PRIMS Full-text transcription (HTML)



Or, Antichristian Blaſphemies, Anti-ſcripturall Diveliſmes, Anti-morall Uncleanneſs, Evidenced in the Light of Truth, and Puniſhed by the hand of Juſtice.

BEING, A ſincere and impartiall Relation of the Proceedings of the Com­miſſioners of the County of Berks, Authorized by the Ordinance for Ejection, againſt John Pordage, late Miniſter of Bradfield, in the ſame County.

Publiſhed for the vindication of Juſtice, and ſatisfaction of the Conſci­entious, in the name, and by the order of the ſaid Commiſſioners and Aſſiſtants.

With ſome Notes, and Animadverſions upon a Book of the ſaid John Pordage, intituled, Innocency appearing, &c.

By CHRISTOPHER FOWLER, Miniſter of the Goſpel at S. Maries in Reding.

Mos iſte ſemper viguit in Eccleſia, ut quo quiſque foret religioſior, eo promptiùs novis adinventionibus contrairet. Vinc. Lyrin. adv. Haer. cap. 9.

2 Pet. 2.1, 2.Falſe teachers ſhall privily bring in damnable hereſies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and many ſhall follow their pernicious waies.

1 Cor. 16.22.If any man love not the Lord Jeſus, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

1 Gal. 8.Though an angel from heaven preach otherwiſe, then that we have preached unto you, let him be accurſed.

1 John 2.23.Whoſoever denyeth the ſon, the ſame hath not the father.

Peccatum nocet perſonae, ſed Haereſis communitati,Luth. tom. 1. p. 260.

Hoc eſt artificiū unicū Satanae & fanaticorū, quod nolunt videri male docere, ſe jactant ſinceriſſimos, fideliſſimos, cum ſunt omniū mendaciſſimi. Id. tom. 4. p. 339.

LONDON: Printed for Francis Eglesfild, and are to be ſold at the Signe of the Marigold in S. Pauls Church-yard. 1655.

To his Highneſs OLIVER Lord PROTECTOR of England, Scotland, Ireland, and the Dominions thereunto belonging.

May it pleaſe your Highneſs.

WE humbly crave leave to acknow­ledge, that we look upon it as an eminent mercy, that under your Highneſs Government, a gracious, and a wiſe Providence hath put an opportunity into the hands of men deſiring to fear God, to effect, what is of higheſt concernment, for the good of ſoules: that, they may neither be ſtarved by the Miniſters inſufficiency, nor poiſoned by blaſphemy, nor blinded by ignorance, nor hardned by ſcandall,

Whileſt men ſlept, (we are loath to ſay the maſters of the houſe,) the envious man hath ſown Tares, tares full of deadly poi­ſon, and that poiſon diffuſed into the very vitalls of faith, and godlineſſe, and that ſo ſubtilly conveyed, that Sathan fights againſtPanatici pug­nant contra Chriſtum, ſub titulo Chriſti: Luther. Chriſt, under the notion of Chriſt.

Among the many ſad Inſtances in this nation, this enſuing Relation preſents ſome of thoſe doctrines to your Highneſs view, Doctrines ſo directly deſtructive to the very fundamentalls of Religion, that we ſolemnly profeſſe, (were it a mat­ter eligible) we had rather ten thouſand times, that we, and our deareſt relations ſhould die ſtark mad in chains at Bedlam, then to live, and die in ſuch execrable opi­nions againſt our Lord Jeſus.

In all humility we beg the boldneſſe to ſay, that your conſcientious, and ſolemn purſuance of Reformation, that the Goſpel of our Lord Jeſus may be glorified, will be the life, and length of your dayes in this time of trouble, as a bond of love upon the hearts of the Godly, in this hour of Apoſtaſie, whileſt you live, and leave your memory precious to ſucceeding Generations.

Your Highneſs faithfully devoted, in the ſervice of the Goſpel, in the name of your Commiſſioners, and their Aſſiſtants; and among them the meaneſt, CHRISTO. FOWLER.


Courteous Reader,

THou art here preſented with a faithfull relation of the Proceedings of the Commiſſioners of Berks, in the buſineſs of Dr. Pordage, late Mi­niſter of Bradfield in the ſaid County: we deſire that thou maiſt read as we do write, with a ſad heart that ſuch prodigious, and damnable hereſies ſhould be belched forth in ſuch a land of light, both publickly and privately againſt the perſon and merits of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, as this Dr. hath done.

We are well aſſured, that neither the former Parlia­ments, nor the preſent Governours did intend, or mean thus to tolerate, though they were tender to conſciences truly tender; their care was, and is, for the ejection of Scandalous, ignorant, and inſufficient Miniſters, and in their room, placing Godly, Learned, Orthodox Divines, the nobleſt work that can be undertaken, (if we may have liberty to ex­preſs our thoughts) in any Common wealth, that calls it ſelf Chriſtian. This man formerly placed in, and now ejected, was none of theſe; first, not Godly, becauſe, he denies the Godhead of Jeſus Chriſt, vilifies his precious blood, which the**Acts 20.28. Scripture calls the blood of God. A Do­ctrine that wants a name black enough to be called by, in which any man living, and dying can never be ſaved, and certainly there can be no godlineſs in that religion, in which there is no ſalvation.

Secondly, Not learned, (we ſpeak not of that great help and ornament of humane learning, whereof this man hath no great cauſe to boaſt, (although by a Charientiſmus he is called Doctor) but, becauſe he is ignorant of the chief heads of Religion, which even ſome children of ten years old from their catechiſme can deliver in more intelligible termes, then he hath done.

Thirdly, Not Orthodox, becauſe, his doctrines are Diametrically oppoſite to all thoſe that now are, or thoſe that have been received as ſuch, by the people of God in all for­mer ages, and his expoſition, and application of the Scri­pture is a meer wretched and ſenſleſs corruption of the ſa­cred text.

Fourthly, No Divine, becauſe, his hereſies are, (if by the example of the**Appietatem, aut Lentulita­tem, Cic. epi­ſtol. lib. 3. epiſt. 7. Oratour in Latine, we may have leave to coyn a word in Engliſh) rather Divellity, then Divinity.

The Matter of his Charge (for which we referre thee to this relation) may be reduced to four heads.

Firſt, Blaſphemy, and of that, the moſt pernicious, directly deſtroying the very foundation.

Secondly, Pretended Viſions, of Angels, to confirme that blaſphemy.

Thirdly, The Doctrine and Scandall of uncleanneſs, theGod moſt juſt­ly puniſhing impiety with impurity. Rom. 1.21, to 24. Iſſue of that blaſphemy.

Fourthly, Ignorance and inſufficiency, the ground there­of.

For the firſt, Blaſphemy, he hath often denied the God­head of our Lord Jeſus, which may be called antecedent Blaſphemy, and called his righteouſneſs a ſapleſs righte­ouſneſs, and his precious blood a van thing, which are moſt direfull Blaſphemies, and conſequences of the former.

The firſt of theſe was the damned hereſie ofaaEuſeb. Eccleſ. hiſto. lib. 5. cap. ult. Theodotus, the tanner,bbIbid. Paulus Samoſatenus,ccEpiphan. Haereſ. 71. Aug. haereſ. 44, 45. Photinus,ddIbid. haereſ. 49. Arrius, whom Hierome in apol. adv. Ruffin. calls Damonium Meridia­num,eeMahomet. Alchor. c. 5. p. 72. (if this may be called Hereſie.) Mahomet,ffMr. Rutherfords Survey, part. 1. cap. 9. Henry Nicholas founder of the Fami­liſts.

The other execrable Blaſhemy concerning Chriſts righteouſneſs, is either a piece of oldhhAlphonſ. de caſtro. lib. 7. col. 7. 510. Pelagianiſme, which puts the merits of Eternall life upon the performance of hu­mane nature, or rather, newiiRutherfords S rvey of the Spirit, Antic. c. 9. p. 58, 59. famil ſme, which moſt abſurdly, and blaſphemouſly ſaith, that Chriſt is not one man, the Son of Mary, but all men believing and loving, and that Chriſt is not God, and man, but the ſtate of perfe­ction in believers, what Chriſtian heart can chuſe but be affected with ſome ſparkes of holy zeal againſt ſuch curſed doctrines, ſpit in the facce of Jeſus Chriſt, by an handfull of ſinfull dirt, fit to be cast into the ſtreet, Pſal. 18.42. and which impious doctrines do neceſſarily conclude our religion to be but a fable, our faith a fancy, our hope a dream, and us of all creatures the moſt miſerable.

To the ſecond, as to Viſions of angels, we believe the Chriſtian Reader will eaſily perſwade himſelfe, that the Bleſſed Angels would rather lie down in the flames of hell, then come to confirme ſuch wicked, antichriſtian do­ctrines, but this is an old fetch of the Prince of dark­neſs.

The Angelici were thought by ſome to have been ſo called for their pretended communion with angels, which agreeth well with that we find inaaEpipha. cont. haereſ. lib. 2. tom. 1. p. 60. Epiphanius vz. that they held themſelves to be of the order of angels, as being perſons in their own conceits angelicall, if ſo, tis likely they looked the angels ſhould be**This Doctor doth confeſſe converſe with them. familiar with them, But the conſtant phraſe of the Scripture ſtill mentioning familiar ſpirits in an evil ſence, never in a good, teacheth us to take them not for glorified Angels in heaven, but for damned fiends in hell.

The pretenſe of converſe with Angels, we find most fre­quent amongst Mahumetans, Papiſts, and Familiſts, take a ſingle inſtance of each of them;

Firſt, Mahumetans, and here, moſt notoriouſly famous is the grand impoſture of that wickedbbForbes in­ſtruct. hiſt. theol. p. 176. Mahomet, pretending great familiarity with the Angel Gabriel, and that the Al­coran was let fall from heaven into his boſome, when he was aſleep; A great helper of this wretch, was Sergius a Ne­ſtorian, who denied (as our Dr.) the Godhead of Chriſt,

2. Of the Papiſts we have a notable hiſtory of their S. Franciſca, who was ſaid to have enjoyed the ſight of an AngelccHere is the Drs. match. continually, he was of an incredible beauty, his countenance more white, then ſnow, more ruddy, then the roſe, croſs'd on his breaſt, his locks long, and curled, more clear then poliſhed gold, ſhining with ſuch brightneſſe, that ſhe could read her mattens at midnight.

3. As for the Familiſts, we cannot have a fitter example then of their PatriarckaaMr. Ruther­fordSurvey Antic. cap. 9. p. 55. Henry Nicholas, who gave out that he had Viſions of, and conferences with Angels from heaven, from whom he learned to expound Scriptures by Allegories, but ſuch Angels are quickly dſcovered to be Divels indeed, when their Revelations are brought to be tried by the Word of God, as they ought, Iſai. 8.20.

Mary Wiltſhire reported to Dr. Goad, and Dr. Featly, at Lambeth, that there appeared to her one in the ſhape of a woman, wth very ſhining lght, having the moon under her feet, and the ſun over her head, with bright beams a­bout it, who gave her being ſick in her bed, three Benedicti­ons, and Fiſher the Jeſuit told her, without doubt it was the Bleſſed Virgin Mary, and it was revealed to him, ſhe muſt be a Nun of the Order of S. Clare.

bbLuther, tom. 2 in Gen. Fol. 193.Luther being acquainted with this Cheat of Sathan, and fearing to be deluded by ſome Diabolicall impoſture under the appearance of Angels, daily prayed, that God woulpreſerve him from ſuch viſions, contenting himſelf with reading, and meditation of the Scriptures, and hearing Ser­mons, and prayer.

The fancy ofccEpiphan. con. Haereſ. lib. 2. tom. 1. haereſ. 9. Quintilla, or Priſcilla, who ſaid, that Chriſt came to her when ſhe was aſleep, and reuealed to her that Pepuza the Village where ſhe lived was an holy place, the city Jeruſalem which deſcended out of heaven, is paralel to the viſion of Suſan Day aBradfield, and the Drs. con­ceit that his houſe ſhould be as Noahs Ark, for ſafety to thoſe that came to dwell under his roof.

