Holy Ghost that dwelt in them 1 Cor. 1.2 and 6.11 19. and yet they did Celebrate the Gospel-Supper among them and that by Divine Appointment 1 Cor. 10.16 and 11.21 23 24 28. and so the Gospel-Supper was appointed to be Celebrated by People in whom Christ doth already and previously dwell yea none else but such are allowed to partake of it as is shewed before But need they then Bread and Wine say the Quakers to put them in Remembrance of him after Christ is come to dwell in them Ans Now the Quakers begin to dispute and prove their Thesis against the Gospel-Supper and their Argument is a fruit of their conceipted perfection in this life from whence they infer that they need no Ordinances albeit the Apostle affirms 1 Cor. 8.2 and 13.9.12 that our knowledge in this life is still short of that which it ought to be and is but in part and that all of it is but dark and through a Glass which shews that we have need of Means and Ordinances as so many Perspicils or Glasses to help our weak and dim-sighted Eyes without which we cannot take up the object This conceipted Perfection of theirs I shall discuss at the Fifteenth Query when I come to it But whaâ— Do these in whom Christ dwells need nothing to put them in Remembrance of him for the Argument carries as much against every such thing as against the Gospel-Supper as is manifest indeed this very well Homologates with their Confession where they decry all manner of External Ordinances calling them Unclean Carnal Dead Babylonish Heathenish Observations and the Whores Cup of Abominations in several places thereof for which see it pages 10 24 77 79 87 92 102 104 105 108 111 122 130 133 135. But I am sure it suits not with the Scriptures any where that shews us many Ordinances and Means appointed of God to keep us in mind of him and our duty unto him and particularly of the Sacred Supper as a Memorial of what Christ hath done and Suffered for us and our memories that are especially weak in Spiritual things have great need of Remembrancers Joh. 14.26 Philip. 3.1 2 Pet. 1.13 and 3.1 2. The Divine Institution of the Gospel-Supper and the Commandment given to the Church to Celebrate the same is enough to warrant our practice of it methinks and our Imperfection in this life proclaims our need of it and other helps and means yea Adam in Innocency had a Tree of Life allowed him of God to eat of as a Symbol and Pledge of Life as long as he stood in his obedience much more need have we of a Pledge to strengthen our weak Faith In the next place to shew us their good skill in Physical Philosophy they give us a very learned and no less true definition of Death To Dye with Christ say they is to come to the Death with him But is it so Then never a Malefactor Died upon a Gibbet but they Died always by the way while they were coming to it seeing they were coming to their Death while they were by the way and to Dye and come to the Death is all one by this definition Hezekiah shewed himself more expert in Physicks when he distinguished betwixt the Birth and coming to the Birth Isa 37.3 but he did not learn his Philosophy at the Quakers School it seems They would have defined Death much better with Aristotle that it is the loss of heat and moisture because the loss of these infers it or if they will stand to my Judgment Death is the separation of Soul and Body because it is the very dissolution of their Union But I shall pass this only I behoove to notice the ignorance of their Inspirer in Naturals as well as Spirituals In the next place they do again vainly repeat that their foolish Argument now refuted and answered viz. That they that are in the death of Christ and buried with him need not Bread and Wine to put them in Remembrance of his Death the contrary whereof is abundantly shewed already and we will not repeat only I cannot but with astonishment wonder that seeing Christ so peremptorily commands it whether it were needful for us or not This do in Remembrance of Me they dare with their Brain-sick fancies directly contradict Divine Commands Oh! who but the Quakers that have gotten a new Christ of their own to be saved by would refuse any Token that Christ had appointed for a Memorial of his Death who wrote his love to us which many waters could not quench in the Characters of his Blood in the day that he was wounded for us in the House of his friends But say the Quakers the Apostle says they must rise with Christ Jesus and if they be risen with him then seek these things that are above and is not Bread and Wine from below Ans Here is another Argument against the Lords-Supper and whereby they reproach and condemn all the Ordinances that ever God appointed from the beginning of the World whereof any External Element was from below as well as the Gospel-Supper Secondly I answer That the seeking of things that are above does not exclude but on the contrary includes the use of the means which God hath appointed for attaining them seeing then the Lords-Supper is one of the means appointed of God for our better attaining things above the use thereof is not there viz. Colos 3.1 disallowed more than the use of Water is in Baptism of which before Thirdly Let the Elements be from whence they will yet I have shewed that the Gospel-Supper Celebrated under these External Elements as the Symbols is an Ordinance Instituted by Christ to be observed by the Gospel Church till his coming to the last Judgment And what then can the Quakers say to enervat Christs Institution Fourthly There is nothing in the Gospel-Supper that is from below excepting the meer External Elements materially and entitatively considered for the Institution the Internal Substance the Mystical Signification the Ends and Effects thereof are all of them things Heavenly and from above and so though Bread and Wine Entitatively considered be from below yet the Sacrament of the Supper and Bread and Wine taken Sacramentally are not from below for Bread and Wine simply or in themselves do not make a Gospel Eucharist more than a Body without a Soul makes a Man as is palpable from many things above said The seeking therefore of these things above mentioned Colos 3.1 is meant only in opposition to the seeking of Corporal commodities belonging to this Life and that not in every respect either but as the chief scope of our Actions Mat. 6.33 or to fulfil our Lusts Rom. 13.14 or with inordinate care and affection Colos 3.2 Luk. 12.22 or with anxious distrust Luk. 12.29 or by unlawful means or without submission to God for that we may seek our worldly necessaries also as Secundary means moderately without anxious care by lawful means for the right use
