omitted In Chap. 21. Sect. 7. where they say That the Sabbath from the Resurrection of Christ was changed into the First Day of the Week which in Scripture say they is called the Lord's Day and is to be continued to the End of the World as the Christians Sabbath In which they assert Three Things First That the First Day of the Week is come in place of the Seventh for a Sabbath To prove which they alledge 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. Now concerning the Collection for the Saints as I have given order to the Churches of Galatia even so do ye Vpon the First Day of the Week let every one of you lay by him in store as God hath prospered him that there be no Gathering when I come Acts 20.7 The Divines Non-sensical Proofs That the First day of the Week is instead of the Sabbath And upon the First Day of the Week when the Disciples came together to break Bread Paul preached to them ready to depart on the Morrow and continued his Speech until Midnight That these Proofs Assert not the things expresly we need not I suppose dispute Now to say that because Paul desires the Corinthians to lay something by them in store that day or because he brake Bread continued his Speech until Midnight therefore the First Day of the Week is come in place of the Sabbath is a Consequence more remarkable for its Sottishness than to be credited for its Soundness Indeed to make so solemn an Article of Faith as these Men would have the Morality of the First Day of the Week to be would need a more positive and express Authority The Text doth clearly enough tell the Reason of the Disciples Meeting so frequently and of Paul's preaching so long because he was ready to depart to Morrow it speaks not a word of its being Sabbath Their Second Assertion That the First Day of the Week is therefore called the Lord 's Day Is drawn yet more strangely from that of Rev. 1.10 The Lord's Day I was in the Spirit on the Lord 's Day and heard behind me a great Voice as of a Trumpet Whereas no particular Day of the Week is mentioned So for them to say John meaned the First Day of the Week hath no more Proof but their own bare Assertion For their Third Assertion That it is to be continued to the End of the World as the Christians Sabbath They that alledge these Scriptures Exod. 20.8 10 11. Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it Holy but the Seventh Day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God in it thou shalt not do any Work sabbath- The sabbath-Sabbath-Day thou nor thy Son nor thy Daughter thy Man-Servant nor thy Maid-Servant nor thy Cattle nor thy Stranger which is within thy Gates for in Six Days the Lord made Heaven and Earth the Sea and all that in them is and rested the Seventh Day wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath Day and hallowed it Isaiah 56.2 4 6 7. Matth. 5.17 18. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil For verily I say unto you Till Heaven and Earth pass one Jot or one Tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled If they prove any thing they must needs prove the continuance of the Seventh Day seeing in all the Law there is no mention made of the First Day of the Week being a Sabbath The Seventh Day If these may be reckoned good and sound Consequences I know no Absurdities so great no Heresies so damnable no Superstitions so ridiculous but may be cloathed with the Authority of Scripture In their Twenty Seventh Chapter in the 1 2 3. Sections they speak at large of the Definition and Nature of Sacraments but in all the Scriptures they bring there is not one Word of Sacraments The Truth is there was a good Reason for this Omission for such a thing is not to be found in all the Bible The word Sacrament not to be found in all the Bible For them to alledge that the thing signified is to be found in Scripture though that be also a begging of the Question will not excuse such who elsewhere aver The Whole Counsel of God is contained in the Scripture to forsake and reject the Tenour thereof and scrape out of the Rubbish of the Romish Tradition for that which is reckoned by themselves so substantial a part of their Faith In their Fourth Section they assert two things First That there are Two only Sacraments under the Gospel Secondly That these two are Baptism and the Supper To prove which they alledge Matth. 28.19 Go ye therefore and Teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 11.20 23. When ye come together therefore into one place this is not to eat the Lord 's Supper for I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus the same Night in which he was betrayed took Bread 1 Cor. 4.1 Let a Man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the Mysteries of God Heb. 5.4 4. And no Man taketh this Honour to himself but he that is called of God as was Aaron Now granting there were such a thing as Sacraments to be solemnly performed all that these Scriptures will prove is That these Two were appointed to be performed But that there are only Two or that these are they which is the thing asserted and incumbent to be proved there is not the least Shadow of Proof alledged For according to their own Definition of a Sacrament in the larger Catechism where they say The parts of a Sacrament are two the one an outward and