he made upon our Saviour And I believe a Quaker that says he hath attained such perfection that he doth not commit one sin cannot say but the Devil tempts him to many Now if the Devil be such a fool to attempt that which is never effected why may not the Jesuites do the same For I always thought the Devil was too cunning for a Jesuite and I doubt they will find it so too at the last 4. But why doth W. L. make such a stir about this Book called The Quakers Pedigree I am of opinion there is some wit if not much truth contained therein But why doth he insinuate as if the Baptists made it and as if they promoted it This must needs be to render them ridiculous which is a very unworthy design But to prevent him from persevering therein for the future I will tell him what the man is not which made that Book HE is not one of the People called Baptists I could let him know who did write it but I will not humour him so far at this time because he hath so pleased himself to throw dirt upon us in Print about it for which he deserves a sharper Reproof than I will permit my pen to give him at this time Will. Pen who seems to have dipt his quill in Gall and Wormwood may do that piece of Justice for me if he please But said W. L. Why should we think they deny the Person of Christ it is not long since they were railed on as the Spawn of SOCINUS for denying the Divinity and now they are faced about to oppose his Humanity either they are very unsettled or T. H. misunderstands them Answ Will. Luddington is no sooner got out of General Venables Wood but he is got into one himself But I 'le do that kindness for him as the Law required when a man saw his neighbours Ox or Ass going astray to bring him home if I can There is a man hath written a Book very lately entituled The Christian a Quaker The Quaker a Christian Which they seem to glory in very much and do him the kindness to sell his Books And one Reason he gives to prove that the name of a Christian doth most properly belong to a Quaker is this Because a Quaker is an Ass His words are these He being before speaking of Antioch saith The Disciples were there first called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Christ's Asses And in a break made for that purpose he inserts these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Asses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ's Asses page 23 24. And continuing his Discourse upon this subject in the latter end of p. 25. and beginning of p. 26. he hath these words But these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom this Author calls Quakers meaning T. H. walk by a better Rule for if they receive a Blow on the one Cheek they turn to them that give it the other also so they profess patiently undergoing all manner of Affronts Persecutions Reproaches and Revilings returning not evil for evil according to the Commandment of the Everlasting God So that they may truly enough be termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ's Asses To which I answer Answ 1. This Author doth abuse his unlearned Reader for that word in the 11th of Acts vers 26. is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which the Learned Leigh in his Critica Sacra p. 288. renders thus Qui Christi discipulum se profitetur à Christo se denominat Who professes themselves Disciples of Christ and derive their name from Christ And it is so used also in Acts 26. 28. and in 1 Pet. 4. 16. both quoted by the said Learned Author But suppose we should interpret the word as the Quakers Advocate doth then we must read Acts 26. 28. thus Almost thou perswadest me to be one of Christ's Asses and 1 Pet. 4. 16. But if any man suffer as one of Christ's Asses let him not be ashamed But how ridiculous this would be I leave to all that hold the name of Christian as Venerable to determine If this will not make a Quaker to blush what will 2. But secondly Besides those he mentions I am perswaded he consulted as his Oracle in this point that famous Conjurer Cornelius Agrippa who at the end of his Book called The vanity of Sciences gives the like ridiculous account of a Christian by comparing him to an Ass But what have the Quakers gained by this man's Book He hath proved them to be Asses and he that took them to be otherwise was mistaken in them And I am much afraid I shall find one property of an Ass in W. L. which is given by a very Learned Author now living his words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An Ass some way or other saith he it seems to be a troublesome Beast by its name for the root is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was troublesome and so any Ass tanquam Davus aliquis perturbat omnia troubleth all where he cometh But let the trouble be as great as it will I will go on to prosecute my purpose and perform my promise to bring him out of this Labyrinth if I can 1. W. L. saith They railed on them as the Spawn of SOCINUS for denying the Divinity 2. But now he saith they are faced about to oppose his Humanity From whence he draws this Conclusion Either