of Gods Publick Worship Lastly I must observe that it properly belongs to the Church-Guides and they are bound to see to the maintaining of decency and order in the Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship for seeing God commands to maintain decency and order therein and they are the Watchmen and Rulers who have the Care and Oversight of the Church Act. 20.28 Rom. 12.8 1 Thes 5.12 1 Tim. 3.5 and 5.17 Heb. 13.7 17. 1 Pet. 5.2 it must of necessity belong unto them and they must be thereunto obliged Having observed these things I hope I may assert that Church-Officers and Judicatures have Divine Warrant and Authority to make and set forth Church-Directories for regulating the External Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship in a decent and orderly way or so as they may be decent and orderly This assertion is clear from our preceeding Observations whereunto I shall add an Argument or two First therefore God commands Church-Officers and Judicacatures to maintain Decency and Order in the whole Circumstances of his Publick Worship as is clear from our preceeding Observations and yet he hath no where particularly condescended upon or defined these Circumstances as is before shewed also Therefore the Church-Officers and Judicatures have certainly Divine Warrant and Authority particularly to condescend upon define and determine them The Consequence which now only needs proving is easily proved for seeing God hath commanded Church-Officers and Judicatures to maintain Decency and Order in these Circumstances and yet hath not himself particularly defined and determined them either he hath given them Warrant and Authority particularly to define and determine the same which is the thing we plead for or else he hath commanded them to maintain Order and Decency in Circumstances never to be defined or ordered but left still to be confused undesined and unordered and so they must do it by random and blind chance Which is extreamly absurd seeing so he should have commanded Contradictions viz. order in Circumstances never to be ordered Secondly Church-Directories rightly regulating the External Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship so that they may be decent and well ordered according to the Scripture do conduce and contribute to set forward a Spiritual Good and Edification as is most clear from our preceeding Observations But it 's beyond all doubt that Church-Officers and Judicatories have Warrant and Authority to do such things as may conduce and contribute to set forward the Spiritual Good and Edification of the Churches of their Oversight or else they cannot have Warrant to do any thing Therefore sure it is Church-Officers and Judicatories have Authority and Warrant to make such Directories rightly regulating the External Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship in the Churches of their Oversight Thou wilt may be say that men can have no Authority to determine any part of Gods Worship not determined in the Scripture Therefore men can have no Authority particularly to determine these Circumstances not so determined in the Scriptures Ans The Antecedent I willingly yield but I utterly deny the Consequence seeing the things we now speak of and which alone are the immediate object of a Church-Directory in this strict and proper acception are no part of the Worship in their particular nature but are meer External Circumstances of that which is the Worship as is evident from all before-said These common Rules made by Church-Authority according to the general Precepts and Rules of Scripture do not of themselves bind Conscience nor doth the Authority from whence they immediately proceed of it self bind Conscience neither is their immediate object in its particular nature any part of Gods Worship as said is Nevertheless they being formed according to the general Precepts of Scripture for Order and Decency these bind Conscience and the general End of Edification it binds Conscience and Conscience is also bound not to despise but reverence lawful Church-Authority it being Gods Ordinance and we cannot contemn any of his Ordinances and be guiltless and therefore we may not in wilful conceit reject such Constitutions of the Church albeit out of the case of Scandal-giving and if it do not proceed from a contempt of church-Church-Authority or from some unruly Humor of Spirit we may upon causes just and reasonable lawfully sometimes intermit and forbear the observation of them These things I have said to prevent Objections And hence I hope it appears that Church-Officers have an Authority to Make and Constitute Church-Directories for ordering the External Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship according to the general Precepts of the Scripture albeit I grant that such Directories are not Infallible and so of themselves no Bond of Conscience nor Rule of Divine Faith As for our Confession and Catechism if the Quakers judge them to be unsound in any of their particular Definitions when the Quakers shall instance them it shall be time enough to make their Apology But while they declare themselves Enemies to the very common form of a Confession and Catechism in a Church herein they proclaim their Hostile mind against Ministers their feeding of the Flock and Edifying of the Body of Christ seeing these Compendious Breviaries of the most fundamental points of Scripture Doctrine and Christian Principles do exceedingly conduce for a method of easier learning and more distinct understanding of the same and that partly because of their succinct and compendious form shortly representing to us and quickly conducting and directing us to the most principal substance of the whole Scripture-Doctrine which is methodically summed in them and which by our own private Industry we could neither soon nor easily distinctly gather out of the whole body of the Scriptures and partly because of their greater Explication each of their Definitions or Enunciations being the perspicuous sentence of many parallel Scriptures compared together and so by their Consociated Beams and United Rays more powerfully Shining like so many Stars and Luminaries placed together into one Constellation and lastly because of their chained Conjunction being united placed and joyned together in a distinct and continual method These things do very much contribute not only to the more speedy learning but also to the more distinct understanding of the most necessary points of Scripture-Doctrine and so of the rest also as having some connexion with or relation unto these And hence also these methodized Models of the most Essential Principles of Scripture-Doctrine wisely formed from the Scriptures are a notable mean to guard people against Delusions and Errors which Corrupt Men are continually broaching in the Church seeing they being in that manner Succinctly and Methodically summed and so quickly learned and more distinctly understood are as it were a Measuring Line in every serious Mans hand to find out the truth or falshood of every Mans Doctrine What Ought not Ministers and have they not Authority to publish from the Scripture the Principles of Religion to the People and that in the most perspicuous and ready way they can have they
