The counterfeit convert, a scandal to Christianity and his unjustly opposing Quakerism to Christianity justly reprehended : and the true Christ, and Holy Scripures [sic] confessed by the Quakers : in opposition to two scandalous books falsly styled I. Quakerism withering, and Christianity reviving, II. Animadversions on G. Whitehead's book, Innocency triumphant.

The counterfeit convert, a scandal to Christianity and his unjustly opposing Quakerism to Christianity justly reprehended : and the true Christ, and Holy Scripures [sic] confessed by the Quakers : in opposition to two scandalous books falsly styled I. Quakerism withering, and Christianity reviving, II. Animadversions on G. Whitehead's book, Innocency triumphant.

Table of contents

Title page

AN EPISTLE TO THE Impartial READER.

In opposition to the great Abuses, Misrepresentations of F. Bugg, and his Advocate Tho. Crisp against us, the following Testimony (which was lately delivered to the Parliament) is added.

THE Counterfeit Convert, A SCANDAL TO CHRISTIANITY.

A FEW Gentle Reflections UPON T. C's Animadversions, (said to be Tho. Crisp's,) on George Whitehead's Book, Entituled [Innocency Triumphant.]

SOME BRIEF REMARKS ON T. C's. BOOK.

§

[Page]

[Page]

THE Counterfeit Convert, A SCANDAL TO CHRISTIANITY, AND His unjustly opposing Quakerism to Christianity justly reprehended. AND THE True Christ, and Holy Scripures Confessed by the QUAKERS. In opposition to Two Scandalous Books falsly styled

I. Quakerism Withering, and Christianity Reviving.

II. Animadversions on G. Whitehead's Book, Innocency Triumphant.

Obad. 3.

The Pride of thine Heart hath deceived thee.

Rom. 1. 31.

Without natural Affection, Implacable, Unmerciful.

LONDON: Printed and Sold by T. Sowle, at the Crooked-Billet in Holloway-Lane; Shoreditch, 1694.

AN EPISTLE TO THE Impartial READER.

[Page]

[Page]

I Do hereby sincerely and in good Conscience declare, that 'tis not for Controversy's sake, nor in love thereto, that I am so much engaged therein; a Peaceable and Amicable Conversation towards all Men, and their Quiet Behaviour, (though of different Perswasions) being far more desirable and acceptable to me: Nor am I the beginner of these Controversies or Contentions, being wholly defensive in my Concern therein; but for the living Truth and an Innocent Peoples sake, to remove [Page] those gross Aspersions which are cast upon both, chiefly by Contentious Apostate Adversaries, which are of the most disingenuous and malicious, who are more skilful in Perverting and Aspersing, than Disputing; their Pamphlets being stuft with Reviling and Railery, not with Argument. And if I did not really believe a necessity laid upon me (in point of Conscience towards God, and love to his People,) to discover and oppose their foul Abuses, bitter Aspersions and gross Calumnies, they might rail on against my self and others, till wearied and out of Breath, and the Fire of their own Envy consume them. But the Controversie is not Personal only, but the Holy Truth is concerned, our Christian Faith and Religion is concerned, our Holy Profession is concerned: And these furious Adversaries will needs concern, (and would fain incense) the Civil Government with their invective Pamphlets against us, to render u [...] as highly obnoxious to the same as they can▪ And therefore we have been the more under a necessity to detect, oppose and obviate their malicious Designs, that our Innocency may [Page] not unjustly lye under such Clouds of Infamy and Scandals as they unjustly cast upon us. As Fra. Bugg endeavoured to incense the House of Commons, against the People called Quakers, with a Malicious Pamphlet (to interrupt our Endeavours for Relief of the said People in the Case of Oaths,) therein most falsly charging the said People with Denying Jesus of Nazareth, Contempt of Governours, Christ's Ministers and Magistrates, Scripture, &c. Having before in his late Book stiled New Rom. Arraign'd, termed Twelve of us Perjured Persons for our Negative Testimony against his so charging the Quakers with Denying Jesus of Nazareth, &c. and thereupon acting his Mock-Trial, forging our Answers and Erecting the form of a Pillory, and thereby scandalizing divers Citi [...]ens (of good Repute and Credit,) as Per [...]ured Persons, thereby affecting not only [...]heir Christian, but Civil Reputations, [...]randing the said People and their Mini [...]ers, with these Characters, viz. New [...]ome, Rome's Sister, the Papists their [...]rethren, and with following the Steps [Page] of the Jesuits; and withal, terming one of their Ministers, one of her chief Cardinals; (i. e. New Rome's,) and consequently this is no better than to render the said People Papists in a high degree. Now let the Impartial and Judicious judge: First, Whether his unjust Attempts herein, and his thus misrepresenting us, do not greatly ten [...] to lessen and injure the Protestant Interest, and consequently to gratifie the Papists. Secondly. Ana is not this a plain Contradiction to the Government, which has been pleased legally to recognize us as Dissenting Protestants. Thirdly, And what Ingenuity, Honesty or Prudence hath F. Bugg or his Abettors shewn, in thus representing a Body of Protestant Subjects, as New Rome, Papists? &c. What a New Rom [...] under the English Protestant Government Strange Reflection? Fourthly, And whether F. B's. thus contradicting the Government's recognizing us (by Law) as Dissenting Protestants (by his thus defaming us as New Rome, Rome's Sister, Papists Brethren, &c.) be not Seditious in the Natu [...] and Tendency thereof, as tending to stir [...] [Page] Discord and Strise amongst Protestant Subjects, and consequently to weaken the Interest of King and People? Let the Prudent and Impartial judge. Fifthly, F. B's. rendring our Declaration to the King and Parliament, (for the Divine Authority of the Holy Scripture, as inserted in the Act of Exemption) Deceitful on our part, and to serve a turn, in his New Rome Arraign'd, p. 40, 42. This is to go about to invalidate and destroy a principal Condition of our present Liberty: And is not this to Confront and Oppose the Governments acceptance of our said Declaration. All which, with many more misrepresentations and Calumnies against us in F. Bugg's Pamphlets, greatly bespeak his Deadly Malice, Revengeful and Unchristian Spirit, which we hope no Rational, Impartial or moderate Man, will Countenance or Encourage. To be sure such malicious Treatment, must needs be odious to all true Christians, and Merciful Men. And seeing I could not with all my late and earnest Endeavours, obtain a Meeting for a free and fair Debate with Fra. Bugg, (when lately [Page] in London) about the Controversie he has begun and published between us. I acquainted his Two Ministers (viz. William Smithies of Cripplegate Parish, London, and Isaac Archer of Milden-hall in Suffolk, where he lives,) with these (and other) his Abuses and Misrepresentations aforesaid against us, to try if they would put a stop to his farther proceeding therein; shewing them by Letters wherein his Abuse and Calumnies against us, would affect them, (he having the Reputation of a Convert, and his writing against us, approbation among some of the Clergy, by his own Confession.) But his last Pamphlet being in the Press before my Letters to them, I suppose they had not opportunity to prevent or stop that. However it will concern them for the future, to stop his Malicious Attempts, otherwise I am perswaded his work will not be to their Credit or Reputation: But the more to the contrary, if they do not stop, and lay him aside, and provide better Tools to work withal, if minded fairly to Controvert Matters with us, or otherwise to let us live quietly, and on all hands to endeavour [Page] for Charity one towards another as much as we can.

And seeing F. B. has presumed to dedicate his last Pamphlet, stiled Quakerism Withering, to the Bishop of Glocester, falsly charging the Teachers of the Quakers therein with Damnable Heresies, even Denying the Lord that bought them. And yet as one both uncertain and doubtful in his evil Attempts against us, proposes this Offer and Submission to the said Bishop in these Words, viz. I therefore do most humbly offer what I have wrote to your Lordship's perusal, and shall most willingly submit to your Censure, the Matters therein contained. And if for want of Judgment in the Matters controverted, I have wronged the Quakers, I shall most willingly retract and make them publick reparation.

Hereupon, I and another Friend, i. e. Samuel Waldenfield, lately took occasion to repair to the said Bishop of Glocester, (having the reputation of a moderate Person,) and shewed him Fr. Bugg's said Pamphlet and Epistle dedicated to him, and this very [Page] Passage of his Submission, as not knowing but he had delivered it first in Manuscript to the Bishop, for his Perusal and Correction: Which when I enquired of him about, the Bishop answered, he had never seen it before, nor knew the Man. Whereupon I shewed him how preposterous it was for F. B. to expose his said Pamphlet in Print to general Judgment, before he had the Bishops Judgment about it, and how inconsistent with his said offer of his Book to his Perusal, and submitting to his Censure the Matters therein. How insincere F. B. was herein is obvious.

It seems he was resolved to traduce and asperse the Quakers in Print first, that the Bishop might not have the opportunity to prevent him therein: Though for a Pretext and Colour, he Complements the Bishop with his Conditional Submission to his Censure and Judgment, whether he had wronged the Quakers or not. Did not this tend to make the World believe he had the Bishops Privity or Approbation therein, or otherwise, that he would not have div [...]lged what he had writ, because offered to the Bishops Perusal [Page] and Censure? who knew nothing of it until 'twas gone out into the World. What a Mockery and plain Abuse was this, (tending to make the Bishop suspected of giving Countenance thereto.) To whom we shewed also Bugg's other Book against us, stiled New Rome Arraign. with his Mock Trial and Condemnation of Perjury and Pillory against us, and the Occasion thereof; which Calumnies the Bishop disowned, and could not allow of such Treatment. And I thought meet to give this hint thereof, to do the Bishop so much Justice, that he might not lye under the suspition of giving Countenance to this our Implacable Adversary, in these his Calumnies and bitter Invectives against us. As I did in the Postscript of my late Answer, Innocency Triumphant. For Henry Goldwell, Justice of Peace, and late Member of Parliament, to whom F. B. dedicated his other Scandalous Book, (stiled New Rome Arraigned) without his Privity or Knowledge (as he confessed) and for which he also told some of us, he severely advertised F. Bugg, when he saw it in Print (with his Mock-Trial, Perjury and [Page] Pillory against us) being sensible it was a Reflection on his Reputation, to be rendred or suspected as the Patroniser or Countenancer of such Scandalous Pamphlets. And 'tis to be much more hoped, that the said Bishop will advertise F. B. for endeavouring to shelter himself under his Countenance or Reputation.

[In point of Civility, I thought meet to shew the said Bishop of Glocester, this foregoing Passage, (relating to him about F. b's. Dedication) in Manuscript, before 'twas printed, because I had such occasion to make use of his Name in Print, that he might not be offended; which he was not, but took it well from us: Samuel Waldenfield being then also present with me.]

However, whatever we suffer, there is a just and all-seeing God, that will judge righteously, do rightly, and finally determine the Controversie between the Two Seeds, the Righteous and the Wicked. To Him the Righteous Judge of all, we commit our Innocent Cause.

Friendly Reader, my Concern in this Controversie, is designed only to vindicate Truth according to my understanding thereof, and [Page] to do particular Persons wronged, so much right (as to their Principle) as by referring to their own Explications; for where either their Words are perverted, or seem dubious in the manner of Expressions, their own more full and clear Demonstrations ought to be taken notice of, in point of Justice to them. And where the whole Body or People called Quakers, are wrongfully charged about their Principles from particular Persons, 'tis an absurd way of arguing, whether it be from any one's defective or dubious manner of Expressions, (or our Adversaries own perversions and misrepresentations.) And in that case, to manifest Truth, and to do the said People right as to their Principles, &c. I find it the plainest way to have recourse to their Concurrent Testimonies and Harmonies of their Writers and Books, to evince the truth of their Principles to others. And this Method which I do sincerely observe all Religious and Christian Societies will allow of, and not condemn a whole Body of Sober Religious People, or Christian Society, for any particular shortness in manner of Expressions; for that were very partial and unjust. And [Page] I doubt not but the Lord our God will stop the Mouth of Iniquity that's open against us, and clear our Innocency more and more, that his Truth may prevail over Deceit and Envy, and the Upright in Heart shall see it, and rejoyce in the Lord, and in the prosperity of his blessed Truth, over his and their Enemies.

From a Servant of Christ George Whitehead.

London, the 3d. of the 2d. Month, 1694,

Reader, Note, That the omission of the Names of our present Opposers in the Title is, 1. Because of the Contempt brought upon them by their great Envy and outrage. 2. Lest their Names in the Title, should cause some to refuse inspecting this Treatise.

In opposition to the great Abuses, Misrepresentations of F. Bugg, and his Advocate Tho. Crisp against us, the following Testimony (which was lately delivered to the Parliament) is added.

[Page]

WE whose Names are underwritten (being in Christian Society with the People commonly called QUAKERS,) Do in good Conscience Declare and Certifie all Persons concerned.

1. That we sincerely believe and Confess, That Jesus of Nazareth, who was born of the Virgin Mary, is the true Messiah, the very Christ, the Son of the Living God, to whom all his Prophets gave Witness. And we do highly value his Death, Sufferings, Works, Offices, and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind, together with his Laws, Doctrine and Ministry.

2. That this very Christ of God, was and is the Lamb of God that takes away the Sins of the World, who was slain, was dead, and is alive, and lives for evermore, in his divine eternal Glory, Dominion and Power with the [...]ather.

[Page]3. That the HOLY Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are of divine Authority, as being given by Inspiration from God.

4. And that Magistracy or Civil Government is God's Ordinance, the good ends thereof being for the Punishment of Evil-doers, and Praise of them that do well.

And we know of no other Doctrine or Principle preached, maintained, or ever received among (or by) us since we were a People, contrary to these before mentioned.

