Perjury

Thought this Charge will be look'd upon by many, as q Pun upon the Quakers, rather than what is like to be proved on them, on account of their ſsuffering Teſtimonies againſt all Oaths, as Unchriſtian; yet as I have proved in ſome measure, under the Head of Hypocriſy, and shall more effećtually prove, when called to it on this Occaſion, That they have not only Sworn, but alſo offered to Swear ſubſtantially in their own way notwithstanding, under the Denomination of Solemn Arreſtatiàns (which they have owned, Ozths was anciently accounted). My preſent Buſineſſ is not ſo much to prove their Solemn Affirmations to be Oaths, (which ſome of their own profeſs'd Members have been at no ſmall pains to do to my my Hands) as to evince, that they have on thoſe Terms and others, forſworn themſelves. In order whereto

Not to inſiſt on their Purjury, as expoſed in Francis Buggs's Preface to his Vox Populi, and Quakeriſm further expos'd,beyond their Attampts to defend themſelves. The firſt Inſtance I shall exhibit is proof of this Charge, is out of p. 137. of their great Apostle Fox's Journal; wherein -, as he tell us, How he was moved of the Lord to write a Paper to the Protećtor by the Name of Oliver Cromwell, (thought I rather think it was Olcfer Cromwell in the Original, according to the Contents of a Letter I have see of his own Hand-Writing) wherein he did, in the preſence of the Lord, declare, That he did deny the wearing or drawing a Carnal Sword, or any other outward Weapon, againſt any Man; which being not only directly contrary to his Admonitions to the ſaid Oliver, and his Officers and Soldiers, To go forth with a free and willing Heart, thzt they might rock Nations as a Cradle, in ſlaying all by their outward Sword, that wo!uld not be ruled by their Light, &c. but alſo groſly inconſiſtence with his Commendations of the Exerciſe of the ſame in the Hand of the Magiſtrate againſt Evil Doers, &c. In the very ſame Page, he, in the Nale of the Lord, forſwears (in their Quaker way) the wearing or drawing of it; as apparent Inſtanceq of his Guilt of Perjury, as the Natural Fruit of this goodly Tree of Doćtrines, William Pen ſo illuſtriouſly magnifies, for want of a true Senſe of his Corruptions; wherefore, 'tis the leſs wonder, That he the ſaid William Pen ſhould be found guilty alſo of the ſaid Crime, this his exalted Patron Fox firſt taught him. In order to the proof whereof1

Not to inſiſt on his Declaration in his Reason againſt Railing, That ſo ſure as God liveth, &c. if Thomas Hicks deſiſted not, and came not to keep Repentance, (meaning of his Writing againſt them) {Page 151} the Lord would make him as an Example of his Fury, and his Head should not go down to the Grave in Peace. Whereas, notwithſtanding he neither deſiſted in Writing againſt them, or repented of what he had wrote, did go down to the Grave in Peace, without being made ſuch an Example of God's Fury, as this our renowned Pen had denouc'd.2

The Matter I insist on, is his ſolemn Declaration in p. 48. of his Great Case of Liberty, That We (i.e. People called Quakers) take the Righteous Holy God to Record, that we hold no Principle destructive to the English Government. When as, beſides their repeated Renunciation of the Oath of Allegiance &c. as Unchriſtian, their well-known Principle of the Unrighteouſneſs of the uſe of the outward Sword, (or any other Carnal Weapon, as they call them) in way of Defenſive War againſt Domeſtick Inſulters, or Foriegn Invaders, not only tends to the Deſtruction if our Egnlish, but alſo of all other Cicvil Governments throughout the Univerſe, to his express Contradiction.3

Wherefore, as thoſe his above-cited Terms are an Oath, according to his own Diſtinćtion in p. 72. of his Treatise on that Subjećt, (compared with thoſe of their Books in his Unity, mention'd in the Margin) ſince he hath not only Sworn in them, but alſo firſworn himſelf, by ſwearing to a Falſhood; I hope he won't take it ill, that I charge him with Perjury,and all that abetted him herein, (as well as in the Inſtance recited p. 14 of Tyranny and Hypocrisy) until he or his Friends have cleared him by their Defences; the which, I can hardly perſwade my ſelf, he or they will attempt, through a true Senſe of his Guilt herein.4

The next Inſtance I urge in proof of this my Charge againſt them, is their Friend Farnſworth's Answer in open Court, before the Mayor of Banbury; who, when the Oath of Abjuration was there tendered him, Denied, in the Preſence of God all Popish Ways. Wherefore, if a ſolemn Appeal to God as an Evidence of the Truth of our Teſtimony, {Page 152} be no leſs than an Oath, according to the Quakers own Doćtrine, in their Poſition and Teſtimony afore referr'd to.5

