WE read, Rev. 17. of a Whore, who made all Nations drunk with the Wine of her Fornications, and her Name is declared by the Holy Spirit, to be Mystery Babylon; which is not only Literally Fulfilled, in that a False Worship hath visibly overspread the greatest part of the World, wherein the true Christian Religion was once planted, and flourished, and visibly a False Church hath been set up and established, to the [Page 2] Overthrow of great part of the Doctrine of Christ, and the very Form of Godliness. But Mystically also, by the prevalency of an Anti­christian Spirit, which by the depth of Deceit and Mysterious working, hath deceived many, suffering them still to retain the form, but ma­king use of them to oppose the power of God­liness: Yea, this Mystery of Iniquity still works, notwithstanding the dawning of the Day of God in this last Age, hath more mani­fested her Deeds of Darkness, than in many preceding, and that amongst the most refined sorts of the Professors of Christianity, even amongst some, and now appears through some, who once made a great shew of being Mem­bers of that Church, which is coming out of the Wilderness, leaning upon the Breasts of her Be­loved. And truly both Literally and Mystical­ly, the Work of this accursed Harlot hath been to bring People into Confusion, and to afflict the true Church, and to make War with the Remnant of her Seed, who hold the Word of their Testimony. Now as certainly as ever that false Adulterous Spirit, in any Age since the Holy Apostle lest that Prophecy on Re­cord, hath sought by hidden Practices, as well as open Opposition, to undermine the true Church, and the Foundation whereon she is Built, viz. Jesus Christ the Rock of Ages, and to introduce a Babylonish Confusion, by in­toxicating both the Heads and Hearts of Peo­ple, in order to betray them from the simpli­city of the Gospel: So certainly, hath this [Page 3] Whorish Spirit appeared in these our Days, (to the further fulfilling thereof) in many different shapes, that (if possible) by the de­ceivableness of unrighteousness, she might de­ceive the very Elect. One while acting in Op­posers from without, not only by outragious Violence, but also by wicked Calumnies, like the Dragon, mentioned Rev. 12.15. Casting out Waters like a Flood. At other times stirring up from within themselves, some who once received like precious Faith with them, but being gone from their First Love, and so grow­ing weary of well-doing, have turned their Backs upon the Way of God, and now push with the Horn, and kick with the Heel, a­gainst those who abide faithful. And though these who have broke the Bond of Fellowship, wherewith they were once United to the Church, as to the pretended Reasons of their Dissatisfaction, as much differ from each other, as Light from Darkness, yet like Herod and Pilate, do readily agree in Persecuting Christ, and the Members of his Body, which is his Church: Amongst whom none have appeared more virulent, both with Tongue and Pen, than George Keith, in whose Vindication, as al­so on whose Behalf, Thomas Crisp hath of late appeared, as a Second to G. K. in the Battel he is now Ingaged in: Which shews that T. C. thinks opposing the Quakers a common Cause, let it be upon what Terms it will; or else, he who formerly clamoured so loud against Friends, as being degenerated from what they [Page 4] were in the beginning, (in that they were (as he alledged) gone too much from the inward to the outward; would not now to serve a turn, eat his former words; and that he might curry favour with G. K. and avoid the Incon­veniency of qu [...]rrelling with him, and there­by dividing their Interests, who in their en­deavours to divide the Quakers were perfect­ly of one Mind) now recant, and exclaim as much on the other hand, as if they were Er­roneous and Unsound, in not sufficiently asser­ting the outward; as in his late Paper, Intitu­led, A Discovery of the Accursed Thing, &c. now before me sufficiently appears.

T. C. begins with a Slander, not only in­sinuating, but positively accusing divers, whom he is pleased Scornfully to term ‘The Chief Priests and Rulers of the Quakers, of deny­ing th [...]t Jesus is the Christ, and that there­in the Spirit of Antichrist hath shown it self through them, and to prove it, tells us of VV. Bingley's hindring G. K. from preach­ing, interrupting him; and when he had done speaking himself, bidding the People pass away, &c. which he brings as an Argu­ment of W. B's Enmity against the preaching the Faith in the Man our Lord Jesus Christ:’ But what if W. B. had another Reason for it, where will his Inference be then? I am apt to think it proceeded more from his dislike to the Preacher, than to the Doctri [...]e preached: And why (I pray) must we be forced to receive a [Page 5] Testimony, if true, for that reason only, from a Person we have just reason to except against? Since our Lord, while on Earth, rejected the Testimony of the Devil, though true, and bade him hold his peace, Luke 4.34, 35. He pro­ceeds to tells us, ‘that others have done worse by him since; what worse then say, He is mad, why hear ye him?’ I suppose they did not take up stones to cast at him, as the Jews served Christ, John 10.31. ‘But they have thereby (says he) proved their Spirit, not to be the same as the Apostle Paul's was; for although some preached Christ out of Envy to him, yet because Christ was preached, he rejoiced:’ Well, what though the Apostle did so rejoice, that Christ was preached, though in some, En­vy was the Motive thereto, that thereby the Knowledge of the Gospel might be more Uni­versally spread, while the greatest part of the World was ignorant of the very History of Christ, as in relation to his Death, Sufferings, Resurrection and Ascension, &c. Yet the same Apostle speaking of what sort of Men should rise up in the last Days, leaveth us a di­rection how to behave our selves towards them, he tells us, 2 Tim. 3. That in the last days pe­rilous times should come, for men should be (a­mongst other things which he there enume­rates) Lovers of their own selves, Boasters, false Accusers, Fierce, Despisers of those that are good, Heady, High-minded, having the Form of God­liness, but denying the Power thereof. From such (says he) turn away. Now I hope T. C. will [Page 6] readily grant, that the Age wherein we live, ought to be reckoned amongst the last Days, therefore if VV. B. by frequent Experience, as well as credible Information, had ground to believe G. K. one of those sort of Men, where­in did he amiss? And if the Meeting were of the same Opinion, (which had they not been, I suppose they would hardly have broke up for his saying, Pass away Friends) wherein could they have better demonstrated their Obedience to the Apostles Exhortation? Or wherein have they deviated from the Rule the Apostle gave them to walk by in such a Case? Though truly it is a question to me (I must confess) whe­ther G. K. deserve the Character, of having the Form of Godliness: I know many are sa­tisfied he hath not the Power of Godliness, perhaps some of his Hearers at Harp-lane.

