THE ANABAPTISTS Printed Proposals, BEARING Date the 12th of October, 1674.  
Subscribed by 

William Kiffin,  
Jeremy Ives,  
Thomas Plant,  
Thomas Hicks and Daniel Dike.    
Briefly Discussed: AND Jeremy Ives' late Daring Challenge to the Quakers, Answered.  
By a Lover of Truth, T. Rudyard.  
Printed, 1674.   

THE ANABAPTISTS printed Proposals Briefly Discussed: Bearing Date the Twelfth of October, 1674.  
HAd your Actions been Christian, or at least worthy of Men, you had not been put to these mean Shifts to cover your Unworthiness: Why tell you the World of your Desire, That those Particulars charged by us against Tho. Hicks might be fully spoken to, when your Actions as well before, as since your Paper, give ample Testimony to the contrary?  
1st, At the Barbican-Meeting the 9th Instant, did not you and your Confederates use your utmost Endeavours to avoid a Discussion of those palpable Forgeries, Lies, Slanders, etc. charged upon T. H? You know it, and hundreds there can witness it.  
2dly, And how willing you are for the Trial or Disquisition of T. H. his Actions, was further verified by your Behaviour at Wheeler-Street-Meeting the 16th Instant (whence T. Hicks absenting himself) ye spent no less than five or six Hours in Abusive Shuffles and Evasions, mixed with loud Outcries whenever we attempted to read our Charge or Complaint against him (although we forbore till J. Ives declared, he then personated him in his Absence.)  
We are sensible T. H. and your late Actions will not endure a public Disquisition, and ours seeks no Corners, which occasion so vast a Distance in yours and our present Apprehensions of what is most suitable to attain our respective Ends: You pretend, yours is To clear the Truth, and to Profit them that hear; and so say we also: And what then? Shall we be Publicly Belied, Traduced and Abused, and Privately have Satisfaction? We could be content with a Little rather than None at all: But could you call an Assembly of some Thousands of People, to Debauch their Judgements, and Leven their Understandings into Envy and Prejudice against us, and propose 50. or 60. excluding all others to be Witnesses of your own, or our Gild or Innocency in the Matter; Is this the Way to clear the Truth & profit the Hearers? O abominable Deceit! O horrid Partiality! It's too apparent your Ends are as black as your Beginnings, and each designed to centre in Abuse. I must tell you, however some Particulars of you have espoused this Forger, etc. yet amongst you, there is not a few, who hearty grieve and trouble, not only at his Forgery, etc. but your Confederacy; and many more sober & judicious Persons are persuaded, that the Way to clear your Innocency, will not be, to cover his Gild, Fiat Justitia, & pereat mundus.  
As for your Proposals (being calculated for a private Cabal or Conventicle) with small Amendments, may pass as fit Mediums for an orderly Dispute or Disquisition of the Matter betwixt us; only to your 9th Proposition, I cannot but particularly inquire into its Reason, or at least your, for the proposing of it: It runs thus, viz.  And when your Paper is answered, that G. Whitehad and W. Penn be obliged to give their Answers to such Charges as T. Hicks shall exhibit against them. 
To this I say; Had you a Star-Chamber-Court, or the ecclesiastics Oath, Ex Officio to impose? Did your Authority comprehend those ministerial Offices of Judges or Justices of the civil Peace, your Blind Proposition at first Sight, might have passed as a tolerable Imposition upon us: But at this Season, when the Laws (under which we live) have made us better Terms, then to be Self- Assassinates; and Providence has so far suspended your Authority in Civils, that you are incapacitated to recognizance us into your Obedience, I say, to be obliged to give Answer, before they know whether T. Hicks' Charge will relate to Civil or Religious Concerns, to Matter proper for their Debate, or Things inquisitory inconsistent to their present Contests, is most unreasonable, illegal, yea irreligious to impose: It is but a Taste of what Dissenters (had you Power, which you want) must receive from your Hands; And whence, unless from the Acts of England's late High Commission Court, you pikt up your Proposition, it's not easily determinable.  
