The Snake in the Grass - Sect. 18.

Of the Quakers' pretended principle against fighting, wherein of their loyalty.

I put these two together, because all their fighting {Page 205} has been chiefly against the king; and therefore both these heads may be despatched in one: yet they have fought too upon other occasions; of which there is a pleasant instance in the printed trials of G. Keith and others in Pennsylvania, where the government is in Mr. Penn, as proprietor, and under him chiefly managed by Quakers, who are justices of the peace, and in other commissions there. But so it fell out, that some pirates took a sloop of theirs; this put them into great distress, betwixt their so much cried up principle against using outward force, though in their own defence, which a whole dozen of them, and George Fox the first, signed in a declaration to king Charles II, in the year 1660, to be antichristian; which declaration is inserted in the said trial, with other testimonies of the Quakers, against even defensive war, though to save their throats or goods from thieves, robbers, and cut-throats, (I use their own words,) as being atheism, and a mistrusting of Providence in restraining evil men. They were in great pain how to save this principle and the sloop too; but that was impossible: and all their sloops, and all that they had, might have gone the same way, if they would not oppose force to force; which at last was resolved upon, and they retook their sloop, and made some of the pirates prisoners. They soon found that necessity in government, when it was in their own hands, which they could not be convinced of while it was in the hands of others.

But they must not go from any former principle for spoiling of their infallibility; therefore they coined or borrowed a pretty distinction, and said, that they did not use the carnal weapon as Quakers, but as magistrates: and now all is whole again.

This is the same salvo the pope has for his using the temporal sword; and this is not the only thing which the Quakers have learnt from the church of Rome, of which I have given several other in Stances.

And I may set this for another, the lawfulness of deposing kings, when they oppose the true church, as we think. I have told before how the church of Rome and the Quakers only do limit the catholic church each within their own communion; and therefore, according to them, whoever opposes their church opposes the whole catholic church: and their principle is, that such may be resisted by arms, whether their own kings, or any others. Nay, fur ther, they embrace the principle of Mahomet, that they may force their religion upon others by the sword, and invade other nations for that only end; as I will shew you presently how the Quakers pressed Oliver, and the other usurpers, to carry their arms through all the popish countries, and to kill and slay them for their idolatry, &c. But let me first begin to shew how active they were against their own natural prince, joining with all the usurpations upon him from their first rise in 1650 to his restor ation 1660. And they approved of the murder of his father, and gloried in it; and justified all the rebellion before their own time, as they joined with all afterwards. They fought, as Rome, with double arms, the spiritual thunder, as well as the carnal sword: they prophesied, and cursed, and damned, as well as fought against the church, the king, and the Cavaliers. But after their interest bade them turn {Page 207} to the other side, since the restoration 1660, they have grown sick of their traitorous prophecies, and spued them up again; for in the reprinting the works of their prophets since 1660, they leave out these now unsavoury passages. Their infallibility - needs an indea: eapurgatorius, as well as that of Rome; through which, we suppose, George Fox's works are to pass, which are designed as a second volume to his Journal. Of this cleanly art they have given us a fair specimen in the reprinting of the works of Edw. Burroughs, one of their main pillars or posts, wherein they leave out, at p. 100, the following prophecies, which he directs thus; To all you who are and have been always ene mies to the very appearance of righteousness, who are called delinquents and cavaliers. And he holds forth to them as follows; Thus saith the Lord, My controversy is against you And you are become cursed in all your hatchings and en deavours, (i. e. to restore the king,) and from time to time my hand hath been against you in battle. Your kings and princes and nobles You are given to be a curse and a desolation, and a prey in houses have been cut off in wrath. and lands and persons, to them whom I have raised up against you; (i. e. Oliver Cromwell;) and then he goes on to prophesy for the future, in these words: And you and your kings and lordly power (by which you have thought to exercise lordship over my heritage) shall be enslaved by the Devil in the pit of darkness, in everlasting bondage, where he shall reign your lord and king for evermore. These are the mildest words they can bestow! Pillars of fire and smoke, like the very {Page 208} opening of the infernal pit; in all whose caverns there lodges not a more furious and cursed spirit than that which inspires these prophets of the Quakers, whose breath is fire and brimstone!

That book of Burroughs's, out of which I have quoted what is above, bears this title; A Trumpet of the Lord or fearful Voices of terrible Thunders, uttered from the Throne Declared and written by a Son of Thunder, &c. 1656.

How does it make one's hair stand an end and how ought it to raise the indignation of every Christian, to see such a blasphemous wretch pretend that all these his hellish thunderings were uttered from the throne of God! To see him begin in such a style as this: By order and authority, says he, given unto me by the Spirit of the living God, King of kings, and Lord of lords, the 31st day of the 10th month, in the year of the world's account 1655, about the 4th hour in the morning, when my meditations was of my God upon my bed, in Kilkenny city in the nation (he would not say kingdom, that was too monarchical at that time of day) of Ireland; at that time the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Write my controversy with all the inhabitants of the earth unto all sorts of people, as I will shew thee; by this same au thority and commission declared, this I send unto you, the tribes of the earth, and this upon your heads shall stand for ever, &c. Given under my hand, and sealed by the Spirit of the eternal God, E. B.

And he styles himself thus in the title-page: By one whose name is truly known by the children of the same birth, but unknown to the world, {Page 209} though it be called Edward Burroughs. This was in imitation of our Saviour, who said the the world knew himnot.

And among the curses with which this fury prophet loads all the tribes of the earth, he bestows what is above quoted, and more, upon the king and cavaliers, p. 9, where he tells those who suffered for the king, it is not for well-doing that ye suffer, but my hand is against you, and my judgments are upon you. But this whole chapter of Bur roughs's Trumpet, notwithstanding of its being sounded forth by God's express commission, and sealed by the Spirit of the eternal God, in the year 1655, was stifled and superseded by these same pro phets in the new edition of Burroughs's works, 1672.

It seems, though they care not for fighting themselves, they can blow the trumpet to others.