they are very unsettled or T. H. misunderstands them And till this Dilemma be removed it seems W. L. can 't go forward If this be the difficulty I 'le do him that kindness to remove it 1. I do affirm That in this point T. H. doth not misunderstand them for the Quakers do say That Christ is not a distinct Person without us Geo. Whitehead in Dip. pl. p. 13. saith Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites and Muggletonians The Socinians tell us of a personal Christ and that the Man Christ Jesus our Lord hath in Heaven a place remote from Earth a Humane body But doth he believe him to be the Eternal God whilst he imagines him to be a personal Christ a Humane body so limited and confined to a remoteness Geo. Whitehead Append. to Reas against Railing p. 21. Therefore you see the difficulty lies not here 2. If any persons did rail on them as the Spawn of Socinus for denying the Divinity I suppose they were mistaken But suppose they should have said they held that part of Socinus Doctrine that saith Christ gave no plenary Satisfaction to the Justice of God for the sins of men herein they had not wronged them For while the Quakers believe Christ to be only God he is not capable to suffer death it being absurd to imagine that the Deity can become Mortal And because they deny the Body to be a part of the Christ they are forced to say Christ never died and so consequently he did not satisfie Justice
is Because no one of them singly nor the whole Body conjoyned know how to clear themselves of those things he hath charged upon them without rejecting the chief of their Ministry whose Tongues and Pens have so often asserted these pernicious Doctrines But that I perceive they are not yet willing to do But let us hear how well W. L. can bring up the Reer in excusing their denial of that great Fundamental Principle of the Christian Religion The Resurrection of the Body W. L. saith Of all the Articles against the Quakers none hath made many honest serious People more afraid of them nor the vulgar more rail at them than this 1. As for the vulgars railing it concerns not me they should have forbore divulging such dangerous Notions 2. But whereas he saith This Principle of theirs in denying the Resurrection of this Body that dies hath made many honest serious People more afraid of them than any other Article they hold I think it hath not been without just cause from the perniciousness thereof And I have good Authority to justifie me therein for the Apostle Paul saith If there be no Resurrection of the dead then is Christ not risen And if Christ be not risen then is our Preaching vain and your Faith is also vain and ye are yet in your sins Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished And if in this life only we have hope in Christ we are of all men most miserable These are some of those evil and dangerous Consequences charged by the Apostle Paul upon this very Doctrine as maintained by the Quakers in denying the Resurrection of this Body from the dead as you may see at large in 1 Cor. 15. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 c. But let us hear W. L. speak his thoughts about it W. L. saith But to tell you freely my thoughts about it there is less cause for it upon this account than any of the former Reply I hope those that read this will be fully satisfied that there is no more difference between the Quakers and W. L. in this Article than there is between Four-pence and a Groat which with us in England is the same piece of Money But hath W. L. no way left to excuse his Friends at the last gasp now their Cause is expiring Yes yes don't think you shall find him without a shift 1. W. L. Flies to what he supposes the Charge suggests viz. That there is no Resurrection insomuch saith he that I have heard lewd men swear and curse them for denying the Resurrection Reply But here W. L. evades the Question which is so plain that it needs none of his Suggestions to darken it Why don't he answer to that For the Quaker saith This Body that dies shall not rise again Speak out and be not afraid to answer now it comes to the point 2. But saith W. L. Doth not their exposing themselves to all the miseries of this life confute the charge Answ I answer No For the Sadducees were men that professed Religion in opposition to the common received Opinion among the Jews and so consequently were exposed to sufferings and yet they denied the Resurrection of this Body and the Being of Angels which are Spirits c. Acts 23. 8. For it 's evident a man may give all his goods to the poor and his body to be burned and have no love to God nor be truly Religious 1 Cor. 13. 3. And what think you of the Esseans a Sect among the Jews of whom Josephus reports That nothwithstanding they denied the Resurrection of the body saying that it is corruptible and that the matter thereof is not perpetual Yet could they not be forced to revile their Law-maker or to eat any forbidden meats by breaking off the members of their bodies fiery Torments and all kind of Tortures which were laid upon them Nay in the very midst of their griefs and pains they scoffed at their Tormentors and laughing joyfully yielded up their Souls as though they hoped to receive them again Joseph Of the Wars of the Jews Lib. 2. p. 616. 