Questions within the limits of one and the same Query or separating any part thereof from another that it may be seen that I have not in the least injured the Adversaries but have only sometimes for a distincter Method alter'd the place of a Total Query The Quakers also Inscribed their Queries all which here follows and first the Inscription Quakers Inscription Some Queries as followeth from the People called Quakers for one or all of the Ministers in Scotland to Answer First QUERY Whether or not Grammar or Logick and the many Tongues and Languages which began in Babylon is an Infallible Rule to make a Minister of Christ And whether or not Elisha the Plow-man Amos the Herdsman Peter and John the Fishermen who could hardly read a letter with many others who were not bred up in these things Logick and Grammar and the many Languages if they could not be Ministers of Christ Jesus Yea or Nay Second QUERY Whether or not the Scriptures were the Rule of Enochs Faith Noahs Faith and holy men in the old world and second world Whether or not they were a Rule to Abrahams Faith Isaacs and Jacobs Faith and Moses 's Faith and all the Patriarchs And whether or not they had Scriptures till Moses did write them Answer these things by plain Scripture Third QUERY Or how long was it after Christ and the Apostles days That that Grammar Logick and Philosophy and Schools of learning were set up to make Ministers of Christ Jesus Fourth QUERY Whether or not the Scriptures are the Word or the words of God seeing the Scriptures say themselves God spake all these words Exod. 20. And he that adds to the words in the last of the Revelation Plagues are added to him And what doth the Scripture signifie doth it not signifie Writings And whether all that is written in the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation be a Rule for your Faith and Manners and every title of it from the one end of the Book to the other both in the Old and New Testament If not distinguish what part is to be obeyed and what not And whether every title from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Revelation is the Word or the Words of God Fifth QUERY Whether or not the Prophets Christ and the Apostles and holy men of God did Preach down perfection and said that men should not be perfect while they were on Earth but said men should carry about a body of Death with them while they were on this side of the Grave let us see where this is written by any of them all Sixth QUERY Whether or not your singing of Davids Psalms his Prayers Prophesies Fastings Reproaches Weepings Mournings Lamentations and Complaints how he was Mocked have any Warrant in the Scripture and you bring all these together in Meeter without distinction Have ye not done this your selves Or did the Apostles it to the Saints in the Primitive times Or have ye the same Spirit the Apostles had Or a larger measure of it than the Apostles had by which ye have turned these into Meeter since the Apostles days And what was the Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs they sang in the Primitive times Answer these things by plain Scripture Seventh QUERY Whether or not your Directory Confession of Faith and Catechisms be an Infallible Rule for you and your people to walk by Or whether or not equal with the Scriptures or above the Scriptures And whether of them is the better Book And whether or not have ye an Infallible Spirit to give forth such a Directory or Catechism or Confession of Faith as ye have done And whether or not the Scriptures are not a better Directory than any ye can make which were given forth by the Holy Ghost by the holy men of God who had the Infallible Spirit Eighth QUERY Whether or not is your Sanctification your Justification and your Faith and Grace the Gifts of these without sin as they are Manifested within you Yea or Nay Ninth QUERY Whether or not Christ and the Apostles gave forth a Command that they should keep the Sabbath-day Let us see where it is written in the Scriptures But the first day of the week the Saints did meet together This is Scripture But let us see the Scripture for a Sabbath-day in the New Testament which speaks for a rest for the people of God But is this a day Yea or Nay Tenth QUERY Whether is there any Scripture or Command in all the New Testament for the Sprinkling of Infants Let us see Scripture without adding or diminishing for it that ye do not bring the Plagues upon you for it for the Plagues are added to them that adds for we do expect plain Scripture from you for this without any shuffling Meanings or Consequences or else never pretend Scripture-Rule more but acknowledge that it hath been your Meanings and Consequences that hath been your Rule Eleventh QUERY Whether doth the Scriptures say in the New Testament that eating of Bread and drinking of Wine after Supper was an Ordinance of Christ And whether do ye practise this as Christ and his Apostles did after Supper Do not ye take it before Dinner Did Christ or his Apostles do so What Scripture have ye for your Rule for this for they took