PREPARE thy Ears, Reader, to hear Legions instead of Hi­story, and Fables, as prodigi­ous as those in Father Cressy's Church-History, both fit to be lookt into these Winter Evenings, when Stories are most acceptable for Merriments sake: Mabomet was but little skill'd in this [Page 14]trick when on the back of his Elborae he rode up to Heaven, receiv'd the Law, and came back again: By the way, I have it from good hands, that Dr. Pocock averr'd, That the story of the Dove in his Bar, was a Fables, that be found the Turks knew nothing of it; and that Grotius' confest to [...] he look up the story only oncommon some.

Cressey makes no bones of Miracles by a Parenthesis (Who was raised from the Dead) Jacob Beoman and Muggle­ton, had their Lying Wonders, and all to prove their contrary Messages from God, foretold 2 Thess. 2.9. But the greatest wonder was, That these Im­postors were regarded; a Distempe­red Body and Mind, may make Men imagine strange things A late Au­thor of more wit than Honesty, in his Interest of Reason in matters of Religion; seems much to doubt, When or M [...]ho­met knew himself to le [...]an Imposter, but having the Falling-Sickness, did think the Angel Gabriel did appear to him, &c. What shall we then think of the story of Sergius the Monk, and his Indoctri­nating his Young Pupil, who never [Page 15]knew Letters? For Popish Miracles, I believe the Rosary, scattered up and down at Hounslow-Heath (where only King James appear'd as a Man of Va­lour) did more good against Popery, than all the Learned Tracts of Bishop Tillotson, and Bishop Saillingfleet, tho' all were as gravely [...]old as Fox's Jour­nal, full of Heresies, Lying Wonders done in a Corner, Revilings; what passa­ges were for Oliver and against the Stuarts, are left out; so those words, G. F. the Son of God: Did not the Pro­phets words continue the same in all Changes? yet this was the man who was call'd, as Simon Magus, The Migh­ty Power of God; but his Wickedness was so great in pretending to bring contrary Messages from the Lord, that Thousands of Quakers abhorr'd and disown'd him as a Deceiver, &c.

Mr. Penn, in his large Preface, says, The Quakers declar'd, a Perfection from Sin, but held not a Perfection in Wisdome and Glory in this Life: Well, Friends had once no Sin, whatever they have of late; the Ranters, from whom they came and derived some pure Principles, [Page 16]thought Drunkenness no sin, nor Un­cleanness, for there could be no Adul­tery among those old Friends, for Adulterium quasi ad alterum; and that was impracticable among them, for they were Corpus Ʋnum.

But Oh! the Wonderful Humility and Modesty of Mr. Penn, that Con­fesseth, They be not so Wise and Glorious as they in Heaven: No truly, not many of them so wise as those accounted here on Earth; not Wise, but Other­wise.

Mr. Penn tells us, G. Fox on a high Mountain in York-shire, had a Vision, He saw People as thick as motes in the Sun, that should in time be brought home to the Lord: Many, saith he, had Con­vincements, who are now at Rest, Tho­mas Salthouse, James Naylor, &c. Well, whoever had Convincements, it is doubted, by Thousands of Qua­kers and others, whether William Penn had ever any Convincements, except of the Folly of this People, and how soon he might take the Chair, when George was gone, and play King or Pope with this Ignorant Tribe: What [Page 17]is James Naylor honoured by him; that unheard of piece of Blasphemy, whom many Quakers cannot endure to hear of? I knew a Man born in the same Town with him, who told me, How all began with Spiritual Pride; after be was a great Repeater of Sermons, be would hear no more, he knew enough, &c. What if Friends should come to Mr. Penn, or Benjamin Coole, or others, in the name of the Lord, to lay aside their Perriwigs; would they obey? No, no, but laugh at it: How can they then expect that others should on these pre­tences, throw away the Ordinances of Christ? Richard Richardson, a great Quaker, hath written a Book against Perriwigs, how Condemned they are by Sober Heathens, Antient Christians, &c. at last he tells us, How John Mulliner, (a Friend) about Northampton, was made to leave that Trade, and to burn one of his Porriwigs before his Servants; that John Hall, a great Man sitting in a Meeting, was shaken by the Lords Power, and so pull'd off his Perriwig, and threw it away: Now were not these Inspired? What means the New Colledge to teach In­spired [Page 18]Persons to Preach, &c. Did not our Preface-Maker threaten Frends, If such orders of his were not observed, to break their Meetings, though he seems to write so zealously for the sufficiency of the Light in Man, &c.

MY Learning is talk'd of by this Man, to make Trophies for his Victory, yet it seems my Argu­ments are light; If by light, said one in the like case, you mean clear, I wonder you cannot see them; if by light you mean trivial, I wonder you cannot answer them. I thought I had in my first Book so smitten the Quakers, that I need not to have smitten them a second time.

Because Repetitions are tedious, es­pecially of Impertinencies, I shall not trouble you with many of his words; neither shall I actum agere of what is my own.

I see I have so broken their Teeth [Page 42]that they cannot bite, though they can bark.

This Man of impotent malice, hav­ing lost his reason, falls a Raving and Lying prodigiously beyond all Men, as shall be proved: I had taken no notice of him, nor W. C. the Church-man, had it not been for my foregoing work, being the seeblest Adversaries I ever had. Reader, know for the venerati­on this man and some few more seem to pretend to for the Scripture, it is nothing; they deny it to be the word of God any more than their own Books, which are Writings of Truth.

Are they good subjects that deny King William to be Lawful King of England, because they grant him lawful Prince of Orange? As vast a difference is there between the light of Nature, and that of Scripture, as between the light of a Glow-worm, and the light of the Moon in the Night time

I brought a writ of Error against the Quakers, and see how frantick they grow; their Errors are so many, that if one should ask a Quaker, What is thy Name? instead of the blasphemous [Page 43]answer of one, my name is, I am; he might reply in the words of the De­monaick in the Gospel, to Jesus, Legion, for we are many; ask their Principles, one tells you one thing, & another another, and all from the same Infallible Spirit; nay, the same man shall transform him­self into several shapes; they cannot stand before Scripture or Reason; when the Sun appears, the night of Bats and Owls is come.

I profess my self to be ashamed to meddle with this Accuser, who is so Infamous for Lying, that all the world can confute him: The Papists in their Casulstical Writing, have asserted, It was lawful for a Priest, if suspected and taken, to say or swear it before a Justice of Peace or a Judge.

Quest. Are you a Priest?

Answ. No, that is of Bacchus or any Pagan God.

Quest. Did you ever read Mass?

Answ. No, that is not with a design to tell you of it. &c

They can deny at the place of Exe­cution any Treason or Murther, and say they are as innocent as the Child [Page 44]to Night born: Why? because for­footh, they have been since absolv'd; nay, if occasion be, that they dyè Protestants too; that is, they protest again? the rie­resies of the times.