3. Whereas it may be objected That they would be more Immoral in their lives if they expected no Resurrection of the body Answ I answer That the Sadducees were men of such strict lives that it 's reported they had their name Sadducees from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tzidek which signifies Just or Righteous and yet they deni'd the Resurrection from the dead Matth. 22. 23. And for those Esseans before-mentioned if he will read Josephus he may find that they were exceeding zealous for the Law and stricter in their lives than the Quakers are by many degrees It 's too long to be here inserted But if W. L. will take the pains to read that Book of Josephus I have mentioned Chap. 7. he will find what I say to be true Besides it 's well known that there were men among the Heathen full of Moral Vertues and men of great strictness in their lives and yet agreed with the Quakers in this That this body shall not rise again Quest If that be not the Resurrection intended what then is it that shall rise from the dead W. L. answers The Apostle has given us as good an account of this Doctrine as we may desire and to that they refer us But suppose saith he they should tell us This very Body should not rise what care I c. Reply 1. I am well satisfied with the account the Apostle Paul gives of the Resurrection in 1 Cor. 15. but not at all informed of the Quakers meaning about it by their referring us thither because I know they can Allegorize some of the plainest Texts in the Bible and why may they not be supposed to do so by this 2. I cannot possibly understand that the Quakers intend the same Resurrection the Apostle doth in 1 Cor. 15. for he tells us That the same body that is buried which he calls sown in corruption shall be raised in incorruption Which agrees with the saying of our Saviour The hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth They that have done good to the Resurrection of life and they that have done evil to the Resurrection of damnation John 5. 28 29. As also with the Prophet Daniel And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt Dan. 12. 2. with many more that might be alledged all which do plainly prove the Resurrection we contend for But the Quaker saith Such a Resurrection is inconsistent with Scripture Reason and the Belief of all men right in their wits Will. Penn. Reas ag Rail p. 133. 3. But what doth W. L. mean when he saith He is willing to part with this Body for a better and that he will never be angry with him who promiseth and assures him a pound
which as it refers to men as by the scope of the place is evident it is not only an Vntruth but Blasphemy Neither will that relieve him to bring in W. P. saying That every such Illumination is not very God for if it were then W. P. must believe there were as many Gods as there are Men in the World because he faith that every man hath that Illumination For W. P. in his Reason against Rayling Page 56. saith Geo. Whitehead owns it in its own being to be no other than God himself where he approves of that saying and adds this to it himself We assert the true Light with which every man is enlightned to be in it self the Christ of God and the Saviour of the World Now if W. P. will contradict himself who can help that it's not T. H. his fault but his own Reader here he confesses the charge so that Mr. Hicks is no Forger 2. Pagan Principle HIS Second Charge is That the Soul is a Part of God and of God's Being without beginning and Infinite W. L. His Answer is What hurt is there in this if they do say so I never heard the Heathen were of this Opinion I see no cause to be offended much less to account them Heathen if the Quakers do count it a part of God Rep. Surely this Man is little Read in Heathen Authors that he can say he never heard the Heathen were of this Opinion that the Soul is a Part of God c. Let him but read Seneca I presume he hath learning enough to do it because he is a Schoolmaster and he will find him to be of this very Opinion These are his Words Quid aliud voces animum quam Deum in Corpore humano hospitantem What can we call the Soul saith he but God abiding in an humane Body And of the Reason wherewith the Soul of Man is endowed he affirms that it is Part of the Divine Spirit in Man's Body For these are his Words Ratio nihil aliud est quam in corpus humanum pars Divini Spiritus c. Seneca Epist 67. So that if I would trouble my self and you I could shew you that herein there is a great union between a Quaker and a Pagan in their Opinion about the Soul of Man the which may be most elegantly detected in the Words of a Learned Author of our times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a little Deity guesting in a body of Flesh Thus Reader thou mayest see that T. H. is no Forger and also that W. L. though ignorantly hath rightly called this A Pagan Principle But W. L. saith The great Heat of disputes of that nature has caused a scoffing Poet to Rhyme thus of OUR Disputes These Disputants like Rams and Bulls Do fight with Arms that spring from Skulls And when they argue the greatest Part O' th Contest falls on Terms of Art Who would but think these Verses had been made upon the late Disputes between us and the Quakers as W. L. words it and yet I find that Hudibras is the Poet and the Title of the Book tells me it was written in the time of the late War and Licensed November 11. 