As they did to Oliver effectually. O, Oliver! says George Fox to him, arise, and come out— For thou hast had authority; stand to it—nor let any other take thy crown and let thy sol diers go forth with a free and willing heart, that thou mayest rock nations as a cradle This is a charge to thee in the presence of the Lord God, &c.

And he further charges Oliver not to turn sober men and true hearts out of his army; so that it seems they esteemed fighting a lawful and a good thing, (in a good cause,) because they thought it con sistent with sober men and true hearts.

But since 1660 it is an antichristian doctrine.

One of the orders given forth by their yearly meeting, 1693, commands that none should carry guns in their ships.

They would take it ill to have their doctrine in Pennsylvania return upon themselves here.

For there they presented G. Keith as endeavour ing to subvert the government, which by their law is death, because that in the 9th and 10th articles of a paper he there published, called, An Appeal from the Twenty-eight Judges, &c. he queried whether it was consistent with their principle against using the carnal sword, to arm the Indians against one an other, and to hire men, and give commissions to fight, for recovering a sloop some privateers had taken from them.

This they inferred to be, by consequence, a subverting of the government; because, without using force upon occasion, their government indeed could not be supported. And therefore they seized and imprisoned the printers and publishers of the said Appeal: and had not the change of government, which happened soon after, (colonel Fletcher being sent governor thither, and superseded the Quaker governor,) put an end to their prosecution, it might have cost them their lives; for their mittimus (which is printed with the said Appeal) was for designing to subvert the government; and it is signed by se veral of their ministers, who are justices of the peace there.

But now, is not force of arms as necessary to support the government in England as in Pennsylvania?

And is not the consequences as dangerous here, of decrying the use of arms as unlawful to Christians?

But it is plain that they are not against force of arms when they like the quarrel. For they did not only encourage Oliver and the other rebels, but they fought themselves against the king, if you will believe George Fox, who, in his letter directed to the council of officers of the army, and the heads of the nation, and for the inferior officers and soldiers to read, 1659, complains of many Quakers being disbanded out of the army, and that for being Quakers, though they were good fighters. These are his words, p. 5; And many valiant captains, soldiers, and officers, have been put out of the army, (by sea and land,) of whom it hath been said among you, that they had rather have had one of them than seven men, and could have turned one of them to seven men; who because of their faith fulness to the Lord God, being faithful towards him, it may be for saying thou to a particular, and for wearing their hats, have been turned out from amongst you.

Here it is plain that they were Quakers while they were in the Army; because by this they were turned off for being Quakers, for saying thee, and not taking off their hats.

And that they were willing to have continued longer in the army, because G. Fox here complains of their being disbanded as a wrong done to them, and a prejudice to the army, and the good cause.

And, p. 6, says he, O! how are men fallen from that which they were at first, when thou sands of us went in the front of you, and were with you in the greatest heat, who looked not for the spoil, but the good of the nation; and now thus should be served by those that are set down in the possession of the spoil of our enemies, that they should requite us so in the end.

And, p. 2, 3, and 8, he encourages them to set up their standard at Rome, and then to fall upon the Turk, and pluck up idolatry, &c.

Here is using the carnal sword to some purpose.

But if you would know in whom they make it unlawful to use the sword, he tells, p. 4, where he threatens that God will overturn the world, and all the powers of the earth, and all sword-men that be not in his power, that is, the king and the cavaliers, whom they damn to the pit of hell, as I have shewn.

So that instead of their disowning the use of the sword, their true meaning is, that none have a right to it but themselves.

Only they are not to pretend to it till it may be of use to them.

But that they have not given up their right to it is plain, by a Declaration from the People called Quakers to the present distracted Nation of England, printed 1659. This was wrote by Edward Burroughs, in the name of all the Quakers, and it is subscribed by fifteen of the principal leaders of them. There, at the end of p. 8, they give us fair warning: We are dreadful, say they, to the wicked, and must be their fear; for we have chosen the Son of God to be our king, and he hath chosen us to be his people; and he might command thousands and ten thousands of his saints at this day to fight in his cause, he might lead them forth and bring them in, and give them victory over all their enemies, and turn his hand upon all their persecutors. But then they say, p. 9. We cannot yet believe that he will make use of us in that way, though it be his only right to rule in nations, and our heirship to possess the uttermost parts of the earth; but for the present we are given up to bear and suffer, &c.

This is plain language. They will not yet take arms, not for the present, not till they see their time. But they have entered a caveat to secure their right and title to it, till they think fit to set up their claim for their heirship to the uttermost parts of the earth. But this is a secret, and to be kept under their thumb for the present; and therefore, in their new edition of Edward Burroughs's work, anno 1672, this passage is left out, with others against the king, &c. but no ways disclaimed or censured by them.

Which is now required from them; or otherwise they must give us leave to believe that it is their principle to take arms, and to fight, to set up their heirship to any kingdom they please, when their king (the Son of God) commands them; and they, believing that their light within is that very Christ, the Son of God, (as is fully shewn,) the consequence is, that they are free to take arms whenever they say it is the time. Or, if the mission of a prophet be necessary to signify the command of their king, to fight for him and for their own heirship, that can never be wanting to them, because they do pretend to keep up a continual succession of prophets among them.

And the word of every true prophet being the command of God himself, consequently whoever believes such a one to be a true prophet, must, at his command, think themselves obliged to pull down any king, and to set up whomsoever that prophet names in his place: as Hazael was make king of Syria, and Jehu of Israel, by the command of Elijah, I Kings xix. 15, 16.

Now the Quakers do pretend to have prophets still, and with as great a power.

