George Fox his firſt Letter.

DEr Leves to wham is my love and to thy wiff & the reſt of Frends in the ever Laſting ſeed of god that changeth not in it live in whom yov have life that was was with the father before the world was

Der Leves mores ther is a yong man cold wilam fartiſ kew that is in trobell abovght Som out ward State that he ſhovd be are of and ſo if that thov canſt do him any good being fatherly leſs doe thy beſt in deavar to aſſiſt and help him to the vtmoſt in his preſant condiſhan which will be a good of eſ J do not knaw the man bvt thov find ovt the trovth & Jvestes in all things & then let rightovſneſs tak place in the thing J heard this reported in this Sity among Som frends & thov being aqvented with the yong man and his condiſhan & therfor aqvent thy ſelf with Som frends that hath vnderſtanding in this thing ther will be water clemenence at the term So no more bvt my lov

Briſtow m 8 d 11 1669 georg fox

Part of George Fox his ſecond Letter.

DEr leves mores with my love to thy wife and to all the reſt of feathfvll frends in the holy pver peacable trovth that changeth not and admitteth of no evil for the divell and all his workes & Jnſtrvmentes is ovt of it and by this trovth all godes children are made free to worſhip and ſerfe the god of trovth in his holy pver vnſpotted trovth

J have heard not good news ovt of long Jſland and road Jſland Som have ron ovt one way and Som another to the diſoner of god and his holy trovth and people and ſome ſpread it as far as barbadvs among bad Spirites & maketh them rejoyce which defileth the Simpelles minds with defiled ſtvf which the had beter a brovght ſvch things to Judgment and to condemnaſhan and then a berred ſvch ſtinking Here he had cauſe to complain, becauſe the Friends of the Miniſtry could not play at Leapfrog privately, but they muſt needs let the World know it: A. Cook and C. Holder of Rhoad-Iſland, the one led a Siſter into a Swamp after Meeting, the other cloſed in with W. C's Wife in a Corn-field. And Mary A— of Long-Iſland left her Husband to exerciſe her Talent in Barbadoes, and became Pregnant in that fruitful Iſland, and returned to her Husband with Increaſe, &c. ſtves ovt of the ſight and the ſmell of any and ſpread the Lords holy preſhus trovth a broad

And as for paſages of trovth in theſe Partes of the World the ſeed of chriſt reaneth over all glory to the lord for ever and meetinges for the moſt partes in in gland are prety qviet bvt by the preſts and biſhops for tieth and old m • ſhoveſes not reparing them the do caſt in preſen and ſvch like ovld popeſh thinges and in Kotland frendes ar freed from ther long impreſment and in Jarland meetings j her ar qviet • in holond and freeſland but at • mdom and danſek the frend •• ther have ſvefered crvely & long and have been baniſhed but the Ld hath ſvported them praſe and glory to his name over all who is the ſtrvngth and life of his people So with my love to the and to all that quereth after me in the holy ſeed

Thov may ſhvw this printed paper to th gaveſ ner or any of the percuting margraſtas in new ingland and thov may let h. ff. coppy this printed paper over for tis worth the keeping a copy of it leſt thov loe it

Jſſ' Swarthmor 11. mo. 1679.

THe Originals of theſe two Letters under Fox's Fiſt, are now in my hands; I have ſhown them to ſeveral Perſons that knew both him and his Learning, who have own'd them to be his own. Witneſs my Hand,

John Talbot, Miſſionary.

Friendly Reader,

We have had G. Fox's Will ſeveral times printed, (both in England and here in America) as it lies to be ſeen in the Prerogative Office in London, wherein there is ſcarce two Lines good Sence or Engliſh; and theſe two Letters are a Confirmation of his Learning; for by the firſt, we ſee, he could not write the date of the Year or ſpell his own Name right; how then was he capable to write a Book, notwithſtanding the many Books the Quakers have ſo impudently publiſhed in his Name, eſpecially his Journal, craftily dreſt up by their chief Wits, that People in after Times might not ſuſpect the Quakers great Apoſtle to be ſuch a Buzard as he was. But this is Quaker Plainneſs and Sincerity.