Signed in Behalf of the said People,

Thomas Lower,

William Crouch,

William Ingram,

William Meade,

William Macket,

Philip Ford,

Francis Camfield,

John Edge,

Thomas Hutson,

Charles Marshall,

Josiah Ellis,

Gilbert Latey,

Theodor Eccleston,

Joseph Wassey,

Thomas Cox,

John Bowater,

Benjamin Antrobus,

William Philips,

Edward Brook,

William Townsend,

John Hall,

George Oldner,

Thomas Barker,

Abraham Johnson,

Tho. Twinbarrow,

Michael Russel,

John Harwood,

John Danson,

John Stringfellow;

William Paul,

Fra. Etteridge,

Benj. Bealing.

THE Counterfeit Convert, A SCANDAL TO CHRISTIANITY.

[Page]

TO introduce the ensuing Reflections on F. Bugg's said Pamphlet, I think it expedient to give a brief Account of our late sincere and earnest Endeavours for a Meeting with him in London, fairly to debate the principal Matters in Controversie between him and the People called Quakers; in order whereunto, in our printed Sheet, Entituled The Quakers Vindication against Fra. Bugg's Calumnies: The following Offer and Proposal was made, viz.

§

[Page]

And further seeing Fra. Bugg has shewn his Hatred and Revenge against George Whitehead, especially for discovering his Self-Condemnation and Malice, &c. I (the Person concerned) freely offer, and am willing (with with the Lord's Asistance) to make it plainly appear, before any Six, Ten or Twelve Competent Witnesses, who are moderate Men of Sense and common Reason, that Fr. Bugg has grossly and wickedly abused and perverted Truth, and wronged the People called Quakers, both in Charge Citation and Observation in his said Pamphlet (which he delivered to the Parliament.) And that in his Book New Rome Arigned, he has forged notorious Lies in other Mens Names to ridicule, defame and scandalize divers Citizens of London, and men of good Repute, condemning them also to the Pillory as Perjured Persons, in his pretended Tryal in a way of Judicature, unwarantably acted by himself, assuming the Place of both Judge, Accuser, Jury, Condemner and Executioner, with a form of a Pillory, and Effig [...]es in [...], to represent the persons so grosly scandalized by him: I say, for these Ends, I do profer, (God willing) to meet Fr. Bugg before Witnesses, at any convenient Time and Place, within the City of London, that the Persons so defamed by him, may be present. To which Proposal I subscribe

—Gearge Whit [...]head.

[Page]Hereunto Fr. Bugg gives an answer, with a new Charge, with Six Articles against the Quakers, and Six against George Whitehead, dated Jan. 29th, 1693; and he has printed what he saith is the substance of his said Answer, p. 5, but he has left out of his printed, what really is the substance thereof, in the very beginning of it, namely, his acceptance of my printed Challenge, being in Writing thus, viz.

§

George Whitehead.

In answer to your faint Challenge, in your pretended Vindication to meet me in any place in London, the following Words he leaves out, viz. [I do accept thereof, and am come to London, being Sixty Miles to meet you.]

Observe here, how plainly and positively this his acceptance seems to be of my said Challenge, but how insincere evasive and shifting he was therein, his following indirect Terms shews insisting upon the Choice of Eight moderate Ministers, giving me my Choice whether to chose the whole number out of the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Independants or Baptists, or whether each of us one out of each. And what was his intent in proposing such a Choice? It was that the difference might be referred to such Ministers for them to Judge and Determine; as he confessed at Jacob Franklings, the First of the twelfth Month, 1693, in the Evening before [Page] several Witnesses. I shewed how unreasonable it was for me to give away Matters of Faith and Conscience, to such Persons of different Perswasion; and how besides the terms of my Challenge for the Persons present to be Witnesses only of what passed, i. e. as to matter of Fact, and not to refer matters of Faith and Conscience to their Determination; asking Bugg if he would refer all the Matters in Difference to Anabaptist Ministers? (whereof Sprinkling Infants was one, as he well knew,) He answered, he would; as indeed his own Proposal would have obliged him, if I had chosen the whole number of Anabaptist Ministers. By this those of the Church of England Clergy, who have encouraged Fr Bugg in his Scribling against the Quakers, may see what a Convert he is, and how litle of Religion or Stability he is come to, in his offering to refer Matters thereof to the Judgment of Presbyterian, Independant, or Anabaptists Ministers, whereby he had been liable to turn Presbyterian, Independant or Anabaptist.

However, since Fr. Bugg so plainly had writ that he accepted of my Challenge, and came to London Sixty Miles to meet me, I closely pursued him by Letters, thereupon sending one Letter after another for some time, day by day, for a Meeting with him fairly to dispute Matters; and seeing him Dillatory, and protracting Time by his various Terms he had to make one after another, I appointed several [Page] Meetings on purpose, and gave him timely notice thereof, as many are Witnesses to Six several Letters of mine sent him. And this thou Fr. Bugg knowest in thy own Conscience to be true; and therefore mayest thou not be ashamed of thy sorry shifting and evading both my Challenge and thy own Acceptance thereof; and yet in thy own Contradiction art driven to confess in these Words; viz. Thus far then we agreed as to matter of Debate; I in my Sheet offered to produce every Book and Page quoted, before Ten or Twelve Impartial Men, and by G. W. offered to make it appear before any Six, Ten, or Twelve Moderate Men, that I had wronged them. So that nothing remained now, but my coming to London to joyn Issue with G. W, As in Page 3, of thy last Pamphlet stiled Quakerism Withering

But that Agreement thou made shift to evade by other Terms; one while by urging for Ministers of divers Perswasions as before, to be Judges of the Matters in Controversie: Another while, for a pre-Engagement to a Conditional Retraction under Hand; another while to leave the Matters in Controversie to the Decision of Disinterested Persons, (as thy Letters shew.) And not only so, but thou woulst have pre-ingaged our Friends, (whom thou hast scandalized with thy Mock Tryal and Pillory, as Perjured Persons, to Retraction and Condemnation, if proved False Witnesses. Another while thou woulst accept against G. W's Twelve Witnesses [Page] being present at the Debate, unless when the Certificate came under Examination, or called in when any Matter depending thereupon, was under Consideration; as by thy Letters to me, which was contrary to my printed Challenge accepted by thee. ‘Thou knowest what Exceptions I made against the inequality of these thy dilatory evasive Terms, and against thy Arrogancy, in bringing thy self into Competition with a Body of People, refusing therein to make any such unequal Bargain with thee, to gratifie thy Ambition. Whereupon I queried, First, Do any of the Clergy engage either themselves or the whole Clergy, to stand or fall by Bugg in his Controversie against a whole People and their Ministers. Secondly, Will any one or Two of the Clergy, (who are Men of Repute) personate and vindicate Bugg against the Quakers, as in my Letter to him dated the Twelfth of the Twelfth Month, 1693.’ Now F, Bugg thou art still partial and unjust, in leaving out my Answers to thy Offers and Terms in thy said Printed Pamphlets thou hast left out.

First, Thy accepting my Printed Challenge, and coming Sixty Miles to London to meet me.

Secondly, My Proffer to leave thee to thy Liberty, to bring whom thou pleased of Members of Parliament, or Ministers for Witnesses.

[Page] Thirdly, My Answers to thy Offers, with my Exceptions against the partiality of thy terms, why didst not print them?

Fourthly: My Offers and Appointments of Three sundry Meetings, and thy absenting from Two of them; and thy flying of about Terms at another of them, (i. e.) at Josiah Ellis's,) after thou hadst granted interchangably to discourse Articles.

Fifthly, Thy granting a Meeting before disinterested Persons, without retraction, and my Acceptance by Letters, containing what follows, viz. ‘Our demand of Satisfaction, and positive challenge made to thee thereupon, for a fair and moderate Dispute within the City of London, before either Three, or Four, or Six, or Eight or Ten Competent Witnesses, being Dis-interested Persons: And withal, giving thee liberty to bring Two, Three or Four Persons to be thy Advocates or Assistants in the Discourse, who are Men of Civility and Sense, that we might have opportunity to vindicate our Christian and Civil Reputations from thy great Abuse and Scandal, affecting both, by thy defaming us as Perjured Persons in thy pretended Tryal and Pillory, &c. in thy N. Rom. Arraign. And to clear the People called Quakers from thy Calumnies in thy printed Sheet delivered to the Parliament, as particularly that of Denying Jesus of Nazareth, &c.’ As more largely appears in our Letter to thee, dated the [Page] Nineteenth of the Twelfth Month, 1693. Pursuant to which, we then gave thee Notice, ‘That we intended (God willing) to meet in the upper Room, at the Bull and Mouth Meeting-House, within Aldersga [...]e, London, on the 22d of the same Month, about the 9th Hour in the Morning where thou hadst notice to meet us.’ And where accordingly divers of us, whom thou hadst scandalized as aforesaid, did then and there meet together, with several moderate disinterested Persons for Witnesses; and also then and there we waited for thee Two Hours, (or above) but thou camest not, as the Persons here named are Witnesses.

Gilbert Latey,

Theodor. Eccl [...]ston,

Richard Needham,

James Parke,

William Robinson,

Samuel Waldenfield.

John Butcher,

John Vaughton,

Benjamin Antrobus, and others.

So that thy Evasion and timorous sculking to secure thy self from fair disquisition of Matters, was notorious, and thou wast as well told of it home, by my next Letter to thee, dated the 23d of the 12th Month, 1693. And how apparent therein didst thou act▪ contrary to thy own pretence of accepting my Challenge, and coming Sixty Miles to London, and wa [...]ing near Three Weeks for a Meeting with me. All thy slim Shifts, Boasting, Railing and Scandalizing us, will [Page] not cover thy Shame, Guilt and Cowardice which thou hast unjustly charged us withal, until 'tis directly fallen upon thy self; though thou falsly turnest the Story of the Pursuit against me, viz. But still I pursued him, (sayst thou, p. 7.) as if I had fled, when thou knowest the contrary how frequently I followed thee with Letters pursuant to my printed Challenge in the Quakers Vindication, seeing thou hadst accepted thereof (in pretence.) And therefore thy implying G. W. to have shuffled and evaded a fair Debate, p. 9. is notoriously false, as many can testifie, but true upon thy self: And as false is thy following Reflection; viz. That G. W. promised in Print; (and what?) to leave the Matter to any moderate Men. What I offered in Print is obvious; 'twas for Moderate Men to be Witnesses, as in the said Q. Vind. but not to leave the Matters in Controversie to them as Judges to detetmine. Wherefore I was not free to pre-ingage to leave or refer Matters of Faith and Conscience to the judgment and determination of Persons of other Perswasions; thereby to betray my Christian Liberty, and come under an Implicite Faith, which my Adversaries Terms would have imposed upon me; though as I told him, I left others Judgments free, as I would have mine, without being preingaged or imposed upon. This was the general Reason of my not obliging my self to his Terms of others Decision.

[Page]On our deeming thee F. B. a Self-condemned Apostate, p. [...]0. Thou questions, Is not [...] throwing Dirt in the Face of the Government, r [...] dring their Religion so false and erroneous, as [...] whoever forsake you, and conform to the Established Religion, must therefore be Self-Condemned Apostates? As if the Government and Establishe [...] Religion, must patronize and excuse all [...] Uncharitableness, Malicious Attempts, Errors Lies, Calumnies and Enormities, under preten [...] of thy conforming thereunto. But here th [...] art out egregiously, thy Self-Condemnatio [...] and Temporising, is made obvious from t [...] own Confession, to the tru [...] of our Doctrine, Ministry, Society, Christian Love, and our Meeting as Blessed of God, even with the comfortable Enjoyment of his Presence, as in thy Quak. De [...]c [...] since thy Conformity. Therefore thou argu [...] falaciously as well as maliciously, to render [...] deeming thee a Self-Condemned Apostate, [...] th [...]o [...]ing Dirt in the face of the Government, &c. This will not cover nor excuse thee before th [...] Great Judge of all; thy Excuse herein being both irreligious and uncertain. And thenc [...] 'tis apparent thou didst not in 1686, accoun [...] the Quakers Criminal in point of Doctrine, seeing thou wast Confirmed, their Doctrine and Ministry was a dispensation of the Love of God sent [...] a Visitation to Mankind as in thy said Qr. Detect. which many of the Conformists were never so Perswaded nor Confirmed, neither ever turned to be such Malicious, Inveterate Enemies [Page] and Persecutors as thou art. Therefore Self-Condemned Apostacy, cannot be so justly charged upon them as upon thee. Thy turning thy Testimony for the Quakers Doctrine and Ministry, as by thee given in 1686, unto what thou thought of them in 58 and 60, is a most base and false Prevarication, as well as contrary to the plain Grammatical import of thy own Testimony given in 1686, (Two Years after thy leaving us, and conforming to the Church of England,) which thou confirmest in these positive Expressions, as thy then present Sense, viz.

‘And in this Manner we went on for many Years, and loved one another with Love unfeigned. And doubtless God blessed our Meetings with the comfortable Enjoyment of his Presence.’

Thus thou in 1686: How canst thou in Conscience alter and turn this to what thou thought of us in 58 and 60? Oh Hardned Man, and injuririous to thy own Conscience; awake, awake to judgment!

Thy consequence also is very inconsequent and false, That by our Doctrine, Pious Sincere Christians are rendred Apostates for acknowledging themselves mistaken (upon Conviction) in that they once thought the Popish Doctrine true, &c. Quak. Wither, p. 12. For the First, Thou art no such Pious sincere Christian as left us, and conformed upon any such Conviction. Secondly, Thou wast not convicted that our Doctrine and [Page] Ministry were false or erroneous, when thou left us, nor when after thy Conformity thou confess'd it was a Dispensation of the love of God, and God blessed our Meetings, &c.

Thy First Charge against the Quakers is, That they deny Jesus of Nazareth, who was born of the blessed Virgin Mary to be Christ, and the efficient Cause of Mans Salvation.