He tells his Reader, ‘They Preach this, and they Print the other,’but doth not Name who Preached, nor who Printed; a Man may suppose by his Method of Writing, that every Individual Person of his so called Chief Priests and Rulers before-named, have both Preached and Printed what he there offers; for he is not so kind as to Name either Persons or Books, which shews him an apt Scholar under his new Master, viz. his highly applauded Restorer of sound Doctrine G. K. for he has exactly learnt his Method, of imposing his say so upon his Reader, without affording him Opportunities of examining the Quotations, by telling him [Page 7] where he may find them, which fault I have to object against him, not only in this place, but also in other parts of his Paper, as I shall have occasion to remark by and by. But pray where is the Heresie in asserting, 'That the Jews never saw the World's Saviour? Was he not God as well as Man? Had the Godhead no share in mans Salvation, but the Manhood only? Or was the Name Saviour more eminently appro­priated to the Manhood? If the Jews had seen him to be what he was (viz. the Saviour of the World) had they Crucified the Lord of Life and Glory, 1 Cor. 7, 8? No surely; for though they with their outward Eyes saw the Man Jesus and his Miracles too, yet the Eyes of their minds were blinded, so as they could not see the life that dwelt in him (but denied it, which was revealed to the true believers, and which John testified they saw, 1 John 1.2. and con­sequently did not see him to be the world's Sa­viour. And as to his affirming, ‘That the Quakers distinguish the Lord Jesus from Christ; and mean something in him, and the Light in every Man,’ 'tis his own false con­struction, for they do assert, That Jesus of Nazareth, who was both God and Man, was and is the Light of the World, and that the rays or beams of Light, which proceed from him the Sun of Righteousness, shine in­to the Hearts of all Mankind, and that Christ and his Light are not divided, but what he did outwardly in the Flesh, and what he doth inwardly in Spirit in the inward parts of the [Page 8] rue believers, is the efficient cause of their Sal­vation, and he, whole Christ undivided, is the hope of their Glory.

But to make the Quakers amends for the o­ther injuries he hath done them, he will now bring them into good Company, for no less then the Apostle John must be erroneous to prove them so too, and for my part, I had ra­ther be a Heretick in Company with the A­postle John, then Orthodox with T. C. But a Man might think how angry so ever he might be with the Apostle John, for siding with the Quakers, and affording them such erroneous stuff as that of hearing, seeing and handling the word of God, he needed not have set old friends variance, and make as if the Apostle Peter preach't another Gospel then the Apostle John, they agreed very well while living, and why should their Epistles differ now they are dead? Oh! T. C. wants a flyng at The Saints, &c. Communion, &c. and rather then he'l want it long, he'l e'ne quote 1 Pet. 1.8. in opposi­tion to what the Author of the said Book as­serts from 1 John 1.1. But for all T. C. and whatever he can do or say, they are still at a­greement with each other, and the Quakers with them both, and so are like to continue, when T. C. and his abettors; viz. the whole Gang of Apostatized Opposers may be gone to their place. And the Foundation whereon they build, and they fix't and established thereon, will stand all the Storms, which ei­ther Battering Rams by lies and slanders, [Page 9] or The Painted Harlot (either maskt or Vnmaskt) by her bewitching Sorceries may be permitted to raise. Yea, though the Watch­men (of the Night) whom he would awake out of their slumber to his assistance, may stumble in the dark, yet the Light he so much con­temns, will shine more and more, to the dis­covering of his confused works, and to the finding out 'in whose Camp it is, that The Accursed thing has been hid.

