and withal T. E. as you cannot but observe is so unconstant to his own assertions and confused in his notions of Perfection and the right fixing the notion of things being necessary in order to the clear proceeding in affirming or denying any thing concerning them I will digress a little to state the Case and that in three particulars By which many of my Adversarie's objections will fall without taking any further notice of them We shall therefore consider 1. What is meant by Perfection and what is to be granted or denyed concerning it 2. Whether the best of Men can attain such a Perfection as that they need not or ought not to acknowledge themselves sinners and Offenders 3. What is the result tendency and consequent of asserting or denying such a Perfection Par. I shall be very glad to have a just account of these particulars Min. I begin with the first It 's very evident that Perfection or being Perfect is taken in different senses in Holy Scripture sometimes in a Positive sense and sometimes in a Comparative A positive Perfection is that which includes such a compleatness wherein nothing is wanting or deficient to the answering and coming up to those measures by which it is to be judged and examined Now the measures by which the Perfection of Men must be judged of are of two sorts First The Capacity of our Nature taken in its best and sinless estate and the holy and perfect Law of God to which it is in every respect exactly conformable And hence the first sense of Perfection is when a Man is in a state of enjoying as great good and satisfaction and as high purity and freedom from all stain of evil as either the Nature of Man can arrive unto or as the perfect Law of God do's require This was our state in Paradise and will be in Heaven This is the Perfection spoken of 1 Cor. 13. 10. and probably Eph. 4. 13. Heb. 12. 23. and elsewhere The second Measure by which a Man's Perfection is to be judged of is the capacity of our Nature since the â—…all and the terms which the Gospel Covenant prescribeth and the Mercy of God accepteth Hence the second sense of Perfection is when a Man lives as holily as ever he can in this frail estate sincerely striving to do all Christian duties and to avoid all sin and supplying his failings by Faith and Repentance So that God accepts him upon the terms of the Gospel as perfectly righteous in and through Christ This may be call'd Evangelical Perfection and is spoken of Heb. 10. 14. and 13. 21. Iam. 3. 2. And this is oft exprest by the Perfect heart And in this sense Perfect is opposed to Wicked Iob. 9. 22. and is explain'd by being upright Psal. 37. 37. And this may be consistent with some failings That there are two measures of Perfection appears by that instance I gave you of St. Paul who acknowledges himself Perfect according to one measure and yet not perfect according to another Phil. 3. 12 and 15. compared So according to this second measure and God's gracious acceptance Asa's heart is said to have been perfect all his days 1 King 15. 14. yet came he far short of a sinless perfection For the high places were not taken away ibid. And he was sinfully passionate against Hanani 2 Chron. 16. 10. Who did but his Office in reproving him for relying on the King of Syria ver 7 And being lame on his feet sought not to the Lord but to the Physicians ver 12. Now let Ellwood ask what Notion the Holy Ghost has of Perfection who records Asa both perfect and a sinner Therefore upon the account of this second sense of Perfection the Hebrew word for perfect is by our Translators often render'd upright and made use of to express the necessary qualification for obtaining God's favour Psal. 15. 2. compared with ver 1 5. and Psal. 18. 23. Elsewhere it is exprest by a heart that is sound in God's Statutes and made to be a ground of sure hope and confidence in God's mercy Psal. 119. 80. Yea the Hebrew word signifying perfection is translated sincerity Ios. 24. 14. which T. E. seems to deny p. 72. This for the Positive sense of Perfection The next sense of Perfection is Comparative by which is meant such a Perfection as is not exactly compleat in it self in respect to the first and highest Measures but only more compleat than some other to which it is compared And this applied to our case consists in outdoing the lower sorts of Christians and coming up to the higher measures and degrees of knowledge and practice and in this sense Perfection is taken Heb. 6. 1. 1 Cor. 11. 6. Now to apply this threefold distinction of Perfection The attaining a comparative perfection is not only desirable and useful but possible nay 't is actually arrived to by some though not by all who notwithstanding may be true Christians The attaining an Evangelical perfection is not only possible but also absolutely necessary to all true Christians But an absolute Perfection in the first sense about which the dispute lies though it be the Crown we aim at yet is not attain'd by any in this life which is my next particular of which I shall now give you an account Par. As you propounded it before it was this Whether the best of Men can in this World attain to such a perfection as they need not or ought not to acknowledge themselves sinners and Offenders Min. To which query I reply by laying down these propositions First That there being two Measures by which we may judge of our Perfection Namely the perfect and exact Law of God and the Terms of the Gospel Covenant the first of these is the Rule of our Duty the second is the condition of our acceptance which are not one and the same under the Gospel The Covenant of Grace as a Covenant requires not the first sort of perfection in order to our acceptance though the Law do's still call for it For if it did Salvation were impossible for us in our faln and frail estate Yet still the Gospel is a dispensation of purity as well as grace nor is it the design thereof to cancel our Obligation to obedience but rather to advance it and therefore it rejects not any Moral duty nor allows any thing that is Morally evil For as it cannot be that any thing Good or Evil should cease to be so under the Gospel So it is unsuitable to the design of that Doctrine that establisheth God's Kingdom to discharge Man from the obedience which he owes as a Creature Whence it follows Secondly That all even the least evil is a sin because the transgression of a Law as well as the grosser Acts of sin All evil thoughts irregular desires and disorderly passions and also the omission of the due exercise of good thoughts and desires as well as of good words and actions are breaches of God's
in his Discipleship And indeed the Scriptures do artribute to him a higher mode of Prophecy than ordinary Now the great and principal work of a Prophet was to teach and instruct the people This is evident from the Scripture 2 Pet. 2. 1. False Prophets and false Teachers do there explain one another And Prophesying is put for Expounding and teaching the will of God 1 Cor. 13. 2. and 14. 1 3. And he that expoundeth and declareth another's mind and meaning is called his Prophet Exod. 7. 1 4 16 And Christ's great work in the exercise of his Prophetical Office was to teach the people and to reveal his Father's will We may therefore safely conclude that Moses's Chair is the Chair of Doctrine For it was the custom of those times for Teachers to sit while they taught as several of the Iewish Doctors and also the antient Commentaries under St. Ambrose's name on 1 Cor. 14. 29 30. do inform us In conformity to this Custom Christ himself taught sitting and the antient Philosophers did the same as Grotius noteth upon the place where he quoteth Seneca calling them Cathedrarii that is Chair-men That Moses's Chair is thus to be taken will further appear from the Persons sitting in it Christ's discourse is not concerning Iudges and Magistrates but Teachers as appears from ver 4. where we read They bound heavy burthens c. that is expounded the Law with intolerable strictness by adding their Traditions to it see Acts 15. 