Atonement in his Blood And the like he hath done in what followed in the Apology which we shall presently shew But. first we shall set down the intire Words as they lye in that Apology which the Bp. pretends to cite and by which the Reader will see the Bp's great unfairness which were at first the Words of an Adversary one Jenner and cited by W. P. with other Articles thus Pag. 148. 5th That we deny Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and therefore deny the Lord that Bought us To which W. P. gives his Adversary an Answer thus And indeed this we deny and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Coruption which does now deluge the whole World Upon this W. P. proceeds to vindicate his Negation first saying that his Friend and Partner G. W. in writing that Apology had already irrefutably considered the Doctrine of Justification and therefore he will not insist so much upon this Point as he had upon others and only adds some short Arguments by which he proves that Wicked and Ungodly Men while so are not in a state of Justification and Acceptance with God by the imputed Righetousness of Christ and confirms the same by several Scripture Arguments and then on the other hand shews that such only are truly justified who are obedient unto the Spirit of God by which they become the Children of God and bring forth fruits of Holiness and in confirmation hereof gives us these Scripture Texts Gal. 6. Ro. 8. Reve. 22. And after having shewn who are not and who are in a state of Justification and Acceptance with God he is so far from denying Justification by Christ that he owns ascribes and asserts the same alone to him which for the Readers satisfaction we shall cite his Words as they lie in that Apology following the above Arguments p. 149. thus We do believe in one holy God Almighty who is an Eternal Spirit the Creator of all things and in one Lord Jesus Christ his only Son and express Image of his substance who took upon him Flesh and was in the World and in Life Doctrine Miracles Death Resurection Ascention Mediation perfectly did and does continue to do the will of God to whose holy Life Power Mediation and Blood we only ascribe our Sanctification Justification Redemption and perfect Salvation Now Impartial Reader judg between the Bp. and W. P. whether W. P. did deny Justification by Christ as the Bp. would insinuate and whether the Bp. was led by a Christian Spirit while he dealt so very unfairly what if we say unjustly by W. P. in misrepresenting his Sense to make him so intend as we have before noted Now as to the Doctrine of Justification we shall not be large thereon in regard many of our Friends have treated upon that head and particularly besides W. P. in several Tracts of his our deceased friend R. Barclay in his Apology hath writ excellently and fully thereof As also that the Bp. hath allowed W. P. to be Orthodox in what is written in Gospel Truths upon that Point for these Reasons we shall be brief yet as W. P. said in 1671. so say we now that we cannot believe it other then a Sin-pleasing Notion and a Doctrine of Divels since all Men as the Scriptures tell us are to be rewarded according to their deeds to assert That Wicked and Ungodly Men while they continue so are in a state of Acceptance and Justification with God by the righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own person wholly without them which wholy excludes the Work of Sanctification wrought by the Spirit of Christ which was the Notion W. P. did briefly and Geo. Whitehead more largely dispute against in that serious Apology see p. the 37 to 40 and p. 148 and agreeable to the Quakers sense and belief in this point are these following Scriptures Mat. 7. 21 22 23. so 1 John 3. 8 10. Rom. 6. 16. 2 Cor. 5. 10. James 1. 15. Heb. 10. 35. In short altho' we firmly believe and which W. P. and G. W. hath asserted that only Jesus Christ is our Justifier yet we do not believe any are truly justified in the sight of God but such who yield obedience to the Spirit of Christ in themselves by which they come to do the will of God and thereby come to obtain the benefit of what Christ fulfilled in his own person without us in concurrance whereunto we have these Scriptures 1 Cor. 6. 11. Titus 3. 5. Rom. 8. 1 2 11 13 14. Heb. 5. 9. and 12. 14. Gal. 6. 7. 8. Now to draw toward a conclusion upon this head Having proved from that serious Apology in 1671. That W. P. did ascribe our Justification only to Christ and our Reconciliation with God to faith in his blood But grants the benefit of it only to such who obey the Spirit of God in themselves Let us now see whether he be not of the same mind and hath aserted the same Doctrine in 1698. which the Bp. commends as Orthodox Thus Gospel Truth IV. That as we are only justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation and not by works of Righteousness that we have done so there is an absolute necessity that we receive and obey to unfeigned repentance and amendment of Life the holy Light and Spirit of Jesus Christ in order to obtain that Remission and Justification from Sin since no Man can be justified by Christ who walks not after the Spirit but after the flesh for whom he sanctifies them he also justifies and if we walk in the Light as he is Light his precious Blood cleanseth us from all Sin as well from the pollution as guilt of Sin Rom. 3. 