His Book, called, A Primmer for all the Doctors and Schollars, &c. of 2434 Queries, wherein he is ſet up as Head and Tutor to all Europe, that the World might think him to be a Learned Perſon: This alſo is Quaker Plainneſs and Sincerity.

Likewiſe, his Book called, A Battledoor, of the Interpretation of 20 or 30 Languages, when he underſtood not one of them, by which the poor deluded Quakers were made to believe that G. Fox had the Gift of Tongues by Inſpiration, as the Apoſtles had at Penticoſt. But this is proved a Cheat; for it is diſcovered that the Quakers hired certain learned Men to do it for them: They gave one Jew Thirty Pounds to do the greateſt part of it, and G. Fox only put his Name to it, as the Author, to deceive. This is alſo Quaker Sincerity. Yet the preſent Followers of the Quakers will not believe this; ſo ſtrong is the Spirit of Deluſion, when once it has ſeized the Soul.

Yet by the Mercy of God, ſome who have not ſhut their Eyes ſo hard, have diſcovered the Quakers, eſpecially by ſeeing what a wicked courſe this Fox took to anſwer his Opponents Books, viz. by picking 10, 12 or 14 words out of a Sentence of 20 or 30 words, and tranſpoſing them, and placing them ſo as to turn their ſound and Chriſtian Sayings into Hereſie & Non-ſence, and then anſwer them as their Sayings. Nay, ſometimes he would charge his Opponent with the Qrs. Hereſie or Error he was writing againſt. And the Qrs. knowing their own Guiltineſs in this caſe, would hide it by charging their Oppoſers with the ſame baſe Method of anſwering their Books. But this they charge without Proof, only to amuſe. I ſay, ſome ſeeing theſe ways of Fox, are convinced that he was an Inſtrument of Satan, and not of God, and ſhewed them by what Power and Spirit he took upon him to throw aſide Chriſts Ordinances, and inſtead thereof ſet up his Womaniſh Inventions of Female Prelates, and his honourable Courts of Women, &c.

And indeed, his Denyal of the Ordinances of BAPTISM and the SUPPER of our LORD, and counting them as Humane Inventions, Carnal and Deviliſh, is alone ſufficient to prove to all who are not bewitched with the ſame Spirit, that he was a Miniſter of Anti-chriſt. And becauſe all Chriſtians from the Apoſtles to his Time had continued in the Practice of theſe Ordinances, he had no way to confirm his Followers in a Belief that he had Power to put an end to them, but by declaring himſelf to be EQUAL WITH GOD, and ſet up for a Worker of Miracles, by the ſame Authority as Chriſt did; for you ſhall find in his Journal, in the third Table, his vile and ſenſleſs Miracles are ſaid to be done by the Power of God, Not in the Name of JESUS, as the Apoſtles wrought Miracles, but in his own Name, by the Power of God, To whom, (he blaſphemouſly ſaid) He was Equal, as his Books teſtifie. And upon this account the Quakers Idolize their great Apoſtle FOX, and his Inventions ſet up inſtead of Chriſts Ordinances, as the Turks Idolize their Prophet Mahomet's And were the Quakers but in Power, and half ſo Numerous as the Mahometans, we ſhould ſoon ſee they would as little bear to hear their FOX ſpoken againſt, as they their Mahomet. And unleſs, it pleaſe God to contiue Watch-men upon the Walls, &c. this Deluſion may prove as dangerous as that of Mahomet, becauſe it carries with it a Pretence of Chriſtianity, under the Guiſe of an outſide Righteouſneſs; Miniſters of Satan (ſaith St. Paul) Transforming themſelves as Miniſters of Righteouſneſs, whoſe End ſhall be according to their Works, 2 Cor. 11.15.

And to ſpeak it with Commiſſeration; Have we not ſeen this to be the Self Righteous end of the Quakers? for never any right Quaker has been known to dye with a Lord have mercy upon him in his Mouth!