Ninth Query and it is evident that these are not another Gospel but are Institutions of the same Gospel preached by the Apostles But secondly taking our Directory in a more strict and proper notion of a Church-Directory as that is restricted to and meerly contains Directions concerning the External Circumstances of the Publick Worship and Government of Gods House I must for Answer to their present Query concerning it first suppose the particular Directions thereof to be materially right and conform to the Scripture general Precepts above mentioned which here once for all I warn seeing I will not here stand to vindicate every particular Direction thereof in particular If the Quakers had quarrelled any particular Direction thereof I behooved to have vindicated it particularly but seeing they have held themselves in the general so must I. These things supposed and taking our Directory in the foresaid strict notion I answer that our Directory thus taken is not simply Gospel or Scripture-Rule but partly Ecclesiastical Constitution it is Gospel or Scripture-Rule in respect of its fundamental ground and chief consideration which consists in the Institution and Rule for maintaing Order and Decency and promoting Edification seeing that is Scripture-Rule it is Ecclesiastical constitution in respect of the particular definition and accommodation of these Circumstances which is an Act elicited by the habit of Christian Prudence conform to the general Rules and Institutions of the Scripture forementioned Hence it appears that though the directions of our Directory thus taken be not simply Gospel-Rules yet neither are they another Gospel seeing in respect of their fundamental ground and chief consideration they are Institutions of the same Gospel preached by the Apostles as is shewed and in so far as they are Ecclesiastical Constitutions they are warranted by the Gospel preached by the Apostles as in regard of particulars I suppose until the Quakers particularly quarrel and in the general I have proved it above at the Survey of their Ninth Query But another Gospel hath no warrant in the Gospel preached by the Apostles but is contrary thereunto and condemned therein Again another Gospel is some Doctrine beside or contrary to the Gospel preached by the Apostles urged as necessary to Salvation and an absolute bond of Conscience and Rule of Divine Faith and so a Doctrine in its matter only beside being thus urged becomes contrary But our Church-Directory beside its agreement with the Scripture general Rules was never so urged as the Practice of our Church sufficiently attests As for our Confession of Faith and Catechism I affirm that albeit as to the formal Constitution which they have from Ecclesiastical Authority they be not Infallible or Canonical otherwise all Ecclesiastical Constitutions would be such yet considering them Materially as to the whole Articles confessed in the one and the whole Definitions delivered in the other and for the questionary part it is no matter seeing that affirms nothing nor denies they are universally and throughout very Scripture-Sentence very Gospel-Rule and Law together either expresly and formally or materially implicitly and by good consequence taught therein Let the Quakers condescend upon any Article or Proposition believed or taught in the one or the other that is not either expresly or implicitly and by good consequence contained in the Scriptures which until they do I must superseed particular Apologizing for them Only I have already sufficiently defended them in the general according as they have impugned them and so many of their particular Enunciations as the Quakers elsewhere in these Queries have particularly impeached I have also particularly maintained and vindicated in my Surveys The Quakers then may see that I affirm the whole Enunciations of our Confession and Catechism materially taken to be very Gospel and Law Rules together and so they are not another Gospel seeing another Gospel does not teach and confess the same Truths which the Gospel preached by the Apostles does And I have told them before that as to their formal Constitution by Ecclesiastical Authority they have not the same Authority which the Gospel preached by the Apostles had we do not equalize them therewith Let the Quakers see to their own Confession of Faith and a black Faith I am sure wherein there is scarce a Sentence that is not contrary to the Gospel preached by the Apostles a good part of which we have already seen and shall see more hereafter As for the Sentence of Scripture here Cited from the Epistle to the Romans a man would wonder to what purpose it is here Quoted But here is the business the Quakers feign to themselves a sort of a Dumb-Gospel without any words or Orations and this they seem to alledge to have a real and strict Identity with the power of God which is as senseless a Dream as can well be faln upon which the very Context of the place Cited overthrows while it calls the Gospel the power of God to Believers only intimating that it is not such unto unbelievers on whose hearts it does not so powerfully work whereas the power of God properly taken is still the same in respect of all the world The Gospel is called the Word of Truth and the word preached Ephes 1.13 Colos 1.5 Heb. 4.2 Which cannot be said of the power of God The Gospel was committed to Pauls trust 1 Thes 2.4 1 Tim. 1.11 But the power of God was never committed to the trust of any meer Creature The Apostle therefore calls the Gospel the power of God by a Figure called Synecdoche attributing the name of the Principal Cause to the Instrument because it is an effectual Instrument of the power of God So the Preaching of the Cross is called the power of God to them that are Saved 1 Cor. 1.18 not by way of Identity but thus Synecdochically as is declared So also the Samaritans reputed Simon Magus the great power of God Act. 8.10 not by way of Identity for I think they were not Quakers but they called him so Synecdochically because in their conceit he was a great Instrument thereof Twelfth QUERY What is Original Sin Whether it be not the Devil yea or nay for doth not the Original signifie the beginning and what did Christ come to destroy was it not the Devil and his works SVRVEY This Inspirer of the Quakers it seems must be a great Jester but I think him a great Fool too to suggest in his sport such Romances and Fictions unto simple Men void of understanding who to his infamy and disgrace thus report them in Earnest The Devil is indeed a very sinful Creature but that he should be very Sin it self is a horrible Fiction For first then Original Sin must be a Person seeing the Devil is a Person Secondly God made the Devil but God made not Original Sin seeing he cannot be the Author of sin therefore Original Sin is not the Devil The Minor is proved already I prove the Major God made all Creatures otherwise they could
accompted a meer blind conjecture and a groundless Fable All the ground that ever I learned from them is this viz. Because a man of a fallible Gift cannot assure people of the meaning Ans It is true there can no assurance thereof arise unto them from such a mans Infallibity which he hath not and as little from a Quaker pretending to it but can give no evidence to make it appear But what then can he not give them assurance thereof from the clear Infallible Scriptures by whose Testimony the meaning is to be Demonstrated we are not to Build our Faith upon the mans Gift but upon the Scriptures that can give as great assurance as any Infallible Gift seeing they are the Infallible Word of God To the Law and to the Testimony if mens Doctrines agree not with these receive them not Lastly I assert against the Quakers who with peremptory Certifications seem to deny it in this Query That when the Scriptures are explained by the Scriptures the meaning held forth and delivered is Scripture-Rule and so it is no addition as the Adversaries here alledge nor is it our meaning but the meaning of the Scriptures and so we may still pretend Scripture-Rule for all that I prove it First the meaning of the Scriptures represented and Taught