constant Method in regard they come naked without any Miracles to attest them for when did God ever send any new Doctrine and did not also give the Preachers thereof a Power of Working Miracles c Answ. This all depends upon the word New New Revelations and New Doctrines which â— have before shewed to be a Mistake and that we are not concerned therein if by Nâ—w Doctrines he means such Doctrines as are essâ—ntial to Salvation we do not pretend or expect to have any New Gospel or such New Doctrines revealed to us but we say the Good Old Gospel and the Doctrines of it which were of old revealed to the Apostles and Saints in the first Ages of Christianity and which are declared of in the Scriptures of Truth are now after the long Night of thick Darkness which hath covered the Earth and that general Apostacy wherein all the World wondred after and worshipped the Beast and the Inhabitants of the Earth were made drunk with the Wine of the Fornication of the great Whore of which all Nations had drunk again revealed by the same Spirit which Christ promised to send to his Disciples to be in them to teach them all things to guide them into all Truth to take of his and shew it unto them and to abide with them forever the Spirit of Christ being still free in his manifold Discoveries and Revelations beyond Utterance the highest Degree whereof is in no wise repugnant to those Essential Truths declared of in Scripture And it is observable that although the Gospel was preached in Demonstration and Power by the Apostles and Disciples in the Beginning and that too universally yet Iohn in his Vision of the future State of the Church saw the Gospel preacht again by an Angel flying in the midst of Heaven thereby intimating that the Gospel should be preached in the Demonstration of the Spirit and Power after the â—postacy as well as it had been before Yet we read not of any Miracles he wrought though he was an Angel Yet in the next page he has another fling at New Revelations which he sayes do manifestly contradict the Faith of the primitive Christians Answ. To this I shall not need to say much Let them look to it whom it concerns That it concerns not us I have already shewed The Faith which we have received is the same with that of the primitive Christians the Author of it is the same the Finisher of it the same and we have received it after the same manner that they received it of old namely by the Gift of God But other Gospel then that which they had we do not expect Again in pag. 106 107. Upon his old Text of new Revelations he runs into an Extravagant Vein of Rayllery charging us with Falshood Rayling Nonsense and Blasphemy that we would bring the World into Egyptian Darkness and all this and much more for a Dream a meer Fancy a Miserable Mistake c. that we follow a False and Fantastick Light and adore a Lye for divine Revelation c. Answ. In this Case what fitter Answer can be given then that which Michael gave the Devil The Lord Rebuke thee Unhappy Man whom nothing less would satisfie then to dash himself against that Stone which if it fall upon him will dash him to pieces 〈…〉 enough that he hath reviled and vilified â—s throughout his whole Book but he must also blaspheme the Light of the Son of God and the Operaâ—ion of the Holy Ghost in calling the one a False Fantastick Light and the other a Lye Well let him remember that the Apostle hath said He that despiseth despiseth not Man but God who hath also given unto us his good Spirit And let him beware of persisting in this Course lest he bring on himself an irreversible Doom which he may read Mat. 12.31 32. Yet would not this man for all this be thought to deny all Revelation neither For sayes he I own those Revelations which are upon Record in the holy Bible which iâ— the Word of God wherein he hath revealed his Will to the Church c. pag. â—07 Answ. He seems not rightly to understand Revelation but rather to have taken in some strange Notion concerning it I would gladly know of him how he would be understood when he sayes God has revealed his Will to the Church in the Holy Bible He sayes The Letter is not the Word but the Sense pag. 96. Does he mean then that this Sense is so revealed in the Bible that he that reads the Letter though he hath no Assistance therein but only his own natural Understanding shall be sure to find the true Sense and understand the Will of God This his words import Yet this he cannot reasonably intend if he will consist with himself because he else-where not only urges the Necessity of Humane Learning but also confesses the Spirit doth help them to understand the Scriptures and that they therefore pray for his Assistance therein pag. 103. But if he means that the Will of God is so revealed in the Scriptures that they can understand it with the Help and Assistance of the Spirit but not without which is the fair import of confessing the Spirit doth help and praying for its Assistance therein what else then I pray is this but to say They can understand the Will of God in the Scriptures when the Spirit revealeth it unto them but not otherwise For if they could understand the Will of God without the Help of the Spirit in vain do they invoke his Assistance but if they cannot understand the Will of God in the Scriptures without the Help of the Spirit and therefore implore his Assistance that shews the Necessity of the Spirit 's Teaching and if the Spirit vouchsafe his Help and do open and make known the Will of God to them that is Revelation How egregiously absurd then it is for this man to exclaim as he does against Revelation who upon his own Principle cannot understand the Will of God without it let the Reader judge But he charges the Quakers with saying The Bible is a Dead Letter but the Word of God is Quick and Powerful so is not the Bible p. 107. Answ. The Word Bible signifies a Book and the Book or Bible the Priests call the Word of God This Man called it so but just now I own said he those Revelations which are upon Record in the Holy Bible which is the Wâ—rd of God pag. 107. Hereupon to shew them how grosly they mistake they have been sometimes asked How it can be that the Bible should be tâ—e â—ord of God seeing the Word of God is quick and powerful and the Bible or Bookâ— a Dead Letter Some of them being by this a little awakened to avoid the Absuâ—dity tell us They do not 〈◊〉 can that the Letter is the Word of God but the Sense so says this man p. 96. But why then do they mean one
