the Woman that was Born of the Virgin Mary and what that Power effected and wrought in the Faithful in the Ages before Christ came into the Flesh it was with Respect to his coming in the Flesh and to what he was to do and suffer in his Body of Flesh for their Sins And what I said as Quoted by him page 35. out of my Book Way to the City of God page 125. Even from the beginning yea upon Man's Fall God was in Christ Reconciling the World to himself and Christ was manifest in the Holy Seed inwardly and stood in the way to ward off the Wrath of God from the Sinners and Unholy that it might not come upon them to the uttermost during the Day of their Visitation All this or what ever else of that sort I have said in any of my Books hath a safe and sound Sense rightly understood though this Prejudiced Adversary seeks by his own Perversion to turn them to the contrary The Word Reconciling Redeeming hath a two-fold Signification the one is to satisfie Divine Justice and pay the Debt of our Sins this was only done by Christ as he Suffered for us in the Flesh the other is to Operate and Work in us in order to slay the Hatred and Enmity that is in us while Unconverted that being Converted we may enjoy that inward Peace of Christ that he hath Purchased for us by his Death and Sufferings Now that the Light Word and Spirit gently Operates and Works in Men to turn and incline them to Love God to Fear him and Obey him to Believe and Trust in him that is to Reconcile Men to God and to ward or keep off the Wrath of God from them And thus God was in Christ Reconciling the World to him in all Ages But this is not by way of Satisfaction to Divine Justice for Men's Sins but by way of Application and Operation inwardly Inviting Persuading and as it were Intreating Men to be Reconciled unto God that so the Wrath of God that hangs over their Heads may not fall upon them for while God by Christ thus inwardly visits the Souls of Men inviting and persuading them to turn and live saying why will ye Dye the Wrath is suspended and delayed to be Executed upon them yet it is not removed but abides upon them until they Repent and Believe as the Scripture testifieth he that believeth not the Wrath of God abideth on him And though this inward Appearance and Operation in Christ in Men's Hearts stayeth the Execution of Divine Wrath and Justice yet that inward Appearance is not the Procuring and Meritorious Cause of Men's Reconciliation with God but the Means whereby what Christ by his Death and Sufferings hath Purchased is applyed for though Christ made Peace for us by his Blood outwardly Shed yet that Peace cannot be nor is obtained or received by any but as the Soul is inwardly Changed and Converted and so Reconciled unto God III. And the like twofold Signification hath the Word to Attone for as it signifieth to Attone or Reconcile God and us that wholly is procured by Christ's Obedience unto Death and Sacrifice that he offered up for Men on the Cross but as it signifieth the effectual Application of that great Attonement made by Christ for Men at his Death that is wrought by his Spirit and inward Appearance in their Hearts And I might well say at Man's Fall the Seed of the Woman was given not only to bruise the Serpent's Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to Attone and Pacify the Wrath of God towards Men as he Quotes me in my Book Way to the City p. 125. For taking Attoning in the first Sense the Virtue Merit and Efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross did as really extend to the Faithful for Remission of Sin and bringing into Reconciliation and Peace with God from Adam's Fall as it now doth which this Prejudiced Author seems wholly ignorant of as well as his Brethren Again taking it in the second Sense for the effectual Application of the Attonment made by Christ's Death through his Meek and Lamb-like Appearance by his Spirit and Life in Men's Hearts it has a Truth in it And Christ may be said to be the Lamb of God that taketh away the Sins of the World both by his outward Appearance in the Flesh as he Dyed for us to Procure and Purchase the Pardon of our Sins and our Justification before God and also by his inward Appearance to Renew and Sanctifie us for as by our Justification the Guilt of Sin is taken away so by our Sanctification is the Filth of it removed Both which is the Work of Christ the Lamb of God respecting both his outward and inward Appearance in his outward being a Sin-offering for us and a Sacrifice in a strict Sense in his inward Appearance of his Divine Life in us being as a Peace-offering and Sacrifice of sweet smelling Incense before God not to Reconcile God and us as is above said but to apply effectually to us the Reconciliation made for us by his Death on the Cross IV. And that I said as he again Quotes me the Seed hath been the same in all Ages and hath had its Sufferings under by and for the Sins of Men in them all for the Removing and Abolishing them This I still hold that there is a tender Suffering Seed or Principle in Men that suffers by Men's Sins and by its gentle Strivings prevails and gains the Victory at last in all the Heirs of Salvation But this suffering Seed or Principle I never held it to be God nor was I ever of that Mind that God did really and properly Suffer by Men's Sins although I have known divers to hold such an absurd Opinion as G. Whitehead hath plainly declared to be his Opinion in his Divinity of Christ p. 56. which is as really Repugnant both to Scripture and sound Reason as to hold that God hath Bodily Parts and Members because the Scripture in many places in condescension to our human Capacities speaks of God's Suffering Repentance being grieved as it doth of his Face Eyes Ears Hands and Feet all which ought not to be properly but Allegorically understood And though I hold that this tender Seed suffers in Men by their Sins that so by its gentle Strivings with them it may overcome them and Slay and Crucifie the Body of Sin in them Yet I hold not that Suffering to be the Procuring and Meritorious Cause of our Justification and Pardon of Sins before God nor do I remember any where that I have so said or writ if any shall shew me where I shall readily Correct and Retract it or any thing in any of my Books that looks that way And if any Query whether I hold that Seed to be Christ that doth so suffer in Men by their Sins I Answer It is not the Fulness of Christ but a Measure proceeding from the Fulness that was and is lodged in the
of Faith to be Preached or Professed his Argument should be also false and as false is this way of reasoning that because the Baptisme is one therefore that one Baptisme is only the inward of the Spirit excluding the outward Baptisme of Water or as to say therefore it is only the outward Baptisme of Water excluding the inward Baptisme of the Spirit Now as the one Faith mentioned Ephes 4.5 Suppose is meant the inward Grace or Virtue of Faith in the hearts of all True Believers doth not exclude the Doctrine of Faith outwardly Preached and Professed so nor doth the inward Baptisme of the Spirit suppose there meant Eph. 4.5 exclude the outward Baptisme of Water both being true and one in their kind as the inward Grace of Faith is specifically one in all true Believers but numerically manifold even as manifold as there are numbers of Believers so the Doctrine of Faith is one in its kind though consisting of many parts therefore to argue as W. Penn doth that Baptisme is one in the same sense as God is one is very inconsiderate which would infer that though God is one in specie yet that there are as many Gods numerically as Believers And notwithstanding that in Ephes 4.5 it is said there is one Baptisme yet it is not said there or elsewhere that there is but one Baptisme for another place of Scripture mentions Baptismes in the Plural Number Heb. 6.2 And indeed as weak as their Argument against Water-Baptisme is from the Scripture words one Baptisme no less weak is their Argument against the outward Supper practised with Bread and Wine in commemoration of our Lord's Death because of the Scripture words one Bread 1 Cor. 10.17 for in that same verse Paul tells of one Bread in a very different signification even as far as the Church of Christ is not Christ we said he being many are one Bread but doth it therefore follow that there is no other Bread than the Church nay for they are all partakers of that one Bread which is Christ and there is a third Bread that he mentions in the same Chapter which is neither the one nor the other one Bread and that is the outward Bread that they did eat v. 16. the bread which we break is it not the Communion of the body of Christ Even as Christ said concerning the outward Bread that it was his Body to wit Figuratively so by the like Figure it was the Communion of his Body but not the Body it self which too many have been so foolish as to imagine that the outward Bread was Converted into Christ's real Body and as if Paul had