HAving lately had some Opportunity and Occasion to view a Book in Manuscript, entituled, The Quakers Unmasked, signed by John Pennyman, and charging the People called Quakers with Double Dealing, Fals­heartedness, Contradictions, Confusions and Temporizing, such Wickedness as can hardly be Paralleld, as great Dissemblers, De­ceivers, Deluders of the People as have appeared in this our Age, Lyers, False Prophets, and to be avoided and witnessed against, Deceitful Workers, Hypocrites; charging G. F. to be one of the greatest Hy­pocrites and Deceivers in this Nation, deceiving the People, threatning him with cutting down, &c.

Here's a hideous out-cry, but the Falsness and Malice thereof will appear anon, when we come to his pretended Proofs, which consist of Collections taken out of their own Writings (as he saith); which he hath so placed, that he saith, those of the mean­est Capacity may easily discern and see them to be as great Dissemblers, Deceivers and Deluders as have appeared in our Age: And for all this he pretends the Discharge of his own Conscience. His pla­cing his Collections to make his Charge obvious against the People called Quakers, are in two Columns about Contradictions and Temporizing; and this, as relating to the several Revolutions and Governments since we were a People, together with some Obser­vations thereupon by another Hand (as he saith); but we have only Joh. Pennyman's Name to the whole Charge, so that what o­ther Hand soever it was that has helped him to compose this Piece of Malice, he has espoused the whole Matter, not only [Page 2] against particular Persons, some dead and some alive, but also against the People called Quakers in general; wherein his deadly Malice hath exceeded all common bounds. And yet upon his Paper against G. F. he has placed this Note in the Margent, viz. But is this to render him obnoxious to the Government? No, I abhor that Practice; but base and self ended Spirits are to be humbled, saith he.

Now I affirm, and it may be obvious to any unbyassed and in­telligent Readers, that John Pennyman hath shamefully lied, dis­sembled and temporized; lied and dissembled, in pretending that he abhors that Practice of rendring us obnoxious to the Govern­ment; for a very mean capacity may see, that the tenour of his work is to render us obnoxious; and particularly it is more appa­rent in certain passages, as 1. from a Paper of one of our Friends, he questions us all in these words, viz. How dare these Men appeal to the King and Council's Consciences that they are harmless, and would do them no harm, &c. p. 9. Now is not this to render us obnoxious as not being harmless, but such as would do them harm? And yet this is the Man that abhors such a Practice as rendring us obnoxious to the Government. 2dly. Whereas in the Quakers Plea, 'tis said on the behalf of the Quakers, that though ‘some that are now called Quakers were once in the Army a­gainst the King, when their Knowledge and Judgment were not otherwise fram'd, &c. yet being altered in their Judgments to the contrary, and that it is not lawful in the Administrati­on of the Gospel, to go to war with carnal Weapons, and that there is now no danger of us, and now we are all of that mind, &c.’ Upon this I pass this Note, viz. that this pretended chang­ed Judgment in the Men that are Quakers, is not to be taken for a change of Judgment in the Quakers. &c. Oh Malicious Insinuati­on! Is not this to render us obnoxious to the Government, as to make them believe, for all this, that the Quakers count it lawful in the Administration of the Gospel, for them to go to War with carnal Weapons? Yea, that themselves may take up Arms and fight against the King, as some have done in the former Wars, before convinc'd and brought under the Gospel Administration? And what is all this but to render us the very People called Quakers as vile, perfideous and obnoxious to the Government, as he could possibly do? And not only perfideous to the Government, but to their own Gospel Profession and Principle; and what's the [Page 3] Nature and Tendency hereof but to influence and incense the present Government with an evil Eye, and prejudice against us, to ruin and destroy us; as a People not fit to live in a Common­wealth or under any Government; but that blessed be the Lord our God, he hath raised a better perswasion and sense of us in the Hearts of many in Power, with respect to our peaceable Conversations, which loudly have all along proclaimed our In­nocency and Clearness, from such Faction and Perfideousness a­gainst the Government (under which we live) as this Apostate Adversary would maliciously insinuate, so manifestly contrary to his own pretences, as abhorring the practice of making us ob­noxious to the Government. 3dly. Against the People called Qua­kers, he observes, that they formerly exhorted Men to fight and would fight themselves; and now deny all fighting on any pretence, is to be imputed to their temporizing and deceit. See here again how base and contradictory he is to himself; his objection lyes chiefly against their denying all fighting or to fight themselves; for this he cries out of temporizing and deceit: Is not this still to render us obnoxious? Let the Impartial judge, and see how he endeavours to invalid and bring contempt upon all our Declarations and Applications to the King and Council, for our Innocency and peaceable Living under the present Government, according to the practice of the Primitive Christians. To his Accusation, that they (viz. the Quakers) formerly exhorted Men to fight, and would fight themselves.

I utterly deny it as a Slander, and put the Question to him; John, wast thou of such a Principle whilst thou own'd the Qua­kers, as to fight thy self and exhort others thereunto? If thou wast, it was time for thee to be gone as one not of us. We know none such in our Society; so its most wicked and unjust to charge us as a People therewith: Another Instance he has in his Obeservations of this kind, viz. again touching fighting, they have taken care to record what one of their Ministry saith; we directed all People to the Spirit of the Lord God in them, and if that led them to fight, I had nothing against it, for this he quotes Fol. 4. but tells us not what Book. This I do greatly question, for I never read it that I know of; however I cannot believe without better evidence, that any Minister of ours did ever preach such Do­ctrin to Friends or People, as that the Spirit of the Lord might [Page 4] lead them to fight with carnal Weapons, &c. since our Testimony and Judgmment has always been to the contrary; to wit, that our Weapons are not carnal but spiritual, and mighty through God; and we wrestle not with Flesh and Blood, but with spiritual wickedness; and we war not after the Flesh nor with a carnal Sword, but with the Sword of the Spirit, which is, the word of God.

And if any one hath writ to any in Power, to this effect, viz. ‘That if they would walk with the Lord and preserve his Peo­ple, the numberless number of this now distressed People would be to them a Strength, and stand by them in the day of Trouble, and be a Defence unto them according to what is cited.’ (This he says, G. F. and E. B. told Rich. Pro­tector, and quotes good Council and Advice, p. 44. Which is a Falshood touching G. F. for that was none of his Paper, nor his Words or Stile; here he has falsly entitu­led that to G. F. which was none of his.) Howbeit this is not a Proof that the People called Quakers, intended to fight for R. Cromwel or any in Authority, seeing there are other and better ways of defence for a Government, than fighting by carnal Weapons, as Righteousness which exalts a Nation; the Prayers and Faith of true Christians and Believers, which was the Mind and Practice of the Primitive Christians for those in Authority; not ex­cluding their civil Contributions, Taxes, Customs and Dues, which has been our Practice to pay, since we were a People; and that Nations and Governments are not always defended by fighting, carnal Weapons, &c. but by a better way and means, to wit, the fear of the Lord according to his Law; observe this instance in the time of King Jehosaphat's Reign, when he sought to the Lord God, the Lord establish'd the Kingdom in his hand, and when he caused the Law of the Lord to be taught in Judah, that the fear of the Lord fell upon all the Kingdoms of the Lands; they made no war against Jehosaphat, see 2 Chron. 17. and 10. and Chap. 20. 29, 30. therefore the fear of the Lord and his Power, was and is a better Defence to a Kingdom or Nation, than Wars and Fighting.

Now having proved from few Instances, what a manifest Hypocrite, and malicious Temporizer John Pennyman is (as also his obscure Agent, who writ his Observations) I shall proceed [Page 5] to evince more of his Falshood, Slander, Baseness and Shallowness in his Reflections and Observations, not looking upon it a suffici­ent Vindication of our selves and our Innocency, only to discover his Malice, Out-rage and Inconsistency; but I have something to demonstrate on the behalf of our Judgment, Practice and Conversation, as we are a People which any indifferent and unprejudiced Reader may easily perceive or distinguish from his envious Objections and Invectives, and how consistent we are, and have all-a-long been in our Judgment and Practice, hav­ing still the Testimony of a Good Conscience to rejoyce in both in the Sight of God and Men, both with respect to the Kingdom and Government of Christ, as head over his Church, and Law-giver to his People, and to the Governments among Men.

First then, to his Preface, on which much of his Work had a Dependence, where he thus proceeds, viz. When I have consi­dered how the Quakers have Writ and Printed against the Presbyte­rians, Independents, and others, for being ingaged in the Late Wars, &c. it hath exceedingly amazed and astonished me, That they who were so great Justifyers and Encouragers not only of what had been done in the Late Wars, but also did Incite, and Encourage those that were therein ingaged, not to leave off until they had set up their Standard at the Gates of Rome, &c. And yet for them to upbraid others with that which themselves for many Years were so deeply concerned and engaged in, &c. who had not been more engaged, if so much, as themselves, in the late Wars—When they themselves had been ingaged in the same Cause and Quarrel with those whom they now so much reproach, &c. Thus far J. P.

To all which I do conscientiously answer, that he hath most grosly and palpably belied the People called Quakers in these Pas­sages divers ways: First, in rendring them, without exception of Persons, not only Justifiers of the Late Wars, and of what had been done therein, without exception of Things done; but also equally concerned with the Presbyterians, Independents and others therein.

