BAPTISM, INFANT-BAPTISM, AND QUAKERISM Briefly, but Impartially Considered, in a Letter to a Friend. WITH A short Dissuasive from the Impiety, Atheism, and POPERY of our AGE, in another Letter. With an Appendix. LONDON, Printed in the Year 1674. TO THE READER. Reader, I Have had the Happiness of these Papers Company some years; they have lain by me in this defensive posture, thou now findest them, a long time, and I assure thee they have demeaned themselves very quietly, though Men of War, without offending any, as I hope they will still, since they first Quartered with me, there have been many Insurrections, many a Battle fought, many a Line drawn, and many a Trench closely Besieged: These Controversies of Infant Baptism and Quakerism have of late been hotly bandied to and again. I have, after several attempts made by myself and others, proved vain and ineffectual through the Author's modest loathness to appear in Print; I have (I say) at length prevailed with the Author to Commission them to go out into the Camp, and contribute all they can towards the Peace and quiet of Religion, I have extorted leave of him to press them to the public Service, and yet I hope they will demean themselves as victorieusly as other Volunteers that have gone out to slay. This is all I thought good to Advertise thee; and so I leave thee to the Author's previous Advice. TO THE READER. Un●●●●●diced, and Impartial Reader, FOR so these papers suppose thee, if they mistake, I am sorry for it; if thou art not Impartial, I wish ●●ou wert so; if not unprejudiced and unpre-engaged, may they make thee so; if thou art hot cither pro or con, here is no treatment for the (at least, not in the first at puter if thou comest with a pious inaifferency to possess thyself of Truth and verity, read and welcome, soon, and prosper. The deagn of those prefactory Lanes is not to Court thy Acceptance, or suborn thy sa rane, for to bride thy vote, nor yet to fort-stall thy judgement, for this would be very unlake the laziness of the dispute they usher in, which is, ●●t to beg, but by strength of reason command thy assent, not to desire the favour, but by dint 〈◊〉 Argument to require the justice of thee to believe the Truths defended, and the Erros confuted, it is hoped both are modestly enough done. I request of thee only to be clam, sedate, and impartial, and be what thou wilt else. It is not knnecessary (I think) to let thee know, that these were real, not feigned Letters, thou art not the first they were sent to, nor the Friend meant in the Title page, though now at the second hand thou art, and I hope they will give thee no cause to be otherwise, so that thou mayst be assured the reason of the Title is not any emulatton of the Fashion of writing (even) contraversies that hath of late so much obtained, A Letter to a Friend of 700. pages sometimes, which me thinks, should be added to the Title, that the Friend might know how long the Letter would keep him from business, and matters of concernment, without the trouble of turning to the end of the Book before he hath scarce sa his eye upon the beginning. Know also this both Letters were writ so long ago as 1668. both of them without the least intent or purpose of publication. That the first was writ in a sheet of paper, which you must be remembered for the us derstanding of an Expression in the close of it. That in the close of the last Letter, the Roman Innovations are intended, and how much reason there hath been since the Year 666. to fear the corrupting of the Truth, and the defacting of the Religion of England by Popish contrivances, I need not tell thee, therefore if thou takest the sense, meaning, or design to be that the Church hath not the power to regulate necessary Circumstances (not expressed in Scripture) in the Worship of God, thou dost mistake. And lastly, take notice, that brevity was studied in both Letters, and therefore thou canst not expect as much here on the Subjects treated of, as thou mayst in larger volumes, yet I think I may say thou wilt find more in a little here than thou canst any where else, so much brevity, reason, and distinctness couched together (if I mistake not) thou wilt miss in many other books; thus much I hope I may say without any arrogance or immodesty. ERRATA. Reader, THou mayst well wonder to see so many Erratas in so few Leaves, and so large a Catalogue of Errors in so little a Book: nor are here all, some are on●●ted because they will not much disturb the sense, others because they will not easily escape they nother. Share the fault between the Author's Absence, and the Printers Negligence, and then Correct before there Readest. Preface 1. line 11. r. Truth. 2 preface l. 11. r. Pray fatory. The Book. p. 2. l. 24. for that r. not. p. 4. l. 10. r. Act 8.36. l. 21. r. it, not God. p. 6. l. 9 r. sure. l. 10. r. not p. 10. l. 1. for now, r. when. l. 11. between they, and are, r. that. p. 11. l. 10. after Baptism, r. to come, ro the sprinkling used in the Law which signified the san●●● b'ing that Baptison doth. p. 16. l. 3. for and, r. the l. 10. for and, r. 1. l 16. r. tremulous l. 25. r. Deutl. p. 18. l 2. to them, add Isa. 8.20. l. 13. for of is, r. in p. 19 deal of. l. 22. deal. not. p. 20. l. 25. r. these. p. 22 l. 17. for of it, r. not. l. 23. r. Evasion. p. 23. l. 11. r. tenent. p. 24 l. 15. r. idioms. p. 26. l. 16. after only, add every. p., 29. l. 17. r. Willingly. p. 32. l. 10. add to which, when. p. 33. l. 13. r. ever. p. 42. l. 18. r. Ratiocinoso's. p. 43. l. 6. r. Wittynesses. l. 7. r. We. p. 46. l. 7, and 10. r. Master, not Minster. l. 8. r. are generally, not and generally. BAPTISM, INFANT-BAPTISM, AND QUAKERISM CONSIDERED. Dear Cousin, THese Lines, etc.— The Question is, Whether Infants are the Subjects of Baptism? Or, Whether Insante may be baptised? Answ. I affirm it, & shall lay down my mind in these following positions concerning Baptism. 1. Baptism is an Ordinance, a Command that claims every Christians Obedience while he is on this side the end of the world: One known proof (to prevent tediousness) shall serve my turn, Mat. 20.19. Teach 〈◊〉 Disci●●s all Nations, Baptising, etc. A pl●● proof that Christ would have all Nations, who pretend to be his Discipies, to be baptised; and if this be a Commandment a Christ, surely they that have any love for him should keep this as well as other commandments, John 14.15. Is it not then 〈◊〉 dangerous aspersion upon the wisdom 〈◊〉 Christ to call it a Carnal Ordinance? Is it not extremely hazardons to load the Institutions of Christ with Carnal, outward, us profitable, and the like ignominious terms. And is it not as much so it neglect then, and take ourselves to be unconcerned in his Commands, when yet we profess to love him? Surely those persons that so usually, so easily neglect this Command under the Notion of an unprofitable one, would have much more done so, were they in our Father Adam's stead, with the prohibition of eating of the Tree of Knowledge, and look 〈◊〉 upon it as a very inconsiderable, and insignificant Command; and may we that fear they will by the neglect of this Command forfeit all happiness, and cast themselves (and every one else, if they can prevail with them) into equal, into greater misery than Adam did us by his Fall? To forbear doing our Blessed Saviour's Commands till we know why, and wherefore, and what reason he had to command them, is pride, and presumption too great for a Christian to be guilty of. To fix bounds to the Commands of Christ, when himself doth not so; to say they reached no further than the