How are they either exercised or concerned in an outward form or order of Government under Christ's dominion But this is now granted us in the Affirmative So then wherein must we understand W. R's opposition to lie against outward Order outward Form of Church-Government outward Laws Edicts Rules Prescriptions c I presume not against any of his own making but against such as he calls G. Fox's c. as he has told us of a slighting G. F 's Rules Methods and Orders with respect to Church-Government see the Accuser c. pag. 83. But then I would know whether it is against all or some that G. F. has writ or given out If he says not against all but some then I intreat him to let 's know what SOME they are particularly What Instructions Rules or Methods they are he Condemns and that he deems condemnable as evil or unlawful in themselves We have divers times prest for a Catalogue of them that the Controversie might be more plainly distinguishable and brought into a narrow compass which now lies not only prolix and tedious in W. R's Books but also scattered confused and ambiguous in his Writings wanting in many places the supplement of his latter Thoughts and Meanings So that when he has write one Book it wants another to declare its meaning he has taken a great compass to write a very little matter in § 4. For his distinction between the words Represented and Concerned he says That many thousands are exercised in an outward Order under the Government of the King who if they should thence declare that they are the Representatives of his Government 't would be deem'd a Mood of Speech tending to the annihillating of the King's Prerogative And concludes the like in relation to Christ's Prerogative p. 43. But herein the man is under a Mistake in this Allusion his skill in the Law and the King's Prerogative and Government has fail'd him in this point For the King's Government is represented in all Courts of Judicature legally acting in his Name and by his Power whereby the King is look't upon to be present in all his Courts Yea every legal Minister and Conservator of the King's Peace even from the Justice to the Sheriff Constable or Peace-Officer does in his place and legal Office in some degree represent the Kings Government in the doing Justice and Conservation of his Peace And this no ways lessens but promotes the King 's legal Prerogative For the King in the Eye of the Law is Justitiarius Capitalis the Head or chief Justice and hath his subordinate Ministers and Justices under him legally impowered by him according to his just and legal Prerogative Now seeing W. R. is so much out and has lost his aim in his Comparison these things are mentioned to rectifie his Judgment And the Comparison as now stated may be better applied to Christ's Kingdom and Government who though he be the chief Overseer and Shepherd the great Apostle and Minister the great Ruler and Governour c. he has his Overseers his Apostles his Ministers and Servants and Helps in Government which is none other than Christ's Government in his Church and Kingdom and under his Dominion which I hope our Opposer dare not deny however he differ with us in the Application § 5. As concerning an Angry Waspish Pen wherewith thou twice over chargest the Pen-man adding That the more he stirs therewith the more will the Cause which he espouseth stink pag. 17 44. I must tell thee first I never met with a more Angry Waspish Pen than thy own though thy Malice and Wickedness hath been in divers parts of our Book deservedly reprehended thou hast in much thereof been mildly treated 2 dly I know no cause espoused by us therein than the Cause of Christ his Church and People which will live and remain sweet and pretious to all the upright in Heart when thy malicious Work and corrupt Cause will more and more appear naucious loathsom and stink above ground till swept into the Pit from whence it came and which thou art very near and without Repentance canst not escape it 3 dly What occasion have we or any of us given thee to rage and roar against us and like a persecuting Informer to go about to expose us in Print tending to disgust Authority and to bring more severe Persecution upon us as seeming to be at Vnion with the Papistical party
pretending to discover Principles and Practices relating to George Fox and hiâ— Party as thou callest them that run paraleâ— with the Church of Rome And then to excuse this thy persecuting Cain-like and Judas-like work against us thou falsly placest it on the Will of the Lord saying The Will of the Lord be done p. 17. whilsâ— thou art doing the Will of the Devil thy Master and Father of Lyes and Lyars adding That 't is but just that Deceit and Idolatry should be discovered in whomsoever c. p. 18. But come on That thou dost do quickly Let 's see what exact Similitudes and eminent Discoveries thou hast shewn and made of our seeming Vnion and Paralel with the Church of Rome Thus thou attempts it viz. 1st 'T is affirmed of the Pope that he is Christ's Vicar on Earth Accounts himself invested with Power to execute outward Laws Edicts and Decrees Herein sayst thou I place not much difference between the Pope on the one part and the Pen-man and some of his the Brethren on the other And why so The Pen-man and his Brethren sayst thou account themselves the Representatives of Christ's inward Government over the Conscience p. 18. That 's an Untruth by the way and none of our words but a scornful Pervertion Where did we so account our selves 'T is improper and unsound to say That visible Men or finite Creatures are the Representatives of Christs inward spiritual Government over the Conscience which is endless and where Christ himself reigns Where did we ever assume a Government in Christ's stead over the Conscience But only as his Servants and Witnesses by his Spirit do commend our selves to every mans Conscience in the sight of God and thereby only represent or shew forth by sound Doctrine and good Conversation That Christ must rule and be obey'd as the Head of his Church which vastly differs from the Pope's false sence of his being Christ's Vicar or Representative on Earth Thou addest viz. And that they are invested with Power to execute outward Laws Edicts and Decrees And what follows on thy discovery and similitude Therefore the Pope and