in the Soul are not God under what notion soever he be taken a Declaration of the Fountain is not the fountain it self Hence the Quakers grand principle that immediat objective Revelations are the primary Rule of their Faith falleth to the Ground and these imprinted Rules are but only secondary Ergo even according to what is here gained from the Quakers the Scriptures are equal even in their primariness to immediat Revelations for the one can no more be called the primary Rule than the other and that by the Quaker his own Concession Moreover seing these immediat Revelations imprinted on the Soul are not the primary but secondary Rule then certainly they ought to be examined according to the primary Rule Now to assert this is most impious Seing these Revelations must be supposed to be self evident and their Divinity already undoubtedly apparent For this is to maintain that we ought to doubt whether or not there is veracity in God and horresco referens Judge that the God of Truth may prove the lyar and deceive us But once more how shal these imprinted secondary Rules be examined not by other words or dictats of whatsoever kind for to do this will cost the examiner a journey to in finitum to which he will not come in haste seing these other Dictats or Revelations are not the Fountain but a Declaration of the Fountain more than the first and to assert that these Revelations may be examined according to God himself and not by the Word of God is to go some stages beyond the wildest of nonsense and again there is very good Reason to wonder why any Revelation should be more primary than the Scriptures both being given by the same Spirit seing the primarinesse is not the immediatness but the chief binding power the prerogative to be the touch-stone of all Doctrines Now this notion of a primary Rule being had there is very good Reason to wonder why the Dictats of the Spirit should be preferred before the Scriptures seing God hath told whether mediatly or immediatly it 's all one the Quakers themselves dare not deny that God hath indeed said it that they are able to make the Man of God wise unto salvation 2 Tim. 3.16 17. And hath commanded and commended the perusal of them as the Book in the determination of which we ought finally and surely to rest in the matters of greatest import Isai. 8.20 Ioh. 5.39 Act. 17.11 2 Pet. 1.19 20. With many other places But on the other hand in all the Scriptures there is not so much as the least intimation that all persons within the Church and faâ— less all men have divine immediat Objective Revelations by which they may examine and discern good from evil and here he is very angry with his adversary because he accused him of confounding in his Apology the principal Rule and the principal Leader and yet as though he had not confounded them compleatly enough in his Apology he here again in his Vindication in one and the same page viz. 38. both calleth the Spirit as imprinting Truths into the Soul the primary Rule as was even now cited and also the same Spirit the principal Leader as imprinting Rules into the Soul to walk by by which Rules must be understood the Truths he spake of just now above here the Reader may see that not only the same thing is both Principal Leader and principal Rule but also that there is not so much as a Metaphysical formality betwixt them for both of them is God under the notion of imprinting Rules or Truths into the soul yet the confidence I shal not say the impudence hath he to deny that he confounded them 8. But the Quakers well knowing that if God speaking in the Holy Scriptures be admitted Judge of the present Debates between us and them Or if the Holy Scriptures be not Esteemed False Ambiguous and Nonsensical then their cause is lost and their great Diana of Immediat Revelations and the rest of their Monstruous and Impious Doctrine falls to the ground they assert with the Papists that the Spirit of God Speaking in the Scriptures is not his own Interpreter and so bereave the Scriptures of that which is the Soul Sense and Marrow thereof denying all Scripture Interpretation though never so Genuine and Clear except they have Immediat Objective Revelation to tell them that such a Meaning is true Hence they say they may very well reject all our Interpretations and Consequences of Scripture seeing we do not pretend to the Spirit that gave forth the Scripture but declare our selves Enemies to it Thus replyeth George Keith to Mr. Iohn Alexander Truths Def. Chap. 8. Behold Reader the grossest of Popish Shiftâ—â— to defend the grossest of Popish Doctrine for the Papists still say that we can know nothing Certainly because we reject their Doctrine of Infallibility just so do the Quakers maliciously belying the whole Reformed Churches Impiously crying out that they are Enemies to the Spirit of God and that because we examine all Doctrines and Practices by the written Word of God. Hence we find that the Spirit the Quakers pretend to is Diametrically opposite to the Scriptures and therefore the Spirit of Lies and Delusion at this they are enraged and cannot away with it Nam trepidant immisso lumine manes Hence William Pen thus speaketh Rej. Pag. 72. Let them shew me that Scripture that plainly and uninterpretatly tells me such a proposition is true and such a One is false that only consists of their additional Meanings such a new Nick-named People Right and such wrong and they do their busines If they cannot as it is impossible they should they must have recourse to some thing else to Rule and Determine and what can that be besides that Eternal Spirit Thou seest Judicious Reader that according to the Quakers God speaking in the Scriptures cannot tell us what is true or what is false who are Right or who are Wrong of the same Nature is that which the Quakers have in their Queries to Mr. Iohn Alexander in which they often require an Answer to be given in plain words of Scripture and in particular Querie 10. They have these Words We say they expect plain Scriptures from you for this without any Shuffling Meanings Consequences or else never pretend Scripture Rule more but acknowledge that it hath been your Meanings Consequences which have been your Rule Hence according to this Doctrine our Saviour laboured but in vain when he proved the resurrection of the Dead from the Scriptures Matth. 22.31 32. for the Sadducees might have answered that such express words were not in the Pentateuch viz. That the dead should rise again and therefore they were not bound to believe it tho the inference were never so clear except they had a new immediate Revelation which they might have said we have not and who could have proved the contrary yea if this Doctrine be true a man doth not sin tho
done The first is that known Example of the Eye-salve and the Sun For one by the Eye-salve or some efficacious Medicament of this nature removing the Tunicle may come to the sight and knowledge of the Sun So that he may say by means of the Salve or its opening of the Eyes he seeth and knoweâ—h the Sun and again by the Suns light he may perceive what is Eye-salve and what not This egregiously illustrateth the purpose and yet is many stages from a Circle The second Example is of a Logâ—cian his Reason and his Systeme of Logick which containeth Rules to discern sound reason from fallacy and sophistry For the Logician knoweth by his own reason that such a Book is sound containing true Reason and not fallacies This he can demonstrat by his own Reason as the mean and yet doth not thus argument my own reason teacheth me so therefore it is so but from reason in actu exercito and the nature of the things contained in the Book which by means of his own reason he seeth to be clear Truths And again by the Book he knoweth what is sound reason and what not By this time I hope we are fully freed of the Circle in which the Romanists would fain have us entangled being covetous of company for I could requit them with two unextricable Circles if time did permit 5. I come to the Removal of the second Objection viz that we cannot distinguish our selves in this point from Quakers and the like Enthusiasts This Objection not only the Papists but also the Quakers urge what they can to the end that they may make the Reformed Churches symbolize with themselves To this purpose Robert Barclay in his Apology attempted to make Calvin the French and Dutch Confessions and the Westminster Divines Patronisers of their Doctrine because they said that we cannot firmly know and savingly believe the Divinity of the Scriptures without the inward Testimony or Operation of the Spirit of God. But he calleth the Divines of Westminster dark dishonest and confused because they did not separat the Word from the Spirit but said that this Testimony or Operation of the Spirit was in and with the Word but neglecteth the consideration of Isai. 59.21 the Scripture upon which they build this their saying And again Vind. pag. 33. Where he abridging his Apology bringeth up again these things ut respondeant ultimae primis he neglecteth the special and chief Reasons whereby his adversary pag. 61. shewed that there was no discord between Calvin French and Dutch Confessions and our Divines Add hereto that it is well known that