is plain seeing they would never have been commended for examining and trying his Doctrine by the Scriptures except the Scriptures were the Rule or for making that a Rule for examining and receiving of Doctrines of Faith which is no Rule of matters of Faith Nay for this they would have been deservedly discommended Fifthly The Scriptures are able to make us Wise unto Salvation 2 Tim. 3.15 Therefore they contain the Rule of Faith and Duty The Consequence is easie seeing without the Rule of these we cannot be wise unto Salvation but plainly ignorant of the way thereunto having no Rule to direct us Sixthly the whole Scriptures were given by Inspiration of God and they were written purposely for the Churches Instruction and Learning as is before shewed Therefore they must surely be the Rule of Faith and Duty for I am sure there is nothing wanting here that is requisite to the Constituting of them for a publick Rule or else let the Quakers if they can shew us what that is for I can not perceive it without the Spectacles of their Eagle-eyed Inspirer Seventhly That Doctrine must be the Rule of Faith and Manners which in all matters of Faith and Manners we ought to observe and take heed to as a Doctrine full of shining light for our instruction and direction but that is the Scriptures Therefore the Scriptures are the Rule of Faith and Manners The Major is clear nor do the Quakers deny it The Minor is laid down in 2 Pet. 1.19 20. where Peter after his rehearsing of the glorious Revelation on the Mount at the Transfiguration which was as glorious a Revelation as any else he addeth That they had a more sure Word of Prophecy whereunto they did well to take heed as unto a light shining c. knowing this first that no Prophecy of the Scripture is of any private Interpretation here it is clear that it is the Scriptures which he calls the more sure Word of Prophecy and prefers before all transient Revelations not as if the Scriptures were more certain in themselves Quoad se than Gods immediate voice from Heaven but because they are a more sure way in regard of us Quoad nos they being a Written yea Sealed and Sworn Evidence and Contract of the whole Bargain and Terms of Salvation and Life delivered into our custody to be perused by us upon all occasions and this gives more assurance in regard of our weakness than a passing Revelation and is more ready for our constant direction than a transient Revelation which we cannot always command nor retain often in our memory till we understand nor are all men able to bear them That on the Mount made the Disciples roave and mistake exceedingly Mark 9.6 The Quakers answer in their Confession of Faith or Principles of Truth page 135 136 140. That by the more sure Word of Prophecy the Apostle means the Light within us and so they deny our Minor But contrariwise the 20 Verse there where he cautions the interpreting of the Scripture-Prophecy clearly coheres with the 19 Verse as a caution subjoyned concerning the same thing which he had there called The more sure Word of Prophecy and so by the more sure Word of Prophecy must be meant the Scriptures because of the clear coherence Secondly I must demand of the Quakers to shew if they can How the Dictat or Light within is more sure than Gods immediate Voice from Heaven such as that was at the Transfiguration I have shewed how the Scriptures are called and are so in regard of us but I cannot understand how the Light within can be or be called so Thirdly The Testimony of other Scriptures produced and to be produced will not permit this violent Gloss Again They ordinarily answer to this Scripture That in it we are only appointed to take heed to the Scriptures until the day dawn and the day-Star arise into our hearts that is as they expound till the Holy Ghost be bestowed on us but no longer But contrariwise First by this answer they retract their former Gloss upon the Text and confess the more sure Word of Prophecy here to be meant of the Scriptures and not the Light within Secondly By this answer they overturn one of their own chiefest Principles viz. That all men ought to follow the Light within for now they yield That such as have not received the Holy Ghost and these are not few are exhorted here to follow the Scriptures and not the Light within them Thirdly Hereby they insinuate That the Scriptures in their Opinion serve for nothing to Renewed Men and Believers who are born of the Spirit and Sealed therewith Joh. 3.5 Rom. 8.9 Eph. 1.13 and so the Scriptures as they will are recommended only to Men unrenewed and so that blessing pronounced upon the Readers Hearers and Keepers of the things written in the Scriptures Revel 1.3 and 22.7 is designed and belongs only to unrenewed Men seeing the reading hearing and keeping of the things written therein whereunto the blessing is annexed belongs only to them as the Quakers will What Does not Paul Peter and John direct all their Epistles and the Book of the Revelation to the Churches the Saints and them that had obtained like precious Faith with them delivering them many Rules of Faith and Manners therein See their Inscriptions I pray and these will inform you better Eightly That must be the Rule of Faith by which we are commanded to try the Spirits 1 John 4.1 seeing we cannot try the Spirits or Doctrines without the Rule for that were to try them by guess But that whereby we are commanded to try the Spirits must certainly be the Scriptures seeing the Quakers do not as yet openly profess the Popish Lesbian Rule of Believing as the Church of Rome does and it cannot be the dictat or light within that we are to try them by seeing that is as fallible as their Light whose Doctrines I try and George Keith a Ring-leading Quaker confesses the possibility of their declining from Infallibility both in Speaking and Writing and consequently in Examining or Judging too in his Quakerism no Popery page 33. and beside the Dictat within hath no Divine Institution to be the Rule and if it were the Rule then the Dictat within every diverse Man would be the Rule to try the Dictat or Dectrine proceeding from the Dictat in another which would make the Dictat of every Man both Superior and Inferior to the Dictat of another Superior when it tries and examines and Inferior when it or its Doctrine is tried and examined which is repugnant Ninthly John shews us 1 John 4.6 That the true and sound imbracing of their Doctrine now written in the Scriptures is a manifest evidence of the Spirit of Truth and the rejecting of it a manifest evidence of the Spirit of Error and so their Doctrine written in the Scriptures must be the Rule of Faith and Manners For How shall it be an evidence
because it is worthy of a Thousand Deaths for its proud Usurpation we shall reach it some few Blows more in particulari Specie First therefore the principal Rule of Faith and Manners must be Essentially right and Infallible or else we can trust nothing to it with any assurance and all were gone it would mislead and deceive us But the Dictate within every man is not Essentially Right Ergo it is not the principal Rule I prove the Minor because many men have not the Spirit as all unrenewed men Rom. 8.9 1 Joh. 4.13 Jud. 19. and so their Dictate within not proceeding from the Spirit cannot be Essentially Right or the principal Rule of Faith and Manners and this destroys the Quakers Principle that the Dictate within every man is the principal Rule Nor doth the Spirit Teach even Believers by an inward immediate objective Dictate seeing God and Nature do nothing in vain and Beings ought not to be multiplied without some necessity which here there is none that can be shewed for seeing the whole Doctrine of Salvation is abundantly made known in the Scriptures so that our understandings being subjectively Enlightened and our Eyes in any measure opened we may plainly see therein the exactness and purity of the Law the Riches of the Promises and in fine our whole Rule by the good help of other means and Ordinances appointed to further our Instruction and Knowledge in these by opening up and explaining their Doctrine and Sence and so clearing the Object quoad nos or in order to our understanding And what needs then I pray another objective Rule Neither is there any reason for the continuance of the immediate Inspiration of the Doctrine of Salvation in the Church more than all the other extraordinary Gifts which are gone long since the Intire Rule of Faith and Manners being now compleated and publickly Recorded which is as Infallible as any immediate Dictate seeing it is the Word of God that cannot Lie and it is more sure for us than any in regard of the Devils Cunning who can and often does bear in a strong Delusion with so much of seeming Evidence as makes it be received for a Divine Dictate And what needs more George Keith who pleads that the Dictate within is the principal Rule and Touchstone of all Doctrines in his Quakerism no Popery pag. 59. albeit most inconsistently as I think he grants the same Authority to the Scriptures pag. 28 thereof does yield that for all their Infallible Dictate yet its possible for them and that is much indeed both to Speak and Write and so to think too in a mixture Quakerism no Popery pag. 33 that is to say Fallibly for if he means of a Mid-way betwixt Fallibly and Infallibly which I am not yet acquainted with nor ever read it he speaks like a man in a mixture Infallible Contradiction For all the World cannot find me a midst betwixt Fallible and Infallible George Keith then it seems is not Infallibly or immediately Inspired for he can both Speak and Write in a mixture which a man immediatly Inspired cannot be Guilty of Habernus confitentem reum Secondly that cannot be the principal Rule of Faith and Manners which hath no Divine Institution to Warrant it or else it is but an Usurper But the Dictate within every I or any man hath no Divine Institution to Warrant it to be the principal Rule of these or else produce it if they can for all they have hitherto produced shall be Confuted and Answered too when I come to to their Objections Therefore the Dictate within every man or any man is not the principal Rule of Faith and Manners Thirdly a Rule to be examined by another Rule cannot be the principal Rule of Faith and Manners I am sure But the Dictate within all men is such Therefore it is not the principal Rule of Faith and Manners The Minor I prove from Isai 8.20 To the Law and to the Testimony says the Text if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no Light in them where all Dictates or Doctrines of Faith and Manners are very expresly commanded to be Tryed and examined by the Scripture and if they agree not with that not to receive them seeing so there is no Light in them they are but Dictates of Darkness And again George Keith Confesses that all Doctrines and Principles of Christian Religion are to be applyed to the Scriptures as a Test and Touchstone in all external Debates and Disputations whatsoever and if they agree not therewith to be denied and disowned for ever Quakerism no Popery pag 28. and so the Scriptures are a Superiour Rule to the Dictate within if it be a Doctrine of the Christian Religion seeing it must be examined by these as a Test and Touchstone and rejected if it agree not therewith I can say no more than is dropt twixt sleeping and waking perhaps from the Pen of an Adversary Fourthly the Scriptures we have seen before are the principal Rule of Faith and Manners positively Ergo the Dictate within cannot be such a Rule The Consequence is plain seeing two Rules each of them positively principal are repugnant for so each of them should be above and below the other Fifthly if the Dictate within be the principal Rule of Faith and Manners then we must either follow its Directions absolutely and without Questioning or Trying them or else conditionally only that they be right if conditionally only then we must examine them by some other Rule to know if they be right or not and so they are not the principal Rule against the supposition nor Infallible seeing an Infallible Rule needs no Superior Rule to be examined by being it self Essentially right If then we must follow the directions of the Dictate within absolutely and without any Tryal then he whose Dictate within prompts him to think that Christ has not two distinct Natures or that he has two distinct Persons aswel as Natures or that he is not Co-eternal Co-equal and Co-substantial with the Father or First person or that his Sufferings and Death was not a Satisfaction for our Sins or that God is a Corporeal Being subject to all humane Passions or that in the Eucharist the Bread is substantially Changed into the Body of Christ or that the Pope is Infallible and so a great Quaker or else each of them a small Pope or that we are not Justified by the Righteousness of the Redeemer I say all of these and other such deluded Hereticks must absolutely follow these Principles as their principal Rule And if the Dictate within bid a man Worship the Sun and Moon and Idols of Gold and Silver worship the Devil and cut his own Throat too he is bound to obey his Rule There is nothing can be answered to these things but this viz. That these and such like evil Directions cannot proceed from the Spirit of God but allanerly from a mans own self and the Devil But
