IT hath been an old Failing in Men, even as antient as the Fall of Man, to be apt and quick sighted in other Mens faillings, and as blind and igno­rant in their own Infirmities: Certain­ly its a great unhappiness unto the whole human Race, that they cannot comply with this one Gosple Instruction (viz.) Cast first the Beam out of thine own Eye, and then shalt thou see clear to cast the Mote out of thy Brothers Eye; the Misfortune of which sad and unhappy Dissaster have been the chief cause of my appearing once more to publick View, as the Author of and Voucher to the following Dis­course, by way of an Answer to a cer­tain Pamphlet handed about in this Go­vernment under the unproper, unsea­sonable, inconsistent, undescreat, De­nomination of A Speech or Sermon made by way of a Charge unto a Grand-Jury, [Page 6]which suits the Time, Purpose and Sea­son, just as much as the Proposition whereupon the Theme is grounded suits good Christian Mens Ears, or the Theme suits Gospel and Truth, even just so much, after my Opinion: With what Views, Aims and Ends the honourable Author of such Religious Chapters Ex­hibited, such Oration, at so an unsui­table, unseasonable a Time, and so in­consistent to the Matter at that Time in Hand: I shall not here undertake to determine, least I should controul the Authors Mentals, seeing he is so pleased to tell us, that it is purely out of Love and Good-will to Mankind and love of Truth: And if this be true its a good Morral; how Mean and Shallow so ever the Sences be that it proceeds from: And in that Nature it bespeaks a very greatful Acceptance: But sup­pose that I mistake the Authors Inten­tions, and suspect the verity of his Pre­tentions, and should humbly conceive that it was some other Object that gave Conceptions to this Religious Plan: Why yet it fortuneth any ignorant mis­takes, that the Master of these so lau­dable [Page 7]and plauseable Performances, is said to be a wise, politick, grave Man, and hath no doubt Wit enough to look upon the sharp rebuke of Religious Ad­monitions, as they proceed from godly Love to his Soul, with such Aspects of good and godly Friendship, as all such things in their own Nature require; therefore I begin to say, if I have good reason to believe that the Author of such a clashing, inconsistent Heap of Folly and Madness, is seven fold more under Mistake and Error than those that he travels to correct and reform, certainly if ever he did himself expect any Thanks suitable to his Toile, La­bour and Expence, for their Recovery; he will be so Modest as to return the same Measures unto any that at least with as good Reason and Will labour to recover him from the like or worse Dis­saster.

I am bound in Conscience to try to lift you out of the Bogg of the diaboli­cal Nature, and out of the dark Dungeon of Ignorance, and set you in the Light of the glorious Gospel; and in order to that purpose it seems to me the best way [Page 8]to take a retrograde Order, according to the Gospel Rule, of beginning with the last first; for should I first begin with the Proposition upon which the Doc­trine of your Pamphlet is grounded, that will certainly prove False at the first Chop, and so then, according unto the Rules of Reason, my Work will be at an End as soon as I begin; because it's a general Rule in Reasons, That if the Proposition be False the Conclusion cannot be True: And it can be nothing but super­fluity to look any further into a Place that we are sure hath little or no Truth in it.

These Things being thus premised, as an Introduction; I come now to the Matter.

