denied truely he could not in so few words have spoken more untruely to prepossesse the Reader but we beg the Reader as to that to suspend his judgement till he have fully read the ensuing Discourse wherein whether any thing have been charged on them that is false and whether Nayler have done faithfully in owning what is truth will appeare at large In the Preface of James Nayler to his answer he tells you The Man of sin and his â—orkings in the last times Revealed That Christ now appearing in his Saints to discover the man of sinne with all his deceits and deceiveable workings now all the powers of darkenesse are gathered against him Gog and Magog As for those deceits and deceiveable workings truely these blasphemous Doctrines of these men with their Diabolicall delusions and quakings will make it appeare where the man of sin is now working To open this we shall stay the Reader a little Agreement betwixt Papists and Quakers 1. It is as claere as the noone day 2 Thes 2. chapter Rev. 12.3 Rev. 13. Rev. 17.4.5.9.10 that the Papall Apostacy and state is The Antichrist so often Prophesied of in Scripture Now it is as plainâ— that the very distinguishing Doctrines and practises of these men are such as are the maine principles of that man of sinne in opposition to Jesus Christ Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 7. 1. The Papists deny the imputed righteousnesse of Christ for justification and in scorne and derision call it A putative Righteousnesse Quak. These also from the same spirit deny the imputed Righteousnesse of Christ for justification And Nayler himselfe before the whole Court at Appleby discoursing with W. C. about justification by righteousnesse of Christ imputed not onely denyed it but in a sleighting way ended his discourse thereabout with this language That which is without is without So George Fox affirmed That he that is borne of God is justified by Christ alone without imputation Sauls Errand pag. 12. Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 3. 2. The Papists in their controversies with us doe positively affirme that justification is by inherent Righteousnesse Hence Bellermine Stapleton c. with the rest doe positively affirme that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is onely justum facere per inherentem justitiam that to justifie is onely to make righteous by inherent righteousnesse Quak. So these men doe as confidently affirme that they are onely justified by inherent righteousnesse or that righteousnesse within which Christ within them enableth them to performe See our proofe Perfect Pharisee pag. 10. Papist Bell. de juâ—tif l. 4. c. 11. 12. 13. 14 3. The Papists againe doe confidently conclude that a man may perfectly keep the whole Law Hence their neglect of the righteousnesse of Christ their workes of supererogation and the like Quak So the Quakers their great assertion as a challenge to all is that eâ—ery Saint is perfect that it is pâ—ssible to be perfectly holy and without sinne Perfect obedience to the Law of God is their great Principle which they confidently cry up more then any Papist Bell. l. 3. de verbo Dei c 4. 4. The Papists affirme that the Scriptures or the Written Word of God are not the supreame Iudge of sp rits Quak So these people that the spirits are not to be câ—yed by Scripture So A. P. in the Booke he but forth called Severall Papers p 19. The Woâ—lds touchstone is without them and they try the spirit by the letter c. but the Saints touchstone is within So that though they agree not what shall be yet both of them consent in denying the Scripture to be the judge of spirits Papist 5 The Papists call the Scripture aâ—â— ad letter a nose of wax a scâ—bbard without a sword Coâ—erus in Euchir pag. 44 Pighius lib. 1. cap. 4. So Melchior Canus sayes It is most certaine the Written Word is onely for Babes and is no way necessary for those that are growâ—e as is more fu l Melchior Canus defens each fid contra confess Worâ—berg cap. 36. Quak. So these men also not onely câ—y downe the necessity of the written word see the perfect Pharisee pag. 20. but also call it a dead letter a carnall letter that they are but a declaration of them that spake it So Melchior Canus againe saith the Gospel is not the Scripture as Farnworth in his Booke Discovery of Faith scoffes at our saying the foure Bookes of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospel pag. 1â— Papist 6. The great argument by which the Papists doe goe about to establish the truth of their way is Immediate revelations and pretended miracles the want of which they upbrayd the Protestant Ministers and charge us to be no Church Quak So the Quakers doe in their pretence to an immediate call and their supposed miracle of quaking So A. P. the Word of the Lord came to me saying So Audland the Word of the Lord came to me but of that more hereafter Papist 7. The Papists doe place much of their holinesse in their Eastings beggerly apparell and forsaking the World as they call it as their lâ—â—ing mewed up in convents and cloysters their wandring up and downe as Hermits and begging Fryers c. Quak. So these men is knowne to place abundance of their holinesse in Fasting beggarly apparell wandring up and downe the World c. we might adde much more but here you may see how the man of sinne in these men in their compliance with the principles and practises of the Romish way breaks out in his deceit and deceiveâ—ble workings 2. He is a stâ—anger in the Booke of God as to the discovery of Antichrist The spirit of errour the spirit of Anti-Christ who doth not observe the spirit of God mightily unvailing Antichrist by the revealing of the spirit of errour in him for 1 Iohn 2.18 there it plainly appeares that horrid errors are of that affinity with the Antichrist that when he would describe that man of sinne in the last time he calls the Heretiques by that very name Now are there many Antichrists whereby we know it is the last time c. Now besides those which we have named the Reader will easily observe such a masse and heape of Arminian Socinian Familisticall errors in their Doctrines layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee that he may câ—earely observe where the spirit of Antichrist works in all deceiveablenesse in this last time 3. Lastly It is the Saints bulwarke against the Papists while they call for our miracles that the spirit of God clearely holds forth that the comming of the man of sinne is after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders 2 Thes 2.9 So Rev. 16.13 the three uncleane spirits ver 14. are the spirits of Devils working miracles to gather together c. Now this further evidenceth the spirit of the man of sinne
owne imaginations to make them odious when we say according to their principle those things that are held forth of Christ without us as Hubbethorn sayes must be acted over againe within us and so Christ must be borne of the Virgin in us and Iudas and Herod and Pilate must be in us to betray and crucifie him Is not this the plaine assertion of Hubbethorn the same thiâ—gs must be fulfilled in us that was in Christ Iesus as he was held forth in the Scripture-letter and in the flesh without us And this we also proved by an assertion of George Bateman pag. 29. to which Nayler answers nothing But further it shall yet appeare that its cleare in Sauls Errand to Damâ—scus pag. 14. where George Fox expressâ—â—y sayes Christ his flesh is a figure for every one passeth thrâ—ugh the same way that Christ did who comes to know Christ in the flesh What a seared conscience must this man needâ— have that when this Doctrine is expressely found in those evidâ—nt plâ—ces in that Booke yet hath the impudence against the light of conscience to say Let that Booke he wiâ—nesse agaiâ—st yâ—u and your lying slanders herein to all that reade it But both you and we shall both learne what thâ—s man and his way iâ— Excep 2 You say this was written in a Letter which Nâ—yler wâ—ote to one in Lancashire viz. That â—e that expects to be saved by him that dyed at Ierusalem should be deceived which â—s a mâ—st 〈◊〉 by untruth c and so he goes on â—aâ—ling Reply 1. It is acknowledged thaâ— that Letter which had this Doctrine in it that Chriâ—t was but a figure was not Naylers Letter in which that other passage is we mistooke Nâ—yleâ— for Hubbethorne and that it was in a Letter from Huâ—bethoâ—â—e written to one in Lancashire Take this ensuing Testimony of Mr. Moore a godly Minister in Lancashire RIchard Hubbethorne wrotâ— that the câ—mmiâ—g of Châ—â—st iâ— the flâ—sh is but a figure or an â—olâ—ing 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 and actions amongst men those things that he will truely spiritually and really doe in the spirits of his people at his second comming This but being objected against him as denying the Lord that bought us He replyed in another Letter Thou dost not understand what I meant by that expression c. These words being often objected to the Quakers and particularly to George Fox though some of them made an answer to the but yet none of them deny it in these parts that I can heare of These Letters were sent to Henry Holme and are now in my hands Kellet in Lancash Jan. 16. 