superior to the Scripture But this is W. P's Fallacy and Ignorance and not the Bishop's the Bishop owneth with all true Christians the Spirit to be superior to the Scriptures as the Author and Lord of them and who useth them as his Instrument as the Work man useth a Rule or Tool that he worketh withal but the Bishop and all sound Christians think that it is no dishonour to the Spirit to acknowledge the Office proper to him which is to Rule and the Office proper to the Scripture to be the Rule and Instrument in the Hand and Management of the Spirit And thus the Office of the Scripture is a far inferior Office to the Office of the Spirit as the Servant and his Office is inferior to the Master and his Office but to put the Spirit in the Office of the Scripture is to degrade the Master and put him in the Servant's place The last thing I shall notice in this Book of W. P. is not so properly a Fallacy as a down-right open-faced Falshood and false Charge and Accusation against all Protestants whatsoever except themselves who though they affect the Name of Protestants yet for the vast disagreement of Doctrine betwixt them even in Fundamentals deserve neither the Name of Protestants nor Christians so much as at large The Accusation is this Page 97 That the Church of England and Dissenters and generally all Protestants Confine the Operations of the Spirit to the first or Apostolical Times as if these did not want them as much or that Christ would be less Propitious where his Gifts were not less needful This I say is a down-right false Accusation the contrary of which cvidently appears from all the several Confessions of Faith of all the Protestant Churches truly owned to be such and which also appears from the afore-cited words of the Bishop in his Testimony where he owns That Conscience must be opened by the Holy Spirit under the Ministry of the Word citing Acts 16. 14. to take in its Light to wit the Doctrine Instrumentally from the Holy Scriptures Can this be done without an Operation of the Holy Spirit If W. P. say Nay it cannot then his own words are an Evidence against the Falsity of his Accusation Again That he chargeth it on them that Ministers are made such and preach without the Spirit and the People worshipping without the Spirit which is too rash and uncharitable Judgment in him so to affirm without any Caution or Restriction How doth it appear that the Quakers Preach and Pray with the Spirit and all others do not Will the Quakers saying it prove it Or doth the great Noise of their Preaching and Praying by the Spirit from an elevated high-flown Conceit through their Spiritual Pride prove it to be so oft-times where there is greatest noise and shew there is least Reality and Substance Surely if Preaching and Printing more unsound Doctrine than all others do and uncharitable Judgments of them that do really excel them both in Knowledge and Piety be proofs that they are not acted by the Spirit of God commonly in either their Preaching or Praying and who are scarce ever heard to acknowledge their sinful Imperfections or ask Forgiveness of them If these be Marks of Men sensual and not having the Spirit notwithstanding of their Boastings Laodicea and Pharisee like they are abundantly to be found among them It is indeed matter of Regrate and Humiliation that there is so little Preaching and Praying with the Spirit among many of all sorts as the little Success it produceth doth manifest in many places yet blessed be God for what is among many of all the several Churches and were there but more Love and Charity Humility and Self-denial it might certainly be hoped that God would give more of his Spirit And for such a Time I joyn with all sincere Christians both to Hope and Pray G. K. A Synopsis or short View of W. P 's Deism and Scepticism collected out of his Book called A Discourse of the General Rule of Faith and Life and Judge of Controversie first Printed in the Year 1673 as an Appendix to his Christian Quaker and Reprinted in this present Year 1699. Compared with some Passages in his other Books With some plain and necessary Consequences naturally flowing from the Positive Doctrine therein delivered by him 1. ALL Mankind hath one General Rule of Faith and Life Page 1 2 3 4 c. 2. This General Rule of Faith and Life cannot be the Scripture because all Men have not the Scripture and because of their uncertainty unless upon the ground of inward extraordinary Revelation and for their Imperfection and many other Reasons given by him in the following Pages to the number of about fourteen 3. The General Rule of Faith and Life must be the Light in every Man's Conscience P. 6 7. 4. The Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life not abstractly and seperately considered from the inward Discoveries it giveth but with respect thereunto For without some inward Discovery it teacheth Men nothing and therefore it can be no Rule to any Man but with respect to its inward Discoveries 5. The inward discoveries of the Light within are of two sorts P. 32. the one extraordinary such as were given to the Prophets and Apostles concerning Adam's fall and the extraordinary manifestation of God in the Flesh of that Man called Jesus Christ whom some call the Son of God But that he was properly the Son of God we utterly deny faith W. P. in his Serious Apology P. 146. The other ordinary such as fall within the ordinary discoveries given to all Mankind 6. The Light within is the general Rule of Faith and Life not with respect to these extraordinary discoveries above mentioned P. 32. but with respect to the ordinary discoveries given to Mankind in general universally 7. We have no need that the Light within should give us any of these extraordinary discoveries P. 32. concerning Adam's fall and that extraordinary manifestation of God in the Flesh of that Man improperly called the Son of God and Jesus Christ because the Historical account of these things is extant in Scripture and it not being needful to be given us by any new inward Revelation we may conclude it is not given to any of us it sufficeth we have the Historical account of them given us in Scripture which is sufficient to beget in us a Historical Faith of these things without any new inward Revelation of them such as was given to the Prophets and Apostles 8. The Historical account of these things though it may be called a Historical Rule of the Historical Faith of them yet it cannot be called the Rule of Faith and Life that is necessary to Salvation For as all have not this Historical Faith because the History hath not reached them so to them who have the History the Historical Faith doth not profit them to Salvation but doth far rather hurt
