IT was our Saviour's Doctrine, Mat. 7.18, 20. that a good Tree cannot bring forth evil Fruit; neither can a corrupt Tree bring forth good Fruit. Wherefore by their Fruits ye shall know them. And it stands true for ever; so that upon certainly knowing the Fruit, we may infallibly know the Tree, whether it be Good or Evil. Now in all good Actions, Love is a chief Ingredient; and in most evil Actions, Envy doth much Influence. Here­by we may make a pretty safe Judgment, both of Men and their Actions, whether they be Good or Bad; for Love is of God, and seeks the real Good of all; as Envy is of the Devil, and seeks their Hurt and Ruin. It might be of good use to instance some Pre­sidents of each sort; though my intended Brevity will not admit thereof at present: So, in a general way, do say, That the Practice of all, in whom the Love of Christ prevaileth, is, To seek the Good, both of the Souls and Bodies of all; even of their Enemies; and [Page 4] never can, by any Provocation whatsoever, be prevailed upon, to Detract, Calumniate and Misrepresent their greatest Enemies; much less thereby to endeavour to Influence the Ci­vil Magistrate against them, that so they might come to suffer, either in their Bodies, Estates or Liberties; being of the Mind of the good Houshoulder, who would not admit his Ser­vants to pull out the very Tares from among the Wheat, till the Harvest.

Praying for our Enemies, and doing unto all Men as we would have them to do unto us; was the Doctrine of him whom we all pretend to follow: That my present Adversary has been in this his Undertaking, acted by this sweet and amiable Virtue, which is the true Characteristick of a true Disciple and Fol­lower of the blessed Jesus, doth not appear; tho' the contrary it's very evident, hath too much prevailed upon him, which hath been the Cause he hath so grosly misrepresented us: Not to say any thing of his abusive Lan­guage. And if so, as I doubt not but what follows will make evidently appear; then I hope we may be satisfied, what place all his endeavours will have with all sincere Chri­stians; so that the Pit he digged for his Neigh­bour, he is fallen into himself.

He begins his Paper with a very sad Ac­count, viz. ‘It has been matter of Sorrow and Shame unto me, and many others, that have now left the Quakers Commu­nion, [Page 5] that we so long professed the Chri­stian Religion, whilst we remained so ig­norant of the Fundamental Principles of it: The Doctrine of the Trinity, or Three Persons of one Nature and Substance in the Godhead: The Incarnation of the se­cond Person, or Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ: The Satisfaction and Atone­ment made unto God the Father, by his Obedience, and Death upon the Cross: The Resurrection and Ascension of his Bo­dy and Person into Heaven: His remain­ing in our Nature, at the right Hand of God, in the Glory of his Father, our Head, High-Priest, and Intercessor: The Faith and full perswasion of his Second, Last, and Outward Appearance, and Com­ing again to Raise the dead Bodies of the Saints, and of all Men, in the great Day, and solemn Assize of all Nations, in which a final and infallible Sentence will be passed upon all, according to the Deeds done in the Body; agreeable to the plain and po­sitive Sense of divers Texts in holy Scrip­ture.’

Truly I am of his Mind, that to re­main so long ignorant whilst under a Christian Profession of these great Doctrines and Principles of the very Christian Religi­on, is Cause sufficient both of Sorrow and Shame; but what is that to the Christan So­ciety, or Societies, he has joyned himself [Page 6] with? For except he can make it appear, those Societies he hath belonged to, were Ig­norant of them, then (and not else) they also may come under the same Reflection; but till then, both the Sorrow and the Shame is like to lie solely at his own Door. Let not R. B. think hereby to Charge the Quakers, and render them Guilty of being defective in their Christian Belief of these Doctrines, offering that as his Reason for leaving them; if he do, I doubt not but to make the contra­ry very evident, to the blasting all his vain Hopes. First, Let us suppose, tho' not grant, what he insinuates to be true; would not this bespeak him a great Ignoramus, or worse, first to joyn with such a People, and then to continue so long with them; but that which doth aggravate his Ignorance is, that when his now Friend D. S. did Calumniate us in Print, he should appear in our Vindication, and wrote an answer in our Defence, to that scandalous Pamphlet (as he then called it) not thinking (I believe) then, which was but in 1694. that he should now write one a great deal more Scandalous himself; all which tends little to his Reputation, (in­deed if he were a Man that wanted Bread, it were something) and he not being educated a Quaker, his ignorant Education cannot re­flect on them; and how much it was the Fruit of Humour I will leave to him to re­flect on. Since this were a heavy Charge, [Page 7] if true, That we did not sincerely believe these great Doctrines of Christianity, enough to offend any Christian Ear. I shall there­fore be more particular in my Answer, be­ing sorry, that That which R. B. accounted the blessed Truth, in 1694. should be so gros­ly Calumniated in 1700. because I believe it to be the blessed Truth still. This at most is but R. B's insinuating Charge, without the least Proof; so that my single Testimony is of equal Authority: I do therefore say, I was brought up, and educated in this Way, and therefore must be granted to know their Principles as well, nay, better than R. B. if there be any thing in Education; and I am well assured, that we do sincerely believe all these above-mentioned Doctrines, as to the Matter and Substance of them, and do only differ with the Church of England in some few Words and Terms; and why we should be blamed for that, when we believe the same things, and the more, seeing these Terms are such as the Holy Ghost did not see meet to express these Mysteries by, in the Holy Scriptures; tho' I do say, if we did not dif­fer with the Church of England about weigh­tier Matters than these Words or Terms, I do not think it were worth our while to Dissent from Her. Yet let us hear what G. Keith hath taught on this Head, Way cast up, p. 88. And (saith he) it is well known that these Words, Three Persons, or Three Hypo­stases, [Page 8] have made great Contention in former times; and divers judged to be Pious and Learn­ed Men, have denied them, and disputed against them; as namely, Jerome against the Three Hy­postases; and Augustine disputed solidly, Lib. 5. & 7. de Trinitate, That the Words [Three Persons] are not properly applicable to the My­stery it self, although he doth not know what other Names to give them: And surely it is too great Presumption and Curiosity in any Man, to dive further into this Mystery, than what God hath been pleased to reveal, or to give Names to it; and yet it is more Presumption, and smel­leth rankly of a Persecuting Spirit, to impose up­on others these words, which the Spirit of God hath not Taught, nor left upon Record in the Scriptures; and yet because we do not own these Word's of Man's Wisdom and Spirit, to cry out against us, as Blasphemers, and Deniers of the true Christ; whereas we (the Quakers) believe in, and own the true Christ, more accord­ing both to his Godhead and Manhood, more according to the Truth, and the Testimony of the Scripture, than our Accusers do, as I hope in its due place to shew. And in p. 87. saith, Nor indeed is there any need of these Terms, Three Distinct Persons; but rather they darken than explain the Mystery, which have occasioned, not only some of the Vulgar, but even some of them, called the Learned, to Err grosly in their Conceptions about the Mystery it self; sure I am, they are in an Error, occasioned in great part, by [Page 9] these unsound and unscriptural Terms, of Three Persons in the Trinity, for Persons signifies Substances, and not the Modes or Properties of One Substance.