Well, though he affirms the Quakers to be erroneous, it seems he was so himself once, if we may take his own confession for true, and did not so fully see the danger thereof, till convinced by G. K's (I suppose) effectual preaching (though perhaps F. B's elaborate writings might have a share in opening his eyes) then now it seems he is got upon the stool of Repentance, but he must give me leave to think, that for all what that Paper offers of any convincing Argument to the con­trary, it would be well for him to Repent of this his Repentance; for if it produce no better effect than such a malicious bundle of stuff, as that one Sheet contains, I cannot (nor I believe many other sober People, even of those who go not under the profession of a Quaker, who may happen to wast time in per­using it) look upon it to be the repentance never to be Repented of. But whatever he the Accu­ser may formerly have been, that doth not make the accused so too, without more proof then he hath hitherto produced, in his patched [Page 10] and peiced, stretched or curtailed Quotations: Neither (I suppose) do the Christian Quakers look upon him, F. B. or G. K. either, to be fit Persons to make their Confessors nor ei­ther D. S. or his friend G. W. proper advo­cates to plead their cause for them: They all and every of them, being no better then Re­negadoes, who joyn with our Adversaries, in that, both by sly Insinuations, and openly Printed slanders, as much as in them lyes, they give away the cause, and grant what the most malicious Antagonists could never yet prove, which could they have done, they would not have left so long undone: But to proceed.

In page second, amongst divers gross re­flections and vile slanders (with which his Pamphlet doth so abound, that it would be endless to trace him through them all) and as it were interwoven therewith, he gives us a kind of confession of Faith, but so worded, as if he thereby meant, to exalt the humanity of Christ above the Divinity, and plainly un­dervalues the Light in every Man, much like the old Professours, and truly puts so mean a price on it, as to its sufficiency, as less could not well be, unless he had added their thread-bare Epithets of Natural and Diabolical. He says, ‘And whatsoever my lot may be from you, I am satisfied, greater is he in whom I be­lieve and trust, even the same Jesus of Naza­reth, whom you term Vessel, Garment, &c. then the Light in every Man in the World. And [Page 11] a little lower, for my trust and hope is in the mercy of God, for the sake of my Lord Jesus of Nazareth (without me) and his Obedience and Sufferings, &c.’ Now pray Observe, he esteems the Body, which the Father prepared for the Son, wherein to do the Fathers will, Heb. 10.5.7. greater than the word, which was in the beginning with God, and was God, John, 1.1. In whom was Life, and the Life was the Light of Men. v. 4. and who was the true Light which Lighteth every Man that cometh into the world, v. 9. But to make this the more clear: Pray what was that, (which they term Vessel, Garment, &c. 'On whom only T. C. fixes his Faith, and re­lies on for Salvation? My Father I. P. at whom T. C. designs this flurt, says Part 2. p. 19. of the Collection of his works. Now the Scriptures do expresly distinguish between Christ and the gar­ment which he wore; between him that came, and the Body in which he came; between the substance which was vailed, and the vail which vailed it. Lo I come! a Body hast thou prepared me. There is plainly he, and the Body in which he came. There was the outward Vessel, and the inward Life. This we certainly know, and can never call the bodily Garment Christ, but that which appeared and dwelt in the Body. Now if ye indeed know the Christ of God, tell us plainly what that is which appeared in the Body? Whether that was not the Christ, before it took up the Body, after it took up the Body, and for ever? Whereby it appears to me that it is on the outward Man of Christ, without respect to that which dwelt therein, Col. [Page 12] 2.19. which my Father here terms Vessel Gar­ment, &c. which T. C. relies on for Salvation. If that be not his sentiments, let him lay his matters more closely together another time, and not let his malice carry him so far into an extream on that hand, whilst he is labouring to prove those he quarrels with, guilty of an extream on the other hand. He proceeds, ‘I am not ashamed of this my belief, and hope in him whom ye contemn.’ Truly if he were not quite shameless, he might be ashamed, that he who hath been a hearer of the Quakers a­bove Thirty years, should now dare to say, that they contemn Jesus Christ, whom he can't but have heard frequently preached amongst them, not only as he appears in Spirit, but like­wise as he became Man, was born of the Virgin Mary Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was Cru­cified, Dead and Buried, rose again the third day, and ascended into Heaven, and Sits on the Right Hand of the Majesty on High, from whence he shall come to Judge both the quick and the dead: Therefore he is the more in­exusable, in that he cannot plead ignorance, so I shall Charge it upon him as a wilful Error and that a very vile and gross one too; I must needs say, he don't go about to Cloake it; so & as barefac'd slander, I return it back upon him, to see whether or no it will yet make him blush.

But now his hand is in, he scribbles on, and tumbles them out thick and threefold, as much without fear as wit, says he, p. ibid. ‘You preach a Christ Crucified in him, &c.’ But [Page 13] the Author of this Doctrine being nameless, I suppose he has forgot who it was, and truly I cannot blame him for forgetting, what (I be­lieve) never had any other Foundation then meer imagination. Next comes something in Print, there I'le believe him, for I read it in a Pa­per subscribed T. C. but where else to find it, I can't tell for my part, therefore since he hath not vouchafed to instruct me in that point, I shall (for all his Capital letter'd remarks) take no farther notice of it at present, only, that there are so many Scratches, one at the end of almost every sentence, that I question, not but he has severly mangled that quotation, and that openly appears, without any Mistery, to be no part of a good Christian.

Page 3. He smooths over F. B's Mock Pil­lory, and speaks (I doubt not) more then he is able to prove, as in relation to the prosecu­tion of F. B. if by they he means the Quakers: But as to G. K's and his adherents sufferings, he has got a pretty faculty of magnifying them, which if he be not able to make good as there exprest, by my consent, he shall stand on F. B's Pillory next time, as a false accuser, in­stead of those Twelve. In short, that whole Paragraph savours of Tertullus's Spirit, though not of his Eloquence, in endeavouring to per­swade the Overseers (as he calls them) that the Quakers aim at the subversion of the Faith, the contrary whereof is most true.