it in the night And Christ says as oft as ye eat of this Bread and Drink of this Wine c. is that a standing Command Or is it left to people seeing it s said as oft as ye Eat this and Drink this do it in remembrance of his Death and shewing his Death until he come again Was this coming to the end of the world Or was it until his coming to dwell in his Apostles who said he would come and dwell and walk in them Need they then Bread and Wine to put them in Remembrance of him And doth not Christ say Eat this and Drink this in remembrance of his Death And doth not the Apostle say that they must die with Christ and to die with him is to come to the Death with him And they that be in the Death of Christ and die with Christ must they have Bread and Wine to put them in remembrance of his Death Yea or Nay And doth not the Apostle say that they must Die with Christ and be Buried with him And when the people are Dead and Buried with Christ must they have Bread and Wine to put them in remembrance of Christs Death Answer this yea or nay And the Apostle says they must rise with Christ Jesus and if they be risen with him then seek these things that are above And is not Bread and Wine from below and if the Apostle puts them to seek these things that are above then he brought them off these things that are below for he says to the Corinthians the things that are seen are Temporal but the things that are not seen are Eternal This he spake when they were Jangling and in a disorder about
2.38 and 8.16 and 10.48 Lastly It must be a desperate cause that forces it's Patrons to such contrary defences presently they affirmed that Baptism with Water was dispensed in the Name of the Lord now they cry About Ship and deny that Baptism in the Name of the Lord is Baptism with Water Are not these Men indeed in a mixture who in the unjust defence of falshood thus run upon such desperate 〈◊〉 of splitting Contradiction But fourthly They except against the same Text that Baptism with Water cannot be meant therein because the Apostles say they had no commission to Baptize with Water seeing Paul says 1 Cor. 1.17 that Christ sent him not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel Ans But in despight of this Exception all our forementioned Arguments do plainly prove the Baptism mentioned in the Text to be Baptism with Water and so also that the Apostles had a Commission to Baptize with Water Secondly The Quakers are bound by this their reasoning to acknowledge the Baptism there mentioned viz. 1 Cor. 1.17 to be Baptism with Water or else they will lose the whole ground pretended for their exception which acknowledged as we have also before proved it truly to be it presently appears from the Context of the same place that the Apostles had a Commission for Baptizing with Water seeing Paul plainly there declares that he Baptized some of these Corinthians which doubtless he did not without Commission or else he had been a manifest Intruder and Usurper of an Office in the Church and Worship of God for which he had no Order or Warrant which must be false I answer therefore lastly that the meaning of these words of Paul is plainly Comparative viz. that Baptism was not the principal and chief work that he was sent for but the Preaching of the Gospel such as is the meaning of that expression Hos 6.6 I desired Mercy and not Sacrifice and such as is the meaning of that Joh. 15.22 If I had not come and spoken unto them they had not had sin that is nothing compared to what they now have Lastly They except against the same Text that Baptism with Water cannot be meant therein because say they it is not therein expresly mentioned Ans First A Man might upon this ground much rather argue against Christs demonstration Luk. 20.37 that the rising of the dead is not expresly taught Exod. 3.6 from whence he brings his Argument where God says I am the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and that therefore such a thing cannot be there meant Or that Circumâ—sion of the flesh of the Foreskin is not expresly mentioned under every distinguishing Character thereof Galat. 5.2 3. where the flesh of the Foreskin is omitted and that therefore it cannot be that which is there meant but our Spiritual Circumcision in Christ that is our Regeneration must be the thing which Paul there disputes against and condemns and is not that well argued Secondly As Baptism with Water is not here expresly named in respect of every punctilio of its designation So far less is any of the forementioned improper Baptisms here expresly mentioned seeing the name Baptism is proper to that of Water and not to the other Therefore by the Quakers own Rule none of these is meant here either and so if the Rule be good no sort of Baptism is here meant but the word Baptizing is set down here for an impertinent Cipher signifying nothing Thirdly I have shewed before that there is much Doctrine meant in the Scriptures which is not therein expresly taught but implicitly only and so this Rule of the Quakers is most false I answer therefore lastly that albeit the word Water be not here Matth. 