10 28. and accordingly the Iews called a thing forbidden by the Doctors Ligatum viz. a thing bound and a thing permitted Solutum or loosed Christ mentions none but Scribes and Pharisees excluding Sadducees who yet were members of their Sanhedrins as well as the other And if he had spoken concerning their Sanhedrins the Priests would no doubt have been mention'd especially the high Priest who was a Chief member of them in our Saviour's time Now that the Scribes here mention'd did succeed the Prophets in their office and Employment is clear from the Scripture Behold says our Saviour I send you Prophets Wise-men and Scribes Mat. 23. 34. Where the one do's expound the other In 1 Cor. 1. 20. Wise-men and Scribes are conjoyn'd For such as were educated in the Learning and wisdom of the Law and professed it were called Scribes Ezra is called a Scribe ch 7. 12. to which sense Christ alludeth Mat. 13. 52. In antient times many were educated in Schools and Colledges to be Prophets But when the gift of Prophesy ceased among that people then they remained Scribes only accordingly Maimonides says that the Reason why Baruch was so discontented was because he had spent so much time under Jeremiah to obtain the gift of Prophesy yet was constrain'd to go without it So that he was called Baruch the Scribe only Wherefore the true notion of Scribes is this They were Students Learned men and Teachers * of the Law to the People as the Prophets were of old but without the gift of Prophecy Succeeding them in their Office but not in their extraordinary Mission and Supernatural Endowments Hence our Lord says that they sate in Moses's seat As for the word Pharisees that denoteth their Sect and way of Religion only most of the Scribes being of that sect as is probable because it was so much in vogue with the people From this Scripture thus explain'd it will follow 1. That Persons without an Extraordinary mission and Supernatural Endowments may be true Successors of them that had both as the Scribes were of the ancient Prophets 2. That men may be God's Officers though they have not that Immediate mission from him For if the Scribes were not God's Officers they did not sit in Moses's Chair in Christ's sence This is so obvious that even Heathen Magistrates are called God's Ministers Rom. 13. 4. 3. That whatever Such as have the Office and Authority to Teach tho' bad men do teach jure Cathedrae as Grotius expresses it keeping themselves within the Sphere of their Authority They ought to be obeyed in Par. You said that our Saviour hath given the people an Eternal Document when such Teachers as live not answerably to their Doctrine fall to their share An eternal Document What 's that p. 20. Min. I told you in our Saviour's own words Whatsoever they bad them to observe that to observe and do but not to do after their works Mat. 23. 3. Par. Nay hold there says he we have had too much of that already England hath not yet forgot since the Scribes and Pharisees of Rome saâ—…e in the Chair here c. ibid Min. Had it been a Turk Iew or profest Atheist that had accosted me with this reply I should have receiv'd it without any surprize at all But seeing this Quaker pretends to Christianity is it not strange that He should fall foul upon Christ himself Had it been a Document of mine own framing though never so reasonable I should not have wonder'd to see him exercise his Sophistry upon i t But it being a Document of our blessed Lord's and deliver'd in no other but his own express words and in his own sense Methinks the Honour and Authority of the Author should have deterr'd him from this Confidence and perswaded him to have been more sparing How would the barbarous Iews have hugg'd themselves and how much innocency would they have pleaded if in the days of Christ they had been furnisht with this Quaker's Argument For had it been broacht then much louder had the Crucifige's rung in Pilat's ears Might not they have argued at Ellwood's rate Hast not thou commanded us to observe and do whatsoever the Scribes and Pharisees bid us We are now set on by them 'T is they that bid us Crucify thee Then from thy self we have an authority to execute this command of theirs So that I must answer my Antagonist in Isaiah's Dialect 2 Kings 19. 22. Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed and against whom hast thou exalted thy voice and lifted thine eyes on high even against the Holy one of Israel Par. I must confess that the Consequences from this gloss are very odious therefore I pray give me now the true sense of the text Min. I cannot do it better than in the words of St. Chrysostom an Author whom this Quaker pretends to have a very good opinion of and whose Authority he misquotes against me with so much triumph p. 120 and 188. Let us here him therefore descanting upon this Document by Theophilact The Lord speaketh of those who fit in Moses's Chair that is of those who teach what is in the Law those therefore who teach the Divine Law we ought to hear tho they do it not themselves Further he objects as Ellwood here But must we do all things they say tho they be evil things We answer says he First that he that teacheth will hardly be so audacious as ever to exhort to things directly evil
not consider what they were rather than from whom they came To these questions they will then be as speechless as he in the Gospel that was found without his Wedding Garment And it will not be Thomas Ellwood that will then be able to open their mouths Par. You have said enough to convince me both of the weakness and naughtiness of this Plea which he has taught the people and by which they encourage themselves to sleight their Teachers and their Doctrine for the least failing they find in them Min. This will neither justify the impiety of these men nor the Separation of such as have already left the Church on that pretence of the Teacher's not following his own directions which is as absurd and preposterous saith St. Augustin As if a Traveller should think he must go back again or leave the way because he saw the Mil-stone with its inscription shewing him the way but not moving in it at all it self But there are too many that rejoyce at the faults of Ministers where they find them and invent and impute them where they find them not that they may have a pretence for their Separation To which purpose rightly saith St. Augustin in the same place Men seek not so much with Charity whom they may Commend in order to their Imitation as with ill will whom they may Carp at in order to their own Deception Some cannot find out Good men being ill themselves and others fear to find such because they would still be evil Par. The true Ministers were always Examples of Goodness he says but too many of these Ministers are Examples of evil p. 24 Min. Has not the Quaker forgot himself here For too many is an implicit acknowledgment that many are not Examples of evil and therefore after all his Exclamations may be Good men Par. When you cannot clear them of your own Profession says he you fall upon the Quakers whom if you can render as bad as your own you think you have done something c. p. 24 25. Min. I never endeavour'd to clear those of mine own Profession that are faulty but the Innocent and to justify the Profession it self from unjust Cavils I ever thought it a method as Ungentile as Improper to defend Truth by Personal Reflections A Zealous Turk and a prophane Christian makes me think no better of Mahometanism nor worse of Christianity But seeing the Quakers themselves have been the first Aggressors in this way of arguing and do place so much of their strength therein it was proper for me only in general terms not naming any particular persons and indeed I was engaged to confnte it by letting them see how much it reflects upon their own Faction and makes all such objections void However that the world may know it was no groundless intimation of mine being thus put upon 't I desire Sir Iames Whitlock's case as it was lately managed in Chancery and two Books the one call'd The Quakers Spritual Court the other The Spirit of the Hat written by a Quaker may be examined By this time I hope I have removed your scruples occasion'd by the Quaker's first Chapter which in his Preface he tells his Reader is Offensive As great a truth as ever he spake For I have sufficiently proved it so to be that is offensive to God to Truth and all Good men But let us now proceed to the