only against their being Three Persons but against their being Three or Three He 's arguing That if the Father be God the Son God and the Holy Ghost God then unless they are Three distinct Nothings they are Three distinct Substances and consequently Three distinct God's Which is as weakly and Sophistically argued by W. P. as if he had argued If the three Dimensions of a Body be three distinct Dimensions then unless they are three distinct Nothings they are three distinct Substances and consequently three distinct Bodies which I only bring to shew the silly Sophistry of his Argument but not that I think this glorious Mystery of the Trinity can be duly represented by this Similitude or any other natural Similitude whatsoever though it is a certain truth that the distinction of the three divine relative Properties in the divine Essence prove them no more to be Three Gods than the distinction of the three Dimensions in a Body prove that they are three Bodies And had W. P. given the Profession of his Faith in all the other Texts of Scripture that are commonly understood by true Christians to prove the true distinction of the Father Son and Holy Ghost in their relative and personal Properties Yet seeing as hath been fully proved W. P. hath quite another sense of all those Texts than the true Scripture sense received by all true Christians the Bishop might well enough charge W. P's Faith with being defective for his imposing a wrong sense on the sound Scripture words as he hath done and which it is like the Bishop had just occasion of suspicion he had done in some of his books Doth W. P. think that if a suspected Papist to clear himself of being free of that Popish Error of Transubstantiation should profess his Faith in that one Text of Scripture Take eat this is my Body would this justly clear him of that Suspicion seeing he may be guilty of that Error for all his Scripture Confession it being the common Policy of the greatest Hereticks to profess their Faith in Scripture words while by their other words they have made it appear that they have a Heretical Sense as in the present case is fully evident In Page 31. To excuse his Equivocation about his owning Jesus Christ to be the Son of God he tells the Bishop we call him the beloved Son of God the only begotten of the Father And in Page 32 and 33 he tells they have called him Christ who was born of the Virgin Mary and Conceived by the Holy Ghost again and again yea that they have not confessed his Name less than nine times in that Paper And from this takes occasion to blame the Bishop with uncharitableness and being beside the business And if we have said so saith W. P. must not the Bishop be extreamly beside the business His uncharità bleness is as obvious I will not say his Untruth What shall I say to his Story of some of our Friends whom he makes to affirm that Christ is not ascended into Heaven he is in us Can it touch us or should he have said it and not have proved it Is that fair and candid Is it charitable supposing it were true which does not appear Or is it just to insinuate upon the People as dubious But let it be never so true saith he it cannot conclude the People if not the Act of the People The Church of England has Doctors of very different Sentiments would the Bishop think it fair the common Belief of the Church should thereby be concluded And in Page 35 he saith So that though we did not dwell upon Points but were concise in our Expressions yet whatever is implied or is implicable from any Assertion Justice as well as Charity always grants and so would the Bishop have done had they been uppermost in his Mind when his Pen run so fast against us It is prodigious Fallacy and Presumption in W. P. thus to treat the Bishop or any Christian Man when he did know in his Conscience how far both he and his Brethren for all his seeming fair Confessions were and still are guilty in both these things in which the Bishop very modestly doth but blame them for not expressing those Matters more fully and clearly to take away Suspicion out of the Minds of some who might be jealous of their Sincerity as they have but too great ground so to be For as to the first viz. Whither he that was born of the Virgin Mary and dyed c. was the Christ and the Son of God truly and properly To this W. P. hath expresly opposed in his Serious Apology p. 146. That the outward Person that suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny It 's true W. P. hath called him that was so born Christ and the Son of God yet that will not prove that he believed him so to be truly and properly The Socinians call Christ the Son of God and yet deny his eternal Generation And so W. P. and G. W. and others of them call the Man that was born of Mary Christ and the Son of God by some Figure because the Son of God the true Christ was in that Man as the thing containing gets the Name of the thing contained by a Metonimy But still they deny that that Man was properly the Son of God or that he was God And accordingly G. W. hath found fault again and again with that Expression of Christ his being God-man calling it unscripture Language and alledging it is no where to be found but in the Pope's Canons Hence it is that they deny that Christ hath our Nature in Heaven or that he consisteth of a Humane Nature or Body though they grant he had a Body but deny that he consists of it as any part of him as a Man may have a Coat or Garment but doth not consist of it The Foundation of which Error is that they do not believe the Hypostatical or Personal Union of the two Natures so as to constitute one Christ they will have Christ to be nothing properly but the Godhead and that is the Father and the Holy Ghost as well as the Son as I have plainly proved in my third Narrative especially And as concerning their denying Christ's Ascension into Heaven first seeing W. P. denieth the Locality of Heaven as well as of Hell he must needs grant that Christ's Body is either no where ascended or is every where which last he seems to be for p. 35. quoting Eph. 4. 10. that he ascended far above all Heavens that he might fill all things Then saith he he is in Man certainly But as he was the Divine Word he did fill all things and was in Man before he ascended but this Text doth not prove that his Body filleth all things for the Question is not Whither the Godhead is present in all things which yet is well known some of the Quakers have denied and some of them in Pensilvania charged me