28.19 formally exprest yet the circumstances of the Text the Analogy of Faith and other Scriptures that I have compared it with in my Arguments do manifestly and irresistibly demonstrate the Baptism here mentioned to be Baptism with Water Let the Quakers answer my Arguments if they can I mean at the Greek Calends All the particular exceptions of the Quakers against our Argument from that Text of Matthew being so overthrown and answered The Quakers have as yet one general Argument whereby they hope to overturn Baptism with Water viz. Baptism with Water say they was but a figure that Christ might be made manifest to Israel who had diverse Baptisms imposed on them till the time of Reformation but Christ the Substance being come the shadows must flee away This Objection they lay down in their Confession of Faith page 25. Ans Whether Baptism with Water be a Figure or not I have now abundantly proved it to be an Ordinance of the New Testament Divinely Appointed due in the Churches Court to all the visible or appearing Disciples of the New Testament and necessary to Salvation under the same and to continue to the end of the World And what then dare the Quakers say against it Or how dare they oppose their own meer Brain-sick fancies to the Word of God and Dictates of the Holy Ghost Secondly Let Baptism with Water be a Figure manifesting Christ to Jews and Gentiles too that is to say a sacred Symbol of Christs blood shed not to be shed and so not a shadow of a thing to come on the Cross and a Seal of Remission of Sins there through Yet Christ by his Incarnation Death and Resurrection did not cancel all manner of Figures universally seeing the Bow in the Cloud is still a Figure to us or a Symbol and Pledge rather that God will no more destroy the World by Water Gen. 9.11 12 13. Nor did he thereby cancel all manner of Figures I would rather call them sacred Signs and Symbols if the Quakers would too representing Christ and his Passion and Blood Shed for we shall moreover prove at the Survey of their next ensuing Query that Christ hath Ordained Bread and Wine to be in the Eucharist a Sacred Sign and Symbol of his Body and Blood to the Worlds end But he hath only cancelled thereby Old Testament Figures shadowing forth Him and His Death and Passion to come Thirdly If Baptism with Water was only a Figure to manifest unto Israel Christ Jesus why then did the Apostles dispense it afterwards to the whole Disciples of the Gentile Church without ever cashiering it and with so much speed and diligence after the appearing of their Discipleship Lastly Gospel Baptism which is done with Water as the External Symbol is so far from being a shadow that should have fled away when Christ came in the Flesh and Dyed and the time of Reformation was come that on the direct contrary it then first received its Institution after Christ was come and together with the breaking forth of that Reformation viz. the New Testament way of Dispensation and is by Christ put into the Commission of the Ministers of that Reformation as an Ordinance to be continued to the Worlds end and was thereafter accordingly carried along
must Rise with Christ Jesus And if they be Risen with him then seek these things that are above And is not Bread and Wine from below and if the Apostle puts them to seek these things that are above then he brought them off these things that are below for he says to the Corinthians The things that are seen are Temporal but the things that are not seen are Eternal This he Spoke when they were Jangling and in a Disorder about outward things Doth he not bring them off things that are Seen to things that are not seen and whether or not ye ever intend ye your selves called Ministers or your Hearers shall come any nearer to Christs Death and Die and be Buried with him but only to take Bread and Wine in Remembrance of Christs Death lest ye and they should come to forget Christs Death Answer us plainly these things Yea or Nay SVRVEY Their Doctrine here doth very well agree with George Keiths Quakerism no Popery page 100. where he flatly denies the Supper of the Lord to be any standing Ordinance of Christ and will have it forsooth a Popish Principle and Practice as also with their Heretical Confession of Faith wherein they deny all manner of External Ordinances pages 24 25 26 27 77 78 79 92 93 102 103 104 105 122 130 133 135. Before we come to a particular Disquisition upon this Query we must expunge that restrictive Clause After Supper out of the principal Question which is first in order as not being any part of the Sacrament Instituted having any mystical meaning neither being any where of Scripture commanded but being only an External Circumstance of that first Supper of our Lord meerly occasional because of the Passover taken before it which according to its Institution Exod. 12. was to be Celebrated at Even In the room whereof because Christ was to Institute the Gospel-Supper it behooved to be taken after it and not before it being thereby to abolish and Antiquat the Passover And if we were tied to every circumstance of that first Gospel-Supper then we behooved always to take it in an Upper Room and with Twelve only in Company yea and after a Paschal Lamb too And albeit a Quaker should answer that this last named Circumstance would be against Sciripture abrogating the Jewish Ceremonies yet it is hard to reply that all matters of Faith and parts of Religious Worship must be not only not against Scripture but according thereunto and having Divine Appointment therein see Isai 8.20 Jer. 7.31 32. and 19.5 6. Matth. 15.9 Mark 7.7 Colos 2.20 21 22. When therefore the Quakers shall be able to prove that that Circumstance of time when the first Gospel-Supper was Celebrated is any Constituent part of the Sacrament with mystical signification Instituted by Christ Jesus or that it is any where of Scripture Commanded then and not till then we shall acknowledge that we are in the wrong in taking it before Dinner and this they are obliged to do if they hold the Affirmative as here they pretend to do seeing all parts of Religious Worship must have positive Scripture-Warrant which if they want they will be plain contrary to Scripture general Precepts forbidding all Will-Worship after the commandments of Men. Having thrust out that limitating Clause After Supper from the state of the Question we find the state thereof to be yet Vitious for it may either be understood of common eating of Bread and drinking of Wine and so it is no Gospel Ordinance seeing Drunkards and Heathens can do that unto excess in a Tavern But Secondly It may be understood though with much ado as it is proposed of Sacramental eating and drinking of Bread and Wine Consecrated Sanctified and set apart for a sacred Symbol of Christs Death for signifying and sealing all the benefits thereof to the worthy Receivers their Spiritual nourishment in Christ and Communion with him and with each other In this sence I confidently assert the eating of Bread and drinking of Wine as the Quakers mockingly term it to be an excellent Gospel-Ordinance Instituted by Christ Jesus to be observed in his Church to the Worlds end This conclusion is so clear from Matth. 