It was well said of Mr. Mead the true English-man, in the late Reign to his Immortal Honour) when Sir D. C. told him of the Quakers Knwery about five years since in Brislot, in cheating the King (a piece of Roguery too long to relate) the men chosen, as the best of them, by his Majesty's order, to decide the matter, were so vile, that he said, thou hast them upon the hip, spare not a man of them. — B. C. i [...] a Fox­onian Quaker, Ideal with him as such; not a separate Quaker, these roundly answered to Dr. Lancasters Questions (Bp. of Londons Ciraplain) about Christ, &c. when the Foxonians did it sophistically; the Separate ones an­swer'd well to alltl equestions from Phi­ladelphia in Pensilvania, when the Foxo­nian ones there refused to do it; they swallow all that Fox once said, and now Penn, without chewing: To Revile and Curie is Common; Oh! what pu­putridstinking [Page 45]words come from the mouths of the pretenders to Pure Breathings?

No doubt when some of the Qua­kers, Fellow-Heathen in America, hear their hard character of the best Mini­sters with us, they think we are like Canabals, or like Infernal Fiends.

Some when they drank of the old doctrine of Christianity, desired not their new. 5 Luke 39. but said as he of the wine, The Old is better.

Deism is now a thriving weed in England, and Quakerisin is of kin to it. The Deist (observe) and Quakers are very friendly one to another: how writes Mr. Nor is of Love to God as Creator, Benefactor; Why not Redeemer? I have been ask'd the question, Is be a Deist? I do not say he is; this is he that hath written so favourably of the Quakers to his perpetual shame.

I am informed, the Quakers Preach more a crucified Christ within a year or two, then ever they have done this thirty year. Well, G. Keith, and other Reformed Quakers, have taught them to speak well, but have they yet taught them to think or believe well? They [Page 46]say no, All but meer Tricks: Ignoramus Whitehead now Preacheth, Christs Body is in Heaven that was once in the Grave. Well, if you be Inspired Persons now, you were Impostors once.

Now for some of B. C's Assertions, the naming of which is enough, or more than enough for any that have read my Quakers Impostors or Apoststes, proved from their Avowed Principles and contra­ry Practises. he saith, That he found not Truth or Serse till be came ro p, 62. of that Book. That the Bristol Quakers ne­ver left their meeting in the last Persecuti­on unless when Sick, &c. not Lawrence Steel, or others. That the Quakers gene­rally bow not to men, &c. That George Whitehead and William Penn did ever hear their open Testimoney, that in my bro [...] I grant the Quakers are more just than others, and careful not to tell a Lye. That I plead for Lying as a Lawful thing.

That I bring 2 Tim. 15. When I call to mind the unfeigned faith that dwelt in thy Grandmother Lois, &c. as a place of scripture for playing at Bowles and Nine­pins: These and many more things, I dare be bold to say, He knows all to be [Page 47]false. He must have a face of brass that asserts this. No wonder Quakers cry shame, and Mr Penn sent me so civil a Message to disown his being concerned since the Cry about it. This man hath cut the throat of their cause. If I prove they Bow, I prove them Apostates, on this mans Confession; then Penn is an Apo­state; and the Quakers so, and B. C. himself so, and that since he wrote this Book, as well as before, as Qua­kers themselves confess.

Other things I shall Reply to; That I had a fit of Love Mell ancholy, made my Confessions, and put up in a Mad­house BOX. Hence I am call'd what he pleas'd times without number; as he had this from the Devil, so I sup­pose W. C. from his Book: if this be false, if I never was one hour in any such place, What Defamers are these? Who shall believe any thing on their Evidence? as all my Friends and Ene­mies too, acquainted with me, know these stories to be some of the most Im­pudent Falshoods that ever were writ­ten, as I declare they are, and I never heard the stories till now; so I say, as [Page 48]the Epistle, I will give Five Pounds to any man that shall prove it. I hope no Ministers, for my sake, will regard what these Monsters, not Men, say of them, and People not Regard.

That R. V. denies, That be corfessed to me, their Minds were changed, about leaving the place of Publick Worship in time of Persecution. That Monsieur Whitehead, denies he expounded So­lomon's Fool for a Holy Man. Whoso is Simple, Prov. 9.4. Give me any form of Words as an Oath or Protesta­tion before God, I will use them, That I heard both these two things with my own Ears; the Cretians are alway Lyars, and so are the Quakers. Should I say, I this day saw a Quaker carryed along Drunk by six Men, holding his Hands, Legs, Body, that I never saw none so carry­ed but he, I care not for their denying, when so many Spectators know it True. That he knows not the story of the 40 days Fast, &c. Never heard von of Mrs. C. of Plymouth? if her husband A. be alive, let him thank you, not me, you force me to it; I care [Page 49]not to mention names, for reason-mentioned in that Book.

That W. P. denies the story of Mr. Nicholet whom he caused to be turned out of his place for Licensing a Book against Popery, in the Reign of K. James the 2d. Why had not Mr. Penn gotten this under Mr. Nicholet's, own Hand? Let him yet do it, it much concerns him; No, no, his guilty Consci­ence keeps him from desiring it, & Mr. Nicholets honesty & credit from doing it. That I say, I have [...] me, yet I write what I have read and heard. Every Child, B. C. excepted, would know the sease of this; Did any one think, tho I am far from my Study and friends, I must forget all that ever I read and heard too?

That I said, I would not propose a Que­stion to William Pnen, and yet did, about not serving Protestant but Popish Kings in Wars, when the sense is plain, I pro­posed it not for an Answer to me, he be­ing suspected to be no small Jacobite. And now the Guas road, Chimpuden & Falshood: The Lake for the Lyar, and the Lyar for the Lake, &c. But what is for thee [Page 50]B. C. thou impudent Publisher of so ma­ny notorious Untruths? nay, no and of them: as that I wrong the Quakers, to charge them with denying Scripture to be a Rule: Judge all men, Quakers themselves; That to pray in Families and alone, is the known practise of Quakers, &c. must be a notorious Untruth or Equivocation: What is it the Old shift, mental Prayer? no friend C. that is al­most gone too. Seeing you so provoke me about Barclay, others remember the Words as well as I; & I declare, He was once a Papist and served the Priest at the High Al [...]: I am ready to prove his Confession of this, where, and to whom, had my challenge been accept­ed of: I am a Hundred Miles from my Study, I think it not worth while to go to Cullington to carry your Answer, who hast out done all men in Lying, by telling me in Print, that Quakers ge­nerally bow not to men; What will you say as one, We bow not, but give a civil N [...]d? Well, the Civil Nod was once called Bowing and condemned to man, as due only to God, and all in the name of the Lord.