that the Discoveries that he sets up for are not the same to all Nations and Persons as can easily be proved Ten thousands would break through the Hedge of his General Rule of binding them to the common Discoveries given to all Mankind as most of the People called Quakers do and would highly pretend to new and special Discoveries given to them by the Light within and to none others and the reason they will alledge that it is not given to others is their Unfaithfulness and especially that like Corah they Rebel against their Spiritual Guides and Leaders Thus we may see the great need of an outward Rule and the great Goodness of God that he hath given us one full and perfectly sufficient to be a Rule of our Faith and Life in all necessary Cases And besides If W. P's Argument have any Truth in it it would infer that Christ or the Spirit abstractly considered from all Revelation both Internal and External should be the Rule because he is the Ruler If the Ruler and the Rule must still be one and the same thing then suppose all Revelation Internal as well as External should cease Christ or the Spirit should be the Rule because the Ruler Who sees not the Fallacy and Sophistry of W. P's Argument here Hath not every common Artificer his Rule of Wood or Brass that is not the Man himself but the Instrument that he hath made and prepared for his use The Prophets Rule by which their Faith was ruled in what they Prophecied was not the Spirit but the internal Revelation of the Spirit the Spirit was their Guide and Ruler but not to speak properly their Rule but the Revelation they had or things revealed that was their Rule and so now the external Revelation of the same Truths is the Rule of our Faith whereby to believe them as the Spirit inwardly by his secret Illumination perswades us of their Truth and certainty not by any new verbal Record but by Sealing to the Record outwardly given Section 12. His falsly alledging that he has the first Reformers Fathers and Martyrs on his side viz. That the Scripture is not the Rule of Faith but the Light in every Conscience His Fallacy in this detected in the late Book called The Deism of W. P. and his Brethren c. The Spirits being superior to the Scripture proves not that the Spirit is the Rule of Faith His pretended ground of his pitying the Bishop for his supposed Ignorance Causeless and Fallacious His false Accusation and Charge against the Bishop and Church of England and all Protestant Opponents to the Quakers that they confine the Operations of the Spirit to the first or Apostolical Times That the Ministers among the Quakers are less acted by the Spirit of God in their Praying and Preaching than the Ministers among their Protestant Opponents evidently proved AND this leads me to detect another Fallacy of his which shall be the last I intend to notice though I could detect many more but these I think will suffice to shew how Fallacious he is Let us therefore hear him once more In his Page 106 and 107 after he has most grosly alledged that he has the concurring Testimony and Assent of the best and first Reformers as well as Martyrs and Fathers to confirm his Fundamental viz. That not the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures without but the Light within is the Rule of Faith and Life and that the Light or Spirit within is something at least co-ordinate if not superior and antecedent to the Scripture Which is more saith he than we said before and consequently is the Rule of Faith and Life superior to the Scripture Having in my late Treatise of W. P's Deism rescued the Fathers and first Reformers from his Perversions I shall only now take notice of his fallacious Inference by this his Argument The Light or Spirit within is something superior and antecedent in way of Excellency to the Scripture therefore it is the superior and antecedent Rule above the Scripture the Proposition is granted and I know none that ever denied it to wit That the Spirit which is God is greater and more excellent than the Scripture But then it followeth not that it is the greater or more excellent Rule because properly speaking it is no Rule at all Right Logicians will tell him if he will go and learn of them which it is to be suspected for all that he was a Student at Oxford he has great need to do that things in a different kind are not to be compared If it were asked of W. P. whither a Knife of Gold or a Knife of Steel were the best Knife he would answer surely though Gold is superior to Steel and more excellent yet it is not fit to be a Knife and Men make not the blades of Knives of Gold So though the Spirit be superior to the Revelation of it whither Internal or External yet not the Spirit but his Revelation is the Rule and Internal Revelation was the Rule to the Prophets whereby they believed their Prophecies and what internal Revelation was to them external Revelation is to us though we have not that internal Revelation that they had which was Prophetical and Extraordinary but the Spirit internally by way of Seal Sealing to us the Truth and Certainty of the external Revelation gives us as sure ground for the certainty of our Faith as they had of theirs But this inward Seal of the Spirit is no Rule either co-ordinate with the Scripture or subordinate to it because it doth not propose to us by it self all the things necessary to be believed by us in verbal Propositions as the Seal of a Bond though it is a Proof and Evidence to the Truth of the Bond yet it tells us not the Contents of it And now because the Bishop found fault with his calling the Scripture without and the Illumination of the Spirit within the double and agreeing Record of true Religion as indeed well he might so do in W. P's sense though in a qualified and sober sense it may be acknowledged as perceiving the fallacious sense that W. P. had of those words well observed by the Bishop That they will not believe what Scripture saith except the Light within them dictate the same And yet none of them can justly say that the Light within doth dictate to them by it self one Article of that called the Apostles Creed yea W. P. doth not so much as pretend that it doth to him yet most uncivilly he falls upon the Bishop p. 107 telling him It must be his turn now to pity the Bishop And truly saith he I do it with all my Heart And this it seems in retaliation of the Bishop's tender Expression of his Pitty and Compassion towards some well-meaning Persons among them who are mislead by their Teachers But for what must he needs Pity the Bishop Why for his supposed Ignorance that he will not allow the Spirit to be