there was never the least controversy between the Brittish and Transmarine Protestants on this head but contrariwise a most entire harmony Having therefore discovered this none-such weakness and extream disingenuity I come directly to the objection and answer both Papists and Quakers together we distinguish our selves from these Enthusiasts for first the Work of the Spirit the necessity of which we maintain is only subjective being rather if we will speak properly an application of the things revealed in Scripture than a Revelation or Testimony strickly so taken whereas the Revelation to which the Quakers pretend is altogether objective like that of the Prophets 2. We assert the sufficiency of the Scriptures as a Rule containing all things necessary to be believed or done Which they deny 3. We assert the Scriptures to be the principal and ultimate rule into which our Faith is lastly to be resolved Hence we examine all Doctrines of men all internal Suggestions by the Scriptures as the infallible Test or Touchstone hence we maintain that the Spirit 's Testimonie is still in and with the Word so that it may be known what is the true and what is the false Spirit by the Word so that the work of the Spirit is to enlighten the understanding and dispose the soul to perceive the Characters of Divinity naturally ingraffed in the Scriptures All which the Quakers deny and assert the quite contrary Now this our Doctrine is by a full and most harmonious consent delivered and asserted by the reformed Churches and most eminent and shining lights therein Luthers words are that if any thing should deliver any Doctrine which it could not prove by Scripture he would spit in its face knowing certainly that it were the Devil Sinopsis Pur. Theol Disp. 2 Pag. 20. But the Holy Ghost by these Divine Characters of the Scripture begetteth Divine and saving Faith in our hearts Maccov Locâ— Com pag. 28. The Testimony of the Spirit is a light so enlightening our understanding that it followeth it sweetly and sheweth the arguments in the things themselves impressed in the things which are to be believed but before unknown Woleb Comp. Theol pag. 4. The Spirit of God perswadeth the hearts of Believers internally of the Divinity of the Scriptures in so much as he openeth the eyes and illuminateth the heart of him who after previous invocation of the Spirit of God readeth the Scriptures so that by this illumination the man shal behold the wonderful things of God and acknowledge Gods Voice speaking in the Scriptures The like Doctrine hath Wallet in his Sinopsis Papiâ—migener Contr. in many places where he asserreth in terminis that this Testimony of the Spirit is 〈◊〉 and with the Scriptures The Words of godly and learned Whitaker are clear as they are cited by Mr. Crawford in a short but learned tracâ—at de Princ. fiâ— obj et effect Whereas ye say that we reject the Testimony of the Church and judge our selves taught by the alone internal perswasion of the Spirit we hold the Ministry of the Church in honour internal perswasions without the external word we shun as sanatical impostures we judge out of the scriptures we believe with the scriptures or because of their Testimony and therefore Hereticks i. e. Enthusiasts we neither are nor can be But of all men must clearly Calv. Inst. L. 1 C. 9. asserteth our Doctrine and strongly refuteth these Enthusiasts for Sect 1. he thus speaketh furthermore these who having rejected the scriptures imagine to themselves a way I know not what of approaching to God are to be judged not so much possâ—ssed with error as acted with madness there have arisen of late some giddy heady persons who disdainfully pretending the rule of the spirit cast off all reading and deride the simplicity of these who follow the dead and killing Letter as they term it But I would know of them what spirit that is by whose breathing they are so lifted up as to be bold to despise the Doctrine of the scriptures as abject and childish if they answer it is the spirit of Christ that security must be very ridiculous for I believe they will grant the Apostles of Christ and others faithful in the primitive Church to have been illuminat by no other Spirit but none of these learned from it to contemn the word of God but every one of them had them
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or persona See the same Author Col. 783 De Libris Ephremi Pariarchae Theopolitani where he confirmeth at large this our assertion Now observe serious Reader of how great a consequence in the Judgement of those who are in this great point most Orthodox the right or wrong use of these words about which we now treat was esteemed and also that they took them in the same sense for which we now plead But I forbear to add more out of the anâ—ients For Calvin Inst. lib. 1. cap. 13. Sect. 2. affirmeth this our proposition of all the Ancient Orthodox without exception and Socinus ingenuously confesseth it Of the Modern writers I affirm the same as is clear from Calvin ibid. and Tremellius in His version of the Text out of the Syriak Pomeâ—ranus on the place and others It is clear then thâ—â— we have both name and thing in Scripture and indeed this Text doth so clearly hold forth this trulie Catholick Doctrine that George Keith is forced to discover that which he by all means endeavoureth to palliat For Truth Defended p. 76.79 He sayeth that this Text is to be understood speaking of Christ as Man only Now I am sure if he could make out this he should do a piece of non such service unto the Arrians and Socinians for this is one of the Texts that they with greatest Care endeavour to pervert and wrest and the Orthodox to vindicate inferring alwayes from it the Divinity of Christ but this he shall never be able to make out for there is nothing more clear than that the whole Context and Scope of the Apostle doth evince that this place speaketh of Christ as God and again who dâ—re say except the Arrians and Socinians with George Keith that Christ as Man can be called the Brightness of the Fathers Glory or the express Image or Character of the Father Man indeed was made according to the Image of God but certain it is that no Creature in Scripture is called the Image of the Father hence when Christ Col 1.15 Is called the Image of the invisible God Divines take the the word GOD for the person of the Father neither at all can it be otherwise understood for Christ is there called the first born of every Creature and he by whom all things were Created and Consist Hence Christ must be called the Image of the invisible God according to his God-head and by â— good Consequence by God must be understood the Person of the Father as a distinct Subsâ—stâ—ncâ— from that of the Son. From all which I conclude that so firm is the Truth of our Doctrine that the very things that seem to infringe and weaken it resolve only into a fair Occasion of and making way for its clearer Evidence and stronger Corroboration Add to all this that the primitive Church carefully retained these Words and Phrases as either being in Scripture in Terminis or bottomed thereon and as being the true Symbols of these Divine Things whereby the Church might most fitly express her mind and repel the Sophistry of Hereticks both before but espâ—cially after the rise of the Arrian Heresie Hâ—nce Iustin Martyr hath a book intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and describes a Person of the Holy â—rinit◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And Damasâ—â—â—e Orth. fide and others follow him in this Description These and the like Phrases are generally found in the works of the Fathers as Irenaeus Tertullian and others before the rise of Arrianism but especially after it as Augustin Athanasius Hilarius Cyrillus Alexandrinus Eusebius Rufinus Sozomenes and many others divers of which as Augustin Athanasius hath books with Titles expresly concerning the Holy Trinity But as I saâ—d before after the rise of the Arrian and Sabellian Heresies the Church with greater Care and Acuracy distinguished the words Substance and Subsistence as he that pleases may see in Ruf. l. i. Cap. 29 and in the History of Sozomenes writing of the Council of Alexandria Notable also to thâ—â— purpose and never to be forgotten are the words of Athanasius who in his Symbol thus speaketh Whosoever will be saved before all thingâ— it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith which Faith except every man keep wholly and inviolat without doubt he shall eternally pâ—rish this truly is the right Cathoâ—ick Faith that we worship one God in Trinity and the Trinity in Vnity without confounding the Persons neither separating the Substance c. From which Time to this day the Church hath Religiously Observed these Words and Phrases whereby She might express the Truth and distinguish her self from that Porphyrian sect of the Arrians as Câ—â—stantin the great called â—hem and other Hereâ—ickâ— By this Time. I am confident that he that will not close his Eyes may perceive that the Doctrine of Quakers is all one with that of Arrians Macedonians Sabellians which is the purpose of this Discourse But yet ex abundanti I will transcrib a Passage or two further The first of which is in Truth