foreseen that many would become so foolish and unwise as so to imagine therefore to caution against any such folly he had said I speak as to wise Men judge ye what I say But whereas many of the People called Quakers by Bread in that part of the Verse the Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Lord's Body Will have to be meant not the outward Elementary Bread but the Body of Christ it self in this they are under a great mistake for that would render the words to have a most absur'd Sense as to say the Body of Christ is the Communion of his Body but the Body is one thing and the Communion of that Body is another and it were as little sense to understand it thus the Body of Christ is a Figure of the Communion of his Body therefore the true sense of the words is the outward Bread which we break is a Figure or Sign of the Communion of the Lord's Body But these Men are under another great Mistake as if by the Lord's Body here were not meant his outward Body that was Crucified and Raised again but the Life which is the Light in them and in every Man whether Believer or Unbeliever But of this great Error I shall have occasion hereafter to take notice only at present let it be remembred that by the Body of Christ in these above-mentioned words is to be understood the Body of Christ that was outwardly Crucified Dyed and rose again and is a living Glorious Body which is the Body of the second Adam the quickning Spirit of the Virtue of which all true Believers partake and by their having the Communion of his Body whether when eating the outward Bread so that they eat with true Faith or when they do not eat yet believing for the Communion of his Body is not confined to the outward eating they have the Communion of his Spirit also and enjoy of the manifold Spiritual Blessings of Grace Life and Light sent and conveyed into their Hearts by and through the glorified Man Christ Jesus who hath a Glorified Body and though this Communion of Christ's Body is hard to be expressed or to be demonstrated to Man's reasonable understanding yet by Faith it is certainly felt and witnessed with the blessed Effects of it causing an encrease in Holiness and Divine Knowledge and Experience in all true Believers nor is there any thing in this Mystery or any other Mystery of the Christian Religion that is contradictory to our reasonable understanding But yet a little further to let them see the folly of that Argument from the Scripture Phrase one Baptisme and one Body when Paul saith Eph. 4.4 There is one Body and one Spirit it doth not bear this Sense as if the Church were but one numerical Body or one single Man or as if there were no Body of the Man Christ in Heaven though some of their Teachers have so falsely argued that because the Body of Christ is one therefore Christ has no Body but his Church and as false should their Arguing be there is but one Spirit and that Spirit is the Holy Ghost therefore the Man Christ hath no Soul or Spirit of Man in him and therefore Believers have no Spirits or Souls of Men in them that are Created Rational Spirits both which are most false and foolish consequences also when the Scripture saith there is one Father and one is your Father it would be a very false consequence to infer that therefore we have never had any outward or visible Fathers and as false a consequence it is from one invisible Baptisme of the Spirit to argue against any outward and visible Baptisme or from the outward visible Baptisme being one in its kind to argue against the invisible and inward Baptisme which is one in its kind also this is an Error called by Logicians a Transition from one kind to another as because there is one kind of Animal on Earth called a Dog therefore there was not any thing else so called whereas there is a Fish that hath the same Name as also a Star in Heaven SECT VI. BUT whereas W. Penn in his above mentioned Argument saith first we know and they confess that they were in the beginning used as Figures and Shadows of a more hidden Spiritual Substance Ans In this
is betwixt the Husband and the Wife who are said to be one Flesh This is a great Mystery said Paul but I speak concerning Christ and the Church who according to Paul's Doctrine as they are one Spirit so they are one Flesh And as elsewhere he said we are of his Flesh and of his Bone and forasmuch as the Children were partakers of Flesh and Blood he took part of the same wherefore he is not ashamed to call them Brethren Now in this R.B. was in a great Error that by his thus excluding the Flesh of Christ's outward Body from being any means of the Saints Communion with God he excludes the said Body of Christ from being any necessary part of the Mediator and at this rate of his Arguing only the Divine Light or Seed in Men is the Mediator betwixt God and Men but according to the Doctrine of the Apostle Paul the Mediator of God and Men who is one is the Man Christ Jesus and by the Man Christ Jesus is understood in Scripture not the Spirit only nor the Soul of his Manhood only but the Body also together with the Soul even Jesus Christ made of the Seed of David according to the Flesh And as really as there is a Relative Union betwixt Brethren and near Kindred with respect to their Flesh and Blood on which account it is said Concerning Joseph Gen. 37.27 He is our Brother and our Flesh and 2 Sam. 5.1 The Tribes of Israel said unto David behold we are thy Bone and thy Flesh So believing Gentiles as well as believing Jews may say concerning the Man Christ who is the Seed of the Woman of whom to wit Eve we are all descended we are his Bone and Flesh and because he hath taken Flesh and Blood like unto us therefore in that very respect he is compleatly qualified and fitted to be our Mediator and High Priest with God by whom because of the true Nature of Man consisting of a true reasonable Soul and true and real Body of Man which the Eternal Word is united unto we have Communion with God His fourth and last Argument hath the like Defect with the former That which Feedeth upon it shall never Dye but the Bodies of all Men once Dye Ans Men are said in Scripture to Dye though the Soul Dyeth not yet Men are said to Dye because the Vital Union of the Soul with the Body is Dissolved which being but for a Time and that a very small Time as a Moment in respect of Eternity and after that their Bodies shall be raised up again and Vitally be United to their Souls therefore by the contrary Argument by the Flesh of Christ that the Saints Feed upon must be meant in part his outward Body of Flesh now Glorified which is a Glorious Spiritual Body because the Resurrection of Christ's Body is the Ground of the Saints Hope wrought in them by the Spirit of Christ that their Bodies shall be raised up and shall together with their Souls inherit Eternal Life And to conclude this whole Matter when Christ said it is the Spirit that Quickneth the Flesh profits nothing His meaning is that according to their Carnal and Fleshly Sense it doth not profit as if he had said it would profit you nothing to Eat my Flesh as ye imagin by the Bodily Mouth but to Eat it Spiritually and by Faith this doth profit but to take the Words the Flesh profits nothing in the Sense that some take them is most Blasphemous as to say Christ's outward Body of Flesh profits nothing to our Salvation for this would make his Coming and Death for us in the Flesh to have been in vain and also would render our Faith Vain that he did so come yea so necessary was Christ's coming in the Flesh for our Salvation that it is by his Flesh and Soul Constituting his Manhood that we have his Spirit the Man Christ is that Olive Tree consisting of Soul and Body United Personally to the Godhead of the Eternal Word which giveth us the Oyl of the Holy Spirit and poureth it into our Hearts and as in the Natural Olive Tree it is by its Body that we have of its Oyl or Spirit and when we Eat of its Oyl we are said to Eat of the Tree because the Tree yields us its Oyl even as when we Eat of an Apple or Drink the Fruit of it or of the Vine we may be said to Eat of the Apple-Tree and Vine-Tree the Fruit being what the Tree naturally yields so the Man Christ consisting of Soul and Body is that Precious Olive Tree and Vine-Tree that yields us the Oyl and Wine of the Holy Spirit and pours it into our Hearts who Believe in him and Love him and as Effectual as his Soul and Flesh of his Manhood is now to Believers for their receiving the Spirit by the same since he came in the Flesh no less Effectual it was to Believers before he came in the Flesh even from the beginning of the World according to B. Jewel's Words he was not come in the Flesh yet they Eat his Flesh to wit by Faith he had not Shed his Blood yet they Drank his Blood viz. by Faith and both his Flesh and his Blood before it had any visible Being or Existence together with his Soul was Effectual to Believers in all Ages for their Reception of the Spirit and all Spiritual Blessings of Justification