A SCOURGE FOR George Whitehead. An Apostate Quaker: An Espouser of Doctrines and Practices tending to Romish-like Bondage: A Persecuting Defamer of the Real Christian-Quaker: A Public Informer against William Pen, to his Defamation: The Author of a Scandalous Book, (written against my Seventh Part of the Christian-Quaker, etc.) Styled, Judgement Fixed, etc.  
THe Impartial Reader perusing the two Books, out of which the ensuing Doctrines are collected, may easily be convinced that G. W. (if he wanted not Scholarship) might (as Author of one, and Approver of tother) sooner obtain Preferment at Rome, than amongst the real Christian Quakers.  
He owns himself to be a Member of a Weekly Meeting, held in London, termed, a Second-days Meeting: The said Meeting have approved R. B's Book of Government, which pretends to show, [R. B's Anarchy; Title Page] That, the Ancient, Apostolic Order of the Church of Christ is Reestablished amongst the People called Quakers. And on that foot treats on the Order and Government pleaded for by him and his Brethren: Notwithstanding one part of the said People disown all Pretences to the Outward Establishment of, or Subjection to any Outward pretended established Government over themselves, as a Society of People; (that only excepted, wherein Charles the Second now Reigns King of England, etc.) having proved a pretence to an established Government, I shall next note some Doctrines; which, as applicable to the Governors, are very pernicious.  
First, G. W. in his Apostate Incendiary, pag 16. thus asserts; I affirm, that 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 Hypocrisy to profess ourselves Members thereof. And in the same page further saith) That he who seems to own the Church of Christ as a member of her, and yet tells the world that 'tis a most dangerous position that we are to believe as the Church believes, is a treacherous Enemy to the Church of Christ.  
Secondly, 'Tis averred on the behalf of the Church, That they have power to decide and remove differences arising between themselves touching outward things, and on that occasion assert, not that the assent of parties differing aught first to be obtained, and therefore the power asserted is absolute, and the sentence in Pursuance thereof, definitive; since no appeal is declaratively admitted. See R. B's. Anarchy, pag. 39  
Thirdly, In R. B's. Anarchy, page 48, 'tis thus written; ' Whether the Church of Christ have power in cases that are matters of conscience, to give positive sentence or decision, which may be obligatory upon believers? The Answer is in these words. I answer affirmatively she hath.  
Fourthly, In R. B's. Anarchy, pag. 68, 'tis thus asserted; There never will, nor can be wanting in case of controversy, the Spirit of God to give Judgement, through some or other, in the Church of Christ, so long as any Assembly can properly, or in any tolerable supposition, be so termed. Secondly, that God ordinarily hath employed such, whom he hath made use of in gathering his Church, though not excluding others. Thirdly, That their, de facto, giving a positive Judgement in such cases, will not import Tyranny & Usurpation, neither will the pretences of any contradicting them, or refusing to submit on the account they see it not, excuse them of being guilty of disobeying God.  
What greater Door can be opened to blind obedience? and yet the aforesaid doctrines are Vindicated by G. W. and his brethren, under the Notion of being the Church of Christ, and so consequently invested with the authority before asserted, but the actions of some of George Whiteheads brethren espoused by him, have proved them to have been the Synagogue of Satan; and therefore on due consideration of the preceding Citations, may not an honest man of the Church of England reasonably thus say unto my adversaries? How unjust have you been in representing our Church as being kin to the Church of Rome for a small Ceremony, and yet have had the impudence to account yourselves defamed, when justly compared to her? Doth it not now appear that your Principles smell too rank of Popery; and that not in a Ceremony or some little Circumstance, but in Doctrine, whereby the very life and props of the Romish See and Power (opposed by Reformed Protestants,) is asserted and vindicated. Thus much as to G. W. and his brethren's Doctrine.  