26. Chap. and Luk. 22. that nothing can be more clear For first We have in both places Christs Fact and Deed set down that he took Bread and Wine and blessed them that he brake the Bread and put the Wine into the Cup and that he distributed it to the Disciples and did eat and drink thereof with them Secondly We have Christs express Commandment albeit the blind Quakers cannot see it injoyning the whole action to be in like manner done by his Church and People afterwards This do c. Luk. 22.19 Thirdly We have his Word of Promise Sacramentally enunciating the thing signified or Internal matter of the External Signs and Symbols by a Metonimy attributing the name of the thing signified to the Sign expressing the Sacramental Union and Relation of the one to the other wherein consists the Internal form of the Sacrament This is my Body given for you This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood shed for you Luk. 22.19 20. Lastly We have the Explication of the end of this Sacred Ordinance which is that it should be for a memorial of Christ Death This do in Remembrance of Me Luk. 22.19 Now what blindness is happened to the Quakers that they cannot here read Christs Institution of the Gospel-Supper consisting of his own Fact and a Commandment to his Church to do the like thereafter with a rich Promise annexed and the End of the work declared Can any thing be devised more clear than this Or Can the Quakers number their own Fingers What shall we think of them when they can neither Read nor hear when it is Read by others this clear Institution of the Eucharist but that they are possessed with a blind and deaf Spirit that deprives them both of sight and hearing Secondly For a further assurance if need were that the Eucharist is a Gospel Ordinance of Divine Institution we have the Practice of the Apostles and the whole Church after the pouring forth of the Spirit Act. 20.7 1 Cor. 10.16 in which places there is not only the Example of the Churches Practice set down but also further we have their accustomed use thereof clearly imported as any Man by reading and considering the places may see Thirdly The Apostle in the first Epistle to the Corinthians eleventh Chapter while he is correcting several abuses that were crept in into the Worship there amongst the rest calls them to the first Institution of the Lords Supper where in the 23. Verse he affirms that it was an Ordinance he had received of the Lord and delivered unto them and in the 26. Verse he shews the duration of it to be until Christs coming again Now what an extream distraction shall it be to say That Christ delivered an Ordinance unto Paul to be by him delivered unto
the Church and to be by Her observed till Christs coming again at the day of general Judgment and that for shewing forth his Death until then which notwithstanding is not a Gospel-Ordinance Instituted by Christ it's a horrid contradiction to say so Is this the Spirit of Revelation I should say of occaecation and fascination that the Quakers boast of Oh miserable Guide and grand Cheat who instead of a plain Path as he pretends doth thus conduct them continually into the dark mists of Cimmerian Clouds or rather into the Chimerical Desarts of Utopia where all their Principles seems to concenter in the common place of Contradiction But say the Quakers here Is that a standing Command or is left to People seeing it 's said As oft as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup do it in Remembrance of his Death and for shewing forth his Death till he come again Was this Coming to the end of the World Or was it till his coming to dwell in his Apostles c. See their Heretical Confession of Faith where they harp the same string page 26 27 77 78 79 80. Ans O miseri Quae tanta Insania cives Quis furor here is a whole heap of Romantick Fictious and Phantastick Dreams For first here they alledge that Christ did not dwell in his Apostles when the first Gospel-Supper was Celebrated and the same they also largely insinuate in their Confession pages 72 74 75. and so they behoove to be all at that time unregenerated Men meerly in Nature seeing Christ by his Spirit dwells in all Regenerated Persons and Believers as these Scriptures witness Rom. 8.9 10. 2 Cor. 13.5 Galat. 4.6 1 Joh. 3.24 But it is most false that Christ did not dwell in his Apostles when the first Gospel-Supper was Celebrated and that they were then unregenerated Men seeing Christ plainly declares that they were clean though not all Joh. 13.10 by this meaning of Judas the Traitor And again he affirms that they were clean through the Word that he had spoken unto them Joh. 15.3 and again he says that they had received the Word of God and kept it and knew surely that he came out from God and that the Father had sent him Joh. 17.6 7 8. and these are things which Flesh and Blood never revealed unto them and the natural Man cannot discern Matth. 