Rail and Slanders detected: Or the Folly and Heresies of the QUAKERS Further Exposed. Being an Answer to an Invective Libel Written by G. Whitehead, impertinently called, Antichrist in Flesh unmasked, etc. Which some of the QUAKERS call An Answer to a Book truly Styled Antichrist in Spirit unmasked: OR, Quakerism a great Delusion. In this Brief Discourse you have the Slanderous Out-cries of G. Whitehead, against Edward, pay, Henry Loader, and William Alcot, Examined, Detected, and Confuted. He Seedeth of Ashes 〈◊〉 deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his Soul, nor say, Is there not a Lie in my right hand? Esai. 44. 20. Wh●●st that Heretics speak like the Faithful, they not only mean otherwise than they say, but clean contrary; and by their Tenets full of Blasphemies they destroy the Souls of those who with their fair words suck in the Poison of their foul Opinions. Irenaeus, in his Third Book against Heresies. London, Printed in the Year, 1692. Rail and Slanders Detected, or the Folly and Heresies of the Quakers further Exposed, etc. IT is well known to all that are but a little acquainted with the Faculties and Writings of the Quakers, that their usual methods, are to cry out against all that oppose or detect their corrupt notions; as such that abuse and defame an Innocent and Religious People: But amongst the many causeless out-cries they have proclaimed in the World, I have not seen one for its magnitude that hath outdone a small parcel of slanderous confused Railleries', that lately was Midwived into the World, and Fathered by George Whitehead: which if there be a Wise Man amongst them, it appears strange that it had not been stifled in the Birth, rather than such an ill shapen Cub should have gone forth into the World to declare itself Legitimate, and publish itself the true Offspring of a Quaker. But we must take it as it is, and in the Title Page G. W. saith, our Book is a desaming confused Book. Answer. I suppose a great part of it must needs be confused, being taken out of your own confused Writings; the reconciling of which to themselves, is as easy as bringing together the South and North Poles. 2. He calls it a defaming Book. Answer: It defames no Man's Person, nor indeed your Principles, any further than your Tongues and Pens did it first of all; for it Treats of your professed notions, which if false, are deservedly exposed, nothing being a more destructive evil in our day, than for falsehood to be carried on in the World with Fame and Applause. But to come to your Book itself: Can you suppose that any thing was contained in it to the purpose? I cannot imagine what you could think of it. If you had said any thing towards reconciling your former Writings with your late professed Faith, you had done something to the purpose; do you think that any whose Eyes are in their Heads, will not easily see that your defects in Truth and Reason are supplied with Slanders and Rail? You tell us, p. 5, 6, 7, 8. We have showed our envy and bitterness; yea, we appear Envious against your present Liberty, as Men of Envious, Turbulent, Persecuting Spirits, etc. Why, what's the matter? why our Book defames the Quakers as a People of a Religious Society, etc. who have solemnly and sincerely declared to the Government, That they own and believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, and desire to live in the Faith, Knowledge, and Practice of them, and that they believe in the Three Divine Witnesses bearing Record in Heaven, the Father, Word, and Holy Spirit, and the Divinity and Humanity of Christ, and Justification by Christ's Works, Righteousness and Merits, and not by their own: This and much more in their professed Faith, whereunto I refer the Reader: Now we have gone and published to the World, wherein the Writings of their chief Guides do directly oppose and contradict this Confession of Faith, from which G. Whitehead concludes, That by this we would make void one Condition of their present Liberty, p. 6. As People not fit to be tolerated, now have their Liberty of Conscience, p. 7. And saith G. W. No doubt had these angry Anabaptists power, we should not enjoy our Liberties, the very Nature and Tendency of these their bitter lying Invectives, being to bring Persecution upon us, as a People not to be given any credit unto in our Solemn Profession before Authority. To all which I Answer, First, We did not know till our Book was Published, that you had professed this as your Faith before the Parliament. And secondly, we must the more admire your Presumptuous confidence herein, that you should so affront the Government; except you had at the same time renounced your former Writings, that so evidently contradict it. And whereas you falsely charge us with persecuting Spirits and Envy, it is well known that our principles, are and ever were that none ought to be persecuted for their Religious Principles or Notions; no not the Papists themselves, so long as they live peaceably in subjection to Authority and the Civil Government: yet had they come and set up a Mass-House at Deptford; and that they might the more effectually prevail upon the Ignorant, and easilier proselyte them to their Idolatry and Superstitions, should have published a Profession of Faith directly contrary to their known Principles, and the Writings of their Chief Guides. We should in like manner have looked upon ourselves obliged both in Honour to God, and Love to our Neighbours, to have detected their Deceits. And we freely allow any to examine our published Faith; and if they can find such plain contradictions as aforesaid, we will be content to bear the discredit, and not retaliate them with Rail and Slanders, nor account them envious Persecutors for it: And now I would appeal to the Light in G. Whitehead, whether he believes that we envy their Liberty, and would Persecute them had we Power? if he so believes, he is miserably deluded in that matter; and if he doth not so believe, how wilfully doth he sin against the Light in casting these Slanderous Aspersions upon us? What, are we envious Persecutors, Hypocrites, and possessed with an unclean Spirit and lying Devil, p. 5, 8, 17. Fie George, are these Thunderbolts fit to be shot at your Antagonists on all occasions? I own that you have some cause to be displeased at our putting you upon a work you cannot possibly do; namely, to reconcile your late Faith with your former Writings: But than you might have called▪ us unreasonable Men, or compared us to Pharaoh's Taskmasters; for its a work we put you upon that is harder than to make Brick without Straw. And indeed G. Whitehead appears to have no mind to touch it with one of his fingers, it is so knotty and difficult a piece of work: No, it passeth the skill of the ablest Orator with all his Rhetoric, or George Whitehead with all his pretended skill in Logic, to do it; and should they go about to do it with their Equivocal Stuff: they know they shall appear in an evil Case. Well, but it may be some Advocate for the Quakers may be ready to say, That although the Quakers first Original and Ancient Authors of that Antiquity as 1648. and since; for I think they do not pretend to any greater Antiquity: See John Whitehead's small Treatise p. 4. He saith, That in the year 1648. God, who had Compassion on his People, did cause a Branch