Before I speak of the Practical Part of their Religion, I shall put the Reader in mind that where outward forcible Power is wanting; a false Church cannot seize the Body and Estate: No thanks therefore to G. W. etc. who wanting such power, do not so do. The Church of Rome though invested with outward power was not guilty of that, until such time she promulgated such kind of Doctrine as before is cited; and that with application to herself, even as G. W. etc. terming themselves the Church of Christ, designs these with application to themselves, and not to advance either the Pope or Church of Rome.  
Having thus premised, I shall add a few instances of a lower sort of Persecution being the utmost that G. W. and his brethren are capable to inflict, viz. Excommunications, or what imports the same, together with Notorious Undeserved Defamations being one Practical Part of their Religion.  
J. B. by a Meeting in London was Excommunicated so far as Excommunication can be imported, by these words, viz. That we do not only testify against that Spirit which hath, as aforesaid, led him into that disorderly Practice, but also against him whilst joined thereunto, nor can we have Spiritual Communion and Fellowship with him, until unfeignedly he shall return unto the Truth by Condemnation of that work and spirit. See F. B. de Christiana Libertate. p. 198, 199. Note the disorderly Practice and Work was (as their paper expressly signifies) his dispersing into several Parts of this Nation my Books, styled the Christian Quaker. But in their Paper they do not insert one sentence thereof, as demonstration, that the Book was erroneous. Oh deed of darkness! And though they exhorted him, when before them, to condemn what he had done, and read some Objections to part of the Book; yet refused to give him Copy thereof, though frequently demanded by him; further adding as an inducement to answer his demand, that if he found the Objections to be as they said, he should readily join with them in condemning what ever should appear to be evil.  
G. W. and his brethren, vindicate a Paper given forth by C. M. and 65 more against John Wilkinson and John Story, proved in my seventh part of my Christian Quaker, pag. 22 to be worse in some respect than the Bull of Leo against Martin Luther. My words on that occasion are as followeth. In the Paper given forth by C. M. and 65 more against John Wilkinson and John Story, treated on in the second part of the Christian Quaker. pag. 92. 'tis thus said, And we do hereby reprove and judge that Jealous Rending and separate spirit, and them (meaning J. W. and J. S.) and their separate Company, and that by the spirit and power of God, and we warn all unto whom this comes to beware of the said J. S. and J. W. whose way at present, is not the way of peace. Whosoever peruseth the said paper may perceive it in some respect much like the Bull given forth by Pope LEO, the tenth Anno 1520. against M. Luther, but yet in one m●in poin● greatly differs. For in the Bull against M. L. there are 42 Articles of Doctrine condemned, and ●…e Bull ordered to be read in every place to the intent that the ma●ter for which he was prosecuted, as an Heretic, might be known; but in the aforesaid Paper subscribed by C. M. etc. there is no mention of any particular Doctrine or Viciousness in life for which they are persecuted by their brethren, but instead thereof these general Recriminations, viz. That they have evil designs and persevere in them, by word, writing, and Practice, etc. See also more on this Subject in the second part of my Christian Quaker, pag. 80. Haddit G. W's. brethren (whose practice against J. W. and J. S. he hath vindicated) been but as plain as Leo was, the spiritual Cheat would have long since been more obvious: and though G. W. in his Judgement Fixed, pag. 16.17. takes notice of the above comparison, yet amidst all his pretences to Divinity and Law, the greatest arguments brought by him to invalidate the force of the said comparison, are these ensuing Questions, viz. And is not this matter of fact to set up a Standard of separation? Where then is his comparison between Pope LEO the tenth and US, and how was the Pope's Proceed more just? For these impertinent questions I may reckon with him a little more anon.  