by themselves is certainly Scripture-Rule for seeing the Scriptures are our Rule as is proved the meaning Taught by them is the very Enunciat Doctrine the Soul and Sentence of that Rule as is palpable But when the Scriptures are explained by the Scriptures the meaning held forth and delivered is the meaning of the Scriptures represented and Taught by themselves and the contrary involves an incurable Contradiction Therefore when the Scriptures are explained by the Scriptures the meaning held forth and delivered is certainly Scripture-Rule Secondly Scripture-Doctrine Taught by the Scriptures is Scripture-Rule or else nothing can be such if that be not But when the Scriptures are explained by the Scriptures the meaning held forth and delivered is Scripture-Doctrine Taught by the Scriptures seeing the meaning of the Scripture is surely Scripture-Doctrine nor can these be diverse or else the Scriptures should mean what they Teach not and Teach what they mean not which is repugnant Therefore when the Scriptures are explained by the Scriptures the meaning held forth and delivered is manifestly Scripture-Rule Lastly if when the Scriptures are explained by themselves the meaning held forth by them be not Scripture-Rule then the Scripture-Rule is some other thing really distinct from the meaning of the Scriptures held forth thereby But that is impossible to be or to be explained for so the Scripture-Rule should by it self mean nothing seeing another meaning then that which is held forth by the Scriptures it can never have Ergo when the Scriptures are explained by themselves the meaning held forth is Inevitably Scripture-Rule But say the Quakers in this Query Interpreting of the Scriptures is an adding to them against which the Plagues are Denounced Rev. 22. Chap. Ans This Objection proves if it prove any thing that all Scripture Expounding by men fallible or not so is utterly unlawful as an adding to the Scripture-Rule But I deny that Interpreting of the Scriptures is an adding to the Scripture-Rule let the Quakers Try if they can prove it for their big Assertion is not current for Proof for I have shewed before that Scripture-Expounding is necessary in the Church and of Divine Institution to the Worlds end such as adding to the Scripture Rule is not and so they cannot be the same thing To add to the Scriptures is to impose some false meaning upon them disagreeing therewith or to set up any other Doctrine as of equal Authority with them I wish the Quakers would notice this who continually impose false meanings on the Scriptures and have set up a new Doctrine contrary to the Scriptures not only as of equal Authority with the same but above them O impudent wickedness But by the Scriptures to unfold clear and Demonstrate their own Genuine and true meaning hath not a shadow into it of adding to the Scripture-Rule seeing as is proved so the meaning delivered is the Scriptures own true meaning which therefore cannot be any addition thereunto But blind Arguments are all that can be expected from Brain-sick Doctors whom we find frequently speaking like men indeed in a mixture SECT II. Concerning Scripture-Consequence or Consequential Scripture I come now to the second Imperious condition which the Quakers like Dictators demand of us and that is that we do not draw Consequences from the Scriptures for Establishing our Doctrine otherwise that we never pretend Scripture-Rule more This I confess is a very unjust Cowardise That they should require us to throw down our Arms and then they will fight us I see the Quakers would fight a Dead man even out of Breath They 'l go to Wars in time of Peace I like the Jest well If the Quakers be so dastardly why did they not send their Queries to some Brute where they should have found a Party sutable to their mind which would not have troubled them with Consequences But as for us we must crave their Pardon seeing by our Creation and Essence we are Rational which chiefly consists in a Discursive or Illative Faculty fitted for discerning of Consequences of purpose that being furnisht with the principles of Nature or Grace we might be capable to perceive the particular Conclusions which they implicitly really and truly contain I shall not need to be long in Discussing this Question concerning Scripture-Consequence nor shall I need many words for clearing the state of the Question but in one word it is Whether or not that which by good Consequence is deduced and drawn from the Scriptures be Scripture-Rule We see by the Certification of the Quakers demand that they deny and take the Negative of the Question But I Assert that whatsoever by good Consequence follows or is deduced from the Scriptures is Infallible Scripture-Rule And I prove it For first Scripture-Doctrine is Scripture-Rule or else nothing can be such Now whatever by good Consequence follows or is deduced from the Scriptures must be Scripture-Doctrine otherwise a good Consequence might infer from the Scriptures that which is not Scripture-Doctrine or that which they Teach not or a Consequence inferring from the Scriptures that which they Teach not and is not their Doctrine should be a good Consequence which involves a direct Contradiction seeing so a Consequence manifestly evil should be a good Consequence Hence then whatever by good Consequence follows or is deduced from the Scriptures is evidently Scripture-Rule Secondly Christ plainly affirms Luk. 20.37 that that Scripture principle I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob does shew and Teach the Resurrection of the Dead Now it does not expresly and formally Teach that it says not expresly that the Dead shall Rise again but only it follows therefrom by
the great ground of the change he gives it the honour of his most frequent appearings thereafter to his Disciples Luk. 24.13 15. Joh. 20.19 26. and again of that glorious manifestation of himself in the pouring forth of the Spirit at the Pentecost Act. 2.1 2 3 4. and again it was on this day as shall be shewed that he made that glorious appearance to John in the Isle of Patmos Revel 1.10 again the first day of the week was by the Apostles and the Church following their Masters Example which is binding in things imitable and that by Divine Precept Ephes 5.1 observed for the Celebrating of Gods Publick Worship as a day set apart for that work as appears from Act. 20.7 1 Cor. 16.1 2. where we have not a meer bare Example or instance of the Churches meeting for once or twice to Gods Publick Worship on that day set down but also we have their constant custom of so doing clearly in both places imported yea further the last of these two Texts shews that that day was set apart for the Publick Divine Worship while it expresly requires the publick Collections of Charity for the Poor a Pendicle of the Publick Worship to be made on that day and shews that the same order was also given to other Churches as well as to them of Corinth And lastly the Holy Ghost hath recorded to us these singular Priviledges and peculiar Honour bestowed by Christ upon this first day of the week above all other days as also the Churches observing of it for Gods Publick Worship and that constantly and as a day set apart for that use and the like he doth not mention of any other day which is very observable What is all this for then for some reason uncontrovertibly and yet no other can be given or fall under imagination or else I intreat the Quakers to shew us it if they can But that the first day of the week is a day peculiarly set apart and sanctified by Christ for the Exercise of his Publick Worship and which he would have his Church peculiarly to regard as designed for that holy use beyond and above all other days as was accordingly done by the Apostles and Church in the pure Primitive times The change of the day then is most surely by Divine Authority But Secondly when Christ foretels the Disciples of the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by Vespasian Matth. 