Here are Two Charges made one, both which we positively and sincerely deny, as contrary to our profest and known Principles. The Scripture Texts 1 Joh. 1. 14. Luk. 1. 26. & 2. 10. 1. Mark [...]. 7. Matt. 17. 5. & 26. 67. & 27 38. 50. & 28. 6. Acts 1. 9, 10, 11. & 5. 3 [...], 31. Acts 2. 36. Hebr. 5. 9. & 12. 2. Rom. 8. 34. Acts 7. 35. 56. & 10. 38. 1 Cor. 15. 15. proving Jesus to be the Christ, &c. p. 14, 15, 16. we ever have and do sincerely believe and own. But that the Quakers [...]ach the contrary, (as B [...]gg [...]aith) we utterly deny, as a gross Calumny imposed upon us. His instance fo [...]roof of from Isaac Pennington's Question to [...]ssors, wherein he distinguishes between Christ and the Body in which he came, and between the outward Vessel and the Inward Life, and not calling the Bodily Garment Christ, &c. i. e▪ chiefly and in the first place Christ, as I. P. explains himself, is no Proof that the Quakers deny Jesus to be Christ, for he did not consist only of an outward Body or Vessel, he had both inward Life, Soul and Spirit, even as perfect [Page] Man, much more as God. And therefore Fr. Bugg's inference, that the Quakers would divide the Humanity from the Godhead is false; they are distinguished but not divided in the entire Being of Christ▪ as also that they can never call him Christ but a Vail, is falsly infinuated; though his Flesh was called the Vail, Heb. 10. 20. This Objection has been plainly answered as well as the Question: Doth not the Name Christ belong to the whole Body, &c. In our Charitable Essay, p. 4. which Fr. Bugg gives the go by to, without Replication, running the rounds to his old Objection, Idem per Idem, imposing and begging the Question; he will neither see, nor take Answers, how plainly soever given, thus impertinent and trifling he is.

But to clear Isaac Pennington in this Point, he did not deny Jesus of Nazareth to be Christ, but sincerely confesseth to the same Jesus Christ in his Works, 2nd Part, p. 18. in these Words, viz. ‘The Enemy hath raised up Jealousies and Prejudices against us, as if we denied the Scriptures and Ordinances of God, and that Christ that died at Jerusalem; against which Isaac P. Answers, viz. First, That we do really in our Hearts own that Christ who came in the fulness of time in that prepared Body to do the Father's Will, (His coming into the World, Doctrine, Miracles, Sufferings, Death, Resurrection, &c. in plainness and simplicity of Heart, according [Page] as it is exprest in the Letters of the Scripture. Secondly, That we own no other Christ than that, nor hold sorth no other thing for Christ but him, who then appeared and was made manifest in the Flesh. And p. 19. ibid. The Lord hath shewn me in Spirit, that they themselves are guilty of that very charge, (and that he will so implead them at his Judgment Seat) which they cast upon us, even of denying that Christ which died at Jerusalem to be Christ.’ Thus far Isaac Pennington. What more plain and innocent Testimony could Man have given? Where's now either his or the Quakers denial of Jesus of Nazareth to be Christ, as F. Bugg has over and over unjustly charged us.

Another Instance out of the Christian Quaker, ‘is that the holy Body, (i. e. of Christ,) was not instrumentally, without a share of the general Victory, and holy Priviledges obtained; yet that the efficient and chiefest Cause was the Light and Life, p. 18.’

This is so far from either denying Jesus to be Christ, or the efficient Cause of Salvation, that it is a plain Confession that Jesus Christ was both the instrumental, and the efficient cause of Man's Salvation; Instrumental in his Holy Body, and Efficient by his Light and Life: Seeing we preach no other Light or Life to effect Salvation, but that of Jesus Christ. And we know of no true Understanding Christians, but will confess that it was not the Humanity or [Page] Manhood of Christ only that effects or works Man's Salvatian, without the Divinity, seeing as Man, he saith, I can of my Self do nothing; as I hear I judge, John 5. 30.

Wherefore Fr. Bugg's Inference that they, (i. e.) the Quakars,) have robbed the blessed Jesus of one of his eminent Attributes, (viz. of being the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation,) is notoriously false and impertinent like the rest, (Jesus Christ is a compleat Saviour.) As also is F. B's other, That they insinuate by consequence that Him that was born of the Virgin, He is no otherwise a Saviour, than other good Men are, p. 21.

Which he has flatly contradicted by his Instance immediately following, viz. If some Men in Scriptures are entituled Saviours, because of their Contribution of their Trials, Travels and Labours towards the Salvation of Mankind; of much more right is that honour ascribed to Him who had the Spirit without Measure, &c. p. 21.

Whereby its apparent, that much more Honour of a Saviour is ascribed to Christ, than to any other Men. Thus notorious is Bugg in his Contradiction to himself, most unjustly to prove his Lying Charge of their Denying Jesus to be the Christ, and the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation. Oh Horrible Insolency, and Self-Condemned Apostacy!

Now Fr. Bugg, I query of thee,

1. Didst thou, when a Quaker, deny Jesus to be the Christ.

[Page]2. Didst thou when a Quaker, deny Jesus to be the efficient cause of Man's Salvation?

3. Didst thou when a Quaker, ever hear the Quakers deny Jesus to be the Christ in their Ministry.

4. Didst thou when a Quaker ever hear the Quakers Deny Christ to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation?

5. Nay, didst thou deny Jesus to be the Christ, or the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation, when in the Name of the People called Quakers, thou confessedst, That in the beginning the inshining Light of Christ Jesus by his Heavenly Spiritual Appearance in the Hearts and Souls of his People, was our Principle, the very Foundation, Principle and Corner Stone of our Building? See his De Christ. Lib. 2d Part, p. 24.

6. Didst thou deny Jesus Christ to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation, in thy confessing to this inshining Light of Christ Jesus, as the more sure word of Prophesie; and that there was sufficiency in it, (being obeyed) to lead to Salvation? Or in thy confessing to the vertue and excellency of this holy Unction, and to this word nigh in the Heart; and to Christ Jesus the Second Adam, as he is a quickening Spirit, even to Christ within; and thus People must wait to know him, except they were Reproba [...]es? ibid. p. 25, 26, 27.

7. Didst thou by these Confessions, deny Jesus of Nazareth, who was born of the Virgin Mary, to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation?

[Page]8. What notorious and gross Contradiction to thy self is it then for thee, to make ascribing the Salvation chiefly to the holy Light of Life in Christ, and unto his Body instrumentally, to be a denial of his being the efficient cause of Man's Salvation, Qu. Wither. p. 22. Seeing that Light of Life was the Light and Life of the same Jesus Christ.

And I think it is a real owning Jesus Christ, who was born of the Virgin Mary, to be the efficient Cause of Man's Salvation, to confess that to his own holy Divine Light of Life, Salvation is chiefly ascribed; but Instrumentally to his Body. And hath not the Apostle Paul the like Distinction, where he confesseth we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his Life? Rom. 5. 10.

Here's Reconciliation by his Death, and much more Salvation by his Life.

Wherefore F. Bugg's Consequence against us, as bringing in Damnable Heresies, Denying the Lord Jesus Christ to be a compleat Saviour, p. 23. is a most foul and absurd Slander.

His instance in p. 23, that the Serpent is a Spirit, and therefore that promised Seed which bruiseth his Head, must be Spiritual: And that Seed is Christ. To which I add consequently, not only the outward Body or Flesh which he took upon him.

I cannot understand how this can be a Denial, that Jesus Christ himself is the efficient Cause [Page] of Man's Salvation, unless F. Bugg doth think that Christ was made up only of that outward Body of Flesh, without any Divine Principle of Light and Life in him; which I suppose he will not attempt to own or prove. For though Christ took upon him the Seed of Abraham according to the Flesh, and was the Seed of the Woman that bruises the Serpents Head, even the promised Seed, who through Death was to bruise under, and destroy him that had the power of Death, viz. The Devil, yet he effectually doth it by his Divine Power, Light and Life, as the immediate and efficient Cause of Man's Salvation: Wherein we still confess his Sufferings and Death in the Flesh Instrumentally to Contribute thereunto. Christ Jesus as the promised Seed, who came of a Woman made under the Law, bruised the Serpent's Head, both without us and within us; without us, through his Sufferings and Death, (by his Divine Testimony, Word and Power; within us, by his Divine Life, Light, Word, (or Seed,) Spirit and Power, which is all but one Christ himself, not Two Christs, nor to be divided. Else how could we be born again of incorruptible Seed? Or how doth that Seed remain in him that's born again? And is not that Seed Christ? And is not the Word of Faith, Christ in Spirit? 'Tis well that F. B. grants the head of the Serpent in Men shall be bruised. Consequently this must be for their Salvation. And Christ therefore as inwardly revealed by [...]is [Page] Spirit and Power the efficient Cause there of.

Divers other absurd Consequences he draws upon us in this case not worth tracing. His other Instances to prove his false Charge of the Quakers denying Jesus to be Christ, and efficient Cause of Man's Salvation, are most grosly applied and perverted, as (he saith) by G. Fox's assuming Divine Attributes to himself, p. 26, 27. Which we must needs look upon to be a reiterated aspersion. For where G. F. uses these Words, I am the Light, him by whom the World was made, and doth enlighten every Man that comes into the World, &c. This he speaks in the Name of Christ, and not of himself; nor in his own Name, as his following Words plainly shews, viz. If you love the Light wherewith you are enlightened, you will love Christ, who saith Learn of me. Now F. B. Dost thou in Conscience believe that G. F. assumes this to himself, or that he himself made the World? Or that he himself enlightens every Man? 'Tis very sad to see thee so hardened and wilfully perverse in thus perverting truth. Thou knowest better, and sins against knowledge in thy Calumnies against us.

F. Bug's Second Charge against the Quakers, Their Books are Blasphemous, and their practice Idolatrous, &c.

This we utterly deny as a Calumnious Clam [...]u [...] against our Books and practice in general: And therefore the more impossible for [Page] Fr. Bugg rationally to produce the Colour of proof thereof. Wherefore I question him about his pretended Allegations.

1. What Blasphemy or Idolatry was it for any of our Friends to write, viz. Thou, O North of England, out of thee did the Branch spring, and Star arise, which gives Light to all the Regions round about; in thee the Sun of Righteousness appeared? &c.

2. How proves F. Bugg that Fox's Disciples or Proselites, (as he scornfully calls them,) ecchoed back these Adorations to him; as calling him the Branch, the Star, the Sun of Righteousness? Alluding to Mic. 5. 2. Numb. 24. 17. Mal. 4. 2. Zech. 3. 8. p. 31. I challenge Bugg to prove where the Quakers gave these Titles to the Person of George Fox, or that he assumed them to himself?

Observe. I have viewed over that Epistle of Edward Burrough's, to the Camp of the Lord in England, p. 64, 65, 66, 67, where mention is made of the North of England, and where the Branch did spring, and the Star arise, and the Sun of Righteousness appeared, &c. And G. F. is not so much as mentioned, or named in all that Epistle; and therefore Bugg has most shamefully belied and scandalized the Quakers in this point also; not only in charging them, that the Quakers Prophets give Witness to G. Fox, instead of Christ; that they call him the Branch, the Star, the Sun of Righteousness, and put the North of England for the Town of Bethlehem▪ [Page] (N. Rom. unm. Epist. to Ber. p. 2.) But also, because of our Testimony against this Horrid Lye and Abuse; among others, Bugg staged Twelve of us, (being Citizens, Tradesmen and others of good Repute,) in his Mock Tryal, wherein he condemns us for Perjured Persons to the Pillory, with a form thereof, (in his N. Rom. Arraign.) to redicule and most grosly defame us, both as to our Christian and Civil Reputations affected thereby. Oh, horrible Insolency and Wickedness in thee F. Bugg! Thus wilfully to persist in thy Imposing gross Lies and Calumnies upon the World against us!

3. What Divine Attributes did G. F. assume to himself, in saying he wrote from the Mouth of the Lord, or that he was cloathed with Righteousness? p. 30.

5. How proves Bugg, that to be a true and entire Copy of John Audland's Letter to G. F. which he cites, p. 30? I deny his Citation; and there's reason to question the truth of it, being also so often varied in Print; and particularly from the Copy sent me by John Pennyman; besides the Date of 1665 given it, in the printed Libel, entituled, Some of the Quakers Principles, &c. gives more Cause to question the Truth of his Copy: For that Date was Two Years after John Audland Died, being in 1663, ('tis great Nonsense to suppose he writ it after he Died,) as appears by their Register of Burials in Westmorland. And thou F. B. hast owned the said Libel and the [Page] composing of it, in thy N. Rom. Arr. p. 10. And didst thou find the Date of 1665, on the said Letters; or didst thou give it, or who did? Answer truly. We may not be imposed upon by thy various uncertain Accounts or Equivocations in this Matter.

5. Which of you have the Original Letter of J. A's? And which of you are able to make it appear, by comparing of Ha [...]ds to be his, (as printed by thee) as thou sayest? p. 32. Which of you are so expert in his Hand, that you can make it so appear ex certa scientia? I greatly question it. I am sure that John Audland believed in, (and confessed) the true Christ of God, according to Scripture, as is fully proved in his Works, cited in my Just Enquiry, (p. 26, 27, 28, 29.) and that he esteemed G. F. no otherwise than eminently Instrumental in Christ, for his own and others help and comfort.

6. What Blasphemy and Idolatry canst thou prove against W. P. and others, in their Book Judas and Jews, and in excusing Josiah Coa's Letter? Thy proofless Clamours will not do, to bear us down, nor thy hideous out-cry and clamour, that never greater Blasphemies were spoke by Man, than by Fox. For shame leave these thy Malicious Calumnies.