the black Hereticks that ever were in the World should at once arise from the dead and alass there are too many of them still alive in their Successors and should in favour of their accursed Delusions most grosly abuse and wrest the holy Scriptures as all Hereticks do and pervert invert and deprave the meaning thereof and so of God speaking therein Yet no man even the most eminently gifted Ministers of Christ were bound by vertue of any standing Appointment or Law of God otherwise Scripture-Interpreting will clearly have a standing Divine Institution to step out and by the grounds of Context the Analogy of Faith or comparison with other Scriptures more clear c. to refute these false wrested meanings vindicate the Texts abused and clear and demonstrate their Genuine and true meaning But that is most false absurd and impious For then the most eminently gifted and able Ministers of Christ whose special Office is to labour in the Word and Doctrine and are bound to their utmost or else to nothing at all to preserve and promote the purity of the meaning of the Scriptures among the people and to convince and stop the mouths of the Gainsayers thereof Tit. 1.9 11. might lawfully without the breach of any standing Divine Appointment or Law stand and look on and see the Scriptures abused perverted and depraved in their meaning and instead of their true meaning horrible falshoods fictions and blasphemies fathered upon them and so on God whose Word they are to the highest dishonour of God imaginable the treading under foot of the precious Truth the over-flowing of the Christian World with Soul-damning Errors and the manifest ruining of poor Souls without indeavouring to prevent remedy or hinder the same by the exercise of a talent that God hath given them If that be not absurd false and impious nothing can be such Nay it involves a contradiction to say that Ministers who are required to convince the Gainsayers of the Truth and so of the true meaning of the Scriptures and to stop their mouths might lawfully suffer these things to be done and not oppose themselves for the defence of Gods truth according to their abilities and occasions The Quakers being beaten from their former standing and being loth to allow us the benefit of Scripture-Interpretation as thereby fore-seeing the danger of their Heretical Interest do betake themselves to another shift and alledge that however necessary or Divinely appointed Scripture-Interpretation may be yet Men that are Fallible may not Interpret the Scriptures Therefore it will be necessary for us to prove the contrary which before we do that the state of the Question may be cleared I grant that these whose Explications formally as such and as raught by them are Authentical and Faith-worthy must of necessity be Infallible or immediately Inspired The Quakers must seek after such Explications as these in the Canonical Writings of the Prophets and Apostles For it is not so with the ordinary Ministers of the Church whose Explications are not formally as such and as taught by them Authentical and Faith-worthy nor is it lawful for any Man so to receive them but allanerly upon the accompt of their agreement with and demonstration from the Scriptures whose Infallible Testimony is sufficient to warrant and assure the meaning delivered Secondly I grant that in the matter of Scripture-Interpretation the Supream and Magisterial Authority from which there is no appeal but it ought to be simply stood to resideth in the Scriptures themselves or in the Spirit their Author speaking therein seeing their Verdict and Sentence in places speaking to the purpose more clearly and such means as reside in them are the alone Rule and Directory of our Interpretations thereof in places more dark and obscure as appears from many things aforesaid The Authority therefore which our Ministers have for Interpreting Scripture is only a Ministerial Authority for Interpreting the Scriptures by their own Verdict and Sentence as the Rule and Judge of their Interpretations whereunto they are Subjected and by whose determination they stand or fall as true Interpretations or forged wrestings seeing the Scriptures are the Rule of Faith by which we are to try and judge Mens Doctrines in matters of Faith having premised these things for clearing our mind and preventing mistakes I Assert that Men who are not endued with an Infallible gift and so are not Infallible but Fallible may Interpret the Scriptures And I prove it For first These Levites that expounded the Scriptures Neh. 8.8 were not Infallible in their Gift seeing there is no proof or evidence thereof possible to be produced nor had they any other extraordinary thing accompanying them in their Birth Call Doctrine or Works or else let it be shewed nor was it any Priviledge of the Ordinary Officers of that Church to be Infallible and yet their Practice thereof is there Recorded to their high Commendation and as Edifying to the People Therefore Teachers that are not Infallible may Interpret Scripture Or else their practice thereof should have been condemned as unlawful instead of being commended Secondly A Fallible Teacher may have a far greater and more distinct knowledge of the meaning of the Scriptures than many other Men also Fallible seeing it is his special Office to labour in the Word and Doctrine and if he does his Duty he is much more in searching of the Scriptures than Men of other particular Callings and hath many more helps and means for it than the commoner sort of Christians and bulk of the People neither have all Men an equal knowledge in any thing Therefore a Fallible Teacher may Interpret the Scriptures The consequence is easie seeing whatever measure of Scripture-meaning such a Man discerneth beyond others he may I hope seasonably make it known to them for their Instruction and Edification May he not Nay I do not see so well how he may not Thirdly if all that Interpret the Scriptures must necessarily upon that accompt be Infallible then no man now adays may presume to Interpret them seeing there is no man now adays Infallible as is before often shewed But that is most false seeing it is now proved that Scripture-Interpretation is an Ordinance of Divine Institution reaching to the end of the world and so it binds and obliges all according to their ability and the Churches exigency whose Office it is to labour in the Word and Doctrine and from the Word to Teach people the mind and Will of God even to the end of the world albeit they be not Infallible but fallible Nor heard I ever of a Divine Institution reaching to the end of the world and yet obliging no body and if this oblige any man it cannot miss the Teachers Lastly seeing the Quakers affirm that Scripture-Interpreting doth necessarily require an Infallible Gift we must require them to exhibit the grounds of their affirmation or else it will be readily thought that they affirm so without any ground and so it must be
any reproof from Christ or his Apostles though most material when they are reproving all the other vices of that Old-Testament-Church We may clearly see that these Apocryphal books are no part of Scripture-Canon or rule place them in what degree ye will next for that I care not but a part or all of these things misses none of these books As for what ye object Sir of many books wanting that might be useful as ye say in the Scripture-Canon I must tell you to cut short that I am not here concerned what books are wanting that is none of the present controversie but it is concerning some books viz. these called Apocryphal which ye will have added to the Canon with the rest that are known to be Canonical and which we deny to be Canonical and requires you the affirmers to prove that they are such and though not obliged as being the denyers yet we have proved they are not such And hereby I cut off your tedious rapsody of confused arguments whereby ye have wasted more paper in your Quakerism no Popery pag. 60.61.62.63 then all your work was worth But the Quakers have one grand principle of following the Dictate within as the principal rule at least which it would seem and George Keith also insinuates Quakerism no Popery pag. 49.59 103. will never reconcile with that other grand principle of Popery to believe as the Church of Rome believes But unto this I Answer that a great number we see of the direct principles of the Quakers are but meer Popish doctrines disguised nay all of their principles almost except some that are much worse being more Blasphemous then ever a Papist held and that of following the dictate within is but a reflex principle obliging them the more to follow their direct principles which we see are generally Popish And so when their great doctors teach their disciples to follow their Dictate within they do in effect teach them to believe as the Church of Rome does yet not so as to discover their design and make every man wise of their secret but subtilly under a disguise They are no fools Albeit they can desipere in loco Sir I have vindicated our Church from the Intire frivolous charge of Popery Calumniously cast upon her by you in your Quakerism no Popery and upon the other hand I have libelled against your eighteen real Popish principles from which ye can make no evasion or tergiversation they are all so clear in the preceeding survey And therefore I must here tell you that your Quakerism no Popery should have been called Quakerism no Verity for there is hardly one true word in it all which I do'nt say to irritate or exasperate you but rather with a desire from my heart if it be possible to convince you for I know you are a Scholar but alace your gifts and parts are ill Imployed against the truths laws and ordinances of Jesus which his dear purchase of them teaches their great value Be no more a stated Enemy to these or else dreadful and terrible shall the event be unto you and all who thus tread upon his truths and Blaspheme his Person as you do and trample under foot also his whole Institutions and ordinances A Second Postscript for Doctor Everards Ghost There is one Doctor Everard I wish he had been never heard who hath published a book which he calls Gospel Treasury opened up or the Holiest of all Un-vailing and this Book he hath divided into two parts In the first part whereof Pag. 150.206.347 he asserts that after we are regenerated it is no more we that think see speak goe wish will rejoyce but that it is God that does them and that it must be Christ the Son of God in us that loves God fears God obeys God and believes in God and says he though that may seem a Paradox yet it is a truth for Indeed and in truth says he there is nothing fears God but God nothing obeys God but God nothing loves God but God And again he affirms Pag. 442.443.444 part second that the good man is so swallowed up in God that wanting sense will desire he now as the word requires covets nothing but now God in him wills knows desires reads writes preaches gives prays hears and is all things for God says he desires not our works but our Sabbath and that himself in us without hindrance may work know praise pray hear crown and reward himself in us Thus the Doctor teaches the great sum of all which is That nothing obeys God but God only The Quakers seem to joyn with the Doctor in this his wild principle while at the last of their