Secondly, In rendring the People called Quakers, as being as much (or more) ingaged in the Late Wars as the Presbyterians, In­dependents, &c. When in the Time and Heat of those Wars, the [Page 6] People called Quakers were not a People,The War began in 1641, and in the Year 1648 the King was be­headed, and all this while no Quakers heard of in the Nation, nor till a­bout 50, 51, or 52. when there was no Wars in England for them to be concerned in; How false then is J. P. to say, The Quakers were as much or more concerned in the War against the King as any other? nor so gathered and constituted as a People, under that Name, Principle or Profession as now, as 'tis well known in this Nation; whereas 'tis not unknown, That both Pres­byterians, Independents and some others, were both gathered and constituted as di­stinct Peoples, and as such both Ministers and their People, many of them concerned in the Late Wars, how far both in Preach­ing, Subscriptions and Actings, is also well known (yet hope that some of them have learned better things ere this time a Day) so that in this Case there is a vast disparity be­tween them and the People called Quakers; therefore the very Ground and Foundation of John Pennyman's Quarrel against us in this Matter (as being so greatly ingaged in the Late Wars, and Justifiers of what had been done, that is, all that was done) in those Wars; This I affirm to be a great Lye against the People called Quakers, and yet grant him, That divers who have been since, and now are of us the People called Quakers, have former­ly been concerned in the Late Wars, while under the Notion of Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists and other Perswasions; yea many also who served the King in those Wars, until they became better principled and of another Spirit, through the Ap­pearance of the Day of Christ and his Power unto them, where­by many were made not only to lay down their Commissions and Offices, desert the Army, relinquish Fighting, but also to break their Swords, Spears, and other Weapons of War, and to con­vert them into necessary Uses, according to that Evangelical Pro­phesie of Esaiah, ch. 2. as knowing that Christ's Kingdom is not of this World; and therefore his Servants must not Fight, and at his Command every one must put up and lay aside their Swords as well as Peter, yea Peter must not fight for Christ, but suffer with him, if he intends to reign with him. Here many, who had been concerned in those Battles that were with confused Noise and Garments rowled in Blood, are now come to that which is with Burning and Fuel of Fire, in order to the Consumption of [Page 7] all that Fuel, Lust, Pride, Enmity and Ambition, from whence Wars have risen, and which have been the original Cause thereof, though many were zealous and consciencious, according to what they believed, in those former Wars, even of those several Perswasions before-mentioned; and my shewing our Adversary's Falsness in his Comparison between the Quakers and Presbyterians in this Case, is not to vilifie or reproach them or any others, be­cause concerned therein, hoping some of them are now better in­formed, but am necessitated to mention them in this Case, to shew the Disparity and Falsness of this Adversary's Compa­rison, who now appears as a rigid Persecutor, to take up and maintain a distinct Quarrel against us, for the Presbyterians and Independents against the Quakers, as for not only upbraiding, but reproaching and vilifying them, for being ingaged in the Late Wars, while he falsly saith, We were so great Justifyers and Incou­ragers of what had been done therein: Hereupon, as the principal Occasion of all his Quarrel after, his charging us with the most revengeful and highest aggravating Terms that was possible for our Pen to express; He thus proceeds, viz. witness those Words to the Nonconforming Ministers, in answer to Mr. Faldo, viz. ‘But why, poor Nonconformists, after all these preached-up Battles, &c. Again, they are true Gospel-Ministers, whose Gospel is Peace on Earth, and good Will towards Men, and not Garments rowl­ed in the Blood of Kings and Princes, Rulers and People, no worldly Armies, Battles, Victories, Trophies, Spoyls, Seque­strations, Decimations, and the like, &c.’

And then J. P. as a Person highly disgusted at this and as greatly simpathizing, or rather temporizing with the Presbyterians, In­dependents and probably some of his private discontented. Coun­sels or Cabals, to aggravate this particular Instance against the People called Quakers, he addeth these Words, viz. What people, setting these aside, could have had the Face and Confidence to have writ such Language as this? certainly not any, especially when they themselves had been engaged in the same Cause and Quarrel, &c.

First, let it be here noted, That John Pennyman, in his great Zeal for the Nonconformists, and enmity against us, hath still proceeded upon his great Lye against the People called Qua­kers, ☞ As what People, setting these aside, could have had the Face, when they themselves had beening aged in the same Cause? See what an apparent Lye this is, and I charge him with it, To prove [Page 8] where the People called Quakers were so ingaged in the same Cause, as to preach up Battles, Spoils, Plunders, &c. Garments rowled in the Blood of Kings, Princes, Rulers, and People world­ly Armies and Battles, Victories, Trophies, Spoils, Sequestra­tions, Decimations, &c. from which he doth not vindicate and acquit John Faldo and his Brethren, but only cries out of Reproach, Revengeful and Aggravating Terms, vilifying, &c. Such an Agent have the Nonconformists as John Pennyman, who instead of vindicating them from these Matters commemorated against them (on their occasion first given) he belies the people called Qua­kers, as being ingaged in the same; and as if John Faldo and his Brethren were so big and eminent in John Pennyman's Eyes, and such awful and formidable Persons, he put this admiring question, viz. What people, setting these aside, could have had the Face and Confidence to have writ such Language as this? Oh wonderful! is John Faldo and his Brethren, the Nonconformists, grown so potent, so awful, so austere or formidable, that it is such a dangerous business to affront them, by reminding them of their former Concerns in the Late Wars, their preached up Battels, &c. even at such a Time when John Faldo, Thomas Hicks the Baptist Forger of Dia­logues, and others, both Presbyterians, Independents and Baptists, and their Learned and Reverend one and twenty Divines, as they call them, have endeavoured with all their Force not only to unchristian us, but to render us as odious and obnoxious in the Face of the Nation, not only to Reli­gion, but to Government, as possibly they could, with their Pens, as Cheats, Impostures, yea the vilest of Men, thus putting us in Bear-skins, to make People destroy us in the open Streets, or as if they would swallow us up at once; witness the muster­ing up their Forces at Barbican, Thomas Hick's Dialogues, J. Faldo's Quakerism no Christianity, and his Vindication thereof, there rendring us as inconsistent with Human Society, destructive of Govern­ment, &c. in our Principles, wherein some Baptists and other per­secuting Spirits, plainly shewed its Sting and Venom, but it cannot penetrate our Armour of Light nor hurt us. These Occasions against us, John Pennyman is pleased to take no notice of, and yet counts it a heinous piece of Confidence, to remind such Nonconformists of their former Preachings, of Battles, Sequestrations, &c. contrary to the Gospel of Peace and good [Page 9] Will towards Men, wherein John Pennyman himself dares not adventure to excuse them, though now he strikes in with them against us; however he may see that there are some among us, that has the Face and Confidence, to oppose both John Faldo, Thomas Hicks, and John Pennyman, in their great Enmity against us; and I do not see that John Pennyman's espousing their cause and quarrel, and abusing us as he hath done, will stop our Pens, considering the many occasions given against us, not only in their late Invectives, but also in the former cruel Persecutions and Sufferings (which many of us indured) both by Presbyterians and Independents, their Ministers, Magistrates and People in Oliver Cromwel's days: Yea, how many caused they in those days to be Imprisoned till Death, Stocked, Whipped; besides the Stoning, Beating and Abusing by the rude Multitude, when incensed by their Ministers and Leaders, &c. of these things John Pennyman can­not be altogether ignorant; nor of the Professors in New-Eng­land's Cruelty, in putting several of our faithful Friends to death for their righteous Testimony; whose innocent Blood the Guilty there, have not washed their hands of, nor have they here given a publick Testimony against that cruelty, that we know of. So let John Pennyman consider what credit he will gain, by closing in with such Presbyterians and Independents. I wish both he and they who are alive, may examin themselves and repent, and if he and they be still of the mind that our Pen hath been too sharp, we are sure their cruel Hands, their Goals in Old England, and Gallows in New-England have been far sharper. And now with their malicious Tongues and Pens (not having Power to persecute as before) by their Forgeries, they would make the World believe that we are no Christians, &c. but we are bet­ter known to Christ and honest Men: As also our so much bear­ing and suffering John Pennyman and his Party, in their pub­lick outrage and frequent disturbances and interruptions in our Meetings, without exercising or seeking Revenge against them, being so far from encouraging any to beat or lay violent Hands on them, that we have laboured to quiet those People, that have had much ado sometimes to keep their Hands off them, by reason of their turbulent Provocations; all this sufficiently evidences that our Principle and Spirit is against Fighting, for I am confident, that had I. P. look't on us as Fighters, &c. he [Page 10] durst not have adventured to have given us such frequent and publick occasions of Provocation, as he and his Party have done, which he knows his Friends the Nonconformists would not suf­fer in their Assemblies, but would have paid him and his Com­pany off to purpose, had he abused them and their Meetings, as he hath done us and ours.

And to manifest John Pennyman and his two or three late Fol­lowers and Disciples, what hideous disturbances have they fre­quently made, in some of our publick Meetings in London? And more particularly his Disciple B. Boyce, who hath shewn a very venerable respect to him, and T. P. little less for him, in pro­claiming him openly to be an upright or sincere Man; and yet this John Pennyman's upright Man, after his various attempts to the Magistrates, to swear the Peace against divers, that never did or intended him harm, his outrage and violence in several Meetings has been notorious. And John Pennyman's own En­vy surpasses all this against the People called Quakers, in rendring them obnoxious to the Government (contrary to his own pre­tence) as will yet further appear.

Now we come to his pretended Contradiction and Temporizing, unjustly charged upon us the People called Quakers from our Writings, which as he reckons are so placed, that those of the meanest Capacity, may easily see them to be as great Dissemblers, De­ceivers and Deluders of the People, &c. and this hideous outcry and clamour he makes, as 1st. wherein he set G. Fox against G. Fox. in his judgment concerning Kingly Government; and withal let it be remarked, that his Observations and Objections are chiefly made against those Declarations, made to the King and present Powers, signifying our innocent Intentions of living peaceably un­der their Government, our honouring the King, &c. Against this lyes the charge of Hypocrisie, Temporizing and Apostacy, &c. But why should it become a heinous crime in his view, for Sub­jects to signifie their Intentions of peaceable Living, and respect to a King or Kingly Government, although some of them have for merly expressed a Fear and Zeal, as he grants, about Kingly Government, which is thus to be understood, of an Earthly oppressing King; as it was feared some in O. C's. days would have constituted and set up, when they were doting for an earthly King to establish and impose their own Religion upon the Nation contrary to their great pretence to Jesus Christ his Headship and [Page 11] Kingship over the Church; this was the very thing for which G. F. and others fore-warned and reprehended them Note that the words that most tended to clear G. F's. intent in this matter, J. P. very unfairly leaves out, as after Earthly King, he leaves out, (and earthly Powers, and will change as they change) As also, (have put out Christ, and would not have him to reign) these words he leaves out. As also, after (all Kings made in Mens earthly wills) he leaves out (THAT WILL NOT HAVE CHRIST TO REIGN) These with several o­ther material pasages, hath J. P. very dissinge­nuously left out of those several passages quoted by him, writ long before the K's. Restauration, tho' Printed the year before. Now where's the contradiction? Is it between opposing an earthly Kingship over a Christian Church, and owning Jesus Christ as the only King, Head and Lawgiver to his Church? Sure no true Christian nor rea­sonable Man will conclude a contradiction here. And where's the Temporizing or Apo­stacy? Have we ever declined Christ's King­ship over his Church throughout the whole World, and set up an earthly King over the Church, instead of Christ? We af­firm we have not, and this is our present case, still having this distinction between Christ's Kingly Office over his Church in Spiritual Divine Matters, and the Office of National Kings or Rulers in Civil Mat­ters; it having been always our principle to render to God his dues, and to Caesar his dues distinctly. But to come more parti­cularly to the business objected against us, as contradiction and temporizing, &c. the matter lies here, viz.