G. F. and his Party seem to be in Vnion and run Paralel with the Church of Rome That 's false The true Apostles and primitive Christians had outward Laws Commands Decrees c. which they practised So hath the Pope and the Church of Rome though not the same What follows Did they therefore seem to be in Union Thy Similitude and Inference are fallacious We differ in the Power and Manner of Execution and our Laws and Decrees which Christ hath given us differ from the Popes The Popes Power is Carnal and Coercive Ours Spiritual and Perswasive The Popes Ecclesiastical Laws Edicts Canons and Decrees are to promote a false Church Idolatrous Worship and Superstition Our Laws and Decrees c. are first written in our Hearts and taught us by Christ Jesus enjoyning us to eye believe and follow him as our Rock our Way and Leader in Holiness and Purity of Life and Conversation Therefore thy Comparison is silly and abusive here as well as Malicious The Pope claims a succession from Peter and Peter's Primacy as their term is as the Rock and Foundation of the Church So do not we but deny that Doctrine as false believing and owning Christ to be the Rock and Foundation nor yet do we assume or pretend any Priviledge Power or Authority over Christ's Church from an outward succession but only being Christ's Witnesses Ministers Servants and Ambassadours are assisted by his immediate Presence Power and Wisdom with us to assist order and govern us in his service and the service of one another in love Again thou proceedest in thy Similitudes viz. 2dly The Pope likewise affirms that the Church of Rome is the true Church and in the true Faith The Romish Clergy teach that we must believe as the Church believes Herein I cannot justly place much difference between the Popish Clergy and Pen-man if he approved this Doctrine viz. The true Church is in the true Faith that is in God and we must either believe thus as the true Church believes or else it were but both a Folly and Hypocrisie to profess our selves Members thereof pag. 18. Thus thou wouldst make me whom I presume thou intendest to resemble the Pope and his Clergy and to seem to be in union with them But dost thou not own the Doctrine to be true in it self viz. 1 st That the true Church is in the true Faith that is in God And darest thou deny this What sayest thou to it Speak out man and be plain to the Point 2 dly That we must either believe THUS i. e in God as the true Church believes or else 't were Hypocrisie to profess our selves Members thereof If thou canst not deny the Doctrine in it self why hast thou made this an Instance of our seeming to be in union with the Popish party For thou knowest in thy Conscience first That it was not spoken of the Church of Rome but in general of the true Church whose Faith is IN GOD which we neither believe of the Church of Rome nor does the Church of Rome believe so of us Where 's then our seeming Union secondly To believe in God as the true Church doth herein the true Church is made an instance and example of Faith in God not to make the Church's believing this or that the sole Reason and Cause of my or our believing the same this were Implicit 't is as not because for Christ who is God is the original efficient cause both of the Church's and my Faith which is in him which is the one living substantial Faith wherein is Unity Whilst thou canst not confute the said Doctrine behold thy Similitude what an empty FALSE SHEW it is What real Protestants in Europe could escape thy Censure of Resembling the Pope and his party nay how canst thou escape thy self upon such Fallacious Similitudes as thou hast invented against us The Pope and his party believe there there is a God a Christ a Heaven a Hell Immortality future states So do all true Protestants What follows according to thy Similitude Ergo all true Protestants seem to be at union with the Pope and his party The Pope and his party believe there is one true â—â—iversal Church and one true Faith So do the Protestants but not so of each other they are not in Union no more are we with the Pope or his party but with the best Reformed Protestants wherein they differ'd from and oppos'd the Church of Rome The Pope believes he is a true Christian and no Apostate So dost thou W. R. believe thou art a true Christian c. What follows Ergo thou dost Resemble the Pope and seemest to be at Union with the Papistical party Is not this argumentum ad hominem like thy Similitudes and more resembling them than thou hast resembled G. F. and his party to the Pope and Church of
their Horns and putting them into the Fold and that he made fast the door and would not separate them until he had the other Sheep also that did not come with the Flock See what Doctrine this is as applyed to Christ the good Shepherd rendring him so severe to his Sheep as to gather shut up and keep so many Goats so long among them in his Fold to trouble bruise and hurt his poor Sheep with their Horns And also that Warning and Precept given in the said Paper to Friends for all to forbear judging any man any more upon any pretence whatsoever Can any that knew E. B. and the soundness of judgment understanding that he was attain'd to in the year 1661. believe that he was the Author of such Doctrine to all Friends as to judge no man under any pretence whatsoever A man well known severely to judge deceitful Workers and rebellious Ones as yea he testified plainly against John Perrot's spirit of Division is fully evinced in his Books and Writings And I dare presume E.B. never gave thee authority nor chose thee or Tho. Crisp to represent him in print so many years after his decease as the Author of the said Paper or warning to all friends To judge no man under any pretence whatsoever And yet thou art severely judging and reproaching others that are not of thy party as Apostates Innovators c. contrary to such an express precept doctrine espoused by thee as E. B's Testimony Besides the express contradiction to thy self in thus representing E. B. in print without his leave authority or consent what great abuse hast thou done to him his Memory Name and Testimony in exposing him in Print as Author of that which doth not so much as look like him or his Testimony or any Vision of his but in the said Doctrines both contrary to his Judgment and Practice