For by their printed injunctions, from the meeting of sufferings in London, the 18th of the 6th month, 1693, to the respective monthly and quarterly meetings in England and Wales, for preserving and spreading friends' books for truth's serovice, among other of their works (to be carefully by them spread) by way of epistle, warning, caution, and exhortation, they add likewise prophecy. And by a canon of their general assembly in London the 27th of the 3rd month, 1675, they strictly caution and forbid to say, that the faithful friends' papers, which we, say they, testify, have been given forth by the power of God, are men's edicts. And in their paper of orders from London, in the 3rd month, 1666, they reckon them as heathens and in fidels who will not submit to the judgment of their church, and dare oppose it as the judgment of man. This is beyond all acts of parliament; they are but the edicts of men; and we pretend our canons and ecclesiastical injunctions to be no other. But whatever a Quaker dictates, if it were to depose the king, and set up their universal monarch above told, and to assert by arms their own heirship to the uttermost parts of the earth: if they should abrogate any or all of our laws, (as they have done that of tithes,) or any thing else, whatever their arbitrary enthusiastical spirit shall suggest to them; this must not be looked upon as any thing that is human, (that is below a Quaker's pride,) but as the very words of God, as if pronounced by an angel or an apostle. So that we must look well to ourselves. These are no ordinary men, believe it.

They have already (as I will shew) annulled and made void all the acts of parliament, and other laws which enjoin the payment of tithes by their one higher and more sovereign authority. And they complained to their associates in wickedness, the cursed rebel parliament, 1659, how they that had served so faithfully in that holy war against the church and the king, were yet persecuted and plundered for not paying of their tithes according to the law.

Here is a material discovery; because the Quakers since 1660 would make us believe that they had been loyal in the rebellion of 41. And the reason they give is, their sufferings under those usurpers. But here it is plain, that their sufferings were not for their loyalty to the king, but for their principles destructive to all government; taking upon them selves a power superior to all laws, and to annul what laws they think fit. For here they confess themselves to have been for the parliament from the beginning of the war, (so the traitors styled that rebellion,) and (as before quoted out of G. Fox) sol diers in Oliver's army. And they urged this as their merit to the parliament 1659, and therefore complain that any of them should suffer by tithes. And to shew what thoroughpaced commonwealth's men they were, G. Fox, in his letter to the council and officers of the army, (before quoted,) speaking of the several steps which were made by the rebel house of commons in destroying the king and house of lords, burst out into an ecstasy of commendation of their glorious proceedings in these words, p. 7; What a sincerity was there once in the nation! What a dirty nasty thing would it have been to have heard talk of a house of lords among them! &c.

This was in the year 1659. They held out against the king to the very last; and that, not only in talk ing and writing and fighting, but in watching and discovering and betraying. Francis Howgil, (of great name among the Quakers,) in a book of his, called, An Information and also Advice to the Army and this present Committee of Safety newly erected, &c. printed 1659, p. 7, boasts, as a merit of the Quakers, their giving intelligence against sir George Booth, and others who rose for the king in Cheshire and Lancashire, whom he calls rebels. Them, says he, who were your real friends, called Quakers, who gave you and the army in telligence about the late insurrection in Cheshire, who were spoiled by the said rebels of their goods, &c. But this, with other now ungrateful passages, are left out of the new edition of Francis Howgil's works in a large folio, reprinted 1676, p. 330.

By the bye, Howgil, in this book, justifies the title of the committee of safety against the late parliament, (as he calls it,) as he did that of the parliament against the late king, p. 6: And as for the long parliament, says he, by whom God did good things, and great things, in the overthrowing that power which was deviated from the afore said end, (to wit, the late king, &c.)

But these last words, to wit, the late king, are left out in the new edition, p. 329, that it this should come to be objected, they might say, that by he power deviated, &c. they did not mean the king, but some other power.

And as the king deviated, so, says he, the parliament deviated, and thereby justifies the committee of safety against the parliament: and so every thing that is uppermost, to the end of the chapter. They too have stumbled upon the doctrine of success.

During the long reign of the Rump, they run down the king's prerogative, and up with privilege of parliament: but when the parliament was kicked out of doors, then privilege was as great a beast as prerogative, and the committee of safety only was in the right. And in the year 1660, then round about again, hey for monarchy! They would make you believe that they were always for monarchy.

The ancient courtiers, says Howgil, ibid. p. 4, paragr. 6, having found so much ease and profit by the late king, turned all cavaliers, and cried up the prerogative of the king But the long parliament, and the people that aided them at that time, counted it no treason to oppose him and God decided the controversy, in overthrowing the one and establishing the other, &c. Yet many are so blind to this day, that they judge the na tion cannot be established in freedom without a king, &c.

This whole paragraph is left out in the new edition, for the reason aforesaid.

But having thus run down the king, they fall as foul upon the parliament when it was discarded.

Many, says Howgil, ibid, are so doating on the name of a parliament as though it were essential, and cries up the privilege of parliament. But if they will not hearken to the cry of their masters, (the people,) but, may be, call them rebels and traitors if they should be turned out, &c. p.5.

And so he goes on to maintain the title of the committee of safety against all others. But they were enraged against none so implacably as against the king: they would stop all means and possibility of his return.

The army of their women, hereafter mentioned, shewed particular zeal in this.

They advise, in their address to the parliament, 1659, (the very year before the king came home,) that the late king, (as they rebelliously termed him,) his rents, parks, and houses should be sold. And to what end? To pay the sacrilegious impropriators, that they (of all men) should not lose by the aboli tion of tithes, which the Quakers demanded: and to shew their zeal in this against the king they repeat it three times, p. 59, 63, and 65.