to spring forth of the Root of David, which was filled with Virtue for the Covenant of Life, and Peace was with him, etc. and much more matter of this Blasphemous nature you have in the Book and Page aforesaid. But who the degenerate Plant of this strange Vine was, I know not, except James Naylor. And saith John Whitehead, In the year 1655. I being a Branch of this Tree, (viz.) the Branch aforesaid, the Life of this Root, caused me to Blossom and bring forth Fruit, for the Spirit of the Lord came upon me. Ibid. But to return: suppose that these Ancient Authors did at first and since, till very lately, run into gross and abominable Errors about the Holy Scriptures, denying them to be the Word of God, and Rule of Faith and Practices: and did deny Christ's being at God's right hand in the Glorious Heavens beyond the Stars; and did deny the Humanity of Christ, and Justification by his Works, Righteousness and Merits, etc. yet they may now have seen their former Errors; and it may be by some means they have been convinced thereof, so that now they are become good, Orthodox Christians; and therefore they have published a Christianlike Profession of Faith, etc. Answer: But than ought they not to have renounced their former Writings that directly contradict it, and then we should have been hearty glad to hear of so great and so happy a Reformation in and amongst them? But now I think upon it, to put them upon renouncing any of their former Writings or Authors Works, will be a greater affront than the other; and I shall incur G. Whitehead's displeasure worse than before; for how can they do that, since all their Author's Books, be they ever so full of Rail, Falsities and Blasphemies, yet they entitle them to the Divine Majesty, and his Eternal Life and Light, given forth from his Mouth, and Sealed by his Spirit, etc. So that I see not how they can renounce what they have written, but must look upon all as infallibly true on their account, as the Pope and his Conclave looks upon their Councils, Edicts, and Decrees; so that as the Laws of the Medes and Persians, they are never to be altered or renounced. Then lastly, which way could the Quakers expect to escape, being defamed or discredited? why it is like they did suppose that the Honourable Assembly in Parliament had matters of greater moment in hand, than to compare their former Writings with their new Faith. So that if we had not concerned ourselves to peep into their Writings, and compare them with their newly professed Faith, and published this to the World; namely, That the Quakers former Writings and their late Profession of Faith, are as really alike as an Apple is to an Oyster, and agree as directly as Light and Darkness, it had not been known. But G. Whitehead saith in p. 6. That this Confession of Faith was sincerely owned and consented to as one condition of their present Liberty. Well then we hope you in plainness speak your Faith therein; for if you did dissemble your Principles to obtain your Liberty, it was but a bad way to get at it: But we hope better things. Now would the Quakers but clear themselves in these their First and Primitive Errors and corrupt principles in point of Faith, we should be hearty glad to hear thereof. First, That they would never more deny the Scriptures to be the Word of God, and Rule ●f Faith and Life; which they have done. ●●●●●…ly, That they would never more am●●… the Scriptures to be of no use in order to the true Knowledge of God. This they have formerly done. Thirdly, That they would no longer hold it to be a sin, Ay, the sin of Idolatry and Breach of the Second Commandment, to take the Practices of the Saints Recorded, Commanded, or Approved, etc. in the Scriptures for our Examples and Rules: This you have done. Fourthly, That they would never more affirm, That whatever is commanded in Scripture is no Duty to us, except we receive the Command by immediate Inspiration as the Prophets and Apostles did. Fifthly, That they would never more deny the Resurrection of the Bodies of Men from the Graves of the Earth, as they have done. Sixthly, That they would never more deny the Body of Christ of Flesh and Bones to be raised from the Grave, and to be now in the Glorious Heavens above, beyond the Stars. This they have also done. Seventhly, That they would never more deny Gospel Ordinances, as Baptism in Water and the Lord's Supper, Administered in Bread and Wine; which the Quakers do both despise and contemn? Eighthly, That they would forever renounce this pernicious Tenet, of believing that no Blessedness is to be enjoyed by the Saints after Death, the Body never being to be raised to any further Blessedness, no more than 〈◊〉 enjoyed a thousand years before they 〈◊〉; and that the Soul is part of God, came 〈◊〉 ●rom God, and shall return into God again, being part of his Essence. Ninthly, That they would never more deny Justification by Christ's Works, Righteousness and Merits; and for time to come, never call it a Doctrine of Devils, as they have formerly done. Tenthly, that they would never say and affirm that the Light within is Christ and God, as they have too commonly done. And finally, that they would leave off their Billingsgate Compliments, and learn to treat their Antagonists more moderately and mildly; for evil Communications will corrupt all their good Manners, if they have any: And waiting for this Reformation in them, I shall now proceed to examine G. W's long Story, and loud Out-cries about the Westmorland Petitioners; which is my next Work. About the Story of the Westmorland Petitioners, G. W. spends several pages in cavilling with what I say, Antichrist in Spirit, etc. pag. 78. namely, That Quake●●●● is not derived from a Person, but from ● Gesture used much amongst the Quakers, formerly in ' their Meetings, as was manifest by what was alleged against them by the Westmorland Petitioners; who alleged that their practice did exceedingly savour of Sorcery, because of the Swell, Quake, Roar and Foaming that were amongst them in their Meetings. I also cite the Quakers Answer to this Petition, p. 35. where they deny not Swelling, Foaming, and Quaking: But they deny Sorcery and Blasphemy; they justify their Quaking and Trembling, as being used by the Saints of old, etc. James Naylor, p. 16, and 17. of his Book, The Power and Glory of the Lord, etc. urgeth many Scriptures to prove their Name, by justifying this practice, saying, That holy Men of God do witness Quaking and Trembling, etc. Now what is this but a plain granting all that I bring the Instance for? I say the same may be said of wicked Men and Devils: But this is therefore no discriminating Character of Christianity or Saintship: For Acts 24. 25. wicked Felix did tremble: And James 2. 