an Equality with God although he was in his Similitude He was made in the Likeness of God not equal to him But if no other Instance of this could be given yet Adam's Capacity of sinning which the divine Nature is utterly insusceptible of was a sufficient Taken of his Inequality Hence â—infer Thâ—â— to aim at and prâ—ss after a State of being in this Life delivered from Sin and by the Mighty Power of God preserved from the Act Commission and Guilt of Sin which is what we intend by the word Perfection is no Presumption no â—â—â—yâ—ng Perfections no aspiring to an Equality with the divine Majesty And verily Reader I cannâ—t but upon this Occasion expresâ— the Serâ—â— of my own Heart simply and nakedlâ— T is the â—elief of my Heart that the Loâ—d is to far 〈◊〉 being offended with any for sincerely pâ—â—ssiâ—g aâ—ter this State of Holiness 〈…〉 he loves his Children so much the more by how much the more they 〈◊〉 him herein and sure I am then 〈◊〉 come out of sin and Iniquity the more they grow up iâ— Righteâ—uâ—ness and true Holiness the nearer tâ—ey approach unto his Likeness and bear the more of his Image whiâ—â— even this Priest in words will allow saying Though we cannot equal which we aim not at yet we may imitate the divine Perfections and that indeed we press after But he attempts to illustrate his meaning by a familiar instance as he calls it A writing Master sits his Schollar a Câ—py wâ—â—h a Charge to imitate iâ— you must 〈◊〉 constâ—ue his meaning to be such that he must frame his Letters according to the Form of those Characters which are set before him and not that he expects he should write according to the Perfection of his Copy Answ. Let me now shew him that his instance as familiar as he thinks it 〈…〉 Way apt to his purpose for the Writing Master if he be ingenuous and honest not only expects but endeavours also what in him lies that his Schollar may arrive to the Perfection of the Copy and this the Scholar oftentimes doth yea sometimes outdoes or excels at least is capable of so doing But this is no way predicable of man in his imitation of divine Perfections his instance therefore is unapt to the Business but if he will grant me that Sin Iniquity and Transgression are the Stains the Blots the Blurs of man's Life and also that it is possible for a Scholar to keep his Lines strait and to write fairly without Blots and Blurs though he should mise of that lively vigour and sprightfulnâ—ss which appears in the Letters of his Master's Copy I shall not think it an uneasie matter even from his own instance to infer a possibility of living without Sin Before I pass from this Place there are two or three Scriptures which my Opponent hath quoted I suppose to corroborate or strengthen his instance which seem to me so pertinent to my Purpose that I am willing to transcribe them out of his Book into mine and let the Reader make what use of them he pleases they are brought in thus Therefore sayes he Christ tells us John 13. â—5 That he hath given us an Example to do as he hath done that is saith the Priest to purifie our selves as he is pure 1 John 3.3 to walk as he walked and to be holy in all manner of conversaâ—ion bâ—cause he was so What is this less then an Vnsinning State But I proceed From the former instance we must now go to instances of another kind for to that Pass is the world now come that although the necessity of this State of being preserved out of Sin be evidently demonstrated the Advantages accrewing therefrom clearly set forth and the Commands requiring it plainly produced yet so prevalent are the Baits of Lust and sinful Pleasures on the degenerate Minds of men and so long have they been nursâ—d up in a Perswasion that they can never be freed from Sin on this Side the Grave that rather then they will believe a Possibility of Deliverance in this Life they wiâ—l not stick to reflect an Uncertainty on the holy Scriptures as if they meant not what they express and call for proofs of another kind Examples namely and instances of some in Ages past who have attained this State of Freedom and yet when instances of this kind are given such and so great is the incredulity of men in this Case especially that they will hardly admit those instances to have been what in holy Scripture they are declared to be thus deals this man with us The Instances brought in his Book are Noah Job and David three good men doubtless Of Noah the Testimony of the holy Ghost is That he was just and perfâ—ct in his Generation and that he walked with God Of Iob that he was perfect and upright and that he feared God and eschewed Evil. Of David that he was a man after God's own Heart Acts 13.22 Now to blemish Noah's Perfection the Priest objects that he was drunk and uncovered in his Tent Gen. 9.20 21. Answ. Noah walked with God before this and I will not stick to say after this also this I grant was his Sin and while he was in his Sin while he was drunk he did not walk with God what was his State then while he did walk with God both before and after this did he ever fall into Sin again let the Accuser of the Brethren charge him with Evil if he can To stain the beauty of Iob's Perfection he objects that Iob in one Place confesseth I have sinned and in another saith Behold I â—m vilâ— Job 7.20 40.4 Answ. The 1 st I have sinned speaks of a time past not present The 2 d. I am vile doth not imply that he was sinful for although the word vile is often used in English to signifie wicked yet the Latine Word vilis doth not properly signifie wicked or sinful but Cheap Mean Small of little Account c. therefore we find in Scripture that where the Word vile is used to signifie wicked or sinful it is not taken from vilis but from scelestus fâ—â—gitâ—sus foedus c. us in Iudges 19.24 Do not so vile a thing Ierome reads it Ne Scelus hoâ— opereâ—ini Tremel Ne facite quicquam hujus Flagitij So Isa. 32.6 A vile Person will speak Villany Tremel hath itâ— Flagiticsus dicâ—tur flagitium eloquens Again Rom. 1.26 God gave them up unto vile Affections Bâ—za reads it Tradidit cos Deus foeâ—â—s Affâ—ctibus but when vile is used to denote â—â—an low of small Account c. it is taken from vilis humilis or the like as in 〈◊〉 15 9. Every thing that was vile and â— fuse that they utterly destroyed Ierom. has i. Qâ—â—quid vero vile fuit et reprobum hoâ— demolâ—â—â— sunâ— So 2 Sam. 6.22 I will be yet more vile then thus In Ierome it is Vilior fiam plusquam factus sum Lament 1.11 I am become