For their Foundation Principle being the ſame with the Heathen Deiſts, as they Live, ſo they dye in the Mode moſt in voge among the Deiſts, viz. Hard without any ſence of Chriſt or of revealed Religion, truſting only to what is within them, the which, one calls Light, the other Reaſon, and in which both Quakers and Deiſts do magnifie themſelves.

Now becauſe W. Penn extols this Fox in the Preface to his Journal, for his wonderful depth in Divinity and his extraordinary Gift in opening Scripture, and would go to the Marrow of things. Therefore take two or three proofs as follow.

Firſt, In his Book of Diſtinction between the Two Suppers, p. 21. he quotes 2 Tim. 17.18. But Hymen • us and Philetus [ſays he] concerning the truth erred, who ſaid the Reſurrection was paſt already, ſuch overthrew People from the Faith that ſtands in Chriſt, who is the Reſurrection and the Life, through which Faith they attained to the Reſurrection, and had their vile Bodyes changed, and made like unto his Glorious Body.

Note, How he preverts the Scripture both in words and ſence, to defend their Hereſie, denying the Reſurrection of the Body after Death; for the words of Scripture, Who ſhall 〈◊〉 our vile Bodyes, Reſpect the time to come at the Reſurrection of the dead, but Fox will have it that they have Already attained the Reſurrection, and had their vile bodies changed. Alſo, he makes the Reſurrection that Paul Preached, Acts 17.19, 22. and 23.6. to be Chriſt himſelf, perverting our Saviours words, who called himſelf the Reſurrection and the Life, 〈◊〉 litteral ſence, which is plain [to all intelligent perſons] contains a figurative ſence, to wit, the Author and Cauſe of the Reſurrection; As when God is called in Scripture the Saints Hope, Confidence and Salvation, i. e. the Author and Cauſe of their Hope, Confidence and Salvation.

Again, In his Book, called, Truths Defence p. 49, 50. in anſwer to his opponent, he quotes 1 Pet. 3.29. and ſays, The Miniſters of God they ſpake to the Spirits in Priſon, and the Priſoner ſhall come out of Priſon. The Son of Perdition is above all that is called God in thee — Thou art one that keeps the Light in Priſon in thee. [And in anſwer to the Queſtion, Whether the Devil is ſtronger then Chriſt, the Fleſh than the Spirit; or, Whether doſt thou find he was ever a Priſoner in Satans Chains? Fox anſwers, We witneſs he was in Satans Chains, and is in thee, elſe how could they crucify him afreſh?

Note, At what a ſenſleſs rate he here perverts the Scripture, and all to prove his Blaſphemy, viz. to prove that God is impriſoned, and in Bondage in Wicked Men, bound in Satans Chains in men: For the Spirits in Priſon, whereof Peter writes in that place, were ſometimes diſobedient in the days of Noah, as the following words expreſly declare. But how could Chriſt in them be diſobedient, and not only Spirits, but diſobedient Spirits? Are not theſe Rare inſtances of Fox his wonderful Depth and extraordinary Gift of Opening Scripture, and going to the Marrow of things, as W. Penn by his wit has there Romanced? I could give many the like Inſtances to prove that his underſtanding in Divinity was equal to that of his Schollarſhip aforeſaid.

But to be ſhort; I ſhall leave his Books, which have all paſſed through the Index ex Purgitor • es of the Quakers, before they were publiſhed, and will conclude with a paſſage taken from his Mouth, which is a more perfect Proof of his Parts and Learning, being a ſhort Diſpute which he maintained againſt T. S. at Cambridge, Aug. 1699. in company with G. Whitehead, and another Quaker, about the Trinity. The ſaid T S. argued thus; 〈◊〉 .

If the father, Son and Holy Ghoſt are three He's, Then there are Three Perſons, But there are Three He's, 〈◊〉 ,

Fox.

What mean you by three hee's?

T. S

Three that may be pointed at; He, He, He.

Fox.