In an Advertisement, in the Gazette of March the 3d 1741-2, the Gentleman, the Author of the Speech and Pam­phlet, was pleased to tell us that he was a united Member of a Society of Religious People called Quakers: And that Men might not take him for an A­theist or a Deis-Man, he sums up some of these extraordinary Principles that he would have Men think he holds in com­mon [Page 9]with that Society, as Meekness, Humility, Charity, Patience, Brother­ly Love, Not rendering Evil for Evil, nor Revilling even for Reveilling; I suppose for shortness sake, he went no further, to shew what Principles he held in common with them of CHRIST and the Gosple; No, he hath done me so much Hardship as to leave me that Task to endeavour to do: I con­fess Indeed, that it was no Prudence in the Remark-Maker, be he who he will, to use such provoking Language; nor can I take it for any Produce of any thing Divine, or of even good Morals either; for it's really absurd to think to reduce Men to Reason by a huff of foul Words. And on the other Hand, I must say too, Men ought not to erect Hobgoblings and Mockings, fit for no other Purpose but to start Passions in the weaker Part of Man­kind: I declare I do not know the Remark-Maker, nor do I aprove of his Method: But this is worthy to be said of him, he really had more Wit then to Sum up the religious Principles he held, of not Rendering Evil for Evil, [Page 10]nor even Reviling for Reviling: Whilst he was in the act that these Principles so expresly forbid: Nor was it a small Surprize to me to see our so reported wise, grave, polite Author, make use of the like Paranomasia, by mystick Allusions, and by express Words to and by false Accusations too, that are plain enough seen through: For through the Epithetes might shew him to be a pas­sionate and hot Nature or Temper: Yet the Epithetes do not shew him to be an apostate Tool nora Time-server either: But let not Truth any longer offend you [suppose I tell you in Truth and Honesty, for I am no respecter of Persons, I regard no Mans Person in these Cases] that its greatly be­lieved amongst all Societies, that you measured your Remarker's Corn by your own Bushel, when you past your Judgment upon the Symptoms of the Epithetes, as shall full plainly appeare by and by: I am really Sorry to tell you that it's a shocking Surprize to me and many others, that would sain har­bour an Opinion of the Authors being a polite wise Man; Is it possible that [Page 11]you should be a Member of a Religi­ous Society of People, that profess them­selves taught by that Spirit of Truth that leadeth unto all Truth, and teach­eth all things, that is true and is no lye? And this Society, and you as a United Member of that Society, hath held forth that the Gosple Dispensation is a Dispensation that knoweth nothing but Love, Peace, Unity, Patience, Charity, & c. all love to God and good­will unto Men, and averseth all Strife, Envie, Malice and Blood-shed; and after you have held forth for a long seer of Years back, as well Exampleary as by Doctrine, that this hath been taught you by this infalable Teacher (and so well it agrees with the reveil­ed written Word) and now, for a Man that Declareth himself a united Mem­ber, to stand forth and declare against the Dictates of that infalable Teacher, that it is both false and erronious; how can this hang together any better then Ropes of Sand, as the old saying is; is it possible in any Case, that you could ever be any Member of that So­ciety of People that have all ways held [Page 12]forth that the Gosple Covenant, Jere­miah Chap. 31. hath long since taken Place, and that Christ had appeared in a Spiritual Manner, without Sin, unto Salvation, the Second Time; in a Spi­ritual Manner, to as many as look and wait to receive him in that order, and than he hath taken Possession of his Spi­ritual Kingdom in the Hearts of true Believers, and there he and only he is the sole Teacher in the aforesaid Spiri­tual Manner: And could thou then be a Member of this Society that hath so many Years past held this Doctrine forth by Doctrine and Examples, now at this time a Day, be so Ignorant as to make such harangues hapy and hapy and hapy again will that Day be when Swords shall be turned Plough-Sheers; if ever thou had believed there would come such a Day, is it possible that thou should Averse, and with all thy might, oppose every thing that hath any shew of the dawn of that Day: Consider that the Epithites of these things leave but a bad Aspect, I am apt to think that the Author of the Remarks was some what of my Opinion, [Page 13]that if no Religion could be true but what is agreeable to the Law of Nature, and seeing the Gosple must be admit­ted to describe the Law of Nature un­to all that believe the Gosple; then certainly if this should pass without Annimadversion, the Stones would cry out against the Christian World: I need not inform any Gospler that we are all by Nature the Children of Wrath, un­der the Malidiction of Gods Wrath and Hatred, and that we through Disobedi­ence have utterly lost that state of Na­ture in which we were first created, from which dismal State no Medicene can de­liver us, but only that salivateing Anti­dote of Faith in Christ, which Anti­dote purgeth out all Envy, Strife, Wrath, Blood-shed, Murders, &c. and forms us by a Transmutation into a new Creature that knoweth nothing in its Nature but Love, Concord, Peace and Unity, which all have attendance un­to the Prophitecal Day in the very Na­tural Effects of it: Could it ever be possible, that a Man of Honesty and Honour, that was Compus-mentus, could ever have composed such a Quile of [Page 14]Sand-Rope Contradictions, not only to all Reveled Gosple Rules and Prece­dents of Christ and his Apostles, but ut­terly inconsistent with the fundamental Principles of that very incorporated So­ciety and Body that he publisheth him­self a Member of: What then may be called Apostate, but he that Revoul­teth from his acknowledged consessed Principles that he hath owned to have held in common with a Society as a uni­ted Member of the same. What is a Tool but a secondary Mean in the Hands of a Prime Labourer, that acts sui­table to the Mind and Motions of the User, to effect his designed Aims and Views with? What is a Time Server, but a mutable un-stable Person that changeth to sute that side of the Ques­tion where he thinketh his Interest may be the Greatest and Securest: Such a Persons Epithetes sheweth him to be an Apostate, Tool and Time-Server, in my Semple Opinion: However I leave every Reader to Judge for himself whe­ther the Pamphlet-Writer or the Re­mark-Maker is shewed by the Epi­thetes to be an Apostate, Tool and Time [Page 15]Server; and proceed now to Cast an Eye into the Pamphlet it self, as the original Head-Spring of the whole Dis­pute, where first I met with excuse beg­ged for, that the Author of the follow­ing Piece is about to use so much Sup­perfluity, as to go about to prove a Thing that proves it self in it's own Na­ture, as (he saith) I must needs be so Vain as to think how I am under full as great an Obligation to pray Pardon for the same Fault.