thing and speak another But if the Letter be not the Word of God how can the Bible be the Word of God seeing the Bible is only the Book wherein the Letter is written Yet does this man so confound and jumble them together that it is hard to know what at last he intends to be the Word of God One while he sayes it is not the Letter but the Sense that is the Word of God by and by he sayes The Bible is the Word of God as if he took the Bible in which the Letter is written to be the Sense of the Letter for he makes the Bible and the Sense of the Letter to be one and the same thing namely the Word of God But the Word of God which is quick and powerful he appears to be a Stranger to But he asks Whence we know that the Word of God is Quick and Lively Answ. By Experience For though he being with the Iews in the Unbelief has never peradventure heard the Voice of God at any time yet blessed be the Lord we have and when the Lord hath spoken in us we have felt his Word living and powerful discerning and discovering the Most Secret Thoughts and Intents of our Hearts But this Answer I conclude will not answer his End He has fitted an Answer to his own Design and put it into his Parishioner's Mouth to speak as for us which is That We learn out of the Bible that the Word of God is Quick and Lively Whereupon as apprehending some Advantage he layes about him with all his Might What! sayes he Out of that Bible which they call a Dead Letter and so goes on for three or four pages together in such an insulting strain as if he had gotten some petty Conquest and were now riding in Triumph But a Wise Man would have defer'd his Boasting until he had put his Armour off That the Bible barely as it is a Book is a Dead Thing that the Scriptures barely as Writings are Dead Letters none I think that considers what he sayes and dareâ— put his Name to it will deny But sayes he Though the Leaves and Letters have no Natural Life in them is therefore the Sense of the Scriptures dead No say I The true Sense and Meaning of the Scriptures is not dead But that Sense which man by his Natural Understanding and Humane Learning only doth invent and form to himself as if he had it from the Scriptures is dead for the true Sense and Meaning of the Scripture is received and understood in by the Openings and Revelation of the Divine Spirit and not otherwise Now we never call the Scriptures a dead Letter in disâ—respect to or dis-esteem of the Scriptures but to manifest the Mistake and Error of those who think it sufficient that they have the Scriptures although they dâ—ny the Revelation of the Spirit by which alone the true Sense and Meaning of the Scriptures can be understood And though the Scriptures without the Spirit be a Dead Letter yet being opened explained applyed and the true Sense of them given by the Spirit they are then truly serviceable and profiâ—able for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction in Righteousness and may be so used by them that are led and guided by the Spirit without any of those Absurdities which this man irreligiously would fasten on them Besides when the Bible is called a Dead Letter it is as in his Book in Opposition to them that call it the Word of God as this Man expresly doth in the very same page 107 though to his own Contradiction he had said but a few Leaves before pag. 96. It is not the Letter but the Sense that is the Word of God So that although he will not have the Letter to be the Word of God but the Sense yet by an incomparable Piece of Ignorance and Self-contradiction he will have the Bible or Book to be the Word of God as if the Book wherein the Letter it written were the Sense of the Letter Thus all his great Bluster and Vapour against others ends in the Detection of his own Confusion He sayes pag. 112. To look for more Revelations or a Repetition of the former would be equally an Act of Impudence and Infidelity Why of Impudence and Infidelity He replies Would it not be an Act of Infidelity not to believe God when he plainly tells us that the Scriptures themselves are able to make us wise unto Salvation through Faith c. and to furnish us throughly to all good Works Answ. He corrupts the Scripture Where doth God plainly tell him that the Scriptures themselves are able c This word themselves he puts in of his own Head and yet sayes God tells us plainly that the Scriptures themselves are able c. wherein he speaks Untruth of God If this be not Infidelity yet it looks as like Impudence as I have seen If the Scriptures themselves were able to make wise unto Salvation through Faith c. there were then no Need of the Help of the Spirit But I have already shewed that unless the Spirit reveal and open them the Scriptures themselves cannot be rightly understood And he himself in saying The spirit doth help them to understand them and that they pray for its Assistance therein pag. 103. doth implicitly acknowledge as much But if there be a Necessity of the spirit 's Teaching in order to a right understanding of the Scriptures then it is evident that the Scriptures themselves are not able to make wise c. without the Help and Assistance i. e. the Teaching and Revelation of the Spirit Whether then it can be an Act of Infidelity to expect that which there is so great a Necessity of that men cannot be wise unto Salvation without it I leave to the Reader 's Judgment Nay let it be well considered seeing Christ hath plainly and expresly told us That he will send the Comforter the spirit of Truth to his Disciples that this spirit shall be in them and shall abide with them forever that he shall testifie of Christ that he shall take of Christ's and shew it unto them that he shall teach them all things and guide them into all Truth as appears in the 14 15 16. Chapters of Iohn I say let it be well considered whether it is not an Act of Infidelity in any who profess themselves to be Christ's Disciples not to believe and expect the Performance of this so absolute a Promise Thus far as to the Infidelity of expecting to have the Truths formerly revealed to the Saints revealed now to us by the same spirit by which they were then revealed unto them which I take to be the Meaning of that Phrase of his a Repetition of the former Revelations Now to the Act of Impudence for he sayes To look for a Repetition of the former Revelations would be equally an Act of Impudence and Infidelity And is it not an Act of Impudence sayes he