I do not like that Argument.

T. S.

Are you three Perſons that diſpute againſt me?

Fox

Yea.

T. S.

Prove it.

Fox.

We are in three places, therefore three Perſons?

T S.

therefore replyed, The Father, Son and H. Ghoſt have been in Three Places, and therefore Three Perſons; for at the Baptiſm of Chriſt, Jeſus came up, the Holy Ghoſt came down, and the Father in Heaven.

Fox.

Perſons have Fleſh and Blood?

T. S.

Angels have not Fleſh and Blood, yet they are Perſons.

Fox.

They cannot be Three Perſons, becauſe they are not viſible in Three Places?

T S.

If Chriſt was Man and the holy Ghoſt was in the form of a Dove, then they were both ſeen.

Fox.

Prove that they were ſeen in ſeveral places?

T. S.

One was ſeen in the Water, the other out.

Fox.

Prove they were ſeen?

T. S.

Many beheld them.

Fox.

The Holy Ghoſt could not be ſeen.

T. S.

He was in the form of a Dove, therefore he could be ſeen.

Fox.

Not in the form of a Dove, but in the likeneſs.

Hereat ſome langhing, Fox anſwerd, That he was ſeen, but not viſible.

Surely (ſaid one) his Religion, Reaſon and Wits are all loſt, for he runs beyond Reaſon and Sence to defend his Tenet.

Behold! how this wonderful deep Fox was confounded in defending this Hereſie, which was the hereſie of Sabellius, who affirmed, That in the divine Eſſence, there were three Names, but denyed that there were Three diſtinct Subſiſtences or Perſons, as Fox and the Quakers do. Now the Name [Perſon] was warrantably applyed to the holy Trinity by the antient Fathers, for Reaſons too large to ſet down here; but moſt properly the name Perſon is applyed, becauſe perſonal acts are throughout the Scripture aſcribed both to Father, Son and holy Ghoſt.

But here we have one Proof more of W. Penns Sincerity in that he ſays, G. Fox was an Original, and no mans Copy; yet we ſee in this, ſo likewiſe in all his other Hereſies, he has exactly copied after the antient Hereticks condemned by the Church: I will not ſay G Fox knew any thing of the antient Hereſies, only good Wits jump't, and that ſo exactly, as ſhwes that both they and he were taught by the ſame Maſter.

An Abſtract of the Oath of Abjuration, ſubſcribed by the three Quakers of the Council, Aug. 1703. at Burlington, and after by 21 Quakers of the Aſſembly of New-Jerſey.

We whoſe Names are under-writen do ſincerely Promiſe and ſolemnly Declare in rhe Preſence of Almighty God, that we will bear Faith and true Allegience to her Majeſty Queen Anne and will her defend to the utmoſt of our Power — And to the utmoſt of our Power Support Maintain and Defend the Limitation and Succeſſion of the Crown, againſt [the pretended King] James, and all other Perſons whatſoever — Theſe things we do ſolemnly and ſincerely declare, according to the Expreſs Words by us ſpoken, and according to the plain and common ſenſe and underſtanding of the ſame words, without any Equivocation, mental Evaſion or ſecret Reſervaſion whatſoever. — And we do make this Recognition and Promiſe heartily, willingly and truly, upon the true Faith of a Chriſtian.

Samuell Jennings. Francis Davenport. George Deacon. and the reſt,

We the Subſcribers of this Declaration, wherein are theſe words, viz. We do faithfully promiſe to the utmoſt of 〈◊〉 Power to 〈◊〉 Support, Maintain and Defend the Limitation and Succeſſion of the Crown, &c. Do declare our true intent and meaning is, to do ALL and EVERY thing according to our Duty, in order thereunto, Provided, That this be not underſtood, conſtrued or taken, that we hereby oblige our ſelves to uſe Force and Arms, which for Conſcience ſake we cannot do in this or any other Action, to the deſtroying the Lives of Men.