1662. Hudibras Part 1. page 267. Canto 3. But I perceive he can allow himself a liberty to say any thing yea rather than T. H. shall go free he will jeer his Friend W. P. also for if the Author of the Quakers Quibbles be not much mistaken the great fault which made that Dispute so fruitless lay in W. P. and his Friends for in page 10. he asks W. P. this question When thou camest to the Reasoning and Disputative part how many shuffles and put-offs How many pittiful Evasions and poor shifts didst thou make how many delays how much loss of time I was not only ashamed to see it but admired thy self and Friends did not blush at it to see you make yourselves and party so ridiculous in the Eyes of others What Rayling instead of Reasoning What Clamour What Noise What Tautologies What Disorder What Discord and Confusion No Argument to me more fully proved you to be no Christians than your Unchristian carriage in that Meeting And he that speaks this is an Indifferent Person neither Quaker nor Baptist As for the abuse he hath done to the Poet in repeating the two first lines otherwise than they are in Hudibras I question not but Hudibras knows how to right himself better than I can direct him in the mean time I would advise W. L. to take that good advice nosec tripsum to study the knowledg of himself more and then he will not be at so much leisure to pry into the lives and espouse the Quarrel of other Men had he been so imployed when he wrote this Book he had saved me this pains for I can assure him that I don't use to imploy my Time after this sort nor would I have done it now only I hope God may have some Honour by detecting his folly and it may be I may be made Instrumental to bring him to a sight of it I had thought to have passed over this Head but the man makes such a stir about an impertinent Question that I am minded to say something to it lest my silence should prove his prejudice Quest But Why saith W. L. may not we aswel say God hath given us a Part of himself as a Part or Measure of his spirit which hath no beginning nor ending Ans I answer as it is in the Question and relates to the Soul of Man I will tell you why we may not so speak because there is a great Disparity betwixt the Soul of Man and the Spirit of God As 1. The Soul of Man is a Creature made by God Isaiah 57. 16. For I will not contend for ever neither will I be always wroth for the Spirit should fail before me and the Souls which I have made 2. But the Holy Spirit is increated and of the same Essence with the Father as the Quaker himself confesseth and from thence takes occasion to confound the Personal Existence of all the Three Now though I may say God hath given us a measure of his Spirit because we are made to partake of the Gifts and Graces thereof yet I may not affirm that therefore the Soul in which they do reside is a part of God and of God's Being without Beginning and Infinite But says W. L. That Man hath an Immortal Soul we all grant and yet before he is got ten lines forward he saith if the Soul be a Created part of Man coming by Generation then as I have heard it argued it must be Mortal and a little after This is a great Mistery and we must wait till another Seal of the Book of Life be opened before we shall know what the Breath of Life was which God Breathed into Adam Gen. 2. He saith Philosophers and Divines have made a great Bustle about the Soul but to define what it
upon his Offices with the holy Spirit As the Priests Prophets and Kings under the Law were anointed with Oyl when they entred upon Theirs see Matth. 3. 16 17. And Jesus when he was baptized went up straightway out of the water And lo the Heavens were opened unto him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a Dove and lighting upon him And lo a voice from Heaven saying This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased Heb. 1. 9. Therefore God even thy God hath Anointed thee with the Oyl of Gladness above thy fellows Luke 4. 17 18 21. And there was delivered unto him the Book of Esaias the Prophet and when he had opened the Book he found the place where it is written The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel c. And applied this to his own Person as being then fulfilled Then he began to say unto them This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears The word which God sent unto the Children of Israel was this That God had Anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with Power who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the Devil for God was with him Acts 10. 