AS for JOHN TALBOT's giving FRANCIS BUGG the Epithet of honest FRANCIS [...]as we have said in our answer to his Chal­lenge that seems to them that know him altogether Jronical; now that that was not there said without some grounds & cause appears not only by the many lyes and falshoods he hath from time to time these many Years past been detected for by many of our Friends, as well as for his divers manifest falshoods contained in this ver [...] Bomb, as we [...]ll evidently make appear, but also by what an Antient Woman Friend [...]e of F: B's Old acquaintance named Anne Dockw [...] hath in her book printe [...] 1669. Intituled An Apostate Conscience exposed &c. Said of him, Therefore be pleas'd First to take notice of some hints that the hath writ of him; and see what she writes out of his book called, the Quakers detected writ two Years after he turn'd to the Church of Eng­land, He there giving a relation how he came to be a Quaker, in which relation having spoken of their Doctrine of the Light, their practices. Conversation and deportment, and what simplicity attended their Ministry in the beginning. He then adds and says page 14. ‘I was still more and more Confi [...]'d that it was a dispensation of the Love of God sent as a visitation to Mankind; being thus perswaded I resol­ved to bear the Cross and did utterly despise the shame that attended them and their message and was not behind any of my Equals both in doing and suffering for the testimony thereof, as some among them can still bear me witness 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 &c.’ Note here we may see how [...] [...]ly he was made to Confess on the Quakers behalf & tho' this was [...] a Church-man, yet doubtless he had not then wholly Forgotten the Days of his Espousals, which since he seems quite to gave done▪ And let us now examine whether it was not to than the Cross, which at first he says he was content to [...] him [...]ecome so [...] ▪ To resolve that, the Author tells that she having heard he had conformed to the Church of England, asked him the cause, and that his Answer was, what [Page 10] would you have me to do? The Statute of Twenty pound per month will be put in Execution against me and I have suffered enough already. Well, by this we may a little guess at his honesty towards God. Let us next see how he hath been (as by the said Authors relation, page 57) towards men. She saith, upon the Bishop of Norwich his not only reo [...]mmending him as an object of Charity deserving the bounty of well disposed persons, but also Certifying that he ap­peared to him a sober, honest and industrious man. This last the said Ann Dockwray saith, will be matter of Admiration to all inqui­sitive people when the real truth of this concern is known; for be­sides the many lies told of particular friends, and for which she hath there [...]cted him she having as above been acquainted with him many years she tells us ‘A [...] to his honesty and industry if he had been an honest and industrious man as the Bishop saith, he would not have lost his time and neglected his trade for near twenty years as (said she) I can make appear out of his own books and spent a good Estate in scribbling against the Quakers to no purpose, as will further appear and run many hundred pounds in debt more than he was able to pay and his Creditors most have lost much money by him if this project with the Bishop & some of the Clergy did not take which was a thing doubtful by his own confession in his 20: Book page 147.’

There may (saith she) be much more said upon this accoun [...] I will instance but few of them ‘In or about the year 1697; He married his Daughter, made great Feasting and Entertainments that was said to be very chargeable; and promised three hundred pounds portion with her upon the marriage and at the same time he was indebted many hundred pounds more than he was worth. He al­so gave Bond to make his wife a Joynture of some part of his, Estate which he hath since sold to his Son.’ Those things (saith she) he hath confessed to me and others &c. page 53. And as to his writing lies against us, she saith, that when he was told of it by [Page 11]some friends. His answer was His pen would run too quick sometimes. These things considered, we hope, we may be very well ex [...]ed for saying what we did in answer to [...]: T [...]s giving the said Bugg the Epithet of HONEST FRANCIS.

And now, whereas of late years you have been so busy to call up­on us to deny our ancient Friends writings from your very [...]i­ting perverting and false quoting them, or from your taking advan­tage of a word or a few words (tho' well meant, yet) not so well guarded as we could have wished they had been, or of here and there a word or two which possibly might be either misprision of Transcriber, Printer or Corrector in either Book or Errata; tho' the sense you put upon them as also the passages themselves, if unfound, have been denied to be according to our Principles; yet you very unfairly continue to cite them against us. As in the case of Solomon Eccles his un [...]ound expression [...] saying. The blood of Christ was no more than the blood of another Saint. And that of Christopher Atkins saying. Your imagined God above the stars; and your carnal Christ &c: is disowned by us. As to the first G:W: saith, he hath disowned that comparison about [...] and saith, Solomon Eccles was not in the Counsel or Wisdom of God therein. And for the last, both the Passage & Author have been also disowned by us, see Antidote page 224 225. Truth & in­nocency &c: page 52. Yet your inveterate haired of us, and your unjust dealings towards us have been such, that you repeat the same things over and over, [...] our Principles, as if they had never been answered, or disowned at all. Now we ask would you be w [...]ling the Papists or others should put you upon disowing those Eminent primitive Pro [...]st [...] [...] as William [...]y [...]d [...] Wil­liam Thorp Sadeel, Martin Luther &c: about Succession Priesthood, [...]orced Maintenance, Priests Annual Wages Tythes Oathes Ʋni­versities, restrained Preaching, Women's Preaching &c: [...]cited in this Appendix, under the penalty of being entituled to those re­cited [Page 12]and manifest Doctrines of theirs, which tho' held by them; yet too much opposed by you both in Doctrine and Practice? Surely, if they should so put you to it, it would be a great pinch upon you; your doctrines and practices in those respects being so manifestly contray to those famous Reformers; as well as it is contrary to ours: whereas most of those things you so loudly charge against us as heresies and blasphemies &c: are your own [...]a­tions, perversion or down [...]ght nothings viz: there are no such words as you cite, and which our now business is partly to make complaint against you for, and put you to the proof of [...] and do expect you should in print make good those charges in the Bomb and D: L's Almanack seeing J: T: hath espoused them both ma­king good the Scripture-Proverb viz: Like Priest like people.

