Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	call_v	john_n	quaker_n	2,408	5	10.5580	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65885	The rector examined about his book scandalously stiled, An antidote against the venom of Quakerism, by John Meriton, who calls himself A.M. rector of Boughton in Norfolk : and his observations remarked, and the Christianity of the people commonly called Quakers, re-asserted and vindicated, from his perversions and aspersions / by George Whitehead.	Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.	1699 (1699)	Wing W1953; ESTC R20277	40,584	48

THE RECTOR EXAMINED About his Book Scandalously stiled An Antidote against the Venom of Quakerism BY John Meriton who calls himself A. M. Rector of Boughton in Norfolk AND His Observations Remarked and the Christianity of the People commonly called Quakers Re-asserted and Vindicated from his Perversions and Aspersions By GEORGE WHITEHEAD And they are Shepherds that cannot understand they all look to their own way every one for his Gain from his quarter Isa. 56. 11. LONDON Printed and Sold by T. Sowle in White-Hart-Court in Gracious-street and at the Bible in Leaden-Hall-street 1699. THE RECTOR EXAMINED About his Book Scandalously stiled An Antidote against the Venom of Quakerism WHAT John Meriton calls The Venom of Quakerism is not what 's contain'd in our Paper entituled The Christianity of the People commonly called Quakers for he grants our Profession throughout the greatest part thereof as well as some others would seem Orthodox page 5. But what he quotes out of other Books as he thinks in Opposition thereto wherein he shews his own Enmity and Perversions and not our Contradiction to what 's Orthodox in our said Profession and the greatest part of what he hath quoted for that end being Answered in the other Examination entituled Truth and Innocency vindicated and but Repetitions and no Refutations of his and his Abettors I need not much repeat or insist upon them but take notice of some other Abuses intermix'd in his Observations and by the way to shew his Learning in Divinity how he defines Christianity and Christian first Negatively then Affirmatively viz. 1st What is understood by the Term Christianity or what is necessary in a strict and proper Sense to entitle a Man to be a Christian For making up this good Composition saith he it is not enough for a Man to know and acknowledge God as the one only true God Creator of all things to depend upon and be subject to him to love him and our Neighbour as our selves to walk soberly and honestly and to practise all those other Duties which by the Light and Law of Nature he may be convinced of for then a Man may believe and be conformable thereunto and yet be no Christian page 3 4. Whereupon we may observe and hence inferr That a Man may be Godly and so live to God and yet no Christian i. e. a Man may be born of God as he that loveth is and yet without Christ as if a Man could come to God without Christ Oh! Lamentable Unchristian Doctrine contrary to his own Doctrine No Man cometh to the Father but by me and If God were your Father ye would love me And if without Christ we can do nothing How should any Man either know God depend upon him be subject to him or love him without Christ And 't is by his Divine Light and Grace that Men are taught these Duties to live Godly and to walk Soberly and Honestly and not by a Light or Law of Humane Nature So that a Man born of God who loves and obeys him and is subject to him is truly and lovingly a Partaker of Christ and of the Nature of Christianity But if to know God to depend upon him to be subject to him to love him our Neighbour as our selves to walk soberly and honestly c. will not entitle a Man to Christianity to be a Christian then 't is not the Jew inward nor the Christian inward nor the New Creature nor the New Birth that will avail but the outward Profession of Christianity though many have that who neither love God nor are subject to him nor love their Neighbours consequently are no New Creatures nor born of God And if to know love and obey God and to live Soberly and Honestly c. be not such a Good Composition as will make up a true Christian in Spirit and Life What will this Composition make up May we take what our Opposer here adds for Answer viz. For who doubts but that some of the Heathens thus far believed and practised who were not only altogether Ignorant of Christ but also vehemently opposed him and the Christian-Name page 4. This I cannot receive for sufficient Answer or for Truth And 't is said but not proved that any of those Gentiles or Heathens who knew and loved God depended upon him and were subject to him and loved their Neighbours as themselves and walked soberly and honestly yet that these Gentiles thus qualified vehemently opposed Christ and the Christian Name We want proof for this Assertion How could they love God and be subject to him and depend upon him and hate or oppose his dear Son and Servants If God were your Father ye would love me saith Christ for I proceeded forth and came from God John 8. 