We never read nor heard but theſe pretenders to Viſions did ever ſcorn, and trample on the Word and Ordinances of Jeſus Chriſt, the Ordinance of Water Baptiſme is totally denied by the Dr. and the other Sacrament is in effect de­nied, becauſe the things ſignfied are denied, ſoe didddRuther. ubi ante, p. 60. Hen­ry Nicholas the Oracle of his Sect hold, that Scriptures, preaching, Sacraments, were but fleſhly, elementiſh, ceremo­niall, and indifferent things.

The third head of the charge againſt the Dr. is for Un­cleanneſſe in Doctrine, and that in two points; the one, de­nying with the**This Marcion had a baſtard by a ſiſter, for which fact he was ejected, and then deni­ed Marriage to Chriſtians. Ob ſtupratam virginem reje­ctus, nuptias interdixit Chriſtianis. Eraſmus in his epiſt. before I­renaeus. Marcionites the remedy againſt it, preſcri­bed by the Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 7.2. the other allowing liberty for it, by penalty of women.

So did Mahomet, and the Papiſts now do, by tolerating Stewes, allowing many female bedfellowes, for one wife, asaaSleidan. Comment. lib. 4. p. 79. Cardinal Campeius did in Germany; Pope Hildebrands doctrine was very good news to whoremongers, who for one wife might have the uſe of 600 women,bbIdem, p. 200. John of Leyden the Mechanical King of the Fanaticks in Germany, pre­tended, that he received his impure doctrine by Revelation, and when ſome made doubt of ſuch Libertiniſme, he laid down his cloke upon the new Teſtament, and ſware by them both, that he had that doctrine delivered to him from God himſelf.

Obj. The Dr. is a Profeſſor, and is taken notice of for holineſſe, amongst men of his perſwaſion at leaſt, nay and others, very many.

Anſ. So was CaſparccRutherfords Survey of An­tic. c. 5. p. 15. Swincfield reputed a man grave, ci­vil and fervent in prayer, yet he became a blaſpemous he­retique against the nature of Cbriſt, and againſt the Scrip­tures, ſaying that Chriſt was not only once born, but often, and that we ought to content our ſelves with the teaching of the ſpirit, for, the vocall word is to be rejected as a kil­ling letter.

Our Engliſh falſe ProphetddCambden Annal. l. 4. p. 40. Hacket was a Profeſſor of ſanctity, a hearer of ſermons, a reader of Scriptures, pray­ng with admirable fervency, yet fell from duty to revela­tion, and from revelation to blaſphemy, ſuch blasphemy againſt God, that even the Divells ſcarce ever durst utter.

The Dr. hath brought in his Proteſtation.

Anſ. Be pleaſed to read the animadverſion upon it, for preſent, conſider the Elceſaits, Priſcillianiſts, and Fami­liſts, they took liberty to diſſemble in their own defence, though they did ſo upon different grounds.

TheeeAlphonſ. de Caſtro. adver. haereſ. l. 0. Elceſaits took a liberty to ſay any thing, becauſe they held that God was more pleaſed with truth in the heart, then displeaſed with falſity in the mouth.

TheffAug. de haer. haer. 7. Priſcillianiſts they allowed in themſelves the deny­ing of the truth, becauſe they held it better to conceal the truth with lying, and perjury, then to confeſſe it with ſhame, and infamy.

TheaaCambden Annal. l. 2. p. 18, 219. Familiſts held it was lawfull for them to deny upon their oathes before Magiſtrates what they liſt, or before any other which were not of their own Family, which of theſe the Dr. will chooſe for his brethren we cannot reſolve, it is lke, he will acknowledge none of them for his maſter, nor is it needfull, that one Heretick ſhould learn of another, for the ſame Divel may teach them all in ſeverall ages, the ſame Errors, Hereſies, and Blasphemies, asbbCal. inſtruc. adv. Libert. c. 1. p. 435. opuſc. Calvin ob­ſerves.

The fourth and laſt head, is ignorance and inſufficiency, we ſhall leave it to the conſcience of every impartial Chri­ſtian, whether his ſhewing himſelf groſſelyThat is the moſt favou­rable word, we wiſh there be nothing of pride, con­tempt, and ſcorn. ignorant of the Lord Jeſus in his Perſon, and Offices, even to a denial of them, and that with reproach, and this in publique, his ſenceleſſe allegorizing of the Scriptures, be not a ſufficient ground for being ſentenced, ignorant, and inſufficient.

As for our awn particular, (if we know our own hearts) we have not been acted in this buſineſſe through ſpleen, paſ­ſion, or perſonal respects, but in ſincerity deſiring, and (according to our meanneſſe) endeavouring the glory of Jeſus Chriſt, and the good of precious ſoules, nor do we find our ſelves moved, (and we deſire we may not) with thoſe unworthy**Robbers, li­ons, Fierie fur­naces, partiall, cruell, envious, unjuſt, killing the Prophets, crucifiers, &c. Theſe and ſuch like are the ſweet flowers of his meeke Rhetorick in his book, to this pur­poſe ſpeak the Familiſts againſt the Puritans in their ſupplication to King James, printed An. 606. asperſions, and reflections caſt upon any of us by himſelf, his Lawyer, or his partie.

As for the Dr. himſelf, we heartily wiſh, that God may vouchſafe him repentance unto life, and that God would be pleaſed to open the eyes, and turn the hearts of thoſe poor, ſeduced people who are Belepered with theſe impious, and impure doctrines, and that God would make, and keep the Commiſſioners of this County, and all the counties of this Nation Conſcientious in, and Couragious for the Truth.

C. F.

The Reader is requeſted to obſerve that, that Note p. 18. be­ginning Laſtly whereas the Dr. complains, &c. is miſplaced, and page 84. at the beginning of the page, let him take in this, The Drs. Anſwer.

In the Preface page 5. line 3. read plurality for penalty. p. 8. marg. r. read for was. p. 17. l. 18. r. ſo for too. p. 18. l. 14. r. ſoa­ringneſſe for oaringneſſe. page 20. l. 1. for there read theirs. p. 24. mar. The Quae. dele The. ibid. at the end of the margin, for de­jected by theſe renowned r. detected by the ſummoned. p 26. l. 16. r. Acerrimi for Acerrini. p. 27. l. 1. for ſo r. for. p. 40. l. 16. read worke for world. p. 78. l. 12. read bear for blaze. p. 79. l 5. r. Iſle­worth for Haworth. p. 84. l. laſt, r. our for one. p 98. l. 7. r. ſalt for ſoft. p. 99. l. 24. r. procedure for procedence. p. 101. l. laſt, read crown for crow. p. 111. margin. r. ω for ο penult. p. 119. mar. r. quam for quod. p. 127. l. 25. r. vocans for vacans p. 159. l. 34. r. at for all. p. 168. l. 2. r. enemies for exerciſes, ibid. l. 33. r. Antichri­ſtian for Antichriſtianiſme. p. 169. l. 6. r. ever for either. ibid. l. 9. Harneſſe for hardneſſe.

There are other Literal faults, and faults in pointing which thou art deſired to mend, or paſſe by.


A Just narration of the proceedings of the Commiſsioners of Berks, upon Articles of Blaſphemy, pretended viſi­ons, uncleanneſſe &c. exhibited and proved against John Pordage, late miniſter of Bradfield in the ſaid county.

MOnday the eighteenth of September 1654, being the firſt day of the Commiſſioners meeting, a charge of articles was then ex­hibited to them, againſt Doctor John Por­dage Rector of Bradfield in this county, who was thereupon, by warrant dated the ſame day under the hands and ſeals of five of the ſaid Com­miſſioners, required to appear, and give anſwer to the ſaid articles on thurſday the fifth of October following, at the Bear in Speenhamland by Newbery, On which day the ſaid Doctor accordingly appeared, but produced no anſwer, onely pleaded he had been formerly diſcharged from the matters charged againſt him in the ſaid articles by the Par­liament, and the former Committee of this county: which no way appearing to the Committee, it was then reſolved by them, that by vertue of the Ordinance they had power to queſtion the ſaid Doctor, upon the ſaid articles, and did then order him a copy of the ſaid articles, and further time2 to give in his anſwer thereunto, till thurſday the nineteenth of the ſaid October.

At which time the ſaid Doctor again appearing, after many demurres by him made to the authority of the Com­miſſioners, in a comtemptuous way and manner, he did ex­hibite his anſwer in writing to the ſaid articles. But additi­onall articles being then exhibited againſt him, the Com­miſſioners ordered him a copy thereof, and gave him a fort­nights time to bring in his anſwer to the ſaid additionall ar­ticles, and then to produce his witneſſes for proof of his defence, and juſtification to both the ſaid charges, and had ſummons granted for his ſaid witneſſes accordingly.

On thurſday the ſecond of November, the ſaid Doctor made a further appearance, and gave in his anſwer to the ſaid additionall articles: and further additionall articles being then exhibited againſt the ſaid Doctor, the Commiſ­ſioners ordered him a copy thereof, and gave him furrher time to give in his anſwer thereunto, till the two and twen­tieth of the ſaid November, at the Bear in Reading, at which time they appointed to proceed upon the whole, and ordered witneſſes to be then and there produced on both ſides, as well for proof of the ſaid ſeverall charges, as of the Doctors anſwer and defence thereunto, and ſummons were iſſued out for that purpoſe.

On the ſaid two and twentieth of November, the Com­miſſioners meeting at the ſaid place, and receiving the Do­ctors anſwer to the third paper of articles, proceeded to examination for proof of the whole; and having ſpent the ſaid day in examination of ſeverall witneſſes for proof of the articles, they appointed to ſit the morrow after upon the ſame buſineſſe and then adjourned.

The next day being the twentie third of the ſaid Novem­ber, they made further proceedings in the examination for proof of the articles, and after all the witneſſes for that pur­poſe that were then preſent, were examined in open Court, and in the Doctors own preſence, and by himſelf croſſe ex­amined; the Commiſſioners required the Doctor to produce his witneſſes for his defence and juſtification, (if he had a­ny)3 which he refuſed, demanding to have firſt copies of the depoſitions againſt him, before he would produce his wit­neſſes, which the Commiſſioners judging to be very unrea­ſonable and irregular, thought not fit to grant unto him, and though they might then juſtly have proceeded to give their judgement, without giving him further time, he ma­king default, yet notwithſtanding, ſuch was their tenderneſſe in the carriage of this buſineſſe, that they gave him further time to produce his ſaid witneſſes, (viz.) till the thirtieth of the ſaid November, at the Bear in Speenhamland; where the Doctor appeared not in perſon, but by his wife and others of his family excuſed his failer, in regard of ſickneſſe, and infirmity of body, under which (as they pretended) he then laboured, and could not appear without further dan­ger of his health, which excuſe (although no poſitive proof thereof was then made) was admitted by the Commiſſion­ers, and further time yet given him, till the ſeventh of De­cember then following at the Bear in Reading. At which time the ſaid Commiſſioners proceeded to examine ſeverall other witneſſes then preſent, in behalf of the Proſecutours, which having done, they examined ſeverall witneſſes on the Doctors part and behalf, and the Doctor pretending to be ill, they adjourned for that time till the morrow morning following. But for that the Doctor had the ſame day produced ſeverall witneſſes in his behalf, who being ſworn, neither the queſtions propounded unto them by the Do­ctor, nor the evidence by them given did lead to juſtifie the Doctor from the matters charged, and proved againſt him, but merely dilatory, as was judged by the Commiſſioners. They did therefore require, that according to former order, he ſhould the next day give in the names of his witneſſes, together with his interrogatories in writing, to which he would have them examined, which the Commiſſioners might firſt conſider of but he peremptorily refuſed ſo to do, onely inſtead thereof, he offered ſeverall queſtions, which being taken by the Clark, were afterwards debated by the Com­miſſioners, and by them adjudged to be to as little purpoſe (though they ſhould be admitted to be true) as the for­mer4 evidence already taken in his behalf, but only to delay, yet notwithſtanding they proceeded to examine two of the Doctors witneſſes to ſome of thoſe queſtions, which they judged moſt tending to his juſtification, which having done, and heard patiently what either the Doctor or his counſell could ſay at large, they cauſed the whole proceedings to be read over publickly, and then commanded the company to withdraw, that they might reſolve on their judgement, which was unanimouſly agreed on, for the ejectment of the Dr, out of the parſonage of Bradfield, for ſcandall, igno­rance, and inſufficiency proved againſt him,

The most materiall things charged againſt him, with the depoſitions thereupon taken, on both ſides, upon which the aforeſaid ſentence of ejestion was grounded, are as fol­loweth,

1 Article.

In the firſt paper of articles exhibited againſt the Dr.