22. to 26. Chap. 8. 1 2 3 4. 1 John 1. 7. We will not spend farther time to comment upon the matter to shew how agreeable W. P's Belief was in 1671. to what it was in 1698. being so very plain that it would be but time lost so to do and therefore we leave it with the Impartial Reader Again the Bp But says W. P. if the Bp. commends their believing in Christ as a propitiation for Sin he ought not to have censured them as short in any fundamental Article of Christian Religion for that all the rest follow from or are comprehended in this p. 25. 26. truly says the Bp. he ought Answ Here again we must charge the Bp. with unfairness in laying down words directly as W. P's in a Different Character the better to make them appear to be his and foisting in several that are none of his the Bp. Cites p. 25. 26. First Impression for these words and therefore we will lay down W. P's words in these two pages from whence the Bp. pretends to take them and then let the Reader judg in the matter Thus W. P. p. 28.
satisfied most or all of his Objections if he vvere not resolved rather to represent us vvrong than right vvhich vve must needs say doth but too much appear in his management tovvards us But farther as to Implication of Faith since the Bp. can produce no Confession of Faith extant so compleat and full that nothing is left to be made out by Implication he might have shevved so much candour as to have given an equal allovvance at least to this short Declaration vvhich vvas not vvrit as W. P. told him in the Preface to his Defence for an exact and compleat account of our Belief as he vvould to any of those Creeds or Symbols of Faith which himself or the Church he is of embraceth which had he done he could not have charged our Confession touching the Beeing of God with imperfection because there is not in it a word of God's creating the present World or supporting it by his Providence or concerning Himself about the inanimate part thereof with a multitude he saith of other particulars for in which we pray of all the Creeds which the Bp. holds Authentick is this multitude of particulars exprest in the first Article touching the Beeing of God without implication If we look into that which bears the name of the Apostles Creed the first Article is delivered thus I believe in God the Father Almighty maker of Heaven and Earth what one word is here of supporting the present world by his providence of concerning himself about the inanimate part of it or of the Bp's multitude of other particulars Are not all those to be made out by implication in this the most celebrated and best Creed extent Again Is there one word in that Creed concerning the Intercession or Mediation of Christ for his People It is said indeed he ascended into Heaven and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty and that from thence he shall come to judg the Quick and the Dead But that sitting at the Right Hand of his Father he makes Intercession for his People tho' it be certainly true Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 7. 25. is not exprest in that Creed but left to be supplied by implication Yet again the Attributes due to God even those which the Bp. says Christianity teacheth of him where are they in words exprest in that Creed Is there a word there of his Omniscience his Omnipresence his infinite Goodness and Love to Mankinde his Justice Mercy c. Will the Bp. allow these to be made out by implication or would he have them left out and disbelieved altogether By these Instances the Bp. we hope will see how much his desire of a blow at W. P. and the Quakers made him mistake when he said p. 4 5. What an easie prevention of all this Imperfection and uncertainty had it been for W. P. and his party to have said I believe in God the Father Almighty maker of Heaven and Earth since that without the help of Implication falls very much short of delivering what he says Christianity teacheth of God To which he adds but this had been confessing an Article of Faith in a way beneath their Light we say no more but that this is a Scoff beneath the gravity which the Bp. pretends to and was expected from him But we must take leave to tell him that by his rejecting that Paper called Gospel Truths and unchristianing us for our shortness in not expressing in that Paper all that Christianity teacheth