19 It is said, the Devil believes and trembles: And Luk. 9 39 we read of him that was possessed that he foamed, etc. But G. W. asks whether we were Eye or Ear-witnesses of these Gestures. He answers in the Negative, No. But how can G. W. tell but we have seen such Gestures amongst them? for my own part I have seen them quake and foam at the Mouth: Besides several that have been Eye and Ear-witnesses of 〈◊〉. But, saith G. W. You had this from the Westmorland Petitioners: And what were they but a Company of envious, persecuting Priests and Magistrates. Answer, no doubt but this is the best Language you can afford any that give the clearest Demonstrations of your corrupt Notions and deceivable Gestures. Then observe what a long run G. W. takes after his own shadow, and then falls a fight with Men of Straw of his own setting up: Saith he, We deny your Story of Swell and Foaming, as charged upon us, or our Meetings in Westmoreland, etc. Answer, than you do not deny Quaking, Trembling and Roaring; so that there remains as much and more undenied, as the Instance is brought for, as any may see in Antichrist in Spirit, p. 78. Again you say your Meetings in Westmoreland are clear of it. I ask George Whitehead, do I say that you and your Meetings in Westmoreland did use to swell and foam? Is there any such thing said or asserted, that you swollen and fo●med there? Suppose you formerly used to q●●●●, tremble, roar, swell and foam at the 〈◊〉- Mouth in London, or elsewhere, the Westmoreland Petitioners may say true, for aught we say in our Book, or for any thing you have said yet. But I challenge you to deny if you dare that such Gestures were used amongst you formerly. Again I shall follow G. Whitehead a little further in this his impertinent, long run, which he makes a material part of the Bundle of Stuff in his slanderous Libel: Saith he, p. 13. Set Case any have been disordered through some natural Infirmity, Distemper, Swooning or Falling Sickness: What doth this affect us or our Meetings on a religious Account; it may be some of your own People's Case? Answer, It is strange to me, that G. W. an old Stickler for Quakerism, should think to put off the Matter of Fact with such an Equivocal Gloss. Do you think that such natural or transient Infirmities, that are incident to Men, were the occasion of the Westmorland Petition, and other Charges of the same Nature, or of what I and many others have seen? Surely if you think so, no body else will. And how impertinent is your next Supposition? Say you, suppose it should be made appear that divers Anabaptists, after they have been dipped and received into Church-Fellowship, have run mad or distracted, and others guilty of great Enormities, how would this affect either your Church-profession or Societies? p. 14. Answer, you speak here to none of us, the Name Anabaptists we never owned, procured, or defended, as you have done your Quaking. And although James Nailor justified your Quaking and Trembling; yet here in p. 11. say you, Quakerism is a Nickname in Derision; and James Nailor in the Title Page of his Book, styles himself one whom Ishmael's Brood calls a Quaker. Pray then what is G. W. who so frequently calls us Anabaptists? Is not he one of Ishmael's Brood, according to his own Doctor's Opinion? And since the Name Anabaptists belongs not to us: First, I answer thus, that if any have submitted to Christ's sacred Ordinance of Baptism, and are received into Church-Fellowship, etc. and after this shall turn Anabaptists, and provoke God thereby, he may in Justice deprive them of their Senses, and give them up to enormous Acts. Now since you are not ignorant that the Name Anabaptists belongs not to us, this might serve for an Answer to your impertinent Supposition. But suppose some Members of the baptised Churches, or any other Christian Societies have so done, we believe God can at his pleasure deprive of Senses and Understanding: And we also believe that the truest Professors, if they have not a constant care and watch, may Apostatise, and run into great Inormities. But what is this to your frequent Gestures of Quaking, Trembling, and foaming in your Meetings formerly? I confess there may be something in it, if you will say that all that used those Gestures amongst you were mad and distracted Men and Women: But 'tis like you will be cautious of saying so; it having been so frequent amongst you, lest any should be so maliciously untoward; though it may be very natural, as to conclude, that Quakerism was first founded, and carried on by mad and distracted Men and Women; for they quaked, trembled, and foamed at the Mouth, etc. Again, I shall take notice of one more of your impertinent Suppositions, after mentioning Mark 9 20, 25, 26. and Luke 9 39, 42, 43. About the Man that was brought to Christ who was possessed, and the Spirit tore him and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming, etc. now suppose, saith G. W. That in any Meeting of the People called Quakers, such Apparitions or gestures has been, he will not own it to have been frequent, no but in any particular person, that some unclean Spirit hath so torn or disordered her or him; (now observe the Inference) we may charitably believe it has been because Jesus Christ has come in Spirit and Power amongst them, to rebuke and cast out such unclean Spirits and to deliver them that were infested thereby; when our Friends have been solemnly met together in Fasting and Prayer in his Name and fear, to wait upon him, and worship him, etc. Answer, I would first ask G. W. what Rule or Reason the Quakers can assign for Fasting? my Question is grounded upon Matth. 9 14. Then came to him the Disciples of John saying, why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but thy Disciples fast not? v. 15. Jesus said unto them, can the Children of the Bride-Chamber mourn as long as the Bridegroom is with them? but the days shall come when the Bridegroom shall be taken from them, then shall they fast: Now I ask you by what Rule you observe days of Fasting, since you really believe that Christ the Bridegroom is really with you, among, and personally in you? Methinks its strange that you should talk of Fasting; that is a Duty in cumbent upon such as believe Christ's Personal Ascension into the glorious Heavens above, beyond the Stars; so that he being personally taken from them, though present in Spirit, they are obliged to Prayer and Fasting, and all other Gospel Ordinances, till his second personal and glorious coming. But what the Quakers have to do with Ordinances, Prayer, or Fasting, I see not. 2. Neither is there Reason to believe you dare in your Assemblies, in Christ's Name, rebuke any unclean Spirits, lest you meet with the same Answer and Repulse as the seven Sons of Sceva did, Acts 19 14, 15, 16. And the evil Spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you? And the Man in whom the evil Spirit was, leapt on them, and overcame them, etc. And to conclude my Answer to his long Story, I ask George Whitehead why he had not denied this Gesture of Quaking and Foaming to Mr. John Faldo, who gives him Provocation enough to do it. See his Book, Quakerism no Christianity, pag. 12. Saith he, How generally were their Meetings (viz. the Quakers,) either silent, or taken up with sudden and violent Eruptions of dismal Howl and horrid Rave, Persons suddenly taken, as with the Falling Sickness, shaking and foaming at the Mouth, and some lying flat on the ground as if stark dead? And saith Mr. Faldo, some such things as these I have seen and heard; and that there are undeniable Testimonies of it, that are so numerous and notorious, that though now they have almost, if not altogether, left the latter sort of them, they dare not deny that it was so: And if they dare to challenge this with an Untruth, I may requite them to keep alive their Remembrance with a good part of a volume of them. Thus far Mr. Faldo, whose Book is signed and approved by 21 Ministers of the Independent and Presbyterian Way. I needed not to have taken this Pains, since these Gestures are fresh in the Memories of many in this Nation: And George Whitehead hath said nothing that denies the Matter of Fact charged in my Books, p. 6, 7. upon the Quakers: he denies not Quaking and Trembling, which was all the Instance was brought for; and then I think for any Service G. W. hath done the Cause, he had better have said nothing. 