☞ Caleb Pusey not only tells D: L: of divers falshoods contained in his Trumpet and other Prin [...]s; but also plainly tells b [...]h where they are and what they be: and therefore now we call upon them to prove in as publick a manner as they have charged or else we do Justly expect they should as publickly acknowledge they have wronged us: Pray do not trifle with us, nor flout at us about in­fallibility as some of you have done, because we cannot retract th [...] [...]or errors which is your manifest perversions &c: and yet at the same time refuse to do us justice by proving or retracting what you have so unjustly charged upon us; however [...]f among the many writings that our friends have writ these fifty years or up­wards there appear any passage that is not justifiable, be it misprision of C [...]rkship faults in printing, slip of the pen; or if by com­paring the rest of his works it appear an error of the mind, we hope we never shall vi [...]di [...]ate in such case.

We find Calv [...]s [...]ed by Daniel Philips for saying thus. Vind: Veri page, 64. Li [...]: 3. Cha: N: 25. Because Christ dwelleth not without us but dwelleth in us Now would it not [...] charity to tell the Calvinist people that they deny Christ to be with­out [Page 13] us? Surely it would; yet it's like such a slip as that can scarce be found in all, or any of our friends books, at least uncor­rected.

And now we shall desire the Candid Reader, that in reading the following charges against these men, and our observations on them that he read and consider them very impartially; but before we re­cite them we also request the Reader that he would be Pleased to take the advice given by these eminent [...]ersons following concern­ing the reading of books.

The first is the famous John Lock, who saith thus ‘To have one's words exact [...] quoted, Cited by the said D: P: pa: 97, 98. and their mean­ing interpreted by the [...] & visible design of the Au­thor in his whole discourse b [...]ing a right that every writer hath a ju [...]t claim to and such as a lover of truth will be very wary of v [...]ating’

The next is Bishop Rider in his Demonstration of the Messias, who is of an opinion, That we are to be governed as to the sig­n [...]fication of a word by the contex [...] & subject matter.

Js [...]dor [...]s is of an opinion ‘That a man must not take little piece-meals by themselves and put that sense upon them that [...]rst comes into his head but he must weigh every word and exa­min the context, the subject matter in which it treats on, and why it was written so.’

Now this Justice is wanting in our present adversaries; there­fore let the reader bu [...] [...]ke these famous mens advice in the read­ing of our friends books; let him but honestly examine the con­text, and the subject matter of which [...] [...]rears and why it was so written; and I doubt not at all but we shall appear to all im­partial and sensible people to be such as deserve not that odious Contractor given us by these men.

And so we proceed [...] [...]rges and begin first with the Bomb; the charges in which is J: T's task now particularly to [Page 14]prove; in which altho' we have corrected above twenty to them, yet we find but four places quoted by them out of our friends books, and they grosly abused; and there being so many charges and so few quotations produced as proof: it therefore we had no other reasons to reject J: T's printed challenge, yet that of it self had been sufficient for now should we weigh every word, examins the Context & Subject which it treats on, and why it was so written? How should we have the [...] meaning interpreted by the plain and visible design of the Author in his whole discourse, as the above per­sons have laid down as a right and just method to be taken in read­ing of books if we know not a reasonable time afore-hand what the books and pages are in order thereto? but seeing, as to the Bomb, it is otherwise, our method therefore of shewing our books, as herein after advertised, will have the less effect in re­lation to satisfy the inquisitive and unprejudiced reader; there­fore, as to that, we can but take the charges as they have gi­ven them, which are as followeth.

Bomb. First by their contempt of the Holy Scriptures, calling them Dust Death and Serpent's meat beastly ware [...] f [...]ol &c.

Ans: This with many other things have been so often answered that we think it meerly needless to say much more of it; and as to the word Dust, it was no ways spoken in contempt of the Ho­ly Scriptures; but it was written against some few of old who ran so far into an extteam as to Deify as it were the very letter of the Scriptures, which, to be sure, may be termed Dust; and that there were such Priests see G: F's Great Mystery page 261; how one Roger Atkins affirmed That the Letter of the Scripture is God. And Richard Stoaks affirmed that the Scripture is God. And Jeremiah Jves affirmed, it was an error to say, the Letter of the Scripture is carnal. ibid: page 111.