Between what one formerly said, some time before the King was Restored, viz. do not the Priests and Presbyterians, &c. cry for an earthly King? Are not all these Elders Christians, that will dote [...]o much of an earthly King, Traytors against Christ? And the Qua­kers declaring since▪ the King was restored, viz. ‘that our Intentions and Endeavours are and shall be good, true, honest and peaceable towards the King and present Governours, and that we do love and honour them, &c.’

Wheres the contradiction here? Is it between warning Pro­fessors of going to set up an earthly King in Christ's stead, and declaring our honest Intentions towards the King, &c. after brought in and set up by a providential Hand of God? Or does it follow that because some of us have declared, a dislike of having a rigid persecuting King set over us, to intrench upon Christs prerogative, that therefore we must not submit to the over-ruling Hand of God in bringing in a King, whether in [Page 12] Mercy or Judgment, or both? We shall not dispute that now; must we be counted Temporizers, for quietly submitting to the over-ruling Power of God in this matter? See how obnoxious our Adversary renders himself; for those who formerly feared it would be worse for the Nation to have a Monarchy, as to Impo­sitions, &c. he hath this Salvo, that it was out of Zeal, that some particular Persons did write against Kingly Government, among whom he ranks G. F. &c. The former Writings against Kingly Go­vernment as he apprehends them, were out of Zeal and Fear of greater Impositions and Bondage; but for such to signifie their peaceable Intentions and Respect to the King when restored, this is counted an earthly Temporizing. How now J. P. is this thy Conscience that thou dischargest? What art thou offended at our innocent plainness? But how shallow art thou, who when thou hast excused all that thou apprehendst against a Kingly Go­vernment, from G. F. or others, as being from a Fear and Zeal, yet now makes it a contradiction and temporizing, for the Quakers to declare their Truth and Fidelity, to the King and present Governours, with their Intentions of Honesty and Peaceableness towards them? Oh shallow Man! Is here either contradiction or temporizing? It had been contradiction, if they had said they intended neither Truth, Fidelity, Honesty or Peaceableness to­wards the King; and it had been temporizing, if they had said they now submit all cases of Conscience, Religion and Worship, to an earthly King to be disposed, ordered and determined at his discretion, and not to Christ, the heavenly King and Head of his Church: But blessed be God we are clear of these things, and out of the reach of thy malicious Spirit, who hast thus grosly slandered us with Contradiction, Temporizing, Dissemb­ling, &c. and thou canst not be ignorant, how many of us have suffered for our tender Consciences, under the several Powers since we were a People, and still dayly exposed to Sufferings; therefore thou art the Temporizer, in going about thus to rend­er us obnoxious to the Government, and thereby to add to our Afflictions and Sufferings; and note, that whatsoever G. F. or others did formerly write (to Presbyterians, &c.) which thou apprehendst to be against Kingly Government, whether it con­cerns the Persecution, Oppression or Bondage, which they fear­ed might happen thereby, according to the instance given of Herod, Saul, &c. this thou dost not go about to disprove, as [Page 13] being from a fallible Spirit, but hast salved the matter with this, being out of a Fear, Zeal, &c. But thy hideous outcry is a­gainst any of our Friends, declaring their honest Intentions of Fi­delity, Peace and Respect to the King; here thou art offended at the words, Loyal Subjects, in a Declaration, which thou sayst, were highly opposed in an Assembly: And I ask thee, wast not thou one of them, who opposed and caused them to be left out? How now John, what a Labyrinth art thou fallen into, through thy En­vy and Malice? but to come yet more closely to the business, to evince thy malicious silliness; set case that some of our Friends did really fear, that a King set up by those that were then our Persecutors, as a Creature of their forming, designed to carry on their own Interest, would not be for the universal Interest and Liberty of the Nation, both in matters Religious and Civil; and thereupon warned them (which is our present case in debate) and yet when it pleased the Lord providentially to bring in the King quietly, to acknowledge their Submission and Peaceableness, and to prevent further censure of a temporizing Insinuation in this case—I do declare that what Form of Religion soever a King be of, he must so far distinguish between his Regal Power and his Religion, as to be tender to his Subjects under several per­suasions, and grant a free Tolleration and Liberty of Consci­ence; or else if he rule either as a Presbyterian, a formal Epis­copalian, or severe Papist, &c. and endeavour to enforce his form of Religion upon all, it will not answer the wisdom of God or his Counsel, nor tend to the universal Good or Satisfaction of the People; so not to his own Prosperity and Quiet, but on the contrary, an universal tenderness and free liberty in Religi­ous matters will. Now John, darst thou yet say that our acknow­ledgment and submission, as before, is Temporizing, or that they are Dissemblers and Deceivers therein? If thou darst, let this one instance among many others, confute thy blindness and re­buke thy malice; as namely the case of Samuel (that faithful Servant of the Lord) when Israel cryed to have a King set over them like other Nations, this thing displeased Samuel, or was evil in the Eyes of Samuel (according to the Hebrew) and yet for all this, when the Lord had commanded him to hearken to their voice, and shew them the manner of their King, &c. Samuel in Obedience to the word of the Lord, anoynted Saul and kissed him, and said, is it not because the Lord hath anoynt­ed [Page 14] thee? &c. see 1 Sam. chap. 8. 5, 6. and chap. 10. 1. Dare John Pennyman say, that Samuel was a temporizing Hypocrite herein, or was Samuel insincere in this matter? And may he not see how nearly this suits the case of G. F. and others whom he so bitterly enveighs against? yea, did not Samuel's concern herein exceed the occasion J. P. carps at? Which shews his implacable Envy and Revenge, still to render us obnoxious to the Govern­ment, contrary to his pretence of abhorring such practice. Now I. P. see what an envious Hypocrite thou art, and how manifest­ly confuted: And yet further from Scripture Testimony, which I must bring over thine head, see Dan. 2. 20, 21. Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever, for Wisdom and Might are his, and he Changeth the Times and Seasons, he removeth Kings and setteth up Kings. See here how plainly he confesseth it is God that doth these things; and also said unto Nebuchadnezzar, the God of Heaven hath given to thee a Kingdom, Power and Strength, ver. 37. and yet for all this confessed, that in the days of these Kings, the God of Heaven should set up a Kingdom which should never be destroyed, and the Kingdoms shall not be left to other People, but it shall break in pieces, and consume all these Kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever, ver. 44. (And did not Nebuchadnezzar confess to God's Power and Kingdom as above his own?) How plainly in his Visions did he see and con­fess to the Kingdom of God and his Christ, as over all these earthly Kings and Kingdoms, Beasts and Horns mentioned, Dan. chap. 7. yea concerning the Ancient of days and the Son of Man; that there was given him Dominion and Glory, and a Kingdom, that all Kingdoms, Nations and Languages should serve him; his Dominion is an everlasting Dominion, which shall not pass away; and his Kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, ver. 14. Did Daniel herein contradict himself or tem­porize, in confessing, that it is God that changeth Times, re­moveth and setteth up Kings, and that even Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon, had his Power and Strength given him of God, Dan. 2. 37. and was not Daniel one of them that stood in the King's Palace? And did not the King make Daniel Ruler over the whole Province of Babylon? Dan. 6. 21. But Daniel sat in the Gate of the King. Or did he temporize with King Darius, in saying, O King live for ever? And yet for all this he confessed to the Kingdom of God and of his Christ, as above all these [Page 15] earthly Kings and Kingdoms, and that it should stand for ever. And what more hath G. F. said, viz. That Christ will reign over all these Presbyterians imitated Elders, their earthly Kings, &c. (knowing also that such Trees as they were, would be more apt to chuse a Bramble for a King, than the Vine, Olive or Fig-Tree.) And what he means by these earthly Kings, is apparent in these words, Herod the King was mad at the Child Jesus, and sought to slay all the Children in Bethlehem and Judea; there is the Fruits of earthly Kings; and such a King, would our false Christians and Elders have; mark by [earthly Kings] Persecuting Kings as the Kings of the Earth set themselves, and the Rulers take Counsel together against the Lord and his anoynted; yet he that sitteth in the Heavens shall vex them, and his anoynted shall break them, &c. see Psal. 2. throughout. And the Kings of the Earth were such that committed Fornication with the great Whore, who was drunken with the blood of the Saints, and who (as its said) reigneth over the Kings of the Earth; see Rev. 17 and 18. Chapters. And was it not the Apostate Chri­stians that doted so much for such-earthly Kings to be set over them, to inforce People by outward Coertion to their form of Religion? Did ever the true Christians call out for such Kings to be set over them? Did not Christ say the Kings of the Gen­tiles exercise Lordship over them, but it shall not be so among you? Now where's the Temporizing? We retain (and are not ashamed of) our Principles, for Christ and his Kingdom above all the Dominions of the Earth; yea, and his Soveraignity and Kingship over our Consciences, we cannot give to another; we trust in and serve the Living God, and the Devil and all his A­gents and Apostate Incendiaries shall not deter us out of this. And yet our Adversary judgeth us Apostates, for declaring our Love and Honour to the National King, saying, are not they in their own judgments become Apostates, for now they say they Love, own and Honour an earthly King. So that in this Man's Sense it is an Apostacy, for any one to shew Respect and Honour to the King (though by the Providence and over-ruling Hand of God resto­red) especially so long after they have shewn a dislike to some Mens endeavouring to set up a King in their earthly Wills; but if he make the worst on't, he might more safely have said, they are reformed in their judgments who own the King after such dislike, than that they are Apostates: But the Man's malice makes himself obnoxious.