I say what a horrid Abuse hast thou done to the Name and Memory of the dead in Christ and that by promoting a forged Subscription if thou canst not give sufficient demonstration and proof that Edw. Burroughs was the Author of the same Paper aforesaid which thou hast exposed in his name in Print If thou sayst it was delivered to thee with Edw. Burrough 's name to it I say that 's no proof of its being his for both I and divers others have seen a Copy of the same only with J. Perrots name to it and this more probably true that he was the Author for divers reasons than thy rendring E. B. the Author Again thou hast also exposed that honest and innocent Person Isaac Pennington in Print to serve thy own turn and thy parties as a Confirmation of thy work and that after his decease also for which I dare presume he gave thee no authority nor chose thee so to represent him in Print or to pick out of the middle diminish or curtalize his Writings or Testimony by leaving out the most material and explanatory precedent and subsequent Passages thereof to the great injury and abuse of his Intention for which his Son John Pennington was stirred up to vindicate his deceased Father and to detect thy abuse and Prevarication And am satisfied that neither Edward Burroughs nor John Crook gave thee Authority to quote or cite them or either of them in opposition to G. F. as thou hast John Crook especially in thy Epistle pag. 3. nor to tell the World in Print That his Testimony is agreeable to thy sence I do not believe J. C. will in the least own thee in thy work of Opposition and strife against many faithful Servants of Christ. Also thou and Francis Bugg have represented William Penn in Print on some passages pickt out of his Address to Protestants as in thy 66 and 73 pages which he never gave you power to do much less to represent him as if he were one in Judgment with you against his Brethren nor did he give thee or F. Bugg leave to discant upon and turn his words to serve your own turns nor to apply them against such his Friends in the Isle of Ely or else-where who are for Womens Meetings and laying Marriages twice before the Mens and Womens Meetings it is not to be supposed that he intended Fly Rome at Home as proper Admonition to them as thy Brother F. Bugg applies them as in the Authority and genuine sence of Dear W. P. p. 78. calling William Penn Dear Friend p. 65. This Noble Man c. p. 73. Which is to render W. P. exactly one of your own party and all this without his authority leave or consent But how comes he now to be Dear William Penn Dear Friend and This Noble man Hast not thou numbred him among the Persecutors of J. S. and J. W. as thou esteemest Charles Marshall and Sixty Five more as thy phrase is who signed the Paper thou art so much offended at p. 22 27. Was not William Penn one of those sixty six Subscribers And dost not thou on this very occasion retort his words Let us fly Rome at Home What! must he therefore be a Persecutor of his Brethren and yet a Dear Friend Dear William Penn This Noble man c. in thy Book What Self-contradiction and manifest Flattery art thou and thy Brother Bugg like Parasites guilty of Pray lift up your Eyes and see your selves if not judicially given over to blindness and hardness of heart Take another Instance or two of thy Self-contradictory dealing Didst not thou expose a Certificate or Testimony as thou esteemedst it of Nathaniel Crips in Print against G. F. without any Authority from Nathaniel for so doing I am sure he confest as much to me and John Bouldron the 6th Moneth 1679. against thy publishing it in Manuscript as that thou didst it without his advice knowledge or order see our Book Accuser c. p. 172 And likewise that pretended Certificate or Testimony of Edw. Perkins which thou printedst against G. F. Edward confessed to me at sundry times and before divers Persons that he did not give any advice or consent to thy printing it for 't was printed without his knowledge And so we may question or suppose thou hast done the like in the rest or most of the pretended Testimonies against G. F. c. from those Women and others of Bristol c. Now may not I rationally take leave to reflect and argue ad hominem upon thee and according to thy own Terms thus Oh! thou Imperious Map of Pride towring lofty and Lordly Spirit insolent and conceited proud Vsurper how durst thou either write in the name or behalf of so many whom thou countest Friends in Truth and numerous too or expose the names of so many deceased Servants of Christ in thy Quarrel as if they were all on thy side and party when thy gave thee no power nor deputed thee so to do And thou must answer for thy misrepresenting them and abusing their Names Memories and Testimonies when the
be otherwise And indeed I can in Truth say That I never had a thought entred in my Breast that OUTWARD ORDER Methods Forms and Discipline were not to be exercised and proceeded in under the Government of Christ according as the Spirit of the Lord should direct and guide p. 42. Thus far W. R Observe He has here given a very fair and ample concession to Truth in words viz. 1st To the Apostles labours for the Churches establishment in the Faith and in the Power 2dly To the practice of that Form which the Power should lead them into 3dly To his care in the Marriage of his two Daughters and others that NO Proceedings in Marriages may be permitted in any such private Methods as may be scandalous to Truth 4thly To outward Order Methods Forms and Discipline that they are to be exercised and proceeded in under Christ's Government according as his spirit directs and guides Are they so A fair confession Had he alwayes kept to this method and language and so been consistent with himself the Controversie had been in a narrow compass But though he seems seriously to say That he never had a thought entred his breast that outward Order Methods Form and Discipline were not to be exercised and proceeded in under the Government of Christ I query on his contradiction how they should be exercised and proceeded in under Christs Government in his Church if so be it cannot consist with the tenor of the new Covenant for any to give forth outward Orders Sentences Decrees c Or if Christ doth invest none with Power from on high to establish such things relating