In the same place they join with the king's lands the glebe lands, and all the colleges and their lands, to be sold upon the same foot, and the very bells out of the churches, except one, in a town, to give notice of fire. Thus they had made sure of the church, and the very nurseries for the education of the clergy, root and branch If the curiosity of any lead them to see the abovesaid subscriptions, they are all bound together, and bear this title; These several Papers were sent to the Parliament the 20th Day of the 5th Month, 1659, being above seven Thousand of the Names of the Handmaids and Daughters of the Lord, and such as feel the Op pression of Tithes, &c. London, printed for Mary Westwood, and are to be sold at the Black Spread Eagle at the west end of Paul's, 1659. And this book of subscriptions contains seventy-two pages in quarto. This was the Quaker solemn league and covenant, a formal association, wherein they bind themselves, under their hands, their lives, and estates, to extirpate the church, and the laws and govern ment which support it. And this was no volunteer of the women; they did not do it without their men, Jer. xliv. 19, for here follows G. Fox's own order verbatim: For all women friends to set their hands against tithes, they may freely as they are moved; and do not quench the Spirit of the Lord in any, for the women in the truth feel the weight as well as the men; for the seed of God in the woman bears witness against tithes in the priests and pope the author of them, and suffers in pri sons, and are summoned up in courts; so that is good which beareth the testimony against them, and is to be received and set a top of the author of the holders of them up. And so if all the women in England send up their names, I shall send them by the women to the parliament; for many women have sent up their names, and some have not, but have been stopped; therefore that all may send their names against tithes that be free with speed to London. G. F.

He did not date this, as it was not his custom to date the papers he gave out; and the reason he gave for it was, because, as he said, the apostles did not date their epistles.

But the year before these subscriptions of the women, he printed a paper, A. D. 1658, called, Papists' Strength, &c. where, p. 19, he leads the way to these pious handmaids in all the particulars which they requested or demanded from the parlia ment, even to the abolition of schools and colleges, as well as churches. These are his words: And this I declare in the presence of the Lord God, and all the magistrates that be in God's fear, they will break down the mass-houses, schools, and colleges, which you make priests and ministers in, &c.

And in a book published by him and other Quakers, called, West answering to the North, printed 1657, p. 78, 79, they exult that Strafford's head was cut off, and Canterbury's, and Charles Stuart's, as traitors, for endeavouring to subvert the fundamental laws. And, p. 79, that his (Charles Stuart's) arbitrary actions were recorded every where in the blood and misery of the late wars, and the destruction of him and his family: the dreadful and sad examples of his righteous judgments, who renders to every one according to his deeds. And, p. 89, Doth not here appear from the grave the spirit that was in Christopher Love, priest, and his fellow-traitors, who being within the jurisdiction of this commonwealth, took upon them to commissionate divers men to treat with Charles Stuart, the proclaimed traitor of the government? P. 95. The common enemy Charles Stuart, &c. and forget not the wonderful deliverances from them, all which the right hand of the Lord effected. P. 96, 97. Multitudes of people flocked out of the city to Westminster to complain of their sufferings which Charles Stuart called tumults and by the guard one of them was slain; at the place of the shedding of whose blood was Charles Stuart's head struck off, and his blood poured forth on the ground; a re markable record of the righteous judgments of God. Lastly, mark these words, p. 102. – the righteous ends of the wars for liberty and law— and these innocent servants of the Lord, who have been all of them always faithful to the honest in terest of the nation, and many of them for it have drawn the sword, and fought in the field from first to last. And, p. 83, The honest men (then) who owned them (the parliament army) through out England against the priests and the common enemy; that is, the church and the king; and by the honest and innocent servants of the Lord, they meant themselves; for they allow none other to be such, (as is fully shewn.) The defence of them. (the laws, say they, p. 16.) have we in the late wars vindicated in the field with our blood, &c.

There is another book of this great apostle, wherein I am very apprehensive his new editors may do him wrong: it is a most bitter and sense less invective against all kings and monarchical government, which was printed in the beginning of the year 1660, but before the restoration, which was in May the same year, to shew what obstinate rebels these Quakers were, who held out against the king to the very last day. That book bears this title, Several Papers given forth by George Fox. London, printed for Thomas Symonds, at the sign of the Bull, 1660.

I set it down thus particularly, because the friends may know that it is still in being, and in the hands {Page 222} of those who will watch the new edition of Fox's works, that they shall neither add nor diminish without being told of it. I give this caution, because great pains has been taken (and by some arts which I will not here mention) to recover this book out of the hands of any who are in the least disaffected to their cause; and it may rationally be supposed, that the design is either wholly to suppress it, or to take out its sting, that it hurt them not, and render them odious to all kingly government.

I will give the reader but a taste out of that delicious dispensatory.

He says, p. 8, that all kings and emperors have sprung up in the night, since the days of the apostles, among the antichrists. P. 12. So the Christians go out from Christ, and set up kings, like the heathens — P. 15. And all these novice Christians that are crying up earthly kings, and fighting for the kings of the earth, are not such as follow the Lamb — P. 16. We know that these kings are the spiritual Egyptians, got up since the days of the apostles P. 18 and 19. You never read of any (king) among the Christians, but among the apostates, since the days of the apostles — P. 8. Many cry for an earthly king, and will have Caesar; and is not this the same nature the Jews was in? And do not they in this crucify Jesus? — P.9. Are not all these Christians that will dote so much of an earthly king traitors against Christ? And will these that are true Christians have any more kings among them but Christ? I say, that is the false church that doth not live -- upon the heads of the kings -- such that are out of the life and power -- work for an earthly king, and will change as they change: these all quench the Spirit of God in themselves -- these all deny the light, &c.

Alas, wretched George! Now must all men know that thou, even thou thyself, didst quench the Spirit, deny the light, &c. because thee didst change just as the times did change, and just as soon: thee didst not stay a minute, nor thy friends with thee; for after all your treasons and rebellions, continued from your beginning with the utmost virulence to the very last day; even while the above antimonarchical and poisonous words were in the very mouth of thee, the king was miraculously and unexpectedly restored; and this changeling Fox immediately tacked about, as did they all: they lost no time; the king came to London the 29th of May, 1660; and in seven days after, viz. the 5th of June, they had drawn up a declaration of their sincerity and good wishes to the government, which they delivered into the king's hand the 22d of the same month, as soon as they could get access. This is endorsed upon the said declaration in print, but it bears date the 5th of June: it is subscribed by a baker's dozen of them, and George Fox the foreman, in the name of themselves and of those in the same unity. And it is worth one's while to compare the words of this declaration with those of Fox's before quoted, and much more of the same strain in that book of his, out of which I have taken them, printed in the foregoing part of the same year 1660. There they were traitors against Christ, and crucifiers of Jesus, who were for any earthly king; and it was the false church which did not live upon the heads of the kings.