OBſerve, Reader: He that engages to Defend to the utmoſt of his Power, according to the common ſenſe of the words, He does Engage to do it both in Perſon and Eſtate, [if he has it] for ſo all the World underſtands the words [Defend to the Utmoſt of Our Power] I ſay this is the common ſenſe of the words, let the Quakers deny it if they can or dare.

And you ſee above, that the Quakers have ingaged to Defend to the Utmoſt of their Power, according to the common ſenſe of the words; Therefore they have engaged to do it in Perſon and Eſtate, as their Ability, and Occaſion is. And yet almoſt in the next breath, they declare they cannot do it in Perſon. Can ſuch Equivocators as theſe be fit Perſons to be truſted in the Goverment?

But will they Defend with their Eſtates? Will they pay to maintain War or Fighting? Have they no mental Evaſion or ſecret Reſervation in this? for we ſee (as above) that they have ſolemnly declared, they have none: Yes indeed, they have; for ſince the year 1660 'tis known to be the Quakers avowed Principle to deny to pay, and cannot pay ſo much as one penny to maintain War or Fighting. And this Samuell Jenings aſſerted before my Lord Cornbury at the Council Table at Amboy, the whole Aſſembly being preſent, viz. That they could no more pay towards War or Fighting, than they could Fight or bear Arms.

Behold here! The Quakers have firſt engaged to defend the Queen, &c. to the utmoſt of their Power, and that as Defence is commonly underſtood, without Evaſion or Reſervation whatſoever, and yet at the ſame time declare their Intentions are, Not to do it neither in Perſon nor Eſtate: This is ſuch an Equivocating Contradiction, as is not [I believe] to be parallelled in the whole World. The Jeſuites of Old-Rome are but Dunces to theſe Quakers; Let the Nimble Fingured Miller, C. Puſey, tell us in his next Print, how and which way they can defend the Queen, &c. to the Utmoſt of their Power, and yet neither do it in Perſon nor Eſtate, and that too, as [Defend] is commonly underſtood; if he can do this, and clear his Brethern from the Guilt of Perjury, I will then be engaged he ſhall be ſet in the Legend for a Worker of Miracles along with the great Fox, and the reſt of the Saints both of Old and New-Rome; Mean time, let the World Judge of this peice of Quaker-Sincerity.

But I muſt do S. Jenings Juſtice in this caſe, for he alſo ſaid, that they did not expect to be gainers by refuſing to pay; meaning (I ſuppoſe) that their Goods might be taken from them. But this is what they have always called Perſecution; therefore this makes the matter worſe; for here the Queen and thoſe in Authority under her are rendered Perſecutors, and by the Quaker-Chronicles paſs for ſuch in the next Age. Now this is at leaſt a paſſive Diſobedience to the Law; and is not their defending in any reſpect, much leſs a doing it to the Utmoſt of their Power, heartily and willingly declared?

I ſay again, What Government can be ſafe in truſting to ſuch a Quick-Silver Tribe of men, whom no words will tye, though never ſo expreſly ſpoken? And they are the ſame in moſt other matters. As in Swearing, they cannot in Conſcience Swear, but they can take an Oath, and their Conſcience in this Country is tayled to their Brethrens Conſcience in England; for the Magiſtrates here could not perſwade their Conſcience, [for ſome time] to take their own New Oath, till they heard that their Brethren took it in England.

But now, Suppoſe the French ſhould beſet us: The Quakers count themſelves no way engaged to aſſiſt us in defence of out Queen and Country, Therefore they are free, (if any tempting occaſion offer) to Joyn with the French againſt us. For, as to their Saying, they cannot for Conſcience ſake bear Arms to Fight, or [as they word it] uſe Force and Arms; this is Deceipt and a Lye, as I could inſtance in ſeveral matters of fact: One pregnant Proof of this has happened ſo lately as the laſt Auguſt, in the County of Burlington, wher a report was, that a part of French were Lucking about a Branch of Anco • u Creek, the Quakers thereabouts got together in Arms, in a Military poſture, with their Guns charged, to meet the French; but you muſt Note, it was on their own account, not at the Command of the Government, that they thus took up Arms; Therefore what their deſign was, who can tell, ſeeing no Credit can be given to what they ſay or ſubſcribe; but it muſt be either to Defend themſelves, or Joyn with the French againſt us▪ If to defend themſelves, that they ſo bore Arms, ſurely they ought much rather to do it at the Command of the Government. No, ſay they we cannot for Conſcience ſake do that. And thus do they make a Stalking-horſe of Conſcience. This is Quaker Sincerity, being Hypocriſie at the leaſt, grand Hypocriſie, and ought to be noticed by the Government.