and Sanctification c. as well before he came in the Flesh as since And thus he was the Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World whose Death was of the same Efficacy from the beginning and will be to the end of the World to all that believe in him And as God is the giver of the Spirit and of all the Graces of the Spirit so he giveth it to Believers by and through Christ even the Man Christ who is both the Procurer and Dispenser of all that Grace that God giveth unto them and though Men most properly Eat the Meat and Drink the Drink that is bought with Money yet in ordinary Speech by a common Metonymy they are said to Eat and Drink the Money that buyeth it as the Poor Widows two Mites were called her Living so after some sort though the inward Life and Spirit of Christ be the most immediate Food of the Souls of Believers Yet because the Flesh of Christ as it was broken for us and his Blood as it was Shed for us is the Price and Purchase Money which hath procured to us the inward Life and Spirit of Christ with the various Graces and Gifts thereof therefore we are said to Eat his Flesh and Drink his Blood by the Like Metonymy But there is much more in this Great Mystery than can be demonstrated by these Similitudes and Examples or any others of the like Nature SECT IV. P. 77. R.B. chargeth it as another Error which he calleth a General Error wherein he saith they all agree viz. both Papists and
under the Gospel That of Christ's washing the Disciples Feet which he insisteth on for several Pages is fully Answered to in the first Part. As also that of Anointing the Sick with Oyl so that no more needs be said to it here As for these Objections that he raiseth about the Time of the natural Day when this Institution should be practised as why not at Night and what sort of Bread whether Leavened or Unleavened and whether other Drink may not be used as well as Wine which he calls Difficulties out of which it is impossible he saith p. 101. to extricate themselves but by laying it aside another of which Difficulties is to understand as he alledgeth that these Words Take Bless and Break the Bread and give it to others are to the Clergy meaning the Pastors but to the Laity only meaning the People Take Eat c. Ans I do not find that he proveth in the least any such Difficulties they may be all easily extricated much more than in many other Cases where far greater Difficulties occur But this is too Rash and Preposterous because of some seeming Difficulties therefore to lay aside a Divine Institution or to conclude it is no such thing This is to cut the Knot instead of loosing it and to Kill instead of Curing At this rate because in Paul's Epistles and in many other places of Scripture there are things hard to be understood and resolved therefore all such places of Scripture are to be rejected Who doth not see the Impertinency of such Consequences And the like may be said in Answer to his Objection from the great Contentions that have hapned betwixt Papists and Protestants about the Supper and betwixt the Protestants one with another and the much Blood that hath been shed occasioned by these Controversies All which say nothing against the Institution it self more than against Christ and his Gospel about which more Blood has been spilt than about that He should have better considered the distinction betwixt a causa per se and causa per accidens and the use of a thing and the abuse of it SECT VI. PAge 104. For would they take it as it lies it would import no more than that Jesus Christ at that time did thereby signifie unto them that his Body and Blood was to be offered for them and desired them that whensoever they did eat or drink they might do it in remembrance of him or with a regard to him whose Blood was shed for them Ans If this Supposition be true as he would have it that whensoever they did eat or drink they were to do it in remembrance of him then why hath he pleaded so much for the ceasing of it Surely if they were to do it whensoever they did Eat or Drink they were to do it to the end of the World because as long as the World continues Eating and Drinking will continue But we do not find that our Saviour's Words import any such Sense he doth not say whensoever ye eat or drink c. But as oft as ye eat this bread and drink this cup where the Word this Imports it to be another Eating than their common Eating and the like is Imported by these Words let a man examine himself and so let him eat c. whoso eateth this bread unworthily c. 1 Cor. 11.28 27. But to this Sense that he hath given I find a Passage a little after p 111. that as I judge is a plain Contradiction to the former He saith there the Apostles Words For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye do shew the Lords death till he come Imports no more a command than to say As oft as thou goest to Rome see the Capitol will infer a Command to me to go thither Now if they were to obey this Institution whensoever they did Eat or Drink then surely they were to do it very often and that by a Command which plainly contradicts this last Assertion of his butth Words As seen as thou goest to Rome see the Capitol implie neither a Command nor any frequent Practice of going therefore this Example is very improper and impertinent in this respect as well as in others Page 110 111. As to that passage 1 Cor. 11. from 23. to 27. He saith There is no Command in this place but only an account of matter of Fact He saith not I received of the Lord that as he took Bread so I should Command it to you to do so also there is nothing like this in the place Ans Be it so that there was no new Command given in the Case either to Paul or by him to the Corinthians It sufficed to Paul to give an account of the matter of Fact as it was delivered to him from the Lord by Divine Revelation as he plainly affirmed That saith he which I received of the Lord that also I delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed c. Now as all Divine Revelations are for some great end we may safely argue that since what the Lord did that night was Revealed to him by the Lord it was not an indifferent thing either to be Believed or Practised since it had a Command in it This do in remembrance of me Here was a positive Command that Christ gave unto his Apostles alledged both by Paul 1 Cor. 11.24 And also by Luke 22.19 There was no need of renewing the same Commandments as the Law of the Ten Commandments once given at Mount Zinai did oblige the twelve Tribes of Israel without any other giving them though what was then given them was oft taught them both by Moses and the succeeeding Prophets so what Christ the great Law-giver under the New Testament gave forth to be his Command wherever that Command is made known to any People Nation or Country it ought to be obeyed without the requiring or expecting any new Sanction And to shew a little further how improper his Example of one saying As often as thou goest to Rome See the Capitol is to the present Case If one that has the Command of another should first say go to Rome and then add As often as thou goest to Rome go to the Capitol this would imply a Command Now Christ said first to his Disciples This do in remembrance of me as both Luke and Paul testifie and then Paul adds further v. 25. As oft as ye drink it this do in remembrance of me and v. 26. for as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye do shew the Lord's death till he come the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated ye shew may be translated ye declare or ye preach for so is the same word translated Acts 15.26 Acts 13.38 Acts 17.13 which signifieth some Publick way of shewing it forth in Religious Meetings that proveth it was not Mens private Eatings which may oft happen when they are alone and for this and the