I am not bound to follow thee B. C. in thy large discourse to make up som­thing about Baptism and the Lords Supper; only was not 1 Cor. 1.14 &c. a notable place to prove it is out of door to Baptise, when Paul nameth whom he Baptized did he go beyond his Commission? or acted he not ac­cording to Mat. 28.19, 20. He gives the reason why he was glad he Bapti­zed no more, Iesi any should say I Bap­tized in my own name? for some said, I am of Paul: Christ sint him not to Baptise, as his principal Work, for that was to preace the Gospel; Like That, Labour not for the most t [...] perisheth (not so much, or not in comparison) but for that which endures to Eternal Life, Labouring for food that perisheth, is so far from being a sin, it is a great Duty in all, and the neglect a great sin against the Law of God and Nature. Mat. 28.19 must be of water baptism, for man cannot baptise with the Spirit.

For the Syllogisme B. C. lays down (once condemned by the Infailible Spirit as a Heathenish Custome, hate­ful to a Christian) how knows he the Apostles Baptized not acording to the [Page 52]Form, Mat 28.1, because we read not so; besides,

What if Christs Words be not a necessary form to be then Used; they that preach in the name of God and Christ, may do it without naming this in so many words, I determine not now but confute his Argument; the Lords Supper they Say, they need not; the Substance is come to them; you wick­ed and Ungodly Wretches was not the Substance come to Paul, and other Saints at that time: what Substance is come to you you Prayerless World­ly Creatures?

Now how can this Man call his Idle Tale an Answer? might I not have expected my Questions to W. Pean to be considered in Order?

Q. 1. About Perfection. What I say of Job, Asa, Paul, None of my reasons here are considered; if the Doctrine of Perfection be not True, they were Imposters, if True, Apostates, for they now Confess, They are not Perfect; then say I of the Devil, for so they once said to us.

Q. 2. Of G. Bishop's Lookings Glass, if [Page 53]way of the Quakers was not like the Old Christans, He was an Impostor; If the Old way was good, they [...] Apo­states

Q. 3. For Matings, They left [...] their Publick Place, were taken in a Private One: Would in a good [...] ­mour tell some of ours, how they Itgle a meeting such all ask day, [...] go­ing in and coming out so fear of [...] ­ers; Were they Aposiates that did this? They that came out of Prison went no more Openly; O shameless Creatures to deny this, and call me Lyar.

Whitehead, when blam'd for not appearing in London as before, said, He could be of as good Ʋse in such [...] [...] ­vate Place; Was never in Prison in all the lift Persecution, as I am creditly Informed; yet some wright Acts 9. 24. that had not been in Scripture Pauls being let down in a Basker, &c. Deny, and Deny as you will, I snow you so well I will as soon take the word of a Seminary Priest or Jesuit a­bout his Church, as yours about your Light, &c.

Mr. Vickris at his own House told me, [Page 54] There was a Dark Day came on us can­not decayed.— Some were in Dect, Frit­ters [...]. When I answer­ted him, The [...] in it [...] not in [...] [...], he said, I believe [...], else it unist be [...] as [...] sayest. The a said [...], Pepent of [...] a fuly. Message from for Lord, and do it no more. so we sat down good Friends, and talked of other things The Story of Elizabeth Serring and For as Dole, is Notorious; did I name the Habitation of either or them, that you thus B. C. quarrel? Pray Look again.

Quest. 4. The Question is, About [...] Ministers for Hummour beginning and following Penn for his. The answer is about Spiritual Learning. Was not Perm followed for his Parts? Had he more of the Spirit than the rest? No, say some Quakers, much less; others say he had none at all: Was not Latin, Greek, and Hebrew condemned, &c. Must I name things again and again, and still unanswered? My charge against Penn; being no Scholiar seems to be granced.

Qust 7. About Bowing to men. Thon tellest the Greatest Lye that ever was told the world, You bow not; you Qua­kers, Men, Women and Children, speak out; Is not B. C. an Impudent, Infam­ons, Ungodly I var?

Quest 5. For saying one thing to Cromwel in the name of the Lord, and the quite con­trary to King Charles; I am put off, The Snake in the Grass will be answered. It will be a pure dish; it hath been long lookt for; the answer you give me and others may serve a Menter is: For my Questions they should have been consi­dered, which an [...]s;wered of the Reader.

What is W. Penn? what are the Qua­ker [...]?

I am told How many of us promised lives and for tunes to K. James, I answer, Jeremary, yet not so many as you ima­ge: They that did, did not pre [...]end to [...], Inspiration, and I know not [...] the Bristol Address was from them called Presbyterians; There were five of us in or nigh the City; this was the act only of one Man; all the rest of us (Ministers) protested against it; nay, One (now Dead) Said, [Page 56]He could be content, they and their Pesteri­ty, should lose the Benefit of Law, who so shank fully betrayed it. I and one Minister more, were in deny or of being bed at Council-Board for opposing the Court design: What a horrid [...] piece [...] was it, to tell that King, [...] Security of their King [...] [...] from Mature judgment and Rooted Principles &c.

Yet 1. They kept Fast Days for fear of Popery and Slavery.

2. Then [...]ould [...] be no Papist, if he believed it Unlawful to Persecute Men for Conscience in the common Ac­ceptation of the Words; then had the Pope Er [...]ed, and a Council, and that in no small matter; but alas K. James knew Prose ution of men for Heresic was ro Persecution for Conscience, besides, an Peroneous Conscience, was no Conscience Quit non est scientia &c.

3 The Addressers would say private­ly. All was but a Trick of K. James; No wonder he Laughed at them when they were gon, and PƲAW'd— &c.

I have been every where, of late [Page 57]years, Plagued about those Scand [...]lous Addresses. Some would call a Second Judas, a Second Cyrus, and the Destroy­er of their Countrey, the Repairer of their Breaches. Well done B. C. to call them that did it to Repentance, I have called on them; all little enough.

Now Friend C. let me ask thee a few. Questions.

Was it not shameful to censure me and another man, for not putting our names to our Books, and thou never put thy name to thine? I gave it out to all I was the Author.

May I not debate the matter with Jews Mahometans and others, and yet be conclusive in the Doctrine of Chri­stianity? Why Child, what ails thy Noddle?

Is it proper to censure me for being Comical, after I gave my reasons, and they not considered? p. 6.

Is it true W. Penn Expounded on Mat. 18.17. Tell the Church, a sense de­nyed in one place, confirmed in ano­ther; to serve a Turn (I see there was a little Mistake in putting the names of the Book) could not so great a Lyer as [Page 58]thou, that talks of my being once in a maed-house; that deniest Quakers Bow; Couldst not thou have said, Some Enemy, or the Printer, or others, put in those Words, or that some Letters accidentally jumpt together and make these unhappy Sentences; Where is Inspitation now? when he was lately told some Quakers deny any Body of Christ in heaven, &c. He said, they were Ignorant tho Sincere: What friend William, is the Light and Infallible Spirit come to this?