end of that dispensation, when he himself says to the end of the World: Or that it was to be of force no longer than till Christ came in his Spirit, when sure the Christians in those times had his Spirit; nay, when the Apostles had no sooner received the Spirit in an extraordinary manner, but the first thing they preached, was, Repent, and be Baptised, Acts 2.38. And when all along after we find them executing this Command, and mentioning it in their Epistles, Eph 4.5. etc. To say that we find God binding the phrases of (for ever) to the end of the World, and the like in the Old Testament to a certain period of time, therefore Man may do it now, are all Argumentations as wild and Extravagant as they are proud and impudent; and certainly, Men that Argue at this rate are arrived to the highest pitch of pride, and Arrogance. I wonder these men do not blot out Teaching as well as Baptising when they go together in the same command. Teach all, &c 2. Baptism is a privilege: It is a Command, therefore Christians must Obey it. It is a privilege, and so they have a right to it, and should bless God for it: that which doth distinguish between Believers and Unbelievers is a privilege, but Baptism doth so: No Indians, no Heathens, ●●nay, no Children but them of Believing. Parents may be Baptised; that it is a privilege, is plain, from Acts 36.37. 3. Baptism confers not Grace, of itself it doth not, nor doth God give Grace a● part of the Nature of Baptism, for many have Grace before they are Baptised, and yet are really Baptised after Conversion; therefore it is a gross mistake, that Infants are Baptised, because Baptism makes them Holy or Gracious, but they are so, because God Commands they should be; and because they have a Covenant, Holiness before hand, and so have a right to God, 1 Cor. 7.14. 4. Baptism is what Circumcision was, Circumcision was an outward sign of invisible Grace, so is Baptism. The Apostle makes Circumcision and Baptism to shadow out the same thing, Col. 2.11, 12. 5. Circumcision was a sign or Seal of the Covenant, Gen. 17.11. Rom. 4.11. 6. Baptism is the same, it is sign of the Covenant, for that which signifies the grace of the Covenant must needs be a sign of it: but Baptism doth so, Col. 2.12. If it be come in the room of Circumcision, and that was a sign of the Covenant, than Baptism must needs be so; if Circumcision was a privilege, and Believers under the Gospel have more privileges than they before it, than either Circumcision is yet to be practised (as it must be, being the Command of it hath never been repealed, and it was given before the date of the Ceremonial Law, if nothing is done in its stead) I say, Believers are yet to be Circumcised, or it was no privilege, or we under the Gospel want a great privilege, which they before it enjoyed, or Baptism must be come in its room; and so we enjoy the privilege of a Seal of the Covenant in Baptism. If the Covenant was a privilege, the Sign of it must be so too; now, if Circumcision was a privilege, and Infants were Circumcised notwithstanding their Actual unbelief, and Baptism be come in its room, than Infants may be baptised, though they do not Actually believe; or Believers since the coming of Christ are still bound to Circumcision, and have less privileges than they before. 7. Being in Covenant is the proper 〈◊〉 son of, and a sufficient reason for Baptism. Baptism is a sign of the Covenant, and th●● that have a right to the thing signified, wh●● is the greater, have to the sign, which is 〈◊〉 less, but they that are in Covenant have 〈◊〉 right to the thing signified; either being 〈◊〉 Covenant is the proper reason of Baptism 〈◊〉 or there is no such reason for the administering it: what true Faith, for we can ne●● be sure where that is, and if it be not 〈◊〉 Faith, I am sure it cannot be the profession of it. 8. The Infants of Believers are in Covenant. If they were so in the Old Te●●ment, that they should not be so in the Ne●● is very strange; that they were in the Old is plain, from Gen. 17.10, 11, 12. that th●● are so in the New, is as plain, from Acts. 〈◊〉 39 The promise is to you and your Children. It is indeed usually objected, that 〈◊〉 is to them, when they come to believe, wh●● as it is to them when they believe upon 〈◊〉 former account the promise is to you; 〈◊〉 that if this Exposition be true, the la●●● part (and to your Children) must sign●●● just nothing at all; and what encouragement could it be, to tell them, the promise was to their Children, when they believ●● when it was so to every body else. 9 The Infants of Believers may be baptised; if the former positions be true, this cannot be denied, therefore I will not insist upon it, nor shall I enlarge into other reasons, it would be too tedious; but surely if Children be Holy or Saints, 1 Cor. 7.14. (the word being in the Original the same with that 1 Cor. 1.2. & 6.2.) If Christ did bless them, Mat. 19.15. unless we take his blessing to be no more than that insignificant Ceremony that Old people use to their Children or God Sons, if he would have them come to him, as in the 140. If they be a part of all Nations, and Christ commands to Baptise all Nations, Mat. 28.19. and if they may be saved, as who so uncharitable us to think otherwise? I say, if these things be true, then surely they may be, they must be Baptised; and they may be, they must be reproved that forbidden them Baptism, Mat. 19.14. And now I shall lay down a few positions, which (I hope) shall prevent and anticipate the usual Objections, and they are these. 1. That Infants are being expressed in Scripture, Commands or Examples is not a sufficient Argument, to exclude them from Baptism, for by that reason Women should not receive the Lords Supper, nor Merchants or Mercers be Baptised, because we never read in Scripture any such Commands or Examples; nay, more, Men and Women should not be Baptised, because we fin● not expressly that Men and Women in Contradistinction to Children, were Baptised 〈◊〉 for the word (Men and Women) where ever used to that purpose, signifies in the Original (Men kind and Womenkind) but Infants are so, therefore they may as well as others be Baptised. 2. That Christ's Commanding, Teaching or Repentance, and Baptising to go together, compared with Infant's inability to t●● former is not a good conclusion against infant-baptism. 1. Because that would equal have ●●●cluded Infnats from Circumcision under 〈◊〉 Old Testament, because God says to A●●ham, when he commanded Circumcision Walk before me, and be perfect, Gen. 17. 〈◊〉 as a Condition of the Covenant on his p●● therefore Infants who could not do the●● thing, should not be Circumcised, and y●● we find they were; therefore, 2. When Christ says, Teach all Nati●● Baptising them he means, Teach them t●● are capable of being taught, and Bapti●● them that are capable of Baptism; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 valid reason to prove that none were baptised but they that were first taught and serpented, because Teaching and Repentant is set before Baptising in Scripture, then it's as valid a reason that some were Baptised before they were Taught or Repent, because Baptising is set before Repenting and Teaching; let said, (John Baptised in the Wilderness, and Preached the Baptism of Repentance) first Baptised, then Preach●● Mark 1.4. but, 3. Infants are capable of Repenting (i.e. 〈◊〉 Original sin) and believing, or else none 〈◊〉 them are saved, for without Faith and repentance there is no Salvation, but surely 〈◊〉 that have a spark either of Grace, 〈◊〉, or Charity, will venture to think 〈◊〉 all infants are damned. 