1653. William Moore Thus you have our confession of our mistake onely of the Name you see the truth of the thing convincingly evidenced But that it is a filthy untruth that Nayler wrote such a Letter in which were those words He that expects to be saved by him that dyed at Ierusalem should be deceived we answer First Nayler may know that we doe onely affirme that Doctor Marshall did object this against him at Applehy and Master Iaques Minister of Bolton in Lancashire sent his promise that he would make it appeare Had Nayler denyed that either of these two were true he might have charged us with a falsehood but this he doth not he dare not doe 2. Though Nayler doe so cry out against this as a slander yet he that considers this their Principle that Christ with all he did in the flesh is but a figure which is proved to be their principle beyond exception will wonder why Nayler should looke upon this as a slander when it is the necessary consequence of that wicked Doctrine for if Christ were but a Figure I should no more expect to be saved by him then by the figures and types of thâ— Law But because the man so loudly cryes out against this as being a filthy untruth that ever he wrote such a Letter though he deny not what we say that this was objected against him by D. Marshall and that M. Iaques engaged to justifie it yet we have affixed M. Iaques Testimony to satisfie the world of our clearenesse from the scandals and wicked reproaches of Nayler and this sent is under his Hand and Scale JAmes Nayler in a Lettor which he writ to Henry Holme gave out this expression If thou expect to be saved by him that dyed at Ierusalem thou art deceived Hoc unum test John Jaques Excep 3 There is but one thing more in Naylers answer whereby he shuffles this Position and that evasion is this We doe owne and confesse that Iesus Christ in the flesh is a figure or example as if figure and example were all one To which we answer Reply Iesus Christ not a Figure 1. We challenge Iames Nayler to shew one tittle of Scripture wherein Iesus Christ is called a Figure The first Adam is called a Figure Rom. 5.14 the Tabernacle called a Figure Heb. 9.9 but Iesus Christ is never called a Figure and therefore it is a sinfull shuffle of Iames Nayler thus to confound an Example and Figure 2. If he be a Figure we againe affirme he must typifie some thing but we referre you to our Booke as to Christ not being a Figure or onely an example where we have layd downe many Scriptures and arguments to which he answers nothing Perfect Pharisee pag. 8. 9. Position 6. That men are not justified by that righteousnesse of Christ which he in his owne Person did fulfill without us Reader thou wilt see in our Booke we had foure proofes for this three of which Nayler denyeth not and for the fourth we referre thee to Mr. Iaqueâ— testimony so that as to the truth of the assertion we must take it for granted especially considering what George Fox saith in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 12. He that is borne of God is iustified by Christ alone without imputation This gives us to understand the meaning of Naylers answer to that Position thus Except That righteousnesse Christ hath performed without me was not my justification c. untill Christ appeared in me c. and appeared in me my righteousnesse sanctification justification and redemption c. Reply Fox denying imputed righteousnesse in plaine tearmes 1. Let but the Reader compare this of Iames Nayler with that expressiâ—n of George Fox viz. he is justified by that alone without imputation and that of Authory Hodgson viz I beleeve to be saved not by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to me but by the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in me which he doth not deny he wâ—ll learne the meaning of Naylers worâ—s to be clearly this that Christ in a man is the matter of his just fication so that though he labour to colour over the businesse in this answer by saying Christ was not his justification till he appeared in him yet comparing his answer with these testimonies it will appeare to be downe-right equivocation and shuffling Question betwixt Quakers uâ—concerning the
justification by reason of the imputation of the obedience of him who is the Lord our righteousnesse This Reader is their great Idoll and Diana and therefore thou wilt pardon our tediousnesse and clearely see how blinde these men are as to Gospel righteousnesse Position 11. That every man in the world hath a light within him sufficient to guide him to salvation without the help of any outward light or discovery In his answer to this Position he denyes none of our proofs but addes his further profession of the same Principle in these words All the World shall witnesse against you that they have a light that lets them see when they sinne which if they did minde and obey would leade out of sinne unto Christ c. Except The maine part of his answer is by way of rayling all that he speaks to make good this Position is that Christ is the true light and that he enlightneth every man and that where he is there need no outward discovery Reply For the first that Christ is the true light is confessed on all hands but that Iesus Christ is in every man or gives a saving light to every man we utterly deny and we have plentifully proved in our answer to the fourth Position The first Text he proves it by is Iohn 1.9 He is the true light that lightneth every one We have fully opened this Text in our answer to the fourth Position and convincingly shewed it is not meant at all of any Gospel saving light where we desire the Reader to satisfie himselfe at large Io. 8.12 opened For his second Iohn 8.12 I am the light of the World he that followes me shall not walke in darkenesse This proves not that Christ doth give a saving light to the whole world no more then that Text 1 Iohn 2.2 doth prove that the whole world shall have the benefit of Christs propitiation Secondly the words immediately following might satisfie Nayler that he is thus a saving light onely to them that follow him who are Beleevers drawne by the power of the spirit of God Cant. 1.4 No man comes to me except the Father draw me Iohn 6.44.45 Every man that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to me So that Christ is onely the light of those that have learned of the Father and have been drawne by the Father and follow him Here is a cleare restriction of Christs being a light onely to Beleevers to them that follow him c. Io. 1.4.5 opened The third Scripture Iohn 1.4 5. the light shined in darkenesse and the darkenesse comprehended it not is cleare against him For the Phrase of the light shined in darkenesse imports onely that Jesus Christ was Preached to them Christ came amongst them and Iohn Preached him to them Ver. 29. Behold the Lambe of God c. yet they were in darkenesse for want of light they could not so much as discover him nor receive him so farre were they from knowing Christ or the world from having Christ a light in them all that they could not apprehend him when he was Preached openly to them His fourth Text is Iohn 3.19 this is the condemnation that light is come into the world is as full against Nayler as the former for it speaks this that Jesus Christ is the true light was Preached to the World and discovered to them when he had before been a mistery hid from Ages and Generations Col. 1 28. yet they would not beleeve him but loved to continue in that darkenesse or ignorance of Christ which is in all by nature Now for the third branch of his answer that where this light of Christ is there need no outward discovery We answer 1. We have abundantly proved that Jesus Christ is not in all in out answer to his reply to the fourth Position 2. We have also proved That Iesus Christ neither is in all nor doth he enlighten all by giving every man a knowledge of the Gospel this we have done at large in the same place 3. We have fully proved that all men in the world doe need an outward light or discovery and that it is the way of Christ his making knowne himselfe by outward discovery and Preaching the Gospel in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 18.19 in six arguments to which Nayler answer nothing Necessity of outward reaching further proved All that he brings for it de novo in his answer is onely