Truth Prevailing And Detecting ERROR OR An ANSWER to a Book mis-called A Friendly Conference between a Minister and a Parishioner of his inclining to Quakerism c. By Thomas Ellwood Isa 54.17 No Weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper and every Tonguè that shall rise against thee in Iudgment thou shalt condemn This is the Heritage of the Servants of the Lord and their Righteousness is of me saith the Lord. Printed in the Year 1676. THE PREFACE Reader THere came lately to my Hand a little Book bearing the Title of A Friendly Conference c. which having turned over I found the Drift and Design of it was to infame the People called Quakers by representing their Principles absurd and heterodox mis-stating some and with sophistical Arguments perverting and opposing others This when I had observed I held my self concerned to vindicate those Truths which we believe and make Profession of from the Absurdities and Errors which the Author of that Book partly through Ignorance but principally through Envy hath endeavoured to fasten on them This is the Occasion and Subject of the following Discourse which I recommend to thy serious and impartial Perusal Who the Author of the Conference was I did not know when I wrâ—â— the Answer to it he not having so much Ingenuity 〈◊〉 to say 〈…〉 as to 〈◊〉 his Name to his Book But after the Answer had a good part passed the Press I received Information concerning the concealed Author both Who and What he is his Name Place c. which I forbear at preâ—ent to publish in Expectation that he himself should do it in his next If he persist a lurking Adversary let him nâ—t think much if after so fair a Warning I give the World his Name with such an 〈◊〉 as his unmanly Dealing with us deserves He writes himself A Lover of the Truth But seeing Truth seeks no Corners what should induce him to conceal his Name If he indeed believed that to be Truth which he undertook to maintain he needed not to have been either afraid or ashamed to have openly avouched it Although I do not think men strictly tyed in all Cases to affix their Names to whatsoever they write yet in Matters of Controversie especially wherein one man shall accuse or charge another Man or People I conceive the Opponent in point of Honesty obliged to give hâ—â— Name as a Caution or Security for making good hâ—â— Charge or giving Satisfaction to the Party injured in case he fail in his Proof Certainly this way of striking in the dark thâ—s skulking way of writing Controversâ—es is very disingenuoâ—â— unfair and unmanly fitter for Fâ—ux with hâ—s Dark-Lanthorn then for one that pretends to be a Minister of the Gospel But leaving the Author for this time to hug himself in the dark and delight in his own Obscurity I shall offer two or three short hints relating to the Book it self 1. Some of the more minute and less material Passages in the Conference I have purposely omitted that I might have more scope without swelling this Book into too great a Bulk more largely to insist on and freely handle those things which are indeed of greater Weight and Moment 2. In those Cases wherein I have had occasion to use the Testimonies of Ancient Authors I have been necessitated for want of some of the Books themselves which in the Country I knew not how to procure to take some few Quotations upon trust from others yet not without great Caution in the Choice of those Quotations for I assure thee Reader I would rather choose to lay them all wholely aside then knowingly to obtrude one wrong one upon thee 3. The first Chapter may peradventure seem not so much defensive as offensive relating more particularly to that Ministry whereof my Opponent professes himself a Member But let it be considered that the Suâ—ject wâ—s not of my choosing but his proposing whose Method and Matter I am in some sort obliged as a Respondent to observe THE CONTENTS Chap. I. OF the present Ministry The Cause of the Peoples not profiting inquired Some Reasons of it given page 1. Chap. II. Of using the Word Thou to a Single Person p. 27. Chap. III. Of Titles and Civil Respects as they are called p. 31. Chap. IV. Of Confession p. 50. Chap. V. Of Perfection p. 54. Chap. VI. Of Swearing p. 100. Chap. VII Of Taking Texts Studying Sermons and Selling them to the People p. 196. Chap. VIII Of Humane Learning Divine Inspiration and Revelation p. 205. Chap. IX Of Tythes p. 277. ERRATA THe Reader is desired before he reads the Book to correct with his Pen the following Mistakes of the Press Others of less moment as Mis-pointings Mis-placing of Letters and the like a friendly Eye it is hoped will overlook or excuse Page 20. line 16. for ever read even p. 24 l. 7. f. more r. move p. 28 l. 3. f spoken to r. spoke unto lin 12. f. answered r. as we read p. 33 l. 24. f mistake r. mis-state p 40. l. 10 f. same now r. same Now. p. 65. l. 3. f that e did r. that he did p 72 l. 20 f. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 77. l. 1. afteâ— this add sense p. 86 l. 13. f wo r. who p. 111. l. 2 f. that r shot p. 114. l. 25 f to r. so p 115. l 25. f Ambassadour r. Ambassadours p. 116. l. 22. f. I for cannot r. for I cannot p. 130. l. 8. f. lib. 72 r lib 7. l. 13. f. takest r. takes it p. 131. l. 4. f. degenerate r derogate p. 132. l. 26. after saith r. my p. â—37 l 5. f. commanded r commended pag. 149. l. 26 f. Quakeos r. Quakers p. 154. l. 25. f margent r. margin p 158. l. 21. f. against r. upon p 164 l. 29. f aid r. said p. 179. l. 23. r. prohibition pag 202 l. 7. deâ—e and. p. 205. l. 2. r. inspiration p. 209. l. 7. f. pricipal r principal p. 218 l. 11. f. we are far r we are so far pag 237. l 3. f. discover r. discovered p. 240. l. 14 f. concerned r. concerning pag. 257. l. 10 f having r. have lin 21. f. for r from p. 259. l. 26. dele his p. 260. l. 8 9. f. ye speak r. yet spake CHAPTER I. Of the present Ministry The Cause of the Peoples not profiting inquired Some Reasons of it given THE Nameless Author of the ill-named Friendly Conference to lay a Foundation for his Discourse causes his Parishioner to report that At a Quakers Meeting a notable Speaker propounded this to the Consciences of the Heaâ—ers Whether any among them could affirm that he had received any Spiritual Advantage by his long frequenting of the Steeple-houses Whether this Question was ever really thus proposed in any of the Quakers Meetings is not my present Business to inquire But seeing it is now propounded after such a manner and that by one who terms himself a Minister I cannot but desire