them It is at best but the Old Heavens that are to be wrapped up as a Scrowl as he saith expresly in his conclusion near the end of his Book called A Discourse concerning the general Rule c. And in his Book called Quakerism a new Nick-name for Old Christianity P. 6. he saith Faith in the History of Christ's outward manifestation is a deadly Poyson these latter Ages has been insected with 9. Seeing the Scriptures are uncertain with respect to all those extraordinary discoveries upon the foundation of all others who are not Quakers as W. P. argueth expresly and can only be certain to such as have inward extraordinary Revelation of those things which W. P. confesseth are not needful P. 32. and are not given to the people called Quakers more than to others it necessarily follows according to W. P's Doctrine that the Faith of all those Doctrines concerning Adam's fall and Christ's Birth Death and Sufferings is uncertain as well to the Quakers as other because as he affirmeth the Scriptures that give the account of those things are uncertain unless upon the ground of inward extraordinary Revelation which neither the Quakers nor any others now have 10. Seeing therefore no Men in our days have these extraordinary discoveries given them by inward Divine Revelation such as the Prophets had concerning Adam's fall and Christ's Birth Death and Sufferings and many other things in controversie betwixt the Socinians and Trinitarians the Arians and Homousians Jews and Christians Papists and Protestants which cannot be certain to us and whereof we can have no certain Faith without inward divine Revelation which is given to none in our days as touching these things it is best to leave all asserting of them or disputing about them because we have no certainty of the truth of them by the common discoveries of the Light within that is the general Rule of Faith and Life 11. Whatever we read or hear read or Preached to us with Scripture proofs do not further oblige us to believe or practise them but as the common and ordinary discoveries given to all Mankind as well as to us Teach the same things Although we may Historically believe these extraordinary things concerning Adam and Christ above mentioned as we believe other Historical things yet we are under no obligation to believe them by any command of God nor is the not believing them our Sin because they fall not within the ordinary discoveries of the Light within given universally to Mankind which are the Rule of our Faith and Life and of all Mankind and we have no certainty of them and therefore we are under no Obligation to believe them 13. The common and ordinary discoveries given to all Mankind by the Light within are these which Paul calls the Work of the Law writ in the Heart and which some of the Ancients Philosophers called the Noble precepts writ in the Heart of Man and which W. P. calleth the Eternal precepts of the Spirit in the Conscience and the Testimony of the Spirit which he saith is the true Rule viz. of Faith and Life universally given to us and all Mankind P. 14. and 25. 14. These common and ordinary discoveries of the Light within given to all Mankind are but few such as that God is that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him That the way of God is a way of Purity Patience Meekness c. without which no Man shall see the Lord These and none other but these and such like common and ordinary discoveries given to all Mankind by the Light within concerning general Piety towards God as a Creator and Moral Justice and Temperance towards Men are the absolute Necessaries of Religion necessary to be believed and practised by us for Salvation 15. One great use of this Doctrine of W. P. and his Brethren if he and they can be believed is that it would bring all Men to be of one Religion by their Belief and Practise of these few things of Moral Piety and Justice according to the common and ordinary Discoveries given to all Mankind 16. This one Religion is Deisin which how much soever undervalued by false Christians whose Faith is Historical in a Christ without them is all one with true Christianity they are but two Names to one and the same thing as every true Christian is a true Deist so every true Deist is a true Christian for he who believes in God believes in Christ because Christ is God And what is Christ but Justice Meekness Patience saith W. P. Address to Protest p. 119. 2d Edit therefore every Just Meek and Patient Man is the true Christian be he a professed Infidel concerning Jesus of Nazareth Jew Mahometan or Pagan The meer Just Man ought not to be excluded the Communion of Christians saith he 17. Another great use of this Doctrine of W. P. is as he thinks that it would if duly improved put an end to all the Controversies and Heats among all Perswasions not only of those called Christians of all sorts as Papists and Protestants Arians and Homousians Socinians and Trinitarians which four he expresly mentions P. 45. but even betwixt Jews and Christians notwithstanding of their professed Unbelief as concerning Jesus of Nazareth and betwixt Mahometans and Christians by the same reason so that they may own another to be their Christian Brethren 18. And seeing the Name Christian is offensive to Jews and Mahometans it may be laid aside as also the Names Jesus and Christ for it is not the outward Name of any thing that saveth nor doth the Light within Men by its common discovery teach them that Name And because many are dissatisfied to call the Light within Christ and Jesus as Socinians Jews and Mahometans and many others of those called Christians let it suffice to call it by the name Light which is owned by all and is offensive to none and all may be called Deists or Professors of the Light within 19. And ieeing many also are dissatisfied to say or think that the Light within every Man is God or any Supernatural and Divine Principle but think it is nothing other but Conscience or the natural Light of Man's Reason let that Dispute also come to an end for Men may agree about the common Dictates and Discoveries of it though they agree not about the Nature and Essence of it so as to know what it is they shall have the Benefit of it to be happy by obeying it though they know not what it is as the Plow-man has the same Benefit that the best Philosopher has of the Sun in the Firmament though he knows not what the Sun is either for Substance Quantity or Quality 20. One great Pinch and Difficulty in the case is certainly to know the just Extent and Number of the common Discoveries of the Light within given to all Mankind as whither the same number of those eternal Precepts and Laws writ in every Man's Heart be given to all Men and whither some of those which W. P. will say are the Dictates of the Light within Men universally will not be denied by others even of his Brethren to be the Dictates of the Light within as particularly whither attesting the Name of God in worldly matters when controverted is condemned by the Light within Whither Self-defence by carnal Weapons be against the Dictates of the Light within for many of his Brethren think both are not Whither all G. F's Orders about outward things opposed by many Quakers are the Dictates of the Light within with respect to its ordinary Discoveries and whither the Quakers especially G. F. have not set up for some new Revelations and Commands beside the common Discoveries of the Light within though they have rejected the external Revelations and Commands of Christ in the Scripture that are not taught them by the common Discoveries of the Light within Christian Reader I have set before thee this short View of W. P's and his Brethrens Dejsm and Scepticism not to approve of it but that thou with all good Christians should with the greatest Abhorrency loath and detest it That this is a true Account of W. P's and his Brethrens Principles and necessary Consequences therefrom I offer to prove to his or their Faces before any Impartial Auditory George Keith London the 17th of the 3d Month 1699. FINIS See his Discourse of The General Rule of Faith ad finem