Def. This compleat Arrian and self contradicter having said pag 75. That It is only the â—â—scriptural Terms of Trinity and Persons which he denyeth and not the Mystery pag 77. He giveth himself the lie and palpably bewrayeth his Arrianism in these words And if Io Alexander â—ir definition of a Person be received that it is an Intelligent Beeing subsisting incommunicably or distinctly one from another I do not see for my part but that three Persons at this â—ate shall infer 〈◊〉 Intelligent Beeings subsisting incommunicably and consequently three Gods. Behold Reader the the Arrian dashing against the same stumbling-stone upon which Arrians and Socinians have alwayes broken their necks For upon this very Account that it seemed to them to infer three Gods the Arrians and Sabellians of old and the Socinians at this day always malign and endeavour what they can to render odious that most necessary Doctrine of the Holy Trinity With this passage of George Keith well agreeth what Hubberthorn in his Reply to Sherlock impiously belloweh forth pag 19. That there is no Scripture for the Catholick Faith and Trinity and three Persons Before I passe this Matter I cannot but take Notice of the strange dealing of George Keith attempting to make Augustin a Patroniser of his Arrian Doctrine For in Truths Def Cap 5. The Quaker hâ—th these Words And indeed Augustin in his 5 and 7 Books of the Trinity not only sayeth the Words three Persons are improper but disputeth against them as I suppose Io. Alexander for all his School Logick and Philosophy shall hardly be able tâ— answer his Argument the substance of which 〈◊〉 my best remembrance is this The word Person either it signifieth somewhat absolute and simple or relative to say the first is absurd otherways therâ— shall be three absolute Beeings or Essence's in God which is absurd If somewhat Relative which is referred or relative to another as Father is relativâ— to a
3.18 Act. 16.14 15. Ezek. 36.26 27. This Distinction is very requisite for clearing of our purpose and liberateth our Doctrine from the Circle which is falsly objected unto us by both Papists and Quakers A DIGRESSION In which the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches anent the necessity of the Spirits Operation in order to firm and saving Knowledge and belief of the Holy Scriptures is Explained and Vindicated from the Exceptions of Papists and Quakers FIrst all the Reformed Churches do with 〈◊〉 Consent assert that in order to a firm and saving knowledge and Divine Faith or believing of the Scriptures the illumiâ—nation and operation of the Spirit of God illumiâ—nating and preparing the Soul is absolutly necessâ—â—ry this all the Confessions witnesse and our Dâ—â—vines such as Calvin in his Institution Polanâ— in his Syntagma demonstratively evince Thâ— Doctrine is impugned on the one hand by the Pâ—pists who object first that we commit a Ciâ—â—cle 2. That we are guilty of Enthusiastick dottages of which we justly accuse the Anabaptists and Quakers and the like Enthusiasts with these the Socinians and other Enemies of the grace of God joyn forces accusing us of the same Crimes On the other hand the Quakers perceiving themselves unextricably in the briers and unwilling to be alone affirm confidently that we cannot separat our selves from them as to this matter 3. In order to the silencing of both these parties who like Samsons Foxes when they appear most opposite one to another even then conspire most firmly the ruine of the Church of God I premit that in order to the production of true Faith in God's ordinary way and method two things are necessary as the principles thereof the Word and the Spirit The Word they call principium objectivum an objective principle or an objective revelation because the Scriptures concur objectively declaring truths to be believed even as the Sun objectively demonstrateth and sheweth things that may be seen though no eyes were open to see them so the Scriptures hold forth clearly all that we ought to believe and do even though the understanding of none were opened to behold the wonders contained in Gods written Law. And again as the Scriptures hold forth other Truths so they evidently declare and manifest the Characters of their Divinity Even as the Sun proveth himself to be the Sun by his own irradiant and illustrious Beams of Light. And as the Sun must be supposed to be an objective light declaring himself and other things The same we say of the Scriptures that in themselves they contain and hold forth these heavenly Rays and glorious Beams and Characters of Divinity prior to the Spirits opening of the understanding and enclining the will for peâ—ception and embracing thereof Now noâ—withstanding of alâ— this poor mankind blind by naâ—ure should be in perpetual darknesse if his eyes were not opened Hence another Principle is necessary viz. The Spirits gracious operations enlightening and â—weetly enclining fiâ—ting and disposing the Soul which is the subject or recipient of this light to understand and believe the things contained in these heavenly Oracles And all these the Spirit doth not by dictating or telling into the ear or mind that such and such excellent things are contained in these Writings as a man making an oration to commend such or such a thing but as we said already by removing the natural mist and darkness modo efficientis aut Dâ—vini instrumenti by way of Efficient or dâ—vine â—nstrument in the Hand of God For the Divinâ— Bâ—auty and Celestial Glory of the Scriptures is so transcendent that the removal of the natural blindnesâ— and pravity of the will is enough for ravishing of the hearts into ardent Love obsequious Obedience and in a word a most enâ—ire and total captivity unto them This working of the Spirit upon the soul is commonly called Subjective Revelation because it terminateth upâ—n the soul which is the subject or recipient of the light contained in the Word and may be more properly called an application of Divine Revelation than Revelation it self This subjective working of the Spirit both the Scriptures themselves and all sound Divines illustrat according to them by the opening of the eyes Ps. 119.18 Eye-salve Rev 3.18 Which Examples both illustrate and prove the purpose yea it is observable that in all the Scriptures the Holy Ghost mentioneth no other kind of Revelation as necessary to Salvation but only objective which indeed was sometimes immediat but not necessarily so but other some times mediat and this subjective Revelation or illumination of the Spirit In a word for any thing we can find is all one whether the objective Revelation be mediat or immediat providing it be Divine see among other Scriptures Ps. 119.18 Luk. 24 46 Act. 16 14 31 32 33 34. 2. Cor. 3 15 16. Rev. 3.18 4. Having premised and illustrated this distinction I come in the next place directly to remove the Objections And first that of the Circle in which the Papists endeavour to entangle us For they object that we being demanded how we know the Scriptures to be the Word of God we answer by the Testimony and Opertaion of the Spirit And again being demanded how we know the Spirit of Truth and discern it from the Spirit of Error We answer by the Scriptures Hence they conclude that we run the round and answer the same by the same and so make a compleat Circle To which I answer that there is here no Circle for a Circle is progressus ab eodem ad idem eodem modo cognitum A Progress from the same to the sâ—me thing by the same kind of Argumentation But so it is not here For there is not the same way of Argumentation For the Word concurreth objectivâ—ly declaring and holding forth what are the true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Characters of the Spirit of God argumentaâ—ively so that we can reason because such a Spirit v. g. He that confesseth Jesus Christ hath come in the Flâ—sh is said by the Scripture to be of God therefore I know and believe that this is true Doctrine and that this Spirit is of God. But on the other hand we make no such use of the Spirits inward Testimony or Operations We do not with the phanatical Enthusiasts reason thus the Spirit or a strong impulse which they call the Spirit bids me believe that such and such Books are the Scriptures therefore I believe them to be so We say no such thing We only say that the Spirits operations are necessary for disposing the Soul to perceive and understand the things contained in the Scriptures themselves and apply the same so that either for his own satisfaction or redarguing of others he still rationally deduceth all his Arguments from the Scriptures making them or which is all one God speaking in them the formal Object and ultimat ground wherein to resolve his Faith. Two Examples I will give to illustrat my answer and then I have
