the case. If men who take away, even from the "faith once delivered to the saints," at least two-thirds, besides many main points of the other third; who equal their own presumptuous conceits to the divine oracles and revelations ; who use and disuse at pleasure, what parts of God's instituted worship they think fit, even the very badges of Christianity (I will not here interpose your making gain your godliness;) but if the aforesaid men are in a way of perdition, what can you conclude of yourselves? In the name of God repent and return and from my soul I pray, that God will please to give you repentance.

Cork, July the 2d, 1698.

EDWARD CORK AND Ross.

A DEFENCE OF A PAPER, &c.

I HAVE given the bishop's exceptions together at large, as he did our paper, and shall now consider their validity. He is pleased to say at the beginning of his first paragraph, He is such a reader as in our paper we desire;' words that gave me great hopes, of not only fair, but friendly dealing; and I heartily wish it had been so but since it seems to me the reverse of his promise, he must not take it ill from me, if I stop a while, and show him a little to himself, and how much he is mistaken in his own temper, as well as in our principles. For though he begins with the names of moderation, charity, and meekness, that is all: he quickly loses sight of them, and forgets them, with himself, almost all the way. And unless my taste be extremely depraved, there is little relish of those virtues in his management, or a tolerable temper shown towards us, respecting either our belief or practice. We desired such a reader, indeed, as had rather we were in the right than in the wrong; one that did not prejudge our case, and would give us (and not our enemies) the wording of our own belief: while the bishop but too plainly shows, he would not have us in the right, even where he dares not say (however freely he suggests it) that we are in the wrong. Which appears,

First, By his unnecessary exceptions to such truths as we have declared in our paper (and he cannot deny) as imperfectly expressed, because we have not said all that might be said, to branch them out, or illustrate them; though enough to be understood by such as are not captious.

Secondly, By suppositions incongruous, and that can have no other service than to expose us, and that in a very ill

manner.

Thirdly, By rendering us to deny, what we do not express in our paper: though indeed we believe it.

Fourthly, In not taking due notice of what is implied, as well as expressed: which had been but just.

Fifthly, In making the worst of what is not concurrent with his belief; and not the best, where we believe the same thing.

Sixthly, By grossly misrendering our pretences to strict living.

Lastly, By condemning us upon rumour. All which is more than leaning to that side that had rather we were in the wrong, than in the right; and consequently not suc a reader as we desired. That this is so, let it but be observed, how he unchristians us in his third paragraph; though immediately in a contradiction to what he just before acknowledges in his second. Nor will he allow us to be so much as Deists in his fourth, or at most but very imperfect ones, because we have not said all of God that may be ascribed to him. I his sixth, he suppose us capable of believing that Christ came of corrupt and sinful flesh, because we say no more, in that place, of the manner of his incarnation, than the evangelist doth, John i. 14. Also, that we are defective, at best ambiguous, about eternal rewards and punishments. He makes us, in his seventh paragraph, to deny the resurrection of the dead at large, and without distinction, though we there acknowledge a future state, which implies it; and have not said one word against it; but upon all occasions, in print, or otherwise, have expressed our belief of that branch of Christian doctrine, according to scripture. In his tenth, he derides our plain (though proper) language, of thou to a single person, though it is what he himself gives to God in his prayers. In his fourteenth and fifteenth, he is pleased to slight, and render our stricter living a trick to promote a party, and that our garb, looks, and gestures, are more to make ourselves remarkable, than out of any persua sion of duty, or conscience: as bad a construction as he could make. In his sixteenth he tells us, 'The light within us, that we say we have from Christ, is rather one of the heights or depths of Satan transformed, and that we are abandoned to his delusions.' So that we, and most of our principles too, are stark naught with the bisho. In hs eighteenth and last paragraph he suggests, We take away two-thirds of the Christian faith, besides many points of the other third; and equal our presumptuous conceits to the

divine oracles, and revelations, and use, and disuse, at pleasure, what part of God's instituted worship we think fit, even the very badges of Christianity. I will not,' says the bishop, interpose (yet suggests it) your making gain your godliness: but if the aforesaid men are in a way to perdition, what can you conclude of yourselves? In the name of God repent and return.' Thus the bishop, upon a whole people, without any other provocation than has been expressed.

I hope, after this, he will not expect (I am sure he ought not) that any body should think him such a reader as we desired for our gospel-truths, and which he promised us to be; or that he has treated us with the moderation, charity, and meekness, he made us hope for; since none of our adversaries have used us much worse, in so little a compass. I heartily wish him a better sight of himself, as well as of us, that he may be less mistaken in both another time; for ĺ have a respect for him, and desire not to be upon these terms with him, any longer than he thinks fit to make it necessary.