[Page 16]And where do we use these very Words (Earthly King) on this occasion, but that we love, own and honour the King (whom here this Man has judged an earthly King) does this shew us to be Apostates? what a factious peevish Spirit is this we have to deal withal? Could not the Primitive Christians shew their Re­spect and Honour to Kings and Governours, but they must be Apostates from Christ, or his Kingship over the Conscience? or was their fearing God and honouring the King, a Contradiction or Temporizing? as if we could not Fear God and Honour the King too; Oh malicious Man! where hast thou lost both Ho­nesty and Wit? did not Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, yea and Daniel also, who were Children of Judah, serve and attend upon the King of Babylon in his Court? dare this Man charge them with being temporizers therein, whereas yet they could not obey the King's Command, wherein it was contrary to the Law of their God, but must rather incur the Penalty and Hazard of a fiery Furnace and a Lyons Den than bow to an Image, pray to the King, or worship contrary to the Law of their God; see Dan. the third Chapter, and Chapter sixth; for their Adversaries could find no occasion against them, concerning the Kingdom, but sought Matter against them concerning the Law of their God; and God appeared for them in their Faithfulness to him, to the Conviction of their Persecutors, insomuch that both Nebuchadnezzar and Darius confessed to the Power and Kingdom of the God of Hea­ven, who is God of Gods and Lord of Kings, saying, I Nebuchad­nezzar praise, extol and honour the King of Heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment, and those who walk in pride he is able to abase: And said King Darius, I make a decree that in every domi­nion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel, for he is the living God, and stedfast for ever, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and his dominion shall be even unto the end, Dan. 6. 26. So that he would have had all his Subjects Quakers, when he saw the Kingdom of God above his own.

Again, although we are most unjustly traduced as Temporizers, because of our Applications to the present King and Government, and partly because of some former Letters writ by some Parti­culars to the Protector and Parliament, warning them, &c. this is no proof of our Adversaries Charge against the People called Quakers, their many and great Sufferings, both in those Days and since, to keep a Conscience clear to God, still acquits them from [Page 17] being such Temporizers, &c. as John Pennyman has infamously rendred them, since we the said People have not looked for Sal­vation, from the Mountains nor from the Hills, but from the Lord of Hosts; we have not reposed our confidence in the Arm of Flesh nor in Princes, but in the over-ruling Power and Name of the Lord our God: It is better to trust in the Lord, than to put confidence in Man; it is better to trust in the Lord than put confidence in Princes, Psal. 118. 8, 9. Again, put not your trust in Princes, nor in the Son of Man in whom there is no help; hap­py is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the Lord his God which made Heaven and Earth, &c. which execute judgment for the oppressed, Psal. 146. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Moreover we have not been wanting, to warn and admonish those in Power, both Parliaments, Protector and King, against Persecution and Oppression, as the Lord hath laid it upon us; nor has any of our Addresses to the King, been to stop any Pro­phet or Servant of the Lord among us, from warning him, &c. So that our clearness from our Adversaries unjust Imputations, is manifest divers ways; and of these things he cannot be alto­gether ignorant. And as for his citing of G. F. to the Protector and Parliament, warning him to keep Kingship from off his Head, which some would have given, and his bidding the Powers of the Earth, take beed of making earthly Kings, &c. And what can John Pennyman make of this? He should have allowed this Con­struction as he has for others, that if O. C. had been made King as some would have had him, he would have been the greater Hypocrite; and it was his zeal for the good of those People, that had been against a King, to warn them of setting up or making such an earthly King, in their earthly Wills, as his Words are plain, as in the other passages cited before; and this Zeal and Fear of the consequence, J. P. does not go about to disprove as erronious there, but would have it run most to our disadvantage, wherein he probably may think his way secure, seeing us a Peo­ple that have been trod upon as to our Persons and Estates, being exposed to so many Sufferings and Spoyls (as we were) he can throw dirt upon us, render us obnoxious to the Government, and so help to afflict us and trample upon us, our Testimony and Chri­stian Reputation; to bring us under Infamy, Reproach and Dis­esteem, if possible; yea, and the severe displeasure of the Powers, (and yet pretend to abhor such a thing) this is the nature of [Page 18] his Temporizing, Malice and Revenge; God will stop him and frustrate him in his Carreer, with his private Abetters and Assistants, I doubt not.

What he cites of E. Boroughs Answer to the Apprentices Peti­tion 1659. against bringing in a strange Nation, &c. an op­pressing Monarchy, &c. this he might easily have excused with that same Provision for others in the like Case, as namely it was out of his Zeal and Fear, that it would have been worse with the Nation, &c. But, says he, all these Lines are left out (and so he saith of F. H. in one Paper) And upon some other Passages in E. B's. Works, of divers Words, being left out, expunged, &c. This Man might very well have let E. B. alone, since he is gone to his rest; if he had been charitable, or but as good as a Moral Hea­then, among whom it was a Maxim, de Mortuis nil nisi bene, but especially since J. P. had Time to have told E. B. of this in his Life-time (he being not here now to answer for himself) and doubtless he was so tender a Man as he would have heard him, if he would have given him any friendly Caution; but thus to cla­mour and abuse Honest Men, that are at rest, is very ignoble, especially since J. P. owned them in their Life-time, and some Time after, and F. H.: Nor do we think our selves bound di­rectly to prostrate our Judgments concerning all particulars, be­fore such a malicious Adversary as J. P. or so far to own his Pro­secution of Men so long after they are dead, when they cannot be here to answer for themselves; however dare our Adversary say otherwise of E. B. and F. H. than that they were sincere-hearted Men to what was then manifest? and zealous Servants and true Prophets of God, and vindicators of Truth in the several Currents and Streams of their Writings, as may be seen in their Prophe­sies and Conditional Threats against the late Powers, &c. And did not thou J. P. say, That E. B. was faithful in his Day? and I doubt not but their Names are recorded in the Lamb's Book of Life, though abused by this Man; wherein all may see his Malice is so deadly, that it extends to the very Grave, as if he would hang us all up, even the Dead as well as the Living. As for what he cites of G. F. to Oliver, dated the eleventh Month 1657. as to the Success he might have had, if he had been Faithful, and thun­dered down Deceit, and asking why they put such as feared God out of the Army? Sober Men and True Hearts, such as the Lord owned, &c.

[Page 19]How plain is it that he judged O. C. as one unfaithful to his former Promises, specious Pretences for the Liberties and Pro­perties of the Subjects, for Liberty to tender Consciences, taking off Oppression, and particularly that of Tythes, which he pro­mised to remove, when he was low in his Mind, in the Time of the Wars, praying to God, weeping, saying, Our Eyes are towards thee O Lord, &c. Surely if J. P. cannot say, That he had no Success in those Days, much less can he determine what Success he might have had against the Pope, as he pretended, if he had performed his Promises; and he was reproveable for put­ing out honest Men for their Consciences, the more, because that was a Breach of his Promise of Liberty to tender Consciences; but there were many, when they saw the Self-endedness of O. C. and his Apostacy from the Cause which so many ventured and lost their Lives for, they deserted the Army, without being put out of it; and I am perswaded, That reproving him for putting such out of the Army for their Consciences, was more upon his Breach of Pro­mise, than with an Intent to have them always continue in it, in order to War, and fight, especially under so much as the Notion of Quakers, who conscientiously deny fighting and Blood-shed: But here seems to be the main Objection, They were sober Men, and such as feared God, therefore they must need be Quakers, and to continue them in Arms, to fight, kill and shed Blood, must needs be con­trary to what the Quakers have since declared to the King. That they must needs be absolute Quakers; because faithful to what they then knew, does not follow; for Paul was sincere, from his Youth upward, to what he professed before his Conversion, and divers had some Convincement and Fear of God upon them, in the Ar­my, before they were either converted so far as to be Quakers, or did clearly see, That Wars and Fighting did not consist with the Gospel Dispensation and New Covenant; but many, when they did see it, came out from them, and did leave them volun­tarily; therefore it is a false Observation and Inference that G. F. his Judgment was, That Quakers might Fight, but rather that it was a Breach of Promise, and reproveable in O. C. to turn truer Men than himself out of the Army, before so far convinced as to lay down their Weapons: And if he should argue, That Christ was contradictory to himself, in suffering Peter, one of his Dis­ciples, to wear a Sword (before fully converted) because he saith, my Kingdom is not of this World, this would not be taken [Page 20] for any good Argument, especially among Christians; so that this Man's deridingly calling the Quakers these peaceable Men, and ma­liciously inveighing against them as Temporizers, because of their Declarations to the King, neither proves them such, nor can he thereby invalid those Declarations, and particularly that to the King, in the Year 1660. viz. ‘All Bloody Principles and Practi­ces we, as to our own Particular do utterly deny, with all out­ward Wars and Strife, and Fighting with outward Weapons, for any End or Pretence whatsoever; so those that use any Weapon to fight for Christ, or for the establishing his Kingdom or Government, both the Spirit, Principle and Practice that we deny, &c.’ And this Testimony we still maintain and stand for; and where's the Contradiction and Temporizing? Have we ever declared, That we have owned Bloody Principles or Practi­ces? or that we would fight with Carnal Weapons for Christ, or for the establishing of his Kingdom and Government? while he cannot prove this, where's the Contradiction? and then where is the Temporizing? is it in denying Bloody Principles, and de­claring our peaceable Intentions, to live quietly in Godliness and honesty under the King and Government? or in giving Testimony against those that would fight for Christ, or the establishing his Kingdom by Carnal Weapons of War, and would build up Sion, with Blood? Have we not all along been against such a Practice? And have not our peaceable Conversations declared the same? Were not the Primitive Christians exhorted to be subject to the Higher Powers, seeing they were ordained of God? And dare he say this was a Temporizing in the Primitive Christians? No, does not the Apostle plainly say, Ye must needs be subject, not only for Wrath but for Conscience-sake, Rom. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. This Subjection for Conscience-sake surely was not temporizing, and the Subjection we owe to the Civil Powers, whether Active or Passive, so as we may keep our Consciences clear to God, in do­ing or suffering, and as the Apostle further exhorted, put them in mind to be subject to Principalities and Powers, to obey Magi­strates, and to be ready to every good Work, Tit. 3. 1. And this was without exception against the Name (King) or other, and submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man, for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the King as supreme, or unto the Gover­nours, &c. sent for the Punishment of Evil-doers, and the Praise of them that do well, 1 Pet. 2. 14. So that the Primitive Christians [Page 21] did not boggle at the Name King; and for this Cause pay ye Tri­bute also, rendring to all their Dues, &c. Ow no Man any thing but Love, &c. Rom. 13. 6, 7, 8. And the true Christians, though they suffered for Christ, and underwent many Injuries from Men, yet they were to live peaceably with all Men; they were not so much as to avenge themselves, but rather to give Place unto Wrath, for vengeance is mine, and I will repay, saith the Lord, Rom. 12. 18, 19. Herein they granted a Vengeance was due, but were not to avenge themselves.