impudently bold they would not adventure to cause a phrase of Scripture to speak that the contrare of which at the first view it proclaimeth 2. Who but one that would adventure upon any thing would make this phrase Word of Prophecy in the 19 v. to speak any other thing than the Prophecy of the Scriptures in the 20 verse or simple Prophecy in the 21 verse seing to do this destroyeth the whole Connexion of the Context 3. The same is evinced by the connexion of this with the following Words for the Apostle giveth his Reason in the 20 Verse why in the 19 he had admonished to study the Scriptures viz. that unlesse they diligently search and study them they would be ready to miss the genuine and fall into a private meaning of the Scriptures that is one which the Scriptures if well attended to would not yield 4. The same is evinced from the general commendation given by the Spirit of God to the searchers of or attenders to the Scriptures as Isa. 8.20 Ioh. 5.39 Act. 17.11 With many other places which are sufficient Commentaries to this Text Whereas on the other hand these our Adversaries no lesse void of Reason then fraughted with audacity cannot bring one Text commanding us to search or take heed to the Light within Add to all this that these our Antagonists contradict the stream of Orthodox Writers upon this place who all give their joint suffrage unto our exposition as Luther Calvin Bullinger Christophorus Imlerus Beza the Dutch Divines who give the same glosse with us yea I dare averr with Confidence that if we except some old Montanists Cataphrygians or the like antient Enthusiasts or of later times the Munserians or such Libertines none hitherto expone this place as the Quakers do But we must yield to them for Hi soli sapiunt alii velut umbra vagantur Doubtless they are the Men and Wisdom shall die with them But I leave them to grapple with their Brother William Pen who in his Rejoynder before cited pag. 334. yieldeth unto us that which they so stifly deny viz. that by the More sure word of Prophesie the Scriptures are to be understood and I passe on to the vindication of Luk. 16.31 If they hear not Moses and the Prophets neither will they be perswaded though one rose from the dead Rob Barclay in opposition to Mr Broun Vind. pag. 39.40 reasoning from this place that the Scriptures are the principal Rule of Faith sayeth first That it will not follow from the Scriptures being more sure than the Testimony of one risen from the dead that therefore they are more sure than the Testimony of the Spirit I Ans. Let him once prove that every Man hath such a Spirit as Quakers do alledge and then let the Spirit go hand in hand with the Scriptures but this he shall never be able to do 2. This will follow that Moses and the Prophets were a Rule to the Church at that time Yea even the primarie Rule otherways might not Abraham have said The Spirit of God directeth every man immediatly If they hear not him they will hear none else but this he said not Therefore Abraham or rather Christ in the Parable judged the Scriptures the principal Rule on Earth As for what he says concerning the Scriptures being a principal Rule to the Iews only is nothing to the purpose unless he prove that they are not so to us which if he hath done we have seen above 3. Certainly the voice of one of the glorified Spirits coming from Heaven where they behold the face of God is no less to be accounted immediat Revelation than the voice of the High-Priest unto the People when he came out from the Holy of Holies which in the Quakers account was immediate Revelation But the Quakers can make what they will to be Divine Revelation To the end that this may more fully appear we shall consider a passage in his Apologie pag. 4. where he maketh an Objection viz. That after the Dispensation of the Law Gods Method of Speaking was altered To which he answereth that Gods speaking was immediate alwayes to the Iews in that it was immediat alwayes to the High. Priest from between the Cherubims To which I Reply This Answer is strange In that he sayes The mind of God revealed by the High-priest unto the People was to them immediate Revelation for certainly a thing delivered from one person to another by the hand of a third cometh unto that person by the hand of another which other must either be a Mediu◠or Midss or else he must say that three make but two which is a ridiculous Contradiction 2. We say that even according to the Quakers principles Gods way of revealing himself to us now is as immediate as it was to the Jews because we have these that were inspired by God speaking unto us though dead hence they have no reason to go about to prove the Scriptures not to be the principal Rule of Faith on this account that they are not immediate Revelation for that which they contend to have been immediat Revelation was no more immediat than the Scriptures My fourth Argument I draw from 2 Tim. 3.15 And that from a Child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make thee wise through Faith unto Salvation From which place I thus Reason That which is able to make such an one as Timothy called the Man of God v 17. Wise through Faith unto Salvation must be a sufficient Rule of Direction to guide us in our Christian Course But the Scriptures are able to make Timothy or the Man of God wise unto Salvation Therefore they are a sufficient Rule or Directory to guide u◠in our Christian Course And here it may be observed that R. B. Vind pag. 40 41. is so pressed with the force of this Argument that he can find no better off-come but to challenge his Adversary as guilty of perversion of Scriptures because he compared the 15 and 17 verse◠together saying that the Scriptures were abl◠to make the man of God perfect But to challenge a man for perversion upon such a ground as this is an evident token of too much perversness for if he had but looked unto the 15 verse he might have seen they are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 able to make Timothy which was a Man of God wise through Faith unto Salvation where there is an ability or sufficiency in some kind of Cause ascribed to the Scriptures Now no other sort of ability or sufficiency can be imagined if it be not that of a Rule or causae Exemplaris seu directivae for Faith is added as the instrumental Cause or as the apprehender Hence I evidently infer that the Scriptures are the adequate and primary Rule for if there were some things to be believed and practised not contained in the Scripture or if the Scriptures were subject to another Test or Rule to be examined thereby
Iesuit more opposite to the Reformed than another with him he joyneth hands He is therefore to be accounted amongst the grossest of Iesuits and these his Romish Cavills are to be neglected being an hundred times sufficiently enervate by our Divines in their Writings against Papists especially in their answers to Bellarmin out of whose Quiver he hath stollen this long ago blunted weapon 2. The task incumbent to him was to evince that it belongeth properly to the Rule of Faith to tell a Man. v. c. Iohn or Iames in particular that he hath true faith whatever therefore he sayeth besides this is besides the purpose But 3. ex abundanti The bare and simple Profession of Quakerism will no more prove one to be a Quaker in earnest than the simple Profession that one hath Faith will prove him to have it indeed Seeing a man may profess himself to be a Quaker and yet be a Iesuit providing there be any difference between them there is therefore more required viz that for any thing Men can know such a man liveth according to the principle of the partie and no more is necessary for the begetting a Judgment of Charity than that a man profess the principles of Christianity Seriously for any thing Men can know practise accordingly but no infallible Evidences that another hath true Faith are any wayes necessarie but only Moral Rational Grounds of certainty those may be had As for the other viz. infallible Evidences those are only necessar to ones self and these they may hâ—ve by the Scripture applyed in Christian prudence and Spiritual Wisdom the Scriptures themselves being the Rule whereby to make the Examen or Search Is. 8.20 Ioh. 5.39 Act. 17.11 2. Tim. 3.15 16 17.2 Pet. 1.19 20. And the enlightned Conscience the Judge the Spirit of Adoption or a filial Disposition inclining the Believer to come to God as a Child unto a Father with both great Confidence and Reverence together with the renewed Spirit of the Believer himself Rom. 8.15 16 the witnesses Hence his antâ—-christian Cavills fall to the ground and the similies no more halt the other Examples brought for the illustration of any Matter for all similes halt in some respect otherwayes they should not be similies but the same and to think the similies here used cannot hold because both Judge witnesses are inward in the matter illustrated by these Similies is not only without but against Reason For even as the one thing being outward and to be proved to others not to the Murderer himself who knoweth it well enough requireth an outward Judge and outward witnesses So the other thing being inward the infallible Testimony of which the Person himself standeth only in need of requireth inward Judge and inward Witnesses 7. The same Author hath another Objection prosecuted at large in his Apologie and abbreviated in his Abridgement falsly called his Vindication Pag. 44.45 which is that there are many things that the Scriptures cannot determine as particular individual Actions to which Mr Broun had answered that general Rules were enough leaving the rest to Christian prudence and Wisdom and also that there should be need