38. Now by this we may see that as his Name is so is the Person to whom it is given for he being Anointed with the Holy Spirit above his fellows he is properly and truly the Lord 's Christ Thirdly That this Name cannot be properly and really applied to the Divine Nature taken Abstractively And my Reason for it is this Because some of those things which were done by the Man Christ Jesus could not have been performed by the Divine Nature in the sense before defined 1. Because if they could there had then been no need for him to have been a man made of a woman to be made flesh and dwell among men to have been exposed to all those sufferings and sorrows which befel him in the days of his flesh while he was upon the earth 2. Because Christ died for our sins according to the Scripture 1 Cor. 15. 3. But the Divine Nature taken Abstractively cannot die For besides this Consideration viz. That the Nature of the Divine Essence cannot possibly admit of it and it 's horrid Blasphemy to assert it So on the contrary it is positively affirmed That God lives for ever If I lift up my hand to Heaven and say I live for ever Deut. 32. 40. yea he swears by himself As I live saith the Lord Isa 49. 18. The name of the Lord the Everlasting God Gen. 21. 33. For thus saith the High and Losty One that inhabiteth Eternity Isa 57. 15. whos 's goings forth have been from of old from everlasting Micah 5. 2. Lord thou hast been our dwelling-place in all Generations Before the Mountains were brought forth or ever thou hadst formed the Earth and the World even from everlasting to everlasting thou art God Psal 90. 1 2. And God said unto Moses I AM that I AM Thus shalt thou say unto the Children of Israel I AM hath sent me unto you This is my name for ever And this is my Memorial unto all Generations Exod. 3. 14 15. The Certainty Perpetuity and Eternity of Gods Being assures Believers of the Certainty and Accomplishment of all his Promises seeing they know he is faithful and cannot lie nor cease to be For if he could do either it would take away all the Foundation of our Faith and Hope in God his Word and Promises But there are some Objections urged by the Quakers in print against this Truth in these words W. P. Askes this Question Was he the Christ of God before he was manifested in the flesh Mr. Ives answers He was the Son of God Quest W. P. But was he the Lords Christ And turns this Answer to it himself Answ W. P. saith I will prove him to have been the Lords Christ as well before as after 1. From the Apostle Paul's words to the Corinthians That Rock was Christ 2. Next from Jude where some Greek Copies have it thus That Jesus brought the people of Israel out of Egypt See The Quakers Account of the Barbican-Meeting p. 24. Reply I will answer to the last first If W. P. have seen any such Greek Copies he should have cited them and told us what they are Till which time I shall account it as the effect of passion stirred up in the defence of a bad cause But surely W. P. forgot himself to bring this Allegation for if this be brought to prove any thing it is That he as Jesus was before he was manifested in the flesh Which name was never given to him till he came in the flesh And she shall bring forth a Son and thou shalt call his name Jesus And she brought forth her first-born Son and he called his name Jesus Matth. 1. 21 25. Besides our English Translation doth very well agree with the Greek for in Jude v. 5. which is the place he refers to the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in our Translation Lord which is the express signification of the word and so rendred in multitudes of places in the New-Testament And this can be brought by W. P. for no better purpose than to undervalue the Scripture by quarrelling with the Translation though there be no cause Secondly As for those words in 1 Cor. 10. 4. That Rock was Christ I answer It 's meant not really but figuratively as appears by the precedent words vers 3 4. And did all eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink for they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them and that Rock was Christ For it 's evident 1. That there was a Real and True Rock which Moses smote with his Rod and out of which the water gushed 2. That the people of Israel drunk of this Water to quench their thirst 3. That this was Real and True Water because their Cattel also drank thereof Numb 20. 11. He smote the Rock twice and the Water came out abundantly and the Congregation drank and their Beasts also 4. That the Water which came out of that Rock became Rivers and followed them in the Wilderness He brought streams also out of the Rock and caused waters to run down like Rivers Psal 78. 16. Behold he smote the Rock that the waters gushed out and the streams overflowed ver 20. And they thirsted not when he led them through the Deserts And in the next words you have an Account how they were supplied in this their journey through the Deserts He caused the waters to flow out of the Rock for them He clave the Rock also and the water gushed out Isa 48. 21. He opened the Rock and the waters gushed out they ran in the dry places like a River Psal 105. 41. And therefore it 's said The Rock followed them Which by a Metonymie is meant the water that