4. The often mention of men's being baptised, and of their Repentance concludes not 〈◊〉- Baptism unlawful, because when the 〈◊〉 and Christianity were Preached, and 〈◊〉 command of Baptism first given, it found ●any, nay, all Unbelievers most Heathens 〈◊〉 they were Men; now, Heathens were 〈◊〉 to be baptised, because there was no 〈◊〉 to believe them in Covenant, therefore Repentance was necessary as the only ●●●ment of their being in Covenant, and they being in Covenant; now Men must necessarily be baptised when Men, for they could not be born again that they might b● Infants; the case was then as it would be● Ministers in our days should go and Preach to the Indians, their Conversion must necessarily precede their Baptism; and being Converted (their Conversion being an Infallible token of their being in Covenant) they must as necessarily be baptised; and yet this hinders not but that they are in Covenant before their Conversion (as Infant are) may be baptised. Nor. 4. Doth Infants appearing, when the come to Age, to be Unbelievers, argue the they may not be baptised, for they may be in Covenant, though unconverted, Gal may reach their hearts afterwards; beside this would Argue against Circumcision, because many of the Jews proved Revolters 〈◊〉 Apostates; and do not many that are baptise in Man's estate prove so too? Ha●● not our Times given us too many sad instances of it? The next thing I shall do, shall be to l●● down two or three positions about the manner of Baptism; whether by dipping, 〈◊〉 sprinking; and, 1. It is more than probable, that sprinkling is the manner, because it is a Prophecy of Gospel times that Christ shall (sprinkle many Nations) Isa. 52.15. which if it mean not that Christ in Gospel times should bring many Nations into his Church, and in initiating and entering them into his Church, as a Seal or Sign of their being in Covenant, sprinkle them by Baptism: I say, if this be not the meaning of it, or if it be metaphorical, whence but from Baptism the Metaphor should be borrowed, I cannot Imagine. 2. The Apostle Paul (who knew what Baptism was well enough) calls sprinkling baptising, which proves nothing more plainly, then that in his times the way of baptiizing was by sprinkling; that he doth so, is plain from 1 Cor. 10.2. they were all baptised in the Cloud, that is, some dewy drops fell from the Cloud upon them; for to say they were dipoed, or plunged in the ●●nd is too absurd. 3. At the furthest, it is indifferent whether it be by dipping, or sprinkling, because Christ no where says, go, and dip all Nation, but, go, and baptise them; and the word in the Original, is used for washing; new, when any thing is washed water is cast upon it, as is on Infants when they are baptised by sprinkling, nor is it any where used for plunging or dipping in the water; but. 4. It Infants may be baptised, it is not indifferent, whether by sprinkling or dipping, for God rathers Mercy than Sardines, and it were a sin to hazard the Life of Children by dipping, when they may be baptizeds by sprinkling, as they may, if it be indifferent, whether it be done by dipping or sprinkling. 5. Those Expressions in Scripture, of (there was muon water) and that of (going down into the water) conclude nothing but that water was scarce in those hot Countries, and a little water was therefore called much; and that the River lay in a steep place, or at the bottom of an Hill, all so they were fain to go down to it. 6. Circumcision was the cutting off the fore skin of one part of the Body (by a trope for the whole) which yet signified 〈◊〉 Spiritual Circumcision of the whole Soul, Dent. 30.6. God will Circumcise thy Heart, that is, thy Soul, Jer. 4.4. Be Circumcise and take away the fore skins of your Heart. that is, the Original bent and propensity 〈◊〉 your Souls to sin. Now, if Baptism suc●●● Circumcision, than this may also be of out part for the whole, to deaote the washing of the whole S●● from the power and guilt of sin, and what part of the B●●ly is more fi●● 〈◊〉 our Faces, which outing vish us fr●● 〈…〉 other Creatures; and so where chie●● 〈…〉 Image of God lies, the Face wh●● 〈…〉 Perch of the Souls Palace, the Heaad 〈◊〉 the ●es and keeps Court; and thus 〈…〉 with this point. I have not, 〈…〉 the least invective against the People that hold the adverse Opinion, because I have a high esteam for most of them; I have all this while only spoken of the thing, not of the Persons that deny what I here defend, or defend what I deny; only I wish they would not hold that Opinion, or having held it, would do so no longer if any gives them Reason and Scripture to the contrary; but these few Lines I have hastily written only for your own perusal, though such success as the satisfying of you is beyond my hopes. The next Question which you and I Discoursed about, was concerning the Quakers, Persons that pretend to a greater Light, a higher perfection than the inspired Saints, whom God made use of to manifest his will, that in spite of Scripture, which says, (other Foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus, 1 Cor. 3.11.) lay the Foundation of their Faith (if they have any) on a Light within, a Comet instead of that Star that came out of Jacob, Num. 24.17. Jesus Christ. A Light that is king led (I fear) by Hell-fire, prepared for Satan and his Accomplices that sometimes transform themselves into Angels of light; Persons that labour to destroy all the Fundamentals of Christian Religion, of whose Arrogance and Pride their rejecting Sacred Writ is not the least Argument; and therefore if I be a little severe and Satirical against them you must pardon me. The first thing to be considered, is the Light within; the Question than is, Whether there be a Light in every man, which if he follow will lead him to Salvation? That is, whether a Natural Man may be saved, for that which is in every Man is Natural to Men, therefore is this Light be in every Man it goes to the making up of a Natural man; in that the Question is, Whether a Natural man may be saved? I deny it; for, 1. He that knows not the things of God cannot be saved; but the Natural man knows not the things of God, 1 Cor. 2.14. 〈◊〉 man can love, or believe in that which he knows not, nor can any be saved without believing in, and loving Jesus Christ; therefore the Natural man that can none of these things cannot be saved. 2. All men dead in sins and trespasses, and in the state of Nature cannot, notwithstanding any Light they have, be saved; for what Light hath any dead man? and what can he follow that hath no Life? what good Action can he Act, that hath no Principles to Act it from? Now, following a good Light is a good Action, and a man dead in trespasses, sins, hath no good Principle to Act from, for he that hath a principle of Life is not dead in sins, and trespasses, but he that hath a Light within, that will, if followed, lead him to Salvation, hath a principle of Life. Again, they that are in the state of Nature, are unregenerate, for they that are not born again are unregenerate, and they that are not so, cannot see God, John 3.3. And they that are in the state of Nature are not born again, for they that are but once born, are not born again, but they that are in the state of Nature are but once born, and that of the flesh, John 3.6. Now, some men are dead in trespasses and sins, Eph. 2.1. in the state of Nature, Eph. 2.3. Therefore all men have not a Light within which will lead them to Salvation, and if they had, cannot follow it, and therefore not be saved. And Quakers hold they can follow it; if all this be true, than it is as true that there is not a lIght within every man, which if followed, will bring them to Heaven. 