Now, tho' our friends in those days have seemed to some to run something into an extream by using such expressions as they did [Page 15]in opposition to such extreams of those sort of priests, whose said crooked expressions did need straightning: we hope they are not to be condemned for using endeavours as they did for that end. As for the word Death, Vind: Veritatis, page, 192. as D: Philips saith, what difference is there between [...]aying, the Letter killeth, and the Letter is death; for the Apostle in Cor: 2.3 6. saith, The Letter killeth; and is not the sense the same, tho' differently worded; and surely as the Apostle used not any slighting expression of the Scripture; no more, we are well satisfied, did G: F: &c. As for the words, Serpents meat, see also what the said D: P: shews us in the same page, how the adversary abusively joyned those following words together; which are not so in G: F's book viz. Your word is carnal. The Letter and the Light is carnal. The Letter, and so dust is the Serpents meat &c. Now to this D: P: aptly answers and sayes, whereas, in that page there are twelve lines between, The Light is carnal the letter, and so dust is the Serpents meat: in this in­termediate space G: F: treats of Infants Baptism and the Lord's Supper: from these two Subjects coming between two Propositi­ons. I conclude, no man that understands a Pro­position will say, Sober Expostula­tion pa: 104. So dust is the Serpents meat is pre­dicated of the Letter, consequently no wayes respects the Scriptures.

As for those words Beastly ware, we are, as to that, also much abused, G: W: saith. ‘I have examined the said book out of which the said expressions have been pretended to be taken, I find no such gross expressions, as calling the Scripture, beastly ware, but divers severe reflections upon the co­vetous, persecuting priests in those days; writ by some prisoners at York-Castle, 1653: A brief Disco­very, pa: 9. and what is there called beastly ware, is not the Scriptures▪ but what Ba­bylons Merchants sell for a large price (i: e.) A rabble of no­tions [Page 16]heaped up in the brain all the week; and which they sell for lucres sake &c: calling them also [...] merchants, costly Sermon-makers who persecuted the pure truth the Saints lived in: but not a word of calling the Scriptures beastly ware; and I am perswaded such blasphemy and contempt of the Holy Scriptures was far from the thoughts of the said prisoners & that which they would have abominated and rejected with abhor­rence, if they had been charged therewith.’

As for the word Jdol, seeing there is no book quoted, we only say thus, that to set up any creature so as to call it God, is to idolize that creature; but in those days, as above, some Priests did so set up the Letter, which is a creature, so as to call it God. What then did they less than idolize the creature?

But now, to shew that our friends have from the beginning had a high and reverend esteem of the Holy Scriptures, see first what G: F: saith of them in answer to those very priests that said the Letter was God &c. In answer to the said Roger Atkins he lays down the said Roger's words, and answers thus, the priest having said the Letter [...] the Scripture was God, it was asked, If the Letter Paper and Ink was God? And he said it was God, and brought Io [...]n, 1: to prove it. And again, he said the Letter was the word of God, G: F: answers. ‘The Scriptures of Truth, they are the words of God and were all learned of God.’ Great Mystery, page, 261. ‘ [...]o the Scriptures are not God, but they were holy men of God, which learned of God which spake them forth.’ And in his answer to the said Richard Stoaks, he saith, Ibid. pa 111. ‘And the Scriptures of Truth are not God, but are his wo [...]d [...] that cannot be broken’ And in his answer to the said [...] holding that the Letter of the Scripture is not car­nal G F: [...] The Letter of the Scripture, Paper and ink, we cannot say is spiritual, but that which it speaks of is spi­ritual.

[Page 17]And Edward Burrough saith, [...] page, 104. the Scripture is a declaration of the word, and what is written of, is the word [mark that] Again he saith, I do honour the Scrip­ture above other writings, and give them the authority, Ibide [...]. esteem and respect due unto them, and more I dare not.

And in the book called Several Papers &c: published by G: F: in the year 1654, there it is said thus concerning the Scriptures, they are a true declaration of that word which was in them that gave or spake them forth, and are of no private interpretation; but were given forth to be read, and fulfilled in the Saints as they were given forth by the Holy Ghost, without adding or di­minishing; and were not given forth for men to make a trade of or get money by: but as they are, they are profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto every good work.

1655. page, 2.And Richard Farnsworth in his book called The Scriptures Vindication saith (in answer to a priest say­ing that we say the Scriptures are not the word of truth) that the Scriptures are words that proceeded from the Spirit of Truth we do not deny but own, and so they are words of truth: but that the Scriptures are the word of God and eternal life as thou wouldest have them to be, thou canst not prove. And in his book called The Holy Scriptures cleared from scandal, He saith, the Scriptures I own, and that holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And such have the be­nefit and comfort of the Scriptures as they are guided by the Ho­ly Ghost &c. Multitudes of instances of our truly owning the Ho­ly Scriptures we might produce, but this we hope is sufficient to satisfy any sober enquirer, and detect the falshoods of these our false accusers.