16.17 1 Cor. 2.14 It is indeed true God had not at that time when the first Gospel-Supper was Celebrated furnisht the Apostles with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit to accomplish them for their extraordinary work that ensued but that was done at the Pentecost but that Christ did not Spiritually dwell in them before the Pentecost the Scriptures cited declares to be false And as for that which Christ says to Peter Luk. 22.32 When thou art Converted strengthen thy Brethren it is not meant of the Conversion of his state as if he had been at that time unregenerated but it is meant of his Conversion from a particular Fact or his Rising after a Fall as beside what is already said is clear in the Text it self for Christ there tells him that he had prayed for him that his Faith might not fail which intimates that he then had Faith and that it should not be totally extinguisht by the temptation he was to meet with seeing Christs prayers were always heard Joh. 11.42 Secondly They thereby insinuate That the Gospel-Supper should be allowed to none but unregenerated Persons in whom Christ dwells not who will surely take it unworthily and eat and drink their own Damnation therein 1 Cor. 11.29 for they do not here deny but acknowledge that the Apostles were by Christ admitted to the Gospel-Supper before he came as they would have it to dwell in them but they will not have them partaking of it after Christ is once come to dwell in them alledging that to be its period and term day but Christ dwells in all Regenerated Persons as is proved Therefore they allow the Gospel-Supper to none but Unregenerated Persons who cannot discern the Lords Body nor shew forth his Death which is not a bare Historical Remembrance of a thing past but consists in our Spiritual feeding by Faith upon Christ Crucified and the application by Faith of him and all the benefits of his Redemption to our selves in our thankfulness to him for so great benefits and in our love towards him and each other which things Unregenerated Men meerly Carnal cannot do Rom. 8.7 8. 1 Cor. 2.11 14. So then the Quakers in this point do directly contradict the Holy Ghost who requires 1 Cor. 11.25 26 29. that none come to the Gospel-Supper that cannot discern the Lords Body and shew forth his Death Thirdly They thereby alledge That there is not a standing Command left to the Church for Celebrating the Lords Supper which I have shewed to be most false from Luk. 22.19 and 1 Cor. 11.23 24. in both which places we have a clear Command set down Do this in Remembrance of Me which Command seeing it was never to this day repealed or else let the Quakers shew where that is Recorded must be as yet standing still in force otherwise they may as well say that all the Commands are repealed together without any ground as that this is repealed and not standing when they can shew us no ground for it from the whole Word of God Fourthly They thereby alledge that the coming again of Christ mentioned 1 Cor. 11.26 and which is no where else in all the Scriptures mentioned upon this purpose is meant of Christs coming to dwell in his Apostles viz. at the pouring forth of the Spirit at the Pentecost after which time they will not deny that Christ dwelt in them as their Confession of Faith owns pages 72 73 74 75. albeit they plainly teach that he did not dwell in them before that time But it 's impossible that Christs Coming again mentioned there 1 Cor. 11.26 should be meant of Christs pouring forth of the Spirit or coming at the Pentecost seeing Christs coming at the Pentecost was already past long before the writing of that Epistle to the Corinths whereas his coming there mentioned is held forth as a thing meerly future and not past now it 's a flat contradiction to say a thing meerly future and not past is already past and so his coming again mentioned in the Text of the Corinths cannot be meant of his coming at the Pentecost Again The Eucharist was Celebrated by the Apostles and the Church after the Pentecost when Christ either dwelt in the Apostles or else never Act. 2.42 and 20.7 1 Cor. 10.16 and 11.28 Therefore the period of the Gospel Eucharist could not be at the pouring out of the Spirit at the Pentecost What Did not Christ dwell in these Corinthians whom Paul writes to seeing they were sanctified in Christ Jesus and justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God and they were Temples to the
I prove the Consequence because Singing of Psalms was no Jewish Ceremony and if the Adversaries will say so let them prove their Affirmative as they are obliged and until then I shall confirm the Negative viz. that Singing of Psalms is no Jewish Ceremony because first I cannot think that Christ joyned a Jewish Ceremony after the Gospel-Supper when he Sung a Hymn or Psalm as it is on the Margine of some of our Bibles Mat. 26.30 Mark 14.26 Nor that Paul and Silas used any Jewish Ceremony especially there not being any fear of Offence and stumbling of weak Brethren there when in Prison they Sung Praises unto God Act. 16.25 Again the Apostle does very plainly Exhort the Christians of the New Testament Ephes 5.19 and Colos 3.16 to speak unto themselves in Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Singing and making Melody in their hearts unto the Lord and Teaching and Admonishing one another in Psalms and Hymns and Spiritual Songs Singing with Grace in their hearts unto the Lord In which Texts he shews that that piece of Worship is edifying both to our selves and also to others that joyn with us while he says speaking to our selves in Psalms and Admonishing one another in Psalms And Secondly that it is a comfortable and Heart-chearing Duty while he says making Melody in your hearts And Thirdly that it glorifies God while he says doing it unto the Lord Therefore Singing of Psalms can be no Jewish Ceremony having these Examples and Precepts for it to the Church of the New Testament Secondly In the first Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 14.15.26 The Apostle in the one place of the Chapter and Verses Cited sharply reproves the Corinthians for their Disorder and Confusion in Singing in the publick Assemblies because every one