24.20 which was fourty years and upwards after Christs Ascension and so it was long after the planting of the Gospel-Church and exautorating of the Ceremonial Law He bids them pray that their flight might not be in the Winter nor on the Sabbath-day There is a Sabbath-day both name and thing under the New Testament which Christ wills his Disciples to pray that their flight might not be thereupon because it would be grievous to them to be forced to travel for preservation of their natural Lives on that day which was Instituted for Gods Publick Worship and their Spiritual comfort Neither is it possible to get the Sabbath-day here mentioned meaned of every day seeing then they behooved either to flee on the Sabbath-day or else never Nor yet can it be meant of an uncertain day or some day Indeterminately for then the Disciples could not have known what day to pray that their flight might not be upon and Christs Exhortation had been vain and to no use or purpose which is most absurd and false This one Scripture proves a Christian External Sabbath-day against all Contradicters and that the first day of the week must be this Christian Sabbath-day appears from the Claim and Interest above declared which it hath under the New Testament unto that honourable Title and peculiar Denomination above all other days and that by Divine Warrant Thirdly There is a particular determinate day under the New Testament which hath by the mind and sentiments of the Scripture a peculiar relation unto the Lord Christ above all other days whatsoever and so it is separated from the common condition of all other days having a peculiar Divine relation which no other hath and thereby a preheminence and dignity before all of them and so it must be an Holy Day seeing common days are not separated from the condition of common days except we please to speak plain contradiction That there is such a particular determinate day under the New Testament is clear from Revel 1.10 where John says He was in the Spirit on the Lords-day which cannot be meant of every day seeing then he could not have been in the Spirit but on the Lords-day whereas it is most evident that John distinctly points at a particular day having some peculiar relation to Christ above all others But the Quakers like Dictators say that the Lords-day here is meant of an uncertain time called the Lords-day because of the Lords special appearing thereupon But their Commentary is most false and cannot agree with the Apostles Scope which is as to shew the certain Person Who received the Vision viz. John and the certain place of the World Where In the Isle of Patmos and the certain kind of frame Wherein While he was in the Spirit so also the certain kind of day or the certain day of the week whereupon he received the Vision and so an uncertain time cannot stand with the Scope Secondly Let the Quakers if they can prove that an uncertain time is here meant or else their Gloss upon the Text will be justly thought uncertain Thirdly Our Adjective does not very perfectly turn the word which in the Original Language is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying Dominick or more clearly pertaining to the Lord which plainly imports a particular determinate day adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with it which is in the Text having a peculiar and stated relation to the Lord above others which by common right are his also Having dispatched the Quakers uncertain time I affirm that the Lords-day here is meant of the first day of the week determinately seeing it hath a peculiar interest into that Denomination above all other days whatsoever for it is the day of Christs glorious Resurrection and ceasing from the great work of Redemption whereof it is a Remembrance it is the day of his frequent appearings to his Disciples thereafter it is the day of his glorious pouring forth of the Spirit and enduing the Apostles with Power from on High it is the day set apart for his Publick Worship and observed also for that use by the Apostles and Church in the pure Primitive time and finally it is the day which the Holy Ghost hath particularly noted unto us as alone honoured by Christ and his Church with such peculiar Priviledges all which is before proved Seeing then the first day of the week hath upon so many special accompts so peculiar an Interest into that Denomination which no other can pretend to The Lords day here mentioned must be inevitably understood of the same seeing the
him and the rest of his Brethren Quakers SECT I. Answers some Calumnies of Popery cast upon us by George Alias Mr. George Keith Sir I have read perused your Book which ye Intitle Quakerism no Popery albeit the Book it self belies the Title and I have redargued all your Erronious principles whereupon you treat therein together with your Confession of Faith signed by many of the hands of your Brethren as also I have Surveyed and examined the preceeding Queries that were sent unto me by a Convent of your tribe though signed but with one of their hands I come now to the calumnies of Popery which ye endeavour to throw upon us And First I find you intend to fix Popery upon us because the Authority which our Ministers have by Ordination came through the hands of the Roman Church I answer you that your Consequence is utterly null for albeit the authority of our Ministers came through their hands yet the authority was not theirs but Christs it was not humane but divine and therefore this cannot infer Popery upon us seeing that authority as to its substance was not a Popish invention but a Divine Institution albeit as to the manner of conveying there was Popish Superstitions and Obligations joyned with it which were sinful and behooved to be Repented of by such of our reformers as had their Ordination at their hands and therefore that Ordination is still valid as to the substance albeit as to the manner it was wrong And if their Ordination had not held valid substantially considered neither could any mans Baptism Baptized in these times by Popish Ministers but behooved to have been done over again as not done before by such as had Authority but that was neither done nor ever thought needful to be done by any of our reformers or any Divine since Nor can this infer as ye would have it in your Quakerism no Popery pag. 89 that we therefore own the Popes Authority seeing to own that were to acknowledge his Papal Supremacy and Usurpation to comply therewith and adhere thereunto which we from our hearts abhorr But all that we in this point assert is that the Pope and his Clergy albeit exceeding corrupt had the Authority of Christs Church in their hands which though by them clogged and corrupted extrinsecally in the conveyance yet retained its Intrinsecal force remaining still valid as to the substance as Water running through a mire mudding it does not lose the Nature of Water substantially though extrinsically it is made Impure Nor can our Ministers be therefore justly called Popes Emissaries as you basely there reproach them seeing their Commission was not upon the Popes Errand but Christs nor was the Authority they had the Popes but Christs Whereas the Popes or Antichrists Emissaries were always understood of these who by his Authority as Pope were sent upon his special Errands through the World to its woful experience of much mischief deceitful Plots most Cruel and Inhumane Massacres and imparallel'd