like Reasons some of the Antients and particularly Augustin called it Verbum visibile the visible Word which when joyned with the Word that is founded in Mens Ears has a double force upon the Minds of devout Believers To which doth well agree that saying of Chrysostome in his Homilies on Matthew cited in the Title Page If thou hadst been without a Body God had given thee naked and incorporeal Gifts but because the Soul is planted in a Body he giveth thee Intelligible things in Sensible things And it was well observed by the Antients that all obsignatory Signs have some words of God or Christ added unto them to make them effectual according to which Augustin said Accedat verbum ad rem fit Sacramentum i.e. let the word be added to the sign and it becomes a Sacrament and therefore we find in Eph. 5.26 the washing of Water joyned with the Word That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word I know some will have the Water here to be meant the inward Water and the Word to be inward also but such a Sense would be not only strained but unintelligible as to say with the washing of the Word by the Word for they make the inward Water and Word to be the same thing here but the Apostle distinguisheth them as two things both which have the Efficacy by the inward working of the Holy Spirit Titus 3.5 Page 111. He undertakes the Answering of the Argument for the Institution of the Supper and its continuance until Christ come at the end of the World from those Words Ye shew forth the Lord's death till he come To this he p. 112. Answers They take two of the chief parts of the Controversie here for granted without proof First that as often imports a Command the contrary whereof is shewn neither will they ever be able to prove it 2ly That this coming is understood of Christ's last Outward coming and not of his Inward and Spiritual that remains to be proved whereas the Apostle might well understand it of his Inward coming and appearance And a little after he saith Now those weak and carnal Corinthians might be permitted the use of this to shew forth or remember Christ's Death till he come to arise in them For though such need those Outward things to put them in mind of Christ's Death yet such as are dead with Christ and not only dead with Christ but burried and so risen with him need not such Signs to remember him Ans That as often together with the foregoing words import a Command I have already proved and it was rashly said in him that he had shewn the contrary and that they will never be able to prove it And whereas some argue had it been a Command some certain times would have been mentioned how oft in a Week Month or Year it should have been Practised To this it is Answered that it followeth not more than to argue that because it is not mentioned how often in a Week Month or Year Publick Prayer is to be used that therefore they are not Institutions of Christ for as Publick Preaching and Prayer is to be used as frequently as can stand with the Ability and Conditions of both Preachers and Hearers so this Practice as frequently is to be used which as the time of those is to be left to the Discretion of the Persons as God shall inwardly Guide them and outwardly afford them the Convenience so is the Time of this to be left to the like Discretion Guidance and Convenience which as it seemed to be the Practice of the Church in the Days of the Apostles each Lord's-day being the first Day of the Week so it is clear from Justin Martyr and other ancient Writers that it was the constant Practice of the Christians Solemnly to Celebrate the same every Lord's-day besides what other times they might have done it As to the second which he calls together with the other the chief thing in Controversie it is indeed so even the chief thing and therefore if this be effectually proved against them that those Words until he come again are understood of Christ's last outward coming the Cause is gained But first let us examine what Proof he brings that they are not to be understood of Christ's last outward coming First he saith the Apostle might well understand it of his inward coming and appearance but what Proof doth he give of this None at all but his simple Affirmation Secondly He saith these Weak and Carnal Corinthians might be permitted the use of this to shew forth or remember Christ's Death till he should arise in them But what Proof gives he of this that this was or might be a Permission for no such Permission is any where expressed in the Scriptures the things that simply were permitted as Circumcision were used but by a few and not long Paul severely opposed them after some time but so he never did either Water-Baptism or the Supper Thirdly That he said though such need thâ—se outward things to put them in mind of Christ 's Death why then seeing there are now in all Churches and Christian Societies some that are as weak as those Corinthians were do not they allow the use of them to such as need them Fourthly That he saith such as are Dead and Buried with Christ and Risen again with him need not such things to remember him Answer Here as elsewhere his Argument is faulty by arguing that because such things are not absolutely necessary therefore they are not useful or necessary in any respect Besides as I have above shewn his Argument has the same force against the use of the Holy Scriptures and all Books all Preaching of the best Men and all External Parts of Worship viz. They that are Dead and Buried with Christ and Risen with him need none of these outward things But the best Men and such are the most humble will and cannot but acknowledge that all outward Helps and Means that God hath afforded them are very useful to them and help to stir up the pure Mind in them Nor are any so Risen with Christ as the Raised Saints shall be at the Resurrection therefore till then they may be helped with outward Means of God's appointing It is very Unwisely as well as Irreverently Argued we need not those things therefore they are not commanded The contrary is the better Argument they are commanded therefore they are needful at least in some respect God better knoweth what we need than we do our selves and therefore in his great Love and Wisdom hath provided outward Helps for us as well as inward But seeing they will needs understand the Words until he come not to mean Christ's last outward coming but his inward then with the same Pretext they may as well understand his Death of an inward Death of Christ in them and the shewing his Death of an inward shewing and then all Remembrance of
their being Members of the Jewish Church and their Eating of the Passover and of the Sacrifices such as were allowed to them to Eat was a Sign of their being still owned as such and if any by their offensiveness and disobedience did occasion the Church to debarr them from the external Privileges of that Church when upon their Repentance and Reconciliation they were again received they needed no second Circumcision so nor do professed Christians having committed any thing that occasion their casting out being again received by Repentance need a second Baptism Now if Baptism had been the alone obsignating token of the Covenant and Badge of Christian Communion how should Persons be received into Communion without a new Baptism but to have a new Baptism is as improper as for a Woman after some just offence against her Husband that he has put her from him if upon her Repentance he receive her again to need a second Marriage with the same Husband but tho' she need no second Marriage yet that her Husband give her some token and pledge of his Favour and Acceptance is very suitable And now seeing these external Practices have so many necessary uses in the Church so that the Church cannot in all respects be duly constituted and have all things in order without them it is evident that as long as the Church was to continue on Earth in its due Constitution so long should these external Practices remain and seeing Christ enjoyned this of breaking Bread to remain to his coming it is evident that it is his last outward coming The Fifth Reason is that Christ's Inward coming was then in and among the Disciples when he did Institute these Outward Practices The Church was never without the Inward Presence of Christ and of God and of the Holy Spirit It is true that Christ promised his Inward Presence to be with them and in them but this was not so to be understood as if the Faithful had him not present formerly in all Ages as well before as after his Outward coming for without the Inward Presence of God and Christ and the Holy Spirit there can be no true Faith nor Holiness We find that the Faithful are called Saints as well in the Old Testament as in the New and therefore they had as true Inward enjoyments of God then as since the difference at most is but in degree betwixt the Divine Enjoyments of the Faithful before Christ came in the Flesh and since as to the general And if it be said that though Christ was Inwardly come to some yet not to all in the Apostles times so as to Answer to the full extent of the fulfilling of the Promise of his Inward coming It may be answered nor is he so come now for as Christ said the Poor ye have always with you so until the end of the World there will be in the Church Babes and little Children as well as young Men and Fathers and therefore on the account of such by R. B.'s Confession that are weak as some of the Corinthians were that needed those Outward things to put them in Remembrance of Christ's Death they are still to be continued even to Christ's last Outward coming but there are too many among the Quakers that think there is no need to Remember Christ's Death as he dyed at Jerusalem abusing and perverting Paul's words henceforth we know Christ no more after the flesh and so there is no need or use of Remembring Christ's Death that they say is but History but Christ within is the Mystery whereas Christ within is not the whole Mystery but in part and the lesser part too the whole Mystery of Christ is Christ both Outwardly come in the Flesh and Inwardly come by his Spirit into the Hearts of the