That the fiery deity of Chriſt mingleth, and mixeth it ſelf with our fleſh.


I was then ſpeaking of the myſticall union between Chriſt and his Church, and in the illuſtration of this union, I applyed that expreſſion out of the 8 of the Canticles, He mingled his wine and his milk together: ſo in this union Chriſts divine nature mingleth it ſelf with our humanity, his ſpirit without fleſh. This expreſſion Maſter Tickle was pleaſed to charge with blaſphemy, asking me what I meant by fleſh, I anſwered (in conference) by fleſh I un­derſtood not the ſinfull and fleſhly part of the ſoul, that luſteth againſt the ſpirit, for with this there can be no uni­on. Secondly, nor the outward elementary fleſh of the bo­dy, but by fleſh, I underſtand our pure humanity or the regenerated part of the ſoul, the converted, part of the ſpi­rit; and thus the ſpirit of Chriſt, and the regenerated part were really in union one with the other, according to the Apoſtles phraſe. We are made partakers of the divine na­ture.

At this anſwer he had nothing to reply.

The proof of this article.

Maſter John Tickle Miniſter of Abingdon, and one of the Aſſiſtants to the Commiſſioners ſworn, and examined.

This Deponent ſaith that Doctor Pordage did deliver in the Pulpit, that the fiery Deity of Chriſt mingleth and mixeth it ſelf with our**The Dr ſaid the deity of Chriſt mingles it ſelf with our fleſh, that is execrable blaſ­phemy. Then, with our pure humanity, that's canting nonſence: then, with the ſoul of Chriſt, moſt unſound and ignorant. Fleſh, and being charged with blaſ­phemy by this Deponent; he repeated his ſence thus, he did not mean with our corruption, but with our fleſh, holding his hand over the Pulpit.

And this Deponent being croſſe examined to ſeverall Interrogatories exhibited by the Doctor farther ſaith, that after the Doctor held up his hand, as he hath formerly de­poſed, the Doctor ſaid, that he did not mean with our fleſh, but with the ſoul of Chriſt, and that this article was delivered without any the leaſt limitation, as to the ſenſe of it, and that the ſame was fully and roundly delivered in the Doctors ſermon at Ildeſly, whereupon the Deponent charged him with blaſphemy, and afterwards they fell into a diſpute.

Article 2.

That the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt is a ſapleſs righteouſneſſe.

The Doctors anſwer to this article is.

I thus deliver the truth: as I was paraphraſing on that portion of ſcripture mentioned in the 9 of Daniel and the 24, of everlaſting righteouſneſſe,Ʋntruth, noto­riouſsy falſe, read the proof and the heds of his ſermon in the animad­verſion. I did ſay words to this effect, That the imputative righteouſneſſe of another was a ſapleſſe and empty righteouſneſſe to all thoſe tht had no right, or intereſt in it. &c. I ſhall deſire a little to explain my ſelf on this propoſition, that the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt will prove a ſapleſſe righteouſ­neſſe, for he that hath not the ſpirit of Chriſt dwelling in his heart by faith notwithſtanding all hisaaThat appli­cation can there be of Chriſt and his merits without the ſpirit. application of Chriſt and his merits, yet to him it is but a ſapleſſe righ­teouſneſſe: ſo ſaith the ſcripture, he that hath not the ſpi­rit6 of Chriſt is none of his, though he ſhould apply the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to himſelf, But here I do not deny the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, nor his active and paſſive obedience to be the materiall cauſe of juſtification, Yea, I own and acknowledge Chriſts righteouſneſſe to be the ſouls righteouſneſſe in point of juſtification when it is applyed upon a true ground according to the truebbSo Mr Erbe­ry would ſay, that Chriſt was God accor­ding to the Scriptures, in his ſenſe. ſenſe of the ſpirit in the Scriptures.

The proof of this article

The aforeſaid Maſter John Tickle examined to this ar­ticle.

This Deponent ſaith that the Doctor delivered that the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was a ſapleſſe righ­teouſneſſe.

And being croſſe examined to this article, and asked by the Doctor whether theſe words (viz) (the fiery deity of Chriſt in the centre of our ſouls, burning &c.) were not ad­ded as ſome limitation to this ſecond article.

This Deponent ſaith, he doth not remember any ſuch addition as is mentioned in the interrogatory, unleſſe it were in**Thus, which righteouſneſs Dan. 9.24. Is not the ſapleſſe righ­teouſneſſe of Chriſt, But the fiery, &c. oppoſition to the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt which he called ſapleſſe, and he farther ſaith, the Doctor did not deliver any ſuch limitation as he makes in his anſwer thereunto, and that there was no ſuch word asccLet the Chriſtian Rea­der obſerve this paſſage. except ſpoken nor any thing like unto it.

Maſter Roger Stephens of Reading Gentleman ſworn and examined.

To the ſecond article this Deponent ſaith, that Doctor Pordage delivered in a ſermon at Ildeſly, that the righte­ouſneſſe of Chriſt was a ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe, a mere em­pty thing,Obſerve what was the drift of the Drs ſermon and he doth not remember any thing to the con­trary but that the ſame was an intire ſentence, and only ſo, and that to his apprehenſion the drift of his ſermon then7 was to take off the ſtrength and efficacy of Chriſts righte­ouſneſſe.

And this Deponent farther ſaith, that in the ſaid ſermon the Doctor did deliver theſe words (viz) you are not to look to this (meaning as the Deponent apprehended Chriſts righteouſneſſe) but to the fiery deity, burning in the cen­ter of the ſoul, conſuming and deſtroying ſin there, which laſt mentioned ſentence did not immediately follow the words which he uſed when he ſaid, the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was ſapleſſe, but the ſame was farther off in the midſt of his ſermon. On the defen­dants part.

In behalf of the Doctour to this article,

Mary Pocock ſworn and examined.

This Deponent (being asked whether ſhe heard the Dr deliver the ſecond article (viz.) That the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, was ſapleſſe, and whether it was delivered with a limitation or not) ſaith it was with this limitation (viz.) Except the firery deity of Chriſt be in our ſouls, burning up our luſts and corruptions.

And this Deponent (being asked whether theſe laſt words were ſpoken together with the other words to make up one ſentence) ſaith yes, thus that the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt was ſapleſſe, except the fiery deity of Chriſt be in the center of our ſouls burning up our luſts and corruptions.

Richard Higgs of Sulhamſted Turner ſworn and ex­amined.

This Deponent ſaith, that he hath been a hearer of Do­ctor Pordage, at certain times for five or ſix years laſt paſt, and that during that time, for ought the Deponent knows, the ſcope of the Doctors Miniſtry hath not been againſt the right or due application of Chriſts righteouſneſſe, but againſt the mis-application thereof, for ought he knows: But this Deponent being asked whether he hath been a conſtant hearer of the Dr, he ſaith he hears him very often, but he is at his own pariſh in the mornings, and ſometimes he is ab­ſent8 at other times, but he hath often heard the Dr.

And this Deponent being further asked, what he hath u­ſually heard the Dr preach concerning the imputative righ­teouſneſſe of Chriſt, he ſaith he cannot charge his memory, but hath a note to which he would reflect for recollecting of his memory, and thereupon produced a note drawn in the form of an examination, in which, what he ſhould ſay was preſcribed unto him, which note was given him from the Dr as he confeſſeth: and being asked what himſelf, or what the Dr meant by Chriſts righteouſneſſe, he ſaith he cannot depoſe:ffThis witneſſe the Dr called, godly, ſober, learned was the animadver­ſion. But here the Dr interpoſing ſaith, that Chriſts righteouſneſſe is his active and paſſive obedience. Upon which the Deponent was further asked, what was Chriſts active obedience, he ſaith it was his ſuffering on the croſſe.

Daniel Roberts of Reading feltmaker, ſworn and examined.

This Deponent ſaith he doth not remember he ever heard the Dr preach above once, which was about three years ſince at Bradfield on theggThe men of his perſwaſion keep the Lords day on this ac­count, becauſe it is the cu­ſtome of the na­tion. Sabboth day, as the Deponent was going to Wayhill Fair, and that then the Drs text was upon that Scripture (The Kingdome of Heaven is like unto a treaſure hid in the fields,) which treaſure the Dr did ſoundly apply to the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, and that he did very much extoll the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, but he doth not remember any expreſſion of imputative righteouſ­neſſe, and that to his beſt remembrance, the Dr did explain the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt to be his obedience to his Fa­thers will, as far as the Deponent could judge, and the De­ponent being asked whether the Drs drift in his ſermon were not to advance an inherent righteouſneſſe, he ſaith he cannot remember.

Animad. firſt.

Animad. 1. and that in theſe three particulars, Firſt, as to the Articles, ſecondly, as to the Drs witneſſes, thirdly, as to his plea.


First particular.

As to the articles, we entreat the reader to obſerve, that theſe two articles depoſed, and the other two (of which anon) were not collateral paſſages, but, the main heads of Dr Pordage's ſermon, his text was Malachy 3.1. his Doctrine, That, God doth uſually prepare his way, in the hearts of his people, before he comes in with his glory to them. He proceeds thus.

There are ſeverall preparations laid down by Divines, as the conviction of ſin, the terrours of the law, the death of Chriſt, the free grace of God, which are (ſaid he) but fleſhly, and flaſhy diſcoveries.

I ſhall give you (ſaid the Dr) the preparations accor­ding to the ſix dayes work in the creation, the ſeventh being that glorious reſt, when God comes in with his glory to the ſoul.

The firſt preparation is a glorious union, which union is the fiery deity of Chriſt mingling, and mixing it ſelf with our fleſh.

The ſecond is a glorious righteouſneſſe, Dan. 9.24. which righteouſneſſe is not that ſapleſſe, imputative righte­ouſneſſe of another (viz. Chriſt as he explained it) but, the fiery deity burning in the center of the ſoul.

The third is a glorious liberty, which liberty (ſaid the Dr) is not a liberty and freedome from the guilt of ſin, the curſe of the law, the wrath of God, purchaſed by the blood of another, and applied by the cleaving of the ſoul, but the fiery deity burning up our luſts, and corruptions in the center of the ſoul.

Two other paſſages of blaſphemy there were uttered by the Dr, that were forgotten by Mr Tickhill, the Deponent, but after finding his paper, he doth remember them, and doth aſſert them (as upon oath.)

The firſt is this: That God in Chriſt, and Chriſt in the ſaints, is the unity in trinity, and trinity in unity.

The ſecond is this: That Chriſt in his preparatory com­ing by his fiery deity, quite conſumes, and deſtroyes all ſin10 and corruption, which conſuming of ſin is that doing away of tranſgreſſion, mentioned Dan. 9.24.

If it be ſaid, Mr Tickhill is ſevere, and rigid, and ſo prejudice may barre the door againſt truth, then,

Secondly, we requeſt that this teſtimony witneſſed and ſigned with Mr Pendarvis his own hand, may be conſi­dered.

Theſe are to certifie whom it may concern, that in a ſer­mon at Ildeſly, Dr Pordage did deliver theſe following ex­preſſions.

Firſt, That Chriſt was a figure, and but a figure.

Secondly, That the Godhead was mingled with our fleſh.

Thirdly, That the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, was but a ſapleſſe righteouſneſſe.

Fourthly, the graces, and gifts of the ſpirit were but fleſh.

Fifthly, That Dr Pordage did falſely accuſe Mr Tickhill of coming on purpoſe to oppoſe him, neither of ushhThis work of providence (as it were) ſpeak­ing thus, (as now we ſee it come to paſſe) yonder is a bla­ſphemer, hear him, and diſ­cover him. thought of his being there. I went, and he with me, to preach upon the deſire of the people: what limitation us'd by the Dr, or whether any, I do not well remember.