his bare word without either argument or text so that we need to say no more Yet ex abundanti we shal adde First It was the wisedome of the Father to have the Gospel Preached to every creature and therefore did he send men forth to publish it Marke 16.15 Mat. 28.19.30 2. It pleased the Father to owne Preaching of the Gospel with the conversion of soules Acts 2.41 1 Cor. 1.21 I◠pleased God by the foolishnesse of Preaching to save them that beleeve 3. It pleased the Lord Iesus when he was ascended up to Heaven to give officers for the perfecting of the Saints Ephes 4.11.12 for the edifying of the body of Christ 4. It pleased him also to establish this as an everlasting Ordinance to continue till the end of all things Mat. 28 last Ephes 4 15. He that hath any sense of the wisedome of God and submission to it will not dare to say with Nayler that every man hath a light within him sufficient without the help of any outward discovery or to charge folly in doing all this upon him whose wisedome is admired infinite and acteth nothing needlessely and in vaine But what dare not these men doe who dare lift up themselves in their blasphemous pride to be as pure as God 2 Pet. 1.19 opence vindicated There is one Scripture 2 Peter 1.19 which is not brought by Nayler by way of proofe but is most ignorantly wrested by him to this their Idoll of light within We hinted how little the man had of any knowledge of Scripture by his so blinde and pittifull abusing this Text in that former Booke Perfect Pharisee p. 19. We see he is yet as confident as he was we shall onely say that which is there called the sure Word of Prophesie 2 Peter 1.19 is that word of Prophesie which in old time holy men of God spake c v. 21. and to this he bids them take heed viz. to the Doctrine of the Prophets where Peter doth not send them to the light within them but to the Bookes and Words of the Prophets as Christ sends the Iewes to the same Scriptures Iohn 3.39 Nay the Text is so farre from hinting any light within that the Apostle tells you these words of the Prophets were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a more sure Word then the voyce that came from Heaven ver 17. Thus the man hath still the weakenesse to produce Scripture that fully destroyes his owne Principle We shall adde no more but from these words of Naylers Where this light of Christ is
the nature of quaking owning it where there was any reall appearance of God to the Prophets and shewing a clear difference betwixt these divâ—ne repâ—ures and the Satanicall quakings of these men he answers nothing at all but onely cavils at a word Excep 2 That we say They call their Quaking their great perfection which he sayes is false c. Reply To which we answer We cannot but look upon that as the great perfection in the eyes of these men which they doe so much cry up and so much desire as such a pretious attainement W. C. One of us doth know that Cap Ward and Will. Cartmell did expresse their desires of it and their hopes to come under that condition Henry Houseman said speaking concerning quaking he was not come up to that perfection yet We might adde more but Iohn Gilpin tells you in Quakers Shaken p. 5 that he did earnestly desire that he might fall into quaking and trembling apprehending that he should thereby attaine to the immediate discoveries of God unto him And is not that perfection Why doth Nayler still charge us with slanders Practice 2. Rayling Except He would endeavour from Scripture to lay downe a warrant for his rayling and his reason is because Christ called the Iewes the children of the Devil c. The Apostle cals men dogs wolves c. Reply 1 We charged them with rayling at those persons they had never seen before telling them they were Devils damned they saw the Devil in their faces so that this appeares to be perfect rayling because not knowing the persons or actions of any such men nor any particular sinne by them yet they let fly their dreadfull censures at randome Thus we instanced in our Perfect Pharisee p. 46. in their rayling at Mr. H. T. Merchant of Newcastle calling him a Priest c. and Gorge Fox rayling at Mr. Nichols in Carlile p. 48. telling him he was an hypocrite though he had never seen his face nor knew his name Now how is this bottom'd upon Christs example or the Apostles who gave such expressions to none but such as they had particular knowledge of as to their sinne giving a reason for such titles 2. Those titles were given to wicked Herod and to the teachers of false Doctrines Phil. 3. 2 Pet. 2. and we have fully cleared it we hope to every mans conscience who is not filled with errour and prejudice that we are neither reproachers of Christ or his Doctrine but according to our talent have found mercy of the Lord to be faithfull in carrying on the interest of the Lord Iesus and therefore we cannot but looke upon it as their sinfull practice in powring out such language upon us 3. He that doth but reade the Scriptures shall finde that this is not the ordinary language of Christ and his Apostles it was very seldome and very solemne and he that doth but compare this with the practice of quakers shall see a vast difference for it is their common practice and such words are as familiar as any they use as thou art damned and I see the Devill in thy face nay they are their usuall first salute to all they meet withall Was this the Apostles way take but any of their Books and compare them with any of Pauls Epistles and as thou wilt see a spirit of sweetnesse and meeknesse in his so thou wilt observe such a continuall froathing out of passion and bitternes in these men as will lay them naked to be acted by a spirit vastly different from that of Paul or any of the Apostles of the Lord Iesus 4. But shall the holy zeale of Christ and his Apostles be wrested to be made a patronage to their malitious raylings Doe they not by this means labour to take away the sinfulnesse of that rayling which the Apostle tells you is the fruit of the flesh and of which they that are guilty shall never enter into the Kingdome of God 1 Cor. 6.9 But we referr thee for further information in this to the Perfect Pharisee pag 44. 45. Pract. 3. Their pretending upon all occasions to be sent by sheâ—iall Commission from God 1. Here we having related by severall passages of the quakers pretending to a Commission from God the ridiculousnesse of their Messages and that pretence he plainely tells us he will not justifie them and when he cannot shuffle it off he tell us he can say nothing to it because he knows not the things in particular though the persons Reader thou mayst observe that are there mentioned are of his familiar company and converse and so thou wilt easily think had they been lyes we should have heard from him with open mouth yet the man will needs take the boldnesse to call them lyes though he confesse he knows not the particulars Now Reader judge of Nayler and his conscience 2. He sayes that they who were before the Magistrates were invited to any of our houses is false Oh! the confidence of this man and how boldly dare he rush upon a lye or any thing to make us odious All we say is that some of them that came to Newcastle were invited to come to our houses by some of us If Iames Nayler will aske M. Tayler if he were not invited by W. C. to his house when he was at that time at Newcastle and did not come he will see the debauchednesse of his conscience for W. C. doth beleeve M. Tayler hath so much honesty left as not to deny it Quakers justifie their cursing because such vvords are in Scripture and make the Scripture a vvarrant for cursing As to George Foxes cursing M. Fetherston which we quoted p. 48. Perf. Phar. all that Nayler replyes is that M. Fetherston confessed all that Geo. Fox spoke was Scripture What a ridiculous evasion is this of so great a sin Because there are such words in Scripture therefore he may apply them as he will There are these words in Scripture I am the Lord and change not he sits upon the circle of the Heavens c. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God these expressions because they are in Scripture is it therefore lawfull to give them to any creature Nay dare Geo. Fox challenge them to himself because they are in Scripture Or because such words the Lord smite thee thou painted wall thou hast lyed against the holy Ghost for whom is reserved the blacknesse of darknesse for ever Are these true of G. Fox or may we therefore lawfully apply them to G. Fox because they are such words as are found in Scripture Oh! what a ridiculous evasion is this He may also plead that he and his followers may lawfully swear because the words sweare and oaths are to be found in Scripture and then this generation will perfectly come up to the necessary and experienced fruit of these principles viz. Ranting to a great degree wherof they are already attained in their most impudent obscene and shamelesse