to Conscience as outward Order Methods Forms Discipline c Or if no visible Persons be invested with power from Christ to execute outward Laws Prescriptions Order c How then are outward Order Methods Forms and Discipline to be exercised and proceeded in under Christ's Government And who are to exercise and proceed in them if not visible Persons May not they declare and practise outwardly what they have received from Christ inwardly How then shall the Law go forth of Sion and the Word from Jerusalem But if he grants that some persons are made instrumental under Christs Government to give forth good outward Methods Forms Order Discipline c. but not to be a bond on the Consciences of others who have believed in the everlasting Light This appears contradictory again William was thy proceedings in the Marriage of two Daughters and thy care that Truth might not be scandalized no bond upon thine or their Consciences How are outward Methods Forms Order and Discipline then to be practised and proceeded in under Christ's Government Must they be so practised exercised and proceeded in by Believers without Conscience or without Obligation or being binding upon their Consciences Strange Doctrine loose and confused and not consistent with any Religious tender Conscience towards God or Christ which requires all to be done in his name and to his glory But after all our Opposers variations inconsistencies and whirlings he is fled to this Refuge or rather Subterfuge viz. That his writing shews dislike to Man's Pretence to establish outward Orders relating to matters of Conscience as the Order of the Gospel or to take upon him the giving forth of any outward Rules c. relating to Faith and Discipline in the Church with intent that they should become a Bond upon others to submit thereto further than from a Recommendation unto the Conscience a service may be seen therein according to the measure of Light given c. pag. 41. Observe 1 st This censures only MAN's PRETENCE to establish outward Orders relating to Conscience c. 2dly Man's taking upon him to give forth any outward Rules in Faith or Discipline in the Church with intent they should become a Bond upon others to submit further than from a Recommendation to the Conscience a service MAY be seen therein according to the measure of Light given c. Whereupon 't is to be noted first That this does not oppose the Spirit of Christ making use of man or men as instrumental to establish or give forth outward Orders Rules c. relating to Conscience Faith or Discipline in the Church to be submitted unto 2 dly Nor such outward Orders Rules c. as a service may be seen in according to the measure of the true Light given But only a dislike to MAN's PRETENCE TAKING VPON HIM therein Which I understand is intended as without the true Spirits Guidance Which appears still to be an Abatement and Extinuation of his more general reiterated Opposition and Noise against ANY giving forth outward Orders Prescriptions c. or being invested with Power from Christ to execute outward Laws Orders c. under Christs inward Government because the new Covenant and its Law is inward For now he only opposeth Man's Pretence and Taking upon him in these cases and who must be Judge that he is but a Pretendor and an Actor in his own will if the Rules Directions or Laws he declares or gives out be in themselves Honest Lawful and Just yea Convenient and Needful not of Man nor by the Will of Man Were not this to judge of Spirits without outward evidence or proof against them But if our Opposer would place the Controversie against some Rules Orders c. among us as being in themselves either unjust unlawful or dishonest and could make sufficient proof thereof that would both greatly narrow and soon determine the Controversie For that can be no good nor true Spirit that gives forth bad or unjust Laws otherwise we have no reason to give credit to him in his bitterly smiting with words of hatred against any Men or Persons among us whilst speaking ministring or acting things just lawful or honest and needful as bound in Conscience to declare and advise others to practise and which he must grant them Liberty both to speak and act or else hee 'l miserably interfer with his pretended Liberty of Conscience Seeing whatsoever things are honest just and of good report are to be thought on and practised That W. R's great Book aforesaid as it is against R. B's Book for Church-Government is against Church-Government so far as it relates to an outward Form of Church-Government outward Order Rules Methods c. And this is no Prevarication as now he renders it as is evident from divers passages before recited and by himself frequently contradicted § 4. Also 't is a manifest falshood where W. R. saith That the Prevaricating Pen-man doth not quote any Sentence of his confuted by his asserting in a Paper dated London 26th of the 3d Moneth 1673. That God hath in his Wisdom afforded those Helps and Governments in the Churches which are not to be despised being in subjection to Christ the one Head and Law-giver c. This was signed by W. R. among other Friends pag. 42. If no visible Persons be invested with Power from
Christ to execute outward Laws Orders c. in an outward Form of Church-Government Or if it be Popery or like the Pope or inconsistent with the New Covenant so to do as he has insinuated what and where are those Helps and Governments which God in his Wisdom hath afforded in his Churches in subjection to Christ Are no visible Persons instrumental therein by the Power of Christ Or are they Helps and Governments or helpers in Government without visible Persons Were Apostles Prophets Teachers Elders Overseers c. in the Christian Churches no visible Persons or not so indued with Power from Christ to be helpers in the Government See 1 Cor. 12 28. I confess I know not how to reconcile our Opposer to himself in these matters no more than I can find Reason or Proof for his black Charges of Impious Prevaricating Pen-man Oh Impious Prevaricator perverse and hard Heart qualified like a proud Prelate The Pen-man's Iniquity angry Waspish Pen c. Thus he I must needs say he 's far more loud in his Censures than in 's Proofs If our Opposer did impartially consider and compare William Penn's Address to Protestants quoted by him he would