To our Adversaries saying, That the Soldiers were charged to go forth with a free willing Heart, &c. Here is a Perversion in this; for their Charge was, they should keep in the Fear of the Lord, that they might not lose the Dread of the Lord: And dare this Man say, That none of them had the Dread of the Lord, at any Time upon them? And that Advice given to O. C. Do not stand cumbering thy self about dirty Priests, &c. This he cites, but to what Purpose it shews; for his cumbering himself with such Covetous Priests, he was reproveable, and the setting up and pro­moting such Priests, hath not consisted with the Good of our Na­tion, under any Government.

Again, I find in his Notes against Francis Howghill, where it is said, That it is no Rebellion to call away those in Power (he hath this Aggravation added) viz. by which he means to Depose those in Power, that perform not their Trust for the Good of the People, p. 4. See here how obnoxious to the Government he hath gone about to render the Quakers, by this perverse addition of a meaning, he hath put upon F. H. as if to call away and to Depose were both one in common Acceptance, and yet this is the Man that pre­tends to abhor that Practice of rendring us obnoxious to the Government: Pray, how can we trust him, &c. he should have been so charitable as not to have aggravated the matter with such a Meaning added; especially since it concerned a Man who is de­ceased, and dyed a Prisoner for the Testimony of Jesus, and at rest, and who in his Life-time bore a faithful Testimony for Truth and Righteousness.

'Tis a most base and revengeful Spirit in J. P. to rake E. B. out of his Grave, to bring Infamy upon his name, his Gospel Testimony which he bore, and Prophetical Spirit which was in him now he is not here to answer for himself; and not rather have prevented both by Friendly Advice in his life time, when [Page 22] they were in Society; but instead thereof it may be rather questioned, whether he was not in those Cases, too much beset with such unstable Spirits as J. P. who now might have put more charitable Constructions upon E. B. and us, than he has done, namely, that he feared the effects of a Monarchy, and that he was so zealous against the great persecuting Whore, that has made her self drunk with the Blood of the Saints, that therefore he would have had the Beast that has long carried her, so to hate her as to cast her off; as being a Man who in his Spi­rit simpathized with the Martyrs of Jesus, and those Souls un­der the Altar of them that were slain for the word of God, who cryed with a loud voice, how long O Lord Holy and True, dost thou not Judge and AVENGE our Blood on them that dwell on the Earth, Rev. 6. 10.

And whatsoever in any of the Writings cited by J. P. may seem disgustful as to Monarchy, we have still this cure for it all, that John Pennyman has prescribed, namely, that these things were writ out of these Mens Zeal and Fear, that Monarchy would be op­pressive, and cause more Burthens or Impositions to be laid upon the Nation than before. And this excuse was pretty warily contrived; for if he had flung all that former Zeal and Fear into the dirt, 'tis not unlikely but he might have highly disgusted his Friends the Presbyterians and Independents, &c. And therefore as a Person that appears rather affected with these former Passages, which intimate a Fear concerning Monarchy, than with our late Applications to the King, &c. he has taken the great pains to collect and transcribe them the more at large, and sorely to chide us (the People called Quakers) for making Declarations and Applications to the King, Council and Parliament, to per­swade them of our faithful and peaceable Intentions, or for any Relief from the Imposition of Oaths, &c. for this we are sore­ly chidden not only as Temporizers, but also for a late fawning flattering Address to the King and Parliament, as he is pleased to call it. We meet with no such chiding for these particular Pas­sages, that seemed to dislike of a Monarchy in Cromwel's days; for the Fear and Zeal that was therein shall either cure all that, or else John shall relinquish the Medicine of his own preparing and wheel about again, and wholly desert his Friends the Non­conformists, both Presbyters, Independents, and others of his private Abetters and Cabalistick Council.

[Page 23]As concerning that passage to the Officers of the Army; where after they are reproved for abusing the Power of God and loosing it, and putting them in Prison that struck at the Root (meaning the Quakers) (saith he) there is this passage, viz. ‘Had you been faithful to the Power of the Lord God, you had gone into Spain, to require the Blood of the Innocent that there had been shed, and have commanded them to have offered up their Inquisiti­ons, &c. and knocked at Romes Gates before now, and trampled Deceit and Tyranny under: And demanded the Pope, and com­manded him to have offered up all his Torture-houses, his Racks and Inquisition, &c.’ Hereupon we have several questions put upon us, viz. Could any People have declared themselves more for fighting? How should the Army set up their Standard upon the top of Rome, but by fighting? How require the Blood that has been shed in the Inquisiti­on, but by fighting? Here he may think he has sorely opposed and puzzelled us. But 'tis no very difficult matter to answer with clearness herein, and safety to our Christian principle, against killing and destroying one another; for either these Passages must be spoken as from a Prophet of God, or only as a Christian, however conditionally. First, if as a Prophet, then he speaks not always what is desirable or pleasant to him, according to his Christian Principle, nor within the compass of his Understand­ing as a Man, nor from any Human contrivance, but what's com­manded him of God, as relating to Judgments or Calamities which may be of divers kinds, and then he may Speak and Prophesie of Wars and Destructions, &c. and yet not at all be of such a Spirit or Principle in himself, as to maintain or desire Wars and Fight­ing; as the Prophet Isaiah, who was an Evangelical Prophet, and against Wars and Fighting and saw the end thereof, Isa. 2. 3, 4, 5. and the Indignation of the Lord upon all Nations, and his Fury upon all their Armies, Isa. 34. 2. yet this Evangelical Prophet said, O Assyrian, the Rod of mine Anger, &c. I will send against an Hypocritical Nation, &c. see Isa. 10. 5, 6. And further, all yee Beasts of the Field come to devour, Isa. 56. 9. And Christ Jesus, himself who said, my Kingdom is not of this World, for if it were, my Servants would fight; yet prophesied of the sad and miserable destruction of Jerusalem, and of those Murderers that slew the Heir; and said to those Hypocrites, fill ye up the mea­sure of your Fathers Iniquities; and this was, that all the Righ­teous Blood shed, might be required at their hands. And se­veral [Page 24] Instances of Gods Judgments might be brought out of the Revelation of John against the great Whore, &c. So that a Man may speak as a Prophet (and be yet a Christian) of divers Calamities and Judgments which he cannot be active in, and yet not destroy his Christian Principle. Secondly, But if as a Chri­stian only, and within the compass of a Christian Freedom, and understanding these aforesaid Passages are spoken; then I may lawfully conclude, that the design thereof was not to incite to Fighting Killing or Bloodshed, but rather that it was writ from a Belief that if they had eyed the Lord, and aimed at the remo­ving Oppression and Persecution, they might have been such a dread of Nations, as is expressed in the same Paper, that possibly they might not have met with such Resistance (if any) in that case; for who knows not that they were formidable for a time? And what success they might have had for such an end, our Ad­versary cannot determine. (However to require their Inquisition and to knock at Romes doors, proves no violence; all this might have been done by Embassies, as in the case of the D. of Savoy, that persecuted the poor Piedmontors the Stock of the Waldenses.) For he proves not an incitation unto Bloodshed and Slaughter in the said Papers, but only that they should have required the Innocent Blood that had been shed, after they had set up their Standard at Rome, according to what many of them had often promised, before they fell on persecuting and imprisoning our Friends; and herein they were reproved of breach of promise, that many of the old Army had made, not to lay down their Arms till they had set up their Standard at Rome, and broke down Oppression there. But on the contrary to fall upon Op­pressing and Imprisoning Men for Conscience here, might they not justly from their own former pretences and promises be ask­ed, why do ye Imprison us, or suffer us to be Imprisoned? (As many were in the Protectors name and time) why do ye not go to Rome and break down the Popes Inquisitions, and in point of Justice require the Innocent Blood that has been shed by that persecuting Power? And might they not have required this as Magistrates, and seen what satisfaction would have been made, according to their own engagements? But when they set up Persecution in England, they lost their Power and Dread, and became Weak and Feeble, till the Lord overturned them. And yet though it 'cannot consist with our Christian Principle so [Page 25] much, as to avenge our selves, War with carnal Weapons, or incite others to War and Bloodshed: And G. F. (who is the Man chiefly struck at in this matter) even in Cromwel's days did ma­nifestly testifie against Wars and Fighting, as also against Plot­ting and contriving Insurrections, and this both by Words, Writing and Suffering; and exhorted the Soldiers to do violence to no Man, neither accuse any Man falsely, and this in the same Paper wherein he reminds them of Rome, &c. Howbeit there re­mains both Judgments and Vials of Wrath from God, in store for the Persecuting Whore, or Mystery Babylon, wherever she sits upon the many Waters, which are Peoples, and Multitudes, and Nations, and Tongues, Rev. 17. and 18. Chapters. that has been drunk with the Blood of the Saints, and made both Nations and Kings drunk with the Wine of the Wrath of her Fornica­tion: And whether at Rome, or throughout all Christendom, that Spirit of Persecution cannot escape, nor they that joyn with it in acts of Cruelty, whether Papists or Protestants, Kings, Princes or People. But as for O. C. (and his Agents) though looked upon to be a Beast, yet he was not so serviceable a Beast or Horn, as those spoken of in the Revelations, chap. 17. 16. that shall hate the Whore, and make her desolate and naked; and shall eat her Flesh and burn her with Fire, because God hath put it into their Hearts to fulfil his Will, ver. 17. (too course a work for Saints and Lambs of Christ, and yet Gods Will it should be done.) Now to foresee or foretel such a Judgment to be of God is one thing, and to incite Men to Wars and Blood­shed is another: And this latter I affirm, stands not with the Principle nor Practice of the People called Quakers, nor do they declare themselves for Fighting, as they are most falsly accused. And as to the question, How should the Army set up their Stand­ard at Rome, but by Fighting? There does lye a plain excepti­on, and certain Instances against the general State of this questi­onary Argument (which yet I bring not as comparative altoge­ther, but only with respect to that Dread, that was believed by some would have attended the old Army, had they been faith­ful to the cause pretended, and gone to Rome for that end decla­red.) My exception is first in the case of Gideon, the Host of the Midianites fled and were overcome, and yet not by Fight­ing on Gideons part, but by a mean Stratagem, as to outward appearance, viz. that of their Pitchers, Trumpets and Lamps; [Page 26] but the hand of the Lord was in it, see Judg. 7. And secondly, in the case of Jehosaphat King of Judah, when the Children of Ammon, Moab and Mount-seir came against Judah, the Lord told them by his Prophet Jehaziel, be not afraid nor dismaid by reason of this great Multitude, for the Battel is not yours, but Gods, 2 Chron. 20. 15. And did they then go against this great Army to fight them? No, but having first sought the Lord, they sung Praises to the beauty of Holyness; and when they began to sing, the Lord set ambushments against the Children of Ammon, Moab, &c. see ver. 22, 23. And its said concerning Barak, Jeptha, Sampson, David, Samuel and the Prophets, that by Faith they subdued Kingdoms, turned to flight the Armies of the Ali­ens, &c. Heb. 11. 32. which therefore was not all by Fighting; but that there has a hand and power of God appeared in these things, and in Revolutions, most sorts will confess except Atheists.

