A Brief Account of the Rise and Progress of the People Called Quakers | Page 9

the refuse and off-scouring
of all things.
This was the purport of their doctrine and ministry; which for the most

part, is what other professors of Christianity pretend to hold in words
and forms, but not in the power of godliness; which, generally speaking,
has been long lost by men's departing from that principle and seed of
life that is in man, and which man has not regarded, but lost the sense
of; and in and by which he can only be quickened in his mind to serve
the living God in newness of life. For as the life of religion was lost,
and the generality lived and worshipped God after their own wills, and
not after the will of God, nor the mind of Christ, which stood in the
works and fruits of the Holy Spirit; so that which these pressed, was not
notion, but experience; not formality, but godliness; as being sensible
in themselves, through the work of God's righteous judgments, that
without holiness no man shall ever see the Lord with comfort.
Besides these general doctrines, as the larger branches, there sprang
forth several particular doctrines, that did exemplify and farther explain
the truth and efficacy of the general doctrine before observed, in their
lives and examples. As,
I. Communion and loving one another. This is a noted mark in the
mouths of all sorts of people concerning them: they will meet, they will
help and stick one to another: whence it is common to hear some say,
"Look how the Quakers love and take care of one another." Others, less
moderate, will say, "The Quakers love none but themselves:" and if
loving one another, and having an intimate communion in religion, and
constant care to meet to worship God, and help one another, be any
mark of primitive Christianity, they had it, blessed be the Lord, in an
ample manner.
II. To love enemies. This they both taught and practised. For they did
not only refuse to be revenged for injuries done them, and condemned
it as of an unchristian spirit; but they did freely forgive, yea, help and
relieve those that had been cruel to them, when it was in their power to
have been even with them: of which many and singular instances might
be given: endeavouring, through faith and patience, to overcome all
injustice and oppression, and preaching this doctrine as Christian, for
others to follow.
III. Another was, the sufficiency of truth-speaking, according to

Christ's own form of sound words, of yea, yea, and nay, nay, among
Christians, without swearing, both from Christ's express prohibition to
swear at all; (Mat. v.) and for that, they being under the tie and bond of
truth in themselves, there was no necessity for an oath; and it would be
a reproach to their Christian veracity to assure their truth by such an
extraordinary way of speaking; simple and uncompounded answers, as
yea and nay, without asseveration, attestation, or supernatural vouchers,
being most suitable to evangelical righteousness. But offering, at the
same time, to be punished to the full for false-speaking, as others for
perjury, if ever guilty of it: and hereby they exclude with all true, all
false and profane swearing; for which the land did and doth mourn, and
the great God was, and is, not a little offended with it.
IV. Not fighting, but suffering, is another testimony peculiar to this
people: they affirm that Christianity teacheth people to beat their
swords into plough-shares, and their spears into pruning-hooks, and to
learn war no more; that so the wolf may lie down with the lamb, and
the lion with the calf, and nothing that destroys be entertained in the
hearts of people: exhorting them to employ their zeal against sin, and
turn their anger against Satan, and no longer war one against another;
because all wars and fightings come of men's own hearts' lusts,
according to the apostle James, and not of the meek Spirit of Christ
Jesus, who is captain of another warfare, and which is carried on with
other weapons. Thus, as truth-speaking succeeded swearing, so faith
and patience succeeded fighting, in the doctrine and practice of this
people. Nor ought they for this to be obnoxious to civil government,
since, if they cannot fight for it, neither can they fight against it; which
is no mean security to any state. Nor is it reasonable, that people should
be blamed for not doing more for others than they can do for
themselves. And, Christianity set aside, if the costs and fruits of war
were well considered, peace, with all its inconveniencies, is generally
preferable. But though they were not for fighting, they were for
submitting to government, and that, not only for fear, but for
conscience-sake, where government doth not interfere with conscience;