3. George Whitehead saith in p. 16. that I have falsely cited, and grossly perverted the Quakers Words and Authors, and taken many false things on Credit, not only the Story from the Westmorland Petitioners; but also out of his Brother Tho. Hicks, his abominable Forgeries and Lies, in his factious Dialogues: And in p. 8. He prays his Reader to observe, that much of our Book against them is taken out of other Books, and Pamphlets of their Adversaries, long since answered and refuted; and their Authority is utterly denied by us, as the Westmoreland Petitioners, who were envious Persecutors. Tho. Hicks his abusive Dialogues, who was proved a notorious Forger of Lies. And a malicious Libel styled, Tyranny and Hypocrisy detected. Answer. I am inclinable to think G. W. hath said some Truth in what hath been repeated; nay, I do in Charity believe it: then I will show you what I believe he saith Truth in. 4. Namely, That the Authority of the Quakers Adversaries Books is utterly denied by them. I am strongly persuaded G. W. saith Truth in this; for they that can deny the Authority of the Scriptures, being the only Rule of Faith and Practice, when alleged against them, may well deny the Authority of all Books wrote against them whatsoever, tho' the Matter be ever so true. 2. As to the rest asserted by G. W. I will not tell him he lies: But I am well satisfied he is departed very far from the Truth. And as to that Book, Tyranny and Hypocrisy detected, It treats chief of the Usurping and Lording Authority that some of the Quakers assumed over others, and of others opposing and contradicting them, as might be made manifest. And as to what instances I bring from that Book, as Josias Coal's Letter from Berbaldus to George Fox, giving him those blasphemous Titles; mentioned, Antichrist in Spirit unmasked, p. 43. or any other passage from thence, cited by me, let G. W. deny them, as to Matter of Fact, if he dare. 3. As for Mr. Hicks his Dialogues, that George Whitehead calls Lies and Forgeries, and the Author a notorious Liar and Forger, etc. It had been much more to purpose had G. W. shown us what some of those Lies and Forgeries were. I have, it's true, examined the Quakers Appeal by way of Charge against Tho. Hicks, wherein they charge him with Lies, and Slanders, and Forgeries, and what not; and I have perused Mr. Hicks' Answer to their Appeal, where Mr. Hicks clears himself both of Lies and Forgery. I find his Answer to their Appeal, subscribed and approved by no less than 22 Persons of Credit, who testify that they have compared Tho. Hicks his Citations with the Quakers Books, out of which they were taken, and find them truly cited; then let the Reader judge who is the Liar, Tho. Hicks, or G. W. Again G. W. seems to be angry with my Citation out of Mr. Hicks' Dialogue, p. 24, 25. In Antichrist in Spirit, p. 14, 15. As for us, had the Scriptures never been, we could have known what is therein contained: I have also heard this from a Quaker myself. But G. W. was not so fair as to mention this, though it was the ground of my Demand. And let the Reader observe what an apparent Perversion George Whitehead makes of my Words, and the occasion of them, p. 18, 19 of his Pamphlet, after he hath charged us with Forgery. Now pray observe, saith he, what strange Test or Proof your Agent Edw. pay puts upon us to evince an immediate Inspiration. G. W. knows this Question was demanded, to prove what is before mentioned: Namely, that had the Scriptures never been, they could have known what was therein contained. Now if this be so, then let the Quakers resolve me what those things were that Jesus did, that are not written, Joh. 21. 25. or what were the Contents of that writing on the ground, Joh. 8. 68 Or else let their proud boasting of immediate Inspirations be condemned to perpetual silence, etc. Saith G. W. Hereupon you have passed unjust Judgement, and falsely charged us with proud boasting; and argued absurdly against immediate Inspiration, as if none have the Spirit of Christ, unless they know and can declare all things that it knows. I answer, It is a strange thing to me, that G. Whitehead doth not see that he condemns himself whilst he is judging another; and it is a lamentable thing that the Quakers will admit of no distinctions: But it verifies that true Proverb, that the want of distinctions are the cause of mistakes. Here G. W. will not admit of a distinction, betwixt immediate Inspirations, and the mediate or more common Gifts of the Spirit. Now all Christians that I know of, will admit of this distinction, That it is one thing to be immediately and extraordinarily endowed and inspired with the Holy Ghost, as the Prophets and Apostles in their Prophecies and Writings were; and another thing to have such common and more immediate Gifts and Graces of the Spirit, that are promised by Christ to them that obey him, as a Seal of their present Acceptance, and future Inheritance. The use of these more immediate or common Gifts, are to help our Infirmities, and to bring to remembrance our Lord's revealed Will in his Word: Things that are secret, and not written; not at all belonging to us, but to the Lord. But observe G. W's plain perversion of my Words. First, saith he, as if none have the Spirit of Christ, unless they know and can declare all Things it knows. Do I demand of you to tell me all things that Jesus did, or that the Holy Spirit knows? You know I do not; and than what an idle Evasion is this? And because we pretend not to immediate or extraordinary Inspirations; therefore we come short of being Christ's Ministers or Ambassadors, and have shut ourselves out from any share in the Spirit of Christ, or Divine Inspiration; and how then will you prove your Call to baptise People in Water. Answer, Then by G. W's Logic, because we do not pretend to such immediate and extraordinary Inspirations, as to know what had been contained in the Scriptures, had they never been written: We fall short of being Christ's Ministers or Ambassadors, and have shut ourselves out from having any share in the Spirit of Christ, etc. One that hath but his Senses, would be inclined to think that this Consequence is much beside the Truth; and yet if this be not true, G. W. cannot imagine how we can prove our Call to baptise People in Water. But to inform him in this Matter, we have a sufficient Call for it, from the Commission of Christ our great Prophet, who is to be heard in all things, Matth. 