nakednesse The next exception is against our objecting Perf. Phar. p. 48. Christopher Atkinson his immodest familiarity with a woman of that way c. where Atkinson challengeth the proofe of it we shall onely say that that immodest familiarity if he will needs force us from our modest covering of that carriage to speak out it was his familiar Kissing of her as we are fully informed by the testimony of M. Walker and M. Wallas and we cannot but account it as a sinfull behaviour But to weaken the strength of this testimony Atkinson tells the Reader that M. Wallace said It was no murther in him to murther Christopher Atkinson and the rest of the prisoners at Kendale Truely we are afraid this whole generation of men are in a confederacy of lying we have purposely sent to finde out the truth of this foule challenge and shall give thee his clearing of himselfe word for word as we received it M. Wallace his vindication from Atkinsons lye HAving received a Paper from the Quakers that were prisoners containing horrible blasphemies viz. That they were the searchers of hearts and saying Let them be accursed from God for ever that will have Christ have any other Body but his Church I spoke these words and no more in the hearing of many viz. That I thought it was no murder in the civill Magistrate to put such blasphemers as they were to death it being according to the Law of God Reade Lev 24.10.16 Deut. 13. the vvhole chapter But that I ever said It was no murder in me to murder them or to put them to death I declare it to be a manifest lye Kendale Ian. 14. 1653. Iohn Wallace We whose names are subscribed did heare when M. Wallace spoke these words above written namely these which are inclosed within the parenthesis but no more Thomas Barket Miles Harrison Now let the Reader judge of what spirit these men are and as for the rayling which Atkinson powres out by reason of this testimony like a floud upon W. C. we his Brethren sâ—y we hope he hath learned that of Christ 2 Pet. 2.23 who when he was reviled reviled not againe when he suffered he threatned not but committed himselfe to him that judgeth righteously There is but one thing remains And that is the account we gave why we called our Booke the Perfect Pharisce which thou mayst reade in pages 49. 50. 51. and so conclude We therein prove from Scripture that that Title was most truely and properly applicable to them to which Nayler answers so exceeding weakely and raylingly that we are resolved not to reply one word thereto as having said enough before to that purpose to discover how weakely he struggles to evade the clearenesse of these Scriptures against himselfe and that way Reader thou wilt by this time see the falsenesse of what Nayler speaks in his word of conclusion to us five as if we had uttered many untruths and false reports taken up by heare say without any ground at all and divers things out of Books which we have on purpose wrested to slander with c. Thou wilt in this reply see the fullest evidence we thinke that can be given as to such cases and all these particulars that he excepts against made the more apparant unto all We professe before the Lord that it 〈◊〉 nothing we have against their persons that should any way leade us to wrest any of their writings to make them odious it is our onely zeale for the truth and Saints of the high God that hath carried out our spirits thus to expose our selves to the revilings of all this generation if by any meanes we might be serviceable to the Gospel and save our selves and them that heare us Thou wilt finde in the close of Naylers Booke two leaves put forth in the name of one who sayes his name in the Flesh is Iohn Andland t is such a perfect piece of bitternesse and rayling and no way in answer to our Booke that we leave it for waste Paper Thus having been carried on by the Everlasting Arme and drawne out by the cords of Love to our deare Lord Iesus his Ordinances and his Saints to beare witnesse to the true grace of God wherein we stand we shall sit downe in comfort and fly to him who is a refuge from the storme and a shadow from the beat when the blaâ—â—â—â— the terrible ones shall be as the storme against the Wall FINIS
Scriptures not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them This he denyeth not we proved it by five testimonies He answers by one Scripture grossely perverted and two others ignorantly applyed but gives no answer to many Scripture arguments against it 14 Spirits not to be tryed by Scripture This we proved by three testimonies none of which nor the Position is denyed but goes about to prove it and falls a rayling 15. No sence meaning or exposition to be given or studying of Scripture This we proved in foure testimonies he confesseth goes about to prove it but answers not a word to fourteen evident Scriptures but falls a rayling grossely 16. They cry downe Baptisme and the Lords Supper as types and shadowes For this we gave foure proofes which he denyed not and we further prove it He shuffles from Baptisme in generall to the businesse of Infant Baptisme and falls a rayling 17. No mediate cull to the Ministry Denies not the Proof but falls miserably a rayling as if he would powr out his gall upon us As for the rest of his Reply to what we charged upon them as their Principles and Practises there is such palpable shufflings such miserable weakenesse and such horrible rayling as that we should not have medled with it at all but that we beleeve it is the designe of God to lay more and more open the spirits of these men THis Booke pretending to Answer us is thus subscribed By one whom the World calls Iames Nayler About man being called by names given them by their Parents We are â—ot a little jealous that there lyes a mystery of iniquity in that very stile and expression For first God himselfe whom to thinke to follow any sinfull expression or custome were no lesse then blasphemous calls men by their Names of distinction given by Men. Gen. 22.11 God said unto him Abraham Hannah called her sonne Samuel 1 Sam. 1.20 She called his name Samuel c. and afterwards when the Lord appeared to him to call him out to the worke of the Priest-hood chap. 3.4 and 6. and 8. verses The Lord called Samuel and called him againe so the second and third time here its evident that God himselfe calls him by the Name that his Mother gave him Acts 9.4 there Iesus Christ from Heaven calls him Saul Saul a Name given him before his conversion Christ when upon Earth calls his Disciples by the Names given them at their Circumcision as Philip Iohn Simon sonne of Ionas c. The Apostles doe so constantly as Festus Agrippa Gaius Aristarchus c. and this without such a mysterious preamble as one whâ—â— the World calls Festus Agrippa c. You see how these pretendâ—r to Scripture depart from Scripture as if they would include God and Christ under the carnall observations of the World or else teach them to speake 2. It is apparant That these very men doe constantly call themselves by these Names as Iames Nayler doth in an Epistle at the end of Farneworths Booke George Fox in a Pamphlet lately Printed and the very men of their Generation call them so without any such preamble The mystery of â—â—e 〈…〉 â—riting tâ—emselve such wâ—o the World câ—ll so and so 3. But shall we tell you where the mystery lyes We are satisfied that this expression is meerly to cloake their pretence to an equality with God Our reason is evident For in this very Answer of Naylers pag 4. where he relates Foâ—es his evadâ—ng of the charge against him that he said He was equall with God Nayler thus hints that Fox being asked whether he spake this of George Fox as he was a creature To this he answered I deny George Fox he is dust and must be dust but I and my Father are one Is not this as plaine as the Sunne that he therefore denyes George Fox that he may deny his being a creature one that must returne to dust that so he may set up and assert his onenesse with God Compare but this with that usuall expression of theirs in their Books Whose name in the flesh is James Nayler Whose name in the flesh is Iohn Audland c. and it will be more apparent But more of this you have in our Answer to their Reply to the first Article In the Epistle in the said Answer Written by A. P. he calls us About the word Priest the Priests of the North a word on purpose given us to our reproach Surely their pretended meeknesse should have taught them other expressions though truely we finde and the Reader may even in this their answer finde more cursed rayling then we receive from the worst of men yet our suffering in that kinde from them also is