3. If there be a Light in every man, it is the Light (that is the knowledge) of Christ or it is not; if they grant that it is the Light of Christ, and deny that it is in every man, for they that are in darkness, or in the dark have no Light; but some (go knows) 〈◊〉 many, and many of them (I fear) that dream of a Light, and think they see, are in darkness, Eph. 5.8. Again, they that have not head of Christ, have not the Light of Christ, 〈◊〉 Faith comes by Hearing, Rom. 10.14. 〈◊〉 But how many in the jodies, and other Hes then parts of the World have not heard of Christ, and so cannot believe in him, can not be saved, Mark 16.16. If they say, it is not the Light of Christ, I deny that if a man follow it he shall be saved, for there is not Salvation in any other, Acts 4.12. Them is no Salvation without believing in Christ, and that he is the Messiah, John 8.24. But as to the Quakers Light in particular. 4. That Light which is not from God cannot save us, but that Light which forbids us doing those things which God in his Word Commands is not, cannot be from God, for that God that is infinitely perfect cannot contradict himself; but the Quakers height bids us leave those Ordinances (as the Sacraments) which God hath Commanded us, if therefore they will reject Scripture, and exalt their Light to be a Rule in its stead, let them bring Miracles that we may believe them Divinely inspired otherwise (nor indeed if they could bring Miracles which they never have done) we can never believe, that that word which Commands the Sacraments is not the word of God, or that God intended they should inst no longer than the rising of their tumulus blazing Stars; nor yet will they (I doubt) work a greater Miracle than they have, namely, that men endued with Reason, should be so foolish, so extremely sottish, as to desert the Word of their great Creator, and substitute in its room their own fond, unreasonable, and unsteady contrite; for sure it is above the power of Nature, and deceit must have a hand in it; but (now, having rescued the Word of God to be still our Rule) if there be a Light in ●●●●y man, etc. the Quakers are no men, for that they have not any Light, I prove thus. 5. They that speak not according to 〈◊〉 Word of God have no Light in them, h●● the Quakers speak not according to 〈◊〉 Word of God, therefore the Quakers, 〈◊〉 all their blazing abroad their imaginable Light, have indeed no Light in them; a●● it is plain that they speak not according 〈◊〉 the Word, from their rejecting the Sarments, and from what shall follow. 1. They deny the Trinity and yet Un●● of God, which I shall prove against th●● with this one Argument, grounded oph●● Scripture, which is this they deviate fr●● Arg. If there be three that bear Record in Heaven, than there are three reasonable Persons, for things without Reason cau●● bear Record to any thing; but there 〈◊〉 three, 1 John 5.7. That these three are Col●● is plain, for unless they differ in Nature 〈◊〉 being God) from the Saints, there 〈◊〉 more than three that bear Record in Hoven, (viz.) the Angels and Saints T●● the Father is God none denies, that 〈◊〉 Son is God, I prove thus; He that 〈◊〉 from Everlasting, before the Creation, my be God; for if he was not God, than he 〈◊〉 Crealed, and if he was Created, he 〈◊〉 not before the Creation, but Jesus Cl●●, the Essential Word of God (by which the World was made) was from everlasting and before the Creation, Prov. 8.22.23 and throughout the Chapter. That the Holy Ghost is God, I prove by the same Argument; He that was before the Creation, and is part of God (if I may have leave 〈◊〉 speak so for our better understanding) is God; but the Spirit of God was before the Creation, Gen. 1.2. if he was not, then but was Created, and if so, than a part of God (give me leave to use the expression) was Created, and so was God partly Created, and partly uncreated; an absurd piece of Blasphemy that would introduce a composition of such imperfection into the Nature of God, for then one part of God was created by the other part, whereas nothing (not part of God) but an infinite, wholly perfect God can Create; then also God would not be Eternal wholly, but a part of him ●●ly, and so would not be God; and he that cannot press his Faith to believe such ●●inconceivable piece of Blasphemous nonsense, so much more un-intelligible than that, great and tremendous Mystery I am now speaking of, must first do the greatest violence imaginable to his own faculties, and all this to damn for ever, damn his precious and immortal Soul: what shall we think of them then, I mean those foolish (I had most said) Devilish Quakers, that make light a matter of denying this wonder Mystery, and think themselves very 〈◊〉 and sccure from the judgement of God, wh● with a mighty Pride and disdain they ●ab●● to overthrow all the Principles of Relig 〈◊〉 but to return, if then there be three 〈◊〉 sons, and these three are God, and th●● three are-one, 1 John 5.7. Then there 〈◊〉 three Persons, and yet but 〈◊〉 God. 〈◊〉 next thing that they speak not according the Word of God, is, 2. That a man may be absolutely 〈◊〉 in this Life, that is, that he 〈◊〉 fulfil the commands of God without the least 〈◊〉 for he that sins at all is therefore impense I deny it. 1. Because if all do offend in many th●● than all are not perfect in every thing, 〈◊〉 all do offend in many things, James 3●●. That the Apostle speaks this of all Christi●● in general is so plain, that it need no pr●●● however it cannot be denied, but he spe●●● it of all the Christians in these times, and to what a high degree of ostentation ha● those men's good conceits of themselves ●●●ried them, that will dare to give the inspan Apostle the lie, or prefer themselves bes●● 〈◊〉 the Christians of these times, who were ●●●●ted by our dear Saviour himself, water●● by his dear Apostles, and to whem his 〈◊〉 our Heavenly Father guve the Increase. 2. If we have no 〈◊〉, we have no 〈◊〉 of Christ's Mediatien, 〈…〉, and the like; and if once we 〈…〉 ●ad will our Condition be? If 〈…〉 have while to Price themselves in 〈◊〉, much good may it do theth; for my pa●●, been willing, and I think every good Christian is so a degree beyond content, to gloriy in such needs, wants, and Infirmities, especially having the great Apostle for our Companion, 2 Cor. 11.30. And I wish these men's so great Civility to themselves do not a length Convert that foolish imaginary light they so much talk of, into everlasting senes in an Eternal Hell. 3. We cannot confessed and pray for formeness of that we have not, but we are to confess and pray for forgiveness of sins, therefore we have sin, Mat. 6.12. Luke 13. 〈◊〉 ●●ames 3.16. 1 John 1.9. 4. We cannot Live or Act but according to our knowledge, but we know the will of God but in part, 1 Cor. 13.12. therefore we do it, or live up to it but in part; now, what's done only in part, is not done perfectly, therefore we cannot do the Wi●●● God perfectly, and are poor imperfect O●● turts; whatever the Quakers are, not be sedious, I refer you to these follow Scriptures, 1 Kings 8.46. Ecsl. 11. 