Faithful The Sixth Reason is that to understand by the coming of Christ in these words untill he come 1 Cor. 11. His Inward coming and not his coming Without us at the day of Judgment by the same pretext and method of Interpretation All the other Scriptures every where that mention his coming throughout the whole Bible and especially throughout the New Testament shall be understood only of his Inward coming And thus we shall have not one proof left us in all the Bible to prove that there is any other coming of Christ to be expected than his Inward coming in Mens Hearts And accordingly indeed we find that too many of the Quakers have by this manner of perverting this place of Scripture been led to understand all these other places of Scripture in the New Testament that mention his coming since he came in the Flesh to be only understood of his Inward coming in Mens Hearts and on this account have denyed any other coming of Christ to be expected but only his Inward coming being persuaded into this False and Antichristian Belief by some of their great Teachers witness what William Baily a great Teacher among them hath plainly declared in this matter p. 306. of the Collection published by the 2d days Meeting of the People called Quakers at Grace-Church-street I never read in all the Scripture saith he as I can remember of a 3 d. coming of Christ personally in his own single person or of a personal Reign besides what shall be in his Saints But I have read of his coming the 2 d. time without Sin unto Salvation c. which the Apostles in their days did witness Witness also Rich. Hubberthorn another great Teacher in his Collection published after his death also by the 2d days Meeting p. 56. in answer to his Opponent How many Souls hast thou led into that Pit of Darkness and Blindness as to believe that Christ is yet to come in Person Now the Scripture which thou bringest proves no such thing Matth. 24.27 And a 3d. witness is G. Whitehead in his Nature of Christianity against R. Gordon who p. 29. saith Dost thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear Outwardly in a bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words p. 30. If thou dost thou may'st look until thy Eyes drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance of him And p. 41. Where doth the Scripture say he is Outwardly and Bodily Glorified at God's right Hand Do these words express the Glory he had with the Father before the World began in which he is now Glorified This and the two foregoing Quotations are to be found more large in my Two Narratives of the Proceedings at Turners-Hall all which sufficiently prove that they believed no Outward coming of Christ as a thing to come therefore it is no wonder that they meant only Christ's coming Inwardly into Mens Hearts by these words ye shew forth the Lord's death until he come for from the same Unbelief they have construed all the other places that mention Christ's coming after his Resurrection of his Inward coming and all this in prejudice of his Outward coming which these Men did not believe which
of Recommendation concerning him they both sent with him to Friends in Ireland contained in the said Manuscript unto you all saith Edward Burrough I do him recommend as a faithful Labourer to be received by you in the Name of him that sends him in tender pity for you all and the Blessing of the Lord upon his Faithfulness I doubt not c. Dated London 19. 3d. mo 1656. And saith Fr. Howgil receive Humphry Norton in the Lord whom the Lord hath moved to come unto you who is a Brother and Faithful in the Lord's Work and be Subject unto him in the Lord all unto him for I much desired that he might come unto you and so the Lord hath ordered it and as you receive him you receive me F. Howgil This Man Humphry Norton after his Arrival in Ireland in the year 1656 writ and spread about several Papers among the People call'd Baptists and others of which I have seen divers contained in a Manuscript all Writ by one Hand and having his Name to them His Argument against Baptism is in the following Words Q. 15. And now ye Baptists seeing that Christ is come and hath Baptized us and all Men come unto him tell me whether there be any Baptism but one seeing the Apostle saith one Lord one Faith one Baptism Eph. 4.5 6. And whether Baptism be not a Doctrin yea or nay If you say an Ordinance whether it be not Abolished yea or nay seeing the Scripture saith having abolished in his Flesh the Enmity even the Law of Commandments contained in Ordinances for to make in himself of Twain one new Man so making Peace Eph. 2.15 Ans That concerning one Baptism is fully Answered above To the latter concerning Ordinances the Word in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not properly Translated Ordinances but rather Opinions or Persuasions But let it be Translated Ordinances how doth this prove that therefore Water-Baptism is Abolished unless the Argument be built upon this Supposition that all Ordinances are Abolished and consequently Baptism with Water and at the same rate Preaching and Prayer must be Abolished which are no less Ordinances And in the same Parcel of Queries the fifth Querie is now Answer in plain Words From whence must this Christ ye wait for come and in what Generation and of what Family and out of what Country and of whom must he be Born that they may no longer be deceived by you who have kept them gazing after a false Christ well may it be called Gazing but leave it and mind these in white Apparel which Reproves you for it Acts 1.10 11. This Humphry Norton after some Years went into New England and after his Return Prints a Book at London which I find Quoted in another Printed Book having the like or the same Queries for Substance the Words are these Is not Christ God and is not God a Spirit you look for a Christ without you from what Coast or Country shall he come What Country-man is he You stand Gazing up in the Clouds after a Man but we stand by in White chiding of you Reader are not these dreadful Words enough to make all Christian Ears to tingle it is no wonder that they have so generally Construed these Words ye shew forth his Death until he come to be only his inward coming when the chiefest Teachers among them had no Faith of his outward coming to Judge the World And it is but too likely that E. Burrough and F. Howgil were as great Unbelievers as he in that great Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion and if they were not they were miserably deceived and did miserably deceive themselves by their supposed Gift of Discerning to give such high Recommendations and Praises of a Man that deserved not to be numbred among the lowest Rank of Christians who hath dared thus openly like one of the Heathen Opposers to Scoff at our Blessed Lord's coming without us to Judgment but never any Christian gave him occasion for such a Scoffing manner of Questioning it being universally believed by all Christians that our Lord will come from Heaven in the same Body wherein he Ascended and is not to be Born again of a Woman Again In another Paper that hath his Name to it there are these Words and whereas he Accused us for denying Christ's Merits I say that which can be Merited is of Self and that which is of Christ is freely given But such a word is not in Scripture as Christ's Merits but is fetch'd from the Whore a at Rome by them Behold the Man whom E. Burrough's called a Faithful Labourer and F. Howgil called a Brother Faithful in the Lord's Work to whom he would have all the Quakers in Ireland to be Subject How can they who follow such blind Guides but fall into the Ditch with them Is there any greater or so great Blindness to be found in the Blindest and most Ignorant of the Papists In a Book of mine called Truth 's Defence p. 140. I find an other Argument I have used against the Supper the Effect of which is contained in these following Words What Christ did at that time and bid his Disciples do until he come is no Gospel Ordinance because it was done in the Night or Evening of the old Covenant Dispensation and consequently was to come to an end with it Ans. I freely acknowledge this Argument is Weak and Unsound and the way to Answer it is by denying the Consequence to be True and Just for mostly what Christ Taught was in the Evening or latter part of the old Covenant but it doth not therefore follow that it was to end with it As also where I have said in my Book called Presbyterian and Independent Churches c. P. 185. That which ye now use is neither Substantial Dinner nor Supper being only a Crumb of Bread c. I acknowledge was unadvisedly said and as weakly Argued for the end of that outward Institution was not any outward Substantial Dinner or Supper as neither was that of the Paschal Lamb. And also where p. 184. of the same I have argued that the use of the outward Signs of Baptism and the Supper did suit most with the Ages and State of Children for they suit well enough with the most grown Christians while remaining in the Mortal Body SECT XII AND thus I have Answered to all the Arguments brought against the outward Baptism and the Supper by their several Writers and chief Teachers that I have found in their Books not omitting any to my best Remembrance of any Note where though I have brought in G. Fox among the last because I had not found the particular Book where his Arguments were until I had finished my Answer to the other four preceeding yet he was the first among the Quakers that led them as into divers other great Errors so into this of rejecting the outward Baptism and the Supper grounding all upon a pretended Divine Inspiration and as