of a particular Revâ—lalation for every particular Action as Eating Drinking c. Yea every particular Word This Consequence he denyeth saying that from Spiritual to Natural Actions the necessity of this Revelation will not follow I answer first The Consequence which he denyed he proveth himself for the Reason why Spiritual Actions need particular inspirations is because of their being either Sin or Duty that they may know how to give Spiritual Worship and leave Carnal Worship but this Reason he grants to stretch it self to natural Actions saying if he say those natural Acts under some Circumstances may be sin or duty I confess then the Revelation of the Spirit is needful Therefore if particular Immediate Revelations be necessary for the performances of Spiritual Actions they are also necessary for the performance of Civil or Natural Actions seeing there is nothing more sure than that every individual Action is so Circumstantiat as to become either Sin or Duty 2. Who was ever so absurd and ridiculous as to deny that any System as for example of Mathematicks or Military Discipline is a perfect Rule to guide any Mathematician or Souldier upon this account that those Books comprehend not the Names of all Mathematicians and Souldiers that ever should exist with all their particular Actions and the Circumstances thereof I am sure that such a one should be esteemed by all Men to have lost his Wits and yet no better than such are the Quakers Achillean Arguments Next he pleaseth himself in reckoning up some differences amongst Ministers As for example those called Remonstrants and publick Resolutioners and hence would infer the Insufficiency of the Scriptures for decision of Controversies and this he thinketh so strong that he requireth a particular answer to it least Sayeth he he viz. Mr. Brown be said to leap where he cannot step Ans. If this do any thing it will overdo seeing he dare not deny that both Paul Barnabas had immediat Objective Revelations who notwithstanding grew so hot in their Contention Act. 15. that they parted one from another of whose meeting again we hear not in all the Scriptures But he labours so to fix that upon the Scriptures with which the Corruption of men is only to be Charged that he woundeth himself while he thrusteth at his Adversary seing if this Reason be Valid Objective Revelation is no more a sufficient Rule than the Scriptures as this Instance of the division of Paul Barnabas evinceth Beside these the Quakers have a heap of Topicks to prove the Scriptures not a perfect Rule such as they cannot be a Rule to deaf persons therefore they cannot be a rule to those that hear and most men know not the Original Tongues Ergo say they the Scriptures cannot be a compleat Rule They object also the variety of Readings Interpretations and the like which they have scraped out of Bellarmin and his brethren and therefore deserve no more answer than what hath been given to them William Pen in his Rejoynder Part 1. Chap. 5. hath this Objection the Scriptures cannot try and examine particular Motions and Prophesies saying that Paul Act. 16. reproved not the Spirit of Divination which possessed that 〈…〉 Philippi from the Scriptures therefore they cannot be a Rule of Faith and Life But I deny the Antecedent for had Iames Nailor but brought that particular Motion whereby he was prompted to receive Divine Worship to Scripture trial he might have found his Spirit to have been the father of 〈◊〉 and Arch-deceiver of Mankind but as the Papists to cover the rest of their abominations have invented one greater and more dangerous than them all that is their Churches infallibility So this Spirit of the Quakers knowing that upon Tryal he will be found a Counterfeit hath taken the Councel given by Alcibiades to Pericles
that is to study how he may secure himself from the hazard of a Trial. Hence these men are in all probability beyond the reach of a Conviction but the many Instances not only of other Antiscriptâ—rians but even of themselves who have been most pitifully and palpably acted by the Devil whom they notwithstanding took for God might teach them at length to suspect their Spirit and try before they trust As for the Prophesies of future Events they may well be brought to the Scripture Test to the end we may know whether the thing Prophesied may be expected without contradicting the Scriptures as for Pauls reproof of the Spirit of Divination it is most irrationally Objected Seeing Paul was immediatly Inspired and a Writer of Scripture himself 2â—y This Action was most Consonant to Scripture being abundantly warranted by that promise of Christ Matth 10 to his Apostles that they should cast out Devils They use also many Arguments against the Scriptures being the principal Rule of which the Chief and Ground of almost all the rest with which they stand and fall and therefore meriteth particular Consideration is this the Scriptures are not the Fountain it self but a declaration of the Fountain therefore they are not to be accounted the principal Original of all Truth and Knowledge nor the adequat Primary Rule of Faith and Manners thus reasoned Rob Barclay in his Appology This consequence is by his adversary judged a Demonstration of the Authors folly pag. 57. as being altogether ridiculous saying who ever dreamed that the Scriptures were God or the Spirit of God To which 〈◊〉 Barclay Vind. pag. 37. thus Replyeth he sayeth I come nearer to the Core of my design which is to set up Enthusiasms in affirming that the Scriptures are not the Fountain but a Declaration of the Fountain and yet the Man within three or four lines confesseth it himself ascribing it to my folly to dream any man thinks so thus â—e goeth backward and forward which he illustrateth by the Example of Laws But if it be so are not they to be blamed that account them the principal Original of all Truth and Knowledge whither the other branch of my deduction followeth from this That they are not to be accounted the primary Rule of Faith and Manners will appear when the Arguments and Objections relating to that come particularly to be mentioned and whereas he thinks this is absurd and not making for my Design because God Himself is the Fountain and yet not the Rule he mistakes the matter as urged by me For I argue that the Scriptures are not the Original Ground of Knowledge but God not simply considered but as manifesting himself in divine immediat Revelations in the hearts of his children which being the new Covenants Dispensation is the primary and adequate Rule of Christians For I was never so absurd as to call God simply considered or the Spirit of God in abstracto not as imprinting Truths to be believed and obeyed in mens hearts not contrary but according to Scripture for he cannot contradict himself the Rule of Christians and this may serve to answer all his Cavills upon this Theam Thus he Answer in his Apol. he thus reasoned the Scriptures are not the Fountain but a Declaration of the Fountain therefore they are not the principal original of all Truth nor the adequate or primary Rule of Faith. Now this Argumentation which is all one with fallacia plurium interrogationum hath a consequent made up of two parts and therefore there are to be considered here two consequences of which the first or the consequence as to the first part of the inference his adversarie calleth a demonstration of the Authors folly as proving that which never man denyed viz. that the Scriptures are not God himself I add that this is also a demonstration of his Malice for in this his ridiculous argumentation he would perswade the world that the Reformed Churches for against them in that place he bendeth his weapons assert that the Scriptures are God himself Upon this account I say his Adversary accuseth him of folly now in stead of a better off-coming he giveth out that his adversary first denyed his Antecedent and then again presently confessed it whereas he never impugned the Antecedent but blameth him for his consequence of which as we have already said the first part is very ridiculous proving the thing that never one denyed and malicious belieing the whole Reformed Churches and the second part viz. Because the Scriptures are not the Fountain therefore they are not the adequat and primary Rule of Faith a Rope of sand The coherence of which will be made out ad Calendas Graecas He sayeth that the second Branch of his Deduction will appear when the Arguments and objections relating to that come particularly to be mentioned which is nothing to the purpose in hand for unless he prove that the Scriptures are not the primary and adequate Rule of Faith from this one Topick that they are not the Fountain but a Declaration thereof the argument is gone Hence all this wrangling is but a further proof of his Weakness and Malice In his following Words he confoundeth the Principal Rule and the Original Ground together which are things most distinct and therefore these words are altogether void of good sense or at best they are ridiculous in that they speak nothing to the purpose For he might well have known if he had pleased that by the Primary Rule is understood that which is now among the hands of Christians according to which they ought to examine ultimately all sort of Doctrines and opinions of men or yet suggestions from within concerning divine things and reject or receive as they disagree or agree with this Rule If in this sense he had understood the primary Rule he had not given such mysterious Niceties But the Question is not if God be greater than the Scriptures for as man is above the word of a man so is he above them But the Question is whether or not the Scriptures contain all things necessary in order to Faith and practise and whether or not we ought to see that every Doctrine we embrace be according to them and if swerving from them we ought to reject it tho an Angel from Heaven should teach it Thus we understand the primary Rule and while he doth not so he but mistaketh the Question 2. This Acyrology or improper speech to call a person a Rule is a grand inductive of Confusion for who ever called a teacher a Rule for only the dictats taught are the Rule Here we see that these new Teachers are contrary to all men in their acceptations of Words as well as in Doctrines But whereas he sayeth that he was never so absurd as to call the Spirit of God simply or in abstracto a Rule but as he imprints Truths in the hearts of Believers he doth not answer these things which he calls Cavills for these Rules imprinted