examination of his second Chapter CHAP. II. Of saying You to a single person Par. IN his second Chapter T. E. says you seem offended with their using the wrd Thou to a single person Min. I only vindicate the use of You to a single person yet must I tell him that to take up a word or phrase tho' lawful in it self in contradiction to an innocent custom and in an affected singularity as a mark of distinction from their Neighbours this is justly offensive And to make it a necessary duty to say Thou to a single person and a sin to say You when God has neither commanded the one nor forbidden the other this is adding to the Word of God and is rank Superstition and Pharisaism in enslaving the Conscience and placing Religion in pitifull niceties Superstition being an impiety which represents God so light or so froward as to be either pleased or angry with things indifferent and of no moment Par. But T. E. says that they lay not the stress of their Religion upon words p. 27. Min. A good hearing Then may a good man without any violence to Religion say as well You as Thou to a single person But if he spoke as he thought why do they and he contend so much about a word and divide the Church and separate themselves from it for a thing they dare lay no stress of Religion upon So that he has in those words done little credit to his Cause and his whole Party in making them all Schismaticks Yet can we think that he has here truly represented his own Party or clear'd them of Superstition while we observe their strict and demure use of words and phrases to the enslaving of their own Consciences As if to say I thank you for your kindness or the like were not as good sense and as lawful as to say I receive thy love Or to say Such a one is dead were not as pleasing to God as to say He is out of the body Or to say I cannot consent to such a thing were not as proper and as Religious as to say I am not free which is a phrase they have very ready to oppose good Laws and good Counsel And if you mark the Quakers you cannot but observe that in the affected use of their distinguishing phrases tones and gestures they really esteem themselves more religious than their Neighbours whilst indeed if they understood it they are the less Religious by how they are the more superstitious and schismatical But I believe that in many of them much of this proceeds from want of knowledge who now I hope will by one of their own Teachers be at length convinc'd of their great errour in laying so much stress of Religion upon words and phrases Par. You must be cautious how you reflect upon the Quakers for the use of their phrases seeing many of them are taken out of the holy Scriptures Min. Though the holy Scriptures ought to be remembred and frequently used in our Converse for our mutual instruction Yet I would not have you so ignorant and superstitious as to think that God in revealing his will there design'd that our duty should consist in the continual use of those very forms of speech but in a due regard to those truths and Commands contained in them As for the style of the Scriptures you are to understand that it was ever accommodated to the particular dialect of that people to whom they were written and therefore varied accordingly as we find it does in the different proprieties of the Hebrew Tongue in
the case of Divorces and reduced Marriage to its Primitive institution Mat. 19. Denounced eight Woes together against the Scribes and Pharisees He asserted and cleared the Moral Law in his Sermon on the Mount from the false Glosses the Jewish Doctors had put upon it and advanced the Law of Nature whereof the Moral Law is the transcript to the highest pitch And was not all this sufficient to make Christ a Reformer He is our sole Lawgiver and what the Apostles taught after his offering up was his own Law which himself had deliver'd before his death and which the Spirit was promised to bring into their remembrance If therefore Civil Respects were so vain and evil a Custom as T. E. makes them p. 41. is it likely that so severe a Reformer should not only Connive at them but expresly allow them as he does Luke 14. 10 As Ellwood implicitly grants he did not denying it but using an absurd and an odd circuit of words to shuffle it off Though therefore the Pharisees ambition and affectation of the chief Seats was rebuked by our Saviour yet it is evident the distinction of persons and places and such good manners as are founded thereon were none of those things which he disliked or design'd ever to remove What though the State of the Church in the time of the Law was in a great measure Outward and the Legal Ceremonies of the Levitical Priesthood upon Christ's death expired What though a more inward and Spiritual Worship was enjoyn'd under the Gospel and the Spirit of God to that end poured out more plentifully than ever Did this prove that to Christians all outward things are vanisht and such things as no way belonged to that Priesthood Are their Bodies vanisht too What then will become of that injunction Glarific God in your Body 1 Cor. 6. 20. Are we now devested of all outward capacities and concernments Untill he can prove this he must allow Christians such outward Customs and usages as are agreeable to this present State such among the rest are Civil Respects being sutable to that distinction which Providence and the State of this World have made of persons and places in the various relations which we find in all Civil Societies He that is an enemy to this distinction is an enemy to all Government which cannot subsist without it for we must distinguish between Rulers and Subjects Governors and Governed both in Common Wealths and private Families What madness then is it to think that Christ meant to take away Civil Respects and good Manners things that are so necessary to uphold this distinction essential to it as the due acknowledgment and proper expressions of it Therefore he abolish'd not those decentCustoms of them which are upon Record in the Old Testament or any where else But all quotations out of the Old Testament to this purpose must needs be still in force Par. You have thus far given me very good satisfaction in this point if you have any thing further to add to it I pray go on to clear it not only to me but to all others who do ignorantly scruple it as I have done Min. The great duty of a Christian is Universal Friendship but as Friendship is amicitia parium aâ—…t imparium of Equals or Unequals So the signification of that Friendship requires different expressions since the state of the World and the constitution of Societies necessarily infers a distribution of persons into several ranks higher and lower the foundations of which distribution are these following First difference of Age calls for different behaviour Lev. 19. 32. Thou shalt rise before the hoary head and honour the face of the Old man The face of the Old man here is the gavity of his person So that respect to mens persons is not always evil but oft times a duty See also 1 Tim. 5. 1. Intreaâ—…an old man as a Father Secondly Difference of sex 1 Cor. 11. 3 4 5. And the Ordinance of Marriage makes Man the head of the Wife and requires expressions of subjection from the Woman to the Man as T. E. himself acknowledges in the example of Sarah obeying Abraham and calling him Lord. Thirdly All domestick and civil relations implying superiority and inferiority as not only Husband and Wife but Parents and Children Masters and Servants all which T. E. acknowledges Why not then between Magistrates and Subjects seeing Magistrates are Fathers of their Country and every Ruler is properly a Master for Christ himself calls Nicodemus a Master of Israel Iob. 3. 10. Fourthly Different occupations and employments some being honourable and others mean make one rankof menhigher than another Exod. 11. 5. Iud. 16. 21. Acts 17. 5. where you have mention of the baser sort Fifthly By reason of the necessity of publick Offices for civil Governmenment some men must needs be publick some private persons Publick Persons must have an eminency above private And Kings in Scripture are lookt upon as Sacred and the Jewish Rulers and Judges frequently styled Gods Exod. 22. 28. Ps. 82. 6. Io. 10. 