Queries here they seem to require our resting or not working and condemn our Confessions Catechisms c. upon that very ground because they are our works and to my sure experience I do know that this book of Doctor Everard hath predisposed several persons and been their preamble unto Quaking and therefore that this treatise may be somewhat compleat I resolve here to answer this principle of the Doctor and to confute it and two or three more of his positions that have some alliance with the principles of the Quakers Therefore first against the Doctors foresaid principle it is not God that believes in Christ crucified accepts and receives his righteousness for justification that looks for salvation through his merits It is not God that loaths himself for sin sorrows for his sin confesses his sin and denies himself c. And these are all works of obedience commanded of God and exercised in the godly and therefore the Doctors principle here is most false 2ly Angels and men are either obliged to obey God or not if not then they may doe what they please they cannot sin and so also fallen Angels and reprobate men are all most unjustly damned for their disobedience wherewith they cannot be justly charged seeing as is supposed they are not obliged to obey If then they be obliged to obey God then the holy Angels that stood obeys God or not if they do then something obeys God that is not God against the Doctors principle seeing Angels are not God I am sure if not then the holy Angels that stood are disobedient to God seeing they are obliged to obey God and yet does it not and that is to say the Angels that stood are fallen Angels 3ly If nothing obeys God but God then never any of all the creatures obeyed God to this day seeing none of them is God and all the creatures are equally guilty or not guilty of disobedience to God seeing not one of them ever obeyed him But these things are absurd Romances Fourthly whatever obeys God must be commanded to obey him seeing all obedience is to some command and Law But God is not commanded to obey seeing all the commandments are directed to creatures and God is not under the Law he hath given to them nor hath he any superior soveraign and though
outward things Doth he not bring them off things that are seen to things that are not seen And whether or not ye ever intend ye your selves called Ministers or your hearers shall come any nearer to Christs Death and Die and be Buried with him but only to take Bread and Wine in remembrance of Christs Death lest ye and they should come to forget Christs Death Answer us plainly these things Yea or Nay Twelfth QUERY What is Original sin Whether it be not the Devil yea or nay For doth not the Original signifie the beginning And what did Christ come to Destroy Was it not the Devil and his works Thirteenth QUERY Whether or not did Christ die for all the ungodly in the world and Sinners that they should live and die in their ungodliness and sins or live unto him and whether or not did Christ shed his blood for all men and was a Propitiation for the sins of all men and whether or not these that do not hold this are these that make Sects and are out of the same Spirit and Doctrine of the Apostles Fourteenth QUERY What makes a Believer Whether or not is it by believing in the Light according to Christs Doctrine who says He is the Light of the World and doth enlighten every one that comes into the world that all men through him might Believe and who follows him shall not walk in darkness for he is the Light and says That he that believes is saved Then is not the Light saving which he believes and he that does not believe in the Light is damned already Then is not the Light or his disobedience to it his Condemnation Yea or Nay Fifteenth QUERY Can any man be saved by his own works Self-righteousness Will-worship and are not all men in the Self-righteousness that are not in the Righteousness of Christ Jesus and are not all of their own works that be out of the Light and the Faith that is the Gift of God and are not all in their Will-worships that are not in the worship that Jesus Christ the heavenly man set up above Sixteen hundred years since that is in the Spirit and the Truth So must not every man come to the Truth and to the Spirit in their own hearts if they come to the worship Jesus Christ set up and are not your Catechisms Confessions of Faith and Directories your own works and your own worship which ye have set down for people to fall down and do worship to and be saved by and have ye not set up this since the Apostles days and since Christ set up his worship Sixteenth QUERY Whether or not your Directory and Catechism and Confession of Faith be Gospel yea or nay And if so whether it be not another Gospel then that which the Apostles Preached who said the Gospel was the power of God Rom. 1.16 Seventeenth QUERY Whether or not the Scriptures do not say that he that believes hath ceased from his own works as God did from his and entred into his rest and whether or not your Directory and Church-maid Faith and Catechisms and Confessions be not your own works and ye follow them and worship them and not cease from them And whether or not in so doing ye keep people and your selves in your own works and from the Rest or we desire you shew us what difference their is betwixt Spiritual Babylon and Sodom and Egypts works of their hands and Temporal Babylon and Sodom and Egypts works of their hands and their worship Of each distinguish I desire you Distinguish the mystery from a plain outward Idol These Queries were Subscribed I. S. and I could fill up his Name at length but I forbear for some reasons that I think more pertinent to Conceal than Divulge unto the world This is the true Transcript of their Queries which were directed unto me as is said which I can Attest by many others that saw and read them before they came to my hand and some after that knows they owned them and they are also the true Pourtraiture of their known Principles and beside I have in this Controversie carried along two of their most famous Books yet extant the Positions whereof which I always Cite do exactly agree with the Scope and Import of these Queries viz. their Confession of Faith Subscribed by Eight or Nine of their most famous Ring-leaders in England by them called The Principles of Truth or a Declaration of their Faith and their Quakerism no Popery written by Mr. George Keith and Subscribed both by him and Mr. Robert Barclay two of their chiefest Luminaries and greatest Apostles forsooth in Scotland This Book Mr. Keith writes against Reverend Mr. Menzies Professor of Theology at Aberdeen a man of so great Veneration and Learning that it may be justly thought a daring boldness for him to have meddled against him So that no man knowing the Quakers Principles or searching these grounds will in the least doubt the faithfulness of my Transcription beside what Credit may be allowed unto my own Ingenuity who never loved the straining of any mans Principle too sore in Consequences unclear and remote much less the fixing of Principles falsly upon such as disclaimed them But of this I need say no more for the Quakers Principles are known and these Queries they will own An Alphaâ—â—â—ical TABLE A GRacious Acts necessarily require gracious Principles proved pag. 157. Adam a common Representative head of Mankind pag. 134. The Analogy of Faith what it is pag. 78. Apocryphal Books not Canonical or of immediate Inspiration pag. 209. Apostacy of the Saints confuted pag. 162. Christian assurance needs not immediate Dictates p. 32. Authority of the Scripture-rule over all other Rules proved ibid. The Pope before the Reformation had Church-Authority and how pag. 199. B THe Baptism of John and the Apostles the same in substance p. 69. Baptism with Water of Divine Institution under the Gospel p. 68. Baptism with Water only properly called Baptism p. 78. Baptism with Water meant in the Text of Matthew Matthew 28.19 proved p. 76. Baptism with Water necessary to Salvation and how p. 74. Baptism with Water not an Old-Testament Ceremony p. 68. Baptism succeeded in the room of Circumcision p. 86. Baptism of Believers Infants a Divine Institution under the Gospel ibid. Baptism the Initiating Seal proved ibid. Probable Evidences enough for admission to Baptism p. 88. The great Beast mentioned in the Revel not our will pag. 195. Bilocation pregnant with Contradictions p. 191. Blasphemies reported in Scripture not Scripture-sentence p. 20. C EXtraordinary calls attended with extraordinary Furniture pag. 7. An inward call not necessary to the validity of Ministerial Acts. pag. 202. A Catechism requisite in a Church and why pag. 123. Our Westminster Catechism aimed at materially Scripture-sentence pag. 129. How the Command is said to be nigh unto us Deut. 30.14 p. 37. Christs coming again mentioned 1 Cor. 11.26 not meaned of his coming at the Pentecost but at the
the Quakers Ergo not the Doctrine of the Quakers The Ten Commands are the Moral Laws Ergo not the Moral Law Is not that well Argued without Logick But what are not whole Sermons and Predictions of the Prophets and Christs whole Doctrine called by them and him the Word of the Lord and his Word as may be seen in almost all our preceeding Arguments Is not the whole Doctrine of the Scriptures called a Word of Prophecy 2 Pet. 1.19 20. Does not Paul call the whole Revealed Truths of God Sound Doctrine and the Doctrine of God 1 Tim. 1.10 and 6.1 Tit. 1.9 and 2.10 And must the Prophets and Apostles Christ and the Holy Ghost learn from the Quakers how their Doctrine should be named will they not allow the Scriptures their Essential Attribute which these gives them that they are the Word of God or albeit we very well know that there are many more words in the Scripture than one why will they not admit of that common Unity here which is not denied in other common Natures and a denomination conformable By these things the objection is both answered and overthrown Again they insinuate another Argument whereby they indeavour to wrest the Title of the Word of God from the Scriptures The Scriptures say they signifies Writings Therefore they mean to infer they are not the Word of God Ans It doth equally follow therefore they are not the Words of God as the Word of God as all may see and so the consequent of their present Argument contradicts the Antecedent of their former Objection and so we may see that the Quakers are but Jugling while they yield the Scriptures the Title of Gods Words whereof their present Argument again indeavours to rob them Secondly our Question is not what the word Scripture signifies but what the Doctrine written in the Scriptures is which the signification of that Word cannot Define But lastly for clear satisfaction I distinguish their Consequent thus viz. That because the Scriptures signifies Writings therefore as to the external Form and Mode which they have from the Writers Pen they are not the Word of God be it so therefore as to their enunciat Doctrine or Sentence they are not the Word of God it follows not For in the Scripture there are two things to be considered viz their Doctrine and Sentence which is the Word of God and their external Form or Mode which they have from the Pen of the Writer which gives the Word of God the Denomination of Written and therefore we call the Scriptures The Written Word Because we said that the Quakers by indeavouring to Wrest the Title of the Word of God from the Scriptures do strike at their Divine Authority therefore I shall here give a short Touch of the Notes and Arguments whereby the Scriptures are clearly Demonstrated to be from God and of Divine Inspiration such as are the Majesty of the Style of the Scriptures above all other Writings under great simplicity of words the Divine purity of the Doctrine savoring wholly of holiness and vertue The Divine Scope of the Doctrine which is to give all glory to God The Efficacy of the Doctrine in the hearts of men above all other Doctrines in the world The Infallible accomplishment of the Predictions therein contained as they were fore-told the wonderful consent of all the parts thereof being written by so many diverse Pen-men so far distant from one another both in time and place which was never to be seen in any other Book in the World especially of divers