But now they lay themselves under the feet of an earthly king; the same earthly king against whose restoration they had belched forth so much venom. See their declaration, p. 4; We do therefore declare, say they, to take off all jealousies, fears, and suspicions of our truth and fidelity to the king and the present governors, that our intentions and endeavours are, and shall be, good, true, honest, and peaceful towards them; and that we do love, own, and honour the king, and these present governors.

But there was a pleasant passage, which I am confident, the reader will excuse me to tell.

In the first draught of this declaration, approved by George Fox and the body of the Quakers, the words loyal subjects were put in, viz. that the Quakers were the king's loyal subjects, and that they had suffered much, as himself had done.

This would imply as if their sufferings had been for him; for how otherwise was it any merit in them with regard to the king? Which looking like a piece of gross hypocrisy, one Edward Billing (a Quaker of more open sincerity and courage than the rest) rose up against it; and knowing well that the Quakers had never suffered, or acted any thing for the king, but, on the contrary, were always most bitter enemies to him and to his interest, he protested against these words in the declaration, and said, that it was a mockery in the face of the world to give themselves the style of loyal subjects. But G. Fox and the generality of the Quakers opposed him, and thought it convenient that these expressions should stand; whereupon Billing being heated, avowed to them, that if they passed the declaration with these words, he would print against it, though it cost him his life: and this did so startle them, (having a guilty conscience,) that to avoid being thus exposed they at last submitted to have these words left out; which they would never have done, if they could have stood the test; but rather, such an objection would have made them more zealous to have asserted their loyalty with the greater vigour, and to have censured this Billing, and caused him to sign an instrument of condemnation against himself, for so foul, and, at that time, dangerous an imputation upon the whole body of the friends; and that so publicly, in the face of their assembly: which they, according to their stated discipline, have done in cases of much less importance than this, and would not have failed to have done in this, if they had not known his charge to be true.

But this contest about the word loyalty was per fectly needless, since they have suffered the words which I have quoted to stand, viz. truth and fide lity to the king; for these imply all that loyalty can mean.

But it serves to this purpose, first, to discover their disloyalty, and, secondly, their deep hypocrisy, of which there never was surely such an impudent instance given as in this declaration; for having themselves served all turns that ever happened in their time, the Rump parliament, then Oliver, protector Dick, the army that turned him out, the committee of safety, &c. as before is told; and now, but just turned to the king, they had the face to upbraid others for their changing and trimming. Hear the words of their declaration, p. 6; And these priests turned to every power and every government as it turned, and made addresses and acknowledgments to every change of government—Now let any honest hearted people judge whether these be sound principled men, that can turn, conform, and transform to every change according to the times? whether these be fit men to teach people?

One would think this were a lampoon some enemy had made upon the Quakers, especially when in the next page, and page 8, they tell the king, False dealing we do utterly deny and speak the truth in plainness and singleness of heart: of which I leave the reader to judge when I have told him further, that, besides G. Fox's several papers before mentioned, the Quakers, in the beginning of the year 1660, before the restoration, did likewise print several papers of George Bishop, another of their apostles, containing violent invectives against the king and kingly government, and stirring up all people to keep them out. That book of Bishop's bears this title; The Warnings of the Lord to the Men of this Generation, &c. London, printed by M. Inman, and are to be sold at the Three Bibles in Paul's Church-yard, and by Richard Moon, book seller, in Wind-street in Bristol, 1660.

Thus industriously did they spread their treasons, and set all their shoulders to support the then usurpation, and obstruct the restoration of the king, and that to the very last, in the same year 1660.

Bishop, p. 26, 27, writing to the then council of state, warns them, in the name of the Lord, to be very vigorous in opposing all attempts that were made towards the restoration; persuades them (as Ahitophel to Absalom, 2 Sam. xvi. 21.) to be desperate, and to think all reconciliation betwixt them and the king to be impracticable.

Beware, says Bishop, ibid. p. 27, of falling under this spirit, or of thinking that the breach between you can be healed; for I declare it to you from the Lord, that it is irreconcilable; it cannot, it will not be healed Therefore, in the power and dread of the Almighty, stand and bear over it, crush it to pieces, stamp it to powder, &c. Therefore it concerns you, whilst ye have time, to bear down this enemy, and to secure places necessary for defence. Did he only mean spiritual defence, or the carnal sword? But he advises to murder in cold blood all that stirred for the king, or, as he there words it, the doing justice on those whom God hath given into your hands, lest out of this serpent's egg do come a cockatrice, and his fruit be a fiery flying serpent, and the Lord deli ver you and your forces into the power of those who seek the destruction of you and your interest. That was the king. And, p. 26, ibid. he tells them that there was a necessity of the expeditious and continual marching of your horse [were these spiritual horse?] up and down in all parts, especially where these insurrections have been. This letter was wrote the 6th of August, 1659, when things were moving towards the restoration; but printed, as before told, anno 1660, to stir them up afresh against the king, when they had a nearer prospect of his return.

Yet in their foresaid declaration to him, after his return, p.7, they gravely tell him, We are a people that follow after those things that make for peace, love, and unity and do deny and bear our testimony against all strife, and wars, and contentions, &c. That is, when they were beaten, and could fight no longer. But while there was one spark of life in the good old cause, they fought, and preached, and cursed, and damned for it all that durst oppose them, that is, all who were on the weaker side; for they still had the grace to court those in power, and, like rats, to fly from a falling house.

