Blasphemy

Not to repeat all thoſe ſeveral Blaſphemies moſt juſtly charged on them, in a certain Treatiſe, entitled, Some few of the Quakers many horrid Blaſphemies, ſince the ſame may be read at leiſure by any that deſire it.

As it is no leſ than Blasphemy in their great Apostle Fox, to pretend himſelf to be the Son of God, and eternal Judge of the World; who was before Languages, and neither he or his Name known in the World; who had a Kingdom which was not of the World; wherein he had power to bind and looſe whom he pleaſed.1

So it was a high degree of the ſame Blaſphemy for him to exalt his Nonſenſical Scribbles, as the infallible Word of the Eternal God, in ſtiling them Certain Papers which are the Word of the Lord; the Word of the Lord to Zion; all Friends every where, this is the Word of the Lord to you; hear the Lord God; with much more to this purpoſe; through the Conceit whereof, he at length became puffed up with a moſt Blaſphemous Imagination, That he was equal with God, and ſhould never turn to Duſt; under pretence of his having the Spirit that was equal.2

Many amongſt us was not only led to Honour him as the Lord's Anointed, and Chriſt's great Apostle, ordained of him to ſet forth Methods and Forms of Church Government for the Children of Light in this our Day, as Moſes was to ſet forth Laws for the Children of Israel in his Day, as afore-notified; but ſome to Idolize him ſo Blaſphemouſly, as to declare, That if there was a Motion or Revelation that did ariſe in them, that they might think was of God, yet if he ſhould deny it to be of the Lord, they ſhould be subject to his Judgment, though it contradićted their own suppoſed Divine one.3

{PAGE 171} By all which as it's evident, that he blaſphemouſly exalted himſelf in the Place of God, above all that is called God; ſo it's alſo obvious, his enſlaved Proſelytes as such ador'd him, in proof of this my Charge againſt them, wherein they further involv'd themſelves by following him in others, as will appear by what follows.4

For not to inſiſt on their blasphemous Pretenſion, That they witneſſed, the Godhead dwelt bodily in his two Converts, Burrows and Howgil.5

As it is no leſs than Blaſphemy in them to pretend That the Name Jesus and Christ belongs to the whole Body, and every Member of the Body, as well as to Chriſt the Head. So to paſs by their blaſphemous Title to their Friend Fuce's Book, [of The Fall of a great Visible Idol] incerted with relation to his suppoſed Overthrow of his Opponent's Faith in Chriſt's Reception at the Right-Hand of God in his glorious Humanity in the Heavens without us, till he perſonally come again the ſecond Time, in order to the Reſtituion of all Things. according to Aćts iii, &c.

As it is no leſs than Blasphemy for them to ſet themſelves (as well as their Patron Fox) in the place of God, by exalting their Body (as they call their Teachers, in conjunćtion with their said Fox as Head) above all that is called God, through their Imposition of his and their Innovations, as Divine Laws, as Duties upon us to ſubmit to, in Cases Temporal and Spiritual; under the penalty if our Excluſion from Church Communion, whether or no we conſent to them.6

So not to inſiſt on their blaſphemous Preference of the Common Light in every Man coming into the World, in the place of God and Christ alſo by attributing the Power of the Creator to the {Page 172} Creature, as afore-notified under the Head of Idolatry.

If you give ſuch Titles to a Mortal Man, as are only properly due to God and Chriſt, be to be guilty of Blaſphemy, as the Quakers themſelves have confeſ'd; then the Quakers having not only given ſuch Titles to their great Patron Fox, but alſo accepted ſuch themſelves as are only properly due to God and Chriſt, as hath been proved under the Head of Idolatry, the Quakers are guilty of Blaſphemy by their own Confeſſion. Again,7

If to injure the Fame of another, by villifying Revilings and ſlanderous Reproaches, &c. be to be guilty of Blaſphemy, as the Quakers have alſo confeſſed; then thoſe our depraved Ones having been proved guilty of both thoſe Crimes to purpoſe,under the Head of their Réilery, thoſe our depraved Ones are guilty of Blaſphemy, by the effećt of their own Confeſion. in further proff whereof,8

Lastly, If their exalted Patron Fox and his Admirers were Orthodox, in their owning a Trinity of Perſons in the Divine Eſſence, in occaſionally ſtiling The Father a Perſon, the Son a Perſon, and the Holy Ghoſt a Perſon; &s they have done in their ſeveral Writings, &c. Then he and his depraved Collegues muſt be not only guilty of Blaſphemy in denying the Term Trinity of Perons in the Godhead, as a Popiſh Invention; but of what, in compariſon of it, may be juſtly called, The Blaſphemy of Blaſphemies, in damning this moſt holy and ever bleſſed Trinity to the Pit of Hell; under pretence, That as they never read of the Word Trinity, the Three Perſons their Opponent dreamed of, which he would divide out of One like a Conjurer, are all denied, and he ſhut with them in perpetual Darkneſs for the Lake and the Pit; with more to this purpoſe, as an undeniable proof of this my Charge againſt them.