And now followeth that (so called) impregnable Proposition, Foundation or principle Head-spring, upon which all this Bull-work and Rampant Edifice bottoms, which matter consisteth of the following Meterials, No Religion foun­ded upon any pretended Refutation of the Will of God can be True, that is in­consistent with, and repugnant to the Law of Nature: Thus it seems stands the Case; Well, and if this be the Case, then we are of all Men in Christ most mise­rable, as saith the Apostle. Note the Proposition is General, viz. To THE LAW OF NATURE; Well, is God then bound to the Law of Nature; sure [Page 16]this Obligation Must be either from the great Connexion of Peace, Love and immuteable espoused Unity between God and Nature, and that be Univer­sel, because the Law of Nature hath but one only Property in the whole (at least) human Race, whether Turks, Barbarians, Jews, Indians, Negros, &c. which they all hold in common with Christians.

How this natural Philosophy doth a­gree, I shall not here stand to censure, but say it must be this Obligation or some other Obligation; but it can be no other Obigation, for any other Obli­gation must needs tend to make God Na­ture's Bond-slave, which would be abo­minable; this must spring then from the Wolston- [...] Deis-men's Opinion, that is, that God made all Things in the State & Nature that they now, stand, & in clo­sed up in an Onus, or Sphere, out of which they cannot pass; nor to any thing perti­cular hath God any regard: So that every thing answereth it's Purpose, and every Action that is done, answereth to the good of one another; and that every one hath Free-will to do what he list­eth [Page 17]to do, and every Action is Good, and so God cannot be so Contrary to Himself, as to destroy Nature, which is his own Work, of which God him­self is Principle and Head.

Of these I hinted before, under the Name of Modern Sadduces; I am realy apt to think I have now hit the Mark well: But my Reader will say, What do they hold concerning the Devil? An­swer, That it is a fained Fable: There is no such Thing, say they. And this nothing differeth from down-right A­theism and Annihilation.

I could make many notable Obser­vations, and shew it demonstrably Plain in the current Course of Actions and Things, but as it Interfereth not with my Design here, I now turn back to the Matter.

Seeing God can do nothing Inconsist­ent to the Law of Nature: If I can prove from the Holy Records, That Nature and it's Law is at this Time contrary to God, and not Subject un­to Gods Law, either the Gospel Re­cord must be False, or the Pamphlets Proposition False. In St. Mathew's [Page 18]Gospel, Chap. 5. v. 38. Christ, saith, Ye have heard say, an Eye for an Eye, and a Tooth for a Tooth: Every Body that knoweth what the Law of Nature is, will say this is agreeable to the Law of Nature: but then what must be said of this Teacher, and his Doctrine? But I say unto you, resist not evil, but if any Man Smite thee on the right-Cheek, turn the other, and if any Man sue thee at the Law, and take thy Coat, give him thy Cloak also; and if any Man compell thee to go with him a Mile, go with him twain ver. 39, 40, 41. It hath been said by them of Old, Thou shall Love thy Friend and Hate thine Enemies. This still agrees with the Law of Nature: But who is this that Preaches this Doc­trine? Love thine Enemies, &c. why truly, if there were any Truth in our Pamphlet Writers Proposition, he is an Imposter, and his Doctrine False, be­ing repugnant to the Law of Nature: And this well agrees to the Principles of the Deis-Men: Well; But is it possi­ble that a Member of a Society of Peo­ple that hold Christ to be their Teacher, should thus toil and labour to prove [Page 19]that Teacher an Imposter. Can this be called a Member; rather, can this Man call himself a Member, and not confess himself an Imposter, with the same, and in the same Breath that he Spends, to call himself a Member. I have often heard say that a Child will Laugh and Cry in one Breath; but I never, I think, heard of a wise Man to say and unsay the self same thing in a Breath.