7. What Blasphemy and Idolatry provest thou against John Blackling's Testimony, that G. F. was blessed with honour above above many Brethren? Were there not Elders worthy of double [Page] Honour? And is not that Honour Eternal, which God gives, and is from above, and wherewith he Honours them, that Honour him?

8. And that his Life Reigns, (i. e. the Life that G. F. partook of,) Is not Christ the Life of all his true Believers and Followers?

9. His tender Words in the Lords Love were my S [...]'s Nourishment.

If these were J. B's Words, what Blasphemy or Idolatry was in them; as believing G. F. Instrumental in the Lord's Love for his Souls Comfort? Did not Paul say, I have fed thee with Milk, and not with strong Meat? 1 Cor. 3. 2. And did not Christ's Ministers comfort the otints who were in Trouble, by the Comfort where with they themselves were comforted of God? 2 Cor. 1. 4.

Were these Blasphemous or Idolatrous, supposest thou, F. Bugg? Oh, how filthy, Loud and Clamourous art thou in thy Charges, and how poor, faint, dull and short in thy proof!

Fr. Bugg's Third Charge against the Quakers.

That they deny the Scriptures, by speaking contemptously of them, &c. Their Contemptuous Expressions of the Holy Scripture, their contempt of the Holy Scriptures, p. 32, 33.

We utterly deny these his Charges, as both Calumnious, and directly contrary to our Principles. His Allegations are fully answered in these our Three Treatises, viz. A Charitable Essay; A Just Enquiry, and Innocency Triumph [...]nt. [Page] But he is so tenacious to his own Opinion, and so Implacable, that he'll receive no Answer; but repeat and impose his old worn, Reproachful Stuff, over and over again.

I am sure our Friends Books alledged by him, if impartially viewed, will clear them in this Case, from either Denying or Contemning the Holy Scriptures. And even that of News coming out of the North, so often objected, doth in divers parts of it clear the point, both by the numerous Quotations of the Scripture in the Margents, as also where its therein said, the Lord hath spoken by his former Prophets; and what? The Scripture. And p. 8, Christ Jesus the Substance of the Prophets, Ibid. The Testimonies of the Prophets of God, and Apostles of Christ (against false Prophets and the Works of the World,) owned, And p. 12, 13. The Scriptures and Saints Conditions, and the Words spoken by the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, owned. And in Eternal Substantial Truths, p. 17. The Life and power of God gave forth the Scriptures, (he saith.)

Now could this be any Contempt of Holy Scripture? No, but the Contrary. And where do the Quakers say, that to preach out of them, (i. e. the Holy Scriptures) is Conjuration?

There may be true Preaching out of the Holy Scripture by the Spirit of Truth; and there is false Preaching, by perverting the Holy Scriptures.

Bugg's own instance which is against them that study to raise a Living thing out of the [Page] Dead; to raise the Spirit out of the Letter, are Conjurers and Diviners, their teaching not being from the mouth of the Lord, p. 34. This is no proof of his general Charge▪ that to preach out of the Holy Scriptures, is Conjuration. Quer. Where proves he these Words?

His Observation is also false, That the Quakers call the Holy Scriptures Death, Dust, and Serpents Meat. This is a foul perversion▪ seeing they esteem the Holy Doctrine, to be the Holy Scripture; which he also has granted and agreed to. And our distinguishing between the outward Writing or Books and the Holy Doctrine therein contained, and between the Letter and the Spirit, 2 Cor. 3. 6, 7. This was no Juggle, nor any Contempt of Holy Scripture, as falsly suggested, p. 33, 36.

The Holy Scriptures mentioned amongst those Writings which I. P. did bring to the Exchange. And to this F. B. saith, Surely they could not burn the Holy Spirit; and that it seems they can call the Bible the Holy Scriptures, for a Wicked Design, p. 36. This is impertinent, as well as Malicious; for the Holy Scriptures therein mentioned, was with the respect to the Doctrine therein contained; for I must tell F. B. that it would shew Contempt to Holy Scripture, even to the Holy Doctrine contained in the Bible, if a Person should voluntarily offer to burn the Bible it self, as the King of Judah did Jeremiah's Roll, Jer. 36. (though he could not [...]urn the Word of the Lord.) But to say the [Page] Bible or Books made up of Paper and Characters will decay and turn to Dust, but the Holy Doctrine, Word and Spirit from whence it came, will endure: This is no Contempt of Holy Scripture▪ nor yet to the Bible.

His Saying G. W. holdly imposes upon the World, that though they call the Scripture Dust, &c. yet they do not call the Holy Scripture so. The first part he falsly imposeth upon me, as he doth on the Quakers. Not only that they call the Holy Scriptures Dust, Death, Serpents Meat, Beastly Ware, &c. which is a horrible Calumny,) but also that they do not believe the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture, to be either Blessed or Holy, p. 38, 39

Thus he imposeth his horrid and gross Lies (against us) upon the World; as also that the Quakers never did beg Pardon of God for Christ's sake; and that they do prefer their own Books, Papers and Epistles before the Scriptures, p. 40. These like the rest, are gross Lies, and contrary to our Testimonies extant in Print, as in divers of our Books we positively declare, ‘That we prefer the Holy Scripture above all other Books extant in the World; and also declare that we are truly thankful to God for preserving to us the outward Writings, Scriptures, or Books commonly called the Bible,’ as in Christ's Lambs defend. Epist. to the Reader, p. 7. The Christianity of the Quak. Vindic. In Answer to Dr. Ford, p. 13. And Charitable Ess [...], p. 5. And we do also frequently read the Scripture [Page] in our Families many of us, more than any other Books or Epistles whatsoever.

To prove the Quakers Denial and Contempt of the ▪Holy Scripture; pursuant to this abominable Lye, Bugg saith, viz. And not knowing a better way to manifest them, I erected a mock Pillory, and tried them, and found them guilty on their own Premises, p. 33.

The more Insolent, Impudent and Shameless thou F. Bugv, and the greater thy Shame and Wickedness: What, convict us of Error by wilful Lies and Forgery, and by notorious Scandal and Defamation? As was thy mock Tryal, and mock Pillory, (as well as thy mock Cage;) from whence we may justly return thy Calumnies against G. Whitehead, upon thy self, and can prove them against thy self: viz.

That F. Bugg is First, A publick Defamer. Secondly, A wicked Forger. Thirdly, A wilful Lyar. Fourthly, A gross Perverter. Fifthly, A false Glosser. Sixthly, A Deceiver, i. e. of some Silly, Ignorant, Cr [...]dulous and Enviour Persons, not of any Impartial, Wise or Judicious. Oh horrible! What a Christion, a Convert, a Church-man, an earnest Contender for the Christian Faith, (as thou stiles thy self,) and yet guilty of such horrid Forger [...], Scandal and Slander as thy said mock Tryal is made up off. Good Lord deliver us all from such a People, and such a Ministry as own such a sinful Wretch, and Self-Condemned, Malicious Apostate as thou art, for a true Convert.

[Page]Thy Charge of Denial and Contempt of Holy Scriptures, on the People called Quakers, is expresly contrary to what thou thy self hast positively declared in Print; and that even in the Name and Person of the said People; ‘pleading for our Testimony to Christ within and the Kingdom of Heaven within, De Christ Lib. ch. 1. par. 2. This (sayst thou), we told, this we proved to the People out of the Holy Scriptures; and that although the Scriptures were good, and a true Declaration of those things which were most surely believed by the Apostles, and by us ought to be believed, yet not the only Rule, but still the Spirit of God, which was the first Principle, the Foundation Principle, &c.’ [Thus far F. Bugg.] Pray note, here's F. Bugg, when a pretended Quaker, speaking truth herein, and clearing himself and the Quakers from being guilty of the least contempt of Holy Scripture; but on the contrary, owning the same both as Holy and True, and to be most surely believed; whereby both himself and the Quakers did then, (i. e. in 1682,) own the Divine Authority of Holy Scripture by his own Confession. But F. Bugg, since a pretended Church-Man, tells the World gross Lies against the People called Quakers; namely, That they deny and contemn the Holy Scripture: F. Bugg the Quaker spoke truth, but F. Bugg the pretended Church-Man and Convert, tells Notorious, Shameful Lies and Calumnies. Tis an ill Bird that [Page] fouls its own Nests; and One such Runagado, is worse than three Turks.

His Reasons to prove that we do not believe the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture, to be either blessed or holy, are as false and impertinent as his Charge, and but a telling Lies, to prove Lies; which therefore I thus oppose.

1. 'Tis false that we cast Reproachful Language, and Contemptuous Expressions upon the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture.

2. Not reading them in our Meetings for Worship, is no Proof that either we have not the Spiritual and Living Worship of God among us; nor any Evidence that we do not belihve the Doctrine and Precepts recorded in Scripture, to be blessed or holy: Our humbly Worshipping God in Spirit and Truth, is what's required of us by Jesus Christ, and the Holy Scripture, which therefore is Testimony of our Belief that the Doctrine thereof is Holy.

3. 'Tis false again, that we say (without Distinction,) to Preach out of them is Conjuration. I am confident these Words were never spoken by the Quakers thus general and positive, without any other Distinction or Exception about the Preachers and manner of Preaching.

4. These are notoriously false, that we lay aside a [...] useless the use of the Lord's Prayer, Ten Commandments, &c. Seeing by the Spirit of Christ, we Pray after that manner as he has taught, and [Page] practise the Substance of the Commandments, in that Love which is the fulfilling thereof.

5. We are not conscious to our selves of denying the Ordinances of Jesus Christ, either in not believing Sprinkling Infants to be of Divine Institution, or in not practising John's Baptism, which is that of Water, not mentioned in Go teach all Nations, Baptizing them, Mat. 28. And This do in remembrance of me, (i. e. as oft as ye do it.) But of how long continuance, and till what coming of Christ is the Question? Though we believe this and all other Precepts both of God and Christ were holy under their several Dispensations, yet it follows not that we must reeds still practise every thidg that was holy, or else be condemned as not believing the Doctrine and Precepts of Scripture to be holy. F. Bugg will make no good Logick of such Arguments and Consequences; for that were to bring us back to the divers Washings, Baptisms, Tythes, Offerings, Pussovers and Circumcisions, &c. under ehe Law; which were all holy in their first Institution and Dedication.

6. 'Tis also notoriously false, that we do prefer our own Books, Papers and Epistles before the Scriptures, (i. e. the holy Scriptures,) because some of them are occasionally read in some of our Meetings; for both in our Ministry, Books and Epistles, People are often referred to the Holy Scriptures for proof, and excited to read them, and that they may understand, believe [Page] and live according to the same, by the Assistance of God's Holy Spirit. And therefore we esteem and prefer the Holy Scriptures before our own Writings, contrary to Bugg's false Aspersion upon the Quakers; i. e. That they make void the holy Scripture by their Traditional Pamphlets. His gross Lies of this kind are numerous; the Lord rebuke his Lying Spirit, and great Envy.

F. Bugg's Fourth Charge against the Quakers. They deny the Ordinances of Jesus Christ, as Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

We deny this Charge, as laid down without distinction; and that for our Reason F. B. cites, viz. ‘As for Baptism and the Lords Supper, Scripturally considered in their several Dispensations, in the Figure and Substance, we confess and own.’ To this F. B. presently answers, This is false as their Books declare, p. 45. What's false? He considers not he knows not what? He answers very inadvertently, are not Baptism and the Lord's Supper, Scripturally considered, both as in the Figure and in the Substance, in the Type, and in the Antitype? I never heard any true Convert Christian, or real Protestant say, this is false before. Was not John's Baptism with Water, a Figure of Christ's Baptism with the Spirit? And of the Washing of Regeneration? Which was greater? And was not the outward Supper, Bread and Cup, in Commemoration of Christ's Death, a Figure also of his Inward Spiritual [Page] Supper, Eating and Drinking with him in his Kingdom? Who said he, except ye eat my Flesh, and Drink my Blood, ye have no Life in you. Where then is the falshood in our confessing Baptism and the Lord's Supper, in the Figure and Substance? F. B. quotes E. Burrough's Works, p. 51. The Bread and Wine is visible and carnal, a figure of a Spiritual thing. And what then? are they Spiritual, or the Substance which is Christ? That's Popery, which the Martyrs opposed, who esteemed the outward Elements, the Bread and the Cup, figurative, or a Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ spiritually receivedly Faith. What great Error then can F. B. prove against us therein?

He farther cites E. B. in this point, as follows p. 45, viz. ‘For Christ never since he was sacrificed, brake the Bread, and drank the Cup with his Disciples, p. 581, (instead of 518.) We do deny, and do say it is no Ordinance of God, neither was it ever commanded of him, or practised by the Saints, but is an Institution of the Whore of Rome, &c.’ This F. B. renders E. B. to say of the Bread and the Cup, (being cited in the next antecedent Words, as here.) Oh sad! what a gross Perverter art thou F. B? This has been often thy fallacious manner of Citation to abuse us; as 'tis plain, that which E. B. here says we deny, as never commanded of God, nor practised by the Saints, but [...] Romish Institution was Sprinkling (or Baptizing) Infants; calling it the Baptism into Faith, &c. as [Page] in E. B's. p. 518, (before quoted,) and not breaking of Bread, and drinking of the Cup' as given by Christ unto his Disciples: E. B▪ knew this was some time practised by Believers' but not the other; and it had been more ingenious for F. B. to have convicted him of Error about Sprinkling, than to mis-represent him. Though I grant E. B. in p. 518, objects against their manner of breaking Bread, and drinking Wine among the Unconverted and Unregenerate, as not commanded of God, nor practised by his Saints. But does not call the breaking of Bread, and drinking Wine, a Popish Institution of Rome, as he does Sprinkling Infants, and their calling it the Baptism into the Faith. This point is answered in the Quakers Vindication, p. 2. col. 1. But F. B. is more expert in mis-representing, traducing and railing, than in rational Argument, or fair Disputation.