Next, take an instance of one amongst many more of his Notorious Lies, pag. 59 he thus saith, Seeing W. R. esteems the Popes (yea even the worst of them) good enough to bring us in comparison with, and to cite and make them as instance against us; as Leo the tenth, pag. 6.22. Pope Paul the third, pag. 19 and 28. Julius the third pag. 31. it may not be amiss to give some description of these Pope's according to a late History or Abstract of the lives of the Popes printed Anno 1679. (and then G. W. proceeds to signify that Leo was ranked amongst Atheists. That Paul the Third was ranked amongst Magicians, Conjurers, Warryers', Bloodsuckers, Parricides, Jmpoysoners and Favourites, of Whores. That Julius the Third was ranked amongst Sodomites (adding instances to prove them such and having so done, doth, pag. 55. thus query) What worse Persons upon Earth, could our Adversary have compared G. F. and our Friends unto, or brought in comparison against them in Church Procceding or Spiritual Censures, Behold his horrid Injustice and Envy.  
Instead of a large Comment on this notorious Falsehood I shall transcribe what I wrote in my seventh Part of the Christian Quaker wherein the Names of Pope Paul, and Pope Julius are inserted, and leave G. W. to be further corrected by his Brethren, according to his merit.  
Pag. 19 What difficulty there may be for one of the Laity to have a just Hearing and Redress in Rome, upon a complaint to be made against the Pope, I will not pretend to be fully acquainted with; yet, this I know, that a Cry for Justice, when relating to G. F. hath not been harkened to in London, by one Part of the people, called Quakers, unto whom I have addressed. See Preface, and Postcript to the Christian Quaker in 5. Parts. 'Tis well if the Endeavours of the Penman (meaning the unnamed Author of the Accuser, etc.) who peradventure may expect Advance in the Government contended for; be not as great to keep off the stroke of Justice, when relating to G. F. as Card. Scombergs, were to keep off the Reformation from the Court of Rome in the days of Pope Paul the Third, not knowing how soon it might be his own turn to ascend the Papal Chair.  
In the 27th. page I cited an Agreement, or Order, made at a Quarterly-Meeting at Ralph Fretwell's, in Barbadoes, the 23d. day of the 10th. Month, 1680, in these words: I desire to give up my whole Concern, if required, both Temporal and Spiritual, unto the Judgement of the Spirit of God in the Men and Women's-Meetings, as believing it to be more according to the Universal Wisdom of God, than any particular Measure in myself, or any Particular's with which the Men's and Woman's Meetings have not Unity. On this occasion, I signified, that G. F. etc. wrote to the Persons concerned, and did not only call them, Dear Friends; but concluded, That the Spirit of God hath given them Life, and will bring them to the City of the Living God, the Heavenly Jerusalem, and Church of the First Born, which are written in Heaven. And so subscribes in these words: Your dear Friends and Brethren in our Lord Jesus, in whom you have Life, Peace, and Salvation. On these words, unto which G. F. and G. W. subscribed their Names, I thus observed; This shows no Dislike to the said Paper, nor yet Dis-unity with the Persons; and yet they in other parts seem to dislike the wording thereof: for in their Letter to them, they also thus say; Now, Dear Friends, if this Order, or Judgement should come into the hands of any Apostates, or Opposers, they will make ill work with it, and say, we set up an Arbitrary Power over Men's Consciences and Properties, in an Implicit Faith and Submission, without inward Conviction, etc. and that it was like the Scotch-Covenant. Then I made this further Observation. This shows their sense what Apostates may say, but doth not declare that such their Saying might be rational: And why so? That's a Secret I will not pretend to be revealed to me: but yet I might have inserted the Case amongst the aforesaid Instances, wherein they were at Union, or Disunion with the Papistical Party; & doubtless, in one of them I might have hit the Mark. For I well remember, that Petro Soave Polano, in his History of the Council of Trent, informs these latter Ages, that in the days of Pope Paul the Third, great Zeal was raised in some, that a Reformation might begin in his own House [meaning the Court of