sensible Sign used according to Christ's own appointment the other an inward and spiritual Grace thereby signified both the Washing of one another's Feet and the Anointing of the Sick with Oil doth answer to it and many other Things So that the Probation of a Sacrament at all or of their being Two Seven yea or Seventy is all alike easie seeing neither Name nor Number is to be found in the Scripture they being the meer Conceits and Inventions of Men. And yet it is marvellous to see with how great Confidence some Men do assert the Scripture to be their Rule while they build up so considerable Parts of their Doctrine without the least Scripture-Foundation Thus I thought fit to pitch upon these Three viz. the Scriptures Sabbath and Sacraments because these be Three of the main things for which we the Quakers are chiefly cried out against and accused as believing Erroneously concerning them Now what we believe concerning these things and how agreeable our Testimony herein is to the Scriptures is heretofore sufficiently demonstrated Also how little Scripture-Proof these have for their Contrary Assertions to us in these things notwithstanding of their great Pretences to Scripture will
the Pride of all Flesh. ye would see the Lord Staining the Pride of all Flesh and bringing into Contempt all the Honourable in the Earth that the Lord alone may be Exalted and see him coming out of his Holy Habitation to silence all Flesh. Hath not the Lord removed most of all those who were Eminently Instrumental to serve him in the Work of the Ministry And is he not daily making their Skirts bare who remain and daily making them to Cease out of the midst of the National Church who rejoiced in her Pride Is not his Voice sounding aloud unto such of you as yet remain Ye shall no more be haughty because of my holy Mountain If to day ye will hear his Voice harden not your hearts for I am sure the Teacher that will tell you infallibly what ye are called to do is near and is not removed into a Corner But it is the Enemies Work to Vail and Cover present Duties and Opportunities and represent what is past or lost as very desirable and even to prompt a People or Person to lament and bewail their by-past Failings and short-comings who do little heed or regard the Worth of the remaining Season and so to Redeem the Time Wherefore my Advice in tender love to thy Soul is That thou Wait on the Lord to understand aright the Import of such Signs as are now appearing when the Lord is proceeding to work marvellous Works and Wonders in the Earth The Lord is angering the Wise and Learned by pouring out his Spirit upon Illiterate Tradesmen not bred up at Schools and Vniversities and is making the Wisdom of the Wise to perish and the Vnderstanding of the Prudent to be hid and pouring out his Spirit upon Sons and Daughters Servants and Hand-maids provoking to jealousy and angering the Mighty Learned Wise Men in this Generation by the foolish Appearance of a Company of Illiterate Tradesmen who were never bred up at Schools and Vniversities Weavers and Shoo-makers and Fishers Yea is not one of the dreadful Signs of this Time fulfilling in thee and thy Brethren Rev. 16 8 9. The fourth Angel poured out his Vial upon the Sun and power was given unto him to scorch Men with fire And Men were scorched with great heat and blasphemed the Name of God which hath power over these Plagues and they Repented not to give him Glory And whether this plague be not poured out upon your Anti-Christian Sun The scorching Plague on Anti-Christ his Dialect doth shew and ye be the Persons that are thus scorched your Dialect doth sufficiently declare unto all those whose Eyes the Lord hath opened I also desire thee to consider how Inconsonant with true Christianity a spirit of Persecution is and how much more unsuitable and unequal for a People or Person under the same Condemnation Surely that poor Man who had been but a little time in Christ's Company was so far influenced by his meek and moderate Spirit as not only to forbear Railing himself against suffering Christ but to rebuke his fellow-Companion for so doing which Instance will stand in Judgment against thee for the contrary Practice Neither will thy denying us to be Members of Christ and not suffering for well-doing Gross Railing rebuked and thy accounting us Demoniacks avail thee nor cover thee from that Woe if thou obtain not Mercy to Repent denounced against such as call good evil and evil good and Light darkness and darkness Light in that day when the Lord Jesus shall declare before Men and Angels we are his Friends and Followers O Robert thy hard Speeches have manifested thy own sad Acknowledgment to be very true the Holy-Fire is gone out with thee indeed in place of which that which never was nor is of God's kindling is brought forth And this is not now to be found by secret Search in Corners by secret Surmises but is by many of you laid open and in thy late Postscript as on a Theatre set up as those who run may read the Holy Fire if ever there was any is quite Extinct Concerning which Compound of unjust groundless Accusations and malitious Inventions I hope I may say there are many sober serious People who fear and serve the Living God inward Jews whose hearts the Lord hath Circumcised to love him