Thus Keith, when a Quaker, spoke truly of the Quakers, tho' now he acts in a con­trary Line. These Men must be acknow­ledged to be, either Insincere formerly, or else they are Insincere now: For as we were, we are; if we were Erroneous, then Keith was Insincere for declaring us Orthodox: If we are Orthodox, Keith is Insincere now for declaring us Heterodox: Nor is it in this one Particular, for if it might be of Service, I believe I could make it ap­pear, that he has declared us in all our Principles Orthodox. Here, in this one Par­ticular, we may observe how zealously he Defends our Consciencious Scruple, not on­ly by the Authority of these Fathers, but also from the Unscripturalness and ill Con­sequences of such Terms; withal, fully declaring our Sincere Belief in the Holy Three, which may be sufficient to shew we are Sound in Faith, touching the Trinity, (so called) I shall not (for Brevity's sake) say any more to Vindicate our conscienci­ous Scrupling these Words and Terms, used by R. B. to express these Mysteries by, but shall proceed, to shew by a Quotation or two, that we are Sound in the Faith, touch­ing the Doctrines themselves; out of that [Page 10] Book which is generally received by the So­ciety.

‘But by this, as we do not at all intend, either to equal our selves to that Holy Man, the Lord Jesus Christ, who was Born of the Virgin Mary, in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwells Bodily; nor to de­stroy the Reality of his present Existence; so neither do we, as some have falsly cal­lumniated us. For though we affirm, that Christ dwells in us, yet not Immediately, but Mediately, as he is in that Seed which is in us; whereas he, to wit, the Eternal Word, which was with God, and was God, dwelt Immediately in that Holy Man: He then is as the Head, and we as the Members; he the Vine, we the Branches— so God dwells otherwise in the Man Je­sus, than in us. We also freely reject the Heresie of Apolinarius, who denied him to have any Soul, but said, The Body was only acted by the Godhead: As also the Error of Eutiches, who made the Manhood to be wholly swallowed up of the Godhead. Wherefore, as we believe he was a true, and a real Man; so we also believe, that he continues so Glorified in the Heavens, in Soul and Body, by whom God shall Judge the World, in the great and general Day of Judgment.—Neither do we hereby intend any ways to Lessen, or Derogate from the Atonement and Sacrifice of Je­sus [Page 11] Christ; but on the contrary, do Magnifie and Exalt it. For as we be­lieve all those things to have been certain­ly translated, which are recorded in the Holy Scriptures, concerning the Birth, Life, Miracles, Sufferings, Resurrection and As­cention of Jesus Christ; so we do believe, that it is the Duty of every one to believe it, to whom it pleaseth God to reveal the same, and to bring to them the Knowledge of it: Yea, we believe it were Damnable Unbelief, not to believe, when so decla­red;—nevertheless, as we do firmly believe it was necessary that Christ should come, that by his Death and Sufferings he might offer up himself a Sacrifice to God, for our Sins, who his own self bare our Sins in his own Body on the Tree; so we believe, that the Remission of Sins, which any par­take of, is only in and by Vertue of that most satisfactory Sacrifice, and no other­wise; for it is by the Obedience of that One, that the free Gift is come upon all to Justification, Barclay's Apol. 334.335.’

Thus, having given these Quotations of our Faith, by which it doth evidently appear, how falsly this R. Bridgman hath insinuated against us, as well as the Soundness of our Faith is sufficiently declared.

I shall now proceed, and be more Brief, be­cause what he offers in the main, is but Trifling. He adds, That without the true Faith [Page 12] of them, we cannot be saved; which true Faith he acknowledges, ought to be wrought by the Operation of the Spirit: I would hope, since he belteves it of so great Concern­ment, he will take care for one, or else, notwithstanding all his other Performances, and going to Church, he is like to remain still Ignorant of the true Faith of them; besides, how can he be fully assured whe­ther he has the true Faith of them wrought by the Spirit, without sticking to his Quaker-Principle, of Immediate Revelation. I would see this R. Bridgman and G. Keith to give over. playing upon words, which is only a trying of Skill. If they would betake themselves like Sampson, to the great Pillars of our Reli­gion, our known and acknowledged Prin­ciples; this were far more Manly, than raising up a Man of Straw to Fight with; for then, if they could overthrow them, it would render them Sampsons indeed. Now G. K. when a Quaker, accounted Immediate Revelation (as stated in his Book on that Sub­ject) and the Universal Principle of Light and Grace (which Principle he States and Proves in his Books, The Universal Free Grace of the Gospel asserted) the two great Princi­ples or Pillars of our Religion, as differing from other Societies of Christians; therefore, Oh ye mighty Men, to work!

R. B. proceeds to Teach of what necessity it is to every one to be rightly inform'd, concern­ing [Page 13] those above-mentioned Doctrines; ad­ding what a necessary work it is, to yield our Love and Obedience to that Law and Light, with which God instructs and enlightens our Na­ture; and that without some Experience thereof, it is in vain to pretend to any Religion. Whe­ther does he offer this as one Reason for leaving us, or Digresses, and gives it as Ad­vice to his present Friends? For it's much but he may think himself (notwithstanding all the pretences of Sorrow and Shame) wi­ser than some Older and more Eminent Church-men.

He goes on, and tells how dangerous it is, ‘To reduce all Religion and Faith to­wards God, under a Profession and Expe­rience of Light and Truth, without any Distinction of common and special Illumi­nation and Grace.’

How far he intends this a Charge against us, I am not like to know; besides, it is too general for him to expect a particular Answer; let him Charge us but Honestly, and do his worst: We know that though there are Diversities of Gifts, yet the same Spirit; and there are differences of Admini­strations, but the same Lord; and there are diversities of Operations, but the same God; which worketh all in all, 1 Cor. 12.4, 5, 6.

Next, he chargeth us by Name, for ha­ving ignorantly and blasphemously opposed this Work of Faith and Reformation; and that if [Page 14] we contradict or deny, it must bespeak great ignorance or obstinacy: But seeing he has been so kind, as to account us Blasphemers and Ignorant, I will submit to be accounted Ob­stinate too, before he shall pass without Rebuke; and do therefore Deny his Charge, and Dare him to prove it. He now being upon the high Rope, goes on insinuating, we Reject the Institutions of Jesus Christ; which, as he saith, is evident from our Writings constantly published from our beginning; yet he offers not one Quotation of them all for Confirmation. If what he says were true, what must we judge of him, as to joyn and continue so many Years with such a People, since (as he says) It is evident from our Writings constantly published, that we reject the Institutions of Jesus Christ, to which he cannot pretend Ignorance? I think he is mightily to blame, thus to Re­proach his old Friends, and all without-Book; it looks like as if he had left them ra­ther out of Humour, than real Conviction; for real Conviction would have demonstra­ted it self with a more Christian Temper: When I have added a little more of his, of like Nature, I shall shew from our Do­ctrine, how opposite his Charges are to what we Believe, by which his Envy will evidently appear; he saith, ‘How under pretence of high Attainments, and further Glory, a Spirit of Pride and great Uncha­ritableness [Page 15] hath possessed us, is sufficiently manifest by its Fruits, in Censuring and Reproaching all other Denominations of profess'd Christians, whom we set at a great Distance, and account as the World which lyeth in Wickedness; with some more of like nature.’