he worship the Crocodile Ibis Dog or Cat with the old Egyptians yea a man may believe or do whatever cometh into his brain for no where in the Scripture is any man in particular as for Example Robert Anthonie or Christopher forbidden or commanded to do any thing According to this principle also they deny all Means and helps for expounding of the Scriptures all Commentaries and Expositions witness amongst others these words of Geo Fox in his Primmar to Europe Pag. 37. What are the Means of searching out the meaning of the Scriptures one whereof you say is a Logical Analysis and what is a Logical Analysis of the Scriptures and Robert B. Vind. Pag. 29. Impiously denyeth that the Holy Ghost is a Distinct Person of the Trinity and that upon this ground because as he sayeth these Words are not found expresly in Scripture The same way Rob B. in his Apology understandeth that place 1 Iohn 2.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as the words at the first sound and without any explication or clearing of them argumenteth from them He that hath an Anointing abiding in him teaching him all things so that he needs no man to teach him hath an inward and immediat Teacher and hath some things inwardly and immediatly revealed unto him The same way also he understandeth and expoundeth Jer. 31.34 So that whatever they say or can say to liberate their Doctrine of this most weightie but just Charge they shall only twist Contradictions the faster And suitable to this Doctrine iâ— the Practice of Quakers who notwithstanding that they Endeavour to perswade the World that they are Illuminat as the Prophets and Apostles were yes if not more have never yet for any thing I can learn benefited the Church by commenting upon any one Book of Scripture but account all Commentaries and such Treaties useless and unworthy except by detorting of them to find out some thing opposite to the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches Now certainly if these men be so Illuminat as they would bear us in hand there can be no reason Alledged whey they benefit not the World by illustrating the Scriptures with clear Commentaries and such Helps as may be most 〈◊〉 for understanding thereof if it be not that they either Envy the World of such a Good which I think they will not say Or else that all such Help are superfluous And indeed this they stick not to say publishing to the World in Print that all Catechetical Doctrine â—nstruction is the Doctrine of Antichrist learned from Papists yea the very Scriptures themselveâ— they call by way of Deâ—raction the Letter in by Divinity worse Add to all this their Doctrine of silent waiting their railing against studied Sermons and explications of Scripture And that in all their Pamphlets they use not to exhort men to search the Scriptures according to the Example of Christ Jesus but in stead thereof the Light within These and many other things which might be said sufficiently evince that this their Revelation or new Light is unto them in place of Commentaries Catechismâ— or any other Helps for understanding the Scriptures yea and the Scriptures themselves So that this one Darling of theirs renders all others needless Moreover they deny with the old Manichees that any part of the old Testament is binding upon us and as for the N. T. William Pen saith that the far greater part thereof is altogether lost and sticketh not to say that without their Spirit we have no more certainty of the Scriptures than of the Popish Legends Add to all this that this Doctrine of the Quakers viz. That the Scriptures are not the principal Rule of Faith and manners or chief Judge of Controversies is downright Popish and as good reason they should be both their Arguments to prove it and their Answers to our Arguments against it altogether Coincide with those of the Romanists which might easily be illustrat in every particular Some Examples we have given already to those we may ad one other viz. Rev. 22.18 From which place we usually reason that the Canon of the Scriptures is compleated to which place the Papists answer that this prohibition is only to be understood of the book of the Revelation alone and that it will no more follow from this place that Traditions ought not to be added to the Scriptures as a part of the rule of Faith and Manners then it will follow from Deut. 4.2 That the Prophets and Apostles were to write no Scriptures afterward To this purpose may Bellarmin answer and the rest of the Jesuites The same way directly answereth Robert Barclay as these may do with the like support of their cause both in his Apologie and Vindication and when Mr. Broun telleth him that this as all the rest is a Popish shift He replies Vind. pag. 35. in these words what then I could tell him an hundred Arguments used by him which the Papists also use against us will he say it follows they are invalid But how pitiful and shameful this shift is none see not for can he say that his Adversary had an hundred Arguments common to him with Papists tending to the overthrow of the Doctrine of the reformed Churches which they hold in opposition to papists either this he must say otherwayes he only discovereth a desperate Cause and an Effronted Defender For certainly there are Arguments common to both us and the Papists by which we defend the Truth of the Christian Religion in opposition to Heathens and Iews yet none except he that is altogether careless of what he says or that mindeth to infer Quidlibet ex quolibet as they say will affirm that Protestants are Papists or Papists Protestants upon that account Hence it is clear that as there is not the least shadow of a Difference between Papists and Quakers in this point so this Quaker is conscious of it seeing he could not but know that if this shift did him any Service to distinguish him from a Papist It will no less distinguish a Papist from himself and prove him to be no Papist So we see that the very shifts that these men use under the covert of which they may Luâ—k contribut only to the more clear Detection and Discovery of their wickedness in promoting what they can this downright Popish Doctrine and gross Hypocrisie in refusing the Name when they cannot but know that they are guilty of the thing CHAP. II. Of Immediate Revelation AS the Quakers have rejected the guidance of the Spirit of God speaking in the Holy Scriptures which are able to make the Man of God wise unto Salvation so they have most impiously and self-deceivingly given up themselves to the guidance of something which they call the Spirit of God as we have heard and again in contradiction to this the Soul of Christ extended and dilated of which say they every man is a partaker But most frequently they call it the Light within or simply the