28. Mark 16. And the frequent Examples of the Apostles, who admonish and exhort us to be Followers of them as they are of Christ, and to keep the Ordinances as they were delivered; so that we need not immediate Inspirations for our Call or Authority herein. But I am persuaded G. W. hath made use of these many nonsensical Quibles to evade resolving the Question. Now let him resolve me in some of those things that Jesus did, that was not written, and what was wrote on the ground: And let him or any other Quaker do it, either by a mediate or immediate Inspiration or Revelation: And if they cannot do it, then let their proud boastings of immediate Inspirations, Revelations, and Knowledge in things above what is written, cease for ever, etc. And I shall still wait for an Answer. Again, p. 21. Saith G. W. To deem them Impostors that say Christ is within thee or them, is to render the holy Apostles Impostors, who preached Christ within, the Word nigh in thy heart, Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. which therefore was not separate from them, and only at a distance; yea, and to render themselves also Impostors, who have confessed the same Truth of Christ within; referring to our Book, p. 22, 23, 69. Antichrist in Spirit, etc. Which I refer the Reader to. Answer. Besides the gross Slanders that G. W. casts upon us, it is a lamentable thing to see how miserably he abuseth the Text, Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. He only mentioning that part that he thinks is for his Turn: The Word is nigh in thy heart, leaving out, In thy Mouth, even the Word of Faith which we preach; which the Apostle there explains thus, If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved, etc. Can any thing be more clearly expressed, ver. 9 Yet G. W. will not distinguish betwixt the Word of Faith that the Apostles preached, and the Object of Faith to whom this Word directs; and because we cannot, neither did the Holy Apostle understand the Word here to be Christ: Therefore G. W. is so daringly confident, that he charges us with rendering the holy Apostles Impostors, and ourselves also. I shall spend no more time on this Particular, but leave the impartial Reader to judge of G. W's gross perversion of this Text. And in p. 22. George Whitehead charges me with wronging and abusing them about the Titles of their Books, as if higher than they give the Holy Scriptures; perverting them, by leaving out the explanatory part of the Titles: And he Instances in H. Smith's Book, A True and Everlasting Rule, etc. Being the first Part of the Title: But I leave out the next following; viz. from God discovered; and for this, here is a loud Outcry of Wrong, Abuse, and Perversion, etc. I ask G. W. does those Words from God discovered, added to The True and Everlasting Rule, diminish the height of the Title? You would persuade your Reader to believe so, or else why do you quarrel at it. The Title was higher than you afford the Scriptures before; and one would be under a strong Temptation to believe, that Addition makes it higher and not lower. Now I would seriously ask G. W. when and how God made this discovery to H. Smith, that the Scriptures are thus useless to guide in the ways of God; and how can you profess in your Faith, that the Scriptures are profitable for Doctrine, Instruction, etc. since there is a sufficient Rule to guide in all the ways of God without them. Again, saith he, we know none among us, that call the Holy Scripture a dead or carnal Letter: And p. 24. he puts us to prove, that the People called Quakers, or any Persons continuing in Society with them, do say; Mark that, that the Holy Scripture is but a dead, carnal Letter; or that we so call the Doctrines or Testimonies contained in them. Answer, what may not the Quakers prove or deny at this rate? There are these Difficulties proposed: First, we must be sure the Persons do at this moment continue in Society with the Quakers. Secondly, that they do now in the present Tense, say, The Scriptures are but a dead or carnal Letter; and this is not enough if this be done: For by Scriptures they do not mean the Writings or written Words of the Old and New Testament, but Faith, Repentance, Holiness, etc. p. 22. Though the outward Letter or Writing in itself alone be dead. And, saith G. W. now I leave the Reader to judge whether he doth not own the Charge. And if he will deny that any approved Quaker did ever, whilst so, call the Scriptures a dead and carnal Letter, let him do it if he dare. Having followed, G. W. in answering his impertinent and absurd Evasions. I shall give the Reader a Breviate of the sweet, convincing Language the Quakers use to treat their Antagonists withal: And first I shall begin with Tho. Lawson in his Book against William Jefrey: Thou Image-maker, thou Cockatrice hatching Eggs, Vultures Eye; and this, because William Jefrey said, Christ was ascended with that Body that God raised him from the dead again. Thou Heathen, because W. J. said the Will of Christ was made known by the Scriptures, Thou Liar, Bundle of Lies, thou Esau, selling thy Birthright, a Mute for the Night-birds, Cormorants, Bitterns, Owls, Ravens, Dragons, wild Beasts, Satyrs, Vultures, Screich-Owls; and that because W. G. said that the Saints have not the glorious Kingdom in possession, but by promise: This for Tho. Lawson, the Quaker, in his Book against W. Jefrey, etc. I shall again mention Famous Edward Boroughs in his Answer to Mr. Bennets 20. Sober Questions, as appears in Boroughs Works in Folio, from p. 29. to 34. a Breviate thereof take as followeth, Thou Reprobate and Child of Darkness, the Light condemns thee, and thy Generation eternally. We Witness thee to be in the Sorcery and Witchcraft. Thou art darkness itself, thou Dragon, thy Queries are conjured in the Black-Art, out of the bottomless Pit; thou Diviner, we Witness thee to be the Beast that Wars with the Lamb, thou Antichrist that lookest at Christ's death at Jerusalem alone: thou art seen with the Light and with it condemned, thou blind Pharisee and Blasphemer, thou Jesuit, art thou pleading for a Christ afar off thee, thou art under the Woe, and from that Woe thou shalt never fly: Let all People see whether thou be not a blind ignorant Sot. Here thou repliest thy sottish Questions concerning the Body of Jesus, as the Devil did about the Body of Moses: Thou disobedient one upon whom God will render Vengeance in flaming fire, thou art Accursed, thou Beast to whom the Plagues of God are due, upon whom the Wrath of God must be accomplished; thou art shut out from God for ever, thou blind Hypocrite, thou dark sottish Beast, thou polluted Beast. And much more to this purpose you will find in the Book and Pages of Edward Boroughs the Quaker aforesaid. Now is it not hard to believe the Testimony the Quakers give of this Man, namely, that he was a Faithful Servant and Prophet of the Lord? And yet he thus Sentences a Man to Woe and Condemnation for ever; and that for ask some sober and serious Questions. Take also a Breviate of Mr. Penn's sweet Language to Mr. Faldo, in Answer to his Book, Quakerism no Christianity. See Mr. Faldo's Reply to Mr. Penn's Answer, p. 93. Saith Mr. Faldo, I shall rake but into one of your Books for the following good Language, and leave large glean of all these lovely Titles and Eipithets you afford me and my Work. ' Behold you Priest, failable, errable Priest, scoffing independent Priest, ungodly Priest, busy Priest, cavilling Priest, overdoing Priest, Antichristian Priest, Mountebank Priest, this taunting Priest, stingy Priest, mercenary John Faldo, a Quack, a Religious Bonesetter, the Priest's break-neck; the Priest and his Poppit-play Doctrine, vaunting, strutting John Faldo, insolent Vilifier, ignorance or malice itself, our malignant Adversary John Faldo, ignorance, malice, and revenge; black as Hell itself in malice, impious scoffs, impudence, strange impudence, the impudence of his wickedness, sordid pedantry, he vomits his Scriptures, he brings no more to purpose than Toby and his Dog, a Doctrine of Devils, a lie, a lie to be sure, a very lie, devilish falsities, a downright lie, an errand lie, a wicked lie, the last great lie of his second part of lies, a wicked lie minted out of Hell. Mr. Penn' s Answer to Mr. Faldo, p. 43. 