Bloodshed even amongst Turks Heathens and Infidels contrived and practised by them as the only sutable Instruments of a Scarlet dyed whore Drunk with the Blood of the Saints and Martyrs of Jesus But Sir you ask there how the Pope and his Clergy came to have this Authority and power of Ordination in their hands and you alledge he must have it either as Christian or as Antichristian whereupon ye in vain build a heap of needless deductions to prove our Ministry Antichristian pag. 89 90 91 92. But to cut off your long discourse there I must tell you he neither had it as Christian if your reduplication be formal as it ought and as it surely is in the Second member of the distinction or else all Christians would have it A quatenus ad omne c. niether had he it as Antichristian or Antichrist for so he has none of Gods Authority but the Devils plain Commission Nor are these two terms Contradictory but contrary and follows the rules thereof seeing many things and persons too are neither Christian nor Antichristian But I shall shew you a Third viz. He has it and his Clergy also as first Ordained a Presbyter and Minister of the Church before he or they by their Acts and Constitutions can ascend the Papal chair and so they thus having it and not being de facto by any Execution of Law taken from them they can surely Communicate the same so as to be valid I speak of them here as before the Reformation not as they are now to be considered which is another matter but not in the course of my present purpose And for that you say that many of the first Reformers had no outward Ordination or call nor were in Orders it is most false for they had the Peoples Earnest intreaties though but of few such Ministers I read and also the approbation of other Reformers that were in Orders which was equivalent to Ordination though it wanted some of the Solemn rights thereof and these times are to be considered too when the reformed Church was but a constituting out of confusion and darkness So that this will not justifie your Enthusiastick Immediate calls which I know ye here aim at by this But you say pag. 92 93. that the Roman Church did at that time viz. before the Reformation Fundamentally err in worshiping a piece of Bread and her other grosse Idolatries so that she could not be a true Church And so could not have any church-Church-authority for ordaining Gospel-ministers Ans Idolatry is a corruption in worship and practise not an Error in Judgment or principles and it doth not always unchurch Physically and Entitatively as the several grosse Idolatries of the Jewish Church both in the wilderness and in the Land of Judea demonstrat though it exceedingly corrupts Morally and takes away her Moral purity Secondly a fundamental Error may either be Formal and Direct when it is formally and directly held by a Church and then it altogether unchurches them as being quite off the foundation ye Quakers look to this who directly deny all persons in the Godhead Or a fundamental Error may be Consequential and Material only when it is not their direct and formal principle but only by consequence unseen and unperceived by them and which if they saw followed being sincerely Ingenuous they would Renounce that principle it follows from their formal and direct principle And though in this case a Church is not morally pure or true yet it doth not Physically and Entitatively take away the being of a Church from her Transubstantiation doth consequentially destroy Christs humane body and so his humane Nature and denies his coming in the Flesh yet this fundamental error being only Material and Consequential not direct and formal and so not formally such could not unchurch them before the Reformation when the consequence in that darkness was not perceived nor Intended to be held or else the Jewish Church often the Churches of Galatia and many
ye are in and repent if that be possible after ye have so abused the Truths of Jesus and his inheritance Second Section fixing Popery upon the Quakers Having discussed your charge of Popery calumniously 〈◊〉 against us I shall present a true one against you and that very breifly First Therefore for I resolve to adhere to the order of the queries above dispatched It is a Popish rule and a great one too That ignorance is the Mother of Devotion and ye both in those queries Quakerism no Popery pag. 98. are not a jot behind with them in that where ye condemn all means of knowledge both humane and divine and consequently knowledge it self seeing we cannot reach knowledge without the use of the means of knowledge whereby through Gods blessing we may attain unto it for extraordinary Inspiration is now ceased as is proved before nor must we tempt God to work extraordinary miracles and neglect and despise the ordinary means which he had allowed Secondly the Papists deny the Scriptures to have any authority over us or in order to us untill they get it from the Church whereby they mean the Pope and his Clergy and do also deprive the whole body of the people or Laity as they call them of the use of the Scriptures And do not ye also deny the Scriptures to be our rule at least our principal rule and endeavour to cause all men reject them at least as the principal rule Witness the proceeding Queries and your Quakerism no Popery And is not this one dish indifferent dressings for both of you aim to bring the Scriptures low yea to nought without your approbation they without their Pope and Councils approbation yea without the approbation of your light and sentiments within and so both of you agree exactly in subjecting the Scripture-authority to the authority of another rule which Inevitably must be as ye apprehend I am sure in both these articles ye are as like the Pope as any bastard can be like his father Thirdly The Papists and ye agree in denying Infant Baptism an external Christian Sabbath-day and Psalms-singing to be ordinances of Divine Institution under the Gospel they alleadgingthem to be only traditional ye that they are superstitious will 〈…〉 All which things we have seen in your queries Con 〈…〉 faith and Quakerism no Popery Sixthly 〈◊〉 have put three Articles into the last The Papists deny Bread and Wine to be in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper affirming that after the priests consecration it is no more Bread and Wiâ—e but is substantially changed into the very body and blood 〈◊〉 Christ so your brethren divinely Inspired as ye are in their fixth query here mock and scoff at the eating of bread and drinking of wine in that Sacrament making way it seems for that Popish Transubstantiation whereof we are the more confirmed because at the Sixteenth Query as I cleared before they lay down an assertion that cannot stand without the very grounds of that Transubstantiation Seventhly The Papists assert the Infallibility of their Pope and Councils and make that a ground of defence for their Church-constitutions and whole religion rejecting all that want the authority of such Infallible guides So do not you assert the Infallibility of your teachers Albeit often they are rather lunatick and oppose our Confession directory c. upon the very account of the fallibility of these that formed them though to no purpose as is shewed Eightly The Jesuit Papists worse then any of the rest stifly deny original sin and assert universal redemption universal light universal grace free-will in natural unrenewed men unto good and the Apostacy of the Saints all which I have shewed to be contrary to the Scriptures and in all these the Quakers are not a jot behind them but on the contrary do exceedingly out-reach them Fourteenthly For there are six articles in my last charge the same Jesuit Papists