Thus the aforesaid Bishop, in his letter to Richard protector, the 9th of September, 1658, assures him, that if he would follow their principle of the light within, (that is, be good to the Quakers,) which if thou dost, says Bishop, and givest up to be governed by it, the Lord will dash in pieces all the consultations against thee and thy father's house, and will settle the throne under thee, and make thee a dread and a terror to all the nations round about, as he made thy father. This is in p. 17 of Bishop's book, before quoted. And the very next letter is p. 18, flattering those officers of the army who plucked down this fine protector, as soon as ever they had done it. It is dated the 27th of April, 1659, and thus directed: To the general council of the army, in whom is risen the spirit of the good old cause, these following particulars are tendered, in order to the carrying through of what is by them begun, &c. The Quakers were for thorough work; and indeed all their quarrel with Oliver, Richard, and the Rump before them, was for sparing Amalek, for not destroying down right all that stood for the king, the church, or the laws. This was still the burden of their song in all their addresses, as in article 11. of the particulars which they recommended to these officers of the army, p. 19: Remember Amalek, i. e. (as this Quaker Bishop there explains it) the soul-murdering and conscience-binding clergyman, and what he did unto you by the way when ye were come out of Egypt --therefore blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven -- ye shall not forget it. And, art. 10, Vex the Mi dianites, i. e. the lawyers, says he, for they vex you with their wiles, wherewith they have be guiled you in the matter of Peor and Cosbi, i.e. the king and protector.

The protector, now his is down, is as bad as the king.

But see how they soothed the protector when he was in the saddle.

Whom, says Bishop in his letter to him, ibid. p. 10, we have loved above any man; whose, with all that is dear to us, have we become, and thy lot and portion have we chosen, to stand or fall, as it should be unto thee; and so have we stood by thee against all thine opposers, whether in field or council. Thine enemies we have accounted and made our own, and never left thee till thou was brought through all. And again: The righteous ends of the wars in which we have borne our part in the heat of the day. But after the king's return, then the case was altered; then they could not fight, no, not they; they would not draw a sword for the world! They never were for Oliver, but were always loyal and faithful to the king. They did not rejoice at Oliver's success against the king, but mourned for the king, though they could not fight for him: and they were sore grieved at the heart for the blood which Oliver shed, and never applauded him in it.

Witness their exultation, (ibid. p. 3.) Did thy sword, say they, ever return empty from the blood of the slain? Didst not thou come upon princes as upon mortar, and as the potter treadeth the clay? Were not the hearts of honest men knit to thee as one man? Was any thing so great that they could not trust thee with? Was any thing so dear that they were not ready to lay down for thy sake? Did they sigh at any time at the remembrance of thee? Did their faces wax pale, confounded, or covered? Or was not the remembrance of thee to them sweet and pleasant, as the dew upon the tender herb, as life from the dead? &c. And so they run on whole pages together in a hideous panegyric, to which I refer the reader. But here he sees how expressly they renounce so much as a sigh at any time for all his traitorous murders, or that their faces were ever pale, or confounded, or covered, for all that blood shed; no, but that they rejoiced and gloried in it, and for all his successes against the king. P. 4. Did he not smite them with a wound incurable, they, and their king, and their nobles? P.5. Wadedst thou not through the blood and war -- with a restless and unwearied spirit? –And whilst it was thus with thee, did the Lord ever fail or forsake thee? Or wantedst thou the hearts and hands of the honest men of these nations? — Can the generations that are past produce the like of the Lord's and his people being with a man as with thee? &c.

But after all this sweetness, as soon as ever the king was restored, an. 1660, the Quakers stoutly deny that ever they had complimented Oliver; or they had forgot it. And not only this, but they fell upon the other dissenters, Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists, (all of whom they comprise under the name of professors,) for their having been on Oliver's side; their soothing and flattering of him when he was in power; their addresses to his son Richard, to stand by him with lives, fortunes, &c.: and yet basely deserting him too when he was deposed, still turning to the rising side.

This you will find in a book which they printed 1660, called, Truth's Character of Professors and their Teachers, wrote by William Caton; where these addresses of the professors to protector Richard are many of them recited, with severe remarks upon them, upbraiding the professors with their treachery, unconstancy, and time-serving, calling Oliver (ironi cally) their Joshua, &c. whom now the Quakers com pare to Haman, to Ahab, and to Pharaoh, as in p. 28, 31, and 41, who before was sweet and plea sant to the Quakers, as the dew upon the tender herb, as life from the dead, &c.

Nay, in some considerations presented unto the king of England, king Charles II, 1660, they represent to him that the professors could not be good subjects to him, because that in the time of his exile some of them called him only the king of Scots. This is in the works of the great Edward Burroughs, p. 762. But the friends have snipped out of his works, reprinted since his death, a most bloody and diabolical invective against this same king Charles II. and the cavaliers, damming them all to the pit of hell, as before has been mentioned. They would not go so far as to call him king of Scots, or any king at all, but common enemy, and proclaimed traitor, &c. Yet see how they can revile others for much less than they themselves were guilty of; and make up a mouth of saintship, simplicity, of Christ's harmless lambs, who never did any mischief in their lives.