Again, he here either must avouch it to be inconsistent with the Nature of God to Destroy his Enemies, or that God hath no Enemies: If God hath no Enemies, then he here again holds the Testimony of Scripture False; if God hath Enemies, and can and doth destroy his Enemies, I am to ask him who or what may be called Gods Ene­mies; if God doth not, cannot, or will not destroy his Enemies; then the Quakers are highly to be commended, to follow Gods own Example, and the Pamphlet-maker highly to be blamed to offer to Seduce them from such hea­venly Examples. From all the Rea­sons aforesaid, I declare the Proposition [Page 20]notoriously False, Ergo, the Conclusion. Nor can I see any Chance or Choice for any other Man, but he must either hold the Proposition False, or the Gospel False, for I think it a moral Impossi­bility to save both, and so, according to the School-mens Rules of Reason, ends the Matter.

But for as much as I am but an ig­norant Person, and none of those School­men, excuse me if I pursue the Theme so far as to make two or three farther Observations upon it: And first, our pretended Religious Member, in some of his Performances, was pleased to say, That such things as were put forth with­out Reason to support them, were tru­ly worthy of but little Credit; If he pleaseth to render some Reason, why he, after he had dipt his Pen in those glorious Scriptures in such Order and Form as a Man in a doze migh have dipt his Fingers into a hot Pitch Pot, and when it stuck to his Fingers and burnt him, he waked, shuffled this way and that way, and could find no way with either Honour or Honesty; or tolerable Sence, to get clear of it a­gain, [Page 21]till at last he shuffls and wipes it off upon the Apostles: What Reason I say hath he to shew for binding up such heavy Burthens to lay upon the Apostles that were so intolerable for himself to bear. If you had not told, that you was a Quaker, I should have taken you for a Frier that was about with his Baskit picking up the super­fluities, or over-and-aboves, of the A­postles, to supply the want of the Pro­fessors of this Age: Indeed if you had proved the Gospel Rules in part or in the whole, limited in part or in the whole, to some particular Persons, or that they were any way appealed in part, so that they concerned not the Christians of this Age; you had shewed some Reason for what you said: But how you have shewed just the same Reason for what you have said, as a Man would have had to plead a Law not to concern a Subject of this Age, because it was made a long time a go, and just the same Reason: But what say you; Was not this the same that Christ taught his Apostles? Was not this the same that they taught others? Was not that [Page 22]the same that was carefully made Mat­ter of Record of, and handed down from Age to Age, for a Rule of Life and Manners, to all Christian Men of all A­ges.

Observation the second: It was some what of a Mystry to me, and still is so how you first laid down your Proposi­tion upon general Terms; and after good Part of your Argument grounded upon it, You attempted to restrict it to a scrap of the Law of Nature: I should have been so foolish as to have thought a Man might as well have moved the Foundation of a Stone Build­ing, when the Edifice was in great Part erected upon it. No, no more then you can mend an original Write made by good Instructions, after Issue is joined upon it: And I am apt to think that you have made so demon­strably Plain what you intended and meant by the Law of Nature, at first, that I am doubtful that you will get the same Praise and Aplaud from the Learned, as those good House-Wives give those corrupt Tinkers that mend one Hole in their Pan and make two.

[Page 23] Observation the third: Suppose that you and I are convinced that the Law and Wars both bottom upon one Bot­tom, and that they are great Evils, and many evil Consequencies attend them both, as both are Harbingers of Strise, Wrath, Discord, Envy, & c. as you say, so say I in that Case; and to your Question ( viz) doth it therefore follow that its good in no Case: I answer, it is good for a Christian Man to shun e­ven every Appearence of Evil: Yet it is good amongst such as have no Faith in God, such as are without God in the World, that have not the Grace of God in them to inable them to be a Law to themselves, that depend in the Arm of Fresh more than in the Power of God; such as look upon things altoge­ther after the outward Appearence, and choose to cleave to the Practice of other Pagan Notions, that know not God, nor nought believe of his Promises; to all such the Laws of Wars are good: But it doth not follow that Men are Convinced of all Evils, therefore they are convinced of none.