Bomb. 2dly. They deny the ever-blessed Trinity in a most blasphemous manner.

[Page 18] Ans: This F: B: produced against G: F: concerning which take G: W [...] [...] in his Sober Expostulation page 9 [...]: which notwithstanding all their clamours, is the substance of what may [...] respect against us: G: W: answers thus ‘A gross calumny also [...] blasphemed nor opposed Scripture-Trinity [...] of the Father, Word (viz [...] the Son) and Holy Ghost but objected against Subsistences or Substances unscripturally by some supposed of or applied to the Deity.’

Bomb. Thirdly, They deny Jesus to be Christ the Son of God.

Ans: This abominable falshood [...] [...]cked charge hath been often brought against W: P: for which see his own vindicati­on in the preface to the abovesaid D: P's book, upon the place thus ‘I can hardly comprehend how any man that desires to be just, and had not much rather we were in the wrong than in the right, (which must-shew the worst of minds) [...] affirm that I denied Jesus Christ who, I believe laid down his life with­out the gates of Jerusalem for the sins of the world to be the son of God, because I said that the body or outward person that died could not properly be the Son of God, but rather the body or person of the Son of God; [...] and making the term body and outward person to be synonimous or the same [...] which distincti [...] I was only [...] to make because Thomas J [...]er, against whom I wri [...] had laid down his proposition [...] the doctrine of Le Middleton, who assert [...] Go himself to [...]a [...]e died as well as his body which the Scriptures tell us God had prepared of the seed of Abraham for his beloved Son to do his will in as the scope of [...]he place and context and particularly the confession made by me to Jesus Christ as the Son of God as page 149 of the Apology doth [...].’ [...] W: [...]'s own words who [...] said page 149 of the [...] book [...] to above, also expresly in our name saith ‘That we believe in [Page 19]one Lord Jesus Christ his [speaking above of God Almighty] ONELY SON and express Image of his Substance, who took upon him flesh and was in the world, and in Life, Doctrine, Miracles, Death, Resurrection and Ascension, and Mediation perfectly did and doth continue to do the will of God, to whose holy Life, Power, Mediation and Blood we only ascribe our Sanctification, Justification, Redemption and perfect Salvation.’ He that can read this and yet say we deny Jesus to be Christ the Son of God, must surely be very much blinded with prejudice.

As for the Bomb's fourth charge about Baptism and the Supper he meerly begs the question in saying we neglect, contemn and deny the Sacred Ordinances of the Gospel, namely Baptism &c: for we do not understand that by Scripture those outward things, as eating bread and drinking wine, and sprinkling Infants having sureties called God-fathers and God-mothers to promise that the child shall forsake the Devil and all his works &c: were any of the Ordinances of the Gospel: Concerning all which having already answered so many Objections about it, we see no need to say more of it here. But see R: Barclay's Apology, and Thomas Lawson's Treatise of Baptism &c.

Bomb. That they undervalue the Death and Sufferings of our Sa­viour, by affirming not only their own sufferings to be not onely great­er but more unjust than the Sufferings of Christ, his Apostles and blessed Martyrs.

Ans: This we know Francis Bugg hath long ago laid to the charge of Edward Burrough, concerning which tho' we grant that passage of E: B's was not safely worded, yet we really believe, considering (according to the above Isodorus his advice) the Context, the Subject of which it treats, and why it was so written, his meaning was no [...] [...]n the least, to undervalue the Death and Sufferings of our Saviour, nor to set up or compare our friends Sufferings to his, as in themselves; but that they were more unjust, [Page 20] according to the Laws of men: Those Persecutors who put our Sa­viour to death of old having a Law, as they thought, for what they did, saying we have a Law, and by our Law he ought to die: And in Queen Marie's days they persecuted according to their unjust Laws; but those Persecutors that Edward Burrough spoke of, E. B's Works page 273. being about the year 1657 used an Arbitrary Power condemning our friends without Law for say­ing THEE AND THOƲ; and for not pulling off the Hat &c: For which they had not so much as pretence of Law. Hereby, saith he, it appears the sufferings to be more unjust (viz:) in the Persecutors (meaning than in the days of Christ, the Abo­stles and Martyrs) because what the Persecutors of old did to the people of God, they did by a Law, and by the due execution of a Law; but now many are caused to suffer deeply, whom the transgression of no Law, good or bad (saith he) can be charged against, and others suffer without the due execution of a Law. Again (saith he) many now suffer cruel things about trivial and foolish matters, as for not pulling off a hat, or for theeing of men. Again (saith he) hundreds have suffered upon suspicion when nothing at all can be charged against them, and this is contrary to Magna Charta. Is it not clear that these words of E: B's are very naturally construed above to be his intent and meaning? tho' we still say they were not safely worded: How­ever it doth not follow from his, or any other friends words or sentences mistaken or misworded, that therefore they are not true Ministers &c: as to the main of their ministry; 1 Sam: 16: 6 7. for was not the Prophet Samuel mistake when he took Eliab to be the Lord's Anointed? Was not that Eminent Apostle, Peter something blameable when Paul withstood him to his face; be­cause, saith he, he was to be blamed, Gal: 2 11: Yet surely these men were friends of God Ministers of Christ [...] Apostles &c.

