The History of the Rise, Increase, and Progress of the Christian People Called Quakers: Intermixed with Several Remarkable Occurrencs.Sewel, William
History
The History of the Rise, Increase, and Progress of the Christian People Called Quakers: Intermixed with Several Remarkable Occurrencs.
Sewel, William
Society of Friends -- History -- Early works to 1800
Given forth the 14th of the Sixth
Month, 1655, when I was a prisoner
at the prison-house, in the city
of Exeter, in Devonshire, for the
testimony of Jesus, and the word of
God.
A chief cause why he was imprisoned there, was, that Thomas Salthouse,
with whom he travelled, (having heard that one George Brooks, a priest
belonging to the Nightingale frigate, said, after the declarations of
M. Halhead, and T. Salthouse, at Plymouth, that it was the eternal
truth which they had spoken, with many other words in vindication of
what they said,) told Brooks, that he had spoken many good words, and
fair speeches; but asked him, whether he lived the life of what he
spoke? Further, ‘He that entereth not by the door, but climbeth up some
other way, is, as Christ said, a thief and a robber.’ For T. Salthouse
thought, and that not without reason, as will be shown by and by, that
he did not want the praises of this priest, that were not better than
those of the damsel possessed with a spirit of divination, which she
spoke concerning Paul and Silas, viz. ‘These men are the servants of
the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation.’ Now what
T. Salthouse had spoken to the priest, was called provoking language;
the rather, because when the priest was speaking of the trinity,
T. Salthouse had asked him, where that word was to be found in the
Scriptures: saying further, ‘I know no such Scripture that speaks of
the three persons in the trinity; but the three that the Scripture
speaks of, are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and these
three are one.’ From hence T. Salthouse, and M. Halhead, were accused
as such as denied the Holy Three that are One. But because about this
accusation, they were at a loss in the court, something else was
thought of to ensnare them, viz. they were required to take the oath
of abjuration of the Pope. This oath the mayor of Plymouth had already
tendered them, when they were first apprehended; and they refusing to
swear, were sent to Exeter prison: and now being brought to trial, and
the said oath required of them, they answered thus:
‘In the presence of the Eternal God, and before all this people, we
do deny, with as much detestation as any of you do, the Pope and his
supremacy, and the purgatory, and all that is in the form of the oath
mentioned, we declare freely against: and we do not deny to swear
because of any guilt that is upon us, but in obedience to the command
of Christ, who saith, “Swear not at all:” and we will not come under
the condemnation of an oath, for the liberty of the outward man.’
Thus refusing to swear, merely that they might not offend against the
command of our Saviour, they were sent back to prison again, as such
that clandestinely adhered to the Pope: and use hath been made of this
snare during the space of many years, to vex the Quakers, so called.
The next day the prisoners were brought again before the bench, and
were asked:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account