As to our Exception against Sprinkling, and seeming thereby to allow of Dipping, p. 46. we except against the one as unscriptural, and allow of the other as once Scriptural in its proper Dispensation.

F. Bugg's Fifth and Sixth Charge against the Quakers.

That they undervalue the Death and Sufferings of Christ; and exalt their own Sufferings above the Sufferings of Christ, above the Sufferings of the Apostles, above the Sufferings of the Martyrs, or any Christians since the Days of Christ, &c.

[Page]We deny these Charges, as expresly contrary to our Principle, and publick known Testimonies, both highly valuing and exalting the Death and Sufferings of Christ above all other: His charging the Quakers to exalt their Sufferings above the Sufferings of Christ, imports as if they so lifted up, extolled, dignified or rendred their Sufferings more excellent than Christ's. This is a most gross Calumny cast upon the People called Quakers, and as expresly contrary to their Intention and Principle. Though F. B. takes advantage at some Words of E. B's, which he partially cites, adding the Words [called Quakers,] and as unfairly construes against the Quakers in general; as where he saith, Q. Mary's Days brought not forth a Suffering more cruel, F. B. leaves out [in many respects,] which many respects, he explains to be about trivial Matters, as for not putting off the Hat, (thee or thou to a Person) and denying the circumstance of Swearing, and Hundreds suffering on Suspicion, when nothing could be charged against them; and that this was contrary to Magna Charta. Thus E. B. reflects upon the Arbitrary Proceedings of those in power, in 1657. Though I cannot warrant all his comparative Expressions, but grant that the Passage objected against E. B. in this place, was not so well worded as intended according to his own Explication: For by greater and more cruel Suffering, I cannot think E. B. so senseless, as to intend in all Respects; as that the People of God in our Age, have unde [...] gone [Page] greater and more cruel Sufferings than all the Primitive Sufferers, Apostles and Martyrs in the Ten Persecutions; no sure, but in some respects wherein they did not suffer then, upon such small Pretences as many did in Cromwel's time, without any such pretext of Law, as the Jews pretended against Christ. However, tho' the Sufferings of the People of God among us, was far short of the Sufferings in the Apostles Days, and in the Ten Persecutions, &c. yet F. B. gives but a mean and partial Account thereof; namely, of a few Imprisonments, and some small Distresses, &c.

In the Twenty Five Years he was amongst the Quakers, he might have remembred also, the cruel Whippings, and tedious Imprisonments, close Confinements many of God's People have met withal here in Old England, together with cruel Beatings, Stockings, Stonings, &c. As also the sad Accounts from New England, of the cruel and barbarous Whippings, Cutting Ears, Hanging and putting to Death, divers of our Iunocent Friends there: I may not say, this was so cruel as the Sufferings in the Days of the Apostles, and Ten Persecutions, &c. But these being inflicted by Professors of Christianity in Old and New England; it seemed more sinful and unjust in them, than in the Heathens, who pretended to no such Religion and Profession.

[Page]One remarkable Passage of Fr. Bugg's, pursuant to the Fifth and Sixth Charge against the Quakers, I must needs take some notice of. In his Sheet to the Parliament, he puts a Query, viz.

Whether was greatest, the Sufferings of the Quakers, or the Sufferings of Christ? To which (Bugg saith) G. W. gave no direct Answer, but glossed it over, as his usual way is; for if he had answered, that the Sufferings of the Quakers had been greatest, as their Doctors teach, (a gross Lie by the way,) the People would have been ready to Stone him for Blasphemy. Again, if he had said, the Sufferings of Christ had been the greatest, he had then given the Lye to E. B. So that he was in a great strait like the Pharisees of old their Predecessors. (Thus far Bugg,) p. 47, 48.

Now F. Bugg, I pray thee see, and I wish thy Ministers William Smi [...]hies, and Isaac Archer, may see what a notorious wilful Liar thou art, in this very point, in saying, G. W. gave no direct Answer to thy Question, but was in a great strait. To evince thy wilful Lie herein, do but review thy own Query, and G. W's. direct Answer therein, in the Quak. Vindic. p. 2. viz. To Bugg's Query 5. Whether was the Sufferings of Christ, or the Sufferings of the Quakers greatest?

1. In the First place we answer, the Sufferings of Christ, in the nature of them, both inward and outward, in Agony of Soul, and Pains of Body, by that most cruel Death of [Page] the Cross, following that of Scourging and Crowning with Thorns.

2. It was most unjustly and wickedly inflicted by his Persecutors the Jews and Heathen; yet worse'in the Jews, because they might have known better, and because they prosecuted him upon false Witness. And as Christ's Sufferings were most Cruel and Unjust, both as to the Nature thereof, and the Dignity of him that suffered, so he was a most acceptable Sacrifice, and sweet smelling Savour to God, and his Suffering and Sacrifice of Universal Advantage and Benefit to Mankind, in that he died for all Men, and and gave himself a Ransom for all, that all might be capable of Redemption and Salvation through him.

Now pray observe, that G. W. gave a direct Answer to Bugg's Query, viz. Whether was the sufferings of Christ, or the sufferings of the Quakers greatest? G. W. &c. answers directly, viz. 1. The Sufferings of Christ in the nature of them, &c. 2. Christ's Sufferings most exalted and esteemed, because of the Dignity of him that suffered. And this was obvious to Bugg's Eyes in Print, in our said Vindication; and therefore then F. B. must needs be a notorious wilful Liar herein, in affirming G. W. gave no direct Answer to thy Query, but was in a great strait. And as to E. B's. intention and Principle, he exalted Christ's Sufferings in their worth, dignity and merit, above all other Men's, as appears by his own and many [Page] other Friends Testimonies; highly valuing and exalting the Death and Sufferings of Christ. E. B's. Confession of Faith, in his Works, p. 252. ‘Confesseth Christ Jesus as the High-Priest of God, the one Offering for Sin, who takes away Sin, and makes Intercession. And p. 441, He also confesseth a being washed and cleansed from all Unrighteousness, by the Blood of Jesus, by which their Sins are remitted, who walk and abide in his Light, &c.’ (He saith.) See also a Book Entituled, The Son of Perdition Revealed, Printed 1661, wherein Ed. Burroughs and G. Whitehead truly thus confess, p. 2, 4. viz. ‘As Thousands can witness, who have heard us both preach up, and contend for the free Grace of God to all Men; and thereby (i. e. by the Grace of God,) Christ tasted Death for every Man, and died for all Men, and gave himself a Ransom for all, Heb. 2. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 6. 2 Cor. 5. 14. 1 Joh. 2. 2. And its also testified, that in many more Books of ours, the free Grace of God, (i. e. in Christ) to all, and Christ's Dying for all Men, is declared. And p. 4. ibid. Reconciliation of the World hrough Christ's Death, and his being a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood, clearly confessed.’ [Thus far E. B. and G. W.] Thus highly have they exalted Christ's Sufferings for the Good of Mankind; but thus have they not exalted their own, or any other Mens, or Peoples wha [...]ever. Therefore the Quakers exalt Christ's Sufferings above their own and [Page] all others; consequently Bugg has greatly wrong'd the People called Quakers in this point, in his Fifth and and Sixth false Charge before cited.

Some of Bugg's Railery and Lies added under the same Head against the Quakers, viz. Gross L [...]ars, Grand Impostors, Impudent Cheats. Yea, Ellwood, Richardson, and the most Learned among them. As they have shewed all the Contempt they can to Jesus of Nazareth, (calling him a Vail, a Garment, &c. To the Scriptures, to the Ordinances and Ministers of Jesus of Nazareth; with great Incharity, p. 56. Here F. B. thou hast lied to purpose, both against the Living and the Dead: I dare say Tho. Ellwood, and the Learned among us (who are yet alive) can testify against thee and the Devil too; who is the Author of these thy Horrid Lies.

And that their Preachers never lost Fifty Pounds, p. 57, is another notorious Lie; for I in particular, with many others, have lost many times more by Informers and Imprisonments.

Whereas F. B. is offended at my calling him so often Bugg, p. 59, 60, calling me thereupon Insolent and Imperious George. What's he then in calling me only Whitehead, and another Fox, and another Ellwood, and another Richardson? Was this Pride, Insolency or Imperiousness in him? If he says 'twas for Brevities sake, so sa [...] I, for I have often mentioned his Name at [...]engtr; but sometimes F. B. for Brevities sake. He has also told me he would not go a step to meet [Page] such a proud imperious Fellow, as in his Letter to me Dated Feb. 16th, 1693. Pray what Humility has F. B. shewn herein? And this is not all, but he thinks thereupon to debase me, by upbraiding me with my former Estate, saying, G. W. came amongst the Quakers, Anno 1652, a poor Boy about Fifteen or Sixteen Years old, travelling on foot, and hath so gathered up his Crumbs, though chiefly at other Mens Tables, that he scorns to call him that fed him and his Friends at his Table by his proper Name, p. 60.

Though he somewhat mistakes as to Time and Age, yet that Poverty I am not at all ashamed of; it was for Christ's sake that I was made low and poor: I was no whit behind F. B. in Education, though I was made willing to walk on foot, and deeply to suffer by Imprisonment, (as I did) and many other ways even in my young Years, wherein the Lord was with me, as he still is (I bless his Name.) And as for being fed at F. B's. Table, I think 'twas not very often, whether Three or Four Times I remember not; and I suppose it was not without some Invitations by him to his House: Didst not thou F. B. invite me to thy House sometimes? Surely it was not then intended to upbraid me in Print, with seeding at thy Table. Thou wast then more a Man, and of more Civility, 'tis pity thy Conversion to the Priests and Levites should so much deprive thee both of Compassion, Natural Affection and Civility: However since 'tis thy pleasure thus to [Page] upbraid me, I offer thee reasonable Satisfaction; let me have a true Bill how oft I have fed at thy Table, and what each Meal of mine comes to, according to the usual Rates of Ordinaries, and I will pay it, or cause Payment to thee, (God willing.)

To thy Six Charges against G. Whitehead.

1. A Publick Defamer.

I deny thy Charge, (the Terms thereof considered in the common and evil Sense,) But why a Publick Defamer? what because he writ that F. Bugg was turned Informer, a Self-Condemned Apostate? &c. The latter is largely proved against thee in my several Answers; as in Innocency against Envy. The contentious Apostate, &c. A Charitable Essay; and Innocency Triumphant.

And the first was also proved against thee in Judgment fixed, p. 225, 226, 227, 228. By thy informing the Magistrate against us, in thy Book of Christian Liberty pretended, accusing us with Impositions, a new stamped Government, comparing our Yearly Meeting in 1675, to the Popes Council of Jesuits and crafty Friars: And our Testimony then given concerning Mens and Womens Meetings, as if it had come from the Pope's Council, &c. upbraiding our Women's Meetings as an Idol of our own erecting, com [...]aring it to the Papists great Idol, viz. The Rood [...] Grace, as in thy De Chris. lib. 2d Part, p. 32, [...]8, 46, 47, Printed in 1682.

[Page]But to be accounted an Informer, as afore, said, F. B. takes very hardly, being in the time 1682, saying, he was one of the greatest Sufferer [...] by Informers in the whole Country. But F. B. was not thou about that time quarrelling with S▪ Cater, about the Fifteen Pound Fine? And pulling thy Neck out of the Collar, and winding thy self out of Sufferings? And was it such a great Crime to render thee an Informer, seeing what thou then writ against our Yearly Meeting, tended to render us as obnoxious as the Papists, like the Popes Council? &c. When 'tis well known, that in those Days; many of our Friends deeply suffered by Laws made against Popish Recusants, in Two Thirds of their Estates, and 20 l. per Month: Didst not tho [...] then deserve the Character of a Malicious Informer, in grosly aspersing us as aforesaid? [...] Wicked Man, is a Wicked Man, a Liar i [...] a Liar, a Forger is a Forger, a Persecutor is a Persecutor, and deserves his Characters.

2. A Wicked Forger.

I deny thy Charge again; Wherein a wicked Forger? What for saying F. Bugg affirms in hi [...] Book de Chris. lib. part 2d, p. 83. That Conformity is a Monster, &c. And yet in about Two Years after, he himself turned about and conformed? In answer to which, thou sayest, I am not the Author of one Word of that Page, bu [...] the whole Passage is a Query of John Ainsloe's beginning p 81, and ending p. 87.

[Page]But hold F. B. Jo. Ainsloe's Query begins not in p. 81, but in p. 82, and recited in p. 83, for p. 81, concludes with these Words, viz. I shall add one Query which J. A. put forth, to which I never heard that he had any Answer; and were not these thy Words Francis? And the Words a few Lines before in the same Page, viz. Error [...]oves obs [...]urity, for its Habitation is Darkness, and Ignorance is the Mother of its Devotion, and Conformity the Monstrous Womb that produced it, &c. And are not these thy Words Francis? and what difference pray between calling Conformity the Monstrous Womb, and Conformity a Monster? Is not a Monstrous Womb as bad as a Monster? What makes a Monster, but something Monstrous; and is not that which is Monstrous, a Monster?

Besides, thou hast appeared so much affected with Jo. Ainsloe's Query and Answer, that thou [...]ast taken some care to recite and print the [...]ame at large, without shewing any dislike to [...]t, but rather as a matter highly approved by [...]hee: So that thou didst espouse the same; and [...]hat he writ therein, thou madest thine by [...]doption. Thou appearing then of the sa [...]e [...]ud gment, why art now so shy of thy own A [...]opted Birth or Monster? Why didst not re [...]ct it at first, but hugg'd it so long?