not small But A. P. might know that every Priest was to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sinne and that we waite not upon any such worke and that the Gospel knowes no Chiefe Priest but the Lord Iesus who is a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek not any Priests at all properly but the Saints metaphorically â—â—lled a Royall Priest-hood and shall the stile of the Lord Iesâ—â— and his Saints be a reproach in the mouthes of Quakers He goes on and tells the world That we 〈◊〉 all strangers to that sort of people called Quakers except one A. P. who is none of the least of that sort of people cannot but know that he is too well knowne to all of us Secondly Three of these five also have had cause to know many more of them as M. Taylour Iohn Audland Stubbs Holmes Atkinson Hedgshon Ayry c. and others from whom we suffered disturbance in our publique Ministry and some of these also are pretenders to be eminently sent forth Thirdly Though all of us were strangers to their persons yet are we not strangers to them in their writings and so if it be possible to know them by their Papers which they industriously scatter up and downe we know them fully But whither tends this aspersion that they are strangers to all of us save one but to make the world beleeve that we have taken up these things against them by report But we hope the Reader by this time understands the nakednesse of the slander and the subtilty of A. P. W. C. As for that evidence which one of us gives concerning their principles and practises which A. P. under the name of Reports would insinuate into the people as if they were lyes the Reader shall observe that the most of these evidences are not at all contradicted by Nayler in his Answer but passed over which we take as confessed by him others onely evaded which yet shall appeare to the Reader in the ensuing answer to be either such things as he was an eye or eare witnesse of or shall be fully confirmed by undeniable testimony A. P. goes on and tells the Reader that in this answer What is truth is owned and what is false is
he know them for they are discerned spiritually There the Apostle gives the reason why no light implanted in our natures in the creation can discerne the things of the spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned where he makes an opposition betwixt naturall and spirituall light and puts an impossibility upon discovering Christ by the light of Nature We may adde that ver 9.10 Eye hath not seene Eare hath not heard neither hath it entred into the heart of man to conceive c. but God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit 3. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted in the soule is not a knowledge of Christ as a Mediator will appeare by undenyable examples for there are multitudes of men and women without contradiction never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator though it must be confessed they had a rationall or naturall light Those thousands of Saints that went over into new England fully experienced it that there is not the least hint of a Christ implanted in those Indians one of us having often conversed amongst them can also fully witnesse it as is more fully also evident by the confessions of many of them in Print who have been converted by the Ministry of Mr. Eliot of which we spake in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 19. But may not these Scriptures fully confound these mens pervertings of that Scripture Reade Psal 143.19 He shewd his Word unto Iacob his statutes and judgements unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any people and as for his judgements they have not knowne them Psal 79.6 Powre out thy wrath vpon the Heathen that have not knowne thee Col. 1.26 the disponsation of God is given to fulfill the Word of God even that mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations But let Paul determine the contrary to whose judgement we shall desire to stand 2 Thes 3.2 All men have not Faith Light in all not sufficient to save 3. That this light which by Christ in creating of the world is implanted in man is not sufficient to bring to a Gospel salvation is also plaine from what we have convincingly proved that this naturall light may be in thousands that never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator and Iohn 17.3 this is life eternall to know thee the very God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent So that there is an utter insufficiency and incapacity in this light to bring to salvation So that though A. P. hath lately expressed his abhorring the distinction betwixt naturall and spirituall light yet our Lord Iesus and the Apostles are so full in it that they are of more authority with us then the novell opinion of A. P. Thus you see this Scripture fully vindicated from their wrestings for hence it is apparent that though Iesus Christ by whom the Father made the world Heb. 1.2 in his creation of man did enlighten and create a principle of light and naturall reason and understanding in the soule which we have proved is eminently there understood yet this proves nothing for the Quakers that either therefore every man that hath a reasonable soule Christ dwells in him or that he knowes Christ or that his naturall light can possibly suffice to bring to Gospel salvation Excep 4 Naylers next defence is this ridiculous argument If Christ be not in the most vile in the world c how shall he judge every one according to their thoughts as well as according to what they doe must he proceed as carnall Iudges doe by proofe or confession and no further Reply We need say no more to shew the simplicity of this argument then to aske them these questions Doth the Scripture say that Christ is in the Devills and yet he sees and knowes and judgeth them Or doth the Scripture say that the damned in Hell Christ is in them Nay but doth not Scripture speake in this language Christ in you the hope of glory Col 1 27. so that Scripture speaking of Christ in you speaks of him as being the hope of glory where he dwells And is Christ in Devils and damned soules the hope of glory For geâ—â—â—er the Quakers nor we are in this controversie at all disposinâ— concerning the abiquity of the Divine Nature by reason of which he is above all and through all and 〈◊〉 all But of Christ in us in that sense the Gospel useth the expression viz. as a saving light and principle the hope of glory 2. How ridiculous is it from Christs knowing all things to inferre that he dwells in all can he not know things unlesse he dwell in them Doth he not know the inward motions of Brutes Horses Fishes c. and is it Scripture Language from thence to inferre his dwelling in them Oh! the vainenesse and frothinesse of such a spirit and how are these men given up to blasphemy We shall conclude with that of David Psal 11.4 The Lord is in his holy temple the Lords throne is in Heaven his eyes behold his eye-lids try the children of men He hath another argument that Christ dwells in the Saints which we know in its Gospel sense but not in Naylers that Christ as man dwells in them but how absurdly and un-scripturally doth this conclusion follow therefore Christ doth dwell in all Thus you see our proofes fully confirmed his lyes confuted his perverted Scriptures cleared and answered and the folly of his arguments fully opened though he hath not answered one of our arguments and many Scriptures against that Doctrine Position 5. That Christ in the Flesh with all he did and suffered therein was but a Figure and nothing but an Example Excep 1 O deceitfull spirits c. are those words expressely found in Sauls Errand to Damascus as you say they are let that Booke be witnesse against you and your lying slanders to all that reade it Reply Surely this man pretends neither to conscience nor modesty that doth challenge us here for a lye for saying that Doctrine was expressely found in Sauls Errand He that shalâ— but looke upon that Booke pag. 2. pag 8. pag. 14. shall begin to know the impudence of Iames Nayler pag. 2. 9. line last in the schedule annaxed to the Lancashire Petition to the Councell of State you have this charge Richard Hubbethorn wrote that Christs comming in the Flesh was but a Figure Now are we lyars in affirming those words are expressely found there Nay further in pag. 8. where Hubbethorne answers to that charge we will give you his owne words Christ in his people is the substance of all figures types and shadowes fulfilling them in them but as he is held forth in the Scripture-letter without them and in the flesh without them he is their example or figure which is both one that the same things might be fulfilled in them that was in Christ Iesus Could a man have spoken more plainely to affirme what we asserted of him And doe we adde our