that the Scribes and Pharisees were got into Moses's Chair not into Aaron's Now Moses was the Civil Magistrate the Judge or Ruler but Aaron was more pâ—operly the Priest but take it in his Sense the Chair for the Pulpit and see his Inference Our Saviour he saith gives the People an Eternal Document how to behave themselves when such Teachers fall to their Share An Eternal Document What 's that To do sayes he whatsoever they bid them nay hold there we have had too much of that already England hath not yet forgot since the Scribes and Pharisees of Rome sate in the Chair here and were forward enough to bid but were the good Men of that Age as ready to observe and do No no Our godly Martyrs by his leave held not that Document to be eternal as Smithfield can amply witness And within our own Memory that Chair as he understands it was possest by another Sort of Pharisâ—es who I am apt to think were readier to bid then ever thiâ— man himself was to observe for all his Eternal Document But Reader consider well if God for a Scourge to this provoking Nation should once more suffer the Pope to repossess that Chair how fit an Instrument would this man be to lead the People into Popery by tâ—â—ling them Christ hath given them this eternal Document that whensoever such Teachers fall to their share they must observe and do whatsoever those Teachers shall bid them to observe then they must receive the Sacrament of â—he Altar then worship the Host then pray to Saints then pray for the dead then adore Images burn Tapers and what not nay if the Emaums which are the Turkish Priests could get into this Chair I see no Remedy upon this man's Principle but Mahomet must be worshipped but to go on He tells us he is to look at the Water not at the Conduit through which it is conveyed page 15. Answ. But if a man see the Conduit be smeered with Mire and Dirt will he choose or is it reasonable he should be tyed to drink the Water that issues therefrom when he may as well have it from a cleaner Again he brings the Apostles's Words we have this Treasure in earthen Vessells that the Excellency of the Power may be of God and not of us Answ. Bâ—t â—ad they this Treasure in filthy Vessels no doubtless for no Excellency could thence have redounded to God Earthen Vessels denote Meaness but are capable of being clean as well as Silver But what saith he do you think of Judas and Nicholas the Deacon Answ. I think Iudas was bad enough he was one that sold his Master for Money yet as bad as he was and as well as he loved the Bag he did not intrude himself as it seems some Priâ—sts for corrupt Interests now adayes do but he was choâ—en and had obtained part of the Ministry from which by â—ransgression he fell Now will this Priest say thâ—t Iudas after he had this transgrâ—ssed and fallen should if he had lived have continued in the Mininistry if he saith yes then may all People see what manner of Ministry this Priest is pleading for If he saâ—â—s No I thence infer that if the Ministers be Corrupt and Wicked the People are so far from being bound to hear them that they ought to turn from them and deny them As for Nicholas the Deacon his Office was bâ—â— to serve Tables to take Care of the Widdows c. He was chosen to be Overseer of the Poor and is no where that I remember in holy Scripture taxed with any scandalous Deportment Ensâ—â—bius indeed reports him to have been the Head of that Sect which in the Revelations is called Nicholaâ—â—â—s but neither one nor t'other â—ayes that he continued his Deaconshâ—â— after his Defection However it appâ—ar not that he was a publick Preacher But the Priest adds Solomon you know fill into the grievous Sin of Idolatry yeâ— for all that we burn not his Books of Proverbs Ecclesiastes and Canticles Answ. But did Solomon fall into this grieâ—vous Idolatry after he writ theâ—e Books or before If it was before then how knows he but Solomon repented and turned from his Idolatry before he writ those Books Charity useth to think the best But sayes he to his Parishioner You cannot but acknowledge that you have heard many excellent Discourses from the Pulpit pressing your Respective Duties both to God and Man Answ. Ay but might his Parâ—shioner well have replyed thoâ—e Discourses made little Impression upon me when I considered from whom they came He told me indeed that I must not be Covetous yet of all my Acquaintance I knew none more covetous then he He told me I must not be drunk yet I have seen him so too often He told me I must live chastly yet he himself was incontinent He told me I must not be Angry yet none more furious then he He told me I must not Swear yet himself would Swear and Curse too He told me I must not Rail when a great part of hâ—s Sermon was made up of Railing I confess I have heard him say The Wickâ—d shall be turned into Hell but how could I think he believed it to be true when he was so wâ—cked himself For Examples are far more powerful tâ—en Precepts therefore it s said Prâ—â—â—pâ—s Admonish 〈…〉 more And Meâ— are apt to live by Examples This the Apostle Paul well knew and therefore exhortâ—d his Son Timothy to be an Example of the Believers not oâ—ly in Word but in Conversation in Charity in Spirit in Faith in Purity And his Son Titus he exhorted In all 〈◊〉 to shew himsâ—lf a Pattern of Good Works The Apostle Peter also exhorted the Elders to feed the Fâ—â—ck of God not as bring Lords over God's 〈◊〉 but â—â—â—ng Examples to the Flock Examples then we see are very necessary and Examples indeed are not wanting The Diffeâ—ence lies in thâ—s The True Ministers were alwayes Examples of Gâ—odâ—â—ss but too many of these Ministers are Examples of Evil And that 's another Reason why the People are not profited by them But when he cannot clear them of his own Profession he falls upon the Quakers whom if he can render as bâ—d as his own he thinks he has done something therefore he sayes If you look narrowly upon the speakers many of them make their pretended Holiness a Cloak for Evâ—â— Designs Ansâ— If with all his narrow looking he could have espy'd those Evil Designs he should have done well to have discovered them If he could find none he has not done well nor like a Christian much less like a Minister of Christ to insinuate such a foul Slandâ—r and offer nothing in Proof of it If â—e could have given an Instance 't is not to be doubted but he would for his whole 〈◊〉 shews him big with Envy in which he gâ—â—eâ—on thus And divers of them sayes he who have been much admired for a time have been