34. which is a much higher Title of respect than any we give in our addresses to them therefore it was boldly done of T. E. to quarrel at the Title of Mâ—…st Sacred Majesty and Dread Sovereign as he do's p. 46. seeing all these are essential to the Title of King which the Quakers own and are willing to give him Pray read these places Ps. 21. 5. 1 Chr. 29. 25. Dan. 4. 36 37. Sixthly Nearness to or distance from such as are Eminent Persons thus they that are near the Kings Person gain an eminence by it Est. 1. 14. Ier. 52. 25. And so the Civil Law looketh upon men as more eminent as they are nearer the Emperor And we do find abundance of these reckon'd up in Scripture Dan. 3. 27. and many other places And the Scripture speaks of different Ranks of Nobility and freely gives them their usual titles without any scruple Thus we read of Princes Gen. 17. 20. and 2 Sam. 19. 6 c. of Dukes Exod. 15. 15. Ios. 13. 21. Gen. 36. 15 c. of Lords Dan. 5. 1 9. Ezr. 8. 25. Neh. 7. 5. And in the New Testament Mark 6. 2 1. where 't is said that Herod made a Supper to his Lords c. Note here that St. Mark writes not like a Quaker He do's not say He made a Supper to his Lords as they call them Nor like Ellwood who is so demure that forsooth he dare not name Titles and Civil Respects without this same reserve as they are called Seventhly By civil vertues and great exploits Men justly gain an Eminency and Renown and become famous See Ruth 4. 11 14. Num. 16. 2. and 1. 16. 1 Chron. 5. 24. and 12. 30. Ezek. 23. 23. Eighthly When persons have larger priviledges and immunities granted to them in the Commonwealth they gain an eminency by them thus Noblemen are constituted by that the Lawyers call
rest of his discourse on this subject is spent in artifices to render me and my Doctrine odious but upon the Principles I have already laid down in the stating of this Case of Perfection they will appear neither to need nor deserve an Answer Par. But there is one thing which must not be omitted T. E. thinks you and others who set your selves in opposition to this truly Gospel Doctrine of being perfectly deliver'd and preserved from sin to be as the Evil Spies who discouraged the heart of the Children of Israel that they should not go into the Land which the Lord had given them c. p. 98 99. Min. The Quaker has brought this comparison to his Disadvantage Did the Good Spies Ioshuah and Caleb ever tell the Children of Israel as T. E. do's the Quakers that they should get such a perfect victory over those Canaanites as that no remainders of them should be left to disturb and vex them any more No such thing but the Scriptures tell them the contrary just as we do to Christians concerning their Spiritual Enemies See Deut. 7. 22. thou mayst not consume them at once and in matter of fact 't is evident they were not wholly driven out or consumed 'T is the Quakers therefore and not Ours that is the discouraging Doctrine For â—…f a perfect freedom from all sins and infirmities here be taught as the necessary condition of obtaining Heaven hereafter then all humble Souls sincerely thirsting after Righteousness standing upon their constant watch and yet finding imperfections wants and infirmities in themselves will if they believe this Doctrine be driven into inevitable despair There are sins of Omission as well as of Commission How many accidents may hinder us from performing our Devotions with that vigour intentness and exactness as the purity and sublimity of the Precepts do require The very Constitutions of our Bodies the influence of the Clime and Season may hinder the performance of our Duties with an exact perfection And therefore we flee to God for Mercy in the performance of our best Services See Nehem. 13. 14 22. So that they do most effectually keep Men from coming to Heaven who build this fools Paradise of imaginary unsinning Perfection for them to dwell in on Earth wherein they grow so proud and conceited that they sit down on this side Iordan and fansie they have no need of Ioshua to conduct them into the true Land of Promise In effect they deny the Gospel despise the death of Christ rely on their own Perfection and I fear tumble into Hell while they vainly dream of Heaven CHAP. VI. Of Swearing Par. NOW we are come to T. E's Chapter of Swearing which is so very long that it consists of no less than 104. pages therefore I shall only propound to you the most material passages in it He begins with a reflexion on that short digression which you made upon the two Covenants and very gravely tells us that you tread in an unbeaten Path p. 101. Min. Had he been acquainted with Authors and not taken things upon trust he would not have accused the account I gave off the two Covenants as a peculiar Notion oâ—… my own when the same has been asserted by the greatest Clerks in Christendom I could fill a Page with Citations of such Authors if it were needful as concurr in the same Notion I shall only name two viz. Dr. Hammond in his Practical Catechism and the excellent Author of the Whole Duty of Man in the Preface of that same Treatise which when T. E. hath consulted he will be be satisfied that I have trodden in no unbeaten Path But seeing T. E. will have it my own Notion and there being so much matter before us upon this Subject of Oaths which in the Conference was primarily intended I will pass on to that and examine my Adversaries Objections and extravagances on this Subject Par. He would gladly clear R. Hubberthorn from that impertinence and dishonesty where with you charged him in acknowledging Oaths lawful in the times of the Old Testament yet alledging Hos. 4. 3. Zech. 5. 3. Texts out of the Old Testament to prove them unlawful now which he says you call his proofs though he do not so himself and hints as if they were only set in the Title-page of the Book p. 106. Min. However they were at first in the Title-page I found them in the Book it self And if they be not Proofs what are they then So here is an implicit acknowledgment of a Quaker's bringing Scripture to prove nothing Par. He thinks you mistake the Case for they are not says he brought against that which was then lawful but against that which was then unlawful namely the wrong use and abuse of Oaths ibid. Min. Wonderful ingenuity I thought the question had not been Whether perjury but whether any Oaths were lawful Now to what end is a quotation brought but to prove the Subject in hand In a word then I desire the Quakers to take notice that these Scriptures viz. Hos. 4. 3. Zech. 5. 3. do not reprove all Oaths as unlawful Par. You told me that an Oath is an Act of Natural Religion but he tells us that all acts of Religion are not acts of Natural Religion as in the case of Circumcision p. 110. Min. 'T is very true that all such acts of Religion as owe their original to a Positive Command and have no reason in the nature of the thing to put mankind upon the observation of them as in the case of Circumcision these are not acts of Natural Religion for T. E. may read the definition of Natural Religion in Bishop Wilkins's Discourse upon that Subject pag. 39. That is Natural Religion which Men might know and should be obliged unto by the meer Principles of Reason improved by consideration and experience without the help of Revelation Now an Oath came into use among men from the meer Principles of Reason improved by consideration without the help of Revelation So that if an Oath be an Act of Religion it must be an act or part of Natural Religion For the first that ever required an Oath was Abimelech a Gentile Gen. 21. 23. He required Abraham to swear And Abraham said I will swear ver 24. Yet we read not that either Abimelech's requiring or Abraham's consenting to it was by any positive command from God So that T. E. must grant that Men were led to bind their Covenants by a solemn calling of God to witness and that by the light of Nature of which more anon But when I say an Oath is an act or part of Natural Religion I do not insist that it is by Natural Religion commanded primarily simply and per se towards God but subordinately implicitly and by consequence as a necessary medium for the publick good in this state of things For the Law of Nature that commands the end must also command the only means So that the use of an