As for his saying, we over-value our own writings. [...]ow [Page 21]knows he that? for though sometimes our Friends, writing by way of caution or exhortation to any, have said, To you this is the word of the Lord, or the like; It is no more to be understood of the letter, or paper and ink (which was what our friends op­posed to the word of God) than the word of the Lord thro' the good men of old, and Prophets was meant only such when they so often cried to the people, saying, Thus saith the Lord &c: neither did they intend that it was the Letter, Paper and Ink that was the word of the Lord; but it was the Spirit of Christ who is the Word of God speaking in and through them to the people; and this may surely be safely said in a degree and measure by such through whom the Spirit of Christ speaks to the people in this day, but we do not say in the same degree, for we prefer the Holy Mens writings called the Scripture to all the books extant in the world,

We now come to other charges against us in the Bomb, which we expect J: Talbot should also prove as publickly as there char­ged, or else that he should as publickly acknowledge he hath wronged us; seeing he hath so far espoused it, as to offer to prove it. The first is.

Bomb. I cannot but advise all to beware of their Leaven, knowing that what they declare touching the faith of Christ crucified, they mean not a word o [...] what they say.

Ans: Behold to what a PRODIGIOUS sort of Omniscience do these men pretend to, even to the knowing the very thoughts and meanings of men, and even contrary to what they profess & declare, yet in the mean time flout at us about infallibility and discerning, when a greater degree of discerning can surely scarce be pretended to than to pretend to know mens meaning [...] though contrary to what they constantly profess and declare; but blessed be the Lord our thoughts excuse us in this [...]; and hereby we know we are in the Truth and that the Bomb's charges are [Page 22]false in this matter, because our hearts condemn us not, for which cause we have confidence in God; which confidence we hope and desire, all the attempts and stratag [...]ms of the adversary will never be able to shake. Are such men fit to detect the want of Charity in others, who are themselves in such a superlative de­gree of uncharitableness toward others?

Bomb. They tell us that the Name Jesus and Christ belongs to every member as well as as to the head, meaning, as well to every believing Quaker, as to Christ the head.

Ans: Here he imposeth again upon his reader a meaning as if we held and meant none members of Christ but such as are called Qua­kers: We believe and hope there are other sheep which are not of this fold, and we assume not any more to our selves, but what the saints had ever a right to. I know the substance of this ob­jection hath been often cited from an ancient book of our friend I­saac Pennington sti [...]ed a Question to Professors page 27: And hath often been answered by our fri [...]nds, see G: Whitehead's An [...] ­dote page 151. What I: P: said, was by way of question, and he concludes his question with this caution (viz:) ‘So that the Name is not given to the Vessel, but to the Nature, to the hea­venly treasure, to that which is of him in the Vessel, to that which the Lord from heaven begets in his own Image and like­ness of his own substance, of his own seed, of his own Spirit & pure life &c:’ But for the word Jesus it's the Bomb's addition, Isaac Pennington hath not there the word Jesus mentioned: Yet, tho' Jesus signifies a Saviour and therefore a name most proper­ly and peculiarly belonging to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; yet we find the Saints are called Saviours also.

As it is said Saviours shall come upon Mount Sion and judge the Mount of Esau: Obadiah, 20. From whence the mar­gin refers to 1 Tim: 4 16 [...] Apostle tells him [...] by taking heed to himself, and continuing in his doctrine, he should [Page 23] save both himself and those that hea [...]d him: And tho' no man ought to assume the name of the Lord Jesus Christ; yet we see that holy man Stephen called Joshua that led the Children of Is­rael over Jordan &c: by the name of Jesus, Asts 7.45.

As for Edward Burrough's saying in the year 1656 to the Priests and Professors that we had sufficient cause to cry against them, and to deny their Church, their worship and their whole religion: His next following words explain his meaning (viz:) as not being in the power and by the spirit of the living God, as commanded of him, or practic'd [mark practic'd] by his saints; so that it appears it was their practical, not their professing part that E: B: chiefly struck at.

Bomb. That our Service-Book bottom'd on divine authority &c: is idolatrous because we pray: O Son of David have mercy on us.

Ans: A very notorious falshood. We deny the charge. We E­steem it no ways idolatrous to say, O Son of David have mercy upon us. And we deny the Service-Book to be bottom'd on di­vine authority; it hath been rather composed, and kept up by humane authority, there being no Scripture-rule directing, nor pretence of any being required of God to set up such a limited form of worship; however we deny it not for the reason the Bomb, as above, alledg [...]h

Bomb. For, let but a Quaker and a Christian happen to dine toge­ther and if the Christian as in duty hound, shall but say▪ Good Lord pardon all our sins &c: and all for Jesus sake, the Quaker will sit with his hat on his head, as a testimony against this known duty &c.