As to this latter, That we account all o­ther Denominations of Christians as the World which lyeth in Wickedness; our Charity is so far reverse to that, that we blieve there may be, even among Turks and Jews, such as belong to the Catholick-Church; hear what is said, Bar­clay's Apology, p. 400. of his Works, viz.

‘There may be therefore Members of this Catholick-Church, both among Heathens, Turks and Jews, and of all the several sorts of Christians, Men and Women, of Integrity and Simplicity of Heart, who though blinded in something in their Un­derstanding, and perhaps burthened with the Superstitions and Formality of the se­veral Sects, in which they are ingrossed; yet being Upright in their Hearts before the Lord, chiefly aiming and labouring to be delivered from Iniquity, and loving to follow Righteousness, are by the secret Touches of this holy Light in their Souls, inliven'd and quicken'd thereby, secretly united to God, and there-through become true Members of this Catholick-Church.’ Is not this very opposite to his false Charge? [Page 16] And to his other Insinuations, That we re­duce all Religion, and Faith towards God, under a Profession of Life and Truth, with­out any distinction of Common and Special Illumination and Grace, and so Reject the Institutions of Christ. See p. 405. of the same Book.

‘Secondly, The Church is to be consider­ed, as it signifies a certain Number of Per­sons, gathered by God's Spirit, and by the Testimony of some of his Servants (raised up for that end) unto the belief of the true Doctrines and Principles of the Chri­stian Faith; who, through their Hearts being united by the same Love, and their Understandings informed in the same Truth, Gather, Meet and Assemble toge­ther to wait upon God, to Worship him, and to bear a joynt-Testimony for the Truth, against Error.’

Thus it is evident how notoriously False are his Charges and Insinuations against us, what he observes of the Disagreeableness of what we Teach or Publish. I should have thought, the small Earnings his Friend G. K. hath made thereof (for if we consider his Eminence, and the great Number of Years he zealously preached and defended our Faith, even nigh thirty Years, which must be granted the chief of his natural Life; and yet upon his Revolt, should be able to draw off no more, looks almost incredible) [Page 17] might have given sufficient Check to his Calumny. As to the oppositeness of our Principles to true Christianity, is another gross Calumny, without any manner of Proof; however, we are ready to vindi­cate them, and shew their agreeableness with the Holy Scriptures, either with this or any other Adversary. And for our Quibling and Shuffling with dull and appa­rent Sophistry; I ascribe to his want of Matter, and the effect of Envy: What he saith of our altering the Sense of our own, and our Opponents Writings, with more of the same kind, is all of a piece with the former, and deserves no other answer; the poor Man being at a loss, must vent his Envy some way. As to those Sounds and Echoes he speaks of, what he intends thereby, is a little dubious; but if he has tender Ears, and cannot endure great Sounds, I ought to pity him; for as the saying is, He is gone out of hot Love, into red Fire.

Most of his ninth Page, as far as I find, is filled with his Resentments, for our re­fusing G. K's Arbitrary Summons: And since he mentions a Paper writ by our Friends, on that occasion, Titled, A word to the well-inclined; I shall for answer, refer to that Paper, which I doubt not, but will give the Impartial entire Satisfaction. As to the Spreading our Books, can he or any else [Page 18] blame us? Would any Christian Society do less, if they were abused and railed on in Print by their Adversaries, but use all lawful means to remove the Reproach, and vindicate their just Case? Would he have us Dumb, that his beloved Keith's Scotch Elo­quence might pass without Remark? Then I doubt not, but Printing would be ac­counted a more edifying Method, than building Stages, and drawing Multitudes of People together. What he insinuates of the Increase of our Number, doth not well agree with his former account, of his and many others leaving our Societies; this should not Increase, but Diminish our Number; tho' I am willing to agree with him in this, I hope our Doctrine and Faith doth take place with many, and yet will more abundantly: The Lord hasten to ac­complish and fulfil these good things he hath promised, that his dear Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, may come to Reign in all Hearts, who has paid so precious a Ran­som to God for them. As to the Misery our numerous Proselites are under, in Partia­lity and Prejudice, that what is published by our Party, passes for Truth, not only in Doctrine and Fact, but that they con­ceive a peculiar Presence of God as a con­tinual Blessing that accompanies them; and the same Conceit we have in all we say or do; and that we are so affected with [Page 19] the relish and savour of it, that it puffs us up with intolerable Pride, while it appears to us under a disguise of Humility. That we should be so Partial, and Flatter our selves, is even against Reason to believe; for People are most apt to Flatter them­selves in an easie way, but few are willing to be byassed in that which may expose them to manifold Sufferings and Exercises; it must be the dint of Reason, and force of Conviction, that must effect that, to which, if God be pleased to give the Sense or Seal of his Spirit or Presence; I will grant to him, it is a Confirmation past controul; and this is so far from being the Misery of any People, that it is the greatest Blessing, what­soever he may think: But that we conceive a peculiar Presence of God, in all we say or do; I cannot tell how to give him Credit for, but desire proof, for I believe it is a mi­stake, as well as he is mistaken, that we are so affected with the Relish and Savour there­of, that it puffs us up with Intolerable Pride. I see his Charity is near at an end towards us: however, he ought to pity us the more, because, as he says, This intolerable Pride ap­pears to us under a disguise of Humility, which is the opposite to Pride; well, he had need to have some good evidence, since he takes upon him to judge other Mens Hearts, and remember our Saviour's Doctrine, Judge not, that ye be not judged; for with what judg­ment [Page 20] ye judge, ye shall be judged: This rash judgment of his puts me quite out of con­ceit with his fine Comment on true Humility.

His eleventh Page appears to me, to be a kind of Preachment, much like one of G. K's new Sermons. What he says of a proud and obstinate Generation of Men, who under pretence of Subjection to a Power above the Magistrate; being very delusive in the Appearance of it: By which one might conclude (if one were as rash in Judgment, as he) that he was gotten from under that Delusion, to pretend Sub­jection to a Power above the Magistrate: If the good Men, the Martyrs, in Queen Mary's time, could have done so, they might have saved their Bodies from the Flames; however, those that believe Magistracy to be God's Ordinance, and are desirous to be subject to God, cannot be ill Subjects, not­withstanding R. B's Insinuations. He Insi­nuates, that being taught that Reasoning is Dangerous in things of Religion, they stop their Ears, and close their Eyes, &c.