Object. The Army was made the Sword of the Lord against Pa­pists and Bishops, M. H. T. S. and the Lord is represented Fight­ing with Olivers Sword, G. R.

And what then? So the wicked are call'd his Sword, Psal. 17. 13. And O Assyrian the Rod of mine Anger, Isa. 10. 5. And Nebuchad­nezzar the King of Babylon my Servant, Jer. 25. 9. and 43. 10. See the places quoted. And also Jer. 49. 28. and 50. 17. and Ezek. 26. 7. and 29. 19. and 30. 10. So that sometimes God makes use of evil Men to execute such Judgments, as well as Men zealous and sincere for a good end therein.

And also that Passage cited about inviting all Christians and Nations that are against Popery, to come against it, &c. This is taken as looking somewhat Warlike; however had they so done, in all probability they had been so formidable and frightful to the Pope, &c. that he would have delivered up his Mitre, &c. that there would have been the less occasion (if any) for War and Bloodshed. But says our Adversary, they gave Directions and Charges to the Protector and Officers and Soldiers concerning Fighting, exhorting thereunto, &c. p. 13. I find no such Charge and Ex­hortation, and I cannot believe it without more plain and direct evidence. As also that charge in his Book, so often cast upon us, viz. That they (viz. the Quakers) approve of what the Armies did against the King and his Party; which I affirm is utterly false, as stated, and especially as charged in general: For we rather [Page 27] have lamented that War and Bloodshed, as a National Calamity and Judgment for the Sins of the People. And though we con­fess, and our Adversaries cannot deny, that the Sword was one of Gods four Judgments upon Idolaters and Oppressors, Ezek. 14. 21. and Jer. 34. 17. and so justifiable as from God, whose Judgments are all just; yet it is possible Men may be Unrighteous and selfish therein, in killing and taking Possession, and so not justified in their immediate acting therein.

That G. F. and many others concerned with him in the Testi­mony of Jesus Christ, have not varyed from their Christian Testimony against Fighting, nor Temporized, Apostatized or been deceitful therein, further appears,

• I. First from his being cast into the Dungeon in Darby Goal, in the year 50. where he lay six Months space, because he would not take up Arms for the Commonwealth against the King.
• II. From his and others refusing considerable Places in the Army, when invited by the Committee of Safety.
• III. From his Answer then, that he abhorred it (viz.) to ac­cept of such Place or Preferment in the Army, as that of a Colonel proffered him, and that he was in the Covenant of Peace, that takes away the occasion of Wars; for he knew from whence all Wars did rise, even from Mens Lusts.

Yet notwithstanding in the year, 1654. he was brought up from Leicester to London, being accused for a Plotter to bring in King Charles. And in the year 1655. after Major Ceeley had cast him into Prison in Doomes-dale at Lanceston (before Judge Glin at the Assizes there) he brought a Man of Belial to swear, that he could raise 4000 Men to involve the Nation in Blood, and bring in King Charles.

Now considering his deep Suffering then, as also that he was then suspected to be as much for King Charles, as J. P. can suspect or insinuate that he was against him, and yet now to own and honour him, which is the great crime in this Adversaries evil Eye. But that he was then guilty of Plotting for the King, and now (in his owning the King in the civil Government) a Tem­porizer, are both alike unrighteous Calumnies and Forgeries of his, and our guilty and Persecuting Adversaries. But that he and others refused Preferments in the old Army, and to take up Arms in the Commonwealth's days against the King and his; [Page 28] and our Testimony both then and now being to the Covenant of Peace, and against even the very occasion of Wars, to wit, Men's Lusts; these are true, and still do plainly evince our con­stant Consistency with our selves and Christian Testimony, from the beginning, against all Plotting, carnal Wars and Fight­ing.

Moreover be it remarked, that after G. F. came to London, and was brought before Oliver Cromwel, he said, That there was a People now gotten up or risen, that he could not win with Gifts, Honours, Offices, or places of Preferment, as he could all other Sects. To which G. F. answered, viz. That we have forsaken our own and are not like to receive any thing of him, nor the Glory of the World; and so he was not like to choke us with such things, as he had done all others, &c. Observe here his and our faithful Friends faithfulness to our Christian and Gospel Testimony, and clearness from Tempori­zing or aiming at worldly Interests, which is the character and design of Temporizers.

Again, as to his hideous clamour against the Quakers, as far more guilty and more abominable in these matters, than any other Party what soever, whilst they so contumeliously upbraid others, and have done the same things themselves. This is a plain lie against the Quakers, considering that but a few lines before, p. 20. he tells the Readers, the Quakers reproach and rail on the Presbyterians and Independents, for their joyning to and abetting the late War, and ap­proving the Execution done upon the late King and his Party. Now that the Quakers have so done and joyned, is an apparent Fal­shood before detected; and that the Quakers have so done, to wit, approved the execution done upon the late King, &c. is a most aggravating Falshood, to expose us to the severity of the Government, who were not then in being.

Now Reader, judge what's the tending of all this our Adver­saries inveterate work against us, but to expose and render us obnoxious to the present King and Government, as possibly he can to ruin and destroy us, so directly contrary to his pretence, of abhorring that Practice; do but see the Man's gross Hypocri­sie, deadly Malice, and most base Temporizing, to bring us un­der into our Graves with contempt, if possible. Howbeit, as we fear not him, nor his Invectives, nor the Devil that old Mur­derer, that has set him on work: So we doubt not but through divine assistance, we shall still close to our Christian Testimony; [Page 29] faithfully witnessing that Christ's Dispensation, Kingdom and Government among his People, is above Wars and Fighting, for it is established in Righteousness and Peace; and of the increase of his Government and Peace there shall be no end; but God will make Wars to cease to the ends of the Earth, and in Salem shall be his Tabernacle, where he breaketh the Bow and the Spear, and Weapons of War, &c. And we the People called Quakers, can in defiance of all Envy and Malice, stand up for Christ Jesus and his Kingdom, and still plead the same things that J. P. quotes out of our Friends Declarations to the King of England, &c. and that with a good Conscience in the sight of God and Men, both what he cites out of Quakers Plea, 1661. viz. ‘No better Testimony can be given of us and of our peaceableness; and that we shall not Plot nor Rebel against the King, than experience it self; experience is the best wit­ness that we are peaceable, and free from Plotting and Re­bellion; for we have always been so since we were a People, both before and since the King came in.’ As also a Declaration quoted by him, given forth in behalf of the whole Body of the elect People of God, who are called Quakers, and signed by, G. Fox and Richard Huberthorn, John Stubbs, Francis Howgill, Ger. Roberts, John Boulton, Leonard Fell, Samuel Fisher, Hen. Fell, John Hind, John Furley, Junior, Tho. Moore, these Names he has mentioned, to expose them to the World as Temporizers, Ap­postates, &c. though Men far more Righteous than himself; and I am perswaded, most of them, if not all, more Conscienti­ous in what they say, than ever John Pennyman was, since he en­tertained prejudice and envy: Hear what he has against these Men, as Temporizers (viz.) ‘That they have suffered, because they would not take up carnal Weapons to Fight withal a­gainst any; and made a prey upon, because they say, we are the Innocent Lambs of Christ; and cannot avenge our selves’ [as he cites] and further in the Postcript, ‘All Wars and Fightings with carnal Weapons, we do deny, who have the Sword of the Spirit. Again, this the People called Qua­kers do witness (viz.) and this is both our Principle and Practice, and hath been from the beginning; so that if we suffer as suspected to take up Arms or make War against any, it is without any ground from us; for it neither is, or ever was in our Hearts, since we owned the Truth of God, [Page 30] neither shall we ever do it, because it is contrary to the Spirit of Christ, his Doctrin, and the Practice of his A­postles, &c.’ Well, this Testimony we stand by, against all the contrary whatever; and do affirm it was conscienti­ously writ, and not from a Temporizing Spirit, as our Adver­sary all along endeavours to insinuate, to prejudice and cloud our Christian Testimony.