that Vsage which they confess was then lawful Answ. He mistakes the Case they are not brought in speaking against that which was then lawful but against that which was then unlawful namely the wrong Use and Abuse of Oaths who that hath at all converst with Books is ignorant that it is usual at the Foot of a Title page to insert some Sentences out of Holy Scripture if the Subject of the Book be Religion out of prophane Authors if the Discourse be of another Nature â— somwhat relating or alluding to the matter treated of The Subject R. H. was treating of was this that all manner of swearing being forbidden by Christ all Oaths are now unlawful and therefore the Use of any Oaths must needs provoke the Displeasure of God against that Nation where they are used This being the Subject of his Book he did very aâ—tly allude to those Words of the Prophet Hosea Because of Oaths the Land mourns The Land mourned then because of Oaths Why because those Oaths then were Vnlawful The Land mourns now because of Oatâ—s why because all Oaths are now unlawful The like is to be said of the Words of Zachary and this is further to be noted that in R. H.'s Book it is thus And as saith the Prophet Every one that sweareth shall be cut off but this Parenthesis as saith the Prophet the Priest leaves out which was not fairly done of him for it shews the Intention of R. H. to be only to allude to the words of the Prophet as if he had said as the Prophet saith in another Case so say I in this he said every one that swears falsly shall be cut off because it was unlawful to swear falsly then I say every one that swears at all shall be cut off because it is unlawful to swear at all now it was therefore ignorantly at least if not maliciously done of the Priest to infinuate that R.H. brought these Scriptures to prove that all Oaths were as unlawful then as now for himself confesseth that R. H. doth yield that some Oaths were lawful then Besides what Reason had he to say of those Scriptures These are his Proofs what doth he mean they were Proofs of He himself in his own Book hath set at the Foot of his Title-page this Scripture 2 Thes. 2.11 For this cause God shall send them strong Delusion that they should believe a Lye Did he intend this for a Proof of what I would know Is it to prove his Book a Conference between a Minister and a Parishioner of his Is it to prove his Parishioner was inclining to Quakerism Is it to prove that the absurd Opinions of that Sect are detected and exposed to a just Censure This is the sume of his Title or is it to prove that they who credit what he hath â—herein written against the Principles of the People called Quakers are indeed under strong Delusion and do believe a Lye But letting his pass let us now hear what the Priest â—an say in defence of Swearing That our Saviour Christ when he said â—ear not at all c. Mat 5. did not forbid â—ll manner of Oaths he takes upon him to prove and saith he will do it in this order First By proving an Oath an Act of natural Religion towards God Secondly An Act of necessary Iustice and Charity towards men Thirdly That it is therefore a Part of that Moral and Eternal Law which our Saviour professeth he came not to destroy but to fulfil Fourthly That we find it practised in the new Testament page 5.6 His first Proposition viz. That an Oath is an Act of natural Religion towards God I deny He offers to prove it by Reason and Consent of Nations By Reason thus That whereby we glorifie God and adore his Attributes is an Act of Religion but by an Oath rightly taken we glorifie God and adore his Attributes therefore such an Oath is an Act of Religion Answ. The first Part of this Argument doth not reach the Proposition he undertook to prove namely That an Oath is an Act of natural Religion for in his Argument he drops the Word Natural and makes no mention of it neither doth he in the Conclusion of his Argument infer that an Oath is an Act of Natural Religion but barely thuâ— Therefore such an Oath is an Act of Religion Now a thing may be an Act of Religion and yet not an Act of Natural Religion as he calls it that iâ— it may be an Act of Religion by Precept or Institution yet not an Act of Religion barely of it â—elf or simply from the Nature of the thingâ— thâ—t may be an Act of Religion being commanded which was not an Act of Religion before it was commandâ—d nor will be an Act of Reâ—igion after that Command which made it so is repealed Tâ—usâ—â—s it in the Caâ—e of Circumcision it was an Act of Religion yet not an Act of Natural Religion It was no â—ct oâ— Religion before it was commanded It was an Act of Religion after it was commanded it is no Act of Religion since that Command which made it so is repealed Here then he hath missed his Aâ—m and that abundantly short of the Mark And it is a very material Consideration for for his main Drift in asserting an Oath to be an Act of Natural Religion seems to be that he might wholely free it from Dependence upon Precept and establish it as a Paâ—t of the Moral and Eternal Law which in his third Proposition he ushers in with a Therefore that it being an Act of Natural Religion c. It is therefore a Part of the Moral and Eternal Law c. But his Therefore being built upon a false Foundation must needs therefore fall to the Ground And as in the first Part of his Argument there is a Dâ—fâ—ct so in the second there is a Reduâ—daâ—cy which makes it stark naught for therein he Assumes thus But by an Oath rightly taken we glorifie God c. The Faâ—lacy lies in those Words rightly taken bâ— which he would take for granted that an Oath may be rightly taken this is meer begging of thâ— Quâ—stion for that is the main thing in Controversie if we câ—uld grant that an Oath may be rightly taken we should not refuâ—e to take it our selves but we â—ay no Oath can be rightly taken because all Oaths are by Christ forbidden The Premisses being both faulty his Conclusion to be sure cannot be good therefâ—â—e what he builds thereupon deserves the less Regard He enumerates many Attributes of God which he saith are acknowledged by an Oath to which no other Answer need be given then that the divine Attributes are acknowledged by speaking the Truth without an Oath and God thereby more glorified in having reâ—eemed a â—eople from â—eâ—fidiousness Treachery and Falshood and brought them to that State of integrity and Uprightness of Heart that haâ—ing put away â—ll Lying which was tâ—e Occasion of Swearing they can now spâ—â—k every