Then ſince they are to be accounted no other than Popiſh Ways, that are contrary to thoſe of the true Ancient and Apoſtolick Church of Chriſt in the firſt Ages of Chriſtianity, according to their Friend Elwood'sConfeſſion in his Truth prevalent, &c. and Foundation of Tythes ſhaken. This Far ſworth, if he owned those of the Quakers, againſt Marriage of lawful Kindreds; Liberty to declare the Word of God without their Monthly Meeting's Certificate of Unity; Diſallowance of Appearance in their Yearly Meetings, in order to eaſe our Minds of what lies upon us to Communicate for the Churches Welfare, without the Conſent of the Quarterly one we belong to; Impoſition of Human Preſcriptions, under the Penalty of our Exclusion before Conviction; keeping their Church Decrees ſecret; condemning Perſons in their Abſc"nce, without giving them Copies of their Excommunications; refuſing what is done in their Yearly Meetings to be call'd in Question; amongſt many other Ways of the ſame nature. All which as they are purely Popiſh in their Original, as may be found upon a Compariſon of the ſame, with thoſe of the Papiſts mentioned in the ſeveral Pages of the Acts and Monuments, and History if the Trent Council, inſtanc'd in the Margin. The ſaid Farnſworth isnot only guilty of the Crime of Swearing in the Quakers Account, but what is far worſe then that, of the ſad Sin of Perjury. In further proof of this my Charge againſt them.6

Wherefore, as ſeveral others of their Brotherhood have alſo been proved guilty of giving falſe Evidence, upon their ſolemn Affirmation, (as they call their Quaker Oaths) for which one of them ſtands indićted by a Bill found againſt him at Hick's Hall for Perjury, according to Fr. Bugg's Relation, {Page 153} in his Preface to his Vox Populi:If he that Swears be of the Devil, as their Patron Fox hath affirmed; then he himſelf with thoſe his depraved Collegues cannot be of God to be sure; ſince they have not only ſwron, but alſo forſworn themſelves in thoſe ſeveral Matters, amongſt other that might be mentioned; which groſs Enormity, as they were led into through their implicite Bigotry to their Apoſtle Fox's Impertinencies, for want of timely dealing with him, in order to his Repentance of his Corruptions, through the Opinion they had of him, as ſome extraordinary One; ſo that ſuperſtitious Reverence they bore him.7

  1. J. Crooks's Works, p. 81. Compared with p. oʄ J. Whiteheaad's Collećtion, and a private Letter of his I have by me, to his Foxonian collegues upon that Occaʃion, with their Anʃwer to it, wherein they blame him nit, ʄor oʄʄering to take Oath put to him as to the Subʃtance oʄ it, though they declare, They wiʃh he hadnot ʃubjećted ʃo aʄar as he did, in repeating ʃo much of the Form of it. See more p. 10. oʄ the 2d Part oʄ John Penyman's Quakers Contradićtions on this Subjećt. See Fox's Good Counsel to O.Cromwell, &c. p. 37, 26. Compared with p. 1 oʄ his Epiʃtle to all Officers and Soldiers of the Armies in England, &c. and Anʃwer to Hidden Things. In his Preʄace to his ʃaid Journal.  ↩︎

  2. P. 180. compared with G.K.'s Appendix to his ʄirʃt Narrative on this Occaʃion. Snake in the Graʃs, p. 56, &c.  ↩︎

  3. As cited by G.W. in p. 19. oʄ his Epiʃtle ʄrom their Meeting ʄor Sufferings.  ↩︎

  4. Ciunterfeit Convert, p. 68. and p. 22, 31, &c.oʄ their Poʃition and Teʃtimony againʃt all Oaths, as cited in John Penyman's Quakers Contradićtions.  ↩︎

  5. See his ʃaid Anʃwerin p. 2. oʄ his Saints Teʃtimony, as cited by G.W. in his Epiʃt.0 aʄore-mentioned.  ↩︎

  6. Aćts and Monuments, p. 616, 608, 598, 599, 610, 286, 288. Hiʃtory of the Trent Council, p. 654, 748, 669, 670, 746, 542, 684, 553, 620, 688, 698, 840, 25, 55, 303, 305, 309, 372, 61, 855, 475  ↩︎

  7. P. 12, 16, &c. oʄ his Doćtrinal Works  ↩︎

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)