As to his many Quotations out of G. F's Great Mystery, I have spent some time in exa­mining [Page 14] them, and find some of them so sound, that he hath not been able to corrupt them; and truly I admire to what end he Transcribed those, unless it were to shew us that he cannot bear sound Doctrine, when G. F. is the Pub­lisher of it. But for the most part, he hath grosly misrepresented, abused, misquoted, curtailed and misapplied passages, which in themselves, taking them as they stand in the Book, would not admit of such Constructions as he puts upon them, too large to be here re­cited; but for a taste, I here present the Rea­der with the following Observations, wherein I have endeavoured to rescue them from the false Glosses he puts upon them.

In his third page, that he may not come be­hind the very worst of the Opposers and Slan­derers, of that Eminent Servant of Christ now at rest, he saith, ‘G. Fox being charged to have said, He was Christ, he answers, It was a Lie; but saith, Christ in the Male or Female, if he speak, he was Christ the Seed, and the Seed was Christ. But he said, he did not speak it as a Creature, p. 299.’ Whereupon T. C. makes this Remark, ‘I take him to mean, It was not the Creature G. F. but Christ in him, that said, He was Christ.’ But if I should tell him, That 'tis either his shortness of Understanding, or aboundings of Malice against G. F. that makes him run into this mistake, I know not how he would take it, but however that is the true state of the [Page 15] Case. For the Sentence explains it self, and take him to mean thus, viz. He G. F. tho' he give the Name Christ to something that is in him, and spake through him, yet it was no Creature, nor of him G. F. but was the Seed which is Christ, the same in both Male and Fe­male, 2 Cor. 13.15. compared with Gal. 3.16, and 28. He quotes p. 67. his Words are these, ‘Also by opposing another, they do imply, they are equal with God; for they say to an Opponent, Thou makest a great pud­der that any should witness he is equal with God.’ T. C. should have been so fair, as to have ad­joined to this Quotation, the latter part of G. F's Answer, but since he hath not I shall do it for him. After G. F. hath recited a passage out of The Catechism of the Assembly of Di­vines, (so called) viz. That the Holy Ghost and the Son is equal in Power and Glory with the Father, he adds, Yet if any one come to witness the Son revealed in him, or come to witness the Holy Ghost in them, as they that gave out the Scrip­tures; or witness the Mind of Christ, and witness that equal which the Father, that equality which you speak of: You Priests destroy that which you have put forth in the Nation, and cry out Horrid Blasphemy. Thus far G. F. and now much good may this Citation do T. C. and the pud­der he has made about it too. But he hath not done with this Point yet, he says, ‘G. F. being charged to profess Equality with God, he an­swers, G. Fox's words were spoken beyond and out of all Creatures, p. 127.’ Here is mang­ling [Page 16] work with a witness, he has cut off the Head and Tail of this Sentence, and only left us the middle, which as it lyes together is so­lid Sence; for after G. F. had repeated the foregoing passage of the Assembly of Divines, he in farther Vindication of himself, from that foul Aspersion they had cast upon him, adds, Yet nevertheless George's words was not spoken as ye preach them; for his words were spoken beyond all Creatures, and out of all Creatures, and he did not say George Fox. But of this enough, and full enough to shew his corrupt Dealings, in a­busing a Man who is dead, and so not able to answer for himself; but Malice unbounded, will take into the Graves of the Dead, if pos­sible, to make the Objects of their hatred stink in the Nostrils of the Living; but when all is done, they for the most part make themselves stink alive, when the Memory of good Men, though they have been never so much scanda­lized, is as the Odour of sweet Ointment, and the good savour, which the remembrance of their Virtues, hath left upon the Spirits of those who survive, Embalms their Names to Posterity.

So having, (I hope) cleared this Point to the Impartial Rea er, I shall next take a view of a Scoff he puts upon the Quakers, for ‘pro­fessing a being guided by an Infallible Spirit, for which he quotes p. 105.’ which whole Paragraph hath relation to the Infallibility of the Spirit of God, which saith G. F. is now possessed and witnessed amongst those called Qua­kers. [Page 17] Now, either the Spirit of God is a fal­lible Spirit, which let him assert if he dare, or 'tis not communicated to Mankind, contrary to 1 Cor. 12.7. and Joel 2.28, 29. or 'tis not necessary towards making a Man a Christian, contrary to Rom. 8.9. or else T. C's Cavil is groundless. And as to what he mentions con­cerning Peter and Simon Magus, I wont under­take to resolve his Doubt, but I question not at all Peter's knowing by the Revelation of the Infallible Spirit of God, and by no outward Means, that Ananias and Sapphira had Lied a­gainst the Holy Ghost in that Case, Acts 5. and that was 1636. Years ago, instead of his 36, and for all that it is not lost yet. For I will undertake to prove (if T. C. be so far dege­nerated from the very form of sound words, as to deny it) that the Infallible Spirit of Christ, is now possessed and witnessed amongst all true Christians whatsoever: For if they have it not, the Apostle tells us, they are none of Christ's, and if not Christ's, then no true Christians. Moreover I Challenge T. C. to prove if he can, that ever any real Quaker, owned as such among the Quakers, ascribed Infallibility to any Man, or number of Men, o­therwise than as immediately influenced by the guidance of the Infallible Spirit of God; for his Inferences without Proof will but shew his Envy; and considering how much he hath ma­nifested himself not only an Adversary, but also an unfair Adversary, will not satisfie rea­sonable Men. Now to prove him guilty of un­fairness [Page 18] in this very particular, I shall Tran­scribe his Quotation, and then that Paragraph in the Book it self, which compared together, will sufficiently clear up the Matter. T. C. p. 3, and 4. ‘Also they say, How can you but delude the People who are not Infallible? p. 82. Hereby opposing others, they imply (not on­ly the Spirit, but) themselves to be Infalli­ble.’ Now G. F's own words run thus. And how can they but delude People, that are not Infal­lible, and are none of Christ's, which have not the Spirit which is Infallible, and are not Ministers of the Gospel, which is the Power of God, which is Infallible? Pray what Credit is there to be gi­ven to this Man's Quotations or Assertions ei­ther. Well I would advise him, the next time he writes, either to be Honester in his Quotations, or else take that Course altoge­ther, which he hath in part already, viz. nei­ther Name, Book, nor Author.