that Christ was to offer up himself in no other Body but that which was without all Sin 7. Why was it Prophecied of Christ a Body hast thou prepared me why not Bodies many if he offer up himself in the Bodies of all the Saints 8. Is not this to make the Sacrifice of Christ of less Value and Efficacie in his own Body than his Sacrifice in W. Penn's Body because the Sacrifice of Christ in that Body that was offered at Jerusalem was the Type this in W. Penn's Body the Anti-type That the History This the Mystery 9. Doth not this strengthen the Papists in their false Faith that Christ is daily offered in the Mass an unbloody Sacrifice I desire that W. Penn and G. Whitehead will give a positive Answer to these Queries and shew wherein my Arguments against their Notion of Christ's being offered a Sacrifice in Men are not so strong against them as W. Penn's Arguments are against the Papist's Notion that Christ is offered up daily in the Mass I. Note Reader Whereas my Adversaries Tho. Elwood and J. Pennington in their Books against me have brought several Quotations out of some of my former Books particularly The Way cast up p. 99. and The Way to the City of God p. 125. on purpose to prove that I was of the same Mind and Persuasion with W. Penn and George Whitehead concerning Christ being a real Sacrifice for Sin in Men to Appease the Wrath and Justice of God and his being the Seed of the Woman in them having Flesh and Blood c. to be understood without any Metaphor or Allegory or other Figurative Speech is what I altogether deny can be inferred from my Words for as I have shewed in my Book of Immed Revel p. 14.15 16. which John Pennington hath perversly applyed in his Book called The Figg-Leaf Covering p. 5.4 The Spiritual Discerning of the Saints in Scripture is held forth under the Names of all the five Senses In like manner the things of God themselves are held forth in Scripture under the Names of sensible things and which are most Taking Pleasant and Refreshing unto the Senses as Light Fire Water Oyl Wine Oyntment Honey Marrow and Fatness Bread Manna and many other such like Names which I expresly grant are Metaphors yet that hinders not said I but that the Spiritual Mysteries Represented under them and signified by them are real and substantial things to wit God's Power and Virtue Spirit Light and Life and the wondrous sweet and precious Workings and Influences thereof which I expresly mention p. 14. and indeed these outward things are but Figures of the Inward and Spiritual which as far exceed and transcend them in Life Glory Beauty and Excellency as a living Body doth the Shadow Now all this I still firmly hold and believe as much as formerly when I Writ those Words for indeed because we have not proper Words whereby to signifie Spiritual and Divine Enjoyments and Refreshments in the Souls of the Faithful therefore Words are borrowed and transferred from their common Signification to a Metaphorical and Allegorical whereby to signifie the Spiritual Enjoyments and Refreshments of the Saints from what they Witness and Experience of the Power Vertue Light Life and Love of God and Christ in them So that I still say the outward Light of Sun Moon Star or Candle is but a Shadow or Figure campared with the Divine Light of God and Christ within the outward Bread Wine Flesh though ever so excellent that the outward Man tasts of is but a Figure and Shadow being compared with that inward Bread of Life inward Wine and Flesh Oyl and Honey that is inwardly tasted and received by the inward Man But behold the wretched perversion that my Prejudiced Adversary John Pennington puts upon my sound Words and the wretched Conclusion that he draws from thence as if therefore I did hold then that the outward Death of Christ was but a Shadow or Sign of the inward Death of Christ in Men and his outward Sacrifice and Blood outwardly Shed was but a Figure and Shadow of his being a Sacrifice within Men and his Blood inwardly Shed which as it hath no Shadow of Consequence from any Words so it never came into my Thoughts so to imagine for in that place of my Book of Immed Rev. above quoted by him I did not compare Christ's Death without and his Death within or his Blood without to his Blood within making That the Shadow and Figure and This the Substance as they do But I was comparing the outward Meats and Drinks as Bread Flesh Wine Marrow and Fatness with the Divine Enjoyments of the Saints which borrow the Names of these outward things and whereof they are but Figures and Shadows II. And when I said in some of my former Books that Christ was the Seed of the Woman that bruised the Serpents Head in the Faithful in all Ages I did not mean that Christ as he was born of the Virgin Mary was a Figure or Allegory of Christ's Birth or Formation in the Saints But on the contrary Christ inwardly Formed is the Allegory and Metaphor yet so that Christ inwardly enjoyed in the Saints is a real Divine Substantial Enjoyment and Participation of Christ his Life Grace and Virtue in measure which they receive out of the Fulness of the Glorified Man Christ Jesus in Heaven for though to Call Christ inwardly the Seed Born or Crucified is Metaphorical yet the inward Life of Christ is Real and Substantial that the Saints Enjoy and being a Measure out of the Fulness that is in the Glorified Man Christ Jesus in Heaven it is of the same Nature therewith and it is one and the same Mediatory Spirit and Life of Christ in him the Head dwelling in Fulness and in them in Measure as Paul said to every one of us is Grace given according to the Measure of the Gift of Christ And whereas he quotes me in his 55th p. saying This is the promised Seed which God promised to our Parents after the Fall and actually gave unto them even the Seed of the Woman that should bruise the Head of the Serpent But doth this prove that Christ being inwardly Formed in the Saints was more properly and without all Allegory Metaphor or Synecdoche the Seed of the Woman than as he was Born of the Virgin I say nay though he would strain my Words to this to bring me into the same Ditch with him and his Brethren who make Christ without the Type and History and Christ within the Substance and Mystery That the promised Seed was actually given to Believers immediately after the Fall hath this plain Orthodox Sense That the Power of Christ's Godhead or the Eternal Word that was in the beginning and which was in the Fulness of Time to take Flesh and Blood like unto the Children did actually break the Power of Sin and Satan in the Faithful and this Power was the real Power of the Seed of
deny And yet with the same Breath as it were he denyeth it for if the Man Christ is to be Prayed unto being the Spring out of which all the living Streams flow unto our Souls surely as such he is the Object of our Faith for how can we Pray to an Object in whom we believe not But seeing he will not allow me that I then owned the Man Christ without us to be the Object of Faith wherein he is most unjust unto me and that I Writ then as a Quaker and my Doctrin was the Quakers Doctrin It is evident that according to him it was not the Quakers Doctrin that the Man Christ without us is in any Part or Respect the Object of our Faith why then doth he and many others Accuse me that I Bely them for saying they hold it not necessary to our Salvation that we believe in the Man Christ without us And it is either great Ignorance or Insincerity in him to say that none of them deny that the Man Christ without us in Heaven is to be Prayed unto Seeing a Quaker of great Note among them William Shewen hath Printed it in his Book of Thoughts p. 37. Not to Jesus the Son of Abraham David and Mary Saint or Angel but to God the Father all Worship Honour and Glory is to be given through Jesus Christ c. This c. cannot be Jesus the Son of Abraham but some other Jesus as suppose the Light within otherwise there would be a Contradiction in his Words so here he Asserts two Jesus's with a witness what saith J. Pennington to this Page 41. In Opposition to my Christian Assertion that the believing Jews before Christ came in the Flesh did believe in Christ as he was to be Born Suffer Death Rise and Ascend and so the Man Christ even before he was Conceived Born c. was the Object of their Faith He thus most Ignorantly and Erroneously