of them had a Psalm by themselves and did not all joyn together and in the other place he directeth them how to Sing Psalms aright viz. with the Spirit and with the understanding also that is not only with the Breath or voice which there he calls the Spirit and the signification from the Original word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most properly signifies the Breath or Wind but also in a known Tongue which the whole Context there declares he means when he says with the Understanding and so the Apostle does here Reform the abuse that was crept in into their publick Singing of Psalms and directs them how to do it aright But a Superstitious Will-worship such as Singing of Psalms must be if it be not of Divine Institution can never be performed aright it involves a plain Contradiction to say so What did Paul direct men how to Worship God aright by a Superstitious Will-worship Nay surely not Singing of Psalms then must undeniably be an Ordinance of Divine Institution under the Gospel Thirdly the Apostle James says Jam. 5.13 Is any man afflicted let him pray is any man merry let him Sing Psalms Therefore Singing of Psalms hath a Divine Warrant under the New Testament The Quakers answer that he bids us Sing Psalms only when we are merry But it seems then that the Quakers are never never Merry but are a number of Sullen Dull and Melancholick Hypocondriack Drones who cannot at all Sing Psalms Secondly there is no such exclusion in the Text as is pretended otherwise the Apostle bids us pray only when we are afflicted also seeing both these are pronounced with one Breath and the manner of the Expression and extent of the Terms are the same in both and the Quakers can shew no ground for exclusion in the one more than the other notwithstanding they may see how frequently and continually we are commanded to pray Ephes 6.18 Phil. 4.6 1 Thes 5.17 They may also see Christ and his Disciples Singing when by all Circumstances it appears they were Sorrowful seeing they were so both presently before and after as appears from Mat. 26.22 Mark 14.26 compared with Mat. 26.30.38 Mark 14.19.34 Joh. 13.21 The Apostle therefore by Merriness and Affliction points at the frame and case unto which these Duties are most especially suited no ways excluding the excercise of them in other frames and cases But let us give them for once not granting that the Apostle does there appoint us to Sing Psalms only when we are Merry yet Singing of Psalms shall by this Text even in the Adversaries own Sence be of Divine Institution under the New Testament or else in their Principles we may in our Merry and Joyful frames offer a Superstitious Will-worship unto God which I have not yet learnt to believe The Quakers applying this Text of James in the 130 page of their Confession of Faith answer us that there is none Merry but the Ransomed of the Lord and therefore they mean to infer for that is their Scope in the place that none should Sing Psalms but these But First then certainly the Quakers are Convict that they themselves are none of the Ransomed of the Lord seeing they here allow the Ransomed of the Lord to Sing Psalms which yet they cannot be persuaded to do Secondly all the Members of the visible Church professing Faith in Christ and subjecting to his Ordinances are by visible Profession and in some degree of the judgment of Charity the Ransomed of the Lord Therefore the Quakers by their own principles ought to allow them to Sing Psalms Thirdly others also beside the Ransomed of the Lord are bound to Worship God except some special piece of Worship by some special Conditions which it requires doth exclude them as the Lords Supper excludes all that do not or cannot Examine themselves discern the Lords Body and shew forth his Death albeit the Church in admitting persons must walk by probabilities and can reach no further and both it and Baptism excludes all that want a visible Interest into the Covenant But Singing of Psalms is a piece of Gods appointed Worship as is shewed and there is no special condition Recorded in all the Scripture that debars any man from Singing and joyning therein or else let the Quakers shew it if they can If they shall say as we see they do say that the Unransomed by this Text are excluded from Singing Psalms they shall speak falsly for beside our former reasons given already to this exception the Text exhorts any man Whatsoever he be unto that duty but especially when he is in a joyful frame And giving without granting the Ransomed only to be meant yet Psalms-singing will still be of Divine Institution if these be allowed and in the judgment of Charity these will be all the professing Members of the Church subjecting to Divine Ordinances And whereas they here alledge that the Ransomed only are Merry or joyful that is also false for others beside these are sometimes joyful Mat. 13.20 Luk. 8.13 and so the exception is to no purpose But the Quakers insinuate here an Argument against Psalms-singing viz. that its very unsuitable to make Songs of Davids sad Cases of Mourning Weeping Lamenting