Now let not C. Puſey in his next Print tell us, this is a Lye, and that theſe were no Quakers that thus bore Arms, for they are approved Quakers, Liſted as ſuch under the Quaker-Banner, by Certificate under the hands of Burlington-Meeting-Men, and by them given in to the Military Officers; and that they thus bore Arms is too obvious to be denyed by any but ſuch as are endued with the above-mentioned Quaker-Sincerity. From which, Good Lord Deliver us.

Daniel Leeds.

Poſt-ſcript.

SInce the fore-going was written, I met with the Quaker-Almanack, put out by J. T. and C. P. for this year 1705. 'Tis a Two-handed Piece, wherein they wou'd make their Readers think, that they have Conquor'd me on both ſides. One will have me to be a meer Ignoramus in Art, and 'tother a Renogado in Religion, and conſequently it muſt be as they ſay, That I am not fit for Religious nor Civil Society. High Charges! But if this be the worſt they can do to me, I think my ſelf the more happy in that they have ſaid as bad of ſome of the beſt Men of our Age.

Firſt, As to J. T's Vapours againſt me, if it would edifie, or be of advantage to Mankind, I would Confute him; for 'tis ſome Errors of the Preſs which he harps moſt upon, and would make to be mine; nay, and he rakes them out of old Almanacks too; whenas he knows I could ſeverely laſh him with the ſame Whip from all his (calculated) Almanacks, and his Book too; but I have now other Fiſh to fry. His grudging me the uſe of his Book, is like ſelling me Roaſt-Meat, and then beating me with the Spit, but what leſs can I expect from a Quaker? Gadbury would have ſcorn'd to have done ſo by him, for copying after his Ephemerides ſeveral years in his Book. But in ſhort, he is wellcome to me to go on with his Yearly Calculations; he has, (it may be) more leaſure than I; and I ſhall make a ſhift to write an Almanack, (perhaps as true as his) either with his help or without it: And let him not be grieved that my Almanack ſells better than his.

And as to C. Puſey's Reply to my Almanack, he has not anſwer'd one quarter part of it, but runs upon other matters, to bring his Reader off from the Scent of their Hereſies: In his Anſwers he copies after the London-Quakers Anſwers, and dares venture no further than they have done to his hands. As to other things he ſees it his ſafeſt way to tell me, He has not ſeen the Books out which I brought my Quotations; and that he thinks is ſufficient to Refute me; or elſe he tells me, G. K's Quaker-Books ſay ſo and ſo. But this is hard patching up Religion, when one Quaker-Book muſt be brought to mend or juſtifie another. And as to the London-Quakers, alas! They are baffled in their Anſwers, and Confounded to their perpetual Shame, by the Author of the Book, called, The Snake in the Graſs, in his Defence and Reply, as all who read thoſe Books may ſee.

But has C. Puſey not one word to ſay to what I have charged of their Monſtrous Notions concerning Chriſt? No. They ſtill ſtand Guilty of the Charge often proved againſt them, viz. That when they ſpeak or write of the Chriſtians Chriſt, they mean not a word of what they ſay; for they will not ſay, nor dare not confeſs, That they believe in a 〈…〉 now in Heaven, and that Chriſt is now, and forever to come, truly and really a Man, in true and proper Humane Nature, Without all other men. No, They have been ſeveral Times provoked to give us a Proof of their Sincerity, in anſwering to this Chriſtian Confeſſion, but they will not. And their refuſing to confeſs to this, bewrays them, and diſcovers the Cloven Foot to all Intelligent Chriſtians, and is another repeated Proof, That they Mean not a Word of what they ſay concerning Chriſt Without; and therefore are Implacable Enemies to the Chriſtian Religion.