their own words to say we calumniat them If we draw from this or the like passages that they deny the Authority of the Old Testament Robert Barclay Ibidem 5ly Both Anabaptists and Quakers deny Original Sin for proof of which see cap. 3. of this Treatise 6ly The Anabaptists Muncer and the rest of his sect taught that Christ made no Satisfaction for sins and compared these who taught the contrary to the rable of Scribes and Pharisees Bulling lib. 1. cap. 11. they taught also that its damnable and dangerous Doctrine to assert that we are justified by the righteousness of Christ or by Faith and not also by Works Bulling lib. 4 cap. 1. Sequ. In which Doctrine the Quakers have not only equalized but outdone and outstript their Ancestors as cap 5. of this Treatise more abundantly evinceth and here it is to be observed once for all that all the Capital adversaries of the Christian Religion how contrary soever they may be or seem to be one to another symbolize in this grand heresy and conspire together the overthrow and subversion of the Doctrine of Iustification by Faith or the imputed Righteousness of Christ which is acknowledged by all the Orthodox to be articulus stantis cadentis Ecclesiae the grand pillar of the Christian Doctrine without the support of which all must go to ruine Hence to name no others Pelagians the bulk of Papists Socinians and the old Libertine Anabaptists and their successors now called Quakers harmoniously agree in deriding and abominating this Cardinal and Fundamental Doctrine of the imputed Righteousness of Christ. 7ly These Anabaptists asserted the possibility of fulfilling the Law. Bulling lib. 1. cap. 8. and that they were arrived at a perfection of degrees and without sin Bulling lib. 1. cap. 11. From this the Doctrine of the Quakers differeth nothing yea the latter hath far outdone the former for besides that they commonly assert that men may altogether fulfil the Law in this life and be without sin For the denyal of which Robert Barclay promised continually to rail upon all the reformed they to the horror of all men assert that man is equal with God which I evince from the Words of Hubberthorn in chap. 4. of this Treatise and that the Soul is a part of God which is made good from the words of the famous and leading Quakers Ibid. 8ly These Anabaptists with blasphemous Melchoir Hofman denied the perseverance of the Saints Bulling lib. 3. cap. 13. with whom these Quakers also conspire which any man in reason may judge a contradiction to their Doctrine of perfection however they commonly maintain it with Robert Barclay Prop 9. with his Apology and Vindication thereof contradicting his own express words cap. 2. where explaining that text 1 Iohn 2.27 He had asserted that the unction there spoken of doth remain for ever in these to whom it is given 9ly These wicked Anabaptists with their abominable Leader David George denied the Resurrection of the Flesh or of the same body talking much of the Resurrection of another more spiritual body Bulling lib. 2. cap 10. In this also the Quakers are not a whit short of these as is made manifest chap. 5. of this Treatise 10â—y These abominable Anabaptists following their pernicious Leader Michael Servetus denyed the Sacred Trinity and the Divinity of Christ In this blasphemy also the Scholars excell the Masters as the Reader may find at large made out chap. 4. of this Treatise 11ly These Anabaptists asserted that the Ministers of the Gospel ought not to be tyed to the explaining of Scriptures that all in the Church ought to speak by turns that which they judged the Spirit offered unto them that the Ministers ought to have no certain Stipend and many other things of this sort Bulling lib. 1. cap. 8. which is at this day the known Doctrine of Quakers 12ly These Anabaptists denied that a Christian ought to be a Magistrat or in any case make war to take or administrate oaths to trouble any man upon the account of his Religion or to prohibite any kind of Religion In all which points the Quakers exactly jump with them for tho they do not in words deny the lawfulness of Magistracy yet seeing they expresly deny the lawfulness of all Wars and Oaths and maintain an unbridled Liberty to do whatsoever is right in a mans own eyes all which is their known Doctrine by most clear consequence they take away all use of Magistracy and Magistrates 13ly Anabaptists with Servetus and the Socinians spake contemptibly of the Sacraments and denied Infant-Baptism but the Quakers have gone a further length not only denying but railing against both Sacraments labouring by might and main to abolish these pledges of the Love of God out of the World I could easily prove the sameness of the Doctrine of the Muncerian Anabaptists with that of the Quakers in many other particulars But at present these may serve to shew that both of them are acted and guided by the same Spirit which is that at present intended by us 3ly If the Spirit or the light within every man were the Supreme and principal Rule then those who persecuted to death the Apostles and Saints of God did not sin in so doing but I am sure the latter is false Ergo the former The Consequence of the Major is most evident for they followed their light within thinking thereby they did God good service Iohn 16.2 neither can they say that then the day of all these persecutors visitation was past for Paul himself was one of them whose light taught him that he according to all that he had for light ought to do many things against the Professors and Servants of Jesus Christ Acts. 26.9 whose day of visitation I think the Quakers themselves will not say was expired 4ly Divine light or that light which is of God is alwayes consonant to it self but so is not that which the Quakers call their spirit or the light within every man for nothing is more evident than that the light within one man is quite contradictory and opposite to that within another and that even in the most weighty necessary and soul-concerning things in all the world as the many and great controversies in all ages do but too too well make out neither can it be said that every one of these who oppose the truth either act against their own judgment or that sometime before they knew and embraced the Truth in their heart and afterward did not hearken to that light this we say cannot be said for it is clear from the earnestness and zeal of both Hereticks and Heathens for their own erroneous Principles that they really think as they speak yea have not many sacrificed their lives to their own fantastick and damnable Opinions which Opinions from the very beginning of their use of Reason they did still hold but not to multiply instances all this is clear in the Person of Paul for certain it is that
Pen to defend this passage from the absurdities with which it had been loaded by Hiâ—ks in his first Dialogue pag 3 4. such as that then the Sun Moon Star or Stone is God â—peâ—keth thus George Whitehead inferring from Iohn 1. That if the Life was of the Divine Beeing the Light must be the same for as the Cause is so is the Effect it was never George Whitehead's principle or words that the Life which is the Light of men is but in it self a meer Effect for he owns it in its own beeing to be no other than God himself counterf Christ detect ed pâ—g 56 and again Wil. Pen. Reason against railing pag. 56 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 The same Willâ— Pen Quakerism a new Nickname pag 9 10. All men are enlightned this Light is Divine because it is the very Light of the world which is God not any effect of his power as a created Light as some men fancy and George Whitehead Dipl pâ— pag 13. to call the Light in every man a meer Creature is conâ—rary to Iohn 1. In him was Life and the Life was the Light of men which Light is Divine and Increated Also George Fox great Myst pag 10. Some câ—ll the Light Consciâ—nce which Light was before Coâ—scâ—ence was or Creature was or Created or made Light was He maâ—e the Sun the Moon and the Light was before thâ—se were made and pâ—g 23. some call it a natural Light which Light was bâ—fore tâ—e word Conscience was or a naâ—ural Light the Sun Moon or Stars either for all things that were made were made by it the natural Light or made Light are created Lights It made the Sun Moon and Stars they were made here it is the natural Light to the naturaâ— Eye and the light that every man is enligâ—tneâ— with that cometh into the world was before thesâ— were made glorified with the Father before the world began Idem pag 185. The Light which every man that cometh into the World is enlightned withal is Christ by whom the world was made And pag 331. The Light which every one that cometh into the world is enlightned withal is not Conscience for the Light was befâ—re any thing was made or Conscience named George Fox younger in a Collection of his Works pag 171. Thus speaketh All mind that Gift of God in your selves which maketh you sensible of your prâ—sent condition you must receive the living principle of God in your own particular vessels which principle I call the Light it being a proper Name for it But I shal not desire to tye up any of you to give this principle of Truth only the name of Light I shall not matter if you call it the Truth or the gift of God are a measure of the eternal Beeing Now Reader did ever the Sun shine upon such a Black and Blasphemous Company of men who durst assert that that dim Light by which most men have enough ado to perceive that there is a Suprem Beeing and notwithstanding of which knowledge they are Ignorant of the true way of the Worship of God the Mystery of the Sacred Trinity the Person of Christ Jesus his Natures and Offices and are at every turn ready to deceive and be deceived I say did ever a company of Men outdo yea or ever equalize these Quakers who dare asâ—eâ—t such a Light as this to be God Notwithstanding of this their matchless exaltation of this Light within every man they again at other times and when occasion serveth depress and bring low the same as much as before they cryed it up For they assert that the Light within any particular person ought to yeild and stoop to the light of their Church or constitut body For William Pen Spirit of Alex pag 14. sayeth We deny that to be a Light which opposeth the judgement of the body Ibid pag 4.5 We as a body have power to determine therefore we abhor renounce rebuke with all severity that rude