65. 79. 64. 109. 117. 140. 208, 210. 74. 107. 116. 40. 46. 110. 157. 204. 213. 214. 203. 215. And much more that follows, being more general Rail and Reflections. 4. Take a Breviate also out of this small bundle of Raillery, written by G. Whitehead against Edward pay, Henry Loader, and William Alcot, thus sweetly worded. The Envy and Bitterness, they are maliciously envious against our present Liberty; as Men of a turbulent, persecuting Spirit, they have grossly belied us in their bitter lying invectives, their envy and bitterness is carnal, blind, and dark, these envious turbulent Teachers in their rage and raillery, Lord deliver every well-meaning person from you and your Envy, such malicious Preachers as these Anabaptists, who as persons possessed with a lying unclean Spirit, are now still foaming out their own shame and malice; their work of malice and falsehood in their puff'd-up envious Flesh, they have grossly belied us, and do charge us with this horrid lie, your shameful lies, you have grossly belied us, you have diabolically and foully foamed out your own shame and envy, as will appear that the foaming unclean Spirit and lying Devil is not cast out of you, the unclean lying Spirit that possesses you, such gross forgeries, horrid and abusive forgeries, a gross lie, O blind Guides, self-contradicting and self-condemning Hypocrites; you are blind Guides, they are gross notorious old lies; Woe unto you lying Hypocrites. Antichrist in Flesh, &c▪ p. 5. 6. 7. 9 10. 11. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20. 21. etc. And more such stuff as this; Now doth not this make it manifest that the Quakers are no Changelings. But is it not strange that these people that call themselves God's Lambs, should act so like raging Bears; and when endeavours have been used to still their ragings, many times their Answer hath been as Tho. Lawson to Will. Jefery, Dost not thou know the Saints shall Judge the World, they being the Saints, and all they condemn, the World. Take a Breviate of some of the Quakers Profession of Faith. The Quakers Profession of Faith. Q. What's your Belief concerning the Blessed Trinity as our Term is. Answer, Our Belief is that in the Unity of the Godhead there is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, being those 3 Divine Witnesses that bear Record in Heaven; the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and that these three are one according to Holy Scrip. Testimon. The Quakers Contradictions of this Faith. 1. Respecting the place where these Divine Witnesses are, or what Heaven they intent. 2. How it appears that they own the Humanity of Christ. 3. How it can be that they own Justification by Christ, briefly examined. Smith's Primer p. 9 They that are false Ministers, Preach Christ without, and bid people Believe in him as he is in Heaven above; Swored of the Lord, p. 24 your carnal Christ is utterly denied by the Light, your imagined God beyond the Stars. J. Pernel's Satan's design discovered. p. 19, 25. saith, That by Preaching Christ in Heaven, the Devil gets his work done on Earth: as, Tho. Lucock being asked by W. J. where that Heaven was into which Christ Ascended? He answered, clapping his hand on his Breast, saying, within me, within me, so that the Heaven the Quakers intent, is within them, in their corruptible bodies. The Quakers Profession of Faith. Q. Do you believe the Divinity and Humanity of Jesus Christ the Eternal Son of God, or that Jesus Christ is truly God and Man? Answer Yes, we verily believe that Jesus is truly God and Man, according as the Holy Scriptures testifies of him, God over all, blessed for ever, the true God and eternalLife, the one Mediator between God and Man, the Man Christ Jesus. The Quakers Contradictions of this Faith. 2. How doth it appear that the Quakers do believe the Humanity of Christ? Since John Whitehead Dip. plu. p. 13. Jesus Christ a person without us, is not Scripture Language, but the Anthropomorphites and Mugletonians. Again, G. W.'s Appendix to Reason against Railing, p. 21. The Socinian tells us of a personal Christ; and that the Man Christ Jesus our Lord hath in Heaven a place remote from Earth, a humane Body. But doth he believe him to be the eternal God, whilst he imagines him to be a personal Christ, a humane Body, so limited and confined to Remoteness, etc. The Quakers Profession of Faith. Quest. Do you believe and expect Salvation and Justification by the Righteousness and Merits of Jesus Christ, or by your own Righteousness or Works? Answer, By Jesus Christ his righteous Merits and Works and not by our own. God is not indebted to us for our deservings; but we to him for his Free Grace in Christ Jesus, whereby we are saved through Faith in him, not of ourselves, etc. The Quakers Contradictions of this Faith. G. Fox, Great Mystery of the great Whore, p. 71. He saith, Christ's Nature is not humane, which is earthly; for that is the first Adam's, &c. And yet they profess to believe the Humanity of Christ. See G. Fox's Great Mystery, etc. p. 16. Saith he, John Bunyan saith, God is distinct from the Saints; and Bunyan is deceived, who, saith he, is distinct from the Saints; and so you are a Company of pitiful Teachers. See Mr. Haworth's Animadversions upon the quibbling Libel from the Hartford Quakers, styled, A Testimony for the Man Christ Jesus, p. 11. One William Bates, a Quaker, said more than once, That what Christ took of the Virgin had now not Being, etc. Sept. 19 1676. in the hearing of Daniel Doughty, John Albury, and Stephen Tothil. Mr. Pen's Justification is not by the Imputation of another's Righteousness, but from the actual performing and keeping God's righteous Laws. Pen's Sandy Foundation, p. 25. E. Burrough's Works, p. 33. God doth not except any, where there is any failing, or who do not fulfil the Law, and answer to every demand of Justice. See Mr. Pen' s Serious Apology, p. 148. Justification by the Righteousness of another; or which Christ fulfilled for us in his own Person, wholly without us, we boldly affirm to be a Doctrine of Devils, and an Arm of the See of Corruption, that doth now deluge the World. See again Mr. Pen' s sandy Foundation, p. 25. 