Spirit and these three are really one yet in his former Books particularly in his Sandy Foundation never yet retracted by him he hath sufficiently discovered his gross and vile error in that fundamental Doctrine of the Christian Faith thus arguing not only against their being Three Persons but their being Three otherwise than Nominally which was the Sabellian Heresie since the Father is God the Son is God and the Spirit is God which their opinion necessitates them to confess then unless the Father Son and Spirit are three distinct nothings they must be three distinct Substances and consequently three distinct God's And he bringeth Five Arguments against their being a Holy Three P. 12 13 14. In his Third Section he seemeth to profess his and his Brethrens Faith in Scripture terms But this his professed Faith is quite inconsistent with what he hath delivered in his other Books here he saith That the Word was made Flesh and dwelt among Men and was and is the only begotten of the Father full of Grace and Truth his beloved Son c. who tasted Death for every Man and dyed for Sin that we might dye to Sin But as it hath been above shewed out of his Sandy Foundation he hath argued against any such distinction as of the Father and the Son in the God-head as inferring a plurality of God's and though here he professeth to believe that this only begotten Son dyed for Sin yet in his Serious Apology Page 146 he saith That the outward Person that suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny And in his guide mistaken P. 25. Christ Co-essential and Co-eternal with his Father c. of being made Man of his Dying Rising and Ascending into Heaven c. he saith of all this that it is confused Babble and by Rote Canting by paths of vain Tradition and Invention results of Factious and corrupted Counsels And in his Rejoinder to John Faldo Page 299. he plainly denyes that the Body of Christ was any constitutive part of Christ and for seven leaves together contends against John Faldo That Christ did not Dye nor hang on the Cross but only the Body which he will not have to be any part of him To this Doctrine of W. P. doth that of G. Whitehead agree a Man as great or rather much greater among the Quakers as W. P. who saith in his Dipper Plunged P. 13. Jesus Christ God-man is not Scripture Language And in his Christian Quaker P. 140. 141. though he grants that Christ had a humane Body of Flesh and Bones yet he denys that he consisted of it and saith he distinguisheth betwixt Christ's having a Body and consisting of it And in a Book given forth by the Quakers from their second days Meeting whereof G. W. is supposed the Author called A Testimony for the true Christ and his Light in confutation of R. Cobbet printed 1668. They deny the Humanity of Christ as Humanity signifieth the Earthly Nature of Man's Body as coming from Humus the Ground but as Humanity signifies Meekness Gentleness Mercifulness as opposite to Cruelty in this last sence they own Christ's Humanity but deny it in the former which yet is the true sense of Scripture and of all true Christians Section 2. His Fallacy in pretending to own Justification by Christ the Propitiation in Contradiction to what he hath delivered in his Serious Apology and Sandy Foundation and his fallacious way of stating the Doctrine of Justification wherein he misrepresents his Opponents IN his fourth Section as seemingly Orthodox as he professeth himself to be as fallacious and insincere he is seeing he knoweth in his own Conscience that what he hath here delivered is utterly inconsistent with what is extant in his other Books never as yet retracted by him nor doth either he or his Brethren own any change of perswasion from what they had ever since they came under the profession of Quakers but as one of them hath lately said in Print As God is the same and Truth is the same so his People are the same viz. the Quakers I shall first set down his present profession of what he believes concerning Justification as followeth That as we are only Justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation and not by works of Righteousness that we have done so there is an absolute necessity that we receive and obey to unfeigned Repentance and amendment of Life the Holy Light and Spirit of Jesus Christ in order to obtain that Remissionand Justification from Sin c. But in contradiction to this see what his Doctrine is in his Serious Apology P. 148. And indeed says W. P. this we deny viz. Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which does now deluge the whole World Note Reader If according to W. P's former words we Only are Justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation and not by works of Righteousness that we have done then it is plainly evident by the same Doctrine that we are Justified by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us for these two manners of Speech are perfectly equivalent viz. That we are only Justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the propitiation and that we are Justified by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person wholly without us The word Only plainly importing the Righteousness of Christ Wholly without us unless there be some great fallacy in W. P's words as the sequel will make appear a little after But if we take these two quotations in their genuine Sense the one that we are Justified by the Righteousness of Christ Only i. e. Wholly without us from the guilt of Sin and the other that this we deny i. e. that we are Justified by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils c. it is a perfect inconsistency and contradiction And yet now W. P. doth teach the same Doctrine which formerly he called the Doctrine of Devils without any change of his perswasion as he plainly tells in the conclusion of his Paper This saith he hath all along been the general stream and tendency both of our Ministry and Writings as our books will make appear But what a Forehead of Bras must W. P. have with so great confidence to assert so known an untruth Again the same W. P. in his forecited Serious Apology thus argueth P 148. against Christ's imputative Righteousness Death came by actual Sin not imputative therefore Justification unto Life came by actual Righteousness not imput ative Note Reader If we are not Justified by Christ's imputed which he calls imputative Righteousness as here he asserts