Rome, and the Ministers most immediately relating to him.] And though he did not positively contradict a Reformation, when a true Representation of matters, worthy thereof, were presented before him; yet the Policy of that day admitted of no real Reformation, but instead thereof, only a mere noise of what was represented as worthy of Amendment, was permitted to go abroad in Germany, &c amongst the discontented Pa●ty, expecting a Reformation; but no Prosecution unto a real and thorough Amendment. And, why so? This, amongst others, was one express reason, That it would give occasion to the Lutherans to brag, that they had enforced the Pope to make that Reformation. (Further adding) That by the Reformation 'twould be confessed, that the things provided against, were deservedly reprehended by the Lutherans. Which would be a great abetting to their whole Doctrine. Had the Party espousing the Pope's Interest, said, 'Twould give occasion to Apostates, or Opposers (for such the Lutherans were accounted) to make ill work with it, it would then have been as pertinent an Example in Terminis, to show a Union, as now 'tis doubted, 'twill appear in substance, etc. 'Twas a notable aim, indeed, to aim at a Power over Persons both in their Temporal and Spiritual Concerns. [Mark] 'twas not over a Tenth part, that might have been accounted Jewish, or like the Priests, but over their whole Concern in Temporal and Spiritual Concerns. Moreover, pag. 30. I thus proceeded: What are the Marks and Tokens observed by G. F. and his Party, as worthy of the term Apostate in their sense. To which I thus answered: I will not undertake to give an answer in the largest extent of their meaning; but yet from the aforesaid Record of Dis-union with John Ansloes Proceed in Marriage, compared with the Quarterly-Meetings Refusal to read a Paper of some Friend's Complaint against the said Record, telling them, (on that occasion) they were all deceived, or deluded; doth, at least, give a just cause of Suspicion, that the Non-acceptance of any Such new Order or Prescription from G. F. or the General-Meeting, hath been deemed matter of Apostasy: if so, I must then say, that our Adversaries have therein exceeded in their Impositions, the Doctrine held forth by some of the very Romish Religion itself. And then I proceeded to give an Instance in these words; 'Twas the Plea of the Counsellors of the Parliament at Paris, in the time of Pope Julius the Third, Anno 1551, with respect to the Decrees of the Council of Trent; that though the Authority of the whole Universality is transferred into the Major Part, when the Cause is common to all, and nothing belongeth to particular men; yet, when the Whole belongeth to all, and every one hath his part, the assent of every one is necessary, & prohibentis conditio potior; and the absent not giving their Voices, are not bound: Of this sort are Ecclesiastical Assemblies; and be the Council as populous as it will, the absent Churches are not bound, if they think sit not to receive it. This hath always been used in ancient Times; That the Councils being ended, the Decrees should be sent to be Confirmed by the Churches that were absent; in which, otherwise th●y had had no Force: which every one that readeth Hillarius, Athanasius, Theodoretus, and Victorinus, (who handle this Particular) may see plainly; and it happened sometimes, that some part of the Cannons were received by some Churches, and some left out, as every one thought sit for their Necessities, Manners, and Uses: And Sir Gregory himself doth witness, That the Church of Rome did not receive the Cannons of the second Council at Constantinople, nor of the first of Ephesus. This, I suppose, the Learned R. Richardson, to whose Ingredients (sufficiently Papistical) the Penman hath referred, knows to be true, and is now cited on this Occasion, that the Impartial Reader may consider, whether, in the most charitable Construction of G. F. or his Party's Actions, under the Form of Government contended for, they have not (notwithstanding the Penman's Detestation of Popery) gone one large step, in point of Imposition, beyond what is allowed by the Doctrine of some, owning the Church of Rome to be the Apostolic See.  
I doubt not, but that every Impartial Reader will hence discern G. W's great Injustice, by accusing me of horrid Injustice and Envy, as aforesaid, for my thus writing.  