If any that comes to us should be so unwise, it's to be feared they may not continue so long with us as R. B. did; for these that comes to us, had need to have both their Eyes and Ears open, for there is a daily Cross to be born by all the Disciples of crucified Jesus. His Envy grows so big, that he cannot let the Dead alone, even that Person, whom he [Page 21] in 1694. gave Testimony, had laid down his Head in Peace; now he accounts him of a melancholly Temper, and an ignorant Education, which blown up by a Spirit of Enthusiasm, gave Birth to his Faction, in those Hurricane Times, when the Church lay despoil­ed of her Power and Priviledges: So that by this Man's Account, not only G. F. but even all the Quakers, are stark Naught; this is he which judgeth others guilty of great Uncharitableness: Let us hear what G. K. says of the Quakers, since he was disowned by them, even in 97. in his Explications, p. 39. viz.

‘But yet I do affirm, that I have found di­vers that go under that name, that to my Understanding and Apprehension, have made a good Progress in spiritual Experiences, and other spiritual Attainments of Knowledge and Vertue; and I do continue in my real Per­swasion and Belief, that there was a good Work of God upon the Hearts of many of that People, and his mighty Power did stir and operate in them, as I hope it doth still continue in some to do unto this day.’

Thus Keith corrects Bridgman; and well he may, if we consider what George must of necessity once have known; to Pity is now vain, and to Pray for, I want Faith; so shall leave him to God; But since R. B. refers for Proof to the enterance of the Journal, of the Deceased, I shall refer thither also, not doubt­ing but the impartial will differ with Bridg­man [Page 22] in their Judgment: G. F. was well known in his Day, and both his personal Acquaintance and Works gives Bridgman the Lye: This Man is so very gross, I shall on this Head only return him as a further Reply, what Michael returned the Devil, The Lord Rebuke thee.

What he would Insinuate of the Rise of the Quakers, that it was when the Church lay spoiled of her Power and Priviledges; as tho' the Quakers were then in great Pro­sperity and Peace, whenas in Truth, they were also great Sufferers, and many of them in Prisons and Dungeons for their Testimony; however, this young Convert talks like a gal­lant Son of the Church, and as bravely doth he undertake to inform her; it's young days for him to conceit himself wiser than his Teachers; yet he is seeking out Expedients how to heal the Breach, and restore the Wastes; his present Thoughts are, by a laborious and diligent Instruction of Youth, and detecting of Error, by open and free Conferences, judiciously managed, in divers parts of the Nation.

How the Ministers of the Church will like this, I will not determine: But to me it seems they were defective in R. B's Account, or else what need is there of this Proposal, if he would not have them to be more Di­ligent and Laborious? And if so, they are not Diligent and Laborious enough; conse­quently [Page 23] Defective; or would he have them take in Him, and F. Bugg to their Assistance? How he would have the Conferences mana­ged in the divers parts of the Nation, he hath not sufficiently taught; he only says, Judiciously; but whether he intends that the Church shall Summons all the several Societies of Christians in the Nation, to Dispute, as G. K. Summon'd the Quakers at Turner's-Hall, or the Church shall state, as she sees meet, all the Principles of the several Societies, and so refute them, and none of the seve­ral Societies to be there; or if present, not suffered to vindicate their several and re­spective Principles; or he intends all to have liberty to oppugn one another's Prin­ciples, tho' this is a Power R. B. (I am apt to think) will scarce grant Dissenters: Or must the Church be sole Plaintiff, and all others only Defendants? The words, open and free Conferences, implies all the several sorts should have liberty to vindicate their several Principles; of what consequence this might be to the King's Peaceable Govern­ment, I will leave to more competent Judg­ments, and the Churches Consideration.

R. B. having made these Proposals to the Church, proceeds very warmly, declaring what a lamentable thing it is, that in a Christian Nation, the publick Seals and Badges of its Communion should be slight­ed, neglected, opposed and rejected, by a [Page 24] sort and number of Men, that will not be ac­countable in matter of Fact, for their Mi­stakes and Abuses. That he here intends the Quakers, I need not to Question, for I take his whole Paper to be designed as a valliant Sally against them; yet, seeing he doth not also tell us, what these publick Seals and Badges are, I must be at a loss, what he intends thereby, his words are ge­neral, and doth imply we are guilty of slighting, neglecting, &c. all the Seals and Badges of the Christian Religion; which is a high Charge, yet since it is false, we may the better bear it. Now, with his leave, I conceive the Seals and Badges of the Chri­stian Religion are many; I would ask him, whether not Swearing, be not one? And what he thinks of Mat. 5.33, 34. Also whether to preach the Gospel freely, be not another? And what he thinks of Mat. 10.8. And whether not to Fight nor Persecute, make not up two more? And what he thinks of Mat. 5.38, 39. & 26.52. John 18.36. James 4.1. 2 Cor. 10.4. Luke 9.55, 56. & Mat. 13.28, 29, 30. Nay, doth not Christianity take in the Moral Law? And if so, then will come in loving our Neighbour as our selves; which Badge, I should have been glad to have seen more worn by him; that would have given some evidence of his be­ing Religious; for I am satisfied, true Chri­stianity doth not destroy Morality, for I think, [Page 25] an honest, sober, and just Liver, is prefer­able to a superstitious Pilgrim; and that there is more Virtue in Praying for our Enemies, than visiting an old Relick. I see not how he comes to reckon us a sort and number of Men, that will not be accountable in matter of Fact, for our Mistakes and Abu­ses: For he gives no Instances; I may say, he has a fine Art in abusing by whole­sale, without proof. We have always been ready to give a sincere account of the Hope that is in us; which is evident from the many Acounts on that Head published, and all has been our readiness to take notice of every occasion that did offer, wherein it might be of Service. I hope R. B. would not have us take our Religion upon his Authority; Would he be for Whipping in, as well as out of the Tem­ple? When once Religion is turned, from inward Sense, to outward Prescriptions; and from Conviction and Reason, to im­plicite Faith and blind Obedience; I think a true Sense of God will be far gone, it will then be time for the Magistrate to see that the Laws are duly executed, for Con­science must be much a-sleep.

All that he has hitherto offered, has been only his bold and envious Say-soes, and Charges without all shew of Proof; where­fore it is high time, for what he has further to offer, to produce some sort [Page 26] of Evidence; he begins thus: ‘It is a most lame and scandalous Insinuation, against the Institution and Practice of outward Baptism, which G. Whitehead advances in his Rector Examined, p. 27. saying, When this Rector, (meaning Mr. Meriton) can demonstrate a probatum est, of such Virtue in that poor Element (as he calls it) of Water-Baptism, as to cure polluted and distempered Souls; as if the issue or effects of a Means that is prescribed, must determine the right or lawfulness of its Institution or Practice, without any Exception; he may at the same rate question the Authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles, in their Teaching and Preaching, because many that heard them were not effectually cleansed.’