Did I say in my Book, The Qua­kers were more humble than others? &c. Away thou shameless Man; What wilt thou saynext? Or that, The Qua­kers were more Just than others? No, I did not so wrong them? Did I not give a true account of Barclay about the Light? p. 79. Look once again.

May not Perfectionists, long con­tinuing so, at last reform, and so God be merciful to them in their Conversion, be a proper Petition: I am not used to deal with such silly Arguers.

Suppose I should plead the cause of him that wrote the story of Henry Windor; let it not displease, seeing he [Page 59]was joyn'd with me; who he is I know not.

He is said to be worse then Mad, worse then the Hammerer: why? the two Qua­kers that came to Henry Winder and his Wife from the Lord, that they had Murthered a Child and must dye, & the Spirit would appear in the Court: They were Meiancholly or Mad, says B. C.

1. They were owned by the Qua­kers before, in and after, to their Death.

2. This Madness was not discern'd by the Justice or Judge, or Quakers or others, but the Quakers clos'd in with them.

3. If any thing falls out as they say, They be the Lords Prophets; if not, they were then mad. Was Sollomon Eccles Mad when he Prophesied falsly to John Story; not when he prophesied of the burning of London, of which Friends took no more notice then the Men of the World, and so never mov'd their Goods, saying, It was a Delusion? Was W. Penn Mad, when he prophesied against Thomas, Hicks? For the story in Bristel of a Quaker that said, Thus [Page 60]saith the Lord, give the man his Rope again; it is denied; so is every thing else; but I pray, Why not as well as when G. Fox was about to Eat, The word of the Lord came unto him, saying, Eat not.— as before.

Now B. C. to humble thee, if it may be, for thy Folly and Falshood; I will suppose, I should apply my self to thee in the same Language thou hast done to me, and with the like Falshood, What wouldst thou say of me? what many now do, and many more will of thee: Suppose I should besprinkle thee with some of thy Oratory to me and another; Th [...] impostor, in thy Colours, fit for Box or Bedlam: in thy south thou wert burnt in the band at Bristol for a Highway-man; yea, thou wert Pillored, and thy Ears were cropt off for Sedition: Thou refusest to Preach to the Quakers under Five Hundred a Year. None of my Friends in Bristol ever deserted St. James's Back, &c. in the last Persecuti­on; and I will prove it, for it is well known John Weeks was committed to Prison; therefore neither he, George Founs, Sa­muel Winney nor I, did ever refuse to [Page 61]walk up and down the City on week days, or to Preach in our Publick Places to a thou­sand at a time, Lords Days. O thou Im­pudent Man, Mad-man, &c. Thou didst prove the Ʋnlawfulness of Bowls and Nine­pins from Mat. 1.2. And Abraham be­gat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, and Ja­cob begat Judas and his Brethren. He must set up for the trade of Lying, that doth it more than thou; every lease is full of Nonsense: None have so much the command of the Peoples Purses as the She Speakers; yet to avoid Reflections as much as may be, I have thus spoken to thee, &c. But there is no end of this; should I thus do, might I not fear as Cain; you had as good cut off a man's arm or leg as thus desame him: VVell, one consideration is comfortable, a Quakers word is no Slander.

You have been known to be Notori­ous Lyars in your highest Pretences, your greatest Speakers.

I had almost forgotten to tell the Reader, that B. C. in the name of Friends, says, As Scripture contain the Word and Command of God to us, so they are the word of God, &c. No more need [Page 62]to be said; your cause is gone: I there­fore declare my work lies with Mr. Penn, to him were my Questions sent, and seeing he cannot answer, and therefore wisely attempts it not, I in­tend no more to answer such scrib­lers as B. C.

I leave you with St. Paul's words, Gal. 1.6, 8, 9. I marvel you are so soon removed to another Gospel; but though we or an Angel from Heaven Preach any other Gospel unto you, then which we have Preached unto you, let him be Accursed; as we said before, so say I now again, if any man Preach any other Gospel unto you then that ye have received, let him be Ac­cursed. Which words have been wisely and seriously used by some Ministers, when Quakers have come from far to them to deliver a Message, forsooth, from the Lord, against the Outward, Word, and Outward Christ, and Outward Baptism, and Outward Supper.

NOw Monsieur, I hope I have pleas'd you to the heart; and no more will you send a Hue and Cry af­ter me for taring away a Rag of the Title of your Book.

What a Blustering Title is here? I must not examine its Grammar or Oratory, because the Writer is a great stranger to both, as will be soon enough dis­covered: In the mean while, I re­member I have heard that when K. James I. was about to Knight▪ one Wil­liams of Essex, he asked him, what his Christen Name was? He answered, penny ruden buden budibras penny knip knap clip clap clun clap, I think, said the King, the Old Nick was thy Gadfer that gave thee such a name; Sir Ruden, I cannot tell what, Williams, arise, said he: whoever gave him his name, let the world judge who made your Title for you, who is the Father of Eye, the Slanderer of the Brethren: Well, Mr. Trepidantium Malleus, Intrepidantur Malleatus, I can't tell what; let me par­ly with you; Empty Casks make great Sounds: Your Title, that Blazing Comet, doth it presage any mischief? certainly its own disappearing. You tell the World strange news of me, that I assure you I never heard till now. Had you it from the Infallible Spirit and Writings of Friend B. C. of my [Page 65]Love Melancholy, and being at Box, men­tioned and hinted 10 times in your little Pamphlet? Always on the same Tune you know what Creature is so: When was this? when was I at Box, or any such place? Oh I have hit it, it was when the Presbyterian said, If ever Jesus Christ was D—it was when he made the Lords Prayer; which W. C. makes no bones of to write plainly, though a Turk would hardly wirte so of his Mahomet:— What will not Church and Quakerish Jacobites say: W. C. a Church-man, he says, and perhaps the first letter may stand for Wicked. Well, Mr. W. C. you Wicked Church­man, I promise any of your Brethren, Five Pound, if they can before me, prove your Charge: You say, You are afraid, lest by answering me, you should be forced to go to Bedlam too, &c. Sure here are had simptomes of hastniag there, but alone for me; and in the close of all, you anticipate an objection to your Readers.

What think you Sirs, am not I almost as mad as my Antagonist to answer his rambling stuff? How doth W. C. an­swer, [Page 66]by granting the thing, but pro­mising Reformation; Excuse it this once, I will trouble you no more: Well then, You have been once mad; if this be gran­ted, your Readers are mad too, if they regard such a mans promise out of his fit, much more if in it.