and composing Sermons out of it then the former so that if this be all they have to say the Doctor and he are still to seek a Warrant for their Practice But he falls fiercely and foully too upon Rich. Hubberthorn for the Reply he made to Dr. Sherlock which he sayes was in these words O thou Enemy and Slanderer of Christ and the Apostles Did they take Texts to gâ—e Mone with them and to lie a Quarter of a Year or Half a Year in a Text Christ came to fulfil the â—cripâ—ure and the Apostles shewed how he fulfilled the Scripture And this he calls a Brutish Reply and sayes Did Dr. Sherlock any where lay such a Slander upon Christ and his Apostles as to say they took Texts to get Money with them or to lie Half or a Quarter of a Year in them as this Man so injuriously infers Who then think you is the Slanderer and who stood at this Man's Elbow to dictate unto him that wretched Vntruth p. 88. Answ. For all his big words I would have him take notice that he deals very unfairly with us in reporting a Reply of R. H.'s and not quoting the Page nor so much as Book out of which he takes it therein falling short of the common Honesty of every fair Adversary Yet will I not therefore as I justly might pass over this place unanswered but supposing the words to be truly recited I say thus Our Charge against the Priests is not only and barely for taking Texts and composing Sermons out of them though for that having no divine Warrant they are condemnable but also for selling those Texts and Sermons to the People for Money Thus making a Trade of the holy Scriptures they lie some of them three some six Moneths in a Text and what by the Helps of Invention and Study they gather into their Understandings that by Measure they sell out to the People taking some Ten some Twenty some Forty Shillings and more for an Hour's Discourse This is Matter of Fact and too Notorious to need Proof Dr. Sherlock as he calls him to defend the Practice of the Priests urges the Examples of Christ and Philip Whereupon R. H. replies Thâ—u Enemy and Slanderer of Christ and the Apostles did they take Texts to get Money with them and to lie a Quarter of a Year or Haâ—â— a Year in a Text. As if he had said If thou dost bring the Examples of Christ and Philip to justifie the Priests Practice in taking Textâ— to get Money with them as you Priests do and in lying a Quarter or Half a Year in a Text as some of you do thou art a Slanderer and Enemy of Christ and the Apostle for did they ever do thus Now this being our Charge against the Priests not only that they take Texts but that thay make a Trade of the Scriptures taking Texts to get Money by c. Doth not Dr Sherlock in bringing the Examples of Christ and Philip to justifie the Priests Practice plainly intimate he intends that they took Texts as the Priests do What else then is that but implicitly to infer that they took Texts to get Money by So that if the Case be truly stated and rightly considered it will appear that the Doctor did slander Christ and Philip in urging their Examples to justifie so bad a Practice not R.H. the Doctor But I observe my Opponent does not â—t all deny that the Priests take Texts to get Money with them but stepping over that he insists a little upon the other part of the Charge namely their lying a Quarter or Half a Year in a Text which sayes he I think very few do nor any but when their Text hath such plenty and variety of Matter in it as requires much Time in the handling of it c. So that at least the one part of the Charge he grants and the other he does not deny CHAP. VIII Of Humane Learning Divine Inspira and Revelation HAving briefly dispatcht the Business of taking Texts framing Discourses on them and selling those Discourses for Money that which comes next under Consideration is Humane Learning which the Priest asserts the Necessity of in interpreting the Scriptures pag. 90. He takes an Occasion to enter upon this Subject from some words of R. H. which as he sets them down for he names no Book are thus The Scribes and Pharisees were Learned Men and they could not open the Scriptures Peter an Vnlearned Man he opened the Scriptures pag 87. At this he carps saying R. H. magnifies the Learning of the Scribes and Pharisees and makes a very Ignoramus of St. Peter c. p. 88. Answ. He had no Cause to quarrel at this for R. H. spake but the Truth He did not magnifie the Learning of the Scribes and Pharisees but barely said they were Learned Men which none that understands what they were will deny Nor does he any whit debase St. Peter as this Priest doth unfairly insinuate but barely sayes He was Vnlearned and so indeed he was in that sort of Learning wherein the Pharisees were learned to which his being unlearned is opposed But sayes he Will tâ—ey prove that St. Peter who opened the Scriptures was an Vnlearned Man Answ. The Scripture sayes it expresly Acts 4.13 Is there no Dâ—fference sayes he betwixt Peter the Fisher-man and Peter the Disciple Answ. Yes there was great Difference but not in point of Humane Learning The Difference lay not there He had no more of that Learning when he was a Disciple then he had when he was a Fisherman But the great Difference lay in this that when he was a Fisherman he was Carnally-minded but afterwards being a Disciple he became spiritually-minded having received an Vnderstanding not from Study and Natural Means but from God as another Apostle said We know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an Vnderstanding that we may know him that is true c. For Luke tells us that a little before his Ascension he opened their Vnderstandings which was an immediate and inward Operation of his Spirit and Power upon them That they might understand the Scriptures And this it is the Apostle Paul desired for the Colossians viz. A spiritual Vnderstanding He goes on Had Peter been so long with him that spake as never man spake and is he still unlearned Answ. Yes unlearned still in humane Learning as much as he was before for Christ did not instruct him in that neither did the Excellency of Christ himself lie in that for when he spake as never man spake it was not in respect of Humane Learning but of Divine and Heavenly Wisdom Did the Holy Ghost saith he give him the Tongue of the learned nay a Portion of the Cloven Tongues by which he spake all Languages to enable him to expound the Scriptures to all Nations and is this Peter unlearned still Answ. Yes he was unlearned still in humane and acquired Learning for that which