But what is T. H's Conceit to provide so long aforehand, that (after our Charge exhibited against him fr Forgery, etc. is answered) W. P. & C. W. be obliged to Answer, & c? Is he afraid that two Years Dialoguing has not pumped him dry in his base Attempts, as well upon our Civil as Religious Rights? or that he has yet more to vent? or rather, after all, that he must fly to the Assistance of an Inquisition to make good his Charge against us; else to forestall our Time to discuss the Consistency of his Sentiments with sound Doctrine and pure Religion? W. Kiffin & J. Ives, you might do well to give us the Reason induced you to be so peremptory upon us, with so unreasonable and illegal a Proposition.  
I cannot but remind you of your late Abuse, in expending so much Time about the Title of a Book, and rather do it now, That if we meet hereafter we may be excused the hearing such needless Cavils. Our first Charge against T. H. is thus, viz.  
A Dialogue betwixt a Christian and a Quaker (yet made by T. Hicks) viz. Wherein (saith he) is faithfully represented, etc.  
1. I say, A Dialogue is nothing else then a Discourse betwixt two, three or more, which a Slander by may write and publish for others Information.  
2. But to acquaint my Reader I writ Dialogue-wise, is to inform, that there was not such real Discourse, but only my own Sentiments of the Persons or Things I would Represent.  
T. Hicks his Books were really his own Sentiments, yet he presents it to the World, as a Real Discourse; and as a Real Dialogue, or Discourse, are they frequently received, and brought as Proofs against us in the Parts where they are spread abroad, as the Words of a Real Quaker.  
This Point have we already debated, showing the Difference betwixt Catechisms and Discourses by Way of Dialogue, & Real Dialogues, as T. H. presents his, and therein sufficiently hath manifested his Abuse. I call, as further Witness, W. L's Letter to J. Ives: We saw him foiled (says W. L.) in his first Attempt to prove his Way of Writing; for as Mr. Penn truly said, there is a vast Difference betwixt a Dialogue composed for Information, and one for Disputation: In the first I writ my own Judgement; in the other an Adversary's. And with your Learned Brother's Judgement, I leave this Particular, which is one Part of that Charge.  
The next thing therein considerable, after his Manner of Writing, is the Matter, and that lay on our Parts to prove Fictitious: And whereas T. H. saith, In his Dialogue is faithfully represented the Quakers Opinions, We are ready to make out, that he has most treacherously misrepresented us; and instead of giving an Account of our Principles, he has feigned and forged Principles that are not ours, for which we appealed, or called to the Anabaptists for Justice; This is our Matter of Charge; this are we ready to prove, if you would stand the Test; if you will abide to hear us.  
But instead thereof, you delay us with Imposing your Reasons why you oppose the Christian to the Quaker: To which I say, Your opposing them no ways troubles us, but T. H's making a Counterfeit Christian and a false Quaker: This is Matter of Fact, and we are ready to prove it against him; but that a Real Christian opposeth a Real Quaker, we deny.  
But what is this Opposition to the Charge of Forgery, etc. against T. H? Suppose a Dialogue had been made betwixt W. K. and J. Ives (who in Principles (although now Confederates) differ more than a real Christian and Quaker) had it been reasonable, if either Party had traduced the other, and the Person wronged called for Justice, that the Malefactor should take up whole Days of Discourse with his Reasons for opposing their two Names (a Thing not worth Discourse) thereby diverting the Complainants Charge, and himself from being called to Judgement? but this is their Dealing with us.  
The Substance of our Complaint is for T. H's Fictions, Forgeries, Lies, Slanders and Abuses; As for his opposing Christian to Quaker, is but a Circumstance, and how suitable to his present Enterprise, will appear, when the Anabaptist has cleared himself of the Forgeries, etc. charged upon him, or we prove him guilty thereof: And when our Innocency or Gild (by a full Disquisition of the Matter in Controversy) is manifested, it will be easy to determine which of us merits the Name of Christian, and which of the Name Quaker; or whether the Anabaptist be the Counterfeit, or Quaker the Real Christian.  
But suppose we are not Christians in your Sense, or of your Dipping; are we therefore none? But suppose, none at all, according to your present Sentiments of us, but Jews, professed Turks or Heathens, as you would have us, shall not your Brother answer for his Forgeries, Lies, and Slanders? Is it your Belief, that an Heretic deserves no Law, no Justice, no Equity from or against Men of your Cast? ye should do well to explain; for I assure you, it smells of your Predecessors.  