and that is to be believed concerning God Christ the Holy Ghost and other Articles of Christian Religion he has given a deep wound to the common Creed called the Apostles and to all the Creeds in the Christian World and struck a very bold stroke towards unchristianing all Christendom But in this we think the Bp. the more to be blamed in as much as when he writ this he declares he had before him a Book of W. P's Entitled The second part of the serious Apology for the principles and practices of the People called Quakers Printed in the Year 1671. in which he might and could scarce but see a more full Confession of Faith concerning the Essentials of Religion God Christ and Holy Spirit We say he could hardly miss seeing this for he took and that most falsely as we have shewed before a quotation out of that Book in p. 148. and this Confession which we now mention is in page 149. and the pages lye open together so that both are alike exposed to the eye at the same time This Confession is in these words We do believe in one only Holy God Almighty who is an eternal Spirit the Creator of all things We would gladly know whether this be not as full as express as comprehensive as the first Article in that which is called the Apostles Creed which says only I believe in God the Father Almighty maker of Heaven and Earth It follows in that Book of W. P's And in one Lord Jesus Christ his only Son and express Image of his substance who took upon him flesh and was in the World and in Life Doctrine Miracles Death Resurrection Ascention and Mediation perfectly did and does continue to do the will of God to whose Holy Life Power Mediation and Blood we only ascribe our Sanctification Justification Redemption and perfect Salvation Here is a full Confession both to the Divinity and Manhood of Christ his Birth Life Doctrine Miracles Death Resurrection Ascention and which the common Creed mentions not his Mediation Then for the Holy Spirit whereas the Creed has only I believe in the Holy Ghost W. P's Confession is more full in these words And we believe in one Holy Spirit that proceeds and breaths from the Father and the Son as the life and virtue of both the Father and the Son a measure of which is given to all to profit with and he that has one has all for these three are one who is the Alpha and Omega the first and last God over all blessed for ever Amen This we suppose the Bp. will acknowledge to be a more full and plain Confession then that which is in the Common Creed called the Apostles with respect to the proceeding of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son not touched in that besides what is said in this concerning the great mistery of the God-head one in three and three in one commonly exprest by the word Trinity of which that Creed called the Apostles is wholly silent Now since the Bp. acknowledges he had that Book of W. P's then before him out of which we have recited this Confession which in many material parts is so much fuller and larger then that the Bp. directs to how unfair and how disingenious how uncharitable is the Bp. towards W. P. and us to censure and unchristian us for a pretended shortness in the wording of some of our Principles and that too after W. P. had told him in the Preface to his Defence that
of that Reply we now conclude it has Miscarried Therefore to the end we may no longer remain Silent under the Bp's Charges and Reflections c. We have thought fit at last tho late to make this Publick and the rather because we have heard some have conceived an Opinion That the Bp's Reply was Unanswerable Cork the 20th of the 7th Month 1700. Thomas Wight Nicholas Harris Advertisement REader please to mind that there are Two Impressions of W. P's Defence Extant The Citations in this Discourse respects the Second very few of the First being in Ireland But the Bps. Citations chiefly Respects the First A Rejoynder to a Book Stiled A Brief and Modest Reply to Mr. Penn's c. THE Bishop seems pleased with William Penn for Printing Gospel Truths together with his Testimony before his own Defence and begins his Introduction thus P. 1 The Bp. of Cork being to vindicate the Truth and Himself thanks Mr. P. for having Printed both his own Paper and the Bp's Testimony against it at length before his Book for the Bp. believes that all sober and Reasonable Christians who shall read those two over and consider them will easily acquit the Bp. from the first of Mr. P's Imputations in his Preface that he is a man of a mind different from those who would have strife among Christians abated and for discouraging Controversies in Religion Answ Evident then it is W. P. was careful to set the whole matter fairly before his Reader that so he might be able to make the better Judgment and we wish the Bp. had as well deserved thanks from W. P. for setting down the Defence tho' not at length