Again he cites these words to the King and Parliament, 1661. (viz.) ‘our Allegiance to the King, our Lives have and shall manifest to him;’ and you, and all Men subscribed he saith, by George Fox, Edward Burroughs, Francis Howgill, John Crook, Samuel Fisher, Richard Huberthorn, John Whitehead, Samuel Thornton, Leonard Fell, John Boulton, and twenty more; and these he has ranked up for Temporizers, Dissemblers, &c. having rendred all our Applications to the King of this kind, but Hypocrisie and Temporizing Deceits as not to be trusted, and this still to render us obnoxious; more especially if his Book be Printed; for see what he saith (not only to cloud, but to murder our Christian Testimony) (viz.) and yet under all these Dissimulations and Temporizings, do like the Whore in the Proverbs, wipe their Mouths, and proclaim themselves an innocent and harmless People; and near his Conclusion, charges G. F. and his Adhe­rents, with a late fawning flattering Address to the King and Parliament. How now John, is this thy abhorring to render us obnoxious to the Government? God will smite thee, thou malicious Hypocrite; our Innocency shall out-live thy Envy and causeless Revenge, and rise up in Judgment against thee. What wilt thou be still be mad against us, because our Friends gave Testimony against the Man that attempted to burn the Bible, among other Books at the Exchange? And wilt thou be still revengful, because some were moved to testifie against thy extravagancy and rio­tous work, with thy twenty seven Venison Pasties (or so esteemed) exposed to the Multitude?

And was not this thy wedding Dinner for Jews and Gentiles, whom thou hadst invited to Merchant-Taylors-Hall? And what was thy intended Mystery in all this? Answer plainly, for it was a very publick Frolick, and whether or no had not the Bible been burned, if the Officer at the Exchange had not prevented? be plain, and do not always smite at others and hide thy self; nor put us off, with telling us, Thou wouldest not do it at the Will of any [Page 31] Mortal: What immortal one would move any to attempt it? An immortal God, or an immortal Devil? Couldst thou imagin that the immortal God would ever move to it? And what moved thee now thus to vent thy Malice and Clamour, not only against the People called Quakers in general, but also against many particular Persons by Name, the meanest of them more Righteous than thy self? Dost thou not know that Edw. Burrough, Fr. Howgill, Sam. Fisher, R. Hubberthorn, Joh. Stubbs, Edw. Piott, George Bishop, George Rose and Miles Hallhead are all deceased? Yea, some of them many Years in their Graves, who dyed Prisoners, sufferers for their Consciences towards God, and yet thou wilt rank them among Temporizers: Oh unrighteous Man! is thy Conscience wholly seared, since thy Essay towards the burning of the Bible? for thou hast as little Recourse or Regard to the Scriptures, or Truth's Principle in thy Writing (though once professed by thee) as thou hast to Conscience; which is none at all in sincerity: Malice and the Gall of Bitterness has swallowed thee up, and Darkness is become thy Habitation. Dost thou not remember that Fr. Howgill, dyed in Prison, and that both E. B. R. H. and others were Prisoners when taken sick, and dyed? And dost thou not know that not only Sam. Fisher but John Crook, John Boulton, and many others, have been great Sufferers since the King's Restau­ration; and must all these be now infamously ranked among Tem­porizers, Dissemblers, &c. Is this thy Conscience and Charity John Pennyman? And is thy Malice so great against William Deus­bury, so that thou must needs endeavour to expose him to the Displeasure of the present Government, to add Afflictions to his Bonds, who is known to be a sincere, upright, peaceable Man, and great Sufferer, both in the Time of the late and present Pow­ers, yea and in present Suffering and Confinement for his Con­science and Testimony. And what Hurt has honest Tho. Salthouse done thee, that thou must needs go about to expose him too? And also Isaac Pennington, who is known to be an Innocent Harmless Man, and hath been a great Sufferer, even under the present Pow­er? What, would not thy Malice suffer thee to let him alone, but thou must needs render him obnoxious for writing something to the Parliament and Army? printed 1659. about their backslid­ing and turning aside from the Good Old Cause, &c. And to aggra­vate the Business against him, thou puttest the Question, Was not then the Armies Cause just in his Opinion, and their Fighting Law­ful, [Page 32] &c. p. 17. How now, John Pennyman, hast thou neither a regard to Men nor Truth? Hast thou done as thou wouldest be done by, thus to expose Men, and question them for that which thou thy self darest not adventure openly to oppose? Therefore I would ask thee, What is thy Opinion concerning that Cause called the Good Old Cause, to wit, Liberty to tender Consciences, removing Oppression, and preserving Men's Properties, formerly pretended to in the Old Army, though not well mannaged and pursued, was this Cause pretended to, just; yea or nay, in it self? Why dost thou cover thy Deceit, desert Truth in any Case, and peevishly expose Conscientious Men, for formerly confessing it? One Passage to the Parliament and Common-wealth 1657. Let the Reader a little take notice of it; for perhaps he may smile at John Pennyman's Design in citing it. The Passage, as he cites it, runs thus, p. 28. viz. ‘Let all these Abbey-Lands, Gleab-Lands that is given to the Priests, be given to the Poor of the Nation, and let all the Great Houses, Abbies, Steeple-houses and White­hall be for Alms-Houses, (or some other use) for all the Blind and Lame to be there.’ What could be J. P's Design in citing this Passage? If it was to make the King and Court angry with our Friends, for advising to make White-Hall an Alms-house for the Blind and Lame (as that seems most likely to be his Design) I dare say he will miss of it; for I am perswaded the King would have been better pleased, and thought it more Charitable, that his House should have been an Alms-house for the Poor, Blind and Lame, than that Oliver and his Crew should there set up their Nests, pamper, feed and gluttonize themselves; for the Humility, serious Praying and Tears were lost when they had killed and taken pos­session, were got to White-hall, and there settled at Ease in ful­ness, pride and idleness, even while many innocent Men were deep Sufferers for their tender Consciences in cold noisom Goals, Holes and Dungeons, with Bread and Water, their Victuals be­ing snatched from them, their Bed-cloaths taken from them by Force, and they forced to lye upon Straw in cold low dark Goals, for above a Year together. In these and such like Sufferings I my self, with many others of our Friends had a deep share in Oliver's Days, and that under Presbyterians and Independents, I affirm; and yet they have not manifested Repentance, nor made Satisfaction. J. P. has taken share, and deeply drunk in that persecuting Spirit; and to aggravate his Matter against us on [Page 33] their behalf, he has that Passage reflecting upon the Nonconfor­mists twice over, cited in his Preface from our Pen (as his Phrase is) quoting, Quakerism a new Nick name: As also in p. 27. he has the same Passage over again, with another out of William Penn's Book, styled, A just Rebuke to one and twenty Divines, re­minding the Presbyterians of their former Proceedings, &c. so that he appears so much disgusted at a Reflection upon the Pres­byterians, &c. that he begins and almost concludes his invective and bitter piece about it, as offended that they were upbraided; such a deeply concerned and zealous Presbyterian Agent is John become.

I may give the Reader a hint of one Fling that John has at me, if he had had Sedition or Treason against me, to be sure I should have heard of it, and many more besides. His Fling is this, viz. about F. B. who (he saith) was one of the chief Preachers of the Quakers, and in very great esteem among them—This Man is charged, by Jer. Ives, to have justified the late War against the King, and is defended by George Whitehead, another of their chief Preachers, p. 9. To all which I answer, as a Man not Conscious to my self herein. Do but see how fallaciously and deceitfully the matter is stated by this peevish Incendiary; as namely, upon his repeating the Anabaptists charging E. B. with justifying the late War against the King (without any Distinction he addeth) and is defended by G. W. which looks like as if I do defend such a Justifi­cation of the late War against the King. What is this but Ma­lice and Wickedness, to render me obnoxious and seditious to the Government, and so uncapable of so much as the Act of Indemnity? As for a present defending of that War, which I never was con­cerned in, nor is there any Words of that import in my answer to Ives (see Serious Search) which John quotes, but leaves out the principal Matter wherein I defend E. B. in his testifying against the Men then in Power, and the Quakers from Ives his most unjust Accusation against them in these general Words, viz. You justifie the late War against the King: What Impostors, &c. This our Adversary has most enviously seconded, as one behold­ing to the Anabaptist Preachers; and was not he a zealous Chap­lain, more than a little concerned in the Old Army, against the King himself? who not very long after his open scurrilous Beha­viour, boasting, vapouring and malicious Work against us, was soon cut off by Death. Now J. P. has enlarged upon his Work [Page 34] against us, to render us odious to the Government; and me in particular, as defending such a Justification of the late Wars against the King; as his Words may be easily taken, rather than defend­ing our Friend or Friends from that Charge which not only my self, but also many thousands of us and among us are wholly clear of, (nor did I ever like Wars and Blood-shed) being a simple­hearted harmless People towards the King and all Men, and do eye the over-ruling Hand and Power of God, and dayly fear him, for our Preservation being in his Holy Will resigned to be patient and passive under what Government he is pleased to set up.