argued very fallaciously and crafâ—ily endeavouring to beguil his Reader with meer Sophistry And after the same manner he goes on What have you to shew for your Estate saith he to his Parishioner I have a good Died replieth the Parishioner But what have you to shew for your Gleâ—â— and Tythes I have a good Terrier and Endowment cries the Priest Prove that Terrâ—â—r and Eâ—dowment to bâ— right by the Law of God saith the Parishioner 〈◊〉 I will quoth the Priest when your Deâ—d 〈◊〉 made good by the Law of God It iâ— sufficient saith the Parishioner that my Deed wayâ—â—oved by the Law of the Land So it iâ— sufficient replies the Priest that our Tythes are settled by the same Laws Answ. 〈◊〉 where Reader how willing the Priest is for his own Interest to parallel his Case with the Parishioner's as if there were no Difference aâ— all in the 〈…〉 One claims a Temporal Thing and 〈…〉 claims a Temporal Thing One claâ—m bâ— a Temporal Right and the other claim by a Temporal Right One hath no Neâ—â— of a Precept or Example in holy Scripture for what he claims 〈◊〉 hath the other Thus he takes his Parishioner by the Nose and endeavours to câ—kes him into a Conceit that their Cases answer pat to one another that their Right is all one their Claim one and the same their pretensions just alike But then they must not stay there the priest must also acknowledge he is no more a Minister of Christ then the other at least that he doth not claim Tythes as a Minister of Christ any more then the other doth his Temporal Estate otherwise the Parallel wâ—ll not hold For if he claims Tythes as a Minâ—ster of Christ if he demands them in Consideration of a Spiritual Office I am sure thâ—n their Claims will not agree and that which will be sufficient to make good a 〈◊〉 the one will not be so to the other whatever he thinks on 't A good Deed for a Temporal Estate sounds some what like but a Terrier and Endowment for a Minister of Christ is new and strange Language which Christians are not acquainted with And for a Temporal Estate held in a Civil Capacity it is sufficient that the Deed be approved by the Laws of the Land because the Estate it self is claimed and held upon no other Considerations then such as are Temporal But it is otherwise in the case of Tythes A Temporal Settlement of Tythes is not sufficient because Tythes are claimed upon Considerations that are not Temporal but Spiritual But the Parishioner puts the Question If Tythes are Temporal Rights how come you 〈◊〉 call them spiritual Preferments The Priest answers All Tythes are not so called because all Impropriations are held in a Laity c. Answ. By this then it appears that if the Impropriations are held in a Laity Tythes are not so Sacred a thing but that they may be and are alienated to common Uses notwithstanding the Dedication of them and whatever else he saith elsewhere page 146 147. to the contrary But other Tythes the Priest saith are called spiritual Preferments not in respect of the Profits but the Persons who are capable of them and therfore are they vulgarly called spiritual Preferments because enjoyed by spiritual Persons page 137. Answ. So then it seems the Persons injoying Tythes must be Spiritual yea so Spiritual as to communicate to the Tythes themselves the Denomination of Spiritual Preferments and yet they must be held by a Temporal Right and why but because they have no Spiritual Right to them But letting that pass two things I desire to be resolved in First Why these Priests who hid such Defiance to the Inspiration of the Spirit should affect to call themselves Spiritual Persons Secondly Seeing towards the Beginning of his Book page 11. he saith some men for a corrupt Interest will intrude themselves into these Sacred Offices and again near the End of it pag 160. He tells us the Secular Care of some of the Clergy for the Maintenance of their Families hath been excessive I would gladly know whether he reckons these for some of his Spiritual Persons seeing these do injoy the Preferments as well as any He tells us in page 140. That which no-Body doubts viz. That Temporal Authorities have Power to establish Temporal Rights from whence in page 141. he infers That in Temporal Affairs an Argument drawn from Temporal Authority where the thing is equitable and Reasonable is a good and convincing Argument and in the next page taking an Occasion to repeat he saith I do not say in every Case a Temporal Authority can create a Right to a Temporal Interest but in such Cases only as are Equitable and Reasonable Answ. I observe here he reels from establishing a Right to creating a Right I hope he doth not think that to establish create is one and the same thing Let him stick to which he pleaseâ—â— so he will be pleased without confouâ—ding them If he will say that Temporal Authority hath created a right to Tythes he thereby cuts off all Pretensions to any Right antecedent to that Creation If he will say that Temporal Authority hath only established a Temporal Right to Tythes that supposeth a Temporal Right to them before But that will lyeâ—â— his Door to prove which hitherto he hath not in any Degree done unless to say iâ— be a Degree of doing it and then indeed 〈◊〉 hath 〈◊〉 it in many Degrees For he hath said it over and over If Tythes saith he 〈◊〉 anâ—ther man's Estate and Property the Caâ—â— will be clear agaiâ—st me but thiâ— saith he is bâ—gging of the Question therefore I am ready 〈◊〉 prove that Tythes are mine not his from whom I receive them Here he saith he is ready to prove but I wonder when he will do it After a Periphrasis of three pages or more he brings his Discourse to this Issue If you will grant saith he that Maintenance in general is due by the 〈◊〉 of the Gospel you will sufficiently justifie Tythes from all the idle Cavils which are brought against them page 145. Iâ— not this notably argued to prove Tythes his not theirs from whom he receiveth them especially from one that was in such Readiness too Well Iâ—le grant him that Maintenance in general is due by the Gospel to a Gospel Minister and now let us see what he can make on 't Why saith he pag. 146. The Gospel commands a Maintenace be provided for the Ministry and the Civil Powers and Nursing Fathers of the Church have set out Tythes for that Maintenance To prove this he urges a Voluntary Dedication of them and to prove that offers Ethelwolfe's Charter The Dedication and Charter I have already examined and shewed how little they conduce to this Cause Therefore not to repeat the same things let us now inquire what Power those Nursing Fathers had to set 〈◊〉 Tythes for a Maintenance for the Ministry He that appointed a