yet in its due strength without suppressing so considerable a part of it and perverting so much of the rest as will be found he hath done Next we are equally agreed to refer W. P's Imputation to all sober and reasonable Christians believing they will not so easily acquit the Bp. as he thinks considering he was the only Person in Ireland who broke out into a Publick Testimony against that Inoffensive Paper called Gospell Truths and therein greatly abused us as W. P. hath plainly shewn in many Instances from Page 22 to 26 of his Defence but slipt over by the Bp. with saying To Omit things less Material as if so egregiously to abuse and villifie a People as he is there charged by W. P. to have done were a light matter with him And farther to speak our Sentiments after the Bp's way Let W. P's Defence and the Bp's Reply be read over and considered by all Sober and Impartial Christians and we cannot but believe they will be of our mind for the sakes of such only there was no need of this Rejoynder that Defence being as we think a sufficient Answer of it self to the most material parts of the Bp's Reply The Bp. proceeds thus ibid 1 the Bp. says a peaceable Testimony against the slight of men touching whom it is questionable whether they be Christians or not and against their cunning craftiness who lye in wait to deceive is no moving strife or raising quarrels among Christians Answ As to the peaceableness of the Bp's Testimony his management therein doth evidently shew it and which we leave to the Impartial Reader But if Misrepresenting Abusing and Calling us no Christians if obtruding Principles upon us as ours which we utterly disown and abhor if drawing Consequences from our Words Writings we never thought of much less intended and forcing them upon us tho we disclaim them if curtailing our Writings leaving out what explained our meaning and wilfuly overlooking our plain Sense with much more too tedious to mention would make it questionable whether we are Christians or not the Bp. is in the right Nay we will go farther with him it would not only be questionable but we had without all peradventure been positively made no Christians for it hath been the constant practice of our Adversaries since we were a People thus to deal by us and amongst the rest we cannot excuse the Bp. from having a share in some of these things which shall be shewn in their places But blessed be God 't is not the Tongues or Pens of all our Adversaries in the World can make us no Christians for we have not only believed in the outward coming and appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Flesh with his Sufferings Death Resurrection Assention and Mediation but in humility of Soul and to the praise of his Holy Name we can say we have witnessed his second coming in Spirit according to his promise John 14. 17 81. Chap. 15. 26. and 16. 13. to fit and prepare our Souls in order to obtain the benefit of his outward death and sufferings for us And thus we are not only Christians by Notion and Tradition but such in reallity for which we have the evidence in our selves according to 1 John 5. 10. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself And Rom. 8. 16. The Spirit it self beareth witness with our Spirits that we are the Children of God Here then is the double and agreeing record of true Religion the Illumination of the holy Ghost within agreeing with the Testimony of the Scriptures of Truth without which we shall have farther occasion to speak to But here that we may not be misunderstood we do not mean so largely of all such as some may call Quakers but of such whose Lives and Conversations influenced by the Holy Spirit bespeak them to be true Quakers and therefore true Christians Next as to the Bp's gross and to use his own Words scurrilous and unchristian charge of slight cuning craftinness lying in wait to deceive which is brought as a confirming charge to his Testmony in which he told us and tells again P. 9 he did not judge us We say as to this charge we shall not at present say much reserving it to be considered with more of the same kind only tell the Bp. That as we know not how he will reconcile this to modesty so we hope he will not say again he don't judge us while if what he says were true whether it respect our Principles or our Morals we think 't is plain he equally judges us to be the worst and basest of Men the Bp. Proceeds P. 1. Mr. P. adds he gave his Paper to the Bp. in a private way at a friendly visit upon his own desire This is what the Bp. Called writing in such a way that is hard to know what is meant If Mr. P. means that either he gave the Paper to the Bp. upon the Bp's Desire or made that Visit upon the Bp's Desire in both Senses the saying is utterly false for both the Visit and the Paper were a Surprize and altogether unexpected by the Bp. Thus the Bp. P. 1 and 2 Answ 1st As to the Paper take the words as they lye in W. P's Preface P. 1 which runs thus Given him by