Oath is commanded by the Law of Nature ex hypothesi or from a supposition that it is necessary for the publick good just in the same sense that Magistrates are commanded by the same Law to make Penal Laws against Vice But if we were perfectly innocent neither the one nor the other would be commanded You may remember I told you in the Conference that if there were that truth in men that their bare testimony were infallible and of sufficient credit then there were no need at all of an Oath So that we are commanded by the Law of Nature to use Oaths only upon just and necessary occasions And thus I assert what I did before in the Conference that an Oath rightly taken that is as every honest man will understand me and as I interpreted my self duly circumstantiated and taken in truth in judgment and in righteousness is an Act of Natural Religion and understood plainly by the light of Nature to comprehend a great deal of Religion in it as having God for the immediate object of that appeal which therein is made to Him and by which so many of the Divine Attributes are acknowledged and glorified as I shew'd you in the Conference And an Oath being such and so needful to the ends of justice and charity it remains as I said that it is not made unlawful by the Doctrine of Christ who has prohibited nothing that hath so much of Morality and goodness in it Par. But T. E. lest he should not be understood hath put in a Marginal Note in order to the explaining what Natural Religion means viz. The word Natural hath divers acceptations for there is Pure Nature Corrupt Nature and the Divine Nature ibid. Min. These may be the senses of the word Nature but would any but a Natural have brought in these to expound Natural Religion Let us apply it thereto and then there is Pure Natural Religion Corrupt Natural Religion and Divine Natural Religion Rare distinctions Besides how comes the Divine Nature to be a sense of the word Natural Is Natural ever used for the Divine Nature or are the Saints who are partakers of it any where called Natural men One would suspect T. E. was not in his right mind when he put down this lamentable Note Par. T. E. tells us you enumerate many attributes of God which are acknowledged by an Oath to which he says no other answer need be given than that the Divine Attributes are acknowledged by speaking the truth without an Oath p. 112. Min. Having mudded the Waters by his Captious-exceptions he thinks to escape undiscern'd and to put off the whole force of my reasoning Conf. p. 57 58. with this fallacious and sleight reply but we must not part so What though a Man may believe the Attributes of God in his heart while he speaks the truth yet do's he so openly and so solemnly acknowledge them as he that immediately calls God to witness by an Oath Speaking truth is not so particularly directed unto God but an Oath rightly taken or duly circumstantiated is so direct an application to God and we do so particularly ascribe a Divinity to that we swear by that Lactantius affirms Socrates his swearing by a Goose and a Dog was an acknowledgment of those Creatures being his Gods And Tertullian plainly gives this reason why the Primitive Christians would not swear by the Genius of the Emperor lest they should thereby own them to be Gods And hence Authors generally make solemn Oaths to be Acts of Religion and One sort of the worship of God So Sanderson Pareus Cbemnitius c. But none can say thus of speaking bare truth and therefore the difference is very great that being an Act of Moral vertue but this an Act of the incommunicable Worship of God that being directed to a Man this to the true and Living God Par. But T. E. has a way to avoid this by telling us that God is more Glorified by having redeemed a People from perfidiousness treachery and falshood c. who can now speak truth every man with his neighbour ibid. Min. Though the price of our Redemption be of infinite value yet if men improve not the Grace which was purchased for them this fault which is in them and not in Christ's Redemption will spoil the Quaker's Argument Are all Men are all Quakers themselves purged from hypocrisie c. If they be not T. E. has said nothing to purpose against the use of solemn and Legal Oaths Par. He tells us now that from Reason you are come to Consent of Nations your second Medium to prove swearing an Act of Religion and here he bids his Reader observe that you have wholly let go your hold of Natural Religion ibid. Min. You may remember my words were these which I suppose he durst not cite for fear of exposing himself I shall resume the Method propos'd and prove that an Oath is an Act of Religion out of the Light of Nature and Consent of Nations c. And is not that which can be proved an Act of Religion out of the light of Nature and by the Consent of Nations an Act of Natural Religion what better way nay what other way to prove it Is this letting go my hold of Natural Religion when I prove it by an instance of Religion evident in the Light of Nature with special precept or institution What mark will T. E. assign us to distinguish it from an Act of Positive Religion according to his own distinction p. 110. So that you see here how unfairly he deals with me which surely he would never have done had he thought that the Books would ever have been compared together Par. As to those instances which you gave of Aristotle Cicero and Seneca affirming an Oath an Act of Religion out of the light of Nature He carps only at your Quotation in Seneca who says that Religion is the chief Bond of fidelity in the Militia where he observes that Seneca do's not say that an Oath is the chief bond but Religion and that you would perswade your Readers that by Religion is meant an Oath p. 113. Min. Had T. E. read the place in Seneca surely he would not so grossly have abused himself The whole Sentence is this Even as the first bond of fidelity in the Militia is Religion and the love of the Ensigns and the wickedness of running away and then afterwards other things are easily required and commanded to those who are bound by an Oath Nothing plainer than that he calls that Oath with which Souldiers are bound Religion And so do many other Authors If T. E. have none but Rider by him in the Country or his Capacity extend no higher let him look Religio there and he will find these words viz. Cic. in Flacoum Religioni suae consulere i. e. fidei Sacramento militari And I think it makes much to my purpose that the Romans did not
Original 'T is the conceit of this Teaching that hath made many of the Quakers despise the Scriptures What need have such says one of them of Scripture-teaching without them when they have received the same Spirit within them Another whom I could name said to a Credible Person That it had been better for him had he never read the Bible Par. But you affirmed the Scriptures were a Perfect Rule this sticks in his teeth And whereas you proved it by 2. Tim. 3. 17. He confesses the Scriptures to be profitable but hopes the Priest will not say Every thing that is profitable is a perfect and sufficient rule p. 247. Min. It 's well if My Gentleman put not on a false Vizard for this is the foundation-Principle of all Popery to deny that the Scripture is a perfect Rule And under this sconce all their other Errours do take Sanctuary wherefore the Papists call the Scripture a Leaden Rule a dead Iudge merum putamen sine nuelâ—…o a meer Nut-shell without a Kernel That the Fathers are clear in this point as well against the Papists as their Frieud Ellwood may be seen in the Confeâ—…nce P. 105. which he passes by That the Scripture is a sufficient Rule the Apostle proves sufficiently 2. Tim. 3. 