'Tis a wonder to see a Man of such Pre­tentions, so lame in Matter, and so abusive in his Charges: His charging G. W. with lame and scandalous Insinuations against the In­stitution and Practice of Water-Baptism, and yet offer no better proof, than this one say­ing of G. W's to the Rector; we must un­derstand, that G. W's thus speaking, was even natural from the Comparisons brought by the Rector, viz. Naaman's washing in Jordan, and the blind Man's washing in the Pool of Si­loam: To which G. W. argues, ad homi­nem, that if the Rector could demonstrate such Vertue in Water-Baptism to the curing [Page 27] Mens Souls of their Infirmities, as Jordan had to Cure the Body of Naaman, and the Pool of Siloam had to restore Sight to the Blind, then his Comparisons were of force; otherwise, why did the Rector bring them? Was it only to fill up Paper? Now if the Rector and this R. B. would from hence allude, the Efficacy of Water-Baptism to the Curing of Souls, since we must grant, nei­ther of these Waters had that Vertue essen­tially in them, being only made effectual by the Grace and Blessing of that Power which appointed them; will it not then be proper to enquire into the effects, to see if they be answerable; and that which gives greater Suspicion that R. B. grants Water-Baptism available to Cure the Soul, is his Comparison of Christ's and the Apostles Preach­ing, that G. W. might at the same rate que­stion their Authority, because that many that heard them, were not effectually cleansed: Now, tho' many that heard them were not; yet many that heard them were. So, tho' a great many that are baptized with out­ward Water remain uncleansed, yet if ei­ther the Rector, or this R. B. can make proof, that many or any are cleansed by Water-Baptism, it will answer G. W's proba­tum est; for G. W. is not so unreasonable as not to admit of any Exceptions, so that R. B. may dispose of his lame and scandalous Insinuations elsewhere. But till such time as [Page 28] R. B. can make such proof, let him not blame us in holding to those Remedies that we know are appointed by God for that purpose, and that are effectual for that end, as the Blood of Christ, and the Operation of the Holy Ghost. R. B. adds, And in the Commissi­on that was given, Mat. 28.19. there is no more mention made of outward Teaching, than of outward Baptism; and the Quakers may as well reject Teaching with Words, as Baptizing with Water.

What way he has to propound to Teach the Nations the Faith of Christ, save by Words, I know not; however, I hope to shew, that we have more reason to que­stion Water-Baptism, than we have to que­stion outward Teaching. To that end, that I may both briefly and clearly state the Case, I will here present, what all the Evan­gelists that takes notice of our Saviour's Discourse at that time, when he gave that Commission, says concerning it; by which, I have some hopes we may perceive, whe­ther outward or spiritual Baptism was intend­ed by our Saviour; and if it doth appear what Baptism was the Subject of our Savi­our's Discourse, tho not expresly mentioned in the Commission, I hope it may suffice. Luke has it thus, And that Repentance and Re­mission of Sins should be preached in his Name, among all Nations, beginning at Jerusalem, and ye are witnesses of these things: Tarry ye in the [Page 29] City of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with Pow­er from on high, Luke 24.47, 48, 49. All Power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth. Go ye therefore and Teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mat. 28.18, 19. And being assembled together with them, com­manded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Fa­ther, which (saith he) you have heard of me: For John truly Baptized with Water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence, Acts 1.4, 5. Go ye into all the World, preach the Gospel to every Creature; he that believes and is baptized, shall be saved, Mar. 16.15.16. Thus we have the Substance of what Christ spake on this Subject; by all which, in all reason, it should remain no longer a doubt, what Baptism was there in­tended, as the the Gospel-Baptism; upon all which I am willing to make these few following Observations:

First, That these Relations of the several Evangelists, relating to, and being an Ac­count of our Saviours Discourse, concerning this Subject, at his Farewel, was therefore spoke at one and the same time.

Secondly, That it is clear, that the Baptism insisted on by our Lord, was his own spiri­tual Baptism, even that of the Holy Ghost, and is so particularly expressed, as well as confirmed, by other Phrases and Terms Sy­nonimous; [Page 30] as the Power from on high, the Pro­mise of the Father, &c.

Thirdly, Since it is evident that the Dis­course of our Lord, relating to Baptism, was not of Water, but the Spirit, which he then promised they should witness not many days hence; and thereupon bids them tarry at Jerusalem, till they were endued; then bids them Go Teach all Nations, bapti­zing them into the Name of the Father, &c. And we know most commonly, the Name of the Father, &c. signifies, his Power, Life and Ver­tue; nay always, when it relates to more than a bare naming of him, and it was this the Nations wanted to be baptized into, even into a spiritual and heavenly Life, and the true and proper Signification of the par­ticle [...], in the Text, is into, and not in, so it naturally followeth the Baptism in the Text was Spiritual Baptism.

Fourthly, Seeing it was the Baptism of the Spirit, our Lord was treating of; there was no need, when he came to give the Commis­sion, to express it afresh, (though I do say Baptizing into the Name of the Father, &c. doth signifie Spiritual Baptism,) it being the Subject of his Discourse at that Juncture; tho' if he had intended Water, there had been an absolute Necessity to have mention'd it, because it had been an altering the Subject of his present Discourse; even from Spiritu­al to Elementary Baptism.

[Page 31] Fifthly, The very Nature of the Commis­sion doth much press the necessity of spiri­tual Baptism, since it was to the Nations that lay in much Wickedness, and therefore need­ed that spiritual Baptism, by which they might become Children of God, and Heirs of Hea­ven.

Sixthly, Seeing it was this spiritual Bap­tism the Nations wanted, therefore it was, our Saviour was so very particular and care­ful, that the Apostles should tarry at Jeru­salem, till they were baptized themselves; for he knew right well, that those that were not baptized themselves, could not so much as be instrumental to the baptizing of others; for those that were not born again themselves, could not be proper Persons to the begeting of others: And because our Lord knew this to be an extraordinary work, which he had commanded them to; so he was equally encouraging, telling them, All Power in Heaven and in Earth was gi­ven unto him, and he would be with them always.