Ita testor. Joh. Pendarvis.

Second Particular.

To the ſecond, as to his witneſſes, here we do unfeigned­ly profeſſe, we are even fain to force our ſelves under much unwillingneſſe, to this part of the animadverſion, not that we regard any revilings, and cenſure, ſo as to be troubled, but becauſe we are willing to live in peace. But becauſe the matter of theſe articles charged, and proved, is of ſo high a concernment, that all that is dear and pecious to ſouls, in heaven, and earth is imbarqued in it; and becauſe the Dr pretends viſions, and thoſe of ſuch height, and glory (as he calls them) that the like have not been heard, or ſeen: and becauſe his friends do intimate, that, theſe Angelicall vi­ſions are in order to the pure preaching of the goſpel to the Church, which hath been in Apoſtacy many hundred years,11 and becauſe he layes ſuch a weight upon his witneſſes. Laſt­ly, becauſe he hath publiſhed them to the world, and named them often in the text, and margent, we think it a duty in­cumbent upon us to write the truth, promiſing to deliver no­thing but the truth, and purpoſing not to write all the truth we might, merely for quietneſſe ſake, and to prevent family diſturbance.

Truly it ſeems ſomewhat obſervable, that Dr Pordage, who hath enjoyed ſuch viſions of glory, (as he ſaith) hath ſuch high diſcoveries, pretends to ſuch a pitch of ſanctity, and mortification, even to perfection. Having ſo much ac­quaintance in London, and in the Countrey, and being under ſo high a charge, as Blaſphemy, Devilliſme, Ʋncleanneſſe, and ignorance, that notwithſtanding all this, he ſhould bring no more, or no other witneſſes in his behalf, then he hath done. And were it not that we deſire to be ſerviceable to the publick, we might have ſpared this pains, (we have no itch to be in print) for the very conſideration what man­ner of perſons the witneſſes are, hath given no ſmall ſatisfa­ction of the Drs guilt, to all Chriſtians hereabouts, that know him, and them.

The firſt witneſſe for the Dr is Richard Higgs, we pur­poſe not to mention the many ill-complexioned and hard ſpeeches, which this man hath uttered againſt the miniſtry, and maintenance. This language now a daies paſſeth a­mongſt many, rather for a prime character of a godly man, (as they ſtile it) then for any fault; many (and we ſpeak it ſadly to ſee them ſo befooled) have little elſe to ſhew for their religion, but their being ſcurrilous, againſt Ʋniverſities, Miniſters, Learning, and maintenance. Do we ſpeak for our ſelves in this, or for the truth? the Lord knows, and our conſciences know, and the day will diſcover it.

So that the goſpel, religion, learning might thrive, & proſper, we ſhould deſire to be ſilent, though we ſate in the duſt; and whatever become of us, or ours, or them, we can in ſome meaſure be contented, ſo that the purity and power of the go­ſpel may dwell in the land.

This man is brought in by the Dr as his chief witneſſe,12 he quotes him often, and doth preface his teſtimony, that, he is a pious, prudent, and a learned Chriſtian, and therefore to be heeded by the people, and believed by the Com­miſſioners.

Thus he depoſeth, that he heard the Dr preach at Bradfield upon, and for the imputative righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, and this he atteſted with much confidence, but now obſerve theſe particulars.

Being demanded by the Commiſſioners very often, and earneſtly, to declare, what he conceived the Dr did mean by Chriſts righteouſneſſe, he would at no hand (although he was upon his oath) reveal it. We were ſuſpicious at firſt that there might be ſome ugly, ſpeckled toad lying under a wholſome ſage leaf, ſome wretched familiſticall blaſphemy, under wholſome expreſſions, nothing more common: theſe late years paſt have diſcovered this practiſe, more then ma­ny former generations; and therefore we preſſed him over and over, ſeeing he had been a ſeven years hearer at times, and a man intelligent, and one that penned the ſermons, that he would tell, what he conceived the Dr did underſtand by Chriſts imputative righteouſneſſe, but there was no pre­vailing with him, he would not tell.

Being further asked what he himſelf meant by Chriſts imputative righteouſneſſe, he would not tell, nor anſwer; either, this was his weakneſſe, that he could not tell, or elſe his wilfulneſſe, that he would not. If the firſt, how groſſe is his ignorance? and how unfit his teſtimony? if the ſecond, what unconſcionableneſſe is this? he being ſworn to ſpeak the truth. But it ſeems to be his ignorance, for,

Being now prompted by the Dr, (from whom he confeſ­ſeth he had the**This practiſe of the Dr loks very ill favour­ed, for this is not the firſt time that he hath done ſo with his wit­neſſes. paper before he came, preſcribing what he ſhould ſpeak,) to ſay, the righteouſneſs of Chriſt was his active and paſſive obedience, he did tell the Commiſſioners what he meant, but being further asked, what he meant by Chriſts active obedience, he anſwered, Chriſts death upon the Croſſe. This pitifull anſwer makes us, who know his former profeſſion, think, that the fiery Deity and viſions of Bradfield, and a typicall Chriſt, are like to make this man13 to forget, if not to ſlight the knowledge of Jeſus Chriſt, in the ſcripture; and now we have mentioned that bleſſed book denyed by many, and wofully neglected by moſt, the reader may obſerve in the next place ſomthing of this very witneſſe.

Fourthly, This Deponent was much infected with the per­nicious and now ſpreading hereſie of anti-ſcripturiſme, he denied the Bible to be the word of God, and from whence he ſhould ſuck in this venome, we cannot imagine, but from Bradfield viſions, we are ſatisfied that this alſo is one of the Drs opinions, even becauſe, (though we have many other reaſons,) this man ſo much his intimate and boſome friend, and grand and choiſe diſciple, is of this judgement; theſe three particulars were witneſſed to his face, before his friends, by ſufficient teſtimony, as ſpoken by him.

That theiiThe Dr prints pag. 40. That Higgs ſaid he ſpake of the eſſentiall word, which is utterly falſe, and beſides mkes the diſ­courſe non­ſence. Scriptures were not the word of God.

And being demanded, what they were then, if not the word, he anſwered.

That they were old declaratives

And then he ſpake thus to one of the company, in a wretched blaſpheming way.

That, if we had thekkAnd ſure they think they have, and would be very angry if it ſhould be que­ſtioned, the Lord lok upon the land, ſo many familiſts or qakers, ſo many Bible makers. ſpirit, we might make as good ſcriptures as that and (to uſe his own expreſſion) even thee, Will. Jennings, who was one of the company. Obj. But he profeſſed the contrary, we reply let no man deceive you with vain words, ſure it were a very ſorry plea for a felon convict, to plead thus, I did not ſteal, for I profeſſe my judgement is againſt theft, why doth not this man recant and expreſſe repentance for it, if he doth really renounce it? but ſeducers, and the ſeduced, eſpecially ſeducers ſeldome or ſcarce at all will confeſſe their errours, for fear of looſing their credit and repute, which if they looſe their work is quite ſpoiled: give us leave a little (though it be ſomewhat di­greſſing yet it may be advantagious, and we are ſure it is ſea­ſonable) to propoſe an inſtance or two firſt, a clamorous & followed Arminian * being much worſted in debate of the ge­nerall point, (as they term it) being asked after in private, by a perſon of honour, and piety, whether he were not aſhamed to face it out ſo in publick, and whether he did not ſpeak14 againſt his own light (he ſaid) we muſt ſay ſomething be­cauſe of the people, ſo ſaid a great preaching Anabaptiſt­icall Arminian to an officer, a gentleman of integrity now in the army, doſt thou think ſaid the officer to him, that your anſwer to the argument was the meaning of the text, no, re­plyed the preacher, but I muſt ſay ſomething; thus it was in this very caſe of Richard Higgs, who being intreated by one of us to recant, and repent of his all-deſtroying Anti-Scripturiſme, the party ſolemnly proteſting, that he intreated him, intirely for the good of his ſoul, and not to endanger him as to the civill magiſtrate, one ſtanding by, like an E­lymas did diſwade him from the acknowledgement of it, as his errour, and perverted him from doing his duty by confeſſing and giving God the glory, ſaying thus, Confeſſe, yea, that is that, they would have: if hereticks, and ſeducers of all ſorts and ſiſes had not bin practitioners in this black art of ſmothering the light, and holding down the truth, nay had they bin but ſo ingenious, as in caſe of a nonplus to have craved day, and ſaid (as a learned man did, and e­very godly man would) I will anſwer thee to morrow, in all likelyhood, theſe foul hereſies had bin rotting in their graves, which are now jetting and walking up, and down the ſtreets, every where. but to proceed.

The next is Daniel Roherts, he is quoted by the Dr as a witneſſe for him, and here we do profeſſe our pen is very loath to give down its ink, we do find in us a very great a­verſeneſſe from naming of any names, but, moſt of all, neigh­bours, but the Dr hath named them often, and pleads for them, and laies great ſtreſſe upon them, and the cauſe is Chriſts, therefore we may not ſeek the favour, or fear the face of man. Thus then, this perſon was firſt a ſeparatiſt, then a preacher de ſe, thens a dipper, and allOur hearts ake to think what kind of perſons all England over lay hands upon, and thruſt themſelves in­to the admini­stration of Chriſt's ordi­nance, breaker of bread, then, an Anti-Sabbatarian, (and that very day and time of the day, that he travelled with this miſhapen errour in pub­lick, and miſcarried, it pleaſed God, that there was a travell at his houſe with a birth of a miſhapen child) then, anmmHow many thouſand ſouls have bin robbed and ranſacked by ſturdy and bloudy hereſies, little er­rours like little thieves firſt creep in at the caſement, and let in the great ones after them. Ar­minian, much for that darling and intoxicating point which pleaſeth at the heart, (and ſo hath a great advantage to15 ſpread) all carnall looſe ones, viz, generall redempti­on, once a mortaliſt, now, a ſimple compounded Anabaptiſt, perhaps, he may think it an honour to him to be the laſt, and thank us for naming of it, if he doth, we did not mean it ſo, neither did we name it ſo, as to aſperſe him, nor to take of the leaſt from his teſtimony, for that is little enough already, if it were a little leſſe, it were juſt no­thing: but, to let the conſcientious, underſtand who are the Drs witneſſes in print, and to judge as he ſees meet.

The next is Mary Pocock, a woman formerly of a trou­bled ſpirit, who ſeeking reſt, and not finding it, hath turned aſide to lying vanities, and hath layed out her money for that which is not bread, we are horribly afraid for her, that ſhe is gone off quite from looking for juſtification and life by a Chriſt without her, a moſt Chriſt diſhonouring, and a ſoul damning, yet a dandled and huggd opinion amongſt very many, at this day; as to her teſtimony conſider.

Firſt, that ſhe depoſeth againſt Mr Tickhills and Mr Stevens oath, and Mr Pendarvis point blank, as though ſhe were reſolved, &c. Oh ſad!

Secondly, She is one of the Drs family, fellowſhip, & the country ſaith, community as to goods, and it is thought, it may concern her, in caſe the Dr be ejected.

Thirdly, We are aſſured, the Drs tenet is, that he may ſay, and unſay, though he ſay in his book, twas ſaid maliciouſly, to caſt an odium upon him, and for his practiſe, we have found his anſwers moſt notoriouſly falſe, now this wo­man we fear, is too much one of his diſciples.

Fourthly, This woman refuſed an oath at Reding when ſhe was to ſpeak for the truth, in ſome articles againſt the Dr, and the very next week, at Newbery when ſhe appea­red for him, ſhe was altogether as forward to take her oath.

Laſtly, She being examined at Newbery, upon that oath which ſhe had taken for the Dr, whether ſhe did not relate to ſome perſons of honour, how the Dr had contended with the Dragon, three hours in his chamber, ſaying to one another thou lyeſt, and thou lyeſt, and whether ſhe did not relate that16 the Drs children were ſtrangely acted in their legs, and thighs, and arms, and whether ſhe did not relate to them, how Mrs Flavell had been in a trance, and how ſhe had found the Philoſophers ſtone, which had puzzel'd ſo many wiſe men, (viz.) the divinity in the humanity.