30. It is a great Abomination to say, God should condemn and punish his innocent Son, that he having satisfied for our Sins, we may be justified by the Imputation of his perfect Righteousness: O why should this horrible thing be contended for by Christians! I shall pass this, when I have only given you one instance more. See Edw. Burrough's Works, p. 32, 33. in Answer to the 12 Question; it being this, Whether the holy Lives and Works of the Saints be not excluded from the Act of Justification, from the Gild of Sin. Edw. Burrough's Answer, Thou dead Beast! Thou art a Stranger from the Life of God, and excluded from the holy Life of the Saints, and their Works; Thou art un-redeemed from thy vain Conversation, and so art not justified nor never shalt be; and by the same that the ●…nts are justified, thou art condemned into the Lake for ever. I shall now leave the Reader to judge, Whether the Quakers own Writings, and their late pretended Faith professed, do not directly contradict each other: About the Three Divine Witnesses in Heaven, the Humanity of Christ; and that they expect Justification by his Works, Righteousness and Merits, etc. and not by their own. The Quakers Profession of Faith in the holy Scriptures. They say they believe in the Three Divine Witnesses that bare Record in Heaven, according to Holy Scripture-Testimony. And in their last Article, they propose the Question thus: Quest. Do you believe and own the Holy Scriptures contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration, and to contain all Matters of Doctrine and Testimony, necessary to be believed and practised in order to Salvation, and Peace with God? They answer and say; yes, we do, and by the assistance of Grace and good Spirit of God. which giveth the Understanding of the Mind of God and meaning of holy Scriptures, we always desire to live in the Faith, Knowledge; and Practise of them in all things appertaining to Life and Godliness: holy Scriptures being given by divine Inspiration, is profitable for Doctrine, Correction, and Instruction, that the Man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished to every good Work, able to make the Man of God wise to Salvation, through Faith in Christ Jesus. The Quakers professed Faith, directly contradicted by their own Writings and Authors. Fox and Hubberthorn Truth's Defence, p. 101. They say the Scriptures are no standing Rule; and that it is dangerous for the ignorant People to read them: I, and yet profitable for Doctrine and Holy Scriptures too? G. Whitehead's serious Apology, p. 49. That which was spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any, is of as great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are, and greater. Pernel's Shield of the Truth, p. 19 He also that saith the Letter, that is, the Scriptures as written, is the Rule and Guide of the people of God, is without, feeding upon husks, and is ignorant of the true Light. James Nailor's Light of Christ, p. 19 God is at liberty to speak to his People by the Scriptures if he please, and where they are given by Inspiration, doth so: And he is also at liberty to speak by any other created thing, as to Balaam by his Ass. Tho. Lawson, in his untaught Teacher; Read p. 6, 7, 8. The Scriptures are not a Rule whereby to know the Will of Christ. See also H. Smith's True and Everlasting Rule from God discovered; for I must remember that part of the Title; or else G. W. will be offended▪ and say I wrong him. H. S. affirms, that there is no other Rule, Way, or Means, by which Men shall ever come to walk with God, but by that which is manifest of God in him; and that it is sufficient to guide in all the ways of God without Scripture, or any other outward Rule. How then are the Scriptures profitable and necessary, as pretended in your Profession of Faith? See also J. Nailor's Answer to the Jews, Read p. 4, 22, 25. It is Blasphemy for any to say the Letter is the Word of God: It is the Devil that contends for the Scriptures to be the Word of God. See Burrough's Works, p. 62. He that persuades People to let the Scriptures be the Rule of Faith and Practice, would keep People in Darkness; for who ever walks by the Rule without them, and teaches Men so to do, would make void the Covenant of Life and Peace. And see what my Antagonist saith, Dip. Plu. p. 13. and then judge, if the Scriptures be no Rule; yea, if it be Idolatry to call the Bible a means, as G. W. expressly saith, who also affirmeth, that Faith grounded on the Scriptures, is but an empty implicit Faith; and bespeaks such Persons void of the knowledge of God, and Christ, and Salvation, and to be yet in their Sins; and that such Men walk by their own Fancies and Imaginations, Christ Ascerded, p. 11. Now if the Scriptures be a dead, carnal Letter, Ink and Paper, saith Pernel▪ in Shield of Truth: If they are the Precepts and Traditions of Men, saith Nailor, in his Love to the lost. And as Helbro●… the Quaker said to James Nobs and his Wife, If they are no better than an old Aim▪ Hick's D. p. 29. If it be dangerous for the Ignorant to read them: If to say an Ass hath as much Authority essentially in himself to teach and rebuke, as the Scriptures: If to account it blasphemy and diabolical, to call the Scriptures the Word of God, be not to contemn and vilify them, I am yet to seek what is. I shall refer the Reader to our Book, Antichrist in Spirit unmasked, where the rest of the Quakers Articles of Faith, published in their late Pamphlet, are particularly examined. Now let the Quakers renounce and explode those Writings and Say of their Authors that stand upon Record, that so directly contradict their new Faith professed by them; and as was said, we shall be glad of so great and happy a Reformation among them, hoping some means hath been blessed to work this happy change upon them. In p. 24, 25. G. Whitehead saith, we have wronged his Words in Citation and Construction, about the holy Scriptures and Person of Christ: and likewise grossly abused, wronged, and mischarged G. Fo● J. Pernel, G. Keith, foully perverting, and misconstruing their Words. And he saith, we have also abused, vilified, defamed, and wronged W. Smith, H. Smith, J. Nailor, E. Burroughs, J. Penington, S. Crisp, W. P. and others, Men of better Fame and Repute than ourselves, and more righteous and innocent than their Defamers. Answer, That forasmuch as G. Whitehead cannot, or at least, hath not showed us wherein we have wronged them as to Matter of Fact, we shall take these to be some of G. W's empty and swelling words of Vanity, and look upon it as a presumptuous Blast blown without Proof or Demonstration; and so it needs no further Answer at present. Again, I shall take no notice at all of the confused Profession of Faith, that G. Whitehead makes▪ in 27, 28, 29, 30. Pages of his Libel; but do think it had been much more to the present purpose, had he instead thereof, laboured to reconcile their Writings with their late published Faith. The Conclusion, Wherein I shall take a little Notice of G. Whitehead's Postscript, G. W. citys Antichrist in Spirit, etc. p. 46. Where I refer the Reader to Saul's Errand to Damascus, p. 6, 7. Where G. Fox takes the Name of the eternal Judge of quick and dead to himself, etc. G. Whitehead saith, this is notoriously false in Fact, being, saith he, in the very same Book Saul's Errand, recorded amongst those Matters, falsely charged on G. F. by his Adversaries the Priests and others, in the County of Lancaster, in their Petition, p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. of Saul's Errand, where G. F. opposeth and answereth their Objections. To all which I answer: In the beginning of the Book, Saul's Errand, there is that part of the Lancaster Petition inserted, p. 4, 5, 6, 7. In which Petition, G. F. is charged with taking to himself the Name of the eternal Judge of quick and dead, etc. The Lancaster Petitioners were several Men of Credit