see there 's no Lash to the Pen-man as he falsly affirms seeing W. P. grants that the one Shepherd may have many Servants p. 44. And on 2 Cor. 4.1 2. He further saith Here is the utmost Imposition the Apostle makes use of He requires not men to receive him without Evidence c. p. 44. No more do we whom Christ hath called forth in his Service and Ministry in this his day who by the manifestation of Truth commend our selves to every mans Conscience in the sight of God having renounced the hidden things of Dishonesty c. Here 's no cause to complain for want of Evidence or of Imposition without Evidence in plainly discovering or shewing the hidden things of dishonesty Truth in its manifestation both in the Ministry and in the Hearers Conscience is Evidence both against what 's Dishonest and for what 's Honest God would not have Men blind in their Duty their own Negligence and Prejudice is cause of blindness Nor hath this Person convicted us of pleading for or setting up Imposition without Evidence in the Conscience or of Imposing a blind Obedience or putting any Persons thereupon No my very Soul is against that And though W. P. also has writ against Imposition without Conviction the Pen-man seems to have no other sence nor doth it follow that he is either against Church Discipline outward Order or Form of Church-Government but for these in the Church of Christ and Christian Societies he being Principl'd for the true Church having Power from Christ to give Judgment spiritual Censures and Sentences against all dark Spirits that sow Discord and make Division and against all ungodly loose disorderly and scandalous walking and walkers under profession of Truth I 'le adventure to quote William Penn's Address to Protestants to shew his Principle and Sence in these matters In page 214. he saith No Scripture-Church-Discipline is hereby oppugned or weakned Let not the Sentence end in Violence upon the Conscience unconvinced Let whoso will expound or determine so it be according to true Church-Discipline which can be exercised on them only who have willingly joyn'd themselves in that Covenant of Union c. P. 215. Let us observe what sort of Church-Government the Apostle recommends Avoid foolish Questions and Contentions c. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second Admonition reject c. And on Phil. 3.15 He did not say You shall be Fined Pillaged Excommunicated and flung into Prison if ye be not of our mind P. 216. on 2 Tim. 2.22 23 24 25. Here is both Faith and Government Religion and Duty all that becomes us towards God our Brethren our Neighbours yea our Opposers and Enemies And W. P. in his Brief Examination and State of Liberty Spiritual he doth more particularly explain and clear the Point to Friends first in his Epistle saying Christ's Liberty is obtained through his Cross they that would be his Free-men must be his Bonds-men and wear his blessed Yoke His Liberty is from Sin not to Sin to do his will not our own And secondly he speaks farther to it in the said Examination Observe Here W. P. pleads not for a Liberty of Conscience in opposition to true Church-Government Discipline or Order but to those outward Penalties Persecutions and Punishments corporal and pecuniary mentioned and opposed by him and the rest of us which is no Liberty to make Division or Discord in the Church of Christ or Society of Believers § 5. To the Question Whether the Church of Christ hath Power in any cases that are matters of Conscience to give a positive Sentence and Decision which may be obligatory upon Believers To this R. B. answers affirmatively SHE HATH Anarch p. 48. And Whereas R. B. pleaded for the Church of Christ having Power in SOME CASES of Conscience to give a positive Sentence or Decision which may be obligatory upon Believers To this W. R. saith Which clearly shews to us R. B 's meaning to be That in some cases the Consciences of Believers ought to be bound by the positive Sentences of others To which he adds Without leaving any Liberty for a Believer to refuse to submit on the account of not seeing it his duty to submit This meaning and Government saith W. R. over Believers we take to be contrary to the Principle of Truth and Liberty we have in Christ Jesus c. p. 44. Herein he appears both unfair in his citation and mistaken in his construction For 1 st The some cases intended wherein a positive Judgment or Sentence from some Members or Believers is binding upon others are such Cases Wherein only the Truth the Spirit of God doth give the Judgment through some or other in the Church of Christ. The only proper Judge of Controversies in the Church is the Spirit of God and the power of deciding solely lies in it saith R. B. Anarch pag. 66. As also That God hath ordinarily in communicating his Will under his Gospel employed such whom he made use of in gathering his Church and in feeding watching over them though not excluding others Thus R. B's Anarchy of the Ranters p. 67 68. Observe here that he placeth the Judgment or Sentence as binding and to be submitted unto by others professing the same Faith on the Truth the Spirit of God the Will of God 2 dly And therefore the Judgment is not placed upon any Imposition of Government over Believers contrary to the Principle of Truth or Liberty that 's in Christ Jesus for the Judgment of Truth or of the holy Spirit which unites in one Mind and Judgment cannot be contrary to that Principle nor without evidence in the Conscience for conviction to oblige and the Conscience thus obliged is not without true sight sence or knowledge of duty therein because