42. for those that hated him were of their Father the Devil ver 44. Where did ever any honest sober Gentiles or Heathen who truly loved God so vehemently oppose Christ as this Man accuseth them We find the contrary in Scripture that many Gentiles believed and received the Gospel of Christ who is the Light of the Gentiles and even in the Case of Justification the Apostle brings those Gentiles for a proof who not having the Law were a Law to themselves when they performed those things contained in the Law and shewed the Work of the Law that was written in their Hearts Rom. 2. 13 14 15 16. But the mistake of this our Opposer and his Adherents is they 'll have the Light which enlightens every Man that cometh into the World not to be Christ but Man's Conscience a Light and Law of Nature and so but natural as of Man and not Divine deeming it Blasphemy to assert the Light that doth enlighten every Man that cometh into the World is not Conscience and that it was before any thing was made or Conscience named as in their first and great Charge against us in their Brief Discovery page 3. whereby they have consequently charged John the Evangelist's Testimony of Christ who is that true Light John 1. with Blasphemy Thus have they brought the Blasphemy upon their own ignorant Opposition to this Evangelical Doctrine of the true Light which Christ the Word is the Fountain of which is a Divine Supernatural Light and therefore increated consequently not Man's natural Conscience but a superiour Reformer and Guide of Man's whole Soul with all the Parts and Faculties thereof He that made all things was not made but he that was the true Light made all things by him all things were made John 1. He that made Man was before Man was before his Soul or Spirit or any Faculties or Intellectuals were made or formed within Man Consequently this Light was not Conscience but that which enlightens Man's Understanding and Conscience and the Eyes of his Understanding How Blasphemous then are these Men who deem this Doctrine of the Light Blasphemy And 't is not safe to conclude That those Jews who were God's chosen People and obedient to the

Infants or Believers we are left at uncertainty by this Rector 't is enough with him to cry It must be with Water Water But who who must come under it Men or Babes Here we are at a loss What an easie way it is to make Christians and to get to Heaven if this be it viz. Learn and believe your Creed and that you are inwardly washed regenerated and entered into God's Kingdom by your Water-Baptism Whether as Infants or grown up is still the Question This Rector boldly tells us Nay further it appears That before our Saviour Baptized those in Judea he represented the Solemnity of Baptism as a thing necessary to enter Men into that Kingdom of God to which he invited them our Saviour not only telling Nicodemus John 3. 5. That except a Man be born again he could not see the Kingdom of God But yet more plainly That except he was born again of Water p. 5. and of the Spirit he could not enter into it p. 28. In this Interpretation of John 3. 5. to outward Water the Rector exactly agrees with the Popish Notion and Interpretation thereof That no Man can enter into the Kingdom of God nor into the Fellowship of Holy Church without Water-Baptism as held by the Rhemists see their Annotations upon John 3. 5. And therein opposed by the Protestants as appears in Dr. Fulk's Answer viz. It is not necessary in this place By Water to understand material Water but rather the Purifying Grace of Christ. As in Chap. 4. ver 11 14. where 't is called Living Water whereof he saith Washing with Water in Baptism is an outward Sign So that the Reform'd Protestants did place Salvation the New Birth and entering into the Kingdom of God upon the Inward Baptism by the Purifying Grace of Christ and not upon the Outward Element of Water they esteem'd that but an outward Sign of the Inward For the outward Baptism by Water the Rector urges our Saviour's Example and Practice from John 3. 22 26. p. 28. as if practised or ministred by Christ himself But that 's a Mistake for in John 4. 2. 't is expresly said Though Jesus himself baptized not but his Disciples I have run the farther into this Point in this place to shew what a Composition the Rector has run Christianity into But to return to some of his invidious Abuses and Perversions For the Credit of his Charge of Venom and Blasphemous Opinions relating to Christianity as well as to the Government against us he saith And to this end and purpose in the Month of March last past there were two Books presented to both Houses of Parliament the one Entitled A Brief Discovery of some of the Blasphemies and Seditious Principles c. The other Entitled Some few of the Quakers many horrid Blasphemies Heresies c. And also a Sheet Entitled Some Reasons humbly offered why the Quakers should be examined p. 6 7. Here we may observe this Rector has owned these same Books as well as presenting them to the Parliament Now one of them that is a Libel stiled Some Few has an Owner with the rest Thou therefore John Meriton Rector so