I never heard what the fate was that besel me for my High Demands for Preaching; Had you it from B. C.? you are grown a great Church-Friend to Friends; you write of Mr. Penn, Mr. Whitebead and other Quakers, with great veneration and devoir, and have many a good word for them; They Allegorize not away the Literal Sense if Scripture; though it is so noto [...]ous they have done it often; though to serve a turn, they shall call for the Literal Sense, Take it up, look on it, lay it aside again: but Mr. Keith and I are both fit for Bedlam; it is pitty the Hospital in Moor-fields should part-us, &c.: Nay, which is more strange, Mr. Bugg, a Reformed-Quaker, and now a Zealous Pious Church-man, can­not escape the Lash: He, Mr. Penny­man and Mr. Crisp left the Quakers on [Page 67]disgusts, and particular Pecques; why had you not told what they were? for fear of a Confutation: All know they left them only for their Blasphemies, Heresies and Abominable Practices.

But that which is almost unpardo­nable, is, your Vilifying the Man whom all the World Admires, an high Episcopal Man too, the Author of the Snake in the Grass! All that wrote against the Quakers before, play'd with them, till he wrote that unanswe­rable piece. p. 17. That his writings are collections of those Gentlemans before named; which is, say you, as if we should take an account of the Presbyterians from Bishop Laud or Heylen; or of our Church from Bellarmine and Harding: Well macht Mr. Churchman, say I, but the mischief is, his Collections are not in their Books; in good truth Sir, you might well ask your Reader, Whether he did not think you mad? Mr. Snake consulted the Authors he cites, and it would have been a most Injurious Charge to so great a Man to be so un­worthily Reflected on, had it not [Page 68]been by such a D—as all must see that are Schollars, and read your Book.

He, Mr. Keith and I, in our Three New Ways of Dealing with the Qua­kers, help not one another to Mate­rials: after you censure us all, as if Fools or Madmen; you tell us, Such Fools as you think to make Fools of them (Quakers)

You ask us, How doth it appear Mr. Keith is Reformed? He desires you to appear, so do I; there is no end of Printing in your way, Cite at large, and then dispute what is the sense of this word and that word; but neither you, nor William Penn, will meet Mr. Keith, or me; Come torth you Cow­ardly Defamers, shew your Faces if you dare.

Because Mr. Keith, changed not in any one Article of Faith, may he not therefore be [...]anged in other things? You say, You set as a looker on, That the Joy of all Ministers about G. K. is groundless, and they be all mistaken: What is the Bishop, Lord Mayor, and Clergy mad too, as well as G. K. and Trepidantium Mallous? Conformists [Page 69]know not who you are: You seem to own your self to be a Jacobite, though not a Socinim, and that I have hit the mark about your being paid by the Quakers for the Service you do them, and ask me,

Why may not I as well as Dr. Stubbe? It is an old question, Why may not one man play the Knave as well as another? Perhaps you are of the opinion of H. P. in the time of the War, when one call'd him Knave, said, If thou wert not a Fool thou wouldst be one too now: Yet you tell me, I would unsay all I have written against the Quakers, for Money: Well Brother, I am then no fool, tho' so often call'd so: You ask me, Whether when I had a Priviledge Place, I ever put on my Surplice? No Sir, when I was at the worst, I was never so Mad yet, as to put my Shirt on all my Cloaths; I will not only as soon, but sooner take Du Moulins Fools Coat, which though he would wear, all would not; Would not a Fools Coat well become a Mi­nister of the Gospel? when I was a Preacher at Brislington and Charleton, I had Presbyterian Ordination; I baptized according to the Directory; I Catechised [Page 70]in the Church, in, What is the chief end of Man? &c.

Mr. W. Churchman tells me, He could trov. G. Keith's Questions to be Prepositions, if need were.— He can say more of the Aberdeen business then I do know, or are like to know for him; is a fine way of answering: I ask you one question, Whatever place Mr. Keith Allegorized in Scripture, Did he once disown the Literal Sense? this his Adversaries, you plead for have done; though sometimes they would own it Politickly; Shew one place where he is guilty here?

For your Citations, It is no more a Body of Flesh, Blood, and Bones when it Riseth; then say I, Not the same Nu­merical Body: He ever own'd it the same for Substance, though not Quali­ties: What think you of the stub stance of the Egg, and Chick coming of it? of Rain, when Ice or Snow? So his other, is not that Flesh that shall be raised; the Apostle saith not, That Body, &c. 1 Cor. 15.27, 53. Yet this Mortal shall put on Immortallity: How shall it arise? Various opinions are [Page 71]about it, among them that are sound in th [...] Doctrine of the Resurrection.

For your great Contradiction, p. 13. about [...] the [...] Christ, as uni­versally [...]essa [...] to S [...]vation [...]nd yet True C [...]ristia [...]y may sul [...]n about the [...]edge of Christ in the [...]r, he says, [...]ny know little of the History of Christ, [...] Birth, manner of Life and Death, that must know him to be a mediator and Sa­viour, and how far God may even to Heathens, discover a Mediator, before they dye who knows? You have many in your Church, and too many in ours, that assert more than this, That Heathen Turks, &c. that never disown their Ma­bomet, may Love God and be Saved: are these Apostates too? For that is my Question; not whether G. Keith wrote Unsoundly at one time, or con­tradicted himself at another: For that mistaken passage in his Exact Narra­tive, He had not changed in one Principle of Religion, for Thirty Year or more: He did not mean by Principle, Opinion, as you seem to understand him, but Arti­tle of Faith: Sure he confessed before, [...] Change in Opinion about many [Page 72]things, as Matthew 28.19. but he was Baptized himself in Infancy, which he owns, &c.

You tell us not what bitter Expressi­ons he once dropt against Presbyteri­ans and others, but in the general, Hard ones; only that he call'd y [...] Prelacy Limbs of Antichrist, your Mi [...] ­stry, Ambitious, Lordly, without Ze [...] for God, and you bid me look in his Books.— Why Sir, I thought you had known that not only G. Keith, but the Scots Presbyterians, Rutherford, Gelaspee, and many others, call'd them so too: and at home the Anabaptists, and some Independents and Presbyterians them­selves have done the like: Doth this prove them Apostates? No, no more, nor so much as the names you give our Ministers and Meetings, too gross to foul my Paper with, prove you to be so: For Election, I take him to be more found than you, your Citations of him & your joques compare together.

If you prove him a Corrupt Man, a Man that had forgotten himself, and dropt an Unadvised word at Turners-Hall, I had not been his Voucher; but [Page 73]an Apostate he was not by any Argu­ments of yours, and therefore you a Libeller; what your design was in that abusive Pamphlet, he that runs may read: I know he hath corrupt notions many and great, and yours of the New Church of England (Remember there I keep, not the Old one) not few or sinail; how I have proved that, I need not tell you; so well, you thought it not safe to Reply, but only rage, You Ʋngrateful VVretch, &c. I profess, when [...] look upon my Reprimand, I wonder how you could call your Re­turn an Answer; Was it Ignorance or Malice? perhaps both; but no wonder when you tell the Quakers, that I have written nothing to purpose against them; I suppose you do not, cannot think so: Why answer you not my Questions to Mr Penn, he could not, B. C. attempted it, but hath ruined their cause, and advanced mine, by making Lyes his Refuge, which I sup­pose makes Mr. Penn disown any hand in it.