Argueth Could that be the Object of theirs viz. The believing Gentiles or of the Jews Faith which our Lord had not yet received of the Virgin which was not Conceived nor Born much less Ascended Ans Yes That can be an Object of Faith and Hope which has not a present Existence but is quid ' futurum something to come though nothing can be an Object of our Bodily Sight or other Bodily Senses but what is in Being and hath a real Existence in the present Time But so Stupid and Gross is he that he cannot understand this that the Faith of the Saints could have a future Object in any Part or Respect this is to make Faith as low and weak a thing as Bodily Sense Is it not generally acknowledged through all Christendom that the Saints of old as Abraham Moses David believed in Christ the Promised Seed as he was to come and be Born and Suffer Death for the Sins of the World according to our Saviours Words Abraham saw my Day and was glad which is generally understood by Expositors that as he saw Christ inwardly in Spirit so he saw that he was to come ' outwardly and be his Son according to the Flesh and by what Eye did he see this but by the Eye of Faith And that Eye of Faith had Christ to come in the Flesh to be Born c. for its Object as a thing to come And in the same Page 41. He Quoteth me falsly saying Immed Rev. p. 132. agreeing with both Papists and Protestants That God speaking in Men is the Formal Object of Faith This Quotation is False in Matter of Fact as well as his Inference from it is False and Ignorant I said in that p. 132. That both Papists and Protestants agree in this That the Formal Object of Faith is God speaking but quoth the Papist it is the Speaking in the Church of Rome no quoth the Protestant God Speaking in the Scriptures is the Formal Object of Faith Here I plainly shew the difference of Papists and Protestants about the Formal Object of Faith though they agree in one Part that it is God Speaking yet in the other Part they differ the Papists making it God Speaking in the Church that is not in every Believer but in the Pope and his Counsel And there in that and some following Pages I Plead for Internal Revelation of the Spirit not only Subjectively but Objectively Working in the Souls of Believers to which Testimony I still Adhere But what then Doth this prove that Christ without us is no Object of our Faith Will he meddle with School Terms and yet understand them no more than a Fool Doth neither he nor his quondam Tutor T. Ellwood understand that the res credendae i. e. The things to be believed are Ingredients in the Material Object of Faith as not only that Christ came in the Flesh was Born of a Virgin but all the Doctrins and Doctrinal Propositions set forth in Scripture concerning God and Christ and all the Articles of Faith are the Material Object of our Faith but the Formal Object of Faith is the inward Testimony of the Spirit moving our Understandings and Hearts to believe and close with the Truth of them All which are well consistent and owned by me Page 43. He Rejects my Exposition of the Parable concerning the lost piece of Money in my late Retractation of my former Mistake p. 15. Sect. 1. p. 10. That by the lost piece of Money is to be understood the Souls of Men as by the lost Sheep and the lost Prodigal To this he most Ignorantly and Falsly opposeth by saying First The Lord can find the Soul without lighting a Candle in it I Answer By finding here is meant Converting the Soul thus the Father of the Prodigal found him when he Converted him to himself this my Son was lost and is found i. e. was departed from God but now is Converted Luke 15.32 And ver 6. I have found the Sheep that was lost Now can this be wrought or doth God Work this Work of Conversion in a lost Soul without his Lighting a Candle in it Secondly He saith the very design of the Parable was to set forth not what God had lost but what Man had lost the Candle being used by Man who needed it not by God and Christ who needed it not How Ignorantly and Stupidly doth he here Argue How can Man use the Candle unless God light it in his Heart and doth not God use it in order to bring or Convert Man to himself It 's true though there were no Candle lighted in Man's Heart God seeth where the Soul is even when it is involved in the greatest Darkness but in order to the Souls Conversion which is principally God's Act it is God that lights the Candle in it and causes his Light to Shine in it And whereas I have said they who Expound the lost Piece of Money to be the Light within will find difficulty to shew what the nine Pieces are which are not lost His Answer to
Ignorantly thinks he hath caught me in a Contradiction about owning a Condition in one Sense in Reference to God's Willing all Men to be saved ex parte Objecti and denying a Conditional Election But this is no Contradiction at all because the Will of God is Conditional Objectively or ex parte Objecti i. e. Men that are the Object of God's Will and yet not Conditional Subjectively i. e. on God's Part if he understand not this Distinction I ought not to suffer for his Ignorance he should not meddle with School-Terms except he understand them the distinction of Volition Conditional Objectively and not Conditional Subjectively and yet the same Will is common and ordinary in all Authors that Treat on such Subjects Page 69. He is Guilty of great Injury against me in Matter of Fact by an Unfaithful Reciting of my Words and thence taking occasion against me In all places in the New Testament where the Word Gospel is used it signifieth the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah that was outwardly to come and did come in the true Nature of Man c. He quite leaves out my Words and did come in the true Nature of Man that were necessary to perfect the Sentence and if he had brought them would have taken away his occasion of his Quarelling with me so Unjustly he saith here he is out again for the New Testament being Written not when Christ was outwardly come but after he was outwardly come the Word Gospel there when it signifieth the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah must needs respect him as already come not as to come Ans Where the New Testament saith the Gospel was Preached to Abraham and to the Children of Israel in the Wilderness Gospel there signified the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah that was then to come and not already come but at other times it signifieth the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ already come as my Words Cautioned it therefore he is Guilty of Abuse and Forgery like his quondam Master Tho. Elwood as elsewhere Page 70. He most â—mpertinently opposeth my sound Assertion by Quoting Paul mentioning another Gospel as 2 Cor. 11.4 and Gal. 1.6 8 9. For by Gospel I understand the true Gospel of Christ and not a false Gospel as when I say every Man is a Rational Creature and J. Pennington should Object a Man Pictured on a Board or Wall is not a Rational Creature Is not this a rare Disputant But his following Opposition is the most observable and is a new effectual Proof of my Charge against him and his Brethren of the 2d Days Meeting who have approved his Book he saith by way of Opposition Also when the Everlasting Gospel was again to be Preached after the Apostacie for it seems by the word again it had been discontinued to be Preached although the History of Christ's Birth Death had not doth that place Rev. 14.6 7. mention any thing of the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah There is not a word of that said there but saying with a loud voice fear God and give Glory to him c. Being Preached with Commission from on high is called Preaching the everlasting Gospel Did G. K. saith he in his diligent search overlook this if not how could he say in all places in the New Testament where the word Gospel is used it signifieth the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah he adds to this two other places as Rom. 1.16 and Colos 1.23 in both which he will not have the Gospel to signifie the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified with respect to that clear and bright Dispensation the Apostles were under which was the Sense I gave of the Gospel in Col. 1.23 And he saith in Rom. 1.16 That the Gospel cannot be said to be the Power of God unto Salvation to the Believer in any other Sense than as it is a Powerful Energetical inward Principle for as it is barely Historical the Ungodly have that Belief though they want the Power This I say effectually proves again my Charge against them That they hold it not necessary for us to believe that Christ Dyed and Rose again for our Salvation why the Gospel that Paul Preached Rom. 1.16 and Col. 1.23 Is not the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified the promised Messiah and when the everlasting Gospel was to be Preached Rev. 14.6 7. Which the Quakers think they have given them to Preach with Commission from on High