Moreover, let the Reader please to take notice how evident John Pennyman's Abuse, Deceit and Falshood is, on some Passages he cites out of a Paper, entituled, A Declaration from the People called Quakers to the present distracted Nation of England, 1659. p. 12. where, upon these Passages, viz. ‘We have chosen the Son of God to be our King, and he hath chosen us to be his People, and he might command thousands and ten thousands of his Saints, at this Day, to fight in his own Cause—and give them Victory over all their Enemies, and turn his Hand upon their Persecutors; but yet his Kingdom is not of this World, neither is his War-fare with Carnal Weapons, &c. neither hath he chosen us for that End; neither can we yet be­lieve that he will make use of us in that way, &c.—But for the present we are given up to bear and suffer all things for his Name's sake, &c.’ Upon which John Pennyman has this Obser­vation, viz. So that they were not then of that Mind, That the Spirit would never move them to fight: And this he brings to contradict their Declaration to the King 1660. ‘Testifying that the Spirit of Christ which leads them into all Truth, will never move them to fight and war against any Man with outward Weapons.’

1. In the first place, I intreat all that read this, to take notice, That the aforesaid Declaration which J. P. has the said Obser­vation upon, (viz. That the Quakers were not then of that Mind, That the Spirit would never move them to fight) was (as he saith, true) subscribed by many, but tells not the Reader, That he, even John Pennyman himself, was one of those many who subscrib­ed it: As I am sure his own Name is to it, with thirteen or four­teen more; wherein he hath dealt most disingenuously and deceit­fully, [Page 35] thus to reflect upon the Quakers and E. B. about it, with­out giving any notice how far himself was concerned in it by sub­scription; which he must needs see and call to mind, if his Malice did not befool him to overlook (or not heed) the Subscripti­ons; but his casting it upon E. B. as being moved by his Spirit to give that Paper forth, shews that he has of late looked on the Conclusion of it; it being there said, That the Substance of this was given forth the twentieth Day of this tenth Month 1659.; being moved of the Lord, by his Spirit thereunto, through Edward Burroughs, and is now judged meet to be published to the Nation, in the behalf of us and our Friends, under our Hands, viz.

• Ger. Roberts,
• Thom. Hart,
• Gil. Latey,
• John Anderdon,
• Joh. Osgood,
• Robert Benbrick,
• John Boulton,
• Ellis Hooks,
• William Crouch,
• Gobert Sikes,
• James Strutt,
• John Pennyman,
• John Crook,
• E. Billings, and
• Ben. Furley.

See now, here is J. Pennyman among the rest, espousing and highly owning the Declaration aforesaid, as the Substance of it being then given forth, at the Motion of the Lord by his Spirit, and published in the behalf of them who subscribed it, and their Friends: Well, I have seriously perused the said Declaration, and I must confess it looks so impartially, and with so much In­nocency and Freeness from a fighting Spirit, and so plainly con­fessing our Choice of the Son of God to be our King, and his Choice of us to be a People, and that his Kingdom is not of this World; and that his War-fare is not with Carnal Weapons, as also that neither is his Victory by the murthering and killing of Men's Persons, nor hath he chosen us for that end, &c. with divers other Passages to the same purpose, as in p. 8. viz. ‘We do not war against any with Carnal Weapons, neither shall we ever provoke the Nation against us, otherwise than by our Righteous and Holy Walking, &c.’

[Page 36]That I wonder J. Pennyman should have or allow of such a Construction upon the said Declaration, as, That the Quakers were not then of that Mind, That the Spirit would never move them to fight: Unless John himself had such a Reserve, when he signed that Paper; which if he had, it was most gross Dissimula­tion to tell the World, That he, with the rest, had chosen the Son of God to be their King; and that his War-fare is not with Carnal Weapons, nor his Victory by killing Men's Persons; nor hath he chosen us for that end. Now if J. P. when he signed this, believed that the Spirit of Christ might, for all this, move him (or any of them) to fight; What abominable Hypocrisy was he guilty of therein?

• 1. To proclaim to the World, That he and the rest are be­come subjects to such a King, as will never allow them to fight.
• 2. And yet have this private Reserve, That he may move him to fight: But I am perswaded the rest of the Signers of the said Paper had no such deceitful Reserve; If J. P. had, he was very deceitful, and has now bewrayed the foulness of his own Nest.

As for the Words he carps at in the said Paper, to which his own Name is, viz. That the Son of God might command thou­sands and ten thousands, &c. That's no Proof that they then believed he would do it; unless it must be taken for granted, That because he had Power to command thousands to fight, there­fore he would do it, and so argue from his Power to his Will, which but mean Logicians would be ashamed of; when it is as plainly told, That Christ's Kingdom is not of this World, and his Warfare is not with Carnal Weapons; and that he has not chosen us for that End, as to kill Men's Persons, &c. As that Christ by Prayer could have obtained more than twelve Legions of Angels to have rescued him:Matth. 26. 53, 54. But how then should the Scripture be fulfilled, That he must suffer?

As for the other Words, ‘Neither can we yet believe that he (viz. the Son of God) will make use of us in that way (viz. of fighting).’ For our Adversary to infer from the Particle yet, (where 'tis intimated, That yet they could not believe that Christ would move them to fight) that therefore the Quakers were not then of that Mind, That he would never move them to fight. He [Page 37] might as well have inferred, from their saying, That yet his Kingdom is not of this World: Therefore they were not then of the Mind, That Christ's Kingdom would never be of this World, but that it might become a worldly Kingdom, and his Servants turn Fighters. Thus absurd is our Adversary's Consequence against us, upon a mere small Circumstance or Ambiguity of a Word; yet [nevertheless] is construed by him for yet [as yet] as putting the signification of adhuc for tamen. And for the pre­sent we are given up to bear and suffer all things for his Names sake: As for the Word present, I grant, if it had been left out, it had appeared more absolute in concurrence with the Substance of the Declaration, which, as 'tis said, was given forth by E. B. But that diminutive Phrase (for the present) is not essential to the Substance of it, but rather to the manner of speaking: John, it may be, can give account of those Particles, which he has construed so much to the Disadvantage of the whole; seeing his Name is to the Paper, and he can give or own such an Interpretation of it as that they (the Quakers) were not then of that Mind, That the Spirit would never move them to fight, though there be enough in the Paper to evince the contra­ry, as is before hinted: And if John had any such Reserve, in espousing and signing the said Paper, or did cause the putting in those Words, as that the Spirit of Christ might move him to fight, it is high Time for him to write a Recantation for that and many other Passages; wherein, while he endeavours to render us su­spicious and obnoxious to the Government, he has greatly be­wrayed his own dark, envious and perfideous Spirit, whose Pra­ctice and Method in his Book, generally is to snarle, snatch and catch at such Passages in our Friends Books, as he thinks most to make Advantage of, to render us Temporizers, odious and ob­noxious to the present Government, and commonly to pass by and leave out such Passages, Threats and Prophecies as were di­rectly against the former Men in Power, and their Oppressions and Cruelties that were inflicted in the Protector's Days. But as for the aforesaid Declaration to the distracted Nation of England, subscribed as aforesaid, 'tis so Impartial and Plain, and a­gainst the Oppressions, &c. under the several Governments in this Nation, lamenting the Judgments and Calamities thereof, that I wish he had published it all to the Nation, for it would ve­ry much have tended to clear our Innocency from his unjust Impu­tations [Page 38] and Insinuations against us as a People. And to manifest our clearness from Temporizing and Parties; and our Testi­mony against Fighting, Warring and Killing, &c. as incon­sistent with Christ's Government and Kingdom.

And now pray further consider, did not our Lord Jesus Christ in his Parable concerning them that Intreated the King's Servants spightfully and slew them, acknowledge the Justice of his Father, in sending forth his Armies, and destroying those Murderers, and burning of their City? Mat. 22. 7. and also against those Hus­bandmen who slew the Heir, whom the Lord miserably destroy­ed, Mat. 21. 7. and Luke 20. 14. were not these Parables against Jerusalem, and the Jews who persecuted and slew the Prophets of God, and his Son Christ the Heir? Did not he therein Pro­phesie against Jerusalem, and of the destruction thereof, and so far recognize that War, and miserable Destruction that came upon them, as a just judgment from God? and yet his Kingdom being not of this World, his Servants might not fight, being under an Injunction to the contrary; was Christ therein contradictory to himself or to his Testimony, for his Servants not fighting? no sure. And the Apostle Paul acknowledged the Magistrate or Rulers place, as owning his Office in not bear­ing the Sword in vain, but as being the Minister of God, a Revenger to execute Wrath upon him that doth evil, Rom. 13. and yet exhorted his Brethren the Saints, not to avenge them­selves, but rather give place unto Wrath, Rom. 12. 19. did the Apostle herein contradict himself or his Christian Testimo­ny? pray consider it.

Now suppose a Government (according to their own princi­ples) in one Nation, should require their Subjects or Friends innocent Blood unjustly shed, in another Nation by Murders, Massacres, &c. would not this be just, and may not God in vindictive Justice and Judgment, stir up a Power or Government, (whose Principle is accordingly) to such an act, as he did the Romans against Jerusalem, and the persecuting Jews? And for any of his Servants so far to recognize the same, as a just Judgment; how do they therein either contradict their Chri­stian Principle, which is, not to avenge themselves, nor to use carnal and destroying Weapons, either for Christ's Kingdom, or the Kingdoms of this World? as being unsuitable Instru­ments for Christ's Lambs and Sheep to make use of, whatever [Page 39] use God in Judgment may cause or suffer to be made thereof among Nations in the Fall; it is not consistent with the sa­ving Gospel of Christ, or nature of his Lambs, Sheep, Inno­cent Followers and Sufferers, to make use of the devouring Sword, to destroy others who cannot defend themselves there­in; and therefore is it not more just and warrantable for Govern­ments (who have a Power, and the Sword of Justice) to de­fend the Lambs and Sheep of Christ, yea Nations and People (so far as their power extends) from devouring Beasts of Prey, rather then to persecute, oppress or suffer them to be devoured by any others, who seek their ruin? And yet we hope for the fulfilling of those Evangelical Prophecies that foretel the end of Wars, Strife and Contention, and Christ's Kingdom of Peace to be set up and exalted to the ends of the Earth: Send Peace in our times O Lord.