She made an anſwer in a careleſſe way, to our amaze­ment, and pity, (ſc. ) ſhe could not tell whether ſhe told them ſo, or no, perhaps ſhe did, perhaps ſhe did not.

It is wonderfull ſtrange, that ſuch extraordinary paſſages, related by her in a glorying way, when they were reaking hot, nay when it was (as ſhe phraſed it) given in to her to re­veal them, and ſhe did reveal them to perſons of honour and unqueſtionable evidence, who do ſtill atteſt it, and when ſhe was minded of ſome circumſtances of the relation, ſhe did re­member ſomething of them, it is much (we ſay) that ſhe ſhould no better remember this her own relation. doth not this woman think that ſhe may ſay any thing to ſave the Dr from the world?

The third particular.

The Drs plea.

That theſe articles come not within the compaſſe of the Act againſt Blaſphemous and Atheisticall opinions, by which Act the Commiſſioners are limited. pag. 54. This he pleads for himſelf, often in his book.


We are well aſſured that all fearing God in the nation, will with their ſouls conſent with us, that the Deniall of the Godhead of our Lord Jeſus, the making a piff at his precious bloud, and calling his compleat righteouſneſſe a poor, vain thing, that the Lord Chriſt is but a type, are blaſphemies that open their mouth againſt heaven, and are of as high a nature, as wretched men, or damned ſpirits can be guilty of: and doe at once, ſo directly deſtroy ſcriptures, duties, or­dinances, graces, glory, all. Now if this defence of the Drs be true, we profeſſe our unfeigned ſorrow from our inmoſt hearts, that the bleſſed glory of our dear Lord Chriſt was no more conſulted for, if there be no proviſion made, for the17 ſtopping of the mouth of blaſphemy againſt the Lord Jeſus, by the Civile Magiſtrate.

We profeſſe we cannot but wonder at the great raſhneſſe of this Dr, and lament the diſhonour (as we humbly think) that this vain man caſts upon authority, in that he proclaims upon the houſe top, and tells it in Gath, that hideous bla­ſphemies againſt Jeſus Chriſt, are not puniſhable by the Commiſſioners of the ſeverall counties; which God forbid, and we believe all the Saints will ſay Amen. And we do with caſe and comfort perſwade our ſelves, that the ſupreme Magiſtrate doth not intend it, and will never ſuffer it.

Whereas ſome do blame the Commiſſioners for being immethodicall, for not reducing the articles under the head, ignorance, we anſwer, that the articles alledged, and proved, do indeed ſhew him guilty of the greateſt ignorance, and in­ſufficiency, that is imaginable, and doth abundantly clear the juſtice of the ſentence: yet theſe articles when they were exhibited, were look'd upon as having too much hideouſ­neſſe in them, that the Commiſſioners could not find in their hearts, to rank them under any other head, but that of bla­ſphemy, and do ſtill look on them as worthy to be branded with the blackeſt Epithite that hell can afford.

And if it be true (as ſome do ſay it is, and therefore do ſay, the Commiſſioners do they cannot tell what themſelves, for theſe articles do not come under the act, as they pretend) then, we ſhall not be ſo quiet in our conſciences as we deſi­red, unleſſe we beg leave to ſay, that it was no teſtimony of over and above kindneſſe to Jeſus Chriſt, in thoſe perſons that drew up that act, (& who they were, we profeſſe before the ſearcher of hearts, we know not) to draw it up ſo, as not to mention, nor mean the ſafeguarding of his glory, from the tongues of blaſphemers, which are ſet on fire of hell: We ſay again, if it be true, we do not ſay it is ſo, we cannot ſay it: and therefore, were we fit, (as indeed we are altoge­ther unfit,) we would in all humility beſeech his Highneſſe Honourable Counſell to take this matter into conſideration, and to determine as they ſee cauſe, that ſo for the future, all clamours of men, and quibbles of counſellours may be pre­vented,18 and every article may be reduced under its own pro­per head. The ground of our requeſt is this, we are fully perſwaded they will never ſuffer any to be Preachers of the Goſpel, who are blaſphemers of the Lord Jeſus, who is the ſubſtance of the goſpel, in whom all the promiſes are yea, and amen, and whoſe precious bloud is the bloud of the everla­sting covenant.

We have been preſſed in our ſpirits to this boldneſſe, through the grief of our hearts, becauſe we do in ſome pit­tance perceive what, through the wretched confidence of profane ones, and the ſecret confidence of morall ones in their own civile righteouſneſſe, and what through thennFor ſo theſe would be thought. a­cuteneſſe of Socinianiſme, and thennFor ſo theſe would be thought. oaringneſſe of Fami­liſme, and the croaking of the Quakers, and the ſpreading of all theſe, there are very poor, mean, and ſlight thoughts all the land over, in city and countrey, of the glory, love, bloud, and merits of our Lord Jeſus, who is God over all, Bleſſed for ever. And let him be bleſſed for ever: as the great God, and our Saviour, Amen.

Laſtly, Whereas the Dr complains how much he was in­jured by being repreſented by his enemies, and look'd upon by the Commiſſioners, as a conjurer, and ſorcerer, and one that dealt in Negromancy, (as he called it) and black Ma­gick; and to this purpoſe, ſtuffs out his book with ſeverall allegations of his own dear ones, to vindicate himſelf from Necromancy, and ſorcery; this is nothing in the world but ſtramineous, chaffie ſtuff, put in to fill up a ragged book: for the Commiſſioners did not look upon him as a conjurer, but as an impoſtor, who made uſe of his apparitions, and viſions, as a miniſteriall way, viz. to confirm his blaſphe­mies, to draw in diſciples, and to confirm thoſe that were ſo, vaunting himſelf thus, what? but one, but one in the whole creation, pretending, that other miniſters knew no more of the goſpel, then a dead horſe, and why? becauſe they are not Nicolaitanes and viſioners.

But he complain's much pag. 71. that the Commiſſioners would not take in his witneſſes, who could depoſe how he had preached againſt conjuration, which witneſſes he names19 twice in the margent, to make his reader believe how grie­vouſly he was wronged.


Though the buſineſſe be eccentricall, yet we will ſee what the witneſſes could have ſaid for the Dr againſt con­juration, they begin thus and ſay,

They heard the Dr preach in 653 at Bradfield, out of Pſal. **We cannot i­magine what verſe, or ver­ſes. were the text out of that Pſalm 51. 51. thus, From the ſubtilty and craft of the fire­root, through the prying, and ſearching of it, doth ariſe all Necromancy, and all prying into ſuch curious arts ſpringeth from the fiery eſſence in the will of men and women, that ſtirreth them up, to pry into, and after ſuch hidden curioſi­ties, this is the gate through which all hidden curioſities do enter. For this he quotes Exodus 7.11. Then the king cal­led all his wiſe men, &c, and at another time, he preached at Bradfield out of Matt. 4.5. and from thence he obſerved, that one pinnacle of the devils temple,, was the pinnacle of the unlawfull arts and forbidden ſciences.

His uſe was this, he exhorts the people, and that as they love thir own ſouls, to take heed of this door, the ſubtilty of the dark Magicks. and bids them conſider how the ſcri­ptures do condemn the luſting and prying mind: and for this quotes Acts 19.19. Thoſe that uſed curious arts burnt their books. For the Divil, the Dragon, doth labour to carry up mens minds to the top of the pinnacle of dark Magicks.

What a ſad thing is it, and who can chuſe but pity the caſe of this Pariſh, to be fed with ſuch husks, ſuch allego­goricall, unprofitable, unſuitable diſcourſes?

What ſhould be in the Drs mind, to tell them of the fire root, and fiery eſſence, and the pinnacle of the devils temple? and ſo to conjure them, as they loved their ſouls to take heed of the black Magicks, poor creatures, we cannot imagine, unleſſe it be this, that the Dr began to ſmell pow­der, there was a great noiſe of the Devils, at Bradfield, and there was the Ordinance for ejecting Miniſters, preparing, the Dr was afraid the Prieſts would perſecute him (for his20 light eclipſed there,) out of envy, he thought, they would article againſt him, as a conjurer, and therefore he preacheth in his flinty non ſenſicall way, againſt the Dark Magicks, and provides his own family, to obſerve, and bear witneſſe, (for in all his thirteen weeks triall, there was not one inha­bitant a witneſſe for him) and ſo in his margent he puts them in rank, and file, to bear witneſſe.

He complains likewiſe in the ſame page, p. 71. how Mr Ford went about to ſtir up the Magiſtrate againſt him, as a blaſphemer. And good reaſon, what harm is in that? what doth the Dr find himſelf a grieved at? is not he a bla­ſphemer? or does not the civile Magiſtrate want ſtirring up? Mr Ford ſaid his living was poſſeſſed, why, was it not? doth not he ſay, that there were an innumerable company of De­vils in his houſe? yea, but he ſaith, Mr Ford branded him for a conjurer: now, that is utterly untrue, and we believe he had no ſuch thought in his heart.

The third Article.

That the diſcoveries of the ſinfulneſſe of ſin, the terrours of the law, the death of Chriſt, the free grace of God, are fleſhly and flaſhy diſcoveries.

To this the Dr gives no particular**In his print­ed book, he doth acknowledge it, and gives this reaſon, Becauſe it was not comprehended in the Act againſt Bla­ſphemies. Pity, if ſuch a blaſphemy, ſhould have ſuch a plea. But there, pag. 42. he tells the world, that even the diſcoveries of the free grace of God, and the death of Chriſt, are but weak, in compariſon of the more full, and clear manifeſtations, and operations, of God, upon the ſoul, in bringing of it into divine union, and fruition. Anſwer.For our parts, we have ever thought, that the diſcovery of the Fathers rich grace and the moſt precious death of Chriſt, had been of all diſcoveries, the moſt glorious. St. Paul calls it a height, breadth, depth, and length, and theſe being too ſhort, he tells us, it paſſeth all underſtanding. Epheſ. 1.17. St. Peter tells us, That even the An­gels do pry into this glorious myſtery. 1 Pet. 1.12. the word is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which ſignifies, propenſo collo, & accurate introſpicere. And for the weakneſſe of theſe diſ­coveries, we are content to be in the dark with St. Paul, who tells us, 2 Cor. 3. the laſt, We beholding as in a glaſſe, the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the ſame image, from glory, to glory, even as by the ſpirit of the Lord. The true and indeed Saints of God, the more they behold by the eye of faith, in the pure, and clear glaſſe of the Goſpel, the glory of the Lord Jeſus, what he is in himſelf, how infinitely bleſſed, and ſelf-ſufficient, and what he hath done for them, in ſuffering ſuch wrath, in conquering ſuch enemies, in purchaſing ſuch glory, with much more, and all this, ſo freely, ſo fully, ſo unchangeably, for ſuch wretched creatures as themſelves, who are altogether as bad, as the worſt in hell: we ſay, the more gracious ſouls do converſe with theſe glories, the more they are transformed, and, that, into the ſame glorious image, and there they pro­ceed, even from glory, to glory, and all this is wrought in them, by the spirit of the Lord.It is not a weakneſſe, but a wickedneſſe in this Dr, to call the diſcoveries of the Fa­thers grace, and the ſon, death, weak diſcoveries, im compariſon, we demand in compa­riſon of what? what diſcoveries are more glorious, and powerfull, then theſe? doth not the man mean his viſions at Beadfield, and his tincturation? oh! deteſtable, in his Epiſtle. Dedicatory, he doth intimate the narrowneſſe, ſyſtemes, formes, darkneſſe, of his perſe­cutours. Be it ſo, nay it is ſo, we arrogate not to our ſelves, we are nothing, and there is nothing more ſometimes, upon our hearts, then this, that God would make our hearts to know our own nothingneſſe. But we do profeſſe to the world, that we would much rather by many thouſand degrees, be in the dark with St. Paul, and St. Peter, then to be in the light, with David George, Caſpur Swincfield, Henry Nicholas, John Pordage. anſwer.


The proof of this article.

The aforeſaid Mr John Tickhill to the third article.