and Repute. Now though G. W. says the charge was false, and G. Fox denies it in that their Book, etc. What then? Have not I more reason to believe the Affirmative of so many, than G. Fox's Negative? I know 'tis a Faculty incident to you to deny Matters of Fact charged upon you, be they ever so apparently true: And who can think that a number of Men should agree together in charging G. Fox with a Falsehood? Though G. Fox denies their charge in his Book, may not we answer it in your own Phrase, p. 8 of your Pamphlet, The Authority of the Quakers Books are utterly denied by us; so that we have grounds to believe the Petitioners say true? Why may not G. F. take the Name of Judge of quick and dead to himself, as well as to approve of those blasphemous Titles given him by Jos. Coal, in his Letter from Berbadoes, cited in Antichrist in Spirit, p. 43, 44, 45, Dear G. Fox, who art the Father of many Nations, whose Light hath reached through us thy Children, even to the Isles afar of, to the begetting of many again to a lively hope, for which Generations to come shall call thee (G. F) blessed, whose Being and Habitation is in the Power of the Highest, in which thou (G. F.) rulest and governest in Righteousness, and thy (G. Fox's) Kingdom is established in Peace, and the Increase thereof is without end 21 day of the 12 month, 1658. Now if G. Fox could digest and approve of all these. Titles, due only to Christ himself in the Opinion of all Christians: Why may he not use the like Modesty, in taking the name of Judge of quick and dead to himself: The other Titles were approved and ordered to be recorded. Why may not G. Fox take this Name to himself, as well as to say in one of your Meetings: Friends, although I have not told it you, I do now declare it, I have power to bind, and lose whom I please? Now if G. W. hath the confidence to deny these things, a further Test of them and others may be more fully given. G. Whitehead's next causeless Outcry, is, that I say the Quakers say, that Christ hath no body but his Church, quoting Saul's Errand, p. 9 Which saith, G. W. is notoriously false again: for, said he, it was the Priest's Objection against L. F. that he professed that Christ had never any body but his Church, Saul's Errand, p. 2. Which saith G. W. was also false, and there recorded amongst their other false Charges objected. To which I answer: First, I do not charge the Quakers, with saying that Christ never had any Body but his Church: They own he had a bodily Garment. But the Petitioners aforesaid charged the Quakers, with saying that Christ hath no Body but his Church. Now instead of G. Fox's owning Christ to have a Body besides his Church, or distinct from his Church: He replies, That Christ's Church is his Body; which I say is but a shuffle; and not denying, but implicitly granting the Matter of Fact. And why may not G. F. deny Christ to have a Personal Body, besides or distinct from his Church, as well as G. Whitehead? Dip. Pl. p. 13. Burrough's Works, p. 150. It is not our wont course to say, that Christ hath no Body but his Church. But we say the Church is his Body. Observe they do not usually say so; but it appears they believe so; See ibid. p. 151. 152. To say Christ hath two Bodies, one out of the sight of the Saints. There is so much Wickedness and Ignorance in the Broachers of such a Particular, that it needs no Answer, etc. See G. Whitehead's Verdict; and I shall leave this to the Reader's Judgement, his Apology, p. 33. Them that accuse us, for saying Christ hath but one Body, should produce Scripture that saith he hath two. And where doth the Scripture say, that Christ's glorified Body in Heaven is of humane Nature? Now the Quakers own Christ's Church to be his Body; then that is the one Body G. W. intends. And it is monstrous to say he hath two: So that then I do not wrong the Quakers, in saying that they own Christ to have no Body but his Church. Now all Christians own Christ's Church to be his Mystical Body; and they also believe him to have a personal glorious Body distinct from his Church, saith he, Ep. etc. p. 59 refers to Pernel's Shield of Truth, p. 12. Where I. P. calls Waterbaptism a formal Imitation and Invention of Men, etc. G. Whitehead saith James Pernel speaks not this of Waterbaptism without distinction. Answer, However he saith so; and then the Charge is owned to be true. To this agrees Smith's Primer, p. 39 Thy Baptism, Bread and Wine, rose from the Pope's Invention: And James Nailor's Salutation to the Seed of God, p. 33, 34. calls Waterbaptism a carnal thing. Now let the judicious Reader judge how far I have been concerned in wronging the Quakers, etc. To conclude, we will give an Answer to G. Whitehead's impertinent Questions, though I think they are not worth taking notice of: His Questions are 4; but his Reasons for ask them vanish in answering the first; viz. Was E. P. deputed and approved by your Congregation, or any select Assembly of Elders or Ministers of the Baptised People or Churches, to write or publish his said Book against the People called Quakers? Or did he do it on his own Authority or Head with your Approbation only. Answer, Your pretended Faith being published and dispersed plentifully here, it did more directly affect this People of the baptised Way; and therefore E. P. did write and publish the said Book, by the approbation of the Majority of this Congregation: And so he did not do it on his own Head. Neither did we see it needful to desire the approbation of others herein, though several have approved of it since. And it is most ridiculously impertinent for you so often to speak of defaming you as a People, except you could show a Dispensation to be universal Dictator's, and a Licence to disperse your confused and pernicious Stuff without Control. Moreover Edw. pay hath this to say, that although he doth not pretend to Perfection, as some of the Quakers have done; that is, a living without Sin: Yet when G. W. becomes Master of an Inquisition, Edw. pay will give sufficient Testimonies, both of his Life and Doctrine, to the confutation of his Defamers. And the mean time, he challenges any to charge and prove against him any thing unbecoming a Man and a Christian, respecting either Life or Principles, humane Frailties excepted. And although G. W. insinuates most arrogantly that he had need to be a Man of singular Piety and eminent Parts, that is sit to discourse with a Quaker in this Controversy; yet E. P. believes that a Man of as mean Qualifications as himself can do it: And let this serve for an Answer to your impertinent Questions. And now, G. W. I conclude with a Word to thee; and do hereby declare, that I never had the least prejudice against, or Controversy with any Quaker about civil things, though I have been intimate with several of them, both at Bristol when I lived there, and elsewhere; but from your Principles, Liberanos, Domine, I hope shall ever be my Litany: And I hope all that are, or would be Christians, will join with me, and say, Amen. And now I have done, except I am foolishly provoked; which if I am, you may, it is like▪ have a Quarterly Packet to keep your Fame in remembrance. This is all from thy Friend, Edward pay. FINIS. ERRATA. PAge 3. line 20. for ●●w read ●●r. p. 24. 1. 7. deal And. 1. 26. for Mat● read Mat●. p. 29. 1. 28. for 〈◊〉 read George.