These are the meek and the loyal Quakers. They can wade in blood, so it be of the king, or the clergy, and their abettors; slay Balaam, vex the Midianites, remember Amalek, give the priests blood to drink. These are the mild breathings of the Quaker spirit! Thus sweetly sings Edward Burroughs in his Word of Advice to the Soldiers, p. 2. O! says he with a gusto, give the priests blood to drink, for they are worthy. But this (with other sweet bits) is left out in the new edition of his works; wherein there is yet enough behind to shew the largeness of his bowels, and to what narrow limits he would con fine that inundation of blood which the good old cause had brought upon these nations, and which he justifies, and that from the mouth of the Lord. In his Warning to the English Army, 1659, he as sures them (p. 540 of his works) in these words, Your victory hath been of the Lord. But then he would have them go on, and carry blood and slaughter into other countries; What are these few poor islands, says he, p. 537, 538, that you have run through 2°And then he advises them to fall upon Italy and Spain, and avenge, says he, p. 537, the blood of the guiltless through all the dominions of the pope, (p. 538,) that your sword and the sword of the Lord may neither leave root nor branch of idolatry -- that your sword be lifted up against them. (p. 540.) Set up your standard at the gates of Rome. And prophesy ing of the time when vengeance should be taken of Rome; The time is come, says he, p. 537, their church cannot stand long; p. 535, 536, And as sure as the Lord lives, so shall it come to pass. But this is long since passed, and their church stands still; and, which is much a greater wonder, this Burroughs is counted still a true pro phet among the Quakers, in whom the fulness of grace and virtue dwelt, as was said of him in his life, wrote 1663, p. 24, by a club of the principal Quakers, G. Fox, Jos. Coal, G. Whitehead, & c. who thus blasphemed in praise of a wretch that durst pawn the very being of God; that as sure as the Lord lives, so it must come to pass, as he said. And since it is not so come to pass, are not all the rest of these Quakers as mad and blasphemous as he, who will believe that he was sent from God, or spoke his words; and that all these lies, and preach ing up of blood, their blasphemies and treasons, are of equal authority with the holy scriptures; yea, of greater, as I have shewn from G. Whitehead? And if this be true, we must believe the very contradic tions of the Quakers before the scriptures; as, that notwithstanding all these loud proclamations of blood and war, which we have heard from them; and that, if their advice were followed, all Chris tendom would be turned into an Aceldama, the pro testants falling upon all popish countries, and the papists upon them; I say, that notwithstanding of all this, if the Quakers' writings are given forth by the Spirit of God, (as they boldly pretend,) we must believe their declaration given to king Charles II, upon the 21st of January, 1660, subscribed by G. Fox and eleven more, in the behalf of the whole body of the Quakers, wherein, p. 4, they declare po sitively against the lawfulness of fighting upon any account. And this, say they, is both our principle and practice, and hath been from the beginning; so that if we suffer, as suspected to take up arms, or make war against any, it is without any ground from us; for it neither is, nor ever was in our hearts, since we owned the truth of God; neither shall we ever do it, because it is contrary to the Spirit of Christ, his doctrine, and the practice of his apostles.

And in the Quakers' Plea, printed 1661, p. 5, they say, Such of us whose principles were once so (that is, for fighting) are changed even from that principle and practice of going to wars, and fighting; and now are all of that mind and heart, that in the administration of the gospel it is on all occasions whatsoever unlawful to go to war, and fight with any man with carnal weapons, contrary to the doctrine of Christ. This was in the year 1661, to fix this opinion of them (the Quakers) in the king and government. But when by this deep deceit and hypocrisy they did prevail, and it had for twelve years after the restoration been generally received, that this was in good earn est the principle of the Quakers, as it continues with most to this day, and I doubt not but many of the simple well-meaning Quakers themselves are im posed upon in this, to think that the Quaker prin ciple is against all war and fighting upon any occa sion whatsoever, as in their Plea above quoted: yet, I say, when the world, and many of themselves, had been thus deluded by their leaders, they, in the year 1672, to secure to themselves their old principle of fighting, whenever the good old cause should stand in need of it, did reprint what I have above quoted of Ed. Burroughs, for carrying blood and war into all the popish countries; and much more to the same purpose, in the new edition of his works. To which there are high testimonies affixed of G. Fox, G. Whitehead, Josiah Coal, Francis Howgil, and Ellis Hooks.

Now if this doctrine of fighting or making war upon any occasion whatsoever was contrary to the Spirit of Christ and his doctrine in the year 1660, (that part of the year I mean after the restoration,) how came the saints above named to publish the con trary doctrine of Edw. Burroughs with such mighty pomp in the year 1672. And we must believe both to be infallible as the holy scriptures themselves, being both given forth by the same Spirit.

But these editors of Burroughs's works are yet more chargeable with whatever is in the new edition, because they took more upon them than barely as editors; that is, to correct and amend, and to expunge what they thought fit: as his declaring war against the king and the church before told; which, though dictated, as he said, by the eternal Spirit, yet they made bold to set these things aside, lest they should offend the powers then in being.

But they thought that carrying the war into Italy and Spain would be less taken notice of, and would continue their claim to the privilege of fighting when they should have occasion for it. Why other wise were not these expunged as well as the traitor ous passages against the king and the government?

If it was through the inadvertence of their infal libility, let them now disclaim it, and confess Burroughs to have been in an error, as to that principle of fighting. No, they will not; and therefore it is their own: they will not, they have not done it; for since the new edition of Burroughs's works, 1672, when a fair occasion seemed to offer towards the re asserting of the good old cause in Monmouth's rebellion, 1685, several of the Quakers in the west, where he landed, took arms, and fought in his quar rel; and though some of them were taken prisoners, yet we heard nothing of their repentance, or that they were obliged by the rest to sign any instruments of condemnation against themselves for this, or any way censured for it by their yearly meetings, or any other authority of theirs.

And if it be true which Edw. Burroughs says, p. 462 of his works, that they (the Quakers) are of one mind and one soul; (which I do not believe, I have a better opinion of many of them, though we have here their infallibility pawned for it;) I say, if this were true, then this would be a demonstration what all the rest of the Quakers would have done, if Monmouth had proceeded to their parts; and what they are still ready to do when a like opportunity shall summon them to arms.

But, as I said, I do not believe that they are all of one mind in this matter; but then, those that are not of this mind, must, I think, past all excuse, renounce the infallibility, or the truth of Edw. Burroughs and of G. Fox, G. Whitehead, and the other Quakers who have published these works of Edw. Burroughs, with such high applause and commendation, in which he disdains to limit the bloody sword within these few poor islands; but would have Oliver (his Joshua) carry it through all Christendom. G. Fox advises further, to fall upon the Turk and all the rest of the world.

O, Oliver! says he¹ in his letter to him dated the 11th month, 1657, &c. thou shouldest not have stood trifling about small things -- Do not stand cumbering thyself about dirty priests; and then he tells him, that if he had followed his counsel, the Hollanders, says he to him, had been thy subjects — How, how, George! our dear friends the Dutch must they to pot too? When the Quaker sword is drawn, it spares none! Protestants, Papists, Turks, it is all one! Germany, Fox goes on, had given up to thy will, and the Spaniard had quivered like a dry leaf -- The king of France should have bowed under thee his neck; the pope should have withered as in the winter; the Turk in all his fatness should have smoked; thou shouldest have crumbled nations to dust. There fore, says he, let thy soldiers go forth with a free and willing heart, that thou mayest rock nations as a cradle -- For a mighty work hath the Lord to do in other nations, and their quakings and shakings are but entering. So this is the word of the Lord God to thee, as a charge to thee from the Lord God, &c.