In his fourth Page he quarrels with G. F. for calling Christ, The Root of God; and nothing will serve him, but he must put it in Capital Letters, with a ‘This I think is Blas­phemous, at the end of it;’ nay it sticks so in his Stomach, that p. 5. he must have t'other fling at it; and there he comes in with a Pa­renthesis, and says, ‘But I think this their Doctrine is the Root of Blasphemous Ran­tism: But why so angry I pray, Is not Christ mentioned as a Root?’ Rom. 11.18. And is not Christ God's? 1 Cor. 3.23. Therefore [Page 19] where is the Blasphemy, in saying, Christ is the Root of God; I think he may as well be called the Root, as the Foundation of God, see 1 Cor. 3.11. compared with 2 Tim. 2.19. since it refers to Men, and not to God.

About the beginning of p. 5. he is guilty of a gross Perversion, and it looks like a wilful one too, for he hath omitted not only one whole Sentence; but the word and at the be­ginning of the next, which greatly alters the Sence, besides his omitting what followed, which is Explanatory of G. F's meaning, the passage is so clear in it self, and T. C's abuse so visible, that I shall only rehearse it, first as quoted by him; and secondly, as it stands in the Book it self, and then leave it to the im­partial to judge. T. C's Citation runs thus; ‘One says such be in Error, that knows no Christ but a Christ within. G. F. answers, They that profess a Christ without them, have a­nother Christ (mark that) within them, here is two, says G. F. p. 254.’ Now the Book it self says, And they that profess a Christ without them, have a Christ without them, and another Christ within them, here is two; for if it be not the same Christ that ended all Types, and Figures, and Sha­dows. If it be not him that is within them, they have not the Possession of the Substance, nor the com­fort of the true Christ; but who have not Christ, the end of Types, Shadows and Figures in them, they are among Antichrists, and false Christs, and [Page 20] they that have a form of Godliness, can confess a Christ without them, and not within them.

A little lower in the same p. 5. he has quite maimed another Quotation, by cutting it in two in the middle; but as much as he dis­joints it, it is not past setting together again, and that shall be my work at this time. T. C. brings in G. F. saying, ‘The Devil was in thee, thou saist thou art saved by a Christ without thee, and so hast recorded thy self a Reprobate, p. 250.’ This is all he can afford; but G. F. proceeds, And ignorant of the Mystery of Christ within thee; for without that thou dost not know Salvation. I would ask T. C. wherein doth G. F. contra­dict the Apostle Paul? 2 Cor. 13.5. Examine your selves whether you be in the faith: prove your own selves. Know you not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be Reprobates? For my part I cannot perceive how G. F. can be Erroneous, and the Apostle Orthodox, for whatever T. C. may think, they seem to me no ways contradictory to each other.

The next Quotation I take notice of in the same Page, is very unfair, if designed; but however I will be so fair to him, as to take his Excuse, if he will plead Ignorance and want of Understanding; what difference there is be­tween words inclosed in a Parenthesis, and where there is no Parenthesis: But if he doth understand it, then it is no longer weakness, but wickedness; the words are these, ‘All be in the fancy that be out of the witnessing Christ that suffered within them, p. 131.’ Now who would [Page 21] have concluded any other, but that G. F. un­dervaluing the Sufferings of Christ without the Gates of Jerusalem, had published, that his Sufferings were within Man only. But now take it with the Parenthesis as the Book hath it, viz. And so all be in the fancy, that be out of the state of witnessing Christ (that Suffered) within them. This alters the Case, for 'tis all one as if he should have said, And so all be in the fancy, that be out of the state of witnessing Christ that suffered without, to be revealed within them; and this is according to Christ's own words, John 14.17. He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Again, p. 6. ‘One says, The Seed to whom the Promise of Salvation is made, is, or hath been Sinners. G. F. answers, The Promise is to the Seed—which Seed is the Hope Christ that purifies—and this Seed never sinned, p. 324. Says T. C. Hereby G. F. does imply, That the Promise of Salvation was to Christ, as if he had need of Salvation, &c.’ Whatever Jugling T. C. may pretend to find in G. F. I cannot acquit T. C. of Jugling, for he hath left out one Sentence, which manifests that G. F. was far from meaning, that Christ stood in need of Salvation; for between the word purifies, and this Seed, instead of T. C's scratch, G. F. hath this Expression, And hereby is the Creature come to know its liberty among the Sons of God; which plainly cuts off T. C's Cavil, if he had but had the Honesty to have inserted it: And in Vindication of G. F's asserting, That the [Page 22] Seed to whom the promises were made was Christ, read Gal. 3.16. and that the Creature comes no other way to be partaker of the pro­mise, than as found in Christ, read v. 28, 29.