This Deponent ſaith, that the Dr delivered, That the diſcoveries of ſin, the terrours of the law, the death of Chriſt, the free grace of God, are fleſhly, and flaſhy diſcoveries: and, being croſſe examined to the Drs interogatorie, he fur­ther ſaith, the very ſumme and ſubſtance of this article was delivered fully, and roundly, by the Dr, in the expreſſe words, for the ſubſtance, to the beſt of this Deponents re­membrance, and that without any limitation.

4 Article.

That the liberty, and freedome, ſpoken of, purchaſed by the bloud of Chriſt, and applied by the clinging, and clea­ving of the ſoul toooWho is that another? how baſely, and with contumely, doth this man ſpeak of Chriſt? another, is not a liberty, or freedome, from the curſe of the law, the wrath of God, but the fiery deity of Chriſt, in the center of our ſouls.

The third and fourth articles of the laſt charge, being of the ſame effect, ſhall be here added. viz.

The third article of the laſt charge.

That the bloud of Chriſt is not meritorious of any mans ſalvation.


The fourth article of the last charge.

That it was a poor thing, to live upon the bloud of Chriſt, and fetching it over again, in a contemptuous kind of ſpeak­ing; Piff, ſaid he, thou art a babe, thou knoweſt nothing, to live upon the bloud of Chriſt, that is a poor thing.


To the former of theſe articles being the fourth of the firſt charge, the Dr gives no particularppAnd gives this reaſon in print, viz. not being within the act againſt blasphemy. Obſerve, what uſe this man makes of that act, in his printed anſwer, he puts in the word (only) a notorious untruth, pag. 43. ſtudied on purpoſe to deceive. He ſaith, that Mr Tickhill did miſtake, which is, not a miſtake in the Dr, bt an impudent untruth. anſwer.

His anſwers to the third and fourth articles of the laſt charge, are as followeth, viz.

To the third.

I call heaven and earth to witneſſe, that ſuch thoughts never entred into my ſoul, nor did ſuch words, come out of my mouth; for my judgement ever hath been, and ſtill is, that the bloud of Chriſt, is ſatisfying, reconciling, and cleanſing bloud, that it is interceding, redeeming, merit­ing bloud, in relation to all thoſe, who, through faith, and patience, come to inherit eternall life.

To the fourth.

I acknowledge, that about four years ſince, ſome ſuch expreſſions were uttered by me, to Mr Grip, but without any ſuch intent, as may be ſuppoſed, by my accuſers, and not with that circumſtantiall aggravation, of repeating it in a contemptuous manner, which is butqqRead the proof, is not this an interje­ction of ſcorn­ing? a ſuppoſition of my adverſary, and cannot be atteſted upon Oath, with­out his witneſſe, pretends infallibly torrHow ſhould we know your thoughts, but by your words? know my thoughts, and purpoſes: Again, this being ſpoken to a particular perſon, upon a particular occaſion, might be true, if the circumſtances of the diſcourſe were accordingly added,23 though, as here preſented, it ſeems very monſtrous.

Therefore to make things clear, I ſhall here inſert ſome particular circumſtances, which may preſent this article, though, in a new, yet, with a true face. I coming to Mrs Grips houſe, ſhessUntruth. took me into a private room, to have ſome conference with me alone, where ſhettFalſe. read the ani­madverſion. break­ing forth into a violent paſſion of tears, weeping, and wringing her hands, and pouring forthitter complaints, and invectives againſt Mr Fowler, as that he was a grace­leſſe man, a lier, and a ſlanderer, not worthy to come up into a Pulpit, or to have the name of a Miniſter of Chriſt, with other, ſuch bitter expreſſions: the cauſe of which was, as ſhe then told me, Mr Fowler's reporting about, that ſhe then lived in adultery, with a gentleman not far off; and after her paſſion was ſomewhat allayed, ſhe brake out into theſe, or ſuch like expreſſions, of high aſſu­rance: Chriſt hath loved me, and died for me, and juſti­fied me, by his blood, from all guilt of ſin, I am an elect perſon, a juſtified perſon, and what is this Mr Fowler, touuOh, the in­vention of man, not ſuch a word ſpoken. charge ſin upon me? theſe, and other expreſſions, fell from her, to this purpoſe, from ſome of which, I feared, ſhe was drenched withA mere fig­ment, and baſe contrivance of his own heart. Antinomianiſme, and told her more then once, it was a poor thing, to live upon the bloud of Chriſt, and to look ſo much upon that, except ſhe had the nature of Chriſt, and the ſpirit of Chriſt; asking her, where was the meekneſſe of Chriſt, the patience of Chriſt, to ſuffer as an innocent lamb, quietly. wwOh, amaze­ing, that any man could de­viſe ſuch un­truths, ſo many, and all fore­thought, and deliberate; not a true word.But ſtill ſhe cri­ed out, ſhe lived on the bloud of Chriſt. I told her, it was a poor thing, to be thus exalted, with notions of the bloud of Chriſt, without mentioning ſanctification, and thoſe holy graces, which flow from Chriſts nature, dwelling in the ſoul. Now by theſe expreſſions of mine, my ſcope was to make Mrs Grip ſee the neceſſity of ſanctification, and of a pure and holy life, and not to make void the bleſſed effect of the bloud of Chriſt, applyed accordng to the mind of God, and true meaning of the ſcriptures: and now having related thexxSee what Mrs Gip de­poſeth to theſe circumſtances, at the end of her depoſition, circumſtances, as near as I can re­memember, I believe a ſober and knowing Chriſtian will24 not judge me eitheryyThis fardell of ſtudied un­truths is very ſcandalous. ſcandalous, or ignorant for theſe ex­preſſions.

The proofs of the fore-mentioned articles. The aforeſaid Mr John Tickhill.

This Deponent further ſaith, that the Dr delivered that the liberty, and freedome ſpoken of and purchaſed by the bloud of Chriſt, is not a liberty, or freedome from the guilt of ſin, the curſe of the law, the wrath of God. But the fiery deity of Chriſt, in the center of our ſouls.

And this Deponent being croſſe, examined by the Dr, further ſaith, that the very ſumme, and ſubſtance of this ar­ticle, was delivered fully, and roundly by the Dr, in the expreſſe words, for the ſubſtance of them, and that, without any limitation, to the beſt of his remembrance.

Maſter Chriſtopher Fowler Miniſter of S. Maries in Re­ding, and one of the Aſſiſtants to the Commiſſioners, ſworn and examined, depoſeth,

That about three weeks, or a moneth ſince, this Depo­nent acquainted Maſter Daniel Blagrave the younger, that theſe Commiſſioners did intend to22This gentle­man with o­thers was ſum­moned to ap­pear by a war­rant from the Commiſſioners, to teſtify his knowledge as to this article, and ſome others, but did not appear. The Quae. What that clauſe intends in the Or­dinance, viz, the Commiſſioners ſhall iſſue forth ſummons, when the perſons ſummon­ed will appear, if they pleaſe, and if they will not, they may chuſe, (for ſo ſome have anſwered) had the appearance bin according to the ſummons, the doctrines, and deeds of darkneſſe had bin more dejected, by theſe renowned. ſummon him, to teſti­fie what he knew of Dr Pordage's doctrine, in relation to Jeſus Chriſt, and thereupon (among other things) the Deponent asked him, whether he did not hear the ſaid Dr deliver, that, the bloud of Chriſt was not meritorious of any mans ſalvation, to which be anſwered, he had heard him ſpeak to that purpoſe.

Suſanna Grip, wife of John Grip, of Reding, Joyner, ſworn, and examined.

This Deponent ſaith, that ſhe told Dr Pordage, it was25 a high thing to live upon the bloud of Chriſt, to which he replyed, piff, to live upon the bloud of Chriſt, that is a poor thing, and repeated the ſame again, and ſaid, thou art a babe, thou knoweſt nothing, to live upon the bloud of Chriſt, that is a poor thing, whereupon the Depo­nents heart fell almoſt dead with fear at his words.

And the ſaid Suſanna Grip being croſſe-examined by the Dr, and asked, whether this was delivered in the ſame very words, ſhe11Obſerve this paſſage, and judge of the Drs anſwer. anſwereth, in the ſame words, and they were ſpoken in the Kitchin about four years ſince, to her beſt remembrance, but who was there preſent, ſhe doth not remember.

And this Deponent being further asked by the Dr upon what occaſion this was ſpoken, ſhe ſaith the Dr was ſpea­king ſomething in a rambling manner, which ſhe did not underſtand, but ſhe thought ſhe would ſpeak ſomething to him which he ſhould underſtand, and rejoyce with her for it, and that was the occaſion of the diſcourſe, and ſhe ſaith further, that the Drs words were delivered without any explanation of them, only this, ſhe asking him (being rea­dy to faint) what then Dr. He anſwered, I do not know what the matter is, that I muſt ſpeak to you, I do not uſe to22That itrue, no more did the Goſticqu s of old, and the libertines of late, and the familiſts now, diſcover my ſelf, but he told her ſomething of a man that dyed at Jeruſalem ſixteen hundred years ago, and that ſhe muſt have it in her, which ſhe cannot remember, being then ſo amazed at his words, and the Ds anſwer to this article being read unto her, ſhe depoſeth that all the circumstances mentioned in his ſaid anſwer, are all of them falſe, and un­true, there was nothing of ſuch a diſcourſe, as the Dr pre­tends, nor any thing tending to it, his anſwer was all falſe, and untrue.

George Aſlet of Bradfield, Weaver, ſworn, and exami­ned, depoſeth.

That he hath heard Dr Pordage in the Church of Brad­field, about two years ſince deliver, that, it was a vain thing to truſt in the33the Dr prints that he hath had wonder­full viſions of the three worlds. 76 p. in which of theſe worlds think you did he ſee this ve­ry accurſed doctrine, was it in the world of Divells or, the world of Angels, or, of glory, our very hand trembles at the writing of this, and every godly heart abhorres it, at the very reading this ſingle paſſge diſcovers of what order his angels are, and of what kind his viſios. bloud of him, that dyed at Jeruſalem ſixteen hundred years ſince or more, unleſſe it were acted in26 me, or in thee, for that was but in the type, the ſubſtance muſt be fulfilled in us, and that Chriſt muſt be crucified in us, that Pontius Pilate muſt condemn him in us, and the Jewes put him to death in us, crucified in us, that he muſt lye buried three dayes in us, and muſt riſe in us, and muſt aſcend in us otherwiſe it was a vain thing to believe in him that dyed at Jeruſalem ſixteen hundred years ſince, or more, without us.

This Deponent croſſe examined.

Being asked in the Drs behalfe whether he did write down the fore-mentioned particulars, or not, he anſwereth, negatively.

And being further asked, whether he did complain of the premiſes within ſix months, to any juſtice of peace, after the ſpeaking thereof, he anſwereth he did not, nor did44But now he ſees cauſe to complain, for he came in of his own free accord, unexpectedly, and bleſſed God for the government, authorizing perſons to whom he might complain. find any cauſe ſo to do.

Animad. 2.

Acerrini morſus morientium ferarum, wild beaſts near their end, bite ſo fiercely, they will even make their teeth meet, the unclean ſpirit rends, and foams when he is a de­parting, and to be ejected, what ailes this Dr to imagine on his bed, and when he cometh forth to tell ſuch a forged, lying tale; 'tis true, his words ſeem ſmooth as oyle, but they be very ſwords he doth not bark much, but he bites, and bites the deeper, becauſe he doth not bark. We conceive the Dr fitting in counſell with his thus, what ſhall we do to blaſt this teſtimony the accuſer hath brought in before theſe men27 of the world? ſo it ſaith that I ſhould blaſpheme the bloud of their Chriſt, their ordinance will reach me, or they will ſtretch it, and the Prieſts are rigid, adviſe what is best to be done I know Miſtris Grip is the witneſſe againſt me though ſhe doth not appear, nor it named, my conſcience tells me ſo. Re olved upon the queſtion, that it is lawfull for the Dr to ſay what he pleaſe to the commiſſioners toave himſelf and to ſay what he pleaſe of the witneſſes to blaſt them, and their teſtimony,

The Dr labours might and main to overthrow this teſti­mony, knowing that this (concurring ſo directly, with Mſter Tickhills, and Maſter Stevens) would help to o­verthrow him, for his overthrowing the very foundation of faith, and godlineſſe.