who desire continually in the Integrity of their hearts to serve him against whom I know no Divination nor Inchantment of Devils or Men shall prosper Of which Blessed Company I do avouch my self one through the Free Grace of God and I hope I and many with me have put all thine and thy Brethrens Writings in the Lord 's own hand to Answer for the Vindication of his Glory and the Manifestation of his Truth and I desire to make no worse use of thy Postscript than Hezekiah made of the Writings of Rabshakeh in that day Unto the Righteous Lord who searcheth the Heart and trieth the Reins do I Appeal for whose Immediate Help and seasonable powerful Appearance I desire both to Hope and patiently to Wait until he have performed his whole Work in Zion and Jerusalem both amongst you and us The Lord will plead out Cause then shall be brought to pass the sure Promise The Lord will punish the Fruit of the stout heart of his Adversary and the glory of his high looks In that day he will inwardly and outwardly both plead our Cause and execute Judgment for us He will bring forth our Righteousness as the Light and make his Judgments for us manifest as the Noon day although we lie among the black pots of your Reproaches Now the Lord will bring us forth unto the Light and we shall behold his Righteousness fulfilled in you or manifested upon you My Witness is in Heaven I am one who desires not the Evil Day but am willing to embrace all the sweet opportunities of the drawings of my Father's Love and the arisings of his Life to stand in the Gap for the single-hearted among you and I must declare for the Exoneration of my own Conscience I am an experimental Witness how grievously thou violatest the Truth in misrepresenting the things which thou callest the bitter Root springing up in these sprouts of Hell 1. Mens not receiving the love of the Truth 2. Their pleasing themselves with Names and Notions while Christ was not received to dwell in the heart 3. Their not departing from Iniquity who seemed to call on his Name I am a Witness when the Lord called me out from among the Presbyterians I was one who according to my Education and Information and Inclination from my Child-hood was a true Lover of that called the Glorious Gospel and a constant Attender upon the Declarations thereof and the Messengers Feet that published it were beautiful to me so long as those Ordinances of man were unto me as the Ordinances of Christ which was more than 30 years I loved them more than all things in this World I passed through
necessary which as Protestants we affirm and have proved is false else we must confess that Water is not here understood of outward Water For to say that when Water and the Spirit are placed here just together and in the same manner thô there be not any difference or ground for it visible in the Text or deduceable from it That the necessity of Water is here Praecepti but not Medii but the necessity of the Spirit is both Medii and Praecepti is indeed confidently to affirm but not to prove * Obj. VI. Sixthly and lastly they Object That the Baptism of Water is a visible Sign or Badge to distinguish Christians from Infidels even as Circumcision did the Jews †Answ. I Answer This saith nothing at all unless it be proved to be a necessary Precept or part of the New Covenant-Dispensation it not being lawful to us to impose outward Ceremonies and Rites and say they will distinguish us from Infidels Circumcision was positively commanded and said to be a Seal of the first Covenant Circumcision a Seal of the first Covenant Water-baptism falsly called a Badge of Christianity Which is the Badge of Christianity but as we have already proved that there is no such Command for Baptism so there is not any Word in all the New Testament calling it a Badge of Christianity or Seal of the New Covenant and therefore to conclude it is so because Circumcision was so unless some better Proof be alledged for it is miserably to beg the Question The professing of Faith in Christ and a holy Life answering thereunto is a far better Badge of Christianity than any outward Washing which yet answers not to that of Circumcision since that affixed a Character in the flesh which this doth not so that a Christian is not known to be a Christian by his being baptized especially when he was a Child unless he tell them so much And may not the Professing Faith in Christ signify that as well I know there are divers of those called Fathers that speak much of Water-baptism What the Fathers say of Water-baptism and of the Sign of the Cross. calling it Character Christianitatis But so did they also of the Sign of the Cross and other such things justly rejected by Protestants For the Mystery of Iniquity which began to work even in the Apostles days soon spoiled the Simplicity and Purity of the Christian Worship so that not only many Jewish Rites were retained but many Heathenish Customs and Ceremonies introduced into the Christian Worship Heathenish Ceremonies introduc'd into the Christian Worship as particularly that word Sacrament So that it is great folly especially for Protestants to plead any thing of this from Tradition or Antiquity for we find that neither Papists nor Protestants use these Rites exactly as the Ancients did who in such things not