I say it again, My work was not fully [...]ify G. Keith, [...] whether he hat [...] [Page 74]contradicted himself, but to detect W. Church-man's design, which was to strengthen the hands of Penn and the Fox­onian Quakers, to wound the Separate Ones; this is obvious to any Sober Reader to be his Design: Did G. K. ever reject the Literal Sense, as they often did of Scripture? If he said Christ within was the Object of Faith; did he say only as within; denying Christ without to be so, which all know the rest did times without number: I am glad we have him so far, I wish more, I doubt not he is C [...]pable yet not so vile as W. C. makes him; he will shortly answer for himself.

Further, W. C. proves him an Apo­state by denying Election, &c. I reply­ed, Then are the Arminians Apostates, which is to be abhorr'd by Sober Men: He says I am no Arminian, No, and yet joques after B. C. and sports himself with you of the Election of Grace; [...] Reprobate VVorld; you babes of Grace; which Pious Sober Arminians do not: Well, if he be not so, are such Armi­nians as appear in a great Figure, and who are numerous in the Church of England, Apostates? I proved at [...] [Page 75]the New Church of England is an Apo­state Church on his Principles, not mine: I am answered, You are an Ʋn­grateful VVretch to reflect on that Church that gives you your Liberty: We hum­bly and heartily Thank His Majesty and the Parliament, for continuing the Liberty we had before, but will you not thank us for helping you to se­cure your Liberty, by joining with you to effect the late happy Revolution: How odious would it have been, after all, to have made our Circumstances worse than King James did; yet to be plain, Had not he given a Toleration, we might have been to seek for it for some of you: Suppose a Man on the Highway is full of Rage, Beats me, takes away my Money, and was about to cut my Throat; there comes a Highway-man to destroy both, he calls for my help, we kill him, he cuts not my Throat after all, I am beholding to him I con­fess; but is this an answer to my Ob­jection, Then is this Church an Apostate Church, &c. which I have abundantly proved, consequent to his Opinion to say, You are Ʋngrateful. — and never [Page 76]answer one of my Arguments; Is this Disputing? — The Title of my Book shews what I designed, not a Vindicati­on of G. Keith, against all his Citations; no, but to convince B. C. of his feeble Arguing about Apostacy.

In what sense Baptism with Water is & is not a Fundamental; I shall take no notice of an old objection, when my answers are not considered: Let him read once again my Reprimand.

Mr. W Churchman, you tell, What care you should take to keep G Keith out of your Church: I pray let him attempt, First to come in: We do not see he is in such hast: you say, You will not so ca­sily take Members. — I grant according to your good old Constitution, you should not: We might be agreed about Communicants; but according to the practise of some Innovators, this Body hath for scores of years lost its Purgative Faculty, and therefore is so unhealthy and giddy, by keeping in those Dregs that should be thrown out; you now take and keep Atheists, Adul­t [...]rs, Swearers, Ignorant Persons, no­ [...] [...] visibly such: thus is its Dis­cipline [Page 77]corrupted as well as Doctrine, for its Doctrine it is one of the best Churches upon Earth: You ask, Why leave we the Church of England? I af­firm we cannot find it, you have left it, as I have proved in my Reprim [...], clearly, fully, accordantly, which you reply nothing too, and I love not Ean­dem Cantilenam.

Well, The Presbyterians Persecuted in New England, say you, Whom? Blas­phemers of Christ, Cursers of Magistrates in the Streets, False Prophets, &c. Obj. In Scotland now: What? such as were found in Popish Cabals, that say, Their Interest and Religion is concern'd in the bringing in of K. James again: But your Church early Persecuted B. Hooper for not wearing a Surplice, who honestly condemas all Symbolical Humane Cere­monies in the worship of God, in [...] Pre­face to his Savory Exposition on the prophesie of Jonah: Fox, that Glori­ous Martyrologer, was a Non Con: Famous Mr C [...]wright, and many more, such, must be involv'd in trouble for a few Popish Tri [...]ets: Were your New England [...] Saints such [...] [Page 78]these? Are your now Martyrs taken up and sent to Goal, for being in a Corpo­ration, or within 5 miles of it? Ruin'd for not coming to their Communion? &c. It is not the Suffering, but the Cause, that makes the Martyr, for when Christ was crucified, two Theeves were cruci­fied with him.

Did ever any Presbyterian perse­cute as your Brethren? Who counte­nanced Sham Plots? By whom was Stephen Colledge Murthered? Who con­demaed him and rejoyced at his death? I speak the more freely of him, be­cause I was with him often after his Sentence, and before his Execution: Who believes he came to Oxon with a design to seiz the King? What be, and be alone? It is well known what the Earl of Anglesey said: Could my Lord Howard, after his Pardon and Discove­ry of another Plot, confirm this? No, he knew nothing of the Shaftsburian Plot: Mr Colledge, with a shower of Tears, solemnly protested to me, when I beg'd his silence if in the least guilty, I never expect mercy from God, if I was guilty, or know any man to be so [Page 79]that way: Such Sham Plots, put some on real ones, which indeed were not successful, as your Plot was against James the Second.

I dare say, you cannot believe it, say what you will, That the Presbyteri­ans rail'd at much at the Quakers, as the Quakers at them.

Neither can you think the Lords Prayer and Ten Commandments turn'd into verse by me, so bad as you say: Pray read, how your Church hath done the Lords Prayer, at the end of the Psalms, approv'd to be Sung; if mine be Ʋncouth, Rhime Doggrel, Prophaning of Scripture, yours much more; so I challenge any man to take the substance and words of the Ten Commandments more exact in one stave or eight lines; others approve and more than so, but you will not any thing that is mine, and for that reason, because mine.

I suppose some in Be [...]lam have talk'd better then you, or some others yet out of it argued more subtilty; I have heard of Mr Widdows, famous for a Tract of Natural Philosophy, that be­ing [Page 80]heard to make a great noise in such a place, some came to him and askt him what it meant? The Devil, said he, hath appeared to me, and told me, be could prove I could not be saved; I told him be was a Lyar from the beginning, and would be so to the end: The Devil be­gan Syllogistivally, He whose name is not written in the book of Life, cannot be saved, but thy name is not written in the book of Life, Ergo thou carst not be saved; I told him, said he, my name was written in the book of Life, and therefore I denyed the minor: so the Devil went on, The Scriptures is the book of Life, but thy name is not written in the Scriptures, Ergo, thy name is not written in the book of Life: I denyed, said he, the minor again, and told him my name was written in the Scripture, he asked me where, I told him, Honour them that are Wid­dows: indeed there is my name Widdows, so I lasted the Devil, and he is gone.

Were you in such an Academy, or amongst such Collegiates, as you phrase it? perhaps you might hear things more Ingenious with your Ravings than now we do.