as it is by him applied to that Sacred Person before defined His words are these Messias doth solely and singularly betoken Christ as it is interpreted John 1. 41. and 4. 25. For though the word Mashiach in Hebrew in the Scripture signifieth any Anointed one whatsoever yet in this Greek form Messias it never signifieth but only Christ Nor is the Hebrew word used in Hebrew Authors but in the same sense and so it is used infinitely among them Sometimes set single without any other addition and very often with this addition Melech Hamashiach the King Messias In this propriety the word is used Dan. 9. 25 26. Psal 2. 2. and so it was confessed by the ancient Jews Mr. Lightfoots 2 d Part of his Harmony Critica Sacra p. 136. Now seeing Christ is thus exalted at the Fathers Right-hand to be a Prince and a Saviour to give us Grace here to enable us to do his will and Glory hereafter far surpassing all our Obedience let us therefore believe in him for the pardon of our sins as he is a Priest receive his Doctrine as he is a Prophet and submit to his Laws as he is a King For whosoever shall be found so doing and continue therein faithful unto death they shall certainly receive that Crown of Life and Glory which God hath promised to them that love him I shall conclude in the words of the Apostle Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity Amen Quakerism is Popery Revived OR Some of their Old Opinions put into a New Dress and Asserted by the Quakers to be New Discoveries of the Light within them THere are two General Principles must be received by every one that will be either a Quaker or Papist 1. That the Scriptures of the Old and New-Testament are not the Rule of Faith and Practice 2. That there is some other Rule of Faith which is Infallible To prove this I shall quote their own sayings that you may know I do not wrong them The Quaker saith thus Will. Penn in Reas ag Rail p. 48. We deny the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith and Practice in honor to that Divine Light that was the Author of them Edw. Burrough's Works p. 62. He that perswades people to let the Scripture be the Rule of Faith and Practice would keep people in darkness Geo. Whitehead Dip. pl. p. 13. It 's Idolatry to call the Bible the means of our knowing God And in his Book entituled Christ Ascended p. 11. You are walking by your fancies and imaginations who set the Scriptures in the place of Christ as your only absolute Rule and Ground of your Faith and Knowledg G. W. in Enthusiasm above Atheism p. 20. saith As for W. Penn's saying That our Belief concerning the Scriptures is that inward Testimony that we have received from the Holy Light within us to the truth of those sayings He concludes thus Wherefore the Scriptures are so far from being the great Rule of Faith and Practice that the Light of Christ within is both our Warrant and Rule for Faith in and Obedience to them And in p. 27. he blames his Antagonist for saying The Doctrine contained in the Scriptures is the Rule of Faith and Practice telling him He should rather have said A Rule subordinate to the great Rule of Faith and Practice to wit That Divine Light And yet saith p. 49. But if he pretend the Spirit to be his Rule then the Scriptures are not Having heard what the Chief Men in the Quakers Ministry have said be pleased to hear what some eminent Popish Priests have said and you will see that this is no new Doctrine The Papist saith thus Eckius Luthers Antagonist in his Book of Faith and Justification The end that moved the Evangelists to write was not because they would have their Writings to rule over Religion and Faith but rather that they should be subject unto it Coster saith the same in his Enchiridion of Controversies And in Chap. 71. The Scriptures are as a Nose of Wax that suffers it self to be turned this way and that way Turrianus p. 250. If Christ had left no other Rule of our Faith than the Scriptures we should have had nothing else but a Delphian Sword Bellarm. de verbo Dei non Scripto Lib. 2. saith The way to keep men sound and undeceived about Religion is to forbid to the Laity or worldly men the reading of the holy Scripture as being the occasion of many Heresies Lib. 4. For although the Scriptures is God's Word nevertheless it can have no Authority without the Churches Approbation being an imperfect broken and lame Rule for there is not comprehended in it all things that are necessary for God's Honour and our Salvation but what is wanting must be supplied by unwritten Tradition Lib. 4. cap. 12. The proper and principal end of the Scripture was not that it should be a Rule of Faith but a profitable Admonition to make men entertain the Doctrine of Preaching Secondly There is some other Rule of Faith which they both say is Infallible 1. The Quaker saith It 's the