which is no where done in any one text of Scripture but is to be gathered out of many Answ Is it not strange Reader that the Bp. who so strangely condemned that Paper of Gospel Truths as short and defective for not being more explicit and full in others as well as in this point should now a second time be so very defective himself as not to tell us where those many Texts are by which the Trinity was to be proved No that he has not done for a good reason too because in all the Scriptures a more full proof could not be found then 1 John 5. 7. But the Bp. to help himself tells us of the Thirty Nine Articles and Nicene Creed To which we answer their foundation in that point ought to be the Holy Scripture if so why had not the Bp. cited or referred us to those Scriptures but in stead of confirming the Trinity we think he has rather lessened the proof thereof while he tells us the Apostles purpose was to prove that Jesus Christ is the Son of God for altho' the Apostles could not prove the Trinity without proving Jesus Christ to be the Son of God yet as the Bp. assignes that Text. by the context chiefly to prove Christ was the Son of God we ask doth he not thereby lessen the proof of the Trinity vvhile as we said above we can no where find so full and plain a Text in all the Holy Scriptures to prove the Trinity we are sure we design not to strain or misrepresent the Bp's sense but what we have said we think naturally follows from his own words and far less then we could have said on the matter As to his appeal to his Paper we agree in that point provided W. P's Defence be compared with it and there the Impartial Reader will see whether W. P. hath wronged the Bp's Sense or not and whether the Bp. hath not now confirmed W. P's asking How came the Bp. to render it a by passage and the Text it self short and otherwise intended by the Apostle then an Article of Faith about the Trinity see p. 33. of W. P's Defence in two places and thus we end as to what the Bp. has said about the Trinity P. 6 7. The Bp. tells us we must give a more explicit confession of our Faith if we expect to be accounted Christians for other reasons then he has given especially says he this for one that a great Person among them who professes as concerning their Principles he was deceived by them thinking they had held sincerely the Principles which by a more diligent search he finds they hold not Answ George Keith being the person he means as appears in the Margin we must take leave to say the Bp. is greatly mistaken for he is neither great among us nor indeed of us at all having been denied by us some Years past and as to that Man he must either have been a great Hypocrite formerly or a foul Apostate now from us The former if for about thirty Years he walkt among us and defended our Principles by word and writing and yet at the same time was not convinced of the verity of them an Apostate to be sure if being convinced of our Principles and from that perswasion defended them while now he retracts and condemns some of the very same Principles he then defended The Bp. proceeds about G Keith p. 7. assures us meaning G. K. and has Printed Testimonies out of their Books to prove they deny Answ As to G. Keith's confident assurance we question not that he having given us sufficient proof thereof already by plainly perverting and misrepresenting our friends words and writings as well as contradicting what he has before writ in defence of us and our principles and did we only refer back to our friends reitterated as well as G. K's own former writings they would sufficiently prove us Orthodox as to the four following points brought by the Bp. from G. K's Third Narrative however because the Bp. shall not have occasion to say we pass them over we will briefly consider them 1st That they i. e. the Quakers deny Faith in Christ as he outwardly suffered at Jerusalem as he rose again ascended and now sits at the right hand of God to be necessary to Salvation Answ If G. K. doth here mean that the Knowledge of the outward death and suffering of Jesus Christ is so necessary to salvation as without the knowledg of which all Men are damned and eternally lost we answer we dare not be so uncharitable as to conclude that the many millions of Men who are and have been in the World and who never had or heard of the outward history of the sufferings and death of Christ c. are so damned provided they yield obedience to the Spirit of God in them selves and thereby from unholy become Holy Men. But if he mean with respect to the Quakers and such who have had the knowledg of the outward history as recorded in Holy Scriptures we hold it absolutely necessary so to believe 2ly That we deny Justification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed Answ To this head we have spoken before and the Bp. himself hath allowed W. P. Orthodox in what is written in Gospel Truth so we need say no more of this now 3ly That we deny the Resurrection of the Body that dieth If he mean the same Numerical Body of Flesh Blood and Bones which we have here on Earth we know not where he will find Scripture for that But on the contrary he may find the Apostle 1 Cor. 15. 