Ans: Where is now the Bomb's charity; thus by whole-sale, with his foolish and overtly distinction, to unchristian us; how­ever, we are no more convinced than the Bomb hath proved that when we dine it's our bounden duty to say Good Lord par­don our sins &c: There is no precept nor practice for it in all [Page 24]the Scripture; however it's not the words but the custom and manner of it, without waiting for the motion of life to a duty, that occasions our testimony against joyning with it, and seeing they say they are in duty bound to use the like words when they go to meals, how is it then that so many of themselves so often sit down thereto and use no words at all, and others not those words? neither are those words to be found in any of their Graces which they have ordered to be said before and after mean: but y ^t we say, to pray for Jesus Christ's sake, is to pray, petition and give thanks in the name, and for the sake of a dead God, is like the rest of his nauseous stuff and abuses. Edward Burrough saith not a word of praying in the name of Jesus, nor for Christ's sake in either of the pages cited by the Bomb: It's true in 1655 he writ sharply against the priests of that time, who were so often praying and petition­ing the then powers against our friends, as in the Westmorland petition may be seen; which petitions and prayers were too much hearkened unto by them: which caused our friends to be greatly persecuted by those powers; therefore it's no wonder we find Edward Burrough in page 101, telling them, as he doth, that the beast was risen in defence of them, and then told them how they prayed to their dead Gods, and preach'd to their ignorant people against God's heritage: But not a word of a dead God, or of praying to God or Christ or Jesus do we find in that page, nor in any part of that Chapter, nor in any part of page 518 cited also by the Bomb. O what do you, PRETENDED CONTENDERS FOR THE FAITH and Mysteries of the Gos­pel, think will be the end of your thus abusing and belying men!

Bomb. Your whole business is to deceive.

Ans: When he hath prov'd this as publickly as charged, we shall then grant he hath done good service for friends; but till then we shall sit down well assured of the contrary; how­ever, [Page 25]no honest or judicious man should so publickly and in such a lavish manner accuse his neighbours, but should as publickly, when required by the accused, either make good what he saith, [...] as publickly acknowledge his fault: One of which we expect from him, as he would approve himself such; for we utterly deny this lavish and monstrous charge.

Bomb. They tell us, All that preach Christ without and bid people believe in him, as he is in heaven above, are false Ministers, Witches and Devils &c.

Ans: As he hath produced no proof; so we provoke him to prove it, if he can, (that is to say) that we, meaning the Quakers, [...] Col: 13.5. thus tell them; for tho' we believe & know Christ to be within all who are not reprobates, yet we believe that he is in heaven above also, whither, in the fight of his disciples, he visibly ascended, according to Acts 1, 11 [...] and the general belief of Christendom: And therefore, where­as in the first impression of William Smith's Book it was said, that they are false (Ministers) which preach Christ without, and bid people believe in him as he is in heaven above, and that by some means or other the word [only] being wanting next after the word above, it was added in the second Impression about thirty years ago, which makes the passage read sound and well; for, as above, if Christ be not [...]n us as well as without us, we are Reprobates.

Bomb. They render the Holy Scriptures to be of no more Au­thority than Aesop's Fables.

Ans: This is as false, as it is alledged without proof. We own the Scriptures to be given forth by divine inspiration and that they were written for our learning that we, thro' patience and comfort of them might have hope; and that all Christian Doctrine ought to correspond therewith and that what is otherwise ought to be rejected: But we abhor such thoughts of Aesop's [...]a­bles, see above.

[Page 26]Note that tho' that one man Solomon Eccles dropp'd such an unjustifiable expression, as that the blood of Christ was no more than the blood of another Sa [...]nt; yet we do not find but our friends upon all occasions disown the passage, see this Introduction.

Bomb. They are no other [mark, no other] than the spawn of the Ranters.

Ans: Here this Challenger may, if he please, challenge his Brother Bugg, or Bugg him; and the Snake both of them; and the Quakers them all for lying, and Bugg for a Contradicter of himself; seeing in the Bomb it's said We are no other than the spawn of the Ranters; yet Bugg in his Book called the Quakers set &c: page 17. says we are the Jesuits natural and undoubted Is­sue, tho' like other Bastards, we are ashamed to own our fathers; so that one while we find we must be squintingly hinted at, as in the title-page of the Almanack for the year 1704 for being the spawn of divers Sects another while the spawn of the Ranters onely, another while the Jesuits undoubted Issue; another while the Snake page 335, tells us Simon Magus is our Father: And thus our poor, but self-interested and prejudiced adversaries being in the net, pudder themselves about us; but the more they flutter, the faster they are in the net; and notwithstanding the false & contradictory account of these our implacable adversaries, they have made no proof of our being any other, and we own our­selves no other than the true Successors of them that were E­steemed as Deceivers, and yet true: As unknown yet well known &c: 2 Cor: 6, 8.

Bomb. That their owning Jesus Christ is indeed no more than a [...]er mystical Romance. That the tendency of all their reasoning a­ [...] instituted Religion is to debauch mankind.