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 4.16. Gal. 5.17. there are none a conceited of themselves, as to think th●● are without sin, but those men that l●● upon themselves with their own 〈◊〉 Lights, now, if I can but prove that 〈◊〉 are not perfect, either poor humble S●●● will need no proof but their own exper●●ces, and therefore thus I attempt it. 5. They that deceive themselves, 〈◊〉 have not the Truth in them, are not perfect but sinful, but the Quakers do streno●●● deceive themselves, and the Truth is it 〈◊〉 them which I prove thus; they that 〈◊〉 they have no fin, deceive themselves, and the Truth is not in them, 1 John 1.8. But the Quakers do so; therefore the Quakers are not perfect, but sinful Creatnes as w●● as we. I know their usual Reasons is ri●●● do not say they have no sin, but they do●●● obey it. To which I answer, they the transgress the Law of God, not only ha●● sin, but obey sin, but they that sin transgress the Law, because sin is a transgression of 〈◊〉 Law, 1 John 3.4. and can a man have transgression of the Law, and not Trans●●● is it 〈◊〉 I cannot see how it's possible; and doubt whether I shall ever, unless by their light. So that these men, for all their ●●at pretences, do sin (as much, shall I 〈◊〉?) or most abundantly more than almost the worst of Persons out of their Number, which who that knows any of them well, knows not, how much more doth God? 〈◊〉 to that petty tonement about saluting, was so simple a one, being confuted by the whole corrent of Scripture, that it would ●●ue nothing but Vanity, and little to do ●●ay to spend his time upon it. I shall only say this therefore; If we ought not only is Salute our Friends, but others, than Sa●●●ation is not only Lawful, but our Duty, 〈◊〉 we ought to Salute, not only our Friends, but others, Mas. 5.47. Now, if Salutation he Lawful, and pulling off Hats, and ●●●ing Courtesies (which are kinds of Sa●●●tion) be unlawful, it must certainly be a beach of the eleventh Commandment, for I am sure it is not of any of the rest: So much for that Vanity. There is one other that vies folly with this, and that is the Religion's Ciritisms of (thou and you) which because they are of the same foolish complexion with the former, I shall 〈◊〉 salu●● them, and so take my leave; 〈◊〉 therefore. 1. If we find (you) used to one Perf●●● in Scripture we may use it; but (you) used to one Person in Scripture, Job 18.2.3. But, 2. To strive about this is to strive wh●● speaks best English, it is not contended who speaks most Holily, but who most Englishly; and we care not much if we a●●●● them to be better English men, though perhaps we might be quit with them, if 〈◊〉 should call to mind some other of their 〈◊〉 osms, but let them be better English m●●● they are not at all the more Religious 〈◊〉 that, unless every good Christian must 〈◊〉 cessarily be a good English man, and, then must not allow them of other Nation though they were Quakers, the named Christians. If they are better critics, the English Tongue, they are no nearer Haven than the top of Babel, than we that 〈◊〉 securely at the bottom; and yet surely we being nothing else but the expressions of 〈◊〉 mind, while others know what we nie●● when we say (you) to them, it being 〈◊〉 usual way of expression we speak as g●●● English as they. It's strange, that signify●● our will to others should be no sin, and yet saying (you) which is an expression of our thoughts to another should be one; if you glease therefore this shall be a breach of the twelfth Commandment, but these are trifles wothy of none, and unbecoming any but Persons given up to Vanity and Follym, and left by God to follow me Light of their own Fires. It remains that I briefly Answer or ●evernt some Objections usually made; I shall choose the latter way, because its more ●●●pendious, and therefore shall lay down 〈◊〉 or three positions concerning the Light within that may serve to prevent their Arguments in defence of it. 1. Where the Scripture says, there is a Licks within every man, it says no more than what we grant, for we acknowledge, and ●●ss, God for it, that every man is en●●ed with the Light of Reason and Consciture? Only we think that these Quakers ●●e the least Portion, and that makes them ●●k so much of it, like them that Live where ●ere is half year Nights, or like a blind man ●at wonders what the Light is which he ●es but very darkly, and so talks of it the ●●re; if they will have Scripture to savour 〈◊〉 Opinion, they must show us where it 〈◊〉 not only that there is a Light in every man, but that there is such a Light in every man, which if he follow, will save him. 2. Where Scripture says, that Christ enlgihtens every man coming into the World, John 1.9. It says not more than what we grant, for all the Mercres we have outward, as the Light of the Sun, and inward, as the Light of Reason, and Conscience, we acknowledge to come to us by Jesus Christ, by virture of the Eternal Compact made between the Father and him, that he should come and Redeem the fallen, decayed, corrupted, and (by the Fall of Adam) cursed world and thus Christ Lightens every Man wi●● the Sun, Reason, and Conscience, and only new man, and Member of the new C●●ation with the Light of saving Grace, it behoves them to prove by Scripture that this Light by which Christ enlightens every man, will (if followed) lead them to Salvation and withal that it's any more than this, that Christ enlightens every man that is enlgitned, besides that this proves not that them is a light in every man, but that every man is enlightened. 3. That in Luke 17.21. (the Kingdom of God is within you) hath nothing in it for the Quakers tenement, for, what mention is here of a light within that will bring al● that follow it to Heaven? None at all; It's evident from the context, that by (the Kingdom of God) is meant the times when the Messiah should be revealed, and his Kingdom come, so that the meaning is no more than this, The Messiah is come, and he is among you, or within you, that is, within the Jewish Nation. The next thing I shall do, is to lay down some positions that may prevent some Objections about perfection; and to that end. 1. Those Proofs in Scripture that mention I perfection by an Imputed Righteousness, God's looking upon Believers as perfect, through the merits of Christ, doth not prove thsolute perfection, but the cvontrary, because he that needs another's Righteousness ●ath no perfect Righteousness of his own, otherwise he would not need another's. 2. Those Proofs that exhort to perfection brove not perfection attainable in this life, no more than those that exhort us to seek Heaven, that Heaven is attainable in this life. 3. Those Proofs that mention a Compatative Righteousness in respect of others, prove not an absolute Righteousness, for that which is Comparative only, is not absolute. 4. Those Proofs that mention a constant Trade in sin, and free Believers from that, do not therefore free them from some 〈◊〉 of Innrmity, and more especially that Proof, 1 John 3. 〈◊〉. The word in the Original signi●es to make a Trade of ●n, and to no tree behever ●●th, ●●t every Believer 〈◊〉 sometimes over-taken with sins of weakness, and if he say be hatin to sin, he hath no Truth in 〈…〉. Behever; but he conses, his 〈…〉 with the Father; to one of taese four positions you may tedure all your Proofs for Perfection, and because 〈…〉 low, I care not if I fill 〈…〉 Paper with one word to their silert meeting, and 〈◊〉 more than they themselves will ali●●● them. That which ten●s not to Edification is not to be cone, 1 Cor. 14.20. (Let all 〈◊〉 done to edifying) and this place is the more to 〈◊〉 need, because it is spoken patt●oulatly of their Meetings; now, how People can I lifie, or do one another good by con●●●g a Company of them into the saint 〈…〉 any 〈…〉 ●ther warm 〈…〉 Charnis●● Cornjuriations them 〈◊〉 needs have more light than Ordian●●● 〈…〉 aiting thee the Apostles were Commanded, Acts 1.4. can patronise this, they must prove that the Apostles stayed in the sune Chami●●r all the while, that they said nothing, as it's everant they did, v. 15. and wh●n that is done, they must evening, all the 〈◊〉 of them, and make a silent Meeting, which shall continue as long as the Apostles old, and by that time they will be as willing to break up their Meeting as I am to 〈◊〉 have writing And if that place (be hent all Flesh) prove any thing to this purpose, it proves more that they are never to speak at all; and if they will do this, with all my heart: we shall have less (thouing) and d●●nding other Meetings, as was the manner of the men, however this willing prevails with me so far as to make me now silent, and rest Your Loving Cousin. Honoured Cousin, etc.