But now as if he thought the errors he pre­tends the Quakers are guilty of in point of Doctrine, not sufficient to do his work, as perhaps being conscious of the weakness as well as groundlesness, of all his loud clamours a­gainst them on that Score, he will e'ne take up his old predecessor's Argument, John 19.12. If thou let this Man go, thou art not Caesar's friend. And rather then fail of his spight, he would if he could render them obnoxious to the Go­vernment, and for that end quotes a passage concerning Monarchy, which he Fathers upon G. F. but whether ever wrote, or at least so wrote by G. F. I know not, for the Book is nameless, and so his clamour not worth the minding. No more is that concerning the House of Lords; for he quotes no Quakers Book, but one of John Pennyman's, which manifests that he is willing to take any thing upon trust, (especially what was written by so dearly be­loved a Brother in the common cause, as the said J. P.) that will but serve for an objection against G. F. in particular, or the Quakers in gene­ral. And as for Episcopacy, he hath taken a large step since he left the Quakers, if he be got to them again; however they will have but little honour by such a Member, nor are we in danger of following such an example. Now upon the whole of these three Paragraphs, I [Page 23] have this to remark, that the method of his exposing them to the world, shews his great de­sire that the Chief Men in the Nation may be set against us; for least they should not be so far taken notice of, as he would have them, they must be all in Capital Letters, that so making a great Figure in that page, the Reader might be taken with more than ordinary cu­riosity to see what that was, and then perhaps it might light into the hands of some, that owed the Quakers as little good-will as T. C. doth, and so from one to another, it might at last come to the ears of the King, Peers and Bishops: And what then? They are Men of more un­derstanding, than to take one Deserters mali­cious Libel, against a Body of People, of whose peaceable behaviour, this Nation hath had so long experience, even under all the Altera­tions, and various Changes which have hap'ned, in relation to Government, ever since they were a People.

His applauding D. S. as a ‘Christian Qua­ker, and running against the Twenty Four who disowned him,’ shews that he, D. S. F. B. G. K. &c. mentioned in that paragraph, are all Birds of a feather, and no wonder then if they flock together. And as for ‘G. W's er­rors and evil deeds he hints at, let him make the best of them, I question not but G. W. is able to answer him, if he thinks it worth his while, which truly I think hardly is.’ And as to his complaint in behalf of G. K. in relation to the proceedings in Pensylvania, against him [Page 25] and his adherents; S. J. hath already given an account how they were managed, in his State of the Case, &c. and therein vindicated himself, and those concerned with him, from the aspersion cast upon them. Perhaps he may alledge, that G. K. hath answered that Book, and stated things otherways: Yet how­ever, he ought in justice to suspend his verdict, till he hears what proof S. J. will bring in defence of what he hath written, which (God sparing him Life) I question not but he may be able to produce.

He says p. 7. ‘It is not my intent to make void or undervalue the Light of Christ, or Spirit of God within, and obedience thereto; for its our duty to walk in the Light, but not to build thereon.’ If he had said so as to ex­clude the benefit which accrued to Mankind, by the death of Christ, I would said so too; but I cannot like him divide Christ, by ascri­bing the whole work to Christ without, and making that the sole Foundation of the true Faith: For unless Christ work inwardly in Mens Hearts by his Spirit, not only the will but the deed also Phil. 2.13. And unless the Fa­ther Sanctify them through his word, whose word is truth John 17.17. To them the Blood of Christ shed without the Gates of Jerusalem will be of no effect. Now The word which took Flesh is Christ and His Life is the Light of Men, John 1.4. therefore to say it is not our duty to build thereon is erroneous, and tends to the undervaluing of Christ, who ought not to [Page 24] be divided. This is other Doctrine then Christ preached, John 12.36. While ye have the Light, believe in the Light, that ye may be the Children of the Light. And how can I believe in the Light, if I have no dependance thereon? How can I obey the Light or Spirit, or walk therein (which he grants is our duty) if I must not build upon it? The Apostle Paul's preach­ing was attended with the demonstration of the Spirit, and of Power: And the reason he gives is, That your Faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the Power of God, 1 Cor. 2.4, 5. which Power of God is Christ, not only as he was manifested outwardly, but also as he ap­pears inwardly, and is certainly what is evi­dently demonstrated in that Chapter. And further he tells the Colossians, Chap. 1.27. That Christ in them was the hope of their Glory. And Rom. 8.24. We are saved by hope. Must not we build then upon the saying hope of Glory, Christ in us? Strange Doctrine surely! How else can we Fly for refuge, to lay hold upon the hope set before us? Or how else shall we experi­ence Hope to be as an Anchor of our Souls, both sure and Stedfast? Heb. 6.18, 19. Or did the A­postle preach false Doctrine, and deny the ap­pearance of Christ in the Flesh? No surely; no more do the Quakers now. How must the whole lump be Leavened, if we have not our Faith fixed on him, who is the Leaven of the Kingdom, and is hid in the three measure of Meal, viz. the Soul, Body and Spirit? Mat. 13.33. But no wonder that Men err when they walk [Page 26] in Darkness, and despise that Light by which they should be preserved from it.