hold perfection to be attainable in this life Wherein ye are indeed more positive then they albeit still against the Scriptures as is before proved which shew us that according to Gods way of disposition for the debate depends not on potentia absoluta who will have us here to have a continual war with our corruptions that the victories of his grace may be the more glorious we the more humble and dependant on him Wee shall never here be fully perfect or freed from all corruption And Sir methinks ye strongly savour of supererogation too while ye say Quakerism no Popery Pag. 37.38 that ye can attain a sinless perfection in this life and yet grow in more degrees of grace for Sir when ye are altogether sinless and so neither God nor his law can ask any more of you as not being defective or unconform in a jot or else ye cannot be sinless ye may spare that which ye have more than is required and due to a needful friend or throw it into the Roman-Churches grand treasury of merit and be Canonized next day for a Saint for exceeding your duty and giving that overplus to the Church Fifteenthly Ye hold justification by your inherent righteousness and salvation by the merit of works as much as any Papist nay as the Pope himself does as is shewed Sevententhly for there are two in the last your brethren have endeavoured what they can in your Confession of Faith as we saw before And ye in your Quakerism no Popery Pag. 94 do sweetly also combine to clear the Pope from that reproachful name of Antichrist they alleadging that the Antichrist is our will and the Whore our wisdom that sits upon the same ye affirming that Antichrist more strictly taken is a spirit sitting in mans heart Properly which the Pope certainly is not and so according to you Sir we cannot at least Properly call the Pope Antichrist Ye are understood Sir Eighteenthly Ye hold the Apocryphal books at least many of them to be of divine Inspiration and consequently of equal authority with the Scriptures for every doctrine divinely Inspired is of Infallible divine authority and Scripture assurance or authority can rise no higher And herein Sir ye also joyn with the Papists And when ye ask which is your only argument by what rule of faith we know that these Apocryphal books are not of divine authority or equal to the Scriptures seeing the Scriptures says not whether they are or not I Answer that though by express Scripture sentence or plain positive saying this cannot be cleared yet seeing these books do all of them want Scripture-stile which by the rest of the undoubted Scriptures compared we easily see and they were not found in the original language of the Old Testament and they are never cited in the New Testament and in many of them there are things frivolous written yea quite unsutable and in some of them the writer excuses his failings and they were never accounted any part of Canonical Scripture in the Old Testament-times and this passes without
because it is worthy of a Thousand Deaths for its proud Usurpation we shall reach it some few Blows more in particulari Specie First therefore the principal Rule of Faith and Manners must be Essentially right and Infallible or else we can trust nothing to it with any assurance and all were gone it would mislead and deceive us But the Dictate within every man is not Essentially Right Ergo it is not the principal Rule I prove the Minor because many men have not the Spirit as all unrenewed men Rom. 8.9 1 Joh. 4.13 Jud. 19. and so their Dictate within not proceeding from the Spirit cannot be Essentially Right or the principal Rule of Faith and Manners and this destroys the Quakers Principle that the Dictate within every man is the principal Rule Nor doth the Spirit Teach even Believers by an inward immediate objective Dictate seeing God and Nature do nothing in vain and Beings ought not to be multiplied without some necessity which here there is none that can be shewed for seeing the whole Doctrine of Salvation is abundantly made known in the Scriptures so that our understandings being subjectively Enlightened and our Eyes in any measure opened we may plainly see therein the exactness and purity of the Law the Riches of the Promises and in fine our whole Rule by the good help of other means and Ordinances appointed to further our Instruction and Knowledge in these by opening up and explaining their Doctrine and Sence and so clearing the Object quoad nos or in order to our understanding And what needs then I pray another objective Rule Neither is there any reason for the continuance of the immediate Inspiration of the Doctrine of Salvation in the Church more than all the other extraordinary Gifts which are gone long since the Intire Rule of Faith and Manners being now compleated and publickly Recorded which is as Infallible as any immediate Dictate seeing it is the Word of God that cannot Lie and it is more sure for us than any in regard of the Devils Cunning who can and often does bear in a strong Delusion with so much of seeming Evidence as makes it be received for a Divine Dictate And what needs more George Keith who pleads that the Dictate within is the principal Rule and Touchstone of all Doctrines in his Quakerism no Popery pag. 59. albeit most inconsistently as I think he grants the same Authority to the Scriptures pag. 28 thereof does yield that for all their Infallible Dictate yet its possible for them and that is much indeed both to Speak and Write and so to think too in a mixture Quakerism no Popery pag. 33 that is to say Fallibly for if he means of a Mid-way betwixt Fallibly and Infallibly which I am not yet acquainted with nor ever read it he speaks like a man in a mixture Infallible Contradiction For all the World cannot find me a midst betwixt Fallible and Infallible George Keith then it seems is not Infallibly or immediately Inspired for he can both Speak and Write in a mixture which a man immediatly Inspired cannot be Guilty of Habernus confitentem reum Secondly that cannot be the principal Rule of Faith and Manners which hath no Divine Institution to Warrant it or else it is but an Usurper But the Dictate within every I or any man hath no Divine Institution to Warrant it to be the principal Rule of these or else produce it if they can for all they have hitherto produced shall be Confuted and Answered too when I come to to their Objections Therefore the Dictate within every man or any man is not the principal Rule of Faith and Manners Thirdly a Rule to be examined by another Rule cannot be the principal Rule of Faith and Manners I am sure But the Dictate within all men is such Therefore it is not the principal Rule of Faith and Manners The Minor I prove from Isai 8.20 To the Law and to the Testimony says the Text if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no Light in them where all Dictates or Doctrines of Faith and Manners are very expresly commanded to be Tryed and examined by the Scripture and if they agree not with that not to receive them seeing so there is no Light in them they are but Dictates of Darkness And again George Keith Confesses that all Doctrines and Principles of Christian Religion are to be applyed to the Scriptures as a Test and Touchstone in all external Debates and Disputations whatsoever and if they agree not therewith to be denied and disowned for ever Quakerism no Popery pag 28. and so the Scriptures are a Superiour Rule to the Dictate within if it be a Doctrine of the Christian Religion seeing it must be examined by these as a Test and Touchstone and rejected if it agree not therewith I can say no more than is dropt twixt sleeping and waking perhaps from the Pen of an Adversary Fourthly the Scriptures we have seen before