3. A Wilful Liar.

That I am sure is false; for though I may ac [...]dentally mistake in some Circumstances, yet [...]ot a Wilful (nor witting) Liar: Thy pretended [Page] proof of this Charge, is the Conten. Apost. p. 3. viz. F. Bugg and his Company being go [...] into the Meeting before G. W. and into the Gallery. I grant there was an accidental Defect or Error happened in that Passage, I not being present to correct the Press, which was afterward corrected, as may be seen in my Sheet, The Cont. Apost. Recharg'd, p. 8. in these Words, viz. And Reader observe in the said Contentious Apostate, and his Blow refelled, p. 3. l. 11. to read [And he into the Gallery,] the word he being omitted, varies from the sense intended, though in some it was corrected after Printed, but in others omitted.

Now pray how will this prove G. W. a wilful Liar? F. Bugg can take small occasion to asperse. Therefore the defective Account, with the said omission of the Word [he] was neither wilfully nor maliciously sent abroad to render thee a Turbulent Disturber, as thou falsly sayest, p. 66. although thou wast very turbulent, and disturbed the whole Meeting, and that wilfully and wickedly, having like a Persecuting Informer, procured a Warrant and a Constable to cause the Persons met, forthwith to appear before some Justice of Peace, to answer an Information against the Meeting, because held under pretence of a Religious Worship, in different form from the Religion established in a place not licensed, &c. which disturbance being contrary to the intent of the Government. And afterwards thou falaciously excused this thy Turbulancy and Persecution, pretending [Page] thy getting a Justice's Warrant, was to the intent to get me to own my Book, Judgment fixed, N. Rom. unm. p. 53, when the Warrant was expressly grounded upon an Information of a Meeting, under pretence of Religious Worship, &c. And to cause the Persons met, to appear as aforesaid, to answer the Information. Now was not this like an Informer?

4. A Gross Perverter.

This I deny as a gross Lie, and his Instance, (though unfairly cited,) Is no proof thereof: 'Tis evident that the Instances Bugg brought in his Sheet, to prove the Quakers Contempt of Government, reviling Christ's Magistrates and Ministers, were out of E. Burr. Works, between the Year 1654, and 1659, which was in Cromwel's Days, against his Persecuting Magistrates and Ministers, whom E. B. testified against, because of their Persecution, and their Arbitrary Usurp'd Dominion over the Consciences of Men, p. 501. This is no Perversion, but true in fact. It was E. B's. reprehentions against them and their Corruptions, that Bugg did make the Quakers Contempt of Government, as more fully is made put in the Quakers Vindication, p. 3. And therefore I did not aggravate the Matter against him, by saying, to do us an ill turn, Bugg has at [...]nawares run his own Head against a Wall. What E. B. G. F. and G. R. writ to O. C. and that Government, it was not in favour to their Usurpation over Mens Consciences, Persecution, &c. and the Substance thereof is answered long since, [Page] in a Treatise Entituled, Christ's Lambs defended from Satan's Rage.

F. Bugg's Charge of Usurpation against the Quakers, p. 69, shews a great height of Malice and Bitterness, as well as gross Falshood and Perversion, and particularly his first Instance, viz. And that in divers respects: First, In that you Summons the Kings Subjects to meet Annually in London, by way of General Council or Con [...] ication, without any legal Warrant, Writ, or other Legal Authority; and when sat in Council in Devonshire-House, you make Laws, Edicts and Canons for the King's Subjects throughout England [...] observe, contrary and in direct opposition to those very Laws, Rules, &c. which the King and Parliament make at Westminster.

Pray observe, this seems a heavy Charge, as if F. B. had a Mind to hang us all, as well as to Pillory and Cage us. But here are several notorious Falshoods contained in these his Words, in divers respects. As First, that we Summons the King's Subjects; this is general, and without Exception too. Query, Who issues out Summon's for the King's Subjects? Secondly, And what Subjects are they? I know no such Summons, but in Free and Christian Agreement Our Yearly Meeting, (which has been of many Years standing, is innocently held for Religious Good and Christian Ends, in the Law of God and for Peace, good Order, Amity and Unit [...] in the Churches of Christ; that we may as God's People and Christian Society, be helpful and [Page] serviceable one to another in our Day. Thirdly, And this our Annual Meeting is of no such intent or design to be as a general Council or Convocation, to make Laws, Edicts or Canons for the Kings Subejcts throughout England to observe, in direct opposition to those of the King and Parliament, (as F. Bugg most malitiously suggests.) For First, We know no Laws, Edicts or Canons we have to make, either for the Kings Subjects, or for our selves, but to be helpful in the truth, and to stir up one another to faithfulness, to that Law and Testimony that God has given and made known to us, who is our Lawgiver.

But what is this Usurpation so highly charged against us? and what Laws and Edicts do we make? To this he bids us see our Yearly Epistle, May 1675, where (he saith), viz. In opposition to the Law the King and Parliament made, that [...]ou should not meet above Four, &c. You in opposition made a Law, that your People should neither [...]rsake, decline, nor remove their Meeting. This was one remarkable Instance of your justling with Authority, &c. [Thus far F. Bugg.] To make [...] look as odious and obnoxious to the Government, as his deadly Malice promp [...]s him. But he is mistaken for all's haste, for what he [...]ls a Law made by us in opposition to King and Parliament, we know no such Law made by us, [...]t an Antient, Apostolical and Christian Testimony and Exhortation, which our said Year-Meeting gave to our Friends; and which [Page] had been our Care and Practice from the beginning, viz.

That an open Testimony for the Lord should be borne, and a publick Standard for Truth and Righteousness, upheld in the power and Spirit of God, by our open and known Meetings, &c. The said Meeting giving Advice and Judgment, that all Friends gathered in the Name of Jesus, keep up those publick Testimonies, and not to decline, forsake or remove their publick Assemblies.

Whereby 'tis plain, that this Advice was given for no other end, than for their keeping their Publick Assembles for the Worship of God, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and very agreeable to the Holy Apostles Exhortation, not for saking the Assembling of your selves together, as the manner of some is.

And how proves F. Bugg, that this Advice was a Law made by our said Meeting, in opposition to the Law made by the King and Parliament? Has he not herein reflected upon the Government, and aspersed the King and Parliament? For where did they make a Law against publick Assemblies, gathered in the Name of Jesus Christ to worship God? How doth he prove the Laws made against Conventicles, or Seditious Meetings, under pretence of Religious Exercise, &c. were made against such Assemblies as met in the Name and Power of Christ Jesus, really to worship God in Spirit and Truth? for such were our Assemblies advised to be kept.

[Page]Another Instance Bugg has against us, That our Books be spread up and down the Nation, &c. And what Usurpation or Justling with Authority is this? Why not our Books be spread as well as his? And must he have all the liberty to spread his dirty Defaming Books, and we not have liberty to divulge Answers to them, to remove his [...]lumnies? That's very unfair and unjust. But he objects being unlicensed; that's not true of all our Books. (But who licensed his New Rome Arraign'd, with his Mock-Trial, Perjury and Pillory? Neither is it true, that they tend to defame both Clergy and Gentry, unless to publish the Persecution and Cruelty of some of the Clergy, be to defame both the Clergy and Gentry in general, That none should pay Tithes or Steeple-House Rates; are not the Words of our last Yearly Epistle which he also objects against. But that our Christian Testimony borne, and greatly suffered for, be faithfully maintained against t [...]: [...]his was not Advice to all the Kings Subjects, but to those that have a Testimony from the Lord against the Oppression of Tithes, as being thereof convinced in their own Consciences, that they might be faithful to that Testimony for Christ Jesus, who put an end to the Law and Priesthood that upheld the Tithes.

Which thou F. B. had once a Testimony against; but wast unfaithful, and turned thy back thereof. But farther, our Christian Testimony against Tithes, was neither Law, Edict, or Cannon [Page] of our own making; but what we received, and were perswaded of in Conscience, by the Light and Testimony of Jesus Christ from the begining.

That none should carry Guns in their Ships: This is perversly and mischievously worded by F. Bugg, and (in its being made a general Prohibition,) varies from the Words of our Yearly Meeting Epistle; and his Inference thereupon, is as Malicious and Mischievous, where he says, This shews that you are not content with your own ease, but as far as your Usurpation prevails, you weaken the Government, p. 70.

Whereas the Caution in our said Epistle was Tender and Christian, relating only to some Ship-Masters, reputed Quakers, who contrary to their former Principle and Practise, (and to the injury of their own Souls and Consciences, by their declension, and placing their Security in that which is altogether Insecure,) carry Guns, & [...] to [...]e endangering their own and others Lives, having let in Disobedience and Unbelief, 'Twas to such only the Caution was tenderly recommended, that they might be preserved through Faith and Confidence in the Arm and power of God, which is the greatest Security: Now I see not how this could be to weaken the Government, to have them thus preserved. 'Tis more like to be a weakening; for any such (by acting contrary to their Principle and Conscience, and letting in Unbelief,) to provoke God to deliver them up to their Enemy to be destroyed.

[Page]Let it be observed how tender and careful our said Yearly Meeting was in this very Matter, with respect both to our Christian Testimony, and the outward Government also, in the next following Passage which F. Bugg, has unfairly and disingeniously left out; and therefore 'tis here inserted, viz.

Dear Friends, you very well know our Christian Principle and Profession in this Matter, both with respect to God and Caesar, that because we are Subjects of Christ's Kingdom, which is not of this World, we cannot fight, Joh. 18. 36, Yet being Subjects of Caesar's Kingdom, we pay our Taxes, Tribute, &c. according to the Example of Christ and his Holy Apostles relating to Christ's Kingdom and Caesars, wherein we are careful not to offend, Mat. 17. 27. and 22. 20. Rom. 13▪ 6, 7. Being also very glad, and much satisfied in the many Testimonies given at this Meeting, of our Friends Innocency, quiet and peaceable Behaviour, under the outward Government, as becomes our Christian Principle and Profession.

Now the Reader may observe, that our Yearly Meetings Epistles, are not Laws and Edicts Imposed, but Epistles tenderly recommended to the Consciences and Christian care of our Friends only.

[Page]5. A False Glosser.

This also I deny, being not conscious to my self of false glossing in this, or any other instance he brings against me, viz. ‘The Quak. Vind. &c. p. 2. F. Bugg accuses somebody for objecting against paying of Tithes under the New Covenant, because abrogated by Christ, &c.’ On which he makes his Observation, That by this they, (i. e. the Quakers,) have condemned the Martyrs and all Christians, &c. As in his Sheet, p. 4. Whereupon he adds, viz. Observe this false Glosser; I did not say they condemn either Martyr or others, who did refuse Payment of Tithes; I neither said so, nor will my Words carry any such intendment. Rep. Neither did I charge thee with so saying; but that the Quakers have Condemned the Martyrs and all Christians, &c. (which makes no distinction.) And by what have they condemned them, but by denying to pay Tithes under the New Covenant, because abrogated by Christ. And how could this be a Condemning the Martyrs and all Christians in thy Sense, unless thou concludest they were all for the payment of Tithes? The Case is plain, I did no accuse thee with saying the Quakers condemned the Martyrs or others who refused the Payment of Tithes, but because in opposition [...] Tho. Ellwoods saying, [‘They who pay Tithes uphold a Legal Ceremony, abrogated by Christ; and thereby deny Christ to be con [...] in the Flesh.]’ Thou observed, by this th [...] have condemned the Martyrs and all Christian [Page] yea, Kings, Parliament and People, who pay or take Tythes. Now doth not this plainly imply, that the Martyrs and all Christians were for the payment of Tithes, if the Quakers Testimony against Tithes be a condemning the Martyrs and all Christians? I confess I cannot find how I am a false Glosser herein; and against thee F. B. in this I fairly objected, ‘That thy Observation was too general upon the Martyrs, for that both John Wickliff, William Swinderby, Walter Brute, William Thorpe, the Bohemians, with others mentioned in the Book of Martyrs and others, did bear Testimony against the Corruptions of the Popish Clergy, and against Tithes, and compelled Maintenance. (And were not these Martyrs Christians?) This was made a Principle Article against them by the Papists, as more largely appears in the first Volumn of Martyrs, in the Reigns of Richard the Second, Henry the Fourth, and Henry the Fifth.’

6. A Deceiver of the People.

This I also sincerely deny, as a false and malicious Aspersion cast upon me and my publick Ministry; it cannot reasonably be supposed to relate to any Personal or Circumstantial Mistakes, (if I have been under any,) but to my publick Ministry about Matters of Faith and Salvation; concerning which, I know him in whom I have believed, whose Divine Power and Goodness, hath preserved me from my [Page] Youth upward in sincerity towards him, whom I have sought from my Childhood; and therefore am not Conscious to my self of being a Deceiver of the People; for my Eye is to the power and Spirit of Jesus Christ, who hath made known unto me the word of Reconciliation, and made me a Living Witness of him, to the Consciences of many Thousands, (I bless God.)

And F. B's Instance, Judgment Fix'd Introd. if the Lord did not lay a necessity upon me, I should chuse to be mute, but the Lord has laid a necessity upon me, &c. And (what Proof is this of his Charge? Where's the Assumption?) I say so still, he has laid a necessity upon me to preach the Gospel, and to testify against Deceit, Envy and Wickedness; and I perceive not how this instance alledged agaisnt me, can be any colour of Proof for his Charge. Can my saying, The Lord has laid a necessity upon me, either to Preach or Write, prove that I am a Deceiver of the People? Doth not F. B. himself pretend the Assistance of God's Holy Spirit, in his New. Rom. Arraign. p. 46. But I am sure a contrary Spirit has assisted him, blown and pu [...]t him up in his reproaching, stigmatizing, calumniating and rendring odious and obnoxious a Peaceable People, and their Christian Testimony; for which the Righteous Judge of all will deal with him; and as for his Personal Detractions, Defamations, and bitter Calumnies [Page] cast upon me; as Wicked Forger, Wilful Liar, Gross Perverter, Publick Defamer, &c. I return them (as before) upon himself, and rejoyce in the Lord my God over them: And that I am counted worthy to suffer for his sake: For I esteem the Reproaches of Christ, greater Riches than the Glory of Egypt.