Christ to every Man so by W. P's Confession it hath not revealed these things to him or his Brethren for he grants they belong to extraordinary Revelation and fall not within the ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind and are none of the absolute Necessaries of Religion and that such Revelation is not necessary and yet without such internal extraordinary Revelation of these things they cannot have the certain Faith of them as he confesseth Section 4. His Fallacy in pretending to own the Doctrine of Justification by Christ the Propitiation the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead to be Fundamentals of Christianity whereas he doth not in truth own any one of them His ill use of the Bishop's Charity by his own Argument retorted on himself it is proved he hath denied all the Fundamental Articles of Christianity The chief reason why W. P. and his Brethren believe not the Fundamentals of Christianity is That they deny the Holy Scripure to be the Rule of their Faith and set up the Light within to be the Rule which yet they confess doth not reveal to them any of those Fundamentals BY all which it plainly appeareth how disingenuous and fallacious W. P. hath been not only in the Paper called Gospel Truths published by him and his three Brethren but in his Answer to the Bishop of Cork on that Head yea and on all the other Heads it were easie to shew his Shuffling and Equivocation as well as his unfair and uncivil Treatment of him To detect which a little further let us consider W. P's words in answer to the Bishop of Cork p. 25 and 26. I am of opinion saith W. P. If he viz. the Bishop had well considered the Force and Comprehensiveness of our Belief concerning Christ That pleaseth him so well he might have saved himself the trouble of what he has published to the World upon the rest of them for whoever believes in Christ as a Propitiation in order to Remission of Sins and Justification of Sinners can hardly disbelieve any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion Since every such Person must necessarily believe in God because it is with him alone Man is to be justified To be sure he must believe in Christ for that is the very Proposition he must also believe in the Holy Ghost because he is the Author of his Conviction Repentance and Belief he must believe Heaven and Hell Rewards and Punishments and consequently the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust For why should he be concerned about the being freed from the Guilt of his Sin if he were unaccountable in another World So that acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a Propitiation in order to the Remission of Sin comprehends the main Doctrine of the Christian Religion And as so many Lines drawn from the Circumference to the Center they all meet and center in Christ And indeed it is as the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion Were this confession of W. P. as sincere as it is seemingly fair it would prove that his Doctrine were indeed Christian and no doubt might and ought to give to the Bishop or any other that were doubtful in the case good Satisfaction of the Christianity of his Doctrine But that all this is meer paint and equivocation what I have above quoted out of his Books fairly and fully doth sufficiently prove That the profession W. P. made of his belief in his Gospel Truths pleased the Bishop so well whereof W. P. takes such particular and great notice and thereby takes occasion to blame his disingenuity as well as his troubling himself with publishing what he hath done to the World Yea W. P. makes it next to impossible that it was the first time the Bishop hath heard of that Doctrine among them viz. the acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a propitiation in order to the remission of Sins and Justifying them as Sinners from Guilt I say that this his profession pleased the Bishop so well did proceed from the Bishops great Charity and Moderation Charitably believing that W. P's Heart and Pen did go along together but as W. P. hath made an ill use of the Bishop's Charity and Judgment thus impertinently to reflect on him so it is fit the Bishop should be better acquainted with W. P's equivocations and double dealings with him which he may easily find out by an indifferent search into his former Books W. P. in his above mentioned confession professeth his belief in Christ as a propitiation and this he would seem to make the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion But what doth W. P. mean by Christ the Propitiation and Faith in him as such doth he mean the same that the Bishop meaneth and all sincere Christians Nay nothing less Christ within as he is the Light and Life as he offers up himself within his Children in the Nature of a Mediating Sacrifice the Lamb within but not the Lamb without the High-Priest within is the Propitiation and his blood as shed within which is the Life and the Life is the Light within as he hath both printed and preached is that Propitiation And certainly did he mean that Faith in the Man Christ without us as he outwardly was crucified was necessary to Christianity and the Characteristick of that Religion and that the acknowledgment of Christ as such was necessary to constitute a Christian he would not plead that a meer Just Man who has no Faith in Christ as the Word Incarnate is a Christian and that he who believes in God believes in Christ because Christ is God as he has argued in his address to Protestants And did he really think that to believe and acknowledge Christ to wit as outwardly crucified and raised again to be the Propitiation was the Navel of Christianity and the Characteristick of that Religion he would not have excluded that Faith from the absolute necessaries of Religion as he hath plainly done in his discourse concerning the general Rule of Faith and Life Nor would he have set up the Light within every Man with respect to its ordinary discoveries of Moral Piety and Justice without any Revelation of Christ as he came outwardly in the Flesh to be the general Rule of Faith to all Christians as well as to all Heathens which is making Deism and Christianity but one and the same thing tho' now he seems to distinguish them by calling Christianity that Religion whereof the Faith and acknowledgment of Christ the Propitiation is the Navel and Characteristick But seeing W. P. doth so Grosly prevaricate and equivocate about Christ the Propitiation and Faith in him as such and that it hath been proved he hath not the true Faith of Christ the Propitiation nor so much as a true notion of it 't is fit to apply W. P's words against himself and to Argue from his words by the Rule of contraries As whoever believes in Christ as a