Contradiction to many Friends about the Tree of Knowledge that God forbad Man to eat of The Question was put concerning thy self thus viz. What kind of Preacher would he make if he should tell People The Tree of Knowledge is good for Food the Tree of Knowledge is not good for Food This Question thou takest to be grounded on a down-right Falshood for sayest thou I never asserted that the Tree of Knowledge was good for Food and that it was not good for Food neither have I written any thing to shew my own sence either way p. 50. No! That 's strange and a gross and manifest Untruth and Shuffle I am sure And I may ask thee if thou hast not belyed thy own Conscience in these Words How darest thou now utter in Print that thou hast not written any thing to shew thy own sence either way i. e. Whether the Tree of Knowledge be good for Food or not good for Food Hast thou not in the first place written to shew thy own sence That it is good for Food by thy plainly opposing the contrary Doctrine as preached by divers among us viz. That the Tree of Knowledge was not good for Food Hast not thou plainly objected against this Doctrine Instancing That a Father may command his Child not to eat an Apple his Rebellious eating no Argument to prove the Apple in it self not good for Food And we know not on what Foot of Truth any one can assert that the Tree of Knowledge is not good for Food And to prove the Tree of Knowledge in it self good for Food thou also didst cite John 17. This is Life Eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Thence infering so that Knowledge is the way to Life But did God forbid the knowledge of himself and of his Son to Man in Innocency when he forbad him to eat of the Tree of Knowledge Didst thou not here plainly enough shew thy sence That the Tree of Knowledge was good for Food And doth not this imply that the Serpent was more kind to Man in moving to eat of it than his Maker was in forbidding him There 's no need of thy adding as in it self for the Tree is it self With what Conscience then durst thou adventure not only to say Thou never assertedst that the Tree of Knowledge was good for Food but also that thou hast not written any thing to shew thy own sence either way Oh wonderful I somewhat admire at such a manifest gross Untruth that thou shouldst undertake in several Pages with several Objections to oppose a Doctrine as thou didst that of the Tree of Knowledge not being good for Food And now to flam us off with telling us That thou hast not written any thing to shew thy own sence either way Hast thou not here play'd Legerdemain to write so plainly in opposition to another's Position and yet tell us Neither hast thou written any thing to shew thy own sence either way For shame leave off such Impertinent Scribling and spend thy time better in the Creation But yet what reason for the Question viz. What kind of Preacher wouldst thou make if thou shouldst tell People the Tree of Knowledge is good for Food the Tree of Knowledge is not good for Food For the first thou hast shewn thy sence plainly however thou wouldst now smother it The latter appears deducible from thy finding out a Salvo or Plea for some that may declare That the Tree of Knowledge is not good for Food for thou wouldst not be understood to reflect on all that have used that Expression because thou questionest not but many have so express'd themselves to shew that if we should feed upon or admire any excellent Qualification or Endowment and not have the Eye of our mind Chiefly unto the Giver we might then come to a loss See the Second Part of thy Christian-Quaker p. 28 29. Thus hast thou excused the Doctrine before opposed by thee viz. That the Tree of Knowledge is not good for Food § 4. As for G. F's Epistle against the envious Spirits and Persecutors of those who could not observe their outward Things Traditions c. thou dost much insist on these Words viz. They that do so viz. set up outward things gather People to themselves not unto God c. If these be truly cited G F. best knows his own Intention and in point of Justice ought rather to have been enquired of as to have been his own Interpreter than to have been brought forth in Print under the disguise of a prejudicial Interpretation and straining his Words and turning his sence besides whatever was intended in them or by him And what hast thou got by the said Citation thou hast so much insisted on If thou strainest the Litteral sense thus That no outward things are to be set up nor outward Order practised in the Church of Christ. Thou wilt therein farther interfer with thy self having already granted outward Form and Order c. to be in the Church of Christ yea even the case of Marriage as what care thou tookest about the marrying thy two Daughters c. But G. F's intention and sence in the words of his said Epistle is by another hand fully spoken to and therefore I forbear enlarging on them However thy construction That out of G. F 's Mouth he and his Brethren may justly be compared to Cain for persecuting their Brethren for no other cause than for not submitting to outward things c. p. 50. This Construction I look upon to be very gross and reproachful and that it proceeded from a persecuting spirit that is a false and unjust Judge And as false and malicious William is thy dark smiting in telling of such sort of Preachers i. e. among the People called Quakers whose Pride and Insolency might prompt them at this day to say Though you are our Witnesses that we have often declared that our Commission from God was to turn People from the Power of Satan to God that so they might all come to be ordered and governed by the appearance of the Power in themselves yet we did NOT mean but that when we had gathered any into the Truth we should be those who ought to have the RULE over them and that such should observe our Traditions or follow us Without giving a Reason why and though they might in Truth be submitting themselves one to another in the Lord according to the Apostles Counsel yet all of them must submit to us and reverence honour and obey us c. pag. 50 51. Thus far thou William But that any Preachers among the said People called Quakers have so said or preached after this exalted imperious and inconsistent manner I must take leave to deny till I have better proof from thee than thy quoting thy self or thy saying that in the 48 49 pages of the 3d part of thy Treatise entituled The Christian-Quaker 'T is so written which is