A FEW Gentle Reflections UPON T. C's Animadversions, (said to be Tho. Crisp's,) on George Whitehead's Book, Entituled [Innocency Triumphant.]

[Page]

TO evince the said T. C's Inadvertency and Impertinency, as well as Malice and outrage, in his unjustly Charging G. W. and his Abettors (or Friends) as proved guilty of Contempt of the Person of our Blessed Saviour, the Holy Scriptures and Governours, Perverseness and Falsehood, justly chargeable on himself in his undertaking to be an Advocate for Fr. Bugg in his Bad Cause, and gross Calumnies.

I finding a great part of T. C's Allegations against us to be taken upon trust from F. Bugg's Authority, and before answered in the foregoing [Page] Treatise, and divers other Answers; I shall need say the less to many of his impertinent and senseless Quarrels; but take notice chiefly of such as concern me, and those Friends whom he calls my Abettors, pursuant to his false Charge of being guilty of Contempt of the Person of our blessed Saviour (i. e. Jesus Christ,) and the Holy Scriptures, &c. which Charge (in good Conscience towards God, and his dear Son Jesus Christ our Mediator,) I sincerely deny and testify against in the first place, as contrary to my Christian Principle and Profession from my Youth upward. Howbeit to prove G. W's Partiality and Contempt of our Lord Jesus, T. C. saith, viz. I shall here insert some of G. K's. Doctrines, which G. W's. Creatures opposed, and about which chiefly the Difference was, which G. W. represents but as [pretended Fundamentals;] for says he, about some fundamental Doctrines, as is pretended by one Party. This is falsly represented and perverted against G. W. in the first Part, who did not represent those of G. K's Doctrin [...] mentioned, but as pretended Fundamentals; although T. C. has this falsehood pretended Fundamentals divers times over in his Introduction. Whereas my Words are [as is pretended by one Party,] relative to divers Accounts lately published in Print, of some [...]ate Divisions and Disputes about several Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith, (as is pretended by one Party,) which therefore, (at least some whereof,) I grant to be such, and do not call them pretended Fundamentals: [Page] But that the late Division is pretended to be about them, according as my Words are clear, in our small Treatise referred to, viz. The Christian Doctrine and Society of the People called Quakers, p. 1. one of which Fundamental Doctrines which he says G. W. represents but as pretended Fundamentals, is, That Christ is in Heaven in his glorified Nature of Man, Body and Soul, God and Man both; Introduction, p. 2.

And where have I contemned or opposed this Doctrine? How Inadvertent and unjust art thou T. C. in this? Do not I plainly declare in the same Treatise, p. 3, ‘That as Man Christ died for our Sins, rose again, and was received into Glory. And p. 5. That Christ's Body that was Crucified, by the power of God was raised from the Dead; and that the same Christ that was Crucified, ascended into Heaven and Glory, and that his Flesh saw no Corruption; it did not Corrupt But yet doubtless his Body was Changed into a more Glorious and Heavenly Condition than it was in when subject to divers Sufferings on Earth.’ &c. Where's now the Contempt of his Person? Mayst thou not be ashamed of thy false abusive Charge?

From my Saying the same Christ that was therein (i. e. in the Body, or Flesh,) Crucified, thou falsly inferrest, So then he that was nailed to the Cross and pierced, was not Christ, p. 24. Here thou quarrellest with the Apostles Doctrine and Language, 1 P [...]t. 3. 18. Being put to Death in [Page] the Flesh: And ch. 4. 1. Christ hath suffered for us in the Flesh. 1 John 4. 2. Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh: And 2 John 7. And many Deceivers are entred into the World, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh. Mark here, Christ suffered in the Flesh, and Jesus Christ come in the Flesh. Was this to deny him that suffered on the Cross to be Christ? or to Con [...]emn his Person? No sure. How sillily hast thou deduced many Inferences of this kind against us, as if thou wert minded to be Litigious?

Again, Thy inferring, That he who was nailed [...]o the Cross, was not Christ, but a Body, a Vail, a Garment, of an Earthly, Perishing Nature, p. 24. Here again thou pervertest and abusest us: Where did we ever say, that he who so suffered, was not Christ, but a Body, a Vail? &c. Seeing [...] was Christ that suffered in the Flesh, and his [...]esh was called the Vail, Heb. 10. What Contempt to Christ, or Denial of him was such Say [...]g? And where did ever any of us say, that [...]s Body that was nailed to the Cross, was of a [...]rishing Nature, seeing his Flesh saw no Cor [...]ption?

But thy great Offence is about I [...]. Pennington's [...]ords, viz. We can never call the Bodily Gar [...]t Christ, p. 26, &c. And what then? is this [...] Undervaluing or Contempt to Jesus Christ? [...]25. Is it not as true literally, as a Man's Gar [...]ent cannot be the Man himself that wears it? [...]d may it not be as true figuratively, as [Page] Christ's Flesh was the Vail? And that without any Contempt to him, his Body or Flesh called the Vail: Unless thou canst prove the Holy Apostle a Contemner thereof; who used the same Expression. He (i. e. Christ) hath Consecrated for us a new and living way, through the Vail, (i. e. his Flesh,) Heb. 10. 20. That Christ Jesus, as to his entire Existence or Being, doth not consist only of the Body or Flesh that was Crucified. Thou grants as much, not only in thy Confessing his Person as joyned to the Godhead, Power, Life and Soul, was called Jesus and the Saviour, p. 24. But also his being the Anointed, as well as the Anointing, p. 5. For Christ was before Abraham, and David in Spirit called him Lord, and he was that Spiritual Rock that all Israel drank of. As for excusing Errors and Contempt of our Lord Jesus, (falsly charged on J. P.) and being liable to be charged therewith, p. 26. I am not conscious to my self of so doing, by discovering his Intention, and by his own Explications of the Words objected against him, viz. As either that the Vail which was Christ's Flesh, or that the Bodily Garment we can never call the entire Christ, as intimated by his own Words, chiefly and in the first place Christ; as in one of his Questions.

'Tis strange that thou should shew so much Envy against that Innocent Man, as to charge him with Contempt of our Lord Jesus, who did more sincerely believe and confess him, both in Principle, Doctrine, Charity and Innocent Conversation, (than thou hast done) whose sincere [Page] Confession is also evinced against thy Brother F. Bugg. By the Term Vail, we neither undervalue Jesus, nor set his Light above himself, as is implied against us, p. 25. For though every degree of Divine Light in us, is of and from Christ Jesus, yet 'tis greater and more as in him, in whom the fulness is, as is more fully cleared in our said Treatise of our Christian Doctrine.

Concerning the Flesh of Christ being a Vail, Heb. 10. thou grants was in respect to Man, and so the Figure may be proper, as intended by the Apostle: If so then that Vail was not the entire Christ, though the Name was given both to his Soul and Body in Scripture, jointly and severally; if by the Term Flesh, be commonly understood the Person of our Lord Jesus, where then dost thou prove that the Quakers contemn the Flesh of Christ, considered either Spiritually or Litterally? And though the Person of Christ I find but once mentioned in Scripture, 2 Cor. 2. 10. from [...] in facie Christi vel Conspectu Christi, in the Face or Sight of Christ. Yet understanding thy meaning, I am not minded to quarrel with thee about Words and Terms.

To thy excusing F. Bugg's false Charge of Denying Jesus of Nazareth, against us, p. 25, I do not perceive thou canst make any good work of it upon his Instances, where he makes our confessing Christ in us, and witnessing him nearer us than at Jerusalem, (as J. Nayl [...]r did, &c.) to be a denying of Jesus of Nazareth, or confessing [Page] that Divine Principle (i. e. the Word, the Life or Spirit of Christ,) to be the Foundation Principle of Living Faith and Knowledge of Christ in his Spiritual Appearance in us. I cannot see how this can be a Denying of Jesus of Nazareth, any more than the Apostles preaching the Word of Faith nigh in the Heart, &c. However thou art chargeable with Bugg's Charge in this Case, which results in this Proposition, from his own pretended Proofs, viz. That to affirm Christ in us, or that which may be known of God in us, or Christ nearer us than Jerusalem, is to deny Jesus of Nazareth. Wilt thou stand to this Proposition yea or nay, according to Bugg's said Charge and Allegation, in his Sheet? If thou wilt, then it will appear who is in the Spirit of Anti-christ, G. W. or T. C. For whether is it not as much Anti-christian to deny Christ come in the Spirit, as to deny Christ come in the Flesh?

And for F. Bugg's Paper to the Parliament, thou grantest so far as it may affect any truly conscientious Quakers, its not well, and thou believest he would not damage such, p. 14. But how know'st thou that? When contrarywise like a Busie-Body in other Mens Matters, and malicious Incendiary, he did interpose with his inveterate Lying Pamplet to the Parliament, against the People called Quakers, even at that very interim when our Friends were petitioning the House of Commons for ease to the said People in general in case of Oaths. Did not this tend [Page] to obstruct favour being shewn them? With what Face or Conscience then canst thou say thou believest he would not damage Conscientious Quakers, when his Invective Pamphlet made no such distinction? For shame Man do not excuse such an act of apparent Malice and Intrusion, who also hast farther shewn how thou dost second Bugg in Malice and Partiality, where thou sayest Liberty of Conscience is but just and reasonable, for such as are truly conscientious, if they could be truly distinguished from G. W. and some such as he is; the opportunity G. W. may have thereby, may be of ill consequence, p. 14. Here thou shewest thy self offended at G. W. and his Friends; having that Liberty, 'tis well thy Horns are short, that thou hast not power to ruin us, but only to bark, and hiss and grin at us Thy Mercy would be that of the Wicked, which is Cruelty; and thou shews what thou wouldst be at, namely, to incense the Government against us, about our Marriages, and Non-payment of Tithes; the latter thou art greatly concerned about, for Liberty of Conscience (forsooth) for the free Payment of them, p. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. And who hinders such whose Consciences are for the Payment of them, if there be any such? But we [...]now very few beside thy self, who alledge Conscience, but rather Compulsion for the Payment thereof. And therefore thy Charge of Reflections on the Laws and Government of the Nation, and of Pride and Insolence, and deserves the [Page] Cognizance of the Ministers of State, p. 15. and Contempt of the Government, with much more of such inveterate Consequences against us about this case of Tithes; all this is a great indication of Malice, Rage and Revenge more than Reason on thy part; the Civil Government need not thee to be an Informer and Instigator therein against us, either because of our Non-payment of Tithes, or our Christian Testimony against them: For it is a Case well known to the Government ever since we were a People, and many of them have so much Charity, (much more than thou hast) as to believe it is not in Contempt to the Government of the Nation, that we refuse the payment of Tithes, but purely because it is a matter of Conscience to us, as our deep Sufferings, Imprisonments and Sequestrations on that account de demonstrate whether our Consciences be rightly informed or no in that Case. However 'tis an easier matter for T. C. to rail against us, and to villi [...] those among us that have given Testimony and Reasons in print, against the Impositions o [...] Tithes in this Gospel Day, than for him to answer or refute such Reasons. Why does he no answer T. Ellwood? Besides his supposing that a there were Tithes before the Law, so he know not but that there may be, after that Law [...] abolished, p. 19. And who then abolished tha [...] Law that gave the Priesthood a right to tak [...] them? if that Law was of Divine Authority it must be abolished by Divine Authority, an [...] [Page] one had that Divine Authority to abolish them [...]ut Christ. Therefore it was by his Divine [...]uthority they were abolished. Now then it [...]emains for T. C. either to prove that Christ re [...]ewed the Law for Tithes, or bring an Authority above his, to enforce Tithes again. But presume he'll not attempt either of these. consequently he does not refute what he cites against Tho. Ellwood, by his [I know not but [...]ere may be,] viz. ‘That they who pay Tithes, uphold a Legal Ceremony, abrogated by Christ, and thereby deny Christ to be come in the Flesh, which is a mark of Anti-Christ.’ And whereas T. C. takes up F. Bugg's Objection, viz. That by this they have con [...]mned the Martyrs, and all Christendom, Kings, [...]rliament and People, who pay or take Tithes; a [...]inst which, I objected his Observation is too [...]neral upon the Martyrs, because some did [...]ar Testimony against Tythes. Hereupon C. chargeth me with being very fallacious, [...]d with wilful wickedness; and why so? [...]his is very harsh;) for saith he, F. B. doth [...]t say all without Exception. But I say his [...]ords are general, that by this the Quakers [...] condemned the Martyrs, as well as all [...]ristendom: And by what? but by their Te [...]mony against the Payment of Tythes, be [...]se 'tis in opposition to Christ's Abrogation. [...]r the Words who pay or take Tythes, cannot be [...]ative to any of the Deceased Martyrs, for [...]y can neither pay nor take Tythes; and [Page] therefore if Bugg had intended an Exception of the Martyrs who denied Tithes, he should have said, they have condemned such, or so many of the Martyrs who have paid or taken Tithes; for who do pay or take Tythes, is in presenti, and not in preterito: The matter seriously considered I must needs look upon T. C. to be very uncharitable, in deeming me fallacious and wilfully wicked in this point. And I am still confirmed in my Consequence upon F. Bugg's Observation against our seeking Favour of the Government, viz. So that if we cannot for Conscience sake pay Tithes, he will not allow us any favour of the Government, if his uncharitable Attempts may take effect: And I do not find how T. C. can invalid this Consequence, by his excusing Bugg, in saying, viz. ‘And not as G. W. would wickedly insinuate, that if any cannot for Conscience sake pay Tithes, they should have no favour. No, no, such uncharitable Sentences are to [...] near of kin to G. W's. own Spirit, to come from F. B. far be it from him, I dare say it never entre [...] into his Heart, such an uncharitable Though [...] p. 17.’