mens Writing The manifold Miracles whereby God hath born Witness thereunto which Satan could never so much as Counterfeit The irreconcilable hatred of Satan and the World against it more than against all other Books in the World The firm stability thereof and the special hand of God which appears in the preserving and transmitting thereof from Age to Age notwithstanding all the Malice of Satan and the Devices of him and his wicked Instruments against it The miserable end of the greatest Persecutors and enemies thereof The Testimony of the many Martyrs Sealing their Witness thereunto with their Blood and the Testimony of the whole Church thereunto which have a piece of weight in their own Order The Scriptures cannot be from evil men or Angels seeing they shew their villany denounce their Doom which Galls them and prescribe a Method of living quite contrary to their Inclination Nor can good Angels or Men be their Author for upon the one hand they durst not have so usurped upon God as to feign his Authority and Commission to so many Laws Ordinances Threatnings and Promises of their own meer Invention and upon the other hand if they had done it they could not have been good Angels or Men Therefore the Scriptures must be from God himself These things put together which I have but named are sufficient to convince that the Scriptures are from God and of Divine Authority and are enough irresistibly to stop the Mouths of all Contradicters Notwithstanding for the full assurance and through persuasion of Faith that the Scriptures are from God and of Divine Inspiration the Spirit is requisite by his effectual Working in with and by the same upon our hearts and minds to Seal up their Divine Authority unto us And yet this makes nothing in the least for the Quakers who Teach to follow a Spirit abstracted and separated from the Scriptures For beside that we shall shew at the following Query that the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures most straitly Ties us to the Scriptures as our Supreme Rule in all matters of Faith It is also evident that it is in with and by the Word of God written in the Scriptures that the Spirit manifests himself unto and in our hearts both in the enlightning of our Minds and renewing of our Wills and Affections as these Scriptures following Witness Psal 19.7.8 Joh. 4.41 Joh. 14.26 Joh. 15.3 Joh. 17.20 Act. 17.11.12 Rom. 15.4 Ephes 6.17 Heb. 4.12 Isai 59.21 These and a Thousand places more that I might instance do manifestly convince that the written Word of God is an Organ and Instrument in the Spirits hand whereby he Enlightens Renews and Sanctifies us more and more himself also as a Physical Cause does immediately influencing the Effect seeing all Effects must depend immediately upon God if they include any real being But say the Quakers whether or not is all that is written from Genesis to Revelation a Rule for your Faith and Manners Ans No doubt we are bound to believe all Scripture Enunciation from the beginning to the end seeing all of it was given by Inspiration of God and written for our Learning 2 Tim. 3.16 2 Pet. 1.21 Luke 24.25 Act. 24.14 1 Cor. 10.11 There is no more doubt we are bound to obey all the Commands of the Moral Law seeing that is of a perpetual binding force Mat. 5.18.19 with whatsoever is of common equity Philip. 4.8 9. or whatever injoyning any piece
of the Spirit of Truth to imbrace a Doctrine that is not the Rule this is liker to be an evidence of the contrary Or How shall it be an evidence of the Spirit of Error to reject such Doctrine this also is rather an evidence of the contrary providing the Rule be retained Lastly God denounces all the plagues mentioned in the Scriptures quake that dreads then against every Man that shall presume to add in matters of Faith and Duty for of these its meant to the Doctrine and Rules written in the Scriptures Therefore the Scriptures do certainly contain the Rule and whole Rule of Faith and Manners The antecedent is laid down Rev. 22.18 where it is peremptorily said That if any Man shall add unto these things that are written in the Scriptures for there is the like reason and no other or more reason against adding to this Book of the Revelation and the rest of the holy Scriptures after the Canon is compleated and this Sanction is added here in the close of this Book as the close of the whole Scriptures God shall add to him all the plagues written in the Book The consequence is also evident For if not the Scriptures but some other Doctrine were the Rule then we not only might add to the Scriptures in matters of Faith and Duty but we ought of necessity to set up that other Doctrine as the Rule and Directory of both which is much worse methinks than any partial adding and so we could not be liable to such a doom for a partial adding And hence by a few arguments of many that may be produced we see that the Scriptures are the infallible Rule of our Faith and Manners that sure Word of Prophecy whereunto we ought to take heed and if an Angel from Heaven shall preach another Gospel to us than that which Christ and the Apostles did let him be accursed Every new Dispensation of the Covenant by the Ministery of Men though it were but only new in the manner was confirmed by Miracles and Wonders Exod. 4.28.30 Deut. 34.11 12. 2 Cor. 12.12 Heb. 2.4 much more need hath the Quakers Doctrine of such confirmations being new not only in the manner but also in the matter contrary to the Doctrine formerly dictated by the Holy Ghost and left upon Record unto us nor heard we ever of so great a company of Inspired Teachers as all the Doctors of the Quakers pretend to be and never one Miracle or Wonder to be had amongst them all excepting only their extream Infatuation and Brain-sickness or that they still retain the proportion and features of Human bodies having quite enervated their rational essence SECT II. Proving the Scriptures to be the principal Rule and overthrowing the Light within George Keith an Arch Quaker and a Man too learned as he imploys it doth here distinguish our Arguments yielding us That the Scriptures are the most compleat external Rule of Faith that is in the World but That they are not for all that the Principal Rule of Faith but only a Secundary Rule thereof and that the Spirit or his Dictat within is the Principal Rule in his Quakerism no Popery pages 9.13 25 59 108 109 110 111. and like Proteus turning himself into all shaces 〈…〉 â—mes designs Christ himself oftner the Spirit 〈…〉 he 〈…〉 of the Spirit within to be 〈…〉 oftnest the dictat◠〈…〉 But I am sure if George Keith be in earnest while he would have Christ himself or the Spirit himself to be our Rule he is beside himself For a Person cannot be a Rule of Faith for that must be some complex Proposition Direction or Precept and the like but Christ and the Spirit are Persons and so they cannot be a Rule of Faith The Major is already proved nor will the Quakers deny it But George Keith as many of his Brethren to my hearing doth flatly refuse the Minor as an uncertain unscriptural notion and a barbarous heathenish term to speak of a Person in the Godhead in his Quakerism no Popery page 97.104 and so according to him there are no Persons at all in the Godhead ah Blasphemy for if there be I am sure we may say there are and if Men believe that there are Three Persons in the Godhead they will not refuse to say the same The Quakers then do reject both the thing and notion and believe not there are Three Persons in the Godhead And therefore that there are I shall shortly prove First The Father Son and Holy Ghost are each of them an Intelligent Being subsisting incommunicably or distinctly from another Ergo each of them is a Person The consequence being from the Definition to the thing defined cannot be denied without a broad contradiction for if they grant the Antecedent that is the thing which all the World understands by a Person The Antecedent I prove for that each of them is an Intelligent Being Subsisting the Quakers dare not deny and their great Works declare it and that they subsist Incommunicably or distinctly from one another though in the same Godhead I prove because one and the same Subsistence cannot beget it Self or be begotten by it Self nor proceed from it Self as is palpable but the Father begets the Son the Son is begotten by him and the Holy Ghost proceeds from both and so they must be distinct Subsistences or subsist distinctly Secondly There are Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father Son and the Holy Ghost 1 John 5.7 Ergo they must either be Three Persons or Three Gods which is the beight of impossibility or let the Quakers shew how they will call them Three for though they also be one viz. one God yet the same Text cited says they are Three too I could never get any other answer to this from a Quaker but That they are three Manifestations viz. of Moses of Christ and of the Spicit But if these were the Father Son and Holy Ghost the World is much elder than they and then Who made it Thirdly While Christ proves Himself the Light of the World against the Jews who denied it He says John 8.17 18. It is also written in your Law That the Testimony of two Men is true I am one that bears Witness of my Self and the Father that sent Me beareth Witness of Me. Now Christ and the Father could not have been two Witnesses according to their Law except they be two distinct Persons for their Law admitted the Testimony of two Men proof enough because it was the Testimony of two Persons and otherwise the Testimony had not been admitted as proof enough Christ then clearly teaches Himself and the Father to be two Persons while he asserts that their Witnessing was proof enough according to their Laws demand Lastly Christ is said to be the express Image in the Original Language Character of the Fathers Person Heb. 1.3 Therefore the Father is a Person and Christ also and distinct Persons for the Father is plainly called so and
the Son being the very express of his Person and exact transumpt must be one also and distinct from the Fathers Person They answer The Word is wrong turned here and that it s turned right in Heb. 11.1 where it 's called Substance But contrariwise the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Original which properly signifies a Subsistence or Person and in an Intelligent Being subsisting distinct it always signifies a Person and so the Union of Christs two Natures in one Person is usually called the Hypostatical Union and to turn the word Substance here would be guilty of Arianism and would infer that Christ is not the same in Substance with the Father but another Substance like his Substance It is then no unscriptural Notion but these things by the way Now to the main point I assert against George Keith and his Complices That the Scriptures are the principal Rule of Faith and Manners and not any Dictat within and I prove it first that the Scriptures are and next that the Dictat within is not First then The Scriptures we have seen already are by Divine Authority ordained to be the Rule of our Faith and Manners and there is no Divine Authority ordaining any other Rule either above them or of equal Authority with them or else let it be shewed and till then let them consider that we are still sent to the Scriptures as the Rule of all matters of Faith and Duty Isai 8.20 Luk. 16.29.31 2 Pet. 1.19 but never to any Dictat within they do not say To the Dictat within but to the Law and Testimony to Moses and the Prophets c. Therefore the Scriptures are infallibly the principal Rule seeing there is none above them or equal with them Secondly The Scriptures are the Rule ruling of Faith and Manners and not ruled by any other Rule or else they are a Rule ruling thereof and themselves ruled by another superior Rule there cannot be a third thing said for the members of the distinction are contradictory But the Scriptures are not a Rule ruling and ruled seeing a Rule is therefore ruled by another Rule because it is not essentially right but fallible and may deceive or else it needed no Rule to rule it but I hope the Quakers will not say That the Scriptures are fallible and may deceive seeing they are of Divine Inspiration and the Word or Words as the Quakers yield of the most High God Therefore the Scriptures are the Rule ruling and not ruled