imagination of the Hat-on in publick prayer and Sp. of the hat pag 21 We have the power and will not such as are in the power do right Ibid. the body will have a true sense feeling and understanding of Motions Visions Revelations and Doctrines therefore it is safest to make her the touchstone in all things relating to God. Behold Reader as the Quakers with the Papists reject the Scriptures from being the Suprem Rule and ultimat Judge So they no less than the grossest of the Romanists ascribe an Infallibility to their Church and make this the suprem Rule and ultimat Judge to which every mans Light within must stoop and yeild though never so clear which is one of the grossest Errors of Popery But yet it is infinitly more gross and impious in the Quakers for in so doing they proclaim the fallibility of that which they maintain to be Christ and God and subject it unto another as capable of deceiving and being deceived which Impiety I am sure is scarcâ— equalized 18ly Although the absurdity of this Doctrine may of it self abundantly secure us that we need not bâ— much concerned let them use what Arguments they will to prove it we being certain that whatever arguments can prove this will equally serve to prove whatever entereth into any mans fancy yet I will propose and enervat these of their arguments which seem to be most strong and plead most for them One of which is proposed by George Keith Truth-defend pag 87. A Divine Law in all men is an inward immediat Dictat but there is a Divine Law in all men Of this Argument singled out of all that ever George Keith wrote as the choicest Master-peice to uphold Quakerism and overthrow the authority of the Scriptures he is so confident that by it alone he thinketh to strike the Cause dead But he is hugely mistaken for if by a divine Law he understand any other thing beside Conscience and Reason which he himself together with his Brother Rob Barclay Quakerism confirm pag 3. acknowledgeth to be only natural We deny his Minor the proof of which we expect ad Kalendas Graecas And thus the great Argument of one of the greatest Champions of the Quakers evanisheth into smoak at the very first handling thereof 2ly Rob Barclay Vind pag 39. thus reasoneh what if I should say is not God a Light And is not he in every man and is not this Light within the increated Spirit The Reader may here observe that this Author is diffident of this Argument and fearful to bring it forth and good reason he hath for by this reason he only evinceth that which he elsewhere by all means endeavoureth to evite viz that the Quakers Grace and Light is common to Devils and damned Souls for God can no more be said to be in every Son and Daughter of Adam without exception than in these
Abraham of whom the Church and Christ according to the Flesh was to Spring then there are some passed by in the Eternal Decree of God and that absolutely to whom God from all Eternity determined to give no Saving Grace but punish them for their sins But the Former is true yea and so true that I am sure none acknowledging the Scriptures will deny it The Major is no less clear except as we said before any shal be so absurd as to deny a Correspondency or Analogy betwixt Type and Antitype and so deny a Type to be a Type for in this Ismael was a Type in that he was not reckoned to be the Seed of Abraham and a Child of the Flesh not a Child of Promise all which came to pass by the absolute Dispensation of God and not conditionally so that Ismael might have brought to pass that he should have been the Legittimate Heir and Seed of Abraham and born by Vertue of a special Promise Neither on the other hand was the Election of Isaac unto these Priviledges from which Ismael was excluded conditional but by the absolute Dispensation of God For I think none will say that Isaac could have hindered himself to be born by Vertue of a special promise and so counted the only Son as we see he is called Gen. 22. 2. Therefore if there be any Correspondence betwixt Type and Antitype the Lord from all Eternity did pass by some that is decreed that he would not give them Grace but permit them to remain Children of the Flesh whom he did not give unto Christ Jesus to be his Seed by Vertue of the Promises of the Covenant of Redemption We come now to the second Proposition viz. That Ismael himself was not Elected This by any thing we can learn from Scripture is most evident For 1. He was by Gods own Command thrust out of the Church Gen. 21.12 And that upon the Account of his persecuting the Heir of Promise and the Church and Image of God in him Gen. 21.9 Gal. 4.29 Now in Scripture we find no mention made of his Repentance or Re-admission into the Church Hence there is no Ground of Charity concerning his Salvation 2. We find nothing that Ismael exercised all his Life except Robbery and Blood-shed as appears from Gen. 16.12 and 20 v. Which Lessons the Saracens his Posterity have exactly learned from him As for Gen. 17.18 20. It speaks of nothing lesse than the Salvation of Ismael for as it appears from verses 19.20 compared together the Lord clearly intimates that he will neither establish his Covenant with himself nor with his Seed and clearly asserts that the things in which he heard Abraham for his son Ismael was only these pertaining to this Life From all which it is clear that Ismael lived and died without Grace or special Favour of God and therefore was no Elect Vessel for I believe that none will deny that the making out by Scripture that Ismael lived without the Special Favour of God will abundantly clear this place from all the mist whereby our Adversaries endeavour to darken it That which he sayes of Moses and Aaron their being Types of these who were to be excluded from Gods spiritual rest who notwithstanding were godly themselves is so far from saying any thing to the Purpose that I am certain he considered not what he was saying For who did ever infer simply because he was a Type of those that were passed by in Gods Eternal Decree therefore he was passed by in it himself we make no such Inference as may be seen from what we have already said I might here take notice of many other things such as his forming the Objection so that he dissimulates no small part of the strength thereof not at all taking notice of the Analogy between the Type and Antitype he knew to be urged not a little by our Divines notwithstanding that he himself asserreth Ismael to be a Type and so considered in this place 2. I might take notice that he clearly intimates that there is now a possibility of Salvation by the Works of the Law and Strength of Nature If it be Replyed that he qualifieth what he saith by the following words viz. that God hath not made a Covenant that men should be saved this way We return That if his Principles stand these words and the former must of Necessity compleat a Contradiction for all these that were to be born to use his own Words by Vertue of the Promises Isaac represented them but Ismael represented not these but others now seing these represented by Ismael might be saved as well as these represented by Isaac according to the Principles of the Universalists it inevitably follows that they must be saved by the Works of the Law. His next Objection he gives in these Words together with his answer is Rom. 9.10 11. It is said there is a Purpose of God according to Election not of Works but of him that calleth Ans. Altho Election there seems to import nothing but Gods Grace as the Explanation following not of Works but of him that calleth will in some sort evict yet we grant there is a Purpose of God both according to Election of Persons and Things and that either General or Special as hath been by us already often acknowledged and the Eternal Election of Persons in Mankind now fallen whether General or Particular is out of Grace and not by their own Works wrought by the Strength of Nature howbeit in that Special or Particular Election arising out of the special Foreknowledge of God Works of Grace and perseverance therein are looked upon as Means and the way to Life yea as a Condition and a Motive both in that and the final Election of the Saints which we call the Election out of the Furnace Rev. 3.4 Thou hast a few Names in Sardis which have not defiled their Garments and they shal walk with me in white Rev. 3 8. Behold I have set before thee an open door and no man can shut it for thou hast a little Strength and hast kept my Word and not denyed my Name Read more at large Rev. 7.13 14 16 17. Reply This answer tho I will not say the best is the rarest that any man could have readily lighted on for to assert the cause of Election to be Grace and yet to be some stages behind good works as he doth here while he acknowledgeth Election to be of works not wrought by the strength of Nature as saying somewhat more then when he granted Election to be of Grace is certainly so absurd that one can invent nothing more absurd tho he bend his wit to the very purpose for then it were all one to say that works done by the strength of Nature are the cause of Election and Grace is the cause of Election or Election is of Grace and Election is of works done by the strength of Nature were Equipollent 2. That Election is Grace or rather