36. calling such curious Body Enquirers Fools Now as to us we fully own and truly believe the Resurrection of the Body according to the Holy Scripture but are not so nice and inquisitive as to enquire what sort of Body God will give us leaving that to his Divine Will who will give us such a Body as pleaseth him and this is Scripture language and agreeable to 1 Cor. 15. 36 37 38. and cited by W. P. in his Defence against the Bp's Testimony in which Book he hath briefly but fully asserted our Belief in this point which we do not find the Bp. makes any return to in his Reply by which as we take it he tacitly allows him Orthodox therein notwithstanding he now brings up this of G. K. against us 4ly That we deny Christ's coming again without us in his glorified Body to judg the Quick and the Dead Answ This charge is false because we own it in express words and would G. K. with the rest of our Adversaries let our plain words and Sense mean what they say and import there would be no room left for this malitious charge as well as many others for many of our Friends have very often publickly in print asserted our Belief in this point and W. P. in particular whom I will cite on this occasion besides in other of his writings hath fully owned the same in
to his Censuring the Quakers instead of saying common Twelve he should have made the Creed into distinct Articles and laid them down for us But leaving this we proceed to the next Ibid. 10. Inconsequent and trifling inferences says the Bp. of W. P. such are p. 31. we call him the beloved Son of God the only begotten of the Father therefore conceived of the holy Ghost Mr. P. knows Solomon was named Jedediah the Lords beloved David said to be his begotten Son Psal 2. his first born Psal 89. 27. Yet neither conceived of the holy Ghost nor born of a Virgin Thus the Bp. Answ Certainly we believe hardly ever came more trifling 〈◊〉 matters to speak in his way from a Man in the station of a Bp. Be pleased Reader to read W. Ps ' Defence from p. 35. to 39. where he answers the Bp. fully upon this point of the manifestation of Christ Jesus in the flesh and shews plainly that altho' the words conceived of the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin be not expressed in that brief Paper Gospel Truths yet they are very fully implied and take but the above words which the Bp. has pickt out of the Defence and they imply no less for who was the beloved Son of God and only begotten of the Father according to John 1. 14. Chap. 3. 16. but Jesus Christ that was born of the Virgin But says the Bp. Solomon was named Jedediah the Lords beloved what then so was Daniel a Man greatly beloved of the Lord and many other servants of God too But where was any of them called the Word made Flesh the only begotten of the Father full of Grace and Truth his beloved Son in whom he was well pleased who tasted death for every Man his office of Justification a Propitiation named Jesus Christ with all this and more of the same kind in Gospel Truths and again repeated by W. P. in his Defence And now for the Bp. a second time to suggest such trifling 〈◊〉 things we should tell him it looks like trifling for trifling 's sake did we not find some of it worse and indeed it looks as if the Bp. would falsify the sense of Scripture rather then want proof to make W. P. guilty of trifling and inconsequent Inferences thus he has cited Psal 2. and Psal 89. 27. to make the Scripture serve his turn against W. P. whereas 't is undenyable what is said in the second Psal is spoken of Christ himself which is fully confirmed in the New Testament in these words Acts 13 33. God hath raised up Jesus again as it is written in the second Psalm Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee Then as to Psal 89. 