And whereas I noted in my Preface, That Peter Fretwell condemned Eliz. Fenton for being baptized, and that therefore ſhe muſt know a bitter Day of Repentance; and that Mary Wheat confirmed the ſame. Now if there be occaſion Eliz. Fenton will make Oath to the Truth of this before a Magiſtrate.

But behold what a ſincere Quaker-Turn-off they have invented for this. Why, they ſay, It was for her evil Life and Converſation that Fretwell ſaid ſhe muſt know a bitter Day of Repentance for, and not for being Baptized. But do they tell what this Evil was that ſhe was guilty of? No, No; have a care of that; you ſhall not catch them there; for it was paſt their skill to tell that: They know that none of her Neighbours can charge her with ſo much as a Spot in her Life and Coverſation, thoſe many years that ſhe has lived both a Wife and a Widdow among them: If they could, no doubt, we had had it in Print, now at this Pinch: Therefore let thoſe her Accuſers think of what Reward they muſt have for ſuch ſlanderous Lyes againſt the Innocent.

But why wou'd the Quakers now deny their Banters againſt Baptiſm? Is it becauſe they begin to be aſhamed of them? Truly I ſhould be glad to be an Inſtrument to bring them to that. No, but here is a Snake in the Graſs, for they uſe their Arts of Confeſſing and Denying (as occaſion requires) only to avoid the Odium of the World; for beſides their former Outrage againſt Baptiſm (which they ſtill juſtifie) C. Puſey in pag. 3. (even while he would take his Friend Fretwell off from ſpeaking againſt Baptiſm) does himſelf bring a bantering Scoff againſt it, and falſifies Luther and Bucer by perverting their ſence to make them ſpeak againſt it too. And all this he does under a deceitful pretence, That 'tis only Infant Baptiſm that the Quakers deny; whenas 'tis evident that both he and they ſhoot their poyſoned Arrows againſt Baptiſm it Self. Their Practice proves this to all that know them, viz. That 'tis All manner of Water-Baptiſm which they deny: They Practiſe none.

Nay, C. P. has the Impudence to deny [after his faſhion] that W. Penn calls it Poyſon, to believe or have faith in the Hiſtory of Chriſts outward Manifeſtation. But what they expect to gain by this way of anſwering Books, I know not. But this I know, that ſeveral who were zealous Quakers have forſaken them for the ſake of this very Doctrine of William Penn's, and that other, where he denys The Outward Perſon, JESUS, who was born of the Virgin, to be properly the Son of God. I ſay, the Quakers refuſing to condemn theſe two Doctrines of W. P. has cauſed many (and ſome very ſenſible Perſons, as they know) to forſake their Society, Thanks be to God for it. And as the Proverb ſays, 'Tis an ill Wind that blows no body Good.

I ſhall conclude with one Inſtance of what I noted before, that C. P. wou'd lead his Reader from the Scent of their Hereſies, by running from the Charge to other Matters▪ You muſt Note, that I had provoked him to ſay (if he durſt) That they did the Scriptures that honour as they did their own Books, viz. as ever to read ſo much as one Chapter of them in any of their Meetings, &c. Now C. Puſey knowing their own guiltineſs in the caſe, inſtead of giving me a plain honeſt anſwer, he falls foul upon the Author of the Snake, &c. and then brings Cirtificates to prove that their School-Boys read them in their Schools. But, Pray what is this to the purpoſe? Any body knows that the Bible is as neceſſary a Book to learn Schollars to read in, as another Book. But this is not reading them in their Meetings, as they do their own Books and Epiſtles. This is one of Friend Caleb's go-by's, and this is Quaker-plainneſs too, which he gives inſtead of anſwers to me.

D. L. FINIS.