G. W. seems (pag. 49.50.) to be much disturbed at one or two Sentences in the Seventh Part of my Christian-Quaker, pag. 20. Therein I related, That the Bishop of Bitonto, in an Oration in relation to the Council of Trent, and Commendation of Pope Paul the Third, exhorts all to submit themselves to that Council; which, saith he, if they do not, it will be justly said, The Pope's Light is come into the World, and Men love Darkness better than Light. And then I thus proceeded: Whether that Expression may be a proper Looking-Glass for the Penman and G. F. to see their Faces in, when they conclude it the Fruit of Darkness, not to submit to their Councils and Outward Directories, I shall leave to the Consideration of the unprejudiced understanding Reader, with this further Information, That G. F. when accounted a Minister of Christ's Light, did then signify, That 'twas below Wisdom to jangle about Outward Things. And yet since hath been a great Instrument to cause Janglings about such things. On this Occasion G. W. pag. 49. 50. thus saith; What a false Looking-Glass hast thou represented here! Thou mayst remember that our frequent Testimony hath been, and still is, to excite People to Christ's Light within, as being that true Light which is come into the World, and to his Council that proceeds from his light and not to the Popes or any of his Councils. Who so ignorant, that cannot see the Sophistry contained in this Answer: I am well satisfied, their sin is not a design to be under the subjection of a Pope at Rome. Oh! that they were but as free from Lusting after the like Power that he and his Cardinals are invested with; if they were, methinks G. W. who, I suppose, from his rendering F. B. a Fool, hate, not to be accounted witty; should, on this occasion, have inserted (instead of these words, and not to the Pope, or any of his Counsel) such an expression as this and not to G. F. above another; as if our desires were to testify against a Pope of Rome, and yet plead for one set, or to be set up amongst ourselves, nor yet to the Second-days Meeting; as if we were against the power of the Cardinals at Rome, and yet execise the like (so far as capable) amongst selves: had he so said, and accordingly, for the future, acted, it might have removed many a Stumbling-block out of the way.  
And since G. W. accounts F. B. a Fool, as before is signified; surely then G. W. takes himself to be a wise Man; which occasions me to examine how wise he may be esteemed amongst witty and honest men: for Children and Fools may be pleased with Hobby-horses, and Knaves may applaud Forgery and Perversion for Sound Truths. First, then note, that if I had compared G. F. G. W. and their Friends to any Action committed by Pope Julius, etc. that had not been justifyable, he should have detected me thereof: but that being wanting, a witty man on sight of G. W's Book, may conclude, that there was some Comparison made, and that 'twas a true one: if so, would it not naturally follow, that G. W. etc. in such a witty man's sense, are as bad as those Popes ranked by him among Atheists, Magicians, Conjurers, Warriors, Bloodsuckers, Parricides, though not directly, or indirectly so accused by me.  
This Just and Righteous Account of G. W. renders him a Notorious False Accuser, a Scandal to the Profession of Christian Religion, and sufficiently inclined, as well as gifted to write Books wrongfully, to slain the Reputation of the men of his Indignation: I hope, his brethren, for the future, will be ashamed to sit under his Pharisaical Ministry, whilst no Satisfaction is given by his real Repentance for the Errors and evil Facts whereof he is guilty; especially, if the sense of his Gild be so great, as to decline the public Meeting (herein after proposed) for the clearing of himself, if he can.  
I now come to prove G. W. a public Informer against W. P. which I term, to his Defamation, because the Matter of Fact whereof he stands accused, is in some respect more condemnable than a Popish Practice deservedly testified against by Reformed Protestants. Now to the Matter in hand.  