27. is it not very plain David doth there personate Christ it runs thus Also I will make him my first born higher then the Kings of the Earth We will not enlarge on the matter only add that if the Bp. could have proved such gross falsifying the plain sense of Scripture as this we should no doubt have heard of it very loudly while the Bp. made so much adoe about two words which altered not the sense as we have before shewn But no more of this now Ibid. 10. The Bp. quotes W. P. for another trifling instance He that confesseth him made flesh confesseth him made flesh by God and therefore made holy flesh does not all the World know say's the Bp. that all flesh is made by God and do we hence conclude all flesh is holy or conceived by the holy Ghost many more may be instanced Answ Here 's Instances enough already and more then are consistant with the Bp's Credit as we have shewn and truly we think as little to the purpose as most Men ever wrote and indeed we do begrudg the time we spend in answering such trifling if some of it be not unjust matter were it not for the sake of Truth and for those who may think there is more in the Bp's Arguments then really there is and had we at first only referred the Reader to W. P's Defence for answer to all these trifling Instances it would have fully answered them and so fully too that we must take W. P's own words to answer the Bp. again because the Bp. hath so unfairly pickt out such as he hoped to make some advantage of and not only so but in this instance hath put in a word of his own and left out three of W. P's without which he could not have made good his charge against W. P. And to shew that he hath so done we here give W. P's own words as they lye in his Defence p. 34. Thus. W. P. He that confesses the word was made flesh confesses him made flesh by God and therefore made holy flesh which is found Doctrine and agrees with John 1. 14. The word was made flesh and dwelt among us c. Now instead of these words the Word was the Bp. has only put in the Word him Again had not the Bp. so unfairly left out three of W. P's words the distinction between Christ's flesh and all other flesh was plainly and fully imply'd by saying the Word was made flesh for who was the word made flesh but Christ the beloved Son of God and only begotten of the Father and so W. P. calld him but four lines before surely one would think here was distinction enough between Christ's flesh which was conceived by the holy Ghost and all other sinful flesh to satisfie any who had not a mind to Cavil or trifle for triflings sake Now Reader judg in the matter Did the Bp. deal justly with W. P. in thus doing by him to answer his unfair purposes but 't is no news for the Quakers to be thus abused and misrepresented by their Adversaries as we noted in the begining And now to the Bp. What is become of his trifling and inconsequent inferences where is wilfuly false overlooking the plain Sense where is manifold arts of uncharitabelness and disingenuity where is the falsifying and perverting plain sense of Scripture and consequently impiety and corruption we leave it with the candid Reader who they are fallen upon whether the Bp. or W. P. And so we proceed Ibid. 10. Saith the Bp. of W. P. Contemptious and scornful Language such is that reflection a weak head Which Reader observe W. P. alluded to himself in relation to the Bp's Arguments in case his instances were no better to the purpose then the Bp's upon that expression of the Bp's stomach turning we will not call the Bp. a weak head but we are sure we should think our Arguments weak were they no more to the purpose then the Bp's are in what 's past but in regard the Bp. did not answer W. P's Arguments about the Language Thee and Thou to a single person they remain yet in force agaist the Bp. And as to his Reflections on our conscientious using that Language calling it a wicked kind of weakness together with an
yet in conclusion we do not find he pretends to confute them by any other Arguments then by his own Assertion as p. 12. he tells us by the way he does not think this Scripture Language and p. 13. avers 't is unintelligible that is Banter so that we need take no further notice then only refer the Reader to R. B's Apology where if he be impartial he will find full satisfaction However in regard the Bp. doth greatly abuse R. Bp's sense we will take notice and answer such his recitalls Thus p. 12. the Bp. cites some words out of R. B's Discourse on the sixth Proposition of his Apology where R. B. was proving that the seed Light or Grace of God is no accident but a real Spiritual substance Then says the Bp. of their feeling it yea anon Tasting Smelling seeing it and handling by virtue of it the things of God which yet says the Bp. are certainly all Spiritual things Again the Bp. goes on p. 13. that people should be able to smell and feel and handle things which being intellectual and immaterial can no ways be incident to these Senses nor are so much as ever Metaphorically said to be smelt or handled the Bp. avers unintelligible that is Banter Then he tells us he expects our Reply that he is a carnally minded Man to whom all this seems strange which he will answer anon Answ First the Bp. in this case might as well have expected to be taxed with great unfairness in wilfully abusing R. B's sense as that he is a carnally minded Man and that he is guilty of the first and such a Man in the last we think nothing can well be plainer while in the first he makes R. B. to