{Page 173} In a deep Senſe of the Truth whereof, though honeſt John Penyman was required of God to offer many of their Books to the Flames, at the Royal Exchange, London, as a Testimony againſt the Blasphemies contained in them; yet inſtead of anſwering the End of the Lord therein; by removing the Cauſe of his flaming Diſpleaſure, by Obliterating and Condemning the ſame, according to their Chriſtian Duty and John Penyman's Exhortations; G. Whitehead in the Name and Behalf of his deprav'd Collegues (besides his lying Aſſertion of John Penyman's deſign being to burn the Bible with their Books, which he utterly diſclaim'd) makes no Bones to add to the long ſcore of their Blaſphemies, By condemning the holy Spirit that influenc'd him in that Service, for an inſtigation of the Devil,as an additional Evidence of this my Charge against them; from which, as I expećt their Diſcharge at leiure, I shall deſcend to give proofs of their Abomination, as a natural consequent of their blaſphemous Allegations; being well ſatisfy'd, that though they (in their Sober Reply, as they call it, preſented to Parliament) pretend, That they always are ready to make it appear, that neither their Books are Blaſphemous, nor Principles pernicious: As they never were, they never will be ready to make any ſuch Thing appear before a proper Auditory, if they can poſſibly avoid it, not notwithstanding thoſe their lofty Pretenſions; ſince, as they have told the World, That for any to ſay Things in the Name of the Lord, or that are moved by him to ſpeak and do, and are not, is the greateſt Blaſphemy and Forgery under Heaven; they having ſo often ſaid, wrote and done Things in the Name of the Lord, &s immediately moved by him, which they have ſince expung'd out of their Collećtions, and deteſted in Praćtice as not to be ſtood by; we may very well conclude, they'll never attempt to acquit themſelves of a Charge they have been at ſuch pains to prove juſtly due to them; the which, if they ſhould offer at, I doubt not but that their Quakers Challenge, in conjunćtion with others in my {Page 174} Custody they have declared their Approbation of, will be found a proof of the Truth of it, beyond their Confutation; in confidence whereof I conclude this Subjećt, and proceed to give Evidence of their next Crime, as follows.9

  1. See his Letter to Oliver Cromwell, as cited p. 113. of the Snake. G.W.'s Juſt Enquiry, p. 11. News out of the North, Title-Page, with p. 1. &c. Several Petitions anſwered, p. 29, 30. Pen's Judas, p. 85. Rice Jones's Mon. Bugg's Pićture of Quakeriſm, p. 14.  ↩︎

  2. Fox's Great Myſt. p. 225. Several Papers printed 1671. p. 60, 61. with others cited p. 61. of F.B.'s Narrat. Doćtrinal Works, p. 29. Saul's Errand, p. 8. &c. Epiſtle of Fox's, p. 1,4. with his Anſwer to J. Wilkinſon, as cited p. 47, 48. of the 4th Part of Rogers's Chriſtian Quaker.  ↩︎

  3. Manuſcripts refer'd to in Rogers's Chriſtian Quaker, Part 1, p. 9. with Part 4. p. 30. Compared with Rebecca Traverſe's Letter as cited p. 103. of Pen's Judas, and Rogers's Quakers divided, &c.  ↩︎

  4. Penington's Anſwer to an Essay towards allaying G. Fox's Spirit, p. 65.  ↩︎

  5. Dewsberry's Chriſt exalted, p. 18. in anſwer to John Tomſon, as cited in Quakeriſm drooping, p. 106. Penington's Queſtion to Profeſſors, p. 276.  ↩︎

  6. Rogers's Poſtſcript to his Quakers divided, with their Yearly Paper of Anno. 1666. Compared with their ſev4ral Orders recited under the head of their Innovation. Fox's Selećt Epiſtles, p. 360. Caton's *Innocency clear'd p. 10,11,12,17,18,19, &c. G. Fox jun. Collećtions, and my other Proofs under the Head of their* Impoſition.  ↩︎

  7. See Cole and Audland's Idolatrous Lettrs, as citex in the Snake.  ↩︎

  8. Whitehead's Definition of Blaſphemy, at the Concluſion of his Epiſtle to the Reader, in his Turth prevalent. Great Myſt. p. 1,94,99,246,247,248, &c. Pen's Anſwer to Mugleton, p. 57. Treatiſe of Oaths p. 142, &c. Judas and the Chief Preiſts, p. 53. Compared with Whitehead and Atkinſon's Ithmael, &c. p. 18. Sword of the Lorx drawn, p. 5, &c. Pen's Sandy Foundation, &c. p. 12,13,15.  ↩︎

  9. See his Teſtimony in bloody Charaćters, as incerted p. 28. &c. of the Account of his Life. William Pen's Judas, p. 40, &c. Compared with thoſe ſeveral Blaſphemies of theirs, as expoſed, p. 271, 185, 306. &c. of Fr. Bugg's Great Myſt. of thd Little Whore, refer'd to p. 38. of his Finiſhing Stroke. See their Friend Weſt's Books John Penyman refers to in p. 96. of the Account of his Life.  ↩︎

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)