Ans: This is said by him [...] us; and he ought [...] publickly to prove it, or so acknowledge [...] fault: The [Page 27]tendency of our Religion is rather to purify and cha [...]ge mankind by the Spirit of Judgment and burning in the inward parts &c: but not to debauch them. O horrid Slander! And our owning Jesus Christ is in much plainness and sincerity.

Bomb That their Principles improved are destructive to all hu­mane Society.

Ans. But as he hath attempted no proof, so we are very sure he never can, That we have such prodigious destroying prin­ciples. It's well known our Principles te [...]d to the preserving and not destroying either men or the humane Society of m [...]n: but what doth he talk of our Principles when but a little [...]g [...]er in the said Bomb, speaking of our Books, which contain (saith he) their Principles if they had any. Now would any men of sense or Justice so confidently proclaim to the world in print that we have Principles destructive to humane society, when at the very same time they [...]ection whether we have any Principles at all.

Bomb. They are Cheats Lyars and Impostors, and implacable ene­mies to the Christian Religion. As vile Impostor's as ever were.

Ans. One would think that a professed Minister of the Gos­pel, who is so tender of his own reputation so as to enter process against his neighbour in defence of it should (as he would approve himself a disciple of the Master he professes, and as one taught by him to do to others as he would have others do to him be tender of his Neighbours reputation also: For how can our reputation be more criminated than by telling us, we are Lyars, Cheats as vile Imposters as ever were: And that our whole business is to de­ce [...]e &c. And tho' men may struggle a while to preserve their reputation, yet such unjustifiable courses such preposterous abu­sing honest men by whole-sale will make but s [...]w steps towards i [...] in the eyes of honest and just men.

Bomb. And since the Quaker Prophets have plainly declared in print, their aversion to gave liberty of [...]onscience to the Episcopal Church [Page 28] [...] works of Richard Hubberthorn pa. 228. Edward Burroughs works p [...] 615. why should we so far encourage them as to hear their [...] [...]ings.

Ans. [...] desire all to take notice that from this we are cauti­o [...] against [...]earing Minister and Prophets that are not for giving Liberty of Conscience, which indeed is in it self a good caution; be­cause Persecuting Ministers cannot be good Ministers; for it's those who walk after the flesh that persecute those who are walking af­ter the Spirit and they that walk after the flesh cannot please God; but the true Ministers exhorted people to live after the Spirit, and if any opposed, they were meekly to instruct those that opposed themselves: but it's no where said in Scripture that they were to persecute them.

Now we think the right application of this should deeply af­fect divers of the Priests of our times, who are frequently to this day Persecuting abundance of conscientious people who tho' they do not joyn with them nor go to hear them yet these persecutions are only be­cause for Conscience sake they cannot comply with the unchristian way of forcing men to maintain them. So that according to their own ar­gument (and a good one in it self it is) all people may esteem that a justifiable reason (if there were no other) not to hear them; but this is not all, for as in other places they persecute us for the above cause, so both here and there too many of them most grievously abuse and belye us, not only as above is shewn but also in this very passage, for there is no such thing as any aversion in any of our Prophets as he calls them) to give liberty of Conscience to the Episcopal Church in either of the said pages. Edward Burrough's 615 page is an answer to the Anabaptists and not one word against liberty of Conscience, either to them or to the Ediscopal Church or any Church or people whatsoever. And Richard Hubberthorn is so far from shewing an aversion to liberty of Conscience to any, that he much blames his then Adversaries who were also Anabap­tists [Page 29]for that they were not for tolerating all perswasions, and con­tinuing his discourse to page 31. there tell them, that if they had been of Christ's Spirit they would have professed toleration and not destruction to all persons in matter of religion: So that the Bomb is as false in this matter as it's argument is good against going to hear those who are averse to give liberty of Conscience.

Bomb. How frequent is it with the Quakers to charge our Commu­nion-table, to be the Table of Devils &c.

Ans. This is spoken to and answered in the Philadelphian Almanack 1704 to which we do not find they have made any re­ply, we may see there how it was such as Drunkards Railers [...]d Cursed speakers that met together in the fellowship which G. F. so called, to which we may truely add that the fellowship of Gross Lyars false Accusers, and those who are not for giving Liberty of Conscience can be no better.

Bomb. How can we, if we have but a spark of zeal for our holy reli­gion which our Martyred Ancestors suffered in the flames for go and hear such blasphemous wretches.

Ans. Meer s [...]ff imposed upon the people, as if those famous Mar­tyrs suffered in the flames for maintaining any of those things con­cerning which you and we differ, and therefore concerning which we query. Did those famous Martyrs suffer in the flames for that they held sprinkling Infants, having God-fathers and God-mo­thers so called and for taking that called the Sacrament and for cal­ling them Gospel ordinances? surely no; but for that they did not do it in the popish way and manner. Did they suffer for that they held Oathes to be lawful? surely no; but some of them rather the contrary. Did they suffer in the flames for maintaining a common Liturgy? or was it not rather for not using it after the popish way and manner? Did they suffer in the flames for hold­ing visible Priesthood under the Gospel? or for maintaining that none should publickly teach or preach to the people or be Mini­sters, [Page 30]but such as had received an outward Ordination from [...] Bishop [...]? Surely no. Did they [...] for maintaining and keep­ing [...] of the Black Coat, White Su [...]plice, Tippet Hood, O g [...]s &c: in the Church? Surely no.