are the principal Rule of Faith and Manners positively Ergo the Dictate within cannot be such a Rule The Consequence is plain seeing two Rules each of them positively principal are repugnant for so each of them should be above and below the other Fifthly if the Dictate within be the principal Rule of Faith and Manners then we must either follow its Directions absolutely and without Questioning or Trying them or else conditionally only that they be right if conditionally only then we must examine them by some other Rule to know if they be right or not and so they are not the principal Rule against the supposition nor Infallible seeing an Infallible Rule needs no Superior Rule to be examined by being it self Essentially right If then we must follow the directions of the Dictate within absolutely and without any Tryal then he whose Dictate within prompts him to think that Christ has not two distinct Natures or that he has two distinct Persons aswel as Natures or that he is not Co-eternal Co-equal and Co-substantial with the Father or First person or that his Sufferings and Death was not a Satisfaction for our Sins or that God is a Corporeal Being subject to all humane Passions or that in the Eucharist the Bread is substantially Changed into the Body of Christ or that the Pope is Infallible and so a great Quaker or else each of them a small Pope or that we are not Justified by the Righteousness of the Redeemer I say all of these and other such deluded Hereticks must absolutely follow these Principles as their principal Rule And if the Dictate within bid a man Worship the Sun and Moon and Idols of Gold and Silver worship the Devil and cut his own Throat too he is bound to obey his Rule There is nothing can be answered to these things but this viz. That these and such like evil Directions cannot proceed from the Spirit of God but allanerly from a mans own self and the Devil But
not Authority to feed the Flock and edifie the Body of Jesus from his own Word in the nearest method and have they not Authority to furnish and guard their People against damnable Delusions and Soul-ruining Errors in the most easie and successful manner they can If they have not Authority for and be not bound to do these things then they have not Authority for nor are they bound to do any thing Let all the Quakers in Britain answer but one mouthful of sence to it if Ministers whose Office must continue in the Church to the end of the World and till that day when all the Saints shall be compleatly perfected Matth. 28.19 20. Ephes 4.11 12 13. be not given to the Church for the very forementioned ends and if these be not the Incumbent Works of their Office But it 's vain to demand an answer which can never be found or sence from these who Impugning Grammar declare themselves Enemies to Sencespeaking And have not the Quakers also published a Confession of their black Faith Entituled The Principles of Truth viz. Per Antiphrasin for they should have said of Falshood Fiction Error Blasphemy and Calumnies printed in the year 1668. and we have also seen several of their sweet Catechisms But say the Quakers Is not the Doctrine of Christian Religion as good in the Scriptures as in any Confession or Catechism Ans Yes no doubt but what of that will that infer any thing against a Confession or Catechism in a Church whereby that good Doctrine of the Scriptures may be more speedily and distinctly learned I would rather think that the better the Doctrine of the Scriptures is the means contributing to our more ready and distinct learning thereof should be the more useful and warrantable So unfortunate are the Quakers that their own Weapons turns upon themselves Observe that this Objection of the Quakers if it could have proved any thing at all would have Militated as much against all Preaching as against a Confession or Catechism Hence though the Scriptures be a better Book than any Confession or Catechism in the World as formally Constituted by Ecclesiastical Authority yet a Confession or Catechism are not therefore unlawful or unwarrantable in a Church as I think is clear enough from what I have said But say the Quakers Whether or not have ye an Infallible Spirit to give forth such a Directory Confession and Catechism as ye have done Ans Hereby the Quakers refuse that any Man may direct according to the Scripture the External Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship or that any Man may Catechize or give an Account or Confession of his Faith which every Man in due Circumstances is bound to do Matth. 10.32 33. Rom. 10.9 10. 1. Pet. 3.15 but much more a Church partly for satisfaction to other Churches partly for distinguishing Orthodox Churches from Heretical Synagogues and partly for a short and clear publick Test of the Principles of her own Members except he be Infallible which any Man may see to tend to the banishing of all these Duties out of the World seeing there is no Man now adays Infallibly Inspired for such things But what great need I pray is there of Mens Infallibility in this Affair They are not to assure their Doctrine from their own Infallibility but from the Infallible Scripture shall not that be sufficient to assure it I cannot but think so To the Law and to the Testimony then instead of your Inspired Parts What should be answered to the last Article of their Query is manifest from what we have said already concerning a Directory and it 's needless to repeat Tenth QUERY Whether or not is your Sanctification your Justification and your Faith and Grace the gifts of these without sin as they are manifested within you Yea or Nay SVRVEY Here is an obscure Riddle a dark Aenigma which where to find the sence of is a little difficult but if it hath any sence they seem to Query Whether or not our Justification Sanctification c. be the gifts of our Directory Confession and Catechism whereof they were last speaking in the preceeding Query But what that term Without Sin stands for here is not easily Divined nor can it have any Errand or Connexion with the present Question and therefore I must throw it by as an insignificant and no less impertinent Cipher I answer therefore to their present Question That our Justification Sanctification c. are the Gifts of God only Rom. 8.32 33. Ephes 2.8 Jam. 1.17 and that the Question is void of sence seeing the bestowing of a gift is an action properly relative to an Intelligent Being for we do not receive gifts from Stocks Stonee or Brutes Notwithstanding this does not presently exclude the use of all ordinary means for their meaning in this Query is plain that our Justification Sanctification c. cannot be the gifts of God but must be the gifts of our Confession Catechism c. because forsooth we make use of these as ordinary means allowed of God for their proper ends above described For albeit our Corns be not the gifts of our Ploughs and Harrows nor the continuance of our Lives the gifts of our Food and Raiment but all these things are the gifts of God yet we may not lay aside all Ploughing and Harrowing and the Quakers I believe will not reject Food and Raiment Let them therefore either permit us the use of Confessions Directories and other inferior helps and means conducible in their own order or else by their own example persuade the world if they can never to Plough or Sow more never to Eat or Drink more This is enough for Answer to this Query which comes in but by way of Objection and Cavillation Eleventh QUERY Whether or not your Directory and Catechism and Confession of Faith be Gospel Yea or Nay and if so Whether it be not another Gospel than that which the Apostles Preached who said the Gospel was the Power of God Rom. 1.16 SVRVEY I have above at the Survey of the Ninth Query abundantly justified our Directory in the general as was there explained and proved that God hath given Warrant and Authority to Church-Guides and Judicatories for Making and Constituting these according to the general Precepts of Scripture for maintaining Order and Decency and promoting Edification in the Church and therefore I shall not here needlesly repeat any thing to that purpose Only I shall take notice that seeing the Quakers oppose these things they therefore declare that it is their mind that Church-Officers and Judicatories should not give Obedience to Gods Commands should slight Order and Decency and the Churches Edification There is the new-coined Directory of the Quakers let all Men judge if it be not an Instrument of the Devil But for Answer to their Query I say That there are several Rules in our Directory that materially considered are very Scripture-Rules particularly delivered therein as I shewed before at the Survey of the