How is it you have not a word to sa­vour the Quakers Prophesies? Is it be­cause you have such in your Church? Arise ap Even, that mad blasphemous Prophet: Was it before the VVars, that a Parson prayed, Confound all the Enemies of thy Clearch and People, a vi­olent cough took him, when over, he thought he was in that part of the Pul­pit Prayer for the Prelates, and so went on, By what Names or Titles soever they be Dignified, whether the Most Re­verend the Arch-Bishops, the Right Re­verend the Bishops, and all inferiour Priests and Deatons.

You a Defender of the Church of England! and take no notice of the Cassandrian Articles, Non Resistance, Bowing to the High Altar, not indeed, Book of Sports now; thank our Meet­ings: Desire some one to answer for you, seeing you cannot for your self.

Now Sir, you would let the world know you have read more then Cato's Verses, perhaps the Sentences under, for you bring us Noble Apotheigems.

O rare discoveries! such as a Parson said, Amor res est bona, as St. Austin saith: Perhaps you would convince me, that you have yet your Grammar by you, but all will not do: ‘Insipientes est discere non putarem, &c.’

Well, Eris mihi magnus Apollo, is right.

De mortuis nil nisi bonum, and all that follows it, was answer'd in my Vindic [...]ae and Reprimand too, therefore I shall not answer now: Only, Are not those you Revile every 30th of Ja­nuary, Dead? VVas not Dr. Owen Dead? who never swore to Richard Cromwel, as Oliver, his son, lately as­sured me: If I must, I will produce the testimony of Dr Goodwin, Mr Jen­kins, about Evangelista Quintus; and also of Mr Sydrack Symson, Dr Sander­son and many others, whose little fin­ger was thicker than my Loyns: We [Page 83]are better reconcil'd than you think for, except a few men that talk as you write. You tell me of one that said of me, I was fit for Bedlam, but it was as the Quakers say, Good Company.

Mr Baxter was a Prodigee for natural and acquired Accomplishments, I never doubted, only he wanted the culture of better Education; he was a grave Man, of a sober life, full of life and mo­tion, a hard Student, very Zealous, and of a Publick Spirit, one of the gravest Preachers upon Earth, which pleas'd me well; and I more believe he was a Good Man, than that Origen or Ter­tullian were so.

But the Quakers will (say you) take Advantage of my comparison between Baxterianism and Quakerism: that I suppose pleaseth you, why complain you if so? but others will see where they are going; whose Cure I hope and see, and could tell of great instan­ces of Great Men already, were it con­venient; I expect no cure of Quakers when others made a comparison be, tween Baxter and Bellermine: N­o doubt Papists triumpht, What then Protestants Reformed.

Because we are often twitted about some mens expresing themselves in these points, particularly Mr. S [...]ph [...]ard; I declare I am well assured, that the Sin­cere Convert was never wrote by him, he gave this under his own hand to Mr. Giles Fermin, and told him, He never saw it but once, and never desired to see it more; this Mr. Fermin in censuring that Book, and Mr. Baxter's Saints Rest and other Tracts, with great depth of judgment hath told the world I also with them, disown Dr. Crisp's wild, unsafe, unsound expressions, and as it is a trouble to me, so it is to others, particularly some Worthy Congrega­tional. Divines, that some men, who seem to plead our cause, have dared to be his Advocates: How odious is it to hear some men, when reproved for idle-walks about business Lords Days, to say, Jesus Christ hath kept the Sabbath for me, &c. and then cite Dr. Crisp; why do not such say, Jesus Christ hath kept the sixth seventh & eighth Command­ment for them, and therefore they may Kill, Commit Adultery and Steal; such may as well say, Jesus Christ entered [Page 85]into Heaven for them, and that is enough, tho they never go there; we are content with Mr. Bolton's way for Distressed Consciences, Dr. Sibbs and others, without the Doctor's Wild Phrases.

But O wonderful! you have some verses out of Ovid too, but still mistaken

Quo me fixit amor, quo me vehemen­tuis ussit.

Whether the Printers mistake or yours, is a query with me, for the next verse which must be yours not his, shews what you are.

Hei mihi quod Amor non sit Medicabi­lis Herbis.

This strongly proves what you say, Fools will be medling; I suppose you learned it not out of Obid, but your Grammar, at the end of Syntaxis; look, if you have it, you shall find it thus.

Hei mihi, quod nullis Amor est medi­cabilis Herbis

Thou art not able to scan a verse is evident, that took Quod—a to be a spondee, when both short; now how [Page 86]might I triumph had I but the tithe or thy Brutallity.

Seeing you love Cato so well, I will direct to some choice verses, and sui­table ones too, as well as I can remem­ber, without Books by me.

Virtutem primam esse puta compescere Linguam.

Had you remembred this and the next,

Rumores suge, ne inciipas novi [...]s Au­ther haberi.

You had never Printed your false stories of Box, &c.

Fistula dulce canit, volucrem dum decipit auce [...]s.

You flatter the Church of England, smile in her face and cut her throat.

Nam sine Doctrina vitu est quasi mor­tis imago.

There is for you Sir!

Now for some choice Sentences in Prose (Erasmus if you have learn'd so for) instead of your dullones.

Si male dixeris pejus Audies: That you deserve tho not have.

Bate sapi [...], et Quercus concionantur.

There is for you and the People; now for his Eccho's

Quid agunt, qui ambiunt Sacerdotium? Otium, non felix si boni Literis? Eris.

Now for some Proverbs, Ne sutor ultra Crepidam: Had G. Fox, the poor Shoomaker, and you, thought of it, he had not set up for a Preacher, nor you for a Poet.

Ante victoriam canis Triumphum; be sure play the fool no more that way: Omnium borarnm bomo: for the Church of England and the Quakers, [...] the same time too? There is your m [...] for you: Asinus ad Lyram: W. C. at the Poets.

Now I have stockt you, How often will you throw out these sayings? I have read them in Erasmas Adag. and else where.

You are coming on as a precious Youth among Friends; Sam: Fisher, or G. Fox cannot go beyond you for Lying, in loathsome phrases, and hom­spun Sentences: Suppose I should, in your words, charge you as falsly as you me, Forty times, about Box or the Mad­house, &c. would you not (and all the [Page 88]world with you) say, I was a most Im­pudent Rogue: Suppose I should say,

You crackt brain; Mad man, in no degree Compis Mentis; you measure your own Cornby anothers Bushel (Lear­nedly Exprest) You Car, you Yelping Cur, you make my worship smile; remem­ber the Proverb about your charge of Amorous Passions, &c. the old woman had never sought her Daughter in the Oven, had she not been there her self: Remember how you were condemned for an Assassinator, and are shortly to be hanged: You got loose lately from a Mad-house, remember what you endured there: You were whipt about London-streets for cutting Purses, as all know.