Having shewed his contradiction to Scrip­ture, I shall now proceed, and take notice that he brings in divers passages, in p. 7. and the beginning of p. 8. with a Say they: But he neither informs us out of what Book he took them, nor for the most part, who was the Au­thor: Probably because he would take the more Latitude to abuse them undiscovered; for he makes no conscience of quoting falsly, and perverting G. F's writings, as I have shewed above, though he has in quoting that Book often referred to the pages: Therefore I cannot think I do him any wrong in suspect­ing these Quotations not to be genuine; and since he hath not given me the opportunity of examining whether they be so or no, as such I shall pass them over.

But now comes a shrewd case of Conscience, the very Master-peice of this Babel-Builders Structure, which demonstrates that he is in confusion, or else certainly would never have let such a blunder be exposed to the World.

He says p. 8. ‘Now I appeal to their Consci­ences, whether or no if our Lord Jesus, &c. is believed on and obeyed, so as to have his perfect work in the Heart to Regenerate, and make all things a-new, whether this can be, and the work of Regeneration not known?’ Truly a very notable question, and very nicely distinguished: I dare believe he made no use of G. K's either Logick or [Page 27] Philosophy in this appeal. But I admire that G. K. should take no more care of his Pupil in his Divinity, than to suffer him to fumble thus, I believe he would not have suffered such a thing to escape his Cognizance among his o­ther sort of Scholars. However to please T. C. I will readily grant, that when a Man is become Regenerate, he hath known the work of Regene­ration. But if his Question in the sense he means it (which truly seems to me, to be what he drives at) hath respect only to a Faith on Christ as he is without, excluding the operati­on of the Light and Spirit within, and Faith therein, then I deny it: For Regeneration is a qualification, rendring a Man capable of en­tering the Kingdom of Heaven, then conse­quently he must be in a state of Salvation, but John Rev. 21.23, 24. After he hath given an account of the Glory of the New Jerusalem, says, The Glory of the Lord did lighten it, and the Lamb is the Light thereof. And the Nations of them which are saved shall walk in the Light of it. And the Apostle Peter speaking concern­ing the Elect, whose Souls were purified in obey­ing the truth through the Spirit, says, Being Born again, not of corruptible Seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth for e­ver, 1 Pet. 1.22, 23.

As for what he relates concerning a Preachers deifying G. F. it is an old thred-bare story, of­ten recited by divers opposers, and hath been already answered, and so I need say the less to it; all that I shall observe is, that they do [Page 28] not all tell one Tale, neither (to my own knowledge, having compared them) is this the same with what hath been Printed by ano­ther person, referring to this very letter.