Propitiation in order to remission of Sins can hardly disbelieve any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion so by good consequence contrariwise whoever believes not in Christ as a Propitiation in the true sense of Scripture generally received by all true Christians to wit as outwardly Crucified Dead and Raised again c. can hardly believe any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion but W. P. believes not in Christ as a Propitiation in order to remission of Sin c. in the true sense of Scripture generally received by all true Christians therefore W. P. hardly believeth any fundamental Article of the Christian Religion to wit as peculiar to the same The first proposition is proved by the Rule of contraries from W. P's assertion as I think he will readily confess the second proposition which is the Assumption is fully proved from what is above at large quoted by me out of his former Books never to this day retracted by him And though he reckoneth up the Doctrine of the Trinity viz. of the Father of Christ the Son and of the Holy Ghost the Doctrine of Heaven and Hell the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust to be Fundamental Doctrines yea and the main of Christian Doctrine yet from what is above proved out of his Books he hath plainly opposed the true Christian Doctrine both of the Holy Trinity and of Heaven and Hell and as plainly he hath opposed the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust in their respective Bodies as I have fully proved in my third Narrative and so have his Brethren G. Whitehead Richard Hubberthorne and others only at present I shall quote these following passages out of some of his former Books in his Reason against Railing in answer to Tho. Hicks P. 138. he thus plainly argueth against the deceased Saints looking for any future Resurrection of the Body which Tho. Hicks argued for Is the Joy of the Ancients saith W. P. now in Glory imperfect or are they in Heaven but by halves But why must the Felicity of the Soul depend upon that of the Body Is it not to make the Soul a kind of Window to be without its beloved Body a better sort of Purgatory Again P. 134. If a thing can be the same and notwithstanding changed for shame let us never make so much stir against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for the absurdity of it is rather out-done than equalled by this carnal Resurrection Again in his answer to J. Faldo called the Invalidity of J. Faldo's Vindication P. 369. It 's sown a Natural Body It 's raised a Spiritual Body and I do utterly deny saith he that this Text is concerned in the Resurrection of Man's carnal Body at all but the States of Men under the First and Second Adam Men are sown into the World Natural but they are raised Spiritual through him who is the Resurrection and the Life and so they are Sons of the Second Adam Nor need any to wonder why W. P. and his Brethren should disbelieve all these fundamental Doctrines of Christianity which now he professeth to own and that as Fundamental but still quite in a most differing Sense from all true Christians for with what certainty can he or they believe them they acknowledge not the Holy Scriptures to be the Rule of their Faith in any of these things or indeed of any others they have no certainty of the Truth of any of these he now calls Fundamentals from the Rule of Faith set up by them which is the Light within them with respect to its ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind but none of these Fundamental Doctrines above mentioned fall within these ordinary Discoveries as W. P. hath confessed for they belong to extraordinary Revelation And if he should affirm they did belong to the ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind he cannot prove it What obscure Knowledge any of them called Heathen Philosophers had of any of these great Mysteries W. P. cannot prove they had it from the Light within but Traditionally either from the Jews and ancient Patriarchs and Prophets or from some among themselves prophetically inspired as it is reported of the Sybils the which report were it true doth not prove that the Knowledge and Faith of these great Fundamentals did fall within the ordinary discoveries of the Light within given to Mankind in general Section 5. His uncivil Treatment of the Bishop as if he did render the Text 1 John 5. 7. defective whereas the Bishop only charg'd the Defect on W. P 's Confession which though given in Scripture words yet not in the true Sense of Scripture His Fallacious Argument against the Holy Trinity answered His Fallacy and Equivocation about his calling him who was born of the Virgin Mary Jesus Christ and the Son of God whereas he hath denied him to be properly so And his abusive Treatment of the Bishop on that Head IN his Page 30 he proceeds in his unchristian and uncivil Treatment of the Bishop unjustly charging him as if the Text 1 John 5. 7. were defective with the Bishop and as if he did render the Text it self short which saith W. P. with submission I think is a bold Attempt in one of his Station If he believes the 39 Articles But all this is nothing but a Scandalous Reflection on the Bishop and a Shuffling and Cover wherewithall to hide his own Error and Incredulity The Bishop might well enough without charging any defect on the Text as he doth not in the least charge a defect on this Confession of W. P. and his Brethren because though given in one Scripture Text yet he had just cause to question not to be given in the true sense of that Scripture for most that are unsound as touching the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity even Socinians as well as others will profess yea and have professed to give their Faith in the Text yea and all other Texts of the like nature who yet are professed Unbelievers of the true Doctrine of the Holy Trinity And though W. P. and his Brethren will frankly confess they believe that the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are one God one in Substance and Essence and thus think to clear themselves of Sociniansm yet he and they at the same time are grosly guilty of Sabellianism acknowledging no distinction betwixt Father Son and Holy Ghost other than Nominal or at most in Manifestation and Operation ad extra and with relation to the Creatures So that W. P's Notion and Faith of the Holy Trinity which he calls the Scripture Trinity but it is not the Scripture Trinity but the Sabellian Trinity is no other than this that as the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God one Essence and Being so the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father and the Holy Ghost is the Son and the Son is the Holy Ghost for as I have quoted him above in his Sandy Foundation he disputeth not