of Faith and Manners and so the principal Rule thereof Thirdly The Scriptures have Intrinsecal and Essential Authority within themselves without derivation from any other Rule contradict who dare seeing they are the Word of God and he deeds not I judge derive Authority to his Word from any other Rule Humane or Divine Ergo they are the Supream and Principal Rule of Faith and Manners George Keith will may be indeavour to retort this Argument as inferring That the Dictat of the Spirit within is the principal Rule as well as the Scriptures seeing that is the Word of God as well as they But by his favour An sit is before Quid sit and Prius est esse quam tale vel tale esse he should first prove that there is such an infallible immediate objective Dictat as he calls it in every Man and then he says something For I deny that there is such a Dictat of the Spirit in every Man to be his Rule seeing every Man hath not the Spirit but Believers only Rom. 8.9 1 Joh. 4.13 Jude 19. and if every Man have the Rule of Faith revealed to him by a Dictat within Why have not Americans as much knowledge of that Rule as we Christians nor do I believe that any Man hath such an immediate Dictat for revealing to him the Doctrine of Salvation who can read or hear for others I am not concerned nor means of nor is there any necessity thereof that being so abundantly manifested in the Scriptures And whatever particular event a Man may have immediately revealed to him and he therefore bound to believe it This concerns not our Argument concerning the Doctrine of Salvation and the Scriptures wherein that was not contained more than the particular commands of a Prince to one two or three of his Subjects will infer that not his publick Laws but his private immediate commands must be the rule to all Nor needs a Believer an immediate objective Dictat to assure him that he is a Child of God as George Keith would have it seeing an effective illumination of the Spirit upon our understanding which is also called Subjective in regard of us opening and enlightning it's eyes to behold the Scripture-marks and inabling it to reflect upon and discern the graces of the Soul in their gracious actings will do the business infallibly though not immediately but per medium for having these Premises and that assistance and the mind not diverted it will be forced to the consequence by the clearness of the objective connexion seeing the meanest Saint cannot resist such evidence of consequence nor can a thousand Dictates within meerly objective make a Man one whit the wiser without subjective light to perceive them more than a Man pur-blind can see the Sun-shining till his eyes be opened albeit George Keith spurns at this distinction between Objective and Subjective which in regard of the Spirit is called Effective as Antichristian and deceitful in his Quakerism no Popery pages 83.84 as if he would for ever confound an Object with an Efficient Cause or a Subject Fourthly A Rule that hath authority over all other Rules and none over it must inevitably be the Principal and Supream Rule But the Scriptures are such a Rule Ergo they are the Supream Principal Rule I prove the Minor the Major needs not because we may not receive any Rule from without or Dictat within which agrees not with the Scriptures as George Keith seemingly also confesses in his Quakerism no Popery pag. 28. to the Law and Testimony if they agree not with that there is no light in them he is Cursed that Preaches another Gospel and not agreeing with that we have and so cannot be Blessed that receives it The Plagues are added to them that add to the Scripture-Rule much more to such as Teach or receive a contrary Rule on the other hand we may nay we are bound to receive the Scripture-Doctrine though it do not agree with the Dictate within or any other pretended Rule as is clear from many things foresaid and the Quakers will not deny sure These things hold firm Again it does not hold that we must not receive the Scriptures if they agree not with the Dictat within but may receive the Dictat within tho it disagree with the Scriptures And so the Scriptures have Authority over all other Rules and none else hath Authority over them Now albeit we have sufficiently already affronted the Dictate within yet
again with Christs Ans The Antecedent is most false for that would depress the dignity of the Baptism wherewith Christ was Baptized being that of John far below the dignity of that wherewith Simon Magus was Baptized and would infer that Christ entertained a more absolute and compleat Communion with the Church of the Old Testament all whose ordinary Covenant-Seals he partaked of than with the Church of the New and that though he sanctified in his own Person all the other ordinary Seals of both Testaments yet he denied that Honour and Priviledge to his own External Baptism dispensed under the New Testament Nor is the Antecedent any ways proved by that place of the Acts cited for the sence of that Fifth Verse which is wrested for a ground to this Objection is not that these Men were Baptized over again by Paul but the sence is that after they had heard that Doctrine from John the sum whereof Paul repeats in the preceeding Verse there they were Baptized by the same John when he Preached it to them and not by Paul now when he Repeats it Secondly The Apostles after Christs Ascention and the powring forth of the Spirit did with great diligence and studious care Baptize the New Testament Disciples with Water and were very forward in promoting that Ordinance amongst them Therefore Baptism with Water must certainly be an Ordinance of the New Testament Divinely Instituted The Consequence is clear seeing if it had not been an Ordinance of Divine Institution belonging to the New Testament they would never have been so diligent and forward for promoting the Interest thereof in the New-Testament Church amongst the Disciples after Christs Ascention and the powring forth of the Spirit otherwise they had manifestly betrayed their trust in such a studious and diligent promoting of an Ordinance in the Church which was not allowed of God and they had no Commission for which cannot be said they did and so much the less because all this passes on without any reproof from God or shadow of alteration in them The Consequence being so clearly proved I next prove the Antecedent from the Apostles constant and speedy dispensing of Baptism with Water to the New-Testament Disciples after the foresaid Events and that presently without delay after their appearing to be Disciples as appears from several Scripture-Texts of the New Testament First From Act. 8.36 38. and Act. 10.47 in which two Texts Water is so expresly mentioned that I need not prove it to be Baptism with Water that is meant and where they were most speedy in dispensing it at the first appearance of the parties Discipleship A second Text is Act. 2.41 where the Disciples were Baptized assoon as ever their Discipleship appeared And that this Baptism here is not meant of any of these forementioned improperly so called Baptisms and consequently that it must be meant of Baptism with Water which only is properly called Baptism as we shall afterwards see I prove Because the Baptism here mentioned pre-requires Conversion and Regeneration ver 38. and 41. to the partaking thereof and so it cannot be meant of the work of Conversion or Regeneration otherwise it should pre-require it self before partaking of it self that is it self without it self which is a strong contradiction Again It pre-supposes hearing yea receiving of the Gospel Doctrine in such Adult Persons as these were as may be seen ver 41. which the Baptism of Doctrine cannot do for that were it self pre-supposed to it self and a contradiction still And lastly the Baptism here mentioned is in the Text ver 38. plainly distinguisht from the miraculous Gifts of the Spirit And moreover is enjoyned as a necessary sacred Pledge of the Remission of Sins viz. by necessity of precept and when it can be had such as never were these Gifts of the Spirit and so Baptism here must be meant of Baptism with Water or the word Baptize razed out of the Text. A third Text is Act. 8.12 13. where these Disciples were quickly Baptized after their Discipleship appeared And neither can Baptism here be meant of the work of Conversion or Regeneration seeing Simon Magus participated of it who yet was no true Convert or Regenerated Person as is there clear Nor can it be meant of the Baptism of Doctrine for it is there plainly declared That they believed the things concerning the Kingdom of God and Christ whether savingly or meerly historically really or in profession only it matters nothing to our present Argument before they partaked of the Baptism there mentioned but they could not believe these things before they in some measure partaked of the Gospel Doctrine which reveals them Nor lastly can it be meant of their enduing with the miraculous gifts of the Spirit seeing it is there expresly denied that any of these Baptized Samaritans were for a time after endued with these A fourth Text is Act. 18.8 where many of the Corinthians presently upon their Discipleship appearing were Baptized and this Text can neither be meant of the Baptism of Doctrine nor the work of Conversion or Regeneration seeing the Baptism therein mentioned pre-supposes in Adult Persons such as these were we shall speak afterwards of Infants the hearing of the Gospel-Doctrine and believing But the Baptism of Doctrine cannot pre-suppose the first of these nor yet the work of Conversion the last of them or else they should pre-suppose themselves to partaking of themselves And to mean it of enduing with the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were most of all impertinent nor were these bestowed upon every Believer as the Baptism there mentioned is plainly imported to have been A fifth Text is 1 Cor. 1.13 with 17. Where the Apostle asks these Corinthians if they were Baptized in the name of Paul and affirms that Christ sent him not to Baptize that is it was not his principal Work for the Expression is comparative but to preach the Gospel Now Baptism here cannot be meant of the Baptism of Doctrine for the Apostle plainly distinguishes it from that Nor can it be meant of the work of Conversion for then Paul denies that it was his main Errand to Convert People which is false and contrary to his very Commission Act. 26.17 18. and he should contradict himself in this first Chapter of the Epistle where he thanks God he Baptized so few of them and in the fourth Chapter of this same Epistle Verse 15. where he affirms that through the Gospel he had converted so many of them Nor can it be meant of enduing with the miraculous gifts of the Spirit for the Baptism here mentioned is intimated to have been common to all of them such as these gifts were not The last Text shall be Act. 22.16 And now why tarriest thou arise and be Baptized says Ananias to Paul Now he needed not arise to be Converted or to hear the Gospel which Ananias could Preach to him Sitting nor yet that he might receive the Miraculous Gifts of the Spirit albeit there