called art accountable for the manifold Abuses Perversions Calumnies and Traducings which are in those Books and detected in my Truth and Innocency vindicated which I doubt not but will turn to your great Shame and Disgrace who promoted them as will also your strenuous Endeavours to Insence the Government against us but that they had more Discretion and Prudence than to be influenced by two or three Invidious Persons against a Peaceable and Serviceable People Now concerning our Christian Profession on which the Rector makes his Observations to evince the Venom of Quakerism as he unjustly defames us He accuseth us with dubious and equivocal Terms agreeable to those of the Oracles of the Heathen p. 7. for our confessing That our Belief is That in the Unity of the God-head there is Father Son and Holy Ghost those Three Divine Witnesses that beare Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Spirit and that these Three are One according to Holy Scripture Testimony These the Rector has judged as dubious equivocal Terms though they are Scripture Terms see Matt. 28. 19. 1 John 5. 7. John 14. 26. Chap. 15. 26. But not being content with this our Confession he begs this Question i. e. But if not Three Persons what Three are they page 8. Let him prove these Terms by plain Scripture as we have done ours and then we shall be resolved so as not to charge him with dubious Terms He might have spared his bitter Insinuations against us as virulent Poison grossest Errors equivocal Reserves wherein they meaning the Quakers may be thought to exceed their Brethren the Jesuits page 8. It had been more Prudence for him to have forborne or reserved these bitter Aspersions than to impose them upon the Reader which shews a great Enmity and bitterness of Spirit in the Man His repeated and partial Citations and Charge against G. F. W. P. and G. W. in page 8 9 10. are answered and detected in the second part of the other Examination i. e. Truth and Innocency c. under the first Head and Title Concerning the Holy Trinity What is alledged against G. W. out of Ishmael c. page 10. about the Three Persons though wrongly cited by the Rector p. 9 10. I have positively disowned that passage twice already both as 't is in it self and as it is none of mine and do now a third time disown the same which none therefore but the Implacable will repeat against me About a Heaven within and the Locality of Heaven p. 10. I do not find either G. F. or W. P. truly quoted or cited upon Examination The Matter as it concerns G. F. is answered in the other Examination aforesaid To the Rector's thus construing our Confession i. e. When they speak of Three Divine Witnesses bearing Record in Heaven that is to say quoth he the Heaven within them p. 10. Thus he imposes his meaning upon us as if we confined the Divine Three bearing Witness in Heaven only to a Heaven within us and not as being in that Heaven without us also which is a mistaken Construction for the Heaven wherein the Divine Three bear Witness is above and distinct from the Earth 1 John 5. 7 8. and yet the same Holy Spirit which is God bears witness in Earth too even in Mens Hearts and Consciences His Spirit bears witness with our Spirits c. And he that believeth on the Son of God hath the Witness in himself 1 John 5. 10. And he that inhabiteth Eternity and dwells in the highest Heavens dwells also in the lowest Hearts even with them that are poor and of contrite Spirits and tremble at his word how despised soever they are in the Eyes of the Proud and Envious whom God will debase And it was no lessening of the Blessed Record of the Divine Three

a partial and unjust Citation in curtailing and perverting his Words to make them look as if writ in Contempt of Holy Scripture where the Rector saith Samuel Fisher has these Words speaking of the Text of Scripture Which Transcriptions and Translations were they neve so certain and entirely answering to the first Original Copies yet are not capable to be to all Men any other than a Lesbyan Rule or Nose of Wax T his worthy Author in his Works has the Testimony of Luke Howard H. Fisher and W. Penn p. 40. Thus this Adversary has injuriously dealt by Samuel Fisher rendering him to speak these words of the Text of Scripture which are spoken in reference to the various Transcriptions Translations Interpretations Expositions Senses and Meanings Thoughts and Conceits of Men who Comment upon them and not to the Text of Scripture purely consider'd The Rector having left out both the foregoing and subsequent Reasons of Sam. Fisher's words which clear his intention both from his Calumny of the Venom of Quakerism and from his insinuating Insincerity against our said Profession I may therefore recite part of them in S. F's behalf he not being here to vindicate himself and the Truth profess'd by him which in his Life-time he largely vindicated to the great Confusion of his Opposers where he saith Moreover how intirely soever the Transcriptions are the Translations which is all the Rule the People have unless the Priest's prattle must be their Rule are confessed to be the most