Salvation whereas these men there spoken of were before of old Ordained to Condemnation says the Text. Fifteenth QUERY Whether or not the Prophets Christ and the Apostles and holy Men of God did preach down Perfection and said that Men should not be perfect while they were on Earth but that they should carry about a Body of Death with them while they were on this side of the Grave Let us see where this is written by any of them all SVRVEY The Quakers here are fighting with their own Shadow and however this mock-Inspirer drops in the Quakers own Principles sure I am he is a base Traducer of other mens Doctrine for What Minister of ours did ever preach that Men should not be perfect here in this Life sure enough they should be perfect but the Question is not what is their Duty and what they should be but what is their Reach and Attainments The Saints are indeed perfectly justified here-away Rom. 8.1 nor can a Remission or Pardon of Sins or an Imputation of Righteousness be understood except it be a full Pardon and a full Imputation The Question therefore is only concerning the Saints their Sanctification in this Life in regard of which I must distinguish a Perfection of Parts which is when we have a degree of every Grace and are renewed in some measure in every power and faculty of the whole Man though we be not come to the just and due measure in any of them And a Perfection of Degrees which consists in the compleat measure of our Conformity and our exact Correspondence to the Law of God in respect of all whatsoever it requires But George Keiths Divine Condescension or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein he abuses some worthy Men does not consist in Gods remitting or nullifying of his Law in it's Direction and Obligation as our Rule which cannot be Matth. 5.18 19. but in the Divine acceptance of the Righteousness of a Redeemer and Surety instead of our own Personal Righteousness of Works The first kind of Perfection I willingly yield to the Saints in this Life seeing every true and real Saint hath some measure of every Grace and is in some degree renewed in every power and faculty of the whole Man Ephes 4.24 Colos 3.10 But that any man is Perfect in this Life in the second sence of Perfection which yet is the most proper so as to be altogether sinless as George Keith would have it in his Quakerism no Popery pag. 37. 38. I utterly deny and albeit the Affirmer be still obliged to prove not I the Denier yet I prove it First Because David says Psal 19.12 Who can understand his Errors and he prays Psal 143.2 That God would not enter into judgment with him for in thy sight says he no man living shall be justified viz. by his own Righteousness and Goodness and so he intreats not to be Examined or Judged according to what he was in himself and I still believe that he was as perfect as any Quaker or George Keith an Antesignanus or Banner-Bearer amongst them Secondly Solomon who was as wise as any Quaker says Prov. 20.7 Who can say I have made my heart clean I am pure from my sin The Quakers answer him forsooth that they can say it Let them be doing then and contradict him and the holy Spirit too by whose Inspiration he was ordered in writing of that for I cannot hinder them Their Moon is at the Full. Thirdly The Apostle tells us Galat. 5.17 That the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the Flesh in Believers for he speaks not of others who are all Flesh or wholly Carnal and have no Spirit or Renewed part so that they cannot behold how peremptory the Expression is do the things that they would Such men are not perfect then albeit the Quakers may possibly differ from the Apostles Judgment Fourthly The Apostle John says most peremptorily 1 Joh. 1.8 That if we say we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us The Quakers answer That the same Apostle says Chap. 3.9 That whosoever is born of God doth not commit Sin for his Seed remains in him and he cannot sin because he is born of God But first This Text cannot be meant of a full and compleat Perfection seeing every Man hath Sin and he deceives himself that thinks otherwise by the former Text and he that hath any Sin cannot be compleatly Perfect Secondly If this last Text were meant of Perfection it would prove every true Convert from the very first new breath in him seeing even then he is born of God which is the Apostles ground why he cannot commit Sin in the manner that he means to be compleatly Perfect and exempted from Sin which yet I think the Quakers themselves will not say The Apostle therefore in the first Text means of Sin dwelling in the best of Saints here away and therefore he expresses it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to have sin and in the second Text he means of sin not only dwelling but reigning in us and made as it were a trade of and acted with full consent which Renewed Men cannot do and therefore he expresses this by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to make and devise or contrive Sin as it were by Trade George Keith answers That though we have Sin in us yet it is not our Sin but our Temptation Quakerism no Popery pag. 38. 39. and that this does not infer Actual Sin however Contrariwise The Apostle calls it Sin and that peremptorily certifying us That we deceive our selves if we say we have it not How then does George Keith call it only a Temptation to Sin and Whether shall we believe him or the Apostle that calls it expresly Sin Secondly If it be not our Sin whose Sin I pray is it it's not the Devils seeing not he but we have it says the Text and I am sure they will not be so impudently Blasphemous as to ascribe it to God Therefore it is certainly ours seeing it must be some bodies and it will also mud and defile our actions Fifthly The Apostle Paul who was I believe more perfect than any Quaker most heavily complains Rom. 7.15 ver to the end of his Corruption Imperfection and Sin dwelling in him against his will his heart and his strong Inclinations to the contrary and therefore certainly he was not perfect and I know not who dare pretend beyond him But George Keith replies Quakerism no Popery pag. 39. 40. That the Apostle is not there describing his then-present-Condition but the Condition of himself and others as they were in the strugling and warfare Estate before the Victory was attained But Contrariwise he is describing his then-present-Condition for he was not then perfect nor long after it when he wrote the Epistle from Rome to the Philippians compare Philip. 3.12 with Rom. 1.11 13 15. and 15.22 23. which was several years after his writing of the