— WE are tied to Love each other by a threefold Cord; as we are Cousins, as we are Friends, and as we are Christians; the last of them (Christianity) is (as I take it) the most firm and insoluble tye. It is that (if our profession of it be sincere, without Hypocrisy, and Found done a Principle of Grace) which will be our Comfort, Joy, and Solace, when our Friends, our Relations, our Riches, yea, our Lives will leave us. God hath been Teaching you and 〈◊〉 by Experience that Lesson which Solomon 〈◊〉 often inculcates, All is Vanity and Vexation of Spirit; that we cannot choose but have it by heart by this time: There is no so●●● Peace, no Tranquillity, no rest, no security in any thing but Christ, and an Interest in him. We have known the Vanity of Fridns, and how their promises have died, and been buried with our Parents: We have also seen Riches take to themselves Wings, and fly away with th' Love and Promises of our Parents Friends on their backs: And as for our-present dying Lives, Divien Providence hath most abundantly displayed and manifested to us the vanity and frailty thereof, when our Fathers and Mothers, and almost all but ourselves are gone, and have taken their last leave of this vain and miserable World; and left us to grapple with all the fierce fiery Temptations wherewith the Devil shall assault our Souls, and all the Afflictions and Troubles that (like our shadows) shall continually follow our Bodies; what remains therefore, but that we seriously set us about that great work of eternal Concernment, examining ourselves what progress we have made in our Journey to Heaven; how far we are gone towards Happiness, or whether we are gone any thing at all; how great the work we have to do, is, and how short the time we have to do it in: and why should we (unless because the Devil will have it so) be backward in Catechising ourselves about these things, things that so much comport with reasonable Souls, things too that so loudly call for the greatest and exactest care; for methinks there is so much of Reason in Religion and Piety, and so much of it wanting in Irreligion and Luxury, that there is none at all in them that choose the way of sin, whatever Joy or Encouragement it may vainly promise them, before Grace and Virtue, though clothed in Rags, and attended with the greatest Misery the World can lay upon them, what pleasure can there be in Vice? Or what delight in sin? Is there any thing in them Consonant to the generous Principles of Reason, or to those more generous Principles of real Happiness? Can there be any thing taking in Gluttony, Drunkenness, or Luxury, in which we are most experienced and perfect, we have but very fairly converted ourselves into Beasts that perish, and turned ourselves a grazing (like Nabuchadnezzar) with the Beasts of the Field? A brave Commendation for a Reasonable Soul! For indeed, if we do but obey that other half ofour selves (our Reasonable Souls) and yield to its dictates, we shall soon be convinced that there is a God; for could the World, so glorious a Fabric, being of a Compound Nature, make itself before it was? Can eachpart come together without some Mover? Or could each part move before it was? Can it bear the rest of the most curious and Critical Reason, and be found to be exactly Consonant to the highest Reason, and yet be made by something that had no Reason at all! It must then be either Created, or Eternal; and if it were Eternal, it is very strange that we should have no Records, no Chronicles of any Persons or their Actions before Adam: That the World should be doing nothing from Eternity till six thousand years ago is more incredible than the greatest error in Religion; and if they did any thing, it is as strangely, so that we should never hear of it: And why those Persons (the Egyptians) that pretend to the highest Antiquity, do yet acknowledge a beginning; why no particular Being's (that God we erve excepted) did erect, or could with any shadow of Reason assert themselves Eternal without making themselves the objects of the greatest Ridicle and Laughter? Or why no particular Nation or People have ever claim a right to the highest Antiquity (viz. Eternity) Or, lastly, why Eternity must (when nothing eel can) exist only in Universals and Generals, and not in Particulars, or Individuals, are all Paradoxes beyond belief incredible. If then there be a God (as it is Infallibly certain there is) and if he hath Created us, it is a Natural, and most reasonable Inference that he should be adored and Worshipped: how disingenuous should we be, if instead of serving him, we should take those Courses that are most displeasing in his eyes, as the least sin, and the most minute vice is; and if he must be Worshipped, it is all the Reason in the World he should acquaint us how, and that we can no way know but as he is pleased to reveal his Will by his word, the Scriptures; and therefore it is your and my safest way to Regulate our Devotions, and all our Actions by his Word. If we should not Worship him according to his Word, according to what else should we? Is it not most probable, that God would rather appoint us our way of Worship i● his Word, then hazard us to he vain Traditions and uncertain dictates of a fallible, though Roman Church? Is it not more safe to follow the Word ofGod than the Commands of Idolatrous Men, under what plausible Titles soever they go? How far therefore the Great, Infallible, and Massy men of our days are out, when they are so importunate with us to serve God according to their Fanatic Breviaries, and yet will not give us leave to Worship him according to his Word, without the imputation of Heretics, is soon discerned by one with half an Eye. We Live (Dear Cousin we Live in Times and Places that it is but Ordinary to hear men talk in Company against the Being of a God, and cry down Religion as a vain and Melancholy fancy; and others make as light of the Word of God as the former do of God; and therefore we had need be well principled in Religion, and know the grounds and Reasons of our Faith against the Huffing Atheists on the one hand, and the proud and imposing Papacy on the other. To my desire that we might be so, impute this large a Harangue. And now I am sufficiently sensible how tedious I have been, how much I need your pardon, and hoping that you will grant it, you shall rest, and I remain Yours, etc. Appendix. I AM not Ignorant of Mr. Danve●s his Book against Infant-Baptism, nor of others about Quakerism, and against Atheism, that have come ou● since these Letters were written, which I have neither time, leisure, nor necessity to take notice of, however, upon that Account, perhaps, it my be needful to add a word o● two concerning each point: Concerning