To the first part, I answer the very Instanc [...] which F. Bugg and T. C. chiefly strike at in thi [...] point, viz. [That Tythes are abrogated b [...] Christ, and the Payment thereof a Denial o [...] his coming in the Flesh and Antichristian,] [...] a plain Indication, that 'tis for Conscience sake they (that are truly Conscientious and Faithfu [...] among us) cannot pay them. And their believing [Page] they are abrogated by Christ, and therefore [...]e Payment thereof, a denying him to be come in [...]e Flesh, is the greater Argument of their be [...]g conscientious to Christ, in refusing to pay [...]em. And therefore F. B's opposing our ha [...]ng Favour, tended to affect the most Tender [...]nd Conscientious among us. And 'tis not T. C's. [...]o, No, that will excuse him, nor his daring to [...]y such an Uncharitable Thought never entred [...]B's Heart, that will clear either of them from [...]ncharitableness towards us in this point. What profound, heart-seeing Judge hast thou T. C. [...]ade thy self herein? it seems very high Pre [...]mption in thee, (but without Probation,) thus acquit thy Brother Bugg's Malicious Heart, [...]en from Uncharitable Thoughts, as if he [...]ere arrived to a very high pitch of Perfection [...]ove thy self, who confessest thy self to be an [...]perfect, Fallible Sinner in thy Imrod. And no [...]ubt as Fallible in this thy profound Judgment [...]d Vindication on thy Brother Bugg's Heart. [...]nd as Fallible and Sinful thou appearest in [...]ondemning G. W. as wicked, and his Spirit as [...]t the Spirit of Christ; and that upon a strange, [...]esumptuous, and severe Exercration upon thy [...]lf, in thy following Words, viz. p. 5, 6.

I have here taken notice of but some of G. W's. [...]ess, that by the Fruit he brings forth, you [...]ay be capable of judging into what Root he is graft [...] [...]; and I am so well satisfied that his Spirit is not [...]e Spirit of Christ, nor he (as he falsly pretends) a [...]stant Servant of Christ, that I do now in coolness [Page] and not in heat of Passion, give him and his wicke [...] Abettors that advantage to improve their Intere [...] and Power therewith, (i. e. the Spirit of Christ, against me, that I may end my Days in Infamy, [...] an Example to others, if his Spirit be that [...] Christs. [Thus far thou T. C].

Now observe here what a fearful Execratio [...] or Curse thou hast conditionally denounced against thy self, (resembling that Oath, God do [...] to me and much more, if, &c. 1 Sam. 20. 1 [...] 2 Sam. 3. 35. 1 King. 2. 23.) and appears no le [...] than an Oath of Cursing in a high degree, an [...] all to prove G. W. wicked, not led by the Spirit [...] Christ, nor a Servant of Christ. For if he [...] so, or his Spirit be of Christ, then with t [...] Spirit of Christ we may improve our Intere [...] and power against thee; and so, as that thou may end thy Days in Infamy, as an Example, &c. Th [...] this be no proof at all against G. W's. Spiri [...] but rather the contrary, that thou art not [...] a Christian Spirit, nor led by the Spirit [...] Christ, (who forbids all Swearing, and co [...] mends Blessing and not Cursing) by thy volu [...] tary bringing thy self under such an Oath [...] Execration; yet the Spirit of Christ in us, not willing thou shouldest perish or dye und [...] thy own Curse, though thou hast reason to fe [...] it's coming upon thee for thy great Envy, a [...] horrible Presumption herein, if thou dost n [...] Repent.

SOME BRIEF REMARKS ON T. C's. BOOK.

[Page]

MY testifying against F. B's. Seditious Treatment, as thereby endeavouring [...]o incense the Government, and stir up the Mobb [...]gainst us, as being New Rome, Perjured Per [...]ons, &c. proves not me Seditious, as is falsly re [...]orted, p. 9. unless T. C. will own himself Se [...]itious, by the same Argument, because he ac [...]uses G. W. to be guilty thereof. Yet Buggs. [...]eigned Pillory, T. C. confesseth was not well don'e [...]ut then to extenuate and excuse F. B's Crime, [...]e places it on high Provocations, &c. telling [...]s Oppression may cause a Wise Man to err, p. 9. [...] seems he would not have him rendred Mad, [...]o' his Mock-Trial and Pillory, was no small [Page] piece of Madness. But is this all the Judgment and Condemnation T. C. has to give against Bugg's cruel Mocking and gross Forgery, in his Mock Trial, and Condemnation of Honest Men to Perjury and Pillory; which appeared no other than the Tragedy of a furious Incendiary and Persecutor, and a work of Envy, Outrage and Scandal to incense the Government and Mobb against us? which to testifie against, could not be seditious on our parts, as T. C. mistakes in his Inference.

On that Saying his Flesh is a Figure, p. 26. The form of a Servant, and Fashion of a Man, are of the same Import, [...], Phil. 2, 6, 7. and not in Contempt given to Christ. Where is the Term Flesh, understood the Person of [...]ur Lord Jesus? Where did J. P. say that the Fles [...] or Body of Christ, is of an Earthly, Perishing Nature, p. 27. though ours be?

I am not convicted of acquitting the Guilty, [...] accusing the Innocent, by inverting F. B's. A [...]gument against J. Pennington upon himself, viz▪ Now if he (to wit Christ) took ours, and ours [...]e a perishing nature, ergo his was perishing, or it w [...] not ours, (Quoth F. B.) This being spoken o [...] Christ's Flesh and Blood, 'tis apparent F. [...] run into the same Error he falsly accuses J [...] with; for he cannot deny that Christ took up [...] him the Flesh and Blood of our Nature, H [...] 2. 14. And that ours is perishing. When [...] F. B's. Consequence is, Ergo, his was perishing, [...] it was not o [...]rs, thereby he plainly has in [...]e [...]re [...] [Page] Christ's Flesh and Flood to be of a perishing Nature. And thou T. C. canst not wind him out of this Snare, nor make F. Bugg innocent or sound in his Logick; against which I excepted, viz. I deny his Ergo, though our Flesh be perishing as in us, it was not perishing when assumed by him: See Innocency Triumph. p. 23, 24.

How far the Name of Christ belongs to every Member, but chiefly to him the Head, is fully demonstrated in my Charitable Essay, p. 4. which thou dost not Answer but quarrelest impertinently.

Where dost thou prove that the Person of our Lord Jesus consists of Flesh, if none do oppose his Flesh or Body, to his Soul or Life? (as thou sayest,) p. 26.

Thou wouldst know where the Flesh of Christ as distinguished from his Life and Soul, is called Christ in Scripture, p. 28.

Answ. 'T was Christ that died, but how? as to his Flesh, not as to his Soul or Spirit.

That the Person Jesus of Nazareth, we do not exclude or deny to be Christ, p. 29. If by Person, thou meanest both Soul and Body, he being a Compleat Saviour.

Qu. 1. Can the Bodily Garment taken literally, be called Christ?

2. And is a Person made up of Body or Flesh only?

3. What is a Person truly and properly? Though [Him] is sometimes given to the [Page] Body, yet more properly to the Son of God, for whom it was prepared, or to the entire Christ.

I know no Contemptuous Speeches, or Expressions of our Lord Jesus, or Scriptures excused, p. 12. 29. consequently much less owned by me. And though I have evinced J. P's. meaning, on his Words reflected on about the Body or Flesh of Christ; it follows not that I thereby make his Expressions mine, seeing I note them as his. I may see cause otherwise to word the Matter, and yet our Intentions be the same. We have not the same Expressions and Utterance in all Cases, and yet may aim at, and mean the same thing, but never to Contemn our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, (or the Holy Scriptures which testifie of him,) in any respect, far be it from us so to do. Therefore T. C. has grosly wronged and misrepresented us in these Matters, with many more Perversions, Lies and Scandals in his Pamphlet than are here recited, for which I wish his Repentance before he dies.

What Terms were intended to G. Fox, where his Name is not mentioned? p. 29.

Dost thou ground this on Bugg's Charge, that our Prophets called him the Branch, the Star, the Sun of Righteousness, and put the North of England, for the Town of Bethlehem; as in his New Rom. [...]n [...]sk. Epist. to Ber. and p. 81? If thou dost, thou hast espoused a shameful Lye, before detected, that our Testimony against T [...]thes [Page] should be maintained, p. 30. is not a Law of our own making, but of Christ's; and we are Conscientious in observing of it.

And to thy Question about (our boldness for [...]ur Testimony in that Case,) what may be expected from them, (that is the Quakers), when they have [...]ower? p, 18.

Answ. It may be expected that they will take [...]way the Burthen of Tythes and forced Maintenance, and leave all People free to maintain their own Ministers. And what hurt should we [...]o therein pray?

Qu. Who termed G. F. the great Apostle of Jesus Christ? p. 30. He was a great Apostle [...]f Jesus Christ, Ergo, not Jesus Christ, as some [...]ave aspersed us with Blasphemy. But he might [...] eminently instrumental in Jesus Christ, as a [...]reat Apostle of his, endued with Life, Strength [...]d Power from above, for the Converting [...], and strengthning many in the Faith: And [...] believe J. C. and J. A. meant no other of [...]. F. but as eminently Instrumental in Christ Jesus, whose Servant, Minister and Apostle he [...]as.

Thou fallaciously beggest the Question, in [...]lieving those High Titles of the Branch and [...]e Star, were intended to G. F. p. 30, as thy [...]rother Bugg most falsly accused and defamed [...], (for Denying▪) with Perjury and Pillory: [...]s a bad Cause thou abette [...], for which the [...] Jadge of all, will judge thee.

[Page]If true Prayer and Praise to God by the Spirit of Christ in his Saints be as Living Sacrifices, how much more his Spirit and Life, which is the Cause of such Sacrifice?

Where provest thou that those Names an [...] Terms thou sayest were H [...]llish and H [...]ll-f [...]ch [...] were given by any of us to true Ministers, [...] to Christ's Ministers, as thy Brother Bugg h [...] accused us?

That F. B. gives us all the ill Names he c [...] p. 32. I meant all the worst of Names, as N [...] Rome, Impostors, Cowards, Sophisters, a pack [...] False Witnesses, and Perjured Persons, and th [...] Simon Magus never exceeded these Impost [...] Were not these as ill Names as he could gi [...] us? What worse than Impostors and Sorcer [...] as Simon Magus was? canst thou give us worse?

P. 35, 36. The Expressions charged as [...] Contempt of Christ's Person, set in opposition [...] Scripture Testimonies, seem to be taken b [...] on trust from Fr. Bugg, and out of his N [...] Rome, &c. and mostly answered; and I doubt not but our Friends Books out of which th [...] were taken, would clear themselves, if impartially examined.

T. C's. Charge against the Quakers amo [...] to this, that they undervalue and con [...]em [...] [...] Body of Christ, the Flesh of Christ, the Pers [...]n Christ, and the [...]a [...] Christ Jesus himself, p. 37. & [...] Which is all a gross and great Slander a [...]a [...] us, for which Jesus Christ will judge thee T. [...] ▪

[Page]As also a Notorious Falshood that G. W. in his little Book, p. 5. doth implicitly deny Christ's Bodily Ascension, p. 37. I have confess'd the contrary, viz. That the same Christ that was Crucified, visibly ascended, &c,

Thou finally appealest to the Impartial Reader, whether there be not great cause for Suspicion, that we contemn and slight our ever Blessed Lord Jesus, the Scriptures and Governours? And what Cause or Ground of Suspicion hast thou for these Ca [...]umies? with Bugg's Exceptions, and thy impertinent Quarrels, which we accept not for any Probations. Now thy great Charge is turned to Suspicion: For shame give over such Envious, Trifling, Doting, Shatter-headed, Confused Work? And do not thus mispend thy little remaining precious time with such abusive peevish Quarrels and Calumnies against the Innocent and Peaceful, who ows thee no ill [...]il. What Injury have either G. Fox, Isaac Pennington, George Whitehead, or Tho. Ell [...]oad done thee, that thou art so peevish and bitter against them?

THE END

Information about this book

Title statement

The counterfeit convert, a scandal to Christianity and his unjustly opposing Quakerism to Christianity justly reprehended : and the true Christ, and Holy Scripures [sic] confessed by the Quakers : in opposition to two scandalous books falsly styled I. Quakerism withering, and Christianity reviving, II. Animadversions on G. Whitehead's book, Innocency triumphant.

Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.

Edition statement

1694

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2005-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A65860

ID [STC]

Wing W1922

ID [STC]

ESTC R38605

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

17806842

ID [OCLC]

ocm 17806842

ID [VID]

106641

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A65860)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 106641)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1109:15)

Source

— The counterfeit convert, a scandal to Christianity and his unjustly opposing Quakerism to Christianity justly reprehended : and the true Christ, and Holy Scripures [sic] confessed by the Quakers : in opposition to two scandalous books falsly styled I. Quakerism withering, and Christianity reviving, II. Animadversions on G. Whitehead's book, Innocency triumphant., Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723..

Extent

[16], 75 p.

Printed and sold by T. Sowle ...,. London :: 1694.. (Preface signed: George Whitehead.) (Error in paging: p. 63 misprinted 64.) (Reproduction of original in the Cambridge University Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.