Light in the Body immediate Inspiration or Enthusiasm by the Light within them which is the Infallible Rule George Keith saith That Will. Penn hath immediate Inspiration as the primary Rule of his Faith and Practice See the Quakers own Account of the Wheeler-street-Meeting p. 56 57. And in answer to Mr. Ives 's Demand To give one evidence that they had Divine Inspiration for the Rule of their Faith and Practice he saith p. 62. It is sufficient that we have the witness in our selves Page 65. We profess and experience Immediate and Divine Revelation as the Ground of our Faith and Testimony And in his Looking-Glass for Protestants p. 29. he saith And this is our Faith in all these particulars who witness unto the Immediate Teachings of God by his Spirit in our hearts Geo. Whitehead Enthus above Atheis saith p. 19. But Enthusiasm taken simply as a Divine Inspiration or breathing into by a Deity we do assert and contend for in the best Acceptation I never thought the Quakers would have owned themselves to be Enthusiasts in Print But what may they not come to in time Page 22 23. he saith We do therefore assert the sufficiency of this Divine Illumination as being of it self able to shew and reveal to us what we ought to believe and do in all things And p. 24. he saith By their Preaching and Writing they proclaim the sufficiency thereof And p. 52. to shew that they are free from Error and Incongruity he saith It is true that we affirm the light of Christ within to be an Absolute Rule teaching men that follow it what they ought to know believe and do And in the same page he saith That he viz. his Antagonist falsly supposeth a defect in the Light and in our Ministry directing thereto Then they must be both of them sufficient and infallible if
there be no defect in either But to proceed In p 69. he saith The Apostles Doctrine contains Rules but the Light within that gave it forth was the Rule the chief or highest Rule for Guidance and Power and that wherein was the Power of Rule and Government to all true Christians And in p. 58. he is displeased much because his Antagonist doth not believe that their Light is sufficient to direct men to believe in Jesus Christ But is it not manifestly insufficient for that the Quakers who pretend to be guided by that Light do not believe in him as I have made appear Now when G. W. hath thus asserted the sufficiency and infallibility of the Light at the close of his Introduction p. 16. Dictator-like he comes forth like a Pope and General Council with a most dreadful Sentence against all that will not believe him in these words To deny the true God who is Light is Atheism But to deny his immediate Light in man is to deny the true God Surely this is a higher piece ofVncharitableness than Mr. Ives can be supposed to be guilty of in saying The Quakers are no Christians I could have alledged many more Testimonies but these are sufficient Now to prove that this is no new Doctrine let us hear what the Popish Priests say to this point The Papist saith It is that Body called the Church or Divine Revelation which is the Infallible Rule A Book entituled A Manual of Contr. written by a Pomish Priest lays this down for an Article of Faith That the Church of Rome is Infallible in all her Propositions and Definitions of Faith and is so to be received under pain of Damnation And this is known to be their professed Principle Bellar. de verb. Dei Interp. Those that speak against the Popes Decrees and Humane Institutions are false Teachers For the Pope hath Power and Authority to judg in all Controversies in Doctrine and to give forth the right meaning of the holy Scripture and no man may appeal from his judgment Charon's Third Truth chap. 2. having said That the Church and the Scripture are Judges together He adds But the Church is primarily and principally and with great preheminence and a little after The Scripture is not nor cannot be the last Rule and Soveveign Judg of Doctrine And chap. 3. p. 2. Faith that is necessary to Salvation comes from the Churches speaking and not from the Reading of the Scripture Without knowing of which after a sort yea and without believing or obeying it expresly a thousand millions are saved And to be short a man may be a Christian and a good Christian and be saved without the Scripture but not without the Church for the Scripture hath no Authority Weight or Power over us but only so much as the Church doth allow and assign unto it In a Boook entituled Reason against Railery c. p. 7. are these words It may be asked when one pitches upon a determinate sense of any place beyond what the Letter inforces by what light he guides himself in that Determination And then answers That that Light whatever it is and not the Letter is indeed the formal Revealer or Rule of Faith 〈◊〉 in the next Paragraph The Letter-Rule secluded I advanced saith he to prove That Tradition or that Body called the Church taken as delivering her thoughts by a constant Tenor of living Voyce and Practice visible to the whole World is the absolute certain way of