walking by the most certain Rule of God's Spirit but doting too much upon Outwards were very Vncertain For most of them all in the Primitive Time did wholly plunge and dip those they Baptized which neither Papists nor Protestants do yea several of the Fathers accused some as Hereticks in their Days for holding some Principles common with Protestants concerning it as particularly Augustin doth the Pelagians for saying That Infants dying Vnbaptized may be saved And the Manichees were Condemned for denying that Grace is universally given by Baptism and Julian the Pelagian by Augustin for denying Exorcism and Insufflation in the use of Baptism All which things Protestants deny also Exorcism or Adjuration So that Protestants do but foolishly to upbraid us as if we could not shew any among the Ancients that denied Water-baptism seeing they cannot shew any whom they acknowledge not to have been Heretical in several things to have used it nor yet who using it did not use also the Sign of the Cross and other things with it which they deny There were some nevertheless in the darkest Times of Popery The Sign of the Cross. who testified against Water-baptism For one Alanus pag. 103 104 107. speaks of some in his Time Many in former Ages testified against Water-baptism that were burnt for the denying of it for they said that Baptism had no Efficacy either in Children or Adult Persons and therefore Men were not obliged to take Baptism Particularly Ten Canonicks so called were burnt for that Crime by the Order of King Robert of France as P. Pithaeus tells in his Fragments of the History of Guienne Which is also confirmed by one Johannes Floracensis a Monk who was famous at that Time in his Epistle to Oliva Abbot of the Ausonian Church I will saith he give you to understand concerning the Heresy that was in the City of Orleans on childer-mass-Childer-mass-day for it was true if ye have heard any thing that King Robert caused to be burnt alive nigh Fourteen of that City of the Chief of their Clergy and the more Noble of their Laicks who were hateful to God and abominable to Heaven and Earth Ten Canonicks burnt at Orleans and why for they did stiffly deny the Grace of Holy Baptism and also the Consecration of our Lord's Body and Blood The time of this Deed is noted in these words by Papir Masson in his Annals of France lib. 3. in Hugh and Robert Actum Aureliae public◠Anno Incarnationis Domini 1022. Regni Roberti Regis 28. Indictione 5. quando Stephanus Haeresiarcha Complices ejus damnati sunt exusti Aureliae Now for their calling them Hereticks and Manichees we have nothing but the Testimony of their Accusers which will no more invalidate their Testimony for this Truth against the use of Water-baptism or give more ground to charge us as being one with Manichees than because some called by them Manichees do agree with Protestants in some things that therefore Protestants are Manichees or Hereticks which Protestants can no ways shun For the Question is Whether in what they did they walked according to the Truth testified of by the Spirit in the Holy Scriptures So that the Controversy is brought back again to the Scriptures according to which I suppose I have formerly discussed it As for the latter part of the Thesis The Baptism of Infants an Humane Tradition denying the Vse of Infant-Baptism it necessarily follows from what is above-said For if Water-Baptism be Ceased then surely Baptising of Infants is not warrantable But those that take upon them to Oppose us in this matter will have more to do as to this latter part for after they have done what they can to prove Water-Baptism it remains for them to prove that Infants ought to be Baptized For he that proves Water-Baptism Ceased proves that Infant-Baptism is vain But he that should prove that Water-Baptism continues has not thence proved that Infant-Baptism is necessary That needs something further And therefore it was a pitiful Subterfuge of Nic. Arnoldus against this to say That the denying of
no Body of Christ Carnal but believe That that Body which Christ took of the Virgin which was of the Seed of Abraham and David in which Christ walked upon the Earth and was Crucified did Arise the Third Day was glorified and remaineth in Heaven wherein the Centre of his most glorious Soul remaineth for Ever And let him shew if he can how this is a denying of the Christ of God or overturning of Christianity He proceedeth pag. 489. at a most violent strain of Railing upon the Supposition of his Old Calumny and here that it may be compleat J. B. makes a Preaching to the Devil he makes a preaching to the Devil For which Blasphemous Abuse I wish heartily the LORD forgive him that these Devils to whom he preacheth be not permitted to give him his Reward for his Sermon But seeing he blusheth not to do this in Print I shall not think the many gross Abuses I have heard to have been uttered by Presbyterian Preachers so Incredible as I have been apt to do especially that which I have been informed of of late of one A Presbyterian Preacher Praying to the Devil to take the Bishops and Curates to him that they might be quit of them who at a Conventicle in the South near Legerwood not far from Lauther made a Digression in his Prayer to the Devil saying O Devil thou hast troubled