various and abominably and wofully corrupted Witness J. O. who is scarce more busie to evince the entireness of his Hebrew and Greek Text than in evidencing the Erroneousness of all Translations some of which that are most ancient and of most account among most Priests as the Septuagint are gone off quoth J. O. from the Original in a Thousand Places twice told Thus they run the bounds trace to and fro and dance up and down in their dark Minds about the Transcriptions and Translations of their Text which they take to be their Rule which Transcriptions and Translations were they never so certain and entire by answering the first Original Copies yet are not capable to be to all Men any other than a Lesbyan Rule or Nose of Wax for as much as even where Men have them as half the World has not they are liable to be wrested and actually twisted twenty ways by Interpreters whose Expositions Senses and Meanings which are as many and various as the Thoughts and Conceits and Inventions of the Men are who Comment upon them must be the Rule to such as can read them neither in Hebrew nor in Greek nor in their own Mother-Tongues neither Appendix p. 751 752. Now to clear S. Fisher from esteeming the Text of Holy Scripture in it self either a Lesbyan or Leaden Rule or a Nose of Wax but only the Corrupters and Perverters thereof making them such that it may appear how well he esteemed of the Holy Scriptures he in the same Book with the said Appendix quoted against him i. e. Rusticus ad Academicus Printed in Quarto 1660. in his Second Apologetical and Expostulatory Exercitation Chap. I. p. 6. he calls the Scripture a Declaration of those things that were believed and of the Word of Faith that was preached a writing Holy Scriptures Scriptures of Truth Books of Writing that consists treat of and declare in forms of plain true suitable and sound Words various true things c. So that as written in the Spirit the Holy Scriptures may be said to be Homogeneous Writings all of one kind But in respect of the several Businesses written of therein they are Heterogeneous i. e. a Body or Bulk of as various Writings as any extant in the World besides them And in p. 48 49. he condemns Mens Mis-renderings corrupt Copyings and Commentings and making the Scripture to stand which way any Critick pleases And farther saith As 't is my continual Exercise in Works to do it i. e. to condemn such their Corruptions and Perversions so do I here in plain Words exalt the Scripture which they so debase and state it over all their Trash and Trumpery even on the very top of all their long Train of Traditions and over the Archest Title of the Tripple-Crown the proudest Pinnacle of Peter's now Un Peter-like painted Temple the highest Point of that Pompous Pious Pitteous Pillar and Ground of Truth the choicest Chapter of that Holy Church and infallibly Erring infallible Chair And in p. 49. he farther declares himself a just plain and impartial Pleader for the Scripture and a doer of Right to those Holy Writings which are egregiously wronged by both Papists and Protestants c. And p. Ibid. he argues for many i. e. who are falsly suppos'd to be slighters and disowners of Scripture who to give it its due and no more as indeed it is do own honour and exalt the Holy Scripture much more and more truly than any of your exalted selves c. And p. 112. The Scripture testifies of the Word which will endure Thus S. Fisher has cleared the Point of his great Value and Esteem of the Holy Scripture considered in its highest primitive best and purest Aspect as at first given forth quite contrary to his being supposed a Contemner thereof Quest. Do you believe the Doctrine of the Resurrection from the Dead and of Eternal Judgment and the Immortality of the Soul Answ. We sincerely believe and confess the Doctrine of the Resurrection from the Dead and of Eternal Judgment according to Holy Scripture Heb. 6. 2. That God will raise the Dead and judge the World in Righteousness by his Son Jesus Christ in the Day appointed even in the Great Day of Judgment and that Harvest which is the End of the World That the Soul of Man though created is Immortal and never dies Even as these Doctrines are more fully testified in Holy Scriptures by Jesus Christ and his holy Apostles 1. For the Doctrine of the Resurrection see Mat. 13. 43. and Chap. 22. 30 31. Mark 12. 25. Luke 20. 36. John 5. 29. 1 Cor. 15. 19 35 36 37 to the 53d verse Phil. 3. 29. Col. 3. 4. 1 John 3. 2. 1 Thess. 4. 16. Rev. 20. 12 13 14 15. 2. Of Eternal Judgment see Mat. 13. 39 40 41 42. Chap. 10. 15. 11. 24. 25. 30 31 41. Mark 8. 38. Luke 9. 26. Acts 17. 31. John 5. 22 27. Acts 10. 42. 2 Thess. 1. 7 8 9. 2 Tim. 4. 1. 1 Pet. 4. 5. 2 Pet. 2. 9. Jude 6. 3. For the Immortality of the Soul see Gen. 1. 27. 2. 7. 1 Kings 17. 21. Mat. 16. 26. Mark 8. 36 37. Eccles. 3. 21. 12. 7. Luke 16. 22 23. 2 Cor. 5. 1 2. In the Observation upon this Profession On our sincerely believing and confessing the Doctrine of the Resurrection from the Dead according to Holy Scripture The Rector thus reflects That is according to their Sence and Interpretation of Holy