The rest of his first paragraph is only a strain of fair and pastoral promises, forgotten by him, and not to be remembered any more, at this time by me; and therefore I shall proceed to his second, Only observe this one thing to my reader, and the bishop too, that he is pleased to place moderation and charity to our account, because he does not take us by our word chiefly to mean only or all, in reference to the things by us believed, which, under favour, he could not do in justice; and therefore he needs not bring us in debtor for that which is our due, since nobody ever took chiefly for only, any more than an eldest for an only son, or an arch for an only bishop. Nor does chiefly imply all, any more than only; for whether it regards things human or divine, it imports the best part of any thing, but not all; the most valuable, that which deserves and commands our regard and esteem in the first place, And I leave it with my reader, Whether believing in God, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit; and believing the scriptures, and the necessity of holiness, and divine worship, and finally of eternal rewards and punishments, are not points of faith chiefly to be received and professed by Christians? And if they are such, the bishop must have been superfinely critical upon our word chiefly, as well as that he might have been a better husband of his moderation and charity, and have kept them for an occasion where they might have been more needed, and consequently better bestowed.

His second paragraph allows us to have sufficiently ex

pressed our Christian belief in two articles, but with this censure, that of eleven, we are only clear in these two, viz. justification by Christ, and submission to the civil government; wishing we may always stick to this belief, and practice;' and adds, "I heartily rejoice to find you acknowledge the necessity of Christ, as a propitiation, in order to the remission of sins, and justifying you, as sinners, from guilt. It is the first time I have heard of it among you.'

If so, it is the bishop's fault, and seems to me next to impossible; since before that paper was given him, he was pleased to acknowledge he had read several of our books; particularly my Rise and Progress of the People called Quakers,' taking it out of his pocket at that time; also Robert Barclay's Apology,' which states, and vindicates our principles at large, in which the two doctrines aforementioned are very clearly declared, and maintained, notwithstanding he seems to make this look like a new discovery. But, however, I am pleased that the bishop is so, at two of the gospel truths: I am of opinion, if he had well considered the force and comprehensiveness of our belief concerning Christ. that pleases him so well, he might have saved himself the trouble of what he has published to the world upon the rest of them: for whoever believes in Christ, as a propitiation, in order to remission of sins, and justification of sinners from the guilt of sin, can hardly disbelieve any fundamental article of the Christian religion; since every such person must necessarily believe in God, because it is with him alone man is to be justified. To be sure he must believe in Christ, for that is the very proposition. He must also believe in the Holy Ghost, because he is the author of his conviction, repentance, and belief. He must believe heaven and hell, rewards and punishment, and consequently the resurrection of the just and unjust for why should he be concerned about being freed from the guilt of his sin, if he were unaccountable in another world? So that acknowledging the necessity of Christ, as a propitiation, in order to the remission of sin, comprehends the main doctrine of the Christian religion; and as so many lines drawn from the circumference to the centre, they all meet and centre in Christ : and indeed it is as the navel of Christianity, and characteristic of that religion. I would intreat him again, to reflect well upon his own acknowledgment and commendation of our belief, concerning the end and benefit of Christ to mankind; and he cannot think us so deficient, much less under such strong and dangerous delusions, as he has been pleased to represent us.

His third paragraph will not suffer us to be Christians,

notwithstanding what we have said of our belief in Christ, in our paper called Gospel-Truths.' In one sense I shall easily agree with him, for I think nothing makes any man a true Christian, but regeneration, the power of the Son of God revealed in the soul, converting it to God: for the devils believe, and tremble too, and yet are devils still; they believe what is true, but they do not truly believe in Him that is true; they know and assent to the propositions of truth, or articles of faith; and knew Him to be Christ too, when he came of old, and called him by his name; but this did not make true Christians then of them: nor yet does an assent now, to all the truths of the gospel, truly qualify men Christians, unless they feel the power of them upon their hearts. And I would have my reader reflect well upon this great and essential truth, though he were as big as a bishop: for a new creature is the business; an orthodox life, the cross of Christ, which is the narrow way of selfdenial. Yet I must say, that whoever declares he believes in Christ as his Sacrifice and Sanctifier, which is to save both from the guilt and pollution of sin, is a professor of Christianity, and may reasonably be allowed to be a Christian at large. And that what we have declared, in our third, fourth, fifth, and sixth Gospel-Truth, comprehends the belief before-mentioned, my just and sober reader may satisfy himself in the perusal thereof.

His fourth paragraph faults our first article, as he is pleased to call it, with great shortness and imperfection concerning our belief of God; for though (he says) we own his providence as to the other life, yet we say nothing as to the creation of this present world, and providence over it :' but, with the bishop's leave, he that believes in God, believes in all that is necessary to a Supreme Being. It is what he, and all Christians, take for granted, and allow, as often as they hear any one say, he believes in God. For not to believe Him omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, is not to believe him to be God, these being inseparable from the divine nature. I must appeal to the bishop, whether a small grain of charity would not have excused us from his reflection upon this head. We have said more than Moses said to Pharaoh: for besides that, I am, is no more than, He is; we have added, that He is the Rewarder of all men, according to their works. We gave the text as it is, and the very text seems expressed for a declaration of faith in God, viz. "He, that will come to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a Rewarder of them that seek him." The text does not enumerate and require the belief of all the divine attributes and properties that are in God, but the