Seventhly and Lastly, How can we think our Lord intended Water-Baptism, when at the same time, he applies Water to John, as belonging to his Dispensation, saying, John truly baptized with Water, but ye shall be bap­tized with the Holy Ghost? The very relish of these Words at this instant, at giving this Commission is enough, I should think to sa­tisfie [Page 32] all, that it was far from our Lord to in­stitute Water, when he applies it thus to John, as a thing past. And truly, very Reason it self is on our side; for how should that great Messenger of the Everlasting Covenant, whose Dispensation should fulfil and end all prece­ding Dispensations; and whom they all did but darkly represent, that he should take up the chief Characteristick and Material part of the very preceding Dispensation; were not this rather to adopt, than fulfil and end? And would not this be and remain, as a Vail and Cloud upon his own Glorious and Spi­ritual Dispensation, which is Spiritually and Substantially, what the others were Outward­ly, Materially and Typically? Glory to God for ever. Well, I must remember, I am not writing a Treatise of Baptism, but only answering an Adversary; yet am willing to add a few words of G. K's out of his Pres­byterian and Independant Visible Churches, printed 1691. p. 182, 183.

And if any were raised up by the Lord, as John was, and could prove and instruct their be­ing sent to Baptize with Water as he was, these to whom they should be sent, ought gladly to re­ceive it; but to do it by bare Imitation, or a meer pretended Call, which they cannot prove to be either Mediate or Immediate, is great Presump­tion, yea, Superstition; and to call that a Com­mand of God, which he hath given them no Com­mand to practise, is to set up the Precepts of [Page 33] Men, in the room of God's Commandments, as the Pharisees did of Old, and is a taking of his Name in vain; for which he will not hold them guiltless: and they can never prove, by all their Art and Skill, that Water-Baptism is command­ed by Christ, Mat. 28.18, 19. for all God's Com­mands and Precepts, especially of publick Institu­tion, relating to the Church, are express, in so many express words, and are not left to be gather­ed by uncertain and doubtful Consequences. When God sent John to Baptize with Water, Water was expressed; but in the Apostles Commission to Bap­tize, no mention is made of Water, nor no words of Institution commanded to be used; but the com­mand is, Go, Teach, baptizing all Nations into the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost. And the Name of either the Father, or the Son, or the holy Ghost, is most fre­quently, if not always used in Scripture, to sig­nifie Power and Life; as, The Name of the Lord is a strong Tower: Thy Name is as Ointment poured forth, &c.

Thus we see Keith, after having been a Quaker nigh, if not altogether, 30 Years, holds out Zealous in his Testimony against Water-Baptism, and says, It can never be proved from Mat. 28.18, 19. And if Water-Baptism can never be proved, how much less can Sprinkling Infants be proved, for which there is neither Precept nor Practice in all the Bible? And yet this is the Baptism R. B. must stand by.

[Page 34]It will be necessary to shew, that the Mini­sters of Christ may Instrumentally, or Ministe­rially, Baptize with this Spiritual Baptism; in­deed it were Gross, if any held, that any Man or Men, had Power to Command, or Give the Holy Ghost; but I doubt not, but it will be Plain, as well as Orthodox, That the Apostles were the Means or Instruments, tho' Christ the Principal, by which the holy Ghost was given; which when I have done, I hope I have performed what will be ex­pected from me at this time. My first proof shall be from Acts 10.44. While Peter yet spake these Words, the holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the Word. To this plain matter of Fact, what can be objected, or who dare deny, but Peter's Preaching was the Means, or Instrumental Cause, of their being thus eminently Baptized with the Holy Ghost; this passage exactly agrees, and runs parallel with our Lord's Command, of Teaching all Nations, Baptizing them, &c. for as the Text words it, it implies, that to Teach Bap­tizing, went together, and was performed by Christ's Presence attending their Ministry; so here, not only by Precept, but by Pra­ctice; and Matter of Fact is true, for through Peter's Preaching, they both heard the Word, and were baptized with the Holy Ghost, at one and the same instant, Acts 11.15, 16. And as our Saviour said in another Case, My Father works hitherto, and I work. So tho' [Page 35] this Power be granted (as indeed it ought) to Christ, and that Christ doth Principally or Originally Baptize with the Holy Ghost, (and also that he administers it as it pleases him, either Immediately, and without all outward Means, or Mediately, and by In­struments) yet his Servants that are by him Commissionated, may be truly said Instru­mentally to Baptize with the Holy Ghost, and may say, Christ worketh hitherto, and we work. So I would have all be very careful that they do not oppose what they do not understand, but rather fall in with Peter, and say, What are we, that we should withstand God? Tho' several Texts of like import might be produced, that proves this Truth, yet for Brevity sake, shall conclude with this one, Gal. 3.5. This only would I learn of you, recei­ved ye the Spirit by the Works of the Law, or by the Hearing of Faith? He therefore that mini­streth to you the Spirit, and worketh Miracles a­mong you, doth he it by the Works of the Law, or by the Hearing of Faith? Thus it is clearly proved, that the true Ministers are Ministers of the Spirit, and do minister it. And as Paul saith, They were made able Ministers of the New Testament, not of the Letter, but of the Spirit.

R. B. begins a new Charge thus, But to ma­nifest how liable they are to pervert the true sense of matter; see what G. Whitehead says concerning the Supper, p. 35. of his Rector Examined, where he produces some Testimonies out of the [Page 36] Book of Martyrs to favour his Case, which duly considered are directly against it. I have examin'd the Quotations, and for further satisfaction, if R. B. will not be offended, I will be so Ingenuous, both to Transcribe them, and the end for which G. W. produced them (in G. W's own Words) by which the Impartial may perceive the falseness of R. B's Charge: And note, he doth not bring this so much to detect this particular Perversion of G. W's (as he accounts it) but thereby to shew, how apt we are to pervert the true sense of matter; so that we may reasonably conclude, he would not bring one of the meanest in his Budget, since it was to be his Goliah.

These following are G. W's Words, and therein is expressed the end for which he quo­ted the following Testimonies. And that the Bread and the Cup which Christ gave at his Sup­per, were a Figure, or Typical, was confessed by divers eminent Martyrs, as John Frith in his Reasons upon the Sacrament, treating of Christ the promised Seed, saith, Likewise the same Promise was made unto Moses, the most meek and gentle Captain of the Israelites, which did not only himself believe on Christ, which was so often promised, but also did prefigurate him by divers Means, both by the Manna which came down from Heaven, and also by the Water which issued out of the Rock, for the refreshing the Bo­dies of his People. Neither is it to be doubt­ed, [Page 37] but that both Manna and this Water, had a prophetick Mystery in them, declaring the very self-same thing, which the Bread and the Wine doth now declare unto us in the Sacrament: For thus saith St. Augustine, Who­soever did understand Christ in the Manna, did eat the same spiritual Food that we do; but they which by that Manna sought only to fill their Bellies, did eat thereof, and are Dead. On the Margent it is, Manna, and the Water of the Rock, a Figure of Christ's Body: Bread and Wine a Figure likewise of Christ's Bo­dy, 1 Cor. 10. See 2 Vol. Mart. p. 305. print­ed 1641. And Dr. Cranmer, Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, confesseth Christ's Speech, i. e. [this is my Body] to be Figurative; and quoting Am­brose in 1 Cor. 11. he calleth the Bread and the Cup Signs, a Type, Figure or Sign of the Blood of Christ, and of his Benefit (In his Disputations in Oxford, Vol. 3. Mar. p. 59. and Chap. 54. ibid.) he saith, The Flesh liveth by Bread, but the Soul is inwardly fed by Christ. And Dr. Ridley (Bishop of London) in his Disputations at Oxford, saith, And as one of the Fathers saith, A Figure is in vain, where the thing signified is present, ibid. p. 74. And p. 75, 76. in opposition to the Popish Do­ctrine of Transubstantiation, he saith, The Say­ings of the Fathers declare it to be a Figu­rative Speech, as appeareth in Origen, Ter­tullian, Chrysostom, (in opere imperfecto) Augustine, Ambrose, Basil, Gregory Nazienzen, [Page 38] Hilary, and most plainly in Bertram. Thus we have both the end for which G. W. quoted them, in his own Words, and the whole Quotations themselves.