15 16 17. Do's not St. Paul say there that they are able to make us wise unto Salvation through Faith Which they could not do were there not a Rule in order to that Salvation For the main use of a Rule is to direct us in the way we should go in The Apostle proceeds to enumerate the several particulars wherein the Scriptures may by us be profitably made use of They are profitable says he for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction Which contain all the intents and purposes of a Rule To shew that the Scripture hath all the Perfection that a Rule can have the Apostle adds that the man of God may be perfect thorowly furnished unto all good Works Let this Quaker therefore beware how he digs up Foundations especially considering how many places there are which make the Law of the Lord Perfect c. Which for brevity sake I must omit I expected that T. E. in this Chapter of Learning would have shewed us his greatest skill and accuracy but I find my self deceived his pages being filled only with pitisul shifts and evasions Lest therefore I should weary you I must desire you to pass to the next and last Chapter of his Book especially considering there is a Tract now in press called Christianity No Enthusiasm which answers all his pretensions to immediate Teaching Par. I shall only then desire you to take notice that he concludes this Chapter with the Testimonies of Tindall Iewel Bradford Philpot and Bullinger all which argue a Necessity of the Spirit in order to the interpreting of Scripture Min. I have seriously consider'd their words and do find that they either speak of the practicable knowledge of the Scriptures which is ouly to be had from the Grace of the Spirit or else of the Ordinary teaching of Gods Spirit in the use of means But where do's he find that any of these relyed on immediate Inspiration or disputed against the use of Humane Learning in Divinity Or do you think that the Quaker observed His decorum in giving Philpot the Reverend Title of a Learned Martyr in this Chapter against Learning p. 275 But to shew that T. E. has abused the Learned and Pious Philpot And that I maintain No notion of Learning different form Him Let us hear his own words I confess saith he that Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God and I acknowledge that God appointeth an Ordinary means for men to came unto knowledge now and not miraculously as He hath done in times past yet we that be taught by Men must take heed that we learn nothing but that which was taught in the Primitive Church by Revelation Par. One thing I wonder at viz. That T. E. should not say Bishop Iewel he having been Bishop of Salisbury as well as Bishop Gauden and Bishop Taylor but barely styles him Iohn Iewel a zealous defender of the Protestant Religion p. 273. Min. You will the less wonder if you consider that the design of Ellwoods Book is to blind and delude the ignorant Common people for he can hardly fancy that men whose Reason has been improved by Consideration and education can be imposed upon by so many apparent fallacies Now should He have called him Bishop Iewel then would the most Vulgar have made this Remark viz. that a man may be a Bishop and yet a zealous defender of the Protestant Religion But if T. E's design be to prove that Gods people cannot be without the assistance of His Holy Spirit he needed not to have gone to Bishop Iewel Arch-Deacon Philpot and the rest He might have brought as plain Proofs and with more Authority from the Book of Common prayer from the Articles and Homilies of the Church of England And if I say any thing to the contrary I will submit to the severest puninshment for so high a Cirme Par. I should give you no further Trouble upon this point but for one odd passage which I had like to have forgot He says The Faith which They have received is the same with that of the Primitive Christians p. 245. Min. Then let me give you a Testimony or two of their Opinion in this matter Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History lib. 5. c. 9. tells us of one Pantaenus who lived in the Second Century that He was a famous Learned man and Moderator in the School of Alexandria And that of Old disputation and exercise in Holy Scripture did flourish among them being instituted by such men as excelled in Eloquence The same Eusebius informs us that Origen perswaded to the Study of Liberal Sciences affirming them advantagious to the knowledge of Holy Scriptures being of an opinion that the exercise of Philosophical Discipline was very necessary and profitable It was an unhappy Project of Iulian the Apâ—…state to extirpate Christianity by destroying All Schools of Literature and Education for by this means saith he if we suffer them We are beaten with our own Weapons And the Christians complained of this as a very great grievance Which shews that they both used Learning and highly valued it also Saint Augustine allows the knowledg of Philosophy and other Heathen Learning to be useful in order to the expounding of Scripture and compares it to the Israelites spoiling of the Egyptâ—…ians to adorn the Tabernacle And saith that Saint Cyprian Lactantius Victorinus Optatus and Hilarius were rarely furnished with these spoils Saint Hierome was brought up in Learning from his Youth And before he set upon explaining the Scripture he Learned the Hebrew Tongue long after he was a man And hehighly commended the Mother of Rusticus who was designed for the Ministry that she brought him up
and the Apostles together Is Melchizedeck's Priesthood greater or better than that of Aarons because Abraham gave him Tithes that cannot be For Tithes were none of his due neither did Abraham pay them duly Nor was there in those days any publick worship wherein He could perform any outward Priestly Office As if Melchizedeck was a meer Cypher bore the Name of a Priest but did not the Work and Office of a Priest It 's true Abraham gave him Tithes but he did not pay him Tithes And when all is done it was but an accidental business and will not bear an Argument With what dint of Argument might a Jew upon Ellwoods Principles implead Christianity it self What Melchizedecks Priesthood above Aarons because Abraham gave him Tithes that 's false even from Christian Principles Did not Iesus himself say that it was more blessed to give than to receive Abraham was the giver Melchizedeck was but the receiver wherefore the Priesthood in Abrahams loins was the greater Priesthood the more blessed Priesthood So that if we pursue the Quakers Argument to the far end with Tithes it overturns not only the Epistle to the Hebrews but indeed the very foundation of Christianity Par. You have given me very good satisfaction as to your Ministry in your reply to T. E's first Chapter I shall therefore pass by His Canting expressions that you are made Priest after the Law of a carnal Commandment which I suppose related to the bloody Sacrifices under the Levitical Law But then whereas you asserted that maintenance in general to the Ministers of the Gospel is just rea sonable and establisht by a Divine Authority He quite contrary to my expectation grants it p 284. Min. Maintenance it seems then is due Now I would know what could possibly have been set out for that maintenancce less obnoxious to exception than Tithes are Par. Nothing that I know of but Men of Corahs temper would have quarrelled with it But as for those Scriptures from which you urged this Maintenance The Apostles intent He saith is not to set out what the Maintenance is as who they are from whom it is to be received Namely such as receive their Ministry ibid. Min. I answer First Nothing can be more plain than that the Apostles drift in these Scriptures is to oblige the People to set forth a maintenance for their Ministers and those instances of the Ox treading out the Corn c. shew the equity and reasonableness thereof Secondly The question being whether the Ministers of the Gospel ought to be provided for out of mens Estate for their work and labour in their Ministry This I perceive is fairly yielded But then did T. E. consider How this very thing has been opposed all along by his own party and how miserably they have abused that Text freely have ye received freely give However we may fairly inferr from his own words that they who are fed by us taught by us planted c. ought not to withhold our maintenances from us But then Thirdly The next Question will be this Whether those who withdraw themselves from the publick Ordinances are for that reason excusable in withdrawing our maintenances If this be so T. E. has found out a right expedient to make all indifferent Men turn either Atheists or Schismaticks in point of interest But then I must desire their Friend Ellwood to take