Pag. 61. G. W. infers from my words, that they who subscribed the Paper against J. S. and J. W. being 66 in number, were Persecutors of their Brethren: and then affirms (without Evidence) that I know W. P. to be one. The said Paper against J. S. and J. W. is already proved to be worse, in some respect, than the Bull given forth by Pope Leo the 10th. against M. Luther. And G. W. hath not written one word that really evidences my said Comparison untrue: what I take to be the Force of his Argument, will hereafter follow: besides, 'tis worthy Observation, that the said Paper was directed to Mens-Meetings; who are therein exhorted to warn J. S. and J. W. wherever they come, to go home, etc. and therein, say they, you will acquit yourselves in God's Sight. From which Exhortations 'tis evident, that the Subscribers of the said Paper, which G. W. vindicates, endeavoured to impose on the Persons to whom they wrote, exhorting them to wa●n J. S. and J. W. as aforesaid, and that without leaving the Persons so exhorted to a Convincement in themselves, that their so doing might be Christianlike; but instead thereof, gives them this assurance, namely, That therein you will acquit yourselves in God's Sight. From all which, 'tis evident, that if W. P. did subscribe the said Paper, he then merited the  Reflections limited to that Matter, for so doing; and in particular, these two things might then be laid to his charge. First, That he was concerned in a Paper importing Excommunication, though not so termed; and that against two ancient Ministers, without mentioning therein any particular matter of false Doctrine, or evil Fact vindicated by J. S. & J. W. Secondly, That his endeavouring, that such to whom 'twas directed, should warn them to go home, etc. as aforesaid, implies a design of Imposition without Conviction, & a Justification of Implicit Faith & Obedience, both which took their Rise from the See of Rome; and was, and yet is hateful to the true Reformed Protestants. That now the Reader may know the force of G. W's Argument against my Comparison, take it in his own words, pag. 61. viz. As for their not mentioning any particular Doctrine, or vicious Life, that others might know the Matters alleged against them, what wouldst infer? That therefore the Pope's Bull against M. Luther was more reasonable or just. That's a mistake, for thou confessedst a Judgement given against that Jealous, Rending, and Separate Spirit, from which thou hast not cleared them: and was that no reason then, to give others Notice and Warning against such a Spirit: Is Schism no sin, or not reprovable? This occasions me thus to say, G. W. is not so plain as Bonner, for he usually told the Protestants for what he Judged them, and was not ashamed of the Pope's Cause; if he designed to judge or reprove men for not owning the Pope and his Clergy to be the Church of Christ, and that they ought to believe as the Church believed, he would have plainly said so, and not instead thereof, tell them, I judge you for being of a Jealous, Rending, and Separate Spirit. This, in Bonner, without Explanation; would have been called Canting Language; and until G. W. doth explain his meaning by those words, he subjects himself to Derision and Scorn; and though he hath insinuated, that I compared him, etc. to a Pope ranked amongst Conjurers, yet he wrongs me therein; and I must confess, that his aforesaid Argument is no grea● Sign of a Conjurer. But notwithstanding G. W. hath informed, as aforesaid, against W. P. yet W. P's. Address to Protestants, afterward Printed, Anno 1679, cleared him from all such Pernicious Principles, that G. W. as before is manifest, vindicates, and such Rome-like Practices, tending to Bondage, as G. W. is become an Espouser of, by owning himself one with, if not one of those that subscribed the Paper against J. S. and J. W. though he pretended to this Purpose, that he was moved or warned of God, not to subscribe the same: I shall quote a few words out of W. P's. Address to Protestants, to show W. P's. S●nse in his own words, pag. 149. 150. For all Societies are to govern themselves according to their Institution, and first Principles of Union, where there is a Violence on this part, Tyranny, and not Order, is introduced. Now since Persuasion and Conviction began all true Christian Societies, all Christian Societies must uphold themselves upon the same free Bottom, or they turn Antichristian. Pag. 186. The Apostle requires not men to receive him without Evidence, and refers them to that in their own Consciences in the Sight of God. Many more Instances might be cited, to show W. P's Detestation of Popish-like, enslaving Principles, and Practices; though George Whitehead, now sinking in his Reputation as a Christian, seems to shelter himself under the Umbrage of W. P. Such mean tricks may get G. W. a Name, with such an one as he scornfully terms F. B. namely, a Fool, but not with men of Understanding, Honesty, and good Conscience. But if W. P. hath been the Author of any thing Printed since his Address, etc. whereby his aforesaid Assertions are denied, or weakened, far be it from me to term any man, manifesting the same, an Informer to his Defamation, whilst persisting therein; for I have had my share in Detecting (by the 8th. Part of my Christian-Quaker) some Principles, or Assertions reputed his, that are not now to my purpose to treat on; and not having any Reply from him, in dislike of what I wrote, Charity obliges me to suppose, that (if his Name was not wrongfully made use of) it hath been instrumental to convince his Conscience of the Truths vindicated by me.  