conveying down the Doctrine taught at first In 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stillingfleeton c. Part 2. p. 19. it 's said That Divine Revelation is firmer and more Authentick than either Scripture or our seeing and again It is the sole standing unextinguishable general Light set up for the assured Guidance of all men And p. 27. They are certain and know themselves certain and declare so much before the face of the Sun and all the eyes of Heaven by their stability fixedness and immovability in Faith In another Popish Book entituled A Rational Compendious way c. p. 31. The Roman Catholick Religion doth not teach any thing as an Article of Faith which is either an Error or a Corruption And p. 30. The Roman Church is infallible and perpetual Now from what hath been said we may draw this Conclusion 1. That if W. L. say true That he is no Christian who denies the Divinity of Christ If he means in the common sense viz. as he is the Second Person in the Divine Essence then the Quakers are no Christians for in that sense they deny the Divinity of Christ in denying the Trinity of Persons 2. That they do really deny the Humane Nature to be a part of Christ and that Sacred Person whom God hath Anointed with the Holy Spirit who is both God and Man The man Christ Jesus to be the Christ the Saviour of the World And so fulfil that Prophecy Even denying the Lord that bought them 3. From hence it follows That the Quakers have no Christ at all but one of their own setting up and adoring For the name Christ cannot be properly applied to the Divine Nature taken Abstractively as I have fully proved And they confess they own no other Christ but the Light within them which they say is only God though in truth it is but a created Light and they Idolaters in worshipping a Creature instead of the Creator 4. If he be no Christian that hath no Rule for his Faith and Practice then the Quakers are no Christians for they have no Rule for their Faith and Practice For 1. They confess the holy Scriptures are not their Rule 2. It 's apparent notwithstanding their high pretences they have not Divine and Immediate Revelation for their Rule for they cannot demonstrate it by Scripture right Reason nor any other way Thus I have used my endeavour according to the Exhortation of the Apostle 2 Tim. 2. 25 26. In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the Devil who are taken captive by him at his will The Lord open the eyes of their understanding and bless this Treatise to all those good ends and purposes for which it is intended To whom be glory in the Churches by Christ Jesus throughout all Ages World without end Amen William Russel Here followeth a Letter from the Baptized-Congregation in Reading concerning William Luddington Brother Ives I Received yours and advised with the Brethren about it and the Answer which is That we do not own William Luddington in any such Relation as Communion with us neither do we know any Principle of Religion that he is stedfast to But about ten or twelve years since he was here in Prison and blamed much for refusing to give God thanks for any of his Mercies or to joyn with them that did with many other strange Humours as Mr. Mason can tell you not suiting with Christian Religion But was looked upon by all to be a Quaker and sometimes a supposed Behmenist which uncertain Fictions best suited his wandring Fancy Sometimes he is for universal Communion with all sorts as he calls it And sometimes speaking against Forms and says He never preached for Baptism nor never would For that Text Mat. 28. 19 20. To the end of the World he says was to the end of that Age. And he had wrote a Book two years since to that purpose and going to print it But Mr. Maynard perswaded him to the contrary So that for this Ten years past we have been so far from any Communion that we have had little Religious Converse neither did we ever find he desired any with us And as for his writing on the behalf of the Quakers he hath done them so little service here that he hath only discovered his folly and made his best Friends ashamed of him and many others say they were deceived in him So that we may say He hath here met with the just reward of his folly and is discerned by all sober rational Christians and left only to be supported if by any by such giddy Brains that will lay hold on any rotten Post to support a Tottering Building But at last yours came and was so acceptable that your Enemies say you have gained great Credit by your discrcet managing that Business And you have morae raised the hearts of all your and the Lord's truly loving Friends towards you And as it is common for men that want Wisdom or good Argument for what they would have to supply it with Railing and abundance of words so your Adversaries have done But God hath furnished you better as appears by your managing this business To whose guidance we leave you with our prayers that you may be kept to the end And rest Your Brethren in Christ Signed by consent By Daniel Roberts Reading this 6th of Decemb. 1674.