matter of justification but the time 2. For Nayler cannot but know that the question is not at all concerning the time when Iesus Christ becomes actual y my justification but concerning what is the matter of our justification whether the righteousnesse which Christ in his Person did performe or the holinesse which he worketh in us be the matter of our justification when we are justified Now notstithstanding Naylers shuffling its cleare their sense is that whensoever the soule is justified for we speake not of the time the matter of its justification is not that righteousnesse which Iesus Christ in his owne Per on did performe without us N yler himselfe at Appleby in discourse asserted He was justified by Christ in him and being there told by one of us that justification is an act of God for Christs sake absolving me from the guilt of sinne not done in me but without me in the Court of Heaven Nayler said nothing to this but that which is wi hout is without See Mr. Higginsons Booke pag. 78. Further proof that Christs righteousnes is the matter of our justification Now that the righteousnesse of Christ performed without us is the matter of our justification whensoever we are justified hesides what we have layd downe undeniably from the Scriptures in the Perfect Pharisce pag. 10. will further appeare by these testimonies Rom 3.24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Iesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation c. Isay 53. He was wounded for our transgressions and through his stripes we are healed Ver. 5.6 he layd on him the iniquities of us all ver 11. he shall beare their iniquities where Christs merit or righteousnesse is the reason of the non-imputation of sinne to the soule But what need we adde more in a case which is so full a Principle of the Gospel But of this enough we shall adde more in the next Position As for reckoning Drunkards and Swearers to have as much right to what Christ did and suffered at Ierusalem as we we looke upon it as one of his reviling fits and passions and leave him to the Lord to rebuke him But this is all the answer he gives to the many Scriptures against his Doctrine layd downe by us Position 7. That men are justified by that Righteousnesse which Christ wiâ—hin us enahled us to performe or which is in effect and some of them have expressed by inherent holinesse We proved this to be their Doctrine by fix testimonies None of which are denyed onely he quarrels at one expression in one of them viz. the third which Nayler layes downe viz. We are not reconciled to God till we be perfectly holy and able to stand so in our owne power he quarrels at the last clause of this of which we shall give you an account in the next Position whether it properly is to be referred but the first branch of it viz. we are not reconciled to God till we be perfectly holy this he denyeth not but asserts againe in his answer thus No imperfect thing can be reconciled to God so that the charge stands cleare against them notwithstanding the heresie of the Tenet and the loud out-cryes of Nayler as if we slandered him And to put it further out of question we shall adde these besides Naylers confession in the present answer New proof that quakers justificution is by inherent righteousnesse Iohn Wâ—lkinson of Hutton in the hearing of Mr. T W. Minister at Kendall and Mr. G. affirmed that the light within men would not onely discover sinne but also redeeme from it and justifie Capt. Robert Lucas of Kellot in Lancashire attesteth under hand that Robert Wither said that men are saved by the workes of Christ which he worketh in them and maketh them to worke 〈◊〉 Cham affirmed to Mr. T. and Mr. Gr. that holy and 〈◊〉 walking with God was a Saints covering from the wrath of 〈◊〉 so that this Principle stands cleare notwithstanding his evasions Excep 1 He chargeth us with wresting truth to slander by saying that his affirming that the light within men will bring to feâ—re God and so leade to iustification doth hold forth justification by inherent righteousnesse Reply 1 To this we answer that it is evident to as it is the sense of his words for let any sober spirited Christian consider his words the light within by bringing a man to exercise a pure conscience in the feare of God towards God and man in uprightnesse will so leade up to justification and peace what doth this but plainely speake that we are justified by obedience to this light in the exercise of a good conscience towards God and man for saith he it doth so leade to justification c. Excep 2 But what saith he againe that no imperfect thâ—ng can be reconciled to God is plaine in Scripture This he layes downe to prove if it would serve the truth of that Position that no are justified by iâ—herent righteousnesse Reply Justification consistent vvith the Saints infirmities We answer That Paul was reconciled to God is plaine and that he was justified which are the same Rom. 5.1.9 10.11 but that Paul was imperfect when yet he was â—eâ—â—nciled to God Rom. 7. will abundantly evidence He that â—â—yes I am carnall and sold under sinne ver 14 was not he tâ—en imperfect What I doe I allow not what I would that I doe not but what I hate that doe I ver 15. he that was in this condition was he not imperfect He that had a Law iâ— his members warring against the Law of his minde and leading him iâ—to captivity to the Law of sinne ver 23. was not he imperfect He that in the sense of his body of death cryed out Wretched man that I am c. was not he imperfect How ignorant doth Nayler discover himselfe to be of the conditions of the Saints of God Was not Peter imperfect when he cursed and denyed his Master Mat. 26.72 but that then he was in a justified state we know none that ever questioned But this grosse fancy of his owne perfections and ignorance of the mistery of justification runs him upon such bold assertions and desperate rocke as these What an uncomfortable Doctrine had this been to Paul when he was complaining of the body af his sinne to have told him therefore he was not justified nor reconciled to God with what a glorious Gospel spirit would Paul have challenged such a man as he doth Angels Principalities and Powers Rom. 8.37.38 It is God that justifieth who shall condemne me It is Christ that died fetching out a pardon and justification from the blood of Iesus notwithstanding his owne imperfection in the worke of holinesse Excep 3 To your Position of being justified by our owne workes we deny for it is he that worketh in us to will and to doe c. and herein we deny selfe-workes c. Reply Ceâ—â—eâ—t of
mayst observe he answers nothing and thereby see the spirit of those men that doe stop their eyes against the plainest light but he that hardeneth his heart shall not prosper Position 13. That the Scriptures are not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth He answers nothing according to his custome to our arguments nor excepts against our proofes but labours to confirme the Position Excep 1 Christ is the Word now if the Scriptures be the Word then there is two Words of God now prove that in Scripture or that the Letter is â—aked the Word in plaine words Reply 1. That Christ is the Word is plaine Iohn 1. and who knoweth it not The essentiall and declarative Word not all one 2. That the will of God contained in the Scripture is the Word of God is as plaine besides the Scriptures we named â—n the Perfect Pharisee pag. 24. Marke 7.13 Luke 11 28. Rom. 10.17 Iohn 12.48 we shall adde these Luke 8.11 the Seed is the Word of God ver 12. then commeth the Devill and taketh the word out of their heart least they should beleeve and be saved can the Devill take Christ out of their hearts 1 Thes 2.13 When yee receaved the Word of God which you heard of us yee received it not as the Word of Men but as it is in truth the Word of God c. This was the Word which the Apostles spake yea received it which cannot be meâ—nt of Christ he should have said yee received him not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God This is so plaine a case we shall not trouble thee further And here thâ—u mayst observe there are two words of God the essentiall and 〈◊〉 declarative and wonder the man should be so weake as to bid 〈◊〉 produce Scripture to prove this when the Scripture is so full of it to any that doth but reade it Excep 2 The Apostle calls what he wrote a Declaration 1 â—ohn 1.2.3 Reply How doth this prove the Scriptures are noâ— the word of God nay doth it not fully prove the contrary for that which he declares was what he had heard of the Lord Iesus Scriptures not onely a declaration of the conditions of Saints Againe we doe owne the Scriptures to be the declarative Word of God or a