You Dunce and Blockhead, that write of Latin in Prose and Verse, and understand not a sentence of either: You deserve to have your bones broken: Do you hear? Goodman Goose, Good­man Woodcock, you ought to be thankful that I am so favourable to you: Away you Blockhead, to talk against the Dis­senters; I could answer you if I saw fit; you deserve a kick o'th' —

Or suppose my Book bore this Title,

The London Wise-aker, Crack-brain'd Apostate maker, proved an Apostate, about his Numseul, being a joco Satyrical return to a tale of a Tub, emitted by a Reverend Conformist:

How should I expose my self instead of you, as you have done your self in stead of me?

Who shall believe such shameless infamous Libellers, as B. C. and W. C. Brethren in Iniquity? Had you served some Men so, they would have ruin'd you both; but you have done it your selves, as to your Reputations, &c.

I advise you read a Book over before you answer it, and if you have not so much wit as to speak sense, have so much wit as to be silent.

The great Dean, Thompson of Bristol, I remember once in the Church, asked a Boy, before all the Congregation:

Quest. Who made the Catechism, call'd Man's Chief End?

Answ. A company of Perjur'd Pres­byterians.

Quest. What did I do with one of those Catechisms that that Prodigal Fellow gave? (That was Trepidantium Malleus.)

Answ. You tore it in pieces, and trampled it under your feet: (He did so in the open street.)

Quest. What say they of it?

Answ. Oh that it is a most Heavenly Piece, &c.

Quest. But what say you?

Answ. They tell of the Trinity: — Distinguish between Justification and Sanctification, &c.

A Curate of his Preached on the 30th. of January, on that Text, He stilleth the Madness of the People: On went he to work, to prove, The Peo­ple of England were a mad People, in that they chose mad Representatives to sit in Parliament; and he would prove they were Mad, in that they voted against the Succession of his Royal Highness the Duke of York; in that they sent for and com­mitted to Prison his Majesty's best Sub­jects, particularly one now present (Mr. Thomson) &c. But, said he (as you to your Readers) You will say, this is a mad discourse; if I am Mad, said he, I am sure you cannot say as Festus to Paul, Much Learning hath made me so; the People smiled, and said, No, they [Page 91]would clear him there. You Sir, write like one, if you are such, I also, and all that read your book, cannot but clear you too in that point.

It is too large here to tell the world of the manner of Mr. Keith's Convicti­ons, of a Meeting in England, in Pen­sylvania, &c. he hath done it.

Now, That it cannot be charged on him, That ever he denyed Christs Body in Hea­ve [...], &c. which the others did; & Curtis in Redding now still doth, Owns no Christ, nor Heaven nor Hell without him, &c.

Can it be imagin'd, W. Penn and G. Whitehead had not appear'd, when G. Keith call'd a Meeting at Turners-Hall, had they not known they were guilty? How many vain pleas were there to excuse their Non-Appea­rance?

I forgive you from the heart, for these Abuses; but were I Quaker, and you had so abused me in Print, perhaps I had made my Fleshly Arm to have smitten thy Outward Man.

I thank you for the kindness you have done me, Slander is sometime the greatest, that makes all, even Enemies, [Page 92]to Pity, and Pity paves the way for Love: and I suppose, your story about the Presbyterians, & the Lords Prayer, no one will believe for my sake; they that object against the use of it say, what I suppose you cannot answer.

It was made under the Legal Dis­pensation; that is, when Circumcisi­ons Sacrifices, &c. were in force: no­thing in it is explicitly asked in the name of Christ; if it be the Laudable custome of all the Churches to conclude a Prayer, or Grace, if never so short, with a Through Jesus Christ our Lord: Is this form proper for us now? Hi­therto you have asked nothing in my name, (implicitly) sure, what you shall ask the Father in my name (explicitly) you shall receive; after this manner pray you, Ties to things, not words; Say thus to such a man, saith the Master to the Servant, He doth his business, though in other words; I will not say, whe­ther the use of it be a matter of Liber­ty which lies between Sin and Duty.

Be so wise as not to Talk of your Churches kindness; I was once to be Tryed on the 35th of Elizabeth; one [Page 93]was then questioned for saying, the Bible was good for nothing but to make men humoursome, that he received the Sacrament in Spain as well as at Bristol, where they pleased for him; that the Com­municants in their Church, lookt like a company of Geese that were to be cram'd; that he had nothing to do at Church but to see fair Women; when this was heard; many were in a rage for questioning this Gentleman about such things as these, this was no Fanaticism, and believed that it was Spite, not Zeal, in their Brethren, that put some on com­plaints, which they found true.

Well, Mr. Jacobite (for all observe you deny not this, though you do your being a Church Arminian or Lauden­cian) I pray remember what your friend Mr. Penn, wrote to Pensylvania of Mr. Keith.

I am sorry any should quarrel with Honest and Learned G. Keith; my Love to him, let him enjoy his Principles; he shall want no encouragement from me; for I love his Spirit, and honour his Gifts, and peculiar Learning, Tongues, Mathe­maticks and Platonick Studies; yet to [Page 94]please others, Mr. Penn play'd the Proteus, and Excommunicated him in London, with such Zeal or Fury, that he said, He knew not whether he Sate, Stood, or Kneeled; yet had so much wit not to prophesie against him, as he blasphemously and wickedly did against others, which came not to pass, there­fore Mr. Whitehead hath done that in these words,

Thus saith the Lord, Thou hast poured out great reproach and contempt upon my Servants and People, I will assuredly pour out great contempt and confusion up-thee. Yet we hope he will go to the Grave in Peace, as did Thomas Hicks.

You Mr. Wicked Churchman, who are such a Lying Historian, cannot you set up too for a Lying Prophet, and be talkt of as such, with Mr. Penn, and Mr. Whitehead, your dear Friends?

If it be objected by my Readers, why I have not been less facetious in dealing with my Adversaries, I have answer'd to it in other Books, and shall only add, Some think to give al­ways grave answers to ridiculous Persons and Things, is to make the answer ridicu­lous too.

Well, Sir, To draw to a close, Whatever bad Properties I have (too many) some say I have this good one, To be easily Reconciled.

If we fall out, we must fall in again, I know no other Remedy amongst Men, unless those that by a figure we call so.

If you please to come to my Lodg­ings, I am plain without a comple­ment, you go no where where you can be more welcome; and the subject of our discourse you shall choose, not I; an Amicable Conference or Silence about these things as you please: I have often said, It is not falling out that doth so much mischief in the world (for that is to most unavoidable) but not falling in again.

If you signifie your Reconciliable Temper (for you seem to be too face­tious to be malitious) be pleas'd to let me know when, [...]here and with whom, I may wait upon you and kiss your hand. Anger, saith Solomon, Resteth in the bo­som of Fools: I am not in the least di­sturbed by what you have done against your self, and for me Eventually.