us much with the Bishops and Curates We beseech thee Devil take them to thee and make us quit of them This Prayer sutes with John Brown's preaching And indeed the Presbyterians will need a New Directory for the Old one by which they are instructed to preach to Men and pray to God will not serve for this New Ministry by which they begin to Preach and Pray to Devils And of the like Strain is his saying after much Railing pag. 490. That if the Quaker write Comments on Paul's Epistles it must be of Paulus Paganizans This sort of Stuff is enough to give all sober Christians a Disgust of this Man's Writings In this page after some Quibbles about Relation he comes pag. 491. N. 11. to affirm That there may be a Relation which is neither from the Nature of the thing nor from some Divine Precept such as a Promise and Divine Institution But is not a Divine Institution a Divine Precept And whereas he boasts here That my whole Discourse falleth as being built upon a Mistake the Reader may see the Mistake is his own and not mine and then judge of his Discourse that 's built thereon as also how Airy Vain and Ostentive he is in saying What will he now do The Declaring of the Lord's Death has no necessary relation with partaking of Christ's Body and Blood His Light has confounded him so as he knows not what he says Is this Language becoming a Gospel-Minister That what Luke saith doth not import a perpetual but temporary Command will after appear Of what Paul saith 1 Cor. 10. will be spoken hereafter To my shewing that 1 Cor. 11.26 Paul expreseth the End of this Ceremony to be a declaring of the Lord's Death which hath no necessary Relation with partaking of Christ's Body and Blood he answereth That a declaration of Christ's Death is a comprehensive End c. And what then That proves not the Necessary Relation nor yet what he adds in this Paragraph therefore I intreat him next time to speak to the purpose Pag. 492. n. 12. He Raileth at me as perverting the Apostle's words but giveth no Reason unless his own meer Affirmation and Queries be esteemed sufficient J. B.'s proofless Proofs for the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper so called He asketh What signified Christ's blessing of the Bread breaking giving it to his Disciples desiring them to eat Answ. Christ blessed the Bread brake it and gave it to his Disciples to eat and they to others where themselves confess no such Mystery or Sacrament as they would have here is deducible see Matth. 14 v. 19. Mark 6.41 He insinuates I speak falsly in saying there is no mention of this Ceremony 1 Cor. 10.16 but is not so Charitable as to point to me where if there be any such thing As for his meer Affirmations and Distinctions here about the Bread I will wait the next time to have them proved by Scripture then will judge them worth the Considering I have shewn in my Apology that the Corinthians being in the Vse of this Ceremony and the Apostles rectifying the Abuse they were in in the Vse of it nor yet its having been done upon a Religious Account or in a general respect to the participiation of the Body and Blood of Christ will not prove the Necessity of its being now to be performed and therefore what he saith pag. 493. n. 14. evanisheth And as for his adding here That then it was an Act of Will-Worship and Superstition and that I conclude the Apostle encouraged such a thing whence he taketh occasion to Rail at me as blasphemousty imputing Vnfaithfulness to the Apostle and to the Spirit of God that acted him I answer What is done by permission for a time is not Will-Worship and Superstition and he confesseth he argues not from the Corinthians practice and for his Railing the ground of it being false it needs no Answer As for his denying the Jews had such a Custom at the time of their Passover his meer Negation is not sufficient to Elide the Testimony of far more Credible Authors than he himself in this matter and as for the words of Luke Do this in Remembrance of me Do this in Remembrance is no perpetual Obligation It doth not infer perpetual Obligation upon the Church in all Ages He Raileth at this but without a reason pag. 495. instancing the Apostle's 1 Cor. 24 25. But I told him before that the Apostle gives here an account of matter of fact which infers not a Command and in this page the Man is miserably pinched to shew how the washing of one anothers Feet albeit commanded with as great Solemnity doth not oblige as much now but his Conjectures prove nothing What! albeit it was a Custom in the hot Countreys and that it was a sign of Christ's Humility how doth all that Abrogate the express Command to do it Let him shew an Exemption from this from plain Scripture The Washing of Feet commanded with as great Solemnity yet Ceased for his meer Assertions have but small weight and by which I am not like nor yet any Man of reason that is not resolved to set up John Brown as a Pope to believe all he saith from his bare words to conclude the differences He thinks pag. 496. That their not keeping exactly to the Method used by Christ in this thing signifieth nothing Professors not keeping to the Method Christ used in the Supper but he should prove by Scripture how they are safe in practising one part and not the other and by what Rule he accounts the