we must raze the word Baptize out of the Text. Secondly I prove the Antecedent of this Argument from the first Epistle of Peter 3.21 where the Apostle shews Baptism with Water to be necessary to Salvation under the New Testament while he says The like Figure whereunto even Baptism doth also now Save us And that Baptism here is meant of Baptism with Water appears by the comparison which he uses comparing our Saving by Baptism to Noahs Saving by Water as being the last the Type and the first the Anti-type for the word which we have here turned like Figure is in the Original Language 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anti-type Now there must be some near resemblance betwixt a Type and its Anti-type which is very little or rather none here betwixt Noahs Temporal Saving by Water and any of these Improper Baptisms but very great betwixt that and our Eternal Saving by Baptism with Water which may be understood by comparing them which we may not stay to do Secondly the explication which he subjoyns in place of a Caution shewing how Baptism now Saves us viz. that its not by putting away the filth of the Flesh or by the meer external washing of the Body which Water had a fitness to do or by the very work wrought as Papists would but by its object which it signifies and Seals viz. the Blood of Christ which causeth the Answer of a good Conscience towards God will not allow it to be meant of any other Baptism but Baptism with Water which he so carefully explains nor can any man make Sence of the explication applying it to any of these Improper Baptisms Lastly Christ gives most express Commission to his Apostles and other succeeding Ministers of the New Testament for the Apostles were not to live to the worlds end which is the duration of the Commission to Baptize with Water all the Disciples that should come unto him under the New Testament to the end of the world Mat. 28.19 20. Therefore Baptism with water must uncontrolably be an Ordinance of the New Testament Divinely Instituted and to continue to the end of the world The Consequence hereof is beyond the exception of all the world The Antecedent will also be clear if I can but prove that by Baptism here is meant Baptism with Water which if I do not good Reader I Intreat thee believe me not henceforth Therefore first the Baptism here mentioned in this Text of Matthew pre-requires Discipleship in the party to be Baptized for the Words in the Original Language are Go make Disciples all Nations Baptizing them c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Baptism of Doctrine does not pre-require that or else a man might not Preach the Gospel to any that is not beforehand a Disciple and so it should never have been Preached to the Gentile or Heathen world Nor does Conversion pre-require Discipleship or else no man might indeavour the Conversion of an Heathen or Pagan or of any man who is not before-hand a Disciple Nor can the Miraculous Gifts of the Spirit be here understood by Baptism seeing the Baptism here mentioned is to continue to the end of the world which these Gifts were not as no man even a Quaker will deny Therefore seeing none of these Improper Baptisms are here meant and some Baptism is meant it must be meant of Baptism with water seeing the Text cannot agree with any other Secondly the Baptism mentioned here in Matthew is the same with that mentioned in Mark Mark 16.16 seeing Matthew here and Mark there are manifestly giving a Narration of the self-same thing and Commission as needs no proof But that Baptism mentioned in Mark is Baptism with Water as is before proved Therefore so also is this mentioned here in Matthew seeing they are the very same as said is Thirdly the whole Tenor and Circumstances of the Commission for Baptism in this Text of Matthew do agree with the Baptism with Water thereafter dispensed by the Apostles and other Ministers in their times at their Order and can agree with no other Therefore the same must be here meant and no other The Consequence is so easie that except we resolve utterly to abandon and renounce our Reason and turn absolute Brutes we must understand every Saying of that wherewith it agrees and not of that wherewith it disagrees I prove the Antecedent For this Commission in Matthew for Baptism pre-requires the Discipleship of the Party Go make Disciples Baptizing c. or it requires that they first be made Disciples before they be Baptized or none to be Baptized but Disciples as is most clear 2dly It requires them to Baptize all the Disciples of whatsoever Nation if they appear to be such viz. as the Connexion of this Baptism with the Condition required whereupon it is to be dispensed declares and the Relative word Them not being restricted with any limitating Circumstance does still repeat its whole Antecedent and is of the same full extent therewith 3dly It requires them without delay with the first convenience after the appearing of their Discipleship to Baptize them Go make them Disciples Baptizing as if it should instantly be done there being no more now to be waited for after discovery of the condition and by this all needless delays are cut off And lastly It requires the Baptism therein mentioned to be dispensed in the Name of the Lord as is plainly exprest in the Text. These things express the tenor and circumstances of this Commission such as are any ways Intrinsecal Now all these things do plainly agree unto the Baptism with Water thereafter dispensed by the foresaid Persons and as is already proved cannot agree with any other That they agree unto that I prove for the Baptism with Water dispensed by them pre-required Discipleship or it was dispensed to none but Disciples Secondly It was dispensed to all that became Disciples and appeared such to the Church of whatever Nation Thirdly It was without delay dispensed to them upon the appearing of their Discipleship Fourthly It was dispensed to them in the Name of the Lord. All which appears from our second third and fourth Arguments before and the many Scriptures cited therein See Act. 2.41 and 8.12 13 36 37. and 10.47 and 18.8 and 22.16 and 1 Cor. 1.13 Lastly All the Baptisms except Baptism with Water that can be alledged or pretended to be meant in this Text of Matthew as the Baptism of Doctrine of Conversion of the miraculous Gifts of the Spirit and let the Baptism of the Cross be added too are only Improperly and Metaphorically so called as needs little demonstration I think seeing pouring dipping sprinkling and washing which the word Baptize signifies in the Original Language being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be proper to any of these and to that any of them agreeth in a proper sence as any Man without preserves may see Having premised this ground I again prove that the Baptism mentioned in this Text of Matthew
and in all the Texts that I have named which here I advertise that this evident Argument may be cumulatively applied to every one of them is Baptism with Water Because we may not throw about the words of any Text of Scripture from a proper to an improper meaning except some necessity either of the Analogy of Faith in general which is the constant and perpetual sentence of many perspicuous and bright shining Scriptures concerning things essential to Salvation or else of the particular scope and circumstances of the Context it self constrain us so to do otherwise we may without any necessity constraining us at our alone will and meer pleasure without any other ground imaginable moving us throw about from a proper to an improper meaning the most properly meant saying in all the whole Scriptures and reject the proper sence and meaning of every Text and make them every where at our meer pleasure to speak improperly but that is utterly absurd and would enervat and turn to nothing the very body of the Scriptures as needs no Demonstration I am sure but there is no such necessity in this or any Text we have Argued from to throw about the word Baptism from being meant properly of Baptism with Water to be meant of any of the fore-mentioned improperly so called Baptisms Or else we charge the Quakers to shew and make good that necessity if they can which we defie them and a whole Legion of their Inspirers ever to do Therefore by this irrefragable Argument from the Analogy of Faith Baptism with Water which alone is properly so called is both meant here in Matthew and in all the Texts that we have named Analogum per se positum stat pro principali Analogato Having so demonstrated that Baptism with Water is meant in that Text of Matthew hence it is manifest that Baptism with Water is an Ordinance which God hath appointed to be continued to the end of the World for the promise there subjoyned of Christs presence with his Ministers there Commissionated alway even unto the end of the World for their encouragement in the Execution of that their Commission doth most plainly shew their Commission to be of that continuance Secondly I have shewed that Baptism with Water was once in the New Testament Church necessary unto Salvation as was explained and due in the Churches Court to all who probably had received the Spirit of Grace Let the Quakers shew us if they can when it became unnecessary and when or where that Bond and Tie was taken off the New Testament Church Thirdly seeing by all our preceeding Arguments it is evident that Baptism with Water was once of Divine Institution under the New Testament the Quakers must either yield the continuance thereof to be to the end of the World or else they must say That it is since the Institution repealed again Let them shew us then where the repealing thereof is Recorded or to be found in the Scriptures which are the Supream Rule of Faith and Manners for the Quakers bare word spoken may be in a mixture when the Moon was at the Full is not enough for it And if they can shew us nothing for it which is sure and yet will say It is repealed they may upon the same ground that is to say without any ground say that the Commandments to repent believe fear and love God and all the rest of them are repealed and then we may do what we please and follow the Light within at the top-speed But now because in Justice we are bound to give the Quakers fair Game we must hear what they have to say against our preceeding Doctrine and we need not doubt but their Infallible heads are furnisht with forcible Arguments Therefore first because from thence they fear their greatest danger albeit I have proved the business by many other convincing Arguments and could without that Argument irresistibly make good the point they assault the Argument from Matthew with several devices First then They alledge that Baptizing in that Text is the same with Disciple-making which is not meant of Baptizing with Water and so neither is that Ans First They ought to shew us some necessary ground for this Metaphorical Commentary upon the word Baptize which we have not seen as yet Secondly Unto this conceipt we shall oppose our second and last Arguments whereby it is proved that Baptism with Water is meant in the Text in despight of this Exception Consider the Arguments for we need not repeat them Thirdly All their grounds for this Exception is because when it is said Go make Disciples c. the word Baptize is subjoined in the Present Tence of the Participle Baptizing but by this ground if good Teaching which presently follows too and in the same manner shall also be the same with Disciple-making and so the whole Commission shall consist of one and the same thing thrice repeated which is most absurd and no Man though as absurd as a Quaker will say it For who shall think or why that Christ committed such a three-fold Tautology in delivering so short a Commission that would neither have suited the wisdom of the Person nor the nature of the thing Secondly They except against the same Text with their old Friend Socinus that the Apostles dispensed their Baptism with Water only in the Name of the Lord Jesus whereas the Baptism mentioned in this Text of Matthew is to be dispensed in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost and so they cannot be one and the same Ans By this Argument they might as well prove that Paul Preached not in the Name of any other Person of the Trinity but of the Lord Jesus only because he only is mentioned Act. 9.27 29. or that he and Timothy served no other Person of the Trinity because he only is mentioned Philip. 1.1 Secondly I shall oppose unto this Exception my first second and fourth Arguments whereby maugre this exception Baptism with Water is proved to be meant in this Text of Matthew Thirdly The rest of the Trinity are omitted in the History though it follows not that so they were in the action partly for shortening the Narration which is usual and partly because it being the great doubt and controversie of the time If Jesus was the true Messias for that cause his name is more frequently mentioned than the rest of the Trinity in the whole New Testament Thirdly They except against the same Text that the Apostles are therein commanded to Baptize in the Name of the Lord which sort of Baptizing is with the Spirit say they not at all with Water Ans Unto this Exception I shall first oppose all my Arguments whereby over the belly thereof I have proved Baptism with Water to be meant in the Text. Secondly Was not Baptism with Water say ye dispensed in the Name of the Lord See it done I pray and commanded to be done that ye may not pretend ignorance hereafter Act.