infants born in Covenant, and so having a right to the sign of it, I offer this Argument further, when the Jews are called (which most of our Brethren do believe) either their Children shall be the Subjects of the sign of the Covenant or not; if they shall, than our Children are so now, and this sign must be either Baptism or Circumcision, but not the latter, therefore the former; if not, than it is as plain as th' Sun at Noon day, that they will want a privilege which they had before the coming of Christ; which was theirs before the giving out of the Ceremonial Law; and therefore not p●●t of i●, and before the distin●●● between J●r an● Gentle, and therefore not prope● to the Jews (though the●● and that God 〈◊〉 give a sign that he will 〈◊〉 Covenant, or the Grace of the Covenant of Grace to ●●me more o●●●oner than others, or that he will enter them into any part (though but the outward) of it, is (one would think) a great privilege. And whether t●as p●ece of Superstition may ●ot be an Obstacle and hindrance to the Co●●●rsion of the Jews, as at this day the Idolatry of the Bom●●n●s●● is, I leave it to the judicious, and unprejudiced to consider. For the f●rther obviating that tri●e & plausible objection, What command have you ●or Infant-Baptism? Bring me one plain Scripture Precept for it without Consequences; is not Believers Baptism plainly Commanded Go, and Teach all Nations, Baptising them? 1. Take notice, that it is granted by us that Believers Baptism is clearly Commanded, but not that only: Insant-Baptism is no less so, we are for Believers Baptism, and only for that in the same Case that Christ and his Apostles were, if the Go●p●● were Preached amongst Heathens, or the like, but (supposing the Text to be understood in their confined sense of Men and Women, or Believers only) our case 〈◊〉 not the same now, and therefore the Argument will not hold. But, 2. Here is no plain Command for Baptising Men and Women, no, nor Believ● without a Consequence, for here is no m●●tion of Men or Women, or Believers; b●● some such Argument must be framed, and we must draw some such Consequence 〈◊〉 Conclusion as these; only they that are, ●●pable of being Taught, or only those that receive the Teachings of Christ and his M●●sters are to be Baptised, but Men and Wom●● or Believers only are so, therefore they only are to be Baptised. And now, my good Friends, where is your Plain Scripture Proof for the Baptising of Men and Women, or Believers without Consequences? Or, if you could produce it for that, were for them only; we desire leave therefore f●● your further Conviction (if you please) to retort your question upon you, where is your Plain Command? Answer it, if you can, yet, 3. I humbly conceive that Text, M●● 28, 19, 20. is a plainer, and more direct Command for Baptising Children than Men and Women, which (besides that the meaning of it (if my former assertions should not hold) seems very fairly without any wresting and distortion of it, to be this, As before my Coming you have given Circumcision the then Sign of the Covenant, to the l●ws, and their Children; so now give Baptism (which I appoint for the future to be a Sign of the Covenant) to the Gentiles (all Nations) upon their accepting of the Covenant (which she Jews reject) and to their Children.) ●esides this, I say, I attempt to prove thus. That place which Commands Baptism before Teaching doth not directly and plainly Command Men and Women to be Baptised, for they are to be taught before they be Baptised; but this doth so. Baptise, in the 19 v. and then Teach, in the 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Teach by Instructing, and our Brethren know very well, for they contend that the Teach, in the 19 v. is not rightly rendered, but should e Translated Disciple, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) or make Disciples, or Scholars; now, we know Children are sent to School, not because they have Learned, but that they may Learn, they are truly Scholar's as soon as they are entered into the School, and given up to the Care and Tuition of the Master, before they have leard a Letter: so Children are entered into the Church of Christ, (and Baptisin is, as is were, their entrance money) before they learned any Lession, when they are solement given up, and devoted by their Partents to Je2us Christ; and if it be granted that Infants may be Baptised as soon as they an capable of Learning any of the Commands of Christ, and so may be Scholars indeed; this grant will overthrow our Baptised brethren's Opinion. See here theresore my good Friends, a plainer Command for the Baptising of Children than you hay for Baptising Men and Women. Councerning the Second Dispute, it may be thought I am too tart, and Satyrical against the poor Quakers; if I am so any where, I desire to be understood of the censorious, the wilfully Ignorant, the haughty, the persect of them, such as that Quking Pope, George Fox, with whom it is at impossible to Write calmly and Christianly as it is to Writ Sense. I have a great deal of Charity for many of those People who walk according to their Light, and are not tainted with the Socinian Mysteries of the Trade; such I hope there are amongst them; and I am for Union, even here also, so as to keep up an a micable correspondence with them, that we may Live Civil and unictly together like Men and Christians, without damning, infesting, and railing at death other. I know the Ingenious and Nobly-designing Author of the Asiddle-wayes hath studiously attempted a Reconciliation between us about Perfection: but I fear they will not be content with an Allowance of an Evanelical, unless he grant them also a Legal Perfection; against which my Arguments and Discourse about that point altogether militate. I must add one word further, with Respect to the Second Letter, against Atheism, and particularly concerning the Eternity of the World, which I take to be the surest and strongest Refuge of the Atheist, if he can maintain it; and for this reasion I am apt to think the new Philosophy hath not deferved so ill of Divines as the Old; but neally merits more civil entertainment than she usually meets with: it being much the easier Province to prove that the World is not the Product of the Concourse, or jumblement of Atoms, than its Non-Eternity against this grand Fancy of the Atheist, I offer these two Arguments. Ad Hominem. 1. That which is imperceptible, (not a be perceived) by the Senses, is not, but the Eternity of the World is imperciptible, neither to be seen, felt, heard, nor smelled; if the former Assertion be false, then doch the Atheists great Objection against the Baing of a God, or a Soul falls to the grount; if the latter be true, then oh you Atheistion Clubs, where alone is the constant Reldence of Wit. Oh, you at are the grey and only Wittist; of the Age, you that has so long ago engrossed to yourselves all reason, and had the Monopoly of all Ingenuity; for Love (who is your only Deity) I say, for Love's sake, produce one of your great Racierinose's, some Mighty Leviathan it Rea2on, (for you are all so;) some presound Admirer of Dame Nature, your Leving Mother and Mistress too, that shall irrefragably demonstrate the Eternity of the World by Sense, and tell us boldly, and bravely (for that he may as well as that there is no God) that he hath often seen (and admired we may be sure) that great Beauty, Eternity of the World: and heard her play the most melodious Music that over was heard. If there be any other Principle of Reasoning besides Sense, what is