God as to Preach and Pray by it But can it be supposed that Men are acted or moved by the Spirit of God to bring forth so many false Doctrines vile Heresies and Errors and gross Untruths and Fallacies and uncharitable Judgments and Perversions of their Opponents words as they commonly do in their writings generally But what way to the Kingdom do they Preach Possibly they will say Christ who said he was the way But how do they Preach him to be the way Just as W. P. hath here and elsewhere Preached him in Print to wit as the Word God and the Light within whose Nature is to discover Sin and lead out of it all such who Love and obey the Convictions of it and that only and alone by the common Illumination which by W. P's confession discovers nothing of Christ as he became a Propitiation for our Sins by his Death on the Cross The great subject of the Apostles Preaching was Christ Crucified and remission of Sin by Faith in him and how all Spiritual Blessings yea the gift of the Holy Spirit himself comes to us by the Crucified Jesus and Faith in him but little or nothing of this sort of Preaching is to be found either in your Meetings or Books but much against it though to cover your Vile Errors you will now and then seem to own it but forgetting your selves quickly disown it all again Yea W. P. knoweth in his Conscience how both publickly and privately he hath blamed me and charged me with my being an Apostate for my asserting the necessity of Friends Preaching this Faith to wit in Christ as he dyed for our Sins c. as being absolutely necessary to Regeneration for us to have this Faith and to know and experience Christ formed in us and to live dwell and Rule in us For this my Christian Testimony he charged me at Ratcliff Meeting that I did what in me lay to pluck up the Testimony of Truth by the Roots And at the Yearly Meeting at Grace-Church-street in the Year 1694 he stood up and accused me before some hundred Friends of them called the Ministry and others that I was seeking to bring in a New method of Preaching among Friends which was to Preach Christ without and the necessity of Faith in him in order to bring People to the knowledge and experience of the new Birth and Christ in them as he dwells in the Saints And also he knows in his Conscience when and where and to whom he hath accused me for Preaching Christ without in opposition to Christ within which God knoweth I never did And therefore in his so doing he hath falsly accused me though his and his Brethrens false Notions of Christ within as above explained I have opposed and by God's help shall oppose and witness against while I live But the true Scripture sense of Christ within as the Word God and of Christ the Word made Flesh without us who is still but one Christ and of his sufficiency to our Salvation both as without us and within us without us as he came to procure and purchase it for us by his Blood and Merits and within us by his Spiritual appearance and special Illumination of the Holy Spirit in the use of the outward means to apply it to us and to work the blessed and glorious effect of it in us I have owned and still hope to own it to the end of my days As for W. P's Arguments against Baptism and the Supper as outwardly administred I know not one of them but I have fully answered that may seem to require an answer and many more in my late Book called The Arguments of the Quakers against Baptism and the Supper Examined and Refuted which he ought more particularty to have answered being so particularly concerned than to have brought them up again as if they had been new Dishes which are nothing but the Old after some Fashion new dressed If the Bishop thinks fit to notice them he may for me to meddle with them were but Actum agere to do what I have already done Section 11. His uncivil Treatment of the Bishop of Cork as if he were Ignorant of Regeneration and the way how it is wrought The Bishop has soundly and Christianly explained the Doctrine of Regeneration and the way how it is wrought W. P's great Fallacy in his definition of Regeneration and the way how it is wrought His Fallacy in seeming to agree to the Bishop's Assertion from that Text Rom. 10. 9. His Fallaeious Argument that because the Spirit Leads and Rules therefore the Spirit is the Rule detected the Ruler and the Rule distinct The great Blessing and Advantage of the Scriptures being a means to preserve us by the Grace of God and assistance of his Holy Spirit from Satan's Delusions and Impostures IN his 26th Page he saith I think nothing makes a Man a true Christian but Regeneration the Power of the Son of God revealed in the Soul converting it to God And in his P. 29 he saith I would have my Reader reflect well upon this great and Essential Truth Tho he were as Big as a Bishop Reader what thinkst thou of this Uncivil Proud and Disdainful Treatment But so far as I understand W. P. sheweth himself as if he were much more big than a Bishop he treats the Modest and humble Bishop as if he were one of his meanest subjects But for all W. P's pretence to be so Skilful in that great and essential Truth of the necessity of Regeneration and the manner and way of its being wrought above and beyond the Bishop the Bishop has beyond all doubt in his short Testimony in three or four lines on that Head made it evident that he understands the Mystery of Regeneration and the manner how it is wrought better than W. P. for all his Big and Lordly thoughts he has of himself and for all his Big talk of the new Creature and Self-denial there is great a deal more of it in his Books than in his Life But mark how W. P. describes the manner how Regeneration is wrought That it is by the power of the Son of God revealed in the Soul converting it to God which are such general words and terms and true when taken in a true Scripture sense that not only every Bishop but every Curate of the Church of England and every ordinary Christian can say the same But under these general Words W. P. hideth a great Fallacy what doth W. P. mean by the power of the Son of God revealed in the Soul converting it to God No other thing but the power of the common Illumination of the Light within given to Infidel Jews Mahometans and all moral Heathens who if they are but meer Just Men according to W. P's Gospel and System of Divinity they are Regenerated Persons though they have no special Illumination of the Holy Spirit giving them any inward and spiritual knowledge and Faith of the Son of