Here is destruction proclaimed to the ends of the earth, and that from the mouth of the Lord!

O blasphemous cursed wretch that durst thus set the dreadful name of the most high God to thy diabolical inspirations for blood and slaughter through the whole earth!

And yet to see these men wipe their mouths, and say, that they are the meek of the earth; they never were for fighting! no, not they: they now deny the use of the carnal sword as antichristian, poor lambs!

And yet I believe in my heart that many of them now are deceived, and think that the Quaker prin ciple is really against fighting, because they have heard so much of it since 1660, and that most of the Quakers of this generation do not know (for it is studiously concealed from them by those of the old stamp) what bloody devils G. Fox, Edward Bur roughs, G. Bishop, and the rest of the primitive Quakers were. Do they know that after the depos ing of protector Dick, G. Fox pursued the council of officers, who had then assumed the supreme power, with the same cry for blood, general, universal blood? Fox would have sent them to have set up their standard at Rome; and then, says he in his letter to them, you should have sent for the Turks' idol, and plucked up idolatry and to have made inquisition for blood, &c.

Now, if using the carnal sword upon any account be contrary to the doctrine of Christ, as the Quakers since 1660 have preached; and if they do believe it themselves, they must hunt this bloody Fox out of their herd, and for ever hereafter disown his spirit and his writings.

And I do earnestly invite Mr. Penn to follow this chase; it is most incumbent upon him of any other, because (I think myself obliged to tell it him) he is suspected by some of his fellow Quakers as favour ing this principle of using the carnal sword; and, to convince him that I do not speak without book, I have now before me a letter from Philadelphia, (the metropolis of Pennsylvania,) dated the 21st of the 4th month, 1695, wherein are these words; I have seen a copy of the king's late grant of the government, wherein they gave the reasons of their taking it away, and of Will. Penn's humble submission, and requesting the government to be granted to him again; which was therefore done, on his giving them certain assurance that he would secure and defend the place, and would send eighty soldiers to Albania, when called for, or find money to pay them. This causeth a great stir among the people, who are not very ready to comply there with, &c.

I will make no comments, but leave it to Mr. Penn himself to own or deny the matter of fact; and whether he will stand by G. Fox as to his principle of fighting, or not: and if any have been heretofore deceived by George Fox, that they would now repent and return.

I have set down thus much of this, and the other primitive Quakers' bloody and rebellious spirit, for the sake of those honest loyal Quakers now amongst us. If they were all guided with the same spirit, they would be all such, especially Mr. Penn having told us, (p. 36 of his preface to Fox's Journal,) that their light within did surely guide them both in reference to religion and civil concerns: and we believe it does both alike infallibly. And then let our now loyal Quakers take a measure of their in fallibility in other things, by the traitorous prin ciples and actions of G. Fox, and all the rest of them, from 1650 to 1660, in that scene of schism and rebellion, the two breasts of the covenant whence the Quakers sucked their infant milk.

I hope this dismal prospect of the birth and growth of Quakerism will cure those Quakers of honesty and sense, who have a just apprehension of the heinousness of schism in the church, and re bellion in the state.

And I would desire them not to satisfy them selves (it will not satisfy the world) to slip out some of the most monstrous passages of treason out of the new editions of their prophets, as I have shewn they have served Edward Burroughs, Francis Howgil, &c., and I have given them a timely warning as to the new edition of G. Fox's works, which is upon the stocks; for this disingenuous trick exposes their infallibility much more, and they are not to think that some will not watch them, and detect their double-dealing.

There is nothing less will serve their turn than downright to acknowledge the folly and wickedness of their former prophets; to renounce, disown, and condemn their blasphemies and treasons; otherwise they must be judged partners with them, and fa vourers, at least, of their impious principles, who refuse to condemn them; when it is so necessary for the glory of God, and removing so horrid a scandal, not only to the Quakers, but to the re formed religion, and to Christianity itself; which appellations the Quakers assume to themselves; but how justly, I leave to the reader.

And the Quakers cannot refuse thus to condemn these scandalous prophets and teachers of theirs, even by their own discipline; for in their yearly meeting, 1675, they made a decree, That the church's testimony and judgment against scan dalous walkers, and the repentance and condemn ation of the parties restored, should be recorded in a distinct book, to be produced or published for that end.

Now if they think blasphemers and traitors and false prophets to be scandalous walkers, they are obliged here, by their own rule, and their practice in other cases, to cause them to sign instruments of condemnation against themselves, and to record these in their public register, together with their church's testimony and judgment against them, to be produced and published for that end, to vindicate their church from the scandal.

But if they refuse (as I am afraid they will) to execute this discipline upon those false prophets herein detected, and many others whom they know, upon all their blasphemers and traitors; (upon their persons if alive, and their works if they are dead;) if they refuse this, it is plain that they think not such to be scandalous walkers, but that they justify them and their principles, though they would for their temporal ease and advantage, and to blind the eyes of the world, cover and cut and shuffle and hide themselves. Let this therefore be the touch stone to prove them; let them produce and publish such their condemnation of Fox, Burroughs, &c. for their false prophecies, and traitorous abetting of Oliver and the Rump, and that in the name and from the mouth of the Lord, adding blasphemy to rebellion; let such persons be censured by them, and their books disowned.

But if they will refuse this justice to themselves and the world, then let them lie under the shame and condemnation; and it must in that case, and for that reason, be laid upon their church, and their avowed doctrine and principle, and not only as the failing of particular persons.

---

1. Council and Advice, &c. p. 26 27. 36,37.  ↩︎