Now take an Instance of G. W's scurrilous Language against myself, etc. namely, Their insolent Abuses, cruel Envy, Outrage, Madness, and Confusions of certain Persons, turned Apostate Informers, treacherous Hypocrites, false Brethren, deceitful Workers, betraying judases, Devils incarnate, who have lost their first Love to truth, become degenerate, without natural Affection, Dogs that are without, Wolves, Raging Waves of the Sea. See his Introductory Epistle.  
G. W. is not only contented so to fame himself, as a Church Governor, but he hath also so confidently discoursed of Skill in Law, as that he is taken to aim at the Repute of being a very Learned Lawyer: How so? The unnamed Penman of the Accuser, turned my word Concerned into Represented, and as such treats thereon. On that Occasion I replied thus; It may be said of many Thousands of our Visible Native Countrymen, that they are at some times, and seasons exercised in an outward Order, under the Government of the King; but if thence they should declare, that they are the Representatives of the King's Government, 'twould be deemed a mode of Speech tending to the Annihilating of the King's Prerogative. For this, G. W. thus treats me, Herein the man is under a mistake, in this Allusion his Skill in the Law and the King's Prerogative and Government has failed him. The truth is, I gave no Instance to illustrate my Assertion; I shall now supply that defect, by instancing one thing amongst many that might be mentioned. Many thousands of our Native Countrymen, are, on the 1st day of the Week, exercised in an orderly manner, in hearing and uttering Religious Service, established by Law under the King's Government.  
Of all these it may be said, That they are exercised in an Outward Order, under the Government of the King; but it cannot be said of all such, that they are Representatives of the King's Government, which chief is represented in his Courts. Methinks G. W. should be ashamed of his ridiculous Opposition on the foot of his Skill in Law, for that by a contrary Assertion to what I laid down, every common Porter (if a Native) exercised as aforesaid, might then be declared a Representative of the King's Government, though no legal Officer. This puts me in mind to note, that G. W. hath lately published in his Name, a Book, styled, Due Order of Law and Justice, against irregular and arbitrary Proceed. I shall a little examine how well such a Title becomes his Book. He opposed giving J. B. Copy of the Meeting's Objections against my Book; for the spreading whereof, he was declared against, as aforesaid: this was sign of great Disorder and Injustice in G. W.  
If G. W. handles the Matter of Law well, I know he must then thereby condemn his own, and his Brethren's Practices: if ill, than it may become a shame to put such a Title, by which he may obtain the Repute of a Learned Lawyer, from such as know him not. (O proud Conceited Man!) Even as G. F. was reputed to be inspired with the Knowledge of Tongues, by subscribing to many framed Sentences in divers Languages; (witness his Battledore) though he is not gifted to write, or speak sense in his Mother-Tongue, in a Through-Discourse, or Debate on some Subjects, if some of his Books and public Discourses may be thought a proper Proof in the Case. The remembrance of this can never credit G. W's Reflections on F. B. for want of Scholarship.  
I shall now add something touching G. W's Hypocritical, Pharisaical Spirit, though he is guilty in divers parts of his Treatise, of many Errors more than this Paper detects him of; yet, at length, he speaks on this wise; Thou knowest, O Lord, that though thou hast endued me with a Christian Spirit, and with Faith, Patience, and rejoicing under all my Sufferings, etc. yet, thou hast also endued me with the Spirit of Righteous Judgement, Understanding, and Zeal for the Glory of thy Holy Name and Truth.  