But if no Arguments will induce you to do us that common Right, that equal Justice that a Heathen would not deny us; but you will still divert our Charge, and interpose such Discourse, as may tyre the Auditory, and cover your Infamous Brother, and consequently his Abettors: If instead of hearing our Charge, and answering our reasonable Demand, you would prove us No Christians, and bid us take that for Answer; I propose, as necessary, in order thereto, That you tell us what sort of Christian (yet mean) the Quaker is not: explain yourselves to the World, What and Who is a true Christian; and (you denying Inward Evidence & Revelation) tell us, whether Faith & Works, or Principle and Practice, or Pretended Faith and Principles without Works or Practice, make a Real Christian; which may serve for a Looking-Glass, as well for yourselves, as for us: I speak particularly to you, who are many Heads confederated this day against us, Each Sect claims the Name; but who has the Nature in your Sense? Therefore answer plainly, without Equivocation or Evasion, what you mean by Christian.  

1. Do ye mean the Presbyterian (so called) with his Directory?  
2. Or, do you mean the Independent with his Savoy-Confession?  
3. Or, do you mean the Anabaptist with his several & various promulged Sistems of Faith?  
4. Or, do you mean those that tell us, We must DIP with them, as necessary to Salvation?  
5. Or, do you mean Such that hold, Christ died not for all, nor was an Universal Sacrifice for all Mankind?  
6. Or, do ye mean Such that profess their Faith, That Millions of People are Damned; or at least, left without Means of Salvation by Eternal Decree, before they Knew or Acted Good or Evil?  
7. Or, do you mean Such that Deny the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and that he was not One with the Father in Glory before the World was?   
It is not my Purpose to draw you out beyond the Bounds of the Faiths or Beliefs of the present Confederacy; therefore I wave to mention such Sorts as are termed, the Church of England or etc. All I desire or expect from you at present, is, to be plain and particular, which of these forementioned, or what others by Faith & Practice are the Real and True, and which, and how many of these Impostors; or if all, declare it, that our Auditors upon your Attempts to prove us No Real Christians, may be capable to judge, whether you Act like Real Christians, or Stagers against Christianity; that we may see, whether, whilst you are Unchristianing others, you heathenise not your Confederates or others that merit the Name better than yourselves: Let us have it under all your Hands, that other Judicious and Indifferent Persons, as well as yourselves, may be capable to Judge betwixt you and us in this Matter of Controversy.  
T. R. London, the 24th of the 8th Month, 1674.   

AN ANSWER TO Jeremy Ives' CHALLENGE.  
THis prior Discourse was no sooner finished, than a Sheet of Jer. Ives (tituled, A Sober Request to the Quakers) was crying about the Streets: And although what I have here already writ, might serve as Answer; yet to avoid Cause of Censure, that we disdain to (or cannot Answer) him, I have a few Lines to Jeremy and his Paper.  
But previous thereto I must tell thee, my Reader, J. Ives is neither the Person with whom our public Contest is, nor one of the Juages that pretended to answer our Appeal to the Anabaptists, for Justice against Thomas Hicks; but a Person (as suited for such a Service) of late listed in, as an Auniliary to defend T. H. or Oppose our Charge against Him; and as a suitable Medium thereto, he would divert our Pursuit against T. H. by answering to his Allure.  
But as to his Printed Piece, He or the Printer has termed it, A Sober Request; and how correspondent the Name or Title is to the Nature or Kind thereof, itself will best demonstrate.  
§. 1. If he means by Sober Request, that Expression of his, if you dare appoint a Time and Place, etc. it's passed my Skill to find the Correspondency of the Body of his Sheet to its Head or Title: But if Daring to Appoint, be the best Terms the Anabaptist can invite us to a Religious Discourse, I must declare, his Language is so far from being Scriptural, that it comes short of the common Hectors or Swordmen of our Time, who for personal Affronts will challenge the Field with much better and more modest Language.  