For my part I cannot find any Perver­sion; and it stands R. B. upon to mani­fest it more plainly, if there be any; what because some of them was brought to op­pose the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, there­fore they are no good Arguments to G. W's purpose, to prove that they were Figures? R. B. might have saved his Quotation, to prove that, for G. W. acknowledges it; so says R. B. The Martyrs intended one thing, and G. W. would make them to intend ano­ther. May I not say, O pertinent Logici­an! Is there not divers Texts in holy Scrip­ture, that one and the same Text holds out two or more Principles of Faith? And what, because one of these Texts is brought to prove one of these points, if one offer it for proof of another, must it be accounted a Perversion? I hope not.

His next Charge is, That the Faith of the Body of Christ, now absent in Heaven, is lost a­mong us. I believe he here speaks Truth of us against his will, and saves himself telling a great Lye thereby; for that Faith is indeed lost, nay it never was received by us, That the Body of Christ is now absent in Heaven; we have always, and still do, believe it to be there present. These are fit Reasons to shew [Page 39] his leaving us was out of Envy; for I hope I have made it already manifest, that we be­lieve the Existence of the Body of Christ in Heaven, as really as any Christians whatsoever. As to his hopes and dependance on the outward Baptism and Supper, as two such Pillars and Supports of the Christian Faith: I may advertise him, that suppose they were what most Protestants account them to be, yet if he have not regard to something beyond them, he may find him­self mistaken in the end; and the Army of Abaddon may compass him about. To con­clude, what I have to say concerning them at present is, That as many as do practice them out of pure Conscience to God, belie­ving the same to be their Duty, we are cha­ritable towards them, hoping in time they will come to see further, as they continue true Seekers of God.

His next is, he saith, It is a specious pretence the Quakers have made to the Vertue and Effica­cy of the inward Principle, as having therein an Art of Extraction, by which they perform, as by one single Still, all that can be proposed from the variety in a Laboratory.