others since had been quite unchurched when yet they were not for their Consequential fundamental Errors But Sir the Case is now hugely alter'd and the Scene changed after that our Reformers have by vive Demonstration shewed the Papists their Clergy at least the unavoidable Consequence who yet still pertinaciously hold the principle which it cannot be conceived how they can do it in such Circumstances of shining Light without allowing the Consequence also There is also a vast difference betwixt the Papist-Church now and before the Council of Trent when many Errors that were before that but taught or held by some particular persons greater or smaller but not turn'd into a Law are now by publick Consent and Constitution of their Canon or Church-law become their universal and Church-profession as she is such a Church viz. Popish And this makes her Guilty now in her very publick and stated Notion of such a Church and the Errors if Fundamental which now I meddle not with because I need not quite Unchurches whereas the other of particular persons cannot do it or else no Church could be long in safety It may be ye will retort this in what I said concerning Consequential-Scripture above viz. that if the Terms Material and Consequential be diminutive as here is said then Consequential-Scripture will not be of equal Authority with that formally and expresly Taught But there is no parity of reason for this Consequence seeing men do not always see or perceive what follows from the Principles they hold nor frequently would they if they saw it hold or own such Principles But God cannot be Guilty of Ignorance but sees most perfectly all that follows from every Principle and therefore every Consequence of his Word is as much by him intended and so is as much of Divine Authority as that which is most expresly and formally therein Enunciated There is no place here then for a Retorsion Having Discussed this head I come to your following Libel of Popery against us charged in your Twelfth Section of that Book of yours often named Where first ye charge us with Popery in Asserting the three Persons in the Godhead and a Trinity But in this the Scriptures are as Popish from which I have proved the three Persons in the Deity And the Concrete also of the word Trinity is in the Scripture 1 Joh. 5.7 and it is the only abstract thereof But the Quakers are herein Blasphemous and quite off the Foundation too for if the Attributes of God and persons in the Godhead be not Fundamental nothing can be such Your Ordination would surely be a meer Nullity Secondly ye alledge we are Popish in affirming of Original Sin in Infants who have not sinned Actually and Thirdly because we deny your universal Grace Ans Indeed your Principles in both these are Jesuitically Popish and Jesuits are the worst of Papists both in their Erroneous Principles and Bloody Practices for ye and they both joyn exactly in these against the Scripture as I have before fully proved Fourthly ye say we are Popish in affirming that humane Learning and Natural Parts are more essential qualifications of a Minister then the Grace of God Ans Sir I described a Minister for these of your Profession before and ye needed not have done it over again for still I see ye would have an ignorant nay unnatural Dunce I have known men but moderately Learn'd be Ministers with us because of their Piety and fit Faculty for exhorting But a man utterly void of Learning and Natural Parts too that 's an Idiot I think cannot in an ordinary Method and we cannot now upon any ground of Scripture look for extraordinary Inspiration to supply such wants be fit to Teach for how shall a man Teach others that which he knows not himself a man of great Gifts though really wanting Grace may be able to Instruct and Teach others as Judas and many others have done but a man void of Gifts and Knowledge though he have Grace cannot do it And herein we are not Popish seeing the Scriptures shew that some without Grace have been Ministers and called by Christ himself to that Office but requires that none without Gifts be admitted thereunto 1. Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1.9 Fifthly ye say we are Popish because our Ministerial Authority is transmitted by external Ordination from Age to Age and that this makes a Minister though he have no Inward call who is thereby Authorized Ans The first was in the Apostles time practised viz. The transmitting of Ministerial Authority by Ordination Act. 14.23 1 Tim. 4.14 2 Tit. 1.5 and for the second it gives him Ministerial Authority and so makes him a Minister surely nor is the Church obliged or capable to know his Inward Call without which his Ministerial Acts are still valid None of these are any ways Popish I am sure not the first for the Scriptures Cited nor yet the second for the reason given Sixthly ye alleadge we are Popish in affirming that Clergy-men ought to be distinguisht from others by their Black Coats so that it is not Lawful for honest Tradesmen such as the Apostles were to Preach who have not past their Apprenticeship at the University Ans For the Clergy their wearing of Black Coats I never learnt that our Church made it necessary and another Garb not Gaudy unlawful but that they accounted it the Gravest and most sutable I acknowledge and I do not think it Popish to be Grave As for the Apostles Preaching who were some of them before Tradesmen they were immediately Called and Inspired which now adays cannot be look'd for as is shewed in our Survey Nor is it Popish to refuse men the Pulpit who can do no good in it for they must be apt to Teach that get that by Scripture Command Seventhly ye alleadge we are Popish because we study our Sermons before we come to the Pulpit and does not wait till the Spirit come Ans do ye think Sir that a Minister of the Gospel should not both by prayer reading and serious meditation prepare himself before he come to Preach to the people And is it Popish if he do viz. Paul exhorted Timothy to be a Papist 1 Tim. 4.13 14 15. When he enjoyned him to read much and meditate much for the increase of his gifts that his profiting might appear to all But Sir what makes your Spirit Study so much for they say to me he will Study sometimes a whole day almost for the wrabling out of a quarter of an hours non-sense It may be he is a Papist and I very much fear it be too true Eightly ye alleadge we are Popish because our Ministers have a modified or set stipend for their maintenance Ans But pray you Sir was the Law of God ordaining the Tenths for the Tribe of Levi Popish too It s true that Law as peculiar to that Church is expired but the Common equity thereof is still a binding example and pattern for the Peoples incouraging of