§. 2. But how Sober is his Request? It's but to appoint a Time or Place for him, to prove us No Christians, and our Ministers, Impostors, etc. Very modest Jeremy! in very good Time. Then it seems, for all thy large Boasts and high Rants, it's not yet done, but thou proposest to do it: and why a fresh or particular Challenge for this? What! hast thou already forgot the two several Meetings that thy Impertinency has abused, and diverted from their particular Occasions by pressing to this Discourse, and yet complains? Wast thou not heard at Barbican the 9th Instant, not only what thou couldst say against us, but till thou hadst fully catechised us, as to our Belief of Christ, & c? & being answered to the People's Satisfaction (still failing in thy Attempt) left the Pulpit & Assembly? Wast thou not, Jeremy, sufficiently heard at Wheeler-Street, the 16th. Instant (the Auditory can witness for us) upon that Subject? And was not the Sum or Close of thy proving us no Christians, a pitiful Retreat, at last turning the Question upon us, to give thee an Evidence of our being so (which not liking thee, thou approvedst as well as the faithless Jews did, the Testimony of Christ and his Followers) when thou hadst failed of thy Promise and Attempt there also, thou fairly turnedst thy Back upon the Argument and Assembly together? In Case thy Memory be Treacherous inquire of the Auditors, and the Relations already in Print, and they will help thy Understanding.  
But seeing the last Discourse betwixt thee and us upon this Subject (in some measure) issued or broke off in the Different demonstrating or evidencing a real and true Christian, 'twill be but reasonable J. I. W. K. T. P. T. H. etc. the present Confederacy mutually in Writing demonstrate & figure out the real and true Christian, and the sure & certain Evidence thereof, that the after Contest may not be, What one is, or how to be demonstrated; but whether we are such or no. And I must tell thee, if a holy Life, upright, honest & a blameless Conversation among Men, be a Part, Member or Evidence of your Christian, (as doubtless it is of a true one) I hearty give my Consent, that J. Ives, being so capacitated (or as Joh. 8.7.) Cast the first Stone.  
§. 3. But from the Manner and Terms of thy Challenge (Sober Request it is not) viz. If you dare appoint a Time and Place for that Purpose; and then appoint whom you will to dispute the Matter with me, provided none be admitted to speak but us two— That a certain Hour be agreed for the Beginning, and another for the Ending— and neither Party exceed the Limits. From these a Reasonable Understanding may measure the Height, Depth and Breadth of thy End, and the Zeal that led thee forth to this Enterprise. I must confess, such Language & Articles as these, might well pass for a Bear-Garden-Prize, (though I have read more modest Terms in their Bills) but to come from an Anabaptist-Preacher, who pretends a more refined or Scriptural Rule for Discipline and Disputes, it seems strange and most absurd: Where dost thou find Jeremy, that any of the Prophets of the Lord (in the Adulterous Generation they lived in) sent out such Daring and singular Terms, to convert the misguided Jews, or convince their Opposers? Or where did Christ or his Apostles send such Challenge with Limitation to Persons, Time & Hours, in Order to propagate the Everlasting Gospel, and answer Gainsayers? Or did ever the Quakers, when they first visited your Assemblies make such Terms with you? Find, if thou canst, such an Ensample from primitive Christianity or Pattern in all the Holy Scriptures, except that of the Uncir cumcised Philistine Goliath, defying the Army of Israel; it is true, he cried out for a single Combatant, and dared such to meet him, and he had his Reward accordingly.  
I must tell thee, thy Actions & Paper bespeak thy Mind to be High and Lofty, instead of Meek and Lowly, the true Christians Ornament; & intimates thee rather a Stager against Religion, than a zealous Contend for true Religion: And this is not my Mind only, but many, as well called by the Name of Baptists, as other discreet and sober Men, that have not a little censured thy customary Carriages, to stir up the People to Rudeness and Laughter at the late Disputes, by the Sign of shaking thy Hand, or waving thy Hat over thy Head (call it what thou wilt) People say, it smells of Ranter or Atheism; And doubt not, but that thy thus treating us in Print, will rather confirm then shake their Opinions of thee: But what shall I say, Men gather not Grapes of Thorns, nor Figs of Thistles.  
§. 4. As to those confident Insinuations and base Assertions in thy printed Challenge, viz.  

1. That W. Penn 's Confession of Faith in Scripture-Language, was a mere Equivocation.  
2. That our Former Opinions were Vile, Absurd and Nonsensical; or that thou provedst to our Face, they make void all Rules of Christian Faith and Practice.  
3. Or, that by force of Argument thou hadst drawn us to that Straight we could make no Reply.  
4. Or, that former Books of Quakers declaredly owned by us, contain in them Doctrines not ways reconcileable to Scripture- Language or Christian Religion.  
5. That our Behaviour was Base and Insolent in thy Absence.   
These I justly charge upon thee as Abominable Falsehoods and Notorious Untruths, which thou and all thy Confederates are not able to prove or maintain.  