We deſire the diſcreet Reader to obſerve his55We cannot find more ſmooth epi­thies, whope it is not btter­neſſe, but ſome better thing, tis in the 'cauſe of Chriſt conſulting­ly forged anſwer, & ex ungue leonem to ſee him by this paper, as he in his viſions did the Devill by his cloven foot, pag. 74. of his book.

Thus he tells you how he came to Miſtris Gips houſe, and how he found her in a very exceeding great paſſion, with tears, and cries, and wringing her hands, uſing bitter invectives againſt Maſter Fowler; and he tells you the reaſon why (viz.) becauſe he reported to the gentry there­about, that ſhe lived in adultery with a**For this was in h s anſwer before the Com­miſſioners, but as he can ſay, and unſay, ſo he can put in, and put out even in print. What anngratefull man is this, thus to beſpatter, and diſ­grace, (ſo far as in him lyes) one of his beſt friends, in the face of a multitude: he reſolves to hazzard all his friends, to attempt any thing, ſo he may enfeeble this ſubtantiall evidence. gentleman, not far off, and how he was afraid th••ſhe was drenched with An­tinomianiſme, and therefore diſcourſed to her of the nature and ſpirit of Chriſt.

To diſprove this, we offer theſe conſiderations.

Firſt, that Miſtriſſe Grip being then upon her oath, did ſolemnly appeal to the Lord of heaven, the ſearcher of all hearts, that ſhe did not ſpeak a ſword of Maſter Fowler,28 neither had ſo much as a thought of him, and that ſhe was ſo far from tears and wringed hands, (as this man feignes) That ſhe was in ſome meaſure of joy, in the apprehenſion of Jeſus Chriſt, and ſhe did affirm, before God, the Commiſſio­ners, and above two hundred perſons, that it was all falſe, and a mere forgery, not a word of it true.

Secondly, Conſider this, that about a fortnight before his tryall was at the Bear in Reding, Maſter Daniel Bla­grave told her the ſaid Miſtris Grip that the Dr would de­clare to the Commiſſioners, how ſhe had railed againſt Maſter Fowler, upon which, ſhe came to Maſter Fowler's houſe immediately, where Maſter Nutkins, one of the Commiſſioners, with ſome friends, then was, and ſhe was exceedingly moved at the Drs impudence, & wickedneſſe, ad­miring how he could raiſe ſuch a report, ſaying, ſhe did not think he could have bin ſuch a Divell, and there ſolemnly did averre, before ſome Chriſtians, that ſhe did not ſpeak to the Dr ſo much, as one word of Maſter Fowler, and did conceive it to be a plot to affright her. So that as the Ds ly­ing anſwer was premeditated, through wickedneſſe, her anſwer upon her oath, was premeditated alſo, through pro­vidence.

Thirdly, As to that paſſage of the Drs contriving, or ſome of his Angels, what Maſter Fowler ſhould report &c. Maſter Fowler remembers not any ſuch thing reported by him to any of the gentry, as his own judgement; the truth is, many of the gentry have rather wondered at his ſparing­neſſe, and ſilence, when occaſion of ſuch diſcourſe hath bin offered, the ground of which ſilence was ſincerely this, when he looked upon the reports of many, ſix or ſeuen years ſince, and the ſuſpicions of ſome godly perſons, he durſt not juſtifie her, and on the other ſide, when he looked upon her profeſſion, gifts, expreſſions, temptations, he durſt not con­demn her eſpecially when he looked upon her temptations, which he believed to be reall, and his judgement is, that a tempted perſon may without any great difficulty diſcern the temptations of another, whether they are from pretence. and hypocriſie, or whether they are from reality, and29 feeling, eſpecially if they have frequent conference.

What paſſages of lewdneſſe there have bin, or whether any he knovves not, he hath ſpoken unto them both of this very ſin, ſix years ſince in private, and both did deny it, he leaves them, and the iſſue to God, but the riſe of the Drs forgery and lying. he believes upon good ground to be ſo falſe, that he thinks the firſt deſerves the Pillery, the ſecond may claim the whetſtone, and the Ds deſign to blast her teſtimony, vvill ſtand heavy upon his account, unleſſe he come to be vvaſhed, vvith that moſt invaluable bloud of Chriſt, vvhich he hath eſteemed as a poor thing.

Fourthly; Again conſider that this Deponent Miſtris Grip did relate this of the Drs blaſphemy to Maſter Fowler, and the other, of apparitions with indignation & grief, before ever the ordinance for ejecting came forth, ſaying to him and others, ſhall this blaſphemer continue to bewitch ſouls? and will the higher powers do nothing? ſhall ſuch be tolera­ted alſo? now, whether this woman, who profeſſeth tender­neſſe of ſpirit, even againſt the leaſt untruthes ha­ving ſpoken much againſt this mans blaſphemies, and viſi­ons, before any Commiſſioners were in being, and there be­ing betwixt them no perſonall grudge, (as to the world, ſhe is a looſer, and did expect to be ſo before hand,) ſhould ſo ſolemnly depoſe before God and Angells an untruth, we leave it to the judgement of indifferent men.

Fifthly, Beſides if the Drs diſcourſe were (as he pleads clearly againſt his own conſcience) ſuch, as it is in his an­ſwer, let the Reader conſider, what colour even in the leaſt can there be, for Miſtris Grips queſtion, (viz) what then Dr? and his anſwer to that queſtion, (viz.) I do not uſe to reveal my ſelf, but I do not know, what the matter is, I muſt ſpeak to you; for conſider, what is there in the Drs anſwer, but that any man may ſpeak to any perſon.

But this is juſt like Maſter Erbury, who, when he had ſpoken moſt bitter things againſt the Lord Jeſus, to an un­derſtanding chriſtian (of which you ſhall hear by and by) clapt him on the arm, telling him, I do not uſe to reveal my ſelf ſo to others.


The truth is, the Dr ſeeing Miſtris Grip to be fixed, and knowing her teſtimony would be looked on as con­ſciencious, and in ſome hopes of his own fooliſh heart, thinking to make her a Proſelyte, and on that account ha­ving revealed to her that, which he knew would very much diſcover him, he thought to try this laſt attempt, whether he might affright her out of her teſtimony, but this would not do, ſhe being throughly reſolved to go through all re­ports to bear witneſſe againſt ſuch horrid blaſphemies, for the glory of Jeſus Chriſt.

But the Dr goes on, and ſaith ſhe is perjured, and why? becauſe ſhe ſaith, ſhe never railed againſt Mr Fowler in her life, ſee p. 62.

1. Conſider her anſwer, regiſtred by the Clark, and read by him, at the command of the Commiſſioners, to all the people.

2. Mrs Grips anſwer was this, The Lord knows it is all falſe, falſe, never, never: any indifferent perſon may ſee the queſtion is not, whether, ſhe did ever rail in her life, but, whe­ther at that time, as the Dr pretends, and which railing at that time, upon ſuch a report, was the riſe, and ground of the Drs diſcourſe with her.

And here the Commiſſioners did ſeverall times offer the Dr, and all his friends, that if any one could ſay any thing, to evidence the Drs anſwer to be true, whch Mrs Grip did depoſe to be falſe, he ſhould be heard, with all freedome and willingneſſe; but no man appearing to the point in hand, the Commiſſioners proceeded to ſome other articles, for which this bold fellow doth aſperſe them for unconſciona­bleneſſe, injuſtice.

But who are his printed witneſſes, p. 62. with which he makes a noiſe, and clamours upon the proceedings, by this way deceiving many, and hardening more.

1. Mr Richard Stockwell is quoted, and ſet forth (by the Dr) as a pious, ſober Chriſtian. pag. 63.

Anſ. We wiſh him ſo, with all our hearts, this man was profered his oath, if he could teſtifie any thing of Mrs Grip, railing at Mr Fowler, as the Dr pretends in his anſwer, ſhe31 did, which he could not do, and ſo was not admitted as a witneſſe.

Obj. But the accuſer ſaith, this man, Richard Stockwell, is an Erburiſt.

Anſ. And he muſt ſay ſo ſtill, upon the reaſons which he gave to the Commiſſioners, till Richard Stockwell ſaith no.

Having ſo fit a ſeaſon, we deſire leave to ſpeak a little of Mr Erbury, we have no thoughts in our hearts to rake up the aſhes of the dead, he is gone to his account, and ſtands, or falls to his own maſter: we do it, in a little ſubſerviency to the glory of Chriſt, by undeceiving, (if he pleaſe to make us inſtrumentall) if it be, but one ſoul in the nation, eſpe­cially about London, and in this county. Upon perſonall knowledge, and upon the oath of Chriſtians, (if called to it) we declare, that theſe were his poſitions.

Firſt, That the Father in fleſh, is the Son.

Secondly, That the Father in Adam, and ſo downward, is Chriſt.

Thirdly, That the fulneſſe of the Godhead is in Chriſt, and the ſaints, as the ſoul is in the head, and foot.

Fourthly, That Jeſus Chriſt was man as he, and no more God.

Fifthly, That it is blaſphemy to ſay that Jeſus Chriſt made an atonement, for the ſins of Gods elect.

Sixthly, That coming to a murderer ſentenced to die, he ſaid, thou hast killed a man, what if thou hadst killed a hundred? I tell thee for thy comfort, God is in thee, but thou doſt not ſee it, but thou ſhalt ſee it.

Theſe upon credible teſtimony.

1. That there is neither good, nor evil, but as men appre­hend it.

And that he might do any thing if his mind did lead him to it.

Poſitions enough to aſtoniſh the heavens, and ſhake the earth, and tend our very bowels; from another gueſſe man then this Dr. both for life and learning. But he is gone to Eternity, and to us that knew him, out of his grave he32 preacheth a ſermon upon that text, Rom. 11.20. Thou ſtandeſt by faith, be not high minded, but fear. let us pray, pray, pray, that God would keep us in the knowledge, love, and practiſe of all divine truth. But to return.

The next witneſſe for the Dr, to prove that Mrs Grip did rail, &c. is John Tench. p. 63.

We wonder that this witneſſe alſo is not encomiaſted with the titles of a ſober, & pious Chriſtian, we cannot tell what this man would ſwear, but we know with ſadneſſe of heart what he ſaith, he hath twice in publick denied the bloud of Chriſt, to be the bloud of God, and this (as we fear) not through miſtake, or ignorance, for he was often told, and ſeverall ſcriptures were alledged to that purpoſe, (viz.) that it was the bloud of a divine perſon, not of the divine nature, but he ſtill perſiſted in his fooliſh (to ſay no more) cavillations, and afterwards ſaid to one of us, that Chriſt died, and roſe again, and then became God.

This is one of John Tawneys followers, a blaſphemer of the Lord Chriſt, a ſlanderer of Chriſtians for his ſake, a late abettor of the Anti-ſcripturall Quakers at Reding, and one, whoſe inconſiderableneſſe makes him audacious.

The reſt are Eleanor Burly, Mrs Kent, ibidem, and in another place John Hambleton is quoted.

What ſavour theſe three have among underſtanding Chriſtians that know them, we will leave to others, the very naming of the laſt, will make thoſe that know him, e­ven to hold their noſes.

Ob. See how bitter theſe Prieſts are, and how rigid.

Anſ. Our reply is this, we have concealed many paſſa­ges that we might have rehearſed, to avoid this very obje­ction, but we do conceive it inevitable, and unreaſonable too, for, this objection will be made by thoſe, who have gall, and bitterneſſe, and are the moſt bitter people in the world; if our relation be falſe, we yield to ſuffer, if it be true, why are we bitter? is it becauſe we will not ſee the ever­laſting Deity, the precious bloud, the bleſſed word and ordi­nances33 of Jeſus Chriſt, trampled, denied, blaſphemed, and ſit ſtill with our hands in our pockets, but according to our mea­ſure, ſpeak a word for him, and his? is this bitterneſſe? then the Lord make us more bitter; in theſe fundamentalls Jeſus Chriſt will give us but little thanks in the day of our ac­count, for our Gallioniſme, or moderation.