declaration of the minde of God but we say the Quakers doe destroy the Scriptures Divinity and authority when they call them onely a declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth For as we prâ—ved before 1 They shall be then no foundation for the Faith of Saints for one mans condition is not the foundation of another mans Faith 2. The Scripture shall have no authority over the soule of any but he that is in the same condition and hath experienced it contrary to Iohn 2.4 8. this is the reason why Nayler sayes they are not commanded to forbear to weare shâ—oes in his Book p. 21. if they were they should as well as they are commanded not to sâ—lute whereas that command if it be in any part binding Luke 10.4 requires both but this will tell thee what is meant by their calling Scripture a speaking forth of the Saints condition viz. it shall have no authority over them further then they list or have an impulse on their spirits or they practice for both the commands are of equall authâ—rity yet he denyes they are commanded one of them nay they are both in the same verse Luke 10.4 Yea 3. This destroyes the divine authority of all Historicall and Propheticall Scripture which could not be the Saints conditions when thâ—y spoke them as also threatnings and promises c But see this at large Perfect Pharisee pag. 24.25 We sha l say but this 1 Iohn 5.16 There is a sinne unto death I doe not say that you should pray for it was this Iohns condâ—â—ion when he spake it did he exper ence in his heart that he had sinned to death 2 Pet. 2.22 The Dog is returned to his vomit c. was this the condition of Peter that spoke it but we are ashamed of this wickednesse and folly of these men Excep 3 VVhereas you say it cannot be understood to be the word Christ that came to the Prophets Samuel Ieremy c it seems your understanding is not with the Apostle who saith It was the Spirit of Ch i st that was in them 1 Peter 1 11 and you say what Christ and his Apostles Preached c. was not Christ the Father or Spirit when as the Scripture saith Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Pet. cap. 1 ver 21. Reply The Quakers grossâ— confounding of Christ with the written VVord 1 Consider Reader how grossely he abuseth and perverts the Scripture to prove that the words that they spoke were Christ and the spirit because it is said These holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost What a grosse and blasphemous conâ—ounding is here of the word that those men spoke and the holy Ghost that moved them to speake making the word spoken by a finite creature to be the everlasting spirit the holy Ghost The words were committed to Paper and Inke Rev. 1. Heb. 2.2 engraven in Tables 2 Cor. 3.7 Isay 30 8. write it before them in a Booke note it in a Booke c. can this be Christ or the Spirit of God and yet these are the things which they were moved of the holy Ghost to write Who knoweth not that it was the spirit of God that moved them to write that revealed the things they were to publish to the world but were those things that the holy Ghost moved them to write were those things Christ were those things the spirit What a miserable ignorance or judiciall blindnesse is this which certainely the righteous judgement of God hath given up this Generation of people to because they received not the truth in the love thereof that they might be saved Position 14. That the Spirits are not to be tryed by the Scriptures c. This Position is not denyed by Nayler we proved it from three testimonies and Nayler in his answer addes his owne defence thereof without exception against any of our proofes VVe shall take his arguments for defence thereof in order Excep 1 The infallible spirit which is the originall of all Scriptures is the tryall of all spirits and that spirituall man judgeth all things and by that spirit the Saints was to judge of all spirits and gave those up to Sathan that was for that end as is plaine 1 Cor. 5 4. Reply 1 The spirit not to be set in opposition to Scripture The force of this argument by which he would prove that spirits are not to be tryed by Scripture lyeth thus The infallible spirit is the tryall of all spirits therefore spirits are not to â—e tryed by Scriptures To
hearing beleeved and were Baptized Acts 22.16 c. But if Nayler from that expression Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach will argue against Baptisme he will fully make voyd the expresse commands of Christ for Baptizing and charge sinne upon the Apostles practice so that in stead of crying downe expounding Scriptures we leave him to study what that expression meaneth Excep For the outward signes of the Supper doe this in remembrance of me till I come but when he was come then the Bread which they did breake was the Body of Christ Reply 1 We cannot but be amazed at his grosse perverting Scripture but we have showne the false meaning of that expression till he come in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 29. The Lords Supper an Ordinance to the end of the vvorld That those Corinthians to whom Paul wrote and commands to use that Ordinance Doe this in remembrance of me till the comming of Christ c. were those in whom he was spiritually come before 1 Cor. 1.2 Yet notwithstanding that spirituall comming they were commanded to eate of the Bread and drinks of the Cup to shew forth the Lords death 1 Cor. 11.26 till he come that is not till his spirituall comming in the worke of grace that was past before but his comming in glory 2. The life of saints here is a life of Faith Heb. 10.38 the just shall live by his Faith Now for the nourishing and strengthning of Faith he hath left the Seales of Bread and Wine as the holders forth of his Body and Blood for Faith to act it selfe upon and therefore before Faith be swallowed up in vision these are appointed as standing Ordinances by the Lord Iesus for the establishing of it The rest of his answer is made up of such rayling in stead of reasoning and such inconsistent expressions that we shall onely leave him to the Lord to deale with his conscience for the guilt of them Position 17. That there is no mediate Call to the Ministry He denyes not our proofe and in stead of answering the many Scripture arguments we gave in our Perfect Pharisee pag. 32. for a mediate call to the Ministry he falls to a downe-right rayling though we have nothing we need to add to the arguments we there layd down against this Position meeting with no answer to what we have written yet we shall observe in the midst of his raylings these things Naylers contradictions 1. How flatly he contradicts himselfe when he tells the Reader pag. 19. l. 8. the Apostles when they had gathered Churches out of the world they ordained them Elders of themselves yet after sayes l. 10. 11. these were ordained not by man and after l. 13. 14. this ordination was not by man nor by the Churches c. the Apostles ordained them Elders and yet those Elders were not ordained by man were not the Apostles men And was not this a mediate call wherein the Apostles ordained them Elders in every City Acts 14.23 2. Though he labâ—urs with abundance of bitternesse to cry downe any mediate call yet as he answers nothing to our Scriptures so we cannot but 〈◊〉 â—ve how he is forced in the midst of his rayling to confesse the truth saying pag. 19. l. 8. the Apostles ordained them Elders which is that mediate call we contended for Lastly The substance of his rayling is to tell us that we are invested in the Ministry by Magistrates Townes and Parishes when as we doe professe we doe not know a Minister in England that is ordained or professeth to receive his ordination from a Magistrate Towne or Parish 2. All that the Magistrate Towne or Parish doe is to provide maintenance for thâ—se that labour in the Gospel nay the late Commission which perhaps Nayler drives at never pretended to put any in the Office of a Minister but onely provided maintenance for him in the propogation of the Gospel so that notwithstanding what he hath said we are still fully convinced of the clearenesse of a mediate call to the worke of publique Ministry of the Word And thuâ— we have followed him in every materiall expression though â—e answers nothing to our Scriptures or Arguments And though his great cavill be at our testimonies and upon this cryes out 〈◊〉 we published filthy lyes yet the Reader will now clearely see that of 55. proofes we layd downe he onely denyes the truth of seven which are yet fully cleared and proved either by the testimony of these that were the witnesses under their Hands and Seales or by the demonstration out of their owne Books however Nayler labours to evade and shuffle them How unjustly we have been charged with lyes will now appeare and we must seriously professe that had it not been to cleare up those truths which he chargeth with falsehood and vindicating Scripture from his grosse perverting of them his Booke is so meerely composed of rayling and abusing us and so beyond expectation sottish and senselesse that we should not have thought it at all worth our answer or observation Were we not ready according to that rule 1 Pet. 3.15 to give a reason of the hope that is in us and that Tit. 1.9.10.11 to convince gainesayers whose mouthes must be stopped we should not have troubled thee or our selves with answering such triviall exceptions as doe hereafter follow against what we have proved so plainely from Scripture against the Principles of the Quakers But that we may not seem to leave any stone unturned that may cleare up the truth to the spirits of the people of God we shall proceed to the consideration of that which followes in Naylers answer Principle 1. Not to salute any REader though we have proved that this command Luke 10.4 of not saluting any by the way were but a particular case and not generally binding as we have made evident by many Scripture Arguments and the practises of the Saints and though we have fully proved the command of Christ imposeth generall salutation upon saints as a duty as thou mayst Reade Perfect Pharisee pag. 31. 