And know, that it is not thy Confident & Bold Assertions that are at this day Proofs or Evidences against us; thou wilt reap no other Effect then the Belching out of THY OWN SHAME; for our Innocency and Integrity is above the Reach of thy Scurrility and Abuse: Nay, such Share hath Jer. Ives in the Hearts of sober Men, that I am bold to say, Thy very Name shall Clear our Innocency as far as thy Tongue or Pen can Tradnce.  
§. 5. And since thy appearing in Confederacy with T. H. W. K. etc. against us, the Question has been (not by a few, and that sober-minded and Considerable in this City) Is this That Jer. Ives? Is this That Jer. Ives? Surely not, say some. I meddle not with many THAT's; but as pertinent to this present Religious Controversy there yet remains a Doubt upon many, Whether thou be That Jer. Ives, that upon a Religious Account, and for his Testimony against Swearing, was cast into Newgate in the Year 1660. & after he had writ to his Brethren a Sharp Letter, dated Jan. 14. 1670. against Swearing; to animate them, or to rebuke them for it; in few Days after gave his Friends the Slip, & got out of Prison by Swearing before Ric. Brown; and not only so, but soon after his Liberty, printed a Plea for Swearing, to the Sorrow of his Brethren and straightening the Bonds of his Fellow-Prisoners. This Jeremy remains upon the Spirits of many sober Person in and about this City, for whose sake I intimate this, that if thou be'st misrepresented, thy Innocency may be cleared; or if thou art the Guilty Person, thou mayst Repent; & in this thou art desired to give Satisfaction: and withal tell us, whether a Baptist-Minister, so circumstantiated, be a true Gospel-Minister, or an Impostor, etc. if no Impostor, give us the Reason wherefore? and if Such be True, who are False? be pleased to explain; for it much concerns thee.  
§. 6. But that I may be clear of Jeremy and his Paper, in giving my Answer, whether we accept of his Challenge, or disregard his Bravado; whether we go out to this Senacherib, or commit our Cause to the Lord; according to my present Apprehension of Jeremy and his proposed Attempt, I give my Answer.  
1. If Jeremy Ives be yet in Confederacy with T. H. W. K. etc. (as doubtless he is) to appear singly, as a Caperer, to divert, and oppose our present Pursuit against T. Hicks for Forgcries, etc. is but a deceitful Shuffling of the Confederates, and decoying us from our present Work; And under these Circumstances, Jeremy's Barking is not worthy our Regard:  
2. But if Jeremy, and his Brethren, and Confederates, are Real, and hearty desire the People's Information, and not mere Caviling & Noise in open and public Assemblies; Let them, as before proposed, give out in Writing, under all their Hands, the full Characters and certain Evidences of a True and Counterfeit Christian, as also of the True Minister and Impostor; and tell us plainly Which & Who such are, proving the same by Holy Scripture; and then,  
3. We pursuing our Charge of Forgeries, in plain Matter of Fact, against T. H. etc. if Jeremy wants Employ, he may continue, as an Auxiliary to his Brother.  
4. After our Charges against T. H. and against W. K. etc. for abetting and countenancing his Forgeries, are heard and fully debated, I doubt not we shall be very ready to hear Jeremy with his Brethren upon his proposed Subject; not upon the Limit and Terms of a Bear-Garden Prize; but under such, as so solid a Discourse calls for and requires, committing the Reasonableness thereof to the Consciences of the then Judicious Auditory; no ways doubting, but that in the Strength of the Lord, we shall be capable to detect his Folly, and maintain our Religion, as really Christian, against all the vain and Daring Attempts, and Airy Rants of our malicious Opponents.  
5. But if these Terms will not serve thee, but that still thou wilt appear as a Privateer against us, thinking by thy bawling Out-Cries to still the Noise of our Charge of Forgery, etc. exhibited against T. H. and stifle our just Complaints against W. K. etc. by my Consent thou shalt rail on, Rabshekah-like, and boast as Goliath, till the just Hand of the Lord overtake thee; we no wise doubting, but the Lord Jehovah, our Strength, will preserve us from the Strife of Tongues and Envy of onreasonable Men, and will also in due time (maugre all this Opposition) Clear our Innecency, and Uncover the Skirts of our Deceitful and Abusive Adversaries.  
T. R. London, the 26th of the 8th Month, 1674.  
THE END.