Obj. But grant for once, that theſe witneſſes are againſt ordinances, ſabboths, ſcriptures, grace, Chriſt, (for ſo they are, ſome of them againſt moſt, and every one of them a­gainſt ſome) yet their teſtimony is legall.

Anſ. It is confeſſed, and their teſtimony was received as ſuch, and we deſire it may be weighed, with all our hearts.

Obj. The Commiſſioners would not receive their wit­neſſe.

Anſ. We reply, This is a ſordid, and falſe imputation of the Drs upon them, they were examined, the Dr had his li­berty to propoſe any queſtions, and to produce any witneſ­ſes, it is confeſſed, the Commiſſioners did refuſe ſome of the witneſſes, becauſe they could not ſpeak to the matter in hand, as, when it was depoſed, the Dr had ſpoken blaſphe­my at one time, in one place, they offered to depoſe that they heard him ſpeak otherwiſe, at another time, and in another place, and this is the naked truth, yet the Commiſſioners are clamoured upon, by him and his friends, in Court, in ci­ty, in town, in countrey, even for crucifiers. &c.

To conclude, that a man of ſuch pretended glories, vi­ſions, ſanctity, likened even to Chriſt almoſt, as to have no ſin for the Devil hardly to work upon him by, ſhould have no more, no other, to appear in his behalf, but as thou haſt ſeen, Reader, ſeems to us wonderfull, obſervable.

The fifth article of the first charge.

That by male, and female Geneſis the 1. we are to un­derſtand by male, the Deity, and by female, the humanity, and that theſe two become one fleſh.

Adde to this two other articles of the laſt charge, viz.


That he preached at Bradfield and did labour to defend it pertinaciouſly, that the little horn in Dan. 7. verſ. 8. was Chriſt, and being told that the horn made war with the Saints, yet he perſiſted to ſay that he was Chriſt.

That he is ignorant and inſufficient for the work of the Miniſtry.

The Drs Anſwer.

To the firſt of theſe the Dr gave no particular an­ſwer.

Animadver. 3.

The Dr could not tell what to ſay then, but ſince in his book. pag. 44. he anſwers thus to this article.

That by male and female might be ſhadowed forth the Deity and pure humanity, the male repreſenting the Deity, the female the pure humanity, which by union become one, the ſpirit of the ſoul brought up by Chriſt into a myſticall union, is made partaker of the divine nature.


What un-edifying matter, and language is this? is this to ſpeak to edification, exhortation, and to comfort? is not this and all the reſt taken out of the euangle of Henry Ni­cholas, and Jacob Behmen? is there not a ſerpent in this graſſe? Irenaeus obſerves of the Gnoſticks, that they did with Scripture words, and phraſes, as if ſome skilfull Artiſt ſhould make with precious ſtones and pearles, the moſt ex­quiſite effigies of ſome Heroique prince, and when it is done, and compleated, in comes ſome phantaſticall fellow, and pulls it all to pieces, and with the ſame ſtones and pearles, goes, and makes the picture of an ape, or a dog. How hate­full is this ſaith that Father as it was then, even ſo it is now, the Gnoſticks in the firſt times, and the Familiſts, and Qua­kers, in theſe laſt times differing no more, (ſome circum­ſtances excepted) then Simon Magus differs from Simon the Sorcerer, the Familiſts take Scripture words, phraſes, and expreſſions, which ſhine as pearles in that place, and35 meaning where the hand of the bleſſed ſpirit hath ſet them, and they diſmember them, and pluck them aſunder, and with them, according to their own whimſies, they make ſometime an ape, or a dog, or both; ſometime non-ſence, or blaſphemy, and oftentimes both, as for inſtance, ſuch ex­preſſions as theſe, Chriſt in you, the fellowes of Chriſt, Chriſts brethren, partakers of the divine nature, I in them, and they in me, you need not that any man teach you, taught of God, perfect as the Father, the letter killeth, the ſpirit to God &c. Now conſider how our new Gnoſticks wreſt, and rack theſe ſcriptures, and make them ſpeak, what they never meant, how do they take theſe pearles, theſe choiſe texts of heaven, and with them make pictures of hell? e. g. I, as Christ, Godded in God, a typicall Christ, you are Chriſted, partakers of the divine eſſence, that of God to God, and body, and ſoul to the grave, fleſhly ordinances, carnall ſcriptures: &c. We need not quote the texts, where theſe phraſes are, neither need we name the men that handled them thus, in­deed we cannot, they are more in number, then we can count.

The Dr in his printed anſwer to this article, ſpeakes much of the ſouls union. We deſire to ſpeak a word, not to amaze as he doth, but to benefit the Reader.

We do acknowledge a reall, ſpirituall, eternall union be­tween Chriſt & Saints, & when we think of it, ſometime a lit­tle fire kindles, and we ſay, Lord, what is man? our hearts cloſe with that of a godly learned**Reynold Conf. with Hart. cap. 1. Diviſ. 2. man, ſpoken upon an oc­caſion ſomething like this, and very proper to theſe dayes, the unity (ſaith he) that the Scripture notes is of three ſorts, firſt, of perſons in one nature, ſecondly, of natures in one perſon, thirdly, of natures and perſons in one quality, in the firſt is one God, in the ſecond is one Chriſt, in the third is one Church. i. e. The company of the elect called, and ſanctified by one ſpirit, partakers of one Baptiſme, knit to Chriſt by one faith, among themſelves in one love, to ſerve one Lord, in one hope of one eternall glory: the firſt and ſecond of theſe unions, we deſire to believe, becauſe they are written, and to admire, becauſe they are exceeding glo­rious,36 the laſt union by the ſpirit, and faith, we deſire to feel, and experimentize in our own ſouls, knowing that in theſe cob webby times of vain ſpeculations, one beam of Gods love, one drop of the bloud of Chriſt upon our hearts, one witneſſe of the ſpirit in ordinances, will doe us more good, then all the meteors, and notions in the world.

But as for H. Ns, union, of being chriſted in Chriſt, and I. Ps. union, of the deity and pure humanity to be one fleſh, and W. E. union of God is in thee, and thee, and the N. Qs, union, to be Chriſt, a part of God, we deſire to look on them, as more abominable, then abomination it ſelf. nay more ugly then hell it ſelf.

To the ſecond and third his anſwers followeth.

Concerning the little horn. Dan. 7. to be Chriſt.

This article was four years ſince exhibited againſt me, from which I was diſcharged by the Committee, Richard Higgs, John Higgs, and Richard Luington atteſting on oath, that I paraphraſing on the ſeventh of Daniel, and ſpeaking of the little horn, ſaid, that ſome interpreters would have the little horn, in the letter to be Antiochus Epipha­nes, a bloudy, and perſecuting tyrant, others think the little horn to be the Turk, who is a great perſecutor of Chriſti­ans,**Mark this phantaſticall ignorance, if not worſe, for by ſuch a myſticall liberty names may be apply­ed, that we dare not name, which, how dreadfull is it? But in the myſtery in regard of his power, we will apply it to the power of Chriſt in a chriſtian, who is often in Scripture reſembled to the horn of David, and to the horn of ſalvation, and that upon three conſiderations. In regard that Chriſts power in the ſoul, doth appear to be a little horn, a ſmall deſpiſed inſtrument to ſence, and rea­ſon, for fleſh and bloud look upon it, as a poor inſtrument in regard of bringing down the ſtrength of ſin in us.

Secondly, In regard of ſin, and66This man be­lies the Divell, who quakes at an ordinance, much more, at Chriſt's power, his fear that Chriſt will exert, and put forth an act of power, into the heart through an ordinance is ſo great, that he even trembles at the thoughts of it, the very addreſſe to the ſolemn reading of a chapter will make the Divell ſad, he is afraid of the iſſue, your anti-ordinance men in England, are the beſt friends that he hath had this many a day, Sathan, who, laugh the power of Chriſt in the ſoul to ſcorn, yet before him his ac­curſed kingdom muſt fall.

373. In regard of its birth, & beginning in the ſoul, it is at the firſt, as a very77We have heard the pa­rable, in re­gard of grace that to be little at firſt, but never of Christs power to be little, till now. litttle grain of muſtard ſeed, yet in due time it will deſtroy the kingdom of ſin, and ſet up the kingdom of holyneſſe in us, having thus drawn away the vail from this article, I hope it appears with a more tolerable and in­nocent face.

That I am very ignorant, and inſufficient for the work of the Miniſtry.

I believe thoſe that exhibite this article againſt me, up­on tryall will be**All the pre­cedent articles prove it (if ſome of them ſhould not come within the act, for blaſphemy, (which plea ihis Diana) yet, they all prove him to be ignorant, and inſufficient, in a very high de­gree of both, found very ignorant, and inſufficient to judge of it, and as to thoſe that are to be my judges, I hope they will not make their wills the rule of ignorance and in­ſufficiency, But proceed according to the Canons of pure reaſon, or ſupernaturall revelation, in giving judge­ment concerning this particular, the event of which I leave to God.

The proofs of the aforeſaid articles.

The aforeſaid Mr John Tickhill of Abingdon.

This Deponent ſaith, that the Dr did deliver that by male and female. Gen. 1. We are to underſtand by male the Deity, by female the humanity, and that theſe two are one fleſh, and being croſſe examined, he further ſaith, that the Dr did deliver theſe expreſſions with approbation, and the Deponents hath cauſe to believe it was his own judge­ment, and as far as he doth remember it was delivered as his judgement.

The ſecond was fully proved upon oath before the Juſtices, by Francis Smith, of Bradfield, who went to the Dr about it, being much offended, and told him the little horn made war with the Saints, yet the Dr did ſtill pertinaciouſly maintain it, and ſpake evill of thoſe that oppoſed him in it.

The aforeſaid George Aſlet of Bradfield further depoſeth, and ſaith.

That the ſaid Dr about a moneth ſince, did deliver, that38 doubtleſſe, the Apoſtle in that text. 1 Cor. 6. (know ye not that your bodies are the temples of the holy Ghost,) did not88Why doth the Dr quarrell at this text? unleſſe it be ur­ged here, as a forcible argu­ment againſt fornication. mean theſe earthly bodies.

And this Deponent further ſaith, that the Dr did deliver that by that text Gen. 18. verſ. 19. (I know him, that he will command his children, and his houſhold after him, &c.) was not meant the outward houſhold of Abraham, but his inward houſhold, his will and affections, which he was Lord Paramount over; and he quoted that text in the laſt of Joſhua, (as for me, and my houſe, we will ſerve the Lord,) which he likewiſe ſaid, was meant of the inward, and not the outward houſe,99Obſerve his Allegoricall phancies, pro­ved by pro­found reaſon. he confeſſeth in his book. p. 87. in the margin, That by Abrahams family was meant his will and affections in a miſticall ſence. But how his will, and affections, could be his family after him, indeed is very miſticall: in his Epiſt. Ded. to his highneſſe, he doth as much as ſay, that, he a precious ſaint, is ejected by the miniſters, becauſe his interpretation of ſcripture, cannot ſuit with their darkneſſe. for a man (ſaid he) cannot command his wife, and children; and he further ſaith, that theſe words were delivered about two yeares ſince, to the beſt of this Deponents remembrance, and the Deponent ſaith he judged thoſe expreſſions to be contrary to the meaning of the holy Ghoſt, in thoſe ſcriptures.

The ſixth article of the firſt charge.

That the gifts and graces of the ſpirit are but fleſh.

The Drs anſwer is as followeth.

I confeſſe, I ſaid the common gifts, and graces of the ſpirit were but fleſh, but this I opened after this manner, they were**Untruth. compare with this, Mr Ste­vens depoſition to this article. but fleſhly, weak, carnall, in the point of Ju­ſtification, in point of truſt, and confidence, in regard of ſalvation, and life eternall, and no otherwiſe, as their1010Untruth. this witneſſe was Mr Pen­darvis, as the Dr prints him to this article, p. 45. Mr Pendarvis ſaith no ſuch thing at all, in his teſtimony, under his own hand. own witneſſes, on examination confeſſed, before the honourable Committee of Berks.

The proof of this article.

The aforeſaid Mr John Tickhill,

This Deponent further ſaith, <