not Authority to feed the Flock and edifie the Body of Jesus from his own Word in the nearest method and have they not Authority to furnish and guard their People against damnable Delusions and Soul-ruining Errors in the most easie and successful manner they can If they have not Authority for and be not bound to do these things then they have not Authority for nor are they bound to do any thing Let all the Quakers in Britain answer but one mouthful of sence to it if Ministers whose Office must continue in the Church to the end of the World and till that day when all the Saints shall be compleatly perfected Matth. 28.19 20. Ephes 4.11 12 13. be not given to the Church for the very forementioned ends and if these be not the Incumbent Works of their Office But it 's vain to demand an answer which can never be found or sence from these who Impugning Grammar declare themselves Enemies to Sencespeaking And have not the Quakers also published a Confession of their black Faith Entituled The Principles of Truth viz. Per Antiphrasin for they should have said of Falshood Fiction Error Blasphemy and Calumnies printed in the year 1668. and we have also seen several of their sweet Catechisms But say the Quakers Is not the Doctrine of Christian Religion as good in the Scriptures as in any Confession or Catechism Ans Yes no doubt but what of that will that infer any thing against a Confession or Catechism in a Church whereby that good Doctrine of the Scriptures may be more speedily and distinctly learned I would rather think that the better the Doctrine of the Scriptures is the means contributing to our more ready and distinct learning thereof should be the more useful and warrantable So unfortunate are the Quakers that their own Weapons turns upon themselves Observe that this Objection of the Quakers if it could have proved any thing at all would have Militated as much against all Preaching as against a Confession or Catechism Hence though the Scriptures be a better Book than any Confession or Catechism in the World as formally Constituted by Ecclesiastical Authority yet a Confession or Catechism are not therefore unlawful or unwarrantable in a Church as I think is clear enough from what I have said But say the Quakers Whether or not have ye an Infallible Spirit to give forth such a Directory Confession and Catechism as ye have done Ans Hereby the Quakers refuse that any Man may direct according to the Scripture the External Circumstances of Gods Publick Worship or that any Man may Catechize or give an Account or Confession of his Faith which every Man in due Circumstances is bound to do Matth. 10.32 33. Rom. 10.9 10. 1. Pet. 3.15 but much more a Church partly for satisfaction to other Churches partly for distinguishing Orthodox Churches from Heretical Synagogues and partly for a short and clear publick Test of the Principles of her own Members except he be Infallible which any Man may see to tend to the banishing of all these Duties out of the World seeing there is no Man now adays Infallibly Inspired for such things But what great need I pray is there of Mens Infallibility in this Affair They are not to assure their Doctrine from their own Infallibility but from the Infallible Scripture shall not that be sufficient to assure it I cannot but think so To the Law and to the Testimony then instead of your Inspired Parts What should be answered to the last Article of their Query is manifest from what we have said already concerning a Directory and it 's needless to repeat Tenth QUERY Whether or not is your Sanctification your Justification and your Faith and Grace the gifts of these without sin as they are manifested within you Yea or Nay SVRVEY Here is an obscure Riddle a dark Aenigma which where to find the sence of is a little difficult but if it hath any sence they seem to Query Whether or not our Justification Sanctification c. be the gifts of our Directory Confession and Catechism whereof they were last speaking in the preceeding Query But what that term Without Sin stands for here is not easily Divined nor can it have any Errand or Connexion with the present Question and therefore I must throw it by as an insignificant and no less impertinent Cipher I answer therefore to their present Question That our Justification Sanctification c. are the Gifts of God only Rom. 8.32 33. Ephes 2.8 Jam. 1.17 and that the Question is void of sence seeing the bestowing of a gift is an action properly relative to an Intelligent Being for we do not receive gifts from Stocks Stonee or Brutes Notwithstanding this does not presently exclude the use of all ordinary means for their meaning in this Query is plain that our Justification Sanctification c. cannot be the gifts of God but must be the gifts of our Confession Catechism c. because forsooth we make use of these as ordinary means allowed of God for their proper ends above described For albeit our Corns be not the gifts of our Ploughs and Harrows nor the continuance of our Lives the gifts of our Food and Raiment but all these things are the gifts of God yet we may not lay aside all Ploughing and Harrowing and the Quakers I believe will not reject Food and Raiment Let them therefore either permit us the use of Confessions Directories and other inferior helps and means conducible in their own order or else by their own example persuade the world if they can never to Plough or Sow more never to Eat or Drink more This is enough for Answer to this Query which comes in but by way of Objection and Cavillation Eleventh QUERY Whether or not your Directory and Catechism and Confession of Faith be Gospel Yea or Nay and if so Whether it be not another Gospel than that which the Apostles Preached who said the Gospel was the Power of God Rom. 1.16 SVRVEY I have above at the Survey of the Ninth Query abundantly justified our Directory in the general as was there explained and proved that God hath given Warrant and Authority to Church-Guides and Judicatories for Making and Constituting these according to the general Precepts of Scripture for maintaining Order and Decency and promoting Edification in the Church and therefore I shall not here needlesly repeat any thing to that purpose Only I shall take notice that seeing the Quakers oppose these things they therefore declare that it is their mind that Church-Officers and Judicatories should not give Obedience to Gods Commands should slight Order and Decency and the Churches Edification There is the new-coined Directory of the Quakers let all Men judge if it be not an Instrument of the Devil But for Answer to their Query I say That there are several Rules in our Directory that materially considered are very Scripture-Rules particularly delivered therein as I shewed before at the Survey of the
Affirmer only be bound to prove his Affirmation yet until they do that I shall confirm our Negation Therefore first If Christ Died for and Redeemed Reprobates upon condition of their Believing then God intended that seeing Christ did not Dye for or Redeem any man either against or beside Gods intention But God never intended that Christ should Dye for or Redeem any Reprobate upon condition of Believing seeing so he should have intended the Redemption of Reprobates and that upon a condition which he infallibly foresaw would never come to pass which sort of Intention cannot even befall any may of sound mind much less can it befall the Infinitly-Wise God Secondly According to this Doctrine whereby Christ is said by his Death to have Redeemed all men whatsoever Conditionally Christ shall by his Death have purchased Redemption upon condition of their Believing for these who long before his Death were already actually damned in Hell for whom there was no place left for Redemption which is extreamly absurd that a price should be exacted from the Redeemer for these who themselves were then Suffering and Eternally without hope to suffer the Vengeance of Eternal Fire for their Sins This cannot stand with Justice Thirdly If Christ hath Redeemed Reprobates Conditionally then the performance of the Condition viz. Believing is either in their own power or else it is a gift of God whether purchased by Christs Death or by God bestowed without being thereby purchased all is one to our present Argument It is not in their own power Joh. 6.44 and 15.5 1 Cor. 2.14 Eph. 2.8 Philip 1.29 Heb. 12.2 If then the Condition be a gift of God then God either bestows it upon Reprobates or not if he doth then he either bestows it upon them Absolutely or else Conditionally if Absolutely then Reprobates shall thereby be made believers and so be saved seeing as is supposed God doth Absolutely bestow saving Faith upon them if Conditionally then seeing Faith is the condition by the Adversaries own principles the sence hereof will be that God bestows Faith in Christ upon Reprobates upon condition that they first have Faith in him which is both nonsense and it also implies a contradiction that they should believe when they have no Faith as is supposed If then God doth not bestow Faith upon Reprobates then they cannot be said to be redeemed seing so their Redemption as is clear from what is now said depends upon a Condition which is neither in their own power nor yet doth God bestow it upon them and so it is utterly impossible for them ever to perform And will any Man say that a Man is Redeemed when yet his Redemption is not made so much as possible to him his Redemption is upon the suppositions and grounds now laid down as impossible for him as when a Man says if ye will bring down the Stars I will give you my Daughter the Marriage with his Daughter is impossible How then comes it to be a thing actual when yet it is impossible I confess that object would be worth the seeing that were at once actual and yet impossible Fourthly if Christ by his death Redeemed all men whatsover only upon Condition of believing and otherwise Redeemed them not then he by his death Redeemed only believers and none else as is manifest But all men whatsoever are not believers therefore Christ did not by his death redeem all men whatsoever from the Adversaries own principles and yet they contend that Christ by his death Redeemed all men whatsoever and so they directly contradict themselves and their universal Conditional Redemption is repugnant Lastly for I will stand no longer upon a negative especially if Christ died for all men whatsoever give it what name they will then he satisfied Justice for all mens sins whatsoever But the Consequent is most false and absurd therefore so is the antecedent from which it follows The falshood of the Consequent and its absurdity are obvious for if Christ satisfied Justice for all Mens sins whatsoever then all Reprobates are most unjustly Condemned Seing their sins for which they are Condemned are by Christ satisfied for and so their Condemnation is an Act of great injustice done both to Christ and them which cannot be charged upon God without extream Blasphemy I Prove the Connexion of the Major because the very immediate end and Intention of Christ dying for any Man was to satisfie Justice for his sins as appears from Isaia 53 8 9 10. Mat. 26 28. Rom. 4 25. and 5 9 10 2 Cor. 5 21. Galat. 3 13. Heb. 9.26 28 and 10 12. 1 Pet. 2 24. In all which places it is manifest that for whomsoever Christ died he died to satisfie Justice for their sins for it is expresly asserted in these Texts that He was smitton for their Transgressions made his Soul an offering for their sins Shed his Blood for the Remission of their sins reconciled them to God by his Blood was delivered to die for their Offences was made sin for them was made a curse for them to deliver them from the curse appeared to put away their sin by the Sacrifice of himself Offered himself a Sacrifice for their sins bare their sins in his Body on the Tree All which declares that for whomsoever Christ died he died to satisfie Justice for their sins If they Answer that Christ satisfied for all Mens sins whatsoever upon condition of their beleiving as they use and otherwise not Unto this I shall subsume that not all Men whatsoever beleive but only some Few Therefore from the Enemies own principles he did not satisfie for all Mens sins whatsoever but only for believers sins and none else and so their principles involves a Contradiction viz. he satisfied for all Mens sins whatsoever say they and yet from these same very principles he did not satisfie for all Mens sins whatsoever but only for believers sins Secondly seeing misbelief is a chief and Mother-sin Christ hath surely satisfied for it also amongst the rest for all for whose sins he did satisfie otherwise he could not at all have Redeemed them from the curse if he had left any of their sins unsatisfied for and so if Christ died and satisfied for any Man that is for all that Condemned then still that Man is Condemned for that which yet is satisfied for which is an Act of extream injustice What did not Christ satisfie for all their sins for whom he satisfied if not how came he to satisfie for a part and not the rest and how are they said to be Redeemed by a partial satisfaction which cannot Redeem any Man and who should satisfie for the rest of their sins If then which is certain Christ satisfied for all their sins for whom he did satisfie and so for their misbelief among the rest I would gladly know if Christ satisfied for all Men whatsoever for what Reprobates are Condemned for it cannot without the greatest injustice be for their sins which as is