[...] suffer in the [...] or otherwise for holding that [...] and forced maintenance was due to a select number of [...] the Clergy; Surely no; but some or them [...]he rather the contrary, as John Wickli [...] William Thorp, William Swinderly, Walter Brute the B [...]le [...]s &c: whose opposing of Tythes was made a principal argument against them by the Papists see the first Volume of Martyrs &c. Anno 1700. Lastly Did they suffer in the flame for [...]g [...]ing and vilifying the Light of Christ in men? which you [...] witness the three Norfolk Re­ctors in their late book called the Quakers Principles &c page 57. O [...]ing it a whimsical witness the Light within [...]h'd from Terra [...]. — 7. Again A [...] Imaginary Christ, — 49. the Light within; A Go [...] Image: The Light can be no Rule to us; — 6. B ou [...] insinuate it to be a spark from the de­vils [...]org [...] &c:

[...] they contradict all this; for in page 49 they tell us, If we say the Spirit it self is our Rule, tis no more than to say, the Light within us, or the Light, the Spirit of God shed into our hearts is so▪ Observe how these three learned Re­ctors blasphemously vilify the Light of Christ, calling it a whim­sical [...] a spark from the Devils forge &c. who yet in the same book [...] be the Light which the Spirit of God sheds into our Hearts &c. what is this but to say the Light [...] on the Spirit of God [...] our Hearts is a whimsical witness &c. Observe [...] 52 they say that every man hath a Light within him, [...] which w [...] [...]incerely declare we have [...] say the [...]gh [...] can be no rule to them; now what is all this but to say they seriously declare th [...] [Page 31]have acted according to a rule that can be no rule to them, O MONSTROUS CONFUSION and Darkness of these learned Rectors in their dark attempts against the true Light of Christ, who enlighteneth every man that cometh into the World and which Jo [...]n was sent to [...]ear witness of, that all through him might believe!

Now concerning these and many other things it is about which we differ with our present opposers; but for which we no where find that those blessed Martyrs did ever suffer in the flames or o­therwise. And tho' they held and maintained some things (if be­ing then early in the day of breaking forth of Gospel-Light) that [...]me i [...] in y ^e dark night of Apostacy, yet walking according as they then saw things, and maintaining those Truths made known [...] them to their death. they were doubtless esteemed in the eyes of the Lord as precious Sufferers and Martyrs, [...]x [...]elling one thing after another; and tho many unscriptural or Popish practices were still retained, yet they were after, not at once but by degrees laid [...], and for which Doctor Burnet saith they the reformers gave [...] reason (viz.) That it was no wonder that Corruptions which had been creeping in a thousand years were not all discovered and thrown out at once▪ Bridge, of the Reformation 2 Book pa: 161. And indeed we do not find but what we and all sincere Protestants hold it our duty rather to suffer for than submit to. And the Au­thor of Light shining out of Darkness &c: tells us aonther story in page 84 about the first Reformers and their sufferings who after having used divers Arguments out of the Ancient Protestants as Luther &c: against the necessity of personal Succession Outward Ordination, and the Clergy's monopolizing the Publick Ministry to themselves, so as none should publickly preach or pray but them­selves; which corruption those first Reformers bo [...]ly testified against, as contrary to the nature of the Gosp [...]-Covenant: ‘Their Arguments (saith the said Author) as much as they are [Page 32]exploded now were the bottom of the Reformation, and those upon whose foundation we now [...]and, did venture their Lives their Fortunes and their Souls hereupon:’ So that, according to which it appears that the Reformation and the bottom upon which those first Reformers stood, was not founded upon, but against that which you since plead for and practice (to wit) Personal Suc­cession, Outward Ordinatination, Restrained preaching with more too tedious here to mention.

To conclude, amongst all the above false charges of the Bomb as w [...] justly call them, if J: T: can but do this part of what he calls a good Office for friends and publish it as far as it's i [...] the Bomb charg'd and challenged, viz. To prove that what we declare touching our Faith in Christ Crucified we mean not a word of what we say and that our whole business is to deceive: then we must needs say whatever service h [...] [...]ght do in it for friends, yet it might doubtless in an extraordinary manner so approve himself a person capable to work such Miracles as that of the Popish Transubstan­tiation would not out do it; because by so doing he must certain­ly prove that to be which is not: But O MISERABLE PROPA­GATORS OF THE GOSPEL IN FOREIGN PARTS [...] thus thro' envy o [...] abuse [...]n [...]onest people (under pretence of doing it) by false accusations contrary to the Gospel and common Morality.