the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified was not that Gospel the Consequence is plain that therefore the Faith of Chrâ—st Crucified is not necessary to their Hearers for Salvation It is not the Everlasting Gospel that is given them to Preach If they Preach it they go beyond their Commission they do a needless Work But saith J. P. Fear God and give Glory to him is called Preaching the Everlasting Gospel But is not that also a Doctrin yes surely so then the Doctrin Fear God c. being Preached is a Preaching the Everlasting Gospel but the Doctrin believe that Christ Died for our Sins and Rose again being Preached is not Preaching the Everlasting Gospel according to John Pennington and his Brethren of the Second Days Meeting This Sufficiently sheweth that those Quakers are semper idem always the same they are the same still as formerly though many that hear them of late say their Way of Preaching is changed they had wont formerly before the Difference arose betwixt them and G. K. to Preach only the Light within and Obedience to it but now they Preach the Man Christ and his Death and Sufferings without and how beneficial they were to Mankind and that the Faith of it is Beneficial Yet by J. P. his Affirmation approved by the Second Days Meeting of the Friends of the Ministry in and about London whereof G. W. and W. Penn are Members and where frequently they are present The Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified is none of the Everlasting Gospel that is given them to Preach but fear God and give Glory to him c. But how comes it that believe in the Light within obey the Light within and that shall suffice to your Salvation is not mentioned in the Angels Commission to Preach the Everlasting Gospel no more than believe in Christ Crucified without you Perhaps J. P. will reply though not mentioned or expressed yet it is implyed and understood But how prove they it is implyed that believing in the Light within alone and obeying it is sufficient to Salvation without Faith in Christ Crucified Is not the Blindness of these Men for all they talk of Light within exceeding Great and the Darkness that 's over them like the Darkness of Egypt that might have been felt John Rev. 14.6 7. did not say the Angel had nothing else to Preach but fear God and give Glory to him that Doctrin being a general Doctrin common both to Law and Gospel and both to true
Gentile Religion as well as true Christian Religion The Apostacie having been so great that many called Christians were Degenerated below the Heathens and their Religion scarce so good as that of some Heathens that did fear God and Worship him only the Angel might Preach that general Doctrin as being very proper and necessary to call Apostate and Degenerate Professors of Christianity from their Idolatry and Profanity as a necessary Introduction to the Everlasting Gospel as well as in one Sense it is a necessary part of it but not the whole Doctrin of the Gospel for Faith and Love are as necessary Doctrins of the Gospel as Fear though neither of them are expresly mentioned yet implyed together with all the other Christian Virtues But J. P. in his Words above Cited will have it That the Gospel cannot be said to be the Power of God unto Salvation to the Believer in any other Sense than as it is a Powerful energetical inward Principle for as it is barely Historical the Ungodly have that Belief I Answer How Foolishly doth he here Argue and Impertinently whoever said that the bare Historical Relation or Report of Christ Crucified is the Power of God unto Salvation Or if any have said it is the Gospel I am sure I never said nor thought it But what hath J. P. against this Sense of the Gospel Rom. 1.16 That it is the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah accompanied with the Spirit of God and Christ inwardly Revealed making it effectually to be Believed and Obeyed in all that shall be Saved by it and thus the Gospel that Paul and the other Apostles Preached is not a bare Form of Doctrin without the Spirit and Power nor the Spirit and Power without the Doctrin And how Non-sensical is he to Argue that as it is barely Historical the Ungodly have that Belief But they have not the Saving Belief of the Doctrin of Christ Crucified for that only is wrought in the Godly by the Power and Spirit of Christ And though the Ungodly may have the Gospel Preached unto them yet while they remain Ungodly they receive it not neither do they truly believe it nor obey it A bare Historical Faith is no more a True Faith than the bare Picture of a Man is a Man Therefore he is Idle to Argue against the Saving Faith of Christ Crucified because the Ungodly may have the bare Historical Belief of it which differs as widely as a Dead Body from a a Living Man But it is not enough for J. P. to Pervert my Words but he will be bold to Pervert the Words of the Scripture and not only put a false Gloss on them but alledge that to be said in Scripture which is not said but is his own Addition For as I have above Cited him he saith also when the Everlasting Gospel was again to be Preached and he adds in Parenthesis for it seems by the Word again it had been discontinued to be Preached although the History of Christ's Birth Death had not Now Reader open the Bible and Read that place Rev. 14.6 7. and thou wilt find the Word again is not there to be found but in G. Fox's Some Principles p. 22. it is found and yet he Grounds his Argument upon this Pillar again by which he inferreth that to his seeming the Everlasting Gospel had been discontinued to be Preached although the History of Christ's Birth Death had not And this discontinuing of the Preaching the Everlasting Gospel he and his Brethren think did remain until G. Fox and the Quakers began to Preach it For saith G. Fox and his Brethren in the Book called Some Principles of the Elect People of God Printed it London 1671. In p. 48. But many People speak after this manner Have we not had the Gospel all this time till now Ans We say no you have had the Sheeps Cloathing while you are Alienated from the Spirit and so not living in the Power which is the Gospel c. But as in Rev. 14.6 7. The Word again is not to be found nor will the Greek bear it so nor is it implyed that there was a discontinuing of the Preaching of it altogether for had the Gospel ceased the Church had ceased also and Faith and Salvation had ceased The most that can be inferred is that the Preaching of it was not so common and frequent as formerly it had met with a great Stoppage and Opposition in many parts of the World even under a Christian Profession because of the Apostacie which had it not come the Gospel would have spread much more than it yet hath done but as the Apostacie goes out the Everlasting Gospel the same that the Apostles Preached will be Preached to every Nation and Kindred and Tongue and People John 14.6 That is universally this doth not prove the discontinuing of it as J. P. falsly Argueth but that the more General and indeed the Universal Spreading of it hath not hitherto been as yet His Argument That the Gospel that Paul Preached to the Colossians was not the Doctrin of Salvation by the promised Messiah Christ Crucified because the Gospel he was speaking of was Preached to or in every Creature under Heaven Therefore saith he it could not be meant of the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified but of that Gospel which had been Preached to or in every Creature under Heaven I say this his Argument is Vain and False but it is a good and effectual Proof to confirm my Charge against them These Quakers Preach not any Gospel for Salvation but that which is Preached to or in every Creature under Heaven but saith J. P. that is not the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified therefore that is none of the Gospel these Quakers Preach what can be required more habemus Confitentem reum we have the Guilty Confessing Matter of Fact But surely the Gospel that Paul Preached to the Colossians was the Doctrin of Salvation by Christ Crucified as appears plainly from 1 Col. v. 14. to the end of the Chapter And his Arguing from the Words to or in every Creature which sort of Argument hath deceived many is no more valid to prove that the Gospel either then or formerly had been Preached to every Man and Woman in the full and adequate Sense of the Word every as it signifieth every individual than that because Paul said v. 28. of that same Chapter whom we Preach Warning every Man and Teaching every Man in all Wisdom that we may present every Man Perfect in Christ Jesus that Paul and his Brethren then living did Teach every Man that ever lived or is now living on Earth If yea then surely John Pennington and all other Men now on Earth were then living and this will be the Doctrin of the Revolution or Transmigration of Souls with a witness which he so frequently would cast upon me though he has no just ground so to do nor any other Man if nay then he