it? How came we to have that knowledge that never came by our Senses, (I mean, by being the Objects of them) or those Notions which we are sure Sense could never teach us? What reason can your Witnesses give, why she should not have an insenlible, or immaterial pringiple of discerning, as well as a material, or corporeal Principle of Sensing, or perceiving by the Senses. But if you will needs have it so, that there is noshing but what is seen, and nothing else is to be believed to be: then produce the Eternity of the World, and let us also see and admire her. 2. If the World be Eternal, all the parts of it are so, or some parts only: not the former, for we see Living Creature which are it's Noblest parts, have their Beginning, not the latter; for if any parts are Eternal, the chiefest and best parts, and for whose use the World is, are so. But this is false. Man, who is the Noblest part, we see, step into the World, and die before our Faces. We see him both begin and end his Life, and are therefore sure by the Atheists one Arguments of sense, that he is not Eternal. And the Atheist is very well satisfied that there is never a Being better than himself. We see no man comes into the World without a Cause, nor can there be any Reason given, why any one man should be without a Cause, or Eternal, and not the rest; there is no such thing as Humane Nature, our of an Individuum, or a particular Person; and therefore Man, or Humane Nature could not be Eternal by any Succelsion of Men, or Humane Nature un individuated; if then there be no Humane Person or judividuum Eternal, Humane Nature cannot be so; And if Man was not Eternal, to what purpose should the Sun, Moon, Stars, or Earth be so? Since we see plainly that all these things are (however it comes about) for the use of Man, since the Chiel est and Noblest parts of the World, which we do know are temporal, and hare had a beginning; why may we not conclude that those things we do not know are so too, and did we but know them as well as we do these, we should as little dispute whether they had a beginning, as we de now whether men, Beasts, Cities, etc. have. The Father is Eternal (without Beginning) to the Child, because he was in the Work before, and he did not see him come in● it. The Atheist, because God made and Furnished a World for him before he made him, disputes against God, and because the World was before him, he will therefore needs conclude, that it was always. How much more would he have been displeased if God has made him when there was no World, and sent him into a naked Nothing. The World than is not Eternal, and if it be not, than it is made either by a fortuitious concourse of Atoms, that is, by Chance or Fortune; or by an Infinitely perfect, powerful, and wise Being, that is, by God, not by Chance or Fortune, for that is nothing; there is no such thing in Rerum Naturae, and can we imagine all things to be made by nothing? If not, than God made the World, and he will as surely judge it. I have now done; only give me leave, I pray you, oh you Protestants of differing Judgements, most especially Presbyterians, Independents, and Anabaptists, though you differ in Matters of Church-Government, or about the Timing or Subjects of Baptism, yet in the Name of the Eternal God let me beg of you, Cement, Cement, Love one another more, bear with one another's Ignorance (we all know but in part) and pardon each others Imperfections. Cannot you have different apprehensions of the things of God, but you must dishonour him, disgrace Religion, disparage Holinest, and envy one another? What means your so great absenting yourselves from one another's Meetings? Why must you have only such Preachers of your own Party to Preach at your Lectures, and not some of all? Why when Doctor or Minister such a one comes up, and severally; his Auditiors, especially Ministers, of his own Party only? And why again, when Doctor or Minister, such a one comes up, the Scene it changed, and behold, a new set of Faces! Doth not God bear with your Ignorance, and will not you bear with one another's? Doth not he Love you, though he very well knows that you neither know, nor do what you ought? and cannot you do the same for one another? It is dreadful to think what heats, and heart-burnings! what Jealousies and surmises! what scorn and Contempt! what Reproaching and backbiting, vilifying & defaming there is amongst you, one against another! Will you never leave these things? Or could you have thought ten or eleven years ago when you Prayed, Preached, and heard together in corwded Corners, when you mourned and Fasted together, when you be wailed together the sins of your Prosperity, your Animosities, your contentions, Pride, and self-interestedness: oh, could you then have thought, or would you have believed, if one had told you that so soon, within so few years, you would have stood aloof off, and looked askew upon one another, as now (God and the World knows) you do? Have you forgot, and have you already forgot when the Almighty saw your Tears trickling down your Cheeks for your Divisions, when he heard your Promises, your Vows, that you would Reform and Unite? And have you so soon broke all? Will you yet return, with the Dog, to his Vomit, and lick up your bitter choler one against another, and then Vomit it up again in each others Faces? Is this the course you intent always to take? Will you always run in this dreadful Round, this Devilish Conjuring Circle, and raise yet more storms upon yourselves? Will you go on to wrest yet greater Judgements out of the hands of God's Mercy upon yourselves, your Nation, and the so rent, torn, and divided Church of God? will you never have done biting, and backbiting each other? I know you do sometimes confess these your divisions, but alas! what will that avail, if you Reform not? I know too you sometimes Preach and Pray, and Discourse, and that with seeming warmth for Unity, but then 〈◊〉 it comes to proctice, and your Notions are to be●●●● duced to Action, than you fall back; and what 〈◊〉 this avail? Shall What is he? What Party is he of 〈◊〉 always the great and most weighty Question that me 〈◊〉 turn the Scale of Respect or ? Shall it 〈◊〉 ever be the Character of the Non-Conformists, 〈◊〉 Lord deliver every good Christian from it. Do you long to be hurtied together into Prisons again? W●●● no place Unite you, but a nasty Dungeon? N●●● thing Sodder you but Persecution? Oh beware 〈◊〉 ware, you provoke not the Almighty God to lash you again; the next time he may Chastise you with Fa● gets, with Scorpions, with Devils; and do not thin, if once you are under Hathces again, that a few colloguing sighs, Prayers, or Promises shall redeem you yet may e'er long (you know not how soon) be deing Penance together in Popish Llmbo's, gawky to ●● ther under the sad Yoke of their Pressing Sevention, and hatrssed with their unmerciful Mortificalors. Nay, who knows but you may e'er long be cahaled gether into Heaven out of a fiery Chaniot ●●● I agg as? And is it for you thus to stand at a distance from, thes to gnaw and bate one another? And when not you 〈◊〉, Pray, and hear together? God for hid! Ah! my Bre hrens, it you have any love so God, who ●● by these things dishonoured, any teny derness for your own Souls, that are by these thing so much hazarded; any pity for the distressed Churel of God that lie bleeding; any Compassion for you Native Land that is e'en quite Ruined & undone; of any regard for your Posterity, follow, and follow has after Unity; if you will not, the Lord be Merciful to us! FINIS.