Bride the Lambs Wife and she hath no need of the Light of the Moon to shine in her because the Lord is the Light and the Lambs Spirit is the Light of the Church that is in him But your visible Churches make use of the Light of the Moon that is your Mens Meetings and also your Womens Meetings and the Orders which are set up by them they are to be Rules for your visible Churches to walk by For the Women have power to order the Affairs of your visible Church as well as your Men and this Practice of yours is altogether Antichristian and so also is your Church-Government because it is the Invisible man Christ who orders all things in his Church by his own Spirit Those who are Members of the Church in God among you in time will abhor your Government because it is Antichristian For you Elders do look upon your selves to be Judges and that you have Power to determine things in matter of Conscience c. p. 10 11. Answ. Christ's Government in his Church is both Invisible and Visible he governs by himself and by his Ministers all are not come to a ripe Age in him there are many Children and weak Ones who have need of helps in Government Our faithful Mens Meetings and Womens Meetings were set up by the Power of Christ Jesus and in his Light he governs and rules among them by his own Spirit And faithful grave and sober Women have power to be Teachers of good things and to teach the younger Women Christian-Church-Order and Spiritual Rule were exercised among the Primitive Christians both Men and Women who were Children of New Jerusalem the free Woman the Inhabitants of this City are not without Order or Ministers therein And therefore this Opposers Blow and Charge of altogether Antichristian against our Mens and Womens Meetings is both Silly Proofless Slanderous and altogether Antichristian against Christ's Work and appointment in Male and Female and as the Church-Government among us is Christ's Government both revealed set up and ordained by him none that are and continue true Members of his Church will ever abhor that Government nor reject slight or despise that promised Dominion and Judgment that he hath given to the Saints to determine matters of Difference but only Apostates false Brethren and deceitful Workers and loose Spirits these will be smiting and accusing the Brethren despising Dominion and speaking evil of Dignities yea speaking perverse things to draw Disciples after them crying against outward Rule and Government Forms and Order in the Church whilst they are seeking Mastery Dominion Rule and Government to themselves As for our visible Church and visible Church-Government or Order so much opposed by this Adversary he talks blindly and ignorantly for though the Church be Invisible as to the Spirits of Men who are Members of it and Christ's immediate Rule and Government in the Heart be Invisible yet there is a Visibility both of the true Christian Congregation and good Order and Rule therein proceeding from the Spirit of Christ within The People of God and their good Conversations and Order in Christ are not all shut up in an Invisibility being as Epistles to be read and seen of all and they as a City set upon a Hill c. J. B. You do prefer your selves and the Church in the first place before God who is Light And have set up themselves and their Church as Head instead of God and Christ p. 12. Their setting up themselves and their Government and are laying aside the Spirit 's Government and Authority p. 13. Those Elders who call themselves Ministers look upon themselves and their Image to be equal in Power and Glory both with the Father and the Son Testimony against the Quakers p. 3. Answ. These are notoriously false and slanderous We prefer the living God and his Son Christ Jesus before all and do not lay aside the Spirit 's Government or Authority but in humility reverence and desire ever to live under the same knowing Self abased and Images defaced and rejected by the Light of Christ Jesus § 4. J. B. If any of those called Teachers intend to speak a few words commonly called Prayer then the Women and the Men that are set in the Meeting shall rise up and the Men will uncover their Heads Their Teachers have judged those Quakers not to be real Members of their Church or Body that have not done it i. e. uncovered their Heads And herein the Quakers in general have given more Homage Reverence and Respect to the Words or Prayers of another wherein there was no Life at all than they have done to the Word of Life it self in their own Particulars And this is Anti-christ's work p. 14 15. Answ. His conclusion is false and slanderous herein We Reverence the Word of Life in our living Prayers and not Lifeless Words And why doth he thus judge any Reverent Posture among us in Prayer as that of Peoples Rising up and Mens Uncovering their Heads in our holy Duty of publick Prayer This is like John Perrot's prejudiced Party And how foully Contradictory to himself is he in thus uncharitably judging us for our Reverent Posture or serious Behaviour which is matter of Conscience to us when yet he 'l not allow any Members or Elders among us to judge or determine matters relating to Conscience And cautions us in Christ's words Judge not that ye be not judged p. 12. Oh blind harden'd Man how darest thou thus judge over our Consciences or falsly accuse us with leading People from the Power to worship and reverence the Form more than the Power And then most falsly to add That this is the work of Antichrist among the Quakers p. 17. Here thou hast slandered and shamefully belyed the People of God called Quakers and hast shewn thy self not worthy of so much as the Name of a Quaker Thou hast long been a Reproach unto them J. B. Postscript to his Antichrist's Transformations within viz. If any amongst you pretend to be moved by the Spirit to go to Prayer then both Men and Women they either stand up or else kneel down and the Men all pull off their Hats which own your Form of Prayer and herein you do both Worship Reverence and Adore the Form outwardly and the Words more than you do the Word of Life in your own Particulars Answ. An erronious Conclusion and no natural Consequence either of our standing up kneeling or putting off our Hats in Prayer for all these may be and are innocently and conscientiously performed with Respect and in a holy Reverence to Almighty God whom we breathe and pray unto by his own Spirit Besides both Kneeling and being Uncovered have been practised among God's People and true Christians in Prayer to him so that these Postures are not condemnable in themselves How blind and ignorant therefore is this Gain-sayer in his Opposition Read Psal. 95.6 O come let us Worship and Bow down Let us