[Page 24] Can any reasonable Creature allow it to stand with Love to Truth and Man­kind, to preach up, that because Men are not convinced of all Evils, there­fore they ought not to say they are convinced of any Evil: Because they are not convinced that the Law is an Evil, therefore they ought not to pre­tend to be convinced that War is an Evil: Because through frail Infirmity Men are attended with many Evils, therefore they must Object against no Evil: Because Men are not Convinced that the Law is Evil therefore they must not Object against War as an Evil, tho' they are convinced it is an Evil. For all the drift and scope of all the doctrine contained in the Pamphlet is, why if War be an Evil: So is this, and so is that: Wo be to them that set evil for good. The whole scope of Doctrine tends not to refute Evil by Scripture Authority and good Reason, but aims and strives to support one Evil by ano­ther, or a greater Evil by a lesser; and in that order to secure and fortify all Evils securely together: And this is [Page 25]the real drift of the Pamphlet, as far as I can see into it.

So you may see, that no Truth can come of a False Proposition, and alto­gether savoureth of the Atheistick, Deis-Mens, Sadducetical Principles in my Opinion; and the Author was pleased, in one of his Religious Chapters, with a great Sum to sum up the Principles of his pretended Society: With Submissi­on, did you by your Religious Pam­phlet intend to shew us, your poor ig­norant Readers, those Performances as the Fruits and Produce of these Princi­ples, or to thereby let us know you were clean departed from all such like Principles? As to my own part, I do freely confess I am not qualified with such Aquirements as to put me in a Capacity to judge of your Religious Performances from the Symtoms of the Epithete, with certainty, for should I with my weak Abilities con­sult the Epithets, it would, I doubt, be the first Question to be determined, whether or no you and those Principles (that you cast up with such great Sum, in order to let us know what extraor­dinary [Page 26]Principles you are Master of, as Member of that Society) ever met in any other Manner than a Borrower may meet with a Thing to be lent? and then it will fall out odly: If the first Question should determine negatively, it might chance to give Cause from my ignorant Judgment upon the Symp­toms of the shewing Nature of the Epi­thets, to conclude you as great a Pel­liculator and Hypocrite in Cases of Religi­on, as ever trod Kentish Ground: From hence it might rise these Conjectures from natural Consequences, That he that was such a gross Pelliculator and Hypocrite in Cases of Religion, and Things belonging to God and Conscience; why not in all other Cases? So, I say, to avoid all this, I refuse to Consult the Epithets or Concrete, and content my self only to ask the Question, and wait my Answer from you, the Author of those Religious Chapters.

I may well assure you that its not with any Pleasure, and much less in a­ny insulting Manner, that I am obliged to treat the Author of those Religious Performances in this sort of sreedom of [Page 27]Words: No, it is realy a pity, and I am sorry that a Man, that I believe o­therwise, in most other Cases, is a po­litick, prompt, wise, discrete Man: It is lamentable, and realy a pity that ever he hath bound himself Voucher to such a confused Heap of Contradictions, Folly and Madness, that I never saw the like in all my life, exposed to pub­lick View in such Cobweb Dress.

In my simple way of thinking, I do know myself to be a Man but of weak Capacities, and yet I should have realy thought it but a Piece of good Justice done me, if Mr. Bickerstaff had put me into his Bedlem, for Tatling over such a Huffe of Vaniety: It would have been much more surprizing then it is to me, had I not been acquainted with the stories of the old Religious Fa­thers, who when they attempted to make use of Religion as a Cloak or Screen to infoist Aims, Vews and Ends of Thing, of a contrary different Na­ture; why they always have thereby runned themselves into Redicule and Confusion.

[Page 28] And now, finaly, I can assure you that I have no envious Eye upon the Person of my Antagonist, but would serve in any reasonable Service that I may: Nay, I may say farther, I should greatly delight in such grave Persons Conversation and prudent Conduct in State Affairs, were it not for that I cannot for my Life help conceiting [tho' perhaps its nothing but Conceit] that all his Words and Actions sent and savour of the Woolstonnitish Deis-Mens Principles, which I abominate. As to my Method of delivering of my Mind, every Man may easily conjecture the Cause of my Order of Words, my Reason for my appearing in Publick, hath no other View but to defend my own Christian like Principles in the first Place; secondly, to defend the Gos­pel of Christ as the Foundation of my Principles; thirdly, to refute, if pos­sible, what seems to me may hurt weak Consciencies, by setting open a Flood­gate to let in Persecution, and lay heavy dooms of Constraint upon realy and truly tender Consciences; and last­ly, out of Good-will and Respect unto [Page 29]my Antagonist, to let him see that he himself is as subject and liable to the common Infermities, Errors and Mis­takes of human Creatures, as any Man at all.