alsude to outward senses whereas the Scope of his Arguments as well as his plain Words do prove the contrary thus p. 95. R. B's Apology and the same Section cited by the Bp. which he makes 16. but it should be Sect. 14. We come to have those Spiritual Senses raised by which we are made capable of Tasting Smelling Seeing and Handling the things of God And in plain opposition to outward Senses which the Bp. would insinuate he intended says in the next words for a Man cannot reach unto those things by his natural Spirit and Senses as is above declared Pray Reader judg in the matter can there be a plainer abuse put upon a Man while the Bp. opposes intellectual and immaterial things and Spiritual Senses to what R. B. intended when R. B's plain words intends Spiritual in opposition to Natural Senses Next as to the Seed Light and Grace of God which the Bp. cites p. 12. and which R. B. says is a real Spiritual Substance which the Soul is able to feel and apprehend from which that real inward Spiritual birth in Believers arises called the New Creature and New Man in the heart Now for confirming R. B's expressions to be sound and Spiritual both in this Citation as also in relation to Spiritual Senses we ask the Bp. what New Creature the Apostle meant 2 Cor. 5. 17. Gal. 6. 15. And what that hidden Man of the heart was the Apostle spoke of 1 Pet. 3. 4. And what those Senses were 1 John 1. 12. by which the Apostle saw felt and handled the word of Life Then what taste that was Ps 34. 8. O taste and see that the Lord is good And what that sweet savour was 2 Cor. 2. 15. Sweet Smell Cant. 4. 9 11. Chap. 7. 13. Now Reader judg in the matter might not the Bp. with much reason if he had considered rightly have expected to be termed a Carnaly minded Man by us while he rendered R. B. guilty of unintelligible Banter P. 12. the Bp. tells us R. B. will have this Light or Grace the purchase of Christs Death for every Man lightning the hearts of all in a day and subsists in the hearts of wicked Men even whilst they are in their wickedness which the Bp. tells us he thinks not Scripture Language Answ That R. B. hath fully and undeniably owned and asserted the Attonement and Sacrifice of Jesus Christ in p. 96. of his Apology as also in the seventh Proposition about Justification we suppose the Bp. will not deny and in the first doth make an especial exception against being misunderstod in that point while he was treating of the necessity of obeying the Light and Grace of Christ in order to receive the benefits of his death and sufferings for us why then might not he say this Seed Light Grace or Spirit of Christ was the purchase of his death since it came by him see John 1. 17. The Law came by Moses but Grace and Truth by Jesus Christ Again John 1. 4 9. Rom. 8. 9. John 16. 7. 13. And that it subsists in the Wicked tho' in a far different manner then in the Righteous as R. B. excellently shews see Luke 17. 21. The Kingdom of Heaven within The wicked Pharisees Mat. 25. 25. The wicked servant had a Talent tho' he did not improve it Now is it not strange the Bp. should overlook many more Scriptures then these while he was so trifling with R. B. Ibid. 12. The Bp. tells us that R. B. says That the knowledge of Christs death and sufferings as declared in the Scripture is not absolutely necessary for making people partakers of this Light Again P. 13. The knowledge of the Scripture tho' comfortable and profitable is not needful Answ We have already in Answer to the four points laid down by the Bp. as G. K's p. 45. 46. spoken to this point and therefore need say the less here nor do we find the Bp. pretends to confute it Nay tells us as to that part which lyes in p. 12. that R. B. proves it after his way And as to that part in p. 13. the Bp. has neither fairly cited it nor told the occasion for R. B. spoke in reference to such from whom the knowledg of the Death and sufferings of Christ hath been with-held to such says R. B. it is not absolutely needful so as they may be saved notwithstanding they have not the outward History provided they obey the Light and Spirit of God which he plainly proves is given universally to all And thereby from unholy become holy Men We desire thee Reader to peruse R. B's fifth and sixth Propositions for full satisfaction to all the Bp's Objections P. 13. The Bp. proceeds thus By what has been produced out of R. B. in his own words it appears Mr. Penn's double and agreeing Testimony of the Light within and the Scriptures of Truth without is but a New bubble upon the World a thin Leaf of Gold to make the poisonous Pill of their Light within go down with the less reluctancy or even suspition Answ As to the Bp's picking out and putting false constructions upon R. B's and W. P's words we have observed to the Reader already Next as to the agreeing Testimony we have spoken to that