notice that if they be not fed taught and planted by us the fault is in themselves and for which we ought not to suffer Fourthly The Fallacy and Cheat lies here that the Quaker do's not distinguish between the first Donors of Tithes and the present payers of Tithes who are considered in the Rent or Purchase for the Tithes they pay which I made plain to you at our first Conference and shall I hope make more plain before we part Par. He is got into a fit of railing again an says though Christ deny them yet if Man will grant them it will serve your turn as well p. 287. Min. Where I wonder do's Christ deny them Had the Quaker proved this He had most effectually done his Work But He is so far from proving this false Assertion that when I am challenging the Quakers for about four pages together to prove Tithes a sin that is to say the transgression of any Law Humane or Divine T. E. is not so hardy as to make any manner of reply though he could not but know that it was the most considerable passage that I had Par. You may be sure T. E. was wise enough to pass by those passages For I suppose He knew neither how to answer your Argument nor vindicate the Reputation of his own Party whom you had render'd both ridiculous and dishonest in the application of that Text The Priests bear Rule by their Means to Tithes or other Estates when i related to the Prophets who prophesied â—…falsly and by their Means or by reason thereof the Priests than usurped an Authority Now it seems the Quakers in their gross Ignorance took Means there for Estates c. and T. E. not knowing how to excuse this puts it into the Catologue of Minute passages Min. I would now know of T. E. wherein consists immediate teaching Had I nothing to object against the Quakers but this very passage comparing it with the Notion of Inspiration its sufficient to prove them very Cheats and to draw any serious Man from their ways making a plain discovery what that Spirit is by which they are guided and directed and that this Text has been so abused see that Tract before mentioned to you called some of the Quakers Principles put forth by Isaac Pennington and the second Quaker there has this passage But to return to his Gospel maintainance which He says is expresly set down by Christ eat such things as are set before you eat and drink such things as they give p. 276. According to this Rule Tithes are a Gospel-maintenance which have been expresly set before us expresly given us And if Tithes were not Melchizedeck's due before such time as Abraham gave him them yet when they wete so given him they were without all dispute which will sufficiently make good our Title to Tithes could we lay no other claim unto them wherefore it was that I said before that if they were not due by a Divine appointment yet are they now due by a voluntary dedication of them Par. It 's from those words that He infers that though Christ deny them and Men give them it will serve your turn Min. Could a more malicious and uncharitable interpretation be put upon my words Ananias and Saphira without any positive appointment dedicated the Money which they raised upon the sale of their Estâ—…e to the use of the Church Might not Ellwood have replied upon St. Peter and the rest Though Christ deny that Money yet if Ananias and Saphira give it it will serve your turn Par. Now T. E. takes notice
to do what I will with mine own Is thine Eye evil because I am good But it seems Ellwood can tell our Saviour another story and will prove from the Laws of God and right reason that it is not Lawful for every Man to do what he will with his own c. Par. But I pass by this profanation He supposes that if Ethelwolf had an ample power of disposing what he pleased or that the People had by consent joyned with him in the Donation every Man according to the interest that he had yet neither could He nor they grant more than belonged to themselves p. 323. Min. Suppose I grant it what then Par. To make a grant of the tenth part for ever is in his understanding utterly repugnant to reason p. 324. Min. Is it reasonable wholly to pass an Estate from them and their Heirs for ever and yet repugnant to reason to grant but a part of that Estate for ever Par He has a way to evade this too For he saith that it must be considered that by the Profits of the Land is not understood the natural only but the artificial product thereof not what the Earth of her own accord without the help of Man brings forth but what by the painful labour toil care sweat and great charge of the diligent and industrious Husbandman is digged and as it were torn out of her Bowels ibid. Min. I will propound you a Case Suppose you were seized in Fee-simple of an Estate valuable at 100 l. per an Might you not out of that Estate charge 10 l. per an for ever to such and such uses Par. This I fancy T. E. himself will not question Min. Then must I tell him that 10 l. per an is not the natural product of the Land not what the Earth of her own accord brings forth but must be fetch 't from the Indies and must be procur'd by the labour toil care and charge of the diligent and industrious Husbandman c. Now I must ask why it should be thought more unreasonable for the Husbandman to pay such things as the Ground it self brings forth than to pay such a sum of Money which must be brought from the remotest parts of the World Par. Believe me I am not able to answer you But says T. E. if Ethelwolf ' s consideration be taken away which it seems was for the health of his Soul why should the charge continue p. 326. Min. You have the parallel Case of Magna Charta already by which the English Subjects do differ from the Subjects of France which by this reason ought as well to be void as Ethelwolf's Charter But then what is all this to the present payers of Tithes If the Clergy must not gain by the Charter why must the Laity have the advantage of it who have a valuable consideration for what they pay But let us seriously consider of the Case If the Clergy must not have the revenue they are in possession of who must Will T. E. find out the Heirs of Ethelwolf and of that People who joyned with him in the Donation But suppose he cannot or suppose the Case worse than He states it that Tithes had been set out for the worship of the Devil and the original proprietors nor any claiming under them in being what is fit to be done in such a Case as this Par. In such a Case the supreme Authority of a Nation ought to proceed to a reformation and change them from a bad use to a good Min. Had the Original of Tithes been never so ill yet we see that our Laws have so reformed the Church that they are notnow used to any such Idolatrous ends and purposes Were not those Censers that we have been discoursing of though Consecrated by wicked Men in so rebellious a manner wrought out into broad Plates for Gods own Altar Surely the Quaker fancies that whatsoever has been abused to Idolatry c. cannot be reformed to a pious use afterwards If so then must Tithes rot in the Fields and no Body meddle with them Suppose the whole Turkish Empire through Gods mercy should be Converted to Christianity May not the Mufti himself and those whom T. E. calls Emaums together with all the Mosks and Revenues now belonging to them be reconsecrated to Christianity Is Idolatry of that contaminating nature that no reformation can purge it how then came Aaron to Officiate in the Priests Office after he had made the Molten Calf and said These be thy Gods which brought thee out of the Land of Egypt Par. But if Tithes saith T. E. were a suitable maintenance the Clergy now does nothing for the People which can deserve so great a compensation p. 329. Min. That is If his Worship may be Judge But what I wonder do the Impropriators for the People which deserve so great a compensation Besides it 's all one to the People whether they pay Tithes or no. As I shall shew you anon Par. You said that our only work is to explain the written word of God to apply the same From these words he concludes that what you do for the People is not suitable to the reward of Tithes p. 329 330. Min. Do's not this Quaker think you instruct the People very graciously As if Tithes were of more real value to them than the word of God explained