Joh. 2.19 where the Apostle says That such Persons of the same sort that Peter here speaks of went out from them that they might be made manifest but were not of them where he teaches that these never were of the number of the truly Redeemed but that before their Apostasie they were not discerned from them and had the same Judgment of Charity with them Seventhly The promises of the Gospel are universal to all Therefore Christ Died for all men whatsoever Ans They are universal to all Believers Whosoever believes shall be saved not unto all men it 's no where said whosoever is a man shall be saved Eighthly They object That except Christ have died for all men whatsoever many to whom the Gospel is preached and are exhorted to Believe shall have nothing that they can Believe or if they believe they shall believe a falshood But these things are absurd Ans It is false that they shall have nothing to Believe for they shall have to believe that Christ is a sufficient Saviour able to save to the utmost all that come unto God by him Heb. 7.25 and that he will also save all that come to God by him Joh. 3.36 and 5.24 and 6.37.47 and so they have also to believe that Salvation is offered to themselves in particular and that they shall surely be saved if they will receive and embrace Christ as he is offered in the Gospel and while they believe these things they shall believe no falshood but a most certain and sure truth And if thereupon they shall flee unto Christ for refuge and resolutely cleave unto him it shall be a clear evidence to them that they are of the number of these for whom Christ died seeing no Reprobate did ever truly flee unto Christ as his only Refuge and cordially adhere unto him Joh. 10.26 Lastly They object That every man is bound to believe that Christ died for him Therefore Christ died for all men whatsoever seeing we cannot be bound to believe falshoods and lies Ans I utterly deny the Antecedent seeing many in the world never had any means to hear of Christs Death who therefore are not bound to believe so much as that he died for any man seeing no man is bound to believe that which was never held forth unto him nor could he in any Moral diligence know of Secondly Neither are all who hear and profess the Gospel bound to believe that Christ died for them but only such as have embraced Christ on his own Gospel-terms whose Faith in Christ and Repentance towards God are Infallible evidences that Christ hath Died for them Nor can there be any thing more absurdly said than that every man even that hears the Gospel preached is bound to believe that Christ died for him whether he have embraced Christ or not for then every man that hears the Gospel should be also bound to believe that he shall be saved whether he embrace Christ or not seeing for whomsoever Christ Died he also saves them Rom. 5.10 and 8.32 1 Thes 5.9 10. Thou wilt say Why then are these for whom Christ Died not Exhorted to believe in Him Ans They are not exhorted to believe that Christ died for them except they shall first make choice of and embrace him for their Lord and Saviour as the Gospel offers him Secondly They are exhorted to believe in Christ or to accept of him as their alone Lord and Saviour upon his own terms to shew them what is their Duty and to make them without excuse in that there was so much pains and means bestowed upon them to shew them their Duty and the way to Salvation and yet they would not obey and embrace but rejected the Mercy of God and Life Eternal when it was offered to them upon condition of their believing in Christ Jesus But thou wilt say They cannot believe in Christ How then can they be unexcusable for not doing it seeing they could not help it Ans But it 's their own fault that they cannot believe in him their inward sinful Corruption is the cause thereof Secondly They are unwilling as well as unable and therefore they are capable enough to become unexcusable seeing they are both unwilling and it 's their own fault that they are unable Fourteenth QUERY What makes a Believer Whether or not is it by believing in the Light according to Christs Doctrine who says He is the Light of the World and doth enlighten every one that comes into the world that all men through him might Believe and who follows him shall not walk in darkness for he is the Light and says That he that believes is saved Then is not the Light saving which he believes and he that does not believe in the Light is damned already Then is not the Light or his disobedience to it his Condemnation Yea or Nay SVRVEY It is one of the chief Articles of the Quakers Creed that all men whatsoever are sufficiently enlightned for Conversion and Salvation as their Confession also asserts pag. 5 15 16 32 33 34. as also that they have sufficient Grace to be Converted and Saved Quakerism no Popery pag. 66 67 68 69 71. Therefore I shall divide this Survey into two Sections the first concerning Universal Light the second concerning Universal Grace SECT I. Concerning Vniversal Sufficient Light The Question here is plain viz. Whether or not there is a sufficient Light for Conversion and Salvation in all men whatsoever without exception The Quakers affirm that there is I deny it and albeit the Affirmer is still obliged to prove not the Denier yet I prove my Negative Therefore first The Natural Man does not discern neither can he know the things of the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 2.14 Ergo Natural Men are not sufficiently enlightned for Conversion or Salvation The Quakers expound this Text sometimes of the unrenewed part in a Man and sometimes of Natural Reason which say they is here meant by the Natural Man But Contrariwise it is plain that Paul does there compare distinct Persons of Men. Secondly I appeal the Analogy of Faith for this their Figurative Gloss Thirdly Though we give them their own Gloss they profit nothing seeing many yea most of men are not renewed and have no other Light but of Natural Reason being destitute of the Spirit and not having the light of the glorious Gospel shining in unto them 2 Cor. 4.3 4. Jud. 19. and so these men cannot discern Spiritually or with a Spiritual evidence seeing a Spiritual act cannot be produced without a Spiritual Principle proportioned thereunto more than a Horse can produce acts of Reason for nothing can act above it's Sphere and Capacity Secondly There are many in the World that are covered with gross darkness Many have their understanding darkened and are alienated from the Life of God through the ignorance that is in them because of the blindness of their hearts Isai 60.2 Ephes 4.18 Believers themselves in their unrenewed state were
ye are in and repent if that be possible after ye have so abused the Truths of Jesus and his inheritance Second Section fixing Popery upon the Quakers Having discussed your charge of Popery calumniously 〈◊〉 against us I shall present a true one against you and that very breifly First Therefore for I resolve to adhere to the order of the queries above dispatched It is a Popish rule and a great one too That ignorance is the Mother of Devotion and ye both in those queries Quakerism no Popery pag. 98. are not a jot behind with them in that where ye condemn all means of knowledge both humane and divine and consequently knowledge it self seeing we cannot reach knowledge without the use of the means of knowledge whereby through Gods blessing we may attain unto it for extraordinary Inspiration is now ceased as is proved before nor must we tempt God to work extraordinary miracles and neglect and despise the ordinary means which he had allowed Secondly the Papists deny the Scriptures to have any authority over us or in order to us untill they get it from the Church whereby they mean the Pope and his Clergy and do also deprive the whole body of the people or Laity as they call them of the use of the Scriptures And do not ye also deny the Scriptures to be our rule at least our principal rule and endeavour to cause all men reject them at least as the principal rule Witness the proceeding Queries and your Quakerism no Popery And is not this one dish indifferent dressings for both of you aim to bring the Scriptures low yea to nought without your approbation they without their Pope and Councils approbation yea without the approbation of your light and sentiments within and so both of you agree exactly in subjecting the Scripture-authority to the authority of another rule which Inevitably must be as ye apprehend I am sure in both these articles ye are as like the Pope as any bastard can be like his father Thirdly The Papists and ye agree in denying Infant Baptism an external Christian Sabbath-day and Psalms-singing to be ordinances of Divine Institution under the Gospel they alleadgingthem to be only traditional ye that they are superstitious will 〈…〉 All which things we have seen in your queries Con 〈…〉 faith and Quakerism no Popery Sixthly 〈◊〉 have put three Articles into the last The Papists deny Bread and Wine to be in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper affirming that after the priests consecration it is no more Bread and Wiâ—e but is substantially changed into the very body and blood 〈◊〉 Christ so your brethren divinely Inspired as ye are in their fixth query here mock and scoff at the eating of bread and drinking of wine in that Sacrament making way it seems for that Popish Transubstantiation whereof we are the more confirmed because at the Sixteenth Query as I cleared before they lay down an assertion that cannot stand without the very grounds of that Transubstantiation Seventhly The Papists assert the Infallibility of their Pope and Councils and make that a ground of defence for their Church-constitutions and whole religion rejecting all that want the authority of such Infallible guides So do not you assert the Infallibility of your teachers Albeit often they are rather lunatick and oppose our Confession directory c. upon the very account of the fallibility of these that formed them though to no purpose as is shewed Eightly The Jesuit Papists worse then any of the rest stifly deny original sin and assert universal redemption universal light universal grace free-will in natural unrenewed men unto good and the Apostacy of the Saints all which I have shewed to be contrary to the Scriptures and in all these the Quakers are not a jot behind them but on the contrary do exceedingly out-reach them Fourteenthly For there are six articles in my last charge the same Jesuit Papists hold perfection to be attainable in this life Wherein ye are indeed more positive then they albeit still against the Scriptures as is before proved which shew us that according to Gods way of disposition for the debate depends not on potentia absoluta who will have us here to have a continual war with our corruptions that the victories of his grace may be the more glorious we the more humble and dependant on him Wee shall never here be fully perfect or freed from all corruption And Sir methinks ye strongly savour of supererogation too while ye say Quakerism no Popery Pag. 37.38 that ye can attain a sinless perfection in this life and yet grow in more degrees of grace for Sir when ye are altogether sinless and so neither God nor his law can ask any more of you as not being defective or unconform in a jot or else ye cannot be sinless ye may spare that which ye have more than is required and due to a needful friend or throw it into the Roman-Churches grand treasury of merit and be Canonized next day for a Saint for exceeding your duty and giving that overplus to the Church Fifteenthly Ye hold justification by your inherent righteousness and salvation by the merit of works as much as any Papist nay as the Pope himself does as is shewed Sevententhly for there are two in the last your brethren have endeavoured what they can in your Confession of Faith as we saw before And ye in your Quakerism no Popery Pag. 94 do sweetly also combine to clear the Pope from that reproachful name of Antichrist they alleadging that the Antichrist is our will and the Whore our wisdom that sits upon the same ye affirming that Antichrist more strictly taken is a spirit sitting in mans heart Properly which the Pope certainly is not and so according to you Sir we cannot at least Properly call the Pope Antichrist Ye are understood Sir Eighteenthly Ye hold the Apocryphal books at least many of them to be of divine Inspiration and consequently of equal authority with the Scriptures for every doctrine divinely Inspired is of Infallible divine authority and Scripture assurance or authority can rise no higher And herein Sir ye also joyn with the Papists And when ye ask which is your only argument by what rule of faith we know that these Apocryphal books are not of divine authority or equal to the Scriptures seeing the Scriptures says not whether they are or not I Answer that though by express Scripture sentence or plain positive saying this cannot be cleared yet seeing these books do all of them want Scripture-stile which by the rest of the undoubted Scriptures compared we easily see and they were not found in the original language of the Old Testament and they are never cited in the New Testament and in many of them there are things frivolous written yea quite unsutable and in some of them the writer excuses his failings and they were never accounted any part of Canonical Scripture in the Old Testament-times and this passes without