I have one passage more to take notice of be­fore I leave him, and truly I cannot tell how to pass by it, it being indeed his Reflections on that Person that first occasioned me to take this work in Hand, who in Truth deserves to have a better Pen imployed in his Defence than mine; but however such as it is, though it may fall short of the end proposed, through want of Skill and Experience in me, how to manage an Argument, yet may serve to testifie the Value I have for, and the Filial Respect I bear to the Memory of a worthily Esteemed, deservedly Honoured, and truly Honourable Father: Who though by F. B. (whom this Man vindicates) in way of Contempt be term­ed a Devout Heathen, was well known (by those who knew the Truth in which he lived, and in which he died, and had any Acquaintance with him) to be a sincere Christian, and true Minister of the Gospel of Christ, not of the Let­ter only, but of the Spirit, as was the Apostle Paul: And his endeavour was to fix People on that Rock which would abide the Storm, and preserve them from falling, viz. That spiritu­al Rock which followed Israel, which Rock was Christ. But by reason of his vindicating the living and lively Faith of Christ spiritually re­vealed in the Heart, without which the Lite­ral Faith, would be so far from saving them, [Page 29] that it would but add to their Condemnation; I say, for this his Zealous Defence of the Go­spel of Christ, and exalting the Spirit above the Flesh, (though they could never prove him guilty of denying or slighting the outward Ap­pearance of Christ in the Flesh) he was not without a share of the Slanders and Calumnies of Adversaries of all sorts, while living; and though he hath now been dead several Years, yet T. C. will not let him rest in his Grave, but must rake in his Ashes, for Dirt to fling at him: And truly he is an Author who hath been much quoted by T. C. in most, if not all the Pamphlets he hath published against that Church, whereof my said Father was an Emi­nent Member: Formerly his Perversions of his Writings tended to make him speak contrary, when Dead, to his Brethren, with whom he was in true Unity while Living, and then T. C. could quote him as Authentick, and by him approved for sound Doctrine: But since that would not effect his Design, now his Writings must be Apocryphal, and he a Publisher of false Doctrine, to prove the Quakers guilty thereof too; but how far he falls short in his Proofs I hope to evince by and by. He hath had several touches at him in some of the fore­going Paragraphs of his Pamphlet, but with­out naming either Book or Author, but now in the close to pin the Basket, he gives us three Letters of his Name, viz. Is. P. yet names no Book neither: But I knowing that The Question to Professors, &c. hath been a [Page 30] Choak-pear to the meer Letter-mongers of our Times; I imagined it might be out of that Book that he took his Quotations, which he quarrels so with, and upon perusing it found them there; and therefore for the Honour I bear to the Memory of so near a Relation, and so good a Man, I shall endeavour to wipe off the Aspersion which T. C. casts upon him. He says, ‘And it's astonishing to behold how they contemn our Lord Jesus, and Deifie him, (viz. G. F.) thereby making way for themselves to be so many Christ's, as ap­pears by Is. P's saying, Doth not the name be­long to every Member as well as to the Head?’ Now if the whole Query, from whence those words are taken, do not tend to contemn our Lord Jesus Christ, or for making way for themselves to be so many Christs, then is T. C. a false Accuser; and to prove him such, I shall transcribe the Query Verbatim, only with the Addition of those Scriptures at length in Parenthesis's, which he quotes in proof of his Assertions, and leave it to the unbyassed to judge, whether it hath such a tendency or no? Or whether it be not sound Apostolical Do­ctrine? Part 2. p. 15. of Is. P's Collection, Qu. 24. Is not the Substance, the Life, the A­nointing called Christ, where-ever it be found? Doth not the Name belong to the whole Body (and every Member in the Body) as well as to the Head? Are they not all of one, yea, all one in the A­nointing? Was not this the great desire of his Heart to the Father, that they all might be one, [Page 31] even as the Father and Christ were one, John 17.21, 23. (That they all may be one, as thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: I in thee, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.) And so being one in the same Spirit, one in the same Life, one in the same Nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. (Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious Promises, that by these you might be Partakers of the Divine Nature) even Partakers of God's Holiness, Heb. 12.10. (For they verily cha­stened us after their own Pleasure, but he for our Profit, that we might be partakers of his Holiness) Christ is not ashamed to call them Bre­thren, Heb. 2.11. (For both he that sancti­fieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them Brethren) nor is the Apostle ashamed to give them the Name Christ together with him, 1 Cor. 12.12. (For as the Body is one, and hath many Members, and all the Members of that one Body, being many, are one Body; so al­so is Christ) The Body is the same with the Head; one and the same in Nature; and doth not the Name belong to the Nature in the whole? So that the Name is not given to the Vessel, but to the Na­ture, to the heavenly Treasure, to that which the Lord from Heaven begets in his own Image and Likeness, of his own Substance, of his own Seed, of his own Spirit and pure Life. Thus far my Fa­ther. Now I observe upon the whole, That he doth not assert, that every Member is a di­stinct Christ, (any more than every Member [Page 32] is a distinct Body) thereby making way for them­selves to be so many Christ's, (as T. C. falsly af­firms.) But so far as every one is a Member of the Body, whereof Christ is Head, and of the Anointing, from whence the Name Christ is derived; so far have they a Title to the Name Christ, or Anointed, as being Christed or Anointed, begotten by him the Incorrupti­ble Seed, sanctified through his Blood, and thereby made Partakers of his Righteousness, are become one with him, his Brethren, Chil­dren of the same Father, Hei [...]s of the same Glory, according to their Measures. Neither doth this tend to the contemning of Christ, for this Union doth not imply an equality, though the Members are all anointed with the same Holy Oil as is Christ the Head, yet he is anointed with the Oil of Gladness above his Fellows, Heb. 1.9. The Scripture abounds in setting forth the Mystical Union between Christ and his Church, as particularly Eph. 5. where the Apostle giving Directions, how Husbands and Wives ought to demean themselves towards each other, stirs them up to mutual Love, by the Example of Christ's Love to his Church, and comparing their near Alliance to each o­ther, by the Union of Christ with his Church, he saith, v. 30. We are Members of his Body, of his Flesh, and of his Bones: Then certainly eve­ry Member is partaker of the same Life, the same Blood, the same Strength, the same Vir­tue, and the same Substance with the Head, though not in the same degree; a lively Type [Page 33] whereof, was the Ointment that was upon Aa­ron's head, that went down to the very skirts of his garment, Psal. 133.2. So that 'twas the same Ointment still, (though not in that quantity) which was upon the Head, that ran down to the very Skirts, but the Head was the place from whence this Ointment flowed un­to the Inferior Parts.

Now having taken notice of what passages in his Paper to me seemed most worthy of no­tice, as deserving to have a black Line drawn over them, and a Mark set on them, for the Scandals, Abuses and Unfairness contained in them, (though I must needs confess, his whole Sheet from one end to the other, is little else but one continued Slander) I shall draw to a Conclusion; solemnly declaring, That it is not Malice (I can truly say) against the Man that drew these Lines from me, but Trouble to see his gross Perversions of good Mens Wri­tings and Meanings, (and that I fear against his own Knowledge) after this manner; and the very worst I wish to him, or the rest con­cerned with him in this ill Work, is their Re­pentance: That their many hard Words and bitter Speeches against the Church of Christ in general, or any Member or Members thereof in particular, may not be laid to their Charge, at the great Day of Judgment; when not on­ly all Actions, but the Secrets of all Hearts shall be laid open, and a Just Reward rendred by Christ to every Man according to his Doings.