Methinks G. W. should have considered, that though he may deceive Fools, and have now and then a Smile from a Hypocrite, yet that God cannot be deceived by telling him a parcel of Lies; but his great Sin is, his (as it were) calling God to witness, by saying, Thou knowest; when in reality, 'twas in a Case wherein a notorious Lie dropped from his Pen; for his very Book will appear in Judgement against him, that at the penning thereof he was far remote from acting the part of a Righteous Judge. And many Instances, not herein cited, might be collected to prove the same: 'tis so notoriously wicked, that 'tis no marvel to me, that G. W. justifies the unnamed Penman of the Accuser, (pag. 52.) though, by W. P's Rule in his Winding-Sheet for Controversy Ended, the said Penman, for not putting his Name to his Work, may be compared to a very Night-bird, a Wanderer, one that looks and creeps up and down like a Vagrant. And though in the Seventh Part of my Christian-Quaker, an Hue and Cry is recorded after the Name of the Penman; yet, I suppose, G. W. was ashamed, or afraid to become an Informer in that Case, by a positive Discovery of the Man's Name. His Confession, pag. 52. that he hath a share therein, and sees no cause to retract, but stand by it; is no positive Discovery.  
I hope G. W. will accept these few Lines as a sufficient SCOURGE, to correct a part of his Errors, and to abate a part of his Wrath, Pride, and Confidence: if not, I now make this offer unto him; That I shall be ready to meet him in some Public Place to be agreed upon between us both, where Liberty may be allowed, that any Persons whatever may freely hear; and my end is, that I may then have opportunity, to treat more largely on the foregoing Subjects, and that he, on behalf of himself and Brethren, may have opportunity to vindicate themselves, if he can, from the guilt of Error now laid, or that further may be laid to his charge, by reason of what he hath wrote in his Book, Styled, Judgement Fixed; though frequently read, Judgement Fired: which would have been a very proper Title to his Bundle of Wrath and Malice. For since 'tis so, that one Part of the people, called, Quakers, are principled from the Second-day Meeting's approved Council, not to read my Books, and that another Part need no further evidence to convince them, that G. W. etc. stand by and espouse a wrong cause, and that others termed Newters will not concern themselves in the Controversy; there is no reason to trace G. W. (nor yet any other) Book against me in all its Perversions, false Quotations and other Evils and Errors by a thorough Answer; especially since a few lines are sufficient to manifest, that the Root from whence their Bulky-Rubbish springs is evil. The Lord soften G. W's Stony-Heart; that he may be Converted and Healed.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
W. D. wrote to G. W to know whether he would stand by this Doctrine, namely, that there can be no unity without Conformity, and that the People of God, or Children of God are, or must be in uniformity. G. W. writes to W. D. and citys the Doctrine, and then adds his answer in th●se words. Ans. True, 1st. with respect to a Conformity to the death of Christ, to the Image of the Son of God. 2dly. They must be in uniformity, with respect to the unity of the Spirit, the unity of the Faith; & being of one Judgement according to their measures of Degrees & Growths in Christ, as they come to be of one Heart and Soul united in Love, there is a uniformity in Substance, though not genera●●y (nor is it required) in all Circumstances.  
Hence I observe, that G. W. strains the word unity to import uniformity, and to be as a Proof that God's Children are, or must be in uniformity; and yet he confesses to Measures of Degrees and Growths in Christ, which admits of various Forms; though the unity in Spirit may not be broken. Next I observe from the latter Part of his words, that there are Requirers of uniformity in Substance, though not generally in all Circumstances. Hence I query, 1st. Who hath power so require God's People to be in uniformity? 2dly. What are the Substantial Forms that must be and can't be dispensed with? 3dly. What are the Circumstantial Forms that may be disp●●…s●d with, and not required? 4thly. Whence the Requirers had their Power to enjoin uniformity? 5thly. Since Christ is the Substance, whether they are not usurpers who require his members to subject to outward Forms, terming some Substantial, and others Circumstantial.  
W. R.   

LONDON, Printed, 1683.