and applied But I must not let the abuse pass which he hath put upon me in this Quotation He so states my words as his Reader must understand him that I make explaining and applying the word of God the sole and the only work of a Minister In the place He quotes I am treating of Infallible inspiration together with those extraordinary gifts which the Apostles had and that they are now ceased and that we take Texts to shew that we have no other Doctrine to deliver but what is taken out of the written word of God then I said our only work is to explain and apply the same only work related to the particular which I was there discoursing of and not to the general Office of a Minister Here you may see how unconscionably the Quaker states my words contrary to their plain sense meaning Par. I perceive he would flatter the People into a conceit that you receive the Tithes from their kindness and courtesie Min. Indeed the People do pay us our Tithes but they do not give them to pay is one thing to give another Should I tell T. E. that a certain Gentleman pays me a Rent-charge out of his Estate who reading this Quakers Book may tell me that I do nothing for him which deserves so great a compensation And though I owe the party all the civility and kindness imaginable suitable to his real worth and quality yet should I tell him that I have no obligation at all to him upon the account of the Rent-charge he pays me for it was none of his benefaction but the kindness of an
Holy Law now incur His displeasure deserve His wrath and need His pardon for Man's present inability to keep the Law in the rigour of it do's by no means excuse him of his duty to keep the whole Law because his weakness is the effect of his own sin and fall and he is accountable for it Thirdly The Perfection of Practice in avoiding all evil and performing every Duty which God requires ought to be endeavour'd after yet such an Absolute sinless Perfection in the whole course of our lives is not attain'd in this life nor was it ever actually attain'd by any meer Man since the fall which though I formerly proved to you in the Conference yet will I now take more pains with you to confirm it Perfection is opposed to Moral imperfection and signifies a state and condition absolutely sinless in rigour of Law such as comes up to the first Measure and our primitive Capacity before we Fell Thus the word ought to be taken in this Controversie And now I shall tell you how far we dispute against it and this I shall do both Negatively and Affirmatively First We do not deny it to be desirable for it is the matter of our highest aims and hopes Nor Secondly As wholly and for ever impossible to us for we believe we shall attain it when we reach the Heavenly Mansions Nor Thirdly As impossible for God to effect now in our present State who can do every thing which implyeth not a contradiction Nor Fourthly Do we discard sincere endeavours after it For we constantly maintain That sincere endeavour to perfect Holiness and to live without all manner of sin is the Condition of Salvation For what Divine ever affirmed it lawful to allow our selves in any sin That therefore we Assert is as followeth We maintain First That the absolute perfection here explained is not the condition of Salvation seeing even Babes in Christ who are far remote from it may be saved Secondly We maintain that it is not the ordinary condition of Christians but is to be reckoned though not among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things simply impossible if God were pleas'd to use His power yet among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things that do not actually come to pass in this World which they that please may call Morally impossible that is so difficult that Men will not actually arrive to it in this lower State wherein it hath pleased God to set us And the Grounds of our Assertion are these First The many expressions of the Saints of God in Scripture who testifie of themselves that they were not absolutely sinless in rigour of Law and the constant experience of the People of God since the Scripture times Secondly The inconsistency of such perfection with the present weakness of Man's Nature and the many deplorable circumstances which are the consequents of his Fall Thirdly The end of Gospel Institutions which are plainly design'd for an Imperfect State and of no use if it were otherwise in the foremention'd explained sense Fourthly Abundance of Scriptures commanding us to grow in Grace therefore we can never be past growing in this life We must abound more and more These and many others suppose plainly that we come not to our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to our ultimate perfection in this life Fifthly Those Scriptunes which shew the danger of standing upon terms with God and the misery we are in if God should deal with us in rigour of Law Enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight shall no Man living be justified Psal. 143. 2. If thou Lord shouldst mark iniquities O Lord who shall stand Psal. 130. 3 c. Sixthly Those Scriptures which shew our need of Mercy at death and judgment The Lord grant unto him that he may find Mercy of the Lord in that Day 2 Tim. 1. 18 c. Seventhly We may confirm it with respect to the times of the Old Testament from Lev. 16. 6. and Heb. 9. 7. where Aaron the Saint of the Lord with his Successors is enjoyned yearly to offer a Sin-offering as well for himself as for the errors of the people Which shews plainly that the Saints in the Old time had not attain'd to an unsinning perfection And with respect to the New Testament the same is proved by the description of the Gospel Righteousness consisting in having sin pardon'd Rom. 3. 6 7 8. Eph. 1. 7. 1 Ioh. 1. 8 9. So that after all this Fourthly We ought not to be discouraged as to our final estate because this unsinning Perfection is not the terms of our acceptance with God nor will the want of it cause our final rejection For to assert this would make void the Covenant of Grace which admits repentance proposeth forgiveness and accepts sincerity because though it be as I said the design of the Gospel to prohibit all sin and to allow none yet if through infirmity a Man fall it provides a Remedy 1 Ioh. 2. 1. And upon performance of the conditions of our acceptance secures Salvation Par. I see not why Men should require more than God is pleas'd to accept and we in a capacity to perform So that you need enlarge no further in the proof of these Only let me understand What is the result tendency and consequent of denying the Quakers absolute unsinning State and asserting the Evangelical Perfection which was your Third particular Min. We deny the Quakers absolute Perfection not only as unattainable and inconsistent with the condition of faln Man but as it is apt to deceive some Men into a Groundless pride to make them neglect the means of remission despise the mercy of the Death of Jesus Christ and rely on their own Merits as it confounds the Covenant of Works and Grace and as it stands as that two-edged sword Gen. 3. 24. keeping the way of the Tree of life and making them despair of ever attaining everlasting Glory when they once find themselves deceived But then there are no ill Consequents as is falsly pretended by our denying this absolute unsinning righteousness or perfection First 'T is no discouragement to Christian care and diligence and the most vigorous endeavours that any Christian can use while he attains at present an Evangelical Perfection and peace and reconciliation with God and the favour to be owned as his child and an heir of Glory and of that State of absolute Perfection in Heaven yea and of a greater degree of Glory according to his growth in Grace here Secondly It 's no Doctrine of looseness or encouragement to sin since that Grace which tenders remission of sin to the sincere and penitent will never accept the slothful and careless And it 's sufficiently proved that the Gospel gives no allowance to sin but promiseth greater rewards to greater degrees of Piety Lastly The asserting this Evangelical Perfection hath many good consequents For it directs to the performance of many considerable Duties which else would have