42. yet thus he excepts Excep 1 The summe of his exception is against High-way salutes To which we answer Reply 1. High-way Salutes are the knowne practice of Quakers as when they meet any of their owne way in the streets or other-where their Phrase is How dost thou and their action to take them by the Hand And if that Text command against High-way salutes how contrary is their practice to it Salute no man by the way 2. However the Quakers doe contend against high-way salutes though by their owne practice Publican-like amongst one another they contradict this Principle yet high-way salutes were the practice of saints when holy Iacob met his Brother Esau by the high-way Gen. 33.3 He passed over before them and bowed himselfe before him seven times untill he came neere to his Brother c. Did nor gracious Abigail salute David by the high-way 1 Sam. 25 23. When David was
comming to her house she went to meet him and when Abigail saw David she hasted and lighted off the Asse and fell before David on her face and bowed her selfe by the ground Thus you see the practice of the saints in high-way salutes 3. Nay it was not onely the custome of the saints to salute by bodily gestures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Salutes of Primitive times but by words also and words equivalent to what are used by the people of God in England in their salutations See 2 Iohn 10. where Iohn forbiddeth them to give the least countenance to the hereticall venters of false Doctrines commands them not so much as to bid them God-speed which clearely proves that that high-way salutation was a common thing in the Apostles dayes and not to be denyed to any but such wicked persons as the Apostle there speaks of in carrying on their wicked Principles If any man bring not this Doctrine receive him not into your house neither bid him God speed Hence Naylers colour of taking the name of God in vaine we fully declare against peoples using that Phrase without any sense of God upon their soules Yet looke upon salutes as a command of Christ and so wish all such as doe use the name of the blessed God in their salutes either to keep a due regard of that Majesty upon their spirits when they use his glorious name or else to use some other expression Excep 2 His next cavill is against that plaine Text Mat. 5.47 If yee salute your Brethren onely what doe you more then doe others doe not even the Publicans so Where in stead of submitting to the authority of the commands of Christ He sayes thus It is no command to them to salute all but a warning to them of their partiality Reply 1. He that hath but looked upon that Text Mat. 5.46.47 but with halfe an eye will clearely see that he must as well except that Christ doth not command to love all as to say that Christ doth not command to salute all when its apparant that the very phrase and reason in both commands is the very same 2. Sure this man doth not understand himselfe when he affirmes that this is a command against partiality in saluting and yet is not a command to salute all for what is partiality in saluting but this saluting some and not saluting all What a ridiculous cavill is this even to the contradicting of himselfe 3. As to his endeavouring by this ridiculous and selfe contradicting exposition to charge us with partiality as that we salute onely those whom we love and who are rich c. we say it is a malitious slander for t is sufficiently knowne we salute strangers whose face we never saw before and the poore of the people as well as the richest of them nay the very Quakers themselves also But how doth this againe fly in their Faâ—es who for the most part carry with so much incivility to all but to people of their owne way Excep 3 3. There is a third exception which we must not passe over without serious observation it being a more then ordinary discovery of the spirit of the Quakers Where when we charge them for picking and choosing at the command of Christ such things in Scripture as doe most agree with their humors and fancies thus though they are forbid in the same place Luke 7.4 to carrie mony in their purses or to weare shooes on their feet as well as to salute any by the way yet we charge them in this because they stand upon the one command and not upon any of the rest and doe evidently bring themselves within the curse Rev. 22. Nayler thus replyes to it pag. 21. l. 4. c What we doe is not from the command that was to others ☞ but from command of the same power by which we are sent forth and if we were commanded to forbeare wearing shooes as well as we are commanded to forbeare your Heathenish customes c. we should be made willing to obey as some have done who have been commanded to goe naked c. Reply Now thou mayst see the mystery of iniquity that lyes in the Quakers layd open we can blesse the Lord that hath made them thus unvayle themselves and discover the rottennesse of their hearts as to the authority of the Scriptures which they have so long by their jugling endeavoured to conceale For here thou wiâ—t clearely see that the Quakers looke upon the commands of Christ in Scripture as having no soveraigne or binding authority over their consciences and practises further then agrees with their owne Principles and fancies For what means that expression What we doe is not from the command that was to others This without controversie is utterly to shake off the authority of the the Word For 1. Was not the whole Word written to others Did any now alive live in those dayes when the Prophets or Apostles writ their severall Bookes Were we of the Church of Corinth or Philippi Were we of the seven Churches of Asia or did we live in these dayes Alas there is no command in Scripture but was given to others long before the dayes of our Fathers and shall no command given to others be binding to us Let them Reade these convincing Texts Rom. 15.4 Whatsoever things were Written before time were Written for our learning where Paul makes the Books of the Old Testament binding to those who were not alive when they were Written for the Romans to whom he then Wrote were borne many hundred yeares after the writing of those Scriptures 1 Cor. 10 11. All these things happened unto them for examples and they were Written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world are come 2 Tim. 3.16 All Scripture to whomsoever Written or to what man soever the command was given before time yet all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for Doctrine reproofe correction instruction in righteousnesse So the 2 Peter 1.19 speaking of the Scriptures that sure Word of Prophesie sayes they doe well to take heed to them as to a light in a darke place though they were Prophesies and commandâ— given forth to other persons many hundred yeares before Thus you see that commands in Scripture that were given forth to others are yet of universall concernment unto all to those that lived not in those dayes even such upon whom the ends of the world are come For that other expression of Naylers If we were commanded to forbeare to weare shooes c. what a wretched casting off is this of the yoke of Christ and a desperate picking and choosing in his commands onely what is agreeing to their owne fancies Iâ— not this to breake his bonds asunder and cast his cords from them Psal 2.3 If we were commanded Is not the revealed will of Christ a command Is one part of the same verse a command see Luke 10.4 and not the other part Is