thirst after Righteousness By Isabel Yeomans A Warning to London in particular By James Parks A Warning to England in general By J. P. A Testimony to the Lords Power and blessed appearance in and amongst Children A plain Path-way opened to the simple hearted for the answering all Doubts and Objections c. By S. Crisp. A Blast blown out of the North ecchoing up towards the South to meet the Cry of their oppressed Brethren The Lamentable Cry of the Oppressed H. Smith's Books collected into one Volumn The Spirit of the Martyrs revived ☞ A faithful Warning and Lamentation over England By William Bingley Jude 13 14. vers †A Pope reputed no better than an Atheist a Prophaner of the holy Scriptures a Person careless of Religion and Piety an Avaritious Corrupt Person who made great advantage of his impious Indulgencies Pardons c How unjust impious therefore is our Adversary W R. to rake so many Instancies as he hath done out of the History of the Council of Trent of Wicked Popes and their Agents to compare brand and scandalize Us or any of our Friends withal who abhor Popery and all the Popes Corruptions †By Execute I understand minister or put in Practice and not in the common Law sence of inflicting corporal or pecuniary Punishments for that 's not consistent with the Government of a Christian Church * See Rhâ— Annotat. fol. 572. * But I suppose he hath a reserved and other sence for his Distinction between Clergy and Laity here than the common sence â—nd distinction 'T is some reflecting reserve no doubt He may tell his mean-in his next Book * I tenderly forbear exposing the Person 's name at present believing that 't was not by his order or consent that W.R. F B. have made him such a subject of printed controversie as also hoping that he has more charity tenderness in him than to allow of their malicious Books Pag. 27. P. 72. P. 26. P. 27. * As our words are Accuser p. 136. * Who must so exercise and proceed in them if no visible man or men be invested with Power from Christ to execute them or put them in practice Pag. 41. pag. 42. Rom 2 8. 1 Cor. 16.16 1 Thes 5 12 13 14. Heb. 13 17. 2 Pet. 3.2 pag. 45. pag. 45. Accuser c. p. 26 27. P. 52. Page 52. This passage W. R. hath Printed divers times over in his Book against himself p. 55. P. 55. †Francis Bugg's Proposition implyes a Contradiction for if Samuel Cater subscribe the Instrument he ought not to have his Money by the tenure of it because he told not his Name If he do not subscribe it as his judgment then he also ought to have his Money again according to F. B's tenet of Christian Liberty As not seeing it his duty ergo he may not or at least ought not to be compelled to suffer for it Another contradiction is from the ground of his Law or Canon viz. the equality in suffering For by his Rule a poor Minister must suffer 20 l when a rich Hearer whom he ministers to but 5 s. And he on the apparent sight of the Informer must tell his Name when the other but when he is asked it Oh equal levelling Law Are not the children of the world wiser looking on us as Levellers to make the rich Hearers pay the poor Preachers penalties as well as they look on them obliged to maintain them on their own supposition * Marg. added Yet I do not limit Persons in this case there may be a special occasion to tell Names for the sake of others but not to make that a general Rule Friends are to be left free to Gods counsel * Q. added If it be not Dog-Latin Thy Charge collected * Query added I do seriously ask William Rogers if this Paper of ours thus Recommended be sufficient proof of Imposition and being turned Antichristian I desire plain Answer hereunto in relation to what he has granted for a Recommendation c. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mas. and Fem. * Yet I find it not So manifest afterward in thy Book at all * And whereunto we have a full Answer in being in Manuscript reserved about five Years in order to pursue and detect that of J. P.'s if divulged abroad in Print †As in his opposing Pastors Teachers Elders c. in our day and the Spirit to them and rendring us at inforceing Orders and setting our selves in the place of the HEIR c. And he was Answer'd in his Life time by several of the Servants of Christ wâ—â— withstood his opposition in this matter * For J. Crook hath given publick Testimony against the Payment of Tythes in this Gospel day witness his Treatise i. e. Tythes no Property c. †But I must confess that in our publick Assemblies for divine Worship such postures as bespeak the most Reverence to God and Union among our selves are most commendable edifying and exemplary c. * N. C 's Epistle †So the Work of Backsliders and Apostates tends to fit them to hear and sit under the Parish Priests contrary to the real Christian Quaker Witness F. Bugg's Proposition espoused by him as his own judgment viz. Things Moral under the Gospel men may be commanded by the Magistrate as HEARING is an act purely Moral A man may be commanded to hear the Gospel preacht without being forced to give his assent to it The Light of Nature guides the Magistrate to instruct his Subjects in whatsoever he thinks for their eternal Good And the Light of Nature obligeth every man to hearken c A man that is only commanded to hear and receive Instruction is dealt with as a rational Creature and forced to nothing The Judgment is still left in himself Thus F. Bugg's De Christiana Libertate or Liberty of Conscience pag 91 92. Whereby he has plainly given away and betray'd the cause of all conscientious Dissenters For what place is left for Liberty of Conscience to dissent if the Magistrate may thus enjoyn the Subjects to hear what he thinks is for their eternal Good and they be thus obliged to hear when he thinks 't is for their good to hear the Parish Priests By this Proposition when the Magistrate commands Fr. Bugg to his Parish Church and hear the Priest he is oblig'd so to do by his own Proposition and reserve his judgment in himself whether to accept or reject what he hears Thus he may be in a freedom fitted to act in ALL FORMS But then let him not esteem himself a Christian Quaker but another sort of a Latitude Christian whose Religion and Principle before cited will not oblige him to suffer any more as a Quaker †So the Work of Backsliders and Apostates tends to fit them to hear and sit under the Parish Priests contrary to the real Christian Quaker Witness F. Bugg's Proposition espoused by him as his own judgment viz. Things