This specious pretence (as he calls it) rightly stated, will stand all Winds and Weathers: For, this Principle in it self, as held by the Quakers, is no other than the Word God, in whom was Life, and the Life the Light of Men, John 1.4. Tho' the Quakers are no [Page 40] such ill Distinguishers, that if R. B. will be so barbarous, as to divide the particular Measure or Manifestation from the fulness, and the purchase of that Blessing (tho' that is a Presumption the Quakers dare not at­tempt, because God, as Father, Word and Spirit, is present therein) to say, That that particular Measure and Manifestation, so di­vided, is sufficient: Tho' they do boldly say, This inward Principle, not divided, but conjunctly taken as aforesaid, is able to ef­fect whatever is needful; yet this doth not lead us to slight any of the least means ap­pointed of God, as helps in the Work of our Salvation; for there are many things ve­ry useful and highly needful towards an End; yet cannot be said to be absolutely necessary; and yet who so unwise as to re­ject them? At the same rate R. B. might find fault with St. John, who told the Belie­vers of his time, That they had received an Un­ction from the Holy One, and they knew all things; and that they needed not that any Man should Teach them; but as the same Anointing should Teach them of all Things. Tho' the Apostle, no more than we, intended hereby to lay waste Gospel Means, or outward and instru­mental Helps, appointed by God. What he adds of William Penn's Ranting at an unrea­sonable rate, and disparaging the Reputation of our Principles; I must say, doth not be­come [Page 41] him; if he had only regarded Civility, it would have taught him better Language. Doth he think his going to Church will priviledge him to abuse by Authority? Nay, surely, many of them are Men of better Tem­per, and more Honour: Nor can I think he cares how much W. P. disparages our Prin­ciple, tho' the Truth of his Heart may be, that he thinks him too great an Honour to it; neither can I believe, that the repute of our Principles affords him any great plea­sure. His charging G. Whitehead with irre­gularity of Practice, without producing proof, doth not bespeak him a Man of Honour; for a Person of worth would abominate to impeach Men of Note, without producing some good Ground for so doing. P. 9. He has more cause to reflect upon his own In­civility, for exposing in Print, part of G. W's private Letter to his Father-in Law, unduly intercepted, together with his own angry Re­sentments and Defamations against G. W, &c. I am sure (saith R. B.) no Principle of Truth, ever taught W. P. to advance such a Notion of the Composition of Man, as he delivers in p. 71. of his Primitive Christianity. Man (says W. P.) as I said just now, is a Composition of both Worlds; his Body of this, his Soul of the other World. If R. B. has a better Notion of the Composition of Man to advance, I should be glad to hear it, tho' a truer I am confident he cannot; so that I cannot but tell him, he [Page 42] is mistaken in so rashly judging W. P's No­tion: Is it not apparent, that our Bodies are of this World? Yet, where is the Person that believes that the Soul is a created, im­mortal and invisible Spirit, that can be so gross as to believe it is of this World too? If not of this, then of some other World; of this it cannot be, for this World is Visi­ble, Material and Corruptible; but the Soul is Invisible, Immaterial and Incorruptible: Truly I should think R. B. cannot be so gross, as to think otherwise, if he believes Man to have an Immortal Soul. He goes on, adding more words of W. P's, viz. By the Body the Soul looks into, and beholds this World; and by the Word it beholds God, the World without end. Upon which R. B. Com­ments thus; So that the World without end, and God, are with him Terms Synonimous [which by the way is falsly inferred] and of this end­less World, it's [with him] a part of Man's Composition; his Soul is of its Essence, and beholds its being a-kin to God, not only by a Relation, but in Substance. Oh! false Comment, and no­table Reason for leaving the Quakers; it is much that Men will expose their Envy so apparently: Let us consider W. P's Words, and then, without any difficulty, we shall discern the disingenuity of this Adversary, and the falseness of the Comment: First let us observe, tho' W. P. do say, Man's Soul is of the other World; yet he doth not say, [Page 43] The other World is God, or that God and the other World are one and the same thing; so that except R. B. can make it appear, that W. P. believes the other World, and God, to be one and the same, he argues to no purpose; and all the fine Gloss and Guilt, with which he would bespatter W. P. will fall as Dung upon his own Face, as well as the dull and apparent Sophistry which he would father upon us, will a great deal of it fall to his Share, to account for; neither will it all vindicate his abuse of W. Penn and others. And as impertinent is he in making those words he Quotes (out of Judas and the Jews, p. 130.) a description of God, and of the Soul of Man, it being a part of him, from W. P's there saying, The new dispersed Flock of God shall rest with him in that World, which never had Beginning, and is without End. Where do we find such a Description of the Soul in these Words? The words carped at, viz. That World which never had beginning, may be allowed by the Ingenuous, as figuratively expressed; as That World is put for Eternal Life in Heaven, Luke 20.35. They that be counted worthy to enjoy that World; by the World, eter­nal Life is here intendedSee T. Wilsons Di­ctionary. it being only a Transmutation, as between the Cause and the Effect. Behold! what a weighty Reason this is for R. B. his leaving our Society: But at the rate he wrangles, he may even fault the [Page 44] very Doctrine of our Lord, that because he told the Pharisees, that the Kingdom of Heaven was within them, that he thereby destroyed the Kingdom of Heaven without. I think it is time to remind him of what he writ in 1694. in our Vindication, Supposing (says he) there may have been some defect in Expressi­on, by which means the matter has not been left so well guarded against the exceptions of malicious Cavillers, who, no doubt (were it not for the ge­neral Authority of the holy Scriptures) would be as ready to make their exceptions against many Sentences or Expressions therein also. But R. B. making God, and the World without end, terms Synonimous with W. P. for want of the word and, before the World without end, shows himseif now to be turned a malicious Caviller. Would one have thought, that this Man would have himself become herein so quickly guilty? What he quotes out of W. P's Book, called Judas and the Jews, is one with this above, so needs no other an­swer. And to his insinuating that G. F. held that Notion, of the Souls being a part of God, is already answered (by abler Pens, as G. W. and J. W.) so I need not say any thing there­to. He returns to W. P. again, touching W.P's Answer to John Faldo, concerning the Re­surrection of the Body; if I take for granted what R. B. quotes as W. P's Answer, not ha­ving the Book by me, I do say, W. P. an­swered wisely, and did well to put by [Page 45] his Antagonist as he did; for I find that those that define so nicely, often run themselves into Contradictions, even G. K. is scarce clear in this particular; as for Instance, G. K. says, in his Testimony against that absurd Opinion, page 3. and That which rises is the Mortal, that puts on Immortality; and the Corruptible, (that putteth on Incorruption. Now Paul says, It is sown a natural Body, it is raised a spiritual Body, it is sown in Corruption, it is raised in Incorrupti­on; so that G. K. and Paul seems to assert two things; G. K. says, that which rises is the Mortal and Corruptible; and Paul says, that it is raised Spiritual and Incorruptible. Would not R. B. account this an Error in a Quaker? Besides, W. P's words are safe, for neither do I remember any Text of Scripture that says in express words, of a Body having the same Matter, and not the same Grosness, &c. but that W. P. is Sound in the Faith, as well as we, is clear; see his Key, where he thus ex­presses himself on our behalf as well as his own; In this (says he) also (i. e.) the Quakers are grosly abused. They deny not, but believe the Resurrection according to Seripture, not only from Sin, but also from the Grave; but are conscienci­ously, not contumeliously Cautious in expressing the manner of the Resurrection intended in the Change, because it is left as a Secret in the Scripture. Are People angry with them for not believing or asserting what is hidden, and which is more curious than necessary to be known; and [Page 46] which the Objectors themselves cannot be po­sitive in? Thou Fool, is to the curious inquirer, as saith the Apostle, which makes the Qua­kers contented with that Body which it shall please God to give them; being assured, that their Corruptible must put on Incorruption, and that their Mortal must put on Immortali­ty, but in such manner as it pleaseth him. And in the mean time, they esteem it their Duty, as well as Wisdom, to acquiesce in his holy Will. It is enough they believe a Re­surrection, and that of a Glorious and Incor­ruptible Body, without further nicities, for to that was the antient Hope. Passing by his Inference touching the Body of Christ, be­cause of his following Query: For, as he says, he could not obtain a plain and positive Answer thereto from several of our Friends, appointed to hear his Reasons for declining our Meetings; and least he should blame me too, I will first place the Query, and then give a positive and plain Answer with little trouble.

Query, Whether our Lord Jesus Christ is now in Heaven above, or without us, in the true and entire Nature of Man glorified, the same for Sub­stance which he had on Earth, and for ever to come united to the Godhead? Answer, Yea. What he says of finding it fully and safely expressed in the Articles of the Church of England, I think it is as fully and as safely expressed in the Apology, in the Quotation I have brought at the beginning.

[Page 47]I come now to his last, which is touching a Letter writ by G. Whitehead, to his Father-in-law, and G. W's Brother-in-law, he gives us some part of G. W's Letter, as well as a Copy of his own Answer, requesting a meet­ing with G. W. in order that G. W. might make good what he had insinuated against him to his Father-in-law (as he says) but G. W. giving him no such Meeting, he was willing to expose it to the publick. As to the Letters, it being a private Concern be­tween them two, I have nothing further to say, than this, That G. W. was under a simple impossibility to offer him a Meeting; for till G. W. saw his Letter in Print, he knew no­thing of it; wherefore R. B. ought either to have taken more care in sending his Letter, or when he was in London, to have gone to G. W. so he has no cause to Glory, as tho' G. W. declined to give him a Meeting; it is nothing but an empty Flourish.

Having thus briefly gone through R. B's whole Paper of his wonderful Reasons for leaving us, hoping I have not omitted any thing that might in the least require my no­tice; withall, both modestly detecting his Envy, and also shewing the Soundness of our Faith, in opposition to his false Charges; whereby, as I doubt not but the Impartial Enquirer will meet with satisfaction, and plainly see, that it is more Envy than real Matter, that thus Influences our Adversaries; [Page 48] hoping withal (tho' blessed be God, it is not only hopes, but we see evidently, that it is true in Fact) that the very means our Ad­versaries use to revenge themselves upon us, turns to our advantage; for thereby the So­ber and Enquiring are the more stirred up to examine into the Truth of Matters, and God is daily adding to his Church, blessed be his holy Name.

Now, for a Conclusion, I heartily wish R. B. may cease to envy the Children and People of God, and come to true Repen­tance; for I am heartily sorry for him. So with the words that he was pleased to add to his Uncle, G. Whitehead's Letter, I shall at present leave him, Prov. 26.26, 27. Whose Hatred is covered by Deceit, his Wickedness shall be shewed before the whole Congregation. Whoso diggeth a Pit, shall fall therein; and he that rolleth a Stone, it will return upon him.

Graithwait, the 7th of the 6th Month, 1700.